Skip to main content

Full text of "A dictionary of the Bible .."

See other formats 


\J 


.  Z  2.  .  'O  2 


§rom  f  0e  EtBrarg  of 

(profeBBor  HEifTiam  JE)enrg  (Breen 

QSequeaf  0eb  6g  0im  to 
f  0e  £t6rarg  of 

(ptincefon  Cljeofoijicdf  gbtminaxp 

,SS/7 

v,  t 


:■ 


Y 


Q^vJ\a*j, 


jlfije£<ouu^(>^    [$1sA 


'VL 


A 


DICTIONARY    OF    THE    BIBLE 


COMPRISING    ITS 


ANTIQUITIES,  BIOGRAPHY,  GEOGRAPHY, 
AND  NATURAL  HISTORY. 


«  EDITED   BY 

WILLIAM     SMITH,    LL.D., 

EDITOE  OF   Till:   DICTIONARIES  OB   "GREEK    AM)    ROMAN    ANTIQUITIES,"    "BIOGRAPHY   AND  MYTHOLOGY, 

AND  "  GEOGRAPHY." 


IN    TWO    VOLUMES.  — Vol.    I. 
A  to  JUTTAH. 


BOSTON : 
LITTLE,    BROWN,  AND   COMPANY 

I860. 


LIST    OF    WRITERS, 

WITH  THE  INITIALS  AFFIXED  TO  THEIR  ARTICLES. 


ALFORD,  HENRY,  D.D.,    H.A. 

Dean  of  Canterbury. 

BAILEY,  HENRY,   B.D H.B. 

Warden  of  St.  Augustine's  Coll.,  Canterbury ; 
late  Fellow  of  St.  John's  Coll.,  Cambridge. 

BARKY,  ALFRED,  M.A.,     A.B. 

I  lead  Master  of  the  Grammar  School,  Leeds;  late 
Fellow  of  Trinity  Coll.,  Cambridge. 

BKVAN,  WILLIAM  L.,  M.A.,....' W.L.B. 

Vicar  of  Hay,  Brecknockshire. 

BROWN,  T.  E.,  M.A.,  T.E.B. 

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

BROWNE,  R.  W.,  M.A., R.W.B. 

Professor  of  Classical  Literature,    King's   Coll., 
London,  and  I'rebendary  of  St.  Paul's  and  Wells. 

BULLOCK,  W.  T.,   M.A., W.T.B. 

Assistant  Secretary  of  the  Society  for  the  Propa- 
gation of  the  Gospel  in  Foreign  Parts. 

CLARK,  SAMUEL,  M.A.,    S.C. 

Principal  of  the  Training  College,  Battersea. 

CON  ANT,  T.  J.,  D.D., T.J.C. 

Professor  of  Sacred   Literature,  Brooklyn,  New 
York. 

COOK,  F.  C,  M.A.,   F.C.C. 

Chaplain   in   Ordinary  to  the  Queen,  and   Pre- 
bendary of  St.  Paul's. 

COTTON,  G.  E.  L.,  D.D.,    G.E.L.C. 

Lord  Bishop  of  Calcutta. 

DAVIES,  J.  LLEWELYN,  M.A.,    J.L1.D. 

Hector  of  Christ  Church,  St.  Marylebone  ;   late 
Fellow  of  Trinity  (loll.,  Cambridge. 

DRAKE,  WILLIAM,  M.A., W.D. 

Hebrew  Examiner  in  the  University  of  London  ; 
late  Fellow  of  St.  John's  Coll.,  Cambridge. 

ELLICOTT,  C.  J.,  B.D.,   C.J.E. 

Professor  of  Divinity,  King's  Coll.,  London  ;  late 
Fellow  of  St.  John's  Coll.,  Cambridge. 

ELW1N,  WHITWELL,  B.A.,    W.E. 

Rector  of  Booton,  Norfolk. 

FARRAR,  F.  W.,  M.A.,    F.W.F. 

Fellow  of  Trinity  Coll.,  Cambridge. 

FELTON,  C.  C,  LL.I).,    C.C.F. 

Professor  of  Greek  Literature  in  Harvard  Uni- 
versity, Cambridge,  .Massachusetts. 

FERGUSSON,  JAMES,  F.R.A.S J.F. 

FFOULKES,  EDMUND  S.,  M.A E.S.l'f. 

Lab-  Fellow  and  Tutor  of  Jesus  Coll.,  Oxford. 

GOTCH,   F.  W.,  LL.D.,    F.W.G. 

Hebrew  Examiner  in  the  University  of  London. 

GROVE,  GEORGE,  Sydenham G. 

HACKETT,   II.  B.,  D.D., ll.B.U. 

Professor  of  Biblical  Literatun  ,  Newton,  Massa- 
chusetts. 

HAWKINS,  ERNEST,  B.D.,    E.H— s. 

Prebendary  of  St.  Paul's;  late  Fellow  of  Fxeter 
Coll.,  Oxford. 

DAYMAN,   IIF.NKV,   M.A., 11.11. 

Head  Master  of  Grammar  School,  Cheltenham ; 
late  Fellow  of  St.  John's  Coll.,  Oxford. 

1I1.UVKY,   LORD  ARTHUR  ('.,   M.A V.C.ll. 

Uectorol  ickworlh  with  Horringer. 


1LESSEY,  JAMES  A.,  D.C.L., J.A.H. 

Head  Master  of  Merchant  Taylors'  School,  and 
Bampton  Lecturer  in  istiu. 

IIOWSON,  JOHN  S.,  M.A., J.S.H. 

Principal  of  the  Collegiate  Institution,  Liverpool. 

HUXTABLE,   EDGAR,  M.A., E.H— c. 

Subdean   of  Wells ;    Vice-Principal   of  Theolo- 
gical College,  Wells. 

LAYARD,  AUSTEN  H.,  D.C.L A.1I.L. 

LEATHES,  STANLEY,  M.A S.L. 

MARKS,  D.  W., D.W.M. 

Professor  of  Hebrew  in  University  Coll.,  London. 

MEYRICK,  FREDERICK,  M.A.,  F.M. 

One  of  Her  Majesty's  Inspectors  of  Schools  ;  late 
Fellow  of  Trinity  Coll.,  Oxford. 

ORGER,   E.  R.,  M.A.,    E.R.O. 

Fellow  of  St.  Augustine's  Coll.,  Canterbury. 

PEliOWNE,   J.  J.  S.,   B.D., J.J.S.F. 

Fellow  of  Corpus  Christi  Coll.,  Cambridge;  He- 
brew Lecturer  in  King's  Coll.,  London. 

PEROWNE,  THOS.  T.,  B.D., T.T.P. 

Fellow  of  Corpus  Christi  Coll.,  Cambridge. 

PHILLOTT,  II.  W.,  M.A.,    Il.W.P. 

Late  Student  of  Christchurch,  Oxford ;    Hector 

of  Staunton-on-Wye,  Herefordshire. 

PLUMPTRE,  E.  II.,  M.A., E.H. P. 

Professor  of  Pastoral   Theology  in  king's  Coll., 
London  ;  late  Fellow  of  Brasenose  Coll.,  Oxford. 

POOLE,  E.  STANLEY,  M;R.A.S E.S.P. 

POOLE,  R.  STUART,  M.R.S.L., R.S.P. 

Of  the  British  Museum. 

PORTER,  J.  L.,  M.A.,  J.L.P. 

Author  of  '  Handbook  of  the  Holy  Land.' 

PRTTCHARD,  CHARLES,  M.A.,    C.P. 

Head  Master  of  the  Grammar  School,  CUpham  ; 

late  Fellow  of  St.  John's  Coll.,  Cambridge. 

RAWLINSON,  GEORGE,  M.A., G.K. 

Late  Fellow  of  ICxeter  Coll.,  Oxford,  and  Bamp- 
ton Lecturer  in  1859. 

ROSE,  II.  J.,  B.D.,    II.J.R. 

Late  Fellow  of  St.  John's  Coll.,  Cambridge. 

SELWYN,  WILLIAM,  D.D.,    W.S. 

Margaret  Professor  of  Divinity,  Cambridge. 

SMITH,   1).  T.,    D.D., D.T.S. 

Professor  of  Sacred  Literature,  Bangor,  Massa- 
chusetts. 

SMITH,  WILLIAM,  LL.D.  (Editor,) 

Classical  Examiner  in  the  University  of  London. 

STANLEY,  ARTHUR  P.,  D.D A.P.S. 

Regius    Professor  of  Ecclesiastical   History,  Ox- 
ford, and  Canon  of  Christchurch. 

S'lOWE,  CALVIN    i:..    1>.D C.E.S. 

Prof,  of  Sacred  Literature,  Andover,  Massachusetts. 

THOMPSON,  .1.    P.,   D.D.,   New  York.  ...J.P.T. 

THOMSON,  WILLIAM,   D.D W.T. 

Provost  "i  Queen's  College,  Oxford, and  Preacher 
at  Lincoln's  Inn. 

VENABLES,   EDMUND,  M.\ E.V. 

WESTCOTT,  B.   P..   M.A B  l'.W. 

Late  Fellow  of  Trinity  I  loll.,  Cambridge. 

WRIGHT,   WTLLIAM    A.,   B.A.,  W.A.W. 

rrinitj  Coll..  i  '.'in'  i  idge, 


DIRECTIONS  TO  BINDER. 


lie  Map  of  Jerusalem,   Plate    I.,  to  be  placed  between  pages  1018  and  1019. 
„      II.,  „  „  „     1028    „    1029. 

„     HI-,  „       •      „  „     1032    „    1033. 


P  II  E  F  A  C  E. 


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

The  scope  and  object  of  the  Work  may  be  briefly  defined.  It  is  a 
Dictionary  of  the  Bible  and  not  of  T]ieolo<i>/.  It  is  intended  to  eluci- 
date the  antiquities,  biography,  geography,  and  natural  history  qf  the 
Old  Testament,  New  Testament,  and  Apocrypha ;  but  nut  to  explain 
systems  of  theology,  or  discuss  points  of  controversial  divinity.     It 


VI  (  PEBFACE. 

has  seemed,  however,  necessary  in  a  "  Dictionary  of  the  Bible  "  to  irive 
a  full  account  of  the  Book,  both  as  a  whole  and  in  its  separate  parts. 
Accordingly,  articles  are  inserted  not  only  upon  the  general  subject, 
such  as  "Bible,"  "Apocrypha,"  and  "Canon,"  and  upon  the  chief 
ancient  versions,  as  "  Septuagint "  and  "  Vulgate ;"  but  also  upon 
each  of  the  separate  books.  These  articles  are  naturally  some  of  the 
most  important  in  the  Work,  and  occupy  considerable  space,  as  will 
be  seen  by  referring  to  "Genesis,"  "Isaiah,"  and  "Job." 

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

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

In  the  composition  and  distribution  of  the  articles  three  [mints 


PREFACE.  Vll 

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

Many  names  in  the  Bible  occur  also  in  the  classical  writers,  and 
are  therefore  included  in  the  Classical  Dictionaries  already  published. 
But  they  have  in  all  cases  been  written  anew  for  this  work,  and  from 
a  Biblical  point  of  view.  No  one  would  expect  in  a  Dictionary  of  the 
Bible  a  complete  history  of  Alexandria  or  a  detailed  life  of  Alexander 
the  Great,  simply  because  they  are  mentioned  in  a  few  passages  of 
the  Sacred  Writers.  Such  subjects  properly  belong  to  Dictionaries 
of  Classical  C4eography  and  Biography,  and  are  only  introduced  here 
so  far  as  they  throw  light  upon  Jewish  history,  and  the  Jewish  cha- 
racter and  faith.  The  same  remark  applies  to  all  similar  articles, 
which,  far  from  being  a  repetition  of  those  contained  in  the  preceding- 
Dictionaries,  are  supplementary  to  them,  affording  the  Biblical  inform- 
ation which  they  did  not  profess  to  give.  In  like  manner  it  would 
obviously  be  out  of  place  to  present  such  an  account  of  the  plants 
and  animals  mentioned  in  the  Scriptures,  as  would  be  appropriate  in 
systematic  treatises  on  Botany  or  Zoology.  All  that  can  be  reason- 
ably required,  or  indeed  is  of  any  real  service,  is  to  identify  the  plants 
and  animals  with  known  species  or  varieties,  to  discuss  the  difficulties 
which  occur  in  each  subject,  and  to  explain  all  allusions  to  it  by  the 
aid  of  modern  science. 

Tn  a  Work  written  by  various  persons,  each  responsible  for  his 
own  contributions,  differences  of  opinion  must  naturally  occur.  Such 
differences,  however,  are  both  fewer  and  of  less  importance  than 
might  have  been  expected  from  the  nature  of  the  subject;  and  in 
some  difficult  questions— snch.  for  instance,  as  that  of  the  "  Brethren 
of  our  Lord" — the  Editor,  instead  of  endeavouring  to  obtain  nni- 
formitv,   lias  considered    it    an   advantage   to  the   reader  to  have   the 

arguments  stated  from  different  points  of  new. 

An  attempt  has  been  made  to  ensure,  as  far  as  practicable, 
uniformity  of  reference  to  the   most   important   books.     Jn  the   case 


Vlli  PKEFAOK. 

of  two  works  of  constant  occurrence  in  the  geographical  articles,  it 
may  be  convenient  to  mention  that  all  references  to  Dr.  Robinson's 
"Biblical  Researches"  and  to  Professor  Stanley's  "Sinai  and  Pales- 
tine," have  been  uniformly  made  to  the  second  edition  of  the  former 
work  (London,  1856,  3  vols.),  and  to  the  fourth  edition  of  the  latter 
(London,  1857). 

The  Editor  cannot  conclude  this  brief  explanation  without 
expressing  his  obligations  to  the  Writers  of  the  various  articles. 
Their  names  are  a  sufficient  guarantee  for  the  value  of  their 
contributions ;  but  the  warm  interest  they  have  taken  in  the  book, 
and  the  unwearied  pains  they  have  bestowed  upon  their  separate 
departments,  demand  from  the  Editor  his  grateful  thanks.  There 
is,  however,  one  Writer  to  whom  he  owes  a  more  special  acknow- 
ledgment. Mr.'  George  Grove  of  Sydenham,  besides  contributing 
the  articles  to  which  his  initial' is  attached,  has  rendered  the  Editor 
important  assistance  in  writing  the  majority  of  the  articles  on  the 
more  obscure  names,  in  preparing  the  lists  of  these  names,  in  the 
correction  of  the  proofs,  and  in  the  revision  of  the  whole  book.  The 
Editor  has  also  to  express  his  obligations  to  Mr.  E.  Stanley  Poole  for 
the  correction  of  the  Arabic  words. 

An  Atlas  of  Biblical  Geography  will  follow  the  second  volume 
of  the  Work,  which  will  be  published  by  the  end  of  next  year. 

WILLIAM  SMITH. 

Lokdon,  March  loth,  1860. 


DICTIONARY 


OF 


BIBLICAL   ANTIQUITIES,   BIOGRAPHY,  GEOGRAPHY, 
AND  NATURAL  HISTORY. 


A  ALAR.     [Addan.] 

AA'EON  (|i"inx  •  'Aapwv;  Aaron),  the  son  of 
Ami-am  (D1DJ?  kindred  of  the  Highest)  and  Joche- 
bod  (133V,  whose  glory  is  Jehovah),  and  the  elder 
brother  of  Moses  and  Miriam  (Num.  xxvi.  59,  xxxiii. 
39  ).  He  was  a  Levite,  and,  as  the  first-horn,  would 
naturally  be  the  priest  of  the  household,  even  before 
any  special  appointment  by  God.  Of  his  early  history 
we  know  nothing,  although,  by  the  way  in  which 
he  is  first  mentioned  in  Ex.  iv.  14,  as  "  Aaron 
the  Levite,"  it  would  seem,  as  if  he  had  been 
already  to  some  extent  a  leader  in  his  tribe.  All 
that  is  definitely  recorded  of  him  at  this  time  is, 
that,  in  the  same  passage,  he  is  described  as  one 
"  who  could  speak  well."  Judging  from  the  acts 
of  his  life,  we  should  suppose  him  to  have  been, 
like  many  eloquent  men,  a  man  of  impulsive  and 
comparatively  unstable  character,  leaning  almost 
wholly  on  his  brother;  incapable  ot  that  endurance 
of  loneliness  and  temptation,  which  is  an  element  of 
real  greatness ;  but  at  the  same  time  earnest  in  his 
devotion  to  God  and  man,  and  therefore  capable  of 
sacrifice  and  of  discipline  by  trial. 

His  first  office  was  to  be  the  "Prophet,"  i.e. 
(a. -curding  to  the  proper  meaning  of  the  word),  the 
Interpreter  and  ".Mouth"  (Ex.  iv.  l(i)  of  his  bro- 
ther, who  was  "slow  of  speech;"  and  accordingly 
he  was  not  only  the  organ  of  communication  with 
tin'  Israelites  and  with  Pharaoh  (Ex.  iv.  30,  vii.  ■_' ). 
but.  also  the  actual  instrument,  of  working  most 
of  the  miracles  of  the  Exodus.  (See  Ex.  vii. 
19,  &c.)  Thus  also  on  the  way  to  Mount  Sinai, 
during  the  battle  with  Amalek,  .Aaron  is  mentioned 
with  II  iir,  as  staying  up  the  weary  hands  of  Moses, 
when  they  were  lifted  up  for  the  victory  of  Israel 
(not  in  prayer,  as  is  sometimes  explained,  but)  to 

bear  th d  of  God  I  ee  Ex.  xvii.  9).     Through  all 

this  period,  he  is  only  mentioned  as  dependent  upon 
hi-,  brother, and  deriving  all  his  authority  from  him. 
The  contrast  between  them  is  even  more  strongly 
marked  on  the  arrival  at  Sinai.  Moses  it  o  • 
as  the  mediator  (Gal.  iii.  19)  for  the  people,  to 
come  near  to  God  for  them,  and  to  speak  His  words 
to  them.  Aaron  only  approaches  with  Nadab,  and 
Abihu,  and  the  seventy  elders  of  Israel,  by  special 
command,  near  enough  to  see  God's  glory,  but  not 
so  as  to  enter  His  immediate  presence.  Left  then. 
on  Moses'  departure,  to  guide  the  people,  he  is  tried 


AAEON 

for  a  moment  on  his  own  responsibility  and  he  fails, 
not  from  any  direct,  unbelief  on  his  own  part,  but 
from  a  weak  inability  to  withstand  the  demand  of 
the  people  for  visible  "gods  to  go  before  them." 
Possibly  it  seemed  to  him  prudent  to  make  an 
image  of  Jehovah,  in  .the  well-known  form  of 
Egyptian  idolatry  (Apis  or  Mnevis),  rather  than 
to  risk  the  total  alienation  of  the  people  to  false 
gods;  and  his  weakness  was  rewarded  by  seeing 
a  "feast  of  the  Lord"  (Ex.  xxxii.  5)  degraded 
to  the  lowest  form  of  heathenish  sensuality, 
and  knowing,  from  Moses'  words  and  deeds,  that 
the  covenant  with  the  Lord  was  utterly  broken. 
There  can  hardly  be  a  stronger  contrast,  with  this 
weakness,  and  the  self-convicted  shame  of  his  excuse, 
than  the  burning  indignation  of  Moses,  and  his  stern 
decisive  measures  of  vengeance ;  although  beneath 
these  there  lay  an  ardent  affection,  which  went 
almost  to  the  verge  of  presumption  in  prayer  for 
the  people  (Ex.  xxxii.  lii-o-l),  and  gained  forgive- 
ness for  Aaron  himself  (Deut.  ix.  20). 

It  is  not  a  little  remarkable,  that  immediately 
after  this  great  sin,  and  almost  as  though  it  had 
not  occurred,  God's  fore-ordained  nurposes  were 
carried  out  in  Aaron's  consecration  to  the  new  office 
of  the  high-priesthood.  Probably  the  fall  and  the 
repentance  from  it  may  have  made  him  one  "  who 
could  have  compassion  on  the  ignorant,  and  them 
who  are  out  of  the  way,  as  being  himself  also  com- 
passed with  infirmity."  The  order  of  God  for  the 
consecration  is  found  in  Ex.  xxix.,  and  the  record  of 
its  execution  in  Lev.  viii. ;  and  the  delegated  cha- 
racter of  the  Aaronic  priesthood  is  clearly  seen  by 
the  fact,  that,  in  this  its  inauguration,  the  priestly 
office  is  borne  by  .Moses,  as  God's  truer  represen- 
tative (see  Heb.  vii.). 

The  form  of  consecration  resembled  other  sacri- 
iniil  ceremonies  in  con-iunng,  firci,  a  so-cfirings 
the  form  of  cleansing  from  sin  and  reconciliation 
[Sin-offering]  ;  a  burnt-offering,  the  symbol  of 
entiie  devotion  to  God  of  the  nature  bo  purified 
[Burnt-offering/];  and  a  meat-offering,  the 
thankful  acknowledgment  and  sanctifying  of  God's 
natural  11  ssings  |  Mi  vr-m  i  bring  ).  It  had.  how- 
ever, besides  these,  the  solemn  assumption  of  the 
robes  (the  garb  of  righteousness),  the  anoint- 
ing (the  symbol  of  God's  grace),  and  the  offering  of 
the  ram  of  consecration,  the  blood  of  which  was 

sprinkled  on  Aaron  and  his  sons,  as  upon   the  altar 

and  vessels  of  the  ministry,  in  order  to  sanctify 
them  for  the  sen  ice  of  <  !od.    The  former  ceremonies 

U 


2  AARON 

represented  the  blessings  and  duties  of  the  man ;  the 
latter  the  special  consecration  of  the  priest." 

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

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

The  only  occasion,  on  which  his  individual  cha- 
racter is  seen,  is  one  of  presumption,  prompted  as 
before  chiefly  by  another,  and,  as  before,  speedily 
repented  of.  The  murmuring  of  Aaron  and  Miriam 
against  Moses  clearly  proceeded  from  their  trust, 
the  one  in  his  priesthood,  the  other  in  her  prophetic 
inspiration,  as  equal  commissions  from  God  (Num. 
xii.  2).  It  seems  to  have  vanished  at  once  before 
the  declaration  of  Moses'  exaltation  above  all  pro- 
phecy and  priesthood,  except  that  of  One  who  was  to 
come  :  and,  if  we  mayjudge  from  the  direction  of  the 
punishment,  to  have  originated  mainly  with  Miriam. 
On  all  other  occasions  he  is  spoken  of  as  acting 
with  Moses  in  the  guidance  of  the  people.  Leaning 
as  he  seems  to  have  done  wholly  on  him,  it  is  not 
strange  that  he  should  have  shared  his  sin  at  Me- 
ribah,  and  its  punishment  [Moses]  (Num.  xx. 
10-12).  As  that  punishment  seems  to  have  purged 
out  from  Moses  the  tendency  to  self-confidence, 
which  tainted  his  character,  so  in  Aaron  it  may 
have  destroyed  that  idolatry  of  a  stronger  mind,  into 
which  a  weaker  one,  once  conquered,  is  apt  to  fall. 
Aaron's  death  seems  to  have  followed  very  speedily. 
It  took  place  on'  Mount  Hor,  after  the  transference 
of  his  robes  and  office  to  Eleazar,  who  alone  with 
Moses  was  present  at  his  death,  and  performed  his 
burial  (Num.  xx.  28).  This  mount  is  still  called 
the  "Mountain  of  Aaron."     [HOR.] 

The  wife  of  Aaron  was  Elisheba  (Ex.  vi.  23)  :  and 
the  two  sons  who  survived  him,  Eleazar  and  Itha- 
mar.  The  high  priesthood  descended  to  the  former, 
and  to  his  descendants  until  the  time  of  Eli,  who, 
although  of  the  house  of  Ithamar,  received  the  high 
priesthood  (see  Joseph.  Ant.  v.  11,  §5,  viii.  1, 
§  3),  and  transmitted  it  to  his  children ;  with  them 
it  continued  till  the  accession  of  Solomon,  who  took 
it  from  Abiathar,  and  restored  it  to  Zadok  (of  the 
house  of  Eleazar),  so  fulfilling  the  prophecy  of  1  Sam. 
ii.  30.  '[A.  B.] 

N.B.  In  1  Chr.  xxvii.  17,  "  Aaron"  (pHK)  is 
counted  as  one  of  the  "  tribes  of  Israel." 


a  "It  is  noticeable  that  the  ceremonies  of  the  restora- 
tion of  the  leper  to  his  place,  as  one  of  God's  people, 
bear  a  strong  resemblance  to  those  of  consecration. 
See  Lev.  xiv.  10-32. 


ABARIM 

AB  ("IX,  father'),  an  element  in  the  composition 
of  many  proper  names,  of  which  Abba  is  a  Chaldaic 
form,  the  syllable  affixed  giving  the  emphatic  force 
of  the  definite  article.  Applied  to  God  by  Jesus 
Christ  (Mark  xiv.  36),  and  by  St.  Paul  (Rom. 
viii.  15  ;    Gal.  iv.  6).  [R.  W.  B.] 

AB.    [Months.] 

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

ABAD'DON.     [Asmodeus.] 

ABAG'THA  (Nn?3N  ;  Abgatha),  one  of  the 
seven  eunuchs  in  the  Persian  court  of  Ahasuerus 
(Esth.  i.  10).  In  the  LXX.  the  names  of  these 
eunuchs  are  different.  The  word  contains  the  same 
root  which  we  find  in  the  Persian  names  Bigtha 
(Esth.  i.  10),  Bigthan  (Esth.  ii.  21),  Bigthana 
(Esth.  vi.  2),  and  Bagoas.  Bohlen  explains  it  from 
the  Sanscrit  baqaddta,  "  given  by  fortune,"  from 
baga,  fortune,  the  sun. 

AB'ANA  (~3"1X;"J  'APavd;  Abana),  one  of 
the  "rivers  (finn"])  of  Damascus  "  (2  K.  v.  12). 
The  Barada  (Xpvaopp6as  of  the  Greeks)  and 
the  Awaj  are  now  the  chief  streams  of  Damascus, 
and  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  the  former 
of  these  represents  the  Abana  and  the  latter  the 
Pharpar  of  the  text.  As  far  back  as  the  days 
of  Pliny  and  Strabo  the  Barada  was,  as  it  now  is, 
the  chief  river  of  the  city  (Rob.  iii.  446),  flowing 
through  it,  and  supplying  most  of  its  dwellings 
with  water.  The  Awaj  is  further  from  Damascus, 
and  a  native  of  the  place,  if  speaking  of  the  two 
together,  would  certainly,  with  Naaman,  name  the 
Barada  first  (Porter,  i.  276).  To  this  may  be 
added  the  fact  that  in  the  Arabic  version  of  the 
passage — the  date  of  which  has  been  fixed  by  R6- 
diger  as   the    I  lth    cent. — Abana   is   rendered   by 

Barda,  (S$rj.     Further,  it  seems  to  have  escaped 

notice  that  one  branch  of  the  Awaj — if  Kiepert's 
map  (in  Rob.  1856)  is  to  be  trusted — now  bears 
the  name  of  Wady  Barbar.  There  is  however  no 
reference  to  this  in  Robinson  or  Porter. 

The  Barada  rises  in  the  Antilibanus  near  Zeb- 
ddng,  at  about  23  miles  from  the  city,  and  1149 
feet  above  it.  In  its  course  it  passes  the  site  of  the 
ancient  Abila,  and  teceives  the  waters  of  Ain-Fijch, 
one  of  the  largest  springs  in  Syria.  This  was  long 
believed  to  be  the  real  source  of  the  Barada,  accord- 
ing to  the  popular  usage  of  the  country,  which 
regards  the  most  copious  fountain,  not  the  most 
distant  head,  as  the  origin  of  a  river.  We  meet 
with  other  instances  of  the  same  mistake  in  the  case 
of  the  Jordan  and  the  Orontes  [Am]  ;  it  is  to  Dr. 
Robinson  that  we  are  indebted  for  its  discovery  in  the 
present  case  (Rob.  iii.  477).  After  flowing  through 
Damascus  the  Barada  runs  across  the  plain,  leaving 
the  remarkable  Assyrian  ruin  Tell  es-Salahiyeh  on 
its  left  bank,  till  it  loses  itself  in  the  lake  or  marsh 
Bahret  el-Kibliyeh.  Mr.  Porter  calculates  that 
14  villages  and  150,000  souls  are  dependent  on  this 
important  river.  For  the  course  of  the  Barada  see 
Porter,  vol.  i.  chap.  v.  Joum.  of  S.  Lit.  N.S.  viii., 
Rob.  iii.  446,  7.  Lightfoot  (Cent.  Chor.  iv.)  and 
Gesenius  (Thes.  116)  quote  the  name}1»D''1p  as  ap- 
plied in  the  Lexicon  Aruch  to  the  Amana.        [('.] 

ABA'RIM  (Milton  accents  Ab'arim),  the 
"mount,"     or    "mountains    of"    (always    with 

t  The  Keri,  with  the  Targum  Jonathan  and  the 
Syriac  version,  has  Amanah.     See  margin  of  A.  V. 


ABDA 

the  def.  article,  Dnnyn  "1H,  or  HPI,  rb  6pos 
rb  'Afiapifi,  or  iv  rcS  irepav  rov  'lopSauov, 
=  the  mountains  of  the  farther  parts,  or  possibly, 
of 'the  fords),  a  mountain  or  range  of  highlands 
on  the  east  of  the  Jordan,  in  the  land  of  Moab 
(Dent,  xxxii.  49),  facing  Jericho,  and  forming  the 
eastern  wall  of  the  Jordan  valley  at  that  part.  Its 
most  elevated  spot  was  "  the  Mount  Nebo,  '  head 
of  'the'  Pisgah,"  from  which  Moses  viewed  the 
Promised  Land  before  his  death.  There  is  nothing 
to  prove  that  the  Abarim  were  a  range  or  tract  ol 
any  length,  unless  the  Ije-Abarim  ("heaps  of  A.") 
named  in  Num.  xxxiii.  44,  and  which  were  on  the 
south  frontier  of  Moab,  are  to  be  taken  as  belonging 
to  them.  But  it  must  be  remembered  that  a  word 
derived  from  the  same  root  as  Abarim,  viz.  "13J/, 
is  the  term  commonly  applied  to  the  whole  of  the 
country  on  the  east  of  the  Jordan. 

These  mountains  are  mentioned  in  Num.  xxvii. 
12,  xxxiii.  47,  48,  and  Dent,  xxxii.  49  ;  also  pro- 
bably  in  Jer.  xxii.  20,  where  the  word  is  rendered 
in  the  A.  V.  "  passages." 

In  the  absence  of  research  on  the  E.  of  the  Jordan 
and  of  the  Dead  .Sea,  the  topography  of  those  regions 
must  remain  to  a  great  degree  obscure.  [G.] 

AB'DA  (N^ay ;  Avtuv;  Ahda).    1.  Father  of 

Adoniram  (1  K.  iv.  6).  2.  Son  of  Shammna  (Neh. 
3d.  17),  called  Obadiah  in  1  Chr.  ix.  1G. 

AB'DEEL  ^tnnj? ;    Abdccl),  father  of  She- 

lemiah  (Jer.  xxxvi.  26). 

AB'DI  (Hiy ;  'A/Sal ;    Abdi),  name  of  three 

men.      1.  (1  Chr.  vi.  44).      2.  (2  Chr.  xxix.  12). 

3.  (Ezr.  x.  26). 

ABDIAS,  2  Esdr.  i.  39.     [Obadiah.] 
AB'DIEL  (Wwjf ;  'A08^X  ;  Abdiel),  son  of 
Guni  (IChr.  v.  15).' 

AB'DON  (fmy;  'A05^y;  Abdon).  1.  A 
judge  of  Israel  (Judg.  xii.  13,  15),  perhaps  the 
same  person  as  Bedan  in  1  Sam.  xii.  11.  2.  Son 
of  Shashak  (1  Chr.  viii.  23).  3.  First-born  son  of 
Jehiel,  son  of  Gibeon  (1  Chr.  viii.  30,  ix.  35,  36). 

4.  Son  of  Micah,  a  contemporary  of  Josiah  (2  Chr. 
xaoriv.  20),  called  Achbor  in  2  K.  xxii.  12. 

AB'DON  QS12V,  'Aftwv,Aaffld>v,  'Pa/30we), 
acitvinthe  tribe  of  Asher,  given  to  the  Gershonites 
(Josh.  xxi.  30;  1  Chr.  vi.  74).  No  place  of  this 
name  appears  in  the  list  of  the  towns  of  Asher 
(Josh.  xix.  24-31);  but  instead  we  find    28)  pay, 

•■  Hebron,"*  which  is  the  same  word,  with  the  change 
frequent  in  Hebrew  of  T  for  "1.  Indeed  many  MSS. 
haw  Abdon  in  Josh.  xix.  28  (Ges.  980;  Winer, 
s.  r.)  •  but,  on  the  other  hand,  all  the  ancient  ver- 
sions retain  the  R,  except  the  Vatican  I, XX.  which 
lias  'EA&wv  (  Alex.  Wxpdv.  [G.j 

ABED'NEGO  (iM""nj| ;  'A/SSewytS  ; 

nago),  i.e.  servant  of  Nego,  perhaps  the  same  as 

.  which  was  the  Chaldaean  name  of  the  planet 

Mercury,  worshipped  as  the  bi  ribe  and  interpreter  of 

the  gods(Gesen.).  Abednegii  h;i>  thei  'haldaoan  name 

a  The  Ain  is  here  rendered  by  II.   The  II  in  the  well- 
known  Hebron  represents  Ch.     Elsewhere 
Gomorrah)  Ain  is  rendered  by  <;  in  the  Auth.  \ 

b  it  is  in  favour  of  Gesenitu'  interpretation  that  the 
ChaUlee  Targum  always  renders  Abel  by  Miahor,  v,  bioh 


ABEL  3 

given  to  Azariah,  one  of  the  three  friends  of  Daniel, 
miraculously  saved  from  the  burning  fiery  furnace 
(Dan.  iii.).       [Azariah,  No.  10.]       [R.  W.  B.] 

A'BEL  (?2X  =  b  meadow,  accordingtoGesenius, 

who  derives  it  from  a  root  signifying  moisture  like 
that  of  grass :  see,  however,  the  arguments  in  favour 
of  a  different  meaning  of  Lengerke,  Kenaan,  i.  358, 
and  Hengstenberg,  Pent.  ii.  319)  ;  the  name  of 
several  places  in  Palestine : — 

1.  A'bel-beth-jia'acha  (i"!3yQ   IT'S   'R),  a 

town  of  some  importance  (tto'A.iv  ko.\  ixrirpSivoAi?, 
"  a  city  and  a  mother  in  Israel  "  2  Sam.  xx.  19), 
in  the  extreme  N.  of  Palestine ;  named  with  Dan, 
Cinneroth,  Kedesh  ;  and  as  such  falling  an  early 
prey  to  the  invading  kings  of  Syria  (1  K.  xv. 
20)  and  Assyria  (2  K.  xv.  29).  In  the  parallel 
passage,  2  Chr.  xvi.  4,  the  name  is  changed  to 
Abel  Maim,  D^O  'R  =  "Abel  on  the  waters."    Here 

Sheba  was  overtaken  and  besieged  by  Joab  (2  Sam. 
xx.  14,  15)  ;  and  the  city  was  saved  by  the  exercise 
on  the  part  of  one  of  its  inhabitants  of  that  sagacity 
for  which  it  was  proverbial  (18).  In  verses  14 
and  18  it  is  simply  Abel,  and  in  14  is  apparently 
distinguished  from  Beth-maacha.  If  the  derivation 
of  Gesenius  be  the  correct  one,  the  situation  of  Abel 
was  probably  in  the  Ard  el-Huleh,  the  .marshy 
meadow  country  which  drains  into  the  Sea  of 
Merom,  whether  at  Abil  (Robinson,  iii.  372),  or 
more  to  the  south  (Stanley,  S.  and  P.  390  note). 
Eusebius  and  Jerome  place  it  between  Paneas  and 
Damascus ;   but  this  has  not  been  identified. 

2.  A'bel-miz'raim  (Mi/ziaim),  D'HVQ  'R,  ac- 
cording to  the  etymology  of  the  text,  the  mourning 
of  Egypt,  irevdos  Aiyinrrov  ( this  meaning,  however, 
requires  a  different  pointing,  ?2R  for  ?3R)  :   the 

name  given  by  the  Canaanites  to  the  floor  of  Atad, 
at  which  Joseph,  his  brothers,  and  the  Egyptians 
made  their  mourning  for  Jacob  (Gen.  1.  11).  It 
was  beyond  (~\2V  =  on  the  east  of)  Jordan,  though 

placed  by  Jerome  at  Betb-Hogla  (now  Ain-Sajla), 
near  the  river,  on  its  tces£  bank.     [Atad.] 

3.  A'bel-SIUt'ti.M  (with  tin; article  D't2£J'n  'R), 
"the  meadow  of  the  acacias,"  in   the*"  plains 
(nh~ry  =  the  deserts)  of  Moab  ;   on  the  low  level 

of  the  Jordan  valley,  as  contradistinguished  from 
the  cultivated  "fields"  on  the  upper  level  of  the 
table-land.  Here — their  last  resting-place  before 
crossing  the  Jordan — Israel  "  pitched  from  Beth- 
jesimoth  unto  A.  Shitthn,"  Num.  xxxiii.  49. 
The  place  is  most  frequently  mentioned  by  its 
shorter  name  of  Shittim.  [Siuttim.]  In  the  days 
of  Josephus  it  was  still  known  as  Abila. — the  town 
embosomed  in  palms,0  (iirov  fdv  n6\is  icrrlv 
'A/3iA.7),  <poivii(6<pvrov  5'  iar\  rb  xa'p'tuv-  Ant. 
iv.  8,  §  1  ),   60   stadia   from   the   river   i\.    I.   §1  ). 

The  town  and  the  palms  have  disappeared  ;  bat  the 
acacia-groves,  denoted  by  the  name  Shittim,  still 
remain,  "marking  with  a  line  of  verdure  the  upper 

terraces  of  the  Jordan  valley"  (Stanley,  67.  and  I'. 
298). 

4.  A'BEL-MEHO'l  mi     I  Mi    Aolah,    !"6inp  'X, 

in  later  Hebrew  lost  its  special  significance,  and  was 
i  sieve!  spot  or  plain  generally. 
c  It  was  amongst   these  palms,  according;  to  Jo- 
sephus, that   Denteronomy  was  delivered  by  Moses. 
See  the  passage  above  cited. 

B2 


4  ABEL 

"  meadow  of  the  dance  "J,  named  with  Beth-shean 
(Scythopolis)  and  Jokneam  (1  K.  iv.  12),  and 
therefore  in  the  N.  part  of  the  Jordan  valley  (Eus. 
iv  Ttf  avAcovt).  To  "the  border  (the  'lip'  or 
'  brink  ')  of  Abel-meholah,"  and  to  Beth-shittah 
(the  '  house  of  the  acacia  '),  both  places  being  evi- 
dently down  in  the  Jordan  valley,  the  routed 
Bedouin  host  fled  from  Gideon  (Judg.  vii.  22). 
Here  Elisha  was  found  at  his  plough  by  Elijah 
returning  up  the  valley  from  Horeb  (1  K.  xix. 
16-19).  In  Jerome's  time  the  name  had  dwindled 
to  'A/SeA/xea. 

5.  A'bel-cera'mim  (COIS  'N),  in  the  A.  V. 
rendered  "  the  plain  of  the  vineyards,"  a  place  east- 
ward of  Jordan,  beyond  Aroer  ;  named  as  the  point 
to  which  Jephtha's  pursuit  of  the  Bene-Ammon 
extended  (Judg.  xi.  33).  A  Kaifj.7]  ap.-Ke\o<p6pos 
"A/3e\  is  mentioned  by  Eusebius  at  6  (Jerome,  7) 
miles  beyond  Philadelphia  (Rabbah)  ;  and  another, 
olvo<p6pos  Ka\ov)xevr\,  more  to  the  N.  12  miles  E. 
from  Gadara,  below  the  Hieromax.  Ruins  bearing 
the  name  of  Abila  are  still  found  in  the  same  posi- 
tion (Ritter,  Syria,  1058).  There  were  at  least 
three  places  with  the  name  of  Aroer  on  the  further 
side  of  the  Jordan.     [Aroer.] 

6.  "  The  great  '  Abel,'  in  the  field  of  Joshua 
the  Bethshemite"  (1  Sam.  vi.  18).  By  comparison 
with  14  and  15,  it  would  seem  that  3  has  been 
here  exchanged  for  7,  and  that  for  ?3X  should  be 
read  |3K  =  stone.  So  the  LXX.  and  the  Chaldee 
Targum.  Our  translators,  by  tha  insertion  of 
"  stone  of,"  take  a  middle  course.  See,  however, 
Lengerke  (358)  and  Herxheimer  (1  Sam.  vi.  18), 
who  hold  by  Abel  as  being  the  name  subsequently 
given  to  the  spot  in  reference  to  the  "  mourning  " 
(•l^UNn'')  there,  ver.  19.  In  this  case  compare 
Gen'.  1.11.  [G.] 

A'BEL,  in  Hebr.  HEBEL  (71PI ;  "AjSeA. ; 
Abel ;  i.  e.  breath,  vapour,  transitorincss,  probably 
so  called  froin  the  shortness  of  his  life),  the  second 
son  of  Adam,  murdered  by  his  brother  Cain  (Gen. 
iv.  1-16).  Jehovah  showed  respect  for  Abel's  offer- 
ing, but  not  for  that  of  Cain,  because,  according 
to  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (xi.  4),  Abel  "  by 
faith  offered  a  more  excellent  sacrifice  than  Cain." 
The  expression  "  sin,"  i.  e.  a  sin-offering  "  lieth  at 
the  door"  (Gen.  iv.  7),  seems  to  imply  that  the 
need  of  sacrifices  of  blood  to  obtain  forgiveness  was 
already  revealed.  On  account  of  Abel's  faith,  St. 
Augustine  makes  Abel  the  type  of  the  new  regene- 
rate man ;  Cain  that  of  the  natural  man  (de  Civ. 
Dei,  xv.  1).  St.  Chrysostom  observes  that  Abel 
offered  the  best  of  his  flock — Cain  that  which  was 
most  readily  procured  (Horn,  in  Gen.  xviii.  5). 
Jesus  Christ  spoke  of  him  as  the  first  martyr 
(Matt,  xxiii.  35)  ;  so  did  the  early  church  subse- 
quently. For  Christian  traditions  see  Iren.  v.  67  ; 
Chrysost.  Horn,  in  Gen.  xix. ;  Cedren.  Hist.  8. 
For  those  of  the  Rabbins  and  Mahommedans.  Eisen- 
menger, Entdeckt.  Jud.  i.  462,  832 ;  Hottinger, 
Hist.  Or.  24  ;  Ersch  &  Gruber,  Enojklop.  s.  v. ; 
and  the  Kur-an  V.  The  place  of  his  murder  and 
his  grave  are  pointed  out  near  Damascus  (Poeocke, 
b.  ii.  168);  and  the  neighbouring  peasants  tell  a 
curious  tradition  respecting  his  burial  (Stanley, 
S.  Sf  P.  p.  413). 

The  Oriental  Gnosticism  of  the  Sabaeans  made 
Abel  an  incarnate  Aeon,  and  the  Gnostic  or  Mani- 
chaean  sect  of  the  Abelitae  in  North  Africa  in  the 
time  of  Augustine   (deHaeres.  86,   87),  so  called 


ABIASAPH 

themselves  from  a  tradition  that  Abel,  though  mar- 
ried, lived  in  continence.  In  order  to  avoid  perpe- 
tuating original  sin,  they  followed  his  example,  but  in 
order  to  keep  up  their  sect,  eaeh  married  pair  adopted 
a  male  and  female  child,  who  in  their  turn  vowed  to 
many  under  the  same  conditions.  [R.  W.  B.] 

A'BEZ  Q>nS  in  pause  }OK  ;  'Pete's  ;   Abes), 

a  town  in  the  possession  of  Issachar,  named  be- 
tween Kishion  and  Remeth,  in  Josh.  xix.  20,  only. 
Gesenius  mentions  as  a  possible  derivation  of  the 
name,  that  the  Chaldee  for  tin  is  i"l^3K.  Possibly, 
however,  the  word  is  a  corruption  of  V3I1,  Thebez, 
now  Tubas,  a  town  situated  not  far  from  Engannim 
and  Shunem  (both  towns  of  Issachar),  and  which 
otherwise  has  entirely  escaped  mention  in  the  list 
in  Joshua.  [G.] 

A'BI  ("OX;  "AQov;  ^46*'),  mother  of  king  Heze- 

kiah  (2  K.  xviii.  2).  The  name  is  written  Abijah 
(iTOX)  in  2  Chr.  xxix.  1.     Her  father's  name  was 

Zeehaiiah.  He  was  perhaps  the  Zechariah  mentioned 
by  Isaiah  (viii.  2).  [R.  W.  B.] 

ABI'A,  ABIAH,   or  ABI'JAH  (H»3«  = 

•irPlX;   'A/3<a;   Abia).      1.  Son   of  Becher,  the 

son  of  Benjamin  (1  Chr.  vii.  8).  2.  WifeofHez- 
ron  (1  Chr.  ii.  24).  3.  Second  son  of  Samuel, 
whom  together  with  his  eldest  son  Joel  he  made 
judges  in  Beersheba  (1  Sam.  viii.  2  ;  1  Chr.  vii.  28). 
The  corruptness  of  their  administration  was  the 
reason  alleged  by  the  Israelites  for  their  demanding 
a  king.      4.  Mother  of  king  Hezekiah.     [Abi.] 

For  other  persons  of  this  name  see  Abijah. 

[R.  W.  B.] 

ABI-AL'BON.     [Abiel,] 

ABI'ASAPH,  otherwise  written  EBI'ASAPH 
(?|DXpX,   Ex.  vi.  24,   and  SlDpX,   1  Chr.  vi. 

8,  22,  ix.  19 ;  'Aflidffap,  'Afitcrd<p,  'Afli&(Ta.<p ; 
Abiasaph  :  according  to  Simonis,  "  enjus  patron 
abstulit  Deus"  with  reference  to  the  death  of 
Korah,  as  related  in  Num.  xvi. ;  but  according  to 
Fiirst  and  Gesenius,  father  of  gathering,  i.  e.  the 
gatherer ;   compare  P)DX,  Asaph,  1  Chr.  vi.  39). 

He  was  the  head  of  one  of  the  families  of  the 
Korhites  (a  house  of  the  Kohathites),  but  his  pie- 
cise  genealogy  is  somewhat  uncertain.  In  Ex.  vi. 
24,  he  appears  at  first  sight  to  be  represented  as 
one  of  the  sons  of  Korah,  and  as  the  brother  of 
Assir  and  Elkanah.  But  in  1  Chr.  vi.  he  appeals 
as  the  son  of  Elkanah,  the  son  of  Assir,  the  son  of 
Korah.  The  natural  inference  from  this  would  be 
that  in  Ex.  vi.  24  the  expression  "  the  sons  of 
Korah"  merely  means  the  families  into  which  the 
house  of  the  Korhites  was  subdivided.  But  if  so, 
the  verse  in  Exodus  must  be  a  later  insertion  than 
the  time  of  Moses,  as  in  Moses'  lifetime  the  great- 
grandson  of  Korah  could  not  have  been  the  head  of 
a  family.  And  it  is  remarkable  that  the  veise  is 
quite  out  of  its  place,  and  appears  impropeily  to 
separate  ver.  25  and  ver.  23,  which  both  relate  to 
the  house  of  Aaron.  If,  however,  this  inference  is 
not  correct,  then  the  Ebiasaph  of  1  Chr.  vi.  is  n 
different  person  from  the  Abiasaph  of  Ex.  vi.,  viz. 
his  great-nephew.  But  this  does  not  seem  pro- 
bable. It  appears  from  1  Chr.  ix.  19,  that  that 
branch  of  the  descendants  of  Abiasaph  of  which 
Shall  um  was  chief  were  porters,  "  keepers  of  the 
gates  of  the  tabernacle;"  and  from  ver.  31    that 


ABIATHAR 

Mattithiab,  "  the  first-bora  of  Shallum  the  Korahite 
had  the  set  office  over  the  things  that  were  made 
in  the  pans,"  apparently  in  the  time  of  David. 
From  Noli.  xii.  2,~>  we  learn  that  Abiasaph's  family 
was  cot  extinct  in  the  days  of  Nehemiah;  for  the 
family  of  Meshullam  (which  is  the  same  as  Shal- 
lum), with  Talmon  and  Akkub,  still  filled  the  office 
of  porters,  "  keeping  the  ward  at  the  threshold  of 
the  gate."  Other  remarkable  descendants  of  Abi- 
asaph,  according  to  the  text  of  1  Chr.  vi.  33-37, 
weie  Samuel  the  prophet  and  Elkanah  his  father 
(1  Sam.  i.  1),  and  Heman  the  singer;  but  Ebiasaph 
seems  to  be  improperly  inserted  in  ver.  37.a  The 
possessions  of  those  Kohathites  wdio  were  not  de- 
scended from  Aaron,  consisting  of  ten  cities,  lay  in 
the  tribe  of  Ephraim,  the  half-tribe  of  Manasseh, 
ami  the  tribe  of  Dan  (Josh.  xxi.  20-26 ;  1  Chr.  vi. 
61).  The  family  of  Elkanah  the  Kohathite  lesided 
in  Mount  Ephraim  (1  Sam.  i.  1).  [A.  C.  H.] 

ABIATHAR  prvaX;  'Af3id8ap;  Abiathar; 
but  the  version  of  Sautes  Pagninus  has  Ebiathar, 
according  to  the  Hebrew  points.  In  Mark  ii. 
26,  it  is  'A@ia.6ap.  According  to  Simonis,  the 
name  means  "  (cujus)  pater  superstes  mansit, 
thoitua  scil.  matre  ;"  but  according  to  Eiirst  and 
Gesenius,  father  of  excellence,  or  abundance). 
Abiathar  was  that  one  of  all  the  sous  of  Ahimelech 
the  high  priest  who  escaped  the  slaughter  inflicted 
upon  his  father's  house  by  Saul,  at  the  instigation 
of  Doeg  the  Edomite  (see  title  to  Ps.  lii.  and  the 
psalm  itself),  in  revenge  for  his  having  inquired  of 
the  Lord  for  David,  and  given  him  the  shew-bread 
to  eat,  and  the  sword  of  Goliath  the  Philistine,  as 
is  related  in  1  Sam.  xxii.  We  are  there  told  that 
when  Doeg  slew  in  Nob  on  that  day  fourscore  and 
five  persons  that  did  wear  a  linen  ephod,'"one  of 
the  sons  of  Ahimelech  the  son  of  Ahitub,  named 
Abiathar,  escaped  and  tied  after  David ;"  and  it  is 
added  in  xxiii.  6,  that  when  he  did  so  "  he  came 
down  with  an  ephod  in  his  hand,"  and  was  thus 
enabled  to  inquire  of  the  Lord  for  David  (1  Sam. 
xxiii.  9,  xxx.  7;  2  Sam.  ii.  1,  v.  19,  &c).  The 
fact  of  David  having  Deeu  the  unwilling  cause  of 
the  death  of  all  Abiathar's  kindred,  coupled  with 
his  gratitude  to  his  father  Ahimelech  for  his  kiud- 
ness  to  him,  made  him  a  firm  and  stedfast  friend 
tu  Abiathar  all  his  life.  Abiathar  on  his  part  was 
firmly  attached  to  David.  He  adhered  to  him  in 
his  wanderings  while  pursued  by  Saul;  he  was 
with  him  while  he  reigned  in  Hebron  (2  Sam.  ii. 
l-"i),  the  city  of  the  house  of  Aaron  (Josh.  xxi. 
10-13);  In' .carried  the  ark  before  him  when  David 
brought  it  up  tu  Jerusalem  (1  Chr.  xv.  11;  1  K. 
ii.  *_i * >  ;  he  continued  faithful  to  him  in  Absalom's 
rebellion  (2  Sam.  xv.  24,  29,  :;:>,  36,  xvii.  15-17, 
xix.  11);  and  "  was  afflicted  in  all  wherein  David 
was  afflicted."  He  was  also  one  of  David's  chief 
counsellors  (1  Chr.  zxvii.  34).  When,  however, 
Adonijah  set  himself  up  for  David's  successor  on 
the  throne  in  opposition  to  Solomon,  Abiathar, 
either. persuaded  by  Joab,  or  in  rivalry  to  Zadok, 
or  under  seme  influence  which  cannot  new  be  dis- 
covered, sided  with  him,  and  was  One  of  his  chief 
partisans,  while  Zadok  was  en  Solomon's  side.  For 
this  Abiathar  was  banished  to  his  native  village, 
Anathoth,  in  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  (Josh.  x\i.  18), 
and    narrowly    escaped     with    his    life,   which    was 


■  see  I'hr  Genealogies  of  our  Lord  nml  Saviour 
Jesus  Christ,  by  Lord  Arthui  Uervey,  p.  .'in,  and  p. 
J I  I,  note. 


ABIATHAR  5 

spared  by  Solomon  only  on  the  strength  of  his  long 
and  faithful  service  to  David  his  father.  He  was 
no  longer  permitted  to  perform  the  functions  or 
enjoy  the  prerogatives  of  the  high-priesthood.  For 
we  are  distinctly  told  that  "  Solomon  thrust  out 
Abiathar  from  being  priest  to  the  Lord;"  ami  that 
"  Zadok  the  priest  did  the  king  p-it  in  the  room  of 
Abiathar"  (1  K.  ii.  Ii7,  35).  So  that  it  is  difficult 
to  understand  the  assertion  in  1  K.  iv.  4,  that  in 
Solomon's  reign  "Zadok  and  Abiathar  weie  the 
priests  ;"  and  still  more  difficult  in  connexion  with 
ver.  2,  which  tells  us  that  "  Azariah  the  son  of 
Zadok"  was  "the  priest:"  a  declaration  confirmed 
by  1  Chr.  vi.  10.  It  is  probable  that  Abiathar  did 
not  long  survive  David.  He  is  not  mentioned  again, 
and  he  must  have  been  far  advanced  in  years  at 
Solomon's  accession  to  the  throne. 

There  are  one  or  two  other  difficulties  connected 
with  Abiathar,  to  which  a  brief  refeience  must  be 
made  before  we  conclude  this  article.  (1.)  In  2  Sam. 
viii.  17,  and  in  the  duplicate  passage  1  Chr.  xviii. 
16,  and  in  1  Chr.  xxiv.  3,  6,  31,  we  have  Ahime- 
lech substituted  for  Abiathar,  and  Ahimelech  the 
son  of  Abiathar,  instead  of  Abiathar  the  son  of 
Ahimelech.  Whereas  in  2  Sam.  xx.  25,  and  in  every 
other  passage  iu  the  0.  T.,  we  are  unifoimly  told 
that  it  was  Abiathar  who  was  priest  with  Zadok 
in  David's  reign,  and  that  he  was  the  son  of  Ahi- 
melech, and  that  Ahimelech  was  the  son  of  Ahitub. 
The  difficulty  is  increased  by  finding  Abiathar 
spoken  of  as  the  high-priest  in  wdiose  time  David 
ate  the  shew-bread,  in  Mark  ii.  26.  (See  Alford, 
ad  loc.)  However,  the  evidence  in  favour  of  David's 
friend  being  Abiathar  the  sori  of  Aliimelech  pre- 
ponderates so  strongly,  and  the  impossibility  of  any 
rational  reconciliation  is  so  clear,  that  one  can  only 
suppose,  with  Procopius  of  Gaza,  that  the  en  or  was 
a  clerical  one  originally,  and  was  propagated  fiom 
one  passage  to  another.  The  mention  of  Abiathar 
by  our  Lord,  in  Mark  ii.  26,  might  perhaps  be  ac- 
counted for,  if  Abiathar  was  the  person  wdio  per- 
suaded his  father  to  allow  David  to  have  the  biead, 
and  if,  as  is  probable,  the  loaves  were  Abiathar's 
(Lev.  xxiv.  9),  and  given  by  him  with  his  own 
hand  to  David.  It  may  also  be  remarked  that  our 
Lord  doubtless  spoke  of  Abiathar  as  fHSH,  "the 

priest,"  the  designation  applied  to  Ahimelech 
throughout  1  Sam.  xx.,  and  equally  applicable  to 
Abiathar.  The  expression  apxicpevs  's  *-ne  Greek 
translation  of  our  Lord's  words. 

(2.)  Another  difficulty  concerning  Abiathar  is  to 
determine  his  position  relatively  to  Zadok,  and  to 
account  tor  the  double  high-priesthood,  and  for  the 
advancement  of  the  line  of  Ithamar  over  that  of 
Eleazar.  A  theory  lias  been  Invented  that  Abiathar 
was  David's,  and  Zadok  Saul's  high-priest,  but  it 
seems  to  lest  on  no  solid  ground.  The  facts  of  tin- 
ease  are  these: — Ahimelech,  the  son  of  Ahitub.  the 
■  on  of  Phinehas,  the  son  of  Eli,  was  high-priesi  in 
the  reign  of  Saul.      On    his  death   his  .-on  Abiathar 

became  high-priest.  Tin'  first  mention  of  Zadok  is 
in  I  Chr.  xii.  28,  where  he  is  described  as  "a 
young  man  might v  of  valour,"  and  is  said  to  have 
joined  David  while  he  reigned  in  Hebron,  in  com- 
pany with  Jehoiada,  "  the  leader  of  the  Aaronites." 

from  this  time  we  lead,  both  in  the  books  of 
Samuel  and  Chronicles,  of  "Zadok  and  Abiathar 
the  priests,"  Zadok  being  always  named  fust.  And 
\.l  we  are  told  that  Solomon  on  his  accession  pot 
Zadok  in  the  room  of  Abiathar.  Perhaps  the  true 
state  of  the  case  was.  that    Abiathaj     Was    the    fust, 


6 


ABIB 


and  Zadok  the  second  priest ;  but  that  from  the 
superior  strength  of  the  house  of  Eleazar  (of  which 
Zadok  was  head),  which  enabled  it  to  furnish  16 
out  of  the  24  courses  (1  Chr.  xxiv.),  Zadok  acquired 
considerable  influence  with  David;  and  that  this, 
added  to  his  being  the  heir  of  the  elder  line,  and 
perhaps  also  to  some  of  the  passages  being  written 
after  the  line  of  Zadok  were  established  in  the  high- 
priesthood,  led  to  the  precedence  given  him  over 
Abiathar.  We  have  already  suggested  the  possi- 
bilitv  of  jealousy  of  Zadok  being  one  of  the  motives 
which  inclined  Abiathar  to  join  Adonijah's  faction. 
It  is  most  remarkable  how,  first,  Saul's  cruel 
slaughter  of  the  priests  at  Nob,  and  then  the 
political  error  of  the  wise  Abiathar,  led  to  the  ful- 
filment of  God's  denunciation  against  the  house  of 
Eli,  as  the  writer  of  1  K.  ii.  27  leads  us  to  observe 
when  he  says  that  "  Solomon  thrust  out  Abiathar 
from  being  priest  unto  the  Lord,  that  he  might 
fulfil  the  word  of  the  Lord  which  He  spake  con- 
cerning the  house  of  Eli  in  Shiloh."  See  also  Joseph. 
.  Ant.  viii.  1,  §§3,  4.  [A.  C.  H.] 

A'BIB.     [Months.] 

ABI'DAH  and  ABI'DA  (yTIlX ;  'A/3ei8c{ ; 

Abida),   a   son  of  Midian   (Gen.  xxv.  4  ;    1  Chr. 

i.  33).  [E.  S.  P.] 

A'BIDAN  (rj"3X;  'A^5^ ;  AbMan),  chief 

of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  at  the  time  of  the  Exodus 
(Num.  i.  11,  ii.  22,  vii.  60,  65,  x.  24). 

A'BIEL  6&02K;  'AjSW/A;  AMcl).      1.  The 

father  of  Kish,  and  consequently  grandfather  of  Saul 
(1  Sam.  ix.  1),  as  well  as  of  Abner,  Saul's  com- 
mander-in-chief (1  Sam.  xiv.  51).  In  the  genealogy 
in  1  Chr.  viii.  33,  ix.  39,  Ner  is  made  the  father  of 
Kish,  and  the  name  of  Abie]  is  omitted  ,  but  the 
correct  genealogy  according  to  Samuel  is  : — 
Abiel 


I  I 

Kish  Ner 

I  I 

Saul  Abner 

2.  One  of  David's  30  "mighty  men"  (1  Chr. 
xi.  32);  called  in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  31,  Abi-Albon,  a 
name  which  has  the  same  meaning.      [R.  W.  B.] 

ABIE'ZER  ("Ity  >nX,  father  of  help  ;  'A/3<- 

f£epi  'I^C'  i  famitia  Ezri,  domus  Abiezer). 
1.  Eldest  son  of  Gilead,  and  descendant  of  Machir 
and  Manasseh,  and  apparently  at  one  time  the  lead- 
ing family  of  the  tribe  (Josh.  xvii.  2;  Num.  xxvi. 
30,  where  the  name  is  given  in  the  contracted 
form  of  ITyVK,  Jeezcr).  In  the  genealogies  of 
Chronicles,  Abiezer  is,  in  the  present  state  of  the 
text,  said  to  have  sprung  from  the  sister  of  Gilead 
(1  Chr.  vii.  18).  Originally,  therefore,  tile  family 
was  with  the  rest  of  the  house  of  Gilead  on  the 
east  of  Jordan ;  but  when  first  met  with  in  the 
history,  some  part  at  least  of  it  had  crossed  the 
Jordan  and  established  itself  at  Ophrah,  a  place 
which,  though  not  yet  identified,  must  have  been 
on  the  hills  which  overlook  from  the  south  the 
wide  plain  of  Esdraelon,  the  field  of  so  many  of  the 
battles  of  Palestine  (Stanley,  246-7  ;  Judg.  vi.  34). 
Here,  when  the  fortunes  of  his  family  were  at  the 
lowest — "  my  '  thousand'  is  '  the  poor  one'  in  Ma- 
nasseh "  (vi.  15) — was  born  the  great  Judge  Gideon, 
destined  to  raise  his  own  house  to  almost  royal  dignity 
(Stanley,  229),  and  to  achieve  for  his  country  one  of 
the  most  signal  deliverances  recorded  in  their  whole 


ABIJAH 

history.  [Gideon  ;  Ophrah.]  The  name  occurs, 
in  addition  to  the  passages  above  quoted,  in  Judg.  vi. 
34,  viii.  2  ;  and  in  an  adjectival  form  (^Tyi!  *38C, 
"the  Abiezrite")  in  Judg.  vi.  11,  24,  viii.  32. 

2.  One  of  David's  "  mighty  men  "  (2  Sam.  xxiii. 
27  ;   1  Chr.  xi.  28,  xxvii.  12).  [G.] 

AB'IGAIL   (^VnX,    or    hV'lX;    'AjSrycua; 

Abigail).  1.  The  beautiful  wifeofNabal,  a  wealthy 
o\\  ner  of  goats  and  sheep  in  Carmel.  When  David's 
messengers  were  slighted  by  Nabal,  Abigail  took  the 
blame  upon  herself,  supplied  David  and  his  follow- 
ers with  provisions,  and  succeeded  in  appeasing  his 
anger.  Ten  days  after  this  Nabal  died,  and  David 
sent  for  Abigail  and  made  her  his  wife  (1  Sam. 
xxv.  14,  seq.).  By  her  he  had  a  son,  called  Chi- 
leab  in  2  Sam.  iii.  3;  but  Daniel,  in  1  Chr.  iii.  1. 
For  Daniel  Thenius  proposes  to  read  !"I  v1^  suggested 

to  him  by  the  LXX.  Aakov'ia  (Then.  Exeg.  Handb. 
ad  foe). 

2.  A  sister  of  David,  married  to  Jether  the  Ish- 
maelitc,  and  mother,  by  him,  of  Amasa  (1  Chr.  ii. 
17).  In  2  Sam.  xvii.  25,  she  is  described  as  the 
daughter  of  Nahash,  sister  to  Zeruiah,  Joab's  mother, 
and  as  marrying  Ithra  (another  form  of  Jether)  an 
Israelite. 

The  statement  in  Samuel  that  the  mother  of 
Amasa  was  an  Israelite  is  doubtless  a  transcriber's 
error.  There  could  be  no  reason  for  recording  this 
circumstance;  but  the  circumstance  of  David's  sister 
marrying  a  heathen  Ishmaelite  deserved  mention 
(Thenius,  Exeg.  Handb.  Sam.  1.  c).  [R.  W.  B.] 

ABIHA'IL  (^ITaX;   'A^iXai\;    Abihaiel). 

1.  Father  of  Zuriel,  chief  of  the  Levitical  family  of 
Merari,  a  contemporary  of  Moses  (Num.  iii.  35). 

2.  Wife  of  Al.ishur  (1  Chr.  ii.  29).  3.  Son  of 
Huri,  of  the  tribe  of  Gad  (1  Chr.  v.  14).  4.  Wife 
of  Rehoboam.  She  is  called  the  daughter,  i.  e.  a 
descendant  of  Eliab,  the  elder  brother  of  David.  In 
2  Chr.  xi.  18,  her  name  is  written  with  H  instead 
of  n,  and  in  the  LXX.  'Aj8icua.  5.  Lather  of 
Esther  and  uncle  of  Mordecai  (Esth.  ii.  15,  ix.  29). 

The  names  of  No.  2  and  4  are  written  in  some 
MSS.  b?n»3S  ('APixaia,  1  Chr.  ii.  29;  'Aj3i- 
yala,  2  Chr.  xi.  18),  which  Gesenius  conjectures 
to  be  a  corruption  of  ?TI  'ON,  but  which  Simonis 

derives  from  a  root  7-111,  and  interprets  "father  of 
light,  or  splendour."  [R.  W.  B.] 

ABrHU^-irraS*;  'A/3iov5;  Aln<t),  the  second 
son  (Num.  iii.  2)  of  Aaron  by  Elisheba  (Ex.  vi.  23), 
win i  with  his  father  and  his  elder  brother,  Nadab 
and  70  elders  of  Israel  accompanied  Moses  to  the 
summit  of  Sinai  (Ex.  xxiv.  1).  Being  together  with 
Nadab  guilty  of  offering  strange  fire  (Lev.  x.  1)  to 
the  Lord,  i.e.  not  the  holy  fiie  which  burnt  con- 
tinually upon  the  altar  of  burnt-offering  (Lev.  vi.  9, 
12);  they  were  both  consumed  by  fire  from  heaven, 
and  Aaron  and  his  surviving  sons  were  forbidden  to 
mourn  for  them.  [R.  W.  B.] 

ABI'HUD  O-irvnN;  'AfaovS;  Abiud),  sou  of 
Bela  and  grandson  of  Benjamin  (1  Chr.  viii.  3). 

ABI'JAH  or  ABI'JAM.  1.  (W3M,  n»2N, 
d*2K,  will  of  Jehovah  :  'A/3ia,  'Afiioi,  LXX. ; 
'Afilas,  Joseph. ;  Abiam,  Abia),  the  son  and  suc- 
cessor of  Rehoboam  on   the  throne  of  Judah  (1  K. 


ABIJAH 

xiv.  31;    2  Chr.  xii.  16).      He  is  called  Abijah 

in  Chronicles,  Abijam  in  Kings  ;  the  latter  name 
being  probably  an  error  in  the  i\ISS.,  since  the 
LXX.  have  nothing  corresponding  to  it,  and  their 
form,  'A&iov,  seems  taken  from  Abijahu,  which 
occurs  2  Chr.  xiii.  20,  21.  Indeed  (iesenius  says 
that  some  ilSS.  read  Abijah  in  1  K.  xiv.  31.  The 
supposition,  therefore,  of  Lightfbot  {Harm.  0.  T., 
p.  209,  1'itman's  edition),  that  the  writer  in  Kings, 
who  takes  a  much  worse  view  of  Abijah's  character 
than  we  find  in  Chronicles,  altered  the  last  syllable 
to  avoid  introducing  the  holy  Jah  into  the  name  of 
a  bad  man,  is  unnecessary.  But  it  is  not  fanciful 
or  absurd,  for  changes  of  the  kind  were  not  un- 
usual :  for  example,  after  the  Samaritan  schism, 
the  Jews  altered  the  name  of  Shechem  into  Sychar 
{drunken),  as  we  have  it  in  John  iv.  5  ;  and  Hosea 
(iv.  15)  changes  Bethel,  house  of  God,  into  Betha veil, 
house  of  naught.     (See  Stanley,  S.  4'  P-  p-  222.) 

From  the  first  book  of  Kings  we  learn  that 
Alii  jah  endeavoured  to  recover  the  kingdom  of  the 
Ten  Tribes,  and  made  war  on  Jeroboam.  No  details 
are  given,  but  we  are  also  informed  that  he  walked 
in  all  the  sins  of  Kehoboam  (idolatry  and  its  attend- 
ant immoralities,  1  K.  xiv.  23,  24),  and  that  his 
heart  "  was  not  perfect  before  God,  as  the  heart  of 
David  his  father."  In  the  second  book  of  Chro- 
nicles his  war  against  Jeroboam  is  more  minutely 
described,  and  he  makes  a  speech  to  the  men  of 
Israel,  reproaching  them  for  breaking  their  alle- 
giance to  the  house  of  David,  for  -worshipping  the 
golden  calves,  and  substituting  unauthorized  priests 
for  the  sons  of  Aaron  and  the  Levites.  He  was 
successful  in  battle  against  Jeroboam,  and  took 
the  cities  of  Bethel,  Jeshanah,  and  Ephrain,  with 
their  dependent  villages.  It  is  also  said  that  his 
army  consisted  of  400,000  men,  and  Jeroboam's  of 
800,000,  of  whom  500,000  fell  in  the  action :  but 
Kennicott  {The  Hebrew  Text  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment considered,  p.  532)  shows  that  our  MSS. 
are  frequently  incorrect  as  to  numbers,  and  gives 
reasons  for  reducing  these  to  40,000,  80,000,  and 
50,000,  as  we  actually  find  in  the  Vulgate  printed 
at  Venice  in  I486,  and  in  the  old  Latin  version  of 
Josephus  ;  while  there  is  perhaps  some  reason  tip 
think  that  the  smaller  numbers  were  in  his  ori- 
ginal Greek  text  also.  Nothing  is  said  by  the 
writer  in  Chronicles  of  the  sins  of  Abijah,  but  we 
are  told  that  after  his  victory  he  "  waxed  mighty, 
and  married  fourteen  wives,"  whence  we  may  well 
infer  that  he  was  elated  with  prosperity,  and  like 
his  grandfather  Solomon  fell  during  the.  last  two 
years  of  his  life  into  wickedness,  as  described  in 
Kings.  Both  records  inform  us  that  lie  i  i  ned 
three  years.  His  mother  was  called  either  Maachah 
or  Michaiah,  which  are  mere  variations  of  the 
same  name,  and  in  some  places  (1  K.  xv.  2  ; 
2  Chr.  xi.  20)  she  is  said  to  !"■  the  daughter  of 
Absalom  or  Abishalom  (again  the  same  name)  ;  in 
one  (2  Chr.  xiii.  2)  of  Uriel  of  Gibeah.  B  I 
it  is  so  common  for  the  word  D2,  daughter,  to  be 
used  in  the  sense  of  granddau 
that  we  need  not  he  itate  i"  a  si  me  that  Uriel 
married  Absalom's  daughter,  and  that  thus  Maachah 
was  daughter  of  Uriel  and  granddaughter  of  Absa- 
lom. Abijah  therefore  was  .1.  n  David, 
nil  his  father's  and  mother's  side.  According 
to  Kwald's  chronology  the  date  of  Abijah's  acces- 
sion was  B.C.  968;  Clinton  places  it  in  nr.  959. 
The  18th  year  of  Jeroboam  coincides  with  the  1st 
and  2nd  of  Abijah. 


ABILENE  7 

2.  The  second  son  of  Samuel,  called  AlUAII  in  our 
version  ('Afiid,  LXX.).    [Asia,  Abiah,  No.  3.] 

3.  The  son  of  Jeroboam  I.  king  of  Israel,  in 
whom  alone,  of  all  the  house  of  Jeroboam,  was 
found  "  some  good  thing  toward  the  Lord  ' 
Israel,"  and  who  was  therefore  the  only  one  of  his 
family  who  was  suffered  to  go  down  to  the  grave 
in  peace.  He  died  in  his  childhood,  just  after 
Jeroboam's  wife  had  been  sent  in  disguise'  to  seek 
help  for  him  in  his  sickness  from  the  prophet  Abi- 
jah, who  gave  her  the  above  answer.     (1  K.  xiv.) 

4.  A  descendant  of  Eleazar,  who  gave  his  name 
to  the  eighth  of  the  twenty-four  courses  into  which 
the  priests  were  divided  by  David  (1  Chr.  xxiv. 
10;  2  Chr.  viii.  14).  To  the  course  of  Abijah 
or  Abia  belonged  Zacharias  the  father  of  John  the 
Baptist  (Luke  i.  5). 

5.  A  contemporary  of  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  7). 

[G.  E.  L.  C] 
ABI'JAM.    [Abijah,  No.  1.] 

A'BILA.  [Abilene.] 

ABILE'NE  (' A&i\T)vh,  Luke  iii.  1 ),  a  tetrarchy 
of  wdiich  Abila  was  the  capital.  This  Abila  must 
not  be  confounded  with  Abila  in  Feraea,  and  other 
Syrian  cities  of  the  same  name,  but  was  situated 
on  the  eastern  slope  of  Antilibanus,  in  a  distiiet 
fertilised  by  the  river  Barada.  It  is  distinctly  as- 
sociated with  Lebanon  by  Josephus  (Ant.  xviii.  0, 
§10,  six.  5,  §1,  xx.  7,  §1;  B.  J.  ii.  11,  §5). 
Its  name  probably  arose  fiom  the  green  luxuriance 
of  its  situation,  "  Abel  "  perhaps  denoting  "  a  grassy 
meadow."  [See  p.  3,  b.]  The  name,  thus  derived, 
is  quite  sufficient  to  account  for  the  traditions  of  the 
death  of  Abel,  which  are  associated  with  the  spot, 
and  which  are  localised  by  the  tomb  called  Nebi  JI<  Ml, 
on  a  height  above  the  ruins  of  the  city.  The  position 
of  the  city  is  very  clearly  designated  by  the  Itineraries 
as  1 8  miles  from  Damascus,  anil  :.s  (or  32)  miles  from 
Heliopolis  or  Baalbec  ([tin.  Ant.  and  Tab.  Pent.'). 

It  is  impossible  to  fix  the  limits  of  the  Abilene 
which  is  mentioned  by  St.  Luke  as  the  tetrarchy 
of  Lysanias.  [Lysanias.]  Like  other  districts 
of  the  East,  it  doubtless  underwent  many  changes 
both  of  masters  and  of  extent,  before  it  was  finally 
absorbed  in  the  province  of  Syria.  Josephus  :ismi- 
ciates  this  neighbourhood  with  the  name  of  Lysa- 
nias both  before  and  after  the  time  referred  to  by 
the  evangelist.  For  the  later  notices  see  the  pas- 
sages just  cited.  We  there  find  "  Abila  of  Lysa- 
nias," and  '•  the  tetrarchy  of  Lysanias,"  distinctly 
mentioned  in  the  reigns  of  Claudius  and  Caligula. 
We  find  also  the  phrase  'A/3L\a  Avcrav[ov  in  Ptolemy 
(v.  15,  §22).  The  natural  conclusion  appears  to  be 
that  this  was  the  Lysanias  of  St.  Luke.  It  is  true 
that  a  chieftain  bearing  the  same  name  is  mentioned 
by  Josephus  in  the  time  of  Antony  and  Cleopatra, 
as  ruling  in  the  same  neighbourhood  (Ant.  xiv. 
:;,  §3,  w.  1,  §1  ;  /.'.  ./.  1.  [3,  41  :  also  Dion 
Cass,  xlix.32):  and  from  the  (lose  connexion  of 
this   man's    father   with    Lebanon   and    Damascus 

'     .   \iii.   16,   §3,   xiv.  7,  §1  ;    A'.  ./.    i.  9, 
it  is  probable  thai  Abilene  was  part  of  his  territory, 

and    that    the    Lysanias  of   St.   l.ule   u  BS  the  sun  or 

on  of  the  former.     I'\ en  it'  we  assun 
many  writers  too  readil]  assume)  thai  the  t 

ed  in  the  time  of  Cla  I         ulfl   is 

to  lie  iilelll  ified,  ll"t   with  tii  of   st.  Luke, 

bul  \\  ith  flu-  eai  li., 

and  never  positive!}  connected  with  Abila)  in  tin1 
fames  of  Antony  and  Cleopatra,  there  is  no  difficulty 
in  believing  that  a  prince  bearing  this  nairn 


8  AB1MAEL 

over  a  tetrarohy  having  Abila  for  its  capital,  in  the 
15th  year  of  Tiberius.  ^See  Wieseler,  Chronolo- 
gische  Synopse  der  vier  Evangelien,  pp.  174-183.) 
The  site  of  the  chief  city  of  Abilene  has  been  un- 
doubtedly identified  where  the  Itineraries  place  it ; 
and  its  remains  have  been  described  of  late  years  by 
many  travellers.  It  stood  in  a  remarkable  gorge 
called  the  Suk  Wady  Barada,  where  the  river 
bleaks  down  through  the  mountain  towards  the 
plain  of  Damascus.  Among  the  remains  the  in- 
scriptions are  most  to  our  purpose.  One  contain- 
ing the  words  Avcraviov  Terpdpxov  is  cited  by  Po- 
coc.ke,  but  has  not  been  seen  by  any  subsequent  tra- 
veller. Two  Latin  inscriptions  on  the  face  of  a 
rock  above  a  fragment  of  Itoman  road  (first  noticed 
in  the  Quarterly  Review  for  1822,  No.  52)  were  first 
published  by  Letronne  (Journal  des  Savans,  1827), 
and  afterwards  by  Orelli  (Inscr.  Lot.  4997,  4998). 
One  relates  to  some  repairs  of  the  road  at  the  expense 
of  the  Abileni:  the  other  associates  the  16th  Legion 
Avitli  the  place.  (See  Hogg,  in  the  Trans,  of  the 
Royal  Geog.  Soc.  for  1851  ;  Porter,  in  the  Journal 
of  Sacred  Literature  for  July,  1853,  and  especially 
his  Damascus,  i.  261-273  ;  and  Robinson,  Later 
Bib.  Res.  478-484.)  [J.  S.  H.] 

ABIM'AEL  (^X»»2N;  'Afli/WA;  Ahimael), 

a  descendant  of  Joktan  (Gen.  x.  28  ;  1  Chr.  i. 
22),  and  probably  the  progenitor  of  an  Arab 
tribe.  Bochart  (Phaleg,  ii.  24)  conjectures  that 
his  name  is  preserved  in  that  of  Ma\i,  a  place 
in  Arabia  Aromatifera,  mentioned  by  Theophrastus 
(Hist.  Plant,  ix.  4),  and  thinks  that  the  Malitae 
are  the  same  as  Ptolemy's  Manitae  (vi.  7,  §154), 
and  that  they  were  a  people  of  the  Minaeans  (for 
whom  see  Arabia).     The  name  in  Arabic  would 

probably  be  written  Y^U,    .  j\.  [E.  S.  P.] 

ABIM'ELECH  (^»*1K,  father  of  the  king, 

or  father-king  ;  'AfZip.e\ex  j  Abimclecli),  the 
name  of  several  Philistine  kings.  It  is  supposed 
by  many  to  have  been  a  common  title  of  their 
kings,  like  that  of  Pharaoh  among  the  Egyptians, 
and  that  of  Caesar  and  Augustus  among  the 
Romans.  The  name  Father  of  the  King,  or  Father 
King,  corresponds  to  Padishah  (Father  King),  the 
title  of  the  Persian  kings,  and  Atalih  (Father,  pr. 
paternity),  the  title  of  the  Khans  of  Bucharia 
(Gesen.  Thes.").  An  argument  to  the  same  effect 
is  drawn  from  the  title  of  Ps.  xxxiv.,  in  which  the 
name  of  Abimelech  is  given  to  the  king,  who  is 
called  Achish  in  1  Sam.  xxi.  11 ;  but  perhaps  we 
ought  not  to  attribute  much  historical  value  to  the 
inscription  of  the  Psalm. 

1.  A  Philistine,  king  of  Gerar  (Gen.  xx.,  xxi.), 
who,  exercising  the  right  claimed  by  Eastern 
princes,  of  coHecting  all  the  beautiful  women  of 
their  dominions  into  their  harem  (Gen.  xii.  15; 
Esth.  ii.  3),  sent  for  and  took  Sarah.  A  similar 
account  is  given  of  Abraham's  conduct  on  this  oc- 
casion, to  that  of  his  behaviour  towards  Pharaoh 
[Abraham]. 

2.  Another  king  of  Gerar  in  the  time  of  Isaac, 
of  whom  a  similar  narrative  is  recorded  in  relation 
to  Rebekah  (Gen.  xxvi.  1,  seqS). 

3.  Son  of  the  judge  Gideon  by  his  Shechemite 
concubine  (Judg.  viii.  31).  After  his  lather's  death 
he  murdered  all  his  brethren,  70  in  number,  with 
the  exception  of  Jotham  the  youngest,  who  concealed 


ABISHAI 

himself;  and  he  then  persuaded  the  Shechemites, 
through  the  influence  of  his  mother's  brethren,  to 
elect  him  king.  It  is  evident  from  this  narrative 
that  Shechem  now  became  an  independent  state, 
and  threw  off  the  yoke  of  the  conquering  Israelites 
(Ewald,  Gesch.  ii.  444).  When  Jotham  heard  that 
Abimelech  was  made  king,  he  addressed  to  the  She- 
chemites his  fable  of  the  trees  choosing  a  king  (Judg. 
ix.  1,  seq.  cf.  Joseph.  Ant.  v.  7,  §2),  which  may  be 
compared  with  the  well-known  table  of  Menenius 
Agrippa  (Liv.  ii.  32).  After  he  had  reigned  three 
years,  the  citizens  of  Shechem  rebelled.  He  was 
absent  at  the  time,  but  he  returned  and  quelled  the 
insurrection.  Shortly  after  he  stormed  and  took 
Thebez,  but  was  struck  on  the  head  by  a  woman 
with  the  fragment  of  a  mill-stone  (comp.  2  Sam.  xi. 
21);  and  lest  he  should  be  said  to  have  died  by  a 
woman,  he  bid  his  armour-bearer  slay  him.  Thus 
God  avenged  the  murder  of  his  brethren,  and  ful- 
filled the  curse  of  Jotham. 

4.  Son  of  Abiathar,  the  high-priest  in  the  time 
of  David  (1  Chr.  xviii.  16),  called  Abimelech  in 
2  Sam.  viii.  16  [Ahimelech].  [R.  W.  B.] 

ABIN'ADAB  (313'aN  ;    'AixivaUfr ;    Abi- 

nadah).  1.  A  Levite,  a  native  of  Kiijathjearim, 
in  whose  house  the  ark  remained  20  years  (1  Sam. 
vii.  1,  2;  1  Chr.  xiii.  7).  2.  Second  son  of  Jesse, 
who  followed  Saul  to  his  war  against  the  Phi- 
listines (1  Sam.  xvi.  8,  xvii.  13).  3.  A  son  of 
Saul,  who  was  slain  with  his  brothers  at  the  fatal 
battle  on  Mount  Gilboa  (2  Sam.  xxxi.  2).  4.  Father 
of  one  of  the  12  chief  officers  of  Solomon  (1  K. 
iv.  7).  [R.  W.  B.]. 

ABIN'OAM  (OyrnN  ;  'Afavei/i  ;  Abinoem), 

the  father  of  Barak  (Judg!  iv.  6,  12 ;  v.  1,  12). 

[R.  W.  B.j 
ABI'EAM    (D"V3X ;     'AfreipJ>v ;     Abirori). 

1.  A  Reubenite,  son  of  Eliab,  who  with  Dathan 
and  On,  men  of  the  same  tribe,  and  Korah  a  Levite, 
organized  a  conspiracy  against  Moses  and  Aaron 
(Num.  xvi.).     [For  details,  see  Korah.] 

2.  Eldest  son  of  Hiel,  the  Bethelite,  who  died 
when  his  father  laid  the  foundations  of  Jericho  (1 
K.  xvi.  34),  and  thus  accomplished  the  first  part  of 
the  curse  of  Joshua  (Josh.  vi.  26).      [R.  W.  B.] 

AB'ISHAG  QCrON. ;  'A/3iady;    Abisag),  a 

beautiful  Shunamite,  taken  into  David's  harem  to 
comfort  him  in  his  extreme  old  age  (1  K.  i.  1-4). 
After  David's  death  Adonijah  induced  Bathsheba, 
the  queen-mother,  to  ask  Solomon  to  give  him 
Abishag  in  marriage  ;  but  this  imprudent  petition 
cost  Adonijah  his  life  (1  K.  ii.  13,  seq.~).  [Ado- 
nijah.] [R.  W.  B.] 

ABISH'AI  0B»n« ;  'AjSeo-cra  and  'AjBicraf; 
Abisai"),  son  of  David's  sister  Zeruiah,  and  brother 
ofjoab.  He  was  one  of  David's  chief  oiricers.  The 
services  which  he  rendered  to  David  were  numerous, 
and  his  zeal  and  devotion  conspicuous.  He  accom- 
panied him  on  his  perilous  visit  to  the  camp  of  Saul 
(1  Sam.  xxvi.  5).  He  was  eager  to  punish  the 
insolence  of  Shimei  (2  Sam.  xvi.  9).  He  fled  with 
him  from  Absalom,  and  commanded  a  third  part  of 
the  royal  army  (2  Sam.  xviii.  2).  He  rescued  him 
from  Ishbi-benob,  the  giant,  in  the  war  with  the 
Philistines  (2  Sam.  xxi.  16,  17).  Lastly,  according 
to  1  Chr.  xviii.  12,  David's  slaughter  of  18,000 
Edomites  (or  Syrians,  1  Sam.  viii.  13)  is  due  to 
Abishai.  [R.  W.  B.] 


ABISHALOM 
ABISH'ALOM  (DlT^ZlK  ;      Afc<r(ra\<bfi  ; 

Abessalom),  father  of  Maachah,  who  wns  the  wife 
of  Kehoboam,  and  mother  of  Abijah  ( 1  K.  xv.  2,  10). 
He  is  called  Absalom  (Dl^K )  ia  2  <  !hr.  xi.  20, 21. 
This  person  must  be  David's  son  (see  LXX.,  2  Sam. 
xiv.  27).  The  daughter  of  Absalom  was  doubtless 
called  Maachah  after  her  grandmother  (2  Sam. 
iii.  3). 

ABISH'UA   (y-IC'^N*;     'Apuroi ;     Abisue. 

According  to  Simonis,  patris  sains;  i.  q.  2&><riTra- 
Tpos,  and  SwiraTpos.  According  to  Fiirst,  fattier  or 
lord  of  happiness.    Pater  saint  is,  Gesen.).     1.  Son 

of  Bela,  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  (1  Chr.  viii.  4). 
2.  Son  of  l'hinehas,  the  son  of  Eleazar,  and  the 
father  of  Bukki,  in  the  genealogy  of  the  high-priests 
(1  Chr.  vi.  4,  5,  50,  51;  Ezr.  vii.  4,  5).  Accord- 
in--  to  Josephus  (Ant.  viii.  1,  §3)  he  executed 
the  office  of  high-priest  after  his  father  Phinehas, 
and  was  succeeded  by  Eli;  his  descendants,  till 
Zadok,  falling  into  the  rank  of  private  persons 
(iSiwTfvcravTts).  His  name  is  corrupted  into 
'idxr-niros.    Nothing  is  known  of  him.     [A.  C.  H.] 

AB'ISHUR  ("I-V^IN  ;  'Afaffoip  ;  Abisur), 
son  of  Shammai  (1  Chr.  ii.  28). 

AB'ITAL  ("?t3*3K  ;  A0ito.\  ;  Ahital),  one  of 
David's  wives  (2  Sam.  iii.  4;   1  Chr.  iii.  3). 

AB'ITUB  (l-ll^nS ;  'A$ircl>\  •  Ahitub),  son  of 
Shaharaim  by  Hushim  (1  Chr.  viii.  11). 

ABLUTION.     [Purification.] 

ABNER  CT33«,  once  Ip/SK,  father  of  light ; 

Af3evi/rip ;  Aimer),  son  of  Ner,  who  was  the 
brother  of  Kish  (1  Chr.  ix.  36),  the  father  of 
Said.  Abner,  therefore,  was  Saul's  first  cousin, 
ami  was  made  by  him  commander-in-chief  of  his 
army  (  1  Sam.  xiv.  51).  He  was  the  person  who 
con  lucted  David  into  Saul's  presence  after  the 
death  of  Goliath  (xvii.  57);  and  afterwards  accom- 
panied his  master  when  he  sought  David's  life  at 
Hachilah  (xxvi.  3-14).  From  this  time  we  hear  no 
more  of  him  till  after  the  death  of  Saul,  when  he 
l'ises  into  importance  as  the  mainstay  of  his  family. 
It  would  seem  that,  immediately  after  the  disastrous 
battle  of  Mount  (iilboa,  David  was  proclaimed  king 
of  Judah  in  Hebron,  the  old  capital  of  that  tribe, 
but  that  the  rest  of  the  country  was  altogether  in 
the  hands  of  the  Philistines,  and  that  five  years 
passed  before  any  native  prince  ventured  to  oppose 
In-  claims  to  their  power.  During  that  time  the 
Israelites  were  gradually  recovering  their  territory, 
and  at  length  Aimer  proclaimed  the  weak  and  unfor- 
tunate [shbosheth,  Saul's  son,  as  king  of  Israel  in 
Mahanaim,  beyond  Jordan — at  firs!  no  doubt  as  a 
place  uf  security  against  the  Philistines,  though  all 
set  ious  apprehen  ion  of  danger  from  them  must  have 
soon  passed  away — and  [shbosheth  was  generally 
recognized  except  by  Judah.  This  view  of  the  order 
of  events  i-  necessary  to  reconcile  2  Sam.  ii.  Hi, 
where  [shbosheth  is  said  to  have  reigni  I   >•  ei  I  rael 


ABOMINATION 


9 


tor  two  years,  with  ver.  ll,  in  which  we  read  that 
David  was  king  of  Judah  lor  seven;  and  it  is  con- 
firmed by  vers.  5,  6,  7,  in  which  David's  message  of 
thank-  to  the  men  of  Jabesh-gilead  for  burying  Saul 
anil  his  -on-  implies  that  no  prince  of  Saul's  house 
had  as  vet  claimed  the  throne,  hut  that  David  hoped 

that  his  title  would  he  m acknowledged  bj  all 

Israel;  while  the  exhortation  "to  be  valiant"  pro- 


bably refers   to   the  struggle   with    the  Philistines, 
who  placed  the  only  apparent  impediment  in  the 
way  of  his  recognition.    War  soon  broke  out  between  ' 
the  two  rival  kings,  ami  a  "  very  sore  battle  "  was 
fought  at  Gibeon  between  the  men  of  Israel  under 
Abner,  and  the  men  of  Judah  under  Joab,  son  of 
Zeruiah,  David's  sister  (I  Chr.  ii.  16).     When  the 
army  of  Ishbosheth  was  defeated,  Joab's  youngest 
brother  Asahel,  who  is  said  to  have  been  "as  light 
of  foot  as  a  wild  roe,"  pursued  Abner,  and  in  spite 
of  warning  refused  to  leave  him,  so  that  Abner  in 
self  defence  was  forced  to  kill  him.      After  this  the 
war  continued,  success  inclining  more  and  more  to 
the  side  of  David,  till  at  last  the  imprudence  of 
Ishbosheth  deprived  him  of  the  counsels  and  general- 
ship of  the  hero,  who  was  in  truth  the  only  support 
of  his  totteiing  throne.     Abner  had  married  Pi/pah, 
Saul's  concubine,  and  this,  according  to  the  views  of 
( )riental  courts,  might  be  so  interpreted  as  to  imply 
a  design  upon  the  throne.      Thus  we  read  of  a  cer- 
tain Armais,  who,  while  left  viceroy  of  Egypt  in  the 
absence  of  the  king  his  brother,  "  used  violence  to 
the  queen  and  concubines,  and  put  on  the  diadem, 
and  set  up  to  oppose  his  brother  "  (Manetho,  quoted 
by  Joseph,  c.  Apion.  i.  15).  Cf.  also  2  Sam.  xvi.  21, 
xi.  3,  1  K.  ii.  13-25,  and  the  case  of  the  Pseudo- 
Smerdis,  Herod,  iii.  68.     [Absalom;  Adoxuah.] 
Rightly  or  wrongly,  Ishbosheth   so   understood  it, 
though  Abner  might  seem  to  have  given  sufficient 
proof  of  his  loyalty,  and  he  even  ventured  to  re- 
proach him  with  it.     Abner,  incensed  at  his  ingra- 
titude, after  an  indignant  reply,  opened  negotiations 
with  David,  by  whom  he  was  most  favourably  re- 
ceived at  Hebron.     He  then  undertook  to  procure 
his  recognition  throughout  Israel ;  but  after  leaving 
his  court  for  the  purpose  was  enticed  back  by  Joah, 
and  treacherously  murdered  by  him  and  his  brother 
Abishai,  at  the  gate  of  the  city,  partly  no  doubt,  as 
Joab  showed  afterwards  in  the  case  of  Amasa,  from 
fear  lest  so  distinguished  a  convert  to  their  cause 
should   gain   too  high   a  place    in   David's   favour 
(Joseph.  Ant.  vii.  1,  §5),   but  ostensibly   in   teta- 
liation  for  the  death  of  Asahel.     For  this  there  was 
indeed  some  pretext,  inasmuch  as  it  was  thought 
dishonourable  even  in  battle  to  kill  a  mere  stripling 
like  Asahel,  and  Joab  and  Abishai  were  in  this  case 
the  revengers  of  blood  (Num.  xxxv.  19),  but  it  is 
also  plain  that  Abner  only  killed  the  youth  to  save 
his  own  life.  This  murder  caused  the  greatest  sorrow 
and  indignation  to  David;   but  as  the  assassins  were 
too  powerful   to   he   punished,  he  contented  himself 
with    showing    every    public    token    of   respect    to 
Aimer's  memory,  by  following  the  bier  and  pouring 
forth  a  simple  dirge  over  tin?  slain,  which  is  thus 
translated  by  Kwald  {Dichter  des  oil. 
P.  99):-    " 

As  a  villain  dies,  ought  Abner  to  die? 
Thy  hands,  no)  fettered  ; 
Thy  feci,  not  bound  with  chains : 

As  one  t  ill-  before  the  malicious,  leilest  thou! 

— /.  c  "  Thou  didst  not  fall  as  a  prisoner  taken  in 
battle,  with  hands  and  feet  fettered,  Imt  by  secret 
assassination,  such   as  a  villain   tncts   at    the   hand; 

of  villains"  (2  Sam.  iii.  33,  34).     See  also  Lowtb, 

/,  xxii.     [<!.  E.  L.  C] 

ABOMINATION'  OK  I  >KSOTATTON  (to 
fiStXvyna  tt)s  tpr)p.cbo-fws,  Matt.  wiv.  15),  men- 
tion,.! by  our  Saviour  as  a  sign  of  the  approaching 
destruction  of  Jerusalem,  with  reference  to  Dan.  i\. 
27,  xi.  .".I,  \ii.  II.  The  Hebrew  words  m  these 
tively,  DOBflD  D^'-liX".  pp'J'H 


10 


ABRAHAM 


DDE?P,and  QfX'ppt?:   the  LXX.  translate  the 

.  first  word  uniformly  pSdAvy/xa.,  and  the  second 
eprnxdixrewv  (ix,  27)  and  ip-n/xwa^ws  (xi.  31,  xii. 
11):  many  MSS.  however  have  7]<pavicrixivov  in 
xi.  31.  The  meaning  of  the  first  of  these  words 
is  clear :  f'-lp^   expresses  any  religious    impurity, 

and  in  the  plural  number  especially  idols.  Suidas 
defines  fi84Avy/.ia  as  used  by  the  Jews  -nav  elSuiAov 
kou  -KO.V  eKTinroofio.  avSpunrov.  It  is  important  to 
observe  that  the  expression  is  not  used  of  idolatry 
in  the  abstract,  but  of  idolatry  adopted  by  the 
Jews  themselves  (2  K.  xxi.  2-7,  xxiii.  13).  Hence 
we  must  look  for  the  fulfilment  of  the  prophecy 
in  some  act  of  apostacy  on  their  part;  and  so 
the  Jews  themselves  appear  to  have  understood  it, 
according  to  the  traditional  feeling  referred  to  by 
Josephus  (//.  J.  iv.  6,  §3),  that  the  temple  would 
be  destroyed  sav  xe?pes  ot/ceTai  ■Kpofiidvaio'i  rb  re/j.e- 
vos.     With  regard  to  the  second  word  DDC,  which 

has  been  variously  translated  of  desolation,  of  the 
desolator,  that  astoivishcth  (Marginal  transl.  xi.  31, 
iii.  11),  it  is  a  participle  used  substantively  and 
placed  in  immediate  apposition  with  the  previous 
noun,  qualifying  it  with  an  adjective  sense  asto- 
nishing,  horrible    (Gesen.   s.  v.  DDK'),   and  thus 

the  whole  expression  signifies  a  horrible  abomi- 
nation. What  the  object  referred  to  was,  is  a 
matter  of  doubt ;  it  should  be  observed,  however, 
that  in  the  passages  in  Daniel  the  setting  up  of  the 
abomination  was  to  be  consequent  upon  the  cessa- 
tion of  the  sacrifice.  The  Jews  considered  the  pro- 
phecy as  fulfilled  in  the  profanation  of  the  Temple 
under  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  when  the  Israelites 
themselves  erected  an  idolatrous  altar  (pai/xos, 
Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  5,  §4)  upon  the  sacred  altar, 
and  offered  sacrifice  thereon :  this  altar  is  de- 
scribed as  jSSe'Airyjua  tyjs  fp-n/j-iiffeais  (1  Mace.  i. 
54,  vi.  7).  The  prophecy  however  referred  ulti- 
mately (as  Josephus  himself  perceived,  Ant.  x.  11. 
§7)  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  the  Romans, 
and  consequently  the  fiSeAvyfjia.  must  describe 
some  occurrence  connected  with  that  event.  But 
it  is  not  easy  to  find  one  which  meets  all  the 
requirements  of  the  case:  the  introduction  of  the 
Roman  standards  into  the  Temple  would  not  be  a 
fiSeAvyfia,  properly  speaking,  unless  it  could  be 
shown  that  the  Jews  themselves  participated  in  the 
worship  of  them ;  moreover,  this  event,  as  well  as 
several  others  which  have  been '  proposed,  such  as 
the  erection  of  the  statue  of  Hadrian,  fail  in  regard 
to  the  time  of  their  occurrence,  being  subsequent 
to  the  destruction  of  the  city.  It  appears  most  pro- 
bable that  the  profanities  of  the  Zealots  constituted 
the  abomination,  which  was  the  sign  of  impending 
ruin.    (Joseph.  B.J.  iv.  3,  §7.)     "     [W.L.B.]" 

A'BRAHAM  (DiYUK,  father  of  a  multitude ; 

'APpad/j.;  Abraham:  originally  ABRAM,  D12N, 
father  of  elevation  ;  "APpa/j. ;  Abram),  the  son  of 
Terah,  and  brother  of  Nahor  and  Haran ;  and  the 
progenitor,  not  only  of  the  Hebrew  nation,  but  of 
several  cognate  tribes.  His  history  is  recorded  to  us 
with  much  detail  in  Scripture,  as  the  very  type  of 
a  true  patriarchal  life ;  a  life,  that  is,  in  which  all 
authority  is  paternal,  derived  ultimately  from  God 
the  Father  of  all,  and  religion,  imperfect  as  yet  in 
revelation  and  ritual,  is  based  entirely  on  that  same 
Fatherly  relation  of  God  to  man.  '  The  natural 
tendency  of  such   a    religion    i.-   to  the  worship  of 


ABRAHAM 

tutelary  gods  of  the  family  or  of  the  tribe ;  traces 
of  such  a  tendency  on  the  part  of  the  patriarchs 
are  found  in  the  Scriptural  History  itself;  and  the 
declaration  of  God  to  Moses  (in  Ex.  vi.  3)  plainly 
teaches  that  the  full  sense  of  the  unity  and  eternity 
of  Jehovah  was  not  yet  unfolded  to  them.  But 
yet  the  revelation  of  the  Lord,  as  the  "  Almighty 
God"  (Gen.  xvii.  1,  xxviii.  3,  xxxv.  11),  and  "  the 
Judge  of  all  the  earth"  (Gen.  xviii.  25),  the  know- 
ledge of  His  intercourse  with  kings  of  other  tribes 
(Gen.  xx.  3-7),  and  His  judgment  on  Sodom  and 
Gomorrah  (to  say  nothing  of  the  promise  which  ex- 
tended to  "  all  nations  ")  must  have  raised  the  pa- 
trial  chal  religion  far  above  this  narrow  idea  of  God, 
and  given  it  the  germs,  at  least,  of  future  exalta- 
tion. The  character  of  Abraham  is  that  which  is 
formed  by  such  a  religion,  and  by  the  influence  of 
a  nomad  pastoral  life ;  free,  simple,  and  manly ;  full 
of  hospitality  and  family  affection ;  truthful  to  all 
such  as  were  bound  to  him  by  their  ties,  though 
not  untainted  with  Eastern  craft  to  those  considered 
as  aliens  ;  ready  for  war,  but  not  a  professed  warrior, 
or  one  who  lived  by  plunder ;  free  and  childlike  in 
religion,  and  gradually  educated  by  God's  hand  to 
a  continually  deepening  sense  of  its  all-absorbing 
claims.  It  stands'  remarkably  contrasted  with  those 
of  Isaac  and  Jacob. 

The  Scriptural  history  of  Abraham  is  mainly 
limited,  as  usual,  to  the  evolution  of  the  Great  Co- 
venant in  his  life ;  it  is  the  history  of  the  man 
himself  rather  than  of  the  external  events  of  his 
life;  and,  except  in  one  or  two  instances  (Gen.  xii. 
10-20,  xiv.,  xx.,  xxi.  22-34)  it  does  not  refer  to  his 
relation  with  the  rest  of  the  world.  To  them  Ire 
may  only  have  appeared  as  a  chief  of  the  hardier 
Chaldaean  race,  disdaining  the  settled  life  of  the 
more  luxurious  Canaanites,  and  fit  to  be  hired  by 
plunder  as  a  protector  against  the  invader's  of  the 
North  (see  Gen.  xiv.  21-23).  Nor  is  it  unlikely, 
though  we  have  no  historical  evidence  of  it,  that 
his  passage  into  Canaan  may  have  been  a  sign  or  a 
cause  of  a  greater  migration  from  Haran,  and  that 
he  may  have  been  looked  upon  (e.g.  byAbimelech, 
Gen.  xxi.  22-32)  as  one,  who  from  his  pesition  as 
well  as  his  high  character,  would  be  able  to  guide 
such  a  migration  for  evil  or  for  good  (Ewald,  Gesch. 
i.  pp.  409-413). 

The  traditions,  which  Josephus  adds  to  the  Scrip- 
tural narrative,  are  merely  such  as,  after  his  manner 
and  in  accordance  with  the  aim  of  his  writings,  exalt 
the  knowdedge  and  wisdom  of  Abraham,  making  him 
the  teacher  of  monotheism  to  the  Chaldaeans, 
and  of  astronomy  and  mathematics  to  the  Egyp- 
tians. He  quotes  however  Nicolaus  of  Damascus," 
as  ascribing  to  him  the  conquest  and  govern- 
ment of  Damascus  on  his  way  to  Canaan,  and 
stating  that  the  tradition  of  his  habitation  was  still 
preserved  there  (Joseph.  Ant.  i.  c.  7,  §2  ;  see 
Gen.  xv.  2). 

The  Arab  traditions  are  partly  ante-Moham- 
medan, relating  mainly  to  the  Kaabah  (or  sacred 
house)  of  Mecca,  which  Abraham  and  his  sou 
"  Ismail"  are  said  to  have  rebuilt  for  the  fourth  time 
over  the  sacred  black  stone.  But,  in  great  measure, 
they  are  taken  from  the  Koran,  which  has  itself 
borrowed  from  the  0.  T.  and  from  the  Rabbinical 
traditions.     Of  the  latter  the  most  remarkable  is  the 


a  Nicolaus  was  a  contemporary  and  favourite  of 
Herod  the  Great  and  Augustus.  The  quotation  is 
probably  from  an  Universal  History,  said  to  have  con- 
tained 111  hooks. 


ABRAHAM 

story  of  his  having  destroyed  the  idols  (see  Jud.  v. 
6-8),  which  Terah  not  only  worshipped  (as  declared 
in  Josh.  xxiv.  2),  but  also  manufactured,  and 
having  been  cast  by  Nimrod  into  a  fiery  furnace, 
which  turned  into  a  pleasant  meadow.  The  Legend 
is  generally  traced  to  the  word  Ur  ("VIS),  Abraham's 
birth-place,  which  has  also  the  sense  of  "  light"  or 
"fire."  But  the  name  of  Abraham  appears  to  be 
commonly  remembered  in  tradition  through  a  very 
large  portion  of  Asia,  and  the  title  "  el-Khalil," 
"  the  Friend"  (of  God)  (see  2  Chr.  xx.  7;  Is. 
xli.  8;  Jam.  ii.  2:1)  is  that  by  which  he  is  usually 
spoken  of  by  the  Arabs. 

The  Scriptural  history  of  Abraham  is  divided 
into  various  periods,  by  til.-  various  and  progressive 
revelatiotTs.of  God,  which  he  received — 

(I.)  With  his  father  Terah,  his  wife  Sarai,  and 
nephew  Lot,  Abram  left  Ur,  for  Haran  (Oharran), 
in  obedience  to  a  rail  of  God  (alluded  to  in  Acts  vii. 
2-4).  Haran,  apparently  the  eldest  brother — since 
Nahor,  and  probably  also  Abram  b  married  his 
daughter — was  dead  already;  and  Nahor, remained 
behind  (Gen.  3d.  31).  In  Haran  Terah  died :  and 
Abiam,  now  the  head  of  the  family,  received  a 
second  call,  and  with  it  the  promise.0  His  promise 
was  two-fold,  containing  both  a  temporal  and  spi- 
ritual blessing,  the  one  of  which  was  the  type  and 
earnest  of  the  other.  The  temporal  promise  was, 
that  he  should  become  a  great  and  prosperous  nation, 
the  spiritual,  that  in  him  "  should  all  families  of 
the  earth  be  blessed"  (Gen.  xii.  2). 

Abram  appears  to  have  entered  Canaan,  as  Jacob 
afterwards  did,  along  the  valley  of  the  Jabbok;  for 
he  crossed  at  once  into  the  rich  plain  of  iloreh, 
near  Sichem,  and  under  Ebal  and  Gerizim.  There, 
in  one  of  the  most  fertile  spots  of  the  land,  he  re- 
ceived the  first  distinct  promise  of  his  future  inhe- 
ritance I  Gen.  xii.  7),  and  built  his  first  altar  to 
God.  "The  Canaauite"  (it  is  noticed)  "was  then 
in  the  land,"  and  probably  would  view  the  strangers 
of  the  warlike  north  with  no  friendly  eyes.  Accord- 
ingly Abram  made  his  second  resting-place  in  the 
strong  mountain  country,  the  key  of  the  various 
passes,  between  Bethel  and  Ai.  There  he  would 
dwell  securely,  till  famine  drove  him  into  the  richer 
and  more  cultivated  land  of  Egypt. 

That  his  history  is  no  ideal  or  heroic  legend,  is 
very  clearly  shown,  not  merely  by  the  record  of  his 
deceit  as  to  Sarai,  practised  in  Egypt  and  repeated 
afterwards,  but  much  more  by  the  clear  description 
of  its  utter  failure,  and  the  humiliating  position  in 
which  it  place!  him  in  comparison  with  Pharaoh, 

and  still  more  with  Ahimelech.  That  he  should 
have  felt  afraid  of  such  a  civilized  and  imposing 
power,  as  Egypt  even  at  that  time  evidently  was, 
is  consistent  enough  with  the  Arab  nature  as  it  is 
now:  that  he  should  have  sought  to  guard  himself 
by  deceit,  especially  of  that  kind,  which  is  true  in 
word  and  false  in  effect,  is  unfortunately  not  at  all 
incompatible  with  a  g< rally  religious  character; 


ABKAHAM 


11 


hut  that  such  a  story  should  have  been  framed  in  an 
ideal  description  of  a  saint  or  hero  is  inconceivable. 
The  period  of  his  stay  in  Egypt  is  not  recorded, 
but  it,  is  from  this  time  that  his  wealth  and  power 
appear  to  have  begun  (Gen.  xiii.  2).  If  the  domi- 
nion of  the  Hyksos  in  .Memphis  is  to  be  referred 
to  this  epoch,  as  seems  not  improbable  [Egypt], 
then,  since  they  were  akin  to  the  Hebrews,  it  is 
not  impossible  that  Abram  may  have  taken  part  in 
their  war  of  conquest,  and  so  have  had  another 
recommendation  to  the  favour  of  l'haraoh. 

On  his  ict urn,  the  very  fact  of  this  growing 
wealth  and  importance  caused  the  separation  of  Lot 
and  his  portion  of  the  tribe  from  Abram.  Lot's 
departure  to  the  rich  country  of  Sodom  implied  a 
wish  to  quit  the  nomadic  life,  and  settle  at  once; 
Abram,  on  the  contrary,  was  content  still  to  "dwell 
in  tents"  and  wait  for  the  promised  time  (Heb. 
xi.  9).  Probably  till  now  he  had  looked  on  Lot  as 
his  heir,  and  his  separation  from  him  was  a  Provi- 
dential preparation  for  the  future.  From  this  time 
he  took  up  his  third  resting-place  at  Mamre,  or 
Hebron,  the  future  capital  of  Judah,  situated  in  the 
direct  line  of  communication  with  Egypt,  and  open- 
ing down  to  the  wilderness  and  pasture  land  of 
Beersheba.  This  very  position,  so  different  from 
the  mountain-fastness  of  Ai,  marks  the  change  in 
the  numbers  and  powers  of  his  tribe. 

The  history  of  his  attack  on  Chedorlaomer  winch 
follows,  gives  us  a  specimen  of  the  view  which 
would  be  taken  of  him  by  the  external  world.  By 
the  way  in  which  it  speaks  of  him  as  "  Abram  the 
Hebrew,""1  it  would  seem  to  be  an  older  document, 
a  fragment  of  Canaanitish  history  (as  Ewald  calls 
it),  preserved  and  sanctioned  by  Moses.  The  inva- 
sion was  clearly  another  northern  immigration  or 
foray,  for  the  chiefs  or  kings  were  of  Shinar  (Baby- 
lonia I,  Ellasar  (Assyria?),  Elam  (Persia),  &c. ;  that 
it  was  not  the  first,  is  evident  from  the  vassalage  of 
the  kings  of  the  cities  of  the  plain ;  and  it  ex- 
tended (see  Gen.  xiv.  5-7)  far  to  the  south  over  a 
wide  tract  of  country.  Abram  appears  here  as  the 
head  of  a  small  confederacy  of  chiefs,  powerful 
enough  to  venture  on  a  long  pursuit  to  the  head  of 
the  valley  of  the  Jordan,  to  attack  with  success  a 
large  force,  and  not  only  to  rescue  Lot,  but  to  roll 
back  for  a  time  the  stream  of  northern  immigra- 
tion. His  high  position  is  seen  in  the  gratitude  of 
the  people,  and  the  dignity  with  which  he  refuses 
the  character  of  a  hireling;  that  it  did  not  elate 
him  above  measure,  is  evident  from  his  reverence 
to  Melchizedek,  in  whom  he  recognized  one  whose 
call  was  equal  and  consecrated  rank  superior  to  his 
own  [Melchizedek]. 

(II. i  The  second  period  of  Abram's  life  is  marked 
by  the  fresh  revelation,  which,  without  further 
unfolding  the  spiritual  promise,  completes  tin-  tem- 
poral one.  already  in  course  of  fulfilment.  It  first 
announced  to  him,  that  a  child  of  his  own  should  in- 
herit the  promise,  and  that  hi-  seed  should  be  as  the 


b  "Iscah"  (in  Gen.  xi.  29]  is  generally  supposed 
to  be  the  same  person  as  Sarai.  That  AOram  calls  her 
his  "sister"  is  not  conclusive  against  it;  lor  see  siv. 

14,  where  Lot  is  called  bis  "brother." 

'   it  i<  expressly  stated  in  the  Aits  (vii.   1)  that 

Uirain  quitted  Haran  alter  his  lather's  death.  This 
i-  supposed  to  he  inconsistent  with  the  Statements  that 
Terah  was  To  years  old   at  the  birth  of    Ahrae 

\i.  80]  ;  that  he  died  at  tie  Gen.  si.  32   ; 

and  that  Abram  was  7.">  years  old  win  n  he  left  I  laran  : 
Inner  it  would  seem  to    follow    that    Ahratn    mi 

from  Haian  i it  his  father's  lifetime.     Various  expla- 


nations have  been  given  of  this  difficulty;  the  most 
probable  is.  that  the  statement  in  ten.  \i.  26,  that 

Terah  was  70  \earsoM  when  he  begat  his  three  chil- 
dren, applies    only  to  the  oldest.  Haran,  and  that  the 

births  of  his  two  younger  children  belonged  to  a  Bub- 
sequent  period    CHRONOl  01 

a  *o  mpartp,  i,\\.     it  tin-  sense  of  the  word  be 
taken,  it  strengthens  tin-  supposition  noticed.    In  any 

,i     name    is    that    applied    to    the    Israelites    hy 

ters,  or  used  by  them  ol   themselves  only  in 
speaking  to  foreigners:  Bee  Hmntxw. 


12 


ABRAHAM 


"  stars  of  heaven."  This  promise,  unlike  the  other, 
appeared  at  his  age  contrary  to  nature,  and  there- 
fore it  is  on  this  occasion  that  his  faith  is  specially 
noted,  as  accepted  and  "  counted  for  righteousness." 
Accordingly,  he  now  passed  into  a  new  position,  for 
not  only  is  a  fuller  revelation  given  as  to  the  cap- 
tivity of  his  seed  in  Egypt,  the  time  of  their  deli- 
verance, and  their  conquest  of  the  land,  "  when  the 
iniquity  of  the  Amorites  was  full,"  but  after  his 
solemn  burnt-offering  the  visible  appearance  of  God 
in  fire  is  vouchsafed  to  him  as  a  sign,  and  he 
enters  into  covenant  with  the  Lord  (Gen.  xv.  18). 
This  covenant,  like  the  earlier  one  with  Noah  (Gen. 
ix.  9-17)  is  one  of  free  promise  from  God,  faith  only 
in  that  promise  being  required  from  man. 

The  immediate  consequence  was  the  taking  of 
Hagar,  Sarai's  maid,  to  be  a  concubine  of  Abram  (as 
a  means  for  the  fultilment  of  the  promise  of  seed), 
aud  the  conception  of  Ishmael. 

(III.)  For  fourteen  years  after,  no  more  is  re- 
corded of  Abram,  who  seems  during  all  that  period 
to  have  dwelt  at  Mamre.  After  that  time,  in 
Abram's  99th  year,  the  last  step  in  the  revelation 
of  the  promise  is  made,  by  the  declaration  that  it 
should  be  given  to  a  son  of  Sarai ;  aud  at  the  same 
time  the  temporal  and  spiritual  elements  are  dis- 
tinguished ;  Ishmael  can  share  only  the  one,  Isaac 
is  to  enjoy  the  other.  The  covenant,  which  before 
was  only  for  temporal  inheritance  (Gen.  xv.  18),  is 
now  made  "  everlasting,"  and  sealed  by  circum- 
cision. This  new  state  is  marked  by  the  change 
of  Abram's  name  to  "  Abraham,"  aud  Sarai's  to 
"  Sarah,"  e  and  it  was  one  of  far  greater  acquaint- 
ance and  intercourse  with  God.  For,  immediately 
after,  we  read  of  the  Lord's  appearance  to  Abraham 
in  human  form,  attended  by  two  angels,  the  mi- 
nisters of  His  wrath  against  Sodom,  of  His  announce- 
ment of  the  coming  judgment  to  Abraham,  and 
acceptance  of  his  intercession  for  the  condemned 
cities/  The  whole  record  stands  alone  in  Scriptui  e 
for  the  simple  aud  familiar  intercourse  of  God  with 
him,  contrasting  strongly  with  the  vaguer  and 
more  awful  descriptions  of  previous  appearances 
(see  e.  g.  xv.  12),  and  of  those  of  later  times  (Gen. 
xxviii.  17,  xxxii.  30;  Ex.  iii.  6,  &c).  And,  cor- 
responding with  this,  there  is  a  perfect  absence  of 
all  fear  on  Abraham's  part,  aud  a  cordial  anil 
reverent  joy,  which,  more  than  anything  else,  recals 
the  time  past  when  "  the  voice  of  the  Lord  God 
was  heard,  walking  in  the  garden  in  the  cool  of  the 
day." 

Strangely  unworthy  of  this  exalted  position  as 
the  "Friend"  and  intercessor  with  God,  is  the  re- 
petition of  the  falsehood  as  to  Sarah  in  the  land  of 


e  The  original  name  ^")C  is  uncertain  in  deriva- 
tion and  meaning.  Gesenius  renders  it  "  nobility," 
from  the  same  root  as  "  Sarah  ;"  Ewald  by  "  quarrel- 
some" (from  the  root  Hlt^  in  sense  of  "  to  fight"). 
The  name  Sarah,  n""lt£>    is  certainly  "  princess." 

''  Tradition  still  points  out  the  supposed  site  of  this 
appearance  of  the  Lord  to  Abraham.  About  a  mile 
from  Hebron  is  a  beautiful  and  massive  oak,  which 
still  bears  Abraham's  name.  The  residence  of  the 
patriarch  was  called  "  the  oaks  of  Mamre,"  errone- 
ously translated  in  A.  V.  "  the  plain"  of  Mamre  (Gen. 
xiii.  18,  xviii.  1)  ;  but  it  is  doubtful  whether  this  is 
the  exact  spot,  since  the  tradition  in  the  time  of  Jo- 
seph us  (B.  J.  iv.  9,  §7)  was  attached  to  a  terebinth. 
This  tree  no  longer  remains  ;  but  there  is  no  doubt 
that  it  stood  within  the  ancient  enclosure,  which  is 


ABRAHAM 

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

This  period  again,  like  that  of  the  sojourn  in 
Egypt,  was  one  of  growth  in  power  and  wealth,  as 
the  respect  of  Abimelech  and  his  alarm  for  the 
future,  so  natural  in  the  chief  of  a  race  of  conquei- 
ing  invaders,  very  cleaily  shows.  Abram's  settle- 
ment at  Beersheba,  on  the  borders  of  the  desert,  near 
the  Amalekite  plunderers,  shows  both  that  he  needed 
room,  and  was  able  to  protect  himself  and  his  flocks. 

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

(IV.)  Again  for  a  long  period  (25  years,  Joseph. 
Ant.  i.  13,  §2)  the  history  is  silent:  then  comes 
the  final  trial  and  perfection  of  his  faith  in  the 
command  to  offer  up  the  child  of  his  affections  and 
of  God's  promise.  The  trial  lay,  first  in  the 
preciousness  of  the  sacrifice,  and  the  perplexity  in 
which  the  command  involved  the  fulfilment  of  the 
promise;  secondly,  in  the  strangeness  of  the  com- 
mand to  violate  the  human  life,  of  which  the  sacred- 
ness  had  been  enforced  by  God's  special  command. 
(Gen.  ix.  5,  6),  as  well  as  by  the  feelings  of  a  father. 
To  these  trials  he  rose  superior  by  faith,  that  "  God 
was  able  to  raise  Isaac  even  from  the  dead"  (Heb. 
xi.  19),  probably  through  the  same  faith,  to  which 
our  Lord  refers,  that  God  had  promised  to  be  tin 
"  God  of  Isaac"  (Gen.  xvii.  19),  and  that  He  was  not 
"  a  God  of  the  dead,  but  of  the  living."  8 

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


still  called  "  Abraham's  House."  A  fair  was  held 
beneath  it  in  the  time  of  Constantino  ;  and  it  remained 
to  the  time  of  Theodosius.  (Robinson,  ii.  81,  ed. 
1856;  Stanley,  S.  <$■  P.  143.) 

s  The  scene  of  the  sacrifice  is,  according  to  our  pre- 
sent text,  and  to  Jusephus,  the  land  of  "  Moriah,"  or 
rPTlD  chosen  by  Jehovah,  Ges.  (comp.  the  name 
"  Jehovah-Jireh").  The  Samaritan  Pentateuch  has 
"Moreh,"  ITl'lfO  •  theLXX.  render  the  word  hereby 
Tiji'  vi/n^r)?,  tlie  phrase  used  for  what  is  undoubtedly 
"  Moreh"  in  xii.  G,  whereas  in  2  Chr.  iii.  they  render 
"Moriah"  by  'A/ntopia:  they  therefore  probably  read 
"Moreh"  also.  The  fact  of  the  three  days'  journey 
from  Beersheba  suits  Moreh  better  (see  Stanley's 
S.  ty  P-  ]>■  251)  ;  other  considerations  seem  in  favour 
of  Moriah. 


ABEAM 

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

The  history  of  Abraham  is  now  all  but  over, 
though  his  life  was  prolonged  for  nearly  50  years. 
The  only  other  incidents  are  the  death  and  burial 
of  Sarah,  the  marriage  of  Isaac  with  Rebekah,  and 
that  of  Abraham  with  Keturah, 

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

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

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

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

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

A'BEAM.    [Abraham.] 

ABRO'NAH  (Dray,  from  -QJ?,  to  cross 
over),  one  of  the  halting-places  of  the  Israelites  in 
tin-  desert,  immediately  preceding  Ezion-geber,  and 
therefore,  looking  to  the  root,  the  name  may  pos- 
sibly retain  the  trace  of  a  ford  across  the  head  oi 
the  Klanitie  Gulf.  In  the  A.  V.  it  is  given  as 
Ebronah  ('E/SpaW;  HebronaK)  (Num.  xxxiii.  84, 
35).    [Ebronah.]  [G.] 

ABBO'NAS  ('AjSpcDi/as),  a  torrent  (xeiV«f5fW), 
apparently  oearCilicia:  if  so,  it  may  possibly  be 
the  Nahr  Abraim,  or  Ibrahim,  the  ancient  Adonis, 
which  rises  in  the  Lebanon  at  Afka,  and  falls  into 
the  sea  at  Jebeil  (Byblos).  It  has  however  been 
conjectured  (Movers,  Bonner  Zeits.  xiii.  38)  that 
the  wmd  is  a  corruption  of  "injn  "OJJ  =  beyond 

the  river  (Euphrates),  which  has  just  before  I n 

mentioned;   a  corruption   not   more  inconceivable 


ABSALOM 


13 


than  many  which  actually  exist  in  the  LXX.     The 
A.  V.  has  Aebonai  (Jud.  ii.  24).  [G.] 

AB'SALOM  (C?bV'2K,father  of  peace ;  A£e<r- 
<Ta\w/j. ;  Absalom),  third  son  of  David  by  Maacah, 
daughter  of  Talmai  king  of  Geshur,  a  Syrian  dis- 
trict adjoining  the  N.E.  frontier  of  the  Holy  Land 
near  the  Lake  of  Merom.  He  is  scarcely  men- 
tioned till  after  David  had  committed  the  great 
crime  which  by  its  consequences  embittered  his  old 
age,  and  then  appears  as  the  instrument  by  whom 
was  fulfilled  (iod's  threat  against  the  sinful  king, 
that  "  evil  should  be  raised  up  against  him  out  of 
his  own  house,  and  that  his  neighbour  should  lie 
with  his  wives  in  the  sight  of  the  sun."  In  the 
latter  part  of  David's  reign,  polygamy  bore  its  ordi- 
nary fruits.  Not  only  is  his  sin  in  the  case  of 
Bathsheba  traceable  to  it,  since  it  naturally  suggests 
the  unlimited  indulgence  of  the  passions,  but  it  also 
brought  about  the  punishment  of  that  sin,  by  raising 
up  jealousies  and  conflicting  claims  between  the 
sons  of  different  mothers,  each  apparently  living 
with  a  separate  house  and  establishment  (2  Sam. 
xiii.  8,  xiv.  24;  cf.  1  K.  vii.  8,  &c).  Absalom 
had  a  sister  Tamar,  who  was  violated  by  her  halt- 
brother  Amnon,  David's  eldest  son  by  Ahinoam, 
the  Jezreelitess.  The  king,  though  indignant  at  so 
great  a  crime,  would  not  punish  Amnon  because  he 
was  his  first  born,  as  we  learn  from  the  words  Kal 
ovk  eAinrTjere  to  irvivjia  'A/j.vwv  tov  vlov  <xvtov, 
on  riyarra  clvtSv,  oti  irpccTordKOS  ainov  ?jv,  which 
are  found  in  the  LXX.  (1  Sam.  xiii.  21),  though 
wanting  in  the  Hebrew.  The  natural  avenger  of 
such  an  outrage  would  be  Tamar's  full  brother  Ab- 
salom, just  as  the  sons  of  Jacob  took  bloody  ven- 
geance for  their  sister  Dinah  (Gen.  xxxiv.).  He 
brooded  over  the  wrong  for  two  years,  and  then  in- 
vited all  the  princes  to  a  sheep-shearing  feast  at  his 
estate  in  Baal-hazor,  possibly  an  old  Canaanitish 
sanctuary  (as  we  infer  from  the  prefix  Baal),  on  the 
borders  of  Ephraim  and  Benjamin.  Here  he  ordered 
his  servants  to  murder  Amnon,  and  then  fled  for 
safety  to  his  father-in-law's  court  at  Geshur,  where 
he  remained  for  three  years.  David  was  over- 
whelmed by  this  accumulation  of  family  sorrows, 
thus  completed  by  separation  from  his  favourite 
son,  whom  he  thought  it  impossible  to  pardon  or 
recall.  But  he  was  brought  back  by  an  artifice  of 
Joab,  who  sent  a  woman  of  Tekoah  (afterwards 
known  as  the  birthplace  of  the  prophet  Amos)  to 
entreat  the  king's  interference  in  a  suppositious  case 
similar  to  Absalom's.  Having  persuaded  David  to 
prevent  the  avenger  of  blond  from  pursuing  a  young 
man  who,  she  said,  had  slain  his  brother,  she 
adroitly  applied  his  assent  to  the  recall  of  Absalom, 
and  urged  him,  as  he  had  thus  yielded  the  general 
principle,  to  "  fetch  home  his  banished."  David 
did  so,  but  would  not  see  Absalom  tor  two  more 
years,  though  he  allowed  him  to  live  in  Jerusalem. 
At  last  wearied  with  delay,  perceiving  that  his 
triumph  was  only  half  complete,  and  that  his 
exclusion  from  court  interfered  with  the  ambitious 
schemes  which  he  was  forming,  fancying  too  that 
sufficient  exertions  were  not  made  in  his  favour,  the 
impetuous  young  man  sunt  his  servants  to  burn  a 
field  of  corn  near   his  own,  belonging  to  Joab,  thus 

doing  as  Samson  had  done  ( Judg.  w.  4).   Thereui 

Joab,  probably  dreading  some  further  outrage  from 

his  violence,  brought  him  to  his  father,  from  whom 

ived  the  kiss  of  reconciliation.    Absalom  now 

began  at  once  to  prepare  tor  rebellion,  urged  to  it 

partly  by  his  own    restless  wickedness,   partly   per- 


14 


ABSALOM 


haps  by  the  fear  lest  Bathsheba's  child  should  sup- 
plant him  in  the  succession,  to  which  he  would  feel 
himself  entitled  as  of  royal  birth  on  his  mother's 
side  as  well  as  his  father's,  and  as  being  now  David's 
eldest  surviving  son,  since  we  may  infer  that  the 
second  son  Chileabwas  dead,  from  no  mention  being 
made  of  him  after  2  Sam.  iii.  o.  It  is  harder  to 
account  for  his  temporary  success,  and  the  immi- 
nent danger  which  betel  so  powerful  a  government 
as  his  father's.  The  sin  with  Bathsheba  had  pro- 
bably weakened  David's  moral  and  religious  hold 
upon  the  people :  and  as  he  grew  older  he  may  have 
become  less  attentive  to  individual  complaints,  and 
that  personal  administration  of  justice  which  was 
one  of  an  eastern  king's  chief  duties.  For  Absalom 
tried  to  supplant  his  father  by  courting  popularity, 
standing  in  the  gate,  conversing  with  every  suitor, 
lamenting  the  difficulty  which  he  would  find  in 
getting  a  hearing,  "  putting  forth  his  hand  and 
kissing  anv  man  who  came  nigh  to  do  him  obei- 
sance." He  also  maintained  a  splendid  retinue 
(>:v.  1),  and  was  admired  for  his  personal  beauty 
and  the  luxuriant  growth  of  his  hair,  on  grounds 
similar  to  those  which  had  made  Saul  acceptable 
(1  Sam.  x.  23).  It  is  probable  too  that  the  great 
tribe  of  Judah  had  taken  some  offence  at  David's 
government,  perhaps  from  finding  themselves  com- 
pletely merged  in  one  united  Israel ;  and  that  they 
hoped  secretly  for  pre-eminence  under  the  less  wise 
and  liberal  rule  of  his  son.  Thus  Absalom  selects 
Hebron,  the  old  capital  of  Judah  (now  supplanted 
by  Jerusalem),  as  the  scene  of  the  outbreak  ;  Amasa 
his  chief  captain,  and  Ahitophel  of  Giloh  his  prin- 
cipal counsellor,  are  both  of  Judah,  and  after  the 
rebellion  was  crushed,  we  see  signs  of  ill-feeling 
between  Judah  and  the  other  tribes  (six.  41).  But 
whatever  the  causes  may  have  been,  Absalom 
raised  the  standard  of  revolt  at  Hebron  after  forty 
years,  as  we  now  read  in  2  Sam.  xv.  7,  which  it 
seems  better  to  consider  a  false  reading  for  four 
(the  number  actually  given  by  Josephus),  than  to 
interpret  of  the  fortieth  year  of  David's  reign  (see 
Gerlach,  in  loco,  and  Ewald,  Geschichte,  iii.  p.  217). 
The  revolt  was  at  first  completely  successful ;  David 
fled  from  his  capital  over  the  Jordan  to  Mahanaim 
in  Gilead,  where  Jacob  had  seen  the  "  Two  Hosts" 
of  the  angelic  vision,  and  where  Abner  had  rallied 
the  Israelites  round  Saul's  dynasty  in  the  person  of 
the  unfortunate  Ishbosheth.  Absalom  occupied  Je- 
rusalem, and  by  the  advice  of  Ahitophel,  who  saw 
that  for  such  an  unnatural  rebellion  war  to  the 
knife  was  the  best  security,  took  possession  of 
David's  harem,  in  which  he  had  left  ten  concubines. 
This  was  considered  to  imply  a  formal  assumption 
of  all  his  father's  royal  rights  (cf.  the  conduct  of 
Adonijah,  1  K.  ii.  13  if.,  and  of  Smerdis  the  Ma- 
gian,  Herod,  iii.  68),  and  was  also  a  fulfilment  of 
Nathan's  prophecy  (2  Sam.  xii.  11).  But  David 
had  left  friends  who  watched  over  his  interests. 
The  vigorous  counsels  of  Ahitophel  were  afterwards 
rejected  through  the  crafty  advice  of  Hushai,  who 
insinuated  himself  into  Absalom's  confidence  to 
work  his  ruin,  and  Ahitophel  himself,  seeing  his 
ambitious  hopes  frustrated,  and  another  preferred 
by  the  man  for  whose  sake  he  had  turned  traitor, 
went  home  to  Gilo  and  committed  suicide.  At  last, 
after  being  solemnly  anointed  king  at  Jerusalem 
{xix.  10),  and  lingering  there  far  longer  than  was 
expedient,  Absalom  crossed  the  Jordanrto  attack  his 
father,  who  by  this  time  had  rallied  round  him  a 
considerable  force,  whereas  had  Ahitophel's  advice 
been  followed,  he  would  probably  have  been  crushed 


ACCAD 

at  once.  A  decisive  battle  was  fought  in  Gilead, 
in  the  wood  of  Ephraim,  so  called,  according  to 
Gerlach  (Comm.  in  loco),  from  the  great  defeat  of 
the  Ephraimites  (Judg.  xii.  4),  or  perhaps  from 
the  connexion  of  Ephraim  with  the  trans-Jordanic 
half-tribe  of  Manasseh  (Stanley,  S.  and  J'.,  p. 
323).  Here  Absalom's  forces  were  totally  defeated, 
and  as  he  himself  was  escaping,  his  long  hair  was 
entangled  in  the  branches  of  a  terebinth,  where  he 
was  left  hanging  while  the  mule  on  which  he  was 
riding  ran  away  from  under  him.  Here  he  was 
despatched  by  Joab  in  spite  of  the  prohibition  ot 
David,  who,  loving  him  to  the  last,  had  desired  that 
liis  life  might  be  spared,  and  when  he  heard  of  his 
death  lamented  over  him  in  the  pathetic  words, 
0  my  son  Absalom !  would  God  I  had  died  for 
thee  I  0  Absalom,  u^/  son,  my  son  !  He  was  buried 
in  a  great  pit  in  the  forest,  and  the  conquerors 
threw  stones  over  his  grave,  an  old  proof  of  bitter 
hostility  (Josh.  vii.  26).  The  sacred  historian  con- 
trasts this  dishonoured  burial  with  the  tomb  which 
Absalom  had  raised  in  the  King's  dale  (comp.  Gen. 
xiv.  17)  for  the  three  sons  whom  he  had  lost 
(comp.  2  Sam.  xviii.  18,  with  xiv.  27),  and  where 
he  probably  had  intended  that  his  own  remains 
should  be  laid.  Josephus  {Ant.  vii.  10,  §  3) 
mentions  the  pillar  of  Absalom  as  situate  2  stadia 
from  Jerusalem.  An  existing  monument  in  the 
valley  of  Jehoshaphat  just  outside  Jerusalem  bears 
the  name  of  the  Tomb  of  Absalom  ;  but  the  Ionic 
pillars  which  surround  its  base  show  that  it  belongs 
to  a  much  later  period,  even  if  it  be  a  tomb 
at  all.  [G.  E.  L.  C.] 


■ 


The  so-called  Tomb  of  Absalom. 

ABSALOM  CA^eff(rd\wfj.os;  Absolom,  Absa- 
lom), the  father  of  Mattathias  (1  Mace.  xi.  70)  and 
Jonathan  (1  Mace.  xiii.  11).  [B.  F.  W.] 

ACCAD  03X;  APXdS ;  Achad),  one  of 
the  cities  in  the  land  of  Shinar  —  the  others 
being  Babel,  Erech,  and  Calneh — which  were  the 
beginning  of  Nimrod's  kingdom  (Gen.  x.  10).  A 
great  many  conjectures  have  been  formed  as  to  its 
ulentification : — 1.  Following  the  reading  of  the 
oldest  version  (the  LXX.),  the  river  Argades,  men- 
tioned by  Aelian  as  in  the  Persian  part  of  Sittacene 
beyond  the  Tigris,  has  been  put  forward  (Bochart, 


ACCARON 

Phal.  iv.  T, ).  But  this  is  too  far  east.  2.  Sacada, 
a  town  stated  by  Ptolemy  to  have  stood  at  the 
junction  of  the  Lycos  (Great  Zab)  with  the  Tigris, 
below  Nineveh  (Leclerc,  in  Winer).  :!.  A  district 
"north  of  Babylon"  called  'Akk^ttj  (Knobel, 
Genesis,  108).  4.  And  perhaps  in  the  absence  of 
any  remains  of  the  name  this  has  the  greatest  show 
of  evidence  in  its  favour,  Xisibis,  a  city  on  the 
Khabour  river,  still  retaining  its  name  (Nisibin), 
and  situated  at  the  N.E.  part  of  Mesopotamia, 
about  150  miles  east  of  Orfa,  and  midway  between 
it  and  Nineveh.  We  have  the  testimony  of  Jerome 
(Onomasticon,  Achad),  that  it  was  the  belief  of 
the  Jews  of  his  day  (Hebraei  dicunt)  that  Nisibis 
was  Accad ;  a  belief  confirmed  by  the  renderings 
of  the  Targums  of  Jerusalem  and  Pseudo-jonathan 
(}"Q'')>3)7  and  of  Ephraem  Syrus ;  and  also  by  the 
fact  that  the  ancient  name  of  Nisibis  was  Acar 
(Rosenmiiller,  ii.  29),  which  is  the  word  given  in 

the  early  Peschito  version  J^j>  and  also  occurring 

in  three  MSS.  of  the  Onomasticon  of  Jerome.  (See 
the  note  to  "  Achad "  in  the  edition  of  Jerome, 
Veil.  1767,  vol.  iii.  127.) 

The  theory  deduced  by  Rawlinson  from  the  latest 
Assyrian  researches,  is,  that "  Akkad  "  was  the  name 
of  the  "  great  primitive  Hamite  race  who  inhabited 
Babylonia  from  the  earliest  time,"  who  originated 
the  aits  and  sciences,  and  whose  language  ^vas  "  the 
great  parent  stock  from  which  the  trunk  stream  of 
the  Semitic  tongues  sprang."  "  In  the  inscriptions 
of  Sargon  the  name  of  Akkad  is  applied  to  the 
'Armenian  mountains  instead  of  the  vernacular  title 
of  Ararat."  (Rawlinson,  in  Herodotus,  i.  319, 
note.)  The  name  of  the  city  is  believed  to  have 
been  discovered  in  the  inscriptions  under  the  form 
Kinzi  Akkad  (ibid.  447).  [G.] 

ACCARON.     [Ekron.] 

AC'CHO  (iay,  hot  sand(?);  "AkX(o,  "A/oj, 
Strabo ;  thePTOLEMAis  of  the  Maccabees  and  N.T.), 
now  called  Acca,  or  more  usually  by  Europeans,  Saint 
Je  'a  d' Acre,  the  most  important  sea-port  town  on 
the  Syrian  coast,  about  30  miles  S.  of  Tyre.  It  was 
situated  on  a  slightly  projecting  headland,  at  the 
northern  extremity  of  that  spacious  bay — the  only 
inlet  of  any  importance  along  the  whole  sea-board 
of  Palestine — which  is  formed  by  the  bold  pro- 
montory of  Carmel  on  the  opposite  side.  This 
hay,  though  spacious  (the  distance  from  Accho  to 
Carmel  being  about  8  miles),  is  shallow  and  ex- 
posed, and  hence  Accho  itself  does  not  at  all  times 
offer  safe  harbourage;  on  the  oppositeside  of  the 
bay,  however,  the  roadstead  of  Haifa,  immediately 
under  Carmel,  supplies  this  deficiency.  Inland  the 
hills,   which    from    Tyre   southwards   press    close 

upon  tl a-sb ,  gradually  recede,  leaving  in  the 

immediate  aeighbourh I  of  Accho  a  plain  of  re- 
markable fertility  abou^  6  miles  broad,  and  watered 
by  the  small  river  Belus  (Jffdhr  Sfam&n),  which 
discharges  itself  into  the  sea  close  Cinder  the  walls 
of  the  town:  to  the  S.E.  the  still  receding  heights 
afford  access  to  the  interior  in  the  direction  of  Sep- 
phoris.  Accho,  thus  u,\ ably  placed  in  com- 
mand of  the  approaches  from  the  north,  both  by 

sea  and  land,  has  I u  justly  termed  the  "  key  of 

Palestine." 

In   the  divisi f  Canaan    among   tie'  tribes, 

fell  to  thr  lot  of  Asher,  hut  was  never 
wrested  from  its  original  inhabitants  (Judg.i.  i  : 
and   hence  it   is   reckoned    among    tie'    cities     of 


ACELDAMA 


15 


Phoenicia  (Strab.  ii.   134;   Plin.  v.   17;   Ptol.  v. 

IS).      No   further    mention   is    made  of   it  in   the 
0.  T.  history,  nor  does  it  appear  to  have  risen  to 
much  importance  until  after  the  dismemberment 
of  the  Macedonian  empire,  when  its  proximity  to 
the  frontier  of  Syria  made  it  an  object  of  frequent 
contention.      Along  with  the  rest  of  Phoenicia  it 
fell  to  the  lot  of  Egypt,  and  was  named  Ptolemais, 
after   one  of  the  Ptolemies,  probably   Soter,    who 
could  not  have  failed  to  see  its  importance  to  his 
dominions  in  a    military  point    of   view.     In  the 
wars  that  ensued  between  Syria  and  Egypt,  it  was 
taken   by  Antiochus  the  Great  (Ptol.  v.  G2),  and 
attached  to    his  kingdom.       When  the    Maccabees 
established    themselves   in  Judaea,   it  became   the 
base  of  operations  against  them.     Simon  drove  his 
enemies  back  within  its  walls,  but  did  not  take  it 
(1   Mac.   v.  22).     Subsequently,  when  Alexander 
Balas  set  up  his  claim  to  the  Syrian  throne,  he 
could  ofier  no  more  tempting  bait  to  secure  the  co- 
operation of  Jonathan  than  the  possession  of  Ptole- 
mais and  its  district    (1    Mac.   x.   39).     On  the 
decay  of  the  Syrian  power  it  was   one  of  the  few 
cities  of  Judaea  which  established  its  independence. 
Alexander    Jannaeus   attacked  it  without  success. 
Cleopatra,  whom   he  had  summoned  to  his  assist- 
ance, took  it,  and  transferred  it,  with  her  daughter 
Selene,  to  the  Syrian  monarchy:  under  her  rule  it 
was  besieged  and  taken  by  Tigranes  (Joseph.  Ant. 
xiii.  12.  §2,  13.  §2,  16.  §4).    Ultimately  it  passed 
into  the  hands  of  the  Romans,  who  constructed  a 
military  road  along    the   coast,  from  Berytus  to 
Sepphoris,  passing  through  it,  and  elevated  it  to  the 
rank   of  a  colony,  with  the  title  Colonia  Claudii 
Caesaris  (Plin.  v.  17).     The  only  notice  of  it  in  the 
N.  T.  is  in  connexion  with  St.  Paul's  passage  from 
Tyre  to  Caesarea  (Acts  xxi.  7) .  Few  remains  of  anti - 
quity  are  to  be  found  in   the  modern  town:    the 
original  name  has  alone  survived  all  the  changes  to 
which  the  place  has  been  exposed.        [W.  L.  B.] 

AC'COS  ('A/c/coJs  ;  Jacob),  father  of  John  and 
grandfather   of  Eupolemus   the   ambassador  from 
Judas  Maccabams  to  Rome  (1  Mace.  viii.  17). 
AC'COZ.     [Koz.] 

ACEL'DAMA  ('AK€\Safid;  Lnehm.  (B) 
'A«eA5a^ax;  Haceldama);  ycoplov a.'1/j.aros,  "the 
field  of  blood ;"  (Chald.  NEH  7pri),  the  name  given 
by  the  Jews  of  Jerusalem  to  a  "  field  "  (^ajpfW) 
near  Jerusalem  purchased  by  Judas  with  the  money 
which  he  received  for  the  betrayal  of  Christ,  and  so 
called  from  his  violent  death  therein  (Acts  i.  \u). 
This  is  at  variance  with  the  account  of  St.  Matthew 
(xxvii.  8),  according  to  which  the  ••  field  of  blood" 
(aypbs  a'lfxaTOs)  was  purchased  by  the  Priests  with 
lie1  ■';<>  pi' res  of  sih  er  after  the}  had  been  cast  doVi  n 
by  Judas,  as  a  bin ial-place  for  strangers,  the  Locality 
being  well  known  af  the  time  as  "  the  field  of  the 

Potter,"'1  (rbv  aypbv  tov  Kcpa/Afiiis).  See  A 1  lord's 
notes  to  Acts  i.  19.  And  accordingly  ecclesiastical 
tradition  appears  from  the  earliesi  times  to  have 
pointed oul  twomstincf  (though  not  unvarying) spots 

as  referred  to  in  the  two  ace its.     |n  Jerome's 

i£  aims  "  was 
show  n  ••  ad  australem11  plagam  montis  Sion."    Arcul- 

prophecy  referred  to  by  st.  Matthew,  Zecha- 
I  Jeremiah)  xi.  12,  LS.doen  not  in  the  pi 
state  of  the  Heb.  text  agree  with  the  quotation  of  the 
Evangelist.     The  Byriao  Vers,  omits  the  name  alto- 
gether. 
b  Eusebins,  from  whom  Jerome  translated,  has  here 


16 


AOHAIA 


fus  (p.  4)  saw  the  "  large  fig-tree  where  Judas 
hanged  himself,"  certainly  in  a  different  place  from 
that  of  the  "small  field  (Aceldama)  where  the  bodies 
of  pilgrims  were  buried"  (p.  5).  Saewulf  (p.  42) 
was  shown  Aceldama  "  next  "  to  Gethsemane,  "  at 
the  foot  of  Olivet,  near  the  sepulchres  of  Simeon  and 
Joseph  "  (Jacob  and  Zacharias).  In  the  "  Citez  de 
Jherusalem  "  (Kob.  ii.  560)  the  place  of  the  suicide 
of  Judas  was  shown  as  a  stone  arch,  apparently 
inside  the  city,  and  giving  its  name  to  a  street.  Sir 
John  Maundeville  (175)  found  the  "  elder-tree"  of 
Judas  "fast  by"  the  "image  of  Absalom;"  but 
the  Aceldama  "  on  the  other  side  of  Mount  Sion 
towards  the  south."  Maundrell's  account  (p. 
4158-9)  agrees  with  this,  and  so  does  the  large  map 
of  Schultz,  on  which  both  sites  are  marked.  The 
Aceldama  still  retains  its  ancient  position,  but  the 
tree  of  Judas  has  been  transferred  to  the  "Hill  of 
Evil  Counsel"  (Stanley,  8.  and  P.  105,  186  ;  and 
Barclay's  Map,  1857,  and  "  City,"  &c,  75,  208). 
The  "field  of  blood"  is  now  shown  on  the  steep 
southern  face  of  the  valley  or  ravine  of  Hinnom, 
near  its  eastern  end ;  on  a  narrow  plateau  (Salz- 
mann,  Etude,  p.  22),  more  than  half  way  up  the 
hillside.  Its  modern  name  is  Ilak  cd-damm.  It  is 
separated  by  no  enclosure ;  a  few  venerable  olive- 
trees  (see  Salzmann's  photograph,  "  Champ  du 
sang"}  occupy  part  of  it,  and  the  rest  is  covered  by 
a  ruined  square  edifice — half  built,  half  excavated — 
which,  perhaps  originally  a  church  (Pauli,  in  Hitter, 
Pal.  p.  464),  was  in  Maundrell's  time  (p.  468)  in 
use  as  a  charnel-house,  and  which  the  latest  con- 
jectures (Schultz,  Williams,  and  Barclay,  207)  pro- 
pose to  identify  with  the  tomb  of  Ananus  (Joseph. 
B.  J.  v.  12,  §2).  It  was  believed  in  the  middle  ages 
that  the  soil  of  this  place  had  the  power  of  very  rapidly 
consuming  bodies  buried  in  it  (Sandys,  187),  and  in 
consequence  either  of  this  or  of  the  sanctity  of  the 
spot,  great  quantities  of  the  earth  were  taken  away  ; 
amongst  others  by  the  Pisan  Crusaders  in  1218  for 
their  Campo  Santo  at  Pisa,  and  by  the  Empress  He- 
lena for  that  at  Rome  (Rob.  i.  355 ;  Raumer,  270). 
Besides  the  charnel-house  above  mentioned,  there  are 
several  large  hollows  in  the  ground  in  this  imme- 
diate neighbourhood  which  may  have  been  caused 
by  such  excavations.  The  formation  of  the  hill  is 
cretaceous,  and  it  is  well  known  that  chalk  is  always 
favourable  to  the  rapid  decay  of  animal  matter. 
The  assertion  (Krafft,  193  ;  Ritter,  Pal.  463)  that 
a  pottery  still  exists  near  this  spot  does  not  seem  to 
be  borne  out  by  other  testimony.  [G.] 

ACHA'IA  ('Axafa)  signifies  in  the  N.  T.  a 
Roman  province,  which  included  the  whole  of  the 
Peloponnesus  and  the  greater  part  of  Hellas  proper 
with  the  adjacent  islands.  This  province  with 
that  of  Macedonia  comprehended  the  whole  of 
Greece :  hence  Achaia  and  Macedonia  are  fre- 
quently mentioned  together  in  the  N.  T.  to  indicate 
all  Greece  (Acts  xviii.  12,  xix.  21  ;  Rom.  xv.  26, 
xvi.  25  ;  1  Cor.  xvi.  15 ;  2  Cor.  ii.  1,  ix.  2,  xi.  10  ; 
1  Thess.  i.  7,  8).  A  narrow  slip  of  country  upon 
the  northern  coast  of  Peloponnesus  was  originally 
called  Achaia,  the  cities  of  which  were  confederated 
in  an  ancient  League,  which  was  renewed  in  B.C.  280 
for  the  purpose  of  resisting  the  Macedonians.  This 
League  subsequently  included  several  of  the  other 
Grecian  states,  and  became  the  most  powerful  poli- 
tical body  in  Greece;  and  hence  it  was  natural  for 


ev  popei'ois.  This  may  be  a  clerical  error,  or  it  may 
add  another  to  the  many  instances  existing  of  the 
change  of  a  traditional  site  to  meet  circumstances. 


ACHIM 

the  Romans  to  apply  the  name  of  Achaia  to  the 
Peloponnesus  and  the  south  of  Greece,  when  they 
took  Corinth  and  destroyed  the  League  in  B.C.  146. 
(Ka\ovcri  5e  ova  'EWaSos  aA\'  'Axa'ias  7iyt/j.6i'a. 
ol  'Pa>|tia(oi,  St6ri  ^x€LP^"Tavro  "EWrfvas  5V 
'AxaicSf  ToVe  rod  'EXA-qvtKov  Trpoeo'TT/K^Taii', 
Paus.  vii.  16,  §10.)  Whether  the  Roman  province 
of  Achaia  was  established  immediately  after  the 
conquest  of  the  League,  or  not  till  a  later  period, 
need  not  be  discussed  here  (see  Diet,  of  Geogr.  i. 
p.  17).  In  the  division  of  the  provinces  by  Au- 
gustus between  the  emperor  and  the  senate  in  B.C. 
27,  Achaia  was  one  of  the  provinces  assigned  to  the 
senate,  and  was  governed  by  a  proconsul  (Strab. 
xvii.  p.  840;  Dion.  Cass.  liii.  12).  Tiberius  in  the 
second  year  of  his  reign  (a.d.  16)  took  it  away 
from  the  senate,  and  made  it  an  imperial  province 
governed  by  a  procurator  (Tac.  Ann.  i.  76);  but 
Claudius  restored  it  to  the  senate  (Suet.  Claud.  25). 
This  was  its  condition  when  Paiil  was  brought 
before  Gallio,  who  is  therefore  (Acts  xviii.  12) 
correctly  called  the  "proconsul"  (avOvTraros)  ol 
Achaia,  which  is  translated  in  the  A.  V.  "  deputy  " 
of  Achaia. 

ACHA'ICUS  ('Axai'/cJs),  name  of  a  Christian 
(1  Cor.  xvi.  17,  subscription  No.  25). 

A'CHAN  (pj?,  trouhler;  written  "Oy  in  1  Chr. 

ii.  7;  "Axav  or  *Ax&p;  Achan  or  Achar),  an 
Israelite  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  who,  when 
Jericho  and  all  that  it  contained  were  accursed 
and  devoted  to  destruction,  secreted  a  portion 
of  the  spoil  in  his  tent.  For  this  sin  Jehovah 
punished  Israel  by  their  defeat  in  their  attack  upou 
Ai.  When  Achan  confessed  his  guilt,  and  the 
booty  was  discovered,  he  was  stoned  to  death  with 
his  whole  family  by  the  people  in  a  valley  situated 
between  Ai  and  Jericho,  and  their  remains,  together 
with  his  property,  were  burnt.  From  this  event  the 
valley  received  the  name  of  Achor  (%.  e.  trouble) 
[Achor]  .  From  the  similarity  of  the  name  Achan 
to  Achar,  Joshua  said  to  Achan,  "  Why  hast  thou 
troubled  us?  the  Lord  shall  trouble  thee  this  day" 
(Josh.  vii.).  In  order  to  account  for  the  terrible 
vengeance  executed  upon  the  family  of  Achan,  it  is 
quite  unnecessary  to  resort  to  the  hypothesis  that 
they  were  accomplices  in  his  act  of  military  insub- 
ordination. The  sanguinary  severity  of  Oriental 
nations,  from  which  the  Jewish  people  were  by  no 
means  free,  has  in  all  ages  involved  the  children  in 
the  punishment  of  the  father.  [R.  W.  B.] 

ACH'BOR  Ctt3?S? ;  'AXo^p  ;  Achobor).  1. 
Father  of  Baal-hanau,  king  of  Edom  (Gen.  xxxvi. 
38  ;  1  Chr.  i.  49).  2.  Son  of  Micaiah,  a  con- 
temporary of  Josiah  (2  K.  xxii.  12,  14;  Jer.  xxvi. 
22,  xxxvi.  12),  called  Abdon  in  2  K.  xxii.  12. 

ACHIACH'ARUS  CAXtdXaPos  (_'AXeix*P°s)> 
i.  e.  I'TinN^nK  =  Postumus  ;  Achicharus),  Tob. 
i.  21,  &c* 

A'CHIM  ('AxeiV,  Matt.  i.  14),  son  of  Sadoc, 
and  lather  of  Eliud,  in  our  Lord's  genealogy;  the 
fifth  in  succession  before  Joseph  the  husband  of 
Mary.  The  Hebrew  form  of  the  name  would  be 
p3»,  Jachin  (Gen.xlvi.  10;  1  Chr.  xxiv.  17),  which 

in  the  latter  place  the  LXX.  lender  'Axi'm  or'Ax^M- 
It  is  a  short  form  of  Jehoiachin.  the  Lord  will 
establish.  The  name,  perhaps,  indicates  him  as 
successor  to  Jehoiachin's  throne,  and  expresses  his 
parents'  faith  that  God  would,  in  due  time,  cstab- 


ACHIOR 

lish  the  kingdom  of  David,  according  to  the  pro- 
mise in  Is.  ix.  7  (6  in  the  Heb.  Bib.)  and  else- 
where. [A.  C.  H.] 

A'CHIOR  ('AxtcSp,  >.  e.  "IIXTlN*.  ttfl  brother 
of  light;  corap.  Num.  xxxiv.  27;  Achior :  con- 
founded with  'Axl<*XaP0S'  Tob.  xi.  17),  a  general 
of  the  Ammonites  in  the  army  of  Holofernes,  who  is 
afterwards  represented  as  becoming  a  proselyte  to 
Judaism  (Jud.  v.  vii.  xiii.  xiv.).  [B.  F.  W.] 

A'CHISH  (V^K  ;  'Ayxis,  'AyXods  ;  Achis), 
a  Philistine  king  at  Oath,  son  of  Maoch,  who  in  the 
title  to  the  34th  Psalm  is  called  Abimelech  (possibly 
corrupted  from  ^?D  K^3N).  David  twice  found  a 
refuge  with  him  when  he  fled  from  Saul.  On  the 
first  occasion,  being  recognised  by  the  servants  of 
Achish  as  one  celebrated  for  his  victories  over  the 
Philistines,  he  was  alarmed  for  his  safety,  and  feigned 
madness  (1  Sam.  xxi.  10-13).  [David.]  From 
Achish  he  fled  to  the  cave  of  Adullam.  2udly. 
David  fled  to  Achish  with  600  men  (1  Sam.  xxvi. 
2),  and  remained  at  path  a  year  and  four  months. 

Whether  the  Achish,  to  whom  Shimei  went  in 
disobedience  to  the  commands  of  Solomon  (1  K.  ii. 
40),  be  the  same  peison  is  uncertain.   [R.  W.  B.] 

ACH'METHA.     [Ecbatana.] 

A'CHOR,     VALLEY      OF,    ("fay  pOJ> ; 

'Ejue/v-ax^p ;  Achor)  —  "  valley  of  trouble,"  accord- 
ing to  the  etymology  of  the  text;  the  spot  at  which 
Achan,  the  "troubler  of  Israel,"  was  stoned  (.Josh, 
vii.  24,  26).  On  the  N.  boundary  of  Judah 
(xv.  7;  also  Isa.  lxv.  10;  Hos.  ii.  15).  It  was 
known  in  the  time  of  Jerome  (Onoiii.  s.  ?'.),  who 
describes  it  as  north  of  Jericho  ;  but  this  is  at 
variance  with  the  course  of  the  boundary  in  Joshua 
(Keifs  Joshua,  131).  [G.j 

ACH'SAH  (nprW;  'A-rxa;  Axa),  daughter  of 

Caleb,  the  son  of  Jephunneh,  the  Kenezite.  Her 
father  promised  her  in  marriage  to  whoever  should 
take  Debir,  the  ancient  name  of  which  (according  to 
the  analogy  of  Kirjath-Arba,  the  ancient  name  ot 
Hebron)  was  Kirjath-Sepher  (or  as  in  Josh.  xv.  49, 
Kirjath-Sanna),  the  city  of  the  booh.  Othniel,  her 
father's  younger  brother,  took  the  city,  and  accord- 
ingly received  the  hand  of  Achsah  as  his  reward. 
Caleb,  at  his  daughter's  request,  added  to  her 
dowry  the  upper  and  lower  springs,  which  she  had 
pleaded  for  as  peculiarly  suitable  to  her  inheritance 
in  a  smith  country  (Josh.  xv.  15-19.     See  Stanley's 

3.&P.  p.  161).  [Gulloth.]  The  story  is  repeated 

in  Judg.  i.  1  1-15.  Achsah  is  mentioned  again,  as 
being  the  daughter  of  Caleb,  in  1  Chr.  ii.  49.  But 
there  is  much  confusion  in  the  genealogy  of  Caleb 
there  given.     [Caleb.]  [A.  C.  II. j 

AOH'SHAPB  C*)^?**;  'ACty,  Kaufy  and 
Kea<p ;  Achsaph,  Axaf),  a  city  within  the  ter- 
ritory of  Asher,  named  between  Beten  and  Alam- 

melech  (Josh.  xix.  2."i  ;  originally  the  seat  ot'  a 
Canaanite  king  (xi.  l,xii.  20  .  [t  is  possibly  the  mo- 
dern Kesaf,  ruins  bearing  which  name  were  found 
by  Robinson  iii.  55)  on  the  N.W.  edge  of  the 
Huleh.     But  more  probably  the  name  has  survived 

in  Chaifa,   a   town  which,  from  its  situation,  must 

always  have  l n  too  important  to  have  escaped 

mention  in  the  history,  as.  it  otherwise  would  have 
done,  [f  this  suggestion  is  correct,  the  LXX.  render- 
ing, Kfd'JK  exhibits  the  name  in  the  process  ot 
change  from  tne  ancient  to  the  modern  form.  [G.] 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


17 


ACHZIB  (1*T3N;  Ke£/3,  "AxC^ ;  Achzib). 
1.  A  city  of  Judah,  in  the  Shefelah,  named  with 

Keilah  and  Mareshah  (Josh.  xv.  44,  Micah  i.  14). 
The  latter  passage  contains  a  play  on  the  name: 
"the  houses  of  Achzib  (.Q^TDNj  shall  be  a  lii 
(2T3N)."  It  is  probably  the  same  with  Chezie 
and  CuozEiiA,  which  see. 

2.  A  town  belonging  to  Asher  (Josh.  xix.  29), 
from  which  the Canaanites  were  not  expelled  (Judg. 
i.  31);  afterwards  Ecdippa  (Jos.  B.  J.  i.  13,  §4, 
'E.icd'nnrwv).  Josephus  also  {Ant.  v.  1,  §22)  gives 
the  name  as'Ap/cfy  . .  .  .  -q  koI  'Aktitt6vs.  Here  was 
the  Casale  Hvbertioi the  Crusaders  (Schulz  ;  bitter, 
Pal.  782);  and  it  is  now  es-Zib,  on  the  sea-shore 
at  the  mouth  of  the  Nahr  Herdamtl,  2  h.  20  m.  N. 
of  Akka  (Robinson,  iii.  028  ;  and  comp.  Maundrell, 
427).  After  the  return  from  Babylon  Achzib  was 
considered  by  the  Jews  as  the  northernmost  limit 
of  the  Holy  Land.  See  the  quotations  from  the 
Gemara  in  Reland  (544).  [<!.] 

AC'ITHO  ('AkMv,  probably  an  error  for 
'AxlT^3;  Achitob,  i.e.  l-ID^nX,  kind  brother), 
Jud.  viii.  1 ;  comp.  2  Esdr.  i.  1."'       [B.  F.  W.] 

ACRABAT'TINE.  [Arahattine.] 
^  ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES  (irpdl-ets 
a.Tro(Tr6\Q}U,  Acta  Apostolorvm),  a  second  trea- 
tise (Sevrepos  Aoyos)  by  the  author  of  the  third 
Gospel,  traditionally  known  as  Lucas  or  Luke  (which 
see).  The  identity  of  the  writer  of  both  books  is 
strongly  shown  by  their  great  similarity  in  style  and 
idiom,  and  the  usage  of  particular  words  and  com- 
pound forms.  The  theories  which  assign  the  book  to 
other  authors,  or  divide  it  among  several,  will  not 
stand  the  test  of  searching  inquiry.  They  will  be 
found  enumerated  in  Davidson's  Introd.  to  the  X.  T. 
vol.  ii.,  and  Alford's  prolegomena  to  vol.  ii.  of  his 
edition  of  the  Greek  Testament.  It  must  be  con- 
fessed to  be,  at  first  sight,  somewhat  surprising 
that  notices  of  the  author  are  so  entirely  wanting, 
not  only  in  the  book  itself,  but  also,  generally,  in 
the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  whom  he  must  have 
accompanied  for  some  years  on  his  travels.  But 
our  surprise  is  removed  when  we  notice  the  habit 
of  the  Apostle  with  regard  to  mentioning  his  com- 
panions to  have  been  veiy  various  and  uncertain, 
and  remember  that  no  Epistles  were,  strictly  speak- 
ing, written  by  him  while  our  writer  was  in  his 
company,  before  his  Roman  imprisonment;  for  he 
does  not  seem  to  have  joined  him  at  Corinth  (  Acts 
xviii.),  where  the  two  Epp.  to  the  Thess.  were 
written,  nor   to   have   been    with    him   at    EphesuS, 

ch.  xix.  whence,  perhaps,  the  Ep.  to  the  Gal.  was 
written;  nor  again  to  have  wintered  with  him  at 
Corinth,  ch.  xx.  3,  at  the  time  of  his  writing  the 
Ep.  to  the  Rom.  and,  perhaps,  that  to  the  Gal. 
The  book  commences  with  an  inscription  I 
Theophilus,  who,  from  bearing  the  appellation  Kpd- 
tiittos,  was  probably  a  man  of  birth  and  station. 
But  its  design  must  not  be  supposed  to  be  limited 

to  th lification    of  Tl philus,    whose   name    i> 

prefixed  only,  as  was  customary  then  as  now,  by 

Way    of   dedication.       The    readers    were    evidently 

intended  to  be  the  members  of  the  Christian 
Church,  whether  Jews  or  Gentiles;  for  its  con- 
ii'  such  as  are  of  the  utmost  consequence 
to  the  whole  church.  They  are  Thefulfilm 
the  promise  of  the  Father  by  the  descent  of  th< 
Holy  Spirit,  and  the  results  of  that  outpouring,  by 
the  dispersion  of  thi   0    oel  \monq  Jews  and  Gen- 

C 


li 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


tiles.  Under  these  leading  heads  all  the  personal 
and  subordinate  details  may  be  ranged.  Imme- 
diately after  the  Ascension,  St.  Peter,  the  first  of 
the  Twelve,  designated  by  our  Lord  as  the  Rock  on 
whom  the  Church  was  to  be  built,  the  holder  of 
the  keys  of  the  kingdom,  becomes  the  prime  actor 
under  God  in  the  founding  of  the  Church.  He  is 
the  centre  of  the  first  great  group  of  sayings  and 
doings.  The  opening  of  the  door  to  Jews  (ch.  ii.) 
and  Gentiles  (ch.  x.)  is  his  office,  and  by  him,  in 
good  time,  is  accomplished.  But  none  of  the  existing 
twelve  Apostles  were,  humanly  speaking,  fitted  to 
preach  the  Gospel  to  the  cultivated  Gentile  world. 
To  be  by  divine  grace  the  spiritual  conqueror  of 
Asia  and  Europe,  God  raised  up  another  instru- 
ment, from  among  the  highly-educated  and  zealous 
Pharisees.  The  preparation  of  Saul  of  Tarsus  for 
the  work  to  be  done,  the  progress,  in  his  hand,  of 
that  work,  his  journeyings,  preachings,  and  perils, 
his  stripes  and  imprisonments,  his  testifying  in 
Jerusalem  and  being  brought  to  testify  in  Rome, — 
these  are  the  subjects  of  the  latter  half  of  the 
book,  of  which  the  great  central  figure  is  the 
Apostle  Paul. 

Any  view  which  attributes  to  the  writer  as  his 
chief  design  some  collateral  purpose  which  is  served 
by  the  book  as  it  stands,  or,  indeed,  any  purpose 
beyond  that  of  writing  a  faithful  history  of  such 
facts  as  seemed  important  in  the  spread  of  the 
Gospel,  is  now  generally,  and  very  properly,  treated 
as  erroneous.  Such  a  view  has  become  celebrated 
in  modern  times,  as  held  by  Baur; — that  the  pur- 
pose of  the  writer  was  to  compare  the  two  great 
Apostles,  to  show  that  St.  Paul  did  not  depart 
from  the  principles  which  regulated  St.  Peter,  and 
to  exalt  him  at  every  opportunity  by  comparison 
with  St.  Peter.  The  reader  need  hardly  be  re- 
minded how  little  any  such  purpose  is  bome  out  by 
the  contents  of  the  book  itself;  nay,  how  naturally 
they  would  follow  their  present  sequence,  without 
any  such  thought  having  been  in  the  writer's 
mind.  Doubtless  many  ends  are  answered  and 
many  results  brought  out  by  the  book  as  its 
narrative  proceeds :  as  e.  g.  the  rejection  of  the 
Gospel  by  the  Jewish  people  everywhere,  mid  its 
gradual  transference  to  the  Gentiles ;  and  others 
which  might  be  easily  gathered  up,  and  made  by 
ingenious  hypothesizers,  such  as  Baur,  to  appear  as 
if  the  writer  were  bent  on  each  one  in  its  turn,  as 
the  chief  object  of  his  work. 

As  to  the  time  when,  and  place  at  which  the 
book  was  written,  we  are  left  to  gather  them 
entirely  from  indirect  notices.  It  seems  most  pro- 
bable that  the  place  of  writing  was  Rome,  and  the 
time  about  two  years  from  the  date  of  St.  Paul's 
arrival  there,  as  related  in  ch.  xxviii.,  sub  fin. 
Had  any  considerable  alteration  in  the  Apostle's 
circumstances  taken  place  before  the  publication, 
there  can  be  no  reason  why  it  should  not  have 
been  noticed.  And  on  other  accounts  also  this  time 
was  by  far  the  most  likely  for  the  publication  of 
the  book.  The  arrival  in  Rome  was  an  important 
period  in  the  Apostle's  life :  the  quiet  which  suc- 
ceeded it  seemed  to  promise  no  immediate  deter- 
mination of  his  cause.  A  large  amount  of  historic 
material  had  been  collected  in  Judaea,  and  during 
the  various  missionary  journeys  ;  or,  taking  another 
and  not  less  probable -view,  Nero  was  beginning  to 
undergo  that  change  for  the  worse  which  dis  aced 
tlie  latter  portion  of  his  reign  :  none  could  tell  how 
soon  the  whole  outward  repose  of  Roman  society 
might  be   shaken,   and   the   tacit    toleration   which 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 

the  Christians  enjoyed  be  exchanged  for  bitter  per- 
secution. If  such  terrors  were  imminent,  there 
would  surely  be  in  the  Roman  Church  prophets 
and  teachers  who  might  tell  them  of  the  storm 
which  was  gathering,  and  warn  them,  that  the 
records  lying  ready  for  publication  must  be  given  to 
the  faithful  before  its  outbreak  or  event. 

Such  a  priori  considerations  would,  it  is  true, 
weigh  but  little  against  presumptive  evidence  fur- 
nished by  the  book  itself;  but  arrayed,  as  they  are,  in 
aid  of  such  evidence,  they  carry  some  weight,  when 
we  find  that  the  time  naturally  and  fairly  indi- 
cated in  the  book  itself  for  its  publication  is  that 
one  of  all  others  when  we  should  conceive  that 
publication  most  likely. 

This  would  give  us  for  the  publication  the  year 
63  A.D.,  according  to  the  most  probable  assignment 
of  the  date  of  the  arrival  of  St.  Paul  at  Rome. 

The  genuineness  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  has 
ever  been  recognised  in  the  Church.  It  is  mentioned 
by  Eusebius  (/f.  E.  hi.  25)  among  the  6/j.o\oyov/j.e- 
vai  6e7cu  ypacpai.  It  is  first  directly  quoted  in  the 
epistle  of  the  churches  of  Lyons  and  Vienne  to 
those  of  Asia  and  Phrygia  (a.d.  177);  then  re- 
peatedly and  expressly  by  Irenaeus,  Clement  of 
Alexandria,  Tertullian,  and  so  onwards.  It  was 
rejected  by  the  Marcionites  (cent,  iii.)  and  Mani- 
chaeans  (cent,  iv.)  as  contradicting  some  of  their 
notions.  In  modern  Germany,  Baur  and  some 
others  have  attempted  to  throw  discredit  on  it, 
and  fix  its  publication  in  the  2nd  century,  mainly 
by  assuming  the  hypothesis  impugned  above,  that 
it  is  an  apology  for  St.  Paul.  But  the  view  has 
found  no  favour,  and  would,  ere  this,  have  been 
forgotten,  had  .it  not  been  for  the  ability  and  sub- 
tlety of  its  chief  supporter. 

The  text  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  is  very  full 
of  various  readings  ;  more  so  than  any  other  book 
of  the  N.  T.  To  this  several  reasons  may  have 
contributed.  In  the  many  backward  references  to 
Gospel  historv,  and  the  many  anticipations  of  state- 
ments and  expressions  occurring  in  the  Epistles, 
temptations  abounded  for  a  corrector  to  try  his 
hand  at  assimilating,  and,  as  he  thought,  recon- 
ciling, the  various  accounts.  In  places  where  eccle- 
siastical order  or  usage  was  in  question,  insertions 
or  omissions  were  made  to  suit  the  habits  and 
views  of  the  Church  in  aftertimes.  Where  the 
narrative  simply  related  facts,  "any  act  or  word 
apparently  unworthy  of  the  apostolic  agent  was 
modified  for  the  sake  of  decorum.  Where  St.  Paul 
repeats  to  different  audiences,  or  the  writer  him- 
self narrates,  the  details  of  his  miraculous  conver- 
sion, the  one  passage  was  pieced  from  the  other,  so 
as  to  produce  verbal  accordance.  There  are  in  this 
book  an  unusual  number  of  those  remarkable  inter- 
polations of  considerable  length,  which  are  found  in 
the  Codex  Bezae  (D)  and  its  cognates.  A  critic  of 
some  eminence,  Bornemann,  believes  that  the  text  of 
the  Acts  originally  contained  them  all,  and  has  been 
abbreviated  by  correctors ;  and  he  has  published  an 
edition  in  which  they  are  inserted  in  full.  But, 
while  some  of  them  bear  an  appearance  of  genuine- 
ness (as  e.  g.  that  in  ch.  xii.  10,  where,  after 
e£eA0oVTes,  is  added  Kari^aav  robs  iirra  /3a6- 
fxovs,  Ka\)  the  greater  part  are  unmeaning  and 
absurd  (e.  g.  that  in  ch.  svi.  39,  where  we  rend 
after  e'|eA.#;7i', — elirovres,  'HyvoiitTa.fj.ti'  to.  ko.8' 
v/j.as  <5ti  iff-ri  avSpes  diKaior  Kal  e^ayayovTts 
iraptKaXtaav  avrovs  Ae'-yofTes  'Ek  ttjs  irrfAeajs 
ravT-qs     if^eXdare    fxrjTroTt    irahiv    ffvvipa<pwffiv 

7]fUV   iTTtKpd^OVTtS   K0.6'    U/XtHv). 


ADADAH 

The  most  remarkable  exegetical  works  and  mo- 
nographs on  the  Acts,  besides  commeutaries  on 
the  whole  N.  T.  are  Baumgarten,  Apostelge- 
schichte,  odor  der  Entvoickelungsgang  der  Kvrehe 
von  Jerusalem  bis  Horn,  Halle,  1852:  Lekebusch, 
Die  Composition  und  Entstehung  der  Apostelge- 
schichte  von  Neucm  nntersucld,  Gotba,  1854. 

Tin!  former  of  these  works  is  a  very  complete 
treatise  on  the  Christian-historical  development  of 
the  Church  as  related  in  the  book  :  the  latter  is  of 
more  value  as  a  critical  examination  of  the  various 
theories  as  to  its  composition  and  authorship. 

Valuable  running  historical  comments  on  the 
Acts  are  also  found  in  Xeander's  Pflanzwng  u, 
Leitung  der  Christlichen  Kin-he  dureh  die  Apostel, 
ed.  4.  Hamburg,  1847:  Conybeare  and  Howson's 
Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paid,  2nd  ed.  Lond.  1856. 
Professed  commentaries  have  been  published  by 
Mr.  Humphry,  Lond.  1847,  and  Professor  Hackett, 
Boston,  U.  S.  1852.  [H.  A.] 

AD'ADAH  (mjnjJ ;  'Apovfa  ;   Adada),  one 

of  the  cities  in  the  extreme  south  of  Judah  named 
with  Dimonah  and  Kedesh  (Josh.  xv.  22).  It  is  not 
mentioned-in  the  Onomasticon  of  Eusebius,  nor  has 
any  trace  of  it  been  yet  discovered. 

A'DAH  (my,  ornament,  beauty;  'ASd;  Ada~). 

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

2.  A  Hittitess,  daughter  of  Elon,  one  (probably 
the  first)  of  the  three  wives  of  Esau,  mother  of  his 
first-born  son  Eliphaz,  and  so  the  ancestress  of  six 
(or  seven)  of  the  tribes  of  the  Edomites  (Gen.  xxxvi. 

2,  10  ff.  15  ft'.).     In  Gen.   xxvi.   34    she   is  called 

Bashemath.  [F.  W.  G.] 

ADAI'AH  (iT'lJ?;    'ASat,  'ESeio;    Hadaia), 

name  of  six  men.  1.  Maternal  grandfather  of 
king  Josiah  (2  K.  sxii.  1).      2.  (1  Chr.  vi.  41). 

3.  (1  Chr.  viii.  21).  4.  (1  Chr.  ix.  12  ;  Neh.  xi. 
12).  5.  (Ezr.  x.  29).  6.  (Ezr.  x.  39  ;  Neh.  xi.  5). 
Written  -inHI?  in  2  Chr.  xxiii.  1. 

ADA'LIA  (K*71K;  Baped;  Adalia),  a  son 
of  Hainan  (Esth.  ix.  8). 

AD'AM    (D"1N;    'Add/x ;     Adam),  the  name 

which  is  given  in  Scripture  to  the  first  man. 
The  term  apparently  has  refeience  to  the  ground 
from  which  he  was  formed,  which  is  called 
Adamah  (I"IC1N,  Gen.  ii.  7).  The  idea  of  redness 
of  colour  seems  to  be  inherent  in  either  word. 
(Cf.  D"1N,  Lam.  iv.  7;    D'lK  red,   DlK  Edom, 

Gen.  xxv.  30  ;    DTX,  a  ruby  :   Arab.   ^$\,  colore 

fusco  praeditus  fuit,  rubrum  tiurit,  &<■.)  The 
generic  term  Adam,  man,  becomes,  in  the  case  of 
the  first  man,  a  denominative.  Supposing  the 
Hebrew  language  to  represent  accurately  the  pri- 
mary ideas  connected  with  ihe  formation  of  man, 
it  would  seem  that  the  appellation  bestowed  by 
God  was  given  to  keep  alive  in  Adam  the  memory 
of  his  earthly  and  mortal  nature  ;  whereas  tin- 
name  by  which  he  preferred  to  designate  himself 
was  /s/j  (t^N,  a  man  of  substance  or  wori 
ii.  23).  The  creation  of  man  was  the  work  of  the 
sixth  day.     His  formation  was  the  ultimate  objeel 

of  the  Creator.      It  was  with  reference  to   him    that 


ADAM 


19 


all  things  were  designed.  He  was  to  be  the  '•  roof 
and  crown"  of  the  whole  fabric  of  the  world.  In 
the  first  nine  chapters  of  Genesis  there  appear  to  be 
three  distinct  histories  relating  more  or  less  to  the 
life  of  Adam.  The  first  extends  from  Gen  i.  1  to 
ii.  3,  the  second  from  ii.  4  to  iv.  26,  the  third  from 
v.  1  to  the  end  of  ix.  The  word  at  the  commence- 
ment of  the  two  latter  narratives,  which  is  rendered 
there  and  elsewhere  generations,  may  also  be  ren- 
dered history.  The  style  of  the  second  of  these 
records  differs  very  considerably  from  that  of  the 
first.  In  the  first  the  Deity  is  designated  by  the 
word  Elohiin  ;  in  the  second  He  is  generally  spoken 
of  its  Jehovah  Elohiin.  The  object  of  the  first  of 
these  narratives  is  to  record  the  creation;  thai  of 
the  second  to  give  an  account  of  paradise,  the  original 
sin  of  man  and  the  immediate  posterity  of  Adam ; 
the  third  contains  mainly  the  history  of  Noah,  re- 
ferring it  would  seem  to  Adam  and  his  descendants, 
principally  in  relation  to  that  patriarch. 

The  Mosaic  accounts  furnish  us  with  very  few  ma- 
terials from  which  to  form  any  adequate  conception 
of  the  first  man.  He  is  said  to  have  been  created 
in  the  image  and  likeness  of  God,  and  this  is  com- 
monly interpreted  to  mean  some  super-excellent  and 
divine  condition  which  was  lost  at  the  Fall :  appa- 
rently however  without  sufficient  reason,  as  the  con- 
tinuance of  this  condition  is  implied  in  the  time  of 
Noah,  subsequent  to  the  flood  (Gen.  ix.  6),  and  is 
asserted  as  a  fact  by  St.  James  (iii.  9),  and  by  St. 
Paul  (1  Cor.  xi.  7).  It  more  probably  points  to 
the  Divine  pattern  and  archetype  after  which  man's 
intelligent  nature  was  fashioned ;  reason,  under- 
standing, imagination,  volition,  &c.  being  attributes 
of  God;  and  man  alone  of  the  animals  of  the  earth 
being  possessed  of  a  spiritual  nature  which  resem- 
bled God's  nature.  Man  in  short  was  a  spirit, 
created  to  reflect  God's  righteousness  and  truth  and 
love,  and  capable  of  holding  direct  intercourse  and 
communion  with  Him.  As  long  as  his  will  moved 
in  harmony  with  God's  will,  he  fulfilled  the  purpose 
of  his  Creator.  When  he  refused  submission  to  God, 
he  broke  the  law  of  his  existence  and  fell,  intro- 
ducing confusion  and  disorder  into  the  economy  of 
his  nature.  As  much  as  this  we  may  learn  from 
what  St.  Paul  says  of  "  the  new  man  being  renewed 
in  knowledge  after  the  image  of  Him  that  created 
him"  (Col.  iii.  10),  the  restoration  to  such  a  con- 
dition being  the  very  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  of 
God.  The  name  Adam  was  not  confined  to  tie- 
father  of  the  human  race,  but  like  homo  was  appli- 
cable to  woman  as  well  as  man,  so  that  we  find  it 
said  in  Gen.  v.  I,  '_',  "  This  is  the  book  of  the 
'history'  of  Adam  in  the  day  that  Cod  created 
'  Adam,'  in  the  likeness  of  God  made  He  him,  male 
and  female  created  He  them,  and  called  their  name 
Adam  in  the  day  when  they  were  created." 

The  man  Adam  was  placed  in  a  garden  which  the 
Lord  Cod  had  planted  "  eastward  in  Eden,"  tor  the 
purpose  of  dressing  it  and  keeping  it.  It  is  of  course 
hopeless  to  attempt  t<>  identity  the  situation  of  Eden 
with  that  of  any  district  familiar  to  modern  geo- 
graphy. There  seems  good  ground  for  supposing  it  tit 
have  been  an  actual  Locality.  It  was  probably  near 
the  source  of  a  river  which  subsequently  divided  into 
four  streams:  these  are  mentioned  by  name:  Pison 

is  supposed  by  SOme  to  be  the  Indus.  >  rihon  is  taken 

for  the  Nile,"  ffiddekel  is  called  by  tie-  I.W 
and  at  1  »an.  \.  I,  Tigris,  and  the  fourth  is  Buphl 
lint   how  they  should  have  been  originally  united    is 

unintelligible.  Adam  was  permitted  to  ...1  of  t'ne 
fruit  of  every  tree  in  the  garden  bul  one,  which  whs 

C  2 


20 


ADAM 


called  the  "  tree  of  the  knowledge  of  good  and  evil." 
What  this  was,  it  is  also  impossible  to  say.  Its 
name  would  seem  to  indicate  that  it  had  the  power 
of  bestowing  the  consciousness  of  the  difference 
between  good  and  evil ;  in  the  ignorance  of  which 
man's  innocence  and  happiness  consisted.  The  pro- 
hibition to  taste  the  fruit  of  this  tree  was  enforced 
by  the  menace  of  death.  There  was  also  another 
tree  which  was  called  "  the  tree  of  life."  Some 
suppose  it  to  have  acted  as  a  kind  of  medicine,  and 
that  by  the  continual  use  of  it  our  first  parents,  not 
created  immortal,  were  preserved  from  death.  (Abp. 
Whately.)  While  Adam  was  in  the  garden  of  Eden 
the  beasts  of  the  field  and  the  fowls  of  the  air  were 
brought  to  him  to  be  named,  and  whatsoever  he 
called  every  living  creature  that  was  the  name 
thereof.  Thus  the  power  of  fitly  designating  objects 
of  sense  was  possessed  by  the  first  man,  a  faculty 
which  is  generally  considered  as  indicating  mature 
and  extensive  intellectual  resources.  Upon  the 
failure  of  a  companion  suitable  for  Adam  among  the 
creatures  thus  brought  to  him  to  be  named,  the 
Lord  God  caused  a  deep  sleep  to  fall  upon  him,  and 
took  one  of  his  ribs  from  him,  which  He  fashioned 
into  a  woman  and  brought  her  to  the  man.  Prof. 
S.  Lee  supposed  the  narrative  of  the  creation  of  Eve 
to  have  been  revealed  to  Adam  in  his  deep  sleep 
(Lee's  Job,  Introd.,  p.  16).  This  is  agreeable  with 
the  analogy  of  similar  passages,  as  Acts  x.  10,  xi.  5, 
xxii.  17.  At  this  time  they  are  both  described  as 
being  naked  without  the  consciousness  of  shame. 

Such  is  the  Scripture  account  of  Adam  prior  to  the 
Fall :  there  is  no  narrative  of  any  condition  super- 
human, or  contrary  to  the  ordinary  laws  of  humanity . 
The  first  man  is  a  true  man,  with  the  powers  of  a 
man  and  the  innocence  of  a  child.  He  is  moreover 
spoken  of  by  St.  Paul  as  being  "  the  figure,  rviros, 
of  Him  that  was  to  come,"  the  second  Adam,  Christ 
Jesus  (Rom.  v.  14).  His  human  excellence  there- 
fore cannot  have  been  superior  to  that  of  the  Son  of 
Mary,  who  was  Himself  the  Pattern  and  Perfect 
Man.  By  the  subtlety  of  the  serpent,  the  woman 
who  was  given  to  be  with  Adam,  was  beguiled  into 
a  violation  of  the  one  command  which  had  been  im- 
posed upon  them.  She  took  of  the  fruit  of  the  for- 
bidden tree  and  gave  it  to  her  husband.  The  propriety 
of  its  name  was  immediately  shown  in  the  results 
which  followed :  self-consciousness  was  the  first 
fruits  of  sin ;  their  eyes  were  opened  and  they  knew 
that  they  were  naked.  The  subsequent  conduct  of 
Adam  would  seem  to  militate  against  the  notion 
that  he  was  in  himself  the  perfection  of  moral  excel- 
lence. His  cowardly  attempt  to  clear  himself  by 
the  inculpation  of  his  helpless  wife  bears  no  marks 
of  a  high  moral  nature  even  though  fallen ;  it  was 
conduct  unworthy  of  his  sons,  and  such  as  many 
of  them  would  have  scorned  to  adopt.  Though 
the  curse  of  Adam's  rebellion  of  necessity  fell  upon 
him,  yet  the  very  prohibition  to  eat  of  the  tree  of 
life  after  his  trausgression,  was  probably  a  mani- 
festation of  Divine  mercy,  because  the  greatest 
malediction  of  all  would  have  been  to  have  the 
gift  of  indestructible  life  superadded  to  a  state  of 
wretchedness  and  sin.  When  moreover  we  find  in 
Prov.  iii.  18,  that  wisdom  is  declared  to  be  a  tree  of 
life  to  them  that  lay  hold  upon  her,  and  in  Rev.  ii.  7, 
xxii.  2,  14,  that  the  same  expression  is  applied  to  the 
grace  of  Christ,  we  are  led  to  conclude  that  this 
was  merely  a  temporary  prohibition  imposed  till 
the  Gospel  dispensation  should  be  brought  in.  Upon 
this  supposition  the  condition  of  Christians  now  is 
as  favourable  as  that  of  Adam  before  the  Fall,  and 


ADAMANT 

their  spiritual  state  the  same,  with  the  single  excep- 
tion of  the  consciousness  of  sin  and  the  knowledge 
of  good  and  evil. 

Till  a  recent  period  it  has  been  generally  believed 
that  the  Scriptural  narrative  supposes  the  whole 
human  race  to  have  sprung  from  one-  pair.  It  is 
maintained  that  the  0.  T.  assumes  it  in  the  reason 
assigned  for  the  name  which  Adam  gave  his  wife 
after  the  Fall,  viz.  Eve,  or  Chavvah,  i.  e.  a  living 
woman,  "  because  she  was  the  mother  of  all  living ;" 
and  that  St.  Paul  assumes  it  in  his  sermon  at  Athens 
when  he  declares  that  God  hath  made  of  one  blood 
all  nations  of  men  ;  and  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans 
and  first  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  when  he  opposes 
Christ  as  the  representative  of  redeemed  humanity 
to  Adam  as  the  representative  of  natural,  fallen  and 
sinful  humanity.  But  the  full  consideration  of  this 
important  subject  will  come  more  appropriately 
under  the  article  Man. 

In  the  middle  ages  discussions  were  raised  as  to 
the  period  which  Adam  remained  in  Paradise  in  a 
sinless  state.  To  these  Dante  refers  in  the  Paradise 
xxvi.  139-142— 

"  Nel  monte,  che  si  leva  piti  dall'  onda, 

Fu'  io,  con  vita  pura  e  disonesta, 

Dalla  prim'  ora  a  quella  ch'  e  seconda. 

Come  il  Sol  muta  quadra,  all'  ora  sesta." 

Dante  therefore  did  not  suppose   Adam    to   have 

been  more  than  seven  hours  in  the  earthly  paradise. 

Adam  is  stated  to  have  lived  930  years :  so  it  would 

seem  that  the  death  which  resulted  from  his  sin 

was  the  spiritual    death  of  alienation  from    God. 

"  In  the  day  that  thou  eatest  thereof  thou  shalt 

surely  die :"    and    accordingly   we  find    that   this 

spiritual  death  began  to  work  immediately.     The 

sons  of  Adam   mentioned   in  Scripture  are    Cain, 

Abel  and  Seth :  it  is  implied  however  that  he  hail 

others.  [S.  L.] 

ADAM  (D1K  =  earth ;"  Adorn),  a  city  on  the 
Jordan  "  beside  (TVO)  'Zarthan,'"  in  the  time  of 
Joshua  (Josh.  iii.  16).  It  is  not  elsewhere  men- 
tioned, nor  is  there  any  reference  to  it  in  Josephus. 
The  LXX.  (both  MSS.)  has  ecus  jxipovs  Kapiadi- 
apt/x,  a  curious  variation,  in  which  it  has  been 
suggested  (Stanley,  S.  $  P.  App.  §80,  note)  that  a 
trace  of  Adam  appears  in  aptp.,  D  being  changed  to 
R  according  to  the  frequent  custom  of  the  LXX. 

Note. — The  A.  V.  here  follows  the  Keri,  which, 
for  DTX3  =  "  by  Adam,"  the  reading  in  the  He- 
brew text  or  Chetib,  has  DINO  =  "  from  Adam," 
an  alteration  which  is  a  questionable  improvement 
(Keil,  51). ,  The  accurate  rendering  of  the  text  is 
"rose  up  upon  a  heap,  very  tar  off,  by  Adam,  the 
city  that  is  beside  Zarthan  "  (Stanley,  S.  $  P.  304 
note).  [G.] 

AD'AMAH  (nftlN  ;  'ApixaiO;  Edema),  one  of 

the  "  fenced  cities"  of  Naphtali,  named  between 
Chinnereth  and  ha-Ramah  (josh.  xix.  36).  It  was 
probably  situated  to  the  N.W.  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee, 
but  no  trace  of  it  has  yet  been  discovered. 

ADAMANT,  a  name  given  to  stones  of  ex- 
cessive hardness,  as,  for  instance,  to  the  diamond. 
It  is  used  twice  in  the  A.  V.  to  render  the  Hebr. 
Shamir  ("VOK*,  root  ~\12t9,  riguit,  horruit),  viz.  in 
Ez.    iii.    9,    and    Zech.    vii.    12.      In    the  former 


a  Can  the  place  have  derived  its  name  from  the 
"'fat'  ground"  (nOlXH)  which  was  in  this  very 

neighbourhood — **  between    Succoth    and    Zarthan " 
(1  K.  vii.  461? 


ADA  MI 

passage  it  is  used  metaphorically  of  the  firmness 
with  which  God's  servant  should  be  endowed  to 
resist  his  enemies ;  in  the  latter,  of  the  hardness  of 
man's  heart  in  resisting  the  truth.  Shamir  occurs 
a  third  time  in  Jer.  xvii.  1,  where  it  is  rendered 
•'diamond"  in  A.  V.  The  Vulgate  in  all  these 
passages  has  Adamas.  The  LXX.  in  Ez.  iii.  9, 
and  Zech.  vii.  12,  have  omitted  to  render  the  He- 
brew word  at  all,  and  the  whole  passage  in  Jer. 
.wii.  1  is  omitted  in  the  Vatican  MS.  of  the  LXX. ; 
but  the  Complut.  Ed.  has  eV  ovvxi  aSafiavrivcp. 
The  word  adamant  occurs  once  in  the  Apocrypha  in 
Ecclus.  xvi.  16,  "He  has  separated  his  light  from  the 
darkness  with  an  adamant,"  i.  e.  by  an  adamantine 
wall — impassable,  irresistible,  immoveable. 

Gesenius  is  disposed  to  connect  Shamir  with  the 
Greek  fffxipts,  afj.vpts,  emery  powder  for  polishing — 
the  debris  of  ff/xvpiTT]s  \ldos  (LXX.,  Job  xli.  7); 
but  Dioscorides  (v.  166)  says,  ff/xvpis  hidos  iariv, 
fi  ras  tyrjcpovs  ol  8a,KTv\wy\v<poi  <TfX7ixov,Tl- 
Bochart  also  supposes  ff/xlpis  to  have  been  a  hard 
stone  used  in  cuttiug  and  polishing  other  stones, 
and  not  a  powder  {Itieroz.  p.  ii.  lib.  vi.  c.  11, 
p.  842).  .  [W.D.] 

AD'AMI  CpiX;  'Apfie;  Adami),  a  place  on 
the  border  of  Naphtali,  named  after  Allon  be- 
zaanannim  (Josh.  xix.  33).  By  some  it  is  taken 
in  connexion  with  the  next  name,  han-Nekeb,  but 
see  Keland,  54.5.  In  the  post-biblical  times  Adami 
bore  the  name  of  Damin. 

A'DAR  (accurately  Addar,  "PIN  ;  2<xpa5a  ; 
Addar),  a  place  on  the  south  boundary  of  Pales- 
tine and  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  3)  which  in  the  parallel 
list  is  called  Hazar-addar. 

A'DAR.     [Months.] 

ADASA  ('AoW.  LXX.  ;  rh  'ASaffd,  Jos. ; 
Adarsa,  Adazer),  a  place  in  Judaea,  a  day's  jour- 
ney from  Gazera,  and  30  stadia  from  Bethhoron 
(Jos.  Aid.  xii.  Id,  §5).  Here  Judas  Maecabaeus 
encamped  before  the  battle  in  which  Nicanor  was 
killed,  Nicanor  having  pitched  at  Bethhoron  (1  Mace, 
vii.  40,  4.">).  In  the  Onomasticon  it  is  mentioned 
as  near  Guphna. 

AD'BEEL  (^NTIX;  Na/35<^A;  Adbcel;  'A0- 
5«'tjAos,  Joseph. ;  "  perhaps  '  miracle  of  God,'  from 

s   <Jg. 

,      ,\\,  miracle,"  Gesen.  s.  v.),  a  son  of  Ishmael 

(Gen.  xxv.  1". ;    1  Chr.  i.  20),  and  probably  the  pro- 
i  Aral)  tribe.     No  satisfactory  identifi- 
cation of' this  name  with  thai  of  any  people  or  place 
mentioned  by  the  '  Ireek  geographers,  or  by  the  Arabs 

themselves,  has  yet  I ndiscoi  ere  I.    The  Latter  have 

lost  most  i'C  the  names  of  tshmael's  descendants  be- 
tween tnat  patriarch  and  'Adnan  (who  \-  said  to  be 
of  the  'J  1st  generation  before  Mohammad),  and  this 
could  scarcely  nave  been  the  case  if  tribes,  or  places 
named  Miter  them,  existed  in  the  time,  of  Arabian 
historians  or  relaters  ei'  traditions;  it  is  therefore 
unlikely  that  these  names  are  to  be  recovered  from 
th-'  works  of  native  authors.  Bui  some  they  have 
taken,  and  apparently  corrupted,  from  the  Bible; 
and  amen,   tie    ,    is  Adlieol,  written   (in  tie 

cz-Zcmdn)   V>\l-  [E.  S.  P.] 

AD'DAN  (pK  ;  *H5«i/,  LXX. ;  'AaAap,  Apocr. 

Esdras  ;  Adon,  Vulg.),  one  of  the  places  from  which 

of  the  captivity  returned  with  Zerubbabel  to 

Judaes  who  could  not  show  their  pedigree  as 
Israelite-.  (Ezr.  ii.  59).      Iii  the  parallel  li.-ts  ■  .t' 


ADDI  21 

Nehemiah  (vii.  Gl)  and  Esdras  the  name  is  Addon 
and  AALAR.  [G.] 

ADDAR  ("TCN  ;    'A5i> ;   Addar),  son  of  Bela 

(1  Chr.  viii.  3),  called  Ard  in  Num.  xxvi.  40. 

ADDER,  a  venomous  serpent.  The  word  occurs 
five  times  in  the  text  of  the  A.  V.  (see  infra)  of 
the  0.  T.  and  three  in  the  margin  as  synonymous 
with  cockatrice,  viz.  Is.  xi.  8,  xiv.  29,  lix.  5. 
It  represents  four  different  Hebrew  words,  ' Acshub, 
Pethen,  Tsiphdni,  and  ShepMphon. 

'Acshub  (^-IKOy),  occurs  only  in  Ps.  cxl.   3, 

and    seems  to    be   a  compound   of  KOJ?,    retror- 

sum   se  ftexit,    and    2pV,    insidiatus    est,    words 

which  express  the  action  of  a  serpent  lurking  in 
ambush  and  coiling  himself  up  to  strike.  The 
LXX.  render  the  word  by  ocnri's,  and  are  followed 
by  St.  Paul  in  quoting  the  passage  at  Horn.  iii.  13, 
and  by  the  Vulgate. 

Pethen  (JHB)  is  expressed  by  adder  in  Ps.  lviii. 
4,  xci.  13,  but  elsewhere  by  asp.  It  is  derived 
from  an  unused  root  jnS,  calidus  fuit,  and  per- 
haps is  related  to  7712,  contorsit.  From  Dent, 
xxxii.  33  and  Job  xx.  14,  16,  it  would  seem  to 
have  been  a  poisonous  snake.  It  was  also  deaf 
(C^inY  not  hearing  the  voice  of  the  dimmer,  from 

which  we  infer  that  the  art  of  charming  serpents 
by  music  was  known  in  David's  days.  Gesenius 
connects  the  word  with  the  Chaldee  JHS     NJflQ 

»   9    y 
and  with  the  Syr.  (-1^25,  but  not  with  ^oAj_2i 
draco. 

Tsiphoni  (^IJJBX)  is  translated  adder  only  in 

Prov.  xxiii.  32,  where  the  LXX.  have  K(pa.cnr)s. 
In  the  three  passages  of  Isaiah  quoted  above,  and 
in  Jer.  viii.  17,  it  is  rendered  cockatrice.  The 
root  is  J?QV,  of  which  Gesenius  gives  two  mean- 
ings, protrusit  and  sibilavit,  which  are  equally 
applicable  to  a  serpent ;  the  former  to  the  way  in 
which  it  strikes  its  prey,  the  latter  to  the  sound  it 
utters.  Tsiphoni  is  probably  the  serpent  called  by 
the  Greeks  jSacriAia'Kd's,  aud  by  the  Latins  regulus. 
The  passage  of  Jeremiah  above  quoted  implies  its 
fierce  nature,  aud  the  translation  of  it  by  the  LXX. 
(u<p(ts  davarovvras)  its  deadly  poison.  From  Is. 
lix.  5,  we  gather  that  the  animal  was  oviparous  ; 
from  xiv.  29,  that  it  was  not  identical  with  ETIJ 
and  from  xi.  8  that  it  was  subterranean  in  habit. 

ShepMphon  (fCSC,  derived  from  ^Dt^,  scrpsit) 
occurs  only  in  Gen.  xlix.  17,  where  it  is  used  by 
Jacob  to  characterize  the  tribe  of  Dan.  Its  habit 
of  lurking  in  the  road,  and  biting  at  the  horses' 
heels,  identifies  it  with  the  Coluber  Cerastes  of  Lin- 
naeus, a  small  and  very  venomous  snake  found  in 
Egypt,  and  fully  described  and  figured  by  Bruce  in 
his  Abyssinian  travels  (vol.  v.  pp.  200-212,  I'M. 
Germ.).  The  LXX.  render  it  u<pts  £<p'  6Sov  lyKadi]- 
ixevos  «V1  Tpi'jSou,  probably  connecting  the  word  with 
pji)B£     See  Gesen.  Thes.  p.  L381.  [W.  D.] 

AD'DI  ('A551,  Luke  iii.  28),  son  of  Cosam,and 
lather  of  .Melchi,  in  our  Lord's  genealogy ;  the  third 
above  Salathiel.     The  etymology  and  Hebrew  form 

of  the  name  are  doubtful,  as  it  does  not  occur  in  the 

LXX.,  but  it  probably  represents  the  Heb  ew  'HV, 
an   ornament,  and   i-  a  short   form  of  Adiel,  or 


22  ADDON 

Adaiah.  The  latter  name  in  1  Chr.  vi.  41  (26  in 
Heb.  Bib.)  is  rendered  in  the  Septuagint  'ASa'f, 
which  is  very  close  to  Addi.  [A.  0.  H.] 

ADDON.     [Addan.] 

A'DER,  accurately  EDER  (TJJJ  ;  "ESep ; 
Heder,  name  of  a  man  (1  Chr.  viii.  15). 

AD'IDA  ('A5t5a ;  Joseph.  yA55iSa ;  Addus, 
Adiada),  a  town  on  an  eminence  {Ant.  xiii.  6, 
§4)  overlooking  the  low  country  of  Judah  ('A.  iv 
TJJ  Sei^Aa),  fortified  by  Simon  Maccabaeus  in  his 
wars  with'  Tryphon  (1  Mace.  xii.  38,  xiii.  13). 
Alexander  was  here  defeated  by  Aretas  (Ant.  xiii. 
15,  §2)  ;  and  Vespasian  used  it  as  one  of  his  out- 
posts in  the  siege  of  Jerusalem  (B.  J.  iv.  9,  §  1). 
Probably  identical  with  Hadid  and  Adithaim 
(which  see).  [G.] 

A'DIEL  6«HV;  'letitfa,  'ASWJA,  'OS^A ; 
Adiel),  name  of  three  men.  1.  (1  Chr.  iv.  36). 
2.  (1  Chr.  ix.  12).       3.  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  25). 

A'DIN  (JHJ?;  'A85iV,  'ASiV,  'H5iV,  'HSiv; 
Adin,  Adan),  name  of  a  man  (Ezr.  ii.  15,  viii.  6 ; 
Neh.  vii.  20,  x.  16). 

AD'INA  (WHi? ;  'AS»/a;  Adina),  name  of  a 
man  (1  Chr.  xi/42)'. 

AD'INO,  THE  EZNITE,  2  Sam.  xxiii.  8. 
See  Jashoiseam. 

ADITHA'IM  (with  the  article,  D^riHyn),  a 

town  belonging  to  Judah,  lying  in  the  low  country 
(Shefeluh),  and  named,  between  Sharaim  and  hag- 
Gederah,  in  Josh.  xv.  36  only.  It  is  entirely  omitted 
by  the  LXX.  At  a  later  time  the  name  appears  to 
have  been  changed  to  Hadid a  (Chadid)  and  Adida. 
For  the  dual  termination,  comp.  the  two  names 
occurring  in  the  same  verse ;  also  Eglaim,  Horo- 
naim,  etc.  [G.] 

ADJURATION.     [Exorcism.] 

AD'LAI  cb^V;  'A5\i;  Adli),  name  of  a  man 

(1  Chr.  xxvii.  29). 

AD'MAH  (nD"lK  ;    A8ajuc£;   Adama),  one  of 

the  "  cities  of  the  plain,"  always  coupled  with 
Zeboim  (Gen.  x.  19;  xiv.  2,  8;  Deut.  xxix.  23; 
Hos.  xi.  8).     It  had  a  king  of  its  own. 

AD'MATHA  (Hncntf;  Admatha),  one  of  the 
seven  princes  of  Persia  (Esth.  i.  14). 

AD'NA  (JO*iy ;  'ES^e  ;  Edna),  name  of  a  man 
(Ezr.  x.  30). 

AD'NAH  (itny;  "ESva,  "E$ms;  Ednas), 
name  of  two  men.  1.  (1  Chr.  xii.  20).  2.  (2  Chr. 
xvii.  14). 

ADONI-BE'ZEK  (p.?:priX,  lord  of  Bezek  ; 

'A5a>yi/3e£e/c ;  Adonibezec),  king  of  Bezek,  a  city 
of  the  Canaanites.  [Bezek.]  This  chieftain  was 
vanquished  by  the  tribe  of  Judah  (Judg.  i.  3-7), 
who  cut  off  his  thumbs  and  great  toes,  and  brought 
him  prisoner  to  Jerusalem,  where  he  died.  He  con- 
fessed that  he  had  inflicted  the  same  cruelty  upon  70 
petty  kings  whom  he  had  conquered.     [R.  W.  B.] 

ADONI'KAM.     [Adonijah,  No.  3.] 


If  so,  it  is  an  instance  of  Ain  changing  to  Cheth 
(see  Ges.  436). 


ADONIJAH 
ADONI'JAH  (rVriX,  -ln'riK,   my  Lord  is 
Jehovah;    'AoWi'as ;    Adonias).       1.   The  fourth 
son  of  David  by  Haggith,  born  at  Hebron,  while 
his   father   was   king   of  Judah    (2  Sam.   iii.  4). 
After   the   death   of  his   three   brothers,   Amnon, 
Chileab,    and   Absalom,    he    became    eldest    son ; 
and  when   his   father's   strength   was   visibly  de- 
clining, put  forward  his  pretensions  to  the  crown, 
by  equipping  himself  in  royal  state,  with  chariots 
and  horsemen,  and  fifty  men  to  run  before  him,  in 
imitation  of  Absalom  (2  Sam.  xv.  1),  whom  he  also 
resembled  in  personal  beauty,  and  apparently  also  in 
character, as  indeed  Josephus  says  (Ant.  vii.  14,  §4). 
For  this  reason  he  was  plainly  unfit  to  be  king,  and 
David  promised  Bathsheba  that  her  son  Solomon 
should  inherit  the  crown  (1  K.  i.  30),  for  there 
was  no  absolute  claim  of  primogeniture  in  these 
Eastern  monarchies.    Solomon's  cause  was  espoused 
by  the  best  of  David's  counsellors,  the  illustrious 
prophet  Nathan  ;  Zadok,  the  descendant  of  Eleazar, 
and  representative  of  the  elder  line  of  priesthood  ;  Be- 
naiah,  the  captain  of  the  king's  bodyguard  ;  together 
with  Shimei  and  Rei,  whom  Ewald  (Geschichte,  iii. 
266)  conjectures  to  be  David's  two  surviving  bro- 
thers,   comparing  1   Chr.   ii.   13,   and   identifying 
^yDC  with  nytDC  (JSMmmah  in  our  version),  and 
•»jn  with  HI  (our  Raddai).     From  1  K.  ii.  8,  it 
is  unlikely  that  the  Shimei  of  2  Sam.  xvi.  5  could 
have  actively  espoused  Solomon's  cause.     On  the 
side  of  Adonijah,  who  when  he  made  his  attempt 
on  the  kingdom  was  about  35  years  old  (2  Sam. 
v.  5),  were  Abiathar,   the  representative  of  Eli's, 
t.  e.  the  junior  line  of  the  priesthood  (descended 
from  Ithamar,  Aaron's  fourth  son),  and  Joab,  the 
famous  commander  of  David's  army ;  the  latter  of 
whom,  always  audacious  and  self-willed,  probably 
expected  to  find  more  congenial  elements  in  Ado- 
nijah's  court  than  in  Solomon's.      His  name  and 
influence  secured  a  large  number  of  followers  among 
the  captains  of  the  royal  army  belonging  to  the 
tribe  of  Judah  (comp.  1  K.  i.  9  and  25)  ;  and  these, 
together  with  all  the  princes  except  Solomon,  were 
entertained  by  Adonijah  at  a  great  sacrificial  feast 
held  "  by  the  stone  Zoheleth,  which  is  by  En-rogel." 
The  meaning  of  the  stone  Zoheleth  is  very  doubtful, 
being   translated  rock  of  the  watch  tower  in   the 
Chaldee ;  great  rock,  Syr.  and  Arab. ;  and  explained 
"  rock  of  the  stream  of  water"  by  R.  Kimchi.     En- 
rogel  is  mentioned  in  Josh.  xv.  7,  as  a  spring  on  the 
border  of  Judah  and  Benjamin,  S.  of  Jerusalem,  and 
may  be  the  same  as  that  afterwards  called  the  Well  of 
Job  or  Joab  (Ain  Ayub).     It  is  explained  spring  of 
the  fuller  by  the  Chaldee  Paraphrast,  perhaps  be- 
cause he  treads  his  clothes  with  his  feet  (?p"l,  see 

Gesen.  s.  v.);  but  comp.  Deut.  xi.  10,  where  "  water- 
ing with  the  feet"  refers  to  machines  trodden  with 
the  foot,  and  such  possibly  the  spring  of  Rogel 
supplied.  [Enrogel.]  A  meeting  for  a  religious 
purpose  would  be  held  near  a  spring,  just  as'  in 
later  times  sites  for  irpocrevxai  were  chosen  by 
the  waterside  (Acts  xvi.  13). 

Nathan  and  Bathsheba,  now  thoroughly  alarmed, 
apprised  David  of  these  proceedings,  who  immedi- 
ately gave  orders  that  Solomon  should  be  conducted 
on  the  royal  mule  in  solemn  procession  to  Gihon, 
a  spring  on  the  W.  of  Jerusalem  (2  Chr.  xxxii.  30). 
[Gihon.]  Here  he  was  anointed  and  proclaimed 
king  by  Zadok,  and  joyfully  recognized  by  the  people. 
This  decisive  measure  struck  terror  into  the  opposite 
party,  and  Adonijah  fled    to   sanctuary,   but  was 


AUONIKAM 

pardoned  by  Solomon  ou  condition  that  he  should 
"  shew  himself  a  worthy  man,"  with  the  threat  that 
"  if  wickedness  were  found  in  him  he  should  die" 
(i.  52). 

The  death  of  David  quickly  followed  on  these 
events ;  and  Adonijah  begged  Bathsheba,  who  as 
"  king's  mother"  would  now  have  special  dignity 
and  influence  [Asa],  to  procure  Solomon's  consent 
to  his  marriage  with  Abishag,  who  had  been  the 
wife  of  David  in  his  old  age  (  1  K.  i.  3).  This  was 
regarded  as  equivalent  to  a  fresh  attempt  on  the 
throne  [Absalom;  Abner]  ;  and  therefore  Solomon 
ordered  him  to  be  put  to  death  by  Benaiah,  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  terms  of  his  previous  pardon. 
Far  from  looking  upon  this  as  "  the  most  flagrant 
act  of  despotism  since  Doeg  massacred  the  priests 
at  Saul's  command"  (Newman,  Hebrew  Mon  vrchy, 
ch.  iv.),  we  must  consider  that  the  clemency  of 
Solomon  in  sparing  Adonijah,  till  he  thus  again  re- 
vealed a  treasonable  purpose,  stands  in  remarkable 
contrast  with  the  almost  universal  practice  of 
Eastern  sovereigns.  Any  one  of  these,  situated  like 
Solomon,  would  probably  have  secured  his  throne 
by  putting  all  his  brothers  to  death,  whereas  we 
have  no  reason  to  think  that  any  of  David's  sons 
suffered  except  the  open  pretender  Adonijah,  though 
all  seem  to  have  opposed  Solomon's  claims;  and  if 
his  execution  be  thought  an  act  of  severity,  we  must 
remember  that  we  cannot  expect  to  find  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  Gospel  acted  upon  a  thousand  years 
before  Christ  came,  and  that  it  is  hard  for  us,  in  this 
nineteenth  century,  altogether  to  realize  the  position 
of  an  Oriental  king  in  that  remote  age. 

2.  A  Levite  in  the  reign  of  Jehoshaphat  (2  Chr. 
xvii.  8). 

3.  One  of  the  Jewish  chiefs  in  the  time  of  Nehe- 
miah  (x.  16).  He  is  called  Adonikam  (Dp'OhX  • 
'ASciiinKaix ;  Adonicani)  in  Ezr.  ii.  13.  Comp. 
Ezr.  viii.  13;  Neh.  vii.  18.  [G.  E.  L.  C] 

ADOXI'RAM  (DT31R,  1  K.  iv.  6  ;  by  an  un- 
usual contraction  ADORAM,  DT1X,  2  Sam.  xx.  24, 
andl  K.  12,18;  alsoHADORAM,  DTjn,  2Chr.x.  18; 

t     -: 

AScovipdfx :  Adoniram,  Aduram).  Chief  receiver 
of  the  tribute  during  the  reigns  of  David  (2  Sam.  xx. 
-  I  ',  Salomon  (1  K.  iv.  6)  and  Rehoboam  (1  K.  xii. 
1 8  .  This  last  monarch  sent  him  to  collect  the 
tribute  from  the  rebellious  Israelites,  by  whom  he 
oned  to  death.  [R.  \y.  B.l 

ADONI-ZE'DEK  (PTC-tflg,  lord  of  justice  ; 
'ASwvtPe&K:  Adonis,  lee),  the  Amorite  king  of 
io  ranked  a  league  with  four  other 
Amorite  princes  against  Joshua.  The  confederate 
kings  having  laid,  siege  to  Gibeon,  Joshua  marched 
to  the  relief  of  his  new  allies  and  put  the  be- 
siegers to  flight.  The  five  kings  took  refuge  in  a 
cave  at  Makkedah,  whence  they  were  taken  and 
slain,  their  bodies  hung  on  trees  and  then  buried 
iii  the  place  of  their  concealment  (Josh.  x.  1-27). 
[Joshua.]  '    [r.  yy.  b.] 

ADOPTION  (uioflfiri'o),  an  expression  meta- 
phorically used  by  St.  Paul  in  reference  to  the  pre- 
sent and   prospective  privileges  of  Christian 
\iii.  15,23;  Gal.iv.  5;   Eph.  i.  5).     He  pi 
alludes  to  the  on,  by  which 

a  person,   not  having   children    of   his    own. 
adopt  as  bis  son  one  horn  of  other  parents.     It  was 
a  forma]  act,  effected  either  bj  the  pro 
udrogatio,  when  the  person  to   be  adopted  . 


ADOKATION 


23 


dependent  of  his  parent,  or  by  adoptio,  specifically 
so  called,  when  in  the  power  of  Iris  parent.  (See 
Diet,  of  Gr.  and  Rom.  Ant.  art.  Adoptio.)  The 
eflect  of  it  was  that  the  adopted  child  was  entitled 
to  the  name  and  sacra  privata  of  his  new  father, 
and  ranked  as  his  heir-at-law :  while  the  father  on 
his  part  was  entitled  to  the  property  of  the  son, 
and  exercised  towards  him  all  the  rights  and  privi- 
leges of  a  father.  In  short  the  relationship  was  to 
all  intents  and  purposes  the  same  as  existed  between 
a  natural  father  and  son.  The  selection  of  a  person 
to  be  adopted  implied  a  decided  preference  and  love 
on  the  part  of  the  adopter :  and  St.  Paul  aptly  trans- 
fers the  well  known  feelings  and  customs  connected 
with  the  act  to  illustrate  the  position  of  the  Chris- 
tianized Jew  or  Gentile.  The  Jews  themselves 
were  unacquainted  with  the  process  of  adoption : 
indeed  it  would  have  been  inconsistent  with  the 
regulations  of  the  Mosaic  law  affecting  the  inherit- 
ance of  property :  the  instances  occasionally  ad- 
duced as  referring  to  the  custom  (Gen.  xv.  3,  xvi. 
2,  xxx.  5-9)  are  evidently  not  cases  of  adoption 
proper.  [W.  L.  B.] 

ADO'RA  or  ADOE.  [Adoraim.] 

ADOEA'IM    (DnVlK;    'ASwpal;    Aduram), 

a  fortified  city  built  by  Rehoboam  (2  Chr.  xi.  9), 
in  Judaha  (Jos.  Ant.  viii.  10,  §  1),  apparently  in  or 
near  the  Shefelah,  since,  although  omitted  from  the 
lists  in  Josh.  xv.  it  is  by  Josephus  (Ant.  xiii.  9,  §1, 
15,  §4;  B.  J.  i.  2,  §6,  i.  8,  §4)  almost  uniformly 
coupled  with  Mareshah,  which  was  certainly  situated 
there.  For  the  dual  termination  compare  Adithaim, 
Gederothaim,  etc.  By  Josephus  it  is  given  as 
"AScopa,  'ASaSpeos  ;  and  in  Ant.  xiii.  6,  §5,  he  calls 
it  a  "  city  of  Idumaea,"  under  which  name  were 
included,  in  the  later  times  of  Jewish  history,  the 
southern  parts  of  Judaea  itself  (Reland,  48 ;  Robin- 
son, ii.  69).  Adoraim  is  probably  the  same  place 
with  'ASoopa  (1  Mace.  xiii.  20),  unless  that  be  Dor, 
on  the  sea-coast  below  Carmel.  Robinson  identifies 
it  with  Dura,  a  "  lanje  village  "  on  a  rising  ground 
west  of  Hebron  (ii.  215).  "[G.] 

ADO'EAM.     [Adoniram.] 

ADOEATION.      The  acts   and  postures  by 

which  the  Hebrews  expressed  adoration,  bear  a  great 
similarity  to  those  still  in  use  among  Oriental  na- 
tions. To  rise  up  and  suddenly  prostrate  the  body, 
was  the  most  simple  method  ;  but  generally  speak- 
ing, the  prostration  was  conducted  in  a  more  formal 
manner,  the  person  falling  upon  the  knee  and  then 
gradually  inclining  the  body,  until  the  forehead 
touched  the  ground.  The  various  expressions  in 
referring  to  this  custom  appear  to  have 

then-  specific  meaning :  thus  ?D3  (niirru,  LXX.) 
describes  the  sudden  fall;  JH3  (ko^h-toi,  LXX.) 
bending  the  knee;  Tip  (kvtttq>,  LXX.)  the  inclina- 
tion of  the  head  and  body;  and  lastly  nnL"   (-rrpocTKv- 

~  *       T  T 

vzlv,  LXX.) complete  prostration:  the  term  "1JD  i  ts. 

xliv.  15,  17,  19,  xlvi.  6)  was  introduced  at  a  late 
period  as  appropriate  to  the  worship  paid  to  idols  by 
the  Babylonians  and  other  eastern  nations  I  Man.  iii". 
5,  6).     Such  prostration  was  usual  in  the  worship 


*  Even  without  this  statement  of  Josephus,  it   is 

ad  Benjamin,"  in  1  Chr.  \i.  10, 

is  a  form  of  expression  for  the  new  kingdom,  and  that 

the  towns  named  are  necessarily  in  the  limits 

of  Benjamin  proper. 


24 


ADRAMMELKCM 


of  Jehovah  (Gen.  xvii.  3  ;  Ps.  xcv.  6)  ;  but  it  was 
by  no  means  exclusively  used  for  that  purpose  ;  it 
was  the  formal  mode  of  receiving  visitors  (Gen. 
xviii.  2),  of  doing  obeisance  to  one  of  superior 
station  (2  Sam.  xiv.  4),  and  of  showing  respect  to 
equals  (1  K.  ii.  19).  Occasionally  it  was  repeated 
three  times  (1  Sam.  xx.  41),  and  even  seven  times 
(Gen.  xxxiii.  3).  It  was  accompanied  by  such  acts 
as  a  kiss  (Ex.  xviii.  7),  laying  hold  of  the  knees  or 
feet  of  the  person  to  whom  the  adoration  was  paid 
(Matt,  xxviii.  9),  and  kissing  the  ground  on  which 
he  stood  (Ps.  lxxii.  9  ;  Mic.  vii.  17).  Similar  adora- 
tion was  paid  to  idols  (1  K.  xix.  18)  ;  sometimes 
however  prostration  was  omitted,  and  the  act  con- 
sisted simply  in  kissing  the  hand  to  the  object  of 
reverence  (Job  xxxi.  27)  in  the  manner  practised 
by  the  Romans  (Plin.  xxviii.  5  :  see  Diet,  of  Ant. 
art.  Adoratio),  in  kissing  the  statue  itself  (Hos. 
xiii.  2).  The  same  customs  prevailed  at  the  time 
of  our  Saviour's  ministry,  as  appears  not  only  from 
the  numerous  occasions  on  which  they  were  put  in 
practice  towards  Himself,  but  also  from  the  parable 
of  the  unmerciful  servant  (Matt,  xviii.  26),  and  from 
Cornelius's  reverence  to  St.  Peter  (Acts  x.  25),  in 
which  case  it  was  objected  to  by  the  Apostle,  as  im- 
plying a  higher  degree  of  superiority  than  he  was 
entitled  to,  especially  as  coming  from  a  Roman  to 
whom  prostration  was  not  usual.  [\Y.  L.  B.] 

ADRAM'MELECH  OferHN ;  'A5pa/ie- 
Ae%  ;  Adrarnelecli).  1.  The  name  of  an  idol  wor- 
shipped by  the  colonists  introduced  into  Samaria 
from  Sepharvaim  (2  K.  xvii.  31).  He  was  worshipped 
with  rites  resembling  those  of  Molech,  children  being 
burnt  in  his  honour.  In  Gesenius  (sub  voce)  the 
word  is  explained  to  mean  splendour  of  the  king, 
being  a  contraction  of  TpGn  TIN.     But  Winer, 

quoting  Reland,  Be  vet.  lingua  Pers.  ix.  interprets 
the  first  part  of  the  word  to  mean  fire,  and  so  regards 
this  deity  as  the  Sun-god,  in  accordance  with  the 
astronomical  character  of  the  Chaldaean  and  Persian 
worship.  Sir  H.  Rawlinson  also  regards  Adram- 
melech  as  the  male  power  of  the  sun,  and  Anam- 
jielecii,  who  is  mentioned  with  Adrammelech, 
as  a  companion-god,  as  the  female  power  of  the  sun. 
(Rawlinson's  Herodotus,  i.  p.  611.) 

2.  Son  of  the  Assyrian  king  Sennacherib,  whom 
he  murdered  in  conjunction  with  his  brother  Sha- 
rezer  in  the  temple  of  Nisroch  at  Nineveh,  after  the 
failure  of  the  Assyrian  attack  on  Jerusalem.  The 
parricides  escaped  into  Armenia  (2  K.  xix.  36 ;  2 
Chr.  xxxii.  21  ;  Is.  xxxvii.  37).  The  date  of  this 
event  was  B.C.  680.  [G.  E.  L.  C] 

ADRAMYT'TIUM  (occasionally  Atramyt- 
TiUM :  and  some  cursive  MSS.  have  ' At paixvTr\vq>, 
instead  of  'ASpa/J-vT-fivaj  in  Acts  xxvii.  2),  a  sea- 
port in  the  province  of  Asia  [Asia],  situated  in  the 
district  anciently  called  Aeolis,  and  also  Mysia  (see 
Acts  xvi.  7).  Adramyttium  gave,  and  still  gives 
its  name  to  a  deep  gulf  on  this  coast,  opposite  to 
the  opening  of  which  is  the  island  of  Lesbos  [Mi- 
TYLENE].  St.  Paul  was  never  at  Adramyttium, 
except  perhaps  during  his  second  missionary 
journey,  on  his  way  from  Galatia  to  Troas  (Acts 
xvi.),  and  it  has  no  Biblical  interest,  except  as 
illustrating  his  voyage  from  Caesarea  in  a  ship  be- 
longing to  t(his  place  (Acts  xxvii.  2).  The  reason 
is  given  in  what  follows,  viz.  that  the  centurion 
and  his  prisoners  would  thus  be  brought  to  the 
coasts  of  Asia,  and  therefore  some  distance  on  their 
way  towards  Rome,   t>>  places   where   some   other 


ADUEL 

ship  bound  for  the  west  would  probably  be  found. 
Ships  of  Adramyttium  must  have  been  frequent  on 
this  coast,  for  it  was  a  place  of  considerable  traffic. 
It  lay  on  the  great  Roman  road  between  Assos, 
Troas,  and  the  Hellespont  on  one  side,  and  Perga- 
mus,  Ephesus,  and  Miletus  on  the  other,  and  was 
connected  by  similar  roads  with  the  interior  of  the 
country.  According  to  tradition  Adramyttium  was 
a  settlement  of  the  Lydians  in  the  time  of  Croesus : 
it  was  afterwards  an  Athenian  colony :  under  the 
kingdom  of  Pergamus  it  became  a  seaport  of  some 
consequence  ;  and  in  the  time  of  St.  Paul  Pliny 
mentions  it  as  a  Roman  assize-town.  The  modern 
Adramijti  is  a  poor  village,  but  it  is  still  a  place  ot 
some  trade  and  shipbuilding.  It  is  described  in  the 
travels  of  Pococke,  Turner,  and  Fellows.  It  is 
hardly  worth  while  to  notice  the  mistaken  opinion 
of  Grotius,  Hammond,  and  others,  that  Hadrume- 
tum  on  the  coast  of  Africa  is  meant  in  this  passage 
of  the  Acts.  [J.  S.  H.] 

A'DRIA,  more  properly  A'DKIAS  (6  'ASpias). 
It  is  important  to  fix  the  meaning  of  this  word  as 
used  in  Acts  xxvii.  27.  The  word  seems  to  have 
been  derived  from  the  town  of  Adria,  near  the  Po  ; 
and  at  first  it  denoted  that  pail  of  the  gulf  of  Ve- 
nice which  is  in  that  neighbourhood.  Afterwards 
the  signification  of  the  name  was  extended,  so  as 
to  embrace  the  whole  of  that  gulf.  Subsequently 
it  obtained  a  much  wider  extension,  and  in  the 
apostolic  age  denoted  that  natural  division  of  the 
Mediterranean,  which  Humboldt  names  the  Syrtic 
basin  (see  Acts  xxvii.  17),  and  which  had  the 
coasts  of  Sicily,  Italy,  Greece,  and  Africa  for  its 
boundaries.  This  definition  is  explicitly  given  by 
almost  a  contemporary  of  St.  Paul,  the  geographer 
Ptolemy,  who  also  says  that  Crete  is  bounded  on 
the  west  by  Adrias.  Later  writers  state  that 
Malta  divides  the  Adriatic  sea  from  the  Tyrrhenian 
sea,  and  the  isthmus  of  Corinth,  the  Aegean  from 
the  Adriatic.  Thus  the  ship  in  which  Josephus 
started  for  Italy  about  the  time  of  St.  Paul's  voy- 
age, foundered  in  Adrias  (Life,  3),  and  there  he 
was  picked  up  by  a  ship  from  Cyrene  and  taken  to 
Puteoli  (see  Acts  xxviii.  13).  It  is  through  igno- 
rance of  these  facts,  or  through  the  want  of  attend- 
ing to  them,  that  writers  have  drawn  an  argument 
from  this  geographical  term  in  favour  of  the  false 
view  which  places  the  Apostle's  shipwreck  in  the 
Gulf  of  Venice.  [Melita.]  (Smith's  Voy.  and 
Shipwreck  of  St.  Paid.  Diss,  on  the  Island  Me- 
lita.) [J.  S.  H.] 

A'DEIEL  (Wl"J?;  'ASpWJA;  Hadriel),  a 
son  of  Barzillai  the  Meholathite,  to  whom  Saul  gave 
his  daughter  Merab,  although  he  had  previously  pro- 
mised her  to  David  (1  Sam.  xviii.  19).  His  five  sons 
were  amongst  the  seven  descendants  of  Saul  whom 
David  surrendered  to  the  Gibeonites  (2  Sam.  xxi.  9) 
in  satisfaction  for  the  endeavours  of  Saul  to  extirpate 
them,  although  the  Israelites  had  originally  made  a 
league  with  them  (Josh.  ix.  15).  In  2  Sam.  xxi. 
they  are  called  the  sons  of  Michal ;  but  as  Michal 
had  no  children  (2  Sam.  vi.  23),  the  A.  V.  in  order 
to  surmount  the  difficulty,  erroneously  translates 
mV  "brought  up"  instead  of  "bare."  This 
accords  with  the  opinion  of  the  Targum  and  Jewish 
authorities.  The  margin  also  gives  "  the  sister  ot 
Michal"  for  "  Michal."  Probably  the  error  is  due 
to  some  early  transcriber.  [R.  W.  B.j 

A'DUEL  ('ASoiWjA,  i.e.  b^V,  1  Chr.  iv.  36 


ADULLAM 

('leSiTJA.) ;  ix.  12  ('ASitjA.),  the  ornament  of  God), 
Tob.  i.  1.  [B.  F.  W.j 

ADUL'LAM,  Apocr.  Odollam,  (D^IJ?,  'OSoA- 

\dfj-),  a  city  of  Judah  in  the  lowland  of  the  Shefelah, 
Josh.  xv.  35  (comp.  Gen.  sxxviii.  1,  "Judah  went 

down"  and  Micah  i.  15,  where  it  is  named  with 
Mareshah  and  Achzib)  ;  the  seat  of  a  Canaanite 
king  (Josh.  xii.  15),  and  evidently  a  place  of  great 
antiquity  (Gen.  xxxviii.  1,  12,  20).  Fortified  by 
Rehoboam  (2  Chron,  xi.  7),  one  of  the  towns  re- 
occupied  by  the  Jews  after  their  return  from  Ba- 
bylon (Neb.  xi.  30),  and  still  a  city  ('O.  tt<5Ais) 
in  the  times  of  the  Maccabees  (2  Mace.  xii.  38). 

The  site  of  Adullam  has  not  yet  been  identified, 
but  from  the  mention  of  it  in  the  passages  quoted 
above  in  proximity  with  other  known  towns  of  the 
Shefelah,  it  is  likely  that  it  was  near  Deir  Dubbdn, 
5  or  H  rniles  N.  of  Eleutheropolis.  (By  E-usebius 
and  Jerome,  and  apparently  by  the  LXX.  it  is  con- 
founded with  EGLON  :  see  that  name.)  The  limestone 
clid's  of  the  whole  of  that  locality  are  pierced  with 
extensive  excavations  (Robinson,  ii.  23,  51-53),  some 
one  of  which  is  doubtless  the  "  cave  of  Adullam," 
the  refuge  of  David  (1  Sam.  xxii.  1  ;  2  Sam.  xxiii. 
13  ;  1  Chr.  xi.  15  ;  Stanley,  S.  and  P.  259). 
Monastic  tradition  places  the  cave  at  Khurcitun,  at 
the  south  end  of  the  Wady  Urt&s,  between  Beth- 
lehem and  the  Dead  Sea  (Robinson,  i.  481).     [G.] 

ADULTERY.  The  parties  to  this  crime  were 
a  married  woman  and  a  man  who  was  not  her  hus- 
band. The  toleration  of  polygamy,  indeed,  renders 
it  nearly  impossible  to  make  criminal  a  similar 
offence  committed  by  a  manned  man  with  a  woman 
not  his  wife.  In  the  patriarchal  period  the  sanc- 
tity of  marriage  is  noticeable  from  the  history  of 
Abraham,  who  fears,  not  that  his  wife  will  be  se- 
duced from'  him,  but  that  he  may  be  killed  for  her 
sake,  and  especially  from  the  scruples  ascribed  to 
Pharaoh  and  Abimelech  (Gen.  xii.,  xx.).  The  wo- 
man's punishment  was,  as  commonly  amongst  east- 
ern nations,  no  doubt  capital,  and  probably,  as  in 
the  case  of  Tamar's  unchastity,  death  by  fire 
(xxxviii.  24).  The  Mosaic  penalty  was  that  both  the 
guilty  parties  should  be  stoned,  and  it  applied  as  well 
to  the  betrothed  as  to  the  married  woman,  provided 
she  were  tree  (Dent.  xxii.  22-24).  A  bondwoman 
so  offending  was  to  be  scourged,  and  the  man  was 
to  make  a  trespass  offering  (Lev.  xix.  20-22). 

The  system  of  inheritances,  on  which  the  polity 
of  Moses  was  based,  was  threatened  with  confusion 
by  the  doubtful  offspring  caused  by  this  crime,  and 
this  secured  popular  sympathy  on  the  side  of  mo- 
rality until  a  far  advanced  stage  of  corruption  was 

I.     Yet  from  stoni  i  le  the  penalty 

we  may  suppose  thai  the  exclusion  of  private 
was  intended.     It  is  probable  that,  when  that  ter- 
ritorial ba  is  of  polity  passed  away — as  it  did  after 
the  i  apidvity — and  when,  owing  to  <  ■■ 
the   marriagi  le  a  looser  bond  of  union, 

public  feeling  in  regard  to  adultery  changed,  and 
the  penalty  of  death  was  seldom  or  never  inflicted. 
Thus  in  the  case  of  the  woman  brought  under  our 
I. oid's  notice  (John  viii.),  it  is  likely  that  no  one 
d  thou  lit  of  Btoning  her  in  Gut,  bul   1 1 

I  the  written  law  ready  for  the  pur] 
the  caviller.     It  is  likely  also  that  a  div 
which  the  adulteress  lost  her  dower  and  ri 
maintenance,  &c.  (Gemara  Chethuboth,  cap.  vii.  6), 
was   the   usual   reme  Ij     og  !  ted    bj    a   wish   to 
avoid  scandal  and  the  excitement  ofcommi 


ADUMMIM 


25 


for  crime.  The  word  irapaSeiY/xan'crai  (Matt.  i. 
19),  probably  means  to  bring  the  case  before  the 
local  Sanhedrim,  which  was  the  usual  course,  but 
which  Joseph  did  not  propose  to  take,  preferring 
repudiation  (Buxtorf,  de  Spans,  et  Divort.  iii.  1-4), 
because  that  could  be  managed  privately  (AdOpa). 

Concerning  the  famous  trial  by  the  waters  of 
jealousy  (Num.  v.  11-29),  it  has  been  questioned 
whether  a  husband  was  in  case  of  certain  facts 
bound  to  adopt  it.  The  more  likely  view  is,  that 
it  was  meant  as  a  relief  to  the  vehemence  of  impla- 
cable jealousy  to  which  Orientals  appear  prone,  but 
which  was  not  consistent  with  the  laxity  of  the 
nuptial  tie  prevalent  in  the  period  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament. The  ancient  strictness  of  that  tie  gave 
room  for  a  more  intense  feeling,  and  in  that  in- 
tensity probably  arose  this  strange  custom,  which 
no  doubt  Moses  found  prevailing  and  deeply  seated ; 
and  which  is  said  to  be  paralleled  by  a  form  of 
ordeal  called  the  "  red  water "  in  Western  Africa 
(Kitto,  Cyclop,  s.  v.).  The  forms  of  Hebrew  jus- 
tice all  tended  to  limit  the  application  of  this  test. 
1.  By  prescribing  certain  facts  presumptive  of 
guilt,  to  be  established  on  oath  by  two  witnesses, 
or  a  preponderating  but  not  conclusive  testimony  to 
the  fact  of  the  woman's  adultery.  2.  By  tech- 
nical rules  of  evidence  which  made  proof  of  those 
presumptive  facts  difficult  (Sotah,  vi.  2-5).  3.  By 
exempting  certain  large  classes  of  women  (all  indeed, 
except  a  pure  Israelitess  manned  to  a  pure  Israelite, 
and  some  even  of  them)  from  the  liability.  4.  By 
providing  that  the  trial  could  only  be  before  the 
great  Sanhedrim  (Sotah,  i.  4).  5.  By  investing  it 
with  a  ceremonial  at  once  humiliating  aDd  intimi- 
dating, yet  which  still  harmonised  with  the  spirit 
of  the  whole  ordeal  as  recorded  in  Num.  v.;  but 
6.  Above  all,  by  the  conventional  and  even  mer- 
cenary light  in  which  the  nuptial  contract  was 
latterly  regarded. 

When  adultery  ceased  to  be  capital,  as  no  doubt 
it  did,  and  divorce  became  a  matter  of  mere  conve- 
nience, it  would  be  absurd  to  suppose  that  this  trial 
was  continued.  And  when  adultery  became  common, 
as  the  Jews  themselves  confess,  it  would  have  been 
impious  to  expect  the  miracle  which  it  supposed. 
If  ever  the  Sanhedrim  were  driven  by  force  of  cir- 
cumstances to  adopt  this  trial,  no  doubt  every 
effort  was  used,  nay,  was  prescribed  (Sotah,  i.  5,  6) 
to  overawe  the  culprit  and  induce  confession.  Nay, 
even  if  she  submitted  to  the  trial  and  was  really 
guilty,  some  rabbis  hold  that  the  effect  on  her 
might  be  suspended  for  veins  through  the  merit  of 
some  good  deed  (Sotah,  iii.  4-6).  Besides,  how- 
ever, the  intimidation  of  the  woman,  the  man  was 
likely  to  feel  the  public  exposure  of  his  suspicions 
odious  and  repulsive.  Divorce  was  a  ready  and 
quiet  remedy;  and  the  only  question  wa  ,  whether 
the  divorce  should  carry  the  dowry,  and  the  pro- 
perty which-she  had  brought  ;  which  was  decided 
by  the  slight  or  grave  character  of  the  sus] 
against  her  (Sotah,  vi.  L,  Gemara  Chethul 
vii.  6 ;  Ogol.  Uxor  Heb.  c.  vii.).  If  the  husband 
were  incapable  through  derangement,  imp 
ment,  &c.,  of  acting  on  his  own  behalf  in  the  matter, 

hedrim  proa  eded  in  his  name  as  coi  • 
the  dowry,  but  not   as  concerned  the  trial  by  the 
water  of  jealousy  (Sotah,  h  [II.  IE] 

ADl'M  "S'\  1M.  "  i  Hi    GOING  I  P  id  "  or  "of  " 
(CTpHN  n?l'0;  Trp6(Tf3aats'\8an!j'tr 

the  ••  pa  is  of  I  he  re  1 ;''  one 
of  the  landmarks  of  the  boundary  of  Benjamin,  a 


26 


AEDIAS 


rising  ground  or  pass  "  over  against  Gilgal,"  and 
"  on  the  soutli  side  of  the  '  torrent '  "  (Josh.  xv.  7, 
xviii.  17),  which  is  the' position  still  occupied  by 
the  road  leading  up  from  Jericho  and  the  Jordan 
valley  to  Jerusalem  (Rob.  i.  558  a),  on  the  south 
face  of  the  gorge  of  the  Wady  Kelt.  Jerome  (  Onom. 
Adommin)  ascribes  the  name  to  the  blood  shed  there 
by  the  robbers  who  infested  the  pass  in  his  day,  as 
they  still  (Stanley,  314,  424;  Martineau,  481; 
Stewart)  continue  to  infest  it,  as  they  did  in  the 
middle  ages,  when  the  order  of  Knights  Templars 
arose  out  of  an  association  for  the  guarding  of  this 
road,  and  as  they  did  in  the  days  of  our  Lord, 
of  whose  parable  of  the  Good  Samaritan  this  is 
the  scene.  But  the  name  is  doubtless  of  a  date 
and  significance  far  more  remote,  and  is  probably 
derived  from  some  tribe  of  "  red  men "  of  the 
earliest  inhabitants  of  the  country  (Stanley,  424, 
note).  The  suggestion  of  Keil  that  it  refers  to  the 
"  rothlichen  Farbe  des  Felsen,"  is  the  conjecture  of  a 
man  who  has  never  been  on  the  spot,  the  whole  pass 
being  of  the  whitest  limestone.  [G.] 

AEDI'AS  ('AiSias ;  Helios),  1  Esdr.  ix.  27. 
Probably  a  corruption  of  Eliah. 

AE'GYPT.     [Egypt.] 

AENEAS  (AtVe'as ;  Aeneas),  a  paralytic  at 
Lydda,  healed  by  St.  Peter  (Acts  ix.  33,  34). 

AE'NON  (Alvd>v ;  Aennori),  a  place  "  near-  to 
Salim,"  at  which  John  baptized  (John  hi.  23).  It 
was  evidently  west  of  the  Jordan  (comp.  iii.  22, 
with  20,  and  with  i.  28),  and  abounded  in  water. 
This  is  indicated  by  the  name,  which  is  merely  a  Greek 
version  of  the  Chaldee  ])T]}  =  "  springs."  Aenon  is 
given  in  the  Onomasticon  as  8  miles  south  of  Seytho- 
polis,  "juxta  Salem  et  Jordanem."  Dr.  Robinson's 
most  careful  search,  on  his  second  visit,  however, 
failed  to  discover  any  trace  of  either  name  or  remains 
in  that  locality  (iii.  333).  But  a  Salim  has  been  found 
by  him  to  the  east  of  and  close  to  Nabulus,  where 
there  are  two  very  copious  springs  (ii.  279  ;  hi.  298). 
This  position  agrees  with  the  requirements  of  Gen. 
xxxiii.  18.  [SALEM.]  In  favour  of  its  distance 
from  the  Jordan  is  the  consideration  that,  if  close 
by  the  river,  the  Evangelist  would  hardly  have 
drawn  attention  to  the  "  much  water"  there. 

The  latest  writer  on  Jerusalem,  Dr.  Barclay 
(1858),  reports  the  discovery  of  Aenon  at  Wady 
Fundi,  a  secluded  valley  about  5  miles  to  the  N.E. 
of  Jerusalem,  running  into  the  great  Wad)/  Fowar 
immediately  above  Jericho.  The  grounds  of  this 
novel  identification  are  the  very  copious  springs  and 
pools  in  which  W.  Farah  abounds,  and  also  the  pre- 
sence of  the  name  Selam  or  Seleim,  the  appellation  of 
another  Wady  close  by.  But  it  requires  more  exami- 
nation than  it  has  yet  received.  (Barclay,  City  of  the 
Great  King,  558-570.)  See  the  curious  speculations 
of  Lightfoot  {Cent.  Chorog.  1,  2,  3,  4).  [G.] 

AERA.     [Chronology.] 

AETHIO'PIA.     [Ethiopia.] 

AFFINITY.     [Marriage.] 

AGABA  (AKKapd;  Aggab),  1  Esdr.  v.  20. 
[Hagar.] 

AGABUS  ("Ayapos),  a  Christian  prophet  m 
the  apostolic  age,  mentioned  in  Acts  xi.  28  and 


3  Robinson's  words,    "  On  the  south  side 

above,"  are  the  more  remarkable,  because  the  identity 
of  the  place  with  the  Maaleh-Adummim  does  not  seem 
to  have  occurred  to  him. 


AGARENES 

xxi.  10.  The  same  person  must  be  meant  in 
both  places  ;  for  not  only  the  panic,  but  the  office 
(jrpo(pT)Ti)s)  and  residence  (07rb  tj)s  'lovoaias),  are 
the  same  in  both  instances.  He  predicted  (Acts  xi. 
28)  that  a  famine  would  take  place  iu  the  reign  of 
Claudius  "throughout  all  the  world"  (£<f>'  bX-nv 
t?V  olKovy,ivt]v).  This  expression  may  take  a  nar- 
rower or  a  wider  sense,  either  of  which  confirms 
the  prediction.  As  Greek  and  Roman  writers  used 
7]  oIkuv/j.4v7]  of  the  Greek  and  the  Roman  world,  so 
a  Jewish  writer  could  use  it  naturally  of  the  Jewish 
world  or  Palestine.  Ancient  writers  give  no  account 
of  any  universal  famine  in  the  reign  of  Claudius, 
but  they  speak  of  several  local  famines  which  were 
severe  in  particular  countries.  Josephus  (Ant.  xx. 
2,  §6;  ib.  5,  §2)  mentions  one  which  prevailed  at 
that  time  in  Judaea,  and  swept  away  many  of  the 
inhabitants.  Helena,  queen  of  Adiabene,  a  Jewish 
proselyte  who  was  then  at  Jerusalem,  imported 
provisions  from  Egypt  and  Cyprus,  which  she  dis- 
tributed among  the  people  to  save  them  from 
starvation.  This,  in  all  probability,  is  the  famine 
to  which  Agabus  refers  in  Acts  xi.  28.  The  chro- 
nology admits  of  this  supposition.  According  to 
Josephus,  the  famine  which  he  describes  took  place 
when  Cuspius  Fadus  and  Tiberius  Alexander  were 
procurators  ;  i.  c.  as  Lardner  suggests,  it  may  have 
begun  about  the  close  of  a.d.  44,  and  lasted  three 
or  four  years.  Fadus  was  sent  into  Judaea  on  the 
death  of  Agrippa,  which  occurred  in  August  of  the 
year  A.D.  44.  If  we  attach  the  wider  sense  to 
olKov^evr]v,  the  prediction  may  import  that  a 
famine  should  take  place  throughout  the  Roman 
empire  during  the  reign  of  Claudius  (the  year  is 
not  specified),  and  not  that  it  should  prevail  in  all 
parts  at  the  same  time.  We  find  mention  of  three 
other  famines  during  the  reign  of  Claudius  :  one 
in  Greece  (Euseb.  Chron.  i.  79),  and  two  m  Rome 
(Dion.  Cass.  Ix.  11 ;  Tac.  Ann.  xii.  43). 

The  name  Agabus  is  variously  derived :  by 
Drusius,  from  2llT),  a  locust;  by  Grotius,  from 
2W,  he  loved:  which  latter  Witsius  and  Wolf  also 
adopt.  See  the  Curae  Philologicae  of  the  latter,  vol. 
ii.  p.  1167.  Winer  refers  to  a  dissertation  by  M. 
Walch,  DeAyabo  vote,  in  his  Dissert,  ad  Act.  Ap. 
ii.  131  ff.  There  is  an  extended  notice  of  the  in- 
cidents in  which  he  appears  in  Baumgarten,  Apostel- 
geschichte,  i.  pp.270  ff.  and  ii.  pp.113  f. 

A'GAG  (JJN,  from  an  Arabic  root  "  to  burn," 
Gesen. ;  'A7C17  and  Tc&y  ;  Agag),  possibly  the  title 
of  the  kings  of  Amalek,  like  Pharaoh  of  Egypt.  One 
king  of  this  name  is  mentioned  in  Num.  xxiv.  7, 
and  another  in  1  Sam.  xv.  8,  9,  20,  32.  The  latter 
was  the  king  of  the  Amalekites,  whom  Saul  spared 
together  with  the  best  of  the  spoil,  although  it  was 
the  well-known  will  of  Jehovah  that  the  Amalekites 
should  be  extirpated  (Ex.xvii.  14;  Deut.  xxv.  17). 
For  this  act  of  disobedience  Samuel  was  commissioned 
to  declare  to  Saul  his  rejection,  and  he  himself  sent 
for  Agag  and  cut  him  in  pieces.     [Sajicel.] 

Haman  is  called  the  Agagitk  in  Esther  (Boi/- 
ycuos,  iii.  1, 10,viii.  3,5).  The  Jews  consider  Hainan 
a  descendant  of  Agag,  the  Amalekite,  and  hence  ac- 
count for  the  hatred  with  which  he  pursued  their  race 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xi.  6,  §5  ;  Targ.  Esth.).     [R.  W.  B.] 

AGAGI'TE.     [Agag.] 

A'GAE.     [Hagar.] 

AGAKE'NES  (viol  "Ayap;  filii  A  jar),  Bar. 
iii.  2;'..     [Hagar.] 


AGATE 

AGATE,  a  precious  stone.  The  word  occurs  in 
the  A.  V.  twice  as  the  representative  of  the  Heb. 
Kadkod,  and  twice  as  that  of  Shebi.  The  derivation 
of  Kadkod  (13*13)  from  113,  ignem  excussit, 
scintillitnit,  implies  the  bright  and  sparkling  charac- 
ter of  the  stone.  From  Is.  liv.  12  we  might  infer 
that  it  was  partially  transparent,  and  from  Ez. 
xxvii.  lb',  that  it  was  imported  from  Syria  to  Tyre. 
In  the  former  passage  the  I,XX.  render  it  foams, 
and  the  Vulgate  iaspis  :  but  in  the  latter  both  ver- 
sions keep  the  Hebrew  word,  Ceseuius  supposes  it 
to  be  the  ruby  or  carbuncle.  S/td>u  (•lit*)  occurs 
in  Ex.  xxvii.  19  and  xxxix.  12.  It  is  rendered  by 
the  LXX.  axaTTjs,  and  in  the  Vulg.  achates,  and 
may  perhaps  be  the  agate,  though  there  is  nothing 
in  the  meaning  of  the  word  to  indicate  the  origin. 
It  is  usually  derived  from  13*^,  captivum  fecit, 
but  may  possibly  be  connected  with  the  proper 
name,  X3U\  from  whence  the  merchants  brought 
all  precious  stones  to  the  markets  of  Tyre  (Comp. 
Braun.  de  Vest.  Sac.  Inst.  Heb.  ii.  15).  The  agate 
was  the  second  stone  on  the  third  row  of  the  breast- 
plate of  the  High-priest.  It  is  a  semipellucid  un- 
crystallised  variety  of  quartz,  found  in  parallel  or 
concentric  layers  of  various  colours,  and  presenting 
different  tints  in  the  same  specimen.  [W.  D.] 

AGE,  OLD.  In  early  stages  of  civilization, 
whin  experience  is  the  only  source  of  practical 
knowledge,  old  age  has  its  special  value,  and  conse- 
quently its  special  honours.  The  Spartans,  the 
Athenians,  and  the  Romans  were  particular  in  show- 
ing respect  to  the  aged,  and  the  Egyptians  had  a 
regulation  which  has  its  exact  parallel  in  the  Bible 
(Herod,  ii.  80;  Lev.  xix.  32).  Under  a  patriarchal 
form  of  government  such  a  feeling  was  still  more 
deeply  implanted.  A  further  motive  was  su- 
peradded in  the  case  of  the  Jew,  who  was  taught 
to  consider  old  age  as  a  reward  for  piety,  and  a 
signal  token  of  God's  favour.  For  these  reasons 
the  aged  occupied  a  prominent  place  in  the  social 
and  political  system  of  the  Jews.  In  private  life 
they  were  looked  up  to  as  the  depositaries  of  know- 
ledge (Job  xv.  10):  the  young  were  ordered  to  rise 
up  in  their  presence  (Lev.  xix.  32):  they  allowed 
them  to  give  their  opinion  first  (Job  x.xxii.  4)  :  they 
were  taught  to  regard  grey  hairs  as  a  "  crown  of 
glory"  and  as  the  "  beauty  of  old  men"  (Prov. 
xvi.  31,  xx.  29).  The  attainment  of  old  age  was 
regarded  as  a  special  blessing  (Job  v.  2G),  not  only 
en  account  of  the  prolonged  enjoyment  of  life  to  the 
individual,  but  also  because  it  indicated  peaceful 
and  prosperous  times  (Zech.  viii.  4;  1  Mac  riv. '.»; 
Is.  lxv.  20).  In  public  affairs  age  carried  weighi 
with  it,  especially  in  the  infancy  of  the  state:  it 
I  under  Moses  the  main  qualification  <  f  those 
wlm  acted  as  the  representatives  of  the  people  in  all 
matters  of  difficulty  and  deliberation.  The  old  men 
(M-  Elders  thus  became  a  class,  and  the  title'  gradu- 
ally ceased  to  convey  the  notion  of  age,  and  was 
used  in  an  official  sense,  like  Patres,  Senatores,  and 
other  similar  terms.  [ELDERS.]  Still  it  would  be 
but  natural  that  such  an  office  was  generally  held 
by  men  of  advanced  age  (1  K.xii.8).   [\V.  L.  B.) 

AG'EE  (NJN  ;  "A<ra,  'Ayod  ;  Age),  nam"  of  a 

man  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  1 1). 

AGGE'US  ('Ayyaros  .     I  [HaGGAI.] 

AGRICULTURE.     This,  though   prominenl 

in  the  Scriptural  narrative  concerning  Adam,  Cain, 


AGRICULTURE 


27 


and  Noah,  was  little  cared  for  by  the  patriarchs; 
more  so,  however,  by  Isaac  ami  Jacob  than  by 
Abraham  (Gen.  xxvi.  12,xxxvii.  7),  in  whose  time, 
probably,  if  we  except  the  Lower  Jordan  valley 
(xiii.  10),  there  was  little  regular  culture  in  Ca- 
naan. Thus  Gerar  and  Shechem  seem  to  have  been 
cities  where  pastoral  wealth  predominated.  The 
herdmen  strove  with  Isaac  about  his  wells;  about 
his  crop  there  was  no  contention  (xx.  14,  xxxiv. 
28).  In  Joshua's  time,  as  shown  by  the  story  of 
the  '  Eshcol'  (Numb.  xiii.  23-4),  Canaan  was  found 
in  a  much  more  advanced  agricultural  state  than 
Jacob  had  left  it  in  (I)eut.  viii.  8),  resulting  pro- 
bably from  the  severe  experience  of  famines,  and 
the  example  of  Egypt,  to  which  its  people  were 
thus  led.  The  pastoral  life  was  the  means  of  keep- 
ing the  sacred  race,  whilst  yet  a  family,  distinct 
from  mixture  and  locally  unattached,  especially 
whilst  in  Egypt.  When,  grown  into  a  nation, 
they  conquered  their  future  seats,  agriculture  sup- 
plied a  similar  check  on  the  foreign  intercourse  and 
speedy  demoralisation,  especially  as  regards  idolatry, 
which  commerce  would  have  caused.  Thus  agri- 
culture became  the  basis  of  the  Mosaic  common- 
wealth (Michaelis,  xxxvii.-xli.).  It  tended  to  check 
also  the  freebootiug  and  nomad  life,  and  made  a 
numerous  offspring  profitable,  as  it  was  already 
honourable  by  natural  sentmient  and  by  law. 
Thus,  too,  it  indirectly  discouraged  slavery,  or, 
where  it  existed,  made  the  slave  somewhat  like 
a  son,  though  it  made  the  son  also  somewhat  of 
a  slave.  Taken  in  connexion  with  the  inalienable 
character  of  inhei  itances,  it  gave  each  man  and  each 
family  a  stake  in  the  soil  and  nurtured  a  hardy 
patriotism.  "The  land  is  Mine"  (Lev.  xxv.  23) 
was  a  dictum  which  made  agriculture  likewise  the 
basis  of  the  theocratic  relation.  Thus  every  family 
felt  its  own  life  with  intense  keenness,  and  had  its 
divine  tenure  which  it  was  to  guard  from  alienation. 
The  prohibition  of  culture  in  the  sabbatical  year 
formed,  under  this  aspect,  a  kind  of  rent  reserved 
by  the  Divine  Owner.  Landmarks  were  deemed 
sacred  (Dent.  xix.  14),  and  the  inalienability  of  the 
heritage  was  ensured  by  its  reversion  to  the  owner 
in  the  year  of  jubilee ;  so  that  only  so  many  years 
of  occupancy  could  be  sold  (Lev.  xxv.  8-16,  23-35). 
The  prophet  Isaiah  (v.  8)  denounces  the  contempt 
of  such  restrictions  by  wealthy  grandees  who  sought 
to  "  add  field  to  field,"  erasing  families  and  depopu- 
lating districts. 

A  change  in  the  climate  of  Palestine,  caused  by 
increase  of  population  and  the  clearance  of  trees, 
must  have  taken  place  before  the  period  of  the 
N.  T.  A  further  change  caused  by  the  .1. 
of  skilled  agricultural  labour,  c.  </.  in  irrigation 
and  terrace-making,  has  since  ensued.  Not  only 
this,  but  the  gnat  variety  of  elevation  and  local 
character  in  so  small  a  compass  of'  country  neces- 
sitates a  partial  and  guarded  application  of  general 
remarks  (Robinson,  i.  507,  553,  '>">4.  hi.  595; 
Stanley,  8.  $  P.  119,  124-6).  Vet  wherever 
industry  is  secure,  the  soil  still  asserts  its  old 
fertility.  The  Haur&n  (Peraea)  is  as  fertile  as 
Damascus,  and  its  bread  enjoys  the  highest  repu- 
tation. The  black  and  tat,  but  light,  soil  about 
<i'aza  is  said  U<  hold  so  much  moisture  as  to  be 
very  fertile  with  little  rain.  Here,  as  in  the 
OUrhood    of    B  I  vast  olive-ground, 

ami  the  verj  and  of  the  shore  is  said  to  be  fertile 
Lfwatered.  Tin-  Israelite-,  probably  found  in  Canaan 
a  fair  proportion  of  woodland,  which  their  neces- 
sities, owing  tn  tie;  discouragemenf  of  commerce, 


28 


AGRICULTURE 


must  have  led  them  to  reduce  (Josh.  xvii.  18). 
But  even  in  early  times  timber  seems  to  have 
been  far  less  used  for  building  material  than  among 
western  nations ;  the  Israelites  were  not  skilful 
hewers,  and  imported  both  the  timber  and  the 
workmen  (1  K.  v.  6,  8).  No  store  of  wood-fuel 
seems  to  have  been  kept ;  ovens  were  heated  with 
such  things  as  dung  and  hay  (Ez.  iv.  12,  15 ;  Mai. 
iv.  13) ;  and,  in  any  case  of  sacrifice  on  an  emer- 
gency, some,  as  we  should  think,  unusual  source  of 
supply  is  constantly  mentioned  for  the  wood  (1  Sam. 
vi.  14 ;  2  Sam.  xxiv.  22  ;  1  K.  six.  21 ;  comp.  Gen. 
xxii.  3,  6,  7).  All  this  indicates  a  non-abundance 
of  timber. 

Its  plenty  of  water  from  natural  sources  made 
Canaan  a  contrast  to  rainless  Egypt  (Deut.  viii.  7, 
xi.  8-12).  Nor  was  the  peculiar  Egyptian  method 
alluded  to  in  Deut.  xi.  10  unknown,  though  less 
prevalent  in  Palestine.  That  peculiarity  seems  to 
have  consisted  in  making  in  the  fields  square  shallow 
beds,  like  our  salt-pans,  surrounded  by  a  raised 
border  of  earth  to  keep  in  the  water,  which  was 
then  turned  from  one  square  to  another  by  pushing 
aside  the  mud  to  open  one  and  close  the  next  with 
the  foot.  A  very  similar  method  is  apparently  de- 
scribed by  Robinson  as  used,  especially  for  garden 
vegetables,  in  Palestine.  There  irrigation  (including 
under  the  term  all  appliances  for  making  the  water 
available)  was  as  essential  as  drainage  in  our  region  ; 
and  for  this  the  large  extent  of  rocky  surface,  easily- 
excavated  for  cisterns  and  ducts,  was  most  useful. 
Even  the  plain  of  Jericho  is  watered  not  by  canals 
from  the  Jordan,  since  the  river  lies  below  the  land, 
but  by  rills  converging  from  the  mountains.  In  these 
features  of  the  country  lay  its  expansive  resources 
to  meet  the  wants  of  a  multiplying  population.  The 
lightness  of  agricultural  labour  in  the  plains  set 
free  an  abundance  of  hands  for  the  task  of  terracing 
and  watering;  and  the  result  gave  the  highest 
stimulus  to  industry. 

The  cereal  crops  of  constant  mention  are  wheat 
and  barley,  and  more  rarely  rye  and  millet  (?).  Of 
the  two  former,  together  with  the  vine,  olive,  and 
fig,  the  use  of  irrigation,  the  plough  and  the  harrow, 
mention  is  found  in  the  book  of  Job  (xxxi.  40  ; 
xv.  33  ;  xxiv.  6  ;  xxix.  9  ;  xxxix.  10).  Two  kinds 
of  cummin  (the  black  variety  called  "  fitches,"  Is. 
xxviii.  27),  and  such  podded  plants  as  beans  and 
leutiles,  may  be  named  among  the  staple  produce. 
To  these,  later  writers  add  a  great  variety  of  garden 
plants,  e.g.,  kidney-beans,  peas,  lettuce,  endive, 
leek,  garlic,  onion,  melon,  cucumber,  cabbage,  &c. 
(Mis/ma,  Celaim.  1.  1,  2).  The  produce  which 
formed  Jacob's  present  was  of  such  kinds  as  would 
keep,  and  had  kept  during  the  famine  (Gen.  xliii.  1 1). 

The  Jewish  calendar,  as  fixed  by  the  three  great 
festivals,  turned  on  the  seasons  of  green,  ripe,  and 
fully-gathered  produce.  Hence,  if  the  season  was 
backward,  or,  owing  to  the  imperfections  of  a  non- 
astronomical  reckoning,  seemed  to  be  so,  a  month 
was  intercalated.  This  rude  system  was  fondly 
retained  long  after  mental  progress  and  foreign 
intercourse  placed  a  correct  calendar  within  their 
power ;  so  that  notice  of  a  Veadar,  i.  e.,  second 
or  intercalated  Adar,  on  account  of  the  lambs  being 
not  yet  of  paschal  size,  and  the  barley  not  forward 
enough  for  the  Abib  (green  sheaf  J,  was  sent  to  the 
Jews  of  Babylon  and  Egypt  (Ugol.  de  Be  Rust.  v. 
22)  early  in  the  season. 

The  year  ordinarily  consisting  of  12  months 
was  divided  into  6  agricultural  periods  as  follows 
(Tosaphta  Taanith,  oh.  1) : — 


AGRICULTURE  ' 

I.  Sowing  Time. 
.'  beginning  about^ 

Tisri,  latter  half  <      autumnal 

v     equinox  VEarly  rain  due. 

Marchesvan ! 

Kasleu,  former  half     . .     . .     : .  ' 

II.  Unripe  Time. 
Kasleu,  latter  half. 

Tebeth. 

Shebath,  former  half. 

III.  Cold  Season. 
Shebath,  latter  half     j 

fveadar]"     '.'.     '.'.     '.'.     ".     '.'.    lLatter  rain  due- 
Nisan,  former  half        ] 

IV.  Harvest  Time. 

I  Beginning  about 
Barley  green. 
Passover. 
Ijar. 

Sivan,  former  half       {SSSSS* 

V.  Summer. 
Siran,  latter  half 
Tamuz. 
Ab,  former  half. 

VI.  Sultrt  Season. 
Ab,  latter  half. 
EM. 
Tisri,  former  half Ingathering  of  fruits. 

Thus  the  6  months  from  mid  Tisri  to  mid  Nisan 
were  mainly  occupied  with  the  process  of  cultiva- 
tion, and  the  rest  with  the  gathering  of  the  fruits. 
Rain  was  commonly  expected  soon  after  the 
autumnal  equinox  or  mid  Tisri ;  and  if  by  the 
first  of  Kasleu  none  had  fallen,  a  fast  was  pro- 
claimed (Mishna,  Taanith,  ch.  1).  The  common 
scriptural  expressions  of  the  "  early "  and  the 
"latter  rain"  (Deut.  xi.  14;  Jer.  v.  24;  Hos. 
vi.  3 ;  Zech.  x.  1 ;  Jam.  v.  7)  are  scarcely  con- 
finned  by  modem  experience,  the  season  of  rains 
being  unbroken  (Robinson,  i.  41,429;  iii.  9(3), 
though  perhaps  the  fall  is  more  strongly  marked 
at  the  beginning  and  the  end  of  it.  The  conster- 
nation caused  by  the  failure  of  the  former  rain 
is  depicted  in  Joel  i.  ii. ;  and  that  prophet  seems 
to  promise  that  and  the  latter  rain  together  "  in 
the  first  month,"  i.e.  Nisan  (ii.  23).  The  ancient 
Hebrews  had  little  notion  of  green  or  root-crops 
grown  for  fodder,  nor  was  the  long  summer  drought 
suitable  for  them.  Barley  supplied  food  both  to 
man  and  beast,  and  the  plant,  called  in  Ez.  iv.  9, 
"  Millet,"  }l"n,  holcus  dochna,  Linn.  (Gesenius), 
was  grazed  while  green,  and  its  ripe  grain  made 
into  bread.  In  the  later  period  of  more  advanced 
irrigation  the  jrpn,  "  Fenugreek,"  occurs,  also  the 
nriK',  a  clover,  apparently,  given  cut  {Peak.  v.  5). 
Mowing  (T3,  Am.  vi.  1  ;  Ps.  lxxii.  6)  and  hay- 
making were  familiar  processes,  but  the  latter  had 
no  express  word,  *VVn  standing  both  for  grass  and 
hay,  a  token  of  a  hot  climate,  where  the  grass  may  ' 
become  hay  as  it  stands. 

The  produce  of  the  land,  besides  fruit  from  trees, 
was  technically  distinguished  as  i"!{03n,  including 
apparently  all  cereal  plant's,  nV3Dp  (quicquid  in 
siliqtiis  nascitur,  Bust.  Lex.),  nearly  equivalent  to 
the  Latin  legumen,  and  D'OIJTlT  or  TWl  MIITIT, 
semina  hortensia  (since  the  former  word  alone  was 
used  also  generically  for  all  seed,  including  all  else 
which  was  liable  to  tithe,  for  which  purpose  the 


AGRICULTURE 

distinction  seems  to  have  existed.  The  plough 
probably  was  like  the  Egyptian,  anil  the  process  of 
ploughing  mostly  very  light,  like  that  called 
scarificatio  by  the  Romans  ("Syria  tenui  sulco 
arat,"  1'lin.  xviii.  47),  one  yoke  of  oxen  mostly 
sufficing  to  draw  it.  Such  is  still  used  in  Asia 
Minor,  and  its  parts  are  shown  in  the  acompanying 
drawing:  a  is  the  pole  to  which  the  cross  beam 
with  yokes,  b,  is  attached;  c,  the  share;  d,  the 
handle;  $  represents  three  modes  of  arming  the 
share,  and/  is  a  goad  with  a  scrapar  at  the  other 


AGRICULTURE 


29 


end,  probably  for  cleansing  the  share.      Mountains 
aud  steep  places  were  hoed  (Is.  vii.  5 ;  Maimon.  ad 


Mishn,  vi.  2;    Robinson,  iii.  595,  602-3).      The 

breaking  up  of  new  laud  was  performed  as  with 
the  Romans  vere  novo.  Such  new  ground  and 
(allows,  the  use  of  which  latter  was  familiar  to  the 
Jews  [Jer.  iv.  3;  Hos.  x.  12),  were  cleared  of 
stones  and  of  thorns  (Is.  v.  2;  Gemara  Hierosol. 
ad  loc.)  early  in  the  year,  sowing  or  gathering 
from  ••  among  thorns  "  being  a  proverb  for 
slovenly  husbandry  (Job  v.  5  ;  Prov.  xxiv.  30,  31  ; 
Robinson,  ii.  127).  Virgin  hind  was  ploughed 
a  second  time.  The  proper  words  are  r\T\Q,  pro- 
scindere,  and  "l^tj?,  offringere,  i.  e.,  iterare  ut 
frangantur  glebae  (by  cross  ploughing),  Van-,  de 
R.  R.  i.  32;  both  are  distinctively  used  Is.  xxviii. 
24.  Land  already  tilled  was  ploughed  before  the 
rains,  that  the  moisture  might  the  better  penetrate 
(Maimon.  ap.  Ugol.  de  Re  Rust.  v.  11).  Rain, 
however,  or  irrigation  (Is.  xxxii.  20)  prepared  the 
soil  for  the  sowing,  as  may  be  inferred  from  the 
prohibition  to  irrigate  till  the  gleaning  was  over, 
lest  the  poor  should  suffer  (Peah,  v.  3);  and  such 
sowing  often  took  place  without  previous  ploughing, 
the  seed,  as  in  the  parable  of  the  sower,  being 
scattered  broadcast,  and  ploughed  in  afterwards,  the 
roots  of  the  late  crop  being  so  far  decayed  as  to 


2.— Egyptian  ploughing  and  sowing. — (Wilkinson,  Tomb**  of  the  Ki/itjs.—  Tlidics.) 


serve  for  manure  (Fellows,  Asia  Minn,-,  p.  72). 
The  soil  was  then  brushed  over  with  a  light  harrow, 
often   of  thorn  bushes.     In  highly  irrigated   spots 


the  seed  was  trampled  in  by  cattle  (Is.  xxxii.  20) 
as  in  Egypt  by  goats  ( Wilkinson,  i.  p.  39,  2nd  Ser.). 
Sometimes,  however,  the  sowing  was  by  patches  only 


i       B.— Go  it*  treading  in  the 

in  well  manured  spots,  a  process  called  "1D30,  dcr. 
"103.  pardus,  from  its  spotted  appearance,  as  repre- 
sented in  the  accompanying  drawing  by  Surenhu- 
sius   to   illustrate  the  Mishna.      Where  the  soil  was 


Pl|{   4.— (""m-.-.r.nun:  in  patcuea.-    Bn     III 


ator  h»s  subsiuYil.— ( Wilkinson,  lbmot,  sear  the  Pyn  "< 

heavier,  the  ploughing  was  best  done  dry  "dum  sicca 
tellure  licet,"  Vii-g.'i'' "/-,/.  i.Jll  ;  and  there,  though 
not  generally,   the  sarritio     "lliy,   dcr.   "liy.   to 

.  and  even  the  Uratio  of  Roman  husbandry, 
performi  1  with  tabulae  affixed  to  the  sides  of  tin' 
share,  mi  lit  !»■  d  leftd.  Bui  the  in forma]  rou- 
tine of  heavy  western  soils  must  not  !»■  made  the 
Btandard  of  such  a  naturally  tine  tilth  as  thai  of 
Palestine  generally.     "Sunt  enim regiomim  propria 

uiuiicia.  sicul  ' '■  tiicae,  in  quibus  agricola 

post  Bementem  ante  mesaem  segetem  non  attingit 
.  .  .  in  iisautem  locis  ubi  Tritio,"  itc 

Columella,  ii.   12.     Daring  the  nuns,  if  not  too 


30 


AGRICULTURE 


heavy,  or  between  their  two  periods,  would  be  the 
best  time  for  these  operations  ;  thus  70  days  before 
the  passover  was  the  time  prescribed  for  sowing  for 
the  "wave-sheaf,"  and,  probably,  therefore,  for  that 
of  barley  generally.  The  oxen  were  urged  on  by  a 
goad  like  a  spear  (Judg.  iii.  31).  The  custom  of 
watching  ripening  crops  and  threshing  floors  against 
theft,  or  damage  (Robinson,  i.  490;  ii.  18,  83,  99) 
is  probably  ancient.  Thus  Boaz  slept  on  the  floor 
(Ruth  iii.  4,  7.)  Barley  ripened  a  week  or  two 
before  wheat,  and  as  fine  harvest  weather  was  cer- 
tain (Prov.  xxvi.  1  ;  1  Sam.  xii.  17  ;  Am.  iv.  7), 
the  crop  chiefly  varied  with  the  quantity  of  timely 
lain.  The  period  of  harvest  must  always  have 
differed  according  to  elevation,  aspect,  &c.  (Robin- 
son, i.  430,  551.)  The  proportion  of  harvest 
gathered  to  seed  sown  was  often  vast,  a  hundred- 
fold is  mentioned,  but  in  such  a  way  as  to  signify 
that  it  was  a  limit  rarely  attained  (Gen.  xxvi.  12  ; 
Matt.  xiii.  8). 

The  rotation  of  crops,  familiar  to  the  Egyptians 
(Wilkinson,  ii.  p.  4),  can  hardly  have  been  un- 
known to  the  Hebrews.  Sowing  a  field  with  divers 
seeds  was  forbidden  (Deut.  xxii.  9),  and  minute 
directions  are  given  by  the  rabbis  for  arranging  a 
seeded    surface   with   great   variety,   yet   avoiding 


' 

. 

Fig.  6.— Sowing.— (Surenhusius.) 


AGRICULTURE 

juxtaposition  of  hcterogenea.     Such  arrangements 
are  shown   in  the  annexed  drawings.     Three  fur- 


7  ^7  p\  2 

i 

\m\m 

\ 

ii  <     %s 

fill  H  ISP 

HI 

'   :"       1 

'   :      :■-'- 

Fig.  8.— Souing.— (.smenliusms.) 

rows'  interval  was  the  prescribed  margin  (Celaim, 
ii.  6).  The  blank  spaces  in  fig.  5,  a  and  6,  repre- 
sent such  margins,  tapering  to  save  ground.  In 
a  vineyard  wide  spaces  were  often  left  between  the 
vines,  for  whose  roots  a  radius  of  4  cubits  was 
allowed,  and  the  rest  of  the  space  cropped :  so 
herb-gardens  stood  in  the  midst  of  vineyards 
(Peah.  v.  5).  Fig.  9  shows  a  corn-field  with  olives 
about  and  amidst  it. 


The  wheat,  &c,  was  reaped  by  the  sickle  (the 
word  for  which  is  £^P"in  in  Deut.,  and  ?|0  in  Jer. 
and  Joel),  either  the  ears  merely,  in  the  "  Picenian  " 
method  (Varr.  de  Re  Rust.  i.  50),  or  stalk  and  all, 
or  it  was  pulled  by  the  roots  (Peah.  v.  10).     It 


Fig  10.— Reaping  wheat.— (Wilkinson,  Tombs  of  the  Kings— Ttiebes.) 


was  bound  in  sheaves — a  process  prominent  in  Scrip- 
ture, and  described  by  a  peculiar  word,  "U3J? — or 


11.— Pulling  up  tl 


supra.) 


AGRICULTURE 

I,  mjmp?,  i"  the  form  of  a  helmet, 
DINDD'O?  of  a  turban  (of  which,  however,  see 
another  explanation,  Buxt.  Lex.  s.  v.  niDfo-13). 
or   rmni?  of  a  cake.     The  sheaves  or  heaps  were 


• 


carted  (Am.  ii.  13)  to  the  floor — a  circular  spot  of 
hard  ground,  probably,  as  now,  from  50  to  80  or 
100  feet  in  diameter.  Such  floors  were  probably  per- 
manent, and  became  well  known  spots  (Gen.  1.  10, 
11 ;  2  Sam.  xxiv.  16,  18).  On  these  the  oxen,  &c, 
forbidden  to  be  muzzled  (Deut.  xxv.  4),  trampled  out 


AGRICULTURE 


31 


Fig.  13.—  Threshing-floor.  The  oxen  driven  rouml  the  h>ap  ;  contrary 
to  the  usual  custom.— (Wilkinson,  Thebes.) 

the  grain,  as  we  find  represented  in  the  Egyptian 
monuments.  At  a  later  time  the  Jews  used  a 
threshing  sledge  called  Mora]  (Is.  xli.  15  ;  2  Sam. 
xxiv.  22  ;  1  Chr.  xxi.  23),  probably  resembling 
the  iwreg,  still  employed  in  Egypt  (Wilkinson,  ii. 
p.  190) — a  stage  with  three  rollers  ridged  with  iron, 
which,  aided  by  the  driver's  weight,  crushed  out, 
often  injuring,  the  grain,  as  well  as  cut  or  tore  the 
straw,  which  thus  became  fit  for  fodder.  It  appears 
to  have  been  similar  to  the  Roman  tribulum  and  the 
Hum  Poenicum (Varr.de JR.  JR.i. 52).  Lighter 
grains  were  beaten  out  with  a  stick  (Is.  xxviii.  27). 


Barley  was  sometimes  soaked  and  then  parched 
before  treading  out,  which  got  rid  of  the  pellicle  of 
the  grain.  See  further  the  Antiquitates  Triturae, 
Ugolini,  vol.  29. 


Fig.  14.— Threshing  Instrument.— (From  FellouVa  Asm  Minor.) 

The  use  of  animal  manure  is  proved  frequent  by 

such  recurring  expressions  as  "  dung  on  the  face  of 
the  earth,  field,"  &c.  (Ps.  lxxxiii.  10  ;  2  K.  ix.  37  ; 
Jer.  viii.  2,  &c).  A  rabbi  limits  the  quantity  to 
three  heaps  of  ten  half-cors,  or  about  380  gallons, 
to  each  HKD  (=  J  of  ephah  of  grain,  Gesen.j,  and 
wishes  the  quantity  in  each  heap,  rather  than  their 
number,  to  be  increased  if  the  field  be  large 
(Schevoith,  cap.  iii.  2).  Nor  was  the  great  useful- 
ness of  sheep  to  the  soil  unrecognised  (ibid.  4), 
though,  owing  to  the  general  distinctness  of  the 
pastoral  life,  there  was  less  scope  for  it.  Vegetable 
ashes,  burnt  stubble,  &c.  were  also  used. 

The   "shovel"    and    "fan"    (fin"]  and  (TITO, 

Is.  xxx.  24,  but  their  precise  difference  is  very 
doubtful)  indicate  the  process  of  winnowing — a 
conspicuous  part  of  ancient  husbandry  (Ps.  xx.w. 
5  ;  Job  xxi.  18  ;  Is.  xvii.  13),  and  important  owing 
to  the  slovenly  threshing.  Evening  was  the  fa- 
vourite time  (Ruth  iii.  2)  when  there  was  mostly 
a  breeze.  The  PHIlO  (p~}\,  to  scatter) =irriov? 
(Matt.  iii.  12  ;  Horn.  Iliad,  xviii.  588),  was  perhaps 
a  broad  shovel  which  threw  the  grain  up  against 
the   wind;    while  the  TIPP   (akin  to  H-Vl?)   may 

have  been  a  fork  (still  used  in  Palestine  for  the 
same  purpose),  or  a  broad  basket  in  which  it  was 
tossed.  The  heap  of  produce  rendered  in  rent  was 
sometimes  customarily  so  large  as  to  cover  the 
Jirn  (Bava  Metzia,  ix.  2).  This  favours  the 
latter  view.  So  the  irrvov  was  a  corn-measure  in 
Cyprus,  and  the  Siirrvoy  =  ^  a  fietii/xi'os  (Liddell 
and  Scott,  Lex.  s.  v.  tztvov).  The  last  process  was 
the  shaking  in  a  sieve,  m33   cribrum,  to  separate 

dirt  aud  refuse  (Am.  ix.  9).  ' 


—  rreu.lin_'  out  the  t;rain  tiv  oxen,  and  winnoninj.      1.   Hakim;  up  the  ran*  to  the  centre.     ?.  The  ilriYer. 
»iil,  in  i  Wilkimon,  H  i 


3.  Winnowing, 


32  A  GRIP-PA 

Fields  and  floors  were  not.  commonly  enclosed ; 
vineyards  mostly  were,  with  a  tower  and  other 
buildings  (Num.  xxii.  '24;  Ps.  lxxx.  13;  Is.  v.  5; 
Matt.  xxi.  33;  comp.  Jud.  vi.  11).  Banks  of  mud 
from  ditches  were  also  used. 

With  regard  to  occupancy,  a  tenant  might  pay  a 
rixed  moneyed  rent  (Cant.  "viii.  11) — in  which  case 
he  was  called  "CL"',  and  was  compellable  to  keep 
the  ground  in  good  order;  or  a  stipulated  share  ot 
the  fruits  (2  Sam.  ix.  10 ;  Matt.  xxi.  34),  often  a 
half  or  a  third ;  but  local  custom  was  the  only 
rule :  in  this  case  he  was  called  ?3pD,  and  was 
more  protected,  the  owner  sharing  the  loss  of  .a 
short  or  spoilt  crop ;  so,  in  case  of  locusts,  blight, 
&c,  the  year's  rent  was  to  be  abated ;  or  he  might 
receive  such  share  as  a  salary — an  inferior  position — 
when  the  term  which  described  him  was  "131  n. 
It  was  forbidden  to  sow  flax  during  a  short  occu- 
pancy  (hence  leases  for  terms  of  years  would  seem 
to  have  been  common),  lest  the  soil  should  be  un- 
duly exhausted  (comp.  Georg.  i.  77).  A  passer-by 
might  eat  any  quantity  of  corn  or  grapes,  but  not 
reap  or  carry  off  fruit  (Deut.  xxiii.  24-25 ;  Matt, 
xii.  1). 

The  rights  of  the  comer  to  be  left,  and  of  glean- 
ing [Corner  ;  Gleaning],  formed  the  poor  man's 
claim  on  the  soil  for  support.  For  his  benefit,  too, 
a  sheaf  forgotten  in  carrying  to  the  floor  was  to  be 
left ;  so  also  with  regard  to  the  vineyard  and  the 
olive-grove  (Lev.  xix.  9,  10 ;  Deut.  xxiv.  19). 
Besides  there  seems  a  probability  that  every  third 
vear  a  second  tithe,  besides  the  priests', .was  paid 
for  the  poor  (Deut.  xiv.  28.  xxvi.  12  ;  Am.  iv.  4; 
Tob.  i.  7 ;  Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  8).  On  this  doubtful 
point  of  the  poor  man's  tithe  (^JJ?  "ICPO)  see  a 
learned  note  by  Sureuhusius,  ad  Peah.  viii.  2. 
These  rights,  in  case  two  poor  men  were  partners 
in  occupancy,  might  be  conveyed  by  each  to  the 
other  for  half  the  field,  and  thus  retained  between 
them  (Maimon.  ad  Peah.  v.  5).  Sometimes  a  cha- 
ritable owner  declared  his  ground  common,  when 
its  fruits,  as  those  of  the  sabbatical  year,  went  to 
the  poor.  For  three  years  the  fruit  of  newly- 
planted  trees  was  deemed  uncircumcised  and  for- 
bidden ;  in  the  4th  it  was  holy,  as  first-fruits ;  in 
the  5th  it  might  be  ordinarily  eaten  (Mishna  Arlah, 
passim).  For  the  various  classical  analogies,  see 
Diet,  of  Gr.  and  Rom.  Antiq.  s.  v.  [H.  H.] 

AGRIP'PA.     [Herod.] 

A'GUR  O-IJN,  from  -|JK?  to  collect),  an  un- 
known Israelite  sage,  the  author  of  the  sayings 
contained  in  Prov.  xxx.  He  is  called  the  son  of 
Jakeh,  and  addressed  his  advice  to  Ithiel  and  Ucal. 
Jerome  and  Raschi  consider  this  a  symbolical  name 
of  Solomon  himself.  But  this  is  inconsistent  with 
the  designation  np"'"J3,  son  of  Jakeh;  since  Solomon 
is  described  in  the  same  book  as  T)T23  son  of 
David.  [R.V.  B.] 

A'HAB  (3XnS% ;  AXadp ;  Achdb),  son  of 
Omri,  seventh  king  of  the  separate  kingdom  of 
Israel,  and  second  of  his  dynasty.  The  great 
lesson  which  we  learn  from  his  life  is  the  depth 
of  wickedness  into  which  a  weak  man  may  fall, 
even  though  not  devoid  of  good  feelings  and  amiable 
impulses,  when  he  abandons  himself  to  the  guidance 
of  another  person,  resolute,  unscrupulous,  and  de- 
praved. The  cause  of  his  ruin  was  his  marriage 
with  Jezebel,  daughter  of  Ethbaal,  or  Eithobal,  king 


AHAB 

ot  Tyre,  who  had  been  priest  of  Astarte,  but  had 
usurped  the  throne  of  his  brother  Phalles  (compare 
Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  13,  2,  with  a.  Apion.  i.  18). 
If  she  resembles  the  Lady  Macbeth  of  our  great 
dramatist,  Ahab  has  hardly  Macbeth's  energy  and 
determination,  though  he  was  probably  by  nature  a 
better  man.  We  have  a  comparatively  full  account 
of  Ahab's  reign,  because  it  was  distinguished  by 
the  ministry  of  the  great  prophet  Elijah,  who  was 
brought  into  direct  collision  with  Jezebel,  when  she 
ventured  to  introduce  into  Israel  the  impure  wor- 
ship of  Baal  and  her  father's  goddess  Astarte.  In 
obedience  to  her  wishes,  Ahab  caused  a  temple  to 
be  built  to  Baal  in  Samaria  itself,  and  an  oracular 
grove  to  be  consecrated  to  Astarte.  With  a  fixed 
determination  to  extirpate  the  true  religion,  Jezebel 
hunted  down  and  put  to  death  God's  prophets, 
some  of  whom  were  concealed  in  caves  by  Obadiah, 
the  governor  of  Ahab's  house;  while  the  Phoenician 
rites  were  carried  on  with  such  splendour,  that  we 
read  of  450  prophets  of  Baal,  and  400  of  Asherah. 
(See  1  K.  xviii.  19,  where  our  version  follows  the 
LXX.  in  erroneously  substituting  "  the  groves*' 
for  the  proper  name  Asherah,  as  again  in  2  K. 
xxi.  7,  xxiii.  6.)  [Asherah.]  How  the  worship 
of  God  was  restored,  and  the  idolatrous  priests  slain, 
in  consequence  of  "  a  sore  famine  in  Samaria,"  will 
be  more  properly  related  under  the  article  Elijah. 
But  heathenism  and  persecution  were  not  the  only 
crimes  into  which  Jezebel  led  her  yielding  husband. 
One  of  his  chief  tastes  was  for  splendid  architecture, 
which  he  showed  by  building  an  ivory  house  and 
several  cities,  and  also  by  ordering  the  restoration 
and  fortification  of  Jericho,  which  seems  to  have 
belonged  to  Israel,  and  not  to  Judah,  as  it  is  said 
to  have  been  rebuilt  in  the  days  of  Ahab,  rather 
than  in  those  of  the  contemporary  king  of  Judah, 
Jehoshaphat  (1  K.  xvi.  34).  But  the  place  in  which 
he  chiefly  indulged  this  passion  was  the  beautiful 
city  of  Jezreel  (now  Zerhi),  in  the  plain  of  Es- 
draelon,  which  he  adorned  with  a  palace  and  park 
for  his  own  residence,  though  Samaria  remained 
the  capital  of  his  kingdom,  Jezreel  standing  in  the 
same  relation  to  it  as  the  Versailles  of  the  old 
French  monarchy  to  Paris  (Stanley.  S.  §  P.  244). 
Desiring  to  add  to  his  pleasure-grounds  there  the 
vineyard  of  his  neighbour  Naboth,  he  proposed  to 
buy  it  or  give  land  in  exchange  for  it ;  and  when 
this  was  refused  by  Naboth,  in  accordance  with  the 
Mosaic  law,  on  the  ground  that  the  vineyard  was 
"  the  inheritance  of  his  fathers"  (Lev.  xxv.  23),  a 
false  accusation  of  blasphemy  was  brought  against 
him,  and  not  only  was  he  himself  stoned  to  death, 
but  his  sons  also,  as  we  learn  from  2  K.  ix.  26. 
Elijah,  already  the  great  vindicator  of  religion,  now 
appeared  as  the  assertor  of  morality,  and  declared 
that  the  entire  extirpation  of  Ahab's  house  was  the 
penalty  appointed  for  his  long  course  of  wickedness, 
now  crowned  by  this  atrocious  crime.  The  execu- 
tion, however,  of  this  sentence  was  delayed  in  con- 
sequence of  Ahab's  deep  repentance.  The  remaining 
part  of  the  first  book  of  Kings  is  occupied  by  an 
account  of  the  Syrian  wars,  which  originally  seems 
to  have  been  contained  in  the  last  two  chapters.  It 
is  much  more  natural  to  place  the  20th  chapter 
after  the  21st,  and  so  bring  the  whole  history  of 
these  wars  together,  than  to  interrupt  the  narrative 
by  interposing  the  story  of  Naboth  between  the 
20th  and  22nd,  especially  as  the  beginning  of  the 
22nd  seems  to  follow  naturally  from  the  end  of  the 
20th.  And  this  arrangement  is  actually  found  in  the 
LXX.  and  confirmed  by  the  narrative  of  Josephus. 


AHAKHEL 

We  read  of  three  campaigns  which  Ahab  undertook 
against  Benhadad  11.  king  of  Damascus,  two  defensive 
and  ono  offensive.     In  the  first,  Benhadad  laid  siege 

to  Samaria,  and  Ahab.  encouraged  1  w  the  patriotic 
counsels  of  God's  prophets,  who,  next  to  the  true 
religion,  valued  must  deeply  the  independence  of 
His  chosen  people,  made  a  sudden  attack  on  him 
whilst  in  the  plenitude  of  arrogant  confidence  he 
was  banqueting  in  his  tent  with  his  32  vassal  kings. 
The  Syrians  were  totally  routed,  and  tied  to  Da- 
mascus. 

N  i  ■  \  t  year  Benhadad,  believing  that  his  failure 
was  owing  to  some  peculiar  power  which  the  God 
of  Israel  exercised  over  the  hills,  invaded  Israel  by 
way  of  Aphek,  on  the  E.  of  Jordan  (Stanley,  S.  4' 
J'.  App.  §6).  Yet  Ahab's  victory  was  so  complete 
that  Benhadad  himself  fell  into  his  hands  ;  but  was 
released  (contrary  to  the  will  of  God  as  announced 
by  a  prophet)  on  condition  of  restoring  all  the  cities 
of  Israel  which  he  held,  and  making  "  streets  "  for 
Ahab  in  Damascus;  that  is,  admitting  into  his 
capital  permanent  Hebrew  commissioners,  in  an 
independent  position,  with  special  dwellings  for 
themselves  and  their  retinues,  to  watch  over  the 
commercial  and  political  interests  of  Ahab  and  his 
subjects.  This  was  apparently  in  retaliation  for  a 
similar  privilege  exacte  I  by  Benhadad's  predecessor 
from  Omri  in  respect  to  Samaria.  After  this  great 
success  Ahab  enjoyed  peace  for  three  years,  and  it  is 
difficult  to  account  exactly  for  the  third  outbreak 
of  hostilities,  which  in  Kings  is  briefly  attributed 
to  an  attack  made  by  Ahab  on  Ramoth  in  Gilead 
on  the  east  of  Jordan,  in  conjunction  with  Jeho- 
shaphat  king  of  Judah,  which  town  he  claimed  as 
belonging  to  Israel.  But  if  Ramoth  was  one  of 
the  cities  which  Benhadad  agreed  to  restore,  why 
diil  Ahab  wait  for  three  years  to  enforce  the  fulfil- 
ment of  the  treaty?  From  this  difficulty,  and  the 
extreme  bitterness  shown  by  Benhadad  against  Ahab 
personally  (1  K.  xxii.  :J1),  it  seems  probable  that 
this  was  not  the  case  (or  at  all  events  that  the 
Syrians  did  not  so  understand  the  treaty),  but  that 
Ahab,  now  strengthened  by  Jehoshaphat,  who  must 
have  felt  keenly  the  paramount  importance  of 
crippling  the  power  of  Syria,  originated  the  war 
by  assaulting  Ramoth  without  any  immediate  pro- 
vocation. In  any  case,  (iod's  blessing  did  not  rest 
on  the  expedition,  and  Ahab  was  told  by  the  prophet 
Micaiah  that  it  would  fail,  and  that  the  prophets 
who  advised  it  were  hurrying  him  to  his  ruin.  For 
giving  this  warning  Micaiah  was  imprisoned;  but 
Ahab  was  so  far  roused  by  it  as  to  take  the  pre- 
caution  of  disguising  himself,  so  as  not  to  offer  a 
conspicuous  mark  to  the  archers  of  Benhadad.    But 

he  was  slain  by  a  "certain  man  who  drew  a  bow  at 
a  venture ;"  and  though  staid  up  in  his  chariot  for 
a  time,  yet  he  died  towards  evening,  and  his  army 
dispersal.  When  he  was  brought  to  be  buried  in 
Samaria,  the  dogs  ticked  up  his  blood  as  a  servant 
was  washing  his  chariot  ;  a  partial  fulfilment  of 
Elijah's  prediction  (1  K.  xxi.  19),  which  was  more 
litei all v  accomplished  in  the  case  of  his  son  (■_'  K. 
ix.  26).  Josephus,  however,  substitutes  Jeznel  for 
Samaria  in  the  former  passage  ( Ant.  v'ui.  1.',,  6). 
'I'he  date  of  Ahab's  accession  is  919  n.c. ;  of  his 
death,  B.C.  897. 

2.  A  Lying  prophet,  who  deceived  the  captivi 
Israelites  in  Babylon,  and  was  burnt  to  death  by 
Nebuchadnezzar,  Jer.  xxix.  21.         |<;.  E.  I..  C] 

AHAR'HEL  ('prnnN  ;  aSekcpbs  'Pr,xoj8  ; 
Aharehel),  name  of  a  man  (1  Chr.  h  , 


AHASUERUS 


33 


AHAS'AI  OTriN;  Ahazi),  a  man  called  Jah- 
ZERAH  (iTT?n*)  iii  1  Chr.  ix.  12.  Gesenius  con- 
jectures that  we  should  read  Ahaziah  (iVTriN)  in 
both  passages. 

AHASBAT  C3pnX  ;  'ArrPirov  ;  Aasbai), 
name  of  a  man  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  '.'A). 

AHASUE'RUS  (CTnip'nN  ;  'AoWrjpos, 
LAX.,  but  'Acurjpos,  Tob.  xiv.  15,  A.  V.;  Assuerus, 
Vulg.),  the  name  of  one  Median  and  two  Persian 
kings  mentioned  in  the  Old  Testament.  It  may  be 
desirable  to  prefix  to  this  article  a  chronological  table 
of  the  Medo-Persian  kings  from  Cyaxares  to  Artax- 
erxes  Longimanus,  according  to  their  ordinary  class- 
ical  names.  The  Scriptural  names  conjectured  to 
correspond  to  them  in  this  article  and  ARTAXERX  i;s 
are  added  in  italics. 

1.  Cyaxares,  king  of  Media,  son  of  Phraortes, 
grandson  of  Deioces  and  conqueror  of  Nineveh,  be- 
gan to  reign  B.C.  634.     Alutsuerus. 

2.  Astyages  his  son,  last  king  of  Media,  n.c 
594.     Darius  the  Mede. 

3.  Cyrus,  son  of  his  daughter  Mandane  and  Cam- 
byses,  a  Persian  noble,  first  king  of  Persia,  559. 
Cyrus. 

4.  Cambyses  his  son,  529.     AJiasuerus. 

5.  A  Magian  usurper,  who  personates  Smerdis, 
the  younger  son  of  Cyrus,  521.     Artaxerxes. 

6.  Darius  Hystaspis,  raised  to  the  throne  on  the 
overthrow  of  the  Magi,  521.     Darius. 

7.  Xerxes,  his  son,  485.     Ahasuerus. 

8.  Artaxerxes  Longimanus  (Macrocheir),  his  son. 
465-495.     Artaxerxes. 

The  name  Ahasuerus  or  Achashverosh  i--  the 
same  as  the  Sanscrit  kshatra,  a  king,  which  appears 
as  kshershe  in  the  aiTow-headed  inscriptions  of'Perse- 
polis,  and  to  this  in  its  Hebrew  form  N  prosthetic  is 
prefixed  (see  Gibbs'  Gesenius  N).  This  name  in 
one  of  its  Greek  forms  is  Xerxes,  explained  by  Herod. 
(vi.  98)  to  mean  ap-qtos,  a  signification  sufficiently 
near  that  of  king. 

1.  In  Dan.  ix.  1,  Ahasuerus  is  said  to  be  the 
father  of  Darius  the  Mede.  Now  it  is  almost  certain 
that  Cyaxares  is  a  form  of  Ahasuerus,  grecised  into 
Axares  with  the  prefix  Cy-  or  Kai-,  common  to  the 
Kaianian  dynasty  of  kings  (Malcolm's  Persia,  ch. 
iii.),  with  which  may  be  compared  Kai  Ehosroo,  the 
Persian  name  of  Cyrus.  The  son  of  thia»Cyaxares 
was  Astyages,  audit  is  no  improbable  conjecture  that 
Darius  the  Mede  was  Astyages,  set  over  Babylon  as 
viceroy  by  his  grandson  Cyrus,  and  allowed  to  live 
there  in  royal  state.  (See  Rawlinson's  Herodotus, 
vol.  i.  Essay  iii.  §11.)  [Darius.]  This  first  Aha- 
suerus, then,  is  Cyaxares,  the  conqueror  of  Nineveh. 
And  in  accordance  with  this  view,  we  lead  in  Tobit, 
xiv.  15,  that  Nineveh  was  taken  by  Nabuchodonosoi 
and  Assuerus,  i.  <•.  Cyaxares. 

2.  In  Ezra  iv.  6,  the  enemies  of  the  Jews,  after 
the  death  of  Cyrus,  desirous  to  frustrate  the  building 
of  Jerusalem,  Bend  accusations  against  them  to 
Ahasuerus  kiiiL,r  of  Persia.  This  must  be  Cambyses. 
For  we  read  (v.  5)  thai  their  opposition  continued 

from  the  time  ot'Cvrus  to  that  of  I  >;u  ius,  and  Aha- 
suerus and  Artaxerxes,  i.e.  Cambyses  and  the  Pseu- 
do-emerdis,  are  mentioned  as  reigning  between  them. 
("Aim 'AXERXE6.  j  XenophoD  (Cyr.  viii.)  calls  the 
brother  of  Cambyses  Tanyoxares,  i.  . .  the  younger 
.  whence  we  inter  that  the  elder  Oxares  oi 
Axares, or  Ahasuerus,  was  Cambyses.  His  constant 
wars  probably  prevented  him  from  interfering  in  the 

D 


34 


AHAVA 


concerns  of  the  Jews.  He  was  plainly  called  after 
his  grandfather,  who  was  not  of  royal  race,  and  there- 
fore it  is  very  likely  that  lie  also  assumed  the  kingly 
name  or  title  of  Axares  or  Cyaxares  which  had  been 
borne  by  his  most  illustrious  ancestor. 

3.  The  third  is  the  Ahasuerus  of  the  book  of 
Esther.  It  is  needless  to  give  more  than  the  heads 
of  the  well-known  story.  Having  divorced  his 
queen  Vashti  for  refusing  to  appear  in  public  at  a 
banquet,  he  married  four  years  afterwards  the  Jewess 
Esther,  cousin  and  ward  of  Mordecai.  Five  years 
after  this,  Haitian,  one  of  his  counsellors,  having 
been  slighted  by  Mordecai,  prevailed  upon  him  to 
order  the  destruction  of  all  the  Jews  in  the  empire. 
But  before  the  day  appointed  for  the  massacre,  Esther 
and  Mordecai  overthrew  the  influence  which  Haman 
had  exercised,  and  so  completely  changed  his  feelings 
in  the  matter,  that  they  induced  him  to  put  Hainan 
to  death,  and  to  give  the  Jews  the  right  of  self- 
defence.  This  they  used  so  vigorously,  that  they 
killed  several  thousands  of  their  opponents.  Now 
from  the  extent  assigned  to  the  Persian  empire 
(Esth.  i.  1),  "  from  India  even  unto  Ethiopia,"  it 
is  proved  that  Darius  Hystaspis  is  the  earliest  pos- 
sible king  to  whom  this  history  can  apply,  and  it  is 
hardly  worth  while  to  consider  the  claims  of  any 
after  Artaxerxes  Longimanus.  But  Ahasuerus  can- 
not be  identical  with  Darius,  whose  wives  were  the 
daughters  of  Cyrus  and  Otanes,  and  who  in  name 
and  character  equally  differs  from  that  foolish  tyrant. 
Neither  can  he  be  Artaxerxes  Longimanus,  although 
as  Artaxerxes  is  a  compound  of  Xerxes,  there  is  less 
difficulty  here  as  to  the  name.  But  in  the  first 
place  the  character  of  Artaxerxes,  as  given  by  Plu- 
tarch and  by  Diodorus  (xi.  71),  is  also  very  unlike 
that  of  Ahasuerus.  Besides  this,  in  Ezra  vii.  1-7, 
11-26,  Artaxerxes,  in  the  seventh  year  of  his  reign, 
issues  a  decree  very  favourable  to  the  Jews,  and 
it  is  unlikely  therefore  that  in  the  twelfth  (Esth. 
iii.  7)  Haman  could  speak  to  him  of  them  as  if  he 
knew  nothing  about  them,  and  persuade  him  to 
sentence  them  to  an  indiscriminate  massacre.  We 
are  therefore  reduced  to  the  belief  that  Ahasuerus  is 
Xerxes  (the  names  being,  as  we  have  seen,  identical) : 
and  this  conclusion  is  fortified  by  the  resemblance  of 
character,  and  by  certain  chronological  indications.  As 
Xerxes  scourged  the  sea,  and  put  to  death  the  engineers 
of  his  bridge,  because  their  work  was  injured  by  a 
storm,  so  Ahasuerus  repudiated  his  queen  Vashti  be- 
cause she  would  not  violate  the  decorum  of  her  sex,  and 
ordered  the  massacre  of  the  whole  Jewish  people  to 
gratify  the  malice  of  Hainan.  In  the  third  year  of 
the  reign  of  Xerxes  was  held  an  assembly  to  arrange 
the  Grecian  war  (Herod,  vii.  7  ft".).  In  the  third 
»  year  of  Ahasuerus  was  held  a  great  feast  and  assem- 
bly in  Shushan  the  palace  (Esth.  i.  3).  In  the 
seventh  year  of  his  reign  Xerxes  returned  defeated 
from  Greece,  and  consoled  himself  by  the  pleasures 
of  the  harem  (Herod,  ix.  108).  In  the  seventh 
year  of  his  reign  "  fair  young  virgins  were  sought  " 
for  Ahasuerus,  and  he  replaced  Vashti  by  marrying 
Esther.  The  tribute  he  "  laid  upon  the  land  and 
upon  the  isles  of  the  sea"  (Esth.  x.  1)  may  well 
have  been  the  result  of  the  expenditure  and  ruin  of 
the  Grecian  expedition.  Throughout  the  book  of 
Esther  in  the  LXX.  '  Kpra^ep^s  is  written  for  Aha- 
suerus, but  on  this  no  argument  of  anv  weight  can 
be  founded.  [G.  E.  L.  C.] 

AHA'VA(NinX;   9 'Evi,  o  'Aoue;   Ahava), 

a  place  CEzr.  viii.  15),  or  a  river  ("li"D)  (viii.  25), 
on  the  banks  of  which  Ezra  collected   the  second 


AHAZ 

expedition  which  returned  with  him  from  Babylon 
to  Jerusalem.  Various  have  been  the  conjectures  as 
to  its  locality  :  c.  g.  Adiaba  (Leclerc  and  Manner!)  ; 
Abeh  or  Aveh(Hiivernick,  see  Winer);  the  Great  Zab 
(Roseiimiiller,Z>(6.  Geogr.).  But  the  latest  researches 
are  in  favour  of  its  being  the  modern  Hit,  on  the 
Euphrates,  due  east  of  Damascus,  the  name  of  which 
is  known  to  have  been  in  the  post-biblical  times  Ihi, 
or  Ihi  da-kira  (Talm.  NTpT  KW),  "  the  spring  of 
bitumen."  See  Rawlinson's  Herodotus,  i.  316,  note. 
In  the  apocryphal  Esdras  the  name  is  given 
Qepds.  Josephus  (Ant.  xi.  5,  §  2)  merely  says  els 
to  Trepav  tov  EixppaTOv.  [*-*]• 

A'HAZ    (TnX,   possessor ;    'Axaf,    Joseph. ; 

'Ax^C7?*  i  Achaz),  eleventh  king  of  Judah,  son  of 
Jotliam,  ascended  the  throne  in  the  20th  year  of 
his  age,  according  to  2  K.  xvi.  2.  But  this  must  be 
a  transcriber's  error  for  the  25th,  which  number 
is  found  in  one  Hebrew  MS.,  the  LXX.,  the 
Peshito,  and  Arabic  version  of  2  Chr.  xxviii.  1  ; 
for  otherwise,  his  s"on  Hezekiah  was  bom  when  he 
was  eleven  years  old  (so  Clinton,  Fasti  Hell.,  vol. 
i.  p.  318).  At  the  time  of  his  accession,  Rezin 
king  of  Damascus  and  Pekah  king  of  Israel  had 
recently  formed  a  league  against  Judah,  and  they 
proceeded  to  lay  siege  to  Jerusalem,  intending  to 
place  on  the  throne  Ben  Tabeal,  who  was  not  a 
prince  of  the  royal  family  of  Judah.  but  probably 
a  Syrian  noble.  Upon  this  the  great  Prophet 
Isaiah,  full  of  zeal  for  God  and  patriotic  loyalty  to 
the  house  of  David,  hastened  to  give  advice  and 
encouragement  to  Ahaz,  and  it  was  probably  owing 
to  the  spirit  of  energy  and  religious  devotion  which 
he  poured  into  his  counsels,  that  the  allies  tailed 
in  their  attack  on  Jerusalem.  Thus  much,  together 
with  anticipations  of  danger  from  the  Assyrians, 
and  a  general  picture  of  weakness  and  unfaithful- 
ness both  in  the  king  and  the  people,  we  find  in 
the  famous  prophecies  of  the  7th,  8th,  and  9th 
chapters  of  Isaiah,  in  which  he  seeks  to  animate 
and  support  them  by  the  promise  of  the  Messiah. 
From  2  K.  xvi.  and  2  Chr.  xxviii.  we  learn  that 
the  allies  took  a  vast  number  of  captives,  who, 
however,  were  restored  in  virtue  of  the  remon- 
strances of  the  prophet  Oded ;  and  that  they  also 
inflicted  a  most  severe  injury  on  Judah  by  the 
capture  of  Elath.  a  flourishing  port  on  the  Red  Sea, 
in  which,  after  expelling  the  Jews,  they  reestab- 
lished the  Edomites  (according  to  the  true  reading 
of   2    K.    xvi.    6,    D^HN    for    CphX),    who 

attacked  and  wasted  the  E.  part  of  Judah,  while 
the  Philistines  invaded  the  W.  and  S.  The  weak- 
minded  and  helpless  Ahaz  sought  deliverance  from 
these  numerous  troubles  by  appealing  to  Tiglath- 
pileser  king  of  Assyria,  who  freed  him  from  his 
most  formidable  enemies  by  invading  Syria,  taking 
Damascus,  killing  Rezin,  and  depriving  Israel  of  its 
Northern  and  Transjordanic  districts.  But  Ahaz 
had  to  purchase  this  help  at  a  costly  price:  he 
became  tributary  to  Tiglath-pileser,  sent  him  all  the 
treasures  of  the  Temple  and  his  own  palace,  and 
even  appeared  before  him  in  Damascus  as  a  vassal. 
He  also  ventured  to  seek  for  safety  in  heathen 
ceremonies ;  making  his  son  pass  through  the  fire 
to  Moloch,  consulting  wizards  and  necromancers 
(Is.  viii.  19),  sacrificing  to  the  Syrian  gods,  intro- 
ducing a  foreign  altar  from  Damascus,  and  probably 
the  worship  of  the  heavenly  bodies  from  Assyria  and 
Babylon,  as  he  would  seem  to  have  set  up  the  horses 
of  the  sun  mentioned  in  2  K.  xxiii.  1 1  (cf.  Tac.  Ann. 


AHAZIAH 

xii.  13);  and  "the  altars  on  the  top  (or  roof)  of 
the  upper  chamber  of  Ahaz  "  (2  K.  xxiii.  12)  were 
connected  with  the  adoration  of  the  stars.  We  see 
another  and  blameless  result  of  this  intercourse 
with  an  astronomical  people  in  the  "  sundial  of 
Ahaz,"  Is.  xxxviii.  8.  He  died  after  a  reign  of  10 
years,  lasting  B.C.  740-724.  [G.  E.  L.  C] 

AHAZI'AH  (nnnX,  -innnx,  whom  Jehovah 

sustains;  'Oxofi'as ;  Oohozias).  1.  SonofAhab 
and  Jezebel,  and  eighth  king  of  Israel.  After  the 
battle  of  Ramoth  in  Gilead  [Ahais]  the  Syrians 
had  the  command  of  the  country  along  the  east  of 
Jordan,  and  they  cut  oil' all  communication  between 
the  Israelites  and  Moabites,  so  that  the  vassal  king 
of  Moab  refused  his  yearly  tribute  of  liiii.iinii 
lambs  and  100,000  rams  with  their  wool  (romp. 
Is.  xvi.  1).  Before  Ahaziah  could  take  measures 
for  enforcing  his  claim,  he  was  seriously  injured  by  a. 
fall  through  a  lattice  in  his  palace  at  Samaria.  In  his 
health  he  had  worshipped  his  mother's  gods,  and  now 
he  sent  to  inquire  of  the  oracle  of  Baalzebub  in  the 
Philistine  city  of  Ekron  whether  he  should  recover  his 
health.  But  Elijah,  who  now  for  the  hist  time  exer- 
cised the  prophetic  office,  rebuked  him  for  this  im- 
piety, and  announced  to  him  his  approaching  death. 
He  reigned  two  years  (B.C.  896,  895).  The  only 
other  recorded  transaction  of  his  reign,  his  endeavour 
to  join  the  king  of  Judah  in  trading  to  Ophir,  is 
more  fitly  related  under  JeHOSHAPHAT  (1  K.  xxii. 
50  if. ;  2  K.  i. ;   2  Chr.  xx.  35  if.). 

2.  Fifth  king  of  Judah,  son  of  Jehoram  and 
Athaliah,  daughter  of  Ahab,  and  therefore  nephew 
of  the  preceding  Ahaziah.  He  is  called  Azariah, 
2  Chr.  xxii.  6,  probably  by  a  copyist's  error,  and 
Jehoahaz,  2  Chr.  xxi.  17.  Ewald  (Geschichte 
des  Folks  Israel,  iii.  p.  525)  thinks  that  his  name 
was  changed  to  Ahaziah  on  his  accession,  but  the 
LXX.  read  'Oxofias  for  Jehoahaz,  and  with  this 
agree  the  Peshito,  Chald.,  and  Arab.  So  too  while 
in  2  K.  viii.  26  we  read  that  he  was  22  years 
old  at  his  accession,  we  find  in  2  Chr.  xxii.  2  that 
his  age  at  that  time  was  42.  The  former  number 
is  certainly  right,  as  in  2  Chr.  xxi.  5,  20,  we  see 
that  his  father  Jehoram  was  40  when  lie  died, 
which  would  make  him  younger  than  his  own  son, 
so  that  a  transcriber  must  have  confounded  DD 
(22)  and  DO  (42).  Ahaziah  was  an  idolater, 
"  walking  in  all  the  ways  of  the  house  of  Ahab," 
and  In1  allied  himself  with  his  uncle  Jehoram  king 
of  Israel,  brother  and  successor  of  the  preceding 
Ahaziah,  against  Hazael,  the  new  king  oi'  Syria. 
The  two  kings  were,  however,  defeated  at  Ramoth, 
where  Jehoram  was' so  severely  wounded  that  he 
retired  to  his  mother's  palace  at  Jezreel  to  be 
healed.  The  union  between  the  uncle  and  nephew 
was   so    close    that    there    was    great    danger    lest 

heathenism  should  entirely  overspread  both  the 
Hebrew  kingdoms,  but  this  was  prevented  by  the 
great  revolution  carried  oat  in  Israel  by  Jehu  under 
the  guidance  of  Elisha,  which  involved  the  house 
id  in  calamities  only  less  severe  than  those 
which  exterminated  the  house  of  Omri  It  broke 
out  while  Ahaziah  was  visiting  his  uncle  at    ; 

As  Jehu  approached  the  town.  Jehoram  and  Ahaziah 
went  out  to  meet  him,  either  from  not  suspecting 
his  designs,  or  to  prevent  them.  The  former  was 
shot   through   the   heart   by  Jehu,   Ahaziah  was 

pursued  as  far  as  the  pas,  ofGur,  near  the  city  ot 
Ibleam.  and  there  mortally  wounded.  He  died  when 
he  reached  Megiddo.     But  in  2  Chr.  x\ii.  9,  it  is 


AHIJAH 


35 


said  that  he  was  found  hidden  in  Samaria  after  the 
death  of  Jehoram,  brought  to  Jehu,  and  killed  by 
his  orders.  Attempts  to  reconcile  these  accounts 
may  be  found  in  Pole's  Synopsis,  in  Lightfoot's 
Harm,  of  old  Test,  (in  loc),  ami  in  Davidson's 
Textofthe  Old  Testament,  part  ii.  book  ii.  ch.xiv. 
Ahaziah  reigned  one  year,  B.C.  884,  called  the  12th 
of  Jehoram  king  of  Israel,  2  K.  viii.  25,  the  11th, 
2  K.  ix.  29.  His  father  therefore  must  have  died 
before  the  11th  of  Jehoram  was  concluded  (Clinton, 
Fasti  Hell.,  i.  p.  324).  [G.  E.  L.  C] 

AH'BAN  (|DriN  ;  'Axafidp  ;  Ahobban),  name 
of  a  man  (1  Chr.  ii.  29). 

AH'ER  ("inx  ;  'A6p  ;  Alio-),  name  of  a  man 
(1  Chr.  vii.  12). 

A'HI  OIIX,  conuected  by  LXX.  and  Vulg.  with 
JIN    brother,  and  hence  translated  in  LXX.  by  a5eA- 

T  " 

cpov,  and  in  Vulg.  by  fratres,  in  1  Chr.  v.  15  ; 
but  in  1  Chr.  vii.  34,  we  find  'Axip,  and  Ahi : 
Gesen.  thinks  it  a  contraction  of  Ahijah,  iTTIX) 
name  of  two  men  (1  Chr.  v.  15 ;  vii.  34). 

AHI'AH.     [Ahijah.] 

AHI'AM  (DKTttJ,  for  D^IIX,  Gesen. ;  'A,u- 

vav ;  Ahiam),  son  of  Sharar  the  Hararite  (or  of 
Sacar,  1  Chr.  xi.  35),  one  of  David's  30  mighty 
men  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  33). 

AHIAN  (pnX  ;  'Afyi ;  Ahin),  name  of  a  man 

(1  Chr.  vii.  19)7 

AHIE'ZER  ("ItJPnK  ;    'Ax^P  ;    Akiezer). 

1.  Son  of  Ammishaddai,  hereditary  chieftain  of  the 
tribe  of  Dan  under  the  administration  of  Moses 
(Num.  i.  12,  ii.  25,  vii.  66). 

2.  The  Benjamite  chief  of  a  body  of  archers  at 
the  time  of  David  (1  Chr.  xii.  3).         [R.  W.  B.] 

AHI'HUD  O-VnX ;  'AXiV>  Ahihud).  1.  The 
son  of  Shelomi,  ami  prince  of  the  tribe  of  Asher, 
selected  to  assist  Joshua  and  Eh'azar  in  the  division 
of  the  Promised  Laud  (Num.  xxxiv.  27). 

2.  (TnTlN;  'Iox'X^-J  Ahind),  chieftain  of  the 

tribe  of  Benjamin  (1  Chr.  viii.  7).         [R.  W.  B.] 

AHI'JAH,  or  AHI'AH  (fWlK  and  -ln»ns* ; 

'Ax'«  ;  Achias).  1.  Son  of  Ahitub,  Ichabod's 
brother,  the  son  of  Phinehas,  the  son  ot  Eli 
(1  Sam.  xiv.  3,  18).  He  is  described  as  being  the 
Lord's  priest  in  Shiloh,  wearing  an  ephod.  And 
it  appears  that  the  ark  of  God  was  under  his  care, 
and  that  he  inquired  of  the  Lord  by  means  of  it 
and  the  ephod  (comp.  1  Chr.  xiii.  3).  There  is, 
however,  great  difficulty  in  reconciling  the  state- 
ment in  1  Sam.  xiv.  18,  concerning  the  ark  being 
used  for  imputing  by  Ahijah  at  Saul's  bidding,  and 
the  statement  that  they  inquired  not  at  the  ark  in 
the  days  of  Saul,  it'  we  understand  the  latter  ex- 
pression  ill  the  strictest  sense.     This  difficulty  seems 

to  have  led  to  the  reading  in  the  Vatican  copy  of 

the  LXX.,  ot'  to  4(povS,  in   1   Sam.  xiv.   IS,  instead 
of  tV  KiS&un'bv,  or  rather  perhaps  of  llfiK,  instead 
of  ]1"1X,  in  the  Hebrew  codex  from  which  tl 
sion  was  made.     Others  avoid  the  difficulty  by  in- 
terpreting J1"IX  to  mean  a  cheW  for  carrying  about 

D2 


36 


AHIJAH 


the  ephod  in.  But  all  difficulty  will  disappear  if 
we  apply  the  expression  only  to  all  the  latter  years 
of  the  reign  of  Saul,  when  we  know  that  the  priestly 
establishment  was  at  Nob,  anil  not  at  Kirjath- 
jearim,  or  Banle  of  Judah,  where  the  ark  was.  But 
the  narrative  in  1  Sam.  xiv.  is  entirely  favourable 
to  the  mention  of  the  ark.  For  it  appeal's  that 
Saul  was  at  the  time  in  Gibeah  of  Benjamin,  and 
Gibeah  of  Benjamin  seems  to  have  been  the  place 
where  the  house  of  Abinadab  was  situated  (2  Sam. 
vi.  3),  being  probably  the  Benjamite  quarter  of 
Kirjath-jearim,  which  lay  on  the  very  borders  of 
Judah  and  Benjamin.  (See  Josh,  xviii.  14,  28.) 
Whether  it  was  the  encroachments  of  the  Philis- 
tines, or  an  incipient  schism  between  the  tribes  of 
Benjamin  and  Judah,  or  any  other  cause,  which 
led  to  the  disuse  of  the  ark  during  the  latter  years 
of  Saul's  reign,  is  difficult  to  say.  But  probably 
the  last  time  that  Ahijah  inquired  of  the  Lord 
before  the  ark  was  on  the  occasion  related  1  Sam. 
xiv.  ">i5,  when  Saul  marred  his  victory  over  the 
Philistines  by  his  rash  oath,  which  nearly  cost 
Jonathan  his  life.  For  we  there  read  that  when 
Saul  proposed  a  night-pursuit  of  the  Philistines, 
the  priest,  Ahijah,  said,  Let  us  draw  near  hither 
unto  God,  for  the  purpose,  namely,  of  asking  coun- 
sel of  God.  But  God  returned  no  answer,  in  con- 
sequence, as  it  seems,  of  Saul's  rash  curse.  If,  as 
is  commonly  thought,  and  as  seems  most  likely, 
Ahijah  is  the  same  person  as  Ahimelech  the  son  of 
Ahitub,  this  failure  to  obtain  an  answer  from  the 
priest,  followed  as  it  was  by  a  rising  of  the  people 
to  save  Jonathan  out  of  Saul's  hands,  may  have 
led  to  an  estrangement  between  the  king  and  the 
high-priest,  and  predisposed  him  to  suspect  Ahime- 
lech's  loyalty,  and  to  take  that  terrible  revenge 
upon  him  for  his  favour  to  David.  Such  changes 
of  name  as  Ahi-melech  and  Ahi-jah  are  not  un- 
common. (See  Genealogies,  p.  115-118.)3  However 
it  is  not  impossible  that,  as  Gesenius  supposes,  Ahi- 
melech may  have  been  brother  to  Ahijah. 

2.  Son  of  Bela  (1  Chr.  viii.  7). 

3.  Son  of  Jerahmeel  (1  Chr.  ii.  25). 

4.  One  of  David's  mighty  men,  a  Pelonite  (1 
Chr.  xi.  36). 

5.  A  Lcvite  in  David's  reign  who  was  over  the 
treasures  of  the  house  of  God,  and  over  the  treasures 
of  the  dedicated  things  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  20). 

6.  One  of  Solomon's  princes,  brother  of  Eli- 
horeph,  and  son  of  Shisha  (1  K.  iv.  3). 

7.  A  prophet  of  Shiloh  (1  K.  xiv.  2),  hence 
called  the  Shilonite  (xi.  29)  in  the  days  of  Solomon 
and  of  Jeroboam  king  of  Israel,  of  whom  we  have 
two  remarkable  prophecies  extant:  the  one  in  1  K. 
xi.  31-39,  addressed  to  Jeroboam,  announcing  the 
rending  of  the  ten  tribes  from  Solomon,  in  punish- 
ment of  his  idolatries,  and  the  transfer  of  the  king- 
dom to  Jeroboam :  a  prophecy  which,  though  deli- 
vered privately,  became  known  to  Solomon,  and 
excited  his  wrath  against  Jeroboam,  who  fled  for 
his  life  into  Egypt,  to  Shishak,  and  remained  there 
till  Solomon's  death.  The  other  prophecy,  in  1  K. 
xiv.  6-16,  was  delivered  in  the  prophet's  extreme 
old  age  to  Jeroboam's  wife,  in  which  he  foretold  the 
death  of  Ahijah,  the  king's  son,  who  was  sick,  and  to 
inquire  concerning  whom  the  queen  was  come  in  dis- 
guise, and  then  went  on  to  denounce  the  destruction 
of  Jeroboam's  house  on  account  of  the  images  which 

a  Where  we  have,  the  further  error  of  Ahimelech 
for  Ahimelech. 


AHIMAAZ 

he  had  set  up,  and  to  foretell  the  captivity  of  Israel 
"beyond  the  river"  Euphrates.  These  prophecies 
give  us  a  high  idea  of  the  faithfulness  and  boldness 
of  Ahijah,  and  of  the  eminent  rank  which  he 
attained  as  a  prophet.  Jeroboam's  speech  concern- 
ing him  (1  K.  xiv.  2,  3)  shows  the  estimation  in 
which  he  held  his  truth  and  prophetic  powers.  In 
2  Chr.  ix.  29  reference  is  made  to  a  record  of  the 
events  of  Solomon's  reign  contained  in  the  "  pro- 
phecy of  Ahijah  the  Shilonite."  If  there  were  a 
larger  work  of  Ahijah's,  the  passage  in  1  K.  xi.  is 
doubtless  an  extract  from  it. 

8.  Father  of  Baasha,  king  of  Israel,  the  contem- 
porary of  Asa,  kins;  of  Judah.  He  was  of  the  tribe 
of  Issachar  (1  K.  xv.  27,  33).  [A.  C.  H.] 

AHI'KAM  (Dp^nN  ;  'Axiicd^;  Ahicam),  a  son 

of  Shaphan  the  scribe,  an  influential  officer  at  the 
court  of  Josiah  (2  K.  xxii.  12),  and  of  Jehoiakim 
his'  son  (Jer.  xxvi.  24).  When  Shaphan  brought 
the  book  of  the  law  to  Josiah,  which  Hilkiah  the 
high  priest  had  found  in  the  temple,  Ahikam  was 
sent  by  the  king,  together  with  four  other  delegates, 
to  consult  Huldah  the  prophetess  on  the  subject. 
In  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim,  when  the  priests  and 
prophets  arraigned  Jeremiah  before  the  princes  of 
Judah  on  account  of  his  bold  denunciations  of  the 
national  sins,  Ahikam  successfully  used  his  in- 
fluence to  protect  the  prophet.  His  son  Gedaliah 
was  made  governor  of  Judah  by  Nebuchadnezzar, 
the  Chaldean  king,  and  to  his  charge  Jeremiah  was 
entrusted  when  released  from  prison  (Jer.  xxxix. 
14,  xl.  5).  [R.  W.  B.] 

■AHI'LUD  (TPTIK ;  'Ax<A.ou5,  'Ax^^X  5 
Aliilud),  father  of  Jehoshaphat  (2  Sam.  viii.  16, 
xx.  24  ;   1  K.  iv.  3  ;   1  Chr.  xviii.  15). 

AHIMAAZ  (}*yO*nX;  'Axtfidas;  Achimaas). 
1.  Father  of  Saul's  wife,  Ahinoam  (1  Sam.  xiv.  50). 

2.  Son  of  Zadok,  the  priest  in  David's  reign. 
When  David  fled  from  Jerusalem  on  account  of 
Absalom's  rebellion,  Zadok  and  Abiathar,  accom- 
panied by  their  sons,  Ahimaaz  and  Jonathan,  and 
the  Levites,  carried  the  ark  of  God  forth,  intending 
to  accompany  the  king.  But  at  his  bidding  they 
returned  to  the  city,  as  did  likewise  Hushai  the 
Archite.  It  was  then  ananged  that  Hushai  should 
feign  himself  to  be  a  friend  of  Absalom,  and  should 
tell  Zadok  and  Abiathar  whatever  intelligence  he 
could  obtain  in  the  palace.  They,  on  their  parts, 
were  to  forward  the  intelligence  through  Ahimaaz 
and  Jonathan.  Accordingly  Jonathan  and  Ahimaaz 
stayed  outside  the  walls  of  the  city  at  En-Rogel,  on 
the  road  towards  the  plain.  A  message  soon  came 
to  them  from  Zadok  and  Abiathar  through  the 
maid-servant,  to  say  that  Ahithcphel  had  counselled 
an  immediate  attack  against  David  and  his  followers, 
and  that,  consequently,  the  king  must  cross  the 
Jordan  without  the  least  delay.  They  started  at 
once  on  their  errand,  but  not  without  being  sus- 
pected, for  a  lad  seeing  the  wench  speak  to  them, 
and  seeing  them  immediately  run  off  quickly — and 
Ahimaaz,  we  know,  was  a  practised  runner — went 
and  told  Absalom,  who  ordeied  a  hot  pursuit.  In 
the  mean  time,  however,  they  had  got  as  far  as 
Bahurim,  the  very  place  where  Shimei  cursed 
David  (2  Sam.  xvi.  5),  to  the  house  of  a  steadfast 
partizan  of  David's.  Here  the  woman  of  the  house 
effectually  hid  them  in  a  well  in  the  court-yard, 
and  covered  the  well's  mouth  with  ground  or 
bruised     corn.       Absalom's    servants    coming    up 


AHIMAAZ 

searched  for  them  in  vain;  and  as  soon  as  they 
were  gone,  and  returned  on  the  road  to  Jerusalem, 
Ahimaaz  and  Jonathan  hasted  on  to  David,  and 
told  him  Abithophel's  counsel,  and  David  with  Ins 
whole  company  crossed  the  Jordan  that  very  night. 
Ahithophel  was  so  moititied  at  seeing  the  failure  of 
his  scheme,  through  the  unwise  delay  in  executing 
it,  that  he  went  home  ami  hanged  himself.  This 
signal  service  rendered  to  David,  at  the  hazard  of 
his  lite,  by  Ahimaaz,  must  have  tended  to  ingra- 
tiate him  with  the  king.  We  have  a  proof  how 
highly  he  was  esteemed  by  him,  as  well  as  an 
honourable  testimony  to  his  character,  in  the  say- 
ing of  David  recorded  -  Sam.  xviii.  27.  For 
when  the  watchman  announced  the  approach  of  a 
messenger,  and  added,  that  his  running  was  like  the 
running  of  Ahimaaz,  the  son  of  Zadok,  the  king 
said,  "  He  is  a  good  man,  and  cometh  with  good 
tidings." 

The  same  transaction  gives  us  a  very  curious 
specimen  of  the  manners  of  tin'  times,  and  a  singu- 
lar instance  of  oriental  or  Jewish  craft  in  Ahi- 
maaz. For  we  learn,  first,  that  Ahimaaz  was  a 
professed  runner — and  a  very  swift  one  too — which 
one  would  hardly  have  expected  in  the  son  of  the 
high-priest.  It  belongs,  however,  to  a  simple  state 
of  society  that  bodily  powers  of  any  kind  should  be 
highly  valued,  and  exercised  by  the  possessor  of 
them  in  the  most  natural  way.  Ahimaaz  was  pro- 
bably naturally  swift,  and  so  became  famous  for 
his  running  (2  Sam.  xviii.  27).  So  we  are  told  of 
Asahel,  Joab's  brother,  that  "  he  was  as  light  of 
foot  as  a  wild  roe"  (2  Sam.  ii.  18).  And  that 
quick  running  was  not  deemed  inconsistent  with 
the  utmost  dignity  and  gravity  of  character  ap- 
peals from  what  we  read  of  Elijah  the  Tishbite, 
that  -'he  girded  up  his  loins  and  ran  before  Ahab 
(who  was  in  his  chariot)  to  the  entrance  of  Jez- 
reel"  (1  K.  xviii.  46).  The  kings  of  Israel  had 
running  footmen  to  precede  them  when  they  went 
in  their  chariots  (2  Sam.  xv.  1;  1  K.  i.  n),  and 
their  guards  were  called  Q*¥*1  runners.  It  ap- 
pears by  2  Chr.  x\x.  6,  10,  that  in  Hezekiah's 
reign  there  was  an  establishment  of  running  mes- 
sengers,  who  were  also  called  DHV"1.  The  same 
name  is  given  to  the  Persian  posts  La  Esth.  iii.  13, 
15,  viii.  14;  though  it  appeals  from  the  latter 
passage  that  in  the  time  of  Xerxes  the  service  was 
performed  with  mules  and  camels.  The  Greek 
name,  borrowed  from  tin-  Persian,  was  &yyapoi. 
As  regards  Ahimaaz's  craftiness  we  read  that,  when 
Absalom  was  killed  by  Joab  and  his  armour-bearers, 
Ahimaaz  was  very  urgent  with  Joab  to  be  em- 
ployed as  the  messenger  to  mn  and  carry  the 
tidings  to  David.  The  politic  Joab,  well  knowing 
the  king's  fond  partiality  for  Absalom,  and  that 
the  news  of  his  death  would  lie  anything  hut  good 
news  to  him,  and,  apparently,  having  a  friendly 
feeling  towards  Ahimaaz,  would  not  allow  him  to 
bearer  of  such  tidings,  but  employed  <'ii>hi 
id.     But  alter   Cusbi    had  started,   Ahimaaz 

Was  SO   urgent    with    Joab    to    be    allowed  to   |l  n   to,, 

that  at  length  he  extorted  his  consent.  Taking  a 
shoitei  or  an  easier  way  by  the  plain  he  i 
to  outrun  Cushi  before  he  gol  in  >i  hi  of  the 
watch-tower,  and,  arriving  first,  he  reported  to  the 
king  tin'  goo, I  news  of  the  victory,  suppressing  his 
knowledge  of  Absalom's  death,  and  leai 
Cushi  the  task  of  announcing  it.  He  had  thus  the 
merit  of  bringing  good  tidings  without  tie-  alloy  of 
the  disaster  of  the  death  of  the  king's  son.     This  is 


AHIMOTH 


37 


the  last  we  hear  of  Ahimaaz,  for  the  Ahimaaz  of 
1  K.  iv.  15,  who  was  Solomon's  captain  in  Naph- 
tali,  was  certainly  a  different  person.  There  is  no 
evidence,  beyond  the  assertion  of  Josephus,  that  he 
ever  tilled  the  office  of  high-priest;  and  Josephus 
may  have  concluded  that  he  did,  merely  because,  in 
the  genealogy  of  the  high-priests  (1  Chr.  vi.  8,  9), 
he  intervenes  between  Zadok  and  Azaiiah.  Judg- 
ing only  from  1  Iv.  iv.  2,  compared  with  1  Chr. 
vi.  10,  we  should  conclude  that  Ahimaaz  died 
before  his  father  Zadok,  and  that  Zadok  was  suc- 
ceeded by  his  grandson  Azariah.  Josephus's  state- 
ment that  Zadok  was  the  first  high-priest  of  Solo- 
mon's temple,  seeing  the  temple  was  not  finished 
till  the  eleventh  year  of  his  reign,  is  a  highly  im- 
probable one  in  itself.  The  statement  of  the  Seder 
Olam,  which  makes  Ahimaaz  high-priest  in  Reho- 
boam's  reign,  is  still  more  so.  It  is  safer,  therefore, 
to  follow  the  indications  of  the  Scripture  narrative, 
though  somewhat  obscured  by  the  apparently  cor- 
rupted passages,  1  K.  iv.  4,  and  1  Chr.  vi.  9,  10, 
and  conclude  that  Ahimaaz  died  before  he  attained 
the  high-priesthood,  leaving  as  his  heir  his  son 
Azarias. 

3.  Solomon's  officer  in  Naphtali,  charged  with 
providing  victuals  for  the  king  and  his  household 
for  one  month  in  the  year.  He  was  probably  of 
the  tribe  of  Naphtali,  and  was  the  king's  son-in- 
law,  having  married  his  daughter  Basmath  (1  K. 
iv.  7,  15).  '    [A.  C.  H.] 

AHI'MAN  (JO^N  ;  'Ax^du  ■  Achiman). 
1.  One  of  the  three  giant  Anakim  wdio  inhabited 
Mount  Hebron  (Num.  xiii.  22,  33),  seen  by  Caleb 
and  the  spies.  The  whole  race  weie  cut  off  by 
Joshua  (Josh.  xi.  21),  and  the  three  bi others  were 
slain  by  the  tribe  of  Judah  (Judg.  i.  lu). 

2.  1  Chr.  ix.  17.  [R.  \V.  B.] 
AHIM'ELECH  (TJ^nK ;  'Ax^^x  and 
'AjSijiteAex  ;  Achimelech).  1.  Son  of  Abituh 
(1  Sam.  xxii.  12),  and  high-priest  at  Neb  in  the 
days  of  Saul.  He  gave  David  the  show-bread  to 
eat,  and  the  sword  of  <  loliath  ;  and  for  so  doing  was, 
upon  the  accusation  of  Doeg  the  Edomite,  put  todeath 
with  his  whole  house  by  Saul's  order.  Eighty-five 
priests  wearing  an  ephod  were  thus  cruelly  slaugh- 
tered; Abiathar  alone  escaped.  [Abiathar.]  The 
LXX.  read  three  '<  vndred  and  five  men,  thus  afford- 
ing another  instanc ft  he  frequent  clerical  em 

transcribing  numbers,  of  which  Ezr.  ii.  compaied 
with  Neh.  vii.  is  a  remarkable  example.  The  inter- 
change of  D^bB*,  or  n3bL';,  with  Wth'C'  and 
C'7C    is  veiy  common.     For  the  question  of  Ahi- 

melech's  identity  with  Ahijah,  see  Ah  i J  ah.     For 

the    singular    contusion     between     Ahimelech    and 

/■  in  the  1st  book  of  Chronicles,  see  Abi- 
athar. 

2.  One  of  David's  companions  while  he  wai 
persecuted  by  Satd,  a  Hittite;  called  in  the  LXX. 

oh  ;  which  is  perhaps  the  righf  reading,  after 
the  analogy  of  Abimelech,  kiugofGerarl  1  Sam.  \.w  i. 

,',:.       lu  the  title  of  I's.   XXXiv.  TplO^N   S&  ins  to  l„. 

a  corrupt  reading  tor  ]"U  "fill  L"H2N.  See  l  Sam. 
x\i.  l:;  (12,  in  A.  \  '  '    [A.  C.  H.j 

a  i  mi  mil  mo-nx;  'ax^o: 

a  Levite  of  the  house  of  tie'  Sorbites,  of  the  family 

of  the  hTohathites,  apparently  in  the  time  of  David 

\  i.  25).     In  v  er.   ■■•.  foi  Ahimoth  we  fin  I 


38 


AHINADAB 


Mahath  (T)TV2),  Made,  as  in  Luke  iii.  26.  For 
a  correction  of  these  genealogies,  see  Genealogies 
of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  p.  214, 
note.  [A.  C.  H.] 

AHIN'ADAB  (T^nN  ;  'Ax^aSajS  ;  Akin- 
adab),  son  of  Iddo,  one  of  Solomon's  twelve  com- 
missaries who  supplied  provisions  for  the  royal 
household.  The  district  entrusted  to  Ahinadab  was 
that  of  Mahanaim,  situated  on  the  east  of  the 
Jordan  (1  K.  iv.  14).  [R.  W.  B.] 

AHIN'OAM  (Dy^riN;  brother  of  grace; 
'Ax^vda/x;  Achiiwam),  a  woman  of  Jezreel,  whose 
masculine  name  may  be  compared  with  that  of 
Abigail,  father  of  joy.  It  was  not  uncommon  to 
give  women  names  compounded  with  3N  (father) 
and  PIN  (brother).  Ahinoam  was  married  to  David 
during  his  wandering  life  (1  Sam.  xxv.  43),  lived 
with  him  and  his  other  wife  Abigail  at  the  court  of 
Achish  (xxvii.  3),  was  taken  prisoner  with  her  by 
the  Amalekites  when  they  plundered  Ziklag  (xxx. 
5),  but  was  rescued  by  David  (18).  She  is  again 
mentioned  as  living  with  him  when  he  was  king 
of  Judah  in  Hebron  (2  Sam.  ii.  2)  ;  and  was  the  mo- 
ther of  his  eldest  son  Amnon  (iii.  2).    [G.  E.  L.  C] 

AHI'O    (VnX  ;     ol   aSeXcpol   avTov  ;     Ahio ; 

2  Sam.  vi.  3,  4  ;  f rater  ejus,  1  Chr.  xiii.  7).  1. 
Son  of  Abinadab,  who  accompanied  the  ark  when 
it  was  brought  out  of  his  father's  house  (2  Sam. 
vi.  3,  4;  1  Chr.  xiii.  7).  2.  (1  Chr.  viii.  14). 
3.  (1  Chr.  viii.  31,  ix.  37). 

AHI'RA  OTCnX;  'AxVe'i  Ahira),  chief  of  the 
tribe  of  Naphtali  when  Moses  took  the  census  in 
the  year  after  the  Exodus  (Num.  i.  15,  ii.  29,  vii. 
78,  83,  x.  27).  [R.  W.  B.] 

AHI'RAM  (Ql'riX  ;  'laxipdv;  Ahiram),  son 
of  Benjamin  (Num.  xxvi.  38),  called  Ehi  in  (!eu. 
xlvi.  21. 

AHIS'AMACH  (TjOp^N  ;  'Axura^x  ; 
Achisamech),  name  of  a  man  (Ex.  xxxi.  6,  xxxv. 
34,  xxxviii.  23). 

AHISH'AHAR  OPI^riN  ;  'AXL<radp ;  AM- 
sahar),  name  of  a  man  (1  Chr.  vii.  10). 

AHT'SHAR  C\fim  ;  'Ax^dp ;  Ahisar), 
the  controller  of  Solomon's  household  (1  K. 
iv.  6). 

AHITOPHEL  (^QrVllX;  'Ax"-o>eA;  Jo- 
seph. 'Ax'T^^eA.os  ;  Achitophel),  a  native  of  Giloh, 
in  the  hill  country  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  51),  and  privy 
councillor  of  David,  whose  wisdom  was  so  highly  es- 
teemed, that  his  advice  had  the  authority  of  a  divine 
oracle,  though  his  name  had  an  exactly  opposite  sig- 
nification (2  Sam.  xvi.  23).  He  was  the  grandfather 
of  Bathsheba  (comp.  2  Sam.  x.  3  with  xxiii.  34). 
She  is  called  daughter  of  Ammiel  in   1   Chr.   iii. 

5;  but  7NM3J?  is  only  the  anagram  of  DJ?vX. 
Absalom  immediately  he  had  revolted  sent  for  him, 
and  when  David  heard  that  Ahitophel  had  joined 
the  conspiracy,  he  prayed  Jehovah  to  turn  his 
counsel  to  foolishness  (xv.  31),  alluding  possibly 
to  the  signification  of  his  name.  David's  grief  at 
the   treachery  of  his  confidential  friend  found  ex- 


AHLAB 

pression  in  the  Messianic  prophecies  (Ps.  xli.  9  ;  lv. 
12-14). 

In  order  to  show  to  the  people  that  the  breach 
between  Absalom  and  his  father  was  irreparable, 
Ahitophel  persuaded  him  to  take  possession  of  the 
royal  harem  (2  Sam.  xvi.  21).  David,  in  order  to 
counteract  his  counsel,  sent  Hushai  to  Absalom. 
Ahitophel  had  recommended  an  immediate  pursuit 
of  David ;  but  Hushai  advised  delay,  his  object 
being  to  send  intelligence  to  David,  and  to  give 
him  time  to  collect  his  forces  for  a  decisive  en- 
gagement. When  Ahitophel  saw  that  Hushai' s 
advice  prevailed,  he  despaired  of  success,  and  return- 
ing to  his  own  home  "  put  his  household  in  order 
and  hung  himself"  (xvii.  1-23).  (See  Joseph. 
Ant.  vii.  9,  §  8  ;  Niemeyer,  Charakt.  iv.  454; 
Ewald,  Geschich.  ii.  652.)  [R.  W.  B.] 

AHI'TUB    (HCnS  ;    'AXiT<i>P ;    Achitob). 

1.  Father  of  Ahimelech,  or  Ahijah,  the  son  of 
Phineas,  and  the  elder  brother  of  Ichabod  (1  Sam. 
xiv.  3,  xxii.  9,  11),  and  therefore  of  the  house  of 
Eli  and  the  family  of  Ithamar.  There  is  no  record 
of  his  high-priesthood,  which,  if  he  ever  was  high- 
priest,  must  have  coincided  with  the  early  days  of 
Samuel's  judgeship. 

2.  Son  of  Amariah,  and  father  of  Zadok  the 
high-priest  (1  Chr.  vi.  7,  8;  2  Sam.  viii.  17),  of 
the  house  of  Eleazar.  From  1  Chr.  ix.  11,  where 
the  genealogy  of  Azariah,  the  head  of  one  of  the 
priestly  families  that  returned  from  Babylon  with 
Zerubbabel,  is  traced,  through  Zadok,  to  "  Ahitub, 
the  ruler  of  the  house  of  God,"  it  appears  tolerably 
certain  that  Ahitub  was  high-priest.  And  so  the 
LXX.  version  unequivocally  renders  it  viov  'Ax'tgIj/J 
riyovfitvov  oIkov  tow  0eoD.  The  expression  T'JJ 
'Sn'3  is  applied  to  Azariah  the  high-priest  in 
Hezekiah's  reign  in  2  Chr.  xxxi.  13.  The  passage 
is  repeated  in  Neh.  xi.  11,  but  the  LXX.  have 
spoilt  the  sense  by  rendering  'IJJ  airtvavri,  as  if  it 
were  "133.  If  the  line  is  correctly  given  in  these 
two  passages  Ahitub  was  not  the  father,  but  the 
grandfather  of  Zadok,  his  father  being  Meraiath. 
But  in  1  Chr.  vi.  8,  and  in  Ezr.  vii.  2,  Ahitub  is 
represented  as  Zadok's  father.  This  uncertainty 
makes  it  difficult  to  determine  the  exact  time  of 
Ahitub's  high-priesthood.  If  he  was  father  to 
Zadok  he  must  have  been  high-priest  with  Ahime- 
lech. But  if  he  was  grandfather,  his  age  would 
have  coincided  exactly  with  the  other  Ahitub,  the 
son  of  Phinehas.  Certainly  a  singular  coincidence. 
3.  The  genealogy  of  the  high-priests  in  1  Chr. 
vi.  11,  12,  introduces  another  Ahitub,  son  of 
another  Amariah,  and  father  of  another  Zadok.  At 
p.  287  of  the  Genealogies  will  be  found  reasons 
for  believing  that  the  second  Ahitub  and  Zadok  are 
spurious.  [A.  C.  H.] 

AH'LAB  (D^nX  ;    Aa\d<p;    Achalab),  a  city 

of  Asher  from  which  the  Canaanites  were  not 
driven  out  (Judg.  i.  31).  Its  omission  from  the 
list  of  the  towns  of  Asher,  in  Josh,  xix.,  has  led 
to  the  suggestion  (Bertheau  on  Judg.")  that  the 
name  is  but  a  corruption  of  Achshaph ;  but  this 
appears  extravagant.  It  is  more  probable  that 
Achlab  reappears  in  later  history  as  Gush  Chaleb, 
ihn  B>H,  or  Giscala  (Reland,  813,  817),  a  place 
lately  identified  by  Robinson  under  the  abbreviated 
name  of  cl-Jish,  near  Safed,  in  the  hilly  country  to 
the  N.W.  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee  (Rob.  ii.  446,  iii.  73). 


AHLAI 

Gush  Chaleb  was  in  Rabbinical  times  famous  for  its 

oil  (see  the  citations  in  Reland,  817),  and  the  old 
olive-trees  still  remain  in  the  neighbourhood  (Rob. 
iii.  72).  From  it  came  the  famous  John,  son  of 
Levi,  the  leader  in  the  siege  of  Jerusalem  (Jos.  17/. 
§10;  B.  J.  ii.  21,  §1),  and  it  had  a  legendary 
celebrity  as  the  birthplace  of  the  parents  of  no  less 
a  person  than  the  Apostle  Paul  (Jerome,  quoted  by 
Reland,  813).  [(!.] 

■     AHLA'I    (V?nN  ;     AaSai,     Axaid  ;      OhoM, 

Oholt).  1.  Name  of  a  woman  (1  Chr.  ii.  31). 
2.  IS'ame  of  a  man  (I  Chr.  xi.  41). 

AHO'AH  (PlinX,  probably  another  form  of 
iTriN  ;  'Ax"i ;  Ahoe),  son  of  Bela,  the  son  ot 
Benjamin  (,1  Chr.  viii.  4).  The  patronymic  Ahohite 
CnnX)  is  found  in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  9,  28;  1  Chr. 
xi.  12,'  29  ;   xxvii.  4. 

AHOHITE.     [Ahoah.] 

AHO'LAH  (r6nH  ;  'OoKd  ■    Oolla),  a  harlot, 

used  by  Ezekiel  as  the  symbol  of  Samaria  (Ez. 
xxiii.  4,  5, -36,  44). 

AHO'LIAB  (2K"6nK;   'EAiajS ;    Ooliab),   a 

Danite  of  great  skill  as  a  weaver  and  embroiderer, 
whom  Moses  appointed  with  Bezaleel  to  erect  the 
tabernacle  (Ex.  xxxv.  30-35). 

AHO'LIBAH  (nn^HN  ;   'OoA^a  ;    Ooliba), 

a  harlot,  used  by  Ezekiel  as  the  symbol  of  Judah 
(Ez.  xxiii.  4,  11,22,  36,44). 

AHOLIBA'MAH   (nm^nN  ;    '0\ipefid  ; 

Oolibama),  one  (probably  the  second)  of  the  three 
wives  of  Esau.  She  was  the  daughter  of  ANAH,  a 
descendant  of  Seir  the  Horite  (Gen.  xxxvi.  2,  25). 
It  is  doubtless  through  this  connexion  of  Esau  with 
the  original  inhabitants  of  Mount  Seir  that  we  are  to 
trari  the  subsequent  occupation  of  that  territory  by 
him  and  his  descendants,  ami  it  is  remarkable  that 
each  of  his  three  suns  by  this  wife  is  himself  the 
head  of  a  tiihe,  whilst  all  the  tribes  of  the  Edomites 
sprung  from  his  other  two  wives  are  founded  by 
his  grandsons  (Gen.  xxxvi.  15-19).  In  the  earlier 
narrative  (den.  xxvi.  34)  Aholihamah  is  called  Ju- 
dith, daughter  ot'  Beeri,  the  llittite.  The  explana- 
tion of  the  change  in  the  name  of  the  woman  seems 
to  be  that  her  proper  personal  name  was  Judith,  and 
that  Aholihamah  was  the  name  which  she  received 
as  the  wife  ot'  Esau  and  foundress  of  three  tribes  ot' 
his  descendants;  she  is  therefore  in  the  narrative 
called  by  the  first  name,  whilsi  in  the  genealogical 
table  of  the  Edomites  she  appears  under  the  second. 
This  explanation  is  confirmed  by  the  recurrence  ot' 
the  name  Aholihamah  in  the  concluding  I i>t  of  the 
ilogical  table  (Gen.  xxxvi.  40-43)  which,  with 
llengstenherg  ( /'■■  I  nti  <'.  Pent.  ii.  279; 
Eng.  transl.  ii.  228),  Tuch  (Komm.  iib  d.  Gen. 
493  ),  Knobel  i  ffi  tu  -.  p.  258  j.  ami  others,  we  must 
i  e  ard  as  a  list  of  u  ones  of  places  and  not  of  i 

as  indeed  is  express] y  said  at  the  close  ot  it :  "  These 

are  the  chiefs  (heads  of  tribes)  of  Esau,  according 
to  their  settlements  in  the  land  of  their  possession.' 
The  district  which  received  the  name  of  Esau's  wife, 
or   perhaps    rather   from   which   she  received    lei 

married  name,  was  no  doubt  (as  the  name  itself  in- 
dicates )  situate!  in  the  heights  ot' tlie  mountains  of 
Bdom,  probably  therefore  in  the  neighbour!) I   of 


AI 


39 


Mount  Hor  ami  IVtra,  though  Knobel  places  it 
south  of'Petra,  having  been  misled  by  Burckhardt's 
name  Hesma,  which  however,  according  to  Robin- 
son (ii.  155),  is  "  a  sandy  tract  with  mountains 
around  it  .  .  .  but  not  itself  a  mountain,  as  re- 
ported by  Burckhardt."  It  seems  not  unlikely 
that  the  three  tribes  descended  from  Aholihamah, 
or  at  least  two  of  them,  possessed  this  district,  since 
there  are  enumerated  only  eleven  district-,  whereas 
the  number  of  tribes  is  thirteen,  exclusive  of  that  oi 
Korah,  whose  name  occurs  twice,  and  which  we 
may  further  conjecture  emigrated  (in  part  at  least; 
from  the  district  of  Aholihamah,  and  became  associ- 
ated with  the  tribes  descended  from  Eliphaz,  Esau's 
first-born  son. 

It  is  to  be  observed  that  each  of  the  wives  of  Esau 
is  mentioned  by  a  different  name  in  the  genealogical 
table  from  that  which  occurs  in  the  history.  This 
is  noticed  under  BASHEMATH.  With  respect  to  the 
name  and  race  of  the  father  of  Aholihamah,  see  Anah 
and  Beeri.  [E.  W.  G.] 

AHU  MAI  C^-inX  ;  'AX^ai-,  Almmai),  name 
of  a  man  (1  Chr.  iv.  2). 

AHUZ'ZATH  (n-jriK;  'Oxo(d6;  Ochozath), 
one  of  the  friends  of  the  Philistine  king  Abimelech 
who  accompanied  him  at  his  interview  with  Isaac 
(Gen.  xxvi.  26).  In  LXX.  he  is  called  6  vvfx<pa- 
yooybs  civtov  —  pronubus,  or  bridesman,  and  his 
name  is  inserted  in  xxi.  22,  23.  St.  Jerome  renders 
the  word  "  a  company  of  friends,"  as  does  also  the 
Targum. 

For  the  termination  "  -ath  "  to  Philistine  names 
comp.  Gath,  Goliath,  Timnath.  [E.  W.  B.] 

A'l  (*J?  =  heap  of  ruins,  Ges.).  1.  (always 
with  the  def.  article,  ^H  (see  Gen",  xii.  8,  in  A.  V.), 
Yai,  7)  Vai,  'Ai'a,  'Ai';  Jos.  Aiva;  Hoi),  a  royal 
city  (comp.  Josh.  viii.  23,  29;  x.  1  ;  xii.  9)  of 
Canaan,  already  existing  in  the  time  of  Abraham 
(Gen.  xii.  8)  [Hai],  and  lying  east  of  Bethel 
(comp.  Josh.  xii.  9),  and  "  beside  Bethaven  "  (Josh, 
vii.  2  ;  viii.  it).  It  was  the  second  city  taken  by 
Israel  after  their  passage  of  the  Jordan,  and  was 
"  utterly  destroyed "  (Josh.  vii.  3,  4,  5;  viii.  1,  2, 
3,  10,  11,  12,  14,  16,  17,  18,  2i>,  21,  23,  24,  25, 
26,  28,  29  ;  ix.  3  ;  x.  1,  2  ;  xii.  it).  |  Sec  Stanley, 
S.  and  P.  202.)  However,  if  Aiath  he  Ai — and  from 
its  mention  with  Migi'on  and  Michmash,  it  is  at 
least  probable  that  it  was  so — tin-  name  was  still 
attached  to  the  locality  at  the  time  of  Sennacherib's 
march  on  Jerusalem  (Is.  x.  28).  [AlATII.]  At 
any  rate,  the  "men  of  Bethel  and  Ai,"  to  the 
number  of  two  hundred  ami  twenty-three,  returned 
from  the  captivity  witli  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  28; 
Nih.  vii.  32,  "  one  hundred  and  twenty-three" 
only);  ami  when  the  Benjamites  again  took  possession 
of  their  towns,  ''Michmash,  Aija.  and  Bethel,  with 
their  'daughters,'"  are  among  the  pla<es  named 
(Neh.  \i.  .".1  ).     |  \ l.i  v. 

Busebius  remarks  (Onom.  'Ayyai)  that  though 
Bethel  remained,  Ai  was  a  tSttos  Hpiifxos,  aiirbs 
fx6vov  St'iKvvTcu:  hut  even  that  cannot  now  be  Said, 
ami  no  attempt  has  y.-t  succeeded  in  fixing  the  site 

ot'    the    city  which  Joshua    doomed    to    lie   a    "   In     |. 

ami  a  desolation  for  ever."  Stanley  (8.  and  /'. 
202)  places  it  at  the  head  ot'  the  Wady  II 

Williams  and  Van  de  Vel.le   (  ,v.  and  /'.  Jul. 

apparently  at  the  same  -pot  as  Robinson  (i.  44.'!, 

'"I  Kiepei't's  map.  1 856), north  of  W&khmds, 

and  between  it  and  I',  ir  Du  van.    For  Krant's  fdenti- 


40 


AIATH 


fication  with  Kirbet  elrHaiyeh,  see  Rob.  iii.  288. 
It  is  the  opinion  of  some  that  the  words  Aviin 
(DMJ7)  in  Josh,  xviii.  23,  and  Gaza  (riTTJ?)  in  1  Chr. 
vii.  28,  are  corruptions  of  Ai.  [Avim  ;  Azzah.] 
2.  (*JJ  ;    Tea  and   Kai  ;    Hoi),  a  city  of  the 

Ammonites,  apparently  attached  to  Heshbon  (Jer. 
xlix.  3).  [G.] 

AIATH  (n*y ;  els  t?>  ir6\tv  'Ayyaf ;  Aiath), 
a  place  named  by  Isaiah  (x.  28)  in  connexion  with 
Migron  and  Michmash.      Probably  the  same  as  Ai. 

[Ai  ;  An  A.] 

AI'JA  (N*y  ;    Hoi),    like   Aiath,    probably    a 

variation  of  the  name  Ai.  The  name  is  men- 
tioned with  Michmash  and  Bethel  (Neh.  xi.  31). 
[Ai.] 

AI'JALON  (P^JK,  "  place  of  deer »  or  ga- 
zelles," Gesen.  p.  46,  Stanley,  208,  note  ;  AlaKwu 
and  AlKco/j.;  Ajalon).  1.  A  city  of  the  Kohathites 
(Josh.  xxi.  24;  1  Chr.  vi.  69),  originally  allotted 
to  the  tribe  of  Dan  (Josh.  xix.  42  ;  A.  V.  "  Ajalon  "), 
which  tribe,  however,  was  unable  to  dispossess  the 
Amorites  of  the  place  (Judg.  i.  35).  Aijalon  was 
one  of  the  towns  fortified  by  Rehoboam  (2  Chr.  xi. 
10)  daring  his  conflicts  with  the  new  kingdom  of 
Ephraim  (1  K.  xiv.  30),.  and  the  last  we  hear  of  it 
is  as  being  in  the  hands  of  the  Philistines  (2  Chr. 
xxviii.  18,  A.  V.  "Ajalon"). 

Being  on  the  very  frontier  of  the  two  kingdoms, 
we  can  understand  how  Aijalon  should  be  spoken  of 
sometimes  (1  Chr.  vi.  69,  comp.  with  66)  as  in 
Ephraim,h  and  sometimes  (2  Chr.  xi.  10  ;  1  Sam. 
xiv.  31)  as  in  Judah  and  Benjamin. 

The  name  is  most  familiar  to  us  from  its  mention 
in  the  celebrated  speech  of  Joshua  during  his  pur- 
suit of  the  Canaanites  (Josh.  x.  12,  "  valley  (pOJT) 

of  Aijalon;"  see  Stanley,  210).  There  is  no  doubt 
that  the  town  has  been  discovered  by  Dr.  Robin- 
son in  the  modern  Tdlo,"  a  little  to  the  N.  of  the 
Jaffa  road,  about  14  miles  out  of  Jerusalem.  It 
stands  on  the  side  of  a  long  hill  which  forms  the 
southern  boundary  of  a  tine  valley  of  corn-fields, 
which  valley  now  bears  the  name  of  the  Me*j  Ibn 
Omeir,  but  which  there  seems  no  reason  for  doubt- 
ing was  the  valley  of  Aijalon  which  witnessed  the 
defeat  of  the  Canaanites  (Rob.  ii.  253,  iii.  145). 

2.  A  place  in  Zebulun,  mentioned  as  the  burial- 
place  of  Elon  (|i?*K),d  one  of  the  Judges  (Judg. 
xii.  12).  [G.] 

AI'JELETH  SHAHAR,  more  correctly 
Ayeleth  Has-shachar  ("int^H  n?*S,  the  hind 

of  the  morning  dawn),  found  once  only  in  the  Bible, 
in  connexion  with  Ps.  xxii.,  of  which  it  forms  part 
of  the  introductory  verse  or  title.  This  term  has 
been  variously  interpreted.  Rashi,  Kimchi  and 
Abeu-Ezra  attest  that  it  was  taken  for  the  name  of 
a  musical  instrument.  Many  of  the  modern  ver- 
sions have  adopted  this  interpretation ;  and  it  also 
seems  to  have  been  that  of  the  translators  from 

a  The  part  of  the  country  in  which  Aijalon  was  situ- 
ated— the  western  slopes  of  the  main  central  table- 
land leading  down  to  the  plain  of  Sharon — must,  if  the 
derivation  of  the  names  of  its  towns  is  to  he  trusted, 
have  abounded  in  animals.  Besides  Aijalon  (deer), 
here  lay  Shaalbim  M'oxes  or  jackals),  and  not  far  off  the 
valley  of  Zeboim  (hyaenas).     Sec  Stanley,  162,  note. 


AIJELETH 

whom  we  have  the  Authorized  Version,  although 
they  have  left  the  term  itself  untranslated.  Some 
critics  speak  of  this  instrument  as  a  "  flute  ;"  and 
J.  D.  Michaelis,  Mendelssohn,  Knapp,  and  others, 
render  the  Hebrew  words  by  "  morning  flute." 
Michaelis  admits  the  difficulty  of  describing  the 
instrument  thus  named,  but  he  conjectures  that 
it. might  mean  a  "flute"  to  be  played  on  at  the 
time  of  the  "morning"  sacrifice.  No  account  is 
rendered,  however,  by  Michaelis,  or  by  those  critics 
who  adopt  his  view,  of  the  etymological  voucher 
for  this  translation.  Mendelssohn  quotes  from  the 
Shilte  Haggeborim  a  very  fanciful  description  of  the 
"Ayeleth  Hasschahar"  (see  Prologomena  to  Mendels- 
sohn's Psalms) ;  but  he  does  not  approve  it :  he  rather 
seeks  to  justify  his  own  translation  by  connecting 
the   name  of  the   "flute"   with   D'OPIN   JY?SK, 

Ayeleth  Ahabim  (Prov.  v.  19),  and  by  endeavour- 
ing to  make  it  appear  that  the  instrument  derived 
its  appellation  from  the  sweetness  of  its  tones. 

The  Chaldee  Paraphrast,  a  very  ancient  authority, 
renders  "HIE'il  rP^N  "  the  power  of  the  continual 
morning  sacrifice,"  implying  that  this  term  con- 
veyed to  the  chief  musician  a  direction  respecting 
the  time  when  the  22nd  psalm  was  to  be  chaunted. 
In  adopting  such  a  translation,  fl?*i<  must  be  re- 
ceived as  synonymous  with  JTlP'tf  (strength,  force) 
in  the  20th  ver.  (A.  V.  19ch  ver.)  of  the  same  psalm. 

According  to  a  third  opinion,  the  "  hind  of  the 
morning"  expresses  allegorically  the  argument  of 
the  22nd  psalm.  That  this  was  by  no  means  an 
uncommon  view  is  evident  from  the  commen- 
taries of  Rashi  and  Kimchi ;  for  the  latter  regards 
the  "  Hind  of  the  Morning"  as  an  allegorical  ap- 
pellation of  the  house  of  Judah,  whose  captivity  in 
Babylon  is,  agreeably  to  his  exegesis,  the  general 
burden  of  the  psalm.  Tholuck,  who  imagines  the 
22nd  Psalm  to  treat  primarily  of  David,  and  of  the 
Messiah  secondarily,  makes  David  allude  to  himself 
under  the  figure  of  "  the  hind  of  the  morning."  He 
speaks  of  himself  as  of  a  hind  pursued  even  from 
the  first  dawn  of  the  morning  (Tholuck  on  the  Ps. 
in  loco). 

The  weight  of  authority  predominates,  however, 
in  favour  of  the  interpretation  which  assigns  to 
"iriL'TI  n?'X  the  sole  purpose  of  describing  to  the 

musician  the  melody  to  which  the  psalm  was  to 
be  played,  and  which  does  not  in  any  way  con- 
nect "Ayeleth  Hasshachar"  with  the  arguments 
of  the  psalm  itself.  To  Aben  Ezra  this  inter- 
pretation evidently  owes  its  origin,  and  his  view 
has  been  received  by  the  majority  of  grammarians 
and  lexicographers,  as  well  as  by  those  commentators 
whose  object  has  beeu  to  arrive  at  a  grammatical 
exposition  of  the  text.  Amongst  the  number, 
Buxtorf,  Bochart,  Gesenius,  Rosenmiiller,  and  M. 
Sachs  (in  Zunz's  Bible),  deserve  especial  mention. 
According  to  the  opinion  then  of  this  trustworthy 
band  of  scholars,  "ln^'H  ]"I?*N  described  a  lyrical 

composition  no  longer  extant ;  but  in  the  age  of 
David,  and  during  the  existence  of  the  Temple  of 


b  Perhaps  this  may  suggest  an  explanation  of  the 
allusion  to  the  "  house  of  Joseph "  in  the  difficult 
passage,  Judg.  i.  34,  35. 

c  'la\u>,  in  Epiphanius;   see  Reland,  553. 

li  It  will  be  observed  that  the  two  words  differ  only 
in  their  vowel-points. 


AIN 

Solomon,  when  the  Psalms  were  chaurtted  for 
public  and  private  service,  it  was  so  well  known 
as  to  convey  readily  to  the  director  of  the  sacred 
music  what  it  was  needful  for  him  to  know. 
That  this  was  not  an  unusual  method  of  describ- 
ing a  melody  may  be  satisfactorily  proved  from  a 
variety  of  analogous  instances.  Ample  evidence 
is  found  in  the  Talmud  (Jeruschal.  Beiach.)  that 
the  expression  "hind  of  the  morning"  was  used 
figuratively  for  "  the  rising  sun ;"  and  a  similar  use 
of  the  Arabic  "Gezalath"  may  be  adduced.  (See 
Rosenmiiller's  Scholia,  in  loco,  and  Fiirst's  Con- 
cordance.) Aben  Ezra  is  censured  by  Bochart  ( Hie- 
rozoicon,  book  iii.  ch.  17)  for  describing  the  poem 

"lllL;,n   JIT'S  as  an  amorous  song  (r6nn,  Nb"l 

r6\\4  103  jx'ti,  -in  -j-n  hy  new  tsva 

2,3nX),  a  term  considered  too  profane  to  be 
employed  in  reference  to  a  composition  used  for 
public  worship.  But  if  for  the  obnoxious  epithet 
•'amorous"  the  word  "elegiac"  be  substituted 
tand  the  expression  used  by  the  rabbi  will  readily 
admit  of  this  change  in  the  translation),  i he  objec- 
tion is  removed. 

Calmet   understands  "in^'D   TOW   to   mean  a 

•'  band  of  music;"  and  he  accordingly  translates 
the  introductory  verse,  "  A  Psalm  of  David, 
addressed  to  the  music  master  who  presides  over 
the  Band  called  the  Morning  Hind."     [1>.  VV.  M.] 

AIN  (|'y)>  an  eye,  and  also,  in  the  simple  but 
vivid  imagery  of  the  East,  a  spring  or  natural  burst 
of  living  water,  always  contradistinguished  from 
the  well  or  tank  of  artificial  formation,  and  which 
latter  is  designated  by  the  words  Beer  (1X3),  Bor 
("1X3  and  "113).     Am  still  retains  its  ancient  and 


AKRABBIM 


41 


double   meaning  in  Arabic, 


(d^' 


Such   living 


springs  abound  in  Palestine  even  more  than  in  other 
mountainous  districts,  and,  apart  from  their  natural 
value  in  a  hot  climate,  form  one  of  the  most  re- 
markable features  of  the  country.  Professor  Stanley 
S.  and  P.  1-4-7,  509)  has  called  attention  to  the 
accurate  and  persistent  use  of  the  word  in  the  ori- 
ginal text  of  the  Bible,  and  has  well  expressed  the 
inconvenience  arising  from  the  confusion  in  the 
A.  V.  of  words  and  things  so  radically  distinct  as 
Am  an  I  Beer.  "  The  importance  of  distinguishing 
between  the  two  is  illustrated  by  Ex.  xv.  27,  in 
which  the  word  Ainoth  (translated  '  wells')  is  used 
for  tin'  springs  of  fresh  water  at  Elim,  although  the 
rocky  soil  of  that  place  excludes  the  supposition  of 
ihc_r  wells." 

Am  oftenest  occurs  in  combination  with  other 
words,  forming  the  names  of  definite  localities: 
these  will  he  found  under  En,  as  En-gedi,  En-gannim, 
\c     h  ae  in  two  cases : — 

1.  (with  the  del',  article,  (?J/n.)  One  of  the  land- 
marks  on  the   eastern    boundary    of    Palestine    as 


:'  That  this,  and  not    the   spring  lately  idcir 
Vfneh,   near  the  source  of   the  Jordan  at  Tel  rl-Kiuii/ 

(Rob.  iii.  893;  Hitter,  Jordan,  215),  is  the  Daphne 

referred  to  in  the  Vulgate,  is  clear  from  the  ([uota- 
tions  from  Jerome  given  in  Reland  Pal.,  cap.  xw. 
l>.  120  .  In  the  Targums  of  Jonathan  and  Jerusalem, 
Riblah  is  rendered  by  Daphne,  ami  ain  by  'Invatha 

NnilJ*y  •       SchWaiZ        ^''        would     place     Ain     at 

■•  r.in-al-Maicha"  (doubtless  Ain-Mellahah  :  to  be 
consistent  with  which,  he  is  driven  to  assume  that 


described  by  Moses  (Num.  xxxiv.  11),  and  appa- 
rently mentioned,  if  the  rendering  of  the  A.  V.  is 
accurate,  to  define  the  position  of  Riblah,  viz.  "on  the 
east  side  of  '  the  spring  '  "  (LXX.  'eirl  ir-qyas).  By 
Jerome,  in  the  Vulgate,  it  is  rendered  contra  fontem 
Daphnin,  meaning  the  spring  which  rose  in  the 
celebrated  grove  of  Daphne  dedicated  to  Apollo  and 
Diana  at  Antioch."  But  Riblah  having  been  lately, 
with  much  probability,  identified  (Hob.  iii.  542-G ; 
Porter,  ii.  335)  with  a  place  of  the  same  name  on 
the  N.E.  slopes  of  the  Hermon  range,  "  the  spring  " 
of  the  text  must  in  the  present  state  of  our  know- 
ledge be  taken  to  be  'Ain  el-'Azy,  the  main  source 
of  the  Orontes,  a  spring  remarkable,  even  among  the 
springs  of  Palestine,  for  its  force  and  magnitude. 
The  objections  to  this  identification  are  the  distance 
from  jP^M— about  9  miles  ;  and  the  direction — 
nearer  N.E.  than  E.  (see  Rob.  iii.  534;  Porter,  ii. 
335-6,  358).     [Riblah  ;  Hamath.] 

2.  One  of  the  southernmost  cities  of  Judah  (Josh, 
xv.  32),  afterwards  allotted  to  Simeon  (Josh.  xix. 
7  ;  1  Chr.  iv.  32  b)  and  given  to  the  priests  (Josh, 
xxi.  16).  In  the  list  of  priests'  cities  in  1  Chr.  vi. 
Ashan  (|K/J?)  takes  the  place  of  Ain. 

In  Neh.  xi.  29,  Am  is  joined  to  the  name  which 
in  the  other  passages  usually  follows  it,  and  appears 
as  Enrimmon.  So  the  LXX.,  in  the  two  earliest  of 
the  passages  in  Joshua,  give  the  name  as  'Epw/xwd 
and  'Epzixixoiv.     (See  Rob.  ii.  204.)  [G.] 

A'JAH  (H»N  ;  'Ate  ;  Aja).  1.  Son  of  Zibeon 
(Gen.  xxxvi.  24;  1  Chr.  i.  40).  [Anah.]  2. 
Eather  of  Rizpah,  a  concubine  of  Saul  (2  Sam.  iii. 
7,  xxi.  8,  10,  11). 

A'JALON  (Josh.  x.  12,  xix.  42 ;  2  Chr.  xxviii. 
18).  The  same  place  as  AlJAXON  (1)  which  see. 
The  Hebrew  being  the  same  in  both,  there  is  no 
reason  for  the  inconsistency  in  the  spelling  of  the 
name  in  the  A.  V.  [G.] 

A'KAN  (}pV;  'lovKa/x;  Acan),  a  descendant 
of  Esau  (Gen.  xxxvi.  27),  called  Jakan  in  1  Chr. 

i.  42.    [Bene-Jaakakt.] 

AK'KTJB  (3-lpy  ;  'Akov$  and  'Akov/j.  ;  Accnb), 
name  of  four  men.  1.  (1  Chr.  iii.  24).  2.  (1  Chr. 
ix.  17;  Ezr.  ii.  42;  Neh.  vii.  45,  xi.  19,  xii.  25). 
3.  (Ezr.  ii.  45).      4.  (Neh.  viii.  7). 

AKRAB'BIM,  "  the  ascent  of,"  and  "  i  in: 
GOING     UP     TO;"     also    "  MaALEHtACRABBIM  " 

(D^3"lpy  n?J?0  =  "  the  scorpion-pass ;"  avdQaats 

'Aicpd/iav  ;  Ascensus  scorpionum).  A  pass  between 
the  south  end  of  the  Dead  Sea  and  Zin.  formin 
of  the  landmarks  on  the  south  boundary  at  once  ol 
Judah  (Josh.  XV.  3  I  and  of  the  Holy  Land  (Num. 
xxxiv.  4).  Also  the  north  (?)  boundary  of  the 
Amorites  (Judg.  i.  .".••  i, 

Judas  Maccabaeus  had  here  a  great  victory  over 


tlie    Daphne    near    PaniM    had    also     the    name    of 
Riblah. 

b  There  i~  a  curious  expression  ill  this  Terse  which 

has  nut  yet  been  explained.     After  enumerating  the 
"dties"  (\3J»)  i't  Simeon,   the  text  proceeds,  "and 

their  villages  (^V^)  "ere  Ktam,  Ain ti\. 

cities"  [vyjj  .     Considering  the  strict  distinction  so 
generally  observed  in  the  use  of  these  two  words,  the 

above  is  at  least  worthy  of  note.      [HAZO 


42 


ALABASTER 


the  Edomites  (1  Mace.  v.  3,"  "  Arabattine,"  which 
see;  Jos.  Ant.  xii.  8,  §1). 

De  Sauley  (i.  77)  would  identify  it  with  the 
long  and  steep  pass  of  the  Wady  es-Zuweirah. 
Scorpions  he  certainly  found  there  in  plenty,  but 
this  wady  is  too  much  to  the  north  to  have  been 
Akrabbim,  as  the  boundary  went  from  thence  to 
Zin  and  Kadesn-bamea,  which  wherever  situated 
were  certainly  many  miles  further  south.  Robinson's 
conjecture  is,  that  "it  is  the  line  of  cliifs  which  cross 
the  Ghor  at  right  angles,  1 1  miles  south  of  the  Dead 
Sea,  and  form"  the  ascent  of  separation  between  the 
Ghor  and  the  Arabah  (ii.  120).  But  this  would  be 
a  descent  and  not  an  ascent  to  those  who  were  enter- 
ing the  Holy  Land  from  the  south.  Perhaps  the 
most  feasible  supposition  is  that  Akrabbim  is  the 
steep  pass  es-Sufah,  by  which  the  final  step  is  made 
from  the  desert  to  the  level  of  the  actual  land  of 
Palestine.  As  to  the  name,  scorpions  abound  in  the 
whole  of  this  district. 

This  place  must  not  be  confounded  with  Acra- 
battene,  north  of  Jerusalem ;  which  see.  [G.] 

ALABASTER  (aAa/3aa"rpos ;  alabastrum), 
a  word  occurring  in  Matt.  xxvi.  7,  Mark  xiv.  3, 
and  Luke  vii.  37,  and  signifying  an  alabaster  box 
to  contain  precious  ointment  or  spikenard.     It  is 


Alabaster  Vessels.— From  the  British  Museum.— The  inscription  on 
the  centre  vessel  denotes  the  quantity  it  holds. 

however  properly  the  name  of  the  substance  of 
which  the  box  was  formed,  and  hence  in  2  K. 
xxi.  13,  the  LXX.  use  6  aXafiacrrpos  for  the 
Heb.  nnW,  patina,  lecythus,  ampulla.  Horace 
(Od.  iv.  12)  uses  onyx  in  the  same  way,  •' Nardi 
parvus  onyx  eliciet  cadum."  Alabaster  is  a  calca- 
reous spar,  resembling  marble,  but  softer  and  more 
easily  worked,  and  therefore  very  suitable  for  being 
wrought  into  boxes.  Pliny  (lib.  iii.  20)  represents 
it  as  peculiarly  proper  for  this  purpose  (xiii.  2), 
"  Vas  unguentarium,  quod  ex  alabastrite  lapide  ad 
unguenta  a  corruptione  conservanda  excavare  sole- 
bant."  The  expression  brake  the  box,  in  Mark 
xiv.  3,  implies  only  the  removal  of  the  seal  upon 
the  mouth  of  the  box,  by  which  seal  the  perfume 
was  prevented  from  evaporating.  [W.  D.] 


ALCIMUS 

AL'AMETH  (TID^y  ;   'EAije/xe'0  ;    Almath). 

1.  SonofBecher  (IChr.  vii.8).     2.  Son  of  Jehoadah 
(1  Chr.  viii.  36),  called  Jarah  in  1  Chr.  ix.  42. 

ALAM'MELECH  pJ/?»^«  =  "king's  oak;" 
'EAijueAe'x  ;  Elmelech),  a  place  within  the  limits  of 
Asher,  named  between  Achshaph  and  Amad  (Josh. 
xix.  26,  only).  It  has  not  yet  been  identified  ; 
but  Schwarz  (191)  suggests  a  connexion  with  the 
Nahr  el-JIcli/:,  which  falls  into  the  Kishon  near 
Haifa.  [G.] 

AL'AMOTH  (n'lDbj? ;  Ps.  xlvi.,  title;   1  Chr. 

xv.  20),  a  word  of  exceedingly  doubtful  meaning, 
and  with  respect  to  which  various  conjectures  pre- 
vail. Some  critics  are  of  opinion  that  it  is  a  kind 
of  lute  brought  originally  from  Elam  (Persia) ; 
others  regard  it  as  an  instrument  on  which  young 
girls  (niu?y)  used  to  play  (comp.  the  old  English 
instrument  "  the  Virginal")  :  whilst  some  again 
consider  the  word  to  denote  a  species  of  lyre,  with 
a  sourdine  (mute)  attached  to  it  for  the  purpose  of 
subduing  or  deadening  the  sound,  and  that  on  this 

account  it  was  called  Pi\u?]}  from  D?J?  to  conceal. 
Lafage  speaks  of  niu?y  as  "  chant  supeVieur  ou 
chant  a  l'octave."  Some  German  commentators, 
having  discovered  that  the  lays  of  the  mediaeval 
minstrels  were  chaunted  to  a  melody  called  "  die 
Jungfraueuweise,"  have  transferred  that  notion  to 
the  Psalms ;  and  Tholuck,  for  instance,  translates 

Thu7V_  by  the  above  German  term.  According  to 
this  notion  TY\u?])  would  not  be  a  musical  instru- 
ment, but  a  melody.  (See  Mendelssohn's  Intro- 
duction to  his  Version  of  the  Psalms;  Forkel, 
Geschichte  der  Musik;  Lafage,  His.  Gen.  de  la 
Masique;   and  Gesenius  on   7\u>V).    [D.W.  M.] 

AL'CIMUS  ('AAkijuos,  valiant,  a  Greek  name, 
assumed,  according  to  the  prevailing  fashion,  as  re- 
presenting D^p^X,  'EXiaKel/x,  God  hath  set  up). 
called  also  JACEIMCS  (6  Ka.Vla.KeifJ.os  all.  'loiaKeiixos, 
Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  9,  5,  i.  e.  Wp\  d.Jud.  iv.  6  van: 
lectt.),  a  Jewish  priest  (1  Mace.  vii.  14),  who  was 
attached  to  the  Hellenizing  party  (2  Mace.  xiv.  3)  b. 
On  the  death  of  Menelaus  he  was  "appointed  to  the 
High-Priesthood  by  the  influence  of  Lysias,  though 
not' of  the  pontifical  family  (Joseph.  1.  c.  ;  xx.  9  ; 
1  Mace.  vii.  14),  to  the  exclusion  of  Onias,  the 
nephew  of  Menelaus.  When  Demetrius  Soter  ob- 
tained the  kingdom  of  Syria  he  paid  court  to  that 
monarch,  who  confirmed  him  in  his  office,  and 
throuoh  his  general  Bacchides  [Bacchides]  esta- 
blished him  at  Jerusalem.  His  cruelty,  however, 
was  so  great  that,  in  spite  of  the  force  left  in  his 
command,  he  was  unable  to  withstand  the  opposi- 
tion which  he  provoked,  and  he  again  fled  to  Deme- 
trius, who  immediately  took  measures  for  his  re- 
storation. The  first  expedition  under  Nicanor  proved 
unsuccessful ;  but  upon  this  Bacchides  marched  a 
second  time  against  Jerusalem  with  a  large  army, 


a  The  Alex.  MS.  in  this  place  reads  lovSaCa  for 
'l&ovnala,  and  Ewald  (Gesch.  iv.  91,  358)  endeavours 
to  show  therefrom  that  the  Acrabattine  there  men- 
tioned was  that  between  Samaria  and  Judaea,  in 
support  of  his  opinion  that  a  large  part  of  Southern 
Palestine  was  then  in  possession  of  the  Edomites. 
But  this  reading  itoes  not  agree  with  the  context,  and 


it  is  at  least  certain  that  Josephus  had  the-  text  as  it 
now  stands. 

i»  According  to  a  Jewish  tradition  (Bereshith  R.  G5), 
he  was  "  sister's  son  of  Jose  ben  Joeser,  "  chief  of  the 
Sanhedrim,  whom  he  afterwards  put  to  death. — 
Raphall,  Hist,  of  Jews,  i.  245,  308. 


ALEMA 

routed  Judas,  who  fell  in  the  battle  (161  B.C.)  and 
reinstated  Aleimus.  After  his  restoration,  Alcimus 
seems  to  have  attempted  to  modify  the  ancient  wor- 
ship, and  as  he  was  engaged  in  pulling  down  "  the 
wall  of  the  inner  court  of  the  sanctuary  "  (i.  <-., 
which  separated  the  court  of  the  Gentiles  from  it ; 
yet  see  <irimm,  1  Mace.  ix.  .r>4)  he  was  "  plagued  " 
(by  paralysis),  and  "died  at  that  time,"  160  B.C. 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  9,5,  xii.  10;  1  Mace.  vii.  ix. 
cf.  '_'  .Mace.  xiv.  xv.  Ewald,  Gesch.  des  Volkes  Isr. 
iv.  365  ff.)  [B.  F.  W.] 

AL'EMA  (iv  'AXi/xais;  in  Alimis),  a  large 
and  strong  city  in  Gilead  in  the  time  of  the 
Maccabees  (1  Mace.  v.  26).  Its  name  does  not 
occur  again,  nor  have  we  yet  any  means  of  identi- 
fying it.  [G.] 

AL'EMETH  (accurately,  Allemeth ;  Vxhv  ; 
TahepaQ;  A/math),  the  form  under  which  Aimon, 
the  name  of  a  city  of  the  priests  in  Benjamin, 
appears  in  1  Chr.  vi.  60  [45].  Under  the  very 
similar  form  of  '  Almit  or  Almitth,  it  has  been 
apparently  identified  in  the  present  day  at  about 
a  mile  N.E.  of  Anata,  the  site  of  Anathoth ;  first 
by  Schwarz  (128)  and  then  by  Mr.  Finn  (Rob. 
iii.  287).  Among  the  genealogies  of  Benjamin  the 
name  occurs  in  connexion  with  Azmaveth,  also  the 
name  of  a  town  of  that  tribe  (1  Chr.  viii.  36,  ix. 
42;  compared  with  Ezr.  ii.  24).  [Almon.]  In 
the  Targum  of  Jonathan  on  2  Sam.  xvi.  5,  Bahurim 
is  rendered  Alemath.  [G.] 

ALEXANDER  III.,  king  of  Macedon,  sur- 
named  the  <  '•  keat  ('A\e£av8pos,  the  helper  of  men  ; 
Alexander ;  Arab,  the  turn-horned,  (iolii,  Lex.  Arab. 
1896),  "the  son  of  Philip"  (1  Mace.  vi.  2)  and 
Olympias  was  bora  at  Pella  B.C.  356.  On  his 
mother's  side  he  claimed  descent  from  Achilles  ; 
and  the  Homeric  legends  were  not  without  influence 
upon  his  life.  At  an  early  age  he  was  placed 
under  the  care  of  Aristotle ;  and  while  still  a 
youth  he  turned  the  fortune  of  the  day  at  <  'haeroneia 
(338  B.C.).  On  the  murder  of  Philip  (B.C.  336) 
Alexander  put  down  with  resolute  energy  the  dis- 
affection and  hostility  by  which  his  throne  was 
menaced ;  and  in  two  years  he  crossed  the  Helles- 
pont (B.C.  334)  to  carry  out  the  plans  of  his  father, 
and  execute  the  mission  of  Greece  to  the  civilised 
world.  The  battle  of  the  Granicus  was  followed 
by  the  subjugation  of  western  Asia;  and  in  the 
following  year  the  fate  of  the  East  was  decided  at 
Issus  (B.C.  333).  Tyre  and  Gaza  we're  the  only 
cities  in  Western  Syria  which  offered  Alexander  any 
resistance,  and  these  were  reduced  and  treated  witii 
unosaal  severity  (b.c  332).  Egypt  next  sub- 
mitted to  him  ;  and  in  b.c.  WW  lie  founded  Alex- 
andria, which  remains  to  the  present  day  the  most 
characteristic  monument  of  his  life  and  work.  In 
the  same  vear  he  finally  defeated  Darius  at    <!au- 


ALEXANDEK 


43 


The  famous  tradition  of  the  visit  of  Alexander  to 
Jerusalem  during  his  Phoenician  campaign  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xi.  8,  1  ff.)  has  been  a  fruitful  source  of  con- 
troversy. The  Jews,  it  is  said,  had  provoked  his 
anger  by  refusing  to  transfer  their  allegiance  to  him 
when  summoned  to  do  so  during  the  siege  of  Tyre, 
and  after  the  reduction  of  Tyre  and  Gaza  (Joseph. 
1.  e.)  he  turned  towards  Jerusalem.  Jaddua  (Jad- 
dus)  the  High-Priest  (Neh.  xii.  11,  22),  who 
had  been  warned  in  a  dream,  how  to  avert  the 
king's  anger,  calmly  awaitel  his  approach;  and 
when  he  drew  near  went  out  to  Sapha  ( HQY,  he 
watched),  within  sight  of  the  city  and  temple,  clad 
in  his  robes  of  hyacinth  and  gold,  and  accompanied 
by  a  train  of  priests  and  citizens  arrayed  in  white. 
Alexander  was  so  moved  by  the  solemn  spectacle 
that  he  did  reverence  to  the  holy  name  inscribed 
upon  the  tiara  of  the  High-Priest ;  and  when 
Parmenio  expressed  surprise,  he  replied  that  "  he 
had  seen  the  god  whom  Jaddua  represented  in  a 
dream  at  Dium,  encouraging  him  to  cross  over  into 
Asia,  and  promising  him  success."  After  this,  it 
is  said,  that  he  visited  Jerusalem,  offered  sacrifice 
there,  heard  the  prophecies  of  Daniel  which  foretold 
his  victory,  and  contened  important  privileges  upon 
the  Jews,  not  only  in  Judaea  but  in  Babylonia  and 
Media,  which  they  enjoyed  during  the  supremacy 
of  his  successors.  The  narrative  is  repeated  in  the 
Talmud  (Joma  f.  69;  ap.  Otho,  Lex.  Itabb.  s.  v. 
Alexander;  the  High-Priest  is  there  said  to  have 
been  Simon  the  Just),  in  later  Jewish  writers 
(Vajikra  R.  13;  Joseph  ben  Gorion,  ap.  Ste. 
Croix,  p.  553),  and  in  the  chronicles  of  Abulfeda 
(Ste.  Croix,  p.  555).  The  event  was  adapted  by 
the  Samaritans  to  suit  their  own  history,  with  a 
corresponding  change  of  places  and  persons  and 
various  embellishments  (Aboul'lfatah,  quoted  by 
Ste.  Croix,  pp.  209-12);  and  in  due  time  Alex- 
ander was  enrolled  among  the  proselytes  of  Judaism. 
On  the  other  hand  no  mention  of  the  event  occurs 
in  Arrian,  Plutarch,  Diodorus,  or  Cm  this ;  and  the 
connexion  in  which  it  is  placed  by  Josephus  is  alike 
inconsistent  with  Jewish  history  (Ewald,  Gesch. 
d.  Volkes  /sr.iv.  124,  ff.)  and  with  the  narrative  of 
Arrian  (iii.  1  efiSSfj.]]  r)pipa  anOTris  rd^Tjs  iXavvoiv 
riKev  is  Hr/XovaLov). 

But  admitting  the  incon  ectness  of  the  details 
of  the  tradition  as  given  by  Josephus,  there  are 
several  points  which  confirm  the  truth  of  the 
main  fact.  Justin  says  that  "  many  kings  of 
the  East  came  to  meet  Alexander  wearing  fillets  " 
(lib.  xi.  10)  ;  and  after  the  capture  of  Tyre 
"  Alexander  himself  visited  some  of  the  cities 
which  still  refused  to  submit  to  him  "  (Curt, 
iv.  5,  13).  Even  at  a  later  time,  accordii 
Curtius,  he  excelled  vengeance  personally  on  the 
Samaritans  for  the  murder  of  his  governor  Andio- 
machus  (Curt.  iv.  8,  10).  Besides  this,  Jewish 
soldiers   were  enlisted   in   his   army   (Hecat.     ■/■. 


gamela ;    and  in  B.C.  330  his  unhappy  rival  was    Joseph.  <■.  Apian,  i.   22);  and  Jews   font 


murdered  by  Bessus,  satrap  of  Bactria.     The  nexl 

two  years  were  occ u pi a  1  by  Alexander  in  the  con- 
solidation of  his  Persian  conquests,  and  the  reduc- 
tion of  Bactria.  In  B.C.  •"•27  he  i  rossed  the  Indus, 
penetrated  to  the  Hydaspes,  and  was  there  forced 
by  the  discontent  of  his  army  to  turn  westward. 
He  reached  Susa  B.C.  325,  and  proceeded  to  Baby- 
lon b.c.  324,  which  he  chose  as  the  capital  of  his 
empire.  In  the  next  year  he  died  there  I  B.C.  323) 
in   the  midst  of  lus  gigantic  plans;    and  those  who 

inherited  his  i [uests  left  his  designs  unachieved 

and  unattempted  (cf.  Dan.  vii.  (^,  viii.  5,  xi.  3 ). 


important  element  in  the  population  of  the  city, 
which  he  founded  shortly  alter  the  supposed  visit. 
Above  all,  the  privil  ^s  which  he  is  said  to  have 
conferred  upon  the  Jews,  including  the  remission  ol 
tribute  every  sabbatical  year,  existed  in  later  times, 
and  imply  some  such  relation  between  the  Jews 
and  the  great  conqueror  as  Josephus  describes. 
Internal  evidence  is  decidedly  in  favour  of  the 
en  in  its  picturesque  fulness.  From  policy 
or  conviction  Alexander  delighted  to  represent  him- 
self as  chosen  by  de  tiny  for  the  great  act  which  he 
achieved.     The  siege  of  Tyre  arose  profct  etQy  from 


44 


ALEXANDER 


a  religious  motive.  The  battle  of  Issus  was  pre- 
ceded by  the  visit  to  Gordium;  the  invasion  of 
Persia  by  the  pilgrimage  to  the  temple  of  Amnion. 
And  if  it  be  impossible  to  determine  the  exact  cir- 
cumstances of  the  meeting  of  Alexander  and  the 
Jewish  envoys,  the  silence  of  the  classical  his- 
torians, who  notoriously  disregarded  {e.g.  the 
JUaceabees)  and  misrepresented  (Tac.  Hist.  v.  8)  the 
fortunes  of  the  Jews,  cannot  be  held  to  be  con- 
clusive against  the  occurrence  of  an  event  which 
must  have  appeared  to  them  trivial  or  unintelligible 
(Jahn,  Archaeol.  iii.  300  ff. ;  Ste.  Croix,  Examen 
critique,  &c,  Paris,  1810;  Thirlwall,  Hist,  of 
Greece,  vi.  206  f. ;  and  on  the  other  side  Ant.  van 
Dale,  Dissert,  super  Aristed,  Amstel.  1705,  pp. 
•39  ff.). 

The  tradition,  whether  true  or  false,  presents 
an  aspect  of  Alexander's  character  which  has  been 
frequently  lost  sight  of  by  his  recent  biogra- 
phers. He  was  not  simply  a  Greek,  nor  must 
he  be  judged  by  a  Greek  standard.  The  Oriental- 
ism, which  was  a  scandal  to  his  followers,  was 
a  necessary  deduction  from  his  principles,  and  not 
the  result  of  caprice  or  vanity  (comp.  Arr.  vii.  29). 
He  approached  the  idea  of  a  universal  monarchy 
from  the  side  of  Greece,  but  his  final  object  was 
to  establish  something  higher  than  the  paramount 
supremacy  of  one  people.  His  purpose  was  to 
combine  and  equalize,  not  to  annihilate:  to  wed 
the  East  and  West  in  a  just  union — not  to  enslave 
Asia  to  Greece  (Plut.  de  Alex.  Or.  1,  §6).  The 
time,  indeed,  was  not  yet  come  when  this  was  pos- 
sible, but  if  he  could  not  accomplish  the  great  issue, 
he  prepared  the  way  for  its  accomplishment. 

The  first  and  most  direct  consequence  of  the 
policy  of  Alexander  was  the  weakening  of  nationali- 
ties, the  first  condition  necessary  for  the  dissolution 
of  the  old  religions.  The  swift  course  of  his  vic- 
tories, the  constant  incorporation  of  foreign  ele- 
ments in  his  armies,  the  fierce  wars  and  changing 
fortunes  of  his  successors,  broke  down  the  barriers 
by  which  kingdom  had  been  separated  from  king- 
dom, and  opened  the  road  for  larger  conceptions 
of  life  and  faith  than  had  hitherto  been  possible 
(cf.  Polyb.  iii.  59).  The  contact  of  the  East  and 
West  brought  out  into  practical  forms,  thoughts 
and  feelings  which  had  been  confined  to  the 
schools.  Paganism  was  deprived  of  life  as  soon 
as  it  was  transplanted  beyond  the  narrow  limits 
in  which  it  took  its  shape.  The  spread  of  com- 
merce followed  the  progress  of  aims ;  and  the 
Greek  language  ami  literature  vindicated  their 
claim  to  be  considered  the  most  perfect  expres- 
sion of  human  thought  by  becoming  practically 
universal. 

The  Jews  were  at  once  most  exposed  to  the 
powerful  influences  thus  brought  to  bear  upon  the 
East,  and  most  able  to  support  them.  In  the 
arrangement  of  the  Greek  conquests,  which  followed 
the  battle  of  Ipsus  B.C.  301,  Judaea  was  made  the 
frontier  land  of  the  rival  empires  of  Syria  and 
Egypt,  and  though  it  was  necessarily  subjected  to 
the  constant  vicissitudes  of  war,  it  was  able  to 
make  advantageous  terms  with  the  state  to  which  it 
owed  allegiance  from  the  important  advantages 
which  it  ottered  for  attack  or  defence  [Antiochus, 
ii.-vii.].  Internally  also  the  people  were  prepared 
to  withstand  the  effects  of  the  revolution  which  the 
Greek  dominion  effected.  The  constitution  of 
Ezra  had  obtained  its  full  development.  A  power- 
ful hierarchy  had  succeeded  in  substituting  the  idea 
of  a  church  for  that  of  a  state  •    and  the  Jew  was 


ALEXANDER, 

now  able  to  wander  over  the  world  and  yet  remain 
faithful  to  the  god  of  his  fathers  [The  Disper- 
sion]. The  same  constitutional  change  had  strength- 
ened the  intellectual  and  religious  position  of  the 
people.  A  rigid  "fence"  of  ritualism  protected 
the  course  of  common  life  from  the  license  of  Gieek 
manners  ;  and  the  great  doctrine  of  the  unity  of 
God,  which  was  now  seen  to  be  the  divine  centre  of 
their  system,  counteracted  the  attractions  of  a  philo- 
sophic pantheism  [Simon  the  Just].  Through 
a  long  course  of  discipline,  in  which  they  had  been 
left  unguided  by  prophetic  teaching,  the  Jews  had 
realised  the  nature  of  their  mission  to  the  world, 
and  were  waiting  for  the  means  of  fulfilling  it. 
The  conquest  of  Alexander  furnished  them  with  the 
occasion  and  the  power.  But  at  the  same  time 
the  example  of  Greece  fostered  personal  as  well 
as  popular  independence.  Judaism  was  speedily 
divided  into  sects,  analogous  to  the  typical  forms  of 
Greek  philosophy.  But  even  the  rude  analysis  of 
the  old  faith  was  productive  of  good.  The  free- 
dom of  Greece  was  no  less  instrumental  in  forming 
the  Jews  for  their  final  work  than  the  contemplative 
spirit  of  Persia,  or  the  civil  organization  of  Pome  ; 
for  if  the  career  of  Alexander  was  rapid,  its  effects 
were  lasting.  The  city  which  he  chose  to  bear  his 
name  perpetuated  in  after  ages  the  office  which  he 
providentially  discharged  for  Judaism  and  mankind  ; 
and  the  historian  of  Christianity  must  confirm  the 
judgment  of  Arrian,  that  Alexander,  "  who  was  like 
no  other  man,  could  not  have  been  given  to  the  world 
without  the  special  design  of  Providence "  (efw 
rov  deiov,  Arr.  vii.  30).  And  Alexander  himself 
appreciated  this  design  better  even  than  his  great 
teacher;  for  it  is  said  (Plut.  de  Alex.  Or.  1,  §6) 
that  when  Aristotle  urged  him  to  treat  the  Greeks 
as  freemen  and  the  Orientals  as  slaves,  he  found  the 
true  answer  to  this  counsel  in  the  recognition  of 
his  '  divine  mission  to  unite  and  reconcile  the  world 
(KOLvhs  rjKeiv  6e66ev  ap/xocrT^s  /cat  SiaWaKTTjs 
tSiv  o\wv  vofiifav).' 


:  (Attx  talent)  o/  Ly 


kin:;  of  Thrace. 


Obv.  Head  of  Alexander  the  Great,  ns  a  young  Jupiter  Ammmi,  to 
right.  Uev.  BASIAEfiS  AY2IMAXOY.  In  field,  mono- 
gram and  2.  Pallas  stated  to  left,  holding  a  Victory. 

In  the  prophetic  visions  of  Daniel  the  influence 
of  Alexander  is  necessarily  combined  with  that  of 
his  successors.8  They  represented  with  partial  ex- 
aggeration the  several  phases  of  his  character ;  and 
to  the  Jews  nationally  the  policy  of  the  Syrian 
kings  was  of  greater  importance  than  the  original 
conquest  of  Asia.  But  some  traits  of  "  the  first 
mighty  king"  (Dan.  viii.  21,  xi.  3)  are  given  with 
vigorous  distinctness.  The  emblem  by  which  he  is 
typified  i.T'Q^,  a  he-goat,  fr.  "ISV  he  leapt,  Ges. 
Thcs.  s.  v.)  suggests  the  notions  of  strength  and 


il  The  attempt  of  Bertholdt  to  apply  the  description 
of  the  third  monarchy  to  that  of  Alexander  has  little 
to  recommend  it  [Daniel]. 


ALEXANDER 

speed  ;b  ami  the  universal  extent  (Dan.  viii.  ">,  .  .  . 
from  the  vest  on  the  face  of  the  whole  earth),  and 
marvellous  rapidity  of  his  conquests  (Dan.  1.  c.  he 
touched  not  theground)  are  brought  forward  as  the 
characteristics  of  bis  power,  which  was  directed  by 
the  strongest  personal  impetuosity  (Dan.  viii.  6, 
in  the  fury  of  his  power).  He  ruled  with  great 
dominion,  and  did  according  to  his  will  (xi.3); 
"  and  there  was  none  that  could  deliver  .  .  .  cut  of 
his  hand  (viii.  7)."  [B.  F.  W.] 

ALEXANDER  BALAS  (Joseph.  Ant.  .xiii. 
4,  §8,  'A\4£av5pos  6  BaAas  Aey6/j.evos  ;  Strab.  xiv., 
p.  751,  rbu  Bd\au  'AAt^avfipov ;  Just.  XXXV.  1, 
Subomant  pro  eo  2?afamquendam  . . .  et  ...  nomen 
ei  Alexandri  inditur.  Balas  possibly  represents  the 
Aram.  X?l?2,  lord:  he  likewise  assumed  the  titles 

ZirMpavj-jS  and  evepyeTT]s,  1  MaCC.  x.  1).  He  was, 
according  to  some,  a  (natural)  son  of  Antiochus  IV. 
Epiphanes  (Strab.  xiii.  Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  i,  1),  but 
he  was  mine  generally  regarded  as  an  impostor  who 
falsely  assumed  the  connexion  (App.  Syr.  * > T ; 
Justin  1.  c.  cf.  Polyb.  .xx.xiii.  Di).  He  claimed 
the  throne  of  Syria  in  152  B.C.  in  opposition  to 
Demetrius  Soter,  who  had  provoked  the  hostility  of 
the  neighbouring  kings  and  alienated  the  affections 
of  his  subjects  (Joseph.  1.  c).  His  pretensions 
were  put  forward  by  Heraclides,  formerly  treasurer 
of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  who  obtained  the  recogni- 
tion of  his  title  at  Borne  by  scandalous  intrigues 
(Polyb.  .xx.xiii.  14,  16).  After  landing  at  Ptole- 
mais  (1  Mace.  x.  1)  Alexander  gained  the  warm 
support  of  Jonathan,  wdio  was  now  the  leader  of 
the  Jews  (1  Mace.  ix.  7o)  ;  and  though  his  first 
efforts  were  unsuccessful  (.lust.  XXXV.  1,  Di),  in 
150  B.C.  he  completely  routed  the  forces  of  Deme- 
trius, who  himself  fell  in  the  retreat  (1  Maec.  x.  48- 
50  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  xiii. '_',  4  ;  Str.  xvi.  p.  751 ).  After 
this  Alexander  married  Cleopatra,  the  daughter  of 
Ptolemaeus  VI.  Philometor  ;  and  in  the  arrangement 
of  bis  kingdom  appointed  Jonathan  governor  ( fj.epi5- 
dpxvs',  1  Mace.  x.  65)  of  a  province  (Judea:  cf. 
1  Mace.  \i.  -<7:.  But  his  triumph  was  of  shoit 
duration.  After  obtaining  power  he  gave  himself 
up  to  a  life  of  indulgence  (Liv.  Ep.  50  ;  cf.  Athen.  v. 
211) ;  and  when  1  temef  nus  Nieator,  the  son  of  I  Deme- 
trius Soter,  landed  in  Syria  in  147  B.C.,  the  new  pre- 
tender found  powerful  support  (1  Mace.  x.  67  tf). 
At  first  Jonathan  defeated  and  slew  Apollonius  the 
governor  of  ('ode-Syria,  wdio  had  joined  the  party 
of  Demetrius,  for  which  exploit  he  received  fresh 
favours  from  Alexander  (1  Mace.  x.  69-89);  but 
shortly  afterwards  (B.C.  146)  Ptolemy  entiled 
Syria  with  a  large  force,  and  after  he  had  placed 
garrisons  in  the  chief  cities  on  the  coast,  which 
received  him  according  to  the  commands  of  Alex- 
ander, suddenly  pronounced  himself  in  favour  of 
Demetrius  1  Mace.  xi.  1-11;  Joseph.  Ant.  xiii. 
4, .')  if. ).  alleging,  probably  with  truth,  the  existence 
of  a  conspiracy  against  his  life  (Joseph.  1.  c.  cf. 
Died.  ap.  Midler.  Fragm.  ii.  16).  Alexander,  wdio 
had  been  forced  to  leave  Anti'ich  (Joseph.  1.  c.), 
was  in  Cilicia  when  he  heard  of  Ptolemy's  defec- 
tion '  1  .Mace.  xi.  14).  He  hastened  to  meet  him, 
but  was  defeated  (1  Mace.  \i.  15;  dust.  rxxv.  2), 
and  tied  to  Abac  in  Arabia  (Diod,  1.  c.),  where  ne 
was  murdered  B.C.  146  (Diod.  1.  c.  ;    1    Mace.   \i. 


ALEXANDRIA 


45 


17  differ  as  to  the  manner;  and  F.useb.  ('limn. 
Arm.  i.  349  represents  him  to  have  been  slain  in 
the  battle).  The  narrative  in  1  Maec.  and  Josephus 
shows  clearly  the  partiality  which  the  Jews  enter- 
tained for  Alexander  "as  the  first  that  entreated  nl' 
true  peace  with  them"  (1  Mace.  x.  47);  and  the 
same  feeling  was  exhibited  afterwards  in  the  zeal 
with  which  they  supported  the  claims  of  his  son 
Antiochus.     [ANTIOCHUS  vi.]  [B.  F.  W.J 


b  There  may  be  also  some  allusion  in  the  word  to 
the  legend  of  Caranus,  the  founder  of  the  ArgiVB 
dynasty  in  Macedonia,  who  was  guided  to  victory  by 
"a  floek  of  goats  "  (Justin,  i.  7). 


Tetradraehm  (Ptolemaic  talent)  of  Alexander  Balas. 

Obv.  Bust  of  King  to  right.  Rev.  BA2IAEQ2  AAEHAN- 
APOY.  Eagle,  upon  rudder,  to  left,  and  '"aim-branch.  In  field 
the  monogram  and  symbol  of  Tvre  ;  date  T3P  (163  Mr.  Seleu- 
cid),  &c. 

ALEXAN'DER  ('AA^avBpos),  in  N.  T. 
1.  Son  of  Simon  the  Cyrenian,  who  was  compelled 
to  bear  the  cross  for  our  Lord  (Mark  xv.  21).  From 
the  manner  in  which  he  is  there  mentioned,  together 
with  his  brother  Rufus,  they  were  probably  persons 
well  known  in  the  early  Christian  church. 

2.  One  of  the  kindred  of  Annas  the  high  priest 
(Acts  iv.  6),  apparently  in  some  high  office,  as  he 
is  among  three  who  are  mentioned  by  name.  Some 
suppose  him  identical  with  Alexander  the  Alabarch 
at  Alexandria,  the  brother  of  Philo  Judaeus,  men- 
tioned by  Josephus  (Ant.  xviii.  8,  §1,  xix.  5,  §1) 
in  the  latter  passage  as  a  <pi\os  apxalos  of  the 
Emperor  Claudius :  so  that  the  time  is  not  incon- 
sistent with  such  an  idea. 

3.  A  Jew  at  Ephesus,  whom  his  countrymen  put 

forward  during  the  tumult  raised  by  Demetrius  the 
silversmith  (Acts  six.  33),  to  plead  their  cause  with 
the  moli,  as  being  unconnected  with  the  attempt  to 
overthrow  the  worship  of  Artemis.  I  >r  he  may 
have  '-ecu,  as  imagined  by  Calvin  and  others,  a 
Jewish  convert  to  Christianity,  whom  the  Jews 
were  willing  to  expose  as  a  victim  to  the  frenzy  of 
the  mob. 

4.  An  Ephesian  Christian,  reprobated  by  St.  Paul 
in  1  Tim.  i.  20,  as  having,  together  with  one  Ilv- 

is,  put  from  him  faith  and  a  good  conscience, 

and  so  made  shipwreck  .■oncoming  the  faith.  This 
may  be  the  same  with 

5.  Alexander  the  coppersmith  ('AX,  6  xa\- 
Kfvs),  mentioned  by  the  same  apostle,  2  Tim.  iv. 
1  1,  as  having  done  him  many  mischiefs.     It  is  quite 

uncertain  where  this  person  reside,!  ;  but  from  the 
caution  to  Timotheus  to  beware  of  him,  probably 
at  Ephesus.  [II.  A.  |' 

ALEXANDRIA  (f,  'AAf^dvSptca,  3  Maec.  iii. 
I;    Mod.,  A7-/  ■  :   I.llm..  '  \Af£aj/8pei/s, 

3  MaCC.  ii.  .'in,  iii.  ■_'!  ;  Acts  wiii.  24,  vi.  9),  the 
Hellenic  Roman  and  Christian  capital  of  Egypt,  was 
founded  i>\  Uexander  the  Great  B.C.  332,  who 
traced  himself'  the  ground-plan  of  the  city  which  he 
designed  to  make  the  metropolis  ot'  bis  western  em- 
pire I'lut.  Alex.  26).  The  work  thus  begun  was 
continu.il  after  the  death  of  Alexander  by  the  Pto- 


46 


ALEXANDRIA 


lemies ;  and  the  beauty  (Athen.  i.  p.  3)  of  Alex- 
andria became  proverbial.  Every  natural  advantage 
contributed  to  its  prosperity.  The  climate  and  site 
were  singularly  healthy  (Strab.  p.  793).  The  har- 
bours, formed  by  the  island  of  Pharos  and  the  head- 
land Lochias,  were  safe  and  commodious,  alike  for 
commerce  and  for  war;  and  the  Lake  Mareotis  was 
an  inland  haven  for  the  merchandise  of  Egypt  and 
India  (Strab.  p.  798).  Under  the  despotism  of  the 
later  Ptolemies  the  trade  of  Alexandria  declined,  but 
its  population  (300.000  freemen,  Diod.  xvii.  52  : 
the  free  population  of  Attica  was  about  1 30,000)  and 
wealth  (Strab.  p.  798)  were  enormous.  After  the 
victory  of  Augustus  it  suffered  for  its  attachment  to 
the  cause  of  Antony  (Strab.  p.  792)  ;  but  its  im- 
portance as  one  of  the  chief  corn-ports  of  Rome H 
secured  for  it  the  general  favour  of  the  first  empe- 
rors. In  later  times  the  seditious  tumults  for  which 
the  Alexandrians  had  always  been  notorious,  deso- 
lated the  city  (a.c.  260  ff.  Gibbon,  Decline  and 
Fall,  c.  x.),  and  religious  feuds  aggravated  the 
popular  distress  (Dionys.  Alex.  Ep.  iii.,  xii. ;  Euseb. 
H.  E.,  vi.  41  ff. ;  vii.  22).  Yet  even  thus,  though 
Alexandria  suffered  greatly  from  constant  dissen- 
sions and  the  weakness  of  the  Byzantine  court,  the 
splendour  of  "  the  great  city  of  the  West '"'  amazed 
Amrou,  its  Arab  conqueror  (a.c.  640  ;  Gibbon, 
c.  li.)  ;  and  after  centuries  of  Mahometan  mis- 
rule it  promises  once  again  to  justify  the  wisdom 
of  its  founder  (Strab.  xvii.  791-9;  Frag.  ap. 
Joseph.  Ant.  xiv.  7,  2;  Pint.  Alex.  20;  Arr. 
iii.  1 ;  Joseph.  B.  J.  iv.  5.  Comp.  Alexander 
the  Great.) 

The  population  of  Alexandria  was  mixed  from  the 
first  (comp.  Curt.  iv.  8,  5)  ;  and  this  feet  formed  the 
groundwork  of  the  Alexandrine  character.  The  three 
regions  into  which  the  city  was  divided  (Regio 
Judaeorum,  Brucheium,  Rhacotis)  corresponded  to 
the  three  chief  classes  of  its  inhabitants,  Jews, 
Greeks,  Egyptians  ;b  but  in  addition  to  these  prin- 
cipal races,  representatives  of  almost  every  nation 
were  found  there  (Dion  Chrys.  Oral,  xxxii.).  Ac- 
cording to  Josephus,  Alexander  himself  assigned  to 
the  Jews  a  place  in  his  new  city ;  "  and  they  ob- 
tained," he  adds,  "  equal  privileges  with  the  Mace- 
donians "  (  c.  Ap.  ii.  4)  in  consideration  "of  then- 
services  against  the  Egyptians  "  (i>.  J.  ii.  18,  7). 
Ptolemy  I.  imitated  the  policy  of  Alexander,  and, 
after  the  capture  of  Jerusalem,  he  removed  a  con- 
siderable number  of  its  citizens  to  Alexandria.  Many 
others  followed  of  their  own  accord ;  and  all  re- 
ceived the  full  Macedonian  franchise  (Joseph.  Ant. 
xii.  1.  Cf.  c.  Ap.  i.  22),  as  men  of  known  and 
tried  fidelity  (Joseph,  c.  Ap.  ii.  4).  Already  on 
a  former  occasion  the  Jews  had  sought  a  home  in 
the  land  of  their  bondage.  More  than  two  cen- 
turies and  a  half  before  the  foundation  of  Alexandria 
a  large  body  of  them  had  taken  refuge  in  Egypt, 
after  the  murder  of  Gedaliah;  but  these,  after  a 
general  apostacy,  were  carried  captive  to  Babylon  by 
Nebuchadnezzar  (2  K.'xxv.  26;  Jer.  xliv.;  Joseph. 
Ant.  x.  9,  7). 


The  Alexandrine  corn-vessels  (Acts  xxvii.  6, 
xxviii.  11)  were  large  (Acts  xxvii.  37)  and  handsome 
(Luo.  Navig.  p.  668,  ed.  Bened.)  ;  and  even  Vespasian 
made  a  voyage  in  one  (Joseph.  B.  J.  vii.  2).  They 
generally  sailed  direct  to  Puteoli  (Dicaearchia,  Strab. 
p.  793);  Senec.  JEj>.  77,  l;,cf.  Suet.  Aug.  98,  Acts 
xxviii.  13)  ;  but,  from  stress  of  weather,  often  sailed 
under  the  Asiatic  coast  (Acts  xxvii. ;  cf.  Luc.  1.  c.  p. 
670  f.  ;  Smith,  Voyage  of  St.  Paul,  pp.  70  ff.). 


ALEXANDRIA 

The  fate  of  the  later  colony  was  far  different. 
The  numbers  and  importance  of  the  Egyptian  Jews 
were  rapidly  increased  under  the  Ptolemies  by  fresh 
immigrations  and  untiring  industry.  Philo  esti- 
mates them  in  his  time  at  little  less  than  1,000,000 
{In  Flacc.  §0,  p.  971);  and  adds,  that  two  of 
the  five  districts  of  Alexandria  were  called  "  Jew- 
ish districts;"  and  that  many  Jews  lived  scattered 
in  the  remaining  three  (iii.  §8,  p.  973).  Julius 
Caesar  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiv.  10,  §1)  and  Augustus 
confirmed  to  them  the  privileges  which  they  had  en- 
jo}red  before,  and  they  retained  them  with  various 
interruptions,  of  which  the  most  important,  A.D.  39, 
is  described  by  Philo  (/.  c),  during  the  tumults 
and  persecutions  of  later  reigns  (Joseph,  c.  Ap.  ii. 
4;  B.J.  xii.  3,2).  They  were  represented,  at 
least  for  some  time  (from  the  time  of  Cleopatra  to 
the  reign  of  Claudius ;  Jost,  Gesch.  d.  Judenth. 
353)  by  their  own  officer  {tdv&pxns,  Strab.  ap. 
Joseph.  Ant .  xiv.  7,  2 ;  aAa^dpxrjs,  Joseph.  Ant . 
xviii.  7,  3;  9,  1 ;  xix.  5,  1  ;  cf.  Rup.  ad  Juv. 
Sat.  i.  130;  yevapxys,  Philo,  In  Flacc.  §10,  p. 
975),  and  Augustus  appointed  a  council  {yepovaia 
i.  e.  Sanhedrin  :  Philo  /.  c.)  "  to  superintend  the 
affairs  of  the  Jews,"  according  to  their  own  laws. 
The  establishment  of  Christianity  altered  the  civil 
position  of  the  Jews,  but  they  maintained  their  rela- 
tive prosperity ;  and  when  Alexandria  was  taken  by 
Amrou  40,000  tributary  Jews  were  reckoned  among 
the  marvels  of  the  city  (Gibbon,  cli.). 

For  some  time  the  Jewish  Church  in  Alexandria 
was  in  close  dependence  on  that  of  Jerusalem.  Both 
were  subject  to  the  civil  power  of  the  first  Ptole- 
mies, and  both  acknowledged  the  high-priest  as  their 
religious  head.  The  persecution  of  Ptolemy  Philo- 
pator  (217  B.C.)  occasioned  the  first  political  sepa- 
ration between  the  two  bodies.  From  that  time 
the  Jews  of  Palestine  attached  themselves  to  the 
fortunes  of  Syria  [AntiOCHUS  the  Great]  ;  and 
the  same  policy  which  alienated  the  Palestinian 
party  gave  unity  and  decision  to  the  Jews  of  Alex- 
andria. The  Septuagint  translation  which  strength- 
ened the  barrier  of  language  between  Palestine  and 
Egypt,  and  the  temple  at  Leontopolis  (161  B.C.) 
which  subjected  the  Egyptian  Jews  to  the  charge 
of  schism,  widened  the  breach  which  was  thus 
opened.  But  the  division  though  marked  was  not 
complete.  At  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  era 
the  Egyptian  Jews  still  paid  the  contributions  to 
the  temple-service  (Raphall,  Hist,  of  Jews,  ii.  72). 
Jerusalem,  though  its  name  was  fashioned  to  a 
Greek  shape,  was  still  the  Holy  City,  the  metropolis 
not  of  a  country  but  of  a  people  {'ltpSnoXis,  Philo, 
In  Flacc.  §7  ;  Leg.  ad  C'ai.  §36),  and  the  Alex- 
andrians had  a  synagogue  there  (Acts  vi.  9).  The 
internal  administration  of  the  Alexandrine  Church 
was  independent  of  the  Sanhedrin  at  Jerusalem  ; 
but  respect  survived  submission. 

There  were,  however,  other  causes  which  tended 
to  produce  at  Alexandria  a  distinct  form  of  the 
Jewish  character  and  faith.  The  religion  and  phi- 
losophy of  that  restless  city  produced  an  effect  upon 


b  Polyhius  (xxxiv.  14;  ap.  Strab.  p.  797)  speaks 
of  the  population  as  consisting  of  "  three  races 
{rpia.  yeVr;),  the  native  Egyptian  .  .  .,  the  merce- 
nary, .  .  .  and  the  Alexandrine  .  .  .  of  Creek  descent." 
The  Jews  might  receive  the  title  of  "mercenaries," 
from  the  service  which  they  originally  rendered  to 
Alexander  (Joseph.  B.  J.  ii.  18,  7)  and  the  first  Pto- 
lemies (Joseph,  c.  Ap.  ii.  4). 


ALEXANDRIA 

the  people  more  powerful  than  the  influence  of 
politics  or  commerce.  Alexander  himself  symbolised 
the  spirit  with  which  he  wished  to  animate  his  new 
capital  by  founding  a  temple  of  Isis  side  by  si<le 

with  the  temples  of  the  Grecian  gods  (Arr.  iii.  1). 
The  creeds  of  the  East  and  West  were  to  coexist  in 
friendly  union  ;  and  in  after-times  the  mixed  worship 
of -Ssaipis  (comp. Gibbon, c.  3x?iu, ;  Ik  t  /  ■'. 
i.  p.  98)  was  characteristic  of  the  Greek  kingdom 
of  Egypt  (August.  Be  Civ.  Dei,  xviii.  5 ;  S.  mcu  i- 
mus  Aegyptiorum  Deus).  This  catholicity  of  wor- 
ship was  farther  combined  with  the  spread  of  uni- 
versal learning-.  The  same  monarchs  who  favoured 
the  worship  of  Serapis  (Clem.  Al.  Protr.  iv.  §48) 
founded  and  embellished  the  Museum  and  Library; 
and  part  of  the  Library  was  deposited  in  the  Sera- 
peum.  The  new  faith  and  the  new  literature  led 
to  a  common  issue ;  and  the  Egyptian  Jews  ne- 
cessarily imbibed  the  spirit  which  prevailed  around 
them. 

The  Jews  were,  indeed,  peculiarly  susceptible  of 
the  influences  to  which  they  were  exposed.  They 
presented  from  the  first  a  capacity  for  Eastern  or 
Western  development.  To  the  faith  and  conserva- 
tism of  the  Oriental  they  united  the  activity  and 
energy  of  the  Greek.  The  mere  presence  of  Hel- 
lenic culture  could  not  fail  to  call  into  play  their 
powers  of  speculation  which  were  hardly  .repressed 
by  the  traditional  legalism  of  Palestine  (comp.  Jost, 
Gesch.  d.  Judenth.  pp.  293 ff,) ;  and  the  unchang- 
ing element  of  divine  revelation  which  they  always 
retained,  enabled  them  to  harmonize  new  .thought 
with  old  belief.  But  while  the  intercourse  of  the 
Jew  and  Greek  would  have  produced  the  same  gene- 
ral consequences  in  any  case,  Alexandria  was  pecu- 
liarly adapted  to  ensure  their  full  effect.  The 
result  of  the  contact  of  Judaism  with  the  many 
creeds  which  were  current  there  must  have  been 
speedy  and  powerful.  The  earliest  Greek  fragment 
of  Je\fish  writing  which  has  been  preserved  (about 
l<l'i  B.C.)  [Am.sTOBULUs]  contains  large  Oiphic 
quotations,  which  had  been  already  moulded  into  a 
Jewish  form  (comp.  Jost,  Gesch.  d.  Judenth.  370)  ; 
and  the  attempt  thus  made  to  connect  the  most  an- 
cient Hellenic  traditions  with  the  Law  was  often 
repeated  afterwards.  Nor  was  this  done  in  the 
spirit  of  bold  forgery.  Orpheus,  Musaeus,  and  the 
Sibyls  appeared  to  stand  in  some  remote  period  an- 
terior to  the  corruptions  of  polytheism,  as  the  wit- 
nesses of  a  primeval  revelation  and  of  the  teaching 
of  nature,  and  thus  it  seemed  excusable  to  attribute 
to  them  a  knowledge  of  the  -Mosaic  doctrines.  The 
third  book  of  the  Sibyllines  (c.  B.C.  150)  is  the 
most  valuable  relic  of  this  pseudo-Hellenic  litera- 
ture, and  shows  how  far  the  conception  of  Judaism 
was  enlarged  to  meet  the  wider  views  of  the  religious 
condition  of  heathendom  whicli  was  opened  by  a 
more  intimate  knowledge  of  I  Ireek  thought  ;  though 
the  later  Apocalypse  of  Ezra  [ESDRAS  iv.]  exhibits 
a  marked  reaction  towards  the  extreme  exclusive- 
in'»  of  former  times, 

Bui  the  indirect  influence  of  Greek  literature  and 
philosophy  produced  still  greater  effects  upon  the 
Alexandrine  Jews  than  the  open  conflicl  and  com- 
bination of  religious  dogmas.  The  literary  school 
of  Alexandria  was  essentially  critical  and  not  crea- 
tive.    For  the  first  time  men  laboured  to  collect, 

revise,  and  classify  all  the  reeoids  of  the  past 
Poets  trusted   to  their  learning  rather  than  to  their 

imagination.      Language  ' ame   a  study  ;    and  the 

legends  of  early  mythology  are  transformed  into 
philosophic   mysteries.      The   Jews   took   a  I 


ALEXANDRIA 


47 


share  in  these  new  studies.  The  caution  against 
writing,  which  became  a  settled  law  in  Palestine, 
found  no  favour  in  Egypt.  Numerous  authors 
adapted  the  history  of  the  Patriarchs,  of  Moses,  and 
of  the  Kings  to  classical  models  (Euseb.  Praep.  Ev. 
ix.  17-39.  Eupolemus,  Artapanus  (?J,  Demetrius, 
Aristaeus,  CleodemusorMalchas,  "a  prophet.")  A 
poem  which  bears  the  name  of  Phocylides  gives  in 
verse  various  precepts  of  Leviticus  (Daniel,  sec.  Ixx. 
Apolog.  p.  512  f.  Romae,  177 -Jj) ;  and  several  large 
fragments  of'  a  "  tragedy  "  in  which  Ezekiel  (c.  B.C. 
110)  dramatized  the  Exodus,  have  been  preserved 
by  Eusebius  (/.  c),  who  also  quotes  numerous  pas- 
sages in  heroic  verse  from  the  elder  Philo  and  Theo- 
dotus.  This  classicalism  of  style  was  a  symptom 
and  a  cause  of  classicalism  of  thought.  The  same 
Aristobulus  who  gave  currency  to  the  Judaeo- 
Orphic  verses  endeavoured  to  show  that  the  Penta- 
teuch was  the  real  source  of  Greek  philosophy 
(Euseb.  Praep.  Ev.  xiii.  12  ;  Clem.  Al.  Strom,  vi. 
98). 

The  proposition  thus  enunciated  was  thoroughly 
congenial  to  the  Alexandrine  character;  and  hence- 
forth it  was  the  chief  object  of  Jewish  speculation 
to  trace  out  the  subtle  analogies  which  were  sup- 
posed to  exist  between  the  writings  of  Moses  and 
the  teaching  of  the  schools.  The  circumstances 
under  which  philosophical  studies  first  gained  a 
footing  at  Alexandria  favoured  the  attempt.  For 
some  time  the  practical  sciences  reigned  supreme  ; 
and  the  issue  of  these  was  scepticism  (Matter,  Hist. 
da  VE'cvle  d'Alex.  iii.  162  ff'.).  Then  at  length 
the  clear  analysis  and  practical  morality  of  the 
Peripatetics  found  ready  followers ;  and  in  the 
strength  of  the  reaction  men  eagerly  trusted  to  those 
splendid  ventures  with  which  Plato  taught  them 
to  be  content  till  they  could  gain  a  surer  know- 
ledge {Phaed.  p.  85).  To  the  Jew  this  surer  know- 
ledge seemed  to  be  already  given  ;  and  the  belief 
in  the  existence  of  a  spiritual  meaning  underlying 
the  letter  of  Scripture  was  the  great  principle 
on  which  all  his  investigations  rested.  The  facts 
were  supposed  to  be  essentially  symbolic  :  the  lan- 
guage the  veil  (or  sometimes  the  mask)  which 
partly  disguised  from  common  sight  the  truths 
which  it  enwrapped.  In  this  way  a  twofold  object 
was  gained.  It  became  possible  to  withdraw  the 
Supreme  Being  (rb  ov,  6  &v)  from  immediate  contact 
with  the  material  world ;  and  to  apply  the  narra- 
tives of  the  Bible  to  the  phenomena  of  the  soul.  It 
is  impossible  to  determine  the  process  by  whicli 
these  results  were  embodied  ;  but,  as  in  parallel  cases, 
they  seem  to  have  been  shaped  gradually  in  the 
minds  of  the  mass,  and  not  fashioned  at  once  by  one 
great  teacher.  Even  in  the  LXX.  there  are  traces 
of  an  endeavour  to  interpret  the  anthropomorphic 
imagery  of  the  Hebrew  text  [Si.itiaoint]  ;  and 
there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  Commentaries  of 
Aristobulus  gave  some  form  and  consistency  to  the 
allegoric  system.  In  the  time  of  Philo  (B.C.  20 — 
A.C.  50)  the  theological  and  interpretative  systems 
were  evidently  fixed  even  in  many  of' their  details, 
and  he  appears  in  both  wises  only  to  have  collected 
and  expressed  the  popular  opinions  of  his  country- 
men. 

In  each  of  these  greal  forms  of  speculation — the 
theological  and  the  i  Uexmdrianism  has 

an  important  bearing  upon  the  Apostolic  writings. 
I'.ut  the  doctrines  which  are  characteristic  of  the 
Alexandrine  school  were  by  do  means  peculiar  to 
it.  The  same  causes  which  led  to  the  formation  of 
wider   views   of  Judaism    in    Egypt,   acting   under 


48 


ALEXANDRIA 


greater  restraint,  produced  corresponding  results  in 
Palestine.  A  doctrine  of  the  Word  (Mernrd),  nnd 
a  system  of  mystical  interpretation  grew  up  within 
the  Rabbinic  schools,  which  bear  a  closer  analogy  to 
the  language  of  St.  John  and  to  the  "  allegories  "  of 
St.  Paul  than  the  speculations  of  Philo. 

But  while  the  importance  of  this  Rabbinic  ele- 
ment in  connexion  with  the  expression  of  Apostolic 
truth,  is  often  overlooked,  there  can  be  no  doubt 
that  the  Alexandrine  teaching  was  more  powerful 
in  furthering  its  reception.  Yet  even  when  the 
function  of  Alexandrianism  with  regard  to  Chris- 
tianity is  thus  limited,  it  is  needful  to  avoid  ex- 
aggeration. The  preparation  which  it  made  was 
indirect  and  not  immediate.  Philo's  doctrine  of  the 
Word  (Logos)  led  men  to  accept  the  teaching  of  St. 
John,  but  not  to  anticipate  it ;  just  as  his  method 
of  allegorizing  fitted  them  to  enter  into  the  argu- 
ments of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  though  they 
could  not  have  foreseen  their  application. 

The  first  thing,  indeed,  which  must  strike  the 
reader  of  Philo  in  relation  to  St.  John  is  the  simi- 
larity of  phrase  without  a  similarity  of  idea.  His 
treatment  of  the  Logos  is  vague  and  inconsistent. 
He  argues  about  the,  term  and  not  about  the  reality, 
and  seems  to  delight  in  the  ambiguity  which  it  in- 
volves. At  one  time  he  represents  the  Logos  as  the 
reason  of  God  in  which  the  archetypal  ideas  of 
things  exist  (\6yos  ivSiddfros),  at  another  time  as 
the  Word  of  (iod  bv  which  he  makes  himself  known 
to  the  outward  world  (\070s  Trpo(popiK6s)  ;  but  he 
nowhere  realizes  the  notion  of  One  who  is  at  once 
Eevealer  and  the  Revelation,  which  is  the  essence  of 
St.  John's  teaching.  The  idea  of  the  active  Logos 
is  suggested  to  him  by  the  necessity  of  withdrawing 
the  Infinite  from  the  finite,  God  from  man,  and  not 
by  the  desire  to  bring  God  to  man.  Not  only  is  it 
impossible  to  conceive  that  Philo  could  have  written 
as  St.  John  writes,  but  even  to  suppose  that  he 
could  have  admitted  the  possibility  of  the  Incarna- 
tion of  the  Logos,  or  of  the  personal  unity  of  the 
Logos  and  the  Messiah.  But  while  it  is  right  to 
state  in  its  full  breadth  the  opposition  between  the 
teaching  of  Philo  and  St.  John,c  it  is  impossible  not 
to  feel  the  important  office  which  the  mystic  theo- 
sophy,  of  which  Philo  is  the  representative,  fulfilled 
in  preparing  for  the  apprehension  of  the  highest 
Christian  truth.  Without  any  distinct  conception 
of  the  personality  of  the  Logos,  the  tendency  of 
Philo's  writings  was  to  lead  men  to  regard  the 
Logos,  at  least  in  some  of  the  senses  of  the  term,  as 
a  person ;  and.  while  he  maintained  with  devout 
earnestness  the  indivisibility  of  the  divine  nature, 
he  described  the'  Logos  as  divine.  In  this  manner, 
however  unconsciously,  he  prepared  the  way  for 
the  recognition  of  a  two-fold  personality  in  the  God- 
head, and  performed  a  work  without  which  it  may 
well  appear  that  the  language  of  Christianity  would 
have  been  unintelligible  (comp.  Domer,  Die  Lehre 
von  der  Person  Christi,  i.  pp.  23  ff.). 

The  allegoric  method  stands  in  the  same  relation 
to  the  spiritual  interpretation  of  Scripture  as  the 
mystic  doctrine  of  the  Word  to  the  teaching  of  St. 
John.  It  was  a  preparation  and  not  an  anticipation 
of  it.  Unless  men  had  been  familiarized  in  some 
such  way  with  the  existence  of  aii  inner  meaning  in 


c  The  closest  analogy  to  the  teaching  of  Philo  on 
the  Logos  occurs  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  which 
is  throughout  Hellenistic  rather  than  Rabbinic.  Com- 
pare Heb.  iv.  12,  with  Philo,  Quis  rev.  div.  haeres, 
§26. 


ALEXANDRIA 

the  Law  and  the  Prophets,  it  is  difficult  to  under- 
stand how  an  Apoll'os  "  mighty  in  the  Scriptures" 
(Acts  xviii.  24-28)  could  have  convinced  many,  or 
how  the  infant  Church  could  have  seen  almost  un- 
moved the  ritual  of  the  Old  Covenant  swept  away, 
strong  in  the  conscious  possession  of  its  spiritual 
antitypes.  But  that  which  is  found  in  Philo  in 
isolated  fragments  combines  in  the  New  Testament, 
to  foi-m  one  great  whole.  In  the  former  the  truth 
is  afrhmed  in  casual  details,  in  the  latter  it  is  laid 
down  in  its  broad  principles  which  admit  of  infinite 
application;  and  a  comparison  of  patristic  inter- 
pretations with  those  of  Philo  will  show  how  pow- 
erful an  influence  the  Apostolic  example  exercised  in 
curbing  the  imagination  of  later  writers.  Nor  is 
this  all.  While  Philo  regarded  that  which  was 
positive  in  Judaism  as  the  mere  symbol  of  abstract, 
truths,  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  it  appears  as 
the  shadow  of  blessings  realized  (Hebr.  x.  11,  yevo- 
fiivcav)  in  the  presence  of  a  personal  Saviour.  His- 
tory in  the  one  case  is  the  enunciation  of  a  riddle; 
in  the  other  it  is  the  record  of  a  life. 

The  speculative  doctrines  which  thus  worked  for 
the  general  reception  of  Christian  doctrine  were  also 
embodied  in  a  form  of  society  which  was  afterwards 
transferred  to  the  Christian  Church.  Numerous 
bodies  of  ascetics  (Therapeutac),  especially  on  the 
borders  of  Lake  Mareotis,  devoted  themselves  to  a 
life  of  ceaseless  discipline  and  study.  Unlike  the 
Essenes,  who  present  the  correspond ing  phase  in 
Palestinian  life,  they  abjured  society  and  labour,  and 
often  forgot,  as  it  is  said,  the  simplest,  wants  of  nature 
in  the  contemplation  of  the  hidden  wisdom  of  the 
Scriptures  (Philo,  De  Vit.  C'ontempl.  throughout). 
The  description  which  Philo  gives  of  their  occupa- 
tion and  character  seemed  to  Eusebius  to  prespnt  so 
clear  an  image  of  Christian  virtues  that  he  claimed 
them  as  Christians  ;  and  there  can  be  no  doubt  that 
some  of  the  forms  of  monasticism  were  shaped  upon 
the  model  of  the  Therapeutae  (Euseb.  H.  E.W.  16). 

According  to  the  common  legend  (Euseb.  I.  c.) 
St.  Mark  first  "  preached  the  Gospel  in  Egypt,  and 
founded  the  first  Church  in  Alexandria."  At  the 
beginning  of  the  second  century  the  number  of 
Christians  at  Alexandria  must  have  been  very  large, 
and  the  great  leaders  of  Gnosticism  who  arose 
there  (Basilides,  Valentinus)  exhibit  an  exaggeration 
of  the  tendency  of  the  Church.  But  the  later  forms 
of  Alexandrine  speculation,  the  strange  varieties  of 
Gnosticism,  the  progress  of  the  catechetical  school, 
the  development  of  Neo-Platonism,  the  various 
phases  of  the  Arian  controversy,  belong  to  the  his- 
tory of  the  Church  and  to  the  history  of  philo- 
sophy. To  the  last  Alexandria  fulfilled  its  mis- 
sion ;  and  we  still  owe  much  to  the  spirit  of  its 
great  teachers,  which  in  later  ages  struggled,  not 
without  success,  against  the  sterner  systems  of  the 
West. 

The  following  works  embody  what  is  valuable  in 
the  earlier  literature  on  the  subject,  with  copious  re- 
ferences to  it :  Matter,  Histoire  cle  VE'cole  d' Alexan- 
dre, 2nd  edit.,  Paris,1840.  D'ahne,  A.  F.,  Geschicht- 
lichc  Darstellung  der  JMisch-Alexandrinischen 
Beliqions-Philosophie,  Halle,  1 834.  Gfrorer,  A.  F., 
Philo,  und  die  Judisch-Alexandrinische  Theosophie, 
Stuttgart,  1835.  To  these  may  be  added,  Ewald, 
H.,  Gesch.  des  Yolkes  Israel,  Gottingen,  1852,  iv. 
250  ff  393  ff.  Jost,  J.  M.,  Gesch.  des  Jiulen- 
thums,  Leipzig,  1857,  i.  344  ff.,  388  ff.  Nean- 
der,  A.,  History  of  Christian  Church,  vol.  i.  66  ff., 
Eng.  Tr.  1847.     Prof.  Jowett,  Philo  and  St.  Paul; 


ALLAH 

St.  Paul's  Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians,  fyc, 
London,  1855,  i.  363  ff.  And  for  the  later  Chris- 
tian history:  Guerike,  H.  F.,  De  Schola  Alexan- 
drina  Catechetica,  Halis,  1825.a  [B.  F.  W.] 

ALI'AH.     [Alvah.] 

ALI'AN.     [Alvan.) 

ALLIANCES.     On  the  first  establishment  of 
the  Jews  in  Palestine,  no  connexions  were  formed 
between  them  and  the  surrounding;  nations.     The 
geographical  position  of  their  country — the  pecu- 
liarity  of  their  institutions — and    the  prohibitions 
against  intercourse  with  the  Canaanites  and  other 
heathen  nations,  alike  tended  to  promote  an  exclu- 
sive and  isolated  state.     But  with  the  extension  of 
their  power  under  the  kings,  the  Jews  were  brought 
more  into  contact  with    foreigners,   and  alliances 
became  essential  to  the  security  of  their  commerce. 
Solomon  concluded  two  important  treaties  exclu- 
sively   for   commercial    purposes ;    the   first   with 
Hiram,  king  of  Tyre,  originally  with   the  view  of 
obtaining  materials  and  workmen   for  the  erection 
of  the  Temple,  and  afterwards  for  the  supply  ot 
ship-builders  and  sailors  (1  K.  v.  2-12,  ix.  27):  the 
second  with  a  Pharaoh,  king  of  Egypt,  which  was 
cemented  by  his  marriage  with  a  princess  of  the 
royal    family ;    by  this    he    secured    a    monopoly 
of  the  trade  in  horses  and  other  products  of  that 
oountry   (1  K.  x.  28,  29).     After  the  division  of 
the  kingdom,  the  alliances  were  of  an  ottensive  and 
defensive  nature:  they  had   their  origin  partly  in 
the  internal  disputes  of  the  kingdoms  of  Judah  and 
Israel,    and    partly    in    the    position   which    these 
countries  held  relatively  to  Egypt  on  the  one  side, 
and  the  great  eastern  monarchies  of  Assyria  and 
Babylonia   on  the   other.     The  scantiness   of  the 
historical  records  at  our  command  makes  it  pro- 
bable that  the  key  to  many  of  the  events  that  oc- 
curred is  to  be  found  in  the  alliances  and  counter- 
alliances  formed  between  these  peoples,  of  which  no 
mention  is  made.     Thus  the  invasion  of  Shishak  in 
Rehoboam's  reign  was  not  improbably  the  result  of 
an  alliance  made  with   Jeroboam,    who  had  pre- 
viously found  an  asylum   in   Egypt  (1  K.  xii.  '_'. 
xiv.  25).     Each  of  these  monarchs  sought  a  con- 
nexion  with  the    neighbouring   kingdom   of  Syria, 
on   which   side   Israel    was    particularly    assailable 
(1  K.  xv.  19):    but  Asa  ultimately  succeeded  in 
securing  the  active  co-operation  of  Benhadad  against 
Baasha  (1  K.  xv.  16-20).     Another  policy,  induced 
probably  by  the  encroaching  spirit  of  Syria,  led  to  the 
formation  of  an  alliance  between  the  two  kingdoms 
under  Ahali  and  Jehoshaphat,  which  was  maintained 
until   the  end  of  Ahab's  dynasty:   it  occasionally 
extended  to  commercial  operations  (2  Chr.  xx.  36). 
The  alliance  ceased  in  Jehu's  reign:   war  broke  out 
shortly  after  between  Amaziah   and  Jeroboam  II.: 
each  nation  looked  for  foreign  aid.  and  a  coalition 
was  firmed  between  Rezin,  king  of  Syria,  and  Pekah 
on  the  one  side,  and  Aha/,  and  Tiglath-Pileser,  king 
of  Assyria,  on  the  other  (2  K.  xvi.  5-9).       By  this 
means  an  opening  was  afforded  to  the  advances  of 
the  Assyrian  power  ;  and  the  kingdoms  of  Israel  and 
Judah,  as  they  were  successively  attacked,  Bought 
the  alliance  of  the  Egyptians,  who  were  strongly 
interested  in  maintaining  the  independence  of  the 
Jews  as  a  barrier  against  the   encroachments   of 
the  Assyrian  power,     Thus  Hoshea  made  a  treaty 
with  s.i  (Sabaco,  or  Sevechus),  and  rebelled  against 


ALLIANCES 


49 


;'  Alexandria  occurs  in  the  Vulgate  by  an  error  for 
No-Ammon  [No-AMMON],  Jer.  xlvi.  2j  ;  ¥./..  \\\.  1  I, 
15,  16;   Nah.  iii.  B. 


Shalmaneser  (2  K.  xvii.  4) :  Hezekiah  adopted  the 
same  policy  in  opposition  to  Sennacherib  (Is.  xxx. 
2) :  in  neither  ease  was  the  alliance  productive  of 
much  good:  the  Israelites  were  abandoned  by  So: 
it  appears  probable  that  his  successor  Sethos,  wdio 
had  offended  the  military  caste,  was  unable  to  render 
Hezekiah  any  assistance :  and  it  was  only  when  the 
independence  of  Egypt  itself  was  threatened,  that 
thaaAssyrians  were  defeated  by  the  joint  forces  of 
Sethos  and  Tirhakah,  and  a  temporary  relief  afforded 
thereby  to  Judah  (2  K.  xix.  9,  36  ;  Herod,  ii.  141). 
The  weak  condition  of  Egypt  at  the  beginning  of 
the  26th  dynasty  left  Judah  entirely  at  the  mercy 
of  the  Assyrians,  who  under  Esarhaddon  subdued 
the  country,  and  by  a  conciliatory  policy  secured 
the  adhesion  of  Manasseh  and  his  successors  to  his 
side  against  Egypt  (2  Chr.  xxxiii.  11-13).  It 
was  apparently  as  an  ally  of  the  Assyrians  that 
Josiah  resisted  the  advance  of  Necho  (2  Chr.  xxxv. 
20).  His  defeat,  however,  and  the  downfall  of  the 
Assyrian  empire  again  changed  the  policy  of  the 
Jews,  and  made  them  the  subjects  of  Egypt.  Ne- 
buchadnezzar's first  expedition  against  Jerusalem 
was  contemporaneous  with  and  probably  in  conse- 
quence of  the  expedition  of  Necho  against  the  Baby- 
lonians (2  K.  xxiv.  1 ;  Jer.  xl.vi.  2)  :  and  lastly  Zede- 
kiah's  rebellion  was  accompanied  with  a  renewal 
of  the  alliance  with  Egypt  (Ez.  xvii.  15):  a  tem- 
porary relief  appears  to  have  been  atforded  by  the 
advance  of  Hophrah  (Jer.  xxxvii.  11),  but  it  was  of 
no  avail  to  prevent  the  extinction  of  Jewish  inde- 
pendence. 

On  the  restoration  of  independence,  Judas  Macca- 
baeus  sought  an  alliance  with  the  Romans,  who 
were  then  gaining  an  ascendancy  in  the  East,  as  a 
counterpoise  to  the  neighbouring  state  of  Syria 
(1  Mac.  viii. ;  Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  10,  §6):  this 
alliance  was  renewed  by  Jonathan  (1  Mac.  xii.  1 ; 
Ant.  xiii.  5,  §8),  and  by  Simon'  (1  Mac.  xv.  17  ; 
Ant.  xiii.  7,  §3)  :  on  the  last  occasion  the  inde- 
pendence of  the  Jews  was  recognized  and  formally 
notified  to  the  neighbouring  nations  B.C.  140  (1 
Mac.  xv.  22,  23).  Treaties  of  a  friendly  nature 
were  at  the  same  period  concluded  with  the  Lace- 
daemonians under  an  impression  that  they  came  of 
a  common  stock  (1  Mac.  xii.  2,  xiv.  20  ;  Ant.  xii. 
4,  §10,  xiii.  5,  §8).  The  Roman  alliance  was 
again  renewed  by  Hyrcauus,  B.C.  128  {Ant.  xiii. 
9,  §2),  after  his  defeat  by  Antiochus  Sidetes,  and 
the  losses  he  had  sustained  were  repaired.  This 
alliance,  however,  ultimately  proved  fatal  to  the 
independence  of  the  Jews:  the  rival  claims  of  11  vr- 
canus  and  Aristobulus  having  been  referred  to  l'oni- 
pey,  B.C.  63,  he  availed  himself  of  the  opportunity 
of  placing  the  country  under  tribute  {Ant.  xiv.  4, 
§4).  Finally,  Herod  was  raised  to  the  sovereignty 
by  the  Roman  Senate,  acting  under  the  advice  of 
M.  Antony  {Ant.  xiv.  14,  §5). 

The  formation  of  an  alliance  was  attended  with 
various    religions    rites:    a    victim    was    slain    and 

divided  into  two  parts,  between  which  the  con- 
tracting parties  passed  involving  imprecations  of  a 
similar  destruction  upon  him,  who  should  break  the 
terms  ot'  the  alliance  (Gen.  xv.  10  J  <■(.  Liv.  i. 
24);  hence  the  expression  IV  "13  m3  (  =  '6pKia 
Ti fjiveiv,  foedus  icere)  to  make  (lit.  to  cut)  a 
treaty;  hence  fllso  the  use  of  the  term  !"PX  (lit. 

i"i  a  covenant.  That  this  custom 
was  maintained  To  a  late  period  appears  from  Jor. 
wxiv.  18-20.  Generally  speaking,  the  oath  alone 
i^  mentioned  in  the  contracting  ot'  alliances,  either 

E 


50 


ALLON 


between  nations  (Josh.  ix.  15)  or  individuals  (Gen. 
xxvi.  28,  xxxi.  53;  1  Sam.  xv.  17;  2  K.  xi.  4). 
The  event  was  celebrated  by  a  feast  (Gen.  I.  c. ; 
Ex.  xxiv.  11  ;  2  Sam.  iii.  12,  20).  Salt,  as  sym- 
bolical of  fidelity,  was  used  on  these  occasions;  it 
was  applied  to  the  sacrifices  (Lev.  ii.  13),  and 
probably  used,  as  among  the  Arabs,  at  hospitable 
entertainments ;  hence  the  expression  "  covenant  of 
salt"  (Numb,  xviii.  19;  2  Chr.  xiii.  5).  Occa- 
sionally a  pillar  or  a  heap  of  stones  was  set  up  as  a 
memorial  of  the  alliance  (Gen.  xxxi.  52).  Presents 
were  also  sent  bv  the  party  soliciting  the  alliance 
(1  Iv.  xv.  18  ;  Is.  xxx.  6  ;  1  Mace.  xv.  18).  The 
fidelity  of  the  Jews  to  their  engagements  was  con- 
spicuous at  all  periods  of  their  history  (Josh.  ix. 
18),  and  any  breach  of  covenant  was  visited 
with  very  severe  punishment  (2  Sam.  xxi.  1  ; 
Ez.  xvii.  16).  [W.  L.  B.] 

AL'LON  (flj>S  or  fhii),  a  large  strong  tree 

of  some  description,  probably  an  oak  (see  Ges.  Thes. 
51,  103  ;  Stanley,  App.  §76).  The  word  is  found 
in  two  names  in  the  topography  of  Palestine. 

1.  Allon,  more  accurately  Elon  (|i?N a 
(D*33yX3)  ;  McoXct;  Elon),  a  place  named  among 
the  cities  of  Naph tali  (Josh.  xix.  33).  Probably 
the  more  correct  construction  is  to  take  it  with  the 
following  word,  i.  e.  "  the  oak  by  Zaanannim,"  or 
"  the  oak  of  the  loading  of  tents,"  as  if  deriving  its 
name  from  some  nomad  tribe  frequenting  the  spot. 
Such  a  tribe  were  the  Kenites,  and  in  connexion 
with  them  the  place  is  again  named  in  Judg.  iv 
11, b  with  the  additional  definition  of  "by  Kedesh 
(Naphtali)."  Here,  however,  the  A.  V.  followin 
the  Vulgate,  renders  the  words  "  the  plain  of 
Zaanaim."     [Elon.]     (See  Stanley,  340,  note.) 

2.  Allon-bac'huth  (n-133  j'^X  c  =  "  oak  of 
weeping ;"  and  so  fiaAavos  tt4v9ovs  ;  quercus 
fletus),  the  tree  under  which  Rebekah's  nurse, 
Deborah,  was  buried  (Gen.  xxxv.  8).  Ewald  (Gesch. 
iii.  29)  believes  the  "  oak  of  Tabor  "  (1  Sam.  x.  3, 
A.  V.  "  plain  of  T.")  to  be  the  same  as,  or  the 
successor  of,  this  tree,  "  Tabor"  being  possibly  a 
merely  dialectical  change  from  "  Deborah,"  and 
he  would  further  identify  it  with  the  "  palm-tree 
of  Deborah"  (Judg.  iv.  5).  See  also  Stanley, 
143,  220.  [G.] 

ALMO'DAD  ("nicta;  'Z\fiw$d5;  Elmc 
dad),  the  first,  in  order,  of  the  descendants  of 
Joktan  (Gen.  x.  26  ;  1  Chr.  i.  20),  and  the  pro- 
genitor of  an  Arab  tribe.  His  settlements  must  be 
looked  for,  in  common  with  those  of  the  other  de- 
scendants of  Joktan,  in  the  Arabian  peninsula ;  and 
his  name  appears  to  be  preserved  in  that  of  Mudad 
(or  El-Mudad,  the  word  being  one  of  those  proper 
names  that  admit  of  the  article's  being  prefixed),  a 
famous  personage  in  Arabian  history,  the  reputed 
father  of  Ishmael's  Arab  wife  (3fir-dt  ez-Zemdn, 
&c),  and  the  chief  of  the  Joktanite  tribe  Jurhnm 
(not  to  be  confounded  with  the  older,  or  first, 
Jurhum),  that,  coming  from  the  Yemen,  settled  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  Mekkeh,  and  intermarried 
with  the  Ishmaelites.     The  name  of  Mudad  was 


P?N,  Alton,  is  the  reading  of  V.  d.  Hooght,  and 
of  Walton's  Polyglott ;  but  most  MSS.  have  as  above 
(Davidson's  Ilehr.  Text,  4G). 

b  It  must  be  remarked  that  the  Targum  Jonathan 
renders  this  passage  bywords  meaning  "  the  plain  of 
the  swamp"  (see  Schwarz,    181).     This  is   Ewald's 


ALMOND-TREE 

peculiar  to  Jurhum,  and  bome  by  several  of  its 
chiefs  (Caussin  de  Perceval,  Essai  sur  VHist.  des 
Arabes  avant  V Islamisme,  4'C,  i.  33,  seq.,  168,  and 
194,  seq.).  Gesenius  {Lex.  ed.  Tregelles,  in  loc.) 
says,  "  If  there  were  an  ancient  error  in  reading 

(for  *niD?X),  we  might  compare  Morad,  ±\y^ 
"r  ii  w«  Jo,  the  name  of  a  tribe  living  in  a  moun- 
tainous region  of  Arabia  Felix,  near  Zabid."  (For 
this  tribe   see  Abulfedae  Hist.  Anteislamica,  ed. 

Fleischer,  p.  190.)     Others  have  suggested  -j^j, 

but  the  well-known  tribes  of  this  stock  are  of  Ish- 
maelite  descent.  Bochart  (Phaleg,  ii.  16)  thinks 
that  Almodad  may  be  traced  in  the  name  of  the 
' AWov/xaiwrai  of  Ptolemy  (vi.  7,  §24),  a  people 
of  the  interior  of  Arabia  Felix,  near  the  sources  of 
the  river  Lax  [Arabia].  [E.  S.  P.] 

AL'MON  ($£>?$;  ro>oAa;  Almon),  a  city 
within  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  with  "  suburbs" 
given  to  the  priests  (Josh.  xxi.  18).  Its  name  does 
not  occur  in  the  list  of  the  towns  of  Benjamin  in 
Josh,  xviii.  In  the  parallel  list  in  1  Chr.  vi.  it  is 
found  as  Alemeth — probably  a  later  fonn,  and  that 
by  which  it  would  appear  to  have  descended  to  us. 
[Alemeth.]  [G.] 

AL'MON-DIBLATHA'IM  (accurately  Dib- 
lathamah,  nO.T|i?3^"}b^y  ;  TeA^j/  AePXaOai/x  ; 

Hclmon-dihlathaini),  one  of  the  latest  stations  of 
the  Israelites,  between  Dibon-gad  and  the  moun- 
tains of  Abarim  (Num.  xxxiii.  46,  47).  Dibon- 
gad  is  doubtless  the  present  Dhiban,  just  to  the 
north  of  the  Arnon ;  and  there  is  thus  every  pro- 
bability that  Almon-diblathaim  was  identical  with 
Beth-diblathaim,  a  Moabite  city  mentioned  by  Je- 
remiah (xlviii.  22)  in  company  with  both  Dibon  and 
Nebo,  and  that  its  traces  will  be  discovered  on  fur- 
ther exploration.  [G.] 
ALMOND-TREE  ;  ALMOND  ttj?]2>).     In 

Jer.  i.  11,  Shdqed  signifies  the  tree,  which  was  so 
called  because  it  is  the  first  of  all  trees  which  buds,  and 
as  it  were  awakes  out  of  sleep,  after  the  winter  season 
(root  *7p£',  vigilavit ;   Comp.  Plin.  xvi.  25,  s.  42 : 

"  floret  prima  omnium  amygdala  mense  Januario, 
Martio  ver5  pomum  maturat").  The  LXX.  render 
IpW  7J3D,  by  PaKTr/piav  KapvLV-nv.  In  Gen. 
xliii.  11,  Num.  xvii.  8,  "IpC  signifies  the  fruit, 
and  the  LXX.  have  icdpva  in  both  places,  the  Vulg. 
amygdala.  In  Eccl.  xii.  5,  "ip^'H  }*&M*1  is  ren- 
dered by  the  LXX.  /col  avO^ffei  rb  afj.vyda\ov,  a 
rendering  followed  by  the  Vulg.  and  A.  V.,  but  re- 
jected by  Gesenius  on  the  ground  that  the  flower  of 
the  almond-tree  is  pink,  not  white ;  and  therefore 
has  no  reference  to  the  hoariness  of  old  age.  Ge- 
senius suggests  "  spemit  seu  fastidit  (senex  dentibus 
carens)  amygdalam,"  vel  "  fastidium  creat  amyg- 
dala seni." 

In  Ex.  xxv.  33,  34,  xxxvii.  19,  20,  the  Pual 
participle  of  the  root  lp£J>  occurs,  signifying  "  made 


explanation  also   (Gcseh.  ii.  492,  note).     For  other 
interpretations  see  Furst  (H.  W.  B.  91). 

c  The  Sam.  Version,  according  to  its  customary 
rendering  of  Allon,  has  here  nn"02  IVti'D,  "  the 
plain  of  Bakith."  See  this  subject  more  fully  ex- 
amined under  Fi.on. 


ALMS 

in  "the  form  of  the  almond-flower."  "In  the  can- 
dlestick shall  be  four  bowls  made  like  unto  almonds, 
with  their  knops  ami  flowers."  [W.  D.] 

ALMS  (Chald.  Np*"!>')>  beneficence  towards  the 

poor,  from  Anglo-Sax.  celmesse,  probably,  as  well  as 
Germ,  almosen,  from  i\€rnj.oaui/ri ;  eleemosyna, 
Vulg.  (but  sec  Bosworth,  A. S.  Diet.).  The  word 
"alms"  is  not  found  in  our  version  of  the  canonical 
books  of  0.  T.,  but  it  occurs  repeatedly  in  N.  T.,  and 
in  the  Apocryphal  books  of  Tobit  and  Ecclesiasticus. 
TheHeb.  HpIV,  righteousness, the  usual  equivalent 

for  alms  in  0.  T.,  is  rendered  by  LXX.  in  Deut. 
xxiv.  13,  Dan.  iv.  24,  and  elsewhere,  i\erjp.offvvq. 
whilst  some  MSS.,  with  Vulg.  and  Kliem.  Test., 
read  in  Matt.  vi.  1,  SiKcuocrvvrj. 

The  duty  of  almsgiving,  especially  in  kind,  con- 
sisting chieliy  in  ]iortions  to  lie  left  designedly  fiom 
pro  luce  of  the  field,  the  vineyard,  and  the  oliveyard 
(Lev.  xix.  9, 10,  xxiii.  22 ;  Deut.  xv.  11,  xxiv.  19, 
xxvi.  2-13;  Ruth  ii.  2),  is  strictly  enjoined  by  the 
Law.  After  his  entrance  into  the  land  of  promise, 
the  Israelite  was  ordered  to  present  yearly  the  first- 
fruits  of  the  land  before  the  Lord,  in  a  manner 
significant  of  his  own  previously  destitute  condition. 
Every  third  year  also  (Deut.  xiv.  28)  each  pro- 
prietor was  directed  to  share  the  tithes  of  his  produce 
with  "  the  Levite,  the  stranger,  the  fatherless,  and 
the  widow.''  The  theological  estimate  of  alms- 
giving among  the  Jews  is  indicated  by  the  fol- 
lowing passages: — Job  xxxi.  17;  Prov.  x.  2,  xi.  4; 
Lsth.  ix.  22  ;  Ps.  cxii.  9  ;  Acts  ix.  36,  the  case  of 
Dorcas;  x.  2,  of  Cornelius:  to  which  maybe  added, 
Tob.  iv.  10,  11,  xiv.  10,  11  ;  and  Eccliis.  iii.  30, 
xl.  24.  And  the  Talmudists  went  so  far  as  to 
interpret  righteousness  by  almsgiving  in  such  pas- 
sages as  Gen.  xviii.  19;    Is.  Jiv.  14;    Ps.  xvii.  15. 

In  the  women's  court  of  the  Temple  there  were 
1 .;  receptacles  feu-  voluntary  offei  ings  (  Mark  xii.  41), 
one  of  which  was  devoted  to  alms  for  education  of 
poor  children  of  good  family.  Before  the  Captivity 
there  is  no  trace  of  permission  of  mendicancy,  but  it 
was  evidently  allowed  in  later  times  (Watt.  xx.  .'in  : 
Mark  x.  40;"  Acts  iii.  2). 

After  the  Captivity,  hut  at  what  time  it  cannot 
be  known  certainly,  a  definite  system  of  almsgiving 
was  introduced,  and  even  enforced  under  penalties. 
In  every  city  there  were  thr sollectors.  The  col- 
lection.-, were  of  two  kinds ;  1.  of  money  for  the  poor 
of  the  city  only.  ma  le  by  two  collectors,  received 
in  a  chest  or  box  (HDIp)  in  the  synagogue  on  the 
Sabbath,  and  distributed  by  tin'  three  in  the  evening ; 
2.  for  the  poor  in  general,  of  food  and  money, 
collected  every  day  from  house  to  house,  receive! 
in  a  dish  ('lriDn),  and  distributed  by  the  three 
collectors.  The  two  collections  obtained  the  names 
respectively  of  "  aim-  of  the  chest,"  and  "alms  of 
the  dish."  Special  collections  and  distributions  were 
also  made  on  fast-  lays. 

The  Pharisees  were  zealous  in  almsgiving,  but 

t itentatious  in  their  mole  of  performance,  for 

which  our  Lord  finds  fault  with  them  (Matt .  vi.  2 ). 

Bui  there  i    no  ground  foi       pposing  that   tl \- 

pression  /x^i  (TaAiria-rjs  is  i  a   mode  of  de- 

nouncing their  display,  by  a  figure  drawn  from  the 
frequent  and  well-known  i f  trumpets  in  reli- 
gious and  other  celebrations,  Jewi  h  as  well  as 
heathen.  Winer,  s.  >.  Carpzov.  Eleem.  ■/•«/.  32. 
Vitriiiga.  DeSyn.  Vet.  iii. 1, 13.  Elsley,  <h.  Gospels. 
Maimouides,  Be  Jure  Pauperis,  vii.  10;  ix.  1,6;  x. 


ALOE 


51 


(1'rideaux).  Jahn,  Arch.  Bill,  iv.  .'171 .  (Upham.) 
Lightfoot,  fforae  Heir.,  on  Matt.  vi.  2,  and  Descr. 
Templi,  19.  Diet,  of  Antiq.  s.  v.  'Tuba.'  [See 
Offerings;  Poor  ;  Tithes;  Temple.] 

The  duty  of  relieving  the  poor  was  not 
neglected  by  the  Christians  (Matt.  vi.  1-4;  Luke 
xiv.  13;  Acts  xx.  35  ;  Gal.  ii.  10).  EveryChris- 
tian  was  exhorted  to  lay  by  on  the  Sunday  in  each 
week  some  portion  of  his  profits,  to  be  applied  to  the 
wants  of  the  needy  (Acts  xi.  30  ;   Rom.  xv.  25-27  ; 

1  Cor.  xvi.  1-4).  It  was  also  considered  a  duty 
specially  incumbent  on  widows  to  devote  themselves 
to  such  "ministrations  (1  Tim.  v.  In).      [H.  W.  P.] 

ALMUG  or  ALGUM  TREE  (CJin'pN  and 
D^E-lllPN ;  the  former  occurring  in  1  K.  x.  11, 
12,  ami  the  latter  in  2  Chr.  ii.  R,  ix.  10,  11). 
From  these  passages  we  learu  that  these  trees 
were  brought,  from  Ophir  and  from  Lebanon, 
and  that  the  timber  was  used  for  pillars  for  the 
house  of  the  Lord  and  for  the  king's  house,  for  ter- 
races or  stairs  (!"l?p£),  and  for  harps  and  psalteries 
for  singers.  Most  of  the  Rabbins  take  the  words  to 
signify  corals,  and  in  this  sense  3-1u?N  is  used  in 
the  Talmud  ;  but  there  can  be  little  doubt  that 
some  kind  of  wood  is  meant,  and  that  this  Rabbini- 
cal meaning  is  due  to  similarity  of  colour  between 
the  two  substances.  Most  later  writers  follow  Cel- 
sius {Hierobot.  i.  p.  171,  «'</.),  who  take  it  to 
mean  the  red  sandal-wood  of  China  and  the  Indian 
Archipelago  (Ptcrocarpus  santalinus  of  Linnaeus), 
of  which  to  this  day  in  India  costly  utensils  axe 
made.  The  statement  in  2  Chr.  ii.  8,  ascribing 
the  growth  of  almug-trees  to  Mount  Lebanon,  is 
adverse  to  this  identification  ;  but  Gesenius  sug- 
gests with  great  probability  that  this  statement  is 
due  to  the  fact  ot  this  timber  being  ex  potted  from 
Tyre,  after  having  been  brought  thither  from  tin- 
East.  The  ancient  versions  afford  no  certain  clue 
as  to  what  tree  is  meant.  The  LXX.  in  1  K.  I.  c. 
have  ireAEKriTcL  al.  aTreAe/crjTa,  in  2  Chr.  /.  c. 
■KtvKiva.  The  Vulgate  has  thyina,  from  6vov, 
8via — an  African  tree  with  sweet-smelling  wood 
used  for  making  costly  furniture,  and  variously 
identified  with  the  cedar,  the  savin,  and  the  African 
arlior  ri!  <r.  i  See  Ihnn.  Oil.  v.  00  ;  Voss.  ad  ('//•</. 
Georj.  ii.  126.)  Some  authors  take  the  algum- 
tree  to  be  a  kind  of  cedar,  relying  on  the  passage  in 

2  Chr.;  and  Dr.  Shaw  supposes  it  to  have  been 
the  cyp  ess,  because  the  wood  of  that  tree  is  still 
used  in  Italy  and  elsewhere  for  violins,  harpsi- 
chords, and  other  stringed  instruments.  Ililler 
( Ilii mpjii/t.  xiii.  §  7)  supposes  a  gummy  or  resin- 
ous wood  to  be  meant,  but  this  would  be  unfit  for 
the  uses  to  which  the  almug-tiee  is  said  to  have 
been  applied.  Josephus  {Ant.  viii.  7)  describes  the 
'•oil  ;  that  of  a  kind  of  pine,  which  he  distinguishes 
from  t]  e  pine  ofhjs  own  days.  [\V.  1'.] 

ALOE  or  LIGN  ALOE  (p^HM  or  JlftflN), 
a  species  of  odoriferous  tree,  culled  by  the  I 
ayaWoxof,  and   by   later   writers   ^v\a\6r).      The 
word  occurs  four  times  in  A.  Y.,vi/„  Num.  xxiv.  6; 
Prov.  vii.   17;     Ps.  xiv.  9;     Cant.   iv.   14.      In   the 

first  two  !  the  I. XX.  have  no  direct 

ing  of  the  word,  as  they  have  confused  it  with  the 
.  T\K,  tentorium  :  in  the  third  passage  they 
t  it  by  araKTi'r,   and  in  the  fourth  by  a\ii0. 
winch  is  merely  the  Hebrew  word  in  Greek  charac- 
ters.      The    agallochuB    is    the    aloe-WOod    ot    later 

i:  2 


52 


ALOTH 


authors,  called  also  paradise-wood  and  eagle-wood. 
It  is  agreed  that  there  are  two  sorts  of  agallocbus, 
the  one  true  and  very  excellent,  the  other  spurious, 
or  at  any  rate  inferior.  The  former  grows  in  Co- 
chin China,  in  the  kingdom  ofSiam  and  in  China, 
is  never  expoited,  and  is  so  rare  in  India  as  to  be 
worth  its  weight  in  gold.  Pieces  of  the  wood, 
resinous,  blackish,  heavy,  and  perforated  as  by 
worms,  are  called  Calambac.  The  people  of  Siam 
call  the  tree  itself  Kissina  ;  the  Japanese  Kaworiki, 
or  scented-tree  ;  and  the  Chinese  Suk-hiang.  The 
aroma  of  the  tree  is  said  to  arise  when  it  becomes 
old  from  the  thickening  of  the  oily  particles  into 
resin  within  the  trunk.  See  description  and  figure 
of  the  tree  in  Eumphii  Herb.  Amboinensi.  v.  ii. 
p.  29-40.  The  inferior  sort  is  called  Garo  in 
Eastern  India,  and  is  the  wood  of  a  tree  growing  in 
the  Moluccas,  Excoecaria  Agallocha  of  Linnaeus. 
The  native  name  of  this  tree  is  aghil,  kdraghil,  or 
kalagaru,  from  which  both  the  Greek  and  Heb. 
names  would  seem  to  be  derived.  The  Portuguese, 
the  first  Europeans  who  visited  India,  on  account  of 
the  similarity  of  sound,  called  the  aghil,  eagle-wood, 
whence  we  have  the  French  bois  d'aigle,  and  the 
Germ.  Adlerhoh.     De  Sacy  suggests  a   connexion 

between  DvHN  and  the  Arabic  \|_£>  \^£>  or  XXi'Ls 
("  quod  more  Aegyptiorum  pronunciatur  hahula") 
=  cardamomum,  Avicen.  Op.  Arab.  v.  i.  p.  1G3, 
243,  275  ;  but  Gesenius  demurs  to  this  as  too  bold. 
The  aloe-wood  is  used  in  the  East  for  perfuming 
garments  and  rooms,  and  is  also  administered  as  a 
cordial  in  fainting  and  epileptic  fits.  The  flower  of 
the  Excoecaria  is  highly  flagrant.  See  Cels.  Hie.ro- 
bot.  v.  i.  p.  134-170;  Dioscorid.  i.  v.  21  ;  and  De 
Lamark,  Encycl.  Method,  i.  422-429.      [W.  D.] 

A'LOTH  (n'^y ;  Baa\w9  ;  Baloth),  a  place 
or  district,  forming  with  Asher  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  ninth  of  Solomon's  commissariat  officers  (1  K. 
iv.  16).  It  is  read  by  the  LXX.  and  later  scholars 
as  Bealoth,  though  the  A.  V.  treats  the  3  as  a 
prefix.  In  the  former  case  see  Bealoth.  Josephus 
has  tt]v  Trepl  'ApKrjv  irapaXiav ,  'ApK^i  being  the 
name  which  he  elsewhere  gives  to  Ecdippa  (Achzib) 
on  the  sea-coast  in  Asher.  [G.] 

ALPHAE'US  CA\cpa7os ;  ^H),  the  father 
of  the  lesser  St.  James  the  Apostle  (Matt.  x.  3  ; 
Mark  iii.  18 ;  Luke  vi.  15  ;  Acts  i.  13),  and  hus- 
band of  that  Mary  (called  in  Mark  xv.  40,  mother 
of  James  the  less  and  of  Joses)  who,  with  the 
mother  of  Jesus  and  others,  was  standing  by  the 
cross  during  the  crucifixion  (John  xix.25.)  [Mary.] 
In  this  latter  place  he  is  called  Clopas  (not,  as  in 
the  A.  V.,  Cleophas) ;  a  variation  arising  from  the 
double  pronunciation  of  the  letter  n  ;  and  found  also 
in  the  LXX.  rendering  of  Hebrew  names.  Winer 
compares  'Ayycuos  from  ""lin,  'Ep.a.6  from  HEIl, 
(pacriK  from  npQ  (2  Chr.  xxx.  1),  Ta/3<=K  from  CDD 

(Gen.  xxii.  24),  and  says  that  although  no  reliable 
example  appears  in  the  LXX.  of  the  hardening  of  n 
at  the  bearinninsr  of  a  word,  vet  such  are  found,  as 
in  KiXik'm  from  tpH.  Whether  the  fact  of  this 
variety  existing  gives  us  a  farther  right  to  identify 
Alphaeus  with  the  Cleopas  of  Luke  xxiv.  18,  can 
never  be  satisfactorily  determined.  If,  as  commonly, 
the  ellipsis  in  'lovSas  'laKdofiou  in  Luke  vi.  15, 
Acts  i.  13,  is  to  be  filled  up  by  inserting  a$c\(p6s, 
then  the  apostle  St.  Jude  was  another  son  of 
Alphaeus:    And  in  Mark  ii.  14,  Levi  for  Matthew) 


ALTAR 

is  also  said  to  have  been  the  son  of  Alphaeus.  Nor 
can  any  satisfactory  reason  be  given  why  we  should 
suppose  this  to  have  been  a  different  person,  as  is 
usually  done.  For  further  particulars,  see  James 
the  Less,  and  Brethren  of  Jesus.  [H.  A.] 
ALTAR  (n2Tp ;    Bvataarripiov,  Pw/aSs  ;    al- 

tare).  (A.)  The  first  altar  of  which  we  have  any 
account  is  that  built  by  Noah  when  he  left  the 
ark  (Gen.  viii.  20).  The  Targumists  indeed  assert 
that  Adam  built  an  altar  after  he  was  driven  out  of 
the  garden  of  Eden,  and  that  on  this  Cain  and  Abel, 
and  afterwards  Noah  and  Abraham,  offered  sacrifice 
(Pseudo  Jonath.  Gen.  viii.  20,  xxii.  9).  According 
to  the  tradition  the  First  Man  was  made  upon  an 
altar  which  God  himself  had  prepared  for  the  pur- 
pose, and  on  the  site  of  this  altar  were  reared  both 
those  of  the  Patriarchs  and  that  in  the  Temple  of 
Solomon.  This  tradition,  if  no  other  wav  valuable, 
at  least  shows  the  great  importance  which  the  Jews 
attached  to  the  altar  as  the  central  point  of  their 
religious  worship  (Bahr,  Symbol,  ii.  350). 

In  the  early  times  altars  were  usually  built  in 
certain  spots  hallowed  by  religious  associations,  e.  g. 
where  God  appeared  (Gen.  xii.  7,  xiii.  18,  xxvi.  25, 
xxxv.  1).  Generally  of  course  they  were  erected 
for  the  offering  of  sacrifice ;  but  in  some  instances 
they  appear  to  have  been  only  memorial.  Such  was 
the  altar  built  by  Moses  and  called  Jehovah  Nissi, 
as  a  sign  that  the  Lord  would  have  war  with  Ama- 
lek  from  generation  to  generation  (Ex.  xvii.  15,  1G). 
Such  too  was  the  altar  which  was  built  by  the 
Reubenites,  Gadites,  and  half-tribe  of  Manasseh, 
"  in  the  borders  of  Jordan,"  and  which  was  erected 
"  not  for  burnt  offering  nor  for  sacrifice,"  but  that 
it  might  be  "  a  witness  "  between  them  and  the  rest 
of  the  tribes  (Josh.  xxii.  10-29).  Altai's  were  most 
probably  originally  made  of  earth.  The  Law  of 
Moses  allowed  them  to  be  made  either  of  earth  or 
unhewn  stones  (Ex.  xx.  26)  :  any  iron  tool  would 
have  profaned  the  altar — but  this  could  only  refer 
to  the  body  of  the  altar  and  that  part  on  which  the 
victim  was  laid,  as  directions  were  given  to  make  a 
casing  of  shittim-wood  overlaid  with  brass  for  the 
altar  of  burnt  offering.  (See  below.) 

In  later  times  they  were  frequently  built  on  high 
places,  especially  in  idolatrous  worship  (Deut.  xii.  2  ; 
for  the  pagan  notions  on  this  subject,  see  Tac.  Ann. 
xiii.  57).  The  altars  so  erected  were  themselves 
sometimes  called  "  high  places  "  (T"l1D2,  2  K.  xxiii. 
8  ;  2  Chr.  xiv.  3,  &c).  By  the  LawV  Moses  all 
altars  were  forbidden  except  those  first  in  the  Taber- 
nacle and  afterwards  in  the  Temple  (Lev.  xvii.  8, 
9;  Deut.  xii.  13,  &c).  This  prohibition,  however, 
was  not  strictly  observed,  at  least  till  after  the 
building  of  the  Temple,  even  by  pious  Israelites. 
Thus  Gideon  built  an  altar  (Judg.  vi.  24).  So 
likewise  did  Samuel  (1  Sam.  vii.  9,  10),  David  (2 
Sam.  xxiv.  25),  and  Solomon  (1  K.  iii.  4). 

The  sanctity  attaching  to  the  altar  led  to  its 
being  regarded  as  a  place  of  refuge  or  asylum  (Ex. 
xxi.  14;"  1  K.  i.  50). 

(B.)  The  Law  of  Moses  directed  that  two  altars 
should  be  made,  the  one  the  Altar  of  Burnt-offering 
(called  also  the  Altar  kolt  e|oxVj  see  Havernick 
in  Ez.  xliii.  13  ff.)  and  the  other  the  Altar  of 
Incense. 

I.  The  Altar  of  Burnt  offering  (r6tyn  n3TO), 

called  in  Malach.  i.  7,  12,  "  the  table  of  the  Lord," 
perhaps  also  in  Ez.  xliv.  16.  This  differed  in  con- 
struction at  different  times.    (1.)   In  the  Tabernacle 


ALTAR 

(Ex.  xxvii  1  ff.  xxxviii.  1  ft'.)  it  was  compara- 
tively small  and  portable.  In  shape  it  was  square. 
It  was  five  cubits  in  length,  the  same  in  breadth, 
and  three  cubits  high.  It  was  made  of  planks  of 
shittim  (or  acacia)-wood  overlaid  with  brass.  (Jo- 
sephus  says  gold  instead  of  brass,  Ant.  iii.  6,  §8). 

The  interior  was  hollow  (Tin?  3-123,  Ex.  xxvii.  8). 
But  as  nothing  is  said  about  a  covering  to  the  altar 
on  which  the  victims  might  be  placed,  Jarchi  is 
probably  correct  in  supposing  that  whenever  the 
tabernacle  for  a  time  became  stationary,  the  hollow 
Case  of  the  altar  was  filled  up  with  earth.  In  sup- 
port of  this  view  he  refers  to  Ex.  XX.  24,  where 
the  command  is  given,  "  make  me  an  altar  of  earth," 
&C.,  and  observes:  "  Altare  terreum  est  hoc  ipsum 
aeneuro  altare  cujus  concavum  terra  implebatur, 
cum  castra  nietarent.tr." 

At  the  four  corners  were  four  projections  called 
horns,  made,  like  the  altar  itself,  of  shittim-wood 
overlaid  with  brass.  It  is  not  quite  certain  how  the 
words  in  Ex.  xxvii.  2,  Vni~l?  }«P1]-|  -IHSD,  should 

be  explained.  According  to  Mendelssohn  they  mean 
that  these  horns  were  of  one  piece  with  the  altar. 
So  also  Knobel  (Coiniu.  in  loc).  And  this  is  pro- 
bably right.  By  others  they  are  understood  to 
describe  only  the  projection  of  the  horns  from  the 
altar.  These  probably  projected  upwards ;  and  to 
them  the  victim  was  bound  when  about  to  be  sacri- 
ficed (Ps.  cxviii.  27).  On  the  occasion  of  the  con- 
secration of  the  priests  (Ex.  xxix.  12)  and  the 
offering  of  the  sin-offering  (Lev.  iv.  7  ft.)  the  blood 
of  the  victim  was  sprinkled  on  the  horns  of  the 
altar.  (See  the  symbolism  explained  by  Baumgarten, 
Cotnmentar  zum  Pentateuch,  ii.  63.)  Round  the 
altar  midway  between  the  top  and  bottom  (or,  as 
others  suppose,  at  the  top)  ran  a  projecting  ledge 
(3313,  A.  V.  "Compass"")  on  which  perhaps  the 

priests  stood  when  they  officiated.  To  the  outer 
edge  of  this,  again,  a  grating  or  net-work  of  brass 

(nsyru  nth  nb'yo  133D)  was  affixed,  and 

reached  to  the  bottom  of  the  altar,  which  thus  pre- 
sented the  appearance  of  being  larger  below  than 
above.'1  Others  have  supposed  this  grating  to  adhere 
closely  to  the  boards  of  which  the  altar  was  com- 
posed, or  even  to  have  been  substituted  for  them 
half-way  up  from  the  bottom. 

At  any  rate  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  the 
grating  was  perpendicular,  not  horizontal  as  Jona- 
than supposes  (Targum  on  Ex.  xxvii.  5).  According 
to  him  it  was  intended  to  catch  portions  of  the 
sacrifice  or  coals  which  fell  from  the  altar,  and 
which  might  thus  be  easily  replaced.  But  it  seems 
improbable  that  a  net-work  or  grating  should  have 
been  constructed  for  such  a  purpose  (cf.  Joseph. 
Ant.  iii.6,  §s).  At  the  four  corners  of  the  net- 
work were  four  brasen  rings  into  which  were  u 
the  staves  by  which  the  altar  was  carried.  These 
staves  were  of  the  same  materials  as  the  altar  itself, 
As  the  priests  were  forbidden  to  ascend  the  altar  by 

steps  (Ex.  XX.  2li),  it  has  been  conjecture!  th:,t  a 
slope  of  earth  led  gradually  up  to  the  3313,  or 
ledge  from  which  they  officiated.     This  must  have 


ALTAR 


53 


Knobel  {in  lac.)  is  of  opinion  that  the  object  "f 
the  net-work  was  to  protect  the  altar  from  being  in- 
jured by  the  feet  and  knees  of  the  officiating  priests. 
'I lie  j3]j,  he  thinks,  w;is  merely  an  ornament  by 
uay  of  finish,  at  the  top  of  this. 


been  either  on  the  north  or  south  side ;  for  on  the 
east  was  "the  place  of  the  ashes"  (Lev.  i.  16), 
and  on  the  west  at  no  great  distance  stood  the  laver 
of  brass.  According  to  the  Jewish  tradition  it  was 
on  the  south  side.  The  place  of  the  altar  was  at 
"  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  tent  of  the  con- 
gregation" (Ex.  xl.  29).  The  various  utensils  for 
the  service  of  the  altar  (Ex. xxvii.  3)  were:  (1.) 
niVD,  pans  to  clear  away  the  fat  (ijth?)  and 
ashes  with:  elsewhere  the  word  is  used  of  the  pots 
in  which  the  flesh  of  the  sacrifices  was  put  to  seethe 
(cf.  Zech.  xiv.  20,  21,  and  2  Chr.  xxxv.  115,  with 

1  Sam.  ii.  14).  (2.)  D1^,  shovels,  Vulg.  forcipes^ 
Gesen.  pakte  cineri  removendo.      (3.)   mp")TO 

basons.  LXX.  <pia\a{,  vessels  in  which  the  blood 
of  the  victims  was  received,  and  from  which  it 
was  sprinkled  (r.  p~lT).  (4.)  T\ J7ttt,  flesh-hooks, 
LXX.  Kpe&ypai,  by  means  of  which  the  flesh  was 
removed  from  the  caldron  or  pot.  (See  1  Sam.  ii. 
13,  14,  where  they  are  described  as  having  three 
prongs.)  (5.)  HfinO,  fire-pans, or  perhaps  censers. 
These  might  either  be  used  for  taking  coals  from 
the  fire  on  the  altar  (Lev.  xvi.  12)  ;  or  for  burning 
incense  (Num.  xvi.  6,  7).  There  is  no  reason  to 
give  the  word  a  different  meaning  in  Ex.  xxv.  38, 
where  our  version,  following  the  Vulgate,  translates 
it  "snuff-dishes."  All  these  utensils  were  of  brass. 
(2.)  In  Solomon's  Temple  the  altar  was  con- 
siderably larger  in  its  dimensions,  as  might  have 
been  expected  from  the  much  greater  size  of  the 
building  in  which  it  was  placed.  Like  the  former 
it  was  square:  but  the  length  and  breadth  were 
now  twenty  cubits,  and  the  height  ten  (2  Chr.  iv. 
1).  It  differed,  too,  in  the  material  of  which  it 
was  made,  being  entirely  of  brass  (1  K.  viii.  64; 

2  Chr.  vii.  7).  It  had  no  grating:  and  instead  of  a 
single  gradual  slope,  the  ascent  to  it  was  probably 
made  by  three  successive  platforms,  to  each  of  which 
it  has  been  supposed  that  steps  led  (Surenhus. 
Mishna,  vol.  ii.  p.  261,  as  in  the  figure  annexed). 


Altai  ni  Burnt  I II 


i  this  maybe  urged  the  fad  that  the  Law 
of  Moses  positively  forbade  the  use  of  steps  (Ex.  ,\:<. 
26)  and  the  assertion  of  Josephus  that  in  Herod's 
tcuq.le   the   ascent   was   by  an    incline  I   plane.      On 

tl ther  hand  steps  are  introduced  in  the  ideal,  or 

symbolical,  temple  of  Ezekiel  (xliii.  17),  and  the 
prohibition  in  Ex.xx.  has  been  interpreted  as  apply- 
ing  to   a   continuous   flight    of  stairs   and    net    to"  a 

broken  ascent.     But  the  Biblical  account  is  s..  brief 

that   we  arih    unable    to  determine  the 


54 


ALTAR 


question.      Asa,   we  read,   renewed  (K^nM)  this 

altar  (2  Chr.  xv.  8).  This  may  either  mean  that 
he  repaired  it,  or  move  probably  perhaps  that  he 
reconsecrated  it  after  it  had  been  polluted  by  idol- 
worship  (iysKaivia-e,  LXX.).  Subsequently  Ahaz 
had  it  removed  from  its  place  to  the'  north  side  of 
the  new  altar  which  Urijah  the  priest  had  made  in 
accordance  with  his  direction  (2  K.  xvi.  14).  It 
was  "cleansed"  by  command  of  Hezekiah  (Uinp 
2  Chr.  xxix.  18),  and  Manasseh,  after  renouncing  his 
idolatry,  either  repaired  (Chetib,  J3*1)  or  rebuilt  it 
(Keri,  |21|1).  It  may  finally  have  been  broken  up 
and  the  brass  carried  to  Babylon,  but  this  is  not 
mentioned  (Jer.  lii.  17  ff.).  According  to  the  Rab- 
binical tradition,  this  altar  stood  on  the  very  spot 
on  which  man  was  originally  created. 

(3.)  The  Altar  of  Burnt-offering  in  the  second 
(Zerubbabel's)  temple.  Of  this  no  description  is 
given  in  the  Bible.  We  are  only  told  (Ezr.  iii.  2) 
that  it  was  built  before  the  foundations  of  the 
Temple  were  laid.  According  to  Josephus  (Ant. 
xi.  4,  §  1)  it  was  placed  on  the  same  spot  on  which 
that  of  Solomon  had  originally  stood.  It  was  con- 
structed, as  we  may  infer  from  1  Mace.  iv.  47, 
of  unhewn  stones  (\idovs  6\oK\r)povs).  Antiochus 
Epiphanes  desecrated  it  (<fKoh6jj.r)ffav  P5e\vy/j.a 
epTjjitcitrecos  iwl  to  Ovcriaffrripiov,  1  Mace.  i.  54): 
and  according  to  Josephus  (Ant.  xii.  5,  §4)  re- 
moved it  altogether.  In 'the  restoration  by  Judas 
Maccabaeus  a  new  altar  was  built  of  unhewn  stone 
in  conformity  with  the  Mosaic  Law  (1  Mace.  iv. 
47). 

(4.)  The  altar  erected  by  Herod,  which  is  thus 
described  by  Josephus  (B.  J.  v.  5,  §6) : — "  In 
front  of  the  Temple  stood  the  altar,  15  cubits  in 
height,  and  in  breadth  and  length  of  equal  dimen- 
sions, viz.  50  cubits :  it  was  built  foursquare,  with 
horn-like  corners  projecting  from  it;  and  on  the 
south  side  a  gentle  acclivity  led  up  to  it.  More- 
over it  was  made  without  any  iron  tool,  neither  did 
iron  ever  touch  it  at  any  time."  Rutin,  has  40 
cubits  square  instead  of  50.  The  dimensions  given 
in  the  Mishna  are  different.  It  is  there  said  (Mid- 
doth,  3,  1)  that  the  altar  was  at  the  base  32  cubits 
square;  at  the  height  of  a  cubit  from  the  ground 
30  cubits  square;  at  5  cubits  higher  (where  was 
the  circuit,  N331D)  it  was  reduced  to  28  cubits 

square,  and  at  the  horns  still  further  to  26.  A 
space  of  a  cubit  each  way  was  here  allowed  for  the 
officiating  priests  to  walk,  so  that  24  cubits  square 
were  left  for  the  fire  on  the  altar  (nmj?E>n).    This 

description  is  not  very  clear.  But  the  Rabbinical 
and  other  interpreters  consider  the  altar  from  the 
S331D    upwards  to  have  been  28  cubits  square, 

allowing  at  the  top,  however,  a  cubit  each  way  for 
the  horns,  and  another  cubit  for  the  passage  of  the 
priests.  Others,  however  (as  L'Empereur  in  foe), 
suppose  the  ledge  on  which  the  priests  walked  to 
have  been  2  cubits  lower  than  the  surface  of  the 
altar  on  which  the  fire  was  placed. 

The  Mishna  further  states,  in  accordance  with  Jo- 
sephus (see  above),  and  with  reference  to  the  law 
already  mentioned  (Ex.  xx.  25),  that  the  stones  of 
which  the  altar  was  made  were  unhewn;  and  that 
twice  in  the  year,  viz.  at  the  Feast  of  the  Passover 
and  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  they  were  white- 
washed afresh.  The  way  up  (t.*'33)  was  on  the 
south  side,  32  cubits  long  and  10  broad,  constructed 


ALTAR 

also  of  unhewn  stones.  In  connexion  with  the 
horn  on  the  south-west  was  a  pipe  intended  to 
receive  the  blood  of  the  victims  which  was 
sprinkled  on  the  left  side  of  the  altar:  the  blood 
was  afterwards  carried  by  means  of  a  subterra- 
nean passage  into  the  brook  Kidron.  Under  the 
altar  was  a  cavity  into  which  the  drink-offerings 
passed.  It  was  covered  over  with  a  slab  of  marble, 
and  emptied  from  time  to  time.  On  the  north  side 
of  the  altar  were  a  number  of  brasen  rings,  to  secure 
the  animals  which  were  brought  for  sacrifice. 
Lastly,  round  the  middle  of  the  altar  ran  a  scarlet 
thread  (N"D*3  X>  tMI"I)  to  mark  where  the  blood 

was  to  be  sprinkled,  whether  above  or  below  it. 

According  to  Lev.  vi.  12,  13,  a  perpetual  riie 
was  to  be  kept  burning  on  the  altar.  This,  as 
Bahr  (Symbol,  ii.  350)  remarks,  was  the  symbol 
and  token  of  the  perpetual  worship  of  Jehovah. 
For  inasmuch  as  the  whole  religion  of  Israel  was 
concentrated  in  the  sacrifices  which  were  offered, 
the  extinguishing  of  the  fire  would  have  looked 
like  the  extinguishing  of  the  religion  itself.  It  was 
therefore,  as  he  observes,  essentially  different  from 
the  perpetual  fire  of  the  Persians  (Curt.  iii.  3; 
Amm.  Marc,  xxiii.  6;  Hyde,  JRel.  Vet.  Pers.  viii. 
p.  148),  or  the  fire  of  Vesta  to  which  it  has  been 
compared.  These  were  not  sacrificial  fires  at  all, 
but  were  symbols  of  the  Deity,  or  were  connected 
with  the  belief  which  regarded  fire  as  one  of  the 
primal  elements  of  the  world.  This  fire,  according 
to  the  Jews,  was  the  same  as  that  which  came 
down  from  heaven  (irvp  ovpavoirtris)  "  and  con- 
sumed upon  the  altar  the  burnt-offering  and  the 
fat"  (Lev.  ix.  24).  It  couched  upon  the  altar, 
they  say,  like  a  lion ;  it  was  bright  as  the  sun ; 
the  flame  thereof  was  solid  and  pure;  it  consumed 
things  wet  and  dry  alike;  and,  finally,  it  emitted 
no  smoke.  This  was  one  of  the  five  things  existing 
in  the  first  temple  which  tradition  declares  to  have 
been  wanting  in  the  second  (Tract.  Joma,  c.  i.  sub 
fin.  fol.  21,  col.  b.).  The  fire  which  consumed  the 
saci  ifices  was  kindled  from  this :  and  besides  these 
there  was  the  fire  from  which  the  coals  were  taken 
to  burn  incense  with.  (See  Carpzov.  Apparat.  Hist. 
Crit.  Annot.  p.  286.) 

II.  The  Altar  of  Incense  (ITlbpn  n2TD  and 
mtDp  "ItppQ  Ex.  xxx.  1 ;  6v<riaffT7ipiov  6v/xLa.fj.a- 
tos,  LXX.),  called  also  the  golden  altar  (n3?p 
3!TTn.  Ex.  xxxix.  38;  Num.  iv.  11)  to  distinguish 
it  from  the  Altar  of  Burnt-offering,  which  was  called 
the  brazen  altar  (Ex.  xxxviii.  30).  Probably  this  is 
meant  by  the  "  altar  of  wood  "  spoken  of  Ezek.  xli. 
22,  which  is  further  described  as  the  "table  that  is 
before  the  Lord,"  precisely  the  expression  used  of 
the  altar  of  incense.  (See  Pelitzsch,  Brief  an 
die  ffebr.  p.  678.)  The  name  rGftt,  "altar," 
was  not  strictly  appropriate,  as  no  sacrifices  were 
offered  upon  it ;  but  once  in  the  year,  on  the  great 
day  of  atonement,  the  high-priest  sprinkled  upon 
the  horns  of  it  the  blood  of  the  sin-oflering  (Ex. 
xxx.  10). 

(a.)  That  in  the  Tabernacle  was  made  of  acacia- 
wood,  overlaid  with  pure  gold.  In  shape  it  was 
square,  being  a  cubit  in  length  and  breadth,  and 
2  cubits  in  height.  Like  the  Altar  of  Burnt- 
offering  it  had  horns  at  the  four  corners,  which  were 
of  one  piece  with  the  rest  of  the  altar.  (So  Rabb. 
Levi  ben  Gersom: — "  Discimus  inde  quod  non  con- 
veniat  facere  cornua  separatim,  et  altari  deinde  ap- 


ALTAR 

ponere,   sed  quod   cornua  debeant  esse  ex  corpoie 

al taris"  {Comment,  in  Leg.  f'ol.  109,  col.  4). 

It  had  also  a  top  or  roof  (3H  ;  iaxa-p<*->  LXX.), 
oil  which  the  incense  was  laid  and  lighted.  Many, 
following  the  interpretation  of  the  Vulgate  craticu- 
lam  ejus,  have  supposed  a  kind  of  grating  to  be 
meant  ;  but  for  this  there  is  no  authority,  liound 
the  altar  was  a  border  or  wreath  ("IT;  arpeiTT^v 
(TTe<pa.vrjV  xpvffiji',  LXX.).  .losephus  says:  eiryjv 
ec^apa  \pvff4a  tnrep  avecTwaa,  e^ovaa  Kara 
ywv'tav  kKa(TTf]v  <n4<pavov  {Ant.  iii.  7).  "  Erat 
itaque  cinctorium,  ex  solido  contlatuni  auro,  quod 
tecto  ita  adhaerebat,ut  in  extremitate  illud  cingeret, 
et  prohiberet,  ne  quid  facile  ab  altari  in  terram  de-. 
volveretur."  (Carpzov.  Appt.tr.  Hist.  Crit.Annot. 
p.  J?:!.)  Below  this  were  two  golden  rings  which 
were  to  be  "  for  places  for  the  staves  to  bear  it 
withal."  The  staves  were  of  acacia-wood  overlaid 
with  gold.  Its  appearance  may  be  illustrated  by 
the  following  figure : — 


ALTAK 


55 


Supposed  furm  of  the  Altar  of  1 


This  altar  stood  in  the  Holy  Place,  "  before  the 
vail  that  is  by  the  ark  of  the  testimony  "  (Ex.  xxx. 
G,  xl.  5).  Philo  too  speaks  of  it  as  eo~co  rod  irpor4- 
pov  KaTair^rd(Tfj.aTos,  and  as  standing  between  the 
candlestick  and  the  table  of  shew-bread.  In  appa- 
rent contradiction  to  this,  the  author  of  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews  enumerates  it  among  the  objects 
which  were  within  the  second  vail  (juera  ro  Sevrepov 
KaTairzTacTiAa),  i.  c.  in  the  Holy  of  Holies.  It  is  true 
that  by  6vfiiaT7)ptou  in  this  passage  may  be  meant 
"a  oenser,"  in  accordance  with  the  usage  of  the 
I. XX.,  but  it  is  better  understood  of  the  Altar  of 
Incense  which  by  Philo  and  other  Hellenists  is 
called  dufxiari}ptov.  It  is  remarkable  also  that  in 
1  K.  vi.   22,   this  same  altar  is   said  to   belong  to 

"  the    oracle "    (T^   TB>K    n2Vpn)    or   most 

Hoi]  Place.  This  may  perhaps  be  accounted  for 
by  th''  great  typical  and  symbolical  importan  ■>■  at- 
tached to  this  altar,  bo  that  it  might  be  considered 
to  belong  to  the  Sevr4pa  aKt\vr\.  (Sec  Bleek  on 
Heb.  ix.  4,  and  Delitzsch  inloc.) 

The  Altar  in  Solomon's  Temple  was  similar 
(1  K.  vii.  48;  1  < Mil .  srviii.  Is  .  bu1  was  mad.' 
of  cedar  overlaid  witli  gold.  The  altar  mentioned 
in  Is.  vi.  G  is  clearly  the  Altar  of  Incense,  not  the 
Altai-  of  Burnt-oflering.  From  this  passage  it 
would  seem  that  heated  stones  (nDi~|)  wi 


upon  the  altar,  by  means  of  which  the  incense  was 
kindled.  Although  it  is  the  heavenly  altar  which 
is  there  described,  we  may  presume  that  the 
earthly  corresponded  to  it. 

(c.)  The  Altar  of  Incense  is  mentioned  as  having 
been  removed  from  the  Temple  of  Zerubbabel  by 
Antiochus  Epiphanes  (1  Mace.  i.  21).  Judas 
Macrabaens  restored  it,  together  with  the  holy 
vessels,  &c.  (I  Mace.  iv.  49).  On  the  arch  of  Titus 
no  Altar  of  Incense  appears.  But  that  it  existed 
in  the  last  Temple,  and  was  richly  overlaid,  we  learn 
from  the  Mishna  (Hagiga  3,  8).  From  the  cir- 
cumstance that  the  sweet  incense  was  burnt  upon 
it  every  day,  morning  and  evening  (Ex.  xxx.  7,  8), 
as  well  as  that  the  blood  of  atonement  was  sprinkled 
upon  it  (v.  10),  this  altar  had  a  special  importance 
attached  to  it.  It  is  the  only  altar  which  appears 
in  the  Heavenly  Temple  (Is.  vi.  (3  ;  Rev.  viii. 
3,  4). 

C.  Other  Altars.  (1.)  Altars  of  brick.  There 
seems  to  be  an  allusion  to  such  in  Is.  Ixv.  3.     The 

words  are:  D^nVil  bv  DntSpE),  "  offering  in- 
cense on  the  bricks,"  generally  explained  as  referring 
to  altars  made  of  this  material,  and  probably  situ- 
ated in  the  "  gardens "  mentioned  just  before. 
Hosenmiiller  suggests,  however,  that  the  allusion  is 
to  some  Babylonish  custom  of  burning  incense  on 
bricks  covered  over  with  magic  formulae  or  cunei- 
form inscriptions.  This  is  also  the  view  of  Gesenius 
and  Maurer. 


Various  Alturs. 

1,'.'.   Egyptian,  from  kis-nlirfs.     (Rossellinl.) 
3.  Assyrian,  found  at  Miorsabad.     (Layard.) 
•1.    Babylonian,  /.;'/'     -  <n<    .\uionale.     i  btyaxd.) 
5.  Assyrian,  from  Khoraabad,     (Layard.) 

(2.)  An  Altar  to  an  Unknown  God  ( ' AyvecaTw 
®e<£,  Acts  xvii.  22).  What  altar  this  was  lias 
been  the  subject  of  much  discussion.  St.  Paul  merely 
mentions  in  his  speech  on  the  Areopagus  that  ho 
had  himself  seen  such  an  altar  in  Athens.  His  as- 
sertion, as  it  happens,  is  confirmed  by  other  writers. 
Pausanias  says  (i.  §4),  ivravda  Ka\  /3a>fj.o\  8eu>v 
re  bvofxa^opivtov  ayvcotTTuiv  /cat  ypwaiv  zeal  iraiSccu 
ruv  @7)(rews  /cat  $a\-f)pov.    And  Philostratus  (  Yit. 

ApOllOfl.   \'i.   .'!),     (TOXppOVtffTtpOV    TO    7Tfpl    TtavTblV 

dewy  6f5  \4ytiv,  Kal  ravra  'A9r]i>T)<Tii>,  oil  /cat 
ayvcii(TTwv    Saifidvaiu    ^w/jtol    'iSpwrai.       This,    as 

Winer  observes,  need  not  ho  interpreted  a--  if  the 
several  altars  were  dedicated  to  a  number  of  jfyvacr- 

toi  0(ol,  but  rather  that  each  altar  had  the  inscrip- 
tion 'Ayuiia-Tw  Qfw.  It  is  not  at  all  probable  that 
such  inscription  referred  to  the  God  of  the  dew-.,  as 

One    whose    Name    it    was    unlaw  till    to    ut! 

Wolf  and  others  have  supposed).     As  to  the  origin 

of  these   altars.    Kichhorn    suggests   that    they  may 


56 


AL-TASCHITH 


have  been  built  before  the  art  of  writing  was 
known  (/3co/uol  avivvfioi),  and  subsequently  in- 
scribed aryv.  0e<p.  Neander's  view,  however,  is 
probably  more  correct.  He  quotes  Diog.  Laertius, 
who,  in  his  Life  of  Epimenides,  says  that  in  the 
time  of  a  plague,  when  they  knew  not  what  God  to 
propitiate  in  order  to  avert  it,  he  caused  black  and 
white  sheep  to  be  let  loose  from  the  Areopagus, 
and  wherever  they  lay  down,  to  be  offered  to  the 
respective  divinities  (t<j>  icpotr'fiKOVri  6e$).  dOev, 
adds  Diogenes,  %ri  /col  vvv  iffriv  evpelv  Kara  -rovs 
5rj/ioi/s  rlav  'Ad.  Pai/Aobs  avaivv/xovs.  On  which 
Neander  remarks  that  on  this  or  similar  occasions 
altars  might  be  dedicated  to  an  Unknown  God, 
since  they  knew  not  what  God  was  offended  and 
required  to  be  propitiated.  [J.  J.  S.  P.] 

AL-TASCHI'TH  (Dn^ri  bit,  Al  Tashcheth), 

found  in  the  introductory  verse  to  the  four  follow- 
ing Psalms  :  lvii.,  lviii.,  lix.,  lxxv.  Literally  ren- 
dered, the  import  of  the  words  is  "  destroy  not;" 
and  hence  some  Jewish  commentators,  including 
Raslii  (*'£>'*1)  and  Kimchi  (p'Tl),  have  regarded 
nnK'n   ?N   as   a   compendium    of  the   argument 

treated  in  the  above-mentioned  Psalms.  Modern 
expositors,  however,  have  generally  adopted  the 
view  of  Aben-Ezra  (Comment,  on  Psalm  lvii.), 
agreeably  to  which  "  Al  Tasche'th"  is  the  beginning 
of  some  song  or  poem  to  the  tune  of  which  those 
psalms  were  to  be  chaunted.  [D.  W.  M.] 

A'LUSH  (K'toX,  Sam.  ES^K ;  Al\ois  ;  Alus), 

one  of  the  stations  of  the  Israelites  on  their  journey 
to  Sinai,  the  last  before  Rephidim  (Num.  xxxiii.  13, 
14).  No  trace  of  it  has  yet  been  found.  In  the 
Seder  Olam  (Kitto,  Ci/c.  s.  u.)  it  is  stated  to  have 
been  8  miles  from  Rephidim.  [G.] 

AL'VAH  (nV?y  ;  Tw\d  ;  Aha),  a  duke  of 
Edom  (Gen.  xxxvi.  40),  written  Aliah  (HvJ?)  in 
1  Chr.  i.  51. 

AL'VAN(|vy;  TcoXafi;  Alvan),  a  Horite,son 
of  Shobal  (Gen.  xxxvi.  23),  written  Man  Q'bV)  in 
1  Chr.  i.  40. 

A'MAD  OVW;  'AfxiriX;  Amaad),  an  un- 
known place  in  Asher  between  Alammelech  and 
MisheaJ  (Josh.  xix.  26  only). 

AMADATHA  (Esth.  xvi.  10,  17);  and 
AMAD  ATHUS  (Esth.  xii.  6).  [Hamjied.vtha.] 

A'MAL  (??0y  ;  'A.uctA.;  Amal),  Dame  of  a  man 
(1  Chr.  vii.  35).' 

AM'ALEK  (p?JDJ?;  'A^uaA^*;  Amalecli),  son 
of  Eliphaz  by  his  concubine  Timnah,  grandson  of 
Esau,  and  one  of  the  chieftains  ("  dukes"  A.  V.) 
of  Edom  (Gen.  xxxvi.  12,10).  His  mother  came 
of  the  Horite  race,  whose  territory  the  descendants 
of  Esau  had  seized :  and,  although  Amalek  himself 
is  represented  as  of  equal  rank  with  the  other  sons 
of  Eliphaz,  yet  his  posterity  appear  to  have  shared 
the  fate  of  the  Horite  population,  a  "  remnant" 
only  being  mentioned  as  existing  in  Edom  in  the 
time  of  Hezekiah,  when  they  were  dispersed 
Iw  a  band  of  the  tribe  of  Simeon  (1  Chr. 
iv.  43).  [W.  L.  B.] 

AMAL'EKITES  (D^Dy  ;  '  Afia\i}Kirai ; 
Amalecitae),  a  nomadic  tribe,  which  occupied  the 
peninsula  of  Sinai  and    the  wilderness  intervening 


AMAM 

between  the  southern  hill-ranges  of  Palestine  and 
the  border  of  Egypt  (Num.  xiii.  29  ;  1  Sam.  xv.  7, 
xxvii.  8).  Arabian  historians  represent  them  as 
originally  dwelling  on  the  shores  of  the  Persian 
Gulf,  whence  they  were  pressed  westwards  by 
the  growth  of  the  Assyrian  empire,  and  spread 
over  a  portion  of  Arabia  at  a  period  antecedent  to 
its  occupation  by  the  descendants  of  Joktan.  This 
account  of  their  origin  harmonizes  with  Gen.  xiv.  7, 
where  the  "  country"  ("  princes"  according  to  the 
reading  adopted  by  the  LXX.)  of  the  Amalekites 
is  mentioned  several  generations  before  the  birth 
of  the  Edomite  Amalek:  it  throws  light  on  the 
traces  of  a  permanent  occupation  of  central  Pales- 
tine in  their  passage  westward,  as  indicated  by  the 
names  Amalek  and  Mount  of  the  Amalekites  (Judg, 
v.  14,  xii.  15):  and  it  accounts  for  the  silence 
of  Scripture  as  to  any  relationship  between  the 
Amalekites  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  Edomites  or 
the  Israelites  on  the  other.  That  a  mixture  of  the 
two  former  races  occurred  at  a  later  period,  would 
in  this  case  be  the  only  inference  from  Gen.  xxxvi. 
16,  though  many  writers  have  considered  that 
passage  to  refer  to  the  origin  of  the  whole  nation, 
explaining  Gen.  xiv.  7,  as  a  case  of prolepsis.  The 
physical  character  of  the  district,  which  the  Ama- 
lekites occupied  [Arabia],  necessitated  a  nomadic 
life,  which  they  adopted  to  its  fullest  extent,  taking 
their  families  with  them  even  on  their  military 
expeditions  (Judg.  vi.  5).  Their  wealth  consisted 
in  flocks  and  herds.  Mention  is  made  ot  a  "  town" 
(1  Sam.  xv.  5),  and  Josephus  gives  an  exaggerated 
account  of  the  capture  of  several  towns  by  Saul 
(Ant.  vi.  7,  §2)  ;  but  the  towns  could  have  been 
little  more  than  stations,  or  nomadic  enclosures.  The 
kings  or  chieftains  were  perhaps  distinguished  by  the 
hereditary  title  Agag  (Num.  xxiv.  7  ;  1  Sam.  xv. 
8).  Two  important  routes  led  through  the  Ama- 
lekite  district,  viz.,  from  Palestine  to  Egypt  by  the 
Isthmus  of  Suez,  and  to  southern  Asia  and  Africa 
by  the  Aelanitic  arm  of  the  Red  Sea.  It  has 
been  conjectured  that  the  expedition  of  the  four 
kings  (Gen.  xiv.)  had  for  its  object  the  opening  of 
the  latter  route  ;  and  it  is  in  connexion  with  the 
former  that  the  Amalekites  first  came  in  contact 
with  the  Israelites,  whose  progress  they  attempted 
to  stop,  adopting  a  guerilla  style  of  warfare 
(Deut.  xxv.  18),  but  were  signally  defeated  at 
Rephidim  (Ex.  xvii.).  In  union  with  the  Ca- 
naanites  they  again  attacked  the  Israelites  on  the 
borders  of  Palestine,  and  defeated  them  near  Hor- 
mah  (Num.  xiv.  45).  Thenceforward  we  hear  of 
them  only  as  a  secondary  power,  at  one  time  in 
league  with  the  Moabites  (Judg.  in.  13),  when  they 
were  defeated  by  Ehud  near  Jericho;  at  another  time 
in  league  with  the  Midianites  (Judg.  vi.  3)  when 
they  penetrated  into  the  plain  of  Esdraelon,  and  were 
defeated  by  Gideon.  Saul  undertook  an  expedition 
against  them,  overrunning  their  whole  district 
"  from  Havilah  to  Shur,"  and  inflicting  an  im- 
mense loss  upon  them  (1  Sam.  xv.).  Their 
power  was  thenceforth  broken,  and  they  degenerated 
into  a  horde  of  banditti,  whose  style  of  warfare  is 
well  expressed  in  the  Hebrew  term  1-113  (Gesen. 
Lex.)  frequently  applied  to  them  in  the  description 
of  their  contests  with  David  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
Ziklag,  when  their  destruction  was  completed  (  ISam. 
xxvii.,  xxx. ;  comp.  Numb.  xxiv.  20).     [W.  L.  B.] 

A'MAM  (D£X  ;  SV;  Amam),  a  city  in  the 
south  of  Judah,  named  with  Shema  and  Moladah 
(el-Milh)  in  Josh.  xv.  26,  only,     hi  the  Alex.  LXX. 


AMAN 

the  name  is  joined  to  the  preceding — acroopafidfj.. 
Nothing  is  known  ot'it.  [G.] 

A'MAN.     [Haman.] 

AMA'NA  (H3DN),  apparently  a  mountain  in 

or  near  Lebanon, — "  from  the  head  of  Amana 
(Cant.  iv.  8).  It  is  commonly  assumed  that  this 
is  the  mountain  in  which  the  river  Abana  (2  K.  v. 
12  ;  Keri,  Targum  Jonathan,  and  margin  of  A.  V. 
"  Amana  ")  has  its  source,  but  in  the  absence  of  fur- 
ther research  in  the  Lebanon  this  is  mere  assumption. 
The  LXX.  translate  euro  apxv*  irlffTews.  [G.] 
AMARI'AH  (finON  and  WPTDK;  'A/zapi'a 

aud  'Afxapias ;  Amtiri<is;  whom  God  promised, 
Sim.,  Gesen.,  i.  q.  ®e6<ppaffTos).  Father  of 
Ahituh,  according  to  1  Chr.  vi.  7,  52,  and  son 
of  Meraioth,  in  the  line  of  the  high-priests.  In 
Josephus's  Hist.  (Ant.  viii.  1,  §3)  he  is  transformed 
into  'Apo<pcuos. 

2.  The  high-priest  in  the  reign  of  Jehoshaphat 
(2  Chr.  xix.  11).  He  was  the  son  of  Azariah,  and 
the  fifth  high-priest  who  succeeded  Zadok  (1  Chr. 
vi.  11).  Nothing  is  known  of  him  beyond  his 
name,  but  from  the  way  in  which  Jehoshaphat 
mentions  him  he  seems  to  have  seconded  that  pious 
king  in  his  endeavours  to  work  a  reformation  in 
Israel  and  Judah  (see  2  Chr.  xvii.  xix.).  Josephus, 
who  calls  him  '  Ajxaaiav  rov  Upia,  "  Amaziah  the 
priest,"  unaccountably  says  of  him  that  he  was  of 
the  tribe  of  Judah,  as  well  as  Zebadiah,  as  the 
text  now  stands.  But  if  tKarepovs  is  struck  out 
this  absurd  statement  will  disappear  (Ant.  ix.  1, 
Jjl).  It  is  not  easy  to  recognise  him  in  the  won- 
derfully corrupt  list  of  high-priests  given  in  the 
Ant.  x.  8,  §6.  But  he  seems  to  be  concealed 
under  the  strange  form  AHinPAMOS,  Axioramus. 
The  syllable  AH  is  corrupted  from  A2,  the  termi- 
nation of  the  preceding  name,  Azarias,  which  has 
accidentally  adhered  to  the  beginning  of  Amariah,  as 
the  final  2  has  to  the  very  same  name  in  the  text 
of  Nicephorus  (ap.  Seld.  de  Success,  p.  103), 
producing   the    form    'Xafiapias.       The    remaining 

Iwpafxos  is  not  far  removed  from  'A/xaplas.  The 
successor  of  Amariah  in  the  high-priesthood  must 
have  been  Jehoiada.  In  Josephus  $i8eas,  which 
is  a  corruption  of  'IwSeas,  follows  Axioramus. 
There  is  not  the  slightest  support  in  the  sacred 
history  for  the  names  Ahituh  and  Zadok,  who  are 
made  to  follow  Amariah  in  the  genealogy,  1  Chr. 
vi.  II,  12. 

3.  The  head  of  a  Levitical  house  of  the  Kohath- 
ites  in  the  time  of  David  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  19, 
cut.  23). 

4.  Tin'  head  of  one  of  the  twenty-four  courses 
of  priests,  which  was  named  ai'ter  him,  in  the  time 
of  David,  of  Hezekiah,  ami  of  Nehemiah  (1  Chr. 
xxiv.  14;  2  Chr.  xxxi.  15;  Neh.  x.  3,  xii.  2,  13). 
In  the  first  passage  the  name  is  written  ~I'2X  ///<■ 
//,,/•,  but  it  seems  to  !"•  tie"  same  name.  Another 
form  of  the  name  is  'HON  Imri  (1  Chr.  ix.  4,  5), 
a  man  of  Judah,  of  the  sons  of  Bani.  Of  the  same 
family  we  find, 

5.  Amariah  in  the  time  of  Ezra  (Ezr.  x.  42  ; 
Neh.  xi.  4). 

6.  Am  ancestor  of  Zephaniah  the  prophet  (Zeph. 
i.  1).  [A.  C.  II.] 

AM  ASA      (Nirpy,  .     'Ayaaaat; 

Amasa).  1.  Son  of  It  In  n  or  Jether,  by  Abigail, 
David's  sister  i/2  Sam.  xvii.  25).    lb'  joined  Absalom 


AMAZIAH 


57 


in  his  rebellion,  and  was  by  him  appointed  com- 
mander-in-chief in  the  place  of  Joab,  by  whom  he 
was  totally  defeated  in  the  forest  of  Ephraim  (2  Sam. 
xviii.  (5).  When  Joab  incurred  the  displeasure  of 
David  for  killing  Absalom,  David  forgave  the  trea- 
son of  Amasa,  recognized  him  as  his  nephew,  and 
appointed  him  Joab's  successor  (xix.  13).  Joab 
afterwards,  when  they  were  both  in  pursuit  of  the 
rebel  Sheha,  pretended  to  salute  Amasa,  and  stabbed 
him  with  his  sword  (xx.  10),  which  he  held  con- 
cealed in  his  left  hand.  Whether  Amasa  be  identical 
with  ''ti'Oy  who  is  mentioned  among  David's  com- 
manders (1  Chr.  xii.  18),  is  uncertain  (Ewald, 
Gesch.  Israel,  ii.  544). 

2.  A  prince  of  Ephraim,  son  of  Hadlai,  in  the 
reign  of  Ahaz  (2  Chr.  xxviii.  12).         [R.  W.  B.] 

AMAS'AI.     [Amasa.] 
'    AMASHAI    Cp^Dg;    'A/Wa;    Amassai), 
name  of  a  man  (Neh.  xi.  13). 

AMASI'AH  (IT'DOy  ;  A/xaffias  ;  Amasias)i 
name  of  a  man  (2  Chr.  xvii.  16). 

A'MATH.     [Hamath.] 

AMATHEIS  CAnaeias;  Emeus),  1  Esd.  ix. 
29.     [Athlai.] 

AM  ATHIS  (in  some  copies  Amathas),  "  the 
LAND  OF  "  (ji  'A/j.a6?rts  X^Pa)  >  a  distr>ct  to  the 
north  of  Palestine,  in  which  Jonathan  Maccabaeus 
met  the  forces  of  Demetrius  (1  Mace.  xii.  25). 
From  the  context  it  is  evidently  Hamath.     [G.] 

AMAZIAH  (iV?l?N,  or  Hn^SftX,  strength  of 

Jehovah;  ' Ape cr eras,  ' Afiaa'tas ;  Amasias,  son  of 
Joash,  and  eighth  king  of  Judah,  succeeded  to  the 
throne  at  the  age  of  25  on  the  murder  of  his 
father,  and  punished  the  murderers;  sparing,  how- 
ever, their  children,  in  accordance  with  Deut.  xxiv. 
Hi,  as  the  2nd  book  of  Kings  (xiv.  (3)  expressly  in- 
forms us,  thereby  implying  that  the  precept  had  not 
been  generally  observed.  In  order  to  restore  his  king- 
dom to  the  greatness  of  Jehoshaphat 's  days,  he  made 
war  on  the  Edomites,  defeated  them  in  the  valley  of 
Salt,  south  of  the  Dead  Sea  (the  scene  of  a  great 
victory  in  David's  time,  2  Sam.  viii.  13  ;  1  Chr. 
xviii.  12  ;  Ps.  Ix.  title),  and  took  their  capital, 
Selah  or  Petra,  to  which  he  gave  the  name  of 
Jokteel,  i.e.  praemium  ]><i  (Gesenius  in  roct), 
which  was  also  borne  by  one  of  his  own  Jewish 
cities  (Josh.   xv.   38).      We  read  in  2  Chr.  \\v. 

12-14,    that    the    victorious    Jews    threw    10, I 

Edomites  from  the  cliffs,  and  that  Amaziah  per- 
formed religious  ceremonies  in  honour  of  the  gods 
of  the  country;  an  exception  to  the  general  cha- 
racter of  his  reign  (cf.  2  K.  xiv.  3,  with  2  Chr. 
xxv.  '_').  In  consequence  of  this  he  was  overtaken  by 
misfortune.  Having  already  offended  the  Hebrews 
of  the  northern  kingdom  by  sending  back,  in  obe- 
dience to  a  prophet's  direction,   Borne    rcenarj 

ti      |.     whom    he   had    hired    from    it,    lie    had    the 

foolish  arrogance  to  challenge  Joash  king  of  Israel 
to  battle,  despising  probably  a  sovereign  whose 
strength  had  been  exhausted  by  Syrian  wars,  and 
who  had  not  yet  made  himself  respected  by  the 
great  successes  recorded  in  •_'  K.  xiii.  25.  But 
Judah  was  completely  defeated,  ami  Amaziah  him- 
self was  taken  pris r,  and  conveyed  by  Joash  to 

Jerusalem,  which,  according  to  Josephus  (Ant.  ix. 
9,3),  opened  its  gates  to  the  conqueror  under  a 
threat   that  otherwise  he  would  put  Amaziah  to 


58 


AMBASSADOR 


death.  We  do  not  know  the  historian's  authority 
for  this  statement,  but  it  explains  the  fact  that  the 
city  was  taken  apparently  without  resistance  (2  K. 
xiv.  13).  A  portion  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  on 
the  side  towards  the  Israelitish  frontier  was  broken 
down,  and  treasures  and  hostages  were  carried  oft' 
to  Samaria.  Amaziah  lived  15  years  after  the 
death  of  Joasli ;  and  in  the  29th  year  of  his  reign 
was  murdered  by  conspirators  at  Lachish,  whither 
he  had  retired  for  safety  from  Jerusalem.  The 
chronicler  seems  to  regard  this  as  a  punishment  for 
his  idolatry  in  Edom,  though  his  language  is  not 
very  clear  on  the  point  (2  Chr.  xxv.  27)  ;  and 
doubtless  it  is  very  probable  that  the  conspiracy 
was  a  consequence  of  the  low  state  to  which  Judah 
must  have  been  reduced  in  the  latter  part  of  his 
reign,  after  the  Edomitish  war  and  humiliation  in- 
flicted by  Joash  king  of  Israel.  His  reign  lasted 
from  B.C.  837  to  809.  (Clinton,  Fasti  Hellenici, 
i.  p.  325.) 

2.  Priest  of  the  golden  calf  at  Bethel,  who  endea- 
voured to  drive  the  prophet  Amos  from  Israel  into 
Judah,  and  complained  of  him  to  king  Jeroboam  II. 
(Am.  vii.  10). 

3.  A  descendant  of  Simeon  (1  Chr.  iv.  34). 

4.  A  Levite  (1  Chr.  vi.  45).  [G.  E.  L.  C] 
AMBASSADOR.  Sometimes  "VS  and  some- 
times T|N?0  is  thus  rendered ;  and  the  occurrence 
of  both  terms  in  the  parallel  clauses  of  Prov.  xiii. 
17  seems  to  show  that  they  approximate  to  syno- 
nvms.  The  office,  like  its  designation,  was  not 
definite  nor  permanent,  but  pro  re  natd  merely. 
The  precept  given  Deut.  xx.  10,  seems  to  imply 
some  such  agency ;  rather,  however,  that  of  a  mere 
nuncio,  often  bearing  a  letter  (2  K.  v.  5,  xix.  14) 
than  of  a  legate  empowered  to  treat.  The  inviola- 
bility of  such  an  officer's  person  may  peihaps  be  in- 
ferred from  the  only  recorded  infraction  of  it  being 
followed  with  unusual  severities  towards  the  van- 
quished, probably  designed  as  a  condign  chastisement 
of  that  offence  (2  Sam.  x.  2-5  ;  cf.  xii.  26-31).  The 
earliest  examples  of  ambassadors  employed  occur  in 
the  cases  of  Edom,  Moab,  and  the  Amorites  (Num. 
xx.  14,  xxi.  21  ;  Judg.  xi.  17-19),  afterwards  in 
that  of  the  fraudulent  Gibeonites  (Josh.ix.4,  &c), 
and  in  the  instances  of  civil  strife  mentioned  Judg. 
xi.  12  and  xx.  12.  (See  Cunaeus  de  Rep.  Hebr.  ii. 
20,  with  notes  by  J.  Nicholaus.  Ugol.  hi.  771-4.) 
They  are  mentioned  more  frequently  during  and 
after  the  contact  of  the  great  adjacent  monarchies  of 
Syria,  Babylon,  &.c.  with  those  of  Judah  and  Israel, 
e.  g.  in  the  invasion  of  Sennacherib.  They  were 
usually  men  of  high  rank ;  as  in  that  case  the 
chief  captain,  the  chief  cupbearer,  and  chief  of  the 
eunuchs  were  deputed,  and  were  met  by  delegates 
of  similar  dignity  from  He%ekiah  (2  K.  xviii.  17, 
18;  see  also  Is.  xxx.  4).  Ambassadors  are  found 
to  have  been  employed,  not  only  on  occasions  of 
hostile  challenge  or  insolent  menace  (2  K.  xiv.  8 ; 
I  'K.  xx.  2,  6),  but  of  friendly  compliment,  of  re- 
quest for  alliance  or  other  aid,  of  submissive  depre- 
cation, and  of  curious  inquiry  (2  K.  xiv.  8,  xvi.  7, 
xviii.  14;  2  Chr.  xxxii.  31).  The  dispatch  of  am- 
bassadors with  urgent  haste  is  introduced  as  a 
token  of  national  grandeur  in  the  obscure  prophecv 
Is.  xviii.  2.  [H.  EL] 

AMBER,  the  A.  V.  rendering  of  ^DL"n 
(Chashmal)  which  occurs  three  times  in  Ezekiel, 
i.  4,  27,  viii.  2,  and  is  rendered  by  the  LXX.  by 


A  MM  AH 

ijKeKTpov;  electrum,  Vulg.  It  is  certain  from 
the  context  of  these  passages  that  the  bituminous 
substance  which  we  c;dl  amber  is  not  meant. 
According  to  Pliny  (xxxiii.  4.  s.  23),  the  tfAeKrpov 
was  a  metallic  substance  compounded  of  four  pai  ts 
gold  and  one  silver.  Passow  claims  this  meaning 
for  the  word  in  those  passages  of  Horn,  and  Hesiod 
where  it  occurs,  and  also  in  Soph.  Antic).  1038, 
where  he  speaks  of  rhv  irpbs  SapSeW  riX^KTpov. 

The  Heb.  7DKTI  is  certainly  a  metal.  Its  de- 
rivation is  not  so  certain.  Bochart  (Hicroz.  iii. 
876-893,  Lips.)  thinks  that  it  is  compounded  of 
U'njJ  =  fiKTlJ),    brass,    and    the   Talmudic    word 

\hl2,  tibbft,  gold,  so  that  bftV'n  =  bDE^n?,  brass 

mixed  with  gold,  xa^KOXpv(rot'>  or  at  any  rate 
brass  having  the  splendour  and  colour  of  gold, 
Xa^icbs  XRvcoeiSris  =  311X0  1"1ETI3,  Ezr.  viii.  27. 
Gesenius  dissents  from  this  derivation,  and  prefers 
to  consider  hftVn  =  b'O  +  £;m,  the  syllable  b'O 
implying  smoothness,  as  in  the  words  t2?0,  J'?D, 
fxa\d(T(ra),  mulceo,  &c.  He  therefore  takes  it  to 
mean  smooth  polished  brass,  comparing  Ez.  i.  7, 
Tvp  D&n.  The  Rabbins  have  a  fanciful  deriva- 
tion of  the  word  from  r\T??1212  C'N  DITI,  animalia 
ignea  loqueniia,  and  assert  it  to  be  the  name  of  an 
angel.  [W.  D.] 

AMETHYST  (ilD^n«),  the  name  of  a  pre- 
cious stone  mentioned  in  Ex.  xxviii.  19,  xxxix.  12, 
which  the  LXX.  have  translated  a/xtdvcTTos,  and  the 
Vulg.  amethystus.  The  Heb.  word  is  a  veibal 
from  the  root  a?V],  to  dream,  and  hence  it  was 

believed  that  it  caused  those  who  wore  it  to  dream, 
whilst  the  Greek  name  of  this  stone  arose  from  its 
supposed  ability  to  protect  the  wearer  of  it  from 
drunkenness  (Der.  a  and  /xeOvcc^).  Pliny  (xxxvii.  9) 
mentions  the  opinion  that  it  was  so  designated  be- 
cause it  imitates  the  colour  of  wine  without  reach- 
ing it.  The  amethyst  was  the  third  jewel  in  the 
third  row  of  the  breastplate  of  judgment.  It  is 
mentioned  also  in  Rev.  xxi.  20,  as  the  twelfth  of 
the  precious  stones  with  which  the  foundations  of 
the  city  wall  were  garnished.  The  amethyst  is  a 
sub-species  of  quartz,  generally  of  a  violet  colour, 
but  those  from  the  East  are  sometimes  deep  red. 
The  best  amethysts  are  found  in  India,  Armenia, 
and  Arabia.  Pliny  calls  them  sculpt urae  faciles  ; 
and  they  were  very  extensively  used  for  rings  and 
seals.     See  Kalisch  on  Ex.  xxviii.  19.       [W.  D.] 

A'MI  (""OX  ;  'Ufie'i;  Ami),  name  of  one  of 
"  Solomon's  servants  "  (Ezr.  ii.  57)  ;  called  Anion 
(}1?DX)  in  Neh.  vii.  59.  Ami  is  probably  a  cor- 
rupted form  of  Amon. 

AMITTAI  (*n»N  ;  'AfiaOl;  Amathi),  father 
of  the  prophet  Jonah  (2  K.  xiv.  25 ;  Jon.  i.  1). 

AM'MAH,  the  hill  of  (i1»K  DJ?33  ;  6  frovrbs 

Afifj-dy ;  collis  aquae  ductus),  ahill  'facing' Giah  by 
the  way  of  the  wilderness  of  Gibeon,  named  as  the 
point  to  which  Joab's  pursuit  of  Abner  after  the  death 
of  Asahel  extended  (2  Sam.  ii.  24).  Josephus  (Ant. 
vii.  i.  §3)  Tijiros  t)s,  iv  '  A/.i/xdrav  KaAovai  (comp. 
Targ.  Jon.  NflON).  Both  Symmachus  (vd-rnrf),  and 
Theodotion  (vfipaywyosi.  agree  with  the  Vulgate  in 


AMMIDOI 

an  allusion  to  some  watercourse  here.  Can  this  point 
to  the  "  excavated  fountain,"  "  under  the  high 
rock,"  described  as  near-  Gibeon  {El-Jib)  by  Ro- 
binson (i.  455)?  [<>.] 

AM'MIDOI,  in  some  copies  Ajummn 
("A/iwiSoi  or  'A/x/jliSioi),  named  in  1  Ksdr.  v.  20 
among  those  who  came  up  from  Babylon  with 
Zorobabel.  The  three  names  Pyra,  Chadias,  and 
A.  ai'e  inserted  between  Beeroth  and  Ramah  with 
out  any  coitesponding  words  in  the  parallel  lists 
of  Ezra  or  Nehemiah. 

AM'MIEL  (biVlp]}  ;  'Ajuit)\  ;  Ammiel),  name 
of  four  men.  1.  (Num.  xiii.  12).  2.  (2  Sam.  ix. 
4,  5,  xvii.  27.  3.  Father  of  Bathsheba  (1  Chr. 
iii.   5),   called  Eliam    (DJp!?K)   in   2  Sam.   xi.   3. 

4.  (I  Chr.  xxvi.  5). 

AMMI'HUDO-'innsy;  'E/x«m55;  Ammihxul), 

name  of  rive  men.  1.  (Num.  i.  10,  ii.  18,  vii. 
48,  53,  x.  22  ;  1  Chr.  vii.  26).  2.  (Num.  xxxiv. 
20).     3.  (Num.  xxxiv.  28).     4.  (2  Sam.  xiii.  37). 

5.  (1  Chr.  ix.  4). 

AMMINADAB  {"^TIpV  ;  'AfxivaUfr ;  Ami- 
nadab  ;  one  of  the  people,  i.  c.  family,  of  the  prince 
(famulus  prinoipis),  Gesen. ;  man  of  generosity, 
Fiirst,  who  ascribes  to  OJJ  the  sense  of  "  homo"  as 
its  primitive  meaning :  the  passages,  Ps.  ex.  3,  Cant, 
vi.  12,  margin,  seem  however  rather  to  suggest 
the  sense  my  people  is  willing).  1.  Son  of  Ram  or 
Aram,  and  father  of  Nahshon,  or  Naasson  (as  it  is 
written,  Matt.  i.  4;  Luke  iii.  32),  who  was  the 
prince  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  at  the  first  numbering 
of  Israel  in  the  second  year  of  the  Exodus  (  Num. 
i.  7,  ii.  3;  Ruth  iv.  19,'  20;  1  Chr.  ii.  10).  We 
gather  hence  that  Amminadab  died  in  Egypt  before 
the  Exodus,  which  accords  with  the  mention  of 
him  in  Ex.  vi.  •_';;,  where  we  read  that  "  Aaron 
took  him  Elisheba  daughter  of  Amminadab,  sister 
of  Nahshon,  to  wife,  and  she  bare  him  Nadab  and 
Abihu,  Eleazar  and  ithamar."  This  also  indicates 
that  Amminadab  must  have  lived  in  the  time  of 
the  most  grievous  oppression  of  the  Israelites  in 
Egypt.  He  is  the  fourth  generation  alter  Judah 
the  patriarch  of  his  tribe,  and  one  of  the  ances- 
tors of  JESUS  CHRIST.  Nothing  more  is  recorded 
of  him  ;  but  the  marriage  of  his  daughter  to  Aaron 
may  In-  milked  as  the  earliest  instance  of  alliance 
between  the  royal  line  of  Judah  and  the  priestlj 
line  of  Aaron.  And  the  name  of  his  grandson 
Nadab  may  lie  noted  as  probably  given  in  honour 
of  Ammi-nadab  bis  grandfather. 

2.  The  chief  dt'  tli.'  1  12  sons  of  Uzziel,  a  junior 
Levitical  house  of  the  family  of  the  Kohathites 
(Ex.  vi.  is  ),  in  the  days  of  David,  whom  that  king 
sent  for,  together  with  I'riel,  Asaiah,  Joel,  She- 
maiah,  and  Eliel,  other  chief  fathers  of  Levitical 
houses,  and  Zadok  and  Abiathar  the  priests,  to 
bring  the  ark  of  God  to  Jerusalem  (1  Chr.  xv.  10- 
L2),  tu  the  tent  which  he  had  pitched  for  it.  The 
passage  last  quoted  is  instructive  as  to  the  mode  of 
naming  the  houses  :  for  besides  the  sons  of  Eohath, 
120,  at  v.  5,  we  have  the  sons  of  Elizaphan,  200, 
at  v.  s.  of  Hebron,  80,  at  v.  9,and  of  Uzziel,  I  L2, 
at  v.  10,  all  of  them  Kohathites  I  Num.  iii.  27,  30  , 

a  The  expression  most  commonly  employed  for  this 
nation  is  "  iiene-Ammon ;"  next  in  frequency  oomes 

"  Ammoni  "  or  "  Aiinnoniai  ;"  anil  least  often  "  Am- 
nion." The  translators  of  the  Autli.  Version  have,  as 
usual,  neglected  these  minute  differences,  and  have 


AMMON 


59 


3.  At  1  Chr.  vi.  22  (7,  Heb.  B.)  Izhar,  the  son 
of  Kohath,  and  Hither  of  Korah,  is  called  Ammi- 
nadab, and  the  Vatican  LXX.  has  the  same  reading. 
(The  Alexandrine  has  Izhar.)  But  it  is  probably 
only  a  clerical  error.  In  Cant.  vi.  12.  it  is  uncer- 
tain whether  we  ought  to  read  ^"l^JSy,  Ammina- 
dib,  with  the  A.  V.,  or  1^1  ^721?  my  willing 
people,  as  in  the  margin.  If  Amminadib  is  a 
proper  name,  it  is  thought  to  be  either  the  name  of 
some  one  famous  for  his  swift  chariots,  1YQ3"UDJ 
or  that  there  is  an  allusion  to  Abinadab,  and  to 
the  new  cart  on  which  they  made  to  ride  (•"U^ST) 
the  ark  of  God  (2  Sam.  vi.  3).  But  this  last, 
though  perhaps  intended  by  the  LXX.  version  of 
Cant.,  which  has  ' Afui/a8dl3 ,  is  scarcely  probable. 
In  vii.  2  (1  A.  V.)  the  LXX.  also  render  ]Hm3 
"  oh  !  prince's  daughter,"  by  dvyaTep  yaSafi,  and  in 
the  Cod.  Alex.  6vyarhp  ' Afj.iva.Sdf3.       [A.  C.  H.] 

AMMISHAD'DAI  (Ht«»y ;  A/niffadoCt;  Am- 

misaddai),  name  of  a  man  (Num.  i.  12,  ii.  25, 
vii.  66,  71,  x.  25). 

AMMIZ'ABAD  (TIP©!?;  Za0dS;  Amizabad), 
name  of  a  man  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  6). 

AM'MON,  AMMONITES,  CHILDREN 
of  AMMON  a  (JlOy  (only  twice),  'OIEJ?,  D^IBJ? ; 
PSJ?  \)3  ;  'Afj.fj.dv,  '  Afifxavtrat,  LXX.  iii  Pent.  ; 
elsewhere  'Afifidiv,  viol  'Afj.fj.dv  •  Joseph.  'Afxixa- 
virat;  Ammon,  Vulg.),  a  people  descended  from 
Ben-Ammi,  the  son  of  Lot  by  his  younger  daughter 
(Gen.  xix.  38;  comp.  Ps.  lxxxiii.  7,  8),  as  Mbab 
was  by  the  elder ;  and  dating  from  the  destruction 
of  Sodom. 

The  near  relation  between  the  two  peoples  in- 
dicated in  the  story  of  their  origin  continued 
throughout  their  existence  :  from  their  earliest 
mention  (Dent,  ii.)  to  their  disappearance  from  the 
biblical  history  (Jud.  v.  2)  the  brother-tribes  are 
named  together  (comp.  Judg.  x.  10;  2  Chr.  xx.  1  ; 
Zeph.  ii.  8,  &c).  Indeed,  so  close  was  their 
union,  and  so  near  their  identity,  that  each  would 
appear  to  be  occasionally  spoken  of  under  the  name 
of  the  other.  Thus  the  "  land  of  the  children  of 
Ammon"  is  said  to  have  been  given  to  the 
"  children  of  Lot,"  i.  e.  to  both  Amnion  and 
Moab  (Deut.  ii.  L9).  They  are  both  said  to  have 
hired  Balaam  to  curse  Israel  (Deut.  xxiii.  4), 
whereas  the  detailed  narrative  of  that  event  omits 
all  mention  of  Ammon  (Num.  xxii.  xxiii.).  In  the 
answer  of  Jephthah  to  the  king  of  Amnion  the 
allusions  are  continually  tn  Moab  (Judg.  xi.  1."'. 
Is,  25),  while  Chemosh,  the  peculiar  deity  of 
Meal.  (Num.  xxi.  29),  is  called  "thy  god" 
The  land  from  Anion  to  Jabbok.  which  the  king 
of  Amnion  calls  "my  land"  (13),  is  elsewhere 
distinctly  stated  to  have  oi.ee  belonged  to  a  "king 
of  Moab  "  i  Num.  xxi.  26). 

Unlike  Moab  the  precise  position  of  the  territory 
of  the  Ammonites  is  not  ascertainable.  In  the 
earliest  mention  of  them  1 1  lent.  ii.  20)  they  are  said 

to  have  destroyed  those  Rephaim,  whom  theycaRed 
the  Zamzummim, and  to  have  dwelt  in  their  place, 
Jabbob  being  their  border b  (Num.  xxi.  -J4: 

employed  the  three  terms,  Children  of  Ammon,  Am- 
monites, Amnion,  indiscriminately. 

'■  JosephUS  says  in  two  places  (Ant.  i.  11,  $5,  and 
xi.  ■">.  ffi),  that  Moab  and  Amnion  were  in  Cocle- 
Svria. 


60 


AMMON 


iii.16,  ii.37).  "Laud"  or  "country"  is,  however, 
but  rarely  ascribed  to  them,  nor  is  there  any  reference 
to  those  habits  and  circumstances  of  civilisation — the 
"  plentiful  fields,"  the"  hay,"  the"  summer-fruits." 
the  "  vineyards,"  the  "  presses,"  and  the  "  songs  of  the 
grape-treaders  " — which  so  constantly  recur  in  the 
allusions  to  Moab  (Is.  xv.  xvi. ;  Jer.  xlviii.)  ;  but, 
on  the  contrary,  we  find  everywhere  traces  of  the 
fierce  habits  of  maiauders  iu  their  incursions — 
thrusting  out  the  right  eyes  of  whole  cities 
(1  Sam.  xi.  2),  ripping  up  the  women  with  child 
(Am.  i.  13),  and  displaying  a  very  high  degree  of 
crafty  cruelty  (Jer.  xli.  6,  7;  Jud.  vii.  11,  12)  to 
their  enemies,  as  well  as  a  suspicious  discourtesy 
to  their  allies,  which  on  one  occasion  (2  Sam.  x. 
1-5)  brought  all  but  extermination  ou  the  tribe  (xii. 
31).  Nor  is  the  contrast  less  observable  between 
the  one  city  of  Amnion,  the  fortified  hold  of  Kab- 
bah (2  Sam.  xi.  1  ;  Ez.  xxv.  5 ;  Am.  i.  13),  and 
the  "  streets,"  the  "  house-tops,"  and  the  "  high- 
places,"  of  the  numerous  and  busy  towus  of  the 
rich  plains  of  Moab  (Jer.  xlviii.;  Is.  xv.  xvi.). 
Taking  the  above  into  account  it  is  hard  to  avoid 
the  conclusion  that,  while  Moab  was  the  settled 
and  civilised  half  of  the  nation  of  Lot,  the  Bene- 
Ammon  formed  its  predatory  and  Bedouin  section. 
A  remarkable  confirmation  of  this  opinion  occurs 
in  the  fact  that  the  special  deity  of  the  tribe  was 
worshipped,  not  in  a  house  or  on  a  high  place,  but 
in  a  booth  or  tent  designated  by  the  very  word 
which  most  keenly  expressed  to  the  Israelites  the 
contrast  between  a  nomadic  and  a  settled  life  (Am. 
v.  20;  Acts  vii.  43)  [Succoth].  (See  Stanley, 
App.  §89.) 

On  the  west  of  Jordan  they  never  obtained  a 
footing.  Among  the  confusions  of  the  times  of 
the  Judges  we  find  them  twice  passing  over; 
once  with  Moab  and  Amalek  seizing  Jericho, 
the  "city  of  palm-trees"  (Judg.  iii.  13),  and  a 
second  time  "  to  fight  against  Judah  and  Ben- 
jamin, and  the  house  of  Ephraim ;"  but  they 
quickly  returned  to  the  freer  pastures  of  Gilead, 
leaving  but  one  trace  of  their  presence  in  the  name 
of  Chephar  ha-Ammouai,  "the  hamlet  of  the  Am- 
monites" (Josh,  xviii.  24),  situated  in  the  portion 
of  Benjamin  .somewhere  at  the  head  of  the  passes 
which  lead  up  from  the  Jordan-valley,  and  form 
the  natural  access  to  the  table-land  of  the  west 
country. 

The  hatred  in  which  the  Ammonites  were  held  by 
Israel,  and  which  possibly  was  connected  with  the 
story  of  their  incestuous  origin,  is  stated  to  have 
arisen  partly  from  their  opposition,  or,  rather,  their 
want  of  assistance  (Deut.  xxiii.  4),  to  the  Israelites 
on  their  approach  to  Canaan.  But  it  evidently 
sprang  mainly  from  their  share  in  the  affair  of 
Balaam  (Deut.  xxiii.  4;  Nell,  xiii.  1).  At  the 
period  of  Israel's  first  approach  to  the  south  of  Pales- 
tine the  feeling  towards  Ammou  is  one  of  regard. 
The  command  is  then  "  distress  not  the  Moabites 
.  .  .  distress  not  the  children  of  Amnion,  nor 
meddle  with  them"  (Deut.  ii.  9,  19;  and  comp. 
37),  and  it  is  only  from  the  subsequent  transaction 
that  we  can  account  for  the  fact  that  Edom,  who 
had  also  refused  passage  through  his  land  but  had 
taken  no  part  with  Balaam,  is  punished  with  the 
ban  of  exclusion  from  the  congiegatiou  for  three 
generations,  while  Moab  and  Amnion  is  to  be  kept 
out  for  ten  generations  (Deut.  xxiii.  2),  a  sentence 
which  acquires  peculiar  significance  from  its  being 
the  same  pronounced  on  "  bastards "  in  the  pre- 
ceding verse,   from   its  collocation   amongst   those 


AMMON 

pronounced  in  reference  to  the  most  loathsome 
physical  deformities,  and  also  from  the  emphatic  re- 
capitulation (ver.  6),  "thou  shalt  not  seek  their 
peace  or  their  prosperity  all  thy  days  for  ever." 

But  whatever  its  origin  it  is  certain  that  the 
animosity  continued  in  force  to  the  latest  date. 
Subdued  by  Jephthah  (Judg.  xi.  33),  and  scat- 
tered with  great  slaughter  by  Saul  (1  Sam.  xi.  11) 
— and  that  not  once  only,  for  he  "  vexed "  them 
"  whithersoever  he  turned  "  (xiv.  47) — they  enjoyed 
under  his  successor  a  short  respite,  probably  the 
result  of  the  connexion  of  Moab  with  David  (1  Sam. 
xxii.  3)  and  David's  town,  Bethlehem  —  where 
the  memory  of  Ruth  must  have  been  still  fresh. 
But  this  was  soon  brought  to  a  close  by  the 
shameful  treatment  to  which  their  king  subjected 
the  friendly  messengers  of  David  (2  Sam.  x.  1  ; 
1  Chr.  xix.  1),  and  for  which  he  destroyed  their 
city  and  inflicted  on  them  the  severest  blows 
(2  Sam.  xii. ;   1  Chr.  xx.).     [Rabbah.] 

In  the  days  of  Jehoshaphat  they  made  an  incur- 
sion into  Judah  with  the  Moabites  and  the  Maonites,0 
but  weie  signally  repulsed,  and  so  many  killed  that 
three  days  were  occupied  in  spoiling  the  bodies 
(2  Chr.  xx.  1-25).  In  Uzziah's  reign  they  made 
incursions  and  committed  atrocities  in  Gilead  (Am. 
i.  13)  ;  Jotham  had  wars  with  them,  and  exacted 
from  them  a  heavy  tribute  of  "  silver  (comp. 
"jewels,"  2  Chr.  xx.  25),  wheat,  and  barley" 
(2  Chr.  xxvii.  5).  In  the  time  of  Jeremiah  we 
find  them  in  possession  of  the  cities  of  Gad  from 
which  the  Jews  had  been  removed  by  Tiglath- 
Pileser  (Jer.  xlix.  1-6) ;  and  other  incursions  are 
elsewhere  alluded  to  (Zeph.  ii.  8,  9).  At  the  time 
of  the  captivity  many  Jews  took  refuge  among  the 
Ammonites  from  the  Assyrians  (Jer.  xl.  11),  but 
no  better  feeling  appears  to  have  arisen,  and  on  the 
return  from  Babylon,  Tobiah  the  Ammonite  and  San- 
ballat  a  Moabite  (of  Choronaim,  Jer.  xlix.),  were  fore- 
most among  the  opponents  of  Nehemiah's  restoration. 

Amongst  the  wives  of  Solomon's  harem  are  in- 
cluded Ammonite  women  (1  K.  xi.  1),  one  of 
whom,  Naamah,  was  the  mother  of  Rehoboam  (1  K. 
xiv.  31;  2  Chr.  xii.  13),  and  henceforward  traces 
of  the  presence  of  Ammonite  women  in  Judah  are 
not  wanting  (2  Chr.  xxiv.  26 ;  Neh.  xiii.  23 ;  Ezr. 
ix.   1 ;  see  Geiger,  Urschrift,  &c.  47,  49,  299). 

The  last  appearances  of  the  Ammonites  in  the 
biblical  narrative  are  in  the  books  of  Judith  (v.  vi. 
vii.)  and  of  the  Maccabees  (1  Mac.  v.  6,  30-43), 
and  it  has  been  already  remarked  that  their  chief 
characteristics — close  alliance  with  Moab,  hatred  of 
Israel,  and  cunning  cruelty — are  maintained  to  the 
end.  By  Justin  Martyr  (Dial.  Tryph.)  they  are 
spoken  of  as  still  numerous  (yvv  izo\v  tt\7J6os)  ; 
but  notwithstanding  this  they  do  not  appear  again. 

The  tribe  was  governed  by  a  king  (Judg.  xi.  12, 
&c. ;  1  Sam.  xii.  12  ;  2  Sam.  x.  1 ;  Jer.  xl.  14) 
and  by  "  princes,"  HE*  (2  Sam.  x.  3 ;  1  Chr.  xix. 
3).  It  has  been  conjectured  that  Nahash  (1  Sam. 
xi.  1 ;  2  Sam.  x.  2)  was  the  official  title  of  the  king 
as  Pharaoh  was  of  the  Egyptian  monarchs;  but 
this  is  without  any  clear  foundation. 

The  divinity  of  the  tribe  was  Molech,  generally 
named  in  the  0.  T.  under  the  altered  foini  of  Mil- 
Com — "  the  abomination  of  the  children  of  Am- 
nion;"   and  occasionally  as   Malcham.      In    more 


c  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  instead  of  "  Ammon- 
ites "  in  1  Chr.  xx.  1,  and  xxvi.  8,  we  should  read, 
with  the  LXX.  "Maonites"  or  "Mchunim."  The 
reasons  for  this  will  be  given  under  Mehukim. 


AMNON 

than  one  passage  under  the  word  rendered  "  their 
king"  in  the  A.  V.  an  allusion  is  intended  to  this 
idol.      [MOLEOH.] 

The  Ammonite  names  preserved  in  the  sacred 
text  are  as  follow.  It  is  open  to  inquiry  whether 
these  words  have  reached  us  in  their  original  form 
(certainly  those  in  Greek  have  not),  or  whether 
they  have  been  altered  in  transference  to  the  He- 
brew records. 

Achior,  'Ax'^p,  quasi  "IIS  ''IIX,  brother  of  light, 
Jud.  v.  5,  &c. 

Baalis,  D^JB,  Joyful,  Jer.  xl.  14. 

Hanun,  J-Un,  pitiable,  2  Sam.  x.  1,  &c. 

Molech,  "qvb,  king. 

Naamah,  HDJJ3  pleasant,  1  K.  xiv.  21,  &e. 

Xachash,  C,n3)  serpent,  1  Sam.  xi.  1,  &e. 

Shobi,  >nL':,  return,  2  Sam.  xvii.  '27. 

Timotheus,  Tifx68tos,  1  Mac.  v.  6,  &c. 

Tobijah,  n^'lD,  good,  Neh.  ii.  10,  &c. 

Zelek,  p?\*,  scar,d  2  Sam.  xxiii.  37. 

The  name  Zamzummim, applied  by  the  Ammonites 
to  the  Rephaim  whom  they  dispossessed,  should  not 
be  omitted.  [G.] 

AM'NON    (fUOK,    once    f^ON  ;    'Anvciv  ; 

Amnori).  1.  Eldest  son  of  David  hy  Ahinoam  the 
Jezreelitess,  born  in  Hebrou  while  his  lather's 
royalty  was  only  acknowledged  in  Judah.  He 
dishonoured  his  half-sister  Tamar,  and  was  in  conse- 
i jui'iici'  murdered  by  her  brother  (2  Sam.  xiii.  1-29). 
[Absalom.] 

2.  Son  of  Shimon  (IChr.  iv.  20).    [G.E.L.C] 
A'MOK  (plOy  ;  'A/xfK  ;  Amoc),  name  of  a  man 
(Neh.  xii.  7,  20)." 

A'MON  (jiON  ;  'Afifidv),  an  Egyptian  di- 
vinity, whose  name   occurs   in    that  of  JlftN  NJ 

(Nab.,  iii.  8),  or  Thebes,  also  called  N3  [No].  It 
has  been  supposed  that  Anion  is  mentioned  in  Jer. 
xlvi.  25,  but  the  A.  V.  is  most  probably  correct  in 
rendering  N3J?  J10X  "  the  multitude  of  No,"  as  in 
the  parallel  passage,  Ez.  xxx.  1  .">,  where  the  equivalent 
pDH  is  employed.  Comp.  also  Kz.  xxx.  4,  10,  for 
the  use  of  the  latter  word  with  reference  to  Egypt. 
The  •  eases,  or  at  least  the  twro  former,  seem  there- 
fore to  be  instances  of  paronomasia  (comp.  Is.  xxx. 
7,  Ixv.  11,  12).  The  Greeks  called  this  divinity 
"Aixjxuiv,  whence  the  Latin  Amnion  and  Hammon ; 
lmt  their  writers  give  the  Egyptian  pronunciation 
as'Au/xoDf  (Herod,  ii.  42),  'A/j.ovv(V\ut.  do  hid.  ct 
Osir.  9),  or  'A).l£>u  (Iambi,  de  Myst.  viii.  :i).  The 
ancient  Egyptian  name  is  Amen,  which  must  signify 
"the  hidden,"  from  the  verb  amen,  "to  enwrap, 
conceal  "  (Champollion,  Dictionnaire  E'gyptien, 
y.  197),  Copt.  <LJULOITI-  This  interpretation 
agrees  with  that  given  by  Plutarch, on  the  auth  nrity 
of  a   supposition    of  Manetho.     (MaftBws  fitu  6 

1,i^(VVVT1)S  TO   KCKpVMXeVOV  otfTCil  Kal  T^V  KpV^/lV 

vnb  touttjs  5r)AoC(r0ai  rrjs  <pu>vrii,  de  Tsid.et  Osir. 
1.  c.)  Amen  was  one  of  the  eight  gods  of  the  first 
order,  and  chief  of  the  triad  of  Thebes,  lie  was 
worshipped  at  that  city  as  Amen-h'a,  or  "Amen  the 
sun,"  represented  as  a  man  wearing  a  cap  with  two 


AMORITE 


61 


d  Compare  the  soubriquet  of  "Le  BalafreV' 


high  plumes,  and  Amen-Ra  ka  mut-ef,  "  Amen-Ra, 
who  is  both  male  and  female,"  represented  as  the 
generative  principle.  In  the  latter  form  he  is  ac- 
companied by  the  figures  of  trees  or  other  vegetable 
products,  like  the  "  groves"  mentioned  in  the  Bible 
[EGYPT],  and  is  thus  connected  with  Baal.  In 
the  Great  Oasis,  and  the  famous  one  named  after 
him,  he  was  worshipped  in  the  form  of  the  ram- 
headed  god  Num,  and  called  either  Amen,  Amen-Ra, 
or  Amen-Num,  and  thus  the  (!reeks  came  to  suppose 
him  to  be  always  ram-headed,  whereas  this  was  the 
proper  characteristic  of  Num  (Wilkinson,  Modern 
Egypt  and  Thebes,  vol.  ii.  pp.  367,  375).  The 
worship  of  Amen  spread  from  the  Oases  along  the 
north  coast  of  Africa,  and  even  penetrated  into 
Greece.  The  Greeks  identified  Amen  with  Zeus, 
and  he  was  therefore  called  Zeus  Animon  and  Ju- 
piter Ammon.  [R.  S.  P.] 

A'MON  (|1»N  ;   'Afids,  Kings  ;   'Afiwv,  Chr. ; 

Joseph.  "Afxaxros  ;  Amori).  1.  King  of  Judah, 
sou  and  successor  of  Manasseh.  The  name  may 
mean  skilful  in  his  art,  or  child  (verbal  from 
JDX,  to  nurse).      Yet   it   sounds   Egyptian,  as  if 

connected  with  the  Theban  god,  and  possibly  may 
have  been  given  by  Manasseh  to  his  son  in  an  idolatrous 
spirit.  Following  his  father's  example,  Amon  devoted 
himself  wholly  to  the  service  of  false  gods,  but  was 
killed  in  a,  conspiracy  after  a  reign  of  two  years. 
Probably  by  insolence  or  tyranny  he  had  alienated 
his  own  servants,  and  fell  a  victim  to  their  hostility, 
for  the  people  avenged  him  by  putting  all  the  con- 
spirators to  death,  and  secured  the  succession  to  his 
son  Josiah.  To  Anion's  reign  we  must  refer  the 
terrible  picture  which  the  prophet  Zephaniah  gives 
of  the  moral  and  religious  state  of  Jerusalem  : 
idolatry  supported  by  priests  and  prophets  (i.  4, 
iii.  4),  the  poor  ruthlessly  oppressed  (iii.  3),  and 
shameless  indifference  to  evil  (iii.  11).  According 
to  Clinton  (F.  If.  i.  p.  328),  the  date  of  his  ac- 
cession is  B.C.  642  ;  of  his  death,  B.C.  640  (2  K. 
xxi.  19;  2  Chr.  xxxiii.  20). 

2.  A  contemporary  of  Ahab  (1  K.  xxii.  26  ; 
2  Chr.  xix.  25). 

3.  See  Ami.  [G.  E.  L.  C] 

AM'ORITE,    THE   AM'ORITES   (nb«, 

"'"iDNn    (always  in  the  singular),  accurately  "  the 

Emorite" — the  dwellers  on  the  summits — moun- 
taineers; "Afjioppaioi ;  Amorrhaei),  one  of  the  chief 
nations  wdio  possessed  the  land  of  Canaan  before  its 
conquest  by  the  Israelites. 

In  the  genealogical  table  of  Gen.  x.  "the  Amo- 
rite"  is  given  as  the  fourth  son  of  Canaan,  with 
"Zidon,  Heth  [HittiteJ,  the  Jebusite,"  4c.  The 
interpretation  of  the  name  as  "mountaineers"  or 
"  highlanders" — due  to  Simonis  (see  his  Onomaa- 
ticori),  though  commonly  ascribed  to  Ewald  —  is 
quite  in  accordance  with  the  notice.-,  of  tie'  text, 
which,  except  in  a  few  instances,  speak  of  the  Amo- 
ritea  as  dwelling  on  the  elevated  portions  of  the 
country.  In  this  respect  they  are  contrasted  with  the 
Cai  unites,  who  were  the  dwellers  in  the  lowlands; 
and  the  two  thus  formed  the  main    broad   divisions 

of  the  Holy  baud.  "The  Hittite,  and  the  Jebu- 
site, and  the  Amorite,  dwell  in  the  mountain  [of 
Judah  and  KphiaimJ,  and  the  Oanaanite  dwells 
by  the  sea  [thi'  lowlands  of  l'hilistia  and  Sharon] 
and  by  the  'side'  of  Jordan"  [in  the  valley  of  tin; 
Arabah], — was  the  reporl  ofthe  first  Israelites  who 
entered  the  country  (Num.  xiii.  29;  and  see  Josh. 


82 


AMOHITES 


v.  1,  x.  (>,  xi.  3;  Deut.  i.  6,  2  » ;  "Mountain  of 
the  A."  44).  This  we  shall  find  borne  out  by 
other  notices.  In  the  very  earliest  times  (Gen. 
xiv.  7)  they  are  occupying  the  barren  heights  west 
of  the  Dead  Sea,  at  the  place  which  afterwards 
bore  the  name  of  En-gedi ;  hills  in  whose  fastnesses, 
the  "rocks  of  the  wild  goats,"  David  afterwards 
took  refuge  from  the  pursuit  of  Saul  (1  Sam.  xxiii. 
29 ;  xxiv.  2).  [Hazezon-Tamar].  From  this 
point  they  stretched  west  to  Hebron,  where  Abram 
was  then  dwelling  under  the  "oak-grove"  ot  the 
three  brothers,  Aner,  Eshcol,  and  Mamre  (Gen. 
xiv.  13  ;  comp.  xiii.  18).  From  this,  their  ancient 
seat,  they  may  have  crossed  the  valley  of  the 
Jordan,  tempted  by  the  high  table-lands  on  the 
east,  for  there  we  next  meet  them  at  the  date  of 
the  invasion  of  the  country.  Sihon,  their  then 
king,  had  taken  the  rich  pasture-land  south  of  the 
Jabbok,  and  had  driven  the  Moabites,  its  former 
possessors,  across  the  wide  chasm  of  the  Anion 
(Num.  xxi.  2G  ;  13),  which  thenceforward  formed 
the  boundary  between  the  two  hostile  peoples 
(Num.  xxi.  13).  The  Israelites  apparently  ap- 
proached from  the  south-east,  keeping  "  on  the 
other  side  "  (that  is  on  the  east)  of  the  upper  part 
of  the  Amon,  which  there  bends  southwards,  so  as 
to  form  the  eastern  boundary  of  the  country  of 
Moab.  Their  request  to  pass  through  his  land  to 
the  fords  of  Jordan  was  refused  by  Sihon  (Num. 
xxi.  21;  Deut.  ii.  26);  he  ''went  out"  against 
them  (xxi.  23  ;  ii.  32),  was  killed  with  his  sons 
and  his  people  (ii.  33),  and  his  land,  cattle,  and 
cities  taken  possession  of  by  Israel  (xxi.  24,  25, 
31,  ii.  34-56).  This  rich  tract,  bounded  by  the 
Jabbok  on  the  north,  the  Anion  on  the  south,  Jor- 
dan on  the  west,  and  "the  wilderness"  on  the  east 
(Judg.  xi.  21,  22) — in  the  words  of  Josephus  "a 
land  lying  between  three  rivers  after  the  manner  of 
an  island"  (Ant.  iv.  5,  §2) — was,  perhaps,  in  the 
most  special  sense  the  "  land  of  the  Amorites " 
(Num.  xxi.  31 ;  Josh.  xii..  2,  3,  xiii.  9;  Judg.  xi. 
21,  22);  but  their  possessions  are  distinctly  stated 
to  have  extended  to  the  very  feet  of  Hermon  (Deut. 
iii.  8,  iv.  48),  embracing  "all  Gilead  and  all 
Bashan  "  (iii.  10),  with  the  Jordan  valley  on  the 
east  of  the  river  (iv.  49),  and  forming  together  the 
land  of  the  "  two  kings  ot  the  Amorites,"  Sihon  and 
Og  (Deut.  xxxi.  4;  josh.  ii.  10,  ix.  10,  xxiv.  12). 

After  the  passage  of  the  Jordan  we  again  meet 
with  Amorites  disputing  with  Joshua  the  conquest 
of  the  west  country.  But  although  the  name 
generally  denotes  the  mountain-tribes  of  the  centre 
of  the  country,  yet  this  definition  is  not  always 
strictly  maintained,  varying  probably  with  the  au- 
thor of  the  particular  part  of  the  history,  and  the 
time  at  which  it  was  written.  Nor  ought  we  to 
expect  that  the  Israelites  could  have  possessed  very 
accurate  knowledge  of  a  set  of  small  tribes  whom 
they  were  called  upon  to  exterminate — with  whom 
they  were  forbidden  to  hold  any  intercourse — and, 
moreover,  of  whose  general  similarity  to  each 
other  we  have  convincing  proof  in  the  confusion  in 
question. 

Some  of  these  differences  are  as  follows  : — 
Hebron  is  "Amorite"  in  Gen.  xiii.  18,  xiv.  13, 
though  "Hittite"  in  xxiii.  and  "Canaanite"  in 
Judg.  i.  10.  The  "  Hivites"  of  Gen.  xxxiv.  2,  are 
"  Amorites"  in  xlviii.  22  ;  and  so  also  in  Josh.  ix. 
7,  xi.  19,  as  compared  with  2  Sam.  xxi.  12.  Jeru- 
salem is  "  Amorite"  in  Josh.  x.  5,  6,a  but  in  xvii. 

The  LXX.  has  here  tojv  Ie/3au.Tat'u>i/. 


AMOS 

63,  xviii.  28;  Judg.  i.  21,  xix.  11  ;  2  Sam.  v.  6, 
&c,  it  is  "  Jebusite."  The  "  Cauaanites  "  of  Num. 
xiv.  45  (comp.  Judg.  i.  17),  are  "  Amorites "  in 
Deut.  i.  44.  Jarmuth,  Lachish  and  Eglon  were 
in  the  low  country  of  the  Sliefela  (Josh.  xv.  35, 
39),  but  in  Josh.  x.  5,  6,  they  are  "  Amorites  that 
dwell  in  the  mountains ;"  and  it  would  appear  as 
if  the  "  Amorites  "  who  forced  the  Danites  into  the 
mountain  (Judg.  i.  34,  35)  must  have  themselves 
remained  on  the  plain. 

Notwithstanding  these  few  differences,  however, 
from  a  comparison  of  the  passages  previously 
quoted  it  appears  plain  that  "  Amorite "  was  a 
local  term,  and  not  the  name  of  a  distinct  tribe. 
This  is  conriimed  by  the  following  facts.  (1)  The 
wide  area  over  which  the  name  was  spread.  (2) 
The  want  of  connexion  between  those  on  the  east 
and  those  on  the  west  of  Jordan — which  is  only 
once  hinted  at  (Josh.  ii.  10).  (3)  The  existence 
of  kings  like  Sihon  and  Og,  whose  territories  were 
separate  and  independent,  but  who  are  yet  called 
"  the  two  kings  of  the  Amorites,"  a  state  of  things 
quite  at  variance  with  the  habits  of  Semitic  tribes. 
(4)  Beyond  the  three  confederates  of  Abram,  and 
these  two  kings,  no  individual  Amorites  appear  in 
the  history  (unless  Arauuah  or  Oman  the  Jebusite 
be  one).  (5)  There  are  no  traces  of  any  peculiar 
government,  worship,  or  customs,  different  from 
those  of  the  other  "  nations  of  Canaan." 

One  word  of  the  "  Amorite"  language  has  sur- 
vived— the  name  Senir  (not  "  Shenir")  for  Mount 
Hermon  (Deut.  iii.  9) ;  but  may  not  this  be  the 
Canaanite  name  as  opposed  to  the  Phoenician  (Siiion) 
on  the  one  side  and  the  Hebrew  on  the  other  ? 

All  mountaineers  are  warlike ;  and,  from  the  three 
confederate  brothers  who  at  a  moment's  notice  ac- 
companied "  Abram  the  Hebrew  "  in  his  pursuit  of 
the  five  kings,  down  to  those  who,  not  depressed 
by  the  slaughter  inflicted  by  Joshua  and  the  terror 
of  the  name  of  Israel,  persisted  in  driving  the  chil- 
dren of  Dan  into  the  mountain,  the  Amorites  fully 
maintained  this  character. 

After  the  conquest  of  Canaan  nothing  is  heard  in 
the  Bible  of  the  Amorites,  except  the  occasional  men- 
tion of  their  name  in  the  usual  formula  for  desig- 
nating the  early  inhabitants  of  the  country.     [G.] 

A'MOS  (DID!?,  a  harden  ;  'A/xas ;  Amos), 
a  native  of  Tekoah  in  Judah,  about  six  miles  S. 
of  Bethlehem,  originally  a  shepherd  and  dresser  of 
sy  com  ore- trees,  was  called  by  God's  Spirit  to  be  a 
prophet,  although  not  trained  in  any  of  the  re- 
gular prophetic  schools  (i.  1,  vii.  14,  15).  He 
travelled  from  Judah  into  the  northern  kingdom 
of  Israel  or  Ephraim,  and  there  exercised  his  mi- 
nistry, apparently  not  for  any  long  time.  His  date 
cannot  be  later  than  the  15th  year  of  Uzziah's  reign 
(B.C.  808,  according  to  Clinton,  F.  H.,  i.  p.  325) : 
for  he  tells  us  that  he  prophesied  "  in  the  reigns  of 
Uzziah  king  of  Judah,  and  Jeroboam  the  son  of 
Joash  king  of  Israel,  two  years  before  the  earth- 
quake." This  earthquake  (also  mentioned  Zech. 
xiv.  5)  cannot  have  occurred  after  the  17th  year  of 
Uzziah,  since  Jeroboam  II.  died  in  the  15th  of  that 
king's  reign,  which  therefore  is  the  latest  year  ful- 
filling the"  three  chronological  indications  furnished 
by  the  prophet  himself.  But  his  ministry  probably 
took  place  at  an  earlier  period  of  Jeroboam's  reign, 
perhaps  about  the  middle  of  it,  for  on  the  one  hand 
Amos  speaks  of  the  conquests  of  this  warlike  king 
as  completed  (vi.  13,  cf.  2  K.  xiv.  25),  on  the 
other  the  Assyrians,  who  towards  the  end   of  his- 


AMOZ 

reign  were  approaching  Palestine  (Hos>.  x.   G,  xi. 

5),  do  m>t  seem  as  yet  to  have  caused  any  alarm  in 
the  country.  Amos  predicts  indeed  that  Israel  and 
other  neighbouring  nations  will  be  punished  by  cer- 
tain will  conquerors  from  the  North  (i.  5,  v.  27, 
vi.  14),  but  does  not  name  them,  as  if  they  were 
still  unknown  or  unheeded.  In  this  prophet's  time 
Israel  was  at  the  height  of  power,  wealth,  and 
security,  but  infected  by  the  crimes  to  which  such 
a  state  is  liable.  The  poor  were  oppressed  (viii.  4), 
the  ordinances  of  religion  thought  burdensome  (viii. 
5),  and  idleness,  luxury,  and  extravagance  were  ge- 
neral (iii.  15).  The  source  of  these  evils  was  idolatry, 
of  course  that  of  the  golden  calves,  not  of  Baal,  since 
Jehu's  dynasty  occupied  the  throne,  though  it  seems 
probable  from  2  K.  xiii.  ti,  which  passage  must  refer 
to  Jeroboam's  reign  [Beniiadad  III.],  that  the 
rites  even  of  Astarte  were  tolerated  in  Samaria, 
though  not  encouraged.  Calf-worship  was  spe- 
cially practised  at  Bethel,  where  was  a  principal 
temple  and  summer  palace  for  the  king  (vii.  13  ; 
cf.  iii.  15),  also  at  Gilgal,  Dan,  and  Beersheba 
in  Judah  (iv.  4,  v.  5,  viii.  14),  mid  was  olien- 
sivelv  united  with  the  true  worship  of  the  Lord 
(v.  14,  21-23;  cf.  2  K.  xvii.  3:5).  Amos  went 
to  rebuke  this  at  Bethel  itself,  but  was  compelled 
to  return  to  Judah  by  the  high-priest  Amaziah, 
who  procured  from  Jeroboam  an  order  for  his  ex- 
pulsion from  the  northern  kingdom.  The  book  of 
the  prophecies  of  Amos  seems  divided  into  four 
principal  portions  closely  connected  together.  (1) 
From  i.  1  to  ii.  3  he  denounces  the  sins  of  the  na- 
tions bordering  on  Israel  and  Judah,  as  a  preparation 
for  (2)  in  which,  from  ii.  4  to  vi.  14,  he  describes 
the  state  of  those  two  kingdoms,  especially  the 
former.  This  is  followed  by  (•'!)  vii.  1 — ix.  10, 
in  which,  after  reflecting  on  the  previous  prophecy, 
he  relates  his  visit  to  Bethel,  and  sketches  the  im- 
pending punishment  of  Israel  which  he  predicted  to 
Amaziah.  After  this  in  (4)  he  rises  to  a  loftier 
and  more  evangelical  strain,  looking  forward  to 
the  time  when  the  hope  of  the  Messiah's  kingdom 
will  be  fulfilled,  and  His  people  forgiven  and  esta- 
blished in  the  enjoyment  of  Cod's  blessings  to  all 
eternity.  The  chief  peculiarity  of  the  style  consists 
in  the  number  of  allusions  to  natural  objects  and 
agricultural  occupations,  as  might  be  expected  from 
the  early  life  of  the  author.  See  i.  3,  ii.  13,  iii. 
4,5,  iv.  2,  7,  9,  v.  8,  19,  vi.  12,  vii.  1,  ix. 
3,  9,  13,  14.  The  book  presupposes  a  popular  ac- 
quaintance with  the  Pentateuch  (see  Hengstenberg, 
Beiirage  zur  Einleitung  ins  Alte  Testament,  i.  p. 
83-]  25),  and  implies  that  the  ceremonies  of  religion, 
except  where  corrupted  by  Jeroboam  I.,  were  in 
accordance  with  the  law  of  Moses.  The  references 
to  it  in  the  New  Testament  are  two:  v.  25,  26,  27 
is  quoted  by  St.  Stephen  in  Acts  vii.  42,  ami  ix.  1  1 
by  St.  James  in  Acts  xv.  10.  As  the  book  is  evi- 
dentlv  not  a  series  of  detached  prophecies,  but  logi- 
cally  and  artistically  connected  in  its  several  parts, 
it  was  probably  written  by  Amos  as  we  now  have 
it  after  his  return  to  Tekoah  from  his  mission  to 
Bethel.  (See  Ewald,  Prophett  n  dt  .-■  Alt*  n  Bundes,  i. 
p.  84  ff.)  [,;-  E.  L,  C] 

A'MOZq'iDN;  'Ajuws;   Amos),  father  of  the 

prophet  Isaiah  (2  K.  xix.  2,  20,  XX.  1  ;   2  Chr.  xxvi. 
22,  xxxii.  2d.  32  ;    Is.  i.   1,  ii.  1,  xiii.  1,  xx.  2. 

AMPHIP'OLTS  ('A^nroAiv  .  a  city  of  Mace- 
donia, through    which    Paul   and    Silas    pa 
their  way  from  Philippi  to  Thessalonica  (Acts  xvii. 


AMULETS 


63 


1).  It  was  distant  33  Roman  miles  from  Philippi 
(Itin.  Anton,  p.  320).  It  was  called  Amphi-polis, 
because  the  river  Strymon  flowed  almost  round  the 
town  (Time.  iv.  102).  It  stood  upon  an  eminence 
on  the  left  or  eastern  bank  of  this  river,  just  below 
its  egress  from  the  lake  Cercinitis,  and  at  the  dis- 
tance of  about  three  miles  from  the  sea.  It  was  a 
colony  of  the  Athenians,  and  was  memorable  in  the 
Peloponnesian  war  for  the  battle  fought  under  its 
walls,  in  which  both  Brasidas  and  Cleon  were  killed 
(Time.  v.  0-11).  Its  site  is  now  occupied  by  a 
village  called  Neokliorio,  in  Turkish  Jeni-Keni,  or 
"  New-Town." 

AM'PLIAS  ^AfjLir\las),  a  Christian  at  Lome 
(Rom.  xvi.  8). 

AM'RAM  (Dipy,  'AixUpd/x;  Amram).    1.  A 

Levite,  father  of  Moses,  Aaron,  and  Miriam  (Ex. 
vi.  18,  20;  Num.  iii.  19).  Hence  the  patronymic 
Amramites  (Num.  iii.  27 ;  1  Chr.  xxvi.  23).  2.  A 
contemporary  of  Ezra  (Ezr.  x.  34).       [R.  W.  B.] 

AM'RAPHEL  6s"W?K  ;  'Af*aP<pdA ;  Amra- 
phel),  perhaps  a  Hamite  king  of  Shinar  or  Babylonia, 
who  joined  the  victorious  incursion  of  the  Elamite 
Chedorlaomer  against  the  kings  of  Sodom  and  Go- 
morrah and  the  cities  of  the  plain  (Gen.  xiv.). 
The  meaning  of  the  name  is  uncertain  ;  some  have 
connected  it  with  the  Sanskrit  amarapdla,  "  the 
guardian  of  the  immortals."  (Comp.  Rawlinson's 
Herodotus,  i.  446.)  [S.  L.] 

AMULETS  were  ornaments,  gems,  scrolls,  &c, 
worn  as  preservatives  against  the  power  of  enchant- 
ments, and  generally  inscribed  with  mystic  forms  or 
characters.  The  "earrings"  in  Gen.  xxxv.  4  (D'WJ  ; 
ivwTia ;  fixtures)  were  obviously  connected  with 
idolatrous  worship,  and  were  probably  amulets  taken 
from  the  bodies  of  the  slain  Shechemites.  They  are 
subsequently  mentioned  among  the  spoils  of  Midian 
(Judg.  viii.  24),  and  perhaps  their  objectionable 
character  was  the  reason  why  Gideon  asked  for 
them.  Again,  in  Hos.  iii.  13,  "  decking  herself  with 
earrings"  is  mentioned  as  one  of  the  signs  of  the 
"  days  of  Baalim."  Hence  in  Chaldee  an  earring 
is  called  KB»"-jj3. 

But  amulets  were  more  often  worn  round  the 
neck,  like  the  golden  bulla  or  leather  lorum  of  the 
Roman  boys.  Sometimes  they  were  precious  stones, 
supposed  to  be  endowed  with  peculiar  virtues.  In 
the  "  Mirror  of  stones"  the  strangest  properties  are 
attributed  to  the  amethyst,  Kinocetus,  Ahctoria. 
Ceraunium.  &c. ;  and  Pliny,  talking  of  succina, 
savs  "  Infantibus  alligari  amuleti  ratione  prodest " 
(xxxvii.  12,  s.  37).   They  were  generally  suspended 

as  the  centre-piece  of  a  necklace,  and  among  the 
Egyptians  often  consisted  of  the  emblems  of  va- 
rious deities,  or  the  symbol  of  truth  and  justice 
("  Thmei  ").  A  gem  of  this  kind,  formed  of 
sapphires,  was  worn  by  the  chief  judge  of  Egypt 
(Diod.  i.  48,  7.".;,  and  a  similar  one  is  repre- 
sented as  worn  by  the  youthful  deity  Harp 
(Wilkinson.  .1/*.  Egypt,  iii.  364).  'fhe  Arabs  hang 
round  their  children's  necks  the  figure  of  an  open 
hand;  a  custom  which,  according  to  Shaw,  arise-, 
from  the  unluckmess  of  the  Dumber  5.  This 
principle  is  often  found  in  the  use  of  amulets. 
Thus  the  basilisk  is  constantly  engraved  on  the 
talismanie  scarabaei  of  Egypt,  and  according  to  Jahn 
{Arch.  Bibl.  §131,  Engl.tr.),  the  D^IT?  of  Is. 
iii.   23,   were   "  figures   of  serpents   carried   in    the 


64  AMULETS 

hand  "  (more  probably  worn  in  the  ears)  "  by  He- 
brew women."     The  word  is  derived  from  WO 

sibilavit,  and  means  both  "enchantments"  (cf.  Is. 
iii.  3),  and  the  magical  gems  and  formularies  used 
to  avert  them  (Gesen.  s. v.).  It  is  doubtful  whe- 
ther the  LXX.  intends  TrepiSe^ta  as  a  translation  of 
this  word;  "  pro  voce  ireptS.  nihil  est  in  textu  He- 
braico  "  (Schleusner's  Thesaurus).  For  a  like  rea- 
son the  phallus  was  among  the  sacred  emblems  of 
the  Vestals  {Bid.  of  Ant.,  Art.  '  Fascinum  '). 

The  commonest  amulets  were  sacred  words  (the 
tetragrammaton,  &c.)  or  sentences,  written  in  a  pe- 
culiar manner,  or  inscribed  in  some  cabbalistic  figure 
like  the  shield  of  David,  called  also  Solomon's  Seal. 
Another  form  of  this  figure  is  the  pentangle  (or  pen- 
tacle,  v.  Scott's  Antiquary),  which  "  consists  of 
three  triangles  intersected,  and  made  of  five  lines, 
which  may  be  so  set  forth  with  the  body  of  man  as 
to  touch  and  point  out  the  places  where  our  Saviour 
was  wounded  "  (Sir  Thos.  Brown's  Vulg.  Errors,  i. 
10).  Under  this  head  fall  the  'E<pecria  ypafxpara 
(Acts  six.  19),  and  in  later  times  the  Abraxic  gems 
of  the  Basilidians ;  and  the  use  of  the  word  "  Abraca- 
dabra," recommended  by  the  physician  Serenus 
Samonicus  as  a  cure  of  the  hemitritaeus.  The  same 
physician  prescribes  for  quartan  ague 

"  Maeoniae  Iliados  quartum  suppone  timenti." 

Charms  "  consisting  of  words  written  on  folds  of 
papyrus  tightly  rolled  up  and  sewed  in  linen,"  have 
been  found  at  Thebes  (Wilkinson,  I.  c),  and  our 
English  translators  possibly  intended  something  of 
the  kind  when  they  rendered  the  curious  phrase 
(in  Is.  iii.)  K'SpH  »pQ  by  "  tablets."  It  was  the 
danger  of  idolatrous  practices  arising  from  a  know- 
ledge of  this  custom  that  probably  induced  the 
sanction  of  the  use  of  phylacteries  (Deut.  vi.  8; 
ix.  18,  mSD'ltD).     The  modern  Arabs  use  scraps 

of  the  Koran  (which  they  call  "  telesmes "  or 
"alakakirs")  in  the  same  way. 


Egyptians  ) 


A  very  large  class  of  amulets  depended  for  their 
value  on  their  being  constructed  under  certain 
astronomical  conditions.  Their  most  general  use 
was  to  avert  ill-luck,  &c,  especially  to  nullify  the 
effect  of  the  6<pea\/j.bs  &a<TKavos,  a  belief  in  which 
is  found  among  all  nations.  The  Jews  were  parti- 
cularly addicted  to  them,  and  the  only  restriction 
placed  by  the  Rabbis  on  their  use  was,  that  none 
but  approved  amulets  (i.e.  such  as  were  known  to 
have  cured  three  persons)  were  to  be  worn  on  the 
.Sabbath  (Lightfoot's  Hor.  Hebr.  in  Mat.  xxiv.  24). 
It  was  thought  that  they  kept  off  the  evil  spirits 
who  caused  disease.  Some  animal  substances  were 
considered  to  possess  such  properties,  as  we  see  from 
Tobit.  Pliny  (xxviii.  47)  mentions  a  fox's  tongue 
worn  on  an  amulet  as  a  charm  against  blear  eyes, 
and  says  (xx-x.  15)  "  Scarabaeorum  cornua  alligata 
amuleti  naturam  obtinent;"  perhaps  an  Egyptian 


ANAH 

fancy.  In  the  same  way  one  of  the  Roman  em- 
perors wore  a  seal-skin  as  a  chann  against  thunder. 
Among  plants,  the  white  bryony  and  the  Hypericon, 
or  Fuga  Daemonum,  are  mentioned  as  useful  (Sir 
T.  Brown,  Vulg.  Errors,  i.  10.  He  attributes  the 
whole  doctrine  of  amulets  to  the  devil,  but  still 
throws  out  a  hint  that  they  may  work  by  "  im- 
ponderous  and  invisible  emissions"). 

Amulets  are  still  common.  On  the  Mod.  Egyp- 
tian "  HegdJb  "  see  Lane,  Mod.  Egypt,  c.  11,  and 
on  the  African  "  pieces  of  medicine,"  a  belief  in 
which  constitutes  half  the  religion  of  the  Africans, 
see  Livingstone's  Travels,  p.  285  et  p>assim.  [Te- 
raphim  ;  Talisman.]  [F.  W.  F.] 

AM'ZI  OVPS  ;    ' AfjL€<T<rla,   'A/xaixi ;    Amasai, 

Amsi),  name  of  two  men,  both  Levites.  1.  (1  Chr. 
vi.  46).      2.  (Neh.  xi.  12). 

A'NAB  (13JJ,  'Ava/3u>e,  'Avwv :  Alex.  'Avwd), 

a  town  in  the  mountains  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  50), 
named,  with  Debir  and  Hebron,  as  once  belonging  to 
the  Anakim  (Josh.  xi.  21).  It  has  retained  its 
ancient  name,  and  lies  among  the  hills  about  10 
miles  S.S.W.  of  Hebron,  close  to  Shoco  and  Eshte- 
moa  (Rob.  i.  494).  The  conjecture  of  Ens.  and 
Jerome  {Onom.  Anob,  Anab)  is  evidently  inad- 
missible. [GL] 

AN'AEL,  ANANAEL  {'AvavX,  'Ai/cwnjA, 
i.  e.  bmyn,  God  hath  given),  Tob.  i.  1  ;  21. 
Cf.  Jer.  xxxi.  38 ;  Zech.  xiv.  10 ;  Neh.  iii.  1,  xii. 
39.  .         [B.  F.  W.] 

A'NAH  (ruy  ;    'Avd ;    Ana),  the  son  of  Zi- 

beon,  the  son  of  Seir,  the  Horite  (Gen.  xxxvi. 
20,  24),  and  father  of  Aholibamah,  one  of  the 
wives  of  Esau  (Gen.  xxxvi.  2,  14).  We  are  no 
doubt  thus  to  understand  the  text,  with  Winer, 
Hengstenberg,  Tuch,  Kuobel,  and  many  others, 
though  the  Hebrew  reads  "  Aholibamah,  daughter  of 
Anah,  daughter  of  Zibeon  (pynVTia  njyn2);" 
nor 'is  there  any  necessity  to  correct  the  reading  in 
accordance  with  the  Sam.,  which  has  |2  instead  of 
the  second  H2  ;   it  is  better  to  refer  the  second  ]"I2 

to  Aholibamah  instead  of  to  its  immediate  ante- 
cedent Anah  :  the  word  is  thus  used  in  the  wider 
sense  of  descendant  (here  granddaughter),  as  it  is 
apparently  again  in  this  chapter,  v.  39.  We  may 
further  conclude  with  Hengstenberg  {Pent.  ii.  280  ; 
Eng.  transl.ii.  229)  that  the  Anah  mentioned  amongst 
the  sons  of  Seir  in  v.  20  in  connexion  with  Zibeon, 
is  the  same  person  as  is  here  referred  to,  and  is  there- 
fore the  grandson  of  Seir.  The  intention  of  the 
genealogy  plainly  is  not  so  much  to  give  the  lineal 
descent  of  the  Seirites  as  to  enumerate  those  de- 
scendants, who,  being  heads  of  tribes,  came  into  con- 
nexion with  the  Edomites.  It  would  thus  appear 
that  Anah,  from  whom  Esau's  wife  sprang,  was  the 
head  of  a  tribe  independent  of  his  father,  and  rank- 
ing on  an  equality  with  that  tribe.  Several  diffi- 
culties occur  in  regard  to  the  race  and  name  of 
Anah.  By  his  descent  from  Seir  he  is  a  Horite 
(Gen.  xxxvi.  20),  whilst  in  v.  2  he  is  called  a 
Hivite,  and  again  in  the  narrative  (Gen.  xxvi.  34) 
he  is  called  Beeri  the  Hittite.  Hengstenberg's  ex- 
planation of  the  first  of  these  difficulties  is  far- 
fetched ;  and  it  is  more  probable  that  the  word 
Hivite  C^nn)  is  a  mistake  of  transcribers  for 
Horite  Cnnn).     With  regard  to  the  identification 


ANAHARATH 

of  Anah  the  Horite  with  Been  the  Hittite,  see 
Beebi.  [K.  \V.  G.] 

ANAHA'RATH  (rnHjK ;  'AvaX*p<Q),  a 
place  within  the  border  of  Naphtali,  named  with 
Shichon  and  Kabbith  (Jos.  xix.  19).  Nothing  is  yet 
known  of  it.  [G.] 

ANAI'AH  (iTJJJ  ;  'Avavias,  'Ava'ia  ;    Ania, 

Anaia),  name  of  a  man  (Neh.  viii.  4,  x.  22),  called 
Ananias  {'Ai/avias)  in  1  Esd.  ix.  43. 

A'NAK.     [Anakim.] 

AN'AKIM   (D*p3J?  ;    'EuukI/j.  ;    Enakim),   a 

race  of  giants  (so  called  either  from  their  stature 
{longicollis,  Gesen.),  or  their  strength  (Fiirst), 
(the  root  pJJ?  being  identical  with  our  word  neck), 

descendants  of  Arba  (Josh.  xv.  13,  xxi.  11),  dwell- 
ing in  the  southern  part  of  Canaanj  and  par- 
ticularly at  Hebron,  which  from  their  progenitor 
received  the  name  of  J?3"1X  JTHp,  city  of  "Arba. 
Besides  the  general  designation  Anakim,  they  are 
variously  called  p3]J  'Oil,  sons  of  Anak  (Num.  xiii. 
33),  p3i? n  Hv\  descendants  of  Anak  (Num.  xiii. 
22),  and  Wfity  *33,  sons  of  Anakim  (Deut.  i.  28). 

These  designations  serve  to  show  that  we  must  re- 
gard Anak  as  the  name  of  the  race  rather  than  that 
of  an  individual,  and  this  is  confirmed  by  what  is 
said  of  Arba,  their  progenitor,  that  he  "  was  a 
great  man  among  the  Anakim "  (Josh.  xiv.  15). 
The  race  appears  to  have  been  divided  into  three 
tribes  or  families,  bearing  the  names  Sheshai,  Ahi- 
man,  and  Talmai.  Though  the  warlike  appearance 
of  the  Anakim  had  struck  the  Israelites  with  terror 
in  the  time  of  Moses  (Num.  xiii.  28 ;  Deut.  ix.  2), 
they  were  nevertheless  dispossessed  by  Joshua,  and 
utterly  driven  from  the  land,  except  a  small  rem- 
nant that  found  refuse  in  the  Philistine  cities,  Gaza, 
Gath,  and  Ashdod  (Josh.  xi.  21).  Their  chief  city 
Hebron  became  the  possession  of  Caleb,  who  is  said 
to  have  driven  out  from  it  the  three  sons  of  Anak 
mentioned  above,  that  is  the  three  families  or  tribes 
of  the  Anakim  (Josh.  xv.  14;  Judg.  i.  20).  After 
this  time  they  vanish  from  history.      [F.  W.  G.] 

AN'AMIM  (D^EOy  ;  'Ere/ienef/t ;  Anamim), 
a  Mizraite  people  or  tribe,  respecting  the  settle- 
ments of  which  nothing  certain  is  known  (Gen. 
x.  13;  1  Chr.  i.  11).  Judging  from  the  po- 
sition of  the  other  Mizraite  peoples,  as  far  as  it 
has  been  determined,  this  one  probably  occupied 
some  part  of  Egypt,  or  of  the  adjoining  region  of 
Africa,  or  possibly  of  the  south-west  of  Palestine. 
No  name  bearing  any  strong  resemblance  to  Anamim 
has  been  pointed  out  in  the  geographical  lists  of  the 
Egyptian  monuments,  or  in  classical  or  modrn 
geography.  [I;.  8.  P.] 

ANAM'MELECH  Pl^Mfi  i  'A»^<^'x  ; 
Anmnclech),  one  of  the  idols  worshipped   by  tin1 

colonists  introduced  into  Samaria  from  Sephar- 
vaim  ('_'   K.    xvii.  31).     He   was    worshipped    with 

rib's    resembling    those    of   Molech,    children   heini: 

burnt  in  bis  honour,  and  is  the  companion-god  to 
Adrammelech.      As   Adrammelech  is  thi 
power  of  the  sun,  so  Anammelecb  is  the  female 
power  of  the  sun  (Rawlinson's   Herodotus,  i.  p. 

611  I.  The  etymology  of  the  word  is  uncertain. 
Rawlinson  connects  it  with  the  name  Anunit.  <le- 
senius  derives  the  name  from  words  meaning  idol  and 


ANANIAS 


65 


king,  but  Reland  (de  vet.  ling.  Pers,  ix.)  deduces 
the  first  part  of  it  from  the  Persian  word  for  grief. 
Winer  advocates  a  derivation  connecting  the  idol 
with  the  constellation  Cepheus,  some  of  the  stars  in 
which  are  called  by  the  Arabs  "  the  shepherd  and 
the  sheep."  [<J.  E.  L.  Q.] 

A'NAN  (pV ;  'Hvdfj.;  Anan),  name  of  a  man 
(Neh.  x.  26).TT 

ANA'NI  OjOJ?;  'Avdv;  .4»rm<),  name  of  a  man, 
one  of  the  royal  line  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  iii.  24). 

ANANI'AH  (!"PJJJ? ;  'Avavia;  Anania),  name 
of  a  priest  (Neh.  iii.  23). 

ANANI'AH  (rP33J?),  a  place,  named  between 
Nob  and  Hazor,  in  which  the  Benjamites  lived  after 
their  return  from  captivity  (Neh.  xi.  32).  The 
LXX.  omits  all  mention  of  this  and  the  accompany- 
ing names.  [G.] 

ANANI'AS  CHJ33&   or  iNUri;    'Avavlas). 

1.  A  high-priest  in  Acts  xxiii.  2  ff.  xxiv.  1. 
He  was  the  son  of  Zebedaeus  (Joseph.  Ant.  xx.  5, 
§2),  succeeded  Joseph  son  of  Camydus  {Ant.  xx.  1, 
§3,  5,  §2),  and  preceded  Ismael  son  of  Phabi  {Ant. 
xx.  8,  §§8,  11).  He  was  nominated  to  the  office 
by  Herod  king  of  Chalcis,  in  a.d.  48  {Ant.  xx.  5, 
§2) ;  and  in  a.d.  52  sent  to  Rome  by  the  prefect 
(Jmmidius  Quadratus  to  answer  before  the  Emperor 
Claudius  a  charge  of  oppression  brought  by  the 
Samaritans  {Ant.  xx.  6,  §2).  He  appears,  however, 
not  to  have  lost  his  office,  but  to  have  resumed  it 
on  his  return.  This  has  been  doubted :  but  Wieseler 
{Chronol.  d.  Apostol.  Zeitalters,  p.  70,  note)  has 
shown  that  it  was  so  in  all  probability,  seeing  that 
the  procurator  Cumanus,  who  went  to  Rome  with 
him  as  his  adversary,  was  unsuccessful,  and  was 
condemned  to  banishment.  He  was  deposed  from 
his  office  shortly  before  Felix  left  the  province 
{Ant.  xx.  8,  §8) ;  but  still  had  great  power,  which 
he  used  violently  and  lawlessly  {Ant.  xx.  9,  §2). 
He  was  at  last  assassinated  by  the  sicarii  {B.  J .  ii. 
17,  §9)  at  the  beginning  of  the  last  Jewish  war. 

2.  A  disciple  at  Jerusalem,  husband  ot  Sapphira 
(Acts  v.  1  ff.).  Having  sold  his  goods  for  the  benefit 
of  the  church,  he  kept  back  a  part  of  the  price, 
bringing  to  the  apostles  the  remainder,  as  if  it  were 
the  whole,  his  wife  also  being  privy  to  the  scheme. 
St.  Peter,  being  enabled  by  the  power  of  the  Spirit 
to  see  through  the  fraud,  denounced  him  as  having 
lied  to  the  Holy  Ghost,  »'.  e.  having  attempted  to 
pass  upon  the  Spirit  resident  in  the  apostles  an  act 
of  deliberate  deceit.  On  hearing  this,  Ananias  tell 
down  and  expired.  That  this  incident  was  no  mere 
physical  consequence  of  St.  Peter's  severity  of  tone, 
as  some  of  the  German  writers  have  maintained, 
distinctly  appears  by  the  direct  sentence  of  a  similar 
death  pronounced  by  the  same  apostle  upon  bis  wife 

Sapphira  a  few  hours  after,     [sapphira.]     It  is 

of  course  possible  that  Ananias's  death  may  have 
been  an  act  of  divine  justice  unlooked  for  by  tie 
apostle,  as  there  is  no  mention  of  such  an  intended 
result  in  his  speech  :  but  in  the  case  of  the 
Bach  an  idea  is  out  of  the  question.  Xiemever 
teristikder  /.'/'«  ',  i.  p.  ;,74)  has  well  stated 
the    case    as    regards    the   flame   which    some    have 

endeavoured  to  cast  on  St.  Peter  in  this  matti  i . 
when  he  .says  that  not  man,  but  God,  is  thus  anim- 
adverted on:  tin'  apostle  is  but  the  organ  and 
announcer  of  the  divine  justice,  which  was  pleased  by 

F 


66 


ANANIAS 


this  act  of  deserved  severity  to  protect  the  morality  of 
the  infant  church,  and  strengthen  its  power  for  good. 

3.  A  Jewish  disciple  at  Damascus  (Acts  ix.  10  If.), 
of  high  repute,  "  a  devout  man  according  to  the 
law,  having  a  good  report  of  all  the  Jews  which 
dwelt  there  "  (Acts  xxii.  12).  Being  ordered  by 
the  Lord  in  a  vision,  he  sought  out  Saul  during  the 
period  of  blindness  and  dejection  which  followed  his 
conversion,  anil  announced  to  him  his  future  com- 
mission as  a  preacher  of  the  Gospel,  conveying  to 
him  at  the  same  time,  by  the  laying  on  of  his  hands, 
the  restoration  of  sight,  and  commanding  him  to 
arise,  and  be  baptized,  and  wash  away  his  sins, 
calling  on  the  name  of  the  Lord.  Tradition  makes 
him  to  have  been  afterwards  bishop  of  Damascus, 
and  to  have  died  by  martyrdom  (Menolog.  Grae- 
corum,  i.  p.  79  f.).  [H.  A.] 

ANANI'AS  (kvavias),  name  of  eight  men. 
1.  (1  Esd.  v.  1G)  (Aw's).  2.  (1  Esd.  ix.  21). 
3.  (1  Esd.  ix.  29).  4.  (1  Esd.  ix.  43).  [Anaiah.] 
5.  (1  Esd.  ix.  48).  [Haman.]  6.  "  An.  the 
great"  (Tob.  v.  12,  13).  7.  Ancestor  of  Judith 
(Jud.  viii.  1,  Vulg.  only).  8.  Song  of  3  Ch.  59  ; 
1  Mace.  ii.  59.     [Hanaxiaii  ;  Shadragii.] 

ANANTEL  (Kvavi-r\\;  Ananiel),  forefather  of 
Tobias  (Tob.  i.  1). 

A'NATH(D3y;  Aivd%,  'A.vd.9;  Anath),  father 

of  Shamgar  (Judg.  iii.  31,  v.  6). 

ANATH'EMA  {avdOefxa,  in  LXX.,  the  equi- 
valent for  Din,  a  thing  or  person  devoted :  in  N.  T. 

generally  translated  accursed.  The  more  usual 
form  is  avdd7]/j.a  {avariOrifju),  with  the  sense  of  an 
offering  suspended  in  a  temple  (Luke  xxi.  5 ;  2 
Mac.  ix.  1 6)  :  the  Alexandrine  writers  preferred  the 
short  penultimate  in  this  and  other  kindred  words 
(e.  g.  iiridefia,  o-uvQifxa) :  but  occasionally  both 
forms  occur  in  the  MSS.,  as  in  Jud.  xvi.  19 ;  2 
Mac.  xiii.  1 5  ;  Luke  xxi.  5 :  no  distinction  therefore 
existed  originally  in  the  meanings  of  the  words,  as 
has  been  supposed  by  many  early  writers.  The 
Hebrew  D"in  is  derived  from  a  verb  signifying  pri- 
marily to  shut  up,  and  hence  to  (1)  consecrate  or 
devote,  and  (2)  exterminate.  Any  object  so  de- 
voted to  the  Lord  was  irredeemable :  if  an  inanimate 
object,  it  was  to  be  given  to  the  priests  (Num. 
xviii.  14);  if  a  living  creature  or  even  a  man,  it 
was  to  be  slain  (Lev.  xxvii.  28,  29) ;  hence  the 
idea  of  extermination  as  connected  with  devoting. 
Generally  speaking  a  vow  of  this  description  was 
taken  only  with  respect  to  the  idolatrous  nations  who. 
were  marked  out  for  destruction  by  the  special  de- 
cree of  Jehovah,  as  in  Num.  xxi.  2 ;  Josh.  vi.  17 : 
but  occasionally  the  vow  was  made  indefinitely, 
and  involved  the  death  of  the  innocent,  as  is  illus- 
trated in  the  cases  of  Jephthah's  daughter  (Judg. 
xi.  31),  and  Jonathan  (1  Sam.  xiv.  24)  who  was 
only  saved  by  the  interposition  of  the  people.  The 
breach  of  such  a  vow  on  the  part  of  any  one  di- 
rectly or  indirectly  participating  in  it  was  punished 
with  death  (Josh.  vii.  25).  In  addition  to  these 
cases  of  spontaneous  devotion  on  the  part  of  indi- 
viduals, the  word  Din  is  frequently  applied  to  the 
extermination  of  idolatrous  nations:  in  such  cases 


a  There  are  some  variations  in  the  orthography  of 
this  name,  both  in  Hebrew  and  the  A.  V.,  which  must 
be  noticed.  1 .  Hebrew  :  In  1  K.  ii.  26,  and  Jer. 
xxxii.9,  it  is  FlJ^y,  and  similarly  in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  27, 


ANATHOTH 

the  idea  of  a  vow  appears  to  be  dropped,  and  the 
word  assumes  a  purely  secondary  sense  (e£oAo(?pet;w, 
LXX.) :  or,  if  the  original  meaning  is  still  to 
be  retained,  it  may  be  in  the  sense  of  Jehovah 
(Is.  xxxiv.  2)  shutting  up,  i.  e.  placing  under  a 
ban,  and  so  necessitating  the  destruction  of  them, 
in  order  to  prevent  all  contact.  The  extermination 
being  the  result  of  a  positive  command  (Ex.  xxii.  20), 
the  idea  of  a  vow  is  excluded,  although  doubtless 
the  instances  already  referred  to  (Num.  xxi.  2  ; 
Josh.  vi.  17)  show  how  a  vow  was  occasionally 
superadded  to  the  command.  It  may  be  further 
noticed  that  the  degree  to  which  the  work  of  de- 
struction was  carried  out,  varied.  Thus  it  applied 
to  the  destruction  of  (1)  men  alone  (Deut.  xx.  13)  ; 
(2)  men,  women,  and  children  (Deut.  ii.  34) ;  (3) 
virgins  excepted  (Num.  xxxi.  17;  Judg.  xxi.  11); 
(4)  all  living  creatures  (Deut.  xx.  16  ;  1  Sam.  xv. 
3)  ;  the  spoil  in  the  former  cases  were  reserved  for  the 
use  of  the  army  (Deut.  ii.  35,  xx.  14 ;  Josh.  xxii. 
8),  instead  of  being  given  over  to  the  priesthood, 
as  was  the  case  in  the  recorded  vow  of  Joshua  (Josh, 
vi.  19).  Occasionally  the  town  itself  was  utterly 
destroyed,  the  site  rendered  desolate  (Josh.  vi.  26), 
and  the  name  Hormah  ('Aj/a0ejua,  LXX.)  applied 
to  it  (Num.  xxi.  3). 

We  pass  on  to  the  Rabbinical  sense  of  Din  as  re- 
ferring to  excommunication,  premising  that  an  ap- 
proximation to  that  sense  is  found  in  Ezr.  x.  8, 
where  forfeiture  of  goods  is  coupled  with  separation 
from  the  congregation.  Three  degrees  of  excom- 
munication are  enumerated  (1)  ,,1*13,  involving  va- 
rious restrictions  in  civil  and  ecclesiastical  matters 
for  the  space  of  30  days :  to  this  it  is  supposed  that 
the  terms  acpopi^eiv  (Luke  vi.  22)  and  airoffwd- 
ycoyos  (John  ix.  22)  refer.  (2)  D"in,  a  more  pub- 
lic and  formal  sentence,  accompanied  with  curses, 
and  involving  severer  restrictions  for  an  indefinite 
period.  (3)  NnOK',  rarely,  if  ever,  used — com- 
plete and  irrevocable  excommunication.  D~in  was 
occasionally  used  in  a  generic  sense  for  any  of  the 
three  (Carpzov.  Appar.  p.  557).  Some  expositors 
refer  the  terms  bvetb~[£eiv  k<x\  (K&aWtiv  (Luke  vi. 
22)  to  the  second  species,  but  a  comparison  of  John 
ix.  22  with  34  shows  that  e/c/3<xAAen/  is  synonym- 
ous with  anoirwdycoyov  Troieiv,  and  there  appeal's 
no  reason  for  supposing  the  latter  to  be  of  a  severe 
character. 

The  word  avdOe/xa  frequently  occurs  in  St.  Paul's 
writing,  and  many  expositors  have  regarded  his  use 
of  it  as  a  technical  term  for  judicial  excommunica- 
tion. That  the  word  was  so  used  in  the  early 
Church,  there  can  be  no  doubt  (Bingham,  Antiq. 
xvi.  2,  §16):  but  an  examination  of  the  passages  in 
which  it  occurs  shows  that,  like  the  cognate  word 
avae^fj-arlCo  (Matt.  xxvi.  74  ;  Mark  xiv.  71  ;  Acts 
xxiii.  12,  21),  it  had  acquired  a  more  general  sense 
as  expressive  either  of  strong  feeling  (Rom.  ix.  3; 
cf.  Ex.  xxxii.  32),  or  of  dislike  and  condemnation 
(1  Cor.  xii.  3,  xvi.  32  ;  Gal.  i.  9).       [W.  L.  B.] 

AN'ATHOTH  (ninjj? ;  'AvaOdd  ■  Anathoth), 

name  of  two  men.  1.  A  Benjamite  (Chr.  vii.  8). 
2.  (Neh.  x.  19). 

AN'ATHOTH  (nin3J?,a  possibly  =  «  echoes ;" 

nhjyn.  2.  English  :  Anethothite,  2  Sam.  xxiii.  27  : 
Anetothite,  1  Chr.  xxvii.  12  :  Antothite,  1  Chr.  xi.  2S, 
xii.  3.  "Jeremiah  of  A."  Jer.  xxix.  27,  should  be, 
"  J.  the  Anathothite." 


ANCHOR 

plur.  of  I"13J?,  by  which  name  the  place  is  called  in  the 

Talmud  Joma,  10;  'Avadd>6;  Anathoth),  a.  city  of 
Benjamin,  omitted  from  the  list  in  Josh,  xviii.,  but  a 
priests'  city;  with  "suburbs"  (Josh.  xxi.  18  ;  1  Chr. 
vi.  60  (45)  ).  Hither,  to  his  "  fields, "  Abiathar  was 
banished  by  Solomon  after  the  failure  of  his  attempt 
to  put  Adonijah  on  the  throne  (1  K.  ii.  26).  This 
was  the  native  place  of  Abiezer,  one  of  David's 
30  captains  (2  Sam.  xxffi.  27  ;  1  Chr.  si.  28, 
xsvii.  12),  and  of  Jehu,  another  of  the  mighty  men 
(1  Chr.  xii.  3)  ;  and  here,  "  of  the  priests  that 
were  in  Anathoth,"  Jeremiah  was  born  (Jer.  i.  1  ; 
si.  21,  23  ;  sxix.  27  ;  sxxii.  7,  8,  9). 

The  "men"  (^2X,  not  *J2,  as  in  most  of  the 
other  cases  ;  comp.  however,  Netophah,  Michmash, 
&c.)  of  A.  returned  from  the  captivity  with  Zerub- 
babel  (Ezra  ii.  23 ;  Neh.  vii.  27 ;  1  Esdr.  v.  18). 

Anathoth  lay  on  or  near  the  great  road  from  the 
north  to  Jerusalem  (Is.  x.  30)  ;  by  Eusebius  it  is 
placed  at  3  miles  from  the  city  (Onom.),  and  by 
Jerome  (turris  Anathoth)  at  the  same  distance 
contra  septentrionem  J erusalcm  (ad  Jerem.  cap.  i.). 
The  traditional  site  at  Kurlct  el-Enab  does  not  fulfil 
these  conditions,  being  10  miles  distant  from  the 
city,  and  nearer  W.  than  N.  But  the  real  position 
has  no  doubt  been  discovered  by  Robinson  at  'Andta, 
on  a  broad  ridge  lj  hour  N.N.E.  from  Jerusalem. 
The  cultivation  of  the  priests  survives  in  tilled 
fields  of  grain,  with  figs  and  olives.  There  are  the 
remains  of  walls  and  strong  foundations,  and  the 
quarries  still  supply  Jerusalem  with  building  stone 
(Rob.  i.  437,  438).  [G.] 

ANCHOR.     [Ship.] 

AN'DEEW,  St.  ('Aspects:  Andreas;  the 
name  Andreas  occurs  in  Greek  writers  ;  e.  g.  Athen. 
vii.  p.  312,  and  xv.  p.  675;  it  is  found  in  Dion 
Cass,  lxviii.  32,  as  the  name  of  a  Cyrenian  Jew,  in 
the  reign  of  Trajan),  one  among  the  first  called  of 
the  Apostles  of  our  Lord  (John  i.  41  ;  Matt.  iv.  18)  ; 
brother  (whether  elder  or  younger  is  uncertain)  of 
Simon  Peter  (ibid.).  He  was  of  Bethsaida,  and  had 
been  a  disciple  of  John  the  Baptist.  On  hearing  Jesus 
a  second  time  designated  by  him  as  the  Lamb  of  God, 
he  left  his  former  master,  and,  in  company  with 
another  of  John's  disciples,  attached  himself  to  our 
Lord.  By  his  means  his  brother  Simon  was  brought 
to  Jesus  (John  i.  41).  The  apparent  discrepancy 
in  Matt.  iv.  18  ft.  Mark  16  if.,  where  the  two 
appear  to  have  been  called  together,  is  no  real  one, 
St.  John  relating  the  first  introduction  of  the  bro- 
thers to  Jesus,  the  other  Evangelists  their  formal 
call  to  follow  Him  in  his  ministry.  In  the 
catalogue  of  the  Apostles,  Andrew  appears,  in 
Matt.  x.  2,  Luke  vi.  14,  second,  next  after  his 
brother  Peter;  but  in  Mark  iii.  16,  Acts  i.  14, 
fourth,  next  after  the  three,  Peter,  James,  and 
John,  and  in  company  with  Philip.  And  this  ap- 
pears to  have  been  his  real  place  of  dignity  among 
the  apostles;  for  in  M:u-k  xiii.  3,  wo  find  Peter, 
James,  John,  and  Andrew,  inquiring  privately  of 
our  Lord  about  His  coming;  and  in  John  xii.  22, 
when  certain  Greeks  wished  tin'  an  interview  with 
Jesus,  they  applied  through  Andrew,  who  consulted 
Philip,  and  in  company  with  him  made  the  request 
known  to  our  Lord.  This  last  circumstance,  com- 
bined with  the  Greek  character  of  hotli  their  names, 
may  perhaps  point  to  some  slight  shade  of  Hel- 
lenistic connexion  on  the  part  of  the  two  apostles; 
though  it  is  extremely  improbable  that  any  of  the 
Twelve  were  Hellenists  in   the  proper  sense.     On 


ANER 


67 


the  occasion  of  the  five  thousand  in  the  wilderness 
wanting  nourishment,  it  is  Andrew  who  points  out 
the  little  lad  with  the  five  barley  loaves  and  the  two 
fishes.  Scripture  relates  nothing  of  him  beyond 
these  scattered  notices.  Except  in  the  catalogue  (i. 
14),  his  name  does  not  occur  once  in  the  Acts.  The 
traditions  about  him  are  various.  Eusebius  (iii.  1) 
makes  him  preach  in  Scythia ;  Jerome  (Ep.  148, 
ad  Marc.)  and  Theodoret  (ad  Psalm,  cxvi.),  in 
Achaia  (Greece)  ;  Nicephorus  (ii.  39),  in  Asia  Minor 
and  Thrace.  He  is  said  to  have  been  crucified,  at 
Patrae  in  Achaia,  on  a  crux  decussata  (X)  ;  but  this 
is  doubted  by  Lipsius  (de  Cruce,  i.  7),  and  Sa- 
gittarius (de  Cruciatibus  Marty  rum,  viii.  12). 
Eusebius  (If.  E.  iii.  25)  speaks  of  an  apocryphal 
Acts  of  Andrew;  and  Epiphanius  (Haer.  xlvi.  1) 
states  that  the  Encratites  accounted  it  among  their 
principal  Scriptures ;  and  (Ixiii.  2)  he  says  the  same 
of  the  Origeniani.  (See  Fabric.  Cod.  Apocr.  i.  456  if., 
Menolog.  Graecor.  i.  221  f.;  Perion.  Vit.  Apostol. 
i.  p.  82  ff.)  [H.  A.] 

ANDRONI'CUS  ('AvSp6viKos).  1.  An  officer 
left  as  viceroy  (SiaSex^e"os,  2  Mace.  iv.  31)  in 
Antioch  by  Antiochus  Epiphanes  during  his  absence 
(B.C.  171).  Menelaus  availed  himself  of  the  oppor- 
tunity to  secure  his  good  offices  by  offering  him 
some  golden  vessels  which  he  had  taken  from  the 
temple.  When  Onias  (Onias  III.)  was  certainly 
assured  that  the  sacrilege  had  been  committed, 
he  sharply  reproved  Menelaus  for  the  crime,  having 
previously  taken  refuge  in  the  sanctuary  of  Apollo 
and  Artemis  at  Daphne.  At  the  instigation  of 
Menelaus,  Andronicus  induced  Onias  to  leave  the 
sanctuary  and  immediately  put  him  to  death  in 
prison  (irapeViVeio-ei',  2  Mace.  iv.  34  ?).  This 
murder  excited  general  indignation ;  and  on  the 
return  of  Antiochus,  Andronicus  was  publicly 
degraded  and  executed  (2  Mace.  iv.  30-38).  Jose- 
phus  places  the  death  of  Onias  before  the  High- 
Priesthood  of  Jason  (Ant.  xii.  5,  1),  and  omits  all 
mention  of  Andronicus  ;  but  there  is  not  sufficient 
reason  to  doubt  the  truthfulness  of  the  narrative, 
as  Wemsdorf  has  done  (De  fide  libr.  Mace.  pp. 
90,  f.). 

2.  Another  officer  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  who 
was  left  by  him  on  Garizim  (iv  Yap'  2  Maec. 
v.  23),  probably  in  occupation  of  the  temple  there. 
As  the  name  was  common,  it  seems  unreasonable  to 
identify  this  general  with  the  former  one,  and  so  to 
introduce  a  conti  adiction  into  the  history  fWerns- 
dorf,  I.  o. ;  Ewald,  Gesch.  d.  Volhes  Isr.  iv.  335  n.  ; 
comp.  Grimm,  2  Mace  iv.  38).  [B.  F.  W.] 

ANDRONI'CUS  ('Aj/o>oVikos  ;  Andronicus). 
a  christian  at  Rome,  saluted  by  St.  Paul  (Rom. 
xvi.  7),  together  with  Junias.  The  two  are  called  by 
him  his  relations  (avyyivcis)  and  fellow-captives, 
and  of  note  among  the  apostles,  using  that  term 
probably  in  the  wider  sense;  and  he  describes  them 
as  having  been  converted  to  Christ  before  himself, 
According  to  Hippolytus  he  was  bishop  of  Pannonia  ; 
according  to  Dorothcus,  of  Spain.  [H.  A.] 

A'NEM  (D3J? ;  t^' kivav,  Alex.  Avd/x),  a  city 
of  Issachar,  with  "  suburbs."  belonging  to  tho 
Gershonites,  1  Chr.  vi.  7:i  (Heb.  .r<8).  It  is  omitted 
in  the  lists  in  Josh.  xix.  and  x\i.,  and  instead  of  it 
1  En-ganuim.  Possibly  the  one  is  a  contraction 
of  the  other,  as  h'artan  of  Kirjathaim.  [G.] 

A'NER  ("131?;  v  'Avap;  Aner),  a  city  of 
Manasseh  west  of  Jordan,  with  "suburbs"  given 

K  2 


68 


ANEE 


to  the  Kohathites  (1  Chr.  vi.  70  (55)).  By  com- 
parison with  the  parallel  list  in  Josh.  xxi.  25,  it 
would  appear  to  be  a  corruption  of  Taanach  (~)jy 

for  -pyri). 

A'NER    p3JJ  ;   Avvdv ;    Aner),   one    of   the 

three  Hebronite  chiefs  who  aided  Abraham  in  the 
pursuit  after  the  four  invading  kings  (Gen.  xiv. 
13,  24).  [R.  W.  B.] 

ANGAREU'O  ('Ayyaptvw  ;  Angaria,  Vulg., 
Matt.  v.  41,  Mark  xv.  21),  simply  translated 
"  compel  "  in  the  A.  V.,  is  a  word  of  Persian, 
or  rather  of  Tatar,  origin,  signifying  to  compel  to 
serve  as  an  &yyapos  or  mounted  courier.  The  words 
ankarie  or  angharie,  in  Tatar,  mean  compulsory 
work  without  pay.  Herodotus  (viii.  98)  describes 
the  system  of  the  ayyapeia.  He  says  that  the 
Persians,  in  order  to  make  all  haste  in  carrying 
messages,  have  relays  of  men  and  horses  stationed 
at  intervals,  who  hand  the  despatch  from  one  to 
another  without  interruption  either  from  weather  or 
darkness,  in  the  same  way  as  the  Greeks  in  their 
XafiTadricpopla.  This  horse-post  the  Persians  called 
ayyapij'iov.  In  order  to  effect  the  object,  license  was 
given  to  the  couriers  by  the  government  to  press 
into  the  service  men,  horses,  and  even  .vessels. 
Hence  the  word  came  to  signify  "  press,"  and 
ayyapeia  is  explained  by  Suidas  SrifMocria  Kcd  avay- 
Kcua  SouAeia,  and  ayyapevecrOai,  els  (popTTiylav 
ayecrBai.  Persian  supremacy  introduced  the  practice 
and  the  name  into  Palestine ;  and  Lightfoot  says  the 
Talmudists  used  to  call  any  oppressive  service 
X*_"]3!3X.  Among  the  proposals  made  by  Demetrius 
Soter  to  Jonathan  the  high-priest,  one  was  ^7/  077a- 
pevecrdaL  to  rwv  lovSaiwv  viro^vyia.  The  svstem 
was  also  adopted  by  the  Romans,  and  thus  the  word 
"angario"  came  into  use  in  later  Latin.  Pliny 
alludes  to  the  practice,  "  festinationem  tabellarii 
diplomate  adjuvi."  Sir  J.  Chardin  and  other  tra- 
vellers make  mention  of  it.  The  ix.yya.poi  were  also 
called  acrrduSai. .  (Liddell  and  Scott,  and  Stephens ; 
and  Scheller,  Lex.  s.'  vv. ;  Xen.  Cyrop.  viii.  6, 
§§17,  18;  Athen.  iii.  94,  122;  Aesch.  Ag.  282, 
Pers.  217  (Dind.);  Esth.  viii.  14;  Joseph.  A.  J. 
xiii.  2,  §3;  Pliny,  Ep.  x.  14,  121,  122;  Lightfoot 
On  Matt.  v.  41 ;  Chardin,  Travels,  p.  257  ;  Pint. 
Be  Alex.  Mag.  p.  326.)  [H.  W.  P.] 

ANGELS  (D*3N?0  ;  ol  ayyeXoi ;  often  with 
the  addition  of  il'lIT,  or  DTvX.  In  later  books 
the  word  C'CHp,  ol  aywi,  is  used  as  an  equi- 
valent term.)  By  the  word  "  angels  "  (i.  e.  "  mes- 
sengers "  of  God)  we  ordinarily  understand  a  race 
of  spiritual  beings,  of  a  nature  exalted  far  above 
that  of  man,  although  infinitely  removed  from  that 
of  God,  whose  office  is  "  to  do  Him  service  in  hea- 
ven, and  by  His  appointment  to  succour  and  defend 
men  on  earth."  The  object  of  the  present  article 
is  threefold:  1st,  to  refer  to  any  other  Scriptural 
uses  of  this  and  similar  words  ;  2ndly,  to  notice  the 
revelations  of  the  nature  of  these  spiritual  beings 
given  in  Scripture;  and  3rdly,  to  derive  from  the 
same  source,  a  brief  description  of  their  office  towards 
nan.  It  is  to  be  noticed  that  its  scope  is  purely 
Biblical,  and  that,  in  consequence,  it  does  not  enter 
into  any  extra-Scriptural  speculations  on  this  mys- 
terious subject. 

(I.)  In  the  first  place,  there  are  many  passages 
in  which  the  expression  the  "  angel  of  God,"  "  the 
angel  of  Jehovah,"  is  certainly  used  for  a  manifes- 


ANGELS 

tation  of  God  himself.  This  is  especially  the  case 
in  the  earlier  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  may 
be  seen  at  once,  by  a  comparison  of  Gen.  xxii.  1 1 
with  12,  and  of  Ex.  iii.  2  with  6,  and  14 ;  where  He, 
who  is  called  the  "  angel  of  God  "  in  one  verse,  is 
called  "  God,"  and  even  "Jehovah  "  in  those  which 
follow,  and  accepts  the  worship  due  to  God  alone. 
(Contrast  Rev.  xix.  10  xxi.  9.)  See  also  Gen.  xvi. 
7,  13,  xxxi.  11,  13,  xlviii.  15,  ltJ;  Num.  xxii. 
22,  32,  35,  and  comp.  Is.  lxiii.  9  with  Ex.  xxxiii. 
14,  &c.  &c.  The  same  expression  (it  seems)  is  used 
by  St.  Paul,  in  speaking  to  heathens.  See  Acts 
xxvii.  23  comp.  with  xxiii.  11. 

It  is  to  be  observed  also,  that,  side  by  side  with 
these  expressions,  we  read  of  God's  being  manifested 
in  the  form  of  man ;  as  to  Abraham  at  Mamre 
(Gen.  xviii.  2,  22  comp.  xix.  1),  to  Jacob  at  Pe- 
nuel  (Gen.  xxxii.  24,  30),  to  Joshua  at  Gilgal 
(Josh.  v.  13,  15),  &c.  It  is  hardly  to  be  doubted, 
that  both  sets  of  passages  refer  to  the  same  kind  of 
manifestation  of  the  Divine  Presence. 

This  being  the  case,  since  we  know  that  "  no 
man  hath  seen  God  "  (the  Father)  "  at  any  time," 
and  that  "  the  only-begotten  Son,  which  is  in  the 
bosom  of  the  Father  He  hath  revealed  Him  "  (John 
i.  18),  the  inevitable  inference  is  that  by  the  "  Angel 
of  the  Lord "  in  such  passages  is  meant  He, 
who  is  from  the  beginning  the  "  Word,"  i.  e.  the 
Manifester  or  Revealer  of  God.  These  appearances 
are  evidently  "  foreshadowings  of  the  Incarnation." 
By  these  (that  is)  God  the  Son  manifested  Himself 
from  time  to  time  in  that  human  nature,  which  He 
united  to  the  Godhead  for  ever  in  the  Virgin's 
womb. 

•  This  conclusion  is  corroborated  by  the  fact,  that 
the  phrases  used  as  equivalent  to  the  word  "  Angels  " 
in  Scripture,  viz.  the  "sons  of  God,"  or  even  in 
poetry,  the  "gods"  (Elohim),  the  "holy  ones," 
&c,  are  names,  which  in  their  full  and  proper 
sense  are  applicable  only  to  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 
As  He  is  "  the  Son  of  God,"  so  also  is  He  the 
"  Angel,"  or  "  messenger  "  of  the  Lord.  Accordingly 
it  is  to  His  Incarnation,  that  all  angelic  ministration 
is  distinctly  referred,  as  to  a  central  truth,  by 
which  alone  its  nature  and  meaning  can  be  under- 
stood. (See  John  i.  51,  comparing  it  with  Gen. 
xxviii.  11-17,  and  especially  with  v.  13.) 

Besides  this,  which  is  the  highest  application  of 
the  word  "  angel,"  we  find  the  phrase  used  of  any 
messengers  of  God,  such  as  the  prophets  (Is.  xlii. 
19;  Hag.  i.  13;  Mai.  iii.  1),  the  priests  (Mai.  ii. 
7),  and  the  rulers  of  the  Christian  churches  (Rev. 
i.  20)  ;  much  as,  even  more  remarkably,  the  word 
"  Elohim  "  is  applied,  in  Ps.  lxxxii.  6,  to  those  who 
judge  in  God's  name. 

These  usages  of  the  word  are  not  only  interesting 
in  themselves,  but  will  serve  to  throw  light  on  the 
nature  and  the  method  of  the  ministration  of  those, 
whom  we  more  especially  term  "  the  angels." 

(II.)  In  passing  on  to  consider  what  is  revealed 
in  Scripture  as  to  the  angelic  nature,  we  are  led  at 
once  to  notice,  that  the  Bible  deals  with  this  and 
with  kindred  subjects  exclusively  in  their  practical 
bearings,  only  so  far  (that  is)  as  they  conduce  to 
our  knowledge  of  God  and  of  ourselves,  and  more 
particularly  as  they  are  connected  with  the  one 
great  subject  of  all  Scripture,  the  Incarnation  of  the 
Son  of  God.  Little  therefore  is  said  of  the  nature  of 
angels  as  distinct  from  their  office. 

They  are  termed  "spirits"  (as  e.g.  in  Heb.  i. 
14),  although  this  word  is  applied  more  com- 
monly, not  so  much  to  themselves,  as  to  their  power 


ANGELS 

dwelling  in  man  (e.g.  1  .Sam.  xviii.  10  ;  Matt.  viii. 
10,  &c.  &c).  The  word  is  the  same  as  that  used  of 
the  soul  of  man,  when  separate  from  the  body  (e.g. 
Matt.  xiv.  20;  Luke  xxiv.  37,  39;  1  Pet.  iii.  19); 
but,  since  it  properly  expresses  only  that  super- 
sensuous  and  rational  element  of  man's  nature, 
which  is  in  him  the  image  of  God  (see  John  iv. 
'24),  mid  by  which  he  has  communion  with  (Iod 
(Koin.  viii.  10);  ami  since  also  we  are  told,  that 
there  is  a  "  spiritual  body,"  as  well  as  a  "  natural 
(vJ/l'X'koV)  body"  (1  Cor.  xv.  44),  it  does  not 
assert  that  the  angelic  nature  is  incorporeal.  The 
contrary  seems  expressly  implied  by  the  words,  in 
which  oar  herd  declares,  that,  after  the  Resurrec- 
tion, men  shall  be  "like  the  angels"  (lcrayye\oi) 
(Luke  xx.  30);  because  (as  is  elsewhere  said,  Phil. 
iii.  21)  their  bodies,  as  well  as  their  spirits,  shall 
have  been  made  entirely  like  His.  It  may  also  be 
noticed  that  the  glorious  appearance,  ascribed  to  the 
angels  in  Scripture  (as  in  Dan.  x.  0)  is  the  same 
as  that  which  shone  out  in  our  Lord's  Transfigura- 
tion, and  in  which  St.  John  saw  Him  clothed  in 
heaven  (Rev.  i.  14-10);  and  moreover,  that,  when- 
ever angels  have  been  made  manifest  to  man,  it  has 
always  been  in  human  form  (as  e.g.  in  Gen.  xviii., 
xix. ;  Luke  xxiv.  4;  Acts  i.  10,  &c.  &c).  The 
very  fact  that  the  titles  "sons  of  God"  (Job  i.  6, 
xxxviii.  7;  Dan.  iii.  25  comp.  with  28 a),  and 
"gods"  (l's.  viii.  5;  xcvii.  7),  applied  to  them, 
are  also  given  to  men  (see  Luke  iii.  38 ;  Ps.  lxxxii. 
6,  and  comp.  our  Lord's  application  of  this  last 
passage  in  John  x.  34-37),  points  in  the  same  way 
to  a  difference  only  of  degree,  and  an  identity  of 
kind,  between  the  human  and  the  angelic  nature. 

The  angels  are  therefore  revealed  to  us  as  beings, 
such  as  man  might  be  and  will  be  when  the  power 
of  sin  and  death  is  removed,  partaking  in  their  mea- 
sure of  the  attributes  of  God,  Truth,  Purity,  and 
Love,  because  always  beholding  His  face  (Matt, 
xviii.  Ill),  and  therefore  being  "made  like  Him" 
(  I  John  iii.  2).  This,  of  course,  implies  finiteness, 
and  therefore  (in  the  strict  sense)  "imperfection" 
(if  nature,  and  constant  progress,  both  moral  and 
intellectual,  through  all  eternity.  Such  imperfec- 
tion, contrasted  with  the  infinity  of  (Iod,  is  ex- 
pressly ascribed  to  them  in  Job  iv.  18  ;  Matt.  xxiv. 
30;  1  Pet.  i.  12:  and  it  is  this,  which  emphatic- 
ally points  them  out  to  us  as  creatures,  fellow-ser- 
vants of  man,  and  therefore  incapable  of  usurping 
the  place  of  gods. 

This  finiteness  of  nature  implies  capacity  of  temp- 
tation  (see  Butler's  Anal.  Part  i.  c.  5-);  and  ac- 
cordingly  we  hear  of  "  fallen  angels."  Of  the 
nature  of  their  temptation  and  the  circumstances 
of  their  fall,  we  know  absolutely  nothing.  All 
that  is  certain  is,  that  they  "left  their  first  estate" 
(t))v  kavrwv  apxh")'  and  that  they  are  iu>\\  " 
Ofthe  devil  "  (  Matt.  \\v.  II  ;  Lev.  xii.  7,  9),  par- 
talcing  therefore  of  the  falsehood,  imcleanness,  and 
hatred,  which  are  his  peculiar  characteristics  (John 
viii.  44).  All  that  can  be  conjectured  must  he 
based  on  the  analogy  <>f  man's  nun  temptation  and 
Bill. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  title  especially  a 
in  the  angels  of  God,  that  of  the  ••  holy  on< 
.    .   Dan.  iv.    L3,  23,  viii.  13;  Matt.  x\\ . 


ANGELS 


69 


a  Gen.  vi.  2,  is  omitted  lure  and  below,   as  being 
a  controverted  passage;  although  many  MSB.  of  the 

I. XX.  have  oi  ayytAoi  instead  of  oi  viol  here. 

*'    The  inordinate  subjectivity  of  (icrman  philosophy 
on  this  subject  (sec,  e.g.,  Winer's  Sealw.  ,  of  course, 


precisely  the  one  which  is  given  to  those  men  who  are 
renewed  in  Christ's  image,  but  which  belongs  to 
them  in  actuality  aud  in  perfection  only  hereafter. 
(Comp.  Heb.  ii.  ID,  v.  9,  xii.  23.)  Its  use  evi- 
dently implies  that  the  angelic  probation  is  over,  and 
their  crown  of  glory  won. 

Thus  much  then  is  revealed  of  the  angelic  nature, 
as  may  make  it  to  us  an  ideal  of  human  goodness 
(Matt.  vi.  lo),  or  beacon  of  warning  as  to  the 
tendency  of  sin.  It  is  obvious  to  remark,  that  in 
such  revelation  is  found  a  partial  satisfaction  of 
that  craving  for  the  knowledge  of  creatures,  higher 
than  ourselves  and  yet  fellow-servants  with  us  of 
God,  which  in  its  diseased  form  becomes  Poly- 
theism.b  Its  full  satisfaction  is  to  be  sought  in 
the  Incarnation  alone,  and  it  is  to  be  noticed,  that 
after  the  Revelation  of  God  in  the  flesh,  the  angelic 
ministrations  recorded  are  indeed  fewer,  but  the 
reference  to  the  angels  are  far  more  frequent — as 
though  the  danger  of  Polytheistic  idolatry  had,  com- 
paratively speaking,  passed  away. 

(III.)  The  most  important  subject,  and  that  on 
which  we  have  the  fullest  revelation,  is  the  office 
of  the  angels. 

Of  their  office  in  heaven,  we  have,  of  course,  only 
vague  prophetic  glimpses  (as  in  1  K.  xxii.  19;  Is. 
vi.  1-3;  Dan.  vii.  9,  10;  Lev.  vi.  11,  &c),  which 
show  us  nothing  but  a  never-ceasing  adoration,  pro- 
ceeding from  the  vision  of  God,  through  the  "  perfect 
love,  which  casteth  out  fear." 

Their  office  towards  man  is  far  more  fully  de- 
scribed to  us.  They  are  represented  as  being,  in 
the  widest  sense,  agents  of  Cod's  Providence,  na- 
tural and  supernatural,  to  the  body  and  to  the  soul. 
Thus  the  operations  of  nature  aie  spoken  of,  as 
under  angelic  guidance  fulfilling  the  Will  of  (iod. 
Not  only  is  this  the  case  in  poetical  passages,  such 
as  Ps.  civ.  4  (commented  upon  in  Heb.  i.  7),  where 
the  powers  of  air  and  fire  are  referred  to  them, 
but  in  the  simplest  prose  history,  as  where  the  pes- 
tilences which  slew  the  firstborn  (Ex.  xii.  23  ; 
Heb.  xi.  28),  the  disobedient  people  in  the  wilder- 
ness (1  Cor.  x.  10),  the  Israelites  in  the  days  of 
David  (2  Sam.  xxiv.  10;  1  Chr.  xxi.  10),  and  the 
army  of  Sennacherib  (2  K .  xix.  35),  as  also  the  plague 
which  cutoff  Herod  (Acts  xii.  23)  are  plainly  spoken 
of  as  the  work  of  the  "  Angel  of  the  Lord."  Nor  can 
the  mysterious  declarations  of  the  Apocalypse,  by 
far  the  most  numerous  of  all,  be  resolved  by  honest 
interpretation  into  mere  poetical  imagery.  (See 
especially  Lev.  viii.  and  ix.)  It  is  evident  that 
angelic  agency,  like  that  of  man,  does  not  exclude 
the  action  of  secondary,  or  (what  are  called)  "na- 
tural "  causes,  or  interfere  with  the  directness  and 
universality  of  the  Providence  of  God.  The  per- 
sonifications of  poetry,  and  legends  of  mythology 
are  obscure  witnesses  of  its  truth,  which,  however, 
can  resi  only  on  the  revelations  of  Scripture  itself. 

.Moie  particularly,  however,  angels  are  spoken  of 
as  ministers  of  what  is  commonly  called  the  "su- 
pernatural/' or  perhaps  more  correctly,  the  "spi- 
ritual" Providence  of  God;  as  agents  in  the 
scheme  of  the  spiritual  redemption  and  sand 
tieii  of  man,  of  which  the  Bible  is  the  record.  The 
of  them  are  different  in  different 
ii  the  <  'id  Te  tami  nl  and  in  the 


•  to  the  conclusion  that  the  belief  in  angels  is 
a  mere  consequence  of  this  craving,  never  (it  would 
Mem,  -ii  entering  Into  the  analogy  ol  God's  provi- 
dence as  to  suppose  it  possible  that  this  inward  crav- 
ing should  correspond  to  some  outward  reality. 


70 


ANGELS 


New ;  but  the  reasons  of  the  differences  are  to  be 
found  in  the  differences  of  scope  attributable  to  the 
books  themselves.  As  different  parts  of  God's  Pro- 
vidence are  brought  out,  so  also  arise  different  views 
of  His  angelic  ministers. 

In  the  Book  of  Job,  which  deals  with  "  Natural 
Religion,"  they  are  spoken  of  but  vaguely,  as  sur- 
rounding God's  throne  above,  and  l-ejoicing  in  the 
completion  of  His  creative  work  (Job  i.  6,  ii.  1, 
xxxviii.  7).  No  direct  and  visible  appearance  to 
man  is  even  hinted  at. 

In  the  Book  of  Genesis,  there  is  no  notice  of  an- 
gelic appearance  till  after  the  call  of  Abraham. 
Then,  as  the  book  is  the  history  of  the  chosen  fa- 
mily, so  the  angels  Aingle  with  and  watch  over  its 
family  life,  entertained  by  Abraham  and  by  Lot 
(Gen.  xviii.,  xix.),  guiding  Abraham's  servant  to 
Padan-Aram  (xxiv.  7,  40),  seen  by  the  fugitive 
Jacob  at  Bethel  (xxviii.  12),  and  welcoming  his 
return  at  Mahanaim  (xxxii.  1).  Their  ministry 
hallows  domestic  life,  in  its  trials  and  its  blessings 
alike,  and  is  closer,  more  familiar,  and  less  awful 
than  in  aftertimes.  (Contrast  Gen.  xviii.  with 
Judg.  vi.  21,  22,  xiii.  16,  22.) 

In  the  subsequent  history,  that  of  a  chosen  na- 
tion, the  angels  are  represented  more  as  ministers  of 
wrath  and  mercy,  messengers  of  a  King,  rather  than 
common  children  of  the  One  Father.  It  is,  moreover, 
to  be  observed,  that  the  records  of  their  appearance 
belong  especially  to  two  periods,  that  of  the  Judges, 
and  that  of  the  captivity,  which  were  transition 
periods  in  Israelitish  history,  the  former  one  des- 
titute of  direct  revelation  or  prophetic  guidance, 
the  latter  one  of  special  trial  and  unusual  con- 
tact with  heathenism.  During  the  lives  of  Moses 
and  Joshua  there  is  no  record  of  the  appearance  of 
created  angels,  and  only  obscure  reference  to  angels 
at  all.  In  the  Book  of  Judges  angels  appear  at 
once  to  rebuke  idolatry  (ii.  1-4),  to  call  Gideon 
(vi.  11,  &c.)  and  consecrate  Samson  (xiii.  3,  &c.)  to 
the  work  of  deliverance. 

The  prophetic  office  begins  with  Samuel,  and  im- 
mediately angelic  guidance  is  withheld,  except 
when  needed  by  the  prophets  themselves  (1  K.  xix. 
5;  2  K.  vi.  17).  During  the  prophetic  and 
kingly  period,  angels  are  spoken  of  only  (as  noticed 
above)  as  ministers  of  God  in  the  operations  of 
nature.  But  in  the  captivity,  when  the  Jews 
were  in  the  presence  of  foreign  nations,  each  claim- 
ing its  tutelary  deity,  then  to  the  prophets  Daniel 
and  Zechariah,  angels  are  revealed  in  a  fresh  light, 
as  watching,  not  only  over  Jerusalem,  but  also 
over  heathen  kingdoms,  under  the  Providence,  and 
to  work  out  the  designs,  of  the  Lord.  (See  Zech. 
passim,  and  Dan.  iv.  13,  23,  x.  10, 13,  20,  21,  &c.) 
In  the  whole  period,  they,  as  truly  as  the  prophets 
and  kings  themselves,  are  seen  as  God's  ministers, 
watching  over  the  national  life  of  the  subjects  of 
the  Great  King. 

The  Incarnation  marks  a  new  epoch  of  angelic 
ministration.  "  The  Angel  of  Jehovah,"  the  Lord 
of  all  created  angels,  having  now  descended  from 
heaven  to  earth,  it  was  natural  that  His  servants 
should  continue  to  do  Him  service  there.  Whether  to 
predict  and  glorify  His  birth  itself  (Matt.  i.  20  ; 
Luke  i.  ii.)  to  minister  to  Him  after  his  temptation 
and  agony  (Matt.  iv.  11  ;    Luke  xxii.  43),  or  to 


c  The  notion  of  special  guardian  angels,  watching 
over  individuals,  is  consistent  with  this  passage,  but 
not  necessarily  deduced  from  it.  The  belisf  of  it 
among  the  early  Christians  is  shown  by  Acts  xii.  15. 


ANISE 

declare  His  resurrection  and  triumphant  ascension 
(Matt,  xxviii.  2;  John  xx.  12;  Acts  i.  10,  11) — 
they  seem  now  to  be  indeed  "  ascending  and  de- 
scending on  the  Son  of  Man,"  almost  as  though 
transferring  to  earth  the  ministrations  of  heaven. 
It  is  clearly  seen,  that  whatever  was  done  by  them 
for  men  in  earlier  days,  was  but  typical  of  and 
flowing  from  their  sendee  to  Him.  (See  Ps.  xci. 
11,  comp.  Matt.  iv.  6.) 

The  New  Testament  is  the  history  of  the  Ch  urch 
of  Christ,  every  member  of  which  is  united  to 
Him.  Accordingly,  the  angels  are  revealed  now,  as 
"  ministering  spirits "  to  each  individual  member 
of  Christ  for  his  spiritual  guidance  and  aid  (Heb.  i. 
14).  The  records  of  their  visible  appearance  are 
but  unfrequent  (Acts  v.  19,  viii.  26,  x.  3,  xii.  7, 
xxvii.  23)  ;  but  their  presence  and  their  aid  are  re- 
ferred to  familiarly,  almost  as  things  of  course,  ever 
after  the  Incarnation.  They  are  spoken  of  as  watch- 
ing over  Christ's  little  ones0  (Matt,  xviii.  10),  as 
rejoicing  over  a  penitent  sinner  (Luke  xv.  10),  as 
present  in  the  worship  of  Christians  (1  Cor.  xi. 
10),d  and  (perhaps)  bringing  their  prayers  before 
God  (Rev.  viii.  3,  4),  and  as  bearing  the  souls  of 
the  redeemed  into  Paradise  (Luke  xvi.  22).  In  one 
word  they  are  Christ's  ministers  of  grace  now,  as 
they  shall  be  of  judgment  hereafter  (Matt.  xiii.  39, 
41,  49,  xvi.  27,  xxiv.  31,  &c).  By  what  method 
they  act  we  cannot  know  of  ourselves,  nor  are  we 
told,  perhaps  lest  we  should  worship  them,  instead 
of  Him,  whose  servants  they  are  (see  Col.  ii.  18; 
Rev.  xxii.  9)  ;  but  of  course  their  agency,  like  that 
of  human  ministers,  depends  for  its  efficacy  on  the 
aid  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

Such  is  the  action  of  God's  angels  on  earth,  as  dis- 
closed to  us  in  the  various  stages  of  Revelation; 
that  of  the  evil  angels  may  be  better  spoken  of 
elsewhere  [Satan]  :  here  it  is  enough  to  say  that 
it  is  the  direct  opposite  of  their  true  original  office, 
but  permitted  under  God's  overruling  providence 
to  go  until  the  judgment  day. 

That  there  are  degrees  of  the  angelic  nature, 
fallen  and  unfallen,  and  special  titles  and  agencies 
belonging  to  each,  is  clearly  declared  by  St.  Paul 
(Eph.  i.  21;  Rom.  viii.  38),  but  what  their  ge- 
neral nature  is,  it  is  needless  for  us  to  know,  and 
therefore  useless  to  speculate.  For  what  little  is 
known  of  this  special  nature  see  Cherubim,  Se- 
raphim, Michael,  Gabriel.   •  [A.  B.] 

ANGLING.     [Fishing.] 

ANIAM  (Dy^X  ;  'Kvidv  ;  Aniam),  name  of  a 

man  (1  Chr.  vii.  19). 

A'NIM  (D^V  ;  Alad/j. ;  Anini),  a  city  in  the 
mountains  of  Judah,  named  with  Eshtemoh  (Es- 
Semucli)  and  Goshen  (Josh.  xv.  50).  Eusebius 
and  Jerome  (Onom.  'A^cr^u,  Anini)  mention  a  place 
of  this  name  in  Daroma,  9  miles  south  of  Hebron 
(comp.  also  Anea,  s.  v.  Anab).  [G.] 

ANISE  {&vrjQov,  Matt,  xxiii.  23  ;  Anethum), 
properly  the  common  dill  {Anethum  graveolens, 
Linn.),  described  by  the  Talmudists  as  ]"QC\ 
The  anise  has  its  specific  name,  dviaov,  and  though 
similar-  to  the  dill  in  properties,  is  an  entirely  dis- 
tinct  plant.     The   dill  is  an  umbelliferous  plant, 


d  The  difficulty  of  the  passage  has  led  to  its  being 
questioned,  but  the  wording  of  the  original  and  the 
usage  of  the  N.  T.  seem  almost  decisive  on  the 
point. 


ANKLET 

producing  a  small  flower  of  a  bright  brown  colour, 
and  a  flattened  elliptical  fruit  or  seed.  Both  the 
plant  and  the  seed  were  used  by  the  ancients  (Plin. 
six.  lil,  xx.  74;  Apic.  vi.  5)  as  a  condiment,  the 
latter  having  a  warm  aromatic  flavour  resembling 
that  of  carraway  seed.  Its  use  with  us  is  medicinal, 
as  a  carminative.  It  is  still  extensively  cultivated 
in  the  East.  [W.  L.  B.] 

ANKLET  (wept(TKe\l5(s,  ire'Sai  irept(T<pvpLOi, 
Clem.  Alex.).  This  word  only  occurs  in  Is.  iii.  18, 
D^DDJ?  (and  as  a  proper  name,  Josh.  xiii.  1*3);  unless 
such  ornaments  are  included  in  mi?VX,  Num.  xxxi. 
50,  which  word  etymologically  would  mean  rather  an 
anklet  than  a  bracelet.  Indeed,  the  same  word  is 
used  in  Is.  iii.  20  (without  the  Aleph  prosthetic) 
for  the  "  stepping-chains  worn  by  Oriental  women, 
fastened  to  the  ankle-band  of  each  leg,  so  that  they 
were  forced  to  walk  elegantly  with  short  steps" 
(<  iesen.  s.  i\).  They  wTere  as  common  as  bracelets 
and  armlets,  and  made  of  much  the  same  materials ; 
the  pleasant  jingling  and  tinkling  which  they  made 
as  they  knocked  against  each  other,  was  no  doubt 
one  of  the  reasons  why  they  were  admired  (Is.  iii. 
16,  18,  "the  bravery  of  their  tinkling  ornaments.") 
To  increase  this  pleasant  sound  pebbles  were  some- 
times enclosed  in  them  (Calmet.  s.  v.  Periscclis 
and  Bells).  The  Arabic  name  "  khulkha.1  "  seems 
to  be  onomatopoean,  and  Lane  {Mod.  Egypt. 
App.  A.)  quotes  from  a  song,  in  allusion  to  the  plea- 
sure caused  by  their  sound,  "  the  ringing  of  thine 
anklets  has  deprived  me  of  reason."  Hence  Mo- 
hammed forbade  them  in  public ;  "  let  them  not 
make  a  noise  with  their-  feet,  that  their  ornaments 
which  they  hide  may  [thereby]  be  discovered " 
{Koran,  xxiv.  31,  quoted  by  Lane);  no  doubt  Ter- 
tullian  discountenances  them  for  similar  reasons : 
"  Nescio  an  cms  de  periscelio  in  nervum  se  patiatur 
arctari.  .  .  .  Pedes  domi  tigite  et  plus  quam  in  auro 
placebunt"  {De  cult,  femin.  ii.  13). 

They  were  sometimes  of  great  value.  Lane  speaks 
of  them  (although  they  are  getting  uncommon)  as 
"made   of  solid   gold  or  silver"    {Mod.   Egypt. 

1.  c.) ;  but  he  says  that  the  poorer  village  children 
wear  them  of  iron.  For  their  use  among  the  an- 
cient Egyptians  see  Wilkinson,  iii.  374,  and  among 
the  ancient  Greeks  and  Romans,  Diet,  of  Ant.  Art. 
"  Periscclis."  They  do  not,  we  believe,  occur  in  the 
Nineveh  sculptures. 

Livingstone  writes  of  the  favourite  wife  of  an 
African  chief,  "she  wore  a  profusion  of  iron  rings 
on  her  ankles,  to  which  were  attached  little  pieces 
of  sheet  iron  to  enable  her  to  make  a  tinkling  as 
she  walked  in  her  mincing  African  style"  (p.  273). 
On  the  weight  ami  inconvenience  of  the  copper  rings 
worn  by  the  chiefs  themselves,  and  the  odd  walk  it 
causes  them  to  adopt,  see  id.  p.  276.     [F.  \V.  F.] 

AN'NA    (HUPI;  "Avva  ;    Anna)  :    the    name 

occurs    in  Punic  as  the  sister  "f  Dido.      1.  The 

r  of  Samuel  (1   K.  i.   2  ff.).      [Hannah.] 

2.  The  wit'-  ,,f  Tnl.it  (T.K.  i.  ;•  11'.).  3.  The  wife 
of  Raguel  (Toh.  vii.  2  ff.).  4.  A  "  prophetess" 
in  Jerusalem  at  the  time  of  our  Lord's  birth  (Luke 
ii.  36).  [B.  F.  W.] 

AN'NAAS  (Saraas;  Atum),   1  Esd.  v.  23. 

[Sl.NAAIl.] 

AN'NAS  ("Acwis,  in  Joseph  us  "A  uai'us),  a  Jewish 
bigh-prie&t.      He  was  son  of  One   Seth,  and    was   a)>- 

pointed  high-priest  in  his : ; 7 1 h  ye  ir(A.D.  7 ),  after  the 
battle  of  Actium,  by  Quirinius,  the  imperial  governor 

of  Syria  (Joseph.  Ant.  wiii2.,  §1 ) ;  but  wa>  obliged 


ANOINT 


71 


to  give  way  to  Isniael,  son  of  Pli.lbi,  by  Valerius 
Gratus,  procurator  of  Judaea,  at  the  beginning  of  the 
reign  of  Tiberius,  a.d.  14  (('6.  xviii.  2,  §2).  But 
soon  Ismael  was  succeeded  by  Eleazar,  son  of  Annas  ; 
then  followed,  after  one  year,  Simon,  son  of  I  !a- 
mithus,  and  then,  after  another  year  (about  A.D. 
25),  Joseph  Caiaphas,  son-in-law  of  Annas  (John 
xviii.  13 ;  Joseph.  I.  c.).  He  remained  till  the 
passover,  A.D.  37,  and  is  mentioned  in  Luke  iii.  2, 
as  officiating  high-priest,  but  after  Annas,  who 
seems  to  have  retained  the  title,  and  somewhat  also 
of  the  power  of  that  office.  Our  Lord's  first  hear- 
ing (John  xviii.  13)  was  before  Annas,  who  then 
sent  him  bound  to  Caiaphas.  In  Acts  iv.  6,  he  is 
plainly  called  the  high-priest,  and  Caiaphas  merely 
named  with  others  of  his  family.  It  is  no  easj 
matter  to  give  an  account  of  the  seemingly  ca- 
pricious applications  of  this  title.  Winer  supposes 
that  Annas  retained  it  from  his  former  enjoyment  of 
the  office ;  but  to  this  idea  St.  Luke's  expressions 
seem  opposed,  in  which  he  clearly  appears  as  bear- 
ing the  high-priest's  dignity  at  the  time  then  pre- 
sent in  each  case.  Wieseler,  in  his  Chronology ,  and 
more  recently  in  an  article  in  Herzog's  Real-cyclo- 
pddie,  maintains  that  the  two,  Annas  and  Caiaphas, 
were  together  at  the  head  of  the  Jewish  people,  the 
latter  as  actual  high-priest,  the  former  as  president 

of  the  Sanhedrim  (N*K'3) ;   and  so  also  Selden,  Be 

Synedriis  et  prae  feet  wis  j uridicis  veterum  Ebrae- 
orum,  ii.  655 :  except  that  this  latter  supposes 
Caiaphas  to  have  been  the  second  praefect  of  the 
Sanhedrim.  Some  again  suppose  that  Annas  held 
the  office  of  J3D,  or  substitute  of  the  high-priest, 

mentioned  by  the  later  Talmudists.  He  lived  to 
old  age,  having  had  five  sons  high-priests  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xx.  9,  §  1).  [H.  A.] 

AN'NAS  {'Avdv ;  Nuas),  name  of  a  man  (1  Esd. 
ix.  32). 

ANNU'US  ("Avvovo?;  Amin),  1  Esd.  viii.  48; 
comp.  Ezr.  viii.  19. 

ANOINT  (ni'TD;  xp'lc0)  ungo).  Anointing 
in  Holy  Scripture  is  either  I.  Material,  with  oil 
[Oil],   or   II.   Spiritual,  with   the   Holy   Ghost. 

1.  Material. — 1.  Ordinary.  Anointing  the 
body  or  head  with  oil  was  a  common  practice  with 
the  Jews,  as  with  other  Oriental  nations  (Pent, 
vwiii.  40;  Ruth  iii.  3;  Mic.  vi.  15).  Absti- 
nence from  it  was  a  sign  of  mourning  (2  Sam.  xiv. 
2;  Dan.  x.  3;  Matt.  vi.  17).  Anointing  the 
head  with  oil  or  ointment  seems  also  to  have  been 
a  mai'k  of  respect  sometimes  paid  by  a  host  to  hia 
guests  (Luke  vii.  46  and  Ps.  xxiii.  5),  and  was 
the  ancient  Egyptian  custom  at  feasts.  Observe, 
however,  that  in  Ps.  xxiii.  the  Hebrew  is  FI^l''"7! 
"thou  hast  made  fat;"  LXX.,  iAlirafas  ;  Yulg., 
iiiipingiiusti  ;  and  in  Luke  vii.  a\d(pa>  is  used 
as  it  '3  m  the  similar  passu  ,  £  (John  xi  2  ;  xu  "). 
The  word  anoint'  {a\tl<poi>)  also  occurs  in  tie 

of  preparing  a  body  with  spices  and  unguents  for 
burial  (Mark  xvi.  1.    Also  sv.  8,  fivplfa).     From 

the  custom  of  discontinuing  the  use  of  oil  in  ti s 

of  sorrow  or  disaster,  to  be  anointed  with  oil  comes 

oify  metaphorically,  to  be  in  the  enjoyment 
ess  or  prosperity  (Ps.  icii.  10;  comp.Eccl. 

ix.  8). 

2.  Official.  Anointing  with  oil  was  a  rite  of 
inauguration  into  each  of  the  three  typical  offices  of 
the    Jewish    commonwealth,    whose 

anointed,  were  type,  of  the  Anointed  One  (r"PL"D, 


72 


ANOINT 


Xptffrbs.  (a)  'Prophets  were  occasionally  anointed 
to  their  office  (1  K.  xix.  16),  and  are  called  mes- 
siahs,  or  anointed  (1  Chr.  xvi.  22;  Ps.  cv.  15). 
(6)  Priests,  at  the  first  institution  of  the  Levitical 
priesthood,  were  all  anointed  to  their  offices,  the 
sons  of  Aaron  as  well  as  Aaron  himself  (Ex.  xl. 
15:  Num.  iii.  3);  but  afterwards,  anointing 
seems  not  to  have  been  repeated  at  the  consecration 
of  ordinary  priests,  but  to  have  been  especially  re- 
served for  the  high-priest  (Ex.  xxix.  29  ;  Lev.  xvi. 
32) ;  so  that  "  the  priest  that  is  anointed"  (Lev. 
iv.  3)  is  generally  thought  to  mean  the  high- 
priest,  and  is  rendered  by  the  LXX.  6  apx^epevs,  6 
Kexpi^^vos  (rW?3n  jnbn).    See  also  vv.  5,  16, 

and  c.  vi.  22  (vi.  15,  Heb.)  (c)  Kings.  The 
Jews  were  familiar  with  the  idea  of  making  a  king 
by  anointing,  before  the  establishment  of  their  own 
monarchy  (Judg.  ix.  8,  15).  Anointing  was  the 
principal  and  divinely-appointed  ceremony  in  the 
inauguration  of  their  own  kings  (1  Sam.  ix.  16,  x. 
1 ;  1  K.  i.  34,  39);  indeed  ,  so  pre-eminently  did 
it  belong  to  the  kingly  office,  that  "  the  Lord's 
anointed"  was  a  common  designation  of  the  theo- 
cratic king  (1  Sam.  xii.  3,  5  ;  2  Sam.  i.  14,  16). 
The  rite  was  sometimes  performed  more  than  once. 
David  was  thrice  anointed  to  be  king :  first,  pri- 
vately by  Samuel,  before  the  death  of  Saul,  by  way 
of  conferring  on  him  a  right  to  the  throne  (1  Sam. 
xvi.  1, 13);  again  over  Judah  at  Hebron  (2  Sam. 
ii.  4),  and  finally  over  the  whole  nation  (2  Sam.  v. 
3).  After  the  separation  into  two  kingdoms,  the 
kings  both  of  Judah  and  of  Israel  seem  still  to  have 
been  anointed  (2  K.  ix.  3,  xi.  12).  So  late  as  the 
time  of  the  captivity  the  king  is  called  "  the 
anointed  of  the  Lord"  (Ps.  lxxxix.  38,  51;  Lam. 
iv.  20).  Some  persons,  however,  think,  that  after 
David,  subsequent  kings  were  not  anointed  except 
when,  as  in  the  cases  of  Solomon,  Joash  and  Jehu, 
the  right  of  succession  was  disputed  or  ^transferred 
(Jahn,  Archaeol.  B ibl.  §223).  Beside  Jewish  kings, 
we  read  that  Hazael  was  to  be  anointed  king 
over  Syria  (1  K.  xix.  15).  Cyrus  also  is  called 
the  Lord's  anointed,  as  having  been  raised  by  God 
to  the  throne  for  the  special  purpose  of  delivering 
the  Jews  out  of  captivity  (Is.  xlv.  1).  (rf)  Inani- 
mate objects  also  were  anointed  with  oil  in  token  of 
their  being  set  apart  for  religious  service.  Thus 
Jacob  anointed  a  pillar  at  Bethel  (Gen.  xxxi.  13); 
and  at  the  introduction  of  the  Mosaic  economy,  the 
tabernacle  and  all  its  furniture  were  consecrated  by 
anointing  (Ex.  xxx.  26-28).  The  expression  "  anoint 
the  shield"  (Is.  xxi.  5)  (IroijUacraTe  dvpeovs, 
LXX. ;  arripite  clypeum,  Vulg.)  refers  to  the  custom 
of  rubbing  oil  into  the  hide,  which,  stretched  upon 
a  (Value,  formed  the  shield,  in  order  to  make  it 
supple  and  fit  for  use. 

3.  Ecclesiastical.  ,  Anointing  with  oil  in  the 
name  of  the  Lord  is  prescribed  by  .St.  James  to  be 
used  together  with  prayer,  by  the  elders  of  the 
church,  for  the  recovery  of  the  sick  aAefycwTes 
(James  v.  14).  Analogous  to  this  is  the  anointing 
with  oil  practised  by  the  twelve  (Mark  ix.  Li),  and 
our  Lord's  anointing  the  eyes  of  a  blind  man  with 
clay  made  from  saliva,  in  restoring  him  miracu- 
lously to  sight  (e7re'xpt<r<?,  John  ix.  6,  11). 

II.  Spiritual. — 1.  In  the  0.  T.  a  Deliverer  is 
promised  under  the  title  of  Messiah,  or  Anointed  (Ps. 
ii.  2;  Dan.  ix.  25,  26);  and  the  nature  of  his 
anointing  is  described  to  be  spiritual,  with  the  Holy 
Ghost  (Is.  Ixi.  1  ;  see  Luke  iv.  18).  As  anointing 
with  oil  betokened  prosperity,  and  produced  a  cheer- 


ANTIOCH 

fill  aspect  (Ps.  civ.  15),  so  this  spiritual  unction  is 
figuratively  described  as  anointing  "  with  the  oil  of 
gladness"  (Ps.  xlv.  7  ;  Heb.  i.  9).  In  the  N.  T. 
Jesus  of  Nazareth  is  shown  to  be  the  Messiah,  or 
Christ,  or  Anointed  of  the  Old  Testament  (John 
i.  41  ;  Acts  ix.  22,  xvii.  2,  3,  xviii.  5,  28);  and 
the  historical  fact  of  his  being  anointed  with  the 
Holy  Ghost  is  recorded  and  asserted  (John  i.  32, 
33;  Acts  iv.  27,  x.  38).  2.  Spiritual  anointing 
with  the  Holy  Ghost  is  conferred  also  upon  Chris- 
tians by  God  (2  Cor.  i.  21),  and  they  are  described 
as  having  an  unction  (xpio>ia)  from  the  Holy  One, 
by  which  they  know  all  things  (1  John  ii.  20,  27). 
To  anoint  the  eyes  with  eyesalve  is  used  figuratively 
to  denote  the  process  of  obtaining  spiritual  percep- 
tion (Rev.  iii.  18).  [T.  T.  P.] 

A'NOS    O^cos  5    Jonas),    1    Esd.    ix.    34. 

[Vaniah.] 

ANT  (H7?D3  ;  an  insect  twice  mentioned  in  the 

book  of  Proverbs  (vi.  6,  xxx.  25).  In  both  pas- 
sages its  provident  habits  are  referred  to,  especially 
its  providing  its  meat  in  the  summer.  This  has  ge- 
nerally been  supposed  to  imply  that  the  store  was 
laid  up  against  winter,  and  among  the  ancients  this 
belief  was  universal.  It  may  suffice  to  refer  to  Hor. 
Sat.  1,  1,  v.  33-38.  But  observation  of  the  habits 
of  ants  does  not  confirm  this  belief,  and  as  certainly 
it  does  not  necessarily  follow  from  the  statements  of 
Scripture.  (See  Kirby  and  Spence's  Entomology,  p. 
313,  Ed. 7,  London,  1856,  where  the  question  is  fully 
discussed.)  The  particular  species  of  ant  referred  to 
by  Solomon  has  not  been  identified ;  and  we  find 
no  mention  of  ants  in  modern  accounts  of  Palestine. 
The  LXX.  render  the  word  il?tD3  by  fivp^l,  in 

Prov.  vi.  6.     The  derivation  of  H?03  is  supposed 

L  TT  :. 

to  be  from  the  root  ?D3,  which  again  is  connected 

with  ??D  and   ?-l?0,  abscidit  vel  abscissus  est,  and 

hence  perhaps  the  idea  that  the  ants  bite  off  the 
end  of  the  grain  they  gather  to  prevent  its  germi- 
nating.    It  seems  more  reasonable  to  connect  i"I?D3 

&  t  t  : 

/  s  " 
with    the   Arabic    root    V*J>   conscendit  prorep- 

tando  arborem :  so  that  n  ?)D3  is  properly  a 
climber  by  creeping.  See  Boch.  Hieroz.  iii.  478. 
seq.  Lips.  [W.  D.] 

AN'TIOCH  (AvTioXe(a).  1.  In  Syria.  The 
capital  of  the  Greek  kings  of  Syria,  and  afterwards 
the  residence  of  the  Roman  governors  of  the  pro- 
vince which  bore  the  same  name.  This  metropolis 
was  situated  where  the  chain  of  Lebanon,  running 
northwards,  and  the  chain  of  Taurus,  running 
eastwards,  are  brought  to  an  abrupt  meeting.  Here 
the  Orontes  breaks  through  the  mountains  ;  and 
Antioch  was  placed  at  a  bend  of  the  river,  partly 
on  an  island,  partly  on  the  level  which  forms  the 
left  bank,  and  partly  on  the  steep  and  craggy  as- 
cent of  Mount  Silpius,  which  rose  abruptly  on  the 
south.  In  the  immediate  neighbourhood  was 
Daphne,  the  celebrated  sanctuary  of  Apollo  (2 
Mace.  iv.  33) ;  whence  the  city  was  sometimes 
called  Antioch  by  Daphne,  to  distinguish  it  from 
other  cities  of  the  same  name. 

No  city,  after  Jerusalem,  is  so  intimately  con- 
nected with  the  history  of  the  apostolic  church. 
Certain  points  of  close  association  between  these 
two  cities,  as  regards  the  progress  of  Christianity, 
may    be  noticed   in  the  first  place.      One  of  the 


ANTIOCH 

seven  deacons,  or  almoners  appointed  at  Jerusalem, 
was  Nicolas,  a  proselyte  of  Antioch  (Acts  vi.  5). 
The  Christians,  who  were  dispersed  from  Jerusa- 
lem at  the  death  of  Stephen,  preached  the  gospel  at 
Antioch  (ibid.  xi.  19).  It  was  from  Jerusalem 
that  Agabus  mid  the  other  prophets,  who  foretold 
the  famine,  came  to  Antioch  (ibid.  xi.  27,  28) ; 
and  Barnabas  and  Saul  were  consequently  sent  on  a 
mission  of  charity  from  the  latter  city  to  the 
former  (ibid.  xi.  30,  xii.  25).  It  was  from  Jeru- 
salem again  that  the  Judaizers  came,  who  disturbed 
the  church  at  Antioch  (ibid.  xv.  1)  ;  and  it  was  at 
Antioch  that  St.  Paul  rebuked  St.  Peter  for  conduct 
into  which  he  had  been  betrayed  through  the  in- 
fluence of  emissaries  from  Jerusalem  ((Jal.  ii.  11, 12). 

The  chief  interest  of  Antioch,  however,  is  con- 
nected with  the  progress  of  Christianity  among  the 
heathen.  Here  the  first  Gentile  church  was 
founded  (Acts  xi.  20,  21)  ;  here  the  disciples  of  Jesus 
Christ  were  first  called  Christians  (xi.  26);  here 
St.  Paul  exercised  (so  far  as  is  distinctly  recorded) 
his  tirst  systematic  ministerial  work  (xi.  22-2G; 
see  xiv.  26-28 ;  also  xv.  35  and  xviii.  23)  ;  hence 
he  started  at  the  beginning  of  his  first  missionary 
journey  (xiii.  1-3),  and  hither  he  returned  (xiv.  26). 
So  again  after  the  apostolic  council  (the  decrees  of 
which  were  specially  addressed  to  the  Gentile  converts 
at  Antioch,  xv.  23),  he  began  and  ended  his  second 
missionary  journey  at  this  place  (xv.  36,  xviii.  22). 
This  too  was  the  starting  point  of  the  third  mis- 
sionary journev  (xviii.  23),  which  was  brought  to 
a  termination  by  the  imprisonment  at  Jerusalem 
and  Caesarea.  Though  St.  Paul  was  never  again, 
so  far  as  we  know,  at  Antioch,  it  did  not  cease  to 
be  an  important  centre  for  Christian  progress ;  but 
it 'does  not  belong  to  this  place  to  trace  its  history 
as  a  patriarchate,  and  its  connexion  with  Ignatius, 
Chrysostom,  and  other  eminent  names. - 

Antioch  was  founded  in  the  year  300  B.C.,  by 
Seleucus  Nicator,  with  circumstances  of  consider- 
able display,  which  were  afterwards  embellished  by 
fable.  The  situation  was  well  chosen,  both  for 
military  and  commercial  purposes.  Jews  were 
settled  there  from  the  first  in  large  numbers,  were 
governed  by  their  own  ethnarch,  and  allowed  to 
have  the  same  political  privileges  with  the  Greeks 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  3,  §1  ;  c.  Ap.  ii.  4).  Antioch 
grew  under  the  successive  Seleucid  kings,  till  it 
became  a  city  of  great  extent  and  of  remarkable 
beauty.  Some  of  the  most  magnificent  buildings 
were  on  the  island.  One  feature,  which  seems  to 
have  been  characteristic  of  the  great  Syrian  cities, 
—a  vast  street  with  c(  lonnades,  intersecting  the 
whole  (rem  end  to  end, — was  added  by  Antiochus 
Epiphanes.  Some  lively  notices  of  the  Antioch  of 
this  period,  and  of  its  relation  to  Jewish  history,  are 
supplied  by  the  books  of  Maccabees.  (See  especially 
1  Mace.  iii.  37,  xi.  13;  2  Mace.  iv.  7-9,  v.  21. 
xi.  36.) 

It  is  the  Antioch  of  the  Roman  period  with 
which  we  are  concerned  in  the  X.  T.  By  Pompey 
it  had  been  made  a  tree  city,  and  BUch  it  continued 
till  the  time  of  Antoninus  Pius.  The  earl-,  | 
rors  raised  there  some  large  and  important  struc- 
tures, such  as  aqueducts,  amph  I  i  baths. 
I  the  Great  contributed  a  road  and  a  colon- 
Joseph.  Ant.  xvi.  5,  §3;  B.  J.,  i.  21, 
§11).  Here  should  be  mentioned  that  the  citizens 
of  Antioch  under  the  Empire  were  noted  lor  scurri- 
lous   wit   and   the   invention    of  nicknames.       This 

perhaps  was  tl rigin*of  the  oame  by  which  the 

es  of  Jesus  Christ  are  designated,  and  which 


ANTIOCH  73 

was  probably  given  by  Romans  to  the  despised  sect, 
and  not  by  Christians  to  themselves. 

The  great  authority  for  all  that  is  known  of 
ancient  Antioch  is  C.  0.  Miiller's  Antiquitates 
Antiochenae  (G6tt.  1839).  Modern  Antakia  is  a 
shrunken  and  miserable  place.  Some  of  the  walls, 
shattered  by  earthquakes,  have  a  striking  appear- 
ance on  the  crags  of  Mount  Silpius.  They  are  de- 
scribed in  Chesney's  account  of  the  Euphrates  Ex- 
pedition, wheie  also  is  given  a  view  of  a  gateway 
which  still  bears  the  name  of  St.  Paul.  One  error, 
however,  should  be  pointed  out,  which  has  found 
its  way  into  these  volumes  from  Calmet,  namely, 
Jerome's  erroneous  identification  of  Antioch  with 
the  Riblah  of  the  Old  Testament. 


Giik-uf  St.  Paul,  A 


2.  Antioch  in  Pisidia  (Acts  xiii.  14,  xiv.  19, 
21  ;  2  Tim.  iii.  11).  The  position  of  this  town  is 
clearly  pointed  out  by  Strabo  in  the  following 
words  (xii.  p.  577): — "In  the  district  of  Phrygia 
called  Paroreia,  there  is  a  certain  mountain-ridge, 
stretching  from  E.  to  W.  On  each  side  there  is  a 
large  plain  below  this  ridge;  and  if  has  two  cities 
in  its  neighbourhood:  Philomelium  on  the  north, 
and  on  the  other  side  Antioch,  called  Antioch  near 
Pisidia.  The  former  lies  entirely  in  the  plain  ;  the 
latter  (which  has  a  Roman  colony)  is  on  a  height." 
The  relations  of  distance  also  between -Antioch  and 
other  towns  are  known  by  the  IVutingerian  table. 
Its  site,  however,  has  only  recently  been  ascertained. 
It  \\;is  formerly  supposed  to  be  Aksher,  which  is 
now  known  to  be  Philomelium  on  the  north  side  of 
the  ridge.  Even  Winer  (1847)  gives  this  view, 
the  difficulties  of  which  were  seen  by  Leake,  and 
previously  by  Mannert.  Mr.  Arundel],  the  British 
chaplain  at  Smyrna,  undertook  a  journey  in  1833 
for  the  express  purpose  of  identifying  the  Pisidian 
Antioch,  and  I  ul  (Arundell's 

\finor,  eh.  xii.,  xiii..  xiv.).  The  ruins  are 
able.  Tins  di  co1  ery  was  fully  eon- 
tinned  by  Mr.  Hamilton  |  Res.  in  Asia  Mm  r,  rol. 
i.  eh.  27).  Antioch  corresponds  to  Talobatch, 
which  is  distant  fri  m  -  six  hour6  over  the 

:  dns. 

This  city,  like  the  Syrian  Antioch.  was  founded 
by  Seleucus  Nicator.     Ohder  the  Romans  it  became 

!   <  '  .  ■■   :i>  We  learn 

from  Pliny  (v.  24).     The  former  tact  is  continued 


74 


ANTIOCHUS 


by  the  Latin  inscriptions  and  other  features  of  the 
coins  of  the  place ;  the  latter  by  inscriptions  dis- 
covered on  the  spot  by  Mr.  Hamilton. 

The  occasion  on  which  St.  Paul  visited  the  city 
for  the  first  time  (Acts  xiii.  14)  was  very  interests 
ing  and  important.  His  preaching  in  the  syna- 
gogue led  to  the  reception  of  the  gospel  by  a  great 
number  of  the  Gentiles :  and  this  resulted  in  a 
violent  persecution  on  the  part  of  the  Jews,  who 
first,  using  the  influence  of  some  of  the  wealthy 
female  residents,  drove  him  from  Antioch  to  Ico- 
nium  (ib.  50,  51),  and  subsequently  followed  him 
even  to  Lystra  (Acts  xiv.  19).  St.  Paul,  on  his 
return  from  Lystra,  revisited  Antioch  for  the  purpose 
of  strengthening  the  minds  of  the  disciples  (ib.  21). 
These  events  happened  when  he  was  on  his  first  mis- 
sionary journey,  in  company  with  Barnabas.  He 
probably  visited  Antioch  again  at  the  beginning  of  his 
second  journey,  when  Silas  was  his  associate,  and  Ti- 
motheus,  who  was  a  native  of  this  neighbourhood, 
had  just  been  added  to  the  party.  The  allusion  in 
2  Tim.  iii.  11  shows  that  Timotheus  was  well  ac- 
quainted with  the  sufferings  which  the  apostle  had 
undergone  during  his  first  visit  to  the  Pisidian  An- 
tioch.    [Phrygia  ;  Pisidia.]  [J.  S.  H.] 

ANTI'OCHUS  II.  ('AvtLoXos,  the  with- 
standcr),  king  of  Syria,  sumamed  the  God  (®e6s), 
"  in  the  first  instance  by  the  Milesians,  because  he 
overthrew  their  tyrant  Timarchus "  (App.  Syr. 
65),  succeeded  his  father  Antiochus  (2<»T7Jp,  the 
Saviour)  in  B.C.  261.  During  the  earlier  part  of 
his  reign  he  was  engaged  in  a  fierce  war  with  Pto- 
lemaeus  Philadelphus,  king  of  Egypt  (totis  viribus 
dimicmit,  Hieron.  ad  Dan.  xi.  6),  in  the  course  of 
which  Parthia  and  Bactria  revolted  and  became  in- 
dependent kingdoms.  At  length  (B.C.  250)  peace 
was  made,  and  the  two  monarchs  "joined  them- 
selves together"  (Dan.  xi.  6),  and  Ptolemy  ("the 
king  of  the  south  ")  gave  his  daughter  Berenice  in 
marriage  to  Antiochus  ("  the  king  of  the  north  ") 
who  set  aside  his  former  wife,  Laodice,  to  receive 
her.  After  some  time,  on  the  death  of  Ptolemy 
(B.C.  247),  Antiochus  recalled  Laodice  and  her 
children  Seleucus  and  Antiochus  to  court.  Thus 
Berenice  was  "not  able  to  retain  her  power;"  and 
Laodice,  in  jealous  fear  lest  she  might  a  second  time 
lose  her  ascendancy,  poisoned  Antiochus  (him  "  that 
supported  her,"  i.e.  Berenice),  and  caused  Berenice 
and  her  infant  son  to  be  "put  to  death,  B.C.  246 
(Dan.  xi.  6  ;  Hieron.  ad  Dan.  1.  c.  App.  Syr.  65). 
After  the  death  of  Antiochus,  Ptolemaeus  Ever- 
getes,  the  brother  of  Berenice  ("  out  of  a  branch  of 
her  root"),  who  succeeded  his  father  Ptol.  Phila- 
delphus, exacted  vengeance  for  his  sister's  death  by 
an  invasion  of  Syria,  in  which  Laodice  was  killed, 
her  son  Seleucus  Callinicus  driven  for  a  time  from 
the  throne,  and  the  whole  country  plundered  (Dan. 
xi.  7-9  ;  Hieron.  1.  c. ;  hence  his  surname  "  the  be- 
nefactor"). The  hostilities  thus  renewed  conti- 
nued for  many  years  ;  and  on  the  death  of  Seleucus 
B.C.  226,  after  his  "return  into  his  own  land" 
(Dan.  xi.  9),  his  sons  Alexander  (Seleucus)  Kerau- 
nos,  and  Antiochus  "  assembled  a  great  multitude 
of  forces"  against.  Ptol.  Philopator  the  son  of  Ever- 
getes,  and  "  one  of  them  "  (Antiochus)  threatened 
to  overthrow  the  power  of  Egvpt  (Dan.  xi.  9,  10  ; 
Hieron.  /.  c).  '     [B.  F.  W.] 

•ANTI'OOHUS  III.,  surnamed  the  Great 
(fxeyas),  succeeded  his  brother  Seleucus  Keraunos, 
who  was  assassinated  after  a  short  reign  in  B.C. 
223.     He  prosecuted  the  war  against  Ptol.  Philo- 


ANTIOCHUS 

pator  with  vigour,  and  at  first  with  success.  In 
B.C.  218  he  drove  the  Egyptian  forces  to  Sidou, 
conquered  Samaria  and  Gilead,  and  wintered  at 
Ptolemais,  but  was  defeated  next  year  at  Raphia, 
near  Gaza  (B.C.  217),  with  immense  loss,  and  in 
consequence  made  a  peace  with  Ptolemy,  in  which 
he  ceded  to  him  the  disputed  provinces  of  Coele- 
Syria,  Phoenicia  and  Palestine  (Dan.  xi.  11,  12; 
Polyb.  v.  40  ff. ;  53  if.).  During  the  next  thirteen 
years  Antiochus  was  engaged  in  strengthening  his 
position  in  Asia  Minor,  and  on  the  frontiers  of 
Parthia,  and  by  his  successes  gained  his  surname 
of  the  Great.  At  the  end  of  this  time,  B.C.  205, 
Ptolemaeus  Philopator  died,  and  left  his  kingdom 
to  his  son  Ptol.  Epiphanes,  who  was  only  five 
years  old.  Antiochus  availed  himself  of  the  op- 
portunity which  was  offered  by  the  weakness  of  a 
minority  and  the  unpopularity  of  the  regent,  to 
unite  with  Philip  III.  of  Macedon  for  the  purpose 
of  conquering  and  dividing  the  Egyptian  dominions. 
The  Jews,  who  had  been  exasperated  by  the  con- 
duct of  Ptol.  Philopator  both  in  Palestine  and 
Egypt,  openly  espoused  his  cause,  under  the  in- 
fluence of  a  short-sighted  policy  ("  the  factions 
among  thy  people  shall  rise,"  i.e.  against  Ptolemy : 
Dan.  xi.  14).  Antiochus  succeeded  in  occupying 
the  three  disputed  provinces,  but  was  recalled  to 
Asia  by  a  war  which  broke  out  with  Attains,  king 
of  Pergamus ;  and  his  ally  Philip  was  himself  em- 
broiled with  the  Romans.  In  consequence  of  this 
diversion  Ptolemy,  by  the  aid  of  Scopas,  again 
made  himself  master  of  Jerusalem  (Joseph.  Ant. 
xii.  3,  3)  and  recovered  the  territory  which  he 
had  lost  (Hieron.  ad  Dan.  xi.  14).  In  B.C.  198 
Antiochus  reappeared  in  the  field  and  gained  a 
decisive  victory  "  near  the  sources  of  the  Jordan  " 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  3,  3;  Hieron.  1.  c.  ubi  Paneas 
nunc  condita  est)  ;  and  afterwards  captured  Scopas 
and  the  remnant  of  his  forces  who  had  taken  refuge 
in  Sidon  (Dan.  xi.  15).  The  Jews,  who  had 
suffered  severely  during  the  struggle  (Joseph.  1.  c), 
welcomed  Antiochus  as  their  deliverer,  and  "  he 
stood  in  the  glorious  land  which  by  his  hand  was 
to  be  consumed  "  (Dan.  xi.  16).  His  further  de- 
signs against  Egypt  were  frustrated  by  the  inter- 
vention of  the  Romans;  and  his  daughter  Cleopati a 
(Polyb.  xxviii.  17),  whom  he  gave  in  marriage  to 
Ptol.  Epiphanes,  with  the  Phoenician  provinces  for 
her  dower  (Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  4,  1),  favoured  the  inte- 
rests of  her  husband  rather  than  those  of  her  father 
(Dan.  xi.  17;  Hieron.  1.  c).  From  Egypt  An- 
tiochus turned  again  to  Asia  Minor,  and  after  va- 
rious successes  in  the  Aegaean  crossed  over  to 
Greece,  and  by  the  advice  of  Hannibal  entered  on  a 
war  with  Rome.  His  victorious  course  was  checked 
at  Thermopylae  (B.C.  191),  and  after  subsequent 
reverses  he  was  finally  defeated  at  Magnesia  in 
Lydia,  B.C.  190.a  By  the  peace  which  was  con- 
cluded shortly  afterwards  (B.C.  188)  he  was  forced 
to  cede  all  his  possessions  "  on  the  Roman  side  of 
M.  Taurus,"  and  to  pay  in  successive  instalments 
an  enormous  sum  of  money  to  defray  the  expenses 
of  the  war  (15,000  Euboic  talents:  App.  Syr.  38). 
This  last  condition  led  to  his  ignominious  death. 
In  B.C.  187  he  attacked  a  rich  temple  of  Belus  in 
Elpnais,  and  was  slain  by  the  people  who  rose  in  its 
defence  (St rab.xvi.  744;  Just,  xxxii.  2).  Thus  "he 
stumbled  and  fell,  and  was  not  found  "  (Dan.  xi.  19). 


a  The  statement  in  1  Mace  viii.  6,  that  Antiochus 
was  taken  prisoner  hy  the  Romans,  is  not  supported 
hy  any  other  testimony. 


ANTIOCHUS 

The  policy  of  Antiochus  towards  the  Jews  was 
liberal  and  conciliatory.  He  not  only  assured  to 
them  perfect  freedom  and  protection  in  the  exercise 
of  their  worship,  but  according  to  Josephus  (Ant. 
xii.  3,  3),  in  consideration  of  their  great  sufferings 
and  services  in  his  behalf,  lie  made  splendid  contri- 
butions towards  the  support  of  the  temple  ritual, 
and  gave  various  immunities  to  the  priests  and 
other  inhabitants  of  .Jerusalem.  At  the  same  time 
imitating  the  example  of  Alexander  and  Seleucus. 
and  appreciating  the  influence  of  their  fidelity  and 
unity,  he  transported  two  thousand  families  of 
Jews  from  Mesopotamia  to  Lydia  and  Phrygia,  to 
repress  the  tendency  to  revolt  which  was  manifested 
in  those  provinces  (Joseph.  Ant.  1.  c). 

Two  sons  of  Antiochus  occupied  the  throne  after 
him,  Seleucus  Philopator,  his  immediate  successor, 
and  Antiochus  IV.,  who  gained  the  kingdom  upon 
the  assassination  of  his  brother.  [B.  F.  W.] 


ANTIOCHUS 


(o 


Tetradrachra  (Attic  talent)  of  Antiochus  III. 

Obv.:  Head  of  King  to  right.    Rev.:  BA2IAEOS  ANTIoXoY. 
two  monograms.    Apollo,  naked,  seated  on  cortina,  to  left. 

ANTI'OCHUS   IV.  EPIPHANES  ('Eiri- 

(pavrjs,  the  Illustrious,  also  called  Qe6s,  and  in 
mockery  i-Ki/xaviis,  the  frantic:  Athen.  x.  438; 
Polyb.  xxvi.  10)  was  the  youngest  son  of  Antiochus 
the  Great.  He  was  given  as  a  hostage  to  the  Ro- 
mans (b.C.  188)  after  his  father's  defeat  at  Mag- 
nesia, In  B.C.  175  he  was  released  by  the  inter- 
vention of  his  brother  Seleucus,  who  substituted 
his  own  son  Demetrius  in  his  place.  Antiochus 
was  at  Athens  when  Seleucus  was  assassinated  by 
Heliodorus.  He  took  advantage  of  his  position,  and, 
by  the  assistance  of  Eumenes  and  Attains,  easily 
expelled  Heliodorus  who  had  usurped  the  crown, 
and  himself  "  obtained  the  kingdom  by  flatteries  " 
(Dan.  xi.  '_'l  ;  cf.  Liv.  xli.  20),  to  the  exclusion  of 
his  nephew  Demetrius  (Dan,  viii.  7). 

The  accession  of  .Antiochus  was  immediately  fol- 
lowed by  desperate  efforts  of  the  Hellenizing  party 
ji  Jerusalem  to  assert  their  supremacy.  Jason 
:  .los.  Ant.  xii.  .">,  1,  see  Jason),  the  bro- 
ther  of  Onias  III.,  tin-  high  priest,  persuaded  the 
king  in  transfer  the  high  priesthood  to  him,  and  at 
the  same  time  bought  permission  (2  Mace.  iv.  9) 
to  irry  out  his  design  of  habituating  the  Jews  to 
Greek  customs  (2  Maco.  iv.  7.  20).  Three  years 
afterwards  Menelaus,  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin 
[Simon],  who  was  commissioned  by  Jason  to 
carry  to  Antiochus  the  price  of  bis  office,  sup- 
planted Jason  by  offering  the  king  a  larger  bribe, 
and  was  himself  appointed  high  priest,  while  I 
was  obliged  to  take  refu  e  among  the  Ammonites 
(2  Mace,  iv.  23-26).  From  these  circumstances 
and  from  the  marked  honour  with  which  Antiochus 
was  received  at  Jerusalem  very  early  in  his  reign 
(c.  B.C.  17:'.;  '_'  Mace,  iv.  22),  it  appears  that  he 
found  no  difficulty  in  regaining  the  border  provinces 
which  had  been  given  as  the  dower  of  his  sister 


Cleopatra  to  Ptol.  Epiphanes.  But  his  ambition 
led  him  still  further,  and  he  undertook  four  cam- 
paigns against  Egypt,  B.C.  171,  170,  1G9,  168, 
with  greater  success  than  had  attended  his  prede- 
cessor, and  the  complete  conquest  of  the  country 
was  prevented  only  by  the  interference  of  the  Ro- 
mans (Dan.  xi.  24;  1  Mace.  i.  16  ff. ;  2  Mace.  v. 
11  ff.).  The  course  of  Antiochus  was  everywhere 
marked  by  the  same  wild  prodigality  as  had  sig- 
nalised his  occupation  of  the  throne  (Dan.  1.  c.). 
The  consequent  exhaustion  of  his  treasury,  and  the 
armed  conflicts  of  the  rival  high  priests  whom  he 
had  appointed,  furnished  the  occasion  for  an  assault 
upon  Jerusalem  on  his  return  from  his  second 
Egyptian  campaign  (B.C.  170),  which  he  had  pro- 
bably planned  in  conjunction  with  Ptol.  Philometor, 
who  was  at  that  time  in  his  power  (Dan.  xi.  26). 
The  Temple  was  plundered,  a  terrible  massacre 
took  place,  and  a  Phrygian  governor  was  left  with 
Menelaus  in  charge  of  the  city  (2  Mace.  v. 
1-22  ;  1  Mace.  i.  20-28).  Twb  years  after- 
wards, at  the  close  of  the  fourth  Egyptian 
expedition  (Polyb.  xxix.  1,  11;  App.  Syr. 
66  ;  cf.  Dan.  xi.  29,  30),  Antiochus  detached 
a  force  under  Apollonius  to  occupy  Jerusalem 
and  fortify  it,  and  at  this  time  he  availed  him- 
self of  the  assistance  of  the  ancestral  enemies 
of  the  Jews  (1  Mace.  iv.  61 ;  v.  3  if. ;  Dan. 
xi.  41).  The  decrees  then  followed  which 
have  rendered  his  name  infamous.  The  Temple 
was  desecrated,  and  the  observance  of  the  law 
was  forbidden.  "  On  the  fifteenth  day  of  Cisleu 
n  field  [t,ne  Syrians]  set  up  the  abomination  of  deso- 
lation (i.  e.  an  idol  altar :  v.  59)  on  the  altar  " 
(1  Mace,  i  .  54).  Ten  days  afterwards  an 
offering  was  made  upon  it  to  Jupiter  Olympius. 
At  Jerusalem  all  opposition  appears  to  have  ceased ; 
but  Mattathias  and  his  sons  organised  a  resistance 
("holpen  with  a  little  help,"  Dan.  xi.  34),  which 
preserved  inviolate  the  name  and  faith  of  Israel. 
Meanwhile  Antiochus  turned  his  arms  to  the  East, 
towards  Parthia  (Tac.  Hist.x.  8)  and  Armenia  (App. 
Syr.  45;  Diod.  ap.  Muller,  Fragm.  ii.  p.  10  ;  Dan. 
xi.  40).  Hearing  not  long  afterwards  of  the  riches  of 
a  temple  of  Nanaea  ("  the  desire  of  women,"  Dan.  xi. 
37)  in  Elymais,  hung  with  the  gifts  of  Alexander,  he 
resolved  to  plunder  it.  The  attempt  was  defeated  ; 
and  though  he  did  not  fall  like  his  father  in  the  act 
of  sacrilege,  the  event  hastened  his  death.  He  re- 
tired to  Babylon,  and  thence  to  Tabae  in  Persia, 
where  he  died  B.C.  164,  the  victim  of  superstition, 
terror,  and  remorse  (Polyb.  xxxi.  2;  Joseph.  Ant. 
xii.  8, 1  ff.),  having  first  heard  of  the  successes  of  the 
Maccabees  in  restoring  the  temple-worship  at  Jeru- 
salem (1  Mace.  vi.  1-16;  cf.  2  Macc.i.  7-17?). 
"  He  came  to  his  end  and  there  was  none  to  help 
him"  (Dan.  xi.  45).  Cf.  App.  Syr.  45;  Liv.  xli. 
•J  I-:.,  xlii.  <;,  xliv.  19,  dv.  11-13;  Joseph;  .1.-,'. 
xii.  5,  8. 

The  reign  of  Antiochus,  thus  shortly  traced,  was 
the  last  in  the  history  of  the  Jews  before 

the  coming  of  our  Lord.  The  prominence  which  is 
given  to  it  in  the  book  of  Daniel  fitly  accords  with 
its  typical  and  representative  character  (Dan.  vii. 
s.  ■_'."■,  viii.  11  if.).     Tli'  of  Alexander 

had  introduced  the  forces  of  Greek  thoaghf  and  lit!' 
into  the  Jewish  nation,  which  was  already  prepared 
for  their  operation  [  \u.\  \\i»i:i:].  For  more  than 
a  century  and  a  half  these  forces  had  acted  power- 
rally  both  upon  the  feith  and  upon  the  habits  of  the 
people;  and  the  time  was  come  when  an  outward 
struggle  alone  could  decide  whether  Judaism  was 


76 


ANTIOCHUS 


to  be  merged  in  a  rationalised  Paganism,  or  to  rise 
not  only  victorious  from  the  conflict,  but  more  vigor- 
ous and  more  pure.  There  were  many  symptoms 
which  betokened  the  approaching  struggle.  The 
position  which  Judaea  occupied  on  the  borders  of 
the  conflicting  empires  of  Syria  and  Egypt,  exposed 
equally  to  the  open  miseries  of  war  and  the  treach- 
erous favours  of  rival  sovereigns,  rendered  its  na- 
tional condition  precarious  from  the  first,  though 
these  very  circumstances  were  favourable  to  the 
growth  of  freedom.  The  terrible  crimes  by  which 
the  wars  of  "  the  North  and  South  "  were  stained, 
must  have  alienated  the  mind  of  every  faithful  Jew 
from  his  Grecian  lords,  even  if  persecution  had  not 
been  superadded  from  Egypt  first  and  then  from 
Syria.  Politically  nothing  was  left  for  the  people 
in  the  reign  of  Antiochus  but  independence,  or  the 
abandonment  of  every  prophetic  hope.  Nor  was 
their  social  position  less  perilous.  The  influence  of 
Greek  literature,  of  foreign  travel,  of  extended 
commerce,  had  made  itself  felt  in  daily  life.  At 
Jerusalem  the  mass  of  the  inhabitants  seem  to  have 
desired  to  imitate  the  exercises  of  the  Greeks  ;  and  a 
Jewish  embassy  attended  the  games  of  Hercules  at 
Tyre  (2  Mace.  iv.  9-20).  Even  their  religious 
feelings  were  yielding ;  and  before  the  rising  of  the 
Maccabees  no  opposition  was  offered  to  the  execution 
of  the  king's  decrees.  Upon  the  first  attempt  of 
Jason  the  "  priests  had  no  courage  to  serve  at  the 
altar"  (2  Mace.  iv.  14;  cf.  1  Mace.  i.  43);  and 
this  not  so  much  from  wilful  apostacy,  as  from  a 
disregard  to  the  vital  principles  involved  in  the  con- 
flict. Thus  it  was  necessary  that  the  final  issues 
of  a  false  Hellenism  should  be  openly  seen  that  it 
might  be  discarded  for  ever  by  those  who  cherished 
the  ancient  faith  of  Israel. 


Tetradruchm  (Att 
(Jbv.  :    Hl'UcI   of   King,    to 


ANTIOCHUS 

ing.  "He  magnified  himself  above  all."  The  real 
deity  whom  he  recognised  was  the  Roman  war-god  ; 
and  fortresses  were  his  most  sacred  temples  (Dan. 
xi.  38  ff. ;  Ewald,  Gesch.  des  Volkes  Isr.  iv.  340). 
Confronted  with  such  a  persecutor  the  Jew  realised 
the  spiritual  power  of  his  faith.  The  evils  of  hea- 
thendom were  seen  concentrated  in  a  personal  shape. 
The  outward  forms  of  worship  became  invested 
with  something  of  a  sacramental  dignity.  Common 
life  was  purified  and  ennobled  by  heroic  devotion. 
An  independent  nation  asserted  the  integrity  of  its 
hopes  in  the  face  of  Egypt,  Syria,  and  Home. 

[B.  F.  W.] 

ANTI'OCHUS  V.  EU'PATOE  (Evtt^t^, 
of  noble  descent),  succeeded  his  father  Antiochus  IV. 
B.C.  164,  while  still  a  child,  under  the  guardianship 
of  Lysias  (App.  Syr.  46  ;  1  Mace.  iii.  32,  f.,  vi.  17), 
though  Antiochus  had  assigned  this  office  to  Philip 
his  own  foster-brother  on  his  death-bed  (1  Mace. 
vi.  14  f.  55;  2  Mace.  ix.  29).  Shortly  after  his 
accession  he  marched  against  Jerusalem  with  a 
large  army,  accompanied  by  Lysias,  to  relieve 
the  Syrian  garrison,  which  was  hard  pressed  by 
Judas  Maccabaeus  (1  Mace.  vi.  19  ft'.).  Here- 
pulsed  Judas  at  Bethzacharia,  and  took  Bethsura 
(Bethzur)  after  a  vigorous  resistance  (1  Mace.  vi. 
31-50).  But  wheu  the  Jewish  force  in  the  temple 
was  on  the  point  of  yielding,  Lysias  persuaded  the  . 
king  to  conclude  a  hasty  peace  that  he  might  ad- 
vance to  meet  Philip,  who  had  returned  from  Persia 
and  made  himself  master  of  Antioch  (1  Mace.  vi. 
51  ff. ;  Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  9,  5  f.).  Philip  was 
speedily  overpowered  (Joseph.  1.  c.) ;  but  in  the 
next  year  (B.C.  162)  Antiochus  and  Lysias  fell 
into  the  hands  of  Demetrius.  Soter,  the  son  of  Se- 
leucus  Philopator,  who  caused  them  to  be  put  to 
death  in  revenge  for  the  wrongs  which  he  had 
himself  suffered  from  Antiochus  Epiphanes  (1 
Mace.  vii.  2-4 ;  2  Mace.  xiv.  1,  2  ;  Joseph.  Ant. 
xii.  10, 1.  Polyb.  xxxi.  19).  [B.  F.  W.] 

ANTI'OCHUS  VI.  ('AAe'£<xj/o>oS  AAe|c£j>- 
Spov  rov  v6dou,  App.  Syr.  68 ;  surnamed  0e'os, 
Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  7, 1 ;  and  iirupaviis  Aiovvcros 
on  coins),  was  the  son  of  Alexander  Balas  and 
Cleopatra  (App.  Syr.  1.  a).  After  his  father's 
death  (146  B.C.)  he  remained  in  Arabia ;  but 
though  still  a  child  (iraiSlov,  App.  1.  c.,7rcu5a- 
piov  ved)Ttpov,  1  Mace.  xi.  54),  he  was  soon 
ST™  BA2IAEOS  ANTIoXoY   afterwards  brought  forward  (c.  145  B.C.)  as 


©EoY  EIII*ANoYS  NIKH*oPoV.  Jupiter  seated  to  left,  hold- 


The  conduct  of  Antiochus  was  in  every  way 
suited  to  accomplish  this  end;  and  yet  it  seems  to 
have  been  the  result  of  passionate  impulse  rather 
than  of  any  deep-laid  scheme  to  extirpate  a  strange 
creed.  At  first  he  imitated  the  liberal  policy  of 
his  predecessors ;  and  the  occasion  for  his  attacks 
was  furnished  by  the  Jews  themselves.  Even  the 
motives  by  which  he  was  finally  actuated  were 
personal,  or  at  most  only  political.  Able,  ener- 
getic (Polyb.  xxvii.  17)  and  liberal  to  profusion, 
Antiochus  was  reckless  and  unscrupulous  in  the  ex- 
ecution of  his  plans.  He  had  learnt  at  Home  to 
court  power  and  to  dread  it.  He  gained  an  empire, 
and  he  remembered  that  he  had  been  a  hostnge. 
llegaidless  himself  of  the  gods  of  his  fathers  (Dan. 
xi.  37),  he  was  incapable  of  appreciating  the  power 
of  religion  in  others ;  and  like  Nero  in  later  times, 
he  became  a  type  of  the  enemy  of  God,  not  as  the 
Roman  emperor  by  the  perpetration  of  unnatural 
crimes,  but  by  the  disregard  of  every  higher  feel- 


claimant  to  the  throne  of  Syria  against 
Demetrius  Nicator  by  Tryphon  or  Diodotus 
(1  Mace.  xi.  39;  App.  Syr.  68;  Strab.  xiv.  p. 
668  ;  xvi.  p.  752),  who  had  been  an  officer  of  his 
father.  Tryphon  succeeded  in  gaining  Antioch 
(1  Mace.  xi.  56);  and  afterwards  the  greater  part 
of  Syria  submitted  to  the  young  Antiochus.  Jo- 
nathan, who  was  confirmed  by  him  in  the  hia;h 
priesthood  (1  Mace.  xi.  57)  and  invested  with  the 
government  of  Judaea,  contributed  greatly  to  his 
success  [Alexander  Balas],  occupying  Ascalon 
and  Gaza,  and  reducing  the  country  as  far  as 
Damascus  (1  Mace.  xi.  60-2).  He  afterwards  de- 
feated the  troops  of  Demetrius  at  Hazor  (1  Mace, 
xi.  67)  near  Cadesh  (v.  73);  and  repulsed  a  second 
attempt  which  he  made  to  regain  Palestine  (1  Mace, 
xii.  24  ft'.).  Tryphon  having  now  gained  the  su- 
preme power  in  the  name  of  Antiochus,  no  longer 
concealed  his  design  of  usurping  the  crown.  As  a 
first  step  he  took  Jonathan  by  treachery  and  put 
him  to  death,  B.C.  143  (1  Mace.  xii.  40  ff.) ;  and 
afterwards  murdered  the  young  king,  and  ascended 


ANTIOCNUS 


APE 


the  throne  (1  Mace.  xiii.  3 1  :  Joseph.  Ant.  xiii, 
5,  6;  App.  Syr.  68.  Livy  (Epit.  55)  says  incor- 
rectly decern  annos  admodWm  hahens  . .  .  Dial,  ap 
Miiller,  Fragm.  ii.  19.  Just,  xxxvi.  1).  [B.F.W.] 


Tetradrachm  (Attic  talent)  of  Antiocl 
King  radiate,  to 


En[ia».VNo]V2  AIoNY^oV. 
©HP  Cl69j^r-  Seleucid). 


ANTI'OCHUS  VII.  SIDE'TES  (2<5W, 
of  Side,  in  Pamphylia :  not  from  ""!*¥,  «  hunter  : 

1'lut.  Apophth.  p.  34  ;  called  also  Eucre^s,  the 
pious,  Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  8,  2  ;  Euseb.  Chron.  Arm. 
i.  349),  king  of  Syria,  was  the  second  son  of  Deme- 
trius 1.  When  his  brother,  Demetrius  Nicator,  was 
taken  prisoner  (c.  141  B.C.)  by  Mithridates  I. 
(Arsaces  VI.,  1  Mace.  xiv.  1)  king  of  Parthia,  he 
married  his  wife  Cleopatra  (App.  Syr.  68  ;  Just, 
xxxvi.  1),  and  obtained  possession  of  the  throne 
(137  B.C.),  having  expelled  the  usurper  Tryphon 
(1  Mace.  xv.  1  ff.;  Strab.  xiv.  p.  668).  At  first 
lie  made  a  very  advantageous  treaty  with  Simon, 
who  was  now  "  high  priest  and  prince  of  the  Jews," 
but  when  he  grew  independent  of  his  help,  he  with- 
drew the  concessions  which  he  had  made  and  de- 
manded the  surrender  of  the  fortresses  which  the 
Jews  held,  or  an  equivalent  in  money  (1  Mace.  xv. 
26  ff . ;  Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  7,  3).  As  Simon  was  un- 
willing to  yield  to  his  demands,  he  sent  a  force 
under  Cendebaeus  against  him,  who  occupied  a  for- 
tified position  at  Cedron  (?  1  Mace.  xv.  41),  near 
Azotus,  and  harassed  the  surrounding  country. 
Alter  the  defeat  of  Cendebaeus  by  the  sons  of  Simon 
and  the  destruction  of  his  works  (1  Mace.  xvi.  1-10), 
Antiochus,  who  had  returned  from  the  pursuit  of 
Tryphon,  undertook  an  expedition  against  Judaea  in 
person.  He  laid  siege  to  Jerusalem,  but  according 
to  Joseplms  granted  honourable  terms  to  Johnllyr- 
canus  (b.C.  133),  who  had  made  a  vigorous  resist- 
ance (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  8;  yet  comp.  Porphyx.  ap. 
Euseb.  Chron.  Arm.  i.  349,  muros  wrbis  demolitur 
atqiic  electissimos  eorum  trucidat).  Antiochus 
next  turned  his  arms  against  the  Parthians,  ami 
Hyrcanus  accompanied  him  in  the  campaign.  But 
after  some  successes,  he  was  entirely  defeated  by 
Phraortes  II.  (Arsaces  VII.),  and  tell  in  the  battle 
c.  B.C.  127-6  (Joseph.  1.  c. ;  Just,  xxxvi.;  xxxviii. 
10;  App.  Si/r.  68,  eKreivev  (avrSu.  For  tie-  year 
of  his  death  cf.  Niebuhf,  Kl.  Schrift.  i.  251.  f.; 
(  liuton,  F.  II.  ii.  332,  ff.).  [B.  F.  W.j 

ANTIPAS.     [Herod.] 

ANTIP'ATER  ('AvrliraTpos  ;  Antipatcr),  son 
of  Jason,  ambassador  fii  m  the  .lews  to  the  Lacede- 
monians (1  Mace.  xii.  l  * > ,  xiv.  22  . 

ANTIPATRISCAvThrarpis).   Our  m< 
identifying  this  town  are  due,  partly  to  the  fortu- 


nate circumstance  that  the  old  Semitic  name  of  the 
place  has  lingered  among  the  present   Arabic    popu- 
lation, and  partly  to  a  journey  specially  undertaken 
by  Dr.   Eli  Smith,  for  the  purpose  of  illustrating 
the  night  march  of  the  soldiers  who  con- 
veyed St.  Paul  from  Jerusalem  to  Caesarea 
(Acts  xxiii.    31).      Dr.   Robinson    was   of 
opinion,  when   he  published  his   first  edi- 
tion, that  the  I'oad  which  the  soldiers  took 
on    this    occasion    led   from    Jerusalem    to 
Caesarea  by  the  pass  of  Beth- Huron,  and 
by  Lydda,  or  Diospolis.     This  is  the  route 
which    was    followed    by    Cestius    Callus, 
as   mentioned  by  Josephus  (B.  J.  ii.   19, 
§1);  and  it  appears  to  be  identical  with 
that  given  in   the   Jerusalem  Itinerary,  ac- 
cording to   which    Antipatris   is   42  miles 
from   Jerusalem,   and   26    from    Caesarea. 
Even  on  this   supposition  it  would    have 
lev  ■  BA2IA.EQ2    YNTioXoY  ^een  1u'te  possible  for  troops  leaving  Jeru- 
in  fleld,  Tl'Y'l'  (Tryphon),  and  date  salem  on  the  evening  of  one  day,  to  reach 
Caesarea  on  the  next,  and  to  start  thence, 
after  a  rest,  to  return  to  (it  is  not  said  that 
they  arrived  at)  their  quarters  at  Jerusalem  before 
nightfall.     But  the  difficulty  is  entirely  removed 
by  Dr.  Smith's  discovery  of  a  much  shorter  road, 
leading  by  Gophna  direct  to  Antipatris.     On  this 
route  he  met  the  Roman  pavement  again  and  again, 
and  indeed  says   "  he  does  not  remember  observing 
any7where  before  so  extensive  remains  of  a  Roman 
road."  (See  Bihliotheoa  Sacra,  vol.  i.  pp.  478-498  ; 
Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  vol.  ii.  pp.  330-334, 
2nd  ed.) 

It  may  be  difficult  to  fix  the  precise  spot  where 
the  ancient  city  stood,  but  the  Arabic  name,  Kefr- 
Saba,  determines  the  general  situation.  Josephus 
tells  us  that  the  old  name  was  Capharsaba  (Ka<pap- 
<rd{ia  or  Xafiap^&fia),  and  that  Herod,  when  he  re- 
built the  city,  changed  it  to  Antipatris,  in  honour 
of  his  father  Antipater  (Ant.  xiii.  15,  §1,  xvi.  .">, 
§2  ;  B.  J.  i.  21,  §9).  The  position  of  Kefr-Saba 
is  in  sufficient  haimony  with  what  the  Jewish  his- 
torian says  of  the  position  of  Antipatris,  which  he 
describes  as  a  well-watered  and  well-wooded  plain, 
near  a  hilly  ridge,  and  with  his  notices  of  a  trench 
dug  from  thence  for  military  purposes  to  tie'  sea 
near  Joppa,  by  one  of  the  Asmonean  princes  (Ant. 
xiii.  15,  §1  ;  B.  J.  i.  4,  §7).  At  a  later  period  he 
mentions  the  place  again  in  connexion  with  a  military 
movement  of  Vespasian  from  Caesarea  towards  Jei  n- 
salem  (/?.  J.  iv.  8,  §1).  No  remains  of  ancient 
Antipatris  have  been  found ;  but  the  ground  has 
not  been  fully  explored.  [.I.  S.  H.] 

ANTO'NIA,  a  fortress,  built  by  Herod  on  the 
site  of  the  more  ancient  Baris,  on  the  N.W.  of  the 
Temple,  and  so  named  by  him  after  his   friend  An- 

tonius.    [Jerusalem.]    The  word  nowhere  occurs 
in  the  Bible. 

ANTOTHI'JAH  ninnty-.'AvaeiiOKal'laOh; 
Anathothia),  name  of  a  man  (  1  Chr.  viii.  24). 

A'NUB  Cl-ljy  ;  'E«/^j3;  Anob),  name  of  a  man 
(1  Chr.  iv.  8). 

A'NUS  CkvviovO;  Banaeus),&  Levite  (1  Esd. 
ix.  48).     [Bam.] 

A  I'AME  ('AircfytTj ;  Aperne),  concubine  of  I  la- 
tins (1  Esd.  iv.  29). 

APE  (S)1p),  Koph.     An  animal  of  the  n 
tribe  mentioned  in  1  K.  x.  22,  ami  in  the  parallel 
in  2  Chr.  ix.  21,  among  the  mere! 


78 


APELLES 


brought  by  the  fleets  of  Solomon  and  Hiram  once  in 
every  three  years.  The  LXX.  render  the  word  by 
ic'i6t}Kos,  which  is  equivalent  to  the  Latin  Simla. 
The  Greeks  have  the  word  /cr)0os,  or  ktjttos,  for  a 
long-tailed  species  of  monkey  (Arist.  H.  A.  ii.  8,9), 
and  Pliny  (viii.  19,  s.  28)  uses  cephus.  Both  Greeks 
and  Hebrews  received  the  word  with  the  animal  from 
India,  for  the  ape,  both  in  Sansc.  and  Malabar,  is  called 
Kapi  =  swift,  active.  Hence  also  the  Genn.  Affe, 
the  Anglosaxon  Apa,  and  the  Engl .  Ape,  the  initial 
guttural  being  dropped,  just  as  the  Latins  got  Amare 
from  the  Sansc.  Kam.  (See  Bopp.  Sansc.  Gloss. 
p.  65.)  The  Cephs  of  Aethiopia  are  described  and 
figured  in  I.  Ludolfi  Historia  Aethiopica,  i.  10, 
§52-64.  They  are  represented  as  tailless  animals, 
climbing  rocks,  eating  worms  and  ants,  and  pro- 
tecting themselves  from  the  attack  of  lions  by  casting 
sand  into  their  eyes.  In  a  mosaic  pavement  found 
at  Praeneste,  and  figured  in  Shaw's  Travels,  p.  423, 
an  ape  or  monkey  is  represented,  having  inscribed 
near  it  the  word  KHII1EN.  [W.  D.] 

APEL'LES  ('ATreAATjs),  a  Christian  saluted 
by  St.  Paul  in  Rom.  xvi.  10,  and  honoured  by 
the  designation  S6ki(j.os  iv  Xpiara.  Origen  (in 
loc.)  suggests  that  he  may  have  been  identical  with 
Apollos ;  but  there  seems  do  ground  for  supposing  it, 
and  we  learn  frorn  Horace  (Sat.  i.  5,  100)  that 
Apella  was  a  common  name  among  the  Jews.  Tra- 
dition makes  him  bishop  of  Smyrna,  or  Heraclea 
(Fabric.  Lux  Evangel,  p.  116).  [H.  A.] 

APHAR'SATHCHITES,  APHAR'SITES, 

APHAR'SACITES(s;DriD"lSN,  WEnSK, 
fc^DDIDN  ;  ' AcpapaaOaxcuoi,' Acpapcraxcuoi,' '  A<pap- 

ffaloi ;  Apharsathachaei,  Arphasachaci),  the  names 
of  certain  tribes,  colonies  from  which  had  settled 
in  Samaria  under  the  Assyrian  leader  Asnapper 
(Ezr.  iv.  9,  v.  6).  The  first  and  last  are  re- 
garded as  the  same.  Whence  these  tribes  came 
is  entirely  a  matter  of  conjecture :  the  initial  X 
is  regarded  as  prosthetic :  if  this  be  rejected,  the  re- 
maining portion  of  the  two  first  names  bears  some  re- 
semblance (a  very  distant  one,  it  must  be  allowed) 
to  Paraetacae,  or  Paraetaceni,  significant  of  moun- 
taineers, applied  principally  to  a  tribe  living  on 
the  borders  of  Media  and  Persia ;  while  the  second 
has  been  referred  to  the  Parrhasii,  and  by  Gesenius, 
.to  the  Persae,  to  which  it  certainly  bears  a  much 
greater  affinity,  especially  in  the  prolonged  form  of  the 
latter  name  found  in  Dan.  vi.  29  (X^D'IS).  The  pre- 
sence of  the  proper  name  of  the  Persians  in  Ezr.  i. 
1,  iv.  3,  must  throw  some  doubt  upon  Gesenius' 
conjecture ;  bat  it  is  very  possible  that  the  local 
name  of  the  tribe  may  have  undergone  alteration, 
while  the  official  and  general  name  was  correctly 
given.  [W.  L.  B.j 

A'PHEK  (pSX.,  from  a  root  signifying  tenacity 
or  firmness,  Ges. ;  'A(f>eV),  the  name  of  several 
places  in  Palestine. 

1.  A  royal  city  of  the  Canaanites,  the  king  of 
which  was  killed  by  Joshua  (Josh.  xii.  18).  As 
this  is  named  with  Tappuah  and  other  places  in  the 
mountains  of  Judah,  it  is  very  probably  the  same 
as  the  Aphekah  of  Josh.  xv.  53. 

2.  A  city,  apparently  in  the  extreme  north  of 
Asher  (Josh.  xix.  30),  from  which  the  Canaanites 
were  not  ejected  (Judg.  i.  31  ;  though  here  it  is 
Aphik,  p^SN).  This  is  probably  the  same  place  as 
the  Aphek   (Josh.  xiii.  4),  on  the  extreme  north 


APHERRA 

"  border  of  the  Amorites,"  and  apparently  beyond 
Sidon,  and  which  is  identified  by  Gesenius  (Thes. 
140  a)  with  the  Aphaca  of  classical  times,  famous 
for  its  temple  of  Venus,  and  now  Aflia  (Rob.  iii. 
606 ;  Porter,  ii.  295-6).  Afka,  however,  lies  be- 
yond the  ridge  of  Lebanon,  on  the  north-western 
slopes  of  the  mountain,  and  consequently  much 
further  up  than  the  other  towns  of  Asher  which 
have  been  identified.  On  the  other  hand  it  is 
hardly  more  to  the  north  of  the  known  limits  of 
the  tribe,  than  Kadesh  and  other  places  named  as 
in  Judah  were  to  the  south ;  and  Aphek  may,  like 
many  other  sanctuaries,  have  had  a  reputation  at 
a  very  early  date,  sufficient  in  the  days  of  Joshua 
to  cause  its  mention  in  company  with  the  other 
northern  sanctuary  of  Baal-gad. 

3.  (With  the  article,  pQXH),  a  place  at  which  the 
Philistines  encamped,  while  the  Israelites  pitched  in 
Eben-ezer,  before  the  fatal  battle  in  which  the  sons 
of  Eli  were  killed  and  the  ark  taken  (1  Sam.  iv.  1). 
This  would  be  somewhere  to  the  N.W.  of,  and  at 
no  great  distance  from,  Jerusalem. 

4.  The  scene  of  another  encampment  of  the  Phi- 
listines, before  an  encounter  not  less  disastrous  than 
that  just  named, — the  defeat  and  death  of  Saul 
(1  Sam.  xxix.  1).  By  comparison  with  ver.  11,  it 
seems  as  if  this  Aphek  were  not  necessarily  near 
Shunem,  though  on  the  road  thither  from  the  Phi- 
listine district.  It  is  possible  that  it  may  be  the 
same  place  as  the  preceding ;  and  if  so,  the  Phi- 
listines were  marching  to  Jezreel  by  the  present  road 
along  the  "  backbone  "  of  the  country. 

5.  A  city  on  the  military  road  from  Syria  to 
Israel  (1  K.  xx.  26).  It  was  walled  (30),  and  was 
apparently  a  common  spot  for  engagements  with 
Syria  (2  K.  xiii.  17;  with  the  article).  The  use 
of  the  word  "Vl^n  (A.  V.  "  the  plain")  in  1  K. 
xx.  25,  fixes  the  situation  of  A.  to  have  been  in  the 
level  down-country  east  of  the  Jordan  [Misiior]  ; 
and  there,  accordingly,  it  is  now  found  in  Fik,  at 
the  head  of  the  Wady  Fik,  6  miles  east  of  the  Sea 
of  Galilee,  the  great  road  between  Damascus,  Na- 
bulus,  and  Jerusalem,  still  passing  (Kiepert's  map, 
1857),  'with  all  the  permanence  of  the  East, 
through  the  village,  which  is  remarkable  for  the 
number  of  inns  that  it  contains  (Burckh.  280).  By 
Josephus  (viii.  14,  §4)  the  name  is  given  as'A<peKa. 
Eusebius  (Onom.  'A<i>e/ca)  says  that  in  his  time 
there  was,  beyond  Jordan,  a  KaS/i7j  ixeydx-q  (Jer. 
castellum  grande)  called  Apheca  by  (yepl)  Hippes 
(Jer.  Hippus) ;  but  he  apparently  confounds  it 
with  (1).  Hippos  was  one  of  the  towns  which 
formed  the  Decapolis.  Fik,  or  Feik,  has  been 
visited  by  Burckhardt,  Seetzen,  and  others  (Ritter, 
Pal.  348-353),  and  is  the  only  one  of  the  places 
bearing  this  name  that  has  been  identified  with 
certainty.  [G.] 

APHE'KAH  (HpSN ;   Qaicovd ;   Apheca),  a 

city  of  Judah,  in  the  mountains  (Josh.  xv.  53), 
probably  the  same  as  Aphek  (1). 

APHE'REMA  ('A<paipefia  ;  '  Atpepeipd,  Jos.), 
one  of  the  three  "  governments  "  (vSfiovs)  added  to 
Judaea  from  Samaria  (and  Galilee,  x.  30)  by  De- 
metrius Soter,  and  confirmed  by  Nicanor  (1  Mace. 
xi.  34)  (see  Jos.  Ant.  xiii.  4,  §9,  and  Reland,  178). 
The  word  is  omitted  in  the  Vulgate.  It  is  probably 
the  same  as  Ephraim  (Ophrah,  Taiyibcli). 

APHER'RA  {'A(p<peppd ;  Euro),  one  of  the 
"  servants  of  Solomon  "  (1  Esd.  v.  34). 


APHIAH 

APHT'AH  (ITSX;  'A^'k  ;  Aphid),  name  of 
one  of  the  forefathers  of  king  Saul  (1  Sam.  ix.  1). 

A'PHIK  (i^SX;  Aphec),  a  city  of  Asher 
from  which  the  Canaanites  were  not  driven  out 
(Judg.  i.    31).        Probahly    the    same    place    as 

Al'HHK  (2). 

APH'RAH,  the  house  of  (TTISi?!?  ITO),  a  place 
mentioned  in  Mie.  i.  10,  and  supposed  by  some 
(Winer,  172)  to  be  identical  with  Ophrah.  But 
this  can  hardly  be,  inasmuch  as  all  the  towns  named 
in  the  context  are  in  the  low  country  to  the  west  of 
Judah,  while  Ophsah  would  appear  to  lie  E.  of 
Bethel  [Ophrah].  The  LXX.  translate  the  word 
e£  oIkov  icara  yiKoira.  \y\ 

APH'SES  (r>!?r!;  'Afeo-^;  Aphses),  chief  of 
the  18th  of  the  24  courses  in  the  service  of  the 
temple  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  15). 

APOCALYPSE.     [Revelation.] 

APOCRYPHA  (Bi&\la'Atr6Kpv4>a.).  The  col- 
lection of  Books  to  which  this  term  is  popularly 
applied  includes  the  following.  The  order  given  is 
that  in  which  they  stand  in  the  English  version. 

I.  1  Esdras. 

II.  2  Esdras. 

III.  Tobit. 

IV.  Judith. 

V.  The  rest  of  the  chapters  of  the  Book  of 
Esther,  which  are  found  neither  in  the  Hebrew  nor 
in  the  Chaldee. 

VI.  The  Wisdom  of  Solomon. 

VII.  The  .Wis  lorn  of  Jesus  the  Son  of  Sirach  or 
Ecclesiasticus. 

VIII.  Barach. 

IX.  The  Song  of  the  Three  Holy  Children. 

X.  The  History  of  Susanna. 

XI.  The  History  of  the  destruction  of  Bel  and 
the  Dragon. 

XII.  The  Prayer  of  Manasseh,  king  of  Judah. 

XIII.  1  Maccabees. 

XIV.  2  Maccabees. 

The  separate  books  of  this  collection  are  treated 
of  in  distinct  Articles.  Their  relation  to  the  ca- 
nonical books  of  the  Old  Testament  is  discussed 
under  CANON.  In  the  present  article  it  is  pro- 
posed to  consider: — I.  The  meaning  and  history  of 
the  word.  II.  The  history  and  character  of  the  collec- 
tion as  a  whole  in  its  relation  to  Jewish  literature. 

I.  The  primary  meaning  of  a-jr6Kpv<pos,  "  hidden, 
secret"  (in  which  sense  it  is  used  in  Hellenistic  as 
well  as  classical  (ireek,  cf.  Ecclus.  xxiii.  19;  Luke 
viii.  17;  Col.  ii.  13),  seems,  towards  the  close  of 
the  2nd  century,  to  have  hern  associated  with  the 
signification  "spurious,"  and  ultimately  to  have 
settled  down  into  the  latter.  Tertullian  (dc  Anim. 
c.  2)  and  Clement  of  Alexandria  {Strom,  i.  19,  69, 
iii.  4,  29)  apply  it  to  the  forged  or  spurious  books 
which  the  heretics  of  their  time  circulated  as  au- 
thoritative. The  first  passage  referred  to  from  the 
Stromata  however  may  be  taken  as  an  instance  of 
the  transition  stage  of  the  words.  The  followers  of 
Prodicus,  a  Gnostic  teacher,  are  said  there  t<>  b  a  I 
that  they  have  fll[3hovs  anoKpixpovs  of  Zoroaster.  In 
Athanasius  (I'p.  Vest.  vol.  ii.  p.  38;  S 
Sac.  Scrip,  vol.  ii.  p.  154,  ed.  Colon.  1686),  Au- 
gustine (c.  Faust,  xi.  2,  •/.  Cm.  /'</,  rv.  23),  Jc- 
n  '  |  I'.ji.  "i/  Lartam,  and  Prol.  ffa/.)  the  word  is 
used  uniformly  with  the  had  meaning  which  had 
become  attached  to  it.     The  writers  of  that  period 


APOCRYPHA 


79 


however  do  not  seem  to  have  seen  clearly  how  the 
word  ha  I  acquired  this  secondary  sense;  and  hence 
we  find  conjectural  explanations  of  its  etymology. 

The  remark  of  Athanasius  {Synops.  S.  Scr.  I.  c.) 
that  such  books  are  avoKpvcpris  /xuKKov  %  avayvdi- 
creois  a£ia  is  probably  meant  rather  as  a  play  upon 
the  word  than  as  giving  its  derivation.  Augustine 
is  more  explicit :  "  Apocryphae  nuncupantur  eo  quod 
earuiii  occulta  origo  non  claruit  patribus  ''  (de  Civ. 
Dei,  I.  a).  "  Apocryphi  non  quod  habendi  sunt 
in  aliqua  auctoritate  secretS,  sed  quia  nulla  testifica- 
tionis  luce  declarati,  de  nescio  quo  secreto,  nescio 
quorum  praesumtionc  prolati  sunt "  (c.  Faust. 
I.  c).  Later  conjectures  are  (1),  that  given  by 
the  translation  of  the  English  Bible  (ed.  1539, 
Pref.  to  Apocr.),  "  because  they  were  wont  to  be 
read  not  openly  and  in  common,  but  as  it  were  in 
secret  and  apart;"  (2)  one,  resting  on  a  misappre- 
hension of  the  meaning  of  a  passage  in  Epiphanius 
{deMens.  ac  Pond.  c.  4)  that  the  books  in  question 
were  so  called  because,  not  being  in  the  Jewish 
canon,  they  were  excluded  airb  T7Js  KpvTrrrjs  from 
the  ark  in  which  the  true  Scriptures  were  pre- 
served ;   (3)  that  the  word  avSKpvcpa  answers  to 

the  Heb.  CTIJJ,   libri  absconditi,    by  which   the 

later  Jews  designated  those  books  which,  as  of 
doubtful  authority  or  not  tending  to  edification,  were 
not  read  publicly  in  the  synagogues ;  (4)  that  it 
originates  in  the  /cpinn-a  or  secret  books  of  the 
Greek  mysteries.  Of  these  it  may  be  enough  to 
say,  that  (1)  is,  as  regards  some  of  the  books  now 
bearing  the  name,  at  variance  with  fact ;  that 
(2),  as  has  been  said,  rests  on  a  mistake;  that  (3) 
wants  the  support  of  djrect  evidence  of  the  use  of 
awtjupvcpa  as  the  translation  for  the  Hebrew  word, 
and  that  (4),  though  it  approximates  to  what  is 
probably  the  true  history  of  the  word,  is  so  far  only 
a  conjecture.  The  data  for  explaining  the  transi- 
tion from  the  neutral  to  the  bad  meaning,  are  to  be 
found,  it  is  believed,  in  the  quotations  already  given, 
and  in  the  facts  connected  with  the  books  to  which 
the  epithet  was  in  the  first  instance  applied.  The 
language  of  Clement  implies  that  it  was  not  alto- 
gether disclaimed  by  those  of  whose  books  he  uses 
it.  That  of  Athanasius  is  in  the  tone  of  a  man 
wdio  is  convicting  his  opponents  out  of  their  own 
mouth.  Augustine  implicitly  admits  that  a  "  se- 
creta  auctoritas"  had  been  claimed  for  the  writings 
to  which  he  ascribes  merely  an  "  occulta  origo." 
All  these  facts  harmonise  with  the  belief  that  the 
use  of  the  word  as  applied  to  special  books  originated 
in  the  claim  common  to  nearly  all  the  sects  that 
participated  in  the  Gnostic  character,  to  a  secret 
esoteric  knowledge  deposited  in  books,  which  were 
made  known  only  to  the  initiated.  It  seems  not 
unlikely  that  there  is  a  reference  in  Col.  ii.  13,  to 
the  pretensions  of  such  teachers.  The  books  of  our 
own  Apocrypha  bear  witness  both  to  the  feeling 
and  the  way  in  which  it  worked.  The  inspiration 
of  the  Pseudo-Esdras  (2  Esdr.  xiv.  4c- 17)  leads 
him  to  dictate  204  books,  of  which  the  70  last  are 
to  be  "delivered  only  to  such  as  are  wise  among  the 
people."  Assuming  the  var.  lect.  of  '.'4  in  the 
Arabic  and  Ethiopian  versions  to  be  the  true  read- 
ing, this  indicates  the  way  in  which  the  secret  books, 

in  which  was  the  "spring  of  understanding,  the 

fountain  of  wisdom,  and  the  stream  of  know  I 

were  >t  up  as  of  higher  value  than  the  twenty-four 
books  acknowledged  by  the  Jewish  canon,  which 
were  for  "the  worthy  ami  unworthy  alike."  It 
was  almost  a  matter  of  course  that  these  secret 


80 


APOCRYPHA 


books  should  be  pseudonymous,  ascribed  to  the 
great  names  in  Jewish  or  heathen  history  that  had 
become  associated  with  the  reputation  of  a  myste- 
rious wisdom.  So  books  in  the  existing  Apocrypha 
bear  the  names  of  Solomon,  Daniel,  Jeremiah,  Ezra. 
Beyond  its  limits  the  oreation  of  spurious  docu- 
ments took  a  yet  bolder  range,  and  the  list  given  by 
Athanasius"  (Syn.  S.  Script.)  shows  at  once  the 
variety  and  extent  of  the  mythical  literature  which 
was  palmed  off  upon  the  unwary  as  at  once  secret 
and  sacred. 

Those  whose  faith  rested  on  the  teaching  of  the 
Christian  Church,  and  who  looked  to  the  0.  T. 
Scriptures  either  in  the  Hebrew,  or  the  LXX.  col- 
lection, were  not  slow  to  perceive  that  these  produc- 
tions were  destitute  of  all  authority.  They  applied 
in  scorn  what  had  been  used  as  a  title  of  honour. 
The  secret  book  {libri  secretiores.  Orlg.  Comm.  in 
Matt.  ed.  Lomm.  iv.  p.  237)  was  rejected  as  spw- 
rious.  The  word  Apocryphal  was  degraded  to  the 
position  from  which  it  has  never  since  risen.  So 
far  as  books  like  the  Testament  of  the  Twelve 
Patriarchs  and  the  Assumption  of  Moses  were  con- 
cerned, the  task  of  discrimination  was  comparatively 
easy,  but  it  became  more  difficult  when  the  ques- 
tion affected  the  books  which  were  found  in  the 
LXX.  translation  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  recog- 
nised by  the  Hellenistic  Jews ;  but  were  not  in  the 
Hebrew  text  or  in  the  Canon  acknowledged  by  the 
Jews  of  Palestine.  The  history  of  this  difficulty, 
and  of  the  manner  in  which  it  affected  the  recep- 
tion of  particular  books,  belongs  rather  to  the 
subject  of  Canon  than  to  that  of  the  present  article, 
but  the  following  facts  may  be  stated  as  bearing  on 
the  application  of  the  word*  (1 .)  The  teachers  of 
the  Greek  and  Latin  Churches  accustomed  to  the 
use  of  the  Septuagint  or  versions  resting  on  the 
same  basis,  were  naturally  led  to  quote  freely  and 
reverently  from  all  the  books  which  were  incorpo- 
rated in  it.  In  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Origen. 
Athanasius,  e.  g.  we  find  citations  from  the  books 
of  the  present  Apocrypha,  as  "Scripture,"  "divine 
Scripture,"  "  prophecy."  They  are  very  far  from 
applying  the  term  a.7c6Kpv<pos  to  these  writings.  If 
they  are  conscious  of  the  difference  between  them 
and  the  other  books  of  the  0.  T.,  it  is  only  so  far 
as  to  lead  them  (cf.  Athan.  Synops.  S.  Scr.  I.  c.) 
to  place  the  former  in  the  list  of  ov  Kavovt^S/x^ua, 
avTiAeyS/ieva,  books  which  were  of  more  use  for  the 
ethical  instruction  of  catechumens  than  for  the 
edification  of  mature  Christians.  Augustine  in 
like  manner  applies  the  word  "  Apocrypha  "  only 
to  the  spurious  books  with  false  titles  which  were 
in  circulation  among  heretics,  admitting  the  others, 
though  with  some  qualifications,  under  the  title  of 
Canonical  {de  doctr.  Chr.  ii.  8).  (2.)  Wherever, 
on  the  other  hand,  any  teacher  came  in  contact  with 
the  feelings  that  prevailed  among  the  Christians  of 
Palestine,  there  the  influence  of  the  rigorous  limi- 
tation of  the  old  Hebrew  canon  is  at  once  conspi- 
cuous. This  is  seen  in  its  bearing  on  the  history 
of  the  Canon  in  the  list  given  by  Melito,  bishop  of 
Sardis  (Euseb.  H.  E.  iv.  2G),  and  obtained  by  him 
from  Palestine.  Of  its  effects  on  the  application  of 
the  word,  the  writings  of  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  and 
Jerome  give  abundant  instances.  The  former 
{Catech.  iv.   33)   gives  the  Canonical  list  of  the 


a  The  books  enumerated  by  Athanasius,  besides 
writings  falsely  ascribed  to  authors  of  canonical  books, 
as  Zephaniah,  Habakk-ak,  Ezekiel,  and  Daniel,  in- 
cluded others  which  have  the  names  of  Enoch,  of  the 


APOCRYPHA 

22  books  of  the  0.  T.  Scriptures,  and  rejects  the 
introduction  of  all  "apocryphal"  writings.  The 
latter  in  his  Epistle  to  Lcata  warns  the  Christian 
mother  in  educating  her  daughter  against  "  omnia 
apocrypha."  The  Prologus  Galeatus  shows  that 
he  did  not  shrink  from  including  under  that  title, 
the  books  which  formed  part  of  the  Septuagint,  and 
were  held  in  honour  in  the  Alexandrian  and  Latin 
Churches.  In  dealing  with  the  several  books  he 
discusses  each  on  its  own  merits,  admiring  some, 
speaking  unhesitatingly  of  the  "  dreams,"  "  fables  " 
of'  others.  (3.)  The  teaching  of  Jerome  influenced, 
though  not  decidedly,  the  language  of  the  Western 
Church.  The  old  spurious  heretical  writings,  the 
"Apocrypha"  ofTertullian  and  Clement,  fell  more 
and  more  into  the  back  ground,  and  were  almost 
utterly  forgotten.  The  doubtful  books  of  the  Old 
Testament  were  used  publicly  in  the  service  of  the 
Church,  quoted  frequently  with  reverence  as  Scrip- 
ture, sometimes  however  with  doubts  or  limitations 
as  to  the  authority  of  individual  books  according  to 
the  knowledge  or  critical  discernment  of  this  or  that 
writer  (cf.  Bp.  Cosins's  Scholastic  History  of  the 
Canon).  During  this  period  the  term  by  which 
they  were  commonly  described  was  not  apocryphal 
but  "  ecclesiastical."  So  they  had  been  described  by 
Rufinus  {Expos,  in  Symb.  Apost.  p.  26),  who 
practically  recognised  the  distinction  drawn  by  Je- 
rome, though  he  would  not  use  the  more  oppro- 
brious epithet  of  books  which  were  held  in  honour : 
"libri  qui  non  canonici  sed  Ecclesiastici  a  majoribus 
appellati  sunt "...."  quae  omnia  (the  contents 
of  these  books)  legi  quidem  in  Ecclesiis  voluerunt 
non  tamen  proferri  ad  auctoritatem  ex  Ms  fidei  con- 
firmandam.  Caeteras  vero  scripturas  apocryphas  no- 
minarunt  quas  in  Ecclesiis  legi  noluerunt:"  and 
this  offered  a  mezzo  termine  between  the  language 
of  Jerome  and  that  of  Augustine,  and  as  such  found 
favour.  (4.)  It  was  reserved  for  the  age  of  the 
Reformation  to  stamp  the  word  Apocrypha  with  its 
present  signification.  The  two  news  which  had 
hitherto  existed  together,  side  by  side,  concerning 
which  the  Church  had  pronounced  no  authoritative 
decision,  stood  out  in  sharper  contrast.  The  Council 
of  Trent  closed  the  question  winch  had  been  left 
open,  and  deprived  its  theologians  of  the  liberty 
they  had  hitherto  enjoyed — extending  the  Canon 
of  Scripture  so  as  to  include  all  the  hitherto  doubtful 
or  deutero-canonical  books,  with  the  exception  of  the 
two  books  of  Esdras  and  the  Prayer  of  Manasseh, 
the  evidence  against  which  seemed  too  strong  to  be 
resisted  (Sess.  IV.  de  Can.  Script.).  In  accordance 
with  this  decree,  the  editions  of  the  Vulgate  pub- 
lished by  authority  contained  the  books  which  the 
Council  had  pronounced  canonical,  as  standing  on 
the  same  footing  as  those  which  had  never  been 
questioned,  while  the  three  which  had  been  rejected 
were  printed  commonly  in  smaller  type  and  stood 
after  the  New  Testament.  The  Reformers  of  Ger- 
many and  England  on  the  other  hand,  influenced  in 
part  by  the  revival  of  the  study  of  Hebrew  and  the 
consequent  recognition  of  the  authority  of  the  He- 
brew Canon,  and  subsequently  by  the  reaction 
against  this  stretch  of  authority,  maintained  the 
opinion  of  Jerome  and  pushed  it  to  its  legitimate 
results.  The  principle  which  had  been  asserted  by 
Carlstadt  dogmatically  in  his  "  de  Canonicis  Scrip- 


Patriarchs,  of  Zechariah  the  father  of  the  Baptist, 
the  Prayer  of  Joseph,  the  testament  (Siad-qKiq)  and 
assumption  of  Moses,  Abraham,  Eldad  and  Modad, 
and  Elijah. 


APOCEYPHA 

turis  libellus"  (1520)  was  acted  on  by  Luther. 
He  spoke  of  individual  books  among  those  in  ques- 
tion with  a  freedom  as  great  as  that  of  Jerome, 
judging  each  on  its  own  merits,  praising  Tobit  as  a 
"pleasant  comedy."  and  the  Prayer  of  Manasseh  as 
a  "  good  model  for  penitents,''  and  rejecting  the  two 
books  of  Esdras  as  containing  worthless  fables. 
The  example  of  collecting  the  doubtful  books  in  a 
separate  group  had  been  set  in  the  Strasburg  edi- 
tion of  the  Septuagint,  1526.  In  Luther's  complete 
edition  of  the  German  Bible  accordingly  (1534) 
the  books  (Judith,  Wisdom,  Tobias,  Sirach,  1  and  2 
Maccabees,  Additions  to  Esther  and  Daniel,  and  the 
Prayer  of  Manasseh)  were  grouped  together  under 
the  general  title  of  "  Apocrypha,  i.  e.  Books  which 
are  not  of  like  worth  with  Holy  Scripture,  yet  are 
good  and  useful  to  be  read."  In  the  history  of  the 
English  Church,  Wicliff  showed  himself  in  this  as 
in  other  points  the  forerunner  of  the  Reformation, 
and  applied  the  term  Apocrypha  to  all  but  the 
"twenty-five"  Canonical  Bonks  of  the  old  Testa- 
ment. The  judgment  of  Jerome  was  formally  as- 
serted in  the  sixth  Article.  The  disputed  books 
were  collected  and  described  in  the  same  way  in  the 
printed  English  Bible  of  1539  (Cranmer's),  and 
since  then  there  has  been  no  fluctuation  as  to  the 
application  of  the  word.  The  books  to  which  the 
term  is  ascribed  are  in  popular  speech,  not  merely 
apocryphal,  but  the  Apocrypha. 

II.  Whatever  questions  may  be  at  issue  as  to  the 
authority  of  these  books,  they  have  in  any  case  an 
interest  of  which  no  controversy  can  deprive  them 
as  connected  with  the  literature,  and  therefore  with 
the  history,  of  the  Jews.  They  represent  the  period 
of  transition  and  decay  which  followed  on  the  return 
from  Babylon,  when  the  prophets  who  were  then 
the  teachers  of  the  people  had  passed  away  and  the 
age  of  scribes  succeeded.  Uncertain  as  may  be  the 
dates  of  individual  books,  few,  if  any,  can  be  thrown 
further  back  than  the  commencement  of  the  3rd 
century  B.C.  The  latest,  the  '2nd  Book  of  Esdras, 
is  probably  not  later  than  30  B.C.,  2  Esdr.  vii.  28 
being  a  subsequent  interpolation.  The  alterations 
of  the  Jewish  character,  the  different  phases  which 
Judaism  presented  in  Palestine  and  Alexandria,  the 
good  and  the  evil  which  were  called  forth  by  contact 
with  idolatry  in  Egypt,  and  by  the  struggle  against 
it  in  Syria,  all  these  present  themselves  to  the  reader 
of  the  Apocrypha  with  greater  or  less  distinctness. 
In  the  midst  of  the  diversities  which  we  might  na- 
turally expect  to  iind  in  books  written  by  different 
authors,  in  different  countries,  and  at  considerable 
intervals  of  time,  it  is  possible  to  discern  some  cha- 
racteristics which  bilnng  to  the  collection  as  a 
whole,  and  these  may  be  noticed  in  the  following 
order. 

(1.)  The  absence  of  the  prophetic  element. 
From  first  to  last  the  books  bear  testimony  to  the 
assi  I  tii n i  nl'  JosephuS  (<■.  A /i.  i.  S),  that  the  aKpifi})S 

fiiafioxv  of  Prophets  had  beep  broken  after  the  close 
of  the   0.  T.  canon.      No   one   speaks   because  the 
word  of  the  Lord   had  come  to  him.     Sometimes 
there  is  a  iliivrt  confession  that  the  gift  ofp 
had  departed  (1  Mace.  ix.  27),  or  tin-  nit. 
a  hope  that  it  might  one  day  return  (ibid.  iv.  46, 
xiv.  41).     Sometimes  a  teacher  asserts  in  words 
the  perpetuity  of  thegift(Wisd.  vii.  27),  and  shows 
in  the  act  of  asserting  it  how  different  the  illumina- 
tion which  he  had  received  was  from  that  I 
mi  tie'  Prophets  of  the  C;inonical  Books.     When  a 
writer  simulates  the  prophetic  character,  he  repeats 
with  slight  modifications  the  language  of  the  older 


APOCRYPHA 


!1 


prophets  as  in  Baruch,  or  makes  a  meie  prediction 
the  text  of  a  dissertation  as  in  the  Epistle  of  Je- 
remy, or  plays  arbitrarily  with  combinations  of 
dreams  ami  symbols,  as  in  2  Esdras.  Strange  and 
perplexing  as  the  last  named  book  is,  whatever  there 
is  in  it  of  genuine  feeling  indicates  a  mind  not  at 
ease  with  itself,  distracted  with  its  own  sufferings 
and  with  the  problems  of  the  universe,  and  it  is 
accordingly  very  far  removed  from  the  utterance  of 
a  man  who  speaks  as  a  messenger  from  God. 

(2.)  Connected  with  this  is  the  almost  total  dis- 
appearance of  the  power  which  had  shown  itself  in 
the  poetry  of  the  Old  Testament.  The  Song  of  the 
Three  Children  lays  claim  to  the  character  of  a 
Psalm,  and  is  probably  a  translation  from  some 
liturgical  hymn;  but  with  this  exception  the  form 
of  poetry  is  altogether  absent.  So  far  as  the  writers 
have  come  vmder  the  influence  of  Greek  cultivation 
they  catch  the  taste  for  rhetorical  ornament  which 
characterized  the  literature  of  Alexandria.  Fictitious 
speeches  become  almost  indispensable  additions  to 
the  narrative  of  an  historian,  and  the  story  of  a 
martyr  is  not  complete  unless  (as  in  the  later  Acta 
Martyrum  of  Christian  traditions)  the  sufferer  de- 
claims in  set  terms  against  the  persecutors.  (Song 
of  the  Three  Child.,  3-22  ;  2  Mac.'  vi.  vii.) 

(3.)  The  appearance,  as  part  of  the  current  lite- 
rature of  the  time,  of  works  of  fiction,  resting  or 
purporting  to  rest  on  an  historical  foundation.  It 
is  possible  that  this  development  of  the  national 
genius  may  have  been  in  part  the  result  of  the 
Captivity.  The  Jewish  exiles  brought  with  them 
the  reputation  of  excelling  in  minstrelsy,  and  were 
called  on  to  sing  the  "songs  of  Zion"  (Ps.  exxxvii). 
The  trial  of  skill  between  the  tln-ee  young  men  in 
1  Esdr.  iii.  iv.  implies  a  traditional  belief  that  those 
who  were  promoted  to  places  of  honour  under  the 
Persian  kings  were  conspicuous  for  gifts  of  a  some- 
what similar  character.  The  transition  from  this 
to  the  practice  of  story-telling  was  with  the  Jews, 
as  afterwards  with  the  Arabs,  easy  and  natural 
enough.  The  period  of  the  captivity  with  its 
strange  adventures,  and  the  remoteness  of  the 
scenes  connected  with  it,  offered  a  wide  and  attractive 
field  to  the  imagination  of  such  narrators.  Some- 
times, as  in  Bel  ami  tin'  Dragon,  the  motive  of  such 
stories  would  he  the  love  of  the  marvellous  ming- 
ling itself  with  the  feeling  of  scorn  with  which  the 
Jew  looked  on  the  idolater.  In  other  cases,  as  in 
Tobit  and  Susanna,  the  story  would  gain  popu- 
larity from  its  ethical  tendencies.  The  singular  va- 
riations in  the  text  of  the  former  book  indicate  at, 
once  the  extent  of  its  circulation  and  the  liberties 
taken  by  successive  editors.  In  the  narrative  of 
Judith,  again,  there  is  probably  something  more 
than  tin?  interest  attaching  to  the  history  of  the 
past.  There  is  indeed  too  little  evidence  of  the 
truth  of  the  narrative  for  us  to  look  on  it  as  his- 
tory at  all,  and  it  takes  its  place  in  the  region  of 
hi  toxical  romance,  written  with  a  political  motive. 
Under  the  guise  of  the  old  Assyrian  enemies  of 
Israel    the   writer    is   covertly  attacking   the  Syrian 

invaders  against  whom  his  countrymen  were  con- 
tending, stining  tin  in  up  by  a  story  ot' imagined  or 
traditional  heroism  to  follow  the  example  of  Judith 

as   she   had    followed    that    ot'  Jael    (  Kwald,   I 

.  vol.  i\ .  p.  "'II  |.     The  development  of  this 

l'"i  in    of  liter;. tn, e    is    of  0  ■..til.lo  with    a 

high  degn f  excellence,  but  it  is  true  of  it  at  all 

times,  and  was  especially  true  of  the  literature  of 

the  ancient  world,  that  it  belongs  rather  to  its  later 
bier  pel  i"d.     It  i-  a  spei  ial  si;  n  of  dec  .\  in  ho- 

G 


82 


APOCRYPHA 


nesty  and  discernment  when  such  writings  are  passed 
oft'  and  accepted  as  belonging  to  actual  history. 

(4.)  The  free  exercise  of  the  imagination  within 
the  domain  of  history  led  to  the  growth  of  a  purely 
legendary  literature.  The  full  development  of  this 
was  indeed  reserved  for  a  yet  later  period.  The 
books  of  the  Apocrypha  occupy  a  middle  place  be- 
tween those  of  the  Old  Testament  in  their  sim- 
plicity and  truthfulness  and  the  wild  extravagances 
of  the  Talmud.  As  it  is,  however,  we  find  in  them 
the  germs  of  some  of  the  fabulous  traditions  which 
were  influencing  the  minds  of  the  Jews  at  the  time 
of  Our  Lord's  ministry,  and  have  since  in  some  in- 
stances incorporated  themselves  more  or  less*with 
the  popular  belief  of  Christendom.  So  in  2  Mac.  i. 
ii.  we  meet  with  the  statements  that  at  the  time  of 
the  Captivity  the  priests  had  concealed  the  sacred 
fire,  and  that  it  was  miraculously  renewed — that 
Jeremiah  had  gone,  accompanied  by  the  tabernacle 
and  the  ark,  "  to  the  mountain  where  Moses  climbed 
up  to  see  the  heritage  of  God,"  and  had  there  con- 
cealed them  in  a  cave  together  with  the  altar  of  in- 
cense. The  apparition  of  the  Prophet  at  the  close 
of  the  same  book  (xv.  15),  as  giving  to  Judas  Mac- 
cabaeus  the  sword  with  which,  as  a  "  gift  from 
God,"  he  was  to  "  wound  the  adversaries,"  shows 
how  prominent  a  place  was  occupied  by  Jeremiah 
in  the  traditions  and  hopes  of  the  people,  and  pre- 
pares us  to  understand  the  rumours  which  followed 
on  our  Lord's  teaching  and  working  that  "  Jeremias 
or  one  of  the  prophets  "  had  appeared  again  (Matt, 
xvi.  14).  So  again  in  2  Esdr.  xiii.  40-47  we  find 
the  legend  of  the  entire  disappearance  of  the  Ten 
Tribes  which,  in  spite  of  direct  and  indirect  testi- 
mony on  the  other  side,  has  given  occasion  even  in 
our  own  time  to  so  many  wild  conjectures.  In  ch. 
xiv.  of  the  same  book  we  recognise  (as  has  been 
pointed  out  already)  the  tendency  to  set  a  higher 
value  on  books  of  an  esoteric  knowledge  than  on 
those  in  the  Hebrew  Canon ;  but  it  deserves  notice 
that  this  is  also  another  form  of  the  tradition  that 
Ezra  dictated  from  a  supematurally-inspired  me- 
mory the  Sacred  Books  which,  according  to  that 
tradition,  had  been  lost,  and  that  both  fables  are 
exaggerations  of  the  part  actually  taken  by  him 
and  by  "  the  men  of  the  Great  Synagogue  "  in  the 
work  of  collecting  and  arranging  them.  So  also  the 
rhetorical  narrative  of  the  Exodus  in  Wisd.  xvi.-xix. 
indicates  the  existence  of  a  traditional,  half-legendary 
history  side  by  side  with  the  canonical.  It  would 
seem,  indeed,  as  if  the  life  of  Moses  had  appeared 
with  many  different  embellishments.  The  form  in 
which  that  life  appears  in  Josephus ;  the  facts 
mentioned  in  St.  Stephen's  speech  and  not  found  in 
the  Pentateuch,  the  allusions  to  Jannes  and  Jambres 
(2  Tim.  iii.  8),  to  the  disputes  between  Michael 
and  the  devil  (Jude  9),  to  the  "  rock  that  fol- 
lowed "  the  Israelites  (1  Cor.  x.  4),  all  bear  testi- 
mony to  the  wide-spread  popularity  of  this  semi- 
apocryphal  history. 

(5.)  As  the  most  marked  characteristic  of 
the  collection  as  a  whole  and  of  the  period  to 
which  it  belongs,  there  is  the  tendency  to  pass  off 
supposititious  books  under  the  cover  of  illustrious 
names.  The  books  of  Esdras,  the  additions  to  Da- 
niel, the  letters  of  Baruch  and  Jeremiah,  and  the 
Wisdom  of  Solomon,  are  obviously  of  this  character. 
It  is  difficult  perhaps  for  us  to  measure  in  each  in- 
stance the  degree  in  which  the  writers  of  such  books 
were  guilty  of  actual  frauds.  In  a  book  like  the 
Wisdom  of  Solomon,  for  example,  the  form  may 
have  been  adopted  as  a  means  of  gaining  attention 


APOCRYPHA 

by  which  no  one  was  likely  to  be  deceived,  and,  as 
such,  it  does  not  go  beyond  the  limits  of  legitimate 
personation.  The  fiction  in  this  case  need  not  dimi- 
nish our  admiration  and  reverence  for  the  book  any 
more  than  it  would  destroy  the  authority  of  Eccle- 
siastes  were  we  to  come  to  the  conclusion  from  in- 
ternal or  other  evidence  that  it  belonged  to  a  later 
age  than  that  of  Solomon.  The  habit,  however,  of 
writing  books  under  fictitious  names  is,  as  the  later 
Jewish  history  shows,  a  very  dangerous  one.  The 
practice  becomes  almost  a  trade.  Each  such  work 
creates  a  new  demand,  to  be  met  in  its  turn  by  a 
fresh  supply,  and  thus  the  prevalence  of  an  Apo- 
cryphal literature  becomes  a  sure  sign  of  want  of 
truthfulness  on  one  side,  and  want  of  discernment 
on  the  other. 

(6.)  The  absence  of  honesty  and  of  the  power  to 
distinguish  truth  from  falsehood,  shows  itself  in  a 
yet  more  serious  form  in  the  insertion  of  formal 
documents  purporting  to  be  authentic,  but  in  reality 
failing  altogether  to  establish  any  claim  to  that 
title.  This  is  obviously  the  case  with  the  decree 
of  Artaxerxes  in  Esth.  xvi.  The  letters  with  which 
2  Mac.  opens  from  the  Jews  at  Jerusalem  betray 
their  true  character  by  their  historical  inaccuracy. 
We  can  hardly  accept  as  genuine  the  letter  in  which 
the  king  of  the  Lacedaemonians  (1  Mac.  xii.  20,21) 
writes  to  Onias  that  "  the  Lacedaemonians  and  Jews 
are  brethren,  and  that  they  are  of  the  stock  of 
Abraham."  The  letters  in  2  Mac.  ix.  and  xi.,  on  the 
other  hand,  might  be  authentic  so  far  as  their  con- 
tents go,  but  the  recklessness  with  which  such  do- 
cuments are  inserted  as  embellishments  and  make- 
weights throws  doubt  in  a  greater  or  less  degree  on 
all  of  them. 

(7.)  The  loss  of  the  simplicity  and  accuracy 
which  characterise  the  history  of  the  0.  T.  is  shown 
also  in  the  errors  and  anachronisms  in  which  these 
books  abound.  Thus,  to  take  a  few  of  the  most 
striking  instances,  Haman  is  made  a  Macedonian, 
and  the  purpose  of  his  plot  is  to  transfer  the  king- 
dom from  the  Persians  to  the  Macedonians  (Esth. 
xvi.  10)  ;  two  contradictory  statements  are  given  in 
the  same  book  of  the  death  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes 
(2  Mac.  i.  15-17,  ix.  5-29)  ;  Nabuchodonosor  is 
made  to  dwell  at  Nineve  as  the  king  of  the  Assy- 
rians (Judith  i.  1). 

(8.)  In  their  relation  to  the  religious  and  ethical 
development  of  Judaism  during  the  period  which 
these  books  embrace,  we  find  (1.)  the  influences  of 
the  struggle  against  idolatry  under  Antiochus,  as 
shown  partly  in  the  revival  of  the  old  heroic  spirit, 
and  in  the  record  of  the  deeds  which  it  called  forth, 
as  in  Maccabees,  partly  again  in  the  tendency  of  a 
narrative  like  Judith,  and  the  protests  against  idol- 
worship  in  Baruch  and  Wisdom.  (2.)  The  growing 
hostility  of  the  Jews  towards  the  Samaritans  is  shown 
by  the  Confession  of  the  Son  of  Sirach  (Ecclus.  1. 
25,  26).  (3.)  The  teaching  of  Tobit  illustrates  the 
prominence  then  and  afterwards  assigned  to  alms- 
giving among  the  duties  of  a  holy  life  (Tob.  iv. 
7-11,  xii.  9).  The  classification  of  the  three  ele- 
ments of  such  a  life,  prayer,  fasting,  alms,  in  xii.  8, 
illustrates  the  traditional  ethical  teaching  of  the 
Scribes  which  was  at  once  recognized  and  purified 
from  the  errors  that  had  been  connected  with  it  in 
the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  (Matt.  vi.  1-18).  (4.)  The 
same  book  indicates  also  the  growing  belief  in  the 
individual  guardianship  of  angels  and  the  germs  of 
a  grotesque  demonology,  resting  in  part  on  the  more 
mysterious  phaenomena  of  man's  spiritual  nature, 
like  the  cases  of  demoniac  possession  in  the  Gospels, 


APOLLONIA 

but  associating  itself  only  too  easily  with  all  the  frauds 
and  superstitions  of  vagabond  exorcists.  (5.)  The 
great  Alexandrian  book  of  the  collection,  the  Wis- 
dom of  Solomon,  breathes,  as  we  might  expect,  a 
strain  of  higher  mood  ;  and  though  there  is  abso- 
lutely no  ground  for  the  patristic  tradition  that  it 
was  written  by  Philo,  the  conjecture  that  it  might 
have  been  was  not  without  a  plausibility  which 
might  well  commend  itself  to  men  like  Basil  and 
Jerome.  The  personification  of  Wisdom  as  "  the 
unspotted  mirror  of  the  power  of  <  !od  and  the  image 
of  his  goodness"  (vii.  26)  as  the  universal  teacher 
of  all  "holy  souls"  in  "all  ages"  (vii.  27),  as 
guiding  and  ruling  Cod's  people,  approaches  the 
teaching  of  Philo  and  foreshadows  that  of  St.  John 
as  to  the  manifestation  of  the  Unseen  God  through 
the  medium  of  the  Logos  and  the  office  of  that  di- 
vine Word  as  the  light  that  lightcth  every  man. 
In  relation  again  to  the  symbolic  character  of  the 
Temple  as  ' '  a  resemblance  of  the  holy  tabernacle  " 
which  God  "  has  prepared  from  the  beginning  "  (ix. 
8),  the  language  of  this  book  connects  itself  at  once 
with  that  of  Philo  and  with  the  teaching  of  St. 
Paul  or  Apollos  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  But 
that  which  is  the  great  characteristic  of  the  book,  as 
of  the  school  from  which  it  emanated,  is  the  writer's 
apprehension  of  God's  kingdom  and  the  blessings 
connected  with  it  as  eternal,  and  so,  as  independent 
of  men's  conceptions  of  time.  Thuschs.  i.  ii.  con- 
tain the  strong  protest  of  a  righteous  man  against 
the  materialism  which  then  in  the  form  of  a  sensual 
selfishness,  as  afterwards  in  the  developed  system 
of  the  Sadducees,  was  corrupting  the  old  faith  of 
Israel.  Against  this  he  asserts  that  the  "  souls  of 
the  righteous  are  in  the  hands  of  God"  (iii.  1)  ; 
that  the  blessings  which  the  popular  belief  con- 
nected  with  Length  of  days  were  not  to  be  measured 
by  the  duration  of  years,  seeing  that  "  wisdom  is  the 
gray  hair  unto  men,  and  an  unspotted  life  is  old 
age."  (6.)  In  regard  to  another  truth  also  this  book 
was  in  advance  of  the  popular  belief  of  the  Jews  of 
Palestine.  In  the  midst  of  its  strong  protests 
against  idolatry,  there  is  the  fullest  recognition  of 
God's  universal  love  (xi.  23-2G),  of  the  truth  that 
His  power  is  but  the  instrument  of  His  righteous- 
ness (xii.  16),  of  the  difference  between  those  who 
are  the  "  less  to  be  blamed  "  as  "  seeking  God  and 
desirous  to  find  Him"  (xiii.  »>),  and  the  victims  of 
a  darker  and  more  debasing  idolatry.  Here  also  the 
unknown  writer  of  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon  seems 
to  prepare  the  way  for  the  higher  and  wider  teach- 
ing ill' the  New  Testament. 

It  does  not,  (all  within  the  scope  of  the  present 
article  to  speak  of  the  controversies  which   have 
a  ithin  the  Church  of  England,  or  in  Lutheran 
rnied  communities  abroad,  in  connexion  with 
the  authority  and  use  of  these  Books.     Those  dis- 
putes raise  questions  of  a  very  grave  interest  to  tin- 
student  of  Ecclesiastical  History.     What   has  been 
aimed  at  here  is  to  supply  the  Biblical  student  with 
Inch  will  prepare  him  b  irly  and 

impartially.  [E.  H.  P.] 

APOLLO'NIA  :'\TT0\\wi>la>.  a  city  of 
donia,  through  which  Paul  and  Silas  passed  in  their 
way  from  Philippi  ami    imphipolis  to  The 
(Acts  xvii.  1).     It  was  in  the  district  of  Mygdonia 
(Plin.  iv.  In.  s.  17  i.  and  according  to  the    I 

.'V  was  distant  :',n  Roman  miles  from  Am- 
phipolis  and  .".7  Roman  miles  from  Thessalonica. 
This  city  must  not  be  confounded  with  the  more 
celebrated  Apollonia  in  Dlyria. 

APOLLONIUS  ('.\tto\\<Zi>ios),   the  son  of 


APOLLOS 


83 


Thrasaeus  governor  of  Coele-Syria  and  Phoe- 
nice,  under  SELETJCUS  IV.  PmLOPATOE,  B.C. 
187  ff.,  a  bitter  enemy  of  the  Jews  (2  Mace.  iv. 
4),  who  urged  the  ting,  at  the  instigation  of  Simon 
the  commander  (crrpaT-nyds)  of  the  temple,  to 
plunder  the  temple  at  Jerusalem  (2  Mace.  iii.  5  ff. ). 
The  writer  of  the  Declamation  on  the  Maccabees, 
printed  among  the  works  of  Josephus,  relates  of 
Apollonius  the  circumstances  winch  are  commonly 
referred  to  his  emissary  Heliodorus  (Be  Mace.  4; 
cf.  2  Mace.  iii.  7  ff.). 

2.  An  officer  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  governor 
of  Samaria  (Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  5,  5  ;  7,  1),  who  le  I 
out  a  large  force  against  Judas  Maccabaeus,  but  was 
defeated  and  slain  B.C.  166  (1  Mace.  iii.  10-12  ;  Jo- 
seph. Ant.  xii.  71).  He  is  probably  the  same  per- 
son who  was  chief  commissioner  of  the  revenue  of 
Judaea  (&p%u>v  <popo\oyias,  1  Mace.  i.  29  ;  cf. 
2  Mace.  v.  24),  who  spoiled  Jerusalem,  taking 
advantage  of  the  Sabbath  (2  Mace.  v.  24-26),  and 
occupied  a  fortified  position  there  (B.C.  168) 
(1  Mace.  i.  30  ft'.). 

3.  The  son  of  Menestheus  (possibly  identical 
with  the  former),  an  envoy  commissioned  (B.C. 
173)  by  Antiochus  Epiphanes  to  congratulate  Pto- 
lemaeus  Philometor  on  his  being  enthroned  (2  Maec. 
iv.  21).  An  ambassador  of  the  same  name  was  at. 
the  head  of  the  embassy  which  Antiochus  sent  to 
Rome  (Liv.  xlii.  6). 

4.  The  son  of  Gennaeus  (o  rod  Fevvalov,  it 
seems  impossible  that  this  can  be  des  edlen  Apoll. 
So/ni,  Luth.),  a  Syrian  general  under  Antiochus  V. 
Eupator  c.  B.C.  163  (2  Mace.  xii.  2). 

5.  The  Daian  (Ados,  Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  4,  ><  :'., 
i.  e.  one  of  the  Dahae  or  Dai,  a  people  of  Sogdiana),  a 
governor  of  Coele-Syria  (rov  '6vra  €-jrl  k.  2.  1  Mace. 
x.  69)  under  Alexander  Balas,  wdio  embraced  the 
cause  of  his  rival  Demetrius  Nicator,  and  was  ap- 
pointed by  him  to  a  chief  command  (1  Mace.  I.  c. 
/caTecrTTjtre,  Vulg.  constituit  duceni).  If  he  were 
the  same  as  the  Apollonius  whom  Polybius  men- 
tions as  foster-brother  and  confidant  of  Demetrius  I. 
(probably  a  son  of  (3)  SuoiV  inrapxovTOtv  aSe\(po7f, 
MeAedypov  Kal  Mevecr84a>s,  Polyb.  xxxi.  21,  §2~), 
his  conduct  is  easily  intelligible.  Apollonius  raised  a 
large  force  and  attacked  Jonathan,  the  ally  of  Alex- 
ander, but  was  entirely  defeated  by  him  (B.C.  147) 
near  Azotus  (1  Mace.  x.  70  ff.).  Josephus  (Ant. 
xiii.  4,  §3  f.)  represents  Apollonius  as  the  general  of 
Alexander  at  the  time  of  his  defeat  ;  but  this  state- 
ment, though  it  has  found  advocates  (Wernsdorf, 
de  fide  lihr.  Mace.  p.  135,  yet  doubtfully),  appears 
to  be  untenable  on  internal  grounds.  Cf.  Grimm, 
1  Mace.  x.  69.  [P..  F.  W.] 

APOLLOPHANES  ('ATroAXo^xx^s;    Apol- 
lophancs),  a   Syrian,  killed  by  Judas    Mac 
(1  Mace.  ii.  5). 

APOL'LOS  ('AiroAAws,  i.  C.  'AttoWwvios,  as 

the  ( !odej  I' ■   I .  illy  gives  it,  or  perhaps  'AttoA- 

\6Swpos),  a  Jew  from  Alexandria,  eloquent  (\6yws, 
which  may  al  .  and  mighty  in  the 

Scriptures :  one  instructed  in  the  way  of  the  Lord 
i  according  to  the  imperfect  view  of  the 
disciples  of  John  the  Baptist  (Acts  xviii.  25),  but 
on  his  coming  in  Cphesus  during  a  temporary  ab- 
sence of  St.  Paul,  a.m.  54,  move  perfectly  taught 
by  Aquila  and  Priscilla.  After  this  he  became  a 
preacher  of  the  gospel,  first  in  Achaia,  and  then  in 
Corinth  (Acts  xviii.  27,  xix.  1),  where  he  v. 
that  which  Paul  had  planted  (1  Cor.  iii.  9).  When 
the  apostle  wrote  his  liist  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians, 
Apollos   was  with  or  near  him  il  Cor.  xvi.  12), 

G  2 


84 


APOLLYON 


probably  at  Ephesus  in  a.D.  57  :  wg  hear  of  him 
then  that  he  was  unwilling  at  that  time  to  journey 
to  Corinth,  but  would  do  so  when  he  should  have 
convenient  time.  He  is  mentioned  but  once  more 
in  the  N.  T.,  in  Tit.  iii.  13,  where  Titus  is  de- 
sired to  "  bring  Zenas  the  lawyer  and  Apollos  on 
their  way  diligently,  that  nothing  may  be  wanting 
to  them."  After  this  nothing  is  known  of  him. 
Tradition  makes  him  bishop  of  Caesarea  {Menolog. 
Graec.  ii.  b.  17).  The  exact  part  which  Apollos 
took  in  the  missionary  work  of  the  apostolic  age 
can  never  be  ascertained :  and  much  fruitless  con- 
jecture has  been  spent  on  the  subject.  After  the 
entire  amity  between  St.  Paul  and  him  which 
appeal's  in  the  first  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  it  is 
hardly  possible  to  imagine  any  important  difference 
in  the  doctrines  which  they  taught.  Certainly  we 
cannot  accede  to  the  hypothesis  that  the  crocpla 
against  which  the  apostle -so  often  warns  the  Co- 
rinthians, was  a  characteristic  of  the  teaching  of 
Apollos.  Thus  much  may  safely  be  granted,  that 
there  may  have  been  difference  enough  in  the  outward 
character  and  expression  of  the  two  to  attract  the 
lover  of  eloquence  and  philosophy  rather  to  Apollos, 
somewhat  perhaps  to  the  disparagement  of  St.  Paul. 
Much  ingenuity  has  been  spent  in  Germany  in 
defining  the  four  parties  in  the  church  at  Corinth, 
supposed  to  be  indicated  1  Cor.  i.  12  :  and  the 
Apollos  party  has  been  variously  characterised :  see 
Neander,  Pflanz.  u.  Leitung,  p.  378  ff.  4th  ed. ; 
Conybeare  and  Howson,  Life  and  Epistles  of  St. 
Paul,  vol.  i.,  p.  526;  vol.  ii.  pp.  6-11,  2nd.  ed. 
Winer  refers  to  Pfizer,  Diss,  de  Apollone  doctore 
apostol.,  Altorf,  1718:  Hopf.,  Comm.  de  Apollone 
pseudo  doctore,  Hag.  1782 :  and  especially  to 
Heymann,  in  the  Saxon  Exegctische  Studien,  ii. 
213  ff.  [H.A.] 

APOLL'YON.     [Asmodetjs.] 

APOSTLE  (airSa-roXos,  one  sent  forth),  the 
official  name,  in  the  N.  T.,  originally  of  those 
Twelve  of  the  disciples  whom  Jesus  chose,  to  send 
forth  first  to  preach  the  gospel,  and  to  be  with  Him 
dining  the  course  of  his  ministry  on  earth.  After- 
wards it  was  extended  to  others  who,  though  not  of 
the  number  of  the  Twelve,  yet  were  equal  with 
them  in  office  and  dignity.  The  woid  also  appears 
to  have  been  used  in  a  non-official  sense  to  desig- 
nate a  much  wider  circle  of  Christian  messengers 
and  teachers  (see  2  Cor.  viii.  23 ;  Phil.  ii.  25). 
It  is  only  of  those  who  were  officially  designated 
apostles  that  we  treat  in  this  article. 

The  original  qualification  of  an  apostle,  as  stated 
by  St.  Peter,  on  occasion  of  electing  a  successor  to 
the  traitor  Judas,  was,  that  he  should  have  boen 
personally  acquainted  with  the  whole  ministerial 
course  of  our  Lord,  from  the  baptism  of  John  till 
the  day  when  He  was  taken  up  into  heaven.  He 
himself  describes  them  as  "  they  that  had  continued 
with  Him  in  his  temptations"  (Luke  xxii.  28).  By 
this  close  personal  intercourse  with  Him,  they  were 
peculiarly  fitted  to  give  testimony  to  the  facts  of 
redemption :  and  we  gather,  from  his  own  words 
in  John  xiv.  28,  xv.  26,  27,  xvi.  13,  that  an  espe- 
cial bestowal  of  the  Spirit's  influence  was  granted 
them,  by  which  their  memories  were  quickened, 
and  their  power  of  reproducing  that  which  they 
had  heard  from  Him  increased  above  the  ordinary 
measure  of  man.  The  apostles  were  from  the 
lower  ranks  of  life,  simple  and  uneducated  ;  some 
of  them  were  related  to  Jesus  according  to  the 
flesh  :    some  had  previously  been  disciples  of  John 


APOSTLE 

the  Baptist.  Our  Lord  chose  them  early  in  his 
public  career,  though  it  is  uncertain  precisely  at 
what  time.  Some  of  them  had  certainly  partly 
attached  themselves  to  Him  before ;  but  after  their 
call  as  apostles,  they  appear  to  have  been  continu- 
ously with  Him,  or  in  liis  service.  They  seem  to 
have  been  all  on  an  equality,  both  during  and  after 
the  ministry  of  Christ  on  earth.  We  find  one 
indeed,  St.  Peter,  from  fervour  of  personal  charac- 
ter, usually  prominent  among  them,  and  distin- 
guished by  having  the  first  place  assigned  him  in 
founding  the  Jewish  and  Gentile  churches  [Peter]  ; 
but  we  never  find  the  slightest  trace  in  Scripture 
of  any  superiority  or  primacy  being  in  consequence 
accorded  to  him.  We  also  find  that  he  and  two 
others,  James  and  John,  the  sons  of  Zebedee,  are 
admitted  to  the  inner  privacy  of  our  Lord's  acts 
and  sufferings  on  several  occasions  (Mark  v.  37  ; 
Matt.  xvii.  1,  ff.,  xxvi.  37);  but  this  is  no  proof 
of  superiority  in  rank  or  office.  Early  in  our 
Lord's  ministry,  He  sent  them  out  two  and  two  to 
preach  repentance,  and  perform  miracles  in  his 
name  (Matt.  x. ;  Luke  ix.).  This  their  mission 
was  of  the  nature  of  a  solemn  call  to  the  children  of 
Israel,  to  whom  it  was  confined  (Matt.  x.  5,  6). 
There  is  however  in  his  charge  to  the  apostles  on 
this  occasion,  not  a  word  of  their  proclaiming  his 
own  mission  as  the  Messiah  of  the  Jewish  people : 
their  preaching  was  at  this  time  strictly  of  a  pre- 
paratory kind,  resembling  that  of  John  the  Baptist, 
the  Lord's  forerunner. 

The  Apostles  were  early  warned  by  their  Master 
of  the  solemn  nature  and  the  danger  of  their  calling 
(Matt.  x.  17),  but  were  not  entrusted  with  any 
esoteric  doctrines,  of  which  indeed  his  teaching, 
being  eminently  and  entirely  practical,  did  not  ad- 
mit. They  accompanied  Him  in  his  journeys  of 
teaching  and  to  the  Jewish  feasts,  saw  his  wonderful 
works,  heard  his  discourses  addressed  to  the  people 
(Matt.  v.  1  ff.,  xxiii.  1  ff.  ;  Luke  iv.  13  ff.)  or 
those  which  he  held  with  learned  Jews  (Matt.  xix. 
13  ff. ;  Luke  x.  25  ff.),  made  inquiries  of  Him  on 
religious  matters,  sometimes  concerning  his  own 
sayings,  sometimes  of  a  general  nature  (Matt.  xiii. 
10  ff.,  xv.  15  ff.,  xviii.  1  ft.;  Luke  viii.  9  if.,  xii. 
41,  xvii.  5  ;  John  ix.  2  ff.,  xiv.  5,  22  al.)  :  some- 
times they  worked  miracles  (Mark  vi.  13  ;  Luke  ix. 
6),  sometimes  attempted  to  do  so  without  suc- 
cess (Matt.  xvii.  16).  They  recognised  their 
Master  as  the  Christ  of  God  (Matt.  xvi.  16  ;  Luke 
ix.  20),  and  ascribed  to  Him  supernatural  power 
(Luke  ix.  54),  but  in  the  recognition  of  the  spiritual 
teaching  and  mission  of  Christ,  they  made  very 
slow  progress,  held  back  as  they  were  by  weakness 
of  apprehension  and  by  natural  prejudices  (Matt, 
xv.  16,  xvi.  22,  xvii.  20  f. ;  Luke  ix.  54,  xxiv.  25  ; 
John  xvi.  12)  :  they  were  compelled  to  ask  of  Him 
the  explanation  of  even  his  simplest  parables  (Mark, 
viii.  14  ff. ;  Luke  xii.  41  ff.),  and  openly  confessed 
their  weakness  of  faith  (Luke  xvii.  5).  Even  at 
the  removal  of  our  Lord  from  the  earth  they  were 
yet  weak  in  their  knowledge  (Luke  xxiv.  21 ;  John 
xvi.  12),  though  He  had  for  so  long  been  carefully 
preparing  and  instructing  them.  And  when  that 
happened  of  which  He  had  so  often  forewarned  them, 
— his  apprehension  by  the  chief  priests  and  Phari- 
sees,— they  all  forsook  Him  and  fled  (Matt.  xxvi. 
56,  &c).  They  left  his  burial  to  one  who  was  not 
of  their  number  and  to  the  women,  and  were  only 
convinced  of  his  resurrection  on  the  very  plainest 
proofs  furnished  by  Himself.  It  was  first  when  this 
fact  became  undeniable  that  light  seems  to  have 


APOSTLE 

entered  their  minds,  and  not  even  ihen  without  his 
own  special  aid,  opening  their  understandings  that 
they  might  understand  the  Scriptures.  Even  after 
that,  many  of  them  returned  to  their  common  occu- 
pations (John  xxi.  3  11'.),  and  it  required  a  new 
direction  from  the  Lord  to  recall  them  to  their  mis- 
sion, and  re-unite  them  in  Jerusalem  (Acts  i.  4). 
Before  the  descent  of  the  Holy  Spirit  on  the  Church, 
Peter,  at  least,  seems  to  have  been  specially  inspired 
by  Him  to  declare  the  prophetic  sense  of  Scripture 
respecting  the  traitor  Judas,  and  direct  his  place  to 
be  idled  up.  On  the  Feast  of  Pentecost,  ten  days 
after  our  Lord's  ascension,  the  Holy  Spirit  came 
down  on  the  assembled  church  (Acts  ii.  1  If.)  ;  and 
from  that  time  the  Apostles  became  altogether  dif- 
ferent men,  giving  witness  with  power  of  the  life 
and  death  and  resurrection  of  Jesus  as  he  had  de- 
clared they  should  (Luke  xxiv.  48  ;  Acts  i.  8.  22, 
ii.  32,  iii.  15,  v.  32,  xiii.  31).  First  of  all  the 
mother-church  at  Jerusalem  grew  up  under  their 
hands  (Acts  iii.-vii.),  and  their  superior  dignity  and 
power  were  universally  acknowledged  by  the  rulers 
and  the  people  (Acts  v.  12  ff.) .  Even  the  persecution 
which  arose  about  Stephen,  and  put  the  first  check 
on  the  spread  of  the  Gospel  in  Judaea,  does  not 
seem  to  have  brought  peril  to  the  Apostles  (Acts 
viii.  1).  Their  first  mission  out  of  Jerusalem  was 
to  Samaria  (Acts  viii.  5  ff.  14),  where  the  Lord 
himself  had,  during  his  ministry,  sown  the  seed 
of  the  Gospel.  Here  ends,  properly  speaking  (or 
rather  perhaps  with  the  general  visitation  hinted  at 
in  Acts  ix.  32),  the  first  period  of  the  Apostles' 
agency,  during  which  its  centre  is  Jerusalem,  and 
the  prominent  figure  is  that  of  St.  Peter.  Agree- 
ably to  the  promise  of  our  Lord  to  him  (Matt.  xvi. 
18),  which  we  conceive  it  impossible  to  understand 
otherwise  than  in  a  personal  sense,  he  among  the 
twelve  foundations  (Rev.  xxi.  14)  was  the  stone  on 
whom  the  Church  was  first  built;  and  it  was  his 
privilege  first  to  open  the  doors  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  to  Jews  (Acts  ii.  14,  42)  and  to  Gentiles 
(Acts  x.  11).  The  centre  of  the  second  period  of 
the  apostolic  agency  is  Antioch,  where  a  church 
soon  was  built  up,  consisting  of  Jews  and  Gentiles; 
and  the  central  figure  of  this  and  of  the  subsequent 
period  is  St.  Paul,  a  convert  not  originally  belong- 
ing to  the  number  of  the  Twelve,  but  wonderfully 
prepared  and  miraculously  won  for  the  high  office 
i.|.  This  period,  whose  history  (all  that  we 
know  of  it)  is  related  in  Acts  xi.  1 9 — r i< >,  xiii.  1-."), 
was  marked  by  the  united  working  of  Paul  and  the 
apostles,  in  the  co-operation  and  intercourse 
of  the  two  churches  of  Antioch  and  Jerusalem. 
From  this  time  the  third  apostolic  period  opens, 
marked  by  the  almost  entire  disappearance  of  the 
Twelve  from  the  sacred  narrative,  and  the  exclusive 
agency  of  St.  Paul,  the  great  apostle  of  the  Gen- 
tiles. The  whole  of  the  remaining  narrative  of  the 
Acts  is  occupied  with  his  missionary  journeys; 
and  when  we  Leave  him  at  Rome,  all  the  Gentile 
churches  from  Jerusalem  roundabout  unto  lllvriemn 
owe  to  him  their  foundation,  ami  look  to  him  for 
supervision,  Of  the  missionary  agency  of  the  res! 
of  the  Twelve,  we  know  absolutely  nothing  from 
the  sacred  narrative.  Some  notices  we  i 
their  personal  history,  which  will  be  found  under 
their  respective  names,  together  with  the  principal 

legends,  trustworthy  or  untrustworthy,  which  have 
come  down  to  us  respecting  them.     See  I'i  n  ft, 
James,  John  especially.    As  regards  the  aj 
office,  it  seems  to  have  been  pre-eminently  that  of 
founding    the    churches,    and    upholding    them    by 


APPEAL 


Sb 


supernatural  power  specially  bestowed  for  that  pur- 
pose. It  ceased,  as  a  matter  of  course,  with  its  first 
holders:  all  continuation  of  it,  from  the  very  con- 
ditions of  its  existence  (cf.  1  Cor.  ix.  1),  being  im- 
possible. The  enlffKOKos  of  the  ancient  churches 
co-existed  with,  and  did  not  in  any  sense  succeed, 
the  Apostles;  and  when  it  is  claimed  for  bishops  or 
any  church  officers  that  they  aie  then-  successois, 
it  can  be  understood  only  chronologically,  and  not 
officially. 

The  work  which  contains  the  fullest  account  ot 
the  agency  of  the  Apostles  within  the  limits  of  the 
N.  T.  history  is  Neander's  treatise,  Gesch.  der 
Pflanzuru)  und  Leitung  der  christlichen  Kirche 
durch  die  Apostel,  4th  edition,  Hamburg,  1847. 
More  ample,  but  far  less  interesting,  notices  may 
be  found  in  Cave's  Antiq.  Apost.,  or  History  of 
the  Apostles,  Lond.  1677.  [H.  A.] 

AP'PAIM  (Q^SK;  ' Air<paii> ;  Apphaim),  name 
of  a  man  (1  Chr.  ii.  30,  31). 

APPEAL.  The  principle  of  appeal  was  recog- 
nized by  the  Mosaic  law  in  the  establishment  of  a 
central  court  under  the  presidency  of  the  judge  or 
ruler  for  the  time  being,  before  which  all  cases  too 
difficult  for  the  local  courts  were  to  be  tried  (Dent. 
xvii.  8-9).  Winer,  indeed,  infers  from  Josephus 
{Ant.  iv.  8,  §  14,  auairefx-n-eToocrav,  sc.  ol  Sucacr- 
rai)  that  this  was  not  a  proper  court  of  appeal,  the 
local  judges  and  not  the  litigants  being,  according  to 
the  above  language,  the  appellants  :  but  these  words, 
taken  in  connexion  with  a  former  passage  in  the 
same  chapter  (e?  tjs  .  .  .  riva  alriav  irpcxpepoi ) 
may  be  regarded  simply  in  the  light  of  a  general 
direction.  According  to  the  above  regulation,  the 
appeal  lay  in  the  time  of  the  Judges  to  the  judge 
(1  Judg.  iv.  5),  and  under  the  monarchy  to  the 
king,  who  appears  to  have  deputed  certain  pel  sons 
to  inquire  into  the  facts  of  the  case,  and  record  his 
decision  thereon  (2  Sam.  xv.  3).  Jehoshaphat  dele- 
gated his  judicial  authority  to  a  court  permanently 
established  for  the  purpose  (2  Chr.  xix.  8).  These 
courts  were  re-established  by  Ezra  (Ezr.  vii.  25). 
After  the  institution  of  the  Sanhedrim  the  final 
appeal  lay  to  them,  and  the  various  stages  through 
which  a  case  might  pass  are  thus  described  by  the 
Talmudists — from  the  local  consistory  before  which 
the  cause  was  first  tried,  to  the  consistory  that  sat 
in  the  neighbouring  town:  thence  to  the  courts  at 
Jerusalem,  commencing  in  the  court  of  the  23  that 
sat  in  the  gate  of  Shushan,  proceeding  to  the  court 
that  sat  in  the  gate  of  Nicanor,  and  concluding  with 
the  reat  council  of  the  Sanhedrim  that  sat  in  the 
roomGazith  (Carpzov.  Appar.  p.  571). 

A  Roman  citizen  under  the  republic  had  the 
right  of  appealing  in  criminal  cases  from  the  deci- 
sion of  a  magistrate  to  the  people  ;  and  as  the 
emperor  succeeded  to  the  power  of  the  people,  there 
was  an  appeal  to  him  in  the  Last  resort.    (See  Diet. 

of  Ant.  art.  Ari'ia.I.ATin. ) 

St.  Paul,  as  a  Roman  citizen,  exercised  a  right  of 
appeal  from  the  jurisdiction  of  the  local  court  at 
Jerusalem  to  the  Emperor  (Acts  wv.  llu  Rut 
as  no  decision  had  been  given,  there  could  be  no 
appeal,  properly  speaking,  in  his  case:  tl 
guage  used  I  Acts  xxv.  9)  implies  the  right  on  the 
the  accused  of  electing  either  to  be  tried  by 
ovincial  magistrate,  or  by  the  Emperor.  Since 
the    procedure   in  the  Jewish   courts   at    thai 

was  of  a  mixed  and  undefined  character,  the  Roman 
and  the  Jewish  authorities  co-existing  and  carrying 
on  the  course  tween  them,  Paul  availed 


86 


APPHIA 


himself  of  his   undoubted  privilege  to  be  tried  by 
the  pure  Roman  law.  [W.  L.  B.] 

AP'PHIA  ('A7r<£ia,  a  Greek  form  of  the  Latin 
Appia,  written  'Airiria.  Acts  xxviii.  15),  a  Christian 
woman  addressed  jointly  with  Philemon  and  Ar- 
chippus  in  Philem.  1,  apparently  a  member  of  the 
former's  household,  seeing  that  the  letter  is  on  a 
family  matter,  and  that  the  church  that  is  in  her 
house  is  mentioned  next  to  these  two,  and  not  im- 
probably his  wife  (Chrys.,  Theodoret).  Nothing 
more  is  said  or  known  other.  [H.  A.] 

AP'PHUS  (' Air<pavs ;  Apphus),  surname  of 
Jonathan  Maccabaeus  (1  Mace.  ii.  5). 

AP'PII  FOR'UM  ('Attttiov  cp6poi>,  Acts  xxviii. 
15)  was  a  very  well  known  station  (as  we  learn 
from  Hor.  Sat .  i.  5,  and  Cic.  ad  Att.  ii.  10)  on  the 
Appian  Way,  the  great  road  which  led  from  Rome 
to  the  neighbourhood  of  the  Bay  of  Naples.  St. 
Paul,  having  landed  at  Puteoli  (ver.  13)  on  his 
arrival  from  Malta,  proceeded  under  the  charge  of 
the  centurion  along  the  Appian  Way  towards  Rome, 
and  found  at  Appii  Forum  a  group  of  Christians, 
who  had  gone  to  meet  him.  The  position  of  this 
placa  is  fixed  by  the  ancient  Itineraries  at  43  miles 
from  Rome  (Itin.  Ant.  p.  107;  Itin.  Hier.  p. 
611).  The  Jerusalem  Itinerary  calls  it  a  mutatio, 
Horace  describes  it  as  full  of  taverns  and  boatmen. 
This  arose  from  the  circumstance  that  it  was  at  the 
northern  end  of  a  canal  which  ran  parallel  with  the 
road,  through  a  considerable  part  of  the  Pomptine 
Marshes.  There  is  no  difficulty  in  identifying  the 
site  with  some  ruins  near  Treponti ;  and  in  fact 
the  43rd  milestone  is  preserved  there.  The  name 
is  probably  due  to  Appius  Claudius,  who  first  con- 
structed this  part  of  the  road  :  and  from  a  passage 
in  Suetonius,  it  would  appeal-  that  it  was  connected 
in  some  way  with  his  family,  even  in  the  time  of 
St.  Paul.    "[Three  Taverns.]  [J.  S.  H.] 

APPLE,  APPLE-TEEE  (ITI2J-I),  Tappuach. 
The  passages  in  which  this  fruit  is  mentioned  are  Cant, 
vii.  8  ;  Prov.  xxv.  11,  and  the  same  word  is  used  for 
the  tree  in  Joel  i.  12  ;  Cant.  ii.  3,  5,  viii.  5.  The  de- 
rivation  is  from  PIQJ,  flavit,  spiravit,  and  implies  a 
fragrance  belonging  to  the  fruit  as  noticed  in  Cant.  vii. 
8.  The  cultivation  of  these  trees  probably  gave  its 
name  to  Beth-Tappuah  of  the  mountains  of  Judah 
(see  Josh.  xv.  34,  53;   xii.  17),  the  modem  Tetfuh 

(Arab.  _  »jLi')>  where  Robinson  noticed  olive- 
yards  and  vineyards,  with  marks  of  industry  and 
thrift  on  every  side.  "  Many  of  the  former  ter- 
races," he  says,  "  along  the  hill-sides  are  still  in 
use,  and  the  land  looks  somewhat  as  it  may  have 
done  in  ancient  times"  (Robins,  ii.  71).  Unfor- 
tunately he  makes  no  mention  of  any  fruit  which 
might  be  identified  with  the  ITISI7)  of  Scripture. 

Referring  to  the  passages  above  quoted  we  may 
gather  that  the  fruit  was  golden-coloured,  fragrant, 
and  sweet,  and  that  the  tree  was  shady  and  beauti- 
ful. "  As  the  apple-tree  among  the  trees  of  the 
wood,  so  is  my  beloved  among  the  sons." 

In  all  the  passages  the  rendering  of  the  LXX.  is 
/j.rj\ov.     Vulg.  malum. 

It  is  said  that  the  apple  is  a  fruit  little  known 
in  Palestine,  and  that  this  rendering  of  fl-lSF)  is  not 
consistent  with  the  excellence  ascribed  both  to  the 
fruit  and  tree  by  Scripture.     Bishop  Patrick  sup- 


AQUILA 

poses  tlie  word  to  signify  all  fruits  that  breathe  a 
fragrant  odour,  such  as  oranges,  peaches,  citrons, 
pomegranates,  &c. ;  i.e.  he  holds  the  name  mSF) 

to  be  generic,  not  specific.  Celsius  {Hierohot.  t.  i. 
p.  255)  has  laboured  to  identify  this  fruit  with 
the  mala  Cydonia,  or  quinces  (see  also  Ray,  Hist, 
of  Plants,  v.  ii.  c.  iii.  p.  1453)  ;  but  the  most  gene- 
ral opinion  is  that  the  citron-tree  {Citrus  medico) 
is  the  ITlSF).  In  the  character  both  of  its  foliage 
and  its  fruit,  it  satisfies  all  the  above-quoted  pas- 
sages of  Scripture,  and  it  flourishes  in  Western  Asia 
in  company  with  the  orange  and  the  lemon.  It  is  a 
large  and  beautiful  tree,  it  is  always  green,  it  is 
very  fragrant,  gives  a  deep  and  refreshing  shade, 
and  is  laden  with  golden  coloured  fruit.  In  Cant, 
ii.  5,  the  rendering  of  the  A.  V.,  "  Comfort  me  with 
apples"  should  be  rather  "  strew  me  a  couch  of 
citron  leaves,"  in  accordance  with  the  Greek  of  the 
LXX.,  ffroifidcraTi  /xe  iv  /r/jAois.  [W.  D.] 

AQ'UILA  ('AicvXas:  Wolf,  Curac,  on  Acts 
xviii.  2,  believes  it  to  have  been  Graecised  from  the 
Latin  Aquila,  not  to  have  any  Hebrew  origin,  and  to 
have  been  adopted  as  a  Latin  name,  as  Paulus  by 
Saul),  a  Jew  whom  St.  Paul  found  at  Corinth  on  his 
arrival  from  Athens  (Acts  xviii.  2).  He  is  there  de- 
scribed as  Xlovriiibs  to?  yevet,  from  the  connexion 
of  which  description  with  the  tact  that  we  find  more 
than  one  Pontius  Aquila  in  the  Pontian  gens  at  Rome 
in  the  days  of  the  Republic  (see  Cic.  ad  Fam.  x.  33  ; 
Suet.  Caes.  78 ;  Diet,  of  Biogr.  ail.  Aquila  and 
Pontius),  it  has  been  imagined  that  he  may  have 
been  a  freedman  of  a  Pontius  Aquila,  and  that  his 
being  a  Pontian  by  birth  may  have  been  merely  an 
inference  from  his  name.  But  besides  that  this  is  a 
point  on  which  St.  Luke  could  hardly  be  ignorant, 
Aquila,  the  translator  of  the  0.  T.  into  Greek,  was 
also  a  native  of  Pontus.  At  the  time  when  St.  Paul 
met  with  Aquila  at  Corinth,  he  had  fled,  with  his  wife 
Priscilla,  from  Rome,  in  consequence  of  an  order  of 
Claudius  commanding  all  Jews  to  leave  Rome  (Suet. 
Claud.  25 — "  Judaeos  impulsore  Chresto  assidue 
tumultuantes  Roma  expulit:"  see  Claudius). 
He  became  acquainted  with  St.  Paul,  and  they 
abode  together,  and  wrought  at  their  common  trade 
of  making  the  Cilician  tent  or  hair-cloth  [Paul]  . 
On  the  departure  of  the  Apostle  from  Corinth,  a 
year  and  six  months  after,  Priscilla  and  Aquila 
accompanied  him  to  Ephesus  on  his  way  to  Syria. 
There  they  remained ;  and  when  Apollos  came  to 
Ephesus,  knowing  only  the  baptism  of  John,  they 
took  him  and  taught  him  the  way  of  the  Lord 
more  perfectly.  At  what  time  they  became  Chris- 
tians is  uncertain:  had  Aquila  been  converted  before 
his  first  meeting  with  St.  Paul,  the  word  naB^r^s 
would  hardly  have  been  omitted  (see  against  this 
view  Neander,  Pfl.  u  Leit.  p.  333  f.,  and  for  it 
Herzog  Encycl.  s.v.).  At  the  time  of  writing 
1  Cor.,  Aquila  and  his  wife  were  still  in  Ephesus 
(1  Cor.  xvi.  19) ;  but  in  Rom.  xvi.  3  ff.,  we  find 
them  again  at  Rome,  and  their  house  a  place  of 
assembly  for  the  Christians.  They  are  there  de- 
scribed as  having  endangered  their  lives  for  that  of 
the  Apostle.  In  2  Tim.  iv.  19,  they  are  saluted  as 
being  with  Timotheus,  probably  at  Ephesus.  In 
both  these  latter  places'  the  form  Prisca  and  not 
Priscilla  is  used. 

Nothing  further  is  known  of  either  of  them. 
The  Menolog.  Graecorum  gives  only  a  vague  tradi- 
tion that  they  were  beheaded  ;  and  the  Martyrol. 
Rom.  celebrates  both  on  July  8.  [H.  A.] 


AR 

AR  (ly)  and  AR  OF  MOAB  (3K10  ~VJ' 
Sam.  Vers.  flEJHN ;  "tip ;  Ar),  one  of  the  chief 
places  of  Moab  (Is.  xv.  1 ;  Num.  xxi.  28). b 
From  the  Onomasticon  (Moab'),  and  from  Jerome's 
Com.  on  Is.  xv.  1,  it  appears  that  in  that  day 
the  place  was  known  as  Areopolis  c  and  Rabbath- 
Moab,  "  id  est,  grandis  Moab  "  (Reland,  577 ;  Rob. 
ii.  1(36,  note).d  The  site  is  still  called  Jiabba ;  it 
lies  about  half-way  between  Kerch  and  the  Wady 
Mojeb,  10  or  11  miles  from  each,  the  Roman  road 
passing  through  it.  The  remains  are  not  so  im- 
portant as  might  be  imagined  (Irby,  14u  ;  Burekh. 
377  ;  De  Sauloy,  ii.  44-1(3,  and  Map  8). 

In  the  books  of  Moses  Ar  appears  to  be  used  as  a 
representative  name  for  the  whole  nation  of  Moab  ; 
see  Deut.  ii.  9, 18,  29  ;  and  also  Num.  xxi.  15,  where 
it  is  coupled  with  a  word  rarely  if  ever  used  in  the 
sarne  manner,  H2^  "  the  dwelling  of  Ar."  In 
Num.  xxii.  36  the  almost  identical  words  'D  TS? 
are  rendered  "  a  city  of  Moab,"  following  the  Sam. 
"Vers.,  the  LXX.,  and  Vulgate.  [G.] 

A'RA  (JON  ;    'Apa ;    Ara),   name  of  a   man 

(1  Chr.  vii.  38). 

A'RAB  (1"1N;    A(>e>;  Alex.,  'Epe'/3 ;   Arab), 

a  city  of  Judah  in  the  mountainous  district,  pro- 
bably in  the  neighbourhood  of  Hebron.  It  is  men- 
tioned only  in  Josh.  xv.  52,  and  has  not  yet  been 
identified.     [Arb'TE.] 

A'RABAH    (nnnV;    "Apafa;     Campestria, 

planities,),  Josh,  xviii.  18.  Although  this  word 
appears  in  the  Auth.  Vers,  in  its  original  shape 
only  in  the  verse  above  quoted,  yet  in  the  Hebrew 
text  it  is  of  frequent  occurrence. 

1.  If  the  derivation  of  Gesenius  (Thes.  1066)  is  to 
be  accepted,  the  fundamental  meaning  of  the  term 
is  "burnt  up  "  or  "waste,"  and  thence  "sterile," 
and  in  accordance  with  this  idea  it  is  employed  in 
various  poetical  parts  of  Scripture  to  designate  gene- 


ARABAH 


87 


a  According-  to  Gesenius  {Jesaia,  515),  an  old,  pro- 
bably Moabite,  form  of  the  word  "PJJ,  a  "  city." 

b  Samaritan  Codex  and  Version,  "as  far  as  Moab," 
reading  "]]}  for  "|J? ;  and  so  also  LXX.  ews  M. 

c  We  have  Jerome's  testimony  that  Areopolis  was 
believed  to  be  quasi' Apeos  7roAis,  "  the  city  of  Ares" 
(Mars).  This  is  a  good  instance  of  the  tendency 
which  is  noticed  by  Trench  {English  Past  and  Pre- 
sent, 218,  220)  as  existing  in  language  to  tamper 
with  the  derivations  of  words.  He  gives  another 
example  of  it  in  "  Ilierosolyma,"  quasi  iepos,  "  holy." 

J  Hitter  (Syrien,  1212,  13)  tries  hard  to  make 
out  that  Areopolis  and  Ar-Moab  were  not  identical, 
and  that  the  latter  was  the  "  city  in  the  midst  of 
the  wady"  [Auokii]  ;  but  he  fails  to  establish  his 
point. 

e  The  early  commentators  and  translators  seem  to 
have  overlooked  or  neglected  the  fact,  that  the 
Jordan  valley  and  its  continuation  smith  of  the  Dead 
Sea  had  a  special  name  attached  to  them,  and  to  them 
only.  By  Josephus  the  Jordan  valley  is  always  called 
the  /xeya  ire&ioi' ;  but  he  applies  the  same  name  to  the 

plain  of  Esdraelon.     Jerome,  in   the   Onomasticon, 

states  the  name  by  which  it  was  then  know  n  w  as 
Avion,  avhuv  (i.e.  channel);  but  he  preserves  no 
BUCh   distinction   in   the  Vulgate,  and  renders  Arabah 

by  planitiee,  solitudo,  campestria,  desertum,  by  one 
or  all  of  which  he  translates  indiscriminately  Mishor, 
Bekaa,  Midbar,  Shefela,  Jeahimon,  equally  unmindful 

Of    the    special    force    attaching    to   several    of    these 


rally  a  ban-en,  uninhabitable  district, — "a  deso- 
lation, a  dry  land,  and  a  desert,  a  land  wherein  no 
man  dwelleth,  neither  doth  any  son  of  man  pass 
thereby "  (Jer.  Ii.  43  :  see  a  striking  remark  in 
Martineau,  395 ;  and  amongst  other  passages,  Job 
xxiv.  5,  xxxix.  6  ;   Is.  xxxiii.  9,  xxxv.  1). 

2.  But  within  this  general  signification  it  is  plain, 
from  even  a  casual  examination  of  the  topographical 
records  in  the  earlier  books  of  the  Bible,  that  the 
word  has  also  a  more  special  and  local  force.  In 
these  cases  it  is  found  with  the  definite  article 
(!"Q~ll?n,  ha-Arabah),  "  the  Arabah,"  and  is  also  so 

mentioned  as  clearly  to  refer  to  some  spot  or  district 
familiar  to  the  then  inhabitants  of  Palestine.  This 
district — although  nowhere  expressly  so  defined  in 
the  Bible,  and  although  the  peculiar  force  of  the 
word  "  Arabah  "  appears  to  have  been  disregarded 
by  even  the  earliest  commentators  and  interpreters 
of  the  Sacred  Books e — has  within  our  own  times 
been  identified  with  the  deep-sunken  valley  or  trench 
which  forms  the  most  striking  among  the  many 
striking  natural  features  of  Palestine,  and  which 
extends  with  great  uniformity  of  formation  from 
the  slopes  of  Hermon  to  the  Elanitic  Gulf  of  the 
Red  Sea ;  the  most  remarkable  depression  known  to 
exist  on  the  surface  of  the  globe  (Humboldt,  Cosmos, 
i.  150,  ed.  Bohn ;  see  also  301).  Through  the 
northern  portion  of  this  extraordinary  fissure  the 
Jordan  rushes  through  the  lakes  of  Huleh  and  Gen- 
nesareth  down  its  tortuous  course  to  the  deep  chasm 
of  the  Dead  Sea.  This  portion,  about  150  miles 
in   length,  is   known   amongst  the  Arabs   by  the 

name  of  el-Ghor  (  r*3&\  ),  an  appellation  which  it 

has  borne  certainly  since  the  days  of  Abulfeda/ 
The  southern  boundary  of  the  Ghor  has  been  fixed 
by  Robinson  to  be  the  wall  of  cliffs  which  crosses 
the  valley  about  10  miles  south  of  the  Dead  Sea. 
Down  to  the  foot  of  these  cliffs  the  Ghor  extends ; 
from  their  summits,  southward  to  the  Gulf  of 
Akabah,  the  valley  changes  its  name,  or,  it  would 


words.  Even  the  accurate  Aquila  has  failed  in  this, 
and  uses  his  favourite  r)  6/j.aAr;  indiscriminately.  The 
Talmud,  if  we  may  trust  the  single  reference  given 
by  Reland  (3C5),  mentions  the  Jordan  valley  under 
the  name  Bekaah,  a  word  at  that  time  of  no  special 
import.  The  Samaritan  Version  and  the  Targums 
apparently  confound  all  words  for  valley,  plain,  or 
low  country,  under  the  one  term  Mishor,  which  was 
originally  confined  strictly  to  the  high  smooth  downs 
east  of  Jordan  on  the  upper  level  [Misnon]. 

In  the  LXX.  we  frequently  find  the  words  'ApajSa 
and  'Apa/3o60 ;  but  it  is  difficult  to  say  whether  tnis 
has  been  done  intelligently,  or  whether  it  is  an  in- 
stance of  the  favourite  habit  of  these  translators  of 
transferring  a  Hebrew  word  literally  into  Greek  when 
they  were  unable  to  comprehend  its  force.  (See 
some  curious  examples  of  this — to  take  one  book 
only — in  2  K.  ii.  14,  a<p4">> ;  iii.  4,  vioxrjS  ;  iv.  39, 
apiwfl  ;  v.  19  (comp.  Gen.  xxxv.  1G),  SejSpafla  ;  vi.  8, 
tAp-wvi ;  ix.  13,  yapeV,  &C  &c.)  In  the  latter  case 
it  is  evidence  of  an  equal  ignorance  to  that  which 
has  rendered  the  word  by  Sutr^oi,  ko.8'  ka~ipnv,  and 
'Apapi'o. 

f  By  AbuUeda  ami  Ibn  Haukal  the  word  cl-Ghor 

is  used  to  denote  the  valley  from  the  Lake  of  Gen- 

nesareth    to    the    Dead    Sea    (Bitter,    Sinai,    1059, 

Thus  each   word    was  originally   applied   to 

tin-  whole  extent,  ami  each  has  been  since  restricted 

to  a  portion  only    see  Stanley,  App.  487).      The  word 

interpreted  by  Freytag  to  mean  "locus  de- 
pressior  inter  montea." 


88  ARABAH 

be  more  accurate  to  say,  retains  its  old  name  of 

Wady  el-Arabah  (io^   £*!$)• 

Looking  to  the  indications  of  the  Sacred  Text 
there  can  be  no  doubt  that  in  the  times  of  the  con- 
quest and  the  monarchy  the  name  "  Arabah  "  was 
applied  to  the  valley  in  the  entire  length  of  both  its 
southern  and  northern  portions.  Thus  in  Deut.  i. 
1,  probably,  and  in  Deut.  ii.  8,  certainly  (A.  V. 
"  plain  "  in  both  cases),  the  allusion  is  to  the  south- 
ern portion,  while  the  other  passages  in  which  the 
name  occurs,  point  with  certainty — now  that  the 
identification  has  been  suggested — to  the  northern 
portion.  In  Deut.  iii.  17,  iv.  49  ;  Josh.  iii.  16, 
xi.  2,  xii.  3;  and  2  K.  xiv.  25,  both  the  Dead 
Sea  and  the  Sea  of  Cinneroth  (Gennesareth)  are 
named  in  close  connexion  with  the  Arabah.  The 
allusions  in  Deut.  xi.  30 ;  Josh.  viii.  14,  xii.  1, 
xviii.  18;  2  Sam.  ii.  29,  iv.  7 ;  2  K.  xxv.  4; 
Jer.  xxxix.  4,  Iii.  7,  become  at  once  intelligible 
when  the  meaning  of  the  Arabah  is  known,  however 
puzzling  they  may  have  been  to  former  com- 
mentators.6  In  Josh.  xi.  16  and  xii.  8  the  Arabah 
takes  its  place  with  "  the  mountain,"  "  the  low- 
land "  plains  of  Philistia  and  Esdraelon,  "  the  south  " 
and  "  the  plain  "  of  Coele  Syria,  as  one  of  the  great 
natural  divisions  of  the  conquered  country. 

*3.  But  further  the  word  is  found  in  the  plural 
and  without  the  article  (n'lXlJJ,  Arbotli),  always 
in  connexion  with  either  Jericho  or  Moab,  and  there- 
fore doubtless  denoting  the  portion  of  the  Arabah 
near  Jericho  ;  in  the  former  case  on  the  west,  and 
in  the  latter  on  the  east  side  of  the  Jordan  ;  the 
Arboth-Moab  being  always  distinguished  from  the 
Sede-Moab  —  the  bare  and  burnt-up  soil  of  the 
sunken  valley,  from  the  cultivated  pasture  or  corn- 
fields of  the  downs  on  the  upper  level — with  all  the 
precision  which  would  naturally  follow  from  the 
essential  difference  of  the  two  spots.  (See  Num. 
xxii.  1,  xxvi.  3,  63,  xxxi.  12,  xxxiii.  48,  49,  50, 
xxxv.  1,  xxxvi.  13;  Deut.  xxxiv.  1,  8;  Josh.  iv. 
13,  v.  10.  xiii.  32;  2  Sam.xv.  28,  xvii.  16  ;  2  K. 
xxv.  5  ;  Jer.  xxxix.  5,  Hi.  8). 

The  word  Arabah  does  not  appear  in  the  Bible 
until  the  book  of  Numbers.  In  the  allusions  to  the 
valley  of  the  Jordan  in  Gen.  xiii.  10,  &c.  the  curious 
term  Ciccar  is  employed.  This  word  and  the  other 
words  used  in  reference  to  the  Jordan  valley,  as 
well  as  the  peculiarities  and  topography  of  that 
region — in  fact  of  the  whole  of  the  Ghor — will  be 
more  appropriately  considered  under  the  word  Jor- 
dan. At  present  our  attention  may  be  confined  to 
the  southern  division,  to  that  portion  of  this  singular 
valley  which  has  from  the  most  remote  date  borne, 
as  it  still  continues  to  bear,  the  name  of  "  Arabah." 

A  deep  interest  will  always  attach  to  this  re- 
markable district,  from  the  fact  that  it  must  have 
been  the  scene  of  a  large  portion  of  the  wanderings 
of  the  children  of  Israel  after  their  repulse  from  the 
south  of  the  Promised  Land.  Wherever  Kadesh 
and  Hormah  may  hereafter  be  found  to  lie,  we 
know  with  certainty,  even  in  our  present  state  of 
ignorance,  that  they  must  have  been  at  the  north 
of  the  Arabah  ;  and  therefore  "  the  way  of  the  Red 
Sea,"  by  which  they  journeyed  "  from  Mount  Hor 
to  compass  the  land  of  Edorn,"  after  the  refusal  of 


s  See  tlie  mistakes  of  Miehaelis,  Marius,  and  others, 
who  identified  the  Arabah  with  the  Bekaa  (i.  e.  the 
plain  of  Coele-Syria,  the  modern  cl-Bukua),  or  with 
the  Mishor,  the  level  down  country  on  the  east  of 
Jordan  (Kcil,  205,  226). 


ARABAH 

the  king  of  Edom  to  allow  them  a  passage  through 
his  country,  must  have  been  southwards,  down  the 
Arabah  towards  the  head  of  the  Gulf,  till,  as  is 
nearly  certain,  they  turned  up  one  of  the  Wadys  on 
the  left,  and  so  made  their  way  by  the  back  of  the 
mountain  of  Seir  to  the  land  of  Moab  on  the  east  of 
the  Dead  Sea. 

More  accurate  information  will  no  doubt  be  ob- 
tained before  long  of  the  whole  of  this  interesting 
country,  but  in  the  meantime  as  short  a  summary 
as  possible  is  due  of  what  can  be  collected  from 
the  reports  of  the  principal  travellers  who  have 
visited  it. 

The  direction  of  the  Ghor  is  nearly  due  north 
and  south.  The  Arabah,  however,  slightly  changes 
its  direction  to  about  N.N.E.  by  S.S.W.  (Rob.  i. 
162,  3).  But  it  preserves  the  straightness  of  its 
course,  and  the  general  character  of  the  region  is 
not  dissimilar  from  that  of  the  Ghor  (Ritter,  Sinai, 
1132;  Irby,  134)  except  that  the  soil  is  more 
sandy,  and  that  from  the  absence  of  the  central 
river  and  the  absolutely  desert  character  of  the 
highland  on  its  western  side  (owing  to  which  the 
wadys  bring  down  no  fertilising  streams  in  sum- 
mer, and  nothing  but  raging  torrents  in  winter), 
there  are  very  few  of  those  lines  and  "  circles  "  of 
verdure  which  form  so  great  a  relief  to  the  torrid 
climate  of  the  Ghor. 

The  whole  length  of  the  Arabah  proper,  from  the 
cliffs  south  of  the  Dead  Sea  to  the  head  of  the  Gulf 
of  Akabah,  appears  to  be  rather  more  than  100 
miles  (Kiepert's  Map,  Rob.  i.).  In  breadth  it  varies. 
North  of  Petra,  that  is  about  70  miles  from  the 
Gulf  of  Akabah,  it  is  at  its  widest,  being  perhaps 
from  14  to  16  miles  across :  but  it  contracts  gra- 
dually to  the  south  till  at  the  gulf  the  opening  to 
the  sea  is  but  4,  or,  according  to  some  travellers, 
2  miles  wide  (Rob.  i.  162  ;   Martineau,  392). 

The  mountains  which  form  the  walls  of  this  vast 
valley  or  trench  are  the  legitimate  successors  of 
those  which  shut  in  the  Ghor,  only  in  every  way 
grander  and  more  desert-like.  On  the  west  are  the 
long  horizontal  lines  of  the  limestone  ranges  of  the 
Tih,  "  always  faithful  to  their  tabular  outline  and 
blanched  desolation  "  (Stanley,  7,  84 ;  also  MS. 
Journal;  and  see  Laborde,  262),  mounting  up  from 
the  valley  by  huge  steps  with  level  barren  tracts 
on  the  top  of  each  (Rob;  ii.  125),  and  crowned  by 
the  vast  plateau  of  the  "Wilderness  of  the  Wan- 
derings." This  western  wall  ranges  in  height  from 
1500  to  1800  feet  above  the  floor  of  the  Arabah 
(Rob.  i.  162),  and  through  it  break  in  the  wadys 
and  passes  from  the  desert  above — unimportant 
towards  the  south,  but  farther  north  larger  and  of 
more  permanent  character.  The  chief  of  these 
wadys  is  the  W.  el-Jerafeh,  which  emerges  about 
60  miles  from  Akabah,  and  leads  its  waters,,  when 
any  are  flowing,  into  the  W.  el-Jeib  (Rob.  ii.  120, 
125),  and  through  it  to  the  marshy  ground  under 
the  clirls  south  of  the  Dead  Sea. 

Two  principal  passes  occur  in  this  range.  First, 
the  very  steep  and  difficult  ascent  close  to  the  Akabah, 
by  which  the  road  of  the  Mecca  pilgrims  between 
the  Akabah  and  Suez  mounts  from  the  valley  to  the 
level  of  the  plateau  of  the  Tlh.  It  bears  apparently 
no  other  name  than  en-Nukb,  "  the  Pass  "  (Rob.  i. 
175).  The  second — es-Sufah — has  a  more  direct 
connexion  with  the  Bible  history,  being  probably 
that  at  which  the  Israelites  were  repulsed  by  the 
Canaanites  (Deut.  i.44;  Num.  xiv.  43-45).  It  is 
on  the  road*  from  Petra  to  Hebron,  above  Ain  el- 
Weibeh,  and  is  not  like  the  former,  from  the  Arabah 


ARABAH 

to  the  plateau,  but  from  the  plateau  itself  to  a  higher 
level  1000  feet  above  it.  See  the  descriptions  of  Ro- 
binson (ii.  178),  Lindsay  (ii.  46),  Stanley  (85). 

The  eastern  wall  is  formed  by  the  granite  and 
basaltic  (Schubert  in  Hitter,  Sinai,  1 0 1 3 )  moun- 
tains of  Edom,  which  are  in  every  respect  a  contrast 
to  the  range  opposite  to  them.  "  At  the  base  are 
low  hills  of  limestone  and  argillaceous  rock  like 
promontories  jutting  into  the  sea  ...  in  some 
places  thickly  strewed  with  blocks  of  porphyry ; 
then  the  lofty  masses  of  dark  porphyry  constituting 
the  body  of  the  mountain ;  above  these  sandstone 
broken  into  irregular  ridges  and  grotesque  groups 
or  clitis,  and  further  back  and  higher  than  all  long 
elevated  ridges  of  limestone  without  precipices " 
(Rob.  ii.  123, 154;  Laborde,  209,  210,  262  ;  Lord 
Lindsay,  ii.  43),  rising  to  a  height  of  2000  to 
2300  feet,  and  in  Mount  Hor  reaching  an  elevation 
of  not  less  than  5000  feet  (Hitter,  Sinai,  1139,  40). 
Unlike  the  sterile  and  desolate  ranges  of  the  Tih, 
these  mountains  are  covered  with  vegetation,  in 
many  parts  extensively  cultivated  and  yielding  good 
crops  ;  abounding  in  "  the  fatness  of  the  earth  " 
and  the  "  plenty  of  corn  and  wine  "  which  were 
promised  to  the  forefather  of  the  Arab  race  as  a 
compensation  for  the  loss  of  his  birthright  (Rob.  ii. 
154;  Laborde,  203,  263).  In  these  mountains 
there  is  a  plateau  of  great  elevation,  from  which 
again  rise  the  mountains — or  rather  the  downs 
(Stanley,  87) — of  Sherilh.  Though  this  district  is 
now  deserted,  yet  the  ruins  of  towns  and  villages 
with  which  it  abounds  show  that  at  one  time  it  must 
have  been  densely  inhabited  (Burckh.  435,  436). 

The  numerous  wadys  which  at  once  drain  and 
give  access  to  the  interior  of  these  mountains  are  in 
strung  contrast  with  those  on  the  west,  partaking 
of  the  fertile  character  of  the  mountains  from  which 
they  descend.  In  almost  all  cases  they  contain 
streams  which,  although  in  the  heat  of  summer 
small  and  losing  themselves  in  their  own  beds,  or 
in  the  sand  of  the  Arabah,  "  in  a  few  paces  "  after 
they  forsake  the  shadow  of  their  native  ravines 
(Laborde,  141),  are  yet  sufficient  to  keep  alive'  a 
certain  amount  of  vegetation,  rushes,  tamarisks, 
palms,  and  even  oleanders,  lilies,  and  anemones, 
while  they  form  the  resort  of  the*  numerous  tribes 
of  the  children  of  Esau,  who  still  "  dwell  (Stanley, 
87,  also  MS.  Journal  ;  Laborde,  141  ;  Mali.  396) 
in  Mount  Seir,  which  is  Edom"  (den.  xxxvi.  8). 
The  most  important  of  these  wadys  are  the  Wady 
Wan  (Jetoum  of  Laborde),  and  the  Wady  AM 
Kusheibeh.  The  former  enters  the  mountains  close 
above  the  Akabah  and  leads  by  tin1  back  of  the  range 
to  Petra,  and  thence  by  Shobek  ami  Tufileh  to  the 
country  east  of  the  1  tead  Sea.  Traces  of  a  Roman  road 
exist  along  this  route  (Laborde,  203;  Kob.  ii.  161); 
by  it  Laborde  returned  from  Petra,  and  there  can 
lie  little  doubt  that  it  was  tin'  route  by  which  the 
Israelites  took  their  leave  of  the  Arabah  when  they 
went  to  "  compass   the  land  of  Edom  "    (  Num.  .\xi. 

4).  The  second,  the  1!'.  AM  Kusheibeh,  is  the 
most  direct  access  from  the  Arabah  to  Petra,  and  is 
that  up  which  Laborde  h  and  Stanley  appear  to 
have  gone  to  the  city.  Besides  these  are  Wady 
Tubal,  in  which  the  traveller  from  the  south  gains 

h  Hardly  recognizable,  though  doubtless  to  be  re- 
cognized, under  the  Pdbouchebe  of  Laborde  (144),  or 

the  Aboil   Ohshebe  of  Lindsay. 

1  The  various  springs  occurring  both  on  the  east 

and  west  sides  of  the  Arabah  are  enumerated  by 
Kobinson  (ii.  184). 


ARABAH 


89 


his  first  glimpse  of  the  red  sandstone  of  Edom,  and 
W.  Ghunmdel,  not  to  be  confounded  with  those  of 
the  same  name  north  of  Petra  and  west  of  Sinai.' 

To  Dr.  Robinson  is  due  the  credit  of  having  first 
ascertained  the  spot  which  forms  at  once  the  south- 
ern limit  of  the  Ghor  and  the  northern  limit  of  the 
Arabah.  Tin's  boundary  is  the  line  of  chalk  cliffs 
which  sweep  across  the  valley  at  about  6  miles 
below  the  S.W.  comer  of  the  Dead  Sea.  They  are 
from  50  to  150  feet  in  height;  the  Ghor  ends  with 
the  marshy  ground  at  then-  feet,  and  level  with  then- 
tops  the  Arabah  begins  (Rob.  ii.  116,  118,  120). 
Thus  the  clitis  act  as  a  retaining  wall  or  buttress 
supporting  the  higher  level  of  the  Arabah,  and  the 
whole  forms  what  in  geological  language  might  be 
called  a  "  fault"  in  the  floor  of  the  great  valley. 

Through  this  wall  breaks  in  the  embouchure  of 
the  great  main  drain  of  the  Arabah — the  Wady 
el-Jeib — in  itself  a  very  large  and  deep  watercourse 
which  collects  and  transmits  to  their  outlet  at  this 
point  the  torrents  which  the  numerous  wadys  from 
both  sides  of  the  Arabah  pour  along  it  in  the  winter 
season  (Hob.  ii.  118,  120,  125).  The  furthest 
point  south  to  which  this  drainage  is  known  to 
reach  is  the  Wady  Ghurundel  (Hob.  ii.  125),  which 
debouches  from  the  eastern  mountains  about  40 
miles  from  the  Akabah  and  60  from  the  cliffs  just 
spoken  of.  The  Wady  el-Jeib  also  forms  the  most 
direct  road  for  penetrating  into  the  valley  from  the 
north.  On  its  west  bank,  and  crossed  by  the  road 
from  Wady  Musa  (Petra)  to  Hebron,  are  the  springs 
of  Ain  el-Weibeh,  maintained  by  Robinson  to  be 
Kadesh  (Rob.  ii.  175;  but  see  Stanley,  93,  95). 

Of  the  substructure  of  the  floor  of  the  Arabah 
very  little  is  known.  In  his  progress  southward 
along  the  Wady  el-Jeib,  which  is  during  part  of  its 
course  over  100  feet  in  depth,  Dr.  Robinson  (ii.  119) 
notes  that  the  sides  are  "  of  chalky  earth  or  marl," 
but  beyond  this  there  is  no  information. 

The  surface  is  dreary  and  desolate  in  the  extreme. 
"  A  more  frightful  desert,"  says  Dr.  Robinson  (ii. 
121)  "it  had  hardly  been  our  lot  to  behold  .  .  . 
loose  grave]  and  stones  everywhere  furrowed  with 
the  beds  of  torrents  .  .  .  blocks  of  porphyry 
brought  down  by  the  torrents  among  which  the 
camels  picked  their  way  with  great  difficulty  .  .  . 
a  lone  shrub  of  the  gbftdah,  the  almost  only  trace 
of  vegetation."  This  was  at  the  ascent  from  the 
Wady  el-Jeib  to  the  floor  of  the  great  valley 
itself.  Further  south,  near  Ain  el-Weibeh,  it  is  a 
rolling  gravelly  desert  with  round  naked  hills  of 
considerable  elevation  (ii.  173).  At  Wady  Ghur- 
undel it  is  "an  expanse  of  shifting  sands,  broken 
by  innumerable  undulations  and  low  hills  "  (Burckh. 
442),  and  "  coi intersected  by  a  hundred  water- 
courses" (Stanley,  87).  The  southern  portion  has 
a  considerable  general  slope  from  east  to  west  quite 
apart  from  the  undulations  of  the  surface  (Stanley, 
85),  a  slope  which  extends  as  far  north  as  Petal 
(Schubert,  L097).  Nor  is  the  heat  less  terrible  than 
the  desolation,  and  all  travellers,  almost  without 
exception,  bear  testimony  to  the  difficulties  of  jour- 
neying in  a  region  where  the  sirocco  appears  to  blow 
almost  without  intermission  (Schub.  L016;  Burckh. 
444;    Mart.  394  ;    Rob.  ii.  L23   > 


k  The  wind  in  the  Klanitic  arm  of  the  Red  Sea  is 
very  violent,  constantly  blowing  down  the  Arabah 
from  the  north.  The  navigation  of  these  waters  is 
on    that    account   almost    proverbially  dangerous   and 

difficult.     (See  the  notice  of  this  in  the  Edin.  Rev. 
vol.  ciii.  248.) 


90 


ARABATTINE 


However,  in  spite  of  this  heat  and  desolation, 
there  is  a  certain  amount  of  vegetation,  even  in 
the  open  Arabah,  in  the  driest  parts  of  the  year. 
Schubert  in  March  found  the  Arta  (Calligonum 
com.),  the  Anthia  variegata,  and  the  Coloquinta 
(Ritter,  1014),  also  tamarisk-bushes  (tarfd)  lying 
thick  in  a  torrent-bed m  (1016) ;  and  on  Stanley's 
road  ' '  the  shrubs  at  times  had  almost  the  appear- 
ance of  a  jungle,"  though  it  is  time  that  they  were 
so  thin  as  to  disappear  when  the  "  waste  of  sand  " 
was  overlooked  from  an  elevation  (85,  and  see  Rob. 
i.  163,  175). 

It  is  not  surprising  that  after  the  discovery  by 
Burckhardt  in  1812"  of  the  prolongation  of  the 
Jordan  valley  in  the  Arabah,  it  should  have  been 
assumed  that  this  had  in  former  times  formed  the 
outlet  for  the  Jordan  to  the  Red  Sea.0  Lately, 
however,  the  levels  of  the  Jordan  and  the  Dead  Sea 
have  been  taken,  imperfectly  but  still  with  suffi- 
cient accuracy  P  to  disprove  the  possibility  of  such 
a  theory  ;  and  in  addition  there  is  the  universal  tes- 
timony of  the  Arabs  that  at  least  half  of  the  district 
drains  northward  to  the  Dead  Sea — a  testimony 
fully  confirmed  by  all  the  recorded  observations  of  the 
conformation  of  the  ground.  A  series  of  accurate 
levels  from  the  Akabah  to  the  Dead  Sea,  up  the  Ara- 
bah, are  necessary  before  the  question  can  be  set  at 
rest,  but  in  the  meantime  the  following  may  be  taken 
as  an  approximation  to  the  real  state  of  the  case. 

1 .  The  waters  of  the  Red  Sea  and  of  the  Medi- 
terranean are  very  nearly  at  one  level  .q 

2.  The  depression  of  the  surface  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee 
is  652  feet,  and  of  the  Dead  Sea  1316  feet,  below  the 
level  of  the  Mediterranean,  and  therefore  of  the  Red 
Sea.  Therefore  the  waters  of  the  Jordan  can  never  in 
historical  times  have  flowed  into  the  Gulf  of  Aka- 
bah, even  if  the  formation  of  the  ground  between  the 
Dead  Sea  and  the  Gulf  would  admit  of  it.     But, 

3.  All  testimony  goes  to  show  that  the  drainage 
of  the  northern  portion  of  the  Arabah  is  towards 
the  Dead  Sea,  and  therefore  that  the  land  rises  south- 
ward from  the  latter.  Also  that  the  south  portion 
drains  to  the  gulf,  and  therefore  that  the  land  rises 
northward  from  the  gulf  to  some  point  between  it 
and  the  Dead  Sea.r  The  watershed  is  said  by  the 
Arabs  to  be  a  long  ridge  of  hills  running  across  the 
valley  at  2  a  days,  or  say  40  miles,  from  the  Akabah 
(Stanley,  85),  and  it  is  probable  that  this  is  not 
far  wrong.  By  M.  de  Bertou  it  is  fixed  as  opposite 
the  entrance  to  the  Wady  Talk,  apparently  the  same 
spot.  [G.] 

ARABATTINE  (t,  'A/cpajSaTTiVr-,  Acrabat- 
tane),  in  Idumaea  (1  Mace.  v.  3).  [Acrabbiji  ; 
and  see  the  note  to  that  article.]  [G-] 

ARA'BIA  ('Apafta,  Gal.  i.  17,  iv.  25),  a  coun-. 
try  known  in  the  O.  T.  under  two  designations : — 
1.  Dip  Y~M,  the  east  country  (Gen.  xxv.  6) ;  or 


m  The  bees  whose  hum  so  charmed  him  (1017) 
must  from  his  description  have  been  in  a  side  wady, 
not  in  the  Arabah  itself. 

B  See  Burckhardt,  441,  442.  The  sagacity  of  Ritter 
had  led  him  earlier  than  this  to  infer  its  existence 
from  the  remarks  of  the  ancient  Mahometan  his- 
torians (Rob.  ii.  187). 

°  This  theory  appears  to  have  been  first  announced 
by  Col.  Leake  in  the  preface  to  Burckhardt's  Travels 
(see  p.  vi.).  It  was  afterwards  espoused  and  dilated 
on,  amongst  others,  by  Lord  Lindsay  (ii.  23),  Dean 
Milman  {Hist,  of  Jews,  Allen,  241),  and  Stephens 
j  Incidents  of  Trap.  ii.  41). 

p  These  observations  will  be  stated  in  detail  in  the 


ARABIA 

perhaps  Dip  (Gen.  x.  30 ;  Num.  xxiii.  7 ;  Is.  ii. 
6)  ;  and  DHj?  \33  pS  (Gen.  xxix.  1) ;  gent.  n. 
Dip  'OB    so»s  of  the  East  (Judg.  vi.  3,  seqq. ; 

1  K.  iv.  30 ;  Job  i.  3 ;  Is.  xi.  14 ;  Jer.  xlix.  28 ; 
Ez.  xxv.  4).  (Translated  by  the  LXX.  and  in  Vulg., 
and  sometimes  transcribed  (KeSefj.)  by  the  former.) 
From  these  passages  it  appears  that  DTp  y~)K  and 
DTp  *J2  indicate,  primarily,  the  country  east  of 

Palestine,  and  the  tribes  descended  from  Ishmael 
and  from  Keturah  ;  and  that  this  original  significa- 
tion may  have  become  gradually  extended  to  Aiabia 
and  its  inhabitants  generally,  though  without  any 
strict  limitation.  The  third  and  fourth  passages 
above  referred  to,  as  Gesenius  remarks  (Lex.  ed. 
Tregelles,  in  voc),  relate  to  Mesopotamia  and  Baby- 
lonia (pomp.  7]  auaroAij,  Matt.  ii.  1,  seqq.).  Winer 
considers  Kedem,  &c,  to  signify  Arabia  and  the 
Arabians  generally  (Reahcurterbuch,  in  voc.)  ;  but  a 
comparison  of  the  passages  on  which  his  opinion  is 
founded  has  led  us  to  consider  it  doubtful.  [Bene- 
Kedem.]    2.  mi?  (2  Chr.  ix.  14)  and  my  (Is.  xxi. 

13;  Jer.  xxv.  24;  Ez.  xxvii.  21);  gent.  n.  *2Tg 
(Is.  xiii.  20;  Jer.  iii.  2);  and  1T]V  (Neb,  ii.  19); 
pi.  D»2njJ  (2  Chr.  xxi.  16,  xxii.  1),  and  DWnnj? 

(2  Chr.  xvii.  11,  xxvi.  7).  (LXX.  'Apafrla,  &c".  ; 
Vulg.  Arabia,  &c.)  These  seem  to  have  the  same 
geographical  reference  as  the  former  names  to 
the  country  and  tribes  east  of  the  Jordan,  and 
chiefly  north  of  the  Arabian  peninsula.  In  the 
N.  T.  'Apafila  cannot  be  held  to  have  a  more 
extended  signification  than  the  Hebrew  equivalents 
in  the  O.  T.  '  2"}V  (Ex.  xii.  38 ;  Neh.  xiii.  3)  and 
3ny  (l  K.  x.  15  ;'  Jer.  xxv.  20,  1.  37  ;  Ez.  xxx.  5), 
rendered  in  the  A.  V.  "  a  mixed  multitude  "  (Ex. 
xii.  38,  here  followed  by  21)  "  the  mixed  multi- 
tude," kings  of  "Arabia"  (so  in  Vulg.,  and  iii 
Heb.  in  corresponding  passage  in  2  Chr.  ix.  14), 
and  (in  the  last  two  instances)  "  the  mingled  people," 
have  been  thought  to  signify  the  Arabs.  The 
people  thus  named  dwelt  in  the  deserts  of  Petia. 

— o 
By  the  Arabs,  the  country  is  called  t_>o*Ji    ii\j 

(BiMd  El-'Arab),  "  the  country  of  the  Arabs,"  and 

— o 
i_,«j--J|   2S»J"»i»  (Jezeeret  El-'Arab),  "  the  penin- 
sula of  the  Arabs"  and  the  people  l_,^c  ('Arab) ; 
"  Bedawee  "     in     modern     Arabic,     and     Aara'b 

(  i_>} yS-S)   m   the  old  language,  being  applied  to 


account  of  the  Jordan.  Those  of  Lynch  seem  on  the 
whole  the  most  reliable  :  they  give  as  the  levels  of 
the  Sea  of  Galilee  and  the  Dead  Sea  below  the  Medi- 
terranean respectively  052  and  1316*7  feet. 

*  See  the  Report  of  Mr.  Robert  Stephenson,  and  of 
M.  Bourdaloue,  quoted  in  Allen's  Dead  Sea. 

'  Schubert's  barometrical  observations  are  not  very 
intelligible,  but  they  at  least  show  this  :  at  the  end 
of  the  2nd  day  his  halting-place  was  495  ft.  above 
the  water  of  the  Gulf;  3rd  day,  1017  ft.  ;  4th  day, 
2180  ft.  Then,  after  leaving  Petra,  his  halting-place 
( 1  in  the  Arabah)  was  97  ft.  below  the  water  of  the 
Gulf  (Schubert;  Ritter,  Sinai,  1097). 


ARABIA 

people  of  the  desert,  as  distinguished  from  towns- 
people. They  give  no  satisfactory  derivation  of  the 
name 'Arab,  that  from  Yaarub  being  puerile.  The 
Hebrew  designation,  'Ereh,  has  been  thought  to  be 
from  'Arabah,  "  a  desert,"  &c,  which,  with  the 
article,  is  the  name  of  au  extensive  district  iu  Ara- 
bia Petraea. 

Geographical  Divisions. — Arabia  was  divided, 
by  the  Greeks,  into  Arabia  Felix  (t)  evSaiixwv 
'Apafiia),  Arabia  Descrta  (r\  epTj/xos  'Apa/3ia), 
(Strab.  xvi.  707;  Plin.  vi.  28,  §32;  Diod.  Sic.  ii.  48, 
seqq.  i,  and  Arabia  Petraea  (^  Herpetic*.  'ApaPia,  I't. 
v.  17,  §1).  The  first  two  divisions  were  those  of 
the  earlier  writers;  the  third  being  introduced  by 
Ptolemy.  According  to  this  geographer's  arrange- 
ment,  they  included,  within  doubtful  limits,  1,  the 
whole  peninsula;  2,  the  Arabian  desert  north  of 
the  former;  and,  3,  the  desert  of  Petra,  and  the 
peninsula  of  Sinai.  It  will  be  more  convenient  in 
this  article  to  divide  the  country,  agreeably  to  the 
natural  divisions  and  the  native  nomenclature,  into 
Arabia  Proper,  or  Jezeeret  El-'Arab,  containing  the 
whole  peninsula  as  far  as  the  limits  of  the  northern 
deserts;  Northern  Arabia,  or  El-Bitdiveh,  bounded 
by  the  peninsida,  the  Euphrates,  Syria,  and  the 
desert  of  Petra,  constituting  properly  Arabia  Be- 
serta,  or  the  great  desert  of  Arabia ;  and  Western 
Arabia,  the  desert  of  Petra  and  the  peninsula  of 
Sinai,  or  the  country  that  has  been  called  Arabia 
Petraea,  bounded  by  Egypt,  Palestine,  Northern 
Arabia,  and  the  Red  Sea. 

Arabia  Proper,  or  the  Arabian  peninsula,  consists 
of  high  table-land,  declining  towards  the  north  ;  its 
most  elevated  portions  being  the  chain  of  mountains 
running  nearly  parallel  to  the  Red  Sea,  and  the  ter- 
ritory east  of  the  southern  part  of  this  chain.  The 
high  laud  is  encircled  from  the  'Akabah  to  the  head 
of  the  Persian  Gulf  by  a  belt  of  low  littoral  country  ; 
on  the  west  and  south-west  the  mountains  fall 
abruptly  to  this  low  region ;  on  the  opposite  side  of 
the  peninsula  the  fall  is  generally  gradual.  So  far 
as  the  interior  has  been  explored,  it  consists  of 
mountainous  and  desert  tracts,  relieved  by  large 
districts  under  cultivation,  well  peopled,  watered 
by  wells  and  streams,  anil  enjoying  periodical  rains. 
The  watershed,  as  the  conformation  of  the  country 
indicates,  sin.;,  lies  from  the  high  land  of  the  Yemen 
to  the  Persian  Gulf.  From  this  descend  the  torients 
that  irrigate  the  western  provinces,  while  several 
considerable  streams — there  are  no  navigable  rivers — 
reach  the  sea  in  the  opposite  direction  :  two  of  these 
traverse 'Oman;  and  another,  the  principal  river  of 
the  peninsula,  enters  the  Persian  Gulf  on  the  coast 
of  El-Bahreyn,  and  is  known  to  traverse  the  inland 
province  called  Venulmeh.  The  geological  formation 
is  in  part  volcanic;  and  the  mountains  are  basalt, 
schist,  granite,  as  well  as  limestone,  &c. ;  the  vol- 
canic action  i  i  illy  observable  about  El- 
Medeeneh  on  the  north-west,  and  in  the  districts 
bordering  the  Indian  Ocean.  The  most  fertile  tracts 
are  those  on  the  south-wesi  am!  south,  'flic  modern 
Yemen  is  especially  productive,  and  at  the  same 
time,  from  its  mountainous  character,  picti 
The  settled  regions  of  the  interior  also  appear  to  be 
ttile  than  is  generally  believed  to  be  the  case; 
and  the  deserts  alio.  ,1  pasturage  after  the  rains. 
The  principal  products  of  the  soil  are  date-palms, 
tamarind-trees,  vines,  fig-trees,  tamarisks,  acacias, 
the  banana,  &c.,  and  a  great  variety  of  thorny 
shrubs,  which,  with  others,  alio,, I  pasture  for  the 
camels;  the  chief  kinds  of  pulse  and  cereals  (except 
oats),  coffee,  spices,  drugs,  gums  and  resins  cotton 


ARABIA 


91 


and  sugar.  Among  the  metallic  and  mineral  pro- 
ducts are  lead,  iron,  silver  (in  small  quantities), 
sulphur,  the  emerald,  onyx,  &c.  The  products  men- 
tioned in  the  Bible  as  coming  from  Arabia  will  be 
found  described  under  their  respective  heads.  They 
seem  to  refer,  in  many  instances,  to  merchandise  of 
Ethiopia  and  India,  carried  to  Palestine  by  Arab  and 
other  traders.  Gold,  however,  was  perhaps  found 
in  small  quantities  in  the  beds  of  torrents  (comp. 
Bind.  Sic.  ii.  93,  iii.  45,  47) ;  and  the  spices,  incense, 
and  precious  stones,  brought  from  Arabia  (1  K.  x. 
2,  IU,  15;  2  Chr.  ix.  1,9,  14;  Is.  lx.  6;  Jer.  vi. 
20;  Ez.  xxvii.  22),  probably  were  the  products  of 
the  southern  provinces,  still  celebrated  for  spices, 
frankincense,  ambergris,  &c,  as  well  as  for  the 
onyx  and  other  precious  stones.  Among  the  more 
remarkable  of  the  wild  animals  of  Arabia,  besides 
the  usual  domestic  kinds,  and  of  course  the  camel 
and  the  horse,  for  both  of  which  it  is  famous,  are 
the  wild  ass,  the  musk-deer,  wild  goat,  wild  sheep, 
several  varieties  of  the  antelope,  the  hare,  monkeys 
(in  the  south,  and  especially  in  the  Yemen)^  the  bear, 
leopard,  wolf,  jackal,  hyaena,  fox;  the  eagle,  vul- 
ture, several  kinds  of  hawk,  the  pheasant,  red-legged 
partridge  (in  the  peninsula  of  Sinai),  sand-grouse 
(throughout  the  country),  the  ostrich  (abundantly  in 
central  Arabia,  where  it  is  hunted  by  Arab  tribes)  ; 
the  tortoise,  serpents,  locusts,  &c.  Lions  were  for- 
merly numerous,  as  the  names  of  places  testify. 
The  sperm-whale  is  found  oft'  the  coasts  bordering 
the  Indian  ocean.  Greek  and  Roman  writers  (Herod., 
Agatharch.  ap.  Muller,  Strab.,  Biod.  Sic,  Q.  Curt., 
Bion.  Perieg.  Heliod.  Aethiop.  and  Plin.)  mention 
.most  of  the  Biblical  and  modern  products,  and  the 
animals,  above  enumerated,  with  some  others.  (See 
the  Dictionary  of  Geograp/n/.) 

Arabia  Proper  may  be  subdivided  into  five  prin- 
cipal provinces  :  the  Yemen  ;  the  districts  of  Hadra- 
mawt,  Mahreh,  and  'Omriu,  on  the  Indian  Ocean 
and  the  entrance  of  the  Persian  Gulf;  El-Bahreyn, 
towards  the  head  of  the  Gulf  just  named  ;  the  great 
central  country  of  Xejd  and  Yem&meh;  and  the  Hijdz 
and  Tihameh  on  the  Red  Sea.  The  Arabs  also  have 
five  divisions,  according  to  the  opinion  most  worthy 
of  credit  (Mardsid,  ed.  Juynboll,  in  roc.  Hijaz ; 
comp.  Strabo),  Tihameh,  the  Hijfiz,  Xejd,  El-'Arood 
(the  provinces  lying  towards  the  head  of  the  Persian 
Gulf,including  Yemdmeh),  and  the  Yemen  (including 
'Oman  ami  the  intervening  tracts).  They  have,  how- 
ever, never  agreed  either  as  to  the  limits  or  the 
number  of  the  divisions.  It  will  be  necessary  to  state 
in  some  detail  the  positions  of  these  provinces,  in 
order  to  the  light  understanding  of  the  identifications 
of  Biblical  with  Arab  names  of  places  and  tribes. 

The  Yemen  embraced  originally  the  most  fertile 
districts  of  Arabia,  and  the  frankincense  and  spice 
country.  Its  name,  signifying  "  the  right  hand  " 
(and  therefore  "  south,"  comp  Matt.  .\ii.  42),  is  sup- 
posed to  have  given  rise  to  the  appellation  evSaiftui/ 
(Felix),  which  the  Greeks  applied  to  a  much  more 
extensive  region.  At  present,  it  is  bounded  by  the 
Hijdz  on  the  north,  and  Hadramawt  i 
with  the  sea-board  of  the  \lr<\  Sea  and  the  Indian 
I  >cean  ;  but  formerly,  as  Fresnel  rem 
Sale,  Prelim.  Disc.),  it  appears  to  have  extended  at 
least  so  as  to  include  Had  ran.  a  v.t  an, I  Mahreh  (Ibn- 
El-Wardee  M.S.;  Yrikoot' s Muahtarak,  ed.  W'iisten- 
feld,  and  Mori  ■•.    In  this  wider  accepta- 

tion, it  embraced  the  region  of  the  first  settlements 

of  the  Joktanitee.    Its  i lern  limits  include,  on  the 

north,  the  district  of  Khawlan  (not,  as  Niebuhr 
supposes,  two  distinct  districts),  named  after  Khaw- 


92 


ARABIA 


Ian  {Kdmoos),  the  Joktanite  (Marasid  in  voc,  and 
Caussin  de  Perceval,  Essai  sur  VHist.  dcs  Arabes 
avant  VIslamisme,  i.  1 1 3) ;  and  that  of  Nejrdn ,  with 
the  city  of  that  name  founded  by  Nejran  the  Joktanite 
(Caussin,  i.  60,  and  113,  seqq.),  which  is,  accord- 
ing to  the  soundest  opinion,  the  Negra  of  Aelius 
Gallus  (Strab.  xvi.  782  ;  see  Jomavd,  Etudes  geogr. 
ct  hist,  sur  V Arabic,  appended  to  Mengin,  Hist,  de 
I'Egyptc,  &c,  iii.  385-6). 

Hadramawt,  on  the  coast  east  of  the  Yemen,  is 
a  cultivated  tract  contiguous  to  the  sandy  deserts 
called  El-Ahkaf,  which  are  said  to  be  the  original  seats 
of  the  tribe  of  'A'd  (Ibn-El-Wardee,  and  others).  It 
was  celebrated  for  its  frankincense,  which  it  still 
exports  (El-Idreesee,  ed.  Jaubert,  i.  54),  and  for- 
merly it  carried  on  a  considerable  trade,  its  prin- 
cipal port  being  ZafaVi,  between  Mirbat  and  Ras 
Sdjir,  which  is  now  composed  of  a  series  of  villages 
(Fresnel,  4e  Lettre,  Jonrn.  Asiat.  iiie  Se'rie,  v. 
521).  To  the  east  of  Hadramawt  are  the  districts 
of  Shihr,  which  exported  ambergris  {Marasid,  in 
voc),  and  Mahreh  (so  called  after  a  tribe  of  Kuda'ah 
{Id.  in  voc),  and  therefore  Joktanite),  extending 
from  Seyhoot  to  Karwan  (Fresnel.  4e  Lettre,  p.  510). 
'Oman  forms  the  easternmost  comer  of  the  south 
coast,  lying  at  the  entrance  of  the  Persian  Gulf.  It 
presents  the  same  natural  characteristics  as  the  pre- 
ceding districts,  being  partly  desert  with  large  fertile 
tracts.  It  also  contains  some  considerable  lead-mines. 
The  highest  province  on  the  Persian  Gulf  is  El- 
Bahreyn,  between  'Oman  and  the  head  of  the  Gulf, 
of  which  the  chief  town  is  Hejer  (according  to  some, 
the  name  of  the  province  also)  {Kdmoos,  Marasid, 
in  voce).  It  contains  the  towns  (and  districts)  of 
Kateef  and  El-Ahsa  (El-Idreesee,  i.  371 ;  Marasid, 
in  voce;  Mushtarak,  in  voc.  El-Ahsa),  the  latter  not 
being  a  province  as  has  been  erroneously  supposed. 
The  inhabitants  of  El-Bahreyn  dwelling  on  the  coast 
are  principally  fishermen  and  pearl-divers.  The  dis- 
trict of  El-Ahsa  abounds  in  wells,  and  possesses 
excellent  pastures  which  are  frequented  by  tribes  of 
other  parts. 

The  great  central  province  of  Nejd,  and  that  of 
Yemameh,  which  bounds  it  on  the  south,  are  little 
known  from  the  accounts  of  traveller's.  Nejd  sig- 
nifies "  high  land,"  and  hence  its  limits  are  very 
doubtfully  laid  down  by  the  Arabs  themselves.  It 
consists  of  cultivated  table-land,  with  numerous 
wells,  and  is  celebrated  for  its  pastures ;  but  it  is 
intersected  by  extensive  deserts.  Yemameh  appears 
to  be  generally  very  similar  to  Nejd.  On  the  south 
lies  the  great  desert  called  Er-Ruba  el-Khdlee,  unin- 
habitable in  the  summer,  but  yielding  pasturage  in 
the  winter  after  the  rains.  The  camels  of  the 
tribes  inhabiting  Nejd  are  highly  esteemed  in  Arabia, 
and  the  breed  of  horses  is  the  most  famous  in  the 
world.  In  this  province  are  said  to  be  remains  of 
very  ancient  structures,  similar  to  those  east  of  the 
Jordan. 

The  Hijaz,  and  Tihameh  (or  El-Ghor,  the  "  low 
land  "'),  are  bounded  by  Nejd,  the  Yemen,  the  Red 
Sea,  and  the  desert  of  Petra,  the  northern  limit  of 
the  Hijaz  being  Eyleh  (El-Makreezee's  Khitat,  invoc. 
Eyleh).  The  Hijaz  is  the  holy  land  of  Arabia,  its 
chief  cities  being  Mekkeh  and  El-Medeeneh ;  and  it 
was  also  the  first  seat  of  the  Ishmaelites  in  the  penin- 
sula. The  northern  portion  is  in  general  sterile  and 
rocky  ;  towards  the  south  it  gradually  merges  into 
the  Yemen,  or  the  district  called  El-'Aseer,  which  is 
but  little  noticed  by  either  eastern  or  western  geo- 
graphers (see  Jomard,  245,  seqq.).  The  province  of 
Tihameh   extends  between   the    mountain-chain  of 


ARABIA 

the  Hijdz,  and  the  shore  of  the  Red  Sea;  and  is 
sometimes  divided  into  Tihameh  of  the  Hijftz,  and 
Tihameh  of  the  Yemen.  It  is  a  parched,  sandy 
tract,  with  little  rain,  and  fewer  pasturages  and 
cultivated  portions  than  the  mountainous  country. 
Northern    Arabia,     or     the    Arabian     Desert 

(juiljJ\),   is  divided  by  the  Arabs   (who   do 

not  consider  it  as  strictly  belonging  to  their  country) 
into  Badiyet  Esh-Sham,  "the  Desert  of  Syria," 
Badiyet  El-Jezeereh,  "  the  Desert  of  Mesopotamia" 

(not  " of  Arabia,"   as  Winer  supposes),  and 

Badiyet  El-'Irak,  "  the  Desert  of  El-Tral."  It  is, 
so  far  as  it  is  known  to  us,  a  high,  undulating, 
parched  plain,  of  which  the  Euphrates  forms  the 
natural  boundary  from  the  Persian  Gulf  to  the 
frontier  of  Syria,  whence  it  is  bounded  by  the 
latter  country  and  the  desert  of  Petra  on  the 
north-west  and  west,  the  peninsula  of  Arabia  form- 
ing its  southern  limit.  It  has  few  oases,  the  water 
of  the  wells  is  generally  either  brackish  or  impo- 
table, and  it  is  visited  by  the  sand-wind  called 
Samoom,  of  which  however  the  terrors  have  been 
much  exaggerated.  The  Arabs  find  pasture  for 
their  flocks  and  herds  after  the  rains,  and  in  the 
more  depressed  plains  ;  and  the  desert  generally  pro- 
duces prickly  shrubs,  &c,  on  which  the  camels  feed. 
The  inhabitants  were  known  to  the  ancients  as 
ffKnv'nai,  "  dwellers  in  tents,"  or  perhaps  so  called 
from  their  town  ai  ~2,Kt]vai  (Strab.  xvi.  747,  767  ; 
Diod.  Sic.  ii.  24;  Amm.  Marc,  xxiii.  6;  comp.  Is. 
xiii.  20;  Jer.  xlix.  31;  Ezek.  xxxviii.  11);  and 
they  extended  from  Babylonia  on  the  east  {comp. 
Num.  xxiii.  7  ;  2  Chr.  xxi.  16  ;  Is.  ii.  6,  xiii.  20), 
to  the  borders  of  Egypt  on  the  west  (Strab.  xvi. 
748;  Plin.  v.  12;  Amm.  Marc.  xiv.  4,  xxii.  15). 
These  tribes,  principally  descended  from  Ishmael 
and  from  Keturah,  have  always  led  a  wandering 
and  pastoral  life.  Their  predatory  habits  are  se- 
veral times  mentioned  in  the  0.  T.  (2  Chr.  xxi.  16 
and  17,  xxvi.  7  ;  Jobi.  15;  Jer.  iii.  2).  They  also 
conducted  a  considerable  trade  of  merchandise  of 
Arabia  and  India  from  the  shores  of  the  Persian 
Gulf  (Ezek.  xxvii.  20-24),  whence  a  chain  of  oases 
still  forms  caravan-stations  (Burckhardt,  Arabia, 
Appendix  vi.);  and  they  likewise  traded  from  the 
western  portions  of  the  peninsula.  The  latter  traffic 
appears  to  be  frequently  mentioned  in  connexion  with 
Ishmaelites,  Keturahites,  and  other  Arabian  peoples 
(Gen.  xxxvii.  25,  28;  1  K.  x.  15,  25;  2  Chr.  ix. 
14,  24;  Is.  Ix.  6  ;  Jer.  vi.  20),  aud  probably  con- 
sisted of  the  products  of  southern  Arabia  and  of  the 
opposite  shores  of  Ethiopia  :  it  seems,  however,  to 
have  been  chiefly  in  the  hands  of  the  inhabitants  of 
Idumaea;  but  it  is  difficult  to  distinguish  between 
the  references  to  the  latter  people  and  to  the  ti  ibes 
of  Northern  Arabia  in  the  passages  relating  to  this 
traffic.  That  certain  of  these  tribes  brought  tribute 
to  Jehoshaphat  appears  from  2  Chr.  xvii.  11  ;  and 
elsewhere  there  are  indications  of  such  tribute 
{comp.  passages  referred  to  above). 

Western  Arabia  includes  the  peninsula  of  Sinai 
[Sinai]  ,  and  the  desert  of  Petra,  corresponding  ge- 
nerally with  the  limits  of  Arabia  Petraea.  The 
latter"  name  is  probably  derived  from  that  of  its 
chief  city ;  not  from  its  stony  character.  It  was  in 
the  earliest  times  inhabited  by  a  people  whose  ge- 
nealogy is  not  mentioned  in  the  Bible,  the  Horites 
or  Horim  (Gen.  xiv.  6,  xxxvi.  20,  21  ;  Deut.  ii.  12, 
22,  xxxvi.  20-22).  [Horites.]  Its  later  inhabit- 
ants were  in  part  the  same  as  those  of  the  preceding 


ARABIA 

division  of  Arabia,  as  indeed  the  boundary  of  the 
two  countries  is  arbitrary  and  unsettled  ;  bul  it  was 
mostly  peopled  by  descendants  of  Esau,  and  was  ge- 
nerally known  as  the  land  of  Edom,  or  Idumaea 
[Edom]  ;  as  well  as  by  its  older  appellation,  the 
desert  of  Seir,  or  Mount  Seir  [SiauJ.  The  com- 
mon origin  of  the  Idumaeans  from  Esau  and  Ishmael 
is  found  in  the  marriage  of  the  former  wit-hadaughter 
of  the  latter  (Gen.  xxviii.  CJ,  xxxvi. .'!).  The  Naba- 
thaeans  succeeded  to  the  Idumaeans,  and  Idumaea  is 
mentioned  only  as  a  geographical  designation  after 
the  time  of  Joseprfus.  The  Nabathaeans  have  always 
been  identified  with  Nebaioth,  son  of  Ishmael  (Gen. 
xxv.  13;  Is.  lx.  7),  until  Quatremere  [Memoiresur 
ies  Ndbatheens)  advanced  the  theory  that  they  were 
of  another  race,  and  a  people  of  Mesopotamia.  [Ne» 
IiAIOTH.1  Petra  was  in  the  great  route  of  the  west- 
ern caravan-traffic  of  Arabia,  and  of  the  merchandise 
brought  up  the  Elanitic  Gulf.  See  preceding  sec- 
tion, and  Edom,  Elath,  Ezioxgeber,  &c. 

Inhabitants." — The  Arabs,  like  every  other  an- 
cient nation  of  any  celebrity,  have  traditions  repre- 
senting their  country  as  originally  inhabited  by 
races  which  became  extinct  at  a  very  remote  period. 
These  were  the  tribes  of 'A  d,Thamood,  Umeiyim, 
'Abeel,  Tasm,  Jedees,  'Emleek  (Amalek),  Jurhum 
(the  first  of  this  name),  and  Wcbari :  some  omit 
the  fourth  and  the  last  two,  but  add  Jasim.  The 
majority  of  their  historians  derive  these  tribes  from 
Shem  ;  but  some,  from  Ham,  though  not  through 
Cush.b  Their  earliest  traditions  that  have  any  ol> 
pious  relation  to  the  Bible  refer  the  origin  of  the 
existing  nation  in  the  first  instance  to  Kahtan, 
whom  they  and  most  European  scholars  identify 
with  Joktan ;  and  secondly  to  Ishmael,  whom  they 
assert  to  have  married  a  descendant  of  Kahtan, 
though  they  only  carry  up  their  geuealogies  to 
'Admin  (said  to  be  of  the  21st  generation  before 
Mohammad).  They  are  silent  respecting  Cushite 
settlements  in  Arabia;  but  modern  research,  we 
think,  proves  that  Cushites  were  among  its  early 
inhabitants.  Although  Cush  in  the  Bible  usually 
corresponds  to  Ethiopia,  certain  passages  seem  to 
indicate  Cushite  peoples  in  Arabia;  and  the  series 
of  the  sons  of  Cush  should,  according  to  recent 
discoveries,  be  sought  for  in  order  along  the  south- 
ern coast:  exclusive  of  Scba  (Meroe),  occupying 
one  extreme  of  their  settlements,  and  Nimrod  the 
other.  The  great  ruins  of  Ma-rib  or  Scba,  and  of 
other  places  in  the  Yemen  and  Hadramiiwt,  are  not 
those  of  a  S.  initio  people;  and  further  to  the  east, 
the  existing  language  of  Mahreh,  the  remnant  of  that 
of  the  inscriptions  found  on  the  ancient  remains  just 
mentioned,  i>  in  so  great  a  degree  apparently  Afri- 
can, as  to  lie  called  by  some  scholars  (  ushite  ;  while 
the  settlements  of  Raamah  and  those  of  his  sons 
Sheba  and  Dedan,  are  probably  to  be  looked  for 
towards  the  head  of  the  Persian  Gulf,  bordered   on 

the  north  by  the  descendants  of  K'etiiiali,  bearing 

the  same  names   as   the   two   latter.      In  Babylonia 
also,   independent   proofs   of  this  immigration   of 
Cftshites  from   Ethiopia  have,  it  is  ;: 
lately  obtained.     The  ancient  cities  and  building 


ARABIA 


93 


*  In  this  section  is  included  the  hi  tory.  The  Arab 
materials  for  the  latter  are  meagre,  and  almost  purely 
traditional.     The  chronology  is  founded  on  gi 

pics,  and  is  too  intricate  anil  unsettled  for  discussion 
in  this  article  ;  but  it  is  necessary  to  observe  that 
"  son  "  should  often  be  read  "  descendant,"  and  that 
the  Arabs  ascribe  gTeat  length  of  life  to  the  ancient 
people. 
b  This  enumeration  is  from  a  comparison  of  Arab 


of  southern  Arabia,  in  their  architecture,  the  in- 
scriptions they  contain,  and  the  native  traditions 
respecting  them,  are  of  the  utmost  value  in  aiding 
a  student  of  this  portion  of  primaeval  history. 
Indeed  they  are  the  only  important  archaic  monu- 
ments of  the  country  ;  and  they  illustrate  both  its 
earliest  people  aud  its  greatest  kingdoms.  Ma-rib, 
or  Seba,"  (the  Mariaba  of  the  Greek  geographers), 
is  one  of  the  most  interesting  of  these  sites.  (See  Mi- 
chaclis'  Questions,  No.  94,  &c.  in  Niebuhr's  Arabia.) 
It  was  founded,  according  to  the  general  agreement 
of  tradition,  by  'Abd-esh-Shems  Seba,  grandson  of 
Yaarub  the  Kahtanite  (Mushtarak,  in  loc. ;  Abu-1- 
Eida,  Hist,  antcisl.  ed.  Fleischer,  p.  114)  ;  and  the 
Dyke  of  El-'Arim,  which  was  situate  near  the  city, 
and  the  rupture  of  which  (a.D.  150-170  according 
to  De  Sacy;  120  according  to  Caussin  de  Perceval) 
formed  an  era  in  Arabian  history,  is  generally  ascribed 
to  Lukman  the  Greater,  the  'A'dite,  who  founded 
the  dynasty  of  the  2nd  'A'd  (Ibn-El-Wardee,  MS. ; 
Hamza  Ispahanensis,  up.  Schultens,  pp.  24-5 ;  El- 
Mes  'oodee,  cited  by  De  Sacy,  Mem.  de  V Acad., 
xlviii.  484  seqq. ;  and  Ibn  Khaldoon  in  Caussin's 
Essai,  i.  16).  'A'dites  (in  conjunction  with  Cush- 
ites) were  probably  the  founders  of  this  aud  similar 
structures,  and  were  succeeded  by  a  predominantly 
Joktanite  people,  the  Biblical  Sheba,  whose  name  is 
preserved  in  the  Arabian  Seba,  and  in  the  Sabaei  of 
the  Greeks.  It  has  been  argued  (Caussin,  Essai,  i. 
42  seqq. ;  Renan,  Langues  Semitiqucs,  i.  300)  that 
the  'A'dites  were  the  Cushite  Seba-;  but  this  hypo- 
thesis, which  involves  the  question  of  the  settlements 
of  the  eldest  son  of  Cush,  and  that  of  the  descent  of 
the  'A'dites,  rests  solely  on  the  existence  of  Cushite 
settlements  in  southern  Arabia,  and  of  the  name  of 

Seba  (La^u,,  )  in  the  Yemen  (by  these  writers  infe- 
rentially  identified  with  X3D  •  by  the  Arabs,  una- 
nimously, with  Seba  the  Kahtanite,  or   fcOK'  :  the 

Hebrew  shin  being,  in  by  far  the  greater  number 
of  instances,  sin  in  Arabic) ;  aud  it  necessitates  the 
existence  of  the  two  Biblical  kingdoms  of  Seba 
and  Sheba  in  a  circumscribed  province  of  southern 
Arabia,  a  result  which  we  think  is  irreconcileable 
with  a  careful  comparison  of  the  passages  in  the 
Bible  bearing  on  this  subject.  [CUSH,  Si.ua, 
SHEBA.]  Neither  is  there  evidence  to  indicate  the 
identity  of 'A'd  and  the  other  extinct  tribes  with 
any  Semitic  or  Hamitic  people:  they  must,  in  the 
present  state  of  knowledge,  be  classed  with  the  Re- 
phaim  and  other  peoples  whose  genealogies  are  not 
known  to  us.  The  only  one  that  can  possibly  be 
identified  with  a  Scriptural  name  is  Amalek,  whose 
supposed  descent  from  the  grandson  of  Esau  seems 
inconsistent  with  Gen,  xiv.  7,  and  Num.  xxiv.  20. 
[Am  w.f.k.] 

The  several  nations  that  have  inhabited  the 
country  are  divided,  by  the  Arabs,  into  extinct, 
and  existing  tribes ;   indf  ■  again  distinguished 

as  L.  El-  Arab  el- A'ribeh  (or —     el-'Arbi,  or 

el-'Aribeh),  the  Pure  or  Genuine  Arabs:  2.  El- 
'Arab  el-Muta'arribeh,  and  3.  El- Arab  el-Mustaa- 


authors.    Caussin  de  Perceval  has  entered  Into  some 

t  (J.'s.sni,  i.  ll-3.r>),  bat  without 
satisfactorily  reconciling  contradictory  opinions  ;  and 
his  identifications  of  these  with  other  tribes  arc  purely 
hypothetical. 

c  Scba  was  the  city  of  Ma-rib  [Muthtorak,  in  roc), 
or  the-  country  in  the  Yemen  of  which  the  city  was 
Ma-rib  {Marfoid,  in  tec).     Sec  also  Siikiia. 


94 


ARABIA 


ribeh,  the  Instititious,  or  Naturalized,  Arabs.  Of 
many  conflicting  opinions  respecting  these  races, 
two  only  are  worthy  of  note.  According  to  the 
first  of  these,  E1-' Arab  el-'A'ribeh  denotes  the  extinct 
tribes,  with  whom  some  conjoin  Kahtan ;  while 
the  other  two,  as  synonymous  appellations,  belong 
to  the  descendants  of  Ishmael.d  According  to  the 
second,  El-'Arab  el-'A'ribeh  denotes  the  extinct 
tribes  ;  El-'Arab  el-Muta'arribeh,  the  unmixed  de- 
scendants of  Kahtan  ;  and  El-'Arab  el-Mustaaribeh 
the  descendants  of  Ishmael,  by  the  daughter  of 
Mudad  the  Joktanite.  That  the  descendants  of 
Joktan  occupied  the  principal  portions  of  the  south 
and  south-west  of  the  peninsula,  with  colonies  in 
the  interior,  is  attested  by  the  Arabs  and  fully  con- 
firmed by  historical  and  philological  researches.  It 
is  also  asserted  that  they  have  been  gradually  ab- 
sorbed into  the  Ishmael  ite  immigrants,  though  not 
without  leaving  strong  traces  of  their  former  ex- 
istence. Fresnel,  however  (le  Lettre,  p.  24), 
says  that  they  were  quite  distinct,  at  least  in  Mo- 
hammad's time,  and  it  is  not  unlikely  that  the 
Ishmaelite  element  has  been  exaggerated  by  Mo- 
hammadan  influence. 

Respecting  the  Joktanite  settlers  we  have  some 
certain  evidence.  In  Genesis  (x.  30)  it  is  said, 
"  and  their  dwelling  was  from  Mesha,  as  thou 
goest  unto  Sephar,  a  mount  of  the  east  [Kedem]." 
The  position  of  Mesha  is  very  uncertain  ;  it  is  most 
reasonably  supposed  to  be  the  western  limit  of  the 
first  settlers  [Mesha]  :  Sephar  is  undoubtedly 
Dhafari,  or  Zafaii,  of  the  Arabs  (probably  pro- 
nounced, in  ancient  times,  without  the  final  vowel, 
as  it  is  at  the  present  day),  a  name  not  un- 
common in  the  peninsula,  but  especially  that  of 
two  celebrated  towns — one  being  the  seaport  on 
the  south  coast,  near  Mirbat ;  the  other,  now  in 
ruins,  near  San'a,  and  said  to  be  the  ancient  resi- 
dence of  the  Himyerite  kings  (Es-Saghanee,  MS. ; 
Mushtarak,  in  voc. ;  Marasid,  ib. ;  El-Idreesee,  i. 
148).  Fresnel  (4e  Lettre,  p.  516,  scqq.)  prefers 
the  seaport,  as  the  Himyerite  capital,  and  is  fol- 
lowed by  Jomard  (Etudes,  p.  367).  He  informs  vis 
that  the  inhabitants  call  this  town  "  Isfor."  Con- 
sidering the  position  of  the  Joktanite  races,  this  is 
probably  Sephar ;  it  is  situate  near  a  thuriferous 
mountain  (Marasid,  in  voc.),  and  exports  the  best 
frankincense  (Niebuhr,  p.  148):  Zafari,  in  the  Ye- 
men, however,  is  also  among  mountains  [Sephar]. 
In  the  district  indicated  above  are  distinct  and 
undoubted  traces  of  the  names  of  the  sons  of  Jok- 
tan mentioned  in  Genesis,  such  as  Hadramawt  for 
Hazarmaveth,  Azal  for  Uzal,  Seba  for  Sheba,  &c. 
Their  remains  are  found  in  the  existing  inhabitants 
of  (at  least)  its  eastern  portion,  and  their  records 
in  the  numerous  Himyerite  ruins  and  inscriptions. 

The  principal  Joktanite  kingdom,  and  the  chief 
state  of  ancient  Arabia,  was  that  of  the  Yemen, 
founded  (according  to  the  Arabs)  by  Yaarub,  the 
son  (or  descendant)  of  Kahtan  (Joktan).  Its  most  an- 
cient capital  was  probably  San'a,  fomierly  called  Azal 

(«M|1?  01  iM'n^  m  the  J/arasic?.  in  voc.  San'a), 
after  Azal,  son  of  Joktan  (Yakoot).  [Uzal.]  The 
other  capitals  were  Ma-rib,  or  SebS,  and  Zafari. 
This  was  the  Biblical  kingdom  of  Sheba.  Its  rulers, 
and  most  of  its  people,  were  descendants  of  Seba. 
(=  Sheba),  whence  the  classical  Sabaei  (Diod.  Sic. 


d  El-'Arab  el-'A'ribeh  is  conventionally  applied  by 
the  lexicographers  to  all  who  spoke  pure  Arabic 
before  its  corruption  began. 


ARABIA 

iii.  38,  46).  Among  its  rulers  was  probably  the 
Queen  of  Sheba  who  came  to  hear  the  wisdom  of 
Solomon  (2  K.  x.  2).  The  Arabs  call  her  Bilkees,  a 
queen  of  the  later  Himyerites  ;  and  their  traditions 
respecting  her  are  otherwise  not  worthy  of  credit. 
[Sheba.]  The  dominant  family  was  apparently 
that  of  Himyer,  son  (or  descendant)  of  Seba.  A 
member  of  this  family  founded  the  more  modern 
kingdom  of  the  Himyerites.  The  testimony  of  the 
Bible,  and  of  the  classical  writers,  as  well  as  native 
tradition,  seems  to  prove  that  the  latter  appellation 
superceded  the  former  only  shortly  before  the  Chris- 
tian era  :  i.  e.  after  the  foundation  of  the  later  king- 
dom. "  Himyerite,"  however,  is  now  very  vaguely 
used. — Himyer,   it  may  be  observed,   is   perhaps 


rei"  (**=*, 


om  s 


S^#A»,   OI  ^=. 


'),' 


and 


several  places  in  Arabia  whose  soil  is  reddish  derive 

their    names   from   Aafar    (   ~ic}),    "reddish." 

This  may  identify  Himyer  (the  red  man  ?)  with 
Ophir,  respecting  whose  settlements,  and  the  posi- 
tion of  the  country  called  Ophir,  the  opinion  of 
the  learned  is  widely  divided  [Ophir].  The  simi- 
larity of  signification  with  <poivi£  and  £pv6p6s 
lends  weight  to  the  tradition  that  the  Phoenicians 
came  from  the  Erythraean  Sea  (Herod,  vii.  89). 
The  maritime  nations  of  the  Mediterranean  who 
had  an  affinity  with  the  Egyptians, — such  as  the 
Philistines,  and  probably  the  primitive  Cretans  and 
Carians — appear  to  have  been  an  offshoot  of  an 
early  immigration  from  southern  Arabia,  which 
moved  northwards,  partly  through  Egypt  [Caph- 
tor].  It  is  noticeable  that  the  Shepherd  invaders 
of  Egypt  are  said  to  have  been  Phoenicians ;  but 
Manetho,  who  seems  to  have  held  this  opinion,  also 
tells  us  that  some  said  they  were  Arabs  (Manetho, 
ap.  Cory,  Anc.  Fragments,  2nd  ed.,  p.  171),  and  the 
hieroglyphic  name  has  been  supposed  to  correspond 
to  the  common  appellation  of  the  Arabs,  Shasu,  the 
"  camel-riding  Shasu"  (Select  Papyri,  pi.  liii.),  an 
identification  entirely  in  accordance  with  the  Egyp- 
tian historian's  account  of  their  invasion  and  polity. 
In  the  opposite  direction,  an  early  Arab  domination 
of  Chaldaea  is  mentioned  by  Berosus  (Cory,  p.  60), 
as  preceding  the  Assyrian  dynasty.  All  these  indi- 
cations, slight  as  they  are,  must  be  borne  in  mind 
in  attempting  a  reconstruction  of  the  history  of 
southern  Arabia. — The  early  kings  of  the  Yemen 
were  at  continual  feud  with  the  descendants  of 
Kahlan  (brother  of  Himyer)  until  the  fifteenth  in 
descent  (according  to  the  majority  of  native  histo- 
rians) from  Himyer  united  the  kingdom.  This 
king  was  the  first  Tubbaa,  a  title  also  distinctive  of 
his  successors,  whose  dynasty  represents  the  proper 
kingdom  of  Himyer,  whence  the  Homcritae  (Ptol. 
vi.  7  ;  Plin.  vi.  28).  Their  rule  probably  ex- 
tended over  the  modem  Yemen,  Hadramawt,  and 
Mahreh.  The  fifth  Tubbaa,  Dhu-1-Adhar,  or  Zu-1- 
Azar,  is  supposed  (Caussin,  i.  73)  to  be  the  Iki- 
sarus  of  Aelius  Gallus  (B.C.  24).  The  kingdom 
of  Himyer  lasted  until  A.D.  525,  when  it  fell 
before  an  Abyssinian  invasion.  Already,  about  the 
middle  of  the  4th  century,  the  kings  of  Axum 
appear  to  have  become  masters  of  part  of  the 
Yemen  (Caussin,  Essai,  i.  114;  Zeitschr.  d. 
Deutsch  Morgenland.  Gesellschaft,  vii.  17  seqq., 
xi.  338  seqq.),  adding  to  their  titles  the  names  of 
places  in  Arabia  belonging  to  Himyer.  After  four 
reigns  they  were  succeeded  by  Himyerite  princes, 


A  RAMA 

vassals  of  Persia,  the  last  of  whom  submitted  to 
Mohammad.  Kings  of  Hadramawt  (the  people  of 
Hadramawt  are  the  classical  Chatramotitae,  Pliu. 
vi.  28 ;  cornp.  Adramitae)  are  also  enumerated  by 
the  Arabs  (Ibn-Ivhaldoon,  ap.  Caussin,  i.  135,  seqq.) 
and  distinguished  from  the  descendants  ofYaarub, 
an  indication,  as  is  remarked  by  Caussin  (I.  c),  of 
their  separate  descent  from  Hazarmaveth  [Hazar- 
MAVETH].  The  Greek  geographers  mention  a 
fourth  people  in  conjunction  with  the  Sabaei,  Ho- 
meritae,  and  Chatramotitae, — the  Minaei  (Strab. 
xvi.  768;  Ptol.  v.  7  §23;  Plin.  vi.  32;  Diod. 
Sic.  iii.  42)  who  have  not  been  identified  with  any 
Biblical  or  modern  name.  Some  place  them  as  high 
as  Mekkeh,  and  derive  their  name  from  Mink  (the 
sacred  valley  N.E.  of  that  city),  or  from  the  god- 
dess  Manah,  worshipped  in  the  district  between 
Mekkeh  and  El-Medeeneh.  Fresnel,  however,  places 
them  in  the  Wadee  Do' an  in  Hadramawt,  arguing 
that  the  Yemen  anciently  included  this  tract,  that 
the  Minaei  were  probably  the  same  as  the  Rhabanitae 
or  Rhamanitae  (Ft.  vi.  7,  §24;  Strabo,  xvi.  782), 
and  that  'Pafjuxvirow  was  a  copyist's  error  for 
'lefiavLTwv. 

The  other  chief  Joktanite  kingdom  was  that  of 
the  llijaz,  founded  by  Jurhum,  the  brother  ofYaarub, 
who  left  the  Yemen  and  settled '  in  the  neighbour- 
hood of  Mekkeh.  The  Arab  lists  of  its  kings  are 
inextricably  confused  ;  but  the  name  of  their  leader 
and  that  of  two  of  his  successors  was  Mudad 
for  El-Mudad),  who  probably  represents  Almodad 
[Almodad].  Ishmael,  according  to  the  Arabs, 
married  a  daughter  of  the  first  Mudad,  whence 
sprang  'Adnan  the  ancestor  of  Mohammad.  This 
kingdom,  situate  in  a  less  fertile  district  than  the 
Yemen,  and  engaged  in  conflict  with  aboriginal 
tribes,  never  attained  the  importance  of  that  of 
the  south.  It  merged,  by  intermarriage  and  con- 
quest, into  the  tribes  of  Ishmael.  (Kutb-ed-Deen,  ed. 
Wiistenfeld,  pp.  35,  and  39  seqq. ;  comp.  autho- 
rities quoted  by  Caussin.)  Fresnel  cites  an  Arab 
author  who  identifies  Jurhum  with  Hadoram  [Ha- 
DOKAM.] 

Although  these  were  the  principal  Joktanite 
kingdoms,  others  were  founded  beyond  the  limits  of 
the  peninsula.  The  most  celebrated  of  these  were 
that  of  Fl-Heereh  in  El-Irak,  and  that  of  Ghassan  on 
the  confines  of  Syria  ;  both  originated  by  emigrants 
after  the  Flood  of  El-'Arim.  El-Heereh  soon  be- 
came Ishmaelitic :  Ghassan  long  maintained  its  ori- 
-tock.  Among  its  rulers  were  many  named 
El-Harith.  Respecting  the  presumed  identity  of 
some  of  these  with  kings  called  by  the  Greeks  and 
Romans  Aretas,  and  with  the  Aretes  mentioned  by 
St.  Paul  (2  Cor.  xi.  32),  see  Aiiktas. 

The  [shmaelites  appear  to  have  entered  the 
la  from  the  north-west.  That  they  have 
spread  over  the  whole  of  it  (with  the  exception  of 
one  or  two  districts  on  the  south  coast  which  are 
1  to  be  still  inhabited  by  unmixed  Joktanite 
] pies),  and  thai  the  modern  nation  is  predomi- 
nantly Ishmoelite,  is  asserted  by  the  Arabs.  They 
do  not,  however,  carry  up  their  genealogies 
than  'Adnan  (as  we  ha\  i  i  .  and  they 

have  lost  the  names  of  most  of  [shmael's  immediate 
and  near  descendants.  Such  as  have  been  \,\. 
with  existing  names  will  be  found  under  the  several 
articles  bearing  their  names.  [See  also  11  v;  lrenes.I 
They  extended  northwards  from  the  llijaz  into  the 
Arabian  desert,  where  they  mixed  with  Ketnrahites 
and  other  Abraliamic  peoples;  and  westwards  to 
Idumaea.    when'    they    mixed    with   Edomites,  &c. 


ARABIA  95 

The  tribes  sprung  from  Ishmael  have  always  been 
governed  by  petty  chiefs  or  heads  of  families  (sheykhs 
and  emeers) ;  they  have  generally  followed  a  patri- 
archal life,  and  have  not  originated  kingdoms,  though 
they  have  in  some  instances  succeeded  to  those  of 
Joktanites,  the  principal  one  of  these  being  that  of 
El-Heereh.  With  reference  to  the  Ishmaelites  gene- 
rally, we  may  observe,  iu  continuation  of  a  former 
remark,  that  although  their  first  settlements  in  the 
Hijiiz,  and  their  spreading  over  a  great  part  of  the 
northern  portions  of  the  peninsula,  are  sufficiently 
proved,  there  is  doubt  as  to  the  wide  extension  given 
to  them  by  Arab  tradition.  Mohammad  derived  from 
the  Jews  whatever  tradition  he  pleased,  and  silenced 
any  contrary,  by  the  Kur-an  or  his  own  dicta.  This 
religious  element,  which  does  not  directly  affect  the 
tribes  of  Joktan  (whose  settlements  are  otherwise 
unquestionably  identified),  has  a  great  influence  over 
those  of  Ishmael.  They  therefore  cannot  be  cer- 
tainly proved  to  have  spread  over  the  peninsula, 
notwithstanding  the  almost  universal  adoption  of 
their  language  (which  is  generally  acknowledged  to 
have  been  the  Arabic  commonly  so  called),  and  the 
concurrent  testimony  of  the  Arabs ;  but  from  these 
and  other  considerations  it  becomes  at  the  same 
time  highly  probable  that  they  now  form  the  pre- 
dominant element  of  the  Arab  nation. 

Of  the  descendants  of  Keturah  the  Arabs  say 
little.  They  appear  to  have  settled  chiefly  north 
of  the  peninsula  in  Desert  Arabia,  from  Palestine  to 
the  Persian  Gulf;  and  the  passages  in  the  Bible  in 
which  mention  is  made  of  Dedan  (except  those 
relating  to  the  Cushite  Dedan,  Gen.  x.  7)  refer 
apparently  to  the  tribe  sprung  from  this  race  (Is. 
xxi.  13 ;  Jer.  xxv.  23 ;  Ez.  xxvii.  20),  perhaps  with 
an  admixture  of  the  Cushite  Dedan,  who  seems  to 
have  passed  up  the  western  shores  of  the  Persian 
Gulf.  Some  traces  of  Keturahites,  indeed,  are  as- 
serted to  exist  in  the  south  of  the  peninsula,  where 
a  king  of  Himyer  is  said  to  have  been  a  Midianite 
(El-Mes'oodee,  ap.  Schnltens,  pp.  158-9) ;  and  where 
one  dialect  is  said  to  be  of  Midian,  and  another  of 
Jokshan  son  of  Keturah  (Moajarn) ;  but  these  tra- 
ditions must  be  ascribed  to  the  Rabbinical  influence 
in  Arab  histoiy.  Native  writers  are  almost  wholly 
silent  on  this  subject ;  and  the  dialects  mentioned 
above  are  not,  so  far  as  they  are  known  to  us,  of  the 
tribes  of  Keturah.     [Keturah,  &c] 

In  Northern  and  Western  Ai  abia  are  other  peoples 
which,  from  their  geographical  position  and  mode 
of  life,  are  sometimes  classed  with  the  Arabs.  Of 
these  are  AmaLEK,  the  descendants  of  Es.\r,  &c. 

Religion.  —  The  most  ancient  idolatry  of  the 
Arabs  we  must  conclude  to  have  been  fetishism, 
of  which  there  are  striking  proofs  in  the  sacred 
trees  and  stones  of  historical  times,  and  in  the 
worship  of  the  heavenly  bodies,  or  Sabaeism.  With 
the  latter  were  perhaps  connected  the  temples  (or 
palace-temples)  of  which  there  are  either  remains 
or  traditions  in  the  Himyerite  kingdom;  such  as 
l'.evt  Ghumdan  in  San'a,  and  those  of  Reydan, 
Beynooneh,  Ru'cyn,  .'Eyneyn,  and  Riam.  To  the 
worship  of  the  heavenly  bodies  we  find  allusii 
Job  ivwi.  26-28)  and  to  the  belief  in  the  influence 
of  the  stars  to  give  rain  (xxxviii.  31).  where  the 
■jive  rain,  and  Orion  withholds  it;  and 
again  in  Judges  (v.  20,  21  i  where  the  Btars  fight 
a  on  t  the  host  of  Sisera.  The  names  of  the  ob- 
jects of  the  earlier  fetishism,  the  stone-worship, 

t  re. -Worship,    &C.,    of   various     tribes,    are   too    nu- 
ll!"'o'm    to  mention.     One,    that    of   Manah,  the 
worshipped    between    Mekkeh    and     El- 


96 


AEABIA 


Medeeneh  has  been  compared  with  Meni  (Is.  lxv. 
11),  which  is  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  "  number" 
[Meni].  Magianism,  an  importation  from  Chal- 
daea  and  Persia,  must  be  reckoned  among  the 
religions  of  the  Pagan  Arabs ;  but  it  never  bad 
very  numerous  followers.  Christianity  was  intro- 
duced in  southern  Arabia  towards  the  close  of  the 
2nd  century,  and  about  a  century  later  it  had  made 
great  progress.  It  flourished  chiefly  in  the  Yemen, 
where  many  churches  were  built  (see  Philostorg. 
Hist.  Eccles.  iii. ;  Sozomen,  vi. ;  Evagr.  vi.).  It 
also  rapidly  advanced  in  other  portions  of  Arabia, 
through  the  kingdom  of  Heereh  and  the  contiguous 
countries,  Ghassan,  and  other  parts.  The  persecu- 
tions of  the  Christians,  and  more  particularly  of 
those  of  Nejran  by  the  Tubbaa  Zu-n-Nuwas,  brought 
about  the  fall  of  the  Himyerite  dynasty  by  the 
invasion  of  the  Christian  ruler  of  Abyssinia. 
Judaism  was  propagated  in  Arabia,  principally  by 
Karaites,  at  the  captivity,  but  it  was  introduced 
before  that  time :  it  became  very  prevalent  in  the 
Yemen,  and  in  the  Hijdz,  especially  at  Kheybar 
and  El-Medeeneh,  where  there  are  said  to  be  still 
tribes  of  Jewish  extraction.  In  the  period  imme- 
diately preceding  the  birth  of  Mohammad  another 
class  had  sprung  up,  who,  disbelieving  the  idolatry 
of  the  greater  number  of  their  countrymen,  and  not 
yet  believers  in  Judaism,  or  in  the  corrupt  Chris- 
tianity with  which  alone  they  were  acquainted, 
looked  to  a  revival  of  what  they  called  the  "  reli- 
gion of  Abraham"  (see  Sprenger's  Life  of  Mo- 
hammed, i.,  Calcutta,  1856).  The  promulgation 
of  the  Mohammadan  imposture  overthrew  paganism, 
but  crushed  while  it  assumed  to  lead  the  move- 
ment which  had  been  one  of  the  causes  of  its 
success,  and  almost  wholly  superseded  the  religions 
of  the  Bible  in  Arabia. 

Language. — Arabic,  the  language  of  Arabia,  is 
the  most  developed  and  the  richest  of  the  Semitic 
languages,  and  the  only  one  of  which  we  have  an 
extensive  literature:  it  is,  therefore,  of  great  im- 
poi-tance  to  the  study  of  Hebrew.  Of  its  early 
phases  we  know  nothing ;  while  we  have  archaic 
monuments  of  the  Himyeritic  (the  ancient  language 
of  southern  Arabia),  though  we  cannot  fix  their 
precise  ages.  Of  the  existence  of  Hebrew  and 
Chaldee  (or  Aramaic)  in  the  time  of  Jacob  there  is 
evidence  in  Gen.  (xxxi.  47) ;  and  probably  Jacob 
and  Laban  understood  each  other,  the  one  speaking 
Hebrew  and  the  other  Chaldee.  It  seems  also 
(Judg.  vii.  9-15)  that  Gideon,  or  Phurah,  or  both, 
understood  the  conversation  of  the  "  Midianites, 
and  the  Amalekites,  and  all  the  children  of  the 

east"  (01p  '02).     It  is  probable,  therefore,  that 

in  the  14th  or  13th  cent.  B.C.  the  Semitic 
languages  differed  much  less  than  in  after  times. 
But  it  appears  from  2  K.  xviii.  26,  that  in  the 
8th  cent.  B.C.  only  the  educated  classes  among  the 
Jews  understood  Aramaic.  With  these  evidences 
before  us,  and  making  a  due  distinction  between 
the  archaic  and  the  known  phases  of  the  Aramaic 
and  the  Arabic,  we  think  that  the  Himyeritic  is  to 
be  regarded  as  a  sister  of  the  Hebrew,  and  the 
Arabic  (commonly  so  called)  as  a  sister  of  the  He- 
brew and  the  Aramaic,  or,  in  its  classical  phasis, 
as  a  descendant  of  a  sister  of  these  two,  but  that 


AKABIA 

the  Himyeritic  is  mixed  with  an  African  language, 
and  that  the  other  dialects  of  Arabia  are  in  like 
manner,  though  in  a  much  less  degree,  mixed  with 
an  African  language.  The  inferred  differences  be- 
tween the  older  and  later  phases  of  the  Aramaic, 
and  the  presumed  difference  between  those  of  the 
Arabic,  are  amply  confirmed  by  comparative  phi- 
lology. The  division  of  the  Ishmaelite  language 
into  many  dialects  is  to  be  attributed  chiefly  to  the 
separation  of  tribes  by  uninhabitable  tracts  of 
desert,  and  the  subsequent  amalgamation  of  those 
dialects  to  the  pilgrimage  and  the  annual  meetings 
of  'Okaz,  a  fair  in  which  literary  contests  took 
place,  and  where  it  was  of  the  first  importance  that 
the  contending  poets  should  deliver  themselves  in  a 
language  perfectly  intelligible  to  the  mass  of  the 
people  congregated,  in  order  that  it  might  be  critic- 
ally judged  by  them ;  for  many  of  the  meanest  of 
the  Arabs,  utterly  ignorant  of  reading  and  writing, 
were  of  the  highest  of  the  authorities  consulted  by 
the  lexicologists  when  the  corruption  of  the  language 
had  commenced,  i.  e.  when  the  Arabs,  as  Moham- 
madans,  had  begun  to  spread  among  foreigners. 

Respecting  the  Himyeritic,0  until  lately  little  was 
known  ;  but  monuments  bearing  inscriptions  in  this 
language  have  been  discovered  in  the  southern 
parts  of  the  peninsula,  principally  in  Hadramawt 
and  the  Yemen,  and  some  of  the  inscriptions  have 
been  published  by  Fresnel,  Arnaud,  Wellsted,  ami 
Cruttenden  ;  while  Fresnel  has  found  a  dialect  still 
spoken  in  the  district  of  Mahreh  and  westwards  as 
far  as  Kisheem,  that  of  the  neighbourhood  of  Za- 
faVi  and  Mirbdt  being  the  purest,  and  called  "  Ek- 
hili;"  and  this  is  supposed  with  reason  to  be  the 
modern  phasis  of  the  old  Himyeritic  (4e  Lett  re). 
Fresnel's  alphabet  has  been  accepted  by  the  learned. 
The  dates  found  in  the  inscriptions  range  from 
30  (on  the  dyke  of  Ma-rib)  to  604  at  Hisn  Choral), 
but  what  era  these  represent  is  uncertain. — Ewald 
(TJeber  die  Himyarische  Sprache  in  Hoefer's  Zcit- 
schrift,  i.  295,  seqq.)  thinks  that  they  are  years  of 
the  Rupture  of  the  Dyke,  while  acknowledging  their 
apparent  high  antiquity ;  but  the  difficulty  of  sup- 
posing such  inscriptions  on  a  ruined  dyke,  and  the 
fact  that  some  of  them  would  thus  be  brought  later 
than  the  time  of  Mohammad,  make  it  probable 
that  they  belong  rather  to  an  earlier  era,  perhaps 
that  of  the  Himyerite  empire,  though  what  point 
marks  its  commencement  is  not  determined.  The 
Himyeritic  in  its  earlier  phasis  probably  represents 
the  first  Semitic  language  spoken  in  Arabia. 

The  manners  and  customs  of  the  Arabs f  are  of 
great  value  in  illustrating  the  Bible ;  but  supposed 
parallels  between  the  patriarchal  life  of  the  Scrip- 
tures and  the  state  of  the  modern  Arabs  must  not 
be  hastily  drawn.  It  should  be  remembered  that 
this  people  are  in  a  degraded  condition ;  that  they 
have,  been  influenced  by  Jewish  contact,  especially 
by  the  adoption,  by  Mohammad,  of  parts  of  the  cere- 
monial law,  and  of  rabbinical  observances  ;  and  that 
they  are  not  of  the  race  of  Israel.  They  must  be 
regarded,  1st.  as  Bedawees,  or  people  of  the  desert, 
and  2ndly,  as  settled  tribes  or  townspeople. 

The  Bedawees  acknowledge  that  their  ancient 
excellence  has  greatly  declined  since  the  time  of 
Mohammad,  and  there  cannot  be  a  doubt  that  this 
decline   had   commenced   much    earlier.      Though 


e  By  this  term  is  to  be  understood  the  ancient  lan- 
guage of  southern  Arabia  generally,  not  that  of  the 
Tlimyerites  only. 

'  The  Arabs  have  impressed  their  national  charac- 


teristics on  every  people  whom  they  have  conquered, 
except  the  Tatar  races.  "  Arab  life  "  is  therefore 
generally  understood  in  a  very  wide  sense.  The 
modern  Egyptians  are  essentially  an  Arab  people. 


AKABIA 

each  tribe  boasts  of  its  unadulterated  blood,  and 
pure  language,  their  learned  men  candidly  ad- 
mit the  depreciation  of  national  character.  Scrip- 
tural customs  still  found  among  them  must  there- 
fore be  generally  regarded  rather  as  indications  of 
firmer  practices,  than  as  being  identical  with  them. 
Furthermore,  the  Bible  always  draws  a  strong  con- 
trast between  the  character  of  the  Israelites  and 
that  of  the  descendants  of  Ishmael,  whom  the  Be- 
dawees  mostly  represent.  Yet  they  are,  by  com- 
parison with  other  nations,  an  essentially  unchange- 
able people,  retaining  a  primitive,  pastoral  life,  ami 
many  customs  strikingly  illustrating  the  Bible. 
They  are  not  as  much  affected  by  their  religion  as 
might  be  supposed  :  many  tribes  disregard  religious 
observances,  and  even  retain  some  pagan  rites.  The 
Wahhaliees,  or  modern  Arab  reformers,  found 
great  difficulty  in  suppressing  by  peisuasion,  and 
even  by  force  of  arms,  such  rites ;  and  where  they 
succeeded,  the  suppression  was,  in  most  cases,  only 
temporary.  Incest,  sacrifices  to  sacred  objects,  &c, 
were  among  these  relics  of  paganism.  (See  Burck- 
hardt's  Notes  on  the  Bedouins  and  W<diabys.)  The 
less  changed  a  tribe,  however,  the  more  difficulty  is 
there  in  obtaining  information  respecting  it :  such  a 
one  is  very  jealous  of  intercourse  with  strangers  even 
of  its  own  nation.  In  southern  Arabia,  for  instance, 
is  a  tribe  which  will  not  allow  a  guest  to  stay  within 
its  encampments  beyond  the  three  days  demanded 
by  the  laws  of  hospitality.  This  exclusion  undoubt- 
edly tends  to  preserve  the  language  from  corruption, 
and  the  people  from  foreign  influence  ;  but  it  pro- 
bably does  not  improve  the  national  character. 

To  the  settled  Arabs,  these  remarks  apply  with 
the  difference  that  the  primitive  mode  of  life  is 
in  a  great  degree  lost,  and  the  Jewish  practices  are 
much  more  observable;  while  intermixture  with 
foreigners,  especially  with  Abyssinian  and  Negro 
concubines  in  the  Yemen  and  the  Hijaz,  has  tended 
to  destroy  their  purity  of  blood.  A  Bedawee  will 
scarcely  many  out  of  his  tribe,  and  is  not  addicted 
to  concubinage ;  he  considers  himself,  and  is,  quite 
distinct  from  a  townsman,  in  habits,  in  mode  of 
thought,  and  in  national  feeling.  Again,  a  distinc- 
tion should  be  made  between  the  people  of  northern 
and  those  of  southern  Arabia ;  the  former  being 
chiefly  of  Ishmaelite,  the  latter  of  Joktauite, 
descent,  and  in  other  respects  than  settlement  and 
intermarriage  with  foreigners,  further  removed 
from  the  patriarchal  character. 

Regarded  in  the  light  we  have  indicated,  Arab 
manners  and  customs,  whether  those  of  the  Bedavi  ees 
or  of  the  townspeople,  afford  valuable  help  to  the 
student  of  the  Bible,  and  testimony  to  the  truth  and 
vigour  of  the  Scriptural  narrative.  Xo  one  can  mix 
with  this  people  without  being  constantly  and  forci- 
bly reminded  either  of  the  early  patriarchs  or  of  the 
settled  Israelites.  We  may  instance  their  pastoral 
life,  their  hospitality  ( that  most  remarkable  of  desert 
virtues)  [Hospitality],  their  universal  respect 
e  (comp.  Lev.  xix.  32),  their  familiar  defer- 
ence (comp.  2  K.  v.  13),  their  superstitious  i 
for  the  beard.  On  the  signet-ring,  which  is  worn 
on  the  little  finger  of  the  right  hand,  is  usually  in- 
scribed  a  sentence  expressive  of  submission  to  God, 
or  of  his  perfection,  &c,  explaining  l"x.  xxxix.  30, 
"  the  engraving  of  a  signet,  Holiness  to  the  Lord," 
and  the  saying  of  our  Lord  (John  iii.  33),  "  He .  .  , 
hath  set  to  his  seal  that  God  is  true."  As  a  mark 
of  trust,  this  ring  is  given  to  anoth.  I 
in  Gen.  xli.4'2  i.  The  inkhorn  worn  in  the  girdle  is 
also  very  ancient  (Kz.  i\.  '_',  3,  11    .as  well  as  the 


ARABIA 


97 


veil.  (For  these  and  many  other  illustrations,  see 
Lane's  Modern  Egyptian*,  iwiex.)  A  man  has  a 
right  to  claim  his  cousin  in  marriage,  and  he  relin- 
quishes this  right  by  taking  off  his  shoe,  as  the  kins- 
man of  Ruth  did  to  Boaz  (Ruth  iv.  7,  8  ;  see  Burck- 
bardfs  Notes  on  the  Bedouins  and  Wahabys,  i. 
113). 

References  in  the  Bible  to  the  Arabs  themselves 
are  still  more  clearly  illustrated  by  the  manners  of  the 
modern  people,  in  their  predatory  expeditions,  their 
mode  of  warfare,  their  caravan  journeys,  &c.  To  the 
interpretation  of  the  book  of  Job,  an  intimate  know- 
ledge of  this  people  and  their  language  and  literature 
is  essential ;  tor  many  of  the  most  obscure  passages 
can  only  be  explained  by  that  knowledge. 

The  commerce  of  Arabia  especially  connected 
with  the  Bible  has  been  referred  to  in  the  sections 
on  Western  and  Northern  Arabia,  and  incidentally 
in  mentioning  the  products  of  the  peninsula.  Direct 
mention  of  the  commerce  of  the  south  does  not 
appear  to  be  made  in  the  Bible,  but  it  seems  to 
have  passed  to  Palestine  principally  through  the 
northern  tribes.  Passages  relating  to  the  fleets  of 
Solomon  and  to  the  maritime  trade,  however,  bear 
on  this  subject,  which  is  a  curious  study  for  the  his- 
torical inquirer.  The  Joktanite  people  of  southern 
Arabia  have  always  been,  in  contradistinction  to 
the  Ishmaelite  tribes,  addicted  to  a  seafaring  life. 
The  latter  were  caravan-merchants ;  the  former, 
the  chief  traders  of  the  Red  Sea,  carrying  their 
commerce  to  the  shores  of  India,  as  well  as  to  the 
nearer  coasts  of  Africa.  Their  own  writers  describe 
these  voyages  ;  since  the  Christian  era  especially,  as 
we  might  expect  from  the  modern  character  of 
their  literature.  (See  the  curious  Accounts  of  India 
and  China  by  Two  Mohammadan  Travellers  of  the 
9th  cent.,  trans,  by  Renaudot,  and  amply  illus- 
trated in  Mr.  Lane's  notes  to  his  translation  of 
the  Thousand  and  One  Nights.)  The  classical 
writers  also  make  frequent  mention  of  the  com- 
merce of  southern  Arabia.  (See  the  Diet,  of  Gr. 
and  Rom.  Geography.)  It  was  evidently  carried  to 
Palestine  by  the  two  great  caravan  routes  from  the 
head  of  the  Red  Sea  and  from  that  of  the  Persian 
Gulf;  the  former  especially  taking  with  it  African 
produce;  the  Latter,  Indian.  It  should  be  observed 
that  the  wandering  propensities  of  the  Arabs,  of 
whatever  descent,  do  not  date  from  the  promulga- 
tion of  El-Isltlm.  All  testimony  goes  to  show  that 
from  the  earliest  ages  the  peoples  of  Arabia  formed 
colonies  in  distant  lands,  and  have  not  been  actuated 
only  by  either  the  desire  of  conquest  or  by  reli- 
gious impulse  in  their  foreign  expeditions;  but 
rather  by  restlessness  and  commercial  activity. 

The  principal  European  authorities  for  the  his- 
tory of  Arabia,  a.re,  Schultens'  Hist.  In, p.  Fetus. 
Jiirfti/tidiiruin,  Hard.  I  iel.  1  7So,  containing  extracts 
from  various  Arab  authors;  and  his  Monurnenta 
Vetustiora  Aral, in-.  Lug.  Rat.  174n;  Eichhorn's 
Monurnenta  Antiquiss.  lli^t.  Arabian,  chiefly  ex- 
tracted from  Ibn-Kuteybeh,  with  bis  notes,  Goth. 
1 77."> ;  I'resnel,  Lettres  sur  I' Hist,  des  Arabes 

.  published  in  the  Journal  Asiatique, 
1838-53;  Quatremere,  Menwire  sur 
the'ens ;  Caussin,  Essai  sur  I' /fist,  des  Arabes 
.  Paris,  1847-8:  for  the  gco- 
graphy,  Niebuhr's  Description  d,-  PArabie,  Amst. 
177':  l'.-i  ekhardt's  Trawls  in  Arabia,  Lond. 
1839;  YVcllsted,  Narrative  of  a  Journey  f 
ruins  of  Naheb-al-Hajar,  in  Journ.  of  JR.  G.  S., 
ui.  20;  his  copy  !  t'  Inscription,  in  Journ, of  Asiat. 
Sor.  of  Bengal,  iii.  18:%4;  and  his  ,/bwrna/,  London, 

H 


98 


ARAD 


1838 ;  Cruttenden,  Narrative  of  a  Journey  from 
Mokhd  to  Sand  •  Joraard,  E'tudes  /jeogr.  et  hist. 
appended  to  Mengin,  Hist,  do  I'Egypte,  vol.  iii. 
Paris,  1839;  and  for  Arabia  Petraea  and  Sinai, 
Robinson's  Biblical  Researches ;  Stanley's  Sinai 
and  Palestine  •  Tuch's  Essay  on  the  Sinaitic  In- 
scriptions, in  the  Journal  of  the  German  Oriental 
Soc.  xiv.  129  seqq.  Strabo,  Ptolemy,  Diodorus 
Siculus,  Pliny,  and  the  minor  geographers,  should 
also  be  consulted  : — for  the  manners  and  customs 
of  the  Arabs,  Burckhardt's  Notes  on  the  Bedouins 
and  Wahabys,  8vo.  1831 ;  and  for  Arab  life  in  its 
widest  sense,  Mr.  Lane's  Notes  on  the  Tiiousatvi 
and  One  Nights,  ed.  1838  ;  and  his  Modern  Egyp- 
tians, ed.  1842. 

The  most  important  native  works  are,  with  two 
exceptions,  still  untranslated,  and  but  few  of  them 
are  edited.  Abu-1-Fida's  Hist.  Anteislamica  has 
been  edited  and  translated  by  Fleischer,  Lips.  1831  ; 
and  El-Idreesee's  Geography  translated  by  Jaubert, 
and  published  in  the  Jiecueil  de  Voyages  et  de  Ale- 
moires,  bytheGeogr.  Soc.  of  Paris,  1836;  of  those 
which  have  been,  or  are  in  course  of  being,  edited, 
are  Yakoot's  Homonymous  Geographical  Dic- 
tionary, entitled  El-Mushtarak  Wad'an,  wa-l-Muf- 
tarak  Sak'an,  ed.  Wiistenfeld,  Got.  1845 ;  the 
Mardsid  el-Ittilda,  probably  an  abridgment  by 
an  unknown  hand  of  his  larger  geogr.  diet,  called 
the  Moajam,  ed.  Juynboll,  Lug.  Bat.  1852-4 ;  the 
Histories  of  Mekkeh,  ed.  Wiistenfeld,  and  now  pub- 
lishing by  the  German  Oriental  Society  ;  and  Ibn- 
Khaldoon's  Prolegomena,  ed.  Quatremere,  i.  Paris, 
1858.  Of  those  in  MS.,  besides  the  indispensable 
works  of  the  Arab  lexicographers,  we  would  especi- 
ally mention  Ibn-Khaldoon's  History  of  the  Arabs  ; 
the  Khareedet  el-Ajdib  of  Ibn-El-Wardee ;  the 
Mir -at  ez-Zemdn  of  Ibn-El-Jdzee ;  the  Murooj 
edh-Dhahab  of  El-Mes'oodee ;  Yakoot's  Moajam 
el-Bulddn ;  the  Kitdb-el-Aghdnee  of  El-Isfahanee ; 
and  the  'Ikd  of  El-Kurtubee.  [E.  S.  P.] 

A'RAD  (T1J?;  T2pr)5;  Arad),  name  of  a  man 
(1  Chr.  viii.  15)! 

A'RAD  ("nj? ;  'ASe'p,  'Apa5),  a  royal  city  of  the 
Canaanites,  named  with  Hormah  and  Libnah  (Josh, 
xii.  14).  The  wilderness  of  Judah  was  to  "  the  south 
of  Arad"  (Judg.  i.  16).  It  is  also  undoubtedly 
named  in  Num.  xxi.  1  (comp.  Hormah  in  ver.  3), 
andxxxiii.  40, '  the  Canaanite  king  of  Arad,' instead 
of  the  reading  of  the  A.  V.,  "  king  Arad  the  Ca- 
naanite." (See  the  translations  of  Zunz,  De  Wette, 
&c.)  It  is  mentioned  in  the  Onomasticon  (s.  v. 
"Apaua,  Arad,  'ASe'p,  Asason  Thamar)  as  a  city  of 
the  Amorites,  near  the  desert  of  Kaddes,  4  miles  from 
Malatha  (Moladah),  and  20  from  Hebron.  This 
agrees  with  the  conjecture  of  Robinson,  who  iden- 
tities it  with  a  hill,  Tell  'Arad,  an  hour  and  a  half 
N.E.  by  E.  from  Milh  (Moladah),  and  8  hours  from 
Hebron  (Rob.  ii.  101,  201,  202).  [G.] 

AR'ADTJS  ("ApaSos;  Arados),  included  in 
the  list  of  places  to  which  the  decree  of  Lucius  the 
consul,  protecting  the  Jews  under  Simon  the  high 
priest,  was  addressed  (1  Mace.  xv.  23).  The  same 
place  as  Arvad.  [<"}.] 

A'RAH  (|-PX  ;    'Ope'x,  "Apes,  'Hpae,  'Upd  ; 

Aree,^  Area),  name  of  two  men.  1.(1  Chr.  vii.  39). 
2.  (Ezr.  ii.  5  ;  Neh.  vi.  18  ;  vii.  10),  given  as  Ares 
('Ape's)  in  1  Esd.  v.  10. 

A'RAM  (fflN,  occasionally  with  the  definite 
article  D'lXil,  and  once  D~) ;  probably  from  a  root 


ARAM 

signifying  height,  and  which  is  also  the  base  of 
"  Ramah."  (Gesenius,  151  ;  Stanley,  129),  the  name 
by  which  the  Hebrews  designated,  generally,  the 
country  lying  to  the  north-east  of  Palestine ; a  the 
great  mass  of  that  high  table-land  which,  rising 
with  sudden  abruptness  from  the  Jordan  and  the 
very  margin  of  the  lake  of  Gennesareth,  stretches, 
at  an  elevation  of  no  less  than  2000  feet  above  the 
level  of  the  sea,  to  the  banks  of  the  Euphrates 
itself,  contrasting  strongly  with  the  low  land  bor- 
dering on  the  Mediterranean,  the  "  land  of  Canaan," 
or  the  low  country  (Gen.  xxxi.  18,  xxxiii.  18,  &c). 
Throughout  the  A.  V.  the  word  is,  with  only  a  very 
few  exceptions,  rendered  as  in  the  Vulgate  and 
LXX. — Syria;  a 'name  which,  it  must  be  remem- 
bered, includes  far  more  to  our  ears  than  did  Aram 
to  the  Jews.     [Syria.] 

Its  earliest  occurrence  in  the  book  of  Genesis  is 
in  the  form  of  Aram-naharaim,  i.  c.  the  ^highland 
of  or  between  the  two  rivers"  (Gen.  xxiv.  10, 
A.  V.  "  Mesopotamia"),  but  in  several  succeeding 
chapters,  and  in  other  parts  of  the  Pentateuch,  the 
word  is  used  without  any  addition,  to  designate  a 
dweller  in  Aram-naharaim — Laban  or  Bethuel — 
"  the  Aramite"  (see  Gen.xxv.  20,  xxviii.  2,  5,  xxxi. 
20,  24 ;  also  Judg.  iii.  10,  compared  with  8  ■ 
Deut.  xxvi.  5,  compared  with  xxiii.  4,  and  Ps.  lx. 
title).  Padan,  or  accurately  Paddan,  Aram 
('N  pS  "  cultivated  highland,"  from  paddah,  to 

plough,  Ges.  1092;  Stanley,  129,  note)  was  an- 
other designation  for  the  same  region  (Gen.  xxv  20, 
xxviii.  2;  comp.  Hos.  xii.  12,  where  the  word 
Sadeh^  PHE?,  is,  perhaps,  equivalent  to  Paddan). 

[Sadeh  ;  Padan  ARAM.]  A  tribe  of  Hittites 
(Khatte i  bearing  the  name  of  Patena  is  reported  to 
have  been  met  with  in  the  inscriptions  of  Shalman- 
eser,  B.C.  900-860.  They  then  occupied  the  valley 
of  the  Orontes,  and  the  country  eastward  as  far  as 
the  watershed  between  that  river  and  the  Euphrates. 
The  latest  explorers  do  not  hesitate  to  identify  this 
name  with  Pactoi-aram  and  Batanaea  or  Bashan 
(Rawlinson's  Herodotus,  i.  463)  ;  but  if  this  be  cor- 
rect, the  conclusion  of  the  identity  of  Padan-aram  and 
Mesopotamia  arrived  at  above  from  a  comparison 
of  the  statements  of  Scripture,  must  be  modified. 

Later  in  the  history  we  meet  with  a  number  of 
small  nations  or  kingdoms  forming  parts  of  the 
general  land  of  Aram: — 1.  Aram-Zobah  (2  Sam. 
x.  6,  8),  or  simply  Zobah,  rQ1¥  (1  Sam.  xiv.  47  ; 
2  Sam.  viii.  3 ;  1  Chr.  xviii.  xix.)  [Zobah].  2. 
Aram  beth-rehob  (2  Sam.  x.  6),  or  Rehob,  y\H~\ 
(x.  8).  [Rehob.]  3.  Aram-maachah  (1  Chr! 
xix.  6),  or  Maachah  only,  PDJ?»  (2  Sam.  x.  6). 

[Maachah.]  .  4.  Geshur,  "  in  Aram  "  (2  Sam. 
xv.  8),  usually  named  in  connexion  with  Maachah 
(Deut.  iii.  14;  Josh,  xiii.  11,  13,  &c).  [Geshur.] 
5.  Aram-Dammesek  (Damascus)  (1  Sam.  viii.  5, 
6;  1  Chr.  xviii.  5,  6).  The  whole  of  these  petty 
states  are  spoken  of  collectively  under  the  name  of 
"  Aram "  (2  Sam.  x.  13),  but  as  Damascus  in- 
creased in  importance  it  gradually  absorbed  the 
smaller  powers  (1  K.  xx.  1),  and  the  name  of 
Aram  was  at  last  applied  to  it  alone  (Is.  vii.  8 ; 
also  1  K.  xi.  25,  xv.  18,  &c). 

It  is  difficult  to  believe,  from  the  narrative,  that 


a  The  name  Aram  probably  appears  also  in  the 
Homeric  names  'ApC^oi  (17.  ii.  783)  and  'Epe/xBoC 
(Od.  iv.  84).  Comp.  Strab.  xvi.  785  ;  Grote,  Hist,  of 
Greece,  iii.  387. 


AEAMITESS 

at  the  time  of  David's  struggles  these  "kingdoms" 
were  anything  more  than  petty  tribes  located  round 
the  skirts  of  the  possessions  of  Gad  and  Manasseh. 
Some  writers,  however  (Rosenmtiller  and  Michaelis 
amongst  others),  have  attempted  to  show  that  their 
territory  extended  as  tin-  as  the  Euphrates  on  the 
one  hand  and  the  Mediterranean  (at  Berytus)  on 
the  other,  in  which  case  it  would  have  been  con- 
siderably  larger  than  Palestine  itself.  Tins,  how- 
ever, will  be  best  examined  under  the  separate 
heads,  including,  in  addition  to  those  already 
noticed,  ISH-TOB  and  IIamatii. 

According  to  the  genealogical  table  in  Gen.  x., 
Aram  was  a  son  of  Shem,  and  his  brethren  were 
Elain,  Asshur,  and  Arphaxad.  It  will  be  observed 
that  these  names  occur  in  regular  order  from  the 
east,  Aram  closing  the  list  on  the  borders  of  the 
"  western  sea." 

In  three  passages  Aram  would  seem  to  denote 
Assyria  ;  2  K.  xviii.  26  ;  Is.  xxxvi.  1  I  ;  Jer.  XXXV.  11). 

In  2  K.  xvi.  6,  the  Syrians  are  said  to  have 
come  to  Elath  (on  the  Red  Sea).  The  word  ren- 
dered Syrians  is  D*19T1N,  Aromim,  which  in  the 

Keri  is  corrected  to  Adomim,  Edomites. 

In  2  Chr.  .xxii.  5,  the  name  is  presented  in  a  short- 
ened form  as  Ram,  D^")!!  •  comp.  Job  xxxii.  2. 

2.  Another  Aram  is  named  in  Gen.  xxii.  21,  as 
a  son  of  Kemuel,  and  descendant  of  Nahor.  From 
its  mention  with  L*z  and  Buz  it  is  probably  iden- 
tical with  the  tribe  of  Ram,  to  the  "kindred"  of 
which  belonged  "  Elihu,  the  son  of  Barachel  the 
Buzite,"  who  was  visiting  Job  in  the  land  of  Uz 
(Job  •xxxii.    2).     It  is  also  worthy  of  notice  that, 

ai ig  the  other  descendants  of  Nahor  are  named 

Tebach  (comp.  Tibhath,  1  Chr.  xix.  18),  and  Maa- 
eah;  so  that  the  tribe  was  possibly  one  of  the 
sinall.-r  divisions  of  Aram  described  ahove.       [G.] 

ARAMI'TESS  (JV??nX) ;  ».  c.  a  female  inha- 
bitant of  Aram  (  1  Chr.  vii.  14).  In  other  passages 
of  the  A.  V,  the  ethnic  of  Aram  is  rendered  Syrian. 

A'RAN  (]-\H  ;  Sam.  |1K  ;  Apa*  ;  Aran,  Aram), 
name  0fa  Ilorite  (Gen.  xxxvi.  28;   1  Chr.  i.  42). 

AE'ARAT  (D~TIN ;  'Apapdr;  Ararat),  a  moun- 
tainous district  of  Asia  mentioned  in  the  Bible  in 
connexion  with  the  following  events:  — (1.)  As  the 
-place  of  the  ark  after  the  I'M    e  (Gen.  viii. 
4,  '■  upon  the  mountains  of  Ararat,"  A.  V. ;   super 
■  Vulg.  i :    2.)  as  the  asylum  ofthe 
Sennacherib  (2  K*.  xix.  .">7 ;  Is.  xxxvii.  38; 
the  LXX.  have  els  Apfxeutau  in   the  latter,  and  the 

Vulg.  to  '  ■■  a  in  i  me   i 

A.  V.  has  in  both  "  the  land  of  Armenia ") :  (3.)  as 
the  ally,  and  probabrj  thi  .  of  Minni  and 

Ashchenaz  (Jer.  li.  27).  |  Lrmenia.]  [n  Gen.  xi. 
2  we  have  apparently  an  indication  of  its  position  as 
eastward  of  Mesopotamia  (D"1j31!?  "from  the  east," 
A.  V.),  whence  Bohlen  (Ihtrod.  to  Gen.  ii.   139) 

identifies  Ararat  with  Ary  n  irta,  tl holy  land  " 

in  the   nortli  of  Hindostan:    but   the  Hebrew   is 
more  correctly  translated  in  the  margin,  as  also  i£ 
iii.     I  I.    -  •      en.    Thesaurus,   p. 

305),  the  writer,  as  it  would  seem,  describing  the 
position  of  Mesopotamia  in  reference  to  his  own 

country,  rather  than  to  Ararat. 

The  name  Ararat  was  unknown  to  the  geographers 

of  i  ireece  and  R as  it  -till  is  to  the  Armenians 

oi  the  present  day:  but  that  it  was  an  indi 

and  an  ancient   name  for  a   portion   of  Armenia, 


ARARAT 


90 


appears  from  the  statement  of  Moses  of  Chorene, 
who  gives  Araratia  as  the  designation  ofthe  central 
province,  and  connects  the  name  with  an  historical 
event  reputed  to  have  occurred  k.c.  1750  (Histor* 
Armen.  Winston,  p.  361).  Jerome  identified  it 
with  the  plain  of  the  Araxes:  it  would;  however, 
be  more  correct  to  consider  the  name  in  its  Biblical 
sense  as  descriptive  generally  of  the  Armenian  high- 
lands— the  lofty  plateau  which  overlooks  the  plain 
of  the  Araxes  on  the  N.,  and  of  Mesopotamia  on 
the  S.  We  shall  presently  notice  the  characteristics 
of  this  remarkable  region,  which  adapted  it  to 
become  the  cradle  of  the  human  race  and  the  cen- 
tral spot  whence,  after  the  Deluge,  the  nations  were 
to  radiate  to  ditl'erent  quarters  of  the  world.  It  is, 
however,  first  necessary  to  notice  briefly  the  opinions 
put  forth  as  to  the  spot  where  the  ark  tested,  as 
described  in  Gen.  viii.  4,  although  all  such  specu- 
lations, from  the  indefiniteness  of  the  account,  can- 
not lead  to  any  certain  result.  Berosus  the  ChaJ- 
daean,  contemporary  with  Alexander  the  Great,  fixes 
the  spot  on  the  mountains  of  Kurdistan  (irpbs  t<£ 
upet  Toiv  KopSvalcov,  Joseph.  Ant.  i.  3,  §6),  which 
form  the  southern  frontier  of  Armenia.  His  opinion 
is  followed  by  the  Syriac  and  Chaldee  versions, 
which  give  VVTJ3  as  the  equivalent  for  Ararat  in 
Gen.  viii.  4,  and  in  a  later  age  by  the  Koran.  Tra- 
dition still  points  to  the  Jebel  Judi  as  the  scene 
ot  the  event,  and  maintains  the  belief,  as  stated 
by  Berosus,  that  fragments  of  the  ark  exist  on  its 
summit.  The  selection  of  this  range  was  natural 
to  an  inhabitant  of  the  Mesopotamian  plain  :  for  it 
presents  an  apparently  insurmountable  barrier  on 
that  side,  hemming  in  the  valley  ofthe  Tigris  with 
abrupt  declivities  so  closely  that  only  during  the 
summer  mouths  is  any  passage  alio,, led  between 
the  mountain  and  river  (Ainsworth's  Travels  in 
track  ofthe  Ten  Thousand,  p.  1.34).  Josephus  also 
quotes  Nicolaus  Damascenus  to  the  effect  that  a 
mountain  named  Baris,  beyond  Minyas,  was  the 
spot.  This  has  been  identified  with  Yaraz,  a 
mountain  mentioned  by  St.  Mai  tin  (Mem.  sur 
I'Armenie,  i.  265)  as  rising  to  the  N.  of  Lake  I  an  ■ 
but  the  only  important  mountain  in  the  position 
indicated  is  described  by  recent  travellers  under  the 
name  Seiban  Tagh,  and  we  are  therefore  inclined  to 
accept  the  emendation  of  Schroeder,  who  proposes 
to  read  Mdtrts,  the  indigenous  name  of  Mount 
Ararat,  for  Blip ts.  That  the  scene  of  an  evenl  so 
deeplj  interesting  to  mankind  had  even  at  that 
earl]  age  been  transferred,  as  was  natural,  to  the 
loftiest  and  most  imposing  mountain  in  the  district, 
appears  from  the  statement  of  Josephus  i  dntlfi.  .">, 
§5    thai   the  spot,  where 

received  a  name  desci  iptive  of  t  hat  event,  w  Inch  he 
renders  '  Aito^ar^piov,  and  which  seems  identical 

with  Nachdjevai i  the  banks  ofthe  Araxes.     To 

this  neighbour] 1  all  the  associations  con 

with  Noah  are  now  assigned  by  the  i 
nians,  and  their  opinion  ha-  been  >o  far  indorsed  by 
Europeans  thai  they  have  given  tie-  name  Ararat 
exclusively  to  the  mountain  which  is  called  Massis 
by  the  Aim.  nians.  Agri-Dagh,  i.e. Steep  Mountain, 
by  the  Turks,  and  Kuh-i-Nuh,  i.e.  Noah's  Moun- 

the  Persians.     It  rises  immediately 
the  plain  ot'  the  Araxes,  and  terminates   in  two 
conical  peaks,  named  the  Great  and  Less  Ararat, 
seven   miles  distant    from   each  other,  the 
former  of  which  attains  an  elevation  of  17,21 

:  he  level  of  the  sea  and  about  14,000  above 

n  of  the  Araxes,  while  the  latter  is  lower 

by  4000  nmniit  of  the  higher  is  covered 

II    2 


100 


ARAEAT 


with  eternal  snow  for  about  3000  feet  of  perpen- 
dicular height.  That  it  is  of  volcanic  origin,  is 
evidenced  by  the  immense  masses  of  lava,  cinders, 
and  pocphyiy  with  which  the  middle  region  is 
covered :  a  deep  cleft  on  its  northern  side  has  been 
regarded  as  the  site  of  its  crater,  and  this  cleft  was 
the  scene  of  a  terrible  catastrophe  which  occurred 
July  2,  1840,  when  the  village  of  Arguri  and  the 
Monastery  of  St.  James  were  buried  beneath  the 
debris  brought  down  from  the  upper  heights  by  a 
violent  earthquake.  Clouds  of  reddish  smoke  and 
a  strong  smell  of  sulphur,  which  pervaded  the 
neighbourhood  after  the  earthquake,  seem  to  indi- 
cate that  the  volcanic  powers  of  the  mountain  are 
not  altogether  dormant.  The  summit  of  Ararat 
was  long  deemed  inaccessible,  and  the  Armenians 
still  cling  to  this  belief.  It  was  first  ascended  in 
1829  by  Parrot,  who  approached  it  from  the  N.W. : 
he  describes  a  secondary  summit  about  400  yards 
distant  from  the  highest  point,  and  on  the  gentle 
depression  which  connects  the  two  eminences  he 
surmises  that  the  ark  rested  (Journey  to  Ararat, 
p.  179).  The  region  immediately  below  the  limits 
of  perpetual  snow  is  barren  and  unvisited  by  beast 
or  bird.  Wagner  (Reise,  p.  185)  describes  the  silence 
and  solitude  that  reign  there  as  quite  overpowering. 
Arguri,  the  only  village  known  to  have  been  built 
on  its  slopes,  was  the  spot  where,  according,  to  tra- 
dition, Noah  planted  his  vineyard.  Lower  down, 
in  the  plain  of  Araxes,  is  Nachdjevan,  where  the 
patriarch  is  reputed  to  have  been  buried. 

Returning  to  the  broader  signification  we  have 
assigned  to  the  term  "  the  mountains  of  Ararat," 
as  co-extensive  with  the  Armenian  plateau  from  the 
base  of  Ararat  in  the  N.  to  the  range  of  Kurdistan 
in  the  S.,  we  notice  the  following  characteristics  of 
that  region  as  illustrating  the  Bible  narrative: — 
(1.)  Its  elevation.  It  rises  as  a  rocky  island  out 
of  a  sea  of  plain  to  a  height  of  from  6000  to  7000 
feet  above  the  level  of  the  sea,  presenting  a  surface 
of  extensive  plains,  whence,  as  from  a  fresh  base, 
spring  important  and  lofty  mountain-ranges,  having 
a  generally  parallel  direction  from  E.  to  W.,  and  con- 
nected with  each  other  by  transverse  ridges  of  mo- 
derate height.  (2.)  Its  geographical  position.  The 
Armenian  plateau  stands  equidistant  from  the 
Euxine  and  the  Caspian  seas  on  the  N.,  and  be- 
tween the  Persian  Gulf  and  the  Mediterranean  on 
the  S.  With  the  first  it  is  connected  by  the 
Acampsis,  with  the  second  by  the  Araxes,  with  the 
third  by  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates,  the  latter  ot 
which  also  serves  as  an  outlet  towards  the  countries 
on  the  Mediterranean  coast.  These  seas  were  the 
high  roads  of  primitive  colonization,  and  the  plains 
watered  by  these  rivers  were  the  seats  of  the  most 
powerful  nations  of  antiquity,  the  Assyrians,  the 
Babylonians,  the  Medes,  and  the  Colchians.  Viewed 
with  reference  to  the  dispersion  of  the  nations, 
Armenia  is  the  true  o/j.<pa\6s  of  the  world :  and  it 
is  a  significant  fact  that  at  the  present  day  Ararat 
is  the  great  boundary-stone  between  the  empires 
of  Russia,  Turkey,  and  Persia.  (3.)  Its  physical 
formation.  The  Armenian  plateau  is  the  result  of 
volcanic  agencies :  the  plains  as  well  as  the  moun- 
tains supply  evidence  of  this.  Armenia,  however, 
differs  materially  from  other  regions  of  similar 
geological  formation,  as,  for  instance,  the  neighbour- 
ing range  of  Caucasus,  inasmuch  as  it  does  not  rise 
to  a  sharp,  well-defined  central  crest,  but  expands 
into  plains  or  steppes,  separated  by  a  graduated 
series  of  subordinate  ranges.  Wagner  (Seise,  p. 
263)  attributes  this  peculiarity  to  the  longer  period 


ABBA 

I  during  which  the  volcanic  powers  were  at  work, 
I  and  the  room  afforded  for  the  expansion  of  the 
I  molten  masses  into  the  surrounding  districts.  The 
result  of  this  expansion  is  that  Armenia  is  far  more 
accessible,  both  from  without,  and  within  its  own 
fimits,  than  other  districts  of  similar  elevation : 
the  passes,  though  high,  are  comparatively  easy, 
and  there  is  no  district  which  is  shut  out  from 
communication  with  its  neighbours.  The  fall  of 
the  ground  in  the  centre  of  the  plateau  is  not 
decided  in  any  direction,  as  is  demonstrated  by  the 
early  courses  of  the  rivers — the  Araxes,  which  flows 
into  the  Caspian,  rising  westward  of  either  branch 
of  the  Euphrates,  and  taking  at  first  a  northerly 
direction — the  Euphrates,  which  flows  to  the  S., 
rising  northward  of  the  Araxes,  and  taking  a 
westerly  direction.  (4.)  The  climate  is  severe. 
Winter  lasts  from  October  to  May,  and  is  succeeded 
by  a  brief  spring  and  a  summer  of  intense  heat. 
The  contrast  between  the  plateau  and  the  adjacent 
countries  is  striking :  in  April,  when  the  Mesopo- 
tamian  plains  are  scorched  with  heat,  and  on  the 
Euxine  shore  the  azalea  and  rhododendron  are  in 
bloom,  the  Armenian  plains  are  still  covered  with 
snow  ;  and  in  the  early  part  of  September  it  freezes 
keenly  at  night.  (5.)  The  vegetation  is  more 
varied  and  productive  than  the  climate  would  lead 
us  to  expect.  Trees  are  not  found  on  the  plateau 
itself,  but  grass  grows  luxuriantly,  and  furnishes 
abundant  pasture  during  the  summer  months  to 
the  flocks  of  the  nomad  Kurds.  Wheat  and  barley 
ripen  at  far  higher  altitudes  than  on  the  Alps  and 
the  Pyrenees :  the  volcanic  nature  of  the  soil,  the 
abundance  of  water,  and  the  extreme  heat  of  the 
short  summer  bring  the  harvest  to  maturity  with 
wonderful  speed.  At  Erz-itim,  more  than  6000 
feet  above  the  sea,  the  crops  appear  above  ground 
in  the  middle  of  June,  and  are  ready  for  the  sickle 
before  the  end  of  August  (Wagner,  p.  255).  The 
vine  ripens  at  about  5000  feet,  while  in  Europe  its 
limit,  even  south  of  the  Alps,  is  about  2650  feet. 

The  general  result  of  these  observations  as  bear- 
ing upon  the  Biblical  narrative  would  be  to  show 
that,  while  the  elevation  of  the  Armenian  plateau 
constituted  it  the  natural  resting-place  of  the  ark 
after  the  Deluge,  its  geographical  position  and  its 
physical  character  secured  an  impartial  distribution 
of  the  families  of  mankind  to  the  various  quarters 
of  the  world.  The  climate  furnished  a  powerful 
inducement  to  seek  the  more  tempting  regions  on 
all  sides  of  it.  At  the  same  time  the  character  of  the 
vegetation  was  remarkably  adapted  to  the  nomad 
state  in  which  we  may  conceive  the  early  generations 
of  Noah's  descendants  to  have  lived.      [W.  L.  B.] 

ARAU'NAH  (n:n«;  'Opvd;  Areuna),  a 
Jebusite  who  sold  his  threshing-floor  on  Mount 
Moriah  to  David  as  a  site  for  an  altar  to  Jeho\rah, 
together  with  his  oxen,  for  50  shekels  of  silver  (2 
Sam.  xxiv.  18-24),  or  (according  to  1  Chr.  xxi.  25) 
for  600  shekels  of  gold  by  weight.  From  the 
expression  (2  Sam.  xxiv.  23)  "these  things  did 
Araunah,  the  king,  give  unto  the  king,"  it  has  been 
inferred  that  he  was  one  of  the  royal  race  of  the 
Jebusites.  His  name  is  variously  written  in  various 
places:  HJllXn  (2  Sam.  xxiv.  16);  H^IN  (xxiv. 
18)  ;  piK  (1  Chr.  xxi. ;  2  Chr.  iii.).     [Ornan.] 

[R.  W.  B.] 

AR'BA  (J/2~lK,  hero  of  Baal,  so  Fiirst,  for 
'pya'IN,  like  ^"IN  ;  'ApjSd/c;  Arbe),  the  progenitor 


ARBATHITE 

of  the  Ax.vkiii,  or  sons  of  Anak,  from  whom  their 
chief  city  Hebron  received  its  name  of  Kirjath  Arba 
(Josh.  xiv.  15,  xv.  13,  xxi.  11).  [F.  W.  G.] 

ARBATHITE,  THE 0rO"jyn ;  6  TapaPaiBt ; 

Arbathites),  i.  e.  a  native  of  the  Arabah  or  Ghor. 
Abialbon  the  A.  was  one  of  David's  30  mighty  men 
(2  Sun.  xxiii.  31  ;    1  Chr.  xi.  32). 

ARBAT'TIS  (iv  Apfidrrois,  Alex.  'ApPaK- 
tois;  Arbatis),  a  district  of  Palestine  named 
in  1  Mace.  v.  23  only.  Ewald's  conjecture  (Ge- 
schichte,    iv.  359  note)  grounded   on  the  reading 

of  the  Peschito  Syriac  (OT.O»*j,  Ard  Bot)  is 
that  the  district  X.  of  the  sea  of  Galilee,  part  of 
which  is  still  called  Ard  el-Batihah,  is  here  in- 
tended. But  it  seems  at  least  equally  probable  that 
the  word  is  merely  a  corruption  of  'AKpaParlvri, 
the  province  or  toparchy  which  lay  between  Nea- 
polis  and  Jericho  (Keland,  192  ;  Joseph.  B.J.  iii.  3, 

§§4,  5,  &c).      [ACBABATENE.]  [G.] 

ARBELA  (iv  'Apj3r)\oLs;  in  Arbellis),  men- 
tioned in  the  Bible  only  in  1  Mace.  ix.  2,  and 
there  only  as  defining  the  situation  of  Masaloth, 
a  place  besieged  and  taken  by  Bacchides  mid  Al- 
cimus  at  the  opening  of  the  campaign  in  which 
Judas  Maccabaeus  was  killed.  According  to  Jo- 
sephus  (Ant.  xii.  11,  §1)  this  was  at  Arbela  of 
Galilee,  iv  'ApjSijXois  ir6\n  ttjs  Tahihaias,  a 
place  which  he  elsewhere  states  to  be  near  Sep- 
phoris,  on  the  lake  of  Gennesareth,  and  remarkable 
for  certain  impregnable  caves,  the  resort  of  robbers 
and  insurgents,  and  the  scene  of  more  than  one  des- 
perate encounter  (comp.  Ant.  xiv.  15,  §§4,  5; 
B.  J.  i.  16,  §§2,  3;  ii.  20,  §6;  Vita,  §37). 
These  topographical  requirements  are  fully  met  by 
the  existing  Irbid*  a  site  with  a  few  ruins,  west  of 
Medjel,  on  the  south-east  side  of  the  Wady  Ha- 
mdrn,  in  a  small  plain  at  the  foot b  of  the  hill  of 
Kurun  Hattin.  The  caverns  are  in  the  opposite 
face  of  the  ravine,  and  hear  the  name  of  Kula'at 
Ibn  Madn  (Rob.  ii.  398;   Burckh.  331 ;  Irby,  91). 

There  seems  no  reason  to  doubt  the  soundness  of 
this  identification.0  The  army  of  Bacchides  was  on 
its  road  from  Antioch  to  the  land  of  Judaea  (yriv 
'lovSa),  which  tliey  were  approaching  "  by  the  way 
that  leadeth  toGalgala"  (Gilgal),d  that  is  by  the 
valley  of  the  Jordan  in  the  direct  line  to  which 
Irbid  lies.e  Ewald,  however  (Geschichte,  iv.  370, 
note),  insists,  in  opposition  to  Josephus,  that  the 
uients  of  this  campaign  were  confined  to 
Judaea  proper,  a  theory  which  drives  him  to  con- 
sider "Galgala"  as  theJiljilia  north  ofGophna. 
[GlLGAl.]  Bul  he  admits  that,  no  trace  of  an 
Arbela  in  that  direction  has  yet  come  to  light. 

Arbela  may  be  the  Bcth-arbel  of  Hos.  x.  14,  but 
there  is  nothing  to  ensure  it.  [G.] 

ARBI'TE,  THE  (^"lXH;  de  Arbt).     Paarai 

a  The  \ri.ii. i  of  Uexander  the  Great  is  called  TrbU 
by  the  Arabic  historians  (Rob.  ii.  399).     The  change 

of  I  to  d  is  not  (infrequent.  .Moreover,  the  present 
Irbid  is  undoubtedly  mentioned  in  the  Talmuds  as 
Arbel  (see  Schwarz,  189  ;  Keland,  358  ;  BU)b,  iii.  343, 
note). 

'■  So  Irby  (91).  Robinson,  on  the  contrary,  says 
that  the  ruins  are  on  the  brow  overlooking  the  chasm 
of  the  wady. 

c  First  sufrijested  in  the  Munich  Oel.  Anzeige,  Nov. 
1836,  and  eagerly  laid  hold  of  by  Robinson. 

d  Some  MSS.  and  the  important  version  of  tlic 
Syriac  Peschito  read  "  (jilead ;"  in  which   case   the 


ARCHEVITES 


101 


the  Arbite  was  one  of  David's  guard  (2  Sam.  xxiii. 
35).  The  word,  according  to  Gesenius  ( 145),-  sig- 
nifies a  native  of  Arab.  In  the  parallel  list  of 
Chronicles  it  is  given  as  Ben-Ezbai,  by  a  change  in 
letters  not  unfrequently  occurring.  [Ezbai.]  The 
LXX.  version,  Ovpaioepx'i,  is  very  corrupt.  (See 
Kennicott,  Dissert,  on  2  Sam.  xxiii.  p.  210.)    [(].] 

ARBONA'I  (Jud.  ii.  24).  [Abronas.] 
ARCHELAUS  ('Apx&aos ;  Archelaus:  in 
the  Talmud,  Dl^pIN),  son  of  Herod  the  Great, 
by  a  Samaritan  woman,  JIalthake  (Joseph.  Ant. 
xrii.  1,  §3;  B.  J.  i.  28,  §4),  and,  with  his 
brother  Antipas,  brought  up  at  Home  (id.  B.  J.  i.  31, 
§1).  At  the  death  of  Herod  (B.C.  4)f  his  kingdom 
was  divided  between  his  three  sons,  Herod  Antipas, 
Archelaus,  and  Philip.  Archelaus  received  the  half, 
containing  Idumea,  Judaea,  Samaria,  and  the  cities 
on  the  coast,  with  GOO  talents'  income  (Joseph.  Ant. 
xvii.  11,  §4).  With  one  party  among  the  Jews  he 
was  popular:  another  complained  against  him,  but  in 
vain,  to  Augustus  (id.  Ant.  xvii.  11, 1).  He  never 
properly  had  the  title  of  king  (jSaciAeus)  assigned  to 
him  (Matt.  ii.  22),  but  only  that  of  idvdpxvs  (ibid.); 
so  that  the  former  word  must  be  taken  as  loosely 
used.  In  the  10th  year  of  his  reign  {Joseph,  xvii. 
13,  §2,  Vit.  1),  or  the  9th  (B.  J.  ii.  7,  §3), 
according  to  Dion  Cass.  (xv.  27)  in  the  consulship 
of  M.  Aemil.  Lepidus  and  L.  Arruntius,  i.  e.  A.n.  6, 
a  complaint  was  preferred  by  his  brothers  mid  his 
subjects  against  him  on  the  ground  of  his  tyranny, 
inconsequence  of  which  he  was  deposed,  and  ba- 
nished to  Vienne  in  Gaul  (Joseph.  Ant.  xvii.  13, 
§2  ;  B.  J.  ii.  7,  §3),  where  he  is  generally  said  to 
have  died.  But  Jerome  (Onomast.  s.v.  Bethlehem) 
relates  that  he  was  shown  the  sepulchre  of  Arche- 
laus near  that  town.  If  so,  he  must  have  returned 
as  a  private  man  to  Judaea,  and  there  have  died. 
The_  parents  of  our  Lord  turned  aside  from  fear  of 
him  on  their  way  back  from  Egypt,  and  went  to 
Nazareth  in  Galilee,  in  the  domain  of  his  gentler 
biother  Antipas.  He  seems  to  have  been  guilty  of 
great  cruelty  and  oppression.  Josephus  relates 
'{Ant.  xvii.  9,  §3;  B.J.  ii.  1,  3)  that  he  put  to 
death  3000  Jews  in  the  temple  not  long  after  his 
accession.  This  cruelty  was  exercised  not  only  to- 
wards Jews,  but  towards  Samaritans  also  (Joseph. 
B.J.  ii.  7,  §3).  Archelaus  wedded  illegally  {rod 
irarpiov  irapafid<nv  iroiy]<rdfj.cvos.  A 'it.  xvii.  13,  §2) 
Glaphyra,  the  former  wife  of  his  brother  Alexander, 
who  had  had  children  by  her.  (There  is  no  reason 
for  saying  with  Winer  that  Archelaus  had  children 
by  her:  he  has  apparently  mistaken  Josephus's  4£ 
ou  koI  TiKva.  i)v  avrfj,  where  oil  refers  to  Alexander, 
not  to  Archelaus.)     '  [II.  A.J 

ARCHERY.     [Arms.] 

AR'CHEVITES  (K";3"IX  ;   'APXva7oi ;   Er- 


Arbcla  beyond  .Ionian  must  be  thought  of.  But  it  is 
hardly  likely  that  Josephus  would  be  inaccurate  in  his 
topography,  at  B  part  of  the  country  which  he  knew 
so  thoroughly. 

■  The  importance  of  the  WadySamdm  In  a  military 

point  of  view,  as  commanding  the  great  north  road, 

the  Sea  of  Galilee,  and  the  important  springs  in  the 

plain  of  Gennesareth,  is  not  lost  sight  of  by  Wilson 

i.iini;  ,,/  the  Bible,  in  Bitter,  Jordan,  338  . 

1   The  death  of  Serod    took  place  in   the   same   year 

with  the  birth  of  Christ ;  but  this  is  to  be  placed  four 

years  before  the  date  in  general  use  as  the  Christian 
era. 


102 


ARCHI 


chuaei,  Vulg.),  perhaps  the  inhabitants  of  Erech, 
some  of  whom  had  been  placed  as  colonists  in 
Samaria  (Ezr.  iv.  9).  [\V.  L.  B.] 

AR'CHI  p3"lKfj  ;  Arcki),  Josh.  xvi.  2.    [Ar- 

C1IITE.] 

AROHIPTUS    ("Apxnnros ;    Archippus),    a 

Christian  teacher  in  Colossae,  called  by  St.  Paul  his 
ffvvffTpa.Ti(xiTr\s  (Philem.  2).  As  the  epistle,  which 
concerns  a  private  matter,  is  addressed  to  him  jointly 
with  Philemon  and  Apphia,  and  as  "  the  church  in 
their  house  "  is  also  addressed,  it  seems  necessary  to 
infer  that  he  was  a  member  of  Philemon's  family. 
He  had  received  (Col.  iv.  1 7)  a  ZiaKOvla  in  the  Lord, 
and  was  admonished  to  take  heed  to  it,  that  he  fulfil 
it.  Jerome,  Theodoret,  and  Oecumenius,  suppose  him 
to  have  been  overseer  of  the  church  at  Colossae. 
Others  believe  him  to  have  been  a  teacher  at  Lao- 
dicaea  (Const.  Apostol.  vii.  4ii ;  Thpo  loret  ad  Col.  iv. 
1 7  ;  and  recently  Wieseler,  Chronol.  dcs  apostol ischen 
Zeitatters,  p.  452)  ;  but  there  does  not  seem  to  be 
any  ground  for  the  view.  There  is  a  legend  that 
he  was  of  the  number  of  the  Seventy  disciples,  and 
suffered  martyrdom  at  Chonae,  near  Laodicaea 
i  i/.  n  )log.  Grace,  i.  246).  There  is  a  monograph 
written  about  him  by  Dietelmair,  Be  Archippo, 
Altorf,  1751.  4to.  [H.  A.] 

ARCHITE,   THE    (♦S'iKn,  as   if   from    a 

place  named  Erech,  TJ'IX  ;    6  'Apaxi- ;   Arachites), 

the  usual  designation  of  David's  friend  Hushai 
(2  Sam.  xv.  32";  xvii.  5,  14  ;  1  Chr.  xxvii.  33). 

The  word  also  appears  (somewhat  disguised,  it  is 
true,  in  the  A.  V.)  in  Josh.  xvi.  2,  where  "  the 
borders  of  Archi  "  (J.  e.  '  the  Archite  ')  a  are  named 
as  on  the  boundary  of  the  "  children  of  Joseph," 
somewhere  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Bethel.  No 
town  of  the  name  of  TpN  appears  in  Palestine :  is  it 

possible  that,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Gerizi,  the  Ze- 
marites  and  the  Jebusites,  we  have  here  the  last 
faint  trace  of  one  of  the  original  tribes  of  the 
country?  [G.] 

ARCHITECTURE.  Although  there  are  many 
notices,  both  in  the  Canonical  Scriptures  and  in  the 
Apocryphal  writings,  bearing  reference  to  the  archi- 
tecture of  other  nations  besides  the  Israelites,  it  is 
nevertheless  obvious  that  the  chief  business  of  a 
work  like  the  present,  under  the  article  of  Archi- 
tecture, is  to  examine  the  modes  of  building  in  use 
among  the  Jews,  and  to  discover,  if  possible,  how 
far  they  were  influenced,  directly  or  indirectly,  by 
the  example  or  the  authority  of  foreigners.  The 
book  of  Genesis  (iv.  17,  20,  22)  appears  to  divide 
mankind  into  great  characteristic  sections,  viz.  the 
"dwellers  in  tents"  and  the  "dwellers  in  cities,'' 
when  it  tells  us  that  Cain  was  the  founder  of  a  city ; 
and  that  among  his  descendants  one,  Jabal,  was 
"  the  father  of  them  that  dwell  in  tents,''  whilst 
Tubal-cain  was  "  the  instructor  of  every  artificer  in 
brass  and  iron."  It  is  probable  that  the  workers  in 
metal  were  for  the  most  part  dwellers  in  towns: 
and  thus  the  arts  of  architecture  and  metallurgy 
became  from  the  earliest  times  leading  characteristics 
of  the  civilized  as  distinguished  from  the  nomadic 
tendencies  of  the  human  race. 

To  the  race  of  Shem  is  attributed  (Gen.  x.  11, 
12,  22,  xi.  2-9)  the  foundation  of  those  cities  in  the 
plain  of  Shinar,  Babylon,  Nineveh,  and  others ;  to 


a  Compare  Josh,  xviii.  16,  where  "  Jebusi"  should 
be  translated  "  the  Jebusite,"  as  it  has  been  in  xv.  8. 
See  also  Gerizim  ;  Zemaeaim. 


ARCHITECTURE 

one  of  which,  Resemthe  epithet  "  great"  sufficiently 
marks  its  importance  in  the  time  of  the  writer,  a 
period  at  least  as  early  as  the  13th  cent.  B.C.,  if  not 
very  much  earlier.  (Rawlinson,  Outline  of  Ass.  Hist. 
p.  10 ;  Layard,  Nineveh,  ii.  221,  235,  238.)  From 
the  same  book  we  learn  the  account  of  the  earliest 
recorded  building,  and  of  the  materials  employed  in 
its  construction  (Gen.  xi.  3,  9) ;  and  though  a  doubt 
rests  on  the  precise  site  of  the  tower  of  Belus,  so 
long  identified  with  the  Birs  Nimroud  (Benjamin  of 
Tudela,  p.  100,  Bohn;  Newton,  On  Prqph.  x.  pp. 
155,  156;  Vaux,  Nin.  and  Persep.  pp.  173,  178; 
Keith,  On  Proph.  p.  289),  yet  the  nature  of  the 
soil,  and  the  bricks  found  there  in  such  abundance, 
though  bearing  mostly  the  name  of  Nebuchadnezzar, 
agree  perfectly  with  the  supposition  of  a  city  pre- 
viously existing  on  the  same  or  a  closely  neighbour- 
ing site.  (Layard,  ii.  249,  278,  and  Nin.  and  Bab. 
531;  Plin.  vii.  56;   Ez.  iv.  1.) 

In  the  book  of  Esther  (i.  2)  mention  is  made  of 
the  palace  at  Susa,  for  three  months  in  the  spring 
the  residence  of  the  kings  of  Persia  (Esth.  iii.  13 ; 
Xen.  Cyrop.  viii.  6,  §22);  and  in  the  books  of 
Tobit  and  Judith,  of  Ecbatana,  to  which  they  retired 
for  two  months  during  the  heat  of  summer.  (Tob. 
iii.  7,  xiv.  14  ;  Jud.  i.  12  ;  Herod,  i.  98.) 

A  branch  of  the  same  Syro-Arabian  race  as  the 
Assyrians,  but  the  children  of  Ham,  was  the  nation, 
or  at  least  the  dominant  caste,  of  the  Egyptians, 
the  style  of  whose  architecture  agrees  so  remarkably 
with  the  Assyrian  (Layard,  ii.  206,  et  seqq.).  It  is 
in  connexion  with  Egypt  that  the  Israelites  appear 
first  as  builders  of  cities,  compelled,  in  common  with 
other  Egyptian  captives,  to  labour  at  the  buildings 
of  the  Egyptian  monarchs.  Pithom  and  Raamses 
are  said  to  have  been  built  by  them.  (Ex.  i.  11  ; 
Wilkinson,  ii.  19.").) 

The  Israelites  were  by  occupation  shepherds,  and 
by  habit  dwellers  in  tents  (Gen.  xlvii.  3).  The 
"house"  built  by  Jacob  at  Succoth  is  probably  no 
exception  to  this  statement  (71*3,  Gesen.).  They 
had  therefore  originally,  speaking  properly,  no  archi- 
tecture. Even  Hebron,  a  city  of  higher  antiquity 
than  the  Egyptian  Zoan  (Tanis),was  called  originally 
from  its  founder,  perhaps  a  Canaanite  of  the  race  of 
Anak,  Kirjath-Arba,  the  house  of  Arba  (Num.  xiii. 
22;  Josh.  xiv.  15).  From  the  time  of  the  occu- 
pation of  Canaan  they  became  dwellers  in  towns 
and  in  houses  of  stone,  for  which  the  native  lime- 
stone of  Palestine  supplied  a  ready  material  (Lev. 
xiv.  34,  45  ;  1  K.  vii.  10  ;  Stanley,  S.  and  P.  146, 
8) ;  but  the  towns  which  they  occupied  were  not 
all,  nor  indeed  in  most  cases,  built  from  the  first 
by  themselves  (Deut.  vi.  10;   Num.  xiii.  19). 

The  peaceful  reign  and  vast  wealth  of  Solomon 
gave  great  impulse  to  architecture  ;  for  besides  the 
Temple  and  his  other  great  works  at  and  near 
Jerusalem,  lie  built  fortresses  and  cities  in  various 
places,  among  which  the  names  and  sites  of  Baalath 
and  Tadmor  are  in  all  probability  represented  by 
the  more  modern  superstructures  of  Baalbec  and 
Palmyra  (1  K.  ix.  15,  24).  Among  the  succeeding 
kings  of  Israel  and  of  Judah,  more  than  one  is  re- 
corded as  a  builder:  Asa  (1  K.  xv.  23),  Baasha 
(xvi.  17).  Omri  (xvi.  24),  Ahab  (xvi.  34,  xxii.  39), 
Hezekiah  (2  K.  xx.  20;  2  Chr.  xxxii.  27,  30), 
Jehoash,  and  Josiah  (2  K.  xii.  11,  12,  xxii.  6); 
and,  lastly,  Jehoiakim,  whose  winter  palace  is  men- 
tioned (Jer.  xxii.  14,  xxxvi.  22  ;  see  also  Am.  iii.  15). 

On  the  return  from  captivity,  the  chief  care  of 
the  rulers  was  to  rebuild  the  Temple  and  the  walls 
of  Jerusalem  in  a  substantia]  manner,  with  stone, 


AKD 

and  with  timber  from  Lebanon  (Ezr.  iii.  8,  v.  8 : 
Neh.  ii.  8,  iii.  1,  32).  During  the  government  of 
.Simon  Maccabeus,  the  fortress  called  Baris,  and 
afterwards  Antonia,  was  erected  for  the  defence  of 
the  Temple  and  the  city.  But  the  reigns  of  Herod 
and  of  his  sons  and  successors  were  especially  re- 
markable for  the  great  architectural  works  in  which 
they  delighted.  Not  only  was  the  Temple  restored 
to  a  large  portion  if  not  to  the  full  degree  of  its 
former  magnificence,  but  the  fortifications  and  other 
public  buildings  of  Jerusalem  were  enlarged  and 
embellished  to  an  extent  previously  unknown  (Luke 
xxi.  5  ;  Benj.  of  Tudela,  p.  8:3,  Bohn).  [More 
particular  descriptions  of  these  works  will  be  found 
under  Jerusalem.]  Besides  these  great  works, 
the  town  of  Caesarea  was  built  on  the  site  of  an 
insignificant  building  called  Strato's  Tower ;  Samaria 
was  enlarged,  and  received  the  name  of  Sebaste ;  the 
town  of  Agrippium  was  built;  and  Herod  carried 
his  love  for  architecture  SO  far  as  to  adorn  with 
buildings  cities  even  not  within  his  own  dominions, 
Berytns,  Damascus,  Tripolis,  and  many  other  places 
(Joseph.  B.  J.  i.  21,  1,  11).  His  son  Philip  tie 
tetrarch  enlarged  the  old  Greek  colony  of  Paneas, 
giving  it  the  name  of  Caesarea  in  honour  of  Tiberius ; 
whilst  his  brother  Antipas  founded  the  city  of  Ti- 
berias, and  adorned  the  towns  of  Sepphoris  raid 
Betharamphta,  giving  to  the  latter  the  name  Livias, 
in  honour  of  the  mother  of  Tiberius  (Reland,  p.  497). 

Of  the  original  splendour  of  these  great  works  no 
doubt  can  be  entertained  ;  but  of  their  stvle  and 
appearance  we  can  only  conjecture,  thong1'  with 
Dearly  absolute  certainty,  that  they  were  formed 
on  Greek  and  Roman  models.  Of  the  style  of  the 
earlier  buildings  of  Palestine,  we  can  only  form  an 
idea  from  the  analogy  of  the  Egyptian,  Assyrian, 
and  Persian  monuments  now  existing,  and  from  the 
modes  of  building  still  adopted  in  Eastern  countries. 
The  connexion  of  Solomon  with  Egypt  and  with  Tvre, 
and  the  influence  of  the  Captivity,  may  have  in  some 
measure  successively  affected  the  style  both  of  the 
two  temples,  and  of  the  palatial  edilices  of  Solomon. 
The  enormous  stones  employed  in  the  Assyrian, 
Persepolitan,  and  Egyptian  buildings,  find  a  parallel 
in  the  substructions  of  Baalbec,  more  ancient  than 
the  superstructure  (Layard,  ii.  317,  318),  and  in 
the  stones  of  so  vast  a  size  which  still  remain  at 
Jerusalem,  relics  of  the  building  either  of  Solomon, 
or  of  Herod  (Williams,  pt.  ii.  1).  But  as  it  has  been 
observed  again  and  again,  scarcely  any  connected 
monuments  are  known  to  survive  in  Palestine  by 
\\  hSch  we  can  form  an  accurate  idea  of  its  buildings, 
beautiful  and  renowned  as  they  were  throughout 
the  East  (I'lin.  v.  14;  Stanley,  183),  and  even 
of  those'  which  do  remain  no  trustworthy  ex- 
amination has  yet  been  made.  It  is  probable, 
however,  that  the  reservoirs  known  under  the 
names  of  the  Pools  of  Solomon  and  Hezekiah  con- 
tain some  portions  at  least  of  the  original  fabrics 
(Stanley,  103,  L65j 

The  domestic  architecture  of  the  Jews,  so  far 
as  it  can  l>"  understood,  is  treated  under  Hoi  SE, 
Tools  and  instruments  of  building  are  mentioned  by 
the  sacred  writers ;  the  plumb-line,  Am.  vii.  7;  the 
measuring-reed,  Ez.  xl.  3;  the  saw,  1  K.  vii.  9. 

[II.  W.  P.] 

AKD  (TIN;  'ApdS,  'ASdp;  Ared,  Eered). 
1.  Smi  .'i'  Benjamin  (Gen.  rivi.  21).  2.  Sen  of 
1'ela,  and  grandson  i't'  Benjamin  (Num.  xwi.  40), 
written  Addar  in  1  Chr.  viii.  :;.  His  descendants 
are  called  phe  Ardites  CTIKil),  Num.  xxvi.  W. 


AREOPAGUS  103 

AR'DATH  —  "the  field  called  Ardath  "  — 
2  Esdr.  ix.  26. 

AE'DON  (jVTTK  ;  'ApSaSj/;  Anion), name  of  a 
man  (1  Chr.  ii.  18). 

AEE'LI  C6x>\\  Sam.  ^TlN*;  'Apn'jX;  Areli), 
a  son  of  Gad  (Gen.  xlvi.  16;  Num.  xxvi.  17). 
His  descendants  are  called  the  Arelites  (Num. 
xxvi.  17). 

AREOPAGUS  or  MARS' HILL  (6'Apzws 
■Kayos,  i.  e.  the  hill  of  Ares  or  Mars ;  Areopagus, 
Vulg.),  was  a  rocky  height  in  Athens,  opposite  the 
western  end  of  the  Acropolis,  from  which  it  is  sepa- 
rated only  by  an  elevated  valley.  It  rises  gradually 
from  the  northern  end,  and  terminates  abruptly  on 
the  south,  over  against  the  Acropolis,  at  which  point 
it  is  about  fifty  or  sixty  feet  above  the  valley  already 
mentioned.  Of  the  site  of  the  Areopagus,  there  can 
be  no  doubt,  both  from  the  description  of  Pausanias, 
and  from  the  narrative  of  Herodotus,  who  relates 
that  it  was  a  height  over  against  the  Acropolis, 
from  which  the  Persians  assailed  the  latter  rock 
(Paus.  i.  28.  §5;  Herod,  viii.  52).  According  to 
tradition  it  was  called  the  hill  of  Mars  (Ares), 
because  this  god  was  brought  to  trial  here  before 
the  assembled  gods  by  Neptune  (Poseidon),  on 
account  of  his  murdering  Halirrhothius,  the  son  of 
the  latter.  The  spot  is  memorable,  as  the  place  of 
meeting  of  the  Council  of  Areopagus  (ri  ev  Apziw 
ttixjo)  jSoi/Atj),  frequently  called  the  Upper  Council 
(tj  avai  /3ouAtj)  to  distinguish  it  from  the  Council 
of  Five  Hundred,  which  held  its  sittings  in  the 
valley  below  the  hill.  It  existed  as  a  criminal 
tribunal  before  the  time  of  Solon,  and  was  the 
most  ancient  and  venerable  of  all  the  Athenian 
courts.  It  consisted  of  all  persons  who  had  held 
the  office  of  Archon,  and  who  were  members  of  it 
for  life,  unless  expelled  for  misconduct.  It  en- 
joyed a  high  reputation,  not  only  in  Athens,  but 
throughout  Greece.  Before  the  time  of  Solon  the 
court  tried  only  cases  of  wilful  murder,  wounding, 
poison,  and  arson  ;  but  he  gave  it  extensive  powers 
of  a  censorial  and  political  nature.  The  Council  is 
mentioned  by  Cicero  (ad  Fain.  xiii.  1  ;  ad  Att.  i. 
14,  v.  11),  and  contiuued  to  exist  even  under  the 
Roman  emperors.  Its  meetings  were  held  on  the 
south-eastern  summit  of  the  rock.  There  are  still 
sixteen  stone  steps  cut  in  the  rock,  leading  up  to 
the  hill  from  the  valley  of  the  Agora  below ;  and 
immediately  above  the  steps  is  a  bench  of  stones 
excavated  in  the  rock,  forming  three  sides  of  a 
quadrangle,  and  facing  the  south.  Here  the  Areo- 
pagites  sat  as  judges  in  the  open  air  (viraidpiot 
eSi/cafoj/TO,  Pollux,  viii.  118).  On  the  eastern 
and  western  side  is  a  raised  block.  These  blocks 
are  probably  the  two  rude  stones  which  Pau- 
sanias saw  there,  and  which  are  described  by 
Euripides  as  assigned,  the  one  to  the  accuser,  the 
oilier  to  the  criminal,  in  the  causes  which  were 
fried  in  the  court  (Iph.  T.  'Jill).  The  Areopagus 
possesses  peculiar  interest  to  the  Christian,  as  the 
spot  from  which  St.  Paul  delivered  his  memorable 
address  to  the  men  of  Athens  (Acts  ivii.  22-31  . 
It  has  been  supposed  by  some  commentators  that 
St.  Paul  was  brought  before  the  Council  of  Areo- 
pagus; but  there  is  no  trace  iii  the  narrative  of  any 

judicial  proi lings.     St  Paul  "  disputed  daily  " 

in  the  "market"  or  Agora  (xvii.  17).  which  was 
situated  south  of  the  Areopagus  in  the  valley  lying 
between  this  hill  and  those  of  the  Acropolis,  thi 
l'nyx  and   the   Museum.      Attracting  more 


104 


A BETAS 


more  attention,  '•'  certain  philosophers  of  the  Epi- 
cureans and  Stoieks"  brought  him  up  from  the 
valley,  probably  by  the  stone  steps  already  men- 
tioned, to  the  Areopagus  above,  that  they  might 
listen  to  him  more  conveniently.  Here  the  philo- 
sophers probably  took  their  seats  on  the  stone 
benches  usually  occupied  by  the  members  of  the 
Council,  while  the  multitude  stood  upon  the  steps 
and  in  the  valley  below.  (For  details,  see  Diet,  of 
Ant.  p.  126  ;  Diet  of  Geogr.  i.  p.  281.) 

AB'ETAS  ('Aperas, 'ApeVjis ;  Arab.  Chorash), 
a  common  appellation  of  many  of  the  Arabian  kings 
or  chiefs.     Two  are  mentioned  in  the  Bible. 

1.  A  contemporary  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  (B.C. 
170)  and  Jason  (2  Mace.  v.  8).  [B.  F.  W.] 

2.  In  2  Cor.  xi.  32,  St.  Paul  writes,  ev  Aafxaff- 
kw  6  idvdpxys  'Aperarov  fiao~i\4ws  icppovptirrjv 
ir6hiv  Aa/xacrKfivwv  ■Ktdcra.i  jxe.  This  Aretas  was 
father-in-law  of  Herod  Antipas.  [Herod.]  There 
is  a  somewhat  difficult  chronological  question  re- 
specting the  subordination  of  Damascus  to  this 
Aretas.  The  city  under  Augustus  and  Tiberius 
was  attached  to  the  province  of  Syria ;  and  we  have 
Damascene  coins  of  both  these  emperors,  and  again 
of  Nero  and  his  successors.  But  we  have  none  of 
Caligula  and  Claudius,  and  the  following  circum- 
stances make  it  probable  that  a  change  in  the  rulership 
of  Damascus  took  place  after  the  death  of  Tiberius. 
There  had  been  war  for  some  time  between  Aretas, 
king  of  Arabia  Nabataea,  whose  capital  was  Petra, 
and  Antipas,  on  account  of  the  divorce  by  Antipas 
of  Aretas's  daughter  at  the  instance  of  Herodias,  and 
also  on  account  of  some  frontier  disputes.  A  battle 
was  fought,  and  the  army  of  Antipas  entirely  de- 
stroyed (Joseph.  Ant.  xviii.  5,  §1).  On  this, 
being  a  favourite  with  Tiberius,  he  sent  to  Rome  for 
help :  and  Vitellius,  governor  of  Syria,  was  com- 
missioned to  march  against  Aretas,  and  to  take  him 
dead  or  alive.  While  he  was  on  his  march  (Ant. 
xviii.  5,  §3)  he  heard  at  Jerusalem  of  the  death  of 
Tiberius  (March  16,  A.D.  37)',  and,  ir6\e/j.ov  e/ccpe- 
peiv  ovKeO'  bfxoiws  Svv&fxevos  Sia  rb  els  Taiov  yue- 
Ta7re7TTCOKeVai  ret  Trpdy/xara,  abandoned  his  march, 
and  sent  his  army  into  winter-quarters,  himself  re- 
maining at  Antioch.  By  this  change  of  affairs  at  Rome 
a  complete  reversal  took  place  in  the  situation  of 
Antipas  and  his  enemy.  The  former  was  ere  long 
(a.D.  39)  banished  to  Lyons,  and  his  kingdom  given 
to  Agrippa,  his  foe  (Ant.  xviii.  7),  who  had  been 
living  in  habits  of  intimacy  with  the  new  emperor 
(Ant.,  xviii.  6,  §5).  It  would  be  natural  that 
Aretas,  who  had  been  grossly  injured  by  Antipas, 
should,  by  this  change  of  affairs,  be  received  into 
favour ;  and  the  more  so,  as  Vitellius  had  an  old 
grudge  against  Antipas,  of  which  Josephus  says,  Ant. 
xviii.  4,  §5,  iKpviTTev  bpyi)v,  /ue'xpi  5tJ  koI  yu.eTTjA.06, 
Taiov  ttV  apxhv  irap€t\7i<p6ros.  Now  in  the  year 
38  Caligula  made  several  changes  iu  the  East,  grant- 
ing Ituraea  to  Sooemus,  Lesser  Armenia  and  parts  of 
Arabia  to  Cotys,  the  territory  of  Cotys  to  Rhaeme- 
talces,  and  to  Polemon,  son  of  Polemon,  his  father's 
government.  These  facts,  coupled  with  that  of  no 
Damascene  coins  of  Caligula  or  Claudius  existing, 
make  it  probable  that  about  this  time  Damascus, 
which  belonged  to  the  predecessor  of  Aretas  (Ant. 
xiii.  5.  §2),  was  granted  to  him  by  Caligula.  Thus 
the  difficulty  would  vanish.  The  other  hypotheses, 
that  the  ethnarch  was  only  visiting  the  city  (as  if 
he  could  then  have  guarded  the  walls  to  prevent 
escape), — that  Aretas  had  seized  Damascus  on  Vi- 
tellius giving  up  the  expedition  against  him  (as  if  a 


AEGOB 

Roman  governor  of  a  province  would  allow  one  of 
its  chief  cities  to  be  taken  from  him,  merely  because 
he  was  in  uncertainty  about  the  policy  of  a  new 
emperor),  are  very  improbable.  Wieseler,  Chron. 
des  apostolischen  Zeitalters,  p.  174,  and  again  in 
his  art.  In  Herzog's  Encyclopadie,  refers  to  a  coin 
fSaffiXioos  'ApeVa  (piAeAArjvos,  but  it  seems  to  be- 
long to  an  earlier  Aretas.  See  Conyb.  and  Howson, 
Life  of  St.  Paul,  ed.  2,  vol.  i.  p.  132,  note.  See 
Wieseler,  pp.  142  ft".,  167  ft'.,  whose  view  has  been 
adopted  in  this  article;  Anger,  de  Temporum  in 
Actis  Ap.  ratione,  p.  173  ft'.,  and  Convb.  and 
Howson,  vol.  i.  p.  99  if.  end.  [H.  A.] 

ABE'US,  a  king  of  the  Lacedaemonians,  whose 
letter  to  the  high  priest  Onias  is  given  in  1  Mace, 
xii.  20,  seq.  He  is  called  Arcus  in  the  A.  V.  in 
ver.  20  and  in  the  margin  of  ver.  7  ;  but  in  the 
Greek  text  he  is  named  'Outdpyjs  in  ver.  20,  and 
Aapehs  in  ver.  7 :  there  can  be  little  doubt  how- 
ever that  these  are  corruptions  of  "Apevs.  In  Jo- 
sephus (Ant.  xii.  4,  §10,  v.  §8)  the  name  is  written 
'ApeTos,  and  in  the  Vulgate  Arins.  There  were  two 
Spartan  kings  of  the  name  of  Areus,  of  whom  the 
first  reigned  B.C.  309-265,  and  the  second,  the 
grandson  of  the  former,  died  when  a  child  of  eight 
years  old  in  B.C.  257.  There  were  three  high  priests 
of  the  name  of  Onias,  of  whom  the  first  held  the 
office  B.C.  323-300.  This  is  the  one  who  must 
have  written  the  letter  to  Areus  I.,  probably  in  some 
interval  between  309  and  300.  (Grimm,  zu  Mace. 
p.  185.)    [Onias.] 

AB'GOB  (3inX,  once  with  the  def.  article 
2inXn  =  "  the  stony,"  from  in,  Ges.  Thes. 
1260 ;  'Apy6&,  Argob),  a  tract  of  country  on 
the  east  of  the  Jordan,  in  Bashan,  in  the  king- 
dom of  Og,  containing  60  "  great  "  and  fortified 
"  cities  "  (D"1"]}?).  Argob  was  in  the  portion  allotted 
to  the  half-tribe  of  Manasseh,  and  was  taken  pos- 
session of  by  Jair,  a  chief  man  in  that  tribe. 
[Jair  ;  Bashan  ;  Havoth-Jair.]  It  afterwards 
formed  one  of  Solomon's  commissariat  districts, 
under  the  charge  of  an  officer  whose  residence  was 
at  Ramoth-Gilead  (Deut.  iii.  4,  13,  14 ;  1  K.  iv. 
13).  In  later  times  Argob  was  called  Trachonitis, 
apparently  a  mere  translation  of  the  older  name. 
[Trachonitis.]  In  the  Samaritan  version  it  is 
rendered  nXQIJH  (Rigobaah);  but  in  theTargums 
of  Onkelos  and  Jonathan  it  is  N3i:nEa  (i.  e.  Tra- 
chonitis). Later  on  we  trace  it  in  the  Arabic  ver- 
sion of  Saadiah  as  «_^,~,»^,  (Mvjeb,  with  the  same 
meaning)  ;  and  it  is  now  apparently  identified  with 
the  Lejah,  sLs^vXli,  a  very  remarkable  district 

south  of  Damascus,  and  east  of,  the  Sea  of  Galilee, 
which  has  been  visited  and  described  by  Burckhardt 
(111-119),  Seetzen,  and  Porter  (vol.  ii.  specially 
240-245).  This  extraordinary  region — about  22 
miles  from  N.  to  S.  by  14  from  W.  to  E.  and  of 
a  regular,  almost  oval,  shape — has  been  described 
as  an  ocean  of  basaltic  rocks  and  boulders,  tossed 
about  in  the  wildest  confusion,  and  intermingled 
with  fissures  and  crevices  in  every  direction.  "  It 
is,"  says  Mr.  Porter,  "wholly  composed  of  black 
basalt,  which  appears  to  have  issued  from  innumer- 
able pores  in  the  earth  in  a  liquid  state,  and  to  have 
flowed  out  on  every  side.  Before  cooling,  its  sur- 
face was  violently  agitated,  and  it  was  afterwards 

a  Jonatb.  fcOU-lO  ;  Jems.  N3121QN- 


ARGOB 

shattered  and  rent  by  internal  convulsions.  The 
cap-like  cavities  from  which  the  liquid  mass  was 
extruded  are  still  seen,  and  likewise  the  wavy  sur- 
face a  thick  liquid  assumes  which  cools  while  flow- 
ing. The  rock  is  rilled  with  little  pits  and  air-bubbles ; 
it  is  as  hard  as  flint,  and  emits  a  sharp  metallic  sound 
when  struck"  (241).  '•  Strange  as  it  may  seem, 
this  ungainly  and  forbidding  region  is  thickly  studded 
with  deserted  cities  and  villages,  in  all  of  which  the 
dwellings  are  solidly  built  and  of  remote  antiquity  " 
(238).  The  number  of  these  towns  visited  by  one 
traveller  lately  returned  is  50,  and  there  were  many 
others  which  he  did  not  go  to.  A  Roman  road  runs 
through  the  district  from  S.  to  N.  probably  between 
Bosra  and  Damascus.  On  the  outer  boundary  of  the 
Lejah  are  situated,  amongst  others,  the  towns  known 
in  Biblical  history  as  Kenath  and  Edrei.  In  the 
absence  of  more  conclusive  evidence  on  the  point,  a 
strong  presumption  in  favour  of  the  identification 
#  of  the  Lejah  with  Argob  arises  from  the  peculiar 
Hebrew  word  constantly  attached  to  Argob,  and  in 
this  definite  sense  apparently  to  Argob  only.  This 
word  is  ??n  (Chebel),  literally  "a  rope"  (ax0il/lcr' 
/j.a,  Tepi/jLerpov,  funiculus),  and  it  designates  with 
charming  accuracy  the  remarkably  delined  boundary 
line  of  the  district  of  the  Lejah,  which  is  spoken  ot 
repeatedly  by  its  latest  explorer  as  "  a  rocky  shore  ;" 
"  sweeping  round  in  a  circle  clearly  defined  as  a 
rocky  shore  line  ;"  "  resembling  a  Cyclopean  wall 
in  ruins"  (Porter,  ii.  19,  219,  239,  &c).  The 
extraordinary  features  of  this  region  are  rendered 
still  more  extraordinary  by  the  contrast  which  it 
presents  to  the  surrounding  plain  of  the  Hauran,  a 
high  plateau  of  waving  downs  of  the  richest  agri- 
cultural soil  stretching  from  the  Sea  of  Galilee  to 
the  Lejah,  and  beyond  that  to  the  desert,  almost 
literally  "without  a  stone;"  and  it  is  not  to  be 
wondered  at — if  the  identification  proposed  above  be 
correct — that  this  contrast  should  have  struck  the 
Israelites,  and  that  their  language,  so  scrupulous  of 
minute  topographical  distinctions,  should  have  per- 
petuated in  the  words,  Mishor,  Argob,  and  Chebel, 
at  once  the  level  downs  of  Bashan  [Mishor],  the 
stony  labyrinth  which  so  suddenly  intrudes  itself 
on  the  soil  (Argob),  and  the  definite  fence  or  boun- 
dary which  encloses  it  [Chebel].  [G.] 

AR'GOB  QJhX;  toD  'Apy6&;  Argob),  a  man 

killed  with  lVkahiah  king  of  Israel  (2  K.  xv.  25). 

ARIARATIIES  (properly  Mithridates,  Diod. 
xxxi.,  x..  p.  25,  ed.  Bip.)  VI.,  Phtjlopatob  ('Apio- 
pdd-qs,  'ApaOrjs,  probably  signifying  "great  or 
"  honourable  /mister,"  from  the  roots  existing  in 
(Sanscrit),  "honourable,"  and  rata  (head), 
"  master;"  Smith,  Diet.  Bioqr.  s.  v.),  king  of 
Cappadocia  ii.c.  163-130.  He  was  educated  at 
Borne  (l.iv.  xlii.  19);  and  his  whole  policy  was 
directed  according  to  the  wishes  of  the  Romans. 
This  subservience  cost  him  his  kingdom  B.C.  158; 
but  he  was  shortly  afterwards  restored  by  the 
Romans  to  a  share  in  the  government  (App.  Syr, 
47;  cfPolyb.  xxii.  20,  23;  Polyb.  iii.  5);  and  on 
the  capture  of  his  rival  Olophernes  by  Demetrius 
Soter,  regained  the  supreme  power  (.lust.  XXXV.  1). 

Befell  in  B.C.  130,  in  the  war  of  the  Romans  against 
Aristonicus  who  claimed  the  kingdom  of  Pergamus 

On    the  death   of  Attains  III.   (.lust,   xxxvii.    1,  2). 

Letters  were  addressed  to  him  from  Home  in  favour 

of  the  Jews  (1   Mace.  XV.  22),   who,  in   aitertimes, 

seem  to  have  been  numerous  in  his  kingdom  (Acts 

ii.  9 ;  comp.  1  Pet  i.  1.).  [B.  V.  W.] 


ARIOCH 


10; 


ARID'AI   (*T^R;    'Apcraios;    Aridai),  ninth 
son  of  Hainan  (Esth.  ix.  9). 
AKID'ATHA(XrnnS';  SapjSeucef ;  Aridatha), 

sixth  son  of  Haman  (Esth.  ix.  8). 

A'RIEH  (iTHXn,  the  lion;  Apia;  Arie),i\axtiQ 
of  a  man  (2  K.  xv.  25). 

A'RIEL  6xnK?  lion,  i.  e.  hero,  of  God,  or, 
hearth  of  God ;  'ApiTJA  ;  Ariel). 

1.  As  the  proper  name  of  a  man  (where  the 
meaning  no  doubt  is  the  first  of  those  given  above) 
the  word  occurs  in  Ezr.  viii.  1G.  This  Ariel  was 
one  of  the  "  chief  men  "  who  under  Ezra  directed 
the  caravan  which  he  led  back  from  Babylon  to 
Jerusalem. 

The  word  occurs  also  in  reference  to  two  Moabites 
slain  by  Benaiah,  one  of  David's  chief  captains  (2 
Sam.  xxui.  20;  1  Chr.  xi.  22).  Gesenius  and 
many  others  agree  with  our  A.  V.  in  regarding 
the  word  as  an  epithet,  "  two  lion-like  men  of 
Moab;"  but  it  seems  better  to  look  upon  it,  with 
Thenius,  Winer,  Furst,  and  others,  as  a  proper 
name,  and  translate  "two  [sons]  of  Ariel,"  supply- 
ing the  word  02,  which  might  easily  have  fallen 
out. 

A  similar  word  occurs  in  Num.  xxvi.  17,  Areli 
(vfcON«)  as  the  name  of  a  Gadite,  and  head  of  one 
of  the  families  of  that  tribe.  Both  the  LXX.  and 
the  Vulg.  give  Ariel  for  this  word,  and  Winer 
without  remark  treats  it  as  the  same  name. 

2.  A  designation  given  by  Isaiah  to  the  city  of 
Jerusalem  (Is.  xxix.  1  (bis),  2  (bis),  7).  Its 
meaning  is  obscure.  We  must  understand  by  it 
either  "  Lion  of  God  " — so  Gesenius,  Ewald,  Hii- 
vernick,  Piirst,  and  many  others — or,  with  Um- 
breit,  Knobel,  and  most  of  the  ancient  Jewish  ex- 
positors, "Hearth  of  God,"  tracing  the  first  com- 
ponent of  the  word  to  the  Arabic  £  ,\ ,  a  fire-place 

or  hearth  (Gesen.  Thes. ;  Fiirst,  Heb.  u.  Chahl. 
Handuort.  s.  v.).  This  latter  meaning  is  suggested 
by  the  use  of  the  word  in  Ez.  xliii.  15,  16,  as  a 
synonyme  for  the  altar  of  burnt-offering,  although 
Havernick  (Commentar  lib.  Ezcch.  p.  699),  relying 
on  the  passage  in  Isaiah,  insists  that  even  here  we 
must  understand  Lion  of  God.  The  difficulty  is  in- 
creased by  the  reading  of  the  text  in  E/.ekiel  being 
itself  doubtful.  On  the  whole  it  seems  most  probable 
that  the  words  used  by  the  two  prophets,  if  not  differ- 
ent in  form,  are  at  least  different  in  derivation  and 
meaning,  and  that  as  a  name  given  to  Jerusalem 
Ariel  means  "  Lion  of  God,"  whilst  the  word  used  by 
Ezekiel  means  "Hearth  of  God."         [F.  W.  G.] 

ARIMATIIAE'A  ('Api/xaOala,  Matt,  xxvii. 
57 :  I. uke  xxiii.  51 ;  John  xix.  38),  the  birthplace,  or 

at  least  the  residence  of  Joseph,  who  obtained  leave 

from  Pilate  to  bury  our  Lord  in  bis  "new  tomb" 
at  Jerusalem.  St.  Luke  calls  this  place  "a  citv  of 
Judaea;"  but  this  presents  no  objection  to  its 
identification  with  the  prophet  Samuel's  birth-place, 
the  llamah  of  1  Sam.  i.  I.  19,  which  is  named  in 
the  Septuaginl  Armathaim  ( ' Apfiadaip),  and  by 
Josephus,  Armatha  (\\?ua0d,  Joseph.  Ant.  \. 
In,    §■_').     The    Ramathem    of   the    Apocrypha 

('Pa.fxa.6eu,    1   Mace.   xi.    :'>4)   is  probably  the  Same 

place.  [  Uamaii.]  [J.  s.  H.] 

A'RIOCH  CnV-lX,   probably  from  nx?  a  (ion, 


10(5 


A K ISA  I 


"  lion-like,"   comp.   ~]~ID3  ;   'Aptaixijs,   LXX.,  in 

Dan.  only  ;  'Apic&x,  Theodot.  ;  Arioch,  Vulg.). 
1.  "  King  of  Ellasar"  (Gen.  xiv.  1,  9).  2.  "  The 
captain  of  the  guard"  of  Nebuchadnezzar  (Dan.  ii. 
14  ff.).  [B.  F.  W.] 

ARIS'AI   OD^X;  'Pov<pcuos  ;  Arisai),  eighth 

son  of  Haman  (Esth.  ix.  9). 

ARISTAR'CHUS  ('Aplffrapxos ;  Aristar- 
chus),  a  Thessalonian  (Acts  xx.  4;  xxvii.  2),  who 
accompanied  St.  Paul  on  his  third  missionary  journey, 
(Acts  xix.  29,  where  he  is  mentioned  as  having  been 
seized  in  the  tumult  at  Ephesus  together  with  Gaius, 
both  (rvv€KS-fi/j.ovs  UavXov).  We  hear  of  him  again 
as  accompanying  the  Apostle  on  his  return  to  Asia, 
Acts  xx.  4  ;  and  again  xxvii.  2,  as  being  with  him  on 
his  voyage  to  Rome.  We  trace  him  afterwards  as  St. 
Paul's  ffwoaxfJ-aKcaros  in  Col.  iv.  10,  and  Philem. 
24,  both  these  notices  belonging  to  one  and  the  same 
time  of  Col.  iv.  7  ;  Philem.  12  ff.  After  this  we 
altogether  lose  sight  of  him.  Tradition,  says  Winer, 
makes  him  bishop  of  Apamea.  [H.  A.] 

AEISTOBU'LUS  ('Apto-rdpovAos ;  Aristo- 
bolus),  a  Jewish  priest  (2  Mace.  i.  10),  who  re- 
sided in  Egypt  in  the  reign  of  Ptolemaeus  VI. 
Philometor  (comp.  Grimm,  2  Mace.  i.  9).  In  a  letter 
of  Judas  Maccabaeus  he  is  addressed  (105  B.C.) 
as  the  representative  of  the  Egyptian  Jews  ('Apja-- 
ro^ooAai  .  .  .  Kal  Tois  iv  Aly.  'louS.  2  Mace.  I.  c), 
and  is  further  styled  "  the  teacher  "  (SiSdcrKaAos, 
i.  c.  counsellor  ?)  of  the  king.  Josephus  makes  no 
mention  of  him ;  but  there  can  be  little  doubt  that 
he  is  identical  with  the  peripatetic  philosopher  of 
the  name  (Clem.  Alex.  Str.  v.  §98  ;  Euseb.  Praep. 
Ev.  viii.  9),  who  dedicated  to  Ptol.  Philometor  his 
allegoric  exposition  of  the  Pentateuch  (BifiAovs 
e^yyyTiKas,  rov  Mouffeais  v6)j.ov,  Euseb.  H.  E. 
vii.  32).  Considerable  fragments  of  this  work  have 
been  preserved  by  Clement  and  Eusebius  (Euseb. 
Praep.  Evan,;],  vii.  13,  14,  viii.  (8)  9,  10,  xiii. 
12  ;  in  which  the  Clementine  fragments  recur)  ; 
but  the  authenticity  of  the  quotations  has  been 
vigorously  contested.  It  was  denied  by  R.  Simon 
and  especially  by  Hody  (De  bibl.  text,  orig.,  pp.  50 
ff.  Oxou.  1705)  who  was  answered  by  Valckenaer 
{Diatribe  de  Aristobulo  Judaeo,  Lugd.  Bat.  1806)  ; 
and  Valckenaer's  arguments  are  now  generally  con- 
sidered conclusive.  (Gfrorer,  Philo  u.  s.  w.  ii.  pp. 
71  ff. ;  Daehne,  Jud.  Alex.  Relig.-Philos.  ii.  73  ff. ; 
Ewald,  Gesch.  des  Volkes  1st:  iv.  294  n.)  The  object 
of  Aristobulus  was  to  prove  that  the  peripatetic  doc- 
trines were  based  (Tiprijadai)  on  the  Law  and  the 
Prophets ;  and  his  work  has  an  additional  interest 
as  showing  that  the  Jewish  doctruies  were  first 
brought  into  contact  with  the  Aristotelian  and  not 
with  the  Platonic  philosophy  (comp.  Matter,  Hist,  de 
Vecole  d' Alex.  iii.  153  ff.).  The  fragments  which 
remain  are  discussed  at  length  in  the  works  quoted 
above,  which  contain  also  a  satisfactory  explanation 
of  the  chronological  difficulties  of  the  different 
accounts  of  Aristobulus.  [B.  F.  W.] 

AEISTOBU'LUS  ('ApL(Tr60ovAos),  a  resident 
at  Rome,  some  of  whose  household  are  greeted  in 
Rom.  xvi.  10.  It  does  not  appear  whether  he  was 
a  Roman  ;  or  whether  he  believed  :  from  the  form 
of  expression,  probably  not.  Or  he  may  have  been 
dead  at  the  time.  The  Menoloq.  Graecormn,  as 
usual  (iii.  p.  17  f.),  makes  him  to  have  been  one  of 
the  70  disciples,  and  reports  that  he  preached  the 
gospel  in  Britain.  [II.  A.] 


AEK 
AEK,  NOAH'S.     [Noah.] 
AEK    OF    THE    COVENANT    (pIN). 

This,  taken  generally  together  with  the  mercy-seat, 
was  the  one  piece  of  the  tabernacle's  furniture  espe- 
ci;dly  invested  with  sacredness  and  mystery,  and  is 
therefore  the  first  for  which  precise  directions  were 
delivered  (Ex.  xxv.).  The  word  signifies  a  mere 
chest  or  box,  and  is  (as  well  as  the  word  !"13t3 

"  ark  "  of  Noah)  rendered  by  the  LXX.  and  New 
Testament  writers  by  ki/3oit6s.  We  may  remark  : 
I.  its  material  dimensions  and  fittings;  II.  its  de- 
sign and  object,  under  which  will  be  included  its 
contents  ;  and  III.  its  history. 


Egyptian  Ark.    (Rotselhni,  p.  99.) 

I.  It  appears  to  have  been  an  oblong  chest  of 
shittim  (acacia)  wood,  2^-  cubits  long,  by  1^  broad 
and  deep.  Within  and  without  gold  was  overlaid  on 
the  wood,  and  on  the  upper  side  or  lid,  which  was 
edged  round  about  with  gold,  the  mercy  seat,  sup- 
porting the  cherubim  one  at  each  end,  and  regarded 
as  the  symbolical  thione  of  the  Divine  presence 
[Cherubim  and  Mercy  Seat],  was  placed.  The 
ark  was  fitted  with  rings,  one  at  each  of  the  four 
corners,  and  therefore  two  on  each  side,  and  through 
these  were  passed  staves  of  the  same  wood  similarly 
overlaid.  By  these  staves,  which  always  remained 
in  the  rings,  the  Levites  of  the  house  of  Kohath,  to 
whose  office  this  especially  appertained,  bore  it  in  its 
progress.  Probably,  however,  when  removed  from 
within  the  veil,  in  the  most  holy  place,  which  was 
its  proper  position,  or  when  taken  out  thence,  priests 
were  its  bearers  (Num.  vii.  9,  x.  21,  iv.  5,  19,  20  ; 
1  K.viii.  3,  6).  The  ends  of  the  staves  were  visible 
without  the  veil  in  the  holy  place  of  the  temple  of 
Solomon,  the  staves  being  drawn  to  the  ends,  appa- 
rently, but  not  out  of  the  rings.  The  ark,  when 
transported,  was  enveloped  in  the  "  veil "  of  the 
dismantled  tabernacle,  in  the  curtain  of  badgers' 
skins,  and  in  a  blue  cloth  over  all,  and  was  there- 
fore not  seen. 

II.  Its  purpose  or  object  was  to  contain  inviolate 
the  Divine  autograph  of  the  two  tables,  that  "  co- 
venant" from  which  it  derived  its  title,  the  idea  of 
which  was  inseparable  from  it,  ami  which  may  be 
regarded  as  the  depositnm  of  the  Jewish  dispensa- 
tion. The  perpetual  safe  custody  of  the  material 
tables  no  doubt  suggested  the  moral  observance  of 
the  precepts  inscribed.  It  was  also  probably  a  re- 
liquary for  the  pot  of  manna  anil  the  rod  of  Aaron. 
We  read  in  1  K.  viii.  9,  that  "  there  was  nothing 
in  the  ark  save  the  two  tables  of  stone  which 
Moses  put  there  at  Horeb.''  Yet  St.  Paul,  or  the 
author  of  Heb.  ix.  4,  asserts  that,  beside  the  two 
tables  of  stone,  the  "  pot  of  manna  "  and  "  Aaron's 
rod  that  budded  "  were  inside  the  ark,  which  were 


A*RK 

directed  to  be  "  laid  up  "  and  "  kept  before  the  tes- 
timony" i.e.  before  the  tables  of  the  law  (Ex.  xl. 
20)  ;  and  probably,  since  there  is  no  mention  of  any 
other  receptacle  for  them,  and  some  would  have 
been  necessary,  the  statement  of  1  K.  viii.  9,  im- 
plies that  by  Solomon's  time  these  relics  had  disap- 
peared.   The  expression  p"lX  "l-'Sp,  Deut.  xxx.  26, 

obscurely  rendered  "  in  the  side  of  the  ark  "  (A.  V.), 
merely  means  "  beside "  it.  The  words  of  the 
A.  V.  in  1  Chr.  xiii.  3,  seem  to  imply  an  use  of 
the  ark  for  the  purpose  of  an  oracle;  but  this  is 
probably  erroneous,  and  "  we  sought  it  not"  the 
meaning;    so  the  LXX.   renders  it:  see  Gesenius, 

Lex.  s.  v.  trn. 

Occupying  the  most  holy  spot  of  the  whole  sanc- 
tuary, it  tended  to  exclude  any  idol  from  the  centre 
of  worship.  And  Jeremiah  (iii.  16)  looks  forward 
to  the  time  when  eyen  the  ark  should  be  "  no  more 
remembered,"  as  the  climax  of  spiritualised  religion 
apparently  in  Messianic  times.  It  was  also  the 
support  of  the  mercy  seat,  materially  symbolising, 
perhaps,  the  "  covenant "  as  that  on  which  "  mercy  " 
rested.  It  also  furnished  a  legitimate  vent  to  that 
longing  after  a  materia]  object  for  reverential  feel- 
ing which  is  common  to  all  religions.  It  was, 
however,  never  seen,  save  by  the  high  priest,  and 
resembled  in  this  respect  the  Deity  whom  it  sym- 
bolised, whose  face  none  might  look  upon  and  live 
(Winer,  adloc.notc).  That  this  reverential  feeling 
may  have  been  impaired  during  its  absence  among 
the  Philistines,  seems  probable  from  the  example  of 
Uzzah. 

III.  The  chief  facts  in  the  earlier  history  of  the 
ark  (see  Josh.  iii.  and  vi.)  need  not  be  recited. 
We  may  notice,  however,  a  fiction  of  the  Kabbis 
that  there  were  two  arks,  one  which  remained  in 
the  shrine,  and  another  which  preceded  the  camp 
on  its  march,  and  that  this  latter  contained  the 
broken  tables  of  the  law,  as  the  former  the  whole 
ones.  In  the  decline  of  religion  in  a  later  period  a 
superstitious  security  was  attached  to  its  presence 
in  battle.  Yet.  though  this  was  rebuked  by  its 
permitted  capture,  when  captured,  its  sanctity  was 
vindicated  by  miracles,  as  seen  in  its  avenging 
pro  ress  through  the  Philistine  cities.  From  this 
period  till  David's  time  its  abode  was  frequently 
shifted.  It  sojourned  among  several,  probably  Le- 
vitical,  families  (1  Sam.  vii.  1  ;  •_'  Sam.  vi.  3,  11; 
1  Chr.  xiii.  13,  xv.  24,  '_'■">)  in  the  border  villages 
of  Eastern  Judah,  and  did  not  take  its  place 
in  the  tabernacle,  but  dwelt  in  curtains,  i.e.  in 
a  separate  tent  pitched  for  it  in  Jerusalem  by 
David.  Its  bringing  up  by  David  thither  was  a 
national  festival,  and  its  presence  there  seems  t<> 
have  suggested  to  bis  piety  the  erection  of  a  house 

to  receive  it.     Subsequently  that  house,  wb - 

pleted,  received,  in  the  u  irk  in  its 

shrine,  the  signal  of  its  inauguration  by  the  effulg- 
ence of  Divine  glory  instantly  manifested.     Several 

of    the     Psalms    contain    allusions    to    these   events 

wiv.,  xlvii.,  exxxii.)  and  l's.  cv.  app 

have  been  composed  on  th icasion  of  the  first  of 

them . 

When   idolatry    i  e  shameless  in  the 

kingdom  of  Judah,  Manasseh  placed  a  "carved 
image "  in  th    "hou      id  probably  re- 

moved the  ark  to  make  way  for  it.  This  may 
air,, nut  for  the  subsequent  statement  thai  it  was 
reinstated  by  Josiah  (2  Chr.  radii.  7,  wxv.  .". ). 
It  was  probably  t  tl  en  i  apt  ive  or  I  by  Ne- 

buchadnezzar (_  Esdr.  x.  22).     Prideaux' 


ARKITE 


107 


ment  that  there  must  have  been  an  ark  in  the 
second  temple,  is  of  no  weight  against  express  testi- 
mony, such  as  that  of  Josephus  (B.  J.  v.  5,  §5) 
and  Tacitus  (Eist.  v.  9,  inania  arcana),  con- 
firmed also  by  the  Rabbins,  who  state  that  a 
sacred  stone  called  by  them  HTlEJ'  ]2X,  "  stone 
of  drinking"  [Stone],  stood  in  its  stead;  as 
well  as  by  the  marked  silence  of  those  apocryphal 
books  which  enumerate  the  rest  of  the  principal 
furniture  of  the  sanctuary  as  present,  besides  the 
positive  statement  of  2  Esdr.  as  above  quoted. 


Egyptian  Ark.     (Wilkinson,  Anc.  Egypt.; 

The  ritual  of  the  Etruscans,  Greeks,  Romans, 
and  other  ancient  nations,  included  the  use  of  what 
Clemens  Alexandrinus  calls  Klarai  /xvffriKal  (Pro- 
trept.  p.  12)  ;  but  especially  that  of  the  Egyptians, 
in  whose  religious  processions,  as  represented  on 
monuments,  such  an  ark,  surmounted  by  a  pair  of 
winged  figures  like  the  cherubim,  constantly  ap- 
pears (Wilkinson,  An.  Eijypt.  v.  p.  271,  275). 
The  same  Clemens  (Strom,  v.  578)  also  contains 
an  allusion  of  a  proverbial  character  to  the  ark  and 
its  rites,  which  seems  to  show  that  they  were  popu- 
larly known,  where  he  says  that  "  only  the  master 
(SiSacr/caAos)  may  uncover  the  ark"  (/a/3aiT<5s). 
In  Latin  also,  the  word  arcanum,  connected  with 
area  and  arceo,  is  the  recognised  term  for  a  sacred 
mystery.  Illustrations  of  the  same  subject  occur 
also  Plut.  de  Is.  et  Osi.  c.  39 ;  Ov.  Ars  Am.  ii. 
6o9,  &c;  Euseb.  Praep.  Evang.u.  3;  Catull. 
briv.  200-1 ;  Apul.  Met.  xi.  262.  [H.  H.] 

'  ARK'ITE,  the  Op-iyn,  Sam.  Cod.  >pW; 
"Apovhccuos ;  Aracaeus),  one  of  the  families 
of  the  Canaanites  (Gen.  x.  17;  1  Chr.  i.  15), 
and  from  the  context  evidently  located  in  the 
north  of  Phoenicia.  Josephus  (Ant.  i.  6,  §2) 
gives  the  name  as  'ApovKalos.  and  as  possessing 
"Apic7)f  T7;e  eV  rw  AifSdvai.  He  also  again  men- 
tions the  place  CApnata.  />'.  ./.  vii.  5,  §1)  in  de- 
fining the  position  of  the  Sabbatical  river.  The 
name  is  found  in  I 'liny  (v.  16),  and  Ptolemy  (v.  15), 
and  from  Aelius  Lampridius  |  4/i  r.  Si  .)  we  learn 
that  the  '  contained  a  temple  dedicated 

to  Alexander  the  Great.  It  was  the  birthplace  of 
Alexander  Severus,  and  was  thence  called  Caesarea 
Lifaani.  Area  was  well  known  to  the  Crusaders, 
who  under  Raimond  of  To  ;ed  it  for  two 

in  1099  in  vain;  it  was.  however,  afterwards 
taken  by  William  of  Sartanges.  In  L202  it  was 
totally  destroyed  by  an  earthquake.     The  site  which 

now  bears  the  name  of  'Arka  (Lj^e)   lies  on  the 

I  "lit   12  miles 

t  Tripoli,  and  5  south  of  the  Nahr  el-Kltebir 
(Eleutherus).     Tl.,  isses  halfway 


108 


ARMAGEDDON 


between  it  and  the  sea.  The  site  is  marked  by  a 
rocky  tell  rising  to  the  height  of  100  feet  close  above 
the  Nahr  Arka.  On  the  top  of  the  tell  is  an  area 
of  about  two  acres,  and  on  this  and  on  a  plateau  to 
the  north  the  ruins  of  the  former  town  are  scattered. 
Among  them  are  some  columns  of  granite  and 
syenite  (Rob.  iii.  579-81;  Ges.  1073;  Winer, 
s.  v. ;  Reland,  575  ;  Burckhardt,  162  ;  Diet,  of  Gr. 
and  Rom.  Gaoijr.,  art.  Arca).  [G.] 

ARMAGED'DON  ('ApfiayeScip,  Rev.  xvi. 
16).  It  would  be  foreign  to  the  purpose  of  this  work 
to  enter  into  any  of  the  theological  controversies  con- 
nected with  this  word.  Whatever  its  full  symbol- 
ical import  may  be,  the  image  rests  on  a  geogra- 
phical basis :  and  the  locality  implied  in  the 
Hebrew  term  here  employed  (rbv  t6-kov  rhv  Ka\6v- 
ixevov  'EPpaiffrl  'Ap^ay^Sdy)  is  the  great  battle- 
field of  the  Old  Testament,  where  the  chief  con- 
flicts took  place  between  the  Israelites  and  the 
enemies  of  God's  people.  The  passage  is  best  illus- 
trated by  comparing  a  similar  one  in  the  book  of 
Joel  (iii.  2,  12),  where  the  scene  of  the  Divine 
judgments  is  spoken  of  in  the  prophetic  imagery  ,1s 
the  "  valley  of  Jehoshaphat,"  the  fact  underlying 
the  image  being  Jehoshaphat 's  great  victory  (2  Chr. 
.  xx.  26  ;  see  Zech.  xiv.  2,  4).  So  here  the  scene 
of  the  struggle  of  good  and  evil  is  suggested  by 
that  battle-field,  the  plain  of  Esdraelon,  which  was 
famous  for  two  great  victories,  of  Barak  over  the 
Canaanites  (Judg.  iv.,  v.),  and  Gideon  over  the 
Midianites  (Judg.  vii.);  and  for  two  great  dis- 
asters, the  death  of  Saul,  in  the  invasion  of  the 
Philistines  (1  Sam.  xxxi.  8),  and  the  death  of  Jo- 
siah  in  the  invasion  of  the  Egyptians  (2  K.  xxiii. 
29,  30  ;  2  Chr.  xxxv.  22)."  With  the  first  and 
fourth  of  these  events,  Megiddo  (MayeSSti  in  the 
LXX.  and  Josephus)  is  especially  connected. 
Hence  '  Ap-fxaysZuiv,  "  the  hill  of  Megiddo."  (See 
Biihr's  Excursus  on  Herod,  ii.  159.)  The  same 
figurative  language  is  used  by  one  of  the  Jewish 
prophets  (Zech.  xii.  11).  As  regards  the  Apoca- 
lypse, it  is  remarked  by  Stanley  {Sinai  and  Pales- 
tine, p.  330),  that  this  imagery  would  be  peculiarly 
natural  to  a  Galilaean,  to  whom  the  scene  of  these 
battles  was  familiar.     [Megiddo.]       [J.  S.  H.] 

ARME'NIA  ('Ap/xevia)  is  nowhere  mentioned 
under  that  name  in  the  original  Hebrew,  though 
it  occurs  in  the  English  version  (2  K.  xix.  37), 
where  our  translators  have  very  unnecessarily  sub- 
stituted it  for  Ararat  (comp.  marginal  reading).  The 
abesnee  of  the  name,  however,  which  was  not  the 
indigenous  name  of  the  people,  by  no  means  implies 
that  the  Hebrew  writers  were  unacquainted  with 
the  country:  they  undoubtedly  describe  certain 
districts  of  it  under  the  names  Ararat,  Minni,  and 
Togarmah.  Of  these  three  the  latter  appeal's  to 
have  the  widest  signification :  it  is  the  name  of  a 
race  (Gen.  x.  3),  and  not  of  a  locality,  and  is  used 
by  Ezekiel  as  descriptive  of  the  whole  country 
(xxvii.  14,  .xxxviii.  6),  while  the  two  former  are 
mentioned  together,  and  have  been  identified  with 
separate  localities. 

Armenia  is  that  lofty  plateau  whence  the  rivers 
Euphrates,  Tigris,  Araxes,  and  Acampsis,  pour 
down  their  waters  in  different  directions,  the  two 
first  to  the  Persian  Gulf,  the  last  two  respectively 
to  the  Caspian  and  Euxine  seas.  It  may  be  termed 
the  nucleus  of  the  mountain  system  of  western 
Asia:  from  the  centre  of  the  plateau  rise  two 
lofty  chains  of  mountains,  which  run  from  E.  to 
W.,  converging  towards  the  Caspian  sea,  but  paral- 


ARMEN1A 

lei  to  each  other  towards  the  W.,  the  most  north- 
erly named  by  ancient  geographers  Abus  Ms,  and 
culminating  in  Mount  Ararat ;  the  other  named 
Niphates  Ms.  Westward  these  ranges  may  be 
traced  in  Anti-Taurus  and  Taurus,  while  in  the 
opposite  direction  they  are  continued  in  Caspius  M*. 
The  climate  of  Armenia  is  severe,  the  degree  of 
severity  varying  with  the  altitude  of  different 
localities,  the  valleys  being  sufficiently  warm  to 
ripen  the  grape,  while  the  high  lands  are  bleak  and 
only  adapted  for  pasture.  The  latter  supported 
vast  numbers  of  mules  and  horses,  on  which  the 
wealth  of  the  country  chiefly  depended  :  and  hence 
Strabo  (xi.  529)  characterizes  the  country  as  <r<p68pa 
'nnrSfioTos,  and  tells  us  that  the  horses  were  held  in 
as  high  estimation  as  the  celebrated  Nisaean  breed. 
The  inhabitants  were  keen  traders  in  ancient  as  in 
modern  times. 

The  slight  acquaintance  which  the  Hebrew 
writers  had  of  this  country  was  probably  derived 
from  the  Phoenicians.  There  are  signs  of  their 
knowledge  having  been  progressive.  Isaiah,  in  his 
prophecies  regarding  Babylon,  speaks  of  the  hosts 
as  coming  from  "the  mountains"  (xiii.  4),  while 
Jeremiah,  in  connexion  with  the  same  subject,  uses 
the  specific  names  Ararat  and  Minni  (li.  27).  Eze- 
kiel, who  was  apparently  better  acquainted  with 
the  country,  uses  a  name  which  was  familiar  to  its 
own  inhabitants,  Togarmah.  Whether  the  use  of 
the  term  Ararat  in  Is.  xxxvii.  38  belongs  to  the 
period  in  which  the  prophet  himself  lived,  is  a 
question  which  cannot  be  here  discussed.  In  the 
prophetical  passages  to  which  we  shall  refer,  it  will 
be  noticed  that  Armenia  is  spoken  of  rather  in 
reference  to  its  geographical  position  as  one  of  the 
extreme  northern  nations  with  which  the  Jews  were 
acquainted,  than  for  any  more  definite  pmpose. 
(1.)  Ararat  is  noticed  as  the  place  whither  the 
sons  of  Sennacherib  fled  (Is.  xxxvii.  38):  in 
the  prophecies  of  Jeremiah  (li.  27)  it  is  summoned 
along  with  Minni  and  Ashkenaz  to  the  destruction  of 
Babylon,  the  LXX.  however  only  notice  the  last. 
It  was  the  central  district  surrounding  the  moun- 
tain of  that  name.  (2 .)  Minni  C3p)  is  only  noticed 
in  the  passage  just  referred  to.  It  is  probably 
identical  with  the  district  Minyas,  in  the  upper 
valley  of  the  Murad-su  branch  of  the  Euphrates 
(Joseph.  Ant.  i.  3,  §6).  It  contains  the  root  of 
the  name  Armenia  according  to  the  generally  re- 
ceived derivation,  Har-Minni,  "  the  mountains  of 
Minni."  It  is  worthy  of  notice  that  the  spot  where 
Xenophon  ascertains  that  the  name  of  the  country 
through  which  he  was  passing  was  Armenia,  co- 
incides with  the  position  here  assigned  to  Minni 
(Xen.  An.  iv.  5;  Ainsworth,  Track"of  10,000,  p. 
177.  (3.)  Togarmah  (n^TO'lFI;  Boyapfid,  and 
®opyofj.a)  is  noticed  in  two  passages  of  Eze- 
kiel, both  of  which  support  the  idea  of  its  identity 
with  Armenia.  In  xxvii.  14  he  speaks  of  its  com- 
merce with  the  Tyrians  in  "horses,  horsemen  and 
mules"  (A.  V.),  or,  as  the  words  mean,  "  carriage- 
horses,  riding-horses,  and  mules"  (Hitzig,  Com- 
ment.), which  we  have  already  noticed  as  the  staple 
productions  of  Armenia.  That  the  house  of  Togar- 
mah "traded  in  the  fairs  of  Tyre,"  as  the  A.  V. 
expresses  it,  is  more  than  the  Hebrew  text  seems  to 
warrant :  the  words  simply  signify  that  the  Arme- 
nians carried  on  commerce  with  the  Tyrians  in  those 
articles.  In  this  passage  Togarmah  is  mentioned 
in  connexion  with  Meshech  and  Tubal;  in  xxxviii. 
6,  it  is  described  as  "  of  the  north  quarters"  in  con- 


ARMLET 

nexion  with  Homer.  Coupling  with  these  particu- 
lars the  relationship  between  Togarmah,  Ashkenaz, 
and  Riphat  (Gen.  x.  3),  the  three  sons  of  Gomer, 
and  the  nations  of  which  these  patriarchs  were  the 
progenitors,  we  cannot  fail  in  coming  to  the  con- 
clusion that  Togarmah  represents  Armenia.  We 
will  only  add  that  the  traditional  belief  of  the  Ar- 
menians themselves,  that  they  are  descended  from 
Thorgomass  or  Tiorgarmah,  strongly  confirms  this 
view.  [W.  L.  B.] 

ARMLET  (rnyVN;  ^AAtoy;  Num. xsxi.  50, 

XA.<5oVa  or  xA-'8^«/;  -  Sam.  i.  10,  ^paxi-aXiov ; 
Aquila,  brachiale  armilla; — properly  a  fetter, 
from  "IVif,  a  step ;  comp.  Is.  iii.  20,  and  Anklet), 

an  ornament  universal  in  the  East,  especially  among 
women  ;  used  by  princes  as  one  of  the  insignia  of  roy- 
alty, and  by  distinguished  persons  in  general.  The 
wind  is  not  used  in  the  A.  V.,  as  even  in  2  Sam.  i.  10, 
they  render  it  "  by  the  bracelet  on  his  arm."  Some- 
times only  one  was  worn,  on  the  right  arm  (Ecclus. 
xxi.  21).  From  Cant.  viii.  G,  it  appears  that  the 
signet  sometimes  consisted  of  a  jewel  on  the  armlet. 


ARMS 


109 


Assyrian  Armlet.     From  Nineveh  Marbles,  IJ 


These  ornaments  were  worn  by  most  ancient 
princes.  They  are  frequent  on  the  sculptures  of  Per- 
sepolis  and  Nineveh,  and  were  set  in  rich  and  fan- 
tastic shapes  resembling  the  heads  of  animals  (Layard, 
Nineveh,  ii.  298).  The  kings  of  Persia  wore  them, 
and  Astyages  presented  a  pair  among  other  orna- 
ments to  Cyrus  (Xen.  Gyr.  i.  3).  The  Aethio- 
pians,  to  whom  some  were  sent  by  Cambyses, 
scornfully  characterised  them  as  weak  fetters  (He- 
rod, ii.  23).  Nor  were  they  confined  to  the  kings, 
since  Herodotus  (viii.  113)  calls  the  Persians  gene- 
rally \f/e\to<popoi.  In  the  Egyptian  monuments 
"  kings  are  often  represented  with  armlets  and 
bracelets,  and  in  the  Leyden  Museum  is  one  bear- 
ing the  name  of  the  third  Thothmcs."  [A  gold 
bracelet      figured      below.]       (Wilkinson's      Anc. 


inn   'niil.t     Fnrm  the  Leyilen  Museum. 

Egypt,  iii.  ::::.,  and  Plates  i,  2,  14).  They 
were  even  used  by  the  old  British  chiefs  (Turner, 
Ani/l.  Sn.r.  i.  .'!83).      'I'he   story   of  Taip'ia   shows 

that  they  were  common  among  the  ancienl  Sa- 
bines,  hut  the  Romans  considered  the  use  of  them 
effeminate,  although  they  were  sometimes  given 
as  military  rewards  (I.iv.  x.  44).     Finally,   they 


are  still  worn  among  the  most  splendid  regalia 
of  modern  Oriental  sovereigns,  and  it  is  even  said 
that  those  of  the  king  of  Persia  are  worth  a 
million  sterling  (Kitto,  Pict.  Hist,  of  Pal.  i.  499). 
They  form  the  chief  wealth  of  modern  Hindoo 
ladies,  and  are  rarely  taken  off.  They  are  made  of 
every  sort  of  material  from  the  finest  gold,  jewels, 
ivory,  coral,  and  pearl,  down  to  the  common  glass 
rings  and  varnished  earthenware  bangles  of  the 
women  of  the  Deccan.  Now,  as  in  ancient  times, 
they  are  sometimes  plain,  sometimes  enchased ; 
sometimes  with  the  ends  not  joined,  and  sometimes 
a  complete  circle.  The  arms  are  sometimes  quite 
covered  with  them,  and  if  the  wearer  be  poor,  it 
matters  not  how  mean  they  are,  provided  only  that 
they  glitter.  It  is  thought  essential  to  beauty  that 
they  should  fit  close,  and  hence  Harmer  calls  them 
"  rather  manacles  than  bracelets,"  and  Buchanan 
says  "  that  the  poor  girls  rarely  get  them  on  without 
drawing  blood,  and  nibbing  part  of  the  skin  from  the 
hand  ;  and  as  they  wear  great  numbers,  which  often 
break,  they  suffer  much  from  their  love  of  admira- 
tion." Their  enormous  weight  may  be  conjectured 
from  Gen.  xxiv.  24.  [F.  W.  F.] 

ARMO'NI  C^bTK;  'Epfioovoi ;  Armoni),  son 
of  Saul  by  Rizpah  (2  Sam.  xxi.  8). 

ARMS,  ARMOUR.  In  the  records  of  a 
people  like  the  Children  of  Israel,  so  large  a  part 
of  whose  history  was  passed  in  warfare,  we  natu- 
rally look  for  much  information,  direct  or  indirect, 
on  the  arms  and  modes  of  fighting  of  the  nation 
itself  and  of  those  with  whom  it  came  into  contact. 

Unfortunately,  however,  the  notices  that  we 
find  in  the  Bible  on  these  points  are  extremely 
few  and  meagre,  while  even  those  few,  owing  to 
the  uncertainty  which  rests  on  the  true  meaning 
and  force  of  the  terms,  do  not  convey  to  us  nearly 
all  the  information  which  they  might.  This  is  the 
more  to  be  regretted  because  the  notices  of  the  his- 
tory, scanty  as  they  are,  are  literally  everything  we 
have  to  depend  on,  inasmuch  as  they  are  not  yet  sup- 
plemented and  illustrated  either  by  remains  of  the 
arms  themselves,  or  by  those  commentaries  which 
the  sculptures,  vases,  bronzes,  mosaics,  and  paintings 
of  other  nations  furnish  to  the  notices  of  manners 
and  customs  contained  in  their  literature. 

In  remarkable  contrast  to  Greece,  Rome,  Egypt, 
and  we  may  now  add  Assyria,  Palestine  has  not 
yet  yielded  one  vestige  of  the  implements  or 
utensils  of  life  or  warfare  of  its  ancient  inhabit- 
ants ;  nor  has  a  single  sculpture,  piece  of  pottery, 
coin,  or  jewel,  been  discovered  of  that  people  with 
whose  life,  as  depicted  in  their  literature,  we  are 
more  familiar  than  with  that  of  our  own  ancestors. 
Even  the  relations  which  existed  between  tin1  cus- 
toms of  Israel,  and  those  of  Egypl  on  the  one  hand, 
and  Assyria  on  the  other,  have  still  to  be  investi- 
gated, so  that  we  are  prevented  from  applying  to 
the  history  of  the  Jews  the  immense  amount  of  in- 
formation which  we  po.^ess  mi  the  warlike  customs 

of  these  two  nations,  the  former  especially.  Per- 
haps the  time  will  arrive  ('or  investigations  in  Pales- 
tine of  the  same  nature  as  those  which  have,  within 

tie  lasi  ten  years,  given  us  so  much  insight  into 

Assyrian   manners;    but    in   the   meantime  all  that 

done  here  is  to  examine  the  various  term 
by  which   instruments  of  war  a]. pear   to   !„•  ,|,.  [g. 
n.ited  iii  the  Bible,  in  the  lighi  of  such  help  a 
be  got  from  the  comparison  of  parallel  passages, 
from    the  derivation   of  the  words,   and    from   the 
renderings  of  the  ancient  versions. 


110 


ARMS 


The  subject  naturally  divides  itself  into — 
I.  Offensive  weapons :  Arms. 
II.  Defensive  weapons  :  Armour. 
I.  Offensive  weapons :  1 .  Apparently  the  earliest 
known,  and  most  widely  used,  was  the  Chereb  (2"in), 

"  Sword,"  from  a  root  signifying  to  lay  waste. 

Its  first  mention  in  the  history  is  in  the  narra- 
tive of  the  massacre  at  Shechem,  when  "  Simeon 
and  Levi  took  each  man  his  sword,  and  came  upon 
the  city  boldly  and  slew  all  the  males"  (Gen.  xxxiv. 
25).  But  there  is  an  allusion  to  it  shortly  before 
in  a  passage  undoubtedly  of  the  earliest  date  (Ewald, 
i.  446  note)  :  the  expostulation  of  Laban  with  Jacob 
(Gen.  xxxi.  26).  After  this,  during  the  account 
of  the  conquest  and  of  the  monarchy,  the  mention 
of  the  sword  is  frequent,  but  very  little  can  be 
gathered  from  the  casual  notices  of  the  text  as  to  its 
shape,  size,  material,  or  mode  of  use.  Perhaps  if 
anything  is  to  be  inferred  it  is  that  the  Chereb  was 
not  either  a  heavy  or  a  long  weapon.  That  of 
Ehud  was  only  a  cubit,  i.  e.  18  inches  long,  so  as 
to  have  been  concealed  under  his  garment,  and  no- 
thing is  said  to  lead  to  the  inference  that  it  was 
shorter  than  usual,  for  the  "  dagger  "  of  the  A.  V. 
is  without  any  ground,  unless  it  be  a  rendering 
of  the  n&xcupa  of  the  LXX.  But  even  assuming 
that  Ehud's  sword  was  shorter  than  usual,  yet  a 
consideration  of  the  narratives  in  2  Sam.  ii.  16,  and 
xx.  8-10,  and  also  of  the  ease  with  which  David 
used  the  sword  of  a  man  so  much  larger  than  him- 
self as  Goliath  (1  Sam.  xvii.  51;  xxi.  9,  10),  goes 
to  show  that  the  chereb  was  both  a  lighter  and  a 
shorter  weapon  than  the  modern  sword.  What 
frightful  wounds  one  blow  of  the  sword  of  the 
Hebrews  could  inflict,  if  given  even  with  the  left 
hand  of  a  practised  swordsman,  may  be  gathered 
from  a  comparison  of  2  Sam.  xx.  8-12  with  1  K. 
ii.  5.  A  ghastly  picture  is  there  given  us  of  the 
murdered  man  and  his  murderer.  The  unfortunate 
Amasa  actually  disembowelled  by  the  single  stroke, 
and  "  wallowing  "  in  his  blood  in  the  middle  of 
the  road — the  treacherous  Joab  standing  over  him, 
bespattered  from  his  "  girdle  "  to  his  "  shoes  " 
with  the  blood  which  had  spouted  from  his  victim  ! 

The  Chereb  was  carried  -in  a  sheath  (")yF),  1  Sam. 
xvii.  51 ;  2  Sam.  xx.  8,  only:  jYJ,  1  Chr.  xxi.  27, 
only)  slung  by  a  girdle  (1  Sam.  xxv.  13)  and 
resting  upon  the  thigh  (Ps.  xlv.  3;  Judg.  iii.  16), 
or  upon  the  hips  (2  Sam.  xx.  8).  "  Girding  on 
the  sword  "  was  a  symbolical  expression  for  com- 
mencing war,  the  more  forcible  because  in  times  of 
peace  even  the  king  in  state  did  not  wear  a  sword 
(1  K.  iii.  24)  ;  and  a  similar  expression  occurs  to 
denote  those  able  to  serve  (Judg.  viii.  10 ;  1  Chr. 
xxi.  5).  Other  phrases,  derived  from  the  chereb,  are, 
"  to  smite  with  the  edge  (literally  '  mouth,'  comp. 
errSfxa,  and  comp.  "  devour,"  Is.  i.  20)  of  the 
"  sword  " — "  slain  with  the  sword  " — "  men  that 
drew  sword,"  &c. 

Swords  with  two  edges  are  occasionally  referred 
to  (Judg.  iii.  16;  Ps.  cxlix.  6),  and  allusions 
are  found  to  "  whetting  "  the  sword  (Deut.  xxxii. 
41;  Ps.  lxiv.  3;  Ezek.  xxi.  9).  There  is  no  re- 
ference to  the  material  of  which  it  was  composed 
(unless  it  be  Is.  ii.  4  ;  Joel  iii.  10) ;  doubtless  it  was 
of  metal  from  the  allusions  to  its  brightness  and 
"  glittering"  (see  the  two  passages  quoted  above,  and 
others),  and  the  ordinary  word  for  blade,  viz.  2n7 

J  '  -  T  ? 

"  a  flame."    From  the  expression  (Josh.  v.  2,  3) — 
"  swords  of  rock,"  A.  V.  "  sharp  knives  " — we  may 


AEMS 

perhaps  infer  that  in  early  times  the  material  was 
flint. 

2.  Next  to  the  sword  was  the  Steak  :  and  of  this 
weapon  we  meet  with  at  least  three  distinct  kinds. 

a.  The  Chanith  (JTOn),  a  "  Spear,"  and  that  of 
the  largest  kind,  as  appears  from  various  circum- 
stances attending  its  mention.  It  was  the  weapon 
of  Goliath — its  staff  like  a  weaver's  beam,  the  iron 
head  alone  weighing  600  shekels,  about  25  lbs. 
(1  Sam.  xvii.  7,  45  ;  2  Sam.  xxi.  19  ;  1  Chr.  xx.  5), 
and  also  of  other  giants  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  21 ;  1  Chr. 
xi.  23)  and  mighty  warriors  (2  Sam.  ii.  23,  xxiii. 
18;  1  Chr.  xi.  11,' 20).  The  Chanith  was  the 
habitual  companion  of  King  Saul — a  fit  weapon  for 
one  of  his  gigantic  stature — planted  at  the  head  of 
his  sleeping-place  when  on  an  expedition  (1  Sam. 
xxv.  7,  8,  11,  12,  16,  22),  or  held  in  his  hand 
when  mustering  his  forces  (xxii.  6) ;  and  on  it  the 
dying  king  is  leaning  when  we  catch  our  last 
glimjjse  of  his  stately  figure  on  the  field  of  Gilboa 
(2  Sam.  i.  6).  His  fits  of  anger  or  madness  become 
even  more  terrible  to  us,  when  we  find  that  it  was 
this  heavy  weapon  and  not  the  lighter  "javelin" 
(as  the  A.  V.  renders  it)  that  he  cast  at  David 
(1  Sam.  xviii.  10,  11,  xix.  9,  10)  and  at  Jonathan 
(xx.  3).  A  striking  idea  of  the  weight  and  force  of 
this  ponderous  arm  may  be  gained  from  the  fact  that 
a  mere  back  thrust  from  the  hand  ol  Abner  was 
enough  to  drive  its  butt  end  through  the  body  of 
Asahel  (2  Sam.  ii.  23).  The  Chanith  is  mentioned 
also  in  1  Sam.  xiii.  19,  22,  xxi.  8  ;  2  K.  xi.  10  ;  1 
Chr.  xxiii.  9,  and  in  numerous  passages  of  poetry. 

b.  Apparently  lighter  than  the  preceding,  and 
in  more  than  one  passage  distinguished  from  it,  was 
the  Cidon  (JIT'S),  to  which  the  word  "  Javelin" 

perhaps  best  answers  (Ewald,  Wurfspiess).  It 
would  be  the  appropriate  weapon  for  such  ma- 
noeuvring as  that  described  in  Josh.  viii.  14-27, 
and  could  with  ease  be  held  outstretched  for  a  con- 
siderable time  (18,  26;  A.  V.  "  spear").  When 
not  in  action  the  Cidon  was  carried  on  the  back  of 
the  warrior — between  the  shoulders  (  1  Sam.  xvii. 
6,  "  target,"  and  margin  "  gorget").  Both  in  this 
passage  and  in  verse  45  of  the  same  chapter  the 
Cidon  is  distinguished  from  the  Chanith.  In  Job 
xxxix.  23  ("  spear")  the  allusion  seems  to  be  to  the 
quivering  of  a  javelin  when  poised  before  hurling  it. 

c.  Another  kind  of  spear  was  the  Romach 
(riDT).     In  the  historical  books  it  occurs  in  Num. 

xxv.  7  ("javelin  "),  and  1  K.  xviii.  28  ("  lancets;" 
1611,  "lancers").  Also  frequently  in  the  later 
books,  especially  in  the  often  recurring  formula  for 
arms,  "  shield  and  spear."  1  Chr.  xii.  8  ("  buck- 
ler"), 24  ("  spear"),  2  Chr.  xi.  12,  xiv.  8,  xxv.  5, 
and  Neh.  iv.  13,  16-21 ;  Ezek.  xxxix.  9  &c. 

d.  A  lighter  missile  or  "  dart"  was  probably  the 
Shelach  (PIPK').  Its  root  signifies  to  project  or 
send  out,  but  unfortunately  there  is  nothing  beyond 
the  derivation  to  guide  us  to  any  knowledge  of  its 
nature.  See  2  Chr.  xxiii.  10,  xxxii.  5  ("  darts")  ; 
Neh.  iv.  17,  23  (see  margin)  ;  Job  xxxiii.  18,  xxxvi. 
12;  Joel  ii.  8. 

e.  The  word  Shebet  (DIES'),  the  ordinary  mean- 
ing of  which  is  a  rod  or  staff,  with  the  derived  force 
of  a  baton  or  sceptre,  is  used  once  only  with  a  mili- 
tary signification,  for  the  "darts"  with  which 
Joab  dispatched  Absalom  (2  Sam.  xviii.  14). 

3.  Of  missile  weapons  of  offence  the  chief  was  un- 
doubtedly the  Bow,  Kcshcth  (nJf'£) ;  it  is  met  with 


ARMS 

in  the  earliest  stages  of  the  history,  in  use  both  for 
the  chace  (Gen.  xxi.  20,  xxvii.  3)  and  war  (xlviii. 
22).  In  later  times  archers  accompanied  the  armies 
of  the  Philistines  (1  Sam.  x.\xi.  '■'> ;  1  Chr.  x.  3) 
and  of  the  Syrians  1 1  K.  xxii.  .".4).  Among  the 
Jews  its  use  was  not  confined  to  the  common  sol- 
diers, but  captains  high  in  rank,  as  Jehu  (2  K.  ix. 
24),  and  even  kings'  sons  (1  Sam.  xviii.  4)  can'ied 
the  how,  and  were  expert  and  sure  in  its  use 
i  2  Sam.  i.  22).  The  tribe  of  Benjamin  seems  to 
have  been  especially  addicted  to  archery  (1  Chr. 
viii.  40,  xii.  2  ;  2  Chr.  xi».  8,  xvii.  7  | ;  but  there 
were  also  bowmen  among  Reuben,  Gad,  Manasseh 
(1  Chr.  v.  18),  and  Ephraim  (Ps.  lxxviii.  9). 

Of  the  form  or  structure  of  the  bow  we  can 
gather  almost,  nothing.  It  seems  to  have  been  bent 
with  the  aid  of  the  foot,  as  now,  for  the  word  com- 
monly used  for  it  is^JTl,  to  tread  (1  Chr.  v.  18, 

viii.  40;  2  Chr.  xiv.  8  ;  Is.  v.  18  ;  Ps.  vii.  12,  &c). 
Bows  of  steel  (or  perhaps  brass,  nt'-irO)  are  men- 
tioned as  if  specially  strong  (2  Sam.  xxii.  5;  Ps. 
xviii.  o4).     The  string  is  occasionally  named,  "in11 

or  "irVD.    It  was  probably  at  first  some  bind-weed 

or  natural  cord,  since  the  same  word  is  used  in 
Judg.  xvi.  7 — 9  for  "  green  withs." 

In  the  allusion  to  bows  in  1  Chr.  xii.  '2,  it  will 
be  observed  that  the  sentence  in  the  original  stands 
"  could  use  both  the  right  hand  ami  the  left  in 
stones  and  arrows  out  of  a  bow,  "the  words  "hurling" 
and  "shooting"  being  interpolated  by  the  trans* 
lators.  It  is  possible  that  a  kind  of  bow  for  shooting 
bullets  or  stones  is  here  alluded  to,  like  the  pellet- 
bow  of  India,  or  the  "stone-bow"  in  use  in  the 
middle  ages,  and  to  which  allusion  is  made  by 
Shakespere  (Twelfth  Night,  ii.  5),  and  which  in 
Wisd.  v.  22  is  employed  as  the  translation  of  ire- 
Tpoj3o'\os.  This  latter  word  occurs  in  the  LXX. 
text  of  t  Sam.  xiv.  14,  in  a  curious  variation  of  a 
passage  which  in  the  Hebrew  is  hardly  Intelligibli — 
iv  /3o\l(Ti,  Kal  iv  TreTpoj36\ois,  Kal  ev  K(i%Aa|i 
rov  TreSlou:  "  with  tilings  thrown,  and  with  stone- 
bows,  and  with  Hints  of  the  field."  It'  this  be 
accepted  as  the  true  reading,  we  have  here  by  com- 
parison with  xiv.  '_'7,  4o,  an  interesting  confirmation 
of  the  statement  |  xiii.  19-22)  of  the  degree  to  which 
the  Philistines  had  deprived  the  people  of  arms; 
leaving  to  the  king  himself  nothing  but  his  faith- 
ful spear,  and  to  his  son,  no  sword,  no  shield,  and 
nothing  but  a  stone-bow  and  a  staff  (A.  V .  "  rod"). 

The  A-RBOWS,  <  'hitzim  'C-Vn),  were  carried  in  a 

quiver,  Theli  (yH,  Gen.  xxvii.  3,  only),  or  Ash- 

n2L"X),    (Ps.  xxii.  6,  xlix.  2,  cxxvii.  5). 

Prom  an  allusion  in  Job  vi.  4,  they  would  seem  to 

have  1 a  sometimes   poisoned;   and  the  "sharp 

arrows  of  the  mighty  with  coals  of  juniper,"  in  Ps. 
cxx.  4,  may  point  to  a  practice  of  using  arrows 
with  some  burning  material  attached  to  them. 

4.  The  Slim:,  Keld  (JJvj5),  is  firs!  mentioned  in 

Judg.  XX.  16,  wlere  we  hear  of  the  ,'JuO  Btfi.ja- 
mites  who  with  their  left  hand  could  "  sling  stones 

at  an  hairbreadth,  andnotmiss."  The  simple  weapon 
with  which  David  killed  the  giant  Philistine  was 

the    natural   attendant   of  a  shepherd,   whose  duty 

it  was  to  keep  at  a  distance  and  drive  ofl  ai 
attempting  to  molesl   his  Bocks.     The  sling  would 
be  familiar  to  all  shepherds  and    ke. 'pers  of  she, 'p. 

and  therefore  the  bold  metaphor  of  Abigail  has  a 
natural  propriety  in  the  month  of  the  wi 


ARMS 


111 


man  whose  possessions  in  Hocks  were  so  great  as 
those  of  Nana] — ■'  as  for  the  souls  of  thine  i 
them  shall  God  sling  out,  as  out  of  the  middle  of  a 
sling  "  ( 1  Sam.  xxv.  29). 

Later  in  the  monarchy,  slingers  formed  part  of 
the  regular  army  (2  K.  iii.  25),  though  it  would 
seem  that  the  slings  there  mentioned  must  have 
been  more  ponderous  than  in  earlier  times,  and  that 
those  which  could  break  down  the  fortifications  of  so 
strong  a  place  as  Kir-haraseth  must  have  been  more 
like  the  engines  which  king  Uzziah  contrived  to 
"  shoot  great  stones  "  (2  Chr.  xxvi.  15).  In  verse  14 
of  the  same  chapter  we  find  an  allusion  (concealed 
in  the  A.  V.  by  two  interpolated  words)  to  stones 
specially  adapted  for  slings — "  Uzziah  prepared 
throughout  all  the  host  shields  and  spears  .  .  .  bows 
aud  sling-stones." 

II.  Passing  from  weapons  to  Armour — from  offen- 
sive to  defensive  arms — we  find  several  references 
to    what   wTas   apparently    armour    for   the   body. 

1.  The  Shir-yon  (jT1"!^  ;  or  in  its  contracted  form 
P"C,    and  once    !TH^);    according  to  the  LXX. 

0copa£,  Vulg.  lorica, — a  Breastplate.  This 
occurs  in  the  description  of  the  anus  of  Goliath — 
D^'jX'p  P'H^,  a  "  coat  of  mail,"  literally  a 
"breastplate  of  scales"  (1  Sam.  xvii.  5),  and 
further  (.'58),  where  Shiryon  alone  is  rendered  "coat 
of  mail."  It  may  be  noticed  in  passing  that  this 
passage  contains  the  most  complete  inventory  of 
the  furniture  of  a  warrior  to  be  tbund  in  the  whole 
of  the  sacred  history.  Goliath  wTas  a  Philistine, 
and  the  minuteness  of  the  description  of  his  equip- 
ment may  be  due  either  to  the  fact  that  the  Phi- 
listines were  usually  better  armed  than  the  Hebrews, 
or  to  the  impression  produced  by  the  contrast  on 
this  particular  occasion  between  this  fully  armed 
champion,  and  the  wretchedly  appointed  soldiers  of 
the  Israelite  host,  stripped  as  they  had  been  very 
shortly  before  both  of  amis,  and  of  the  meaus  of 
supplying  them,  so  completely,  that  no  smith  could 
be  found  in  the  country,  nor  any  weapons  seen 
among  the  people,  and  that  even  the  ordinary  im- 
plements of  husbandry  had  to  be  repaired  and 
sharpened  at  the  forges  of  the  conquerors  (1  Sam. 
xiv.  19-22).  Shiryon  also  occurs  in  1  K.  xxii.  34, 
aiid  2  Chr.  xviii.  33.  The  List  cited  passage  is  very 
obscure;  the  A.  V.  follows  the  Syriac  translation, 
but  the  real  meaning  is  probably  "  between  the 
joint-- and  the  breastplate."  Ewald  reads  "  betw<  en 
the  loins  and  the  chest;"  LXX.  and  \i 
"between  the  lungs  and  the  breastbone."  It  is 
further  found  in  2  Chr.  xxvi.  14,  and  Neh.  iv.  L6 
("  habergeons "), also  in  Job  xii.  26  and  Is.  lix.  17. 
This  word  has  furnished  one  of  the  names  of  Mount 
Hermon  (see  Deut.  iii.  9  ;  Stanley.  403),  a  parallel 
to  which  is  found  in  the  name  @u>pa£  given  to  Mount 
Sipylus  in  Lydia.  It  is  possible  that  in  1  leut.  iv.  48, 
Sion  (jX*"')  is  a  corruption  of  Shir-yon. 

2.  Another  piece  of  defensive  armour  was  the 

ra  (JOnfi),  which  is  mention..!  l.i.t  twice — 

namely,  in  reference  to  the   8f  wn  oi  the 

priest,    which    is   said    to    have    had   a    hole   in    the 

middle  for  the  head  with  a  hem  or  binding  round  the 

ho!.'    '•  as  it   w  ere  the   '  mouth  "  of  an 

Ninn),  to  prevent  the  >t nil'  from  I 
xxviii.  :'■-'  .     The  English   "habergeon"  wa 

diminutive   of  the    "hauberk,"   and  was  a   quilted 

shirt  or  double!  put  head. 


112 


ARMY 


3.  The  Helmet  is  but  seldom  mentioned.  The 
word  for  it  is  Coba'  (JJ213,  or  twice  JDlp),  from 
a  root  signifying  to  be  high  and  round.  Reference 
is  made  to  it  in  1  Sam.  xvii.  5  ;  1  Chr.  xxvi.  14; 
Ezek.  xxvii.  10. 

4.  Greaves,  or  defences  for  the  feet  (not  "  legs  " 
as  in  the  A.V.) —  HnVJD,  Mitzchah,  made  of  brass, 

•  t   :  • 

ntJTU  —  are  named  in  1  Sam.  xvii.  6,  only. 

Of  the  defensive  arms  borne  by  the  warrior  the 
notices  are  hardly  less  scanty  than  those  just  ex- 
amined. 

5.  Two  kinds  of  Shield  are  distinguishable. 

a.  The  Tzinnah  (H3V ;  from  a  root  p¥,  to  pro- 
tect). This  was  the  large  shield,  encompassing 
(Ps.  v.  12)  and  forming  a  protection  for  the  whole 
person.  When  not  in  actual  conflict,  the  tzinnah 
was  carried  before  the  warrior  (1  Sam.  xvii.  7,  41). 
The  definite  article  in  the  former  passage  ('  the ' 
shield,  not  "  a  shield  "  as  in  the  A.  V.)  denotes  the 
importance  of  the  weapon.  The  word  is  used  with 
Eomach  (1  Ch.  xii.  8,  14;  2  Ch.  xi.  32,  &c.)  and 
Chanith  (1  Ch.  xii.  34)  as  a  formula  for  weapons 
generally. 

b.  Of  smaller  dimensions  was  the  Magen  (J3J3, 

from  pi!,  to  cover),  a  buckler  or  target,  probably 

for  use  in  hand  to  hand  fight.  The  difference  in 
size  between  this  and  the  Tzinnah  is  evident  from 

1  K.  x.  16,  17 ;  2  Chr.  ix.  15,  16,  where  a  much 
larger  quantity  of  gold  is  named  as  being  used  for 
the  latter  than  for  the  former.  The  portability  of 
the  magen  may  be    inferred  from    the  notice   in 

2  Chr.  xii.  9,  10 ;  and  perhaps  also  from  2  Sam. 
i.  21.  The  word  is  a  favourite  one  with  the  poets 
of  the  Bible  (see  Job  xv.  26  ;  Ps.  iii.  3,  xviii. 
2,  &c).  Like  Tzinnah,  it  occurs  in  the  formu- 
listic  expressions  for  weapons  of  war,  but  usually 
coupled  with  light  weapons— the  bow  (2  Chr. 
xiv.  8,  xvii.  7),  darts,  VOW  (2  Chr.  xxxii.  5). 

6.  What  kind  of  arm  was  the  Shelet  (lsStJ>)  it 
is  impossible  to  determine.  By  some  translators  it 
is  rendered  a  "  quiver,"  by  some  "  weapons  "  gene- 
rally, by  others  a  "  shield."  Whether  either  or 
none  of  these  are  correct,  it  is  clear  that  the  word 
bad  a  very  individual  sense  at  the  time :  it  denoted 
certain  special  weapons  taken  by  David  from  Ha- 
dadezer  king  of  Zobah  (2  Sam.  viii.  7  ;  1  Chr. 
xviii.  7),  and  dedicated  in  the  temple,  where  they 
did  service  on  the  memorable  occasion  of  Joash's 
proclamation  (2  K.  xi.  10  ;  2  Chr.  xxiii.  9),  and 
where  their  remembrance  long  lingered  (Cant. 
iv.  4).  From  the  fact  that  these  arms  were  of 
gold  it  would  seem  that  they  cannot  have  been  for 
offence. 

In  the  two  other  passages  of  its  occurrence  (Jer. 
li.  11 ;  Ezek.  xxvii.  11)  the  word  has  the  force  of  a 
foreign  arm.  [G.l 

ARMY.  I.  Jewish  Army. — The  military  or- 
ganization of  the  Jews  commenced  with  their  de- 
parture from  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  was  adapted 
to  the  nature  of  the  expedition  on  which  they 
then  entered.  Every  man  above  20  years  of  age 
was  a  soldier  (Num.  i.  3) :  each  tribe  formed  a 
regiment,  with  its  own  banner  and  its  own  leader 
(Num.  ii.  2,  x.  14)  :  their  positions  in  the  camp 
or  on  the  march  were  accurately  fixed  (Num.  ii.) : 
the  whole  army  started  and  stopped  at  a  given 
signal  (Num.  x.  5,  6):  thus  they  came  up  out 
of  Egypt  ready  for  the  fight  (Ex.  xiii.  18).     That 


ARMY 

the  Israelites  preserved  the  same  exact  order 
throughout  their  march,  may  be  inferred  from 
Balaam's  language  (Num.  xxiv.  6).  On  the  ap- 
proach of  an  enemy,  a  conscription  was  made 
from  the  general  body  under  the  direction  of  a 
muster-master  (originally  named  "iDCi*,  Deut.  xx.  5, 
"  office'r,"  afterwards  "IS1D,  2  K.  xxv.  19,  "  scribe 

of  the  host,"  both  terms  occurring,  however,  to- 
gether in  2  Chr.  xxvi.  11,  the  meaning  of  each  being 
primarily  a  writer  or  scribe),  by  whom  also  the 
officers  were  appointed  >(Deut.  xx.  9).  From  the 
number  so  selected,  some  might  be  excused  serv- 
ing on  certain  specified  grounds  (Deut.  xx.  5-8  ; 
1  Mac.  iii.  56).  The  army  was  then  divided  into 
thousands  and  hundreds  under  their  respective  cap- 
tains (D^D^H  lb,  fliXSn  X>,  Num.  xxxi.  14), 

and  still  further  into  families  (Num.  ii.  34;  2  Chr. 
xxv.  5,  xxvi.  12) — the  family  being  regarded  as 
the  unit  in  the  Jewish  polity.  From  the  time  the 
Israelites  entered  the  land  of  Canaan  until  the 
establishment  of  the  kingdom,  little  progress  was 
made  in  military  affairs:  their  wars  resembled 
border  forays,  and  the  tactics  turned  upon  stratagem 
rather  than  upon  the  discipline  and  disposition  of 
the  forces.  Skilfully  availing  themselves  of  the 
opportunities  which  the  country  offered,  they  gained 
the  victory  sometimes  by  an  ambush  (Josh.  viii.  4)  ; 
sometimes  by  surprising  the  enemy  (Josh.  x.  9,  xi. 
7 ;  Judg.  vii.  21)  ;  and  sometimes  by  a  judicious 
attack  at  the  time  of  fording  a  river  (Judg.  iii.  28, 
iv.  7,  vii.  24,  xii.  5).  No  general  muster  was 
made  at  this  period  ;  but  the  combatants  were  sum- 
moned on  the  spur  of  the  moment  either  by  trum- 
pet-call (Judg.  iii.  27),  by  messengers  (Judg.  vi. 
35),  by  some  significant  token  (1  Sam.  xi.  7),  or, 
as  in  later  times,  by  the  erection  of  a  standard 
(D|J?  Is.  xviii.  3 ;  Jer.  iv.  21,  li.  27),  or  a  beacon- 
fire  on  an  eminence  (Jer.  vi.  1). 

With  the  kings  arose  the  custom  of  maintaining 
a  body-guard,  which  formed  the  nucleus  of  a  stand- 
ing army.  Thus  Saul  had  a  band  of  3000  select 
warriors  (1  Sam.  xiii.  2,  xiv.  52,  xxiv.  2),  and 
David,  before  his  accession  to  the  throne,  600  ( 1  Sam. 
xxiii.  13,  xxv.  13).  This  band  he  retained  after  he 
became  king,  and  added  the  Cherethites  and 
Pelethites  (2  Sam.  xv.  18,  xx.  7),  together  with 
another  class,  whose  name    Shalishim    (D^tJ*  vt? , 

rpiffrdrai,  LXX.)  has  been  variously  interpreted 
to  mean  (1)  a  corps  of  veteran  guards  =  Roman 
triaru  (Winer,  s.  v.,  Kriegsherr) ;  (2)  chariot- 
warriors,  as  being  three  in  each  chariot  (Gesen. 
Thes.  p.  1429)  ;  (3)  officers  of  the  guard,  thirty 
in  number  (Ewald,  Gesch.  ii.  601).  The  fact  that 
the  Egyptian  war-chariot,  with  which  the  Jews 
were  first  acquainted,  contained  but  two  warriors, 
forms  an  objection  to  the  second  of  these  opinions 
(Wilkinson.  Anc.  Egypt,  i.  335),  and  the  frequent 
use  of  the  term  in  the  singular  number  (2  K.  vii. 
2,  ix.  25,  xv.  25)  to  the  third.  Whatever  be 
the  .meaning  of  the  name,  it  is  evident  that  it 
indicated  officers  of  high  rank,  the  chief  of  whom 

QPhWT},  "  lord,"  2  K.  vii.  2,  or  wbtin  E»&h? 

"  chief  of  the  captains,"  1  Chr.  xii.  18)  was  imme- 
diately about  the  king's  person,  as  adjutant  or 
seeretary-at-war.  David  further  organized  a  na- 
tional militia,  divided  into  twelve  regiments,  each  of 
which  was  called  out  for  one  month  in  the  year 
under  their  respective  officers  (1  Chr.   xxvii.  1); 


ARMY 

:it  the  head  of  the  army  when  in  active  service  he 
appointed  a  commander-in-chief  (NHV""1^,  "cap- 
tain of  the  host,"  1  Sam.  xiv.  50). 

Hitherto  the  anny  had  consisted  entirely  of 
infantry  (vJI,  1  Sam.  iv.  10,  xv.  4),  the  use  of 
horses  having  been  restrained  by  divine  com- 
mand (Deut.  xvii.  16).  The  Jews  had,  however, 
experienced  the  great  advantage  to  be  obtained 
by  chariots,  both  in  their  encounters  with  the 
Canaanites  (Josh.  xvii.  16;  Judg.  i.  19),  and 
at  a  later  period  with  the  Syrians  (2  Sam.  viii. 
4,  x.  18).  The  interior  of  Palestine  was  indeed 
generally  unsuited  to  the  use  of  chariots:  the 
Canaanites  had  employed  them  only  in  the  plains 
and  valleys,  such  as  Jezreel  (Josh.  xvii.  16),  the 
plain  of  l'hilistia  (Judg.  i.  19  ;  1  Sam.  xiii.  5),  and 
the  upper  valley  of  the  Jordan  (Josh.  xi.  9  ;  Judg. 
iv.  _').  But  the  border,  both  on  the  side  of  Egypt 
and  Syria,  was  admirably  adapted  to  their  use; 
and  accordingly  we  find  that  as  the  foreign  relations 
of  the  kingdoms  extended,  much  importance  was 
attached  to  them.  David  had  reserved  a  hundred 
chariots  from  the  spoil  of  the  Syrians  (2  Sam.  viii. 
4) :  these  probably  served  as  the  foundation  of  the 
force  which  Solomon  afterwards  enlarged  through 
his  alliance  with  Egypt  (2  K.  x.  28,  29),  and  ap- 
plied to  the  protection  of  his  border,  stations  or 
barracks  being  erected  for  them  in  different  localities 
(1  K.  ix.  19).  The  force  amounted  to  1400  chariots, 
4000  horses,  at  the  rate  (in  round  numbers)  of  three 
horses  for  each  chariot,  the  third  being  kept  as  a  re- 
serve, and  12,000  horsemen  (2  K.  x.  26 ;  2  Chr.  i. 
14).  At  this  period  the  organization  of  the  army  was 
complete;  and  we  have,  in  1  K.  ix.  22,  apparently 
a  list  of  the  various  gradations  of  rank  in  the 
service,  as  follow :— (1)  nDPfel3PI  ^38,  "  men 
of  war "  =  privates ;  (2)  CH^y,  "sen-ants,"  the 
lowest  rank  of  officers  =  lieutenants;  (3)  D'HK' 

.   [        .  "T   * 

"  princes "=  captains;  (4)  D^vC,  "captains," 
already  noticed,  perhaps  =  staff -officers  ;  (5) 
3?}i?  *JK>   and    EJ»KhBn    nb,    "rulers    of  his 

chariots  and  his  horsemen  "  =  cavalry  officers. 

It  does  not  appear  that  the  system  established  by 
David  was  maintained  by  the  kings  of  Judah ;  but 
in  Israel  the  proximity  of  the  hostile  kingdom  of 
Syria  necessitated  the  maintenance  of  a  standing 
army.  The  militia  was  occasionally  called  out  in 
time  of  peace,  as  by  Asa  (2  Chr.  xiv.  8),  by 
Jehoshaphat  (2  Chr.  xvii.  14 1,  by  Amariah  (2  Chr. 
xxv.  .">),  and  lastly  by  I'z/.iali  (2  Chr.  x.xvi.  11): 
but  these  notices  prove  that  such  cases  were 
exceptional.  On  the  other  hand  the  incidental  no- 
tices ot  the  body-guard  lead  to  the  conclusion  that 
it  was  regularly  kept  up  (1  K.  xiv.  28;  2  K.  xi.  4, 
11).  Occasional  reference  is  made  to  war-chariots 
(2  I\.  viii.  21),  and  it  would  appear  that  this 
branch  of  the  service  was  maintained,  until  the 
wars    with   the    Syrians  weakened    the    resources  of 

the  kingdom  (2  K.  xiii.  7):  it  was  restored  by 
Jotham  (Is.  ii.  7 1.  bm  in  EJezekJah's  reign  no 
force  ot'  the  kind  could  be  maintained,  ami  the  .lews 
were  obliged  to  seek  the  aid  ot'  Egypt  for  horses 

and  chariots  (2  K.  xviii.  2:'.,  24).  This  was  an 
evident  breach  of  the  injunction  in  Deut.  xvii.  16, 
and  met  with  strong  reprobation  on  the  part  of 

the  prophet  Isaiah  (  xxxi.   1). 

\\  ith  regard  to  the  arrangement  and 
of  the    army  in    the  Held,  we    know    bul    little.       \ 

division   int..  three  bodies  is   frequently  mentioned 


ARMY 


113 


(Judg.  vii.  16,  ix.  43;  1  Sam.  xi.  11;  2  Sam. 
xviii.  2):  such  a  division  served  various  purposes: 
in  action  there  would  be  a  centre  and  two  wings ; 
in  camp,  relays  for  the  night-watches  (Judg.  vii. 
19);  and  by  the  combination  of  two  of  the  divi- 
sions, there  would  be  a  main  body  and  a  reserve,  or 
a  strong  advanced  guard  (1  Sam.  xiii.  2,  xxv.  13). 
Jehoshaphat  divided  his  army  into  five  bodies,  corre- 
sponding, according  to  Ewald  (Geschichte,  iii.  192), 
to  the  geographical  divisions  of  the  kingdom  at  that 
time :  may  not,  however,  the  threefold  principle  of 
division  be  noticed  here  also,  the  heavy-armed  troops 
of  Judah  being  considered  as  the  proper  army,  and 
the  two  divisions  of  light-armed  of  the  tribe  of  Ben- 
jamin as  an  appendage  (2  Chr.  xvii.  14-18)? 

The  maintenance  and  equipment  of  the  soldiers 
at  the  public  expense  dates  from  the  establishment 
of  a  standing  army :  before  which,  each  soldier 
armed  himself,  and  obtained  his  food  either  by  vo- 
luntary offerings  (2  Sam.  xvii.  28,  29),  by  forced 
exactions  (1  Sam.  xxv.  13),  or  by  the  natural  re- 
sources of  the  country  (1  Sam.  xiv.  27):  on  one 
occasion  only  do  we  hear  of  any  systematic  arrange- 
ment for  provisioning  the  host  (Judg.  xx.  10).  It 
is  doubtful  whether  the  soldier  ever  received  pay 
even  under  the  kings  (the  only  instance  of  pay 
being  mentioned  applies  to  mercenaries,  2  Chr.  xxv. 
6)  :  but  that  he  was  maintained,  while  on  active 
service,  and  provided  with  arms,  appears  from  1  K. 
iv.  27,  x.  16,  17  ;  2  Chr.  xxvi.  14:  notices  occur 
of  an  arsenal  or  armoury,  in  which  the  weapons  were 
stored  (1  K.  xiv.  28 ;   Neh.  iii.  19  ;  Cant.  iv.  4). 

The  numerical  strength  of  the  Jewish  anny 
cannot  be  ascertained  with  any  degree  of  accuracy : 
the  numbers,  as  given  in  the  text,  are  manifestly 
incorrect,  and  the  discrepancies  in  the  various 
statements  irreconcileable .  At  the  Exodus  the 
number  of  the  warriors  was  600,000  (Ex.  xii. 
37),  or  603,350  (Ex.  xxxviii.  26 ;  Num.  i.  46); 
at  the  entrance  into  Canaan,  601,730  (Num.  xxvi. 
51).  In  David's  time  the  anny  amounted,  accord- 
ing to  one  statement  (2  Sam.  xxiv.  9),  to  1,300,000, 
viz.  800,000  for  Israel  and  500,000  for  Judah; 
but  according  to  another  statement  (1  Chr.  xxi. 
5,  6)  to  1,470,000,  viz.  1,000,000  for  Israel  and 
470,000  for  Judah.  The  militia  at  the  same 
period  amounted  to  24,000x12  =  288,000  (1  Chr. 
xxvii.  1  rf.).  At  a  later  period  the  army  of  Judah 
under  Abijah  is  stated  at  400,000,  and  that  of 
Israel  under  Jeroboam  at  300,000  (2  Chr.  xiii.  3). 
Still  later,  Asa's  army,  derived  from  the  tribes  of 
Judah  and  Benjamin  alone,  is  put  at  530,000 
(2  Chr.  xiv.  8),  and  Jehoshaphat's  at  1,160,000 
(2  Chr.  xvii.  14  ff'.). 

Little  need  be  said  on  this  subject  with  regard  to 
the  period  that  succeeded  the  return  from  the 
Babylonish  captivity  until  the  organization  of  mili- 
tary affairs  in  Judaea  under  the  Romans.  The 
system  adopted  by  Judas  Macc.abaeus  was  in  strict 
Conformity  with  the  Mosaic  law  (I  Mac.  iii.  55): 
and  though  be  maintained  a  standing  army,  varying 
from  :5(mhi  to  6000  men  i  I  Mac.  i\ .  6  ;  2  Mac.  viii. 
16),  je\  the  custom  of  paying  the  soldiers  appears 

to  have  I n  still  unknown,  and  to   have  originated 

with  Simon  (1  Mac.  xiv.  32).  The  introduction  of 
mercenaries  commenced  with  John  rlyrcanus,  who, 
according  to  Josephus  {Ant.  xiii.  X,  §4),  rifled  the 
tomb-  of  the  kings  in  order  to  pay  tin-in  :  the  intes- 
tine commotions  that  prevailed  in  the  reign  ot'  Alex- 
ander Jannaeus  obliged  him  to  increase  the  number 
to  6200  men  (Joseph.  A„t.  xiii.  13,  §•'•,  14,  §1): 
and    the    same  policy    was    followed    bv    Alexandra 

I 


114 


ARNA 


(Ant.  xiii.  16,  §2)  and  by  Herod  the  Great,  who 
had  in  his  pay  Thraeian,  German,  and  Gallic  troops 
(Ant.  xvii.  8,  §3).  The  discipline  and  arrange- 
ment of  the  army  was  gradually  assimilated  to 
that  of  the  Romans,  and  the  titles  of  the  officers 
borrowed  from  it  (Joseph.  B.  J.  ii.  20,  §7). 

II.  Roman  ARMY.— The  Roman  army  was  di- 
vided into  legions,  the   number    of  which  varied 
considerably,  each  under  six  tribuni  (x^iapxos, 
"  chief  captain,"  Acts  xxi.  31),  who  commanded  by 
turns.     The  legion  was  subdivided  into  ten  cohorts 
(o-irupa,  "  band,"  Acts  x.  1),  the  cohort  into  three 
maniples,  and  the  maniple  into  two  centuries,  con- 
taining originally  100  men,  as  the  name  implies, 
but  subsequently  from   50  to  100  men,  according 
to  the  strength  of  the   legion.     There  were  thus 
60  centuries  in  a  legion,  each  under  the  command 
of  a   centurion    (kKaTouT'pxws,    Acts    x.    1,   22; 
eKa.T6vTa.pxos,   Matt.  viii.  5,  xxvii.   54).     In   ad- 
dition to  the  legionary  cohorts,  independent  cohorts 
of  volunteers  served  under  the   Roman  standards; 
and  Biscoe  (History  of  Acts,  p.  220)  supposes  that 
all  the  Roman  forces  stationed  in  Judaea  were  of 
this  class.     Josephus  speaks  of  five  cohorts  as  sta- 
tioned at  Caesarea  at  the  time  of  Herod  Agrippa's 
death  (Ant.  xix.  9,   §2),  and  frequently  mentions 
that  the  inhabitants  of  Caesarea  and  Sebaste  served 
in  the  ranks  (Ant.  xx.  8,  §7).     One  of  these  cohorts 
was  named  the  Italian  (Acts  x.  1),  not  as  being  a 
portion  of  the  Italica  legio   (for  this  was  not  em- 
bodied until  Nero's  reign),    but   as   consisting  of 
volunteers  from  Italy  ("  Cohors  militum  voluntaria. 
quae  est  in  Syria,"  Grater,  Tnscr.  i.  434).     This 
cohort  probably  acted  as  the  body-guard  of  the  pro- 
curator.    The  cohort  named  "  Augustus'  "  (o-rreTpa 
2e/3a<rr^,  Acts  xxvii.  1)  may  have  consisted  of  the 
volunteers  from  Sebaste  (B.J.  ii.  12,  §5;  Biscoe, 
p.  223).     Winer,  however,  thinks    that  it  was  a 
cohors   Augusta,    similar    to    the    legio   Augusta 
(Realw.  s.  v.  Homer).      The    head-quarters  of  the 
Roman    forces    in    Judaea    were   at    Caesarea.     A 
single  cohort  was  probably  stationed  at  Jerusalem 
as  the  ordinary  guard ;  at  the  time  of  the  great 
feasts,  however,  and  on  other  public  occasions,  a 
larger  force  was  sent  up,  for  the  sake  of  preserving 
order  (B.  J.  ii.  12,   §1,  15,  §3).     Frequent  dis- 
turbances arose  in  reference  to  the  images  and  other 
emblems  carried  by  the  Roman  troops  among  their 
military   ensigns,    whicli    the    Jews    regarded    as 
idolatrous:  deference  was  paid  to  their  "prejudices 
by  a  removal  of  the  objects  from  Jerusalem  (Ant. 
xviii.  3,  §1,  5,  §3).      The    ordinary   guard   con- 
sisted of  four  soldiers  (rerpaBiov,  "  quaternion"), 
of  which  there  were  four,  corresponding  to  the  four 
watches  of  the  night,  who  relieved  each  other  every 
three  hours  (Acts  xii.  4 ;   cf.  John  xix.  23 ;  Polyb. 
vi.  33,  §7).     When  in  charge  of  a  prisoner,  two 
watched  outside  the   door   of  the  cell,  while  the 
other  two  were  inside  (Acts  xii.  6).     The  officer 
mentioned    in  Acts  xxviii.  16    (ffTpa.Toireh'a.pxvs, 
"  captain  of  the  guard '")  was  perhaps  the  prae- 
fectus  praetorio,  or  commander  of  the  Praetorian 
troops,  to  whose  care  prisoners  from  the  provinces 
were  usually  consigned    (Plin.  Ep.  x.  65).     The 
5e^i6\a0oi  (lancearii,  Vu]g.;  "  spearmen,"  A.  V.), 
noticed  in  Acts  xxiii.  23,  appear  to  have  been  light- 
armed,  irregular  troops:  the  origin  of  the  name  is, 
however,  quite  uncertain  (Alford,  Comm.  in  I.  c). 

AR'NA  (Arna),  one  of  the  forefathers  of  Ezra 
(2  Esd.  i.  2),  occupying  the  place  of  Zerahiah  or 
Zaraias  in  his  genealogy. 


ARNON 

AR'NAN  (pTN;  'Opvd;  Amari),  name  of  a 

man  (1  Chr,  iii.  21). 

AR'NON  (p2"]N  ;  derivable,  according  to  Ge- 

senius,  Thes.  153,  from  roots  signifying  ''swift" 
or  "  noisy,"    either  suiting    the   character  of  the 

stream;  'Apvuv;  Anion),  the  river  f'?nj,  ac- 
curately "  torrent ")  whicli  formed  the  boundary 
between  Moab  and  the  Amorites,  on  the  north 
of  Moab  (Num.  xxi.  13,  14,  24,  26;  Judg.  xi. 
22),  and  afterwards  between  Moab  and  Israel 
(Reuben)  (Dent.  ii.  24,36,  iii.  S,  12,  16,  iv.  48 ; 
Josh.  xii.  1,  2,  xiii.  9,  16;  Judg.  xi.  13,  26). 
From  Judg.  xi.  18,  it  would  seem  to  have  been  also 
the  east  border  of  Moab.a  See  also  2  K.  x.  33; 
Jer.  xlviii.  20.  In  many  of  the  above  passages  it 
occurs  in  the  formula  for  the  site  of  Aroer,  "  which 
is  by  the  brink  of  the  river  Anion."  In  Numbers 
it  is  simply  "  Anion,"  but  in  Deut.  and  Joshua 
generally  "  the  river  A."  (A.  V.  sometimes  "  river 
of  A.").  Isaiah  (xvi.  2)  mentions  its  fords;  and 
in  Judg.  xi.  26  a  word  of  rare  occun-ence  (*1\  hand, 

comp.  Num.  xiii.  29)  is  used  for  the  sides  of  the 
stream.  The  "  high  places  of  A."  (m02,  a  word 
which  generally  refers  to  worship)  are  mentioned  in 
Num. 'xxi.  28.  By  Josephus  (Ant.  iv.  5,  §1)  it 
is  described  as  rising  in  the  mountains  of  Arabia 
and  flowing  through  all  the  wilderness  (eprifj.os) 
till  it  falls  into  the  Dead  Sea.  In  the  time  of 
Jerome  it  was  still  known  as  Anion  ;  but  in  the 
Samarito-Arabic  version  of  the  Pentateuch  by  Abu. 
Said  (10th  to  12th  cent.)  it  is  given  as  el-Mojeb. 
There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  Wady  el-Mojeb  of 
the  present  day  is  the  Anion.  It  has  been  visited 
and  described  by  Burckhardt  (372-375);  Irby 
(142)  ;  and  Seetzen  (Rcise,  1854,  ii.  3-1-7  ;  and  in 
Ritter,  Syria,  1 195).  The  ravine  through  which  it 
flows  is  still  the  "  locum  vallis  in  praerupta  demersae 
satis  horribilem  et  periculosum  "  which  it  was  in  the 
days  of  Jerome  (Onom.~).  The  Roman  road  from 
Rahba  to  Dhiban  crosses  it  at  about  two  hours'  dist- 
ance from  the  former.  On  the  south  edge  of  the  ravine 
are  some  ruins  called  Mehatet  el  Haj,  and  on  the  north 
edge,  directly  opposite,  those  still  bearing  the  name  of 
'Ard'ir  [Aroek]  .  The  width  across  between  these 
two  spots  seemed  to  Burckhardt  to  be  about  two 
miles :  the  descent  on  the  south  side  to  the  water 
occupied  Irby  1J  hour:  "extremely  steep"  (Je- 
rome, per  abrupta  descerulens\  and  almost  impass- 
able "  with  rocks  and  stones."  On  each  face  of  the 
ravine  traces  of  the  paved  Roman  road  are  still  found, 
with  milestones;  and  one  arch  of  a  bridge,  31  feet  6 
inches  in  span,  is  standing.  The  stream  runs  through 
a  level  strip  of  grass  some  40  yards  in  width,  with  a 
few  oleanders  and  willows  on  the  margin.  This 
was  in  June  and  July,  but  the  water  must  often  be 
much  more  swollen,  many  water-worn  rocks  lying 
far  above  its  then  level. 

Where  it  bursts  into  the  Dead  Sea  this  stream 
is  82  ft.  wide  and  4  ft.  deep,  flowing  through  a 
chasm  with  perpendicular  sides  of  red,  brown,  and 
yellow  sandstone,  97  ft.  wide  (romantische  Felsen- 
thor:  Seetzen).  It  then  runs  through  the  delta  in 
a  S.W.  course,  narrowing  as  it  goes,  and  is  10  ft. 
dec])  where  its  waters  meet  those  of  the  Dead  Sea. 
(Lynch,  Report,  May  3,  1847,  20.) 


a  This  appears  to  have  been  the  branch  called  the 
Sell  es-Saldeh,  which  flows  N.W.  from  Kalaat  eU 
Katrane,  joining  the  WadyMojeb,  two  or  three  miles 
east  from  'Ard'ir. 


AROD 

According  to  the  information  given  to  Burckhardt, 
its  principal  source  is  near  Katrane,  on  the  Haj 
route.  Hence,  under  the  name  of  Seil  es-Saideh, 
it  flows  N.W.  to  its  junction  with  the  W.  Lcjtim, 
one  hour  E.  of  'Ara'ir,  mid  then,  as  W.  Mqjeb, 
more  directly  \Y.  to  the  Dead  Sea.  The  W.  Mojeb 
receives  on  the  North  the  streams  of  the  W.  Wale, 
and  cm  the  South  those  of  IE.  Skckik  and  W.  Sa- 
llhch  (S.) 

At  its  junction  with  the  Lejum  is  a  piece  of 
pasture  ground,  in  the  midst  of  which  stands  a  hill 
with  ruins  on  it  (Burck.  374").  May  not  these 
ruins  be  the  site  of  the  mysterious  "  city  that  is  in 
the  midst  of  the  river"  (Josh.  xiii.  9,  16 ;  Deut.  ii. 
36)  so  often  coupled  with  Aroer  ?  From  the  above 
description  of  the  ravine,  it  is  plain  that  that  city 
cannot  have  been  situated  immediately  below  Aroer, 
as  has  been  conjectured.  [G.] 

A'ROD  ("li"lK;  Arod),a.  son  ofGad  (Num.  xxvi. 
17),  called  Arodi  (HVTN)  in  Gen.  xlvi.  17.  His 
family  are  called  the  ARODITES  (Num.  xxvi.  17). 

AR'OER  Ojpy,  occasionally  TS'W.,  =  ruins, 
places  of  which  the  foundations  are  laid  bare,  Ge- 
senius;"  'Apo-rjp;  Aroer),  the  name  of  several 
towns  of  Eastern  and  Western  Palestine. 

1.  A  city  "  by  the  brink,"  or  "  on  the  bank  of" 
(both  th^  same  expression — '  on  the  lip ')  or  "  by  " 
the  torrent  Arnon,  the  southern  point  of  the  terri- 
tory of  Sihon  King  of  the  Amorites,b  and  afterwards 
of  the  tribe  of  Reuben  (Deut.  ii.  36,  iii.  12,  iv.  4S  ; 
Josh.  xii.  2,  xiii.  9,  16  ;  Jti'dg.  xi.  26  ;c  2  K.  x.  33  ; 
1  Chr.  v.  8),  but  later  again  in  possession  of  Moab 
(Jer.  xlviii.  19).  It  is  described  in  the  Onomasticon 
(Aroer)  as  "usque  hodie  in  oertice  montis," 
"  super  ripam  (xelXos)  torrentis  Anion,"  an  ac- 
count agreeing  exactly  with  that  of  the  only  tra- 
veller of  modern  times  who  has  noticed  the  site, 
namely,  Burckhardt,  who  found  ruins  with  the  name 
'Ara'ir  on  the  old  Roman  road,  upon  the  very  edge 
of  the  precipitous  north  bank  of  the  Wady  Mojeb. 
[Arxon.]  Like  all  the  topography  east  of  the 
Jordan,  this  site  requires  further  examination. 
Aroer  is  often  mentioned  in  connexion  with  the 
city  that  is  "  in,"  or  "  in  the  midst  of,"  "  the 
river."  The  nature  of  the  cleft  through  which 
the  Arnon  flows  is  such  that  it  is  impossible  there 
Can  have  1 D  any  town  in  such  a  position  imme- 
diately ueai-  Aroer;  but  a  suggestion  has  been  made 
above  [Arnon],  which  en.  investigation  of  the  spot 
may  clear  up  this  point. 

2.  Aroer  "that  is  'facing'  (VJS"^? )  Rabbah" 
(Rabbah  of  Amnion),  a  town  "built"  by  and 
belonging  to  Gad  (Num.  xxxii.  34;  Josh.  xiii. 
25;  2  Sam.  xxiv.  5).  This  is  probably  the  place 
mentioned  in  Judg.  xi.  33,  which  was  shown  in 
Jerome's  time  (  Onom.  Aruir)  "  in  monte,  rigesimo 
ah  Aelia  lapide  ad  septentrionem."  Ritter  (Syria, 
1130)  suggests  an  identification  with  Ayra,  found 
by  Burckhardt  2£  hours  S.W.  of  es-Salt.     There 

"  May  it  not  with  equal  probability  be  derived  from 
AJfUi ,  Jumper,  the  modern  Arabic  '.  (;'<//■  (sec  Rob.  ii. 
124,  note)  1  Com]).  Lus,  Rimmon,  Tappuach,  and 
other  places  deriving  their  names  from  trees. 

b  From  the  omission  of  the  name  in  the  remark- 
able fragment,  Num.  xxi.  27-30,  where  the  principal 
places  taken  hy  the  Amorites  from  Moab  are  named, 
&roer  would  appear  not    to   tie  one  of  the  very  oldest 

cities.     Possibly  it  was  built   by  the  Amorit 


ARPHAXAD 


115 


is  considerable  difference  however  in  the  radical  lettei  a 
of  the  two  words,  the  second  Ain  not  being  present. 

3.  Aroer,  in  Is.  xvii.  2,  if  a  place  at  all,'1  must 
be  still  further  north  than  either  of  the  two  already 
named,  and  dependant  on  Damascus.  Gesenius, 
however,  takes  it  to  be  Aroer  of  Gad,  and  the 
"  forsaken  "  state  of  its  cities  to  be  the  result  of  the 
deportation  of  Galilee  and  Gilead  by  Tiglath-Pileser 
(2  K.  xv.  29).     See  Ges.  Jcsaia,  556. 

4.  A  town  in  Judah,  named  only  in  1  Sam.  xxx. 
28.  Robinson  (ii.  199)  believes  that  he  has  iden- 
tified its  site  in  Wady  'Ar'drah,  on  the  road  from 
Petra  to  Gaza,  about  11  miles  W.S.W.  of  Bir-es- 
Seba,  a  position  which  agrees  very  fairly  with  the 
slight  indications  of  the  text.  [G .] 

ARO'ERITE.  Hothan  the  Aioerite  was  the 
father  of  two  of  David's  chief  captains  (1  Chr.  xi. 
44). 

A'ROM  ('hp6fji ;  Asonus),  name  of  a  man 
(1  Esd.  v.  16). 

AR'PAD     (ISnX;     'Ap<pd8  ■     Arphad),    a 

city  or  district  in  Syria,  apparently  dependent 
on  Damascus  (Jer.  xlix.  23).  It  is  invariably 
named  with  Hamath  (now  Hamah,  on  the 
Orontes),  but  no  trace  of  its  existence  has  yet  been 
discovered,  nor  has  any  mention  of  the  place  been 
found  out  of  the  Bible  (2  K.  xviii.  34,  xix.  13; 
Is.  x.  9,  xxxvi.  19,  xxxvii.  13:  in  the  two  last  pas- 
sages it  is  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  Arphad).  Arpad 
has  been  identified,  but  without  any  ground  be- 
yond the  similarity  in  the  names,  with  Arvad,  the 
island  on  the  coast  of  Phoenicia  (Winer).  [G.] 

AR'PHAD.     [Arpad.] 

ARPHAXAD  (Tl^IS;  ' Ap<pa£<i5 ;  Jos. 
'Ap<pal;d$r)s ;  Arphaxad),  the  son  of  Shem  ami 
the  ancestor  of  Eber  (Gen.  x.  22,  24,  xi.  10),  and 
said  to  be  of  the  Chaldaeans  (Joseph,  i.  6,  4). 
Bochart  (Phaleg,  ii.  4)  supposed  that  the  name 
was  preserved  in  that  of  the  province  Arrapachitis 
('AppairaxiTis,  Ptol.  vi.  1,  §2  ;  'Appaira)  in 
Northern  Assyria  (comp.  Ewald,  Gesch.  des  I 
Isr.,  i.  378).  Different  interpretations  of  the  name 
have  been  given;  but  that  of  Ewald  (/.  c.)  appears 
to  be  the  best,  who  supposes  it  to  mean  the  strong- 
hold of  the  Chaldees  (Arab,  araph,  to  bind,  and 

Kurd,  Kurd,  pi,  Ahnnl ,  Chald.  Comp.  Niebuhr, 
Gesch.  Assurs,  p.  414,  n). 

2.  AurilAXAti,  a  king  "  who  reigned  over  the 
Medes  in  Ecbatana,  and  strengthened  the  city  by 
vast  fortifications"  (Judith  i.  1-4).  In  a  war  with 
••  Nabuchodonosor,  king  of  Assyria,"  he  was  entirely 
defeated  "  in  the  greai  plain  in  the  borders  of 
Ragau"  (?  Stages,  A'"//'',  Tobit  i.  16,  &c.),  an. I 

afterwards  taken  prisoner  ami  put  to  death  (  Jtld.  i. 
13-15).  From  the  passage  in  Judith  (i.  2,  <{iko- 
56fj.r)ff(v  eV  'EK^aTavoif)  he  has  been  frequently 
identified  with  Deioces  (Artaeus,  Ctes.).  the  founder 
of  Ecbatana  (Herod,  i.  98);  but  as  Deioces  died 
peaceably  (Herod,  i.  I<'2),  it  seems  fetter  to  look 

their  conquest,  to  guard  the  important  boundary  of 
the  Anion. 

'  In  this  place  the  Utters  of  the  nanio  arc  trans- 
posed, -Tuny. 

''   The    I. XX.     have    KaTaAfAEtufit'i-))    e'?    70v   «'<">,a, 

apparently  reading  ~^V  ^V  for  "ty'ty.  ^V  ;  nor  do 
any  of  the  ancient  versions  agree  with  the  Hebrew 
text. 

I   2 


116 


ARROWS 


for  the  original  of  Arphaxad  in  his  son  Phraortes 

(Artynes,  Ctas.),  who  greatly  extended  the  Median 
empire,  and  at  last  fell  in  a  battle  with  the  Assy- 
rians, 633  B.C.  (Herod,  i.  102,  <xvt6s  re  %it<pdapr] 
.  .  .  Kal  o  CTpixTos  ai'TOv  6  iroWos.  Niebuhr 
(Gesch.  Assur's,  32)  endeavours  to  identify  the 
name  with  Astyages  =  Ashdahak,  the  common 
title  of  the  Median  dynasty,  and  refers  the  events 
to  a  war  in  the  twelfth  year  of  Nebuchadnezzar, 
king  of  Babylon,  B.C.  592  (Ibid.  pp.  212,  285). 
[Judith;  Nebuchadnezzar.]  [B.  F.  W.] 
ARROWS.     [Arms.] 

A  RSA'CES  VI.,  a  king  of  Parthia,  who  assumed 
the  royal  title  Arsaces  ('Apcra/cTjs,  Armen.  Arschag, 
probably  containing  the  roots  both  of  Arya  and 
Sacae)  in  addition  to  his  proper  name,  Mithri- 
dates  I.  (Phraates,  App.  Syr.  07  from  confusion 
with  his  successor)  according  to  universal  custom 
(Strab.  xv.  p.  702),  in  honour  of  the  founder  of 
the  Parthian  monarchy  (Justin,  xli.  5,  5).  He 
made  great  additions  to  the  empire  by  successful 
wars ;  and  when  Demetrius  Nicator  entered  his 
dominions  to  collect  forces  or  otherwise  strengthen 
his  position  against  the  usurper  Tryphon,  he  de- 
spatched an  officer  against  him  who  defeated  the 
great  army  after  a  campaign  of  varied  success 
(Justin,  xxxvi.  1),  and  took  the  king  prisoner,  B.C. 
138  (1  Mace.  xiv.  1-3;  Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  5,  §11 ; 
Justin,  xxxvi.  1  ;  xxxviii.  9).  Mithridates  treated 
his  prisoner  with  respect,  and  gave  him  his  daughter 
in  marriage  (App.  Syr.,  G7,  68),  but  kept  him  in 
confinement  till  his  own  death,  c.  B.C.  130. 
(App.  Syr.  68;  Diod.  ap.  Miiller,  Fragm.  Hist. 
ii.  19.)    '  [B.  F.  W.j 

AR'SARETH,  a  region  beyond  Euphrates,  ap- 
parently of  great  extent  (2  Esdr.  xiii.  45,  only).   [G.] 

ARTAXER'XES  (KflBWirnN  or    ni-ns 

KFlpJi',  Artachshashta  or  Artachshasta ;    'Ap6a- 

ffavda. ;  Artaxerxes),  the  name  probably  of  tiro 
different  kings  of  Persia  mentioned  in  the  Old 
Testament.  The  word,  according  to  Herod,  vi. 
98,  means  b  /xdyas  apri'ios,  the  great  warrior,  and 
is  compounded  of  arta,  great  or  honoured  (cf.  'Ap- 
rdioi,  Herod,  vii.  61,  the  old  national  name  of  the 
Persians,  also  Aril,  and  the  Sanscrit  Arya,  which  is 
applied  to  the  followers  of  the  Brahminical  law),  and 
kshatra  or  kshershe,  a  king,  grecised  into  Xerxes. 
[Ahasuerus.] 

1.  The  first  Artaxerxes  is  mentioned  in  Ezr.  iv. 
7,  as  induced  by  "  the  adversaries  of  Judah  and  Ben- 
jamin "  to  obstruct  the  rebuilding  of  the  temple, 
and  appears  identical  with  Smerdis,  the  Magian  im- 
postor, and  pretended  brother  of  Cambyses.  For 
there  is  no  doubt  that  the  Ahasuerus  of  Ezr.  iv.  6 
is  Cambyses,  and  that  the  Darius  of  iv.  24  is  Darius 
Hystaspis,  so  that  the  intermediate  king  must  be 
the  Pseudo-smerdis,  who  usurped  the  throne  B.C. 
522,  and  reigned  eight  months  (Herod,  iii.  61,  67  ff.). 
We  need  not  wonder  at  this  variation  in  his  name. 
Artaxerxes  may  have  been  adopted  or  conferred  on 
him  as  a  title,  and  we  find  the  true  Smerdis  called 
Tanyoxares  (the  younger  Oxares)  by  Xeuophon 
(Cyrop.  viii.  7)  and  Ctesias  (Pers.fr.  8-13),  and 
Oropastes  by  Justin  (Hist.  i.  9).  Oxares  appears 
to  be  the  same  name  as  Xerxes,  of  which  Artaxerxes 
is  a  compound. 

2.  In  Neb.  ii.  1,  we  have  another  Artaxerxes, 
who  permits  Nehemiah  to  spend  twelve  vears  at 
Jerusalem,  in  order  to  settle  the  affairs  of  the  colony 
there,  which  had  fallen  into  great  confusion.     We 


ARUBOTH 

may  safely  identify  him  with  Artaxerxes  Macrocheir 
or  Longimanus,  the  son  of  Xerxes,  who  reigned  B.C. 
464-425.  And  we  believe  that  this  is  the  same 
king  who  had  previously  allowed  Ezra  to  go  to 
Jerusalem  for  a  similar  purpose  (Ezr.  vii.  1). 
There  are  indeed  some  who  maintain  that  as  Darius 
Hystaspis  is  the  king  in  the  sixth  chapter  of  -Ezra, 
the  king  mentioned  next  after  him,  at  the  beginning 
of  the  seventh,  must  be  Xerxes,  and  thus  they  dis- 
tinguish three  Persian  kings  called  Artaxerxes  in  the 
Old  Testament,  (1)  Smerdis  in  Ezr.  iv.  (2)  Xerxes 
in  Ezr.  vii.,  and  (3)  Artaxerxes  Macrocheir  in  Ne- 
hemiah. But  it  is  almost  demonstrable  that  Xerxes 
is  the  Ahasuerus  of  the  book  of  Esther  [Ahasue- 
rus], and  it  is  hard  to  suppose  that  in  addition  to 
his  ordinary  name  he  would  have  been  called  both 
Ahasuerus  and  Artaxerxes  in  the  0.  T.  It  seems 
too  very  probable  that  the  policy  of  Neh.  ii.  was  a 
continuation  and  renewal  of  that  of  Ezr.  vii.,  and 
that  the  same  king  was  the  author  of  both.  Now 
it  is  not  possible  for  Xerxes  to  be  the  Artaxerxes  of 
Nehemiah,  as  Josephus  asserts  (Ant.  xi.  5,  §6), 
for  Xerxes  only  reigned  21  years,  whereas  Nehemiah 
(xiii.  8)  speaks  of  the  32nd  year  of  Artaxerxes. 
Nor  is  it  necessary  to  believe  that  the  Artaxerxes  of 
Ezr.  vii.  is  necessarily  the  immediate  successor  of 
the  Darius  of  Ezr,  vi.  The  book  of  Ezra  is  not  a 
continuous  history.  It  is  evident  from  the  first 
words  of  eh.  vii.  that  there  is  a  pause  at  the  end 
of  ch.  vi.  Indeed,  as  ch.  vi.  concludes  in  the  6th 
year  of  Darius,  and  ch.  vii.  begins  with  the  7th  year 
of  Artaxerxes,  we  cannot  even  believe  the  latter 
king  to  be  Xerxes,  without  assuming  an  interval  of 
36  years  (b.c.  515-479)  between  the  chapters,  and 
it  is  not  more  difficult  to  imagine  one  of  58,  which 
will  carry  us  to  B.C.  457,  the  7th  year  of  Arta- 
xerxes Macrocheir.  We  conclude  therefore  that  this 
is  the  king  of  Persia  under  whom  both  Ezra  and 
Nehemiah  carried  on  their  work ;  that  in  B.C.  457 
he  sent  Ezra  to  Jerusalem ;  that  after  1 3  years  it 
became  evident  that  a  civil  as  well  as  an  ecclesias- 
tical head  was  required  for  the  new  settlement,  and 
therefore  that  in  444  he  allowed  Nehemiah  to  go  up 
in  the  latter  capacity.  From  the  testimony  of  pro- 
fane historians  this  king  appears  remarkable  among 
Persian  monarchs  for  wisdom  and  right  feeling,  and 
with  this  character  his  conduct  to  the  Jews  coin- 
cides (Diod.  xi.  71). 

It  remains  to  say  a  word  in  refutation  of  the  view 
that  the  Artaxerxes  of  Nehemiah  was  Artaxerxes 
Mnemon,  elder  brother  of  Cyrus  the  Younger,  who 
reigned  B.C.  404-359.  As  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  were 
contemporaries  (Neh.  viii.  9)  this  theory  transfers 
the  whole  history  contained  in  Ezra  vii.  ad  fin.  and 
Nehemiah  to  this  date,  and  it  is  Lord  to  believe  that 
in  this  critical  period  of  Jewish  annals  there  are  no 
events  recorded  between  the  reigns  of  Darius  Hy- 
staspis (Ezr.  vi.)  and  Artaxerxes  Mnemon.  Besides, 
Eliashib,  who  was  high-priest  when  Nehemiah 
reached  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  1),  i.e.  on  this  last 
supposition,  B.C.  397,  was  grandson  of  Jeshua  (Neh. 
xii.  10),  high-priest  in  the  time  of  Zerubbabel, 
B.C.  530.  We  cannot  think  that  the  grandfather 
and  grandson  were  separated  by  an  interval  of  139 
years.  [0.  E.  L.  C] 

.  AR'TEMAS  ('Apre/iSs,  i.  e.  '  AprefxlZtepos),  a 

companion  of  St.  Paul  (Tit.  iii.  12).  According  to 
tradition,  he  was  bishop  of  Lystra. 

AR'UBOTH  (Arubboth,  ni3TK;  'ApaPde-, 

Aruhotli),  the  third  of  Solomon's  commissariat 
districts     (1    K.    iv.     10).       It    included    Sochoh, 


ARUMAH 

and  was  therefore  probably  a  name  for  the  rich 
corn-growing  country  of  the  Shefelah.  In  any  case, 
the  significance  of  the  word  is  entirely  lost  at  pre- 
sent.    Josephus  omits  all  mention  of  it.  [G.] 

ARU'MAH  (nOVlN  ;  'Apy/xd,  Vat.  'Apt/xd; 
in  Ruma),  a  place  apparently  in  the  neighbour- 
hood  of    Shechem,  at  which  Abimelech   resided 

(J ml--,  ix.  41).  It  is  conjectured  that  the  word 
in  verse  31,  1101113,  rendered  "privily"  and 
in  the  margin  "at  Tormah,"  should  be  read  "at 
Arumah"  by  changing  the  11  to  an  X,  but  for 
this  there  is  no  support  beyond  the  apparent  pro- 
bability of  the  change.  Arumah  is  possibly  the 
same  place  as  Kuma,  under  which  name  it  is  given 
by  Eusebius  and  Jerome  in  the  Onomasticon.  Ac- 
cording to  them  it  was  then  called  Arimathaea  (see 
also  Am  ma).  But  this  is  not  consonant  with 
its  apparent  position  in  the  story.  [G.] 

AR'VAD  (TPX,  from  a  root  signifying  "  wan- 
dering," Ges.  1268),  a  place  in  Phoenicia,  the  men 
of  which  are  named  in  close  connexion  with  those  of 
Zidon  as  the  navigators  and  defenders  of  the  ship  of 
Tyre  in  Ezek.  xxvii.  8,  11.  In  agreement  with 
this  is  the  mention  of  "  the  Arvadite"  (HIlXIl)  in 
Gen.  x.  18,  and  1  Chr.  i.  16,  as  a  son  of  Canaan, 
with  Zidon,  Ilamath,  and  other  northern  localities. 
The  LXX.  have  in  each  of  the  above  passages "Apo- 
Sios,  and  in  Josephus  {Ant.  i.  6,  §2)  we  rind 
'ApovScuos  " '  ApaSov  ryv  vrjffov  ia%iv.  There 
is  thus  no  doubt  that  Arvad  is  the  island  of  Ruad 

(iL  ,)>  which  lies  off  Tortosa  (Tartus),  2  or  3 

miles  from  the  Phoenician  coast,  (not  at,  but)  some 
distance  above,  the  mouth  of  the  river  Eleutherus, 
now  the  iVahr  &l-Kebir  (Maund.  403;  Burckh. 
161),  and  at  the  northern  extremity  of  the  great 
bay  which  stretches  above  Tripoli  (Kiepert's  Map, 
1856).  The  island  is  high  and  rocky,  but  very 
small,  hardly  a  mile  in  circumference  (see  Maund. 
399;  "800  yards  in  extreme  length,"  Allen,  ii. 
ITS).  According  to  Strabo  (xvi.  2,  §13)  Arvad 
was  founded  by  fugitives  from  Sidon,  and  he  tes- 
tifies to  its  prosperity,  its  likeness  to  Tyre,  and 
especially  to  the  well  known  nautical  skill  of  the 
inhabitants."  (See  the  notices  by  Strabo,  Pliny, 
and  others  in  Gesenius,  1269,  and  Winer,  Arva- 
ilii'n.)  Opposite  Arvad,  on  the  mainland,  was  the 
city  Antaradus,  by  which  name  the  TargumJerus. 
renders  the  name  Arvad  in  (Jen.  x.  18.  [Auadus.] 
A  plan  of  the  island  will  be  found  in  Allen's  Dead 
Sea,  end  of  vol.  ii.;  also  in  the  Admiralty  (.'harts, 
2050, '  Island  of  Ruad.'  [G.] 

AR'ZA  (N^'IN ;  ' Q.<ra,  ' Apcru  :  .l.s  <),  nameof 
a  man  (  1   K.  xvi.  9). 

A'SA  (NDS,  curing,  physician}  'A<rd;  Jos. 
"Acrai'os;  Asa),  son  of  Abijah,  and  third  king 
of  Judah,  was  conspicuous  for  his  earnestness 
in  supporting  the  worship  of  God,  and  rooting  oul 
idolatry  with  its  attendant  immoralities ;  and  for 
the  rigour  and  wisdom  with  which  he  provided  for 
the  prosperity  of  lu^  kingdom.  In  hi  sal  a  •<<<  I 
heathenism    he    did    not    span'    his  grandmother 

Maachah,  who   occupied    the    b\ ial    dignity    of 

"King's  Mother,"  to  which  great  importance  was 
attached   in  the   Jewish   court,   as  afterwards  in 


ASA 


117 


1  These  nautical  propensities  remain  in  full  force. 
(See  Allen's  Dead  Sea,  ii.  183.) 


Persia,  and  to  which  parallels  have  heen  found  in 
modern  Eastern  countries,  as  in  the  position  of  the 
Sultana  Valide  in  Turkey  (see  1  K.  ii.  19;  2  K. 
xxiv.  12  ;  Jer.  xxix.  2  ;  also  Calmet,  Fragm.  xvi. ; 
and  Bruce's  Travels,  vol.  ii.  p.  537,  and  iv.  244). 
She  had  set  up  some  impure  worship  in  a  grove 
(the  word  translated  idol,  1  K.  xv.  13,  is  in  Hebrew 
horror,  while  in  the  Vulgate  we  read,  ne  esset 
(Maacha) princeps in sacris  Priapi) ;  but  Asa  burnt 
the  symbol  of  her  religion,  and  threw  its  ashes  into 
the  brook  Kidron,  as  Moses  had  done  to  the  golden 
calf  (Ex.  xxxii.  20),  and  then  deposed  Maachah  from 
her  dignity.  He  also  placed  in  the  temple  certain 
gifts  which  his  lather  had  dedicated,  probably  in  the 
earlier  and  better  period  of  his  reign  [Abijah], 
and  which  the  heathen  priests  must  have  used  for 
their  own  worship,  and  renewed  the  great  altar 
which  they  apparently  had  desecrated  (2  Chr.  xv. 
8).  Besides  this,  he  fortified  cities  on  his  frontiers, 
and  raised  an  army,  amounting,  according  to  2  Chr.. 
xiv.  8,  to  580,000  men,  but  the  uncertainty  at- 
taching to  the  numbers  in  our  present  text  of 
Chronicles  has  been  pointed  out  by  Kennicott 
[Abijah],  and  by  Davidson  {Introduction  to  the 
0.  T.,  p.  680),  who  considers  that  the  copyists 
were  led  into  error  by  the  different  modes  of  marking 
them,  and  by  confounding  the  different  letters 
which  denoted  them,  bearing  as  they  do  a  greal 
resemblance  to  each  other.  Thus  Asa's  reign  marks 
the  return  of  Judah  to  a  consciousness  of  the 
high  destiny  to  which  God  had  called  her,  and  to 
the  belief  that  the  Divine  Power  was  truly  at  work 
within  her.  The  good  effects  of  this  were  visible  in 
the  enthusiastic  resistance  offered  by  the  people  to 
Zerah,  an  invader,  who  is  called  a  Cushite  or  Ethi- 
opian, and  whom  several  authors,  as  Ewald  (Gesch. 
des  V.  I.  iii.  p.  470),  identify  with  Osorkon  I.,  the 
second  king  of  the  22nd  dynasty  of  Egypt,  inheritor 
therefore  of  the  quarrel  of  his  father  Shishak,  to  whom 
Asa  had  probably  refused  to  pay  tribute.  [Zerah.] 
At  the  head  of  an  enormous  host  (a  million  of  men, 
we  read  in  2  Chr.  xiv.  9)  he  attache  I  Mareshah  or 
Marissa  in  the  S.W.  of  the  country,  near  the  later 
Eleutheropolis  (Robinson,  B.  R.,  ii.  67),  a  town 
afterwards  taken  by  Judas  Maccabaeus  (1  Mace.  v. 
65),  and  finally  destroyed  by  the  Parthians  in  their 
w.w  against  Herod  (Joseph.  Ant,  xiv.  1.'!,  §9).  There 
he  was  utterly  defeated,  and  driven  back  with  im- 
mense loss  to  Gerar.  As  Asa  returned  laden  with 
spoil,  he  was  commended  and  encouraged  by  a  pro- 
phet, and  on  his  arrival  at  Jerusalem  convoked  an 
assembly  of  his  own  people  and  of  many  who  had 
come  to  him  from  Israel,  and  with  solemn  sacrifices 
and  ceremonies  renewed  the  covenant  by  which  tie- 
nation  was  dedicated  to  God.  The  peace  which  fol- 
lowed this  victory  was  broken  by  the  attempt  of 
Baasha  of  Israel  to  fortify  Raman  as  a  kind  ofDe- 
celeia,  "  that  he  might  not  sutler  any  to  go  out  or 
to  come  in  unto  Asa  king  of  Judah."  To  stop  this 
he  purchase.)  the  help  of'  Benhadad  1.  kin., 
masCUS,  by  a  large  payment  of  treasure   left    in   tin- 

temple  and  palace  from  the  Egyptian  tribute  in  Re- 

hoboam's  time,  and  thus  he  forced  Baasha  to  abandon 
his  purpose,  and  destroyed  the  works  which  he  had 
begun  at  Ramah,  asing  the  materials  to  fortify  two 
towers  in   Benjamin,  Geba  (the  hill),  and  Mizpeh 

/<•/,-/. ,»vr),  a.s  checks  to  any  future  invasion. 
The  wells  which  be  sunk  at  Mizpeh  were  famous  in 

Jeremiah's  time(\li.  o).      The   means  l.y  which  he 

obtained  this  success  were  censured  by  the  prophet 

llanani,  who  seems  even  to  have  excited  some  dis- 
content in  Jerusalem,  in  consequence 'of  which  he 


118 


ASADIAS 


was  imprisoned,  and  some  other  punishments  in- 
flicted (2  Chr.  xvi.  9).  The  prophet  threatened 
Asa  with  war,  which  appears  to  have  been  fulfilled 
by  the  continuance  for  some  time  of  that  with  Baasha, 
as  we  infer  from  an  allusion,  in  2  Chr.  xvii.  2,  to 
the  cities  of  P^phraim  which  he  took,  and  which  can 
hardly  refer  to  any  events  prior  to  the  destruction  of 
Ram  ah. 

In  his  old  age  Asa  suffered  from  the  gout,  and 
it  is  mentioned  that  "  he  sought  not  to  the  Lord 
but  to  the  physicians."  If  any  blame  be  intended, 
we  must  suppose  that  he  acted  in  an  arrogant  and 
independent  spirit,  and  without  seeking  God's  bless- 
ing on  their  remedies.  He  died  greatly  loved  and 
honoured  in  the  41st  year  of  his  reign.  There  are 
difficulties  connected  with  its  chronology,  arising 
perhaps  from  the  reasons  already  mentioned  as  to 
the  numbers  in  Chronicles.  For  instance,  in  2 
Chr.  xvi.  1,  we  read  that  Baasha  fortified  Ramah  in 
.the  36th  year  of  Asa's  reign.  In  1  K.  xv.  33, 
Baasha  is  said  to  have  died  in  the  26th.  If  the 
former  number  be  genuine,  it  is  supposed  by  the 
note  in  the  margin  of  the  English  Bible,  by  Clinton, 
and  with  some  little  hesitation  by  Ewald,  that  the 
Chronicler  is  referring  to  the  years  not  of  Asa's 
reign,  but  of  the  separate  kingdom  of  Judah,  which 
would  coincide  with  the  16th  of  Asa  and  the  13th  of 
Baasha,  and  leave  11  years  for  the  statement  of  1  K. 
xv.  16,  and  for  the  fulfilment  of  Hanani's  threat. 
According  to  Clinton  (F.  H.,  i.  p.  321)  the  date 
of  Asa's  accession  was  B.C.  956.  In  his  lath  year 
(B.C.  942)  was  the  great  festival  after  the  defeat  of 
Zerah.  In  B.C.  941  was  the  league  with  Benhadad, 
and  in  B.C.  916  Asa  died.  The  statement  in  2  Chr. 
xv.  19,  must  be  explained  of  the  35th  year  of  the 
kingdom  of  Judah,  if  we  adopt  that  view  of  the  date 
in  xvi.  1 .  Clinton,  with  an  inconsistency  very  un- 
usual in  him,  does  adopt  it  in  the  later  place,  but 
imagines  a  fresh  war  with  Ethiopia  in  B.C.  922  to 
account  for  the  former.  [G.  E.  L.  C] 

ASA'DIAS  ('Ao-aSi'os,  i.  e.  HHDn,  the  Lord 

\  t  :  — :' 

loveth;  Hasadias),  1  Chr.  iii.  20,  where  in  A.  V. 
it  is  written  Hasadiah. 

2.  Bar.  i.  1.  [B.  F.  W.] 

ASABL  ('AeriijA.;  "Vulg.  omits),  of  the  tribe 
of  Naphtali,  and  forefather  of  Tobit  (Tob.  i.  1). 
[Jahzeel  ?] 

ASAHEL  (bxnb'J?,  made  by  God;  'AcrayX; 
Asael),  nephew  of  David,  being  the  youngest  son 
of  his  sister  Zeruiah.  He  was  celebrated  for  his 
swiftness  of  foot,  a  gift  much  valued  in  ancient 
times,  as  we  see  by  the  instances  of  Achilles, 
Antilochus  (Horn.  //.  xv.  570),  Papirius  Cursor 
(Liv.  ix.  16),  and  others.  When  fighting  under 
the  command  of  his  brother  Joab  against  Ish- 
bosheth's  army  at  Gibeon,  he  pursued  Abner,  who, 
after  vainly  warning  him  to  desist,  was  obliged 
to  kill  him  in  self-defence,  though  with  great  re- 
luctance, probably  on  account  of  his  extreme  youth 
(2  Sam.  ii.  18  ff.).      [ABNER.) 

Asahel  was  also  the  name  of  three  other  men 
(2  Chr.  xvii.  8  ;  2  Chr.  xxxi.  13  ;  Ezr.  x.  15).   ] 
[G.  E.  L.  C. 

ASAHFAH,  or  ASAFAH  (rWJJ ;  'Aaa'ia ; 

Asaid),  a  servant  of  king  Josiah,  sent  by  him,  to- 
gether with  others,  to  seek  information  of  Jehovah 
respecting  the  book  of  the  law  which  Hilkiah  found 
in  the  temple  (2  K.  xxii.  12.  14;  also  called 
Asaiah,  2  Chr.  xxxiv.  20).  [R.  W.  1'..] 


ASENATH 

ASAIAH  (irbj? ;  Aaa'ia ;  Alex,  herd  ;  Ascm), 

name  of  four  men.  1.  (1  Chr.  ix.  5).  [Maaseiah.] 
2.  (1  Chr.  iv.  36  ;  vi.  30).  3.  (1  Chr.  xv.  6). 
4.  (1  Chr.  xv.  6,  11).     See  Asahiah. 

ASANA  (' Aaaavd ;  Asana),  name  of  a  man 
(1  Esd.  v.  31).     [Ashnah.] 

A'SAPH  (P)DK;  'A<rd<p;  Asaph).  1.  A 
Levite,  son  of  Berechiah,  one  of  the  leaders  of 
David's  choir  (1  Chr.  vi.  39).  Psalms  1.  and 
lxxiii.  to  lxxxiii.  are  attributed  to  him,  but  pro- 
bably all  these,  except  1.,  lxxiii.,  and  lxxvii.,  are 
of  later  origin  (Vaihiuger,  Vers,  of  Psalms) ;  and 
he  was  iu  aftertimes  celebrated  as -a  seer  (nTH)  as 
well  as  a  musical  composer,  and  was  put  on  a  par 
with  David  (2  Chr.  xxix.  30;  Neh.  xii.  46).  The 
office  appears  to  have  remained  hereditary  in  his 
family,  unless  he  was  the  founder  of  a  school  of 
poets  and  musical  composers,  who  were  called  after 
him  "the  sons  of  Asaph  "  (comp.  the  Homeridae) 
(1  Chr.  xxv.  1 ;  2  Chr.  xx.  14;  Ezr.  ii.  41). 

2.  The  recorder  (TOTO)  of  Hezekiah  (2K.  xviii. 
18,  37;  Is.  xxxvi.  3,  22). 

3.  The  controller  of  the  royal  forests  of  Aita- 
xerxes  (Neh.  ii.  8). 

4.  A  Levite  (Neh.  xi.  17).  [R.  W.  B.] 
ASAE'EEL  ("pN'-lb'X  ;     'E<rep^A  ;      Asracl), 

name  of  a  man  (1  Chr.  iv.  16). 

ASAKE'LAH  (i"6sO^N  ;  'EpcnJA  ;  Asareld). 
name  of  a  man  (1  Chr.  xxv.  2),  called  Jesharelaii 
(i-6iOt^)  in  ver.  14. 

AS'CALON. '  [Ashkelon.] 

ASEAS  ('Atra'i'as;  Ascas),  name  of  a  man 
(1  Esd.  ix.  32). 

ASEBE'BIA  ('Ao-el37iPia;-Sebebias),  a  Levite 
(1  Esd.  viii.  47).     [Sherebiah.] 

ASE'BIA  ('AcrcPta;  Asbia),  1  Esd.  viii.  48. 

AS'ENATH  (rUDN*  ;   'Ao-ei/e'0  ;   Alex.  'Ao-er- 

ve6  ;  Aseneth),  daughter  of  Potipherah.,  priest,  or 
possibly  prince,  of  On  [Potipherah],  wife  of 
Joseph  (Gen.  xli.  45),  and  mother  of  Manasseh  and 
Ephraim  (xli.  50,  xlvi.  20).  Her  name  has  been 
considered  to  be  necessarily  Egyptian  (Lepsius, 
Chronologic  d.  Aegypter,  i.  p.  382),  and  Egyptian 
etymologies  have  therefore  been  proposed.  Gesenius 
(TVies.  s.  v.)  suggests  ^.ortGITTj  "  sne  w^°  's 
of  Neith,"  the  Egyptian  Minerva  ;  but  this  word  has 
not  been  found  in  the  ancient  Egyptian  or  Coptic  ; 
and  it  must  be  regarded  as  very  doubtful.  If  we 
are  guided  by  the  custom  of  the  Hebrews,  and  the 
only  parallel  case,  that  of  Bithiah,  whose  Hebrew 
name,  "  daughter,"  that  is,  "  servant,  of  Jehovith," 
implying  conversion,  must  have  been  given  her  on 
her  marriage  to  Mered,  at  a  time  probably  not  long 
distant  from  that  of  Joseph's  rule  [Bithiah], 
we  must  suppose  that  his  Egyptian  wife  received  a 
Hebrew  name  from  Joseph,  especially  if  her  native 
name  implied  devotion  to  the  gods  of  the  country. 
Such  a  new  name  would  have  been  preserved  in 
preference  to  the  other  in  the  O.  T.  If  Hebrew, 
Asenath  may  be  compared  to  the  male  proper  name 
Asnah,  H3DX  (Ezr.  ii.  50),  and  derived  like  it  from 


ASER 
|DX  or  DDX,  in  which  case  both  names  would 
signify  storehouse ;  unless  both  may  be  cognate  with 

i"OD,  and  mean  bramble,  a  sense  not  repugnant  to 

.Semitic  usage  in  proper  names.  The  former  de- 
rivation is  perhaps  the  more  probable,  in  connexion 
with  Joseph's  history  and  the  name  of  Ephruim. 

A'SER.     [Asher.]  tR"  S"  P'J 

ASE'RER  (2epdp ;  Saree),  name  of  a  man 
( i  Esd.  v.  32).     [Siseka.] 

A'SHAN  {\'C'l};  'Acrdv,  Alo-dp;  Asari),  a  city 
in  the  low  country  of  Judah  named  in  Josh.  xv. 
4l',  with  Libnah  and  Ether.  In  Josh.  xix.  7, 
and  1  Clir.  iv.  32,  it  is  mentioned  again  as  belong- 
ing to  Simeon,  but  in  company  with  Ain  and  Rim- 
nion,  which  (see  Josh.  xv.  ill)  appear  to  have  been 
much  more  to  the  south.  In  1  Chr.  vi.  59,  it  is 
given  as  a  priests'  city,  occupying  the  same  place 
as  the  somewhat  similar  word  Ain  (^y)  does  in  the 
list  of  Josh.  xxi.  16. 

In  1  Sam.  xxx.  30,  Chor-ashan  is  named  with 
Hormah  and  other  cities  of  "the  South." 

Eusebius  and  Jerome  (Ouom.)  mention  a  village 
named  Bethasan  as  15  miles  west,  of  Jerusalem; 
but  this,  though  agreeing  sufficiently  witli  the  posi- 
tion of  the  place  in  Josh.  xv.  42,  is  not  far  enough 
south  tin'  the  indications  of  the  other  passages;  and 
indeed  Euseb.  and  Jer.  discriminate  Bethasan  from 
'•  Asan  nt'  tin'  tribe  of  Simeon."  It  has  not  yet 
been  identified,  unless  it  be  the  same  as  Ain;  in 
which  case  Pobinson  found  it  at  Al  Ghuweir.     [(!.] 

ASH'BEA   (ynC'N,    [adjure;   'Eaofid;   domo 

juramenti  is  the  transl.  of  theVulg.  "  of  the  house 
of  Ashbea"),  name  of  a  man  (1  Chr.  iv.  21). 

ASH'BEL  {blVii  ;  'Ao-fliJA,  'Acrv^p ;  Asbel), 

a  son  of  Benjamin  (Gen.  xlvi.  21 ;  Num.  xxvi.  ;'.s  ; 
1  ('in-,  viii.  1).  Respecting  the  sons  of  Benjamin, 
see  l'i  cher. 

ASH'DOD,  or  AZOTUS  ("l'nL';X  ;  'Afrros, 
LXX.  and  X.  T.),  one  of  the  live  confederate  cities 
of  the  Philistines,  situated  about  :i0  miles  from  the 
southern  frontier  of  Palestine,  3  from  the  Mediter- 
ranean Sea,  and  nearly  midway  between  Gaza  and 
Joppa.  It  stood  on  an  elevation  overlooking  the 
plain,  and  tlie  natural  advantages  of  its  position 
were  improved  by  fortifications  of  great  strength. 
For  this  reason  it  was  probably  selected  as  one  of 
the  seats  of  the  national  worship  of  Dagon  (1  Sam. 
v.  5).     It  was  assigned  to  the  tribe  of  Judah  (Josh. 

\\.    IT),  but  was  never  subdued    by    the   Israelites: 

it  appears  on  the  contrary  to  have  been  tie'  poinl 
tin-  conducting  offensive  operations  against  them,  so 
much  so.  that  after  I'z/.iah  had  succeeded  in  break- 
ing down  the  wall  of  the  town,  lie  secured  himself 
against  future  attacks  by  establishing  forts  on  the 
adjacent  hills  (2  Chr.  xxvi.  6):  even  down  bo  Ne- 
hemiah's  a  it  preseiYsd  its  distinctiveness  it  rue 
and  language  (Neh.  liii.  23).  But  its  chief  im- 
portance arose  from  its  position  on  the  high-road 
from  Palestine  to  Egvpt,  commanding  the  entrance 
to  or  from  the  latter  country:  it  was  on  this  ac- 
count besieged  by  Tartan,  tin-  general  of  the  Assy- 
rian king,  Saigon,  about  B.C.  716,  apparently  to 
frustrate  the  league  formed  between  rlezekiah  and 
Egypt  (Is.  xx.  1).  Its  importance  as  well  as 
I h   is  testified  by  tie'  pro!  -    which 

it  afterwards  sustained  under  Psammetichu  - 
B.c.   630  (Herod,   ii.    157),  thi  which 


ASHER 


119 


are  incidentally  referred  to  by  Jer.  (xxv.  20). 
That  it  recovered  from  this  blow  appears  from  its 
being  mentioned  as  an  independent  power  in  alliance 
with  the  Arabians  and  others  against  Jerusalem 
(Neh.  iv.  7).  It  was  destroyed  by  the  Maccabees 
1  (1  Mace.  v.  68,  x.  84-),  and  lay  in  ruins  until  the 
1  Roman  conquest  of  Judaea,  when  it  was  restored  by 
Gabinius,  B.C.  55  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiv.  5,  §3;  A'.  J. 
i.  7,  §7),  and  was  one  of  the  towns  assigned  to 
Salome  after  Herod's  death  (Joseph.  Ant.  xvii.  8, 
§1).  The  only  notice  of  Azotus  in  the  N.  T.  is  in 
connexion  with  Philip's  return  from  Gaza  (Acts 
viii.  40).  It  is  now  an  insignificant  village,  witli 
no  memorials  of  its  ancient  importance,  but  is  still 
cilled  Esdud.  [W.  L.  B.] 

ash'doth  pis'gah  (rupsn  n'ntw, 

from  *l£'N,  "to   pour   forth;"  'AcrriSwd  <pacryd  ; 

radices  Pisgae),  a,  curious  and  (since  it  occurs 
in  none  of  the  later  books)  probably  a  very 
ancient  term,  found  only  in  Deut'.  iii.  17  ;  Josh, 
xii.  3,  xiii.  20;  and  in  Deut.  iv.  49,  A.  V.  "  springs 
of  Pisgah."  In  the  two  passages  from  Deuteronomy 
the  words  form  part  of  a  formula,  by  which  appa- 
rently the  mountains  which  enclose  the  Dead  Sea  on 
the  e<ist  side  are  defined.  Thus  in  iii.  17,  we  read, 
"the  '  Arabah  '  also  (J.  e.  the  Jordan  valley)  and 
the  '  border,'  from  Cinnereth  (Sea  of  Galilee)  unto 
the  sea  of  the  '  Arabah,'  the  Salt  Sea,  under  Ashdoth 
hap-Pisgah  eastward :"  and  so  also  in  iv.  49, 
though  here  our  translators  have  chosen  to  vary  the 
formula  for  English  readers.  The  same  intention 
is  evident  in  the  passages  quoted  from  Joshua  ;  and 
in  x.  40,  and  xii.  8  of  the  same  book,  Ashdoth  is 
used  alone — "  the  springs,''  to  denote  one  of  the 
main  natural  divisions  of  the  country.  The  only 
other  instance  of  the  use  of  the  word  is  in  the  highly 
poetical  passage,  Num.  xxi.  15,  "the  '/> 
forth'  of  the  '  torrents,'  which  extendeth  to  Shebeth- 
Ar."  This  undoubtedly  refers  also  to  the  east  of 
the  Dead  Sea. 

What  the  real  significance  of  the  term  may  be,  it 
is  impossible  in  our  present  ignorance  of  the  country 
east  of  the  Dead  Sea  to  determine.  Doubtless,  like 
the  other  topographical  words  of  the  Bible,  it  has  a 
precise  meaning  strictly  observed  in  its  use;  but 
whether  it  be  the  springs  poured  forth  at  the  base 
of  the  mountains  of  Moab,  or  the  roots  or  spurs  oi 
those  mountains,  or  the  mountains  themselves,  it  is 
useless  at  present  to  conjecture.  [( !.] 

ASH'ER,  Apocr.  and  N.  T.  A'SER  (IPS  ; 
'A<rr)p;  Aser),  the  8th  sen  of  Jacob,  by  Zilpah, 
Leah's  handmaid  (Gen.  xxx.  13).  The  name  is 
interpreted  as  meaning  "happy,"  in  a  pa 
full  of  the  paronemastic  turns  which  distin- 
guish these  very  ancient  records:  "And  I. .ah 
said,  '  In  my  happiness  am  I  CHL"X3),  tor  the 
daughters  will  call  me  happy'  (*jl~)L"N ),  and  she 
called  his  name  Asher"  ("lL"X),  ''.  <'.  ••  happy."      A 

similar  play  occurs  in  the  blessing  of  Moses  (Deut. 

xxxiii.  24).      Cad  was  /.ilpah's  other  an  I  eld 

but  the    fortl 3   of  the    brothers    Were    not    at   all 

I.     in'  the  ti if.'  descended  from  Asher  no 

action  is  recorded  during  the  whole  course  of  the 

history.     It-  i  bund   in  the  various 

tie'   tribes   which   occur   throughout   the 

earlier  books,  n .  xlvi.  Ex.  i.  Num.  i. 

ii.    xiii.    &c.,    and    like  the   rest    Asher  sent    his 

one  of  the  spies  from  Kadesh-barnea  (Num. 

\iii.  .     I'l.iin.    t!"'  march  through  the  desert  his 


120 


ASHER 


place  was  between  Dan  and  Naphtali  on  the  north 
side  of  the  tabernacle  (Num.  ii.  27)  ;  and  after  the 
conquest  he  took  up  his  allotted  position  without 
any  special  mention. 

The  limits  of  the  territory  assigned  to  Asher  are, 
like  those  of  all  the  tribes,  and  especially  of  the 
northern  tribes,  extremely  difficult  to  trace.  This 
is  partly  owing  to  our  ignorance  of  the  principle  on 
which  these  ancient  boundaries  were  drawn  and 
recorded,  and  partly  from  the  absence  of  identi- 
fication of  the  majority  of  the  places  named.  The 
general  position  of  the  tribe  was  on  the  sea-shore 
from  Carmel  northwards,  with  Manasseh  on  the 
south,  Zebulun  and  Issachar  on  the  south-east,  and 
Naphtali  on  the  north-east  (Jos.  Ant.  v.  1,  §22). 
The  boundaries  and  towns  are  given  in  Josh.  xix. 
24 — 31,  xvii.  10,  11,  and  Judg.  i.  31,  32.  From  a 
comparison  of  these  passages  it  seems  plain  that 
Dor  (Tantura)  must  have  been  within  the  limits 
of  the  tribe,  in  which  case  the  southern  boundary 
was  probably  one  of  the  streams  which  enter  the 
Mediterranean  south  of  that  place — either  Nahr  el- 
Dcfneh  or  Nahr  Znrha.  Following  the  beach  round 
the  promontory  of  Carmel,  the  tribe  then  possessed 
the  maritime  portion  of  the  rich  plain  of  Esdraelon, 
probably  for  a  distance  of  eight  or  ten  miles  from 
the  shore.  The  boundary  would  then  appear  to 
have  run  northwards,  possibly  bending  to  the  east 
to  embrace  Ahlab,  and  reaching  Zidon  by  Kanah  (a 
name  still  attached  to  a  site  six  miles  inland  from 
Said),  whence  it  turned  and  came  down  by  Tyre 
to  Achzib  (Ecdippa,  now  es-Zib.a) 

This  territory  contained  some  of  the  richest  soil 
in  all  Palestine  (Stanley,  265  ;  Kenrick,  Phoen.  35), 
and  in  its  productiveness  it  well  fulfilled  the  promise 
involved  in  the  name  "  Asher,"  and  in  the  bless- 
ings which  had  been  pronounced  on  him  by  Jacob 
and  by  Moses.  Here  was  the  oil  in  which  he  was 
to  "  dip  his  foot,"  the  "  bread "  which  was  to  be 
"  fat,"  and  the  "  royal  dainties "  in  which  he  was 
to  indulge  ;b  and  here  in  the  metallic  manufactures 
of  the  Phoenicians  (Kenrick,  38)  were  the  "  iron 
and  brass"  for  his  "  shoes."  The  Phoenician  set- 
tlements were  even  at  that  early  period  in  full 
vigour;0  and  it  is  not  surprising  that  Asher  was 
soon  contented  to  partake  their  luxuries,  and  to 
"  dwell  among  them  "  without  attempting  the  con- 
quest and  extermination  enjoined  in  regard  to  all 
the  Canaanites  (Judg.  i.  31,  32).  Accordingly  he 
did  not  drive  out  the  inhabitants  of  Accho,  nor 
Dor,d  nor  Zidon,  nor  Ahlab,  nor  Achzib,  nor  Hel- 
bah,  nor  Aphik,  nor  Rehob  (Judg.  i.  31),  and  the 
natural  consequence  of  this  inert  acquiescence  is 
immediately  visible.  While  Zebulun  and  Naphtali 
"  jeoparded"  their  lives  unto  the  death "  in  the 
struggle  against  Sisera,  Asher  was  content  to  forget 
the  peril  of  his  fellows  in  the  creeks  and  harbours 
of  his  new  allies  (Judg.  v.  17,  18).  At  the  num- 
bering of  Israel  at  Sinai,  Asher  was  more  numerous 
than  either  Ephraim,  Manasseh,  or  Benjamin  (Num. 
i.  32-41),  but  in  the  reign  of  David,  so  insignificant 


a  Achshaph  (LXX.  Kea<|>  or  Kota<//a)  must  be 
Chaifa  :  Robinson's  identification  (iii.  55)  is  surely 
too  far  inland.  Alammelech  was  probably  on  the 
Nahr  el  MeJech,  a  tributary  of  the  Kishon.  Jipthah- 
el  maybeVe/rt*  (Rob.  iii.  107).  Bethlehem  (Beit 
Lahm)  is  10  miles  inland  from  the  shore  of  the  bay 
of  Chaifa  (Rob.  113);  and  as  it  was  in  Zebulun,  it 
fixes  the  distance  of  Asher's  boundary  as  less  than 
that  from  the  sea. 

b  For  the  crops,  see  Rob.  iii.  102  ;  for  the  oil,  Ken- 
rick, 31  :  Reland,  817. 


ASHES 

had  the  tribe  become,  that  its  name  is  altogether 
omitted  from  the  list  of  the  chief  rulers  (1  Chr. 
xxvii.  10-22);  and  it  is  with  a  kind  of  astonish- 
ment that  it  is  related  that  "  divers  of  Asher  and 
Manasseh  and  Zebulun"  came  to  Jerusalem  to  the 
Passover  of  Hezekiah  (2  Chr.  xxx.  11).  With  the 
exception  of  Simeon,  Asher  is  the  only  tribe  west 
of  the  Jordan  which  furnished  no  hero  or  judge  to 
the  nation.0  "  One  name  alone  shines  out  of  the 
general  obscurity — the  aged  widow  '  Anna  the 
daughter  of  Phanuel  of  the  tribe  of  Aser,'  who  in 
the  very  close  of  the  history  departed  not  from  the 
temple,  but  '  served  God  with  tastings  and  prayers 
night  and  day'"  (Stanley,  265).  [G<] 

ASHE'EAH  (nlK'N),  the  name  of  a  Phoenician 

goddess,  or  rather  of  the  idol  itself.  Our  trans- 
lators following  the  rendering  of  the  LXX.  (&A<ros), 
and  of  the  Vulg.  (lucus)  translate  the  word  by 
"  grove."  Almost  all  modern  interpreters  however 
since  Selden  (De  Diis  Syriis,  p.  343)  agree  that 
an  idol  or  image  of  some  kind  must  be  intended,  as 
seems  sufficiently  proved  from  such  passages  as 
2  K.  xxi.  7,  xxiii.  6,  in  the  latter  of  which  we  find 
that  Josiah  "  brought  out  the  Asherah"  (or  as  our 
version  reads  "  the  grove  ")  "  from  the  house  of  the 
Lord."  There  can,  moreover,  be  no  doubt  that 
Asherah  is  very  closely  connected  with  Ashtoreth 
and  her  worship,  indeed  the  two  are  so  placed  in 
connexion  with  each  other,  and  each  of  them  with 
Baal  (e.  g.  Judg.  iii.  7,  comp.  ii.  3  ;  Judg..vi.  25  ; 
1  K.  xviii.  19),  that  many  critics  have  regarded 
them  as  identical.  There  are  other  passages  how- 
ever in  which  these  terms  seem  to  be  distinguished 
from  each  other  as  2  K.  xxiii.  13,  14,  15.  Movers 
(Phbn.  i.  561)  first  pointed  out  and  established  the 
difference  between  the  two  names,  though  he  pro- 
bably goes  too  far  in  considering  them  as  names  of 
distinct  deities.  The  view  maintained  by  Bertheau 
(Handb.  d.  A.  T.  Richt.,  p.  67)  appears  to  be  the 
more  correct  one,  that  Ashtoreth  is  the  proper 
name  of  the  goddess,  whilst  Asherah  is  the  name  of 
the  image  or  symbol  of  the  goddess.  This  symbol 
seems  in  all  cases  to  have  been  of  wood  (see  e.g. 
Judg.  vi.25-30  ;  2  K.  xxiii.  14),  and  the  most  pro- 
bable etymology  of  the  term  ("IK'N^"!^'1,  to  be 
straight,  direct)  indicates  that  it  was  formed  of 
the  straight  stem  of  a  tree,  whether  living  or  set 
up  for  the  purpose,  and  thus  points  us  to  the 
phallic  rites  with  which  no  doubt  the  worship  of 
Astarte  was  connected.  [Ashtoreth.]  See  also 
Egypt.  •       [F.W.G.] 

ASHES.  The  ashes  on  the  altar  of  burnt- 
offering  were  gathered  into  a  cavity  in  its  surface  on 
aheap  called  the  apple  (111211),  from  its  round  shape 
(Cramer,  de  Ara  exteriori),  said  to  have  sometimes 
amounted  to  300  Cors ;  but  this  Maimon.  and 
others  say  is  spoken  hyperbolice.  On  the  days  of 
the  three  solemn  festivals  the  ashes  were  not  re- 
moved, and  the  accumulation  taken  away  after- 
wards in  the  morning,  the  priests  casting  lots  for 
the  office  (Mishna    Temid.  i.  2,  and  ii.  2).     The 


c  Zidon  was  then  distinguished  by  the  name  Rab- 
bah  =  "the  Strong,"  Josh.  xix.  28. 

<*  This  name  is  added  by  the  LXX.  Compare  Josh, 
xvii.  11. 

e  This  would  be  well  compensated  for  if  the  ancient 
legend  could  be  proved  to  have  any  foundation,  that 
the  parents  of  St.  Paul  resided  at  Giscala,  or  Gush 
Chaleb,  i.  e.  the  Ahlab  of  Asher  (Judg.  i.  31).  See 
Reland,  813. 


ASKLMA 

ashes  of  a  red  heifer  burnt  entire,  according  to  regu- 
lations prescribed  in  Num.  xix.,  had  the  ceremonial 
efficacy  of  purifying  the  unclean  (Heb.  ix.  13),  but 
of  polluting  the  clean.  [Sacrifice.]  Ashes  about 
the  person,  especially  on  the  head,  were  used  as  a 
sign  of  sorrow.      [MOURNING.]  [H.  H.] 

ASH'IMA  (KCB'N  ;  'Acn/xdd;  Asima),  a  god 

worshipped  by  the  j pie  of  ETamath.    The  worship 

was  introduced  into  Samaria  by  the  Hamathite 
colonists  whom  Shalmanezer  settled  in  that  land 
(2  K.  xvii.  30).  The  name  occurs  only  in  this 
single  instance.  The  Talmudists  say  that  the  word 
signifies  a  goat  without  hair,  or  rather  with  short 
hair  (Buxtorf,  Lex.  Tahn.),  and  from  this  circum- 
stance Ashima  has  been  regarded  as  identical  with 
the  Mendesian  god  of  the  Egyptians  (considered 
by  the  Greeks  to  be  Pan),  to  whom  the  gnat  was 
sacred.  This  god  has  also  by  some  been  identified 
with  the  Phoenician  god  Esmun  (see  Winer, 
Realw.),  whose  name  is  frequently  found  in  Phoe- 
nician inscriptions  as  a  component  of  the  names  of 
persons,  and  who  is  regarded  as  the  Phoenician 
Aesculapius  (Gesen.  Mbn.  Phoen.  pp.  136,  347). 
The  two  conjectures  are  not  necessarily  discrepant, 
since  to  the  Phoenician  Esmun  belong  the  charac- 
teristics both  of  Pan  and  of  Aesculapius  (Movers, 
Phonizier,  i.  532).  There  are  many  other  con- 
jectures of  Jewish  writers  respecting  this  god,  but 
they  are  of  no  authority  whatever.        [F.  W.  G.] 

ASH'KELON,  AS'KELON,   Apocr.    AS'- 

CALON  (pS?V:^a;  0Ilce  "the  Eshkalonite," 
'JDpK'Nn;  ' AcTKaXwy ;  Saad.       Vi^r  (note  the 

change  from  Aleph  to  Ain);  Ascalon),  one  of  the 
five  cities  of  the  lords  of  the  Philistines  (Josh. 
xiii.  3;  1  Sam.  vi.  17),  but  less  often  mentioned, 
and,  apparently,  less  known  to  the  Jews  than  the 
other  four.  This,  doubtless,  arose  from  its  re- 
mote situation,  alone,  of  all  the  Philistine  towns, 
on  the  extreme  edge  of  the  shore  ot  the  Medi- 
terranean (Jer.  xlvii.  7),  and,  also,  well  down  to 
the  south.  Gaza,  indeed,  was  still  further  south, 
but  then  it  was  on  the  main  road  from  Egypt  to 
the  centre  and  north  of  Palestine,  while  Ashkelon 
lay  considerably  to  the  left.  The  site,  which 
retains  its  ancient  name,  fully  bears  out  the  above 
inference:  but  some  indications  of  the  (act  may  lie 
traced,  even  in  the  scanty  notices  of  Ashkelon 
which  occur  in  the  Bible.  Thus,  the  name  is 
omitted  from  the  list  in  Josh.  xv.  of  the  Philistine 
towns  falling  to  tin;  lot  of  Judah  (but  comp.  Jos. 
Ant.  V.  1,  §_'_',  where  it  is  specified),  although 
Ekron,  Ashdod  and  Gaza  are  all  named;  and  con- 
siderable  uncertainty  rests  over  its  mention  in 
Judg.  i.  is  (see  Berthean  in  Excg.  ffandb.).  Sam- 
son went  down  from  Timnath  to  Ashkelon,  when  he 
slesv  the  thirty  men  and  took  their  spoil,  as  it'  to  a 
remote  place  whence  his  exploit  was  not  likely  to 

lie  heard  of;    and   tl dy   other   mention   ot'  it  in 

the  historical  1 ks  is  in  the  formulistic  pa 

Josh.  xiii.  '■'•,  and  1  Sam.  vi.  17,  and  in  the  casual 
notices   et    Jud.    U     .;';  ,    1    Mae.   x.   86,  M    I    '    Ml 

33.  The  other  Philistine  cities  aie  each  distin- 
guished by  some  special  occurrence  or  tact  con- 
nected   With    it,  but    eZCept   the  one  exploit    ot'  Snm- 

BOn,  Ashkelon  is  to  us  no  more  than  a  name.      In 


ASHKENAZ 


121 


"  The  usual  form  would  be 


TpiTN, 


Ashkal.     Uo- 


digei  [in  Gesenitu,  liTii)  Boggests  that  the  uncom- 
mon termination  is  a  Philistine  form. 


the  poetical  books  it  occurs  2  Sam.  i.  20;  Jer. 
xxv.  20,  xlvi.  5,  7;  Am.  i.  8;  Zeph.  ii.  4,  7; 
Zech.  i.\.  5. 

In  the  post-biblical  times  Ashkelon  rose  to  con- 
siderable importance.  Near  the  town — though  all 
traces  of  them  have  now  vanished — were  the  temple' 
and  sacred  lake  of  Derceto,  the  Syrian  Venus; 
and  it  shared  with  Gaza  an  infamous  reputation  for 
the  steadfastness  of  its  heathenism  and  for  the 
cruelties  there  practised  ou  Christians  by  Julian 
(Roland,  588,  590).  "The  soil  around  the  town 
was  remarkable  for  its  fertility  ;  the  wine  of  Asca- 
lon was  celebrated,  and  the  Al-henna  plant 
flourished  better  than  in  any  other  place  except 
Canopus"  (Kenrick,  28).  It  was  also  celebrated 
for  its  cypresses,  for  figs,  olives,  and  pomegranates, 
and  tor  its  bees,  which  gave  their  name  to  a  valley 
in  the  neighbourhood  (Kenrick,  28 ;  Edrisi  and  Ibn 
Batuta  in  Putter,  Palastina,  88).  Its  name  is 
familiar  to  us  in  the  "Eschalot"  or  "  Shallot,"  a 
kind  of  onion,  first  grown  there,  and  for  which 
this  place  was  widely  known.  "The  sacred  doves 
of  Venus  still  fill  with  their  cooings  the  luxuriant 
gardens  which  grow  in  the  sandy  hollow  within 
the  ruined  walls"  (Stanley,  257).  Ascalon  played 
a  memorable  part  in  the  struggles  of  the  Crusades. 
"  In  it  was  entrenched  the  hero  of  the  last  gleam 
of  history  which  has  thrown  its  light  over  the 
plains  of  Philistia,  and  within  the  walls  and  towers 
now  standing  Richard  held  his  court"  (Stanley, 
ibid.).  By  the  Mahomedan  geographers  it  was 
called  "  the  bride  of  Syria "  (Schultens,  Index 
Geogr.). 

"  The  position  of  the  town  is  naturally  very 
strong:  the  walls  are  built  on  a  ridge  of  rock 
which  winds  in  a  semicircular  curve  around  the 
town  and  terminates  at  each  end  in  the  sea.  There 
is  uo  bay  or  shelter  for  ships,  but  a  small  harbour 
towards  the  east  advanced  a  little  way  into  the 
town,  and  anciently  bore,  like  that  of  Gaza,  the 
name  of  Majumas  "  (Kenrick,  28). 

In  the  time  of  Origen  some  wells  of  remarkable 
shape  were  shown  near  the  town,  which  were 
believed  to  be  those  dug  by  Isaac,  or  at  any  rate, 
to  be  of  the  time  of  the  patriarchs.  Iu  connexion 
with  this  tradition  may  be  mentioned  the  fact  that 
in  the  Samaritan  version  of  Gen.  xx.  1,  2,  and 
xxvi.  1,  Askelon  (j1?pDyb)  is  put  for  the  "  Gerar" 

of  the  Hebrew  text.  [G.] 

ASH'KENAZ  (T32^;K  ;  'AcrxavaC;  Ascenez), 
one  ot' the  three  sons  of  Gomer,  son  of  Japhet  (Gen. 
x.  3),  that  is,  one  of  the  peoples  or  tribes  belonging 
to  tic  great  Japhetic  division  of  the  human  race,  and 
springing  immediately  from  that  part  of  it  which 

bears  the  name  of  ( i<  IMER.  The  original  seat  of  the 
people  of  Ashkenaz  was  undoubtedly  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  Armenia,  since  they  an-  mentioned  by 
Jeremiah  (li.  27)  in  connexion  with  the  kingdoms  of 
Ararat  and  Minni.  We  are  not,  however,  on  this  ac- 
count to  conclude  that  they,  any  more  than  the  (lo- 
in general,  were  confined  to  this  locality. 
Assuming  here,  what  will  be  more  properly  discussed 
under  the  word  J  \rin  i ,  that  the  Japhetic  tritx 
■j rate, i  from  their  original  Beats  westvi aid  and  north- 
ward, thus  peopling  Asia  Minor  and  Europe,  we 
may  probably  recognise  the  tribe  of  Ashkenaz  on 
them  shore  of  Asia  Minor,  in  the  name  of 
Lake  Ascanius,  and  in  Europe  in  the  name Scand-ia, 

b  Note  here,  as  in  the  Arabic,  the  substitution  of 
Ain  for  Aleph. 


122 


ABHNAH 


Scand-iasma..  Knobel  (  Volkertafol,  p.  35)  regards 
the  word  as  a  compound  (TJS'K'K),  the  latter 
element  being  equivalent  to  the  Gr.  yevos,  Lat. 
yens,  genus,  Eng.  kiwi,  kin ;  the  meaning  therefore 
being  the  .As-race.  If  this  be  so,  it  would  seem 
that  we  here  find  the  origin  of  the  name  Asia, 
which  has  subsequently  been  extended  to  the  whole 
eastern  part  of  the  world.  Knobel  considers  that 
Ashkenaz  is  to  be  identified  with  the  German  race. 
It  is  worthy  of  notice,  though  possessing  little 
weight  as  evidence  for  this  view,  that  the  rabbins, 
even  to  the  present  day,  call  Germany  T33JJ'S. 
The  opinion  of  Gorres  ( Volkertafel,  p.  92)  that 
Ashkenaz  is  to  be  identified  with  the  Cymry 
or  Gaelic  race  seems  less  probable  than  that  of 
Knobel.  *  [F.  W.  G.] 

ASH'NAH  (nj^'X),  the  name  of  two  cities 

of  Judah,  both  in  the  Shefelah  or  Lowland ;  (1) 
named  between  Zorea  and  Zanoah,  and  therefore 
probably  N.W.  of  Jerusalem  (Josh.  xv.  33  ;  "Acraa ; 
Asenci) ;  and  (2)  between  Jiphthah  and  Nezib,  and 
therefore  to  the  S.W.  of  Jerusalem  (Josh.  xv.  43; 
Esna).  Each, according  to  Robinson's  Map(1857), 
would  be  about  16  miles  from  Jerusalem,  and  there- 
fore corresponding  to  the  Bethasan  of  the  Onomast. 
Eusebius  names  another  place,  'Affvd,  but  with  no 
indication  of  position.  [G.] 

ASH'PENAZ  (TJ3E^X,  of  uncertain  origin,  yet 
see  Hitzig  on  Dan.  i.  3,  and  compare  the  form 
T33t5>K,Gen.x.3;  LXX.,'AjBi«ro>£=*"tty  »2K(?); 

'A<T<pave£,  Theodot. ;  Asphaz,  Abiczcr,  Syr.),  the 
master  of  the  eunuchs  of  Nebuchadnezzar  (Dan. 
i.  3).  [B.  F.  W.] 

ASHTAROTH,  and  (once)  AS'TAROTH 
(nilDC'V;  'Ao-Tapw6;   Astaroth),  a  city  on  the 

E.  of  Jordan,  in  Bashan,  in  the  kingdom  of  Og, 
doubtless  so  called  from  being  a  seat  of  the  wor- 
ship of  the  goddess  of  the  same  name.  [ASH- 
toreth.]  It  is  generally  mentioned  as  a  descrip- 
tion or  definition  of  Og, — who  "dwelt  in  Astaroth 
in  Ediei"  (Deut.  i.  4),  "at  Ashtaroth  and  at 
Edrei"  (Josh.  xii.  4,  xiii.  12),  or  "who  was  at 
Ashtaroth"  (ix.  10).  It  fell  into  possession  of  the 
half  tribe  of  Manasseh  (Josh.  xiii.  31),  and  was 
given  with  its  suburbs  or  surrounding  pasture-lands 
(trijr?)  to  the  Gershonites  (1  Chr.  vi.  71  [56], 

the  other  Levitical  city  in  this  tribe  being  Golan. 
In  the  list  in  Josh.  xxi.  27,  the  name  is  given  as 
Beeshterah  (quasi '  ]}  ]"P3  =  "house  of  A.;"  Reland, 

621  Gesenius,  Thes.  175  a,  196  mm,  1083).  No- 
thing more  is  heard  of  Ashtaroth.  It  is  not  named 
in  any  of  the  lists,  such  as  those  in  Chronicles,  or 
of  Jeremiah,  in  which  so  many  of  the  trans-Jordanic 
places  are  enumerated.  Jeiome  (Onom.  Astaroth) 
states  that  in  his  time  it  lay  six  miles  from  Ad;  a, 
which  again  was  25  from  Bostra.  Eusebius  and  he 
further  {Asieroth  Carnaim)  speak  of  two  nufiai,  or 
castella,  which  lay  nine  miles  apart,  "  inter  Adaram 
«'t  Abilam  civitates."  One  of  these  was  possibly 
that  first  named  above,  and  the  other  may  have  been 
Ashteroth-karnaim.  The  only  trace  of  the  name 
yet  recovered  in  these  interesting  districts  is  Tell- 
Ashterdh  or  Asherdh  (Ritter,  Syria,  819;  Porter, 
ii.  212),  and  of  this  nothing  more  than  the  name 
is  known.  Uzziah  the  Ashterathite  is  named  in 
1  Chr.  xi.  44.  [G.] 


ASHTORETH 
ASH'TEROTH  -  KAR'NAIM     (mTO 
D>J*1p  =  "  Ashtaroth  of  the  two  horns  or  peaks ;" 

Sam.  Vers. 'p-n^SJ?;  Saad.     j^^J|;  'Acrra- 

pwQ  Kal  (Alex,  omits  Kai)  Kapvatv ;  Astaroth 
Carnaim),  a  place  of  very  great  antiquity,  the 
abode  of  the  Rephaim  at  the  time  of  the  incur- 
sion of  Chedorlaomer  (Gen.  xiv.  5),  while  the  cities 
of  the  plain  were  still  standing  in  their  oasis.  The 
name  reappears  but  once,  and  that  in  the  later 
history  of  the  Jews,  as  Carnaim,  or  Camion  (1 
Mace.  v.  26,  43,  44;  2  Mace.  xii.  21,  26;  Jos. 
Ant.  xii.  8,  §4),  "  a  strong  and  great  city," 
"  hard  to  besiege,"  with  a  "  temple  (rb  Tefievos) 
of  Atargatis"  (to  '  At  apyaTtiov),  but  with  no  in- 
dication of  its  locality,  beyond  its  being  in  "  the 
land  of  Galaad." 

It  is  usually  assumed  to  be  the  same  place  as 
the  preceding  [Ashtaroth],  but  the  few  facts 
that  can  be  ascertained  are  all  against  such  an 
identification.  1.  The  affix  "  Kamaim,"  which 
certainly  indicates  some  distinction,"  and  which  in 
the  times  of  the  Maccabees,  as  quoted  above,  appears 
to  have  superseded  the  other  name.  2.  The  fact 
that  Eusebius  and  Jerome  in  the  Onomasticon, 
though  not  very  clear  on  the  point,  yet  certainly 
make  a  distinction  between  Ashtaroth  and  A. -Car- 
naim, describing  the  latter  as  a  Kcvfi^  fieyio'TT]  ttjs 
'ApajSi'os,  vicus  grandis  in  angulo  Batanaeeae.  .">. 
Some  weight  is  due  to  the  renderings  of  the  Sama- 
ritan version,  and  of  the  Arabic  version  of  Saadiah, 
which  give  Ashtaroth  as  in  the  text,  but  A.-Kar- 
naira  by  entirely  different  names  (see  above).  The 
first  of  these,  Aphinith,  does  not  appear  to  have 
been  yet  recognised ;  but  the  second,  es-Sanamcin, 
can  hardly  be  other  than  the  still  important  place 
which  continues  to  bear  precisely  the  same  name, 
on  the  Haj  route,  about  25  miles  south  of  Damascus, 
and  to  the  N.W.  of  the  Lcjah  (Burckh.  55;  Ritter, 
Syria,  812).  Perhaps  it  is  some  confirmation  ot 
this  view  that  while  the  name  Karnaim  refers  to 
some  double  character  in  the  deity  there  worshipped, 
es-Sanamein  is  also  dual,  meaning  "  the  two  idols." 
There  accordingly  we  are  disposed  to  fix  the  site  of 
Ashtaroth-Karnaim  in  the  absence  of  further  evi- 
dence. [*'■] 

ASH'TORETH  (finFlB^;  'Affrdprv,  As- 
tarte), the  principal  female  divinity  of  the  Phoeni-. 
cians,  as  Baal  was  the  principal  male  divinity.  It  is 
a  peculiarity  of  both  names  that  they  frequently 
occur  m  the  plural  and  are  associated  together 
in  this  form  (Judg.  x.  6  ;  1  Sam.  vii.  4,  xii.  10). 
Gesenius  (Thcs.  s.  vv.)  maintained  that  by  these 
plurals  were  to  be  understood  statues  of  Baal 
and  Astarte ;  but  the  more  correct  view  seems  to 
be  that  of  Movers  (PhSn.  i.  175,  602),  that  the 
plurals  are  used  to  indicate  different  modifications 
of  the  divinities  themselves.  In  the  earlier  books 
of  the  0.  T.,  only  the  plural,  Ashtaroth,  occurs, 
and  it  is  not  till  the  time  of  Solomon,  who  intro- 
duced the  worship  of  the  Sidonian  Astarte,  and 
only  in  reference  to  that  particular  goddess,  Aslito- 
reth  of  the  Sidoniaus,  that  the  singular  is  found  in 
the  0.  T.  (1  K.  xi.  5,  33;  2  K.  xxiii.  13).  The 
worship   of  Astarte   was   very    ancient  and   very 


a  This  was  held  by  the  Jews  at  the  date  of  the 
Talmud  to  refer  to  its  situation  between  two  higll 
peaked  hills  (see  Sukkah,  fol.  2),  though  it  more 
probably  alludes  to  the  worship  of  the  horned  goddess, 
the  "  mooned  Ashtaroth." 


ASHTORETH 

widely  spread.  We  find  the  plural  Ashtaroth 
united  with  the  adjunct  Karnaim  as  the  name  of  a 
city  as  early  as  the  time  of  Abraham  (Gen.  xiv.  5), 
and  we  read  of  a  temple  of  this  goddess,  appa- 
rently as  the  goddess  of  war,  amongst  the  Philis- 
tines in  the  time  of  Saul  (1  Sam.  xxxi.  10 ).  From 
the  connexion  of  this  goddess  with  Baal  or  Bel 
we  should  moreover  naturally  conclude  that  she 
would  be  found  in  the  Assyrian  pantheon,  and  in 
fact  the  name  Ishtar  appears  to  he  clearly  identified 
in  the  list  of  the  great  gods  of  Assyria  (Layard, 
N~.  and  B.,  352,  629 ;  Rawlinson,  Early  History 
of  Babylon,  Lond.  1854,  p.  23;  Rawlinson,  Hero- 
dotus, i.  634).  There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that 
this  Assyrian  goddess  is  the  Ashtoreth  of  the  Old 
Testament  and  the  Astarte  of  the  Greeks  and  IJo- 
maus.  The  worship  of  Astarte  seems  to  have  ex- 
tended wherever  Phoenician  colonies  were  founded. 
Thus  we  find  her  name  in  inscriptions  still  existing 
in  the  island  of  Cyprus  on  the  site  of  the  ancient 
Citium,  and  also  at  Carthage  (Gesen.  Mon.  Phoen. 
pp.  125,  449),  and  not  unfrcquently  as  an  element 
in  Phoenician  proper  names,  as  "A CTapros,  'A/35a- 
(TTapT09,  AeXaacrTdpTos  (Jos.  c.  Ap.  i.  18).  The 
name  occurs  moreover  written  ill  Egyptian  hiero- 
glyphics, as  Astart  (Ges.  Thcs.  s.  v.  For  evi- 
dence of  her  wide-spread  worship  see  also  Eckhel, 
Doct.  Num.  iii.  369  sqq.).  It  is  worthy  of  remark 
that  Rodiger  in  his  recently  published  Addenda  to 
Gesenius'  Thesaurus  (p.  106)  notices  that  in  the 
inscription  on  the  sarcophagus  of  a  king  named 
Esmnnazar  discovered  in  January,  1855  (see 
Robinson,  iii.  36,  note),  the  founding,  or  at 
least  restoration,  of  the  temple  of  this  goddess  at 
Sidon,  is  attributed  to  him  and  to  his  mother 
Amashtoreth,  who  is  further  styled  priestess  of 
Ashtoreth. 

If  now  we  seek  to  ascertain  the  character  and  at- 
tributes of  this  goddess  we  find  ourselves  involved 
inconsiderable  perplexity.  There  can  be  no  doubt 
that  the  general  notion  symbolized  is  that  of  pro- 
ductive power,  as  Baal  symbolizes  that  of  gene- 
rative power,  and  it  would  be  natural  to  conclude 
that  as  the  sun  is  the  greal  symbol  of  the  latter, 
and  therefore  to  be  identified  with  Baal,  so  the 
moon  is  the  symbol  of  the  former  and  must  be 
identified  with  Astarte.  That  this  goddess  was  so 
typified  can  scarcely  be  doubted.  The  ancient 
name  of  the  city,  Ashtaroth-Karnaim,  already  re- 
ferred to,  seems  to  indicate  a  honied  Astarte,  that 
is  an  image  with  a  crescent  moon  on  her  head  like 
the  Egyptian  Athor.  At  any  rate  it  is  certain  that 
she  was  by  some  ancient  writers  identified  with  the 
moon,  thus  Lucian  (Be  Syria  Dea,  4)  says, 
' AffTcipTTjj'  8'  tyw  Sok4co  ScA.rji'aiT]!'  ifi.ix.tvai.  And 
again  rlerodian,  v.  '<,  10,  Ovpaviav  QolviKes 
' AffTpoapxH"  (a  grecised  form  of  Astarte)  bvo- 
fid^ovffi,  <rthi]vr)v  elvai  OiKopres.  On  these 
grounds  Movers,  Winer,  Keil,  and  others  maintain 
that  originally  Ashtoreth  was  the  moon-goddess. 
<  in  the  other  hand  it  appears  to  be  now  ascertained 

that  the  Assyrian  Ishtar  was  not  the  moon-goddess, 
but  the  plan  el  Venus  (Rawlinson,  Herod.  1.  < 
it  is  certain  that  Astart.'  was  by  many  ancient  writers 
identified  with  the  goddess  Venus  (or  Aphrodite)  as 

well  as  also  with  the  planet  of  that  name.  The 
name  its.lt"  seems  to  be  identical  with  our  word 
Star,  a  word  very  widely  spread  (Sanskrit,  tara; 

Zend,  star&nm ;  Pehlevi,  ■    :   Pers.  g  ,l£^. 

;   Gr.  iurr-fip;   I.at.  stella).     Though  this 
derivation   is  regarded  as  doubtful   bj    Keil,  from 


ASHURITES 


123 


the  absence  of  the  initial  ]}  in  all  the  presumed 
representatives  of  the  word  (Kdnvjc,  i.  168,  Kng. 

tr.  i.  189),  it  is  admitted  by  Gesenius,  Fiirst, 
Movers,  and  most  Hebrew  critics  on  apparently 
good  grounds.  On  the  whole  it  seems  most  likely 
that  both  the  moon  and  the  planet  were  looked 
upon  as  symbols,  under  different  aspects  and  per- 
haps at  different  periods,  of  the  goddess,  just  as 
each  of  them  may  in  different  aspects  of  the  hea- 
vens be  regarded  as  the  "  queeu  of  heaven." 

The  inquiry  as  to  the  worship  paid  to  the  goddess 
is  not  less  perplexed  than  that  of  the  heavenly  body 
in  which  she  was  symbolized.  Movers  (PhSn. 
607)  distinguishes  two  Astartes,  one  Carthagi- 
nian-Sidonian ,  a  virgin  goddess  symbolized  by  the 
moon,  the  other  Syro-Phoenician  symbolized  by  the 
planet  Venus.  Whether  this  he  so  or  not,  it  is 
certain  that  the  worship  of  Astarte  became  iden- 
tified with  that  of  Venus:  thus  Cicero  (</,■  Nat. 
Deor.  iii.  23)  speaks  of  a  fourth  Venus,  "  Syria 
Tyroque  concepta,  quae  Astarte  vocatur,"  and  that 
this  worship  was  connected  with  the  most  impure 
and  licentious  rites  is  apparent  from  the  close  con- 
nexion of  this  goddess  with  ASHEBAH,  or,  as  our 
translators  rendered  the  word,  "  groves."  It  is  not 
necessary  that  we  should  here  enter  further  into 
the  very  perplexed  and  revolting  subject  of  the 
worship  of  this  goddess.  The  reader  who  wishes 
to  pursue  the  inquiry  may  find  ample  details  in 
Movers'  Phonizicr,  already  referred  to,  and  iu 
Creuzer's  Symbolik.  [F.  W.  G-] 

ASH-TREE  (fit*,  'Oren,  rendered  by  theLXX. 

irirvs,  and  by  the  Vulg.  pinus).  It  is  mentioned 
only  in  Is.  xliv.  14,  in  connexion  with  other  timber 
trees.  The  similarity  of  sound  favours  the  notion 
that  it  is  the  Latin  ornus,  or  ash-tree;  and  Celsius 
(Hierobot.  i.  192)  takes  it  to  be  the  Arabic 
s  - 1 
\  \,   which,    according    to    Sprengel    (Hist,    rci 

herb.  i.  14)  is  the  Capparis  spinosa  of  Linnaeus, 
a  thorny  tree  producing  bitter  berries.  Gesenius, 
however,  prefers  to  render  it  by  pine,  on  the  au- 
thority of  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.,  and  supposes  the 
name  to  have  arisen  from  the  gracefulness  of  its 
form,  the  root  being  pX,  which  in  Arabic  signifies 
agilis,  gracilis  fait.  [W.  D.] 

ASH'UR  Cl-intrX  ;  'A<rx",  'Acrovp  ■  Ashur, 
Assur),  the  "  Father  of  Tekoa "  {I  Chr.  ii.  24, 
iv.  5). 

ASH'URITES,  the   (niBWri;    rbv   Oafftpl; 

Alex.      Qatrovp  ;     GesSUrx).       This     nam CUTS 

only  in  the  enumeration  of  those  over  whom 
[shbosheth  was  made  king  (2  Sam.  ii.  9).  By 
some  of  the  old  interpreters — Arabic,  Syriac, 
and  Vulgate  versions — and  in  modern  times  by 
Ewald     ((JeScA.    iii.   145),    the    name    is    taken    as 

meaning  the  Geshurites,  the  members  of  a  small 
kingdom  to  the  S.  or  S.E.  of  Damascus,  one  of  the 
petty  states  which  were  included  under  the  general 
\ram.  [Aram;  Geshur.]  The  difficulty 
in  accepting  this  substitution  is  that  Geshur  had  a 
king  of  its  own,  Talmai,  whose  daughter  moreover 
was  married  to  David  son.  where  about  this  viy 

i  Chr.  iii   '-'.  compared  with  -I),  a  circum- 
i  a  ith  his  being  the  ally  of  l-h- 

l,  oi    with   the   Litter   being  made  kin 

the  | pie  of  Geshur.     Talmai  was  >ti!l  king  many 

real  •  ait.i   this  o. .  :  Sam.  riii.  37)i     In 


124 


ASHVATH 


addition,  Geshur  was  surely  too  remote  from  Ma- 
hanaim  and  from  the  rest  of  Ishbosheth's  territory 
to  be  intended  here. 

It  would  therefore  be  perhaps  safer  to  follow 
the  Targum  of  Jonathan,  which  has  Beth-Asher, 
"IK'N  IV3  "  the  house  of  Asher,"  a  reading  sup- 
ported  by  several  MSS.  of  the  original  text,  which, 
omitting  the  Van,  have  n^NH  (Davidson,  Hebr. 
Text,  ad  loc).  "  The  Asherites"  will  then  denote 
the  whole  of  the  country  west  of  the  Jordan  above 
Jezreel  (the  district  of  the  plain  of  Esdraelon),  and 
the  enumeration  will  proceed  regularly  from  north 
to  south,  Asher  to  Benjamin.  The  form  "  Asherite  " 
occurs  in  Judg.  i.  32. 

The  reading  of  the  LXX.  was  evidently  quite 
different;  but  what  it  was  has  not  been  yet 
recognised. 

There  is  clearly  no  reference  here  to  the  Asshuvim 
of  Gen.  xxv.  3.  [G-] 

ASH'VATH  (npV;  A<n'0;  Asoth) ,  name  of  a 
man  (1  Chr.  vii.  33). 

A'SIA  (J)  'Aala).  The  passages  in  the  N.  T., 
where  this  word  occurs,  are  the  following:  Acts  ii. 
9,  vi  9,  xvi.  6,  xix.  10,  22,  26,  '27,  xx.  4,  16,  18, 
xxi.  27,  xxvii.  2  ;  Rom.  xvi.  5  (where  the  true 
reading  is  'Affias)  ;  1  Cor.  xvi.  19  ;  2  Cor.  i.  8  ; 
2  Tim.  i.  15;  1  Pet.  i.  1 ;  Rev.  i.  4,  11.  [Chief 
of  Asia:  see  Asiarch.]  In  all  these  passages 
it  may  be  confidently  stated  that  the  word  is  used, 
not  for  "  the  continent  of  Asia,"  nor  for  what  we 
commonly  understand  by  "  Asia  Minor,''  but  for  a 
Roman  province  which  embraced  the  western  part 
of  the  peninsula  of  Asia  Minor,  and  of  which  Ephe- 
sus  was  the  capital.  This  province  originated  in 
the  bequest  of  Attains,  king  of  Pergamus,  or  king 
of  Asia,  who  left  by  will  to  the  Roman  Republic  his 
hereditary  dominions  in  the  west  of  the  peninsula 
(B.C.  133).  Some  rectifications  of  the  frontier 
were  made,  and  "  Asia"  was  constituted  a  province. 
Under  the  early  Emperors  it  was  rich  and  flourishing, 
though  it  had  been  severely  plundered  under  the 
Republic.  In  the  division  made  by  Augustus  of 
senatorial  and  imperial  provinces,  it  was  placed  in 


ASIARCHAE 

the  former  class,  and  was  governed  by  a  proconsul. 
(Hence  a.v6vwaroi,  Acts  xix.  38,  and  on  coins.)  It 
contained  many  important  cities,  among  which 
were  the  seven  churches  of  the  Apocalypse,  and  it 
was  divided  into  assize  districts  for  judicial  business. 
(Hence  ayopaioi,  i.e.  rj/xepat,  Acts,  ibid.).  It  is 
not  possible  absolutely  to  define  the  inland  bound- 
ary of  this  province  during  the  life  of  St.  Paul : 
indeed  the  limits  of  the  provinces  were  frequently 
undergoing  change  ; '  but  generally  it  may  be  said 
that  it  included  the  territory  anciently  subdivided 
into  Aeolis,  Ionia,  and  Doris,  and  afterwards  into 
Mysia,   Lydia,  and  Caria.      [Mysia,  'Lycia,  Bi- 

THYNIA,  PlIRYGIA,  GALATIA.] 

Meyer's  comment  on  Acts  xvi.  6  is  curious,  and 
neither  necessary  nor  satisfactory.  He  supposes 
that  the  divine  intimation  given  to  St.  Paul  had 
reference  to  the  continent  of  Asia,  as  opposed  to 
Europe,  and  that  the  apostle  supposed  it  might 
have  reference  simply  to  Asia  cis  Taurum,  and 
therefore  attempted  to  penetrate  into  Bithynia. 
The  view  of  Meyer  and  De  Wette  on  Acts  xxvii.  2 
(and  of  the  former  on  Acts  xix.  10),  viz.,  that  the 
peninsula  of  Asia  Minor  is  intended,  involves  a  bad 
geographical  mistake :  for  this  term  "  Asia  Minor" 
does  not  seem  to  have  been  so  applied  till  some 
centuries  after  the  Christian  era.  Moreover  the 
mistake  introduces  confusion  into  both  narratives. 
It  is  also  erroneous  to  speak  of  Asia  in  the  N.  T. 
as  A.  proconsulates ;  tor  this  phrase  also  was  of 
later  date,  and  denoted  one  of  Constantine's  subdivi- 
sions of  the  province  of  which  we  are  speaking. 

In  the  books  of  Maccabees,  where  reference  is 
made  to  the  pre-provincial  period  of  this  district 
(B.C.  200-150),  we  frequently  encounter  the  word 
Asia  in  its  earlier  sense.  The  title  "  King  of  Asia" 
was  used  by  the  Seleucid  monarchs  of  Antioch ,  and 
was  claimed  by  them  even  after  it  more  properly 
belonged  to  the  immediate  predecessors  of  Attains 
(see  1  Mace.  xi.  13  ;  Conybeare  and  Howson's  Life 
and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  ch.  xiv.;  Marquardt's 
Rom.  Alterthiimer,  iii.  pp.  130-146).  [J.  S.  H.] 

ASIAR'CHAE  ('Atndpxai ;  principes  Asiae, 
Vulg.  ;  chief  of  Asia,  A.  V. ;  Acts  xix.  31), 
officers  chosen  annually  by  the  cities  of  that  part 


Greek  Imperial  Copper  Coin  ('  medallion  ")  of  Laodicea  ol  Phrygin  ;  (  ummouus  ;  with  name  of  Asian  li. 

Obv.  :  AYTKAIMAYP  .  ANTfiNEINOlJCE.      Bust  of  Emperor  to  right.     Rev.:  eniAIATJirP  HTOCACIAP  . 
AAOAIKEJ2N    IS'EflKOPfiN.     Figure  in  triumphal  quadriga  onions,  to  left. 

of  the  province  of  Asia,  of  which  Ephesus  was,  under  l  the  aediles  at  Rome  (Niebuhr,  iii.  35  ;  Gibbon,  sv 
Roman  government,  the  metropolis.  They  had  ii.  205,  ed.  Smith).  Their  office  was  thus,  in  great 
charge  of  the  public  games  and  religious  theatrical  I  measure  at  least,  religious,  and   they  are  in  conse- 

speetaeles,  tl xpenses  of  which  they  bore,  as  was  i  quence  sometimes  called  apxicpfh,  and  their,  office 

done  by  the  holders  of  AsiTovpyiai  at  Athens,  and  |  UpoHTvvr)  {Mart.  S.  Polycarp.  in  Pair .  Ap.  c.  21). 


ASIBIAS 

Probably  it  represented  tin-  religious  element  of  the 
ancient  Panionian  league;  to  the  territorial  limits 
of  which  also  the  circle  of  the  functions  of  the 
Asiarchs  nearly  corresponded.  (See  Herod,  i.  142.) 
Officers  called  AvKidpxai-  are  mentioned  by  Strabo 
(xiv.  p.  665),  who  exercised  judicial  and  civil  func- 
tion-,, subject  to  the  Unman  government  ;  but  there 
is  no  evidence  to  show  that  the  Asiarchs  exercised 
any  but  the  religious  functions  above-mentioned. 
Modestinus  names  Bidvviapx'ia  and  KaTrvaSoKapxia 
as  religious  offices  in  Bitnynia  and  Cappadocia. 
The  ollice  of  Asiarch  was  annual,  and  subject 
to  the  approval  of  the  proconsul,  but  might  be 
renewed;  and  the  title  appeals  to  have  been  con- 
tinued to  those  who  had  at  any  time  held  the  office. 
From  its  costliness,  it  was  often  (cUl)  conferred  on 
a  citizen  of  the  wealthy  city  of  Tralles  (Strabo,  xiv. 
p.  649).  Philip,  the  Asiarch  at  the  time  of  S.  Poly- 
carp's  martyrdom,  was  a  Trallian.  Coins  or  in- 
scriptions bearing  the  names  of  persons  who  had 
served  the  office  of  Asiarch,  once  or  more  times, 
are  known  as  belonging  to  the  following  cities : 
Aphrodisias,  Cyzicus,Hypaepa,  Laodicea,  Pergamus, 
Philadelphia,  Sardis,  Smyrna,  Thyatira.  (Aristid. 
Or.  xxvi.  j).  518,  ed.  Dind.  ;  Eckhel,  ii.  507  ;  iv. 
207  ;  Bockh,  Inscr.  vol.  ii. ;  Van  Dale,  Dissert. 
p.  274,  seq. ;  Krause,  Civitates  Neocorae,  p.  71  ; 
Wetstein,  On  Acts  XIX. ;  Akerman,  Numismatic 
Tllustr.  p.  51  ;  Herod,  v.  38  ;  Hammond,  On 
N.  T.)  [H.  W.  P.] 

ASI'BIAS  (Acefiias ;  Zabdias),  name  of  a  man 
(1  Esd.  ix.  29). 

A'SIEL  (bi^by ;  'Ao-nJA;  Asiet),  name  of  a 

man  (1  Chr.  iv.  35). 

AS'IPHA   (Acn<pd;   Gusphd),   1  Esd.  v.  20. 
[Hascpha.] 

AS'KELON.     [Ashkelon.] 

ASMODE'US  O'lpK'K;     'AcrfioScSos,    Tob. 

iii.  8),  the  same  as  JHDN,  which  in  Job  mi,  12, 

&c,  means  "destruction,"  and  'AiroWvaiv,  Rev. 
ix.  1 1,  where  he  is  called  "  a  king,  the  angel  of  the 
bottomless  pit,"  and  6  'OXodpevaiv,  Wisd.  xviii.  25, 
where  he  is  represented  as  the  ''Evil  angel"  (Ps. 
lxxviii.  40)  of  the  plague.  (Schlensner's  T 
s.  r.)  From  the  fact  thai  the  Talmud  (cod. 
(iittin.  Eccles.  i.  12)  calls  him  >TtTl  fcO^ft  rex 
daemonum  (ct'.  Lightfoot,  Hor.  Hebr.'et  Talm.ia 
Luke  \i.  15),  some  assume  him  to  be  identical  with 
Beelzebub,  and  others  with  AzraeL  The  name  is 
derived  either  from  "10"',  to  destroy,  or,  according 
to  Reland  (Winer,  .v.  v.),  from  a  Persian  word 
=  ireipdC*"'.  In  the  book  of  TobH  this  evil  spirit 
is  represented  as  loi  ing  Sara,  the  daughter  of  Raguel, 
and  causing  the  death  of  seven  husbands,  who  mai- 
ried  her  in  succession,  on  tin'  bridal  night  ;  gaining 
the  power  to  do  bo  (;n  is  hinted)  through  their  in- 
continence. Tobias,  instructed  by  Raphael,  burns 
on  "  the  ashes  of  perfume "  the  heart  and  live  of 
the  fish  which  he  caught  in  the  Tigris;  '-the  which 
smell  when  the  evil  spirit  had  smelled,  he  tie  I  into 
the  Utmost  parts  of  Egypt,  and  the  angel  bound 
him  "  (Tob.  viii.  .">). 

It   is   obviously    a   vain   endeavour  to  attempt  to 
rationalise  this  story  of 

.     .     .     Asniocleii-  with  the  ti-hy  fume 

That  drove  him.  though  enamoured,  from  the  Bponse 

OfTobit's  son,  ami  with  a  vengeance   sent 
From  Media  post  to  Egypt,  there  fas!  hound. 


ASS  125 

since  it  is  throughout  founded  on  Jewish  demonology, 
and  "  the  loves  of  the  angels,"  a  strange  fancy  de- 
rived from  Gen.  vi.  2.    Those  however  who  attempt 

this  task  make  Asmodeus  the  demon  of  impurity, 
and  suppose  merely  that  the  fumes  deadened  the 
passions  of  Tobias  and  his  wife.  The  Rabbis  (among 
other  odd  fables)  make  this  demon  the  offspring  of 
the  incest  of  Tubalcain  with  his  sister  Noema,  and 
say  (in  allusion  to  Solomon's  many  wives)  that 
Asmodeus  once  drove  him  from  his  kingdom,  but 
being  dispossessed  was  forced  to  serve  in  building 
the  temple,  which  he  did  noiselessly,  by  means  of  a 
mysterious  stone  Shamir  (Calmet,  s.  v.  and  frag- 
ments, 271.  where  there  is  a  great  deal  of  fanciful 
and  groundless  speculation).  [F.  YV.  F.] 

AS'NAH(!"I3DN;  'Acrevd  ;  Asend),  name  of  a 
man  (Ezr.  ii.  50).     [See  Asexath.] 

ASNAP'PER  (133pK;  Syr.  Espid;  A<r«- 
va<pdp;  Asenaphar),  mentioned  in  Ezr.  iv.  10, 
with  the  epithets  "  great  and  noble,"  as  the  person 
who  settled  the  Cuthaeans  in  the  cities  of  Samaria. 
He  has  been  variously  identified  with  Shalmaneser, 
Sennacherib,  and  Esar-haddon.  Of  the  three  the 
third  is  the  most  probable,  as  Gesenius  says,  since 
in  ver.  2  of  the  same  chapter  the  Cuthaeans  attri- 
bute their  settlement  to  that  king.  But  on  the 
whole,  as  this  is  but  slight  evidence,  it  seems  better 
to  accept  Patrick's  view  {Comm.  in  loco),  that 
Asnapper  was  "  some  great  commander,  who  was 
entrusted  by  one  of  these  kings  to  conduct  them, 
and  bring  them  over  the  river  Euphrates,  ami  sec 
them  settled  in  Samaria."  [G.  E.  L.  C] 

A'SOM  (AoSfi;  Asom),  1  Esd.  ix.  33.     [Ha- 

SIIUM.] 

ASP(jnS,   Pethen;    aairis,    EXX.;     identical 

with  the  adder  mentioned  in  Ps.  1  viii.  4,  xci.  13. 
It  occurs  in  Deut,  xxxii.  33;  Job  xx.  14,  16;  Is. 
xi.  8 ;  and  Rom.  iii.  1:!.  It  is  the  Coluber  Naja  of 
Egypt,  and  is  very  poisonous.  See  Adder.  [W.  D.] 

AS'PATHA  (XriSDX;    <i>aayd;    Esphatha), 

third  son  of  Haman  (Esth.  ix.  7). 

AS'PHAlt,  THE  POOL  (XdKKOs  'A<T<pdp)  in 
the  "wilderness  of  Thecoe.'  By  this  "pool" 
Jonathan  and  Simon  Maocahacns  encamped  at  the  be- 
ginning of  their  struggle  with  Bacchides  (  1  Mace.  ix. 
:'>:;  ;  Joseph.  .1;,/.  xiii.  1 .  §2).  Is  it  possible  that  the 
name  is  a  corruption  of  AaKKos  'Aatpa\TirT}s  ?  [G.] 

ASPHAIt'ASUS  l' Acr<papd<ros  ;  Mechpsato- 
chor),  1  Esd.  v.  8.     [Mi/.r.u:.] 

AS'RIEL  ("?X"X"X  ;  'Effpifo;  Aariel,EsrieT)y 
a  son  of  the  patriarch  Manasseh  (Num.  xxvi.  .;i  ; 
Josh.  xvii.  2;    1  Chr.  vii.   14). 

ASS,  a  quadruped  frequently  mentioned  in 
Scripture,     The  name  is  assigned  by  the  A.  V.  to 

several  distinct  lid,,  words,  viz.  JinN.  ~\V2n,  TJ? 
T1")y%  and  N^S,  and  the  Greek  words  Zvos  an  I 
viro^vyiov.  It  occurs  also  in  two  passages  ot 
1  ■veins  xiu  19,  xxxiii  24,  m  the  first  it  whi.h  it 
stands  for  ovaypos. 

'Athdn  ( JiriN  |,  a  she-ass  of  the  domestic  kind.  s,. 
called  from  its  slowness,  being  from  the  mot  JJTIN, 

UUUsed  in  Heb.,  but  having  in   Arab,    the   mi 

incessit.        It    is  men- 


126  ASS 

tioned  several  times  in  Genesis,  twice  as  distinguished 
from  TlJOn.  It  occurs  also  in  Num.  xxii.,  where 
Balaam's  ass  is  mentioned,  and  also  in  1  Sam.  ix., 
x.,  in  the  account  of  Saul  being  sent  to  seek  his 
father's  asses.  Also  in  2  K.  iv.  22,  24,  and  1 
Chr.  xxvii.  30.  In  the  two  passages  of  Genesis 
(xii.  16,  xlv.  23)  where  JiriN  contrasts  with  "11011, 
the  LXX.  have  Ti/xiovos,  but  in  the  other  passages 
either  t\  ovos,  or  ovos  0r?\ei'a.  In  Zech.  ix.  9, 
only  do  they  depart  from  their  usual  rendering,  and 
express  ni3'nS"}2  *VJ?  by  tvwXov  viov. 

Chamor  ("iVDn)  is  the  general  term  for  the  male 
ass,  whether  domesticated  or  not,  and  is  derived 
from  the  root  "Iftll,  rubuit,  because  of  its  reddish 
colour,  as  in  Spanish  they  call  the  ass  burro,  bur- 
rico  —  ruber,  and  in  Gr.  from  irvppSs  comes  irvp- 
f>iX<>s,  sc.  'Imros.  The  Hebrews  used  the  ass  as  a 
beast  of  burden,  for  ploughing,  and  for  riding,  and 
held  it  in  considerable  esteem.  The  comparison  of 
Issachar  to  a  strong  ass  (Gen.  xlix.  14)  is  not  in- 
tended as  a  reproach,  though  with  the  Greeks,  the 
Romans,  the  Egyptians  and  other  nations,  the  stu- 
pidity of  the  ass  became  a  proverb.  In  the  law  of 
Moses  (Deut.  xxii.  10)  it  was  forbidden  to  plough 
with  the  ox  and  the  ass  yokel  together:  it  was 
also  unclean  because  it  did  not  chew  the  cud  (Lev. 
xi.  26)  ;  and  hence  the  force  of  the  statement  in 
2  K.  vi.  25,  "  And  there  was  a  great  famine  in 
Samaria :  and  behold,  they  besieged  it,  until  an  ass's 
head  was  sold  for  fourscore  pieces  of  silver,"  &c. ; 
for  there  could  be  no  stronger  proof  of  the  straits 
the  besieged  were  put  to  than  that  they  should  eat 
what  was  unclean.  The  imputation  cast  upon  the 
Jews  in  ancient  times  of  worshipping  an  ass's  head, 
has  been  variously  explained.  The  conjectures  on 
this  matter  are  some  of  them  ingenious,  but  all  un- 
satisfactory. The  LXX.  usually  render  IIDn  by 
o  ovos. 

'Air  (y)),  from  root  "VJ?,  fervere,  aestuare)  sig- 
nifies a  young  male  ass.  The  A.  V.,  in  Judg.  x.  4, 
xii.  14,  renders  it  ass  colts;  in  Gen.  xxxii.  15, 
xlix.  11,  foal;  in  Job  xi.  12,  colt;  and  in  Isa. 
xxx.  6,  24,  young  asses.  In  the  four  first  passages 
the  LXX.  have  iru\os.  In  Job  and  Isaiah  ovos. 
The  ass  is  a  lascivious  animal ;  hence  the  deriva- 
tion of  this  word  ;  and  possibly  also  of  "I1DH,  for 
one  meaning  of  "tfDn  is  aestuavit. 

Arod  C"T"ny).  This  animal  is  mentioned  in  Job 
xxxix.  5,  in  company  with  the  fcOQ,  and  both  are 
rendered  in  A.  V.  by  wild  ass.  The  LXX.  omit 
TITS?.  Gesenius  says  lilJ?  =  X"]S,  the  former 
being  the  Aramean,  the  latter  the  Heb.  form ;  but 
probably  two  distinct  animals  are  meant.  We 
have  the  Chald.  plur.  emphat.  N'*l*lJ?,  from  T\V, 
in  Dan.  v.  21,  which  is  rendered  by  Theodot.  bvd- 
ypuv.  The  11"|J?  is  probably  the  wild  mule  of 
Mongolia,  which  is  superior  to  the  onager  in 
strength,  beauty,  and  swiftness.  The  derivation  is 
from  an  unused  root  TlV,  which  in  the  Arab  sig- 
nifies fugit  (cognate  of  1T\T\,  tremuit,  trepidavit). 
Bochart  (Hicroz.  ii.  p.  218,  Lips.)  suspects  the 
name  THJJ  to  be  onomatopoetic,  from  the  neighing 
of  the  animal  when  it  sees  man;  and  Gesenius 
thinks  that  there  may  be  some  truth  in  this  con- 


ASSIR 

lecture,  although  we  have  no  confirmation  of  it  in 
the  other  Semitic  dialects.  In  Sanscrit  rud  —  flere, 
to  weep. 

Pere  (&OB),  the  wild  ass  of  Asia,  formerly 
found  in  Syria,  but  now  very  rare  in  Western  Asia, 
but  still  found  in  Arabia  and  Persia.  Gesenius 
refers  to  Ker  Porter's  .  Travels  in  Georgia  and 
Persia,  i.  p.  459,  for  a  description  and  figure 
of  this  animal,  agreeing  precisely  with  a  living  ex- 
ample which  he  saw  in  the  Zoological  Gardens  in 
London  in  1835.  The  chase  of  this  animal  by  the 
soldiers  of  the  army  of  Cyrus  is  related  by  Xeno- 
phon.  Martial  calls  it pirfcher  onager;  and  Op- 
pian  has  described  its  beauty,  fieetness,  and  un- 
tameableness.  The  word  occurs  in  Gen.  xvi.  12, 
where  it  is  said  that  Ishmael  shall  be  DIN  X"I2 
rendered  in  A.  V.  a  wild  man,  in  Ps.  civ.  11  ;  in 
several  passages  of  Job;  Isa.  xxxii.  14;  Jer.  ii. 
24,  xiv.  6;  and  Hos.  viii.  9.  The  LXX.  vari- 
ously render  it  by  ovaypos,  ovos  &ypios,  ovos  iprj- 
(iIttis,  and  ovoi  iv  aypip.  The  derivation  is  from 
NTS,  cito  ferri,  cito  currerc,  onagrum  agcre.  See 
Hos.  xiii.  15,  where  N'HQ"',  onagrum  egit.=fero- 
citer  egit  instar  onagri.  [W.  D.] 

ASSA'BIAS  ('Ao-apias ;  ffasabias),  1  Esd.  i. 
9.     [Hashabiah.] 

ASSAL'IMOTH  (2a\i,uc£0  ;  Salimoth  (39)  ), 
1  Esd.  viii.  36.     [Shelomith.] 

ASSA'NIAS(2ajuias;  Assa7inas),  1  Esd.  viii. 
54.     [Hashabiah.] 

ASSH'UR.     [Assyria.] 

ASSIDEANS  ('A<rt8a?oi ;  Assidaei ;  i.  e. 
D^pn,  the  jiious,  "puritans;"  ol  eii<rej8e?y,  ol 
'6o~ioi),  the  name  assumed  by  a  section  of  the  orthodox 
.Tews  (1  Mace.  ii.  42,  alii  'lovSaiuiv  probably  by 
correction;  1  Mace.  vii.  13;  2  Mace.  xiv.  6),  as 
distinguished  from  "  the  impious "  (ot  aere/3ely, 
1  Mace.  iii.  8,  vi.  21,  vii.  5,  &c),  "  the  lawless  " 
(ot  &vofj.oi,  1  Mace.  iii.  6,  ix.  23,  &c),  "  the 
transgressors"  (ol  irapdvo/noi,  1  Mace.  i.  11,  &c), 
that  is,  the  Hellenizing  faction.  They  appear  to 
have  existed  as  a  party  before  the  Maccabaean  rising, 
and  were  probably  bound  by  some  peculiar  vow  to 
the  external  observance  of  the  Law  (1  Mace.  ii.  42, 
tKovffia^zo-Qai.  tg3  v6fia>).  They  were  among  the 
first  to  join  Mattathias  (1  Mace.  I.  c.)  ;  and  seem 
afterwards  to  have  been  merged  in  the  general  body 
of  the  faithful  (2  Mace.  xiv~.  6,  ol  \ty6/j.evoi  tow 
'lovdaiicv  'Affidcuoi,  wv  a<pT)yiiTcu  'lovSas  6  Ma/c/ca- 
fiaios  .  .  .)  When  Bacchides  came  against  Jerusalem 
they  used  their  influence  (1  Mace.  vii.  13,  irpwrot 

01  'ActS.  iicrav  iv  viols  'IcporjA.)  to  conclude  a 
peace,  because  "  a  priest  of  the  seed  of  Aaron  " 
(Alcimus)  was  with  him,  and  sixty  of  them  fell  by 
his  treachery  [Alcimus].  The  name  Chasidim 
occurs  frequently  in  the  Psalms  (  e.  g.  Ps.  lxxix. 

2  =  1  Mace.  vii.  17;  exxxii.  9,  &c.)  ;  and  it  has 
been  adopted  in  recent  times  by  a  sect  of  Polish 
Jews,  who  take  as  the  basis  of  their  mystical  system 
the  doctrines  of  the  Cabbalistic  book  Zohar  (Beer, 
Ersch  und  Gruber,  s.  v.  Chassidder).     [B.  F.  W.] 

AS'SIR  (TDN ;   'Aoslp,  'Ao-fip;  Aser,  Asir). 

1.  Son    of  Korah    (Ex.   vi.    24;    1   Chr.   vi.    22). 

2.  Son  of  Ebiasaph,  and  a.  forefather  of  Samuel 
(1  Chr.  vi.  23,  37).  3.  Son  of  Jeconiah  (1  Chr. 
iii.  17),  unless  "IDN  rTOD''  bo  translated  "  Jeconiah 
the  captive"  (Bertheau  ad  luc.).  [G.] 


ASSOS 

AS'SOS  or  AS'SUS  (vAo-<ros),  a  town  and  sea- 
port of  the  Roman  province  of  Asia,  in  the  district 
anciently  called  Mysia.  It  was  situated  on  the 
northern  shore  of  the  gulf  of  AnriAMYTTirM,  and 
was  only  about  seven  miles  from  the  opposite  coast 
of  Lesbos,  near  Methymna  (Strab.  xiii.  p.  618). 
A  good  Roman  road,  connecting  the  towns  of  the 
central  parts  of  the  province  with  Alexandria 
Troas  [Troas]  passed  through  Assos,  the  distance 
between  the  two  latter  places  being  about  20  miles 
{Hin.  Anton.).  These  geographical  points  illus- 
trate St.  Paul's  rapid  passage  through  the  town,  as 
mentioned  in  Acts  xx.  13,  14.  The  ship  in  which 
be  was  to  accomplish  his  voyage  from  Troas  to 
Caesarea  went  round  Cape  Tectum,  while  he  took' 
the  much  shorter  journey  by  land.  Thus  he  was 
able  to  join  the  ship  without  difficulty,  and  in  suffi- 
cient time  for  her  to  anchor  oil'  Mitylene  at  the 
close  of  the  day  on  which  Troas  had  been  left. 

The  chief  characteristic  of  Assos  was  that  it  was 
singularly  Greek.  Fellows  found  there  "no  trace 
of  the  Romans."  Leake  says  that  "the  whole 
gives  perhaps  the  most  perfect  idea  of  a  Greek  city 
that  anywhere  exists."  The  remains  are  numerous 
and  remarkably  well  preserved,  partly  because 
many  of  the  buildings  were  of  granite.  The  cita- 
del, above  the  theatre,  commands  a  glorious  view, 
and  must  itself  have  been  a  noble  object  from  the 
sea.  The  Street  of  Tombs,  leading  to  the  Great 
Gate,  is  one  of  the  most  remarkable  features  of 
Assos.  Illustrations  of  the  ancient  city  will  be 
found  in  Texier,  Clarac,  Fellows,  and  Choiseul- 
Gouffier.  It  is  now  utterly  desolate.  Two  mono- 
graphs on  the  subject  are  mentioned  by  Winer: 
Quandt,  De  Asson.  Regiom.  1710;  Amnell,  De 
AtrcT6D,  Upsal.  1758. 

It  is  now  a  matter  of  curiosity  to  refer  to  the 
interpretation  which  used  to  be  given  to  the  words 
aaaov  -KapiXzyovTO,  in  Acts  xxvii.  13.  In  the 
Vulgate  they  were  rendered  "cum  sustulissent  de 
Asson,"  and  they  were  supposed  to  point  to  a  city 
of  this  name  in  Crete.  Such  a  place  is  actually 
inserted  by  Padre  Georgi,  in  the  map  which  accom- 
panies his  Paulm  Naufragus  (Venet.  1730,  p. 
LSI).  The  true  sense  of  the  passage  was  first 
given  by  Beza.  [J.  S.  H.] 

ASSUE'RUS  (Aai-opos),  Tob.  xiv.  15.    [Anv- 

SUERCS.] 

AS'Sl'L  iTliTX;  'Atrarovp).  1.  (Ezr.  iv.  2; 
Ps.  Ixxxiii.  8  ;  2  Esd.  ii.  S  ;  Jud.  ii.  14;  v.  1  ;  vi. 
1,  17  ;  vii.  'in,  24;  xiii.  15;  xiv.  ;1 ;  xv.  6;  xvi.  4. 
[AsSHUR;  Assyria.]  2.  ('AoWjS;  Alex. ' \aovp j 
Aziu),  1  Esd.  v.  31.     [Hauiiuk.] 

ASSYE'IA,  ASSH'UR   (TttPK;   'Ao-o-oiV; 

Jos.  'Afftrupia ;  Assur),  was  a  great  and  powerful 
country  lying  on  the  Tigris  (Gen.  ii.  14),  the 
capita]  of  which  was  Nineveh  (Gen.  \.  11,  &c). 
It  derived  its  name  apparently  from  Asshur, 
the    Mm   of  Shem    dleii.   \.   22),   who   in    later 

times  was  worshipped  as  their  chief  god  by  the 
Assyrians.  'fhe  boundaries  of  Assyria  differed 
greatly  at  different  periods.  Probably  in  tic 
earliest  times  it  was  confined  to  a  -mall  trad  of 
low  country  between  fchi  tnd  the 

Lesser  Zab,  or  Zab  Asfal,  Lying  chiefly  on  the  left 
bank  of  the  Tigris.     Gradually  its  limits  wi 
tended,  until  it  came  to  !»•  regarded  as  comprising 
the  whole  region  between  the  Armenian  mountains 

(lat.  37°  30')  upon  the  north,  and  upon  tie 

the  country  abou.1    Baghdad   I  i  i  I-  t- 

ward  its  boundary  was  tie-  high  range  of  Z:c_rios. 


ASSYRIA 


12^ 


or  mountains  of  Kur'dist&n;  westward,  it  was,  ac- 
cording to  the  views  of  some,  bounded  by  the 
Mesopotamia!]  desert,  while,  according  to  others,  it 
reached  the  Euphrates.  Taking  the  greatest  of 
these  dimensions,  Assyria  may  be  said  to  have 
extended  in  a  direction  from  N.E.  to  S.W.  a  dis- 
tance of  nearly  500  miles,  with  a  width  varying 
from  350  to  100  miles.  Its  area  would  thus  a 
little  exceed  100,000  square  miles,  or  about  equal 
that  of  Italy. 

1.  General  character  of  the  country . — The  coun- 
try within  these  limits  is  of  a  varied  chaiacter.  On 
the  north  and  east  the  high  mountain-chains  of 
Armenia  and  Kurdistan  aie  succeeded  by  low  ranges 
of  limestone-hills  of  a  somewdiat  arid  aspect,  which 
detach  themselves  from  the  principal  ridges,  running 
parallel  to  them,  and  occasionally  inclosing,  between 
their  northern  or  north-eastern  flank  and  the  main 
mountain-line,  rich  plains  and  fertile  valleys.  To 
these  ridges  there  succeeds  at  first  an  undulating 
zone  of  country,  well  watered  and  fairly  productive, 
which  finally  sinks  down  with  some  suddenness 
upon  the  great  Mesopotamian  plain,  the  modern 
district  of  El-Jezireh.  This  vast  flat,  which  ex- 
tends in  length  for  250  miles  from  the  latitude  of 
Mardin  (37°  20')  to  that  of  Tekrit  (34°  33'),  and 
which  is  in  places  of  nearly  equal  width,  is  inter- 
rupted only  by  a  single  limestone-range — a  narrow 
ridge  rising  abruptly  out  of  the  plain;  wdiich, 
splitting  off  from  Zagios  in  lat.  33°  30',  may  be 
traced  under  the  names  of  Sarazur,  Hamrin,  and 
Sinjar,  from  Twan  in  Luristan  nearly  to  Eakkah 
on  the  Euphrates.  "From  all  parts  of  the  plain 
the  Sinjar  is  a  beautiful  object.  Its  limestone  rocks, 
wooded  here  and  there  with  dwarf  oak,  are  of  a 
rich  golden  colour;  and  the  numberless  ravines 
which  furrow  its  sides  form  ribs  of  deep  purple 
shadow"  (Layard,  Nineveh  and  Babylon,  p.  265). 
Above  and  below-  this  barrier,  stretching  southward 
and  westward  further  than  the  eye  can  reach,  ami 
extending  northward  and  eastward  70  or  80  miles 
to  the  hill-country  before  mentioned,  is  an  immense 
level  tract,  now  for  the  most  part  a  wilderness, 
scant ly  watered  on  tin1  right  bank  of  the  Tigris, 
but  abundantly  supplied  on  the  left,  which  bears 
marks  of  having  been  in  early  times  throughout 
well  cultivated  and  thickly  peopled.  This  plain  is 
not  alluvial,  and  most  parts  of  it  are  even  con- 
siderably raised  above  the  level  of  tin1  rivers.  It 
is  covered  in  spring  time  with  the  richest  vegeta- 
tion, presenting  to  the  eye  a  carpet  of  Bowers, 
varying  in  hue  from  day  to  day;  but  as  tin'  sum- 
mer advances  it  is  parched  up,  and  gradually 
changes  to  an   aril   and   yellow  waste,  except  along 

the  courses  of  the  rivers.     All  over  this  vast  tint, 

on   both  sides  of  the  Tigris,  rise  "  grass-o 

heaps,    marking    the    site    of   ancient    habitations" 
(Layard,  p.  245).     Mr.  Layard  counted  from  one 
spot   nearly  a  hundred  (Nineveh  and  its  Hen 
i.  p.  315);  from  another  above  200  of  the-,'  lofty 

\  ii.  ,'»</  Bab.  p.  2  15 1.  Tho-e  which 
have   been   examined  have  been  uniformly  found  to 

appearances  distinctly  connecting  them  with 
the  remains  of  Nineveh.  [Nineveh.]  It  may 
therefore  lie  regarded  as  certain  that,  they  belong  to 
the  time  of  Assyrian  greatness,  and  thus  they  will 
serve  to  mark  the  extent  of  the  real  Assyrian  do- 
minion. They  are  numerous  on  the  left  bank  of 
tic  Tigris   from    Bavian   to  the    Diyaleh,  and   on 

t  they  thickly  stud  tl utire  country  both 

north  and  south  of  the  Sinjar  range,  extending 
east u aid  beyond  theKhabour  >  Layard,  chs.  xii.-xiv.j, 


128 


ASSYRIA 


northward  to  Mardin,  and  southward  to  the  vicinity 
of  Baghdad. 

2.  Provinces  of  Assyria. — Assyria  in  Scripture 
is  commonly  spoken  of  in  its  entirety,  and  unless 
the  Hnzzab  (3-'!i,rT)  of  Nahum  (ii.  7)  is  an  equiva- 
lent for  the  Adiabene  of  the  geographers,  no  name 
of  a  district  can  be  said  to  be  mentioned.  The 
classical  geographers,  on  the  contrary,  divided  As- 
syria into  a  number  of  regions — Strabo  (xvi.  §1 
and  §4)  into  Aturia,  Arbelitis,  Artacene,  Apollo- 
niatis,  Chalonitis,  Dolomcne,  Calachene,  Adiabene, 
Mesopotamia,  &c. ;  Ptolemy  (vi.  1)  into  Arrapa- 
chitis,  Adiabene,  the  Garamaean  country,  Apollo- 
niatis,  Arbelitis,  the  country  of  the  Sambatae, 
Calacine,  and  Sittacene.  These  regions  appear  to 
be  chiefly  named  from  cities,  as  Arbelitis  from 
Arbela;  Calacene  (or  Calachine)  from  Calah  or 
Halah  (Gen.  x.  11;  2  K.  xvii.  6);  Apolloniatis 
from  Apollonia;  Sittacene  from  Sittace,  &c.  Adia- 
bene, however,  the  richest  region  of  all,  derived  its 
appellation  from  the  Zab  (Diab)  rivers  on  which  it 
lay,  as  Ammianus  Marcellinus  informs  us  (xxiii.  20). 
Ptolemy  (v.  18)  made  Mesopotamia  (which  he  un- 
derstood literally  as  the  whole  country  between  the 
Euphrates  and  the  Tigris)  distinct  from  Assyria, 
just  as  the  sacred  writers  distinguish  D*"li13  D"IN 
from  *VlGJ-'Nt.     Strabo  (xvi.    §1)   extended  Assyria 

to  the  Euphrates,  and  even  across  it  into  Arabia 
and  Syria  ! 

3.  Chief  cities. — The  chief  cities  of  Assyria  in 
the  time  of  its  greatness  appear  to  have  been  the 
following: — Nineveh,  which  is  marked  by  the 
mounds  opposite  Mosul  (Nebbi-  Yunus  and  Koyun- 
jik);  Calah  or  Halah,  now  Nimrud ;  Asshur,  now 
Kileh  Sherghat;  Sargina,  or  Dur-Sargina,  now 
Khorsabad ;  Arbela,  still  Arbil;  Opis  at  the  junc- 
tion of  the  Diyalch  with  the  Tigris ;  and  Sittace,  a 
little  further  down  the  latter  river,  if  this  place 
should  not  rather  be  reckoned  to  Babylonia. 

4.  Nations  bordering  on  Assyria. — Towards  the 
north,  Assyria  bordered  on  the  strong  and  moun- 
tainous region  of  Armenia,  which  may  have  been 
at  times  under  Assyrian  dominion,  but  was  never 
reckoned  an  actual  part  of  the  country.  (See  2  K. 
xix.  37.)  Towards  the  east  her  neighbours  were 
originally  a  multitude  of  independent  tribes,  scat- 
tered along  the  Zagros  chain,  who  have  their  fitting 
representatives  in  the  modern  Kurds  and  Lurs — the 
real  sovereigns  of  that  mountain-range.  Beyond 
these  tribes  lay  Media,  which  ultimately  subjected 
the  mountaineers,  and  was  thereby  brought  into 
direct  contact  with  Assyria  in  this  quarter.  On 
the  south,  Elam  or  Susiana  was  the  border-state 
east  of  the  Tigris,  while  Babylonia  occupied  the 
same  position  between  the  rivers.  West  of  the 
Euphrates  was  Arabia,  and  higher  up  Syria,  and 
the  country  of  the  Hittites,  which  last  reached 
from  the  neighbourhood  of  Damascus  to  Anti-Taurus 
and  Amanus. 

5.  History  of  Assyria — original  peopling. — On 
the  subject  of  the  original  peopling  and  early  con- 
dition of  Assyria  we  have  more  information  than  is 
generally  possessed  with  regard  to  the  first  begin- 
nings of  nations.  Scripture  informs  us  that  Assyria 
was  peopled  from  Babylon  (Gen.  x.  11;,  and  both 
classical  tradition  and  the  monuments  of  the  coun- 
try agree  in  this  representation.  In  Herodotus 
(i.  7),  Ninus,  the  mythic  founder  of  Nineveh,  is  the 
son  (descendant)  of  Belus,  the  mythic  founder  of 
Babylon — a  tradition    in    which    the  derivation  of 


ASSYRIA 

Assyria  from  Babylon,  and  the  greater  antiquity 
and  superior  position  of  the  latter  in  early  times 
are  shadowed  forth  sufficiently.  That  Ctesias  (ap. 
Diod.  Sic.  ii.  7)  inverts  the  relation,  making 
Semiramis  (according  to  him,  the  wife  and  suc- 
cessor of  Ninus),  found  Babylon,  is  only  one  out  of 
ten  thousand  proofs  of  the  untrustworthy  character 
of  his  history.  The  researches  recently  carried,  on 
in  the  two  countries  clearly  show,  not  merely  by 
the  statements  which  are  said  to  have  been  de- 
ciphered on  the  historical  monuments,  but  by  the 
whole  character  of  the  remains  discovered,  that 
Babylonian  greatness  and  civilization  was  earlier 
than  Assyrian,  and  that  while  the  former  was  of 
native  growth,  the  latter  was  derived  from  the 
neighbouring  country.  The  cuneiform  writing,  for 
instance,  which  is  rapidly  punched  with  a  very 
simple  instrument  upon  moist  clay,  but  is  only 
with  much  labour  and  trouble  inscribed  by  the 
chisel  upon  rock,  must  have  been  invented  in  a 
country  where  men  "  had  brick  for  stone"  (Gen. 
xi.  3),  and  have  thence  passed  to  one  where  the 
material  was  unsuited  for  it.  It  may  be  observed 
also,  that  while  writing  occurs  in  a  very  rude 
form  in  the  earlier  Babylonian  ruins  (Loftus's 
Chaldaea,  p.  169),  and  gradually  improves  in  the 
later  ones,  it  is  in  Assyria  uniformly  of  an  advanced 
type,  having  apparently  been  introduced  there  after 
it  had  attained  to  perfection. 

6.  Date  of  the  foundation  of  the  kingdom. — 
With  respect  to  the  exact  date  at  which  Assyria 
became  a  separate  and  independent  country,  there 
is  an  important  difference  between  classical  autho- 
rities. Herodotus  and  Ctesias  were  widely  at 
variance  on  this  point,  the  latter  placing  the  com- 
mencement of  the  empire  almost  a  thousand  years 
before  the  former !  Scripture  does  but  little  to 
determine  the  controversy  ;  that  little,  however,  is 
in  favour  of  the  earlier  author.  Geographically — 
as  a  countri] — Assyria  was  evidently  known  to 
Moses  (Gen.'ii.  14,  xxv.  18;  Num.  xxiv.  22,  24); 
but  it  does  not  appear  in  Jewish  history  as  a 
kingdom  till  the  reign  of  Menahem  (ab.  B.C.  770). 
In  Abraham's  time  (B.C.  1900  ?)  it  is  almost  cer- 
tain that  there  can  have  been  no  Assyrian  kingdom, 
or  its  monarch  would  have  been  found  among  those 
who  invaded  Palestine  with  Chedorlaomer  (Gen. 
xiv.  1).  In  the  time  of  the  early  Judges  (B.C. 
1400?)  Assyria,  if  it  existed,  can  have  been  of  no 
great  strength ;  for  Chushan-Rishathaim,  the  first 
of  the  foreigners  who  oppressed  Israel  (Judg.  iii.  8), 
is  master  of  the  whole  country  between  the  rivers 
{Aram-Naharaim  =  "  Syria  between  the  two 
rivers").  These  facts  militate  strongly  against 
the  views  of  Ctesias,  whose  numbers  produce  for 
the  founding  of  the  empire  the  date  of  B.C.  2182 
(Clinton,  F.  H.  i.  p.  263).  The  more  modest  ac- 
count of  Herodotus  is  at  once  more  probable  in 
itself,  more  agreeable  to  Scripture,  and  more  in 
accordance  with  the  native  writer  Berosus.  He- 
rodotus relates  that  the  Assyrians  were  "  lords  of 
Asia  "  for  520  years,  when  their  empire  was  partially 
broken  up  by  a  revolt  of  the  subject-nations  (i.  95). 
After  a  period  of  anarchy,  the  length  of  which  he 
does  not  estimate,  the  Median  kingdom  was  formed, 
179  years  before  the  death  of  Cyrus,  or  B.C.  708. 
He  would  thus,  it  appears,  have  assigned  to  the 
foundation  of  the  Assyrian  empire  a  date  not  very 
greatly  anterior  to  B.C.  1228.  Berosus,  who  made 
the  empire  last  526  years  to  the  reign  of  Pul  (ap. 
Euseb.  Chron.  Can.  i.  4),  must  have  agreed  nearly 
with  this  view  ;  at  least  he  would  certainly  have 


ASSYRIA 

placed  the  rise  of  the  kingdom  within  the  13th 
century.  This  is,  perhaps,  the  utmost  that  can  he 
determined  with  any  approach  to  certainty.  If,  for 
convenience  sake,  a  more  exact  date  be  desired,  the 

conjecture  of  Dr.  Brandis  has  some  claim  to  be 
adopted,  which  fixes  the  year  R.c.  1:27.'}  as  that 
from  which  the  520  years  of  Berosus  are  to  be 
reckoned  (Ilerum  Assyriarum  Tempora  Emendata, 
p.  17). 

7.  Early  kings,  from  the  foundation  of  the  king- 
dom  to  I'ul. — The  long  list  of  Assyrian  kings,  which 
has  come  down  to  us  in  two  or  three  forms,  only 
slightly  varied  (Clint.  F.  H.  i.  p.  207),  and  which 
is  almost  certainly  derived  from  Ctesias,  must  of 
necessity  be  discarded  together  with  his  date  for 
the  kingdom.  It  covers  a  space  of  above  1200 
years,  and  bears  marks  besides  of  audacious  fraud, 
being  composed  of  names  snatched  from  all  quarters, 
Arian,  Semitic,  and  Greek — names  of  gods,  names 
of  towns,  names  of  rivers — and  in  its  estimate  of 
time  presenting  the  impossible  average  of  34  or  35 
years  to  a  reign,  and  the  very  improbable  pheno- 
menon of  reigns  in  half  the  instances  amounting 
exactly  to  a  decimal  number.  Uufoitunately  we 
have  no  authentic  list  to  substitute  for  the  forgery 
of  Ctesias.  Berosus  spoke  of  45  kings  as  reigning 
during  his  period  of  526  years,  and  mentioned  all 
their  names  (Euseb.  1.  s.  c.)  ;  but  they  have  un- 
luckily not  been  preserved  to  ns.  The  work  of 
Herodotus  on  Assyrian  history  (Herod,  i.  106  and 
184)  has  likewise  entirely  perished;  and  neither 
Greek  nor  Oriental  sources  are  available  to  supply 
the  loss,  which  has  hitherto  proved  irreparable. 
Recently  the  researches  in  Mesopotamia  have  done 
something  towards  tilling  up  this  sad  gap  in  our 
knowledge;  but  the  reading  of  names  is  still  so 
doubtful  that  it  seems  best,  in  the  present  condition 
of  cuneiform  inquiry,  to  treat  the  early  period  of 
Assyrian  history  in  a  very  general  way,  only  men- 
tioning kings  by  name  when,  through  the  satis- 
factory identification  of  a  cuneiform  royal  designa- 
tion with  some  name  known  to  us  from  sacred  or 
profane  sources,  firm  ground  has  been  reached,  and 
serious  error  rendered  almost  impossible. 

The  Mesopotamian  researches  have  rendered  it 
apparent  that  the  original  seat  of  government  was 
not  at  Nineveh.  The  oldest  Assyrian  remains  have 
been  found  at  Kileh-Sherghat,  on  the  right  hank  ot 
the  Tigris,  60  miles  south  of' the  later  capital;  and 
this  place  the  monuments  show  to  have  been  the 
residence  of  the  earliest  kings,  as  well  as  of  the 
Babylonian  governors  who  previously  exercised,  au- 
thority over  the  country.  The  ancient  name  of 
the  town  appears  to  have  been  identical  with  that 
of  the  country,  viz.  Asshw.  It  wis  built  of  brick, 
and  has  yielded  hut  a  very  small  number  of  sculp- 
tures. The  kings  proved  to  have  reigned  th 
fourteen  in  number,  divisible  into  three  groups;  and 
their  reigns  are  thought  to  have  covered  a  space  of 
nearly  350  years,  from  B.C.  1273  to  n.c.  930.  The 
most  remarkable  monarch  of  the  series  was  called 
Tigiath-Pileser.  He  appears  to  have  been  king 
towards  the  close  of'  the  twelfth  century,  and  thus 
to  have  be.  n  contemporary  with  Samuel.  He  over- 
ran the  whole  country  between  Assyria  Proper  and 
the  Euphrates;  swept  the  valley  of  the  Euphrates 
from  smith  to  north,  from  the  bonier:,  ot'  Babylon 
t  '  Mount  Taurus;  crossed  the  Euphrates,  ai 
tended  in  northern  Syria  with  the  Hittites;  in- 
vaded Armenia  and  Cappadocia;  and  claims  to  have 
subdued  forty-two  countries  "  from  the  channel  of 
the  Lower  Zab  {Zab  Asfal)  to  the  Upper  Sea  of  the 


ASSYRIA 


129 


Setting  Sun."  All  this  he  accomplished  in  the  first 
live  years  of  his  reign.  At  a  later  date  he  appeal's 
to  have  suffered  defeat  at  the  hands  of  the  king  of 
Babylon,  who  had  invaded  his  territory  and  suc- 
ceeded in  carrying  off  to  Babylon  various  idols  from 
the  Assyrian  temples. 

The  other  monarchs  of  the  Kileh-Sherghat  series, 
both  before  and  after  Tigiath-Pileser,  are  compara- 
tively insignificant.  The  later  kings  of  the  series  are 
only  known  to  us  as  the  ancestors  of  the  two  great 
monarchs,  Sardanapalus  the  first,  and  his  son  Shal- 
maneser  or  Shalmanubar,  who  were  among  the 
most  warlike  of  the  Assyrian  princes.  Sardanapalus 
the  first,  who  appears  to  have  been  the  warlike 
Sardanapalus  of  the  Greeks  (Suidas,  s.  v.;  comp. 
Hellau.  Fr.  158),  transferred  the  seat  of  govern- 
ment from  Kileh-Sherghat  to  Kimrvd  (probably 
the  Scriptural  Calah),  where  he  built  the  first 
of  those  magnificent  palaces  which  have  recently 
been  exhumed  by  our  countrymen.  A  great  portion 
of  the  Assyrian  sculptures  now  in  the  British 
Museum  arc  derived  from  this  edifice.  A  descrip- 
tion of  the  building  has  been  given  by  Mr.  Layard 
(Nin.  and  its  Remains,  vol.  ii.  ch.  11).  By  an 
inscription  repeated  more  than  a  hundred  times 
upon  its  sculptures  we  learn  that  Sardanapalus 
carried. his  arms  far  and  wide  through  Western 
Asia,  warring  on  the  one  hand  in  Lower  Babylonia 
and  Chaldaea,  on  the  other  in  Syria  and  upon  the 
coast  of  the  Mediterranean.  His  son,  Shalmaneser 
or  Shalmanubar,  the  monarch  who  set  up  the  Black 
Obelisk,  now  in  the  British  Museum,  to  commemo- 
rate his  victories,  was  a  still  greater  conqueror. 
He  appears  to  have  overrun  Cappadocia,  Armenia, 
Azerbijan,  great  portions  of  Media  Magna,  the 
Kurdish  mountains,  Babylonia,  Mesopotamia,  Syria, 
and  Phoenicia;  everywhere  making  the  kings  id' 
the  countries  tributary  to  him.  If  we  may  trust 
the  reading  of  ceitain  names,  on  which  cuneifoim 
scholars  appear  to  be  entirely  agreed,  he  came  in 
contact  with  various  Scriptural  personages,  being 
opposed  in  his  Syrian  wars  by  Benhadad  and  Hazael, 
kings  of  Damascus,  and  taking  tribute  from  Jehu, 
king  of  Israel.  His  son  and  grandson  followed  in 
his  steps,  but  scarcely  equalled  his  glory.  The 
latter  is  thought  to  be  identical  with  the  Biblical 
Pul,  I'hul,  or  Phaloch  [Pl'L],  who  is  the  tlist  of 
the  Assyrian  kings  of  whom  we  have  mention  in 
Scripture. 

8.  The  kings  from  Pul  to  Esarhaddon. — The 
succession  of  the  Assyrian  kings  from  Pul  almost  to 
the  close  of'  the  empire  is  tendered  tolerably  certain, 
not  merely  by  the  inscriptions,  but  also  by  the 
Jewish  records.  In  the  2nd  book  of  Kings  we  find 
the  names  of  Pul,   Tigiath-Pileser,    Shalmaneser, 

Sennacherib,  and  Esarhaddon,  following another 

in  rapid  succession  (2  K.  xv.  19  and  29,  ivii.  •"■. 

xviii.  1.".,  xix.  37);  ami  in  Isaiah  we  have  the 

of  ''Saigon,    king   of  Assyria"    (\\.   \\  who    is    a 

contemporary  of  the  prophet,  and  who  musl  evi- 
dently therefore  belong  to  the  same  series.  The 
inscriptions,  by  showing  as  that  Saxgon  was  tin' 
father  of  Sennacherib,  fix  his  place  in  the  list,  and 

give  us  for  the  monarchs  of  the  last  half  ot'  the 
8th   and   the    first  half  of  the  7th  .vutuiy  B.C.  the 

(probably)  complete  list  of  Tigiath-Pileser  II.,  Shal- 
maneser 11.,  Sargon,  Sennacherib,  and  Esarhaddon. 

It  is  not    intended    in  this   place    to   enter   into  any 
lecoiitlt  of  the  actions  of  these  kiie.'S,  which 

will  be  more  properly  related  in  the  articles  pe- 
cially  devoted  to  them.  |  I'm..  Shalmaneser, 
Sabqow ,  &c.]     A  few  remarks,  however,  will  !• 


130 


ASSYRIA 


made  on  the  general  condition  of  the  empire  at  this 
period. 

9.  Establishment  of  the  Lower  Dynasty.  —  It 
seems  to  be  certain  that  at,  or  near,  the  accession 
of  Pul,  a  great  change  of  some  kind  or  other 
occurred  in  Assyria.  Berosus  is  said  to  have  brought 
his  grand  dynasty  of  45  kings  in  526  years  to  a  close 
at  the  reign  of  Pul  (Polyhist.  ap.  Euseb.  1.  s.  a), 
and  to  have  made  him  the  first  king  of  a  new  sei ies. 
By  the  synchronism  of  Menahem  (2  K.  xv.  19),  the 
date  of  Pul  may  be  determined  to  about  B.C.  770. 
It  was  only  23  years  later,  as  we  find  by  the  Canon 
of  Ptolemy,  that  the  Babylonians  considered  their 
independence  to  have  commenced  (B.C.  747).  Heio- 
dotus  probably  intended  to  assign  nearly  to  this 
same  era  the  great  commotion  which  (according  to 
him)  broke  up  the  Assyrian  empire  into  a  number 
of  fragments,  out  of  which  were  formed  the  Median 
and  other  kingdoms.  These  traditions  may  none  of 
them  be  altogether  trustworthy ;  but  their  coinci- 
dence is  at  least  remarkable,  and  seems  to  show 
that  about  the  middle  of  the  eighth  century  B.C. 
there  must  have  been  a  break  in  the  line  of  Assyrian 
kings  —  a  revolution,  foreign  or  domestic  —  and  a 
consequent  weakeniug  or  dissolution  of  the  bonds 
which  united  the  conquered  nations  with  their 
conquerors. 

It  was  related  by  Bion  and  Polyhistor  (Agathias, 
li.  25),  that  the  original  dynasty  of  Assyrian  kings 
ended  with  a  certain  Belochus  or  Beleus,  who  was 
succeeded  by  a  usurper  (called  by  them  Beletaras 
or  Balatorus),  in  whose  family  the  crown  continued 
until  the  destruction  of  Nineveh.  The  general  cha- 
racter of  the  circumstances  narrated,  combined  with 
a  certain  degree  of  resemblance  in  the  names — for 
Belochus  is  close  upon  Phaloch,  and  Beletaras  may 
represent  the  second  element  in  Tiglath-Pileser  (who 
in  the  inscriptions  is  called  "  Tiglath-Palatsira  ") — 
induce  a  suspicion  that  probably  the  Pul  or  Phaloch 
of  Scripture  was  really  the  last  king  of  the  old 
monarchy,  and  that  Tiglath-Pileser  II.,  his  successor, 
was  the  founder  of  what  has  been  called  the  "  Lower 
Empire."  It  may  be  suspected  that  Berosus  really 
gave  this  account,  and  that  Polyhistor,  who  repeated 
it,  has  been  misreported  by  Eusebius.  The  syn- 
chronism between  the  revolution  in  Assyria  and  the 
era  of  Babylonian  independence  is  thus  brought 
almost  to  exactness,  for  Tiglath-Pileser  is  known  to 
have  been  upon  the  throne  about  B.C.  740  (Clinton, 
F.  H. ,  i.  p.  278),  and  may  well  have  ascended  it 
in  B.C.  747. 

10.  Supposed  loss  of  the  empire  at  this  period. — 
Many  writers  of  repute — among  them  Clinton  and 
Niebuhr — have  been  inclined  to  accept  the  state- 
ment of  Herodotus  with  respect  to  the  breaking  up 
of  the  whole  empire  at  this  period.  It  is  evident, 
however,  both  from  Scripture  and  from  the  monu- 
ments, that  the  shock  sustained  through  the  do- 
mestic revolution  has  been  greatly  exaggerated. 
Niebuhr  himself  observes  (  Vortrwje  iiber  alte  Ge- 
schichte,  i.  p.  38)  that  after  the  revolution  Assyria 
soon  "  recovered  herself,  and  displayed  the  most 
extraordinary  energy."  It  is  plain,  from  Scripture, 
that  in  the  reigns  of  Tiglath-Pileser,  Shalmaneser, 
Sargon,  Sennacherib,  and  Esarhaddon,  Assyria  was 
as  great  as  at  any  former  era.  These  kings  all 
warred  successfully  in  Palestine  and  its  neighbour- 
hood ;  some  attacked  Egypt  (Is.  xx.  4) ;  one  appears 
as  master  of  Media  (2  K.  xvii.  6) ;  while  another 
has  authority  over  Babylon,  Susiana,  and  Elymais 
(2  K.  xvii.  24;  Ezr.  iv.  9).  So  far  fiom  our 
observing   symptoms    of    weakness    and    curtailed 


ASSYRIA 

dominion,  it  is  clear  that  at  no  time  were  the 
Assyrian  arms  pushed  further,  or  their  efforts  more 
sustained  and  vigorous.  The  Assyrian  annals  for 
the  period  are  in  the  most  complete  accordance  with 
these  representations.  They  exhibit  to  us  the 
above-mentioned  monarchs  as  extending  their  do- 
minions further  than  any  of  their  predecessors. 
The  empire  is  continually  rising  under  them,  and 
reaches  its  culminating  point  in  the  reign  of  Esar- 
haddon. The  statements  of  the  inscriptions  on 
these  subjects  are  fully  borne  out  by  the  indica- 
tions of  greatness  to  be  tiaced  in  the  architectural 
monuments.  No  palace  of  the  old  monarchy 
equalled,  either  in  size  or  splendour,  that  of  Sen- 
nacherib at  Nineveh.  No  seiies  of  kings  belonging 
to  it  left  buildings  at  all  to  be  compared  with 
those  which  were  erected  by  Sargon,  his  son,  and 
his  grandson.  The  magnificent  remains  at  Ko- 
yunjik  and  Khorsabad  belong  entirely  to  these  later 
kings,  while  those  at  Nimrud  are  about  equall) 
divided  between  them  and  their  predecessors.  It 
is  further  noticeable  that  the  writers  who  may  be 
presumed  to  have  drawn  from  Berosus,  as  Poly- 
histor and  Abydenus,  particularly  expatiated  upon 
the  glories  of  these  later  kings.  Polyhistor  said 
(ap.  Euseb.  i.  5)  that  Sennacherib  conquered  Baby- 
lon, defeated  a  Greek  aimy  in  Cilicia,  and  built 
there  Tarsus,  the  capital.  Abydenus  related  the 
same  facts,  except  that  he  substituted  for  the  Greek 
army  of  Polyhistor  a  Greek  fleet;  and  added,  that 
Esarhaddon  (his  Axerdis)  conquered  lower  Syria 
and  Egypt  (ibid.  i.  9).  Similarly  Menander,  the 
Tyrian  historian,  assigned  to  Shalmaneser  an  expe- 
dition to  Cyprus  (ap.  Joseph.  Ant.  Jud.  ix.  14), 
and  Herodotus  himself  admitted  that  Sennacherib 
invaded  Egypt  (ii.  141).  On  every  ground  it  seems 
necessary  to  conclude  that  the  second  Assyrian 
kingdom  was  really  greater  and  more  glorious  than 
the  first;  that  under  it  the  limits  of  the  empire 
reached  their  fullest  extent,  and  the  internal  pros- 
perity was  at  the  highest. 

The  statement  of  Herodotus  is  not,  however, 
without  a  basis  of  truth.  It  is  certain  that  Baby- 
Ion,  about  the  time  of  Tiglath-Pileser's  accession, 
ventured  upon  a  revolt,  which  she  seems  after- 
wards to  have  reckoned  the  commencement  of  her 
independence  [Babylon J.  The  knowledge  of  this 
fact  may  have  led  Herodotus  into  his  error,  for  he 
would  naturally  suppose  that  when  Babylon  be- 
came free  there  was  a  general  dissolution  of  the 
empire.  It  has  been  shown  that  this  is  far  from 
the  truth  ;  and  it  may  further  be  observed  that, 
even  as  regards  Babylon,  the  Assyrian  loss  was 
not  permanent.  Sargon,  Sennacherib,  and  Esar- 
haddon, all  exercised  full  authority  over  that  coun- 
try, which  appears  to  have  been  still  an  Assyrian 
fief  at  the  close  of  the  kingdom. 

11.  Successors  of  Esarhaddon. — By  the  end  of 
the  reign  of  Esarhaddon  the  triumph  of  the  Assy- 
rian arms  had  been  so  complete  that  scarcely  an 
enemy  was  left  who  could  cause  her  serious  anxiety. 
The  kingdoms  of  Hamath,  of  Damascus,  and  of 
Samaria,  had  been  successively  absorbed ;  Phoenicia 
had  been  conquered ;  Judaea  had  been  made  a  feud- 
atory; Philistia  and  Idumaea  had  been  subjected, 
Egypt  chastised,  Babylon  recovered,  cities  planted 
in  Media.  Unless  in  Armenia  and  Susiana  there 
was  no  foe  left  to  chastise,  and  the  consequence 
appears  to  have  been  that  a  time  of  profound  peace 
succeeded  to  the  long  and  bloody  wars  of  Sargon 
and  his  immediate  successors.  In  Scripture  it  is 
remarkable  that  we  hear  nothing  of  Assyria  after 


ASSYRIA 

the  reign  of  Esarhaddon,  and  profane  history  is 
equally  silent  until  the  attacks  begin  which  brought 
about  her  downfal.  The  monuments  show  that 
the  sou  of  Esarhaddon,  who  was  called  Sardana- 
palus  by  Abydenus  (ap.  Euseb.  i.  9),  made  scarcely 
any  military  expeditions,  but  occupied  almost  his 
whole  time  in  the  enjoyment  of  the  pleasures  of 
the  chase.  Instead  of  adorning  his  residence — as 
his  predecessors  had  been  accustomed  to  do — with 
a  record  and  representation  of  his  conquests,  Sarda- 
napalus  II.  covered  the  walls  of  his  palace  at  Nine- 
veh with  sculptures  exhibiting  his  skill  and  prowess 
as  a  hunter.  No  doubt  the  military  spirit  rapidly 
decayed  under  such  a  ruler,  and  the  advent  of  fresh 
enemies,  synchronising  with  this  decline,  produced 
the  ruin  of  a  power  which  had  for  six  centiuies 
been  dominant  in  Western  Asia. 

12.  Fall  of  Assyria. — The  fall  of  Assyria,  long  pre- 
viously prophesied  by  Isaiah  (x.  5-19),  was  effected 
(humanly  speaking)  by  the  growing  strength  and 
boldness  of  the  Medes.  If  we  may  trust  Herodotus, 
the  first  Median  attack  on  Nineveh  took  place  about 
the  year  B.C.  633.  By  what  circumstances  this 
people,  who  had  so  long  been  engaged  in  contests 
with  the  Assyrimis,  and  had  hitherto  shown  them- 
selves so  utterly  unable  to  resist  them,  became 
suddenly  strong  enough  to  assume  an  aggressive 
attitude,  and  to  force  the  Ninevites  to  submit  to  a 
siege,  can  only  be  conjectured.  Whether  mere 
natural  increase,  or  whether  fresh  immigrations 
from  the  east,  had  raised  the  Median  nation  at  this 
time  so  far  above  its  former  condition,  it  is  impos- 
sible to  determine.  We  can  only  say  that,  soon 
after  the  middle  of  the  seventh  century  they  began 
to  press  upon  the  Assyrians,  and  that,  gradually 
increasing  in  strength,  they  proceeded,  about  the 
year  B.C.  633,  to  attempt  the  conquest  of  the 
country.  For  some  time  their  efforts  were  unsuc- 
cessful;  but  after  a  while,  having  won  over  the 
Babylonians  to  their  side,  they  became  superior  to 
the  Assyrians  in  the  field,  and  about  B.C.  625,  or 
a  little  earlier,  laid  final  siege  to  the  capital  [ME- 
DIA.]. Saracus,  the  last  king — probably  the  grand- 
son of  Esarhaddon — made  a  stout  and  prolonged 
defence,  but  at  length,  finding  resistance  vain,  he 
collected  his  wive.s  and  his  treasures  in  his  palace, 
and  with  his  own  hand  setting  fire  to  the  building, 
perished  in  the  flames.  This  account  is  given  in 
brief  by  Abydenus,  who  probably  follows  Berosus ; 
and  its  outline  so  far  agrees  with  Ctesias  (ap. 
Diod.  ii.  27)  as  to  give  an  important  value  to  that 
writer's  details  of  the  siege.  [Nixi:vi:h.]  In  j 
the  general  fact  that  Assyria  was  overcome,  and  | 
Nineveh  captured  and  destroyed,  by  a  combined 
attack  of  Medes  and  Babylonians,  Josephus  (Ant. 
Jitd.  x.  5)  and  the  book  of  Tobit  (xiv.  15)  are 
agreed.  1'olyhistor  also  implies  it  (ap.  Euseb.  i. 
5);  and  these  authorities  must  be  regarded  as  out- 
weighing the  silence  of  Herodotus,  who  mentions 
only  the  Medes  in  connexion  with  the  capture  (i. 
106),  and  says  nothing  of  the  Babylonians. 

13.  Fulfilment  of  prophecy. — The  prophecies  of 
Nahum  and  Zephaniah  (ii.  13-5)  against  Assyria 
were  probably  delivered  shortly  before  the  catas- 
trophe.  The  date  of  Nahum  is  very  doubtful 
[Nahum],  but  it  is  not  unlikely  that  he  wrote 
about  B.C.  645,  towards  the  clo^e  of  the  reign  of 
Manasseh.  Zephamah  is  even  later,  since  he  pro- 
phesied under  Josiah,  who  reigned  from  B.C.  ,;  19 
to  608.  If  B.C.  625  be  the  date  ,,t  the  destruction 
of  Nineveh,  we  may  place  Zephaniah's  prophecy 
about  B.C.  6.">0.      E/.ekiel,  writing  about  B.C.  584, 


ASSYRIA 


131 


bears  witness  historically  to  the  complete  destruc- 
tion which  had  come  upon  the  Assyrians,  using  the 
example  as  a  warning  to  Pharaoh-Hophra  and  the 
Egyptians  (eh.  xxxi.). 

It  was  declared  by  Nahum  emphatically,  at  the 
close  of  his  prophecy,  that  there  should  be  "  no 
healing  of  Assyria's  bruise  "  (iii.  19).  In  accord- 
ance with  this  announcement  we  find  that  Assyria 
never  rose  again  to  any  importance,  nor  even  suc- 
ceeded in  maintaining  a  distinct  nationality.  Once 
only  was  revolt  attempted,  and  then  in  conjunction 
with  Armenia  and  Media,  the  latter  heading  the 
rebellion.  This  attempt  took  place  about  a  century 
after  the  Median  conquest,  during  the  troubles 
which  followed  upon  the  accession  of  Darius  Hy- 
staspis.  It  failed  signally,  and  appears  never  to 
have  been  repeated,  the  Assyrians  remaining 
thenceforth  submissive  subjects  of  the  Persian  em- 
pire. They  were  reckoned  in  the  same  satrapy 
with  Babylon  (Herod,  iii.  92;  comp.  i.  192),  and 
paid  an  annual  tribute  of  a  thousand  talents  of 
silver.  In  the  Persian  armies,  which  were  drawn 
in  great  part  from  the  subject-nations,  they  appear 
never  to  have  been  held  of  much  account,  though 
they  fought,  in  common  with  the  other  levies,  at 
Thermopylae,  at  Cunaxa,  at  Issus,  and  at  Afbela. 

14.  General  character  of  the  empire. — In  con- 
sidering the  general  character  of  the  Assyrian  em- 
pire, it  is,  in  the  first  place,  to  be  noticed,  that  like 
all  the  early  monarchies  which  attained  to  any 
great  extent,  it  was  composed  of  a  number  of  sepa- 
rate kingdoms.  In  the  East,  conquest  has  scarcely 
ever  been  followed  by  amalgamation,  and  in  the 
primitive  empires  there  was  not  even  any  attempt 
at  that  governmental  centralisation  which  we  find 
at  a  later  period  in  the  satrapial  system  of  Persia. 
As  Solomon  "  reigned  over  all  the  kingdoms  from 
the  river  (Euphrates)  unto  the  land  of  the  Philis- 
tines and  the  border  of  Egypt,"  so  the  Assyrian 
monarchs  bore  sway  over  a  number  of  petty  kings 
— the  native  rulers  of  the  several  countries — through 
the  entire  extent  of  their  dominions.  These  native 
princes — the  sole  governors  of  their  own  kingdoms 
—  were  feudatories  of  the  Great  Monarch,  of  whom 
they  held  their  crown  by  the  double  tenure  of 
homage  and  tribute.  Jlenahem  (2  K.  xv.  19), 
Hoshea  (ibid.  xvii.  4),  Ahaz  (ibid.  xvi.  8),  Heze- 
ki.ih  (ibid,  xviii.  14),  and  lUanasseh  (2  Chr.  xxxiii. 
11-3),  were  certainly  in  this  position,  as  were 
many  native  kings  of  Babylon,  both  prior  and  sub- 
sequent to  Nabonassar ;  and  this  system  (if  we  may 
trust  the  inscriptions)  was  universal  throughout 
the  empire.  It  naturally  involved  the  frequent 
recurrence  of  troubles.  Princes  circumstanced  as 
were  the  Assyrian  feudatories  would  he  always 
looking  (In-  an  occasion  when  they  might  revolt  and 

re-establish   their  independence.     Tl fler  of  a 

foreign  alliance  would  be  a  bait  which  they  could 
scarcely  resist,  and  hence  the  continual  warnings 
given  to  the  .lews  to  beware  of  trusting  in  Egypt, 
Apart  from  this,  on  the  occurrence  of  any  imperial 
misfortune  or  difficulty,  such  tbr  instance  as  a 
one  expedition,  a  formidable  attack,  or  a 
sudden  death,  natural  or  violent,  of  the  reigning 
monarch,  there  would  be  a  strong  temptation  to 
throw  oil  the  yoke,  which  would  lead,  almost  of 
necessity,  to  a  rebellion.  The  history  of  the 
I  Israel  and  Judah  sufficiently  illustrates 
the  tendency  in  question,  which  required  to  be  met 
by  checks  and  remedies  of  the  severest  character. 
The  deposition  of  the  rebel  prince,  the  wast 
his  country,  the  plunder  of  his  capital,  n  considerable 

K   2 


132 


ASSYRIA 


increase  in  the  amount  of  the  tribute  thenceforth 
required,  were  the  usual  consequences  of  an  unsuc- 
cessful revolt;  to  which  were  added,  upon  occasion, 
still  more  stringent  measures,  as  the  wholesale  exe- 
cution of  those  chiefly  concerned  in  the  attempt,  or 
the  transplantation  of  the  rebel  nation  to  a  distant 
locality.  The  captivity  of  Israel  is  only  an  instance 
of  a  practice  long  previously  known  to  the  Assy- 
rians, and  by  them  handed  on  to  the  Babylonian 
and  Persian  governments. 

It  is  not  quite  certain  how  far  Assyria  required  a 
religious  conformity  from  the  subject  people.  Her 
religion  was  a  gross  and  complex  polytheism ,  compris- 
ing the  worship  of  thirteen  principal  and  numerous 
minor  divinities,  at  the  head  of  the  whole  of  whom 
stood  the  chief  god,  Asshur,  who  seems  to  be  the 
deified  patriarch  of  the  nation  (Gen.  x.  22).  The 
inscriptions  appear  to  state  that  in  all  countries 
over  which  the  Assyrians  established  their  supre- 
macy, they  set  up  "  the  laws  of  Asshur,"  and 
"  altars  to  the  Great  Gods."  It  was  probably  in 
connexion  with  this  Assyrian  requirement  that 
Ahaz,  on  his  return  from  Damascus,  where  he  had 
made  his  submission  to  Tiglath-Pileser,  incurred 
the  guilt  of  idolatry  (2  K.  xvi.  10-6).  The  history 
of  Hezekiah  would  seem,  however,  to  show  that 
the  rule,  if  resisted,  was  not  rigidly  enforced ;  for 
it  cannot  be  supposed  that  he  would  have  consented 
to  re-establish  the  idolatry  which  he  had  removed, 
yet  he  certainly  came  to  terms  with  Sennacherib, 
and  resumed  his  position  of  tributary  (2  K.  xviii. 
14).  In  any  case  it  must  be  understood  that  the 
worship  which  the  conquerors  introduced  was  not 
intended  to  supersede  the  religion  of  the  conquered 
race,  but  was  only  required  to  be  superadded  as  a 
mark  and  badge  of  subjection. 

15.  Its  extent. — With  regard  to  the  extent  of 
the  empire  very  exaggerated  views  have  been  en- 
tertained by  many  writers.  Ctesias  took  Semira- 
mis  to  India,  and  made  the  empire  of  Assyria  at 
least  co-extensive  with  that  of  Persia  in  his  own 
day.  This  false  notion  has  long  been  exploded,  but 
even  Niebuhr  appears  to  have  believed  in  the  ex- 
tension of  Assyrian  influence  over  Asia  Minor,  in 
the  expedition  of  Memnon — whom  he  considered 
an  Assyrian — to  Troy,  and  in  the  derivation  of  the 
Lydian  Heraoleids  from  the  first  dynasty  of  Nine- 
vite  monarchs  {Alt.  Gcschicht.  i.  pp.  28-9).  The 
information  derived  from  the  native  monuments 
tends  to  contract  the  empire  within  more  reasonable 
boimds,  and  to  give  it  only  the  expansion  which  is 
indicated  for  it  in  Scripture.  On  the  west,  the  Me- 
diterranean and  the  river  Halys  appear  to  have 
been  the  boundaries ;  on  the  north,  a  fluctuating 
line,  never  reaching  the  Euxine  nor  extending  be- 
vond  the  northern  frontier  of  Armenia;  on  the  east, 
the  Caspian  Sea  and  the  Great  Salt  Desert ;  on  the 
south,  the  Persian  Gulf  and  the  Desert  of  Arabia. 
The  countries  included  within  these  limits  are  the 
following: — Susiana,  Chaldaea,  Babylonia,  Media, 
Matieue,  Armenia,  Assyria  Proper,  Mesopotamia, 
parts  of  Cappadocia  and  Cilicia,  Syria,  Phoenicia, 
Palestine,  and  Idumaea.  Cyprus  was  also  for  a 
while  a  dependency  of  the  Assyrian  kings,  and  they 
may  perhaps  have  held  at  one  time  certain  portions 
of  Lower  Egypt.  Lydia,  however,  Phrygia,  Lycia, 
Pamphylia,  Pontus,  Iberia,  on  the  west  and  north, 
Bactria,  Sacia,  Parthia,  India — even  Carmania  and 
Persia  Proper — upon  the  east,  were  altogether  be- 
yond the  limit  of  the  Assyrian  sway,  and  appear  at 
no  time  even  to  have  been  over-run  by  the  Assy- 
rian armies. 


ASSYRIA 

1G.  Qivilisation  of  the  Assyrians. — The  civilisa- 
tion of  the  Assyrians,  as  has  been  already  observed, 
was  derived  originally  from  the  Babylonians.  They 
were  a  Semitic  race,  originally  resident  in  Babylonia 
(which  at  that  time  was  Cushite),  and  thus  ac- 
quainted with  the  Babylonian  inventions  and  dis- 
coveries, who  ascended  the  valley  of  the  Tigris  an 
established  in  the  tract  immediately  below  the 
Armenian  mountains  a  separate  and  distinct  nation- 
ality. Their  modes  of  writing  and  building,  the 
form  and  size  of  their  bricks,  their  architectural  or- 
namentation, their  religion  and  worship,  in  a  great 
measure,  were  drawn  from  Babylon,  which  they 
always  regarded  as  a  sacred  land — the  original  seat 
of  their  nation,  and  the  true  home  of  all  their  gods, 
with  the  one  exception  of  Asshur.  Still,  as  their 
civilisation  developed,  it  became  in  many  respects 
peculiar.  Their  art  is  of  home  growth.  The 
alabaster  quarries  in  their  neighbourhood  supplied 
them  with  a  material  unknown  to  their  southern 
neighbours,  on  which  they  could  represent,  far 
better  than  upon  enamelled  bricks,  the  scenes  which 
interested  them.  Their  artists,  faithful  and  la- 
borious, acquired  a  considerable  power  of  rendering 
the  human  and  animal  forms,  and  made  vivid  and 
striking  representations  of  the  principal  occupations 
of  human  life.  If  they  do  not  greatly  affect  the 
ideal,  and  do  not,  in  this  branch,  attain  to  any 
very  exalted  rank,  yet  even  here  their  emblematic 
figures  of  the  gods  have  a  dignity  and  grandeur 
which  is  worthy  of  remark,  and  which  implies  the 
possession  of  some  elevated  feelings.  But  their 
chief  glory  is  in  the  representation  of  the  actual. 
Their  pictures  of  war,  and  of  the  chase,  and  even 
sometimes  of  the  more  peaceful  incidents  of  human 
life,  have  a  fidelity,  a  spirit,  a  boldness,  and  an 
appearance  of  life,  which  place  them  high  among 
realistic  schools.  Their  art,  it  should  be  also  noted, 
is  progressive.  Unlike  that  of  the  Egyptians,  which 
continues  comparatively  stationary  fi  om  the  earliest 
to  the  latest  times,  it  plainly  advances,  becoming 
continually  more  natural  and  less  uncouth,  more  life- 
like and  less  stiff,  more  varied  and  less  conventional. 
The  latest  sculptures,  which  are  those  in  the  hunting- 
palace  of  the  son  of  Esarhaddon,  are  decidedly  the 
best.  Here  the  animal-forms  approach  perfection, 
and  in  the  striking  attitudes,  the  new  groupings, 
and  the  more  careful  and  exact  drawing  of  the 
whole,  we  see  the  beginnings  of  a  taste  and  a  power 
which  might  have  expanded  under  favourable 
circumstances  into  the  finished  excellence  of  the 
Greeks. 

The  advanced  condition  of  the  Assyrians  in  vari- 
ous other  respects  is  abundantly  evidenced  alike  by 
the  representations  on  the  sculptures  and  '"by  the 
remains  discovered  among  their  buildings.  They  are 
found  to  have  understood  and  applied  the  arch  ;  to 
have  made  tunnels,  aqueducts,  and  drains ;  to  have 
used  the  lever  and  the  roller ;  to  have  engraved  gems  ; 
to  have  understood  the  arts  of  inlaying,  enamelling, 
and  overlaying  with  metals ;  to  have  manufactured 
glass,  and  been  acquainted  with  the  lens;  to  have 
possessed  vases,  jars,  bronze  and  ivory  ornaments, 
dishes,  bells,  earrings,  mostly  of  good  workmanship 
and  elegant  forms — in  a  word,  to  have  attained  to 
a  very  high  pitch  of  material  comfort  and  pros- 
perity. They  were  still,  however,  in  the  most  im- 
portant points  barbarians.  Their  government  was 
rude  and  inartificial ;  their  religion  coarse  and 
sensual ;  their  conduct  of  war  cruel ;  even  their 
art  materialistic  and  so  debasing ;  they  had  served 
their  purpose  when  they  had  prepared  the  East  for 


ASTAROTH 

centralised  government,  and  been  God's  scourge  to 
punish  the  people  of  Israel  (Is.  x.  5-6)  ;  they  were, 
therefore,  swept  away  to  allow  the  rise  of  that 
Arian  race  which,  with  less  appreciation  of  art, 
was  to  introduce  into  Western  Asia  a  more  spiritual 
form  of  religion,  a  better  treatment  of  captives, 
and  a  superior  governmental  organisation. 

(See  for  the  geography  Capt.  Jones'  paper  in  the 
riv*  volume  of  the  A-<iiiti''  Society's  Journal  (part 
2) ;  Col.  Chesney's  Euphrates  Expedition ;  Mr. 
I. a  yard's  works;  Rich's  Kurdistan,  &c.  For  the 
historical  views,  Rawhnson's  Herodotus,  vol.  i.; 
Brandis's  Rerum  Assyriarum  Tcmpora  Emcndata; 
Sir  II.  Rawlinson's  ( 'ontributions  in  the  Asiat.  Soc. 
Journ.  and  the  Athenaeum  •  Bosanquet's  Sacred 
ami  Profane  Chronology ;  M.  Oppert's  liapport 
a  son  Excellence  M.  !•■  Ministre  tie  I'  fust  ruction ; 
Dr.  Hindis' s  <_'<<ntril>uti<iits  to  the  Dublin  University 
Magazine;  Mr.  Vance  Smith's  Exposition  of  the 
Prophecies  relating  to  Nini  veh  and  Assyria  ;  and 
cump.  B.  G.  Nielmhr's  Vorti'Sge  Boer  alter  Ge- 
schichte,  vol.  i.;  Clinton's  Fasti  Hell.,  vol.  i.;  and  M. 
Nielmhr's  Geschichte  Assur's  and  Babel's.)  [G.  K.] 

ASTAROTH    (n'iriL,:i; ;   'Ao-rapM;    Asta- 

roth),  Deut.  i.  4.      [ASHTABOXH.] 

ASTAR'TE. 


ATARGATIS 


133 


[ASHTORETH.] 

AS'TATH  ('Ao-Tiifl;  Ezead),  1  Esd.  viii.  38. 

[AZGAD.] 

ASTRONOMY.     [Star.] 

ASTY'AGES  CA.o-rva.yris ;  Herod.  'Affrviyas, 
Ctes.  Wo-irdSas),  the  last  king  of  the  Medcs,  B.C. 
595-560,  or  is.c.  592-558,  who  was  conquered 
by  Cyrus  (Bel  and  Dragon,  1).  The  name  is 
identified  by  Rawlinson  and  Niebuhr  (Gesch. 
Assur's,  p.  32)  with  Deioces  =  Ashdahdk  (Aru.), 
Ajis  Dalutka  (I'ers.),  "  the  biting  snake,"  the 
emblem    of   the    Median    power, 

Mede;  Cyrus.] 

ASUPTDI,    and     "  HOUSE    OF "    (11*3 

D^SpSn  ;  oIkos  'Affa<pivv,  'E<re<f>i7*  ;  Domus  ser- 

Dorum  Concilium),  1  Chr.  xxvi.  15,  17.  This 
word  is  probably  not  to  be  taken  as  a  proper 
name:  in  Neli.  xii.  25,  it  is  rendered  in  A.  V. 
"  thresholds." 

ASYN'CEITDS  QAtrtyicpiTos ;  Asyncritus), 
a  Christian  a(  Rome,  laluted  by  St.  Paul  (Rom. 
xvi.  14). 

A'TAD,  the  threshing-floor  of  ("lOXn  )"}}  '= 

"  the  floor  (or  trodden  space)  of  the  thorn;"  Sam. 

Vers,    moy  "HON  ;     Saad.    -^ydl  !    "*">* 

AtolS ;    area    Atad),  a   spot    "beyond   Jo 
at  which  Joseph  and  his  brethren,  on  their  way 
from    Egypt   to  Hebron,   made  their  seven  days 

"great  and  very  b mourning"  over  the  1  ><>. | \- 

of  Jacob;  in  consequence  of  which  we  are  told 
it  acquired  from  the  Canaanites  the  new  name 
of  Abel-Mifc  .1.  10,  11).     According  to 


of  the  Canaanites,  "  the  inhabitants  of  the  land," 
who  were  confined  to  the  west  side  of  the  river  (see 
amongst  others  Terse  13  of  this  chapter),  and  one 
ot  whose  special  haunts  was  the  sunken  district  "  by 
the'  side'  of  Jordan"  (Num.  xiii.  29).  [Canaan.] 
The  word  "Oy,  "  beyond,"  although  usually  signi- 
fying the  east  of  Jordan,  is  yet  used  for  either  east 
or  west  according  to  the  position  of  the  speaker. 
[Euer.]  That  Jerome  should  have  defined  the 
situation  as  "  trans  Jordanem,"  at  the  same  time 
that  he  explains  it  as  between  the  river  and  Jericho, 
may  be  accounted  for  either  by  the  words  being  a 
mere  quotation  from  the  text,  or  by  some  subse- 
quent corruption  of  copyists.  The  pas-age  does 
not  survive  in  Eusebius.  [G.] 

ATARAH  (Hinj?;  'Ardpa;  Atara),  a  wife  of 
Jerahmeel,  and  mother  of  Onam  (1  Chr.  ii.  26). 

ATAR'GATIS  CArapydris,  Strab.xvi.p.  785, 

' ArapyaTiov  5e  rr/u  ' Addpav ol  "EWyvts 

eKaXovv),  or  according  to  another  form  of  the  word 
Derceto  (Aep/cercS,  Strab.  I.  c. ;  Luc.  de  Syria 
dea,  p.  884  ed.  Bened. ;  Plin.  H.  N.  v.  19  prodi- 
giosa  Atargatis  Graecis  Derceto ;  Ov.  Met.  iv.  45 
Dercetis),  a  Syrian  goddess,  represented  generally 
with  the  body  of  a  woman  and  the  tail  of  a  fish 
(Luc.  I.  c. ;  Ovid,  I.  c.  comp.  Dagon).  Her  most 
famous  temples  were  at  Hierapolis  (Mabug)  and 
Ascalon.  Herodotus  identified  her  with  Aphrodite 
Urania  (i.  105,  compared  with  Diod.  Sic.  ii.  4). 
Lucian  compared  her  with  Here,  though  he  allowed 
that  she  combined  traits  of  other  deities  (Aphrodite, 
Rhea,  Selene,  &c;  see  Ashtoreth).  Plutarch 
{Crass.  17)  says  that  some  regarded  her  as  "  Aphro- 
dite, others  as  Here,  others  as  the  cause  and  natural 
power  which  provides  the  principles  and  seeds  for 
all  things  from  moisture"  (jyjv  apxas  Ka)  o-itip- 
/xara  iraaiv  «|  vypwv  Trapaffxovffav  alriav  Kal 
[Darius  the  ,  <pvaiv).  This  last  view  is  probably  an  accurate 
[B.  F.  W.]  :  description  of  the  attributes  of  the  goddess,  and 
explains  her  fish-like  form  and  popular  identifica- 
tion with  Aphrodite.  Lucian  also  mentions  a 
ceremony  in  her  worship  at  Hierapolis  which 
appears  to  be  connected  with  the  same  belief,  and 
with  the  origin  other  name.  Twice  a  year  water 
was  brought  from  distant  places  and  poured  into 
a  chasm  in  the  temple ;  because,  he  adds,  ac- 
cording to  tradition,  the  waters  of  the  Deluge  were 
drained  away  through  that  opening  (de  S'/i 
p.  883).  Compare  Burrn.  ad  Ovid.  Met.  iv.  45, 
where  most  of  the  references  are  given  at  length ; 
Movers,  Phoeniz.  i.  584  if. 

There  was  a  temple  ol' Atargatis  ('ArapyaTtlov, 
Alex.  'Arepy. — 2  Mace.  xii.  2t>)  at  Karniou  (Kar- 
naim,  1  Mace.  v.  4:'.;  i.e.  Ashtaroth-Karnaitn) 
which  was  destroyed  by  Judas  Maccabaeus  (1  Mace. 
v.  44). 

The  name  is  rightly  derive  1  by  Michaelis 
Syr.  pp.  975  f.)  from  Syr.   Targeto,  an  opening 

(tarag,  1 pened  i.    <  !omp.  Moi  era,  Phoenii .  i.  594 

f.     Others    have   deduced    it.    with    little   proba- 
bility, from  "i-l  TIN    greatness  of  fortune  (?) ,  or 


r'erome  t  was  in" his^  "  T»?K,  **■■* /*■    '■  »•«•»•  P«) 

called  Bethgla  or  Bethacla    Beth-Hogla),  a  name  suggests  Syr.  dargeto= dagto,  a  fish.     It  has  been 

which  he  connects  with  the  gyratory  dances  or  supposed  that  Atargatis  was  the  tutelary 

races  of  the  funeral  ceremony :"  locus  gyri ;  eo  quod  of  the  first  Assyrian  dynasty    i  .  a.  Der- 

plangentium  eir<  umierint."     Beth-Hoglah  keto:  Niebuhr,  Oesch.  Assur's,  ]>p.  131,  138),  and 

is  known  to  have  lain  between  the  Jordan  and  Jericho,  that  the  name  appears  in  Tiglath-  or  Tilgath-Pil&xx 

therefore  on  the  west  side  of  Jordan  [  \'<\  CH-HOG-  (id.  p.  37  - 
laii];  and  with  this  agrees  the  fact  of  tin  mention        An   inter  sting   coin   representing   Atargatis    is 


134  ATAROTH 

engraved  and  described  in  the  Philosophical  Trans- 
actions, vol.  lxi.  pp.  346  ff. 

AT'AROTH  (nYlDg,  and  once  n'lDJ?  = 
crowns;  ij  'ArapwO;  AtarotK),  the  name  of 
several  places  in  Palestine  both  on  the  E.  and  W.  of 
Jordan. 

1.  One  of  the  towns  in  the  "  land  of  Jazer  and 
land  of  Gilead  "  (Num.  xxxii.  3),  taken  and  "  built " 
by  the  tribe  of  Gad  (xxxii.  34).  From  its  mention 
with  places  which  have  been  identified  on  the  N.E. 
of  the  Dead  Sea  near  the  mountain  of  Jcbel  Attarits 
(  W  ^ .  a  connexion  has  been  assumed  between 

Ataroth  and  that  mountain.  But  Jebel  Attarus 
lies  considerably  to  the  S.  of  Heshbon  (Hesbaii), 
which  was  in  the  tribe  of  Reuben,  and  which  is 
named  apparently  as  the  southernmost  limit  of  Gad 
(Josh.  xiii.  26),  so  that  some  other  identification  is 
necessary.  Atroth-Shophan  was  probably  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Ataroth  ;  the  Shophan  serving  as 
a  distinction  ;  but  for  this  see  Atroth. 

2 .  A  place  on  the  (South  ?)  boundary  of  Ephraim 
and  Manasseh  (Josh.  xvi.  2,  7).  The  whole  speci- 
fication of  this  boundary  is  exceedingly  obscure,  and 
it  is  not  possible  to  say  whether  Ataroth  is  or  is  not 
the  same  place  as, 

3.  Ataroth-adar,  or  -addar  ("flN"'y)  on 
the  west  border  of  Benjamin,  "  near  the  '  moun- 
tain '  that  is  on  the  south  side  of  the  nether  Beth- 
horon  "  (Josh,  xviii.  13).  In  xvi.  5  it  is  accurately 
rendered  Ataroth-addar. 

In  the  Onomasticon  mention  is  made  of  an 
Atharoth  in  Ephraim,  in  the  mountains,  4  miles  N. 
of  Sebaste :  as  well  as  of  two  places  of  the  name 
"  not  far  from  "  Jerusalem.  The  former  cannot  be 
that  seen  by  Robinson  (ii.  265),  now  'Atara.  Ro- 
binson discovered  another  about  6  miles  S.  of 
Bethel  (i.  575).  This  is  too  far  to  the  E.  of 
Beth-horon  to  be  Ataroth-addar,  and  too  far  S.  to  be 
that  on  the  boundary  of  Ephraim  (2). 

4.  "Ataroth,"  the  house  of  Joab"  (i.e. 
Ataroth-beth-Joab),  a  place  (?)  occurring  in  the  list 
of  the  descendants  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  ii.  54;  'Ara- 
pwd  oIkov  'Iwafi  ;   Coronae  domiis  Joab.)       [G.] 

ATERpttK;  'Ariip;  Ather,  Ater),  name  of 
two  men.  1.  (Ezr.  ii.  42;  Neh.  vii.  45),  called  in 
Esdras  Iatal.  2.  Ater  of  Hezekiah  (Ezr.  ii.  16  ; 
Neh.  vii.  21),  called  in  Esdras  AtereziaS. 

ATHAI'AH  (iTTiy;  'ABata;  Athaias),  name 
of  a  man  (Neh.  x-i.4). 

ATHALI'AH  (il^nj?  ;  ro6o\la ;  Athalia), 
daughter  of  Ahab  and  Jezebel,  married  Jehoram 
the  son  of  Jehoshaphat  king  of  Judah,  and  intro- 
duced into  the  S.  kingdom  the  worship  of  Baal, 
which  had  already  defiled  and  overspread  the  N. 
After  the  great  revolution  by  which  Jehu  seated 
himself  on  the  throne  of  Samaria,  she  killed  all  the 
members  of  the  royal  family  of  Judah  who  had 
escaped  his  sword  (2  K.  x.  14),  availing  herself 
probably  of  her  position  as  lung's  Mother  [Asa], 
to  perpetrate  the  crime.  Most  likely  she  exercised 
the  regal  functions  during  Ahaziah's  absence  at 
Jezreel  (2  K.  ix.),  and  resolved  to  retain  her  power. 


ATHALIAH 

exposed  by  the  overthrow  of  the  house  of  Omri,  and 
of  Baal-worship  in  Samaria.  It  was  not  unusual  in 
those  days  for  women  in  the  East  to  attain  a  pro- 
minent position,  their  present  degradation  being  the 
result  of  Mahometanism.  Miriam,  Deborah,  Abi- 
gail, are  instances  from  the  Bible,  and  Dido  was 
not  far  removed  from  Athaliah,  either  in  birthplace 
or  date,  if  Carthage  was  founded  B.C.  861  (Joseph. 
c.  Apion.  i.  18).  From  the  slaughter  of  the  royal 
house,  one  infant  named  Joash,  the  youngest  son  of 
Ahaziah,  was  rescued  by  his  aunt  Jehosheba, 
daughter  of  Jehoram  (probably  by  another  wife 
than  Athaliah)  who  had  married  Jehoiada  (2  Chr. 
xxii.  11)  the  high-priest  (2  Chr.  xxiv.  6).  The  child 
was  brought  up  under  Jehoiada's  care,  and  concealed 
in  the  temple  for  six  years,  during  which  period 
Athaliah  reigned  over  Judah.  At  length  Jehoiada 
thought  it  time  to  produce  the  lawful  king  to  the 
people,  trusting  to  their  zeal  for  the  worship  of 
God,  and  loyalty  to  the  house  of  David,  which  had 
been  so  strenuously  called  out  by  Asa  and  Jehosha- 
phat. After  communicating  his  design  to  five 
"  captains  of  hundreds,"  whose  names  are  given  in 
2  Chr.  xxiii.  1,  and  securing  the  co-operation,  of  the 
Levites  and  chief  men  in  the  country-towns  in  case 
of  necessity,  he  brought  the  young  Joash  into  the 
temple  to  receive  the  allegiance  of  the  soldiers  of 
the  guard.  It  was  customary  on  the  Sabbath  for  a 
third  part  of  them  to  do  duty  at  the  palace,  while 
two-thirds  restrained  the  crowd  of  visitors  and  wor- 
shippers who  thronged  the  temple  on  that  day,  by 
occupying  the  gate  of  Sur  ("I-1D,  1  K.  xi.  6,  called 
of  the  foundation,  "V\D\,  2  Chr.  xxiii.  5,   which 

Gerlach,  in  loco,  considers  the  right  reading  in 
Kings  also),  and  the  gate  "  behind  the  guard  "  (porta 
quae  est  post  habitaculum  scutariorum,  Vulg.), 
which  seem  to  have  been  the  N.  and  S.  entrances 
into  the  temple,  according  to  Ewald's  description  of 
it  (Geschichte,  iii.  p.  306-7).  On  the  day  fixed 
for  the  outbreak  there  was  to  be  no  change  in  the 
arrangement  at  the  palace,  lest  Athaliah,  who  did 
not  worship  in  the  temple,  should  form  any  sus- 
picions from  missing  her  usual  guard,  but  the  latter 
two-thirds  were  to  protect  the  king's  person  by 
forming  a  long  and  closely-serried  line  across  the 
temple,  and  killing  any  one  who  should  approach 
within  certain  limits.  They  were  also  furnished 
with  David's  spears  and  shields,  that  the  work  of 
restoring  his  descendant  might  be  associated  with 
his  own  sacred  weapons.  When  the  guard  had 
taken  up  their  position,  the  young  prince  was  an- 
ointed, crowned,  and  presented  with  the  Testimony 
or  Law,  and  Athaliah  was  first  roused  to  a  sense  of 
her  danger  by  the  shouts  and  music  which  accom- 
panied the  inauguration  of  her  grandson.  She 
hurried  into  the  temple,  but  found  Joash  already 
standing  "  by  a  pillar,"  or  more  properly  on  it,  i.  e. 
on  the  tribunal  or  throne  apparently  raised  on  a 
massive  column  or  cluster  of  columns,  which  the 
king  occupied  when  he  attended  the  service  on 
solemn  oocasions.     The  phrase   in   the  original  is 

*l-1J3y"?y,  rendered  eV2  tov  ctvAov  by  the  LXX.  and 
super  tribunal  in  the  Vulgate,  while  Gesenius  gives 
for  the  substantive  a  stage  or  pulpit.  (Comp.  2  K. 
xxiii.  3,  and  Ezek.  xlvi.2.)  She  arrived  however 
too  late,  and  was  immediately  put  to  death  by  Je- 


especially  after  seeing  the  danger  to  which  she  was 

hoiadas  commands,  without  the  temple,      the  only 

other  recorded  victim    of  this   happy  and  almost 


a  The  marginal  note  to  this  name  in  the  Bibles  of 
the  present  day,  viz.  "  Asarites  or  crowns,"  &c,  is  a 
corruption  of  Aiarites  in  the  edition  of  1611. 


bloodless    revolution,    was     Mattan    the    priest  of 
Baal.    For  the   view  here  given   of  the  details  of 


ATHABIAS 

Jehoiada's  plan,  see  Ewald,  Geachichte,  iii.  p.  574  fl'. 
The  latter  words  of  2  K.  xi.  t>  in  our  version 
"  that  it  be  not  broken  down "  are  probably 
wrong : — Ewald  translates, "  according  to  custom ;" 
Gesenius  gives  in  his  Lexicon  "a  keeping  off." 
Clinton's  date  for  Athaliah's  usurpation  is  u.c. 
883-877.  In  modern  times  the  history  of  Athaliah 
has  been  illustrated  by  the  music  of  Handel  and 
of  Mendelssohn,  and  the  stately  declamation  of 
Racine.  [G.  E.  L.  C] 

ATHAKI'AS   {'ArOapias  ;    et  Astharas),    a 

corrupt  rendering  of  KHtjhrin,  THE  Tirsiiattia 
(1  Esd.  v.  40). 

ATHENO'BIUS  ('A8vv6pios),  an  envoy  sent 
by  Antiochus  VII.  Sidetes  to  Simon,  the  Jewish 
high  priest  ( 1  Mace.  xv.  28-36).  He  is  not  men- 
tioned elsewhere.  [B.  F.  YV.] 

ATHENS  (Adrivai;  Athenae),  the  capital 
of  Attica,  and  the  chief  seat  of  Grecian  learning 
and  civilisation  during  the  golden  period  of  the 
history  of  Greece.  This  city  is  fully  described 
elsewhere  [Diet,  of  Gr.  and  Horn.  Geoi/r.  I.  p. 
•J.").'i,  sq.);  and  an  account  of  it  would  be  out 
of  place  in  the  present  work.  St.  Paul  visited  it 
in  his  journey  from  Macedonia,  and  appears  to  have 
remained  there  some  time  (Acts  xvii.  14,  15,  seq. ; 
comp.  1  Thess.  iii.  1).  During  his  residence  there 
he  delivered  his  memorable  discourse  on  the  Areo- 
pagus to  the  "  men  of  Athens"  (Acts  xvii.  22-31) 
[AREOPAGUS].  In  order  to  understand  the  lo- 
calities mentioned  in  the  sacred  narrative,  it  may 
be  observed  that  four 
hills  of  moderate  height 
rise  within  the  walls  of 
the  city.  Of  these  one 
to  the  north-east  is  the 
celebrated  Acropolis,  or 
.italel,  being  a  square 
craggy  rock  about  150 
feet  high.  Immediately 
to  the  west  of  the 
Acropolis  is  a  second  hill 
of  irregular  form,  but 
inferior  height, called  the 
Areopagus.  To  the  south- 
west rises  a  third  hill, 
the  Pnyx,  on  which  the 
assemblies  of  the  citizens 
were  held :  and  to  the 
smith  of  the  latter  is  a 
fourth  hill,  known  as  the 

.Museum.       The    Ag 

or  "  market,"  where  St. 
Paul  disputed  daily,  was 
situated  in  the  ralley  be- 
tween the  Acropolis,  the 
Areopagus,  the  l'nyx 
and  the  Museum,  being 

bounded  by  the  Acropolis  on  the  N.E  and  P., 
by  the  Areopagus  on  the  N-,  by  the  l'nyx  on  the 
N.W.  and  W.,  and  by  the  Museum  en  the  S. 
The  annexed  plan  shows  the  position  of  the  Agora. 
Many  writers  have  maintained  that  there  were  two 
markets    at    Athens:    and    that    a    second    market, 

usually  called  the  new  Agora,  existed  to  the  north 
ol   the  Acropolis.     If  this  were  true.il  would  be 

doubtful  in  which  of  the  two  markets  St.  Paul 
disputed;  but  since  the  publication  of  Forch- 
hammer's  treatise  on  the  Topography  of  Athens, 

it    is  generally  admitted   that    then    wa-   only  one 


ATONEMENT,  DAY  OF         135 

Agora  at  Athens,  namely,  the  one  situated  in  the 
valley  already  described.  [The  subject  is  dis- 
cussed at  length  in  the  Diet,  of  Geogr.  I.  p.  293, 
seq.]  The  remark  of  the  sacred  historian  re- 
specting the  inquisitive  character  of  the  Athenians 
(xvii.  21)  is  attested  by  the  unanimous  voice  of 
antiquity.  The  great  Athenian  orator  rebukes  his 
countrymen  for  their  love  of  constantly  going  about 
in  the  market,  and  asking  one  another,  What  news  ? 
(irepu6vT€s  avrcSv  Trw8dvea0ai  Kara  t?;j/  ayopdv. 
Xeyerai  ti  kcliv6v ;  Dem.  Philipp.  i.  p.  43,  ed. 
Peiske).  Their  natural  liveliness  was  partly  owing 
to  the  purity  and  clearness  of  the  atmosphere  of 
Attica,  which  also  allowed  them  to  pass  much 
of  their  time  in  the  open  air. 

The  remark  of  St.  Paul  upon  the  "  superstitious" 
character  of  the  Athenians  (xvii.  22)  is  in  like 
manner  confirmed  by  the  ancient  writers.  Thus 
Pausanias  says  that  the  Athenians  surpassed  all 
other  states  in  the  attention  which  they  paid  to  the 
worship  of  the  gods  (' \6rjvaioLS  Trepiaff6rep6v  ti 
■fj  ro?s  &Wois  is  ra  BeTd  iffTi  (Tirovdrjs,  Paus.  i. 
24,  §3)  ;  and  hence'  the  city  was  crowded  in  every 
direction  with  temples,  altars,  and  other  sacred 
buildings.  The  altar  "  to  the  Unknown  God,"  which 
St.  Paul  mentions  in  his  address,  has  been  spoken 
of  under  Altar. 

Of  the  Christian  church,  founded  by  St.  Paul  at 
Athens,  we  have  no  particulars  in  the  N.  T.;  but, 
according  to  ecclesiastical  tradition  (Euseb.  //.  E. 
iii.  4),  Dionysius  the  Areopagite,  who  was  con- 
verted by  the  preaching  of  the  Apostle,  was  the 
first  bishop  of  the  church.    [Dionysius.] 


Athena,  Burning  the  position  et  Uic  Agora. 


ath'Lai (^ny,  lor  rvhrys. •  &a\i-A! 

name  of  a  man  i'Exr.  x.  28).     [Am  \  i  ni.i-.J 

AT'iniA   CAr«pd;     A<jisti),   1    Esd.   v.   32. 

[IlAlll'HA.] 

ATONEMENT,     THE     DAY     OF      DV 

□  'ISSn  ;    rifJ-ipa    Qi\aa p.oi>  \  tionum, 

and   dies  propitiationis  ;    in    the  Talmud,  NOV, 

i.  e.  trie  day  :  in  Philo,  rrjo-Tfias  tupr^.  Lib.  dt  Sept, 
vol.  v.  p.  47,  edit.  Tauchn.;    in  Acts   xxvii.  9,  y 


136 


ATONEMENT,  DAY  OP 


vqcTTela  ;  in  Heb.  vii.  27,  t\  $5/uepa,  according  to 
Olshausen  and  others  ;  but  see  Ebrard's  and  Bengel's 
notes),  the  great  day  of  national  humiliation,  and  the 
only  one  commanded  in  the  Mosaic  law.  [Fasts.] 
The  mode  of  its  observance  is  described  in  Lev.  xvi., 
where  it  should  be  noticed  that  in  vv.  3  to  10  an 
outline  of  the  whole  ceremonial  is  given,  while  in 
the  rest  of  the  chapter  certain  points  are  mentioned  | 
with  more  details.  The  victims  which  were  offered 
in  addition  to  those  strictly  belonging  to  the  special 
service  of  the  day,  and  to  those  of  the  usual  daily 
sacrifice,  are  enumerated  in  Num.  xxix.  7-11  ;  and 
the  conduct  of  the  people  is  emphatically  enjoined 
in  Lev.  xxiii.  26-32. 

II.  It  was  kept  on  the  tenth  day  of  Tisri,  that  is, 
from  the  evening  of  the  ninth  to  the  evening  of  the 
tenth  of  that  month,  five  days  before  the  Feast  of 
Tabernacles.  [Festivals.]  Some  have  inferred 
from  Lev.  xvi.  1,  that  the  day  was  instituted  on 
account  of  the  sin  and  punishment  of  Nadab  and 
Abilm.  Maimonides  {More  Ncvochim,  xviii.)  re- 
gards it  as  a  commemoration  of  the  day  on  which 
Moses  came  down  from  the  mount  with  the  second 
tables  of  the  law,  and  proclaimed  to  the  people  the 
forgiveness  of  their  great  sin  in  worshipping  the 
•golden  calf. 

III.  The  observances  of  the  day,  as  described  in 
the  law,  were  as  follows.  It  was  kept  by  the  people 
as  a  solemn  sabbath  (o~a(Sfia.Ta  aafifiSaTwv,  LXX.). 
They  were  commanded  to  set  aside  all  work  and 
"  to  afflict  their  souls,"  under  pain  of  being  "  cut 
off  from  among  the  people."  It  was  on  this  occa- 
sion only  that  the  high  priest  was  permitted  to 
enter  into  the  Holy  of  Holies.  Having  bathed  his 
person  and  dressed  himself  entirely  in  the  holy 
white  linen  garments,  he  brought  forward  a  young 
bullock  for  a  sin-offering  and  a  ram  for  a  burnt- 
offering,  purchased  at  his  own  cost,  on  account  of 
himself  and  his  family,  and  two  young  goats  for  a 
sin-ottering  with  a  ram  for  a  burnt-ottering,  which 
were  paid  for  out  of  the  public  treasury,  on  ac- 
count of  the  people.  He  then  presented  the  two 
goats  before  the  Lord  at  the  door  of  the  tabernacle 

and  cast  lots  upon  them.     On  one  lot  ilin  v  (i.  e. 

for   Jehovah)   was   inscribed,   and   on    the    other 

?TX?y7  (i.  e.  for  Azazel).     He  next  sacrificed  the 

young  bullock  as  a  sin-offering  for  himself  and  his 
family.  Taking  with  him  some  of  the  blood  of  the 
bullock,  he  rilled  a  censer  with  burning  coals  from 
the  brazen  altar,  took  a  handful  of  incense,  and 
entered  into  the  most  holy  place.  He  the:i  threw 
the  incense  upon  the  coals  and  enveloped  the  mercy- 
seat  in  a  cloud  of  smoke.    Then,  dipping  his  finger 


ATONEMENT,  DAY  OF 

into  the  blood,  he  sprinkled  it  seven  times  before 
the  mercy-seat,  eastward.* 

The  goat  upon  which  the  lot  "for  Jehovah" 
had  fallen  was  then  slain,  and  the  high-priest 
sprinkled  its  blood  before  the  mercy-seat  in  the 
same  manner  as  he  had  done  that  of  the  bullock. 
Going  out  from  the  Holy  of  Holies  he  purified  the 
holy  place,  sprinkling  some  of  the  blood  of  both  the 
victims  on  the  altar  of  incense.b  At  this  time  no 
one  besides  the  high-priest  was  suffered  to  be  pre- 
sent in  the  holy  place. 

The  purification  of  the  Holy  of  Holies,  and  of 
the  holy  place,  being  thus  completed,  the  high 
priest  laid  his  hands  upon  the  head  of  the  goat  on 
which  the  lot  "  for  Azazel "  had  fallen,  and  con- 
fessed over  it  all  the  sins  of  the  people.  The  goat 
■was  then  led,  by  a  man  chosen  for  the  purpose, 
into  the  wilderness,  into  "a  land  not  inhabited," 
and  was  there  let  loose. 

The  high  priest  after  this  returned  into  the  holy 
place,  bathed  himself  again,  put  on  his  usual  gar- 
ments of  office,  and  offered  the  two  rams  as  burnt- 
offerings,  one  for  himself  and  one  for  the  people. 
He  also  burnt  upon  the  altar  the  fat  of  the  two 
sin-offerings,  while  their  flesh  was  carried  away 
and  burned  outside  the  camp.  They  who  took 
away  the  flesh  and  the  man  who  had  led  away  the 
goat  had  to  bathe  their  persons  and  wash  their 
clothes  as  soon  as  their  service  was  performed. 

The  accessory  burnt-offerings  mentioned  Num. 
xxix.  7-11,  were  a  young  bullock,  a  ram,  seven 
lambs,  and  a  young  goat.  It  would  seem  that  (at 
least  in  the  time  of  the  second  temple)  these  were 
ottered  by  the  high  priest  along  with  the  evening 
sacrifice  (see  below,  V.  7.) 

It  may  be  seen  (as  Winer  has  remarked)  that  in 
the  special  rites  of  the  Day  of  Atonement  there  is  a 
natural  gradation.  In  the  first  place  the  high 
priest  and  his  family  are  cleansed  ;  then  atonement 
is  made  by  the  purified  priest  for  the  sanctuary 
and  all  contained  in  it;  then  (if  the  view  to  which 
reference  has  been  made  be  correct)  for  the  brazen 
altar  in  the  court,  and  lsisfly,  reconciliation  is  marie 
for  the  people. 

IV.  In  the  short  account  of  the  ritual  of  the 
day  which  is  given  by  Josephus  (Ant.  iii.  10,  §3) 
there  are  a  few  particulars  which  are  worth}'  of 
notice.  His  words  of  course  apply  to  the  practice 
in  the  second  temple,  when  the  ark  of  the  covenant 
had  disappeared.  He  states  that  the  high  priest 
sprinkled  the  blood  with  his  finger  seven  times  on  the 
ceiling  and  seven  times  on  the  floor  of  the  most  holy 
place,  and  seven  times  towards  it  (as  it  would  appear, 
outside  the  veil),  and  round  the  golden  altar.  Then 
going  into  the  court  he  either  sprinkled  or  poured 


a  See  Lev.  xvi.  14.  The  English  version,  "  upon 
ttie  mercy-seat,"  appears  to  be  opposed  to  every 
Jewish  authority.  (See  Drusius  in  loc.  in  the  Critici 
Sacri.)  It  has,  however,  the  support  of  Ewald's 
authority.  The  Vulgate  omits  the  clause  ;  the  LXX. 
follows  the  ambiguity  of  the  Hebrew.  The  word 
eastward  must  mean  either  the  direction  in  which 
the  drops  were  thrown  by  the  priest,  or  else  on  the 
east  side  of  the  ark,  i.  e.  the  side  towards  the  veil. 
The  last  clause  of  the  verse  may  be  taken  as  a  re- 
petition of  the  command,  for  the  sake  of  emphasis  on 
the  number  of  sprinklings  :  "  And  he  shall  take  of 
the  blood  of  the  bullock  and  sprinkle  it  before  the 
merey-seat,  on  the  east ;  and  seven  times  shall  he 
sprinkle  the  blood  with  his  finger  before  the  mercy-  I 
seat." 

b  That  the  altar  of  incense  was  thus  purified  on  ' 


the  day  of  atonement  we  learn  expressly  from  Ex. 
xxx.  10.  Most  critics  consider  that  this  is  what  is 
spoken  of  in  Lev.  xvi.  18  and  20.  But  some  suppose 
that  it  is  the  altar  of  burnt-offerings  which  is  re- 
ferred to  in  those  verses,  the  purification  of  the  altar 
of  incense  being  implied  in  that  of  the  holy  place 
mentioned  in  ver.  16.  Abenezra  was  of  this  opinion 
(see  Drusius  in  loc).  That  the  expression,  "before 
the  Lord,"  does  not  necessarily  mean  within  the 
tabernacle,  is  evident  from  Ex.  xxix.  11.  If  the 
golden  altar  is  here  referred  to,  it  seems  remarkable 
that  no  mention  is  made  in  the  ritual  of  the  cleansing 
of  the  brazen  altar.  But  perhaps  the  practice  spoken 
of  by  Josephus  and  in  the  Mishna  of  pouring  what 
remained  of  the  mixed  blood  at  the  foot  of  the  large 
altar,  was  an  ancient  one,  and  was  regarded  as  its 
purification. 


ATONEMENT,  DAY  OF 

the  blood  round  the  great  altar.  He  also  informs 
us  that  along  with  the  fat,  the  kidneys,  the  top  of 
the  liver,  and  the  extremities  (at  i^oxai)  of  the 
victims  were  burned. 

V.  The  treatise  of  the  Mishna,  entitled  Yoma, 
professes  to  give  a  full  account  of  the  observances 
of  the  day  according  to  the  usage  in  the  second 
temple.  The  following  details  appear  either  to  be 
interesting  in  themselves  or  to  illustrate  the  lan- 
guage of  the  Pentateuch. 

1.  The  high  priest  himself,  dressed  in  his 
coloured  official  garments,  used,  on  the  Day  of 
Atonement,  to  perform  all  the  duties  of  the  ordi- 
nary daily  service,  such  as  lighting  the  lamps,  pre- 
senting the  daily  sacrifices,  and  offering  the  incense. 
After  this  he  bathed  himself,  put  on  the  white 
garments,  and  commenced  the  special  rites  of  the 
day.  There  is  nooning  in  the  Old  Testament  to 
reader  it  improbable  that  this  was  the  original 
practice. 

2.  The  high  priest  went  into  the  Holy  of  Holies 
four  times  in  the  course  of  the  day:  first,  with 
the  censer  and  incense,  while  a  priest  continued  to 
agitate  the  blood  of  the  bullock  lest  it  should  co- 
agulate: secondly,  with  the  blood  of  the  bullock : 
thirdly,  with  the  blood  of  the  goat:  fourthly, 
after  having  offered  the  evening  sacrifice,  to  fetch 
out  the  censer  and  the  plate  which  had  contained 
the  incense.  These  four  entrances,  forming,  as 
they  do,  parts  of  the  one  great  annual  rite,  are  not 
opposed  to  a  reasonable  view  of  the  statement  in 
Heb.  is.  7,  and  that  in  Josephus,  Bell.  Jud.  V.  5. 
§7.  Three  of  the  entrances  seem  to  be  very  dis- 
tinctly implied  in  Lev.  xvi.  12,  14,  and  15. 

3.  It  is  said  that  the  blood  of  the  bullock  and 
that  of  the  goat  were  each  sprinkled  eight  times, 
once  towards  the  ceiling  and  seven  times  on  the 
floor.  This  does  not  agree  with  the  words  of  Jo- 
sephus  (see  above,  IV.). 

4.  After  he  had  gone  into  the  most  holy  place 
the  third  time,  and  had  returned  into  the  holy 
place,  the  high  priest  sprinkled  the  blood  of  the 
bullock  eight  times  towards  the  veil,  and  did  the 
same  with  the  blood  of  the  goat.  Having  then 
mingled  the  blood  of  the  two  victims  together  and 
sprinkled  the  altar  of  incense  with  the  mixture,  he 
came'  into  the  court  and  poured  out  what  remained 
at  the  foot  of  the  altar  of  bnrnt-offering. 

I).  .Most  careful  direction-  are  given  for  the  pre- 
paration of  the  high  prie>t  for  the  services  of  the 
.lav.  For  seven  days  previously  he  kept  away 
from  his  own  house  and  dwelt 'in  a  chamber  ap- 
pointed for  bis  use.  This  vvas  to  avoid  the  acci- 
dental causes  of  pollution  which  he  might  meet 
with  in  his  domestic  life.     But  to  pn 

lity  of  hi,  incurring  some  uncleanness  in 
spite  of  this  precaution,  a  deputy  was  chosen  who 
might   act   for  him  when  the  day  i  ame.     In  the 

treatise  of  the  Mi.dliia  entitled  ••  pjrki  .\voth,"  it  is 

stated  that  no  such  i  ver  I"  fel  the  high 

priest.  Bui  Josephus  (Ant.  rvii.  6,  §4)  relates 
ince  of  the  high  priest  Matthias,  j'„  the  tune 
of  Herod  the  Great,  when  his  relation  Joseph  took 
his  place  in  the  aacred  office.  During  the  whole  of 
the  seven  days  the  high  priest  had  to  perform  the 
ordinary  sacerdotal  duties  of  the  daily  service  him- 

Belf,  as  well  as  on  the  hay  of  At ment.     I 

third  day  and  on  the  seventh  he  was  sprinkle  I  n  ith 

""'  ashes  of  the  re  l  beifi  r  i der  I 

in  the  event  of  his  having  touched  a  dead  body 
without  knowing  it.  On  the  seventh  day  he  was 
uLu  required   to  take  a  solemn  oath   before   the 


ATONEMENT,  DAY  OF  137 

elders  that  he  wouTd  alter  nothing  whatever  in  the 
accustomed  rites  of  the  Day  of  Atonement.0 

6.  Several  curious  particulars  are  stated  regard- 
ing  the   scapegoat.      The   two   goats   of  the  sin- 
offering  were  to  be  of  similar  appearance,  size,  and 
value.     The  lots  were,  originally,  of  boxwood,  but 
in  later  times  they  were  of  gold.     They  were  put 
into  a  little  box  or  urn,  into  which  the  High  Priest 
put  both  his   hands  and  took   out  a  lot  in  each, 
while  the  two  goats  stood  before  him,  one  at  the 
right  side  and  the  other  on  the  left.     The  lot  in 
each  hand  belonged  to  the  goat  in  the  corresponding 
position,  and  when  the  lot  "for  Azazel"  happened 
to  be  in  the  right  hand,  it  was  regarded  as  a  good 
omen.     The  high  priest  then  tied  a  piece  of  scarlet 
cloth  on  the  scapegoat's  head,  called  "  the  scarlet 
tongue,"  from  the  shape  in  which  it  was  cut.     Mai- 
monides  says  that  this  was  only  to  distinguish  him, 
in  order  that  he  might  be  known  when  the  time  came 
for  him  to  be  sent  away.     But  in  the  Gemara  it  is 
asserted  that  the  red  cloth  ought  to  turn  white,  as 
a  token  of  God's  acceptance  of  the  atonement  of  the 
day,  referring  to  Is.  i.  18.    A  particular  instance  of 
such  a  change,  when  also  the  lot  "  to  Azazel"  was 
in   the   priest's  right  hand,  is  related   as   having 
occurred   in   the   time   of  Simon  the  Just.     It   is 
further  stated  that  no  such  change  took  place  for 
forty  years   before   the   destruction    of  Jerusalem. 
The  prayer  which  the  high  priest  uttered  over  the 
head  of  the  goat  was  as  follows: — "O   Lord,  the 
house  of  Israel,  thy  people,  have  trespassed,  rebelled, 
and  sinned  before  thee.     I  beseech  thee,  O  Lord, 
forgive   now  their  trespasses,  rebellions    and    sins 
which  thy  people  have  committed,  as  it  is  written 
in  the  law  of  Moses,  thy  servant,  saying  that  in  that 
day   there   shall    be   '  an   atonement   for    you   to 
cleanse  you  that  ye  may  be  clean  from  all  your 
sins  before  the  Lord  "  (Gemara  on  Yoma,  quoted 
by  Frischmuth).     The  goat  was  then  goaded  and 
rudely  treated  by  the  people  till  it  was  led  away 
by  the  man  appointed.     As  soon  as  it  reached  a 
certain  spot,  which  seems  to  have  been  regarded  as 
the  commencement  of  the  wilderness,  a  signal  was 
made  by  some  sort  of  telegraphic  contrivance,  to  the 
high  priest,  who  waited  for  it.     The  man  who  led 
the  goat  is  said  to  have  taken  him  to  the  tup  of  a 
high  precipice  and  thrown  him  down  backwards,  so 
as  to  dash  him  to  pieces.     If  this  was  not  a  mistake 
of  the   writer   of  Yoma,  it   must  have  been,    as 
Spencer  argues, a  modern  innovation.      It  can,; 
doubted  that  the   goat  was,  originally,  set    free. 
Even   if  there  be  any  uncertainty  in   the  words  of 
the  Hebrew,  the  rendering  of  the  l.xx.  must  be 
better  authority  than  the  Talmud-  xa\  6  Qairoa- 
TiKKwv  rbv  x't^pov  rbi>  SieerTaA/teVof  els  &(pfcrti> 
k.  t.  A.  Lev.  xvi.  26. 

7.  The  high  priest,  as  soon  as  he  had  received 
the  signal  that  the  goat  had  reached  the  wilderness, 
read  some  lessons  from  the  law.  and  offered  up 
some  prayers.  He  then  bathed  himself,  resumed 
his  coloured  garments,  and  offered  either  the  whole, 
or  a  great  part,  of  the  accessory  offering  (mentioned 
Num.  \wi\.  7-1  I  i  with  i  he  regular  evening  sacri- 
fice. After  this,  he  washed  a  am.  put  on  the 
I  ei  tered  tin'  most  holy  place 
tin-  the  fourth   time,  to  fetch   out    the  censer  and 


■  This,  according  to  the  Jerusalem  Gemara  on 
5  oma  qu  iti  d  bj  Lightfoot  ,  wa  institati  d  in  con- 
sequence of  an  innovation  of  the  Sadduccan  party, 
who  had  directed  the  high  priest  to  throw  the  in- 
cense upon  the  censer  0Uts.de  the  veil,  and  to  carry  it, 
smoking;,  into  the  Holy  of  Holies. 


138 


ATONEMENT,  DAY  OF 


the  incense-plate.  This  terminated  the  special  rites 
of  the  day. 

8.  The  Mishna  gives  very  strict  rules  for  the 
fasting  of  the  people.  In  the  law  itself  no  express 
mention  is  made  of  abstinence  from  food.  But  it  is 
most  likely  implied  in  the  command  that  the  people 
were  "  to  afflict  their  souls."  According  to  Yoma, 
every  Jew  (except  invalids  and  children  under  13 
years  of  age)  is  forbidden  to  eat  anything  so  large 
as  a  date,  to  drink,  or  to  wash  from  sun-set  to 
sun-set. 

VI.  There  has  been  much  discussion  regarding 
the  meaning  of  the  word  Azazel.  The  opinions  which 
seem  most  worthy  of  notice  are  the  following  : — 

1.  It  has  been  regarded  as  a  designation  of  the 
goat  itself.  This  view  has  been  most  favoured  by 
the  old  interpreters.  They  in  general  supposed  it 
to  mean  the  goat  sent  away,  or  let  loose.  In 
accordance  with  this  the  Vulgate  renders  it,  Caper 
Emissarius  ;  Symmachus,  6  rpdyos  airepxo'fMvos ; 
Aquila,  6  rpdyos  airoAeAv/xevos ;  Luther,  der 
ledige  Bock  ;  the  English  translators,  the  scapegoat. 
The  LXX.  uses  the  term  6  airoirufiircuos,  applied 
to  the  goat  itself.  Theodoret  and  Cyril  of  Alex- 
andria consider  the  meaning  of  the  Hebrew  to  be  the 
goat  sent  away,  and  regard  that  as  the  sense  of  the 
word  used  in  the  LXX.  If  they  were  right,  airo-n-ofi- 
ttcuos  is,  of  course,  not  employed  in  its  ordinary 
meaning  (Averrunous).  (See  Suicer,  s.v.)  It  should 
also  be  observed  that  in  the  latter  clause  of  Lev. 
xvi.  10  the  LXX.  renders  the  Hebrew  term  as  if  it 
was  an  abstract  noun,  translating  ?TNTy?  by  els 
tt]i'  a7ro7ro/u7r/jj'.  Buxtorf  fffcb.  Lex.)  and  Fagius 
(  Critici  Sacri,  in  he.)  in  accordance  with  this  view 
of  its  meaning,  derived  the  word  from  TJ?  a,  goat, 
and  7tN  to  depart.  To  this  derivation  it  has  been 
objected  by  Bochart,  Winer,  and  others,  that   TJ? 

denotes  a  she-goat,  not  a  he-goat.  It  is,  however, 
alleged  that  the  word  appears  to  be  epicene  in  Gen. 
xxx.  33;  Lev.  iii.  12,  and  other  places.     But  the 

application  of  7TNTV  to  the  goat  itself  involves  the 

Hebrew  text  in  insuperable  difficulties.  It  can 
hardly  be  supposed  that  the  prefix  which  is  common 
to  the  designation  of  the  two  lots  should  be  used  In 
two  different  meanings.  If  one  expression  is  to  be 
rendered  for  Jehovah,  it  would  seem  that  the  other 
must  be  for  Azazel,  with  the  preposition  in  the 
same  sense.  If  this  is  admitted,  taking  Azazel  for 
the  goat  itself,  it  does  not  seem  possible  to  make 
sense  out  of  Lev.  xvi.  10  and  26.  In  these  verses 
the  versions  are  driven  to  strange  shifts.  We  have 
already  referred  to  the  inconsistency  of  the  LXX. 
In  the  Vulgate  and  our  own  version  the  first  clause 
of  ver.  10  stands  "  cujus  (sc.  hirci  sors)  autem  in 
caprum  emissarium" — "but  the  goat  on  which 
the  lot  fell  to  be  the  scapegoat."  In  ver.  26  our 
version  reads  "  And  he  that  let  go  the  goat  for  the 
scapegoat,"  while  the  Vulgate  cuts  the  knot  to 
escape  from  the  awkward  tautology — "  ille  vero,  qui 
dimiserit  caprum  emissarium." 

2.  Some  have  taken  Azazel  for  the  name  of  the 
place  to  which  the  goat  was  sent,  a)  Abenezra 
quotes  the  words  of  an  anonymous  writer  referring 
it  to  a  hill  near  Mount  Sinai.  Vatablus  adopts  this 
opinion  (Critici  Sncri,  in  Lev.  xvi.)  b)  Some  of 
the  Jewish  writers,  with  Le  Clerc,  consider  that  it  i 
denotes  the  clitf  to  which  the  goat  was  taken  to  be 
thrown  down,  according  to  Yoma.  c)  Bochart 
regarded  the  word  as  a  pluralis  fractus  signifying 


ATONEMENT,  DAY  OF 

desert  places,  and  understood  it  as  a  general  name 
for  any  fit  place  to  which  the  goat  might  be  sent. 
But  Gesenius  remarks  that  the  pluralis  fractus, 
which  exists  in  Arabic,  is  not  found  in  Hebrew. 

3.  Many  of  those  who  have  studied  the  subject 
most  closely  take  Azazel  for  a  personal  being  to 
whom  the  goat  was  sent,      a)  Gesenius  gives  to 

7TXTJ?  the  same  meaning  as  the  LXX.  has  assigned 

to  it,  if  WKoirofx-Kouos  is  to  be  taken  in  its  usual  sense; 
but  the  being  so  designated  he  supposes  to  be  some 
false  deity  who  was  to  be  appeased  by  such  a  sacri- 
fice as  that  of  the  goat.     He  derives  the  word  from  a 

root  unused  in  Hebrew,  but  found  in  Arabic,   ?TJ? 

to  remove  or  take  away  (Heb..  Lex.  s.  v.).  Ewald 
agrees  with  Gesenius,  and  speaks  of  Azazel  as  a 
demon  belonging  to  the  pre-Mosaic  religion,  b)  But 
others,  in  the  spirit  of  a  simpler  faith,  have  regarded 
him  as  an  evil  spirit,  or  the  devil  himself.  In  {he 
book  of  Enoch  the  name  Azalzel  is  given  to  one  of  the 
fallen  angels ;  and  assuming,  with  Spencer,  that  this 
is  a  corruption  of  Azazel,  if  the  book  were  written, 
as  is  generally  supposed,  by  a  Jew,  about  B.C.  40,  it 
represents  an  old  Jewish  opinion  on  the  subject. 
Origen,  adopting  the  word  of  the  LXX.,  identifies 
him  with  the  devil  :  €tj  re  ev  rw  AeviriKqi 
airoTrofJiircuos  hv  T]  'EfipaiKT]  ypacpyj  o>v6fx.acrey 
'K£a0)\,  ouSels  erepos  i\v  {sc.  f\  6  8tdfio\os) 
(c.  Cels.  vi.  p.  305,  ed.  Spenc).  Of  modern  writers, 
Spencer  and  Hengstenberg  have  most  elaborately 
defended  the  same  opinion.  Spencer  derives  the 
word  from  TI?,  fortis,  and   ?TX,  explaining  it  as 

cito  recedens,  which  he  affirms  to  be  a  most  suit- 
able name  for  the  evil  sprit.  He  supposes  that  the 
goat  was  given  up  to  the  devil,  and  committed  to 
his  disposal.  Hengstenberg  affirms  with  great  con- 
fidence that  Azazel  cannot  possibly  be  anything  but 
another  name  for  Satan.  He  repudiates  the  con- 
clusion that  the  goat  was  in  any  sense  a  sacrifice 
to  Satan,  and  does  not  doubt  that  it  was  sent  away 
laden  with  the  sins  of  God's  people,  now  forgiven, 
in  order  to  mock  their  spiritual  enemy  in  the 
desert,  his  proper  abode,  and  to  sjinbolize  by  its 
free  gambols,  their  exulting  triumph.  He  considers 
that  the  origin  of  the  rite  was  Egyptian,  and  that 
the  Jews  substituted  Satan  for  Typhon,  whose 
dwelling  was  the  desert.  The  obvious  objection  to 
Spencer's  view  is  that  the  goat  formed  part  of  a 
sin-offering  to  the  Lord,  and  that  it,  with  its  fellow, 
had  been  formally  presented  before  the  Lord  at  the 
door  of  the  Tabernacle.  Few,  perhaps,  will  be 
satisfied  with  Hengstenberg's  mode  of  meeting  this 
difficulty. 

4.  An  explanation  of  the  word  which  seems  less 
objectionable,  if  it  is  not  wholly  satisfactory,  would 

render  the  designation  of  the  lot  7TNTJP.  "  for 
complete  sending  away."  Thus  understood,  the  word 
would  come  from  ?TJ?  (the  root  adopted  by  Ge- 
senius), being  the  Pealpal  form,  which  indicates 
intensity.  This  view  is  held  by  Tholuck  (quoted 
and  approved  by  Thompson;,  by  Bahr,  and  by 
Winer. 

VII.  As  it  might  be  supposed,  the  Talmudists 
miserably  degraded  the  meaning  of  the  day  of 
atonement.  They  regarded  it  as  an  opportunity 
afforded  them  of  wiping  off  the  score  of  their  more 
heavy  offences.  Thus  Yoma  (cap.  viii.)  says,  "  The 
day  of  atonement  and  death  make  atonement 
through  penitence.     Penitence  itself  makes  atone- 


ATONEMENT,  DAY  OF 

ment  for  slight  transgressions,  and  in  the  case  of 
grosser  sins  it  obtains  a  respite  until  the  coming 
of  the  day  of  atonement,  which  completes  the 
reconciliation."  More  authorities  to  the  same 
general  purpose  are  quoted  by  Frischmuth  (p.  917), 
some  of  which  seem  also  to  indicate  that  the  peculiar 
atoning  virtue  of  the  day  was  supposed  to  rest  in  the 
scapegoat. 

Philo  {Lib.  de  Septenario)  regarded  the  day  in  a 
far  nobler  light.  He  speaks  of  it  as  an  occasion  for 
the  discipline  of  self-restraint  in  regard  to  bodily 
indulgence,  and  for  bringing  home  to  our  minds  the 
truth  that  man  does  not  live  by  bread  alone,  but 
by  whatever  God  is  pleased  to  appoint.  The  prayers 
proper  for  the  day,  he  says,  are  those  for  forgive- 
ness of  sins  past  and  for  amendment  of  life  in 
future,  to  be  offered  in  dependence,  not  on  our 
own  merits,  but  on  the  goodness  of  God. 

It  cannot  be  doubted  that  what  especially  dis- 
tinguished the  symbolical  expiation  of  this  day  from 
that  of  the  other  services  of  the  law,  was  its  broad 
and  national  character,  with  perhaps  a  deeper  refer- 
ence to  the  sin  which  belongs  to  the  nature  of  man. 
Ewald  instructively  remarks  that  though  the  least 
uncleanness  of  an  individual  might  be  atoned  by 
the  rites  of  the  law  which  could  be  observed  at 
other  times,  there  was  a  consciousness  of  secret  and 
indefinite  sin  pervading  the  congregation,  which 
was  aptly  met  by  this  great  annual  fast.  Hence, 
in  its  national  character,  he  sees  an  antithesis  be- 
tween it  and  the  passover,  the  great  festival  of 
social  life;  and,  in  its  atoning  significance,  he  re- 
gards it  as  a  fit  preparation  for  the  rejoicing  at 
the  ingathering  of  the  fruits  of  the  earth  in  the 
feast  of  tabernacles.  Philo  looked  upon  its  position 
in  the  Jewish  calendar  in  the  same  light. 

In  considering  the  meaning  of  the  particular  rites 
of  the  day,  three  points  appear  to  be  of  a  very  dis- 
tinctive character.  1.  The  white  garments  of  the 
high  priest.  2.  His  entrance  into  the  Holy  of  Ho- 
lies. 3.  The  scapegoat.  The  writer  of  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews  (ix.  7-25)  teaches  us  to  apply  the 
first  two  particulars.  The  high  priest  himself,  with 
his  person  cleansed  and  dressed  in  white  garments, 
was  the  best  outward  type  which  a  living  man 
could  present  in  his  own  person  of  that  pure  and 
holy  One  who  was  to  purify  His  people  and  to 
cleanse  them  from  their  sins. 

But  respecting  the  meaning  of  the  scapegoat, 
we  have  no  such  light  to  guide  us,  and  (as  has  been 
already  implied  in  what  has  been  stated  regarding 
the  word  Azazel)  the  subject  is  one  of  great  doubt 
and  ditliculty. 

Of  those  who  take  Azazel  for  the  Evil  Spirit, 
some  have  supposed  that  the  goat  was  a  sort  of 
bribe,  or  retaining  fee,  for  the  accuser  of  men. 
Spencer,  in  supposing  that  it  was  given  up  with  its 
load  of  sin,  to  the  enemy  to  be  tormented,  made  it 
a  symbol  of  the  punishment  of  the  wicked;  while, 
according  to  the  strange  notion  of  Hengstenberg,  that 
it  was  sent  to  mock  the  devil,  it  was  significant  of 
th"  freedom  of  those  who  had  become  reconciled  to 

Cod. 

Some  few  of  those  who  have  held  a  different  opi- 
nion on  the  word  Azazel,  have  supposed  that  the 
goat  was  taken  into  the  wilderness  to  suffer  there 


ATT  A  LI  A 


139 


d  In  the  similar  part  of  the  rite  for  the  purification 
of  the  leper  (Lev.  xiv.  6,  7),  in  which  a  live  bird  was 
set  tree,  it  must  be  evident  that  the  bird  signified  the 
carrying  away  of  the  uncleanness  of  the  sufferer  in 
precisely  the  same  manner. 


vicariously  for  the  sins  of  the  people.  But  it  has 
been  generally  considered  that  it  was  dismissed  to 
signify  the  carrying  away  of  their  sins,  as  it  were, 
out  of  the  sight  of  Jehovah.d 

If  we  keep  in  view  that  the  two  goats  are  spoken 
of  as  parts  of  one  and  the  same  sin-offering,  and 
that  every  circumstance  connected  with  them  ap- 
pears to  have  been  carefully  arranged  to  bring  them 
under  the  same  conditions  up  to  the  time  of  the 
casting  of  the  lots,  we  shall  not  have  much  difficulty 
in  seeing  that  they  form  together  but  one  symbolical 
expression.  Why  there  were  two  individuals  in- 
stead of  one  may  be  simply  this — that  a  single  ma- 
terial object  could  not,  in  its  nature,  symbolically 
embrace  the  whole  of  the  truth  which  was  to  be 
expressed.  This  is  implied  in  the  reasoning  of  the 
author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  on  the  office 
and  sacrifice  of  Christ  (Heb.  ix.).  Hence  some,  re- 
garding each  goat  as  a  type  of  Christ,  supposed  that 
the  one  which  was  slain  represented  his  death,  and 
that  the  goat  set  free  signified  his  resurrection. 
(Cyril,  Bochart, and  others,  quoted  by  Spencer.)  But 
we  shall  take  a  simpler,  and  perhaps  a  truer  view, 
if  we  look  upon  the  slain  goat  as  setting  forth  the  act 
of  sacrifice,  in  giving  up  its  own  life  for  others  "  to 
Jehovah,"  in  accordance  with  the  requirements  of 
the  Divine  law  ;  and  the  goat  which  carried  off  its 
load  of  sin  "  for  complete  removal,"  as  signifying  the 
cleansing  influence  of  faith  in  that  sacrifice.  Thus  in 
his  degree  the  devout  Israelite  might  have  felt  the 
truth  of  the  Psalmist's  words,  "  As  far  as  the  east  is 
from  the  west,  so  far  hath  he  removed  our  trans- 
gressions from  us."  But  for  us  the  whole  spiritual 
truth  has  been  revealed  in  historical  fact,  in  the  life, 
death,  and  resurrection  of  Him  who  was  made  sin 
for  us,  wdio  died  for  us,  and  who  rose  agaiu  for  our 
justification.  This  Mediator,  it  was  necessary, 
should,  "  in  some  unspeakable  manner,  unite  death 
and  life  "  (Maurice  on  Sacrifice,  p.  85). 

(Spencer,  do  legibus  Hebracorum  Bitualibus,  lib. 
iii.  Dissertatio  viii. ;  Lightfoot's  Temple  Sendee, 
c.  xv. ;  Yoma,  with  the  notes  in  Surenhusius'  ed. 
of  the  Mishna,  vol.  ii. ;  Frischmuth,  Dissertatio  de 
Hirco  Emissario,  in  the  Thesaurus  Theologico-Phi- 
lologicus;  Ewald,  Die  Alterthiimer  des  Volkcs 
Israel,  p.  370  seq. ;  Hengstenberg,  Egypt  and  the 
Books  of  Moses,  on  Lev.  xvi.  {English  Translation) 
and  Christologic,  Protevangelium ;  Thompson's 
Bampton  Lectures,  Lect.  iii.  and  notes.  For  the 
modes  in  which  the  Modern  Jews  have  regarded  and 
observed  the  Day  of  Atonement,  see  Buxtorf,  Syna- 
goga  Judaica,  cap.  xx.,  and  Picart,  Ceremonies 
Meligieuses,  vol.  i.)  [S.  C.] 

AT'EOTH  (rnpj?;  Etroth),  a  city  of  Gad, 
named  with  Aroer  and  Jaazer  (Num.  xxxii.  35). 
Xo  doubt  the  name  should  be  taken  with  that  follow- 
ing it,  Shophan;  the  addition  serving  to  distinguish 
this  place  from  the  Ataroth  in  the  same  neighbour- 
hood. The  A.  V.  follows  the  Vulgate,  Etroth  et 
Sophan.  In  the  LXX.  it  is  altogether  omitted.   [G.] 

AT'TAI  OFIJ? ;  'Edi,  'U01,  'UrOl;  Ethci,  Ethi, 
Ethai '),  name  of  three  men.  1.  (1  Chr.  ii.  35,  3(5). 
2.  (1  Chr.  xii.  11).  3.  Second  son  of  king  Keho- 
boam  by  Maacah  (2  Chr.  xi.  20). 

ATTALIA  ('ATTaA.6io),a  coast-town  of  Pam- 
phylja,  mentioned  only  very  casually  in  the  New 
Testament  (  Arts  xiv.  25),  as  the  place  from  which 
Paul  and  Barnabas  sailed  on  their  return  to  Antioch  , 
from  their  missionary  journey  into  the  inland  parts 
of  Asia  .Minor.     It  does  not  appear  that  they  made 


140 


ATT ALUS 


any  stay,  or  attempted  to  preach  the  gospel  in  At- 
talia. This  city,  however,  though  comparatively 
modem  at  that  time,  was  a  place  of  considerable 
importance  in  the  first  century,  and  has  continued 
to  exist  till  now.  Its  name  since  the  twelfth  cen- 
tury has  been  Satalia,  a  corruption,  of  which  the  I 
crusading  chronicler,  William  of  Tyre,  gives  a  cu- 
rious explanation. 

Attalus  Philadelphus,  king  of  Pergamus,  ruled 
over  the  western  part  of  the  peninsula  from  the  N. 
to  the  S.,  and  was  in  want  of  a  port  which  should 
be  useful  for  the  trade  of  Egypt  and  Syria,  as 
Troas  was  for  that  of  the  Aegean.  Thus  Attalia 
was  built  and  named  after  the  monarch.  All  its 
remains  are  characteristic  of  the  date  of  its  founda- 
tion. 

There  has  been  considerable  doubt  concerning  the 
exact  position  of  Attalia.  There  is  a  discrepancy 
even  between  Strabo  and  Ptolemy,  the  former 
placing  it  to  the  W.  of  the  river  Catarrhactes,  the 
latter  to  the  E.  This  may  probably  be  accounted 
for  by  the  peculiar  character  of  this  river,  the  cal- 
careous waters  of  which  are  continually  making- 
changes  in  the  channels.  Beaufort  thought  that 
the  modem  Satalia  is  the  ancient  Olbia,  and  that 
Laara  is  the  true  Attalia.  Forbiger,  after  Man- 
nert,  is  inclined  to  identify  the  two  places.  But 
Spratt  and  Forbes  found  the  true  Olbia  further  to 
the  west,  and  have  confirmed  Leake's  opinion,  that 
Attalia  is  where  the  modern  name  would  lead  us  to 
expect  to  find  it.  (Beaufort's  Karamania  ;  Spratt 
and  Forbes'  Lycia.)  [J.  S.  H.] 

AT 'TALUS  CAttoAos,  a  Macedonian  name  of 
uncertain  origin),  the  name  of  three  kings  of 
Pergamus  who  reigned  respectively  B.C.  241-197, 
159-138  (Philadelphus),  138-183  (Philometor). 
They  were  all  faithful  allies  of  the  Romans  (Liv. 
xlv.13);  and  the  last  appointed  the  Romans  his 
heirs.  It  is  uncertain  whether  the  letters  sent 
from  Rome  in  favour  of  the  Jews  (1  Mace.  xv.  22) 
were  addressed  to  Attalus  II.  (Polyb.  xxv.  6, 
xxxi.  9,  xxxii.  3,  5,  8,  &c,  25  f.  ;  Strab.  xiii.  4  ; 
Just.  xxxv.  1,  xxxvi.  4,  5  ;  App.  Mith.  62)  or 
Attalus  III.,  as  their  date  falls  in  B.C.  139-8 
[Lucius],  about  the  time  when  the  latter  suc- 
ceeded his  uncle.  Josephus  quotes  a  decree  of  the 
Pergamenes  in  favour  of  the  Jews  {Ant.  xiv.  10, 
§22)  in  the  time  of  Hyrcanus,  about  B.C.  112  ; 
comp.  Apoc.  ii.  12-17.  [B.  F.  W.] 

ATTHAKA'TES  CAr9dparris  ;  Atharathes), 
1  Esd.  ix.  49  ;  comp.  Neb.  viii.  9,  a  corruption  of 
"  The  Tirshatha  ;"  comp.  ATHARIAS. 

AUGUSTUS  CAES'AE  {AbyoZffTos  ■  Ka7- 
<rap),  the  first  Roman  emperor.  During  his  reign 
Christ  was  born  (Luke  ii.  1  ft'.)  He  was  bom 
A.U.C.  691,  B.C.  63.  His  father  was  Cains  Octa- 
vius ;  his  mother  Atia,  daughter  of  Julia  the  sister 
of  C.  Julius  Caesar.  He  bore  the  same  name 
as  his  father,  Caius  Octavius.  He  was  prin- 
cipally educated,  having  lost  his  father  when  young, 
by  his  great  uncle  Julius  Caesar.  After  his  mur- 
der, the  young  Octavius  came  into  Italy  as  Caius 
Julius  Caesar  Octavianus,  being  by  his  uncle's  will 
adopted  into  the  Gens  Julia  as  his  heir.  He  was 
taken  into  the  Triumvirate  with  Antony  and  Le- 
pidus,  and  after  the  removal  of  the  latter,  divided 
the  empire  with  Antony ;  taking  the  West  for  his 
share.  But  there  was  no  real  concord  between 
-  them,  and  the  compact  resulted  in  a  struggle  for 
tin'  supreme  power,  which  was  terminated  in  favour 
of  Octavianus  bv  the  decisive  naval  battle  of  Ae- 


AVEN 

tium,  B.C.  31  (Suet.  Octav.  87  ;  Dion  Cass.  L. 
15  ft'. ;  Veil.  Pater,  ii.  85).  On  this  victory,  he 
was  saluted  Imperator  by  the  senate ;  and  on  his 
offering  afterwards  to  resign  the  chief  power,  they 
conferred  on  him  the  title  Augustus  (B.C.  27).  He 
managed  with  consummate  tact  and  skill  to  conso- 
lidate the  power  conferred  on  him,  -by  leaving  the 
names  and  rights  of  the  principal  state  officers -intact, 
while  by  degrees  he  united  them  all  in  his  own 
person.  The  first  link  binding  him  to  N.  T.  his- 
tory is  his  treatment  of  Herod  after  the  battle  of 
Actium.  That  prince,  who  had  espoused  Antony's 
side,  found  himself  pardoned,  taken  into  favour  and 
confirmed,  nay  even  increased  in  his  power  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xv.  6,  §5  ft'.;  7  §3;  10  §3).  In  gratitude 
Herod  built  him  a  temple  of  marble  near  the  source 
of  the  Jordan  {Ant.  xv.  10,  §3),  and  was  through 
life  the  fast  friend  of  the  imperial  family.  After 
Herod's  death  in  a.d.  4,  Augustus  divided  his  do- 
minions almost  exactly  according  to  his  dying  direc- 
tions, among  his  sons  {Ant.  xvii.  11,  §4);  but  was 
soon  obliged  to  exile  one  of  them  [Arciielaus], 
and  attach  his  portion,  Judaea  and  Samaria,  to  the 
province  of  Syria  {Ant.  xvii.  13,  §2).  Augustus 
died  at  Nola  in  Campania,  Aug.  19  A.U.C  767, 
a.d.  14,  in  his  76th  year  (Suet.  Octav.  99  f . ; 
Dion.  Cass.  lvi.  29  ff. ;  Joseph.  Ant.  xviii.  3,  §2, 
B.  J.  11,  9,  §1).  Long  before  his  death  he  had  as- 
sociated Tiberius  with  him  in  the  empire  (Suet. 
Tiber.  21  ;  Tacit.  Ann.  1,3).  See,  for  a  more  com- 
plete notice,  the  article  Augustus  in  the  Dictionary 
of  Biography  and  Mythology.  [H.  A.] 

AUGUSTUS'  BAND  (Acts  xxvii.l).  [Army, 
p.  114,  a.] 

AURA'NUS  (tIs  Avpdvos),  leader  of  a  riot  at 
Jerusalem  (2  Mac.  iv.  40).  In  the  Vatican  LXX. 
and  Vulgate  the  name  is  rendered  rls  rvpdvvos, 
quidam  tyrannus. 

AUTE'AS  CAvraias  ;  Vulg.  omits),  name  of  a 
Levite  (1  Esd.  ix.  48).     [Hodijaii.] 

A'VA  (N!iy  =  Awa;  'Aid;   Avail),  a  place  in 

the  empire  of  Assyria,  from  which  colonies  were 
brought  to  repeople  the  cities  of  Samaria  after  the 
deportation  of  the  Jews  (2  K.  xvii.  24).  From 
the  names  in  connexion  with  which  it  is  intro- 
duced, it  would  appeal-  to  be  the  same  place  with 
Ivah.  [Ivah.]  It  has  been  suggested  to  be  iden- 
tical with  Ahava  :  for  other  suppositions  see  Winer, 
sub  voce. 

AVARAN  (Avapdv ;  Aharoii),  surname  of 
Eleazar,  brother  of  Judas  Maccabaeus  (1  Mac. 
ii.  5). 

A'VEN  (J1K,  nothingness).  1.  The  "  plain  of 
Aven"  ('NTiyp'O)  is  mentioned  by  Amos  (i.  5) 
in  his  denunciation  of  Aram  (Syria)  and  the  country 
to  the  N.  of  Palestine.  It  has  not  been  identified 
with  certainty.  Michaelis  (notes  on  Amos)  heaid 
from  a  native  of  Damascus  of  a  valley  near  that  city, 
called  Un,  and  he  quotes  a  Damasi  ene  proverb  re- 
ferring thereto ;  but  the  information  was  at  best 
suspicious,  and  has  not  been  confirmed,  although 
the  neighbourhood  of  Damascus  has  been  tolerably 
well  explored  by  Burckhardt  (App.  iv.)  and  by 
Porter.  The  Prophet,  however,  would  seem  to  be 
alluding  to  some  principal  district  of  the  country, 
of  equal  importance  with  Damascus  itself,  and  so 
the  LXX.  have  understood  it,  taking  the  letters  as 
pointed  JIN  and  expressing  it   in   their  version  as 


AVIM 

irtSioy^Clv.  By  this  they  doubtless  intend  the  great 
plain  of  Lebanon,  Coelesyria,  in  which  the  renowned 
idol  temple  of  Baalbek  or  Hehopolis  was  situated, 
and  which  still  retains  the  very  same  name  by 
which.  Amos  and  Joshua  designated  it,  el  Buha'a. 
The  application  of  Aven  as  a  term  of  reproach  or 
contempt  to  a  flourishing  idol  sanctuary,  and  the 
play  or  paronomasia  therein  contained,  is  quite  in 
keeping  with  the  manner  of  Amos  and  of  Hosea. 
The  latter  frequently  applies  the  very  same  word  to 
Bethel.     [Bethavem.] 

2.  In  Hos.  x.  8,  "the  high  places  of  .Aven " 
('N  H1D3  ;  fiwfxol Tflp  ;  excelsa  idoli),  the  word 

is  clearly  a  contraction  of  Beth-aven,  that  is  Beth- 
el (comp.  iv.  15,  &c). 

3.  In  this  manner  are  pointed,  in  Ez.  xxx.  17, 
the  letters  of  the  name  which  is  elsewhere  given  as 
On,  JIN,  the  sacred  city  of  Heliopolis  or  On,  in 
Egypt.  [Ox.]  (The  LXX.  and  Vulgate  both  render 
it  accordingly,  'HAiotnroAi's,  Heliopolis?)  The  in- 
tention of  the  prophet  is  doubtless  to  play  upon  the 
name  in  the  same  manner  as  Amos  and  Hosea.  See 
above  (1).  [G.] 

A'VIM,  A'VIMS,  or  A'VITES"  (CWn  = 

the  Avvim  ;  o't  'Evaiioi,  the  word  elsewhere  used  by 
the  LXX.  for  Hivites ;  Hevaei).  1.  An  early, 
but  perhaps  not  an  aboriginal b  people  among  the 
inhabitants  of  Palestine,  whom  we  meet  with  in  the 
S.  W.  corner  of  the  sea-coast,  whither  they  may 
have  made  their  way  northwards  from  the  Desert 
(Stanley,  Sinai  and  Pal.  App.  §83).  The  only 
notice  of  them  which '  has  come  down  to  us  is 
contained  in  a  remarkable  fragment  of  primeval 
history  preserved  in  Deut.  ii.  23.  Here  we  see 
them  "  dwelling  in  '  the '  villages "  (or  nomad 
encampments — Chatzerim)  in  the  S.  pait  of  the 
Shefela,  or  great  western  lowland,  "as  far  as 
Gaza."  In  these  rich  possessions  they  were  attacked 
by  the  invading  Philistines,  "the  Caphtorim  which 
came  forth  out  of  Caphtor,"  and  who  after  "de- 
stroying" them  and  "dwelling  in  their  stead,"] 
appear  to  have  pushed  them  further  north.  This 
must  be  inferred  from  the  terms  of  the  passage  in 
Josh.  xiii.  2,  3,  the  enumeration  of  the  rest  of  the 
land  still  remaining  to  be  conquered.  Beginning0 
from  "  Sihor,  which  is  before  Egypt,"  probably  the 
Wady-el-Arish,  the  list  proceeds  northwards  along 
the  lowland  plains  of  the  sea-coast,  through  the  five 
Lordships  of  the  Philistines — all  apparently  taken  in 
their  order  from  S.  to  N.- — till  we  reach  the 
Avvim,d  as  if  they  had  been  driven  up  out  of  the 
more  southerly  position  which  they  occupied  at  the 
date  of*  the  earlier  record  into  the  plains  of  Sharon. 

Nothing  more  is  told  us  of  this  ancient  people, 
whose  very  name  is  said1'  to  signify  "ruin."  Pos- 
sibly a  trace  ot' their  existence  is  to  be  found  in  the 

B  It  is  characteristic  of  the  looseness  of  the  A.  V. 
that  this  name  is  given  differently  each  time  it  occurs, 
and  that  they  arc  all  inaccurate. 

b  According  to  Kwald  [Geschichte,  i.  310)  and 
Berthcau,  the  Avvim  were  an  Urvolk  of  Palestine 
proper.  They  may  have  been  so,  but  there  is  nothing 
to  prove  it,  while  the  mode  of  their  dwellings  points 
rather  to  the  desert  as  their  origin. 

c  The  punctuation  of  this  passage  in  our  Bibles  is 
not  in  accordance  with  the  Hebrew  text,  which  has  a 
fail  stop  at  Geshuri  (vcr.  2),  thus  :  "  This  is  the 
land  that  yet  rcmaincth,  all  the  borders  of  the 
Philistines  and  all  the  Geshurite.    From  Sihor 


AXE 


141 


town  "  Avim  "  (accurately,  as  in  the  other  cases, 
'  the  Avvim ')  which  occurs  among  the  cities  ol 
Benjamin  (Josh,  xviii.  23),  and  which  may  have 
preserved  the  memory  of  some  family  of  the  extinct 
people  driven  up  out  of  their  fertile  plains  to  take 
refuge  in  the  wild  hills  of  Bethel;  just  as  in  the 
"  Zemaraim  "  of  the  preceding  verse  we  have  pro- 
bably a  reminiscence  of  the  otherwise  forgotten  Ze- 
marites  [Zemaraiji].  But  on  the  other  hand  it  is 
possible  that  the  word  in  this  place  is  but  a  varia- 
tion or  corruption  of  the  name  of  Ai.   [Ai.] 

The  inhabitants  of  the  north-central  districts  of 
Palestine  (Galileans)  were  in  later  times  distin- 
guished by  a  habit  of  confounding  the  gutturals,  as, 
for  instance,  J?  with  PI  (see  Lightfoot,  Chor.  Cent. 

ch.  87 ;  Buxtorf,  Lex.  Talrn.  yhi).  Is  it  possible 
that  "'•in,,  Hkite,  is  a  variation,  arising  from  this 
eause,  of  l|-1J*5  Avite,  and  that  this  people  were 
known  to  the  Israelites  at  the  date  of  the  conquest 
by  the  name  of  Hivites-?  At  any  rate  it  is  a  curious 
fact  that  both  the  LXX.  and  Jerome,  as  we  have 
seen  above,  identified  the  two  names,  and  also  that 
the  town  of  ha- Avvim  was  iu  the  actual  district  of 
the  Hivites,  in  the  immediate  neighbourhood  of 
Gibeon,  Chephirah,  and  their  other  chief  cities 
(Josh.  ix.  7,  17,  compared  with  xviii.  22-27). 

The  name  of  the  Avvim  has  been  derived  from 
Avva  (Ava),  or  Ivvah  (Ivah),  as  if  they  had  mi- 
grated thence  into  Palestine  ;  but  there  is  no  argu- 
ment for  this  beyond  the  mere  similarity  of  the 
names.f 

2.  The  people  of  Avva,  among  the  colonists  who 
were  sent  by  the  king  of  Assyria  to  re-inhabit  the 
depopulate!  cities  of  Israel  (2  K.  xvii.  31).  They 
were  idolaters,  worshipping  gods  called  Xibhaz  and 
Tartak.     [Ava.]  [G.] 

A'VITH  (rp-iy  ;    rerealfi),  the    city  of  Ha- 

dad  ben-Bedad,  one  of  the  kings  of  Edom  be- 
fore there  were  kings  in  Isiael  (Gen.  xxxvi. 
55  ;  1  Chr.  i.  46 ;  in  the  latter  passage  the  Text 
(Clietib)  has  ni'JI,  which  in  the  Keri  is  corrected 
to  agree  with  the  reading  in  Genesis).     The  name 

may  be  compared  with  cl-Ghoieeitheh  (  j£j  tJ£\ ) 

a  "  chain  of  low  hills,"  mentioned  by  Burckhardt 
(375)  as  lying  to  the  E.  of  the  district  of  Eerek  in 
iloab  (Knobel,  Genesis,  257).  [0.] 

AWL  (y\"}0;  otrfiTiov;    svbula),   a  tool    of 

which  we  do  not  know  the  ancient  form.  The 
only  notice  of  it  is  in  connexion  with  the  custom 
of  boring  the  ear  of  the  slave  (Ex.  xxi.  6;  Pent. 
xv.  17).  [W.  L.  B.] 

AXE.  The  Jews  had  more  than  one  designation 
for  this  tool :  (1)  DTlip,  from  its  quality  of  sharp- 


even  to  the  border  of  Ekron  northward,  is  counted  to 
the  Canaanite,"  &c. 

d  It  is  perhaps  worth  notice,  where  every  syllable 
has   some   significance,  that   while   "  the  Gazathite 

the  Ekronite,"  are  all  in  the  singular,  "  the 

Avvim"  is  plural. 

c  Gosenius,  Thesaurus,  loon.  Lengerke's explana- 
tion of  it,  as  "  dwellers  in  the  lowlands,"  is  not  ob- 
vious ;  nor  does  he  specify  any  derivation. 

f  See  Lengerke's  confident  hypothesis  [Kenaan, 
183),  for  which,  as  is  often  the  case,  he  does  net 
condescend  to  give  the  shadow  of  a  reason. 


142  AZAEL 

ness;  (2)  |T~I3,  from  its  use  in  cutting ;  (3)  /H2, 
from  the  material,  iron.  The  second  of  these 
terms  appears  occasionally  to  have  been  applied  to 
the  adze  (I  K.  vi.  7).  The  construction  of  the 
tool  was  similar  to  that  now  in  use,  except  that 
the  head  appeal's  to  have  been  fastened  to  the 
handle  by  thongs,   and   so"  was   liable  to  slip    oil 


Egyptian  Axe. — (British  Museum.) 

(Deut.  xix.  5;  2  K.  vi.  5).  The  word  "axe"  is 
improperly  given  in  our  version  as  the  translation 
of  1VJJQ  (Is.  xliv.  12,  marginal  translation;  Jer.  x. 

3) :  the  instrument  meant  is  a  curved  knife,  such 
as  a  wood-carver  would  use:  in  Is.  xliv.  12,  the 
word  describes  the  sort  of  workman,  the  smith 
of  knives,  or  fine  workman  :  in  Jer.  x.  3,  the  stop- 
ping should  be  altered  so  as  to  connect  the  word 
with  "  the  workman."  [\V.  L.  B.] 


Assyrian  Axe  —(British  Mus.um  ) 

AZAEL  ('AfarjXos  ;  Ezelus),  name  of  a  man 
(1  Esd.  ix.  14).     [Asahel.] 

AZAE'LUS  ('A^otjA.os  ;  Dielus),  an  Israelite  in 
the  time  of  Esdras :  the  name  is  probably  merely  a 
repetition  of  that  preceding  it  (1  Esd.  ix.  3-1). 

A'ZAL  (Atzel,  ?\'X,   but  from   the  emphatic 

accent  ?^'N,  Atzal ;  'la<r6S,  Alex.  'AcrtnjA. ;  usque 

ad  proximnni),  a  name  only  occurring  in  Zech. 
xiv.  5.  It  is  mentioned  as  the  limit  to  which  the 
'ravine'  or  cleft  (K*jl)  of  the  Mount  of  Olives 
will  extend  when  "  Jehovah  shall  go  forth  to  fight." 
The  whole  passage  of  Zecharuah  is  a  highly  poetical 
one:  and  several  commentators  agree  with  Jerome 
in  talcing  Azal  as  an  appellative,  and  not  a  proper 
name.  [G.] 

AZALI'AH   (-lirWx;    'E^Xlas,   'EtreAi'ay; 

Aslia,  Eselia),  name  of  a  man  (2  K.  xxii.  3  ;  2  Chr. 
xxxiv.  8). 

AZANIAH  (P1»3TS  ;  'ACavias ;  Azanias), 
name  of  a  man  (Neh.  x.  9). 

AZA'PHION  ('Affffa-rrcpicbe;  Sephegus),!  Esd. 
v.  33.  Possibly  a  corruption  of  Sophereth. 

AZARA  {'Affapa. ;  Attrc),  one  of  the  "  servants 
of  the  temple"  (1  Esd.  v.  31).  No  corresponding 
name  can  be  traced  in  the  parallel  list  in  Ezra. 

AZA'RAEL  (the  same  name  as  the  succeeding 
one  ;  7fcOfy  ;  'O^irjA  ;  Azareel),  a  Levite-musician 
(Neh.  xii.  36). 

AZA'REEL  6tOTK  ;  'O&^A,  AtrpdJA,  'Afa- 
pi/)\,  'Efpi^A,  'ZffSpiriK  •  Azareel,  Ezrihel,  Ezrel, 


AZARIAH 

Azreel),   name   of  five  men.      1.  (1  Chr.  xii.  6). 

2.  (1  Chr.   xxv.    18),   called   Uzziel  in  xxv.  3. 

3.  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  22).  4.  (Ezr.  x.  40),  called 
elsewhere  Eskil.  5.  (Neh.  xi.  13). 

AZARIAH  (irnm   and  -irV-lTNVACafu'as; 

Azarias ;  v:hom  God  hath  helped).  It  is  a  com- 
mon name  in  Hebrew  and  especially  in  the  families 
of  the  priests  of  the  line  of  Eleazar,  whose  name 
has  precisely  the  same  meaning  as  Azariah.  It 
is  nearly  identical,  and  is  often  confounded  with 
Ezra  as  well  as  with  Zerahiah  and  Seraiah.  The 
principal  persons  who  bore  this  name  were: — 

1.  Son  of  Ethan,  of  the  sons  of  Zerah,  where, 
perhaps,  Zerahiah  is  the  more  probable  reading 
(1  Chr.  ii.  8). 

2.  Son  of  Ahimaaz  (1  Chr.  vi.  9).  He  appears 
from  1  K.  iv.  2,  to  have  succeeded  Zadok,'  his 
grandfather,  in  the  high-priesthood,  in  the  reign 
of  Solomon,  Ahimaaz  having  died  before  Zadok. 
[Ahimaaz.]  To  him,  it  can  scarcely  be  doubted, 
instead  of  to  his  grandson,  Azariah  the  son  of  Jo- 
hanan,  belongs  the  notice  in  1  Chr.  vi.  10,  "  He  it 
is  that  executed  the  priest's  office  in  the  temple 
that  Solomon  built  at  Jerusalem,"  meaning  that  he 
officiated  at  the  consecration  of  the  temple,  and  was 
the  first  high-priest  that  ministered  in  it.  The 
other  interpretation  which  has  been  put  upon  these 
words,  as  alluding  to  the  Azariah  who  was  high- 
priest  in  Uzziah's  reign,  and  resisted  the  king  when 
he  attempted  to  offer  incense,  is  quite  unsuited  to 
the  words  they  are  meant  to  explain,  and  utterly 
at  variance  with  the  chronology.  For  this  Aza- 
liah  of  1  Chr.  vi.  10  precedes  Amariah,  the  high- 
priest  in  Jehoshaphat's  reign,  whereas  Uzziah  was 
king  five  reigns  after  Jehoshaphat.  Josephus 
merely  mentions  Azarias  as  the  son  and  successor 
of  Ahimaaz. 

3.  The  son  of  Johanan.  He  must  have  been 
high-priest  in  the  reigns  of  Abijah  and  Asa,  as  we 
know  his  son  Amariah  was  in  the  days  of  Jeho- 
shaphat, the  son  of  Asa.  It  does  not  appear  what 
part  he  took  in  Asa's  zealous  reformation  (2  Chr. 
xv.),  nor  whether  he  approved  the  stripping  of  the 
house  of  God  of  its  treasures  to  induce  Benhadad  to 
break  his  league  with  Baasha  king  of  Israel,  as 
related  2  Chr.  xvi.,  for  his  name  and  his  office  are 
never  alluded  to  in  the  history  of  Asa's  reign, 
either  in  the  book  of  Kings  or  Chronicles.  The 
active  persons  in  the  religious  movement  of  the 
times  were  the  king  himself  and  the  two  prophets, 
Azariah  the  son  of  Oded,  and  Hanani.  The  silence 
concerning  Azariah,  the  high-priest,  is,  perhaps, 
rather  unfavourable  than  otherwise  to  his  religious 
character.  His  name  is  almost  lost  in  Josephus's 
list  of  the  high-priests.  Having  lost,  as  we  saw  in 
the  article  Amariah,  its  termination  A2,  which 
adhered  to  the  following  name,  it  got  by  some  pro- 
cess transformed  into  Icros. 

4.  The  high-priest  in  the  reign  of  Uzziah,  king 
of  Judah,  whose  name,  peihaps  from  this  circum- 
stance, is  often  corrupted  into  Azariah  (2  K.  xiv. 
21;  xv.  1,  6,  7,  8,  &c).  The  most  memorable 
event  of  his  life  is  that  which  is  recorded  in  2  Chr. 
xxvi.  17-20.  When  king  Uzziah,  elated  by  his 
great  prosperity  and  power,  "  transgressed  against 
the  Lord  his  God,  and  went  into  the  temple  of  the 
Lord  to  bum  incense  upon  the  altar  of  incense," 
Azariah  the  priest,  accompanied  by  eighty  of  his 
brethren,  went  in  boldly  after  him,  and  withstood 
him.  With  unflinching  faithfulness,  and  a  high 
sense    of  his  own    responsibility  as  ruler   of  the 


AZARIAH 

House  of  God,  he  addressed  the  king  with  the  well- 
merited  reproof — "  It  appeitaineth  not  unto  thee, 
Uzziah,  to  burn  incense  unto  the  Lord,  but  to  the 
priests  the  sons  of  Aaron,  that  are  consecrated  to 
burn  incense:  go  out  of  the  sanctuary,  for  thou 
hast  trespassed :  neither  shall  it  be  for  thiue  honour 
from  the  Lord  God."  And  it  is  added  that  when 
"  Azariah  the  chief  priest  and  all  the  priests  looked 
upon  him,  behold  he  was  leprous  in  his  forehead, 
and  they  thrust  him  out  from  thence ;  yea  himself 
hasted  to  go  out,  because  the  Lord  had  smitten 
him."  Uzziah  was  a  leper  unto  the  day  of  his 
death,  and,  as  such,  was  never  able  again  to  go  to 
the  Lord's  House,  which  he  had  so  presumptuously 
invaded.  Azariah  was  contemporary  with  Isaiah 
the  prophet,  and  with  Amos  and  Joel,  and  doubt- 
less witnessed  the  great  earthquake  in  Uzziah's 
reign  (Am.  i.  1 ;  Zech.  xiv.  5).  He  is  not  men- 
tioned in  Josephus's  list.  IourjAoy  occurs  instead ; 
possibly  the  name  of  the  prophet  inadvertently  sub- 
stituted for  that  of  the  high-priest.  Neither  is  he 
in  the  priestly  genealogy  of  1  Chr.  vi. 

5.  The  high-priest  in  the  days  of  Hezekiah  (2 
Chr.  xxxi.  10-13).  He  appears  to  have  cooperated 
zealously  with  the  king  in  that  thorough  purifica- 
tion of  the  temple  and  restoration  of  the  temple- 
services  which  was  so  conspicuous  a  feature  in  He- 
zekiah's  reign.  He  especially  interested  himself  in 
providing  chambers  in  the  house  of  the  Lord  in 
which  to  stow  the  tithes  and  offerings  and  conse- 
crated things  for  the  use  of  the  priests  and  Levites, 
and  in  appointing  overseers  to  have  the  charge  of 
them.  For  the  attendance  of  priests  and  Levites, 
and  the  maintenance  of  the  temple-services,  de- 
pended entirely  upon  the  supply  of  such  oilerings, 
and  whenever  the  people  neglected  them  the 
priests  and  Levites  were  forced  to  disperse  them- 
selves to  their  villages,  and  so  the  house  of  God 
was  deserted  (comp.  Neh.  x.  35-39,  xii.  27-30, 
44-47).  His  name  seems  to  be  corrupted  into 
Nrjpias  in  Josephus.  He  succeeded  Urijah,  who 
was  high-priest  in  the  reign  of  Ahaz.  Who  his 
successor  was  is  somewhat  uncertain.  He  is  not, 
any  more  than  the  preceding,  included  in  the  gene- 
alogy of  1  Chr.  vi. 

6.  Another  Azariah  is  inserted  between  Hilkiah, 
in  Josiah's  reign,  and  Seraiah,  who  was  put  to 
death  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  in  1  Chr.  vi.  13.  But 
Josephus  does  not  acknowledge  him,  making  Se- 
raiah the  son  of  Hilkiah,  and  there  seems  to  be 
scarcely  room  for  him.  It  seems  likely  that  he 
may  have  been  inserted  to  assimilate  the  genealogy 
to  that  of  Ezr.  vii.  1,  where,  however,  the  Seraiah 
and  Azariah  are  probably  neither  of  them  the  high- 
priests  of  those  names. 

7.  Several  other  priests  and  Levites  of  this  name 
occur,  as  Azariah  the  son  of  Zephaniah  (1  Chr.  vi. 
36);  the  son  of  Hilkiah  in  the  genealogy  of  Ezra 
(Ezr.  vii.  1),  who  is  probably  the  same  head  of  a 
house  as  is  indicated  in  1  Chr.  ix.  11;  Neh.  vii. 
7,  x.  2,  and  xii.  1,  under  the  form  Ezra;  Azariah 
the  son  of  Maaseiah,  one  of  the  priests  of  the  plain, 
who  repaired  a  portion  of  the  wall  (Neh.  iii.  23.. 
24);  a  Levite  (Neh.  viii.  7);  and  other  Levites 
(2  Chr.  xxix.  12)  in  the  days  of  Hezekiah. 

8.  A  chief  officer  of  Solomon's,  the  son  of  Na- 
than, perhaps  David's  grandson  (1  K.  iv.  5). 

9.  Son  of  Jehoshaphat  king  of  Judah  (2  Chr. 
xxi.  2). 

10.  The  original  name  of  Abed-nego  (Dan.  i.  6. 
7,  11,  19).     He  appears  to  have  been  of  tin'  seed- 


AZEKAH 


14.°> 


royal  of  Judah,  and  for  this  reason  selected,  with 
Daniel  and  his  other  two  companions,  for  Nebu- 
chadnezzar's especial  service.  The  three  children, 
as  they  were  called,  were  remarkable  for  their 
beauty,  and  wisdom,  and  knowledge,  and  intelli- 
gence. They  wei'e  no  less  remarkable  for  their 
piety,  their  strict  adherence  to  the  law  of  Moses, 
and  the  steadfastness  of  their  faith,  even  unto  death, 
and  their  wonderful  deliverance. 

11.  Azariah,  the  son  of  Oded  (2  Chr.  xv.  1), 
called  simply  Oded  in  ver.  8,  was  a  remarkable 
prophet  in  the  days  of  king  Asa,  and  a  contempo- 
rary of  Azariah  the  son  of  Johanan  the  high-priest, 
and  of  Hanani  the  seer.  He  powerfully  stirred  up 
t'he  spirit  of  Asa,  and  of  the  people  of  Judah  and 
Benjamin,  in  a  brief  but  pithy  prophecy,  which, 
has  been  preserved,  to  put  away  all  idolatious  wor- 
ship, and  to  restore  the  altar  of  the  one  true  God 
before  the  porch  of  the  temple.  Great  numbers  of 
Israelites  from  Ephraim,  and  Manasseh,  and 
Simeon,  and  all  Israel,  joined  in  the  national  refor- 
mation, to  the  great  strengthening  of  the  kingdom  ; 
and  a  season  of  rest  and  great  prosperity  ensued. 
Oded,  the  prophet  in  the  days  of  Ahaz,  may  pro- 
bably have  been  a  descendant  of  Azariah. 

12.  At  2  Chr.  xxii.  6,  Azariah  is  a  clerical  error 
for  Ahaziah. 

13.  Several  other  persons  of  this  name  are  men- 
tioned of  different  tribes,  as  e.  g.  Azariah  the  son 
of  Obed  in  the  reign  of  Joash  (1  Chr.  ii.  38,  39 ; 
2  Chr.  xxiii.  1),  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  whose  name 
is  very  important,  as  marking  clearly  the  time 
when  the  genealogy  in  1  Chr.  ii.  36-41,  was  made 
out,  viz.,  in  Hezekiah's  reign;  for  Azariah,  in  v. 
38,  appears  from  2  Chr.  xxiii.  1,  xxiv.  1,  to  have 
been  the  captain  of  a  hundred  when  Joash  was 
seven  years  old ;  in  other  words,  about  one  gene- 
ration older  than  Joash.  Now  there  are  six  gene- 
rations after  Azariah  in  that  genealogy,  ending 
with  Elishama,  and,  counting  Joash,  there  are  from 
Joash  to  Hezekiah  also  six  generations,  viz.,  Joash, 
Amaziah,  Uzziah,  Jotham,  Ahaz,  Hezekiah.  Eli- 
shama, therefore,  was  contemporary  with  Heze- 
kiah. Zabad,  in  1  Chr.  ii.  36,  37,  we  know  too 
from  xi.  41,  to  have  been  a  contemporary  of  David. 
Another  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim,  2  Chr.  xxviii. 
12 ;  a  son  of  Hoshaiah,  Jer.  xliii.  2,  probably  of 
Judah ;  comp.  Neh.  xii.  32,  33,  &c.      [A.  C.  H.] 

AZARI'AS  CA-Capias  ;  Azarias).  1.  (1  Esd. 
ix.  21),  elsewhere  called  Uzziah.  2.  (1  Esd.  ix. 
43).  3.  (1  Esd.  ix.  48),  elsewhere  called  Azariah. 
4.  Priest  in  the  line  of  Esdras  (2  Esd.  i.  1),  else- 
where Azariah  and  Ezerias.  5.  Name  assumed 
by  the  angel  Raphael  (Tob.  v.  12',  vi.  6,  13,  vii.  8, 
ix.  2).  6.  A  captain  in  the  army  of  Judas  Macca- 
baeus  (1  Mae.  v.  18,  56,  60). 

A'ZAZ  (tty  ;  'Afouf;  Azuz),  name  of  a  man 
(1  Chr.  v.  8).TT 

AZAZIAH(-innty;  'OQas;  Ozaziu.  Azarias), 
name  of  three  men.  1.  (1  Chr.  xv.  21).  2. 
(1  Chr.  x".wii.  20).      3.  (2  Chr.  xxxi.  13). 

AZBAZ'AKETH  ('A<rj8aKa<f>as  ;  Asbazareth  . 
king  of  the  Assyrians,  probably  a  corruption  of 
Esarhaddon  (1  Esd.  v.  69). 

AZ'BUK  (P-12TV  ;  'AfrPovx;  Azboc),  name  of 

a  man  (Neh.  iii.  16). 

AZK'KAH(npty,from  a  root  signifying  to  dig 


144 


AZEL 


or  till  the  ground,8  see  Gesen.  s.  v. ;  'A^tj/ccJ,  once 
'lafyicd  ;  Azecci),  a  town  of  Judah,  with  dependent 
villages  ("  daughters")  lying  in  the  Shefela  or  rich 
agricultural  plain,  a  situation  quite  in  accordance 
with  the  derivation  of  the  name  given  above.  It  is 
named  with  Adullam,  Shaaraim,  and  other  places 
known  to  have  been  in  that  locality  (Josh.  xv.  35; 
2  Chr.  xi.  9  ;  Neh.  xi.  30),  but  is  most  clearly 
defined  as  being  near  Shochoh  (that  is  the  northern 
one)  [Shochoh.]  (1  Sam.  xvii.  1).  Joshua's  pur- 
suit of  the  Canaanites  after  the  battle  of  Beth-horon 
extended  to  Azekah  (Josh.  x.  10,  11).  Between 
Azekah  and  Shochoh,  an  easy  step  out  of  their  own 
territory,  the  Philistines  encamped  before  the  battle 
in  which  Goliath  was  killed  (1  Sam.  xvii.  1).  It  was 
among  the  cities  fortified  by  Rehoboam  (2  Chr.  xi. 
9),  was  still  standing  at  the  time  of  the  invasion  of 
the  kings  of  Babylon  (Jer.  xxxiv.  7),  and  is  men- 
tioned as  one  of  the  places  re-occupied  by  the  Jews 
after  their  return  from  Captivity  (Neh.  xi.  30). 

The  position  of  Azekah  has  not  yet  been  recognised . 
The  above  passages  would  seem  to  show  that  it 
must  have  been  to  the  N.  of  the  Shefela,  near  Beth- 
horon  ;  but  by  Eusebius  and  Jerome  it  is  spoken  of 
as  lying  between  (ava  /Acffov)  Eleutheropolis  and 
Jerusalem,  i.  e.  further  S.  and  in  the  mountains  of 
Judah.  Perhaps  like  Shochoh,  Aphek,  &c.  there 
were  more  than  one  place  of  the  name.  Schwarz 
(p.  102)  would  identify  it  with  "Tell  Ezakaria " 
{Zakariya  on  Robinson's  Map,  1856)  not  far  from 
Aiiv-shems,  and  very  possibly  correctly".  [G.] 

A'ZEL  (b^N,  in  pause  T>¥K  ;  'E<HjX  ;  Asel),  a 
descendant  of  Saul  (1  Chr.  viii.  37,  38,  ix.  43,  44). 

A'ZEM  (Q>'y,  when  not  emphasized  DVJ?  ; 
'\aaov,  'Aa6fj.:  Asem,Eseiri),  a  city  in  the  extreme 
smith  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  29),  afterwards  allotted 
to  Simeon  (xix.  3).     Elsewhere  it  is  Ezem.       [G.] 

AZEPHU'KITH  ('Apaicpovpte  ;  Vulg.  omits), 
1  Esd.  v.  16.  There  is  no  name  answering  to  this 
in  the  parallel  lists  of.  Ezra  and  Nehemiah. 

AZ'GAD  013$;  'A<ryi5;  Azgad),  the  name  of 

a  man  (Ezr.  ii.  12,  viii.  12;  Neh.  vii.  17,  x.  15). 

AZI'A  ('O£ios  ;  Ozuus),  a  "  servant  of  the  tem- 
ple" (1  Esd.  v.  31),  elsewhere  called  UzzA. 

AZI'EI  (2  Esd.  i.  2),  one  of  the  ancestors  of  Es- 
dras,  elsewhere  called  AzariaH  and  EziAS. 

A'ZIEL  (^Xnj?  ;  'Of^A  ;  Oziel),  a  Levite 
(1  Chr.  xv.  20).  The  name  is  a  shortened  form  of 
Jaaziel  (y^tl?''),  which  occurs  in  ver.  18  of  same 
chapter. 

AZI'ZA  (Nny;  '£££<*;  Aziza),  name  of  a 
man  (Ezr.  x.  27). 

AZMA'VETH  (HOy  ;  'Afr^e,  'Aa^e  ■ 
Azmaveth,  Azmoth).  1.  One  of  the  "  mighty 
men"  of  David  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  31 ;   1  Chr.  xi.  33). 

2.  A  descendant  of  Saul  (1  Chr.  viii.  36,  ix.  42). 

3.  A  Benjamite  (1  Chr.  xii.  3).     4.  One  of  David's 
overseers  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  25). 

AZMA'VETH  (n)»ty;  'A(u.J>8;  Azmaveth), 
a  place  to  all  appearance  in  Benjamin,  being 
named  with  Anathoth,  Kirjath-Jearim  and  other 
towns  belonging  to  that  tribe.     Fortv-two  of  the 


a  The  verb  occurs  only  in  Is.  v.  2.  where  it  is  ren- 
dered in.  the  A.  V.  "  fenced  ;"  but  by  Gesenius,  in  his 
Jesaia,  "  grub  ihn  urn." 


AZZUR 

Bene- Azmaveth  returned  from  the  captivity  with 
Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  24).  The  "sons  of  the 
singers"  seem  to  have  settled  round  it  (Neh. 
xii.  29).  The  name  elsewhere  occurs  as  Beth- 
Azmaveth.  Azmaveth  does  not  make  its  appear- 
ance in  the  lists  in  Joshua,  but  the  name  was  borne 
by  several  Benjamites  of  the  kindred  of  Saul 
(1  Chr.  viii.  36,  ix.  42,  xii.  3;  in  the  last  passage 
Bene-A.  may  merely  denote  natives  of  the  place, 
especially  as  natives  of  Anathoth,  Gibeah,  &c.  are 
mentioned  in  the  same  verse).  [G.] 

AZ'MON  (pOJJ?  or  p)y-  'Acrefiuva,  SeA^uoW; 

Asemona),  a  place  named  as  being  on  the  S.  boundary 
of  the  Holy  Land,  apparently  near-  the  torrent  of 
Egypt  (  Wadi  el-ArisK)  (Num.  xxxiv.  4,  5;  Josh, 
xv.  4).  It  has  not  yet  been  identified.  It  is  men- 
tioned by  Eusebius  and  Jerome  (Ono?n.),  but  evi- 
dently was  not  actually  known  to  them.  [G.] 

AZ'NOTH-TA'BOR  (Ton  nUTS* ;  'A(avi>0 

Qaflaip,  or  ' ' AOQafidip;  Azanotthabor)  —  the  ears 
(«'.  e.  possibly  the  summits)  of  Tabor,  one  of  the 
landmarks  of  the  boundary  of  Naphtali  (Josh.  xix. 
34).  The  town,  if  town  it  be,  or  the  reason  ii»r 
the  expression  contained  in  the  name,  has  hitheito 
escaped  recognition.  By  Eusebius  (under  ' AfrvaOcoO) 
it  is  mentioned  as  lying  in  the  plain  in  the  confines 
of  Dio-caesarea. 

For  the  use  of  the  word  JTK  =  ear,  comp.  Uzzen- 

Sherah  ;  and  for  the  metaphor  involved  in  the 
name,  comp.  Chisloth-Tabor.  [G.] 

A'ZOR  {'A(wp  ;  Azor),  son  of  Eliakim,  in  the 
line  of  our  Lord  (Matt.  i.  13,  14). 

AZO'TUS.     [Ashdod.] 

AZ'EIEL  (^ITy,  help  of  God;  Gesen.  com- 
pares thevPunie  Hasdrubal,  i.  e.  ?J?2  i"ITJ?,  help  of 
Baal;  'le(pi-h\,'0(ffi\;  Ezriel,  Ozriel),  name  of 
three  men.  1.  (1  Chr.  v.  24).  2.  (1  Chr.  xxvii. 
19).      3.  (Jer.  xxxvi.  26). 

AZRI'KAM  (Di^-lTy;  'E^kc^;  Ezricam), 
the  name  of  four  men.  1.  A  descendant  of  the 
royal  line  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  iii.  23).  2.  (1  Chr. 
viii.  38 ;  ix.  44).  3.  (1  Chr.  ix.  14;  Neh.  xi.  15). 
4.  "  Governor  of  the  house"  to  king  Ahaz  (2  Chr. 
xxviii.  7). 

AZU'BAH  (nn-ITy;  'AfrvPd;  Azuba).  1. 
Wife  of  Caleb,  son  of  Hezron  (1  Chr.  ii.  18,  19). 
2.  Mother  of  king  Jehoshaphat  (1  K.  xxii.  42  ; 
2  Chr.  xx.  31). 

A'ZUR  or  AZ'ZUR  (IVty  or  1-Ty;  'A£oip, 
'E^ep  ;  Azur),  name  of  three  men.  1.  A  Gibeonite 
(Jer.  xxviii.  1).     2.  (Ez.  xi.  1).     3.  (Neh.  x.  17). 

AZU'RAN  CA(ap6v,  Alex.  'A&vpSs;  Azoroc), 
1  Esd.  v.  15.  There  is  no  corresponding  name  in 
the  parallel  lists  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah. 

AZ'ZAPI  (!T?y;  rofa;    Gaza).     This  is   the 

more  accurate  rendering  of  the  name  of  the  well- 
known  Philistine  city,  Gaza  (Deut.  ii.  23  ;  1  K.  iv. 
24;  Jer.  xxv.  20).  [Gaza.]  There  is  apparently 
nothing  to  explain  why  an  exception  should  have 
been  made  in  these  three  places  from  the  usual  but 
less  correct)  version  of  the  name.  [G.] 

AZ'ZAN  (}-ty  ;  'o£a  ;     Azan),  name  of  a  man 
(Num.  xxxiv.  26). 
AZ'ZUR.     [Azub.J 


BAAL 


BA'AL  (7JO;  Baa\;  Baal), the  supreme  male 
divinity  of  the  Phoenician  and  Canaanitish  nations, 
as  Ashtoreth  was  their  supreme  female  divinity. 
Both  names  have  the  peculiarity  of  being  used  in 
the  plural,  and  it  seems  certain  that  these  plurals 
designate  not  (as  Gesenius,  Thes.  s.  vv.,  main- 
tained) statues  of  the  divinities,  but  different  modi- 
fications of  the  divinities  themselves.  That  there 
were  many  such  modifications  of  Baal  is  certain 
from  the  feet  that  his  name  occurs  with  numerous 
adjuncts,  both  in  the  0.  T .  and  elsewhere,  as  we 
shall  have  occasion  to  notice  hereafter.  The  plural 
Baalim  is  found  frequently  done  {e.g.  Judg.  ii.  11, 
x.  10;  1  K.  xviii.  18;  Jer.  ix.  14;  Hos.  ii.  17), 
as  well  as  in  connexion  with  Ashtoreth  (Judg.  x. 
6 ;  1  Sam.  vii.  4)  and  with  Asherah,  or,  as  our 
version  renders  it,  "  the  groves"  (Judg.  iii.  7  ;  2 
Chr.  xxxiii.  3).  There  is  no  difficulty  in  deter- 
mining the  meaning  of  the  name  since  the  word 
is  in  Hebrew  a  common  noun  of  frequent  occur- 
rence, having  the  meaning  Lord,  not  so  much, 
however,  in  the  sense  of  Ruler  as  of  Master, 
Owner,  Possessor.  The  name  of  the  god,  whether 
singular  or  plural,  is  always  distinguished  from  the 
common  noun  by  the  presence  of  the  article  (7572 H, 
Dvl?3ri),  except  when  it  stands  in  connexion  with 
some  other  word  which  designates  a  peculiar  modi- 
fication of  Baal.  In  the  Chaldaic  form  the  word 
becomes  shortened  into  ;S)2,  and,  thence  dropping 
the  guttural,  ?3,  Bel,  which  is  the  Babylonian 

name  of  this  god  (Buxtorf,  Lex.  Ghald.  et  Talm., 
Gesen.,  Fiirst,  Movers;  the  identity  of  the  two 
words  is,  however,  doubted  by  Kawlinson,  Herod. 
i.  318). 

There  can  be  no  doubt  of  the  very  high  an- 
tiquity of  the  worship  of  Baal.  We  rind  his  wor- 
ship established  amongst  the  Moabites  and  their 
allies  the  Midianites  in  the  time  of  Moses  (Num. 
xxii.  41),  and  through  these  nations  the  Israelites 
wire  seduced  to  the  worship  of  this  god  under  the 
particular  form  of  Baal-I'eor  (Num.  xxv.  3  sqq. ; 
Deut.  iv.  3).  Notwithstanding  the  fearful  punish- 
ment which  their  idolatry  brought  upon  them  in 
this  instance,  the  succeeding  generation  returned  to 
the  worship  of  Baal  (Judg.  ii.  10-13),  and  with  the 
exception  of  the  period  during  which  Gideon  was 
jndge  (Judg.  vi.  26,  sqq.  viii.  li.'i)  this  form  of 
idolatry  seems  to  have  prevailed  amongst  them  up 
to  the  time  of  Samuel  (Judg.  x.  10;  1  Sam.  vii.  4), 
at  whose  rebuke  the    people    renounced  the  worship 

of  Baalim.  Two  centuries  pass  over  before  we 
hear  again  of  Baal  in  connexion  with  the  people  of 
Israel,  though  we  can  scarcely  conclude  from  this 
silence  that  his  worship  was  altogether  abandoned. 
We  know  that  in  the  time  of  Solomon  the  service 
of  many  gods  of  the  surrounding  nations  was  intro- 
duced, and  particularly  that  of  Ashtoreth,  with 
which  Baal  is  so  frequently  connected.  However 
this  may  be,  the  worship  of  Baal  spread  greatly, 
and  together  with  that  of  Asherah  became  the 
religion  of  the  court  and  people  of  the  ten  tribes 
under  Ahab,  king  of  Israel,  in  consequence  of  Ids 
marriage  with  Jezebel  (I  K.  xvi.  31-33;  xviii. 
19,     22).     And    though    tins    idolatry    was   ocea- 


BAAL 


145 


sionally  put  down  (2  K.  iii.  2,  x.  liiS)  it  appears 
never  to  have  been  permanently  or  effectually  abo- 
lished in  that  kingdom  (2  K.  xvii.  16).  In  trie 
kingdom  of  Judah  also  Baal-worship  extensively 
prevailed.  During  the  short  reign  of  Ahaziah  and 
the  subsequent  usurpation  of  his  mother  Athaliah, 
the  sister  of  Ahab,  it  appears  to  have  been  the  reli- 
gion of  the  court  (2  K.  viii.  27;  comp.  xi.  18), 
as  it  was  subsequently  under  Ahaz  (2  K.  xvi.  3; 
2  Chr.  xxviii.  2),  and  Mauasseh  (2  K.  xxi.  3). 

The  worship  of  Baal  amongst  the  Jews  appeal's 
to  have  been  appointed  with  much  pomp  and 
ceremonial.  Temples  were  erected  to  him  (1  K. 
xvi.  32;  2  K.  xi.  18);  his  images  were  set  up  (2 
K.  x.  26)  ;  his  altars  were  very  numerous  (Jer.  xi. 
13),  were  erected  ■  particularly  on '  lofty  eminences, 
(IK.  xviii.  20),  and  on  the  roofs  of  houses  (Jer. 
xxxii.  29)  ;  there  were  priests  in  great  numbers 
(1  K.  xviii.  19),  and  of  various  classes  (2  K.  x.  19); 
the  worshippers  appear  to  have  been  arrayed  in 
appropriate  robes  (2  K.  x.  22) ;  the  worship  was 
performed  by  burning  incense  (Jer.  vii.  9)  and 
offering  burnt-sacrifices,  which  occasionally  con- 
sisted of  human  victims  (Jer.  xix.  5).  The  officiat- 
ing priests  danced  with  frautic  shouts  around  the 
altar,  and  cut  themselves  with  knives  to  excite  the 
attention  and  compassion  of  the  god  (1  K.  xviii. 
26-28  ;  comp.  Lucian,  De  Dea  Syra,  50  ;  Tert. 
Apol.  9 ;  Lucan,  i.  565 ;  Tibul.  i.  6,  47). 

Throughout  all  the  Phoenician  colonies  we  con- 
tinually find  traces  of  the  worship  of  this  god, 
partly  in  the  names  of  men  such  as  Adher-bal, 
Asdru-bal,  Hanni-bal,  and  still  more  distinctly  in 
Phoenician  inscriptions  yet  remaining  (Gesen.  Moix. 
Phoen.  passim).  Nor  need  we  hesitate  to  regard 
the  Babylonian  Bel  (Is.  xlvi.  1)  or  Belus  (Herod, 
i.  181),  as  essentially  identical  with  Baal,  though 
perhaps  under  some  modified  form.  Hawlinson 
distinguishes  between  the  second  god  of  the  first 
triad  of  the  Assyrian  pantheon,  whom  he  names 
provisionally  Bel-Nimrod,  and  the  Babylonian  Bel 
whom  he  considers  identical  with  Merodach  {Herod. 
i.  594,  sqq.;   627,  sqq.). 

The  same  perplexity  occurs  respecting  the  con- 
nexion of  this  god  with  the  heavenly  bodies  as  we 
have  already  noticed  in  regard  to  Ashtoreth. 
Creuzer  (Si/mb.u.  413)  and  Movers  {Phon.  i.  180) 
declare  Baal  to  be  the  Sun-god ;  on  the  other  hand, 
the  Babylonian  god  is  identified  with  Zeus,  by 
Herodotus ;  and  there  seems  to  be  no  doubt  that 
Bel-Merodach  is  the  planet  Jupiter  (Kawlinson, 
Herod.  I.  c).  It  is  quite  likely  that  in  the  case  of 
Baal  as  well  as  of  Ashtoreth  the  symbol  of  the  god 
varied  at  different  times  and  in  different  localities. 
Indeed  the  great  number  of  adjuncts  with  which 
the  name  of  Baal  is  found  is  a  sufficient  proof  of 
the  diversity  of  characters  in  which  he  was  re- 
garded, anil  there  must  no  doubt  have  existed  a 
corresponding  diversity  in  the  worship.  It  may 
even  be  a  question  whether  in  the  original  notion 
of  Baal  there  was  reference  to  any  of  the  heavenl] 

bodies,  since  the  derivation  of  the  name  does  not  in 
this  instance,  as  it  dots  in  the  case  of  Ashtoreth,  point 
directly  to  them.  If  we  separate  the  name  Baal  from 
idolatry,  we  seem, according  to  its  meaning,  to  obtain 
simply  the  notion  of  Lord  and  Proprietor  of  all. 
With  this  the  idea  of  productive  power  is  naturally 
associated,  and  that  power  is  as  naturally  symbo- 
lized by  the  .-,un,  whilst  on  the  other  hand  the  ideas 
oi'  providential  arrangement  ami  rule,  and  so  ofT/ros- 
perity,  are  as  naturally  suggested  by  the  word,  and 
in  the  astral  Mythology  these  ideas  are  associated  with 

L 


146 


BAAL 


the  planet  Jupiter.  In  point  of  fact  we  find  adjuncts 
to  the  name  of  Baal  answering;  to  all  these  notions, 
e.  g.  Bee\ffdiJ.r]v,  Balsamen  (Plaut.  Poen.  v.  2.  67) 
^'W-'pm,  "  Lord  of  the  heavens;"  pir^Xft, 
Baal-Hamon  (Gesen.  Mon.  Phoen.  349),  the  Sun- 
Baal,  and  similarly  the  name  of  a  city  in  the  0.  T. 
pOn-"?J?2  (Cant.  viii.  11);  "I1J-7V3,  Baal-dad, 
the  name  of  a  city  (Josh.  xi.  17),  Baal  the  For- 
tune-bringer,  which  god  may  he  regarded  as  identical 
with  the  planet  Jupiter  (Gesen.  Thes.  Fiirst). 
Many  more  compounds  of  Baal  in  the  0.  T.  occur, 
and  amongst  them  a  large  number  of  cities,  which 
are  mentioned  below.  We  shall  first  mention 
those  names  of  men  and  of  gods  in  which  Baal 
is  the  first  element.  It  may  be  noted  before 
proceeding  to  specify  the  particular  compounds 
of  Baal  that  the  word  standing  alone  occurs  in 
the  0.  T.  in  two  instances  as  the  name  of  a  man 
(1  Chr.  v.  5,  viii.  30).  Fiirst  considers  that  in 
these  instances  the  latter  element  of  the  word  is 
dropped. 

1.  Ba'al-be'rith    (IVQ    ?yH  ;   BaaXfepld ; 

BaaVicrit).  This  form  of  Baal  was  worshipped  at 
Shechem  by  the  Israelites  after  the  death  of 
Cideon  (Judg.  viii.  33,  ix.  4).  The  name  signifies 
the  Covenant- Baal,  and  has  been  compared  with 
the  Greek  Zeus  SpKios  or  the  Latin  Deris  fidius. 
The  meaning,  however,  does  not  seem  to  be  the 
god  who  presides  over  covenants,  but  the  god  who 
comes  into  covenant  with  the  worshippers.  In 
Judg.  ix.  46  he  is  called   JV")2   ?N,      We  know 

nothing  of  the  particular  form  of  worship  paid  to 
this  god. 

2.  Ba'al-ze'bub  (M2T  ?J?2  ;  BaaA  pvta ; 
Beelzebub),  the  form  of  Baal  worshipped  at  Kkron 
(2  K.  i.  2,  3,  16).  The  meaning  of  the  name  is 
Baal  or  Lord  of  the  Jig.  Though  such  a  designa- 
tion of  the  god  appears  to  vis  a  kind  of  mockery, 
and  has  consequently  been  regarded  as  a  term  of 
derision  (Seidell,  De  Diis  Syris,  375),  yet  there 
seems  no  reason  to  doubt  that  this  was  the  name 
given  to  the  god  by  his  worshippers,  and  the 
plague  of  flies  in  hot  climates  furnishes  a  suffi- 
cient reason  for  the  designation.  Similarly  the 
Greeks  gave  the  epithet  dirSixvios  to  Zeus  (Fausan. 
v.  14,  §2 ;  Clem.  Alex.  Protrept.  ii.  38),  and  Pliny 
(xxix.  6,  34,  init.)  speaks  of  a  Fly-god  Myiodes. 
The  name  occurs  in  the  N.  T.  in  the  well  known 
form  Beelzebub. 

3.  Ba'al-ha'nan  (pn  ?J?3,  Bad  is  gracious; 
BaWev&v ,  BaKatvv&p,  BaWavdu  ;  B alarum, 
Balaan;  comp.  pmn\  'ladvvTjs,  JeJiovah  is  gra- 
cious). 1.  The  name  of  one  of  the  early  kings  of 
Edom  (Gen.  xxxvi.  38,  39  ;  1  Chr.  i.  49,  50). 
2.  The  name  of  one  of  David's  officers,  who  had 
the  superintendence  of  his  olive  and  sycomore  plan- 
tations (1  Chr.  xxvii.  28).  He  was  of  the  town  of 
Gederah  (Josh.  xv.  36)  or  Beth-Gader  (1  Chr.  ii. 
51),  and  from  his  name  we  may  conjecture  that  he 
was  of  Canaanitish,  not  Jewish  origin. 

4.  Ba'al-pe'or  piyS  ?y3;  Bee\<pey<Zp;  Beel- 

phegor).  We  have  already  referred  to  the  worship 
of 'this  god.  The  narrative  (Num.  xxv.)  seems 
clearly  to  show  that  this  form  of  Baal-worship  was 
connected  with  licentious  rites.  Without  laying 
too  much  sfcress  on  the  Rabbinical  derivation  of  the 


BAAL 

word  "liyS,  hiatus,  i.  e.  "  aperire  hymenem  vir- 

gineum,"  we  seem  to  have  reason  to  conclude 
that  this  was  the  nature  of  the  worship.  Baal- 
Peor  was  identified  by  the  Rabbins  and  early 
fathers  with  Priapus  (see  the  authorities  quoted  by 
Scldcn,  De  Diis  Syris,  i.  4,  p.  302,  sq.,  who, 
however,  dissents  from  this  view).  This  is  more- 
over the  view  of  Creuzer  (ii.  411),  Winer, 
Gesenius,  Fiirst,  and  almost  all  critics.  The  reader 
is  referred  for  more  detailed  information  par- 
ticularly to  Creuzer's  SymJbolik  and  Movers'  Pho- 
nizier.  [F.  W.  G.] 

BA'AL  (?J?3),  geographical.    This  word  occurs 

as  the  prefix  or  suffix  to  the  names  of  several  places 
in  Palestine.  Gesenius  has  expressed  his  opinion 
(Thes.  225  a.)  that  in  these  cases  it  has  no  refer- 
ence to  any  worship  of  the  god  Baal,  at  the  parti- 
cular spot,  but  merely  expresses  that  the  place 
"  possesses"  or  contains  something  special  denoted 
by  the  other  part  of  the  name,  the  word  Baal 
bearing  in  that  case  a  force  synonymous  with  that 
of  Beth.  Without  being  so  presumptuous  as  to 
contradict  this  conclusion,  some  reasons  may  (with 
considerable  hesitation)  be  mentioned  for  reconsi- 
dering it. 

(«.)  Though  employed  in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures 
to  a  certain  extent  metaphorically,  and  theie  cei- 
tainly  with  the  force  of  "  possession  "  or  "  owner- 
ship,"— as  a  "  lord  of  hair"  (2  K.  i.  8),  "  lord  of 
dreams"  (Gen.  xxxvii.  19),  &c,  Baal  never 
seems  to  have  become  a  naturalized  Hebrew  word. 
but  frequently  occurs  so  as  to  betray  its  Canaanite 
origin  and  relationship.  Thus  it  is  several  times 
employed  to  designate  the  inhabitants  of  towns 
either  certainly  or  probably  heathen,  but  rarely  it 
evei-  those  of  one  undoubtedly  Hebiew.  It  is 
applied  to  the  men  of  Jericho  before  the  conquest 
(Josh.  xxiv.  11);  to  the  men  of  Shechem,  the 
ancient  city  of  Hamor  the  Hivite,  who  rose  to 
recover  the  rights  of  Hamor's  descendants  long 
after  the  conquest  of  the  land  (Judg.  ix.  2-51,  with 
Ewald's  commentary,  Gcsch.  ii.  445-7),  and  in  the 
account  of  which  struggle,  the  distinction  between 
the  vVS  of  Shechem,  and  the  D^'ON — the  Hebrew 

relations  of  Abimelech  — is  carefully  maintained. 
It  is  used  for  the  men  of  Keilah,  a  place  on  the 
western  confines  of  Judah,  exposed  to  all  the  attacks 
and  the  inftuencesof  the  surrounding  heathen  (1  Sam. 
xxiii.  11,  12),  for  Uriah  the  Hittite  (2  Sam.  xi.  26). 
and  for  others  (Is.  xvi.  8,  &c).  Add  to  this  the 
consideration  that  if  Baal  forms  part  of  the  name 
of  a  person,  we  are  sure  to  find  the  name  men- 
tioned with  some  Hebrew  alteration,  as  Jerub- 
besheth  for  Jerub-baal ;  Mephibosheth  for  Merib- 
baal ;  Ish-bosheth  tor  Esh-baal,  and  others.  In  Hos. 
ii.  16,  a  remarkable  instance  is  preserved  of  the 
distinction,  noticed  above  in  connexion  with  the 
record  of  the  revolt  at  Shechem,  between  the  hea- 
then Baal,  and  the  Hebrew  Ish — "at  that  day. 
saith  Jehovah,  men  shall  call  Me  '  Ishi,'  and  shall 
call  Me  no  more  '  Baali,'  "  both  words  having  the 
sense  of  "  my  husband." 

(b.)  Such  places  called  by  this  name  or  its  com- 
pounds as  can  be  identified,  and  several  of  which 
existed  at  the  time  of  the  conquest,  were  either 
near  Phoenicia,  as  Baal-gad,  Baal-hermon,  Bei- 
markos  (of  later  times) ;  or  in  proximity  to  some 
other  acknowledged  seat  of  heathen  worship,  as 
Baal-meon  and  Bamoth-Baal,  near  the  infamous 
seat  of  Baal-peer;  or  Kirjath-Boal  and  Baal-tamar, 


BAAL 

which  were  in  the  district  containing  the  early  and 
famous  sanctuaries  ami  high  places  of  Gibeon  and 
Bethel. 

(c.)  On  more  than  one  occasion  Baal  forms  part 
of  the  names  of  places  which  we  elsewhere  discover 
to  have  been  elevated  spots,  spots  in  which  the  wor- 
ship of  the  Canaanites  delighted.  Thus  Baal- 
hermon  is  elsewhere  called  "  Mount  B."  and  Baal- 
Perazim  is  (very  probably)  "  Mount  P."  Baalath- 
beer  too  is  called  in  the  parallel  lists  Ramath  (i.  e. 
"  height").  Compare  the  Vulgate  rendering  of 
Baalah  in  1  Chr.  xiii.  <i,  ad  collem  Cariathiarim. 

(d.)  There  is  the  consideration  of  the  very  deep 
significance  with  which  the  name  of  Baal  must 
always  have  been  invested  both  for  the  Israelites 
and  for  their  predecessors  in  the  country  ;  for  those 
who  venerated  and  those  who  were  commanded  to 
hate  him.  Surely  this  significance  must  have  been 
sufficient  to  prevent  that  portentous  name  from  be- 
coming a  mere  alternative  for  a  term  which,  like 
Beth,  was  in  the  commonest  daily  use. 

The  places  in  the  names  of  which  Baal  forms  a 
part  arc  as  follows : 

1.  Ba'al,  a  town  of  Simeon,  named  only  in 
1  Chr.  iv.  33,  and  which  from  the  parallel  list  in. 
Josh.  xix.  seems  to  have  been  identical  with 
Baalath-beer. 

2.  Ba'alah  (r6y3  ;     BaaA,    Ba\d;    Baala). 

(a.)  Another  name  for  KlRJATH-jEARIM,  or 
Kirjatii-Baal,  the  well-known  town,' now  Kuriet 
el  Enab.  It  is  mentioned  in  Josh.  xv.  9,  10; 
1  Chr.  xiii.  i>  (els  ttoAiv  AaviS  ;  (id  collem  Caria- 
thiarirn).  In  Josh.  xv.  11,  it  is  called  Mount  (1H) 
Baalah,  and  in  xv.  GO,  and  xviii.  14,  Kirjath- 
Baal.  From  the  expression  "  Baalah,  which  is 
Kirjath-jearim "  (comp.  "  Jebusi,  which  is  Jeru- 
salem," xviii.  28),  it  would  seem  as  if  Baalah 
were  the  earlier  or  Canaauite  appellation  of  the 
place.     In  2  Sam.  vi.  2,  the  name  occurs  slightly 

altered  as  "  Baale  of  Judah  "  (iTl-in!  *?J?3),  otto 
twv  apxovTcov  'lovfia,  dc  triris  Titdd). 

(b.)  A  town  in  the  south  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv. 
29),  which  in  xix.  3  is  called  Balah,  and  in  the 
parallel  list  (1  Chr.  iv.  29)  BlLHAH. 

3.  Ba'alath  (TipXD;  Baa\d9;  Baalath),  a 
town  of  Dan  named  with  Gibbethon,  Gath-rimmon, 
and  other  Philistine  places  (Josh.  xix.  44).  It  is 
possible  that  the  same  town  is  referred  to  in  1  K. 
ix.  18  and  2  Chr.  viii.  6  (BaAadd).  Sec  Jus.  Aid. 
viii.  6,  §1. 

4.  Ba'alath-be'er  OK3  rbyz,  Baal  of  the 

well  =  Holy-well;  BcAck  ;  Baalath-Beer),  a  town 
among  those  in  the  south  pari  of  Judah,  given  to 
Simeon;  and  which  also  bore  the  name  of  Ka- 
h  ith-Negeb,  or"  the  heights  of  the  South  "  (Josh. 
\j\.  S).  In  another  list  it  appears  in  the  con- 
t racted  form  of  Ba  \i.. 

Other  sacred  wells  in  this  parched  region  were 
the  I'eer-lahai-i'ii,  the  "well  of  the  vision  of 
God;"  and  Beer-sheba,  the  "  well  of  the  oath." 

5.  Ba'al-gad  (*13  7>y2;  BaKaydS  ;   Baalgad), 

a  place  evidently  well-known  at  the  time  of  the 
conquest  of  Palestine,  and  as  such  used  to  denote 
the  most  northern  (Josh.  xi.  17,  xii.  7),  or  perhaps 

north-western    (xiii.    5,    Ihnnatli    being  to   tl \- 

treme  north-east)  point  to  which  Joshua's  victories 
extended.  It  was  in  all  probability  a  Phoenician 
or  Canaauite  sanctuary,  of  Baal  mm  It  the  aspect  of 


BAAL 


14- 


(lad,  or  Fortune.  [Gad.]  No  trace  of  its  site  has 
yet  been  discovered.  The  words  "  the  plain 
(Hyp 3)  of  Lebanon"  would  lead  to  the  supposi- 
tion that  it  lay  in  the  great  plain  between  the  two 
ranges  of  Lebanon  and  Anti-Lebanon,  which  is  still 
known  by  the  same  Hebrew  word  cl-Buka  a  ;  and 
it  has  accordingly  been  identified  by  lken  and 
others  with  Baalbec  (Rob.  iii.  519).  But  against 
this  are  the  too  great  distance  of  Baalbec  to  the 
north,  and  the  precise  expression  of  the  text— 
"under  Mount  Hennon "  (Jerome:  ad  radices 
montis  Hennon).  The  conjecture  of  Schwarz  (60), 
supported  by  Robinson  with  his  usual  care,  is,  that 
the  modern  representative  of  Baalgad  is  Banias, 
a  place  which  long  maintained  a  great  reputation 
as  the  sanctuary  of  Pan.     [Caesakea  Piiilipi'I.] 

6.  Ba'al-ha'mon  (}'lE>n  '3  ;  Baal  of  multitude ; 

BeeAafuov ;  ea  quae  habetpopulos),  a  place  at  which 
Solomon  had  a  vineyard,  evidently  of  great  extent 
(Cant.  viii.  11).  The  only  possible  clue  to  it- 
situation  is  the  mention  in  Judith  viii.  3,  of  a  Be- 
lamon  or  Balamon  (Ba\a/j.d>v ;  A.  V.  Balamo) 
near  Dothaim  ;  and  therefore  in  the  mountains  of 
Ephraim,  not  far  north  of  Samaria.  If  so,  this 
vineyard  may  have  been  in  one  of  the  "  fat  valleys  " 
of  the  "  drunkards  of  Ephraim,  who  are  over- 
come with  wine,"  to  which  allusion  is  made  in  Is 
xxviii.  1. 

7.  Ba'al-Ha'zor  ("livn  '2,  Baal's  village;  BeA- 
acrcip,  Alex.  BeSAacrcop;  Baalhasor),  a  place  "  '  by' 
Ephraim"    ('N"0y),    where   Absalom    appears    to 

have  had  a  sheep-farm,  and  where  Amnon  was 
murdered  (2  Sam.  xiii.  23). 

8.  Mount  Ba'al-iier'mon  (flEnn  bv2  "IH) 

( Judg.  iii.  3),  and  simply  Baal-hermon  (1  Chr.  v.  _  1 1 
This  is  usually  considered  as  a  distinct  place  from ' 
Mount  Hennon  ;  but  the  only  apparent  ground  foi 
so  doing  is  the  statement  in  the  latter  of  the  above 
passages,  "  unto  Baal-hermon,  and  Senir,  and B 
Mount  Hermon;"  but  it  is  quite  possible  that  the 
conjunction  rendered  "  and"  may  be  here,  as*often 
elsewhere,  used  as  an  expletive, — "  unto  Baal-her- 
mon, even  Senir,  even  Mount  Hennon."  Perhaps 
this  derives  some  colour  from  the  fact,  which  we 
know,  that  this  mountain  had  at  least  three  names 
(Deut.  iii.  9).  May  not  Baal-hermon  have  been 
a  fourth,  in  use  among  the  Phoenician  worshippers 
of  Baal,  one  of  whose  sanctuaries,  Baal-gad,  was  at 
the  foot  of  this  very  mountain  ? 

9.  Ba'ai.-mic'ox  (fiyp  '3;  v  BetX/xeuv ;  Baal 
mcori),  one  of  the  towns  which  were  "built"  l>\ 
the  Reubenites  (Num.  xxxii.  38),  and  to  which 
they  "  gave  other  names."  Possibly  the  "  Beth," 
winch  is  added  to  the  name  in  its  mention  else- 
where, and  which  sometimes  superseded  the"  Baal" 

of  the  original  name,  is t  the  changes  referred 

to.  [BETH-BAAL-MEON :  BeTH-MEON.]  It  is  also 
n;u I  in   1   Chr.  v.  S,   and   aeh    occasion    with 

N'elio.         Ill    the    time    ot     KzeKiel    it    Wis    .Mo.iliile,    ;u|d 

under  that  prosperous  dominion  had  evidently  be 

cornea  place  ot' distinction,  being  noticed  as  oi 

the  cities  which  an'  the  "  glory  of  the  country  "  |  Ei 
sxi    '.')•     Iii    the   days   ,<t'  Kuseliius  and   Jerotm 
(Onom.  Balmen)  it  was  still  a"vicus  maximus" 
called    Balmano,    9    miles   distant    from    lb 

The  "unto"  hi  the  A.  v.  is  interpolated,  though 
not  bo  ma 

L  2 


148 


BAAL 


{'le&ovs,  Esblis),  near  the  "  mountain  of  the  hot 
springs,"  and  reputed  to  be  the  native  place  of 
Elisha. 

10.  Ba'al-per'azim  (D^ynS  '3  ;  Baal-phara- 
sim),  the  scene  of  a  victory  of  David  over  the 
Philistines,  and  of  a  great  destruction  of  their  j 
images,  and  so  named  by  him  in  a  characteristic 
passage  of  exulting  poetry — "  '  Jehovah  hath  burst 
(V"l2)  upon  mine  enemies  before  me  as  a  burst 
(1'-|2  \  of  waters.'  Therefore  he  called  the  name  of 
that  place  '  Baal-perazim,'  "  i.  e.  bursts  or  destruc- 
tions (2  Sam.  v.  20 ;  1  Chr.  xiv.  11).  The  place  and 
the  circumstance  appear  to  be  again  alluded  to  in 
Is.  xxviii.  21,  where  it  is  called  Mount  P.  Perhaps 
this  may  point  to  the  previous  existence  of  a  high 
place  or  sanctuary  of  Baal  at  this  spot,  which  would 
lend  more  point  to  David's  exclamation  (see  Gese- 
nius,  Jes.  844).  The  LXX.  render  the  name  in  its 
two  occurrences,  respectively  'Eirdvw  hiaKoirwv, 
and  Aicckottti  (papacriu:  the  latter  an  instance  of 
retention  of  the  original  word  and  its  explanation 
side  by  side ;  the  former  uncertain. 

11.  Ba'al-siial'isha  (nt^pt^  '2  ;  Baidffapicrd, 
Ba6<rapi ;  Baalsalisa),  a  place  named  only  in  2  K. 
iv.  42  ;  apparently  not  far  from  Gilgal  (comp.  v. 
38).  It  was  possibly  situated  iu  the  district,  or 
"  land"  of  the  same  name.    [Shalisha.] 

12.  Ba'al-TA'mar  (IDA  '2,  sanctuary  of  the 
palm  :  Baa\  Oa/j.dp;  Baatthamar),  a  place  named 
only  in  Judg.  xx.  33,  as  near  Gibeah  of  Benjamin. 
The  palm-tree  ("1EPI)  of  Deborah  (iv.  5)  was 
situated  somewhere  iu  the  locality,  and  is  possibly 
alluded  to  (Stanley,  145,  6).  Iu  the  days  of  Eu- 
sebius  it  was  still  known  under  the  altered  name  of 

•  B-qOdafxdp ;   but  no  traces  of  it  have  been  found 
by  modern  travellers.  [G.] 

13.  Ba'al-ze'phon  (ji£>V  7j?2,  place  of  Ze- 
phon; BetKaeirtpwv ,  Be€\creir(pdjv ;  Bcclsephoii),  a 
place  in  Egypt  near  where  the  Israelites  crossed 
the  Red  Sea  (Ex.  xiv.  2,  9  ;  Num.  xxxiii.  7).  From 
the  position  of  Goshen  and  the  indications  afforded 
by  the  narrative  of  the  route  of  the  Israelites,  we 
place  Baal-zephon  on  the  western  shore  of  the  Gulf 
of  Suez,  a  little  below  its  head,  which  at  this  time 
was  about  30  or  40  miles  northward  of  the  present 
head.  [Goshen  ;  Red  Sea,  Passage  of.]  Its  posi- 
tion with  respect  to  the  other  places  mentioned  with 
it  is  clearly  indicated.  The  Israelites  encamped 
before  or  at  Pi-hahiroth,  between  Migdol  and  the 
sea,  before  Baal-zephon,  according  to  Ex.  (xiv.  2,  9), 
while  in  Num.,  Pi-hahiroth  is  described  as  being 
before  Baal-zephon,  and  it  is  said  that  when  the 
people  came  to  the  former  place  they  pitched  before 
Migdol  (xxxiii.  7)  ;  and  again,  that  afterwards  they 
departed  from  before  Pi-hahiroth,  here  in  Heb.  Ha- 
ll iroth  (v.  8).  Migdol  and  Baal-zephon  must  there- 
fore have  been  opposite  to  one  another,  and  the 
latter  behind  Pi-hahiroth  with  reference  to  the 
Israelites.  Baal-zephon  was  perhaps  a  well-known 
place,  if,  as  seems  likely,  it  is  always  mentioned  to 
indicate  the  position  of  Pi-hahiroth,  which  we  take 
to  be  a  natural  locality  [Red  Sea,  Passage  of  ; 
Pi-hahiroth].  The  name  has  been  supposed  to 
mean  "  place  of  Typhon,"  or  "  sacred  to  Typhon," 
an  etymology  approved  by  Gesenius  (Thes.  s.  v.). 
Zephon  would  well  enough  correspond  in  sound  to 
Typhon,  had  we  any  ground  for  considering  the  latter 


BAASHA 

name  to  be  either  Egyptian  or  Semitic,  but  as  we  have 
not,  the  conjecture  is  a  very  bold  one.  Were,  how- 
ever, Typhon  an  Egyptian  word,  we  could  not  con- 
sider Zephon  in  Baal-zephon  to  be  its  Hebrew  tran- 
scription, inasmuch  as  it  is  joined  with  the  Hebrew 

form  7^3.  We  would  rather  connect  Baal-zephon, 
as  a  Hebrew  compound,  with  the  root  HQV,  as  if 
it  were  named  from  a  watch-tower  on  the  frontier 
like  the  neighbouring  T^JD,  "  the  tower."  It  is 
noticeable  that  the  name  of  the  son  of  Gad  called 
Ziphion  P^QV  in  Gen.  (xlvi.  16)  is  written  Zephon 
|1SV  in  Num.  (xxvi.  15).     The  identifications  of 

Baal-zephon  that  have  been  proposed  depend  upon 
the  supposed  meaning  "  place  of  Typhon."  Forster 
(Epp.  ad  Mich.,  pp.  28,  29)  thinks  it  was  Heroo- 
polis,  'Hpwwv  tt6\ls,  which  some,  as  Champollion 
(JJE'gypte  sous  les  Pharaons,  ii.  p.  87  seqq.),  con- 
sider, wrongly,  to  be  the  same  as  Avaris,  the  strong- 
hold of  the  Hycsos,  both  which  places  were  connected 
with  Typhon  (Steph.  B.  s.  v.  'Updo ;  Manetho,  ap. 
Jos.  c.  Apion.  i.  26).  Avaris  cannot  be  Heroopolis, 
for  geographical  reasons.  (Comp.,  as  to  the  site  of 
Avaris,  Brugsch,  Geographischc  Inschriftcn,  i.  p.  86 
seqq. ;  as  to  that  of  Heroopolis,  Lepsius  C'hron.  d. 
Aegypt.  i.  p.  344  seqq.,  and  p.  342,  against  the  two 
places  being  the  same.)  [R.  S.  P.] 

BAALAH.     [Baal,  No.  2.] 
BA'ALATH.     [Baal,  Nos.  3,  4.] 
BA'ALE  OF  JUDAH.     [Baal,  No.  2,  «.] 
BA'ALIM.     [Baal.] 
BA'ALIS  (D'pyS  ;   BeAe«r<ra  ;  Baatis),  king 

of  the  Bene-Ammon  (/ScKTiAeus  vlSs  'AjXfidov)  at 
the  time  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  Nebu- 
chadnezzar (Jer.  xl.  14). 

BA'ANA  (NJ1?3  ;  Bavd,  Baavd ;  Bona,  Baana), 

the  name  of  several  men.  1.  The  son  of  Ahilud, 
Solomon's  commissariat  officer  in  Jezreel  and  the 
north  of  the  Jordan  valley  (1  K.  iv.  12).  2.  (Neh. 
iii.  4).     3.  (1  Esd.  v.  8).    [Baanah,4.] 

BA'ANAH  (Tljya  ;  Baavd  ;  Baana).      1.  Son 

of  Rimmon,  a  Benjamite,  who  with  his  brother 
Rechab  murdered  Ish-bosheth.  For  this  they  were 
killed  by  David,  and  their  mutilated  bodies  hung 
up  over  the  pool  at  Hebron  (2  Sam.  iv.  2,  5,  6,  9). 

2.  A  Netophathite,  father  of  Heleb  or  Heled, 
one  of  David's  mighty  men  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  29  \ 
1  Chr.  xi.  30). 

3.  (Accurately  Baana  NJJJ3  ;  Bawd  ;  Bti<tn<i), 
son  of  Hushai,  Solomon's  commissariat  officer  in 
Asher  (1  K.  iv.  16). 

4.  A  man  who  accompanied  Zerubbabel  on  his 
return  from  the  captivity  (Ezr.  ii.  2 ;  Neh.  vii.  7). 
Possibly  the  same  person  is  intended  in  Neh.  x.  27. 
[Baana,  3.] 

BA'AEA  (Niyil  ;  v  BaaSd  ;  Alex.  Baapd  ; 
Bard),  one  of  the  wives  of  Shaharaim,  a  descendant 
of  Benjamin  (1  Chr.  viii.  8). 

BAASEI'AH  (rWJ?2  ;    Baaffia  ;    Basaia),  a 

Gershonite  Levite,  one  of  the  forefathers  of  Asaph 
the  singer  (1  Chr.  vi.  40  [25]  ). 

BA'ASHA  (N^'i?3  ;    Baa<rd  ;    Joseph.    Baad- 

vt)s  ;  Baasd),  third  sovereign  of  the  separate  kingdom 
of  Israel,  and  the  founder  of  its  second  dynasty. 


•  BABEL,  BABYLON 

The  name,  according  to  Gesenius,  is  from  a  root  to 
be  wicked,  but  this  would  seem  impossible  unless 
it  ha.s  been  altered  [Abi.iah],  and  Calmet  suggests 
that  it  may  mean  in  the  work,  from  3  in,  and  ilWV 
to  make,  or  he  who  seeks  ITJJ3,  and  lays  waste  !"INtJ\ 

Baasha  was  son  of  Ahijah  of  the  tribe  of  Issa- 
char,  and  conspired  against  King  Nadab,  son  of  Jero- 
boam, when  he  was  besieging  the  Philistine  town  of 
Gibbethon,  and  killed  him  with  his  whole  family. 
He  appears  to  have  been  of  humble  origin,  as  the 
prophet  Jehu  speaks  of  him  as  having  been  "exalted 
out.  of  the  dust"  (1  K.  xvi.  2).  In  matters  of 
religion  his  reign  was  no  improvement  on  that  of 
Jeroboam  ;  he  equally  forgot  his  position  as  king  ot 
the  nation  of  God's  election,  and  was  chiefly  remark- 
able for  his  persevering  hostility  to  Judah.  It  was 
probably  in  the  13th  year  of  his  reign  [Asa]  that 
he  made  war  on  its  king  Asa,  and  began  to  fortify 
Ramah  as  an  iiriTtixHrna  against  it.  He  was  de- 
feated by  the  unexpected  alliance  of  Asa  with  Ben- 
hadad  I.  of  Damascus,  who  had  previously  been 
friendly  to  Baasha.  Benhadad  took  several  towns 
in  the  X.  of  Israel,  and  conquered  lands  belonging 
to  it  near  the  sources  of  Jordan.  Baasha  died  in 
the  24th  year  of  his  reign,  and  was  honourably 
buried  in  the  beautiful  city  of  Tirzah  (Cant.  vi.  4), 
which  he  had  made  his  capital.  The  dates  of  his 
accession  and  death  according  to  Clinton  (_F.  II.  i. 
321)  are  B.C.  953  and  B.C.  931  (1  K.  xv.  27,  xvi. 
7;  2  Chr.  xvi.  1-6).  [G.  E.  L.  C] 

BABEL, BAB'YLON,&c.  (7-33  ;  BapvAdv), 
is  properly  the  capital  city  of  the  country,  which, 
is  called  in  Genesis  Shinar  ("IJ73C)  and  in  the 
later  Scriptures  Chaldaea,  or  the  land  of  the 
Chaldaeans  (D^^'S),  The  name  is  connected  in 
Genesis  with  the  Hebrew  root  7v3,  "  confundere" 
"  because  the  Lord  did  there  confound  the  language 
of  all  tin'  earth"  (Gen.  xi.  9);  but  the  native  ety- 
mology is  Bab-il,  "  the  gate  of  the  sod  77,"  or 
perhaps  more  simply  "  the  gate  of  God  ;"  ami  this 
no  doubt  was  the  original  intention  of  the  appella- 
tion as  given  by  Nimrod,  though  the  other  sense 
came  to  be  attached  to  it  after  the  confusion  of 
tongues.  Probably  a  temple  was  the  first  building 
raised  by  the  primitive  nomads,  and  in  the  gate  of  this 
temple  justice  would  he  administered  in  early  times 
(comp.  2  Sam.  xix.  8),  after  which  houses  would 
grow  up  about  the  gate,  and  in  this  way  the  name 
would  readily  pass  from  the  actual  portal  of  the 
temple  to  the  settlement.  According  to  the  tradi- 
tions which  tin-  Creeks  derived  from  the  Baby- 
lonians in  Alexander's  age  the  city  was  originally 
built  about  the  year  B.C.  2230.  'lie'  architectural 
remains  discovered  in  southern  Babylonia,  taken  in 
conjunction  with  the  monumental  records,  seem  to 
indicate  that  it  was  not  at  first  the  capital,  nor,  in- 
deed, a  town  of  very  great  importance.  It  pro- 
bably owed  its  position  at  the  head  of  Nimrod's 
cities  (Gen.  x.  10)  to  the  power  and  pre-eminence 

whereto  it  afterwards  attained  rather  than  to  any 
original  superiority  that  it  could  boast  over  the 
places  coupled  with  it.  Erech,  Ur,  and  Ellasar, 
appear  to  have  been  all  more  ancient  than  Babylon, 
and  were  capital  cities  when  Babil  was  a  pro 
village.  The  firs!  ris.-  of  the  Chaldaean  power  was 
in  the  region  close  upon  the  Persian  Gulf,  as  Be- 
rosus  indicated  by  his  fish-god  Oannes,  who  broughl 
the  Babylonians  civilization  and  the  arts  out  of  the 


BABEL,  BABYLON 


149 


sea  (ap.  Syndell.  p.  28,  B.).  Thence  the  nation 
spread  northwards  up  the  course  of  the  rivers,  and 
the  seat  of  government  moved  in  the  same  direc- 
tion, being  finally  fixed  at  Babylon,  perhaps  not 
earlier  than  about  B.C.  1700. 

1.  Topography  of  Babylon — Ancient  descriptions 
of  the  city. — The  descriptions  of  Babylon  which  have 
come  down  to  us  in  classical  writers  are  derived  chiefly 
from  two  sources,  the  works  of  Herodotus  and  of 
Ctesias.  These  authors  were  both  of  them  eye- 
witnesses of  the  glories  of  Babylon — not,  indeed,  at 
their  highest  point,  but  before  they  had  greatly  de- 
clined— and  left  accounts  of  the  city  and  its  chief 
buildings,  which  the  historians  and  geographers  of 
later  times  were,  for  the  most  part,  content  to  copy. 
The  description  of  Herodotus  is  familiar  to  most 
persons.  According  to  this,  the  city,  which  was 
built  on  both  sides  of  the  Euphrates,  formed  a  vasl 
square,  enclosed  within  a  double  line  of  high  walls, 
the  extent  of  the  outer  circuit  being  480  stades,  or 
about  56  miles.  The  entire  area  included  would 
thus  have  been  about  200  square  miles.  Herodotus 
appears  to  imply  that  this  whole  space  was  covered 
with  houses,  which,  he  observes,  were  frequently 
three  or  four  stories  high.  They  were  laid  out  in 
straight  streets  crossing  each  other  at  right  angles, 
the  cross  streets  leading  to  the  Euphrates  being 
closed  at  the  river  end  with  brazen  gates,  which 
allowed  or  prevented  access  to  the  quays  wherewith 
the  banks  of  the  Euphrates  were  lined  along  its 
whole  course  through  the  city.  In  each  division 
of  the.  town,  Herodotus  says,  there  was  a  fortress 
or  stronghold,  consisting  in  the  one  case  of  the 
royal  palace,  in  the  other  of  the  great  temple  of 
Belus.  This  last  was  a  species  of  pyramid,  com- 
posed of  eight  square  towers  placed  one  above  the 
other,  the  dimensions  of  the  basement  tower  being 
a  stade — or  above  200  yards — each  way.  The 
height  of  the  temple  is  not  mentioned  by  Hero- 
dotus. A  winding  ascent,  which  passed  round  all 
the  towers,  led  to  the  summit,  on  which  was 
placed  a  spacious  ark  or  chapel,  containing  no 
statue,  but  regarded  by  the  natives  as  the  habita- 
tion of  the  god.  The  temple  stood  in  a  sacred  pre- 
cinct, two  stades  (or  400  yards)  square,  which  con- 
tained two  altars  for  burnt-offerings  and  a  sacred 
ark  or  chapel,  wherein  was  the  golden  image  of 
Bel.  The  two  portions  of  the  city  were  united  by 
atiridge,  composed  of  a  series  of  stone  piers  with 
moveable  platforms  of  wood  stretching  from  one 
pier  to  another.  Such  an'  the  chief  features  of 
the  description  left  us  by  Herodotus  (i.  178-186). 

According  to  Ctesias  (ap.  Diod.  Sir.  ii.  7,  et 
seqq.)  the  circuit  of  the  city  was  not  480  but  ::»;<> 
stades—  which  is  a  little  under  42  miles.  It  lav, 
he  says,  on  both   sides  of  the  Euphrates,  and  the 

two   parts   were   c cted   together   by   a   stone 

bridge  five  stades  (above  1000  yard?)  long,  and  30 
feet  broad,  of  the  kind  described  by  Herodotus.  At 
either  extremity  of  the  bridge  was  a  royal  palace, 
that  in  tin-  eastern  city  being  the  more  magnificent 
of  the  two.  It  was  defended  by  a  triple  Cft 
tin-  outermost  60  stades,  or  7  miles,  round:  the 
second,  which  was  circular,  40  stades,  or  4.1,  miles ; 
and  the  third  20  stades,  or  2\  miles.  The"  height 
of  the  second  or  middle  wall  was  300  feet,  and  its 
were  420  feet.  The  elevation  of  the  inner- 
most circuit  was  even  greater  than  this.  The  walls 
of  both  the  second  and  the  third  enclosure  were  made 
oi  coloured  brick,  and  represented  hunting  scenes — 
the  ,hase  of  the  leopard  and  the  lion— with  figures, 
male  and   female,  regarded  by  Ctesias  as  those  of 


150 


BABEL,  BABYLON 


Ninus  and  Semiramis.  The  other  palace  was  in- 
terior both  in  size  and  magnificence.  It  was  en- 
closed within  a  single  enceinte,  30  stades,  or  3^ 
miles,  in  circumference,  and  contained  representa- 
tions of  hunting  and  battle  scenes  as  well  as  statues 
in  bronze,  said  to  be  those  of  Ninus,  Semiramis,  and 
Jupiter  Belus.  The  two  palaces  wei'e  joined,  not 
only  by  the  bridge,  but  by  a  tunnel  under  the  river  ! 
Ctesias'  account  of  the  temple  of  Belus  has  not 
come  down  to  us.  We  may  gather,  however,  that 
he  represented  its  general  character  in  much  the 
same  way  as  Herodotus,  but  spoke  of  it  as  sur- 
mounted by  three  statues,  one  of  Bel,  40  feet  high, 
another  of  Rhea,  and  a  third  of  Juno  or  Beltis.  He 
seems  further  to  have  described  elaborately  the 
famous  "hanging  gardens"  of  Nebuchadnezzar 
(Diod.  Sic.  ii.  10),  but  the  description,  as  reported 
by  Diodorus,  is  not  very  intelligible.  It  appears 
that  they  were  a  square  of  400  feet  each  way,  and 
rose  in  ten-aces,  the  topmost  terrace  being  planted 
with  trees  of  all  kinds,  which  grew  to  a  great 
size. 

In  examining  the  truth  of  these  descriptions,  we 
shall  most  conveniently  commence  from  the  outer 
circuit  of  the  town.  All  the  ancient  writers  appear 
to  agree  in  the  tact  of  a  district  of  vast  size,  more 
or  less  inhabited,  having  been  enclosed  within  lofty 
walls,  and  included  under  the  name  of  Babylon. 
With  respect  to  the  exact  extent  of  the  circuit  they 
differ.  The  estimate  of  Herodotus  and  of  Pliny  (H. 
N.  vi.  26)  is  480  stades,  of  Strabo  (xvi.  i.  §5)  385, 
of  Q.  Curtius  (v.  i.  §26)  368,  of  Clitarchus  (ap. 
Biod.  Sic.  ii.  7)  365,  and  of  Ctesias  (ap.  eund.) 
360  stades.  It  is  evident  that  here  we  have 
merely  the  moderate  variations  to  be  expected  in 
independent  measurements,  except  in  the  first  of 
the  numbers.  Setting  this  aside,  the  difference 
between  the  greatest  and  the  least  of  the  estimates 
is  little  more  than  1  per  cent."  With  this  near 
agreement  on  the  part  of  so  many  authors,  it  is 
the  more  surprising  that  in  the  remaining  case 
we  should  find  the  great  difference  of  one-third 
more,  or  33J  per  cent.  Perhaps  the  true  explana- 
tion is  that  Herodotus  spoke  of  the  outer  wall, 
which  could  be  traced  in  his  time,  while  the  later 
writers,  who  never  speak  of  an  inner  and  an  outer 
barrier,  give  the  measurement  of  Herodotus'  inner 
wall,  which  may  have  alone  remaiued  in  their  day. 
This  is  the  opinion  of  M.  Oppert,  who  even  believes 
that  he  has  found  traces  of  both  enclosures,  showing 
them  to  have  been  really  of  the  size  ascribed  to 
them.  This  conclusion  is  at  present  disputed,  and 
it  is  the  more  general  belief  of  those  who  have  ex- 
amined the  ruins  with  attention  that  no  vestiges  of 
the  ancient  walls  are  to  be  found,  or  at  least,  that 
none  have  as  yet  been  discovered.  Still  it  is  im- 
possible to  doubt  that  a  line  of  wall  inclosing  an 
enormous  area  originally  existed.  The  testimony 
to  this  effect  is  too  strong  to  be  set  aside,  and  the 
disappearance  of  the  wall  is  easily  accounted  for, 
either  by  the  constant  quarrying,  which  would  na- 
turally have  commenced  with  it  (Rich,  First  Mem. 
p.  44),  or  by  the  subsidence  of  the  bulwark  into  the 
moat  from  which  it  was  raised.  Taking  the  lowest 
estimate  of  the  extent  of  the  circuit,  we  shall  have 
for  the  space  within  the  rampart  an  area  of  above  100 


■'  If  the  estimate  of  Ctesias  be  regarded  as  100, 
(hat  of  Clitarchus  will  be   ..     ..     100-1923 
„      Q.  Curtius..      .....     ..     100-2 

„      Strabo        100-694;but 

„      Herodotus        i3:s-3 


BABEL,  BABYLON 

square  miles;  nearly  five  times  the  size  of  London  ! 
It  is  evident  that  this  vast  space  cannot  have  been 
entirely  covered  with  houses.  Diodorus  confesses 
(ii.  9,  ad  fin.)  that  but  a  small  part  of  the  enclo- 
sure was  inhabited  in  his  own  day,  and  Q.  Curtius 
(v.  i.  §27)  says  that  as  much  as  nine-tenths  con- 
sisted, even  in  the  most  flourishing  times,  of  gar- 
dens, parks,  paradises,  fields,  ami  orchards. 

With  regard  to  the  height,  and  breadth  of  the 
walls  there  is  nearly  as  much  difference  of  state- 
ment as  with  regard  to  their  extent.  Herodotus 
makes  the  height  200  royal  cubits,  or  337J  feet ; 
Ctesias  50  fathoms,  or  300  feet;  Pliny  and  Solinus 
200  royal  feet;  Strabo  50  cubits,  or  75  feet. 
Here  there  is  less  appearance  of  independent  measure- 
ments than  in  the  estimates  of  length.  The  two 
original  statements  seem  to  be  those  of  Herodotus 
and  Ctesias,  which  only  differ  accidentally,  the 
latter  having  omitted  to  notice  that  the  royal  scale 
was  used.  The  later  writers  do  not  possess  fresh 
data;  they  merely  soften  down  what  seems  to 
them  an  exaggeration — Pliny  and  Solinus  changing 
the  cubits  of  Herodotus  into  feet,  and  Strabo  the 
fathoms  of  Ctesias  into  cubits.  We  are  forced  then 
to  fall  back  on  the  earlier  authorities,  who  are  also 
the  only  eye-witnesses  ;  and,  surprising  as  it  seems, 
perhaps  we  must  believe  the  statement,  that,  the 
vast  enclosed  space  above  mentioned  was  surrounded 
by  walls  which  have  well  been  termed  "  aitificial 
mountains,"  being  nearly  the  height  of  the  dome  of 
St.  Paul's!  (See  Grote's  Greece,  vol.  iii.  p.  397; 
and,  on  the  other  side,  Mure's  Lit.  of  Greece, 
vol.  iv.  p.  546.)  The  ruined  wall  of  Nineveh  was, 
it  must  be  remembered,  in  Xenophon's  time  150 
feet,  high  (Anab.  iii.  4.  §10),  and  another  wall 
which  he  passed  in  Mesopotamia  was  100  feet  (ibid. 
ii.  4.  §12). 

The  estimates  for  the  thickness  of  the  wall  are 
the  following: — Herodotus,  50  royal  cubits,  or 
nearly  85  feet;  Pliny  and  Solinus,  50  royal,  or 
about  60  common  feet;  aud  Strabo,  32  feet.  Here 
again  Pliny  and  Solinus  have  merely  softened  down 
Herodotus ;  Strabo,  however,  has  a  new  number. 
This  may  belong  prope'dy  to  the  inner  wall, 
which,  Herodotus  remarks  (i.  181),  was  of  less 
thickness  than  the  outer. 

According  to  Ctesias  the  wall  was  strengthened 
with  250  towers,  irregularly  disposed,  to  guard 
the  weakest  parts  (Diod.  S.  ii.  7) ;  aud  according 
to  Herodotus  it  was  pierced  with  a  hundred  gates, 
which  were  made  of  brass,  with  brazen  lintels  and 
side-posts  (i.  179).  The  gates  and  walls  are  alike 
mentioned  in  Scripture ;  the  height  of  the  one  and 
the  breadth  of  the  other  being  specially  noticed 
(Jer.  Ii.  58  ;  comp.  1.  15,  and  li.  53). 

Herodotus  and  Ctesias  both  relate  that  the  banks 
of'  the  river  as  it  flowed  through  the  city  were  on 
each  side  ornamented  with  quays.  The  stream  has 
probably  often  changed  its  course  since  the  time  of 
Babylonian  greatness,  but  some  remains  of  a  quay 
or  embankment  (E)  on  the  eastern  side  of  the 
stream  still  exist,  upon  the  bricks  of  which  is  read 
the  name  of  the  last  king.  The  two  writers  also 
agree  as  to  the  existence  of  a  bridge,  and  describe 
it  very  similarly.  Perhaps  a  remarkable  moimd 
(K)  which  interrupts  the  long  flat  valley — evi- 
dently the  ancient  course  of  the  river- — closing  in 
the  principal  ruins  on  the  west,  may  be  a  trace  of 
this  structure. 

2.  Present  state  of  the  Ruins. — Before  seeking 
t ■  ►  identity  the  principal  buildings  of  ancient  Baby- 
lon with  the  ruins  near  Hillah,  which  are  univer- 


BABEL,  BABYLON 

sally  admitted  t<>  mark  the  site,  it.  is  necessary  to 
give  an  account  of  their  present  character  and  con- 
dition, which  the  accompanying  plan  will  illustrate. 


[A 


BABEL,  BABYLON 


151 


resent  State  of  the  Ruins  of  Bubyla 


•  About  five  miles  above  Hillah,  on  the  opposite 
or  left  bank  of  the  Euphrates,  occur  a  series  of 
artificial  mounds  of  enormous  size,  which  have 
been  recognised  in  all  ages  as  probably  indicating 
the  site  of  tin'  capital  of  southern  Mesopotamia. 
They  consist  chiefly  of  '.'  three  great  masses  of 
building — the  high  pile  of  unbaked  brickwork 
called  by  Rich  '  MujeUibe,'  but  which  is  known  to 
the  Arabs  as  ' Babil  (A);'  the  building  denomi- 
nated the  •  Kasr'  or  palace  (B) ;  and  a  lofty  mound 
(0),  upon  which  stands  the  modern  tomb  of  Ant- 
ram-iliH-  Alh"  (Loftus's  Chaldaea,  p.  17).  Besides 
these  principal  masses  the  most  remarkable  features 
are  two  parallel  lines  of  ram  pail  (FF)  bounding  the 
chief  ruins  en  the  east,  some  similar  but  inferior 
remains  on  the  north  and  west  (I  I  and  II),  an  em- 
bankment along  the  river-side  (E),  a  remarkable 
isolated  heap  (K)  in  the  middle  of  a  long  valley, 
which  seems  to  have  been  the  ancient  bed  of  the 
stream,  and  two  long  lines  of  ram  pat  t  (G  <  '•  1,  meet- 
ing at  a  n.;htan.:ie  and  with  the  it,  it,  terming 
an  irregular  triangle,  within  which  all  the  ruins 
on  this  side  (except  Babil)  are  enclosed.  On  the 
u  esl ,  or  righl  hank,  the  remains  are  very  slight  and 
scanty.  There  is  the  appearance  of  an  enclosure, 
uid  of  a  building  of  moderate  size  within  it  (D), 


nearly  opposite  the  great  mound  of  Amrdm,  but 
otherwise,  unless  at  a  lone-  distance  from  the  stream, 
this  side  of  the  Euphrates  is  absolutely  baie  of 
ruins. 

Scattered  over  the  country  on  both  sides  of  the 
Euphrates,  and  reducible  to  no  regular  plan,  are  a' 
number  of  remarkable  mounds,  usually  standing 
single,  which  are  plainly  of  the  same  date  with  the 
great  mass  of  nuns  upon  the  river-bank.  Of  these, 
by  far  the  most  striking  is  the  vast  ruin  called  the 
Birs-Nimrud,  which  many  regard  as  the  tower  of 
Babel,  situated  about  six  miles  to  the  S.VV.  of 
Hillah,  and  almost  that  distance  from  the  Eu- 
phrates at  the  nearest  point.  This  is  a  pyramidical 
mound,  crowned  apparently  by  the  ruins  of  a 
tower,  rising  to  the  height  of  153^  feet  above  the 
level  of  the  plain,  and  hi  circumference  somewhat 
more  than  2000  feet.  As  a  complete  description  of 
it  is  given  under  the  next  article  [Babel,  tower 
of]  no  more  need  be  said  of  it  here.  There  is 
sufficient  reason  to  believe  from  the  inscriptions 
discovered  on  the1  spot,  and  from  other  documents 
of  the  time  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  that  it  marks  the 
site  of  Borsippa,  and  was  thus  entirely  beyond  the 
limits  of  Babylon  (Beros,  Fr.  14). 


TEMPLE   0E   BELUS 


II  UlO  lili.~r.it  Bll 


.'>.  Identification  of  sites. —  On  comparing  the  ex- 
isting ruins  \\  itii  the  accounts  el'  the  ancient  writers, 
the  great  difficulty  which  meets  us  is  the  position 
of  the  remains  almost  exclusively  on  the  left  bank 
of  the  river.     All  the  old  accounts  agree  in  repre- 


152 


BABEL,  BABYLON 


sentiug  tlie  Euphrates  as  running  through  the  town, 
and  the  principal  buildings  as  placed  on  the  oppo- 
site sides  of  the  stream.  In  explanation  of  this 
difficulty  it  has-been  urged,  on  the  one  hand,  that 
the  Euphrates  having  a  tendency  to  run  off  to  the 
right  has  obliterated  all  trace  of  the  buildings  in 


BABEL,  BABYLON 

this  direction  (Layard's  Nin.  and  Bab.,  p.  493) ; 
on  the  other,  that  by  a  due  extension  of  the  area  oi' 
Babylon  it  may  be  made  to  include  the  Birs-Xim- 
rud,  and  that  thus  the  chief  existing  remains  will 
really  lie  on  the  opposite  banks  of  the  river  (Rich, 
Second  Memoir,  p.  32  ;  Ker  Porter,  Travels,  ii.  p. 


of  liabil,  from  the  West. 


383).  But  the  identification  of  the  Birs  with 
Borsippa  completely  disposes  of  this  latter  theory  ; 
while  the  former  is  unsatisfactory,  since  we  ran 
scarcely  suppose  the  abrasion  of  the  river  to 
have  entirely  removed  all  trace  of  such  gigantic 
buildings  as  those  which  the  ancient  writers  de- 
scribe.    Perhaps  the  most  probable  solution  is  to 


be  found  in  the  fact,  that  a  large  canal  (called 
Shebil)  intervened  in  ancient  times  between  the 
Kasr  mound  (B)  and  the  ruin  now  called  Babil 
(A),  which  may  easily  have  been  confounded  by 
Herodotus  with  the  main  stream.  This  would  have 
had  the  two  principal  buildings  upon  opposite  sides  ; 
while    the   veal   river,  which  ran    down  the   long 


\  lew  <  1  the  Kasr. 


BABEL,  BABYLON 

valley  to  the  west  of  the  Ka&r  and  Antrum  mounds, 
would  also  have  separated  (as  Ctesias  related)  be- 
tween the  greater  and  the  lesser  palace.  If  this 
explanation  be  accepted  as  probable,  we  may  iden- 
tity the  principal  ruins  as  follows: — 1.  The  great 
mound  of  Babil  will  be  the  ancient  temple  of 
Belus.  It  is  an  oblong  mass,  composed  chiefly  of 
unbaked  brick,  rising  from  the  plain  to  the  height 
of  140  ft.,  flatfish  at  the  top,  in  length  about  200, 
and  in  breadth  about  14u  yards.  This  oblong 
shape  is  common  to  the  temples,  or  rather  temple- 
towers,  of  lower  Babylonia,  which  seem  to  have 
had  nearly  the  same  proportions.     It  wa.s  origin- 


BABEL,  BABYLON 


153 


ally  coated  with  tine  burnt  brick  laid  in  an  excellent 
mortar,  as  was  proved  by  Mr.  Layard  {Win.  and 
Bab.  pp.  503-5)  ;  and  was  no  doubt  built  in  stages, 
most  of  which  have  crumbled  down,  but  which 
may  still  be  in  part  concealed  under  the  rubbish. 
The  statement  of  Berosus  (Fr.  14),  that  it  was  re- 
built by  Nebuchadnezzar,  is  confirmed  by  the  fact 
that  all  the  inscribed  bricks  which  have  been  found 
in  it  bear  the  name  of  that  king.  It  formed  the 
tower  of  the  temple,  and  was  surmounted  by  a 
chapel,  but  the  main  shrine,  the  altars,  and  no 
doubt  the  residences  of  the  priests  were  at  the  foot, 
in  a  sacred  precinct.     2.  The  mound  of  the  Kasr 


<  hart  hi'  tin-  country  ruunil  Babylon,  with  limits  of  the  ancient  City,  according  to  Opprrt. 


will  mark  the  site  of  the  great  Palace  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar. It  is  an  irregular  square  of  about  700 
yards  each  way,  and  may  lie  regarded  as  chiefly 
formed  of  the  old  palace-platform  (resembling  those 
at  Nineveh,  Susa,  and  elsewhere),  upon  which  are 
still  standing  certain  portions  of  the  ancient  resi- 
dence whereto  the  name  of  "  Kasr"  or  "  Palace" 
especially  attaches.  The  walls  are  composed  of 
burnt  bricks  of  a  pale  yellow  colour  and  of  excel- 
lent quality,  bound  together  by  a  fine  lime  cement, 
and  stamped  with  the  name  and  titles  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar. They  "  contain  traces  of  architec- 
tural ornament — piers,  buttresses,  pilasters,  N.c." 
(Layard,  p.  506);  and  in  the  rubbish  at  their  base 


have  been  found  slabs  inscribed  by  Nebuchadnezzar, 
and  containing  an  account  of  the  building  of  the 
edifice,  as  well  as  a  lew  sculptured  fragments  and 
many  pieces  of  enamelled  brick  of  brilliant  hues. 

(In  these  last  portions  of  figures  are  traceable,  re- 
calling the  statements  ol'(  ItesiaS  (ap.  I  >iod.  Sic.)  that 
the  brick  walls  of  the  palace  were  coloured  and  re- 
presented hunting  scenes.  No  plan  of  the  palace  is 
to  be  made  out  from  the  existing  remains,  which  are 
tossed  in  apparent  confusion  on  the  highest  point  of 
the  mound.  '■'<.  The  mound  of  Atnrdtm  is  thought 
bj  M.  Oppert  to  represent  the  "  hanging  gardens" 
of  Nebuchadnezzar;  but  this  conjecture  does  not. 
seem  lo  be  a  very  happy  one.      The  mound  is  com- 


154 


BABEL,  BABYLON 


posed  of  poorer  materials  than  the  edifices  of  that  I 
prince,  and  has  furnished  no  bricks  containing  his 
name.  Again,  it  is  far  too  Large  for  the  hanging-  j 
gardens,  which  are  said  to  have  been  only  400  ft.  ! 
each  way.  The  Amrdm  mound  is  described  by  | 
Rich  as  an  irregular  parallelogram,  1100  yards  long 
by  800  broad,  and  by  Ker  Porter  as  a  triangle,  the 
sides  of  which  are  respectively  1400,  1100,  and  j 
850  ft.  Its  dimensions  therefore  very  greatly  I 
exceed  those  of  the  curious  structure  with  which  it  ] 
has  been  identified.  Most  probably  it  represents 
the  ancient  palace,  coeval  with  Babylon  itself,  of 
which  Nebuchadnezzar  speaks  in  his  inscriptions  as 
adjoining  his  own  more  magnificent  residence.  It 
is  the  only  part  of  the  ruins  from  which  bricks  have 
been  derived  containing  the  names  of  kings  earlier 
than  Nebuchadnezzar;  and  is  therefore  entitled  to 
be  considered  the  most  ancient  oftthe  existing  re- 
mains. 4.  The  ruins  marked  I)D  on  either  side  of 
the  Euphrates,  together  with  all  the  other  remains 
on  the  right  bank,  may  be  considered  to  represent 
the  lesser  Palace  of  Ctesias,  which  is  said  to  have 
been  connected  with  the  greater  by  a  bridge  across 
the  river,  as  well  as  by  a  tunnel  under  the  channel 
of  the  stream  (!).  The  old  course  of  the  Euphrates 
seems  to  have  been  a  little  east  of  the  present  one, 
passing  between  the  two  ridges  marked  II,  and 
then  closely  skirting  the  mound  of  Amrdm,  so  as  to 
have  both  the  ruins  marked  D  upon  its  right  bank. 
These  ruins  are  of  the  same  date  and  style.  The 
bricks  of  that  on  the  left  bank  bear  the  name  of 
Neriglissar;  and  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  this 
ruin,  together  with  those  on  the  opposite  side  of  the 
stream,  are  the  remains  of  a  palace  built  by  him. 
Perhaps  (as  already  remarked)  the  mound  K  may  be 
a  remnant  of  the  ancient  bridge.  .">.  The  two  long 
parallel  lines  of  embankment  on  the  east  (F  F  in 
the  plan)  which  form  so  striking  a  feature  in  the 
remains  as  represented  by  Porter  and  Rich,  but 
which  are  ignored  by  M.  Oppert,  may  either  be  the 
lines  of  an  outer  and  inner  inclosure,  of  which  Ne- 
buchadnezzar speaks  as  defences  of  his  palace;  or 
they  may  represent  the  embankments  of  an  enor- 
mous reservoir,  which  is  often  mentioned  by  that 
monarch  as  adjoining  his  palace  towards  the  east. 
6.  The  embaukment(E)  is  composed  of  bricks  marked 
with  the  name  of  Labynetus  or  Nabunit,  and  is 
undoubtedly  a  portion  of  the  work  which  Berosus 
ascribes  to  the  last  king  (Fr,  14). 

The  most  remarkable  fact  connected  with  the 
magnificence  of  Babylon,  is  the  poorness  of  the  ma- 
terial with  which  such  wonderful  results  were 
produced.  The  whole  country,  being  alluvial,  was 
entirely  destitute  of  stone,  and  even  wood  was 
scarce  and  of  bad  quality,  being  only  yielded  by  the 
palm-groves  which  fringed  the  courses  of  the  canals 
and  rivers.  In  default  of  these,  the  ordinary  ma- 
terials for  building,  recourse  was  had  to  the  soil  of 
tiie  country — iti  many  parts  an  excellent  clay — and 
with  bricKs  made  from  this,  either  sun-dried  or 
baked,  the  vast  structures  were  raised,  which,  when 
they  stood  in  their  integrity,  provoked  comparison 
with  the  pyramids  of  Egypt,  and  which  even  in 
their  decay  excite  the  astonishment  of  the  traveller. 
A  modern  writer  has  noticed  as  the  true  secret  of 
the  extraordinary  results  produced,  "  the  unbounded 
command  of  naked  human  strength"'  which  the  Baby- 
lonian monarchs  had  at  their  disposal  (Grote's  Hist, 
of  Greece,  vol.  iii.  p.  401) ;  but  this  alone  will  not 
account  tor  the  phaenomena;  and  we  must  give 
the  Babylonians  credit  tor  a  genius  and  a  grandeur 
of  conception   rarely  surpassed,  which  led  them  to 


BABEL,  BABYLON 

employ  the  labour  whereof  they  had  the  command 
in  works  of  so  imposing  a  character.  With  only 
"  brick  for  stone,"  and  at  first  only  "slime  (""ID!"!) 

for  mortar"  (Gen.  xi.  3),  they  constructed  edifices 
of  so  vast  a  size  that  they  still  remain  at  the  present 
day  among  the  most  enormous  ruins  in  the  world, 
impressing  the  beholder  at  once  with  awe  and  ad- 
miration. 

4.  History  of  Babylon. — The  history  of  Babylon 
mounts  up  to  a  time  not  very  much  later  than  the 
Flood.  The  native  historian  seems  to  have  pos- 
sessed authentic  records  of  his  country  for  above 
2000  years  before  the  conquest  by  Alexander 
(Beros.  Fr.  11);  and  Scripture  represents  the  "  be- 
ginning of  the  kingdom  "  as  belonging  to  the  time 
of  Nimrod,  the  grandson  of  Ham,  and  the  great- 
grandson  of  Noah  (Gen.  x.  6-10).  Of  Nimrod  no 
trace  has  been  found  in  the  Babylonian  reftiains, 
unless  he  is  identical  with  the  god  Bel  of  the  Baby- 
lonian Pantheon,  and  so  with  the  Greek  Belus,4he 
hero-founder  of  the  city.  This  identity  is  possible, 
and  at  any  rate  the  most  ancient  inscriptions  appear 
to  show  that  the  primitive  inhabitants  of  the  country 
were  really  Cushite,  i.  e.  identical  in  race  with  the 
early  inhabitants  of  Southern  Arabia  and  of  Ethiopia. 
The  seat  of  government  at  this  early  time  was,  as 
has  been  stated,  in  lower  Babylonia,  Erech  (  Warka) 
and  Or  (Muglieir)  being  the  capitals,  and  Babylon 
(if  built)  being  a  place  of  no  consequence.  The 
country  was  called  Shinar  ("lyjt^L  and  the  people 

the  Akkadim  (comp.  Accad  of  Gen.  x.  10).  Of 
the  art  of  this  period  we  have  specimens  in  the 
ruins  of  Mugheir  and  Warka,  the  remains  of  which 
date  from  at  least  the  20th  century  before  our  era. 
We  find  the  use  of  kiln-baked  as  well  as  of  sun-dried 
bricks  already  begun  ;  we  find  writing  practised,  for 
the  bricks  are  stamped  with  the  names  and  titles  of 
the  kings;  we  find  buttresses  employed  to  support 
buildings,  and  we  have  probable  indications  of  the 
system  of  erecting  lofty  buildings  in  stages.  On 
the  other  hand,  mortar  is  unknown,  and  the  bricks 
are  laid  either  in  clay  or  in  bitumen  (comp.  Gen. 
xi.  3);  they  are  rudely  moulded,  and  of  various 
shapes  and  sizes ;  sun-dried  bricks  predominate,  and 
some  large  buildings  are  composed  entirely  of  them  ; 
in  these  reed-matting  occurs  at  intervals,  apparently 
used  to  protect  the  mass  from  disintegration.  There 
is  no  trace  of  ornament  in  the  erections  of  this  date, 
which  were  imposing  merely  by  their  size  and 
solidity. 

The  first  important  change  which  we  are  able  to 
trace  hi  the  external  condition  of  Babylon,  is  its 
subjection,  at  a  time  anterior  to  Abraham,  by  the 
neighbouring  kingdom  of  Elamor  Susiaua.  Berosus 
spoke  of  a  first  Chaldaean  dynasty  consisting  of 
eleven  kings,  whom  he  probably  represented  as 
reigning  from  B.C.  2234  to  B.C.  1976.  At  the  last 
mentioned  date  lie  said  there  was  a  change,  and  a 
new  dynasty  succeeded,  consisting  of  49  kings,  who 
reigned  458  years  (from  B.C.  1976  to  B.C.  15 IS). 
It  is  thought  that  this  transition  may  mark  the  in- 
vasion of  Babylonia  from  the  East,  and  the  esta- 
blishment of  Elamitic  influence  in  the  country, 
under  Chedorlaomer  (Gen.  xiv.),  whose  represen- 
tative appears  as  a  conqueror  in  the  inscriptions. 
Amraphel,  king  of  Shinar,  and  Arioch,  king  of 
EUasar  (Larsa),  woidd  be  tributary  princes  whom 
Chedorlaomer  had  subjected,  while  he  himself  may 
have  become  the  founder  of  the  new  dynasty,  which, 
according  to  Berosus,  continued  on  the  throne  for 
above  450  years.     From  this  point  the  history  of 


BABEL,  BABYLON 

Babylon  is  almost  a  blank  for  above  twelve  centu- 
ries.    Except  in  the  mention  of  the  plundering  of 
Job    by  the  Chaldaeans  (Job  i.    17),   and  of  the 
"goodly  Babylonish  garment"   which  Achau  co- 
veted (Josh.  vii.  lit),  Scripture  is  silent  with  regard 
to  the  Babylonians  from  the  time  of  Abraham  to 
that  of  Hezekiah.     Berosus  covered  this  space  with 
three  dynasties;  one  (which  has  been  already  men- 
tioned) of  49  Chaldaean  kings,  who  reigned  458 
years ;   another  of  9  Arab  kings,  who  reigned  24") 
years;  and  a  third  of  49  Assyrian  monarchs,  who 
held  dominion  for  526  years;  but  nothing  beyond 
this  bare  outline  has  come  down  to  us  on  his  autho- 
rity concerning  the  period  in  question.     The  mo- 
numental records  of  the  country  furnish  a  series  of 
nanus,  the  reading  of  which    is  very    uncertain, 
which  may  be  arranged  with  a  good  deal  of  proba- 
bility in  chronological  order,  apparently  belonging 
to  the  first  of  these  three  dynasties.    Of  the  second 
DO  traces  have  been  hitherto  discovered.     The  third 
would  seem  to  be  identical  with  the  Upper  Dynasty 
%of  Assyria,  of  which  some  account  has  been  given 
in  a  former  article   [Assyria].     It  would  appear 
then  as  if  Babylon,  after  having  had  a  native  Chal- 
daean  dynasty  which  ruled  for  224  years  (Brandis, 
p.  17),  an'd  a  second  dynasty  of  Elamitic  Chaldaeans 
who  ruled  for  a  further  period  of  458  years,  fell 
wholly  under  Semitic  influence,  becoming  subject 
first  to  Arabia  for  two  centuries  and  a  half,  and 
then  to  Assyria  for  above  five  centuries,  and  not 
regaining  even  a  qualified  independence  till  the  time 
marked  by  the  close  of  the  Upper  and  the  formation 
of  the  Lower  Assyrian  empire.     This  is  the  conclu- 
sion  which    seems  naturally  to   follow  from   the 
abstract  which  is  all  that  we  possess  of  Berosus: 
and  doubtless  it  is  to  a  certain  extent  true.     But 
the  statement  is  too  broad  to  be  exact;  and  the  mo- 
numents show  that  Babylon  was  at  no  time  ab- 
sorbed  into  Assyria,  or  even  for  very  many  years 
together  a  submissive  vassal.     Assyria,  which  she 
In  I  colonised  during  the  time  of  the  second  or  great 
Chaldaean  dynasty,  to  which  she  had  given  letters 
and  the  arts,  and  which  she  had  held  in  subjection 
for  many  hundred  years,  became  in  her  turn  (about 
B.C.  1270)  the  predominant  Mesopotamian  power, 
and  the  glory  of  Babylon  in  consequence  suffered 
eclipse.     But  she  had  her  native  kings  during  the 
whole  of  the  Assyrian  period,  and  she  frequently 
contended  with  her  great  neighbour,  being  some- 
times even  the  aggressor.     Though  much  sunk  from 
herformer  greatness,  she  continued  to  be  the  second 
power  in  Asia;  and  retained  a  vitality  which  at  a 
later  date  enabled  her  to  become  once  more  the  head 
of  an  empire. 

The  line  of  Babylonian  kings  becomes  exactly 
known  to  us  from  the  year  B.C.  747.  An  astro- 
nomical work  of  the  geographer  Ptolemy  has  pre- 
served to  us  a  document,  the  importance  of  which  for 
comparative  chronology  it  is  scarcely  possible  to  ex- 
aggerate. The  "  ('anon  of  Ptolemy,"  as  it  is  called, 
gives  us  the  succession  of  Babylonian  monarchs, 
with  the  exact  length  of  the  reign  of  each,  from  the 
year  B.C.  747,  when  Nabonassa]  mounted  the 
throne,  to  B.C.  331,  when  the  last  Persian  long  was 
dethroned  by  .Alexander.  This  document,  which 
from  its  close  accordance  with  the  statements  of 
Scripture  always  vindicated  to  itself  a  high  au- 
thority in  the  eves  of  Christian  chronologers,  has 
recently  been  confirmed  in  so  many  points  by  the 
inscriptions  that  its  authentic  character  is  esta- 
blished beyond  all  possibility  of  cavil  or  dispute. 
As  tin-  basis  of  all  accurate  calculation  for  oriental 


BABEL,  BABYLON 


155 


dates  previous  to  Cyrus,  it  seems  proper  to  tran- 
scribe the  earlier  portion  of  it  in  this  place.  [The 
dates  B.C.  are  added  for  convenience  sake.] 


Nabonassar  . .     . . 

Nadlus 

Chinzinus  and  I'orus 

Elulaeus 

Mardocempalus  . . 

Arceanus 

First,  interregnum 

Belibus 

Aparanadius 
Regibelus 
Mesesimordacus  .  . 
Second  interregnum 
Asaridanus  . . 
Suosduchinus 
Cinneladanus 
Nabopolassar 
Nebuchadnezzar  . . 
lltoarudamus 
Nerigassolassarus 
Nabonadius 
Cyrus 


Years. 

N.E. 

14 

1 

2 

15 

5 

17 

5 

22 

12 

27 

5 

39 

2 

44 

3 

46 

6 

49 

1 

55 

4 

56 

8 

60 

13 

68 

20 

81 

22 

101 

21 

123 

43 

144 

2 

187 

4 

189 

17 

193 

9 

210 

747 
733 
731 
726 
721 
709 
70+ 
702 
699 
693 
692 
688 
6S0 
667 
647 
625 
601 
561 
559 
555 
538 


Of  Nabonassar,  the  first  king  in  Ptolemy's  list, 
nothing  can  be  said  to  be  known  except  the  fact, 
reported  by  Berosus,  that  he  destroyed  all  the 
annals  of  his  predecessors  for  the  purpose  of  com- 
pelling the  Babylonians  to  date  from  himself  (Fr. 
11a).  It  has  been  conjectured  that  he  was  the 
husband,  or  son,  of  Semiramis,  and  owed  to  her  his 
possession  of  the  throne.  But  of  this  theory  there 
is  at  present  no  proof.  It  rests  mainly  upon  a 
synchronism  obtained  from  Herodotus,  who  makes 
Semiramis  a  Babylonian  queen,  and  places  her  five 
generations  (167  years)  before  Nitocris,  the  mother 
of  the  last  king.  The  Assyrian  discoveries  have 
shown  that  there  was  a  Semiramis  about  this  time, 
but  they  furnish  no  evidence  of  her  connexion  with 
Babylon,  which  still  continues  uncertain.  The 
immediate  successors  of  Nabonassar  are  still  more 
obscure  than  himself.  Absolutely  nothing  beyond 
the  brief  notation  of  the  canon  has  reached  us  con- 
cerning Nadius  (or  Nabius),  Chinzinus  (or  Chinzirus) 
and  Porus,  or  Elulaeus,  who  certainly  cannot  be 
,the  Tyrian  king  of  that  name  mentioned  by 
Menander  (ap.  Joseph.  Ant.  Jiid.  ix.  14.  §2). 
Mardocempalus,  on  the  contrary,  is  a  monarch  to 
whom  great  interest  attaches.  He  is  undoubtedly 
the  Merodach-Baladan,  or  Berodach-Baladau  [Me- 
rodach-Baladan]  of  Scripture,  and  was  a  person- 
age of  great  consequence,  reigning  himself  twice, 
the  first  time  for  12  years,  contemporaneously 
with  the  Assyrian  king  Sargon,  and  the  second 
time  for  six  months  only,  during  the  first  year  of 
Sennacherib;  and  leaving  a  sort  of  hereditary 
claim  to  his  sons  and  grandsons,  who  are  found 
to  have  been  engaged  in  hostilities  with  Esar- 
haddon  and  his  successor.  His  dealings  with 
Hezekiah  sutlicienrry  indicate  the  independent  posi- 
tion of  Babylon  at  this  period,  while  the  interest 
which  he  felt  in  an  astronomical  phenomenon  (2 
Chr.  xxxii.  :il)  harmonises  with  the  character  of 
a  native  Chaldaean  king  which  appears  to  belong  to 
him.  The  Assyrian  inscriptions  show  that  after 
reigning  12  years  Merodach-Baladan  was  deprived 
of  his  crown  and  driven  into  banishment  by  Sargon, 
who  appears  to  have  placed  Arceanus  (his  son?) 
upon  flic  throne  as  viceroy,  a  position  which  be 
maintained  for  6ve years.  A  time  of  trouble  then 
ensued,  estimated  in  tin' canon  at  two  years,  during 
which    various    pretenders    assumed    the    crowu, 


156 


BABEL,  BABYLON 


among  them  a  certain  Hagisa,  or  Acises,  who 
reigned  for  about  a  month,  and  Merodach-Baladan, 
who  held  the  throne  for  half  a  year  (Polyhist.  ap. 
Euseh.).  Sennacherib,  bent  on  re-establishing  the 
influence  of  Assyria  over  Babylon ,  proceeded  against 
Merodach-Baladan  (as  he  informs  us)  iu  his  first 
year,  and  having  dethroned  him,  placed  an  Assy- 
rian named  Belib,  or  Belibus,  upon  the  throne, 
who  ruled  as  his  viceroy  for  three  years.  At  the 
end  of  this  time,  the  party  of  Merodach-Baladan 
still  giving  trouble,  Sennacherib  descended  again 
into  Babylonia,  once  more  overran  it,  removed 
Belib,  and  placed  his  eldest  son — who  appears  in 
the  Canon  as  Aparanadius  —  upon  the  throne. 
Aparauadius  reigned  for  six  years,  when  he  was 
succeeded  by  a  certain  Regibelus,  who  reigned  for 
one  year;  after  which  Mesesimordacus  held  the 
throne  for  four  years.  Nothing  more  is  known 
of  these  kings,  and  it  is  uncertain  whether  they 
were  viceroys,  or  independent  native  monarchs. 
They  were  contemporary  with  Sennacherib,  to 
whose  reign  belongs  also  the  second  interregnum, 
extending  to  eight  years,  which  the  Canon  inter- 
poses between  the  reigns  of  Mesesimordacus  and 
Asaridanus.  In  Asaridanus  critical  eyes  long  ago 
detected  Esarhaddon,  Sennacherib's  son  and  suc- 
cessor; and  it  may  be  regarded  as  certain  from  the 
inscriptions  that  this  king  ruled  in  person  over 
both  Babylonia  and  Assyria,  holding  his  court 
alternately  at  their  respective  capitals.  Hence  we 
may  understand  how  Manasseh,  his  contemporary, 
came  to  be  "  carried  by  the  captains  of  the  king  of 
Assyria  to  Babylon"  instead  of  to  Nineveh,  as 
would  have  been  done  in  any  other  reign.  [Esau- 
had  don.]  Saosduchmus  and  Ciniladanus  (or 
Cinneladanus),  his  brother  (Polyhist.),  the  suc- 
cessors of  Asaridanus,  are  kings  of  whose  history  we 
know  nothing.  Probably  they  were  viceroys  under 
the  later  Assyrian  monarchs,  who  are  represented 
by  Abydenus  (ap.  Euseh.)  as  retaining  their  au- 
thority over  Babylon  up  to  the  time  of  the  last 
siege  of  Nineveh. 

With  Nabopolassar,  the  successor  of  Cinnela- 
danus, and  the  father  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  a  new 
era  in  the  history  of  Babylon  commences.  Accord- 
ing to  Abydenus,  who  probably  drew  his  informa- 
tion from  Berosus,  he  was  appointed  to  the  govern- 
ment of  Babylon  by  the  last  Assyrian  king,  at  the 
moment  when  the  Medes  were  about  to  make  their 
final  attack ;  whereupon,  betraying  the  trust  re- 
posed in  him,  he  went  over  to  the  enemy,  arranged 
a.  marriage  between  his  son  Nebuchadnezzar  and 
the  daughter  of  the  Median  leader,  and  joined  in 
the  last  siege  of  the  city.  [Nineveh.]  On  the 
success  of  the  confederates  (B.C.  625)  Babylon  be- 
came not  only  an  independent  kingdom,  but  an 
empire;  the  southern  and  western  portions  of  the 
Assyrian  territory  were  assigned  to  Nabopolassar 
in  the  partition  of  the  spoils  which  followed  on 
the  conquest,  and  thereby  the  Babylonian  dominion 
became  extended  over  the  whole  valley  of  the 
Euphrates  as  far  as  the  Taurus  range,  over  Syria, 
Phoenicia,  Palestine,  Idumaea,  and  (perhaps)  a  por- 
tion of  Egvpt.  Thus,  among  others,  the  Jews 
passed  quietly  and  almost  without  remark,  from 
one  feudal  head  to  another,  exchanging  dependency 
on  Assyria  for  dependency  on  Babylon,  and  con- 
tinuing to  pay  to  Nabopolassar  the  same  tribute 
and  service  which  they  had  previously  rendered  to 
the  Assyrians.  Friendly  relations  seem  to  have 
been  maintained  with  Media  throughout  the  reign 
of  Nabopolassar,  who  led   or  sent  a  contingent  to 


BABEL,  BABYLON 

help  Cyaxares  in  his  Lydian  war,  and  acted  as 
mediator  in  the  negotiations  by  which  that  wai 
was  concluded  (Herod,  i.  74).  At  a  later  date 
hostilities  broke  out  with  Egypt.  Neco,  the  son 
of  Psamatik  I.,  about  the  year  B.C.  608,  invaded 
the  Babylonian  dominions  on  the  south-west,  and 
made  himself  master  of  the  entire  tract  between 
his  own  country  and  the  Euphrates  ('2  K.  xxiii.  29, 
and  xxiv.  7).  Nabopolassar  was  now  advanced  in 
life,  and  not  able  to  take  the  field  in  person  (Beros. 
Fr.  14).  He  therefore  sent  his  son,  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, at  the  head  of  a  large  army,  against  the 
Egyptians,  and  the  battle  of  Carchemish,  which 
soon  followed,  restored  to  Babylon  the  former 
limits  of  her  territory  (comp.  2  K.  xxiv.  7  witli 
Jer.  xlvi.  2-12).  Nebuchadnezzar  pressed  for- 
ward and  had  reached  Egypt,  when  news  of  his 
father's  death  recalled  him  ;  and  hastily  returning  to 
Babylon,  he  was  fortunate  enough  to  find  himself, 
without  any  struggle,  acknowledged  king  (B.C.  (i()4). 

A  complete  account  of  the  .works  and  exploits  of 
this  great  monarch — by  far  the  most  remarkable  <# 
all  the  Babylonian  kings — will  be  given  in  a  later 
article.  [Nebuchadnezzar.]  It  is  enough  to  note 
in  this  place  that  he  was  great  both  in  peace  and 
in  war,  but  greater  in  the  former.  Besides  re- 
covering the  possession  of  Syria  and  Palestine,  and 
carrying  off  the- Jews  after  repeated  rebellions  into, 
captivity,  he  reduced  Phoenicia,  besieged  and  took 
Tyre,  and  ravaged,  if  he  did  not  actually  conquer, 
Egypt.  But  it  was  as  the  adorner  and  beautifier 
of  his  native  land — as  the  builder  and  restorer  of 
almost  all  her  cities  and  temples — that  this  monarch 
obtained  that  great  reputation  which  has  handed 
down  his  name  traditionally  iu  the  East,  on  a  par 
with  those  of  Nimrod,  Solomon,  and  Alexander, 
and  made  it  still  a  familiar  term  in  the  mouths  of 
the  people.  Probably  no  single  man  ever  left  behind 
him  as  his  memorial  upon  the  earth  one  half  the 
amount  of  building  which  was  erected  by  this  king. 
The  ancient  ruins  and  the  modern  -towns  of'  Baby- 
Ionia  are  alike  built  almost  exclusively  of  his  bricks. 
Babvlon  itself,  the  capital,  was  peculiarly  the  object 
of  his  attention.  It  was  here  that,  besides  repairing' 
the  walls  and  restoring  the  temples,  he  constructed 
that  magnificent  palace,  which,  with  its  triple  en- 
closure, its  hanging  gardens,  its  plated  pillars,  and 
its  rich  ornamentation  of  enamelled  brick,  was  re- 
garded in  ancient  times  as  one  of  the  seven  wonders 
of  the  world  (Strab.  xvi.  1.  §5). 

Nebuchadnezzar  died  B.C.  561,  having  reigned 
for  43  years,  and  was  succeeded  by  Evil-Merodach, 
his  son,  who  is  called  in  the  Canon  llloarudamus. 
This  prince,  who  "  iu  the  year  that  he  began  to 
reign  did  lift  up  the  head  of  Jehoiachin,  king  of 
Judah,  out  of  prison"  (2  K.  xxv.  27),  was  mur- 
dered, after  having  held  the  crown  for  two  years 
only,  by  Neriglissar,  his  brother-in-law.  [Evil- 
Meuodacii.]  Neriglissar — the  Nerigassolassar  of 
the  canon — is  (apparently)  identical  with  the 
"  Nergal-shar-ezer,  Kab-Mag"  of  Jeremiah  (xxxix. 
3,  13-14).  He  bears  this  title,  which  has  been 
translated  "chief  of  the  Magi"  (Gesenius),  or 
"  chief  priest "  (Col.  Rawlinson),  in  the  Inscrip- 
tions, and  calls  himself  the  son  of  a  "  king  of 
Babylon."  Some  writers  have  considered  him  iden- 
tical with  "'  Darius  the  Mede"  (Larcher,  Conringius, 
Bouhier);  but  this  is  improbable  [DARIUS  the 
Mede],  and  he  must  rather  be  regarded  as  a  Babylo- 
nian of  high  rank,  who  having  married  a  daughter 
of  Nebuchadnezzar  raised  his  thoughts  to  the  crown, 
and  finding  Evil-Merodach  unpopular  with  his  sub- 


BABEL,  BABYLON 

jects;  murdered  him,  and  became  his  successor. 
Neriglissar  built  the  palace  at  Babylon,  which  seems 
to  have  been  placed  originally  on  the  right  bank  of 
the  river.  He  was  probably  advanced  in  life  at 
his  accession,  and  thus  reigned  but  four  years, 
though  he  died  a  natural  death,  and  left  the  crown 
to  his  son,  Laborosoarehod.  This  prince,  though  a 
mere  lad  at  the  time  of  his  father's  decease,  was 
allowed  to  ascend  the  throne  without  difficulty : 
but  when  he  had  reigned  nine  months,  he  became 
the  victim  of  a  conspiracy  among  his  friends  and 
connexions,  who,  professing  to  detect  in  him  symp- 
toms of  a  bad  disposition,  seized  him,  and  tortured 
him  to  death.  Nabonidus  (or  Labynetus),  one  of 
the  conspirators,  succeeded  ;  he  is  railed  by  Berosus 
'•  a  certain  Nabonidus,  a  Babylonian"  (ap.  Joseph. 
C.  .1/'.  i.  '21),  by  which  it  would  appear  that  he 
was  not  a  member  of  the  royal  family  ;  and  this  is 
likewise  evident  from  his  inscriptions,  in  which  he 
only  claims  tor  his  father  the  rank  of"  Kab-Mag." 
Herodotus  seems  to  have  been  mistaken  in  supposing 
him  (i.  188)  the  son  of  a  great  queen,  Nitocris,  and 
(apparently)  of  a  former  king,  I.abynetus  (Nebu- 
chadnezzar?), indeed  it  may  be  doubted  whether 
the  Babyloniau  Nitocris  of  Herodotus  is  really  a 
historical  personage.  His  authority  is  the  sole 
argument  for  her  existence,  which  it  is  difficult  to 
credit  against  the  silence  of  Scripture,  Berosus,  the 
Canon,  and  the  Babylonian  monuments.  She  may 
perhaps  have  been  a  wife  of  Nebuchadnezzar ;  but 
in  that  case  she  must  have  been  wholly  unconnected 
with  Nabonidus,  who  certainly  bore  no  relation  to 
that  monarch. 

Nabonidus,  or  Labynetus  (as  he  was  called  by 
the  Greeks),  mounted  the  throne  in  the  year  B.C. 
555,  very  shortly  before  the  war  broke  out  between 
Cyrus  and  Croesus.  He  entered  into  alliance  with 
the  latter  of  these  monarchs  against  the  former, 
and,  had  the  struggle  been  prolonged,  would  have 
sent  a  contingent  into  Asia  Minor.  Events  pro- 
ceeded too  rapidly  to  allow  of  this ;  but  Nabonidus 
had  provoked  the  hostility  of  Cyrus  by  the  mere 
fact  of  the  alliance,  and  felt  at  once  that  sooner  or 
later  he  would  have  to  resist  the  attack  of  an 
avenging  army.  He  probably  employed  his  long 
and  peaceful'  reign  of  17  years  in  preparations 
against  the  dreaded  foe,  executing  the  defensive 
works  which  Herodotus  ascribes  to  his  mother 
(i.  185),  and  accumulating  in  the  town  abundant 
stores  of  provisions  (ib.  c.  190).  In  the  year  B.C. 
539  the  attack  came.  Cyrus  advanced  at  the  head 
of  his  irresistible  hordes,  but  wintered  upon  the 
Diyaleh  or  Gyndes,  making  his  final  approaches  in 
the  ensuing  spring.  Nabonidus  appears  by  the 
inscriptions  to  have  shortly  before  this  associated 
with  1 1 tin  in  the  government  of  the  kingdom  his 
son,  Bel-shar-ezer  or  Belshazzar;  on  the  approach 
of  Cyrus,  therefore,  he  took  the  field  himself  at  the 
head  of  his  army,  leaving  his  son  to  command  in 
the  city.  In  this  way,  by  help  of  a  recent  dis- 
covery, the  accounts  of  Berosus  and  the  book  of 
Daniel — hitherto  regarded  as  hopelessly  conflict- 
ing— may  be  reconciled.  [Belshazzar,  ]  Na- 
bonidus engaged  the  army  of  Cyrus,  but  was  de- 
feated and  forced  to  shut  himself  up  in  the  neigh- 
bouring town  of  Borsippa  (marked  now  by  the 
Birs-Nunnul),  where  he  continued  till  after  the 
fill  of  Babylon  (Beros.  ap.  Joseph,  c.  Ap.  i.  21). 
Belshazzar  guarded  the  city,  but,  over-confident  in 
it>  strength,  kept  insufficient  watch,  and  recklessly 
indulging  in  untimely  and  impious  festivities  i  Dan. 
v.),  allowed  the  enemy  to  enter  the  town  by  the 


BABEL,  BABYLON 


157 


channel  of  the  river  (Herod,  i.  191;  Xen.  Ci/rop. 
vii.  7).  Babylon  was  thus  taken  by  a  surprise,  as 
Jeremiah  had  prophesied  (li.  31) — by  an  army  of 
Medes  and  Persians,  as  intimated  170  years  earlier 
by  Isaiah  (xxi.  1-9),  and,  as  Jeremiah  had  also  fore- 
shown (li.  39),  during  a  festival.  In  the  carnage 
which  ensued  "upon  the  taking  of  the  town,  Bel- 
shazzar was  slain  (Dan.  v.  3(J).  Nabonidus,  on 
receiving  the  intelligence,  submitted,  and  was 
treated  kindly  by  the  conqueror,  who  not  only 
spare"!  his  life,  but  gave  him  estates  in  Carmania 
(Beros.  ut  supra;  comp.  Abyd.  Fr.  9). 

Such  is  the  general  outline  of  the  siege  and  cap- 
ture of  Babylon  by  Cyrus,  as  derivable  from  the 
fragments  of  Berosus,  illustrated  by  the  account,  in 
Daniel,  and  reduced  to  harmony  by  aid  of  the  im- 
portant fact,  obtained  recently  from  the  monuments, 
of  the  relationship  between  Belshazzar  and  Nabo- 
nidus. It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  remark  that  it 
differs  in  many  points  from  the  accounts  of  He- 
rodotus and  Xenophon  ;  but  the  latter  of  these  two 
writers  is  in  his  Cyropaedia  a  mere  romancer,  and 
the  former  is  very  imperfectly  acquainted  with  the 
history  of  the  Babylonians.  The  native  writer, 
whose  information  was  drawn  from  authentic  and 
contemporary  documents,  is  far  better  authority 
than  either  of  the  Greek  authors,  the  earlier  of 
whom  visited  Babylon  nearly  a  century  after  its 
capture  by  Cyrus,  when  the  tradition  had  doubtless 
become  in  many  respects  corrupted. 

According  to  the  book  of  Daniel,  it  would  seem 
as  if  Babylon  was  taken  on  this  occasion,  not  by 
Cyrus,  king  of  Persia,  but  by  a  Median  king,  named 
Darius  (v.  31).  The  question  of  the  identity  of 
this  personage  with  any  Median  or  Babylonian  king 
known  to  us  from  profane  sources,  will  be  discussed 
hereafter.  [Darius  the  Mede .]  It  need  only  be  re- 
marked here  that  Scripture  does  not  really  conflict 
on  this  point  with  profane  authorities ;  since  there 
is  sufficient  indication,  from  the  terms  used  by  the 
sacred  writer,  that  "  Darius  the  Mede,"  whoever 
he  may  have  been,  was  not  the  real  conqueror,  nor 
a  king  who  ruled  in  his  own  right,  but  a  monarch 
intrusted  by  another  with  a  certain  delegated  au- 
thority (see  Dan.  v.  31,  and  ix.  1). 

With  the  conquest  by  Cyrus  commenced  the 
decay  and  ruin  of  Babylon.  The  "broad  walls" 
were  then  to  some  extent  "  broken  down  "  (Beros. 
Fr.  14),  and  the  "high  gates"  probably  "  burnt 
with  fire"  (Jer.  li.  58).  The  defences,  that  is  to 
say,  were  ruined ;  though  it  is  not  to  be  supposed 
that  the  laborious  and  useless  task  of  entirely  de- 
molishing the  gigantic  fortifications  of  the  place 
was.  attempted,  or  even  contemplated,  by  the  con- 
queror. Babylon  was  weakened,  but  it  continued 
a  royal  residence,  not  only  during  the  lifetime  of 
Darius  the  Mede,  but  through  the  entire  period  of 
the  Persian  empire.  The  Persian  kings  held  their 
court  at  Babylon  during  the  larger  portion  of  the 
year;  and  at  tin'  time  of  Alexander's  conquests  it 
was  still  the  second,  if  not  tie  first,  city  of  the 
empire.  It  had,  however,  suffered  considerably  on 
more  than  one  occasion  subsequent  to  the  time  of 
Cyrus.  Twice  in  the  reign  ofDarios  (Behist.  Ins.), 
and  once  iii  that  of  Xerxes  (Ctes.  piers.  §22),  it 
had  risen  against  the  Persians,  and  made  an  effort 
to  regain  its  independence.     After  each  rebellion  its 

defences  were  weake I,  and  during  the  long  period 

of  profound  peace  which  the  Persian  empire  enjoyed 
from  the  reign  of  \er.\es  to  that  of  Darius  Ciido- 
mantius  they  were  allowed  to  go  completely  to 
decay.    The  public  buildings  also  suffered  grievously 


158 


BABEL,  TOWER  OF 


from  neglect.  Alexander  found  the  great  temple  of 
Belus  in  so  ruined  a  condition  that  it  would  have 
required  the  labour  of  10,000  men  for  two  months 
even  to  clear  away  the  rubbish  with  which  it  was 
encumbered  (Strab.  xvi.  1.  §5).  His  designs  for  the 
restoration  of  the  temple,  and  the  general  embellish- 
ment of  the  city,  were  frustrated  by  his  untimely 
death,  and  the  removal  of  the  seat  of  empire  to 
Antioch  under  the  Seleucidae  gave  the  finishing 
blow  to  the  prosperity  of  the  place.  The  great  city 
of  Seleucia,  which  soon  after  arose  in  its  neighbour- 
hood, not  only  drew  away  its  population,  but  was 
actually  constructed  of  materials  derived  from  its 
buildings  (l'lin.  77.  N.  vi.  30).  Since  then  Babylon 
has  been  a  quarry  from  which  all  the  tribes  in  the 
vicinity  have  perpetually  derived  the  bricks  with 
which  they  have  built  their  cities,  and  (besides 
Seleucia)  Ctesiphon,  Al  Modain,  Baghdad,  Kufa, 
Kerbelah,  Hillah,  and  numerous  other  towns,  have 
risen  from  its  ruins.  The  "  great  city,"  "  the 
beauty  of  the  Chaldees'  excellency,"  has  thus  em- 
phatically "  become  heaps  "  (Jer.  li.  37) — she  is 
truly  "  an  astonishment  and  a  hissing,  without  an 
inhabitant."  Her  walls  have  altogether  disappeared 
— they  have  "  fallen  "  (Jer.  li.  44),  been  "  thrown 
down"  (1.  15),  been  "  broken  utterly"  (li.  58). 
"  A  drought  is  upon  her  waters  "  (1.  39) ;  for  the 
system  of  irrigation,  on  which,  in  Babylonia,  fer- 
tility altogether  depends,  has  long  been  laid  aside ; 
"  her  cities  "  are  everywhere  "  a  desolation  "  (li. 
43);  her  "laud  a  wilderness;"  "wild  beasts  of 
the  desert  "  (jackals)  "  lie  there ;"  and  "  owls  dwell 
there"  (comp.  Layard,  Nin.  and  Bab.  p.  484,  with 
Is.  xiii.  21-2,  and  Jer.  1.  39):  the  natives  regard 
the  whole  site  as  haunted,  and  neither  will  the 
"  Arab  pitch  tent,  nor  the  shepherd  fold  sheep 
there"  (Is.  xiii.  20). 

(See  for  the  descriptive  portions,  Rich's  Two 
Memoirs  on  Babylon  ;  Ker  Porter's  Travels,  vol.  ii. ; 
Layard's  Nineveh  and  Babylon,  ch.  xxii. ;  Fresnel's 
Two  Letters  to  M.  Maihl  in  the  Journal  Asiatique, 
June  and  July,  1853  ;  and  Loftus's  Chaldaea,  ch.  ii. 
On  the  identification  of  the  ruins  with  ancient  sites, 
compare  Rawlinson's  Herodotus,  vol.  ii.  Essay  iv. ; 
Oppert's  Maps  and  Plans ;  and  Rennell's  Essay  in 
Rich's  Babylon  and  Pcrscpolis.  On  the  history, 
compare  M.  Niebuhr's  Geschichte  Asshur's  mid 
Babel's ;  Brandis's  Rerum  Assyriarum  Tempora 
Emendata  ;  Bosauquet's  Sacred  and  Profane  Chro- 
nology ;  and  Rawlinson's  Herodotus,  vol.  i.  Essays 
vi.  and  viii.)  [G.  R.j 

BA'BEL,  TOWER  OF.  The  "  tower  of 
Babel  "  is  only  mentioned  once  in  Scripture  (Gen. 
xi.  4-5),  and  then  as  incomplete.  No  reference  to 
it  appears  in  the  prophetic  denunciations  of  the 
punishments  which  were  to  fall  on  Babylon  for  her 
pride.  R  is  therefore  quite  uncertain  whether  the 
building  ever  advanced  beyond  its  foundations.  As, 
however,  the  classical  writers  universally  in  their 
descriptions  of  Babylon  gave  a  prominent  place  to  a 
certain  tower-like  building,  which  they  called  the 
temple  ( Herod.,  Diod.  Sic,  Arrian.,  Plin.  &c),  or  the 
tomb  (Strabo)  of  Belus,  it  has  generally  been  sup- 
posed that  the  tower  was  in  course  of  time  finished, 
and  became  the  principal  temple  of  the  Chaldaean 
metropolis.  Certainly  this  may  have  been  the 
case;  but,  while  there  is  some  evidence  against, 
there  is  none  in  favour  of  it.  A  Jewish  tradition, 
recorded  by  Bochart  (Phaley,  i.  9),  declared  that 
fire  fell  from  heaven,  and  split  the  tower  through 
to  its  foundation;  while  Alexander  Polyhistor  (Fr. 


BABEL,  TOWER  OF 

10)  and  the  other  profane  writers  who  noticed  the 
tower  (as  Abydenus,  Frs.  5  and  0),  said  that  it  had 
been  blown  down  by  the  winds.  Such  authorities 
therefore  as  we  possess,  represent  the  building  as 
destroyed  soon  after  its  erection.  When  the  Jews, 
however,  were  carried  captive  into  Babylonia, 
struck  with  the  vast  magnitude  and  peculiar  cha- 
racter of  certain  of  the  Babylonian  temples,  they 
imagined  that  they  saw  in  them,  not  merely  build- 
ings similar  in  type  and  mode  of  construction  to  the 

"tower"  (7^30)  of  their  scriptures,  but  in  this 

or  that  temple  they  thought  to  recognise  the  very 
tower  itself.  The  predominant  opinion  was  in 
favour  of  the  great  temple  of  Nebo  at  Borsippa,  the 
modern  Birs-Nimrud,  although  the  distance  of 
that  place  from  Babylon  is  an  insuperable  difficulty 
in  the  way  of  the  identification.  Similarly  when 
Christian  travellers  first  began  to  visit  the  Meso- 
potamian  ruins,  they  generally  attached  the  name 
of  "  the  tower  of  Babel  "  to  whatever  mass,  among 
those  beheld  by  them,  was  the  loftiest  and  most 
imposing.  Rawulf  in  the  16th  century  found  the 
"tower  of  Babel"  at  Fclugiah,  Pietro  della  Valle 
in  the  18th  identified  it  with  the  ruin  Babil  near 
Hillah,  while  early  in  the  present  century  Rich 
and  Ker  Porter  revived  the  Jewish  notion,  and 
argued  for  its  identity  with  the  Birs.  There  are 
in  reality  no  real  grounds  either  for  identifying  tin' 
tower  with  the  Temple  of  Belus,  or  for  supposing 
that  any  remains  of  it  long  survived  the  check 
which  the  builders  received,  when  they  were 
"  scattered  abroad  upon  the  face  of  the  earth,"  and 
"  left  off  to  build  the  city  "  (Gen.  xi.  8).  All  then 
that  can  be  properly  attempted  by  the  modern 
critic  is  to  show,  1.  what  was. the  probable  type 
and  character  of  the  building;  and  2.  what  were 
the  materials  and  manner  of  its  construction. 

With  regard  to'the  former  point,  it  may  readily 
be  allowed  that  the  Birs-Nimrud,  though  it  cannot 
be  the  tower  of  Babel  itself,  which  was  at  Babylon 
(Gen.  xi.  9),  yet,  as  the  most  perfect  representative 
of  an  ancient  Babylonian  temple-tower,  may  well 
be  taken  to  show,  better  than  any  other  ruin,  the 
probable  shape  and  character  of  the  edifice.  This 
building  appears,  by  the  careful  examinations  re- 
cently made  of  it,  to  have  been  a  sort  of  oblique 
pyramid  built  in  seven  receding  stages.  "  Upon  a 
platform  of  crude  brick,  raised  a  few  feet  above  the. 
level  of  the  alluvial  plain,  was  built  of  burnt  brick 
the  first  or  basement  stage  — an  exact  square,  272 
feet  each  way,  and  26  feet  in  perpendicular  height. 
Upon  this  stage  was  erected  a  second,  230  feet  each 
way,  and  likewise  26  feet  high ;  which,  however, 
was  not  placed  exactly  in  the  middle  of  the  first, 
but  considerably  nearer  to  the  south-western  end. 
which  constituted  the  back  of  the  building.  The 
other  stages  were  arranged  similarly — the  third 
being  188  feet,  and  again  26  feet  high  ;  the  fourth 
146  feet  square,  and  15  feet  high;  the  fifth  104 
feet  square,  and  the  same  height  as  the  fourth ;  the 
sixth  62  feet  square,  and  again  the  same  height  ; 
and  the  seventh  20  feet  square  and  once  more  the 
same  height.  On  the  seventh  stage  there  was 
probably  placed  the  ark  or  tabernacle,  which  seems 
to  have  been  again  15  feet  high,  and  must  have 
nearly,  if  not  entirely,  covered  the  top  of  the 
seventh  story.  The  entire  original  height,  allowing 
three  feet  for  the  platform,  would  thus  have  been 
156  feet,  or,  without  the  platform,  153  feet.  The 
whole  formed  a  sort  of  oblique  pyramid,  tie- 
gentler  slope  facing   the  N..E.,  and   the  steeper  in- 


BABEL,  TOWER  OF 

dining  to  the  S.W.  On  the  N.E.  side  was  the  grand 
entrance,  and  here  stood  the  vestibule,  a  separate 
building,  the  debris  from  which  having  joined  those 
from  the  temple  itself,  fill  up  the  intermediate 
space,  and  very  remarkably  prolong  the  mound  in 
this  direction"  (Rawlinson's  Herodotus,  vol.  ii. 
pp.  58'2-3).  The  Birs  temple,  which  was  called 
the  "Temple  of  the  Seven  Spheres,"  was  ornamented 
with  the  planetary  colours  (see  the  plan),  but  this 
was  most  likely  a  peculiarity.  The  other  chief 
features  of  it  seem  to  have  been  common  to  most, 
if  not  all,  of  the  Babylonian  temple-towers.  The 
leal  ore  of  stages  is  found  in  the  temples  at  Warka 
and  Mugheir  (Loftus'  Chaldaea,  pp.  129 and  168), 
which  belong  to  very  primitive  times  (b.c.  2230)  ; 
that  of  the  emplacement,  so  that  the  four  angles 
face  the  four  cardinal  points,  is  likewise   common 


BABEL,  TOWER  OF 


159 


to  tho.°e  ancient  structures;  while  the  square 
form  is  universal.  On  the  other  hand  it  maybe 
doubted  whether  so  large  a  number  of  stages  was 
common.  The  Mugheir  and  Warka  temples  have 
no  more  than  two,  and  probably  never  had  more 
than  three,  or  at  most,  four  stages.  The  great 
temple  of  Belus  at  Babylon  (Babil)  shows  only 
one  stage;  though,  according  to  the  best  au- 
thorities, it  too  was  a  sort  of  pyramid  (Herod., 
Strab.).  The  height  of  the  Birs  is  158^  feet, 
that  of  Babil  140  (?),  that  of  the  Warka  temple 
100,  that  of  the  temple  at  Mugheir  50  feet. 
Strabo's  statement  that  the  tomb  of  Belus  was  a 
stade  (606  feet  in  height)  would  thus  seem  to  be  a 
gross  .  exaggeration.  Probably  no  Babylonian 
tower  ever  equalled  the  Great  Pyramid  ;  the 
original  height  of  which  was  4S0  feet. 


I'emplool  Bire-Nimiud  at  I  oraippo 


With  regard  to  the  materials  used  in  the  tow,!. 
and  the  manner  of  its  construction,  more  light  is  to 
hi'  obtained  from  the  Warka  and  Mugheir  build- 
ings than  from  the  Birs.  The  Birs  was  rebuilt 
from  top  to  bottom  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  shows 
the  mode  of  construction  prevalent  in  Babylon  at 
the  best  period  ;  the  temples  at  Warka  and  Mug- 
heir remain  to  a  certain  extent  in  their  primitive 
condition,  the  upper  stories  alone  having  been 
renovated.  Tin'  Warka  temple  is  composed  en- 
tirely of  sun-dried  bricks,  which  are  of  various 
shapes  and  sizes;  the  cement  used  i^  mud;  and 
reflds  are  largely  employed  in  the  construction. 
It  is  a  building  of  the  most  primitive  type  and 
exhibits  a  ruder  style  of  art  than  that  which  we 
perceive  from  Scripture  to  have  obtained  at  the  date 
of  the  tower.     Burnt  bricks  were  employed  in  the 


ii  uposition  of  the  tower  (Gen.  \i.  S),  and  though 
perhaps  it  is  somewhat  doubtful  what   the  hemar 

(piOT\\  used  tor  mortar  may  have  been  (see  Fresnel 

in  Journ.  Asiatique  lor  June,  1853,  p.  0),  vet  on 
the  whole  it  is  most  probable  that  bitumen  (which 
abounds  in  Babylonia)  is  the  substance  intended. 
Now  the  lower  basement  of  the  Mugheir  temple 
exhibits  this  combination  in  a  decidedly  primitive 
form.  The  burnt  hricks  are  of  small  size  and  of  an 
inferior  quality;  they  are  laid  in  bitumen;  and 
they  face  a  mass  of  sun-dried  brick,  forming  a  solid 
wall  outside  it.  ten  feet  in  thickness.  No  reeds  are 
used  in  the  building.  Writing  appears  on  it,  hut  of 
an  antique  cast.  The  supposed  date  i>  B.C.  2300 — 
a  little  earlier  than  the  time  commonly  assigned  to 
tin'  buil  ling  of  the  tower.     Probably  the  erection  of 


160 


BABEL,  TOWER  OK 


oS     So   I 

■5     f        «5     J. 


£d=  5     I 


CO    - 


a    bo  « 


.3  S2     .a    x  *j  —  tc 


<    CO    o 


-2  g  £ 

O    I 


the  two  buildings  was  not  separated  by  a  very  long  in- 
terval, though  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose  that  of  the 
two  the  tower  was  the  earlier.  It'  we  mark  its  date, 
as  perhaps  we  are  entitled  to  do,  by  the  time  of 
Peleg,  the  son  of  Eber,  and  father  of  Reu  (see  Gen. 
x.  •_'.">),  we  may  perhaps  place  it  about  B.C.  2600. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  that  any  real  idea 
of  "  scaling  heaven  "  was  present  to  the  minds  of 
those  who  raised  either  the  Tower  of  Babel,  or  any 
other  of  the  Babylonian  temple-towers.  The  ex- 
pression used  in  Genesis  (xi.  4)  is  a  mere  hyperbole 
for  great  height  (comp.  Deut.  i.  28  ;  I>an.  iv.  11, 
&c),  and  should  not  be  taken  literally.  Military 
defence  was  probably  the  primary  object  of  such 
edifices  in  early  times:  but  with  the  wish  for  this 
may  have  been  combined  further  secondary  mo- 
tives, which  remained  when  such  defence  was  other- 


BACCHIDES 

wise  provided  for.  Dio 
dorus  states  that  the  great 
tower  of  the  temple  ot 
Belus  was  used  by  the 
Cnaldaeans  as  an  observa- 
tory (ii.  9),  and  the  care- 
ful emplacement  of  the 
Babylonian  temples  with 
the  angles  facing  the  four 
cardinal  points,  would  be 
a  natural  consequence,  and 
may  be  regarded  as  a  strong 
confirmation  of  the  reality 
of  this  application.  M. 
Fresnel  has  recently  con- 
jectured that  they  were 
also  used  as  sleeping-places 
for  the  chief  priests  in  the 
summer-time  (Journ.  Asi- 
atique,  June,  1853,  pp. 
529-31).  The  upper  air 
is  cooler,  and  is  free  from 
the  insects,  especially  mos- 
quitos,  which  abound  be- 
low ;  and  the  description 
which  Herodotus  gives  of 
the  chamber  at  the  top  of 
the  Belus  tower  (i.  181) 
goes  far  to  confirm  this 
ingenious  view.     [G.  R.] 

BA'BI  (BajSi'  ;  Alex. 
Brifiai ;  Beer),  1  Esd.  viii. 
37.     [Bebai.] 

BAB'YLON.  [Babel.] 

BACA,  THE  VAL- 
LEY of  (Joan  ppy; 

KoiXas  rod  K\avQfi£>vos  ; 
Vallis  lacrymaruni),  a 
valley  somewhere  in  Pales- 
tine, through  which  the  ex- 
iled Psalmist  sees  in  vision 
tile  pilgrims  passing  in  their 
march  towards  the  sanc- 
tuary of  Jehovah  at  Zion 
(l's.'lxxxiv.  6).  The  pas- 
sage seems  to  contain  a 
play,  in  the  manner  of 
Hebrew  poetry,  on  the 
name  of  the  trees  (Q^NSB  • 

Mulberry)  from  which 
the  valley  probably  derived 
its  name,  and  the  "  tears  " 
C33)  shed  by  the  pilgrims  in  their  joy  at  their 
approach  to  Zion.  These  tears  were  so  abundant 
as  to  turn  the  dry  valley  in  which  the  Bacaim  trees 
delighted  (Niebulir,  quoted  in  Winer,  s.  v.)  into  a 
springy  or  marshy  place  (PJM3).     That  the  valley 

was  a  real  locality  is  most  probable,  from  the  use 
of  the  definite  article  before  the  name  (Gesen.  Thes. 

205).     A  valley  of  the  same  name  f\y.jS  \    iS5  L  J 

still  exists  in  the  Sinaitic  district  (Burck.  619). 

The  rendering  of  the  Targum  is  Gehenna,  »'.  c. 
the  Ge-Hinaom  or  ravine  below  Mount  Zion.  This 
locality  agrees  well  with  the  mention  of  Bacaim 
trees  in  2  Sam.  v.  23.  [(!.] 

BAC'CHIDES  (BaKXiSvs),  a  friend  of  Anti- 
ochus  Epiphanes    (Joseph.   Ant.  xii.  10,  §2)  and 


BACCHURUS 

governor  of  Mesopotamia  (£v  T<p  iripav  rov  TroTa.fx.ov, 
1  Mace.  vii.  8  ;  Joseph.  1.  c.),  who  was  commis- 
sioned by  Demetrius  Soter  to  investigate  the  charges 
which  Alcimus  preferred  against  Judas  Maccabaeus. 
He  confirmed  Alcimus  in  the  high  priesthood ; 
and,  having  inflicted  signal  vengeance  on  the  ex- 
treme party  of  the  Assidaeans  [Assideans]  he  re- 
turned to  Antioch.  After  the  expulsion  of  Alcimus 
and  the  defeat  and  death  ofNicanor,  he  led  a  second 
expedition  into  Judaea.  Judas  Maccabaeus  fell  in 
the  battle  which  ensued  at  Laisa  (B.C.  1*51);  and 
Bacchides  reestablished  the  supremacy  of  the  Syrian 
faction  (1  Mace.  ix.  25,  oi  a<re/3e?s  avSpes  ;  Jos. 
Ant.  xiii.  1,  §1).  He  next  attempted  to  surprise 
Jonathan,  who  had  assumed  the  leadership  of  the 
national  party  after  the  death  of  Judas;  but  Jona- 
than escaped  across  the  Jordan.  Bacchides  then 
placed  garrisons  in  several  important  positions, 
and  took  hostages  for  the  security  of  the  present 
government.  Having  completed  the  pacification 
of  the  country0  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  1,  5)  he  re- 
turned to  Demetrius  (B.C.  160);  After  two 
years  he  came  back  at  the  request  of  the  Syrian 
faction,  in  the  hope  of  overpowering  Jonathan  and 
Simon,  who  still  maintained  a  small  force  in  the 
desert ;  but  meeting  with  ill  success,  he  turned 
against  those  who  had  induced  him  to  undertake 
the  expedition,  and  sought  an  honourable  retreat. 
When  this  was  known  by  Jonathan  he  sent  envoys 
to  Bacchides  and  concluded  a  peace  (B.C.  158)  with 
him,  acknowledging  him  as  governor  under  the 
Syrian  king,  while  Bacchides  pledged  himself  not  to 
enter  the  land  again,  a  condition  which  he  faithfully 
observed  (1  Mace.  vii.  ix. ;  Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  10, 11  ; 
xiii.  1).  [B.  F.  W.] 

BACCHU'RUS  (BaKxovpos  ;  Zaccarus),  one 
of  the  "  holy  singers"  (t&v  hpo\f/a\Twu)  who  had 
taken  a  foreign  wife  (1  Esd.  ix.  24).  No  name 
corresponding  with  this  is  traceable  in  the  parallel 
list  in  Ezra. 

BACCHUS.     [Dionysus.] 

BACE'NOR  {Ba.KT)VQop ;  Bacenor),  apparently 
a  captain  of  horse  in  the  army  of  Judas  Maccabaeus 
(2  Mac.  xii.  35).  Or  possibly  rov  Ba.K7}vopos  may 
have  been  the  title  of  one  of  the  Jewish  companies 
or  squadrons. 

BACH'RITES,  THE  (n32n  ;  LXX.  omits: 

/'/;(.  Becheritanmi),  the  family  ofBECHER,  sun  of' 
Ephraim  (Num.  xxvi.  35).     [BeriaH.] 

BADGER  (£;nn,  Tachash).  The  word 
occurs  seven  times  in  the  4th  chapter  of  Num- 
bers and  six  times  in  Exodus,  always  (with  one 
exception)  in  connexion  with  "liy,  a  skin,  and 
in  relation  to  the  coverings  of  the  Tabernacle,  of 
the  Ark  df  the  Covenant,  and  of  other  sacred  ves- 
sels. In  E/.ek.  xvi.  In  it  indicates  the  material  of 
which  the  shoes  of  women  Were  made.  The  LXN. 
render  it  by  Sep/xara  vaKivdiva  and  Ka\v/.i.fxa  Sep- 
IXO.TLVOV  vaKivdivov.  Aquil.  and  Synnn.  lavdiva, 
Jer.  pelles  Ianthinae:  ami  in  this  conjecture  that 
a  colour  is  signified  these  ancient  authorities  are 
followed  by  Bochart,  Oedman,  Rosenmiiller,  and 
Hamilton  Smith  in  Kitto.  The  fact,  however,  that 
C'nn  is  frequently  found  in  the  plural  seems  to 
exclude  the  notion  of  a  colour,  and  Gesenius  argues 
that  some  animal  must  be  meant,  probably  a  badger 


BAHURIM 


161 


c  In  1  Mace  ix.  a",  his  return  seems  to  be  referred  to 
the  death  of  Alcimus. 


or  seal.    The  Talmudists  say  that  CnFl  is  an  animal 

like  a  weasel.     The  Arabic     ^^^J  is  not  only  a 

dolphin  but  also  a  seal,  ami  seals  were  numerous 
on  the  shores  of  the  peninsula  of  Sinai  (Strab.  xvi. 
p.  77(3).  Perhaps  the  Latin  taxus  or  taxo,  the 
original  of  the  Spanish  taxon,  Ital.  tasso,  Fr.  taisson, 
Germ.  Daclis,  is  the  same  word.  The  etymology 
of  the  word  in  Heb.  is  favourable  to  this  view. 
K'ni7!  =  nCTlFl  from  the  root  PlKTl,  quievit ;  and 
seals  no  less  than  badgers  are  somnolent  animals. 
Maurer,  however,  derives  it  from  the  root  L'Tlfi 

intrusit,  irrupit,  penetravit,  a  notion  which  suits  the 
burrowing  of  the  badger  as  well  as  the  plunging  of  the 
seal.  Pliny  (ii.  56)  mentions  the  use  of  the  skins 
of  seals  as  a  covering  for  tents,  and  as  a  protection 
from  lightning.  (Comp.  Plut.  Symp.  v.  9  ;  Sueton. 
Octav.  90  ;   Faber,  Archaeol.  Hebr.  i.  p.  115.) 

The  t^nPl  has  also  been  identified  with  the  Tri- 
chechus  marinus  of  Linnaeus,  and  with  the  sea-cow 
called  Lamantin  or  Dwgong.  Others  find  it  in  an 
animal  of  the  hyena  kind,  which  is  called  by  the 
Arabs  Tahesch  (Botta's  Voyage  in  Yemen,  1S41). 
Robinson  (i.  171)  mentions  sandals  made  of  the 
thick  skin  of  a  fish  which  is  caught  in  the  Red  Sea. 
It  is  a  species  of  halicore,  named  by  Ehrenberg 
Halicora  Hcmprichii.  The  skin  is  clumsy  and  coarse, 
and  might  answer  very  well  for  the  external  covering 
of  the  Tabernacle.  The  badger  is  not  unknown  in 
Palestine,  but  on  the  whole  the  weight  of  authority 
is  in  favour  of  rendering  the  word  seal.     [W.  D.] 

BA'GO  {Bayw,  BayS ;  Vulg.  omits),  1  Esd. 
viii.  40.     [Bigvai.] 

BAGO'AS    (Baywas ;    Bugoas,  Vagao),  Jud. 

xii.  1 1 .  The  name  is  said  to  be  equivalent  to  eunuch 
in  Persian  (Plin.  H.  N.  xiii.  4,  9).  Comp.  Burmnnn 
ad  Ovid.  Am.  ii.  2,  1.  [B.  F.  W.] 

BA'GOI  {Bayo'i;  Zaroar),  1  Esd.  v.  14.  [Big- 

VAI.] 

BAHARU'MITE,  THE.     [Rahurim.] 

bahu'rim  (nn-ina  and  nnna ;  BapaKi^ ; 

Alex.  Baovpeifx,  Baovpi/x ;  Jus.  Baxovpi)s  and 
Baovplv  ;  Bulinrim),  a  village,  the  slight  notices 
remaining  of  which  connect  it  almost  exclusively 
with  the  flight  of  David.  It  was  apparently  on,  or 
close  to  the  road  leading  up  from  the  Jordan  valley 
to  Jerusalem.  Shimei  the  son  of  Gera  resided 
here  (2  Sam.  xvii.  18;  1  K.  ii.  8).  and  from  the 
village,  when  I 'avid,  having  left  the  "  top  of  the 
mount"  behind  him,  was  making  his  way  down  the 
eastern  slopes  of  Olivet  into  the  Jordan  valley 
below,  Shimei  issued  forth,  and  running  along  I  Jos. 
8ia.Tpexwv)  ou  The  side  or  "rib"  of  the  hill  over 
:  the  king's  party,  flung  his  stones  and  dust. 
and  foul  abuse  ( wi.  '>).  with  a  virulence  which  is 
tn   this  day   exhibited    in   the    East  towards   fallen 

greatness  however  eminent  it  may  previously  have 
been,  lb-re  in  the  courl  of  a  house  was  the  well 
in  which  Jonathan  ami  Ahiinaaz  eluded  their  pur- 
suers (xvii.  IS).     In  bis  account  of  the  occurrence, 

Josephus  (.!/'/.  vii.  0.  §7)  distinctly  states  that 
Bahurim  lay  nil'  the  main  road  (7ra78es  iKrpa- 
WvTes  TTJ?  oSov),  which  agrees  well  with  the  ac- 
cuiiiit  dt'  shiniei's  behaviour.  Her"  Phaltiel,  the 
husband  ofMichal,  bade  farewell  to  his  wife  when 
mi  her  return  to  King  David  at  Hebron  (2  Sam.  in. 
16).    Bahurim  must  have  been  very  near  the  south 

M 


162 


BAJITH 


boundary  of  Benjamin,  but  it  is  not  mentioned  in 
the  lists  in  Joshua,  nor  is  any  explanation  given  ot'it> 
being  Benjamite,  as  from  Shimei's  residing  there  we 
may  conclude  it  was.  In  the  Targum  Jonathan  on 
2  Sam.  xvi.  5,  we  find  it  given  as  Almon  (]b?y). 

But  the  situation  of  Almou  (see  Josh.  xxi.  18)  will 
not  at  all  suit  the  requirements  of  Bahurim.  Dr. 
Barclay  conjectures  that  the  place  lay  where  some 
ruins  still  exist  close  to  a  Wady  Ruwaby,  which 
runs  in  a  straight  course  for  3  miles  from  Olivet 
directly  towards  Jordan,  offering  the  nearest  though 
not  the  best  route  (Barclay,  563,  4). 

Azmaveth  "  the  Barhumite "  C?3n*)2n  ;  o 
BapSiap.lTris  ;  Alex.  Bapufielrris  ;  2  Sam.  xxiii.  31), 
or   "  the   Baharumite  "    (''O-ITISn  ;     b   Bapwfxi ; 

1  Chr.  xi.  33),  one  of  the  heroes  of  David's  guard, 
is  the  only  native  of  Bahurim  that  we  hear  of  except 
Shimei.  [G.] 

BA'JITH   (JV3n,   with   the   definite  article, 

"  the  house  "),  referring  not  to  a  place  of  this  name, 
but  to  the  "temple"  of  the  false  gods  of  Moab,  as 
opposed  to  the  "high  places"  in  the  same  sen- 
tence (Is.  xv.  2,  and  compare  xvi.  12).  The  allu- 
sion has  been  supposed  to  be  to  Beth-Baal-meon,  or 
Beth-diblathaim,  which  are  named  in  Jer.  xlviii. 
22,  as  here,  with  Dibon  and  Nebo.  But  this  is 
mere  conjecture,  and  the  conclusion  of  Gesenius  is 
as  above  (Jesaia  ad  loc.) ;  LXX.  XvirelaOe  i<p*  iav- 
tovs  ;  Ascendit  doinus.  [G.] 

BAKBAK'KAR  ("lj33i?3  ;  Ba.Kl3a.Kdp  ;  Bac- 

bacar),  a  Levite,  apparently  a  descendant  of  Asaph 
(1  Chr.  ix.  15). 

BAK'BUK  (p-13p3  ;  BaK&ovK  ;  Bacbuc). 
"  Children  of  Bakbuk"  were  among  the  Nethinim 
who  returned  from  captivity  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr. 
ii.  51  ;  Neh.  vii.  53). 

BAKBUKI'AH  (rrp3,53  ;  LXX.  omits). 
1.  A  Levite  in  time  of  Nehemiah  (Neh.  xi.  17, 
xii.  9).  2.  A  Levite  porter,  apparently  a  different 
person  from  the  preceding  (Neh.  xii.  25). 

BAKING.     [Bread.] 

BA'LAAM  (DV^3,  i.  c.  Bileam  ;  BaXadfx. ; 
Joseph.  BaXa/xos ;  Balaam),  a  man  endowed  with 
the  gift  of  prophecy,  introduced  in  Numbers  (xxii.  1) 
as  the  son  of  Beor.  He  belonged  to  the  Midianites, 
and  perhaps  as  the  prophet  of  his  people  possessed 
the  same  authority  that  Moses  did  among  the  Israel- 
ites. At  any  rate  he  is  mentioned  in  conjunction 
with  the  five  kings  of  Midian,  apparently  as  a  per- 
son of  the  same  rank  (Num.  xxxi.  8  ;  cf.  xxxi.  HI ). 
He  seems  to  have  lived  at  Pethor,  which  is  said  at 
Deut.  xxiii.  4  to  have  been  a  city  of  Mesopotamia 
(Q^rU  D"]XV  He  himself  speaks  of  being  "brought 
from  Aram  out  of  the  mountains  of  the  East" 
(Num.  xxiii.  7).  The  reading,  therefore,  fifty  ^3 
instead  of  1EJJ  \J3  which  at  Num.  xxii.  5,  is  found 
in  some  MSS.,  and  is  adopted  by  the  Samaritan, 
Syriac,  and  Vulgate  versions,  need  not  be  preferred, 
as  the  Ammonites  do  not  appear  to  have  ever  extended 
so  far  as  the  Euphrates,  which  is  probably  the  river 
alluded  to  in  this  place.  The  name  Balaam,  accord- 
ing to  Gesenius,  is  compounded  of  ?3  and  Dy 
"  non-populas  fortasse,  i.  q.  peregrinus ;"  according 


BALAAM 

to  Vitringa  it  is  7j?3  and  DJ? ,  the  lord  of  the  people ; 

according  to  Simonis,  JP3  and  DJ)   the  destruction 

of  the  people.  There  is  a  Bela,  the  son  of  Beor, 
mentioned  Gen.  xxxvi.  32,  as  the  first  king  of 
Edom.  Balaam  is  called  in  2  Pet.  ii.  15  "  the  son 
of  Bosor :"  this  Lightfoot  (  Works,  vii.  80)  thinks  a 
Chaldaism  for  Beor,  and  infers  that  St.  Peter  was 
then  in  Babylon.  Balaam  is  one  of  those  instances 
which  meet  us  in  Scripture  of  persons  dwelling 
among  heathens  but  possessing  a  certain  knowledge 
of  the  one  true  God.  He  was  endowed  with  a 
greater  than  ordinary  knowledge  of  God :  he  was 
possessed  of  high  gifts  of  intellect  and  genius :  he 
had  the  intuition  of  truth,  and  could  see  into  the 
life  of  things, — in  short,  he  was  a  poet  and  a 
prophet.  Moreover,  he  confessed  that  all  these 
superior  advantages  were  not  his  own  but  derived 
from  God,  and  were  his  gift.  And  thus,  doubtless, 
he  had  won  for  himself  among  his  contemporaries 
far  and  wide  a  high  reputation  for  wisdom  and 
sanctity.  It  'vas  believed  that  he  whom  he  blessed 
was  blessed,  and  he  whom  he  cursed  was  cursed. 
Elated,  however,  by  his  fame  and  his  spiritual 
elevation  he  had  begun  to  conceive  that  these  gifts 
were  his  own,  and  that  they  might  be  used  to  the 
furtherance  of  his  own  ends.  He  could  make  mer- 
chandise of  them,  and  might  acquire  riches  and 
honour  by  means  of  them.  A  custom  existed 
among  many  nations  of  antiquity  of  devoting  ene- 
mies to  destruction  before  entering  upon  a  war 
with  them.  At  this  time  the  Israelites  were 
marching  forwards  to  the  occupation  of  Palestine : 
they  were  now  encamped  in  the  plains  of  Moab,  on 
the  east  of  Jordan  by  Jericho.  Balak,  the  king  of 
Moab,  having  witnessed  the  discomfiture  of  his 
neighbours,  the  Amorites,  by  this  people,  entered 
into  a  league  with  the  Midianites  against  them,  and 
despatched  messengers  to  Balaam  with  the  rewards 
of  divination  in  their  hands.  We  see  from  this, 
therefore,  that  Balaam  was  in  the  habit  of  using 
his  wisdom  as  a  trade,  and  of  mingling  with  it 
devices  of  his  own  by  which  he  imposed  upon 
others  and  perhaps  partially  deceived  himself. 
When  the  elders  of  Moab  and  Midian  told  him 
their  message,  he  seems  to  have  had  some  mis- 
givings as  to  the  lawfulness  of  their  request,  for  he 
invited  them  to  tarry  the  night  with  him  that  he 
might  learn  how  the  Lord  would  regard  it.  These 
misgivings  were  confirmed  by  the  express  prohi- 
bition of  God  upon  his  journey.  Balaam  reported 
the  answer,  and  the  messengers  of  Balak  returned. 
The  king  of  Moab,  however,  not  deterred  by  this 
failure,  sent  again  more  and  more  honourable 
princes  to  Balaam,  with  the  promise  that  he  should 
be  promoted  to  very  great  honour  upon  complying 
with  his  request.  The  prophet  again  refused,  but 
notwithstanding  invited  the  embassy  to  tarry  the 
night  with  him  that  he  might  know  what  the  Lord 
would  say  unto  hirn  further;  and  thus  by  his 
importunity  he  extorted  from  God  the  permission 
he  desired,  but  was  warned  at  the  same  time  that 
his  actions  would  be  overruled  according  to  the 
Divine  will.  Balaam  therefore  proceeded  on  his 
journey  with  the  messengers  of  Balak.  But  God's 
anger  was  kindled  at  this  manifestation  of  deter- 
mined self-will,  and  the  angel  of  the  Lord  stood  in 
the  way  for  an  adversary  against  him.  The  words 
of  the  Psalmist,  "  Be  ye  not  like  to  horse  and  mule 
which  have  no  understanding,  whose  mouths  must 
be  held  with  bit  and  bridle,  lest  they  fall  upon 
thee,"  had  they  been  familiar  to  Balaam,  would 


BALAAM 

have  come  home  to  him  with  most  tremendous 
force;  for  never  have  they  received  a  more  forcible 
illustration  than  the  comparison  of  Balaam's  con- 
duct to  his  Maker  with  his  treatment  of  his  ass, 
affords  us.  The  wisdom  with  which  the  tractable 
brute  was  allowed  to  "  speak  with  man's  voice," 
and  "forbid"  the  untractable  "madness  of  the 
prophet,"  is  palpable  and  conspicuous.  He  was 
taught,  moreover,  that  even  she  had  a  spiritual 
perception  to  which  he,  though  a  prophet,  was  a 
stranger ;  and  when  his  eyes  were  opened  to  be- 
hold the  angel  of  the  Lord,  "  he  bowed  down  his 
head  aud  fell  flat  on  his  face."  It  is  hardly  neces- 
sary to  suppose,  as  some  do,  among  whom  are 
Heugstenberg,  and  Leibnitz,  that  the  event  here 
referred  to  happened  only  in  a  trance  or  vision, 
though  such  an  opinion  might  seem  to  be  supported 
by  the  fact  that  our  translators  render  the  word 
?QJ  in  xxiv.  4,  16,  "falling  into  a  trance," 
whereas  no  other  idea  than  that  of  simple  falling  is 
conveyed  by  it.  St.  Peter  refers  to  it  as  a  real 
historical  event:  "the  dumb  ass,  speaking  with 
man's  voice,  forbad  the  madness  of  the  prophet" 
(2  Pet.  ii.  16).  We  are  not  told  how  these  things 
happened,  but  that  they  did  happen,  and  that  it 
pleased  God  thus  to  interfere  on  behalf  of  His 
elect  people,  and  to  bring  forth  from  the  genius  of 
a  self-willed  prophet,  who  thought  that  his  talents 
were  his  own,  strains  of  poetry  bearing  upon  the 
destiny  of  the  Jewish  nation  and  the  Church  at 
large,  which  are  not  surpassed  throughout  the  Mo- 
saic records.  It  is  evident  that  Balaam,  although 
acquainted  with  God,  was  desirous  of  throwing  an 
air  of  mystery  round  his  wisdom,  from  the  instruc- 
tions he  gave  Balak  to  offer  a  bullock  and  a  ram 
on  the  seven  altars  he  everywhere  prepared  for 
him  ;  but  he  seems  to  have  thought  also  that  these 
sacrifices  would  be  of  some  avail  to  change  the 
mind  of  the  Almighty,  because  he  pleads  the  merit 
of  them  (xxiii.  4),  aud  after  experiencing  their 
impotency  to  effect  such  an  object,  "  he  went  no 
more,"  we  are  told,  "  to  seek  for  enchantments" 
(xxiv.  1).  His  religion,  therefore,  was  probably 
such  as  would  be  the  natural  result  of  a  general 
acquaintance  with  God  not  confirmed  by  any 
covenant.  He  knew  Him  as  the  fountain  of  wis- 
dom, how  to  worship  Him  he  could  merely  guess 
from  the  customs  in  vogue  at  the  time.  Sacrifices 
had  been  used  by  the  patriarchs,  to  what  extent 
they  were  efficient  could  only  be  surmised.  There 
is  an  allusion  to  Balaam  in  the  prophet  Micah 
(vi.  5),  where  Bishop  Butler  thinks  that  a  con- 
versation is  preserved  which  occurred  between  him 
and  the  king  of  Moab  upon  this  occasion.  But 
such  an  opinion  is  hardly  tenable,  if  we  bear  in 
mind  that  Balak  is  nowhere  represented  as  con- 
sulting Balaam  upon  the  acceptable  mode  of  wor- 
shipping God,  and  that  the  directions  found  in 
Micah  are  of  quite  an  opposite  character  to  those 
which  were  given  by  the  son  of  Beor  upon  the' 
high  places  of  Baal.  The  prophet  is  recounting 
''the  righteousness  of  the  Lord"  in  delivering  His 
people  out  of  the  hand  of  Moab  under  Balak,  and 
at  the  mention  of  his  name  the  history  of  Balaam 
comes  back  upon  his  mind,  and  he  is  led  to  make 
those  noble  reflections  upon  it  which  occur  in  the 
following  verses.  "  The  doctrine  of  Balaam  "  is 
spoken  of  in  Rev.  ii.  14,  where  an  allusion  has  been 
supposed  to  NiK(5Aaos,  the  founder  of  the  sect  of 
the  Nicolaitans,  mentioned  in  v.  15,  these  two 
names  being  probably  similar  in  signification. 
Though  the  utterance  of  Balaam  was   overruled  so 


BALDNESS 


163 


that  ho  could  not  curse  the  children  of  Israel,  he 
nevertheless  suggested  to  the  Moabites  the  expe- 
dient of  seducing  them  to  commit  fornication. 
The  effect  of  this  is  recorded  in  ch.  xxv.  A 
battle  was  afterwards  fought  against  the  Midianites, 
in  which  Balaam  sided  with  them  and  was  slain  by 
the  sword  of  the  people  whom  he  had  endeavoured 
to  curse  (Numb.  xxxi.  8).  (Comp.  Bishop  Butler's 
Sermons, serm.vu.;  Ewald,  Gesch.  des  Volkes Israel, 
ii.  277).  [S.  L.] 

BA'LAC  (<5  BaXa/c;  Balac),  Rev.  ii.  14. 
[Balak.] 

BALADAN.     [Merodach-Baladan.] 

BA'LAH  (ybl;  Ba\d;  Bala),  Josh.  xix.  3. 
[Baal,  Geogr.  No".  2,  &.] 

BA'LAK  (p?3;  BaAa/c;  Balac),  son  of 
Zippor,  king  of  the  Moabites,  at  the  time  when 
the  children  of  Israel  were  bringing  their  journey- 
ings  in  the  wilderness  to  a  close.  According 
to  Gesenius  the  name  signifies  inanis,  vacuus. 
Balak  entered  into  a  league  with  Midian  and  hired 
Balaam  to  curse  the  Israelites ;  but  his  designs 
were  frustrated  in  the  manner  recorded  in  Num. 
xxii.-xxiv.  He  is  mentioned  also  at  Josh.  xxiv.  9  ; 
Judg.  xi.  26 ;  Mic.  vi.  5.  [Balaam.]  [S.  L.] 
"  BALAMO.     [Baal,  Geogr.  No.  6.] 

BALAS'AMUS  (BadAaafjios  ;  Balsamus),  in 
1  Esd.  ix.  43.  The  corresponding  name  in  the  list 
in  Ezra  is  Maaseiah. 

BALDNESS  (firnp;  (paXaKpaxfLs,  <pa\d- 
Kpoojxa.  ;  and  in  Lev.  xiii.  43,  <pa\dvToifj.a). 
There  are  two  kinds  of  baldness,  viz.  artificial  and 
natural.  The  latter  seems  to  have  been  uncommon, 
since  it  exposed  people  to  public  derision,  and  is  per- 
petually alluded  to  as  a  mark  of  squalor  and  mi- 
sery (2  K.  ii.  23  ;  Is.  iii.  24,  "  instead  of  well-set 
hair,  baldness,  and  burning  instead  of  beauty."  Is. 
xv.  2  ;  Jer.  xlvii.  5  ;  Ez.  vii.  18,  &c).  For  this 
reason  it  seems  to  have  been  included  under  the 
AsixV  ;llu'  «f"»pi  (Lev.  xxi.  20,  LXX.)  which 
were  disqualifications  for  priesthood.  A  man  bald 
on  the  back  of  the  head  is  called  rHp,  <pa\a.Kpbs, 
LXX.,  Lev.  xiii.  40,  and  if  forehead-bald,  the  word 
used  to  describe  him  is  1133,  avatyaKavrlas,  LXX., 
Lev.  xiii.  41  (rccalvaster).  (Gesen.  s.  vv.)  In 
Lev.  xiii.  29  sq.,  very  careful  directions  are  given 
to  distinguish  Bohak,  "a  plague  upon  the  head  and 
beard"  (which  probably  is  the  Mentagra  of  Pliny, 
and  is  a  sort  of  leprosy),  from  mere  natural  bald- 
ness which  is  pronounced  to  be  clean,  v.  40  (Jahn, 
Arch.  Bihl.  §189).  But  this  shows  thai  even  na- 
tural baldness  subjected  men  to  an  unpleasant  suspi- 
cion. It  was  a  defect  with  which  the  Israelites 
were  by  no  means  familiar,  since  Alyvirriovs  &i> 
tis  ZXax'iaTovs  'ISoito  cpaKaKpovs  ■ko.vtwv  avOpui- 
itu>i>,  says  Herod,  (iii.  12);  an  immunity  which  he 
attributes  to  their  constant  shaving.  They  adopted 
this  practice  for  purposes  of  cleanliness,  and  ge- 
nerally wore  wigs,  some  of  which  have  been  found 
in  the  ruins  of  Thebes.  Contrary  to  the  general 
practice  of  the  East,  they  only  let  the  hair  grow  as 
a  sign  of  mourning  (Herod,  ii.  36),  and  shaved 
themselves  on  all  joyous  occasions:  hence  in  Gen.  xli. 
•1-1  we  have  an  undesigned  coincidence.  The  same 
custom  obtains  in  China,  and  among  the  modern 
Egyptians,  who  shave  off'  all  tin1  hair  except  the 
shoosheh,  a  tuft  on  the  forehead  and  crown  of  the 
head  i  Wilkinson,  Anc.  Egypt,  iii.  359,  sq.;  Lane, 
Mod.  /■■mt.  i.  eh.  1). 

M  2 


164 


BALM 


Baldness  was  despised  both  among  Greeks  and 
Romans.  In  //.  ii.  219,  it  is  one  of  the  defects  of 
Thersites ;  Aristophanes  (who  was  probably  bald 
himself,  Pax,  767,  Eq.  550)  takes  pride  in  not 
joining  in  the  ridicule  against  it  (ovb"  eaKuitytv 
robs  (paAaicpovs,  Nub.  540).  Caesar  was  said 
"  ealvitii  deformitatem  iniquissime  ferre,"  and  he 
generally  endeavoured  to  conceal  it  (Suet.  Caes.  45  ; 
comp.  Dom.  18). 

Artificial  baldness  marked  the  conclusion  of  a  Na- 
zarite's  vow  (Acts  xviii.  18  ;  Num.  vi.  9),  and 
was  a  sign  of  mourning  ("  quasi  calvitio  luctus  le- 
varetur,"  Cic.  Tusc.  Disp.  iii.  26).  It  is  often 
alluded  to  in  Scripture;  as  in  Mic.  i.  16  ;  Am.  viii. 
10;  Jer.  xlvii.  5,  &c. ;  and  in  Deut.  xiv.  1,  the 
reason  for  its  being  forbidden  to  the  Israelites  is 
their  being  "  a  holy  and  peculiar  people."  (Cf.  Lev. 
xix.  27,  and  Jer.  ix.  26,  marg.)  The  practices 
alluded  to  in  the  latter  passages  were  adopted  by 
heathen  nations  (e.g.  the  Arabs,  &c.)  in  honour  of 
various  gods.  Hence  the  expression  rpoxoKovpaSes. 
The  Abantes  (oirtdev  Ko/xo&vres),  and  other  half- 
civilised  tribes,  shaved  off  the  forelocks,  to  avoid  the 
danger  of  being  seized  by  them  in  battle.  (See  also 
Herod,  ii.  36,^.  82.)  [F.  W.  F.] 

BALM,  the  translation  in  the  A.  V.  of  the 
Hebrew  Tzari  0~lV).  Lee  (Lex.  p.  520)  supposes 
it  to  be  Mastich,  a  gum  obtained  from  the  Pistaccia 
Lentiscus  ;  but  Gesenius  defends  the  common  ren- 
dering, balsam.  It  was  the  gum  of  a  tree  or  shrub 
growing  in  Gilead,  and  very  precious.  It  was  one 
of  the  best  fruits  of  Palestine  (Gen.  xliii.  1 1),  ex- 
ported (Gen.  xxxvii.  25 ;  Ez.  xxvii.  17)  and  espe- 
cially used  for  healing  wounds  (Jer.  viii.  22  ;  xlvi. 
11,  li.  8).  The  Balsam  was  almost  peculiar  to 
Palestine  (Strab.  xvi.  2,  p.  763  ;  Tac.  Hist.  v.  6  ; 
Plin.  xii.  25,  §54,  32,  §59),  distilling  from  a 
shrub  like  the  vine  and  rue,  which  in  the  time  of 
Josephus  was  cultivated  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
Jericho  and  of  the  Dead  Sea  (Ant.  xiv.  4,  §1,  xv. 
4,  §2),  and  still  grows  in  gardens  near  Tiberias 
(Burckhardt,  Syria,  323).  It  is  derived  from  an 
unused  root  HIS,  fidit,  fissuras  fecit,   from   the 

process  by  which  it  was  obtained.  In  Ezek.  xxvii. 
17  the  A.  V.  gives  in  the  margin  rosin.  The 
LXX.  have  ptjtiVt)  wherever  """IV  occurs  in  the 
Heb.       The  fact  that  the  'HV  grew  originally  in 

Gilead  does  not  forbid  us  to  identify  it  with  the 
shrub  mentioned  by  Josephus  as  cultivated  near 
Jericho  ;  nor  is  it  necessary  to  tie  the  sense  of 
*"l¥  down  to  the  meaning  of  the  cognate  words  in 

o    y 
Arab,   and  Syr.    .^   and   JO*-,  the  etymology 

of  each  being  the  same,  so  that  they  may  be  appli- 
cable to  the  gum  of  diiie'rent  trees  or  shrubs,  which 
flourished  in  the  localities  where  these  languages 
were  respectively  spoken.  Jahn  says  that  the  odori- 
ferous balsam  "HV  is  not  gathered  from  the  tree  in 

Yemen  called  by  the  Arabic  name  Abu  Shamm,  but 
is  distilled  from  a  fruit  which  is  indigenous  on  the 
mountains  of  Mecca  and  Medina.  The  sap  extracted 
from  the  body  of  the  tree  is  opobalsamum ;  the 
juice  of  the  fruit  is  carpdbahamum,  and  the  liquid 
which  is  extracted  from  the  branches  when  cut  off  is 
xylobalsamum  (Jahn,  Bibl.  Ant.  i.  §74).  Bochart 
contends  that  the  balm  mentioned  in  Jer.  viii.  8  was 
the  resin  drawn  from  the  terebinth  or  turpentine 
tree.  [W.  I).] 


BANQUETS 
BALNU'US  (BaAi/ouo? ;   Bonnus),   1  Esd.  ix. 

31.       [BlNNUI.] 

BALTHA'SAR,Bar.i.  11,12.  [Belsiiazzar.] 
BA'MAH  (n»3,  a  high  place).  Though  fre- 
quently occurring  in  the  Bible  to  denote  the  elevated 
spots  or  erectious  on  which  the  idolatrous  rites  were 
conducted  [High-place],  this  word  appears  in 
its  Hebrew  form  only  in  one  passage  (Ez.  xx.  29), 
very  obscure,  and  full  of  the  paronomasia,  so  dear 
to  the  Hebrew  poets,  so  difficult  for  us  to  appreciate : 
"  What  is  the  high-place  (nOSH)  whereunto  ye 
hie  (DHK3!"1)  ?  and  the  name  of  it  is  called  Bamah 
(H?D3)  unto  this  day."     (LXX.  t\  itrTiv  a/ia/Aa 

.  .  .  .  Kal  iireKaKeo-av  rb  ovofxa  avrov  'A^a/xd.) 
Ewald  (Prophetea,  286)  pronounces  this  verse  to  be 
an  extract  from  an  older  prophet  than  Ezekiel.  [G.] 

BA'MOTH-BA'AL  (^3-Tli»3,  high  places 
of  Baal ;  Bai/xwv  BoaA  ;  Bamothbaal),  a  sanctuary 
of  Baal  in  the  country  of  Moab  (Josh.  xiii.  17), 
which  is  probably  mentioned  in  the  Itinerary  in 
Num.  xxi.  19,  under  the  shorter  form  of  Bamoth, 
or  Bamoth-in-the-ravine  (20),  and  again  in  the 
enumeration  of  the  towns  of  Moab  in  Is.  xv.  2.  In 
this  last  passage  the  word  is  translated  in  the 
A.  V.  "  the  high  places,"  as  it  is  also  in  Num. 
xxii.  41,  where  the  same  locality  is  doubtless  re- 
ferred to.a  Near  to  Bamoth  was  another  place 
bearing  the  name  of  the  same  divinity, — Baal- 
meon,  or  Beth-baai.-meon.  [G.] 

BAN  (rov  Baevdv  ;  Tubal),  a  name  in  a  very 
corrupt  passage  (1  Esd.  v.  37)  ;  it  stands  for  Tobiah 
in  the  parallel  lists  in  Ezra  and  Nehemiah. 

BANAI'AS  (Bavalas;  Baneas),  1  Esd.  ix.  35. 
[Benaiaii.] 

BA'NI  CJH  ;  Bavi,  Bowi,Bavovt ;  Bunni,Bani, 

Benni),  the  name  of  several  men.  1.  A  Gadite, 
one  of  David's  mighty  men  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  36  ;  LXX. 
translate,  XloAvSwdfj-eoos  vlbs  FaAaaSi).  2.  A 
Leviteof  the  line  of  Merari,  and  forefather  to  Ethan 
(1  Chr.  vi.  46).  3.  A  man  of  Judah  of  the  line  of 
Pharez  (1  Chr.  ix.  4).  4.  "  Children  of  Bani  "  re- 
turned from  captivity  with  Zerubbabel  (Ear.  ii.  10  ; 
Neb.,  x.  14  ;  Ezr.  x.  '29,  34  ;  1  Esd.  v.  12).  [Bix- 
nui,  Mani,  and  Maani.]  5.  An  Israelite  "  of  the 
.sons  of  Bani"  (Ezr.  x.  38).  [Bannus.]  6.  A  Le- 
vite  (Neh.  iii.  17).  7.  A  Levite  (Neb.,  viii.  7  ;  ix. 
4  ;  LXX.  transl.  Kal  ol  viol  KaS/xi-fjA,  5;  x.  13). 
[Ants.]  .8.  Another  Levite  (Neh.  ix.  4;  LXX. 
transl.  viol  Xccvei/i).  9.  Another  Levite,  of  the 
sons  of  Asaph  (Neh.  xi.  22). 

BA'NID  (Bavlas  ;  Alex.  Bavi ;  Bania),  1  Esd. 
viii.  36.  This  represents  a  name  which  has  appa- 
rently escaped  from  the  present  Hebrew  text  (see 
Ezr.  viii.  10). 

BANNAI'A  CXafSavvdios  ;  Alex.  Bavvaiovs  ; 
Bannus),  1  Esd.  ix.  33.  The  corresponding  name 
in  the  list  in  Ezra  is  Zabad. 

BAN'NUS  (Bavvovs  ;  Baneas),  1  Esd.  ix.  34. 
[Bani,  or  Binnui.] 

BANQUETS.      These,    among    the   Hebrews, 


a  It  will  be  observed  that  our  Translators  have,  in 
Num.  xxiii.  3,  rendered  by  "  high  place  "  a  totally 
different  word  CSt^),  which  is  devoid  of  the  special 
meaning  of  "  Bamoth." 


BANQUETS 

were  not  only  a  means  of  social  enjoyment,  but 
were  a  part  of  the  observance  of  religious  festivity. 
At  the  three  solemn  festivals,  when  all  the  males  ap- 
peared before  the  Lord,  the  family  also  had  its  do- 
mestic feast,  as  appears  from  the  place  and  the  share 
in  it  to  which  "  the  widow,  the  fatherless,  and  the 
stranger,"  were  legally  entitled  (Deut.  xvi.  11). 
Probably,  when  the  distance  allowed,  and  no  incon- 
venience hindered,  both  males  and  females  went  up 
(e.  g.  to  Shiloh.  1  Sam.  i.  9)  together,  to  hold  the 
festival.  These  domestic  festivities  were  doubtless 
to  a  great  extent  retained,  after  laxity  had  set  in  as 
regards  the  special  observance  by  the  male  sex 
(Nehem.  viii.  17).  Sacrifices,  both  ordinary  and 
extraordinary,  as  amongst  heathen  nations  (Ex. 
xxxiv.  15  ;  Judg.  xvi.  23),  included  a  banquet,  and 
Eli's  sons  made  this  latter  the  prominent  part.  The 
two,  thus  united,  marked  strongly  both  domestic 
and  civil  life.  It  may  even  be  said  that  some  sacri- 
ficial recognition,  if  only  in  pouring  the  blood  so- 
lemnly forth  as  before  God,  always  attended  the 
slaughter  of  an  animal  for  food.  The  firstlings  of 
cattle  were  to  be  sacrificed  and  eaten  at  the  sanc- 
tuary if  not  too  far  from  the  residence  (I  Sam.  ix. 
13;  2  Sam.  vi.  19;  Ex.  xxii.  29,  30;  Lev. 
xix.  5,  6;  Deut.  xii.  17,  20,  21,  xv.  19-22). 
From  the  sacrificial  banquet  probably  sprang  the 
aytnr/j ;  as  the  Lord's  supper  with  which  it  for  a 
while  coalesced,  derived  from  the  Passover.  Besides 
religious  celebrations,  such  events  as  the  weaning  a 
son  and  heir,  a  marriage,  the  separation  or  reunion 
of  friends,  and  sheepshearing,  were  customarily  at- 
tended by  a  banquet  or  revel  (Gen.  xxi.  8,  xxix.  22, 
xxxi.  27,  54;  1  Sam.  xxv.  2,  36;  2  Sam.  xiii. 
23).  At  a  funeral,  also,  refreshment  was  taken  in 
common  by  the  mourners,  and  this  might  tend  to 
become  a  scene  of  indulgence,  but  ordinarily  abste- 
miousness seems  on  such  occasions  to  have  been 
the  rule.  The  case  of  Archelaus  is  not  conclusive, 
but  his  inclination  towards  alien  usages  was 
doubtless  shared  by  the  Herodianizing  Jews  (Jer. 
xvi.  5-7;  Ezek.  xxiv.  17;  Hos.  ix.  4;  Eccl.  vii. 
2  ;  Joseph,  dc  B.  J.  ii.  1).  Birthday-banquets 
are  only  mentioned  in  the  cases  of  Pharaoh  and 
Herod  (Gen.  xl.  20;  Matt.  xiv.  6).  A  leading 
topic  of  prophetic  rebuke  is  the  abuse  of  festivals 
to  an  occasion  of  drunken  revelry,  and  the  growth 
of  fashion  in  favour  of  drinking  parties.  Such  was 
the  invitation  typically  given  by  Jeremiah  to  the 
Rechabites  (Jer.  xxxv.  5).  The  usual  time  of  the 
banquet  was  the  evening,  and  to  begin  early  was  a 
mark  of  excess  (Is.  v.  11;  Eccl.  x.  1(3).  The 
slaughtering  of  the  cattle,  which  was  the  prelimi- 
nary of  a  banquet,  occupied  the  earlier  part  of  the 
same  day  (Troy,  ix.  2  ;  Is.  xxii.  13;  Matt.  xxii.  4). 
The  mot  essential  materials  of  the  banqueting- 
room,  next  to  the  viands  and  wine,  which  last 
was  of)  I  with  spires  (Prov.  ix.  2;  Cant. 

viii.  21,  were  perfumed  ointments,  garlands  or 
loose  (lowers,  white  or  brilliant  robes,  after  these, 
exhibitions  of  music,  singers,  ami  dancers,  riddles, 
jesting  and  merriment  (Is.  xxviii.  1  ;  Wisd.  ii.  6; 
_'  Sam.  xix.  35;  Is.  xxv.  (>,  v.  12  ;  Judg.  xiv.  12  ; 
Neb.,  viii.  Id;  Eccl.  X.  10;  Matt.  xxii.  11;  Am. 
\i.  5,  <■;  Luke  xv.  25).  Seven  days  was  a  not 
uncommon  duration  of  a  fe  tival,  especially  fin-  a 
wedding,  but  sometimes  fourteen  (Tob.  viii.  19; 
Gen,  xxix.  27;  Judg.  xiv.  12);  but  if  the  bride 
were  a  widow,  three  days  formed  the  limit  (Bux- 
torf,  c?e  Conviv.  ffebr.").  The  remainder  sent  to  the 
guests  (Luke'  xiv.  17)  was,  probably,  only  usual  in 
princely  banquets  on  a   huge  scale,  involving  pro- 


BARABBAS 


1G5 


tracted  preparation.  "  Whether  the  slaves  who 
bade  the  guests  had  the  office  (as  the  vooatores  or 
invitatores  among  the  Romans)  of  pointing  out  the 
places  at  table  and  naming  the  strange  dishes,  must 
remain  undecided."  (Winer,  s.  v.  Gastmahlc.) 
There  seems  no  doubt  that  the  Jews  of  the  0.  T. 
period  used  a  common  table  for  all  the  guests.  In 
Joseph's  entertainment  a  ceremonial  separation  pre- 
vailed, but  there  is  no  reason  for  supposing  a  separate 
table  for  each,  as  is  distinctly  asserted  in  Tosephot 
Tr.  Berach.  c.  vi.to  have  been  usual  (Buxtorf,  /.  c). 
The  latter  custom  certainly  was  in  use  among  the 
ancient  Greeks  and  Germans  (Horn.  Od,  xxiii.,  xxii. 
74;  Tac.  Germ.  22),  and  perhaps  among  the  Egyp- 
tians (Wilkinson,  ii.  202,  engravings).  But  the 
common  phrase  to  "  sit  at  table,"  or  "  eat  at  any 
one's  table,"  shows  the  originality  of  the  opposite 
usage.  The  posture  at  table  in  early  times  was 
sitting  (25!^    H3D,  to  sit  round,  1  Sam,  xvi.   11, 

xx.  5,  18),  and  the  guests  were  ranged  in  order  of 
dignity  (Gen.  xliii.  33  ;  1  Sam.  ix.  22  ;  Joseph. 
Ant.  xv.  2,  §4) :  the  words  which  imply  the  re- 
cumbent posture  (kvaK\iveiv,  avairiirTetv,  or  ava- 
KeiaQai)  belong  to  the  N.  T.  The  separation  of 
the  women's  banquet  was  not  a  Jewish  custom 
^Esth.  i.  9).  Portions  or  messes  were  sent  from 
the  entertainer  to  each  guest  at  table,  and  a  double 
or  even  five-fold  share  when  peculiar  distinction 
was  intended,  or  a  special  part  was  reserved  ( 1  Sam. 
i.  5;  Gen.  xliii.  34  ;  1  Sam.  ix.  23,24).  Portions 
were  similarly  sent  to  poorer  friends  direct  from  the 
banquet-table  (Neh.  viii.  10 ;  Esth.  ix.  19,  22). 
The  kiss  on  receiving  a  guest  was  a  point  of  friendly 
courtesy  (Luke  vii.  45).  Perfumes  and  scented 
oils  were  offered  for  the  head,  beard,  and  garments. 
It  was  strictly  enjoined  by  the  Habbis  to  wash  both 
before  and  after  eating,  which  they  called  the 
D'OI^N-I  WV  and  D^nnN*  ITO  ;  but  washing 
the  feet  seems  to  have  been  limited  to  the  case  of  a 
guest  who  was  also  a  traveller. 

In  religious  banquets  the  wine  was  mixed,  by  rab- 
binical regulation,  with  three  parts  of  water,  and 
four  short  forms  of  benediction  were  pronounced  over 
it.  At  the  passover  four  such  cups  were  mixed, 
blessed,  and  passed  round  by  the  master  of  the  feast 
(apxirpiKAwos).  It  is  probable  that  the  character 
of  this  official  varied  with  that  of  the  entertainment ; 
if  it  were  a  religious  one,  his  office  would  be  quasi- 
priestly  ;.  if  a  revel,  he  would  be  the  mere  <rv/j.wo- 
aidpxys  or  arbiter  bibendi.  [H.  H.] 

BAN'UAS  (Bavvos  ;  Bamis),a  name  occurring 
in  the  lists  of  those  who  returned  from  captivity 
(1  Esd.  v.  26).  Banuas  and  Sudias  answer  to 
Hodaviah  in  the  parallel  lists  of  Ezra  and  Ne- 
hemiah. 

BARAB'BAS  (Bapa^as,   N3N  13,  son  of 

.1'.'./,  see  Simonis  Onom.  N.  '/'.  38),  a  robber 
(\ri(ni)s,  John  xviii.  4n),  who  had  committed 
murder  in  an  insurrection  (Mark  xiv.  7  ;  Luke  xxiii. 
19)  in  Jerusalem,  and  was  lying  in  prison  at  the  time 
of  the  trial  of  Jesus  before  1'ilate.  When  the  Roman 
governor,  in  his  anxiety  to  save  Jesus,  proposed 
to  release  him  to  the  people  in  accordance  with  tin' 
custom  that  he  should  release  one  prisoner  to  them 

at  the  Passover,  tin'  whole  multitude  cried  out. 
Alp€  tovtov,  o.-k6\v(Tov  Se  7}fxlv  ruv  Bo.pafSfiav ; 
which  request  was  complied  with  by  Pilate.     Ac- 

cording  t any  of  the  cursive,  or  later  MSS.  in 

Matt,  xxvii.  lil,  l.is  name  was  'll\ffovs  BapafiPas  ; 
Pilate's  question  there  running,  TiVa0eA«T«  a-KoXvaaj 


166 


BARACHEL 


vjjav  ;  'irjaovv  Bapafificiv,  ^  '\t)govv  rbv  Aey6/xevov 
Xpicrrdv  ;  and  this  reading  is  supported  by  the  Ar- 
menian version,  and  cited  by  Origen  (on  Matt.  vol. 
v.  35).  It  has  in  consequence  been  admitted  into 
the  text  by  Fritzsche  and  Tischendorf.  But  the 
contrast  in  ver.  20,  "  that  they  should  ask  Bar- 
abbas,  and  destroy  Jesus,"  seems  fatal  to  it.   [H.  A.] 

BARACHEL  (^8jpn3  ;  BapaXifc  ; '  Bar- 
achcl),  "  the  Buzite,"  father  of  Elihu  (Job  xxxii. 
2,  6).     [Buz.] 

BARACHIAS,  Matt.xxiii.35.  [Zacharias.] 
BA'RAK  (p~l3,  lightning,  as  in  Ex.  six.  16; 

Bapdic,  LXX. ;  comp.  the  family  name  of  Hannibal, 
Barca  =  "  fulmen  belli  "),  son  of  Abinoam  of 
Kedesh,  a  refuge-city  in  Mount  Naphthali,  was  in- 
cited  by  Deborah,  a  prophetess  of  Ephraim,  to  de- 
liver Israel  from  the  yoke  of  Jabin.  Jabin  ("  pru- 
dent ")  was  probably  the  dynastic  name  of  those 
kings  of  northern  Canaan,  whose  capita!  city  was 
Hazor  on  L.  Merom.  Sisera,  his  general  and  pro- 
curator, oppressed  a  promiscuous  population  at 
Harosheth.  Accompanied,  at  his  own  express  de- 
sire, by  Deborah,  Barak  led  his  rudely-armed  force 
of  10,000  men  from  Naphthali  and  Zebulon  to  an 
encampment  on  the  summit  of  Tabor,  where  the 
900  iron  chariots  of  Jabin  would  be  useless.  At  a 
signal  given  by  the  prophetess,  the  little  army, 
seizing  the  opportunity  of  a  providential  storm 
(Joseph,  v.  5,  §4)  and  a  wind  that  blew  in  the 
faces  of  the  enemy,  boldly  rushed  down  the  hill,  and 
utterly  routed  the  unwieldy  host  of  the  Canaanites 
in  the  plain  of  Jezreel  (Esdraelon),  "  the  battle- 
field of  Palestine  "  (Stanley,  S.  and  P.  p.  331). 
From  the  prominent  mention  of  Taanach  (Judg.  v. 
19,  "  sandy  soil ")  and  of  the  river  Kishon,  it  is 
most  likely  that  the  victory  was  partly  due  to  the 
suddenly  swollen  waves  of  that  impetuous  torrent 
(X^t/xappovs,  LXX.),  particularly  its  western  branch 
called  Megiddo.  The  victory  was  decisive,  Haro- 
sheth taken  (Judg.  iv.  16),  Sisera  murdered,  and 
Jabin  ruined.  A  peace  of  40  years  ensued,  and 
the  next  danger  came  from  a  different  quarter.  The 
victors  composed  a  splendid  epinician  ode  in  com- 
memoration of  their  deliverance  (Judg.  v.). 

It  is  difficult  to  decide  the  date  of  Barak.  He 
appears  to  have  been  a  contemporary  of  Shamgar 
(Judg.  v.  6).  If  so,  he  could  not  have  been 
so  much  as  178  years  after  Joshua,  where  he  is 
generally  placed.  Lord  A.  Hervey  supposes  the 
narrative  to  be  a  repetition  of  Josh.  xi.  1-12  ((!  ene  i- 
logies,  p.  228,  sq.).  A  great  deal  may  be  said  for 
this  view  ;  the  names  Jabin  and  Hazor ;  the  men- 
tion of  subordinate  kings  (Judg.  v.  19;  cf.  Josh.  xi. 
2  sq.')  ;  the  general  locality  of  the  battle;  the  pro- 
minence of  chariots  in  both  narratives,  and  espe- 
cially the  name  Misrephoth-maim,  which  seems  to 
mean  "  burning  by  the  waters,"  as  in  the  marg.  of 
the  A.  V.,  and  not  "  the  flow  of  waters."  Many 
chronological  difficulties  are  also  thus  removed ;  but 
it  is  fair  to  add  that  in  Stanley's  opinion  (£. 
and  P.,  392,  note)  there  are  geographical  diffi- 
culties in  the  way.  (Ewald,  Gesch.  des  VSlkes 
Tsrael ;  Lord  A.  Hervey,  Genealogies,  225-246  sq.) 
[Deborah.]  [F.  W.  F.] 

BARBARIAN  (fidpfiapos).  Xlas  /at)  "EAAriv 
fidpfiapos  is  the  common  Greek  definition,  quoted 
by  Serv.  ad  Virg.  Aen.  ii.  504;  and  in  this  strict 
sense  the  word  is  used  in  Horn.  i.  14,  "  I  am  debtor 
both  to  Greeks  and  barbarians;"  where  Luther  used 


BARLEY 

the  term  •  Ungrieche,'  which  happily  expresses  its 
force.  "EAA^ej  koI  fidpfiapoi  is  the  constant  di- 
vision found  in  Greek  literature,  but  Thucydides 
(i.  3)  points  out-  that  this  distinction  is  subsequent 
to  Homer,  in  whom  the  word  does  not  occur, 
although  he  terms  the  Carians  fiapfiap6<pa>voi  (II. 
ii.  867,  where  Eustathius  connects  the  other  form 
Kdpfiavos  with  Kdp).  At  first,  according  to  Strabo 
(xiv.  662),  it  was  only  used  Kar'  bvofxaroTrouav 
iirl  twv  SvcreKtpSpais  /cot  KAnpias  Kal  rpax^us 
AaAovvrwv,  and  its  generic  use  was  subsequent.  It 
often  retains  this  primitive  meaning,  as  in  1  Cor. 
xiv.  11  (of  one  using  an  unknown  tongue),  and 
Acts  xxviii.  24  (of  the  Maltese,  who  spoke  a  Punic 
dialect).  So  too  Aesch.  Agam.  2013,  xeAiSovos 
5'lktjv  "Ayvoira  (paivTjv  fidpfiapov  KeKTr\^.iurj :  and 
even  of  one  who  spoke  a  patois,  are  Aiafiios  &v 
koX  iv  (pcovfj  fiapfidpcp  Tt&pafxixivos,  Plat.  Protag. 
341  c.  (it  is  not  so  strong  a  word  as  naAiyyAcocr- 
aos,  Donaldson,  Crat.  §88) ;  and  the  often  quoted 
line  of  Ov.  Prist,  v.  10,37. 

"  Barbarus  hie  ego  sum  quia  non  intdligor  vlli." 
The  ancient  Egy ptians  ( like  the  modern  Chinese) 
had  an  analogous  word  for  all  robs  fii]  crcpicriv 
oixoyAaxrcrovs,  Herod,  ii.  158;  and  fidpfiapos  is 
used  in  the  LXX.  to  express  a  similar  Jewish  dis- 
tinction.    Thus  in  Ps.  lxiii.  1,  Ados  fidpfiapos  is 

used  to  translate  JJD,  "  peregrino  sermone  utens." 
(Schleusn.  Phes.  s.  v.),  which  is  also  an  onomato- 
poeian  from  JJJ?,  to  stammer.  In  1  Cor.  v.  13, 
1  Tim.iii.7,wehave  oi  ff|«, and  Matt.  vi.  32,Tcte0vrj, 
used  Hebraistically  for  D?"l}  E^N  (in  very  much 
the  same  sort  of  sense  as  that  of  fidpfiapoi)  to  dis- 
tinguish all  other  nations  from  the  Jews ;  and  in 
the  Talmudists  we  find  Palestine  opposed  to  HI^IX 

just  as  Greece  was  to  Barbaria  or  7)  fidpfiapos : 
(cf.  Cic.  Fin.  ii.  15;  Lightfoot,  Cattm-ia  Chorogr. 
ad  init.)  And  yet  so  completely  was  the  term 
fidpfiapos  accepted,  that  even  Josephus  and  Philo 
scruple  as  little  to  reckon  the  Jews  among  them 
(Ant.  xi.  7,  §1,  &c),  as  the  early  Romans  did  to 
apply  the  term  to  themselves  ("  Demophilus  scrip- 
sit,  Marcus  vertit  barbare;"  Plaut.  Asin.  prol.  10). 
Very  naturally  the.  word  after  a  time  began  to  in- 
volve notions  of  cruelty  and  contempt  (Oypos  fiap- 
fidpov,  2  Mac.  iv.  25,  xv.  2,  &c),  and  then  the 
Romans  excepted  themselves  from  the  scope  of  its 
meaning  (Cic.  dc  Pep.  i.  37,  §68).  Afterwards 
only  the  savage  nations  were  called  barbarians  ; 
though  the  Greek  Constantinopolitans  called  the 
Romans  "  barbarians  "  to  the  very  last.  (Gibbon,  C. 
51,  vi.  351,  ed.  Smith ;  Winer,  s.  v.)     [F.  W.  F.) 

BARHUMITE,  THE.     [Bahurim.] 

BARIAHCnnn  ;  Beppi ;  Alex.  Bepia  ;  Baria), 

one  of  the  sons  of  Shemaiah,  a  descendant  of  the 
royal  family  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  iii.  22). 

BAR-JE'SUS.     [Elymas.] 

BAR-JO'NA.     [Peter.] 

BAR'KOS  (D1p"]3  ;  BapicSs,  BapKove;  Bercos). 

"  Children  of  Barkos  "  were  among  the  Nethinim 
who  returned  from  the  captivity  with  Zerubbabel 
(Ezr.  ii.  53  ;  Neh.  vii.  55). 

BARLEY  (rni?b ;  KpiB-fi ;  hordeum),  a  grain 
cultivated  for  food  both  in  Egypt  and  Palestine. 
It  is  first  mentioned  in  Ex.  ix.  31,  from  which 
passage  we  learn  that  it  was  earlier  than  wheat. 


BARNABAS 

It  was  sown  in  October  or  the  beginning  of  No- 
vember, ripened  in  March,  and  was  generally 
cut  in  April.  It  is  reckoned  among  the  valuable 
products  of  the  promised  land  in  Deut.  viii.  8. 
We  read  of  barley-meal  in  Num.  v.  15,  of  barley- 
bread  in  Jud.  vii.  13,  and  barley-cakes  in  Ez.  iv. 
12.  It  was  measured  by  the  ephah  and  homer. 
Barley  was  used  as  food  for  horses  (1  K.  iv.  28  ; 
comp.  Horn.  II.  v.  196),  and  there  are  several  passages 
which  indicate  that  it  was  less  valued  than  wheat. 
The  jealousy-offering  (Num.  v.  15)  was  to  be 
barley-meal,  though  the  common  mincha  was  of  fine 
wheat-flour  (Lev.  ii.  1),  the  meaner  grain  being 
appointed  to  denote  the  vile  condition  of  the  person  on 
whose  behalf  it  was  offered.  The  purchase-money 
of  the  adulteress  in  Hos.  iii.  2  is  generally  believed 
to  be  a  mean  price.  The  derivation  of  the  word 
from  "iytJ',  horruit,  is  obviously  from  the  bearded 
ears  of  the  barley — just  as  in  Latin  we  have  hordeum 
from  horreo.  Gesenius  notices  that  myt^  sing,  is 
used  for  the  growing  crop,  and  W1^]}^  plur.  for  the 
grain.  [W.  D.] 

BARNABAS  (HK-liriaj  Bapudfas),  a 
name  signifying  vibs  TrapaKKrjcrecos,  "  son  of  pro- 
phecy," or  "  exhortation  "  (or,  but  not  so  probably, 
"  consolation,"  as  A.  V.),  given  by  the  Apostles 
(Acts  iv.  36 )  to  Joseph  (or  Joses,  as  the  Rec.  Text), 
a  Levite  of  the  island  of  Cyprus,  who  was  early  a 
disciple  of  Christ  (according  to  Euseb.  //.  E.  i.  12, 
and  Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  ii.  p.  176  Sylb.,  one  of  the 
Seventy),  and  in  Acts  (I.  c.)  is  related  to  have 
brought  the  price  of  a  field  which  he  had  sold,  and 
to  have  laid  it  at  the  feet  of  the  Apostles.  In  Acts 
ix.  27,  we  rind  him  introducing  the  newly-converted 
Saul  to  the  Apostles  at  Jerusalem,  in  a  way  which 
seems  to  imply  previous  acquaintance  between  the 
two.  On  tidings  coming  to  the  church  at  Jerusalem 
that  men  of  Cyprus  mid  Cyrene  had  been,  after  the 
persecution  which  arose  about  Stephen,  preaching 
the  word  to  Gentiles  at  Antioch,  Barnabas  was 
sent  thither  (Acts  xi.  19-26),  and  being  a  good 
man,  and  full  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  he  rejoiced  at  see- 
ing  the  extension  of  the  grace  of  God,  and  went  to 
Tarsus  to  seek  Saul,  as  one  specially  raised  up  to 
preach  to  the  Gentiles  (Acts  xxvi.  17).  Having 
brought  Saul  to  Antioch,  he  was  sent,  together  with 
him,  to  Jerusalem,  upon  a  prophetic  intimation  of  a 
coming  famine,  with  relief  to  the  brethren  in  Judaea 
(Acts  xi.  30).  On  their  return  to  Antioch,  the  two, 
being  specially  pointed  out  by  the  Holy  Ghost  (Acts 
xiii.  2)  for  the  missionary  work,  were  ordained  by 
the  church,  and  sent  forth  (a.d.  45).  From  this 
time,  though  not  of  the  number  of  the  Twelve, 
Barnabas  and  Paul  enjoy  the  title  and  dignity  of 
Apostles.  Their  first  missionary  journey  is  related 
in  Acts  xiii.  xiv.  ;  it  was  confined  to  Cyprus  and 
Asia  Minor.  Some  time  after  their  return  to  An- 
tioch (a.d.  47  or  48),  they  were  sent  (a.d.  50), 
with  some  others,  to  Jerusalem,  to  determine  with 
the  Apostles  and  Elders  the  difficult  question  re- 
specting the  necessity  of  circumcision  for  the  Gentile 

i veils  (Acts  xt.  1  il'.).     <)u  that  occasion,  Paul 

and  Barnabas  were  recognized  as  the  Apostles  of  the 
uncircumcision.  After  another  stay  in  Antioch  on 
their  return,  a  variance  took  place  between  Bar- 
nabas and  Paul  on  the  question  of  taking  with 
them,  on  a  second  missionary  journey,  John  Mark, 
sister's  son  to  Barnabas  (Acts  xv.  36  ff.).  "The 
contention  was  so  sharp,  that  they  parted  asunder:" 
and  if  we  may  judge  from  the  hint  furnished  by  the 


BARTHOLOMEW 


it;7 


notice  that  Paul  was  commended  by  the  brethren  to 
the  grace  of  God,  it  would  seem  that  Barnabas  was 
in  the  wrong.  He  took  Mark,  and  sailed  to  Cyprus, 
his  native  island.  And  here  the  Scripture  notices 
of  him  cease:  those  found  in  Gal.  ii.  1,  9,  13, 
belong  to  an  earlier  period  ;  see  above.  From  1  Cor. 
ix.  6,  we  infer  that  Barnabas  was  a  manned  man  ; 
and  from  Gal.  /.  c,  and  the  circumstances  of  the 
dispute  with  Paul,  his  character  seems  not  to  have 
possessed  that  thoroughness  of  purpose  and  deter- 
mination which  was  found  in  the  great  Apostle. 
As  to  his  further  labours  and  death,  traditions  differ. 
Some  say  that  he  went  to  Milan,  and  became  first 
bishop  of  the  church  there  :  the  Clementine  Homilies 
make  him  to  have  been  a  disciple  of  our  Lord  Him- 
self, and  to  have  preached  in  Home  and  Alexandria, 
and  converted  Clement  of  Rome:  the  Clementine 
Recognitions — to  have  preached  in  Rome  even  dur- 
ing the  lifetime  of  Our  Lord.  There  is  extant  an 
apocryphal  work,  probably  of  the  fifth  century, 
Acta  ct  Passio  Barnabac  in  Cypro,  which  relates 
his  second  missionary  journey  to  Cyprus,  and  his 
death  by  martyrdom  there :  and  a  still  later  enco- 
mium of  Barnabas,  by  a  Cyprian  monk  Alexander, 
which  makes  him  to  have  been  brought  up  with 
St.  Paul  under  Gamaliel,  and  gives  an  account  of 
the  pretended  finding  of  his  body  in  the  time  of  the 
Emperor  Zeno  (474-490).  We  have  an  Epistle  in 
21  chapters  called  by  the  name  of  Barnabas.  Of 
this,  the  first  four  chapters  and  a  half  are  extant 
only  in  a  barbarous  Latin  version  ;  the  rest  in  the 
original  Greek.  Its  authenticity  has  been  de- 
fended by  some  great  names  ;  and  it  is  quoted  as 
the  work  of  Barnabas  by  Clem.  Alex,  (seven  times), 
by  Origen  (thrice),  and  its  authenticity,  but  not  its 
authority,  is  allowed  by  E-useb.  (//.  E.  iii.  25)gand 
Jerome  {Catal.  Scriptor.  Ecclesiust.  c.  6 :  see 
Pearson,  Vindiciae  Ignatianae,  pt.  i.  c.  4).  But 
it  is  very  generally  given  up  now,  and  the  Epistle 
is  believed  to  have  been  written  early  in  the  second 
century.  The  matter  will  be  found  concisely  treated 
by  Hefele,  in  the  prolegomena  to  his  edition  of  the 
Apostolic  Fathers,  1  vol.  8vo.,  Tubingen,  1847  ;  and 
more  at  length  in  his  volume,  Das  Sendschreiben 
des  Ap.  Barnabas,  fyc,  Tubingen,  1840;  and  in 
Heberle's  article  in  Herzog's  Cyclopaedia.   [H.  A.] 

BARO'DIS  (BapccSls  ;  Rahotis),  a  name  in- 
serted in  the  list  of  those  "  servants  of  Solomon  " 
who  returned  with  Zerubbabel  (1  Esd.  v.  34). 
There  is  no  corresponding  name  in  the  list  of  Ezra 
or  Xchemiah. 

BAR'SABAS.  [Joseph  Barsabas  ;  Judas 
Bahsabas.] 

BAR'TACUS  (BaprdKos ;  Bezax),  the  father 

of  A  panic,  fche  concubine  of  king  Darius  (1  Esd.  iv. 
29).  "The  admirable"  (6  6avjj.affr6s)  was  pro- 
bably an  official  title  belonging  to  his  rank.  The 
Syiiac  version  has  ptOIN,  a  name  which  recalls 
that  of  Artachaeas  ('Aprax^s),  who  is  named  by 
Herodotus  (vii.  22,  1  17)  as  being  in  a  high  position 
in  the  Persian  army  under  Xerxes,  and  a  special 
favourite  of  that  king  (Simonis,  Oiwm. ;  Smith's 
Diet,  of  Biog.  i.  369). 

BAETHOL'OMEW  (Bap0oAo/ia?oj,  i.  r. 
*D7fi  "12,  '  /'  of  Talm  ii:  comp.  the  1. XX.  ©oA/xai, 
QoXa/jiai,  Josh.  xv.  14,  2  K~.  xiii.  ">7,  and  0oAo- 
^iotos,  Joseph.  Ant.  xx.  1,  §1  ;    Bartholomaeus), 

in f  the  Twelve  Apostles  of  Christ  (.Matt.  x.  3; 

Mark  iii.  18  :   Luke  vi.  14  ;  Acts  i.  13).     His  ov:n 


168 


BARTIMAEUS 


name  nowhere  appeals  in  the  three  first  Gospels : 
and  it  has  been  not  improbably  conjectured  that  he 
is  identical  with  Nathanael  (.John  i.  45  ff.).  Natha- 
nael  there  appears  to  have  been  first  brought  to  Jesus 
by  Philip :  and  in  the  three  first  catalogues  of  the 
Apostles  (cited  above)  Bartholomew  and  Philip  ap- 
pear  together.  It  is  difficult  also  to  imagine,  from 
the  place  assigned  to  Nathanael  m  John  xxi.  2, 
that  he  can  have  been  other  than  an  Apostle.  If 
this  may  be  assumed,  he  was  born  at  Cana  of 
<  jalilee  :  and  is  said  to  have  preached  the  gospel  in 
India  (Euseb.  //.  E.  v.  10;  Jerome,  Vir.  Must.  36) : 
meaning  theieby,  probably,  Arabia  Felix  ("lv8ot 
ol  ko.Kovij.svoi  evdaii-ioues,  Sophron.),  which  was 
sometimes  called  India  by  the  ancients  (Mosheim, 
De  Rebus  Christ,  ante  Constant.  M.  Commentarii, 
b.  20b').  Some  allot  Armenia  to  him  as  his  mission- 
field,  and  report  him  to  have  been  there  flayed 
alive  and  then  crucified  with  his  head  downwards 
(Assemann.  Bibl.  Or.  iii.  2,  20).  [H.  A]. 

BAETIMAE'US  (BaPTip.a7os,  i.e.  »N»t?  12, 
son  of  Timai),  a  blind  beggar  of  Jericho  who 
(Markx.  46  ff.)  sat  by  the  wayside  begging  as  our 
Lord  passed  out  of  Jericho  on  His  last  journey  to 
Jerusalem.  Notwithstanding  that  many  charged 
him  to  hold  his  peace,  he  continued  crying, "  Jesus, 
thou  son  of  David,  have  mercy  on  me!"  Being 
called,  and  his  blindness  miraculously  cuied,  on  the 
ground  of  his  faith,  by  Jesus,  he  became  thence- 
forward a  disciple.  Nothing  more  is  known  of 
him.  [H.  A.] 

BA'RUCH  ("q-'na,  blessed  =  Benedict ;  Bapovx ', 

Joseph.  Bapovxos ;  BarucK).  1.  Son  of  Neriah, 
the  friend  (Jer.  xxxii.  12),  amanuensis  (Jer.  xxxvi. 
4  11'. ;  32)  and  faithful  attendant  of  Jeremiah  (Jer. 
xxxvi.  10  ff. ;  Joseph.  Ant.  x.  6,  §2  ;  B.C.  603), 
in  the  discharge  of  his  prophetic  office.  He  was  of  a 
noble  family  (Joseph.  Ant.  x.  9,  §1,  e£  iino-r}fjiov 
ffcpodpa  oiKlas;  comp.  Jer.  li.59;  Bar-,  i.  1,  Be  tribu 
Simeon,  Vet.  Lat.),  and  of  distinguished  acquire- 
ments (Joseph.  I.  c.  rrj  -Karpc&cp  yXdiTTri  &ia<pep6v- 
reos  ireirai8evp.euos)  ;  and  his  brother  Seraiah  held 
an  honourable  office  in  the  court  of  Zedekiah  (Jer. 
li.  59).  His  enemies  accused  him  of  influencing 
Jeremiah  in  favour  of  the  Chaldaeans  (Jer.  xliii.  3; 
cf.  xxxvii.  13) ;  and  he  was  thrown  into  prison 
with  that  prophet,  where  he  remained  till  the  cap- 
ture of  Jerusalem  B.C.  586  (Joseph.  Ant.  x.  9, 
§1).  By  the  permission  of  Nebuchadnezzar  he 
remained  with  Jeremiah  at  Masphatha  (Joseph. 
I.  c.) ;  but  was  afterwards  forced  to  go  down  to 
Egypt  with  "  the  remnant  of  Judah,  that  were  re- 
turned from  all  nations"  (Jer.  xliii.  6;  Joseph. 
Ant.  x.  9.  §6).  Nothing  is  known  ceitainly  of 
the  close  of  his  life.  According  to  one  tradition  he 
remained  in  Egypt  till  the  death  of  Jeremiah,  and 
then  retired  to  Babylon,  where  he  died  in  the  12th 
year  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  (Bertholdt, 
Einl.  1740  n.).  Jerome,  on  the  other  hand,  states, 
"on  the  authority  of  the  Jews"  (Hebraei  tradunt), 
that  Jeremiah  and  Baruch  died  in  Egypt  "  before 
the  desolation  of  the  country  by  Nabuchodonosor  " 
(Comin.  in  Is.  xxx.  6,  7,  p.  405).     [Jeremiah.] 

2.  Son  of  Zabbai  (Neh.  iii.  20,  x.  6).  3.  Son 
of  Col-hozeh  (Neh.  xi.  5).  [B.  F.  W.] 

BA'RUCH,  THE  BOOK  OF,  is  remarkable 
as  the  only  book  in  the  Apocrypha  which  is  formed 
on  the  model  of  the  Prophets;  and  though  it  is 
wanting  in  originality,  it  presents  a  vivid  reflection 


BARUCH 

of  the  ancient  prophetic  fire.  It  may  be  divided 
into  two  main  parts  i. — iii.  8,  and  iii.  9 — end.  The 
first  part  consists  of  an  Introduction  (i.  1 — 14), 
followed  by  a  confession  and  prayer  (i.  15 — iii.  8). 
The  second  part  opens  with  an  abrupt  a  Idress  to 
Israel  (iii.  9 — iv.  30),  pointing  out  the  sin  of  the 
people  in  neglecting  the  divine  teaching  of  Wisdom 
(iii.  9 — iv.  8),  and  introducing  a  noble  lament  of 
Jerusalem  over  her  children,  through  which  hope 
still  gleams  (iv.  9-30).  After  this  the  tone  of  the 
book  again  changes  suddenly,  and  the  writer  ad- 
dresses Jerusalem  in  words  of  triumphant  joy,  and 
paints  in  the  glowing  colours  of  Isaiah  the  return  of 
God's  chosen  people  and  their  abiding  glory  (iv. 
30— v.  9). 

1.  The  book  at  present  exists  in  Greek,  and  in 
several  translations  which  were  made  from  the 
Greek.  The  two  classes  into  which  the  Greek  MSS. 
may  be  divided  do  not  present  any  very  remarkable 
variations  (Fritzsche,  Einl.  §7);  but  the  Syro- 
Hexaplaric  text  of  the  Milan  JIS.,  of  which  a  com- 
plete edition  is  at  length  announced,  is  said  to 
contain  references  to  the  version  of  Theodotion 
(Eiehhom,  Einl.  in  die  Apoc.  Schrift.  388  n.), 
which  must  imply  a  distinct  recension  of  the 
Greek,  if  not  an  independent  rendering  of  an  original 
Hebrew  text.  Of  the  two  Old  Latin  versions  which 
remain,  that  which  is  incorporated  in  the  Vulgate 
is  generally  literal ;  the  other  (Cams,  Rom.  1688; 
Sabatier)  is  more  free.  The  vulgar  Syriac  and 
Arabic  follow  the  Greek  text  closely  (Fritzsche, 
I.  c). 

2.  The  assumed  author  of  the.  book  is  undoubt- 
edly the  companion  of  Jeremiah,  though  Jahn 
denied  this ;  but  the  details  are  inconsistent  with 
the  assumption.  If  the  reading  in  i.  1  be  correct 
(eret ;  De  Wette  conj.  fi-qvi,  Einl.  §-321  a;  comp. 
2  K.  xxv.  8),  it  is  impossible  to  fix  "  the  fifth 
year  "  in  such  a  way  as  to  suit  the  contents  of  the 
book,  which  exhibits  not  only  historical  inaccuracies 
but  also  evident  traces  of  a  later  date  than  the  be- 
ginning of  the  captivity  (iii.  9  ff.,  iv.  22  ff . ;  i.  3  ff. 
Comp.  2  K.  xxv.  27). 

3.  The  book  was  held  in  little  esteem  among  the 
Jews  (Hieron.  Praef.  in  Jerem.  p.  834  . . .  nee  ha- 
betur  apud  Hebraeos  ;  Epiph.  de  mens,  ov  Kelvrai 
iirLO'ToXal  (Bapovx)  '"'ap'  'E/8paiois);  though  it  is 
stated  in  the  Greek  text  of  the  Apostolical  Consti- 
tutions that  it  was  read,  together  with  the  Lamen- 
tations, "on  the  tenth  of  the  month  Gorpiaeus" 
(i.e.  the  day  of  Atonement ;  Const.  Ap.  v.  20,  1). 
But  this  reference  is  wanting  in  the  Syriac  version 
(Bunsen,  Anal.  Ante-Nic.  ii.  187),  and  the  asser- 
tion is  unsupported  by  any  other  authority.  There 
is  no  trace  of  the  use  of  the  book  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, or  in  the  Apostolic  Fathers,  or  in  Justin.  But 
from  the  time  of  Irenaeus  it  was  frequently  quoted 
both  in  the  East  and  in  the  West,  and  generally  as 
the  work  of  Jeremiah  (Iren.  adv.  Haer.  v.  35,  1 
significavit  Jeremias,  Bar.  iv.  36 — v ;  Tertull.  c. 
Gnost.  8  Hieremiae,  Bar.  {Epist.)  vi.  3  ff. ;  Clem. 
Paed.  i.  10,  §91,  8ia'lepe/j.lov,  Bar.  iv.  4  ;  id.  Paed. 
ii.  3,  §36,  Beta  ypa<p-fi,  Bar.  iii.  16-19;  OiUG.  ap. 
Euseb.  ff.  E.  vi.  25 ;  'lepe/xias  abv  dp-frois  K<xl  rrj 
eViCTToA^C?).  Cvpr.  Test.  Lib.  ii.  6,  apud  Hicre- 
miam,  Bar.  iii.  35,  &c).  It  was,  however,  "obe- 
lized" throughout  in  the  LXX.  as  deficient  in  the 
Hehrew  (Cod.  Chis.  ap.  Daniel,  &c,  Romae,  1772, 
p.  xxi.).  On  the  other  hand  it  is  contained  as  a  se- 
parate hook  in  the  Pseudo-Laodicene  Catalogue,  and 
in  the  Catalogues  of  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  Athanasius 
.uid  Nicephorus ;   but  it  is  not  specially  mentioned 


BAKUCH 

in  the  Conciliar  catalogues  of  Carthage  mid  Hippo, 
probably  as  being  included  under  the  title  Jeremiah. 
(Com p.  [Athan.]  Syn.  S.  Script,  ap.  Credner,  Zur 
Gesch.  des  Kan.  138.  Hilar.  I'rol.  in  Psalm.  15.) 
It  is  omitted  by  those  writers  who  reproduced  in  the 
main  the  Hebrew  Canon  {e.  g.  Melito,  Gregory  Na- 
zianzen,  Epiphanius).  Augustine  quotes  the  words 
of  Baruch  (iii.  16)  as  attributed  "more  commonly 
to  Jeremiah  "  {quidam  .  . .  scribae  ejus  attribuerunt 
. .  .sed  Jeremiae  celebratius  habetur,  de  Civ.  xviii. 
33),  and  elsewhere  uses  them  as  such  (c.  Faust. 
xii.  43).  At  the  Council  of  Trent  Baruch  was 
admitted  into  the  Romish  Canon;  but  the  Protest- 
ant churches  have  unanimously  placed  it  among 
the  Apocryphal  books,  though  Winston  maintained 
its  authenticity  (I.  c.  infra). 

4.  Considerable  discussion  has  been  raised  as  to 
the  original  language  of  the  book.  Those  who  advo- 
cated its  authenticity  generally  supposed  that  it  was 
first  written  in  Hebrew  (Huet,  Dereser,  &c. ;  but 
Jahn  is  undecided  :  Bertholdt,  Einl.  1755),  and  this 
opinion  found  many  supporters  (Bendtsen,  Griine- 
berg,  Movers,  Hitzig,  De  Wette,  Einl.  §323). 
Others  again  have  maintained  that  the  Greek  is  the 
original  text  (Eichhorn,  Einl.  388  tf. ;  Bertholdt, 
Einl.  1757;  Havernick,  ap.  De  Wette,  1.  c.)  The 
truth  appears  to  lie  between  these  two  extremes. 
The  two  divisions  of  the  book  are  distinguished  by 
marked  peculiarities  of  style  and  language.  The 
Hebraic  character  of  the  first  part  (i. — iii.  8)  is 
such  as  to  mark  it  as  a  translation  and  not  as  the 
work  of  a  Hebraizing  Greek:  e.g.  i.  14,  15,  22, 
ii.  4,  9,  25,  iii.  8 ;  and  several  obscurities  seem  to 
be  mistranslations:  e.g.  i.  2,  8,  ii.  18,  29.  The 
second  part,  on  the  other  hand,  which  is  written 
with  greater  freedom  and  vigour,  closely  approaches 
the  Alexandrine  type.  And  the  imitations  of  Jere- 
miah and  Daniel  which  occur  throughout  the  first 
part  (cf.  i.  15-18  =  Dan.  is.  7-10;  "ii.  1,  2  =  Dan. 
ix.  12,  13,  ii.  7-19  =  Dan.  ix.  13-18)  give  place 
to  the  tone  and  imagery  of  the  Psalms  and  Isaiah. 

5.  The  most  probable  explanation  of  this  con- 
trast is  gained  by  supposing  that  some  one  tho- 
roughly conversant  with  the  Alexandrine  transla- 
tion of  Jeremiah,  perhaps  the  translator  himself 
(Hitzig,  Fritzschc),  found  the  Hebrew  fragment 
which  forms  the  basis  of  the  book  already  attached 
to  the  writings  of  that  prophet,  and  wrought  it  up 
into  its  present  form.  The  peculiarities  of  language 
common  to  the  LXX.  translation  of  Jeremiah  and 
the  first  pai't  of  Baruch  seem  too  great  to  be  ac- 
coiuitud  for  in  any  other  way  (for  instance  the  use 
of  5€a'^wT7)y,a7ro<rToA.T),/3o'(u/37}cns  (/8o/Uj3e<V),a7rot- 
KifffiSs,  /J.dvva,  airocnpecptiv  {neut.),  epyd^eadal 
rivi,  uvofxa  t-n acaKeTaOai  4iri  tiui),  and  the  great 
discrepancy  which  exists  between  the  Hebrew  and 

•  Ireek  texts  as  to  the  arrangement  of  the  later  chapters 
of  Jeremiah,  increases  the  probability  of  such  an  ad- 
dition having  been  made  to  the  canonical  prophe- 
cies. These  verbal  coincidences  cease  to  exist  in  the 
second  part,  or  become  very  rare;  but  this  also  is 
distinguished  by  characteristic  words:  e.g.  6  aid- 
vios  6  0710s,  iirdyeiv.  At  the  same  time  the  ge- 
neral unity  (even  in  language,  e.g.  xaPIX("T^l'v) 
and  coherence  of  the  book  in  its  present  form  point 
to  the  work  of  one  man.  (Fritzsche,  Einl '.  §5  ; 
Hitzig,  Psalm,  ii.  11'.';  Ewald,  Gesch.  d.  I  '  < 
Tsr.  iv.  232  n.).  Bertholdl  appears  to  be  unite  in 
error  {Einl.  174:'.,  17i>-!)  in  assigning  iii.  1-8  to 
a  separate  writer  (De  Wette,  Einl.  §322). 

6.  There  are  no  certain  data  by  which  to  ti.\  the 
time  of  the  composition  of  Baruch.     Ewald  (/.  c. 


BASHAN 


169 


pp.  230  Ii'. )  assigns  it  to  the  close  of  the  Persian 
period ;  and  this  may  be  true  as  far  as  the  Hebrew 
portion  is  concerned;  but  the  present  book  must  be 
placed  considerably  later,  probably  about  the  time 
of  the  war  of  liberation  (c.  B.C.  160),  or  somewhat 
earlier. 

7.  The  Epistle  of  Jeremiah,  which,  according 
to  the  authority  of  some  Greek  MSS.,  stands  in  the 
English  version  as  the  6th  chapter  of  Baruch,  is 
the  work  of  a  later  period.  It  consists  of  a  rhe- 
torical declamation  against  idols  (comp.  Jerem.  x., 
xxix.)  in  the  form  of  a  letter  addressed  by  Jeremiah 
"  to  them  which  were  to  be  led  captive  to  Babylon." 
The  letter  is  divided  into  clauses  by  the  repetition 
of  a  common  burden :  they  are  no  gods ;  fear  them 
not  (vv.  16,  23,  29,  66);  how  can  a  man  think  or 
say  that  they  are  gods?  (vv.  40,  44,  56,  64).  The 
condition  of  the  text  is  closely  analogous  to  that 
of  Baruch ;  and  the  letter  found  the  same  partial 
reception  in  the  Church.  The  author  shows  an  inti- 
mate acquaintance  with  idolatrous  worship ;  and 
this  circumstance,  combined  with  the  purity  of  the 
Hellenistic  dialect,  points  to  Egypt  as  the  country 
in  which  the  Epistle  was  written.  There  is  no  po- 
sitive evidence  to  fix  its  date,  for  the  supposed  re- 
ference in  2  Mace.  ii.  2,  is  more  than  uncertain  ; 
but  it  may  be  assigned  with  probability  to  the  first 
century  B.C. 

8.  A  Syriac  first  Epistle  of  Baruch  "  to  the 
nine  and  a  half  tribes"  (comp.  4  Esdr.  xiii.  40,  Vers. 
Arab.)  is  found  in  the  London  and  Paris  Polyglotts. 
This  is  made  up  of  commonplaces  of  wai  ning,  encou- 
ragement, and  exhortation.  Fritzsche  {Einl.  §8) 
considers  it  to  be  the  production  of  a  Syrian  monk. 
It  is  not  found  in  any  other  language.  Whiston 
(.A  Collection  of  Authentiek  Records,  &c.  London, 
1 727,  i.  pp.  1  if.,  25  If.)  endeavoured  to  maintain 
the  canonicity  of  this  Epistle  as  well  as  that  of  the 
BookofBarnch.  [B.  F.  W.] 

BARZIL'LAI  (%T3,  iron ;  Btp(e\\i ;  Ber- 

zillai).  1.  A  wealthy  Gileadite  who  showed  hos- 
pitality to  David  when  he  fled  from  Absalom 
(2  Sam.  xvii.  27).  On  the  score  of  his  age,  and 
probably  from  a  feeling  of  independence,  he 
declined  the  king's  offer  of  ending  his  days  at 
court  (2  Sam.  xix.  32-39).  David  before  his  death 
recommended  his  sons  to  the  kindness  of  Solomon 
(1  K.  ii.  7). 

2.  A  Meholathite,  whose  son  Adriel  married 
Michal,  Saul's  daughter  (2  Sam.  xxi.  8). 

3.  Ezr.ii.  61 :  Neh.  vii.  6:}.  [K.  W.  B.] 

BAS'ALOTH  {Ba<ra\4fi  ;  Alex.  Baa\6d  ; 
Phasalon),  1  Esd.  v.  31.     [Bazlitii.] 

BAS'CAMA  (7)  Bao-zco/ua  ;  Jos.  Bcaricd;  Bas- 
camd),  a  place  in  Gilead  {els  tt)v  YaXaafilTiv) 
where  Jonathan  Maccabaeus  was  killed  by  Trypho, 

and  from  which  his  bones  wen-  afterwards  disin- 
terred and  conveyed  to  Modin  by  his  In-other  Simon 
(1  Mac.  xiii.  23;  Joseph.  Ant.  \iii.  6,  §6).  No 
trace  of  the  name  lias  _\  ,t  I n  discovered.      [G.] 

HA'SIIAN  (almost  invariably  with  the  definite 
article,  |^'2n  ;  Baadv ;  Basari),  a  district  on  the 

east  of  . Ionian.  It  is  not,  like  Argob  and  other 
districts  of  Palestine,  distinguished  by  one  constant 

designation,  but  is  sometimes  spoken  of'  as  the 
•■  laud  cf  Bashan"  ('3H  px.  1  Chr,  v.  11  ;  and 
comp.  Num.  xxi.  3."..  x.wii.  :;:;),  and  sometimes  as 
•■all  Bashan"  t'3n  bl ;  Deut.  iii.  LO,  13;  Josh. 


170 


BASHAN 


xii.  5,  xiii.  12,  30),  but  most  commonly  without  any 
addition.  It  was  taken  by  the  children  of  Israel  after 
their  conquest  of  the  land  of  Sihon  from  Arnon  to 
Jabbok.  They  "  turned  "  from  their  road  over  Jor- 
dan and  "  went  up  by  the  way  of  Bashan" — pro- 
bably by  very  much  the  same  route  as  that  now  fol- 
lowed by  the  pilgrims  of  the  Hajj  and  by  the  Romans 
before  them — to  Edrei  on  the  western  edge  of  the 
Lejah.  [Edrei.]  Here  they  encountered  Og  king 
of  Bashan,  who  "  came  out "  probably  from  the  na- 
tural fastnesses  of  Argob,  only  to  meet  the  entire  de- 
struction of  himself,  his  sons,  and  all  his  people  (Num. 
xxi.  33-35;  Deut.  iii.  1-3).  Argob,  with  its  GO 
strongly  fortified  cities,  evidently  formed  a  principal 
portion  of  Bashan  (Deut.  iii.  4,  5),  though  still  only 
a  portion  (13),  there  being  besides  a  large  number  of 
unwalled  towns  (5).  Its  chief  cities  were  Ashtaroth 
(i.  e.  Beeshterah,  comp.  Josh.  xxi.  27  with  1  Chr. 
vi.  71),  Edrei,  Golan,  Salcah,  and  possibly  Maha- 
naim  (Josh.  xiii.  30).  Two  of  these  cities,  viz. 
Golan  and  Beeshterah,  were  allotted  to  the  Levites 
of  the  family  of  Gershom,  the  former  as  a  "  city  of 
refuge"  (Josh.  xxi.  27;  1  Chr.  vi.  71). 

The  limits  of  Bashan  are  very  strictly  defined. 
It  extended  from  the  "  border  of  Gilead  "  on  the  south 
to  Mount  Hermou  on  the  north  (Deut.  iii.  3,  10,  14; 
Josh.  xii.  5;  1  Chr.  v.  23),  and  from  the  Arabah  or 
Jordan  valley  on  the  west  to  Salchah  (Sulkhad)  and 
the  border  of  the  Geshuritcs,  and  the  Maacathites  on 
the  east  (Josh.  xii.  3-5 ;  Deut.  iii.  10).  This  im- 
portant district  was  bestowed  on  the  half  tribe  of 
Manasseh  (Josh.  xiii.  29-31),  together  with  "half 
Gilead."  After  the  Manassites  had  assisted  their 
brethren  in  the  conquest  of  the  country  west  of  the 
Jordan,  they  went  to  their  tents  and  to  their  cattle 
in  the  possession  which  Moses  had  given  them  in 
Bashan  (xxii.  7,  8).  It  is  just  named  in  the  list  of 
Solomon's  commissariat  districts  (1  K.  iv.  13). 
And  here,  with  the  exception  of  one  more  passing 
glimpse,  closes  the  history  of  Bashan  as  far  as  the 
Bible  is  concerned.  It  vanishes  from  our  view  until 
we  meet  with  it  as  being  devastated  by  Hazael  in 
the  reign  of  Jehu  (2  K.  x.  33).  True  the  "  oaks" 
of  its  forests  and  the  wild  cattle  of  its  pastures — 
the  "  strong  bulls  of  Bashan" — long  retained  their 
proverbial  fame  (Ezek.  xxvii.  6  ;  Ps.  xxii.  12),  and 
the  beauty  of  its  high  downs  and  wide  sweeping 
plains  could  not  but  strike  now  and  then  the  heart 
of  a  poet  (Am.  iv.  1;  Ps.  lxviii.  15;  Jer.  1.  19; 
Mic.  vii.  14),  but  history  it  has  none;  its  very 
name  seems  to  have  given  place  as  quickly  as  pos- 
sible to  one  which  had  a  connexion  with  the  story 
of  the  founder  of  the  nation  (Gen.  xxxi.  47-8),  and 
therefore  more  claim  to  use.  Even  so  early  as  the 
time  of  the  conquest, "  Gilead"  seems  to  have  begun 
to  take  the  first  place  as  the  designation  of  the 
country  beyond  the  Jordan,  a  place  which  it  re- 
tained afterwards  to  the  exclusion  of  Bashan  (comp. 
Josh.  xxii.  9, 15,  32  ;  Judg.  xx.  1 ;  Ps.  lx.  7,  cviii.  8  ; 
1  Chr.  xxvii.  21 ;  2  K.  xv.  29).  Indeed  "  Bashan  " 
is  most  frequently  used  as  a  mere  accompaniment 
to  the  name  of  Og,  when  his  overthrow  is  alluded 
to  in  the  national  poetry. 

After  the  captivity,  Bashan  is  mentioned  as  di- 
vided into  four  provinces — Gaulanitis,  Auranitis, 
Trachomtis,  and  Batanaea.  Of  these  four,  all  but 
the  third  have.retained  almost  perfectly  their  ancient 
names,  the  modern  Lejah  alone  having  superseded 
the  Argob  and  Traehouitis  of  the  Old  and  New  Tes- 
taments. The  province  of  Jaulan  is  the  most  west- 
ern of  the  four;  it  abuts  on  the  sea  of  Galilee  and 
the  lake  of  Merom,  from  the  former  of  wkich  it 


BASHKMATH 

rises  to  a  plateau  nearly  3000  feet  above  the  surface 
of  the  water.  This  plateau,  though  now  almost 
wholly  uncultivated,  is  of  a  rich  soil,  and  its  N.W. 
portion  rises  into  a  range  of  hills  almost  every- 
where clothed  with  oak  forests  (Porter,  ii.  259). 
No  less  than  127  ruined  villages  are  scattered  over 
its  surface.     [Golan.] 

The  Hauran  is  to  the  S.E.  of  the  last  named  pro- 
vince and  S.  of  the  Lejah  ;  like  Jaulan,  its  surface 
is  perfectly  flat,  and  its  soil  esteemed  amongst  the 
most  fertile  in  Syria.  It  too  contains  au  immense 
number  of  ruined  towns,  and  also  many  inhabited 
villages.     [Hauran.] 

The  contrast  which  the  rocky  intricacies  of  the 
Lejah  present  to  the  rich  and  flat  plains  of  the  Hau- 
ran and  the  Jaulan  has  already  been  noticed. 
[Argob.] 

The  remaining  district,  though  no  doubt  much 
smaller  in  extent  than  the  ancient  Bashan,  still 
retains  its  name,  modified  by  a  change  frequent  in 
the  Oriental  languages.  Ard-el- Bathany eh  lies  on 
the  east  of  the  Lejah  and  the  north  of  the  range  of 
Jebel  Hauran  or  ed  Druze  (Porter,  ii.  57).  It  is 
a  mountainous  district  of  the  most  picturesque  cha- 
racter, abounding  with  forests  of  evergreen  oak, 
and  with  soil  extremely  rich ;  the  surface  studded 
with  towns  of  very  remote  antiquity,  deserted  it  is 
true,  but  yet  standing  almost  as  perfect  as  the  day 
they  were  built. 

Eor  the  boundaries  and  characteristics  of  these 
provinces,  and  the  most  complete  researches  yet 
published  into  this  interesting  portion  of  Palestine, 
see  Porter's  Damascus,  vol.  ii.  [G.] 

BA'SHAN-HA'VOTH-JA'IE,  a  name  given 
to  Argob  after  its  conquest  by  Jair  (Deut.  iii. 
14).    ' 

BASH'EMATH,  or  BAS'MATH  (IW3, 
fragrant;  Bacre/j.a.6 ;  Basemath).  1.  Daughter  of 
Ishmael,  the  last  married  of  the  three  wives  of 
Esau  (Gen.  xxxvi.  3,  4,  13),  from  whose  son, 
Keuel,  four  tribes  of  the  Edomites  were  descended. 
When  first  mentioned  she  is  called  Mahalath  (Gen. 
xxviii.  9);  whilst,  on  the  other  hand,  the  name 
Bashemath  is  in  the  narrative  (Gen.  xxvi.  34) 
given  to  another  of  Esau's  wives,  the  daughter  of 
Elon  the  Hittite.  It  is  remarkable  that  all  Esau's 
wives  receive  different  names  in  the  genealogical 
table  of  the  Edomites  (Gen.  xxxvi.)  from  those 
by  which  they  have  been  previously  mentioned 
in  the  history.  The  diversity  will  be  best  seen  by 
placing  the  names  side  by  side : — 

Genealogy  Narrative 

(Gen.  xxxvi.  2,  3).  (Gen.  xxvi.  34 ;  xxviii.  9). 

1.  Adah,  d.  of  Elon.  2.  Bashemath,  d.  of  Elon. 

2.  Aholibamah,  d.  of  Anah.  1.  Judith,  d.  of  Beeri. 

3.  Bashemath,  d.  of  Ishmael.  3.  Mahalath,  d.  of  Ishmael. 

Whatever  be  the  explanation  of  this  diversity  of 
names,  there  is  every  reason  for  supposing  that  they 
refer  to  the  same  persons  respectively ;  and  we  may 
well  conclude  with  Hengstenberg  that  the  change 
of  all  the  names  cannot  have  arisen  from  accident; 
and  further,  that  the  names  in  the  genealogical  table, 
which  is  essentially  au  Edomitish  document,  are 
those  which  these  women  respectively  bore  as  the 
wives  of  Esau  (Hengstenberg,  Auth.d.  Pent.  ii.  277, 
Eng.  fcransl.  ii.  226).  This  view  is  confirmed  by 
the  fact  that  the  Seirite  wife,  who  is  called  Judith 
in  the  narrative,  appears  in  the  genealogical  account 
under  the  name  of  Aholibamah,  a  name  which 
appears  to  have  belonged  to  a  district  of  Idumea 
(Gen.  xxxvi.  41).     The  only  ground  for  hesitation 


BASIN 

or  suspicion  of  error  in  the  text  is  the  occurrence  of 
this  name  Bashemath  both  in  the  narrative  and 
the  genealogy,  though  applied  to  different  persons. 
The  Samaritan  text  seeks  to  remove  this  difficulty  hy 
reading  Mahalath  instead  of  Bashemath  in  the  gene- 
alogy.  We  might  with  more  probability  suppose 
that  this  name  (Bashemath)  has  been  assigned  to  the 
wrong  person  in  one  or  other  of  the  passages  ;  but  if 
so  it  is  impossible  to  determine  which  is  erroneous. 
2.  A  daughter  of  Solomon  and  wife  of  one 
of  his  officers,  called  in  A.  V.  Basmatii  (1  K. 
iv.  15).  [F.  W.  G.] 

BASIN.  1.  p"ITO;  (ptaAri ;  phiala;  from  p"l* 
to  scatter  (Ges.  p.  434)  ;  often  in  A.  V.  bowl.  2. 
}"&*;  Kpar^ip  ;  crater.  3.  "11  S3  ;  crater;  in  A.  V. 
sometimes  cup,  from  "1S3,  cover,  a  cup  with  a  lid. 
4.  F]D,  wrongly  in  LXX.  (Ex.  xii.  22)  6vpa,  and 
in  Vulg.  limen  (Ges.  p.  965). 

1.  Between  the  various  vessels  bearing  in  the 
A.  V.  the  names  of  basin,  bowl,  charger,  cup  and 
dish,  it  is  scarcely  possible  now  to  ascertain  the 
precise  distinction,  as  very  few,  if  any  remains  are 
known  up  to  the  present  time  to  exist  of  Jewish 
earthen  or  metal  ware,  and  as  the  same  words  are 
variously  rendered  in  different  places.  We  can 
only  conjecture  as  to  their  form  and  material  from 
the  analogy  of  ancient  Egyptian  or  Assyrian  speci- 
mens of  works  of  the  same  kind,  and  from  modem 
Oriental  vessels  for  culinary  or  domestic  purposes. 
Among  the  smaller  vessels  for  the  Tabernacle  or 
Temple-service,  many  must  have  been  required  to 
receive  from  the  sacrificial  victims  the  blood  to  be 
sprinkled  for  purification.  Moses,  on  the  occasion 
of  the  great  ceremony  of  purification  in  the  wilder- 
ness, put  half  the  blood  in  "  the  basins"  nJSNl"!,  or 
bowls,  and  afterwards  sprinkled  it  on  the  people 
(Ex.  xxiv.  6,  8,  xxxix.  21  ;  Lev.  i.  5,  ii.  15,  iii.  2, 
8,  13,  iv.  5,  34,  viii.  23,  24,  xiv.  14,  25,  xvi.  15, 
19;  Heb.  ix.  19).  Among  the  vessels  cast  in 
metal,  whether  gold,  silver,  or  brass,  by  Hiram  for 
Solomon,  besides  the  laver  and  great  sea,  mention 
is  made  of  basins,  bowls,  and  cups.  Of  the  first 
OirHtP'  mal'S-  bowls)  he  is  said  to  have  made  100 
(2  Chr.  iv.  8  ;  1  K.  vii.  45,  40.  Cf.  Ex.  xxv. 
-'■>  and  1  Chr.  xxviii.  14,  17).  Josephus,  pro- 
bably with  great  exaggeration,  reckons  of  (piaAai 
and  <T7roi/5e?a,  20,000  in  gold  and  40,000  in  silver, 
besides  an  equal  number  in  each  metal  of  Kpariipts, 
for  the  offerings  of  flour  mixed  with  oil  (Ant. 
viii.  3  §§7,  8.  Comp.  Birch,  Hist,  of  Pottery, 
i.  152). 

2.  The  "basin"  from  which  our  Lord  washed 
the  disciples'  feet,  vi-KTi)p,  was  probably  deeper  and 
larger    than    the    hand-basin   for    sprinkling,  TD 

(Jer.  Iii.  18),  which,  in  A.  V.  "caldrons,"  Vulg. 
.  is  by  the  Syr.  rendered  basins  for  washing 
the  feet    (John  xiii.   5).       (Schleusner,   Drusius.) 
[Washing  it  Feet  and  Hands.]    [H.  W.  P.] 

BASKET.  The  Hebrew  terms  used  in  the 
description  of  this  article  are  as  follows:  (1)  7D 
so  called  from  the  twigs  of  which  it  was  originally 
made,  specially  used  as  the  Greek  kclvovv  (Horn. 
(hi.  iii.  442),  and  the  Latin  canistrum  (  Virg.  Aen, 
i.  701)  tor  holding  bread  (Gen.  xl.  16  if. ;  Ex. 
xxix.  3,  2:".;  Lev.  viii.  2,  26,  31;  Num.  vi.  15, 
17,  19).  The  form  of  the  Egyptian  bread-baskel 
is  delineated  in  Wilkinson's  Anc.  Egypt,  iii.  220, 


BASKET 


171 


after  the  specimens  represented  in  the  tomb  of 
Rameses  III.  These  were  made  of  gold  (comp.  Horn. 
Od.  x.  355),  and  we  must  assume  that  the  term 
sal  passed  from  its  strict  etymologic;d  meaning  to 
any  vessel  applied  to  the  purpose.  In  Judg.  vi.  19. 
meat  is  served  up  in  a  sal,  which  could  hardly 
have  been  of  wickerwork.    The  expression  *")h  vD 

(Gen.  xl.  16)  is  sometimes  referred  to  the  material 
of  which  the  baskets  were  made  (/cava  /SaiVa 
Symm.),  or  the  white  colour* of  the  peeled  sticks, 
or  lastly  to   their  being  "  full  of  holes "   (A.  V. 

margin),  i.  e.  open  work  baskets.     (2)  fl'l^D/D, 


Egyptian  Baskets.    (Frum  Wilk 


a  word  of  kindred  origin,  applied  to  the  basket  used 
in   gathering  grapes  (Jer.    vi.   9).      (3)  N3t3,    in 

which  the  first-fruits  of  the  harvest  were  presented 
(Deut.  xxvi.  2,  4).  From  its  being  coupled  with 
the  kneading-bowl  (A.  V.  "store";  Deut.  xxviii. 
5, 17),  we  may  infer  that  it  was  also  used  for  house- 
hold purposes,  perhaps  to  bring  the  corn  to  the 
mill.  The  equivalent  term  in  the  LXX.  for  this 
and  the  preceding  Hebrew  words  is  KapraAAos, 
which  specifically  means  a  basket  that  tapers  down- 
wards {i<6<pivos  o|us  to  kixtw,  Suid.),  similar  to 
the  Roman  corbis.  This  shape  of  basket  appears 
to  have  been  familiar  to  the  Egyptians  (Wilkinson, 
ii.  401).     (4)  3-1?3,  so  called  from  its  similarity 


Egyptian  Bankets.     (From  Wilk 


to  a  birdcage  or  trap  {KapraAAos  is  used  in  the 
latter  sense  in  Ecclus.  xi.  30),  probably  in  regard 
to  its  having  a  lid:  it  was  used  for  carrying  fruit 
(Am.  viii.  1,  2)  ;  the  I. XX.  gives  ayyos  ;  Symm. 
more  correctly  KaAaOos  ;  the  Vulg.  uncitlUS.  (5) 
TV5!,  used  like  the  Greek  KaAados  (LXX.)  for  car- 
rying fruit  (Jer.  xxiv.  1,  2),  as  well  as  on  a  larger 
scale  for  carrying  clay  to  the  brickyard  (Ps.  lxxxi. 
6;  K6(pivos,  LXX.;  pots,  A.V.),  Or  for  holding 
bulky    articles    (2    K.    x.    7;    KapraAAos,   LXX.): 

the  shape  of  this  basket  and  the  i le  of  carrying 

it  usual  among  the  brickmakers  in  Egypt  is  deli- 
neated in  Wilkinson,  ii.  99,  and  aptly  illustrates 
Rs.  lxxxi.  6. 


172 


BASMATH 


The  name  Sallai  (Neh.  xi.  8,  xii.  20)  seems  to 
indicate  that  the  manufacture  of  baskets  was  a 
recognised  trade  among  the  Hebrews. 

In  the  N.T.  baskets  are  described  under  the  three 
following  terms,  k6(J)lvos,  ffirvpis,  and  ffapydvij. 
The  last  occurs  only  in  2  Cor.  xi.  33,  in  describing 
St.  Paul's  escape  from  Damascus :  the  word  pro- 
perly refers  to  anything  twisted  like  a  rope  (Aesch. 
Suppl.  791)  or  any  article  woven  of  rope  (ir\4y/j.a 
ti  etc  <rxolVLOV>  Sjrid.) ;  fish-baskets  specially 
were  so  made  (dirb  ff-j/oiviov  irKeyfiariov  els 
vnodoxhv  i'x0"a"/>  Etym.  Mag.).  With  regard  to 
the  two  former  words,  it  may  be  remarked  that 
ic6<pivos  is  exclusively  used  in  the  description  of  the 
miracle  of  feeding  the  five  thousand  (Matt.  xiv. 
20,  xvi.  9;  Mark  vi.  43;  Luke  ix.  17;  John  vi. 
13),  and  ffirvpis  in  that  of  the  four  thousand 
|Matt.  xv.  37  ;  Mark  viii.  8),  the  distinction  is 
most  definitely  brought  out  in  Mark  viii.  19,  20. 
The  ffirvpis  is  also  mentioned  as  the  means  of 
St.  Paul's  escape  (Acts  ix.  25).  The  difference 
between  these  two  kinds  of  baskets  is  not  very 
apparent.  Their  construction  appears  to  have  been 
the  same ;  for  ic6<pivos  is  explained  by  Suidas  as 
ayyeiov  ttXsktov,  while  ffirvpis  is  generally  con- 
nected with  ffire?pa.  The  ffirvpis  (sporta,  Vulg.) 
seems  to  have  been  most  appropriately  used  of  the 
provision  basket,  the  Roman  sportida.  Hesychius 
explains  it  as  rb  rSiv  irvpSiv  ayyos ;  compare  also 
the  expression  Helicvov  airb  ffirvpiSos  (Athen.  viii. 
17).  The  ic6<pivos  seems  to  have  been  generally 
larger.  According  to  Etym.  Mag.  it  is  fiadv  ku! 
koIXov  x<>>pyiJ-a  •  as  used  by  the  Romans  (Colum. 
xi.  3,  p.  460)  it  contained  manure  enough  to  make 
a  portable  hotbed  [Diet,  of  Ant.  Cophinus]:  in 
Rome  itself  it  was  constantly  carried  about  by  the 
Jews  (quorum  cophinus  foeniimque  supellex,  Juv. 
iii.  14,  vi.  542).  Greswell  (Diss.  viii.  pt.  4)  surmises 
that  the  use  of  the  cophinus  was  to  sleep  in,  but 
there  is  little  to  support  this.  [W.  L.  B.] 

BAS'MATH  (nob'3  ;    r,  Baffe^ie ;    Base- 

matli),  a  daughter  of  Solomon,  married  to  Ahi- 
maaz,  one  of  his  commissariat  officers  (1  K.  iv. 
15).     [Bashematii.] 

BAS'SA  (Baffffai ;  Alex.  Bdffffa  ;  Vulg.  not 
recognizable),  1  Esd.  v.  16.     [Bezai.] 

BA'STAI  (BaffBdt;  Hasten),  1  Esd.  v.  31. 
[Besai.] 

BAT  ($)j>pj?;  'hatalleph),  an  animal  in- 
cluded by  the  Mosaic  law  among  unclean  things 
which  may  not  be  eaten  (Deut.  xiv.  18,  19,  and 
Lev.  xi.  19,  20).  It  is  accurately  described  in  the 
latter  passage  as  a  fowl  that  creeps,  going  upon 
all-fours,  for  the  bat  has  claws  on  its  pinions  by 
which  it  attaches  itself  to  the  surface  of  its  dwell- 
ing-place, and  creeps  along  it.  It  is  mentioned 
in  Is.  ii.  20.  Bats  are  very  common  in  the  East. 
Layard  (Nineveh  and  Babylon,  p.  307)  describes 
his  visit  to  a  cavern  on  the  banks  of  the  Khabour, 
swarming  with  bats.  "  Flying  towards  the  light," 
he  adds,  "  these  noisome  beasts  compelled  us  to  re- 
treat. They  clung  to  our  clothes,  and  our  hands 
could  scarcely  prevent  them  settling  on  our  faces. 
The  rustling  of  their  wings  was  like  the  noise  of  a 
great  wind,  and  an  abominable  stench  arose  from 
the  recesses  of  the  cave." 

The  derivation  of  f]?t2y  is  of  itself  conclusive  as 
to   its  meaning,  being  from   ?&]}  —  Vtai.  caligi- 


BATH-KABBIM 

nosafuit  nox,  and  F)JJ  solans  ;  just  as  we  have  the 

Gk.  vvKTepts  from  j/uf ,  and  the  Latin  Vespertilio 
from  vesper.  Geseniits  points  out  a  similar  deriva- 
tion in  Persian.     Comp.  Ov.  Met.  iv.  415  : — 

"  Lucemque  perosi 
Nocte  volant,  seroque  trahunt  a  vespere  nomen." 

In  the  three  passages  above  referred  to  the  LXX. 
have  vvKTepts.  [W.  D.] 

BATH,  BATHING.  This  was  a  prescribed 
pail  of  the  Jewish  ritual  of  purification  in  cases  of 
accidental,  leprous,  or  ordinary  uncleanness  (Lev. 
xv.  pass.,  xvi.  28,  xxii.  6  ;  Num.  xix.  7,  19 ;  2 
Sam.  xi.  2,  4  ;  2  K.  v.  10)  ;  as  also  after  mourning 
which  always  implied  defilement,  e.  g.  Ruth  iii.  3  ; 
2  Sam.  xii.  20.  The  high-priest  at  his  inaugura- 
tion (Lev.  xiii.  6)  and  on  the  day  of  atonement, 
once  before  each  solemn  act  of  propitiation  (xvi.  4, 
24 ),  was  also  to  bathe.  This  the  rabbis  have  multi- 
plied into  fen  times  on  that  day.  Maimon.  (Coiutit. 
de  Vasis  Sanct.  v.  3)  gives  rules  for  the  strict 
privacy  of  the  high-priest  in  bathing.  There  were 
bath-rooms  in  the  later  Temple  over  the  chambers 
Abtincs  and  Happarvah  for  the  priests'  use  (Light- 
foot,  Descr.  of  Temp.  24).  A  bathing-chamber  was 
probably  included  in  houses  even  of  no  great  rank  in 
cities  from  early  times  (2  Sam.  xi.  2) ;  much  more 
in  those  of  the  wealthy  in  later  times ;  often  in 
gardens  (Susan.  15).  With  this,  anointing  was 
customarily  joined  ;  the  climate  making  both  these 
essential  alike  to  health  and  pleasure,  to  which 
luxury  added  the  use  of  perfumes  (Susan.  17  ;  Jud. 
x.  3  ;  Esth.  ii.  12).  The  "  pools,"  such  as  that  ot 
Siloam,  and  Hezekiah's  (Neh.  iii.  15,  16;  2  K.  xx. 
20;  Is.  xxii.  11;  John  ix.  7),  often  sheltered  by 
porticoes  (John  v.  2),  are  the  first  indications  we 
have  of  public  bathing  accommodation.  Ever  since 
the  time  of  Jason  ( Prideaux,  ii.  168)  the  Greek  usages 
of  the  bath  probably  prevailed,  and  an  allusion  in 
Josephus  (\ovff6/xevos  ffrpancoTiKdiiTepov,  B.  J.  i. 
17,  §7)  seems  to  imply  the  use  of  the  bath  (hence, 
no  doubt,  a  public  one,  as  in  Rome,)  by  legionary 
soldiers.  We  read  also  of  a  castle  luxuriously  pro- 
vided with  a  volume  of  water  in  its  court,  and  of 
a  Herodian  palace  with  spacious  pools  adjoining,  in 
which  the  guests  continued  swimming,  &c.  in  very 
hot  weather  from  noon  till  dark  (Joseph.  Ant.  xii. 
4,  §11,  xv.  3,  §3).  The  hot  baths  of  Tiberias, 
or  more  strictly  of  Emmaus  (Euseb.  Onomast. 
Aida/j.,  query  Al/AdO?  Bonfrerius)  near  it,  and  of 
Callirrhoe,  near  the  Eastern  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea, 
were  much  resorted  to.  (Reland,  i.  46 ;  Joseph. 
Ant.  xviii.  2,  xvii.  6,  §5,  B.  J.  i.  33,  §5  ;  Amm. 
Marcell.  xiv.  8;  Stanley,  375,  295.)  The  parallel 
customs  of  ancient  Egypt,  Greece,  and  Rome,  are 
too  well  known  to  need  special  allusion.  (See  Diet. 
of  Gr.  and  Rom.  Ant.  art.  Baheae.)        [H.  H.] 

BATH.     [Measures.] 

BATH-BAB'BIM,  the  gate  of  (TI2  ~\K> 
D^BI),  one  of  the  gates  of  the  ancient  city  of 
Heshbon,  by  (?J?)  which  were  two  "  pools,"  a  where- 
to Solomon  likens  the  eyes  of  his  beloved  (Cant.  \  ii. 
4  [5]).  The  "  Gate  of  Bafhrabbim  "  at  Heshbon 
would,  according  to  the  Oriental  custom,  be  the 
gate  pointing  to  a  town  of  that  name.  The  only 
place  in  tin's  neighbourhood  at  all  resembling  Bath- 


!1  The  "  fishpools"  of  the  A.  V.  is  from  piscinae  of 
the  Vuli;.  Ti  e  Hebrew  word  Berecah  is  simply  a 
pool  or  tack. 


BATHSHEBA 

rabbim  in  sound  is  Rabbah  (Amman),  but  the  one 
tank  of  which  we  gain  auy  intelligence  as  remain- 
ing at  Hesbdn,  is  on  the  opposite  (S.)  side  of  the 
town  to  Amman  (Porter,  Handbook,  298).  Future 
investigations  may  settle  this  point.  The  LXX.  and 
Vulg.  translate  :  iv  -wvXous  Qvyarphs  iroWwv ;  in 
porta  filiae  multitudinis.  [G.] 

BATH'SHEBA  QnBrna,  2  Sam.  xi.  3,&c; 
also  called  Bathshua,  JMB^VIS,  in  1  Chr.  iii.  5; 
Br)p<ra/3ee;  Joseph.  Bee0<ra/37J ;  i.e.  daughter  of an 
oath,  or,  daughter  of  seven,  sc.  years),  the  daughter 

of  Eliam  (2  Sam.  xi.  3),  or  Ammiel  (1  Chr.  iii.  5), 
the  son  of  Ahithophel  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  34),  the  wife  of 
Uriah  the  Hittite.  It  is  probable  that  the  enmity  of 
Ahithophel  towards  I  (avid  was  increased,if  notcaused, 
by  the  dishonour  brought  by  him  upon  his  family  in 
the  person  of  Bathsheba.  The  child  which  was  the 
fruit  of  her  adulterous  intercourse  with  David  died: 
but  after  marriage  she  became  the  mother  of  four 
sous,  Solomon  (Matt.  i.  tf),  Shimea,  Shobab,  and 
Nathan.  When,  in  David's  old  age,  Adonijah,  an 
elder  son  by  Haggith,  attempted  to  set  aside  in  his 
own  favour  the  succession  promised  to  Solomon, 
Bathsheba  was  employed  by  Nathan  to  inform  the 
king  of  the  conspiracy  (1  K.  i.  11, 15,  23).  After 
the  accession  of  Solomon,  she,  as  queen-mother,  re- 
quested permission  of  her  son  for  Adonijah  to  take 
in  marriage  Abishag  the  Shunamite.  This  permis- 
sion was  refused,  and  became  the  occasion  of  the 
execution  of  Adonijah  (1  K.  i.  24,  25).  [David.] 
Bathsheba  was  said  by  Jewish  tradition  to  have  com- 
posed and  recited  Prov.  xxxi.  by  way  of  admonition 
or  reproof  to  her  son  Solomon,  on  his  marriage  with 
Pharaoh's  daughter.  CaJmet,  Diet.  s.  v. ;  Com.  a 
Lapid.  on  Prov.  xxxi.  [H.  W.  P.] 

BATH'-SHUA    (J?-1trn3  ;    Vat.    and    Alex. 

ri  Bvpffa/iee  ;  Pethsabee),  a  variation  of  the  name 
of  Bathsheba,  mother  of  Solomon,  occurring  only 
in  1  Chr.  iii.  5.  It  is  perhaps  worth  notice  that 
Shua  was  a  ( 'anaanite  name  (eomp.  1  Chr.  ii.  3,  and 
Gen.  xxxviii.  2,  12 — where  "Bath-shua"  is  really 
the  name  of  Judah's  wife),  while  Bathsheba 's 
original  husband  was  a  Hittite. 

BATH-ZACHARI'AS  (quasi  rP131  JT3 ; 
BaiBfrxapia  ;  Alex,  and  Joseph.  Bedfaxapia  ; 
Bethzacltira),  a  place,  named  only  1  Mac.  vi. 
.;■_',  33,  to  which  Judas  Maceabaeus  marched  from 
Jerusalem,  and  where  he  encamped  tin-  the  relief 
of  Bethsura  (Bethzur)  when  the  latter  was 
besieged  by  intiochus  Enpator.  The  two  places 
were  seventy  stadia  apart  (Joseph  .!/</.  \ii.  9,  §4), 
and  ih.'  approaches  to  Bathzacharia  were  intricate 
and  confined—  artvris  oi/a-ris  rrjs  irap68ov  (Jo  eph. 
/:.  ./.  i.  i.  §;.,  ami  coiiip.  the  passage  cited  above, 
from  which  it  is  evident  that  Josephus  knew  the 
spot  .  This  description  is  met  in  every  respect  by 
the  modern  Beit  Sak&rieh,  which  has  been  dis- 
covered by  Robinson  at  nine  miles  north  of  Beitsur, 
"  on  an  almost  isolated  promontory  or  tell,  jutting 

out  between  fcwo  deep  valleys,   and'  em ted  with 

the  high  ground  south  bj  a  low  neck  between  the 
heads  of  the  valleys,  the  neck  forming  the  onlj 
place  of  access  to  what  must  have  been  an  almost 
impregnable  position"  (Rob.  iii.  283,284).  The 
place  lies  in  the  entangled  country  west  of  the 
Hebron  road  between  four  and  five  miles  smith  of 
Bethlehem.     [Bktiiziti:.]  [<;.] 


BEALOTH  173 

BAV'AI  0;)2 ;  Bevd;  Bavai),  son-of Henadad, 

ruler  ("lb')  of  the  "  district"  (TJ^B)  of  Keilah  in  the 
time  of  Nehemiah  (Neh.  iii.  18). 

BAY-TREE.    TheHeb.  Ezrdch  (niW)  occurs 

only  once  in  the  Bible,  in  Ps.  xxxvii.  35,  where  the 
A.  V.  renders  it  bay-tree,  and  in  the  margin  "  a  tree 
that  groweth  in  his  own  soil."  In  this  passage  the 
LXX.  have  ws  ras  KeSpovs tov  Aifidvov.  Gesenins 
renders  it  arbor  indigena,  and  derives  it  from  the  root 
l"PT,  ortus  est  sol,  provenit,  progerminavit,  the  form 
mTN  being  equivalent  to  IT1T,  with  N  prosthetic. 
There  is  no  authority  for  assigning  the  name  to  any 
particular  tree,  though  many  commcntatois  suppose 
the  laurel  to  be  meant.  The  Kcfipoi  of  the  LXX. 
arose  from  confounding  niTN  with  ilTIX.   [~W.  D.l 

°       t:  v  r  :  - 

BAZ'LITH  (H^V?),  "Children  of  B."  were 
amongst  the  Nethinim  who  returned  with  Zerub- 
babel  (Neh.  vii.  54).  In  Ezr.  ii.  52,  the  name 
is  given  as  Bazluth  (D-17^3).  LXX.  in  both 
BacraXdd ;   Besluth.      [Basaloth.] 

BDELLIUM,  the  translation  of  the  Heb. 
bedolach  (11712),  which  occurs  only  twice  in 
the  Scriptures.  It  is  mentioned  in  Gen.  ii.  12 
as  one  of  the  productions  of  the  land  of  Ha- 
vilah,  and  in  Num.  xi.  7,  where  the  colour  ot 
the  manna  is  said  to  be  as  the  colour  of  bdellium, 
while  in  Exod.  xvi.  14  the  manna  is  likened 
to  the  hoar-frost  on  the  ground.  The  LXX.  ren- 
der it  by  6.v6pa£  in  Gen.  and  by  KpvcrTaWov  in 
Num.  They  therefore  took  it  to  be  a  precious  stone  ; 
in  which  they  are  followed  by  Reland,  who  sup- 
poses it  to  be  a  crystal,  and  by  Wahl  and  Hartmann, 
who  render  it  beryl,    and   would    read   n?~Q   for 

PI712.  Others  have  taken  it  to  be  Bdellium,  a 
vegetable  product  exuding  from  a  tree  growing  in 
Arabia,  India,  and  Babylonia,  whitish  in  colour, 
resinous,  pellucid,  and  approaching  to  the  colour  of 
frankincense.  Dioscorides  describes  it  (i.  70,  al. 
80),  and  after  him  Pliny  (xii.  9,  §19).  See  also 
Joseph.  Ant .  iii.  1,  §G  ;  Celsius,  Sterob.  i.  324.; 
and  Clericus,  ad  Gen.  ii.  12.  Gesenius  objects  to 
both  these  explanations.  It  cannot  be  a  precious 
stone,  he  argues,  because  in  Gen.  ii.  12  }2N  is  pre- 
fixed to  DPIS?,  not  to  rPhS.  It  is  not  a  gum,  becau 
that  would  not.  be  of  sufficient  \alue  to  rank  with 
the  gold  and  precious  stones  of  the  land  of  Ilavilah. 
He  adopts  therefore  the  theory  of  Bochart  (Hien  , 
ii.  674-83,  iii.  592,  Lips.)  that  11712  signifies 
pearls,  which  are  found  in  great  abundance  on  the 
slimes  of  the  Persian  Gulf.  In  this  case  11713  is  a 
quah'iliteial  from  7*72,  with  a  guttural   added,  and 

signifies  margarita  selecta  et  eximia.  It  is  most 
probable  that  bedolach  is  a  precious  stone.    [\V.  D.] 

BEALI'AH  (!V?y3,  remarkable  as  containing 

the  name-  of  both  Baal  and  Jab;  BaaXtd : 
Baalia),a  Benjamite,  who  went  over  to  David  at 
Ziklag  il  Chr.  xii.  5). 

BE'ALOTH  (nta,  the  plur.  fern,  form  of 
Baal;   BaA^curai/;  Alex.  Ba\did  ;    BahtK),  a  town 

iii  the  e\tiv south  of  Ju  lah  i  Josh.  w.  24  i. 


174 


BEAN 


BE'AN,  Children  of  (v'loi  Baidv;  Joseph,  v'loi 
rod  Baavov ;  filii  Dean),  a  tribe,  apparently  of 
predatory  Bedouin  habits,  retreating  into  "towers" 
(Trvpyovs)  when  not  plundering,  and  who  were  de- 
stroyed by  Judas  Maccabaeus(l  Mac.  v.  4).  Thename 
has  been  supposed  to  be  identical  with  Beon  ;  but 
in  the  absence  of  more  information  this  must  remain 
mere  conjecture,  especially  as  it  is  very  difficult  to 
tell  from  the  context  whether  the  residence  of  this 
people  was  on  the  east  or  west  of  Jordan.         [G.] 

BEANS  (>"IB;  P&l),  mentioned  in  2  Sam. 
xvii.  28  among  the  provisions  brought  for  David 
and  for  the  people  to  Mahanaim,  and  in  Ez.  iv. 
9  as  one  of  the  ingredients  of  the  bread  which 
the  prophet  should  eat  for  390  days.  The  LXX. 
in  both  places  have  kvo./j,6s.  >1S  is  from  the 
root  ??3,  which,  according  to  Gesenius,   signifies 

volvendo  aequare  et  eomplanare,  though,  accord- 
ing to  others,  findere,  secare.  In  the  former  case 
we  have  allusion  to  the  rounded  form  of  the  bean 
— in  the  latter  to  its  mode  of  germination.  The 
monuments  of  Egypt  show  that  the  bean  was  culti- 
vated in  that  country  at  an  early  date  ;  and  in  spite 
of  the  contrary  statement  of  Herodotus,  it  was 
probably  an  article  of  food  with  the  lower  classes. 
Beans  with  rice  and  dourra  bread  are  chief  articles 
of  food  to  this  day  among  the  Fellahs.  They  eat 
horse-beans  steeped  in  oil.  [W.  D.] 

BEAK  (3'n  and  yif't  &pKTos;  ursa),  an 
animal  frequently  mentioned  in  Scripture.  The 
ferocity  of  the  she-bear  when  deprived  of  her 
cubs  is  alluded  to  in  2  Sam.  xvii.  8 ;  Prov. 
xvii.  12  ;  and  Hos.  xiii.  8 — its  attacking  flocks  in 
1  Sam.  xvii.  34,  36,  37 — its  hostility  to  cattle  is 
implied  in  Is.  xi.  7 — its  roaring  in  Is.  lix.  11 — its 
habit  of  ranging  far  and  wide  for  food  in  Prov. 
xxviii.  15 — its  lying  in  wait  for  its  prey  in  Lam. 
iii.  10  ;  and  from  2  K.  ii.  24  we  may  infer  that  it 
would  attack  men,  and  from  Am.  v.  19  that  it 
was  as  much  to  be  dreaded  as  the  lion.  The  second 
beast  of  Daniel's  vision  "  was  like  to  a  bear,  and  it 
raised  up  itself  on  one  side,  and  it  had  three  ribs  in 
the  mouth  of  it  between  the  teeth  of  it :  and  they 
said  thus  unto  it,  Arise,  devour  much  flesh."  The 
3M  was  therefore  a  carnivorous  animal.  The  beast 
in  Rev.  xiii.  2  had  the  feet  of  a  bear.  It  is  also 
mentioned  in  Wisd.  xi.  17,  and  Ecclus.  xlvii.  3. 
The  LXX.  translate  it  by  &pieTos.  Gesenius  de- 
rives 3H  from  22^,  repsit,  rependo  incessit ;  but 
Bochart  (Hierqz.  i.  806)  says  it  was  so  called  be- 
cause  it   is   an   hairy   animal,    comparing  <_0^ 

parros  pilos  habuit  in  facie.  The  variety  of  the 
Asiatic  bear-  which  inhabits  the  Himalayas  is  espe- 
cially ferocious,  and  it  is  probable  that  the  same 
species  among  the  mountains  of  Armenia  is  the 
animal  of  Scripture.  ryv.  f_)i 

BEARD  (jj?J ;  irwywv;  barbel).  Western 
Asiatics  have  always  cherished  the  beard  as  the 
badge  of  the  dignity  of  manhood,  and  attached 
to  it  the  importance  of  a  feature.  The  Egyptians 
on  the  contrary,  sedulously,  for  the  most  part, 
shaved  the  hair  of  the  face  and  head,  and  compelled 
their  slaves  to  do  the  like.  Herodotus  (i.  36) 
mentions  it  as  a  peculiarity  of  the  Egyptians,  that 
they  let  the  beard  grow  in  mourning,  being  at  all 
other  times  shaved.     Hence  Joseph,  when  released 


BEARD 

from  prison,  "  shaved  his  beard"  to  appear  before 
Pharaoh  (Gen.  xli.  14).  It  was,  however,  the  prac- 
tice among  the  Egyptians   to  wear  a  false  beard, 


Beards.      Egyptian,  from  Wilkinson  ftop  row").      Of  Other  nations, 
from  RoseUini  and  Layard  l  bottom  row). 

made  of  plaited  hair,  and  of  a  different  form  accord- 
ing to  the  rank  of  the  persons,  private  individuals 
being  represented  with  a  small  beard,  scarcely  two 
inches  long,  kings  with  one  of  considerable  length, 
square  at  the  bottom,  and  gods  with  one  turning  up 
at  the  end  (Wilkinson,  An.  Egypt,  suppl.  plate  77, 
part  2).  The  enemies  of  the  Egyptians,  including 
probably  many  of  the  nations  of  Canaan,  Syria,  and 
Armenia,  &c,  are  represented  nearly  always  bearded. 
On  the  tomb  of  Beni  Hassan  is  represented  a  train 
of  foreigners  with  asses  and  cattle,  who  all  have 
short  beards,  as  have  also  groups  of  various  nations 
on  another  monument. 

Egyptians  of  low  caste  or  mean  condition  are  re- 
presented sometimes,  in  the  spirit  of  caricature, 
apparently  with  beards  of  slovenly  growth  (Wil- 
kinson, ii.  127).  In  the  Ninevite  monuments  is  a 
series  of  battle-views  from  the  capture  of  Lachish  by 
Sennacherib,  in  which  the  captives  have  beards  very 
like  some  of  those  in  the  Egyptian  monuments. 

There  is,  however,  an  appearance  of  convention- 
alism bjth  in  Egyptian  and  Assyrian  treatment  of 
the  hair  and  beard  on  monuments,  which  prevents 
our  accepting  it  as  characteristic.  Nor  is  it  pos- 
sible to  decide  with  certainty  the  meaning  of  the 
precept  (Lev.  xix.  27,  xxi.  5)  regarding  the 
"  corners  of  the  beard."  It  seems  to  imply  some- 
thing in  which  the  cut  of  a  Jewish  beard  had  a 
ceremonial  difference  from  that  of  other  western 
Asiatics;  and  on  comparing  Herod,  iii.  8  with  Jer. 
ix.  26,  xxv.  23,  xlix.  32,  it  is  likely  that  the  Jews 
retained  the  hair  on  the  sides  of  the  face  between 
the  ear  and  eye  (^Kp6ra<poi),  which  the  Arabs  and 
others  shaved  away.  Size  and  fulness  of  beard  are 
said  to  be  regarded,  at  the  present  day,  as  a  mark  of 
respectability  and  trustworthiness.  The  beard  is 
the  object  of  an  oath,  and  that  on  which  blessings 
or  shame  are  spoken  of  as  resting  (D'Arvieux, 
Moeurs  et  Coutumes  des  Arabcs).  The  custom 
was  and  is  to  shave  or  pluck  it  and  the  hair  out 
in  mourning  (Is.  1.  6,  xv.  2 ;  Jer.  xli.  5,  xlviii. 
37 ;  Ezr.  ix.  3 ;  Bar.  vi.  31) ;  to  neglect  it  in 
seasons  of  permanent  affliction  (2  Sam.  xix.  24),  and 
to  regard  any  insult  to  it  as  the  last  outrage  which 
enmity  can  inflict.  Thus  David  resented  the  treat- 
ment of  his  ambassadors  by  Hanun  (2  Sam.  x.  4) ; 
so  the  people  of  God  are  figuratively  spoken  of  as 
"beard"  or  "hair"  which  he  will  shave  with  "the 
razor,  the  king  of  Assyria  "  (Is.  vii.  20).  The  beard 
was  the  object  of  salutation,  and  under  this  show  of 
friendly  reverence  Joab  beguile  1  Amasa  (2  Sam.  xx. 
9).     The  dressing,  trimming,  anointing,  &c.  of  the 


BEBAI 

beard,  was  performed  with  much  ceremony  by  per- 
sons of  wealth  and  rank  (Ps.  cxxxiii.  2).  The  re- 
moval of  the  beard  was  a  part  of  the  ceremonial 
treatment  proper  to  a.  leper  (Lev.  xiv.  9).  There 
is  no  evidence  that  the  Jews  compelled  their  slaves 
to  wear  beards  otherwise  than  they  wore  their 
own;  although  the  Romans,  when  they  adopted 
the  fashion  of  shaving,  compelled  their  slaves  to 
cherish  their  hair  and  beard,  and  let  them  shave 
when  manumitted  (Liv.  xxxiv.  52,  xlv.  44).  [H.  H.] 

BE'BAI  033;  BajSa/',  B-nBl,  B^crf;  Bebai). 

1.  "  Sons  of  Bebai/'  623  (Neh.  G28)  in  number, 
returned  from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii. 
11;  Neh.  vii.  It!  ;  1  Esd.  v.  13),  and  at  a  later 
period  twenty-eight  more,  under  Zechariah  the  son 
of  Bebai,  returned  with  Ezra  (Ezr.  viii.  11).  Four 
of  this  family  had  taken  foreign  wives  (Ezr.  x.  28  ; 
1  Esd.  ix.  29).  The  name  occurs  also  among  those 
who  sealed  the  covenant  (Neh.  x.  15).  [Baisi.] 

2.  Father  of  Zechariah,  who  was  the  leader  of 
the  twenty-eight  men  of  his  tribe  mentioned  above 
(Ezr.  viii."  11).     Ba/3i.  " 

BE'BAI  (Ales.  B-nfial  ;  Vat,  omits ;  Vulg. 
omits),  a  place  named  only  in  Jud.  xv.  4.  It  is 
possibly  a  mere  repetition  of  the  name  Chobai 
occurring  next  to  it. 

BECHER  (132;  BoX6p;  Bechor:  first-born, 

but  according  to  Gesen.  a  young  camel,  which 
Simouis  also  hints  at,  Onom.  p.  399). 

1.  The  second  son  of  Benjamin,  according  to  the 
list  both  iu  Gen.  xlvi.  21,  and  1  Chr.  vii.  6;  but 
omitted  in  the  list  of  the  sons  of  Benjamin  in  1  Chr. 
viii.  1,  as  the  text  now  stands.  No  one,  however, 
can   look   at   the  Hebrew  text   of  1  Chr.  viii.   1, 

^3L,;n  W133  ita'nx  -i^in  jc^s,  without  at 

least  suspecting  that  11133,  his  first-born,  is  a 
corruption  of  "133,  Becher,  and  that  the  suffix  1  is  a 
corruption  of  1,  and  belongs  to  the  following  73CX 
so  that  the  genuine  sense  in  that  case  would  be, 
Benjamin  begat  Bela,  Becher,  and  Ashbel,  in  exact 
agreement  with  Gen.  xlvi.  21.  The  enumeration, 
the  second,  the  third,  &c,  must  then  have  been 
added  since  the  corruption  of  the  text.  There  is, 
however,  another  view  which  may  be  taken,  viz., 
that  1  Chr.  viii.  1  is  right,  and  that  in  Gen.  xlvi. 
21,  and  1  Chr.  vii.  8,  "133  as  a  proper  name,  is  a 
corruption  of  133,  first-bom,  and  so  that  Ben- 
jamin had  no  son  of  the  name  of  Becher.  In 
favour  of  this  view  it  may  be  said  that  the  position 
of  Becher,  immediately  following  Bela  the  first-born 
in  both  passages,  is  just  the  position  it  would  be  in 
if  it  meant  "  lirst-born  ;"  that  Becher  is  a  singular 
Dame  to  give  to  a  second  son;  and  that  the  dis- 
crepance between  Gen.  xlvi.  21,  where  Ashbel  is  tin' 
third  son,  and  1  Chr.  viii.  1,  where  ho  is  expressly 
called  the  second,  and  the  omission  of  Ashbel  in 
I  Chr.  vii.  0',  would  all  ho  accounted  for  on  the 
supposition  of  "133  having  been  accidentally  taken 
for  a  proper  name,  instead  of  in  the  sense  of  "  tirst- 
born."  It  may  be  added  further  that  in  1  Chr. 
vir-     S   the  same  confusion  has  arisen  in  the  ca  e 


BECHER 


175 


"  We  are  more  inclined  to  think  it  is  a  corruption  of 
D1.  or  DJO.  and  belongs  to  the  preceding  \~IN>  Ehi, 
as  Ahiram  is  certainly  the  right  name,  as  appears  by 
Num.  xxvi.  38. 


of  the  sons  of  Azel,  of  whom  the  second  is  in  the 
A.  V.  called  BocAeru,  in  Hebrew  -1133  but  which 
in  the  LXX.  is  rendered  ttpwtStokos  avrov,  and 
another  name,  'Acra,  added  to  make  up  the  six  sons 
of  Azel.  And  that  the  LXX.  are  right  in  their 
rendering  is  made  highly  probable  by  the  very 
same  form  being  repeated  in  ver.  39,  "  and  the 
sons  of  Eshek  his  brother  were  Ulam  his  first-born, 
11133^  Jehush  tlie  second,"  &c.     The  support  too 

which  Becher  as  a  proper  name  derives  from  the 
occurrence  of  the  same  name  in  Num.  xxvi.  35,  is 
somewhat  weakened  by  the  fact  that  Bered  (BapdS, 
LXX.)  is  substituted  for  Becher  in  1  Chr.  vii.  20, 
and  that  it  is  omitted  altogether  in  the  LXX.  ver- 
sion of  Num.  xxvi.  35.  Moreover,  which  is  perhaps 
the  strongest  argument  of  all,  in  the  enumeration 
of  the  Benjamite  families  in  Num.  xxvi.  38,  there 
is  no  mention  of  Becher  or  the  Bachrites,  but 
Ashbel  and  the  Ashbelites  immediately  follow  Bela 
aud  the  Belaites.  Notwithstanding,  however,  all 
this,  the  first  supposition  was,  it  can  scarcely  be 
doubted,  substantially  the  true  one.  Becher  was 
one  of  Benjamin's  three  sons,  Bela,  Becher,  Ashbel, 
and  came  down  to  Egypt  with  Jacob,  being  one  of 
the  fourteen  descendants  of  Rachel  who  settled  in 
EJgypt,  viz.  Joseph  and  his  two  sons  Manasseh  and 
Ephraim,  Benjamin  and  his  three  sons  above  named, 
Gera,  Naaman,  Ehi  CflK,  alias  DlTlN  Ahiram, 
Num.  xxvi.  38,  and  RiriK,  Aharah,  1  Chr.  viii.  1, 
and  perhaps  Pl'iriN  and  rVIIN,  ver.  4  and  7),  and 
Ard  (1"1X,  but  in  1  Chr.  viii.  3, 11N,  Addar),  the 
sons  of  Bela,  Muppim  (otherwise  Shuppim,  and 
Shephuphan,  1  Chr.  vii.  12,  15,  viii.  5;  but  Shu- 
pham,  Num.  xxvi.  39)  and  Huppim  (Huram,  1  Chr. 
viii.  5,  but  Hupham  Num.  xxvi.  39),  apparently 
the  sons  of  Ahiram  or  Ehi  (Aher,  1  Chr.  vii.  12), 
and  Rosh,  of  whom  we  can  give  no  account,  as  there 
is  no  name  the  least  like  it  in  the  parallel  passages, 
unless  perchance  it  be  for  Joash  (&]}')''),  a  son  of 
Becher,  1  Chr.  vii.  8.a  And  so,  it  is  worthy  of  ob- 
servation, the  LXX.  render  the  passage,  only  that 
they  make  Ard  the  son  of  Gera,  great-grandson 
therefore  to  Benjamin,  and  make  all  the  others  sons 
of  Bela.  As  regards  the  posterity  of  Becher,  we 
have  already  noticed  the  singular  fact  of  there 
being  no  family  named  after  him  at  the  numbering 
of  the  Israelites  in  the  plains  of  Moab,  as  related  in 
Num.  xxvi.  But  the  no  less  singular  circumstance 
of  there  being  a  Becher,  and  a  family  of  Bachrites, 
among  the  sons  of  Ephraim  (ver.  35) ,  seems  to  sup- 
ply the  true  explanation.  The  slaughter  of  the 
sons  of  Ephraim  by  the  men  of  Gath,  who  came  to 
steal  their  cattle  out  of  the  land  of  Goshen,  in  that 
border  affray  related  in  1  Chr.  vii.  21,  bad  sadly 
thinned  the  house  of  Ephraim  of  its  males.  The 
daughters  of  Ephraim  must  therefore  have  sought 
husbands  in  other  tribes,  and  in  many  cases  must 
have  I u  heiresses.    It  is  therefore  highly  probable 

that  Becher,b  or  his  heir  and  head  of  his  house, 
married  an  Ephrainiitish  heiress,  a  daughter  of 
Shuthelah  (1  Chr.  vii.  20,  21),  and  so  that  hi-. 
bouse  was  reckoned  iu  the  tribe  of  Ephraim,  just  as 
Jair,  the  son  of  Segub,  was  reckoned  in  the  tribe  of 
•Manasseh  (1  Chr.  ii.  22  ;  Num.  xxxii.  40,  41).    The 

b  This  view  suggests  the  possibility  of  Becher  being 
really  the  first-born  of  Benjamin,  hut  having  for- 
feited his  birthright  for  the  sake  of  the  Ephtaimitish 

inheritance. 


176 


BECHER 


time  when  Becher  first  appears  among  the  Ephraim- 
ites,  viz.,  just  before  the  entering  into  the  promised 
land,  when  the  people  were  numbered  by  genealogies 
for  the  express  purpose  of  dividing  the  inheritance 
equitably  among  the  tribes,  is  evidently  highly 
favourable  to  this  view.  (See  Num.  xxvi.  52-56, 
xxvii.)  The  junior  branches  of  Becher's  family 
would  of  course  continue  in  the  tribe  of  Benjamin. 
Their  names,  as  given  in  1  Chr.  vii.  8,  were 
Zemira,  Joash,  Eliezer,  Elioenai,  Omri,  Jerimoth, 
and  Abiah ;  other  branches  possessed  the  fields 
round  Anathoth  and  Alameth,  called  Alemeth 
vi.  60,  and  Almou  Josh.  xxi.  18.  Which  of  the 
above  were  Becher's  own  sons,  and  which  were 
grandsons,  or  more  remote  descendants,  is  perhaps 
impossible  to  determine.  But  the  most  important 
of  them,  as  being  ancestor  to  king  Saul,  and  his 
great  captain  Abner  (2  Sam.  iii.  38),  the  last  named 
Abiah,  was  it  seems  literally  Becher's  son.  The 
generations  appear  to  have  been  as  follows :  Becher 
— Abiah  (Aphiah,  1  Sam.  ix.  1) — Bechorathc — Zeror 
— Abiel  (Jehiel,  1  Chr.  ix.  35) — Ner — Kish — Saul. 
Abner  was  another  son  of  Ner,  brother  therefore  to 
Kish,  and  uncle  to  Saul.  Abiel  or  Jehiel  seems  to 
have  been  the  first  of  his  house  who  settled  at 
Gibeon  or  Gibeah  (1  Chr.  viii.  29,  ix.  35),  which d 
perhaps  he  acquired  by  his  marriage  with  Maachah, 
and  which  became  thenceforth  the  seat  of  his  family, 
and  was  called  afterwards  Gibeah  of  Saul  (1  Sam. 
xi.  4 ;  Is.  x.  29).  From  1  Chr.  viii.  6  it  would 
seem  that  before  this,  Gibeon,  or  Geba,  had  been 
possessed  by  the  sons  of  Ehud  (called  Abihud  ver. 
3)  and  other  sons  of  Bela.  But  the  text  appears  to 
be  very  corrupt. 

Another  remarkable  descendant  of  Becher  was 
Sheba  the  son  of  Bichri,  a  Benjamite,  who  headed 
the  formidable  rebellion  against  David  described  in 
2  Sam.  xx. ;  and  another,  probably,  Shimei  the  son 
of  Gera  of  Bahurim,  who  cursed  David  as  he  fled 
from  Absalom  (2  Sam.  xvi.  5),  since  he  is  said  to 
be  "  a  man  of  the  family  of  the  house  of  Saul." 
But  if  so,  Gera  must  be  a  different  person  from  the 
Gera  of  Gen.  xlvi.  21  and  1  Chr.  viii.  3.  Perhaps 
therefore   nriQK'O  is  used  in  the  wider  sense  of 

tribe,  as  Josh.  vii.  17,  and  so  the  passage  may  only 
mean  that  Shimei  was  a  Benjamite.  In  this  case 
he  would  be  a  descendant  of  Bela. 

From  what  has  been  said  above  it  will  be  seen 
how  important  it  is,  with  a  view  of  reconciling 
apparent  discrepancies,  to  bear  in  mind  the  different 
times  when  different  passages  were  written,  as  well 
as  the  principle  of  the  genealogical  divisions  of  the 
families.  Thus  in  the  case  before  us  we  have  the 
tribe  of  Benjamin  described  (1)  as  it  was  about  the 
time  when  Jacob  went  down  into  Egypt ;  (2)  as  it 
was  just  before  the  entrance  into  Canaan  ;  (3)  as  it 
was  in  the  days  of  David ;  and  (4)  as  it  was  eleven 
generations  after  Jonathan  and  David,  i.  e.  in  Heze- 
kiah's  reign.  It  is  obvious  how  in  these  later  times 
many  new  heads  of  houses,  called  sons  of  Benjamin, 
would  have  sprung  up,  while  older  ones,  by  failure 
of  lines,  or  translation  into  other  tribes,  would  have 
disappeared.  Even  the  non-appearance  of  Becher 
in  1  Chr.  viii.  1  may  be  accounted  for  on  this  prin- 
ciple, without  the  necessity  for  altering  the  text. 

2.  Sou  of  Ephraim,  Num.  xxvi.  35,  called  Bered 
1  Chr.  vii.  20.    Same  as  the  preceding.    [A.  C.  H.] 


BED 
BECHO'RATH(rn'm;  Vat.  BaXlp.]  Alex. 

Bex^pa.6;  Bechorath),  son  of  Aphiah,  or  Abiah, 
and  grandson  of  Becher,  according  to  1  Sam.  ix. 
1,  1  Chr.  vii.  8.     [Becher.]  [A.  C.  H.] 

BECTILETH,  the  plain  of  (tI  ireSi'of  Bcuk- 
ri\ate  ;  Alex.  Be/cTe\e'0  ;  Syr.  A^x-AJ3    >ta^> 

=  house  of  slaughter),  mentioned  in  Jud.  ii.  21, 
as  lying  between  Nineveh  and  Cilieia.  The  name 
has  been  compared  with  BaKraiaWa,  a  town  of 
Syria  named  by  Ptolemy  ;  Bactiali  in  the  Peutinger. 
Tables,  which  place  it  21  miles  from  Antioch.  The 
most  important  plain  in  this  direction  is  the  Bekaa, 
or  valley  lying  between  the  two  chains  of  Lebanon. 
And  it  is  possible  that  Bectileth  is  a  corruption  of 
that  well-known  name  :  if  indeed  it  be  a  historical 
word  at  all.  [G.] 

BED  and  BED-CHAMBER.  We  may  dis- 
tinguish in  the  Jewish  bed  five  principal  parts: — 
1.  the  substratum;  2.  the  covering;  3.  the  pil- 
low; 4.  the  bedstead  or  analogous  support  for  1.  ; 
5.  the  ornamental  portions. 


c  It  is  possible  that  Bechorath  may  be  the  same 
person  as  Becher,  and  that  the  order  has  been  acci- 
dentally inverted. 

'i  Comp.  1  Chr.  vii.  14,  viii.  5,  6,  29,  ix.  35. 


Minor.) 


1 .  This  substantive  portion  of  the  bed  was 
limited  to  a  mere  mat,  or  one  or  more  quilts.  2.  A 
quilt  liner  than  those  used  in  1 .  In  summer  a  thin 
blanket  or  the  outer  garment  worn  by  day  (1  Sam. 
xix.  13)  sufficed.  This  latter,  in  the  case  of  a  poor 
person,  often  formed  both  1.  and  2.  and  that  with- 
out a  bedstead.  Hence  the  law  provided  that  it 
should  not  be  kept  in  pledge  after  sunset,  that  the 
poor  man  might  not  lack  his  needful  covering 
(Deut.  xxiv.  13).  3.  The  only  material  mentioned, 
for  this  is  that  which  occurs  1  Sam.  xix.  13,  and 
the  word  used  is  of  doubtful  meaning,  but  seems  to 
signify  some  fabric  woven  or  plaited  of  goat's-hair. 
It  is  clear,  however,  that  it  was  something  hastily 
adopted  to  serve  as  a  pillow,  and  is  not  decisive  of 
the  ordinary  use.  In  Ez.  xiii.  18,  occurs  the  word 
np3  (jrpo<TKt<pa\<xiov,  LXX.),  which  seems  to  be 
the  proper  term.  Such  pillows  are  common  to  this 
day  in  the  East,  formed  of  sheep's  fleece  or  goat's- 
skin,  with  a  stuffing  of  cotton,  &c.  We  read  of  a 
"  pillow,"  also,  in  the  boat  in  which  our  Lord  lay 
asleep  (Mark  iv.  38)  as  he  crossed  the  lake.  The 
block  of  stone  such  as  Jacob  used,  covered  perhaps 
with  a  garment,  was  not  unusual  among  the  poorer 
folk,  shepherds,  &c. 

4.  The  bedstead  was  not  always  necessary,  the 
divan,  or  platform  along  the  side  or  end  of  an 
Oriental  room,  sufficing  as  a  support  for  the  bed- 
dino-.  (See  preceding  cut.)  Yet  some  slight  and 
portable  frame  seems  implied  among  the  senses  of 
the  word  HLSO,  which  is  used  for  a  "  bier  "  (2  Sam. 
iii.  31),  and  for  the  ordinary  bed  (2  K.  iv.  10),  for 


BED 

the  litter  on  which  a  sick  person  might  be  carried 
(1  Sam.  six.  15),  for  Jacob's  bed  of  sickness  (Gen. 
xlrii.  31),  and  for  the  couch  on  which  guests  re- 
clined at  a  banquet  (Esth.  i.  6).  Thus  it  seems  the 
comprehensive  and  generic  term.  The  proper  word 
for  a  bedstead  appears  to  be  EHJP,  used  Deut.  iii. 

11,  to  describe  that  on  which  lay  the  giant  Og, 
whose  vast  bulk  and  weight  required  one  of  iron. 


BEE 


177 


Bill  and  Head-rest.     (Wilkinson,  Annei.t  Egyptian':.) 

5.  The  ornamental  portions,  and  those  which 
1  usury  added,  were  pillars  and  a  canopy  (Jud. 
xiii.  9);  ivory  carvings,  gold  and  silver  (Joseph. 
Ant.  sii.  21,  14),  and  probably  mosaic  work,  purple 
<md  fine  linen,  are  also  mentioned  as  constituting 
parts  of  beds  (Esth.  i.  6  ;  Cant.  iii.  9,  10)  where 
the  word  p^lSX,  LXX.  cpopeiov,  seems  to  mean 

"a  litter"    (Prov.  vii.  16,  17;    Amos  si.  4).  So 
also  are  perfumes. 


Pillow,  or  Head-rest.      (Wilkinson,  Ancient  Egyptians.) 


There  is  but  little  distinction  of  the  bed  from 
sitting  furniture  among  the  Orientals ;  the  same 
article  being  used  for  nightly  rest,  and  during 
the  day.  This  applies  both  to  the  divan  and  bed- 
stead in  all  its   forms,   except  perhaps  the  litter. 

There  was  also  a  garden-watcher's  bed,  nwO,  ren- 
dered variously  in  the  A.  V.  "cottage"  and 
,"  which  seems  to  have  been  slung  like  a 
hammock,  perhaps  from  the  trees  (Is.  i.  8, 
rriv.  2D). 

Josephus  (Ant.  xii.  4,  11)  mentions  the  bed- 
chambers in  the  Arabian  palace  of  Hyrcanus. 

The  ordinary  furniture  of  a  bedchamber  in  pri- 
vate life  is  given  in  2  K".  iv.  10.  The  "bed- 
chamber" in  the  temple  where  Joash  was  hidden, 
was,  as  Calmet  suggests  (Diet,  of  Bib.  Art. 
"Beds"),  probably,  a  store-chamber  for  1 
beds,  not  a  mere  bedroom,  and  thus  better  adapted 
to  conceal  the  fugitives  (2  K.  si.  2  ;  2  Chr.  xxii. 
11,  lYltarpn  Tin  "chamber  of  beds,"  not  the 
usual  33l'Vp  "Tin  "chamber  of  reclining,"  Es. 
vii.  28  and  passim). 


The  position  of  the  bed-chamber  in  the  most  re- 
mote and  secret  parts  of  the  palace  seems  marked 
in  the  passages,  Ex.  viii.  3  ;  2  K.  vi.  12.     [H.  H.] 

BE'DAD  0*12;   Bap&S;  Badad),  the  father 

of  one  of  the  kings  of  Edom,  "  Hadad  ben-Bedad  " 
(Gen.  sxxvi.  35  ;    1  Chr.  i.  46). 

BE'DAN  (p3;  Badan),  mentioned  1  Sam.  xii. 

11,  as  a  Judge  of  Israel  between  Jerubbaal  (Gideon) 
and  Jephthah.  As  no  such  name  occurs  in  the  Book 
of  Judges,  various  conjectures  have  been  forme  1  as 
to  the  person  meant,  most  of  which  are  discussed  in 
Pole  (Synopsis,  in  foe).  Some  maintain  him  to  be 
the  Jair  mentioned  in  Judg.  x.  3,  who,  it  must 
then  be  supposed,  was  also  called  Bedan  to  distin- 
guish him  from  the  older  Jair,  son  of  Manasseh, 
(Num.  xxxii.  41),  a  Bedan  being  actually  named 
among  the  descendants  of  Manasseh  in  1  Chr.  vii.  17. 
The  Chaldee  Paraphrast  reads  Samson  for  Bedan  in 
1  Sam.  xii.  11,  and  many  suppose  Bedan  to  be  an- 
other name  for  Samson,  either  a  contraction  of  Ben- 
Dan  (the  son  of  Dan  or  Danite),  or  else  meaning  in 
or  into  Dan  (3)  with  a  reference  to  Judg.  siii.  25. 

Neither  explanation  of  the  word  is  very  probable, 
or  defended  by  any  analogy,  and  the  order  of  the 
names  does  not  agree  with  the  supposition  that 
Bedan  is  Samson,  so  that  there  is  no  real  argument 
for  it  except  the  authority  of  the  Paraphrast.  The 
LXX.,  Syr.,  and  Arab,  all  have  Barak,  a  very  pro- 
bable correction  except  for  the  order  of  the  names. 
Ewald  suggests  that  it  may  be  a  false  reading  for 
Abdon.  Alter  all,  as  it  is  clear  that  the  Book  of 
Judges  is  not  a  complete  record  of  the  period  of 
which  it  treats,  it  is  possible  that  Bedan  was  one  of 
the  Judges  whose  names  are  not  preserved  in  it, 
and  so  may  perhaps  be  compared  with  the  Jael  of 
Judg.  v.  6,  who  was  probably  also  a  Judge,  though 
we  know  nothing  about  the  subject  except  from  Debo- 
rah's song.  The  only  objection  to  this  view  is,  that  as 
Bedan  is  mentioned  with  Gideon,  Jephthah,  and 
Samuel,  he  would  seem  to  have  been  an  important 
Judge,  and  therefore  not  likely  to  be  omitted  in  the 
history.  The  same  objection  applies  in  some  degree 
to  the  views  which  identify'  him  with  Abdon  or  Jair, 
who  are  but  cursorily  mentioned.     [G.  E.  L.  C] 

BEDEI'AH  (HH3  ;    BaSdia  ;    Badaias),   one 

of  the  sons  of  Bani,  in  the  time  of  Ezra,  who  had 
taken  a  foreign  wife  (Ezr.  x.  35). 

BEE   (nilS't,    Deborah),   a   gregarious  insect 

of  the  Hymenoptcrous  order.  In  Deut.  i.  44, 
l's.  exviii.  12,  and  Is.  vii.  18  reference  is  made 
to  the  way  in  which  bees  attack  the  objects  of 
their  anger  in  swarms.  Both  the  Psalmist  ami 
the  Prophet  in  all  probability  adopted  the  simile 
from  Moses.  "The  Amontes,  which  dwelt  in 
the  mountains,  came  out  against  yon  and  chased 
you  as  bees  do,"  &c.  (Deut.  I.  c).  In  Judg. 
siv.  8  and  in  Ecclus.  xi.  3  the  production  of  honey 

by  bees  and  its  use  as  food    is   menti d.     Bees 

must  have  been  very  common  in  Palestine  to  justify 
the  title  given  to  it  of  a  land  flowing  with  milk 
and  honey.  It  is  noticeable  that  in  Prov.  vi.  8 
the  LXX.  have  introduced  after  the  description  of 
the  forethought  of  the  ant  a  similar  panegyric  on 
the  bee  as  an  example  of  industry  and  ingenuity  in 
her  work.  This  insertion,  if  it  be  an  insertion,  is 
of  very  ancient  date,  for  it  is  quoted  by  Clemens 
Alexandrinus,  by  Origen,  by  Basil,  &c.     The  LXX. 

N 


178 


BEELIADA 


always  render  fTTHI    by  jx^Xiffaa.     The  root  of 

the  word  isl^^,  exegit — examen  apum  quasi  exa- 

gimen  (Ges.)  [W.  D.] 

BEELI'ADA    (Vyb))2  =  known    by   Baal; 

'EAmSe'  ;  Alex.  BaAAiaSd ;  Baaliada),  one  of 
David's  sons,  born  in  Jerusalem  (1  Chr.  xiv.  7). 
In  the  lists  in  Samuel  the  name  is  Eliada,  El 
being  substituted  for  Baal. 

BEEL'SARUS  (BeeXffdpos ;  Beelsuro),  1  Esd. 

V.  8.       [BlLSUAX.] 

BEELTETH'MUS  (BeeArefyos ;  Alex.  Bee\- 
refxwd ;  Balthemus),  an  officer  of  Artaxerxes  re- 
siding in  Palestine  (1  Esd.  ii.  16,  25).     The  name 

is  a  corruption  of  DJjp  ?J?2  =  lord  of  judgment, 

A.  V.  "  chancellor ;"  the  title  of  Rehum,  the  name 
immediately  before  it  (Ezr.  iv.  8). 

BEEL'ZEBUL  (Bee\&&ov\ ;  Beelzebub),  the 
title  of  a  heathen  deity,  to  whom  the  Jews  ascribed 
the  sovereignty  of  the  evil  spirits  (Matt.  x.  25,  xii. 
24;  Marklii.  22  ;  Luke  xi.  15  IT.).  The  correct 
reading  is  without  doubt  Beelzebul,  and  not 
Beelzebub  as  given  in  the  Syriac,  the  Vulg.,  and 
some  other  versions  ;  the  authority  of  the  MSS.  is 
decisive  in  favour  of  the  former,  the  alteration  being 
easily  accounted  for  by  a  comparison  with  2  K.  i. 
2,  to  which  reference  is  made  in  the  passages 
quoted.  [Baal,  p.  146,  No.  2.]  Two  questions 
present  themselves  in  connexion  with  this  sub- 
ject: — (1)  How  are  we  to  account  for  the  change 
of  the  final  letter  of  the  name?  (2)  On  what 
grounds  did  the  Jews  assign  to  the  Beelzebub  of 
Ekron  the  peculiar  position  of  6  apx»>v  twv 
Scu/Aoviaiv?  The  sources  of  information  at  our 
command  for  the  answer  of  these  questions  are 
scanty:  the  names  are  not  found  elsewhere:  the 
LXX.  translates  Beelzebub  BdaA  (iviav,  as  also 
does  Josephus  {Ant.  ix.  2,  §1);  and  the  Talmudical 
writers  are  silent  on  the  subject. 

1.  The  explanations  offered  in  reference  to  the 
change  of  the  name  may  be  ranged  into  two  classes, 
according  as  they  are  based  on  the  sound,  or  the 
meaning  of  the  word.  The  former  proceeds  on  the 
assumption  that  the  name  Beelzebub  was  offensive 
to  the  Greek  ear,  and  that  the  final  letter  was 
altered  to  avoid  the  double  b,  just  as  Habakkuk 
became  in  the  LXX.  'A/j-fiaKov/A  (Hitzig,  Vorbemerk. 
in  Habakkuk),  the  choice  of  I,  as  a  substitute  for 
6,  being  decided  by  the  previous  occurrence  of  the 
letter  in  the  former  part  of  the  word  (Bengel, 
Gnomon  in  Matt.  x.  25,  comparing  MeA^oA  in  the 
LXX.  as  =  Michal).  It  is,  however,  by  no  means 
clear  why  other  names,  such  as  Magog,  or  Eldad, 
should  not  have  undergone  a  similar  change  :  we 
should  prefer  the  assumption,  in  connexion  with  this 
view,  that  the  change  was  purely  of  an  accidental 
nature,  for  which  no  satisfactory  reason  can  be 
assigned.  The  second  class  of  explanations  carries 
the  greatest  weight  of  authority  with  it :  these 
proceed  on  the  ground  that  the  Jews  intentionally 
changed  the  pronunciation  of  the  word,  so  as  either 
to  give  a  significance  to  it  adapted  to  their  own 
ideas,  or  to  cast  ridicule  upon  the  idolatry  of  the 
neighbouring  nations,  in  which  case  we  might  com- 
pare the  adoption  of  Sychar  for  Syehem,  Bethaven 
for  Bethel.  The  Jews  were  certainly  keenly  alive 
to  the  significance  of  names,  and  not  unfrequently 
indulged  in  an  exercise  of  wit,  consisting  of  a  play 


BEER 

upon  the  meaning  of  the  words,  as  in  the  case  of 
Nabal  (1  Sam.  xxv.  25),  Abraham  (Gen.  xvii.  5), 
and  Sarah  (Gen,  xvii.  15).  Liglitfoot  (JExercita- 
tions,  Matt.  xii.  24)  adduces  instances  from  the 
Talmudical  writers  of  opprobrious  puns  applied  to 
idols.  The  explanations,  which  are  thus  based  on 
etymological  grounds,  branch  off  into  two  classes  ; 
some  connect  the  term  with  7-13T,  habitation,  thus 

making  Beelzebul  =  of'/coSec-a- dTijs  (Matt.  x.  25), 
the  lord  of  the  dwelling,  whether  as  the  "  prince  of 
the  power  of  the  air"  (Eph.  ii.  2),  or  as  the 
prince  of  the  lower  world  (Paulus,  quoted  by 
Olshausen,  Comment,  in  Matt.  x.  25),  or  as  in- 
habiting human  bodies  (Schleusuer,  Lex.  s.  v.), 
or  as  occupying  a  mansion  in  the  seventh  heaven, 
like  Saturn  in  Oriental  mythology  (Movers, 
Phoenic.  i.  260,  quoted  by  Winer,  Realwort.  art. 
Beelzebub;  comp.  Michaelis,  Suppl.  ad  Lex.  p.  205, 

for  a  similar  view).  Others  derive  it  from  ?2T,  dung 
(a  word,  it  must  be  observed,  not  in  use  in  the 
Bible  itself,  but  frequently  occurring  in  Talmudical 
writers),  thus  making  Beelzebul,  literally,  the  lord 
of  dung,  or  the  dunghill ;  and  in  a  secondary  sense, 
as  zebel  was  used  by  the  Talmudical  writers  as 
=  idol  or  idolatry  (comp.  Liglitfoot  Exercit.  Matt, 
xii.  24;  Luke  xi.  15),  the  lord  of  idols,  prince  of 
fcdse  gods,  in  which  case  it  =  &px<^v  twv  Saifiovicov. 
It  is  generally  held  that  the  former  of  these  two 
senses  is  more  particularly  referred  to  in  the  N.  T. 
(Carpzov,   Appar.   p.  498,    comparing   the   term 

DV'1?3   as    though    connected   with   ??3,   dung; 

T    T 

Olshausen,  Comment,  in  Matt.  xii.  25)  :  the  latter, 
however,  is  adopted  by  Lightfoot  and  Schleusner. 
We  have  lastly  to  notice  the  ingenious  conjecture  of 
Hug  (as  quoted  by  Winer)  that  the  fly,  under  ■ 
which  Baalzebub  was  represented,  was  the  Scara- 
bacus  pilbdarius  or  dunghill  beetle,  in  which  case 
Baalzebub  and  Beelzebul  might  be  used  indifferently. 
2.  The  second  question  hinges  to  a  certain  extent 
on  the  first.  The  reference  in  Matt.  x.  25  may 
have  originated  in  a  fancied  resemblance  between 
the  application  of  Ahaziah  to  Baalzebub,  and  that 
of  the  Jews  to  our  Lord  for  the  ejection  of  the 
unclean  spirits.  As  no  human  remedy  availed  for 
the  cure  of  this  disease,  the  Jews  naturally  referred 
it  to  some  higher  power  and  selected  Beelzebub  as 
the  heathen  deity  to  whom  application  was  made  in 
case  of  severe  disease.  The  title  apx^v  toiv  Sai- 
fAoviaiy  may  have  special  reference  to  the  nature  of 
the  disease  in  question,  or  it  may  have  been  educed 
from  the  name  itself  by  a  fancied  or  real  etymology. 
It  is  worthy  of  special  observation  that  the  notices 
of  Beelzebul  are  exclusively  connected  with  the  sub- 
ject of  demoniacal  possession,  a»  circumstance  which 
may  account  for  the  subsequent  disappearance  of 
the  name.  [W.  L.  B.] 

BEER  ("1N3  -n-ell ;  rb  <ppeap;  puteus). 

1.  One  of  the  latest  halting-places  of  the  Israel- 
ites, lying  beyond  the  Anion,  and  so  called  because 
of  the  well  which  was  there  dug  by  the  "  princes  " 
and  "nobles"  of  the  people,  and  is  pe-petuated  in 
a  fragment  of  poetry  (Numb.  xxi.  16-18).a      This 


a  There  is  no  connexion  between  the  "  gathering" 
in  ver.  16  and  that  in  xx.  8.  From  the  A.  V.  it  might 
be  inferred  that  the  former  passage  referred  to  the 
event  described  in  the  latter  ;  but  the  two  words 
rendered  "gather"  are  radically  different, — 7ilp  in 
ch.  xx.,  CpN  in  xxi. 


BEERA 

is  possibly  the  Bicek-ki.im,  or  "  well  of  heroes," 
referred  to  in  Is.  xv.  8.   The  "wilderness"  ("13"10) 

which  is  named  as  their  next  starting  point  in  the 
last  clause  of  verse  18,  may  be  that  before  spoken  of 
in  13,  or  it  may  be  a  copyist's  mistake  for  "IX3J0. 

[t  was  so  understood  by  the  LXX.,  who  read  the 
clause,  Kal  airb  (ppearos — "  and  from  the  well," 
i.  e.  "  from  Beer." 

According  to  the  tradition  of  the  Targumists — 
a  tradition  in  part  adopted  by  St.  Paul  (1  Cor.  x. 
4) — this  was  one  of  the  appearances,  the  last  before 
the  entrance  on  the  Holy  Land,  of  the  water  which 
had  "  followed  "  the  people,  from  its  first  arrival 
at  Rophidim,  through  their  wanderings.  The  water 
— so  the  tradition  appears  to  have  run — was  granted 
for  the  sake  of  Miriam,  her  merit  being  that,  at 
the  peril  of  her  life,  she  had  watched  the  ark  in 
which  lay  the  infant  Moses.  It  followed  the  march 
over  mountains  and  into  valleys,  encircling  the 
entire  camp,  and  furnishing  water  to  every  man  at 
his  own  tent  door.  This  it  did  till  her  death 
(Num.  xx.  1),  at  which  time  it  disappeared  for  a 
season,  apparently  rendering  a  special  act  necessary 
on  each  future  occasion  for  its  evocation.  The 
striking  of  the  rock  at  Kadesh  (Num.  xx.  10)  was 
the  first  of  these ;  the  digging  of  the  well  at  Beer 
by  the  staves  of  the  princes,  the  second.  Miriam's 
well  at  last  found  a  home  in  a  gulf  or  recess  in  the 
sea  of  Galilee,  where  at  certain  seasons  its  water 
flowed,  and  was  resorted  to  for  healing  purposes 
(Targums  Onkelos,  and  Ps.  Jon.  Num.  xx.  1,  xxi. 
18,  and  also  the  quotations  from  the  Talmud  in 
Lightfoot  on  John  v.  4). 

2.  A  place  to  which  Jotham,  the  son  of  Gideon, 
fled  for  fair  of  his  brother  Abimelech  (Judg.  ix. 
21).  There  is  nothing  in  the  text  or  elsewhere  to 
indicate  its  position  (LXX.  Vat.  Bcurjp;  the  Alex, 
entirely  alters  the  passage — Kal  eVopevfli)  iv  65<S 
Kal  (<p'iyev  els  'Papa  ;   Yulg.  in  Jirru).  [G.] 

BEE'IIA  (N")H3  ;  Be^ ;  Berd),  son  of  Zo- 
phah,  of  the  tribe  of  Asher  (1  Chr.  vii.  37). 

BEE'RAH  (n*lK3  ;  Betf\  ;  Alex.  BeTjpa  ; 
Beera),  prince  (K1"^})  of  the  Reubenites,  carried 
away  by  Tiglath-Pileser  (1  Chr.  v.  6). 

BEER-E'LIM  (D^S  1«3,  well  of  heroes ; 

(pptap  rov  Alkel/i;  puteus  Eliiti),  a  spot  named  in 
Is.  jcv.  s  as  on  the  "  border  of  Moab,"  apparently 
the  south,  Eglaim  being  at  the  north  end  of  the 
Dead  Sea.  The  name  points  to  the  well  dug  by 
the  chiefs  of  Israel  on  their  approach  to  the  pro- 
mised land,  close  by  the  "  bordei  of  Moab"  (Num. 
xxi.  1H;  comp.  13),  and  "such  is  the  suggestion  of 
Gesenius  <■!•  lia,  533).  [Beer,  l.j  Beer-elim 
was -probably  chosen  by  the  Prophet  out  of  other 
places  on  the  boundary  on  account  of  the  similarity 

between  the  sound  of  the  name  and  that  of  rlD??"1 

— the  "howling"  which  was  to  reach  even  to  thai 
remote  point  (Ewald,  Proph.  233).  [G.] 

BEE'RI  P"1N3,  fontanus,  Gesen. ;   Ufa 

Fiirst;  Berjp,  Gen.,  BeTjpe'i,  Hos. ;  Been).  1. 
The  father  of  Judith,  one  of  the  wives  of  Esau 
(Gen.  xxvi.  34).  There  need  be  no  question 
that  Judith,  daughter  of  Beeri,  is  the  same 
person  as  is  called  in  the  genealogical  table  (Gen. 
xxxvi.  2)  Aholibamah,  daughter  of  Anah,  and  con- 


BEER-EAHA1-KOI 


17'.' 


sequently  Beeri   and  Anah   must   be   regarded   as 

names  of  the  same  person.  There  is  the  further  diffi- 
culty  that  Beeri  is  spoken  of  as  a  Hittite,  whilst  Anah 
is  called  a  Horite  and  also  a  Hivite,  and  we  have  thus 
three  designations  of  race  given  to  the  same  indi- 
vidual. It  is  stated  under  Anah  that  Hivite  is  most 
probably  to  be  regarded  as  an  error  of  transcription 
for  Horite.  With  regard  to  the  two  remaining  names 
the  ditficulty  does  not  seem  to  be  formidable.  It  is 
agreed  on  all  hands  that  the  name  Horite  C~in) 

signifies  one  who  dwells  in  a  hole  or  cave,  a 
Troglodyte ;  and  it  seems  in  the  highest  degree 
probable  that  the  inhabitants  of  Mount  Seir  were  so 
designated  because  they  inhabited  the  numerous 
caverns  of  that  mountainous  region.  The  name 
therefore  does  not  designate  them  according  to  their 
race,  but  merely  according  to  their  mode  of  life,  to 
whatever  race  they  might  belong.  Of  their  race 
we  know  nothing  except  indeed  what  the  conjunc- 
tion of  these  two  names  in  reference  to  the  same 
individual  may  teach  us:  and  from  this  case  we 
may  fairly  conclude  that  these  Troglodytes  or  Hor- 
ites  belonged  in  part  at  least  to  the  widely  extended 
Canaanitish  tribe  of  the  Hittites.  On  this  sup- 
position the  difficulty  vanishes,  ami.  each  of  the 
accounts  gives  us  just  the  information  we  might 
expect.  In  the  narrative,  where  the  stress  is  laid 
on  Esau's  wife  being  of  the  race  of  Canaan,  her 
father  is  called  a  Hittite  ;  whilst  in  the  genealogy, 
where  the  stress  is  on  Esau's  connexion  by  mar- 
riage with  the  previous  occupants  of  Mount  Seir, 
he  is  most  naturally  and  properly  described  under 
the  more  precise  term  Horite.  2.  Father  of  the 
prophet  Hosea  (Hos.  i.  1).  [F.  W.  G.] 

BEER-LAHA'I-ROI  (*tfl  mb  1N3,  well  oj 

the  living  and  seeing  \Qod~\  ;  (ppeap  ov  evunriov 
elSov ;  to  <ppeap  rr\s  opdereas  ;  puteus  viventis  el 
videntis  mc),  a  well,  or  rather  a  living  spring," 
(A.  Y .  fountain,  comp.  ver.  7)  between  Kadesh  and 
Bered,  in  the  wilderness,  "  in  the  way  to  Shur," 
and  therefore  in  the  "  south  country  "  (Gen.  xxiv. 
62),  which, according  to  the  explanation  of  the  text, 
was  so  named  by  Hagar,  because  God  saw  hei 
('•JO)  there  (Gen.  xvi.  14).     From  the  fact  of  this 

etymology  not  being  in  agreement  with  the  forma- 
tion of  the  name,  it  has  been  suggested  (Ges.  Tins. 
175)  that,  the  origin  of  the  name  is  Lechj  (comp. 
Judg.  xv.  9,  19).  It  would  seem,  however,  that 
the  Lechi  of  Samson's  adventure  was  much  too  far 
north  to  be  the  site  of  the  well  Lachai-roi. 

By  this  well  Isaac  dwelt  both  before  and  after 
the  death  of  his  father  (Gen.  xxiv.  62,  xxv.  11). 
In  both  these  passages  the  name  is  given  in  the 
A.  Y.  as  "  the  well  l.ahai-ioi." 

Mr.  Lowland  announces  the  discovery  of  the  well 
Lahai-roi  at  Moyle  or  Moilahi,  a  station  on  the 
road  to  Beersheba,  10  hours  south  of  /.'»' 
near  which  is  a  hole  or  cavern  bearing  the  name 
of  Beit  Hagar  (Litter,  Smai,  1086,  7);  but  this 
requires  confirmation. 

This   well  is  not  to  be  confounded  with  thai 

by     which    the   life   of  Ishmael    was    preserved   on 
on  (<  ien,    wi.    19  I   and    which, 

ing  to  the  Moslem  belief,  is  the  well  Zem-zem 
at  Mecca.  [G.] 


*  One  of  the  very  few  cases  in  which  the  two 
words  j^y,  Ain,  a  living  spring,  and  "1X3,  Beer,  an 
artificial  well,  arc  applied  to  the  same  thing. 

N   2 


180 


BEEROTH 


BEE'ROTH  (TYT\$2,  wells;  Byptir,  BeypuOd, 

ByptiB  •  Beroth),  one  of  the  four  cities  of  the 
Hivites  who  deluded  Joshua  into  a  treaty  of  peace 
with  them,  the  other  three  being  Gibeon,  Chephirah, 
and  Kirjath-Jearim  (Josh.  ix.  17).  Beeroth  was 
with  the  rest  of  these  towns  allotted  to  Benjamin 
(xviii.  25),  in  whose  possession  it  continued  at  the 
time  of  David,  the  murderers  of  Ish-bosheth  being 
named  as  belonging  to  it  (2  Sam.  iv.  2).  From 
the  uotice  in  this  place  (verse  2,  3)  it  would  appear 
that  the  original  inhabitants  had  been  forced  from 
the  town,  and  had  taken  refuge  at  Gittaim  (Neh. 
xi.  34),  possibly  a  Philistine  city. 

Beeroth  is  once  more  named  with  Chephirah  and 
K.  Jearim  in  the  list  of  those  who  returned  from 
Babylon  (Ezr.  ii.  25  ;  Neh.  vii.  29  ;  1  Esdr.  v.  19). 
[Beroth.] 

Beeroth  was  known  in  the  times  of  Eusebius, 
and  his  description  of  its  position  (O)iom.  Beeroth 
with  the  corrections  of  Keland,  618,  9  ;  Rob.  i.  452, 
note)  agrees  perfectly  with  that  of  the  modern 
el-Bireh,  which  stands  at  about  10  miles  north 
of  Jerusalem  by  the  great  road  to  Ndblus,  just  be- 
low a  ridge  which  bounds  the  prospect  northwards 
from  the  Holy  city  (Rob.  i.  451,  2;  ii.  262). 
No  mention  of  Beeroth  beyond  those  quoted 
above  is  found  in  the  Bible,  but  one  link 
connecting  it  with  the  N.  T.  has  been  suggested, 
and  indeed  embodied  in  the  traditions  of  Palestine, 
which  we  may  well  wish  to  regard  as  true,  viz. 
that  it  was  the  place  at  which  the  parents  of  "  the 
child  Jesus"  discovered  that  he  was  not  among 
their  "  company"  (Luke  ii.  43-45).  At  any  rate 
the  spring  of  el-Birch  is  even  to  this  day  the  custom- 
ary resting-place  for  caravans  going  northward, 
at  the  end  of  the  first  day's  journey  from  Jeru- 
salem (Stanley,  215;  Lord  Nugent,  ii.  112; 
Schubert  in  Winer,  s.  v.). 

Besides  Baanah  and  Rechab,  the  murderers  of 
Ishbosheth,  with  their  father  Rimmon,  we  find 
Nahari  "  the  Beerothite  "  (TpX3n;  6  B7jda>pa?os  ; 
2  Sam.  xxiii.  37),  or  "  the  Berothite"  (Tlllin  ; 

6  BypooQi;  1  Chr.  xi.  39),  one  of  the  "  mighty 
men"  of  David's  guard.  [G.J 

BEE'ROTH  of  the  Children  of  Jaakan 
(fpl^-'Oa  nhX3  ;     Bripiie   vloov  'laKi/j.  ;    Alex. 

'laxs'in;  Beroth  filiorum  Jacan),  the  wells  of  the 
tribe  of  Bene-Jaakan,  which  formed  one  of  the 
halting-places  of  the  Israelites  in  the  desert  (Deut. 
x.  6).  In  the  lists  in  Num.  xxxiii.,  the  name  is 
given  as  Bene  Jaakan  only.  [G.] 

BEER'-SHEBA  QDK>  1N3,  J?3^  '3,  well  of 

sweariri'j,  or  of  seven;  •Ppzap  opKifffiov,  and  Qpeap 
tov  bpKov,  in  Genesis  ;  B7?ptra/3e'e  in  Joshua  and 
later  books ;  Jos.  BnpcrovfSdi'  '6pKiov  8<=  (pptap  Ae- 
yoiro  &i> ;  Bersabee),  the  name  of  one  of  the  oldest 
places  in  Palestine,  and  which  formed,  according  to 
the  well-known  expression,  the  southern  limit  of 
the  country. 

There  are  two  accounts  of  the  origin  of  the  name. 
1.  According  to  the  first,  the  well  was  dug  by 
Abraham,  and  the  name  given,  because  there  he 
and  Abimelechthe  king  of  the  Philistines  "sware" 
(iy3C'J)  both  of  them  (Gen.  xxi.  31).  But  the 
compact  was  ratified  by  the  setting  apart,  of  "  seven 
ewe  lambs;"  and  as  the  Hebrew  word  for  "seven" 
is  y^K',  Sheba,  it  is  equally  possible  that  this  is 
the  meaning  of  the  name.     It  should  not  be  over- 


BEER-SHEBA 

looked  that  here,  and  in  subsequent  early  notices  of 
the  place,  it  is  spelt  Beer-shaba  (]}3W  '3). 

2.  The  other  narrative  ascribes  the  origin  of  the 
name  to  an  occurrence  almost  precisely  similar,  in 
which  both  Abimelech  the  kingof  the  Philistines,  and 
Phichol  his  chief  captain,  are  again  concerned,  with 
the  difference  that  the  person  on  the  Hebrew  side 
of  the  transaction  is  Isnac  instead  of  Abraham  (Gen. 
xxvi.  31-33).  Here  there  is  no  reference  to  the 
"seven"  lambs,  and  we  are  left  to  infer  the  deri- 
vation of  Shibeah  (i"IJ?3t^,  not  "  Shebah,"  as  in 
the  A.  V.)  from  the  mention  of  the  "  swearing " 
(1J?3B»)inver.31. 

If  we  accept  the  statement  of  verse  1 8  as  referring 
to  the  same  well  as  the  former  account,  we  shall 
be  spared  the  necessity  of  enquiring  whether  these 
two  accounts  relate  two  separate  occurrences,  or 
refer  to  one  and  the  same  event,  at  one  time  ascribed 
to  one,  at  another  time  to  another  of  the  early  heroes 
and  founders  of  the  nation.  There  are  at  present 
on  the  spot  two  principal  wells,  and  five  smaller 
ones.  They  are  among  the  first  objects  encountered 
on  the  entrance  into  Palestine  from  the  South,  and 
being  highly  characteristic  of  the  life  of  the  Bible, 
at  the  same  time  that  the  identity  of  the  site  is  be- 
yond all  question,  the  wells  of  Beersheba  never  fail 
to  call  forth  the  enthusiasm  of  the  traveller. 

The  two  principal  wells — apparently  the  only 
ones  seen  by  Robinson — are  on  or  close  to  the 
northern  bank  of  the  Wady  es-Seba'.  They  lie  just 
a  hundred  yards  apart,  and  are  so  placed  as  to  be 
visible  from  a  considerable  distance  (Bonar,  Land 
of  Prom.  1).  The  larger  of  the  two,  which  lies  to 
the  east,  is,  according  to  the  careful  measurements 
of  Dr.  Robinson,  12£  feet  diam.,  and  at  the  time  of 
his  visit  (Apr.  12)  was  44J  feet  to  the  surface  of 
the  water:  the  masonry  which  encloses  the  well 
reaches  downwards  for  28 J  feet. 

The  other  well  is  5  feet  diam.  and  was  42  feet  to 
the  water.  The  curb-stones  round  the  mouth  of 
both  wells  are  worn  into  deep  grooves  by  the  action 
of  the  ropes  of  so  many  centuries,  and  "  look  as  if 
frilled  or  fluted  all  round."  Round  the  larger  well 
there  are  nine,  and  round  the  smaller  five  large 
stone  troughs — some  much  worn  and  broken,  others 
nearly  entire,  lying  at  a  distance  of  10  or  12  feet 
from  the  edge  of  the  well.  There  were  formerly 
ten  of  these  troughs  at  the  larger  well.  The  circle 
around  is  carpeted  with  a  sward  of  fine  short  grass 
with  crocuses  and  lilies  (Bonar,  5,  6,  7).  The 
water  is  excellent,  the  best,  as  Dr.  R.  emphatically 
records,  which  he  had  taste  J  since  leaving  Sinai. 

The  five  lesser  wells — apparently  the  only  ones 
seen  by  Van  de  Velde — are,  according  to  his  account 
and  the  casual  notice  of  Bonar,  in  a  group  in  the  bed 
of  the  wady,  not  on  its  north  bank,  and  at  so  great 
a  distance  from  the  other  two,  that  the  latter  were 
missed  by  Lieut.  V". 

On  some  low  hills  north  of  the  large  wells  are 
scattered  the  foundations  and  ruins  of  a  town  of 
moderate  size.  There  are  no  trees  or  shrubs  near 
the  spot.  So  much  for  the  actual  condition  of  Beer- 
sheba. 

After  the  disxins:  of  the  well  Abraham  planted 
a  "  grove"  (?£'X,  Eshel)  as  a  place  for  the  worship 
of  Jehovah,  and  here  he  lived  until  the  sacrifice  of 
Isaac,  and  for  a  long  time  afterwards,  xxi.  33 — 
xxii.  1,  19.  Here  also  Isaac  was  dwelling  at  the 
time  of  the  transference  of  the  birthright  from  Esau 
to  Jacob  (xxvi.  33,  xxviii.  10),  and  from  the  pa- 


BEER-SHEBA 

triarcha]  encampment  round  the  wells  of  his  grand- 
father, Jacob  set  forth  on  the  journey  to  Mesopo- 
tamia which  changed  the  course  of  his  whole  life. 
Jacob  does  not  appear  to  have  revisited  the  place 
until  he  made  it  one  of  the  stages  of  his  journey 
down  to  Egypt.  He  then  halted  there  to  offer 
sacrifice  to  "  the  God  of  his  father,"  doubtless  under 
the  sacred  grove  of  Abraham. 

From  this  time  till  the  conquest  of  the  country 
we  lose  sight  of  B.,  only  to  catch  a  momentary 
glimpse  of  it  in  the  lists  of  the  "cities"  in  the  ex- 
treme south  of  Judah  (xv.  28)  given  to  the  tribe  of 
Simeon  (xix.  2  ;  1  Chr.  iv.  28).  Samuel's  sons 
were  judges  in  Beersheba  (1  Sam.  viii.  2),  its  dist- 
ance no  doubt  precluding  its  being  among  the 
number  of  the  "  holy  cities  "  (LXX.  ro7s  Tiyiafffie- 
vois  Tro'Xecn)  to  which  he  himself  went  in  circuit 
every  year  (vii.  16).  By  the  times  of  the  mo- 
narchy it  had  become  recognized  as  the  most  south- 
erly place  of  the  country.  Its  position  as  the  place 
of  arrival  and  departure  for  the  caravans  trading 
between  Palestine  and  the  countries  lying  in  that 
direction  would  naturally  lead  to  the  formation  of 
a  town  round  the  wells  of  the  patriarchs,  and  the 
great  Egyptian  trade  begun  by  Solomon  must  have 
increased  its  importance.  Hither  Joab's  census  ex- 
tended (2  Sam.  xxiv.  7 ;  1  Chr.  xxi.  2),  and  here 
Elijah  bade  farewell  to  his  confidential  servant 
(TnB'D)    before    taking   his  journey   across    the 

desert  to  Sinai  (1  K.  xix.  3).  From  Dan  to  Beer- 
sheba (Judg.  xx.  1,  &c),  or  from  Beersheba  to  Dan 
(1  Chr.  xxi.  2  ;  comp.  2  Sam.  xxiv.  2),  now  became 
the  established  formula  for  the  whole  of  the  pro- 
mised land  ;  just  as  "  from  Geba  to  B."  (2  K.  xxiii. 
8),  or  "  from  B.  to  Mount  Ephraim  "  (2  Chr.  xix. 
4)  was  that  for  the  southern  kingdom  after  the  dis- 
ruption. After  the  return  from  the  captivity  the 
formula  is  narrowed  still  more,  and  becomes  "  from 
B.  to  the  Valley  of  Hinnom  "  (Neh.  xi.  30). 

One  of  the  wives  of  Ahaziah,  king  of  Judah, 
Zibiah  mother  of  Joash,  was  a  native  of  Beersheba 
(2  K.  xii.  1  ;  2  Chr.  xxiv.  1).  From  the  incidental 
references  of  Amos,  we  find  that,  like  Bethel  and 
Gilgal,  the  place  was  at  this  time  the  seat  of  an 
idolatrous  worship,  apparently  connected  in  some 
intimate  manner  with  the  northern  kingdom  (Am. 
v.  5,  viii.  14).  But  the  allusions  are  so  slight  that 
nothing  can  be  gathered  from  them,  except  that  in 
the  latter  of  the  two  passages  quoted  above,  we  have 
perhaps  preserved  a  form  of  words  or  an  adjuration 
used  by  the  worshippers,  "  Live  the  '  way'  of  Beer- 
sheba!"" After  this,  with  the  mere  mention  that 
Beersheba  and  the  villages  round  it  ("  daughters") 
were  re-inhabited  after  the  Captivity  (Neh.  xi.  30), 
the  name  dies  entirely  out  of  the  Bible  records; 
like  many  other  pi. i  es,  i:  associations  are  entirely 
confined  to  the  earlier  history,  and  its  name  is  not 
even  once  mentioned  in  the-  New  Testament. 

But  though  unheard  of,  its  position  ensured  a 
continued  existence  to  Beei  heba.  In  the  time  of 
Jerome  it  was  still  a  considerable  place  (oppidum, 
Quaest.  ad  Gen.  xvii.  30  ;  or  victts  grandis,  <  taom.), 
the  station  of  a  Roman  praesidium ;  and  later  it  is 
mentioned  in  some  of  the  ecclesiastical  lists 

opal  city  under  the  Bishop  of  Jerusalem  (Re- 
land,  620).  Its  present  condition  has  been  already 
described.     It  only  remains  to  notice  that  the  place 


BEHEMOTH 


181 


retains  its  ancient  name  as  nearly  similar  in  sound 
as  an  Arabic  signification  will  permit — Bir  es-Sebd 
— the  "  well  of  the  lion,"  or  "  of  seven."  [G.] 

BEESH'TERAH    (!TTFl#Jf3  ;      i'i   BoaopA, 

Alex.  BeeBapd  ;  Bosra),  one  of  the  two  cities 
allotted  to  the  sons  of  Gershom,  out  of  the  tribe  of 
Manasseh  beyond  Jordan  (Josh.  xxi.  27).  By 
comparison  with  the  parallel  list  in  1  Chr.  vi.  7  1 , 
Beeshterah  appears  to  be  identical  with  Ashtaroth. 
In  fact  the  name  is  considered  by  Gesenius  as  merely 
a  contracted  form  of  Beth-Ashtaroth,  the'  house  of 
A.  (Thes.  196;  comp.  175).     [Bosor.]        [G.] 

BEETLE    (bhn,    Chargdl)    occurs    only   in 

Lev.  xi.  22,  where  it  is  mentioned  as  one  of  four 
flying  creeping  things,  that  go  upon  all  four, 
which  have  legs  above  their  feet  to  leap  withal 
upon  the  earth,  which  the  Israelites  were  per- 
mitted to  eat.  The  other  three  are  the  locust,  the 
bald  locust,  and  the  grasshopper,  respectively  ren- 
dered by  the  LXX.  fipovxos,  o.tt6.kj),  and  &Kpts 
— while  they  translate  ?inn  by  btyiofiaxos,  which 

Suidas  explains  by  elSos  aicplfios,  /j.7]  txov  '""repa. 
Pliny  (xi.  29)  and  Aristotle  (Hist.  Anim.  ix.  6) 
mention  locusts  that  are  serpent-destroyers. 

Beetle  is  certainly  an  incorrect  rendering  of 
7Jnn.  It  does  not  appear  that  the  beetle,  though 
common  in  Egypt,  was  ever  an  article  of  food,  but 
the  various  kinds  of  locusts  were  so.  The  word  is 
derived  from  an  unused  quadriliteral  7jl"}n  =  Arab. 

V-^T~^.  saliit,  saltitavit ;  as  in  Germ,  we  have 

Heuschrccke  from  schrecken.  The  Egyptian  beetle 
is  mentioned  in  Exod.  viii.  21,  &c,  under  the  name 
mynTlfcs  where  the  A.  V.  renders  it  "  swarms  of 
fliesV'     See  Fly.  [W.  D.] 

BEHEADING.     [Punishments.] 

BE'HEMOTH  (niCHS),  an  animal  de- 
scribed in  Job  xl.  15-24,  and  nowhere  else  men- 
tioned in  Scripture.  Various  conjectures  have 
been  hazarded  as  to  what  animal  is  meant,  the 
principal  authorities  being  in  favour  either  of  the 
elephant  or  the  hippopotamus.  Among  those  who 
adopt  elephant  are  Drusius,  Grotius,  Schultens, 
J.  D.  Michaelis,  &c,  while  among  the  advocates 
of  rhinoceros  are  Bochart  (Hicroz.  ii.  p.  754 
sq.),  Ludolf  (Hist.  Aethiop.  i.  11),  and  Gesenius 
(Thes.  Ling.  Heb.  p.  183).  The  arguments  of 
the  last  in  favour  of  his  own  view  may  be 
summed  up  thus:  1st,  the  general  purpose  and 
plan  of  Jehovah's  two  discourses  with  Job  re- 
quire that  the  animal  which  in  this  second  dis- 
l  with  i  in'  oroo  dile  should  be  an 
amphibious  not  a  terrestrial  animal,  the  first  dis- 
course (xxxviii.  xxxix.)  having  been  limited  to 
land-animals  and  birds.  2ndly.  the  crocodile  and 
hippopotamus  being  both  natives  of  Egypt  and 
Aethiopi  |  her  by 

the  ami.;. I  writers  (see  Herod,  ii.  69-71;  Diod. 
i.  35:  Plin.  xxviii.  8).  3rdly,  it  seems  certain 
i  amphibious  animal  is  meant  from  the 
contrast  between  w.  15,  20,  21,  22,  and  w.  l'.;. 
24,  in  which  the  argument  seems  to  be,  "  Though 


a  There   is   a   correspondence    worth   noting   be-    n  o6(k,  "  the  way"  (A.  V.  incorrectly  "that  way,"  by 
tween  the  word  "way"  or  "manner"  in  this  for-    wMch  the  new  religion  is  designated  in  the  Acta  of  the 

inula   ;^"nn,   literally   "the   road"),   ami  the  wold     ApOStle8  [see  is.  2,  &C.). 


182 


BEKAH 


he  feedeth  upon  grass,"  &c.  like  other  animals,  yet 
he  liveth  and  delighteth  in  the  waters,  and  nets  are 
set  for  him  there  as  for  fish,  which  by  his  great 
strength  he  pierces  through.  4thly,  the  mention 
of  his  tail  in  v.  17  does  not"  agree  with  the  elephant, 
nor  can  23T,  as  some  have  thought,  signify  the 
trunk  of  that  animal :  and  5thly,  though  rflDrG 
may  be  the  plural  majcstatis  of  nOHS,  bcstia,  yet 
it  is  probably  an  Egyptian  word  signifying  60s 
marinas,  put  into  a  Semitic  form. 

The  following  is  the  passage  of  Job  which  de- 
scribes the  behemoth,  literally  rendered.  It  cer- 
tainly suits  the  hippopotamus  better  than  the  ele- 
phant. 

"  Behold  now  Behemoth,  which  I  have  made 
with  thee!  He  eateth  chives  (  =  the  Egyptian  sec- 
file  pomnn)  like  cattle  !  Behold  now,  his  strength 
is  in  his  loins  and  his  power  in  the  muscles  (lit. 
firm  parts)  of  his  belly. 

"  He  curveth  his  tail  like  a  cedar :  the  tendons  of 
his  haunches  are  intertwined. 

"  His  bones  are  as  pipes  of  brass ;  his  spine  like 
liars  of  hammered  iron. 

"  He  is  chief  of  the  works  of  God:  He  that  made 
him  hath  furnished  •him  with  his  weapon  (i.  c. 
his  sharp-cutting  teeth). 

"  For  as  to  fodder  the  mountains  bring  it  forth 
for  him,  and  all  the  beasts  of  the  field  disport  there. 
"  Beneath   the    lotus-trees    he   lieth    down ;     in 
covert  of  the  reeds  and  marsh. 

"  The  lotus-trees  hide  him  with  their  shadow ; 
the  willows  of  the  stream  surround  him. 

"  Lo  !  the  river  hath  swoln  beyond  his  channel, 
he  does  not  haste  to  fly  ;  he  is  confident  though  a 
river  (or  Jordan)  draw  near  to  his  mouth. 

"  In  his  eyes  ( =  sight)  shall  we  take  him  ? 
through  the  nets  he  has  bored  his  nostril." 

This  description  fully  accords  with  Gordon  Cum- 
ming's  accurate  observation  of  the  habits  of  the 
hippopotamus,  and  also  with  Dr.  Livingstone's  ac- 
count of  the  animal.  [W.  D.] 

BE'KAH.     [Weights.] 

BEL.     [Baal.] 

BEL  AND  DKAGON.  [Daniel,  Apocry- 
phal ADDITIONS  TO.] 

BE'LA  (JJ^3  ;    BaAa,  and   BaAe,  and   BaAa/c, 

Gen.  xiv.  2,  8  ;  Bela;  a  swallowing  up,  or  destruc- 
tion. In  the  Liber  Nom.  Hcbr.,  in  St.  Jerome's 
works,  torn,  ii.,  it  is  corrupted  to  2a\al,  in  the 
Cod.  Keg. ;  but  in  the  Cod.  Colbert,  it  is  written 
BaAAa,a  and  interpreted  KaTairovTicr/xhs  (see  Ps.  It. 
(liv.)  9,  Sept.).  Jerome  appears  to  confound  it  with 
?J?2,  where  he  renders  it  "  habcns,  sive  devorans  ;" 
and  with  rP3,  where  he  says,  "  Balla,  absorpta 

sive  inreterata"). 

1.  One  of  the  five  ci-ties  of  the  plain  which  was 
spared  at  the  intercession  of  Lot,  and  received  the 
name  of  Zoar  ("|J?1V),  smaflness,  i.  e.  a  little  one 
(Gen.  xiv.  2,  xix.  22).  It  lay  on  the  southern 
extremity  of  the  Dead  Sea,  on  the  frontier  of  Moab 
and  Palestine  (Jerome  on  Is.  xv.),  and  on  the 
route  to  Egypt ;  the  connexion  in  which  it  is  found, 


BELA 

Is.  xv.  5;  Jer.  xlviii.  34;  Gen.  xiii.  10.  We  first 
read  of  Bela  in  Gen.  xiv.  2,  8,  where  it  is  named 
with  Sodom,  Gomorrha,  Admah,  and  Zeboiim,  as 
forming  a  confederacy  under  their  respective  kings, 
in  the  vale  of  Siddim,  to  resist  the  supremacy  of 
the  king  of  Shinar  and  his  associates.  It  is  singular 
that  the  king  of  Bela  is  the  only  one  of  the  five 
whose  name  is  not  given,  and  this  suggests  the 
probability  of  Bela  having  been  his  own  name,  as 
well  as  the  name  of  his  city,  which  may  have  been 
so  called  from  him.  The  tradition  of  the  Jews 
was  that  it  was  called  Bela  from  having  been 
repeatedly  engulphed  by  earthquakes ;  and  in  the 
passage  Jer.  xlviii.  34,  "  From  Zoar  even  unto 
Horonaim  (have  they  uttered  their  voice)  as  an 
heifer b  of  three  years  old,"  and  Is.  xv.  5,  they 
absurdly  fancied  an  allusion  to  its  destruction  by 
three  earthquakes  (Jerome,  Quwst.  Heb.  in  Gen. 
xiv.).  There  is  nothing  improbable  in  itself  in  the 
supposed  allusion  to  the  swallowing  up  of  the  city 
by  an  earthquake,  which  y?3  exactly  expresses 
(Num.  xvi.  30);  but  the  repeated  occurrence  of 
J/P3,  and  words  compounded  with  it,  as  names  of 

men,  rather  favours  the  notion  of  the  city  having 
been  called  Bela  from  the  name  of  its  founder. 
This  is  rendered  yet  more  probable  by  Bela  being 
the  name  of  an  Edomitish  king  in  Gen.  xxxvi.  32. 
For  further  information  see  De  Saulcy's  Narrative, 
i.  457-481,  and  Stanley's  S.  $  P.  285.  [Zoar.] 
2.  Son  of  Beor,  who  reigned  over  Edom  in  the 
city  of  Diuhabah,  eight  generations  before  Saul, 
king  of  Israel,  or  about  the  time  of  the  Exodus. 
Bernard  Hyde,  following  some  Jewish  commentators 
(Simon.  Onomast.  142,  note),  identifies  this  Bela 
with  Balaam  the  son  of  Beor ;  but  the  evidence 
from  the  name  does  not  seem  to  prove  more  than 
identity  of  family  and  race.  There  is  nothing 
whatever  to  guide  us  as  to  the  age  of  Beor,  or 
Bosor,  the  founder  of  the  house  from  which  Bela 
and  Balaam  sprung.  As  regards  the  name  of  Bela's 
royal  or  native  city  Dinhabah,  which  Fiirst  and 
Gesenius  render  "  place  of  plunder,"  it  may  be 
suggested  whether  it  may  not  possibly  be  a  form 
of  rQrn,  the  Chaldee  for  gold,  after  the  analogy 

of  the  frequent  Chaldee  resolution  of  the  dagesh 
forte  into  nun.  There  are  several  names  of  places 
and  persons  in  Idumea  which  point  to  gold  as 
found  there — as  Dizahah,  Deut.  i.  1,  "place  of 
gold;"  Mezahab,  "waters  of  gold,"  or  "gold- 
streams,"  Gen.  xxxvi.  39. c  Compare  Dehebris,  the 
ancient  name  of  the  Tiber,  famous  for  its  yellow 
waters.  If  this  derivation  for  Dinhabah  be  true, 
its  Chaldee  form  would  not  be  difficult  to  account 
for,  and  would  supply  an  additional  evidence  of 
tln»  early  conquests  of  the  Chaldees  in  the  direction 
of  Idumea.  The  name  of  Bela's  ancestor  Beor, 
"IJJ3,  is  of  a  decidedly  Chaldee  or  Aramean  form, 
like  Peor  l'y3,    Pethor  "lhS,    Rehob   HIT),   and 

others ;  and  we  are  expressly  told  that  Balaam  the 
son  of  Beor  dwelt  in  Pethor,  which  is  by  the  river 
of  the  land  of  the  children  of  his  people,  i.  e.  the 
river  Euphrates  ;  and  he  himself  describes  his  home 
as  being  in  Aram  (Num.  xxii.  5,  xxiii.  7).  Saul 
again,  who  reigned  over  Edom  after  Samlah,  came 


a  BoAAd  is  also  the  LXX.'s  version  of  Srra,  Gen. 
xiv.  2. 

b  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  in  both  passages  the 
fry  of  the  distressed  Moabites  is  compared  to  the 
lowing-  of  a  heifer  whose  calf  lias  been  taken  from 


her.     The  3  of  comparison  is  very  frequently  omitted 
in  Hebrew  poetry. 

c  In  riHrnD,   "  the  golden  city,"   Is.  xiv.  4,  th-> 
reading  is  doubtful  (Gcsen.  in  v.). 


BELAH 

from  Rehoboth  by  the  river  Euphrates  (Gen.  xxxvi. 
37).  We  read  in  Job's  time  of  the  Chaldeans 
making  incursions  into  the  land  of  Uz,  and  carrying 
off  the  camels,  and  slaying  Job's  servants  (Job  i. 
17).  In  the  time  of  Abraham  we  have  the  king 
of  Shinar  apparently  extending  his  empire  so  as  to 
make  the  kings  on  the  borders  of  the  Dead  Sea  his 
tributaries,  and  with  his  confederates  extending  his 
conquests  into  the  very  country  which  was  after- 
wards the  land  of  Edom  (Gen.  xiv.  6).  Putting 
all  this  together,  we  may  conclude  with  some  con- 
fidence that  Bela  the  son  of  Beor,  who  reigned  over 
Edom,  was  a  Chaldean  by  birth,  and  reigned  in 
Edom  by  conquest.  He  may  have  been  contem- 
porary with  Moses  and  Balaam.  Iladad,  of  which 
name  there  were  two  kings  (Gen.  xxxvi.  35,  39), 
is  probably  another  instance  of  an  Aramean  king  of 
Edom,  as  we  find  the  name  Benhadad  as  that  of  the 
kings  of  Syria,  or  Aram,  in  later-history  (1  K.  xx.). 
Compare  also  the  name  of  Hadad-ezer,  king  of  Zobah, 
in  the  neighbourhood  of  the  Euphrates  (2  Sam.  viii. 
.'_!,  &c).  The  passage  Gen.  xxxvi.  31-39,  is  given  in 
duplicate  1  Chr.  i.  43-51. 

3.  Eldest  son  of  Benjamin,  according  to  Gen. 
xlvi.  21,d  Num.  xxvi.  38,  1  Ch.  vii.  6  viii.  1,  and 
head  of  the  family  of  the  Belaites.  The  houses  of 
his  family,  according  to  1  Chr.  viii.  3-5,  were  Addar, 
Gera,  Abihud  (read  Ehud,  TinK,  for  T-in»3K), 

Abishua,  Naaman,  Ahoah,  Shupham,  and  Ilaram. 
Of  these  Ehud  is  the  most  remarkable.  The  exploit 
of  Ehud  the  son  of  Gera,  who  shared  the  peculiarity 
of  so  many  of  his  Benjamite  brethren,  in  being  left- 
handed  (Judg.  xx.  16),  in  slaying  Eglon  the  king 
of  Moab,  and  delivering  Israel  from  the  Moabitish 
yoke,  is  related  at  length  Judg.  iii.  14-30.  The 
greatness  of  the  victory  subsequently  obtained  may 
be  measured  by  the  length  of  the  rest  of  80  years 
which  followed.  It  is  perhaps  worth  noticing  that 
as  we  have  Husham  by  the  side  of  Bela  among  the 
kings  of  Edom,  Gen.  xxxvi.  34,  so  also  by  the  side 
of  Bela,  son  of  Benjamin,  we  have  the  Benjamite 
family  of  Hushim  (1  Chr.  vii.  12),  sprung  appa- 
rently from  a  foreign  woman  of  that  name, -whom 
a  Benjamite  took  to  wife  in  the  land  of  Moab  (1 
Chr.  viii.  8-11).     [Becher.] 

4.  Son  of  Ahaz,  a  Reubenite  (1  Chr.  v.  8).  It 
is  remarkable  that  his  country  too  was  "  in  Aroer, 
even  unto  Nebo  and  Baal-meon ;  and  eastward  he 
inhabited  into  the  entering  in  of  the  wilderness  from 
the  river  Euphrates"  (8,  9).  [A.  C.  H.] 

BE'LAH.     [Bela,  3.] 
BE'LAITES,  THE  OjfalPI),  Num.  xxvi.  38. 
[Bela,  3.] 
BE'LEMUS  (BrJAe^os;  Balsamus),  1  Esd.  ii. 

16.        [BlSHI.A-U.] 

BE'LIAL.  The  translators  of  our  A.  V.,  fol- 
lowing the  Vulgate,  have  frequently  treated  the 
word  ?J?v2  as  a  proper  name,  and  given  it  in  the 
form  Belial,  in  accordance  with  2  Cor.  vi.  15. 
This  is  particularly  the  case  where  it  is  connected 
with  the  expressions  LJ^K  man  of,  or  }2  son  of :  in 

other  instances  it  is  translated  wicked  or  some  equi- 
valent term  (Deut.  xv.  9;  Ps.  xli.  8,  ci.  3;  Prov. 
vi.  12,  xvi.  27,  xix.  28;  Nab.,  i.  11,  15).  There 
can  be  no  question,  however,  that  the  word  is  not 
to  be  regarded  as  a  proper  name  in  the  0.  T.  ;  its 


BELLOWS 


183 


d  In  A.  V.  "  Belah,"  the  ]}  being  rendered  by  II. 
Comp.  Shuah. 


meaning  is  worthlessncss,  and  hence  recklessness, 
lawlessness.  Its  etymology  is  uncertain:  the  first 
part  vZ  =  witliout ;  the  second  part  has  been  va- 
riously connected  with  ?)]),  yoke,  as  in  the  Vulg. 
(Judg.  xix.  22)  Belial,  id  est  absque  jitgo,  in  the 
sense  of  unbridled,  rebellious ;  with  n?]),  to  ascend, 
as  =  without  ascent,  that  is,  of  the  lowest  con- 
dition ;  and  lastly  with  b^,  usefulness  =  with- 
out usefulness,  that  is,  good  for  nothing  (Gesen. 
Thesawr.  p.  209):  the  latter  appears  to  be  the 
most  probable,  not  only  in  regard  to  sense,  but  also 
as  explaining  the  unusual  fusion  of  the  two  words, 
the  ,  at  the  end  of  the  one  and  at  the  beginning 
of  the  other  leading  to  a  crasis,  originally  in  the 
pionunciation,  and  afterwards  in  the  writing.  The 
expression  son  or  man  of  Belial  must  be  under- 
stood as  meaning  simply  a  worthless,  lawless 
fellow  (jrapdvofxos,  LXX.) :  it  occurs  frequently  in 
this  sense  in  the  historical  book's  (Judg.  xix.  22, 
xx.  13;  1  Sam.  i.  16,  ii.  12,  x.  27,  xxv.  17,  25, 
xxx.  22  ;  2  Sam.  xvi.  7,  xx.  1  ;  IK.  xxi.  10 ; 
2  Chr.  xiii.  7),  and  only  once  in  the  earlier  books 
(Deut.  xiii.  13).  The  adjunct  JS^N  is  occasionally 
omitted,  as  in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  6,  and  Job  xxxiv.  18, 
where  ?y-v2  stands  by  itself,  as  a  term  of  re- 
proach. The  later  Hebrews  used  pana.  and  /xa>p4 
in  a  similar  manner  (Matt.  v.  22) :  the  latter  is 
perhaps  the  most  analogous ;  in  1  Sam.  xxv.  25, 
Nabal  (y3J  =  ftuipSs)  is  described  as  a  man  of 
Belial,  as  though  the  terms  were  equivalent. 

In  the  N.  T.  the  term  appears  in  the  form 
BeAiap  and  not  BeAi'aA,  as  given  in  the  A.  V. 
The  change  of  A  into  p  was  common :  we  have  an 
instance  even  in  Biblical  Hebrew  DITTO  (Job 
xxxviii.  32)  for  IYi'mD  (2  K.  xxiii.  5);  in  Chaldee 
we   meet   with   K¥~in  for   D1^?!!  ;   and   various 

other  instances  ;  the  same  change  occurred  in  the 
Doric  dialect  (<pavpos  for  (pavXos),  with  which 
the  Alexandrine  writers  were  most  familiar.  The 
term  as  used  in  2  Cor.  vi.  15  is  generally  understood 
as  an  appellative  of  Satan,  as  the  personification  of 
all  that  was  bad  :  Bengel  (Gnomon  in  loc.)  explains 
it  of  Antichrist,  as  more  strictly  the  opiposite  of 
Christ  (pmnem  colluviem  antichristianam  notare 
videtur).  [W.  L.  B.] 

BELLOWS  (nQD;  <pv<rr,TVp,  LXX.).  The 
word  occurs  only  in  Jer.  vi.  29,  "  The  bellows 
are  burned  ;  "  where  their  use  is  to  heat  a  smelting 
furnace.  They  were  known  even  in  the  time  of 
Moses,  and  perhaps  still  earlier,  since  the  opera- 
tions of  a  foundry  would  be  almost  impossible  with- 
out them.  A  picture  of  two  different  kinds  of 
bellows,  both  of  highly  ingenious  construction,  may 
be  found  in  Wilkinson,  Anc.  Egypt,  iii.  338. 
"  They  consisted,"  he  says,  "  of  a  Leather,  secured 
and  fitted  into  a  frame,  from  which  a  long  pipe  ex- 
tended  for  carrying  the  wind  to  the  tire.  They  were 
worked  by  the  feet,  the  operator  standing  upon  them, 
with  one  under  each  loot,  and  pressing  them  alter- 
nately while  he  pulled  up  each  exhausted  skin  with 
;i  Btring  he  held  in  his  hand.  In  one  instance  we 
observe  from  the  painting,  that  when  the  man  left 
the  bellows,  they  wore  raised  as  it' inflated  with  air; 
and  this  would  imply  a  knowledge  of  the  valve. 
The  pipes  <-\<-u  in  the  time  of  Thothmes  III., 
[supposed  to  be]  the  contemporary  of  Moses,  appear 


184 


BELLS 


to  have  been  simply  of  reed,  tipped  with  a  metal 
point  to  resist  the  action  of  the  fire." 


Egyptian  Bellows.     (F.  Cuillinni,  Kerlie 
Ancitms  Egypticns.) 

Bellows  of  an  analogous  kind  were  earl)'  known 
to  the  Greeks  and  Romans.  Homer  ( II.  xviii.  470) 
speaks  of  '-'0  <pv<rai  in  the  forge  of  Hephaestos,  and 
they  are  mentioned  frequently  by  ancient  authors 
(Diet,  of  Ant.  art.  Follis).  Ordinary  hand-bellows, 
made  of  wood  and  kid's-skin,  are  used  by  the  modern 
Egyptians,  but  are  not  found  in  the  old  paintings. 
They  may  however  have  been  known,  as  they  were  to 
the  "early  Greeks.  [F.  W.  F.] 

BELLS.  There  are  two  words  thus  translated 
in  the  A.  V.,  viz.  f)DJ?S,  Ex.  xxviii.  33  (from 
Di?3,  to  strike;  KwSaves,  LXX.),  and  nVpSE, 
Zech.  xiv.20  (to  en-l  rhv  xaAuw  tov  'imrov,  LXX. ; 
A.  V.  marg.  "bridles,"  from  7?\\  to  strike). 

In  Ex.  xxviii.  33  the  bells  alluded  to  were  the 
golden  ones,  according  to  the  Rabbis  72  in  number 
(Winer,  s.  v.  Schellen),  which  alternated  with  the 
three-coloured  pomegranates  round  the  hem  of  the 
high-priest's  ephod.  The  object  of  them  was  "  that 
his  sound  might  be  heard  when  he  went  in  unto  the 
holy  place,  ami  when  he  came  out,  that-  he  die  not " 
(Ex.  xxviii.  34),  or  "that  as  he  went  there  might 
be  a  sound,  and  a  noise  made  that  might  be  heard  in 
the  temple,  for  a  memorial  to  the  children  of  his 
people  "  (Ecclus.  xlv.  9).  No  doubt  they  answered 
the  same  purpose  as  the.  bells  used  by  the  Brahmins 
in  the  Hindoo  ceremonies,  and  by  the  Roman  Ca- 
tholics during  the  celebration  of  mass  (comp.  Luke 
i.  21).  To  this  day  bells  are  frequently  attached, 
for  the  sake  of  their  pleasant  sound,  to  the  anklets 
of  women.  [Anklet.]  The  little  girls  of  Cairo 
wear  strings  of  them  round  their  feet  (Lane,  Mod. 
Eg.  ii.  370),  and  at  Koojar  Mungo  Park  saw  a 
dance  "  in  which  many  performers  assisted,  all  of 
whom  were  provided  with  little  bells  fastened  to 
their  legs  and  arms." 

In  Zech.  xiv.  20  "  bells  of  the  horses  "  (where 
our  marg.  Vers,  follows  the  LXX.)  is  probably  a 
wrong  rendering.  The  Hebr.  word  is  almost  the 
same  as  D"p6yP  "  a  pair  of  cymbals,"  and  as  they 
are  supposed  to  be  inscribed  with  the  words  "  Holi- 
ness unto  the  Lord,"  it  is  more  probable  that  they 
are  not  bells  but  "  concave  or  flat  pieces  of  brass, 
which  were  sometimes  attached  to  horses  for  the 
sake  of  ornament"  (Jahn,  Arch.  Bibl.  §96).  In- 
deed they  were  probably  the  same  as  the  D^lHi!^, 

Ix-qviffKoi  ('Is.  iii.  18;  Judg.  viii.  21),  lunulae  of 
gold,  silver,  or  brass  used  as  ornaments,  and  hung 
by  the  Arabians  round  the  necks  of  their  camels, 
as  we  still  see  them  in  England  on  the  harness 
of  horses.     They  were   not  only  ornamental,   but 


BELSHAZZAR 

useful,  as  their  tinkling  tended  to  enliven  the 
animals ;  and  in  the  caravans  they  thus  served 
the  purpose  of  our  modern  sheep-bells.  The  com- 
parison to  the  KiiSccves  used  by  the  Greeks  to 
test  horses  seems  out  of  place ;  and  hence  Arch- 
bishop Seeker's  explanation  of  the  verse,  as  meaning 
that  war-horses  would  become  useless,  and  their 
trappings  would  be  converted  to  sacred  purposes,  is 
untenable.  The  general  meaning,  as  obvious  from 
the  context,  is  that  true  religion  will  then  be  uni- 
versally professed.  [F.  W.  F.] 

BEL'MAIM  (BeA0e>;  Alex.  BeAjSafyi;  Belma), 
a  place  which,  from  the  terms  of  the  passage,  would 
appear  to  have  been  south  of  Dothaim  (Jud.  vii.  3). 
Possibly  it  is  the  same  as  Belmen,  though  whether 
this  is  the  case,  or  indeed  whether  either  of  them 
ever  had  any  real  existence  it  is  at  present  im- 
possible to  determine.  [Judith.]  The  Syriac 
has  Abel-mechola.  [G.] 

BEL'MEN  (BeA/xeV;  Alex.  BeAfxaiv,  Compl. 
BeA/xaijU  ;  Vulg.  omits),  a  place  named  amongst 
the  towns  of  Samaria  as  lying  between  Bethhoron 
and  Jericho  (Jud.  iv.  4).  The  Hebrew  name  would 
seem  to  have  been  Abel-maim,  but  the  only  place 
of  that  name  in  the  0.  T.  was  far  to  the  north  of 
the  locality  here  alluded  to.  [Abel-maim.]  The 
Syriac  version  has  Abel-meholah,  which  is  more 
consistent  with  the  context.  [Abel-meholah  ; 
Belmaim.]  [G.] 

BELSHAZZAR  (>XK^2,  Dan.  v.  1,  and 
WN?2,  vii.  1  ;  BaXrdffap  ;   Baltasar),  the  last 

king  of  Babylon.  According  to  the  well-known 
scriptural  narrative,  he  was  warned  of  his  coming 
doom  by  the  handwriting  on  the  wall  which  was 
interpreted  by  Daniel,  and  was  slain  during  a  splen- 
did feast  in  his  palace.  Similarly  Xenophon  (Cyrop. 
vii.  5.  3)  tells  us  that  Babylon  was  taken  by  Cyrus 
in  the  night,  while  the  inhabitants  were  engaged  in 
feasting  and  revelry,  and  that  the  king  was  killed. 
On  the  other  hand  the  narratives  of  Berosus  in  Jo- 
sephus  (c.  Apion.  i.  20)  and  of  Herodotus  (i.  184  ft.) 
differ  from  the  above  account  in  some  important 
particulars.  Berosus  calls  the  last  king  of  Babylon 
Nabonnedus  or  Nabonadius  (Nabn-nit  or  Nabo- 
ndhit,  i.  e.  Areoo  blesses  or  makes  prosperous), 
and  says  that  in  the  17th  year  of  his  reign  Cyrus 
took  Babylon,  the  king  having  retired  to  the 
neighbouring  city  of  Borsippus  or  Borsippa  (Birs-i- 
Nimrud).  called  by  Niebuhr  (Lect.  on  Anc.  Hist. 
xii.) "  the  Chaldaean  Benares,  the  city  in  which 
the  Chaldaeans  had  their  most  revered  objects  of 
religion,  and  where  they  cultivated  their  science." 
Being  blockaded  in  that  city  Nabonnedus  surren- 
dered, his  life  was  spared,  and  a  principality  or 
es'.ate  given  to  him  in  Carmania,  where  he  died. 
According  to  Herodotus  the  last  king  was  called 
Labynetus,  a  name  easy  to  reconcile  with  the  Nabon- 
nedus of  Berosus,  and  the  Nabannidochus  of  Mega- 
sthenes  (Euseb.  Praep.  Evang.  ix.  41).  Cyrus, 
after  defeating  Labynetus  in  the  open  field,  appeared 
before  Babylon,  within  which  the  besieged  defied 
attack  and  even  blockade,  as  they  had  walls  300  ft. 
high,  and  75  ft.  thick,  forming  a  square  of  15  miles 
to  a  side,  and  had  stored  up  previously  several 
years'  provision.  But  lie  took  the  city  by  drawing 
oif  for  a  time  the  waters  of  the  Euphrates,  and  then 
marching  in  with  his  whole  army  along  its  bed, 
during  a  great  Babylonian  festival,  while  the  people, 
feeling  perfectly  secure,  were  scattered  over  the 
whole   city    in    reckless   amusement.      These   dis- 


BELSHAZZAR 

crepancies  have  lately  been  cleared  up  by  the  disco- 
veries of  Sir  Henry  Rawlinson ;  and  the  histories  of 
profane  writers,  far  from  contradicting  the  scrip- 
tural narrative,  are  shown  to  explain  and  confirm 
it.  In  1854  he  deciphered  the  inscriptions  on  some 
cylinders  found  in  the  ruins  of  Um-Qeer  (the  ancient 
Ur  of  the  Chaldees),  containing  memorials  of  the 
works  executed  by  Nabonnedus.  From  these  in- 
scriptions it  appears  that  the  eldest  son  of  Nabon- 
nedus was  called  Bel-shar-ezar,  and  admitted  by  his 
father  to  a  share  in  the  government.  This  name  is 
compounded  of  Bel  (the  Babylonian  god)  Shar  (a 
king),  and  the  same  termination  as  in  Nabopolassar, 
Nebuchadnezzar,  &c.,  and  is  contracted  into  Bel- 
shazzar,  just  as  Neriglissar  (again  with  the  same 
termination)  is  formed  from  Nergal-sharezar.  In  a 
communication  to  the  Athenaeum,  No.  1377,  Sir 
Henry  Rawlinson  says,  "  we  can  now  understand 
how  Belshazzar,  as  joint  king  with  his  father,  may 
hare  been  governor  of  Babylon,  when  the  city  was 
attacked  by  the  combined  forces  of  the  Medes  and 
Persians,  and  may  have  perished  in  the  assault 
which  followed ;  while  Nabonnedus  leading  a  force 
to  the  relief  of  the  place  was  defeated,  and  obliged  to 
take  refuge  in  Borsippa,  capitulating  after  a  short 
resistance,  and  being  subsequently  assigned,  accord- 
ing to  Berosus,  an  honourable  retirement  in  Car- 
mania."  In  accordance  with  this  view  we  arrange 
the  last  Chaldaean  kings  as  follows : — Nebuchad- 
nezzar, his  son  Evilmcrodach,  Neriglissar,  Labroso- 
archad  (his  son,  a  boy,  killed  in  a  conspiracy),  Na- 
bonnedus or  Labynetus,  and  Belshazzar.  Herodotus 
says  that  Labynetus  was  the  son  of  Queen  Nitocris; 
and  Megasthenes  (Euseb.  Chr.  Arm.  p.  60)  tells  us 
that  he  succeeded  Labrosoarchad,  but  was  not  of 
his  family.  Na^awi'So%ov  airotSeiKvvcri  /3acri\ea, 
irpoffTjKovra  ot  ou5eV.  In  Pan.  v.  2,  Nebuchad- 
nezzar is  called  the  father  of  Belshazzar.  This  of 
course  need  only  mean  grandfather  or  ancestor.  Now 
Neriglissar  usurped  the  throne  on  the  murder  of 
Evilmerodach  (Beros.  up.  Joseph.  Apion.  i.) :  we 
may  therefore  well  suppose  that  on  the  death  of  his 
son  Labrosoarchad,  Nebuchadnezzar's  family  was 
restored  in  the  person  of  Nabonnedus  or  Labynetus, 
possibly  the  son  of  that  king  and  Nitocris,  and  father 
of  Belshazzar.  The  chief  objection  to  this  suppo- 
sition would  be  that  if  Neriglissar  married  Nebu- 
chadnezzar's daughter  (Joseph,  c.  Ap.  i.  21),  Na- 
bonnedus would  through  her  be  connected  with 
Labrosoarchad.  This  difficulty  is  met  by  the  theory 
of  Rawlinson  (Herod.  Essay  viii.  §25),  who  connects 
Belshazzar  with  Nebuchadnezzar  through  his  mo- 
ther, thinking  it  probable  that  Nabu-nahit,  whom 
be  does  not  consider  related  to  Nebuchadnezzar, 
would  strengthen  his  position  by  marrying  the 
daughter  of  thai  king,  who  would  thus  be  Bel- 
shazzar's  maternal  grandfather.  A  totally  different 
view  is  taken  by  Marcus  Niebuhr  (Geschichte 
Assur's  und  BdbeVs  seit  PAui,  p.  01),  who  con- 
siders Belshazzar  to  be  another  name  for  Evilmero- 
dach, the  son  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  lie  i . !■ 
their  characters  by  comparing  Dan.  v.  with  the 
language  of  Berosus  about  Evilmerodach^  irpoaras 
tSiv  ■Kpayfx.a.TCiiv  av6fX'£S  kcu  a(7€\ya>s.  Hi 
siders  that  the  capture  of  Babylon 
Daniel,  was  nut  by  the  Persians,  b  it  by  the  Mi  les, 
under  Astyages  (i.e.  Darius  the  Mede),  and  thai 
between  the  reigns  of  Evilmerodach  or  Belshazzar, 
,  and  Neriglissar,  we  must  ins.  it  a  brief  period 
during  which  Babylon  was  subject  to  the  Medes. 
This  solves  a  difficulty  as  to  1li.'  age  of  Darius 
(Dan.  v.  31  ;  cf.  Rawlinson,  Essaj  iii.  §11),  but 


BEN-AMMI 


185 


most  people  will  probably  prefer  the  actual  facts 
discovered  by  Sir  Henry  Pawlinson  to  the  theory 
(though  doubtless  very  ingenious)  of  Niebuhr.  On 
Rawlinson's  view,  Belshazzar  died  B.C.  538,  on 
Niebuhr's  B.C.  559.  [G.  E.  L.  C] 

BELTESHAZ'ZAR.     [Daniel.] 

BEN  (}2  ;  LXX.  omits  ;  Ben),  a  Levite  "of  the 

second  degree,"  one  of  the  porters  appointed  by 
David  to  the  service  of  the  ark  (1  Chr.  xv.  18). 

BENA'IAH  (-ima   and   rV32  =  "  built  by 

v       tt  :  tt  :  J 

Jah  ;"  Bavaias;  Banalas),  the  name  of  several 
Israelites : — 

1.  Benaiahu,  the  son  of  Jehoiada  the  chief 
priest  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  5),  and  therefore  of  the  tribe 
of  Levi,  though  a  native  of  Kabzeel  (2  Sam.  xxiii. 
20  ;  1  Chr.  xi.  22),  in  the  south  of  Judah  ;  set  by 
David  (1  Chr.  xi.  25)  over  his  bodyguard  of  Chere- 
thites  and  Pelethites  (2  Sam.  viii.  18 ;  1  K.  i.  38 ; 
1  Chr.  xviii.  17  ;  2  Sam.  xx.  23)  and  occupying 
a  middle  rank  between  the  first  three  of  the  Gib- 
borim  or  "  mighty  men,"  and  the  thirty  "  valiant 
men  of  the  armies"  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  22,  23 ;  1  Chr. 
xi.  25,  xxvii.  6  ;  and  see  Kennicott,  Diss.  177). 
The  exploits  which  gave  him  this  rank  are  narrated 
in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  20,  21 ;  1  Chr.  xi.  22.  He  was 
captain  of  the  host  for  the  third  month  (1  Chr. 
xxvii.  5). 

Benaiah  remained  faithful  to  Solomon  during 
Adonijah's  attempt  on  the  crown  (1  K.  i.  8,  10),  a 
matter  in  which  he  took  part  in  his  official  capacity 
as  commander  of  the  king's  body-guard  (1  K.  i.  32, 
38,  44)  ;  and  after  Adonijah  and  Joab  had  both 
been  put  to  death  by  his  hand,  he  was  raised  by 
Solomon  into  the  place  of  the  latter  as  commander- 
in-chief  of  the  whole  army  (ii.  35,  iv.  4). 

Benaiah  appears  to  have  had  a  son,  called  after 
his  grandfather,  Jehoiada,  who  succeeded  Ahitho- 
phel  about  the  person  of  the  king  (1  Chr.  xxvii. 
34).  But  this  is  possibly  a  copyist's  mistake  for 
"  Benaiah  the  son  of  Jehoiada." 

2.  Benaiah  the  Pirathonite;  an  Ephraim- 
ite,  one  of  David's  thirty  mighty  men  (2  Sam.  xxiii. 
30  ;  1  Chr.  xi.  31),  and  the  captain  of  the  eleventh 
monthly  course  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  14). 

3.  BENAIAHU  ;  a  Levite  in  the  time  of  David, 
who  "  played  with  a  psaltery  on  Alamoth  "  (1  Chr. 
xv.  18,  20,  xvi.  5). 

4.  Benaiahu;  a  priest  in  the  time  of  David, 
appointed  to  blow  the  trumpet  before  the  ark 
(1  Chr.  xv.  24,  xvi.  6). 

5.  Benaiah  ;  a  Levite  of  the  sons  of  Asaph 
(2  Chr.  xx.  14). 

6.  Benaiaiitt  ;  a  Levite  in  the  time  of  Heze- 
kiah,  one  of  the  "  overseers  (D^pS)  of  offerings" 
(2  Chr.  xxxi.  13). 

7.  Benaiah,  one  of  the"  princes"  (D^L*^)  of 
the  families  of  Simeon  (1  Chr.  i\ . 

8.  Benaiah  ;  four  laymen  in  the  time  of  Ezra 
who  had  taken  strange  wives.  1  (Kzr.  x.  25). 
[P.aanias.]  2  (Ezr.  x.  30).  [Naidus.]  3  (x.  35) 
and  4  (x.  43).    [Ban  was.] 

9.  Benaiahu;  father  of  Pelatiah,  "a  prince  of 
the  people  "  in  the  time  of  Exekiel  (xi.  i.  13). 

BEN-AM'MI  C^V"!?.'     '  0» the 

son  of  the  younger  daughter  of  Lot,  and  the  pro- 
genitor of  the  Ammonites  (Gen.  xix.  38).      The 


186 


BENE-BERAK 


reading  of  the  LXX.  and  Vulgate  differs  from  the 
Hebrew  text,  by  inserting  the  name  of  Amnion,  as 
well  as  the  exclamation  which  originated  it :  /col 
itcdXeffe  to  ovofia  avrov  'Afi/xav  \iyovffa  Tibs 
yivovs  ftov ;  Amnion,  id  cstfilius  populi  mei. 

BENE'-BERAK   (pn3"»J3  ;    Bavai&aKdr  ; 

Alex.    BavriflapaK  ;    et  Bane    et   Baruch ;     Syr. 

u-^.»^^d),   one  of  the  cities  of  the  tribe  of 

Dan,  mentioned  only  in  Josh.  xix.  46.  The  paucity 
of  information  which  we  possess  regarding  this  tribe 
(omitted,  entirely  from  the  lists  in  1  Chr.  ii.-viii., 
and  only  one  family  mentioned  in  Num.  xxvi.)  makes 
it  impossible  to  say  whether  the  "  sons  of  Berak  " 
who  gave  their  name  to  this  place  belonged  to  Dan, 
or  were,  as  we  may  perhaps  infer  from  the  name, 
earlier  settlers  dispossessed  by  the  tribe.  The 
reading  of  the  Syriac,  Baal-debac,  is  not  confirmed 
by  any  other  version.  By  Eusebius  the  name  is 
divided  (comp.  Vulg.),  and  Bapatcai  is  said  to  have 
been  then  a  village  near  Azotus.  No  trace  has  been 
found  of  it.  [G."l 

BENE-JA'AKAN  (tPJP  *?.4>  Children  of 

Jaakan ;  Bavaia  ;  Alex.  BaviK&v  ;  Benejaacan), 
a  tribe  who  gave  their  name  to  certain  wells  in  the 
desert  which  formed  one  of  the  halting-places  of  the 
Israelites  on  their  journey  to  Canaan.  [Beeroth 
Bene-jaakan.]  In  Num.  xxxiii.  31,32,  the  name 
is  given  in  the  shortened  form  of  Bene-jaakan.  The 
tribe  doubtless  derived  its  name  from  Jaakan,  the 
son  of  Ezer  son  of  Seir  the  Horite  (1  Chr.  i.  42), 
whose  name  is  also  given  in  Genesis  as  Akan. 
[Aran  ;  Jakan.] 

The  situation  of  these  wells  has  not  been  yet 
identified.  In  the  time  of  Eusebius  (Onom.  Beroth 
fil.  Jacin,  'Ia/ceiyu)  the  spot  was  shown  10  miles 
from  Petra  on  the  top  of  a  mountain.  Robinson 
suggests  the  small  fountain  et-Taiyibeh,  at  the 
bottom  of  the  Pass  cr-Rubay  under  Petra,  a  short 
distance  from  the  Arabah.  The  word  Beeroth, 
however,  suggests  not  a  spring  but  a  group  of 
artificial  wells. 

In  the'Targ.  Ps.  Jon.  the  name  is  given  in  Num- 
bers as  Aktha.  NnpJ?  »T3.  [G.] 

BENE-KE'DEM  (Dip  »33,  the  children  of 
the  East),  an  appellation  given  to  a  people,  or  to 
peoples,  dwelling  to  the  east  of  Palestine.  It  occurs 
in  the  following  passages  of  the  0.  T.: — (1)  Gen. 
xxix.  1,  "  Jacob  came  into  the  land  of  the  people  of 
the  East,"  in  which  was  therefore  reckoned  Haran. 
(2)  Job  i.  3,  Job  was  "  the  greatest  of  all  the  men 
of  the  East"  [Job].  (3)  Judg.  vi.  3,  33,  vii.  12, 
yiii.  10.  In  the  first  three  passages  the  Bene-Kedem 
are  mentioned  together  with  the  Midianites  and  the 
Amalekites ;  and  in  the  fourth  the  latter  peoples  seem 
to  be  included  in  this  common  name :  "  Now  Zebah 
and  Zalmunna  [were]  in  Karkor,  and  their  hosts  with 
them,  about  fifteen  thousand  [men],  all  that  were 
left  of  all  the  hosts  of  the  children  of  the  East." 
In  the  events  to  which  these  passages  of  Judges 
relate,  we  find  a  curious  reference  to  the  language 
spoken  by  these  eastern  tribes,  which  was  understood 
by  Oideon  and  his  servant  (or  one  of  them)  as  they 
listened  to  the  talk  in  the  camp ;  and  from  this  it 
is  to  be  inferred  that  they  spoke  a  dialect  intelligible 
to  an  Israelite:  an  inference  bearing  on  an  affinity 
of  race,  and  thence  on  the  growth  of  the  Semitic 
languages.  (4)  1  K.  iv.  30,  "  Solomon's  wisdom 
excelled  tin;  wisdom  of  all  the  children  of  the  East 


BENHADAD 

country."  (5)  Is.  xi.  14 ;  Jer.  xlix.  28 ;  Ez.  xxv. 
4,  10.  From  the  first  passage  it  is  difficult  to 
deduce  an  argument,  but  the  other  instances,  with 
their  contexts,  are  highly  important.  In  Ezekiel, 
Amnion  is  delivered  to  the  "  men  of  the  East,"  and 
its  city  Kabbah  is  prophesied  to  become  "  a  stable 
for  camels,  and  the  Ammonites  a  couching-place 
for  flocks ;"  referring,  apparently,  to  the  habits 
of  the  wandering  Arabs ;  while  "  palaces "  and 
"  dwellings,"  also  mentioned  and  thus  rendered 
in  the  A.  V.,  may  be  better  read  "  camps  " 
and  "  tents."  The  words  of  Jeremiah  strengthen 
the  supposition  just  mentioned :  "  Concerning  Ke- 
dar,  and  concerning  Hazor,  which  Nebuchadrezzar 
king  of  Babylon  shall  smite,  thus  saith  the  Lord, 
Arise  ye,  go  up  to  Kedar,  and  spoil  the  men  of 
the  East.  Their  tents  and  their  flocks  shall  they 
take  away :  they  shall  take  to  themselves  their 
curtains  [«'.  e.  tents'],  and  all  their  vessels,  and 
their  camels" 

Opinions  are  divided  as  to  the  extension  of  the 
appellation  of  Bene-Kedem  ;  some  (as  Kosenmuller 
and  Winer)  holding  that  it  came  to  signify  the 
Arabs  generally.  From  a  consideration  of  the 
passages  above  cited,  and  that  which  makes  men- 
tion of  the  land  of  Kedem,  Gen.  xxv.  6  [Ishmael], 
we  think  (with  Gesenius)  that  it  primarily  signified 
the  peoples  of  the  Arabian  deserts  (east  of  Palestine 
and  Lower  Egypt),  and  chiefly  the  tribes  of  Ishmael 
and  of  Keturah,  extending  perhaps  to  Mesopotamia 
and  Babylonia  (to  which  we  may  suppose  Kedem 
to  apply  in  Num.  xxiii.  7,  as  well  as  in  Is.  ii.  6)  ; 
and  that  it  was  sometimes  applied  to  the  Arabs  and 
their  country  generally.  The  only  positive  instance 
of  this  latter  signification  of  Kedem  occurs  in  Gen. 
x.  30,  where  "  Sephar,  a  mount  of  the  East,"  is 
by  the  common  agreement  of  scholars  situate  in 
Southern  Arabia  [Arabia  ;  Sephar]. 

In  the  0.  T.  31J?,  with  its  conjugate  forms, 
seems  to  be  a  name  of  the  peoples  otherwise  called 
Bene-Kedem,  and  with  the  same  limitations.  The 
same  ma*  be  observed  of  ri  avaroKr)  in  the  N.  T. 
(Matt.  h.  1,  seqq,).  Dip  \J3}  Dip  *J3  pN, 
Dip  Y~\ti,  an^  dp  (m  tne  passages  above  re- 
ferred to),  are  translated  by  the  LXX.  and  in  the 
Vulg.,  and  sometimes  transcribed  (Ke5e'/u.)  by  the 
former;  except  LXX.  in  1  K.  iv.  30,  and  LXX.  and 
Vulg.  in  Is.  ii.  6,  where  they  make  Kedem  to  relate 
to  ancient  time.  [E.  S.  P.] 

BENHA'DAD  (1in-;3,  son  of  Hadad;  vibs 
'ASep ;  Benadad'),  the  name  of  three  kings  of 
Damascus.  Hadad  or  Adad  was  a  Syrian  god, 
probably  the  Sun  (Macrob.  Saturnalia,  i.  23), 
still  worshipped  at  Damascus  in  the  time  of 
Josephus  (Ant.  ix.  4,  0),  and  from  it  several 
Syrian  names  are  derived,  as  Hadadezer,  i.  e.  Ha- 
dad has  helped.  The  "  son  of  Hadad,"  therefore, 
means  worshipper  of  Hadad.  Damascus,  after 
having  been  taken  by  David  (2  Sam.  viii.  5,  6), 
was  delivered  from  subjection  to  his  successor  by 
Rezon  (1  K.  xi.  24),  who  "was  an  adversary  to 
Israel  all  the  days  of  Solomon." 

Beniiadad  I.  was  either  son  or  grandson  to 
Rezon,  and  in  his  time  Damascus  was  supreme  in 
Syria,  the  various  smaller  kingdoms  which  sur- 
rounded it  being  gradually  absorbed  into  its  territory. 
Benhadad  must  have  been  an  energetic  and  powerful 
sovereign,  and  his  alliance  was  courted  both  by  Baasha 
of  Israel  and  Asa  of  Judah.  He  finally  closed  with 
flic  latter  on    receiving  a    large  amount  ot  treasure, 


BENHADAD 

and  conquered  a  great  part  of  the  N.  of  Israel,  thereby 
enabling  Asa  to  pursue  his  victorious  operations  in 
the  S.  From  1  K.  xx.  34-,  it  would  appear  that  he 
continued  to  make  war  upon  Israel  in  Omri's  time, 
and  forced  him  to  make  "  streets  "  in  Samaria  for 
Syrian  residents.    [Ahab.]     This  date  is  B.C.  950. 

Benhadad  II.,  son  of  the  preceding,  and  also 
king  of  Damascus.  Some  authors  call  him  (jrancl- 
son,  on  the  ground  that  it  was  unusual  in  antiquity 
for  the  son  to  inherit  the  father's  name.  ■  But  Ben- 
hadad seems-  to  have  been  a  religious  title  of  the 
Syrian  kings,  as  we  see  by  its  reappearance  as  the 
name  of  Hazael's  son,  Benhadad  III.  Long  wars 
with  Israel  characterised  the  reign  of  Benhadad  II., 
of  which  the  earlier  campaigns  are  described  under 
Ahab.  His  power  and  the  extent  of  his  dominion 
are  proved  by  the  thirty-two  vassal  kings  who  ac- 
companied him  to  his  first  siege  of  Samaria.  Some 
time  after  the  death  of  Ahab,  probably  owing  to  the 
difficulties  in  which  Jehoram  of  Israel  was  involved 
by  the  rebellion  of  Moab,  Benhadad  renewed  the 
war  with  Israel,  and  after  some  minor  attempts 
which  were  frustrated  by  Elisha,  attacked  Samaria  a 
second  time,  and  pressed  the  siege  so  closely  that 
there  was  a  terrible  famine  in  the  city,  and  atrocities 
were  committed  to  get  food  no  less  revolting  than 
those  which  Josephus  relates  of  the  siege  of  Jerusalem 
by  Titus.  But  when  the  Syrians  were  on  the  very 
point,  of  success,  they  suddenly  broke  up  in  the  night 
in  consequence  of  a  sudden  panic,  under  which  they 
fancied  that  assistance  was  coming  to  Israel  from 
Egypt  or  some  Canaanitish  cities  as  Tyre  or  Ra- 
moth.  Jehoram  seems  to  have  followed  up  this 
unhoped-for  deliverance  by  successful  offensive  ope- 
rations, since  we  find  from  2  K.  ix.  1  that  Ramoth  in 
i  lilead  was  once  more  an  Israelitish  town.  [Ahab.] 
Soon  after  Benhadad  fell  sick,  and  sent  Hazael,  one 
of  his  chief  officers,  with  vast  presents,  to  consult 
Elisha,  who  happened  to  be  in  Damascus,  as  to  the 
issue  of  his  malady.  Elisha  replied  that  the  sick- 
aess  was  not  a  mortal  one,  but  that  still  he  would 
certainly  die,  and  he  announced  to  Hazael  that  he 
would  be  his  successor,  with  tears  at  the  thought  of 
the  misery  which  he  would  bring  on  Israel.  On 
the  day  after  Hazael's  return  Benhadad  was  mur- 
dered, but  not,  as  is  commonly  thought  from  a 
cursory  reading  of  2  I\.  viii.  15,  by- Hazael. 
Such  a  supposition  is  hardly  consistent  with  Hazael's 
character,  would  involve  Elisha  in  the  guilt  of 
having  suggested  the  deed,  and  the  introduction 
of  Hazael's  name  in  the  latter  clause  of  ver.  15, 
can  scarcely  be  accounted  for,  it'  he  is  also  the 
subject  of  the  first  clause.  Ewald,  from  the  Hebrew 
text  and  a  general  consideration  of  the  chapter 
.  des  V.  I.  iii.  p.  523,  note),  thinks  that 
more  of  Benhadad's  own  servants  were  the 
murderers:  Calmet  (  Fragm.  vii.)  believes  that  the 
wef  cloth  which  caused  his  death,  tvas  intended  to 
his  cure.  This  view  he  supports  by  a  re- 
ference to  Brace's  Travels,  iii.  p.  •">.;.  Hazael  suc- 
ceeded  him  perhaps  "•  bad  no  Datura!  heirs, 

and  with  him  expired  the  dynasty  founded  by  Rezon. 
Benhadad's  death  was  about  b.o.  890,  and  he  must 
hai  e  reigned  some  30 

Benhadad  III.,  son  of  the  above-mentioned 
Hazael,  and  his  successor  on  the  throne  of 
I  iis  reign  was  disastrous  tor  Damascus,  and  the  vast 
power  wielded  by  his  father  sank  into  insigm 
In  the  striking  language  of  scripture,  "Jehoahaz 
[the  son  of  Jehu]  besought  the  Lord,  and  the  Lord 
hearkened  unto  him,  for  he  saw  the  oppression  of 


BENJAMIN 


187 


Israel,  because  the  king  of  Syria  oppressed  them  ; 
and  the  Lord  gave  Israel  a  saviour  "  (2  K.  xiii.  4,  5). 
This  saviour  was  Jeroboam  II.  (cf.  2  K.  xiv.  27),  but 
the  prosperity  of  Israel  began  to  revive  in  the  reign  of 
his  father  Jchoash,  the  son  of  Jehoahaz.  When  Ben- 
hadad succeeded  to  the  throne  of  Hazael,  Jehoash,  in 
accordance  with  a  prophecy  of  the  dying  Elisha,  re- 
covered the  cities  which  Jehoahaz  had  lost  to  the 
Syrians,  and  beat  him  in  Aphek  (2  K.  xv.  17)  in 
the  plain  of  Esdraelon,  where  Ahab  had  already  de- 
feated Benhadad  II.  [Ahab.]  Jehoash  gained  two 
more  victories,  but  did  not  restore  the  dominion  of 
Israel  on  the  E.  of  Jordan.  This  glory  was  re- 
served for  his  successor.  The  date  of  Benhadad  III. 
is  B.C.  840.  His  misfortunes  in  war  are  noticed 
by  Amos  i.  4.  [G.  E.  L.  C] 

BEN-HA'IL  (Vrr}3,  son  of  the  host,   i.  e. 

warrior •  BenhaiV),  one  of  the  "  princes"  ("HC) 

whom  king  Jehoshaphat  sent  to  teach  in  the  cities 
of  Judah  (2  Chr.  xvii.  7).  The  LXX.  translates, 
robs  rjyovfj.4vovs  avrov  K  a\  robs  v  lob  s  rSiv 
8  v  v  a  t  u>  v. 

BEN-HA'NAN  (prn_|2  ;    ulbs  -Pavd  ;   Alex. 

wav  ;  filius  Hanaii),  son  of  Shimon,  in  the  line  of 
Judah  (1  Chr.  iv.  20). 

BENI'NU  (-13*33;  Bavovdi;  Alex.  Bavovaiai; 

Baninu),  a  Levite  ;  one  of  those  who  sealed  the 
covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  13  [14]  ). 

BEN'JAMIN  (|*0»33;  Beviafiiv,  Beviapeiv ; 
Benjamin).  1.  The  youngest  of  the  children  of 
Jacob,  and  the  only  one  of  the  thirteen  (if  indeed 
there  were  not  more:  comp.  "  all  his  daughters," 
Gen.  xxxvii.  35,  xlvi.  7),  who  was  bom  in  Pales- 
tine. His  birth  took  place  on  the  road  between 
Bethel  and  Bethlehem,  a  short  distance — "  a  length 
of  earth  " — from  the  latter,  and  his  mother  Rachel 
died  in  the  act  of  giving  birth  to  him,  naming  him 
with  her  last  breath  Ben-oni,  "  son  of  my  sorrow  " 
(comp.  1  Sam.  iv.  19-22).  This  was  by  Jacob 
changed  into  Benjamin  (Binyamiri)  (Gen.  xxxv. 
16-18). 

The  name  is  worthy  some  attention.  From  the 
terms  of  the  story  it  would  appear  to  be  implied 
that  it  was  bestowed  on  the  child  in  opposition  to 
the  desponding,  and  probably  ominous,  name  given 
him  by  his  dying  mother,  and  on  this  assumption  it 
has  been  interpreted  to  moan  "  Son  of  the  right 
hand,','  »'.  e.  fortunate,  dexterous,  Felix;  as  if 
P0*"|3.      This    interpretation    is   inserted   in   the 

text  of  the  Vulgate  and  the  margin  of  the  A.  V. 
and  has  the  support  of  Gesenius  (  Thes.  -'I'd).  On 
the  other  hand  the  Samaritan  Codex  gives  the  name 
in  an  altered  form  as  D^Q^D,  son  of  days,  i.  e.  son 
of  my  oil  age  (comp.  Con.  xliv.  20),  which  is 
adopted  by  Philo,  Aben-ezra,  and  others.  Loth 
these  interpretations  are  of  comparatively  late  date, 
and  it  is  notorious  that  such  explanatory  glosses 
are  not  only  often  invented  long  subsequently  to 
the  original  record,  but  are  as  often  at  variance 
with  the  real  meaning  of  that  record.  The  mean- 
ing given  by  Josephus—  Staryv  eVauTOJ  "y(vofX(vr]v 
bo~vvqv  rrj  ,u7)Tpi  {Ant.  i.  21,  §3) — is  completely 
differenl  from  either  of  the  above.  However 
this  may  be,  the  name  is  not  so  pointed  as  to  agree 
u  ith  any  interpretation  founded  on  "  son  of" — being 
33,  and  not  32.  Moreover  in  the  adjectival  forms 
of  the  word  the  first  syllable  is  generally  suppressed, 


188 


BENJAMIN 


as  »3*D*~»33  or  iywn  '3,  i.  e.  "  sons  of  Yemini," 
for  sons  of  Benjamin ;  ^D^  EJ^N,  "  man  of  Yemini," 
for  man  of  Benjamin  (1  Sam.  ix.  1 ;  Esth.  ii.  5)  ; 
^D11  f"IN,  land  of  Yemini  for  land  of  Benjamin 
(1  Sam.  ix.  4) ;  as  if  the  patriarch's  name  had 
been  originally  ptt11,  Yamin  (comp.  Gen.  xlvi.  10), 
and  that  of  the  tribe  Yeminites.  These  adjectival 
forms  are  carefully  preserved  in  the  LXX. 

Until  the  journeys  of  Jacob's  sons  and  of  Jacob 
himself  into  Egypt  we  hear  nothing  of  Benjamin, 
and  as  far  as  he  is  concerned  those  well-known 
narratives  disclose  nothing  beyond  the  very  strong 
affection  entertained  towards  him  by  his  father  and 
his  whole-brother  Joseph,  and  the  relation  of  fond 
endearment  in  which  he  stood,  as  if  a  mere  darling 
child  (comp.  Gen.  xliv.  20),  to  the  whole  of  his 
family.  Even  the  harsh  natures  of  the  elder 
patriarchs  relaxed  towards  him.  But  Benjamin 
can  hardly  have  been  the  "  lad "  which  we  com- 
monly imagine  him  to  be,  for  at  the  time  that 
the  patriarchs  went  down  to  reside  in  Egypt,  when 
"  every  man  with  his  house  went  with  Jacob, '  ten 
sons  are  ascribed  to  Benjamin, — a  larger  number 
than  to  any  of  his  brothers — and  two  of  these, 
from  the  plural  formation  of  their  names,  were 
themselves  apparently  families  (Gen.  xlvi.  21).a 

And  here,  little  as  it  is,  closes  all  we  know  of  the 
life  of  the  patriarch  himself;  henceforward  the 
history  of  Benjamin  is  the  history  of  the  tribe. 
And  up  to  the  time  of  the  entrance  on  the  Pro- 
mised Land  that  history  is  as  meagre  as  it  is  after- 
wards full  and  interesting.  We  know  indeed  that 
shortly  after  the  departure  from  Egypt  it  was  the 
smallest  tribe  but  one  (Num.  i.  36 :  comp.  verse 
1) ;  that  during  the  march  its  position  was  on  the 
west  of  the  tabernacle  with  its  brother  tribes  of 
Ephraim  and  Manasseh  (Num.  ii.  18-24).  We 
have  the  names  of  the  "  captain  "  of  the  tribe,  when 
it  set  forth  on  its  long  march  (Num.  ii.  22)  ; 
of  the  "  ruler  "  who  went  up  with  his  fellows  to 
spy  out  the  land  (xiii.  9) ;  of  the  families  of  which 
the  tribe  consisted  when  it  was  marshalled  at  the 
great  halt  in  the  plains  of  Moab  by  Ji  rdan-Jericho 
(Num.  xxvi.  38-41,  63),  and  of  the  "prince"  who. 
was  chosen  to  assist  in  the  dividing  of  the  land 
(xxxiv.  21).  These  are  indeed  preserved  to  us. 
But  there  is  nothing  to  indicate  what  were  the 
characteristics  and  behaviour  of  the  tribe  which 
sprang  from  the  orphan  darling  of  his  fatheV  and 
brothers.  No  touches  of  personal  biography  like 
those  with  which  we  are  favoured  concerning 
Ephraim  (1  Chr.  vii.  20-23):  no  record  of  zeal  for 
Jehovah  like  Levi  (Ex.  xxxii.  26) :  no  evidence  of 
special  bent  as  in  the  case  of  Reuben  and  Gad 
\  Num.  xxxii.).  The  only  foreshadowing  of  the  ten- 
dencies  of  the  tribe  which  was  to  produce  Ehud, 
Saul,  and  the  perpetrators  of  the  deed  of  Gibeah,  is 
to  be  found  m  the  prophetic  gleam  which  lighted  up 
the  dying  Jacob,  "  Benjamin  shall  ravin  as  a  wolf, 


a  According  to  other  lists,  some  of  these  "children" 
would  seem  to  have  been  grandchildren  (comp.  Num. 
xxvi.  3S-41  ;   1  Chr.  vii.  6-12,  viii.  1). 

b  A  trace  of  the  pasture  lands  may  be  found  in  the 
mention  of  the  "  herd"  (1  Sam.  xi.  5)  ;  and  possibly 
others  in  the  names  of  some  of  the  towns  of  Ben- 
jamin :  as  hap-Pilrah,  "  the  cow  ;"  Zclah-ha-eleph, 
"  the  ox-rib"  (Josh,  xviii.  23,  2S). 

c  It  is  perhaps  hardly  fanciful  to  ask  if  we  may  not 
account  in  this  way  for  the  curious  prevalence  among 


BENJAMIN 

in  the  morning  he  shall  devour  the  prey,  and  at 
night  he  shall  divide  the  spoil  "  (Gen.  xlix.  27). 

The  proximity  of  Benjamin  to  Ephraim  during  the 
march  to  the  Promised  Land  was  maintained  in  the 
territories  allotted  to  each.  Benjamin  lay  imme- 
diately to  the  south  of  Ephraim  and  between  him 
and  Judah.  The  situation  of  this  territory  was 
highly  favourable.  It  formed  almost  a  parallelo- 
gram, of  about  26  miles  in  length  by  12  in 
breadth.  Its  eastern  boundary  was  the  Jordan, 
and  from  thence  it  extended  to  the  wooded  dis- 
trict of  Kiijath-jearim,  a  point  about  eight  miles 
west  of  Jerusalem,  while  in  the  other  direction  it 
stretched  from  the  valley  of  Hinnom,  under  the 
"  Shoulder  of  the  Jebusite  "  on  the  south,  to  Bethel 
on  the  north.  Thus  Dan  intervened  between  Ben- 
jamin and  the  Philistines,  while  the  communications 
with  the  valley  of  the  Jordan  were  in  their  own 
power.  On  the  south  the  territory  ended  ab- 
ruptly with  the  steep  slopes  of  the  hill  of  Jerusalem, 
— on  the  north  it  melted  imperceptibly  unto  the 
possessions  of  the  friendly  Ephraim.  The  smallness 
ot  this  district,  hardly  larger  than  the  county  of 
Middlesex,  was,  according  to  the  testimony  of 
Josephus,  compensated  for  by  the  excellence  of  the 
land  (Sia  t)jv  rrjs  yys  aper^v,  Ant.  v.  l).b  In 
the  degenerate  state  of  modern  Palestine  few 
traces  remain  of  this  excellence.  But  other  and 
more  enduring  natural  peculiarities  remain,  and 
claim  our  recognition,  rendering  this  possession  one 
of  the  most  remarkable  among  those  of  the  tribes. 

(1.)  The  general  level  of  this  part  of  Palestine  is 
very  high,  not  less  than  2000  feet  above  the  maritime 
plain  of  the  Mediterranean  on  the  one  side,  or  than 
3000  feet  above  the  deep  valley  of  the  Jordan  on 
the  other,  besides  which  this  general  level  or  plateau  is 
surmounted,  in  the  district  now  under  consideration, 
by  a  large  number  of  eminences — defined,  rounded 
hills — almost  every  one  of  which  has  borne  some 
part  in  the  history  of  the  tribe.  Many  of  these  hills 
carry  the  fact  of  their  existence  in  their  names. 
Gibeon,  Gibeah,  Geba  or  Gaba,  all  mean  "  hill ;  " 
Ramah  and  Ramathaim,  "  eminence ;"  Mizpeh, 
"Watch  tower;"  while  the  "  ascent  of  Beth-horon," 
the  "  cliff  Rimmon  "  the  "  pass  of  Mich-mash"  with 
its  two  "  teeth  of  rock,"  all  testify  to  a  country 
eminently  broken  and  hilly. 

The  special  associations  which  belong  to  each  of 
these  eminences,  whether  as  sanctuary  or  fortress, 
many  of  them  arising  from  the  most  stirring  inci- 
dents in  the  history  of  the  nation,  will  be  best 
examined  under  the  various  separate  heads. 

(2.)  No  less  important  than  these  eminences  are  the 
torrent  beds  and  ravines  by  which  the  upper  country 
breaks  down  into  the  deep  tracts  on  each  side  of  it. 
They  formed  then,  as  they  do  still,  the  only  mode 
of  access  from  either  the  plains  of  Fhilistia  and  of 
Sharon  on  the  west,  or  the  deep  valley  of  the  Jordan 
on  the  east  c — the  latter  steep  and  precipitous  in  the 
extreme,  the  former  more  gradual  in  their  declivity. 
Up  these  western  passes  swarmed  the  Philistines  on 
their   incursions  during  the  times  of  Samuel  and 

the  names  of  the  towns  of  Benjamin  of  the  titles  of 
tribes.  Ha-Awim,  the  Avites  ;  Zcmaraim,  the  Zc- 
marites  ;'  ha-Ophni,  the  Ophnife  ;  Chephar  ha-Am- 
monai,  the  village  of  the  Ammonites  ;  ha-Jebusi,  the 
Jebusite, — are  all  among  the  names  of  places  in  Ben- 
jamin ;  and  we  can  hardly  doubt  that  in  these  names 
is  preserved  the  memory  of  many  an  ascent  of  the 
wild  tribes  of  the  desert  from  the  sultry  and  open 
plains  of  the  low  level  to  the  fresh  air  and  secure 
fastnesses  of  the  upper  district. 


BENJAMIN 

of  Saul,  driving  the  first  kiug  of  Israel  right  over 
the  higher  district 'of  his  own  tribe,  to  Gilgal  in  the 
hot  recesses  of  the  Arabah,  and  establishing  them- 
selves over  the  face  of  the  country  from  Michmash 
to  Ajalon.  Down  these  same  defiles  they  were 
driven  by  Saul  after  Jonathan's  victorious  exploit, 
just  as  in  earlier  times  Joshua  had  chased  the 
Canaanites  down  the  long  hill  of  Beth-horon,  and  as 
centuries  after  the  forces  of  Syria  were  chased  by 
Judas  Maccabaeus  (1  Mace.  iii.  16-24). 

The  passes  on  the  eastern  side  are  of  a  much 
more  difficult  and  intricate  character  than  those 
on  the  western.  The  principal  one,  which,  now 
unfrequented,  was  doubtless  in  ancient  times  the 
main  ascent  to  the  interior,  leaves  the  Arabah 
behind  the  site  of  Jericho,  and  breaking  through 
the  barren  hills  with  many  a  wild  bend  and  steep 
slope,  extends  to  and  indeed  beyond  the  very 
central  ridge  of  the  table-land  of  Benjamin,  to 
the  foot  of  the  eminence  on  which  stand  the  ruins  of 
Birch,  the  ancient  Beeroth.  At  its  lower  part  this 
valley  bears  the  name  of  Wady  Fuic&r,  but  for  the 
greater  part  of  its  length  it  is  called  Wady  Suweinit. 
It  is  the  main  access,  and  from  its  central  ravine 
branch  out  side  valleys,  conducting  to  Bethel,  Mich- 
mash, Gibeah,  Anathoth,  and  other  towns.  After 
the  fall  of  Jericho  this  "ravine  must  have  stood  open 
to  the  victorious  Israelites,  as  their  natural  inlet  to 
the  country.  At  its  lower  end  must  have  taken 
place  the  repulse  and  subsequent  victory  of  Ai, 
with  the  conviction  and  stoning  of  Achan,  and 
through  it  Joshua  doubtless  hastened  to  the  relief 
of  the  Gibeonites,  and  to  his  memorable  pursuit  of 
the  Canaanites  down  the  pass  of  Beth-horon,  on  tie 
other  side  of  the  territory  of  Benjamin. 

Another  of  these  passes  is  that  which  since  the 
time  of  our  Saviour  has  been  the  regular  road 
between  Jericho  and  Jerusalem,  the  scene  of  the 
parable  of  the  Good  Samaritan. 

Others  lie  further  north  by  the  mountain  which 
bears  the  traditional  name  of  Quarantania ;  first  up 
the  face  of  the  cliff,  afterwards  less  steep,  and 
finally  leading  to  Bethel  or  Taiyibeh,  the  ancient 
Opbxah  (Rob.  i.  570). 

These  intricate  ravines  may  well  have  harboured 
the  wild  beasts,  which,  if  the  derivation  of  the 
names  of  several  places  in  this  locality  are  to  be 
trusted,  originally  haunted  the  district — zeboim, 
hyaenas  (1  Sain.  xiii.  18),  shual  and  shaalbim, 
foxes  or  jackals  (Judg.  i.  35;  1  Sam.  xiii.  17), 
ajalon,  gazelles.11 

Such  were  the  limits  and  such  the  character  of 
the  possession  of  Benjamin  as  fixed  by  those  who 
originally  divided  the  land.  But  it  could  not  have 
been  long  before  they  extended  their  limits,  since  in 
the  e.ulv  lists  of  1  Chr.  viii.  we  find  mention  made 
of  Benjamites  who  built  Lod  and  Ono,  and  of 
others  who  were  founders  of  Aijalon  (12,  13),  all 
which  towns  were  beyond  the  spot  named  above  as 
the  westernmost  point  in  their  boundary.  These 
places  too  were  in  their  possession  after  the 
return  from  the  captivity  (Xeh.  xi.  35). 

The  contrast  between  the  warlike  character  of 
the  tribe  and  the  peaceful  image  of  its  progenitor 
has  been  already  noticed.    That  fierceness  and  power 


BENJAMIN 


189 


d  The  subject  of  the  connexion  between  the  topo- 
graphy of  Benjamin  and  the  events  which  took  place 
there  is  treated  in  the  most  admirable  manner  in 
the  4th  chapter  of  Mr.  Stanley's  Sinai  and  Palestine. 
Very  much  of  the  above  article  is  drawn  from  that 
source. 

c  A  fair  argument  in  favour  of  the  received  chro- 


are  not  less  out  of  proportion  to  the  smallness  of  its 
numbers  and  of  its  territory.  This  comes  out  in 
many  scattered  notices,  (a)  Benjamin  was  the  only 
tribe  which  seems  to  have  pursued  archery  to  any 
purpose,  and  their  skill  in  the  bow  (1  Sam.  xx. 
20,  36;  2  Sam.  i.  22  ;  1  Chr.  viii.  40,  xii.  2; 
2  Chr.  xvii.  17)  and  the  sling  (Judg.  xx.  16) 
are  celebrated,  (6)  When,  after  the  first  conquest 
of  the  country,  the  nation  began  to  groan  under  the 
miseries  of  a  foreign  yoke,  it  is  to  a  man  of  Ben- 
jamin, Ehud  the  son  of  Gera,  that  they  turn  for 
deliverance.  The  story  seems  to  imply  that  he 
accomplished  his  purpose  on  Eglon  with  less  risk, 
owing  to  his  proficiency  in  the  peculiar  practice  of 
using  his  left  hand,  a  practice  apparently  confined 
to  Benjamites,  though  by  them  greatly  employed 
(Judg.  iii.  15,  and  see  xx.  16;  1  Chr.  xii.  2). 
(c)  Baanah  and  Rechab,  "  the  sons  of  Rimmon  the 
Beerothite  of  the  children  of  Benjamin,"  are  the 
only  Israelites  west  of  the  Jordan  named  in  the 
whole  history  as  captains  of  marauding  predatory 

"  bands  "  (Dl,*1!nil) ;   and  the  act  of  which  they 

were  guilty — the  murder  of  the  head  of  their  house 
— hardly  needed  the  summary  vengeance  inflicted 
on  them  by  David  to  testify  the  abhorrence  in 
which  it  must  have  been  held  by  all  Orientals  how- 
ever warlike,  (if)  The  dreadful  deed  recorded  in 
Judg.  xix.  though  repelled  by  the  whole  country, 
was  unhesitatingly  adopted  and  defended  by  Ben- 
jamin with  an  obstinacy  and  spirit  truly  extra- 
ordinary. Of  their  obstinacy  there  is  a  remark- 
able trait  in  1  Sam.  xxii.  7-18.  Though  Saul  was 
not  only  the  king  of  the  nation,  but  the  head  of 
the  tribe,  and  David  a  member  of  a  family  which 
had  as  yet  no  claims  on  the  friendship  of  Benjamin, 
yet  the  Benjamites  resisted  the  strongest  appeal  of 
Saul  to  betray  the  movements  of  David,  and  after 
those  movements  had  been  revealed  by  Doeg  the 
Edomite  (worthy  member — as  he  must  have  seemed 
to  them — of  an  accursed  race  !)  they  still  firmly 
refused  to  lift  a  hand  against  those  who  had 
assisted  him. 

And  yet — to  return  to  the  deed  of  Gibeah — in 
one  or  two  of  the  expressions  of  that  antique  and 
simple  narrative — the  phrase  "  Benjamin  my  bro- 
ther"— the  anxious  inquiry,  "what  shall  we  do 
for  wives  for  them  that  remain  ?" —  and  the  en- 
treaty to  be  favourable  to  them  "  for  our  sakes  " — 
we  seem  to  hear  as  it  were  an  echo  of  those  terms 
of  fond  affection  which  have  given  the  son  of 
Rachel's  grief  so  distinct  a  place  in  our  minds. 

That  frightful  transaction  was  indeed  a  crisis  in 
the  history  of  the  tribe:  the  narrative  undoubtedly 
is  intended  to  convey  that  the  six  hundred  who 
took  refuge  in  the  cliil'  Rimmon,  and  who  were 
afterwards  provided  with  wives  partly  from  Jabesh 
Gilead  (Judg.  xxi.  10),  partly  from  Sliiloh  (xxi. 
21),  were  the  only  survivors.  A  long  interval 
•must  have  elapsed  between  mi  abject  a  condition 
and  the  culminating  point  at  which  we  next  meet 
with  the  tribe.e 

Several  circumstances  may  have  conduced  to  its 
restoration  to  that  place  which  it  was  now  to  as- 
sume.    The  Tabernacle  was  at   Sliiloh  in  Ephraim. 


nology  of  the  hook  of  Judges  may  be  drawn  from  this 
circumstance — since  no  shorter  period  would  have 
been  sufficient  for  the  tribe  to  have  recovered  such 
almost  total  extermination,  and  to  have  reached  the 
numbers  and  force  indicated  in  the  li>ts  of  1  Chr.  xii. 
1-8,  vii.  G-12,  viii.  1-40. 


190 


BENJAMIN 


during  the  time  of  the  last  Judge ;  but  the  Ark 
was  in  Benjamin  at  Kirjath-jearim.     Ramah,  the 

official  residence  of  Samuel,  and  containing  a  sanc- 
tuary greatly  frequented  (1  Sam.  ix.  12,  &c.), — 
Mizpeh,  where  the  great  assemblies  of  "  all  Israel  " 
took  place  (1  Sam.  vii.  5), — Bethel,  perhaps  the 
most  ancient  of  all  the  sanctuaries  of  Palestine,  and 
Gibeon,  specially  noted  as  "the  great  high  place" 
(2  Chr.  i.  3),  were  all  in  the  land  of  Benjamin. 
These  must  gradually  have  accustomed  the  people 
who  resorted  to  these  various  places  to  associate  the 
tribe  with  power  and  sanctity,  and  they  tend  to 
elucidate  the  anomaly  which  struck  Saul  so  forcibly, 
"  that  all  the  desire  of  Israel "  should  have  been 
fixed  on  the  house  of  the  smallest  of  its  tribes 
(1  Sam.  ix.  21). 

The  struggles  and  contests  which  followed  the 
death  of  Saul  arose  from  the  natural  unwillingness 
of  the  tribe  to  relinquish  its  position  at  the  head  of 
the  nation,  especially  in  favour  of  Judah.  Had  it 
been  Ephraim,  the  case  might  have  been  different, 
but  Judah  had  as  yet  no  connexion  with  the  house 
of  Joseph,  and  was  besides  the  tribe  of  David,  whom 
Saul  had  pursued  with  such  unrelenting  enmity. 
The  tact  and  sound  sense  of  Abner,  however,  suc- 
ceeded in  overcoming  these  difficulties,  though  he 
himself  fell  a  victim  in  the  very  act  of  accomplish- 
ing his  purpose,  and  the  proposal  that  David  should 
be  "  king  over  Israel"  was  one  which  "  seemed 
good  to  the  whole  house  of  Benjamin,"  and  of 
which  the  tribe  testified  its  approval,  and  evinced 
its  good  faith,  by  sending  to  the  distant  capital  of 
Hebron  a  detachment  of  3000  men  of  the  "  brethren 
of  Saul"  (1  Chr.  xii.  29).  Still  the  insults  of 
Shimei  and  the  insurrection  of  Sheba  are  indications 
that  the  soreness  still  existed,  and  we  do  not  hear 
of  any  cordial  co-operation  or  firm  union  between 
the  two  tribes  until  a  cause  of  common  quarrel 
arose,  at  the  disruption,  when  Rehoboam  assembled 
"  all  the  house  of  Judah  with  the  tribe  of  Benjamin, 
to  fight  against  the  house  of  Israel,  to  bring  the 
kingdom  again  to  the  son  of  Solomon  "  (1  K.  xii. 
21;  2  Chr.  xi.  1).  Possibly  the  seal  may  have 
been  set  to  this  by  the  fact  of  Jeroboam  having  just 
taken  possession  of  Bethel,  a  city  of  Benjamin,  for 
the  calf-worship  of  the  northern  kingdom  f  (1  K.  xii. 
29).  On  the  other  hand  Rehoboam  fortified  and 
garrisoned  seveial  cities  of  Benjamin,  and  wisely 
dispersed  the  members  of  his  own  family  through 
them  (2  Chr.  xi.  10-12).  The  alliance  was  further 
strengthened  by  a  covenant  solemnly  undertaken 
(2  Chr.  xv.  9),  and  by  the  employment  of  Ben- 
jamites  in  high  positions  in  the  army  of  Judah 
(2  Chr.  xvii.  17).  But  what  above  all  must  have 
contributed  to  strengthen  the  alliance  was  the  fact 
that  the  Temple  was  the  common  property  of  both 
tribes.  True,  it  was  founded,  erected,  and  endowed 
by  princes  of  "  the  house  of  Judah,"  but  the  city 
of  "  the  Jebusite"  (Josh,  xviii.  28),  and  the  whole 
of  the  ground  north  of  the  Valley  of  Hinnom,  was 
in  the  lot  of  Benjamin.  In  this  latter  fact  is  lite- 
rally fulfilled  the  prophecy  of  Moses  (Deut.  xxxiii. 
12) :  Benjamin  "  dwelt  between  "  the  "  shoulders  " 
of  the  ravines  which  encompass  the  Holy  City  on 
tlie  west,  south,  and  east  (see  a  good  treatment 
of  this  point  in  Blunt's  Uudes.  Coincidences, 
Pt.  II.  §xvii.). 

Henceforward  the  history  of  Benjamin  becomes 

f  Bethel,  however,  was  on  the  very  boundary  line, 
and  centuries  before  this  date  was  inhabited  by  both 
Ephr'aimites  and  Benjamites  (Judg.  xix.  Hi). 


BEN-ZOHETH 

merged  in  that  of  the  southern  kingdom.  That  the 
tribe  still  retained  its  individuality  is  plain  from 
the  constant  mention  of  it  in  the  various  censuses 
taken  of  the  two  tribes,  and  on  other  occasions, 
and  also  from  the  lists  of  the  men  of  Benjamin  who 
returned  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii. ;  Neh.  vii.)  and 
took  possession  of  their  old  towns  (Neh.  xi.  31-35). 
At  Jerusalem  the  name  must  have  been  always 
kept  alive,  if  by  nothing  else,  by  the  name  of  "  the 
high  gate  of  Benjamin"  (Jer.  xx.  2).  [Jeru- 
salem.] 

But  though  the  tribe  had  thus  given  up  to  ;i 
certain  degree  its  independent  existence,  it  is  clear 
that  the  ancient  memories  of  their  house  were  nol 
allowed  to  fade  from  the  recollections  of  the  Ben- 
jamites. The  genealogy  of  Saul,  to  a  late  date,  is 
carefully  preserved  in  the  lists  of  1  Chr.  (viii.  33- 
40,  ix.  39-44) ;  the  name  of  Kish  recurs  as  the 
father  of  Mordecai  (Est.  ii.  5),  the  honoured  de- 
liverer of  the  nation  from  miseries  worse  than  those 
threatened  by  Nahash  the  Ammonite.  But  it  was 
reserved  for  a  greater  than  these  to  close  the  line  of 
this  tribe  in  the  sacred  history.  The  royal  name 
once  more  appears,  and  "Saul  who  also  is  called 
Paul "  has  left  on  record  under  his  own  hand  that 
he  was  "  of  the  stock  of  Israel,  of  the  tribe  of  Ben- 
jnmin."  It  is  perhaps  more  than  a  mere  fancy  to 
note  how  remarkably  the  chief  characteristics  of  the 
tribe  are  gathered  up  in,  his  one  person.  There 
was  the  fierceness,  in  his  persecution  of  the  Chris- 
tians ;  and  there  were  the  obstinacy  and  persistence, 
which  made  him  proof  against  the  tears  and  prayers 
of  his  converts,  and" "  ready  not  to  be  bound  only, 
but  also  to  die  for  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus " 
(Acts  xxi.  12, 13).  There  were  the  force  and  vigour 
to  which  natural  difficulties  and  confined  circum- 
stances formed  no  impediment ;  and  lastly,  there 
was  the  keen  sense  of  the  greatness  of  his  house,  in 
his  proud  reference  to  his  forefather  "  Saul  the 
son  of  Cis,  a  man  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin." 

Be  this  as  it  may,  no  nobler  hero  could  be  found 
to  close  the  rolls  of  the  worthies  of  his  tribe — no 
prouder  distinction  could  be  desired  for  Benjamin 
than  that  of  having  produced  the  first  judge  of  its 
nation,  the  first  king,  and  finally,  when  Judaism 
gave  place  to  Christianity,  the  great  Apostle  of  the 
Gentiles. 

2.  A  man  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  son  of  Bil- 
han,  and  the  head  of  a  family  of  warriors  (1  Chr. 
vii.  10). 

3.  One  of  the  "  sons  of  Harim;"  an  Israelite  in 
the  time  of  Ezra,  who  had  married  a  foreign  wife 
(Ezr.  x.  32).  '  [G.] 

BEN'JAMIN,     HIGH     GATE,     or     GATE,     OF 

(j'v'pyn  '3  "\W),  Jer.  xx.  2,  xxxvii.  13,  xxxviii.  7  ; 
Zech.  xiv.  10.     [Jerusalem.] 

BE'NO  032  ;  LXX.  translates  v'iot ;  Benno), 
a  Levite  of  the  sons  of  Merari  (1   Chr.  xxiv.  26, 

27). 

BEN-O'NI  C0i&")2,  son  of  my  sorrow,  or  of  my 
strength,  i.  e.  of  my  last  effort,  Hiller,  Onom.  300, 
&c. ;  vlhs  oSi/vys  /xov ;  Benoni,  id  est  filivs  doloris 
mei),  the  name  which  the  dying  Rachel  gave  to  her 
newlv-born  son,  but  which  by  his  father  was  changed 
into  Benjamin  (Gen.  xxxv.  18). 

BEN-ZO'HETH  (nniT"|3;  viol  ZwdP;  Alex. 

Zux^O !  Zolictli),  a  name  occurring  among  the 
descendants  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  iv.  20).    The  passage 


BEON 

appears  to  be  a  fragment,  and  as  if  the  name  of  a 
son  of  the  Zoheth  just  mentioned  had  originally 
followed.     A.  V.  follows  Vulgate. 

BE'ON  Qty3;   Balav;   Alex,   ftafia. ;  Beon),  a 

place  on  the  east  of  Jordan  (Num.  xxxii.  3),  doubtless 
a  contraction  of  Baal-meon  (romp.  ver.  38). 

BE'OR  ("I'lya  ;  Bewp ;  Bcor\  1.  The  father 
of  Bela.  one  of  the  early  Edomite  kings  (Gen. 
xxxvi.  32;  1  Chr.  i.  43).  2.  Father  of  Balaam 
(Num.  xxii.  5,  xxiv.  3,  15 ;  xxxi.  8  ;  Josh.  xiii.  22, 
xxiv.  9  ;  Mic.  vi.  5).  He  is  called  BOSOR  in  the 
N.  T.     [Bela.] 

BE'RA  (yi3  ;  Vat.  and  Alex.  BaXAa ;  Joseph. 
BaAAas;  Bard),  king  of  Sodom  at  the  time  of  the 
invasion  of  the  five  kings  under  Cfledorlaomer  (Gen. 
xiv.  2  ;  also  17  and  '21). 

BERA'CHAH  (JtTB  ;  Bepxta ;  Baracha),  a 

Benjamite,  one  of"  Saul's  brethren;"  who  attached 
himself  to  David  at  Ziklag  (1  Chr.  xii.  3). 

BERA'CHAH,  Valley  of  (n3T3  ptgg  ; 
KoiXas  Ev\oyias ;  vallis  benedictionis),  a  valley 
(Jos.  riva  ko7\ov  Kai  (papayytiS-rj  rSwov)  in 
which  Jehoshaphat  and  his  people  assembled  to 
"  bless  "  Jehovah  after  the  overthrow  of  the  hosts 
of  Moabites,  Ammonites,  and  Mehunim,  who  had 
come  against  them,  and  which  from  that  fact  ac- 
quired its  name  of  "  the  valley  of  blessing"  (2  Chr. 
xx.  26).  The  place  is  remarkable  as  furnishing 
one  of  the  latest  instances  in  the  0.  T.  of  a  name 
bestowed  in  consequence  of  an  occurrence  at  the 
spot. 

The  name  of  Bereikut  (dS^jyj)  st'^  survives, 

attached  to  ruins  in  a  valley  of  the  same  name 
lying  between  Tekua  and  the  main  road  from  Beth- 
lehem to  Hebron,  a  position  corresponding  accurately 
enough  with  the  locality  of  the  battle  as  described 
in  2  Chr.  xx.  (Rob.  iii.  275:  the  discovery  is  due 
to  Wolcott;  see  Ritter,  Jordan,  635.)  It  must 
not  be  confounded  with  Caphar-barucha,  now  pro- 
bably Beni  Nairn,  an  eminence  on  very  high  ground, 
3  or  4  miles  east  of  Hebron,  commanding  an  ex- 
tensive view  of  the  Dead  Sea,  and  traditionally  the 
scene  of  Abraham's  intercession  for  Sodom.  The 
tomb  of  Lot  has  been  shown  there  since  the  days  of 
Mandeville(see  Reland,685;  Rob.  i.  489-91).  [G.] 

BERACHI'AH  (-irvrna,  Berechiahu  ;  Bctpa- 

x'ta;  Barachid),  a  Gcrshonite  Levite,  father  of  Asaph 
the  singer  (1  Chr.  vi.  39).      [BERECHIAH.] 

BERAI'AH  (rVN"U  ;  Bapd'ia ;  Baraia),  son 

of  Shimhi,  a  chief  man  of  Benjamin  (1  Chr.  viii. 
21). 

BERE'A  (Bfpola).  1.  A  city  of  Macedonia, 
to  which  St.  Paul  retired  with  Silas  and Timotheus, 
in  tin1  course  of  his  first  visit  to  Europe,  on  being 
persecuted  in  Thessalonica  I  Acts  Evii.  10),  and  from 
which,  on  being  again  persecuted  by  emissaries 
from  Thessalonica,  he  withdrew  to  the  sea  for  the 
purpose  of  proceeding  to  Athens  lib.  14, 15).  The 
community  of  Jews  must  have  been  considerable  in 
Berea,  and  their  character  is  described  in  very 
favourable  terms  (»o.  11).  Sopater,  one  of  St. 
Paul's  missionary  companions,  was  from  this  place 
(BepouuoSf  Acts  xx.  4).  He  accompanied  theapo  tie 
on  his  return   from    the   second    visit    to    Europe 


BERED 


191 


(ib.)  •  and  he  appears  to  have  previously  been  with 
him,  in  the  course  of  that  second  visit,  at  Corinth, 
when  he  wrote  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  (Rom. 
xvi.  21). 

Berea,  now  called  Verria  or  Kara-Verria,  is 
fully  described  by  Leake  {Northern  Greece,  vol.  iii. 
pp.  290  seqq.),  and  by  Cousinery  (Voyage  dans  la 
Macedoine,  vol.  i.  pp.  69  seqq.).  Situated  on  the 
eastern  slope  of  the  Olympian  mountain-range, 
with  an  abundant  supply  of  water,  and  com- 
manding an  extensive  view  of  the  plain  of  the 
Axius  and  Haliacmon,  it  is  regarded  as  one  of 
the  most  agreeable  towns  in  Rumili,  and  has 
now  15,000  or  20,000  inhabitants.  A  few  an- 
cient remains,  Greek,  Roman,  and  Byzantine,  still 
exist  here.  Two  roads  are  laid  down  in  the 
Itineraries  between  Thessalonica  and  Berea,  one 
passing  by  Fella.  St.  Paul  and  his  companions 
may  have  travelled  by  either  of  them.  Two  roads 
also  connect  Berea  with  Dium,  one  passing  by 
Pydna.  It  was  probably  from  Dium  that  St.  Paul 
sailed  to  Athens,  leaving  Silas  and  Timotheus  be- 
hind ;  and  possibly  1  Thess.  iii.  2  refers  to  a  journey 
of  Timotheus  from  Berea,  not  from  Athens. 
[Timothy.]  The  coin  in  Akcrman's  Numismatic 
Illustrations  of  the  N.  T.  p.  46,  is  erroneously 
assigned  to  the  Macedonian  Berea,  and  belongs  to 
the  following. 

2.  The  modern  Aleppo,  mentioned  in  2  Mace, 
xiii.  4,  in  connexion  with  the  invasion  of  Judaea 
by  Antioehus  Eupator,  as  the  scene  of  the  miserable 
death  of  Menelaus.  This  seems  to  be  the  city,  in 
which  Jerome  says  that  certain  persons  lived,  who 
possessed  and  used  St.  Matthew's  Hebrew  Gospel 
(De  Vir.  Illust.  c.  3). 

3.  (Bepe'a),  a  place  in  Judaea,  apparently  not 
very  far  from  Jerusalem,  where  Bacchides, 
the  general  of  Demetrius,  encamped  shortly 
before  the  engagement  in  which  Judas  Macca- 
baeus  was  slain  (1  Mace.  ix.  4.  See  Joseph.  Ant. 
xii.  11,  §1).  [J.  S.  H.] 

BERECHI'AH  (-irvrm  anfl    iWT3j    Ba- 

pa%ia\  Barachian).  1.  One  of  the  sons  of  Zerub- 
babel,  and  a  descendant  of  the  royal  family  of  Judah 
(1  Chr.  iii.  20). 

2.  A  man  mentioned  as  the  father  of  Meshullam 
who  assisted  in  rebuilding  the  walls  of  Jerusalem 
(Neh.  iii.  4,  30 ;  vi.  18). 

3.  A  Levite  of  the  line  of  Elkanah  (1  Chr.  ix.  1 6). 

4.  A  doorkeeper  for  the  ark  (1  Chr.  xv.  23). 

5.  Berechiahu,  one  of  the  chief  men  of  the  tribe 
of  Ephraim  in  time  of  king  Ahaz  (2  Chr.  xxviii.  12). 

6.  Berechiahu,  father  of  Asaph  the  singer  (1  Chr. 
xv.  17).     [Beraciiiah.] 

7.  Berechiahu,  father  of  Zechariah  the  prophet 
(Zeeh.  i.  1,  also  7).  [G.] 

BE'RED  (Tj3;  BapdS;  Barad).  1.  A  place 
in  the  south  of  Palestine,  between  which  and  Kadesh 
lav  tin'  w>'ll  Lachai-roi  (Gen.  xvi.  14).  The  name 
is  variously  given  in  the  ancient  versions:  Peschito, 

Gadar,  J*«^?  =  Gerar ;  Arab.  Fared,  $^,  pro- 
bably a  mere  corruption  t>f  the  Hebrew  name; 
Onkelos,  Chagra,  &OJn  (elsewhere  employed  in 
the  Targums  for  "  Shur  ;"  can  it  be  connected  with 
Hagar,  13PI,  nJH  ?)  ;  Ps.-Jonathan,  I 
N¥-1?n.  i.e.  the  Elusa,  "E\ov<ra,  of  Ptolemy  an. 1 
the  ecclesiastical  writers,  now  el-Kh&lasak,  on  the 
Hebron  road,  about   12  miles  south  of  Beersheba 


192 


BERENICE 


(Rob.  i.  201,  2  ;  Stewart,  205  ;  Reland,  755). 
We  have  the  testimony  of  Jerome  (  Vita  S.  Hila- 
rionis)  that  Elusa  was  called  by  its  inhabitants 
Barec,  which  would  be  an  easy  corruption  of 
Bered,  "J  being  read  for  T.  Chalutza  is  the  name 
elsewhere  given  in  the  Arabic  version  for  "  Shur" 
and  for  "  Gerar." 

2.  A  son  or  descendant  of  Ephraim  (1  Chr.  vii. 
20),  possibly  identical  with  Becher  in  Num.  xxvi.  35, 
by  a  mere  change  of  letters  (133  for  T13).    [G.] 

BERENI'CE.     [Beenice.] 

BE'RI  (»*13  ;  Baplv;  Bert),  son  of  Zophah,  of 
the  tribe  of  Asher  (1  Chr.  vii.  36). 

BERI'AH  (nyna,  in  mil,  or  a  gift,  see  No.  2 ; 
Bepid,  Bapid;  Baria,  Bcria,  Brie).      1.  A  son  of 
Asher  (Gen.  xlvi.  17;  Num.  xxvi.  44,  45),  from 
whom  descended  the  "  family  of  the  Beriites,"  *JJ'*13 
Bapidi,  familia  Brieitarum  (Num.  xxvi.  44). 

2.  A  son  of  Ephraim,  so  named  on  account  of 
the  state  of  his  father's  house  when  he  was  born. 
"  And  the  sons  of  Ephraim  ;  Shuthelah,  and  Bered 
his  son,  and  Tahath  his  son,  and  Eladah  his 
son,  .and  Tahath  his  son,  and  Zabad  his  son,  and 
Shuthelah  his  son,  and  Ezer,  and  Elead,  whom 
the  men  of  Gath  [that  were]  born  in  [that]  land 

slew"  [lit.  "and  the  men slew  them"],  "because 

they  came  down  to  take  away  their  cattle.  And 
Ephraim  their  father  mourned  many  days,  and 
his  brethren  came  to  comfort  him.  And  when  he 
went  in  to  his  wife,  she  conceived,  and  bare  a  son, 
and  he  called  his  name  Beriah,  because  it  went  evil 
with  his  house"  [lit.  "because  evil"  or  "a  gift" 
"was  to  his  house:"  il"P33  fllTH  njTl3  *3,  on 
iv  kcikoTs  eyeuero  iv  o?K(p  fiov,  LXX.  :  "  eo 
quod  in  malis  domus  ejus  ortus  esset,"  Vulg.] 
(1  Chr.  vii.  20-23).  With  respect  to  the  meaning 
of  the  name,  Gesenius  prefers  the  rendering  "in 
evil  "to  "a  gift,"  as  probably  the  right  one.  In 
this  case  HJ?"l3  in  the  explanation  would  be,  ac- 
cording to  him,  HiH  with  Beth  essentiae  (Thes. 
s.  v.).  It  must  be  remarked,  however,  that  the 
supposed  instances  of  Beth  essentiae  being  prefixed 
to  the  subject  in  theO.  T.  are  few  and  inconclusive, 
and  that  it  is  disputed  by  the  Arabian  grammarians  if 
the  parallel  "  redundant  Be  "  of  the  Arabic  be  ever 
so  used  (comp.  Thes.  pp.  174,  175,  where  this  use 
of  "redundant  Be" "  is  too  arbitrarily  denied).  The 
LXX.  and  Vulg.  indicate  a  different  construction, 
with  an  additional  variation  in  the  case  of  the 
former,  ("my  house"  for  "his  house,")  so  that 
the  rendering  "  in  evil  "  does  not  depend  upon  the 
construction  proposed  by  Gesenius.  Michaelis 
suggests  that  nj?~)3  may  mean  a  spontaneous  gift 
of  God,  beyond  expectation  and  the  law  of  nature, 
as  a  son  born  to  Ephraim  now  growing  old  might 
be  called  (Suppl.  pp.  224,  225;.  In  favour  of  this 
meaning,  which,  with  Gesenius,  we  take  in  the 
simple  sense  of  "  gift,"  it  may  be  urged,  that  it  is 
unlikely  that  four  persons  would  have  borne  a  name 
of  an  unusual  form,  and  that  a  case  similar  to  that 
here  supposed  is  found  in  the  naming  of  Seth  (Gen. 
iv.  25).  This  short  notice  is  of  no  slight  historical 
importance;  especially  as  it  refers  to  a  period  of 
Hebrew  history  res;  ecting  which  the  Bible  affords 
us  no  other  like  information.  The  event  must  be 
assigned  to  the  time  between  Jacob's  death  and  the 
beginning  of  the  oppression.     The  indications  that 


BERIAH 

guide  us  are,  that  some  of  Ephraim's  sons  must  have 
attained  to  manhood,  and  that  the  Hebrews  were  still 
free.  The  passage  is  full  of  difficulties.  The  first 
question  is:  What  sons  of  Ephraim  were  killed  ?  The 
persons  mentioned  do  not  all  seem  to  be  his  sons. 
Shuthelah  occupies  the  first  place,  and  a  genealogy  of 
his  descendants  follows  as  far  as  a  second  Shuthelah, 
the  words  "  his  son  "  indicating  a  direct  descent,  as 
Houbigant  (ap.  Barrett,  Synopsis  in  loc.)  remarks, 
although  he  very  needlessly  proposes  conjectural]}' 
to  omit  them.  A  similar  genealogy  from  Beriah  to 
Joshua  is  given  in  ver.  25-27.  As  the  text  stands 
there  are  but  three  sons  of  Ephraim  mentioned 
before  Beriah — Shuthelah,  Ezer,  and  Elead — all  of 
whom  seem  to  have  been  killed  by  the  men  of  Gath, 
though  it  is  possible  that  the  last  two  are  aline 
meant,  and  the  first  of  whom  is  stated  to  have  left 
descendants.  In  the  enumeration  of  the  Israelite 
families  in  Numbers  four  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim 
are  mentioned,  sprung  from  his  sons  Shuthelah, 
Becher,  and  Tahan,  and  from  Eran,  son  or  descend- 
ant of  Shuthelah  (xxvi.  35,  36).  The  second  and 
third  families  are  probably  those  of  Beriah  and  a 
younger  son,  unless  the  third  is  one  of  Beriah, 
called  after  his  descendant  Tahan  (1  Chr.  vii.  25); 
or  one  of  them  may  be  that  of  a  son  of  Joseph, 
since  it  is  related  that  Jacob  determined  that  sons 
of  Joseph  who  might  be  born  to  him  after  Ephraim 
and  Manasseh  should  "be  called  after  the  name  of 
their  brethren  in  their  inheritance"  (Gen.  xlviii.  6). 
See  however  Becher.  There  can  be  no  doubt 
that  the  land  in  which  the  men  of  Gath  were 
born  is  the  eastern  part  of  Lower  Egypt,  if  not  ■ 
Goshen  itself.  It  would  be  needless  to  say 
that  they  were  bom  in  their  own  land.  At 
this  time  very,  many  foreigners  must  have  been 
settled  in  Egypt,  especially  in  and  about  Goshen. 
Indeed  Goshen  is  mentioned  as  a  non-Egyptian 
country  in  its  inhabitants  (Gen.  xlvi.  34),  and  its 
own  name  as  well  as  nearly  all  the  names  of  its 
cities  and  places  mentioned  in  the  Bible,  save  the 
cities  built  in  the  oppression,  are  probably  Semitic. 
In  the  Book  of  Joshua,  Shihor,  the  Nile,  here  the 
Pelusiac  branch,  is  the  boundary  of  Egypt  and 
Canaan,  the  Philistine  territories  appaiently  being 
considered  to  extend  from  it  (Josh.  xiii.  2,  3).  It 
is  therefore  very  probable  that  many  Philistines 
would  have  settled  in  a  part  of  Egypt  so  accessible 
to  them  and  so  similar  in  its  population  to  Canaan 
as  Goshen  and  the  tracts  adjoining  it.  Or  else  these 
men  of  Gath  may  have  been  mercenaries  like  the 
Cherethim  (in  Egyptian  Shayratana)  who  were  in  the 
Egyptian  service  at  a  later  time,  as  in  David's,  and  to 
whom  lands  were  probably  allotted  as  to  the  native 
army.  Some  suppose  that  the  men  of  Gath  were 
the  aggressors,  a  conjecture  not  at  variance  with  the 
words  used  in  the  relation  of  the  cause  of  the  death 

of  Ephraim's  sons,  since  we  may  read  "  when  ('3 j 

they  came  down,"  &c,  instead  of  "because,"  &c. 
(Bagster's  Bible,  in  loc),  but  it  must  be  remem- 
bered that  this  rendering  is  equally  consistent  with 
the  other  explanation.  There  is  no  reason  to  sup- 
pose that  the  Israelites  at  this  time  may  not  have 
sometimes  engaged  in  predatory  or  other  warfare. 
The  warlike  habits  of  Jacob's  sons  are  evident  in 
the  narrative  of  the  vengeance  taken  by  Simeon  and 
Levi  upon  Hamor  and  Shechem  (Gen.  xxxiv.  25- 
29),  and  of  their  posterity  in  the  account  of  the 
fear  of  that  Pharaoh  who  began  to  oppress  them 
lest  they  should,  in  the  event  of  war  in  the  land, 
join  with  the  enemies  of  his  people,  and  by  fighting 


BERIITES 

against  thpm  get  them  out  of  the  country  (Ex.  i. 
8-10).  It  has  been  imagined,  according  to  which 
side  was  supposed  to  have  acted  the  aggressor,  that 
the  Gittites  descended  upon  the  Ephraimites  in  a 
predatory  excursion  from  Palestine,  or  that  the 
Ephraimites  made  a  raid  into  Palestine.  Neither  of 
these  explanations  is  consistent  with  sound  criticism, 
because  the  men  of  Gath  are  said  to  have  been  born 
in  the  land,  that  is,  to  have  been  settled  in  Egypt, 
as  already  shown,  and  the  second  one,  which  is 
adopted  by  Bunsen  (JJgypt's  Place,  i.  pp.  177, 
178),  is  inadmissible  on  the  ground  that  the  verb 
used,  TV,  "  he  went  down,"   or  "descended,"  is 

applicable  to  going  into  Egypt,  but  not  to  coming 
from  it.  The  Rabbinical  idea  that  these  sons  of 
Ephraim  went  to  take  the  Promised  Land  needs  no 
refutation.  (For  these  various  theories  see  Poli 
Synopsis  in  loc.) 

3.  A  Benjamite.  He  and  his  brother  Shema 
were  ancestors  of  the  inhabitants  of  Ajalon,  and 
expelled  the  inhabitants  of  Gath  (1  Chr.  viii.  13, 
16). 

4.  A  Levite  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  10,  11).     [R.  S.  P.] 

BERI'ITES.     [Beuiaii,  1.] 

BE'RITES,  the  (Dnnn  ;  ev  Xapfri),  a  tribe 

or  people  who  are  named  with  Abel  and  Beth 
maaehah — and  who  were  therefore  doubtless  situ- 
ated in  the  north  of  Palestine — mentioned  only  as 
having  been  visited  by  Joab  in  his  pursuit  after  Sheba 
the  son  of  Bichri  (2  Sam.  xx.  14).  The  expression 
is  a  remarkable  one,  "all  the  Beiites"  ('2H  73  • 
comp,  "all  the  Bithron").  The  Vulgate  has  a 
different  reading — omnesque  viri  electi  congregati 
fuerant — apparently  reading  for  D"H2n  by  an  easy 
transposition  and  change  of  letters  CIFIB,  i.e.  the 

young  men,  and  this  is  in  Ewald's  opinion  the  cor- 
rect reading  (Jicsch.  iii.  249,  note).  [G.] 

BE'RITH,  the  god  (nn3  bit),  Judg.  ix.  46. 
[Baal-berith,  p.  146.] 

BERNI'CE  and  BERENI'CE  (Bepvlxr,,  also 
in  Joseph. ;  Bemice  =  4>epevli<r),  see  Sturz,  Dial. 
Maced.  p.  31  ;  the  form  Beronice  is  also  found), 
the  eldest  daughter  of  Herod  Agrippa  I.  (Acts 
xii.  l,&c).  She  was  first  married  to  her  uncle 
Herod,  king  of  Chalcis  (Joseph.  Ant.  xix.  5,  §1), 
and  after  his  death  (a.d.  48)  she  lived  under 
circumstances  of  great  suspicion  with  her  own  bro- 
ther Agrippa  II.  (Joseph.  Ant.  xx.  7,  3  ;  Juvenal, 
Sat.  vi.  156  fl'.),  in  connexion  with  whom  she  is 
mentioned  Acts  xxv.  13,  23,  xxvi.  30,  as  having 
visited  Festus  on  his  appointment  as  Procurator  of 
Judaea.  She  was  a  second  time  married,  to  Pole- 
mon,  king  of  Cil  cia,  but  soon  left  him,  and  re- 
turned to  her  brother  (Joseph,  ibid.).  She  after- 
wards became  the  mistress  of  Vespasian  (Tacit. 
Hist.  ii.  81),  and  of  his  son  Titus  (Sueton. 
Tit.  7).  [H.  A.] 

BER'ODACH-BAL'ADAN.     2  K.  xx.  12. 

[M  KRODACH-BaL A  DA  N .] 

BE'ROTH   (BVp<iy;    Alex.  Brjpcid),  1  Esd.  v. 

19.    [Beeboth.] 
BEROTHAH,   BE'ROTHAI  (,*]Tn3 

!"ini"Q  ;  Berotha,  Beroth).    The  first  of  these  two 

names,  each  of  which  occurs  once  only,  is  given  by 
Ezekiel  (xlvii.  16)   in  connexion  with  Hamatli  and 


BERYL 


193 


Damascus  as  forming  part  of  the  northern  boundary 
of  the  promised  land.  The  second  is  mentioned 
(2  Sam.  viii.  8)  as  the  name  of  a  city  of  Zobah 
taken  by  David,  also  in  connexion  with  Hamath 
and  Damascus.  The  slightncss  of  these  references 
makes  it  impossible  to  identify  the  names  with  any 
degree  of  probability,  or  even  to  decide  whether 
they  refer  to  the  same  locality  or  not.  The  well- 
known  city  Beirut  (Berytus)  naturally  suggests  itself 
as  identical  with  one  at  least  of  the  names ;  but  in 
each  instance  the  circumstances  of  the  case  seem  to 
require  a  position  further  east,  since  Ezekiel  places 
Berothah  between  Hamath  and  Damascus,  and 
David's  war  with  the  king  of  Zobah  led  him  away 
from  the  sea-coast  towards  the  Euphrates  (2  Sam. 
viii.  3).  In  the  latter  instance  the  difficultv  is 
increased  by  the  Hebrew  text  reading  in  1  Chr. 
xviii.  8,  Chun  instead  of  Berothai,  and  by  the  fact 
that  both  in  Samuel  and  Chronicles  the  Greek 
translators,  instead  of  giving  a  proper  name,  translate 
by  the  phrase  e/c  tSiv  iK\eKrwv  ir6\eoov,  clearlv 
showing  that  they  read  either  the  same  text  in  each 
passage,  or  at  least  words  which  bore  the  same 
sense.  Fiirst  regards  Berothah  and  Berothai  as 
distinct  places,  and  identifies  the  first  with  Berytus. 
Mislin  (Saints  Lieux,  i.  244)  derives  the  name 
from  the  wells  (Bceroth),  which  are  still  to  be 
seen  bored  in  the  solid  rock  at  Beirut.    [F.  VV.  G.J 

BE'ROTHITE,  THE  (1  Chr.  xi.  39).  [Bee- 
roth.] 

BERYL  (^'"in,  Tarshish;  BfyvMos), 
a  precious  stone,  the  first  in  the  fourth  row  on 
the  breastplate  of  the  high-priest  (Ex.  xxviii.  20, 
xxxix.  13).  The  colour  of  the  wheels  in  Ezekiel's 
vision  was  as  the  colour  of  a  beryl-stcne  ( Ez. 
i.  16,  x.  9);  it  is  mentioned  among  the  trea- 
sures of  the  king  of  Tyre  in  Ez.  xxviii.  13. 
where  the  marginal  reading  is  chrysolite  ;  in  Cant. 
v.  14  as  being  set  in  rings  of  gold  ;  and  in  Dan. 
x.  6  the  body  of  the  man  whom  Daniel  saw  in 
vision  is  said  to  be  like  the  beryl.  In  Rev.  xxi. 
19  the  beryl  is  the  8th  foundation  of  the  city, 
the  chrysolite  being  the  7th.  In  Ex.  xxviii.  20 
the  LXX.  have  ■x_Pvffo'M()os,  while  they  render 
the  11th  stone,  Dilb',  by  B-qpvWiov.  In  Ez.  i. 
16  they  have  Bapffeis,  in  x.  9  \idos  avQpaKos,  and 
xxviii.  13  avQpai,.  In  Cant.  v.  14  and  in  Dan.  x. 
6  Qapcrls.  This  variety  of  rendering  shows  the 
uncertainty  under  which  the  old  interpreters  la- 
boured as  to  the  stone  actually  meant.  Josephus 
takes  it  to  have  been  the  chrysolite,  a  golden-coloured 
gem,  the  topaz  of  more  recent  authors,  found 
iii  Spain  (Plin.  xxxvii.  109),  whence  its  name 
tWiri  (see  Braun,  de  Vest.  Sac.  Hcb.  lib.  ii. 
c.  18,  §193).  Luther  suggests  turquoise,  while 
others  have  thought  that,  amber  was  meant.  Ka- 
lisch  in  the  two  passages  of  Exodus  translates 
ES^HFl  by  chrysolite,  wdiich  he  describes  as  usu- 
ally green,  but  with  different  degrees  of  shade,  gene- 
rally transparent,  but  often  only  translucent — 
harder  than  glass,  but  not  so  hard  as  quartz.  The 
passage  in  Rev.  xxi.  20  is  adverse  to  this  view. 
Schleusner  (i.  p.  44ii)  says  the  B^pvWos  is  aqua- 
marine. "The  beryl  is  a  gem  of  the  genus  eme- 
rald, but  less  valuable  than  the  emerald.  It  differs 
from  the  precious  emerald  in  not  possessing  any  of 
the  oxide  of  chrome.  The  colours  of  the  beryl  are 
greyish-green,  blue,  yellow,  and  sometimes  neraly 
white."  (Humble,  Diet.  Geol.  &c.  p.  30.)  [W.  D.1 

0 


194 


BERZELUS 


BERZE'LUS  (Qa-oCeXSalos;  Alex.  Zop&Weov  ;  ' 
Phargeleu),  1  Esd.  v.  38.     [Baiizillai.] 

BE'SAI  CD3;  Brjo-i, Bao-i ;  £es<?e)-  "Children 
of  Besai"  were  among  the  Nethinim  who  returned 
to  Judaea  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  49  ;  Neh.  vii. 
52).     [Bastai.J 

BESODEI'AH  (nj'flDa  ;  Baacodia,  "AflSeia ; 
Besodia),  father  of  Meshullam,  and  one  of  the  re- 
pairers of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  G). 

BE'SOR,  the  BROOK  (")ib'3n  ^113  ;  xe'M"P" 
pos  tov  Bocr6p ;  torrens  Besof),  a  torrent-bed  or 
wady  in  the  extreme  south  of  Judah,  of  which 
mention  occurs  only  in  1  Sam.  xxx.  9,  10,  21.  It 
is  plain  from  the  conditions  of  the  narrative  that  it 
must  have  been  south  of  Ziklag,  but  hitherto  the 
situation  of  neither  town  nor  wady  has  been  iden- 
tified with  any  probability.  The  name  may  signify 
"fresh"  or  "cool"  (Fiirst).  [*-'•] 

BE'TAH  (np3  ;   5)  MsTefriK,   quasi   1121313  ; 

Alex.  r)  MacrPdx  \  Bete),  a  city  belonging  to 
Hadadezer,  king  of  Zobah,  mentioned  with  Berothai 
as  having  yielded  much  spoil  of  brass  to  David 
(2  Sam.  viii.  8).  In  the  parallel  account  1  Chr. 
xviii.  8,  the  name  is  called  by  an  inversion  of 
letters,  Tibchath.  Ewald  (Gesch.  ii.  195)  pro- 
nounces the  latter  to  be  the  correct  reading,  and 
compares  it  with  Tebach  (Gen.  xxii.  24).        [G.] 

BET'ANE  (BeTavr) ;  Alex.  B\trdvn,  i.  c.  prob. 
Bai.Ta.vr] ;  Vulg.  omits),  a  place  apparently  south 
of  Jerusalem  (Jud.  i.  9),  and  possibly  identical  with 
BrjQavlv  of  Eusebius  (Onom.  'Apl,  Am),  two  miles 
from  the  Terebinth  of  Abraham  and  four  from 
Hebron.  This  has  been  variously  identified  with 
Betharath,  Bethainun,  and  Betaneh  or  Ecbatana  in 
Syria,  placed  by  Pliny  (v.  17)  on  Carmel  (Winer, 
s.  v.  Betane).  Bethany  is  inadmissible  from 
the  fact  of  its  unimportance  at  the  time,  if  indeed 
it  existed  at  all.  [G.] 

BE'TEN  (|123  ;  BaidS*  ;  Alex.  BaTvt ;  Beteii), 

one  of  the  cities  on  the  border  of  the  tribe  of  Asher 
(Josh.  xix.  25,  only).  By  Eusebius  (Onom. 
Barval )  it  is  said  to  have  been  then  called 
Bebeten,  and  to  have  lain  eight  miles  east  of 
Ptolemais.  Xo  other  trace  of  its  existence  has  been 
discovered  elsewhere.  [G.] 

BETH  (7V2,  according  to  Gesenius  (T/tcs.  and 

Lex.),  from  a  root,  012,  to  pass  the  night,  or  from 

!"Ij2,  to  build,  as  So/x6s,  domus,  from  Se'/xoi),  the 

most   general    word   for    a    house    or    habitation. 
Strictly  speaking  it  has  the  force  of  a  settled  stable 
dwelling,  as  in  Gen.  xxxiii.  17,  where  the  building 
of  a  "  house"  marks  the  termination  of  a  stage  of 
Jacob's  wanderings  (comp.  also  2  Sam.  vii.  2,  6, 
and  many  other  places) ;   but  it  is  also  employed 
for  a  dwelling  of  any  kind,  even  for  a  tent,  as  in 
Gen.  xxiv.  32,  where  it  must  refer  to  the  tent  of  j 
Laban ;  also  Judg.   xviii.  31,  1  Sam.  i.  7,  to  the  | 
tent  of  the  tabernacle,  and  2  K.  xxiii.  7,  where  it  j 
expresses  the  textile  materials  (A.  V.  "  hangings  ") 
for  the  tents  of  Astarte.     From  this  general  force  j 
the  transition  was  natural  to  a  house  in  the  sense  ■ 
of  a  family,  as  Ps.  cvii.  41,  "families"  (Prayer- 
Book,  "  households"),  or  a  pedigree,  as  Ezr.  ii.  59. 
In  2  Sam.  xiii.  7,  1  K.  xiii.  7,  and  other  places,  it 
has  the  sense  of  "  home,"  i.  e.  "  to  the  house."    Beth  ' 


BETH-ABARA 

also  has  some  collateral  and  almost  technical  mean- 
ings, similar  to  those  which  we  apply  to  the  word 
"house,"  as  in  Ex.  xxv.  27  for  the  "  places"  or 
sockets  into  which  the  bars  for  carrying  the  table 
were  "housed;"  and  others. 

Like  Aedes  in  Latin  and  Dom  in  German,  Beth 
has  the  special  meaning  of  a  temple  or  house  of 
worship,  in  which  sense  it  is  applied  not  only  to 
the  tabernacle  (see  above)  or  temple  of  Jehovah 
(1  K.  iii.  2  ;  vi.  1,  &c),  but  to  those  of  false  gods 
— Dagon  (Judg.  xvi.  27;  1  Sam.  v.  2),  Kiminon 
(2  EC.  t.  18),  Baal  (2  K.  x.  21),  Nisroch  (2  K. 
xix.  37),  and  other  gods  (Judg.  ix.  27).  "  Bajith" 
in  Is.  xv.  2  is  really  ha-Bajith  =  "the  Temple" 
— meaning  some  well-known  idol  fane  in  Moab. 
[Bajith.] 

Beth  is  more  frequently  employed  in  combination 
with  other  words  to  form  the  names  of  places  than 
either  Kirjath,  Hatzer,  Beer,  Ain,  or  any  other 
word.  A  list  of  the  places  compounded  with  Beth 
is  given  below  in  alphabetical  order;  but  in  addi- 
tion to  these  it  may  be  allowable  here  to  notice  two, 
which,  though  not  appearing  in  that  form  in  the 
A.  V.,  yet  do  so  in  the  LXX.,  probably  with 
greater  correctness. 

Beth-eked  ("IpJ?  '3  ;   BaiQaKaO ;  camera  2x1s- 

torurn),  the  "  shearing  house,"  at  the  pit  or  well 
(TI3)  of  which,  the  forty-two  brethren  of  Ahaziah 
were  slain  by  Jehu  (2  K.  x.  12).  It  lay  between 
Jezreel  and  Samaria  according  to  Jerome  (Onom.) 
15  miles  from  the  town  of  Legio,  and  in  the  plain 
of  Esdraelon. 

BETH-HAGGAN(|Hn'2  ;  BaiOydv ;  Domushorti), 
A.  V.  "  the  garden-house"  (2  K.  ix.  27),  one  of  the 
spots  which  marked  the  flight  of  Ahaziah  from  Jehu. 
It  is  doubtless  the  same  place  as  En-gannim, 
"  spring  of  gardens,"  the  modern  Jeniti,  on  the 
direct  road  from  Samaria  northward,  and  overlook- 
ing the  great  plain  (Stanley,  349,  note).         [G.] 

BETH-AB ARA  (R770a;3ap<{,  quasi  TTpV.  1"T3, 

house  of  ford  or  ferry),  a  place  beyond  Jordan, 
■nipav  tov  'lop.  in  which,  according  to  the  Received 
Text  of  the  N.  T.,  John  was  baptizing  (John  i.  2S), 
apparently  at  the  time  that  he  baptized  Christ 
(comp.  ver.  29,  39,  35).  If  the  reading  of  the 
Received  Text  be  the  correct  one,  Bethabara  may 
be  identical  with  Beth-barah,  the  ancient  ford  of 
Jordan,  of  which  the  men  of  Ephraim  took  possession 
after  Gideon's  defeat  of  the  Midianites  [Beth- 
bakaii]  ;  or,  which  seems  more  likely,  with  Beth- 
nimrah,  on  the  east  of  the  river,  nearly  opposite 
Jericho.  [Beth-NIMRAH.]  But  the  oldest  MSS. 
(A  B)  and  the  Vulgate  a  have  not  Bethabara  but 
Bethany,  a  reading  which  Origen  (ad  he.)  states 
to  have  obtained  in  almost  all  the  copies  of  his 
time,  crx^ov  iravra  to.  avTiypacpa,  though  altered 
by  him  in  his  edition  of  the  Gospel  on  topogra- 
phical grounds.  In  favour  of  Bethabara  are.  (a) 
the  extreme  improbability  of  so  familiar  a  name 
as  Bethany  being  changed  by  copyists  into  one  so 
unfamiliar  as  Bethabara,  while  the  reverse  —  the 
change  from  an  unfamiliar  to  a  familiar  name — is 
of  frequent  occurrence.  (/))  The  fact  that  Origen, 
while  admitting  that  the  majority  of  MSS.  were  in 
favour  of  Bethany,  decided  notwithstanding  for 
Bethabara.  (c)  That  Bethabara  was  still  known 
in  the  days  of  Eusebius  (Onomasticon,  s.  v.),  and 

a  In  the  Onomasticon,  however,  Jerome  has  Beth- 
abara. 


BETH-ANATH 

greatly  resorted  to  by  persons  desirous  of  baptism 
(vitali  gurgite  baptiz  tntur). 

Still  the  fact  remains  that  the  most  ancient 
MSS.  have  "  Bethany,"  and  that  name  has  been 
accordingly  restored  to  the  text  by  Lachmann,  Tis- 
chendorf,  and  other  modern  editors.  At  this  dis- 
tance of  time,  and  in  the  absence  of  any  careful 
research  on  the  east  of  Jordan,  it  is  impossible  to 
decide  on  evidence  so  slight  and  conflicting.  It 
must  not  be  overlooked  that  if  Bethany  be  ac- 
cepted, the  definition  "beyond  Jordan"  still  re- 
mains, and  therefore  another  place  must  be  intended 
than  the  well-known  residence  of  Lazarus.      [G.] 

BETH'-ANATH  (n3J?  '3  ;    Badda/xt,   Batda- 

vaXi  Bai0eve'0;  Bethanath),  one  of  the  "fenced 
cities"  of  Naphtali,  named  with  Bethshemesh  (Josh. 
xix.  38)  ;  from  neither  of  them  were  the  Canaanites 
expelled  (Judg.  i.  33).  By  Eusebius  and  Jerome 
(Onom.  s.  v.  Aveip,  BaQ/xd,  B-qdauaOd)  it  is  spoken 
of  as  a  village  called  Batanaea,  15  miles  eastward 
of  Caesarea  (Diocaesarea,  or  Sepphoris),  ami  reputed 
to  contain  medicinal  springs,  AovTpd  Idvifia.  No- 
thing, however,  is  known  to  have  been  discovered 
of  it  in  modern  times.  [^'0 

BETH'-ANOTH  (n'lJJ?  '3 ;  Batdavd^ ;  Beth- 
anoth),  a  town  in  the  mountainous  district  of 
Jndah,  named  with  HaDiul,  Bethzur,  and  others,  in 
Josh.  xv.  59  only.  It  is  very  probably  the  modern 
I'ifit-iiinuii,  the  remains  of  which,  near  to  those  of 
Halhul  and  Beit  Sur,  were  discovered  by  Wolcott 
and  visited  by  Robinson  (iii.  281).  [G.] 

BETH'ANY  (quasi  W  ITS,  house  of  dates ; 

B-qOavia  ;  Bethania),  a  village  which,  scanty  as 
are  the  notices  of  it  contained  in  Scripture,  is  more 
intimately  associated  in  our  minds  than  perhaps  any 
other  place  with  the  most  familiar  acts  and  scenes 
of  the  last  days  of  the  life  of  Christ.  It  was  at 
Bethany  that  He  raised  Lazarus  from  the  dead, 
and  from  Bethany  that  He  commenced  His  "  tri- 
umphal entry"  into  Jerusalem.  It  waf  His  nightly 
resting-place  during  the  time  immediately  pre- 
ceding His  passion ;  and  here  at  the  houses  of 
Martha  and  Mary,  and  of  Simon  the  leper,  we  are 
admitted  to  view  Him,  more  nearly  than  elsewhere, 
in  tin'  circle  of  His  domestic  life. 

Though  it  was  only  at  a  late  period  of  the  life 
of  our  Lord  that  His  connexion  with  Bethany  com- 
menced, yet  this  is  fully  compensated  for  by  its 
having  been  the  scene  of  His  very  last  acts  on 
earth.  It  was  somewhere  here,  on  these  wooded 
slopes  beyond  the  ridge  of  olivet,  that  the  Apostles 
tvhen  they  last  beheld  His  figure,  as,  with 
"uplifted  hand-" — still,  to  the  very  moment  of 
disappearance,  "blessing"  them  —  He  was  "taken 
up"  into  the  "cloud"  which  "received"  and  hid 
Him  from  their  "  stedfast"  gaze,  the  words  .-till 
ringing  in  their  ears,  which  prove  that  space  and 
time  are  no  hindrance  to  the  connexion  of  Christians 
with  their  Lord — "  Lo !  1  am  with  you  always, 
even  to  the  end  of  the  world." 

The  little  information  we  possess  about  Bethany 
is  entirely  gathered  from  the  X.  T.,  neither  the 
O.  T.  nor  the   Apocrypha   having  apparently  any 

a  It  has  been  suggested  (Hitzig,  Jesaia)  that  the 
word  rendered  "  pom- "  in  the  A.  V.  of  Is.  x.  SO 
(  fl*3JJ)— "  poor  Anathoth  " — is  an  abbreviate  i 
of  the  name  of  Bethany,  as  Nimrah  is  of  Beth-nim- 
rah,  &c.  ;  but  apart  from  any  other  difficulty,  there  is 
the  serious  one  that  Bethany  does  not  lie  near  the  other 


BETHANY 


195 


allusion  to  it."  It  was  situated  "at"  (rrpSs)  the 
Mount  of  Olives  (Mark  xi.  1  ;  Luke  xix.  29),  about 
fifteen  stadia  from  Jerusalem  (John  xi.  18),  on  or 
near  the  usual  road  from  Jericho  to  the  city  (Luke 
xix.  29,  comp.  1  ;  Mark  xi.  1,  comp.  x.  46),  and 
close  by  and  west  (?)  of  another  village  called  BETH- 
phage,  the  two  being  several  times  mentioned 
together. 

There  never  appears  to  have  been  any  doubt  a  :  to 
the  site  of  Bethany,  which  is  now  known  by  a  naiiii 

derived  from  Lazarus — el  'Az'irijehh  (  £_,    • \j£\  ). 

It  lies  on  the  eastern  slope  of  the  Mount  of  Olives, 
fully  a  mile  beyond  the  summit,  and  not  very  far 
from  the  point  at  which  the  road  to  Jericho  begins 
its  more  suddeu  descent  towards  the  Jordan  valley 
(Lindsay,  91,  and  De  Saulcy,  120).  The  spot  is 
a  woody  hollow  more  or  less  planted  with  fruit- 
trees, — olives,  almonds,  pomegranates,  as  well  as 
oaks,  and  carobs  ;  the  whole  lying  below  a  secondary 
ridge  or  hump,  of  sufficient  height  to  shut  out  the 
village  from  the  summit  of  the  mount  (Rob.  i.  431 , 
432  ;  Stanley,  189  ;  Bonar,  138,  9). 

From  a  distance  the  village  is,  to  use  the  em- 
phatic words  of  the  latest  published  description, 
"  remarkably  beautiful  " — "  the  perfection  of  re- 
tirement and  repose" — "  of  seclusion  and  lovely- 
peace"  (Bonar,  139,  230,  310,  337  ;  and  see  Lind- 
say, 69).  It  is  difficult  to  reconcile  these  glowing 
descriptions  with  Mr.  Stanley's  words  (189),  or 
with  the  impression  which  the  present  writer 
derived  from  the  actual  view  of  the  place.  Pos- 
sibly something  of  the  difference  is  due  to  the 
different  time  of  year  at  which  the  visits  were 
made. 

El-  Azwiyeh  itself  is  a  ruinous  and  wretched 
village,  a  "wild  mountain  hamlet"  of  "some 
twenty  families,"  the  inhabitants  of  which  display 
even  less  than  the  ordinary  eastern  thrift  and  industry 
(Rob.  i.  432  ;  Stanley,  189  ;  Bonar,  310).  In  the 
village  are  shown  the  traditional  sites  of  the  house 
and  tomb  of  Lazarus  ;  the  former  the  remains  of  a 
square  tower,  apparently  of  old  date,  though  cer- 
tainly not  of  the  age  of  the  kings  of  Judah,  tc 
which  De  Saulcy  assigns  it  (128) — the  latter  a 
deep  vault  excavated  in  the  limestone  rock,  the 
bottom  reached  by  26  steps.  The  house  of  Simon 
the  leper  is  also  exhibited.  As  to  the  real  age  and 
character  of  these  remains  there  is  at  present  no 
information  to  guide  us. 

Schwarz  maintains  el  Azariyeh  to  be  Azal  ;  and 
would  fix  Bethany  at  a  spot  which,  he  says,  the 
Arabs  call  Beth-hanan,  on  the  mount  of  Offence 
above  Siloam  (263;  135). 

These  traditional  spots  are  first  heard  of  in  the 
4th  century — in  the  Itinerary  of  the  Bourdeaiu 
Pilgrim,  and  the  Onomasticon  of  Eusebius  and 
Jerome;  and  they  continued  to  exist,  with  certain 
varieties  of  buildings  and  of  ecclesia.-tical  establish- 
ments in  connexion  therewith,  down  to.  the  16th 
century,  since  which  tie'  place  has  fallen  gradually 
into  its  present  decay,  'this  pari  of  the  historj  i- 
well  given  by  Robinson  (i.  432-3).  By  Mande- 
ville  and  other  mediaeval  travellers  the  town  is 
spoken  of  as  the  "  Castle  of  Bethany,"  an  expres- 


places  mentioned  in  the  passage,  and  i-  ([iiite  out  of  the 
line  of  Sennacherib's  advance. 

b  The  Arabic  name  is  given  above  from  Robinson, 
Lord  Lindsay,  however,  denies  thai   this  is  correct. 

and   asserts,   after   frequently  hearing   it    pronounced, 
that  the  name  i-  Lazarieh. 

()    _ 


196 


BETII-ARABAH 


sion  which  had  its  origin  in  castellum  being  em- 
ployed in  the  Vulgate  as  the  translation  of  Kci/xri 
in  John  xi.  1. 

N.B.  The  derivation  of  the  name  of  Bethany 
given  above — that  of  Lightfoot  and  Reland — is 
doubtless  more  correct  than  the  one  proposed  by 
Simonis  (Ononi.  s.  v.),  viz.  IVjiy  '3,  locus  depres- 
sion's, which  has  no  special  applicability  to  this 
spot  more  than  any  other,  while  it  lacks  the  cor- 
respondence with  Beth-phage, "  House  of  Figs,"  and 
with  the  "  Mount  of  Olives,"  which  gives  so  much 
colour  to  this  derivation,  although  it  is  true  that 
the  dates  have  disappeared,  and  the  figs  and  olives 
alone  are  now  to  be  found  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
Bethany.  This  has  been  well  brought  out  by  Stanley 
(S.  $  P.  186,  187).  It  may  also  be  remarked  that 
the  use  of  the  Chaldee  word  ^H,  for  the  fruit  of 
the  date-palm,  is  consistent  with  the  late  period  at 
which  we  first  hear  of  Bethany.  [G.] 

BETH-AE/ABAH  (ilinyn  '2,  house  of  the 

desert ;  BaiOapafid,  Qapafiad/J.,  BriOapafid  ;  Beth- 
Araba),  one  of  the  six  cities  of  Judah  which  were 
situated  down  in  the  Arabah,  i.  e.  the  sunk  valley 
of  the  Jordan  and  Dead  Sea  ("  wilderness,"  Josh, 
xv.  61),  on  the  north  border  of  the  tribe,  and  ap- 
parently between  Beth-hoglah  and  the  high  land 
on  the  west  of  the  Jordan  valley  (xv.  6).  It  is  also 
included  in  the  list  of  the  towns  of  Benjamin  (xviii. 
22,  BaiOaPapd,  Vat.).  [G.] 

BETH-A'EAM  (accurately  Beth-haram, 
D"in  '3  ;  BaiOapdv,  Alex.  BaiBappd  ;  Betharam), 
one  of  the  towns  of  Gad  on  the  east  of  Jordan, 
described  as  in  "the  valley"  (pftyil,  not  to  be 
confounded  with  the  Arabah  or  Jordan  valley), 
Josh.  xiii.  27,  and  no  doubt  the  same  place  as  that 
named  Beth-haran  in  Num.  xxxii.  36.  No  fur- 
thermention  is  found  of  it  in  the  Scriptures  ;  but 
Eusebius  and  Jerome  (Onomast.)  report  that  in 
their  day  its  appellation  (a  Syris  dicitur)  was 
Bethramtha,  B-r\Qpajj.<pQd  (see  also  the  quotations 
from  the  Talmud  in  Schwarz,  231)  ;  the  Syriac 
and  other  versions,  however,  have  all  Bethharan, 
with  no  material  variation,  and  that  in  honour  of 
Augustus,  Herod  had  named  it  Libias  (AijSios).  Jo- 
sephus'  account  is  that  Herod  (Antipas),  on  taking 
possession  of  his  tetrarchy,  fortified  Sepphoris  and 
the  city  (tt6\is)  of  Betharamphtha,  building  a  wall 
round  the  latter,  and  calling  it  Julias  in  honour  of 
the  wife  of  the  emperor.  As  this  could  hardly  be 
later  than  B.C.  1 — Herod  the  Great,  the  predecessor 
of  Antipas,  having  died  in  B.C.  4 — and  as  the  empress 
Livia  did  not  receive  her  name  of  Julia  until  after 
the  death  of  Augustus,  a.d.  14,  it  is  probable  that 
Josephus  is  in  error  as  to  the  new  name  given  to 
the  place,  and  speaks  of  it  as  having  originally  re- 
ceived that  which  it  bore  in  his  own  day.  It  is 
curious  that  he  names  Libias  long  before  (Ant. 
xiv.  1,  §4)  in  such  connexion  as  to  leave  no  doubt 
that  he  alludes  to  the  same  place.  Under  the  name 
of  Amathus  he  again  mentions  it  (Ant.  xvii.  10, 
§6  ;  comp.  B.  J.  ii.  4,  §2),  and  the  destruction  of 
the  royal  palaces  there  by  insurgents  from  Peraea. 

Ptolemy  gives  the  locality  of  Libias  as  31°  26'  lat. 
and  67°  10'  long.  (Hitter,  Jordan,  573)  ;  and  Euse- 
bius and  Jerome  (Onomasticon)  state  that  it  was 
five  miles  south  of  Bethnabran,  or  Bethamnaran 
(t.  e.  Beth  nimrah  ?).  This  agrees  with  the  position 
of  the  Wady  Seir,  or  Sir,  which  falls  into  the  Ghor 


BETH-BATvAH 

opposite  Jericho,  and  half  way  between  Wady  Hes- 
ban  and  Wady  Shoaib.  No  one  appears  to  have 
explored  this  valley.  Seetzen  heard  that  it  con- 
tained a  castle  and  a  large  tank  in  masonry  (Reisen, 
1854;  ii.  318).  These  may  turn  out  to  be  the 
ruins  of  Livias.  [G"0 

BETH-AR'BEL  6n3"1N  '3 ;  e/c  rot  oUov  rod 

'lepo$odfi ;  Alex.  'Iepo/SaaA.),  named  only  in  Hos. 
x.  14,  as  the  scene  of  a  sack  and  massacre  by  Shal- 
man  (Shalmaneser).  No  clue  is  given  to  its  po- 
sition ;  it  may  be  the  ancient  stronghold  of  Arbela 
in  Galilee,  or  (as  conjectured  by  Hitzig)  another 
place  of  the  same  name  near  Pella,  of  which  men- 
tion is  made  by  Eusebius  in  the  Onomasticon.  In 
the  Vulgate  Jerome  has  translated  the  name  to 
mean  "  e  domo  ejus  qui  judicavit  Baal,"  i.  e.  Jerub- 
baal  (?y3~)'')  or  Gideon,  understanding  Salman  as 

Zalmunna,  and  the  whole  passage  as  a  reference  to 
Judg.  viii.  [G.] 

BETH-A'VEN  QJK  '3,  house  of  naught,  i.  e. 

badness ;  Batdc&v,  Alex.  BriBavv ;  Bethaven),  a 
place  on  the  mountains  of  Benjamin,  east  of  Bethel 
(Josh.  vii.  2,  Baifl^A,  xviii.  12),  and  lying  between 
that  place  and  Michmash  (1  Sam.  xiii.  5;  also  xiv. 
23,  rrjv  BafxciO).  In  Josh,  xviii.  12,  the  "wilder- 
ness "  (Midbnr  =  pasture-land)  of  Bethaven  is  men- 
tioned. In  1  Sam.  xiii.  5  the  reading  of  the  LXX. 
is  BaiOwpwv,  Beth-horon ;  but  if  this  be  correct, 
another  Beth-horon  must  be  intended  than  that 
commonly  known,  which  was  much  further  to  the 
west.  In  Hos.  iv.  15,  v.  8,  x.  5,  the  name  is  trans- 
ferred, with  a  play  on  the  word  very  characteristic 
of  this  prophet,  to  the  neighbouring  Bethel — once 
the  "  house  of  God,"  but  then  the  house  of  idols,  of 
"  naught."  [G.] 

BETH-AZ'MAVETH  (ni»TJ[  '3;  Bij0a(r,ue£0; 

Bethazmoth).  Under  this  name  is  mentioned,  in  Neh. 
vii.  28  only,  the  town  of  Benjamin  which  is  else- 
where called  Azjiaveth,  and  Bethsamos. 

Mr.  Finn  proposes  to  identify  Azmaveth  with 
Jlizmeh,  a  village  on  the  hills  of  Benjamin  to  the 
S.E.  of  Jeba.     '  [G.] 

BETH-BAAL-ME'ONa  (}ty»  ^3  '3  ;  oKkos 

MeeA/3a>0;  Alex.  oIkos  BeKapidiv  ;  Oppidum  Baal- 
maon),  a  place  in  the  possessions  of  Reuben,  on  the 
"  Mishor  "  or  downs  (A.  V.  "  plain  ")  east  of  Jor- 
dan (Josh.  xiii.  17).  At  the  Israelites'  first  ap- 
proach its  name  was  Baal-meon  (Num.  xxxii.  38, 
or  in  its  contracted  form,  Beon,  xxxii.  3),  to  which 
the  Beth  was  possiblv  a  Hebrew  addition.  Later 
it  would  seem  to  have  come  into  possession  of  Moab, 
and  to  be  known  either  as  Beth-meon  ( Jer.  xlviii. 
23)  or  Baal-meon  (Ez.  xxv.  9).  The  name  is  still 
attached  to  a  ruined  place  of  considerable  size 
(betiiichtlich,  Seetzen),  a  short  distance  to  the  S.W. 
of  Hesban,  and  bearing  the  name  of  "  the  fortress  of 

Mi'un "  (      ~xk^        v^^^  ) ,  according  to  Burck- 

hardt  (865),  or  Jfae'm,  according  to  Seetzen  (Reisen, 
i.  408),  which  appears  to  give  its  appellation  to  the 
Wadi  Zerka  Mucin  (Ibid.  402).  [G.] 

BETH-BA'RAH   (H-3'3,    quasi  rn3j>'3, 

house  of  passage,  or,  of  the  ford ;  Bai6r)pd;  Bet/i- 

a  It  is  possible  that  the  name  contains  u  trace  of 
the  tribe  or  nation  of  Maon,- — the  Maonites  or  Me- 
hunim.     [Maon  ;   Mkiivnim.] 


BETH-BAST 

herd),  named  only  in  Judg.  vii.  24,  as  a  point 
apparently  south  of  the  scene  of  Gideon's  victory, 
which  took  place  at  about  Bethshean,  and  to  which 
point  "  the  waters  "  (D1^!"!)  were  "  taken"  by  the 

Ephraimites  against  Midian.  What  these  "  waters  " 
were  is  not  clear,  probably  the  wadys  and  streams 
which  descend  from  the  highlands  of  Ephraim  ;  it  is 
only  plain  that  they  were  distinct  from  the  Jordan, 
to  which  river  no  word  but' its  own  distinct  name 
is  ever  applied.  Beth-barah  derives  its  chief  inte- 
rest from  the  possibility  that  its  more  modern  re- 
presentative may  have  been  Beth-abara  where  John 
baptized  [Beth-ABAKA]  ;  but  there  is  not  much 
in  favour  of  this  beyond  their  similarity  in  sound. 
The  pursuit  of  the  Midianites  can  hardly  have 
reached  so  far  south  as  Beth-abara,  which  was 
accessible  to  Judaea  and  Jerusalem  and  all  the 
"region  round  about"  (^  Trepixwpos ;  i.  e.  the 
oasis  of  the  South  Jordan  at  Jericho). 

If  the  derivation  of  the  name  given  above  be  cor- 
rect, Beth-barah  was  probably  the  chief  ford  of  the 
district,  and  may  therefore  have  been  that  by  which 
Jacob  crossed  on  his  return  from  Mesopotamia,  and 
at  which  Jephthah  slew  the  Ephiaimites.        [G.] 

BETH-BA'SI  (Batepaffl ;  Bethbessua),  a  town 
which  from  the  mention  of  its  decays  (to  nadypt)- 
fi.eva)  must  have  been  originally  fortified,  lying  in 
the  desert  (rfj  ip-rifiy),  and  in  which  Jonathan  and 
Simon  Maceabaeus  took  refuge  from  Bacchides  (1 
Mace.  ix.  62,  64).  Josephus  (Ant.  xiii.  1,  §5)  has 
BrjQaKaya  ( Beth-hogla),  but  a  reading  of  the  pas- 
sage quoted  by  Keland  (632)  presents  the  more 
probable  form  of  Beth-keziz.  Either  alternative  fixes 
the  situation  as  in  the  Jordan  valley  not  far  from 
Jericho.     [Keziz,  valley  of.]  [G.] 

BETH-BIR'EI  {^-\2  '3 ;  oIkos  Bapovaeoopifi 

(by  inclusion  of  the  next  name)  ;  Bethberai),  a  town 
of  Simeon  (1  Chr.  iv.  31),  which  by  comparison 
with  the  parallel  list  in  Josh.  xix.  appears  to  have 
had  also  the  name  of  Beth-lebaoth.  It  lay  to  the 
extreme  south,  with  Beersheba,  Hormah,  &c.  (comp. 
Josh.  xv.  32,  Lebaoth).  [G]. 

BETH'-CAR   ("13 '3,  house  of  lambs;   BaiB- 

xip,  Alex.  BeAx^p ;  Bethchar),  a  place  named  as 
the  point  to  which  the  Israelites  pursued  the  Philis- 
tines from  Mizpeh  on  a  memorable  occasion  (1  Sam. 
vii.  11),  and  therefore  west  of  Mizpeh.  From  the 
unusual  expression  "  under  Beth-car"  ('3  nnflfD) 

it  would  seem  that  the  place  itself  was  on  a  height, 
with  the  road  at  its  tout.  Josephus  {Ant.  vi.  2,  §2) 
has  yue'xp'  Koppaliov,  and  goes  on  to  say  that  the 
stone  Ebenezer  was  set  up  at  this  place  to  mark- 
it  as  the  spot  to  which  the   victory   had   extended. 

[Eben-ezee.]  [<;.] 

•  BETH-DA  GON  (flJV3,  house  of  Dagon; 
BayaSi-fiX  ;  Alex.  Br]6Sayii>v  ;  Bcthdagoii). 

1.  A  city  in  the  low  country  (Shefelah)  of  Judnh 
(Josh.  xv.  41),  and  therefore  not  fir  from  the  Phi- 
listine territory,  with  which  its  name  implies  a  con- 
nexion. From  the  absence  of  any  conjunction  before 
this  name,  it  has  been  suggested  that  it  should  be 
taken  with  the  preceding,  "  Gederoth-Bethdagon ;" 
in  that  case  probably  distinguishing  Gederoth  from 
the  two  places  of  similar  name  in  the  neighbourhood. 
Caphardagon  existed  as  a  very  large  village  between 
Diospolis  (Lydda)  and  Jamnia  in  the  time  of  Je- 
rome (Oiwm.  s.v.).   A  Beitdejan  has  been  found  by 


BETH-EL 


197 


Robinson  between  Lydda  and  Jaffa;  but  this  is  too 
far  north,  and  must  be  another  place. 

2.  A  town  apparently  near  the  coast,  named  as 
one  of  the  landmarks  of  the  boundary  of  Asher 
(Josh.  xix.  27  ;   ]}i\  '3,   BaiOiyeviQ).      The  name 

and  the  proximity  to  the  coast,  point  to  its  being  a 
Philistine  colony. 

3.  In  addition  to  the  two  modern  villages  noticed 
above  as  bearing  this  ancient  name,  a  third  has 
been  found  by  Kobinson  (iii.  298)  a  few  miles  east 
of  Nabulus.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  in  the 
occurrence  of  these  names  we  have  indications  of 
the  worship  of  the  Philistine  god  having  spread  far 
beyond  the  Philistine  territory.  Possibly  these  are 
the  sites  of  towns  founded  at  the  time  when  this 
warlike  people  had  overrun  the  face  of  the  country 
to  "  Michmash  eastward  of  Bethaven"  on  the  south, 
and  Gilboa  on  the  north — that  is,  to  the  very  edge 
of  the  heights  which  overlook  the  Jordan  valley — 
driving  "  the  Hebrews  over  Jordan  into  the  land  of 
Gad  and  Gilead"  (1  Sam.  xiii.  5-7  ;  comp.  17,  18  ; 
xxix.  1  ;  xxxi.  1).  [G.] 

BETH-DIBLATHA'IM  (D?r63V3,  house 
of  the  double  cake  (of  figs)  ;  oIkos  AaiBAadatfj.  ; 
domus  Deblathaim),  a  town  of  Moab  (Jer.  xlviii. 
22),  apparently  the  place  elsewhere  called  Almon- 

DlBLATHAIM.  [G.j 

BETH'-EL  (f?N  fV3,  house  of  God;  BaiSrjA  ; 
Joseph.  B-ndyX,  Be0rjA?j  ir6\ts ;  Bethel).  1.  A 
well-known  city  and  holy  place  of  central  Palestine. 

Of  the  origin  of  the  name  of  Bethel  there  are 
two  accounts  extant.  1.  It  was  bestowed  on  the 
spot  by  Jacob  under  the  awe  inspired  by  the  noc- 
turnal vision  of  God,  when  on  his  journey  from  his 
father's  house  at  Beersheba  to  seek  his  wife  in 
Haran  (Gen.  xxviii.  19).  He  took  the  stone  which 
had  served  for  his  pillow  and  put  (Dt^11)  it  for  a 
pillar,  and  anointed  it  with  oil  ;  and  he  "  called  the 
name  of  that  place  (DIpD  Nli"l)  Bethel;  but  the 
name  of  '  the '  city  ("I^H)  was  called  Luz  at  the 
first." 

.  The  expression  in  the  last  paragraph  of  this 
account  is  curious,  and  indicates  a  distinction  be- 
tween the  "city"  and  the  "place" — the  early 
Canaanite  "city"  Luz,  and  the  "place,"  as  yet  a 
mere  undistinguished  spot,  marked  only  by  the 
"  stone,"  or  the  heap  (Joseph.  to?s  XlOois  a-v/xepo- 
pov)X(vois),  erected  by  Jacob  to  commemorate  his 
vision. 

2.  But  according  to  the  other  account,  Bethel 
received  its  name  on  tin:  occasion  of  a  blessing 
bestowed  by  God  upon  Jacob  after  his  return  from 
Padau-aram  ;  at  which  time  also  (according  to  this 
narrative)  the  name  of  Israel  was  given  him.  Here 
again  Jacob  erects  (3-^)  a  "  pillar  of  stone," 
which,  as  before,  he  anoints  with  oil  (Gen.  xxxv. 
14,  1")).  The  key  of  this  story  would  seem  to  be 
the  feet  of  God's  "speaking"  with  Jacob.  "God 
went  up  from  him  in  the  place  where  He  <  spike' 
with  him" — "Jacob  sd  up  a  pillar  in  the  place 
where  Me  '  spike'  with  him,"  and  •'  called  the  name 
of  the  place  where  Cod  spake1'  with  him  Bethel." 

Whether  these  two  narratives  represent  distinct 
events,  or,  as  would  appear  to  be  the  case  in  other 


•  The  word  is  the  same  ("121)  in  all  three  cases  ; 
though  in  the  A.  V.  it  is  rendered  "talked"  in  the 
two  former. 


198 


BETH-EL 


instances  in  the  lives  of  the  patriarchs,  are  different 
representations  of  the  one  original  occasion  on  which 
the  hill  of  Bethel  received  its  consecration,  we  know 
not,  nor  indeed  does  it  concern  us  to  know.  It  is 
perhaps  worth  notice  that  the  prophet  Hosea — in  the 
only  reference  which  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  contain 
to  this  occurrence — had  evidently  the  second  of  the 
two  narratives  before  him,  since  in  a  summary  of 
the  life  of  Jacob  he  introduces  it  in  the  order  in 
which  it  occurs  in  Genesis — laying  full  and  cha- 
racteristic stress  on  the  keyword  of  the  story : 
"  He  had  power  over  the  angel  and  prevailed  ;  he 
wept  and  made  supplication  unto  him  ;  He  found 
him  in  Bethel,  and  there  He  spake  with  us,  even 
Jehovah  God  of  hosts"  (Hos.  xii.  4,  5). 

Early  as  is  the  date  involved  in  these  narratives, 
yet,  if  we  are  to  accept  the  precise  definition  of 
Gen.  xii.  8,  the  name  of  Bethel  would  appear  to 
have  existed  at  this  spot  even  before  the  arrival  of 
Abram  in  Canaan :  he  removed  from  the  oaks  of 
Moreh  to  "  '  the '  mountain  on  the  east  of  Bethel," 
with  "  Bethel  on  the  west  and  Hai  on  the  east." 
Here  he  built  an  altar  ;  and  hither  he  returned  from 
Egypt  with  Lot  before  their  separation  (xiii.  3,  4). 
See  Stanley,  S.  §•  P.  218. 

In  one  thing,  however,  the  above  narratives  all 
agree, — in  omitting  any  mention  of  town  or  build- 
ings at  Bethel  at  that  early  period,  and  in  drawing 
a  marked  distinction  between  the  "  city  "  of  Luz  and 
the  consecrated  "  place"  in  its  neighbourhood  (comp. 
besides  the  passages  already  quoted,  Gen.  xxxv.  7). 
Even  in  the  ancient  chronicles  of  the  conquest  the 
two  are  still  distinguished  (Josh.  xvi.  1,  2)  ;  and 
the  appropriation  of  the  name  of  Bethel  to  the  city 
appears  not  to  have  been  made  till  still  later,  when 
it  was  taken  by  the  tribe  of  Ephraim  ;  after  which 
the  name  of  Luz  occurs  no  more  (Judg.  i.  22-26). 
If  this  view  be  correct,  there  is  a  strict  parallel 
between  Bethel  and  Mori  ah,  which  (according  to 
the  tradition  commonly  followed)  received  its  conse- 
cration when  Abraham  offered  up  Isaac,  but  did  not 
become  the  site  of  an  actual  sanctuary  till  the  erection 
of  the  Temple  there  by  Solomon.     [Moriah.] 

The  intense  significance  of  the  title  bestowed  by 
Jacob  on  the  place  of  his  vision  —  "  House 
of  God " — and  the  wide  extent  to  which  that 
appellation  has  been  adopted  in  all  languages  and  in 
spite  of  the  utmost  diversities  of  belief,  has  been 
well  noticed  by  Mi-.  Stanley  (220,  1).  It  should 
not  be  overlooked  how  far  this  has  been  the  case 
with  the  actual  name  ;  the  very  syllables  of  Jacob's 
exclamation,  forming,  as  they  do,  the  title  of  the 
chief  sanctuary  of  the  Mahometan  world — the 
Beit-allah  of  JMecca — while  they  are  no  less  the 
favourite  designation  of  the  meanest  conventicles  of 
the  humblest  sects  of  Protestant  Christendom. 

On  the  other*  hand,  how  singular  is  the  fact — 
if  the  conclusions  of  etymologists  are  to  be  trusted 
(Spencer,  de  Leg.  Hcbr.  444;  Bochart,  Canaan, 
ii.  2) — that  the  awful  name  of  Bethel  should  have 
lent  its  form  to  the  word  by  which  was  called  one 
of  the  most  perplexing  of  all  the  perplexing  forms 
assumed  by  the  idolatry  of  the  heathen — the  Baitulia, 
the  \i6oi  fj.L\pvxoi,  or  living  stones,  of  the 
ancient  Phoenicians.  Another  opportunity  will 
occur  for  going  more  at  length  into  this  interesting 
subject  [Stoxes]  ;  it  will  be  sufficient  here  to  say 
that  the  Baitulia  seem  to  have  preserved  the  erect 
position  of  their  supposed  prototype,  and  that  the 
worship  consisted  of  anointing  them  with  oil  (Arno- 
bius,  adv.  Gentes,  i.  39). 

The  actual  stone  of  Bethel  itself  was  the  subject 


BETH-EL 

of  a  Jewish  tradition,  according  to  which  it  was 
removed  to  the  second  temple,  and  served  as  the 
pedestal  for  the  ark.  It  survived  the  destruction 
of  the  temple  by  the  Romans,  and  was  resorted  to 
by  the  Jews  in  their  lamentations  (Reland,  Pal. 
638).    [Temple,  the  Second.] 

After  the  conquest  Bethel  is  frequently  heard  of. 
In  the  troubled  times  when  there  was  no  king  in 
Israel,  it  was  to  Bethel  that  the  people  went  up  in 
their  distress  to  ask  counsel  of  God  (Judg.  xx.  18, 
26,  31,  xxi.  2  :  in  the  A.  V.  the  name  is  translated 
"  house  of  God  ").  Here  was  the  ark  of  the  cove- 
nant under  the  charge  of  Phinehas  the  grandson  of 
Aaron,  with  an  altar  and  proper  appliances  for  the 
offering  of  burnt-offerings  and  peace-offerings  (xx. 
26-28,  xxi.  4)  ;  and  the  unwonted  mention  of  a 
regular  road  or  causeway  as  existing  between  it 
and  the  great  town  of  Shechem  is  doubtless  an 
indication  that  it  was  already  in  much  repute. 
Later  than  this  we  find  it  named  as  one  of  the 
holy  cities  to  which  Samuel  went  in  circuit,  taking 
equal  rank  with  Gilgal  and  Mizpeh  (1  Sam.  vii.  16). 

Doubtless,  although  we  are  not  so  expressly  told, 
it  was  this  ancient  reputation,  combined  with  its 
situation  on  the  extreme  south  frontier  of  his  new 
kingdom,  and  with  the  hold  which  it  must  have 
had  on  the  sympathies  both  of  Benjamin  and 
Ephraim — the  former's  by  lot,  and  the  latter's  by 
conquest — that  made  Jeroboam  choose  Bethel  as  the 
depository  of  the  new  false  worship  which  was  to 
seal  and  consummate  the  division  between  the  ten 
tribes  and  the  two. 

Here  he  placed  one  of  the  two  calves  of  gold, 
and  built  a  "  house  of  high  places",  and  an  altar 
of  incense,  by  which  he  himself  stood  to  burn  ; 
as  we  see  him  in  the  familiar  picture  of  1  K.  xiii. 
Towards  the  end  of  Jeroboam's  life  Bethel  fell  into 
the  hands  of  Judah  (2  Chr.  xiii.  19),  whence  it  was 
probably  recovered  by  Baasha  (xvi.  1).  It  then 
remains  unmentioned  for  a  long  period.  The  wor- 
ship of  Baal,  introduced  by  the  Phoenician  queen 
of  Ahab  (1  K.  xvi.  31),  had  probably  alienated 
public  favour  from  the  simple  erections  of  Jero- 
boam to  more  gorgeous  shrines  (2  K.  x.  21,  22). 
Samaria  had  been  built  (1  K.  xvi.  24),  and  Jezreel, 
and  these  things  must  have  all  tended  to  draw  public 
notice  to  the  more  northern  part  of  the  kingdom. 
It  was  during  this  period  that  Elijah  visited  Bethel, 
and  that  we  hear  of  "  sons  of  the  prophets  "  as  resi- 
dent there  ( 2  K.  ii.  2, 3),  two  facts  apparently  incom- 
patible with  the  active  existence  of  the  calf-worship. 
The  mention  of  the  bears  so  close  to  the  town  (iii. 
23,  25),  looks  too  as  if  the  neighbourhood  were  not 
much  frequented  at  that  time.  But  after  his  de- 
struction of  the  Baal  worship  throughout  the 
country,  Jehu  appears  to  have  returned  to  the 
simpler  and  more  national  religion  of  the  calves, 
and  Bethel  comes  once  more  into  view  (2  K.  x.  29). 
Under  the  descendants  of  this  king  the  place  and 
the  worship  must  have  gi-eatly  flourished,  for  by 
the  time  of  Jeroboam  II.,  the  great-grandson  of 
Jehu,  the  rude  village  was  again  a  royal  residence 
with  a  "  king's  house"  (Am.  vii.  13);  there  were 
palaces  both  for  "  winter  "  and  "  summer,"  "  great 
houses"  and  "houses  of  ivory"  (iii.  15),  and  a 
very  high  degree  of  luxury  in  dress,  furniture,  and 
living  (vi.  4-6).  The  one  original  altar  was  now 
accompanied  by  several  others  (iii.  14,  ii.  8)  ;  and  the 
simple  "  incense  "  of  its  founder  had  developed  into 
the  "burnt-offerings"  and  "  meat-offerings "  of 
•-  solemn  assemblies."  with  the  fragrant  "  peace- 
offerings"  of  "fat  beasts"  (v.  21,  22). 


BETH-EL 

How  this  prosperity  came  to  its  doom  we  are  not 
told.  After  the  desolation  of  the  northern  kingdom 
by  the  king  of  Assyria,  Bethel  still  remained  an 
abode  of  priests,  who  taught  the  wretched  colonists 
"  how  to  fear  Jehovah,"  "  the  God  of  the  laud " 
(2  K.  xvii.  28,  27).  The  buildings  remained  till 
the  time  of  Josiah,  by  whom  they  were  destroyed  ; 
and  in  the  account  preserved  of  his  reforming  ico- 
noclasm  we  catch  one  more  glimpse  of  the  altar  of 
Jeroboam,  with  its  last  loathsome  tire  of  "  dead 
men's  bones  "  burning  upon  it,  the  altar  and  high- 
place  surviving  in  their  archaic  antiquity  amidst 
the  successive  additions  of  later  votaries,  like  the 
wooden  altar  of  Becket  at  Canterbury,  which 
continued  in  its  original  simplicity  through  all  the 
subsequent  magnificence  of  the  church  in  which 
he  was  murdered  (Stanley,  Canterbury,  184).  Not 
the  least  remarkable  of  these  later  works  was  the 
monument  (}V5?n  ;  crrr]Kri),  evidently  a  conspicuous 
erection,  of  the  "  man  of  God  "  who  proclaimed 
the  ultimate  downfall  of  this  idolatrous  worship 
at  its  very  outset,  and  who  would  seem  to  have 
been  at  a  later  date  canonized  as  it  were  by  the 
votaries  of  the  very  idolatry  which  he  denounced. 
"  Woe  unto  you !  for  ye  build  the  sepulchres 
of  the  prophets,  and  your  fathers  killed  them." 

But,  in  any  case,  the  fact  of  the  continued 
existence  of  the  tomb  of  this  protester  through  so 
many  centuries  of  idolatry  illustrates  very  remark- 
ably the  way  in  which  the  worship  of  Jehovah 
and  the  false-worship  went  on  side  by  side  at  Bethel. 
It  is  plain  from  several  allusions  of  Amos  that 
this  was  the  case  (v.  14,  22)  ;  and  the  fact  before 
noticed  of  prophets  of  Jehovah  being  resident 
there,  and  of  the  friendly  visits  even  of  the  stern 
Elijah  ;  of  the  relation  between  the  "  man  of  God 
from  Judah"  and  the  "  lying  prophet"  who  caused 
his  death  ;  of  the  manner  iu  which  Zedekiah  the 
son  of  Chenaanah,  a  priest  of  Baal,  resorts  to  the 
name  of  Jehovah  for  his  solemn  ail  juration,  and  lastly 
of  the  way  in  which  the  denunciations  of  Amos  were 
tolerated  and  he  himself  allowed  to  escape, — all  these 
point  to  a  state  of  things  well  worthy  of  investiga- 
tion. In  this  connexion,  too,  it  is  curious  that  men 
of  Bethel  and  Ai  returned  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii. 
28  ;  Neh.  vii.  32)  ;  and  that  they  returned  to  their 
native  place  whilst  continuing  their  relations  with 
Nehemiah  and  the  restored  worship  (Neh.  xi.  31).  In 
the  Book  of  Esdras  the  name  appears  as  BETOLI0S. 
in  later  times  Bethel  is  only  named  once,  amongst 
the  strong  cities  in  Judaea  which  were  repaired 
by  Bacchides  during  the  struggles  of  the  times  of 
the  .Maccabees  (1  Mac.  ix.  .">U). 

Bethel  receives  a  bare  mention  from  Eusebius  and 
Jerome  in  the  Onomasticon,  as  12  miles  from 
Jerusalem  on  the  right  hand  of  the  road  to  Sichem  ; 
and  here  its  ruins  still  lie  under  the  scan-civ  altere  I 

name  of  I'<  itin.     They  cover  a  space  of  "  thr r 

four  acres,'  and  consist  of"  very  many  foundations 
and  half-standing  walls  of  houses  and  other  build- 
ings." "  The  ruins  lie  upon  the  front  of  a  low  hill 
between  the  heads  of  two  hollow  wadys  which  unite 
and  run  off  into  the  main  valley  es-Suweinit  "  (  Rob. 
i.  448-9).  Dr.  Clarke,  and  other  travellers  since 
his  visit,  have  remarked  on  the  "  stony"  nature  of 
the  soil  at  Bethel,  as  perfectly  in  keeping  with  the 
narrative  of  Jacob's  slumber  there.  When  on  tin' 
sput  little  doubt  can  be  felt  as  to  the  localities  of 
this  interesting  place.  The  round  mount  S.E.  of 
Bethel  must  be  the  "mountain"  on  which  A  In. en 
built  the  altar,  and  on  which  he  and  Lol  stood 
when    they  made   their  division  of  the   land   (<ien. 


BETHESDA 


199 


xii.  7,  xiii.  10).  It  is  still  thickly  strewn  to  its  top 
with  stones  formed  by  nature  for  the  building  of 
"  altar "  or  sanctuary.  As  the  eye  turns  invo- 
luntarily eastward,  it  takes  in  a  large  part  of  the 
plain  of  the  Jordan  opposite  Jericho  ;  distant  it  is 
true,  but  not  too  distant  to  discern  in  that  clear 
atmosphere  the  lines  of  verdure  that  mark  the 
brooks  which  descend  from  the  mountains  beyond 
the  liver,  and  fertilize  the  plain  even  in  its  present 
neglected  state.  Further  south  lies,  as  in  a  map, 
fully  half  of  that  sea  which  now  covers  the  once 
fertile  oasis  of  the  "  cities  of  the  plain,"  and  which 
in  those  days  was  as  "  the  garden  of  the  Lord,  even 
as  the  land  of  Egypt."  Eastward  again  of  this  mount, 
at  about  the  same  distance  on  the  left  that  Bethel 
is  on  the  right,  overlooking  the  Wady  Suweinit,  is 
a  third  hill  crowned  by  a  remarkably  desolate-looking 
mass  of  grey  debris,  the  most  perfect  heap  of  ruin 
to  be  seen  even  in  that  country  of  ruins.  This  is 
Tell  er-Rijmeh,  "  the  mound  of  the  heap,"  agreeing 
in  every  particular  of  name,  aspect,  and  situation, 
with  Ai. 

An  admirable  passage  on  the  history  of  Bethel  will 
be  found  in  Stanley  (217-223). 

2.  A  town  in  the  south  part  of  Judah,  named 
in  Josh.  xii.  16,  and  1  Sam.  xxx.  27.  The  collo- 
cation of  the  name  in  these  two  lists  is  decisive 
against  its  being  the  well-known  Bethel.  In  the 
latter  case  the  LXX.  read  Baid(r6vp,  i.  e.  Bethzur. 
By  comparison  of  the  lists  of  the  towns  of  Judah 
and  Simeon  (Josh.  xv.  30,  xix.  4  ;  1  Chr.  v.  29, 
30),  the  place  appears  under  the  names  of  CHESIL, 
Bethul,  and  Bethuel. 

Hiel,  The  Bethelite  (vNH  JT2;  6  Bai- 
StjAittjs)  is  recorded  as  the  rebuilder  of  Jericho 
(I  K.  xvi.  34).  [G.] 

BETH-E'MEK   (plpyn   JV3,    house  of  the 

valley  ;  Bcufyte  ;  Alex.  BrjBae/AeK  ;  Bethemec),  a 
place  on  or  near  the  border  of  Asher,  on  the  north 
side  of  which  was  the  ravine  of  Jiphthah-el  (Josh. 
xix.  27).  Robinson  has  discovered  an  'Amkak 
about  8  miles  to  the  N.  E.  of  Akka;  but  if  his 
identification  of  Jefdi  with  Jiphthah-el  be  tenabL  , 
the  site  of  Beth-emek  must  be  sought  for  farther 
south  than  Amkah  (Rob.  iii.  103,  107,  8).     [G.] 

BE'THER,    THE    MOUNTAINS   OF    (1113   HPI  ; 

opr\  koi\wix<Lt<j3v  ;  Bether,  and  Bctliel),  Cant.  ii. 
17.  There  is  no  clue  to  guide  us  to  what  mountains 
are  intended  here. 

For  the  site  of  Bether,  so  famous  in  the  post-bi- 
blical history  of  the  Jews,  see  Relaud,  030,  640; 
Rob.  iii.  267-271.  [G.] 

BETHES'DArBTjfleo-Sci,  asif  |>£Oaa  A.AJi, 
house  of  mercy,  or  N^C'X  JV3,  place  ofth 
ing  of  water;  Euseb.  Br/ca^a;  Bethsaida),  the 
Hebrew  name  of  a  reservoir  or  tank  {KoAvuf37]8pa, 
i.e.  a  swimming-pool),  with  live  "porches" 
{(TTods),  close  upon  the  sheep-gate  or  "market" 
(eirl  TJj  -KpoPaTiKij — it  will  be  observed  that  the 
word  "market"  is  supplied)  in  Jerusalem  (John 
v.  2).  The  porches  -i.  e.  cloisters  or  colonnades  *  - 
were  extensive  enough  to  accommodate  a  large  num- 
ber of  sick  and  Infirm  people,  whose  custom  it  was 

to  Wiil    there  for  the  "  troubling  of  the  water." 


a  Cloisters  or  colonnades  round  artificial  tanks  are 
common  in  the  East.    One  example  is  the  Taj  B 
in  the  set  of  drawings  of  Beejapore  now  publishinur 
by  the  East  India  Company. 


200 


BETHEZEL 


Eusebius — though  unfortunately  he  gives  no  clue 
to  the  situation  of  Bethesda — describes  it  in  the 
Onomasticon  as  existing  in  his  time  as  two  pools 
(eV  rah  \i/j.vats  BiSv/xois),  the  one  supplied  by  the 
periodical  rains,  while  the  water  of  the  other  was 
of  a  reddish  colour  (jretyoiviyjxivov),  due,  as  the 
tradition  then  ran,  to  the  fact  that  the  flesh  of  the 
sacrifices  was  anciently  washed  there  before  offering, 
on  which  account  the  pool  was  also  called  vpo- 
/SariKTj.  See,  however,  the  comments  of  Lightfoot 
on  this  view,  in  his  Exercit.  on  S.  John,  v.  2. 
Eusebius's  statement  is  partly  confirmed  by-  the 
Bourdeaux  Pilgrim  (a.d.  333),  who  mentions  in 
his  Itinerary  "  twin  fish-pools,  having  five  porches, 
which  are  called  Bethsaida "  (quoted  in  Barclay, 
299). 

The  large  reservoir  called  the  Birket  Israil, 
within  the  walls  of  the  city,  close  by  the  St.  Ste- 
phen's gate,  and  under  the  north-east  wall  of  the 
Haram  area,  is  generally  considered  to  be  the 
modern  representative  of  Bethesda,  This  tradition 
reaches  back  certainly  to  the  time  of  Saewulf,  a.d. 
1102,  who  mentions  it  under  the  name  of  Bethsaida 
{Early  Trav.  41).  It  is  also  named  in  the  Citez 
de  Jherusalem,  A.D.  1187  (sect.  vii. ;  Rob.  ii.  562), 
and  in  more  modern  times  by  Maundrell  and  all 
the  later  travellers. 

The  little  that  can  be  said  on  the  subject  goes 
rather  to  confirm  than  to  invalidate  this  tradition. 
On  the  one  hand,  (1)  the  most  probable  position  of 
the  sheep-gate  is  at  the  north-east  part  of  the  city 
[Jerusalem].  On  the  other  hand  the  Birket 
Israil  exhibits  none  of  the  marks  which  appear  to 
have  distinguished  the  water  of  Bethesda  in  the  re- 
cords of  the  Evangelist  and  of  Eusebius.  (2)  The 
construction  of  the  Birkeh  is  such  as  to  show  that 
it  was  originally  a  \vater-reservoir,b  and  not,  as  has 
been  suggested,  the  moat  of  a  fortress  (Rob.  i.  293-4, 
iii.  243) ;  (3)  there  is  certainly  a  remarkable  coin- 
cidence between  the  name  as  given  by  Eusebius, 
Bezatha,  and  that  of  the  north-east  suburb  of  the 
city  at  the  time  of  the  Gospel  history — Bezetha ;  and 
(4)  there  is  the  difficulty  that  if  the  Birket  Israil 
be  not  Bethesda,  which  of  the  ancient  "  pools  "  does 
it  represent? 

One  other  proposed  identification  must  be  no- 
ticed, viz.  that  of  Dr.  Robinson  (i.  342-3),  who 
suggests  the  "  fountain  of  the  Virgin,"  in  the  valley 
of  the  Kedron,  a  short  distance  above  the  Pool  of 
Siloam.  In  favour  of  this  are  its  situation,  sup- 
posing the  sheep-gate  to  be  at  the  south-east  of  the 
city,  as  Lightfoot,  Robinson,  and  others  suppose,  and 
the  strange  intermittent  "  troubling  of  the  water  " 
caused  by  the  periodical  ebbing  and  flowing  of  the 
supply.  Against  it  are  the  confined  size  of  the 
pool,  and  the  difficulty  of  finding  room  for  the  five 
stoae.  (See  Barclay's  detailed  account,  City,  fyc. 
516-524,  and  325,  6.)  [G.] 

BETHE'ZEL  (^SKil  JT3,  house  of  firm- 
ness (?)  ;  oIkov  ix^>lxevov  <xvtvs  j  domus  vicind),  a 
place  named  only  in  Mic.  i.  11.  From  the  context  it 
was  doubtless  situated  in  the  plain  of  Philistia.  [G.] 

BETH-GA'DER    (TT3'3,    if   not   in   pause, 

Geder,  YT3  ;  BaidyeSwp  ;  Bethgader),  doubtless  a 

place,  though  it  occurs  in  the  genealogies  of  Judah 
as  if  a  person  (1  Chr.  ii.  51).  Possibly  the  same 
place  as  Geder  (Josh.  xii.  13).  [G.] 

b  The  photographs,  woodcuts,  anil  careful  state- 
ments of  Salzmann,  are  conclusive  on  this  point. 


BETH-HORON 
BETH-GA'MUL  (S)JD5  '3,  house  of  the  weaned, 
Gesen.  Lex.,  but  may  it  not  be  "  house  of 
camel "  ?  ;  oTkos  yatjj.d>A  ;  Alex.  ya/u.u>Ad ;  Beth- 
gamul),  a  town  of  Moab,  in  the  mishor  or  downs 
east  of  Jordan  (A.  V.  "  plain  country,"  Jer.  xlviii. 
23,  comp.  21)  ;  apparently  a  place  of  late  date, 
since  there  is  no  trace  of  it  in  the  earlier  lists  of 
Num.  xxxii.  34-38,  and  Josh.  xiii.  16-20.  A  place 
called  Um  el-Jemdl  is  said  to  exist  a  few  miles 
south  of  Busrah  in  the  Hauran  (Burckh.  106  ; 
Kiepert's  map  in  Rob.  1857)  ;  but  this  is  much  too 
far  to  the  N.E.  to  suit  the  requirements  of  the  text. 
In  a  country  of  nomadic  tribes  this  latter  name 
would  doubtless  be  a  common  one.  [G.] 

BETH-HAC'-CEREM  *  (0^3  H  '3,  house  of 

the  vine  ;  Brt8aKxa.pt  fJ.,  B7j0axxaPiu<*  '■>  Bethacha- 
rarri),  a  town  which,  like  a  few  other  places, 
is  distinguished  by  the  application  to  it  of  the 
word  pelec,  7]7B,  A.  V.  "  part,"  (Neh.  iii.  14).  It 
had  then  a  "ruler"  called  *TK\     From  the  other 

mention  of  it  (Jer.  vi.  1)  we  find  that  it  was  used 
as  a  beacon-station,  and  that  it  was  near  Tekoa. 
By  Jerome  (Comm.  Jer.  vi.)  a  village  named 
Bethachanna  is  said  to  have  been  on  a  mountain 
between  Tekoa  and  Jerusalem,  a  position  in  which 
the  eminence  known  as  the  Frank  mountain 
(Herodium)  stands  conspicuous  ;  and  this  has  ac- 
cordingly been  suggested  as  Beth-haccerem  (Po- 
cocke,  Rob.  i.  480).  The  name  is  at  any  rate  a 
testimony  to  the  early  fruitfulness  of  this  part  of 
Palestine. 

Karem  (Kope'/x)  's  one  0I"  the  towns  added  in 
the  LXX.  to  the  Hebrew  text  of  Josh.  xv.  59, 
as  in  the  mountains  of  Judah,  in  the  district  of 
Bethlehem.  [G.] 

BETH-HA'RAN  (pH'3  ;  v  Bai6apdu;  Beth- 

arari),  one  of  the  "  fenced  cities "  on  the  east  of 
Jordan,  "  built "  by  the  Gadites  (Num.  xxxii.  36). 
It  is  named  with  Beth-nimrah,  and  therefore  is  no 
doubt  the  same  place  as  Beth-aram  (accurately 
Beth-haram),  Josh.  xiii.  27.  The  name  is  not  found 
in  the  lists  of  the  towns  of  Moab  in  either  Isaiah, 
Jeremiah,  or  Ezekiel.  [G-] 

BETH-HOG'LA,  and  -HOGLAH  (H^H  '3, 

house  of  partridge,  Gesen. ;  though  Jerome  gives 
another  interpretation,  locus-  gyri,  reading  the  name 
i"!/0y  '3,  and  connecting  it  with  the  funeral  races 
or  dances  at  the  mourning  for  Jacob  [Atad]  ; 
Bai6ay\adfx,  Bedeyaiw,  Bcu0a.Aa.yd;  Bethagla). 
a  place  on  the  border  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  6)  and 
of  Benjamin  (xviii.  19),  to  which  latter  tribe  it  was 
reckoned  to  belong  (xviii.  21).  A  magnificent  spring 
and  a  ruin  between  Jericho  and  the  Jordan  still 
bear  the  names  of  Ain-hojla  and  Kusr  Hajla,  and 
are  doubtless  on  or  near  the  old  site  (Rob.  i.  544-6). 
The  LXX.  reading,  BaidayAadfj.,  may  point  to 
En-eglaim,  a  place  which  was  certainly  near  this 
locality.  [G.] 

BETH-HO'RON  (P"VirT3,  or  in  contracted 
form  >i"lh  '3,  and  once  pn  3,  house  of  caverns  or 


a  This  name  deserves  notice  as  one  of  the  very  few 
instances  in  which  the  translators  of  the  A.  V.  have 
retained  the  definite  article,  which  in  the  original  so 
frequently  occurs  in  the  middle  of  compound  proper 
names. 


BETH-HORON 

holes;  Baidcopoov ;  Beth-horon),  the  name  of  two 
towns  or  villages,  an  "upper"  (11  vJJn '3)  and  a 
«  nether"  (flfinfin '3),  (Josh,  xvi."  3,  5  ;   1  Chr. 

vii.  24),  on  the  road  from  Gibeon  to  Azekah  (Josh.  x. 
10,  11)  and  the  Philistine  Plain  (1  Mace.  iii.  24). 
Beth-horon  lay  on  the  boundary-line  between  Ben- 
jamin and  Ephraim  (Josh.  xvi.  3,  5,  and  xviii.  13, 
14),  was  counted  to  Ephraim  (Josh.  xxi.  22  ;  1  Chr. 
vii.  24),,  and  given  to  the  Kohathites  (Josh.  xxi.  22  ; 
1  Chr.  vi.  68  [53]  ). 

The  road  connecting  the  two  places  is  memorable 
in  sacred  history  as  the  scene  of  two  of  the  most 
complete  victories  achieved  by  the  Jewish  arms  ; 
that  of  Joshua  over  the  five  kings  of  the  Amorites 
(Josh.  x. ;  Ecclus.  xlvi.  6),  and  that  of  Judas  Mac- 
cabaeus  over  the  forces  of  Syria  under  Seron  "(1 
Mace.  iii.  13-24).  Later  still  the  Roman  army 
under  Cestius  Callus  was  totally  cut  up  at  the 
same  spot  (Joseph.  B.  J.  ii.  19,  §§8,  9). 

There  is  no  room  for  doubt  that  the  two  Beth- 
horons   still    survive    in    the    modern    villages    of 

Beit-'ur    (jis.   tl^Aj),     et-tahta,    and    el-foka, 

which  were  first  noticed  by  Dr.  Clarke,  and  have 
been  since  visited  by  Dr.  Robinson,  Mr.  Stanley, 
and  others.  Besides  the  similarity  of  the  name, 
and  the  fact  that  the  two  places  are  still  designated 
as  "  uppei  "  and  "  lower,"  all  the  requirements  of 
the  narrative  are  fulfilled  in  this  identification. 
The  road  is  still  the  direct  one  from  the  site  which 
must  have  been  Gibeon  {el-Jib),  and  from  Mich- 
mash  (M&khm&s)  to  the  Philistine  plain  on  the 
one  hand,  and  Antipatris  (Joseph.  B.J.  ii.  19,  §9) 
on  the  other.  On  the  mountain  which  lies  to  the 
southward  of  the  nether  village  is  still  preserved 
the  name  (  Yalo)  and  the  site  of  Ajalon,  so  closely 
connected  with  the  proudest  memories  of  Beth- 
horon ;  and  the  long  "  descent "  between  the  two 
remains  unaltered  from  what  it  was  on  that  great 
day  "  which  was  like  no  day  before  or  after  it." 

The  importance  of  the  road  on  which  the  two 
Beth-horons  are  situated,  the  main  approach  to  the 
interior  of  the  country  from  the  hostile  districts  on 
both  sides  of  Palestine — Philistia  and  Egypt  on  the 
west,  Moab  and  Amnion  on  the  east — at  once 
explains  and  justifies  the  frequent  fortification  of 
'these  towns  at  different  periods  of  the  history 
(1  K.  ix.  17  ;  2  Chr.  viii.  5  ;  1  Mac.  ix.  50 ; 
Jud.  iv.  4,  5).  This  road,  still,  as  in  ancient  times, 
"  the  great  road  of  communication  and  heavy 
transport  between  Jerusalem  and  the  sea-coast" 
(Rob.  ii.  252),  though  a  route  rather  more  direct, 
known  as  the  "  Jaiia  road,"  is  now  used  by  tra- 
vellers with  light  baggage — leaves  the  main  north 
road  at  Tuleil  el-Ful,  3|  miles  from  Jerusalem,  due 
west  of  Jericho.  Bending  slightly  to  the  north,  it 
runs  by  the  modern  village  of  el-Jib,  the  ancient 
Gibeon,  and  then  proceeds'  by  the  Beth-horons  in  a 
direct  line  due  west  to  Jimzu  [Gmzo]  and  L&dd 
[Lydda],  at  which  it  parts  into  three,  diverging 
north  to  Caphar-Saba  [Antipatris],  south  to 
Gaza,  and  west  to  Jaffa  [Joppa], 

From  Gibeon  to  the  Upper  Beth-horon  is  a  dis- 
tance of  about  4  miles  of  broken  ascent  and  descent. 
The  ascent,  however,  predominates,  and  this  there- 
fore appears  to  be  the  "going  up"  to  Beth-horon 


BETH-LEHEM 


201 


a  The  statements  of  Dr.  Robinson  and  Mr.  Stanley 
on  this  point  are  somewhat  at  variance  ;  but  although 
the  road  from  Gibeon  to  Beitur et-Tahta  is  by  no 
means  a  uniform  rise,  yet  the  impression  is  certainly 


which  formed  the  first  stage  of  Joshua's  pursuit.3 
With  the  upper  village  the  descent  commences  ; 
the  road  rough  and  difficult  even  for  the  mountain- 
paths  of  Palestine  ;  now  over  sheets  of  smooth  rock 
flat  as  the  flagstones  of  a  London  pavement ;  now 
ovei  the  upturned  edges  of  the  limestone  strata  ; 
and  now  amongst  the  loose  rectangular  stones  so 
characteristic  of  the  whole  of  this  district.  There 
are  in  many  places  steps  cut,  and  other  marks  of 
the  path  having  been  artificially  improved.  But 
though  rough,  the  way  can  hardly  be  called 
"  precipitous ;"  still  less  is  it  a  ravine  (Stanley, 
208),  since  it  runs  for  the  most  part  along  the  back 
of  a  ridge  or  watershed  dividing  wadys  on  either 
hand.  After  about  three  miles  of  this  descent,  a 
slight  rise  leads  to  the  lower  village  standing  on  its 
mamelon, — the  last  outpost  of  the  Benjamite  hills, 
and  characterized  by  the  date-palm  in  the  enclosure 
of  the  village  mosque.  A  short  and  sharp  fall  below 
the  village,  a  few  undulations,  and  the  road  is 
amongst  the  dura  of  the  great  corn-growing  plain 
of  Sharon. 

This  rough  descent  from  the  upper  to  the  lower 
Beitur  is  the  "  going  down  to  Bethhoron  "  of  the 
Bible  narrative.  Standing  on  the  high  ground  of 
the  upper  village,  and  overlooking  the  wild  scene, 
we  may  feel  assured  that  it  was  over  this  rough 
path  that  the  Canaanites  fled  to  their  native 
lowlands. 

In  a  remarkable  fragment  of  early  history  (1 
Chr.  vii.  24)  we  are  told  that  both  the  upper  and 
lower  towns  were  built  by  a  woman  of  Ephraim, 
Sherah,  who  in  the  present  state  of  the  passage 
appears  as  a  granddaughter  of  the  founder  of  her 
tribe,  and  also  as  a  direct  progenitor  of  the  great 
leader  with  whose  history  the  place  is  so  closely 
connected.  [G.] 

BETH-JESHTMOTH,  or  -  JES'IMOTH 
(n'lP^n  3;  in  Numbers,  nfoCJ»n,  house  of  the 
wastes  ;  Alaifjuid ;  Alex.  'ATificid  ;  Bethsimoth, 
Bethiesimoth),  a  town  or  place  east  of  Jordan,  in 
the  "deserts"  (j"Q*1J?)  of  Moab;  that  is,  on  the 

lower  level  at  the  south  end  of  the  Jordan  valley 
(Num.  xxxiii.  49)  ;  and  named  with  Ashdoth-pisgah 
and  Beth-peor.  It  was  one  of  the  limits  of  the 
encampment  of  Israel  before  crossing  the  Jordan. 
Later  it  was  allotted  to  Reuben  (Josh.  xii.  3,  xiii. 
20),  but  came  at  last  into  the  hands  of  Moab,  and 
formed  one  of  the  cities  which  were  "  the  glory  of 
the  country"  (Ez.  xxv.  9).  Schwarz  (228)  quotes 
"  a  Beth-Jisimuth  as  still  known  at  the  north-eastern- 
most point  of  the  Dead  Sea,  half  a  mile  from  the 
Jordan;"  but  this  requires  confirmation.         [G.] 

BETH-LEB'AOTH  (lYIN^  '3,  house  of  lion- 
esses; Ba.0a.pcbe,  Alex.  Bc«0aA/3ci0 ;  Beth-lebaoth), 
a  town  in  the  lot  of  Simeon  (Josh.  xix.  G),  and 
therefore  in  the  extreme  south  of  Judah  (xv.  32, 
Lebaoth),  probably  in  the  wild  country  to  which  its 
name  bears  witness.  In  the  parallel  list  in  1  Chr. 
iv.  31  the  name  is  given  BeTH-BIREI.  [(!.] 

BETH'-LEHEM  (Dr6  TV3  =  house  of  bread; 
Br?0Aee';u;  Bethlehem).  1."  One  of  the  oldest  towns 
in  Palestine,  already  in  existence  at  the  time  of 
Jacob's  return  to  the  country.     Its  earliest  name 


that  of  an  ascent  ;  and  Beitur,  though  perhaps  no 
higher  than  the  ridge  between  it  and  Gibeon,  yet 
looks  higher,  because  it  is  so  much  above  everything 
beyond  it. 


202 


BETH-LEHEM 


was  Ephrath  or  Ephratah  (see  Gen.  xxxv.  16, 
xlviii.  7  ;  Josh.  xv.  59,  LXX.),  and  it  is  not  till 
long  after  the  occupation  of  the  country  by  the 
Israelites  that  we  meet  with  it  under  its  new  name 
of  Bethlehem.  Here,  as  in  other  cases  (comp.  Beth- 
meon,  Bethdiblathaim,  Bethpeor),  the  "  Beth"  ap- 
pears to  mark  the  bestowal  of  a  Hebrew  appellation ; 
and  if  the  derivations  of  the  Lexicons  arc  to  be 
trusted,  the  name  in  its  present  shape  appears  to 
have  been  an  attempt  to  translate  the  earlier 
Ephrata  into  Hebrew  language  and  idiom,  just  as 
the  Aral's  have  in  their  turn,  with  a  further  slight 
change  of  meaning,  converted  it  into  Beit-lahm 
(house  of  flesh). 

However  this  may  be,  the  ancient  name  lingered 
as  a  familiar  won!  in  the  mouths  of  the  inhabitants 
of  the  place  (Ruth  i.  '-',  iv.  11  ;  1  Sam.  xvii.  12), 
and  in  the  poetry  of  the  Psalmists  and  Prophets 
(Ps.  cxxxii.  6;  Mic.  v.  2)  to  a  late  period. 
[Ephrath.]  In  the  genealogical  lists  of  1  Chr. 
it  recurs,  and  Ephrath  appears  as  a  person — the 
wife  of  Caleb  and  mother  of  Hur  ("VI n)  (ii.  19,  51, 
iv.  4)  ;  the  title  of  "  father  of  Bethlehem  "  being 
bestowed  both  on  Hur  (iv.  4)  and  on  Salma,  the 
son  of  Hur  (ii.  51,  54).  The  name  of  Salma  recalls 
a  very  similar  name  intimately  connected  with 
Bethlehem,  namely  the  father    of   Boaz,    Salmah 

(HD1?^,  Ruth  iv.  20;  A.  V.  "Salmon")  or  Sal- 
mon (I'lDpK',  verse  21).     Hur  is  also  named  in 

Ex.  xxxi.  2  and  1  Chr.  ii.  20,  as  the  lather  of  Uri 
the  father  of  Bezaleel.  In  the  East  a  trade  or  calling 
remains  fixed  in  one  family  for  generations,  and  it' 
there  is  any  foundation  for  the  tradition  of  the  Targum 
that  Jesse  the  father  of  David  was  "  a  weaver  of  the 
veils  of  the  sanctuary  "  *  (Targ.  Jonathan  on  2  Sam. 
xxi.  19),  he  may  have  inherited  the  accomplishments 
and  the  profession  of  his  art  from  his  forefather,  who 
was  "  rilled  with  the  Spirit  of  God,"  "  to  work  all 
manner  of  works,''  and  amongst  them  that  of  the 
embroiderer  and  the  weaver  (Ex.  xxv.  35). b 

After  the  conquest  Bethlehem  appears  under 
its  own  name  Beth-lehem-judah  (Judg.  xvii.  7  ; 
1  Sam.  xvii.  12  ;  Ruth  i.  1,  2),  possibly,  though 
hardly  probably,  to  distinguish  it  from  the  small 
and  remote  place  of  the  same  name  in  Zebulun. 
As  the  Hebrew  text  now  stands,  however,  it  is 
omitted  altogether  from  the  list  of  the  towns 
of  Judah  in  Joshua  xv.  though  retained  by  the 
LXX.  in  the  eleven  names  which  they  insert 
between  verses  59  and  60.  Among  these  it  occurs 
between  Theko  (Tekoa),  &hkw  (comp.  1  Chr.  iv. 
4,  5),  and  Phagor  (?Peor,  <&aywp).  This  omission 
from-  the  Hebrew  text  is  certainly  remarkable, 
but  it  is  quite  in  keeping  with  the  obscurity 
in  which  Bethlehem  remains  throughout  the  whole 
of  the  Sacred  history.  Not  to  speak  of  the  later 
event  which  has  made  the  name  of  Bethlehem 
so  familiar  to  the  whole  Christian  and  Mussulman 
world,  it  was,  as  the  birthplace  of  David,  the 
scene  of  a  most  important  occurrence  to  ancient 
Israel.  And  yet  from  some  cause  or  other  it  never 
rose  to  any  eminence,  nor  ever  became  the  theatre 


1  At  the  date  of  the  visit  of  Benjamin  of  Tutlela, 
there  were  still  "  twelve  Jews,  dyers  by  profession, 
Living  at  Beth-lehem  "  (Bern',  of  Tutlela,  Asher,  i.  75). 

b  May  not  this  elucidate  the  allusions  to  the 
"  weaver's  beam  "  (whatever  the  "beam"  may  be) 
which  occur  in  the  accounts  of  giants  or  mighty  men 
slain  by  David  or  his  heroes  ;  but  not  in  any  uncon- 
nected with  him. 


BETH-LEHEM 

of  any  action  or  business.  It  is  difficult  to  say 
why  Hebron  and  Jerusalem,  with  no  special  associa- 
tions in  their  favour,  were  fixed  on  as  capitals, 
while  the  place  in  which  the  great  ideal  king,  the 
hero  and  poet  of  the  nation,  drew  his  first  breath 
and  spent  his  youth,  remained  an  "  ordinary  Ju- 
daean  village."  No  doubt  this  is  in  part  owing  to 
what  will  be  noticed  presently — the  isolated  nature 
of  its  position,  but  that  circumstance  did  not  prevent 
Gibeon,  Ramah,  and  many  other  places  situated  on 
eminences  from  becoming  famous,  and  is  not  suffi- 
cient to  account  entirely  for  such  silence  respecting 
a  place  so  strong  by  nature,  commanding  one  of  the 
main  roads,  and  the  excellence  of  which  as  a  mili- 
tary position  may  be  safely  inferred  from  the  fact 
that  at  one  time  it  was  occupied  by  the  Philistines 
as  a  garrison  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  l4;  1  Chr.  xi.  16). 

Though  not  named  as  a  Levitical  city,  it  was 
apparently  a  residence  of  Levites,  for  from  it  came 
the  young  man  Jonathan,  the  son  of  Gershom 
who  became  the  first  priest  of  the  Danites  at  their 
new  northern  settlement  (Judg.  xvii.  7,  xviii.  30), 
and  from  it  also  came  the  concubine  of  the  other 
Levite  whose  death  at  Gibeah  caused  the  destruction 
of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  (xix.  1-9). 

The  Book  of  Ruth  is  a  page  from  the  domestic 
history  of  Bethlehem  ;  the  names,  almost  the  very 
persons,  of  the  Bethlehemites  are  there  brought 
before  us ;  we  are  allowed  to  assist  at  their  most 
peculiar  customs,  and  to  witness  the  very  springs 
of  those  events  which  have  conferred  immortality 
on  the  name  of  the  place.  Many  of  these  customs 
were  doubtless  common  to  Israel  in  general,  but 
one  thing  must  have  been  peculiar  to  Bethlehem. 
What  most  strikes  the  view,  after  the  charm  of 
fhe  general  picture  has  lost  its  first  hold  on  us,  is 
the  ultimate  connexion  of  the  place  with  Moab.  Of 
the  origin  of  this  connexion  no  record  exists,  no  hint 
of  it  has  yet  been  discovered,  but  it  continued  in 
force  for  at  least  a  century  after  the  arrival  of 
Ruth,  till  the  time  when  her  great  grandson  could 
rind  no  more  secure  retreat  for  his  parents  from  the 
fury  of  Saul,  than  the  house  of  the  king  of  Moab  at 
Mizpeh  (1  Sam.  xxii.  3,  4).  But  whatever  its 
origin,  here  we  find  the  connexion  in  full  vigour. 
When  the  famine  occurs,  the  natural  resource  is  to 
go  to  the  country  of  Moab  and  "  continue  there;" 
the  surprise  of  the  city  is  occasioned  not  at  Naomi's* 
going  but  at  her  return.  Ruth  was  "not  like" 
the  handmaidens  of  Boaz — some  difference  of  feature 
or  complexion  there  was  doubtless  which  distin- 
guished the  "  children  of  Lot  "  from  the  children  of 
Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob;  but  yet  she  gleans 
after  the  reapers  in  the  field  without  molestation  or 
remark,  and  when  Boaz  in  the  most  public  manner 
possible  proclaims  his  intention  of  taking  the  stranger 
to  be  his  wife,  no  voice  of  remonstrance  is  raised, 
but  loud  congratulations  are  expressed,  the  parallel 
in  the  life  of  Jacob  occurs  at  once  to  all,  and  a 
blessing  is  invoked  on  the  head  of  Ruth  the 
Moabitess,  that  she  may  be  like  the  two  daughters 
of  the  Mesopotamian  Nahor,  "like  Rachel  and  like 
Leah,  who  did  build  the  house  of  Israel."  This,  in 
the  face  of  the  strong  denunciations  of  Moab  con- 
tained in  the  law  is,  to  say  the  least,  very  remark- 
able.0 


c  Moab  appears  elsewhere  in  connexion  with  a  place 
in  Judah,  Jasliubi-\e\\em  (1  Chr.  iv.  22).  We  might 
be  tempted  to  believe  the  name  merely  another  form 
of  Beth-lehem,  if  the  context — the  mention  of  Mare- 
shah  and  ChozeIJa,  places  on  the  extreme  west  of  the 
tribe  —did  not  forbid  it. 


BETH-LEHEM 

The  elevation  of  David  to  the  kingdom  does  not 
appeal-  to  have  affected  the  fortunes  of  his  native 
place.  The  residence  of  Saul  acquired  a  new  title 
specially  from  him,  by  which  it  was  called  even 
down  to  the  latest  time  of  Jewish  history  (2  Sam. 
xxi.  (3 ;  Joseph.  B.J.  v.  2,  §1,  Tal3a9ffuov\r)),  but 
David  did  nothing  to  dignify  Bethlehem,  or  connect 
it,  with  himself.  The  only  touch  of  recollection 
which  he  manifests  for  it,  is  that  recorded  in  the 
well-known  story  of  his  sudden  longing  for  the  water 
of  the  well  by  the  gate  of  his  childhood  (2  Sam. 
xxiii.  15). 

The  few  remaining  casual  notices  of  Bethlehem 
in  the  Old  Testament  may  be  quickly  enumerated. 
It  was  fortified  by  Rehoboam  (2  Chr.  xi.  6).  By 
the  time  of  the  captivity,  the  Inn  of  Chimham  by 
(?¥X  =  "close  to")  Bethlehem,  appears  to  have 
become  the  recognised  point  of  departure  for  tra- 
vellers to  Egypt  (Jer.  xli.  17) — -a  caravanserai  or 
khan  (D-IIJl ;  see  Stanley,  App.  §90),  perhaps 
the  identical  one  which  existed  there  at  the  time 
of  our  Lord  {KaTa\v/xa),  like  those  which  still 
exist  all  over  the  East  at  the  stations  of  travellers. 
Lastly,  "  Children  of  Bethlehem,"  to  the  number 
of  123,  returned  with  Zerubbabel  from  Babylon 
Ezr.  ii.  21;  Neh.  vii.  26). 

In  the  New  Testament  Bethlehem  retains  its  dis- 
tinctive title  of  Bethlehem-judah1'  (Matt.  ii.  1,  5), 
and  once,  in  the  announcement  of  the  Angels,  the 
"city  of  David"6  (Luke  ii.  4;  and  comp.  John 
vii.  42  ;  Kiifir) ;  oastellurri).  Its  connexion  with 
the  history  of  Christ  is  too  familiar  to  all  to  need 
any  notice  here :  the  remark  should  merely  be  made 
that  as  in  the  earlier  history  less  is  recorded  of  the 
place  after  the  youth  of  David  than  before,  so  in 
the  later,  nothing  occurs  after  the  birth  of  our  Lord 
to  indicate  that  any  additional  importance  or  in- 
terest was  fastened  on  the  town.  In  fact,  the  pas- 
sages just  quoted,  and  the  few  which  follow,  ex- 
haust the  references  to  it  in  the  X.  T.  (Matt.  ii.  6, 
8,  16;  Luke  ii.  15). 

After  this  nothing  is  heard  of  it  till  near  the 
middle  of  the  2nd  century,  when  Justin  Martyr 
(Speaks  of  our  Lord's  birth  as  having  taken  place 
'*  in  a  certain  cave  very  close  to  the  village,"  which 
cave  he  goes  on  to  say  had  been  specially  pointed 
out  by  Isaiah  as  "  a  sign."  The  passage  from  Isaiah 
to  which  he  refers  is  xxxiii.  13-19,  in  the  LXX. 
version. of  which  occurs  the  following — "He  shall 
dwell  on  high:  His  place  of  defence  shall  be  in  a 
lofty  cave  of  the  strong  rock"  (Justin.  Dial.  c. 
Tryph.  §§78,  70).  Such  is  the  earliest  supplement 
we  possess  to  the  meagre  indications  of  the  narrative 
of  the  Gospels;  and  while  it  is  not  possible  to  i\ 
with  certainty  that  the  tradition  is  true,  there  is  no 
reason  t;;<  discrediting  it.  [here  is  nothing  m 
itself  improbable — as  there  certainly  is  in  man') 
cases  where  the  traditional  scenes  of  events  are  laid 
in  caverns- — in  the  supposition  that  the  place  in 
which  Joseph  and  Mary  took  shelter,  and  where 
was  the  "manger"  or  "stall"  (whatever  the 
(pdrvT]  may  have  been).1'  was  a  cave  in  the  lime- 
stone rock  of  which  the  eminence  of  Bethleh  m    i 


BETH-LEHEM 


203 


ll  In  the  Greek  copies  of  St.  Matthew  the  name  is 
given  as  D.  ttjs  'IovSou'as  ;  but  in  the  more  ancient 
Syriao  recension  lately  published  byMr.Cureton  it  i-, 
as  in  the  0.  T.,  Bethlehem-judah. 

e  observe  that  this  phrase  has  lost  the  meaning 
which  it  bears  in  the  O.  T-,  where  it  specially  and 
invariably  signifies  the  fortress  of  the  Jebusites,  the 
fastness  of /ion  (2  Sam.  v.  7,  !> ;   1  Chr.  \i.  5,  7). 


composed.  Nor  is  it  necessary  to  assume  that 
Justin's  quotation  from  Isaiah  is  the  ground  of  an 
inference  of  his  own ;  it  may  equally  be  an  autho- 
rity happily  adduced  by  him  in  support  of  the  ex- 
isting tradition. 

But  the  step  from  the  belief  that  the  nativity 
may  have  taken  place  in  a  cavern,  to  the  belief  that 
the  present  subterraneous  vault  or  crypt  is  that 
cavern,  is  a  very  wide  one.  Even  in  the  150  years, 
that  had  passed  when  Justin  wrote,  so  much  had 
happened  at  Bethlehem  that  it  is  difficult  to  believe 
that  the  true  spot  could  have  been  accurately  pre- 
served. In  that  interval — an  interval  as  long  as 
that  between  the  landing  of  William  III.  and  the 
battle  of  Waterloo — not  only  had  the  neighbourhood 
of  Jerusalem  been  overrun  and  devastated  by  the 
Romans  at  the  destruction  of  the  city,  but  the  em- 
peror Hadrian,  amongst  other  desecrations,  had 
actually  planted  a  grove  of  Adonis  at  the  spot 
(lucus  inumbmbat  Adonidis,  Jerome,  Ep.  Paul.). 
This  grove  remained  at  Bethlehem  for  no  less  than 
180  years,  viz.,  from  a.d.  135  till  315.  After 
this  the  place  was  purged  of  its  abominations  by 
Constantino,  who  about  A.D.  330  erected  the  pre- 
sent church  (Euseb.  Vit.  Const.  3,  40.  See  Tobler, 
102,  note).  Conceive  the  alterations  in  the  ground 
implied  in  this  statement ! — a  heathen  sanctuary 
established  and  a  grove  planted  on  the  spot — that 
grove  and  those  erections  demolished  to  make  room 
for  the  Basilica  of  Constantine  ! 

The  modern  town  of  Beit-lahn  (  l+^     cIxaj  ) 

lies  to  the  E.  of  the  main  road  from  Jerusalem  to 
Hebron,  6  miles  from  the  former.  It  covers  the 
E.  ami  N.E.  parts  of  the  ridge  of  a  "  long  grey 
hill"  of  Jura  limestone,  which  stands  nearly  due 
E.  and  \V.,  and  is  about  a  mile  in  length.  The  hill 
has  a  deep  valley  on  the  N.  ami  another  on  the  S. 
The  west  end  shelves  down  gradually  to  the  valley; 
but  the  east  end  is  bolder,  and  overlooks  a  plain  of 
some  extent.  The  slopes  of  the  ridge  are  in  many 
parts  covered  by  terraced  gardens,  shaded  by  rows 
of  olives  with  figs  anil  vines,  the  terraces  sweeping 
round  the  contour  of  the  hill  with  great  regularity. 
On  the  top  of  the  hill  lies  the  village  in  a  kind  of 
irregular  triangle  (Stewart),  at  about  150  yards 
from  the  apex  of  which  and  separated  from  it  by  a 
vacant  space  on  the  extreme  eastern  part  of  the 
ridge,  spreads  the  noble  Basilica  of  St.  Helena, 
"  half  church,  half  tint,"  now  embraced  by  its 
three  convents,  Greek,  Latin,  and  Armenian. 

This  is  not  the  place  for  a  description  of  the 
"holy  places"  of  Bethlehem.  All  that  can  lie  .-aid 
about  them  has  been  well  said  by  Lord  Nugent 
(i.  13-21 ).  and  Mr.  Stanley  (438-442).  (Seealso, 
though  interspersed  with  much  irrelevant  matter, 
Stewart,  246,  :'.:!4,  5.)  Of  the  architecture  of  the 
church  very  little  is  known;  for  a  resume' of  that 
little  si  i  m's    Handbook  of  Archit 

524;  also  Sal/.mann's  Photographs  and  the  Etude 
accompanying  them  (p.  72).8     One  fact,  of  great 


f  It  is  as  well  to  remember  thai  the  "  stable,"  ami 
its  accompaniments,  are  the  creations  of  the  imagina- 
tion of  poets  ami  painters,  with  no  support  from  the 
Gospel  narrative. 

-  Mi-.  Stanley  mentions,  ami  recurs  characteristically 
to  the  interesting  fact,  that  the  present  roof  is  con- 
structed from  English  oak  given  to  the  church  by 
Edward  IV.  [S.  \  /'.,  141,  139.)  Tobler,  Hit  note, 
adduces  the  authority  of  Butychiua  that  the  present 
church  is  the  work  of  Justinian,  who  destroyed  that 
antine  as  not  sufficiently  magnificent. 


204 


BETHLOMON 


interest — probably  the  most  genuine  about  the^ 
place — is  associated  with  a  portion  of  the  crypt  of 
this  church,  namely,  that  here,  "  beside  what  he 
believed  to  be  the  cradle  of  the  Christian  faith," 
St.  Jerome  lived  for  more  than  30  years,  leaving  a 
lasting  monument  of  his  sojourn  in  the  Vulgate 
translation  of  the  Bible. 

In  the  plain  below  and  east  of  the  convent,  about 
a  mile  from  the  walls,  is  the  traditional  scene  of  the 
angels'  appearance  to  the  shepherds,  a  very  small 
poor  village  called  Beit-Sahur,  to  the  E.  of  which 
are  the  unimportant  remains  of  a  Greek  church. 
These  buildings  and  ruins  are  surrounded  by  olive- 
trees  (Seetzen,  ii.  41,  42).  Here  in  Arculfs  time, 
"  by  the  tower  of  Ader,"  was  a  church  dedicated  to 
the 'three  shepherds,  and  containing  their  monuments 
(Arculf,  G).  But  this  plain  is  too  rich  ever  to  have 
been  allowed  to  lie  in  pasturage,  and  it  is  more 
likely  to  have  been  then  occupied,  as  it  is  now,  and 
as  it  doubtless  was  in  the  days  of  Ruth,  by  corn- 
fields, and  the  sheep  to  have  been  kept  on  the  hills.1* 
The  traditional  well  of  David  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  15), 
a  group  of  three  cisterns,  is  more  than  half  a  mile 
away  from  the  present  town  on  the  other  side 
of  the  wady  on  the  north.  A  few  yards  from  the 
western  end  of  the  village  are  two  apertures,  which 
have  the  appearance  of  wells ;  but  they  are  merely 
openings  to  a  cistern  connected  with  the  aqueduct 
below,  and  we  have  Dr.  Robinson's  assurance  that 
"  there  is  now  no  well  of  living  water  in  or  near 
the  town." 

The  population  of  Beit-lahm  is  about  3000  souls, 
entirely  Christians.  All  travellers  remark  the  good 
looks  of  the  women  {Eothen),  the  substantial  clean 
appearance  of  the  houses,  and  the  general  air  of 
comfort  (for  an  eastern  town)  which  prevails. 

2.  (DrT?'2;  BaiOfxdv,  Alex.  Baid\ee/j. ;  Beth- 
lehem), a'  town  in  the  portion  of  Zebulun  named 
nowhere  but  in  Josh.  xix.  15.  It  has  been  recovered 
by  Dr.  Robinson  at  Beit  Lahm,  about  six  miles  west 
of  Nazareth,  and  lying  between  that  town  and  the 
main  road  from  Akka  to  Gaza.  Robinson  charac- 
terises it  as  "  a  very  miserable  village,  none  more 
so  in  all  the  country,  and  without  a  trace  of  an- 
tiquity except  the  name"  (iii.  113).  [G.] 

BETHLO'MON  (BaiOKcc^wv),  1  Esd.  v.  17. 
[Bethlehem,  1.]  [G.] 

BETH-MA'ACHAH  (PDJ?»  '2,  and  with  the 
article,  'SH  '2  ;  BrjO/xaxd,  Qep/xaxd  ;  Beth- 
maacha),  a  place  named  only  in  2  Sam.  xx.  14,  15, 
and  there  occurring  more  as  a  definition  of  the  posi- 
tion of  Abel  than  for  itself.  In  the  absence  of  more 
information,  we  can  only  conclude  that  it  is  identical 
with  Maachah,  or  Aram-maachah,  one  of  the 
petty  Syrian  kingdoms  in  the  north  of  Palestine. 
[Aram"]  [G.] 

BETH-MAK'CABOTH  (nhVlJSn  '2,  house 
of  the  chariots,  in  Chron.  without  the  article  ;  Bai9- 
fiaxepe'3  ;  -Alex.  BaiQafi^apxaa^wQ  ;  Bethmarcha- 
both),  one  of  the  towns  of  Simeon,  situated  to  the 
extreme  south  of  Judah,  with  Ziklag  and  Hormah 
(Josh.  xix.  5  ;  1  Chr.  iv.  31).  What  "  chariots  "  can 
have  been  in  use  in  this  rough  and  thinly  inhabited 
part  of  the  country,  at  a  time  so  early  as  that  at  which 


h  'AypavAoOi'i-es  (Luke  ii.  8  ;  A.  V.  "  abiding  in  the 
field")  has  no  special  reference  to  "field"  more 
than  hill ;  hut  means  rather  "  passing  the  night  out 
of  doors."  x«pa  also  means  a  "  district  "  or  neighbour- 
hood, with  no  special  topographical  signification. 


BETH-NIMRAH 

those  lists  of  towns  purport  to  have  been  made  out, 
we  know  not.  At  a  later  period — that  of  Solo- 
mon— "  chariot  cities "  are  named,  and  a  regular 
trade  with  Egypt  in  chariots  was  earned  on  (1  K. 
ix.  19  ;  2  Chr.  viii.  6  ;  1  K.  x.  29  ;  2  Chr.  i.  17), 
which  would  naturally  require  depots  or  stopping- 
places  on  the  road  "  up  "  to  Palestine  (Stanley,  160). 
In  the  parallel  list,  Josh.  xv.  30,  31,  Madmannah 
occurs  in  place  of  Beth-marcaboth  ;  possibly  the 
latter  was  substituted  for  the  former  after  the 
town  had  become  the  resort  of  chariots.  Without 
supposing  the  one  word  to  be  a  mere  corruption  of 
the  other,  the  change  of  a  name  to  one  differing 
less  in  appearance  than  in  meaning  is  quite  in  cha- 
racter with  the  plays  on  words  frequent  in  Hebrew 
literature.    [Hazar-susim,  Madmannah.]  [G.] 

BETH-ME'ON  (l'iyO'2;  oIkos  Ma6v;  Beth- 
maori),  Jer.  xlviii.  23.  A  contracted  form  of  the 
name  elsewhere  given  as  Beth-baal-MEON.  [G.] 

BETH-NIM'RAH   (TOO)   JV2  =  house   of 

sweet  ivatcr,  Gesen. ;  tj  'Na/j.pdfj. ;  Alex.  'Afifipdv, 
BaivQavafipd  ;  Bcthncmra),  one  of  the  "  fenced 
cities  "  on  the  East  of  the  Jordan  taken  and  "  built " 
by  the  tribe  of  Gad  (Num.  xxxii.  36)  and  de- 
scribed as  lying  "  in  the  valley  "  (pQJ?2)  beside 
Beth-haran  (Josh.  xiii.  27).  In  Num.  xxxii.  3  it 
is  named  simply  Nimrah.  By  Eusebius  and 
Jerome  (Onom.  Bethamnaram,  and  Beth-nemra) 
the  village  is  said  to  have  been  still  standing  five 
miles  north  of  Libias  (Beth-haran) ;  and  under 
Ne'/Spa  Eusebius  mentions  that  it  was  a  large  place, 
Kwfxrf  fxeyiffTT],  in  Karavaia  (?  Batanaea),  and 
called  Abara. 

The  name  still  survives  in  the  Nahr  Nimrin, 
the  Arab  appellation  of  the  lower  end  of  the  Wady 
Shoaib,  where  the  waters  of  that  valley  discharge 
themselves  into  the  Jordan  close  to  one  of  the 
regular  fords  a  few  miles  above  Jericho.  It  has 
been  seen  by  Seetzen  (Hcisen,  1854,  ii.  318),  and 
Robinsou  (i.  551),  but  does  not  appear  to  have 
been  explored,  and  all  that  is  known  is  that  the 
vegetation  is  very  thick,  betokening  an  abundance 
of  water.  The  Wady  Shoaib  runs  back  up  into 
the  Eastern  mountains,  as  far  as  es-Salt.  Its  name 
(the  modern,  form  of  Hobab  ?)  connects  it  with  the 
wanderings  of  the  children  of  Israel,  and  a  tradition 
still  clings  to  the  neighbourhood,  that  it  was  down 
this  valley  they  descended  to  the  Jordan  (Seetzen, 
ii.  377). 

It  seems  to  have  escaped  notice  how  fully  the 
requirements  of  Bethabara  are  met  in  the  circum- 
stances of  Bethnimra — its  abundance  of  water  and 
its  situation  close  to  "  the  region  round  about 
Jordan "  (ji  irepix^pos  rod  lopfidvov,  i.  e.  the 
CiCCAR  of  the  O.  T.,  the  0«sis  of  Jericho),  imme- 
diately accessible  to  "  Jerusalem  and  all  Judaea " 
(John  i.  28 ;  Matt.  iii.  5 ;  Mark  i.  5)  by  the  direct 
and  ordinary  road  from  the  capital.  Add  to  this, 
what  is  certainly  a  strong  confirmation  of  this  sug- 
gestion, that  in  the  LXX.  the  name  of  Bethnimra 
is  found  almost  exactly  assuming  the  form  of  Beth- 
abara —  BcuQavafipd,  ByQafipd,  Be8a.pa.l3d  (see 
Holmes  and  Parsons'  LXX.). 

The  "  Waters  of  Nimrin,"  which  are  named  in 
the  denunciations  of  Moab  by  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah, 
must  from  the  context  be  the  brook  which  still 
bears  the  same  name  at  the  S.  E.  part  of  the  Dead 
Sea.  [Nimrin.]  A  similar  name  (signifying, 
however,  in  Arabic,  "panther")  is  not  uncommon 
on  the  east  of  the  Jordan.  [G.] 


BETH-PA  LET 

BETH-PA'LET  (13^3  '3  ;  wlien  not  in  pause, 

U?3,  house  of  flight ;  BcuGcpabaO;  Bethphelet),  a 

town  among  those  in  the  extreme  south  of  Judah, 
named  in  Josh.  xv.  27,  and  Neh.  xi.  26,  with 
Moladah  and  Beersheba.  In  the  latter  place  it  is 
Bkthphelet  (following  the  Vulgate).  Its  remains 
have  not  yet  been  discovered.       .  [G.] 

BETH-PAZ'ZEZ  Q»tf3  '3  ;  Bvpa-a<pns  ;  Alex. 
Baid(pacrris  ;  Bcthpheses),  a  town  of  Issachar  named 
with  En-haddah  (Josh.  xix.  21),  and  of  which 
nothing  is  known.  [G.] 

BETH-PE'(tR  ("ityB  IV3  ;  oIkos  Qoyiip  ;  in 
Josh.  BaiOtyoy&p  ;  fanum  Phogor,  Phogor,  Beth- 
phogor  ;  in  Omm..  Bethfogo),  a  place,  no  doubt 
dedicated  to  the  god  Baal-peor,  on  the  east  of  Jor- 
dan, opposite  (airtvavTi)  Jericho,  and  six  miles 
above  Libias  or  Beth-haran  (Euseb.  Onomnsticon). 
It  was  in  the  possession  of  the  tribe  of  Reuben 
(Josh.  xiii.  20).  In  the  Pentateuch  the  name  occurs 
in  a  formula  by  which  one  of  the  last  halting-places 
of  the  children  of  Israel  is  designated — "  the  ravine 
PNiin)  over  against  (7-173)  Beth-peor"  (Deut.  iii. 

29,  iv.  46).  In  this  ravine  Moses  was  probably 
buried  (xxxiv.  6). 

Here,  as  in  other  cases,  the  Beth  may  be  a  Hebrew 
substitution  for  Baal.  [G.] 

BETH'-PHAGE    (Beflc/xxy^    and    B^cryrj  ; 

Bcthphage ;   quasi  N33'3,  house  of  unripe  figs), 

the  name  of  a  place  on  the  mount  of  Olives,  on 
the  road  between  Jericho  and  Jerusalem.  From  the 
two  being  twice  mentioned  together,  it  was  appa- 
rently close  to  Bethany  (Matt.  xxi.  1-;  Mark  xi. 
1  ;  Luke  xix.  29),  and  from  its  being  named  first 
of  the  two  in  the  narrative  of  a  journey  from  east 
to  west,  it  may  be  presumed  that  it  lay,  if  any- 
thing, to  the  eastward  of  Bethany.  The  fact  of 
our  Lord's  making  Bethany  His  nightly  lodging 
place  (Matt.  xxi.  17,  &c.)  is  no  confirmation  of 
this  (as  Winer  would  have  it) ;  since  He  would 
doubtless  take  up  His  abode  in  a  place  where  He 
had  friends,  even  though  it  were  not  the  first  place 
at  which  He  arrived  on  the  road.  No  remains 
which  could  answer  to  this  position  have  however 
been  found  (Rob.  i.  433),  and  the  traditional  site 
is  above  Bethany,  halfway  between  that  village 
and  the  top  of  the  mount. 

By  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  and  also  by  Origen, 
the  place  was  known,  though  no  indication  of  its 
position  is  given  ;  by  the  former  it  is  called  Kw/x-q, 
by  Jerome  villain.  They  describe  it  as  a  village  oi 
the  priests,  possibly  from  "  Beth  phace,"  signifying 
in  Syriac  the  "  house  of  the  jaw,"  and  the  jaw 
in  the  sacrifices  being  the  portion  of  the  priests 
(Reland,  653).  Lightfoot's  theory,  grounded  on  the 
statements  of  the  Talmudists,  is  extraordinary :  that 
Bethphage  was  the  name  of  a  district  reaching  from 
the  foot  of  Olivet  to  the  wall  of  Jerusalem.  (But 
see  Reland,  652  ;  Hug,  Einl.  i.  18,  19.)  Schwarz 
(263,  4),  and  Barclay,  in  his  map,  appear  to  agree 
in  placing  Bethphage  on  the  southern  shoulder  of 
the  "  Mount  of  Oilence,"  above  the  village  of  Siloam, 
and  therefore  west  of  Bethany. 

The  name  of  Bethphage,  the  signification  of 
which  as  given  above  is  generally  accepted,  is,  like 
those  of  Bethany,  Caphenatha,  Bezetha,  and  the 
Mount  of  Olives  itself,  a  testimony  to  the  ancient 
fruitfulness  of  this  district  (Stanley,  1  ST  i .      [< ! .] 


BETH-SAIDA 
BETH-PHE'LET,    Neh.    xi 


26. 


205 

[Beth- 


PALET.] 

BETH-EATHA  (KEH  IV3  house  of  Kapha, 

or  of  the  giant ;  6  Ba.6pa.ia  ;  Alex.  BaOpecpa.  ; 
Bethrapha),  a  name  which  occurs  in  the  genealogy 
of  Judah  as  the  son  of  Esh-ton  (1  Chr.  iv.  12  only). 
There  is  a  Rapha  in  the  line  of  Benjamin  and  else- 
where, but  no  apparent  connexion  exists  between 
those  and  this,  nor  has  the  name  been  identified  as 
belonging  to  any  place.  [G.] 

BETH-EE'HOB  (jirn  JV3,  house  ofBechob, 
or  of  room  ;  'Powfi,  6  oIkos  Paa/3,  Alex.  Tw/3  ; 
Rohob),  a  place  mentioned  as  having  near  it  the 
valley  in  which  lay  the  town  of  Laish  or  Dan 
(Judg.  xviii.  28).  It  was  one  of  the  little  kingdoms 
of  Aram  or  Syria,  like  Zobah,  Maacah,  and  Ish-tob 
(comp.  the  reading  of  the  Alex.  LXX.  above),  in 
company  with  which  it  was  hired  by  the  Ammonites 
to  fight  against  David  (2  Sam.  x.  6).  In  ver.  8 
the  name  occurs  in  the  shorter  form  of  Rehob,  in 
which  form  it  is  doubtless  again  mentioned  in 
Num.  xiii.  21.  Being,  however,  "  tar  from  Zidon  " 
(Judg.  xviii.  28),  this  place  must  not  be  confounded 
with  two  towns  of  the  name  of  Rehob  in  the  terri- 
tory of  Asher.  [Rehob.]  The  conjecture  of  Ro- 
binson (iii.  371)  is  that  this  ancient  place  is  repre- 
sented by  the  modern  Hunin,  a  fortress  commanding 
the  plain  of  the  Huluh,  in  which  the  city  of  Dan 
{Tell  el-Kady)  lay. 

Hadadezer  the  king  of  Zobah  is  said  to  have  been 
the  son  of  Rehob  (2  Sam.  viii.  3,  12).  [G.] 

BETH-SA'IDA  (hvecdlSd;    J?*^,     Av*n, 

house  offish;  Bethsaida),  the  name  of  two  places 
in  Northern  Palestine : — 

1.  "  Bethsaida  of  Galilee  "  (John  xii.  2i),  a  city 
(iroAis),  which  was  the  native  place  of  Andrew, 
Peter,  and  Philip  (John  i.  44,  xii.  21)  in  the  land 
of  Gennesareth  (tV  7V  I\)  (Mark  vi.  45 ;  comp. 
53),  and  therefore  on  the  west  side  of  the  lake.  It 
was  evidently  in  near  neighbourhood  to  Capernaum, 
and  Chorazin  (Matt.  xi.  21 ;  Luke  x.  13  ;  and 
comp.  Mark  vi.  45,  with  John  vi.  16),  and,  if  the 
interpretation  of  the  name  is  to  be  trusted,  close  to 
the  water's  edge.  By  Jerome  (Comm,  in,  Esai.  ix.l) 
and  Eusebius  (Omm.)  these  towns  and  Tiberias 
are  all  mentioned  together  as  lying  on  the  shore  of 
the  lake.  Epiphanius  (adv.  Haer.  ii.)  says  of  Beth- 
saida and  Capernaum  ov  fiaKpav  ovtwv  t<5  SiaffTrj- 
ixari.  Wilibald  (a.d.  722)  went  from  Magdalum 
to  Capernaum,  thence  to  Bethsaida,  and  then  to 
Chorazin.  These  ancient  notices,  however,  though 
they  fix  its  general  situation,  none  of  them  contain 
any  indication  of  its  exact  position,  and  as,  like  the 
other  two  towns  just  mentioned,  its  name  and  all 
memory  of  its  site  have  perished,  IIO  positive  identi- 
fication can  lie  made  of  it.  Dr.  Robinson  places 
Bethsaida  at '  Ain  et-Tabigah,  a  short  distance  north 
of  Khan  Minyeh,  which  he  identities  with  Caper- 
naum (iii.  359). 

2.  By  comparing  the  narratives  (of  the  same 
event)  contained  in  Mark  vi.  31-53,  and  l.uke  ix. 
10-17,  in  the  latter  of  which  Bethsaida  is  named  as 
the  spot  at  which  the  miracle  took  place,  while  in 
the  former  the  disciples  are  said  to  have  crossed  the 
water  from  the  scene  of  the  event  "  to  Bethsaida  in 
the  land  of  Gennesarethi" — it  appears  certain  that 
the  Bethsaida  at  which  the  5owu  were  fed  must 
have  been  a  second  place  of  the  same  name  on  the 
east  of  the  lake.     Such  a  place  there  was  at   the 


206 


BETH-SAMOS 


north-eastern  extremity — formerly  a  village  (Kwfi-q), 
but  rebuilt  and  adorned  by  Philip  the  Tetrarch, 
and  raised  to  the  dignity  of  a  town  under  the  name 
of  Julias,  after  the  daughter  of  the  emperor  (Jos. 
Ant.  xviii.  2,  §1 ;  B.J.  ii.  9,§l,iii.l0,  §7).  Here 
in  a  magnificent  tomb  Philip  was  buried  (Jos.  Ant. 
xviii.  4,  §6). 

Of  this  Bethsaida  we  have  certainly  one  and 
probably  two  mentions  in  the  Gospels :  1 .  that 
named  above,  of  the  feeding  of  the  5000  (Luke  ix. 
10).  The  miracle  took  place  in  a  t6ttos  epyfios — 
a  vacant,  lonely  spot,  somewhere  up  in  the 
rising  ground  at  the  back  oPthe  town,  covered  with 
a  profusion  of  green  grass  (John  vi.  3,  10  ;  Mark 
vi.  39  ;  Matt.  xiv.  19),  and  in  the  evening  the 
disciples  went  down  to  the  water  and  went  home 
across  the  lake  (els  rb  irepav)  to  Bethsaida  (Mark 
vi.  45),  or  as  St.  John  (vi.  17)  and  St.  Matthew 
(xiv.  34)  more  generally  express  it,  towards  Caper- 
naum, and  to  the  land  of  Gennesareth.  The  coin- 
cidence of  the  two  Bethsaidas  occurring  in  the  one 
narrative,  and  that  on  the  occasion  of  the  only 
absolutely  certain  mention  of  the  eastern  one,  is  extra- 
ordinary. In  the  very  ancient  Syriac  recension  (the 
Nitrian)  just  published  by  Mr.  Cureton.  the  words 
in  Luke  ix.  10  "  belonging  to  the  city,  called  Beth- 
saida "  are  omitted. 

2.  The  other,  highly  probable,  mention  of  this 
place  is  in  Mark  viii.  22. a  If  Dalmanutha  (viii. 
10)  was  on  the  west  side  of  the  lake,  then  was 
Bethsaida  on  the  east ;  because  in  the  interval 
Christ  had  departed  by  ship  to  the  other  side  (13). 
And  with  this  well  accords  the  mention  imme- 
diately after  of  the  villages  of  Caesarea  Philippi  (27), 
and  of  the  "high  mountain"  of  the  transfiguration 
(ix.  2),  which,  as  Mr.  Stanley  has  ingeniously  sug- 
gested, was,  not  the  traditional  spot,  but  a  part  of 
the  Hermon  range  somewhere  above  the  source  of 
the  Jordan  (S.  f  P.  399). 

Of  the  western  Bethsaida  no  mention  is  made  in 
Josephus,  and  until  the  discovery  by  Reland  of  the 
fact  that  there  were  two  places  of  the  name,  one  on 
the  west,  and  one  on  the  east  side,  the  elucidation 
of  the  various  occurrences  of  the  two  was  one  of  the 
hardest  knots  of  sacred  geography  (see  Cellarius, 
Notit.  ii.  536).  [G.] 

BETH'-  SAMOS  (BaiBao-yidiv ;  Alex.  BaiO- 
a<T/j.ci>8 ;    Cebethamus),    1  Esd.   v.   18.       [Beth- 

AZMAVETII.] 

BETH  SAN  (1  Mace.  v.  52  ;  xii.  40,  41). 
[Betiishean.] 

BETH'SHAN  (1  Sam.  xxxi.  10,  12  ;  2  Sam. 
xxi.  12).     [Betiishean.] 

BETH-SHEAN  (JtfB>  JT-3),  or,  in  Samuel, 
Bethshan,  (Vi?  '3 ;  BcuBcrdv,  B't]0irdu,  6  oJkos 
2di/;  Bethsari),  a  city  which,  with  its  '•  daughter  " 
towns  belonged  to  Manasseh  (1  Chr.  vii.  29),  though 
within  the  limits  of  Issachar  (Josh.  xvii.  11),  and 
therefore  on  the  west  of  Jordan  (comp.  1  Mace.  v. 
52) — but  not  mentioned  in  the  lists  of  the  latter 
tribe.     The  Canaanites  were  not  driven  out  from  the 


a  The  use  of  the  word  Kto/urj  in  this  place  is  remark- 
able. Mr.  Stanley  suggests  that  its  old  appellation 
had  stuck  to  it,  even  after  the  change  in  its  dignity 
(.v.  %  P.  A  pp.  §85). 

b  Unless  the  conjecture  of  Sehwarz  (148,  note)  be 
accepted,  that  the  words  (Vi.'T\  JTO,  house  of  1l>e 
tnotli  ;  A.  V.  ivory  house)  in  1  K.  xxii.  39,  should  be 
rendered  Beth-shan. 


BETH-SHEMESH 

town  (Judg.  i.  27).  In  Solomon's  time  it  seems  to 
have  given  its  name  to  a  district  extending  from  the 
town  itself  to  Abel-meholah  ;  and  "  all  Betiishean" 
was  under  the  charge  of  one  of  his  commissariat 
officers  (1  K.  iv.  12). 

The  corpses  of  Saul  and  his  sons  were  fastened 
up  to  the  wall  of  Bethshean  by  the  Philistines 
(1  Sam.  xxxi.  10,  12)  in  the  open  "street"  or 
space  (3m),  which — then  as  now — fronted  the 
gate  of  an  eastern  town  (2  Sam.  xxi.  12).  From 
this  time  we  lose  sight  of  Beth-shean b  till  the 
period  of  the  Maccabees,  in  connexion  with  whose 
exploits  it  is  mentioned  more  than  once  in  a  cur- 
sory manner  (1  Mace.  v.  52  ;  comp.  1  Mace, 
xii.  40,  41).  The  name  of  Scythopolis  (2ku(W 
■k6\i.s)  appears  for  the  first  time  in  2  Mace.  xii.  29. 
[Scythopolis.]  This  name,  which  it  received 
after  the  exile,  and  under  the  Greek  dominion, 
has  not  survived  to  the  present  day ;  as  in  many 
other  cases  (comp.  Ptolemais)  the  old,  Semitic 
appellation  has  revived,  and  the  place  is  still  called 
Bcisan.  It  lies  in  the  Ghor  or  Jordan  valley, 
about  twelve  miles  south  of  the  sea  of  Galilee,  and 
four  miles  west  of  the  Jordan.  The  site  of  the 
town  is  on  the  brow  of  the  descent,  by  which  the 
great  plain  of  Esdraelou  drops  down  to  the  level  of 
the  Ghor.  A  few  miles  to  the  south-west  are  the 
mountains  of  Gilboa,  and  close  beside  the  town 
runs  the  water  of  the  Ain-Jalud,  the  fountain  of 
which  is  in  Jezreel,  and  is  in  all  probability  the 
spring  by  which  the  Israelites  encamped  before  the 
battle  in  which  Saul  was  killed  (1  Sam.  xxix.  l).c 
Three  other  large  brooks  pass  through  or  by  the 
town,  and  in  the  fact  of  the  abundance  of  water, 
and  the  exuberant  fertility d  of  the  soil  consequent 
thereon,  as  well  as  in  the  power  of  using  their 
chariots,  which  the  level  nature  of  the  country 
near  the  town  conferred  en  them  (Josh.  xvii.  10), 
resides  the  secret  of  the  hold  which  the  Canaanites 
retaine  1  on  the  place. 

If  Jabesh-Gilead  was  where  Dr.  Robinson  con- 
jectures — at  ed-Deir  in  the  Wady  Ydhis — the  dis- 
tance from  thence  to  Beisan,  which  it  took  the  men 
of  Jabesh  "  all  night "  to  traverse,  cannot  be  less 
than  twenty  miles.  [G.] 

BETH'- SHEMESH  (ttW  T\%   in   pause 

t/'t0t^'2,  house  of  the  sun;  irSkis  tjAiov;   Bcu0- 

cra/xi's  ;  Bethsames),  the  name  of  several  places. 
1.  One  of  the  towns  which  marked  the  north 
boundary  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  10),  but  not  named 
in  the  lists  of  the  cities  of  that  tribe.  It  was  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  Kirjath-jearim  and  Timnah, 
and  therefore  in  close  proximity  to  the  low-country 
of  Philistia.  The  expression  "  went  down  "  in  Josh. 
xv.  10  ;  1  Sam.  vi.  21.  seems  to  indicate  that  the 
position  of  the  town  was  lower  than  Kirjath-jearim  ; 
an  J  it  is  in  accordance  with  the  situation  that  there 
was  a  valley  (pDJ?)  of  cornfields  attached  to  the 
place  (1  Sam.  v.  13). 

From  Ekron  to  Bethshemesh  a  road  C^T^,  656s) 
existed  along  which  the  Philistines  sent  back  the  ark 


c  The  exactness  of  the  definition  in  this  description 
is  seriously  impaired  in  the  A.  V.  by  the  substitution 
of  "  a  fountain  "  for  "  the  fountain  "  of  the  original. 

d  So  great  was  this  fertility,  that  it  was  said  by  the 
ltabbis,  that  if  Paradise  was  in  the  land  of  Israel, 
Beth-shean  was  the  gate  of  it ;  for  that  its  fruits  were 
the  sweetest  in  all  the  hind.  (See  the  quotations  in 
Lightfoot,  Ghor.  Cent.  Ix.) 


BETH-SHITTAH 

after  its  calamitous  residence  in  their  country  (1  Sam. 
vi.  9,  12)  ;  and  it  was  in  the  field  of  "  Joshua  the 
Beth-shemite "  (''K'ptfn  VPS)  that  the  "  great 
Abel "  (whatever  that  may  have  been)  was  on 
which  the  ark  was  set  down  ( 1  Sam.  vi.  18J.  Beth- 
shemesh  was  a  "  suburb  city,"  allotted  to  the  priests 
(Josh.  xxi.  1C  ;  1  Chr.  vi.  59)  ;  and  it  is  named  in 
one  of  Solomon's  commissariat  districts  under  the 
charge  of  Ben-Dekar  (1  K.  iv.  9).  It  was  the  scene 
of  an  encounter  between  Jehoash,  king  of  Israel, 
and  Amaziah,  king  of  Judah,  in  which  the  latter 
was  worsted  and  made  prisoner  (2  K.  xiv.  11,  13; 
2  Chr.  xxv.  21,  23).  Later,  in  the  days  ot  Ahaz, 
it  was  taken  and  occupied  by  the  Philistines,  to- 
gether with  several  other  places  in  this  locality 
(2  Chr.  xxviii.  18). 

By  comparison  of  the  lists  in  Josh.  xv.  10,  xix. 
41,  4.;,  and  1  K.  iv.  9,  it  will  be  seen  that  Iu- 
Siiemesh,  "  city  of  the  suu,"  must  have  been 
identical  with  Beth-shemesh,  Ir  being  probably  the 
older  form  of  the  name;  and  again,  from  Judg.  i. 
35,  it  appears  as  if  Har-cheres,  "  mount  of  the  sun," 
were  a  third  name  for  the  same  place  ;  suggesting  an 
early  and  extensive  worship  of  the  sun  in  this 
neighbourhood.     [Ir-Shemesh  ;  Heres.] 

Beth-shemesh  is  now  'Ain-Shcms.  It  was  visited 
by  Dr.  Robinson,  who  found  it  to  be  in  a  position 
exactly  according  with  the  indications  of  Scripture, 
on  the  north-west  slopes  of  the  mountains  of  Judah 
— "  a  low  plateau  at  the  junction  of  two  fine 
plains"  (Hub.  iii.  153) — about  two  miles  from  the 
great  Philistine  plain,  and  seven  from  Ekron  (ii. 
224-6).  The  origin  of  the  '  Ain  ("  spring")  in 
the  modern  name  is  not  obvious,  as  no  spring  or 
well  appears  now  to  exist  at  the  spot ;  but  the 
Shcms  and  the  position  are  decisive. 

2.  A  city  on  the  border  of  Issachar  (Josh.  xix. 

3.  One  of  the  "  fenced  cities  of  Naphtah,  twice 
named  (Josh.  xix.  38  ;  Judg.  i.  33),  and  on  both 
occasions  with  Beth-axath.  The  Cauaauite  inha- 
bitants were  not  expelled  from  either  place,  but 
became  tributaries  to  Israel.  Jerome's  expression 
{diuiin.  Bethsatnis)  in  reference  to  this  is  perhaps 
worthy  of  notice,  "  in  qua  ci>ltores  pristini  man- 
serunt ;"  possibly  glancing  at  the  worship  from 
which  the  place  derived  its  name. 

4.  By  this  name  is  once  mentioned  (Jer.  xliii. 
13)  an  idolatrous  temple  or  place  in  Egypt,  which 
the  LXX.  render  by  'H\iovtt6\is  *v"Q.v,  i.  e.  the 
famous  Heliopolis ;  Vulg.  domus  solis.  In  the 
middle  ages  Heliopolis  was  still  called  by  the  Arabs 
Aim  Sht  ms  Edrisi,  &c.,  in  Rob.  i.  25).  [Avi.x  : 
Ox.]  [G.] 

BETH-SHITTAH  (nt^J;n  TV3,  house  of 
the  acacia}  B^6ff4eS  ;  Alex.  ?;  Ba<reeTTa  ;  Beth- 
setta),  one  of  the  spots  to  which  the  (light  of  the 
host  of  the  Midianites  extended  after  their  discom- 
fiture by  Gideon  (Judg.  vii.  22).  Both  the  nar- 
rative and  the  name  (comp.  "  Abel-shittim,"  which 
was  in  the  Jordan  valley  opposite  Jericho)  require 
its  situation  to  he  somewhere  near  the  river, 
where  also  Zererath  (probably  Zeredatha  or  Zartan) 
and  Abel-meholah  doubtless  lay:  but  no  identifica- 
tion has  yet  been  made  of  any  of  these  spots.  The 
Sh&ttah  mentioned  by  Robinson  (ii.  356)  and  Wilson 
(Ritter,  Jordan,  414)  is  too  far  to  the  wesi  to  suit 
the  above  requirements.  Josephus's  version  of  tin1 
locality  is  absolutely  in  favour  of  the  place  being 
well  watered  :  ev  ko'i\o4>  xapoSpais  7T6pieiAvj^^eVy 
Xojptco  {Ant.  v.  6,  §5).  [  >'.J 


BETHULIA 


207 


BETH-SURA  (tj  Baidvovpa,  ra  Baidrrovpc, 
1  Mae.  iv.  29.  61  ;  vi.  7,  26,  31,  49,  50;  ix.  52  ;   • 
x.  14  ;  xi.  G5  ;  xiv.  7  ;  2  Mac.  xi.  5  ;  xiii.  19,  22). 
[Beth-zur.] 

BETH-TAP'PUAH  (ItlS*)  '2,  -house  of  the 

apple  or  citron ;  Baidaxov,  Alex.  Be86air<f>ove ; 
Beth-thaphud),  one  of  the  towns  of  Judah,  in  the 
mountainous  district,  and  near  Hebron  (Josh.  xv. 
53  ;  comp.  1  Chr.  ii.  43).  Here  it  has  actually  been 
discovered  by  Robinson  under  the  modem  name  of 
Teffuh,  1^  hour,  or  say  5  miles,  W.  of  Hebron,  on 
a  ridge  of  high  table-land.  The  terraces  of  the 
ancient  cultivation  still  remain  in  use,  and  though 
the  "  apples "  have  disappeared,  yet  olive-groves 
and  vineyards  with  fields  of  grain  surround  the 
place  on  every  side  (Rob.  ii.  71  ;  Schwarz,  105). 

The  name  of  Tappnah  was  borne  by  another 
town  of  Judah  which  lay  in  the  rich  lowland  of 
the  Shefela.    [Apple  ;    Tappuah.]  [G.] 

BETHU'EL^XirQ;  BaBovfa;  Joseph.  Bo0- 

oirjAos ;  Bathuel),  the  son  of  Nahor  by  Milcah ; 
nephew  of  Abraham,  and  father  of  Rebekah  (Gen. 
xxii.  22,  23;  xxiv.  15,  24,  47;  xxviii.  2).  In 
xxv.  20,  and  xxviii.  5,  he  is  called  "  Bethuel  the 
Syrian"   (i.  e.  Aramite,  ^SIXH).      Though  often 

referred  to  as  above  in  the  narrative,  Bethuel 
only  appears  in  person  once  (xxiv.  50).  Upon  this 
an  ingenious  conjecture  is  raised  by  Prof.  Blunt 
{Coincidences,  I.  §iv.)  that  he  was  the  subject  of 
some  imbecility  or  other  incapacity.  The  Jewish 
tradition,  as  given  in  the  Targum  Ps. Jonathan  on 
Gen.  xxiv.  55  (comp.  33),  is  that  he  died  on  the 
morning  after  the  arrival  of  Abram's  servant,  owing 
to  his  having  eaten  a  sauce  containing  poison  at  the 
meal  the  evening  before,  and  that  on  that  account 
Laban  requested  that  his  sister's  departure  might  be 
delayed  for  a  year  or  ten  months.  Josephus  was 
perhaps  aware  of  this  tradition  since  he  speaks  of 
Bethuel  as  dead  {Ant.  i.  1G,  §2).  [G.] 

BETHU'EL  6s-irQ  ;   BaOovfa  ;   Alex.  Bad- 

ov\;  Bathuel),  1  Chr.  iv.  30.     [BETHTJL.] 

BETH  UL    ("pina  ;    Arab.    Bethur,      A,  ; 

Bov\d ;  Bethul),  a  town  of  Simeon  in  the  south. 
named  with  El-tolad  and  Hormah  (Josh.  xix.  4).  In 
the  parallel  lists  in  Josh.  xv.  30,  and  1  Chr.  iv.  9,  the 
name  appears  under  the  forms  of  Chesil  O^DB) 

and  Bethuel  ;  and  probably  also  under  that  of 
Bethel  in  Josh.  xii.  10;  since,  for  the  reasons  urged 
under  Bethel,  and  also  on  account  of  the  position  of 
the  name  in  this  list,  the  northern  Bethel  can  hardly 
be  intended.      [Bethel.]  [G.] 

BETHU'LIA  {BervXova;  Bethulid),  the  city 

which  was  the  scene  of  the  chief  events  ot'  the  book 
of  Judith,  in  which  book  only  does  the  name  occur. 
Its  position  is  there  described  with  very  minute 
detail.  It  was  near  to  Dothaim  (iv.  6),  on  a  hill 
{opos)  which  overlooked  (airivavri)  the  plain  of 
I  .  I.  lelon  (vi.  11,  13,  14,  vii.  7,  In,  xiii.  in)  an  I 
commanded  the  passes  from  that  plain  to  the  hill 
country  ot'  Manasseh  (iv.  7,  vii.  1),  in  a  position 
so  .tmng  thai  Holofernes  abandoned  the  idea  of 
ill  ing  it  by  attack,  and  determined  to  reduce  it  by 
Hi;-  himself  of  the  tun  springs  or  well-. 
{■KTiyai |  which  wi  e  "  under  the  city  "  in  the  valley 
at  the  toot  of  the  eminence  on  which  it  was  built, 
and  from  which  the  inhabitants  derived  their  chief 
-  ipply   of  water   (vi.    11,  vii.  7,   13,  21).     Not- 


208 


BETH-ZACHARIAS 


withstanding  this  detail,  however,  the  identification 
of  the  site  of  Bethulia  has  hitherto  defied  all  at- 
tempts, and  is  one  of  the  greatest  puzzles  of  sacred 
geography  ;  so  much  so  as  to  form  an  important 
argument  against  the  historical  truth  of  the  book 
of  Judith  (Rob.  iii.  337,  8). 

In  the  middle  ages  the  name  of  Bethulia  was 
given  to  "  the  Frank  Mountain,"  between  Beth- 
lehem and  Jerusalem  (Kob.  i.  4-79),  but  it  is  unne- 
cessary to  say  that  this  is  very  much  too  far  to  the 
south  to  suit  the  narrative.  More  lately  it  has  been 
assumed  to  be  Safed  in  North  Galilee  (Rob.  ii. 
425) ;  which  again,  if  in  other  respects  it  would 
agree  with  the  story,  is  too  far  north.  Von  Raumer 
{Pal.  135,  6)  suggests  Sanur,  which  is  perhaps 
the  nearest  to  probability.  The  ruins  of  that  town 
are  on  an  "  isolated  rocky  hill,"  with  a  plain  of 
considerable  extent  to  the  east,  and,  as  far-  as  situa- 
tion is  concerned,  naturally  all  but  impregnable  (Rob. 
ii.  312).  It  is  about  three  miles  from  Dotlum, 
and  some  six  or  seven  from  Jenin  (Engannim), 
which  stand  on  the  very  edge  of  the  great  plain  of 
Esdraelon.  Though  not  absolutely  commanding 
the  pass  which  leads  from  Jenin  to  Sebastieh,  and 
forms  the  only  practicable  ascent  to  the  high 
country,  it  is  yet  sufficiently  near  to  bear  out  the 
somewhat  vague  statement  of  Jud.  v.  6.  Nor  is 
it  unimportant  to  remember  that  Sanur  actually 
endured  a  siege  of  2  months  from  Djezzar  Pasha 
without  yielding,  and  that  on  a  subsequent  occasion 
it  was  only  taken  after  a  three  or  four  months'  in- 
vestment, by  a  force  very  much  out  of  proportion  to 
the  size  of  the  place  (Rob.  ii.  313).  [G.] 

BETH-ZACHAEI'AS.  [Batii-Zacharias.] 

BETH'-ZUR  ("II  ¥  '2,  house  of  rock ;  B^ffoip  ; 
Bethswrd),  a  town  in  the  mountains  of  Judah, 
named  between  Halhul  and  Gedor  (Josh.  xv.  58). 
As  far  as  auy  interpretation  can,  in  their  present 
imperfect  state,  be  put  on  the  genealogical  lists  of 
1  Chr.  ii.  42-49,  Bethzur  would  appear  from  ver. 
45  to  have  been  founded  by  the  people  of  Maon, 
which  again  had  derived  its  origin  from  Hebron. 
However  this  maybe,  Beth-zur  was  "  built," — i.  e. 
probably  fortified — by  Rehoboam,  with  other  towns 
of  Judah,  for  the  defence  of  his  new  kingdom 
(2  Chr.  xi.  7).  After  the  captivity  the  people  of 
Beth-zur  assisted  Nehemiah  in  the  rebuilding  of  the 
wall  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  16)  ;  the  place  had  a 
"  ruler"  (IK'),  and  the  peculiar  word  Pelec  (^|?S) 

is  employed  to  denote  a  district  or  circle  attached 
to  it,  and  to  some  other  of  the  cities  mentioned 
here.     [Topographical  Terms.] 

In  the  wars  of  the  Maccabees,  Bethzur,  or  Beth- 
sura,  played  an  important  part.  It  was  fortified 
by  Judas  and  his  brethren  "  that  the  people  might 
have  a  defence  against  Idumaea,"  and  they  suc- 
ceeded in  making  it  "  very  strong  and  not  to  be 
taken  without  great  difficulty''  (Jos.  Ant.  xii.  §4)  ; 
so  much  so,  that  it  was  able  to  resist  for  a 
length  of  time  the  attacks  of  Simon  Mac.  (1  Mace, 
xi.  65)  and  of  Lysias  (2  Mace.  xi.  5),  the  garrison 
having  in  the  former  case  capitulated.  Before 
Bethzur  took  place  one  of  the  earliest  victories  of 
Judas  over  Lysias  (1  Mace.  iv.  29),  and  it  was 
in  an  attempt  to  relieve  it  when  besieged  by  An- 
tiochus  Eupator,  that  he  was  defeated  in  the  passes 
between  Bethzur  and  Bath-zacharias,  and  his  bro- 
ther Eleazar  killed  by  one  of  the  elephants  of  the 
king's  army  (1  Mace.  vi.  32-47  ;  Jos.  Ant.  xii. 
9,  3).     The  recovery  of  the  site  of  Bethzur,  under 


BEZALEEL 

the  almost  identical  name  of  Beit-siir,  by  Wolcott 
and  Robinson  (i.  216,  note;  iii.  277),  explains  its 
impregnability,  and  also  the  reason  for  the  choice 
of  its  position,  since  it  commands  the  road  from 
Beersheba  and  Hebron,  which  has  always  been 
the  main  approach  to  Jerusalem  from  the  south. 

A  short  distance  from  the  Tell,  on  which  are 
strewn  the  remains  of  the  town,  is  a  spring,  Ain 
edh-Dhirweh,  which  in  the  days  of  Jerome,  and 
later,  was  regarded  as  the  scene  of  the  baptism  of 
the  Eunuch  by  Philip.  The  probability  of  this  is 
elsewhere  examined  [Gaza]  ;  in  the  meantime  it 
may  be  noticed  that  Beitsur  is  not  near  the  road  to 
Gaza  (Acts  viii.  26),  which  runs  much  more  to  the 
north-west.     [Beth-sura.]  [G.] 

BETO'LIUS  (Ber6Aws),  1  Esd.  v.  21. 
[Bethel.] 

BETOMES'THAM  (Bero^o-flcuV)  and  BE- 
TOMASTHEM  (BaiTOfiaffOaifi)  ;  Syr.  Blth- 
masthini),  a  town  "  over  against  Esdraelon,  facing 
the  plain  that  is  near  Dothaim"  (Jud.  iv.  6,  xv.  4), 
and  which  from  the  manner  of  its  mention  would 
seem  to  have  been  of  equal  importance  with  Be- 
thulia itself.  No  attempt  to  identify  either 
Betomestham  or  Bethulia  has  been  hitherto  suc- 
cessful.    [Bethulia.     Dothaim.]  [G.] 

BETO'NIM  (D'Obn  =  pistachio  nuts  ;  Bora- 
vifi ;  Betonim),  a  town  in  the  inheritance  of  the 
children  of  Gad,  apparently  on  their  northern 
boundary  (Josh.  xiii.  26).  The  word,  somewhat 
differently  pointed,  occurs  in  Gen.  xliii.  11,  A.  V. 
"  nuts."  It  is  probably  related  to  the  modern  Arabic 
word  Butm  =  terebinth,  Pistacia  terebinthus.  [G.] 

BETROTHING.     [Marriage.] 

BEU'LAH  (n>1J?2  =  married  ;  olKovfievri ;  in- 
hahitata),  the  name  which  the  land  of  Israel  is  to 
bear,  when  "  the  land  shall  be  married  (^ySfl)  " 
Is.  lxii.  4. 

BE'ZAI  (*¥3  ;  BatnroD,  Be<re'i,  Byffi ;  Bcsai), 
"  Children  of  Bezai,"  to  the  number  of  323, 
returned  from  captivity  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii. 
17  ;  Neh.  vii.  23).  The  name  occurs  again  among 
those  who  sealed  the  covenant  (Neh.  x.  18). 
[Bassa.] 

BEZAL'EEL  ('psbva  ;  Beo-eAeijA. ;  Beseleel). 
1.  The  artificer  to  whom  was  confided  by  Jehovah 
the  design  and  execution  of  the  works  of  art  re- 
quired for  the  tabernacle  in  the  wilderness  (Ex. 
xxxi.  1-6).  His  charge  was  chiefly  in  all  works  of 
metal,  wood,  and  stone,  Aholiab  being  associated 
with  him  for  the  textile  fabrics;  but  it  is  plain 
from  the  terms  in  which  the  two  are  mentioned 
(xxxvi.  1,  2,  xxxviii.  22),  as  well  as  from  the  enu- 
meration of  the  works  in  Bezaleel's  name  in  xxxvii. 
and  xxxviii.,  that  he  was  the  chief  of  the  two,  and 
master  of  Aholiab' s  department  as  well  as  his  own. 
Bezaleel  was  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  the  son  of  Uri 
the  son  of  Hur  (or  Chur).  Hur  was  the  offspring 
of  the  marriage  of  Caleb  (one  of  the  chiefs  of  the 
great  family  of  Pharez)  with  Ephvath  (1  Chr.  ii. 
19,  50),  and  one  of  his  sons,  or  descendants  (comp. 
Ruth  iv.  20)  was  Salma,  or  Salmon,  who  is  handed 
down  under  the  title  of  "  father  of  Bethlehem  ;" 
and  who,  as  the  actual  father  of  Boaz,  was  the  direct 
progenitor  of  king  David  (1  Chr.  ii.  51,  54;  Ruth 
iv.  21).    [Bethlehem,  Hur.] 

2.  One  of  the  sons  of  Pahath-moab  who  had 
taken  a  foreign  wife,  Ezr.  x.  30. 


BEZEK 
BE'ZEK  (pt3j  BeCe'/c;  £«*«;),  tlie  name  of 
two  apparently  distinct  places  in  Palestine. 

1.  The  residence  of  Adoni-bezek,  i.e.  the  "lord 
of  Bezek"  (Judg.  i.  5);  in  the  "lot  fa~\i)  of 
Judah  "  (verse  3),  and  inhabited  by  Canaanites  and 
Perizzites  (verse  4).  This  must  have  been  a 
distinct  place  from 

2.  Where  Saul  numbered  the  forces  of  Israel 
and  Judah  before  going  to  the  relief  of  Jabe-sh- 
Gilead  (1  Sam.  xi.  8).  From  the  terms  of  the  nar- 
rative this  cannot  have  been  more  than  a  day's  march 
from  Jabesh ;  and  was  therefore  doubtless  some- 
where in  the  centre  of  the  country,  near  the  Jordan 
valley.  In  accordance  with  this  is  the  mention  in 
the  Onomasticon  of  two  places  of  this  name  seven- 
teen miles  from  Neapolis  (Shechem),  on  the  road  to 
Beth-shean.  The  LXX.  inserts  iv  Ba/xd  after  the 
name,  possibly  alluding  to  some  "  high  place  "  at 
which  this  solemn  muster  took  place.  This  Josephus 
gives  as  BaAtt  (Ant.  vi.  5,  §3). 

No  identification  of  either  place  has  been  made  in 
modern  times.  [G.] 

BE'ZER  IN  THE  WILDERNESS  ("121E3  1V3  ; 

Bocr6p  iv  Tij  ipy/xtS  ■  Besor  in  solitudine),  a  city  of 
the  Keubenites,  with  "  suburbs,"  in  the  Mishor  or 
downs,  set  apart  by  Moses  as  one  of  the  three  cities 
of  refuge  on  the  east  of  the  Jordan,  and  allotted  to 
the  Merarites  (Deut.  iv.  43;  Josh.  xx.  8,  xxi.  36; 
1  Chr.  vi.  78).  In  the  two  last  passages  the  exact 
specification,  "1^03,  of  the  other  two  is  omitted, 
but  traces  of  its  former  presence  in  the  text  in 
Josh.  xxi.  16  are  furnished  us  by  the  reading  of 
the  LXX.  and  Vulg. — ttjv  Boabp  iv  rrj  ipT)[A<p,  r^v 
M  i  a  w  (Alex.  Miffwp)  kcu  to.  irepio-n-6pia  ;  Bosor 
in  solitudine,  Misor  et  Jaser. 

Bezer  may  be  the  Bosor  of  the  Books  of  Macca- 
bees.    [Bosor.]  mi 

BE'ZEE  ("11?3;  Baffdv;  Alex.  Bacrdp;  Bosor), 
son  of  Zophah,  one  of  the  heads  of  the  house  of 
Asher  (1  Chr.  vii.  37). 

BE'ZETH  (Bij&'fl  ;  Bethzecha),  a  place  at 
which  Bacchides  encamped  after  leaving  Jerusalem, 
and  where  there  was  a  "  great  pit"  (to  <pp4ap  rb 
fj.iya-  1  Mace.  vii.  19).  By  Josephus  (Ant.  xii. 
10,  §2)  the  name  is  given  as  "  the  village  Beth- 
zetho"  (km/xt)  B7j0^V)0d)  \eyo/j.evri),  which  recals 
the  name  applied  to  the  Mount  of  Olives  in  the 
early  Syi'iac  recension  of  the  N.  T.  published  by 
Mr.  Cureton  —  Beth-Zaith.  The  name  may  thus 
refer  either  to  the  main  body  of  the  Mount  of 
Olives,  or  to  that  branch  of  it  to  the  north  of 
Jerusalem,  which  at  a  later  period  was  called 
Bezetha.  rQ  -i 

BI'ATAS  (GaKlas;  Alex.  Wflos;  Philias), 
1  Esdr.ix.  48.    [Pelaiah.] 

BIBLE  (Bi0A/a,  LXX.  ;  Biblia,  Vulg.).— 
I.  The  application  of  this  word,  kclt  i^oxv",  to  the 
collected  books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament  is 
not  to  be  traced  farther  bach  than  the  5th  century. 
The  terms  which  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament 
use  of  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  are  rj  ypa<pr] 
(2  Tim.  iii.  16;  Acts  viii.  32;  Gal.  hi.  22),  a! 
ypacpai  (Matt.  xxi.  42;  Luke  xxiv.  27),  ra  Upa 
ypd^ara  (2  Tim.  iii.  15).  Bi&Klov  is  (bund 
(2  Tim.  iv.  13;  Rev.  x.  3,  v.  I),  but  with  uo 
distinctive  meaning;   nor  does  the   use  of  TO  Aoi7ra 

rwv  &i&kiwv  for  the  Hagiographa  in  the  Preface 


BIBLE 


209 


to  Ecclesiasticus,  or  of  ai  Upal  /8i/3Aoi  in  Josephus 
{Ant.  i.  6,  §2),  indicate  anything  as  to  the 
use  of  to;  $t$\ia  alone  as  synonymous  with  y 
ypa<pr).  The  words  employed  by  early  Christian 
writers  were  naturally  derived  from  the  language 
of  the  New  Testament,  and  the  old  terms,  with 
epithets  like  0e?a,  ayia,  and  the  like  continued  to 
be  used  by  the  Greek  fathers,  as  the  equivalent 
"  Scriptura "  was  by  the  Latin.  The  use  of  f) 
TraAcua  SiaOriKr]  in  2  Cor.  iii.  14,  for  the  law  as 
read  in  the  synagogues,  and  the  prominence  given 
in  the  Epistle  to  the  Heb.  (vii.  22,  viii.  6,  ix.  l.">; 
to  the  contrast  between  the  iraXaid  and  the  Kaivi}, 
led  gradually  to  the  extension  of  the  former  to  in- 
clude the  other  books  of  the  Jewish  Scriptures,  and 
to  the  application  of  the  latter  as  of  the  former  to  a 
book  or  collection  of  books.  Of  the  Latin  equi- 
valents which  were  adopted  by  different  writers 
(Instrumentum,  Testamentum),  the  latter  met 
with  the  most  general  acceptance,  and  perpetuated 
itself  in  the  languages  of  modem  Europe.  One 
passage  in  Tertullian  (adv.  Marc.  iv.  1)  illustrates 
the  growing  popularity  of  the  word  which  event- 
ually prevailed,  "  instrument  vel  quod  magis  in 
usu  est  dicere,  testament! ."  The  word  was  na- 
turally used  by  Greek  writers  in  speaking  of  the 
parts  of  these  two  collections.  They  enumerate 
(c.  g.  Athan.  Si/nop.  Sac.  Script.)  ra  /3i£Aia  of 
the  Old  and  New  Testament;  and  as  these  were 
contrasted  with  the  apocryphal  books  circulated  by 
heretics,  there  was  a  natural  tendency  to  the  appro- 
priation of  the  word  as  limited  by  the  article  to  the 
whole  collection  of  the  canonical  Scriptures.  In 
Chrysostom  (Horn.  x.  in  Gen.,  Horn.  ix.  in  Col.) 
it  is  thus  applied  in  a  way  which  shows  this 
use  to  have  already  become  familiar  to  those  to 
whom  he  wrote.  The  liturgical  use  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, as  the  worship  of  the  Church  became  organised, 
would  naturally  favour  this  application.  The  MSS. 
from  which  they  were  read  would  be  emphatically 
the  books  of  each  church  or  monastery.  And  when 
this  use  of  the  word  was  established  in  the  East,  it 
was  natural  that  it  should  pass  gradually  to  the 
Western  Church.  The  terminology  of  that  Church 
bears  witness  throughout  (e.  g.  Episcopus,  Pres- 
byter, Diaconus,  Litania,  Liturgia,  Monaehus,  Ab- 
bas, and  others)  to  its  Greek  origin,  and  the  history 
of  the  word  Biblia  has  followed  the  analogy  of  those 
that  have  been  referred  to.  Here  too  there  was 
less  risk  of  its  being  used  in  any  other  than  the 
higher  meaning,  because  it  had  not,  in  spite  of 
the  introduction  even  in  classical  Latinitv  ofBiblio- 
theca,  Bibliopola,  taken  the  place  of  libri.  or  Libelli. 
in  the  common  speech  of  men. 

It  is  however  worthy  of  note,  as  bearing  on  the 
history  of  the  word  in  our  own  language,  and  on 
th.it  of  its  reception  in  the  Western  Church,  that 
"Bible"  is  not  found  in  Anglo-Saxon  literature, 
though  Bibliopece  is  given  (Lye,  Diet.  Anglo- 
Sax.)  as  used  in  the  same  sense  as  the  corn 
ingword  in  mediaeval  Latin  for  the  Scriptures  as  the 
great  treasure-house  of  books  |  DuCangeandAdelung, 
If  wederive  from  our  mother-tone  e  the 
singularly  happy  equivalent  of  the  Greek  ebayye- 
\(op,  we  have  received  the  word  which  stands  on  an 
equal  eminence  with  Gospel  as  one  of  the  later  im- 
portations consequent  on  the  Norman  Conquest  and 
fuller  intercourse  With  the  Continent.  When  the 
English  which  grew  out  of  this  union  first  appeal 
ill  liter;, i, ,ie.  the  word  is  already  naturalised,  [n 
R.Brunne(p.  290),Kers  Ploughman(  1916,4271  ), 
«»d  Chaucer  (Prol.  437),  it  appears  in  its  dis- 


210 


BIBLE 


tinctive  sense,  though  the  latter,  in  at  least  one  I 
passage  (House  of  Fame,  Book  iii.)  uses  it  in  a 
way  which  indicates  that  it  was  not  always  limited  J 
to  that  meaning.  From  that  time  however  the 
higher  use  prevailed  to  the  exclusion  of  any  lower ; 
and  the  choice  of  it,  rather  than  of  any  of  its 
synonymes  by  the  great  translators  of  the  Scriptures, 
Wyklyf,  Luther,  Coverdale,  fixed  it  beyond  all 
possibility  of  a  change.  The  trauformation  of  the 
word  from  a  plural  into  a  singular  noun  in  all  the 
modern  languages  of  Europe,  though  originating 
probably  in  the  solecisms  of  the  Latin  of  the  13th 
century  (Du  Cange,  m  voc.  Biblia),  has  made  it 
fitter  than  it  would  otherwise  have  been,  for  its 
high  office  as  the  title  of  that  which,  by  virtue  of 
its  unity  and  plan,  is  emphatically  THE  Book. 

II.  The  history  of  the  growth  of  the  collections 
known  as  the  Old  and  New  Testament  respectively, 
will  be  found  fully  under  Canon.  It  falls  within 
the  scope  of  the  present  article  to  indicate  in  what 
way  and  by  what  steps  the  two  came  to  be  looked 
on  as  of  co-ordinate  authority,  and  therefore  as  parts 
of  one  whole — how,  i.  e.  the  idea  of  a  completed 
Bible,  even  before  the  word  came  into  use,  pre- 
sented itself  to  the  minds  of  men.  As  regards  a 
large  portion  of  the  writings  of  the  New  Testament 
it  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  they  claim  an  autho- 
rity not  lower,  nay  even  higher  than  the  Old.  That 
which  had  not  been  revealed  to  the  "  prophets"  of 
the  Old  dispensation  is  revealed  to  the  prophets  of 
the  New  (Eph.  iii.  5).  The  Apostles  write  as 
having  the  Spirit  of  Christ  (1  Cor.  vii.  40), 
as  teaching  and  being  taught  "  by  the  revelation  of 
Jesus  Christ"  (Gal.  i.  12).  Where  they  make  no 
such  direct  claim  their  language  is  still  that  of  men 
who  teach  as  "  having  authority,"  and  so  far  the 
old  prophetic  spirit  is  revived  in  them,  and  their 
teaching  differs,  as  did  that  of  their  Master,  from 
the  traditions  of  the  Scribes.  As  the  revelation  of 
God  through  the  Son  was  recognised  as  fuller  and 
more  perfect  than  that  which  had  been  made  iroAvfxe- 
pS>s  Kal  iroAvrpSirvs  to  the  fathers  (Heb.  i.  1),  the 
records  of  what  He  had  done  and  said,  when  once 
recognised  as  authentic,  could  not  be  regarded  as 
less  sacred  than  the  Scriptures  of  the  Jews.  Indi- 
cations of  this  are  found  even  within  the  N.  T. 
itself.  Assuming  the  genuineness  of  the  2nd  Epistle 
of  Peter,  it  shows  that  within  the  lifetime  of  the 
Apostles,  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  had  come  to  be 
classed  among  the  ypa<pa\  of  the  Church  (2  Pet. 
iii.  16).  The  language  of  the  same  Epistle  in  rela- 
tion to  the  recorded  teaching  of  Prophets  and  Apostles 
(iii.  2,  cf.  Eph.  iii.  20,  iii.  5,  v.  11),  shows  that  the 
iraaa  trpo(pr]T€ia  ypa<pr\s  can  hardly  be  limited  to 
the  writings  of  the  Old  Testament.  The  command 
that  the  letter  to  the  Colossians  was  to  be  read  in 
the  church  of  Laodicea  (Col.  iv.  16),  though  it 
does  not  prove  that  it  was  regarded  as  of  equal  au- 
thority with  the  ypa<p$i  Qe6iri>€v<TTOS,  indicates  a 
practice  which  would  naturally  lead  to  its  being  so 
regarded.  The  writing  of  a  man  who  spoke  as  in- 
spired, could  not  fail  to  be  regarded  as  participating  in 
the  inspiration.  It  is  part  of  the  development  of  the 
same  feeling'that  the  earliest  records  of  the  worship  of 
the  Christian  Church  indicate  the  liturgical  use  of 
some  at  least  of  the  writings  of  the  New,  as  well  as 
of  the  Old  Testament.  Justin  (Apol.  i.  66)  places 
to  airofivTifioi'evfxaTa,  tu>v  airoffT6\a)v  as  read  in 
close  connexion  with,  or  in  the  place  of  tci  ffvy- 
yp6.fxiAa.To.  T&v  Trpocp7}Ta>v,  and  this  juxta-position 
corresponds  to  the  manner  in  which  Ignatius  had 
previously  spoken  of  at  irpo(prirelai,  v6/xos  Maxre'aij, 


BIBLE 

rb  evayyzAiov  (Ep.  ad  Smyrn.  c.  7).  It  is  not 
meant  of  course  that  such  phrases  or  such  practices 
prove  the  existence  of  a  recognised  collection,  but 
they  show  with  what  feelings  individual  writings 
were  regarded.  They  prepare  the  way  for  the  ac- 
ceptance of  the  whole  body  of  N.  T.  writings,  as 
soon  as  the  Canon  is  completed,  as  on  a  level  with 
those  of  the  Old.  A  little  further  on  and  the 
recognition  is  complete.  Theophilus  of  Antioch 
(ad  Autolyc.  B.  iii.),  Ireuaeus  (adv.  Hacr.  ii. 
27,  iii.  1),  Clement  of  Alexandria  {Strom,  iii.  p. 
455,  iv.  p.  561),  Tertullian  (adv.  Prax.  15, 
20),  all  speak  of  the  New  Testament  writings  (what 
writings  they  included  under  this  title  is  of  course 
a  distinct  question)  as  making  up  with  the  Old, 
fxia  yvaxris  (Clem.  Al.  I.  c.),  "  totum  instrumen- 
tum  utriusque  testamenti"  (Tert.  I.  c),  universae 
scripturae.  As  this  was  in  part  a  consequence  of 
the  liturgical  usage  referred  to,  so  it  reacted  on  it, 
and  influenced  the  transcribers  and  translators  of 
the  books  which  were  needed  for  the  instruction  of 
the  Church.  The  Syrian  Peschito  in  the -3rd,  or  at 
the  close  of  the  2nd  century,  includes  (with  the 
omission  of  some  of  the  avTL\iy6jxeva)  the  New 
Testament  as  well  as  the  Old.  The  Alexandrian 
Codex,  presenting  in  the  fullest  sense  of  the  word  a 
complete  Bible,  may  be  taken  as  the  representative 
of  the  full  maturity  of  the  feeling,  which  we  have 
seen  in  its  earlier  developments. 

III.  The  existence  of  a  collection  of  sacred  books 
recognised  as  authoritative,  leads  naturally  to  a 
more  or  less  systematic  arrangement.  The  arrange- 
ment must  rest  upon  some  principle  of  classification. 
The  names  given  to  the  several  books  will  indicate 
in  some  instances  the  view  taken  of  their  contents, 
in  others  the  kind  of  notation  applied  both  to  the 
greater  and  smaller  divisions  of  the  sacred  volumes. 

The  existence  of  a  classification  analogous  to  that 
adopted  by  the  later  Jews  and  still  retained  in  the 
printed  Hebrew  Bibles,  is  indicated  even  before  the 
completion  of  the  0.  T.  Canon  (Zech.  vii.  12). 
When  the  Canon  was  looked  on  as  settled,  in  the 
period  covered  by  the  books  of  the  Apocrypha,  it 
took  a  more  definite  form.  The  Prologue  to  Eccle- 
siasticus  mentions  "  the  law  and  the  prophets  and 
the  other  Books."  In  the  N.  T.  there  is  the  same 
kind  of  recognition.  "  The  Law  and  the  Prophets" 
is  the  shorter  (Matt.  xi.  13,  xxii.  40 ;  Acts  xiii.  15, 
&c.) ;  "  the  Law,  the  Prophets,  and  the  Psalms  " 
(Lukexxiv.  44),  the  fuller  statemeut  of  the  division 
popularly  recognised.  The  arrangement  of  the 
books  of  the  Heb.  text  under  these  three  heads,  re- 
quires however  a  further  notice. 

1.  The  Torah,  JT11H  v6jxos,  naturally  continued 
to  occupy  the  position  which  it  must  have  held  from 
the  first  as  the  most  ancient  and  authoritative  por- 
tion. Whatever  questions  may  be  raised  as  to  the 
antiquity  of  the  whole  Pentateuch  in  its  present 
form,  the  existence  of  a  book  bearing  this  title  is 
traceable  to  a  very  early  period  in  the  history 
of  the  Israelites  (Josh.  i.  8,  viii.  3,  xxiv.  26).  The 
name  which  must  at  first  have  attached  to  those 
portions  of  the  whole  book  was  applied  to  the  earlier 
and  contemporaneous  history  connected  with  the 
giving  of  the  Law,  and  ascribed  to  the  same  writer. 
The  marked  distinctness  of  the  five  portions  which 
make  up  the  Torah  shows  that  they  must  have 
been  designed  as  separate  books,  and  when  the 
Canon  was  completed,  and  the  books  in  their  pre- 
seut  form  made  the  object  of  study,  names  for  each 
book  were  wanted  and  were  found.     In  the  Hebrew 


BIBLE 

classification  the  titles  were  taken  from  the  initial 
words,  or  prominent  words  in  the  initial  verse ;  in 
that  of  the  LXX.  they  were  intended  to  be  signi- 
ficant of  the  subject  of  each  hook,  and  so  we  have — 

1.  JT^'NIS  ....     TeVetm. 

2.  rrirx;  (nWn)  .    .  v'e|o5os. 

3.    N"lPS<l AtVlTlK&V. 


BIBLE 


211 


4.  n3*JD3 

5.  nnzn' 


'ApidfJ.01. 

Aevr  £pov6/J.iov. 


The  Greek  titles  were  adopted  without  change, 
except  as  to  the  4th  in  the  Latin  versions,  and  from 
them  have  descended  to  the  bibles  of  modern 
Christendom. 

2.  The  next  group  presents  a  more  singular  com- 
bination.    The  arrangement  stands  as  follows  : — 


— the  Hebrew  titles  of  these  books  corresponding  to 
those  of  the  English  bibles. 

The  grounds  on  which  books  simply  historical 
were  classed  under  the  same  name  as  those  which 
contained  the  teaching  of  Prophets,  in  the  stricter 
sense  of  the  word,  are  not  at  first  sight  obvious,  but 
the  0.  T.  presents  some  facts  which  may  suggest 
an  explanation.  The  Sons  of  the  Prophets  (1  Sam. 
x.  5  ;  2  K.  v.  22,  vi.  1)  living  together  as  a  so- 
ciety, almost  as  a  caste  (Am.  vii.  14),  trained  to  a 
religious  life,  cultivating  sacred  minstrelsy,  must 
have  occupied  a  position  as  instructors  of  the  people, 
.  even  in  the  absence  of  the  special  calling  which  sent 
them  as  God's  messengers  to  the  people.  A  body 
of  men  so  placed,  become  naturally,  unless  intellec- 
tual activity  is  absorbed  in  asceticism,  historians 
and  annalists.  The  references  in  the  historical 
books  of  the  0.  T.  show  that  they  actually  were  so. 
Nathan  the  prophet,  Gad,  the  seer  of  David 
(1  Chr.  xxix.  29),  Ahijah  and  Iddo  (2  Chr.  ix. 
29),  Isaiah  (2  Chr.  xxvi.  22,  xxxiii.  32),  are  cited 
as  chroniclers.  The  greater  antiquity  of  the  earlier 
historical  books,  and  perhaps  the  traditional  belief 
that  they  had  originated  in  this  way,  were  likely  to 
co-operate  in  raising  them  to  a  high  place  of  honour 
in  the  arrangement  of  the  Jewish  Canon,  and  so 
they  were  looked  on  as  having  the  prophetic  cha- 
racter which  was  denied  to  the  historical  books  of 
the  Hagiographa.  The  greater  extent  of  the  pro- 
phecies of  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  no  less  than  the 
prominent  position  which  they  occupied  in  the  his- 
tory of  Israel,  led  naturally  to  their  being  recog- 
nised as  the  Prophetae  Majores.  The  exclusion  of 
Daniel  from  this  subdivision  is  a  more  remarkable 
fact,  and  one  which  has  been  differently  interpreted, 
the  Rationalistic  school  of  later  criticism  (Eichhorn, 
De  Wette,  Bertholdt)  seeing  in  it  an  indication  of 
later  date,  and  therefore  of  doubtful  authenticity, 
the  orthodox  school  on  the  other,  as  represented  by 
Hengstenberg  {Dissert,  on  Dan.,  (Jli.  ii.  §iv.  and 
v.),  maintaining  that  the  difference  rested  only  on 
the  ground  that,  though  the  utterer  of  predictions, 
he  had  not  exercised,  as  the  others  had  done,  a 
prophet's  office  among  the  people.  Whatever  may 
have  been  its  origin,  the  position  of  this  Book  in 


the  Hagiographa  led  the  later  Jews  to  think  and 
speak  slightingly  of  it,  and  Christians  who  reasoned 
with  them  out  of  its  predictions  were  met  by  re- 
marks disparaging  to  its  authority  (Hengstenberg, 
I.e.).  The  arrangement  of  the  Prophetae  Minores 
does  not  call  for  special  notice,  except  so  far  as  they 
were  counted,  in  order  to  bring  the  whole  list  of 
Canonical  books  within  a  memorial  number,  an- 
swering to  that  of  the  letters  in  the  Hebrew 
alphabet,  as  a  single  volume,  and  described  as  to 
dtob~eKa.Trp6<pT)T0V. 

3.  Last  in  order  came  the  group  known  as  Cetu- 
bim,  Q^DS  (from  3113  to  write),  ypa<pe7a,  ayto- 

ypacpa,  including  the  remaining  books  of  the  Hebrew 
Canon,  arranged  in  the  following  order,  and  with 
subordinate  divisions : 

(«)  Psalms,  Proverbs,  Job. 

(6)  The  Song  of  Songs,  Ruth,  Lamentations, 
Ecclesiastes,  Esther. 

(c)  Daniel,  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  1  and  2  Chro- 
nicles. 

Of  these,  (a)  was  distinguished  by  the  memorial 
word  DEN  "  truth,"  formed  from  the  initial  letters 
of  the  three  books ;  (6)  as  fl'l^l?  GJ>»n,  the  five 
rolls  as  being  written  for  use  in  the  synagogues  on 
special  festivals  on  five  separate  rolls. 

Of  the  Hebrev/  titles  of  these  books,  those  which 
are  descriptive  of  their  contents  are  D'pnn  the 
Psalms.  vK^P,  Proverbs.  rO^N  Lamentations 
(from  the  opening  word  of  wailing  in  i.  1).  The 
Song  of  Songs  (D-n^'H  "W).  Ecclesiastes  (H^Hp, 
the  Preacher).  1  and  2  Chronicles  (CD^H  n3"3 
words  of  days  =  records). 

The  Septuagint  translation  presents  the  following 
titles, — VaXfioi,  Tlapot/iiai,  Qprjvoi,  TAo-/Lia  afffxa.- 
Twv,  ,Y,KK\rjcnao'Tr}s,  TlapaAfnTo/xtva  (i.  e.  things 
omitted,  as  being  supplementary  to  the  Books  of 
Kings).  The  Latin  version  imports  some  of  the 
titles,  and  translates  others.  Psalmi,  Proverbia, 
Threni,  Canticum  Canticorum,  Ecclesiastes,  Parali- 
pomenon,  and  these  in  their  translated  form  have 
determined  the  received  titles  of  the  book  in  our 
English  Bibles, — Ecclesiastes,  in  which  the  Greek 
title  is  retained,  and  Chronicles,  in  which  the 
Hebrew  and  not  the  Greek  title  is  translated,  being 
exceptions. 

The  LXX.  presents,  however,  some  striking  va- 
riations in  point  of  arrangement  as  well  as  in  rela- 
tion to  the  names  of  books.  Both  in  this  and  in  the 
insertion  of  the  avrtXey6fj.eva,  which  we  now  know 
as  the  Apocrypha,  among  the  other  books,  we  trace 
the  absence  of  that  strong  reverence  for  the  Canon 
and.  its  traditional  order  which  distinguished  the 
Jews  of  Palestine.  The  Law,  it  is  true,  stands  first, 
but  the  distinction  between  the  greater  and  lesser 
prophets,  between  the  Prophets  and  the  Hagio- 
grapha is  no  longer  recognised.  Daniel,  with  the 
Apocryphal  additions,  follow*  upon  Ezekiel ;  the 
Apocryphal  1st  or  3rd  Book  of  Esdras  comes  as  *a 
2nd  following  0D  the  Canonical  Ezra.  Tobrl  and 
Judith  are  placed  after  Nehemiah,  Wisdom  (2o<p/a 
'S,a\6/j.a>vTos )  and  Ecclesiasticus  (2o<£>ia  Sei'pax) 
after  Canticles,  Barucb  before  and  the  Epistle  of 
Jeremiah  alter  Lamentations,  (he  twelve  Lesser 
Prophets  before  the  four  Greater, and  the  two  Books 
of  Maccabees  come  at  the  close  of  all.  The  Latin 
version  follows  nearly  the  same  order,  inverting  the 
relative  position  of  the  greater  and   lesser  prophets. 

1'  2 


212 


BIBLE 


The  separation  of  the  doubtful  books  under  the  title 
of  Apocrypha  in  the  Protestant  versions  of  the 
Scriptures,  left  the  others  in  the  order  in  which  we 
now  have  them. 

The  history  of  the  arrangement  of  the  Books  of 
the  New  Testament  presents  some  variations,  not 
without  interest,  as  indicating  differences  of  feeling 
or  modes  of  thought.  The  four  Gospels  and  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles  uniformly  stand  first.  They 
are'  so  far  to  the  New  what  the  Pentateuch  was 
to  the  Old  Testament.  They  do  not  present 
however  in  themselves,  as  the  Books  of  Moses 
did,  any  order  of  succession.  The  actual  order 
does  not  depend  upon  the  rank  or  function  of 
the  writers  to  whom  they  are  assigned.  The  two 
not  written  by  Apostles  are  preceded  and  followed 
by  those  which  are,  and  it  seems  as  if  the  true  ex- 
planation were  to  be  found  in  a  traditional  belief 
as  to  the  dates  of  the  several  Gospels,  according  to 
which  St.  Matthew's,  whether  in  its  Greek  or  He- 
brew form,  was  the  earliest,  and  St.  John's  the 
latest.  The  arrangement  once  adopted  would  na- 
turally confirm  the  belief,  and  so  we  find  it  assumed 
by  Irenaeus,  Origen,  Augustine.  The  position  of 
the  Acts  as  an  intermediate  book,  the  sequel  to  the 
Gospels,  the  prelude  to  the  Epistles,  was  obviously 
a  natural  one.  After  this  we  meet  with  some 
striking  differences.  The  order  in  the  Alexandrian, 
Vatican  and  Ephraem  MSS.  (A  B  C)  gives  pre- 
cedence to  the  Catholic  Epistles,  and  as  this  is  also 
recognised  by  the  Council  of  Laodicea  {Can.  60), 
Cyril  of  Jerusalem  (Catech.  iv.  p.  35),  and  Atha- 
nasius  (Epist.  Fest.  ed.  Bened.  i.  p.  9dl),  it  would 
appear  to  have  been  characteristic  of  the  Eastern 
Churches.  Lachmann,  who  bases  his  recension  of 
the  text  chiefly  on  this  family  of  MSS.,  has  repro- 
duced the  arrangement  in  his  editions.  The 
Western  Church  on  the  other  hand,  as  repre- 
sented by  Jerome,  Augustine,  and  their  successors, 
gave  priority  of  position  to  the  Pauline  Epistles, 
and  as  the  order  in  which  these  were  given  presents 
(1.)  those  addressed  to  Churches  arranged  accord- 
ing to  their  relative  importance,  (2.)  those  ad- 
dressed to  individuals,  the  foremost  place  was  na- 
turally occupied  by  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans. 
The  tendency  of  the  Western  Church  to  recognise 
Rome  as  its  centre  of  authority  may  perhaps  in 
part  account  for  this  departure  from  the  custom  of 
the  East.  The  order  of  the  Pauline  Epistles  them- 
selves, however,  is  generally  the  same,  and  the 
only  conspicuously  different  arrangement  was  that 
of  Marcion,  who  aimed  at  a  chronological  order. 
In  the  three  MSS.  above  referred  to,  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  comes  after  2  Thessalonians.  In  those 
followed  by  Jerome,  it  stands,  as  in  the  English 
Bible  and  the  Textus  Receptus,  after  Philemon.  We 
are  left  to  conjecture  the  grounds  of  this  difference. 
Possibly  the  absence  of  St.  Paul's  name,  possibly 
the  doubts  which  existed  as  to  his  being  the  sole 
author  of  it,  possibly  its  approximation  to  the  cha- 
racter of  the  Catholic  Epistles  may  have  determined 
the  arrangement.  The  Apocalypse,  as  might  be 
expected  from  the  peculiar  character  of  its  contents, 
occupied  a  position  by  itself.  Its  comparatively 
late  recognition  may  have  determined  the  position 
which  it  has  uniformly  held  as  the  last  of  the 
Sacred  Books. 

.  IV.  Division  into  Chapters  and  Verses.  As 
soon  as  any  break  is  made  in  the  continuous  writing 
which  has  characterised  in  nearly  all  countries  the 
early  stages  of  the  art,  we  get  the  germs  of  a 
system  of  division.     But  these   divisions 'may   be 


BIBLE 

used  for  two  distinct  purposes.  So  far  as  they  are 
used  to  exhibit  the  logical  relations  of  words,  clauses 
and  sentences  to  each  other,  they  tend  to  a  recognised 
punctuation.  So  far  as  they  are  used  for  greater  con- 
venience of  reference,  or  as  a  help  to  the  memory, 
they  answer  to  the  chapters  and  verses  of  our  mo- 
dern Bibles.  The  question  now  to  be  answered  is 
that  which  asks  what  systems  of  notation  of  the 
latter  kind  have  been  employed  at  different  times 
by  transcribers  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  and 
to  whom  we  owe  the  system  now  in  use. 

(1.)  The  Hebrew  of  the  Old  Testament. 

It  is  hardly  possible  to  conceive  of  the  liturgical 
use  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  without  some 
kinds  of  recognised  division.  In  proportion  as  the 
books  were  studied  and  commented  on  in  the  schools 
of  the  Rabbis,  the  division  would  become  more 
technical  and  complete,  and  hence  the  existing  no- 
tation which  is  recognised  in  the  Talmud  (the  Ge- 
mara  ascribing  it  to  Moses, — Hupfeld,  Stud,  unci 
Kril.  1830,  p.  827)  may  probably  have  originated 
in  the  earlier  stages  of  the  growth  of  the  synagogue 
ritual.  The  New  Testament  quotations  from  the 
Old  are  for  the  most  part  cited  without  any  more 
specific  reference  than  to  the  Book  from  which  they 
come.  The  references  however  in  Mark  xii.  26 
and  Luke  xx.  37  (eirl  ttjs  pdrov),  Rom.  xi.  2 
(iv  'H\ia)  and  Acts  viii.  32  (r)  irepioxv  Trjs 
ypacpvs),  indicate  a  division  which  had  become 
familiar,  and  show  that  some  at  least  of  the  sec- 
tions were  known  popularly  by  titles  taken  from 
their  subjects.  In  like  manner  the  existence  of  a 
cycle  of  lessons  is  indicated  by  Luke  iv.  17  ;  Acts 
xiii.  15,  xv.  21 ;  2  Cor.  iii.  14;  and  this,  whether 
identical  or  not  with  the  later  Rabbinic  cycle,  must 
have  involved  an  arrangement  analogous  to  that 
subsequently  adopted. 

The  Talmudic  division  is  on  the  following  plan. 
The  law  was  in  the  first  instance  divided  into  fifty- 
four  nV^HS  Parshioth  =  sections,  so  as  to  pro- 
vide a  lesson  for  each  Sabbath  in  the  Jewish  inter- 
calary year,  provision  being  made  for  the  shorter 
year  by  the  combination  of  two  of  the  shorter  sec- 
tions. Co-existing  with  this  there  was  a  subdi- 
vision into  lesser  Parshioth,  which  served  to  de- 
termine the  portions  of  the  sections  taken  by  the 
seveial  readers  in  the  synagogues.  "  The  lesser  Par- 
shioth themselves  were  classed  under  two  heads 
—the  open  (JlininS,  Petuchoth)  which  served 
to  indicate  a  change  'of  subject  analogous  to  that 
between  two  paragraphs  in  modern  writing,  and 
beo-an  accordingly  a  fresh  line  in  the  MSS.,  and  the 
Shut  (DiWriD,  Satumoth),  which  corresponded  to 
minor  divisions,  and  were  marked  only  by  a  space 
within  the  line.  The  initial  letters  3  and  D 
served  as  a  notation,  in  the  margin  or  in  the  text 
itself,  for  the  two  kinds  of  sections.  The  threeffra 
initial  QSS  or  DDD.  was  used  when  the  com- 
mencement of  one  of  the  Parshioth  coincided  with 
that  of  a  Sabbath  lesson  (comp.  Keil.  Einleitung  in 
das  A.  T.  §170,  171). 

A  difierent  terminology  was  employed  for  the 
Prophetae  Priores  and  Posteriores,  and  the  division 
was  less  uniform.  The  tradition  of  the  Jews  that  the 
Prophets  were  first  read  in  the  service  of  the  syna- 
gogue, and  consequently  divided  into  sections,  be- 
cause the  reading  of  the  Law  had  been  forbidden 
by  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  rests  upon  a  very  slight 
foundation,  but  its  existence  is  at  any  rate  a  proof 


BIBLE 

that  the  Law  was  believed  to  have  been  systematic- 
ally divided  before  the  same  process  was  applied  to  the 
other  books.  The  name  of  the  sections  in  this  case 
was  n'HDQn  (Haphtaroth,  from  "1133,  dimittere). 

If  the  name  were  applied  in  this  way  because 
the  lessons  from  the  Prophets  came  at  the  close  of 
the  synagogue  service,  and  so  were  followed  by  the 
dismissal  of  the  people  (Vitriuga  do  Sijnatj.  iii.  2, 
20),  its  history  would  present  a  singular  analogy 
to  that  of  "  Missa,"  "  Mass,"  on  the  assumption 
that  it  also  was  derived  from  the  "  Ite  missa  est," 
by  which  the  congregation  was  informed  of  the 
conclusion  of  the  earlier  portion  of  the  service  of 
the  Church.  The  peculiar  use  of  Missa  shortly 
after  its  appearance  in  the  Latin  of  ecclesiastical 
writers  in  a  sense  equivalent  to  that  of  Haptaroth 
(sex  Missas  de  Propheta  Esaia  facite,  Caesar. 
Arelat.  and  Aurelian  in  Bingham,  Ant.  siii.  1) 
presents  at  least  a  singular  coincidence.  The  Hap- 
taroth themselves  were  intended  to  correspond  with 
the  larger  Parshioth  of  the  Law,  so  that  there  might 
be  a  distinct  lesson  for  each  Sabbath  in  the  interca- 
lary year  as  before ;  but  the  traditions  of  the  Ger- 
man and  the  Spanish  Jews,  both  of  them  of  great 
antiquity,  present  a  considerable  diversity  in  the 
length  of  the  divisions,  and  show  that  they  had 
never  been  determined  by  the  same  authority  as 
that  which  had  settled  the  Parshioth  of  the  Law 
(Van  der  Hooght,  Praefat.  in  Bib.  §35).  Of  the 
traditional  divisions  of  the  Hebrew  Bible  however 
that  which  has  exercised  most  influence  in  the  re- 
ceived arrangement  of  the  text,  was  the  subdivision 
of  the  larger  sections  into  verses  (D^p-IDS  Pesu- 
kim\  These  do  not  appear  to  have  been  'used  till 
the  post-Talmudic  recension  of  the  text  by  the 
Masoretes  of  the  9th  century.  They  were  then 
applied,  first  to  the  prose  and  afterwards  to  the 
poetical  books  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  supersed- 
ing in  the  latter  the  arrangement  of  (Tt'ixoi,  kwAo., 
K6jxjj.ara,  lines  and  groups  of  lines,  which  had  been 
based  upon  metrical  considerations.  The  verses  of 
the  Masoretic  divisions  were  preserved  with  compa- 
ratively slight  variations  through  the  middle  ages, 
and  came  to  the  knowledge  of  translators  and  editors 
when  the  attention  of  European  scholars  was  di- 
rected to  the  study  of  Hebrew.  In  the  Hebrew 
MSS.  the  notation  had  been  simply  marked  by  the 
Soph-Passuk  (  :  )  at  the  end  of  each  verse ;  and 
in  the  earlier  printed  Hebrew  Bibles  (Sabionetta's, 
1557,  and  Plantin's,  1566)  the  Hebrew  numerals 
which  guide  the  reader  in  referring,  are  attached  to 
every  fifth  verse  only.  The  Concordance  of  Rabbi 
Nathan  1450,  however,  had  rested  on  the  applica- 
tion of  a  numeral  to  each  verse,  and  this  was 
adopted  bv  the  Dominican  Paguinus  in  his  Latin 
version,  1528,  and  carried  throughout  the  whole  of 
the  Old  and  New  Testament,  coinciding  substantially, 
as  regards  the  former,  with  the  Masoretic,  and 
therefore  with  the  modem  division,  but  differing 
materially  as  to  the  New  Testament  from  that 
which  was  adopted  by  Robert  Stephens  (<;/'.  infra) 
and  through  his  widely' circulated  editions  passed 
into  general  reception.  The  chief  facts  that  remain 
to  be  stated  as  to  the  verse  divisions  of  the  Old 
Testament  are,  (1.)  that  it  was  adopted  by  SI 
in  his  edition  of  the  Vulgate,  1555,  and  by  Frellon 
in  that  of  1556;  that  it  appeared,  for  the  lirsttime 
in  an  English  translation,  in  the  Geneva  Bible  of 
1560,  and  was  thence  transferred  i"  the  Bishops' 
Bible  of  1568,  and  the  Authorised  Version  of  161  1. 
In  Coverdale's  Bible  we  meet  with  the  older  nota- 


BIBLE 


213 


tion,  which  was  in  familiar  use  for  other  books,  and 
retained  in  some  instances  (e.  g.  in  references  to 
Plato),  to  the  present  times.  The  letters  ABC 
D  are  placed  at  equal  distances  in  the  margin  of 
each  page,  and  the  reference  is  made  to  the  page 
(or,  in  the  case  of  Scripture,  to  the  chapter)  and  the 
letter  accordingly. 

The  Septuagint  translation,  together  with  the 
Latin  versions  based  upon  it,  have  contributed  little 
or  nothing  to  the  received  division  of  the  Bibles. 
Made  at  a  time  when  the  Rabbinic  subdivisions 
were  not  enforced,  hardly  perhaps  existing,  and  not 
used  in  the  worship  of  the  synagogue,  there  was  no 
reason  for  the  scrupulous  care  which  showed  itself 
in  regard  to  the  Hebrew  text.  The  language  of 
Tertullian  (Scorp.  ii.)  and  Jerome  (in  Mic.  vi.  "J  ; 
Zeph.  iii.  4)  implies  the  existence  of  "capitula"  of 
some  sort ;  but  the  word  does  not  appear  to  have 
been  used  in  any  more  definite  sense  than  "  locus  " 
or  "  passage."  The  liturgical  use  of  portions  of  the 
Old  Testament  would  lead  to  the  employment  of 
some  notation  to  distinguish  the  avayvaxr^ara  or 
"'  lectiones,''  and  individual  students  or  transcribers 
might  adopt  a  system  of  reference  of  their  own  ;  but 
we  find  nothing  corresponding  to  the  fully  organised 
notation  which  originated  with  the  Talmudists  or 
Masoretes.  It  is  possible  indeed  that  the  general 
use  of  Lectionaria — in  which  the  portions  read  in 
the  Church  services  were  written  separately — may 
have  hindered  the  development  of  such  a  system. 
Whatever  traces  of  it  we  find  are  accordingly  scanty 
and  fluctuating.  The  sticho-metric  mode  of  writing 
(i.  e.  the  division -of  the  text  into  short  lines  ge- 
nerally with  very  little  regard  to  the  sense)  adopted 
in  the  4th  or  5th  centuries  (see  Prolegom.  to  Breit- 
inger's  Septuagint,  i.  §6),  though  it  may  have  faci- 
litated reference,  or  been  useful  as  a  guide  to  the 
reader  in  the  half-chant  commonly  used  in  liturgical 
services,  was  too  arbitrary  (except  where  it  corre- 
sponded to  the  parallel  clauses  of  the  Hebrew  poet- 
ical books)  and  inconvenient  to  be  generally  adopted. 
The  Alexandrian  MSS.  present  a  partial  notation 
of  Ke<paAcua,  but  as  regards  the  Old  Testament  these. 
are  found  only  in  portions  of  Deuteronomy  and 
Joshua.  Traces  exist  (Monument.  Eccles.  Coteler. 
Breitinger,  Proleg.  ut  srip.)  of  a  like  division  in 
Numbers,  Exodus,  and  Leviticus,  and  Latin  MSS. 
present  frequently  a  system  of  division  into  "  tituli  " 
or  "  capitula,"  but  without  any  recognised  standards. 
In  the  13th  century,  however,  the  development  of 
theology  as  a  science,  and  the  more  frequent  use  of 
the  Scriptures  as  a  text-book  for  lectures,  led  to  the 
general  adoption  of  a  more  systematic  division, 
traditionally  ascribed  to  Stephen  Langton,  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury  (Triveti  Annul,  p.  182,  ed. 
Oxou),  Hugh  de  St.  Cher  (Gibert  Genebrard, 
Chronol.  1.  iv.  p.  644),  and  passing  through  his 
Commentary  (Pustilla  in  Universa  Biblia,  and 
Concordance,  circ.  1240)  into  general  use.  Xo 
other  subdivision  of  the  chapters  was  united  with 

this  bey I  that  indicated  by  the  marginal  letters 

A  P.  < '  I  >  as  described  above. 

As  regards  the  Old  Testament  then,  the  present 
arrangement  grows  out  of  the  union  of  Cardinal 
Hugo's  capitular  division  and  the  Masoretic  verses. 
The  Apocryphal  books,  to  which  of  course  no  Ma- 
soretic division  was  applicable,  did  not  receive  a 
versicular  division  till  the  Latin  edition  of  Pagninus 
in  1528,  nor  the  division  new  in  use  till  Stephens's 
edition  of  the  Vulgate  in  1545,  The  history  of  the 
New  Testament  presents  some  additional  tacts  of 
interest.     Here,    as  in   the  case  of  the   Old,   the 


2U 


BIBLE 


system  of  notation  grew  out  of  the  necessities  of 
study.  The  comparison  of  the  Gospel  narrative 
gave  rise  to  attempts  to  exhibit  the  harmony  be- 
tween them.  Of  these,  the  first  of  which  we  have 
any  record,  was  the  Diatcssaron  of  Tatian  in  the 
2nd  century  (Euseb.  //.  E.  iv.  29).  This  was 
followed  by  a  work  of  like  character  from 
Ammonius  of  Alexandria  in  the  3rd  (Eus.  Epist. 
ad  Carpianum).  The  system  adopted  by  Am- 
monius, however,  that  of  attaching  to  the  Gospel 
of  St.  Matthew  the  parallel  passages  of  the  other 
three,  and  inserting  those  which  were  not  parallel, 
destroyed  the  outward  form  in  which  the  Gospel 
history  had  been  recorded,  was  practically  inconve- 
nient. Nor  did  their  labours  have  any  direct  effect 
on  the  arrangement  of  the  Greek  text,  unless  we 
adopt  the  conjectures  of  Mill  and  Wetstein  that  it  is 
to  Ammonius  or  Tatian  that  we  have  to  ascribe  the 
marginal  notation  of  Ke<pa\cua,  marked  by  A  B 
T  A,  which  are  found  in  the  older  MSS.  The 
search  after  a  more  convenient  method  of  exhibiting 
the  parallelisms  of  the  Gospels  led  Eusebius  of 
Caesarea  to  form  the  ten  Canons  (Kavoves,  registers) 
which  bear  his  name,  and  in  which  the  sections  of 
the  Gospels  ar/e  classed  according  as  the  fact  nar- 
rated is  found  in  one  Evangelist  only,  or  in  two  or 
more.  In  applying  this  system  to  the  transcrip- 
tion of  the  Gospels,  each  of  them  was  divided 
into  shorter  sections  of  variable  length,  and  to  each 
of  these  were  attached  two  numerals,  one  indicating 
the  Canon  under  which  it  would  be  found,  and  the 
other  its  place  in  that  Canon.  Luke,  for  ex- 
ample, would  represent  the  13th  section  belonging 
to  the  first  Canon.  This  division,  however,  ex- 
tended only  to  the  books  that  had  come  under  the 
study  of  the  Harmonists.  The  Epistles  of  St. 
Paul  were  first  divided  in  a  similar  manner  by  the 
unknown  Bishop  to  whom  Euthalius  assigns  the 
credit  of  it  (circ.  396),  and  he  himself,  at  the  in- 
stigation of  Athanasius,  applied  the  method  of  divi- 
sion to  the  Acts  and  the  Catholic  Epistles.  Andrew, 
bishop  of  Caesarea  in  Cappadocia,  completed  the 
work  by  dividing  the  Apocalypse  (circ.  500). 

Of  the  four  great  uncial  MSS.,  A  presents  the 
Ammonian  or  Eusebian  numerals  and  canons,  C 
and  D  the  numerals  without  the  canons.  B  has 
neither  numerals  nor  canons,  but  a  notation  of  its 
own,  the  chief  peculiarity  of  which  is,  that  the 
Epistles  of  St.  Paul  are  treated  as  a  single  book,  and 
brought  under  a  continuous  capitulation.  After  pass- 
ing into  disuse  and  so  into  comparative  oblivion, 
the  Eusebian  and  Euthalian  divisions  have  recently 
(since  1827)  again  become  familiar  to  the  English 
student  through  Bishop  Lloyd's  edition  of  the 
Greek  Testament.  • 

With  the  New  Testament,  however,  as  with  the 
Old,  the  division  into  chapters  adopted  by  Hugh  de 
St.  Cher  superseded  those  that  had  been  in  use 
previously,  appeared  in  the  early  editions  of  the 
Vulgate,  was  transferred  to  the  English  Bible  by 
Coverdale  and  so  became  •universal.  The  notation 
of  the  verses  in  each  chapter  naturally  followed  on 
the  use  of  the  Masoretic  verses  for  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. The  superiority  of  such  a  division  over  the 
marginal  notation  A  B  C  D  in  the  Bible  of  Car- 
dinal Hugh  de  St.  Cher  led  men  to  adopt  an 
analogous  system  for  the  New.  In  the  Latin  ver- 
sion of  Pagninus  accordingly,  there  is  a  versicular 
division,  though  differing  from  the  one  subsequently 
used  in  the  greater  length  of  its  verses.  The  ab- 
sence of  an  authoritative  standard  like  that  of  the 
Masoretes,  left  more  scope  to  the  individual  discre- 


BIER 

tion  of  editors  or  printers,  and  the  activity  of  the 
two  Stephenses  caused  that  which  they  adopted  in 
their  numerous  editions  of  the  Greek  Testament  and 
Vulgate  to  be  generally  received.  In  the  Preface 
to  the  Concordance,  published  by  Henry  Stephens, 
1594,  he  gives  the  following  account  of  the  origin 
of  this  division.  His  father,  he  tells  us,  finding 
the  books  of  the  New  Testament  already  divided 
into  chapters  (tmemata,  or  sections),  proceeded  to  a 
further  subdivision  into  verses.  The  name  versiculi 
did  not  commend  itself  to  him.  He  would  have 
preferred  tmematia  or  sectiunculae,  but  the  pre- 
ference of  others  for  the  former  led  him  to  adopt  it. 
The  whole  work  was  accomplished  "  inter  equitan- 
dum  "  on  his  journey  from  Paris  to  Lyons.  While 
it  was  in  progress  men  doubted  of  its  success.  No 
sooner  was  it  known  than  it  met  with  universal 
acceptance.  The  edition  in  which  this  division  was 
first  adopted  was  published  in  1551,  another  came 
from  the  same  press  in  1555.  It  was  used  for  the 
Vulgate  in  the  Antwerp  edition  of  Hentenius  in 
1559,  for  the  English  version  published  in  Geneva 
in  1560,  and  from  that  time,  with  slight  variations 
in  detail,  has  been  universally  recognised.  The  con- 
venience of  such  a  system  for  reference  is  obvious ; 
but  it  may  be  questioned  whether  it  has  not  been 
purchased  by  a  great  sacrifice  of  the  perception  by 
ordinary  readers  of  the  true  order  and  connexion  of 
the  books  of  the  Bible.  In  some  cases  the  division 
of  chapters  separates  portions  which  are  very  closely 
united  (See  e.  g.  Matt.  ix.  38,  and  x.  1,  xix.  1, 
and  xx.  1 ;  Mark  ii.  23-28,  and  iv.  1-5,  viii.  38, 
and  ix.  1 ;  Luke  xx.  45-47,  and  xxi.  1-4;  Acts  vii. 
GO,  and  viii.  1 ;  1  Cor.  x.  33,  xi.  1 ;  2  Cor.V. 
18,  v.  1,  vi.  18,  and  vii.  1),  and  throughout  gives 
the  impression  ot  a  formal  division  altogether  at 
variance  with  the  continuous  flow  of  narrative  or 
thought  which  characterised  the  book  as  it  came 
from  the  hand  of  the  writer.  The  separation  of 
verses  in  its  turn  has  conduced  largely  to  the  habit 
of  building  doctrinal  systems  upon  isolated  texts. 
The  advantages  of  the  received  method  are  united 
with  those  of  an  arrangement  representing  the  ori- 
ginal more  faithfully  in  the  structure  of  the  Para- 
graph Bibles,  lately  published  by  different  editors, 
and  in  the  Greek  Testaments  of  Lloyd,  Lachmann, 
and  Tischendorf.  The  student  ought,  however,  to 
remember  in  using  these  that  the  paragraphs  belong 
to  the  editor  not  to  the  writer,  and  are  therefore 
liable  to  the  same  casualties  rising  out  of  subjective 
peculiarities,  dogmatic  bias,  and  the  like,  as  the 
chapters  of  our  common  Bibles.  Practically  the 
risk  of  such  casualties  has  been  reduced  almost  to  a 
minimum  by  the  care  of  editors  to  avoid  the  errors 
into  which  their  predecessors  have  fallen,  but  the 
possibility  of  the  evil  exists,  and  should  therefore  be 
guarded  against  by  the  exercise  of  an  independent 
judgment.  [E.  H.  P.] 

BICH'EI     0*133  ;     BoXopt-el ;     Bichri    and 

Bochri ;  first-bom,  Sim.;  youthful,  Gesen.,  Fiirst ; 
but  perhaps  rather  son  of  Becker),  ancestor  of 
Sheba  (2  Sam.  xx.  1  ff.).    [Becher.]    [A.  C.  H.]. 

BID'KAR  ("lp"l3  ;  BaSeKap  ;  Joseph.  Ba5a- 
upos  ;  Badacer),  Jehu's  "  captain  "  (KOCS* ;  Joseph. 
o  rrjs  rpir-qs  ixoipas  rryt/Acvv,  Ant.  ix.  6,  §3), 
originally  his  fellow-officer  (2  K.  ix.  25)  ;  who  com- 
pleted the  sentence  on  Jehoram  son  of  Ahab,  by 
casting  his  body  into  the  field  of  Naboth  after  Jehu 
had  transfixed  him  with  an  arrow. 

BIER.     [Bcrial.] 


I 


BIGTHA 


BINNUI 


215 


BIG'THA  CSJ133  ;  Bapa(i ;  Bagatha),  one 
of  the  seven  "chamberlains"  (C'p^D  eunuchs) 
of  the  harem  of  Ahasuerus  (Esth.  i.  10). 

BIG'THAN  and  BIG'THANA  (jnj3,  Esth. 

ii.  21,  and  JOn}3,  vi.  2  ;   Bagathan),  an  eunuch 

(chamberlain,  A.  V.)  in  the  court  of  Ahasuerus,  one 
of  those  "  who  kept  the  door"  (marg.  "  threshold," 
apxi-ffcofJ-aTocpvAaKes,  LXX.),  and  who  conspired 
with  Tcresh,  one  of  his  coadjutors,  against  the  king's 
life.  The  conspiracy  was  detected  by  Mordecai,  and 
the  eunuchs  hung.  Prideaux  (Con.  i.  363)  supposes 
that  these  officers  had  been  partially  superseded  by 
the  degradation  of  Vashti,  and  sought  revenge  by 
the  murder  of  Ahasuerus.  This  suggestion  falls  in 
with  that  of  the  Chaldee  Vs.,  and  of  the  LXX. 
which  in  Esth.  ii.  21  interpolates  the  words 
6\vir-f]drj(Tav  oi  fivo  evvovxoi  tov  Pafflkews  .  .  .  . 
Srt  TrpoT}x9v  MopSoxalos.  The  name  is  omitted 
by  the  LXX.  on  both  occasions.  Bigthan  is  probably 
derived  from  the  Persian  and  Sanskrit  Bagadana, 
"  a  gift  of  fortune"  (Gesen.  s.  v.).        [F.  W.  F.] 

BIG'VAI  (''IJB  ;  Bayove,  Bayova'i ;  Beguai, 
Begoai). 

1.  "  Children  of  Bigvai,"  2056  (Neh.  2067)  in 
number,  returned  from  the  captivity  with  Zerub- 
babel  (Ezr.  ii.  14;  Neh.  vii.  19),  and  72  of  them 
at  a  later  date  with  Ezra  (Ezr.  viii.  14).  [BAGOI ; 
Bago.] 

2.  Apparently  one  of  the  chiefs  of  Zerubbabel's 
expedition  (Ezr.  ii.  2  ;  Neh.  vii.  7),  and  who  after- 
wards signed  the  covenant  (Neh.  x.  16). 

BIL'DAD  (*n?3,  son  of  contention,  if  Ge- 
senius'  derivation  of  it  from  TV?  |2  be  correct ; 
Ba\5a5  ;  Baldad),  the  second  of  Job's  three  friends. 
He  is  called  "  the  Shuhite"  (M-ICSTI),  which  implies 

both  his  family  and  nation.  Shuah  was  the  name 
of  a  son  of  Abraham  and  Keturah,  and  of  an  Ara- 
bian tribe  sprung  from  him,  when  he  had  been  sent 
eastward  by  his  father.  Gesen.  (s.  u.)  supposes  it 
to  be  "the same  as  the  2a/c/caia  of  Ptolemy  (v.  15) 
to  the  east  of  Batanea,"  and  therefore  to  the  east  of 
the  land  of  Uz  [Shuah].  The  LXX.  strangely 
enough,  renders  it  6  twi/  2au^ecoi'  rvpavvos,  ap- 
pearing to  intend  a  distinction  between  him  and 
the  other  friends,  whom  in  the  same  verse  it  calls 
&aai.\<us  (Job  ii.  11). 

Bildad  takes  a  share  in  each  of  the  three  contro- 
versies with  Job  (viii.  xviii.  xxv.).  He  follows  in 
the  train  of  Eliphaz,  but  with  more  violent  decla- 
mation, less  argument,  and  keener  invective.  His 
address  is  abrupt  and  unteiider,  and  in  his  very  first 
speech  he  cruelly  attributes  the  death  of  Job's 
children  to  their  own  transgressions  ;  and  loudly 
calls  on  Job  to  repent  of  his  supposed  crimes.  His 
second  speech  (xviii.)  merely  recapitulates  his  former 
assertions  of  the  temporal  calamities  of  the  wicked; 
on  this  occasion  he  implies,  without  expressing, 
Job's  wickedness,  and  does  not  condescend  to  exhort 
him  to  repentance.  In  the  third  speech  (xxv.),  un- 
able to  refute  the  sufferer's  arguments,  he  takes 
refuge  in  irrelevant  dogmatism  on  God's  glory 
and  man's  nothingness:  in  reply  to  which  Job 
justly  reproves  him  both  for  deficiency  in  argument 
ami  failure  in  charitable  forbearance  (Ewald,  das 
Buck  Fjob).  [F.  VV.  F.] 

BIL'EAM  (Dy'pa  ;  'U^Adav,  Alex.   lPKad/j. ; 

Baalam),  a  town  in-  the  western  half  of  the  tribe 


of  Manasseh,  named  only  in  1  Chr.  vi.  70,  as  being 
given  (with  its  "  suburbs  ")  to  the  Kohathites.  In 
the  lists  in  Josh.  xvii.  and  xxi.  this  name  does  not 
appear,  and  Ibleam  and  Gath-rimmon  are  substituted 
for  it,  the  former  by  an  easy  change  of  letters,  the 
latter  uncertain.   [Gathrimmon  ;  Ibleam.]   [G.] 

BIL'GAH  (H^3  ;  o  BeAyds ;  Belga).     1.  A 

priest  in  the  time  of  David;  the  head  of  the 
fifteenth  course  for  the  temple  service  (1  Chr.  xxiv. 
14). 

2.  A  priest  who  returned  from  Babylon  with 
Zerubbabel  and  Joshua  (Neh.  xii.  5,  18);  piobably 
the  same  who,  under  the  slightly  altered  name 
BiLGAi,  sealed  the  covenant  (Neh.  x.  8). 

BIL'GAI  (»J?3  ;  BeAyd'i  ;  Belgai),  Neh.  x.  8  ; 
probably  the  same  as  BiLGAH,  2. 

BIL'HAH  (nrf?2  ;  BaAAa ;  Bala).  1.  Hand- 
maid of  Rachel  (Gen.  xxix.  29),  and  concubine  of 
Jacob,  to  whom  she  bore  Dan  and  Naphtali  (Gen.  xxx. 
3-8,  xxxv.  25,  xlvi.  25  ;  1  Chr.  vii.  13).  Her  step- 
son Reuben  afterwards  lay  with  her  (Gen.  xxxv.  22), 
which  entailed  a  curse  upon  Reuben  (Gen.  xlix.  4). 

2.  A  town  of  the  Simeonites  (1  Chr.  iv.  29)  ; 
also  called  Baalah  and  Balah.  [Baal,  p.  147, 
No.  2,  &.] 

BIL'HAN  (fi"P3 ;  BaAadfx,  BaAadv;  Balaan, 
Balan;  the  same  root  as  Bilhah,  Gen.  xxx.  3,  &c. 
The  final  |  is  evidently  a  Horite  termination,  as  in 
Zaavan,  Akan,  Dishan,  Aran,  Lotan,  Alvan,  Hemdan, 
Eshban,  &c. ;  and  may  be  compared  with  the 
Etruscan  ena,  Greek  a.{y)s,  o>v,  &c). 

1.  A  Horite  chief,  son  of  Ezer,  son  of  Seir,  dwell- 
ing in  Mount  Seir,  in  the  land  of  Edom  (Gen. 
xxxvi.  27  ;   1  Chr.  i.  42). 

2.  A  Benjamite,  son  of  Jediael  (1  Chr.  vii.  10). 
It  does  not  appear  clearly  from  which  of  the  sons 
of  Benjamin  Jediael  was  descended,  as  he  is  not 
mentioned  in  Gen.  xlvi.  21,  or  Num.  xxvi.  But  as 
he  was  the  father  of  Ehud  (ver.  10),  and  Ehud 
seems,  from  1  Chr.  viii.  3,  6,  to  have  been  a  son 
of  Bela,  Jediael,  and  consequently  Bilhan,  were 
probably  Belaites.  The  occurrence  of  Bilhan  as 
well  as  Bela  in  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  names  both 
imported  from  Edom,  is  remarkable.     [A.  C.  H.] 

BIL'SHAN  (JK73  ;  BaAaadv,  BaA(rdi>  ;  Bel- 
san),  one  of  Zerubbabel's  companions  on  his  expe- 
dition from  Babylon  (Ezr.  ii.  2  ;  Neh.  vii.  7). 

BIM'HAL  (7Pip3  ;  BojuarjA  ;    Chamaal),  one 

of  the  sons  of  Japhlet  in  the  line  of  Asher  (1  Chr. 
vii.  33). 

BIN'EA  (XyJ3  ;  Baavd;  Banaa),  the  son  of 

Moza  ;  one  of  the  descendants  of  Saul  (1  Chr.  viii. 
37  ;  ix.  43). 

BIN'NUI  (M33  ;  Bavovi,  Bavaia,  Bavi ;  Ben- 
nni,  Benaias,  Bannui).  1.  A  Levite,  father  of 
Noadiah,  in  Ezra's  time  (Ezr.  viii.  33). 

2.  One  i,t'  the  suns  of  Pahath-moab,  who  had 
taken  a  foreign  wife  (Ezr.  x.  I'.u).   [Balnits.] 

3.  Another  Israelite,  of  the  sons  of  Bani,  who 
had  also  taken  ;t  foreign  wife  (Ezr.  x.  38). 

4.  Altered  from  Ham  in  the  corresponding  list 
in  Ezra  (  Neh.  vii.  15). 

5.  A  Levite,  son  of  Henadad,  who  assisted  at  the 

reparati .1'  the  wall  of  Jerusalem,  under  Nehe- 

tniah,  Neh.  iii.  24  ;  x.  t".  He  is  possibly  also  the 
Binnui  in  xii.  K. 


216 


BIRDS 


BIRDS   (Spy,    -|'1S$    [};•}?;    to  7reT€t>/«  —  to 

upvea  tov  obpavov,  opvis,  bpvidiov ;  volucris,  avis). 
Birds  are  mentioned  as  articles  of  food  in  Dent, 
xiv.  11,  20,  the  intermediate  verses  containing  a 
list  of  unclean  birds  which  were  not  to  be  eaten. 
There  is  a  similar  list  in  Lev.  xi.  13-19.  From 
Job  vi.  6,  Luke  xi.  12,  we  find  that  the  eggs  of 
birds  were  also  eaten.  Quails  and  pigeons  are 
edible  birds  mentioned  in  the  O.  T.  Our  Saviour's 
mention  of  the  hen  gathering  her  chickens  under 
her  wing  implies  that  the  domestic  fowl  was  known 
in  Palestine.  The  art  of  snaring  wild  birds  is  re- 
ferred to  in  Ps.  cxxiv.  7;  Prov.  i.  17,  vii.  23;  Am. 
iii.  5;  Hos.  v.  1,  vii.  12.  The  cage  full  of  birds  in 
Jer.  v.  27,  was  a  trap  in  which  decoy-birds  were 
placed  to  entice  others,  and  furnished  with  a  trap- 
door which  could  be  dropped  by  a  fowler  watching 
at  a  distance.  This  practice  is  mentioned  in  Ecclus. 
xi.  30  (Tre'p5i|  BrjpevT^s  iv  KapTaWcp  ;  comp. 
Aris't.  Hist.  Anim.  ix.  8).  In  Deut.  xxii.  6,  it  is 
commanded  that  an  Israelite  finding  a  bird's-nest  in 
his  path  might  take  the  young  or  the  eggs,  but 
must  let  the  hen-bird  go.  By  this  means  the 
extirpation  of  any  species  was  guarded  against. 
Comp.  Phocyl.  Garm.  80,  seq. : 

M>j  tis  opvi.6as  KaAiijs  oi/Ja  navTas  eAe'cr&o" 

jLLT^Te'pa  2'  eK7rpoAt7roi$,  'iv  e'x??s  7raAi  "H/crSe  veorrovs. 

Birds  were  not  ordinarily  used  as  victims  in  the 
Jewish  sacrifices.  They  were  not  deemed  valuable 
enough  for  that  purpose ;  but  the  substitution  of 
turtle-doves  and  pigeons  was  permitted  to  the  poor, 
and  in  the  sacrifice  for  purification.  The  way  of 
offering  them  is  detailed  in  Lev.  i.  15-17,  and  v.  8  ; 
and  it  is  worthy  of  notice  that  the  practice  of  not 
dividing  them,  which  was  the  case  in  other  victims, 
was  of  high  antiquity  (Gen.  xv.  10). 

The  abundance  of  birds  in  the  East  has  been 
mentioned  by  many  travellers.  In  Curzon's  Mo- 
nasteries of  the  Levant,  and  in  Stanley's  Sinai  and 
Palestine,  this  abundance  is  noticed ;  by  the  latter 
in  connexion  with  his  admirable  illustration  of  the 
parable  of  the  sower  (Matt.  xiii.  4).  (Comp.  Rosen- 
miiller,  Mbrgenl.  v.  59.) 

The  nests  of  birds  were  readily  allowed  by  the 
Orientals  to  remain  in  their  temples  and  sanctuaries, 
as  though  they  had  placed  themselves  under  the  pro- 
tection of  God  (comp.  Herod,  i.  159  ;  Aelian,  V.  If. 
v.  17).  There  is  probably  an  allusion  to  this  in 
Ps.  lxxxiv.  3. 

The  seasons  of  migration  observed  by  birds  are 
noticed  in  Jer.  viii.  7.  Birds  of  song  are  mentioned 
in  Ps.  civ.  12  ;  Eccl.  xii.  4.  Ducks  and  geese  are 
supposed  to  be  meant  by  the  word  D'HB'O  in 
1  K.  iv.  23.  [W.  D.] 

BIR'SHA  (J?Kh2  ;    Bapad ;   Bersa),  king  of 

Gomorrha  at  the  time  of  the  invasion  of  Chedor- 
laomer  (Gen.  xiv.  2). 

BIRTH-DAYS  (to  yeviffia,  Matt.  xiv.  6). 
Properly  to  yev46\ia  is  a  birthday  feast  (and  hence 
in  the  early  writers  the  day  of  a  martyr's  comme- 
moration), but  to  yevetria  seems  to  be  used  in  this 
sense  by  a  Hellenism,  for  in  Herod,  iv.  26,  it  means 
a  day  in  honour  of  the  dead.  It  is  very  probable 
that  in  Matt.  xiv.  6,  the  feast  to  commemorate  He- 
rn, l's  accession  is  intended,  for  we  know  that  such 
leasts  were  common  (especially  in  Herod's  family, 
Joseph.  Ant.  xv.  11,  §3;  Blunt's  Coincidences, 
Append,  vii.),  and  were  called  "  the  day  of  the 
king  "  (JIos.  vii.  5 ).     The  Gemarists  distinguish  ex- 


I 

BISHLAM 

pressly  between  D'OPD  *?Z'  S^Dl^,  7ewe'tna  regni, 
and  the  PIT^H  DV  or  birthday.  (Lightfoot,  Hon 
Hebr.  ad  Matt.  xiv.  6.) 

The  custom  of  observing  birthdays  is  very  an- 
cient (Gen.  xl.  20;  Jer.  xx.  15);  and  in  Job  i. 
4,  &c,  we  read  that  Job's  sons  "  feasted  every  one 
Iris  day."  In  Persia  they  wei  e  celebrated  with  pe- 
culiar honours  and  banquets,  for  the  details  of  which 
see  Herod,  i.  138.  And  in  Egypt  "the  birthdays 
of  the  kings  were  celebrated  with  great  pomp.  They 
were  looked  upon  as  holy :  no  business  was  done 
upon  them,  and  all  classes  indulged  in  the  festivities 
suitable  to  the  occasion.  Every  Egyptian  attached 
much  importance  to  the  day,  and  even  to  the  hour 
of  his  birth"  (Wilkinson,  v.  29u).  Probably  in 
consequence  of  the  ceremonies  usual  in  their  celebra- 
tion the  Jews  regarded  their  observance  as  an  idola- 
trous custom  (Lightfoot,  I.  c).  [F.  W.  F.) 

BIRTHRIGHT     ("li33 ;    to    irponorSKia). 

The  advantages  accruing  to  the  eldest  son  were 
not  definitely  fixed  in  patriarchal  times.  The 
theory  that  he  was  the  priest  of  the  family  rests  on 
no  scriptural  statement,  and  the  Rabbis  appear 
divided  on  the  question  (see  Hottinger's  Note  on 
Goodwin's  Moses  awl  Aaron,  i.  1  ;  Ugol.  iii.  53). 
Great  respect  was  paid  to  him  in  the  household, 
and,  as  the  family  widened  into  a  tribe,  this  grew 
into  a  sustained  authority,  undefined  save  by  cus- 
tom, in  all  matters  of  common  interest.  Tims  the 
"  princes  "  of  the  congregation  had  probably  rights 
of  primogeniture  (Num.  vii.  2,  xxi.  18,  xxv.  14). 
A  "  double  portion  "  of  the  paternal  property  was 
allotted  by  the  Mosaic  law  (Deut.  xxi.  15-17),  nor 
could  the  caprice  of  the  father  deprive  him  of  it. 
This  probably  means  twice  as  much  as  any  other 
son  enjoyed.  Such  was  the  inheritance  of  Joseph, 
his  sons  reckoning  with  his  brethren,  and  becoming 
heads  of  tribes.  This  seems  to  explain  the  request 
of  Elisha  for  a  "double  portion  "  of  Elijah's  spirit 
(2  K.  ii.  9).  Reuben,  through  his  unfilial  conduct, 
was  deprived  of  the  birthright  (Gen.  xlix.  4  ;  1  Chr. 
v.  1).  It  is  likely  that  some  remembrance  of  this 
lost  pre-eminence  stirred  the  Reubenite  leaders  of 
Koran's  rebellion  (Num.  xvi.  1,  2,  xxvi.  5-9). 
Esau's  act,  transferring  his  right  to  Jacob,  was  al- 
lowed valid  (Gen.  xxv.  33).  The  first-bom  of  the 
king  was  his  successor  by  law  (2  Chr.  xxi.  3)  ; 
David,  however,  by  divine  appointment,  excluded 
Adonijah  in  favour  of  Solomon,  which  deviation 
from  rule  was  indicated  by  the  anointing  (Goodwin, 
I.  c.  4,  with  Hottinger's  notes).  The  first-born  of 
a  line  is  often  noted  by  the  early  scriptural  genea- 
logies, e.g.  Gen.  xxii.  21,  xxv.  13;  Num.  xxvi.  5, 
&c.  The  Jews  attached  a  sacred  import  to  the  title 
(see  Schottgen,  Hor.  Hebr.  i.  922)  and  thus  "  first- 
born "  and  "  first  -begotten"  seem  applied  to  the 
Messiah  (Rom.  viii.  29,  Heb.  i.  6).  [H.  H.] 

BIR'ZAVITH  (fnp3,  Keri,  n»P3  ;  Bep- 
daid,  Alex.  Bep^aie  ;  Barsaith),  a  name  occurring  . 
in  the  genealogies  of  Asher  (1  Chr.  vii.  31),  and 
apparently,  from  the  mode  of  its  mention,  the  name 
of  a  place  (comp.  the  similar  expression,  "  father  of 
Bethlehem,"  "father  of  Tekoa,"  &c.  in  chaps,  ii. 
and  iv.).  The  reading  of  the  Keri  may  be  inter- 
preted  "well  of  olives."  No  trace  of  it  is  found 
elsewhere. 

BISHLAM  (0^2  ;  Beselarri),  apparently  an 
officer  or  commissioner  {avvTacrffo^iivos,  1  Esd.  ii. 
16)  of  Artaxerxes  in  Palestine  at  the  time  of  the 


BISHOP 

return  of  Zerubbabel  from  captivity  (Ezr.  iv.  7). 
By  the  LXX.  the  word  is  translated,  ev  elpijpri,  in 
peace ;  see  margin  of  A.  V.,  and  so  also  both  Arabic 
and  Syriae  versions. 

BISHOP  (eTn'cTKOTos).  This  word,  applied 
in  the  N.  T.  to  the  officers  of  the  Church  who 
were  charged  with  certain  functions  of  superintend- 
ence, had  been  in  use  before  as  a  title  of  office. 
The  inspectors  or  commissioners  sent  by  Athens  to 
her  'subject-states  wore  iiricncoTroi  (Aristoph.  Av. 
1022),  and  their  office,  like  that  of  the  Spartan 
Harmosts,  authorised  them  to  interfere  in  all  the 
political  arrangements  of  the  state  to  which  they 
were  sent.  The  title  was  still  current  and  beginning 
to  be  used  by  the  Romans  in  the  later  days  of  the 
republic  (Cic.  ad  Att.  vii.  11).  The  Hellenistic 
.lews  found  it  employed  in  the  LXX.  though  with 
no  very  definite  value,  for  officers  charged  with 
certain  functions  (Num.  iv.  16,  xxxi.  14;  Ps.  cix. 
8 ;  Is.  lx.  17  ;  for  Heb.  PHpS,  or  TIpS).     When 

the  organisation  of  the  Christian  churches  in  Gen- 
tile cities  involved  the  assignment  of  the  work  of 
pastoral  superintendence  to  a  distinct  order  the  title 
fviffKOTros  presented  itself  as  at  once  convenient 
and  familiar,  and  was  therefore  adopted  as  readily 
as  the  word  elder  (Trpecrfivrepos)  had  been  in  the 
mother  church  of  Jerusalem.  That  the  two  titles 
were  originally  equivalent  is  clear-  from  the  follow- 
ing facts. 

1.  iirlcTKOTroi  and  wpecrfivrepoi  are  nowhere 
named  together  as  being  orders  distinct  from  each 
other. 

2.  iTTiffKOTroi  and  Sianovoi  are  named  as  appa- 
rently an  exhaustive  division  of  the  officers  of 
churches  addressed  by  St.  Paul  as  an  apostle  (Phil. 
i.  1;  1  Tim.  iii.  1,  8). 

3.  The  same  persons  are  described  by  both 
names  (Acts  xx.  17,  18;  Tit.  i.  5,  8). 

4.  wpefffivTepot  discharge  functions  which  are 
essentially  episcopal,  i.  c.  involving  pastoral  super- 
intendence (1  Tim.  v.  17;  1  Pet.  v.  1,2).  The 
age  that  followed  that  of  the  Apostles  witnessed  a 
gradual  change  in  the  application  of  the  words,  and 
in  the  Epistles  of  Ignatius,  even  in  their  least  inter- 
polated or  most  mutilated  form,  the  bishop  is  re- 
cognised as  distinct  from,  and  superior  to,  the 
Presbyters  (Ep.  ad  Smyrn.  viii.;  ad  Trail,  ii., 
iii.,  viii. ;  ad  Magn.  vi.).  In  those  of  Clement  of 
Rome,  however,  the  two  words  are  still  dealt  with 
as  interchangeable  (1  Cor.  xlii.,  xliv.,  lvii.).  The 
omission  of  any  mention  of  an  sirlaKoiros  in  addi- 
tion to  the  irptcriivTtpoi  and  SkLkovoi  in  Poly- 
carp's  Epistle  to  the  Philippians  (c.  v.),  and  the 
enumeration  of  "  apostoli,  episcopi,  doctor es,  mi- 
nistri,"  in  the  Shepherd  of  Hernias  (i.  3,  5),  are 
less  decisive,  but  indicate  a  transition  stage  in  the 
history  of  the  word. 

Assuming  as  proved  the  identity  of  the  bishops 
and  elders  of  the  N.  T.  we  have  to  inquire  into — 
1.  The  relation  which  existed  between  the  two 
titles.  2.  The  functions  and  mode  of  appointment 
of  the  men  to  whom  both  titles  were  applied.  3. 
Their  relations  to  the  general  government  and  dis- 
cipline of  the  Church. 

I.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  irpefffivTepoi  had 
the  priority  in  order  of  time.  The  existence  of  a 
body  bearing  that  name  is  implied  in  the  use  of  the 
correlative  ot  vewrepoi.  (comp.  Luke  xii.  26  ;  I  Pet. 
v.  1,5)  in  tin'  narrative  of  Ananias  (Acts  v.  6).  The 
order  itself  is  recognised  in  Acts  .\i.  30,  and  takes 
part  in  the  deliberations  of  the  Church  al  Jerusa- 


BISHOP 


217 


lem  in  x\cts  xv.  It  is  transferred  by  Taid  and  Bar- 
nabas to  the  Gentile  churches  in  their  first  mis- 
sionary journey  (Acts  xiii.  23).  The  earliest  use 
of  iiricTKOirot,  on  the  other  hand,  is  in  the  address 
of  St.  Paul  to  the  elders  at  Miletus  (Acts  xx.  18), 
and  there  it  is  rather  descriptive  of  functions  than 
given  as  a  title.  The  earliest  epistle  in  which  it 
is  formally  used  as  equivalent  to  TrpeafivTepoi  (ex- 
cept ou  the  improbable  hypothesis  that  Timothy 
belongs  to  the  period  following  on  St.  Paul's  de- 
parture from  Ephesus  in  Acts  xx.  1)  is  that  to  the 
Philippians,  as  late  as  the  time  of  his  first  impri- 
sonment at  Pome.  It  was  natural,  indeed,  that 
this  should  be  the  order ;  that  the  word  derived 
from  the  usages  of  the  synagogues  of  Palestine, 
every  one  of  which  had  its  superintending  elders 

(D'OpT  ;  comp.  Luke  vii.  3),  should  precede  that 

borrowed  from  the  constitution  of  a  Greek  state. 
If  the  latter  was  afterwards  felt  to  be  the  more 
adequate,  it  may  have  been  because  there  was  a  life 
in  the  organisation  of  the  Church  higher  than  that 
of  the  synagogues,  and  functions  of  pastoral  super- 
intendence devolving  on  the  elders  of  the  Christian 
congregation  which  were  unknown  to  those  of  the 
other  periods.  It  had  the  merit  of  being  descriptive 
as  well  as  titular;  a  "  nomen  officii"  as  well  as  a 
'*  nomen  dignitatis."  It  could  be  associated,  as  the 
other  coidd  not  be,  with  the  thought  of  the  highest 
pastoral  superintendence — of  Christ  himself  as  the 
Truifj.i}v  Kai  iiricrKOTTOs  (1  Pet.  ii.  25). 

II.  Of  the  order  in  which  the  first  elders  were 
appointed,  as  of  the  occasion  which  led  to  the 
institution  of  the  office,  we  have  no  record.  Argu- 
ing from  the  analogy  of  the  Seven  in  Acts  vi.  5,  6, 
it  would  seem  probable  that  they  were  chosen  by 
the  members  of  the  Church  collectively  (possibly 
to  take  the  place  that  had  been  filled  by  the  Seven, 
comp.  Stanley's  Apost.  Age,  p.  64)  and  then  set  apai  t 
to  their  office  by  the  laying  on  of  the  apostles' 
hands.  In  the  case  of  Timothy  (1  Tim.  iv.  14; 
2  Tim.  i.  6)  the  irpetx^vrtpiov,  probably  the  body 
of  the  elders  at  Lystra,  had  taken  part  with  the 
apostle  in  this  act  of  ordination ;  but  here  it 
remains  doubtful  whether  the  office  to  which 
Timothy  was  appointed  was  that  of  the  Bishop- 
Elder  or  one  derived  from  fhe  special  commission 
with  which  the  two  epistles  addressed  to  him  show 
him  to  have  been  entrusted.  The  connexion  of 
1  Tim.  v.  22  is,  on  the  whole,  against  our  refer- 
ring the  laying  on  of  hands  there  spoken  of  to  the  or- 
dination of  elders  (comp.  Hammond,  in  loc),  and  the 
same  may  be  said  of  Heb.  vi.  2.  The  imposition 
of  hands  was  indeed  the  outward  sign  of  the  com- 
munication of  all  spiritual  ^apfoytoTa,  as  well  as  of 
functions  for  which  xap'tffH-a'ra  were  required,  and 
its  use  for  the  latter  (as  in   1  Tim.  iv.  14  ;   2  Tim. 

i.  6)  was  c lected  with  its  instrumentality  in  the 

bestowal  of  the  former.  The  conditions  which 
were  to  be  observed  in  choosing  these  officers,  as 
stated  in  the  pastoral  epistles,  arc,  blameless  life 
and  reputation  among  those  "  that  are  without  " 
as  well  as  within  the  Church,  fitness  for  the  work 
of  teaching,  the  wide  kindliness  of  temper  which 
shows  itself  in  hospitality,  the  being  "  the  husband 
of  one  wife"  c-  e.  according  to  the  mosl  probable 
interpretation,  not  divorced  and  then  married  to 
another;  but  com  p.  Hammond,  Estius,  Ellicott, 
loc),  showing  powers  of  government  in  his  own 
household  as  well  as  in  self-control,  not  being  a 
recent  and,  therefore,  an  untried  convert.  When  ap- 
pointed, thedutic  s  of  the  bishop-elders  appear  to  have 


218 


BISHOP 


been  as  follows : — 1 .  General  superintendence  over 
the  spiritual  well-being  of  the  flock  (1  Pet.  v.  2). 
According  to  the  aspects  which  this  function  pre- 
sented those  on  whom  it  devolved  were  described 
as  Troifxeves  (Eph.  iv.  11),  Trpoeffrwres  (1  Tim.  v. 
17),  ■KpoCffTaiJ.evoi  (1  Thess.  v.  12).  Its  exercise 
called  for  the  x°-PLfffxa  /cujSepp^crecus  (1  Cor.  xii. 
28).  The  last  two  of  the  above  titles  imply  ob- 
viously a  recognised  rank,  as  well  as  work,  which 
would  show  itself  naturally  in  special  marks  of 
honour  in  the  meetings  of  the  Church.  2.  The 
work  of  teaching,  both  publicly  and  privately 
(1  Thess.  v.  12;  Tit,  i.  9  ;  1  Tim.  v.  17).  Af 
first,  it  appears  from  the  description  of  the  prac- 
tices of  the  Church  in  1  Cor.  xiv.  26,  the  work  of 
oral  teaching,  whatever  form  it  assumed,  was  not 
limited  to  any  body  of  men,  but  was  exercised  ac- 
cording as  each  man  possessed  a  special  xdpiTfia  f°'' 
it.  Even  then,  however,  there  were,  as  the  warn- 
ings of  that  chapter  show,  some  inconveniences 
attendant  on  this  freedom,  and  it  was  a  natural 
remedy  to  select  men  for  the  special  function  of 
teaching  because  they  possessed  the  x^ptc/xa,  and 
then  gradually  to  confine  that  work  to  them.  The 
work  of  preaching  {uripvaaziv)  to  the  heathen  did 
not  belong,  apparently,  to  the  bishop-elders  as  such, 
but  was  the  office  of  the  apostle-evangelist.  Their 
duty  was  to  feed  the  flock,  teaching  publicly  (Tit. 
i.  9),  opposing  errors,  admonishing  privately  (1 
Thess.  v.  12).  3.  The  work  of  visiting  the  sick 
appears  in  Jam.  v.  14,  as  assigned  to  the  elders  of 
the  Church.  There,  indeed,  it  is  connected  with 
the  practice  of  anointing  as  a  means  of  healing, 
but  this  office  of  Christian  sympathy  would  not, 
we  may  believe,  be  confined  to  the  exercise  of  the 
extraordinary  xaPL<rlJ-a'ra  lafidrwv,  and  it  is  pro- 
bably to  this,  and  to  acts  of  a  like  kind,  that  we 
are  to  refer  the  avriKa-fx^dvicrQai  rS>v  aaQtvovvraiv 
of  Acts  six.  34,  and  the  aPTiA-fixf/ets  of  1  Cor.  xii. 
28.  4.  Among  these  acts  of  charity  that  of  receiv- 
ing strangers  occupied  a  conspicuous  place  (1  Tim. 
iii.  2;  Tit.  i.  8).  The  bishop-elder's  house  was  to 
be  the  house  of  the  Christian  who  arrived  in  a 
strange  city  and  found  himself  without  a  friend. 
5.  Of  the  part  taken  by  them  in  the  liturgical 
meetings  of  the  Church  we  have  no  distinct  evi- 
dence. Reasoning  from  the  language  of  1  Cor.  x. 
xii.,  and  from  the  practices  of  the  post-apostolic 
age,  we  may  believe  that  they  would  preside  at 
such  meetings,  that  it  would  belong  to  them  to 
bless  and  to  give  thanks  when  the  Church  met  to 
break  bread. 

The  mode  in  which  these  officers  of  the  Church 
were  supported  or  remunerated  varied  probably  in 
different  cities.  At  Miletus  St.  Paul  exhorts 'the 
elders  of  the  Church  to  follow  his  example  and 
work  for  their  own  livelihood  (Acts  xix.  34).  In 
1  Cor.  ix.  14,  and  Gal.  vi.  8,  he  asserts  the  right 
of  the  ministers  of  the  Church  to  be  supported  by 
it.  In  1  Tim.  v.  17,  he  gives  a  special  application 
of  the  principle  in  the  assignment  of  a  double  allow- 
ance (rifi-fi,  comp.  Hammond,  in  loc.)  to  those  who 
have  been  conspicuous  for  their  activity. 

Collectively  at  Jerusalem,  and  probably  in  other 
churches,  the  body  of  bishop-elders  took  part  in 
deliberations  (Acts  xv.  6-22,  xxi.  18),  addressed 
other  churches  (ibid.  xv.  23),  were  joined  with  the 
apostles  in  the  work  of  ordaining  by  the  laying  on 
of  hands  (2  Tim.  i.  6).  It  lay  in  the  necessities  of 
any  organised  society  that  such  a  body  of  men 
should  be  subject  to  a  power  higher  than  their  own, 
whether  vested  in  one  chosen  by  themselves  or  de- 


BISHOP 

riving  its  authority  from  some  external  source ;  and 
we  find  accordingly  that  it  belonged  to  the  delegate 
of  an  apostle,  and  a  fortiori  to  the  apostle  himself, 
to  receive  accusations  against  them,  to  hear  evi- 
dence, to  admonish  where  there  was  the  hope  of 
amendment,  to  depose  where  this  proved  unavailing 
(1  Tim.  v.  19,  iv.  1 ;  Tit.  iii.  10). 

III.  It  is  clear  from  what  has  been  said  that 
episcopal  functions  in  the  modem  sense  of  the 
words,  as  implying  a  special  superintendence  over 
the  ministers  of  the  Church,  belonged  only  to  the 
apostles  and  those  whom  they  invested  with  their 
authority.  The  name  of  apostle  was  not,  however, 
limited  to  the  twelve.  It  was  claimed  for  St.  Paul 
for  himself  (1  Cor.  ix.  1)  ;  it  is  used  by  him  of 
others  (Pom.  xvi.  7 ;  2  Cor.  viii.  23 ;  Phil, 
ii.  25).  It  is  clear  that  a  process  of  change 
must  have  been  at  work  between  the  date  of  the 
latest  of  the  pastoral  epistles  and  the  letters  of 
Ignatius,  leading  not  so  much  to  an  altered  organi- 
sation as  to  a  modification  of  the  original  termi- 
nology. The  name  of  apostle  is  looked  on  in  the 
latter  as  belonging  to  the  past,  a  title  of  honour 
which  their  successors  could  not  claim.  That  of 
bishop  rises  in  its  significance,  and  takes  the  place 
left  vacant.  The  dangers  by  which  the  Church 
was  threatened  made  the  exercise  of  the  authority 
which  was  thus  transmitted  more  necessary.  The 
permanent  superintendence  of  the  bishop  over  a  given 
district,  as  contrasted  with  the  less  settled  rule  of 
the  travelling  apostle,  would  tend  to  its  develop- 
ment. The  Revelation  of  St.  John  presents  some- 
thing like  an  intermediate  stage  in  this  process. 
The  angels  of  the  seven  churches  are  partly  ad- 
dressed as  their  representatives,  partly  as  individuals 
ruling  them  (Rev.  ii.  2,  iii.  2-4).  The  name  may 
belong  to  the  special  symbolism  of  the  Apocalypse, 
or  have  been  introduced  like  irpeafivTepot  from  the 
organisation  of  the  synagogue,  and  we  have  no 
reason  for  believing  it  ever  to  have  been  in  current 
use  as  part  of  the  terminology  of  the  Church.  But 
the  functions  assigned  to  the  angels  are  those  of  the 
earlier  apostolate,  of  the  later  episcopate.  The 
abuse  of  the  old  title  of  the  highest  office  by  pre- 
tenders, as  in  Rev.  ii.  2,  may  have  led  to  a  reaction 
against  its  being  used  at  all  except  for  those  to 
whom  it  belonged  kot'  e|o%V-  In  this,  or  in 
some  similar  way,  the  constitution  of  the  Church 
assumed  its  later  form ;  the  bishops,  presbyters, 
and  deacons  of  the  Ignatian  Epistles,  took  the  place 
of  the  apostles,  bishops,  elders,  and  deacons,  of  the 
New  Testament  (Stanley,  Sermons  and  Essays 
on  the  Apostolic  Age,  pp.  63-77  ;  Neander's  Pjluni. 
u.  Leit.  i.  p.  248-266 ;  Augusti,  Christl.  Archiiol. 
b.  ii.  c.  6). 

The  later  history  of  the  word  is  only  so  far  re- 
markable as  illustrating  by  its  universal  reception 
in  all  the  western  churches,  and  even  in  those  of 
Syria,  the  influence  of  the  organisation  which 
originated  in  the  cities  of  Greece  or  the  Proconsular 
Asia,  and  the  extent  to  which  Greek  was  the  uni- 
versal medium  of  intercourse  for  the  churches  of  the 
first  and  second  centuries  (Milman,  Latin  Christ. 
b.  I.  c.  i.):  nowhere  do  we  find  any  attempt  at 
substituting  a  Latin  equivalent,  hardly  even  an 
explanation  of  its  meaning.  Augustine  (de  Civ.  J>. 
i.  9)  compares  it  with  "  speculator es,"  "  praepositi;" 
Jerome  (Ep.  VIII.  ad  Evagr.)  with  "  superin- 
tendentes."  The  title  episcopus  itself,  with  its 
companions,  presbyter  and  diaconus,  was  trans- 
mitted by  the  Latin  of  the  Western  Church  to  all 
the    Romance    languages.      The    members   of   the 


BITHIAH 

Gothic  race  received  it,  as  they  received  their 
Christianity,  frofn  the  missionaries  of  the  Latin 
Church.     "  [E.  H.  P.] 

BITHI'AH  (rPlia,  worshipper,  lit.  daughter, 
of  Jehovah  ;  Berdia ;  Bethia),  daughter  of  a  Pha- 
raoh, and  wife  of  Mered,  a  descendant  of  Judah 
(1  Chr.  iv.  18).  The  date  of  Mered  cannot  be 
determined,  for  the  genealogy  in  which  his  name 
occurs  is  indistinct,  some  portion  of  it  having  ap- 
parently been  lost.  It  is  probable,  however,  that 
he  should  be  referred  to  the  time  before  the  Exodus, 
or  to  a  period  not  much  later.  Pharaoh  in  this 
place  might  be  conjectured  not  to  be  the  Egyptian 
regal  title,  but  to  be  or  represent  a  Hebrew  name ; 
but  the  name  Bithiah  probably  implies  conversion, 
and  the  other  wife  of  Mered  seems  to  be  called 
"  the  Jewess."  Unless  we  suppose  a  transposition 
in  the  text,  or  the  loss  of  some  of  the  names  of  the 
children  of  Mered's  wives,  we  must  consider  the 
name  of  Bithiah  understood  before  "  she  bare 
Miriam"  (ver.  17),  and  the  latter  part  of  ver.  18 
and  ver.  19  to  be  recapitulatory ;  but  the  LXX. 
does  not  admit  any  except  the  second  of  these  con- 
jectures. The  Scriptures,  as  well  as  the  Egyptian 
monuments,  show  that  the  Pharaohs  intermarried 
with  foreigners  ;•  but  such  alliances  seem  to  have 
been  contracted  with  royal  families  alone.  It  may 
be  supposed  that  Bithiah  was  taken  captive.  There 
is,  however,  no  ground  for  considering  her  to  have 
been  a  concubine:  on  the  contrary,  she  is  shown 
to  be  a  wife,  from  her  taking  precedence  of  one 
specially  designated  as  such.  [R.  S.  P.] 

BITH'RON  (more  accurately  "  the  Bithron," 
}1~)ri3n,  the  broken  or  divided  place,  from  IJIS 
to  cut  up,  Ges. ;  oXtjv  tt)v  irapaTfivovaav  ;  omnis 
Bethhoroii),  a  place — from  the  form  of  the  ex- 
pression, "  all  the  Bithron,"  doubtless  a  district — 
in  the  Arabah  or  Jordan  valley,  on  the  east  side  of 
the  river  (2  Sam.  ii.  29).  The  spot  at  which 
Aimer's  party  crossed  the  Jordan  not  being  specified, 
we  cannot  fix  the  position  of  the  Bithron,  which 
lay  between  that  ford  and  Mahanaim.  As  far  as  we 
know  the  whole  of  the  country  in  the  Ghor  on  the 
other  side  of  the  river  is  of  the  broken  and  inter- 
sected character  indicated  by  the  derivation  of  the 
name.  If  the  renderings  of  the  Vulg.  and  Aquila  are 
correct,  they  must  of  course  intend  another  Beth- 
horon  than  the  well  known  one.  Bethharam,  the 
conjecture  of  Thenius,  is  also  not  probable.      [G.] 

BITHYN'IA  (BiQwia).  This  province  of  Asia 
Minor,  though  illustrious  in  the  earlier  parts  of 
post-apostolic  history,  through  Pliny's  letters  and 
the  Council  of  Nicaea,  has  little  connexion  with 
the  history  of  the  Apostles  themselves.  It  is  only 
mentioned  in  Acts  xvi.  7,  and  in  1  Pet.  i.  1.  From 
the  former  of  these  passages  it  appears  that  St. 
Paul,  when  on  his  progress  from  Iconium  to  Troas, 
in  the  course  of  his  second  missionary  journey, 
made  an  attempt  to  enter  Bithynia,  but  was  pre- 
vented, cither  by  providential  hindrances  or  by 
direct  Divine  intimations.  From  the  latter  it  is 
evident  that,  when  St.  Peter  wrote  his  first  Epistle, 
there  were  Christians  (probably  of  Jewish  or 
proselyte  origin)  in  some  of  the  towns  of  this  pro- 
vince, as  well  as  in  "  Pontus,  Galatia,  Cappadocia 
and  Asia." 

Bithynia,  considered  as  a  Roman  province,  was 
on  the  west  contiguous  to  Asia.  On  the  east  its 
limits  underwent  great  modifications.  The  pro;  ince 
was  originally  inherited    by  the   Roman  republic 


BLAINS 


219' 


(B.C.  74)  as  a  legacy  from  Nicomedes  III.,  the  last 
of  an  independent  line  of  monarchs,  one  of  whom 
had  invited  into  Asia  Minor  those  Gauls,  who  gave 
the  name  of  Galatia  to  the  central  district  of  the 
peninsula.  On  the  death  of  Mithridates,  king  of 
Pontus,  B.C.  63,  the  western  part  of  the  Pontic 
kingdom  was  added  to  the  province  of  Bithynia, 
which  again  received  further  accessions  on  this  side 
under  Augustus  a.d.  7.  Thus  the  province  is 
sometimes  called  "  Pontus  and  Bithynia"  in  in- 
scriptions ;  and  the  language  of  Pliny's  letters  is 
similar.  The  province  of  Pontus  was  not  con- 
stituted till  the  reign  of  Nero  [Pontus].  It  is 
observable  that  in  Acts  ii.  9  Pontus  is  in  the 
enumeration  and  not  Bithynia,  and  that  in  1  Pet.  i.  1 
both  are  mentioned.  See  Marquardt's  continuation 
of  Becker's  Rom.  Altc-rthumer,  III.  i.  p.  146.  For 
a  description  of  the  country,  which  is  mountainous, 
well-wooded  and  fertile,  Hamilton's  Researches  in 
A.M.  may  be  consulted,  also  a  paper  by  Ainsworth  in 
the  Roy.  Geog.  Journal,  vol.  fat.  The  course  of  the 
river  Rhyndacus  is  a  marked  feature  on  the  western 
frontier  of  Bithynia,  and  the  snowy  range  of  the 
Mysian  Olympus  on  the  south-west.        [J.  S.  H.] 

BITTERN  ("liSp,  Kipod),  an  animal  men- 
tioned in  connexion  with  the  desolations  of  Baby- 
lon, Idumaea,  and  Nineveh  (Is.  xiv.  23,  xxxiv. 
11,  and  Zeph.  ii.  14).  In  all  these  passages 
the  LXX.  have  exivos,  the  hedgehog  or  por- 
cupine, a  translation  which  Gesenius  defends  on 
etymological  grounds,  deriving  "IISp  from  "IQp 
{contractus  est,  "  quippe  qui  prae  metu  convol- 
vat  et  contrahat  se  ").  The  context  of  the  passs§es 
in  which  it  occurs  seems  to  require  an  aquatic  bird 
rather  than  a  quadruped,  and  this  is  confirmed  by 
the  Arabic  version,  which  has  Al-houbara,  the 
name  of  a  bird  which,  according  to  Shaw,  is  of  the 
bigness  of  a  capon,  but  of  a  longer  habit  of  body. 
The  bittern  answers  these  conditions,  and  is  a  soli- 
tary bird,  loving  marshy  ground.  Its  scientific 
name  is  Botaurus  stellaris,  and  it  belongs  to  the 
Gruidae  or  cranes.  [W.  D.] 

BIZJOTH'JAH  (nWU;      LXX.    omits; 

Baziothia),  a  town  in  the  south  of  Judah  named 
with  Beersheba  and  Baalah  (Josh.  xv.  28).  No 
mention  or  identification  of  it  is  found  else- 
where. [G]. 

BIZ'THA  (Xnt3  ;  Ba&v,  Alex.  BaCea  ; 
Bazatha),  the  second  of  the  seven  eunuchs  of  king 
Ahasuerus'  harem  (Est.  i.  10).  The  .name  is  Per- 
sian, possibly  samaJ'  ocstc,  a  word  referring  to  his 
condition  as  a  eunuch  (Ges.  Thes.  197). 

BLATNS  (nV?V2X ;  <\>\vKTiZts,  <pK\>Kraivai, 
LXX. ;  Ex.  ix.  9,  ava^tovcrai  tv  re  rots  av9pa>irois 
Kal  iv  rots  rerpanoffL ;  also  j'nK',  pustula  ardens), 
violent  ulcerous  inflammations  (from  J?-13,  to  boil 
up).  It  was  the  sixth  plague  of  Egypt,  and  hence 
is  called  in  Deut.  xxviii.  27,  35,  "the  botch  of 
Egypt"  ( Ony?  pnC5;  cf.  Job  ii.  7,  JTI  |W).    It 

seems  to*have  been  the<I/o>pa  aypia  or  black  leprosy, 
:\  fearful  kind  of  elephantiasis  (eomp.  Plin.  xxvi.  5). 
[t  musl  nave  come  with  dreadful  intensity  on  the 
in. in  i  ins  Vi  hose  art  it  baffled,  and  whose  scrupulous 
cleanliness  (Herod,  ii.  .'!•>)  it  rendered  nugatory:  so 
that  they  were  unable  to  stand  in  the  presence  of 
(loses  because  of  the  boils, 


220 


BLASPHEMY 


Other  names  for  purulent  and  leprous  eruptions  are 
nsb  rnriB  (Morphea  alba),  nnSD  (Morphea 
nigra),  and  the  more  harmless  scab  JinQDD,  Lev. 
xiii.  passim  (Jahn,  Arch.  Bibl.  §189).     [F.  W.  F.] 

BLASPHEMY  (pxaacpv/j-la),  in  its  techni- 
cal English  sense,  signifies  the  speaking  evil  of 
God  (!"P  Dt?  2p3),  and  in  this  sense  it  is  found 
Ps.  lxxiv.  18;  Is.  lit  5;  Rom.  ii.  24,  &c.  But  ac- 
cording  to  its  derivation  (jBAcJirrw  (pyp.^  quasi 
I3\atyi<p.)  it  may  mean  any  species  of  calumny  and 
abuse(or  even  an  unlucky  word,  Eurip.  Ion.  1187): 
see  1  K.  xxi.  10  ;  Acts  xviii.  6  ;  Jude  9,  &c.  Hence 
in  the  LXX.  it  is  used  to  render  ?]"]2,  Job  ii.  5  ;  tfi}} 
2  K.  xix.  6  ;  nVD-lil,  2  K.  xix.  4,  and  ivh  Hos.  vii. 
16,  so  that  it  means  "  reproach,"  *  derision,"  &c. : 
and  it  has  even  a  wider  use,  as  2  Sam.  xii.  14,  where 
it  means  "  to  despise  Judaism,"  and  1  Mace.  ii.  6, 
where  ^Kaff(prijxia  =  idolatry.  In  Sir.  iii.  18  we 
have  ws  j8Aacr(J)rj/xos  6  iyKaraMiriiv  irarepa, 
where  it  is  equivalent  to  KaTvpa/xiuos  (Schleusner, 
Thesaur.  s.  v.). 

Blasphemy  was  punished  with  stoning,  which 
was  inflicted  on  the  son  of  Shelomith  (Lev.  xxiv. 
11).  On  this  charge  both  our  Lord  and  St.  Stephen 
were  condemned  to  death  by  the  Jews.  From  Lev. 
xxiv.  16,  wrongly  understood,  arose  the  singular  su- 
perstition about  never  even  pronouncing  the  name 
of  Jehovah.  Ex.  xxii.  28,  "Thou  shalt  not  revile 
the  gods,  nor  curse  the  ruler  of  thy  people,"  does 
not  refer  to  blasphemy  in  the  strict  sense,  since 
"  elohim "  is  there  used  (as  elsewhere)  of  magis- 
trates, &c. 

The  Jews,  misapplying  Ex.  xxiii.  13,  "Make  no 
mention  of  the  name  of  other  gods,''  seemed  to  think 
themselves  bound  to  give  nicknames  to  the  heathen 
deities ;  hence  their  use  of  Bosheth  for  Baal,  Bethaven 
for  Bethel,  Beelzebul  for  Beelzebub,  Hos.  iv.  5,  &c. 
It  is  not  strange  that  this  "  contumelia  numinum" 
(Plin.  xiii.  9),  joined  to  their  zealous  prose- 
lytism,  made  them  so  deeply  unpopular  among  the 
nations  of  antiquity  (Winer,  s.v.  Gotteslasterung). 
When  a  person  heard  blasphemy  he  laid  his  hand 
on  the  head  of  the  offender,  to  symbolize  his  sole 
responsibility  for  the  guilt,  and  rising  on  his  feet, 
tore  his  robe,  which  might  never  again  be  mended. 
(On  the  mystical  reasons  for  these  observances,  see 
Lightfoot,  Ilor.  Hebr.  Matt.  xxvi.  65.) 

It  only  remains  to  speak  of  "  the  blasphemy 
against  the  Holy  Ghost,"  which  has  been  so  fruitful 
a  theme  for  speculation  aud  controversy  (Matt.  xii. 
32  ;  Mark  iii.  28).  It  consisted  in  attributing  to 
the  power  of  Satan  those  unquestionable  miracles, 
which  Jesus  performed  by  "  the  finger  of  God,"  and 
the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  nor  have  we  any  safe 
ground  for  extending  it  to  include  all  sorts  of  willing 
(as  distinguished  from  wilful)  offences,  besides  this 
one  limited  and  special  sin.  The  often  misunder- 
stood expression  "it  shall  not  be  forgiven  him, 
neither  in  this  world,  &c,"  is  a  direct  application 
of  a  Jewish  phrase  in  allusion  to  a  Jewish  error,  and 
will  not  bear  the  inferences  so  often  extorted  from  it. 
According  to  the  Jewish  school  notions,  "  a  quo 
blasphematur  nomen  Dei,  ei  non  valet  po'enitentia 
ad  suspendendum  judicium,  nee  dies  expiationis  ad 
expiandum,  nee  plagae  ad  adstergendum,  sed  omnes 
suspendunt  judicium,  et  mors  abstergit."  In  refu- 
tation of  this  tradition  our  Lord  used  the  phrase  to 
imply  that  "  blasphemy  against  the  Holy  Ghost 
shall  not  be  forgiven;   neither  before  death,  nor,  as 


BLOOD 

you  vainly  dream,  by  means  of  death  "  (Lightfoot, 
Hor.  Hebr.  ad  locum).  As  there  are  no  tenable 
grounds  for  identifying  this  blasphemy  with  "  the 
sin  unto  death,"  1  John  v.  16,  we  shall  not  here 
enter  into  the  very  difficult  inquiries  to  which  that 
expression  leads.  [F.  W.  F.] 

BLAS'TUS  (BAa<rros),the  chamberlain  (6  iirl 
rov  K01TWV03)  of  Herod  Agrippa  I.,  mentioned 
Acts  xii.  20,  as  having  been  made  by  the  people  of 
Tyre  and  Sidon  a  mediator  between  them  and  the 
king's  anger.  [H.  A.] 

BLINDING.     [Punishments.] 

BLINDNESS   (jVtiJfr,   rQW,   from   the   root 

"V"iy,  to  bore)  is  extremely  common  in  the  East  from 
many  causes  ;  e.  g.  the  quantities  of  dust  and  sand 
pulverised  by  the  sun's  intense  heat ;  the  perpetual 
glare  of  light ;  the  contrast  of  the  heat  with  the 
cold  sea-air  on  the  coast  where  blindness  is  spe- 
cially prevalent ;  the  dews  at  night  while  they  sleep 
on  the  roofs  ;  small  pox,  old  age,  &c. ;  and  perhaps 
more  than  all  the  Mahommedan  fatalism,  which 
leads  to  a  neglect  of  the  proper  remedies  in  time. 
One  traveller  mentions  4000  blind  men  in  Cairo, 
and  Volney  reckons  that  1  in  every  5  were  blind, 
besides  others  with  sore  eyes  (i.  86).  Ludd,  the 
ancient  Lydda,  and  Bamleh,  enjoy  a  fearful  noto- 
riety for  the  number  of  blind  persons  they  contain. 
The  common  saying  is  that  in  Ludd  every  man  is 
either  blind  or  has  but  one  eye.  Jaffa  is  said  to 
contain  500  blind  out  of  a  population  of  5000  at 
most.  There  is  an  asylum  for  the  blind  in  Cairo 
(which  at  present  contains  300),  and  their  conduct 
is  often  turbulent  and  fanatic  (Lane,  i.  39,  292  ; 
Trench,  On  the  Miracles ;  Matt.  ix.  27,  &c).  Blind 
beggars  figure  repeatedly  in  the  N.  T.  (Matt.  xii. 
22),  and  "  opening  the  eyes  of  the  blind''  is  men- 
tioned in  prophecy  as  a  peculiar  attribute  of  the 
Messiah  (Is.  xxix.  18,  &c).  The  Jews  were  spe- 
cially charged  to  treat  the  blind  with  compassion 
and  care  (Lev.  xix.  4 ;  Deut.  xxvii.  18). 

Penal  and  miraculous  blindness  are  several  times 
mentioned  in  the  Bible  (Gen.  xix.  11,  aopacria, 
LXX.;  2  K.  vi.  18-22;  Acts  ix.  9).  In  the  last 
passage  some  have  attempted  (on  the  ground  of  St. 
Luke's  profession  as  a  physician)  to  attach  a  tech- 
nical meaning  to  axAi/s  and  <tk6tos  . ( Jahn,  Arch. 
Bibl.  §201),  viz.  a  spot  or  "  thin  tunicle  over  the 
cornea,"  which  vanishes  naturally  after  a  time :  for 
which  fact  Winer  (s.  v.  Blindheit)  quotes  Hippocr. 
(Praedict.  ii.  215)  &xAve's  .  .  .  iKXealvovrai  ko.\ 
atyavi^ovrai  t)v  llii  Tpci>fj.d  n  imyevwrai  iv  tovtw 
tg3  xwp'lV-  But  this  does  not  remove  the  miracu- 
lous character  of  the  infliction.  In  the  same  way 
analogies  are  quoted  for  the  use  of  saliva  (Matt, 
viii.  23,  &c.)  and  of  fishgall  in  the  case  of  the 
XevKoifia  of  Tobias  ;  but,  whatever  may  be  thought 
of  the  latter  instance,  it  is  very  obvious  that  in  the 
former  the  saliva  was  no  more  instrumental  in  the 
cure  than  the  touch  alone  would  have  been  (Trench 
on  the  Miracles,  ad  loc). 

Blindness  wilfully  inflicted  for  political  or  other 
purposes  was  common  in  the  East,  and  is  alluded  to  in 
Scripture  (1  Sam.  xi.  2  ;  Jer.  xxii.  12).   [F.  W.  F.] 

BLOOD  (CO.  To  blood  is  ascribed  in  Scrip- 
ture the  mysterious  sacredness  which  belongs  to  life, 
and  God  reserves  it  to  Himself  when  allowing  man 
the  dominion  over  and  the  use  of  the  lower  animals 
for  food,  &c.  (as  regards,  however,  the  eating  of 
blood,   see   Food).      Thus    reserved,    it    acquires 


BLOOD,  ISSUE  OF 

a  double  power;  1.  that  of  sacrificial  atonement,  in 
which  it  had  a  wide  recognition  in  the  heathen 
world;  and  2.  that  of  becoming  a  curse,  when 
wantonly  shed,  e.  g.  even  that  of  beast  or  fowl  by 
tli«'  huntsman,  unless  duly  expiated,  e.g.  by  burial 
(Gen.  ix.  4  ;  Lev.  vii.  26,  xvii.  11-13).  As  regards 
1.  the  blood  of  sacrifices  was  caught  by  the  Jewish 
priest  from  the  neck  of  the  victim  in  a  bason,  then 
sprinkled  seven  times  (in  case  of  birds  at  once 
squeezed  out  on  the  altar,  i.  e .  on  its  horns,  its  base, 
or  its  four  corners,  or  on  its  side  above  or  below  a 
line  running  round  it,  or  on  the  mercy-seat,  accord- 
ing to  the  quality  and  purpose  of  the  offering  ;  but 
that  of  the  passover  on  the  lintel  and  door-posts, 
Exod.  xii. ;  Lev.  iv.  5-7,  xvi.  14-19;  Ugolini, 
Tlies.  vol.  x.  and  sdii.).  There  was  a  drain  from 
the  temple  into  the  brook  Cedron  to  carry  off  the 
blood  (Maimon.  apud  Cramer  de  Ard  Exter. 
Ugolini,  viii.).  In  regard  to  2.  it  sufficed  to  pour 
the  animal's  blood  on  the  earth,  or  to  bury  it,  as  a 
solemn  rendering  of  the  life  to  God  ;  in  case  of 
human  bloodshed  a  mysterious  connexion  is  observ- 
able between  the  curse  of  blood  and  the  earth  or 
land  on  which  it  is  shed,  which  becomes  polluted  by 
it ;  and  the  proper  expiation  is  the  blood  of  the 
shedder,  which  every  one  had  thus  an  interest  in 
seeking,  and  was  bound  to  seek  (Gen.  iv.  10,  ix. 
4-6  ;  Num.  xxxv.  33  ;  Ps.  cvi.  38  ;  see  Blood, 
Avenger  of).  In  the  case  of  a  dead  body  found, 
and  the  death  not  accounted  for,  the  guilt  of  blood 
attached  to  the  nearest  city,  to  be  ascertained  by 
measurement,  until  freed  by  prescribed  rites  of  expi- 
ation (Deut.  xxi.  1-9).  The  guilt  of  murder  is 
one  for  which  "  satisfaction"  was  forbidden  (Num. 
xxxv.  31).  [H.  H.] 

BLOOD,  ISSUE  OF  (tft  2-1T ;  IT,  Rabbin. ; 
flnxu  laborans).  The  term  is  in  Scripture  ap- 
plied only  to  the  case  of  women  under  menstru- 
ation or  the  fluxus  uteri  (Lev.  xv.  19-30  ;  Matt.  ix. 
20,  yvv))  alfioppoovaa  •  Mark  v.  25  and  Luke  viii. 
43,  ovaa  iv  pixrei  uifiaros).  The  latter  caused  a 
permanent  legal  nncleanness,  the  former  a  tempo- 
rary one,  mostly  for  seven  days ;  after  which  she 
was  to  be  purified  by  the  customary  offering.  The 
"  bloody  flux "  (Svffeurepia)  in  Acts  xxviii.  8, 
where  the  patient  is  of  the  male  sex,  is,  probably,  a 
medically  correct  term  (see  Bartholini  de  Morbis 
Biblicis,  17).  [H.  H.] 

BLOOD,  REVENGER  OF  (J>K3 ;    Goel).\ 

It  was,  and  even  still  is,  a  common  practice  among 
nations  of  patriarchal  habits,  that  the  nearest  of  kin 
should,  as  a  matter  of  duty,  avenge  the  death  of  a 
murdered  relative.  The  early  impressions  and  practice 
on  this  subject  may  be  gathered  from  writings  of  a 
different  though  very  early  age  and  of  different  coun- 
tries (Gen.  xxxiv.  30  ;  Horn.  II.  xxiii.  84,  88,  xxiv. 
480,  482  ;  Od.  xv.  270,  276;  Miiller  on  Aeschyl. 
/.'mn.  c  ii.  A.  &  P.).  Compensation  for  murder 
is  allowed  by  the  Koran,  and  he  who  transgresses 
after  this  by  killing  the  murderer  shall  sutler  a 
grievous  punishment  (Sale,  Koran,  ii.  p.  _'  1 ,  and 
xvii.  p.  230).  Among  the  Bedouins,  and  other 
Arab  tribes,  should  the  offer  of  blood-money  he  re- 
fuse!, the  'Thai'.'  or  law  of  blood,  comes  into  ope- 
ration, and  any  person  within  the  fifth  de 
blood  from  the  homicide  may  be  legally  killed  by 
any  one  within  the  same  degree  of  consanguinity  to 
the  victim.  Frequently  the  homicide  will  wander 
from  tent  to  tent  over  the  Desert,  or  even  rove 
through  tin' towns  and  villages  on  its  borders  with 


BLOOD,  REVENGER  OF 


221 


a  chain  round  his  neck  and  in  rags  begging  contri- 
butions from  the  charitable  to  pay  the  apportioned 
blood-money.  Three  days  and  four  hours  are  al- 
lowed to  the  persons  included  within  the  '  Thar,' 
for  escape.  The  right  to  blood-revenge  is  never 
lost,  except  as  annulled  by  compensation :  it  de- 
scends to  the  latest  generation.  Similar  customs 
with  local  distinctions  are  found  in  Persia,  Abyssi- 
nia, among  the  Druses  and  Circassians.  (Niebuhr. 
Descr.  de  VArabie,  pp.  28,  30,  Voyage,  ii.  p. 
350  ;  Burckhardt,  Notes  on  the  Bedouins,  pp.  66, 
85,  Travels  in  Arabia,  i.  p.  409,  ii.  330,  Syria, 
pp.  540,  113,  643  ;  Layard,  Nin.  $  Bab.  pp.  305- 
307;  Chardin,  Voyages,  vol.  vi.  pp.  107-112.) 
Money-compensations  for  homicide  are  appointed  by 
the  Hindu  law  (Sir  W.  Jones,  vol.  iii.  chap,  vii.), 
and  Tacitus  remarks  that  among  the  German  nations 
"  luitur  homicidium  certo  armentorum  ac  pecorum 
numero"  (Germ.  21).  By  the  Anglo-Saxon  law 
also  money-compensation  for  homicide,  wer-gild,  was 
sanctioned  on  a  scale  proportioned  to  the  rank  of  the 
murdered  person  (Lappenberg,  ii.  336;  Lingard,  i. 
411,414). 

The  spirit  of  all  legislation  on  the  subject  has 
probably  been  to  restrain  the  licence  of  punish- 
ment assumed  by  relatives,  and  to  limit  the  duration 
offends.  The  law  of  Moses  was  very  precise  in  its 
directions  on  the  subject  of  Retaliation. 

1.  The  wilful  murderer  was  to  be  put  to  death 
without  permission  of  compensation.  The  nearest 
relative    of  the   deceased   became    the    authorized 

avenger  of  blood  (7&0,  the  redeemer,  or  avenger, 
as  next  of  kin,  Gesen.  s.  v.  p.  254,  who  rejects 
the  opinion  of  Michaelis,  giving  it  the  sig.  of  "  pol- 
luted," i.  c.  till  the  murder  was  avenged  (6  ayxi<r~ 
revttiv,  LXX.,  propinquus  occisi,  Vulg.,  Num.  xxxv. 
19),  and  was  bound  to  execute  retaliation  himself 
if  it  lay  in  his  power.  The  king,  however,  in  later 
times  appears  to  have  had  the  power  of  restraining 
this  licence.  The  shedder  of  blood  was  thus  re- 
garded as  impious  and  polluted  (Num.  xxxv.  16-31  ; 
Deut.  xix.  11 ;  2  Sam.  xiv.  7,  11,  xvi.  8,  and  iii.  29, 
with  1  K.  ii.  31,  33  ;   1  Chr.  xxiv.  22-25). 

2.  The  law  of  retaliation  was  not  to  extend  1  e- 
yond  the  immediate  offender  (Deut.  xxiv.  16  ;  2  K. 
xiv.  6 ;  2  Chr.  xxv.  4 ;  Jer.  xxxi.  29-30 ;  Ezek. 
xviii.  20  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  8,  §39). 

3.  The  involuntary  shedder  of  blood  was  per- 
mitted to  take  flight  to  one  of  six  Levitical  cities, 
specially  appointed  out  of  the  48  as  cities  of  refuge, 
three  on  each  side  of  the  Jordan  (Num.  xxxv.  22, 
23  ;  Deut.  xix.  4-6.  The  cities  were  Kedesh,  in 
Mount  Naphtali ;  Shechem,  in  Mount  Ephraim  ; 
Hebron,  in  the  hill-country  of  Judah.  On  the  E. 
side  of  Jordan,  Bezer,  in  Reuben;  Ramoth,  in  Gad  ; 
Golan,  in  Manasseh  (Josh.xx.  7,  8).  The  elders  cf 
the  city  of  refuge  were  to  hear  his  case  and  protect 
him  till  he  could  lie  tried  before  the  authorities  .of 
his  own  city,  if  the  act  were  then  decided  to  have 
been  involuntary,  he  was  taken  back  to  the  city  of 
refuge,  round  which  an  area  with  a  radius  of  2000 
(3000,  Patrick)  cubits  was  assigned  as  the  limit  of 
protection,  and  was  to  remain  there  in  safety  till 
the  death  of  the  high-priest  for  the  time  being.  Be- 
yond the  limit  of  the  city  of  refuge  the  revenger 
might  slay  him,  but  alter  the  high-priest's  death  lie 
might  iet urn  to  his  home  with  impunity  (Num.  xxxv. 
25,  28  ;   Josh.  xx.  4,  6).     The  roads  to  the  cities 

tO   lie   kepi    open    (  I  lent.   Xl'x.  3). 

To  these  particulars  the  Talmudists  add,  among 
others  of  an  absurd  kind,   the    following:    at  the 


222 


BOANERGES 


cross-roads  posts  were  erected  bearing  the  word 
u?pD,  refuge,  to  direct  the  fugitive.  All  facilities 
of  water  and  situation  were  provided  in  the  cities : 
no  implements  of  war  or  chase  were  allowed  there. 
The  mothers  of  high-priests  used  to  send  presents  to 
the  detained  persons  to  prevent  their  wishing  for 
the  high-priest's  death.  If  the  fugitive  died  before 
the  high-priest,  his  bones  were  sent  home  after  the 
high-priest's  death  (P.  Fagius  in  Targ.  Onk.  Ap. 
Rittershus.  de  Jure  Asyli,  Crit.  Sacr.  viii.  p.  159  ; 
Lightfoot,  Cent.  Chorogr.  c.  50,  Op.  ii.  p.  208). 

4.  If  a  person  were  found  dead,  the  elders  of  the 
nearest  city  were  to  meet  in  a  rough  valley  un- 
touched by  the  plough,  and  washing  their  hands 
over  a,  beheaded  heifer,  protest  their  innocence  of  the 
deed,  and  deprecate  the  anger  of  the  Almighty  (Deut. 
xxi.  1-9).  [H.  W.  P.] 

BOANER'GES  (Boavepyts),  a  name  signify- 
ing viol  jSpovrris,  "  sons  of  thunder,"  given  by 
our  Lord  to  the  two  sons  of  Zebedee,  James  and 
John:  It  is  the  Aramaic  pronunciation  (according 
to  which  Scheva  is  sounded  as  oa)  of  L^JT  "03. 

The  latter  word  in  Hebrew  signifies  a  tumult  or 
uproar  (Ps.  ii.  1),  but  in  Arabic  and  Syriac  thunder. 
Probably  the  name  had  respect  to  the  fieryzeal  of  the 
brothers,  signs  of  which  we  may  see  in  Luke  ix.  54  ; 
Mark  ix.  38;  comp.  Matt.  xx.*20  if.  [H.  A.] 

BOAR  ("VTn,  Chazir),  a  pachydermatous 
animal,  mentioned  only  by  this  name  in  Ps.  lxxx. 
14,  but  in  several  other  passages  where  the  do- 
mesticated animal  is  meant  the  A.  V.  has  swine 
(Lev.  xi.  7  ;  Deut.  xiv.  8  ;  Prov.  xi.  22  ;  Is.  lxv. 
4,  lxvi.  3).  The  hour  is  an  animal  which  com- 
mits great  ravages  upon  vineyards,  and  it  is  in 
this  connexion  that  he  is  mentioned  by  the  Psalmist. 
Pococke  observed  very  large  herds  of  wild  swine 
by  the  Jordan  where  it  flows  into  the  sea  of 
Tiberias,  and  among  the  reeds  by  the  shore  of  that 
sea.  This  habit  of  lurking  in  reeds  was  known 
to  the  Assyrians,  and  sculptured  on  their  monu- 
ments (see  Layard,  Nineveh  and  Babylon,  p.  109). 
"VTn  is  from  an  unused  root  "lTn  (circumivit,  volvit, 
quod  se  volutant  in  Into  porci).  The  LXX.  render 
it  ffvs  or  5s,  but  in  the  N.  T.  x°'P0S  >s  usei^  wr 
swine.  [W.  D.] 

BO'AZ  (Ty'3,  flectness ;  BoSC;  Booz).  1.  A 
wealthy  Bethlehemite,  kinsman  to  Elimelech,  the 
husband  of  Naomi.  Finding  that  the  kinsman  of 
Ruth,  who  stood  in  a  still  nearer  relation  than  him- 
self, was  unwilling  to  perform  the  office  of  ?HS,  he 
had  those  obligations  publicly  transferred  with  the 
usual  ceremonies  to  his  own  discharge ;  and  hence 
it  became  his  duty  by  the  "  levirate  law  "  to  marry 
Ruth  (although  it  is  hinted,  Ruth  iii.  10,  that  he 
was  much  her  senior,  and  indeed  this  fact  is  evident 
whatever  system  of  chronology  we  adopt),  and  to 
redeem  the  estates  of  her  deceased  husband  Mahlon 
(iv.  1  ff. ;  Jahn,  Arch.  Bihl.  §157).  He  gladly 
undertook  these  responsibilities,  and  their  happy 
union  was  blessed  by  the  birth  of  Obed,  from  whom 
in  a  direct  line  our  Lord  was  descended.  No  ob- 
jection seems  to  have  arisen  on  the  score  of  Ruth's 
Moabitish  birth ;  a  fact  which  has  some  bearing 
on  the  date  of  the  narrative  (cf.  Ezr.  ix.  1  ff.). 
[Bethlehem.] 

Boaz  is  mentioned  in  the  genealogy  (Matt.  i.  5), 
but  there  is  great  difficulty  in  assigning  his  date. 
The  genealogy  in  Ruth  (iv.  18-22)  only  allows  10 


BOOTY 

generations  for  850  years,  and  only  4  for  the  450 
years  between  Salmon  and  David,  if  (as  is  almost 
certain  from  St.  Matt,  and  from  Jewish  tradition) 
the  Rahab  mentioned  is  h'ahab  the  harlot.  If  Boaz 
be  identical  with  the  judge  Ibzan  [Ibzan],  as  is 
stated  with  some  shadow  of  probability  by  the  Je- 
rusalem Talmud  and  various  Rabbis,  several  gene- 
rations must  be  inserted.  Dr.  Kennicott,  from  the 
difference  in  form  between  Salmah  and  Salmon 
(Ruth  v.  20,  21),  supposes  that  by  mistake  two  dif- 
ferent men  were  identified  (Dissert,  i.  543)  ;  but  we 
want  at  leasts/wee  generations,  and  this  supposition 
gives  us  only  one.  Mill  quotes  from  Nicolas  Sy- 
ranus  the  theory,  "  dicunt  majores  nostri,  et  bene 
quod  videtur,  quod  tres  fuerint  Booz  sibi  succe- 
dentes ;  in  Mt.  i.  isti  tres  sub  uno  nomine  com- 
prehenduntur."  Even  if  we  shorten  the  period  of 
the  Judges  to  240  years,,  we  must  suppose  that 
Boaz  was  the  youngest  son  of  Salmon,  and  that  he 
did  not  many  till  the  age  of  65  (Dr.  Mill,  On  the 
Genealogies ;  Lord  A.  Hervey,  Id.  262,  &c). 

2.  Boaz,  the  name  of  one  of  Solomon's 
brazen  pillars  erected  in  the  temple  porch. 
[Jaciiin.]  It  stood  on  the  left,  and  was  17-g- 
cubits  high  (1  K.  vii.  15,  21;  2  Chr.  iii.  15; 
Jer.  Iii.  21).  It  was  hollow  and  surmounted  by  a 
chapiter,  5  cubits  high,  ornamented  with  net-work 
and  100  pomegranates.  The  apparent  discrepancies 
in  stating  the  height  of  it,  arise  from  the  including 
and  excluding  of  the  ornament  which  united  the 
shaft  to  the  chapiter,  &c.  [F.  W.  F.] 

BOC'CAS  (o  BokkcLs  ;  Boccus),  a  priest  in 
the  line  of  Esdras  (1  Esd.  viii.  2).  [Bukki  ; 
Bokitii.] 

BOCH'ERU  (•1"D3  ;  Bocru;  1  Chr.  viii.  38, 
ix.  44,  according  to  the  present  Hebrew  text),  son  of 
Azel ;  but  rendered  TrpairoTOKOs  by  LXX.  in  both 
passages,  as  if  pointed -TOS.  [Becher.]  [A.C.H.] 

BO'CHIM  (D^an,  the  weepers;  6  KXave/xcbv, 
K\av6/.twves  ;  locus  flentiurn  sive  lacrymarum),  a 
place  on  the  west  of  Jordan  above  Gilgal  (Judg.  ii. 
1  and  5),  so  called  because  the  people  "  wept " 
there. 

BO'HAN  (JH3;  Baav;  Boen),  a  Reubenite, 
after  whom  a  stone  was  named,  possibly  erected  to 
commemorate  some  achievement  in  the  conquest  of 
Palestine  (comp.  1  Sam:  vii.  12).  Its  position  was 
on  the  border  of  the  territories  of  Benjamin  and 
Judah  between  Betharabah  and  Bethhogla  on  the 
E.,  and  Adummim  and  Enshemesh  on  the  W. 
Its  exact  situation  is  unknown  (Josh.  xv.  6,  xviii. 
17).     [Stones.]  [W.  L.  B.] 

BONDAGE.     [Slavery.] 

BOOK.     [Writing.] 

BOOTHS.  [Succoth;  Tabernacles,  Feast 

OF.] 

BOOTY.  This  consisted  of  captives  of  both 
sexes,  cattle,  and  whatever  a  captured  city  might 
contain,  especially  metallic  treasures.  Within  the 
limits  of  Canaan  no  captives  were  to  be  made  (Deut. 
xx.  14  and  16)  ;  beyond  those  limits,  in  case  of 
warlike  resistance,  all  the  women  and  children  were 
to  be  made  captives,  and  the  men  put  to  death.  A 
special  charge  was  given  to  destroy  the  "  pictures 
and  images  "  of  the  Canaanites,  as  tending  to  idola- 
try (Num.  xxxiii.  52).  The  case  of  Amalek  was  a 
special  one,  in  which  Saul  was  bidden  to  destroy  the 


BOOZ 

cattle.  So  also  was  that  of  the  expedition  against 
Arad,  in  which  the  people  took  a  vow  to  destroy  the 
cities,  and  that  of  Jericho,  on  which  the  curse  of 
God  seems  to  have  rested,  and  the  gold  and  silver, 
&c.  of  which  were  viewed  as  reserved  wholly  for 
Him  (1  Sam.  xv.  2,  3;  Num.  xxi.  2;  Josh.  vi. 
19).  The  law  of  booty  was  that  it  should  be  di- 
vided equally  between  the  army  who  won.it  and 
the  people  of  Israel,  but  of  the  former  half  one 
head  in  every  500  was  reserved  to  God,  and  appro- 
priated to  the  priests,  and  of  the  latter  one  in  every 
50  was  similarly  reserved  and  appropriated  to  the 
Levites  (Num.  xxxi.  26-47).  As  regarded  the  army 
David  added  a  regulation  that  the  baggage-guard 
should  share  equally  with  the  troops  engaged.  The 
present  made  by  David  out  of  his  booty  to  the  elders 
of  towns  in  Judah  was  an  act  of  grateful  courtesy 
merely,  though  perhaps  suggested  by  the  law,  Num. 
1.  c.  So  the  spoils  devoted  by  him  to  provide 
for  the  temple,  must  be  regarded  as  a  freewill 
oifering  (1  Sam.  xxx.  24-26;  2  Sam.  viii.  11;  1 
Chr.  xxvi.  27).  [H.  H.] 

BO'OZ  (Rec.  T.  Bo6{;  Lachm.  with  ABD,  Bo6s ; 
Booz),  Matt.  i.  5  ;  Luke  iii.  32.    [Boaz.] 

BO'KITH  (Borith),  a  priest  in  the  line  of 
Esdras  (2  Esd.  i.  2).     The  name  is  a  corruption 

of  BUKKI. 

BORROWING.     [Loan.] 

bos'cath  (npya),  2  k.  xxii.  1.   [Boz- 

KATH.] 

BO'SOR,  1.  (Boff6p  ;   J?x£0an  ;   Bosor),  a 

city  both  large  and  fortified,  on  the  East  of  Jordan 
in  the  land  of  Gilead  (Galaad),  named  with  Bozrah 
(Bosora),  Carnaim,  and  other  places  in  1  Mace.  v. 
26,  36.  It  is  probably  Bezer,  though  there  is 
nothing  to  make  the  identification  certain. 

2.  (2  B6o~op,  ex  Bosor),  the  Aramaic  mode  of 
pronouncing  the  name  of  Beor,  the  father  of 
Balaam  (2  Pet.  ii.  15);  in  accordance  with  the 
substitution,  frequent  in  Chaldee,  of  V  for  JJ  (see 
Gesenius,  1144).  [G.] 

9       -» 

BOS'ORA  (Boa-apa,  and  Boaoppa;   jJ-QJi  • 

Barasa,  Bosor),  a  strong  city  in  Gilead  taken  by 
Judas  Maccabaeus  (1  Mac.  v.  26,  28),  doubtless 
the  same  as  Bozrah. 

BOTTLE.  The  words  which  are  rendered  in 
A.  V.  of  0.  T.  "  bottle"  are,  1.  npn  (Gen.  xxi. 
14, 15,19);  airiAs;  vter:  askin-bottle.  2.  hi), 
or  723  (1  Sam.  x.  3 ;  Job  xxxviii.  37;  Jer.  xiii. 
12;  Is.  v.  10,  xxx.  14;  Lam.  iv.  2);  ayyeiov, 
Kepa.fj.iov,  a/ricos;  titer,  vas  testemn,  lagena, 
laguncula.  3.  p-13[p3  (Jer.  xix.  1)  ;  Qikos  harpa.- 
kivos;  laguncula.  4.  *1NJ  (Josh.  ix.  4,  13;  Judg. 
iv.  19 ;  1  Sam.  xvi.  20 ;  Ps.  cxix.  83) ;  cutkos  ; 
uter,  lagena. 

In  N.  T.  the  only  word  rendered  "bottle"  is 
ao-K 6s  (Matt.  ix.  27;  Mark  ii.  18;  Luke  v.  33). 
The  bottles  of  Scripture  are  thus  evidently  of 
two  kinds.  1.  The  skin  bottle;  2.  The  bottle 
of  earthen  or  glass-ware,  both  of  them  capable 
of  being  closed  from  the  air.  1.  The  skin 
bottle  will  be  best  described  in  the  following 
account  collected  from  Chardin  and  others.  The 
Arabs,  and  all  those  that  lead  a  wandering  life, 
keep    their    water,    milk,    and     other    liquors,     in 


BOTTLE 


223 


leathern  bottles.  These  are  made  of  goatskins- 
When  the  animal  is  killed,  they  cut  off  its  feet  and 
its  head,  and  they  draw  it  in  this  manner  out  of 
the  skin,  without  opening  its  beliy.  In  Arabia 
they  are  tanned  with  acacia-bark  and  the  hairy 
part  left  outside.  If  not  tanned,  a  disagreeable 
taste  is  imparted  to  the  water.  They  afterwards 
sew  up  the  places  where  the  legs  were  cut  oil' 
and  the  tail,  and  when  it  is  filled  they  tie  it 
about  the  neck.  The  great  leathern  bottles  are 
made  of  the  skin  of  a  he-goat,  and  the  small  ones, 
that  serve  instead  of  a  bottle  of  water  on  the  road, 
are  made  of  a  kid's  skin.  These  bottles  when  rent 
are  repaired  sometimes  by  setting  in  a  piece ;  some- 
times by  gathering  up  the  wounded  place  in  man- 
ner of  a  purse ;  sometimes  they  put  in  a  round 
flat  piece  of  wood,  and  by  that  means  «top  the 
hole  (Chardin,  ii.  405,  viii.  409  ;  Wellsted,  Arabia, 
i.  89,  ii.  78  ;  Lane,  Mod.  Eg.  ii.  c.  1.  Harmer, 
from  Chardin's  notes,  ed.  Clarke,  i.  284).  Bruce 
gives  a  description  of  a  vessel  of  the  same 
kind,  but  larger.  "  A  gerba  is  an  ox's  skin, 
squared,  and  the  edges  sewed  together  by  a 
double  seam,  which  does  not  let  out  water.  An 
opening  is  left  at  the  top,  in  the  same  manner  as 
the  buughole  of  a  cask ;  around  this  the  skin  is 
gathered  to  the  size  of  a  large  handful,  which, 
when  the  gerba  is  full  of  water,  is  tied  round  with 
whipcord.  These  gerbas  contain  about  sixty  gallons 
each,  and  two  of  them  are  the  load  of  a  camel. 
They  are  then  all  besmeared  on  the  outside  with 
grease,  as  well  to  hinder  the  water  from  oozing 
through,  as  to  prevent  its  being  evaporated  by  the 
heat  of  the  sun  upon  the  gerba,  which,  in  fact, 
happened  to  us  twice,  so  as  to  put  us  in  danger  of 
perishing  with  thirst."     (Travels,  iv.  334.) 


Skin  Bottles.     (From  the  Museo  Borbomco.J 

Wine-bottles  of  skin  are  mentioned  as  used  bv 
Greeks,  Romans,  and  Egyptians,  by  Homer  (Od. 
vi.  78,  olvov  %x*vev  'AffKai  iv  alyeicv  •  II.  iii. 
247);  by  Herodotus,  as  used  in  Egypt  (ii.  121), 
where  he  speaks  of  letting  the  wine  out  of  the  skin 
by  the  -rroSedv,  the  end  usually  tied  up  to  serve  as 
the  neck;  by  Virgil  (Georg.  ii.  384).  Also  by 
Athenaeus,  who  mentions  a  large  skin-bottle  of  the 
nature  of  the  gerba  (acr/ebs  4k  irapSaAwv  Sep/xdrcov 
eppan/xevos,  v.  28  p.  199).  Chardin  says  that 
wine  in  Persia  is  preserved  in  skins  saturated  with 
pitch,  which,  when  good,  impart  no  flavour  to  the 
wine  (  Voyages,  iv.  75).  Skins  for  wine  or  other 
liquids  are  in  use  to  this  day  in  Spain,  where  thev 
are  called  borrachas. 

The  effect  of  external  heat  upon  a  akin-bottle  is 
indicated  in  Ps.  cxix.  83,  "  a  bottle  in  the  smoke," 
and  of  expansion  produced  by  fermentation  in  Matt. 
ix.  17,  "  new  wine  in  old  bottles." 

2.  Vessels  of  metal,  earthen,  or  glass  ware  for 
liquids  were  in  use  among  the  Creeks,  Egyptians, 
Etruscans,  and  Assyrians  (xpvffdTviros  <pid\ri 
Tvpo-T]VT),  Athen.\.  20  (28);  apyvpty  (pidKrj,  fl. 
x.xiii.  243;  afxcpiOerov  <pid\rjv  a-wvpunov,  270), 
and  also  no  doubt  among  the  Jews,  especially  in  later 
times.  Thus  Jer.  xix.  1 ,  "  a  potter's  earthen  bottle." 


224 


BOW 


The  Jews  probably  borrowed  their  manufactures  in 

this  particular  from  Egypt,  which  was  celebrated 
for  glass  work,  as  remains  and  illustrations  of 
Egyptian  workmanship  are  extant  at  least  as  early 
as  the  15th  century  B.C.  (Wilkinson,  ii.  59,  60). 


Egyptian  liottlcs.     I  to  7,  glass;  8  to  11,  earthenware.     (Fn 
British  Museum  Collection.) 

Glass  bottles  of  the  3rd  or  4th  century  B.C. 
have  been  found  at  Babylon  by  Mr.  Layard.  At 
Cairo  many  persons  obtain  a  livelihood  by  selling 
Nile  water,  which  is  carried  by  camels  or  asses  in 
skins,  or  by  the  carrier  himself  on  his  back  in 
pitchers  of  porous  grey  earth  (Lane,  Mod.  Eg.  ii. 
153,  155;  Burckhardt, Syria,  p.  611;  MaUndreLl, 
Journey,  p.  407,  Bohn ;  Wilkinson,  Egypt,  c.  lii. 
vol.  i.  148-158;  Diet,  of  Antiq.  Vinum;  Layard, 
Nineveh  and  Babylon,  pp.  196,  503;  Gesenius, 
s.  vv.)  [H.  W.  P.] 


Assyrian  GIas9  Bottles.     (From  the  British  Museum  Collection.) 

BOW.     [Arms.] 

BOWL.  1.  n?3  ;  (TTpeTTTuv  avdi^iov;  funi- 
culus ;  see  Ges.  p.  288.  2.  ?SD  ;  KeKavn ;  concha. 
3.  ?QD  ;  also  in  A.  V.  dish.  4.  yQS  ;  Kparrjp  ; 
scyphus.  5.  rVfpJO  ;  Kva6os  ;  cyathus.  Of  these 
words  (1)  may  be  taken  to  indicate  chiefly  round- 
ness, from  7?},  roll,  as  a  ball  or  globe,  placed  as 
an  ornament  on  the  tops  or  capitals  of  columns 
(1  K.  vii.  41  ;  2  Chr.  iv.  12,  13)  ;  also  the  knob 
or  boss  from  which  proceed  the  branches  of  a 
candlestick  (Zech.  iv.  2),  and  also  a  suspended  lamp, 
in  A.V.  "golden  bowl"  (Eccl.  xii.  6).  (2) 
indicating  lowness,  is  perhaps  a  shallow  dish  or 
basin ;  (3)  a  hollow  vessel ;  (4)  a  round  vessel 
(Jer.  xxxv.  5)  Kepdfxiov  LXX.  ;  (5)  a  lustratory 
vessel,  from  I"lp3,jcw<?. 

A  like  uncertainty  prevails  as  to  the  precise 
form  and  material  of  these  vessels  as  is  noticed 
under  Basin.  Bowls  would  probably  be  used 
at  meals  for  liquids,  or  broth,  or  pottage  (2  K. 
iv.  40).     Modern  Arabs  are   content  with  a  few 


BOZRAH 

wooden  bowls.  In  the  Brit.  Mus.  are  deposited 
several  terra-cotta  bowls  with  Chaldaean  inscrip- 
tions of  a  superstitious  character,  expressing  charms 
against  sickness  and  evil  spirits,  which  may  pos- 
sibly explain  the  "  divining  cup  "  of  Joseph  (Gen. 
xliv.  5).  The  bowl  was  filled  with  some  liquid 
and  drunk  off  as  a  charm  against  evil.  See  a  case 
of  Tippoo  Sahib  drinking  water  out  of  a  black  stone 
as  a  charm  against  misfortune  (Gleig,  Life  of  Mwnro, 
i.  218).  One  of  the  Brit.  Mus.  bowls  still  retains 
the  stain  of  a  liquid.  These  bowls,  however,  are 
thought  by  Mr.  Birch  not  to  be  very  ancient 
(Lavard,  Kin.  and  Bab.  509,  511,  526.  Birch,  Anc. 
Pottery,  i.  154.     Shaw,  231.)  [H.  W.  P.] 

BOX-TREE  (1-1^Nri,  TeassMr),  a  tree  men- 
tioned twice  by  the  Prophet  Isaiah,  and  in  one  passage 
as  a  product  of  Mount  Lebanon  (Is.  xli.  19,  lx.  13). 
It  is  translated  box-tree  in  A.  V.  and  buxus  in  the 
Vulgate,  but  is  properly  a  species  of  .cedar,  called 
Scherbin,  to  be  recognized  by  the  small  size  of  the 
cones,  and  the  upward  tendency  of  the  branches.  (See 
Niebuhr's  Arab.  p.  149.)  This  last  character  explains 
the    derivation    from    "It^X,  credits  fuit,    whence 

•  -      T 

TICJ'KF),  erectio  =  proccritas  —  procera  arbor. 
In  both  the  above-quoted  passages  the  word  is  con- 
nected in  the  A.  V.  with  the  fir-tree  and  the  pine- 
tree.  In  Is.  xli.  19  the  LXX.  do  not  translate  it 
at  all,  and  they  render  !"lt2t^  by  ttv^ov;  in  Is.  lx. 
13  they  translate  it  by  ictSpov. 

There  is  no  reference  to  the  "1-lE'NFl  in  Stanley's 

enumeration  of  the  trees  of  Palestine  (Stanley's 
Sinai  and  Palestine,  pp.  139-146,  App.  p.  517- 
521),  and  possibly  the  name  is  synonymous  with 
?*1N ;  but  Kobinson,  in  his  latest  volume  of  Biblical 

Researches  in  Palestine,  mentions  a  grove  near  el- 
Hadith  which  only  the  natives  speak  of  as  Arez, 
though  the  tree  bears  a  general  resemblance  to  the 
cedar,  and  is  probably  the  Sherbin.  (See  Gels.  Hierob. 
i.  pp.  74,  79  :  Freytag,  Lex.  ii.  p.  408;  Rob.  iii. 
593.)  [W.  D.] 

BOZEZ  (f*yi3,  shining,  according  to  the  con- 
jecture of  Gesenius,  Thes.  229  ;  Batre's  ;  Boses), 
the  name  of  one  of  the  two  "  sharp  rocks  "  (He- 
brew, "teeth  of  the  cliff")  "between  the  pas- 
sages" by  which  Jonathan  entered  the  Philis- 
tine garrison.  It  seems  to  have  been  that  on  the 
north  side  (1  Sam.  xiv.  4,  5).  Robinson  notices 
two  hills  of  blunt  conical  form  in  the  bottom  of 
the  Wady  Swreinit  just  below  Miikhmds  (i.  441 
and  iii.  289).  Stanley,  on  the  other  hand,  could 
not  make  them  out  (S.  §  P.  205,  note).  And  indeed 
these  hills  answer  neither  to  the  expression  of  the 
text  nor  the  requirements  of  the  narrative.     [G.] 

BOZ'KATH  (ni?>'3  ;  Ba<nj5cS0  ;  Alex.  Mo<r- 
%&.$  ;  in  Kings,  BaffovpwO  ;  Joseph.  Bocnctd  ; 
Bascath,  Besecath),  a  city  of  Judah  in  the  Shefelah  ; 
named  with  Lachish  (Josh.  xv.  39).  It  is  men- 
tioned once  again  (2  K.  xxii.  1)  as  the  native  place 
of  the  mother  of  king  Josiah.  Here  it  is  spelt  in 
the  A.  V.  "  Boscath."  No  trace  of  the  site  has  yet 
been  discovered.  [G.] 

BOZ'RAH  (my3,    possibly  from  a  root  with 

the  force  of  restraining,  therefore  used  for  a  sheep- 
fold,  <iescn.  s.  v.;  Bo<r6ppa;  Bocr6p,  also  ox"- 
pii,aa  Jer.  xlix.  22,  re?xos  Am.  i.  12;  Bosra), 
the  name  of  more  than  one  place  on  the  east  of 


BRACELET 

Palestine.  1.  In  Edom — the  city  of  Jobab  the  son 
of  Zerah,  one  of  the  early  kings  of  that  nation 
(Gen.  xxxvi.  33;  1  Chr.  i.  44).  This  is  doubtless 
the  place  mentioned  in  later  times  by  Isaiah  (xxxiv. 
6,  lxiii.  1  (in  connexion  with  Edom),  and  by  Jere- 
miah (xlix.  13,  22),  Amos  (i.  12),  and  Micah  (ii. 
12,  "sheep  of  B.,"  comp.  Is.  xxxiv.  6:  the  word 
is  here  rendered  by  the  Vulgate  and  by  Gesenius 
"  fold,"  "  the  sheep  of  the  foid,"  Ges.  Thes.  230). 
It  was  known  to  Eusebius,  who  speaks  of  it  in  the 
Onomasticon  ( Botrc&p)  as  a  city  of  Esau  in  the 
mountains  of  Idumaea.  in  connexion  with  Is.  lxiii.  1. 
and  in  contradistinction  to  Bostra  in  Peraea.  There 
is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  the  modern  representative 

of  Bozrah    is  el-Busaireh,  jj'.,.^tH,   which  was 

first  visited  by  Burckhardt  (Syr.  407  ;  Beszeyra), 
and  lies  on  the  mountain  district  to  the  S.E.  of  the 
Dead  Sea,  between  Tufileh  and  Petra,  about  half- 
way between  the  latter  and  the  Dead  Sea.  Irby 
and  Mangles  mention  it  under  the  name  of  Ipseyra 
and  Bsaida  (chap.  viii. :  see  also  Robinson,  ii.  167). 
The  "  goats  "  which  Isaiah  connects  with  the  place 
were  found  in  large  numbers  in  this  neighbourhood 
by  Burckhardt  (Syr.  4(J5). 

2.  In  his  catalogue  of  the  cities  of  the  land  of 
Moab,  Jeremiah  (xlviii.  24)  mentions  a  Bozrah  as 
in  "the  plain  country"   (ver.  21,   X"En  pK, 

i.  e.  the  high  level  downs  on  the  east  of  the  Dead 
Sea  and  of  the  lower  Jordan,  the  Belka  of  the 
modern  Arabs).  Here  lay  Heshbon,  Nebo,  Kiijath- 
aim.  Diblathaim,  and  the  other  towns  named  in  this 
passage,  and  it  is  here  that  we  presume  Bozrah 
should  be  sought,  and  not,  as'  has  been  lately  sug- 
gested, at  Boscra,  the  Roman  city  in  Bashan  full 
sixty  miles  from  Heshbon  (Porter's  Damascus,  ii. 
163,  &c).  On  the  other  hand  Bozrah  stands  by 
itself  in  this  passage  of  Jeremiah,  not  being  men- 
tioned in  any  of  the  other  lists  of  the  cities  of 
Moab,  e.  g.  Num.  xxxii. ;  Josh.  xiii. ;  Is.  xvi.;  Ez. 
xxv.  ;  and  the  catalogue  of  Jeremiah  is  expressly 
said  to  include  cities  both  "far  and  near"  (xlviii. 
24).  Some  weight  also  is  due  to  the  consideration 
of  the  improbability  that  a  town  at  a  later  date  so 
important  and  in  so  excellent  a  situation  should  be 
entirely  omitted  from  the  Scripture.  Still  there  is 
tlic  tact  (if  tin'  specification  of  its  position  as  in  the 
Mishor;  and  also  this,  that  in  a  country  where  the 
very  kings  were  "sheep-masters"  (2  K.  iii.  4), 
a  name  signifying  a  sheepfold  must  have  been  of 
common  occurrence. 

For  the  I  Ionian  Bostra,  the  modern  Busra,  on 
the  south  border  of  the  Hour  an,  see  Reland,  665, 
and  Porter,  ii.  chap.  12.  [G-] 

BRACELET  (my*X  ;  ^4k\u»p  ■  x^S<iu). 
Under  ARMLET  an  account  is  given  of  these  orna- 
ments, the  materials  of  which  they  were  generally 
made,  the  manner  in  which  they  were  worn,  &C. 
Besides  myVX  three  other  words  are  translated 
by  "bracelet  "in  the  Bible,  viz.:  1.  TE¥  (from 
~ID\'  to  fasten),  Num.  xxxi.  50,  &C  ;  2.  mt?  (a 
chain,  (reipd,  from  its  being  wreathed,  TIC).  It- 
only  occurs  in  this  sense  in  Is.  iii.  19,  lint 
compare  the  expression  "wreathes  chains"  in  Ex. 
xxviii.  14,  22.  Bracelets  ol  line  twisted  Venetian 
gold  are  still  common   in   Egypt  (Lane,  ii.   368, 

Append.  A.  and   plate.-,);    3.   7T1S,  'Gen.   xxxviii. 


BRASS 


225 


18,  25,  rendered  "bracelet,"  but  meaning  pro- 
bably  "a  string  by  which  a  seal-ring  was  sus- 
pended" (Gesen.  s.  v.). 


Gold  Egyptian  Bracelet.      (Wilkinson.) 


Men  as  well  as  women  wore  bracelets,  as  we  see 
from  Cant.  v.  14,  which  may  be  rendered,  "  His 
wrists  are  circlets  of  gold  full  set  with  topazes." 
Layard  says  of  the  Assyrian  kings :  "  The  arms 
were  encircled  by  armlets,  and  the  wrists  by  brace- 
lets, all  equally  remarkable  for  the  taste  and  beauty 
of  the  design  and  workmanship.  In  the  centre  of  the 
bracelets  were  stars  and  rosettes,  which  were  probably 
inlaid  with  precious  stones"  (Nineveh,  ii.  323). 
These  may  be  observed  on  the  sculptures  in  the  British 
Museum.  [Armlet  ;  Anklet.]  [F.  W.  F.] 


Assyrian  Bracelet  Clasp.     (Nineveh  Marbles.) 

BRAMBLE.     [Thistle;  Thorn.] 
BRASS  (xaA./co"s).       The  word  Tpm  (from 
the  root  £T1J,  to  shine)  is  improperly  translated  by 

"  brass  "  in  the  earlier  books  of  Scripture,  since  the 
Hebrews  were  not  acquainted  with  the  compound  of 
copper  and  zinc  known  by  that  name.  In  most 
places  of  the  0.  T.  the  correct  translation  would  be 
copper  (although  it  may  sometimes  possibly  mean 
bronze  (xctAicbs  KeKpa/xevos),  a  compound  of  copper 
and  tin.  Indeed  a  simple  metal  was  obviously  in- 
tended, as  we  see  from  Deut.  viii.  9,  "  out  of  whose 
I  hills  thou  mayest  dig  brass,"  and  Job  xxviii.  2, 
|  "  Brass  is  molten  out  of  the  stone,"  and  Dent,  xxxiii. 
25,  "  Thy  shoes  shall  be  iron  and  brass,"  which  seems 
to  be  a  promise  that  Asher  should  have  a  district 
rich  in  mines,  which  we  know  to  have  been  the 
case,  since  Euseb.  (viii.  15,  17)  speaks  of  the  Chris- 
tians being  condemned  to?s  Kara  $aiv&>  ttjs  IlaAoi- 
ffriv-ns  xa^K°v  fJ.era.Wois  (Lightfoot,  Cent. 
( 'horogr.  c.  99).    [Asher.] 

Copper  was  known  at  a  very  early  period,  and 
the  invention  of  working  it  is  attributed  to  Tubal- 
cain  (Gen.  iv.  24;  cf.  Wilkinson,  Anc.  Egypt,  iii. 
243  ;'comp.  "  Prius  aeris  erat  quam  ferri  cognitus 
usus,"  Lucr.v.  1292).  Itsextremeductility  (xa^KOS 
from  xaA.ri&>)  made  its  application  almost  universal 
among  the  ancients,  as  Hesiod  expressly  says  (Diet. 
of  Ant.,  art.  Aes). 

The  same  word  is  used  for  money,  in  both  Testa- 
ments (Ezek.  xvi.  .'iii;  .Matt.  x.  9,  &c). 

It  is  often  used  in  metaphors,  e.g.  Lev.  x.wi.  9, 

'•  I  will  make  your  heaven  as  iron  ami  your  earth 
as  brass,''  ''.  <'.  dead  ami  hard.  Tins  expression  is  re- 
versed in  Deut.  xxviu  2  (  comp.  (  den  1.%  n  "  Mini 
a  hot  and  ciijiprr  *ky, "  &c.  Anc.  U<tr.\.  "  Is  my 
flesh  ot  brass,"  |,  ,•.  invulnerable,  Job  vi.  12. 
"  They  are  all  brass  and  iron,"  I.  e.  base,  ignoble, 
impure,  Jer.  vi.  28.  [t  is  often  used  as  an  emblem 
of  strength,  Zech.  vi.  1  ;  Jer.  i.  lS,&c.  The  "brazen 
thighs"'  of  the  mystic  image  in  Nebuchadnezzar's 
dream  were  a  fit   svmbol  of  the  "Axaioi  xa^K0X'- 


226 


BRAZEN-SERPENT 


raises.  No  special  mention  of  orichalcum  seems 
to  be  made  in  the  Bible. 

The  word  xa^K0^'lfiav01'  m  ^ev-  u  1*>,  "•  ^ 
(ol  trSSts  avTov  ofxoioi  xa^K0^l$°LVV)i  nas  excited 
much  difference  of  opinion.  The  A.  V.  renders  it 
"fine  brass,"  as  though  it  were  from  %•  ar>d  Aei/3<a 
(smelting  brass),  or  that  6peixa\Kos,  which  was 
so  rare  as  to  be  more  valuable  than  gold.  Bochart 
makes  it  "  aes  album  igneo  colore  splendens,"  as 
though  from  p1?,  "shining."  It  may  perhaps  be 
deep-coloured  frankincense,  as  opposed  to  apyvpoXi- 
flavov  (Liddell  and  Scott's  Lex.)  [F.  W.  F.] 

BRAZEN-SERPENT.  [Serpent.] 
BREAD  (DrP).  The  preparation  of  bread  as 
an  article  of  food  dates  from  a  very  early  period : 
it  must  not,  however,  be  inferred  from  the  use  ot 
the  word  lechem  in  Gen.  iii.  19  ("  bread,"  A.  V.) 
that  it  was  known  at  the  time  of  the  fall,  the  word 
there  occurring  in  its  general  sense  of  food:  the 
earliest  undoubted  instance  of  its  use  is  found  in 
Gen.  xviii.  6.  The  corn  or  grain  ("OB*,  jJI)  em- 
ployed was  of  various  sorts :  the  best  bread  was 
made  of  wheat,  which  after  being  ground  produced 
the  "flour"  or  "meal"  (TODp  ;  aAevpov ;  Judg. 
vi.  19;  1  Sam.  i.  24;  1  K.  iv!  22,  xvii.  12,  14), 
and  when  sifted  the  "  fine  flour "  (fi  ?D ;  more 
fully  D^n  r6b,  Ex.  xxix.  2 ;  or  rhb  IIDp,  Gen. 

xviii.  G  ;  crejU.i8aA.ts)  usually  employed  in  the  sacred 
offerings  (Ex.  xxix.  40;  Lev.  ii.  1;  Ez.  xlvi.  14), 
and  in  the  meals  of  the  wealthy  (1  K.  iv.  22  ;  2  K. 
vii.  1  ;  Ez.  xvi.  13, 19  ;  Rev.  xviii.  13).  "  Barley" 
was  used  only  by  the  very  poor  (John  vi.  9,  13), 
or  in  times  of  scarcity  (Ruth  iii.  15,  compared  with 
i.  1 ;  2  K.  iv.  38,  42  ;  Rev.  vi.  6  ;  Joseph.  B.  J. 
v.  10,  §2)  :  as  it  was  the  food  of  horses  (1  K.  iv. 
28),  it  was  considered  a  symbol  of  what  was  mean 
and  insignificant  (Judg.  vii.  13 ;  comp.  Joseph.  Ant . 
v.  6,  §4,  fxa^av  Kpidivrfu,  vv  evreAeias  avSpdirois 
&fipaiTov ;  Liv.  xxvii.  13),  as  well  as  of  what  was 
of  a  mere  animal  character,  and  hence  ordered  for 
the  offering  of  jealousy  (Num.  v.  15  ;  comp.  Hos.  iii. 
2;  Philo,  ii.  307).    "Spelt"  (00133;  oAvpa,  (ea  ; 

rye,  fitches,  spelt,  A.  V.)  was  also  used  both  in 
Egypt  (Ex.  ix.  32)  and  Palestine  (Is.  xxviii.  25; 
Ez.  iv.  9 ;  1  K.  xix.  6,  LXX.  tyiepv(plas  6\vpl- 
tt)s)  :  Herodotus  indeed  states  (ii.  36)  that  in  the 
former  country  bread  was  made  exclusively  of  olyra, 
which,  as  in  the  LXX.,  he  identifies  with  zca  •  but 
in  this  he  was  mistaken,  as  wheat  was  also  used 
(Ex.  ix.  32  ;  comp.  Wilkinson's  Anc.  Eg.  ii.  397). 
Occasionally  the  grains  above  mentioned  were  mixed, 
and  other  ingredients,  such  as  beans,  lentiles,  and 
millet,  were  added  (Ez.  iv.  9 ;  cf.  2  Sam.  xvii.  28) ; 
the  bread  so  produced  is  called  "  barley  cakes " 
(Ez.  iv.  12,  "  as  barley  cakes,"  A.  V.),  inasmuch 
as  barley  was  the  main  ingredient.  The  amount  of 
meal  required  for  a  single  baking  was  an  ephah  or 
three  measures  (Gen.  xviii.  6  ;  Judg.  vi.  19  ;  1  Sam. 
i.  24;  Matt.  xiii.  33),  which  appears  to  have  been 
suited  to  the  size  of  the  ordinary  oven.  The  baking 
was  done  in  primitive  times  by  the  mistress  of  the 
house  (Gen.  xviii.  6)  or  one  of  the  daughters 
(2  Sam.  xiii.  8):  female  servants  were  however 
employed  in  large  households  (1  Sam.  viii.  13): 
it  appears  always  to  have  been  the  proper  bu- 
siness of  women  in  a  family  (Jer.  vii.  18,  xliv. 
19;  Matt.  xiii.  33;  cf.  I'lin.  xviii.  11,28).    Baking 


BREAD 

as  a  profession,  was  carried  on  by  men  (Hos.  vii. 
4,  G).  In  Jerusalem  the  bakers  nongregated  in  one 
quarter  of  the  town,  as  we  may  infer  from  the 
names  "  bakers'  street"  (Jer.  xxxvii.  21),  and 
"tower  of  the  ovens"  (Neh.  iii.  11,  xii.  38,  "  fur- 
naces," A.  V.).  In  the  time  of  the  Herods,  bakers 
were  scattered  throughout  the  towns  of  Palestine 
{Ant.  xv.  9,  §2).  As  the  bread  was  made  in  thin 
cakes,  which  soon  became  dry  and  unpalatable,  it 
was  usual  to  bake  daily,  or  when  required  (Gen. 
xviii.  6  ;  comp.  Harmer's  Observations,  i.  483) :  re- 
ference is  perhaps  made  to  this  in  the  Lord's  prayer 
(Matt.  vi.  11  ;  Luke  xi.  3).  The  bread  taken  by 
persons  on  a  journey  (Gen.  xlv.  23  ;  Josh.  ix.  12) 
was  probably  a  kind  of  biscuit.  The  process  of 
making  bread  was  as  follows : — the  flour  was  first 
mixed  with  water,  or  perhaps  milk  (Burckhardt's 
Notes  on  the  Bedouins,  i.  58)  ;  it  was  then  kneaded 
(£'■!  ?)  with  the  hands  (in  Egypt  with  the  feet  also ; 


Egyptians  kneading  dough  with  their  hands.    (Wilkinson.     From  a 
painting  in  the  Tomb  of  Kemesis  ill.  at  Thebes.) 

Herod,  ii.  36  ;  Wilkinson,  ii.  386)  in  a  small  wooden 
bowl    or   "  kneading-trough "    (fl"lX£'Q,   a   term 

which  may,  however,  rather  refer  to  the  leathern 
bag  in  which  the  Bedouins  carry  their  provisions, 
and  which  serves  both  as  a  wallet  and  a  table ; 
Niebuhr's  Voyage,  i.  171;  Harmer,  iv.  366  ft'.; 
the  LXX.  inclines  to  this  view,  giving  eyKaraAelu- 
fj.ara  ("  store,"  A.  V.)  in  Deut.  xxviii.  5,  17  ;  the 
expression  in  Ex.  xii.  34,  however,  "  bound  up  in 
their  clothes,"  favours  the  idea  of  a  wooden  bowl), 
until  it  became  dough  (p¥3  ;   ffrais,  Ex.  xii.  .'U, 

39;  2  Sam.  xiii.  8;  Jer.  vii.  18;  Hos.  vii. 
4:  the  term  "  dough"  is  improperly  given  in  the 

b 


1 


Egyptians  kneading  the  dough  with  their  feet,  At  a  and  6  the  dough 
is  probably  left  to  ferment  in  a  basket,  as  is  now  done  at  Cairo. 
(Wilkinw.nO 


BEEAD 

A.  V.  as=niDnj?,  in  Num.  xv.  20,  21 ;  Neh.  x. 
37;  Ez.  xliv.  30).  When  the  kneading  was  com- 
pleted, leaven  ("INt^;  Cv/xti)  was  generally  added 

[Leaven]  :  but  when  the  time  for  preparation 
was  short,  it  was  omitted,  and  unleavened  cakes, 
hastily  baked,  were  eaten,  as  is  still  the  prevalent 
custom  among  the  Bedouins  (Gen.  xviii.  6,  xix.  3  ; 
Ex.  xii.  39;  Judg.  vi.  19:  1  Sam.  xxviii.  24). 
Such  cakes  were  termed  nV^'D  (afafjux,  LXX.),  a 

word  of  doubtful  sense,  variously  supposed  to  con- 
vey the  ideas  of  thinness  (Fiirst.  Lex.  s.  v.),  sweet- 
ness (Gesen.  Thesaur.  p.  815),  or  purity  (Knobel, 
Coram,  in  Ex.  xii.  20),  while  leavened  bread  was 
called  j'tDn  (lit.  sharpened  or  soured;  Ex.  xii.  39: 

Hos.  vii.  4).  Unleavened  cakes  were  ordered  to  be 
eaten  at  the  passover  to  commemorate  the  hastiness 
of  the  departure  (Ex.  xii.  15,  xiil.  3,  7;  Deut.  xvi. 
">  j,  as  well  as  on  other  sacred  occasions  (Lev.  ii.  11, 
vi.  16;  Num.  vi.  15).  The  leavened  mass  was 
allowed  to  stand  for  some  time  (Matt.  xiii.  33 ; 
Luke  xiii.  21),  sometimes  for  a  whole  night  ("  their 
baker  sleepeth  all  the  night,"  Hos.  vii.  6),  exposed 
to  a  moderate  heat  in  order  to  forward  the  ferment- 
ation ("  he  ceaseth  from  stirring"  ["VJ7J3  ;  "  raising," 

A.  V.]  the  fire  "  until  it  be  leavened,"  Hos.  vii.  4). 
The  dough  was  then  divided  into  round  cakes 
(  Dn?  ni")33,  lit.  circles ;  &proi ;  "  loaves,"  A.  V. ; 
Ex.  x.xix.  23 ;  Judg.  viii.  5;  1  Sam.  x.  3;  Prov.  vi. 
26;  in  Judg.  vii.  13,  7-1 7 V ;  payts),  not  unlike  flat 

stones  in  shape  and  appearance  (Matt.  vii.  9;  comp. 
iv.  3),  about  a  span  in  diameter  and  a  finger's 
breadth  in  thickness  (comp.  Lane's  Modern  Egyp- 
ti'ins,  i.  164):  three  of  these  were  required  for  the 
meal  of  a  singLe  person  (Luke  xi.  5),  and  consequently 


BREAD 


227 


Two  Egyptians  carrying  bread  to  the  confectioner,  who  roll*  out  the 

paste,  which  is  : titer,  ards  made  into  cakes  of  various  iurms,  d,  e,/, 
g,  h.     (Wilkinson.) 

one  was  barely  sufficient  to  sustain  life  (1  Sam.  ii. 
36,  '•morsel,"  A.  V.;    Jer.  xxxvii.   21,  "piece," 

A.  V.),  whence  the  expression  )Tv  Dn?,  "bread 

of  affliction  "  (1  K.  xxii.  27 ;  Is.  xxx.  20),  referring 
not  to  the  quality  (pane  jilclirin,  (Jrotius^,  but  to 
the  quantity;  two  hundred  would  suffice  for  a  party 
for  a  reasonable  time  (1  Sam.  xxv.  1*;  2  Sam. 
xvi.  1).  The  cakes  were  sometimes  pumiii, 
hence  called  !"l?n  (KoWvpls;  Ex.  .x.xix.  2,  23; 
Lev.  ii.  4.  viii.  2(1,  xxiv.  5;   Num.  xr.  20;   2  Sam. 


vi.  19),  and  mixed  with  oil.  Similar  cakes,  sprinkled 
with  seeds,  were  made  in  Egypt  (Wilkinson,  ii. 
386).     Sometimes  they  were  rolled  out  into  wafers 

rmmM 


Ef^yptians  making  cakes  of  bread  sprinkled  with  seeds.     (Wilkinson.) 

(|Tp"l;  Xayavov;  Ex.  xxix.  2,  23;  Lev.ii.  4;  Num. 

vi.  15-19),  and  merely  coated  with  oil.  Oil  was 
occasionally  added  to  the  ordinary  cake  (1  K.  xvii. 
12).  A  more  delicate  kind  of  cake  is  described  in 
2  Sam.  xiii.  6,  8,  10;  the  dough  ("Hour,"  A.  V.) 
is  kneaded  a  second  time,  and  probably  some  stimu- 
lating seeds  added,  as  seems  to  be  implied  in  the 
name  JYQ'O?  (from  32?,  heart ;  compare  our  ex- 
pression a  cordial;  KoAAvpiSes;  sorbitiunculue). 
The  cakes  were  now  taken  to  the  oven ;  having  been 
first,  according  to  the  practice  in  Egypt,  gathered 

into  "white  baskets"  (Gen.  xl.  16),  "HPI  vD,  a 

doubtful  expression,  referred  by  some  to  the  white- 
ness of  the  bread  (icava  xovSpira>v;  Aquil.  k6<Plvoi 
yvpeais  ;  canistra  farinae),  by  others,  as  in  the 
A.  V.,  to  the  whiteness  of  the  baskets,  and  again, 
by  connecting  the  word  Hn  with  the  idea  of  a  hole, 
to  an  open-work  basket  (margin,  A.  V.),  or  lastly  to 
bread  baked  in  a  hole 

H 


(Kitto,  Cyclop,  art. 
Bread).  The  baskets 
were  placed  on  a  tray 
and  carried  on  the 
baker's  head  (Gen.  xl. 
16;  Herod,  ii.  35;  Wil- 
kinson, ii.  386). 

The  methods  of  bak- 
ing (HSN)  were,  and 
still  are,  very  various 
in  the  East,  adapted  to 
the  various  styles  of 
life.  In  the  towns, 
where  professional  bak- 
ers resided,  there  were 
no  doubt  fixed  ovens, 

in  shape  and  size  resembling  those  in  use  among  our- 
selves: but  more  usually  each  household  possessed 
a  portable  oven  ("I-13D  ;  KAifiavos),  consisting  of  a 
stone  or  metal  jar  about  three  feet  high,  which 
was  heated  inwardly  with  wood  (I  K.  xvii.  12; 
Is.  xliv.  15;  Jer.  vii.  18)  or  dried  grass  and 
flower-stalks  (xop-ros,  Matt.  vi.  30);  when  the 
tire  had  burned  down,  the  cakes  were  applied 
either  inwardly  (Herod,  ii.  92)  or  outwardly : 
such  ovens  were  used  by  the  Egyptians  (Wilkinson, 
ii.  385),  and  by  the  Easterns  of  Jerome's  time 
(Comment,  in  Lam.  v.  10),  and  an-  still  common 
among  the  Bedouins  (Wellsted's  Travels,  i.  350; 
Niebuhr's  Descript.  de  I'Arabie,  pp.  45,  46).  The 
use  of  a  single  oven  by  several  families  only  took  place 
in  time  of  famine  (Lev.  xxyi.  26).  Another  species  of 
oven  consisted  ofa  hole  dog  in  the  ground,  the  sides 
of  which  were  coated  with  clay  and  the  bottom  with 
pebbles  (Manner,  i.  4*7).  Jahn  (Archaeol.  i.  9, 
§140)  thinks  that  this  oven  is  referred  to  in  the  term 
D'TS  (Lev.  xi.  ."..'});  but  the  dual  number  is  an 
objection  to  this  view;  the  term  ,"in  (Gen,  xl.  16) 
has  also  been  referred  to  it. 

Q  2 


228 


BREASTPLATE 


Other  modes  of  baking  were  specially  adapted  to 
the  migratory  habits  ot  the  pastoral  Jews,  as  of  the 
modern  Bedouins ;  the  cakes  were  either  spread 
upon  stones,  which  were  previously  heated  by 
lighting  a  fire  above  them  (Burckhardt's  ATutcs,  i. 
58)  or  beneath  them  (Belzoni's  Travels,  p.  84) ; 
or  they  were  thrown  into  the  heated  embers  of  the 
fire  itself  (Wellsted's  Travels,  i.  350  ;  Niebuhr, 
Dcsrript.  p.  46) ;  or  lastly,  they  were  roasted 
by  being  placed  between  layers  of  dung,  which 
bums  slowly,  and  is  therefore  specially  adapted  for 
the  purpose  (Ez.  iv.  12,  15;  Burckhardt's  Notes, 
i.  57  ;  Niebuhr's  Descript.  p.  46).  The  terms  by 
which  such  cakes  were  described  were  HHy  (Gen. 
xviii.  6  ;  Ex.  xii.  39;  1  K.  xvii.  13;  Ez.  iv.  12  ; 
Hos.  vii.  8),  WD  (1  K.xvii.  12  ;  Pa.  xxxv.  16),  or 
more  fully  D^SVI  Fliiy  (1  K.  xix.  6,  lit.  on  the 
stones,  "coals,"  A.  V.),  the  term  HilJ?  referring, 

however,  not  to  the  mode  of  baking,  but  to  the 
rounded  shape  of  the  cake  (Gesen.  Thesaur.  p. 
997)  :  the  equivalent  terms  in  the  LXX.  iyKpvcplas, 
and  in  the  Vulg.  subcinericius  panis,  have  direct  re- 
ference to  the  peculiar  mode  of  baking.  The  cakes 
required  to  be  carefully  turned  during  the  process 
(Hos.  vii.  8  ;  Harmer,  i.  488).  Other  methods 
were  used  for  other  kinds  of  bread ;  some  were 
baked  on  a  pan  (J"QnQ  ;  Trryavov;  sartago :  the 

Greek  term  survives  in  the  tajen  of  the  Bedouins), 
the  result  being  similar  to  the  khubz  still  used  among 
the  latter  people  (Burckhardt's  Notes,  i.  58),  or 
like  the  Greek  rayi\viai,  which  were  baked  in  oil, 
and  eaten  warm  with  honey  (Athen.  xiv.  55,  p. 
646)  ;  such  cakes  appeared  to  have  been  chiefly 
used  as  sacred  offerings  (Lev.  ii.  5,  vi.  14,  vii.  9; 
1  Chr.  xxiii.  '29).  A  similar  cooking  utensil  was 
used  by  Tamar  (2  Sam.  xiii.  9)  named  mt'JO  (tt/- 
yavou),  in  which  she  baked  the  cakes  and  then 
emptied  them  out  in  a  heap  (pV\  not  poured,  as  if 

it  had  been  broth)  before  Amnon.  A  different  kind 
of  bread,  probably  resembling  the  ftita  of  the  Be- 
douins, a  pasty  substance  (Burckhardt's  Notes,  i. 
57)  was  prepared  in  a  saucepan,  nUTIIC  (iaxapa; 

craticula  ;  frying-pan,  A.  V. ;  none  of  which  mean- 
ings however  correspond  with  the  etymological 
sense  of  the  word,  which  is  connected'  with  boiling} ; 

this  was  also  reserved  for  sacred  offerings  (Lev.  ii. 
7  ;  vii.  9).  As  the  abovementioned  kinds  of  bread 
(the  last  excepted)  were  thin  and  crisp,  the  mode  of 
eating  them  was  by  breaking  (Lev.  ii.  6;  Is.  lviii. 
7;  Lam.  iv.  4;  Matt.  xiv.  19,  xv.  36,  xxvi.  26; 
Acts  xx.  11  ;  comp.  Xen.  Anab.  vii.  3,  §22,  'dprovs 
Sie'/cAa),  whence  the  term  D"13,  to  breaks  to  give 

bread  (Jer.  xvi.  7):  the  pieces  broken  for  consump- 
tion were  called  Kkdo-fxara  (Matt.  xiv.  20  ;  John 
vi.  12).  Old  bread  is  described  in  Josh.  ix.  5,  12, 
as  crumbled  (C^ipJ  ;  Aquil.  iipadvpw/j.evos ;  in 
frusta,  oomminuti  ;  A.  V.  "  mouldy,"  following  the 
LXX.  evpaiTiicv  Kai  /3e/3pa.7xeVos},  a  term  which 
is  also  applied  (  1  K.  xiv.  3)  to  a  kind  of  biscuit, 
which  easily  cr.umbled  (xoWvpis  ;  "cracknels," 
A.  V.).  [W.  L.B.] 

BREASTPLATE.     [Arms,  p.  111.] 
BRETHREN  OF  JESUS.     [Brother.] 
BRICK  (  i~I3pp,  made  of  white  clay ;  ir\iv9os ; 
later;    in   Ez.  iv.   1,  A.  V.,  tile).     Herodotus  (i. 


BRICK 

179),  describing  the  mode  of  building  the  walls  of 
Babylon,  says  that  the  clay  dug  out  of  the  ditch 
was  made  into  bricks  as  soon  as  it  was  carried  up, 
and  burnt  in  kilns,  Kafxivoiai.  The  bricks  were 
cemented  with  hot  bitumen  (&crtpa\TOs\  and  at 
every  thirtieth  row  crates  of  leeds  were  stuffed 
in.  This  account  agrees  with  the  history  of  the 
building  of  the  Tower  of  Confusion,  in  which 
the  builders  used  brick  instead  of  stone,  and  slime 
("1DH  ;  a<T<paATos),  for  mortar  (Gen.  xi.  3  ;  Jo- 
seph. Ant.  i.  4,  §3).  In  the  alluvial  plain  of  As- 
syria, both  the  material  for  bricks  and  the  cement, 
which  bubbles  up  from  the  ground,  and  is  collected 
and  exported  by  the  Arabs,  were  close  at  hand  for 
building  purposes,  but  the  Babylonian  bricks  were 
more  commonly  burnt  in  kilns  than  those  used  at 
Nineveh,  which  are  chiefly  sun-dried  like  the  Egyp- 
tian. Xenophon  mentions  a  wall  called  the  wall 
of  Media,  not  far  from  Babylon,  made  of  burnt 
bricks  set  in  bitumen  (nrXivdois  otttcus  iv  afffpaArq* 
KeifJLevous)  20  feet  wide,  and  100  feet  high.  Also 
another  wall  of  brick  50  feet  wide  (Died.  ii.  7,  8, 
12;  Xen.  Anab.  ii.  4,  §12,  iii.  4,  §11;  Nah.  iii. 
14  ;  Layard,  Nineveh,  ii.  46,  252,  278).  While  it 
is  needless  to  inquire  to  what  place,  or  to  whom  the 
actual  invention  of  brick-making  is  to  be  ascribed, 
there  is  perhaps  no  place  in  the  world  more  favour- 
able for  the  process,  none  in  which  the  remains  of 
original  brick  structures  have  been  more  largely 
used  in  later  times  for  building  purposes.  The  Ba- 
bylonian bricks  are  usually  from  12  to  13  in. 
square,  and  3±  in.  thick.  (English  bricks  are 
usually  9  in.  long,  4-^  wide,  2J  thick.)  They 
most  of  them  bear  the  name  inscribed  in  cuneiform 
character,  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  whose  buildings,  no 
doubt,  replaced  those  of  an  earlier  age  (Layard, 
Xiii.  and  Babyl.  pp.  505,  531).  They  thus  possess 
more  of  the  character  of  tiles  (Ezek.  iv.  1).  They 
were  sometimes  glazed  and  enamelled  with  patterns 
(if  various  colours.  Semiramis  is  said  by  Diodorus 
to  have  overlaid  some  of  her  towers  with  surfaces  of 
enamelled  brick  bearing  elaborate  designs  (Diod.  ii. 
8).  Enamelled  bricks  have  been  found  at  Nimroud 
(  Layard,  ii.  312).  Pliny  (vii.  56)  says  that  the  Ba- 
bylonians used  to  record  their  astronomical  observa- 
tions on  tiles  (coctilibus  laterculis).  He  also,  as 
well  as  Vitruvius,  describes  the  process  of  making 
bricks  at  Rome.  There  were  three  sizes,  (1.)  1J  ft. 
long,  1  ft.  broad;  (2.)  4  (Greek)  palms  long, 
12-135  in.  (3.)  5  palms  long,  15-16875  in.  The 
breadth  of  (2.)  and  (3.)  the  same.  He  says  the 
Greeks  preferred  brick  walls  in  general  to  stone  (xxxv. 
14  :  Vitruv.  ii.  3,  8).  Bricks  of  more  than  3  palms 
length  and  of  less  than  lg  palm,  are  mentioned 
by  the  Talmudists  (Gesen.,  s.  v.).  The  Israelites, 
in  common  with  other  captives,  were  employed  by 
the  Egyptian  monarchs  in  making  bricks  and  in 
building  (Ex.  i.  14,  v.  7).  Kiln-bricks  were  not  ge- 
nerally used  in  Egypt,  but  were  dried  in  the  sun, 
and  even  without  straw  are  as  firm  as  when  first  put 
up  in  the  reigns  of  the  Amunophs  and  Thothmes 
whose  names  they  bear.  The  usual  dimensions  vary 
from  20  in.  or  17  in.  to  14£  in.  long  ;  8|  in.  to  6J 
in.  wide  ;  and  7  in.  to  4|  in.  thick.  When  made  of 
the  Nile  mud,  or  alluvial  deposit,  they  required  (as 
they  still  require)  straw  to  prevent  cracking,  but 
those  formed  of  clay  taken  from  the  torrent  beds  on 
the  edge  of  the  desert,  held  together  without  straw  ; 
and  crude  brick  walls  had  frequently  the  additional 
security  of  a  layer  of  reeds  and  sticks,  placed  at  in- 
tervals to  act  as  binders  (Wilkinson,  ii.  194,  smaller 
ed. ;    Birch,  Ancient  Pottery,  i.   14 ;   comp.  Her. 


BRIDE 

i.  179).  Baked  bricks  however  were  used,  chiefly 
in  places  in  contact  with  water.  They  are  smaller 
than  the  sun-dried  bricks  (Birch,  i.  23).  A  brick- 
kiln is  mentioned  as  in  Egypt  by  the  prophet  Jere- 
miah (xliii.  9).  A  brick  pyramid  is  mentioned  by 
Herodotus  (ii.  136)  as  the  work  of  King  Asychis. 
Sesostris  (ii.  138)  is  said  to  have  employed  his  cap- 
tives in  building.  Numerous  remains  of  buildings  of 
various  kinds  exist,  constructed  of  sun-dried  bricks, 
of  which  many  specimens  are  to  be  seen  in  the  Brit. 
Mus.  with  inscriptions  indicating  their  date  and  pur- 
pose (Birch,  i.  11,  17).  Among  the  paintings  at 
Thebes,  one  on  the  tomb  of  Rekshara,  an  officer  of  the 
court  of  Thothmes  III.  (about  1400  B.C.),  represents 
the  enforced  labours  in  brick-making  of  captives, 
who  are  distinguished  from  the  natives  by  the  co- 


BRIDGE 


229 


lour  in  which  they  are  drawn.  Watching  over  the 
labourers  are  "  task-masters,"  who,  armed  with 
sticks,  are  receiving  the  "  tale  of  bricks  "  and  urging 
on  the  work.  The  processes  of  digging  out  flu.'  clay, 
of'  moulding,  and  of  arranging,  aie  all  duly  repre- 
sented, and  though  the  labourers  cannot  be  deter- 
mined to  be  Jews,  yet  the  similarity  of  employment 
illustrates  the  Bible  history  in  a  remarkable  degree 
(Wilkinson,  ii.  197  ;  Birch,  i.  19  ;  see  Aristoph.  Av. 
1133,  AIjvtttios  Tr\iv8o(p6(jos ;  Ex.  v.  17,  18). 

The  Jews  learned  the  ait  of  brick-making  in 
Egypt,  and  we  find  the  use  of  the  brick-kiln  in 
David's  time  (2  Sam.  xii.  31),  and  a  complaint 
made  by  Isaiah  that  the  people  built  altars  of  brick 
instead  of  unhewn  stone  as  the  law  directed  (Is.  lxv. 
3  ;  Ex.  xx.  25).     [Pottery.]  [H.  W.  P.] 


A  ih 


E_DfZ3        ~/1 
EL_JL_J  vm,  I 

f    M       9 

_JLUCp 
i  LJLD.  U.-  ~-J  L^J  I      !■  f.  ,  ..J 


Foreign  captives  employed  in  making  bricks  at  Thebes.    (Wilkinson.) 
Pigs  1,2.  Men  returning  after  carrying  the  bricks.     Pigs.  8, 6.  Taskmasters      Figs.  4, 5.   Men  carrying  bricks,     Fig.  12,  13.  Pif 
-:— ;  the  clay  ..r  mud.      Pig.  8,  14     Making  bricks  with  a  wood™  muulil,  •!,  It.      Fig.  14.    Fetching frater  fruin  the  tank,  h. 


bricks  (kt6bi)  are  said  to  be  i 

BRIDE,  BRIDEGROOM.     [Marriage.] 

BRIDGE.  The  only  mention  of  a  bridge  in 
the  Canonical  Scriptures  is  indirectly  in  the  proper 
name  Geshur  ("WJI),  a  district  in  Bashan,  N.E.  of 
the  sea  of  Galilee.  At  this  place  a  bridge  still 
exists,  called  the  bridge  of  the  sun-,  of  Jacob  (Gesen. 

s.u.).    Absalom  was  *'>■■     f  a  daughter  of  the 

king  of  Geshur  i  2  Sam.  iii.  3,  riii.  37,  riv.  S 
TheChaldee  paraphrase  renders  "  gates,"  in  Nalumi 
ii.  6,  ■•  bridges,"  where  however  dykes  or  weir-  n  ,■ 
to  be  understood,  which  being  burst  by  inundation, 
destroyed  the  walls  of  Nineveh  (  Diod.  ii.  27).  Judas 
Maccabaeus  is  said  to  have  intended  to  make  a  bridge 
in  order  to  besiege  the  town  of  Casphor  or  Caspis, 


situate  near  a  lake  (2  Mac.  ,\ii.  13).  Josephus 
{Ant.  v.  1,  §:;),  speaking  of  the  Jordan  at  the  time 
of  the  passage  of  the  Israelites,  says  it  had  never 
been  bridged  before,  ovk  e£et/KTo  irporepov,  as  if  in 
his  own  time  bridges  had  been  made  over  it,  which 
iwiler  the  Romans  was  the  case.  (See  the  notices 
below.)  In  Is.  xxxvii.  2.V,  "Vlp,  dig  • 
rendered  by  I. XX.  yiepvpav  T1677/XI. 

Permanent  bridges  aver  water  do  not  appear  to 
have  been  used  by  the  Israelites  in  their  earlier 
times,  but  we  have  frequent  mention  made  of  fords, 
and  of  their  military  importance  (den.  xxxii.  22  ; 
Josh,  ii.  7;  Judg.  iii.  28,  vii.  24,  xii.  5;  Is.  xvi. 
2).  West  of'  the  Jordan  there  are  few  rivers  of 
importance  (  kaaa.  Marc.  riv.  8;   Reland,  p.  284), 


230 


BRIERS 


and  perhaps  the  policy  of  the  Jews  may  have  dis- 
couraged intercourse  with  neighbouring  tribes,  for  it 
seems  unlikely  that  the  skill  of  Solomon's  architects 
was  unable  to  construct  a  bridge. 

Herodotus  (i.  186)  describes  a  bridge  consisting 
of  stone  piers,  with  planks  laid  across,  built  by  Ni- 
tocris,  B.C.  circ.  GOO,  connecting  the  two  portions  of 
Babylon  (see  Jer.  li.  31,  32,  1.  38),  and  Diodorus 
speaks  of  an  arched  tunnel  under  the  Euphrates 
(ii.  9).  Bridges  of  boats  are  described  also  by  He- 
rodotus (iv.  88,  vii.  36 ;  comp.  Aesch.  Pers.  69, 
\iv6Seffixos  ffx^Sia),  and  by  Xenophon  (Anab.  ii.  4, 
§12).  A  bridge  over  the  Zab,  made  of  wicker- 
work  connecting  stone  piers,  is  described  by  Layard 
(i.  192),  a  mode  of  construction  used  also  in  South 
America. 

Though  the  arch  was  known  and  used  in  Egypt 
as  early  as  the  15th  century  B.C.  (Wilkinson,  ii. 
302,  seq.,  Birch,  i.  14),  the  Romans  were  the  first 
constructors  of  arched  bridges.  They  made  bridges 
over  the  Jordan  and  other  rivers  of  Syria,  of 
which  remains  still  exist  (Stanley,  296 ;  Irby  and 
Mangles,  90,  91,  92,  142,  143).  A  stone  bridge 
over  the  Jordan,  called  the  Bridge  of  the  daughters 
of  Jacob,  is  mentioned  by  B.  de  la  Brocquiere,  A.D. 
1432,  and  aportion  of  one  by  Arculf,  A.D.  700  {Early 
Trav.  in  Pal.  '8,  300;  Burckhardt,  Syria,  315; 
Robinson,  ii.  441).  The  bridge  (ye(pvpa)  connecting 
the  Temple  with  the  upper  city,  of  which  Josephus 
speaks  (B.  J.  vi.  6,  §2,  Ant.  xv.  11,  5),  seems  to 
have  been  an  arched  viaduct  (Robinson,  i.  288,  iii. 
224).  [H.  W.  P.] 

BRIEKS.  No  less  than  six  Heb.  words  are 
thus  rendered  in  eleven  passages  of  the  O.  T.  In 
Heb.  vi.  8,  ij  represents  aKavOai.  In  the  8th 
chapter  of  Judges  occurs  twice  (v.  7,  16)  the  word 
□"•JplH  which  the  LXX.  render  by  reus  Bap/cr)j'i',a, 

or  2>apKofxfj.eiv,  and  the  A.  V.  by  briers:.  This 
is  probably  an  incorrect  rendering.  The  word 
properly  means  a  threshing  machine,  consisting  of 
a  flat  square  wooden  board  set  with  teeth  of  iron, 
flint,  or  fragments  of  iron  pyrites,  which  are 
abundant  in  Palestine.  Gesenius  conjectures  that 
{p"l2  was  the  name  for  pyrites,  from  |T12  fulgu- 
ravit ;  and  hence  that  ^p"l3  =  tribula  pyritis  mu- 
itit<t  =  j~flD  (see  Robinson,  ii.  307). 

For  pnn,  Mic.  vii.  4,  and  |1?p,  Ez.  xxviii.  24, 
see  under  Thorn. 

In  Ez.  ii.  6,  we  read  "  Though  briers  and  thorns 
be  with  thee,"  briers  representing  the  Heb.  CH^D, 
which  is  explained  by  rebels  in  the  margin.  The 
root  is  3"1D,  rebellis  vel  refractarius  fuit,  and  the 

rendering,  should  be  "  Though  rebellious  men  like 
thorns  be  with  thee." 

In  Is.  Iv.  13,  we  have  "  instead  of  the  brier  shall 
come  up  the  myrtle-tree,"  the  Heb.  word  for  brier 
being  T BID,  sirpad  ;    kovvQti;  urtica.      KSpv^a 

is  a  strong-smelling  plant  of  the  endive  kind,  flea- 
bane,  Inula  helenium,  Linn.  (Arist.  H.  A.  iv.  8, 

28;  Diosc.  iii.  126).     The  Peschito  has  J»L.  ,  sa- 

tnreia,  savory,  wild  thyme,  Thymus  Serpyllum,  a 
plant  growing  in  great  abundance  in  the  desert  of 
Sinai  according  to  Burckhardt  (Syr.  ii.).  Gesenius 
rejects  both  flea-bane  and  wild  thyme  oil  etymolo- 
gical grounds,  and   prefers  urtica,  nettle,  consider- 


BROTHER 

ing  "IB^D  to  be  a  compound  of  ^ID  ussit,  and 
TBD    punxit.      He   also   notices    the    opinion   of 

Ewald  (Gram.  Grit.  p.  520)  that  Sinapi  album, 
the  white-mustard,  is  the  plant  meant. 

In  Is.  v.  6,  we  have  mention  of  briers  and  thorns 
as  springing  up  in  desolated  and  wasted  lauds ;  and 
here  the  Hebrew  word  is  TOC^.  from  root  "lOt? 

•     T     "  -     T    * 

riguit,  horruit  [Adamant]  (comp.  Is.  vii.  23,  24, 
25,  ix.  18,  and  xxxii.  13.  In  Is.  x.  17,  xxvii.  4. 
"VOti*  is  used  metaphorically  for  men.     The  LXX. 

in  several  of  these  passages  have  aKavda;  in  one 
X^pTos,  iu  another  &.yp<a(TTis  |?7pc6. 

There  is  nothing  in  the  etymology  or  usage  by 
which  we  can  identify  the  "VD£?  with  any  parti- 
cular species  of  prickly  or  thorny  plant.  Possibly 
it  is  a  general  term  for  the  very  numerous  plants 
of  this  character  which  are  found  in  the  unculti- 
vated lands  of  the  East.  [W.  D.] 

BRIMSTONE  (nn33;  6<uov;  sulphur).  The 
Hebrew  word  is  connected  with  "iBil  "  gopher- 
wood,"  A.  V.  Gen.  vi.  14,  and  probably  signified  in 
the  first  instance  the  gum  or  resin  that  exuded  from 
that  tree;  hence  it  was  transferred  to  all  inflam- 
mable substances,  and  especially  to  sulphur,  a  mine- 
ral substance  found  in  considerable  quantities  on  the 
shores  of  the  Dead  Sea,  as  well  as  in  other  parts  of 
Palestine.  It  was  one  of  the  elements  employed  in 
the  destruction  of  the  cities  of  the  plain  (Gen.  xix. 
24),  and  hence  is  frequently  employed  in  a  meta- 
phorical sense,  as  expressive  of  Divine  vengeance 
(Deut.  xxix.  23;  Job  xviii.  15;  Is.  xxxiv.  9;  Ez. 
xxxviii.  22  ;  Rev.  xix.  20,  xx.  10,  xxi.  8).  [W.  L.  B.] 

BROTHER  (PIK;  a5e\<p6s).  The  Hebrew 
word  is  used  in  various  senses  in  the  O.  T.  as  1. 

Any  kinsman,  and  not  a  mere  brother ;  e.  g.  nephew 
(Gen.  xiv.  16,  xiii.  8),  husband  (Cant.  iv.  9).  2. 
One  of  the  same  tribe  (2  Sam.  xix.  13).  3.  Of  the 
same  people  (Ex.  ii.  11),  or  even  of  a  cognate  people 
(Num.  xx.  14).  4.  An  ally  (Am.  i.  9).  5.  Any 
friend  (Job  v.  15).  6.  One  of  the  same  office  (1  K. 
ix.  13).  7.  A  fellow  man  (Lev.  six.  17).  8.  Meta- 
phorically of  any  similarity.  It  is  a  very  favourite 
Oriental  metaphor,  as  in  Job  xxx.  19,  "I  am  be- 
come a  brother  to  the  jackals"  (Gesen.  s.  v.). 

The  word  a5ck<p6s  has  a  similar  range  of  mean- 
ings in  the  N.  T.,  and  is  also  used  for  a  disciple 
(Matt.  xxv.  40,  &c.) ;  a  fellow-worker,  as  in  St. 
Paul's  Epp.  passim ;  and  especially  a  Christian. 
Indeed,  we  see  from  the  Acts  that  it  was  by  this 
name  that  Christians  usually  spoke  of  each  other. 
The  name  Christian  was  merely  used  to  describe 
them  objectively,  i.  e.  from  the  Pagan  point  of  view, 
as  we  see  from  the  places  where  it  occurs,  viz.  Acts 
[xi.  26],  xxvi.  28,  and  1  Pet.  iv.  16. 

The  Jewish  schools  distinguish  between  "  bro- 
ther"' and  "neighbour;"  "brother"  meant  an 
Israelite  by  blood,  "  neighbour  "  a  proselyte.  They 
allowed  neither  title  to  the  Gentiles;  but  Christ 
and  the  Apostles  extended  the  name  "brother"  to 
all  Christians,  and  "  neighbour "  to  all  the  world, 
1  Cor.  v.  11  ;  Luke  x.  29,  30  (Lightfoot,  I/or. 
Hebr.  ad  Matt.  v.  22). 

We  must  now  briefly  touch  on  the  difficult  and 
interesting  question  as  to  who  were  "  the  brethren 
of  the  Lord,"  and  pass  in  review  the  theories  re- 
specting them.  And  first  we  would  observe  that  in 
arguing  at  all  against  their  being  the  real  brethren 


BROTHER 

of  Jesus,  far  too  much  stress  lias  been  laid  on  the 
assumed  indefiriteness  of  meaning  attached  to  the 
word  "  brother  "  in  Scripture.  In  all  the  adduced 
cases  it  will  be  seen  that,  when  the  word  is  used  in 
any  but  its  proper  sense,  the  context  prevents  the 
possibility  of  confusion ;  and  indeed  in  the  only  two 
exceptional  instances  (not  metaphorical),  viz.  those 
in  which  Lot  and  Jacob  are  respectively  called 
"brothers"  of  Abraham  and  Laban,  the  word  is 
only  extended  so  far  as  to  mean  "nephew;"  and  it 
must  be  remembered  that  even  these  exceptions  are 
quoted  from  a  single  book,  seventeen  centuries  earlier 
than  the  gospels.  If  then  the  word  "  brethren," 
as  repeatedly  applied  to  James,  &c.  really  mean 
"cousins"  or  "kinsmen,"  it  will  be  the  only  in- 
stance of  such  ;ui  application  in  which  no  data  are 
given  to  correct  the  laxity  of  meaning.  Again,  no 
really  parallel  case  can  be  quoted  from  the  N.  T., 
except  in  merely  rhetorical  and  tropical  passages ; 
whereas  when  "  nephews "  are  meant  they  are 
always  specified  as  such,  as  in  Col.  iv.  10  ;  Acts 
xxiii."  lb'  (Kitto,  The  Apostles,  Sec,  p.  165,  sq.). 
There  is  therefore  no  adequate  warrant  in  the 
language  alone,  to  take  "  brethren "  as  meaning 
"relatives;"  and  therefore  the  a  priori  presumption 
is  in  favour  of  a  literal  acceptation  of  the  term. 
We  have  dwelt  the  more  strongly  on  this  point,  be- 
cause it  seems  to  have  been  far  too  easily  assumed 
that  no  importance  is  to  be  attached  to  the  mere 
fact  of  their  being  invariably  called  Christ's  bre- 
thren ;  whereas  this  consideration  alone  goes  far  to 
prove  that  they  really  w^re  so. 

There  are  however  three  traditions  respecting 
them.  They  are  first  mentioned  (Matt.  xiii.  56) 
in  a  manner  which  would  certainly  lead  an  un- 
biassed mind  to  conclude  that  they  were  our  Lord's 
uterine  brothers.  "  Is  not  this  the  carpenter's  son  ? 
is  not  his  mathcr  called  Mary?  and  his  brethren 
James,  and  Joses,  and  Judas,  and  Simon  ?  and  his 
sisters,  are  they  not  all  with  us?"  But  since  we 
find  that  there  was  a  "  Mary,  the  mother  of  James 
and  Joses  "  (Matt,  x.wiii.  36),  and  that  a  "  James 
and  Judas  (?)  "  were  sons  of  Alphaeus  (Luke  vi.  15, 
16),  the  most  general  tradition  is — I.  That  they 
were  all  our  Lord's  first  cousins,  the  sons  of  Al- 
phaeus (or  Clopas — not  Cleopas,  see  Alford,  Gk. 
Test.  Matt.  x.  3)  and  Mary,  the  sister  of  the  Virgin. 
This  tradition  is  accepted  by  Papias,  Jerome  (  Cat. 
Script.  Ecc.  2),  Augustine,  and  the  Latin  Church 
generally,  and  is  now  the  one  most  commonly  re- 
ceived. Yet  there  seem  to  be  overwhelming  argu- 
ments against  it:  for  (1.)  The  reasoning  entirely  de- 
pends (in  three  very  doubtful  assumptions,  viz. 
o.  that  "his  mother's  sister"  (John  xix.  25)  must 
be  in  apposition  with  "  Maty,  the  wife  of  Cleo- 
phas,"  which  would  be  improbable,  if  only  on  the 
ground  that  it  supposes  two  sisters  to  have  had  the 
same  name,  a  supposition  substantiated  by  no  pa- 
rallel cases  [Wieseler  (comp.  Mark  xv.  40)  thinks 
that  Salome,  the  wife  of  Zebedee,  is  intended  by  "  his 
mother's  sister  "].  6.  that  "  Mary,  the  mother  of 
James"  was  the  wife  of  Alphaeus,  i.e.  that  the 
James  intended  is  'idtcosfios  6  'AXfpaiov.  c.  That 
Cleophas,  or  more  correctly  Clopas,  whose  wife 
Mary  was,  is  identical  with  Alphaeus;  which  may 
be  the  case,  although  it  cannot  be  proved.  ('_'.)  If 
his  cousins  were  meant,  it  would  be  signally  untrue 
that  "neither  did  his  brethren  believe  on  him" 
(John  vii.  5  sq.),  for  in  all  probability  three  out  of 
the  tour  (viz.  James  the  Less,  Matthew  (or  Levi), 
and  Jude,  the  brother  (?)  of  James)  were  actual 
Apostl  s.     We  do  not  see  bow  this  objection  can  be 


BROTHER 


231 


removed.  (3.)  It  is  quite  unaccountable  that  these 
"  brethren  of  the  Lord,"  if  they  were  only  his  cou- 
sins, should  be  always  mentioned  in  conjunction 
with  the  Virgin  Mary,  and  never  with  their  own 
mother  Mary,  who  was  both  alive  and  in  constant 
attendance  on  our  Lord.  (4.)  They  are  generally 
spoken  of  as  distinct  from  the  Apostles  ;  see  Acts  i. 
14;  1  Cor.  ix.  15;  and  Jude  (17)  seems  to  clearly 
imply  that  he  himself  was  not  an  Apostle.  It 
seems  to  us  that  these  four  objections  are  quite  ade- 
quate to  set  aside  the  very  slight  grounds  for  iden- 
tifying the  "brethren  of  the  Lord"  with  the  "sons 
of  Alphaeus." 

II.  A  second  tradition  accepted  by  Hilary,  Epipha- 
nius,  and  the  Greek  fathers  generally,  makes  them  the 
sons  of  Joseph  by  a  former  marriage  with  a  certain 
Escha  or  Salome  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  ;  indeed  Epipha- 
nius  {Haeres.  29,  §4)  even  mentions  the  supposed 
order  of  birth  of  the  4  sons  and  2  daughters.  But 
Jerome  {Com.  in  Matt.  xii.  49)  slights  this  as  a 
mere  conjecture,  borrowed  from  the  "  deliramenta 
Apocryphorum,"  and  Origen  says  that  it  was  taken 
from  the  Gospel  of  St.  Peter.  The  only  shadow  of 
ground  for  its  possibility  is.  the  apparent  difference 
of  age  between  Joseph  and  the  Virgin. 

III.  They  are  assumed  to  have  been  the  offspring 
of  a  levirate  marriage  between  Joseph  and  the  wife 
of  his  deceased  brother  Clopas.  But  apart  from  all 
evidence,  it  is  obviously  idle  to  examine  so  arbitrary 
an  assumption. 

The  arguments  against  their  being  the  sons  of  the 
Virgin  after  the  birth  of  our  Lord,  ate  founded  on 
— (1.)  The  almost  constant  tradition  of  her  aenrap- 
Oevia.  St.  Basil  (Serm.  cle  S.  NativJ)  even  records 
a  story  that  "  Zechary  was  slain  by  the  Jews  be- 
tween the  porch  and  the  altar  "  for  affirming  her  to 
be  a  Virgin  after,  as  well  as  before  the  birth  of  her 
most  holy  Son  (Jer.  Taylor,  Duct.  Dubit.  II.  3, 
4).  Still  the  tradition  was  not  universal :  it  was 
denied,  for  instance,  by  large  numbers  called  Anti- 
dicomarianitae  and  Helvidiani.  To  quote  Ezek. 
xliv.  2  as  any  argument  on  the  question  is  plainly 
absurd.  (2.)  On  the  fact  that  on  the  cross  Christ 
commended  his  mother  to  the  care  of  St.  John ; 
but  this  is  easily  explicable  on  the  ground  of  his 
brethren's  apparent  disbelief  in  Him  at  that  time, 
though  they  seem  to  have  been  converted  very  soon 
afterwards.  (3.)  On  the  identity  of  their  names  with 
those  of  the  sons  of  Alphaeus.  This  argument  loses 
all  weight,  when  we  remember  the  constant  recur- 
rence of  names  in  Jewish  families,  and  the  extreme 
commonness  of  these  particular  names.  In  the 
N.  T.  alone  there  may  be  at  least  five  contemporary 
Jameses,  and  several  Judes,  not  to  mention  the 
21  Simons,  17  Joses,  and  16  Judes  mentioned  by 
Josephus. 

On  the  other  band,  the  arguments  for  their  being 
our  Lord's  uterine  brothers  are  numerous,  and, 
taken  collectively,  to  an  unprejudiced  mind  almost 
irresistible,  although  singly  they  are  open  to  objec- 
tions: c.  ;/.  (1.)  The  word  irpcuToVoKos  vJos,  Luke 
ii.  7.  (2.)  Matt.  i.  25,  ovk  iylyvaiffKev  avr^jv 
(cos  ou  %T(K(V,  k.t.X..  to  which  All'oid  justly  re- 
marks, only  one  meaning  could  have  been  attached 
but  tin-  preconceived  theories  about  the  atnrap- 
Qfvia.  {'■'<.)  The  general  tone  of  the  gospels  on  the 
subject,  since  they  are  constantly  spoken  of  with  the 
\  .  Mary,  and  with  no  shadow  of  a  hint  that  they 
were  not  her  own  children  (Matt.  xii.  46;  Mark 
iii.  :'•!,  &c).  It  can  we  think  be  hardly  denied 
that  any  one  of  these  arguments  is  singly  stronger 
than  those  produced  on  the  othei  side. 


232 


BUBASTIS 


To  sum  up  then,  we  have  seen  (I.)  that  "  the 
brethren  of  the  Lord  "  could  hardly  have  been  iden- 
tical with  the  sons  of  Alphaeus,  and  (II.)  that  we 
have  no  grounds  for  supposing  them  to  have  been 
the  sons  of  Joseph  by  a  previous,  or  (III.)  a  levi- 
rate  marriage ;  that  the  arguments  in  favour  of 
their  being  actual  brothers  of  our  Lord  are  cogent, 
and  that  the  tradition  on  the  other  side  is  not  suffi- 
ciently weighty  or  unanimous  to  set  them  aside. 
Finally ,  this  tradition  of  the  perpetual  virginity  of 
the  mother  of  our  Lord  (which  any  one  may  hold, 
if  he  will,  as  one  of  the  "  pie  credibilia,"  Jer. 
Taylor,  Duct.  Dub.  II.  3,  6)  is  easily  accounted 
for  by  the  general  error  on  the  inferiority  of  the 
wedded  to  the  virgin  state :  Scripture  in  no  way  re- 
quires us  to  believe  it,  and  since  Mary's  previous 
virginity  is  alone  requisite  to  the  Gospel  narrative, 
we  must  regard  it  as  a  question  of  mere  curiosity. 
[James;  Joses;  Jude]  (Pearson,  On  the  Creed, 
Art.  III.  and  notes  ;  Kuinoel  and  Alford  on  Matt. 
xiii.  56;  Lightfoot,  Hor.  Hebr.  Matt.  v.  22,  &c, 
&c).  [F.  W.  P.] 

BUBASTIS.       [PlBESETH.] 

BUK'KI  0p2  ;  Bukki  and  BcoKai  ;  Bocci). 
1.  Son  of  Abishua  and  father  of  Uzzi,  fifth  from 
Aaron  in  the  line  of  the  high-priests  in  1  Chr.  v. 
31,  vi.  36  (vi.  5,  51,  A.  V.),  and  in  the  genealogy 
of  Ezra,  Ezr.  vii.  4,  and  1  Esdr.  viii.  2,  where  he 
is  called  Bokko.,  BOCCAS,  which  is  corrupted  to  Bo- 
rith,  2  Esdr.  i.  2.  Whether  Bukki  ever  filled  the 
office  of  high-priest,  we  are  not  informed  in  Scrip- 
ture. Epiphanius  in  his  list  of  the  ancestors  of 
Jehoiada,  whom  he  fancifully  supposes  to  be  bro- 
ther of  Elijah  the  Tishbite,  omits  both  Bukki  and 
Abishua  (Advers.  Melchizedec.  iii.).  Josephus 
[Ant.  viii.  1,  §3)  expressly  says  that  all  of  Aaron's 
'  line  between  Joseph  (Abishua)  the  high-priest,  and 
Zadok  who  was  made  high-priest  in  the  reign  of 
David,  were  private  persons  (ISicoTevaavres)  i.  e. 
not  high-priests,  and  mentions  by  name  "  Bukki  the 
son  of  Joseph  the  high-priest,"  as  the  first  of  those 
who  lived  a  private  life,  while  the  pontifical  dig- 
nity was  in  the  house  of  Ithamar.  But  in  v.  11, 
§5  Josephus  says  as  expressly  that  Abishua  (there 
called  Abiezer)  having  received  the  high-priesthood 
from  his  father  Phinehas,  transmitted  it  to  his  own 
son  Bukki,  who  was  succeeded  by  Uzzi,  after  whom 
it  passed  to  Eli.  We  may  conclude  therefore  that 
Josephus  had  no  more  means  of  knowing  for  certain 
who  were  high-priests  between  Phinehas  and  Eli, 
than  we  have,  and  may  adopt  the  opinion,  which  is 
far  the  most  probable,  that  there  was  no  high- 
priest  between  them,  unless  perhaps  Abishua.  For 
an  account  of  the  absurd  fancies  of  the  Jews,  and  the 
statements  of  Christian  writers  relative  to  the  suc- 
cession of  the  high-priests  at  this  period,  seeSelden, 
de  Success,  in  Pontif.  Hebr. ;  also  Genealog.  of  our 
Lord,  ch.  x.  [A.  C.H.] 

2.  Son  of  Jogli,  "prince"  (N^'^j  of  the  tribe 
of  Dan,  one  of  the  ten  men  chosen  to  apportion  the 
land  of  Canaan  between  the  tribes  (Num.  xxxiv. 
22).     (BaKxip,  Alex.  Bokk'l  ;  Bocci.) 

BUKKI'AH  (■ln'jpa,  Bukkijahu  ;  BovKlas, 
Alex.  BokkUs  ;  Bocciau),  a  Kohathite  Levite,  of 
the  sons  of  Heman,  one  of  the  musicians  in  the 
Temple,  the  leader  of  the  sixth  band  or  course  in 
the  service  (i  Chr.  xxv.  4,  13). 


*  The  "  princes  "  are  only  specified  to  seven  tribes 
out  of  the  ten  :  not  to  Jvulah,  Simeon,  or  Benjamin. 


BULRUSH 
BUL.     [Months.] 

BULL,  BULLOCK,  terms  used  synonymously 
with  ox,  oxen,  in  the  A.  V.  as  the  representatives 
of  several  Hebrew  words.  Twice  in  the  N.  T.  as 
the  rendering  of  ravpos,  Heb.  ix.  13,  x   4. 

"Ip2  is  properly  a  generic  name  for  horned  cattle 
when  of  full  age  and  tit  for  the  plough.  Accord- 
ingly it  is  variously  rendered  bullock  (Is.  lxiv.  25), 
cow  (Ez.  iv.  15),  oxen  (Gen.  xii.  16).  Hence  in 
Deut.  sxi.  3,  "Ip2  Tb)V  is  a  heifer;  Ex.  xxix. 
1,  "Ip2"|2  "IS,  a  young  bullock;  and  in  Gen.  xviii. 
7,  simply  "Ip2"j2  ;  rendered  a  calf  in  A.  V.  It  is 
derived  from  au  unused  root,  "lp2,  to  cleave,  hence 

-  T 

to  plough,  as  in  Latin  armentum  is  aramentum. 

1)19  differs  from  "1p2  in  the  same  way  as  HCi' 
a  sheep,  from  |NV,  a,  flock  of  sheep.  It  is  a  generic 
name,  but  almost  always  signifies  one  head  of 
horned  cattle,  without  distinction  of  age  or  sex.  It 
is  very  seldom  used  collectively.  The  Chaldee 
form  of  the  word,  "lin,  occurs  in  Ezr.  vi.  9,  17,  vii. 
17;  Dan.  iv.  25,  &c. ;  and  Plutarch  (Sull.  c.  17) 
says  0d>p  ol  QolviKfs  r^v  fiovv  KaXovffi.  It  is 
probably  the  same  word  as  ravpos,  taurus,  Germ. 
stier ;  Engl,  steer.     The  root  "VI £>  is  not  used,  but 

the  Arab.    \j    excitavit  pulverem,  is  a  very  natural 
derivation  of  the  word. 

/J!?— n?jy5  a  calf,  mule  or  female,  properly  of 
the  first  year,  derived,  as  Gesenius  thinks,  from  an 
Aethiopic  word  signifying  fetus,  embryo,  puling. 
catulus,  while  others  derive  it  from  ?3J?  volvit, 
rotavit,  festinavit.  The  word  is  used  of  a  trained 
heifer  (Hos.  x.  11),  of  one  giving  milk  (Is.  vii.  21, 
22),  of  one  used  in  ploughing  (Judg.  xiv.  18),  and 
of  one  three  years  old  (Gen.  xv.  9).  Almost  sy- 
nonymous with  ?3J?  is  "IS  the  latter  signifying 
generally  a  young  bull  of  two  years  old,  though  in 
one  instance  (Judg.  vi.  25)  possibly  a  bull  of  seven 
years  old.  It  is  the  customary  term  for  bulls 
offered  in  sacrifice,  aud  hence  is  used  metaphorically 
in  Hos.  xiv.  3,  "  so  will  we  render,  '  as  bullocks,' 
our  lips." 

There  are  four  or  five  passages  in  which  the  word 
□n2N  is  used  for  bulls.  It  is  the  plural  of  TQN*, 
strong,  whence  its  use.  See  Ps.  xxii.  13,  1.  13, 
lxviii.  31  ;   Is.  xxxiv.  7  ;   Jer.  1.  11. 

All  the  above  words  refer  to  domesticated  cattle, 
which  formed  of  old,  as  now,  an  important  part  of 
the  wealth  of  the  people  of  Palestine.  In  Is.  li.  20, 
the  word  K'lR  occurs,  and  is  rendered  "  wild  bull," 
but  "  wild  ox  "  in  Deut.  xiv.  5.  The  LXX.  have 
a-evrKiov  in  the  former  passage  and  ftpvya  in  the 
latter.  It  was  possibly  one  of  the  larger  species  of 
antelope,  and  took  its  name  from  its  swiftness — the 

$  - 
Arabic  Li'^  being  cursu  antevertU.  The  Ante- 
lope Oryx  of  Linnaeus  is  indigenous  in  Syria, 
Arabia,  and  Persia.  Dr.  Robinson  mentions  large 
herds  of  black  aud  almost  hairless  buffaloes  as  still 
existing  in  Palestine,  and  these  may  be  the  animal 
indicated  tiii.  396).  [W.  D.] 

BULRUSH,  used  synonymously  with  Rush  in 
the  A.  V.  as  the  rendering  of  the  words  J103N 
and  KOl.      In  Is.  ix.  13,  xix.  15,   we  have  the 


BUN  AH 

proverbial  expression  flDJKl  H23,  A.  V.  "  branch 
and  rush,"  equivalent  to  high  and  low  alike  (the 
LXX.  have  jxiyav  Ka\  /xiKpov  in  one  passage,  apxh" 

Kal  t4\os  in  the  other),  and  in  Is.  lviii.  5,  }V33N 
is  rendered  bulrush.  The  word  is  derived  from 
□  3X,  marsh,  because  the  bulrush  grows  in  marshy 
ground.      The  root  D3N  is  not  in  use,  but  we  have 

-   -  £     . 

the  cognate  Arab,  verb   ^-»\    tepida  fuit  aqua, 

corrupta,  stagnans.  The  bulrush  was  platted  into 
ropes,  as  appears  from  Job  xli.  2,  where  ptD3N  = 

funis  junceus  (see  Bochart.  Hieroz.  ii.  p.  772)  ; 
comp.  Plin.  //.  N.  xix.  2,  "junco  Graecos  adfunes 
usos,  nomini  credamus,  quo  kerbam  cam  appel- 
lant." The  LXX.  have  Kp'ucov  in  Is.  lviii.  5,  and 
also  in  Job  xli.  2. 

OfoSi  translated  bulrush,  occurs  in  Ex.  ii.  3;  Is. 
xviii.  2;  translated  rush  in  Job  viii.  11,  and  Is. 
xxxv.  7.  It  is  the  Hebrew  name  of  the  Papyrus 
Nilotioa,  which  was  called  so  from  its  quality  of 
absorbing  water,  the  root  being  ND3,  sorpsit, 
lu nis.it.  I'll.'  Egyptians  used  this  plant  for  gar- 
ments, shoes,  baskets,  various  kinds  of  utensils,  and 
especially  for  boats.  It  was  the  material  of  the 
ark  in  which  Moses  was  exposed,  and  of  it  the 
vessels  mentioned  in  Is.  xviii.  2,  were  formed.  This 
practice  is  referred  to  by  Lucan  (iv.  136),  "  Con- 
seritur  bibula  Memphitis  cymba  papyro,"  and  by 
Pliny  (xiii.  11.  s.  22)  "  Ex  ipso  quidem  papyro  na- 
vigia  texuut."  (Comp.  Cels.  Ilieroh.  ii.  137-152.) 
In  Job  viii.  11,  the  LXX.  have  trdirvpos.    [W.  D.] 

BU'NAH  (rmn;  Bauad;  Buna),  a  son  of 
Jerahmeel,  of  the  family  of  Pharez  in  Judah  (1  Chr. 
ii.  2;,). 

BUN'NI.  1.  033  ;  Bonni,  Boni),  one  of  the 
Levites  in  the  time  of  Nehemiah  (Xeh.  ix.  4)  ; 
possibly  the  same  person  is  mentioned  in  x.  15. 
The  LXX.  in  both  cases  translate  the  name  by  vl6s. 

2.  Am  it  her  Levite,  but  of  earlier  date  than  the 
preceding  (Neh.  xi.  15).  The  name,  ^-IS,  is  also 
slightly  different.     LXX.  omits. 

3.  Bunni  is  said  to  have  been  the  Jewish  name 
of  Nieodemus  (Lightfoot  on  John  iii.  1  ;  Ewald, 
v.  233). 

BURIAL,  SEPULCHRES,  TOMBS.  The 
Jewsuniformly  disposed  of  the  corpse  by  entombment 
where  possible,  and  failing  that,  by  interment;  ex- 
tending this  respect  to  the  remains  even  of  the  slain 
enemy  and  malefactor  (1  K.  xi.  15;  Dent.  xxi. 
23),  in  the  latter  case  by  express  provision  of  law. 
Since  this  was  the  only  case  so  guarded  by  Mosaic 
precept,  it  may  be  concluded  that  natural  feeling 
was  relied  mi  as  rendering  any  such  general  injunc- 
tion superfluous.  Similarly,  to  disturb  remains 
was  regarded  as  a  barbarity,  only  justifiable  in  the 
case  of  those  who  had  themselves  outraged  religion 
(2  K.  xxiii.  16,  17;  Jer.  viii.  1.  2).  The  Rabbis 
quote  the  doctrine  "drisi  thou  art,  and  unto  dust 

shalt  thou  return,"  as  a  reason  for  preferring  to  en- 
ton  ili  or  inter  their  dead  ;  but  thai  preferential  prac- 
tice is  older  than  the  Mosaic  record,  as  traceable  in 
patriarchal  examples,  and  continued  unaltered  by 
any  Gentile  influence;  so  Tacitus  {Hist.  \.  ■<)  no- 
tices that  it  was  a  point  of  Jewish  en  torn,  corpora 
c  mdere  qu  vm  a  emare. 


BURIAL 


233 


On  this  subject  we  have  to  notice :  I .  the  place 
of  burial,  its  site  and  shape;  2.  the  mode  of  burial ; 
3.  the  prevalent  notions  regarding  this  duty. 

1.  A  natural  rave  enlarged  and  adapted  by  exca- 
vation, or  an  artificial  imitation  of  one,  was  the 
standard  type  of  sepulchre.  This  was  what  the 
structure  of  the  Jewish  soil  supplied  or  suggested. 
A  distinct  and  simple  form  of  sepulture  as  con- 
trasted with  the  complex  and  elaborate  rites  of 
Egypt  clings  to  the  region  of  Palestine  and  varies 
but  little  with  the  great  social  changes  between 
the  periods  of  Abraham  and  the  captivity.  Jacob 
and  Joseph,  who  both  died  in  Egypt,  are  the  only 
known  instances  of  the  Egyptian  method  applied  to 
patriarchal  remains.  Sepulchres,  when  the  owner's 
means  permitted  it,  were  commonly  prepared  before- 
hand, and  stood  often  in  gardens,  by  roadsides,  or 
even  adjoining  houses.  Kings  and  prophets  alone 
were  probably  buried  within  towns  (1  K.  ii.  10, 
xvi.  tl,  28  ;  2  K.  x.  35,  xiii.  9  ;  2  Chr.  xvi.  14, 
xxviii.  27  ;  1  Sam.  xxv.  1,  xxviii.  3).  Sarah's  tomb 
and  Rachel's  seem  to  have  been  chosen  merely  from 
the  accident  of  the  place  of  death  ;  but  the  successive 
interments  at  the  former  (Gen.  xlix.  31)  are  a  chro- 
nicle of  the  strong  family  feeling  among  the  Jews. 
It  was  the  sole  fixed  spot  in  the  unsettled  patriarchal 
life;  and  its  purchase  and  transfer,  minutely  detailed, 
are  remarkable  as  the  sole  transaction  of  the  kind, 
until  repeated  on  a  similar  occasion  at  Shecbem. 
Thus  it  was  deemed  a  misfortune  or  an  indignity, 
not  only  to  be  deprived  of  burial  (Is.  xiv.  20 ;  Jer. 
passim;  2  K.  ix.  10),  but  in  a  lesser  degree  to  be 
excluded  from  the  family  sepulchre  (1  K.  xiii.  22), 
as  were  Uzziah  the  royal  leper,  and  Manasseh  (2  Chi', 
xxvi.  23,  xxxiii.  20).  Thus  the  remains  of  Saul 
and  his  sons  were  reclaimed  to  rest  in  his  father's 
tomb.  Similarly  it  was  a  mark  of  a  profound  feel- 
ing towards  a  person  not  of  one's  family  to  wish  to 
be  buried  with  him  (Ruth  i.  17  ;  1  K.  xiii.  31),  or 
to  give  him  a  place  in  one's  own  sepulchre  (Gen. 
xxiii.  6;  comp.  2  Chr.  xxiv.  16).  The  head  of  a 
family  commonly  provided  space  for  more  than  one 
generation ;  and  these  galleries  of  kindred  sepulchres 
are  common  in  many  eastern  branches  of  the  human 
race.  Cities  soon  became  populous  and  demanded 
cemeteries  (comp.  the  term  ■wo\vdv5piov,  Ez.  xxxix. 
1 5),  which  were  placed  without  the  walls ;  such  an 
one  seems  intended  by  the  expression  in  2  K.  xxiii. 
6,  "  the  graves  of  the  children  of  the  people," 
situated  in  the  valley  of  the  Kedron  or  of  Jehosha- 
phat.  Jeremiah  (vii.  32,  xix.  11)  threatens  that  the 
eastern  valley  called  Tophet,  the  favourite  haunt  ot 
idolatry,  should  be  polluted  by  burying  there  (comp. 
2  K.  xxiii.  16).  Such  was  also  the  "  Potter's  Field  " 
(Matt,  xxvii.  7),  which  had  perhaps  been  wrought 
by  digging  for  clay  into  boles  serviceable  for  graves. 

The  Mishnaic  description  of  a  sepulchre,  com- 
plete according  to  Rabbinical  notions,  is  somewhat 
as  follows:  a  cavern  about  (l  cubits  square,  or  6 
by  8,  from  three  sides  of  which  are  recessed  longi- 
tudinally several  vault-,  called  D'D)D.  each  large 
enough  for  a  corpse.  On  the  fourth  side  the  cave  a 
is  approached  through  a  small  open  covered  court. 
or»portico  TiPl,  ot'  a  size  to  receive  the  bier  and 
bearers.  In  some  such  structures  tin'  demoniac 
may  have  housed.  The  entry  from  this  court  to 
that    Cavem     was     closed     by     a    large    stone    called 

7vl3,  as  capable  of  being  rolled,  thus  continuing  the 

elistic    narrative.      Sometimes   several   such 

cavern-,  each  with  its  recesses,  were  entered  from 

the  several  sides  of  the  same  portico.  (Mishna,  Bava 


234 


BURIAL 


Batra,  t>,  8,  quoted  by  J.  Nicolaus  de  sepulchris 
Jlebraeorum.)  Such  a  tomb  is  that  described  in 
Buckingham's  Travels  in  Arabia  (p.  158),  and  those 
known  to  tradition  as  the  "tombs  of  the  kings" 
(see  below).  But  earlier  sepulchres  were  doubtless 
more  simple,  and,  to  judge  from  2  K.  xiii.  21,  did 
not  prevent  mutual  contact  of  remains.  Sepulchres 
were  marked  sometimes  by  pillars,  as  that  of  Ra- 
chel, or  by  pyramids  as  those  of  the  Asmoneans  at 
Modin  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  6,  7),  and  had  places  of 
higher  and  lower  honour.  Like  temples,  they  were, 
from  their  assumed  inviolability,  sometimes  made  the 
depositaries  of  treasures  (De  Saulcy,  ii.  183).  We 
rind  them  also  distinguished  by  a  "  title  "  (2  K.  xxiii. 
17).  Such  as  were  not  otherwise  noticeable  were 
scrupulously  "  whited  "  (Matt,  xxiii.  27)  once  a  year, 
after  the  rains  before  the  passover,  to  warn  parsers 
by  of  defilement  (Cippi  Hebr.  Hottinger,  p.  1034; 
Rossteusch  de  sepul.  calce  notat.  Ugolini,  xxxiii.). 

2.  With  regard  to  the  mode  of  burial,  we  should 
remember  that  our  impressions,  as  derived  from  the 
0.  T.,  are  those  of  the  burial  of  persons  of  rank  or 
public  eminence,  whilst  those  gathered  from  the 
N.  T.  regard  a  private  station.  But  in  both  cases 
"  the  manner  of  the  Jews "  included  the  use  of 
spices,  where  they  could  command  the  means.  Thus 
Asa  lay  in  a  "bed  of  spices  "  (2  Chr.  xvi.  14).  A 
portion  of  these  were  burnt  in  honour  of  the  de- 
ceased, and  to  this  use  was  probably  destined  part 
of  the  100  pounds  weight  of  "  myrrh  and  aloes  "  in 
our  Lord's  case.  On  high  state  occasions  the  vessels, 
bed,  and  furniture  used  by  the  deceased  were  burnt 
also.  Such  was  probably  the  "  great  burning  "  made 
for  Asa.  If  a  king  was  unpopular  or  died  dis- 
graced  (e.g.  Jehoram,  2  Chr.  xxxi.  19;  Joseph. 
Ant.  ix.  5,  §3),  this  was  not  observed.  In  no  case, 
save  that  of  Saul  and  his  sons,  were  the  bodies  burned, 
nor  in  that  case  were  they  so  burnt  as  not  to  leave 
the  "  bones "  easily  concealed  mid  transported,  and 
the  whole  proceeding  looks  like  a  hasty  precaution 
against  hostile  violence.  Even  then  the  bones  were 
interred)  and  re-exhumed  for  solemn  entombment. 
The  ambiguous  word  in  Am.  vi.  10,  1S"1DD,  ren- 
dered in  the  A.  V.  "he  that  burnetii  him,''  pro- 
bably means  "  the  burner  of  perfumes  in  his  ho- 
nour," i.e.  his  near  rela- 
tion, on  whom  such  duties 
devolved;  not,  as  Winer 
(s.  v.  Begraheii)  and  others 
think,  "  the  burner  of  the 
corpse."  For  a  great  mor- 
tality never  causes  men  to 
burn  corpses  where  it  is 
not  the  custom  of  the 
country  ;  nor  did  the  cus- 
tom vary  among  the  Jews 
on  such  an  occasion  (Ez. 
xxxix.  12-14).  It  was  the 
office  of  the  next  of  kin  to 
perform  and  preside  over 
the  whole  funereal  office  ; 
but  a  company  of  public 
buriers,  originating  in  an 
exceptional  necessity  (Ez. 
I.  c),  had  become,  it 
seems,  customary  in  the 
times  of  the  N.  T.  (Acts 
v.  (3,  10).  The  closing 
of  the  eyes,  kissing,  and 
washing  the  corpse  (Gen. 
xlvi.  4,  1.  1  ;  Acts  ix. 
37),  are  customs  common 


BURIAL 

to  all  nations.  Coffins  were  but  seldom  used,  and  if 
used  were  open  ;  but  fixed  stone  sarcophagi  were  com- 
mon in  tombs  of  rank.  .  The  bier,  the  word  for  which 
in  the  O.  T.  is  the  same  as  that  rendered  bed  [see 
Bed],  was  borne  by  the  nearest  relatives,  and  fol- 
lowed by  any  who  wished  to  do  honour  to  the  dead. 
The  grave-clothes  (bd&via,  ivTa<pia)  were  probably 
of  the  fashion  worn  in  life,  but  swathed  and  fastened 
with  bandages,  and  the  head  covered  separately.  Pre- 
viously to  this  being  done,  spices  were  applied  to  the 
corpse  in  the  form  of  ointment,  or  between  the  folds  of 
the  linen ;  hence  our  Lord's  remark,  that  the  woman 
had  anointed  his  body,  Trpbs  tJ>  ivTcupia^eti',  "  with 
a  view  to  dressing  it  in  these  ivrdepta;"  not,  as 
in  A.  V.  "  for  the  burial."  For  the  custom  of 
mourners  visiting  the  sepulchre  see  MOURNING; 
for  that  of  frequenting  tombs  for  other  purposes, 
see  Necromancy. 

3.  The  precedent  of  Jacob's  and  Joseph's  remains 
being  returned  to  the  land  of  Canaan  was  followed, 
in  wish  at  least,  by  every  pious  Jew.  Following 
a  similar  notion,  some  of  the  Rabbins  taught  that 
only  in  that  land  could  those  who  were  buried  ob- 
tain a  share  in  the  resurrection  which  was  to  usher 
in  Messiah's  reign  on  earth.  Thus  that  land  was 
called  by  them  "the  land  of  the  living,"  and  the 
sepulchre  itself,  "the  house  of  the  living."  Some 
even  feigned  that  the  bodies  of  the  righteous,  wher- 
ever else  burial, rolled  back  to  Canaan  underground, 
and  found  there  only  their  appointed  rest  (J.  Nico- 
laus, de  sepult.  Heb.  xiii.  1).  Tombs  were,  in  po- 
pular belief,  led  by  the  same  teaching,  invested  with 
traditions.  Thus  Machpelah  is  stated  (Lightfoot, 
Centuria  Chorographia,  s.  v.  Hebron)  to  have  been 
the  burial-place  not  only  of  Abraham  and  Sarah, 
but  also  of  Adam  mid  Eve;  and  there  was  pro- 
bably at  the  time  of  the  N.  T.  a  spot  fixed  upon 
by  tradition  as  the  site  of  the  tomb  of  every  pro- 
phet of  note  in  the  0.  T.  To  repair  and  adorn 
these  was  deemed  a  work  of  exalted  piety  (Matt, 
xxiii.  29).  The  scruples  of  the  Scribes  extended 
even  to  the  burial  of  the  ass  whose  neck  was  broken 
(Ex.  xxxiv.  20),  mid  of  the  first-born  of  cattle. 
(1!.  Maimoii.  de primogen.  ch.  iii.  §4,  quoted  by 
J.  Nicolaus,  de  sepult.  Heb.  xvi.  3,  4.)      [H.  H.l 


of  the  Tombs  called  "  Tom  he  of  the  Prophets.' 


BURIAL 


BURNT-OFFERING 


235 


The  neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem  is  thickly 
studded  with  tombs,  many  of  them  of  great 
antiquity.  A  succinct  but  valuable  account  of 
them  is  given  in  Porter's  Handbook  (p.  143,  sqj)  ; 
but  it  is  only  necessary  in  this  article  to  refer  to 
two  or  three  of  the  most  celebrated.  The  so-called 
"  Tombs  of  the  Prophets"  will  be  best  explained 
by  the  preceding  plan,  taken  from  Porter  (p.  147), 
and  of  which  he  gives  the  following  description : — 

"  Through  a  long  descending  gallery,  the  first  part 
of  which  is  winding,  we 
enter  a  circular  chamber 
about  '24  ft.  in  diameter 
and  10  high,  having  a 
hole  in  its  roof.  From 
this  chamber  two  paral- 
lel galleries,  10  ft.  high 
and  5  wide,  are  carried 
southwards  through  the 
rock  for  about  60  ft.,  a 
third  diverges  S.E.,  ex- 
tending 40  ft.  They  are 
connected  by  two  cross- 
galleries  in  concentric 
curves,  one  at  their  ex- 
treme end,  the  other  in 
the  middle.  The  outer 
one  is  115  ft.  long  and 
has  a  range  of  thirty 
niches  on  the  level  of  its 

floor,   radiating  outwards.     Two  small   chambers, 
with  similar  niches,  also  open  into  it." 

The  celebrated  "Tombs  of  the  Kings"  have 
received  this  name  on  account  of  their  remarkable 
character;  but  they  are  supposed  by  Robinson  and 
I'orter  to  be  the  tomb  of  Helena,  the  widowed 
queen  of  Monobazus  king  of  Adiabene.  She  became 
a  proselyte  to  Judaism,  and  fixed  her  residence  at 
Jerusalem,  where  she  relieved  many  of  the  poor 
during  the  famine  predicted  by  Agabus  in  the  days 
of  Claudius  Caesar  (Acts  xi.  28),  and  built  for 
herself  a  tomb,  as  we  learn  from  Josephus.  (On 
Helena  and  her  tomb  see  Joseph.  Ant.  xx.  2  §1, 
sq.,  4,  §3;  B.  J.  v.  2,  §2,  4,  §2;  Paus.  viii.  16, 
§5;  Robinson,  i.  361,  sq.)  Into  the  question  of 
the  origin  of  these  tombs  it  is,  however,  unneces- 
sary to  enter ;  but  their  structure  claims  our 
attention.  They  are  excavated  out  of  the  rock. 
The  traveller  passes  through  a  low  arched  doorway 
into  a  court  92  ft.  long  by  87  wide.  On  the 
western  side  is  a  vestibule  or  porch  39  ft.  wide. 
The  open  front  was  supported  by  two  columns  in 


the  middle.  Along  the  front  extend  a  deep  frieze 
and  cornice,  the  former  richly  ornamented.  At 
the  southern  side  of  the  vestibule  is  the  entrance  to 
the  tomb.  The  first  room  is  a  mere  antechamber 
18tt  ft.  by  19.  On  the  S.  side  are  two  doors 
leading  to  other  chambers,  and  on  the  W.  one. 
These  three  chambers  have  recesses,  running  into 
the  walls  at  right  angles,  and  intended  for  bodies. 
(For  further  particulars  see  Porter,  from  whose 
Handbook  the  preceding  account  is  taken.) 


ID. 


The  so-called  "  Tomb  of  Zachariah,"  said  to  have 
been  constructed  in  honour  of  Zachariah,  who  was 
slain  "  between  the  temple  and  the  altar  "  in  the 


Vestibule  of  the  Tomb 

(From  Photograph,  i 


The no-ealled  "Tomb  of  Zeclmrinh."    (From  Photogrs] 

reign  of  Joash  (2  Chr.  xxiv.  21  ;  Matt,  xxiii.  35), 
is  held  in  great  veneration  by  the  Jews.  It  is 
doubtful,  however,  whether  it  be  a  tomb  at  all, 
and  the  style  of  architecture  can  scarcely  be  earlier 
than  our  era.  A  drawing  of  it  is  inserted  here 
on  account  of  its  celebrity.  ■  It  bears  a  considerable 
resemblance  to  the  so-called  tomb  of  Absalom  which 
is  figured  on  ]i.  14. 

BUBNT-OFFEBING  (nty  or  rt^ty,andin 
poetical  passages  y?2,  /.>.  ••  perfect,"  6\oK&pnwffis 
(Gen.),  6\oKavroofia  (Ex.  and   Lev.,  &c.   I. XX. ; 


236 


BURNT-0FFER1NU 


oAoKaurcojua,  N.  T. ;  holocauctum,  Vulg.).  The 
original  derivation  of  the  word  Tw]}  is  from  the 
root  Tw]}  "ascends;"  and  it  is  applied  to  the 
ottering,  which  was  wholly  consumed  by  fire  on  the 
altar,  and  the  whole  of  which,  except  the  refuse 
ashes,  "ascended"  in  the  smoke  to  God.  It  corre- 
sponds therefore  in  sense,  though  not  exactly  in  form, 
to  the  word  6\oKavTa>ixa,  "whole  burnt-ottering," 
from  which  the  name  of  the  sacrifice  in  modern  lan- 
guages is  taken.  Every  sacrifice  was  in  part  "  a 
burnt-ottering,"  because,  since  fire  was  the  chosen 
manifestation  of  God's  presence,  the  portion  of  each 
sacrifice  especially  dedicated  to  Him  was  consumed 
bv  fire.  But  the  term  is  generally  restricted  to  that 
which  is  properly  a  "  whole  burnt-ottering,"  the 
whole  of  which  was  so  offered  and  so  consumed. 

The  burnt-offering  is  first  named  in  Gen.  viii.  20, 
as  offered  after  the  Flood.  (In  iv.  4  we  find  the 
more  general  word  HPDD  "  ottering,"  a  word 
usually  applied  to  unbloody  sacrifices,  though  in 
the  LXX.  and  in  Heb.  xi.  4  translated  by  Ova'ta.) 
Throughout  the  whole  of  the  book  of  Genesis  (see 
xv.  9,  17,  xxii.  2,  7,  8,  13)  it  appears  to  be  the 
only  sacrifice  refeired  to ;  afterwards  it  became  dis- 
tinguished as  one  of  the  regular  classes  of  sacrifice 
under  the  Mosaic  law. 

Now  all  sacrifices  are  divided  (see  Heb.  v.  1) 
into  "gifts"  and  "  sacrifices-for-sin "  (i.e.  eucha- 
ristic  and  propitiatory  sacrifices),  and  of  the  former 
of  these  the  burnt-offering  was  the  choicest  specimen. 
Accordingly  (in  Ps.  xl.  8,  9,  quoted  in  Heb.  x.  5) 
we  have  first  (in  ver.  8)  the  general  opposition,  as 
above,  of  sacrifices  (Ovatai)  (propitiatory),  and 
offerings  (rpofftyopai),  and  then  (in  ver.  9)  "  burnt- 
ottering,"  as  representing  the  one,  is  opposed  to 
"  sin-offering,"  as  representing  the  other.  Similarly 
in  Ex.  x.  25  (less  '  precisely)  "  burnt-offering  "  is 
contrasted  with  "  sacrifice."  (So  in  1  Sam.  xv.  22  ; 
Ps.  1.  8;  Mark  xdi.  33.)  On  the  other  hand,  it  is 
distinguished  from  "  meat-offerings  "  (which  were 
unbloody),  and  from  "  peace-offerings  "  (both  of  the 
eucharistic  kind),  because  only  a  portion  of  them 
were  consumed.     (See  1  K.  iii.  15,  viii.  64,  &c.) 

The  meaning  therefore  of  the  whole  burnt-offering 
was  that  which  is  the  original  idea  of  all  sacrifice, 
the  ottering  by  the  sacrificer  of  himself,  soul  and  body, 
to  God,  the  submission  of  his  will  to  the  Will  of 
the  Lord.  See  Ps.  xl.  10,  li.  17,  19,  and  compare 
the  more  general  treatment  of  the  subject  under  the 
word  Sacrifice.  It  typified  (see  Heb.  v.  1,3,  7, 
8)  our  Lord's  ottering  (as  especially  in  the  tempta- 
tion and  the  agony),  the  perfect  sacrifice  of  His  own 
human  will  to  the  Will  of  His  Father.  As  that 
offering  could  only  be  accepted  from  one  either  sin- 
less or  already  purified  from  sin,  therefore  the  burnt- 
ottering  (see  Ex.  xxix.  36,  37,  38;  Lev.  viii.  14, 
18,  ix.  8,  12,  xvi.  3,  5,  &c.)  was  always  preceded 
by  a  sin-offering.  So  also  we  Christians,  because 
the  sin-offering  has  been  made  once  for  all  for  us, 
otter  the  continual  burnt-ottering  of  ourselves,  "  as 
a  living  sacrifice,  holy  and  acceptable  to  the  Lord." 
(See  Rom.  xii.  1 .) 

In  accordance  with  this  principle  it  was  enacted 
that  with  the  burnt-offering  a  "  meat-offering"  (of 


a  It  is  clear  that  in  this  ceremony  the  burnt-offer- 
ing touched  closely  on  the  propitiatory  or  sin-offering; 
although  the  solemnity  of  the  blood-sprinkling  in  the 
latter  was  much  greater,  and  had  a  peculiar  signifi- 
eanc.  It  is,  of  course,  impossible  that  the  forms  of 
sacrifices   should    be    rigidly  separated,   because   the 


BUSHEL 

flour  and  oil)  and  "drink-ottering"  of  wine  should 
be  offered,  as  showing  that,  with  themselves,  men 
dedicated  also  to  God  the  chief  earthly  gifts  with 
which  He  had  blessed  them.  (Lev.  viii.  18,  22, 
26,  ix.  16, 17,  xiv.,20  ;  Ex.  xxix.  40  ;  Num.  xxviii. 
4,  5.) 

The  ceremonial  of  the  burnt-offering  is  given  in 
detail  in  the  book  of  Leviticus.  The  animal  was 
to  be  a  male  unblemished,  either  a  young  bullock, 
ram,  or  goat,  or,  in  case  of  poverty,  a  turtle-dove 
or  pigeon.  It  was  to  be  brought  by  the  offerer 
"  of  his  own  voluntary  will"  and  slain  by  himself, 
after  he  had  laid  his  hand  upon  its  head,  to  make  it 
his  own  representative,  on  the  north  side  of  the 
altar.  The  priest  was  then  to  sprinkle  the  blood 
upon  the  altar,"  and  afterwards  to  cut  up  and  burn 
the  whole  victim,  only  reserving  the  skin  for  him- 
self. The  birds  were  to  be  ottered  similarly,  but 
not  divided.  (See  Lev.  i.,  vii.  8,  viii.  18-21,  &c.) 
It  will  be  observed  how  all  these  ceremonies  were 
typical  of  the  meaning  described  above,  and  especially 
how  emphatically  the  freedom  of  will  in  the  sacri- 
ficer is  marked. 

The  burnt-ottering  being  thus  the  rite  which 
represented  the  normal  state  and  constant  duty  of 
man,  when  already  in  covenant  with  God,b  was  the 
one  kind  of  sacrifice  regularly  appointed.  Thus  there 
were,  as  public  burnt-offerings — 

1st.  The  daily  burnt-offering,  a  lamb  of  the  first 
year,  sacrificed  every  morning  and  evening  (with 
an  ottering  of  flour  and  wine)  for  the  people  (Ex. 
xxix.  38-42;   Num.  xxviii.  3-8). 

2ndly.  The  Sabbath  burnt-offering,  double  of 
that  which  was  offered  every  day  (Num.  xxviii. 
8-10). 

3rdly.  The  offering  at  the  new  moon,  at  the  three 
great  festivals,  the  great  Day  of  Atonement,  and 
feast  of  trumpets :  generally  two  bullocks,  a  ram, 
and  seven  lambs.     (See  Num.  xxviii.  11-xxix.  39.) 

Private  burnt-offerings  were  appointed  at  the 
consecration  of  priests  (Ex.  xxix.  15;  Lev.  viii.  18, 
ix.  12),  at  the  purification  of  women  (Lev.  xii.  6, 
8),  at  the  cleansing  of  the  lepers  (Lev.  xiv.  19), 
and  removal  of  other  ceremonial  uncleanness  (xv. 
15,  30),  on  any  accidental  breach  of  the  Nazaritic 
vow,  or  at  its  conclusion  (Num.  vi. ;  comp.  Acts 
xxi.  26),  &c. 

But  freewill  burnt-offerings  were  offered  and  ac- 
cepted bv  God  on  any  solemn  occasions,  as,  for 
example,  at  the  dedication  of  the  tabernacle  (Num. 
vii.)  and  of  the  temple  (1  K.  viii.  64),  when  they 
were  offered  in  extraordinary  abundance.  But. 
except  on  such  occasions,  the  nature,  the  extent, 
and  the  place  of  the  sacrifice  were  expressly  limited 
by  God,  so  that,  while  all  should  be  unblemished 
and  pure,  there  should  be  no  idea  (as  among  the 
heathen)  of  buying  His  favour  by  costliness  of  sacri- 
fice. Of  this  law  Jephthah's  vow  was  a  transgres- 
sion, consistent  with  the  semi-heathenish  character 
of  his  early  days  (see  Judg.  xi.  3,  24).  The 
sacrifice  of  cows  in  1  Sam.  vi.  14  was  also  a 
formal  infraction  of  it,  excused  by  the  probable  igno- 
rance of  the  people,  and  the  special  nature  of  the 
occasion.  [A.  B.] 

BUSHEL.     [Measures.] 


ideas  which  they  enshrine,   though  capable  of  dis- 
tinction, are  yet  inseparable  from  one  another. 

b  This  is  remarkably  illustrated  by  the  fact  that 
heathens  were  allowed  to  offer  burnt-offerings,  and 
that  Augustus  ordered  two  lambs  and  a  bullock  to  be 
offered  for  him  every  day  [Joseph.  B.  J.  ii.  17,  §2). 


BUTTER 

BUTTER  (n^Jpn,  chem'haJi  ;  Poirvpov, 
butyrum),  curdled  milk,  as  distinguished  from 
3 ?n.  fresh  milk :  hence  cards,  butter,  and  in  one 

T    T 

place  probably  cheese.     It  comes  from  an  unused 

root,  KJOn  =  Arab.  L»^    spissum  fait    lac.     In 

Gen.  xviii.  8,  butter  and  milk  are  mentioned  among 
the  things  which  Abraham  set  before  his  heavenly 
guests  (comp.  Judg.  v.  25  ;  2  Sam.  xvii.  29).  Milk 
is  generally  offered  to  travellers  in  Palestine  in  a 
curdled  or  sour  state,  "  lebben,"  thick,  almost  like 
butter  (comp.  Josephus'  rendering  in  Judg.  iv. 
19: — yd\a  5ie<p6opbs  ^8tj).     In  Deut.  xxxii.  15, 

we  find  |N\*  ypni  ~lp3  DNpn  among  the  bless- 
ings which  Jeshurun  had  enjoyed,  where  milk  of 
kine  would  seem  contrasted  with  milk  of  sheep. 
The  two  passages  in  Job  (xx.  17,  xxix.  6)  where 
the  word  HXOn  occurs  are  also  best  satisfied  by 

rendering  it  milk ;  and  the  same  may  be  said  of  Ps. 
Iv.  21,  which  should  b?  compared  with  Job  xxix.  6. 
In  Prov.  xxx.  33,  Gesenius  thinks  that  cheese  is 
meant,  the  word  j'^JD  signifying  pressure  rather 
than  churning.  Jarchi  (on  Gen.  xviii.  8)  explains 
HXpri  to  be pinguedo  lactis,  quam  de  ejus  super- 

ficie  colligunt,  i.  e.  cream,  and  Vitringa  and  Hitzig 
give  this  meaning  to  the  word  in  Is.  vii.  15-22. 
Butter  was  not  in  use  among  the  Greeks  and 
Romans  except  for  medicinal  purposes,  but  this  tact 
is  of  no  weight  as  to  its  absence  from  Palestine. 
Robinson  mentions  the  use  'of  butter  at  the  present 
day  (Bibr  lies.  i.  449;,  and  also  the  method  of 
churning  (i.  485,  and  ii.  418),  and  from  this  we 
may  safely  infer  that  the  art  of  butter-making  was 
known  to  the  ancient  inhabitants  of  the  land,  so 
little  have  the  habits  of  the  people  of  Palestine  been 
modified  in  the  lapse  of  centuries.  Burckhardt 
(Travels  in  Arabia,  i.  p.  52)  mentions  the  different 
uses  of  butter  by  the  Arabs  of  the  Hedjaz.  [W.D.] 

BUZ  (T-13,  contempt;  6  Bau|),  the  second  son 
of  Milcah  and  Nahor  (Gen.  xxii.  21).  The  gen- 
tilic  name  is  H-IS,  and  Klihu  is  called  "  the  Buzite  " 

(Boi;0T7js)  of  the  kindred  of  Ram,  i.  e.  Aram. 
Elihu  was  therefore  probably  a  descendant  of  Buz, 
whose  family  seems  to  have  settled  in  Arabia  De- 
seitaor  Petraea,  since  Jeremiah  (xxv.  23  'Pis),  in 
denouncing  God's  judgments  against  them,  mentions 
(hem  with  Thema  and  Dedan.  Some  connect  the 
territory  of  Buz  with  Busan,  a  Roman  fort  men- 
tioned in  Amm.  Marc,  xviii.  10,  and  others  with 
Basta  in  Arabia  Petraea,  which  however  has  only 
the  first  letter  in  common  with  it  (Winer,  .v.  ».)'. 

The  jingle  of  the  names  IIuz  and  Buz  is  by  no 
means  so  apparent  in  the  Hebrew  Q'-iy,  T-13)  ;  but  it 
is  rpiite  in  the  Oriental  taste  to  give  to  relations  these 
rhyming  appellatives  ;  comp.  Islina  and  Ishui  (Gen. 
,\lvi.  17);  Mehujael  ami  Methusael  (Gen.  iv.), 
Uzziel  and  Uzzi  (1  Chr.  vii.  7):  and  among  the 
Arabians,  Haroot  and  Maroot  the  rebel  angels,  Hasan 
and  Hoseyn,  the  sons  of  'Alee,  &c.  The  Koran 
abounds  in  such  homoioteleuta,  ami  sc  pleasing  are 
they  to  the  Arabs,  that  they  even  call  ( lain  and  Abel, 
Kabil  and  Habil  (Weil's  Bibl.  Legends,  23;  also 
Southey's  Notes  to  Thalaba),  or  Habil  and  Habid 
(see  Stanley,  413).  The  same  Idiom  i<  found  in 
Mahratta  and  the  modem  languages  of  the  East. 

2.   A  name  occurring  in  the  genealogies  of  the 


CADMIEL 


237 


tribe  of  Gad  (1  Chr.  v.  14).     (Bov£  Alex.  'Axi- 
fioiC;  Buz).  [F.  W.  F.] 

BU'ZI  (n-1 3, no  article;  Bov(u  ;  Buzi),  father 

of  Ezekiel  the  prophet  (Ez.  i.  3). 

BYSSUS.     [Linen.] 


CAB.     [Measures.] 

CAB'BON    (}133;      Xa/3p<l ;   Alex.    Xa/3£a  ; 

Chebbon),  a  town  in  the  low  country  (Shefelah) 

of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  40)  which  is  only  once  men- 
tioned, and  of  which  nothing  has  been  since  disco- 
vered. [G.] 

CA'BUL  (*>133  ;  Xaipa/j.aaro/x4\,  including  the 
Hebrew  word  following,  ?ND£'£  ;   Alex.  Xa/SoJA  ; 

CabuT),  a  place  named  as  one  of  the  landmarks  on 
the  boundary  of  Asher  (Josh.  xix.  27).  From  its 
mention  in  proximity  to  Jiphthach-el — afterwards 
Jotapata,  and  now  Jefat — it  is  probable  that  it  is 
the  same  with  that  spoken  of  by  Josephus  (  Vit.  §43, 
45)  as  in  the  district  of  Ptolemais.,  and  40  stadia  from 
Jotapata.  In  this  case  it  may  fairly  be  considered  as 
still  existing  in  the  modern  Kabul,  which  was  found 
by  Dr.  Smith  and  by  Robinson  8  or  9  miles  east  of 
Akka,  and  about  the  same  distance  from  Jefat  (Rob. 
iii.  87,  8.  For  references  to  the  Talmuds  see  Schwarz, 
192).  Being  thus  on  the  very  borders  of  Galilee, 
it  is  more  than  probable  that  there  is  some  con- 
nexion between  this  place   and  the  district  (V1N 

(  I    V   1 

>133,  "  the  land  of  C.'  )  containing  twenty  cities, 

which  was  presented  by  Solomon  to  Hiram  king  of 
Tyre  (1  K.  ix.  11-14).  The  LXX.  rendering  of 
the  name,  "Optov,  appears  to  arise  from  their 
having  read  7-133,  Gebool,  "  boundary,"  for  7133. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  explanation  of  Josephus  is 
quite  in  accordance  with  that  hinted  at  in  the 
text — itself  thoroughly  in  keeping  with  Oriental 
modes  of  speech.  Hiram,  not  liking  Solomon's  gift, 
seizes  on  the  name  of  one  of  the  cities,  which  in  his 
own  Phoenician  tongue  expresses  his  disappoint- 
ment (/tara  ^olv'lkcov  yAcorray,  ovk  apicrKov.  Jos. 
Ant.  viii.  5,  §3),  and  forms  from  it  a  designation 
for  the  whole  district.  The  pun  is  doubtless  a 
Phoenician  one,  since  there  is  no  trace  of  it  in  the 
Hebrew  beyond  the  explanation  in  ver.  12,  "  they 
pleased  him  not;"  the  Hebrew  words  for  which, 
V^yS  -l"!^"1  Us,   have  no   affinity  whatever  with 

"  Cabul."     See  however  possible  derivations  of  the 

name  in  the  Onom  isticons  of  Simonis  (p.  417),  and 
Hiller  (435,  775).  [<;.] 

CAD'DIS  Ka55('$  ;  Caddis),  the  surname  {Sia- 
Kahovfxfvos)  of  Joaxnan,  the  eldest  brother  of 
Judas  Maceabaeus  ^1  Mace  ii.  2). 

CADES,  l  -Mac.  xi.  63,  73.     [Kedesh.] 

CA'DES-BAKXU  KaSrj*  Bapvi) ;  Vulg.  has 
different  reading),  Judith  v.  14.     [Kadesh-BAR- 

nl:a.J 

CADMIEL    (Ko5ot)Aos  ;    Alex.    KaS^iijAor  ; 
el),  i  Esd.  v.  26,  58.    [Kadmiel.] 


238 


CAESAR 


CAE'SAR  (Kcucrap,  also  6  Se/Scwrrrfs  [Augus- 
tus] in  Acts  xxv.  21,  25),  always  in  the  N.  T. 
the  Roman  emperor,  the  sovereign  of  Judaea  (John 
xix.  15;  Acts  xvii.  7).  It  was  to  him  that  the 
Jews  paid  tribute  (Matt.  xxii.  17  ff. ;  Luke  xx.  22, 
xxiii.  2) ;  and  to  him  that  such  Jews  as  were  cives 
Romani  had  the  right  of  appeal  (Acts  xxv.  11  f., 
xxvi.  32,  xxviii.  19)  ;  in  which  case,  if  their  cause 
was  a  criminal  one,  they  were  sent  to  Rome  (Acts 
xxv.  12,  21, — comp. Pliny,  Epp.  x.  97)  ;  where  was 
the  court  of  the  emperor  (Phil.  iv.  22).  The  N.  T 
history  falls  entirely  within  the  reigns  of  the  five 
first  Roman  Caesars,  viz.,  Augustus,  Tiberius, 
Caligula,  Claudius,  and  Nero ;  only  the  two  former 
of  whom,  and  Claudius,  are  mentioned  by  name; 
but  Nero  is  the  emperor  alluded  to  in  the  Acts 
from  ch.  xxv.  to  the  end,  and  in  Phil.  (I.  c),  and 
possibly  in  the  Apocalypse.  See  further  under 
Augustus,  and  under  the  names  of  the  several 
Caesars  above-mentioned.  [H.  A.] 

CAESAREA  (Kaurapda,  Acts  viii.  40,  ix.  30, 
x.  1,  24,  xi.  11,  xii.  19,  xviii.  22,  xxi.  8,  16  ;  xxiii. 
23,  33  ;  xxv.  1,  4,  6,  13).  The  passages  just  enu- 
merated show  how  important  a  place  this  city 
occupies  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  It  was  the 
residence,  apparently  for  several  years,  of  Philip, 
one  of  the  seven  deacons  or  almoners  (viii.  40,  x.xi. 
8,  10),  and  the  scene  of  the  conversion  of  the 
Italian  centurion,  Cornelius  (x.  1,  24,  xi.  11). 
Here  Herod  Agrippa  I.  died  (xii.  19).  From  hence 
St.  Paul  sailed  to  Tarsus,  when  forced  to  leave 
Jerusalem  on  his  return  from  Damascus  (ix.  30), 
and  at  this  port  he  landed  after  his  second  mis- 
sionary journey  (xviii.  22).  He  also  spent  some 
time  at  Caesarea  on  his  return  from  the  third 
missionary  journey  (xxi.  8, 16),  and  before  long  was 
brought,  back  a  prisoner  to  the  same  place  (xxiii. 
23,  33),  where  he  remained  two  years  in  bonds 
before  his  voyage  to  Italy  (xxv.  1,  4,  6,  13). 

Caesarea  was  situated  on  the  coast  of  Palestine, 
on  the  line  of  the  great  road  from  Tyre  to  Egypt, 
and  about  half  way  between  Joppa  and  Dora 
(Joseph.  B.  J.  i.  21,  §5).  The  journey  of  St. 
Peter  from  Joppa  (Acts  x.  24)  occupied  rather 
more  than  a  day.  On  the  other  hand  St.  Paul's 
journey  from  Ptolemais  (Acts  xxi.  8)  was  accom- 
plished within  the  day.  The  distance  from  Jeru- 
salem was  about  70  miles ;  Josephus  states  it  in 
round  numbers  as  600  stadia  (Ant.  xiii.  11,  §2; 
B.  J.  i.  3,  §5.  The  Jerusalem  Itinerary  gives  68 
miles  ( Wesscling,  p.  600.  Dr.  Robinson  thinks 
this  ought  to  be'  78  :  Bib.  Res.  ii.  242,  note).  It 
has  been  ascertained,  however,  that  there  was  a 
shorter  road  by  Antipatris  than  that  which  is 
given  in  the  Itinerary,- — a  point  of  some  import- 
ance in  reference  to  the  night-journey  of  Acts  xxiii. 
[Antipatris.] 

In  Strabo's  time  there  was  on  this  point  of  the 
coast  merely  a  town  called  "  Strato's  tower"  with  a 
landing-place  (TrpSffop/xov  ex&"/)»  whereas,  in  the 
time  of  Tacitus,  Caesarea  is  spoken  of  as  being  the 
head  of  Judaea  ("  Juiaeae  caput,"  Tac.  Hist.  ii. 
79).  It  was  in  this  interval  that  the  city  was 
built  by  Herod  the  Great.  The  work  was  in  fact 
accomplished  in  ten  years.  The  utmost  care  and 
expense  were  lavished  on  the  building  of  Caesarea. 
It  was  a  proud  monument  of  the  reign  of  Herod, 
who  named  it  in  honour  of  the  Emperor  Augustus. 
.  The  full  name  was  Kaicrapeia  2e (Scurry]  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xvi.  5,  §1).  It  was  sometimes  called  Caesarea 
Stratonis,  and  Caesarea  Palaestinae  ;  sometimes  also 
(from  its  position)  ira.pa.Ai6s  (Joseph.  B.  J.  iii.  9, 


CAESAREA 

§1),  or  r)  £ttI  daAaTTp  (id.  vii.  1,  §3 ).  It  must  be 
carefully  distinguished  from  CAESAREA  Philippi. 

The  magnificence  of  Caesarea  is  described  in 
detail  by  Josephus  in  two  places  (Ant.  xv.  9  ;  B.J. 
i.  21).  The  chief  features  were  connected  with 
the  harbour  (itself  called  Se/Sao-rbs  Kifxr]v  on  coins, 
and  by  Josephus,  Ant.  xvii.  5,  §1),  which  was  equal 
in  size  to  the  Piraeus.  A  vast  breakwater,  com- 
posed of  stones  50  feet  long,  curved  round  so  as 
to  afford  complete  protection  from  the  south-westerly 
winds,  leaving  an  opening  only  on  the  north.  Broad 
landing-wharves  surrounded  the  harbour;  and  con- 
spicuous from  the  sea  was  a  temple,  dedicated  tc 
Caesar  and  to  Rome,  and  containing  colossal  statues 
of  the  Emperor  and  the  Imperial  City.  Caesarea 
contained  also  an  amphitheatre  and  a  theatre.  The 
latter  was  the  scene  of  the  death  of  Herod  Agrippa  I. 
Caesarea  was  the  official  residence  of  the  Hero- 
dian  kings,  and  of  Festus,  Felix,  and  the  other 
Roman  procurators  of  Judaea.  Here  also  were  the 
head-quarters  of  the  military  forces  of  the  province. 
It  was  by  no  means  strictly  a  Jewish  city.  The 
Gentile  population  predominated  ;  and  at  the  syna- 
gogue-worship the  Scriptures  of  the  O.  T.  were 
read  in  Greek.  Constant  feuds  took  place  here 
between  the  Jews  and  Greeks  ;  and  an  outbreak 
of  this  kind  was  one  of  the  first  incidents  of  the 
great  war.  It  was  at  Caesaiea  that  Vespasian 
was  declared  emperor.  He  made  it  a  Roman 
colony,  called  it  by  his  name,  and  gave  to  it  the 
Jus  Italicvm,  The  history  of  the  place,  during 
the  time  of  its  greatest  eminence,  is  summed  up 
in  one  sentence  by  Pliny: — "Stratonis  turris, 
eadem  Caesarea,  ab  Herode  rege  condita:  nunc 
Colonia  prima  Flavia,  a  Vespnsiano  Imperatore 
deducta"  (v.  14). 

To  the  Biblical  geographer  Caesarea  is  inter- 
esting as  the  home  of  Eusebius.  It  was  also  the 
scene  of  some  of  Origen's  labours  and  the  birth- 
place of  Procopius.  It  continued  to  be  a  city  of  some 
importance  even  in  the  time  of  the  Crusades.  Now, 
though  an  Arabic  corruption  of  the  name  still  lingers 
on  the  site  (JTaisariyeK),  it  is  utterly  desolate ;  and 
its  ruins  have  for  a  long  period  been  a  quarry,  from 
which  other  towns  in  this  part  of  Syria  have  been 
built.  (See  Buckingham's  Travels  and  the  Appendix 
to  vol.  i.  of  I)]-.  Traill's  Josephus.)        [J.  S.  H.] 

CAESAREA  PHILIPPI  (Kaicrdpeia  r,  4>i- 
A'nrirov)  is  mentioned  only  in  the  two  first  Gospels 
(Matt.  xvi.  13;  Mark  viii.  27)  and  in  accounts  of 
the  same  transactions.  The  story  in  Eusebius,  that 
the  woman  healed  of  the  issue  of  blood,  and  sup- 
posed to  have  been  named  Berenice,  lived  at  this 
place,  rests  on  no  foundation. 

Caesarea  Philippi  was  the  northernmost  point  of 
our  Lord's  journeyings ;  and  the  passage  in  His 
life,  which  was  connected  with  the  place,  was  other- 
wise a  very  marked  one.  (See  Stanley's  Sinai  <$- 
Palestine,  p.  391.)  The  place  itself  too  is  re- 
markable in  its  physical  and  picturesque  cha- 
racteristics, and  also  in  its  historical  associations. 
It  was  at  the  easternmost  and  most  important  of 
the  two  recognised  sources  of  the  Jordan,  the  other 
being  at  Tell-el-Kadi.  [Dan  or  Laish,  which  by 
Winer  and  others  has  been  erroneously  identified 
with  Caes.  Philippi.]  Not  that  either  of  these 
sources  is  the  most  distant  fountain-head  of  the 
Jordan,  the  name  of  the  river  being  given  (as  in 
the  case  of  the  Mississippi  and  Missouri,  to  quote 
Dr.  Robinson's  illustration),  not  to  the  most  remote 
fountains,  but  the  most  copious.  The  spring  rises, 
and  the  city  was  built,  on  a  limestone  terrace  in  a 


CAGE 

valley  at  the  base  of  Mount  Hermon.  Caesarea 
Philippi  has  no  0.  T.  history,  though  it  has  been 
not  unreasonably  identified   with  Baal-Gad.     Its 

annals  run  back  direct  from  Herod's  time  into 
heathenism.  There  is  no  difficulty  in  identifying 
it  with  the  Panium  of  Josephus ;  and  the  inscrip- 
tions are  not  yet  obliterated,  which  show  that  the 
<iod  Pan  had  once  a  sanctuary  at  this  spot.  Here 
Herod  the  Great  erected  a  temple  to  Augustus,  the 
town  being  then  called  from  the  grotto  where  Pan 
had  been  honoured.  It  is  worth,  while  here  to 
quote  in  succession  the  words  of  Josephus  and  of 
Dr.  Robinson:  —  "Herod,  having  accompanied 
Caesar  to  the  sea  and  returned  home,  erected  him  a 
beautiful  temple  of  white  marble  near  the  place 
called  Panium.  This  is  a  fine  cavern  in  a  moun- 
tain ;  under  which  there  is  a  great  cavity  in  the 
earth;  and  the  cavern  is  abrupt,  and  very  deep, 
and  full  of  still  water.  Over  it  hangs  a  vast  moun- 
tain, and  under  the  mountain  rise  the  springs  of 
the  river  Jordan.  Herod  adorned  this  place,  which 
was  already  a  very  remarkable  one,  still  further  by 
the  erection  of  this  temple,  which  he  dedicated  to 
Caesar."  (Joseph.  Ant.  xv.  10,  §3  ;  comp.  B.  J. 
i.  21,  §3).  "The  situation  is  unique;  combining 
in  an  unusual  degree  the  elements  of  grandeur  and 
beauty.  It  nestles  in  its  recess  at  the  southern 
base  of  the  mighty  Hermon,  which  towers  in 
majesty  to  an  elevation  of  7000  or  8000  feet 
above.  The  abundant  waters  of  the  glorious  foun- 
tain spread  over  the  terrace  luxuriant  fertility  and 
the  graceful  interchange  of  copse,  lawn  and  waving 
fields."    (Robinson,  iii.  404.) 

Panium  became  part  of  the  territory  of  Philip, 
tetrarch  of  Trachonitis,  who  enlarged  and  embellished 
the  town,  and  called  it  Caesarea  Philippi,  partly 
after  his  own  name,  aud  partly  after  that  ot  the 
emperor  {Ant.  xviii.  2,  §1  ;  B.  J.  ii.  9,  §1). 
Agrippa  II.  followed  in  the  same  course  of  flattery, 
and  called  the  place  Xeronias  (Ant.  xx.  9,  §4). 
Josephus  seems  to  imply  in  his  life  (Vit.  13) 
that  many  heathens  resided  here.  Titus  exhibited 
gladiatorial  shows  at  Caesarea  Philippi  after  the 
end  of  the  Jewish  war  (B.  J.  vii.  2,  §1).  The 
old  name  was  not  lost.  Coins  of  Caesarea  Paneas 
continued  through  the  reigns  of  many  emperors. 
Under  the  simple  name  of  Paneas  it  was  the  seat  of 
a  Greek  bishopric  in  the  period  of  the  great  councils 
and  of  a  Latin  bishopric  during  the  crusades.  It  is 
still  called  Banias,the  first  name  having  here,  as  in 
other  cases,  survived  the  second.  A  remarkable 
monument,  which  has  seen  all  the  periods  of  the 
history  of  Caesarea  Philippi,  is  the  vast  castle  above 
the  site  of  the  city,  built  in  Syro-Greek  or  even 
Phoenician  times,  and,  after  receiving  additions 
from  the  Saracens  and  Franks,  still  the  most  re- 
markable fortress  in  the  Holy  Land.       [J.  S.  II.] 

CAGE.  The  term  so  rendered  in  Jer.  v.  27, 
31?3,  is  more  properly  a  trap  (irayls,  decipula), 

in  which  decoy  birds  were  placed:  the  same  article 
is  referred  to  in  Ecclus.  xi.  30  under  the  term 
Ka.pTa.Wos,  which  is  elsewhere  used  of  a  tapering 
basket.  [Fowling.]  In  Rev.  xviii.  2  the  Greek 
term  is  <pv\a,K7],  meaning  a  prison  or  restricted 
habitation  rather  than  a  cag<  [W.  L.  B.] 

CAI'APHAS  (Kaidcpas,  said  |  Winer,  &c.)  to  be 
derived  from  NQ*3.  depressio,  Targ.  Prov.  .\vi.  26  . 
in  full  JOSEPH  CaIAPHAB  (Joseph.  Ant.  xviii.  2,  2), 

high-priest  of  the  Jews  under  Tiberius  daring  the 

years   of  our   Lord's  public  ministry,   and   at    the 


CAIN 


23l» 


time  of  his  condemnation  and  crucifixion.  Matt. 
xxvi.  3,  57  (Mark  aud  Luke  do  not  name  him): 
John  xi.  49,  xviii.  13,  14,  24,  28  ;  Acts  iv.  G.  The 
Procurator  Valerius  Gratus,  shortly  before  his 
leaving  the  province,  appointed  him  to  the  dignity, 
which  was  before  held  by  Simon  ben-Camith. 
He  held  it  during  the  whole  procuratorship  of 
Pontius  Pilate,  but  soon  after  his  removal  from 
that  office  was  deposed  by  the  Proconsul  Vitellius 
(a.d.  36),  and  succeeded  by  Jonathan,  sou  of 
Ananus  (Joseph.  Ant.  xviii.  4,  §3).  He  was  son-in- 
law  of  Annas.  [Annas.]  Some  in  the  ancient 
church  confounded  him  with  the  historian  Josephus, 
and  believed  him  to  have  become  a  convert  to 
Christianity.  (Assemann,  Biblioth.  Orient,  ii. 
165.)  [H.  A.] 

CAIN  (\\p  derived  either  from  iljp  ,  to  ac- 
quire, Gen.  iv.  1  ;  from  pp,  a  spear,  as  indicative 

of  the  violence  used  by  Cain  and  Lamech,  Gesen. 
Thesaur.  p.  120  ;  or  from  an  Arabic  word  kayn, 
a  smith,  in  reference  to  the  arts  introduced  by  the 
Cainites,  Von  Bohlen,  Introd.  to  Gen.  ii.  85  ;  KaiV  ; 
Joseph.  Kai's;  Cain).  The  historical  facts  in  the 
life  of  Cain,  as  recorded  in  Gen.  iv.,  are  briefly 
these : — He  was  the  eldest  son  of  Adam  and  Eve  ; 
he  followed  the  business  of  agriculture;  in  a  fit 
of  jealousy,  roused  by  the  rejection  of  his  own 
sacrifice  and  the  acceptance  of  Abel's,  he  com- 
mitted the  crime  of  murder,  for  which  he  was 
expelled  from  Eden,  and  led  the  life  of  an  exile ; 
he  settled  in  the  land  of  Nod,  and  built  a  city 
which  he  named  after  his  son  Enoch ;  his  de- 
scendants are  enumerated,  together  with  the  inven- 
tions for  which  they  were  remarkable.  Occasional 
references  to  Cain  are  made  in  the  N.  T.  (Heb.  xi. 
4;   1  John  iii.  12;  Jude  li.) 

The  following  points  deserve  notice  in  connexion 
with  the  Biblical  narrative: — 1.  The  position  of 
the  land  of  Nod.  The  name  itself  tells  us  little  ; 
it  means  flight  or  exile,  in  reference  to  v.  12  where 
a  cognate  word  is  used:  von  Bohlen 's  attempt  to 
identify  it  with  India,  as  though  the  Hebrew  name 
Hind  (TJil)  had  been  erroneously  read  han-Nod,  is 
too  far  fetched ;  the  only  indication  of  its  position 
is  the  indefinite  notice  that  it  was  "  east  of  Eden  " 
(16),  which  of  course  throws  us  back  to  the  pre- 
vious settlement  of  the  position  of  Eden  itself. 
Knobel  (Comm.  in  loc),  who  adopts  an  ethnological 
interpretation  of  the  history  of  Cain's  descendants, 
would  identify  Nod  with  the  whole  of  Eastern  Asia, 
and  even  hints  at  a  possible  connexion  between  the 
names  Cain  and  China.  It  seems  vain  to  attempt 
the  identification  of  Nod  with  any  special  locality; 
the  direction  "  east  of  Eden  "  may  have  reference  to 
the  previous  notice  in  iii.  24,  and  may  indicate  that 
the  land  was  opposite  to  (Ka.Ttva.VTi,  LXX.)  the 
entrance,  which  was  haired  against  his  return.  It 
is  not  improbable  that  the  east  was  further  used  to 
mark  the  direction  which  the  Cainites  took,  as 
distinct  from  the  Sethites,  wdio  would,  according  to 
Hebrew  notions,  be  settled  towards  the  west. 
Similar  observations  must  he  made  in  regard  to  the 

city   Enoch,   which   has   l n   identified   with    the 

names  of  the  Heniochi,  a  tribe  in  Caucasus  (Hasse), 
Anuchta,  a  town  in  Susiana  i  Huetius).  <  'hanoge,  an 
ancient  town  in  India  (von  Bohlen), and  Icoiiium,  as 
the  place  where  the  deified  king  Annacos  was 
honoured  (  Ewald)  :  all  such  attempts  at  identifica- 
tion must  he  subordinated  to  the  previous  settle- 
4  the  position  ot'  Eden  and  Nod. 

2.  The  "  mark  set  upon  Cain"  has  given  rise  to 


240 


CAIN 


various  speculations,  many  of  which  would  never  have 
been  broached,  if  the  Hebrew  text  had  been  con- 
sulted: the  words  probably  mean  that  Jehovah  gave 
a  sign  to  Cain,  very  much  as  signs  were  afterwards 
given  to  Noah  (Gen.  ix.  1.3),  Moses  (Ex.  iii.  2,  12), 
Elijah  (1  K.  xix.  11),  and  Hezekiah  (Is.  xxxviii. 
7,  8).  Whether  the  sign  was  perceptible  to  Cain 
alone,  and  given  to  him  once  for  all,  in  token  that 
no  man  should  kill  him,  or  whether  it  was  one  that 
was  perceptible  to  others,  and  designed  as  a  pre- 1 
caution  to  them,  as  is  implied  in  the  A.  V.,  is 
uncertain  ;  the  nature  of  the  sign  itself  is  still  moie 
uncertain. 

3.  The  narrative  implies  the  existence  of  a  con- 
siderable population  in  Cain's  time  ;  for  he  fears 
lest  he  should  be  murdered  in  return  for  the 
murder  he  had  committed  (14).  Josephus  {Ant. 
i.  2,  §1)  explains  his  fears  as  arising  not  from  men 
but  from  wild  beasts  ;  but  such  an  explanation  is 
wholly  unnecessary.  The  family  of  Adam  may 
have  largely  increased  before  the  birth  of  Seth,  as 
is  indeed  implied  in  the  notice  of  Cain's  wife  (17), 
and  the  mere  circumstance  that  none  of  the  other 
children  are  noticed  by  name  may  be  explained  on 
the  ground  that  their  lives  furnished  nothing 
worthy  of  notice. 

4.  The  character  of  Cain  deserves  a  brief  notice. 
He  is  described  as  a  man  of  a  morose,  malicious, 
and  revengeful  temper ;  and  that  he  presented  his 
offering  in  this  state  of  mind  is  implied  in  the 
rebuke  contained  in  ver.  7,  which  may  be  rendered 
thus:  "  If  thou  doest  well  (or,  as  the  LXX.  has  it, 
w  opdws  Trpo&eveyiqis),  is  there  not  an  elevation 
of  the  countenance  (i.  e.  cheerfulness  and  happi- 
ness)  ?  but  if  thou  doest  not  well,  there  is  a  sinking 
of  the  countenance :  sin  lurketh  (as  a  wild  beast) 
at  the  door,  and  to  thee  is  its  desire :  but  thou 
shalt  rule  over  it."  The  narrative  implies  there- 
fore that  his  offering  was  rejected  on  account  of 
the  temper  in  which  it  was  brought. 

5.  The  descendants  of  Cain  are  enumerated  to 
the  sixth  generation.  Some  commentators  (Knobel, 
von  Bohlen)  have  traced  an  artificial  structure  in 
this  genealogy,  by  which  it  is  rendered  parallel  to 
that  of  the  Sethites :  e.  g.  there  is  a  decade  of 
names  in  each,  commencing  with  Adam  and  ending 
with  Jabal  and  Noah,  the  deficiency  of  generations 
in  the  Cainites  being  supplied  by  the  addition  of 
the  two  younger  sons  of  Lamech  to  the  list ;  and 
there  is  a  considerable  similarity  in  the  names,  each 
list  containing  a  Lamech  and  an  Enoch ;  while  Cain 
in  the  one  =  Cain-an  in  the  other,  Methusael  = 
Methuselah,  and  Mehujael  =  Mahalaleel :  the  in- 
ference from  this  comparison  being  that  the  one 
was  framed  out  of  the  other.  It  must  be  observed, 
however,  that  the  differences  far  exceed  the  points 
of  similarity ;  that  the  order  of  the  names,  the 
number  of  generations,  and  even  the  meanings  of 
those  which  are  noticed  as  similar  in  sound,  are 
sufficiently  distinct  to  remove  the  impression  of 
artificial  construction. 

6.  The  social  condition  of  the  Cainites  is  promi- 
nently brought  forward  in  the  history.  Cain  him- 
self was  an  agriculturist,  Abel  a  shepherd :  the 
successors  of  the  latter  are  represented  by  the 
Sethites  and  the  progenitors  of  the  Hebrew  race  in 
later  times,  among  whom  a  pastoral  life  was  always 
held  in  high  honour  from  the  simplicity  and  de- 
votional habits  which  it  engendered :  the  successors 
of  the  former  are  depicted  as  the  reverse  in  all 
these  respects.  Cain  founded  the  first  city;  Lamech 
institute'!  polygamy;  Jabal  introduced  the  nomadic 


CAINAN 

life  ;  Jubal  invented  musical  instruments ;  Tubal- 
cain  was  the  first  smith  ;  Lamech's  language  takes 
the  stately  tone  of  poetry ;  and  even  the  names  of 
the  women,  Naamah  {pleasant),  Zillah  {shadow), 
Adah  (ornamental),  seem  to  bespeak  an  advanced 
state  of  civilization.  But  along  with  this,  there 
was  violence  and  godlessness ;  Cain  and  Lamech 
furnish  proof  of  the  former,  while  the  concluding 
words  of  Gen.  iv.  26  imply  the  latter. 

7.  The  contrast  established  between  the  Cainites 
and  the  I-'ethites  appears  to  have  reference  solely  to 
the  social  and  religious  condition  of  the  two  races. 
On  the  one  side  there  is  pictured  a  high  state  of 
civilization,  unsanctified  by  religion,  and  productive 
of  luxury  and  violence;  on  the  other  side,  a  state 
of  simplicity  which  afforded  no  material  for  history 
beyond  the  declaration  "  then  began  men  to  call 
upon  the  name  of  the  Lord."  The  historian  thus 
accounts  for  the  progressive  degeneration  of  the 
religious  condition  of  man,  the  evil  gaining  a  pre- 
dominance over  the  good  by  its  alliance  with  worldly 
power  and  knowledge,  and  producing  the  state  of 
things  which  necessitated  the  Hood. 

8.  Another  motive  may  be  assigned  for  the  in- 
troduction of  this  portion  of  sacred  history.  All 
ancient  nations  have  loved  to  trace  up  the  invention 
of  the  arts  to  some  certain  author,  and,  generally 
speaking,  these  authors  have  been  regarded  as 
objects  of  divine  worship.  Among  the  Greeks, 
Apollo  was  held  to  be  the  inventor  of  music,  Vul- 
can of  the  working  of  metals,  Triptolemus  of  the 
plough.  A  similar  feeling  of  curiosity  prevailed 
among  the  Hebrews  ;  and  hence  the  historian  has 
recorded  the  names  of  those  to  whom  the  invention 
of  the  arts  was  traditionally  assigned,  obviating  at 
the  same  time  the  dangerous  error  into  which  other 
nations  had  fallen,  and  reducing  the  estimate  of 
their  value  by  the  position  which  their  inventors 
held.  [W.  L.  B.] 

CAIN1  (with  the  article,  ^j?n  =  "  the  lance," 

Ges. ;  but  may  it  not  be  derived  from  jp,  Ken,  "  a 

nest,"  possibly  in  allusion  to  its  position  ;  ZaKavaifi, 
Alex.  ZavctiaKelfx,  both  by  including  name  pre- 
ceding;  Accain);  one  of  the  cities  in  the  low  country 
(Shefelah)  of  Judah,  named  with  Zanoah  and  Gi- 
beah  (Josh.  sv.  56).  It  does  not  appear  to  have 
been  mentioned  or  identified  by  any  one.  [G .] 

CAI'NAN  (Marg.,  correctly  Kenan  ;  ]^  ;  Kai- 
vav  ;  Qainan ;  possessor,  Fiirst ;  telifaber,  Gesen., 
as  if  =  l^p,  from  the  Arab,  to  forge,  as  in  Tubal- 
Cain,  Gen.  iv.  22  :  see  Dr.  Mill's  Vindic.  of  our 
Lord's  Geneal.  p.  150).  1.  Son  of  Enos,  aged  70 
years  when  he  begat  Mahalaleel  his  son.  He  lived 
84U  years  afterwards,  and  died  aged  910  (Gen.  v. 
9-14).  The  rabbinical  tradition  was  that  he  first 
introduced  idol-worship  and  astrology — a  tradition 
which  the  Hellenists  transferred  to  the  post-diluvian 
Cainan.  Thus  Ephraem-Syrus  asserts  that  the 
Chaldees  in  the  time  of  Terah  and  Abram  wor- 
shipped a  graven  god  called  Cainan;  and  Gregory 
Bar-Hebraeus,  another  Syiiac  author,  also  applies  it 
to  the  son  of  Arphaxad  (Mill,  ut  sup.).  The  origin 
of  the  tradition  is  not  known  ;  but  it  may  probably 
have  been  suggested  by  the  meaning  of  the  sup- 
posed root  in  Arabic  and  the  Aramean  dialects  ;  just 


i  The  letter  p  is  generally  rendered  in  the  A.  V. 
by  K.  A  possible  connexion  of  this  name  with  that 
of  the  "  Kenites  "  is  obscured  by  the  form  Cain,  which 
is  probably  derived  from  the  Vulgate. 


CAIUS 

as  another  signification  of  the  same  root  seems  to 
have  suggested  the  tradition  that  the  daughters  of 
Cain  were  the  first  who  made  and  sang  to  musical 
instruments  (Gesen.  s.  v.  f-lp). 

2.  Son  of  Arphaxad,  and  father  of  Sala,  accord- 
ing to  Luke  iii.  35,  36,  and  usually  called  the 
second  Cainan.  He  is  also  found  in  the  present 
copies  of  the  LXX.  in  the  genealogy  of  Shem,  Gen. 
x.  '_'+,  xi.  12,  and  1  Chr.  i.  ±8  (though  he  is  omitted 
in  1  Chr.  i.  2-f-),  but  is  nowhere  named  in  the 
Hebrew  codd.,  nor  in  any  of  the  versions  made  from 
the  Hebrew,  as  the  Samaritan,  Chaldee,  Syriac, 
Vulgate,  &c.  Moreover  it  can  be  demonstrated 
that  the  intrusion  of  the  name  into  the  version  of 
the  LXX.  is  comparatively  modern,  since  Augustine 
is  the  first  writer  who  mentions  it  as  found  in 
the  0.  T.  at  all;*  and  since  we  have  the  absolute 
certainty  that  it  was  not  contained  in  any  copies  of 
the  Alexandrine  Bible  which  either  Berosus,  Eupo- 
lemus,  Polyhistor,  Josephus,  Philo,  Theophilus  of 
Antioch,  Julius  Africanus,  Origen,  Eusebius,  or 
even  Jerome,  had  access  to.  It  seems  certain  there- 
fore that  his  name  was  introduced  into  the  gene- 
alogies of  the  Greek  0.  T.  in  order  to  bring  them 
into  harmony  with  the  genealogy  of  Christ  in 
St.  Luke's  Gospel,  where  Cainan  was  found  in  the 
time  of  Jerome.  The  question  is  thus  narrowed 
into  one  concerning  its  introduction  into  the  Gospel. 
It  might  have  been  thought  that  it  had  found  its 
way  by  accident  into  the  genealogy  of  Joseph,  and 
that  Luke  inserted  that  genealogy  exactly  as  he 
found  it.  But  as  Beza's  very  ancient  MS.  pre- 
sented to  the  University  of  Cambridge,  does  not 
contain  the  name  of  Cainan,  and  there  is  strong 
"  ground  for  supposing  that  neither  did  Irenaeus's 
copy  of  St.  Luke,  it  seems  on  the  whole  more  pro- 
bable that  Cainan  was  not  inserted  by  St.  Luke 
himself,  but  was  afterwards  added,  either  by  acci- 
dent, or  to  make  up  the  number  of  generations  to 
17,  or  from  some  other  cause  which  cannot  now  be 
discovered.  For  further  information,  see  Geneal. 
of  our  Lord  J.  C,  ch.  viii. ;  Heidegger,  Hist.  Patri- 
arch, ii.  8-15;  Bochart,  Phaleg,  lib.  ii.  cap.  13; 
and  for  the  opposite  view,  Mill's  Vindic.  of  our 
Lord's  Geneal.  p.  143  sqq.  [A.  C.  H.] 

CAIUS.     [John,  Second  and  Third  Epis- 
CAKES.    [Bread.]  tles  of.] 

CA'LAH  (IT?3  ;  XaAa%  ',  Chale),  one  of  the 
most  ancient  cities  of  Assyria.  Its  foundation  is 
ascribed  to  the  patriarch  Asshur  (Gen.  x.  11).  The 
name  has  been  thought  identical  with  the  Halah 
(!"l7n),  which  is  found  in  Kings  (2  K.  xvii.  6,  and 

xviii.  11)  and  Chronicles  (1  Chr.  v.  2(3);  but  this 
view  is  unsupported  by  the  Septuagint,  which  ren- 
ders Halah  by  'AAae.  .According  to  the  opinions 
of  the  best  Oriental  antiquaries,  the  site  of  Calah 
is  marked  by  the  NimrM  ruin-;,  which  have  fur- 
nished so  large  a  proportion  of  the  Assvrian  remains 
at  present  in  England.  If  this  be  regarded  as  ascer- 
tained, Calah  must  !»'  considered  to  have  been  at 
onetime  (about  B.C.  930-720)  the  capital  of  the  em- 
pire. It  was  the  residence  of  the  warlike  Sardana- 
palus  and  his  successors  down  to  the  time  of  Sargon, 
who  built  a  new  capital,  which  he  called  by  his 


CALDEON 


241 


a  Demetrius  (b.c.  170),  quoted  bj  Eusebius  [Praep. 
Evang.  ix.  21),  reckons  1360  years  from  the  birth  of 
shciii  to  Jacob's  going  down  to  Egypt,  which  seems 
to  include  the  130  years  of  Cainan.  But  in  the  great 
tl actuation  of  the  numbers  in  the  ages  of  the  patri- 


own  name,  on  the  site  occupied  by  the  modern 
Khorsabad.  Calah  still  continued  under  the  later 
kings  to  be  a  town  of  importance,  and  was  espe- 
cially favoured  by  Esarhaddon,  who  built  there  one 
of  the  grandest  of  the  Assyrian  palaces.  In  later 
times  it  gave  name  to  one  of  the  chief  districts  of 
the  country,  which  appears  as  Calacine  (Ptolem. 
vi.  1)  or  Calachene  (Strab.  xvi.  1,  §1)  in  the  geo- 
graphers. [G.  K.] 

CALAMO'LALUS  (Ka\a/j.w\d\os;  Cliomus), 
1  Esdr.  v.  22,  a  corrupt  name,  apparently  agglo- 
merated of  Elam,  Lod,  and  Hadid. 

CALAMUS  \T\:p  ;  Ka\a^os).  This  word  oc- 
curs three  times  in  A.  V. — Ex.  xxx.  23  among  the 
ingredients  of  the  holy  anointing  oil, — Cant.  iv.  14 
in  an  enumeration  of  the  sweet  scents, — and  Ez. 
xxvii.  19,  among  the  articles  brought  to  the 
markets  of  Tyre.      H3p  is  properly  the  marsh  and 

river  reed,  and  is  used  in  that  sense  in  various 
passages  of  Scripture  [Reed]  ;  but  in  the  places 
just  referred  to  it  signifies  the  Calamus  odoratus, 
an  Indian  and  Arabian  plant  (Plin.  xii.  12,  48), 
of  which  the  Linnaean  name  is  Acorus  calamus. 
No  doubt  the  same  plant  is  intended  in  Is.  xliii. 
24 ;  Jer.  vi.  20 ;  where  A.  V.  has  sweet  cane. 
In  the  latter  text  the  Heb.  is  21t2n  fl3p,  and  in 
Ex.  xxx.  23,  DC'2  HJp.     "  A  scented  cane  is  said 

to  have  been  found  in  a  valley  of  Mount  Lebanon 
(Polyb.  v.  46  ;  Strab.  xvi.  4).  The  plant  has  a 
reed-like  stem  which  is  extremely  fragrant,  like  the 
leaves,  especially  when  bruised.  It  is  of  a  tawny 
colour,  much  jointed,  breaking  into  splinters,  and 
having  the  hollow  stem  filled  with  pith  like  a  spider's 
web."     (Kalisch  on  Ex.  xxx.  23.)  [W.  D.] 

CAL'COL  (^73;   KaAx«A,  XaA/caS;    Chal- 

chal,  C'halcol),  a  man  of  Judah,  son  or  descendant 
of  Zerah  (1  Chr.  ii.  6).  Probably  identical  with 
Chalool  (A.  V.  only  ;  no  difference  in  the  Hebrew), 
son  of  Mahol,  one  of  the  four  wise  men  whom 
Solomon  excelled  in  wisdom  (1  K.  iv.  31).  For  the 
grounds  of  this  identification  see  Darda.  [G.] 

CALDEON.    1.  TH,  probably  from  TH,  boil, 

akin  to  Arab.  .S  1.3 ,  to  be  moved,  as  water  in  boiling  ; 

a  pot  or  kettle  ;  also  a  basket.    2.  "VD,  a  pot  or  kettle. 

3.  jfoMK,  or  Jfojtf.      4.  nr6|?,  from  p&p,  pour. 

Ae'/3?)s,  x^T/>ce«  Trb5i(TT?;p,  lebes,  olla.  A  vessel 
tor  boiling  flesh,  either  for  ceremonial  or  domestic 


lironre  caldron  from  Egyptian  Tlicbes.     (Brit.  M 


arehs,  no  reliance  can  be  placed  on  this  argument. 
Nor  have  we  any  certainty  that  the  figures  hava 
not  been  altered  in  the  modern  copies  of  Eusebius? 
to  make  them  agree  with  the  computation  of  the 
altered  copies  of  the  LXX. 

R 


24i 


CALEB 


use  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  13;  1  Sam.  ii.  14  ;  Mic.  lii.  3; 
Jobxli.  20).  [II.  W.  P.] 

CA/LEB  (2^3  ;  XaAe/S  ;  dog,  Gesen.;  Belter, 
Klaffer,  i.  e.  barker,  Fiiist).  1.  According  to 
1  Chr.  ii.  9,  18,  19,  42,  50,  the  son  of  Hezron,  the 
son  of  Pharez,  the  son  of  Judah,  and  the  father  ot 
Hur  by  Ephrath  or  Ephiatah,  and  consequently 
grandfather  of  Caleb  the  spy.  His  brothers,  ac- 
cording to  the  same  authority,  were  Jerahmeel  and 
Ham ;  his  wives  Azubah,  Jerioth,  and  Ephratah  ; 
and  his  concubines  Ephah  and  Maachah  (ver.  9,  42, 
46,  48).  But  from  the  manifest  corruption  of  the 
text  in  many  parts  of  the  chapter,  from  the  name 
being  written  ,2-'D3  in  ver.  9,  which  looks  like  a 
patronymic,  from  2-")i?3,  Chelub  (1  Chr.  iv.  11)  the 

brother  of  Shuah,  from  the  evident  confusion  be- 
tween the  two  Calebs  at  ver.  49,  and  from  the  non- 
appearance of  this  elder  Caleb  anywhere  except  in 
this  genealogy,  drawn  up  in  Hezekiah's  reign  [Aza- 
riah,  No.  13],  it  is  impossible  to  speak  with  con- 
fidence of  his  relations,  or  even  of  his  existence. 

2.  Son  of  Jephunneh,  by  which  patronymic  the 
illustrious  spy  is  usually  designated  (Num.  xiii.  6, 
and  ten  other  places),  with  the  addition  of  that  of 
"  the  Kenezite,"  or  "  son  of  Kenaz,"  in  Num.  xxxii. 
12  :  Josh.  xiv.  6,  14.  Caleb  is  first  mentioned  in 
the  list  of  the  rulers  or  princes  (N^'J),  called  in 
the  next  verse  D^XI,  "  heads,"  one  from  each 
tribe,  who  were  sent  to  search  the  land  of  Canaan 
in  the  second  year  of  the  Exodus,  where  it  may  be 
noted  that  these.  UWm  or  D^&O  are  all  different 
from  those  named  in  Num.  i.  ii.  vii.  x.  as  princes 
or  heads  of  the  tribes  of  Israel,  and  consequently 
that  the  same  title  was  given  to  the  chiefs  of 
families  as  to  the  chiefs  of  the  whole  tribe.  Caleb 
was  a  N^'J  or  £*N~I  in  the  tribe  of  Judah,  perhaps 
as  chief  of  the  family  of  the  Hezronites,  at  the  same 
time  that  Nahshon  the  son  of  Amminadab  was 
prince  of  the  whole  tribe.  He  and  Oshea  or  Joshua 
the  son  of  Nun  were  the  only  two  of  the  whole 
number,  who  on  their  return  from  Canaan  to 
Kadesh-Barnea,  encouraged  the  people  to  enter  in 
boldly  to  the  land,  and  take  possession  of  it ;  for 
which  act  of  faithfulness  they  narrowly  escaped 
stoning  at  the  hands  of  the  infuriated  people.  In 
the  plague  that  ensued,  while  the  other  ten  spies 
perished,  Caleb  and  Joshua  alone  were  spared. 
Moreover,  while  it  was  announced  to  the  congre- 
gation by  Moses  that,  for  this  rebellious  murmur- 
ing, all  that  had  been  numbered  from  20  years  old 
and  upwards,  except  Joshua  and  Caleb,  should 
perish  in  the  wilderness,  a  special  promise  was 
made  to  Caleb  the  son  of  Jephunneh,  that  he 
should  survive  to  enter  into  the  land  which  he  had 
trodden  upon,  and  that  his  seed  should  possess  it. 
Accordingly,  45  years  afterwards,  when  some  pro- 
gress had  been  made  in  the  conquest  of  the  land, 
Caleb  came  to  Joshua  and  reminded  him  of  what 
had  happened  at  Kadesh,  and  of  the  promise  which 
Moses  made  to  him  with  an  oath.  He  added  that 
though  he  was  now  85  years  old,  he  was  as  strong 
as  in  the  day  when  Moses  sent  him  to  spy  out  the 
land,  and  he  claimed  possession  of  the  land  of  the 
Anakims,  Kirjath-Arba,  or  Hebron,  and  the  neigh- 
bouring hill-country  (Josh.  xiv.).  This  was  im- 
mediately granted  to  him,  and  the  following  chapter 
relates  how  he  took  possession  of  Hebron,  driving 
out  the  three  sons  of  Anak;  and  how  he  offered 


CALEB 

Achsah  his  daughter  in  marriage  to  whoever  would 
take  Kirjath-Sepher,  i.  e.  Debir ;  and  how  when 
Othuiel,  his  younger  brother,  had  performed  the 
feat,  he  not  only  gave  him  his  daughter  to  wife, 
but  with  her  the  upper  and  nether  springs  of  water 
which  she  asked  for.  After  this  we  hear  no  more 
of  Caleb,  nor  is  the  time  of  his  death  recorded.  But 
we  learn  from  Josh.  xxi.  13,  that-  in  the  distribution 
of  cities  out  of  the  different  tribes  lor  the  priests 
and  Levites  to  dwell  in,  Hebron  fell  to  the  priests, 
the  children  of  Aaron,  of  the  family  of  Kohathites, 
and  was  also  a  city  of  refuge,  while  the  surrounding 
territory  continued  to  be  the  possession  of  Caleb,  at 
least  as  late  as  the  time  of  David  (1  Sam.  xxv.  3, 
xxx.  14). 

But  a  very  interesting  question  arises  as  to  the 
birth  and  parentage  of  Caleb.  He  is,  as  we  have 
seen,  styled  "  the  son  of  Jephunneh  the  Kenezite," 
and  his  younger  brother  Othniel,  afterwards  the 
first  Judge,  is  also  called  "  the  son  of  Kenaz " 
(Josh.  xv.  17;  Judg.  i.  13,  iii.  9,  11). 

On  the  other  hand  the  genealogy  in  1  Chr.  ii. 
makes  no  mention  whatever  of  either  Jephunneh  or 
Kenaz,  but  represents  Caleb,  though  obscurely,  as 
being  a  descendant  of  Hezron  and  a  son  of  Hur  (see 
too  ch.  iv.).  Again  in  Josh.  xv.  13  we  have  this 
singular  expression,  "  Unto  Caleb  the  son  of  Jephun- 
neh he  gave  a  part  among  the  children  of  Judah ;" 
and  in  xiv.  14,  the  no  less  significant  one,  "  Hebron 
became  the  inheritance  of  Caleb  the  son  of  Jephun- 
neh the  Kenezite,  because  that  he  wholly  followed 
Jehovah  God  of  Israel."  It  becomes  therefore 
quite  possible  that  Caleb  was  a  foreigner  by  birth ; 
a  proselyte,  incorporated  into  the  tribe  of  Judah, 
into  which  perhaps  he  or  his  ancestors  had  married, 
and  one  of  the  first-fruits  of  that  gentile  harvest, 
of  which  Jethro,  Rahab,  Ruth,  Naaman,  and  many 
others  were  samples  and  signs.  And  this  conjecture 
receives  a  most  striking  confirmation  from  the 
names  in  Caleb's  family.  For  on  turning  to  Gen. 
xxxvi.  11,  15,  we  find  that  Kenaz  is  an  Edomitish 
name,  the  son  of  Eliphaz.  Again,  in  1  Chr.  ii.  50, 
52,  among  the  sons  of  Caleb  the  son  of  Hur  we 
find  Shobal  and  half  the  Manahethites  or  sons  of 
Manahath.  But  in  Gen.  xxxvi.  20-23,  we  are  told 
that  Shobal  was  the  son  of  Seir  the  Horite,  and 
that  he  was  the  father  of  Manahath.  So  too  Korah, 
Ithran,  Elah  (1  Chr.  ii.,  iv.),  and. perhaps  Jephun- 
neh, compared  with  Pinon,  are  all  Edomitish  names 
(1  Chr.  i. ;  Gen.  xxxvi.).  We  find  too  Temanites, 
or  sons  of  Teman  (1  Chr.  i.  36),  among  the  chil- 
dren of  Ashur  the  son  of  Hezron  (1  Chr.  iv.  6). 
The  finding  thus  whole  families  or  tribes,  appa- 
rently of  foreign  origin,  incorporated  into  the  tribes 
of  Israel,  seems  further  to  supply  us  with  an  ensy 
and  natural  solution  of  the  difficulty  with  regard 
to  the  great  numbers  of  the  Israelites  at  the  Exodus. 
The  seed  of  Abraham  had  been  multiplied  by  the 
accretion  of  proselytes,  as  well  as  by  generation. 

3.  Caleb-Ephratah,  according  to  the  present 
text  of  1  Chr.  ii.  24,  the  name  of  a  place  where 
Hezron  died.  But  no  such  place  was  ever  heard  of, 
and  the  composition  of  the  name  is  a  most  impro- 
bable one.  Nor  could  Hezron  or  his  sun  have  given 
any  name  to  a  place  in  Egypt,  the  land  of  their 
bondage,  nor  could  Hezron  have  died,  or  his  son 
have  lived,  elsewhere  than  in  Egypt.  The  present 
text  must  therefore  be  corrupt,  and  the  reading 
which  Jerome's  Hebrew  Bible  had,  and  which  is 
preserved  in  the  LXX.,  is  probably  the   true   one. 

viz.   iimSX   3T>3    N2,    "  Caleb    came    in    unto 


CALF 

Ephratah."  The  whole  information  given  seems 
to  be  that  Hezron  had  two  wives,  the  first  whose 
name  is  not  given,  the  mother  of  Jerahmeel,  Ram, 
and  Caleb  or  Chelubai ;  the  .second,  Abiah,  the 
daughter  of  Machir,  whom  he  married  when  60 
years  old,  and  who  bare  him  Segub  and  Ashur. 
Also  that  Caleb  had  two  wives,  Azubah,  the  first, 
the  mother,  according  to  Jerome's  version,  of  Jeii- 
oth  ;  and  Ephratah,  the  second,  the  mother  of  Hur; 
and  that  this  second  marriage  of  Caleb  did  not  take 
place  till  after  Hezron's  death.  [A.  C.  H.j 

CALF   (rtay,  b)V  ;    ^xot,  8c^a\is).      In 

Ex.  xxxii.  4,  we  are  told  that  Aaron,  constraiued 
by  the  people  in  the  absence  o£  Moses,  made  a 
molten  calf  of  the  golden  earrings  of  the  people,  to 
represent  the  Elohim  which  brought  Israel  out  of 
Egypt.  He  is  also  said  to  have  "  finished  it  with 
a  gi-aving-tool,"  but  the  word  t3~in  may  mean  a 

mould  (comp.  2  K.  v.  23,  A.  V.  "bags;"  LXX. 
OvXaKOis).  Bochart  (Hieroz.  lib.  ii.  cap.  xxxiv.) 
explains  it  to  mean  "  he  placed  the  earrings  in  a 
bag,"  as  Gideon  did  (Judg.  viii.  24).  Probably, 
however,  it  means  that  after  the  calf  had  been  cast, 
Aaron  ornamented  it  with  the  sculptured  wings, 
feathers,  and  other  marks,  which  were  similarly 
represented  on  the  statues  of  Apis,  &c.  (Wil- 
kinson, iv.  348).  It  does  not  seem  likely  that 
the  earrings  would  have  provided  the  enormous 
quantity  of  gold  required  for  a  solid  figure.  More 
probably  it  was  a  wooden  figure  laminated  with 
gold,  a  process  which  is  known  to  have  existed  in 
Egypt.  "A  gilded  ox  covered  with  a  pall"  was 
an  emblem  of  Osiris  (Wilkinson,  iv.  335). 


CALF 


243 


of  Apis.     (Wilkinson. ) 


The  legends  about  the  calf  are  numerous.  The 
suggestion  is  said  by  the  Jews  to  have  originated 
with  certain  Egyptian  proselytes  (Godwyn's  Mos. 
and  Aar.  iv.  5);  Hur,  "the  desert's  martyr," 
was  killed  for  opposing  it  ;  Abu'lfeda  says  'that 
all  except  12,000  worshipped  it  ;  when  made,  it 
was  magi.ally  animated  (Ex.  xxxii.  24).  "The 
devil,"  says  Jonathan,  "  got  into  the  metal  and 
fashioned  it  into  a  calf"  (Lightfoot,  Works,  v. 
398).  Hence  the  Koran  (vii.  146)  calls  it  "a 
corporeal  calf,  made  of  their  ornaments,  which 
lowed."  This  was  effected,  not  by  Aaron  (accord- 
ing to  the  Mohammedans),  but  by  al  Sameri,a  chief 
Israelite,  whose  descendants  still  inhabit  an  inland 
of  the  Arabian  gulf.  He  took  a  handful  of  dust 
from  the  footsteps  of  the  horse  of  Gabriel,  who 
rode  at  the  bead  of  the  host,  and  threw  it  into  the 
mouth  of  the  calf,  which  immediately  lie 
low.     No  one  is  to  be  punished  in  hell  more  than 


40  days,  being  the  number  of  days  of  the  calf- 
worship  (Sale's  Koran,  ed.  Davenport,  p.  7,  note  : 
and  see  Weil's  Legends,  125).  It  was  a  Jewish 
proverb  that  "  no  punishment  befalleth  the  Israelites 
in  which  there  is  not  an -ounce  of  this  calf"  (God- 
wyn,  ubi  supr.\ 

To  punish  the  apostasy  Moses  burnt  the  calf, 
and  then  grinding  it  to  powder  scattered  it  over 
the  water,  where,  according  to  some,  it  produced  in 
the  drinkers  effects  similar  to  the  water  of  jealousy 
(Num.  v.).  He  probably  adopted  this  course  as 
the  deadliest  and  most  irreparable  blow  to  their 
superstition  (Jerome,  Ep.  128  ;  Plut.  de  Is.  p. 
362),  or  as  an  allegorical  act  (Job  xv.  16),  or  with 
reference  to  an  Egyptian  custom  (Herod,  ii.  41  ; 
Poli  Syn.  ad  loc.).  It  has  always  been  a  difficulty 
to  explain  the  process  which  he  used  ;  some  account 
for  it  by  his  supposed  knowledge  of  a  forgotten 
art  (such  as  was  one  of  the  boasts  of  alchymy)  by 
which  he  could  reduce  gold  to  dust.  Goguet  (Ori- 
gine  des  Lois)  invokes  the  assistance  of  natron, 
which  would  have  had  the  additional  advantage  of 
making  the  draught  nauseous.  Baumgarten  easily 
endows  the  fire  employed  with  miraculous  pro- 
perties. Bochart  and  Rosenmuller  merely  think 
that  he  cut,  ground,  and  filed  the  gold  to  powder, 
such  as  was  used  to  sprinkle  over  the  hair  (Jos. 
Ant.  viii.  7,  §3).  There  seems  little  doubt  that 
f]^  =  Ka.TaKa.iw,  LXX.  (Havernick's  Introd.  to 
the  Pentat.  p.  292.) 

It  has  always  been  a  great  dispute  respecting 
this  calf  and  those  of  Jeroboam,  whether,  I.  the 
Jews  intended  them  for  some  Egyptian  God,  or  II. 
for  a  mere  cherubic  symbol  of  Jehovah. 

I.  The  arguments  tor  the  first  supposition  are,  1. 
The  ready  apostasy  of  the  Jews  to  Egyptian  super- 
stition (Acts  vii.  39,  and  chap.  v.  passim  ;  Lac- 
tant.  Inst.  iv.  10).  2.  The  fact  that  they  had 
been  worshippers  of  Apis  (Josh.  xxiv.  14),  and 
their  extreme  familiarity  with  his  cultus  (1  K.  xi. 
40).  3.  The  resemblance  of  the  feast  described  in 
Ex.  xxxii.  5,  to  the  festival  in  honour  of  Apis  (Suid. 
s.  v.  "AirtSes).  Of  the  various  sacred  cows  of 
Egypt,  that  of  Isis,  of  Athor,  and  of  the  three  kinds 
of  sacred  bulls,  Apis,  Basis,  and  Mnevis,  Sir  G. 
Wilkinson  fixes  on  the  latter  as  the  prototype  of 
the  golden  calf;  "  the  offerings,  dancings,  and  re- 
joicings practised  on  that  occasion  were  doubtless 
in  imitation  of  a  ceremony  they  had  witnessed  in 
honour  of  Mnevis"  (Anc.  Egypt.,  v.  197,  see 
Plates  35,  36).  The  ox  was  worshipped  from  its 
utility  in  agriculture  (Hut.  de  Is.  74),  and  was  a 
symbol  of  the  sun,  and  consecrated  to  him  (Horn. 
<></.  i.  xii.  &c. ;  Warburton,  Div.  Leg.  iv.  :'..  5). 
Hence  it  is  almost  universally  found  in  Oriental 
and  other  mythologies.  4.  The  expression  "an  ox 
that  eateth  hay,"  &C.  (1's.  cvi.  2(1,  &<•.),  where 
some  see  an  allusion  to  the  Egyptian  custom  of 
bringing  a  bottle  of  hay  when  they  consulted  Apis 
(Godwyn's  Mos.  and  Aar.  iv.  5).  Yet  these  terms 
of  scorn  are  rather  due  to  the  intense  hatred  of  the 
Jews,  both  to  this  idolatry  and  that  of  Jeroboam. 
Thus  in  Tob.  i.  5,  we  have  one  of  Jeroboam's  calves 
called  r]  Sd^aAti  Baa\,  which  is  an  unquestion- 
able calumny;  just  as  in  Jer.  xlvi.  15,  "Airts  6 
fi6ffxos  aou  6  iKXeKrhs  is  either  a  mistake  or  a 
corruption  ofthetexi  (Bochart,  Hieroz.  ii.  28,  6, 
and  Schleusner,  s.r.  "Airis). 

II.  It  seems  to  us  more  likely  that  in  this  oalf- 
worship  the  Jew.,  merely 

.     "Likened  their  Maker  to  tie  praveol  ox ;" 

\l  2 


244 


CALITAS 


or  in  other  words,  adopted  a  well-understood  che- 
rubic emblem.  For  1.  it  is  obvious  that  they 
were  aware  ot'  this  symbol,  since  Moses  finds  it 
unnecessary  to  describe  it  (Ex.  xxv.  18-22).  2. 
Josephus  seems  to  imply  that  the  calf  symbolized 
God  (Ant.  viii.  8,  §4).  3.  Aaron  in  proclaiming 
the  feast  (Ex.  xxxii.  5)  distinctly  calls  it  a  feast 
to  Jehovah,  and  speaks  of  the  god  as  the  visible 
representation  of  Him  who  had  led  them  out  of 
Egypt.  4.  It  was  extremely  unlikely  that  they 
would  so  soon  adopt  a  deity  whom  they  had  so 
recently  seen  humiliated  by  the  judgments  of 
Moses  (Num.  xxxiii.  4).  5.  There  was  only  one 
Apis,  whereas  Jeroboam  erected  two  calves.  (But 
see  Jahn,  Arch.  Bibl.  §464.)  6.  Jeroboam's  well- 
understood  political  purpose  was,  not  to  introduce 
a  new  religion,  but  to  provide  a  different  form  of 
the  old  ;  and  this  alone  explains  the  fact  that  this 
was  the  only  form  of  idolatry  into  which  Judah 
never  fell,  since  she  already  possessed  the  arche- 
typal emblems  in  the  Temple.  7.  It  appears  from 
1  K.  xxii.  6,  &c.  that  the  prophets  of  Israel, 
though  sanctioning  the  calf-worship,  still  regarded 
themselves,  and  were  regarded,  as  "  prophets  of 
Jehovah." 

These  arguments,  out  of  many  others,  are  ad- 
duced from  the  interesting  treatise  of  Moncaeus, 
de  Vitulo  Aureo  (Sacri  Critici,  ix.).  The  work 
is  inhibited  by  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  has  been 
answered  by  Visorinus.  A  brief  resume'  of  it  may 
be  found  in  Poli  Sijn.  ad  Ex.  xxxii.,  and  in  Watt's 
"  Remnants  of  Time"  (ad  finem).     [Cherubim.] 

The  prophet  Hosea  is  full  of  denunciations  against 
the  calf-worship  of  Israel  (Hos.  viii.  5,  6,  x.  6),  and 
mentions  the  curious  custom  of  kissing  them  (xiii. 
2).  His  change  of  Bethel  into  Bethaveu  possibly  rose 
from  contempt  of  this  idolatry  (but  see  Bethaven). 
The  calf  at  Dan  was  carried  away  by  Tiglath-Pileser, 
and  that  of  Bethel  10  years  after  by  his  son  Shal- 
maneser  (1  K.  xv.  29,  xvii.  13  ;  Prideaux,  Con- 
nexion, i.  15). 

Bochart  thinks  that  the  ridiculous  story  of 
Celsus  about  the  Christian  worship  of  an  ass-headed 
deity  called  @a(pa/3au>8  i)  'Ovit>\  (a  story,  at  the 
source  of  which  Tertullian,  'Ovokoittjs,  Ap<>l.  lii. 
Ad.  Nat.  i.  14,  could  only  guess),  sprang  from 
some  misunderstanding  of  cherubic  emblems  (Minuc. 
Eel.  Apol.  ix.).  But  it  is  much  more  probable,  as 
Origen  conjectured,  that  the  Christians  were  con- 
founded with  the  absurd  mystic  Ophiani  (Tac.  Hist. 
v.  4;  Menvale,  Hist,  of  Emp.  vi.  564). 

In-  the  expression  "  the  calves  of  our  lips  "  (Hos. 
xiv.  2),  the  word  "calves"  is  used  metaphorically 
for  victims  or  sacrifices,  and  the  passage  signifies 
either  "  we  will  render  to  thee  sacrifices  of  our  lips," 
that  is,  "  the  tribute  of  thanksgiving  and  praise," 
or  "  we  will  offer  to  thee  the  sacrifices  which  our 
lips  have  vowed."  The  LXX.  erroneously  trans- 
late Kapirbv  rwv  xe'^eW,  which  is  followed  by 
the  Syr.  and  Arab,  versions,  and  is  supposed  to 
have  been  borrowed  by  the  author  of  the  epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  (xiii.  15).  For  allusions  to  the 
"  fatted  calf"  see  Gen.  xviii.  21  ;  Luke  xv.  23,  &c. ; 
and  on  the  custom  of  cutting  up  a  calf,  and  "  pass- 
ing between  the  parts  thereof"  to  ratify  a  covenant, 
see  Jer.  xxxiv.  18,  19  ;  Gen.  xv.  10,  17  ;  Ephrerh 
Syrus,  i.  161  ;  Horn.  II.  iii.  208.         [F.  W.  F.] 

CAL'ITAS  (KaXnas,  and  KaXlras ;  Calitas), 
1  Esd.  ix.  23,  48.     [Kelita.] 

CALLIS'THENES  (KaAAiaOevns),  a  partisan 
of  Nicanor,   who  was   burnt  by  the  Jews  on  the 


CAMEL 

defeat  of  that  general  in  revenge  for  his  guilt  in 
setting  fire  to  "the  sacred  portals"  (2  Mace.  viii. 
33).  [B.  F.  W.] 

CAL'NEH,  or  CAL'NO  (n^3,  i^3  ;  Xa\ 

civvy,  XaXavri  ;  Chalanne),  appears  in  Genesis  (x. 
10)  among  the  cities  of  Nimrod.  The  word  is 
thought  to  mean  "  the  fort  of  the  god  Ana  or 
Ami,"  who  was  one  of  the  chief  objects  of  Babylo- 
nian worship.  Probably  the  site  is  the  modern 
Niffer,  which  was  certainly  one  of  the  early  capitals, 
and  which,  under  the  name  of  Nopher,  the  Talmud 
identifies  with  Calneh  (see  the  Yoma).  Arab  tra- 
ditions made  Niffer  the  original  Babylon,  and  said 
that  it  was  the  place  where  Nimrod  endeavoured  to 
mount  on  eagle!'  wings  to  heaven.  Similarly,  the 
LXX.  speak  of  Calneh  or  Calno,  as  "  the  place  where 
the  tower  was  built"  (Is.  x.  9).  Niffer  is  situated 
about  60  miles  S.E.E.  of  Babylon  in  the  marshes 
on  the  left  bank  of  the  Euphrates  :  it  has  been 
visited  and  described  by  Mr.  Layard  (Nin.  fy  Bab. 
ch.  xxiv.),and  Mr.  Loftus  (Chaldaea,  p.  101).  We 
may  gather  from  Scripture  that  in  the  8th  century 
B.C.  Calneh  was  taken  by  one  of  the  Assyrian 
kings,  and  never  recovered  its  prosperity.  Hence 
it  is  compared  with  Carchemish,  Hamath,and  Gath 
(Is.  x.  9  ;  Am.  vi.  2),  and  regarded  as  a  proof  of  the 
resistless  might  of  Assyria.  [G.  R.] 

CAL'NO   (1373  ;    XaKavi) ;     Alex.   XaXavvq, 

the  passage  however  does  not  agree  with  the 
Hebrew  ;  Calano),  Is.  x.  9.     [Calneh.] 

CAL'PHI  (6  XaXcpi ;  Jos.  Xuifaios  ;  Calphi), 
father  of  Judas,  one  of  the  two  captains  (&pxovTts) 
of  Jonathan's  army  who  remained  firm  at  the  battle 
of  Gennesar  (1  Mace.  xi.  70). 

CALVARY  (Kpaviov  ;  Syr.  Karkaptha  ;  Cal- 
rarin).  a  word  occurring  in  the  A.  V.  only  in  Luke 
xsiii.  S3,  and  there  no  proper  name,  but  arising  from 
the  translators  having  literally  adopted  the  word 
calvaria,  i.e.  a  bare  scull,  the  Latin  word  by  which 
the  Kpaviov  of  the  Evangelists  is  rendered  in  the 
Vulgate ;  Kpavlov  again  being  nothing  but  the 
Greek  interpretation  of  the  Hebrew  Golgotha. 

Kpaviov  is  used  by  each  of  the  four  Evangelists 
in  describing  the  place  of  the  Crucifixion,  and  is  in 
every  case  translated  in  the  Vulg. "  calvaria ;  and 
in  every  case  but  that  in  St.  Luke  the  A.  V.  has 
"  scull."  Prof.  Stanley  has  not  omitted  to  notice 
this  (S.  fy  P.  460,  note),  and  to  call  attention  to  the 
fact  that  the  popular  expression  "  Mount  Calvary  " 
is  not  warranted  by  any  statement  in  the  accounts 
of  the  place  of  our  Lord's  crucifixion.  There  is  no 
mention  of  a  mount  in  either  of  the  narratives. 
[Crucifixion;  Golgotha  ;  Jerusalem.]  [G.]  [ 

CAMEL   £»|,    133,    ni-13-13 ;    Kd^Xos  ; 

camelus,  dromedarius),  an  animal  of  the  order 
Ruminantia,  and  genus  Camelus.  It  is  a  native  ot 
Asia,  where  from  the  earliest  ages  to  the  present 
day  it  has  been  the  chief  means  of  communication 
between  the  different  regions  of  the  East ;  and  from 
its  wonderful  powers  of  endurance  in  the  desert 
has  enabled  routes  to  be  opened  which  would 
otherwise  have  been  impracticable.  "  Their  home 
is  the  desert ;  and  they  were  made,  in  the  wisdom 
of  the  Creator,  to  be  the  carriers  of"  the  desert. 
The  coarse  and  prickly  shrubs  of  the  wastes  are  to 
them  the  most  delicious  food  ;  and  even  of  these  they 
eat.  but  little.  So  few  are  the  wants  of  their  nature, 
that  their  power  of  going  without  food,  as  well  as 


CAMEL 

without  water,  is  wonderful.  Their  well-known 
habit  of  lying  down  upon  the  breast  to  receive  their 
burdens,  is  not,  as  is  often  supposed,  merely  the 
result  of  training  ;  it  is  an  admirable  adaptation  of 
their  nature  to  their  destiny  as  carriers.  This  is 
their  natural  position  of  repose  ;  as  is  shown  too  by 
the  callosities  upon  the  joints  of  the  legs,  and  espe- 
cially by  that  upon  the  breast.  Hardly  less  won- 
derful is  the  adaptation  of  their  broad  cushioned  foot 
to  the  arid  sands  and  gravelly  soil,  which  it  is  their 

lot  chiefly  to  traverse As  the  carriers  of 

the  East,  the  '  ships  of  the  desert,'  another  im- 
portant quality  of  the  camel  is  their  sure-footed- 
ness  "  (Robinson,  ii.  632-635).  The  present  geo- 
graphical distribution  of  the  camel  extends  over 
Arabia,  Syria,  Asia  Minor  to  the  foot  of  the  Caucasus, 
the  south  of  Tartary,  and  part  of  India.  In  Africa 
it  is  found  in  the  countries  extending  from  th« 
Mediterranean  to  the  Senegal,  and  from  Egypt  and. 
Abyssinia  to  Algiers  and  Morocco.  The  camel  and 
dromedary  are  one  species  ;  the  latter  being  distin- 
guished only  by  higher  breeding  and  finer  qualities. 
The  two-humped  camel,  sometimes  called  the  Bac- 
trim camel,  is  a  variety  only,  not  a  distinct  species 
(Patterson,  Introd.  to  Zoology,  p.  417).  The  drome- 
dary is  a  swift-riding  camel,  called  by  the  Arabs 
Deloul,  by  the  Turks  Hejin ;  the  difference  between 
them  and  a  common  camel  being  as  great  as  that 
between  a  high-bred  Arab  mare  and  an  English 
cart-horse  (Layard,  N.  fy  B.  p.  292). 

The  camel  is  frequently  mentioned  in  Holy  Scrip- 
ture. It  was  used  not  only  in  Palestine,  but  also 
in  Arabia  (Jud.  vii.  12),  in  Egypt  (Ex.  ix.  3),  in 
Syria  (2  K.  viii.  9),  and  in  Assyria,  as  appears  from 
the  sculptures  of  Nineveh  (see  Layard,  N.  §  B. 
p.  582).  It  was  used  at  an  early  date  both  as  a 
riding  animal  and  as  a  beast  of  burden  (Gen.  xxiv. 
64,  xxxvii.  25).  It  was  likewise  used  in  war 
(1  Sam.  xxx.  17  ;  Is.  xxi.  7).  Of  its  hair  coarse 
garments  were  manufactured  (Matt.  iii.  4  ;  Mark 
i.  6).  The  camel  is  included  in  the  lists  of  unclean 
animals  (Lev.  xi.  4 ;    Deut.  xiv.  7).      The  word 

;12Z  is  found  in  all  the  Semitic  languages,  in  the 
Greek  and  Latin  (whence  it  has  passed  into  the 
languages  of  Western  Europe),  and  in  the  Coptic 
X^JULCffX-  In  Sanscrit  it  occurs  as  kramela 
and  kramelaka  ;  and  hence  Schlegel  traces  the  word 
to  the  root  krarn  =  to  step.  Bochart  derives  it 
from  the  root  ?tD,3,  to  revenge,  because  the  camel  is 
vindictive  aud  retains  the  memory  of  injuries 
(animal  fivqaiKoLKOv)  \  but  Gesenius  considers  it 
more  likely  that  PDJI  should  have  assumed  the  force 
of  the  cognate  verb    V^~»»  to  carry. 

The  word  "133  occurs  in  Is.  Ix.  5,  and  in  Jer. 
ii.  25.  In  both  places  A.  Y.  has  dromedary:  it 
should  rather  be  young  camel;  the  distinction 
between  it  and  ?!D3  being  of  age,  and  not  of 
species. 

Di~l3"13,  in  Is.  lxvi.  20,  seems  to  be  the  name 
given  to  high-bred  riding  camels,  now  called  I 
the  root  being  "TI3,  to  leap,  or  move  quickly,  in 

the  same  war  as  we  have  in  the  Greek  Spu/xaSes. 
(Comp.  Herod,  iii.  103,  al  -yap  ff(pt  Kap-nhni  'imrwv 
ovk  ificriToves  es  tox^ttito  eld.  See  Layard,  A.  cj 
/>'.  p.  292,  note.  | 


CANA 


245 


In  Esth.  viii.  10,  the  words  »J3  Enini"!"!^ 
D,3?3Tn  are  rendered  in  A.  V.  "  camels  and  young 
dromedaries"  [Mule];  and  1  K.  iv.  28  (v.  8,  Heb.), 
Cp^j  is  rendered  dromedaries  [HORSE].     [W.  I).] 

CA'MON  (JIDp;  "Paixudiv;  Aiex.  'Pa^w;  Jos. 

Ka/xa>j/ ;  Camon),  the  place  in  which  Jair  the  Judge 
was  buried.  The  few  notices  of  Jair  which  we 
possess  have  all  reference  to  the  country  E.  of  Jor- 
dan, and  there  is  therefore  no  reason  against  accept- 
ing the  statement  of  Josephus  (Ant.  v.  7,  §6)  that 
Camon  was  a  city  of  Gilead.  In  support  of  this  is 
the  mention  by  Polybius  (v.  70,  §12)  of  a  Camoun 
(Ka/Liow)  in  company  with  Pella  and  other  trans- 
Jordanic  places  (Keland,  679).  In  modern  times, 
however,  the  name  has  not  been  recovered  on  the 
E.  of  Jordan.  Eusebius  and  Jerome  identify  it  with 
Cyamon,  in  the  plain  of  Esdraelon.  "    [G.] 

CAMP.     [Encampments.] 

CAMPHIRE  Op*3;  Kvvpos  ;  cyprus ;  A.  V. 
marg.  cypress),  a  plant  or  shrub,  mentioned  only  in 
Cant.  i.  14,  iv.  13.  It  is  the  Lawsonia  inermis  of 
Linnaeus,  has  whitish  scented  flowers  growing  in 
bunches,  and  acquired  its  name  from  "123,  to  cover, 

or  paint,  because  from  the  dried  leaves  of  the  plant 
was  made  an  unguent,  with  which  women  imparted 
a  red  stain  to  their  nails.     In  Adler's  Lex.  the  Syr. 

ji_2)Q_^>    is   explained   by  henna,  folia  hennae. 

The  Arabs  call  the  plant  Henna ;  it  is  still  used 
for  the  same  purpose  as  of  old  ;  and  it  is  an 
interesting  proof  of  the  identity  of  this  plant  with 
the  ~IQ3  of  Canticles,  that  the  women  of  the  East 

are  fond  of  placing  its  bunches  of  sweet-smelling 
flowers  in  their  bosom.  It  is  supposed  that  allusion 
to  the  practice  of  staining  the  nails  with  henna  is 
made  in  Deut.  xxi.  12.  The  practice  is  universal 
in  Egypt,  and  must  have  been  so  for  ages,  for  the 
nails  of  mummies  (especially  of  females)  show  traces 
of  it.  The  shrub  is  described  and  figured  in  Son- 
nini,  Aegypt.  Travels,  i.  p.  164.  (See  also  Dios- 
corid.  i.  125;  Plin.  xii.  24;  Celsius,  Hierobot.  i. 
p.  222,  seq.) 

Kiinchi  mentions  that  Eben  Esra  woidd  connect 

5  ~   - 

"IS3  with  the  Arab,  word  ,jl£=j  tlic  calvx  of  the 


palm-tree  flower — comparing  the  Chald.  HD-IS  = 

unripe  dates  ;  so  also  T.  D.  Michaelis :  but  this  view 
of  the  word  is  rejected  by  Gesenius.  [W.  1*.] 

CA'NA  of  GALILEE,  once  Cana  in  Gali- 
lee (Kava  ttjs  FaAiAaias  ;  Syriac,  Pesch.  Katna, 

L±-fr&,  Nitrian,  Katnah,  CTLL^O  ;  Cana  Ga- 

I,  a  i  illage  or  town  memorable  as  the  scene  of 
Christ s  first  miracle  (Jc.hu  ii.  1 ,  11,  iv.  4ii),  as  well 
as  of  a  subsequent  one  (iv.  '1(1,  54),  ami  also  as  the 
Dative  place  of  the  Apostle  Nathanael  (xxi.  2).  The 
lour  passages  quoted — all,  it  will  be  observed,  from 
St.  John — are  the  only  ones  in  which  the  name  occurs. 
Neither  of  them  affords  any  clue  to  the  situation  of 
Cana.  All  we  can  gather  is.  thai  it  was  no!  far 
from  Capernaum  (John  ii.  12,  iv.  46),  and  also  on 
higher  ground,  since  our  Lord  went  down  (Karelin) 
from  the  one  to  the  other  (ii.  12).  No  further  help 
it  to  be  obtained  from  the  notices  either  of  Josephus 
(Vit.  §16;    B.J.  i.   17,  §5)— even  if  the  place 


246 


CANAAN 


which  he  mentions  be  the  same — or  of  Eusebius  and 
Jerome  in  their  Onomasticon. 

The  traditional  site  is  at  Kefr  Kenna,  a  small 
village  about  4^  miles  north-west  of  Nazareth.  It 
now  contains  only  the  rains  ot  a  church  said  to 
stand  over  the  house  in  which  the  miracle  was  per- 
formed, and — doubtless  much  older — the  fountain 
from  which  the  water  for  the  miracle  was  brought 
(Mislin,  iii.  443-6).  The  Christians  of  the  village 
are  entirely  of  the  Greek  Church.'  The  "  water-pots 
of  stone"  were  shown  to  M.  Lamartine,  though  at 
St.  Willibald's  visit  centuries  before  there  had  been 
but  one  remaining  {Early  Trcw.  16).  In  the  time 
of  the  Crusades,  the  sis  jars  were  brought  to  France, 
where  one  of  them  is  said  still  to  exist  in  the  Muse'e 
d' Angers  (see  M.  Didron's  Essays  in  the  Annates 
Archeologiques ,  xi.  5,  xiii.  2). 

The  tradition  identifying  Kefr  Kenna  with  Cana 
is  certainly  of  considerable  age.  It  existed  in  the 
time  of  Willibald  (the  latter  "half  of  the  8th  cent.), 
who  visited  it  in  passing  from  Nazareth  to  Tabor, 
and  again  in  that  of  Phocas  (1 2th  cent.  See  Re- 
land,  680).  From  that  time  until  lately  the  tra- 
dition appears  to  have  been  undisturbed.  But 
even  by  Quaresmius  the  claims  of  another  site  were 
admitted,  and  these  have  been  lately  brought  for- 
ward by  Dr.  Robinson  with  much  force.  The  rival 
site  is  "a  village  situated  further  north,  about  5 
miles  north  of  Seffurieh  (Sepphoiis)  and  9  of 
Nazareth,  near  the  present  Jefat,  the  Jotapata  of 
the  Jewish  wars.     This  village  still  bears  the  name 

otKana  cl-jelil  (  V*ls\M  UK)»  a  name  wnic]l  is 

in   every  respect  the   exact  representative  of  the 

Hebrew  original — as  Kenna,  (j^J*    ^S ,  is  widely 

different  from  it — and  it  is  in  this  fact  that  the 
chief  strength  of  the  argument  in  favour  of  the 
northern  Kana  seems  to  reside.  The  argument  from 
tradition  is  not  of  much  weight.  The  testimonies 
of  Willibald  and  Phocas,  given  above,  appear  to 
have  escaped  the  notice  of  Dr.  Robinson,  and  they 
certainly  form  a  balance  to  those  of  Adrichomius 
and  others,  which  he  quotes  against  Kefr  Kenna 
(Rob.  ii.  346-9,  iii.  108,  with  the  note  on  De  Saulcy  ; 
comp.  Ewald,  v.  147  ;  Mislin,  iii.  443-6). 

The  Gospel  history  will  not  be  affected  whichever 
site  may  be  discovered  to  be  the  real  one.        [G.] 

CA'NAAN  (}y33  (=C'naan  ;  comp.  the  Greek 
name  Xva,  as  mentioned  below)  ;  Xavadv ;  Jos. 
Xuvdavos  ;  Chanaari).  1.  The  fourth  son  of  Ham 
(Gen.  x.  6 ;  1  Chr.  i.  8 ;  comp.  Jos.  Ant.  i.  6,  §4), 
the  progenitor  of  the  Phoenicians  ("  Zidon"),  and  of 
the  various  nations  who  before  the  Israelite  con- 
quest peopled  the  sea-coast  of  Palestine,  and  ge- 
nerally the  whole  of  the  country  westward  of  the 
Jordan  (Gen.  x.  13;  1  Chr.  i.  13).  [Canaan, 
land  OF;  Canaanites.]  In  the  ancient  nar- 
rative of  Gen.  ix.  20-27,  a  curse  is  pronounced  on 
Canaan  for  the  unfilial  and  irreverential  conduct  of 
Ham :  it  is  almost  as  if  the  name  had  belonged  to 
both,  or  the  father  were  already  merged  in  the  son. 

2.  The  name  "  Canaan  "  is  sometimes  employed 
for  the  country  itself — more  generally  styled 
"  the  land  of  C."  It  is  so  in  Zeph.  ii.  5  ;  and  we 
also  find  "  Language  of  C."  (Is.  xix.  18)  :  "  Wars 
of  C."  (Judg.  iii.  1):  "  Inhabitants  of  C."  (Ex. 
xv.  15):  "King  of  C"  (Judg.  iv.  2,  23,  24, 
v.  19):  "  Daughters  of  C."  (Gen.  xxviii.  1,  6,  8, 
xxx vi.  2):     "Kingdoms  of  C."  (I's.  cxxxv.   11). 


CANAAN 

In  addition  to  the  above  the  word  occurs  in  several 
passages  where  it  is  concealed  in  the  A.  V.  bv  being 
translated.  These  are  :  Is.  xxiii.  8,  "  traffickers," 
and  xxiii.  11,  "the  merchant  city;"  Gesenius, 
"  Jehovah  gab  Befehl  iiber  Canaan :"  Hos.  xii.  2, 
"He  is  a  merchant;"  Ewald,  "  Kanaan  halt  tru- 
gerische  wage :"  Zeph.  i.  11,  "  merchaut-people ;" 
Ewald,  "  dass  alle  Canaaniter  sind  dahiu."      [G.j 

CA'NAAN,  the  LAND  of  ($33  ptf,  from 

a  root  JJ33,  signifying  to  be  low ;  see  2  Chr.  xxviii. 

19  ;  Job  xl.  12,  amongst  other  passages  in  which  the 
verb  is  used),  a  name  denoting  the  country  west  of 
the  Jordan  and  Dead  Sea,  and  between  those  waters 
and  the  Mediterranean  ;  specially  opposed  to  the 
"  land  of  Gilead,"  that  is  the  high  table-land  on  the 
east  of  the  Jordan.  Thus:  "  our  little  ones  and  our 
wives  shall  be  here  in  the  cities  of  Gilead  .  .  .  but 
we  will  pass  over  aimed  into  the  land  of  Canaan" 
(Num.  xxxii.  26-32),  and  see  xxxiii.  51  :  "  Phi- 
neas  .  .  .  returned  from  the  children  of  Reuben  and 
the  children  of  Gad  out  of  the  land  of  Gilead  into 
the  land  of  Canaan  to  the  children  of  Israel,"  Josh, 
xxii.  32  ;  see  also  Gen.  xii.  5,  xxiii.  2,  19,  xxxi. 
18,  xxxiii.  18,  xxsv.  6,  xxxvii.  1,  xlviii.  4,  7,  xlix. 
30 ;  Num.  xiii.  2,  17,  xxxiii.  40,  51  ;  Josh.  xvi.  2  ; 
Judg.  xxi.  12.  True  the  district  to  which  the 
name  of  "low  land"  is  thus  applied  contained 
many  very  elevated  spots: — Shechem  (Gen.  xxxiii. 
18),  Hebron  (xxiii.  19),  Bethel  (xxxv.  6),  Beth- 
lehem (xlviii.  7),  Shiloh  (Josh.  xxi.  2;  Judg.  xxi. 
12),  which  are  all  stated  to  be  in  the  "land  of 
Canaan."  But  high  as  the  level  of  much  of  the 
country  west  of  the  Jordan  undoubtedly  is,  there  are 
several  things  which  must  always  have  prevented, 
as  they  still  prevent,  it  from  leaving  an  impression 
of  elevation.  These  are,  (1)  that  remarkable,  wide, 
maritime  plain  over  which  the  eye  ranges  for  miles 
from  the  central  hills  ;  a  feature  of  the  country 
which  cannot  be  overlooked  by  the  most  casual  ob- 
server, and  which  impresses  itself  most  indelibly  on 
the  recollection;  (2)  the  still  deeper,  and  still  more 
remarkable  and  impressive  hollow  of  the  Jordan 
valley,  a  view  into  which  may  be  commanded  from 
almost  any  of  the  heights  of  central  Palestine  ;  and, 
(3)  there  is  the  almost  constant  presence  of  the 
long  high  line  of  the  mountains  east  of  the  Jordan, 
which  from  their  distance  have  the  effect  more  of 
an  enormous  cliff  than  of  a  mountain  range — look- 
ing down  on  the  more  broken  and  isolated  hills  of 
Canaan,  and  furnishing  a  constant  standard  of  height 
before  which  everything  is  dwarfed. 

The  word  "Canaanite"  was  used  in  the  O.  T. 
in  two  senses,  a  broader  and  a  narrower,  which 
will  be  most  conveniently  examined  under  that 
head  ;  but  this  does  not  appear  to  be  the  case  with 
"  Canaan,"  at  least  in  the  older  cases  of  its  occur- 
rence. It  is  only  in  later  notices,  such  as  Zeph.  ii.  5, 
and  Matt.  xv.  22,  that  we  find  it  applied  to  the 
low  maritime  plains  of  Philistia  anil  Phoenicia 
(comp.  Mark  vii.  26).  In  the  same  manner  it  was 
by  the  Greeks  that  the  name  Xva,  Cna,  was  used 
for  Phoenicia,  i.  c.  the  sea-side  plain  north  of  the 
"  Tyrian  ladder"  (see  the  extract  in  Reland,  7,  and 
Gesenius,  696),  and  by  the  later  Phoenicians  both  of 
Phoenicia  proper  and  of  the  Punic  colonies  in  Africa. 
(See  the  coin  of  Laodicea  ad  Lib.  and  the  testi- 
mony of  Augustin,  both  quoted  by  Gesenius,  696.) 
The  LXX.  translators  had  learnt  to  apply  this 
meaning  to  the  word,  and  in  two  cases  they  render 
the    Hebrew    words   given    above    by    x^Pa   r&v 


CANAANITE 

QoiviKtav  (Ex.  xvi.  .'35 ;  Josh.  v.  12,  comp.  v.  1),  as 
they  do  "Canaanites"  by  fyoivines.  [*'•] 

CA'NAANITE,  THE  (Rec.  T.  6  Kavavir^s, 
A,  KavavtirTis  ;  Lachm.  with  B  C,  6  Kavavcuos  ; 
I),  Xavavaios;  Chanuncus),  the  designation  of  the 
Apostle  Simon,  otherwise  known  as  "  Simon  Ze- 
lotcs."     It  occurs  in  Watt.  vi.  4  ;   Mark  iii.  18. 

The  word  does  not  signify  a  descendant  of  Canaan, 
that  being  in  the  Greek  both  of  the  LXX.  and  the 
N.  T.   XavavaTios  =  >3J|33  (comp.  Matt.   xv.  22 

with  Mark  vii.  26).  Nor  does  it  signify,  as  has 
been  suggested,  a  native  of  Kana,  since  that  would 
probably  be  Kavirris.  But  it  comes  from  a  Chaldee 
or  Syriac  word,   )X3p,  Kanean,  or  (Tiii  i  r> 

Kanenieh,  by  which  the  Jewish  sect  or  faction  of 
"  the  Zealots  " — so  prominent  in  the  last  days  of 
Jerusalem — was  designated  (see  Buxtorf,  Lex. 
s.  v.).  This  Syriac  word  is  the  reading  of  the 
Peschito  version.  The  Greek  equivalent  of  Kanean 
is  Z7]KaiT7]s,  Zelotes,  and  this  St.  Luke  (vi.  15 ; 
Acts  i.  13)  has  correctly  preserved.  St.  Matthew 
ami  St.  Mark,  on  the  other  hand,  have  literally 
transferred  the  Syriac  word,  as  the  LXX.  trans- 
lators did  frequently  before  them.  There  is  no 
necessity  to  suppose,  as  Mr.  Cureton  does  (Nitrian 
Rec.  lxxxvii.),    that   they    mistook    the    word   for 

01>.J_i»J_.0  =  Xavavalos,  a  Canaanite  or  de- 
scendant of  Canaan.  The  Evangelists  could  hardly 
commit  such  an  error,  whatever  subsequent  trans- 
cribers of  their  works  may  have  done.  But  that 
this  meaning  was  afterwards  attached  to  the  w,ord 
is  plain  from  the  readings  of  the  Codex  Bezae  (D) 
and  the  Vulgate,  as  given  above,  and  from  the 
notice  quoted  from  Coteler  in  the  note  to  Winer's 
article  (4(33).  The  spelling  of  the  A.  V.  has 
doubtless  led  many  to  the  same  conclusion :  and  it 
would  be  well  if  it  were  altered  to  "  Kananite,"  or 
some  other  form  distinguished  from  the  well-known 
one  in  which  it  now  stands.  [*-*•] 

CA'NAANITES,  THE  OJjnsn,  i.  e.  accu- 
rately according  to  Hebrew  usage — Gesen.  Hob. 
<!rmn.  §lo7 — "the  Canaanite  ;"  but  in  the  A.  V. 
with  few  exceptions  rendered  as  plural,  and  there- 
fore indistinguishable  from  D^JJJS,  which  also,  but 

very  unfrequently,  occurs:  Xavavaios,  4>oiVi|,  Ex. 
vi.  15,  comp.  Josh.  v.  1  ;  Chananeus),  a  word  used 
in  two  senses: — 1.  a  tribe  which  inhabited  a  parti- 
cular locality  of  the  land  west  of  the  Jordan  before 
the  conquest;  and  2.  in  a  wider  sense,  the  people 
wIki  inhabited  generally  the  whole  of  that  country. 
1.  For  the  tribe  of  "the  Canaanites"  only — the 
dwellers  in  the  lowland.  The  whole  of  the  country 
west  of  Jordan  was  a  "  lowland"  as  compared  with 
the  loftier  and  more  extended  tracts  on  the  east: 
but  there  was  a  part  of  this  western  country 
which  was  still  more  emphatically  a  "  lowland." 

a.  There  were  the  plains  lying  between  theshoreof 

the  Mediterranean  and  the  fool  of  the  hills  of  Ben- 
jamin, Judah,  and  Ephraim — the  Shefela  or  plain 
of  Philistia  on  the  south — that  of  Sharon  between 
Jaffa  and  Carmel — the  great  plain  of  Esdraelon  in 
the  rear  of  the  bay  of  Akka;  and  lastly,  the  plain 
of  Phoenicia,  containing  Tyre,  Sidon,  and  all  the 
other  cities  of  that  nation.  //.  But  separated  en- 
tirely from  these  was  the  still  lower  region  of  the 
Jordan  Valley  or  Arabah,  the  modern  Crhdr,s  region 
which  extended  in  length  from  the  sea  of  Cinneroth 
CGennesareth)  to  the  south  of  the  Dead  Sea  about 


CANAANITES 


247 


120  miles,  with  a  width  of  from  8  to  14.  The 
climate  of  these  sunken  regions — especially  of  the 
valley  of  the  Jordan — is  so  peculiar,  that  it  is  natural 
to  find  them  the  special  possession  of  one  tribe. 
"  Amalek  " — so  runs  one  of  the  earliest  and  most 
precise  statements  in  the  ancient  records  of  Scripture 
— "  Amalek  dwells  in  the  land  of  the  south  ;  and 
the  Hittite,  and  the  Jebusite,  and  the  Amorite,  dwell 
in  the  mountains ;  and  the  Canaanite  dwells  by  the 
sea,  and  by  the  side  of  Jordan"  (Num.  xiii.  29). 
This  describes  the  division  of  the  country  a  few 
years  only  before  the  conquest.  But  there  had 
been  little  or  no  variation  for  centuries.  In  the 
notice  which  purports  to  be  the  earliest  of  all,  the 
seats  of  the  Canaanite  tribe — as  distinguished  from 
the  sister  tribes  of  Zidon,  the  Hittites,  Amorites, 
and  the  other  descendants  of  Canaan — are  given  as 
on  the  sea-shore  from  Zidon  to  Gaza,  and  in  the 
Jordan  valley  to  Sodom,  Gomorrah,  and  Lasha 
(afterwards  Callirhoe),  on  the  shore  of  the  present 
Dead  Sea  (Gen.  x.  18-20).  In  Josh.  xi.  3— at  a 
time  when  the  Israelites  were  actually  in  the 
western  country — this  is  expressed  more  broadly. 
"  The  Canaanite  on  the  east  and  the  west "  is  care- 
fully distinguished  from  the  Amorite  who  held 
"  the  mountain  "  in  the  centre  of  the  country.  In 
Josh.  xiii.  2,  3,  we  are  told  with  more  detail  that 

"  all  the  <  circles'   (llMa)  of  the  Philistines  .  .  . 

from  Sihor  (the  Wady  el  Arish)  unto  Ekron  north- 
ward, is  counted  to  the  Canaanite."  Later  still, 
the  Canaanites  are  still  dwelling  in  the  upper  part 
of  the  Jordan  Valley — Bethshean  ;  the  plain  of  Es- 
draelon— Taanach,  Ibleam,  and  Megiddo  ;  the  plain 
of  Sharon — Dor;  and  also  on  the  plain  of  Phoenicia — 
Accho  and  Zidon.  Here  were  collected  the  chariots 
which  formed  a  prominent  part  of  their  armies 
(Judg.  i.  19,  iv.  3;  Josh.  xvii.  16),  and  which  could 
indeed  be  driven  nowhere  but  in  these  level  low- 
lands (Stanley,  S.  §  P.  134). 

The  plains  which  thus  appear  to  have  been  in 
possession  of  the  Canaanites  specially  so  called, 
were  not  only  of  great  extent ;  they  were  also  the 
richest  and  most  important  parts  of  the  country, 
and  it  is  not  unlikely  that  this  was  one  of  the  rea- 
sons for  the  name  of  "  Canaanite"  being 

2.  applied  as  a  general  name  for  the  non-Israelite 
inhabitants  of  the  land,  as  we  have  already  seen  was 
the  case  with  "  Canaan." 

Instances  of  this  are,  Gen.  xii.  6;  Num.  xxi.  3 — 
where  the  name  is  applied  to  dwellers  in  the  south, 
who  in  xiii.  29  are  called  Amalekites ;  Judg.  i. 
10 — with  which  comp.  Gen.  xiv.  13  and  xiii.  18, 
and  Josh.  x.  5,  where  Hebron,  the  highest  land  in 
Palestine,  is  stated  to  be  Amorite  ;  and  Gen.  xiii.  1  2. 
where  the  "land  of  Canaan  "  is  distinguished  from 
the  very  Jordan-valley  itself.  See  also  Gen.  xxiv.  3, 
37,  comp.  xxviii.  2,  G;  Ex.  xiii.  11,  comp.  5. 
But  in  many  of  its  occurrences  it  is  difficult  to 
know  in  which  category  to  place  the  word.  Thus 
in  Gen.  i.  11:  if  the  floor  of  A  tad  was  at  Bethhogla, 
close  to  the  west  side  of  the  Jordan,  "  the  Canaan- 
ites "  must  be  intended  in  the  narrower  and  stricter 
sense  ;  bat  the  expression  "inhabitants  of  the  land" 
appears  as  if  intended  to  he  more  general.  Again,  in 
(ieu.  >,.  is,  19,  where  the  present  writer  believes 
the  tribe  to  be  intended,  Gesenius  takes  it  to  apply 

to  the  whole  of  the  Canaanite  nations.  But  in 
these  and  other  similar  instances,  allowance  must 
surely  be  made  for  the  different  dates  at  which 
the  various  records  thus  compared  were  composed. 
And  besides  this,  it  is  difficult  to  imagine  what  ac- 


248 


CANAANITES 


curate  knowledge  the  Israelites  can  have  possessed 
of  a  set  of  petty  nations,  from  whom  they  had  been 
entirely  removed  for  four  hundred  years,  and  with 
whom  they  were  now  again  brought  into  contact 
only  that  ifiey  might  exterminate  them  as  soon  as 
possible.  And  before  we  can  solve  such  questions 
we  also  ought  to  know  more  than  we  do  of  the 
usages  and  circumstances  of  people  who  differed  not 
only  from  ourselves,  but  also  possibly  in  a  material 
degree  from  the  Orientals  of  the  present  day.  The 
tribe  who  possessed  the  ancient  city  of  Hebron,  be- 
sides being,  as  shown  above,  called  interchangeably 
Canaanites  and  Amorites,  are  in  a  third  passage 
(Gen.  xxiii.)  called  the  children  of  Heth  or  Hittites 
(comp.  also  xxvii.  46  with  xxviii.  1,  6).  The  Ca- 
naanites who  were  dwelling  in  the  land  of  the 
south  when  the  Israelites  made  their  attack  on  it, 
may  have  been  driven  to  these  higher  and  more 
barren  grounds  by  some  other  tribes,  possibly  by 
the  Philistines  who  displaced  the  Avvites,  also 
dwellers  in  the  low  country  (Deut.  ii.  23). 

Beyond  their  chariots  (see  above)  we  have  no 
clue  to  any  manners  or  customs  of  the  Canaanites. 
Like  the  Phoenicians,  they  were  probably  given  to 
commerce  ;  and  thus  the  name  be«ame  probably  in 
later  times  an  occasional  synonym  for  a  merchant 
(Job  xli.  6;  Prov.  xxxi.  24;  comp.  Is.  xxiii.  8,  11; 
Hos.  xii.  2  ;  Zeph.  i.  11.    See  Kenrick,  Phoen.  232). 

Of  the  language  of  the  Canaanites  little  can  be 
said.  On  the  one  hand,  being — if  the  genealogy  of 
Gen.  x.  be  right — Hamites,  there  could  be  no  affinity 
between  their  language  and  that  of  the  Israelites 
who  were  descendants  of  .Shem.  On  the  other  is 
the  fact  that  Abram  and  Jacob  shortly  after  their 
entrance  to  the  country  seem  able  to  hold  converse 
with  them,  and  also  that  the  names  of  Canaanite 
persons  and  places  which  we  possess,  are  trans- 
latable into  Hebrew.  Such  are  Melchizedek,  Ha- 
mor,  Shechem,  Sisera  .  .  .  Ephrath,  and  also  a  great 
number  of  the  names  of  places.  But  we  know  that 
the  Egyptian  and  Assyrian  names  have  been  materi- 
ally altered  in  their  adoption  into  Hebrew  records, 
either  by  translation  into  Hebrew  equivalents,  or 
from  the  impossibility  of  accurately  rendering  the 
sounds  of  one  language  by  those  of  another.  The 
modern  Arabs  have  adopted  the  Hebrew  names  of 
places  as  nearly  as  would  admit  of  their  having  a 
meaning  in  Arabic,  though  that  meaning  may  be 
widely  different  from  that  of  the  Hebrew  name. 
Examples  of  this  are  Beit-ur,  Beit-lahm,  Dir  cs 
seba,  which  mean  respectively,  "  house  of  the  eye," 
"  house  of  flesh,"  "  well  of  the  lion,"  while  the 
Hebrew  names  which  these  have  superseded  meant 
"  house  of  caves,"  "  house  of  bread,"  "  well  of  the 
oath."  May  not  a  similar  process  have  taken  place 
when  the  Hebrews  took  possession  of  the  Canaanite 
towns,  and  "  called  the  lands  after  their  own 
names?"  (For  an  examination  of  this  interesting 
but  obscure  subject  see  Gesenius,  Hcbr.  Spr.  223-5.) 

The  "  Nethinim"  or  servants  of  the  temple  seem 
to  have  originated  in  the  dedication  of  captives  taken 
in  war  from  the  petty  states  surrounding  the  Israel- 
ites. [Nethinim.]  If  this  was  the  case,  and  if 
they  were  maintained  in  number  from  similar 
sources,  there  must  be  many  non-Israelite  names  in 
the  lists  of  their  families  which  we  possess  in  Ezr. 
ii.  43-54;  Neh.  vii.  46-56.  Several  of  the  names 
in  these  catalogues — such  as  Sisera,  Mehunim,  Ne- 
phushim— are  the  same  as  those  which  we  know  to 
fie  foreign,  and  doubtless  others  would  be  found  on 
examination.  The  subject  perhaps  woidd  not  be 
beneath  the  examination  of  a  Hebrew  scholar. 


CANDLESTICK 

This  is  perhaps  the  proper  place  for  noticing  the 
various  shapes  under  which  the  formula  for  desig- 
nating the  nations  to  be  expelled  by  the  Israelites 
is  given  in  the  various  Books. 

1.  Six  nations:  the  Canaanites,  Hittites,  Amo- 
rites, Perizzites,  Hivites,  and  Jebusites.  This  is 
the  usual  form,  and,  with  some  variation  in  the 
order  of  the  names,  it  is  found  in  Exod.  iii.  8,  17, 
xxiii.  23,  xxxiii.  2,  xxxiv.  11 ;  Deut.  xx.  17  ;  Josh, 
ix.  1 ,  xii.  8  ;  Judg.  iii.  5.  In  Ex.  xiii.  5,  the  same 
names  are  given  with  the  omission  of  the  Perizzites. 

2.  With  the  addition  of  the  Girgashites:  making 
up  the  mystic  number  seven  (Deut.  vii.  1  ;  Josh.  iii. 
10,  xxiv.  M ).  The  Girgashites  are  retained  and  the 
Hivites  omitted  in  Neh.  ix.  8  (comp.  Ezr.  ix.  1). 

3.  In  Exod.  xxiii.  28,  we  find  the  Canaanite,  the 
Hittite  and  the  Hivite. 

4.  The  list  of  ten  nations  in  Gen.  xv.  19-21  in- 
cludes some  on  the  east  of  Jordan,  and  probably 
some  on  the  south  of  Palestine. 

5.  In  1  K.  ix.  20  the  Canaanites  are  omitted 
from  the  list.  [G.] 

CANDA'CE  (Ko.vUk-0,  Strab.  xvii.  p.  820), 
a  queen  of  Ethiopia  (Meioe),  mentioned  Acts  viii. 
27.  The  name  was  not  a  proper  name  of  an  indi- 
vidual, but  that  of  a  dynasty  of  Ethiopian  queens. 
(See  Plin.  iv.  35 ;  Dion  Cass.  liv.  5  ;  Strab.  I.  c.) 
The  eunuch  of  this  queen,  who  had  charge  of  all 
her  treasure,  is  mentioned  in  Acts  as  having  been 
met  by  Philip  the  Evangelist  on  the  desert  road  from 
Jerusalem  to  Gaza,  and  converted  to  Christianity. 
Ethiopian  tradition  gives  him  the  name  of  Indich ; 
and  in  lien.  iii.  12,  and  Euseb.  H.  E.  ii.  1,  he  is 
said  to  have  first  propagated  the  gospel  in  Arabia 
Felix  and  Ethiopia,  but  Sophronius  makes  him 
preach  and  suiter  martyrdom  in  the  island  of  Ceylon. 
(See  Wolf,  Curae,  ii.  113.)  [H.  A.] 

CANDLESTICK  (TTJMip  ;  AvXv(a  rod  <pa- 

t6s,  1  Mace.  i.  21  ;  6  adavaros — Kiy6)xevos  ^x>x~ 
vos  Kai  Kai6p.€i/os  aSiaAenrrois  iv  t<2  va<£,  Diod. 
Sic.  ap.  Schleusn.  Thes.  s.  v.),  which  Moses  was 
commanded  to  make  for  the  tabernacle,  is  described 
Ex.  xxv.  31-37,  xxxvii.  17-24.  It  is  called  in  Lev. 
xxiv.  4,  "  the  pure,"  and  in  Ecclus.  xxvi.  19,  "  the 
holy  candlestick."  With  its  various  appurtenances 
(mentioned  below)  it  required  a  talent  of  "  pure 
gold,"  and  it  was  not  moulded,  but  "  of  beaten 
work""  (ropevr-fi).  Josephus,  however,  says  {Ant. 
iii.  6,  §7)  that  it  was  of  cast  gold  {Kex°3VixJ>Ji^vr))-> 
and  hollow.  From  its  golden  base  ("Sp\  fiacris, 
Jos.),  which,  according  to  the  Jews,  was  3  feet 
high  (Winer,  Leuchter),  sprang  a  main  shaft  or  reed 
(i"IJp),  "and  spread  itself  into  as  many  branches 
as  there  are  planets,  including  the  sun.  It  ter- 
minated in  7  heads'  all  in  one  row,  all  standing 
parallel  to  one  another,  one  by  one,  in  imitation 
of  the  number  of  the  planets  "  (Winston's  Jos. 
ubi  supra).  As  the  description  given  in  Ex.  is 
not  very  clear,  we  abbreviate  Lightfoot's  expla- 
nation of  it.  "  The  foot  of  it  was  gold,  from 
which  went  up  a  shaft  straight,  which  was  the 
middle  light.  Near  the  foot  was  a  golden  dish 
wrought  almondwise  ;  and  a  little  above  that  a 
golden  knop,  and  above  that  a  golden  flower.  Then 
two  branches,  one  on  each  side,  bowed,  and  coming 
up  as  high  as  the  middle  shaft.  On  each  of  them 
were  three  golden  cups  placed  almondwise  on 
sharp,  scollop-shell  fashion  ;  above  which  was  a 
golden    knop,    a  golden    flower,    and    the   socket. 


CANDLESTICK 

Above   the  branches   on  the  middle  shaft   was  a 
golden  boss,  above  which  rose  two  shafts  more  ; 

above  the  coming  out  of  these  was  another  boss, 
and  two  more  shafts,  and  then  on  the  shaft  up- 
wards were  three  golden  scollop-cups,  a  knop,  and 
a  flower :  so  that  the  heads  of  the  branches  stood 
an  equal  height"  (  Works,  ii.  399,  ed.  Pitman). 
Calmet  remarks  that  "  the  number  7  might  remind 
them  of  the  sabbath :"  we  have  seen  that  Josephus 
gives  it  a  somewhat  Egyptian  reference  to  the  num- 
ber of  the  planets,  but  elsewhere  (B.  J.  vii.  5,  §5) 
he  assigns  to  the  7  branches  a  merely  general  re- 
ference, as  rrjs  irapa.  rols  '\ovb~aiois  ej38o,u.a5o$ 
rtyv  ri^u  efi<pai>i£ovTes.  The  whole  weight  of 
the  candlestick  was  100  minae  ;  its  height  was, 
according  to  the  Rabbis,  5  feet,  and  the  breadth, 
or  distance  between  the  exterior  branches  3^  feet 
(Jahn,  Arch.  Bibl.  §329).  It  has  been  calculated  to 
have  been  worth  5076/.  exclusive  of  workmanship. 
According  to  Josephus  the  ornaments  on  the 
shaft  and  branches  were  70  in  number,  and  this 
was  a  notion  in  which  the  Jews  with  their  peculiar 
reverence  for  that  number  would  readily  coincide  ; 
but  it  seems  difficult  from  the  description  in  E.xodus 
to  confirm  the  statement.  On  the  main  shaft 
(called  "  the  candlestick,"  in  Ex.  xxv.  34)  there 
are  said  to  be  "  4  almond-shaped  bowls,  with  their 
knops  and  their  flowers,"  which  would  make  12 
of  these  ornaments  in  all ;  and  as  on  each  of  the  6 
branches  there  were  apparently  (for  the  expression 
in  verse  33  is  obscure)  3  bowls,  3  knops,  and  3 
flowers,  the  entire  number  of  such  figures  on  the 

.  candlestick  would  be  66.  The  word  translated 
"  bowl"  in  the  A.  V.  is  ySJI,  Kpar-fip,  for 
which  Joseph.  (/.  c.)  has  Kparr]pi5ta  ko\  po'tffKoi. 
It  is  said  to  have  been  almond-shaped  ("TpK'D, 
eKT€TVTrw[i4voi  KapviffKois),  but  whether  the 
fruit  or  flower  of  the  almond  is  intended  cannot 
be  certain.  The  word  "llfiQS  is  variously  ren- 
dered "  knop  "  (A.  V.),  "  pommel  "  (Geddes), 
acpatptoT-iip  (LXX.),  spherula  (Vulg.),  "  apple " 
(Arabic,  and  other  versions)  ;  and  to  this  some 
apply  the  pu'l'iTKoi,  and  not  (as  is  more  natural) 
the  cr<paipia  of  Jos.     The  third  term   is  PITS,   "  a 

bud,"  Kplva  (LXX.  and  Jos.),  which  from  an  old 
gloss  seems  to  be  put  for  any  avOos  eowSid^ov, 
Kplvois  o/xulou.  From  the  tact  that  it  was  ex- 
pressly made  "after  the  pattern,  shown  in  the 
mount,"  many  have  endeavoured  to  find  a  sym- 
bolical meaning  in  these  ornaments,  especially 
Meyer  and  Biihr  (Synth,,/,  i.  416,  sq.).  Generally  it 
was  "  a  type  of  preaching  "  (Godwyn's  Moses  and 
A, trim,  ii.  1)  or  of"  the  light  of  the  law  "  (Light- 
foot,  /.  c).  Similarly  candlesticks  are  made  types 
of  the  spirit,  of  the  Church,  of  witnesses,  &c. 
(Comp.  Zech.  iy. ;  Rev.  ii.  5,  xi.  4,  &c. ;  Wemyss, 
Clan.  Symbol,  s,  v.) 

The  candlestick  was  placed  on  the  south  side  of 
the  first  apartment  of  the  tabernacle,  opposite  the 
table  of  shew-bread,  which  it  was  intended  to  illu- 
mine,in  an  oblique  position  I  \o|«s)  so  that  the  lamps 
looked  to  the  cast  ami  south  (Jo;.  .1/;/.  iii.  6.  §7  ; 
Ex.  xxv.  37);  hence  the  central  was  called  "the 
western  "  lamp,  according  to  some,  thoitgh  others 
render  it  "  the  evening  lamp,"  and  say  that  it 
alone  burned  perpetually  (Ex.  xxvii.  20,  21),  the 
others  not  being  lit  during  the  day,  although  the 
Holy  Place  was  dark  (Ex.  xxx.  S  ;  1  Mace.  iv.  .Mi). 
In  1  Sam.  iii.  2,  we  have  the  expression  "  ere  the 


CANDLESTICK 


249 


lamp  of  God  went  out  in  the  temple  of  the  Lord," 
and  this  taken  in  connexion  with  1  Chr.  xiii.  11, 
and  Lev.  xxiv.  2,  3,  would  seem  to  imply  that 
"  always  "  and  "  continually,"  merely  mean  "  tem- 
pore constituto,"  i.  e.  by  night ;  especially  as  Aaron 
is  said  to  have  dressed  the  lamps  every  morning 
and  lighted  them  every  evening.  Rabbi  Kimchi 
(ad  Joe.)  says  that  the  other  lamps  often  went  out 
at  night,  but  "  they  always  fouud  the  western 
lamp  burning."  They  were  each  supplied  with 
cotton,  and  half  a  log  of  the  purest  olive-oil  (about 
two  wine-glasses),  which  was  sufficient  to  keep 
them  burning  during  a  long  night  (Winer). 

The  priest  in  the  morning  trimmed  the  lamps  with 
golden  snuffers  (DTlpTO  ;  iirapvarripes  ;  foixipes), 
and  carried  away  the  snuff  in  golden  dishes  (MinnO; 

viro6ifjt.ara ;  acerrae,  Ex.  xxv.  38).  When  carried 
about,  the  candlestick  was  covered  with  a  cloth  of 
blue,  and  put  with  its  appendages  in  badger-skin 
bags,  which  were  supported  on  a  bar  (Num.  iv.  9). 

In  Solomon's  temple,  instead  of  this  candlestick 
(or  besides  it,  as  the  Rabbis  say,  for  what  became 
of  it  we  do  not  know),  there  were  10  golden  can- 
dlesticks similarly  embossed,  5  on  the  right  and 
5  on  the  left  (1  K.  vii.  49  ;  2  Chr.  iv.  7).  These  are 
said  to  have  formed  a  sort  of  railing  before  the  vail, 
and  to  have  been  connected  by  golden  chains,  under 
which,  on  the  day  of  atonement,  the  high  priest 
crept.     They  were  taken  to  Babylon  (Jer.  Iii.  19). 

In  the  temple  of  Zerubbabel  there  was  again  a 
single  candlestick  (1  Mace.  i.  23,  iv.  49).  It  was 
taken  from  the  Herodian  temple  by  Titus,  and 
carried  in  triumph  immediately  before  the  con- 
queror (Joseph.  B.  J.  vii.  5,  §5).  The  description 
given  of  its  k'iwv  and  \€irro\  KavAiffKoi  by  Jo- 
sephus, agrees  only  tolerably  with  the  deeply  inte- 
resting sculpture  on  the  Arch  of  Titus ;  but  he 


Candlestick,    (,Frum  Arch  oi  Titus.) 

drops  a  hint  that  it  was  not  identical  with  the  one 
\ised  in  the  Temple,  saying  (possibly  in  allusion  to 
the  fantastic  griffins,  &c,  sculptured  on  the  pedi- 
ment, which  are  so  much  worn  that  we  found  it 
difficult  to  make  them  out)  to  tpyov  e^aacckto 
tt/s  Kara  t^v  riixeTtpav  xp^crtv  crvvr)6elas :  where 
see  Winston's  note.  Hence  Jahn  (Hcbr.  Com. 
§cjix.)  says  that  the  candlestick  carried  in  the 
triumph  was  "somewhat  different  from  the  golden 
tick  i'f  the  temple."    These  questions  are 


250 


CANE 


examined  in  Reland's  treatise  De  Spoliis  Templi 
Hierosol.  in  Arm  Titiano  conspicuis.    The  general 

accuracy  ot'  the  sculpture  is  undoubted  (l'rideaux, 
Con.  i.  166). 

After  the  triumph  the  candlestick  was  deposited 
in  the  Temple  of  Peace,  and  according  to  one  story 
fell  into  the  Tiber  from  the  Milvian  bridge  during 
the  flight  of  Maxentius  from  Constantine,  Oct.  28, 
312  a.d.  ;  but  it  probably  was  among  the  spoils 
transferred,  at  the  end  of  400  years,  from  Rome  to 
Carthage  by  Genseric,  A.D.  455  (Gibbon,  iii.  291). 
It  was  recovered  by  Belisarius,  once  more  carried  iu 
triumph  to  Constantinople,  "  and  then  respectfully 
deposited  in  the  Christian  church  of  Jerusalem" 
(Id.  i\\  24),  a.d.  533.  It  has  never  been  heard 
of  since. 

When  our  Lord  cried  "  I  am  the  light  of  the 
World"  (John  viii.  12),  the  allusion  was  probably 
suggested  by  the  two  large  golden  chandeliers, 
lighted  in  the  court  of  the  women  during  the  feast 
of  tabernacles,  which  illuminated  all  Jerusalem 
(Wetstein,  ad  loc),  or  perhaps  to  the  lighting  of 
this  cell issal  candlestick,  "  the  more  remarkable  in 
the  profound  darkness  of  an  Oriental  town"  (Stan- 
ley, S.  <£•  P.  p.  420).  [F.  W.  F.] 

CANE.     [Calamus.] 

CANKEKWORM  (p7[ ;  PPodXos).  The  Heb. 
term  yelek  probably  describes  the  locust  in  a  certain 
stage  of  its  growth,  viz.,  just  when  it  emerges  from 
the  caterpillar  state  and  obtains  the  use  ot  its 
wings ;  see  Nah.  iii.  16,  "  the  cankerworm  throireth 
off  (t3K'B,  spoileth,  A.  V.)  its  scales  and  fleeth 
away."  The  term  is  translated  caterpillar  in  Ps. 
cv.  34,  and  Jer.  li.  1 4,  27  ;  cankerworm  in  Joel  i.  4, 
ii.25  ;  Nah.  iii.  15, 16.  [Locust.]      [W.  L.  B.] 

CAN'NEH  (i-133,  one  Codex  H&D  ;  Xavad  ; 
Alex.  Xavadv  ;   Chene),  Ez.  xxvii.  23.     [Calnilh.] 

CANON  OF  SCRIPTURE,  THE,  may  be 

generally  described  as  "  the  collection  of  books 
which  forms  the  original  and  authoritative  written 
rule  of  the  faith  and  practice  of  the  Christian 
Church."  Starting  from  this  definition  it  will  be 
the  object  of  the  present  article  to  examine  shortly, 
I.  The  original  meaning  of  the  term  :  II.  The  Jewish 
Canon  of  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures  as  to  (a) 
its  formation,  and  (0)  extent :  III.  The  Christian 
Canon  of  the  Old  ;  and  IV.  of  the  New  Testament. 
I.  The  use  of  the  word  Canon. — The  word  Canon 
(Kavdiv,  akin  to  HJp  [cf.  Gesen.  T/ies.s.  v.]  Kavq, 
Kavva,  canna  [canalis,  channel],  cane,  cannon)  in 
classical  Greek  is  (1)  properly  a  straight  rod,  as 
the  rod  of  a  shield,  or  that  used  in  weaving  (licia- 
toriuih),  or  a  carpenter's  rule.  (2)  The  last  usage 
offers  an  easy  transition  to  the  metaphorical  use  of  the 
word  for  a  testing  rule  in  ethics  (comp.  Arist.  Eth. 
Nic.  iii.  4,  5),  or  in  ail  (the  Canon  of  Polycletus ; 
Luc.  de  Salt.  p.  946  B.),  or  in  language  (the" Canons 
of  Grammar).  The  varied  gift  of  tongues,  accord- 
ing to  the  ancient  interpretation  of  Acts  ii.  7,  was 
regarded  as  the  "  canon  "  or  test  which  determined 
the  direction  of  the  labours  of  the  several  Apostles 


a  Credner  accepts  the  popular  interpretation,  as  if 
canonical  were  equivalent  to  "  having  the  force  of 
law,"  and  supposes  that  scripturae  legis,  a  phrase 
occurring  in  the  time  of  the  persecution  of  Diocletian, 
represents  ypa<t>al  /caidi/os,  which  however  does  not, 
as  far  as  I  know,  occur  anywhere  (Zur  Gesch.  d.  Kan. 
p.  G7).  The  terms  canonical  and  canonize  are  pro- 
bably of  Alexandrine  origin  ;   but   there   is   not  the 


CANON 

(Severian.  ap.  Cram.  Cat.  in  Act.  ii.  7,  SiSurat 
eKciffTw  yhwaffa  KaOairep  Kavtvv).  Chronological 
tables  were  called  Kav6ves  xPoviK0'1  (Plut.  Sol. 
27) ;  and  the  summary  of  a  book  was  called 
Kavwv,  as  giving  the  "  ride,"  as  it  were,  of  its  com- 
position. The  Alexandrine  grammarians  applied 
the  word  in  this  sense  to  the  great  "  classical " 
writers,  who  were  styled  "  the  rule"  (6  Kavwv),  or 
the  perfect  model  of  style  and  language.  (3)  But 
in  addition  to  these  active  meanings  the  word  was 
also  used  passively  for  a  measured  space  (at 
Olympia),  and,  in  later  times,  for  a  fixed  tax 
(Du  Cauge,  s.  v.  Canon). 

The  ecclesiastical  usage  of  the  word  offers  a 
complete  parallel  to  the  classical.  It  occurs  in  the 
LXX.  in  its  literal  sense  (Jud.  xiii.  6),  and  again  in 
Aquila  (Job  xxxviii.  5).  In"  the  N.  T.  it  is  found  in 
two  places  in  St.  Paul's  epistles  (Gal.  vi.  16  ;  2  Cor. 
x.  13-16),  and  in  the  second  place  the  transition  from 
an  active  to  a  passive  sense  is  worthy  of  notice. 
Iu  patristic  writings  the  word  is  commonly  used 
both  as  a  rule  in  the  widest  sense,  and  especially  in 
the  phrases  "the  rule  of  the  Church,"  "the  rule 
of  faith,"  "  the  rule  of  truth  "  (b  Kavwv  rrjs  ii<K\r]- 
o~ias,  6  Kavibv  rr\s  a\ri9eias,  6  Kavwp  rf/s  iriCTeeos  ; 
and  so  also  Kavu>v  €KK\r)cnaa'riK6s,  and  6  kovwv 
simply).  This  rule  was  regarded  either  as  the 
abstract,  ideal  standard,  embodied  only  in  the  life 
and  actio:,  of  the  Church  ;  or,  again,  as  the  concrete, 
definite  cieed,  which  set  forth  the  facts  from  which 
that  life  sprang  (regula :  Tertull.  de  virg.  vel.  1). 
In  the  fourth  century,  when  the  practice  of  the 
Church  was  further  systematised,  the  decisions  of 
synods  were  styled  "  Canons,"  and  the  discipline  by 
which  ministers  were  bound  was  technically  "  the 
Rule,"  and  those  who  were  thus  boimd  were  styled 
Canonici  ("  Canons  ").  In  the  phrase  "the  canon 
(t.  e.  fixed  part)  of  the  mass,"  from  which  the  po- 
pular sense  of  "  canonize "  is  derived,  the  passive 
sense  again  prevailed. 

As  applied  to  Scripture  the  derivatives  of  Kavwv 
are  used  long  before  the  simple  word.  The  Latin 
translation  of  On  gen  speaks  of  Scripturae  Canonicae 
(de  Princ.  iv.  33),  Hbri  regulates  ( '  'omm.  in  Matt. 
§117),  and  Hbri  canonizati  (id.  §28).  In  another 
place  the  phrase  haberi  in  Canone  (Prol.  in  Cant. 
s.  f.)  occurs,  but  probably  only  as  a  translation  of 
Kavovi^ta&ai,  which  is  used  in  this  and  cognate 
senses  in  Athanasius  (Ep.  Eest.\  the  Laodicene 
Canons  (a.Kav6vi<rra,  Can.  lis.),  .and  later  writers. 
This  circumstance  seems  to  show  that  the  title 
"Canonical"  was  first  given  to  writings  in  the 
sense  of  "  admitted  by  the  rule,"  and  not  as 
"forming  part  of  and  giving  the  rule."  It  is 
true  that  an  ambiguity  thus  attaches  to  the  word, 
which  may  mean  only  "  publicly  used  in  the 
Church ;"  but  such  an  ambiguity  may  find  many 
parallels,  and  usage  tended  to  remove  it.H  The 
spirit  of  Christendom  recognised  the  books  which 
truly  expressed  its  essence;  and  in  lapse  of  time, 
when  that  spirit  was  deadened  b\  later  overgrowths 
of  superstition,  the  written  "  Rule"  occupied  the 
place  and  received  the  name  of  that  vital  "  Rule" 
by   which   it   was   first    stamped    with    authority 


slightest  evidence  for  connecting  the  "  canon  "  of 
classical  authors  with  the  "  canon "  of  Scripture, 
notwithstanding  the  tempting  analogy.  If  it  could 
be  shown  that  o  koviov  was  used  at  an  early  period 
for  the  list  of  sacred  books,  then  it  would  be  the 
simplest  interpretation  to  take  tawovi^eaOiu  in  the 
sense  of  "  being  entered  on  the  list." 


CANON 

(o  Kdvwv  rrjs  aX-ndtias  al  SeTou  ypacpal,  Isiil.  Pelus. 
Ep.  cxiv. ;  comp.  Aug.  de  doctr.  Chr.  iv.  9  (6)  ;  ami 
as  a  contrast  Anon.  ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  v.  28). 

The  first  direct  application  of  the  term  kclvuv  to 
the  Scriptures  seems  to  be  in  the  verses  of  Amphi- 
lochius  (c.  380  A. a),  who  concludes  his  well-known 
Catalogue  of  the  Scriptures  with  the  words  ovros 
aipevSearaTos  Kavuv  av  etr]  tSiv  OeoTrveixTTaii/ 
ypacpuv,  where  the  word  indicates  the  rule  by 
which  the  contents  of  the  Bible  must  be  determined, 
and  thus  secondarily  an  index  of  the  constituent 
books.  Among  Latin  writers  the  word  is  com- 
monly found  from  the  time  of  Jerome  (Prol.  Gal. 
.  .  .  Tobias  et  Judith  non  sunt  in  Canone)  and  Au- 
gustine {De  Civ.  xvii.  24, .  .  .  perpauci  auctoritatem 
Canonis  obtinuerunt ;  id.  xviii.  38,  .  .  .  inveniuntur 
in  Canone),  and  their  usage  of  the  word,  which  is 
wider  than  that  of  Greek  writers,  is  the  source  of 
its  modem  acceptation. 

The  uncanonical  books  were  described  simply  as 
"  those  without,"  or  "those  uncanonized "  (ana- 
vSviara,  Cone.  Laod.  lix.).  The  Apocryphal  books, 
which  were  supposed  to  occupy  an  intermediate 
position,  were  called  "  books  read"  {avayiyvwaK6- 
fj.eva,  Athan.  Ep.  Fcst.),  or  "ecclesiastical"  (ec- 
clesiastici,  Rutin,  in  Syinb.  Apost.  §38),  though 
the  latter  title  was  also  applied  to  the  canonical 
Scriptures  (Leont.  I.  c.  infr.).  The  canonical  books 
(Leont.  de  Sect.  ii.  ra  nav  ov  i£6  fie  y  a  /3t/8Aia) 
were  also  called  "  books  of  the  Testament"  (eV- 
5ia07)Ka  /8ij8A.ia),  and  Jerome  styled  the  whole  col- 
lection by  the  striking  name  of  "  the  holy  library  " 
{Bibliotheca  sancta),  which  happily  expresses  the 
unity  and  variety  of  the  Bible  (Credner,  Zur  Gesch. 
d.  Kan.  §1 ;  Hist,  of  Canon  of  N.  T.  App.  D). 

II.  (o)  The  formation  of  the  Jewish  Canon. — 
The  history  of  the  Jewish  Canon  in  the  earliest 
times  is  beset  with  the  greatest  difficulties.  Before 
the  period  of  the  exile  only  faint  traces  occur  of  the 
solemn  preservation  and  use  of  sacred  books.  Ac- 
cording to  the  command  of  Moses  the  "  book  of  the 
law"  was  "  put  in  the  side  of  the  ark"  (Deut.  xxxi. 
25  ff.),  but  not  in  it  (1  K.  viii.  9 ;  comp.  Joseph.  Ant. 
iii.  i.  7,  v.  1,  17),  and  thus  in  the  reign  of  Josiah, 
Hilkiah  is  said  to  have  "  found  the  book  of  the  law  in 
the  house  of  the  Lord  "  (2  K.  xxii.  8  ;  comp.  2  Chr. 
xxxiv.  14).  This  "  book  of  the  law,"  which,  in 
addition  to  the  direct  precepts  (Ex.  xxiv.  7),  con- 
tained general  exhortations  (Deut.  xxviii.  61)  and 
historical  narratives  (Ex.  xvii.  14),  was  further 
increased  by  the  records  of  Joshua  (Josh.  xxiv.  26), 
and  probably  by  other  writings  (1  Sam.  x.  25), 
though  it  is  impossible  to  determine  their  contents.11 
At  a  subsequent  time 'collections  of  proverbs  were 
made  ( I 'row  xx  v.  1 ),  and  the  later  prophets  (especially 
Jeremiah;  cum]).  Kaeper, Jerem.  Libror.  ss.  interp. 
et  vindex,  Berol.  1837)  were  familiar  with  the 
writings  of  their  predecessors,  a  circumstance  which 
may  naturally  be  connected  with  the  training  of 
"  the  prophetic  schools."  It  perhaps  marks  a  fur- 
ther step  in  tin'  formation  of  the  Canon  when  "  the 
book  of  the  Lord"  is  mentioned  by  Isaiah  as  a  ge- 
neral collection  of  sacred  teaching  (nx.  16;  comp. 
xxix.  18),  at  once  familiar  ami  authoritative;  but 
it  is  unlikely  that  any  definite  collection  either  of 
"the  psalms"  or  of  "the  prophets  "  existed  before 
the  captivity.     At  that  time  Zechariah  speaks  of 


CANON 


251 


b  According  to  some  (Fabric.  Cod.  Pseudep.  V.  T. 
i.  1113),  this  collection  of  sacred  hooks  was  presen  ed 
by  Jeremiah  at  the  destruction  of  the  Temple  (comp. 
.  Mace.  ii.  1 1.)  ;  according  to  others  it  was  consumed 


"  the  law  "  and  "  the  former  prophets  "  as  in  some 
measure  co-ordinate  (Zech.  vii.  12.);  and  Daniel 
refers  to  "  the  books"  (Dan.  ix.  2,  D^lQDil)  in  a 
manner  which  seems  to  mark  the  prophetic  writings 
as  already  collected  into  a  whole.  Even  after  the 
captivity  the  history  of  the  Canon,  like  all  Jewish 
history  up  to  the  date  of  the  Maccabees,  is  wrapt 
in  great  obscurity.  Faint  traditions  alone  remain 
to  interpret  results  which  are  found  realized  when 
the  darkness  is  first  cleared  away.  Popular  belief 
assigned  to  Ezra  and  "the  great  synagogue "  the 
task  of  collecting  and  promulgating  the  Scriptures 
as  part  of  their  work  in  organising  the  Jewish 
Church.  Doubts  have  been  thrown  upon  this  belief 
(Rau,  De Synag.  magna,  1726 ;  comp.  Ewald,  Gesch. 
d.  V.  Isr.  iv.  191),  and  it  is  difficult  to  answer 
them,  from  the  scantiness  of  the  evidence  which  can 
be  adduced ;  but  the  belief  is  in  every  way  con- 
sistent with  the  history  of  Judaism  and  with  the 
internal  evidence  of  the  books  themselves.  The 
later  embellishments  of  the  tradition,  which  repre- 
sent Ezra  as  the  second  author  of  all  the  books 
[2  Esdras],  or  define  more  exactly  the  nature  of 
his  work,  can  only  be  accepted  as  signs  of  the  uni- 
versal belief  in  his  labours,  and  ought  not  to  cast 
discredit  upon  the  simple  fact  that  the  foundation 
of  the  present  Canon  is  due  to  him.  Nor  can  it  be 
supposed  that  the  work  was  completed  at  once ;  so 
that  the  account  (2  Mace.  ii.  13)  which  assigns  a 
collection  of  books  to  Nehemiah  is  in  itself  a  con- 
firmation of  the  general  truth  of  the  gradual  form- 
ation of  the  Canon  during  the  Persian  period.  The 
work  of  Nehemiah  is  not  described  as  initiatory  or 
final.  The  tradition  omits  all  mention  of  the  law, 
which  may  be  supposed  to  have  assumed  its  final 
shape  under  Ezra,  but  says  that  Nehemiah  "  ga- 
thered together  the  [writings]  concerning  the  kings 
and  prophets,  and  the  [writings]  of  David,  and 
letters  of  kings  concerning  offerings,"  while  "  found- 
ing a  library"  {Karafia\\6ixevos  /3ijGAio0t/K7)i/ 
iitKrvvnyayz  to,  irepl  twv  jSainAe'oii'  Kal  irpofpVTiiy 
Kal  ra  rov  AavlS  Kal  iiTLaroAa.s  fSaffiXiwv  irepl 
ava.Q-oixd.TOJi> ;  2  Mace.  I.  c).  The  various  classes 
of  books  were  thus  completed  in  succession  ;  and  this 
view  harmonises  with  what  must  have  been  the 
natural  development  of  the  Jewish  faith  after  the 
Return.  The  constitution  of  the  Church  and  the 
formation  of  the  Canon  were  both  from  their  nature 
gradual  and  mutually  dependent.  The  construction 
of  an  ecclesiastical  polity  involved  the  practical 
determination  of  the  divine  rule  of  truth,  though, 
as  in  the  parallel  case  of  the  Christian  Scriptures, 
open  persecution  first  gave  a  clear  and  distinct  ex- 
pression to  the  implicit  faith. 

The  persecution  of  Antiochus  (b.C.  1 68)  was  for 
the  Old  Testament  what  the  persecution  of  Dio- 
cletian was  for  the  New,  the  final  crisis  which 
stamped  the  sacred  writings  with  their  peculiar 
character.  The  king  sought,  out  "  the  books  of  the 
law"  {ra  $if3\ta  rov  vSpov,  1  Mace.  i.  56)  and 
burnt  them;  and  the  possession  of  a  "  hook  of  the 
covenant"  (j8i/3AjW  5ia6JiKir>)  was  a  capital  crime 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  5,  $4,  ^rpavl^tro  t'iirov  /8i/8Aos 
evpeOeir)  iepa.  Ka\  vifios  .  .  .).  According  to  the 
common  tradition,  this  proscription  of  "  the  law  " 

led  to  the  public  use  of  the  writings  of  the  prophets, 
and  without  discussing  the  accuracy  of  this    belief. 


together  with  the  ark  (Epiph.  de  Pond.  civ.  ii.  1C2). 
In  2  K.  xxii.  S  ff.,  2  Chr.  xxxiv.  14  ft.,  mention  is 
made  only  of  the  Laic. 


252 


CANON 


it  is  evident  that  the  general  effect  of  such  a  per- 
secution would  be  to  direct  the  attention  of  the 
people  more  closely  to  the  books  which  they  con- 
nected with  the  original  foundation  of  their  faith. 
And  this  was  in  fact  the  result  of  the  great  trial. 
After  the  Maccabaean  persecution  the  history  of  the 
formation  of  the  Canon  is  merged  in  the  history  of 
its  contents.0  The  Bible  appears  from  that  time 
as  a  whole,  though  it  was  natural  that  the  several 
parts  were  not  yet  placed  on  an  equal  footing,  nor 
regarded  universally  and  in  every  respect  with 
equal  reverence"1  (cornp.  Zunz,  D.  Gottesd.  Vortr. 
d.  Jud.  pp.  14,  25,  &c). 

But  while  the  combined  evidence  of  tradition 
and  of  the  general  course  of  Jewish  history  leads 
to  the  conclusion  that  the  Canon  in  its  present 
shape  was  formed  gradually  during  a  lengthened 
interval,  beginning  with  Ezra  and  extending  through 
a  part  or  even  the  whole  (Neh.  xii.  11,  22)  of  the 
Persian  period  (a.C.  458-332),  when  the  cessation 
of  the  prophetic  gift6  pointed  out  the  necessity  and 
defined  the  limits  of  the  collection,  it  is  of  the 
utmost  importance  to  notice  that  the  collection  was 
peculiar  in  character  and  circumscribed  in  contents. 
All  the  evidence  which  can  be  obtained,  though  it 
is  confessedly  scanty,  tends  to  show  that  it  is  false, 
both  in  theory  and  fact,  to  describe  the  0.  T.  as 
"  all  the  relics  of  the  Hebraeo-Chaldaic  literature 
up  to  a  certain  epoch"  (De  Wette,  Einl.  §8),  if 
the  phrase  is  intended  to  refer  to  the  time  when 
the  Canon  was  completed.  The  epilogue  of  Eccle- 
siastes  (xii.  11  ff.)  speaks  of  an  extensive  literature, 
with  which  the  teaching  of  Wisdom  is  contrasted, 
and  "  weariness  of  the  flesh  "  is  described  as  the 
result  of  the  study  bestowed  upon  it.  It  is  im- 
possible that  these  "  many  writings "  can  have 
perished  in  the  interval  between  the  composition  of 
Ecclesiastes  and  the  Greek  invasion,  and  the  Apo- 
crypha includes  several  fragments  which  must  be 
referred  to  the  Persian  period  (Buxtorf,  Tiberias, 
10  f. ;  Hottinger,  Thes.  Phil.;  Hengstenberg,  Bci- 
trdye,  i. ;  Havernick,  Einl.  i. ;  Oehler,  art.  Kanon 
d.  A.  T.  in  Herzog's  Encyklop.). 

(j8)  The  contents  of  the  Jewish  Canon. — The 
first  notice  of  the  0.  T.  as  consisting  of  distinct 
and  definite  parts  occurs  in  the  prologue  to  the 
Greek  translation  of  the  Wisdom  of  Sirach  (Eccle- 
siasticus).  The  date  of  this  is  disputed  [Eccle- 
siasticus  ;  Jesus  son  op  Sirach]  ;  but  if  we 
admit  the  later  date  (c.  B.C.  131),  it  falls  in  with 
what  has  been  said  on  the  effect  of  the  Antiochian 
persecution.  After  that  "  the  law,  the  prophecies, 
and  the  remainder  of  the  books"  are  mentioned  as 
integral  sections  of  a  completed  whole  (6  v6y.os, 
Kal  at  irpocprjTuat,  Kal  ret  Aoi7ra  rwv  liifih'iojv),  and 
the  phrase  which  designates  the  last  class  suggests  no 
reason  for  supposing  that  that  was  still  indefinite 
and  open  to  additions.  A  like  threefold  classifi- 
cation is  used  for  describing  the  entire  0.  T.  in  the 
Gospel  of  St.  Luke  (xxiv.  44,  iv  t<£  vofj-oi  Mcovaecos 
ical  Trpocpr)Tais  Kal  tya\fj.o?s  ;  comp.  Acts  xxviii.  23), 
and  appears  again  in  a  passage  of  Philo,  where  the 


c  The  reference  to  the  work  of  Judas  M ace.  in 
2  Mace.  ii.  14,  oxrauTws  8e  ical  'IoiiSas  ra  SiaireTTTui- 
KQTa  6lol  tov  7r6Aejujr  tov  yeyovoTa  r\fu.v  enio-i'injyaye 
n-avra,  Kal  fori  Trap'  r)/Juv,  appears  from  the  connexion 
to  refer  in  particular  to  his  care  with  regard  to  the 
restitution  of  the  copies  of  the  sacred  writings  which 
were  "lost"  (Siaire-n-TuiKOTa).  It  is  of  importance  to 
notice  that  the  work  was  a  restoration,  and  not  a 
/in/-  collection. 

d  Yet  the  distinction  between  the  three  degrees  of 


CANON 

Therapeutae  are  said  to  find  their  true  food  in 
"  laws  and  oracles  uttered  by  prophets,  and  hymns 
and  (t&  &A\a)  the  other  [books  ?]  by  which 
knowledge  and  piety  are  increased  and  perfected" 
(Philo,  de  vita  cant.  3).     [Bible.] 

The  triple  division  of  the  0.  T.  is  itself  not  a 
mere  accidental  or  arbitrary  arrangement,  but  a 
reflection  of  the  different  stages  of  religious  develop- 
ment through  which  the  Jewish  nation  passed. 
The  Law  is  the  foundation  of  the  whole  revelation, 
the  special  discipline  by  which  a  chosen  race  was 
trained  from  a  savage  wilfulness  to  the  accomplish- 
ment of  its  divine  work.  The  Prophets  portray 
the  struggles  of  the  same  people  when  they  came 
into  closer  connexion  with  the  kingdoms  of  the 
world,  and  were  led  to  look  for  the  inward  anti- 
types of  the  outward  precepts.  The  Hagiographa 
carry  the  divine  lesson  yet  further,  and  show  its 
working  in  the  various  phases  of  individual  life, 
and  in  relation  to  the  great  problems  of  thought 
and  feeling,  which  present  themselves  by  a  neces- 
sary law  in  the  later  stages  of  civilization  (comp. 
Oehler,  art.  Kanon,  in  Herzog's  Encyklop.  p.  253). 

The  general  contents  of  these  three  classes  still, 
however,  remain  to  be  determined.  Joseph  us, 
the  earliest  direct  witness  on  the  subject,  enumerates 
twenty  books  "which  are  justly  believed  to  be 
divine"  (to  SiKaiccs  6e7a  ■mTzianvpLeva):  five 
books  of  Moses,  thirteen  of  the  prophets,  extending 
to  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes  {i.  e.  Esther,  according 
to  Josephus)/  and  four  which  contain  hymns  and 
directions  for  life  (Joseph,  c.  Apion.  i.  8).  Still 
there  is  some  ambiguity  in  this  enumeration,  for 
in  order  to  make  up  the  numbers,  it  is  necessary 
either  to  rank  Job  among  the  prophets,  or  to 
exclude  one  book,  and  in  that  case  probably  Eccle- 
siastes,  from  the  Hagiographa.  The  former  alter- 
native is  the  more  probable,  for  it  is  worthy  of 
special  notice  that  Josephus  regards  primarily  the 
historic  character  of  the  prophets  (to.  kot'  ai/rovs 
TrpaxOtvra  ffvveypa^/av),  a  circumstance  which 
explains  his  deviation  from  the  common  arrange- 
ment in  regard  to  the  later  annals  ( 1  and  2  Chr., 
Ezr.,  Neh.),  and  Daniel  and  Job,  though  he  is  silent  as 
to  the  latter  in  his  narrative  (comp.  Orig.  ap.  Euseb. 
II.  E.  vi.  25).  The  later  history,  he  adds,  has  also 
been  written  in  detail,  but  the  records  have  not 
been  esteemed  worthy  of  the  same  credit,  "  because 
the  accurate  succession  of  the  prophets  was  not 
preserved  in  their  case "  (8ia  to  jxtj  yevzcrOat 
ttjv tSiv  Ttpo<p-nTwv  aK-pi/Sf)  hiab'ux'hv).  "But  what 
faith  we  place  in  our  own  Scriptures  (ypa/x/j-acriv)  is 
seen  in  our  conduct.  They  have  suffered  no  addition, 
diminution,  or  change.  From  our  infancy  we  learn 
to  regard  them  as  decrees  of  God  (Qeou  SSyfiaTa)  ; 
we  observe  them,  and  if  need  be  we  gladly  die  for 
them  "  (c.  Apion.  i.  8  ;  comp.  Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  10). 

In  these  words  Josephus  clearly  expresses  not  his 
own  private  opinion,  nor  the  opinion  of  his  sect, 
the  Pharisees,  but  the  general  opinion  of  his  coun- 
trymen. The  popular  belief  that  the  Sadducees 
received    only    the    books    of  Moses    (Tertull.  De 


inspiration  which  were  applied  by  Abarbauel  (Keil, 
Einl.  §158,  G)  to  the  three  classes  of  writings  is 
unknown  to  the  early  rabbins. 

e  After  Malachi,  according  to  the  Jewish  tradition 
(Vitringa,  Obs.  Sacr.  vi.  6  ;   ap.  Keil,  /.  c). 

f  The  limit  fixed  by  Josephus  marks  the  period  to 
which  the  prophetic  history  extended,  and  not,  as  is 
commonly  said,  the  date  at  which  the  ().  T.  canon 
was  itself  finally  closed. 


CANON 

praescr.  hacrct.  45;  Hieron.  in  Matih.  xxii.  31,  p. 
181  ;  Origen,  c.  Cels.  i.  49),  rests  on  no  sufficient 
authority  ;  and  if  they  had  done  so,  Josephus  could 
not  have  (ailed  to  notice  the  fact  in  his  account  of 
the  different  sects  [Sadducees].8  In  the  tradi- 
tions of  the  Talmud  on  the  other  hand,  Gamaliel 
is  represented  as  using  passages  from  the  Prophets 
and  the  Hagiog'-apha  in  his  controversies  with 
them,  and  they  reply  with  quotations  from  the 
same  sources  without  scruple  or  objection.  (Comp. 
Eichhorn,  Einl.  §35  ;  Lightfoot,  Horae  Hebr.  et 
Talm.  ii.  616  ;  C.  F.  Schmid,  Enarr.  Sent.  Fl.  Jo- 
sephi  de  Libris  V.  T.  1777  ;  G.  Guldenapfel,  Dis- 
sert. Josephi  de  Sadd.  Can.  Sent,  exhihens,  1804.) 

The  casual  quotations  of  Josephus  agree  with 
his  express  (.'anon.  With  the  exception  of  Prov., 
Eccles.,  and  Cant.,  which  furnished  no  materials 
for  his  work,  and  Job,  which,  even  if  historical, 
offered  no  point  of  contact  with  other  history,  he 
uses  all  the  other  books  either  as  divinely  inspired 
writings  (5  Moses,  Is.,  Jer.,  Ez.,Dan.,  xii.  Proph.), 
or  as  authoritative  sources  of  truth. 

The  writings  of  the  N.  T.  completely  confirm 
the  testimony  of  Josephus.  Coincidences  of  lan- 
guage show  that  the  Apostles  were  familiar  with 
several  of  the  Apocryphal  books  (Bleek,  Ueber  d. 
Stellnng  d.  Apokr.  u.  s.  w.  in  Stud.  u.  Krit.  1853, 
pp.  267  if.)  ;h  but  they  do  not  contain  one  autho- 
ritative or  direct  quotation  from  them,  while,  with 
the  exception  of  Judges,  Eccl.,  Cant.,  Esther,  Ezra, 
and  Nehemiah,  every  other  book  in  the  Hebrew 
Canon  is  used  either  for  illustration  or  proof' 

Several  of  the  early  fathers  describe  the  contents 
of  the  Hebrew  Canon  in  terms  which  generally 
agree  with  the  results  already  obtained.  Melito 
of  Sai'dis  (c.  179  A.D.)  in  a  journey  to  the  East 
made  the  question  of  the  exact  number  and  order 
of  "  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament "  a  subject  of 
special  inquiry,  to  satisfy  the  wishes  of  a  friend 
(Euseb.  H.  E.  iv.  2(3).  He  gives  the  result  in 
the  following  form  :  the  books  are,  5  Moses  .  .  . 
Jos.,  Jud.,  Ruth,  4  K.,  2  Chr.  Ps.,  Prov.  (2aAo- 
fiSivos  Tlapoin'iai  %  nal  Sot^ia),  Eccl.,  Cant.,  Job, 
Is.,  Jer.  xii.  Proph.,  I  Ian.,  Ez.,  Esdr.  The  ar- 
rangement -is  peculiar,  and  the  books  of  Nehemiah 
and  Esther  are  wanting.  The  former  is  without 
doubt  included  in  the  general  title  "  Esdras,"  and 
it  has  been  conjectured  (Eichhorn,  Einl.  §52  ;  comp. 
Routh,  Ilel.  Sacr.  i.,  136)  that  Esther  may  have 
formed  part  of  the  same  collection  of  records  of  the 
history  after  the  exile. k     The  testimony  of  Oni<;r..\ 

e  In  Ant.  xiii.  10,  §6,  Josephus  simply  says  that 
the  Sadducees  rejected  the  precepts  which  were  not 
Contained  ill  the  laws  Of  Moses  (aTep  oiiK  avayeypaiTTaL 
iv  toU  Majvo-e'cus  coVot;),  hut  derived  only  from  tra- 
dition (to.  <f/e  napa&oo-ew; ,  opposed  to  ra  yfypa/x/xiva). 
The  statement  has  no  connexion  whatever  with  the 
other  writings  of  the  Canon. 

The  Canon  of  the  Samapitans  was  confined  to  the 
Pentateuch,  not  so  much  from  their  hostility  to  the 
Jews,  as  from  their  undue  exaltation  of  the  Law 
(Keil,  Einl.  $218). 

h  The  chief  passages  which  Pdeek  quotes,  after  Slier 
and  Nitz^ch,  are  .lames  i.  li)  ||  Sirac.  v.  11  ;  1  Pet.  i. 
6,  7  i|  Wisd.  iii.  3-7  ;  Heh.  xi.  34,  3.">  ||  2  Mace.  vi. 
18— vii.  42  ;  Heb.  i.  3  ||  Wisd.  vii.  26,  &C.  ;  Rom.  i. 
2(1-32  ||  Wisd.  xiii. -xv.  ;  Horn.  ix.  21  ||  Wisd.  xv.  7  ; 
Eph.  vi.  13-17  j|  Wisd.  v.  ls-2((.  But  it  is  obvious 
that  if  these  passages  prove  satisfactorily  that  the 
Apostolic  writers  were  acquainted  with  the*apocryphal 
books,  they  indicate  with  equal  clearness  that  their 
Menee  with  regard  to  them  cannot  have  been  purely 
accidental.      An  earlier  criticism  of  the  alleged  coin- 


CANON 


253 


labours  under  a  similar  difficulty.  According  to 
the  present  Greek  text  (Euseb.  IT.  E.  vi.  25; 
In  Ps.  i.  Philoc.  3),  in  enumerating  the  22  books 
"  which  the  Hebrews  hand  down  as  included  in  the 
Testament  (evSiad-fjKovs),"  he  omits  the  book  of 
the  12  minor  prr>phets/  and  adds  "  the  letter  "  to 
the  book  of  Jeremiah  and  Lamentations  ('Iepe/xiay 
(Tvv  ®p-f]vois  Kal  t?7  ziriffToAfj  ev  kv'i).  The  num- 
ber is  thus  imperfect,  and  the  Latin  version  of  i!u- 
finus  has  rightly  preserved  the  book  of  the  xii 
prophets  in  the  catalogue,  placing  it  after  Cant, 
and  before  the  greater  prophets,  a,  strange  position 
which  can  hardly  have  been  due  to  an  arbitrary 
insertion  (cf.  Hil.  Prol.  in  Ps.  15)1.  The  addi- 
tion of"  the  Letter"  to  Jer.  is  inexplicable  except 
on  the  assumption  that  it  was  an  error  springing 
naturally  from  the  habitual  use  of  the  LXX.,  in 
which  the  books  are  united,  for  there  is  not  the 
slightest  trace  that  this  late  apocryphal  fragment 
[Barfch,  Book  of]  ever  formed  part  of  the 
Jewish  Canon.  The  statement  of  Jerome  is  clear 
and  complete.  After  noticing  the  coincidence  of 
the  22  books  of  the  Hebrew  Bible  with  the  number 
of  the  Hebrew  letters,  and  of  the  5  double  letters 
with  the  5  "  double  books"  (Sam.,  K.,  Chr.,  Ez., 
Jer.),  he  gives  the  contents  of  the  Law,  the  Pro- 
phets, and  the  Hagiographa,  in  exact  accordance 
with  the  Hebrew  authorities,  placing  Daniel  in  the 
last  class  ;  and  adding  that  whatever  is  without  the 
number  of  these  must  be  placed  among  the  Apo- 
crypha. ("  Hie  prologus  Script,  quasi  galeatum 
principium  omnibus  libris  quos  de  Haebraeo  verti- 
mus  in  Latinum,  convenire  potest,  ut  scire  valea- 
mus,  quidquid  extra  hos  est,  inter  Apocrypha  esse 
ponendum,"  Hieron.  Prol.  Gal.)  The  statement* 
of  the  Talmud  is  in  many  respects  so  remarkable 
that  it  must  be  transcribed  entire.  "But  who 
wrote  [the  books  of  the  Bible]  ?  Moses  wrote  his 
own  book,  ?  the  Pentateuch,  the  section  about  Ba- 
laam and  Job.  Joshua  wrote  his  own  book  and 
the  eight  [last]  verses  of  the  Pentateuch.  Samuel 
wrote  his  own  book,  the  book  of  Judges  and  Ruth. 
David  wrote  the  book  of  Psalms  [of  which  however 
some  were  composed]  by  the  ten  venerable  elders, 
Adam,  the  first  man,  Melchizedek,  Abraham,  Mo- 
ses, Hainan,  Jeduthun,  Asaph,  and  the  three  sons 
of  Korah.  Jeremiah  wrote  his  own  book,  the  books 
of  Kings  and  Lamentations.  Hezekiah  and  his 
friends  [reduced  to  writing]  the  books  contained  in 
the  Memorial  word  IaMSCHaK,  i.e.  Isaiah,  Pro- 
verbs,  Canticles,    Ecclesiastes.     The   men   of  the 


cidences  is  given  in  Cosin's  Canon  of  Scripture, 
§§35  ff. 

1  Some  passages  are  quoted  in  the  N.  T.  which  arc 
not  found  in  the  canonical  books.  The  most  im- 
portant of  these  is  that  from  the  prophecies  of  Enoch 
[Enoch,  Book  or]  (Jude,  17).  others  have  been 
found  in  Luke  xi.  49-51  ;  John  vii.  38;  James  iv. 
5,  (i  ;  1  Cor.  ii.  9 ;  but  these  are  more  or  less 
questionable. 

k  Hotly  Ve  Bibl.  text.  p.  (!4(i)  quotes  a  singular 
note,    falsely  attributed   to  Athanasins,   who   likewise 

omits  Esther.  "  Sunt  etiam  ex  antiquis  Hebraeis  qui 
Esther  admittant,  atque  ut  numcrus  idem  (22)  ser- 
vetur,  cum  Judicibus  eopularunt."  The  book  is  want- 
ing also  in  the  Synops.  X.  Script.,  (hegor.  Xuz.,  Amphi- 
lochius,  Nicephorus  Oallistus,  &c. 

1  Origen  expressly  excludes  1  Mace,  ftom  the 
canon  (e£io  Si  toutwi'  eVri  to.  Mouck.),  although  written 
in  Hebrew.  Bertholdt's  statement  to  the  contrary  is 
incorrect  •T'.inl.  §3'),  although  Keil  [de  Auct.  Van. 
1Mb.  Mace.  07)  maintains  the  same  opinion. 


254 


CANON 


great  Synagogue  [reduced  to  writing]  the  books 
contained  in    the  memorial   letter   KaiNDaG,   i.  e. 

Ezekiel,  the  12- lesser  prophets,  Daniel,  and  Esther. 
Ezra  wrote  his  own  book,  and  brought  down  the 
genealogies  of  the  books  of  Chronicles  to  his  own 
times  ....  Who  brought  the  remainder  of  the 
books  [of  Chronicles]  to  a  close?  Nehemiah  the 
son  of  Hachalijah"  (Baba  Bathra  f.  14  b.  ap. 
Oehler,  art.  Kanon,  I.  c). 

In  spite  of  the  comparatively  late  date  (c.  A.D. 
500),  from  which  this  tradition  is  derived,  it  is 
evidently  in  essence  the  earliest  description  of  the 
work  of  Ezra  and  the  Great  Synagogue  which  has 
been  preserved.  The  details  must  be  tested  by 
other  evidence,  but  the  general  description  of  the 
growth  of  the  Jewish  Canon  bears  every  mark  of 
probability.  The  earty  fables  as  to  the  work  of 
Ezra  [2  Esdras  ;  see  above]  are  a  natural  corrup- 
tion of  this  original  belief,  and  after  a  time  entirely 
supplanted  it ;  but  as  it  stands  in  the  great  collec- 
tion of  the  teaching  of  the  Hebrew  Schools,  it  bears 
witness  to  the  authority  of  the  complete  Canon, 
and  at  the  same  time  recognizes  its  gradual  forma- 
tion in  accordance  with  the  independent  results  of 
internal  evidence. 

The  later  Jewish  Catalogues  throw  little  light 
upon  the  Canon.  They  generally  reckon  twenty- 
two  books,  equal  in  number  to  the  letters  of  the  He- 
brew alphabet,  five  of  the  Law,  eight  of  the  Pro- 
phets (Josh.,  Jud.,  and  Ruth,  1,  2  Sam.,  1,  2  K., 
Is.,  Jer.  and  Lam.,  Ez.,  12  Proph.),  and  nine  of 
the  Hagiographa  (Hieron.  Prol.  in  Reg.).  The 
last  number  was  more  commonly  increased  to  eleven 
by  the  distinct  enumeration  of  the  books  of  Ruth  and 
Lamentation  ("  the  24  Books"  i"IJD"IN1  D'X'J?), 
and  in  that  case  it  was  supposed  that  the  Tod  was 
thrice  repeated  in  reverence  for  the  sacred  name 
(Hody,  De  Bibl.  text.  p.  644 ;  Eichhorn,  EM. 
§6).  In  Hebrew  MSS.,  and  in  the  early  editions 
of  the  0.  T.,  the  arrangement  of  the  later  books 
offers  great  variations  (Hody,  I.e.,  gives  a  large 
collection),  but  they  generally  agree  in  reckoning 
all  separately  except  the  books  of  Ezra  and  Nehe- 
miah m  (Buxtorf,  Hottinger,  Hengstenberg,  Haver- 
nick,  11.  cc. ;  Zunz,  Gottesd.  Vortrage  d.  Jitden). 

So  far  then  it  has  been  shown  that  the  Hebrew 
Canon  was  uniform  and  coincident  with  our  own  ;n 
but  while  the  Palestinian  Jews  combined  to  pre- 
serve the  strict  limits  of  the  old  prophetic  writings, 
the  Alexandrine  Jews  allowed  themselves  greater 
freedom.  Their  ecclesiastical  constitution  was  less 
definite,  and  the  same  influences  which  created 
among  them  an  independent  literature  disinclined 
them  to  regard  with  marked  veneration  more  than 
the  Law  itself.     The  idea  of  a  Canon  was  foreign 


m  Notwithstanding  the  unanimous  judgment  of 
later  writers,  there  are  traces  of  the  existence  of 
doubts  among  the  first  Jewish  doctors  as  to  some 
books.  Thus  in  the  Mishna  (Jad.  3,  5)  a  discussion 
is  recorded  as  to  Cant,  and  Eccles.  whether  they 
"  soil  the  hands ;"  and  a  difference  as  to  the  latter 
book  existed  between  the  great  schools  of  Hillel  and 
Shammai.  The  same  doubts  as  to  Eccles.  are  re- 
peated in  another  form  in  the  Talmud  (Sabb.  f.  30,  2), 
where  it  is  said  that  the  book  would  have  been  con- 
cealed (TJJI)  but  for  the  quotations  at  the  beginning 
and  the  end.  Comp.  Hieron.  Comm.  in  Eccles.  s.  f.  : 
"  Aiunt  Hebraei  cum  inter  caetera  scripta  Salomonis 
quae  antiquata  sunt  nee  in  memoria  duraverunt,  et 
hie  liber  oblitterandus  viderctur,  eo  quod  Tanas  Dei 
asscreret  creaturas ex  hoc  uno  capitulo  (xii.) 


CANON 

to  their  habits ;  and  the  fact  that  they  possessed 
the  sacred  books  not  merely  in  a  translation,  but 
in  a  translation  made  at  different  times,  without 
any  unity  of  plan  and  without  any  uniformity  of 
execution,  necessarily  weakened  that  traditional 
feeling  of  their  real  connexion  which  existed  in 
Palestine.  Translations  of  later  books  were  made 
(1  Mace,  Ecclus.,  Baruch,  &c.),  and  new  ones 
were  written  (2  Mace.  Wisd.),  which  were  reck- 
oned in  the  sum  of  their  religious  literature,  and 
probably  placed  on  an  equal  footing  with  the  Hagio- 
grapha in  common  esteem.  But  this  was  not  the 
result  of  any  express  judgment  on  their  worth,  but  a 
natural  consequence  of  the  popular  belief  in  the  doc- 
trine of  a  living  Word  which  deprived  the  prophetic 
writings  of  part  of  their  distinctive  value.  So  far 
as  an  authoritative  Canon  existed  in  Egypt,  it  is 
probable  that  it  was  the  same  as  that  of  Palestine. 
In  the  absence  of  distinct  evidence  to  the  contrary 
this  is  most  likely,  and  positive  indications  of  the 
fact  are  not  wanting.  The  translator  of  the  Wis- 
dom of  Sirach  uses  the  same  phrase  (6  vo/xos  Kal 
ol  irpocpriTcu  Kal  ra  &\Aa  /3i£SAia)  in  speaking  of 
his  grandfather's  biblical  studies  in  Palestine,  and  of 
his  own  in  Egypt  (comp.  Eichhorn,  EM.  §22),  and 
he  could  hardly  have  done  so,  had  the  Bible  been 
different  in  the  two  places.  The  evidence  of  Piiilo, 
if  less  direct,  is  still  more  conclusive.  His  lan- 
guage shows  that  he  was  acquainted  with  the  Apo- 
cryphal books,  and  yet  he  does  not  make  a  single 
quotation  from  them  (Hornemann,  Observ.  ad 
illustr.  doctr.  de  Can.  V.  T.  ex  Philone,  pp.  28, 
29,  ap.  Eichhorn,  EM.  §26),  though  they  offered 
much  that  was  favourable  to  his  views.  On  the 
other  hand,  in  addition  to  the  Law,  he  quotes  all 
the  books  of  "  the  Prophets,"  and  the  Psalms  and 
Proverbs,  from  the  Hagiographa,  and  several  of 
them  (Is.,  Jer.,  Hos.,  Zech.,  Ps.,  Prov.),  with  clear 
assertions  of  their  "  prophetic "  or  inspired  cha- 
racter. Of  the  remaining  Hagiographa  (Neh., 
Ruth,  Lam.,  1,  2  Chrou.,  Dan.,  Eccl.,  Cant.)  he 
makes  no  mention,  but  the  three  first  may  have 
been  attached,  as  often  in  Hebrew  usage,  to  other 
books  (Ez.,  Jud.,  Jer.),  so  that  four  writings  alone 
are  entirely  unattested  by  him  (comp.  Hornemann, 
I.  c).  A  further  trace  of  the  identity  of  the 
Alexandrine  Canon  with  the  Palestinian  is  found 
in  the  Apocalypse  of  Esdras  [2  Esdras],  where 
"  24  open  books"  are  specially  distinguished  from 
the  mass  of  esoteric  writings  which  were  dictated 
to  Ezra  by  inspiration  (2  Esdr.  xiv.  44  ff.). 

From  the  combination  of  this  evidence  there  can 
be  no  reasonable  doubt  that  at  the  beginning  of  the 
Christian  era  the  Jews  had  only  one  Canon  of  the 
Sacred  writings,  defined  distinctly  in  Palestine,  and 


meruisse  auctoritatem "     Parallel  passages  are 

quoted  in  the.  notes  on  the  passage,  and  by  Bleek, 
Stud.  u.  Krit.  1853,  pp.  322  ff.  The  doubts  as  to 
Esther  have  been  already  noticed. 

A  series  of  references  to  the  Apocryphal  books  from 
Jewish  writers  has  been  made  by  Hottinger  [Hies. 
Philol.  1659),  and  collected  and  reprinted  by  Words- 
worth [On  the  Canon  of  the  Scriptures,  App.  C). 
Compare  also  the  valuable  notices  in  Zunz,  I).  Gottesd. 
Vortr.  d.  Jud.  pp.  12G  ff. 

a  The  dream  of  a  second  and  third  revision  of  the 
Jewish  canon  in  the  times  of  Eleazer  and  Hillel,  by 
which  the  Apocryphal  books  were  ratified  (Genebrard), 
rests  on  no  basis  whatever.  The  supposition  that  the 
Jews  rejected  the  Apocrypha  after  our  Lord's  coming 
(Card.  Perron)  is  equally  unfounded.  Cosin,  Canon 
of  Scripture,  §§23,  25. 


CANON 

admitted,  though  with  a  less  definite  apprehension 
of  its  peculiar  characteristics,  by  the  Hellenizing 
Jews  of  the  Dispersion,  and  that  this  Canon  was 
recognized,  as  far  as  can  be  determined,  by  our 
Lord  and  His  apostles.  But  on  the  other  hand, 
the  connexion  of  other  religious  books  with  the 
Greek  translation  of  the  0.  T.,  and  their  common 
use  in  Egypt  was  already  opening  the  way  for  an 
extension  of  the  original  Canon,  and  assigning  an 
authority  to  later  writings  which  they  did  not  de- 
rive from  ecclesiastical  sanction. 

III.  a.  The  History  of  the  Christian  Canon  of  the 
Old  Testament. — The  history  of  the  Old  Testament 
Canon  among  Christian  writer's  exhibits  the  natural 
Issue  of  the  currency  of  the  LXX.,  enlarged  as  it 
had  been  by  apocryphal  additions.  In  proportion 
as  the  Fathers  were  more  or  less  absolutely  de- 
pendent on  that  version  for  their  knowledge  of  the 
Old  Testament  Scriptures,  they  gradually  lost  in 
common  practice  the  sense  of  the  difference  between 
the  books  of  the  Hebrew  Canon  and  the  Apocrypha. 
The  custom  of  individuals  grew  into  the  custom  of 
the  Church  ;  and  the  public  use  of  the  Apocryphal 
books  obliterated  in  popular  regard  the  character- 
istic marks  of  their  origin  and  value,  which  could 
onlv  be  discovered  by  the  scholar.  But  the  custom 
of  the  Church  was  not  fixed  in  an  absolute  judg- 
ment. It  might  seem  as  if  the  great  leaders  of  the 
Christian  Body  shrank  by  a  wise  forethought  from 
a  work  for  which  they  were  unfitted ;  for  by  ac- 
quirements and  constitution  they  were  little  capable 
of  solving  a  problem  which  must  at  last  depend  on 
historical  data.  And  this  remark  must  be  applied 
to  the  details  of  patristic  evidence  on  the  contents 
of  the  Canon.  Their  habit  must  be  distinguished 
from  their  judgment.  The  want  of  critical  tact 
which  allowed  them  to  use  the  most  obviously 
pseudonymous  works  (2  Esdras,  Enoch)  as  genuine 
productions  of  their  supposed  authors,  or  as  "  divine 
Scripture,"  greatly  diminishes  the  value  of  casual 
and  isolated  testimonies  to  single  books.  In  such 
cases  the  form  as  well  as  the  fact  of  the  attestation 
requires  to  be  examined,  and  after  this  the  com- 
bined witness  of  different  Churches  can  alone  suffice 
to  stamp  a  book  with  ecclesiastical  authority. 

The  confusion  which  was  necessarily  introduced 
by  the  use  of  the  LXX.  was  further  increased  when 
the  Western  Church  rose  in  importance.  The 
LXX.  itself  was  the  original  ot  the  Old  Latin,  and 
the  recollection  of  the  original  distinction  between 
the  constituent  books  of  the  Bible  became  more 
and  more  difficult  in  the  version  of  a  version  ; 
and  at  the  same  time  the  Hebrew  Church  dwindled 
down  to  an  obscure  sect,  and  the  intercourse  between 
the  Churches  of  the  East  and  West  grew  less  inti- 
mate. The  impulse  which  instigated  Melito  in 
the  second  century  to  seek  in  "  the  Bast  "  an  "  ac- 
curate'' account  of  "  the  books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment," gradually  lost  its  tone  as  the  Jewish  nation 
and  literature  were  further  withdrawn  from  the 
circle  of  Christian  knowledge.  The  Old  Latin  ver- 
sion converted  use  popularly  into  belief,  and  the 
investigations  of  Jerome  were  unable  to  counteract 
the  feeling  which  had  gained  strength  silently, 
without  any  distinct  and  authoritative  sanction. 
Yet  one  important,  though  obscure,  protest  was 
made  against  the  growing  error.  The  Nazarenes, 
the  relics  of  the  Hebrew  Church,  in  addition  to  the 
New  Testament  "  made  use  of  the  Old  Testament, 
as  the  Jews"  (Epiph.  ffaer.  \\i\.  7).  They  bad 
"the  whole  Law,  and  the  Prophets,  and  the  Ha- 
giographa  so  called,  that  is  the  poetical  books,  and 


CANON 


255 


the  Kings,  and  Chronicles  and  Esther,  and  all  the 
other  books  in  Hebrew"  (Epiph.  I.  c.  Trap'  ai>To?s 
yap  iras  6  i>6p.os  Kal  oi  Trpocpyrai  Kal  ra.  ypatytta 
\eyop.eva,  <p7}/j.)  5e  to  ffrixvpri,  Kal  al  Ba<riAe?ai 
Kal  napaAenrSfitva,  Kal  Aladrjp  Kal  ra\\a  irdi/Ta 
'E/3pai'/cais  avayivuHrKtrai).  Ami  in  connexion 
with  this  fact,  it  is  worthy  of  remark  that  JUSTUS 
MARTYR,  who  drew  his  knowledge  of  Christianity 
from  Palestine,  makes  no  use  of  the  Apocryphal 
writings  in  any  of  his  works. 

From  what  has  been  said,  it  is  evident  that  the 
history  ot  the  Christian  Canon  is  to  be  sought  in 
the  first  instance  from  definite  catalogues  and  not 
from  isolated  quotations.  But  even  this  evidence 
is  incomplete  and  unsatisfactory.  A  comparison  of 
the  subjoined  table  (No.  I.)  of  the  chief  extant  Cata- 
logues will  show  how  few  of  them  are  really  inde- 
pendent ;  and  the  later  transcriptions  are  commonly 
of  no  value,  as  they  do  not  appear  to  have  been 
made  with  any  critical  appreciation  of  their  distinc- 
tive worth. 

These  Catalogues  evidently  fall  into  two  great 
classes,  Hebrew  and  Latin  ;  and  the  former,  again, 
exhibits  three  distinct  varieties,  which  are  to  be 
traced  to  the  three  original  sources  from  which  the 
Catalogues  were  derived.  The  first  may  be  called 
the  pure  Hebrew  Canon,  which  is  that  of  the 
Church  of  England  (the  Talmud,  Jerome,  Joan. 
Damasc).  The  second  differs  from  this  by  the 
omission  of  the  book  of  Esther  {Melito  [At/tan.'] 
Syn.  S.  Script.,  Greg.  Naz.,  Amphiloch.,  Leant., 
Niceph.,  Callist.).  The  third  differs  by  the  addi- 
tion of  Barach,  or  "the  Letter"  (Origen,  Atha- 
nas.,  Cyr.  Hieros.  \Concil.  Laod.~\,  Ilil.  Pictav.). 
The  omission  of  Esther  may  mark  a  real  variation 
in  the  opinion  of  the  Jewish  Church  [Esther], 
but  the  addition  of  Baruch  is  probably  due  to  the 
place  which  it  occupied  in  direct  connexion  with 
Jeremiah,  not  only  in  the  Greek  and  Latin  trans- 
lations, but  perhaps  also  in  some  copies  of  the 
Hebrew  text  [Baruch,  Book  of].  This  is  ren- 
dered more  likely  by  the  converse  fact  that  the  La- 
meutations  and  Baruch  are  not  distinctly  enume- 
rated by  many  writers  who  certainly  received  both 
books.  During  the  four  first  centuries  this  Hebrew 
Canon  is  the  only  one  which  is  distinctly  recog- 
nised, and  it  is  supported  by  the  combined  authority 
of  those  fathers  whose  critical  judgment  is  entitled 
to  the  greatest  weight.  In  the  meantime,  however, 
as  has  been  already  noticed,  the  common  usage  of 
the  early  fathers  was  influenced  by  the  position 
which  the  Apocryphal  books  occupied  in  the  cur- 
rent versions,  and  they  quoted  them  frequently  as 
Scripture,  when  they  were  not  led  to  refer  to  the 
judgment  of  antiquity.  The  subjoined  table  (No.  II.) 
will  show  the  extent  and  character  of  this  partial 
testimony  to  the  disputed  books. 

These  casual  testimonies  are,  however,  of  compa- 
ratively slight  value,  and  are,  in  many  cases,  opposed 
to  the  deliberate  judgment  ot'  the  authors  from 
whom  they  are  quoted.  The  real  divergence  as  to 
the  contents  of  the  Old  Testament  Canon  is  to  be 
traced  to  Augustine,  whose  wavering  and  uncer- 
tain language  on  the  point  furnishes  abundant  ma- 
terials tor  controversy.  By  education  and  cha- 
racter he  occupied  a  position  more  than  usually 
Unfavourable  for  historical  criticism,  and  yet  his 
overpowering  influence,  when  it  fell  in  with  ordi- 
nary U  .insistency  and  strength   to   the 

opinion  which  he  appeared  to  advocate,  lor  it  may 
he  reasonably  doubted  whether  he  differed  inten- 
tionally from  Jerome  except   iii   language.     In  a 


256 


CANON 


CANON 


No.  I.— CHRISTIAN  CATALOGUES  OF  THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

The  list  extends  only  to  such  hooks  as  are  disputed.  Of  the  signs,  *  indicates  that  the  book  is  expressly 
reckoned  as  Holy  Scripture :  f  that  it  is  placed  expressly  in  a  second  rank  :  ?  that  it  is  mentioned  with 
doubt.     A  blank"  marks  the  silence  of  the  author  as  to  the  book  in  question. 


I.  Conciliar,  Catalogues  : 

[Laodicene]    . .  A.C.  363 

Carthaginian  . .  . .  397  (?) 
Apostolic  Canons  . . 

II.  Private  Catalogues  : 
(a)  Greek  writers. 

Melito     ..      ..  A.C.  c.  160 

Origen  . .  . .  c.  183-253 
Athanasius  . .  296-373 
Cyril  of  Jerus.  315-386 

Synopsis  S.  Script. 
[Nicephori]  Stichometria 
Gregory  of  Naz.  300-391 
Amphilochius  . .  c.  380 
Epiphanius  . .  c.  303-403 
Leontms  . .  . .  c.  590 
Joannes  Damasc.  . .  f750 
Nicephorus  Callist.  c.  1330 
Cod.  Gr.  Saec.  X.  . . 

(6)  Latin  writers. 

Hilarius  Pictav.  A.C.  |c.  370 


Hieronymus 
Ruffinus    . . 
Augustinus 
[Damasus] 
rinnocentius]    , 
Cassiodorus 
Isidorus  Hispal. 


329-420 

c.  380 

355-430 


.  t570 
.  f69f> 


Sacram.  Gallic.  "  ante 
annos  1000" 


*  3 


Cone.  Laod.  Can.  lis.1 

Cone.  Carthag.  iii.  Can. 

xxxix.  (Alii  xlvii.).2 
Can.  Apost.  lxxvi.  (Alii 

lxxxv.).3 


Ap.  Euseb.   H.  E.   iv. 

26. 
Ap.  Euseb.    H.  E.   vi. 

25.4 
Ep.  Fest.   i.   767,   Ed. 

Ben? 
Catech.  iv.  35. 

Credner,  Zur  Gesch.  d. 

Kan.  127  ft'.6 
Credner,  a.  a.  O.  117ff.7 

Carm.  xii.  31,  Ed.  Par. 

1 840.8 
Amphiloch.  Ed.  Combef. 

p.  132.9 
Be   Mensuris,    p.   162, 

Ed.  Petav.10 
Be  Sectis,  Act.  ii.  (Cai- 

laudi,  xii.  625  f.)u 
Be  fide  orthod.  iv.  17.12 

Hody,  p.  648. 13 

Montfaucon,  Bibl.  Cois- 
lin.  p.  193  f. 


Prol.  in  Ps.  15.'4 

Prol.  Galeat.  ix.  pp.  ")47 
ff.,  Ed.  Mio-ne.15 
t      Expos.  Symb.  37  f.lfi 

Be  doctr.  Christ,  ii.  8.1? 

Credner,  a.  a.  0.  p.  188. 

Ep.  adExsup.  (Gallandi, 

viii.  56  f.). 
Belnstit.Biv.litt.  xiv.is 

Be  Orig.  vi.  I:" 

*    {  Hody,  p.  654. 


CANON 

famous  passage  (de  Doctr.  Christ,  ii.  8  (13))  he 
enumerates  the  books  which  are  contained  in  "  the 
whole  Canon  of  Scripture,"  and  includes  among 
them  the  apocryphal  books  without  any  clear  mark 
of  distinction.  This  general  statement  is  further 
confirmed  by  two  other  passages,  in  which  it  is 
argued  that  he  draws  a  distinction  between  the 
Jewish  and  Christian  Canons,  and  refers  the  authority 
of  the  Apocryphal  books  to  the  judgment  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church.  In  the  first  passage  he  speaks  of  the 
Maccabaean  history  as  not  "  found  in  the  Sacred 
Scriptures  which  are  called  canonical,  but  in  others, 
among  which  are  also  the  books  of  the  Maccabees, 
which  the  Church,  and  not  the  Jews,  holds  for  ca- 
nonical, on  account  of  the  marvellous  sufferings  of 
the  martyrs  [recorded  in  them]  ..."  (quorum 
supputatio  temporum  non  in  Scripturis  Sanctis, 
quae  Canonicae  appellantur,  sed  in  aliis  invenitur, 
in  quibus  sunt  et  Machabaeorum  libri,  quos  non 
Judaei,  sed  ecclesia  pro  Canonicis  habet  .  .  .  de  Civ. 
xviii.  36).  In  the  other  passage  he  speaks  of  the 
books  of  the  Maccabees  as  "  received  (recepta)  by  the 
Church,  not  without  profit,  if  they  be  read  with  so- 
briety "  (c.  Gaud.  i.  38).    But  it  will  be  noticed  that 


CANON 


257 


in  each  case  a  distinction  is  drawn  between  the  "  Ec- 
clesiastical "  and  properly  "  Canonical"  books.  In 
the  second  case  he  expressly  lowers  the  authority 
of  the  books  of  the  Maccabees  by  remarking  that 
"  the  Jews  have  them  not  like  the  Law,  the  Psalms, 
and  the  Prophets  to  which  the  Lord  gives  His  wit- 
ness "  (Aug.  I.  c).  And  the  original  catalogue  is 
equally  qualified  by  an  introduction  which  distin- 
guishes between  the  authority  of  books  which  are 
received  by  all  and  by  some  of  the  Churches;  and, 
again,  between  those  which  are  received  by  churches 
of  great  or  of  small  weight  (de  Doctr.  Chr.  ii. 
8  (12)  )  so  that  the  list  which  immediately  follows 
must  be  interpreted  by  this  ride.  In  confirmation 
of  this  view  of  Augustine's  special  regard  for  the 
Hebrew  Canon,  it  may  be  further  urged  that  he 
appeals  to  the  Jews,  "  the  librarians  of  the  Chris- 
tians," as  possessing  "all  the  writings  in  which 
Christ  was  prophesied  of"  (In  Ps.  xl.,  Ps.  lvi.), 
and  to  "  the  Law,  the  Psalms,  and  the  Prophets," 
which  were  supported  by  the  witness  of  the  Jews 
(c.  Gaud.  I.  c),  as  including  "  all  the  canonical 
authorities  of  the  Sacred  books"  (de  unit.  Ecclcs. 
16),  which,  as  he  says  in  another  place  (de  Civ.  xv. 


NOTES  ON  TABLE  NO.  I. 


1  The  evidence  against  the  authenticity  of  this  Canon, 
as  an  original  part  of  the  collection,  is  decisive,  in  spite 
of  the  defence  of  liickell  (Stud.  u.  Krit.  iii.  611  ff.),  as  the 
present  writer  has  shown  at  length  in  another  place 
(Hist,  of  N.  T.  Canon,  iv.  498  ff.).  The  Canon  recurs  in 
the  Capitular.  Aquisgran.  c.  xx.,  with  the  omission  of 
Baruch  and  Lamentations. 

2  The  same  Canon  appears  in  Cone.  Hipp.  Can.  xxxvi. 
The  Greek  version  ot  the  Canon  omits  the  books  of 
Maccabees  ;  and  the  history  of  the  Council  itself  is  very 
obscure.    Comp.  Cosin.  $32. 

3  This  Canon  mentions  three  books  of  the  Maccabees. 
Judith  is  not  found  in  some  MSS. ;  and  generally  it  may 
be  observed  that  the  published  text  of  the  Conclliar  Canons 
needs  a  thorough  revision.  Ecclesiasticus  is  thus  men- 
tioned :  efioflef  Se  npocno-TOpeio-0to  vpiiv  p.av0dveiv  tijuuir 
Toil's  veovs  TT)v  owpt'ay  rov  iro\vp.adov^  1tLpa\.  Comp. 
Constit.  Apost.  ii.  57. 

The  Canons  of  Laodicea,  Carthage,  and  the  Apostolic 
Canons,  were  all  ratified  in  the  (Juini-Sextine  Council, 
Ca  .  2. 

4  Tepepu'as  oiiv ©prjvots  ko\  e  tt  i  o-  t  o  A  t}  iv  evi.  Origen 
expressly  says  mat  this  catalogue  is  <is  'E/3patoi  ira- 
paSiSoacri.,  and  begins  with  the  words :  eto-i  Se  at  etKoo-t 
&vo  |3t)3Aoi  Ka6'  'E^p<uous  a'i&e.  He  quotes  several  of 
the  Apocryphal  books  as  Scripture,  as  will  be  seen  below  ; 
and  in  his  Letter  to  Afiicanus  defends  the  interpolated 
Greek  text  of  Daniel  and  the  other  0.  T.  books,  on  the 
ground  of  their  public  use  (Ep.  ad  Afrk.  §  3,  ff.).  The 
whole  of  this  last  passage  is  of  the  deepest  interest,  and 
places  in  the  clearest  light  the  influence  which  the  LXX. 
exercised  on  common  opinion. 

5  Athanasius  closes  his  whole  catalogue  with  the  words  : 
TaOra  Tnryat  tov  o~u>rriptou  .  .  .  ev  toutois  p.  6  v  o  t  s  to  tt}? 
ei'cre/3eias    StSao-KaAetoi'    evayyeKi^erai.      p.j)6Vis    toutois 

e7rt/3aAAe'TW  p.T)St  tovtiov  dtpatpet'o-#u>  Tt «7TII(  teat 

erepa  /3t£At'a  toutioi'  e£u>9ev,  ov  Kavovi£6p.eva  p.ev  TervTTto- 
peva  6e  irapd  tu>v  warepuiv  avayivtii<TKeo~9ai  tois  dprt 
7rpo<repxojiie'i'Ois  (tot  /3ouAof*eVot?  KaTr)\eia6ai.  toi/  ttjs 
evcre^eiai  \6yov. 

«  The  list  of  the  Apocryphal  books  is  prefaced  by  a 
clause  nearly  identical  with  that  in  Athanasius.  In  a 
second  enumeration  (Creduer,  a.  a.  O.  p.  144),  three  books 
of  the  MaccaUcs  and  Susanna  are  enumerated  among  the 
afTtAeYo/xefo* 

7  The  Apocryphal  books  are  headed :  kou  oVai  an-t- 
Ae'yoi'Tat  tt)s  TraAatds  a5rnt  eio-ti>.  Susanna  (i.  C.  Add. 
to  Daniel)  is  reckoned  among  them. 

8  The  catalogue  ends  wilh  the  words:  wao-a?  e\ei<;. 
et  rts  6"e  toutioi/  cktot  ovk  ev  yvqo~iois. 

9  The  verses  occur  under  the  name  of  Gregory  of 
Nazianzus,  but  are  generally  referred  to  Amphilochius. 
Of  Esther  he  says :  toutou  -KpotreyKpivovot.  tt\v  'EaSijp 
Tii'es.  He  concludes :  oJtos  atpevSicrraroi  Kaviov  dv  elr) 
tu>v  9eoTrvevo~Tajv  ypaqjwv. 

10  Epiphanius  adds  of  Wisdom  and  Ecclus. :  \prjo-ipoi 
juei>  eto~'t  «at  tu<pe'Atp.ot,  aAA'  et?  dpiBpbv  py)Tu>v  ovk  ara- 
(pepOfTOt,  Sl'o  oii&e  .  .  .  iv  t[]  t»J5  Staflrjiois  (ct/3uiTiiJ  f_deeTe'- 


8r\o-av\.  The  same  catalogue  is  repeated  de  Mens.  p.  18C. 
In  another  plate  (ado.  haer.  lxxvi.  p.  941),  he  speaks  of  ' 
the  teaching  contained  in  "the  xxii.  books"  of  the  Old 
Test.,  in  the  New  Test.,  and  then  ev  Tats  2o(pi'ats,  ZoAo- 
/twt'TO?  re  <brfpX  kou  v'lov  2tpa\  kou  Trdtrat?  aTrAtus  #etats 
ypa<pats.  In  a  third  catalogue  (adv.  haer.  v.  p.  19)  he 
adds  the  letters  of  Baruch  and  Jeremiah  (which  he  else- 
where specially  notices  as  wanting  in  the  Hebrew, 
de  Mens.  p.  163),  and  speaks  of  Wisdom  and  Ecclus.  as 
ev  <x/u.cpiAe'KTu>  (among  the  Jews),  x<°Pls  dAAtof  Ttviii/ 
|3i/3AtW  eea7roKpi/<pu>i'.     Comp.  adv.  haer.  xxix.  p.  122. 

11  Leont.  1.  C.  ravrd  eo"Ti  to.  Kavoi'L^op-eva  £t/3Ata  ev 
rrj  eKK\-qo~iq  Kat  7raAata  /cat  via,  wv  ra  7raAata  Trdvra 
8e\ovrai  ot  'E^patot. 

12  Joan.  Damasc.  1.  c.  ^  aotpia  tov  2oAop.u)i'TOt  xat  i) 
2o(pta  tov  'Itjo*oi»  ....  eVdpeTOi  p-ev  Kai  KaAat  dAA  ovk 
apidpovvrai,  ov5e  efceilTO  iv  Tfj  ki/3iotu>. 

13  Ouibus  nonnulli  adjiciunt  Esther,  Judith,  et  Tobit. 
cktos  6e  toutioi/  Try;  ypa<f)ij<;  array  voQov  (Hody,  I.  c). 

14  Hilar.  I.  c.  Qulbusdam  autem  visum  est  additis  Tobia 
et  Judith  xxiv.  libros  secundum  numerum  graecarum 
litterarum  connumerare  .... 

15  Hieron.  I.  c.  Quicquid  extra  hos  (the  books  of  the 
Hebrew  canon)  est,  inter  apocrypha  ponendum.  Igitur 
Sapient ia,  quae  vulgo  Salomonis  inscribitur,  et  Jesufilii 
Sirach  litier,  et  Judith  et  Tobias  et  Pastor  non  sunt  in  ca- 
none.   Macchabaeorum  primum  librum  Hebraicum  reperi  : 

secundus  Graecus  est Cf.  1'rol.  in  Libros  Salom.  ad 

Chrom.  et  Beliod.  Fertur  et.  LWdpeTos,  Jesufilii  Sirach 
liber,  et  alius  i/zeuo'eTrt-ypacpo?,  qui  Sapientia  Salomonis 

inscribitur Sicut  ergo  Judith  et  Tobit,  et  Macclia- 

baeorum  libros  legit  quidem  ecclesia,  sed  inter  canonicos 
non  recipit,  sic  et  haec  duo  volumina  legit  ad  aedifica- 
tionem  plebis,  non  ad  auctoritatem  ecclesiasticorum  dog- 
matum  confirmandam.  Comp.  Prologos  in  Dan.  flierem., 
Tobit,  Judith,  Joiiam;  Ep.  ad  I'aulinum,  liii.  Hence  at 
the  close  of  Esther  one  very  ancient  MS.,  quoted  by 
Martianay  on  the  place,  adds:  Hucusque  completum  est 
Vet.  Test,  id  est,  omnes  canonicae  Scripturae  . . .  quas 
transtulit  Hieronymus  .  .  .  .  de  Hebraicfl.  veritate  .... 
caelerae  vero  Scripturae,  quae  non  sunt  canonicae,  sed 

dicuntur  ecclesiasucae,  Istae  sunt,  id  est giving  the 

list  contained  in  I'rol.  Calat. 

'*  After  giving  the  Hebrew  canon  ami  the  received 
canon  of  N.  T.,  Kutinns  says:  Sciendum  tnmen  est, 
quod  et  alii  libri  sunt,  qui  non  canonioi  sed  colcsiastici 
a  majoribus  appellati  sunt,  id  est,  Sapientia,  quae  dicitur 
SoUmoniS,  et  alia  Sajiiiiiliii  qua.-  dieitur_/i/it  Sirach  .... 
ejusdem   vero  ordinis   lib.llus  est   Tobiae  et  Judith  et 

Machabaeorum   libri Quae   omnia  leg)  quidem  in 

ecclesiis  voluerunt,  non  tamen  proferri  ad  auctoritatem 
ex  his  tidei  confirmandam,  Caeteraa  vero  Scripturaa 
apocryphat  nominarunt,  (|uas  in  ecclesiis  legi  Itoluerunt. 

"  See  below. 

U  Casslodorus  gives  also,  however,  with  marks  of  high 
respect,  the  catalogue  of  Jerome.    Comp  Cosin,  >J  P9. 

,,J  Isidorus,  like  Cassiodoroe,  gives  the  catalogue  of 
Jerome,  as  well  as  thai  of  VugusUne.   Comp.  Cosin,  $  103. 


258 


CANON 


CANON 


SO 


j|W^' 

Dan.  p 
d  Mign 

.2.] 
iii.  580 

6,  &c. 
xvi.  3. 
.  in  Pro 

3,  24. 

»•■•§< 

•S    r  Y.  s 

_■  ^  -•  -S 
an  s  i. 
§  ™  S  ^ 

Cat.  ii.  1 
Oraf.  xx 
Horn,  xii 

13. 
Ancor.  1 

&a     : 

■3  SB 

*m 

2  w 


t^q 


a.  w  jS  <" 


f?      t^ 


•"  ■ ■  a  P-, 
S  ' .  ^  ."g 

-~     T,!S 

2,     55 


HAffiO 


la-- 


6  « (S;  <S 


boa. 


^ 


7No-S 

^S^S?  s»S« 

C)^ 


s   X 

e 


el 


#5 


^  c3 


qq 


-     ft,^  <; 


■*    H 
CO     !=<■£        . 

a  -^  a  *: 

<S  «•  q<2 


gq  ^       C;  GJ  C; 


;     :     :     !?» 

j!            H            5     7     u,  M 

-1         *        fiJpKi 

risers. 

s<iwoe)«     w 


£      s 


CANON 

23,  4),  "  were  preserved  in  the  temple  of  the  He- 
brew people  by  the  care  of  the  successive  priests." 
But  on  the  other  hand  Augustine  frequently  uses 
passages  from  the  apocryphal  books  as  co-ordinate 
with  Scripture,  and  practically  disregards  the  rules 
of  distinction  between  the  various  classes  of  Sacred 
writings  which  he  had  himself  laid  down.  He 
stood  on  the  extreme  verge  of  the  age  of  inde- 
pendent learning,  and  follows  at  one  time  the  con- 
clusions of  criticism,  at  another  the  prescriptions  of 
habit,  which  from  his  date  grew  more  and  more 
powerful. 

The  enlarged  Canon  of  Augustine,  which  was,  as 
it  will  be  seen,  wholly  unsupported  by  any  Greek 
authority,  was  adopted  at  the  Council  of  CAR- 
THAGE (A.c.  397  ?),  though  with  a  reservation 
(Can.  47,  De  confirmando  isto  Canone  transmarina 
ecclesia  consulatur),  and  afterwards  published,  in 
the  decretals  which  bear  the  name  of  Innocent, 
DAMASUS,  and  Gelasius  (cf.  Credner,  Zwr  Gcsch. 
d  Kan.  151  ft'.);  and  it  recurs  in  many  later 
writers.  But  nevertheless  a  continuous  succession 
of  the  more  learned  fathers  in  the  West  maintained 
the  distinctive  authority  of  the  Hebrew  Canon  up 
to  the  period  of  the  Reformation.  In  the  6th  cen- 
tury Primasius  (Comm.  in  Apoc.  iv.  Cosin,  §92  ?), 
in  the  7th  GREGORY  the  Great  {Moral,  xix.  21,  p. 
022),  in  the  8th  Bede  (In  Apoc.  iv.  ?),  in  the  9th 
Alcuin  (up.  Hody,  654  ;  yet  see  Carni.  vi.,  vii.), 
in  the  loth  Radtjxphtjs  Flav.  (In  Lexit.  xiv. 
Hody,  655),  in  the  12th  Peter  op  Clugni  (Ep.  c. 
Petr.  Hody,  I.  c),  Hugo  de  S.  Victore  (de 
Script.  6),  and  John  of  Salisbury  (Hody,  656  ; 
Cosin,  §1-30),  in  the  13th  Hugo  Cardinalis 
(Hody,  656),  in  the  14th  Nicholas  Liranus 
(Hody,  p.  657  ;  Cosin,  §146),  Wiclif  (?  comp. 
Hody,  658),  and  Occam  (Hody,  657  ;  Cosin,  §147), 
in  the  15th  Thomas  Anglicus  (Cosin,  §150),  and 
Thomas  de  Walden  (Id.  §151),  in  the  16th 
Card.  XlMENES  (Ed.  Compl.  Pref.),  SlXTUS 
Senensis  (Biblioth.  i.  1),  and  Card.  Cajetan 
(Hody,  p.  662  ;  Cosin,  §173),  repeat  with  approval 
the  decision  of  Jerome,  and  draw  a  clear  line  between 
the  Canonical  and  Apocryphal  books  (Cosin,  Scho- 
lastical  History  of  the  Canon ;  Reuss,  Die  Gesch. 
d.  Heiligen  Schriften  N.  T.,  Ed.  2,  §328). 

Up  to  the  date  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  the 
Romanists  allow  that  the  question  of  the  Canon 
was  open,  but  one  of  the  first  labours  of  that  as- 
sembly was  to  circumscribe  a  freedom  which  the 
growth  of  literature  seemed  to  render  perilous.0 
The  decree  of  the  Council  "on  the  Canonical 
Scriptures"  which  was  made  at  the  4th  Session 
(April  8th,  1546),  at  which  about  53  represen- 
tatives were  present,  pronounced  the  enlarged 
Canon,  including  the  apocryphal  books,  to  be  de- 
serving in  all  its  parts  of  "equal  veneration" 
(pari  pietatis  aflectu),  and  added  a  list  of  books 
"  to  prevent  the  possibility  of  doubt"  (ne  cui  du- 
bitatio  suboriri  possit).  This  hasty  and  peremptory 
decree,  unlike  in  its  form  to  any  catalogue  before 
published,  was  closed  by  a  solemn  anathema  against 
all  who  should  "  not  receive  the  entire  books  with 
all  their  parts  as  sacred  and  canonical"  ( Si  nuis 
autem  libros  ipsos  integros  cum  omnibus  Buis  par- 
tilms,  prout  in  ecclesia  catholica  legi  consueveruni 
et  in  veteri  vulgata  hatina  editione  babentur,  pro 


CANON 


259 


°  The    history  of  the  Catalogue  published    at   the 
Council  of  Florence  0  111)  is  obscure  (Cosin,  §§159 

f.),  and  it  was  probably  limited  to  the  determination 

of  books  for  Ecclesiastical  use  (Heuss,  §325). 


sacris  et  canonicis  non  susceperit  ....  anathema 
esto,  Cone.  Trid.  Sess.  iv.).  This  decree  was  not, 
however,  passed  without  opposition  (Sarpi,  139ff.ed. 
1655,  though  Pallavacino  denies  this)  ;  and  in  spite 
of  the  absolute  terms  in  which  it  is  expressed,  later 
Romanists  have  sought  to  find  a  method  of  escaping 
from  the  definite  equalization  of  the  two  classes  of 
Sacred  writings  by  a  forced  interpretation  of  the 
subsidiary  clauses.  Du  Pin  (Dissert,  prelim,  i.  1), 
Lamy  (App.  Bibl.  ii.  5),  and  Jalin  (Einl.  ind.  A.  T., 
i.  141  ff.  ap.  Reuss,  a.  a.  0.  §337),  endeavoured  to 
establish  two  classes  of  proto-Canonical,  and  deutero- 
Canonical  books,  attributing  to  the  first  a  dogmatic, 
and  to  the  second  only  an  ethical  authority.  But 
such  a  classification,  however  true  it  maybe,  is  ob- 
viously at  variance  with  the  terms  of  the  Tridentine 
decision,  and  has  found  comparatively  little  favour 
among  Romish  writers  (comp.  [Herbst]  Welte, 
Einl.  ii.  ff.  1  f.). 

The  reformed  churches  unanimously  agreed  in 
confirming  the  Hebrew  Canon  of  Jerome,  and  re- 
fused to  allow  any  dogmatic  authority  to  the  apo- 
cryphal books,  but  the  form  in  which  this  judg- 
ment was  expressed  varied  considerably  in  the 
different  confessions.  The  Lutheran  formularies 
contain  no  definite  article  on  the  subject,  but  the 
note  which  Luther  placed  in  the  front  of  his  Ger- 
man translation  of  the  Apocrypha  (ed.  1534),  is 
an  adequate  declaration  of  the  later  judgment  of 
the  Communion:  "  Apocrypha,  that  is  Books  which 
are  not  placed  on  an  equal  footing  (nicht  gleicli  ge- 
halten)  with  Holy  Scripture,  and  yet  are  profitable 
and  good  for  reading."  This  general  view  was 
further  expanded  in  the  special  prefaces  to  the  se- 
parate books  in  which  Luther  freely  criticized  their 
individual  worth,  and  wholly  rejected  3  and  4  Es- 
dras,  as  unworthy  of  translation.  At  an  earlier 
period  Carlstadt  (1520)  published  a  critical  essay, 
De  canonicis  scripturis  libellus  (reprinted  in  Cred- 
ner, Zur  Gesch.  d.  Kan.  pp.  291  ft'.),  in  which  he 
followed  the  Hebrew  division  of  the  Canonical  hi  inks 
into  three  ranks,  and  added  Wisd.,  Ecclus.,  Ju- 
dith, Tobit,  1  and  2  Mace,  as  Hagiographa,  though 
not  included  in  the  Hebrew  collection,  while  he  re- 
jected the  remainder  of  the  Apocrypha  with  consi- 
derable parts  of  Daniel  as  "utterly  apocryphal" 
(plane  apocryphi ;  Credn.  pp.  389,  410  ff.). 

The  Calvinistic  churches  generally  treated  the 
question  with  more  precision,  and  introduced  into 
their  symbolic  documents  a  distinction  between  the 
"Canonical"  and  "Apocryphal,"  or  "Ecclesias- 
tical "  books.  TheGallican  confession  (1561),  after 
an  enumeration  of  the  Hicronymian  Canon  (Art. 
3),  adds  (Art.  4)  "  that  the  other  ecclesiastical 
books  are  useful,  yet  not  such  that  any  article  of 
feith  could  be  established  out  of  them"  (71/0  [sc. 
Spiritu  Sancto]  suggerenta,  docemur,  illos  [sc 
libros  Canonicos}  ah  aliis  libris ecclesiasticis discer- 
nere,  qui,  ut  sint  utiles,  nun  sunt  tarnen  ejusmodi, 
ut  ex  iis  constitui  possit  aiiquis  fidei  articulus). 
The  Belgic  Confession"  (1561  ?)  contaias  a  similar 
enumeration  of  the  Canonical  hooks  (Art.  4),  and 
allows  their  public  use  by  the  cluueli,  but  denies 
to  them  all  independent  authority  in  matters  of 
faith  (Art.  6).  The  later  Helvetic  Confession 
(1562,  Bullinger)  notices  the  distinction  between 
the  Canonical  and  Apocrypha]  books  without  pro- 
nouncing any  judgment  on  the  question  |  Niemeyer, 
Libr.  Symb.  Eccles.  Eef.  i>.  t68).  The  West- 
minster Confession  (Art.  '■')  places  tin1  Apocrypha] 

1 ks  on  a  level    with   other   human    writings,  and 

C des  to  them  i tlier  authority  in  the  Church. 

S  2 


2G0 


CANON 


The  English  Church  (Art.  6)  appeals  directly  to 
the  opinion  of  St.  Jerome,  and  concedes  to  the  Apo- 
cryphal books  (including  [1571]  4  Esdras  and 
The  prayer  of  ManassesP)  a  use  "  for  example  of 
life  and  instruction  of  manners,"  but  not  for  the 
establishment  of  doctrine;  and  a  similar  decision  is 
given  in  the  Irish  Articles  of  1615  (Hardwick,  I.  c, 
341  f.).  The  original  English  Articles  of  1552 
contained  no  catalogue  (Art.  5)  of  the  contents  of 
"  Holy  Scripture,"  and  no  mention  of  the  Apo- 
crypha, although  the  Tridentine  decree  (1546) 
might  seem  to  have  rendered  this  necessary.  The 
example  of  foreign  Churches  may  have  led  to  the 
addition  upon  the  later  revision. 

The  expressed  opinion  of  the  later  Greek  Church 
on  the  Canon  of  Scripture  has  been  modified  in 
some  cases  by  the  circumstances  uuder  which  the 
declaration  was  made.  The  "  Confession  "  of  Cyril 
Lucar,  who  was  most  favourably  disposed  towards 
the  Protestant  churches,  confirms  the  Laodicene 
Catalogue,  and  marks  the  Apocryphal  books  as  not 
possessing  the  same  divine  authority  as  those  whose 
canonicity  is  unquestioned  (Kimmel,  Mori.  Fid. 
Ecclcs.  Or.  i.  p.  42,  to  Kvpos  irupa  tov  iravayiov 
Trvev/xaros  ovk  ixov0~lv  ®s  T°-  Kvpiais  Kal  avafxcpi- 
{S6\a>s  Kavovixa  fiifSXia).  In  this  judgment  Cyril 
.  Lucar  was  followed  by  his  friend  Metrophanes  Cri- 
topulus,  in  whose  confession  a  complete  list  of  the 
books  of  the  Hebrew  Canon  is  given  (Kimmel,  ii.  pp. 
105  f.),  while  some  value  is  assigned  to  the  Apocry- 
phal books  (anufiA-fiTovs  oi/x  yyov/xeOu.)  in  consider- 
ation of  their  ethical  value  ;  and  the  detailed  decision 
of  Metrophanes  is  quoted  with  approval  in  the  "  Or- 
thodox Teaching"  of  Platon,  Metropolitan  of  Mos- 
cow (ed.  Athens,  1836,  p.  59).  The  "Orthodox 
Confession  "  simply  refers  the  subject,  of  Scripture  to 
the  Church  (Kimmel,  p.  159,  rj  eK/cATjcria  exel  tw 
i^ovaiav  .  .  .  va  SoKifid^r]  ras  ypcxpds  ;  comp.  p. 
123).  On  the  other  hand  the  Synod  at  Jerusalem, 
held  in  1672,  "  against  the  Calvinists,"  which  is 
commonly  said  to  have  been  led  by  Romish  in- 
fluence (yet  comp.  Kimmel,  p.  lxxxviii.),  pronounced 
that  the  books  which  Cyril  Lucar  "  ignorantly  or 
maliciously  called  apocryphal,"  are  "  canonical  and 
Holy  Scripture,"  on  the  authority  of  the  testimony 
of  the  ancient  Church  ([Kimmel,]  Weissenboru, 
Dosith.  Confess,  pp.  467  f.).  The  Constautinopo- 
iitan  Synod,  which  was  held  in  the  same  year,  no- 
tices the  difference  existing  between  the  Apostolic, 
Laodicene,  and  Carthaginian  Catalogues,  and  ap- 
pears to  distinguish  the  Apocryphal  books  as  not 
wholly  to  be  rejected  ('6<ra  fxcvroi  tSiv  tt)s  ■KaKaias 
8ia8r}Kris  /8i)3Aia)i'  rfj  avapid/xricra  rwv  ayioypd- 
(pwv  ov  <rvfj.Tr(pi\a/x^dv€raL  .  .  .  ovk  a.n6fi\r)Ta 
Tvyxdvovffi  b~i6\ov).  The  authorised  Russian  Ca- 
techism (The  Doctrine  of  the  Russian  Church,  &c, 
by  Rev.  W.  Blackmore,  Aberd.,  1845,  pp.  37  ff.) 
distinctly  quotes  and  defends  the  Hebrew  Canon  on 
the  authority  of  the  Creek  Fathers,  and  repeats  the 
judgment  of  Athanasius  on  the  usefulness  of  the  Apo- 
cryphal books  as  a  preparatory  study  in  the  Bible  ; 
and  there  can  be  no  doubt  but  that  the  current  of 
Greek  opinion,  in  accordance  with  the  unanimous 
agreement  of  the  ancient  Greek  Catalogues,  coincides 
with  this  judgment. 

The  history  of  the  Syrian  Canpn  of  the  0.  T.  is 
involved  in  great  obscurity  from  the  scantiness  of 
the  evidence  which  can  be  brought  to  bear  upon  it. 


p  The  Latin  copy  of  1562  includes  only  2,  3  Esd., 
Wisd..  Ecclus.,  Tobit,  Jud.,  1,  2  Mace.  "(Hardwick, 
Hist,  nf  Art.  p.  275). 


CANON 

The  Peshito  was  made,  in  the  first  instance,  directly 
from  the  Hebrew,  and  consequently  adhered  to  the 
Hebrew  Canon;  but  as  the  LXX.  was  used  after- 
wards in  revising  the  version,  so  many  of  the  Apo- 
cryphal books  were  translated  from  the  Greek  at 
an  early  period,  and  added  to  the  original  collection 
(Assem.  Bibl.  Or.  i.  7 1 ).  Yet  this  change  was  only 
made  gradually.  In  the  time  of  Ephrem  (c.  A.D. 
370)  the  Apocryphal  additions  to  Daniel  were  yet 
wanting,  and  his  commentaries  were  confined  to 
the  books  of  the  Hebrew  Canon,  though  he  was  ac- 
quainted with  the  Apocrypha  (Lardner,  Credibility; 
&c.,  iv.  pp.  427  f. ;  see  Lengerke,  Daniel,  cxii.). 
The  later  Syrian  writers  do  not  throw  much  light 
upon  the  question.  Gregory  Bar  Hebraeus,  in  his 
shoit  commentary  on  Scripture,  treats  of  the  books 
in  the  following  order  (Assem.  Bibl.  Orient,  ii. 
282):  the  Pentateuch,  Josh.,  Judg.,  1  &  2  Sam., 
Ps.,  1  &  2  K.,  Prov.,  Ecclus.,  Eccl.,  Cant.,  Wisd., 
Ruth,  Hist.  Sua.,  Job,  Is  ,  12  Proph.,  Jer.,  Lam., 
Ez.,  Dan.,  Bel,  4  Gosp.,  Acts  ...  14  Epist.  of  St. 
Paul,  omitting  1  &  2  Chr.,  Ezr.,  Neh.,  Esther,  Tobit , 
1  Si'2  Mace,  Judith,  (Baruch  ?),  Apocalypse,  Epist. 
James,  1  Pet.,  1  John. 

In  the  Scriptural  Vocabulary  of  Jacob  of  Edessa 
(Assem.  I.  c.  p.  499),  the  order  and  number  of  the 
books  commented  upon  is  somewhat  different: 
Pent.,  Jos.,  Jud.,  Job,  1  &  2  Sam.,  David  (i.e. 
Ps.),  1  &2  K.,  Is.,  12  Proph.,  Jer.,  Lam.,  Baruch, 
Ez.,  Dan.,  Prov.,  Wisd.,  Cant.,  Ruth,  Esth., 
Judith,  Ecclus.,  Acts,  Epist.  Jaines,  1  Pet.,  1  John, 
14  Epist.  of  St.  Paul,  4  Gosp.,  omitting  1  &  2 
Chr.,  Ez.,  Neh.,  Eccl.,  Tobit,  1  &  2  Mace,  Apoc. 
(comp.  Assem.  Bibl.  Orient,  iii.  4  not.). 

The  Catalogue  of  Ebed-Jesu  (Assem.  Bibl.  Orient., 
iii.  5  ff.)  is  rather  a  general  survey  of  all  the  He- 
brew and  Christian  literature  with  which  he  was 
acquainted  (Catalogus  librorum  omnium  Ecclesias- 
ticorum)  than  a  Canon  of  Scripture.  After  enu- 
merating the  books  of  the  Hebrew  Canon,  together 
with  Ecclus.,  Wisd.,  Judith,  add.  to  Dan.,  and 
Baruch,  he  adds,  without  any  break,  "  the  traditions 
of  the  Elders"  (Mishnah),  the  works  of  Josephus, 
including  the  Fables  of  Aesop  which  wei  e  popularly 
ascribed  to  him,  and  at  the  end  mentions  the 
"  book  of  Tobias  and  Tobit."  In  the  like  manner, 
after  enumerating  the  4  Gosp.,  Acts,  3  Cath. 
Epist.  and  14  Epist.  of  St.  Paid,  he  passes  at  once 
to  the  Diatessaron  of  Tatian,  and  the  writings  of 
"  the  disciples  of  the  Apostles."  Little  dependence, 
however,  can  be  placed  on  these  lists,  as  they  rest 
on  no  critical  foundation,  and  it  is  kuown  from 
other  sources  that  varieties  of  opinion  on  the  subject 
of  the  Canon  existed  in  the  Syrian  Church  (Assem. 
Bibl.  Orient,  iii.  6  not.). 

One  testimony,  however,  which  derives  its  origin 
from  the  Syrian  Church,  is  specially  worthy  of 
notice.  Junilius,  an  African  bishop  of  the  6th 
century,  has  preserved  a  full  and  interesting  account 
of  the  teaching  of  Paulus,  a  Persian,  on  Holy  Scrip- 
ture, who  was  educated  at  Nisibis  where  "  the 
Divine  Law  was  regularly  explained  by  public 
masters,"  as  a  branch  of  common  education  (Junil. 
De  part.  leg.  Praef.).  He  divides  the  books  of  the 
Bible  into  two  classes,  those  of  "  perfect,"  and 
those  of  "  mean "  authority.  The  first  class  in- 
cludes all  the  books  of  the  Hebrew  Canon  with  the 
exception  of  1  &  2  Chr.,  Job,  Canticles,  and  Esther, 
and  with  the  addition  of  Ecclesiasticus.  The  second 
class  consists  of  Chronicles  (2),  Job,  Esdras  (2). 
Judith,  Esther,  and  Maccabees  (2),  which  arc  added 
by    ''very    many"    (plurimi)    to   the   Canonical 


CANON  CANON  261 

books.  The  remaining  books  are  pronounced  to  be 
of  no  authority,  and  of  these  Canticles  and  Wisdom 
are  said  to  be  added  by  "  some  "  {quidam)  to  the 
Canon.  The  classification  as  it  stands  is  not  without 
difficulties,  but  it  deserves  more  attention  than  it 
has  received  (comp.  Hody,  p.  653  ;  <  lallandi,  Biblioth, 
xii.  79  ff.  The  reprint  in  Wordsworth,  On  the 
Canon,  App.  A.,  pp.  42  ft'.,  is  very  imperfect). 

The  Armenian  Canon,  as  far  as  it  can  be  ascer- 
tained from  editions,  follows  that  of  the  LXX.,  but 
it  is  of  no  critical  authority  ;  and  a  similar  remark 
applies  to  the  Aethiopian  Canon,  though  it  is  more 
easy  in  this  case  to  trace  the  changes  through  which 
it  has  passed  (Dillmann,  Ueber  d.  Aeth.  Kan.,  in 
Ewald's  Jahrbuch,  1853,  pp.  144  ft'.). 

In  addition  to  the  books  already  quoted  under 
the  heads  for  which  they  are  specially  valuable, 
some  still  remain  to  be.  noticed.  C.  K.  Schmid, 
Hist.  ant.  et  vindic.  Can.  S.  Vet.  et  Nov.  Test., 
Lips.  1775.  [H.  Corrodi],  Versuch  einer  Beleucht- 
ung  .  .  .  d.  Bibl.  Kanons,  Halle,  1792  ;  Movers, 
Loci  quidam  Hist.  Can.  V.  T.  illnstrati,  Breslau, 
1842.  The  great  work  of  Hody  (Be  biblior.  text., 
Oxon.  1705)  contains  a  rich  store  of  materials, 
though  even  this  is  not  free  from  minor  errors. 
Stuart's  Critical  History  and  Defence  of  the  Old 
Test.  Canon,  Loudon,  1849,  is  rather  an  apology 
than  a  history. 

IV.  The  history  of  the  Canon  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment.— The  history  of  the  Canon  of  the  N.  T. 
presents  a  remarkable  analogy  to  that  of  the  Canon  of 
the  0.  T.  The  beginnings  of  both  Canons  are  obscure 
from  the  circumstances  under  which  they  arose : 
both  grew  silently  under  the  guidance  of  an  inward 
instinct  rather  than  by  the  force  of  external 
authority  :  both  were  connected  with  other  religious 
literature  by  a  series  of  books  which  claimed  a 
partial  and  questionable  authority :  both  gained 
deh'niteness  in  times  of  persecution.  The  chief 
ditference  lies  in  the  general  consent  with  which  all 
the  churches  of  the  West  have  joined  in  ratifying 
one  Canon  of  the  N.  T.,  while  they  are  divided  as 
to  the  position  of  the  0.  T.  Apocrypha. 

The  history  of  the  N.  T.  Canon  may  be  con- 
veniently divided  into  three  periods.  The  first 
extends  to  the  time  of  Hegesippus  (c.  A.D.  170), 
and  includes  tlie  era  of  the  separate  circulation  and 
gradual  collection  of  the  Apostolic  writings.  The 
second  is  closed  by  the  persecution  of  Diocletian 
(a.d.  303),  and  marks  the  separation  of  the  sacred 
writings  from  the  remaining  Ecclesiastical  literature. 
The  third  may  lie  defined  by  the  third  Council  of 
Carthage  (a.d.  397),  in  which  a  catalogue  of  the 
books  of  Scripture  was  formally  ratified  by  conciliar 
authority.  The  first  is  characteristically  a  period 
of  tradition,  the  second  of  speculation,  the  third  of 
authority  ;  and  it  is  not  difficult  to  trace  the 
features  of  the  successive  ages  in  the  course  of  the 
history  of  the  Canon. 

1.  The  history  of  the  Canon  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment to  170  a.d. — The  writings  of  the  X.  T. 
themselves  contain  little  more  than  faint,  and 
perhaps    unconscious   intimations   of    the    position 

which  they  were  destined  ( «upy.     The  mission 

of  the  Apostles  was  essentially  one  of  preaching  and 
not  of  writing:  of  founding  a  present  church  and 
not  of  legislating  for  a  future  one.  The  "word" 
is  essentially  one  of  "hearing,"  "received,"  and 

i  The  late  tradition  commonly  quoted  from  Photiua     S«tit6tov  nd9r)  tc  kcu  Bavpara  Ka\  iiSdypara  ....  SceVafe 
(Biblioth.  254)  to  show  that  St.  John  completed  the    re  koX  oTii/Siripflpuxrc  .... 

Canon  refers  only  to  the  Gospels  I  ™i>s  to^ous  ot  avi-  |       r  The  titles  of  the  disputed  hooks  of  the  N.  T.  are 
ypatl>ou     6(.a.<popo<.5     yAwcr<rats    Ta    crum'ipia    tou    italicized  throughout,  for  convenience  of  reference. 


"  handed  down,"  a  "  message,"  a  "  proclamation." 
Written  instruction  was  in  each  particular  case  only 
occasional  and  fragmentary;  and  the  completeness 
of  the  entire  collection  of  the  incidental  records  thus 
formed  is  one  of  the  most  striking  proofs  of  the 
Providential  power  which  guided  the  natural 
development  of  the  church.  The  prevailing  method 
of  interpreting  the  O.  T.,  and  the  peculiar  position 
which  the  first  Christians  occupied,  as  standing  upon 
the  verge  of  "  the  coming  age"  (alwv),  seemed  to 
preclude  the  necessity  and  even  the  use  of  a  "  New 
Testament."  Yet  even  thus,  though  there  is  nothing 
to  indicate  that  the  Apostles  regarded  their  written 
remains  as  likely  to  preserve  a  perfect  exhibition  of 
the  sum  of  Christian  truth,  coordinate  with  the  Law 
and  the  Prophets,  they  claim  for  their  writings  a 
public  use  (_!  Thess.  v.  27  ;  Col.iv.  16;  Rev.  xxii. 
18),  and  atrauthoritative  power  (1  Tim.  iv.  Iff.;  2 
Thess.  iii.  6  ;  Rev.  xxii.  19)  ;  and,  at  the  time  when 
2  Peter  was  written,  which  on  any  supposition  is  an 
extremely  early  writing,  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul 
were  placed  in  significant  connexion  with  "  the 
other  Scriptures  "  4  (ras  \onras  ■ypacpds,  not  ras 
&\\as  ypacpas). 

The  transition  from  the  Apostolic  to  the  sub- 
Apostolic  age  is  essentially  abrupt  and  striking.  An 
age  of  conservatism  succeeds  an  age  of  creation ;  but 
in  feeling  and  general  character  the  period  which 
followed  the  working  of  the  Apostles  seems  to  have 
been  a  faithful  reflection  of  that  which  they 
moulded.  The  remains  of  the  literature  to  which 
it  gave  birth,  which  are  wholly  Greek,  are  sin- 
gularly scanty  and  limited  in  range,  merely  a  few 
Letters  and  "  Apologies."  As  yet  writing  among 
Christians  was,  as  a  general  rule,  the  result  of  a 
pressing  necessity  and  not  of  choice ;  and  under 
such  circumstances  it  is  vain  to  expect  either  a  dis- 
tinct consciousness  of  the  necessity  of  a  written 
Canon,  or  any  clear  testimony  as  to  its  limits. 

The  writings  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers  (c. 
70-120  A.D.)  are  all  occasional.  They  sprang  out 
of  peculiar  circumstances,  and  offered  little  scope 
for  quotation.  At  the  same  time,  the  Apostolic  tradi- 
tion was  still  fresh  in  the  memories  of  men,  and  the 
need  of  written  Gospels  was  not  yet  made  evident  by 
the  corruption  of  the  oral  narrative.  As  a  conse- 
quence of  this,  the  testimony  of  the  Apostolic  fathers 
is  chiefly  important  as  proving  the  general  currency 
of  such  outlines  of  history  and  types  of  doctrine  as 
are  preserved  in  our  Canon.  They  show  in  this 
way  that  the  Canonical  books  offer  an  adequate 
explanation  of  the  belief  of  the  next  age,  and  must 
therefore  represent  completely  the  earlier  teaching 
on  which  that  was  based.  In  three  places,  how- 
ever, in  which  it  was  natural  to  look  for  a  more 
distinct  reference,  Clement  (Ep.  47),  Ignatius  (ud 
Eph.  12),  and  Polycarp  {Ep,  3)  refer  to  Apostolic 
Epistles  written  to  those  whom  they  were  them- 
selves addressing.  The  casual  coincidences  of  the 
writings  of  the  Apostolic  fathers  with  the  language 
of  the  Epistles  are  much  more  extensive.  With 
the  exception  of  the  Epistles  of  dude,  2  Peter,  and 
'_',  :i  John'  with  which  no  coincidences  occur,  ami 
1.  2  Thessalonians,  Colossians,  Titus,  and  Philemon, 
with  which  the  coincidences  arc  very  questionable, 
all  the  other  Epistles  were  clearly  known,  and  used 
by  them  ;  but  still  they  are  not  quoted  with  the 
formulas  which  preface  citations  from  the  O.  T. 


2(32 


CANON 


(ri  ypacprj  Aeyei,  ytypairrat,  &c.),s  nor  is  the 
famous  phrase  of  Ignatius  (ad  Phil  id.  5,  Trpoatyvywv 
tQ  tvayyeA.i(j>ws  crapKl'lriaov  Kal  rois  airoffT6\oLS 
a>s  ■KptcrfSvTtpiu)  e/cKArj(n'as)  sufficient  to  prove  the 
existence  of  a  collection  of  Apostolic  records  as  dis- 
tinct from  the  sum  of  Apostolic  teaching.  The 
coincidences  with  the  Gospels  on  the  other  hand 
both  in  fact  and  substance  are  numerous  and  inter- 
esting, but  such  as  cannot  be  referred  to  the  exclu- 
sive use  of  our  present  written  Gospels.  Such  a 
use  would  have  been  alien  from  the  character  of  the 
age  and  inconsistent  with  the  influence  of  a  his- 
torical tradition.  The  details  of  the  life  of  Christ 
were  still  too  fresh  to  be  sought  for  only  in  fixed 
records ;  and  even  where  memory  was  less  active, 
long  habit  interposed  a  barrier  to  the  recognition  of 
new  Scriptures.  The  sense  of  the  infinite  depth 
and  paramount  authority  of  the  0.  T.  was  too 
powerful  even  among  Gentile  converts  to  require  or 
to  admit  of  the  immediate  addition  of  supple- 
mentary books.  But  the  sense  of  the  peculiar 
position  which  the  Apostles  occupied,  as  the  original 
inspired  teachers  of  the  Christian  church,  was 
already  making  itself  felt  in  the  sub-apostolic  age  ; 
and  by  a  remarkable  ngreement  Clement  (ad  Cor. 
i.  7,  47),  Polycarp  (ad  Phil,  iii.),  Ignatius  (ad 
Bom.  iv.),  and  Barnabas  (c.  i.)  draw  a  clear  line 
between  themselves  and  their  predecessors,  from 
whom  they  were  not  separated  by  any  lengthened 
intervals  of  time.  As  the  need  for  a  definite 
standard  of  Christian  truth  became  more  pressing, 
so  was  the  character  of  those  in  whose  writings  it 
was  to  be  sought  more  distinctly  apprehended. 

The  next  period  (120-170  A.D.),  which  may  be 
fitly  termed  the  age  of  the  Apologists,  carries  the 
history  of  the  formation  of  the  Canon  one  step 
further.  The  facts  of  the  life  of  Christ  acquired  a 
fresh  importance  in  controversy  with  Jew  and 
Gentile.  The  oral  tradition,  which  still  remained 
in  the  former  age,  was  dying  away,  and  a  variety 
of  written  documents  claimed  to  occupy  its  place. 
Then  it  was  that  the  Canonical  Gospels  were 
definitely  separated  from  the  mass  of  similar  narra- 
tives in  virtue  of  their  outward  claims,  which  had 
remained ,  as  it  were,  in  abeyance  during  the  period 
of  tradition.  The  need  did  not  create  but  recog- 
nised them.  Without  doubt  and  without  con- 
troversy, they  occupied  at,  once  the  position  which 
they  have  always  retained  as  the  fourfold  Apostolic 
record  of  the  Saviour's  ministry.  Other  narra- 
tives remained  current  for  some  time,  which  were 
either  interpolated  foims  of  the  Canonical  books 
(The  Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews,  &c),  or 
independent  traditions  (The  Gospel  according  to  the 
Egyptians,  &c),  and  exercised  more  or  less  in- 
fluence upon  the  form  of  popular  quotations,  and 
perhaps  in  some  cases  upon  the  text  of  the  Canonical 
Gospels;  but  where  the  question  of  authority  was 
raised,  the  four  Gospels  were  ratified  by  universal 
consent.  The  testimony  of  Justin  Martyr 
{f  c.  246  A.  D.)  is  in  this  respect  most  important. 
An  impartial  examination  of  his  Evangelic  references, 
if  conducted  with  due  reference  to  his  general 
manner  of  quotation,  to  possible  variations  of  read- 
ing, and  to  the  nature  of  his  subject,  which  excluded 


3  The  exceptions  to  this  statement  which  occur  in 
the  Lathi  versions  of  Polycarp  (ad  Phil.  c.  xii.  "  ut 
his  Scripturis  dictum  est,"  Ps.  iv.  4  ;  Eph.  iv.  26), 
and  Barnabas  (c.  iv.  "  sicut  scriptum  est,"  Matt.  xx. 
16),  cannot  be  urged  against  the  uniform  practice 
which  is  observed  in  the  original  texts.  Some  of  the 
most  remarkable  Evangelic  citations  are  prefaced  by 


CANON 

express  citations  from  Christian  books,  shows  that 
they  were  derived  certainly  in  the  main,  probably 
exclusively,  from  our  Synoptic  Gospels,  and  that 
each  Gospel  is  distinctly  recognised  by  him  (Dud.  c. 
Tryph.  §103,  p.  331,  D.  eV  yap  rois  airOjUCTjyUO- 
vevfjuiffiv  &  (prifil  virb  t  w  v  &  ir  0  0t  6  A  w  v  (Mat- 
thew, John)  avrov  ku\  r  w  v  i  k  e  iv  0  1  s  it  ap  a- 
KOXovQtiffavraiv  (Mark,  Luke)  o-vvTeraxOat 
....  Comp.  Dial.  c.  49  with  Matt.  xvii.  13 ; 
Dial.  c.  106  with  Mark  iii.  16,  17  ;  Dial.  c.  105 
with  Luke  xxiii.  46).  The  references  of  Justin  to 
St.  John  are  less  decided  (comp.  Apol.  i.  6 1 ;  Dial.  63, 
123,  56,  &c. ;  Otto,  in  Illgen's  Zeitschrift,  u.  s.w. 
1841,  pp.  77  ff.  1843,  pp.  34  ff.) ;  and  of  the 
other  books  of  the  N.  T.  he  mentions  the  Apoca- 
lypse only  by  name  (Dial.  c.  81),  and  offers  some 
coincidences  of  language  with  the  Pauline  Epistles. 

The  evidence  of  Papias  (c.  140-150  A.D.)  is 
nearly  contemporary  with  that  of  Justin,  but  goes 
back  to  a  still  earlier  generation  (6  irptafiuTepds 
^Aeye).  In  spite  of  the  various  questions  which  have 
been  raised  as  to  the  interpretation  of  the  fragments 
of  his  '  Enarrations '  preserved  by  Eusebius  (H.  E. 
iii.  39)  it  seems  on  every  account  most  reasonable 
to  conclude  that  Papias  was  acquainted  with  our 
present  Gospels  of  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark,  the 
former  of  which  he  connected  with  an  earlier 
Hebrew  original  (7]p/j.rivevffe) ;  and  probably  also 
with  the  Gospel  of  St.  John  (Frag.  xi.  Kouth  ;  comp. 
Iren.  v.  s.  f.),  the  former  Epistles  of  St.  John  and 
St.  Peter  (Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  24),  and  the  Apocalypse 
(Frag,  viii.).' 

Meanwhile  the  Apostolic  writings  were  taken  by 
various  mystical  teachers  as  the  foundation  of 
strange  schemes  of  speculation,  which  are  popularly 
confounded  together  under  the  general  title  of 
Gnosticism,  whether  Gentile  or  Jewish  in  their 
origin.  In  the  earliest  fragments  of  Gnostic  writers 
which  remain  there  are  traces  of  the  use  of  the 
Gospels  of  St.  Matthew  and  St.  John,  and  of  1 
Corinthians  (' A7r 6 <p ams  fityaX-n  [Simon  M.]  ap. 
Hippol.  adv.  Haer.  vi.  16 ;  9  ;  13)  ;  and  the  Apoca- 
lypse was  attributed  by  a  confusion  not  difficult  of 
explanation  to  Cerinthus  (Epiph.  Haer.  li.  3). 
In  other  Gnostic  •  (Ophite)  writings  a  little  later 
there  are  references  to  St.  Matthew,  St.  Luke, 
St.  John,  Romans,  1,  2  Corinthians,  Galatians, 
Ephesians,  Hebrews  (Hist,  of  N.  T.  Canon,  pp. 
313  ff.)  ;  and  the  Clementine  Homilies  contain 
clear  coincidences  with  all  the  Gospels  (Horn.  xix. 
20  St.  Mark ;  Horn.  xix.  22  St.  John).  It  is, 
indeed,  in  the  fragments  of  a  Gnostic  writer,  Basi- 
lides  (c.  125  a.Vk),  that  the  writings  of  the  N.  T. 
are  found  quoted  for  the  first  time  in  the  same 
manner  as  those  of  the  O.  T.  (Basil,  ap.  Hipp. 
adv.  Haer.  pp.  238  ytypairrat ;  240  ri  ypcxpri,  &c). 
A  Gnostic,  Heracleon,  was  the  first  known  com- 
mentator on  the  Christian  Scriptures.  And  the 
history  of  another  Gnostic,  Marcion,  furnishes  the 
first  distinct  evidence  of  a  Canon  of  the  N.  T. 

The  need  of  a  definite  Canon  must  have  made 
itself  felt  during  the  course  of  the  Gnostic  con- 
troversy. The  common  records  of  the  life  of  Christ 
may  be  supposed  to  have  been  first  fixed  in  the  dis- 
cussions with  external  adversaries.     The  standard 


QKvptosJ  eln-ei>  not  Ae'yei,  which  seems  to  show  that 
they  were  derived  from  tradition  and  not  from  a 
written  .narrative  (Clem.  Up.  13,  46). 

1  A  fragment  of  Papias'  Commentary  on  the  Apo- 
calypse is  preserved  in  the  Commentary  published  by 
Cramer,  Cat.  in  Apoc,  p.  360,  which  is  not  noticed 
by  llouth. 


CANON 

of  Apostolic  teaching  was  determined  when  the 
Church  itself  was  rent  with  internal  divisions.  The 
Canon  of  Marcion  (c.  140  A.D.)  contained  both 
elements,  a  Gospel  ("The  Gospel  of  Christ") 
which  was  a  mutilated  recension  of  St.  Luke,  and 
an  "  Apostle"  or  Apostolicon,  which  contained  ten 
Epistles  of  St.  Paul — the  only  time  Apostle  in 
Mansion's  judgment  —  excluding  the  pastoral 
Epistles,  and  that  to  the  Hebrews  (Tert.  adv.  Marc. 
v.  ;  Epiph.  ado.  Haer.  xlii.).  The  narrow  limits  of 
this  Canon  were  a  necessary  consequence  of  Marcion's 
belief  and  position,  but  it  offers  a  clear  witness  to 
the  fact  that  Apostolic  writings  were  thus  early 
regarded  as  a  complete  original  rule  of  doctrine. 
Nor  is  there  any  evidence  to  show  that  he  regarded 
the  books  which  he  rejected  as  unauthentic.  The  con- 
duct of  other  heretical  teachers  who  professed  to 
admit  the  authority  of  all  the  Apostles  proves  the 
converse;  for  they  generally  defended  their  tenets 
by  forced  interpretations,  and  not  by  denying  the 
authority  of  the  common  records.  And  while  the 
first  traces  of  the  recognition  of  the  divine  inspira- 
tion and  collective  unity  of  the  Canon  comes  from 
them,  it  cannot  be  supposed,  without  inverting  the 
whole  history  of  Christianity,  that  they  gave  a 
model  to  the  Catholic  Church,  and  did  not  them- 
selves simply  perpetuate  the  belief  and  custom 
which  had  grown  up  within  it. 

The  close  of  this  period  of  the  history  of  the 
N.  T.  Canon  is  marked  by  the  existence  of  two 
important  testimonies  to  the  N.  T.  as  a  whole. 
Hitherto  the  evidence  has  been  in  the  main  frag- 
mentary and  occasional ;  but  the  Muratorian 
Canon  in  the  West,  and  the  Peshito  in  the  East, 
deal  with  the  collection  of  Christian  Scriptures  as 
.such.  The  first  is  a  fragment,  apparently  trans- 
lated from  the  Greek,  and  yet  of  Koman  origin, 
mutilated  both  at  the  beginning  and  the  end,  and 
written,  from  internal  evidence,  about  170  A.D.  It 
commences  with  a  clear  reference  to  St.  Mark's 
Gospel,  and  then  passes  on  to  St.  Luke  as  the  third, 
St.  John,  the  Acts,  thirteen  Epistles  of  St.  Paul. 
The  first  Epistle  of  St.  John  is  quoted  in  the  text ; 
and  then  afterwards  it  is  said  that  "  the  Epistle  of 
Jude  and  two  Epistles  of  the  John  mentioned  above 
(superscripti :  or  "  which  bear  the  name  of  John" 
superscriptae)  are  reckoned  among  the  Catholic 
[Epistles]  (M.S.  Catholica,i.e.  Ecclesia?)."  "We 
receive  moreover  the  Apocalypses  of  John  and 
Peter  only,  which  [latter]  some  of  our  body  will 
not  have  read  in  the  Church."  u  Thus  the  cata- 
logue omits  of  the  books  received  at  present  the 
Epistle  of  James,  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  and 
2  Peter,  while  it  notices  the  partial  reception  of 
the  Revelation  of  Peter.  The  Canon  of  the  Peshito 
forms  a  remarkable  complement  to  this  catalogue. 
It  includes  the  four  Gospels  and  the  Acts,  fourteen 
Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  1  John,  1  Peter,  and  James, 
omitting  Jxide,  2  Peter,  2,  3  John,  and  the  Apoca- 
lypse ;  and  this  Canon  was  preserved  in  the  Syrian 
Churches  as  long  as  they  had  an  independent 
literature  (Ebed  Jesu  f  1318  A-D-  aP-  Assem. 
Dibl.  Or.  iii.  pp.  3  If.).  Up  to  this  point,  there- 
fore, 2  Peter  is  the  only  book  of  the  N.  T.  which 
is  not  recognised  as  an  Apostolic  and  authoritative 
writing;    and   in    this    result   the   evidence    from 


CANON 


26* 


u  We  have  given  what  appears  to  be  the  meaning 
of  the  corrupt  text  of  the  passage.  It  would  be  out 
of  place  to  discuss  all  the  disputed  points  here  ;  comp. 
Ili.sl.  of  X.  T.  Canon,  pp.  242  tf.,  and  the  references 
there  given. 


casual  quotations  coincides  exactly  with  the  enu- 
meration in  the  two  express  catalogues. 

2.  The  history  of  the  Canon  of  the  N.  T.  from 
170  A.D.  to  303  A.D. — The  second  period  of  the 
history  of  the  Canon  is  marked  by  an  entire  change 
in  the  literary  character  of  the  Church.  From  the 
close  of  the  second  century  Christian  writers  take 
the  foremost  place  intellectually  as  well  as  morally  ; 
and  the  powerful  influence  of  the  Alexandrine 
Church  widened  the  range  of  Catholic  thought,  and 
checked  the  spread  of  speculative  heresies.  From 
the  first  the  common  elements  of  the  Koman  and 
Syrian  Canons,  noticed  in  the  last  section,  form  a 
Canon  of  acknowledged  books,  regarded  as  a  whole, 
authoritative  and  inspired,  and  coordinate  with 
the  0.  T.  Each  of  these  points  is  proved  by  the 
testimony  of  contemporary  fathers  who  represent 
the  Churches  of  Asia  Minor,  Alexandria  and  North 
Atrica.  Irenaeds,  who  was  connected  by  direct 
succession  with  St.  John  (Euseb.  H.  E.  v.  20), 
speaks  of  the  Scriptures  as  a  whole,  without  dis- 
tinction of  the  Old  or  New  Testaments,  as  "  perfect, 
inasmuch  as  they  were  uttered  by  the  Word  of 
God  and  His  Spirit "  (Adv.  Haer.  ii.  28,  2).  "  There 
could  not  be,"  he  elsewhere  argues,  "  more  than 
four  Gospels  or  fewer"  (Adv.  Haer.  iii.  11,  8  sq.). 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  again,  marks  "  the 
Apostle"  (6  o.it6(tto\os,  Strom,  vii.  3,  §14; 
sometimes  ctaroVToAoi)  as  a  collection  definite  as  "  the 
Gospel,"  and  combines  them  "as  Scriptures  of  the 
Lord"  with  the  Law  and  the  Prophets  (Strom,  vi.  11, 
§88)  as  "  ratified  by  the  authority  of  one  Almighty 
power"  (Strom,  iv.  1,  §2).  Tertullian  notices 
particularly  the  introduction  of  the  word  Testament 
for  the  earlier  word  Instrument,  as  applied  to  the 
dispensation  and  the  record  (adv.  Marc.  iv.  1),  and 
appeals  to  the  New  Testament,  as  made  up  of  the 
"  Gospels  "  and  "  Apostles"  (ado.  Prax.  15).  This 
comprehensive  testimony  extends  to  the  four  Gospels, 
the  Acts,  1  Peter,  1  John,  thirteen  Epistles  of  St. 
Paul,  and  the  Apocalypse;  and,  with  the  exception 
of  the  Apocalypse,  no  one  of  these  books  was  ever 
afterwards  rejected  or  questioned  till  modem  times.  " 

But  this  important  agreement  as  to  the  principal 
contents  of  the  Canon  left  several  points  still  un- 
decided. The  East  and  West,  as  was  seen  iu  the 
last  section,  severally  received  some  books  which 
were  not  universally  .accepted.  So  far  the  error 
lay  in  defect ;  but  in  other  cases  apocryphal  or 
unapostolic  books  obtained  a  partial  sanction  or  a 
popular  use,  before  they  finally  passed  into  oblivion. 
Both  these  phenomena,  however,  were  limited  in 
time  and  range,  and  admit  of  explanation  from  the 
internal  character  of  the  books  in  question.  The 
examination  of  the  claims  of  the  separate  writings 
belongs  to  special  introductions  ;  but  the  subjoined 
table  (No.  III.)  will  give  a  general  idea  of  the  extent 
and  nature  of  the  historic  evidence  which  bears  upon 
them. 

This  table  might  be  much  extended  by  the  inser- 
tion of  isolated  testimonies  of  less  considerable 
writers.  Generally,  however,  it  may  !«■  said  that. 
of  the  "  disputed"  books  of  the  N.  T.,  the  Apoca- 
lypse was  universally  received,  with  the  single  ex- 
ception of  Konysius  of  Alexandria,  by  all  the 
writers  of  the  period;  and  the  Epistle  to  the  He- 
brews, by  the  Churches  of  Alexandria,  Asia  (?)  and 
Syria,  hut  not  by  those  of  Africa  and  Pome.     The 


1  The  Manichees  offer  no  real  exception  to  the 
truth  of  this  remark.  Comp.  Beausobre,  Hist,  de 
Munich.,  i.  ff.  297  f. 


204 


CANON 


CANON 


o 

.V 

• 

P  S3 

•°  .  • 

"3   p 
1-° 

3     .     . 

CzJ  >■**   CO 

' 

:pi                 i-T           co 

j<; 

2-7 

3  a 

=3           is  «a  £  V 

.CO                   o    O 

fq 

•■H   CM 

•^9 

Pica 

a     .              £  ,-,  v:  •>, 
^  to            35  ^o  *S 

* 

^3 

.— 

, 

,     «                              e* 

rH          -* 

i« 

O        . 

:S  e  .j 

<r< 

"2  « 

CO    g 

P.   tu 

£  N  &  "  .J             .3    .  £ 

»"    ./•  Sco           a,  v.  « 

■^  is  S  K!  §  £>      c^sr 

|^5 

N 

57  hH 

q<Ss§ 

hi 

*                *                ■*- 

* 

-i— 

»     .n'2 

iS   • 

62 

'3.  3 
w  pa 

* 

CO 

* 

-J— 

1 

"3 

00 

. « s    2"    ■ 

«       2    .•-'..    •      ba- 
re   •  3r:    .  "    a    •  "^  -* 

a  m          .   Ss  °   •    °   » 

•ra       •«;       °"  :S 

CD 
CO 

*-     ~     - 

0    2^ 

CO 

o 

R 

IS    .  »j  s;  «  ~  C  —  -%: .  j 

■^   (►  W4!  ft,  «^^J  c/jra-cq  a 

qqcT 

o  P.JJ, 

* 

*               *               * 

*              o 

R 

*  * 

- 

, , 

■* 

a                   ko 

•=  iS      :S      N 
>S  ^  *j  :a 

CM 

Q 

*^> 

*■* 

.R  -5         |^B    t> 

:3 

0> 
Pi 
CM 

■$ 

t' 

:          N        : 

J ! Z  *.  ~- H  • 

*  :0  .&"  £§  siSJ 

: 

1    : 

hi 

o 

*                  <! 

"-' 

^ 

1 — ' 

i — i                       e-. 

<v. 

aj 

c 

c-    CO                   ^    CD 

•5^ 

;a 

o 

cd     .         ?  zcn 

St       ■ 

: 

*        * 

^  . 

CO 
of 

*              o 

£:p 

.. 

_^ 

CcT   co            CJ 

.  K      i 

CN 

CO 

o 

...             K      .  "V 
a  cd                .JH"* 

.s  'p  .a       a  co 
a  a  "S  •>  5  -a 
5§S*    ««S  * 

: 

hj 

-                 CO  c-0 

lO 

1— 1     _ 

K  H 

C^l 

S3       -S  V   3 

•S      •  "O 

,„■ 

o 

"rt        2  "  S 

.  H  "  co" 

:« 

5 

1-5 

:          !^^^« 
*           R 

* 

hj 

■a  2- 

CO    £    •£ 

CO   H-t     ?o 

'  "o 

6^                               CC                 _    r-l    "    ^i. 
^3    .J   g*     § 

^  o             8    .  K  K)  1  S 

-T-r  cn             o  «             sa,  cs 

.  ■* 

co     k       .            CO     > 

pq  Sq  J>j       w  bq 

to     .    §.  P 

4-cda 

-*     < 

■oS.            i~;=t"bnt^P, 

D    S    k                S^UAO^  (^  C. 

s        * 

*            * 

S 

.    PS 

R 

H 

"            ►< 

c 

S'" 

1           < 

to" 

PS 

o!  ■< 

<3                  3 

p;  s 

w 

£g 

p                        £                        3 

p 

a 

5  s 

p 

fc 

■<  _ 

£                  Is                  j 

fc                S3 

-5 

rf  o 

5  fc 

3                        B                        & 

W                        (" 

9    H 

o 

5  * 

Pm  >-5 

S            H            E 

3           '      pa                  PS 

S                J                 w 
5                  O                  H 

o                 » 

S              2 

O               Q 

PS 

6 

P<     ™ 

as 

H 

CANON 

Epistles  of  St.  James  and  St.  Judo,  on  the  other 
hand,  were  little  used,  and  the  Second  Ep.  of  St. 
Peter  was  barely  known. 

But  while  the  evidence  for  the  formation  of  the 
Canon  is  much  more  copious  during  this  period 
than  during  that  which  preceded,  it  is  essentially  of 
the  same  kind.  It  is  the  evidence  of  use  and  not  of 
inquiry.  The  Canon  was  fixed  in  ordinary  prac- 
tice, and  doubts  were  resolved  by  custom  and  not 
by  criticism.  Old  feelings  and  beliefs  were  perpe- 
tuated by  a  living  tradition  ;  and  if  this  habit  of 
mind  was  unfavourable  to  the  permanent  solution 
of  difficulties,  it  gives  tresh  force  to  the  claims  of 
the  acknowledged  books,  which  are  attested  by  the 
witness  of  every  division  of  the  Church  (OriGEN, 
Cyprian,  Methodius\  for  it  is  difficult  to  con- 
ceive how  such  unanimity  could  have  arisen  except 
from  the  original  weight  of  apostolical  authority. 
For  it  will  be  observed  that  the  evidence  in  favour 
of  the  acknowledged  books  as  a  whole  is  at  once 
clear  and  concordant  from  all  sides  as  soon  as  the 
Christian  literature  is  independent  and  considerable. 
The  Canon  preceded  the  literature  and  was  not  de- 
termined by  it. 

3.  The  history  of  the  N.  T.  Canon  from  A.d. 
303-397. — The  persecution  of  Diocletian  was  di- 
rected in  a  great  measure  against  the  Christian 
writings  (Lact.  Instit.  v.  2 ;  de  mort.persec.  16). 
The  influence  of  the  Scriptures  was  already  so 
great  and  so  notorious,  that  the  surest  method  of 
destroying  the  faith  seemed  to  be  the  destruction  of 
the  records  on  which  it  was  supported.  The  plan 
of  the  emperor  was  in  part  successful.  Some 
were  found  who  obtained  protection  by  the  sur- 
render of  the  Sacred  books,  and  at  a  later  time  the 
question  of  the  readmission  of  these  "  traitors  "  (tra- 
ditorcs),  as  they  were  emphatically  allied,  created 
a  schism  in  the  Church.  The  Donatists,  who  main- 
tained the  sterner  judgment  on  their  crime,  may  be 
regarded  as  maintaining  in  its  strictest  integrity  the 
popular  judgment  in  Africa  on  the  contents  of  the 
Canon  of  Scripture  which  was  the  occasion  of  the 
dissension  ;  and  Augustine  allows  that  they  held  in 
common  with  the  Catholics  the  same  "  Canonical 
Scriptures,"  and  were  alike  "  bound  by  the  autho- 
rity of  both  Testaments"  (August,  c.  Cresc.  i.  31, 
57  ;  Ep.  129,  3).  The  only  doubt  which  can  be 
raised  as  to  the  integrity  of  the  Donatist  Canon 
arises  from  the  uncertain  language  which  Augus- 
tine himself  uses  as  to  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 
which  the  Donatists  may  also  have  countenanced. 
But,  however  this  may  have  been,  the  complete 
Canon  of  the  N.  T.,  as  commonly  received  at  pre- 
sent, was  ratified  at  the  third  Council  of  Car- 
thage (a.d.  397),y  and  from  that  time  was  ac- 
cepted throughout  the  Latin  Church  (Jerome, 
Innocent,  RrjTFiNUS,  PHILASTRIUS),  though  oc- 
casional doubts  as  to  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 
still  remained2  (Isid.  Hisp.  Proem.  §§85-109). 

Meanwhile  the  Syrian  Churches,  faithful  to  the 
conservative  spirit  of  the  East,  still  retained  the 
Canon  of  the  Peshito.     Chrysostom  {$Wl  a.d.), 


CANON 


265 


y  The  enumeration  of  the  Pauline  Epistles  marks  the 
doubt  which  had  existed  as  to  the  Hebrews  :  Epifltolae 
Pauli  Apostoli  xiii ;  ejusdem  ad  Hebraeos  una.  In  the 
Council  of  Hippo  {Can.  30)  the  phrase  is  simply  "  xiv 
Epistles  of  St.  Paul."  Generally  it  may  be  observed 
that  the  doubt  was  in  many,  if  not  in  most,  cases  as 
to  the  authorship,  and  not  as  to  the  canonicity  of  the 
letter.     Conip.  Hieron.  Ep.  ad  hard.,  129,  §3. 

1  The  MSS.  of  the  Vulgate  from  the  sixth  century 
downwards  very  frequently  contain  the  apocryphal 


Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  (f429  a.  d.),  and 
Theodoret,  who  represent  the  Church  of  Antioch, 
furnish  no  evidence  in  support  of  the  Epistles  of 
Jude,  2  Peter,  2,  3  John,  or  the  Apocalypse. 
Junilius,  in  his  account  of  the  public  teaching 
at  Nisibis,  places  the  Epistles  of  James,  Jude, 
2,  3  John,  2  Peier  in  a  second  class,  and  mentions 
the  doubts  which  existed  in  the  East  as  to  the  Apo- 
calypse. And  though  Ephrem  Syrus  was  ac- 
quainted with  the  Apocalypse  {Opp.  Syr.  ii.  p. 
332  C.),  yet  his  genuine  Syrian  works  exhibit  no 
habitual  use  of  the  books  which  were  not  contained 
in  the  Syrian  Canon,  a  fact  which  must  throw 
some  discredit  upon  the  frequent  quotations  from 
them,  which  occur  in  those  writings  which  are  only 
preserved  in  a  Greek  translation. 

The  Churches  of  Asia  Minor  seem  to  have  occu- 
pied a  mean  position  as  to  the  Canon  between  the 
East  and  West.  With  the  exception  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse, they  received  generally  all  the  books  of  the 
N.  T.  as  contained  in  the  African  Canon,  but  this 
is  definitely  excluded  from  the  Catalogue  of  Gre- 
gory of  Nazianzus  (fc  389  a.d.),  and  pro- 
nounced "  spurious  "  (y69ov)  on  the  authority  of 
"  the  majority  "  (oi  irXelovs),  in  that  of  Amphilo- 
chius  (c.  380  a.d.),  while  it  is  passed  over  in 
silence  in  the  Laodicene  Catalogue,  which  even  if  it 
has  no  right  to  its  canonical  position,  yet  belongs  to 
the  period  and  country  with  which  it  is  commonly 
connected.  The  same  Canon,  with  the  same  omis- 
sion of  the  Apocalypse  is  given  by  Cyril  of  Jeru- 
salem (|386  a.d.)  ;  though  Epiphanius,  who 
was  his  fellow-countryman  and  contemporary,  con- 
firms the  Western  Canon,  while  he  notices  the 
doubts  which  were  entertained  as  to  the  Apoca-^ 
lypse.  These  doubts  prevailed  in  the  Church  of 
Constantinople,  and  the  Apocalypse  does  not  seem 
to  have  been  recognised  there  down  to  a  late  period, 
though  in  other  respects  the  Constantinopolitan 
Canon  was  complete  and  pure  (NiCEPHORUS,  Pho- 
tius,   Oecumenius,   Theophylact,  f  c.    1077 

A.D.). 

The  well-known  Festal  Letter  of  Athanasius 
(j373  A.D.)  bears  witness  to  the  Alexandrine 
Canon.  This  contains  a  clear  and  positive  list  of 
the  books  of  the  N.  T.  as  they  are  received  at  pre- 
sent; and  the  judgment  of  Athanasius  is  confirmed 
by  the  practice  of  his  successor  Cyril. 

One  important  Catalogue  yet  remains  to  be  men- 
tioned. After  noticing  in  separate  places  the  origin 
and  use  of  the  Gospels  and  Epistles,  Eusebius 
sums  up  in  a  famous  passage  the  results  ot  his  in- 
quiry into  the  evidence  on  the  Apostolic  books 
furnished  by  the  writings  of  the  three  first  cen- 
turies (//.  E.  iii.  25).  "His  testimony  is  by  no 
means  free  from  difficulties,  nor  in  all  points  ob- 
viously consistent,  but  his  last  statement  must  be 
used  to  fix  the  interpretation  of  the  former  and 
more  cursory  notices.  In  the  first  class  of  acknoio- 
ledged  books  (d/xoKoyov/xeva)  he  places  the  four 
Gospels,  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  (i.e.  fourteen, 
H.  E.  iii.  3),  1  John,   1  Peter,  and  (elf  ye  <pavein) 


Epistle  to  the  Laodiceans  among  the  Pauline  Epistles, 
generally  after  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians,  but  also 
in  other  places,  without  any  mark  of  suspicion.  The 
text  in  Cod.  Hurl.  (Brit.  Mas.)  2883  (sec.  xi.),  in 
which  it  occurs  alter  the  Apocalypse,  differs  in  several 
respects  from  any  of  Anger's  MSS.  Comp.  Anger,  Der 
Laodicenerbrief,  Leips.  1843,  pp.  H2  ff.  The  Greek 
title  in  G  (not  F),  wpo?  AaovSaKr)<xa.<;  apxerai,  is  appa- 
rently only  a  rendering  of  the  Latin  title  from  the 
form  of  the  name  (</.  Laudicenses). 


266 


CANON 


CANON 


No.  IV.— THE  CHIEF  CATALOGUES  OF  THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

Only  "  disputed  "  books  are  noticed,  or  such  as  were  in  some  degree  recognized  as  authoritative. 
The  symbols  are  used  as  before. 


I.  Conciliar  Catalogues: 

[Laodicea] 

Carthage       

Apostolic  (Concil.  Quinisext.) 

II.  Oriental  Catalogues  : 

(a)  Syria. 

The  Peshito  Version 

Junilius        

Joann.  Damasc 

Ebed  Jesu 

(b)  Palestine. 

Eusebius       

Cyril  of  Jerus 

Epiphauius  . :      

(c)  Alexandria. 

Origen 

Athanasius 

(d)  Asia  Minor. 

Gregor.  Naz 

Amphibolous       

(e)  Constantinople. 
Chrysostom  

Leontius       

Nicephorus 

11.  Occidental  Catalogues: 

(a)  Africa. 

Cod.  Clarom 

Augustine 

(6)  Italy. 

Can.  Murat 

Phil^strius 

Jerome  . .       ...    . . 

Rufinus         

Innocent       

[Gelasius] 

Cassiodorus  (  Yet.  Trans.}  . . 

(c)  Spain. 

Isidore  of  Sev 

Cod.  Banc.  206 


() 


() 


L.  c.  supr.1 
L.  c.  supr. 
L.  c.  supr.* 


L.  c.  supr. 
L.  c.  supr.3 
L.  c.  supr. 

II.  E.  iii.  25." 

L.  c.  supr? 

Adv.  haer.  lxxxi.  5. 

Ap.  Euseb.  //.  E.  vi.  25. 
L.  c.  supr? 

L.  c.  supr. 
L.  c.  supr.7 

Synopsis  S.  Script,  torn. 

vi.  p.  318  A.8 
L.  c.  supr. 
L.  c.  supr? 


Tischdf.  Cod.  Clarom. 

pp.  468,  sq. 
L.  c.  supr. 

Hist.  N.  T.  Canon,  pp. 

558  ff. 
Haer.  88  (All.  60).10 
Ad  Paul.  Ep.  53,  §8  (i. 

p.  548,  Ed.Migne). 
L.  c.  supr. 
L.  c.  supr. 
L.  c.  supr. 
Do  inst.  div.  Litt.  14." 

De  Ord.  Libr.  S.  Script. 

init.12 
Hody,  p.  649. 


'  The  omission  of  the  Apocalypse  is  frequently  ex- 
plained by  the  expressed  object  of  the  Catalogue,  as  a  list 
of  books  for  public  ecclesiastical  use :  ocra  Sel  /3i(3Ai'a 
avayiVio(TKea-6ai,  compared  with  the  former  canon :  on 
oil  Set  ISiioTiKovs  \fia\ixoii';  AeyecrOcu  iv  rjj  eK/cAijcria,  k.t.A. 
Yet  compare  the  Catalogue  of  Cyril. 

3  The  Catalogue  adds  likewise  the  Apostolical  Consti- 
tutions (SiaTa-yai.  .  .  .  iv  oktio  /3t|3Aiois)  for  esoteric  use. 
When  the  Catalogue  was  confirmed  in  the  Quinisextine 
Council  (Can.  2),  the  Constitutions  were  excluded  on  the 
ground  of  corruptions;  but  no  notice  was  taken  of  the 
Epistles  of  Clement,  both  of  which,  as  is  well  known,  are 
found  at  the  end  of  the  Cud.  Alex.,  and  are  mentioned  in 
the  index  before  the  general  summary  of  books;  which 
again  is  followed  by  the  titles  of  the  Apocryphal  Psalms 
of  Solomon. 


3  He  adds  also  "  the  Apostolic  Canons,"  and  according 
to  one  MS.  the  two  Epistles  of  Clement. 

4  The  other  chief  passages  in  Eusebius  are,  //.  E.  iii.  3, 
24;  ii.  23.  His  object  in  the  passage  quoted  is  avane^a.- 
\aiuo-ao-6at.  Tas  £r)Au0elVas  rrjS  Kairrjs  6ia0r;/o)S  ypa^as. 

5  The  list  concludes  with  the  words,  ra  Se  Aoirra  Trapi-a 
ef<o  Kelo-9oi  iv  Bevrepif  kou  6<ra  pev  iv  eKKAjjcri'a  ^77 
avayu-uio-KeTai,  ravra' pnqSe  Kara  cravTov  ai/ayii/coovce 
KaOws  rj/coveras  .... 

e  At  the  end  of  the  list  Athanasius  says  (comp.  above), 
jUTjSeW  toutois  cTrijSaAAt:'™,  p.7)Se  tovtw  <ic£aipe(.<r0io  Ti. 
7  Amphiloch.  I.  c. : — 

tirs  6e  <j>a.o-l  -rqv  TTpbs  'E/3paious   v69ov, 
ovk  ev  Aeyoi'Tes-  yvritria  yap  t;  *apis. 
eley'  Tt  Aoi7rop  ;  Ka9o\LKiof  eTtiaroKtav 
TLvi'S  i*.iv  €nra  (jiuo-lv,  oi  6e  Tptis  p.6Voi' 


CANON 

in  case  its  authenticity  is  admitted  (such  seems  to 
be  his  meaning),  the  Apocalypse.  The  second  class 
of  disputed  books  ( avri\iy6p.€va)  he  subdivides 
into  two  parts,  the  first  consisting  of  such  as  were 
generally  known  and  recognised  (yvcbpifxa  to?s 
vo\\o?s),  including  the  Epistles  of' James,  Jude, 
2  Peter,  2,  3  John  ;  and  the  second  of  those  which 
he  pronounces  spurious  (v6da),  that  is  which  were 
either  unauthentic  or  unapostolic,  as  the  Acts  of 
Paul,  the  Shepherd,  the  Apocalypse  of  Peter,  the 
Apocalypse  of  John  (if  not  a  work  of  the  Apostle), 
and  according  to  some  the  Gospel  according  to  the 
Hebrews.  These  two  great  classes  contain  all  the 
books  which  had  received  ecclesiastical  sanction,  and 
were  in  common  distinguished  from  a  third  class 
of  heretical  forgeries  {e.g.  the  Gospels  of  Thomas, 
Peter,  Mathias,  &c). 

One  point  in  the  testimony  of  Eusebius  is  parti- 
cularly deserving  of  notice.  The  evidence  iu  favour 
of  the  apostolic  authority  of  2  Peter  which  can  be 
derived  from  the  existing  writings  of  the  first  three 
centuries  is  extremely  slender  ;  but  Eusebius,  who 
possessed  more  copious  materials,  describes  it  as 
"generally  well  known;"  and  this  circumstance 
alone  suggests  the  necessity  of  remembering  that 
the  early  Catalogues  rest  on  evidence  no  longer 
available  for  us.  In  other  respects  the  classification 
of  Eusebius  is  a  fair  summary  of  the  results  which 
follow  from  the  examination  of  the  extant  ante- 
Nicene  literature. 

The  evidence  of  later  writers  is  little  more  than 
the  repetition  or  combination  of  the  testimonies 
already  quoted.  An  examination  of  table  No.  IV., 
]>.  266,  which  includes  the  most  important  Cata- 
logues of  the  writings  of  the  N.  T.,  will  convey  a 
clear  summary  of  much  that  has  been  said,  and 
supply  the  most  important  omissions. 

At  the  era  of  the  Reformation  the  question  of 
the  N.  T.  Canon  became  again  a  subject  of  great 
though  partial  interest.  The  hasty  decree  of  the 
Council  of  Trent,  which  affirmed  the  authority  of 
all  the  books  commonly  received,  called  out  the 
opposition  of  controversialists,  who  quoted  and  en- 
forced the  early  doubts.  Erasmus  with  charac- 
teristic moderation  denied  the  apostolic  origin  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  2  Peter,  and  the  Apoca- 
lypse, but  left  their  canonical  authority  unques- 
tioned (Praef.  ad  Antilegom.').  Luther,  on  the 
other  hand,  with  bold  self-reliance,  created  a  purely 
subjective  standard  for  the  canonicity  of  the  Scrip- 
tures in  the  character  of  their  "  teaching  of  Christ," 
and  while  he  placed   the  Gospel  and  first  Epistle 


CANON 


267 


of  St.  John,  the  tipistles  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Romans' 
Galatians,  Ephesians,  and  the  first  Epistle  of  St- 
Peter,  in  the  first  rank  as  containing  the  "  kernel  ot 
Christianity,"  he  set  aside  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 
St.  Jude,  St.  James,  and  the  Apocalypse  at  the 
end  of  his  version,  and  spoke  of  them  and  the  re- 
maining Antilegomena  with  varying  degrees  of  dis- 
respect, though  he  did  not  separate  2  Peter  and 
2,  3  John  from  the  other  Epistles  (comp.  Landerer, 
Art.  Kanon  in  Herzog's  Encyklop.  pp.  295  ft'.). 
The  doubts  which  Luther  rested  mainly  on  internal 
evidence  were  variously  extended  by  some  of  his  fol- 
lowers (Melancthon,  Centur.  Magdeb.,  Elacius, 
Gerhard:  comp.  Reuss,  §334);  and  especially 
with  a  polemical  aim  against  the  Romish  Church 
by  Chemnitz  {Exam.  Cone.  Trid.  i.  73).  But 
while  the  tendency  of  the  Lutheran  writers  was  to 
place  the  Antilegomena  on  a  lower  stage  of  autho- 
)  it}%  their  views  received  no  direct  sanction  in  any 
of  the  Lutheran  symbolic  books  which  admit  the 
"  prophetic  and  apostolic  writings  of  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments,"  as  a  whole,  without  further 
classification  or  detail.  The  doubts  as  to  the  An- 
tilegomena of  the  N.  T.  were  not  confined  to  the 
Lutherans.  Carlstadt,  who  was  originally  a 
friend  of  Luther  and  afterwards  professor  at  Zurich, 
endeavoured  to  bring  back  the  question  to  a  critical 
discussion  of  evidence,  and  placed  the  Antilegomena 
in  a  third  class  "  on  account  of  the  controversy  as 
to  the  books,  or  rather  (ut  certius  loquar)  as  to  their 
authors"  (Be  Can.  Script,  pp.  410-12,  ed. 
Credn.).  Calvin,  while  he  denied  the  Pauline 
authorship  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  and  at 
least  questioned  the  authenticity  of  2  Peter,  did  not 
set  aside  their  canonicity  {Praef.  ad  Hebr. ;  ad 
2  Petr.)  ;  aud  he  notices  the  doubts  as  to  St.  James 
and  St.  Jude  only  to  dismiss  them. 

The  language-  of  the  Articles  of  the  Church  of 
England  with  regard  to  the  N.  T.  is  remarkable. 
In  the  Articles  of  1552  no  list  of  the  books  of 
Scripture  is  given ;  but  in  the  Elizabethan  Articles 
(1562,  1571)  a  definition  of  Hoi)-  Scripture  is 
given  as  "  the  Canonical  books  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testament,  of  whose  authority  was  never  any 
doubt  in  the  Church  "  (Art.  vi.).  This  definition 
is  followed  by  an  'enumeration  of  the  books  of  the 
0.  T.  and  of  the  Apocrypha ;  and  then  it  is  said 
summarily,  without  a  detailed  catalogue,  "  all  the 
books  of  the  N.  T.,  as  they  are  commonly  received, 
we  do  receive  and  account  them  for  Canonical 
(pro  Canonicis  habemns)."  A  distinction  thus  re- 
mains between  the  "Canonical"  books,  and  such 


NOTES  ON  table  NO.  IV. — continued. 


Xprjvai  Se'xeotfai,  tt)v  'IaKwjSou  fxlav 
fjitav  6"e   II erpov  tt]v  r    Twcu'you  txiav  .   .   . 
7-t)v  5'   ' \irOKa.\v\l/t.v  Tqv  Twayyov  ira\iv 
Ti^es  ptv  e*y*cpiVov<m',  ot  7r  Aei'ous  oV  ye 
voBov  \iyovcni'.     OStos  ai/<ev6"e'crTaTOs 
Kaviov  av  eiT)  twi'  &e<mv€v<TTu}v  ypafyioi'  .   .   . 
H  This  Canon  of  Chrysostom,  which  agrees  with  that  of 
the  I'eahito,  is  fully  supported  by  the  casual  evidence  oi 
the  quotations  which  occur  in  his  works.     The  quotation 
from  2  Peter,  which   is   found  in  Hum.  in  Joaitn.  34  (33), 
torn.  viii.  p.  230  (ed.  Par.  >,  stands  alone.    Suidas'  asser- 
tion (s.  v.  Icoai'iTjs)  that  he  received  "  the  Apocalypse  and 
three  Epistles  <>f  St.  ■/'ih  n  "  is  not  supported  by  any  other 
evidence. 

9  Nicophorus  adds  to  the  disputed  books  "  the  Gospel 
according  to  the  Hebrews."  In  one  MS.  the  Apocalypsi 
ot  St.  John  is  placed  also  among  the  Apocryphal  books 
(Credner,  a.  a.  ( t.  |>.  122). 

10  This  catalogue,  which    excludes   I  lie  EpiitU  In   llif 

etas  and  the  Apocalypsi  (statntnm  esl  nihil  aliud  legi 
in  ecclesia  debere  caihoiica  nisi  ....  et  I'auli  tredecim 


epistolas  et  septem  alias  ....),  is  followed  by  a  section 
in  which  Philastrius  speaks  of  "other  [heretics]  who 
assert  that  the  Fpistle  to  the  Hebrews  is  not  Paul's  " 
(Ilaer.  89).  And  in  another  place  (Ilaer.  60)  he  reckons 
it  as  heresy  to  deny  the  authenticity  of  the  Gospel  and 
Apocali/pse  of  St.  John.  The  different  statements  seem 
to  be  the  result  of  careless  compilation. 

"  This  catalogue  is  described  as  "  secundum  antiquum 
translationeui,"  and  stands  parallel  with  those  of  Ji  rome 
and  Augustine.  The  enumeration  of  ihei  latholic  epistles 
is  somewhat  ambiguous,  but  I  believe  that  it  includes 
Only  three  epistles.  Kpistolae  Petri  ad  gentes.  Jacobi, 
Johannis  ad  Parihos.  The  insertion  of  Judae  after 
gentet,  seems  to  have  been  a  typographical  error,  for  the 
present  writer  has  not  found  the  reading  in  any 
lour  .MSS.  which  he  has  examined. 

'-'  In  another  place  (DeeccUs.  Offic.  i.  12)  rsidore  men- 
tions without  condemning  the  doubts  which  existed  as  to 
i  lie  Epistle  In  tlie  Hebrews,  James,  2,  3  John,  2  I'eter,  but 
not  as  to  Jude. 


268 


CANON 


"  Canonical  books  as  have  never  been  doubted  in 
the  Church;"  and  it  seems  impossible  to  avoid  the 
conclusion  that  the  framers  of  the  Articles  intended 
to  leave  a  freedom  of  judgment  on  a  point  on  which 
the  greatest  of  the  continental  reformers,  and  even 
of  Romish  scholars  (Sixtus  Sen.  Biblioth.  S.  i.  1  ; 
Caietan,  Praef.  ad  Epp.  ad  Hebr.,  Jac,  2,  3  John, 
Jud.)  were  divided.  The  omission  cannot  have 
arisen  solely  from  the  fact  that  the  Article  in  ques- 
tion was  framed  with  reference  to  the  Church  of 
Rome,  with  which  the  Church  of  England  was 
agreed  on  the  N.  T.  Canon;  for  all  the  other  pro- 
testant  confessions  which  contain  any  list  of  books, 
give  a  list  of  the  books  of  the  New  as  well  as  of  the 
Old  Testament  (Conf.  Belg.  4 ;  Conf.  Gall.  3 ; 
Conf.  Fid.  1).  But  if  this  license  is  rightly  con- 
ceded by  the  Anglican  Articles,  the  great  writers  of 
the  Church  of  England  have  not  availed  themselves 
of  it.  The  early  commentators  on  the  Articles 
take  little  (Burnet)  or  no  notice  (Beveridge)  of  the 
doubts  as  to  the  Antilegomena ;  and  the  chief  con- 
troversialists of  the  Reformation  accepted  the  full 
Canon  with  emphatic  avowal  (Whitaker,  Disp.  on 
Scripture,  cxiv.  p.  105 ;  Fulke's  Defence  of-Eng. 
Trans,  p.  8;  Jewel,  Defence  of  Apol.  ii.  9,  1). 

The  judgment  of  the  Greek  Church  in  the  case 
of  the  0.  T.  was  seen  to  be  little  more  than  a 
reflection  of  the  opinions  of  the  West.  The  differ- 
ence between  the  Roman  and  Reformed  Churches 
on  the  N.  T.  were  less  marked ;  and  the  two  conflict- 
ing Greek  confessions  confirm  in  general  terms, 
without  any  distinct  enumeration  of  books,  the  po- 
pular Canon  of  the  N.  T.  (Cyr.  Luc.  Conf.  i.  p. 
42;  Dosith.  Confess,  i.  p.  467).  The  confession 
of  Metrophanes  gives  a  complete  list  of  the 
books  ;  and  compares  their  number — thirty-three — 
with  the  years  of  the  Saviour's  life,  that  "  not  even 
the  number  of  the  Sacred  books  might  be  devoid  of 
a  divine  mystery."  (Metroph.  Critop.  Conf.  ii.  105, 
Ed.  Kimm.  et  Weissenb.).  At  present,  as  was 
already  the  case  at  the  close  of  the  17th  century 
(Leo  Allatius,  ap.  Fabric.  Bibl.  Grace,  v.  App.  p. 
38),  the  Antilegomena  are  reckoned  by  the  Greek 
Church  as  equal  in  Canonical  authority  in  all  re- 
spects with  the  remaining  books  (Catechism,  I.  c. 
supr.). 

The  assaults  which  have  been  made,  especially 
during  the  present  century,  upon  the  authenticity 
of  the  separate  books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments 
belong  to  the  special  articles.  The  general  course 
which  they  have  taken  is  simple  and  natural. 
Semlcf  (Untersuch.  d.  Kan.  1771-5)  first  led  the 
way  towaids  the  later  subje|tn-e  criticism,  though 
he  rightly  connected  the  formation  of  the  Canon 
with  the  formation  of  the  Catholic  Church,  but 
without  any  clear  recognition  of  the  providential 
power  which  wrought  in  both.  Next  followed  a 
series  of  special  essays  in  which  the  several  books 
were  discussed  individually  with  little  regard  to  the 
place  which  they  occupy  in  the  whole  collection 
(Schleiermacher,  Bretschneider,  De  Wette,  &c): 
At  last  an  ideal  view  of  the  early  history  of  Chris- 
tianity was  used  as  the  standard  by  which  the  hooks 
were  to  be  tried,  and  the  books  were  regarded  as 
results  of  typical  forms  of  doctrine  and  not  the 
sources  of  them  (F.  C.  Baur,  Schwegler,  Zeller). 
All  true  sense  of  historic  evidence  was  thus  lost. 
The  growth  of  the  Church  was  left  without  expla- 
nation, and  the  original  relations  and  organic  unity 
of  the  N.  T.  were  disregarded. 

For  the  later  period  of  the  history  of  the  N.  T. 
Canon,  from  the  close  of  the  second  century,   the 


CANTICLES 

great  work  of  Lardner  (Credibility  of  the  Gospel 
History,  Works  i. — vi.  Ed.  Kippis,  1788)  fur- 
nishes ample  and  trustworthy  materials.  For  the 
earlier  period  his  criticism  is  necessarily  imperfect, 
and  requires  to  be  combined  with  the  results  of 
later  inquiries.  Kirchhofer's  collection  of  the  ori- 
ginal passages  which  bear  on  the  history  of  the 
Canon  (Quellensammlung,  u.  s.  w.,  Zurich,  1844) 
is  useful  and  fairly  complete,  but  frequently  inac- 
curate. The  writings  of  F.  C.  Baur  and  his  fol- 
lowers often  contain  very  valuable  hints  as  to  the 
characteristics  of  the  several  books  in  relation  to 
later  teaching,  however  perverse  their  conclusions 
may  be.  In  opposition  to  them  Thiersch  has  vin- 
dicated, perhaps  with  an  excess  of  zeal,  but  yet  in 
the  main  rightly,  the  position  of  the  Apostolic  writ- 
ings in  relation  to  the  first  age  (  Versuch  zur  Her- 
stellung,  u.  s.  w.,  Erlangen,  1845;  and  Erwieder- 
ung,  u.  s.  w.,  Erlang.,  1846).  The  section  of  Reuss 
on  the  subject  (Die  Gesch.  d.  heil.  Schriften 
N.  T.,  2te  Aufl.  Braunschw.  1853),  and  the  article 
of  Landerer  (Herzog's  Encyklop.  s.  v.)  contain  va- 
luable summaries  of  the  evidence.  Other  references 
and  a  fuller  discussion  of  the  chief  points  are  given 
by  the  author  of  this  article  in  The  History  of  the 
Canon  of  the  N.  T.  (Cambr.  1855).     [B.  F.  W.] 

CANOPY  (koivo>tt(Iov  ;  conopeum;  Jud.  x.  21, 
xiii.  9,  xvi.  19).  The  canopy  of  Holofernes  is  the 
only  one  mentioned,  although,  perhaps,  from  the 
"  pillars  "  of  the  litter  [Bed]  described  in  Cant.  iii. 
10,  it  may  be  argued  that  its  equipage  would  include 
a  canopy.  It  probably  retained  the  mosquito  nets 
or  curtains  in  which  the  name  originated,  although 
its  description  (Jud.  x.  21)  betrays  luxury  and 
display  rather  than  such  simple  usefulness.  Varro 
(R.  R.  ii.  10.  8)  uses  quae  in  conopeis  jacent  of 
languid  women  very  much  as  avai:av6fievos  .... 
iv  T(p  Kcovojtrfitf)  (1.  c.)  describes  the  position  of  a 
luxurious  general.  (For  further  classical  illustra- 
tion, see  Diet,  of  Ant.  art.  Conopeum.)  It  might 
possibly  be  asked  why  Judith,  whose  business  was 
escape  without  delay,  should  have  taken  the  trouble 
to  pull  down  the  canopy  on  the  body  of  Holofernes  ? 
Probably  it  was  an  instance  of  the  Hebrew  notion 
that  blood  should  be  instantly  covered  (comp. 
2  Sam.  xx.  12 ;  Lev.  xvii.  13)  [Blood]  ;  and  for 
this  purpose  the  light  bedding  of  Syria  was  inade- 
quate. [Bed.]  Tent  furniture  also  is  naturally 
lighter,  even  when  most  luxurious,  than  that  of  a 
palace ;  and  thus  a  woman's  hand  might  unfix  it 
from  the  pillars  .without  much  difficulty.    [H.  H.] 

CANTICLES  (Dn^n  TB>,  Song  of  Songs, 

i.  e.  the  most  beautiful  of  songs  ;  ^fffia  aff/xaTccv  ; 
Canticum  Canticoruni),  entitled  in  the  A.  V.  The 
Song  of  Solomon.  No  book  of  the  0.  T.  has 
been  the  subject  of  more  varied  criticism,  or  been 
more  frequently  selected  for  separate  translation 
than  the  Song  of  Solomon.  It  may  be  convenient 
to  consider  it  under  four  points  of  view  : — I.  Au- 
thor and  date  ;  II.  Form  ;  III.  Meaning  ;  IV.  Ca- 
nonicity. 

I.  Author  and  date. — By  the  Hebrew  title  it  is 
ascribed  to  Solomon  ;  aud  so  in  all  the  versions,  and 
by  the  majority  of  Jewish  and  Christian  writers,  an- 
cient and  modern.  In  fact,  if  we  except  a  few  of 
the  Talmudical  writers  (Bava  Bathra,  R.  Moses 
Kimchi ;  see  Gray's  Key),  who  assigned  it  to  the 
age  of  Hezekiah,  there  is  scarcely  a  dissentient  voice 
down  to  the  close  of  the  last  century.  More  recent 
criticism,  however,  has  called  in  question  this  deep- 
rooted,  and  well  accredited  tradition.     Among  Eng- 


CANTICLES 

lish  scholars  Kennicott,  among  German  Eichom 
and  Kosenmiiller,  regard  the  poem  as  belonging  to 
the  age  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  (Kennicott,  Diss.  i. 
pp.  20-22 ;  Eichom,  Isagogen  in  V.  T.  P.  iii. 
§  647,  p.  531,  ft.  ed.  sec. ;  Kosenm.  Animadv.  on 
Lowth.  Praelect.,  Schol.  in  Y.  T.).  Kennicott 
based  his  opinion  upon  the  uniform  insertion  of 
the  \  in  all  the  copies,  in  the  name  of  David 
("PVT).  The  name,  however,  occurs  only  once 
(iv.  4)  ;  and  the  insertion  of  the  letter  in  this  soli- 
tary instance  is  easily  accounted  for  by  a  supposed 
error  in  transcription.  At  any  rate  the  insertion 
of  the  *  would  not  bring  the  Canticles  so  far  down 
as  the  time  of  Ezra  ;  since  we  find  the  same  pecu- 
liarity in  Hos.  iii.  5,  and  Am.  vi.  5  (Gesen. 
Lex.  s.  v.).  The  charge  of  Chaldaism  has  been 
vigorously  pressed  by  Kosenmiiller,  and  especially 
by  Eichorn.  But  Gesenius  (Heb.  Gr.  §2)  assigns 
the  book  to  the  golden  age  of  Hebrew  litera- 
ture, and  traces  "  the  few  solitary  Chaldaisms " 
which  occur  in  the  writings  of  that  age  to  the 
hands  of  Chaldee  copyists.  Gesenius  has  more- 
over suggested  an  important  distinction  between 
Chaldaisms,  and  dialectic  variations  indigenous  to 
N.  Palestine,  where  he  conjectures  that  Judges  and 
Canticles  were  composed.  The  application  of  this 
principle  is  sufficient  to  eliminate  most  of  the  Chal- 
daisms alleged   by  Eichorn   (e.  g.   t^  for  "1CX)  • 

while  the  occurrence  of  similar  forms  in  Phoenician 
affords  an  indication  of  other  intrusive  forces  beside 
the  Aramean  acting  upon  the  Biblical  Hebrew. 
Nor  is  the  suggestion  of  Gesenius  that  the  book  was 
written  in  N.  Palestine,  and  consequently  tinged 
with  a  local  colouring,  inconsistent  with  the  opinion 
which  places  it  among  the  "  one  thousand  and  five  " 
songs  of  Solomon  (1  K.  iv.  32).  Comp.  1  K.  ix.  19 
with  2  Chr.  viii.  6,  where  the  buildings  of  Lebanon 
are  decidedly  contrasted  with  those  of  Jerusalem, 
and  are  not  therefore  to  be  confounded  with  the 
"house  of  the  forest  of  Lebanon"  (IK.  vii.  2), 
which  was  probably  in  Jerusalem.  By  a  further 
comparison  of  these  passages  with  Robinson  (Inbl. 
Res.  iii.  441),  who  describes  remains  of  massive 
buildings  as  still  standing  on  Lebanon,  it  will  appear 
probable  that  Solomon  had  at  least  a  hunting-seat 
somewhere  on  the  slopes  of  that  mountain  (comp. 
Cant.  iv.  9).  In  such  a  retreat,  and  under  the  in- 
fluence of  its  scenery,  and  the  language  of  the  sur- 
rounding peasantry,  he  may  have  written  Canticles. 
Artistically  this  would  have  been  in  keeping  with 
the  general  conditions  of  pastoral  poetry.  In  our 
own  language  such  compositions  are  not  unfre- 
quently  accommodated  to  rustic  ideas,  and  some- 
times to  provincial  dialects.  If,  moreover,  it  should 
be  urged  that  Chaldaisms  are  not  provincialisms ; 
it  may  be  replied  that  Solomon  could  scarcely  In' 
ignorant  of  the  Aramean  literature  of  his  own  time, 
and  that  he  may  have  consciously  used  it  for  the 
purpose  of  enrichment  (Gesen.  Ileb.  Gr.  §§  2,  4). 

The  title,  though  it  is  possibly  too  flattering  to 
have  come  from  the  hand  of  Solomon,  must  bare 
existed  in  the  copy  used  by  the  LXX.,  and  conse- 
quently can  lay  claim  to  a  respectable  antiquity. 
The  moral  argument  put  forward  by  the  supporters 
of  the  most  recent  literal  interpretation,  and  based 
upon  the  improbability  of  Solomon's  criminating 
himself  (see  below),  is  not  very  conclusive.  His 
conduct  could  easily  be  traced  to  a  spirit  of  gene- 
rous self-accusation;  and  at  any  rate  it  need  Dot  be 
exalted  above  the  standard  which  was  likely  to 
flourish  in  the  atmosphere  of  a  court  such  as   bis. 


CANTICLES 


269 


On  the  whole  then  it  seems  unnecessary  to  depart 
from  the  plain  meaning  of  the  Hebrew  title. 

Supposing  the  date  fixed  to  the  reign  of  Solomon, 
great  ingenuity  has  been  employed  by  the  Rabbi- 
nical and  some  Christian  writers,  in  determining  at 
what  period  of  that  monarch's  life  the  poem  was 
written  (see  Pol.  Syn.  Pref.  ad  Cant.).  The  point 
at  issue  seems  to  have  been  whether  Solomon  ever 
repented  after  his  fall.  If  he  did,  it  was  contended 
that  the  ripeness  of  wisdom  exhibited  in  the  Song 
seemed  the  natural  growth  of  such  an  .experience  : 
if  he  did  not,  it  was  urged  that  no  other  than  a  spi- 
ritually-minded man  could  have  composed  such  a 
poem  f|and  that  therefore  it  must  have  been  written 
while  'Solomon  was  still  the  cherished  of  God. 
Then  again  it  was  a  moot  point  whether  the  com- 
position was  the  product  of  Solomon's  matured 
wisdom,  or  the  fresh  outburst  of  his  warm  and 
passionate  youth ;  whether  in  fact  the  master  ele- 
ment tof  the  poem  were  the  literal  form,  or  the 
allegorical  meaning.  The  question  resolves  itself 
into  one  of  interpretation,  and  must  be  deter- 
mined by  reference  to  III.  below. 

II.  Form. — This  question  is  not  determined  by 

the  Hebrew  title.     The  rendering  of  D*YB>n  W, 

mentioned  by  Simonis  [Lex.  Ileb.),  "  series  carmi- 
num"  (comp.  <reipa,  chain),  and  adopted  by 
Paulus,  Good,  and  other  commentators,  can 
scarcely  compete  with  Gesen.  "  Song  of  Songs, 
i.  e.    the    most    beautiful    of   songs"    (comp.    Ps. 

xlv.  1,  rVT*V  "l*K>,  "  a  delightful  song,"  Gesen. ; 

"  carmen  jucundum,"  Rosenm. ;  comp.  also  Theocr. 
Idy.  viii.  irpo<T(piAes  /xeAos).  The  non-continuity 
which  many  critics  attribute  to  the  poem  is  far 
from  being  a  modern  discovery.  This  is  suffi- 
ciently attested  by  the  Lat.  "  Canticacanticorum," 
and  the  Chaldee  paraphrase,  "  the  songs  and 
hymns  which  Solomon,  the  prophet,  the  king  of 
Israel,  uttered  in  the  spirit  of  prophecy  before  .the 
Lord."  Ghislerius  (16th  cent.)  considered  it  a 
drama  in  five  acts.  One  of  the  first  separate  trans- 
lations published  in  England  is  entitled  "  The  Can- 
ticles, or  Balades  of  Solomon,  in  Englysh  metre," 
1549  ;  and  in  1596  appeared  Solomon's  Song  in 
8  eclogues,  by  J.  M.  [Jervase  Markham]  ;  the 
number  of  eclogues  in  this  latter  production  being 
the  same  as  that  of  the  Idylls  into  which  the 
book  was  afterwards  divided  by  Jahn.  Down  to 
the  18th  cent.,  however,  the  Canticles  were 
generally  regarded  as  continuous. 

Gregory  Nazianzus  calls  it  vvfMpiKOv  Spafid  re 
Ka\  aa/xa.  According  to  Patrick,  it  is  a  "  Pastoral 
Eclogue,"  or  a  "Dramatic  poem;"  according  to 
Lowth,  "  an  epithalamium,  or  oaptarvs  nuptialis  of 
a  pastoral  kind."  Michaelis  and  Rosenmiiller,  while 
differing  as  to  its  interpretation,  agree  in  making- 
it  continuous,  "  camion  amatorium "  (Mich.).  A 
modified  continuity  was  suggested  by  Bossuet,  who 
divided  the  Song  into  7  parts,  or  scenes  of  a  pas- 
toral drama,  corresponding  with  the  7  days  of  the 
Jewish  nuptial  ceremony  (Lowth,  Praelect.  xxx.). 
Bossuet  is  followed  by  Calmet,  Percy,  Williams, 
and  Lowth  :  but  bis  division  is  impugned  by  Taylor 
(  Fragm.  Calmet),  who  proposes  one  of  (>  days;  and 
considers  the  drama  to  be  post-nuptial,  not  ante- 
nuptial, as  it  is  explained  by  Bossuet.  The  entire 
nuptial  theory  has  been  severely  bandied  by  J.  D. 
Michaelis,  and  the  literal  school  of  interpreters  in 
general.  Michaelis  attacks  the  first  day  of  Bossuet, 
and  involves  in  its  destruction  the  remaining  six 


270 


CANTICLES 


(Not.  ad  Lowth.  Prael.  xxxi.).  It  should  be  ob- 
served that  Lowth  does  not  compromise  himself  to 
the  perfectly  dramatic  character  of  the  poem.  He 
makes  it  a  drama,  but  only  of  the  minor  kind,  i.  e. 
dramatic  as  a  dialogue ;  and  therefore  not  more  dra- 
matic than  an  Idyll  of  Theocritus,  or  a  Satire  of 
Horace.  The  fact  is,  that  he  was  unable  to  dis- 
cover a  plot ;  and  evidently  meant  a  good  deal  more 
by  the  term  "  pastoral "  than  by  the  term  "  drama." 
Moreover,  it  seems  clear,  that  if  the  only  dramatic 
element  in  Cant,  be  the  dialogue,  the  rich  pastoral 
character  of  its  scenery,  and  allusions,  renders  the 
term  drama  less  applicable  than  that  of  idyll. 
Bossuet,  however,  claims  it  as  a  regular  drangi  with 
all  the  proprieties  of  the  classic  model.  Now  the 
question  is  not  so  much  whether  the  Canticles 
make  up  a  drama,  or  a  series  of  idylls,  as  which 
of  these  two  Greek  names  the  more  nearly  ex- 
presses its  form.  And  if  with  Lowth  we  recog- 
nize a  chorus  completely  sympathetic  and  assistant, 
it  is  difficult  to  see  how  we  can  avoid  calling  the 
poem  a  drama.  But  in  all  the  translations  of  the 
allegorical  school  which  are  based  upon  the  dra- 
matic idea,  the  interference  of  the  chorus  is  so  in- 
frequent, or  so  indefinite  ;  the  absence  of  anything 
like  a  dramatic  progress  and  development  sufficient 
to  enlist  the  sympathy  of  a  chorus  is  so  evident, 
that  the  strongly  marked  idyllic  scenery  could  not 
fail  to  outweigh  the  scarcely  perceptible  elements 
of  dramatic  intention.  Accordingly  the  Idyllic 
theory,  propounded  by  Sig.  Melesegenio,  confirmed 
by  the  use  of  a  similar  form  among  the  Arabians, 
under  the  name  of  "  Cassides "  (Sir  W.  Jones, 
Poes.  As.  Comment,  iii.),  and  adopted  by  Good, 
became  for  a  time  the  favourite  hypothesis  of  the 
allegorical  school.  After  Markham's  translation, 
however  (see  above),  and  the  division  of  Ghisle- 
rius,  we  cannot  consider  this  theory  as  originating 
either  with  the  learned  Italian  translator,  or,'  as 
suggested  by  Mr.  Home,  with  Sir  W.  Jones. 

The  idyllic  form  seems  to  have  recommended 
itself  to  the  allegorical  school  of  translators  as 
getting  rid  of  that  dramatic  unity  and  plot  which 
their  system  of  interpretation  reduced  to  a  succes- 
sion of  events  without  any  culminating  issue.  In 
fact,  it  became  the  established  method  of  division 
both  with  literal  and  allegorical  translators;  e.  g. 
Herder,  Pye  Smith,  Kleuker,  Magnus;  and  as  late 
as  184(3  was  maintained  by  Dr.  Noyes  of  Harvard 
University,  an  ultra  literalist.  But  the  majority 
of  recent  translators  belonging  to  the  literal  school 
have  adopted  the  theory  of  Jacobi,  originally  pro- 
posed in  1776,  and  since  developed  by  Umbreit, 
Ewald,  Meier,  &c.  Based  as  this  theory  is  upon 
the  dramatic  evolution  of  a  simple  love-story,  it 
supplies  that  essential  movement  and  interest,  the 
want  of  which  was  felt  by  Lowth  ;  and  justifies  the 
application  of  the  term  drama,  to  a  composition  of 
which  it  manifests  the  vital  principle  and  organic 
structure. 

By  the  reactionary  allegorists,  of  whom  Rosen- 
miiller  may  be  considered  the  representative,  the 
Song  of  Solomon  has  either  been  made  absolutely 
continuous,  or  has  been  divided  with  reference 
to  its  spiritual  meaning,  rather  than  its  external 
form  (e.  g.  Hengstenberg,  and  Prof.  Burrowes). 

The  supposition  that  the  Cant,  supplied  a  model 
to  Theocritus  seems  based  on  merely  verbal  coinci- 
dences, such  as  coidd  scarcely  fail  to  occur  between 
two  writers  of  pastoral  poetry  (comp.  Cant.  i.  9, 
vi.  10,  with  Theocr.  xviii.  30,  3(5 ;  Cant.  iv.  1 1  with 
Theocr.  xx.  26,  27  ;   Cant.  viii.  6,  7,  with  Theocr. 


CANTICLES 

xxiii.  23-26 ;  see  other  passages  in  Pol.  Syn.  : 
Lowth,  Prael. ;  Gi-ay's  Key).  In  the  essential 
matters  of  form  and  of  ethical  teaching,  the  re- 
semblance does  not  exist. 

III.  Meaning. — The  schools  of  interpretation 
may  be  divided  into  three : — the  mystical,  or 
typical ;  the  allegorical ;  and  the  literal. 

1.  The  mystical  interpretation  is  properly  an 
offshoot  of  the  allegoric/d,  and  probably  owes  its 
origin  to  the  necessity  which  was  felt  of  supplying 
a  literal  basis  for  the  speculations  of  the  allegorists. 
This  basis  is  either  the  marriage  of  Solomon  with 
Pharaoh's  daughter,  or  his  marriage  with  an  Israel- 
itish  woman,  the  Shulamite.  The  former  (taken 
together  with  Harmer's  variation)  was  the  favourite 
opinion  of  the  mystical  interpreters  to  the  end 
of  the  18th  century:  the  latter  has  obtained  since 
its  introduction  by  Good  (1803).  The  mystical 
interpretation  makes  its  first  appearance  in  Origen, 
who  wrote  a  voluminous  commentary  upon  the  Cant. 
Its  literal  basis,  minus  the  mystical  application,  is 
condemned  by  Theodoret  (a.D.  420).  It  reappears 
in  Abulpharagius  (1226-1286),  and  was  received 
by  Grotius.  As  involving  a  literal  basis,  it  was 
vehemently  objected  to  by  Sanctius,  Durham,  and 
Calovius ;  but  approved  of,  and  systematized  by 
Bossuet,  endorsed  by  Lowth,  and  used  for  the  pur- 
pose of  translation  by  Percy  and  Williams.  The 
arguments  of  Calovius  prevented  its  taking  root  in 
Germany :  and  the  substitution  by  Good  of  an 
Israelitish  for  an  Egyptian  bride  has  not  saved  the 
general  theory  from  the  neglect  which  was  inevit- 
able after  the  reactionary  movement  of  the  19th 
century  allegorists. 

2.  Allegorical. — Notwithstanding  the  attempts 
which  have  been  made  to  discover  this  principle  of 
interpretation  in  the  LXX.  (Cant.  iv.  8)  ;  Jesus 
Sirach  (xlvii.  14-17)  ;  Wisd.  (viii.  2)  ;  and  Joseph, 
(c.  Apion.  i.  §  8) ;  it  is  impossible  to  trace  it  with 
any  certainty  farthei  back  than  the  Talmud  (seeGins- 
burg,  Introd.).  According  to  the  Talmud  the  beloved 
is  taken  to  be  God,  the  loved  one,  or  bride,  is  the 
congregation  of  Israel.  This  general  relation  is  ex- 
panded into  more  particular  detail  by  the  Targum. 
or  Chaldee  Paraphrase,  which  treats  the  Song  of 
songs  as  an  allegorical  history  of  the  Jewish  people 
from  the  Exodus  to  the  coming  of  the  Messiah,  and 
the  building  of  the  third  temple.  In  order  to 
make  out  the  parallel,  recourse  was  had  to  the 
most  extraordinary  devices:  e.  g.  the  reduction  of 
words  to  their  numerical  value,  and  the  free  inter- 
changing of  words  similar  to  each  other  in  sound. 
Elaborate  as  it  was,  the  interpretation  of  the  Tar- 
gum was  still  further  developed  by  the  mediaeval 
Jews ;  but  generally  constructed  upon  the  same 
allegorical  hypothesis.  It  was  introduced  into 
their  liturgical  services  ;  and  during  the  persecu- 
tions of  the  middle  ages,  its  consoling  appeal  to 
the  past  and  future  glories  of  Israel  maintained  it 
as  the  popular  exposition  of  a  national  poem.  It 
would  be  strange  if  so  universal  an  influence  as 
that  of  the  scholastic  philosophy  had  not  obtained 
an  expression  in  the  interpretation  of  the  Canticles. 
Such  an  expression  we  find  in  the  theory  of  Ibn 
Caspe  (1200-1250),  which  considers  the  book  as 
representing  the  union  between  the  active  intellect 
(intellectus  agens),  and  the  receptioe  or  material 
intellect  (intellectus  materialis).  A  new  school  oi 
Jewish  interpretation  was  originated  by  Mendels- 
sohn (1729-1786);  which,  without  actually  deny- 
ing the  existence  of  an  allegorical  meaning,  deter- 
mined to  keep  it  in  abeyance,  and  meanwhile   I" 


CANTICLES 

devote  itself  to  the  literal  interpretation.  At  present 
the  most  learned  Rabbis,  following  Lowesohn,  have 
abandoned  the  allegorical  interpretation  in  toto 
(Hexheimer,  1848;  Philippson,  1854). 

In  the  Christian  Church,  the  Talrnudical  inter- 
pretation, imported  by  Origen,  was  all  but  univer- 
sally received.  It  was  impugned  by  Theodore  of 
Mopsuestia  (360-429),  but  continued  to  hold  its 
ground  as  the  orthodox  theory  till  the  revival  of 
letters  ;  when  it  was  called  in  question  by  Erasmus 
and  Grotius,  and  was  gradually  superseded  by 
the  typical  theory  of  Grotius,  Bossuet,  Lowth,  &c. 
This,  however,  was  not  effected  without  a  severe 
struggle,  in  which  Sanctius,  Durham,  and  Calovius 
were  the  champions  of  the  allegorical  against  the 
typical  theory.  The  latter  seems  to  have  been 
mainly  identified  with  Grotius  (Pol.  Syn.),  and 
was  stigmatised  by  Calovius  as  the  heresy  of  Theo- 
dore Mopsuest.,  condemned  at  the  2nd  council  of 
Constantinople,  and  revived  by  the  Anabaptists. 
In  the  18th  century  the  allegorical  theory  was 
reasserted,  and  reconstructed  by  Puffendorf  (1776), 
and  the  reactionary  allegorists ;  the  majority  of 
whom,  however,  with  Kosenm.  return  to  the 
system  of  the  Chaldee  Paraphrase. 

Some  of  the  more  remarkable  variations  of  the 
allegorical  school  are: — (a.)  The  extension  of  the 
Chaldee  allegory  to  the  Christian  Church,  originally 
projected  by  Aponius  (7th  century),  and  more 
fully  wrought  out  by  De  Lyra  (1270-1340),  Bright- 
man  (1600),  and  Cocceius  (1603-1699).  According 
to  De  Lyra,  chaps,  ii.-vii.  describe  the  history  of  the 
Israelites  from  the  Exodus  to  the  birth  of  Christ ; 
chap.  vii.  ad  tin.  the  history  of  the  Christian  Church 
to  Constantine.  Brightman  divides  the  Cant,  into 
a  history  of  the  Legal,  and  a  history  of  the  Evange- 
lical Church  ;  his  detail  is  highly  elaborate,  e.  g. 
in  Cant.  v.  8,  he  discovers  an  allusion  to  Peter 
Waldo  (1160),  and  in  verse  13  to  Robert  Trench 
(1290).  (6.)  Luther's  theory  limits  the  allegorical 
meaning  to  the  contemporaneous  history  of  the 
Jewish  people  under  Solomon,  (c.)  According  to 
Ghislerius,  and  Corn,  a  Lapide  the  Bride  is  the 
Virgin  Mary,  {d.)  Puffendorf  refers  the  spiritual 
sense  to  the  circumstances  of  our  Saviour's  death 
and  burial. 

3.  The  Literal  interpretation  seems  to  have 
been  connected  with  the  general  movement  of 
Theodore  Mopsuest.  (360-429)  and  his  followers, 
in  opposition  to  the  extravagances  of  the  early 
Christian  allegorists.  Its  scheme  was  nuptial,  with 
Pharaoh's  daughter  as  the  bride.  That  it  was  by 
many  regarded  as  the  only  admissible  interpretation 
appears  from  Theodoret,  who  mentions  this  opinion 
only  to  condemn  it.  Borne  down  and  overwhelmed 
by  the  prolific  genius  of  mediaeval  allegory,  we 
have  a  glimpse  of  it  in  Abulpharagius  (vid.  supr.)  ; 
and  in  the  MS.  commentary  (Bodl.  Oppenh.  Coll. 
.No.  625),  cited  by  Mr.  Ginsburg,  and  by  him 
referred  conjecturally  to  a  French  Jew  of  the  12th 
or  13th  cent.  This  Commentary  anticipates  more 
recent  criticism  by  interpreting  the  Song  as  cele- 
brating the  humble  love  of  a  shepherd  "»</  shep- 
herdess. The  extreme  literal  view  was  propounded 
by  Castellio  (1544) ;  who  called  the  Cant.  "  Col- 
loquium Salomonis  cum  arnica  quadam  Sula- 
mitha,"  and  rejected  it  from  the  Canon.   Following 

out  this  idea,  Whiston  (1723)  recognised  the  I k 

as  a  composition  of  Solomon  ;  but  denounced  it  as 
foolish,  lascivious,  and  idolatrous.  Meanwhile  the 
nuptial  theory  was  adopted  by  Grotius  as  the 
literal  basis  of  a  secondary  and    spiritual   interpre- 


CANTICLES 


271 


tation  ;  and,  after  its  dramatical  development,  by 
Bossuet,  long  continued  to  be  the  standard  scheme 
of  the  mystical  school.  In  1803  it  was  recon- 
structed by  Good,  with  a  Jewish  instead  of  an 
Egyptian  bride.  The  purely  literal  theory,  op- 
posed on  the  one  hand  to  the  allegorical  interpreta- 
tion, and  on  the  other  to  Castellio  and  Whiston, 
owes  its  origin  to  Germany.  Michaelis  (1770) 
regarded  the  Song  as  an  exponent  of  wedded  love, 
innocent,  and  happy.  But,  while  justifying  its 
admission  into  the  Canon,  he  is  betrayed  into  a 
levity  of  remark  altogether  inconsistent  with  the 
supposition  that  the  book  is  inspired  (Not.  ad 
Lowth.  Prael.).  From  this  time  the  scholarship 
of  Germany  was  mainly  enlisted  on  the  side  of  the 
literalists.  The  literal  basis  became  thoroughly 
dissociated  from  the  mystical  superstructure  ;  and 
all  that  remained  to  be  done  was  to  elucidate  the 
true  scheme  of  the  former.  The  most  generally 
received  interpretation  of  the  modern  literalists  is 
that  which  was  originally  proposed  by  Jacobi 
(1771),  adopted  by  Herder,  Ammon,  Umbreit, 
Ewald,  &c.  ;  and  more  recently  by  Prof.  Meier  of 
Tubingen  (1854),  and  in  England  by  Mr.  Gins- 
burg, in  his  very  excellent  translation  (1857). 
According  to  the  detailed  application  of  this  view 
as  given  by  Mr.  Ginsburg,  the  Song  is  intended  to 
display  the  victory  of  humble  and  constant  lore 
over  the  temptations  of  wealth  and  royalty.  The 
tempter  is  Solomon :  the  object  of  his  seductive 
endeavours  is  a  Shulamite  shepherdess,  who,  sur- 
rounded by  the  glories  of  the  court,  and  the  fasci- 
nations of  unwonted  splendour,  pines  for  the  shep- 
herd-lover from  whom  she  has  been  involuntarily 
separated. 

The  drama  is  divided  into  5  sections,  indicated 
by  the  thrice  repeated  formula  of  adjuration  (ii.  7, 
iii.  5,  viii.  4),  and  the  use  of  another  closing  sen- 
tence (v.  1). 

Section  1  (Ch.  i. — ii.  7)  :  scene — a  country  seat 
of  Solomon.  The  shepherdess  is  committed  to  the 
charge  of  the  court-ladies  ("  daughters  of  Jeru- 
salem ")  ;  who  have  been  instructed  to  prepare  the 
way  for  the  royal  approach.  Solomon  makes  an 
unsuccessful  attempt  to  win  her  affections. 

Sect.  2  (ii.  8 — iii.  5) :  the  shepherdess  explains 
to  the  court-ladies  the  cruelty  of  her  brothers, 
which  had  led  to  the  separation  between  herself 
and  her  beloved. 

Sect.  3  (iii.  6 — v.  1) :  entry  of  the  royal  train 
into  Jerusalem.  The  shepherd  follows  lus  be- 
trothed into  the  city,  and  proposes  to  rescue  her. 
Some  of  her  court  companions  are  favourably  im- 
pressed by  her  constancy. 

Sect.  4  (v.  2 — viii.  4):  the  shepherdess  tells 
her  dream,  and  still  farther  engages  tile  sympathies 
of  her  companions.  The  king's  flatteries  and  pro- 
mises are  unavailing. 

Sect.  5  (viii.  5-14):  the  conflict  is  over  ;  virtue 
and  truth  have  won  the  victory :  and  the  shep- 
herdess and  her  beloved  return  to  their  happy 
home  :  visiting  on  the  way  the  tree  beneath  whose 
shade  they  first  plighted  their  troth  (viii.  5).  Her 
brothers  repeat  the  promises  which  they  had  once 
made  conditionally  upon  her  virtuous  and  irre- 
proachable conduct. 

Such  is  a  brief  outline  of  the  scheme  most  re- 
cently projected  by  the  literalists.  It  must  not  be 
supposed,  however,  that  the  supporters  of  the 
allegorical  interpretation  have  been  finally  driven 
from  the  field.  Even  in  Germany  a  strong  band 
of  reactionary  Allegorists   have    maintained  their 


272 


CANTICLES 


ground,  including  such  names  as  Hug,  Kaiser, 
Roseumiilier,  Hahn,  and  Hengstenberg.  On  the 
whole,  their  tendency  is  to  return  to  the  Chaldee 
Paraphrase  ;  a  tendency  which  is  specially  marked  in 
Rosenmiiller.  In  England  the  battle  of  the  Literalists 
has  been  fought  by  Dr.  Pye  Smith  (Congreg.  Mag. 
for  1837,  38)  ;  in  America  by  Prof.  Noyes,  who 
adopts  the  extreme  erotic  theory,  and  is  unwilling 
to  recognize  in  Cant,  any  moral  or  religious  design. 
It  should  be  observed  that  such  a  sentiment  as  this 
of  Dr.  Noyes  is  utterly  alien  to  the  views  of  Jacobi 
and  his  followers  ;  who  conceive  the  recommenda- 
tion of  virtuous  love  and  constancy  to  be  a  portion 
of  the  .very  highest  moral  teaching,  and  in  no  way 
unworthy  of  an  inspired  writer. 

The  allegorical  interpretation  has  been  defended 
in  America  by  Professors  Stuart  and  Burrowes.  The 
internal  arguments  adduced  by  the  allegorists  are 
substantially  the  same  which  were  urged  by  Calo- 
vius  against  the  literal  basis  of  the  mystical  inter- 
pretation.    The  following  are  specimens  : — 

(a.)  Particulars  not  applicable  to  Solomon  (v. 
2) :  (6.)  particulars  not  applicable  to  the  wife  of 
Solomon  (i.  6,  8  ;  v.  7  ;  vii.  1,  cf.  i.  6):  (c.)  So- 
lomon addressed  in  the  second  person  (viii.  12): 
(d.)  particulars  inconsistent  with  the  ordinary  con- 
ditions of  decent  love  (v.  2) :  (<?.)  date  20  years 
after  Solomon's  marriage  with  Pharaoh's  daughter 
(conip.  Cant.  v.  4,  and  1  K.  vi.  38).  It  will  readily 
be  observed  that  these  arguments  do  not  in  any 
way  affect  the  literal  theory  of  Jacobi. 

For  external  arguments  the  allegorists  depend 
principally  upon  Jewish  tradition,  and  the  analogy 
of  Oriental  poetry.  The  value  of  the  former,  as 
respects  a  composition  of  the  10th  cent.  B.C.,  is 
estimated  by  Mich.  (Not.  ad  Lowth.)  at  a  very 
low  rate.  For  the  latter,  it  is  usual  to  refer  to 
such  authors  as  Chardin,  Sir  W.  Jones,  Herbelot, 
&c.  (see  Rosenm.  Anitnad.).  Rosennriiller  gives  a 
song  of  Hafiz,  with  a  paraphrase  by  a  Turkish 
commentator,  which  unfolds  the  Spiritual  meaning. 
For  other  specimens  of  the  same  kind  see  Lane's 
Egyptians.  On  the  other  hand  the  objections 
taken  by  Dr.  Noyes  are  very  important  (New 
Transit).  It  would  seem  that  there  is  one  essen- 
tial difference  between  the  Song  of  Solomon  and 
the  allegorical  compositions  of  the  poets  in  question. 
In  the  latter  the  allegory  is  more  or  less  avowed ; 
and  distinct  reference  is  made  to  the  Supreme 
Being :  in  the  former  there  is  nothing  of  the  kind. 
But  the  most  important  consideration  adduced  by 
the  literalists  is  the  fact  that  the  Cant,  are  the 
production  of  a  different  country,  and  separated 
from  the  songs  of  the  Sufis  and  the  Hindoo  mys- 
tics by  an  interval  of  nearly  2000  years.  To  which 
it  may  be  added  that  the  Song  of  Solomon  springs 
out  of  a  religion  which  has  nothing  in  common 
with  the  Pantheism  of  Persia  and  India.  In  short, 
the  conditions  of  production  in  the  two  cases  are 
utterly  dissimilar.  But  the  literalists  are  not 
content  with  destroying  this  analogy  ;  they  proceed 
farther  to  maintain  that  allegories  do  not  generally 
occur  in  the  sacred  writings  without  some  intima- 
tion of  their  secondary  meaning,  which  intimation 
in  the  case  of  the  Cant,  is  not  forthcoming.  They 
argue  from  the  total  silence  of  our  Loid  and  His 
apostles  respecting  this  book,  not  indeed  that  it  is 
uninspired  ;  but  that  it  was  never  intended  to  bear 
within  its  poetic  envelope  that  mystical  sense 
winch  would  have  rendered  it  a  perfect  treasury 
of  reference  for  Paul,  when  unfolding  the  spiritual 
relation  between  Christ  and  His  church  (see  2  Cor. 


CAPERNAUM 

xi.  2  ;  Rom.  vii.  4  ;  Eph.  v.  23-32).  Again,  it  is 
urged,  that  if  this  poem  be  allegorically  spiritual, 
then  its  spiritualism  is  of  the  very  highest  order, 
and  utterly  inconsistent  with  the  opinion  which 
assigns  it  to  Solomon.  The  philosophy  of  Solomon, 
as  given  in  Eccl.,  is  a  philosophy  of  indifference, 
apparently  suggested  by  the  exhaustion  of  all 
sources  of  physical  enjoyment.  The  religion  of 
Solomon  had  but  little  practical  influence  on  his 
life ;  if  he  wrote  the  glowing  spiritualism  of  the 
Cant,  when  a  young  man,  how  can  we  account  for 
his  fearful  degeneracy  ?  If  the  poem  was  the  pro- 
duction of  his  old  age,  how  can  we  reconcile  it 
with  the  last  fact  recorded  of  him  that  "  his  heart 
was  not  perfect  with  the  Lord,  his  God  ?"  For 
the  same  reason  it  is  maintained  that  no  other 
writer  would .  have  selected  Solomon  as  a  symbol 
of  the  Messiah.  The  excessively  amative  character 
of  some  passages  is  designated  as  almost  blas- 
phemous when  supposed  to  be  addressed  by  Christ 
to  His  church  (vii.  2,  3,  7,  8) :  and  the  fact  that 
the  dramatis  personae  are  three,  is  regarded  as  de- 
cidedly subversive  of  the  allegorical  theory. 

The  strongest  argument  on  the  side  of  the  alle- 
gorists is  the  matrimonial  metaphor  so  frequently 
employed  in  the  Scriptures  to  describe  the  relation 
between  Jehovah  and  Israel  (Ex.  xxxiv.  15,  16  ; 
Num.  xv.  39  ;  Ps.  Lxxiii.  27  ;  Jer.  iii.  1-11  ;  Ez. 
xvi.,  xxiii.,  &c).  It  is  fully  stated  by  Prof.  Stuart 
(0.  T.  Canon).  On  the  other  hand  the  literalists 
deny  so  early  a  use  of  the  metaphor.  They  con- 
tend that  the  phrase  "  to  go  whoring  after  other 
gods  "  describes  a  literal  fact ;  and  that  even  the 
metaphor  as  used  by  the  prophets  who  lived  after 
Solomon  implies  a  wedded  relation,  and  therefore 
cannot  be  compared  with  the  ante-nuptial  affection 
which  forms  the  subject  of  Cant. 

IV.  Canonicity . — It  has  already  been  observed 
that  the  book  was  rejected  from  the  Canon  by  Cas- 
tellio  and  Whiston  ;  but  in  no  case  has  its  rejection 
been  defended  on  external  grounds.  It  is  found  in 
the  LXX.,  and  in  the  translations  of  Aquila,  Sym- 
machus,  and  Theodot.  It  is  contained  in  the  cata- 
logue given  in  the  Talmud,  and  in  the  catalogue 
of  Melito  ;  and  in  short  we  have  the  same  evidence 
for  its  canonicity  as  that  which  is  commonly  ad- 
duced for  the  canonicity  of  any  book  of  the  0.  T. 

(In  addition  to  the  ordinary  sources,  reference 
is  advised  to  Lowth,  Praelect.  xxx.,  xxxi.,  together 
with  the  notes  of  Michaelis,  and  the  animadver- 
sions of  Rosenmiiller,  Oxon.  1821  ;  Harmer's  Out- 
lines, &c,  London,  2nd  ed.  1775;  Tiansl.  with 
notes  by  Mason  Good,  Lond.  1803  ;  Congreg.  Mag. 
for  1837  and  1838;  New  Transl.  of  Prov.  Eccl. 
and  Cant,  by  Prof.  Noyes,  Boston,  1846  ;  Com- 
mentary on  Song,  &c,  by  Prof.  Burrowes,  Phila- 
delphia, 1853  ;  Das  Gereitcte  Hohelied,  by  J.  T. 
Jacobi,  1771  :  Salomon's  Lieder  der  Liebe,  &c,  in 
vol.  iii.  of  Herder's  works,  Stuttgart,  and  Tubingen,. 
1852  ;  Das  Hohelied  Salomo's,  &c,  by  Ewald,  Got- 
tingen,  1826  ;  Das  Hohc  Lied  Salomonis  ausgelcgt 
von  W.  Hengstenberg,  Berlin,  1853  ;  Das  Hohc 
Lied,  &c,  by  Ernst  Meier,  Tubingen,  1854;  The 
Song  of  Songs,  &c,  by  C.  D.  Ginsburg,  Lond., 
1857  ;  the  last  mentioned  is  specially  recommended 
to  the  English  reader).  [T.  E.  B.] 

CAPEE'NAUM  (Rec.  T.  Kairepvaoifx  ;  Lachm. 

withB.  Kcupapvaovfj.,  as  if  D1H3  "IQ3.  "village  of 

Nachum  ;"  Syriac  Nitr.iOClAAJ    $£l±>D,  Peseh. 

J&3.A4.J     'y£ld  ;     Capharnauni),    a    name    with 


CAPERNAUM 

which  all  are  familiar  as  that  of  the  scene  of  many 
acts  and  incidents  in  the  life  of  Christ.  There  is 
no  mention  of  Capernaum  in  the  0.  T.  or  Apo- 
crypha, but  the  passage  Is.  ix.  1  (in  Hebrew,  viii.  23) 
is  applied  to  it  by  St.  Matthew.  The  word  Caphar 
in  the  name  perhaps  indicates  that  the  place  was  of 
late  foundation.     [Caphar.] 

The  few  notices  of  its  situation  in  the  N.  T.  are 
not  sufficient  to  enable  us  to  determine  its  exact 
position.  It  was  on  the  western  shore  of  the  Sea  of 
Galilee  (r^v  irapadaXaffffiav,  Matt.  iv.  13;  comp. 
John  vi.  '24),  and,  if  recent  discoveries  are  to  be 
trusted  (Cureton's  Nitrian  Eec.  John  vi.  17),  was 
of  sufficient  importance  to  give  to  that  Sea,  in  whole 
or  in  part,  the  name  of  the  "  lake  of  Capernaum." 
(This  was  the  case  also  with  Tiberias,  at  the  other 
extremity  of  the  lake.  Comp.  John  vi.  1,  "the 
sea  of  Galilee  of  Tiberias.")  It  was  in  the  "  land 
of  Gennesaret"  (Matt.  xiv.  34,  compared  with 
John  vi.  17,  21,  24),  that  is,  the  rich,  busy  plain 
on  the  west  shore  of  the  lake,  which  we  know  from 
the  descriptions  of  Josephus  and  from  other  sources 
to  have  been  at  that  time  one  of  the  most  prosper- 
ous and  crowded  districts  in  all  Palestine.  [Gen- 
Nesareth.]  Being  on  the  shore,  Capernaum  was 
lower  than  Nazareth  and  Cana  of  Galilee,  from 
which  the  road  to  it  was  one  of  descent  (Johnii.  12  ; 
Luke  iv.  31),  a  mode  of  speech  which  would  apply 
to  the  general  level  of  the  spot  even  if  our  Lord's 
expression  "exalted  unto  heaven"  (v^ooOrjar) ,  Matt. 
xi.  23)  had  any  reference  to  height  of  position  in 
the  town  itself.  It  was  of  sufficient  size  to  be 
always  called  a  "  city  "  (tt^A-is,  Matt.  ix.  1 ;  Mark 
i.  33) ;  had  its  own  synagogue,  in  which  our  Lord 
frequently  taught  (John  vi.  59  ;  Mark  i.  21 ;  Luke 
iv.  33,  38) — a  synagogue  built  by  the  centurion 
of  the  detachment  of  Roman  soldiers  which  appears 
to  have  been  quartered  in  the  place a  (Luke  vii. 
1,  comp.  8;  Matt.  viii.  8).  But  besides  the  gar- 
rison there  was  also  a  customs  station,  where  the 
dues  were  gathered  both  by  stationary  (Matt.  ix. 
9  ;  Mark  ii.  14 ;  Luke  v.  27)  and  by  itinerant 
(Matt.  xvii.  24)  officers.  If  the  "  way  of  the  sea" 
was  the  great  road  from  Damascus  to  the  south 
(Ritter,  Jordan,  271)  the  duties  may  have  been 
levied  not  only  on  the  fish  and  other  commerce  of 
the  lake,  but  on  the  caravans  of  merchandise  pass- 
ing to  Galilee  and  Judaea. 

The  only  interest  attaching  to  Capernaum  is  as 
the  residence  of  our  Lord  and  his  Apostles,  the  scene 
of  so  many  miracles  and  "  gracious  words."  At 
Nazareth  He  was  "  brought  up,"  but  Capernaum 
was  emphatically  His  "  own  city  ;"  it  was  when 
He  retained  thither  that  He  is  said  to  have  been 
"at  home"  (Mark  ii.  1;  such  is  the  force  of  iv 
oIkw — A.  V.  "  in  the  house  ").  Here  he  chose  the 
Evangelist  Matthew  or  Levi  (Matt.  ix.  9).  The 
brothers  Simon-Peter  and  Andrew  belonged  to  Ca- 
pernaum (Mark  i.  29),  and  it  is  perhaps  allowable 
to  imagine  that  it  was  mi  the  sea-beach  below  the 
town  (for,  doubtless,  like  true  orientals,  these  two 
fishermen  kept  close  to  home),  while  Jesus  was 
"walking"  there,  before  "great  multitudes"  had 
learned  tn  "gather  together  unto  Him,"  that  they 
heard  the  quiet  call  which  was  to  make  tiiem  for- 
sake all  and  follow  Him  (Mark  i.  16,  17,  comp. 
28).  It  was  here  that  Christ  worked  the  miracle 
on  the  centurion's  servant  (Matt.  viii.  5  ;  Luke  vii. 


CAPERNAUM 


273 


a  The  fact  of  a  Roman  having  built  the  synagogue 
certainly  seems  some  argument  against  the  prosperity 

of  the  town. 


1),  on  Simon's  wife's  mother  (Matt.  viii.  14;  Mark 
i.  30;  Luke  iv.  38),  the  paralytic  (Matt.  ix.  1; 
Mark  ii.  1  ;  Luke  v.  18),  and  the  man  afflicted 
with  an  unclean  devil  (Mark  i.  33  ;  Luke  iv.  33). 
The  son  of  the  nobleman  (John  iv.  46)  was,  though 
resident  at  Capernaum,  healed  by  words  which  ap- 
pear to  have  been  spoken  in  Cana  of  Galilee.  At 
Capernaum  occurred  the  incident  of  the  child  (Mark 
ix.  33  ;  Matt,  xviii.  1  ;  comp.  xvii.  24) ;  and  in 
the  synagogue  there  was  spoken  the  wonderful  dis- 
course of  John  vi.  (see  verse  59 ). 

The,  doom  which  our  Lord  pronounced  against 
Capernaum  and  the  other  unbelieving  cities  of  the 
plain  of  Gennesareth  has  been  remarkably  fulfilled. 
In  the  present  day  no  ecclesiastical  tradition  even 
ventures  to  fix  its  site ;  and  the  contest  between 
the  rival  claims  of  the  two  most  probable  spots  is 
one  of  the  hottest,  and  at  the  same  time  the  most 
hopeless,  in  sacred  topography.  Fortunately  no- 
thing hangs  on  the  decision.  The  spots  in  dispute 
are  1.  Khan  Minyeh,  a  mound  of  ruins  which  takes 
its  name  from  an  old  khan  hard  by.  This  mound 
is  situated  close  upon  the  sea-shore  at  the  north- 
western extremity  of  the  plain  (now  El  Ghuweir). 
It  is  of  some  extent,  but  consisting  of  heaps  only 
with  no  visible  ruins.  These  are  south  of  the 
ruined  khan ;  and  north  of  them,  close  to  the 
water-line  of  the  lake,  is  a  large  spring  surrounded 
by  vegetation  and  overshadowed  by  a  fig-tree  which 
gives  it  its  name — Ain  et  Tin  (the  spring  of  the 
rigtree).  Three  miles  south  is  another  large  spring 
called  the  "  Round  Fountain,"  which  is  a  mile  and 
a  half  from  the  lake,  to  which  it  sends  a  consider- 
able stream  with  fish. 

2.  Three  miles  noith  of  Khan  Minyeh  is  the 
other  claimant,  Tell  Hum, — ruins b  of  walls  and 
foundations  covering  a  space  of  "half  a  mile  long 
by  a  quarter  wide,"  on  a  point  of  the  shore  pro- 
jecting into  the  lake  and  backed  by  a  very  gently 
rising  ground.  Rather  more  than  three  miles  fur- 
ther is  the  point  at  which  the  Jordan  enters  the 
north  of  the  lake. 

The  arguments  in  favour  of  Khan  Minyeh  will 
be  found  in  Robinson  (ii.  403,  4,  iii.  344-358). 
They  are  chiefly  founded  on  Josephus's  account  of 
his  visit  to  Cephamome,  which  Dr.  R.  would 
identify  with  the  mounds  near  the  khan,  and  on 
the  testimonies  of  successive  travellers  from  Arcul- 
fus  to  Quaresmius,  whose  notices  Dr.  R.  interprets 
— often,  it  must  be  confessed,  not  without  diffi- 
culty— In  reference  to  Khan  Minyeh.  The  fountain 
Capharnaum,  which  Josephus  elsewhere  mentions 
(/>.  ./.  iii.  10,  §8)  in  a  very  emphatic  manner  as  a 
chief  source  of  the  water  of  the  plain  of  Gennesa- 
reth and  as  abounding  with  tish,  Dr.  Ii.  believes  to 
be  the  Ain  et  Tin.  But  the  "Round  Fountain" 
certainly  answers  better  to  Josephus's  account  than 
a  spring  so  close  to  the  shore  and  so  near  one  end 
of  the  district  as  is  Ain  et  Tin.  The  claim  of 
Khan  Minyeh  is  also  strongly  opposed  by  a  later 
traveller  (Bonar,  437-41).  Still  this  makes  nothing 
for  Tell  Hum. 

The  arguments  in  favour  of  Tell  Hum  date  from 
about  L675.  They  are  urged  by  I>r.  Wilson.  The 
principal  one  is  the  name,  which  is  maintained  to 
be  a  relic  of  the  Hebrew  original — Caphar  having 
given  place  to  Tell.  Dr.  Wilson  also  ranges  Jose- 
phus mi  his  side  (Landsofthe  Bible,  ii.  139-149. 
See  also  Ritter,  Jordan,  335-343,   who  supports 

b  Vast  ruins  ....  no  ordinary  city  ....  site  of  a 
meat  town  |  Bonar,   111.  5  . 

T 


274 


CAPHAR 


Tell  Hum).  Khan  Minyeh,  Et-Tabighah,  ami 
Tell  Hum,  are  all,  without  doubt,  ancient  sites, 
but  the  conclusion  from  the  whole  of  the  evidence 
is  irresistible: — that  it  is  impossible  to  say  which  of 
them  represents  Capernaum,  which  Choiazin,  or 
which  Bethsaida.  Those  anxious  to  inquire  further 
into  this  subject  may  consult  the  originals,  as  given 
above.  For  the  best  general  description  and  re- 
production of  the  district,  see  Stanley,  8.  4'  P- 
ch.  x.  [G.] 

CATHAR   ("IQ3,   from  a  root  signifying  "  to 

cover,"  Ges.  707),  one  of  the  numerous  words  em- 
ployed in  the  Bible  to  denote  a  village  or  collection 
of  dwellings  smaller  than  a  city  (//•).  Mr.  Stanley 
proposes  to  render  it  by  "  hamlet  "  (.S'.  and  /'.  App. 
§85),  to  distinguish  its  occurrences  from  those  of 
<  'havvah,  Chatzer,  Benoteh,  and  other  similar  words. 
As  an  appellative  it  is  found  only  three  times: 
1  Chi',  xxvii.  25;  Cant.  vii.  11,  and  1  Sam.  vi.  IS 
(in  the  last  the  pointing  being  different,  Copher, 
"ID3 ) ;   but  in  neither  is  there  anything  to  enable 

us  to  fix  any  special  force  to  the  word. 

In  names  of  places  it  occurs  in  Chephar- 
Ammonai,  Chephirah,  Caphar-salama.  But 
the  number  of  places  compounded  therewith  men- 
tioned in  the  Talmuds  shows  that  the  name  became 
a  much  commoner  one  at  a  time  subsequent  to  the 
Biblical  history.  In  Arabic  Kefr  is  in  frequent  use 
(see  the  lists  in  the  Index  to  Robinson,  ii.  and  iii.) 
To  us  its  chief  interest  arises  from  its  forming  a 
pait  of  the  name  of  Capernaum,  i.  e.  Caphar- 
nahum.  [C-] 

CA'PHAE-SALAMA  (XapapcraXafid;  Alex. 
Xapcpapaapafia.  ;  Capharsalama),  a  place  (K^^tcn, 
Jos.  Ant.  xii.  10,  §4)  at  which  a  battle  was  fought 
between  Judas  Maccabaeus  and  Nicanor  (1  Mac.  vii. 
31).  From  the  fugitives  having  taken  refuge  in 
the  "  city  of  David,"  it  would  appear  to  have  been 
near  Jerusalem.  Is  it  not  possible  that  it  was 
Siloam,  the  Arabic  name  of  which  is  Kcfr-selwdn  ? 
Ewald  places  it  north  of  Ramla  on  the  Samaritan 
boundary  (Oesch.  iv.  368,  note),  but  no  certain 
tiaces  of  it  seem  to  have  been  yet  found.         [G .] 

CAPHENATHA  (Xa<p^a6d ;  Caphetetha), 
a  place  apparently  close  to  and  on  the  east  side  of 
Jerusalem,  which  was  repaired  by  Jonathan  Macca- 
baeus (1  Mac.  xii.  37).  The  name  is  derived  by 
Lightfoot  from  Caphnioth  the  Talmudic  word  for 
unripe  tigs.  If  this  be  correct,  there  is  a  remark- 
able correspondence  between  the  name  Caphenatha 
and  those  of  Bethany  (house  of  dates),  Bethphage 
(house  of  figs),  and  of  the  Mount  of  Olives  itself, 
on  which  the  three  were  situated — all  testifying  to 
tin-  ancient  fruitfulness  of  the  place.  [G.] 

CAPHI'RA   (Katyeipas ;    Enocadies),   1   Esd. 

V.  19.       [CltEPHIRAH.] 

CAPH'TOR   niMS3  ;    KcuriraSo/a'a ;    Cappa- 

docia) :  CAPHTORIM  (DnhS3  ;  ra^o^ef/i, 

Xa(p6opiei/j.,  Ka<pdopnip.  ;  Caphtorim,  Cappa- 
doces),  a  country  thrice  mentioned  as  the  primi- 
tive seat  of  the  Philistines  (Deut.  ii.  23 ;  Jer. 
xlvii.  4;  Am.  ix.  7),  who  are  once  called  Caphto- 
rim (Deut.  ii.  23),  as  of  the  same  race  as  the  Miz- 
raite  people  of  that  name  (Gen.  x.  14;  1  Chr.  i. 
12).  The  position  of  the  country,  since  it  was 
peopled  by  Mizraites,  must  be  supposed  to  be  in 
Egypt  or  near  to  it  in  Africa,  for  the  idea  of  the 
south-west  of  Palestine  is  excluded  by  the  migra- 


< APHTOR 

tion  of  the  Philistines.  In  Jer.  it  is  spoken  of  as 
TUnSS  ""N,  and  has  therefore  been  supposed  to  be 
an  island.  ^K,  however,  has  a  wider  signification  ; 
commonly  it  is  any  maritime  land,  whether  coast 
or  island,  as  in  the  expression  D^IJIH  >SN  (Gen.  x. 
5),  by  which  the  northern  coasts  and  the  islands  of 
the  Mediterranean  seem  to  be  intended,  the  former, 
in  part  at  least,  being  certainly  included.  It  must 
be  remembered,  however,  that  the  Kile  is  spoken  of 
as  a  sea  (D*)  by  Nahum  in  the  description  of  No,  or 

Thebes  (iii.  8).  [No.]  It  is  also  possible  that  the 
expression  in  Jer.  merely  refers  to  the  maritime 
position  of  the  Philistines  (comp.  Ez.  xxv.  16),  and 
that  Caphtor  is  here  poetically  used  for  Caphtorim. 
The  writer  {Encyclopaedia  Britannica,  8th  ed., 
EfHipt,  p.  419)  has  proposed  to  recognise  Caphtor  in 
the  ancient  Egyptian  name  of  Coptos.  This  name, 
if  literally  transcribed,  is  written  in  the  hiero- 
glyphics Kebtu,  Kebta,  anil  Keb-Her,  probably  pro- 
nounced Kubt,  Kabt,  and  Kebt-Hor  ( Brugsoh,  Geogr. 
Tnschr.  Taf.  xxxviii.  no.  899,  900),  whence  Coptic 

KeqT,  kgrto,  Keirrtu,  KeiiT"  to, 

j 

Gr.  Ko7ttos,  Arab.  UiV,  Kuft.     The  similarity  of 

name  is  so  great  that  it  alone  might  satisfy  us, 
but  the  correspondence  of  Alyvirros,  as  if  Ala 
yviTTos,  to  11FI23  ''N,  unless  ''N  refer  to  the  Phi- 
listine coast,  seems  conclusive.  We  must  not  sup- 
pose, however,  that  Caphtor  was  Coptos :  it  must 
rather  be  compared  to  the  Coptite  nome,  probablv 
in  primitive  ages  of  greater  extent  than  under  the 
Ptolemies,  for  the  number  of  nomes  was  in  the 
course  of  time  greatly  increased.  The  Caphtorim 
stand  last  in  the  list  of  the  Mizraite  peoples  in 
Gen.  and  Chr.,  probably  as  dwellers  in  Upper 
Egypt,  the  names  next  before  them  being  of 
Egyptian,  and  the  earliest  names  of  Libyan  peoples 
[Egypt].  It  is  not  necessary  to  discuss  other 
identifications  that  have  been  proposed.  The  chief 
are  Cappadocia,  Cyprus,  and  Crete,  of  which  the 
last  alone,  from  the  evident  connexion  of  the  Phi- 
listines with  Crete,  would  have  any  probability  in 
the  absence  of  more  definite  evidence.  There  would, 
however,  be  great  difficulty  in  the  way  of  the  sup- 
position that  in  the  earliest  times  a  nation  or  tribe 
removed  from  an  island  to  the  mainland. 

The  migration  of  the  Philistines  is  mentioned  or 
alluded  to  in  all  the  passages  speaking  of  Caphtor 
or  the  Caphtorim.  It  thus  appears  to  have  been 
an  event  of  great  importance,  and  this  supposition 
receives  support  from  the  statement  in  Amos.  In 
the  lists  of  Gen.  and  Chr.,  as  the  text  now  stands, 
the  Philistines  are  said  to  have  come  forth  from 
the  Casluhim — "the  Casluhim,  whence  came  forth 
the  Philistines,  and  the  Caphtorim," — where  the 
Heb.  forbids  us  to  suppose  that  the  Philistines  and 
Caphtorim  both  came  from  the  Casluhim.  Here 
there  seems  to  have  been  a  transposition,  for  the 
other  passages  are  as  explicit,  or  more  so,  and  their 
form  does  not  admit  of  this  explanation.  The 
period  of  the  migration  must  have  been  very  re- 
mote, since  the  Philistines*  were  already  established 

a  The  conquest  of  the  Avim  does  not  seem  to  have 
been  complete  when  the  Israelites  entered  the  Pro- 
mised Land,  for  they  are  mentioned  after  the  "  five 
lords  of  the  Philistines"  in  Josh.  (xiii.  3).  The 
expression  therefore  in  Deut.  ii.  23,  "  And  the  Avim 


CAPHTOR 

in  Palestine  in  Abraham's  time  (Gen.  xxi.  32,  34). 
The  evidence  of  the  Egyptian  monuments,  which 
is  indirect,  tends  to  the  same  conclusion,  but  takes 
us  yet  further  back  in  time.  It  leads  us  to  suppose 
that  the  Philistines  and  kindred  nations  were  cog- 
nate to  the  Egyptians,  but  so  diilerent  from  them 
in  manners  that  they  must  have  separated  before 
the  character  and  institutions  of  the  latter  had  at- 
tained that  development  in  which  they  continued 
throughout  the  period  to  which  their  monuments 
belong.  We  rind  from  the  sculptures  of  Rameses 
III.  at  Medeenet  Haboo,  that  the  Egyptians  about 
1200  B.C.  were  at  war  with  the  Philistines,  the 
Tok-karu,  and  the  Shayratana  of  the  Sea,  and  that 
other  Shayratana  served  them  as  mercenaries.  The 
Philistines  and  Tok-karu  were  physically  cognate, 
and  had  the  same  distinctive  dress ;  the  Tok-karu 
and  Shayratana  were  also  physically  cognate,  and 
fought  together  in  the  same  ships.  There  is  reason 
to  believe  that  the  Tok-karu  are  the  Carians,  and 
the  Shayratana  cannot  be  doubted  to  be  the  Chere- 
thim  of  the  Bible  and  the  earlier  Cretans  of  the 
Greeks,  inhabiting  Crete,  and  probably  the  coast  of 
Palestine  also  (Enc.  Brit.  Egypt,  462).  All  bear  a 
greater  resemblance  to  the  Egyptians  than  does  any 
other  group  of  foreign  peoples  represented  in  their 
sculptures.  This  evidence  points  therefore  to  the 
spread  of  a  seafaring  race  cognate  to  the  Egyptians 
at  a  very  remote  time.  Their  origin  is  not  alone 
spoken  of  in  the  record  of  the  migration  of  the  Phi- 
listines, but  in  the  tradition  of  the  Phoenicians  that 
they  came  from  the  Erythraean  Sea  [Arabia],  and 
we  must  look  for  the  primaeval  seat  of  the  whole 
race  on  the  coasts  of  Arabia  and  Africa,  where  all 
ancient  authorities  lead  us  mainly  to  place  the 
Cushites  and  the  Ethiopians.  [Cush.]  The  dif- 
ference of  the  Philistines  from  the  Egyptians  in 
dress  and  manners  is,  as  we  have  seen,  evident  on 
the  Egyptian  monuments.  From  the  Bible  we 
learn  that  their  laws  and  religion  were  likewise 
different  from  those  of  Egypt,  and  we  may  there- 
fore consider  our  pievious  supposition  as  to  the 
time  of  the  separation  of  the  peoples  to  which  they 
belong  to  be  positively  true  in  their  particular  case. 
It  is  probable  that  they  left  Caphtor  not  long  after 
the  first  arrival  of  the  Mizraite  tribes,  while  they  had 
not  yet  attained  that  attachment  to  the  soil  that 
afterwards  so  eminently  characterized  the  descend- 
ants of  those  which  formed  the  Egyptian  nation. 
The  words  of  the  prophet  Amos  seem  to  indicate  a 
deliverance  of  the  Philistines  from  bondage.  "  [Are] 
ye  not  as  children  of  Ethiopians  (D,!,CJO)  unto  me, 

[0]  children  of  Israel  ?  hath  the  Lord  said.  Have 
not  I  caused  Israel  to  go  up  out  of  the  hind  of  Egypt, 
and  the  Philistines  from  Caphtor,  and  Aram  from 
Kir?"  (Am.  ix.  7).  The  mention  of  the  Ethiopians 
is  worthy  of  note  :  here  they  are  perhaps  spoken  of 
as  a  degraded  people.  The  intention  appears  to  be 
to  show  that  Israel  was  not  the  only  nation  which 
had  been  providentially  led  from  one  country  to 
another  where  it  might  Nettle,  and  the  interposition 
would  seem  to  imply  oppression  preceding  the  mi- 
gration. It  may  be  remarked  that  Manetho  speaks 
of  a  revolt  and  return  to  allegiance  of  the  Libyans, 
probably  the  Lehabim,  or  Lubim,  from  whose  name 
Libya,  &C.,  certainly  came,  in  the  reign  of  the  6rs< 


CAPTAIN 


275 


king  of  the  third  dynasty,  Necherophea  or  Neche- 
rochis,  in  the  earliest  age  of  Egyptian  history,  B.C. 
cir.  2600  (Coiy,  Anc.  Frag.  2nd  ed.  pp.  100, 
101.).  [R.  S.  P.] 

CAPPADO'CIA  (KaTTTraSoKi'o).  This  eastern 
district  of  Asia  Minor  is  interesting  in  reference  to 
New  Testament  history  only  from  the  mention  of 
its  Jewish  residents  among  the  hearers  of  St.  Peter's 
first  sermon  (Acts  ii.  9),  and  its  Christian  residents 
among  the  readers  of  St.  Peter's  first  Epistle  (1  Pet. 
i.  1).  The  Jewish  community  in  this  region, 
doubtless,  formed  the  nucleus  of  the  Christian  :  and 
the  former  may  probably  be  traced  to  the  first  in- 
troduction of  Jewish  colonists  into  Asia  Minor  by 
Seleucus  (Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  3  §4).  The  Roman 
.period,  through  the  growth  of  large  cities  and  the 
construction  of  roads,  would  afford  increased  faci- 
lities for  the  spread  both  of  Judaism  and  Chris- 
tianity. It  should  be  observed  that  Cappadocia 
was  easily  approached  from  the  direction  of  Pales- 
tine and  Syria,  by  means  of  the  pass  called  the 
Cilician  Gates,  which  led  up  through  the  Taurus 
from  the  low  coast  of  Cilicia,  ami  that  it  was  con- 
nected, at  least  under  the  later  Emperors,  by  good 
roads  with  the  district  beyond  the  Euphrates. 

The  range  of  Mount  Taurus  and  the  upper 
course  of  the  Euphrates  may  safely  be  mentioned, 
in  general  terms,  as  natural  boundaries  of  Cappa- 
docia on  the  south  and  east.  Its  geographical 
limits  on  the  west  and  north  were  variable.  In 
early  times  the  name  reached  as  far  northwards  as 
the  Euxine  Sea.  The  region  of  Cappadocia,  viewed 
in  this  extent,  constituted  two  satrapies  under  the 
Persians,  and  afterwards  two  independent  mo- 
narchies. One  was  Cappadocia  on  the  Pontus,  the 
other  Cappadocia  near  the  Taurus.  Here  we  have 
the  germ  of  the  two  Roman  provinces  of  Pontus 
and  Cappadocia.  [Pontus.]  Several  of  the  mo- 
narchs  who  reigned  in  Cappadocia  Proper  bore  the 
name  of  Ariaratnes.  One  of  them  is  mentioned  in 
1  Mace.  xv.  22.  The  last  of  these  monaichs  was 
called  Arehelaus  (see  Joseph.  Ant.  xvl.  4,  §6). 
He  was  treacherously  treated  by  the  Emperor  Ti- 
berius, who  reduced  his  kingdom  to  a  province 
a.d.  17.  This  is  the  position  in  which  the  country 
stood  during  the  time  of  St.  Peter's  apostolic  work. 
Cappadocia  is  an  elevated  table-land  intersected 
by  mountain-chains.  It  seems  always  to  have  been 
deficient  in  wood ;  but  it  was  a  good  grain  country, 
and  it  was  particularly  famous  for  grazing.  Its 
Roman  metropolis,  afterwards  both  the  birthplace 
and  episcopal  see  of  St.  Basil,  was  Caesarea  (now 
Kaisariyeh  ),  formerly  Mazaca,  situated  near  Mount 
Argaeus,  the  highest  mountain  in  Asia  Minor. 
Some  of  its  other  cities  were  equally  celebrated  in 
ecclesiastical  history,  especially  Nyssa,  Nazianzus, 
Samosata  and  Tyana.  The  native  Cappadocians 
seem  originally  to  have  belonged  to  the  Syrian 
stock:  and  since  Ptolemy  (v.  li)  places  the  cities  of 
[conium  and  Derbe  within  the  limits  of  this  region, 
we  may  possibly  obtain  from  this  circumstance 
some  light  on  "  the  speech  of  Lycaonia,"  Acts  xiv. 
11.  [Lycaonia.]  The  best  description  of  these 
parts  of  Asia  Minor  will  be  found  in  Hamilton's 
Researches,  andTexier's  Asie  Mineure.  [J.  S.  H.] 
CAPTAIN.      (1.)   As  a  purely  military  title, 


who  dwelt  in  villages  (D'HVnSi  wrongly  made  a 
prop,  name  in  the  A.  V.,  and  in  the  I.XX.,  where  the 
fern.  pi.  niTUn  has  become,   through   the  previous 


change  of  T  to  T,  'AcnjSuifl;,  even  to  Azzah  (Gaza), 
Oaphtorim  who  came  forth  from  Caphtor  destroyed 
them  and  dwelt  in  their  stead,"  may  mean  that  a 
part  of  the  Avim  alone  perished. 

T  2 


276  CAPTIVITIES  OF  THE  JEWS 
Captain  answers  to  "ID*  in  the  Hebrew  army,  and 
X^iapxos  (tribunus)  in  the  Roman.  [Army.] 
The  "  captain  of  the  guard  "  (o-Tpa.Toire8a.pxys)  m 
Acts  xxviii.  16,  is  also  spoken  of  under  Army  [p. 
114].  (2.)  J*Xpi  which  is  occasionally  rendered 
captain,  applies  sometimes  to  a  military  (Josh.  x. 
24;  Judg.  xi.  6,  11  ;  Is.  xxii.  3;  Dan.  xi.  18), 
sometimes  to  a  civil  command  (e.  g.  Is.  i.  10,  iii. 
6) :  its  radical  sense  is  division,  and  hence  decision 
without  reference  to  the  means  employed :  the  term 
illustrates  the  double  office  of  the  D2b>.     (3.)  The 

"captain  of  the  temple"  (arpar-nyhs  tov  lepov) 
mentioned  by  St.  Luke  (xxii.  4  ;  Acts  iv.  1,  v.  24) 
in  connexion  with  the  priesfs.  was  not  a  military 
officer,  but  superintended  the  guard  of  priests  and 
Levites,  who  kept  watch  by  night  in  the  Temple. 
The  office  appears  to  have  existed  frcm  an  early 
date;  the  "  priests  that  kept  the  door"  (2  K.  xii. 
9,  xxv.  18)  are  described  by  Josephus  (Ant.  x.  8. 
§5)  as  rovs  (pvXa.ao'ovra^  to  Upov  7)ye/j.6vas:  a 
notice  occurs  in  2  Mace.  iii.  4  of  a  ■npoo'Tarns  tov 
Upov  ;  this  officer  is  styled  ffTpaTi)y6s  by  Josephus 
(Ant.  xx.  6,  §2  ;  B.  J.,  vi.  5,  §3)  ;  and  in  the 
Mishna  (Middoth,  i.  §2)  nan  "111  B»K,  "  the 
captain  of  the  mountain  of  the  Temple;"  his  duty, 
as  described  in  the  place  last  quoted,  was  to  visit 
the  posts  during  the  night,  and  see  that  the  sentries 
were  doing  their  duty.  (4.)  The  term  &pxvyos, 
rendered  "  captain  "  (Heb.  ii.  10),  has  no  reference 
whatever  to  a  military  office.  [\V.  L.  B.] 

CAPTIVITIES    OF   THE   JEWS.      The 

bondage  of  Israel  in  Egypt,  and  their  subjugation 
at  different  times  by  the  Philistines  and  other  na- 
tions, are  sometimes  included  under  the  above  title  ; 
and  the  Jews  themselves,  perhaps  with  reference  to 
Daniel's  vision  (ch.  vii.),  reckon  their  national  cap- 
tivities as  four — the  Babylonian,  Median,  Grecian, 
and  Roman  (Eisenmenger,  Entdecktes  Judenthurn, 
vol.  i.  p.  748).  But  the  present  article  is  confined 
to  the  forcible  deportation  of  the  Jews  from  their 
native  land,  and  their  forcible  detention,  under  the 
Assyrian  or  Babylonian  kings. 

The  kingdom  of  Israel  was  invaded  by  three  or  four 
successive  kings  of  Assyria.  Pul  or  Sardanapalus, 
according  to  Rawlinson-(CWiwie  of  Assyrian  His- 
tory, p.  14,  but  compare  Rawl.  Herodotus,  vol.  i. 
p.  466),  imposed  a  tribute,  B.C.  771  (or  762  Rawl.) 
upon  Menahem  (1  Chr.  v.  26,  and  2  K.  xv.  19). 
Tiglath-Pileser  carried  away  B.C.  740  the  trans- 
Jordauic  tribes  (1  Chr.  v.  26)  and  the  inhabitants 
of  Galilee  (2  K.  xv.  29,  compare  Is.  ix.  1),  to  As- 
syria. Shalmaneser  twice  invaded  ('_'  K".  xvii.  3,  5) 
the  kingdom  which  remained  to  Hoshea,  took  Sa- 
maria B.C.  721  after  a  siege  of  three  years,  and 
carried  Israel  away  into  Assyria.  In  an  inscription 
interpreted  by  Rawlinson  (Herodotus,  vol.  i.  p. 
472),  the  capture  of  Samaria  is  claimed  by  King 
Sargon  (Is.  xx.  1)  as  his  own  achievement.  The 
cities  of  Samaria  were  occupied  by  people  sent  from 
Babylon,  Cuthah,  Ava,  Hamath,  and  Sepharvaim : 
and  Halah,  Habor,  Hara,  and  the  river  of  Gozan 
became  the  seats  of  the  exiled  Israelites. 

Sennacherib  B.C.  713  is  stated  (Rawl.  Outline, 
p.  24,  but  compare  Demetrius  ap.  Clem.  Alexand. 
Stiomata,  i.  21,  incorrectly  quoted  as  confirming 
the  statement)  to  have  carried  into  Assyria  200,000 
captives  from  the  Jewish  cities  which  he  took  (2  K. 
xviii.  13).  Nebuchadnezzar,  in  the  first  half  of  his 
reign,  B.C.  606-562,  repeatedly  invaded  Judaea,  be- 


CAPTIVITIES  OF  THE  JEWS 

sieged  Jerusalem,  carried  away  the  inhabitants  to 
Babylon,  and  destroyed  the  city  and  Temple.  Two 
distinct  deportations  are  mentioned  in  2  K.  xxiv.  14 
(including  10,000  persons)  and  xxv.  11.  One  in 
2  Chr.  xxxvi.  20.  Three  in  Jer.  Iii.  28,  29,  includ- 
ing 4600  persons,  and  one  in  Dan.  i.  3.  The  two 
principal  deportations  were,  (1)  that  which  took 
place  B.C.  598,  when  Jeb.oiacb.in  with  all  the 
nobles,  soldiers,  and  artificers  were  carried  away  ; 
and  (2)  that  which  followed  the  destruction  of  the 
Temple  and  the  capture  of  Zedekiah  B.C.  588.  The 
three  which  Jeremiah  mentions  may  have  been  the 
contributions  of  a  particular  class  or  district  to  the 
general  captivity ;  or  they  may  have  taken  place, 
under  the  orders  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  before  or  after 
the  two  principal  deportations.  The  captivity  of 
certain  selected  children  B.C.  607,  mentioned  by 
Daniel,  who  was  one  of  them,  may  have  occurred 
when  Nebuchadnezzar  was  colleague  or  lieutenant 
of  his  father  Nabopolassar,  a  year  before  he  reigned 
alone.  The  70  years  of  captivity  predicted  by  Je- 
remiah (xxv.  12)  are  dated  by  Prideaux  from 
B.C.  606  (see  Connexion,  anno  606  ;  and  comp. 
Davison,  On  Prophecy,  Lect.  vi.  pt.  1).  If  a  sym- 
bolical interpretation  were  required,  it  would  be 
more  difficult  to  regard  (with  Winer  and  Rosen- 
miiller)  these  70  years  as  an  indefinite  period  de- 
signated arbitrarily  by  a  sacred  number,  than  to 
believe  with  St.  Augustine  (Enarratio  in  Ps. 
exxvi.  1)  that  they  are  a  symbol  of  "all  time." 
The  captivity  of  Ezekiel  dates  from  B.C.  598,  when 
that  prophet,  like  Mordecai  the  uncle  of  Esther 
(ii.  6),  accompanied  Jehoiachin. 

We  know  nothing,  except  by  inference  from  the 
book  of  Tobit,  of  the  religious  or  social  state  of  the 
Israelitish  exiles  in  Assyria.  Doubtless  the  con- 
stant policy  of  17  successive  kings  had  effectually 
estranged  the  people  from  that  religion  which  cen- 
tered in  the  Temple,  and  had  reduced  the  number 
of  faithful  men  below  the  7000  who  were  revealed 
tor  the  consolation  of  Elijah.  Some  priests  at  least 
were  among  them  (2  K.  xvii.  28),  though  it  is  not 
certain  that  these  were  of  the  tribe  of  Levi  (1  K. 
xii.  31).  The  people  had  been  nurtured  for  250 
years  in  idolatry  in  their  own  land,  where  they 
departed  not  (2  K.  xvii.  22)  from  the  sins  of  Jero- 
boam, notwithstanding  the  proximity  of  the  Temple, 
and  the  succession  of  inspired  prophets  (2  K.  xvii. 
13)  among  them.  Deprived  of  these  checks  on 
their  natural  inclinations  (2  K.  xvii.  15),  torn  from 
their  native  soil,  destitute  of  a  hereditary  king, 
they  probably  became  more  and  more  closely  assi- 
milated to  their  heathen  neighbours  in  Media.  And 
when,  after  the  lapse  of  more  than  a  century,  they 
were  joined  B.C.  598  by  the  first  exiles  from  Jeru- 
salem, very  few  families  probably  retained  suffi- 
cient faith  in  the  God  of  their  fathers  to  appi'eciate 
and  follow  the  instruction  of  Ezekiel.  But  whether 
they  were  many  or  few,  their  genealogies  were  pro- 
bably lost,  a  fusion  of  them  with  the  Jews  took 
place,  Israel  ceasing  to  envy  Judah  (Is.  xi.  13) ; 
and  Ezekiel  may  have  seen  his  own  symbolical  pro- 
phecy (xxxvii.  15-19)  partly  fulfilled. 

The  captive  Jews  were  probably  prostrated  at 
first  by  their  great  calamity,  till  the  glorious  vision 
of  Ezekiel  in  the  5th  year  of  the  captivity  revived 
and  reunited  them.  The  wishes  of  their  conqueror 
were  satisfied  when  he  had  displayed  his  power  by 
transporting  them  into  another  land,  and  gratified 
his  pride  by  inscribing  on  the  walls  of  the  royal 
palace  his  victorious  progress  and  the  number  of  his 
captives.     He  could  not  have  designed   to  increase 


CAPTIVITIES  OF  THE  JEWS 

the  population  of  Babylon,  for  he  sent  Babylonian 
colonists  into  Samaria.  One  political  end  certainly 
was  attained — the  more  easy  government  of  a  people 
separated  from  local  traditions  and  associations  (see 
Gesenius  on  Is.  xxxvi.  16,  and  compare  Gen.  xlvii. 
21).  It  was  also  a  great  advantage  to  the  Assyrian 
king  to  remove  from  the  Egyptian  border  of  his 
empire  a  people  who  were  notoriously  well-affected 
towards  Egypt.  '1'he  captives  were  treated  not  as 
slaves  but  as  colonists.  There  was  nothing  to 
hinder  a  Jew  from  rising  to  the  highest  eminence 
in  the  state  (Dan.  ii.  48),  or  holdiug  the  most  con- 
fidential  office  near  the  person  of  the  king  (Neh.  i. 
11;  Tob.  i.  13,  22).  The  advice  of  Jeremiah 
(xxix.  5,  &c.)  was  generally  followed.  The  exiles 
increased  in  numbers  and  in  wealth.  They  observed 
the  .Mosaic  law'  (Esth.  iii.  8  ;  Tob.  xiv.  9).  They 
kept  up  distinctions  of  rank  among  themselves  (Ez. 
xx.  1).  And  though  the  assertion  in  the  Talmud 
be  unsupported  by  proof  that  they  assigned  thus 
early  to  one  of  their  countrymen  the  title  of  Head 
of  the  Captivity  (or,  captain  of  the  people,  2  Esd. 
v.  16),  it  is  certain  that  they  at  least'  preserved 
their  genealogical  tables,  and  were  at  no  loss  to  tell 
who  was  the  rightful  heir  to  David's  throne.  They 
had  neither  place  nor  time  of  national  gathering, 
no  Temple  ;  and  they  offered  no  sacrifice.  But  the 
rite  of  circumcision  and  their  laws  respecting  food, 
&c.  were  observed;  their  priests  were  with  them 
(Jer.  xxix.  1)  ;  and  possibly  the  practice  of  erecting 
synagogues  in  every  city  (Acts  xv.  21)  was  begun 
by  the  Jews  in  the  Babylonian  captivity. 

The  captivity  is  not  without  contemporaneous 
literature.  In  the  apocryphal  book  of  Tobit,  which 
is  generally  believed  to  be  a  mixture  of  poetical 
fiction  with  historical  facts  recorded  by  a  contem- 
porary, we  have  a  picture  of  the  inner  life  of  a 
family  of  the  tribe  of  Naphtali,  among  the  captives 
whom  Shalmaneser  brought  to  Nineveh.  The  apo- 
cryphal book  of  Baruch  seems,  in  Mr.  Layard's 
opinion,  to  have  been  written  by  one  whose  eyes, 
like  those  of  EzekieL,  were  familiar  with  the  gigantic 
forms  of  Assyrian  sculpture.  Several  of  the  Psalms 
appear  to  express  the  sentiments  of  Jews  who  were 
either  partakers  or  witnesses  of  the  Assyrian  cap- 
tivity. Ewald  assigns  to  this  period  Ps.  xlii., 
xliii.,  lxxxiv.,  xvii.,  xvi.,  xlix.,  xxii.,  xxv.,  xxxviii., 
lxxxviii.,  xl.,  lxix.,  cix.,  Ii.,  lxxi.,  xxv.,  xxxiv., 
lxxxii.,  xiv.,  exx.,  exxi.,  exxiii.,  exxx.,  exxxi.  And 
in  Ps.  lxxx.  we  seem  to  have  the  words  of  an 
Israelite,  dwelling  perhaps  in  Judaea  (2  Chr.  xv. 
9,  xxxi.  6),  who  had  seen  the  departure  of  his  coun- 
trymen to  Assyria:  and  in  Ps.  exxxvii.  an  outpour- 
ing of  the  first  intense  feelings  of  a  Jewish  exile  in 
Babylon.  But  it  is  from  the  three  great  prophets, 
Jeremiah;  Ezekiel,  and  Daniel,  that  we  learn  most 
of  the  condition  of  the  children  of  the  captivity. 
The  distant  warnings  of  Jeremiah,  advising  and 
cheering  them,  followed  them  info  Assyria.  There, 
for  a  few  years,  they  had  no  prophetic  guide;  till 
suddenly  the  vision  of  Ezekiel  at  Chebar  (in  the 
immediate  vicinity  of  Nineveh,  according  to  I.ayard, 
or,  according  to  others,  near  Carchemish  on  the  Eu- 
phrates) assured  them  that  the  glory  which  filled 
the  Temple  at  Jerusalem  was  not  hopelessly  nrith- 
drawn  from  the  outcast  people  of  ( iod-  As  Jeremiah 
warned  them  of  coming  woe.  so  Ezekiel  taught 
them  how  to  bear  that  which  was  come  upon  them. 
And  wleai  he  died,  after  passing  at  least  27  years 
(Ez.  xxix.  17)  in  captivity,  Daniel  survived  even 
beyond  the  Return  ;  and  though  his  high  station 
and  ascetic  life  probably  secluded  him  from  frequent 


CAPTIVITIES  OF  THE  JEWS    277 

familiar  intercourse  with  his  people,  he  filled  the 
place  of  chief  interpreter  of  God's  will  to  Israel, 
and  gave  the  most  conspicuous  example  of  devotion 
and  obedience  to  His  laws. 

The  Babylonian  captivity  was  brought  to  a  close 
by  the  decree  (Ezr.  i.  2)  of  Cyrus  B.C.  536,  and 
the  return  of  a  portion  of  the  nation  under  Shesh- 
bazzar  or  Zerubbabel  B.C.  535,  Ezra,  J3.C.  458,  and 
Nehemiah  B.C.  445.  The  number  who  returned 
upon  the  decree  of  B.C.  530  (which  was  possibly 
framed  by  Daniel,  Milman,  Hist,  of  Jews,  ii.  8) 
was  42,360,  besides  sen-ants.  Among  them  about 
30,000  are  specified  (compare  Ezr.  ii.  and  Neh. 
vii.)  as  belonging  to  the  tribes  of  Judah,  Benjamin, 
and  Levi.  It  has  been  inferred  (Prideaux,  anno 
536)  that  the  remaining  12,000  belonged  to  the 
tribes  of  Israel  (compare  Ezr.  vi.  17).  And  from 
the  fact  that  out  of  the  24  courses  of  priests  only 
4  returned  (Ezr.  ii.  36),  it  has  been  inferred  that 
the  whole  number  of  exiles  who  chose  to  continue 
in  Assyria  was  about  six  times  the  number  of 
those  who  returned.  Those  who  remained  (Esth. 
viii.  9,  11),  and  kept  up  their  national  distinc- 
tions, were  known  as  The  Dispersion  (John  vii. 
35  ;  1  Pet.  i.  1  ;  James  i.  1) :  and,  in  course  of 
time,  they  served  a  great  purpose  in  diffusing  a 
knowledge  of  the  true  God,  and  in  affording  a  point 
for  the  commencement  of  the  efforts  of  the  Evan- 
gelists of  the  Christian  faith. 

Many  attempts  have  been  made  to  discover  the 
ten  tribes  existing  as  a  distinct  community.  Jo- 
sephus  (Ant.  xi.  5,  §2)  believed  that  in  his  day 
they  dwelt  in  large  multitudes,  somewhere  beyond 
the  Euphrates,  in  Arsareth,  according  to  the  author 
of  2  Esd.  xiii.  45.  Rabbinical  traditions  and  fables, 
committed  to  writing  in  the  middle  ages,  assert  the 
same  fact  (Lightfoot,  Hor.  Hcbr.  in  1  Cor.  xiv.  Ap- 
pendix), with  many  marvellous  amplifications  (Ei- 
senmenger,  Ent.  Jud.  vol.  ii.,  ch.  x. ;  Jahu,  He- 
brew Commonwealth,  App.  bk.  vi.).  The  imagina- 
tion of  Christian  writers  has  sought  them  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  their  last  recorded  habitation  : 
Jewish  features  have  been  traced  in  the  Affghan 
tribes:  rumours  are  heard  to  this  day  of  a  Jewish 
colony  at  the  foot  of  the  Himalayas:  the  Black- 
Jews  of  Malabar  claim  affinity  with  them  :  elaborate 
attempts  have  been  made  to  identify  them  recently 
with  the  Nestorians,  and  in  the  17th  century  with 
the  Indians  of  North  America.  But  though  history 
bears  no  witness  of  their  present  distinct  existence, 
it  enables  us  to  track  the  footsteps  of  the  departing 
race  in  four  directions  after  the  time  of  the  Captivity. 
(1.)  .Some  returned  and  mixed  with  the  Jews  (Luke 
ii.  36;  Phil.  iii.  5,  &c).  (2.)  Some  were  left  in 
Samaria,  mingled  with  the  Samaritans  (Ezr.  vi.  21  ; 
John  iv.  12),  and  became  bitter  enemies  of  the 
Jews.  (3.)  Many  remained  in  Assyria,  and  mix- 
ing with  the  Jews  formed  colonies  throughout  the 
East,  and  were  recognised  as  an  integral  pari  of  the 
Dispersion  (see  Acts  ii.  9,  xxvi.  7;  Buchanan's 
Christian  Researches,  p.  212),  for  whom,  probably 
ever  since  the  days  id' Ezra,  that  plaintive  prayer,  the 
tenth  of  the  Shemoneh  Esre,  has  been  daily  offered, 
"Sound  the  great  trumpet  for  our  deliverance,  lift 
up  a  banner  tor  the  gathering  of  our  exiles,  anil 
unite  us  all  together  from  the  four  ends  of  tie- 
earth."  (4.)  "Most,  probably,  apostatized  in  Assyria, 
as  Prideaux  (anno  677)  supposes,  and  adopted  the 

Usages  ami    idolatry   of  the   nations   among    whom 

they  weii'  planted,  and  became  wholly  swallowed 

up  iu  them.      Dissertations  on  the  Ten  Tribes  have 
been  written  by  Calmet,  Commcntctire  Lateral,  vol. 


27S 


CAKABASION 


iii.  and  vi. ;  by  Witsius,  Aegyptiaca  ;  and  by  J.  I). 
Miehaelis. 

The  Captivity  was  a  period  of  change  in  tlie  ver- 
nacular language  of  the  Jews  (see  Neh.  viii.  8)  and 
in  the  national  character.  The  Jews  who  returned 
were  remarkably  free  from  the  old  sin  of  idolatry : 
a  great  spiritual  renovation,  m  accordance  with  the 
divine  promise  (Ez.  xxxvi.  24-28),  was  wrought  in 
them.  A  new  and  deep  feeling  of  reverence  for  the 
letter  of  the  law  and  for  the  person  of  Moses  was 
probably  a  result  of  the  religious  service  which  was 
performed  in  the  synagogues.  A  new  impulse  of 
commercial  enterprise  and  activity  was  implanted 
in  them,  and  developed  in  the  days  of  the  Disper-  , 
sion  (see  James  iv.  13).  [W.  T.  B.] 

CARABA'SION  ('Paj8a<nW ;  Alex.  Kapa- 
fiacriwv ;  Marimoth),  a  corrupt  name  to  which  it 
is  difficult  to  find  anything  corresponding  in  the 
Hebrew  text  (1  Esd.  ix.  34). 

CARBUNCLE  (rnj?N  *»«,  HgT3  or 
J"lp~)2  ;  KpvffraWov,  afxapaySos  ;  lapides  sen//,. 
tos,  smdragdus,  carbunculus  (?)).  From  the  etymo- 
logy of  np"l2  (Ex.  xxviii.  17),  root  pp.3,  to  flash, 
we  assume  that  a  stone  of  a  bright  coruscant  colour 
is  meant.  Kalisch  translates  it  smaragd,  and  says 
it  is  a  sort  of  precious  corundum  of  strong  glass 
lustre,  a  beautiful  green  colour  with  many  degrees 
of  shade,  pellucid  and  doubly  refractive.  Pliny 
enumerates  twelve  species  of  ff/j-dpaySos.  They  are 
not  rare  in  Egypt.  (Rosenm.  Alterth.  iv.  1,  34. 
See  Braun.  de  Vest.  Sacerdott.  p.  517,  sq.)  The 
form  Dp*l3  occurs  in  Ez.  xxviii.  13. 

In  Is.  liv.  12,  H^pN  \nN  (lit.  "  stones  of  a 
sparkling  gem")  are  translated  "carbuncles,"  and  by 
the  LXX.  Aidovs  KpvffTaWov.  PHpX  comes  from 
the  root  mp,  to  light  a  fire.     Compare  the  Arab. 

jsjj,  to  force  fire  from  the  hearth.    The  same  root 

in  Chald.,  Syr.,  and  Arab,  has  the  force  of  boring  ; 
a  meaning  which  may  be  traced  to  the  production 
of  fire  by  rapid  boring  into  wood.  [W.  I>.] 

CAR'CAS  (D3~p  ;  '  ApK€<ralos ;  Charchas),  the 

seventh  of  the  seven  "chamberlains"  (i.e.  eunuchs, 
DipnD)  of  king  Ahasuerus  (Esth.  i.  10).  The 
name  has  been  compared  with  the  Sanscrit  Kar- 
kaca,  =  severe  (see  Gesenius,  713). 

CARCHE'MISH  (E»»3n3  ;  XapKapis,  Xap- 

fjLiis  ;  Charcamis).  The  Scriptural  Carchemish  is 
not,  as  has  generally  been  supposed,  the  classical 
Circesium.  It  lay  very  much  higher  up  the  Eu- 
phrates, occupying  nearly  the  site  of  the  later  Ma- 
bog,  or  Hierapolis.  The  Assyrian  inscriptions  show 
it  to  have  been,  from  about  B.C.  1100  to  B.C.  850, 
a  chief  city  of  the  Hittites,  who  were  masters  of 
the  whole  of  Syria  from  the  borders  of  Damascus 
to  the  Euphrates  at  Bir,  or  Birch-jik.  It  seems  to 
have  commanded  the  ordinary  passage  of  the  Eu- 
phrates in  this  part  of  its  course,  and  thus  in  the 
contentions  between  Egypt  and  Assyria  its  posses- 
sion was  of  primary  consequence  (comp.  2  Chr. 
xxxv.  20,  with  Jer.  xlvi.  2).  Carchemish  appears 
to  have  been  taken  by  Pharaoh-Necho  shortly  after 
the  battle  of  Megiddo  (ab.  B.C.  608),  and  retaken 
by  Nebuchadnezzar  after  a  battle  three  years  later, 
B.C.   605  (Jer.  xlvi.   2).     The  word  Carchemish 


CARMEL 

would  mean  •'  the  foit  of  Chemosh,"  the  well-known 
deity  of  the  Moabites.  [G.  R.I 

CAREAH(rnp;  Kaprjfl;  Alex.  Kap-f)s;  Caree), 

father  of  Johanan  (2  K.  xxv.  23),  elsewhere  in  the 
A.  V.  spelt  Kareah. 

CA'RIA  (Kap'ta).  the  southern  part  of  the  region 
which  in  the  X.  T.  is  called  Asia,  and  the  south- 
western part  of  the  peninsula  of  Asia  Minor.  In 
the  Roman  times  the  name  of  Caria  was  probably 
less  used  than  previously.  At  an  earlier  period  we 
find  it  mentioned  as  a  separate  district  (1  Mace, 
xv.  23).  At  this  time  (i3.c.  139)  it  was  in  the 
enjoyment  of  the  privilege  of  freedom,  granted  by 
the  Romans.  A  little  before  it  had  been  assigned 
by  them  to  Rhodes,  and  a  little  later  it  was  incor- 
porated in  the  province  of  Asia.  From  the  context 
it  appears  that  many  Jews  were  resident  in  Caria. 
The  cities  where  they  lived  were  probably  Hali- 
carnassus  (»"&.),  Cnidus  (Jb.  also  Acts  xxvii.  7),  and 
Miletus  (Acts  xx.  15-38).  Off  the  coast  of  Caria 
were  the  islands  Pathos,  Cos,  Rhodes.  [J.  S.  H.] 

CAR'ME  (Xapfj.1  ;  Alex.  Xap/x-fi  ;  Caree), 
1  Esd.  v.  25.     [Harim.] 

CAR'MEL.  Nearly  ahvays  with  the  definite 
article,  ?DP3i"l.  i.  e.  "the  park,"  or  "  the  well- 
wooded  place."  1.  (6Kap(ffi\os;  Camel.  In  Kings, 
generally  '•  Mount  C."  'Sil  "I PI  ;    opos  rh  Kap/xri- 

Aiov:  in  the  Prophets,  "Carmel.")  A  mountain 
which  forms  one  of  the  most  striking  and  character- 
istic features  of  the  country  of  Palestine.  As  if  to 
accentuate  more  distinctly  the  bay  which  forms  the 
one  indentation  in  the  coast,  this  noble  ridge,  the 
only  headland  of  lower  and  central  Palestine,  forms 
its  southern  boundary,  running  out  with  a  bold  bluff 
promontory  all  but  into  the  very  waves,  of  the 
Mediterranean.  From  this  point  it  stretches  in  a 
nearly  straight  line,  bearing  about  S.S.E.,  for  a  little 
more  than  twelve  miles,  when  it  terminates  sud- 
denly by  a  bluff  somewhat  corresponding  to  its 
western  end,  breaking  down  abruptly  into  the  hills 
of  Jenin  and  Samaria  which  form  at  that  part  the 
central  mass  of  the  country. 

Carmel  thus  stands  as  a  wall  between  the  mari- 
time plain  of  Sharon  on  the  south,  and  the  more 
inland  expanse  of  Esdraelon  on  the  north.  To- 
wards the  former  the  slopes  or  spurs,  by  which 
the  central  ridge  descends,  are  gradual ;  but  on 
the  north  side  the  gradients  are  more  sudden,  in 
many  places  descending  almost  by  precipices  to  the 
Kishon,  which  runs  at  the  foot  of  the  mountain  in 
a  direction  generally  parallel  to  the  central  axis. 

The  structure  of  Carmel  is  in  the  main  the 
Jura  formation  (upper  oolite),  which  is  prevalent 
in  the  centre  of  Western  Palestine — a  soft  white 
limestone,  with  nodules  and  veins  of  flint.  As 
usual  in  limestone  formations  it  abounds  in  caves 
("  more  than  2000,"  Mislin,  ii.  46),  often  of  great 
length  and  extremely  tortuous.  At  the  west  end 
are  found  chalk  and  tertiary  breccia  formed  of 
fragments  of  chalk  and  flint  (Russegger,  in  Ritter, 
Pal.  712).  On  the  north-east  of  the  mount,  beyond 
the  Nahr  el  Mnkatta,  plutonic  rocks  appear,  break- 
ing through  the  deposited  strata  and  forming  the 
beginning  of  the  basalt  formation  which  runs  through 
the  Plain  of  Esdraelon  to  Tabor  and  the  Sea  of  I  Ga- 
lilee (Ritter.  712,  3).  The  round  stones  known  by 
the  names  of  "lapides  Judaic! "  and  "Elijah's 
melons  "   are  the   bodies    known    to    geologists    as 


CAEMEL 

"geodes."  Their  exterior  is  chert  or  flint  of  a 
lightish  brown  colour;  the  interior  hollow,  and 
lined  with  crystals  ot'  quartz  or  chalcedony.  They 
are  of  the  form,  and  often  the  size,  of  the  large 
water  melons  of  the  east.  Formerly  they  were 
easily  obtained,  but  are  now  very  rarely  found 
(Seetzen,  ii.  131,4;  Parkinson's  Organic  Remains, 
i.  322,  451).  The  "olives"  are  commoner.  They 
are  the  fossil  spines  of  a  kind  of  echinus  (cidaris 
glandiferd)  frequent  in  these  strata,  and  in  size 
and  shape  are  exactly  like  the  fruit  ( Parkinson,  iii. 
4."').  The  "apples"  are  probably  the  shells  of  the 
cidaris  itself.  For-  the  legend  of  the  origin  of  these 
"  fruits,"  and  the  position  of  the  "  held  "  or  "  gar- 
den "  of  Elijah  in  which  they  are  found,  see  Mislin, 
ii.  64,  5." 

In  form  Carmel  is  a  tolerably  continuous  ridge,  at 
the  W.  end  about  600,b  and  the  E.  about  1600  feel 
above  the  sea.  The  highest  part  is  some  four  miles 
from  the  east  end,  at  the  village  of  Esfieh,  which, 
according  to  the  measurements  of  the  English  en- 
gineers, is  1728  feet  above  the  sea.  In  appearance 
Carmel  still  maintains  the  character  which  there  is 
no  reason  to  doubt  was  the  origin  of  its  name.  It 
is  still  clothed  with  the  same  "  excellency "  of 
"wood,"  which  supplied  the  prophets  of  Israel  and 
Judah  alike  with  one  of  their  most  favourite 
illustrations  (Is.  xxxiii.  9  ;  Mic.  vii.  14).  Modern 
travellers  delight  to  describe  its  "rocky  dells  with 
deep  jungles  of  copse" — its  "shrubberies  thicker 
than  any  others  in  central  Palestine"  (Stanley,  MS.) 
— its  "  impenetrable  brushwood  of  oaks  and  other 
evergreens,  tenanted  in  the  wilder  parts  by  a  pro- 
fusion of  game  and  wild  animals"  (Porter,  ffandb.  . 
but  in  other  places  bright  with  "  hollyhocks, 
jasmine,  and  various  flowering  creepers"  (Van  de 
Velde).  "There  is  not  a  flower,"  says  the  last- 
named  traveller,  "  that  I  have  seen  in  Galilee,  or 
on  the  plains  along  the  coast,  that  I  do  not  find 
here  on  Carmel  .  .  .  still  the  flagrant,  lovely  moun- 
tain that  he  was  of  old"  (i.  .'517,  8).  "  The  whole 
mountain  side  was  dressed  with  blossoms  and  flower- 
ing shrubs  and  fragrant  herbs"  (Martineau,  559). 

Carmel  fell  within  the  lot  of  the  tribe  of 
Asher  (Josh.  xix.  26),  which  was  extended  as 
far  south  as  Dor  (Tantnm),  probably  to  give 
the  Asherites  a  share  of  the  rich  corn-growing 
plain  of  Sharon.  The  king  of  "  Jokneam  of  Car- 
mel "  was  one  of  the  Canaanite  chiefs  who  fell 
before  the  arms  of  Joshua  (xii.  22).  These  are  the 
earliest  notices  which  we  possess  of  the  name. 
There  is  not  in  them  a  hint  of  any  sanctity  as 
attaching  to  the  mount.  But  taking  into  account 
the  known  propensity  of  the  early  inhabitants  of 
Palestine  to  convert  "high  places"  into  sanctuaries 
— the  prominence  of  Carmel — the  fact  that  an  altar 
of  Jehovah  did  exist  there  before  the  introduction  of 
Baal  worship  into  the  kingdom  (1  K.  xviii.  30  ■ — 
Elijah's  choice  of  the  place  for  the  assembly  of  the 

1 pie,  such  assemblies   being  commonly  held  at 

holy  places — and  the  custom,  which  appears  to 
have  been  prevalent,  of  resorting  thither  on  new- 
moon  and  sabbath  (2  K.  iv.  '_'•'>)■ — taking  these  into 
account,  tie  re  seem  to  be  grounds  for  belli 
that  from  very  early  times  it  was  considered  as  a 
sacred    spot.     In   later   times  we   know    thai    its 


CARMEL 


270 


'  The  legend  is  sometimes  told  of  Lazarus  (Seetzen, 
Reisen,  1854,  ii.  134). 

b  The  cupola  of  the  convent  is  560  ft.  above  the 


reputation  was  not  confined  to  Palestine.  Pytha- 
goras was  led  to  it  by  that  reputation  ;  such  is  the 
express  statement  of  his  biographer  Iamblichus,  who 
himself  visited  the  mountain  ;  Vespasian  too  came 
thither  to  consult — so  we  are  told  by  Tacitus  with 
that  mixture  of  fact  and  fable  which  marks  all  the 
heathen  notices  of  Palestine — the  oracle  of  the  god, 
whose  name  was  the  same  as  that  of  the  mountain 
itself;  an  oracle  without  image  or  temple — "  ara 
tantum  et  reverentia  "  {Diet,  of  Geogr.  Carmelus). 

But  that  which  has  made  the  name  of  Carmel 
most  familiar  to  the  modern  world  is  its  intimate 
connexion  with  the  history  of  the  two  great  prophets 
of  Israel — Elijah  and  Elisha.  The  fiery  zeal  of  the 
one,  the  healing  tenderness  of  the  other  are  both 
inseparably  connected  in  our  minds  with  this 
mountain.  Here  Elijah  brought  back  Israel  to 
allegiance  to  Jehovah,  and  slew  the  prophets  of  the 
foreign  and  false  god;  here  at  his  entreaty  weie 
consumed  the  successive  "  fifties "  of  the  royal 
guard  ;  but  here,  on  the  other  hand,  Elisha  re- 
ceived the  visit  of  the  bereaved  mother  whose  son  he 
was  soon  to  restore  to  her  arms  (2  K.  iv.  25,  &c). 

The  first  of  these  three  events,  without  doubt, 
took  place  at  the  eastern  end  of  the  ridge.  In  fact 
it  is  difficult  to  find  another  site,  the  actual  name 
of  which  has  not  been  preserved,  in  which  every 
particular  is  so  minutely  fulfilled  as  in  this.  The 
tradition  preserved  in  the  convent,  and  among  the 
Druses  of  the  neighbouring  villages — the  names  of 
the  places — the  distance  from  Jezrecl — the  nature 
of  the  locality — the  presence  of  the  never-failing 
spring — all  are  in  its  favour.  -It  is,  however, 
remarkable  that  the  identification  has  been  made 
but  lately,  and  also  that  it  should  have  been  made 
by  two  travellers  almost  at  the  same  time — Lieut. 
Van  de  Velde  in  1852,  and  Professor  .Stanley  in 
1853.  This  interesting  site  cannot  be  better  de- 
scribed than  in  the  words  of  the  latter  traveller. 

"  The  tradition  is  unusually  trustworthy:  it  is 
perhaps  the  only  case  in  Palestine  in  which  the 
recollection  of  an  alleged  event  has  been  actually 
retained  in  the  native  Arabic  nomenclature.  Many 
names  of  towns  have  been  so  preserved,  but  here  is 
no  town,  only  a  shapeless  ruin,  yet  the  spot  has  a 
name — El-Maharrqkah — 'the  burning,'  or  'the 
sacrifice.'  The  Druses  come  here  from  a  distance 
to  perform  a  yearly  sacrifice;  and,  though  it  is 
possible  this  practice  may  have  originated  the 
name,  it  is  more  probable  that  the  practice  itself 
arose  from  an  earlier  tradition.  .  .  .  But  be  tin- 
tradition  gpod  or  bad,  the  localities  adapt  them- 
selves to  the  event  in  almost  every  particular. 
Thd  summit  thus  marked  out  is  the  i 
eastern  point  of  the  range,  commanding  the  last 
view  of  the  sea  behind,  and  the  first  view  of  the 
great  plain  in  front.  .  .  .  There  on  rlie  1 
ridge  of  the  mountain  may  well  have  stood  on  i1 
sacred  'high-place'  the  altar  of  Jehovah  which 
Jezebel  hail  cast  down.     Close  beneath,  on  a  wide 

upland    sweep,     under   the   shade   of    ancient    olives 

and  round  a  well*  of  water,  said  to  lie  perennial, 
and  which  may  therefore  have  escaped  the  general 
drought,  and  have  been  able  to  furnish  water  for 

the  trend ie-  round  the  altar,  mn  t  have  been  ranged 
on   one  side  the  king   and  people  with    the 


■   Josephus  distinctly  says  that  the  water  was  ob- 
tained from  the  neighbouring  well  :  oirb  tjj;  Kpiji'>js 
Ant.  uii.  13,  §5).     There  is  therefore  no  occasion 


sea  [Admiralty  Chart,  1585).     For  the  general  form  of    for  the  " coincidence "  discovered  by  Prof.  Blunt,  Und. 
the  ridge  see  the  section  on  Van  de  Velde'a  new  map.    Coincidences    II.  nnu.). 


280 


CARMEL 


prophets  of  Baal  and  Astarte,  and  on  the  other  the 
solitary  and  commanding  figure  of  the  prophet  of 
Jehovah.  Full  before  them  opened  the  whole  plain 
of  Esdraelon :  the  city  of  Jezreel,  with  Aliab's 
palace  and  Jezebel's  temple,  distinctly  visible:  in 
the  nearer  foreground,  immediately  under  the  base 
of  the  mountain,  was  clearly  seen  the  winding  bed 
of  the  Kishon."  To  this  may  be  added  that  a 
knoll  is  pointed  out  between  the  ridge  and  the 
plain,  bearing  the  name  of  Tell  Kasls,d  "  the  hill 
of  the  Priests,"  and  that  the  modern  name  of 
the  Kishon  is  Nahr  el  Mukatta,  "the  river  of 
slaughter."  "  The  closing  scene  still  remains.  From 
the  slaughter  by  the  side  of  the  Kishon  the  king 
went  up  to  the  glades  of  Carmel  to  join  in  the 
sacrificial  feast.  And  Elijah  too  ascended  to  the 
'  top  of  the  mountain,'  and  there  with  his  face  on 
the  earth  remained  wrapt  in  prayer,  while  his 
servant  mounted  to  the  highest  point  of  all,  whence 
there  is  a  wide  view  of  the  blue  reach  of  the 
Mediterranean,  over  the  western  shoulder  of  the 
ridge.  .  .  .  Seven  times  the  servant  climbed  and 
looked,  and  seven  times  there  was  nothing  ...  At 
last  out  of  the  far  horizon  there  rose  a  little  cloud,8 
and  it  grew  in  the  deepening  shades  of  evening  till 
the  whole  sky  was  overcast,  and  the  forests  of 
Carmel  shook  in  the  welcome  sound  of  the  mighty 
winds,  which  in  eastern  regions  precede  a  coming 
tempest"  (Sinai  &■  Palestine,  p.  353-6). 

There  is  good  reason  to  believe  that  a  later 
incident  in  the  life  of  the  same  great  prophet 
took  place  on  Carmel.  This  was  when  he  "caused 
fire  to  come  down  from  heaven "  and  consume 
the  two  "  fifties  "  of  the  guard  which  Ahaziah 
had  despatched  to  take  him  prisoner,  for  having 
stopped  his  messengers  to  Baalzebub  the  god 
of  Ekron  (2  K.  i.  9-15).  [See  Elijah,  p.  529.] 
In  this  narrative  our  Version,  as  is  too  fre- 
quently the  case,  conceals  the  force  of  the  ori- 
ginal by  imperfect  translation.     "A  hill"  (v.  9) 

should  be  "  the  mount"  (11111),  the  word  always 

used  for  Carmel,  and,  in  connexion  with  Elijah,  for 
Carmel  only,  with  the  exception  of  Sinai,  which  of 
course  cannot  be  intended  here.  Josephus  (Ant. 
ix.  2,  §1),  with  equal  force,  has  inl  tSjs  icopv<pris 
tov  opovs. 

The  tradition  in  the  present  convent  is,  that 
Elijah  and  Elisha  both  resided  on  the  mountain, 
and  a  cave  is  actually  shown  under  the  high-altar 
of  the  church  as  that  of  Elijah.  There  is  nothing 
in  the  Scripture  to  sanction  such  a  statement  with 
regard  to  Elijah,  but  in  the  case  of  Elisha,  the 
tradition  may  rest  on  better  grounds.  After,  the 
ascent  of  Elijah,  Elisha  went  to  Mount  Carmel 
(2  K.  ii.  25),  though  only  for  a  time  ;  but  lie  was 
again  there  at  the  Shunammite's  visit  (iv.  25),  and 
that  at  a  time  when  no  festival,  no  "  new  moon  or 
sabbath"  (v.  23),  required  his  presence.  (In  iv. 
27,  there  is  nearly  the  same  error  as  was  noticed 
above  in  reference  to  i.  9  ;  "  the  hill "  should  be 
rendered  "  the  mount.") 

This  is  the  last  mention  of  Carmel  as  the  scene 
of  any  event  in  the  sacred  history.  Its  sanctity 
no  doubt  remained,  but  it  is  its  richness  and  its 
prominence — "  Tabor  among  the  mountains ;  Car- 
mel by  the  sea  " — which  appear  to  have  taken  hold 
of  the  poets  of  the  nation,  both  of  Israel  and  Judah, 


<•  But  this  knoll  appears,  from  the  description  of  Van 
de  Velde  (i.  330),  and  from  his  new  map  (Dec.  1858), 
the  only  one  in  which  it  is  marked,  to  be  too  far  off. 


CARMI 

and  their  references  to  it  are  frequent  and  charac- 
teristic (Cant.  vii.  5;  Is.  xxxv.  2,  xxxvii.  24 ;  Jer.  xlvi. 
18, 1. 19  ;  Am.  i.  2,  ix.  3  ;  Mic.  vii.  14  ;  Nah.  i.  4). 

Carmel  has  derived  its  modern  name  from  the 
great  prophet ;  Mar  Elyas  is  the  common  designa- 
tion, Kurmel  being  occasionally,  but  only  seldom, 
heard.  It  is  also  the  usual  name  of  the  convent, 
though  dedicated  "in  honorem  BB.  Virginis  Mariae." 

Professor  Stanley  has  pointed  out  (S.  and  P. 
352)  that  it  is  not  any  connexion  with  Elijah  that 
gives  the  convent  its  interest  to  the  western  world, 
but  the  celebrated  order  of  the  Barefooted  Carmelite 
Friars, that  has  sprung  from  it,  and  carried  its  name 
into  Europe.  The  order  is  said  in  the  traditions  of 
the  Latin  Church  to  have  originated  with  Elijah 
himself  (St.  John  of  Jerus.  quoted  in  Mislin,  49), 
but  the  convent  was  founded  by  St.  Louis,  and  its 
French  origin  is  still  shown  by  the  practice  of  un- 
furling the  French  flag  on  various  occasions. 
Edward  I.  of  England  was  a  brother  of  the  order, 
and  one  of  its  most  famous  generals  was  Simon 
Stokes  of  Kent  (see  the  extracts  in  Wilson's  Lands, 
ii.  246.  For  the  convent  and  the  singular  legends 
connecting  Mount  Carmel  with  the  Virgin  Mary 
and  Our  Lord  see  Mislin,  ii.  47-50).  By  Napoleon 
it  was  used  as  a  hospital  during  the  siege  of  Acre, 
and  after  his  retreat  was  destroyed  by  the  Arabs. 
At  the  time  of  Irby  and  Mangles's  visit  (1817) 
only  one  friar  remained  there  (Irby,  60). 

2.  (Xep,ueA.  in  Josh.;  t5  Kapp.yjKov  in  Sam.  ; 
Channel)  a  town  in  the  mountainous  country  of 
Judah  (Josh.  xv.  55),  familiar  to  us  as  the  residence 
of  Nabal  (1  Sam.  xxv.  2,  5,  7,  40),  and  the  native 
place  of  Band's  favourite  wife,  "  Abigail  the  Car- 
melitess  "  (1  Sam.  xxvii.  3  ;  1  Chr.  iii.  1).  This 
was  doubtless  the  Carmel  at  which  Saul  set  up  a 
"place"  (1*,  i.  e.  literally  a  "hand;"  comp.  2 

Sam.  xviii.  18,  "Absalom's  place,"  where  the 
same  word  is  used)  after  his  victory  over  Amalek 
(1  Sam.  xv.  12).  And  this  Carmel,  and  not  the 
northern  mount,  must  have  been  the  spot  at  which 
king  Uzziah  had  his  vineyards  (2  Chr.  xxvi.  10). 
In  the  time  of  Eusebius  and  Jerome  it  was  the  seat 
of  a  Roman  garrison  (Onomaslicon,  Carmelus). 
The  place  appears  in  the  wars  of  the  Crusades, 
having  been  held  by  king  Amalrich  against  Sala- 
din  in  1172.  The  ruins  of  the  town,  now  Kur- 
mul,  still  remain  at  ten  miles  below  Hebron  in 
a  slightly  S.E.  direction,  close  to  those  of  Main 
(Maon),  Zif  (Ziph),  and  other  places  named  with 
Carmel  in  Josh.  xv.  55.  They  are  described  both 
by  Robinson  (i.  494-8)  and  by  Van  de  Velde  (ii.  77- 
79),  and  appear  to  be  of  great  extent.  Conspicuous 
among  them  is  a  castle  of  great  strength,  in  the  walls 
of  which  are  still  to  be  seen  the  large  bevelled 
masonry  characteristic  of  Jewish  buildings.  There 
is  also  a  very  fine  and  large  reservoir.  This  is  men- 
tioned in  the  account  of  king  Amalrich's  occupation 
of  the  place,  and  now  gives  the  castle  its  name  of 
Kasr  el-Birkch  (Van  de  Velde,  ii.  78).  [G.] 

CAR'MI  ("Ens  ;  Xap/xl ;  C'larmi).  1.  A  man 
of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  father  of  Achan,  the  "  troubler 
of  Israel"  (Josh.  vii.  1,  18;  1  Chr.  ii.  7),  accord- 
ing to  the  first  two  passages  the  son  of  Zabdi  or 
Zimri.  [Zabdi.]  In  1  Chr.  iv.  1  the  name  is 
given  as  that  of  a  "  son  of  Judah  ;"  but  the  same 


e  This  cloud  is  treated  in  the  formularies  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church  as  a  type  of  the  Virgin  .Mary. 
(See  Mislin,  ii.  p.  45,  and  Breviarium  fiom.  July  16.) 


CARNAIM 

person  is  probably  intended  ;  because  (1)  no  son  of 
Judah  of  that  name  is  elsewhere  mentioned;  and 
(2)  because,  out  of  the  five  names  who  in  this  pas- 
sage are  said  to  be  "sons"  of  Judah,  none  but 
Pharez  are  strictly  in  that  relation  to  him.  Hezron 
is  the  2nd  generation,  Hur  the  4th,  and  Shobal 
the  6th. 

2.  The  4th  son  of  Reuben,  progenitor  of  the 
family  of  the  Caemites  ('•DlSn)  (Gen.  xlvi.  9  ; 
Ex.  vi.  14  ;   Num.  xxvi.  6  ;   i'  OhY.  v.  3).       [G.] 

CARNA'IM  {Kapvaiv;  Alex.  Kapveiu ;  Gar- 
nairrt),  a  large  and  fortified  city  in  the  country  east 
of  Jordan — "  the  laud  of  Galaad  ;"  containing  a 
"temple"  (rb  reyavos  iv  K.).  It  was  besieged 
and  taken  by  Judas  Maccabaeus  (1  Mace.  v.  2<j, 
4:;,  44).  Under  the  name  of  Caknion  (to  Kapviov) 
the  same  occurrence  is  related  in  2  Mace.  xii.  21, 
26,  the  temple  being  called  the  Ataegateion 
(rb  'ArapyaTelov).  This  enables  us  to  identify  it 
with  Ashteeoth-Kaenaim.  [G.] 

CARNI'ON.  [Carnaim.] 
CARPENTER.  [Handicraft.] 
CAR'PUS  (Kapiros  ;  on  the  accentuation,  see 
Winer's  Grammar,  6th  ed.  p.  49),  a  Christian  at 
Troas,  with  whom  St.  Paul  states  that  he  left  a 
cloak  (2  Tim.  iv.  Ill)  ;  on  which  of  his  journeys  it 
is  uncertain,  but  probably  in  passing  through  Asia 
Minor  after  his  first  captivity,  for  the  last  time  before 
his  martyrdom  at  Rome.  According  to  Hippolytus, 
Carpus  was  bishop  of  Berytus  in  Thrace,  called 
Berrhoea  in  the  Synopsis  de  Vita  et  Morte  Pro- 
pfietarum,  which  passes  under  the  name  of  Doro- 
thea of  Tyre.  [H.  A.] 

CARRIAGE.  This  word  occurs  only  six  times 
in  the  text  of  the  A.  V.,  and  it  may  be  useful  to 
remind  the  reader  that  in  none  of  these  does  it  bear 
its  modern  sense,  but  signifies  what  we  now  call 
"  baggage."  The  Hebrew  words  so  rendered  are 
three.     1.  v3,  c'le,  generally  translated  "stuff" 

or  "  vessels."  It  is  like  the  Greek  word  ffKevos ;  and 
in  its  numerous  applications  perhaps  answers  most 
nearly  to  the  English  word  "  things."  This  word, 
rendered  "  carriage,"  occurs  in  1  Sam.  xvii.  22 — 
'•  David  left  his  '  baggage'  in  the  hands  of  the  keeper 
of  the  '  baggage  :' "  also  Is.  x.  28 — "  At  Michmash 
he  hath  left  his  '  baggage.'  " 

2.  H'T'QD,  Cehudah,  "  heavy  matters,"  Judg. 
xviii.  21  only,  though  perhaps  the  word  may  bear 
a  signification  of  "  preciousness,"  which  is  sometimes 
attached  to  the  root,  and  may  allude  to  the  newly 
acquired  treasures  of  the  Danites  (LXX.  Alex,  i^v 
KTTJaiv  rqv  HvSo^ov). 

:\.  The  word  rendered  "carriages"  in  Is.  xlvi.  1 
should,  it  would  appear  (Ges,  Thes.  917  b;  Jcs"i<(, 
ii.  10 1 ),  he  "  your  burdens." 

4.  In  the  N.  T.,  Acts  x\i.  15,  "  we  took  up  our 
carriages "    is   the    rendering  of  iiriaKevatTafxevoi, 
and  here  also  the  meaning  is  simply  "  bag 
(Jer.  praeparati). 

5.  But  in  the  margin  of  1  Sam.  xvii.  20,  and 
xxvi.  5,  7 — and  there  only — "carriage"  is  em- 
ployed in  the  sense  of  a  wagon  or  cart ;  the  "place 
of  the  carriage"  answering  to  "trench"  in  the  text. 
The  Hebrew  word  is  btyO,  from  TOty,  a  wagon, 

and  the  allusion  is  to  the  circle  of  wagons  which 
surrounded  the  encampment  Mies.  '/'/<,-. 

For  carriages  in  the  modern  sense,  see  Cam  : 

Chariot.  [G.] 


CART 


281 


CAR'SHENA  (JMBhS  ;  LXX.  omits ;  Char- 
semi),  one  of  the  seven  princes  C1")^)  of  Persia  and 
Media  who  "  saw  the  king's  face,  and  sat  the  first 
in  the  kingdom"  of  Ahasuerus  (Est.  i.  14).  A 
similar  name,  Carshen,  is  found  in  modern  Persian. 
For  other  derivations  from  the  ancient  dialects  of 
Persia,  see  Gesenius,  717. 

CART  (rpjy  ;    a/xa^a ;   plcmstrwm ;   also  ren- 
dered "  wagon,"  Gen.  xlv.  19,  27  :  Num.  vii.  3,  7, 
r  '  '    ' 

8  :  from  ?}]},  roll,  Ges.  p.  989),  a  vehicle  drawn 

by  cattle  (2  Sam.  vi.  6),  to  be  distinguished  from 
the  chariot  drawn  by  horses.-  [Chariot.]  Carts 
and  wagons  were  either  open  or  covered  (Num. 
vii.  3),  and  were  used  for  conveyance  of  persons 
(Gen.  xlv.  19),  burdens  (1  Sam.  vi.  7,  8),  or  pro- 
duce (Am.  ii.  13).  As  there  are  no  roads  in  Syria 
and  Palestine  and  the  neighbouring  countries,  wheel- 
carriages  for  any  purpose  except  conveyance  of 
agricultural  produce  are  all  but  unknown  ;  and 
though  modern  usage  has  introduced  European  car- 
riages drawn  by  horses  into  Egypt,  they  were 
unknown  there  also  in  times  comparatively  recent. 
(Stanley,  S.  §.  P.  135;  Porter,  Damascus,  i.  339; 
Lynch,  Narrative,  75,  84 ;  Niebuhr,  Voyage,  i.  1 23  ; 
Layard,  Nin.  ii.  75 ;  Mrs.  Poole,  Englishwoman  in 
Egypt,  2nd  series,  77.)  Tlje  only  cart  used  in 
Western  Asia  has  two  wheels  of  solid  wood  (Olearius, 
Travels,  418;  Sir  R.  Porter,  Travels,  ii.  533). 
For  the  machine  used  for  threshing  in  Egypt  and 
Syria,  see  Threshing.  But'  in  the  monuments  of 
ancient  Egypt  representations  are  found  of  carts 


^fek 


Egyptian  cart  with  two  wheels.     (Wilk 


with  two  wheels,  having  four  or  six  spokes,  used 
for  carrying  produce,  and  of  one  used  for  religious 
purposes  having  four  w-heels  with  eight  spokes.     A 


Egyptian  < :irt  with  fom  wheels.    (Wilkinson.) 

ba  -relief  al  Nineveh  represents  a  cart  having  two 
wheels  with  eighl  spokes,  drawn  by  oxen,  conveying 
female  captives;  and  others  represent  carl 
tured  from  enemies  with  captives,  and  also  some 
used  in  carrying  timber  and  other  articles  (Layard, 
Nin.  ii.  396,  Nm.  $  Bab.  134,  I  17.  583,  Mon. 
of  Bab.  pt.ii.pl>.  12,  17).    Four-wheeled  carriages 


282 


CARVING 


are  said  by  Pliny  (N.  H.  vii.  56)  to  have  been  in- 
vented by  the  Phrygians  (Wilkinson,  Anc.  Egypt. 
Abridgm.  i.   384,   335;    ii.  *39,   47).     The  carts 


Assyrian  cart  drawn  by 


(Layard,  ii.  396.) 


used  in  India  for  conveying  goods,  called  Suggar  or 
Hackeri,  have  two  wheels,  in  the  former  case  of 
solid  wood,  in  the  latter  with  spokes.  They  are 
drawn  by  oxen  harnessed  to  a  pole  (Capper,  Iwlia, 
pp.  346,  352).  fH.  W.  P.] 


Modern  Indian  cart. 

CARVING.  1 .  riySpO,  carved  work  in  relief, 
from  y?p,  carve;  in  pi.  fi'lyPpp,  carved  figures. 
2.  Dtinn,  from  t£Hn,  carve  =  xaP<*°'<Ta>'  3. 
HpTO,  participle  in  Pual  of  (Dpi!  not  used)  ppl"!,, 
cut,  delineate  :  engraved,  or  carved  (icor/c),  1  K.  vi. 
35.  4.  n-IDQ,  carved  work,  from  !"in9,  open, 
applied  to  wood,  1  K.  vii.  36 ;  to  gems,  Ex.  xxviii. 
9,  36;  2  Chr.  ii.  6,  13;  to  stone,  Zech.  iii,  9; 
yKv<pT],  yXv/x/xa,  eyKoXairrSv  ;  caelatura. 

The  arts  of  carving  and  engraving  were  much  in 
request  in  the  construction  both  of  the  Tabernacle 
and  the  Temple  (Ex.  xxxi.  2,  5,  xxxv.  33  ;  1  K.  vi. 
18,  35;  Ps.  lxxiv.  6),  as  well  as  in  the  ornament- 
ation of  the  priestly  dresses  (Ex.  xxviii.  9-36  ;  Zech. 
iii.  9  ;  2  Chr.  ii.  6,  14).  In  Solomon's  time  Huram 
the  Phoenician  had  the  chief  care  of  this  as  of  th" 
larger  architectural  works.  [H.  W.  P.] 

CASIPH'IA  (XJQD3  ;  ev  apyvptai  rov  tuttov; 

Chaspid),  a  place  of  uncertain  site  on  the  road 
between  Babylon  and  Jerusalem  (Ezr.  viii.  17). 
Neither  the  Caspiae  Pylae  nor  the  city  Kaswin, 
with  which  some  writers  have  attempted  to 
identify  it,  are  situated  upon  this  route.  (Gesen: 
Thes.  703.) 

CAS'LEU  (Xaffe\ev  ;  Casleu),  1  Mac.  i.  54  ; 
iv.  52,  59;  2  Mac.  i.  9,  18;  x.  5.  [CmSLEU ; 
Months.] 


CASSIA 

CAS'LUHIM  (Dn"6p3  ;  Xafffiavieip ;  Chas- 

luim).,  a  Mizraite  people  or  tribe  (Gen.  x.  14; 
1  Chr.  i.  12).  In  both  passages  in  which  this 
word  occurs,  it  would  appear,  as  the  text  now 
stands,  as  if  the  Philistines  came  forth  from  the 
Casluhim,  and  not  from  the  Caphtorim,  as  is  else- 
where expressly  stated :  here  therefore  there  would 
seem  to  be  a  transposition  [Caphtoi;].  The  only 
clue  we  have  as  yet  to  the  position  of  the  Casluhim 
is  their  place  in  the  list  of  the  sons  of  Mizraim  be- 
tween the  Pathrusim  and  the  Caphtorim,  whence  it 
is  probable  that  they  were  seated  in  Upper  Egypt 
[Pathros  ;  Caphtor].  The  LXX.  seem  to  iden- 
tify them  with  the  D^EKTI  of  Ps.  lxviii.  31  (A.  V. 
"princes"),  which  some,  though  not  the  LXX.  in 
that  place,  take  to  be  a  proper  name,  and  compare 
with  the  native  civil  name  of  Hermopolis  Magna. 
This  would  place  the  Casluhim  in  the  Heptanomis 
[Hashmannim].  Bochart  (Pltaleg,  iv.  31)  sug- 
gests the  identity  of  the  Casluhim  and  the  Colchians, 
who  are  said  to  have  been  an  Egyptian  colony  (He- 
rod, ii.  104;  Diod.  Sic.  i.  28),  but  this  story  and 
the  similarity  of  name  (Ges.  Thes.  s.  v.)  do  not  seem 
sufficient  to  render  the  supposition  a  probable  one. 
Gesenius,  however,  gives  it  his  support  (  Thes.  I.  c). 
Forster  conjectures  the  Casluhim  to  be  the  inhabit- 
ants of  Cassiotis,  the  tract  in  which  is  the  slight 
elevation  called  Mount  Casius  (Epp.  ad  Michaelis,  p. 
16  sq.).  Bunsen  assumes  this  to  be  proved  (Bibel- 
werk,  p.  26).  There  is,  however,  a  serious  difficulty 
in  the  way  of  this  supposition — the  nature  of  the 
ground,  a  low  littoral  tract  of  rock,  covered  with 
shifting  and  even  quick  sand,  like  the  neighbouring 
"  Serbonian  bog,"  and  which  we  cannot  suppose 
ever  to  have  supported  much  animal  or  vegetable 
life,  far  less  a  whole  people  or  tribe.       [R.  S.  P.] 

CASTHON  {Xa<T<pu>v;  Alex.  Xcurcpud),  1 
Mace.  v.  36.     [Caspiior.] 

CAS'PHOR  {Xaffcpdp  ;  C'asphor),  one  of  the 
fortified  cities  in  the  "  land  of  Galaad  "  ( 1  Mace, 
v.  26),  in  which  the  Jews  tool;  refuge  from  tire 
Ammonites  under  Timotheus  (comp.  ver.  6),  and 
which  with  other  cities  was  taken  by  Judas  Macca- 
baeus  (v.  36).  In  the  latter  passage  the  name  is 
given  as  Casphon,  and  in  2  Mace.  xii.  13  as 
Caspis,  if  indeed  the  same  place  is  referred  to,  which 
is  not  quite  clear  (see  Ewald  iv.  359  note).    [G.] 

CAS'PIS  {Kaffir iv  ;  Casphin),  a  strong  fortified 
city — whether  east  or  west  of  Jordan  is  not  plain — 
having  near  it  a  lake  (\ifxvri)  two  stadia  in  breadth. 
It  was  taken  by  Judas  Maccabaeus  with  great 
slaughter  (2  Mace.  xii.  13,  16).  The  parallel 
history  of  the  1st  Book  of  Maccabees  mentions 
a  city  named  CASPHOR  or  CASPHON,  with  which 
Caspis  may  be  identical — but  the  narratives  differ 
materially.  [G.] 

CASSIA  (nip,  rriyyp  ;  tpls  ;  Gen.  !piw<;, 
Kaffia  ;  casia,  stacte).  Cassia  is  mentioned  in  Ex. 
xxx.  24,  among  the  ingredients  of  the  holy  oil  of 
anointing  ;  and  in  Ez.  xxvii.  19,  as  one  of  the  articles 
of  merchandize  in  the  markets  of  Tyre,  hi  Ps. 
xlv.  8,  it  is  mentioned  in  connexion  with  myrrh 
and  aloes  as  being  used  to  scent  garments  with. 

Cassia  is  the  rind  of  an  aromatic  plant  somi  what 
like  cinnamon,  but  not  of  so  fine  and  sweet  a  flavour. 
It  is  mentioned  frequently  by  ancient  writers. 
(Theophrast.  Hist.  /'/.  ix.  5;  Plin.  xii.  19  ;  Dioscor. 
i.  12.)  Dioscorides  mentions  a  kind  of  cassia  called 
KtTTii,  a  Syriac  form  of  mp.     The  root  of  Dip 


CASTLE 

is  "Tip,  to  cut  or  Split.     The  name  was  given  to 

this  plant  because  of  the  splitting  of  its  stalks. 
(Schleusn.  Lex.  V.  T.  Ka<ria.)  The  shrub  is  said 
to  grow  in  India  and  Arabia.  It  is  not  the  Laurus 
cassia  of  Malabar  ;  for  this  is  only  a  wild  species  of 
the  Cinnamon  Ceylonicum,  my  Vp.  pi.  of  ny^'p, 
is  from  the  root  J?Vp,  to  abrade  the  bark,  and 
would  seem  to  be  the  same  plant  or  bark  as  PHp  ; 

possibly  some  preparation  of  it  in  a  form  suitable 
for  scenting  garments.  [W.  D.]  ■ 

CASTLE.     [Fortifications.] 

CASTOR  AND  POL'LUX,  the  Dioscuri 
{AioffKovpot,  Acts  xxviii.  11).  For  the  mythology 
of  these  two  heroes,  the  twin-sons  of  Jupiter  and 
Leda,  we  must  refer  to  the  Diet,  of  Biog.  and 
My t hoi.  We  have  here  to  do  with  them  only  so 
far  as  they  were  connected  with  seafaring  life. 
They  were  regarded  as  the  tutelary  divinities  (®eoi 
<ra>T7)pes)  of  sailors.  They  appeared  in  heaven  as 
the  constellation  of  Gemini.  Immediately  on  ship- 
board they  were  recognised  in  the  phosphoric  lights, 
called  by  modern  Italian  sailors  the  fires  of  St. 
Elmo,  which  play  about  the  masts  and  the  sails 
("  In  magna  tempestate  apparent  quasi  stellae  velo 
insidentes  :  adjuvari  se  tunc  periclitantes  existimant 
Pollucis  et  Castoris  numine,"  Senec.  Nat.  Quaes,  i. 
I  ;  comp.  Plin.  ii.  37).  Hence  the  frequent  allu- 
sions of  Roman  poets  to  these  divinities  in  con- 
nexion with  navigation  (see  especially  Hor.  Carm. 
i.  3.  2,  "  fratres  Helenae,  lucida  sidera,"  and  iv.  8. 
31).  As  the  ship  mentioned  here  by  St.  Luke  was 
from  Alexandria,  it  may  be  wrorth  while  to  notice 
that  Castor  and  Pollux  were  specially  honoured  in 
the  neighbouring  district  of  Cyrenaica  (Schol.  Pind. 
Pyth.  v.  6).  In  Catull.  iv.  27,  we  have  distinct 
mention  of  a  boat  dedicated  to  them.  See  also 
lxviii.  65.  In  art  these  divinities  were  sometimes 
represented  simply  as  stars  hovering  over  a  ship, 
but  more  frequently  as  young  men  on  horseback, 
with  conical  caps,  and  stars  above  them  (see  the 
coins  of  Rhegium,  a  city  of  Bruttii,  at  which  St. 


CAVE 


283 


Silvei  coin  of  Bruttii.  Ohv. :  Headi  of  Castor  and  Pollux  to  ri„-ht. 
Rev.  :  Castor  and  Pollux  mounted,  advancing  to  righb  In  the 
exergue  BP KTTJ.fi N. 

Paul  touched  on  the  voyage  in  question,  v.  13). 
Such  figures  were  probably  painted  or  sculptured 
at  the  bow  of  the  ship  (hence  irapdcrri/xou  ;  see 
Diet,  of  Antiq.  art.  [nsigne).  This  custom  was 
very  frequent  in  ancient  shipbuilding.  Herodotus 
>ays  iiii.  :'>7)  that  the  Phoenicians  used  to  place 
tin'  figures  of  deities  at  the  bow  of  their  vessels. 
Virgil  (Aen.  x.  209)  and  Ovid  (Trist.  i.  10,  2) 
supply  us  with  illustrations  of  the  practice  ;  and 
Cyril  of  Alexandria  (Cramer's  Catena,  ad  I .  c.)  says 
that  such  was  always  the  Alexandrian  method  of  or- 
namenting each  side  of  the  prow.  [SHIP.]    [J.  S.  II .] 

CAT  (alAovpos ;  cattd).     This  animal  is  men- 
tioned only  in  liar.  vi.  22,  as  a Ig  those  which 

defile  the  gods  of  the  heathen  with  impunity.    The 


etymology  of  at\ovpos  given  by  Phavoriuus,  irapa 
to  ai'AAetf  tV  obpav,  i.  e.  from  moving  the  tail, 
agrees  with  the  habit  of  the  cat.  Martial  (xiii.  69) 
says — 

"  Pannonicas  nobis  nnnquam  dedit  Umbria  cattag  ;" 
this  being  the   only  mention  of  catta  in  classical 
writers.     Bochart  thinks  that  by  the  word  D,!|V 

in  Is.  xiii.  21,  xxxiv.  14,  Jer.  1.  39,  and  Ps.  lxxiv. 
14,  some  species  of  cats  are  meant ;  but  this  is  very 
doubtful.  [W.  D.]' 

CATERPILLAR.     [Locust.] 

CATHU'A  (Kadovd  ;  Canna),  1  Esd.  v.  30. 
Apparently  answers  to  Giddel  in  Hebrew  text. 

CAVE  (i"l"iyp  ;  <nrli\aiov;  spelunca ;  inA.V. 

Is.  ii.   19,  hole;  Jer.  vii.  11,  den;  Josh.  xiii.  4, 

literatim,  Mearah  ;  ilfaara,  Vulg.).  I.  The  chalky 
limestone  of  which  the  rocks  of  Syria  and  Palestine 
chiefly  consist  presents,  as  is  the  case  in  all  limestone 
formations,  a  vast  number  of  caverns  and  natural 
fissures,  many  of  which  have  also  been  artificially 
enlarged  and  adapted  to  various  purposes  both  of 
shelter  and  defence.  (Page,  Text-Book  of  Geology, 
p.  141 ;  Kitto,  Phys.  Geogr.  of  Pal.  p.  72.)  This 
circumstance  has  also  given  occasion  to  the  use  of 
so  large  a  number  of  words  as  are  employed  in  the 
Scriptures  to  denote  caves,  holes,  and  fissures,  some 
of  them  giving  names  to  the  towns  and  places  and 
their  neighbourhood.  Out  of  them,  besides  No.  I., 
may  be  selected  the  following  : — 

II.  "1-1  n  or  Tin  (Ges.  p.  458),  a  hole;  usually 
TptbyAr],  and  caverna.     From  this  come  (a),  ''"in, 

dweller  in  caves,  the  name  of  the  Horites  of  Mount 
Seir,  Wady  Ghoeyer,  expelled  by  the  Edomites, 
probably  alluded  to  by  Job,  a  Troglodyte  race 
spoken  of  by  Strabo.  (Gen.  xiv.  6,  xxxvi.  21  ;  Deut. 
ii.  12  ;  Job  xxx.  6  ;  Strab.  i.  42,  xvi.  775-776; 
Burckhardt,  Syria,  410;  Robinson,  ii.  69,  157; 
Stanley,  S.  $  P.  §§68-71.)    [Horites.]    (6)  pin, 

land  of  caverns  (Ez.  xlvii.  16,  18  ;  Burckhardt, 
Syria,  110,  286);  AvpavTris,  LXX. ;  Auran,  Vulg. 
[Hauran.]  (c)  jVlJTJVSli  house  of  caverns,  the 
two  towns  of  Beth-horon  (Josh.  xvi.  3,  5).  [Beth- 
HORON.]  (d)  D^in,  two  caverns,  the  town  Horo- 
naim  (Is.  xv.  5).     [Horonaim.] 

III.  D^n,  places   of  refuge    in    rocks  (Ges. 

445)  for  birds,  Cant.  ii.  14  ;  rr/cfVr;  ;  foramina 
petrae,  Obad.  3;  dirul ;  scissurae  petrarum  ;  A.  V. 
clefts. 

IV.  mrOft  ;  rpvfj.a\(a  ;  antrum;  A.  V.  den ; 
a  ravine  through  which  water  flows  (Ges.  858), 
Judg.  vi.  2. 

The  caves  of  Syria  and  Palestine  are  still  used, 
either  occasionally  or  permanently,  as  habitations; 
as  at  A  nab,  near  Szult.  Ramoth-f  lileadf  Buckingham, 
Travels  in  Syria,  62).  The  shepherds  near  He- 
bron leave  their  villages  in  the  summer  to  dwell 
in  caves  and  ruins,  in  order  to  be  nearer  to  their 
flocks  and  tields  i  Robinson,  i.  'J  1  2  ).  Almost  all  the 
habitations  at  Om-keis,  Gadara,  are  caves  (Burck- 
hardt,  p.  '_'7.".).  An  extensive  system  of  caves  exjsts 
at  Beit  Jibrtn,  Eleutheropolis,  in  Judah,  which  has 
served  for  residence  or  concealment,  though  now 
disused  (Robinson,  ii.  53);  and  another  between 
Bethlehem  and  Hebron  (Irbyand  Maiv_rie~.  103). 

The  most   remarkable  caves  noticed  in  Scripture 


284 


CAVE 


are : — 1.  That  in  which  Lot  dwelt  after  the  destruc- 
tion of  Sodom  (Gen.  xix.  30).  2.  The  cave  of 
•  Machpelah  (xxiii.  17).  3.  Cave  of  Makkedah  (Josh. 
x.  .16).  4.  Cave  of  Adullam  (1  Sam.  xxii.  1  ). 
5.  Cave  of  Engedi  (xxiv.  3).  6.  Ohadiah's  cave 
(1  K.  xviii.  4).  7.  Elijah's  cave  in  Horeb  (xix.  9). 
8,  9.  The  rock  sepulchres  of  Lazarus,  and  of  our 
Lord  (John  xi.  38;  Matt,  xxvii.  60).  Some  of 
these  may  be  identified,  and  to  others  approximate, 
if  not  absolutely  identical,  sites  may  be  assigned. 
Thus  the  existing  caverns  near  the  S.E.  end  of  the 
Dead  Sea  serve  fully  to  justify  the  mention  of  a 
cave  as  the  place  of  Lot's  retirement ;  as  those  on 
the  W.  side  agree  both  in  situation  and  in  name 
with  the  caves  of  En-gedi  (Lynch,  Narrative, 
234 ;  Robinson,  i.  500  ;  Stanley,  296).  The  cave 
of  Machpelah  undoubtedly  lies  beneath  the  mosque 
at  Hebron  (Robinson,  ii.  79  ;  Stanley,  149  ;  Benj. 
of  Tudela,  Early  Trav.  86).  The  cave  of  Mak- 
.  kedah  can  hardly  be  the  one  to  which  tradition  has 
assigned  the  name  (Irby  and  Mangles,  p.  93)  ;  for 
though  it  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  that  the  cave 
was  close  to  the  town  of  Makkedah,  yet  the  situation 
of  the  great  caverns  both  at  Beit  Jibrin  and  at 
Deir  Dubbdn  in  neither  case  agrees  with  that  of 
Makkedah  as  given  by  Eusebius,  eight  miles  from 
Eleutheropolis  (Reland,  885 ;  Robinson,  ii.  23, 
53 ;  Stanley,  211).  The  site  assigned  by  the 
same  ancient  authority  to  Adullam,  10  m.  E.  of 
Eleutheropolis,  agrees  as  little  with  that  of  the 
cave  believed  by  tradition  to  have  been  David's 
hiding-place,  viz.  in  the  Wady  Khurcitun  at  the 
S.E.  of  Bethlehem,  which  in  some  respects  agrees 
witli  the  Scripture  narrative  better  than  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  Deir  Dubbdn,  assigned  to  it  by  Mr. 
Stanley.  (See  1  Sam.  xx.  6,  and  particularly  xxii. 
3,  4 ;  'Joseph.  Ant.  vi.  12,  §3  ;  Reland,  549;  Irby 
and  Mangles,  103  ;  Robinson,  i.  482  ;  Stanley,  259.) 

The  cave  in  which  Obadiah  concealed  the  pro- 
phets cannot  now  be  identified,  but  it  was  probably 
iu  the  northern  part  of  the  country,  in  which  abun- 
dant instances  of  caves  fit  for  such  a  purpose  might 
be  pointed  out. 

The  sites  of  the  cave  of  Elijah,  as  well  as  of  the 
"  cleft"  of  Moses  on  Mount  Horeb  (Ex.  xxxiii.  22), 
are  also  obviously  indeterminate ;  for  though  tradi- 
tion has  not  only  assigned  a  place  for  the  former 
on  Jebel  Musa,  and  consecrated  the  spot  by  a  chapel, 
there  are  caves  on  the  competing  summit  of  Serbal, 
to  one  or  other  of  which  it  might  with  equal  proba- 
bility be  transferred.  (Stanley,  49  ;  Robinson,  i. 
103 ;  Burckhardt,  608.) 

Besides  these  special  caves  there  is  frequent  men- 
tion in  O.  T.  of  caves  as  places  of  refuge.  Thus  the 
Israelites  are  said  to  have  taken  refuge  from  the 
Philistines  in  "holes"  (ISam.  xiv.  11):  to  which  the 
name  of  the  scene  of  Jonathan's  conflict,  Mixkhmas 
(Michmash),  sufficiently  answers.  (Stanley,  204  ; 
Rob.  i.  440  ;  Irby,  89.)  So  also  in  the  time  of 
Gideon  they  had  taken  refuge  from  the  Midianites 
in  dens  and  caves  and  strongholds,  such  as  abound 
in  the  mountain  region  of  Manasseh.  (Judges  vi. 
2;  Stanley,  341.) 

Not  only  have  the  caves  of  Palestine  afforded 
refuge  from  enemies,  but  during  the  earthquakes 
also,  by  which  the  country  has  been  so  often  visited, 
the  inhabitants  have  found  in  them  a  safe  retreat. 
This  was  the  case  in  the  great  convulsion  of  1837, 
when  Safet  was  destroj  ed  ;  and  to  this  mode  of 
retreat  the  prophet  Isaiah  probably  alludes  (Is.  ii. 
10,  19,  21  ;   Robinson,  ii.  422  ;  Stanley,  151). 

But  Adullam  is  not  the  only  cave,  nor  were  its 


CAVE 

tenants  the  only  instances  of  banditti  making  the 
caves  of  Palestine  their  accustomed  haunt.  Josephus 
(Ant.  xiv.  15,  §5)  relates  the  manner  in  which,  by 
order  of  Herod,  a  cave  occupied  by  robbers,  or  rather 
insurgents,  was  attacked  by  soldiers  let  down  from 
above  in  chests  and  baskets,  from  which  they  dragged 
forth  the  inmates  with  hooks,  and  killed  or  thrust 
them  down  the  precipices  ;  or,  setting  fire  to  their 
stores  of  fuel,  destroyed  them  by  suffocation.  These 
caves  are  said  to  have  been  in  Galilee,  not  far  from 
Sepphoris  ;  and  are  probably  the  same  as  those 
which  Josephus  himself,  in  providing  for  the  defence 
of  Galilee,  fortified  near  Gennesaret,  which  elsewhere 
he  calls  the  caves  of  Arbela  (B.  J.  i.  16,  §2-4,  ii. 
20,  §6  ;  Vit.  §37).  Bacchides,  the  general  of  Deme- 
trius, in  his  expedition  against  Judaea,  encamped  at 
Messaloth,  near  Arbela,  and  reduced  to  submission 
the  occupants  of  the  caves  {Ant.  xii.  11,  §1  ;  1  Mac. 

ix.  2).  Messaloth  is  proliably  ni;>D?0,  steps,  or 
terraces  (comp.  2  Chr.  ix.  11;  Ges.  957.)  The 
Messaloth  of  the  book  of  Maccabees  and  the  robber- 
caves  of  Arbela  are  thus  probably  identical,  and 
are  the  same  as  the  fortified  cavern  near  Medjdel 
(Magdala),  called  Kalaat  Ibn  Maan,  or  Pigeon's 
Castle,  mentioned  by  several  travellers.  They  are 
said  by  Burckhardt  to  be  capable  of  containing  600 
men.  (Reland,  358,  575  ;  Burckhardt,  Syria,  .".:;i  ; 
Irby  and  Mangles,  91;  Li gh tfoot,  'Cent.  Chorogr. 
ii.  231 ;  Robinson,  ii.  398 ;  Raiimer,  108 :  comp. 
also  Hos.  x.  14.)     [Beth-Arbei,.] 

Josephus  also  speaks  of  the  robber  inhabitants  of 
Trachonitis,  who  lived  in  large  caverns,  presenting 
no  prominence  above  ground,  but  widely  extended 
below  (Ant.  xv.  10,  §1).  These  banditti  annoyed 
much  the  trade  with  Damascus,  but  were  jnut  down 
by  Herod.  Strabo  alludes  very  distinctly  to  this  in 
his  description  of  Trachonitis,  and  describes  one  of 
the  caverns  as  capable  of  holding  4000  men  (Strabo, 
xvi.  756  ;  Raumer,  68  ;  Jolliffe,  Travels  in  Pal.  i. 
197). 

Lastly,  it  was  the  caves  which  lie  beneath  and 
around  so  many  of  the  Jewish  cities  that  formed 
the  last  hiding-places  of  the  Jewish  leaders  in  the 
war  with  the  Romans.  Josephus  himself  relates 
the  story  of  his  own  concealment  in  the  caves  of 
Jotapata  ;  and  after  the  capture  of  Jerusalem,  John 
ofGischala,  Simon,  and  many  other' Jews,  endea- 
voured to  conceal  themselves  in  the  caverns  beneath 
the  city ;  whilst  in  some  of  them  great  spoil  and 
vast  numbers  of  dead  bodies  were  found  of  those 
who  had  perished  during  the  siege  by  hunger  or 
from  wounds  (Joseph.  B.  J.  iii.  8,  §1,  vi.  9,  §4). 

The  rock  dwellings  and  temples  of  Petra  are 
described  in  a  separaie  article. 

Natural  cavities  in  the  rock  were  and  are  fre- 
quently used  as  cisterns  for  water,  and  as  places  of 
imprisonment  (Is.  xxiv.  22  ;  Ez.  xxxii.  23  ;  Zech.  ix. 
11)  [Cistern;  Prison];  also  as  stalls  for  horses 
and  for  granaries  (Irby  and  Mangles,  146).  No 
use,  however,  of  rock  caverns  more  strikingly  con- 
nects the  modern  usages  of  Palestine  and  the  adjacent 
regions  with  their  ancient  history  than  the  employ- 
ment of  them  as  burial-places.  The  rocky  soil  of 
so  large  a  portion  of  the  Holy  Laud  almost  forbids 
interment,  excepting  in  cavities  either  natural  or 
hewn  from  the  rock.  The  dwelling  of  the  demoniac 
among  the  tombs  is  thus  explained  by  the  rock 
caverns  abounding  near  the  Sea  of  Galilee  (Jolliffe, 
i.  36).  Accordingly  numerous  sites  are  shown  in 
Palestine  and  adjacent  lands  of  (so-called)  sepulchres 
of  saints  and  heroes  of  Old' and  New  Test.,  venerated 


CEDAR 

both  by  Christians  and  Mohammedans  {Early  Tra- 
vels, p.  36 ;  Stanley,  148).  Among  these  may 
be  mentioned  the  cave  of  Machpelah,  the  tomb  of 
Aaron  on  Mount  Hor,  of  Joseph,  and  of  Rachel,  as 
those  for  which  every  probability  of  identity  in  site 
at  least  may  be  claimed  (Irby  and  Mangles,  134; 
Robinson,  i.  218,  219,  ii.  275-287).  More  ques- 
tionable are  the  sites  of  the  tombs  of  Elisha,  Obadiah, 
and  John  the  Baptist,  at  ;-'amaria;  of  Habakkuk  at 
Jebatha  (Gabatha),  Micah  near  Keila,  and  of  Debo- 
rah, Rebekah's  nurse,  at  Bethel  (Stanley,  143, 
149  ;  Reland,  772,  698,  981 ;  Rob.  ii.  304).  The 
questions  so  much  debated  relating  to  the  tombs 
in  and  near  Jerusalem  and  Bethany  will  be  found 
treated  under  those  heads.  But  whatever  value  may 
belong  to  the  connexion  of  the  names  of  Judges, 
Kings,  or  Prophets,  with  the  very  remarkable  rock- 
tombs  near  Jerusalem,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that 
the  caves  bearing  these  names  are  sepulchral  caverns 
enlarged  and  embellished  by  art.  The  sides  of 
the  valley  of  Jehoshaphat  are  studded  with  caves, 
many  of  which  are  inhabited  bv  Arab  families. 
(Sandys,  188;  Maundrell,  446  ;  Robinson,  i.  241, 
349,  364;  Bartlett,  Walks  about  Jerusalem,  117.) 
It  is  no  doubt  the  vast  number  of  caves  throughout 
the  country,  together  with,  perhaps,  as  Maundrell 
remarks,  the  taste  for  hermit  life  which  prevailed 
in  the  5th  and  6th  centuries  of  the  Christian  era, 
which  has  placed  the  sites  of  so  many  important 
events  in  caves  and  grottoes  ;  e.  g.  the  birth  of  the 
Virgin,  the  Annunciation,  the  Salutation,  the  birth 
of  the  Baptist  and  of  our  Lord,  the  scene  of  the 
Agony,  of  St.  Peter's  denial,  the  composition  of  the 
Apostles'  Creed,  the  Transfiguration  (Shaw,  pt.  ii. 
c.  1 ;  Maundrell,  E.  T.  p.  479):  and  the  like  causes 
have  created  a  traditionary  cave-site  for  the  altar  of 
Elijah  on  Mount  Carmel,  and  peopled  its  sides,  as 
well  as  those  of  Mount  Tabor,  with  hermit  inhabit- 
ants. (1  K.  xviii.  19  ;  Irby  and  Mangles,  60;  Re- 
land,  329  ;  Winer,  s.  v.  Carmel;  Am.  ix.  3;  .Sir 
J.  Maundeville,  Travels,  31  ;  Sandys,  203;  Maun- 
drell, E.  T.  478  ;  Jahn,  Arch.  Bibl.  9  ;  Stanley, 
353  ;  Kitto,  Phys.  Geoyr.  30,  31  ;  Van  Egmont, 
Travels,  ii.  5-7.)  [H.  W.  P.] 

CEDAR  (PK  ;  KeSpos  ;  cedrus  ;  from  PN; 
root  of  T-11X,  coiled  or  compressed,  Gesen.  p.  148). 
The  term  is  expressive  of  a  mighty  and  deeply 
rooted  tree,  and  is  usually  understood  to  apply  here 
to  one  of  the  coniferous  kind,  but  not  always  to 
that  which  is  commonly  known  as  the  Cedar  of 
Lebanon. 

The  conditions  to  be  fulfilled  in  order  to  answer 
all  the  descriptions  in  the  Bible  of  a  cedar-tree  are 
that  it  should  be  tall  (Is.  ii.  13),  spreading  (Ez. 
xxxi.  3),  abundant  (1  K.  v.  6,  10),  fit  for  beams, 
pillars,  and  boards  (1  K.  vi.  10,  15,  vii.  2),  masts 
of  ships  (Ez.  xxvii.  5),  and  for  carved  work  as 
images  (Is.  xliv.  14).  To  these  may  be  added  qua- 
lities ascribed  to  cedar  wood  by  profane  writers. 
Pliny  speaks  of  the  cedar  of  Crete,  Africa,  and  Syria 
as  being  most  esteemed  and  imperishable.  The 
sime  quality  is  ascribed  also  to  juniper.  In  Egypt 
and  Syria  ships  were  built  of  cedar,  and  in  Cyprus 
a  tree  was  cut  down  120  feet  long  and  proportion- 
ately thick.  The  durability  of  cedar  was  proved, 
he  says,  by  the  duration  of  the  cedar  roof  of  the 
temple  of  Diana  at  Ephesus  which  had  lasted  400 
years.  At  Utica  the  beams,  made  of  Nuraidian 
cedar,  of  a  temple  of  Apollo  had  lasted  1  ITS  veal's] 
Vitruvius  speaks  of  the  antiseptic  properties  of  the 
oil  of  cedar    and  also  of  juniper  ( 1'lin.  //.  X.  xiii. 


CEDAR 


285 


5,  xvi.  40  ;  Vitruv.  ii.  9  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  5,  2  ; 
Sandys,  Travels,  166,  167). 

Not  only  was  cedar  timber  used  by  David  and 
Solomon  in  their  buildings  (2  Sam.  v.  11  ;   IK.  v. 

6,  vi.  15,  vii.  2),  but  also  in  the  2nd  Temple 
rebuilt  under  Zerubbabel,  the  timber  employed 
was  cedar  from  Lebanon  (Ezr.  iii.  7  ;  1  Esdr.  iv. 
48,  v.  55).  Cedar  is  also  said  by  Josephus  to  have 
been  used  by  Herod  in  the  roof  of  his  temple  ( B.  J. 
v.  5,  §2).  The  roof  of  the  Rotunda  of  the  Church 
of  the  Holy  Sepulchre  at  Jerusalem  is  said  to  have 
been  of  cedar,  and  that  of  the  Church  of  the  Virgin 
at  Bethlehem  to  have  been  of  cedar  or  cypress. 
(Williams,  Holy  City,  ii.  202  ;  Quaresmius,  Eluc. 
Terr.  Sanct.  vi.  12 ;  Per.  2  ;  Tobler,  Bethlehem, 
110,  112.) 

Now  in  some  important  respects  no  tree  but  the 
cedar  (pinns  cedrus'),  or  its  almost  equivalent,  the 
pinus  Deodara,"  can  answer  the  above  conditions. 
The  characteristics  of  these  two  trees,  of  which 
great  numbers  are  found  from  Mount  Taurus  to  the 
Himalayas,  are  so  often  interchanged  that  they  are 
scarcely  to  be  distinguished  the  one  from  the  other. 
No  tree  is  at  once  so  lofty,  spreading,  and  um- 
brageous, and  the  wood  of  the  Deodara  at  least  is  ex- 
tremely durable.  The  difficulties  which  are  found 
in  reconciling  the  ancient  descriptions  with  the  mo- 
dern specimens  of  cedar  wood  lie,  1.  in  the  fitness 
of  cedar  trees  for  masts  of  ships  (Ez.  xxvii.  5) ;  2. 
still  more  in  the  very  general  agreement  as  to  the 
inferior  quality  of  the  timber  which  is  usually  de- 
scribed as  less  valuable  than  the  worst  sorts  of  deal. 
Of  authorities  quoted  by  Dr.  Royle  in  his  article  on 
the  subject  in  Dr.  Kitto's  Cyclopaedia  (art.  Eves'), 
two  only  ascribe  serviceable  qualities  to  the  cedar 
wood  whether  grown  in  England  or  in  specimens 
brought  from  the  ancient  cedar  grove  on  Mount  Le- 
banon. Accordingly,  Celsius  in  his  Hierobotanicon, 
has  endeavoured  to  prove  that  by  the  cedar  of  Scrip- 
ture is  meant  the  pinus  sylvestris  or  Scotch  fir,  and 
that  by  "  fir  "  is  intended  the  cypress.  Others  have 
supposed  that  the  Sandarac  tree,  the  citrus  of  Pliny, 
Callitris  quadrivalvis,  or  Thuja  articulata,  repre- 
sents the  cedar.  The  timber  of  this  tree  is  extremely 
hard  and  durable  ;  the  roof  of  the  mosque  of  Cordova, 
built  in  the  9th  century,  is  constructed  of  it,  which 
was  formerly  supposed  from  the  Spanish  name  alerce 
to  have  been  made  of  larch  (Cook,  Sketches  in  Spain, 
p.  5,  and  note  ;  Fergusson,  Handb.  of  Arch.  i.  456). 
Besides  these  trees,  the  Cephalouian  pine,  the  com- 
mon yew,  taxus  baccata,  and  the  juniper  cedar,  cedrus 
baccifera,  oroxycedrus,  each  of  them  possesses  quali- 
ties which  answer  to  some  at  least  of  those  ascribed  to 
the  cedar.  The  opinion  of  Celsius  is  founded  in  great 
measure  on  the  use  by  the  Arabs  and  Arabic  writers 

of  the  word   •    ],  arz,  evidently  the  equivalent  of 

PN,  cres,  to  express  the  cedar  of  Lebanon,  and  also 

at  Aleppo  the  pinus  sylvestris,  which  is  abundant 
both  near  that  city  and  on  Lebanon.  A  similar 
argument  will  apply  also  to  the  Thuja  articulata 
of  Mount  Atlas,  which  is  called  by  the  Arabs 
el-arz,  a  name  which  led  to  the  mistake  as  to  the 
material  of  the  Cordova  roof  from  its  similarity  to 
the  Spanish  alerce  (Niebuhr,  Descr.  de  I'Arabie, 
131,  &c,   and    Questions,   zc.    169,   &c. ;    Pliny, 


a  The  difference  between  the  Lebanon  cedar  ami 
the  Deodara  consists  chiefly  in  the  cones,  which  in 
the  latter  grow  in  pairs,  and  upon  stalks  ;  the  leave 
also  are  longer  and  more   distinctly   3-sided.     The 

v.hi  do)  both  is  extremely  resinous. 


286 


CEDAR 


H.  N.,  xiii.  11,  15;  Kitto,  Eres,  Thuja;  Hay, 
West.  Barb.  c.  iv.  49  ;  Gesen.  148,  who  rejects 
the  opinion  of  Celsius  ;  Winer,  s.  ».). 

It  may  be  observed,  1.  that  unsuccessful  experi- 
ments on  English-grown  cedar,  or  on  wood  derived 
from  the  trees  of  the  ancient  cedar  grove  of  Leba- 
non, do  not  as  yet  invalidate  all  claim  of  the  cedar, 
whether  Lebanon  or  Deodara  cedar,  to  share  in  the 
qualities  anciently  ascribed  to  it.  Besides  the  trees 
which  belong  to  the  one  grove,  known  by  the  name 
of  "  the  Cedars,"  groves  and  green  woods  of  cedar 
are  found  in  other  parts  of  the  range  (Bucking- 
ham, Travels  among  Arabs,  p.  468 ;  Eng.  Cycl. 
s.  v.  Syria  ;  Robinson,  iii.  593 ;  Burckhardt,  Syria, 
p.  19  ;  Loudon,  Arboretum,  vol.  iv.  pp.  2406,  2407  ; 
Celsius,  Hicrobotanicon,  i.  89 ;  Belon,  Obs.  de  Ar- 
boribus  coniferis,  ii.  pp.  162,  165,  166).  2.  That 
it  has  been  already  shown  that  the  Deodara  cedar 
certainly  possesses  in  a  remarkable  degree  the  pro- 
perty of  durability,  said  to  be  wanting  in  the  Le- 
banon cedar.  But  3.  The  remains  of  wood  used  in 
the  Kineveh  palaces  were  supposed  by  Layard  to_be 
cedar,  a  supposition  confirmed  by  the  inscriptions, 
which  show  that  the  Assyrian  kings  imported  cedar 
from  Lebanon.  This  wood  is  now  proved  by  micro- 
scopic examination  to  be  yew  (Layard,  N.  and  B. 
pp.  356,  357  ;  Loudon,  u.  s.  p.  2431). 

In  speaking  therefore  of  cedar  of  Lebanon  used 
m  building  for  beams,  pillars,  or  ceiling  boards,  it 
is  probable  that  the  wood  of  more  than  one  tree 
was  employed,  but  under  the  one  name  of  cedar, 
and  that  the  trees  which  furnished  the  material 
were,  besides  the  pinus  cedrus,  the  cedrus  Deodara, 
the  yew,  tax  us  baccata,  and  also  the  Scotch  pine 
(pinus  sylvestris).  The  Sandarac  tree  (  Thuja  arti- 
culata)  is  said  by  Van,Egmont  (Travels,  ii.  280) 
to  have  been  found  on  Lebanon,  but  no  hint  of  im- 
portation of  foreign  timber  is  anywhere  given  in 
Scripture,  or  by  Josephus,  whilst  each  of  the  above- 
named  trees  grows  there  in  greater  or  less  abundance. 
The  pinus  sylvestris  may  have  furnished  the  mate- 
rial of  the  ship-masts  mentioned  by  Ezekiel ;  and  it 
may  be  added,  that  the  LXX.  render  "  masts  "  in  that 
passage  by  Itrrovs  i\arivovs,  made  of  fir,  or  like  fir. 

But  there  is  another  use  of  cedar  wood  men- 
tioned in  Scripture,  viz.  in  purification  (Lev.  xiv. 
4 ;  Num.  xix.  6).  The  term  cedar  is  applied  by 
Pliny  to  the  lesser  cedar,  oxycedrus,  a  Phoenician 
juniper,  which  is  still  common  on  the  Lebanon, 
and  whose  wood  is  aromatic.  The  wood  or  fruit 
of  this  tree  was  anciently  burnt  by  way  of  per- 
fume, especially  at  funerals  (Plin.  H.  N.  xiii.  1, 
5;  Ov.  Fast.  ii.  558;  Horn.  Od.  v.  60).  The 
tree  is  common  in  Egypt  and  Nubia,  and  also  in 
.Arabia,  in  the  Wady  Mousa,  where  the  greater 
cedar  is  not  found.  It  is  obviously  likely  that  the 
use  of  the  more  common  tree  should  be  enjoined 
while  the  people  were  still  in  the  wilderness,  rather 
than  of  the  uncommon  (Shaw,  Travels,  464  ;  Burck- 
hardt, Syria,  430  ;  Russell,  Nubia,  425). 

The  grove  of  trees  known  as  the  Cedars  of  Leba- 
non consists  of  about  400  trees,  standing  quite 
aione  in  a  depression  of  the  mountain  with  no  trees 
near,  about  6400  feet  above  the  sea,  and  3000 
below  the  summit.  About  11  or  12  are  very 
large  and  old,  25  large,  50  of  middle  size,  and  more 
than  300  younger  and  smaller  ones.  The  older  trees 
have  each  several  trunks  and  spread  themselves 
widely  round,  but  most  of  the  others  are  of  cone- 
like form  ami  (In  not  send  out  wide  lateral  branches. 
In  1550  there  were  28  old  trees,  in  1739  Pococke 
counted  15,  but  the  number  of  trunks  makes  the 


CEILING 

operation  of  counting  uncertain.  They  are  regarded 
with  much  reverence  by  the  native  inhabitants  as 
living  records  of  Solomon's  power,  and  the  Ma- 
ronite  patriarch  was  formerly  accustomed  to  cele- 
brate there  the  festival  of  the  Transfiguration  at  an 
altar  of  rough  stones.  Within  the  last  10  years  a 
chapel  has  been  erected  (Robinson,  iii.  590,  591  ; 
Stanley,  S.  $  P.  p.  140)..  [H.  W.  P.] 

CE'DEON,  1.  (77  KeSpaw  ;  Alex.  KeSpd,  ; 
Gedor),  a  place  fortified  by  Cendebaeus  under  the 
orders  of  king  Antiochus  (Sidetes),  as  a  station  from 
which  to  command  the  roads  of  Judaea  (1  Mace, 
xv.  39,  41,  xvi.  9).  It  was  not  far  from  Jamnia 
(Jabne),  or  from  Azotus  (Ashdod),  and  had  a 
winter  -  torrent  or  wady  (xeiyuappoux),  on  the 
eastward  of  it,  which  the  army  of  the  Maccabees 
had  to  cross  before  Cendebaeus  could  be  attacked 
(xvi.  5).  These  conditions  are  well  fulfilled  in  the 
modern  place  Katra  or  Kutrah,  which  lies  on  the 
maritime  plain  below  the  river  Rubin,  and  three 
miles  south-west  of  Ahir  (Ekron).  Schwarz  (119) 
gives  the  modern  name  as  Kadrun — but  this  wants 
confirmation.  Ewald  (Gesch.  iv.  390,  note)  sug- 
gests Tell-  Turmus,  five  or  six  miles  further  south. 

2.  In  this  form  is  given  in  the  X.  T.  the  name 

of  the   brook    Kidron    (j'Tli?   ^>m  =  "  the   black 

torrent")  in  the  ravine  below  the  eastern  wall  of 
Jerusalem  (John  xviii.  1,  only).  Beyond  it  was 
the  garden  of  Gethsemane.  Lachmann,  with  A  D, 
has  ^e/jtiappous  rod  KtSpiiv  ;  but  the  Rec.  Text  with 
B  has  twv  KeSpaiv,  i.  e.  "  the  brook  of  the  cedars  " 
(so  too  the  LXX.  in  2  Sam.  xv.  23).  Other  MSS. 
have  the  name  even  so  far  corrupted  as  rov  KeSpov, 
cedri,  and  rwv  StvSpwv.  In  English  the  name  is 
often  erroneously  read  (like  Cephas,  Cenchreae, 
Chuza,  &c.)  with  a  soft  C  ;  but  it  is  unnecessary  to 
point  out  that  it  has  no  connexion  with  "  Cedar." 
[Kidron.]  [G.] 

CEl'LAN  (Ki\dv  ;  Ciaso),  sons  of  Ceilan  and 
Azetas,  according  to  1  Esd.  v.  15,  returned  with 
Zorobabel  from  Babylon.  There  are  no  names  cor- 
responding to  these  in  the  lists  of  Ezra  or  Nehemiah. 

CEILING  (PSD,  from  JQD  ;  eKoiAoo-ra^Tjo-e, 
1  K.  vi.  9  ;  to  cover  with  rafters,  Gesen.  965  ; 
Schleusner,  Lex.  V.  T.  koiKoctt.),  or  Spnfc?  (Ez. 

xli.  16),  a  plank.  The  descriptions  of  Scripture 
(1  K.  vi.  9,  15,  vii.  3;  2  Chr.  iii.  5,  9;  Jer. 
xxii.  14;  Hag.  i.  4),  and  of  Josephus  (Ant.  viii. 
3,  §2 — 9,  xv.  11,  §5),  show  that  the  ceilings  of  the 
Temple  and  the  palaces  of  the  Jewish  kings  were 
formed  of  cedar  planks  applied  to  the  beams  or  joints 
crossing  from  wall  to  wall,  probably  with  sunk  panels 
((paTudfiara),  edged  and  ornamented  with  gold, 
and  carved  with  incised  or  other  patterns  (Padv^v- 
\ots  yAvtycus),  sometimes  painted  (Jer.  xxii.  14). 

It  is  probable  that  both  Egyptian  and  Assyrian 
models  were  in  this  as  in  other  branches  of  architec- 
tural construction,  followed  before  the  Roman  period. 
[Architecture.]  The  construction  and  designs 
of  Assyrian  ceilings  in  the  more  important  build- 
ings can  only  be  conjectured  (Layard,  Nineveh, 
ii."  265,  289),  but  the  proportions  in  the  walls 
themselves  answer  in  a  great  degree  to  those  men- 
tioned in  Scripture  (Nin.  and  Bab.  642 ;  Eer- 
gusson,  Handbook  of  Architecture,  i.  201).  Ex- 
amples, however,  are  extant,  of  Egyptian  ceilings 
in  stucco  painted  with  devices,  of  a  date  much 
earlier  than  that   of  Solomon's  Temple.      Of  these 


CEILING 

devices  the  principal  are  the  guilloehe,  the  chevron, 
and  the  scroll.  Some  are  painted  in  blue  with 
stars,  and  others  bear  representations  of  birds  and 
other  emblems  (Wilkinson,  Anc.  Egypt,  ii.  290). 
The  excessive  use  of  vermilion  and  other  glaring 
colours  in  Roman  house-painting,  of  which  Vitru- 
vius  at  a  later  date  complains  (vii.  5),  may  have 
been  introduced  from  Egypt,  whence  also  came  in 
all  probability  the  taste  for  vermilion  painting 
shown  in  .lehoiakim's  palace  (Jer.  xxii.  14  ;  Am. 
iii.  15;  Wilkinson,  i.  19).  See  also  the  descrip- 
tions given  by  Athenaeus  (v.  196)  of  the  tent  of 
Ptolemy  Philadelphia,  and  the  ship  of  Philopator 
(ib.  206),  and  of  the  so  called  sepulchres  of  the 
kings  of  Syria  near  Tyre,  Hasselquist,  165. 

The  panel  work  in  ceilings,  which  has  been  de- 
scribed, is  found  in  Oriental  and  North  African 
dwellings  of  late  and  modern  times.  Shaw  describes 
the  ceilings  of  Moorish  houses  in  Barbary  as  of 
wainscot,  either  "  very  artfully  painted,  or  else 
thrown  into  a  variety  of  panels,  with  gilded  mould- 
ings and  scrolls  of  the  Koran  intermixed  "  {Travels, 


G, -'.<-,;< 

BeiM 


Panelled  ceiling  from  house 


CENSER 


28^ 


(Lane,  Modern  Egyptians.) 


p.  208).  Mr.  Porter  describes  the  ceilings  of 
houses  at  Damascus  as  delicately  painted,  and  in 
the  more  ancient  houses  with  "  arabesques  encom- 
passing panels  of  blue,  on  which  are  inscribed  verses 
and  chapters  of  the  Koran  in  Arabic.  Also  a  tomb 
at  Palmyra,  with  a  stone  ceiling  beautifully  pa- 
nelled and  painted  {Damascus,  i.  34,  37,  57,  60, 
'232  ;  ef.  Dent.  vi.  9  ;  also  Lane's  Mod.  Egypt,  i. 
37,  38).  Many  of  the  rooms  in  the  Palace  of  the 
Moors  at  the  Alhambra  were  ceiled  and  ornamented 
with  the  richest  geometrical  patterns.  These  still 
remain,  and  restorations  of  them  may  be  seen  at 
the  Alhambra  Court  of  the  Crystal  Palace.  The 
ancient  Egyptians  used  coloured  tiles  in  their  build- 


Persia,  and  he  mentions  beautiful  specimens  of  mo- 
saic, arabesque,  and  inlaid  wood-work  in  ceilings  at 
Ispahan,  at  Kooni  in  the  mosque  of  Fatima,  and  at 
Ardevil.  These  ceilings  were  constructed  on  the 
ground  and  hoisted  to  their  position  by  machinery 
(Chardin,  Voyage,  ii.  434,  iv.  126,  vii.  387,  viii. 
40,  plate  39  ;  Olearius,  p.  241).  [H.  W.  P.] 

CELOSYRIA.     [Coelesyria.] 

CEN'CHREA  (accurately  CENCHREAE, 
KeyKpeai),  the  eastern  harbour  of  Corinth  (i.  e.  its 
harbour  on  the  Saronic  Gulf)  and  the  emporium  of 
its  trade  with  the  Asiatic  shores  of  the  Mediterra- 
nean, as  Lechaeum  {Lutraki)  on  the  Corinthian 
Gulf  connected  it  with  Italy  and  the  west.  A  line 
of  walls  extended  from  the  citadel  of  Corinth  to 
Lechaeum,  and  thus  the  pass  of  Cenchreae  was  of 
peculiar  military  importance  in  reference  to  the  ap- 
proach along  the  Isthmus  from  Northern  Greece  to 
the  Morea.     {Corinth.] 

St.  Paul  sailed  from  Cenchreae  (Acts  xviii.  18) 
on  his  return  to  Syria  from  his  second  missionary 
journey ;  and  when  he  wrote  his  epistle  to  the 
Romans  in  the  course  of  the  third  journey,  an 
organised  church  seems  to  have  been  formed  here 
(Rom.  xvi.  1.  See  Phoebe).  The  first  bishop  of 
this  church  is  said  {Apost.  Const,  vii.  46)  to  have 
been  named  Lucius,  and  to  have  been  appointed  by 
St.  Paul. 

The  distance  of  Cenchreae  from  Corinth  was  70 
stadia  or  about  nine  miles.  Pausanias  (ii.  3)  de- 
scribes the  road  as  having  tombs  and  a  grove  of 
cypresses  by  the  wayside.  The  modern  village  of 
Kikries  retains  the  ancient  name,  which  is  conjec- 
tured by  Dr.  Sibthorpe  to  be  derived  from  the 
millet  (iceyKpi),. which  still  grows  there  (Walpole's 
Travels,  p.  41).  Some  traces  of  the  moles  of  the 
port  are  still  visible  (see  Leake's  Morea,  iii.  pp. 
233-235).  The  following  coin  exhibits  the  port 
exactly  as  it  is  described  by  Pausanias,  with  a 
temple  at  the  extremity  of  each  mole,  and  a  statue  . 
of  Neptune  on  a  rock  between  them.       [J.  S.  H.J 


Panelled  ceiling  from  house  in  Cairo.    (Lane,  Modern  Egyptian*  ) 

lligs  (Athen.  v.  206  ;  Wilkinson,  ii.  287).    The  like 
taste  is  observed  by  Chardin  to  have  prevailed  in 


al    Coin   of  Corinth.     On   the  oh 
Phis;  on  the  reverse  the  port  of  (  enchreae,  with  o.  l    i.  .  ,  that 

i^,  '  "I. "MA    LAV4    TVI.IA  fOHlNTHOS. 

CENDEBE'US  (accurately  CENDEBAEUS, 
KtvSeficuos),  a  general  left  by  Antiochus  VII.  in 
command  of  the  sea-board  of  Palestine  (1  Mace.  xv. 
38  If.)  after  the  defeat  of  Tryphon  B.C.  138.  He 
fortified  Kedron  and  harassed  the  .lews  for  some  time, 
but  was  afterwards  defeated  by  Judas  and  John,  the 
sons  of  Simon  Maccabaeus,  with  great  loss  |  1  Mace. 
xvi.  l-io).    [Antiochus VII.]         [B.F.W.] 

censer  (nrino  and  rncpO;  in  i.xx. 

mostly  ■Kvpelov,  but  also  dincrKt}  and  Ov/xiaT-fiptov); 
thuribulvm.  The  former  of  the  Hebrew  words  (  from 
nnn.  to  seize  or  lay  hold  of,  especially  of  fire) 

seems  used  generally  for  any  instrument  to  seize  or 
hold  burning  coals,  or  to  receive  ashes,  &c,  such  as 


288 


CENSUS 


the  appendages  of  the  brazen  altar  and  golden  can- 
dlestick mentioned  in  Ex.  xxv.  38,  xxxvii.  23,  in 
which  senses  it  seems  rendered  by  the  LXX.  by 
6Trapti<ri-pk,  iirapvTrip,  or  perhaps  vTr66efxa.  It, 
however,  generally  boars  the  limited  meaning  which 
properly  belongs  to  the  second  word,  found  only  in 
the  later  books  (e.g.  2  Chr.  xxvi.  19  ;  Ez.  viii.  11), 
(der.  mbp,  incense),  that,  viz.  of  a  small  portable 
vessel  of  metal  fitted  to  receive  burning  coals  from 
the  altar,  and  on  which  the  incense  for  burning  was 
sprinkled  by  the  priest  to  whose  office  this  ex- 
clusively belonged,  who  bore  it  in  his  hand,  and 
with  whose  personal  share  in  the  most  solemn 
ritual  duties  it  was  thus  in  close  and  vivid  con- 
nexion (2  Chr.  xxvi.  18;  Luke  i.  9).  Thus 
"  Korah  and  his  company"  were  bidden  to  take 
"  censers,"  with  which  in  emulation  of  Aaron  and 
his  sons  they  had  perhaps  provided  themselves3 
(comp.  Ez.  viii.  11);  and  Moses  tells  Aaron  to 
take  "  the  censer"  (not  a  as  in  A.  V.),  i.  e.  that 
of  the  sanctuary,  or  that  of  the  High-priest,  to  stay 
the  plague  by  atonement.  The  only  distinct  precepts 
regarding  the  use  of  the  censer  are  found  in  Num. 
iv.  14,  where  among  the  vessels  of  the  golden  altar, 
I.  e.  of  incense,  "  censers "  are  reckoned ;  and  in 
Lev.  xvi.  12,  wRere  we  find  that  the  High-priest 
was  to  carry  it  (here  also  it  is  "  the"  not  "  a 
censer"  that  he  is  ordered  to  "  take")  into  the  most 
holy  place  within  the  vail,  where  the  "incense" 
was  to  be  "  put  on  the  fire,"  i.  e.  on  the  coals  in 
the  censer,  "  before  the  Lord."  This  must  have 
been  on  the  Day  of  Atonement,  for  then  only  was 
that  place  entered.  Solomon  prepared  "  censers  of 
pure  gold"  as  part  of  the  same  furniture  (1  K. 
vji.  50 ;  2  Chr.  iv.  22).  Possibly  their  general 
use  may  be  explained  by  the  imagery  of  Rev. 
viii.  3,  4,b  and  may  have  been  to  take  up  coals 
from  the  brazen  altar,  and  convey  the  incense 
while  burning  to  the  "  golden  altar,"  or  "  altar  of 
incense,"  on  which  it  was  to  be  ottered  morning  and 
evening  (Ex.  xxx.  7,  8).  So  Uzziah,  when  he  was 
intending  "  to  burn  incense  upon  the  altar  of  in- 
cense," took  "  a  censer  in  his  hand"  (2  Chr.  xxvi. 
16,  19).  The  Mishna  (Joma,  iv.  4)  mentions  a 
silver  censer  which  had  a  handle,  and  was  fetched 
from  some  chamber  where  such  utensils  were  kept 
(ib.  v.  1,  and  Barthenora's  comment)  ;  and  was 
used  to  gather  the  coals  from  the  altar,  which  were 
then  transferred  to  a  golden  censer.  On  the  great 
Day  of  Atonement,  however,  a  golden  one  of  finer 
standard  (Tamir,  v.  5)  was  used  throughout.  The 
word  Ov^.iaTt]piov  rendered  "  censer"  in  Hebr.  ix.  4 
probably  means  the  "  altar  of  incense."  c  [Altar.] 
(In  Ugolini,  vol.  xi.  a  copious  collection  of  autho- 
rities on  the  subject  will  be  found  ;  Sonneschmid  de 
Thy m.  Sand,  is  referred  to  by  Winer,  s.  v.  Rauch- 
fass.)  [H.  H.] 

CENSUS  OpQp,  or  rHpS,  numbering  com- 
bined with  lustration,  from  IpQ,  survey  in  order 
to  purge,  Gesen.  1120;   LXX.,    api0/x6s  ;   N.  T., 


"  Gesenius  s.  v.  nFinO  seems  to  prefer  the  general 
meaning  of  a  fire-shovel  in  this  passage ;  but,  from  Num. 
xvi.  17,  it  was  probably  the  same  fashion  of  thing  as 
that  used  by  Aaron  in  the  priestly  function.  Nor,  as 
the  rebellion  was  evidently  a  deliberately  concerted 
movement,  is  there  any  difficulty  in  supposing  the 
amount  of  preparation  suggested  in  the  text. 

b  The  word  for  censer  here  is  Ai/Sai-wi-os,  from  the 
Ai'3ai/o5  of  Matt.  ii.  11  ;  in  Rev.  v.  8,  </>iaA.as  js  used 
apparently  to  mean  the  .same  vessel. 


CENSUS 

avoypacpi]  ;  dinume ratio,  descriptio).  I.  Moses 
laid  down  the  law  (Ex.  xxx.  12,  13)  that  whenever 
the  people  were  numbered,  an  ottering  of  £  a  shekel 
should  be  made  by  every  man  above  20  years  of 
age,  by  way  of  atonement  or  propitiation.  A  pre- 
vious law  had  also  ordered  that  the  firstborn  of 
man  and  of  beast  should  be  set  apart,  as  well  as  the 
first  fruits  of  agricultural  produce ;  the  first  to  be 
redeemed,  and  the  rest  with  one  exception  ottered 
to  God  (Ex.  xiii.  12,  13,  xxii.  29).  The  idea  of 
lustration  in  connexion  with  numbering  predomi- 
nated also  in  the  Roman  census  (Diet,  of  Antiq. 
Lustrum),  and  among  Mohammedan  nations  at  the 
present  day  a  prejudice  exists  against  numbering 
their  possessions,  especially  the  fruits  of  the  field 
(Hay,  Western  Barbary,  p.  15  ;  Crichton,  Arabia, 
ii.  180 ;  see  also  Lane,  Mod.  Egypt,  ii.  72,  73). 
The  instances  of  numbering  recorded  in  the  0.  T. 
are  as  follows : — 

1.  Under  the  express  direction  of  God  (Ex. 
xxxviii.  20),  in  the  3rd  or  4th  month  after  the 
Exodus  during  the  encampment  at  Sinai,  chiefly 
for  the  purpose  of  raising  money  for  the  Tabernacle. 
The  numbers  then  taken  amounted  to  603,550 
men,  which  may  be  presumed  to  express  with 
greater  precision  the  round  numbers  of  600,000 
who  are  said  to  have  left  Egypt  at  first  (Ex.  xii. 
37). 

2.  Again,  in  the  2nd  month  of  the  2nd  year 
after  the  Exodus  (Num.  i.  2,  3).  This  census  was 
taken  for  a  double  purpose  (a.)  to  ascertain  the 
numbei  of  fighting  men  from  the  age  of  20  to 
50  (Joseph.  Ant.  iii.  12,  §4).  The  total  number 
on  this  occasion,  exclusive  of  the  Levites,  amounted 
at  this  time  also  to  603,550  (Num.  ii,  32), 
Josephus  says  603,650  ;  each  tribe  was  numbered, 
and  placed  under  a  special  leader,  the  head  of  the 
tribe.  (6.)  To  ascertain  the  amount  of  the  redemp- 
tion offering  due  on  account  of  all  the  firstborn 
both  of  persons  and  cattle.  Accordingly  the  num- 
bers were  taken  of  all  the  firstborn  male  persons  of 
the  whole  nation  above  one  month  old,  including 
all  of  the  tribe  of  Levi  of  the  same  age.  The  Le- 
vites, whose  numbers  amounted  to  22,000,'  were 
taken  in  lieu  of  the  firstborn  males  of  the  rest  of 
Israel,  whose  numbers  were  22,273,  and  for  the 
surplus  of  273  a  money  payment  of  1365  shekels, 
or  5  shekels  each,  was  made  to  Aaron'and  his  sons 
(Num.  iii.  39,  51).  If  the  numbers  in  our  present 
copies,  from  which  those  given  by  Josephus  do  not 
materially  differ,  be  correct,  it  seems  likely  that 
these  two  numberings  were  in  fact  one,  but  applied 
to  different  purposes.  We  can  hardly  otherwise  ac- 
count for  the  identity  of  numbers  even  within  the 
few  mouths  of  interval  (Calmet  on  Num.  i.  Pic- 
torial Bible,  ibid.).  It  may  be  remarked  that  the 
system  of  appointing  head  men  in  each  tribe  as 
leaders,  as  well  as  the  care  taken  in  preserving  the 
pedigrees  of  the  families  corresponds  with  the 
practice  of  the  Arab  tribes  at  the  present  day 
(Crichton,  Arabia,  ii.  185,  186;  Niebuhr,  Descr. 
de  l' Arable,  14 ;   Buckingham,  Arab  Tribes,  88  ; 


c  This  word  undeniably  bears  this  sense  in  Joseph. 
Ant.  iii.  8,  3,  who  gives  it  similarly  the  epithet 
Xpva-ovv ;  as  also  in  Philo.  de  fit.  Mos.  p.  668,  ed. 
Paris.  It  thus  becomes  =  eva-iaa-Trjptov  ev^ia^oros, 
the  expression  for  the  same  thing  in  LXX.,  Ex.  xxx. 
1,  but  its  simpler  meaning  is  merely  that  of  an 
"instrument  for  the  ev^la/na  (incense),"  and  thus, 
either  censer,  or  incense  altar.  See  also  1  Mace.  i. 
21    22. 


CENSUS 

Jahn,  Hist.  Book  ii.  8,  11  ;  Malcolm,  Sketches  of 
Persia,  xiv.  157,  159). 

3.  Another  numbering  took  place  38  years 
afterwards,  previous  to  the  entrance  into  Canaan, 
when  the  total  number,  excepting  the  Levites, 
amounted  to  601,730  males,  showing  a  decrease  of 
1870.  All  tribes  presented  an  increase  except  the 
following,  Reuben,  of  2770  ;  Simeon,  37,100  ;  Gad, 
5150;  Ephraim  and  Naphtali  8000  each.  The 
tribe  of  Levi  had  increased  by  727  (Num.  xxvi.). 
The  great  diminution  which  took  place  in  the  tribe 
of  Simeon  may  probably  be  assigned  to  the  plague 
consequent  on  the  misconduct  of  Zimri  (Calmet, 
on  Num.  xxv.  9).  On  the  other  hand,  the  chief 
instances  of  increase  are  found  in  Manasseh  of 
20,500;  Benjamin,  10,200;  Asher,  11,900,  and 
Issachar,  9900.  None  were  numbered  at  this 
census  who  had  been  above  20  years  of  age  at  the 
previous  one  in  the  2nd  year,  excepting  Caleb  and 
Joshua  (Num.  xxvi.  63-65). 

4.  The  next  formal  numbering  of  the  whole 
people  was  in  the  reign  of  David,  who  in  a  moment 
of  presumption,  contrary  to  the  advice  of  Joab, 
gave  orders  to  number  the  people  without  requiring 
the  statutable  offering  of  ^  a  shekel.  The  men  of 
Israel  above  20  years  of  age  were  800,000,  and  of 
Judah  500,000,  total  1,300,000.  The  book  of 
Chron.  gives  the  numbers  of  Israel  1,100,000,  and 
of  Judah  470,000,  total  1,570,000 ;  but  informs 
us  that  Levi  and  Benjamin  were  not  numbered 
(1  Chr.  xxi.  6,  xxvii.  24).  Josephus  gives  the 
numbers  of  Israel  and  Judah  respectively  900,000 
and  400,000  (2  Sam.  xxiv.  1,9;  and  Calmet,  ad 
loc. ;  1  Chi-,  xxi.  1,  5,  xxvii.  24;  Joseph.  Ant.  vii. 
13,  §1). 

5.  The  census  of  David  was  completed  by  Solo- 
mon, by  causing  the  foreigners  and  remnants  of 
the  conquered  nations  resident  within  Palestine  to 
be  numbered.  Their  number  amounted  to  153,600, 
and  they  were  employed  in  forced  labour  on  his 
great  architectural  works  (Josh.  ix.  27  ;  1  K.  v. 
15,  ix.  20,  21  ;  1  Chr.  xxii.  2 ;  2  Chr.  ii.  17,  18). 

Between  this  time  and  the  Captivity,  mention 
is  made  of  the  numbers  of  armies  under  successive 
kings  of  Israel  and  Judah,  from  which  may  be  ga- 
thered with  more  or  less  probability,  and  with  due 
consideration  of  the  circumstances  of  the  times  as 
influencing  the  numbers  of  the  levies,  estimates  of 
the  population  at  the  various  times  mentioned. 

6.  Kehoboam  (B.C.  975-958)  collected  from 
Judah  and  Benjamin  180,000  men  to  fight  against 
Jeroboam  (1  K.  xii.  21). 

7.  Abijam  (958-955),  with  400,000  men,  made 
war  on  Jeroboam  with  800,000,  of  whom  500,000 
were  slain  (2  Chr.  xiii.  3,  17). 

8.  Asa  (955-914)  had  an  army  of  300,000  men 
from  Judah,  and  280,000  (Josephus  says  250,000) 
from  Benjamin,  with  which  he  defeated  Zerah  the 
Ethiopian,  with  an  army  of  1,000,000  (2  Chr.  xiv. 
8,  9;  Joseph.  Aid.  viii.  12,  1). 

9.  Jehoshaphat  (914-891),  besides  nun  in  gar- 
risons, had  under  aims  l,16O,Q00  men,  including 
perhaps  subject  foreigners  (2  Chr.  xvii.  14-19; 
Jahn,  Hi,t.  v.  37). 

10.  Amaziah  (838-811)  had   from   Judah  and 
niii  300,000,   besides    100,000   men 

from  Israel  (2  Chr.  xxv.  5,  6). 

11.  CJzziah  (811-759)  could  bring  into  tin'  field 

107,000,  Josephus),  well 
under  2600  officers  (2  Chr.  xxvi.  II-::.; 
Ant.  ix.  10,  §3). 

.it-.    V.  I'    1  i:i  \  e 


CENSUS 


289 


other  and  partial  notices  of  numbers  indicating  po- 
pulation, Tims,  a.  Gideon  from  4  tribes  collected 
32,000  men  (Judg,  vi.  35,  vii. :'.).  b.  Jephthah  put 
to  death  42,000  Ephraimites  (Judg.  xii.  6).  The 
numbers  of  Ephraim  3U0  years  before  were  32,500 
(Num.  xxvi.  37).  c.  Of  Benjamin  25,000  were 
slain  at  the  battle  of  Gibeah,  by  which  slaughter, 
and  that  of  the  inhabitants  of  its  cities,  the  tribe 
was  reduced  to  600  men.  Its  numbers  in  the  wil- 
derness were  45,600  (Num.  xxvi.  41  ;  Judg.  xx. 
35,  46).  d.  The  number  of  those  who  joined 
David  after  Saul's  death,  besides  the  tribe  of 
Issachar,  was  340,922  (1  Chr.  xii.  23-38).  e.  At 
the  time  when  Jehoshaphat  could  muster  1,160,000 
men,  Ahab  in  Israel  could  only  bring  7000  against 
the  Syrians  (1  K.  xx.  15).  /.  The  numbers  carried 
captive  to  Babylon  B.C.  599  from  Judah,  are  said 
(2  K.  xxiv.  14,  16)  to  have  been  from  8000  to 
10,000,  by  Jeremiah  4600  (Jer.  lii.  30). 

12.  The  number  of  those  who  returned  with 
Zerubbabel  in  the  first  caravan  is  reckoned  at 
42,360  (Ezr.  ii.  64).;  but  of  these  perhaps  12,542 
belonged  to  other  tribes  than  Judah  and  Benjamin. 
It  is  thus  that  the  difference  between  the  total 
(v.  64)  and  the  several  details  is  to  be  accounted 
for.  The  purpose  of  this  census,  which  does  not 
materially  differ  from  the  statement  in  Nehemiah 
(Neh.  vii.),  was  to  settle  with  reference  to  the  year 
of  Jubilee  the  inheritances  in  the  Holy  Land,  which 
had  been  disturbed  by  the  Captivity,  and  also  to 
ascertain  the  family  genealogies,  and  ensure,  as  far 
as  possible,  the  purity  of  the  Jewish  race  (Ezr.  ii. 
59,  x.  2,  8,  18,  44;  Lev.  xxv.  10). 

In  the  second  caravan,  B.C.  458,  the  number 
was  1496.  Women  and  children  are  in  neither 
case  included  (Ezr.  viii.  1-14). 

It  was  probably  for  kindred  objects  that  the  pe- 
digrees and  enumerations  which  occupy  the  tiist 
9  chapters  of  the  1st  book  of  Chronicles,  woe 
either  composed  before  the  Captivity,  or  compiled 
afterwards  from  existing  records  by  Ezra  and 
others  (1  Chr.  iv.  28,  32,  39,  v.  9,  vi.  57,  81,  vii. 
28,  ix.  2).  In  the  course  of  these  we  meet  with 
uotices  of  the  numbers  of  the  tribes,  but  at  what 
periods  is  uncertain.  Thus  Reuben,  Gad,  and  half 
the  tribe  of  Manasseh  are  set  down  at  44,760 
(v.  18),  Issachar  at  87,000  (vii.  5),  Benjamin 
59,434  (vii.  7,  9, 11),  Asher  26,000  (vii.  40).  Be- 
sides there  are  to  be  reckoned  priests,  Levites,  and 
residents  at  Jerusalem  from  the  tribes  of  Benjamin, 
Ephraim,  and  Manasseh  (ix.  3). 

Throughout  all  these  accounts  two  points  are 
clear.  1.  That  great  pains  were  taken  to  ascertain 
and  register  the  numbers  of  the  Jewish  people  at 
various  times  for  the  reasons  mentioned  above. 
2.  That  the  numbers  given  in  sunn1  eases  can  with 
difficulty  be  reconciled  with  other  numbers  of  no 
very  distant  date,  as  well  as  with  the  presumed 
capacity  of  the  country  for  supporting  population. 
Thus  the  entire  male  population  above  20  years  of 
opting  Levi  and  Benjamin,  at  Davids 
is  given  as  1,300,000  or  1,570,000  (-'  Sam. 
xxiv.   J  ;    1  Chr.   xxi.),   strangers    153,600,   total 

1,453,600  or  1,723, ».     Th<  e  iii.nii.ei-,  i 

i  tribes  being  borne  in  mind)  represent  a  po- 
pulation of  not  I  times  this  amount,  or 
at  least,  5,814,000,  of  whom  not  less  than  2,000,000 
2  Sam.  xxiv.  9).  About 
100  yearsafter  Jehoshaphat  wa  i  from 
Judah  and  Benjamin  ( in' 
an  army  oi    1 .  16<  (,00 

ing  a  population  of  4,640  000.     Fifty  years  later. 

1/      • 


290 


CENSUS 


Amaziah  could  only  raise  300,000  from  the  same 
2  tribes,  and  27  years  after  this,  Uzziah  had 
307,500  men  and  2600  officers.  Whether  the 
number  of  the  foreigners  subject  to  Jehoshaphat 
constitutes  the  difference  at  these  periods  must  re- 
main uncertain. 

To  compare  these  estimates  with  the  probable 
capacity  of  the  country,  the  whole  area  of  Pales- 
tine, including  the  trnns-Jordanic  tribes,  so  far  as 
it  is  possible  to  ascertain  their  limits,  may  be  set 
down  as  not  exceeding  11,000  square  miles;  Judah 
and  Benjamin  at  3135,  and  Galilee  at  930  sq.  miles. 
The  population,  making  allowance  for  the  excepted 
tribes,  would  thus  be  not  less  than  530  to  the 
square  mile.  Now  the  population  of  Belgium  in 
1850  was  4,426,202,  or  at  the  rate  of  388  to  the 
sq.  mile,  the  area  being  about  11,400  sq.  miles. 
The  area  of  the  kingdom  of  Saxony  is  5752  sq. 
miles,  and  its  population  in  1852  was  1,987,832, 
or  an  average  of  345J,  but  in  some  districts  500, 
to  the  sq.  mile.  The  counties  of  Yorkshire,  West- 
moreland (the  least  populous  county  in  England), 
and  Lancashire,  whose  united  area  is  8642  sq. 
miles,  contained  in  1852  a  population  of  3,850,215, 
or  rather  more  than  445  to  the  sq.  mile ;  while 
the  county  of  Lancashire  alone  gave  1064  persons, 
the  West  Riding  of  Yorkshire  496,  and  Warwick- 
shire 539  to  the  sq.  mile.  The  island  of  Barbadoes 
contains  about  166  sq.  miles,  and  in  1850  con- 
tained a  population  of  145,000,  or  873  to  the  sq. 
mile.  The  population  of  Malta  in  1849  was 
115,864,  or  1182  to  the  sq.  mile.  The  two  last 
instances,  therefore,  alone  supply  an  average  supe- 
rior to  that  ascribed  to  Palestine  in  the  time  of 
David,  while  the  average  of  Judah  and  Benjamin 
in  the  time  of  Jehoshaphat,  would  seem,  with  the 
exception  mentioned  above,  to  give  1480  to  the 
sq.  mile,  a  population  exceeded  only,  in  England, 
by  the  county  of  Middlesex  (6683),  and  approached 
by  that  of  Lancashire  (1064). 

But  while,  on  the  one  hand,  great  doubt  rests  on 
the  genuineness  of  numerical  expressions  in  O.  T.  it 
must  be  considered  on  the  other,  that  the  readings  on 
which  our  version  is  founded, give  with  trifling  varia- 
tions the  same  results  as  those  presented  by  the  LXX. 
and  by  Josephus  (Jahn,  v.  36  ;  Winer,  Zahlen  ; 
Glasse,  Phil.  Sacr.  de  caussis  corruptionis,  i.  §23, 
vol.  ii.  p.  189). 

In  the  list  of  cities  occupied  by  the  tribe  of 
Judah,  including  Simeon,  are  found  123  "  with 
their  villages,"  and  by  Benjamin  26.  Of  one  city, 
Ai,  situate  in  Benjamin,  which  like  many,  if  not 
all  the  others,  was  walled,  we  know  that  the  po- 
pulation, probably  exclusive  of  children,  was  12,000, 
whilst  of  Gibeon  it  is  said  that  it  was  larger  than 
Ai  (Josh.  viii.  25,  29,  x.  2,  xv.  21-62,  xviii.  21, 
28,  xix.  1-9).  If  these  "  cities  "  may  be  taken  as 
samples  of  the  rest,  it  is  clear  that  Southern  Pales- 
tine, at  least,  was  very  populous  before  the  entrance 
of  the  people  of  Israel. 

But  Josephus,  in  his  accounts  (1 .)  of  the  popu- 
lation of  Galilee  in  his  own  time,  and  (2.)  of  the 
numbers  congregated  at  Jerusalem  at  the  time  of 
the  Passover,  shows  a  large  population  inhabiting 
Palestine.  He  says  there  were  many  cities  in 
Galilee,  besides  villages,  of  which  the  least,  whether 
cities  or  villages  is  not  quite  certain,  had  not  less 
than  15,000  inhabitants  (B.  J.  iii.  3,  §2,  4;  comp. 
Tac.  Hist.  v.  8).  After  the  defeat  of  Cestius, 
A.D.  66,  before  the  formal  outbreak  of  the  war,  a 
census  taken  at  Jerusalem  by  the  priests,  of  the 
numbers  assembled  there  for  the  Passover,  founded 


CENSUS 

on  the  number  of  lambs  sacrificed,  compared  with 
the  probable  number  of  persons  partaking,  gave 
2,700,000-  persons,  besides  foreigners  and  those 
who  were  excluded  by  ceremonial  defilement  (see 
Tac.  Hist.  v.  12).  In  the  siege  itself  1,100,000 
perished,  and  during  the  war  97,000  were  made 
captives.  Besides  these  many  deserted  to  the  Ro- 
mans, and  were  dismissed  by  them  (i?.  /.  vi.  8, 
9,  3).  These  numbers,  on  any  supposition  of 
foreign  influx  [ofx6<pv\ov  a\\'  ovk  iirix^P10") 
imply  a  large  native  population ;  and  63  years 
liter,  in  the  insurrection  of  Barchochebas,  Dion 
Cassius  says  that  50  fortified  towns  and  980  villages 
were  destroyed,  and  580,000  persons  were  slain  in 
war,  besides  a  countless  multitude  who  perished  by 
famine,  fire,  and  disease,  so  that  Palestine  became 
almost  depopulated  (Dion  Cass.  lxix.  14). 

Lastly,  there  are  abundant  traces  throughout  the 
whole  of  Palestine  of  a  much  higher  rate  of  fertility 
in  former  as  compared  with  present  times,  a  fertility 
remaiked  by  profane  writers,  and  of  which  the  pre- 
sent neglected  state  of  cultivation  affords  no  test. 
This  combined  with  the  positive  divine  promises  of 
populousness,  increases  the  probability  of  at  least 
approximate  correctness  in  the  foregoing  estimates 
of  population  (Tac.  Hist.  v.  6  ;  Amm.  Marc.  xiv. 
8  ;  Joseph.  B.  J.  iii.  3  ;  St.  Jerome,  on  Ezek.  xx., 
and  Rabbinical  authorities  in  Reland  c.  xxvi. ;  Shaw, 
Travels,  ii.  pt.  2,  c.  1,  336,  340,  and  275  ;  Hassel- 
quist,  Travels,  120,  127,  130  ;  Stanley,  S.' $  Pal. 
120,  374;  Kitto,  Phys.  Geogr.  33;  Raiimer,  Pa- 
laestina,  8,  80,  83,  App.  ix.  Comp.  Gen.  xiii.  16, 
xxii.  17;  Num.  xxiii.  10;  IK.  iv.  20;  Acts  xii. 
20). 

II.  In  N.  T.,  St.  Luke,  in  his  account  of  the 
"taxing,"  says,  a  decree  went  out  from  Augustus 
airoypd.<peff9aL  izaffav  t))v  olKovjxevrjv  oi/'ttj  y\  ctaro- 
ypacpT]  Trp&TT)  4yev£To  TjyefxouevovTos  tt)s  'Svplas 
Kvprjviov,  and  in  the  Acts  alludes  to  a  disturbance 
raised  by  Judas  of  Galilee  in  the  days  of  the 
"  taxing"  (Luke  ii.  1 ;  Acts  v.  37). 

The  Roman  census  under  the  Republic  consisted, 
so  tar  as  the  present  purpose  is  concerned,  in  an  en- 
rolment of  persons  and  property  by  tribes  and 
households.  Every  paterfamilias  was  required  to 
appear  before  the  Censors,  and  give  his  own  name 
and  his  father's  ;  if  married,  that  of  his  wife,  and 
the  number  and  ages  of  his  children :  after  this  an 
account  and  valuation  of  his  property,  on  which  a 
tax  was  then  imposed.  By  the  lists  thus  obtained 
every  man's  position  in  the  state  was  regulated. 
After  these  duties  had  been  performed,  a  lustrum, 
or  solemn  purification  of  the  people  followed,  but 
not  always  immediately  (Diet,  of  Antiq.  Census, 
Lustrum;  Dionys.  iv.  15,22;  Cic.  de  Legg.  iii. 
3;  Dig.  50,  tit.  15;  Cod.  11,  tit.  48;  Clinton, 
Fast.  Hell.  iii.  p.  457,  c.  10). 

The  census  was  taken,  more  or  less  regularly,  in 
the  provinces,  under  the  republic,  by  provincial 
censors,  and  the  tribute  regulated  at  their  discre- 
tion (Cic.  Verr.  ii.  lib.  ii.  53,  56),  but  no  complete 
census  was  made  before  the  time  of  Augustus,  who 
carried  out  3  general  inspections  of  this  kind,  viz., 
(1.)  B.C.  28;  (2.)  B.C.  8;  (3.)  A.D.  14;  and  a 
partial  one,  A.D.  4.  The  reason  of  the  partial 
extent  of  this  last  was  that  he  feared  disturbances 
out  of  Italy,  and  also  that  he  might  not  appear  as 
an  exactor.  Of  the  returns  made,  Augustus  him- 
self kept  an  accurate  account  (breviarium),  like  a 
private  man  of  his  property  (Dion  Cass.  liv.  35, 
lv.  13 ;  Suet.  Aug.  27,  101  ;  Tac  Ann.  i.  11 ;  Tab. 
Ancyr.  ap.  Tac.  ii.  188,  Ernesti). 


29. 


30. 


CENTURION 

A  special  assessment  of  Gaul  under  commissioners 

sent  for  the  purpose  is  mentioned  in  the  time  of 
Tiberius  (Tae.  Ann,  i.  31,  ii.  6;  Liv.  Ep.  134, 
136). 

The  difficulties  which  arise  in  the  passage  from 

St.  Luke  are  discussed  under  Cvuenius.  [11.  \V.  1'.] 

CENTURION.     [Abmt.] 

CEPHAS.     [Peter.] 

CE'RAS    (K-qpds;     Curiae),    1    Esd, 
[Keros.] 

CE'TAB   (KrirAp  ;    Cetha),    1   Esd 
Th<  re  is  no  name  corresponding  with  this  in  the 
lists  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah. 

CHA'BRIS  ('AjSpi'j;  Alex.  Xappels ;  Vulg. 
omits),  the  son  of  Gothoniel  ((5  rod  I\),  one  of  the 
three  "  rulers  "  (&pxovres),  or  "  ancients  "  (jrpeff- 
fivrepot)  of  Bethulia,  in  the  time  of  Judith  (Jud. 
vi.  15,  viii.  10,  x.  6). 

CHA'DIAS.  "  They  of  Chadias  (ot  XaSWaf) 
and  Ammidoi,"  according  to  1  Esd.  v.  20,  re- 
turned from  Babylon  with  Zorobabel.  There  are 
no  corresponding  names  in  Ezra  and  Nehemiah. 

chaff  (wn,  yb,  fan;  cimid.  n-iy; 

Xvovs,  &xvpov  ;  stipula,  pulvis,  favilla).  The 
Heb.  words  rendered  chaff  in  A.  V.  do  not  seem 
to  have  precisely  the  same  meaning :  £>£'n  =  dry 
grass,  hay  ;  and  occurs  twice  only  in  0.  T.,  viz.,  Is. 
.v.  24,  xxxiii.  11.  The  root  WT\  is  not  used.  Pro- 
bably the  Sanscrit  kaksch  =  hay  is  the  same  word. 
(Bopp.  Gloss,  p.  41.) 

1*10  or  VO  is  chaff  separated  by  winnowing  from 
the  grain — the  husk  of  the  wheat.  The  carrying 
away  of  chaff  by  the  wind  is  an  ordinary  scriptural 
image  of  the  destruction  of  the  wicked,  and  of  their 
powerlessness  to  resist  God's  judgments  (Is.  xvii. 
13;  Hos.  xiii.  3;  Zeph.  ii.  2).  The  root  of  the 
word  is  MD,  to  press  out,  as  of  milk ;  whence 
its  second  meaning,  to  separate. 

pPl  is  rendered  straw  in  Ex.  v.  7,  10,  11,  &c, 
and  stubble  in  Job  xxi.  18.  In  Ex.  v.  12,  we  read 
P^P  C-'p,  stubble  for  straw;  so  that  it  is  not  the( 

same  as  stubble.  It  means  straw  cut  into  short 
portions,  in  which  state  it  was  mixed  with  the  mud 
of  which  bricks  were  made  to  give  it  consistency. 
In  1  K.  iv.  28,  mention  is  made  of  a  mixed  fodder 
for  horses  and  camels  of  barley  and  pFl,  such  as 
the  Arabs  call  tibn  to  this  day.  The  derivation  of 
the  word  is  doubtful.  Gesenius  was  of  opinion  that 
pH  was  tor  i"Onri,  from  root  n33,  to  build,  in 
reference  to  edifices  of  bricks  made  with  straw. 
Roediger  prefers  to  connect  it  with  f3,  which  pro- 
perly implies  a  separation  ami  division  of  parts,  and 
is  thence  transferred  to  the  mental  power  of  dis- 
cernment ;  so  that  pn  signifies  properly  anything 

cut  into  small  parts  (Ges.   Thes.  1  192). 

The  Chaldaic  word  "Viy  occurs  but  once,  in  Dan. 


CHALCEDONY 


291 


It  is  connected  with  the  Syr.  jiQ.^» 

S  -  3 

a  straw  or  small  bit  of  i 


and  Arab.  .Lr , 

flying  into  and  injuring  the  eye. 


[W.  !».] 


CHAIN.     Chains  wen-  used,    1.   as   badges  of 

office  ;  2.  for  ornament ;  3.  for  confining  prisoners. 
1.  The  gold  chain  Op"l)  placed  about  Joseph's 
neck  (Gen.  xli.  42),  and  that  promised  to  Daniel 
(Dan.  v.  7,  named  ^pOH),  are  instances  of  the  first 
use.  In  Egypt  it  was  one  of  the  insignia  of  a 
judge,  who  wore  an  image  of  truth  attached  to  it 
(Wilkinson's  Anc.  Egypt,  ii.  26);  it  was  also 
worn  by  the  prime  minister.  In  Persia  it  was  con- 
sidered not  only  as  a  mark  of  royal  favour  (Xen. 
Anab.  i.  2,  §27),  hut  a  token  of  investiture  (Dan. 
I.  c.  ;  Morier's  Second  Journey,  p.  93).  In  Ez. 
xvi.  11,  the  chain  is  mentioned  as  the  symbol  of 
sovereignty.  2.  Chains  for  ornamental  purposes 
were  worn  by  men  as  well  as  women  in  many 
countries  both  of  Europe  and  Asia  (Wilkinson,  iii. 
375),  and  probably  this  was  the  case  among  the 
Hebrews  (I'rov.  i.  9).  The  necklace  (pJJJ)  con- 
sisted of  pearls,  corals,  &c,  threaded  on  a  string ; 
the  beads  were  railed  D'1!-')")!"!,  from  fill,  to  per- 
forate (Cant.  i.  10,  A.  V.  "chains,"  where  "of 
gold"  are  interpolated).  Besides  the  necklace,  other 
chains  were  worn  (Jud.  x.  4)  hanging  down  as  far 
as  the  waist,  or  even  lower.  Some  were  adorned 
with  pieces  of  metal,  shaped  in  the  form  of  the 

moon,  named  D*3*nK'  (/jL-fjvicrKoi,  LXX. ;  lunulae, 
Vulg.;  round  tires  like  the  moon,  A.  V.;  Is.  iii. 
18)  ;  a  similar  ornament,  the  hildl,  still  exists  in 
Egypt  (Lane's  Modern  Egyptians,  App.  A.).  The 
Midianites  adorned  the  necks  of  their  camels  with 
it  (Judg.  viii.  21,  26)  ;  the  Arabs  still  use  a  similar 
ornament  (Wellsted,  i.  301).  To  other  chains  were 
suspended  various  trinkets — as  scent-bottles,  T13 
CS3n  {tablets  or  houses  of  the  souls,  A.  V.,  Is.  iii. 
20),  and  mirrors,  D'Ov'?}  (Is.  iii.  23).  Step- 
chains,  nnyV  (tinkling  ornaments,  A.  V.),  were 

attached  to  the  ankle-rings,  which  shortened  the 
step  and  produced  a  mincing  gait  (Is.  iii.  16,  18). 
3.  The  means  adopted  for  confining  prisoners  among 
the  Jews  were  fetters  similar  to  our  handcutls 
D^^'rD    (lit.    two    brasses,   as    though   made   in 

halves),  fastened  on  the  wrists  and  ankles,  and 
attached  to  each  other  by  a  chain  (Judg.  xvi.  2 1 ; 
2  Sam.  iii.  34;  2  K.  xxv.  7  ;  Jer.  xxxix.  7). 
Among  the  Romans,  the  prisoner  was  handcuffed 
to  one,  and  occasionally  to  two  guards — the  hand- 
cuff on  the  one  being  attached  to  that  on  the  other 
by  a  chain  (Acts  xii.  Ii,  7,  xxi.  33;   Diet,  of  Ant., 

ait.  Catena).  [W.  L.B.] 

CHALCEDONY  <xa\KriSdn/  ;  calcedonius) 
occurs  only  in  Rev.  xxi.  L9,  being  the  precious 
stone  with  which  the  third  foundation  of  the  wall  of 
the  New  Jerusalem  is  garnished.  According  to  1  'liny 
(II.  N.  xxxvii.  8,  §15),  chalcedony  is  a  gem  re- 
embling  the  Callais  or  turquoise,  which  some  have 
judged  to  lie  a  kind  of  carbuncle  or  ruby.  Sal- 
masius  differs  from  those'  who  make  the  colour  of 
chalcedony  to  be  like  that  of  tin1  carbuncle,  ami 
snys  that  they  confound  rbu  Kapxyo'd'i'ioi/  \idov, 
which  is  a  species  of  carbuncle,  with  -rfj  xa^KV- 
Sovlcp ;  but  confesses  that  it  is  by  no  means 
clear  what  stone  the  ancients  called  chalcedonius. 

1    on  Re\ .  ;  xxi.  1 9  |  saj  s  that  this  st",; 
the  colour  ofa  pallid  lamp,  shines  in  the  open  air, 

but  is  dark  ID  B  inoi  be  cut.  and  has  powers 

of  attraction.     The  etymology  of  the  word  is  not 

U  2 


292 


CHALCOL 


less  doubtful  than  its  meaning.  Some  derive  it, 
from  x«A.kJs,  from  a  belief  that  it  rings  like  brass 
when  struck.  Others  have  derived  it  from  XccA- 
KrjScoi',  as  though  from  a  locality  where  it  is  found  ; 
and  others  from  Kapxv^^"-  ^ee  Braun.  de  Vest. 
Heb.  ii.  c.  ii.  p.  525.  [W.  D.] 

CHAL'COL,  1  K.  iv.  31.  [Calcol.] 
CHALDE'A,  more  correctly  CHALDAEA 
(D^ba  ;  v  XakSaia  ;  Chaldaea)  is  properly  only 
the  most  southern  portion  of  Babylonia.  It  is 
used,  however,  in  our  version  for  the  Hebrew 
ethnic  appellative  Casdim  (or  "  Chaldaeans "), 
under  which  term  the  inhabitants  of  the  entire 
country  are  designated ;  and  it  will  therefore  here 
be  taken  in  this  extended  sense.  The  origin  of 
the  term  is  very  doubtful.  Casdim  has  been  de- 
rived by  some  from  Chesed  0£'3),  the  son  of 
Nahor  (Gen.  xxii.  22)  ;  but  if  Ur  was  already  a  city 
"  of  the  Casdim"  before  Abraham  quitted  it  (Gen. 
xi.  28),  the  name  of  Casdim  cannot  possibly  have 
been  derived  from  his  nephew.  On  the  other  hand 
the  term  Chaldaea  has  been  connected  with  the  city 
Kalwadha  (Chilmad  of  Ezekiel,  xxvii.  23).  This 
is  possibly  correct.  At  any  rate  in  searching  for  an 
etymology  it  should  be  borne  in  mind  thai  Kaldi  or 
Kaldai,  not  Casdim,  is  the  native  form. 

1.  Extent  and  boundaries.  —  The  tract  of 
country  viewed  in  Scripture  as  the  land  of  the 
Chaldaeans  is  that  vast  alluvial  plain  which  has 
been  formed  by  the  deposits  of  the  Euphrates  and 
the  Tigris— at  least  so  far  as  it  lies  to  the  west 
of  the  latter  stream.  The  country  to  the  east  is 
Elam  or  Susiana ;  but  the  entire  tract  between 
the  rivers,  as  well  as  the  low  country  on  the 
Arabian  side  of  the  Euphrates,  which  is  culti- 
vable by  irrigation  from  that  stream,  must  be 
considered  as  comprised  within  the  Chaldaea  of 
which  Nebuchadnezzar  was  king.  This  extraor- 
dinary flat,  unbroken  except  by  the  works  of  man, 
extends,  in  a  direction  nearly  N.E.  and  S.W.,  a 
distance  of  400  miles  along  the  course  of  the  rivers, 
and  is  on  the  average  about  100  miles  in  width. 
A  line  drawn  from  Hit  on  the  Euphrates  to  Tekrit 
on  the  Tigris,  may  be  considered  to  mark  its  north- 
ern limits ;  the  eastern  boundary  is  the  Tigris 
itself;  the  southern  the  Persian  Gulf;  on  the  west  its 
boundary  is  somewhat  ill-defined,  and  in  fact  would 
vary  according  to  the  degree  of  skill  and  industry  de- 
voted to  the  regulation  of  the  waters  and  the  exten- 
sion of  works  for  irrigation.  In  the  most  flourish- 
ing times  of  the  Chaldaean  empire  the  water  seems 
to  have  been  brought  to  the  extreme  limit  of  the 
alluvium,  a  canal  having  been  cut  along  the  edge 
of  the  tertiary  formation  on  the  Arabian  side 
throughout  its  entire  extent,  running  at  an  average 
distance  from  the  Euphrates  of  about  30  miles. 

2.  General  character  of  the  country. — The  ge- 
neral aspect  of  the  country  is  thus  described  by  a 
modern  traveller,  who  well  contrasts  its  condition 
now  with  the  appearance  which  it  must  have  pre- 
sented in  ancient  times.  "  In  former  days,"  he 
says,  "  the  vast  plains  of  Babylon  were  nourished 
by  a  complicated  system  of  canals  and  water- 
courses, which  spread  over  the  surface  of  the 
country  like  a  net-work.  The  wants  of  a  teeming 
population  were  supplied  by  a  rich  soil,  not  less 
bountiful  than  that  on  the  banks  of  the  Egyptian 
Nile.  Like  islands  rising  from  a  golden  sea  of 
waving  corn,  stood  frequent  groves  of  palm-trees 
and  pleasant  gardens,  affording  to  the  idler  or  tra- 


CHALDEA 

veller  their  grateful  and  highly-valued  shade. 
Crowds  of  passengers  hurried  along  the  dusty  roads 
to  and  from  the  busy  city.  The  land  was  rich  in 
corn  and  wine.  How  changed  is  the  aspect  of  that 
region  at  the  present  day  !  Long  lines  of  mounds, 
it  is  true,  mark  the  courses  of  those  main  arteries 
which  formerly  diffused  life  and  vegetation  along 
their  banks,  but  their  channels  are  now  bereft  of 
moisture  and  choked  with  drifted  sand  ;  the  smaller 
offshoots  are  wholly  effaced.  '  A  drought  is  upon 
her  waters,'  says  the  prophet,  '  and  they  shall  be 
dried  up!'  All  that  remains  of  that  ancient  civili- 
sation— that  '  glory  of  kingdoms,' — '  the  praise  of 
the  whole  earth,' — is  recognisable  in  the  numerous 
mouldering  heaps  of  brick  and  rubbish  which  over- 
spread the  surface  of  the  plain.  Instead  of  the  lux- 
urious fields,  the  groves  and  gardens,  nothing  now 
meets  the  eye  but  an  arid  waste — the  dense  popu- 
lation of  former  times  is  vanished,  and  no  man 
dwells  there."  (Loftus's  Chaldaea,  pp.  14-5.)  The 
cause  of  the  change  is  to  be  found  in  the  neglect  of 
man.  "  There  is  no  physical  reason,"  the  same 
writer  observes,  "  why  Babylonia  should  not  be  as 
beautiful  and  as  thickly  inhabited  as  in  days  of 
j^ore ;  a  little  care  and  labour  bestowed  on  the 
ancient  canals  would  again  restore  the  fertility 
and  population  which  it  originally  possessed."  The 
prosperity  and  fertility  of  the  country  depend  en- 
tirely on  the  regulation  of  the  waters.  Carefully 
and  properly  applied  and  husbanded,  they  are  suffi- 
cient to  make  the  entire  plain  a  garden.  Left  to 
themselves,  they  desert  the  river  courses  to  accu- 
mulate in  lakes  and  marshes,  leaving  large  districts 
waterless,  and  others  most  scantily  supplied,  while 
they  overwhelm  tracts  formerly  under  cultivation, 
which  become  covered  with  a  forest  of  reeds,  and 
during  the  summer  heats  breed  a  pestilential  miasma. 
This  is  th£  present  condition  of  the  greater  part  of 
Babylonia  under  Turkish  rule ;  the  evil  is  said  to 
be  advancing  ;  and  the  whole  country  threatens  to 
become  within  a  short  time  either  marsh  or  desert. 

3.  Divisions. — In  a  country  so  uniform  and  so 
devoid  of  natural  features  as  this,  political  divisions 
could  be  only  accidental  or  arbitrary.  Few  are 
found  of  any  importance.  The  true  Chaldaea,  as 
has  been  already  noticed,  is  always  in  the  geo- 
graphers a  distinct  region,  being  the  most  southern 
.portion  of  Babylonia,  lying  chiefly  (if  not  solely) 
on  the  right  bank  of  the  Euphrates  (Strab.  xvi.  1, 
§6  ;  Ptol.  v.  20).  Babylonia  above  this,  is  sepa- 
rated into  two  districts,  called  respectively  Amor- 
dacia  and  Auranitis.  The  former  is  the  name  of 
the  central  territory  round  Babylon  itself;  the  latter 
is  applied  to  the  regions  towards  the  north,  where 
Babylonia  borders  on  Assyria  (Ptol.  v.  20). 

4.  Cities. — Babylonia  was  celebrated  at  all  times 
for  the  number  and  antiquity  of  its  cities.  "  Babel, 
and  Erech,  and  Accad,  and  Calneh  in  the  land  of 
Shinar,"  are  the  first  towns  mentioned  in  Scripture 
(Gen.  x.  10).  The  "  vast  number  of  great  cities" 
which  the  country  possessed,  was  noted  by  Hero- 
dotus (i.  178),  and  the  whole  region  is  in  fact 
studded  with  huge  mounds,  each  mound  marking 
beyond  a  doubt  the  site  of  a  considerable  town.  The 
most  important  of  those  which  have  been  identified 
are  Borsippa  {Birs-N'unriiJ).  Sippara  or  Sepharvaim 
(Mosaib),  Cutha  {Ibrahim),  Calneh  ( /, 
Erech  (Warka),  Ur  (Mugheir),  Chilmad  (Kal- 
wadha),  Larancha  (Senkereh),  Is  {Hit),  Doraba  (Ak- 
kerkuf)  :  but  b<  sides  these  there  were  a  multitude  of 
others,  the  sites  of  which  have  not  been  determined, 
as  the  Accad  of  Genesis  (x.  10)  ;  the  Teredon  of 


CHALDEA 

Abydenus  (Fr.  8)  ;  Asbi,  Rubesi,  &c.,  towns  men- 
tioned in  the  inscriptions.  Two  of  these  places — 
Ur  and  Borsippa — are  particularly  noticed  in  the 
following  article  [Chaldean*].  Of  the  rest 
Erech,  Larancha,  and  Calneh,  were  in  early  times 
of  the  most  consequence;  while  Cutha,  Sippara, 
and  Teredon  attained  their  celebrity  Lit  a  compara- 
tively recent  epoch. 

5.  Canals. — One  of  the  most  remarkable  features 
of  ancient  Babylonia  was,  as  has  been  already  ob- 
served, its  network  of  canals.  A  more  particular 
account  will  now  be  given  of  the  chief  of  these. 
Three  principal  canals  carried  off  the  waters  of  the 
Euphrates  towards  the  Tigris,  above  Babylon. 
These  were,  1.  The  original  "  Royal  River,"  or 
Ar-Malcha  of  Berosus,  which  left  the  Euphrates  at 
Perisabor  or  Anbar,  and  followed  the  line  of  the 
modern  Saklawyeh  canal,  passing  by  Akkcrkuf,  and 
entering  the  Tigris  a  little  below  Baghdad  ;  2.  the 
Nahr  Malcha  of  the  Arabs,  which  branched  off  at 
Ridhitaniyeh,  and  ran  across  to  the  site  of  Seleucia  ; 
and  3.  the  Nahr  Kutha,  which  starting  from  the 
Euphrates  about  12  miles  above  Mosaib,  passed 
through  Cutha,  and  fell  into  the  Tigris  20  miles 
below  the  site  of  Seleucia.  On  the  other  side  of 
the  stream,  a  large  canal,  perhaps  the  most  im- 
portant of  all,  leaving  the  Euphrates  at  Hit,  where 
the  alluvial  plain  commences,  .skirted  the  deposit  on 
the  west  along  its  entire  extent,  and  fell  into  the 
Persian  Gulf  at  the  head  of  the  Bubian  creek, 
about  20  miles  west  of  the  Shat-el-Arab ;  while  a 
second  main  artery  (the  Pallacopas  of  Arrian) 
branched  from  the  Euphrates  nearly  at  Mosaib, 
and  ran  into  a  great  lake,  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
Borsippa,  whence  the  lands  to  the  south-west  of 
Babylon  were  irrigated.  From  these  and  other 
similar  channels,  numerous  branches  were  carried 
out,  from  which  further  cross  cuts  were  made, 
until  at  length  every  field  was  duly  supplied  with 
the  precious  fluid. 

6.  Sea  of  Nedjef,  Chaldaean  marshes,  <§-c. — 
Chaldaea  contains  one  natural  feature  deserving  of 
special  description — the  "  great  inland  freshwater 
sea  of  Nedjef"  (Loftus,  p.  45).  This  sheet  of 
water,  which  does  not  owe  its  origin  to  the  inunda- 
tions, but  is  a  permanent  lake  of  considerable  depth, 
surrounded  by  cliffs  of  a  reddish  sandstone  in  places 
40  feet  high,  extends  in  a  south-easterly  direction 
a  distance  of  40  miles  from  about  lat.  31°  53' 
long.  44°  to  lat.  31°  26',  long.  44D  35'.  Its 
greatest  width  is  35  miles.  It  lies  thus  on  the 
right  bank  of  the  Euphrates,  from  which  it  is 
distant  (at  the  nearest  point)  about  20  miles,  and 
receives  from  it  a  certain  quantity  of  water  at  the 
time  of  the  inundation,  which  flows  through  it, 
and  is  carried  back  to  the  Euphrates  at  Scan  voa, 
by  a  natural  river  course  known  as  the  Shut-el- 
Atchan.  Above  and  below  the  Sea  of  Nedjef, 
from  the  Birs-Nimrud  to  Kvfa,  and  from  the 
south-eastern  extremity  of  the  Sea  to  S<im<ira,  ex- 
tend the  famous  Chaldaean  marshes  (Strab.  xvi. 
1,  §12;  Arrian,  Exp.  Al.  vii.  22),  where  Alex- 
ander was  nearly  lost,  but  these  are  entirely  distinct 
from  the  sea  itself,  depending  on  the  state  of  the 
Hindiyeh  canal,  and  disappearing  altogether  when 
that  is  effectually  closed. 

7.  Productions. — The  extraordinary  fertility  of 
the  Chaldaean  soil  has  been  noticed  by  various 
writers.  It  is  said  to  be  the  only  country  in  the 
world  where  wheal  grows  wild.  Berosus  noticed 
this   production   (Fr.    1,  §2),    and   also   the 

neous  growth  of  barley,   sesame,   ochrys,    palms, 


CHALDEANS 


293 


apples,  ami  many  kinds  of  shelled  fruit.  Herodotus 
declared  (i.  193)  that  grain  commonly  returned 
200-fold  to  the  sower,  and  occasionally  300-fold. 
Strabo  made  nearly  the  same  assertion  (xvi.  1, 
§14);  and  Pliny  said  (//.  N.  xviii.  17),  that  the 
wheat  was  cut  twice,  and  afterwards  was  good  keep 
for  1  leasts.  The  palm  was  undoubtedly  one  of  the 
principal  objects  of  cultivation.  According  to  Strabo 
it  furnished  the  natives  with  bread,  wine,  vinegar, 
honey,  porridge,  and  ropes ;  with  a  fuel  equal  to 
charcoal,  and  with  a  means  of  fattening  cattle  and 
sheep.  A  Persian  poem  celebrated  its  360  uses 
(Strab.  xvi.  1, 14).  Herodotus  says  (i.  193)  that  the 
whole  of  the  fiat  country  was  planted  with  palms, 
and  Ammianus  Marcellinus  (xxiv.  3)  observes  that 
from  the  point  reached  by  Julian's  army  to  the 
shores  of  the  Persian  Gulf  was  one  continuous 
forest  of  verdure.  At  present  palms  are  almost 
confined  to  the  vicinity  of  the  rivers,  and  even 
there  do  not  grow  thickly  except  about  the  villages 
on  their  banks.  The  soil  is  rich,  but  there  is  little 
cultivation,  the  inhabitants  subsisting  chiefly  upon 
dates.  More  than  half  the  country  is  left  dry  and 
waste  from  the  want  of  a  proper  system  of  irriga- 
tion ;  while  the  remaining  half  is  to  a  great  extent 
covered  with  marshes  owing  to  the  same  neglect. 
Thus  it  is  at  once  true  that  "  the  sea  has  come  up 
upon  Babylon  and  she  is  covered  with  the  waves 
thereof"  (Jer.  li.  42)  ;  that  she  is  made  "  a  posses- 
sion for  the  bittern,  and  pools  of  water"  (Is.  xiv. 
23)  ;  and  also  that  "  a  drought  is  upon  her  waters, 
and  they  are  dried  up"  (Jer.  1.  38),  that  she  is 
"wholly  desolate" — "the  hindermost  of  the  na- 
tions, a  wilderness,  a  dry  land,  and  a  desert  "  (ib. 
12,  13).  (See  Loftus's  Chaldaea  and  Susiana  ; 
Layard's  Nineveh  and  Bab.  chs.  xsi. — xxiv. ;  Raw- 
linson's  Herodotus,  vol.  i.  Essay  ix.  ;  and  Mr.  Tay- 
lor's Paper  in  the  Journal  of  the  Asiatic  Society, 
vol.  xv.)  [G.  R.] 

CHALDEANS,  or  CHAL'DEES  (D*Wa  ; 
XaAScuoi ;  Chaldaei),  appear  in  Scripture,  until 
the  time  of  the  captivity,  as  the  people  of  the 
country  which  has  Babylon  for  its  capital,  and 
which  is  itself  termed  Shinar  OJttB')  ;  but  in  the 
book  of  Daniel,  while  this  meaning  is  still  found 
(v.  30,  and  ix.  1),  a  new  sense  shows  itself.  The 
Chaldaeans  are  classed  with  the  magicians  and  as- 
tronomers; and  evidently  form  a  sort  of  priest  class, 
who  have  a  peculiar  ''tongue"  and  "learning" 
(i.  4),  and  are  consulted  by  the  king  on  religious 
subjects.  The  same  variety  appears  in  profane 
writers.  Berosus,  the  native  historian,  himself  a 
Chaldaean  in  the  narrower  sense  (Tatian.  Or.  adv. 
Gr.  58),  uses  the  term  only  in  the  wider;  while 
Herodotus,  Diodorus,  Strabo,  and  the  later  writers 
almost  universally  employ  it  to  signify  a  seci  or 
portion  of  the  people,  whom  they  regard  either  as 
priests  or  as  philosophers.  With  this  view,  how- 
ever, is  joi 1  another,  which  but  ill  harmonises 

wiili  it  ;  namely,  that  the  chaldaeans  are  the  inha- 
bitants of  a  particular  pari  of  Babylonia,  viz.,  the 
country  bordering  on  the  Persian  Gulf  and  on 
Arabia  (Strab.  xvi.  1.  §6  ;  Ptol.  v.  20).  By  help 
of  the  inscription  recentl]  li  overed  in  the  country, 
these  discrepancies  and  apparent  contradictio 
explicable. 

It  appears  that  the  Chaldaean 
were  in  the  earliesi  times  merely  one  out  of  the 
many  Cushite  tribes  inhabiting  the  great  alluvial 
plain  known  afterwards  as  chaldaea  or  Babylonia. 
Their  special  m;u  was  probably  that  southern  por- 


294 


CHALDEANS 


tion  of  the  country  which  is  found  to  have  so  late 
retained  the  name  of  Chaldaea.  Here  was  Ur  "of 
the  Chaldees,"  the  modem  Mutjhcir,  which  lies 
south  of  the  Euphrates,  near  its  junction  with 
the  Skat-el- Hie.  Hence  would  readily  come  those 
"three  bauds  of  Chaldaeans"  who  were  instru- 
ments, simultaneously  with  the  Sabaeans,  in  the 
affliction  of  Job  (Job  i.  15-17).  In  process  of  time, 
as  the  Kaldi  grew  in  power,  their  name  gradually 
prevailed  over  that  of  the  other  tribes  inhabiting  the 
country  ;  and  by  the  era  of  the  Jewish  captivity  it 
had  begun  to  be  used  generally  for  all  the  inhabit- 
ants of  Babylonia.  We  may  suspect  that  when  the 
name  is  applied  by  Berosus  to  the  dynasties  which 
preceded  the  Assyrian,  it  is  by  way  of  prolepsis. 
The  dynasty  of  Nabopolassar,  however,  was  (it  is 
probable)  really  Chaldaean,  and  this  greatly  helped 
to  establish  the  wider  use  of  the  appellation.  It  had 
thus  come  by  this  time  to  have  two  senses,  both 
ethnic :  in  the  one  it  was  the  special  appellative  of  a 
particular  race  to  whom  it  had  belonged  from  the 
remotest  times,  in  the  other  it  designated  the  na- 
tion at  large  in  which  this  race  was  predominant. 
We  have  still  to  trace  its  transference  from  an  ethnic 
to  a  mere  class  sense — from  the  name  of  a  people  to 
that  of  a  priest  caste  or  sect  of  philosophers. 

It  has  been  observed  above  that  the  Kaldi  proper 
were  a  Cushite  race.  This  is  proved  by  the  remains 
of  their  language,  which  closely  resembles  the 
Galla  or  ancient  language  of  Ethiopia.  Now  it 
appears  by  the  inscriptions  that  while  both  in  Assy- 
ria and  in  later  Babylonia,  the  Semitic  type  of 
speech  prevailed  for  civil  purposes,  the  ancient 
Cushite  dialect  was  retained,  as  a  learned  language, 
for  scientific  and  religious  literature.  This  is  no 
doubt  the  "  learning"  and  the  "  tongue"  to  which 
reference  is  made  in  the  book  of  Daniel  (i.  4).  It 
became  gradually  inaccessible  to  the  great  mass  of 
the  people,  who  were  Semitized,  by  means  (chiefly) 
of  Assyrian  influence.  But  it  was  the  Chaldaean 
learning,  in  the  old  Chaldaean  or  Cushite  language. 
Hence  all  who  studied  it,  whatever  their  origin  or 
race  were,  on  account  of  their  knowledge,  termed 
Chaldaeans.  In  this  sense  Daniel  himself,  the 
"master  of  the  Chaldaeans  "  (Dan.  v.  11),  would 
no  doubt  have  been  reckoned  among  them ;  and  so 
we  find  Seleucus,  a  Greek,  called  a  Chaldaean  by 
Strabo  (xvi.  1,  §6).  It  may  be  doubted  whether 
the  Chaldaeans  at  any  time  were  all  priests,  though 
no  doubt  priests  were  required  to  be  Chaldaeans. 
They  were  really  the  learned  class,  who  by  their 
acquaintance  with  the  language  of  science  had  be- 
come its  depositaries.  They  were  priests,  magi- 
cians, or  astronomers,  as  their  preference  for  one 
or  other  of  those  occupations  inclined  them  ;  and 
in  the  last  of  the  three  capacities  they  probably 
effected  discoveries  of  great  importance. 

According  to  Strabo,  who  well  distinguishes  (xvi. 
1,  §6)  between  the  learned  Chaldaeans  and  the 
mere  race  descended  from  the  ancient  Kaldi,  which 
continued  to  predominate  in  the  country  bordering 
upon  Arabia  and  the  Gulf,  there  were  two  chief 
seats  of  Chaldaean  learning,  Borsippa,  and  Ur  or 
Orchoe.  To  these  we  may  add  from  Pliny  (//.  N. 
vi.  26)  two  others,  Babylon,  and  Sippara  or  Se- 
pharvaim.  The  Chaldaeans  (it  would  appear)  con- 
gregated  into  bodies,  forming  what  we  may  perhaps 
call  universities,  and  pursuing  the  studies,  in  which 
they  engaged,  together.  They  probably  mixed  up 
to  some  extent  astrology  with  their  astronomy, 
even  in  the  earlier  times,  but  they  certainly  made 
great  advances   in  astronomical   science,    to  which 


CHAPITER 

their  serene  sky,  transparent  atmosphere,  and  re- 
gular horizon  specially  invited  them.  The  obser- 
vations, covering  a  space  of  1903  years,  which 
Callisthenes  sent  to  Aristotle  from  Babylon  (Sim- 
plic.  ad  Arist.  de  Goel.  ii.  p.  123),  indicate  at  once 
the  antiquity  of  such  knowledge  in  the  country, 
and  the  care  with  which  it  had  been  preserved  by 
the  learned  class.  In  later  times  they  seem  cer- 
tainly to  have  degenerated  into  mere  fortune-tellers 
(Cic.  de  Div.  i.  1 ;  Aul.  Cell.  i.  9 ;  Juv.  vi.  552,  x. 
94-,  &c.)  ;  but  this  reproach  is  not  justly  levelled 
against  the  Chaldaeans  of  the  empire,  and  indeed  it 
was  but  partially  deserved  so  late  as  the  reign  of 
Augustus  (see  Strab.  xvi.  1,  §6).  [G."R.] 

CHALDEES.     [Chaldeans.] 

CHALK  STONES  (T^IK ;  lapides  ci- 
neris)  occurs  only  in  Is.  xxvii.  9,  and  signifies 
literally  stones  of  lime.  *1il  is  from  an  unused 
root,  "V3,  to  boil  up,  in  reference  to  the  heating  of 
lime  when  slaked.  [W.  D.] 

CHAMELEON  (113  ;  xaAta'A-e'a"/ ;  chamae- 
leon),  probably  a  species  of  large  lizard,  called  l"13 

on  account  of  its  great  strength.  (In  Lev.  xi.  30, 
it  is  enumerated  among  the  creeping  things  that  are 
unclean.)  It  is  said  to  destroy  serpents,  and  was 
called  by  the  Greeks  o<pi6viKos,  by  the  Arabians 
guaril.  The  true  chameleon  was  probably  the 
nip^pri  of  Lev.  xi   30.     [Mole.]  [W.  D.] 

CHAMOIS  (")DT ;  Kafj.T]XowdpSa\is  ;  camclo- 
pardalus),  a  species  of  deer  or  antelope,  called  "IftT 
from  its  habit  of  leaping,  from  root  "l£T,  to  leap 

(Ges.  Thes.  420).  Bochart  (ffier.  ii.  273-279)  has 
shown  that  the  rendering  of  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  is 
an  error.  Luther  has  not  been  more  happy  in  trans- 
lating it  alcen,  elk,  which  only  inhabits  northern 
countries.  There  are  several  species  of  antelope  in 
Western  Asia.  The  IDT  is  classed  among  beasts 
that  may  be  eaten  in  Deut.  xiv.  5.  [W.  D.] 

CHA'NAAN  (Xavadv),  the  manner  in  which 
the  word  Canaan  is  spelt  in  the  A.  V.  of  the 
Apocrypha  and  N.  T.  (comp.  Charran'  for  Haran, 
&c.)  Jud.  v.  3,  9,  10  ;  Bar.  iii.  22  ;  Sus.  56  ; 
1  Mace.  ix.  37  ;  Acts  vii.  11,  xiii.  19. 

Chanaanite  for  Canaanjte,  Jud.  v.  16. 

CHANNUNE'US  (Xavowaios ;  Chananaeus), 
1  Esd.  viii.  48.  This  answers  to  Merari,  if  to  any- 
thing, in  the  parallel  list  of  Ezra  (viii.  19). 

chapiter.  i.  rnnb,  m  pi-  ri'nnb,  from 

"1713,  to  surround;  imdefta;  capitellum.  2.  J"ICV, 
from  nQV,  to  draw  out  (Ges.  912-914);  at  «e- 
cpa\al ;  capita.  The  upper  member  of  a  pillar — 
the  same  word  which  is  now  in  use  in  the  slightly 
different  form  of  "  capital ;"  also  possibly  a  roll 
moulding  at  the  top  of  a  building  or  work  of  art, 
as  in  the  case  (1)  of  the  pillars  of  the  Tabernacle 
and  Temple,  and  of  the  two  pillars  called  especially 
Jachin  and  Boaz  ;  and  (2)  of  the  lavers  belonging 
to  the  Temple  (Ex.  xxxviii.  17;  1  K.  vii.  27,  31, 
38).  As  to  the  form  and  dimensions  of  the  former, 
see  Tauernacle,  Temple,  Boaz,  and  of  the 
latter,  Laver.  3.  The  word  K'NI,  rush  =  head, 
is  also  occasionally  rendered  "Chapiter,"  as  in  the 
description  of  the  tabernacle,  Ex.  xx.wi.  38,  xxxviii. 


CHARAATHALAR 

17,  19,  28  ;  but  in  tbe  account  of  the  temple  it  is 
translated  "  top"  as  1  K.  vii.  10,  &c.    [H.  W.  P.] 

CHARAATH ALAR  (Xapa.a0a\dv  ;  Alex. 
Xapa  ada\dp  ;  Carmellam  et  Careth),  1  Esd.  v. 
30.  The  names  "Cherub,  Addan, and  Immer,"  in 
the  lists  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  are  here  changed 
to  "  Charaathalar  leading  them,  and  Aalar." 

CHARACA  (els  rbv  Xdpaica  (?  Xdpa£) ; 
Characa),  a  place  mentioned  only  in  2  Mac.  xii.  17, 
and  there  so  obscurely  that  nothing  can  be  cer- 
tainly inferred  as  to  its  position.  '  It  was  on  the 
east  of  Jordan,  being  inhabited  by  the  Jews  called 
"  Tubieni,"  or  of  "Tobie"  [Ton],  who  were  in 
Gilead  (comp.  1  Mac.  v.  9,  13) ;  and  it  was  750 
stadia  from  the  city  Caspin  ;  but  where  the  latter 
place  was  situated,  or  in  which  direction  Charax 
was  with  regard  to  it,  there  is  no  clue.  Ewald  (iv. 
359,  note)  places  it  to  the  extreme  east,  and  identities 
it  with  Raphon.  The  only  name  now  known  on 
the  east  of  Jordan  which  recals  Charax  is  Kerak,  the 
ancient  Kir-Moab,  on  the  S.E.  of  the  Dead  Sea, 
which  in  post-biblical  times  was  called  XapaK/xuPa, 
and  Muifiovxapa^  (see  the  quotations  in  Reland, 

705).      The  Syriac  Peschito   has   JLOJ.3,   Carca, 

which  suggests  Karkor  (Judg.  viii.  10).       [G.] 

CHARASHIM,  THE  VALLEY  OF  (K»| 

D^'in,  "  ravine  of  craftsmen  ;"  'AyeaSSa't'p ;  Alex. 

Vr\ffpa<TelpL,  '6ti  removes  tfaav;  vallis  artificum), 
a  place  mentioned  twice  ; — 1  Chr.  iv.  14,  as  having 
been  founded  or  settled  by  Joab,  a  man  of  the  tribe 
of  Judah  and  family  of  Othniel ;  and  Neh.  xi.  35, 
as  being  reinhabited  by  Benjamites  after  the  Cap- 
tivity. In  this  passage  it  is  rendered  "  valley  of 
craftsmen."  Its  menti6n  by  Nehemiah  with  Lod 
(Lydda),  Neballat,  &c.  fixes  its  position  as  in  the 
swelling  ground  at  the  back  of  the  plain  of  Sharon, 
east  of  Jaffa.  The  Talmud  (as  quoted  by  Schwarz, 
p.  1  >5)  reports  the  valley  of  Charashim  to  consist 
of  Lod  and  Ono,  which  lay  therein.  Whether  Joab 
the  son  of  Seraiah  is  the  same  person  as  the  son 
of  Zeruiah  will  be  best  examined  under  the  name 
Joab.  [G.] 

CHAR'CHAMIS  (Xapxafiis  ;  Alex.  Xa\- 
Xa^us ;    Charcamis),  1  Esd.  i.  25.      [Carche- 

MISH.] 

CHARCHE'MISH  (K»»313 ;  LXX.  omits; 
Charcamis),  2  Chr.  xxxv.  20.  [Carchejiish.] 

CHAR'CUS  (Bapxove  ;  Barcus),  1  Esd.  v.  32. 
Corrupted  from  Babkos,  the  corresponding  name 
in  the  parallel  lists  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah — pos- 
sibly by  a  change  of  2  into  3.  But  it  does  not 
appear  whence  the  translators  of  the  A.  V.  got 
their  reading  of  the  name.  In  the  edition  of  1  < i  1  I 
it  is  ••  I  lhareus." 

CIIA'REA   (Xapda;    Caree),   1  Esd.    v.    32. 

[II  \KSI1A.] 

CHARGER  (1.  myp,  from  a  root  signifying 
hollowness ;  rpv(i\iov,  kotuAtj  ;  acetabulum. 
2.  7t3"UX  :  ipvKTTjp  i  /'  '  '  '  >'  only  found  Ezr.  i.  9), 

a  shallow  vessel  for  receiving  water  or  blood,  felso 
for  presenting  offerings  of  line  flour  with  oil  (Num. 
vii.  7'.) ;  Ges.  Th(  s.  22).  The  "chargers "^nentioned 
in  Numbers  are  said  to  have  been  of  silver,  and  to 
have  weighed  each  130  shekels,  or  65  oz.  (Hussey, 
Am;.  Weights,  c.  ix.  p.  I'.1"  I. 

2.  The  daughter   of  Herodias  brought  the  head 


CHARIOT 


295 


of  St.  John  Baptist  in  a  charger,  4ir\  irivaKi  (Matt. 

xiv.  8);  probably  a  trencher  or  platter,  as  11 

Od.  i.  141. 

SaiTpbs  6e  Kpziuv  irivaKas  7rape'07)/cei>  atCpas 
TravToiijiV. 

Comp.  Luke  i.  63.   Tru/aidStov,  a  writing-tablet. 

[Basin.]  [II.  W.  P.] 

CHARIOT.  1.  3:n  from  22\toride;  SPMa; 
curras  :  sometimes  including  the  horses  (2  Sam. 
viii.  4,  x.  18).  2.  3-"D"),  a  chariot  or  horse  (Ps. 
civ.  3).  3.  33"lD,  m.  from  same  root  as  (1)  a 
chariot,  litter,  or  seat  (Lev.  xv.  9,  Cant.  iii.  10). 

4.  nnsno,  f.   s.  r6:y,  from  'pjj;,  roii  (Ps.  xivi. 

10,  6vpe6s ;  scutum).  6.  jTHQX,  Cant.  iii.  9; 
(pvpe'iov ;  ferculum.  (Between  1-4  no  difference  of 
signification.)  A  vehicle  used  either  for  warlike  or 
peaceful  purposes,  but  most  commonly  the  former. 
Of  the  latter  use  the  following  only  are  probable 
instances  as  regards  the  Jews,  1  K.  xviii.  44,  and  as 
regards  other  nations,  Gen.  xli.  43,  xlvi.  29 ;  2  K. 
v.  9  ;  Acts  viii.  28. 

The  earliest  mention  of  chariots  in  Scripture  is 
in  Egypt,  where  Joseph,  as  a  mark  of  distinction, 
was  placed  in  Pharaoh's  second  chariot  (Gen.  xli. 
43),  and  later  when  he  went  in  his  own  chariot  to 
meet  his  father  on  his  entrance  into  Egypt  from 
Canaan  (xlvi.  29).  In  the  funeral  procession  of 
Jacob  chariots  also  formed  a  part,  possibly  by  way 
of  escort  or  as  a  guard  of  honour  (1.  9).  The  next 
mention  of  Egyptian  chariots  is  for  a  wrarlike  pur- 
pose (Ex.  xiv.  7).  In  this  point  of  view  chariots 
among  some  nations  of  antiquity,  as  elephants 
among  others,  may  be  regarded  as  filling  the  place 
of  heavy  artillery  in  modern  times,  so  that  the 
military  power  of  a  nation  might  be  estimated  by 
the  number  of  its  chariots.  Thus  Pharaoh  in  pur- 
suing Israel  took  with  him  600  chariots.  The 
Canaanites  of  the  valleys  of  Palestine  were  enabled 
to  resist  the  Israelites  successfully  in  consequence 
of  the  number  of  their  chariots  of  iron,  »'.  e.  perhaps 
armed  with  iron  scythes  (Ges.  s.  v. ;  Josh.  xvii.  18  ; 
Judg.  i.  19).  Jabin,  king  of  Canaan,  had  900  cha- 
riots (Judg.  iv.  3).  The  Philistines  in  Saul's  time 
had  30,000,  a  number  which  seems  excessive  (1 
Sam.  xiii.  5  ;  but  comp.  LXX.  and  Joseph.  Ant.  vi. 
6,  §1).  David  took  from  Hadadezer  king  of  Zobah 
1000  chariots  (2  Sam.  viii.  4),  and  from  the 
Syrians  a  little  later  700  (x.  18),  who  in  order  to 
recover  their  ground  collected  32,000  chariots 
(1  Chr.  xix.  7).  Up  to  this  time  the  Israelites 
possessed  few  or  no  chariots,  partly  no  doubt  in 
consequence  of  the  theocratic  prohibition  against 
multiplying  horses,  for  fear  of  intercourse  with 
Egypt,  and  the  regal  despotism  implied  in  the  pos- 
session of  them  (Dent.  xvii.  L6  ;  1  Sam.  viii.  11, 
12).  But  to  some  extent  David  (2  Sam.  viii.  4), 
and  in  a  much  greater  degree  Solomon,  broke 
through  the  prohibition  from  seeing  the  necessity 
of  placing  his  kingdom,  under  its  altered  circum- 
stances, ona  footing  of  military  equality  orsuperiority 
towards  other  nations.  He  raised,  therefore,  and 
maintained  a  force  of  1400  chariots  (1  K.  x.  25) 
by  taxation  on  certain  cities  agreeably  to  Eastern 
custom  in  such  matters  1  K.  i\.  L9,  x.  25;  Xen. 
Anab.  i.  4,9).  The  chariots  themselves  and  also 
the  horses  were  imported  chiefrj  from  Egypt,  and 
ich  chariot  was  600  shekels  of  silver, 
and  of  each  horse  150  (1  K.  x.  29).  [Shekel.] 
From  thi.s  time  chariots  were  regarded  as  among 


the  most  important  aims  of  war,  though  the  sup- 
plies of  them  and  of  horses  appear  to  have  been  still 
mainly  drawn  from  Egypt  (1  K.   xxii.  34;   2   K. 


296  CHARIOT  CHAIUOT 

(2  Sam.  viii.  and  2  K.  vi.  14,  15),  Persia  (Is.  xxii- 

6),  and  lastly  Antiochus  Eupator  is  said  to  have  had 

300  chariots  armed  with  scythes  (2  Mac.  xiii.  2). 

In  the  N.  T.,  the  only  mention  made  of 

a  chariot  except  in  Rev.  is.  9,  is  in  the  case 

of  the  Ethiopian  or  Abyssinian  eunuch  of 

Queen  Candace,  who  is  described  as  sitting 

in  his  chariot  reading  (Acts  viii.  28,  29, 

38). 

Jewish  chariots  were  no  doubt  imitated 
from  Egyptian  models,  if  not  actually  im- 
ported from  Egypt.  The  following  descrip- 
tion of  Egyptian  chariots  is  taken  from  Sir 
G.  Wilkinson.  They  appear  to  have  come 
into  use  not  earlier  than  the  18th  dynasty 
(B.C.  1530).  The  war  chariot,  from  which 
the  chariot  used  in  peace  did  not  essentially 
differ,  was  extremely  simple  in  its  construc- 
tion. It  consisted,  as  appears  both  from 
Egyptian  paintings  and  reliefs,  as  well  as 
from  an  actual  specimen  preserved  at  Flo- 
rence, of  a  nearly  semicircular  wooden 
frame  with  straightened  sides,  resting  pos- 
teriorly on  the  axle-tree  of  a  pair  of  wheels, 
and  supporting  a  rail  of  wood  or  ivory  at- 
tached to  the  frame  lay  leathern  thongs  and 
one  wooden  upright  in  front.  The  floor  of 
the  car  was  made  of  rope  network,  intended 
to  give  a  more  springy  footing  to  the  occu- 
pants. The  car  was  mounted  from  the 
back,  which  was  open,  and  the  sides  were 
strengthened  and  ornamented  with  leather 
and  metal  binding.  Attached  to  the  off  or 
right-hand  side,  and  crossing  each  other 
diagonally  were  the  bow-case,  and  inclining 
(Wilkinson.)  backwards,  the  quiver  and  spear-case.  If 
two  persons  were  in  the  chariot  a  second 
ix.  1!i,  21,  xiii.  7,  14,  xviii.  24,  xxiii.  30;  Is.  |  bow-case  was  added.  The  wheels,  of  which  there  were 
xxxi.  1).  The  prophets  also  allude  frequently  to  !  2,  had  6  spokes:  those  of  peace  chariots  had  some- 
chariots  as  typical  of  power,  Ps.  x.x.  7,  civ.  3 ;!  times  4,  fastened  to  the  axle  by  a  linch-pin  secured 
Jer.  li.  21  ;  Zech.  vi.  1.  by  a  thong.     There  were  no  traces;  but  the  horses, 

Chariots  also  of  other  nations  are  mentioned,  as  |  which  were  often  of  different  colours,  wore  only  a 
of    Assyria   (2   K.  xix.    23  ;    Ez.   xxiii.   24),  Syria    breast-band  and  girths  which  were  attached  to  the 


ml  complete  fumitur 


saddle,  together  with  head  furniture  consisting  of 
cheek  pieces,  throat-lash,  head  stall  and  straps 
across  the  forehead  and  nose.  A  bearing-rein  was 
fastened  to  a  ring  or  hook  in  front  of  the  saddle, 
and  the  driving-reins  passed  through  other  rings 


on  each  side  of  both  horses.  From  the  central 
point  of  the  saddle  rose  a  short  stem  of  metal, 
ending  in  a  knob,  whether  for  use  or  mere  orna- 
ment is  not  certain.  The  driver  stood  on  the 
off-side,   and  in  discharging   his  arrow    hung   his 


CHARIOT 

whip  from  the  wrist.  In  some  instances  the  king 
is  represented  alone  in  his  chariot  with  the  reins 
fastened  roundhis  body,  thus  using  his  weapons  with 
his  hands  at  liberty.  Most  commonly  2  persons, 
and  sometimes  3  rode  in  the  chariot,  of  whom  the 
third  was  employed  to  cany  the  state  umbrella 
(2  K.  ix.  20,  24  ;"l  K.  xxii.  34;  Acts  viii.  38).  A 
second  chariot  usually  accompanied  the  king  to 
battle  to  be  used  in  case  of  necessity  (2  Chr.  xxv.  34). 

On  peaceable  occasions  the  Egyptian  gentleman 
sometimes  drove  alone  in  his  chariot  attended  by 
servants  on  foot.  The  horses  wore  housings  to 
protect  them  from  heat  and  insects.  For  royal  per- 
sonages and  women  of  rank  an  umbrella  was  carried 
by  a  bearer,  or  fixed  upright  in  the  chariot.  Some- 
times mules  were  driven  instead  of  horses,  and  in 
travelling  sometimes  oxen,  but  for  travelling  pur- 
poses the  sides  of  the  chariot  appear  to  have  been 
closed.  One  instance  occurs  of  a  4-wheeled  car, 
which,  like  the  Terpd,KVK\os  afxa^a  (Herod,  ii.  G3), 
was  used  for  religious  purposes.  [Cart.]  The 
processes  of  manufacture  of  chariots  and  harness  are 
fully  illustrated  by  existing  sculptures,  in  which 
also  are  represented  the  chariots  used  by  neighbour- 
ing nations  (Wilkinson,  Anc.  Egypt,  i.  p.  36'8, 
386 ;  ii.  p.  75,  76,  2nd  Ed.). 

The  earlier  Assyrian  war  chariot  and  harness  did 
not  differ  essentially  from  the  Egyptian.  Two  or 
three  persons  stood  in  the  car,  but  the  driver  is 
sometimes  represented  as  standing  on  the  near  side, 
whilst  a  3rd  warrior  in  the  chariot  held  a  shield  to 
protect  the  archer  in  discharging  his  arrow.  The 
car  appears  to  have  had  closed  sides.  The  war 
chariot  wheels  had  6  spokes ;  the  state  or  peace 
chariot  8  or  more,  and  a  3rd  person  in  state-pro- 
cessions carried  the  royal  umbrella.  A  3rd  horse, 
like  the  Greek  irapiiopos,  was  generally  attached 
(Layard,  Nineveh,  ii.  350). 


CHEBAR 


297 


Assyrian  chariot. 

Iii  later  times  the  3rd  horse  was  laid  aside,  the 
wheels  were  made  higher,  and  had  8  spokes:  and 
the  front  of  the  car,  to  which  the  quiver  was  re- 
moved from  its  former  side  position,  was  made 
square  instead  of  round.  The  cars  were  more 
highly  ornamented,  panelled,  and  inlaid  with  va- 
luable woods  and  metals,  and  painted.  The  em- 
broidered housings  in  which  in  earlier  times  the 
horses  were  clothed,  were  laid  aside,  and  plumes 
and  tassels  used  to  decorate  their  necks  and  fore- 
heads. (Layard,  Nineveh,  ii.  353,356;  Nineveh 
and  Babylon,  341,  587,  603,  618;  Mon.  of  Kin. 
•_'nd  series,  pi.  2+ ;   Ez.  xxvii.  20). 

The  Persian  art,  as  appears  from  the  sculptures 
at  Persepolis,  and  also  at  Koyounjik,  shew 
similarity  to  the  Assyrian  ;   but  the  procession  re- 
presented at  the  former  place  contains  a  chariot  or 
car  with  wheels  of  12  spokes,  while  from  t!i< 
tures  at  the  latter,  it  appears  that  the'  Elamites,  or 


Persians,  besides  chariots  containing  2  persons 
which  were  sometimes  drawn  by  4  horses,  used 
a  kind  of  cart  drawn  by  a  single  mule  or 
more,  consisting  of  a  stage  on  high  wheels  ca- 
pable of  holding  5  or  0  persons,  of  whom  the 
driver  sat  on  a  low  stool,  with  his  legs  hanging  on 
each  side  of  the  pole.  (Xenoph.  Cyrop.  iv.  3,  1, 
and  2,  §22;  Is.  xxii.  6;  Ez.  xxiii.  24;  Niebuhr, 
Voyage,  ii.  105;  Chardin,  Voyage,  viii.  257.  PI. 
lix. ;  Layard,  Nin.  $  Bab.  447-449;  Olearius, 
Travels,  p.  302.) 


Assyrian  chariot. 

Chariots  armed  with  scythes  (apfj.ara  SptTravJ]- 
(popa,  Xen.  Anab.  i.  7,  §10)  may  perhaps  be  in- 
tended by  the  "  chariots  of  iron  "  of  the  Canaan- 
ites  ;  they  are  mentioned  as  part  of  the  equipment 
of  Antiochus  (2  Mac.  xiii.  2),  and  of  Darius  (Diod. 
Sic.  xvii.  53  ;  Appian.  Syr.  32).  Xenophon  men- 
tions a  Persian  chariot  with  4  poles  and  8  horses 
{Cyrop.  vi.  4). 

Among  the  parts  of  wheeled-carriages  mentioned 
in  A.V.  are,  1.  the  Wheels,  □'•SSift,  &£oves,  rotae; 

also  DvSPS  ;  rpoxoi,  rotae.  2.  Spokes,  D'lK'n, 
radii.  3.  Naves,  D^Hil ;  modioli.  4.  Felloes, 
□^i?L!'n  ;  vSitol  ;  apsides.  5.  Axles,  flH* ;  x^P€ s  j 
axes.  To  put  the  horses  to  the  carriage,  "IDX  • 
Cev£cu  ;  jungere  ;  and  once  (Mic.  i.  13),  D]"P 

The  Persian  custom  of  sacrificing  horses  to  the 
Sun  (Xen.  Cyrop.  viii.  3,  12),  seems  to  have  led 
to  offerings  of  chariots  and  horses  for  the  same 
object  among  the  Jewish  monarchs  who  fell  into 
idolatry  (Ez.  viii.  17;  2  K.  xxiii.  11;  P.  della 
Valle,  xv.  ii.  p.  255  ;  Winer,  Wagen).   [H.  W.  P.] 

CHAR'MIS  (Xap^uis;  Alex.  Xa\  fie  is ;  Charmi), 
son  of  Melchiel,  one  of  the  three  "  ancients  "  (irpetr- 
fivrepoi),  or  "rulers"  (&pxovres)  of  Bethulia 
(Jud.  vi.  15,  viii.  10,  x.  6). 

CHAR'RAN  (Xappdv  ;  Charan),  Acts  vii.  2,  4. 
[IIauan.] 

CHASE.     [Hunting.] 

CHAS'EBA  (XourePd ;  Casebd),  a,  name  among 
the  list  of  the  "  Servants  of  the  Temple"  (1  Esd. 
v.  31),  which  has  nothing  corresponding  to  it  in 
Ezra  and  Nehemiah,and  is  probably  a  mere  corrup- 
ti if  that  succeeding  it — Gazera.. 

CHE'BAR  ("133  ;  XoPdp  ;  Chobar),  a  rive  in 
the  ••  laud  of  the  Chaldaeans "  (Ez.  i.  ;!),  on  the 
banks  of  which  some  of  the  Jews  were  located  at 
the  time  of  the  captivity,  and  where  Ezekiel  saw 
his  earlier  visions  (Ez.  i.  1,  iii.  15,  23,  &c).  It 
is  commonly  regarded  as  identical  with  the  Habor 
(11311),  or  river  of  Gozan,  to  which  some  portion 
of  the  Israelites  were  removed  by  the  Assyrians 


298 


CHEBEL 


(2  K.  xvii.  6).  But  this  is  a  mere  conjecture,  rest- 
ing  wholly  upon  the  similarity  of  name  ;  which 
after  all  is  not  very  close.  It  is  perhaps  better  to 
suppose  the  two  streams,  distinct,  more  especially  if 
we  regard  the  Habor  as  the  ancient  'Afioppas  (mo- 
dern Khabour),  which  fell  into  the  Euphrates  at 
Circesium  ;  for  in  the  Old  Testament  the  name  of 
Chaldaea  is  never  extended  so  far  northwards.  The 
Ohebar  of  Ezekiel  must  be  looked  for  in  Babylonia. 
It  is  a  name  which  might  properly  have  been  given 
to  any  great  stream  (comp.  "123,  great).  Perhaps 
the  view,  which  finds  some  support  in  Pliny  (//. 
N.  vi.  26),  and  is  adopted  by  Bochart  (Phaleg,  i. 
8)  and  Cellarius  (Geograph.  c.  22),  that  the  Che- 
bar  of  Ezekiel  is  the  Nahr  Malcha  or  Royal  Canal 
of  Nebuchadnezzar — the  greatest  of  all  the  cuttings 
in  Mesopotamia — may  be  regarded  as  best  deserving 
acceptance.  In  that  case  we  may  suppose  the 
Jewish  captives  to  have  been  employed  in  the  exca- 
vation of  the  channel.  That  Chaldaea,  not  upper 
Mesopotamia,  was  the  scene  of  Ezekiel's  preaching, 
is  indicated  by  the  tradition  which  places  his  tomb 
at  Keffil  (Loftus's  Chaldaea,  p.  35).         [G.  R.] 

CHE'BEL(^an),  one  of  the  singular  topo- 
graphical  terms  in  which  the  ancient  Hebrew  lan- 
guage abounded,  and  which  give  so  much  force  and 
precision  to  its  records.  The  ordinary  meaning  of 
the  word  Chebel  is  a  "  rope  "  or  "  cord ;"  and  in  this 
sense  it  frequently  occurs  both  literally  (as  Josh.  ii. 
15,  "  cord  ;"  1  K.  xxx.  31,  "  ropes  ;"  Is.  xxxiii.  23, 
"  tacklings  ;"  Am.  vii.  17,  "  line  ")  and  metapho- 
rically (as  Eccl.  xii.  6;  Is.  v.  18;  Hos.  xi.  4). 
From  this  it  has  passed — with  a  curious  corre- 
spondence to  our  own  modes  of  speech — to  denote  a 
body  of  men,  a  "  band"  (as  in  Ps.  cxix.  61).  In 
1  Sam.  x.  5,  10,  our  word  "  string"  would  not 
be  inappropriate  to  the  circumstances — "  a  string 
of  prophets  coming  down  from  the  high  place." 
Further  it  is  found  in  other  metaphorical  senses, 
arising  out  of  its  original  meaning  (as  Job  xviii.  10  ; 
Ps.  xviii.  4  ;  Jer.  xiii.  21).  From  the  idea  of  a 
measuring-line  (Mic.  ii.  5),  it  has  come  to  mean  a 
"  portion "  or  "  allotment "  (as  1  Chr.  xvi.  18  ; 
Ps.  cv.  11 ;  Ez.  xlvii.  13).  It  is  the  word  used  in 
the  familiar  passage  "  the  lines a  are  fallen  unto 
me  in  pleasant  places  "  (Ps.  xvi.  6).  But  in  its 
topographical  sense,  as  meaning  a  "  tract "  or 
"  district,"  we  find  it  always  attached  to  the  region 
of  Argob,  which  is  invariably  designated  by  this, 
and  by  no  other  term  (Deut.  iii.  4,  13,  14 ;  IK. 
iv.  13).  It  has  been  already  shown  how  exactly 
applicable  it  is  to  the  circumstances  of  the  case. 
[Argob.]  But  in  addition  to  the  observations  there 
made,  the  reader  should  be  referred  to  the  report  of 
the  latest  traveller  in  those  interesting  regions,  who 
abundantly  confirms  the  statements  of  his  prede- 
cessors as  to  the  abrupt  definiteness  of  the  boundary 
of  the  district.  (Mr.  C.  C.  Graham,  in  Cambridge 
Essays,  1858.)  No  clue  is  afforded  us  to  the  reason 
of  this  definite  localization  of  the  term  Chebel ;  but 
a  comparison  of  the  fact  that  Argob  was  taken 
possession  of  by  Manasseh — a  part  of  the  great 
tribe  of  Joseph — with  the  use  of  this  word  by  that 
tribe,  and  by  Joshua  in  his  retort,  in  the  very  early 
and  characteristic  fragment,  Josh.  xvii.  5, 14  (A.  V. 
"  portion"),  prompts  the  suggestion  that  it  may 
have  been  a  provincialism  in  use  amongst  that  large 


a  The  use  of  the  word  in  this  sense  in  our  own  idiom- 
atic expression — "  hard  lines" — will  not  be  forgotten. 
Other  correspondences  between  Chebel  as  applied  to 


CHEDORLAOMER 

and  independent  part  of  Israel.  Should  this  be 
thought  untenable,  its  application  to  the  "  rocky 
shore"  of  Argob  may  be  illustrated1  and  justified 
by  its  use  (Zeph.  ii.  5-7;  A.  V.  "coast")  for  the 
"  coast  line"  of  the  Mediterranean  along  Philistia. 
In  connexion  with  the  sea-shore  it  is  also  employed 
in  Josh.  xix.  29. 

The  words  used  for  Chebel  in  the  older  versions 
are  <rxoiVio>ia,  irepi/xerpov,  irepl-^uipov ;  regio, 
funiculus.  [G.] 

CHEDORLA'OMER  ("lOj^Tj?  ;  XotioMo- 
yojxSp ;  Chodorlahomor'),  a  king  of  Elam,  in  the 
time  of  Abraham,  who  with  three  other  chiefs 
made  war  upon  the  kings  of  Sodom,  Gomorrah, 
Admah,  Zeboim,  and  Zoar,  and  reduced  them  to 
servitude.  For  twelve  years  he  retained  his  hold 
over  them  ;  in  the  thirteenth  they  rebelled  ;  in  the 
next  year,  however,  he  and  his  allies  marched  upon 
their  country,  and  after  defeating  many  neighbour- 
ing tribes,  encountered  the  five  kings  of  the  plain 
in  the  vale  of  Siddim.  He  completely  routed  them  ; 
slew  the  kings  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  and  carried 
away  much  spoil,  together  with  the  family  of  Lot. 
Chedorlaomer  seems  to  have  perished  in  the  rescue, 
which  was  effected  by  Abraham  upon  hearing  oi 
the  captivity  of  his  nephew  (Gen.  xiv.  17).  Ac- 
cording to  Gesenius,  the  meaning  of  the  word  may 

be  "  handful  of  sheaves,  from  g  ,«xT>  handful  and 
"IDJ?,  sheaf ;"  but  this  is  unsatisfactory.  The  name 
of  a  king  is  found  upon  the  bricks  recently  dis- 
covered in  Chaldaea,  which  is  read  Kudur-ma- 
pula.  This  man  has  been  supposed  to  be  identical 
with  Chedorlaomer,  and  the  opinion  is  confirmed 
by  the  fact  that  he  is  further  distinguished  by  a 
title  which  may  be  translated  "  Ravager  of  the 
west."  "  As  however  one  type  alone  of  his  legends 
has  been  discovered,"  says  Col.  Rawdiuson,  "  it  is 
impossible  to  pronounce  at  present  on  the  identifi- 
cation. The  second  element  in  the  name  '  Chedor- 
laomer '  is  of  course  distinct  from  that  in  '  Kudur- 
mapula.'  Its  substitution  may  be  thus  accounted 
for.  In  the  names  of  Babylonian  kings  the  latter 
portion  is  often  dropped.  Thus  Shalmaneser  be- 
comes Shalman  in  Hoshea ;  Merodach-bal-adan 
becomes  Mardocempal,  &c.  Kudur-mapula  might 
therefore  become  known  as  Kudur  simply.     The 

epithet    *  el  Ahmar,'    ^^NJI,  which  means    the 

Red,  may  afterwards  have  been  added  to  the  name, 
and  may  have  been  corrupted  into  Laomer,  which, 
as  the  orthography  now  stands,  has  no  apparent 
meaning.  Kedar-el- Ahmar,  or  '  Kedar  the  Red,' 
is  in  fact  a  famous  hero  in  Arabian  tradition,  and 
his  history  bears  no  inconsiderable  resemblance  to 
the  Scripture  narrative  of  Chedor-laomer.  It  is 
also  very  possible  that  the  second  element  in  the 
name  of  Chedor-laomer,  whatever  be  its  true  form, 
may  be  a  Semitic  translation  of  the  original  Hamite 
term  mapula."  "  Chedorlaomer  may  have  been 
the  leader  of  certain  immigrant  Chaldaean  Elamites 
who  founded  the  great  Chaldaean  empire  of  Berosus 
in  the  early  part  of  the  20th  century  B.C.,  wdiile 
Amraphel  and  Arioch,  the  Hamite  kings  of  Shinar 
and  Ellasar,  who  fought  under  his  banner  in  the 
Syrian  war  as  subordinate  chiefs,  and  Tidal,  who  led 
a  contingent  of  Median  Scyths  belonging  to  the  old 
population,  may  have  been  the  local  governors  who 


measurement,  and  our  own  words  "  rod,"  and  "  chain," 
and  also  "  cord,"  as  applied  in  the  provinces  and  colo- 
nies, to  solid  measure  of  wood,  &c,  are  obvious 


CHEESE 

had  submitted  to  his  power  when  he  invaded  Chal- 
daea"  (Rawlinson's  Herod.,  i.  436,  446).    [S.  L.] 

CHEESE  is  mentioned  only  three  times  in  the 
Bible,  and  on  each  occasion  under  a  different  name 
in  the  Hebrew :  (1.)  113*33,  from  }33,  to  curdle 
(Job  s.  10),  referred  to,  not  historically,  but  by 
way  of  illustration :  (2.)  f~\n,  from  yift,  to  cut 
(rpv<pa\ldes  rov  yaAaKTOS,  LXX. ;  formellae  casei, 
Vulg.,  1  Sam.  xvii.  18)  ;  the  Chaldee  and  Syriac  give 
p3-l2  •  Hesychins  explains  rpvtpaXiSes  as  Tfirj/xaTa 
rod  atraXov  rvpov  :   (3.)  "Ip3  niDt^,  from  i"ISt^ 

to  scrape  (2a<pcod  fSociv,  LXX. ;  cheese  of  kine,  A.  V. 
2  Sam.  xvii.  29  :  the  Vulgate,  following  Theodo- 
tiou's  rendering,  yaKaQ-qva  ^cxrxa/Jia,  gives  plagues 
vitulos,  guided  by  the  position  of  the  words  after 
"  sheep  "  :  the  Targum  and  other  Jewish  authorities, 
however,  identify  the  substance  with  those  men- 
tioned above),  lit  is  difficult  to  decide  how  far  these 
terms  correspond  with  our  notion  of  cheese  •  for 
they  simply  express  various  degrees  of  coagulation. 
It  may  be  observed  that  cheese  is  not  at  the  present 
day  common  among  the  Bedouin  Arabs,  butter 
being  decidedly  preferred  ;  but  there  is  a  substance, 
closely  corresponding  to  those  mentioned  in  1  Sam. 
xvii. ;  2  Sam.  xvii.,  consisting  of  coagulated  butter- 
milk, which  is  dried  until  it  becomes  quite  hard,  and 
is  then  ground :  the  Arabs  eat  it  mixed  with  butter 
(Burekhardt,  Notes  on  the  Bedouins,  i.  60).  In 
reference  to  this  subject,  it  is  noticeable  that  the 
ancients  seem  generally  to  have  used  either  butter 
or  cheese,  but  not  both :  thus  the  Greeks  had  in 
reality  but  one  expression  for  the  two,  for  /Sovtv- 
pov  —  /8oi!j,  Tvpds,  "cheese  of  kine:"  the  Komans 
used  cheese  exclusively,  while  all  nomad  tribes 
preferred  butter.  The  distinction  between  cheese 
proper,  and  coagulated  milk,  seems  to  be  referred 
to  in  Pliny,  xi.  96.  [W.  L.  B.] 

CHE'LAL  (bbl  ;  XaAfa  ;  Chalal),  Ezr.  x.  30. 

CHELCI'AS  (XeAicias,  i.  e.  H^il,  the  por- 
tion of  the  Lord,  Hilkiah  ;  Helcias),  the  father 
of  Susanna  (Hist,  of  Sus.  2,  29,  63.).  Tradition 
(Hippol.  in  Susann.  i.  689,  ed.  Migne)  represents 
him  as  the  brother  of  Jeremiah,  and  identical  with  the 
priest  who  found  the  copy  of  the  law  in  the  time  of 
Josiah  (2  K.  xxii.  8).  [B.  F.  W.] 

CHEL'LIANS,  THE  (Jud.  ii.  23).  [Chel- 
i.us.] 

CHEL'LUH  C'n-^3,  Keri,  inta  ;  XeA/a'a  ; 
<  'hcliitu),  Ezr.  x.  35. 

CHEL'LUS  (XeAAous;  Alex.  Xe\ovs;  Vulg. 
omits),  named  amongst  the  places  beyond  (i.  e.  on 
the  west  of)  Jordan  to  which  Nabuchodonosor  sent 
his  summons  (Jud.  i.  9).  Except  its  mention  with 
"  Kades  "  there  is  no  clue  to  its  situation.  Keland 
(Pal.  717)  conjectures  that  it  may  be  Chalutza, 
i"I^M?n,  a  place  which,  under  the  altered  form  of 

Elusa,  was  w i ■  1 1  known  to  the  Roman  and  Gre 
graphers.   With  this  agrees  the  subsequent  mention 
of  the  "  land  of  the  Chellians"  (tt)s  XeAAaiW,  t<  rra 
Cellori),  "  by  the  wilderness,"  to  the  south  of  whom 
were  the  children  of  Ishmael  (Jud.  ii.  23).     [G.] 

CIIE'LOD  (XeAeouA;  Alex.  XeAeouS  ;   Vulg. 
omits).     "Many   nations   of  the  sons  <'t'  I 
were  among  those  who  obeyed  the  summons  of  Na- 
buchodonosor to  his  war  with  Arphaxad  (Jud.  i. 


CHENANI 


299 


6).  The  word  is  apparently  corrupt.  Simonis 
suggests  XaAcov,  perh.  Ctesiphon.  Ewald  con- 
jectures it  to  be  a  nickname  for  the  Syrians,  "  sons 
of  the  moles'"  ibh  (Gesch.  iv.  543). 

CHE'LUB  (2-173).  1.  A  man  among  the  de- 
scendants of  Judah,  described  as  the  brother  of 
Shuah  and  the  father  of  Mechir.  (In  the  LXX. 
the  name  is  given  as  Caleb,  XaAe'/3,  the  father  of 
Ascha;  the  daughter  of  the  well-known  Caleb  was 
Achsah ;  Vulg.  Caleb.) 

2.  (3  XeAou/3,  Chelub).  Ezri  the  son  of  Che- 
lub  was  the  overseer  of  those  who  "  did  the  work  of 
the  field  for  tillage  of  the  ground,"  one  of  David's 
officers  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  26). 

CHEL'UBAI  03^3  ;  o  Xa\efi ;  Calubi),  the 
son  of  Hezron,  of  one  of  the  chief  families  of  Judah. 
The  name  occurs  in  1  Chr.  ii.  9  only,  and  from  a 
comparison  of  this  passage  with  ii.  18  and  42,  it 
would  appear  to  be  but  another  form  of  the  name 
Caleb.  It  is  worth  noting  that,  while  in  this 
passage  Jerahmeel  is  stated  to  be  a  brother  of 
Chelubai,  it  appears  from  1  Sam.  xxvii.  10  that 
the  Jerahmeelites  were  placed  on  the  "  south  of 
Judah,"  where  also  were  the  possessions  of  the 
house  of  Caleb  (Judg.  i.  15  ;  1  Sam  xxv.  3,  xxx. 

14).     In  the  Syriac  Vers,  the  name  is  U  HN.PP) 

Salci;  probably  a  transcriber's  error  for  U  ">  >0, 

Celubi  (Burrington,  i.  209).  [G.] 

CHE'MOSH  (BW3  ;  Xa^s ;    Chamos),  the 

national  deity  of  the  Moabites  (Num.  xxi.  29  ;  Jer. 
xlviii.  7,  13,  46).  In  Judg.  xi.  24,  he  also  appears 
as  the  god  of  the  Ammonites  :  he  must  not,  however, 
be  identified  with  Molech.  Solomon  introduced,  and 
Josiah  abolished,  the  worship  of  Chemosh  at  Jeru- 
salem (1  K.  xi.  7  ;  2  K.  xxiii.  13).  With  regard 
to  the  meaning  of  the  name,  and  the  position  which 
Chemosh  held  in  mythology,  we  have  nothing  to 
record  beyond  doubtful  and  discordant  conjectures. 
Jerome  (Conun.  in  Is.  xv.  2)  identifies  him  with 
Baal-Peor;  others  with  Baal-Zebub,  on  etymolo- 
gical grounds  ;  others,  as  Gesenius  (Thcsaur.  693), 
with  Mars,  or  the  god  of  war,  on  similar  grounds  ; 
and  others  (Beyer  ad  Seldcn,  p.  323)  with  Saturn, 
as  the  star  of  ill  omen,  Chemosh  having  been  wor- 
shipped, according  to  a  Jewish  tradition,  under  the 
form  of  a  black  star.  Jerome  (on  Is.  xv.)  notices 
Dibon  as  the  chief  seat  of  his  worship.     [W.  L.  B.] 

CHENA'ANAH  (H3y;_3  ;    Xavavi;    Chana- 

nnh  ;  according  to  Gesen.  fem.  of  Canaan.  1. 
Son  of  Bilhan,  son  of  Jediael,  son  of  Benjamin,  head 
of  a  Benjamite  house  (1  Chr.  vii.  in),  probably  of 
the  family  of  the  Belaites.     [Bela.] 

2.  Father,  or  ancestor,  of  Zedekiah,  the  false 
prophet  who  made  him  horns  of  iron,  and  en- 
couraged Ahab  to  go  up  against  Ramoth-Gilead, 
and  smote  Micaiah  on  the  cheek  (1  K.  xxii.  11,  24; 
2  Chi-,  xviii.  10,  23).  He  may  be  the  same  as  the 
preceding.  [A.  C.  H.j 

CHEN'ANI  0333;  Xuwevl;  Alex.  Xwavi; 
et  Chanani),  one  of  the  Levites  who  assisted  at  the 
solemn  purification  of  the  people  under  Ezra  (Neh. 
ix.  4  only).  By  the  LXX.  the  word  Bani  C33) 
preceding  is  read  as  if  meaning  "sons" — "sons  of 
Chenani."  The  Vulgate  and  A.  V.  adhering  to  the 
Masoretic  pointing,  insert  "  and." 


300 


CHENANIAH 


CHEN ANT AH  (WM3;  Xuvevia,  Xuvtvias  ; 
Chonenias) ,  chief  of  the  Levites,  when  David  car- 
ried the  ark  to  Jerusalem  (1  Chr.  xv.  22,  xxvi.  29). 
In  1  Chr.  xv.  27,  his  name  is  written  iT'333. 

CHE'PHAR-HAAM'MONAI  (»Jtagn  *1S3, 
"  Hamlet  of  the  Ammonites  ;"  Kapacpa  Kai  Ke<pipa 
ical  Moi/i;  Alex.  Kacp-qpafxpiiv  ;  Villa  Emma),  a 
place  mentioned  among  the  towns  of  Benjamin 
(Josh,  xviii.  24).  No  trace  of  it  has  yet  been  dis- 
covered, but  in  its  name  is  doubtless  preserved  the 
memory  of  an  incursion  of  the  Ammonites  up  the 
long  ravines  which  lead  from  the  Jordan  valley  to 
the  highlands  of  Benjamin.  [G.] 

CHEPHIRAH  (iTVMil,  with  the  definite 
article,  except  in  the  later  books, — "  the  hamlet ;" 
Xecpeipd,  Ke<pipa ;  Caphira,  Caphara),  one  of  the 
four  cities  of  the  Gibeonites  (Josh.  ix.  17),  and 
named  afterwards  among  the  towns  of  Benjamin, 
with  Ramah,  Beeroth,  and  Mizpeh  (xviii.  26).  The 
men  of  Chephirah  returned  with  Zerubbabel  from 
Babylon  (Ezr.  ii.  25  ;  Neh.  vii.  29).  The  Samaritan 
Version,  at  Gen.  xiii.  3,  renders  Hai  (Ai)  by 
Cephrah,  i"HQ3  ;  but  this  cannot  be  Chephirah, 
since  both  Ai  and  it  are  mentioned  together  in 
Josh.  ix.  (comp.  3  with  17),  and  iu  the  lists  of 
Ezra  and  Nehemiah  already  quoted.  And  indeed 
Dr.  Robinson  seems  to  have  discovered  it  under  the 
scarcely  altered  name  of  Kefir,  in  the  mountain- 
country  on  the  western  confines  of  Benjamin,  about 
2  miles  west  of  Yah  (Ajalon)  (Rob.  iii.  146). 
[Caphira.]  [G.] 

CHE'RAN(p3;  Xappdv;  Charan),  one  of  the 

sons  of  Dishon  (so  A.  V.,  but  Hebrew  is  Dishan), 
the  Horite  "  duke"  (Gen.  xxxvi.  26  ;  1  Chr.  i.  41). 
No  name  corresponding  with  this  has  yet  been  dis- 
covered amongst  the  tribes  of  Arabia. 

CHE'REAS  (Xaipeas  ;  Chaereas),  a  brother  of 
Timotheus,  the  leader  of  the  Ammonites  against 
Judas  Mace.  (1  Mace.  v.  6),  who  held  Gazara 
(Jazar,  1  Mace.  v.  8),  where  he  was  slain  on  the 
capture  of  the  fortress  by  the  Jews  (2  Mace.  x. 
32,  37.).  [B.  F.  W.] 

CHER'ETHIMS  (D^IYIS),  Ez.  xxv.  16.    The 

plural  form  of  the  word  elsewhere  rendered  Che- 
rethites ;  which  see.  The  Hebrew  word  occurs 
again  in  Zeph.  ii.  5  ;  A.  V.  "  Cherethites."  In 
these  passages  the  LXX.  render  Cretans,  and  the 
Vulgate  by  Palaestini  and  Philistines  (KprjTes ; 
Alex.  KpiTas  criScovos  ;  Palaestini,  Philistliiui). 

CHERETHITES    AND    PELETHITES 

CnSsiTl  TnS  ;    Xepe0>    nal    *e\e0(  ;    ^cofiaTO- 

(pvXaKEs,  Joseph.  Ant.  vii.  5,  §4  ;  Ccrethi  ct  Phc- 
lethi),  the  life-guards  of  King  David  (2  Sam.  viii.  18, 
xv.  18,  xx.  7,  23;  1  K.  i.  38,  44 ;  1  Chr.  xviii.  17). 
These  titles  are  commonly  said  to  signify  "  execu- 
tioners and  couriers "  (jxyyapoi)  from  n~l3,  to  slay, 
and  fi?Q,  to  run.  It  is  plain  that  these  royal 
guards  were  employed  as  executioners  (2  K.  xi.  4), 
and  as  couriers  (1  K.  xiv.  27).  Similarly  Potiphar 
was  captain  of  the  guard  of  Pharaoh,  and  also  chief 
of  the  executioners  (Gen.  xxxvii.  36),  as  was  Arioch, 
Nebuchadnezzar's  officer  (Dan.  ii.  14).  In  the  latter 
part  of  David's  reign  the  Cherethites  and  Pelethites 
were  commanded  by  Benaiah  (2  Sam.  viii.  18,  xx. 
23,  xxiii.  23).     But  it  has  been  conjectured  that 


CHERUB 

the  royal  body-guards  may  have  been  foreign  mer- 
cenaries, like  the  Pope's  Swiss  guards.  They  are 
connected  with  the  Gittites,  a  foreign  tribe  (2  Sam. 
xv.  18)  ;  and  the  Cherethites  are  mentioned  as  a 
nation  (1  Sam.  xxx.  14),  dwelling  apparently 
on  the  coast,  and  therefore  probably  Philistines 
of  which  name  Pelethites  may  be  only  another 
form.  [R.  W.  B.] 

CHERITH,   THE   BROOK  (1V)3  bn:  ; 

Xeifxdp'povs  XoppdO  ;  torrens  Carith),  the  torrent- 
bed  or  wady — to  use  the  modern  Arabic  word 
which  exactly  answers  to  the  Hebrew  Nachal — 
in  (not  "  by,"  as  the  translators  of  the  A.  V. 
were  driven  to  say  Iry  their  use  of  the  word 
"brook")  which  Elijah  hid  himself  during  the 
early  part  of  the  three  years'  drought  (1  K.  xvii. 
3,  5).  No  further  mention  of  it  is  found  in  the 
Bible,  and  by  Josephus  (Ant.  viii.  13,  §2)  it  is 
spoken  of  merely  as  xci^appouy  tls. 

The  position  of  the  Cherith  has  been  much  dis- 
puted. The  words  of  the  passage  unfortunately  give 
no  clue  to  it  :  —  "  get  thee  hence  (i.  e.  apparently 
from  the  spot  where  the-  interview  with  Ahab  had 
taken  place,  and  which  may  or  may  not  be  Samaria), 
and  turn  thy  face  eastward  (i"|73Tp),  and  hide  thee 

in  the  torrent  Crith,  which  is  facing  (OS  7V)  the 

Jordan."  The  expression  "  facing  the  Jordan,"  which 
occurs  also  in  verse  5,  seems  simply  to  indicate  that 
the  stream  in  question  ran  into  that  river  and  not 
into  either  the  Mediterranean  or  the  Dead  Sea.  Jo- 
sephus, as  we  have  seen,  does  not  name  the  torrent, 
and  he  says  that  Elijah  went,  not  "  eastward,"  but 
towards  the  south — els  ra  irpbs  v6tov  ^zpr).  Euse- 
bius  and  Jerome  on  the  other  hand  (Onomasticon, 
Chorath)  place  the  Cherith  beyond  Jordan,  where 
also  Schwarz  (51)  would  identify  it  in  a  Wady 
Alias,  opposite  Bethshean.  This  is  the  Wady  el- 
Yabis  (Jabesh),.  which  Benj.  Tudela  says  is  a  cor- 
ruption of  DK^N  -[NHii-408;  Asher).  The  only 
tradition  on  the  subject  is  one  mentioned  by  Maiinus 
Sanutus  in  1321  ;  that  it  ran  by  Phasaelus,  Herod's 
city  in  the  Jordan  valley.  This  would  make  it  the 
Ain  Fusail  which  falls  from  the  mountains  of 
Ephraim  into  the  Ghor,  south  of  Rum  Surtabeh, 
and  about  15  miles  above  Jericho.  This  view  is 
supported  by  Bachiene,  and  in  our  own  time  by 
Van  de  Velde  (ii.  310).  The  spring  of  the  brook  is 
concealed  under  high  cliffs  and  under  the  shade  of 
a  dense  jungle  (V.  de  Velde,  Memoir,  339).  Dr. 
Robinson  on  the  other  hand  would  find  the  name 

in  the  Wady   Kelt  (£^y$),  behind  Jericho.     The 

two  names  are  however  so  essentially  unlike, — npt 
so  much  in  the  change  of  the  Caph  to  Kaph,  and 
Resh  to  Lim,  both  of  which  are  conceivable,  as  in 
the  removal  of  the  accent  from  the  end  in  Crith  to 
the  beginning  in  Kelt, — that  this  identification  is 
difficult  to  receive,  especially  in  the  absence  of  any 
topographical  grounds.  (See  the  same  doubt  ex- 
pressed by  Winer,  Chrith.) 

The  argument  from  probability  is  in  favour  of 
the  Cherith  being  on  the  east  of  Jordan,  of  which 
Elijah  was  a  native,  and  where  he  would  be  more 
out  of  Ahab's  reach  than  in  any  of  the  recesses  of 
the  mountains  of  Ephraim  or  Benjamin.  With  in- 
creased knowledge  of  that  part  of  the  country,  the 
name  may  possibly  be  discovered  there.  [G.] 

CHERUB  (3-113  ;.Xepovl3;  Xapoifr;  Cherub), 
apparently  a  place  in  Babylonia  from  which  some 
persons  of  doubtful  extraction  returned  to  Judaea 


CHERUB 

with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  59;  Neb.,  to.  61").     Iu 

the  parallel  list  of  1  Esdr.  v.  this  name,  with  the 
next,  Addan,  seems  to  be  corrupted  to  Charaath- 

ALAR. 

CHEE'UB,     CHER'UBIM    (l-TlB,     plur. 

D^l-TG,    or,    as   mostly   in  Pentateuch,   D'O'G  ; 

Xepoi'3,     x^o^'V)-      The    symbolical    figure   so 
called  was  a  composite  creature-form,  which  finds  a 


CHEBUB 


301 


parallel  in  the  religious  insignia  of  Assyria,  Egypt, 
and  Persia,  e.  g.  the  sphinx,  the  winged  bulls  and 
lions  of  Nineveh,  &c,  a  general  prevalence  which 


prevents  the  necessity  of  our  regarding  it  as  a  mere 
adoption  from  the  Egyptian  ritual.  In  such  forms 
(comp.  the  Chimaera  of  Greek  and  the  Griffin  of 
north-eastern  fables)  every  imaginative  people  has 
sought  to  embody  its  notions  either  of  the  attri- 
butes of  Divine  essence,  or  of  the  vast  powers  of 
nature  which  transcend  that  of  man.  In  the 
various  legends  of  Hercules  the  bull  and  the  lion 
constantly  appear  as  forms  of  hostile  and  evil 
power;  and  some  of  the  Persian  sculptures  appa- 
rently represent  evil  genii  under  similar  quasi- 
bic  forms.  The  Hebrew  idea  seems  to  limit 
the  number  of  the  cherubim.  A  pair  (Hx.  xxv.  18, 
ike.)  were  placed  on  the  mercy-seat  of  the  ark;  a 
pair  of  colossal  size"  overshadowed  it  in  Solomon's 
Temple  with  the  canopy  of  their  contiguously  ex- 
tended  wings.     Ezekiel,  i.  4-14,  speaks  of  four,b  and 

similarly  the  a] alyptic  (wa  (Rev.  iv.  6)  are  four. 

So  at  the  front  or  east  ol  Eden  were  posted  "  the 
cherubim,"  as  though  the  whole  of  some  re 
number.  They  utter  no  voice,  though  one  is  "  heard 
from  above  them,"  nor  have'  dealings  with  men  save 
to  awe  and  repel.  A  "man  clothed  in  linen"  is 
introduced  medium  of  communication  between 


them  and  the  prophet,  whereas  for  a  similar  office 
one  of  the  Seraphim  personally  officiates ;  and  these 
latter  also  "  cry  one  to  another."  The  cherubim 
are  placed  beneath  the  actual  presence  of  Jehovah, 
whose  moving  throne  they  .appear  to  draw  (Gen.  iii. 
24;  Ez.  i.  5,^25,  26,  x.  1,  2,  6,  7  ;  Is.  vi.  2,  3,  6). 
The  expression,  however,  "  the  chariot  (i"Q3"l?D)  of 
the  cherubim"  (1  Chr.  xxviii.  18)  does  not  imply 
wheels,  but  the  whole  apparatus  of  ark  and  che- 
rubim is  probably  so  called  in  reference  to  its  being 
carried  on  staves,  and  the  words  "  chariot "  and 
"  cherubim  "  are  in  apposition.  So  a  sedan  might 
be  called  a  "  carriage,"  and  23")JD  is  used  for  the 

body  of  a  litter.  See,  however,  Dorjen,  De  chentb. 
Sanct.  (ap.  Ugolini,  vol.  viii.),  where  the  opposite 
opinion  is  ably  supported.  The  glory  symbolising 
that  presence  which  eye  cannot  see  rests  or  rides 
on  them,  or  one  of  them,  thence  dismounts  to  the 
temple  threshold,  and  then  departs  and  mounts 
again  (Ez.  x.  4,  18;  comp.  ix.  3;  Ps.  xviii.  10). 
There  is  in  them  an  entire  absence  of  human  sym- 
pathy, and  even  on  the  mercy-seat  they  probably 
appeared  not  merely  as  admiring  and  wondering 
(1  Pet.  i.  12),  but  as  guardians  of  the  covenant 
and  avengers  of  its  breach.  A  single  figure  there 
would  have  suggested  an  idol,  which  two,  especially 
when  represented  regarding  something  greater  than 
themselves,  could  not  do.  They  thus  became  sub- 
ordinate, like  the  supporters  to  a  shield,  and  are 
repeated,  as  it  were  the  distinctive  bearings  of  divine 
heraldry, — the  mark,  carved  or  wrought,  every- 
where on  the  house  and  furniture  of  God  (Ex.  xxv. 
20  ;   IK.  vi.  29,  35,  vii.  29,  36). 

Those  on  the  ark  were  to  be  placed  with  wings 
stretched  forth,  one  at  each  end  of  the  mercy-seat, 
and  to  be  made  "  of  the  mercy-seat,"  which  Abar- 
benel  (Spencer,  de  leg.  Neb.  ritual,  iii.  diss,  v.)  and 
others  interpret  of  the  same  mass  of  gold  with  it, 
viz.  wrought  by  hammering,  not  cast  and  then 
joined  on.  This  seems  doubtful,  but  from  the  word 
nt^'ptD,  the  solidity  of  the  metal  may  perhaps  be 

inferred.  They  are  called  xeP0UjSl^.  5o£tjs  (Heb. 
ix.  5),  as  on  them  the  glory,  when  visible,  rested ; 


Fig.  3.  Assyrian  Gryphon.    (Ley 


459.) 


a  It  is  perhaps  questionable  whether  the  smaller 
cherubim  on  the  mercy-seat  were  there  in  Solomon's 
temple,  as  well  as  the  colossal  overshadowing  ones. 
That  they  were  on  the  ark  when  brought  from  Shilob 
to  the  battle  seems  most  likely  ;  and  it  is  hardly  con- 
sistent with  the  reverential  awe  shown  in  the  treat- 
ment of  the  ail;,  even  by  the  enemy,   to   sup]  I 


but,  whether  thus  visibly  symbolized  or  not.  a  per- 
petual presence  of  God  is  attributed  to  the  Holy  of 
Holies.  They  were  anointed  with  the  holy  oil,  like 
the  ai  k  itself,  and  the  other  sacred  furniture.  Their 
ivere  to  he  stretched  upwards,  ami  their  faces 


they  could  have  been  lost  in  the  course  of  it<  wander- 
ings [see  Are  of  Covenant]  ;  still,  the  presence  of 
the  two  pair»  together  seems  hardly  consistent  and 
appropriate. 

b  The  number  four  was  one  of  those  which  were 
sacred  among  the  .lews,  like  seven,  and  forty  (Biihr, 
De  Symbol.]. 


302 


CHERUB 


"  towards  each  other  and  towards  the  merry-seat." 
It  is  remarkable  that  with  such  precise  directions 
as  to  their  position,  attitude  and  material,  nothing 
save  that  they  were  winged,  is  said  concerning  their 
shape. 


E-'iy.  4.  Assyrian  winged  bull.    (Lajanl,  jftBi  ami  Bab.,  2/6.) 

Was  this  shape  already  familiar,  or  kept  de- 
signedly mysterious  ?  From  the  fact  that  cherubim 
were  blazoned  on  the  doors,  walls,  curtains,  &c,  of 
the  house,  and  from  the  detailed  description  of 
shapes  by  Ezekiel,  the  latter  notion  might  he 
thought  absurd.  But  if  the  text  of  Ezekiel,  and 
the  carvings,  &c,  of  the  temple  had  made  them 
popular,  Josephus  could  not  possibly  have  said 
\Ant.  viii.  3,  §3)  tols  5e  xepou/3ei?  ovSels  oiroTai 
rives  -f}ffav  elire'iv  ovS'  ilKaffai  SiWtcu.  It  is 
also  remarkable  that  Ez.  i.  speaks  of  them  as 
"  living  creatures  "  (lli'n,  £3 a),  under  mere  animal 

forms.  Into  which  description  in  eh.  x.  14,  the 
remarkable  expression,  "the  face  of  a  cherub,"  is 
introduced,  and  the  prophet  concludes  by  a  reference 


c  The  "  cherubim,  lions,  and  oxen,"  which  orna- 
mented certain  utensils  in  the  temple  (1  K.  vii.  29), 
are  probably  all  to  he  viewed  as  cherubic  insignia,  the 
former  of  composite  form,  the  two  latter  of  simple. 

d  Sehoetgen,  Hor.  Hebr.  ad  Apoc.  iv.  3,  quotes 
Pirkc,  Rab.EHezer,  "Ad  quatuor  pedes  (throni)  sunt 
quatuor  animalia  quorum  unum  quodque  quatuor 
facies  et  tot  alas  habet.  Quando  Deus  loquitur  ab 
oriente  tunc  id  fit  inter  duos  cherubinos  facie  hominis, 
quando  Deus  loquitur  ameridie,  tunc  id  fit  inter  duos 
cherubinos  facie  leonis,"  &e. 

e  Bahr,  SymboUk,  vol.  i.  p.  313-4  (whose  entire 
remarks  on  this  subject  are  valuable  and  often  pro- 
found), inclines  to  think  that  the  precise  form  varied 
within  certain  limits  ;  e.  g.  the  cherubic  figure  might 
have  one,  two,  or  four  faces,  two  or  four  feet,  one  or 
two  pair  of  wings,  and  might  have  the  bovine  or 
leonine  type  as  its  basis  ;  the  imagery  being  modified 
to  suit  the  prominently  intended  attribute,  and  the 


CHERUB 

to  his  former  vision,  and  an  identification  of  those 
creatures  with  the  cherubim — (v.  20)  "  J  knew 
that  they  were  cherubim."  On  the  whole  it  seems 
likely  that  the  word  "  cherub  "  meant  not  only  the 
composite  creature-form,  of  which  the  man,  lion, 
ox,  and  eagle  were  the  elements,  but,  further,  some 
peculiar  and  mystical  form,  which  Kzekiel,  being  a 
priest,  would  know  and  recognise  as  "  the  face  of  a 
cherub,"  kcit  <f|oxV  ;  but  which  was  kept 
secret  from  all  others ;  and  such  probably  were 
those  on  the  ark,  which,  when  it  was  moved,  was 
always  covered  [Ark  of  Covenant],  though 
those  on  the  hangings  and  panels  might  be  of  the 
popular  device.0  What  this  peculiar  cherubic  form 
was  is  perhaps  an  impenetrable  mystery.  It  was 
probably  believed  popularly  to  be  something  of  the 
bovine  type  (though  in  Ps.  cvi.  20  the  notion 
appeal's  to  be  marked  as  degraded)  :  so  Spencer  (de 
leg.  Hebr.  rit.  iii.  diss.  5.  4.  2)  thinks  that  the  ox 
was  the  forma  proecipua,  and  quotes  Grotius  on 
Ex.  xxv.  18  ;  Bochart,  Hicrozoic.  p.  87,  ed.  1690. 
Hence  the  "  golden  calf."  The  symbolism  of  the 
visions  of  Ezekiel  is  more  complex  than  that  of  the 
earlier  Scriptures,  and  he  certainly  means  that  each 
composite  creature-form  had  four  faces  so  as  to 
look  four  ways  at  once,  was  four-sided  d  and  four- 
winged,  so  as  to  move  with  instant  rapidity  in 
every  direction  without  turning,  whereas  the 
Mosaic  idea  was  probably  single-faced,15  and  with 
but  one  pair  of  wings.  Ezekiel  adds  also  the 
imagery  of  the  wheels  —  a  mechanical  to  the 
previous  animal  forms.  This  might  typify  inani- 
mate nature  revolving  in  a  fixed  course,  informed 
by  the  spiritual  power  of  God.  The  additional 
symbol  of  being  "  full  of  eyes "  is  one  of  obvious 
meaning. 

This  mysterious  form  might  well  be  the  symbol 
of  Him  whom  none  could  behold  and  live.  For  as 
symbols  of  Divine  attributes,  e.  g.  omnipotence  and 
omniscience,  not  as  representations  of  actual  beings 
(Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  v.  p.  241),  the  cherubim 
should  be  regarded/  Philo  indeed  assigns  a  varied 
signification  to  the  cherubim  :  in  one  place  he  makes 
them  allegories  of  the  beneficent  and  avenging 
energies  of  God  ;  in  another,  of  the  two  hemispheres 
of  the  then  astronomical  system,  one  of  which  sup- 
ported the  planets  and  the  other  the  fixed  stars  ; 
elsewhere,  of  power  and  goodness  simply.  They  are 
symbolical  in  Gen.  iii.  24,  just  as  the  serpent  is  a 
symbol  in  iii.  1-14,  though  functions  and  actions  are 
attributed  to  each.  When  such  symbolical  forms 
have  become  conventional,  the  next  step  is  to  literalise 
them  as  concrete  shapes  of  real  beings.  The  (wa  of 
Kev.  iv.  6-8  are  related  both  to  the  cherubim  and  to 


highest  forms  of  creature-being  expressing  best  the 
highest  attributes  of  the  Creator.  Thus  he  thinks 
the  human  form  might  indicate  spirituality  (p.  340). 
(Comp.  Grot,  on  Exod.  xxv.  18,  and  Heb.  ix.  5.) 
Some  useful  hints  as  to  the  connexion  of  cherubic 
with  other  mythological  forms  may  be  found  in 
Creuzer,  Synibol.  i.  441,  540. 

f  In  Ez.  xxviii.  14, 16,  theTyrian  king  is  addressed 
as  the  "  anointing  cherub  that  covereth."  This  seems 
a  mistake  in  the  A.  V.,  arising  from  a  confusion  of 
nt'TDO,  which  means  "  stretched  out "  (Vulg.  cherub 
extentus),  from  HB'Di  Aram,  to  extend,  with  some 
word  from  flC'D,  to  anoint.  The  notion  is  borrowed 
no  doubt  from  the  "extended"  attitude  of  the  che- 
rubim of  the  sanctuary,  "  covering "  the  ark,  &c, 
with  their  wings.  So  the  king  should  have  been  the 
guardian  of  the  law. 


CHERUB 

the  seraphim  of  prophecy,  combining  the  symbols  of 
both.  They  are  not  stern  and  unsympathising  like 
the  former,  but  invite  the  seer  to  "  come  and  see;" 
nor  like  the  latter  do  they  cover  their  face  (Is. 
vi.  2)  from  the  presence  of  deity,  or 
use  their  wings  to  speed  on  his  errands, 
but,  in  a  state  of  rest  and  praise,  act 
as  the  choregi  of  the  heavenly  host. 
And  here,  too,  symbolism  ever  sliding 
into  realism,  these  have  been  diversely 
construed,  e.  g.  as  the  four  evangelists, 
four  archangels,  &c. 

Many  etymological  sources  for  the 

word  2113  have  been  proposed.    The 

two  best  worth  noticing,  and  between 
which    it   is   difficult   to   choose   are, 

(1)  the  Syriac  <-^.Oi_0,  great,  strong 

(Gesen.  s.  v.  ;  comp.  Philo  de  pro- 
fugis,  p.  4f).ri).  The  fact  that  all  the 
symbols  embody  various  forms  of 
strength,  the  lion  among  wild,  and  the 
ox  among  tame  beasts,  the  eagle  among 
birds,  the  man  as  supreme  over  all 
nature,  is  in  favour  of  this ;  (2)  the 

Syriac  >  "*)»■  1,  to  plough,  i.e.  to  cut 

into;  hence  Arab.  ,  <r£=-,<  sculpsit ;   and  here  a 

doubt  occurs  whether  in  the  active  or  passive  sense, 
"  that  which  ploughs"  =  the  ox  (comp.  1p2  "  ox," 
from  same  word  in  Arab.  "  to 
plough  "),  which  brings  us 
to  the  forma  praecipua  of 
Spencer ;  or,  that  which 
is  carved  =  an  image.  In 
favour  of  the  latter  is  the  fact 
that  3113  is  rabbinical  for 
"  image  "  generically  (Si- 
monis,  Bouget,andPagninus, 
Lexx.  s.  i\),  perhaps  as  the 
only  image  known  to  the 
law,  all  others  being  deemed 
forbidden,  but  possibly  also 
as  containing  the  true  germ 
of  meaning.3  Besides  these 
two  wisdom  or  intelligence 
has  been  given  by  high  au- 
thority as  the  true  meaning 
of  the  name  (Jerome  on  Is. 
vi.  2);  so  Philo  de  Vit. 
Mos.  688— &s  5'  hv  "EA- 
\-qvfS  efiroiev  iirlyvwcris 
iced  eiri(TTii)ytt7j  TroWr]  ;  and 
CI. -m.  Alex.  Strom,  v.  24ii 
— iOeAet  8e  rb  ovofx.a.  run/ 
X^povfilfj.  SrjAovv  aiadrjcriv 

TT0\XT)V. 

Though  the  exact  form  of  the  cherubim  is  uncer- 
tain, they  must  have  borne  a  general  resemblance 
to  the  composite  religious  figures  found  upon  the 


CHEEUB 


503 


monuments  of  Egypt,  Assyria,  Babylonia,  and 
Persia.  The  first  two  figures  are  winged  crea- 
tures from  the  Egyptian  monuments.  The  next 
three  are  taken  from  Assyrian  sculptures.     No.  5 


Fig.  5.  Assyrian  sphinx.     (Layard,  ii.  348.) 


represents  the  griffin  of  Northern  fable,  as  we 
see  from  the  griffin  found  as  an  ornament  in 
Scythian  tombs,  but  drawn  by  Grecian  artists. 
In   the   sacred   boats   or   arks    of  the   Egyptians, 


*  The  griffin  of  Northern  fable  watching  the  gold 
in  the  wilderness  has  (see  above)  been  compared  with 
the  cherub,  both  as  regards  his  composite  form,  and 
his  function  as  the  guardian  of  a  treasure.  The 
"  watchful  dragon  "  of  the  Hesperides  seems  perhaps 
a  fabulous  reflex  of  the  same,  where  possibly  the 
"  serpent"  {&pa.Ku>v)  may,  by  a  change  not  uncommon 
in  myth,  have  taken  the  place  of  the  "  cherubim." 
The  dragon  and  the  bull  have  their  place  also  in  the 
legend  of  the  golden  fleece.  There  is  a  very  near  resem- 


T\%.  C.  A  G 


there  are  sometimes  found  two  figures  with  ex- 
tended wings,  which  remind  us  of  the  description 
of  the  cherubim   "  covering  the  mercy-seat  with 


blance  too  between  the  names  ypv-n-  (with  <;  afforma- 
tivc)  and  3-113  i  and  possibly  an  affinity  between  ypv-rr- 
and  the  Greek  forms  7AUJR0,  y\v<j>io,  ypar/xo,  yAcu/iupos 
(cf.  Germ,  graben),  all  related  to  carving,  as  between 
3/"n3    and    the    Syriac    and   Arab,    words   signifying 

tmtril ,  sctdpsit,  &C,  as  above.  We  have  another  form 
of  the  same  rojol  probably  in  Kvplii<;,  the  block  or 
tablet  on  which  the  laws  were  engraved. 


304 


CHESALON 


their    wings,    and    their    faces    [looking]    one    tc 
another"  "(Ex.  xxv.  20).  [H.  H.] 


CHEZIB 

This  is  invariably  used  for  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant, 
and,  with  two  exceptions,  for  that  only.  It  is  in- 
structive to  be  reminded  that  there  is  no  connexion 
whatever  between  this  word  and  that  for  the  "  ark  " 
of  Noah,  and  for  the  "  ark  "  in  which  Moses  was 
hid  among  the  Hags  (both  1130,  Tebah).     The  two 

exceptions  alluded  to  are  («)  the  "  coffin"  in  which 
the  bones  of  Joseph  were  carried  from  Egypt  (Gen. 
I.  26  ;  rendered  in  the  Targ.  Ps.  Jon.  by  yAcbcrcro- 
kojxov — comp.  John  xii.  6 — in  Hebrew  letters  :  the 
reading  of  the  whole  passage  is  very  singular)  ; 
and  (b)  the  "  chest  "  in  which  Jehoiada  the 
priest  collected  the  alms  for  the  repairs  of  the 
Temple  (2  K.  xii.  9,  10;  2  Chr.  xxiv.  8-11).  Of 
the  former  the  following  wood-cut  is  probably  a 
near  representation.  2.  D^H,  "  chests,"  from  T03 
to  hoard  (Ez.  xxvii.  24only):  A. V.  "chests."  [G.] 


perhaps 

CHE'S ALON  (f^DS  ;  XwrAt&v;  Cheshn),  a 
place  named  as  one  of  the  landmarks  on  the  west 
part  of  the  north  boundary  of  Judah,  apparently 
situated  on  the  shoulder  (A.  V.  "side")  of  Mount 
Jearim  (Josh.  xv.  10).  The  name  does  not,  how- 
ever, reappear  in  the  list  of  towns  of  Judah  later 
in  the  same  chapter.  Mount  Jearim,  the  "  Mount 
of  Forests,"  has  not  necessarily  any  connexion  with  I 
IQrjath  Jearim,  though  the  two  were  evidently, 
from  their  proximity  in  this  statement  of  the 
boundary,  not  far  apart.  Chesalon  was  the  next 
landmark  to  Bethshemesh,  and  it  is  quite  in  ac- 
cordance with  this  that  Dr.  Robinson  has  observed 
a  modern  village  named  Kesla,  about  six  miles  to 
the  N.E.  of  Ain-shems,  on  the  western  mountains 
of  Judah  (Rob.  ii.  30  note ;  iii.  154).  Eusebius 
and  Jerome,  in  the  Onomasticon,  mention  a 
Chaslon,  but  they  differ  as  to  its  situation,  the 
former  placing  it  in  Benjamin  "  the  latter  in  Judah : 
both  agree  that  it  was  a  very  large  village  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem.  The  meaning  of  the 
name  is  thought  by  Professor  Stanley,  like  Che- 
sulloth,  to  have  reference  to  its  situation  on  the 
"loins"  of  the  mountain.  [G.] 

CHE'SED  (1^3;  XafrS;  Cased),  fourth  son 
of  Nahor  (Gen.  xxii.  22).     [Chaldea,  p.  292.] 

CHE'SIL    (^p3  ;    Bcu0tj\ ;    Alex.    Xatrfip  ; 

Cesil),  a  town  in  the  extreme  south  of  Palestine, 
named  with  Hormah  and  Ziklag  (Josh.  xv.  30). 
The  name  does  not  occur  again,  but  in  the  list  of 
towns  given  out  of  Judah  to  Simeon,  the  name 
Bethul  occurs  in  place  of  it  (xix.  4),  as  if  the 
one  were  identical  with,  or  a  corruption  of,  the 
other.  This  is  confirmed  by  the  reading  of  1  Chr. 
iv.  30,  Bethuel  : — by  that  of  the  LXX.  as  given 
above,  and  by  the  mention  in  1  Sam.  xxx.  27  of  a 
Bethel  among  the  cities  of  the  extreme  south.  In 
this  case  we  can  only  conclude  that  7>*D3  was  an 
early  variation  of  7103.  [G.] 

CHEST.  By  this  word  are  translated  in  the 
A.  V.  two  distinct  Hebrew  terms:  1.  f1~|&  or  pX 
from   mX,  to  gather;   Kt^a)r6s ;  gazophylacium. 


a  Possibly  referring  to  the  village  now  Beit  Iksa, 
between  Jerusalem  and  Nebi  Samwil,  and  therefore 
in  Benjamin 


Egypt 


CHESTNUT-TREE  (flEny ;  irXaravos ;  pla- 

tawis),  a  tree  mentioned  in  Gen.  xxx.  37,  as  one  of 
those  from  which  Jacob  took  rods  and  pilled  them 
to  set  before  the  flocks ;  and  in  Ez.  xxxi.  8,  as  one 
of  the  trees  to  which  the  Assyrian  empire  in  its 
strength  and  beauty  is  likened.  These  are  the  only 
two  passages  in  which  the  word  occurs.  The  au- 
thority for  the  rendering  of  the  A.  V.  is  doubtful ; 
and  plane-tree  (Platanus  orientalis  of  Linnaeus) 
would  probably  be  nearer  the  truth,  for  the  plane 
is  of  common  growth  in  Palestine.  (See  Cels. 
Hierob.  i.  513.)  Moreover  the  etymology  of  the 
word  connects  it  with  D~IJ?,  "  to  be  naked,"  and  with 

Arab.  a.«x,  "  to  strip  off  bark" — the  shedding  of 

its  bark  yearly  being  characteristic  of  the  plane-tree. 
(See  Hiller  in  Ilierophyt.  i.  402.)  [W.  I).] 

.    CHESUL'LOTH   (with    the   definite   article, 

nV?p3n  ;  Xa.aa.Aw8;   Casaloili),  one  of  the  towns 

of  Issachar,  meaning  in  Hebrew  "  the  loins,"  and 
therefore,  perhaps,  deriving  its  name  from  its  situa- 
tion on  the  slope  of  some  mountain  (Josh.  xix.  18. 
See  the  quotation  from  Jarchi  in  Keil's  Joshua, 
338).  From  its  position  in  the  lists  it  appears  to 
be  between  Jezreel  and  Shunem  (Solatn),  and, 
therefore,  not  far  enough  north  to  be  the  Iksal 
mentioned  by  Robinson  (ii.  332)  or  the  place  noted 
by  Eusebius  and  Jerome  under  Acchaseluth,  'Axe- 
a€\w0,  in  the  Onomasticon.  [G.] 

CHE'ZIB  (3'T3  ;  Sam.  Cod.  H3T3  ;  Sam.  Vers. 
1131*13  ;  Xaa-pi ;  Vulg.  translating,  ■;  ■  nato 
ultra  cessavit,  and  comp.  a  similar  translation  by 
Aquila,  in  Jer.  Qu.  ffebr. ),  ;i  name  which  occurs  but 


CHIDON 

once  (Gen.  xxxviii.  5).  Judah  was  at  Chezib  when 
the  Canaanitess  Bathshua  bore  his  third  son  Shelah. 
The  other  places  named  in  this  remarkable  narrative 
are  all  in  the  low  country  of  Judah,  and,  therefore, 
in  the  absence  of  any  specification  of  the  position  of 
Chezib,  we  may  adopt  the  opinion  of  the  inter- 
preters, ancient  and  modern,  who  identify  it  with 
Aciizib  (H^pX).  It  is  also  probably  identical 
with  Chozeba.  [G.] 

CHI'DON  (JT3;    LXX.  Vat.   omits;    Alex. 

XetSwv ;  Chidori),  the  name  which  in  1  Chr.  xiii.  9 
is  given  to  the  threshing-floor  at  which  the  accident 
to  the  ark,  on  its  transport  from  Kirjath-jearim  to 
Jerusalem,  took  place,  and  the  death  of  Uzzah.  In 
the  parallel  account  in  2  Sam.  vi.  the  name  is 
given  as  Nachon.  The  word  Chidon  signifies  a 
"javelin;"  Nachon,  "prepared"  or  "firm."  Whe- 
ther there  were  really  two  distinct  names  for  the 
same  spot,  or  whether  the  one  is  simply  a  corrup- 
tion or  alteration  of  the  other  is  quite  tuicertain  (see 
Ges.  Thes.  683;  Simonis,  Onom.  339-40).  Jo- 
sephus  (Ant.  vii.  4,  §2)  has  XeiSciv.  The  Jewish 
tradition  (Jerome,  Quaest.  Heb.  on  1  Chr.  xi.  9)  was 
that  Chidon  acquired  its  name  from  being  the  spot 
on  which  Joshua  stood  when  he  stretched  out  the 
weapon  of  that  name  (A.  V.  "  spear")  towards  Ai 
(Josh.  viii.  18).  But  this  is  irreconcileable  with  all 
our  ideas  of  the  topography  of  the  locality.     [G.] 

CHILDREN  (D"03  ;    T«ra,  TraiSta ;   liberi, 
filii.    From  the  root  i"l33,  to  build,  are  derived  both 

J  T  T 

|3,  son,  as  in  Ben-hanan,  &c,  and  113,  daughter,  as 
in  Bath-sheba.  The  Chald.  also  "13,  son,  occurs  in 
0.  T.,  and  appears  in  N.  T.  in  such  words  as 
Barnabas,  but  which  in  plur.    ^33,  Ezr.  vi.  1G, 

resembles  more  the  Hebr.  Cognate  words  are  the 
Arabic  Bern',  sons,  in  the  sense  of  descendants,  and 
Benat,  daughters,  Ges.  pp.  215,  236;  Shaw,  Tra- 
vels, Pr.  p.  8).  The  blessing  of  offspring,  but  espe- 
cially, and  sometimes  exclusively,  of  the  male  sex 
is  highly  valued  among  all  Eastern  nations,  while 
the  absence  is  regarded  as  one  of  the  severest  pu- 
nishments (Her.  i.  13i)  ;  Strab.  xv.  733;  Gen.  xvi. 
2,  xxix.  31,  xxx.  1,  14;  Deut.  vii.  14;  1  Sam.  i. 
6,  ii.  5,  iv.  20 ;  2  Sam.  vi.  23,  xviii.  18 ;  2  K. 
iv.  14;  Is.  xlvii.  9;  Jer.  xx.  15;  Hos.  ix.  14; 
Esth.  v.  11;  Ps.  cxxvii.  3,  5 ;  Eccl.  vi.  3 ;  Dru- 
sius,  Prov.  Ben-Sirae,  ap.  Cr.  Sacr.  viii.  1887  ; 
Lane,  Mod.  Eg.  i.  2o8,240;  Mrs.Pooie, English™. 
in  Eg.  iii.  163;  Niebuhr,  Descr.  de  I'Ar.  67; 
Chardin,  Toy.  vii.  446;  Russell,  Nubia,  343). 
Childbirth  is  in  the  East  usually,  but  not  always, 
attended  with  little  difficulty,  and  accomplished 
with  little  or  no  assistance  (Gen.  xxxv.  17,  xxxviii. 
28;  Ex.  i.  19;  1  Sam.  iv.  19,  20;  Burckhardt, 
Notes  on  Bedouins,  i.  96 ;  Harmer,  06s.  iv.  425 ; 
Lady  M.  W.  Montagu,  Liters,  ii.  -J  17,  219,  222). 
As  soon  as  the  child  was  born,  and  the  umbilical 
cord  cut,  it  was  washed  in  ;l  bath,  rubbed  willi 
salt,  and  wrapped  in  swaddling  clothes.  Arab 
mothers  sometimes  rub  their  children  with  earth  or 
sand  (Ez.  xvi.  4;  Job  xxxviii.  9;  Luke  ii.  7; 
Burckhardt,  /.  c).  On  the  8th  day  tin'  rite  of  cir- 
cumcision in  the  case  "fa  boy,  was  performed,  and 
a  name  given,  sometimes,  bui  net  usually,  the  same 
as  that  of  the  father,  and  generally  conveying  some 
special  meaning.  Among  Mohammedans,  circumci- 
sion is  most  commonly  delayed  till  the  5th,  6th,  or 
(veil  the  14th  year  (Gen.  xxi,  4,  xxix.  32,  ."-•">.  xxx. 


CHILDREN 


305 


6,  24;  Lev.  xii.  3;  Is.  vii.  14,  viii.  3,  Luke  i.  59,  . 
ii.  21,  and  Lightfoot,  ad  loc. ;  Spencer,  de  Legg. 
Hebr.  v.  p.  62  ;  Strab.  xvii.  p.  824 ;  Her.  ii.  36, 
104  ;  Burckhardt,  ibid.  i.  96  ;  Lane,  Mod.  Eg.  i. 
87  ;  Mrs.  Poole,  Englishw.  in  Eg.  iii.  158  ;  Nie- 
buhr, Descr.  p.  70).  [Circumcision.]  After 
the  birth  of  a  male  child  the  mother  was  con- 
sidered unclean  for  7  +  33  days;  if  the  child  were 
a  female,  for  double  that  period  14  +  66  days.  At 
the  end  of  the  time  she  was  to  make  an  offering 
of  purification  of  a  lamb  as  a  burnt-offering,  and 
a  pigeon  or  turtle-dove  as  a  sin-offering,  or  in  case 
of  poverty,  two  doves  or  pigeons,  one  as  a  burnt- 
offering,  the  other  as  a  sin-offering  (Lev.  xii.  1-8 ; 
Luke  ii.  22).  The  period  of  nursing  appears 
to  have  been  sometimes  prolonged  to  3  years  (Is. 
xlix.  15;  2  Mace.  vii.  27 ;  eomp.  Livingstone, 
Travels,  o.  vi.  p.  126;  but  Burckhardt  leads  to  a 
different  conclusion).  The  Mohammedan  law  en- 
joins mothers  to  suckle  their  children  for  2  full  years 
if  possibl*  (Lane,  Mod.  Eg.  i.  p.  83 ;  Mrs.  Poole, 
Englishw.  in  Eg.  iii.  p.  161).  Nurses  were  em- 
ployed in  cases  of  necessity  (Ex.  ii.  9 ;  Gen.  xxiv. 
59,*  xxxv.  8  ;  2  Sam.  iv.  4;  2  K.  xi.  2  ;  2  Chr. 
xxii.  11).  The  time  of  weaning  was  an  occasion  of 
rejoicing  (Gen.  xxi.  8).  Arab  children  wear  little 
or  no  clothing  for  4  or  5  years  :  the  young  of  both 
sexes  are  usually  carried  by  the  mothers  on  the  hip 
or  the  shoulder,  a  custom  to  which  allusion  is  made 
by  Isaiah  (Is.  xlix.  22,  lxvi.  12  ;  Lane,  Mod.  Eg. 
i.  83).  Both  boys  and  girls  in  their  early  years, 
boys  probably  till  their  5th  year,  were  under  the 
care  of  the  women  (Prov.  xxxi.  1 ;  Herod,  i.  136  ; 
Strab.  xv.  733;  Niebuhr,  Descr.  p.  24).  After- 
wards the  boys  were  taken  by  the  father  under  his 
charge.     Those  in  wealthy  families  had  tutors  or 

governors  (DWVS,  TraiSayooyoC)  who  were  some- 
times eunuchs  (Num.  xi.  12; '2  K.  x.  1,  5;  Is. 
xlix.  23 ;  Gal.  iii.  24 ;  Esth.ii.  7;  Joseph.  Vit.  76; 
Lane,  M.  E.  i.  83).  Daughters  usually  remained 
in  the  women's  apartments  till  marriage,  or,  among 
the  poorer  classes,  were  employed  in  household 
work  (Lev.  xxi.  9  ;  Num.  xii.  14;  1  Sam.  ix.  11 ; 
Prov.  xxxi.  19,  23 ;  Ecclus.  vii.  25,  xlii.  9  ;  2  Mace, 
iii.  19).  The  example,  however,  and  authority  of 
the  mother  were  carefully  upheld  to  children  of 
both  sexes  (Deut.  xxi.  20;  Prov.  x.  1,  xv.  20; 
1  K.  ii.  19). 

The  firstborn  male  children  were  regarded  as  de- 
voted to  God,  and  were  to  be  redeemed  by  an  offer- 
ing (Ex.  xiii.  13;  Num.  xviii.  15;  Luke  ii.  22). 
Children  devoted  by  special  vow,  as  Samuel  was, 
appear  to  have  been  brought  up  from  very  early 
years  in  a  school  or  place  of  education  near  the 
tabernacle  or  temple  (1  Sam.  i.  24,  28).  [EDU- 
CATION.] 

The  authority  of  parents,  especially  the  father, 
over  children  was  very  great,  as  was  also  the  re- 
vercnee  enjoined  by  the  law  to  lie  paid  to  parents. 
The  disobedient  child,  the  striker  or  reviler  of  a 
parent,  was  liable  to  capital  punishment,  though 
net  at  the  independent  will  of  the  parent.  Chil- 
dren were  liable  t"  be  taken  as  slaves  in  car  of 
non-pavnieiit  of  debt,  and  were  expected  to  perform 

menial  offices  tor  them,  such  as  washing  the  feet, 
and  to  maintain  them  in  poverty  and  old  age.  How 

tins  last  obligation  was  evaded,  i Corban.    The 

lil bedience  is   enjoined   by   the  Gospel   (Gen. 

xxxviii.  24;  Lev.  x*i.  9;  Num.  xii.  14;  Deut. 
xxiv.  16;  I  K.  ii.  19  ;  2  K.  xiv.  6,  iv.  1  ;  Is.  1.  I; 
Neb.  v.  5  ;  Job  xxiv.  9  ;   Prov.  x.  I,  xv.  20,  xxix. 


306 


CHILEAB 


3  ;  Drasius,  Quaest.  Hebr.  ii.  63,  ap.  Cr.  Sacr. 
viii.  1547;  Col.  iii.  20;  Eph,  vi.  1;  1  Tim.  i.  9; 
comp.  Virg.  Aen.  vi.  609  ;  mid  Servius,  ad  loc. ; 
Aristoph.  Ran.  146  ;  Plato,  Phaedo ,  144 ;  de 
Legg.  ix.). 

The  legal  age  was  12,  or  even  earlier  in  the  case 
of  a  female,  and  13  for  a  male  (Maimon.  de  Pros, 
c.  v.;  Grotius  and  Calmet  on  John  ix.  21). 

The  inheritance  was  divided  equally  between  all 
the  sons  except  the  eldest,  who  received  a  double 
portion  (Dent.  xxi.  17;  Gen.  xxv.  31,  xlix.  3; 
1  Ch.  v.  1,  2  ;  Judg.  xi.  2,  7).  Daughters  had  by 
right  no  portion  in  the  inheritance ;  but  if  a  man 
had  no  son,  his  inheritance  passed  to  his  daughters, 
but  they  were  forbidden  to  many  out  of  their 
father's  tribe  (Num.  xxvii.  1,  8,  xxxvi.  2,  8). 

The  term  sons  was  applied  also  to  the  disciples 
and  followers  of  the  teachers  of  the  various  sects 
which  arose  after  the  Captivity.  (Lightfoot,  Hor. 
Hcbr.  on  John  xiii.  33  ;  Luke  xi.  45  ;  John  xvi.  16.) 
[See  Sects,  Schools,  and  .Schools'  op  Pro- 
phets.] [H.  W.  P.] 
,      CHIL'EAB.     [Abigail;  DaxielJ 

CHILTON  (P73  ;  Xe\ai&v  ;  Alex.  Xe\eJ,v  ; 
Cheliori),  the  son  of  Elimelech  and  Naomi,  and 
husband  of  Orpah  (Ruth  i.  2-5,  iv.  9).  He  is  de- 
scribed as  "  an  Ephrathite  (?  Ephraimite)  of  Beth- 
lehem-judah." 

CHIL'MAD  Octa  ;    Xap/xdv  ;    Chclmad),  a 

place  or  country  mentioned  in  conjunction  with 
Sheba  and  Asshur  (Ez.  xxvii.  23).  The  only 
name  bearing  any  similarity  to  it  is  Charmande,  a 
town  near  the  Euphrates  between  the  Mascas  and 
the  Babylonian  frontier  (Xen.  Anab.  i.  5,  §10).  As 
however  no  other  writer  notices  this  place,  it  is 
highly  improbable  that  it  was  of  sufficient  import- 
ance to  rank  with  Sheba  and  Asshur.  Hitzig  (Com- 
ment, on  Ez.  I.  c.)  proposes  to  alter  the  punctua- 
tion to  "1)373  with  the  sense  "  Asshur  was  as  thy 
pupil  in  commerce."  [W.  L.  B.] 

CHIM'HAM  (Dnp3— but  see  below;  Xa/xadu; 

Alex.  Xa.va.av  ;  Jos.  'Ax'ifJ-avos  ;  Chamaam),  a  fol- 
lower, and  probably  a  son  (Josh.  Ant.  vii.  11,  §4  ; 
and  comp.  1  K.  ii.  7)  of  Barzillai  the  Gileadite. 
who  returned  from  beyQnd  Jordan  with  David 
(2  Sam.  xix.  37,  38,  40).  David  appears  to 
have  bestowed  on  him  a  possession  at  Beth- 
lehem, on  which,  in  later  times,  an  inn  or  Khan 
(n-Tli)  was  standing,  well-known  as  the  start- 
ing point  for  travellers  from  Jerusalem  to  Egypt 
(Jer.  xli.  17).  There  is  some  uncertainty  about 
the  name,  possibly  from  its  not  being  that  of  a 
Hebrew.  In  2  Sam.  xix.  40,  it  is  in  the  Hebrew 
text  Chimhau,  J!l!33  ;  and  in  the  Chetib  of  Jer. 
xli.  17,  Chemoham,"  DmD3.  [G.] 

CHIN'NERETH  (accurately  Ciunareth, 
rnD3  ;     Keveped  ;    Alex.   XevepoO  ;    CenerctK),    a 

fortified  city  in  the  tribe  of  Naphtali  (Josh,  xix.  35 
only),  of  which  no  trace  is  found  in  later  writers, 
and  no  remains  by  travellers.  Whether  it  gave  its 
name  to,  or  received  it  from,  the  lake,  which  was 
possibly  adjacent,  is  quite  uncertain.  By  S.  Je- 
rome Chinnereth  was  identified  with  the  later 
Tiberias.  This  may  have  been  from  some  tradition 
then  existing :  the  only  corroboration  which  we  can 
Mud  for  it  is  the  mention  in  Joshua  of  Hammath 


CHIOS 

as  near  it,  which  was  possibly  the  Hummam  or 
Emmaus,  near  the  shore  of  the  lake  a  little  smith 
of  Tiberias.  This  is  denied  by  Reland  (161),  on 
the  ground  that  Capernaum  is  said  by  St.  Matt. 
(iv.  13)  to  have  been  on  the  very  borders  of 
Zebulun  and  Naphtali,  and  that  Zebumn  was  to 
the  south  of  Naphtali.  But  St.  Matthew's  expres- 
sion will  hardly  bear  this  strict  interpretation. 
The  town,  or  the  lake,  appears  to  have  given  its 
name  (slightly  altered)  to  a  district — "  all  Cinue- 
roth"  (1  K.  xv.  20).  [G.] 

CHIN'NERETH,  SEA  OF  (rn23  DJ;  v 
daXatraa  XeveptO ;  mare  Cenereth,  Num.  xxxiv. 
11  ;  Josh.  xiii.  27),  the  inland  sea,  which  is  most 
familiarly  known  to  us  as  the  "  lake  of  Gennesa- 
reth."  This  is  evident  from  the  mode  in  which  it 
is  mentioned  in  various  passages  in  the  Penta- 
teuch and  Joshua — as  being  at  the  end  of  Jordan 
opposite  to  the  "  Sea  of  the  Arabah,"  i.  c.  the 
Dead  Sea  ;  as  having  the  Arabah  or  Ghor  below  it, 
&c.  (Deut.  iii.  17;  Josh.  xi.  2.  xii.  3).  In  the 
two  former  of  these  passages  the  word  "  sea  "  is 
omitted  ;  in  the  two  latter  it  is  in  a  plural  form — 
"Chinneroth"  (ace.  Cinnaroth  JT1"I33  ;  and  H1133 

Cinnroth).  The  word  is  by  some  derived  from 
Cinnoor  {javvvpa,  cithara,  a  "harp"),  as  if  in 
allusion  to  the  oval  shape  of  the  lake.  But  this,  to 
say  the  least,  is  doubtful.  It  seems  more  likely 
that  Cinnereth  was  an  ancient  Canaanite  name 
existing  long  prior  to  the  Israelite  conquest,  and, 
like  other  names,  adopted  by  the  Israelites  into  their 
language.  The  subsequent  name  "Gennesar"  was 
derived  from  "  Cinnereth  "  by  a  change  of  letters 
of  a  kind  fiequent  enough  in  the  East.     [Genxe- 

SARETH.]  [G.] 

CHIOS  (Xios).  The  position  of  this  island  in 
reference  to  the  neighbouring  islands  and  coasts 
could  hardly  be  better  described  than  in  the  detailed 
account  of  St.  Paul's  return  voyage  from  Troas 
to  Caesarea  (Acts  xx.  xxi.).  Having  come  from 
Assos  to  Mitylene  in  Lesbos  (xx.  14),  he  arrived 
the  next  day  over  against  Chios  (v.  1 5),  the  next 
day  at  Samos  and  tarried  at  Trogyllium  (ib.) :  and 
the  following  day  at  Miletus  (ib.) :  thence  he  went 
by  Cos  and  Rhodes  to  Patara  (xxi.  1).  [Mitylene, 
Samos.]  With  this  it  is  worth  while  to  compare 
the  account  of  Herod's  voyage  to  join  Marcus 
Agrippa  in  the  Black  Sea.  We  are  told  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xvi.  2,  §2)  that  after  passing  by  Rhodes  and 
Cos,  he  was  detained  some  time  by  north  winds  at 
Chios,  and  sailed  on  to  Mitylene,  when  the  winds 
became  more  favourable.  It  appears  that  during 
this  stay  at  Chios  Herod  gave  very  liberal  sums 
towards  the  restoration  of  some  public  works 
which  had  suffered  in  the  Mithridatic  war.  This 
island  does  not  appear  to  have  any  other  association 
with  the  Jews :  nor  is  it  specially  mentioned  in 
connexion  with  the  first  spread  of  Christianity  by 
the  Apostles.  When  St.  Paul  was  there,  on  the 
occasion  referred  t$>,  he  did  not  land,  but  only 
passed  the  night  at  anchor.  At  that  time  Chios 
enjoyed  the  privilege  of  freedom  (Plin.  v.  38),  and 
it  is  not  certain  that  it  ever  was  politically  1  part 
of  the  province  of  Asia,  though  it  is  separated  from 
the  mainland  only  by  a  strait  of  5  miles.  Its 
length  is  about  32  miles,  and  in  breadth  it  varies 
from  8  to  18.  Its  outline  is  mountainous  and 
bold;  and  it  has  always  been  celebrated  for  its 
beauty  and  fruitfulness.  In  recent  times  it  has 
been  too  well  known,  under  its  modem  name  ot 


CHISLEU 

Scio,  for  the  dreadful  sufferings  of  its  inhabitants 
in  the  Greek  war  of  independence.  Chios  is  de- 
scribed by  the  older  travellers,  Thevenot,  Tourne- 
fort.  and  Chandler.  [J.  S.  H.] 

CHISLEU.     [Months.] 

CHIS'LON  (pbp3  ;  Xa<T\6v  ;  Chasclon), 
father  of  Elidad,  the  prince  of  the  tribe  of  Benja- 
min, chosen  to  assist  in  the  division  of  the  land  of 
Canaan  among  the  tribes  (Num.  xxxiv.  21). 

CHIS'LOTH-TA'BOR  ("OFl  r6p3,  "  loins 

of  Tabor  ;"  Xaae\a>6ai6  ;  Alex.  Xaira\we  fiadwp  ; 

Ceseleth  thabor),  a  place  to  the  border  (7-133)  of 

which  reached  the  border  of  Zebulun  (Josh.  xix. 
12).  It  may  be  the  village  Iksal  which  is  now 
standing  about  two  miles  and  a  half  to  the  west  of 
Mount  Tabor.  Josephus  names  a  village  Xaloth 
as  in  the  great  plain,  i.  e.  of  Esdraelon,  and  as  one 
of  the  landmarks  of  lower  Galilee  ,B.  J.  iii.  3,  §1  ; 
and  see  Vita,  §4-4),  but  it  is  impossible  to  say  if 
this  was  identical  with  Chisloth-Tabor  or  with 
Chesulloth.  [G.] 

CHITTIM,  KIT'TIM  (0^3,  D*»fl3  ;  K17- 

tioi,  Kitioi,  KTjTieijU,  XeTTtei/x  ;  Cetthim,  Cethim), 
a  family  or  race  descended  from  Javan  (Gen.  x.  4 ; 

I  Chr.  i.  7  ;  A.  V.  Kittim),  closely  related  to  the 
Dodanim,  and  remotely  (as  we  may  conclude 
from  the  absence  of  the  conjunction  before  it)  to 
the  other  descendants  of  Javan.  Chittim  is  fre- 
quently noticed  in  Scripture :  Balaam  predicts  that 
a  fleet  should  thence  proceed  for  the  destruction  of 
Assyria  (Num.  xxiv.  24,  DT13  *l!,ft;a  venient  in 
trieribus  de  Italia,  Vulg.)  :  in  Is.  xxiii.  1,  12,  it 
appears  as  the  resort  of  the  fleets  of  Tyre  :  iii  Jer. 
ii.  10,  the  "  isles  of  Chittim"  (,!|N,  i.  e.  maritime 

districts)  are  to  the  far  west,  as  Kedar  to  the  east 
of  Palestine :  the  Tyrians  procured  thence  the  cedar 
or  box-wood,  which  they  inlaid  with  ivory  for 
the  decks  of  their  vessels  (Ez.  xxvii.  6,  D'Hti'XTlS 

A.  V.  "  the  company  of  the  Ashurites,"  but  rather 
[ivory]  the  daughter  of  cedar,  i.  e.  inclosed  in 
cedar)  :  in  Dan.  xi.  SO,  "  ships  of  Chittim  " 
(koI  tjIoucti  'Pojjucuoi ;  Trieres  et  Romani)  advance 
to  the  south  to  meet  the  king  of  the  north:  at  a 
later  period  we  find  Alexander  the  Great  described 
as  coming  e/c  ttjs  yrjs  Xerrielfi  (T  Mace.  i.  1  ; 
A.  V.  Cm.  r  i  1  km  i,  and  Perseus  as  KiTTieW  fSacri- 
\evs  (1  Mace.  viii.  5;   A.  V.  Citois).     Josephus 

II  msidered  Cyprus  .is  the  original  seat  of  the  Chittim, 
adducing  as  evidence  tin'  name  of  its  principal  town, 
Citium  (X46i/j.os  8e  XeOi/xa  t^v  vy\aov  i<rx*v 
Kvirpos  avrr)  vvv  Ka\uTai,  Ant.  i.  6,§1).  Citium 
was  without  doubt  a  Phoenician  town,  and  the  name, 
as  it  appeals  in  Phoenician  inscriptions,  exactly  accords 
with  the  Hebrew  (Gesen.  Thesaur.  726).  From 
tlie  town  the  name  extended  to  the  whole  island  of 
Cyprus,  which  was  occupied  by  Phoenician  colo- 
nies, and  remained  under  Tyre  certainly  until  about 
B.C.  720  (Joseph.  Ant.  ix.  14,  §2).  With  the 
decay  of  the  Phoenician  power  (tire.  n.C.  600)  the 
Greeks  began  to  found  flourishing  settlements  on 
its  coasts,  as  they  had  also  done  in  Crete,  Rhodes, 
and   the  islands  of  the   Aejraean   Sea.     The  name 


CHORASHAN 


307 


a  Hengstenberg  (Hist,  of  Sal.)  explains  this  ex- 
pression as  =  from  the  side  of  Cyprus,  (.  e.  from  that 
island  as  a  rendezvous. 


Chittim,  which  in  the  first  instance  had  applied  to 
Phoenicians  only  (for  D^fiS  =  Cfin,  Hittites,  a 

branch  of  the  Canaanitish  race),  passed  T>ver  to  the 
islands  which  they  had  occupied,  and  thence  to  the 
people  who  succeeded  the  Phoenicians  in  the  occu- 
pation of  them  (a7r'  avTrjs,  sc.  Kvirpov,  vricroi  re 
iraffai',  K<xl  to.  TT/Veico  rwv  irapa  BaXacrffav,  Xedl/j. 
virb  'Efipaicov  ovoixd^erai,  Joseph.  Ant.  i.  6, 
§1).  Thus  in  Mace,  Chittim  evidently  =  Ma- 
cedonia, and  was  perhaps  more  especially  applied 
to  that  country  from  the  apparent  similarity  of  the 
name  in  the  form  Ma/certa,  which  they  supposed 
=  Ma  and  Keriot,  tlie  land  of  the  Cetii.  The  use  of 
the  term  was  extended  yet  farther  so  as  to  em- 
brace Italy  according  to  the  LXX.  (Dan.),  and  the 
Vulgate  (Num.  and  Dan.),  to  which  we  may  add 
the  rendering  of  the  Chaldee  Targum,  which  gives 
\vb\2H  (Italia)  in  1  Chr.  i.  7,  and  K^ISK  (Apu- 
lia) in  Ez.  xxvii.  6.  The  "  ships  of  Chittim  "  in 
Dan.  have  been  explained  as  Macedonian,  which 
Popillius  Laenas  may  have  seized  at  Delos  after  the 
defeat  of  Perseus,  and  taken  on  his  expedition  to 
Egypt  against  Antiochus ;  but  the  assumption,  on 
which  this  interpretation  jests,  is  not  borne  out  by 
the  narrative  (Liv.  xliv.  29,  xlv.  10),  nor  does 
there  appear  any  difficulty  in  extending  the  term 
to  Italy,  as  one  of  the  lands  in  the  far  west  with 
which  the  Hebrews  were  but  little  acquainted.  In 
an  ethnological  point  of  view,  Chittim,  associated 
as  the  name  is  with  Javan  and  Elishah,  must  be 
regarded  as  applying,  not  to  the  original  Phoeni- 
cian settlers  of  Cyprus,  but  to  the  race  which  suc- 
ceeded them ;  viz.  the  Carians,  who  were  widely 
dispersed  over  the  Mediterranean  coasts,  and  were 
settled  in  the  Cyclades  (Thucyd.  i.  8),  Crete 
(Her.  i.  171)  and  in  the  islands  called  Macariae 
Insulae,  perhaps  as  being  the  residence  of  the  Ca- 
rians. From  these  islands  they  were  displaced  by 
the  Dorians  and  [onians  (Herod.  I.  c),  and  emi- 
grated to  the  main  land,  where  they  occupied  the 
district  named  after  them.  The  Carians  were  con- 
nected with  the  Leleges,  and  must  be  considered  as 
related  to  the  Pelasgic  family  though  quite  distinct 
from  the  Hellenic  branch  (Knobel,  Yolkertafel,  p. 
95  ff.).  [W.  L.  B.] 

CHIUN  (JV3).     [-Rejiphax.] 

CHLO'E  (X\6tf),a  woman  mentioned  in  1  Cor. 
i.  11,  some  of  whose  household  had  informed  St. 
Paul  of  the  fact  that  there  were  divisions  in  the 
Corinthian  church.  She  is  supposed  by  Theophy- 
lact  and  others  to  have  been  an  inhabitant  of  Corinth  ; 
by  Estius,  some  Christian  woman  known  to  the 
Corinthians  elsewhere  ;  by  Michaelis  and  Meyer,  an 
Ephesian,  having  friends  at  Corinth.  It  is  impos- 
sible to  decide.  [H.  A.] 

CHO'BA  (XoijSa  ;  Vulg.  omits),  a  place  men- 
tioned in  Jud.  iv.  4,  apparently  situated  in  the  central 
part  of  Palestine.     It  is  probably  the  same  place  as 

CHO'BAI  (XaijScu),  which  occurs  in  Jud.  xv. 
4,  5  ;  in  the  latter  Terse  the  Greek  is  Xa>0a.  The 
name  suggests  Hobah  (rOlfl,  which  is  the  reading 

of  the  Syriac),  especially  in  connexion  withthe  men- 
tion of  Damascus  in  v.  5,  if  the  distance  from  the 
probable  site  of  Bethulia  were  not  too  great. 

CHORASHAN  (}L,;j;-"li3 ;  B?jp<raj8ee';  Alex. 
Bwpaaav  ;  in  lacu  Asan),  one  of  the  places  in  which 
'•  David  and  his  men  were 'wont  to  haunt,''  and  to 

X  •_' 


308 


CHORAZIN 


his  friends  in  which  he  sent  presents  of  the  plunder 
taken  from  the  Amalekites  (1  Sam.  xxx.  30). 
The  towns  named  in  this  catalogue  are  all  south  of 
Hebron,  and  Chorashan  may,  therefore,  be  iden- 
tical with  Ashan  of  Simeon.  This  is,  however, 
quite  uncertain,  and  the  name  has  not  been  dis- 
covered. .[G-] 

CHORA'ZIN  (Xopa(iv,  XopaCeiV,  Xopo(aii> ; 
Corozairi),  one  of  the  cities  in  which  our  Lord's 
mighty  works  were  done,  but  named  only  in  His 
denunciation  (Matt.  xi.  21;  Luke  x.  13).  It  was 
known  to  St.  Jerome,  who  describes  it  {Comm.  in 
Esai.  ix.  1)  as  on  the  shore  of  the  lake,  two  miles 
from  Capernaum.  St.  Willibald  (about  A.D.  750) 
visited  the  various  places  along  the  lake  in  the 
following  order — Tiberias,  Magdalum,  Capernaum, 
Bethsaida,  Chorazin.  Dr.  Robinson's  conclusion  is 
that  Khan  Minyeh  being  Capernaum,  Et-Tabighah 
is  Bethsaida,  and  Tell  Hum  Chorazin,  but  the 
question  is  enveloped  in  great  obscurity.  The 
origin  of  the  name  is  also  very  uncertain.  Origen 
writes  the  name  as  x^Pa  ^'V,  t.  e.  the  district  of 
Zin ;  but  this  appears  to  be  only  conjecture,  and 
has  no  support  from  MSS.  A  place  of  this  name 
is  mentioned  in  the  Talmud  (see  Reland,  722)  as 
famous  for  wheat,  which  is  still  grown  in  large 
quantities  in  this  neighbourhood.  [G.] 

CHOZE'BA  (N2T3  ;  Xwfofid ;  viri  mendacii). 

The  "  men  of  Chozeba  "  are  named  (1  Chr.  iv.  22) 
amongst  the  descendants  of  Shelah  the  son  of 
Judah.  The  name  does  not  reappear,  but  it  is 
sufficiently  like  CHEZIB  (and  especially  the  reading 
of  the  Samaritan  Codex  of  that  name)  to  suggest 
that  the  two  refer  to  the  same  place,  that,  namely, 
elsewhere  called  Achzib,  at  which  place  Shelah  was 
born.  (The  Vulgate  version  of  this  passage  is  worth 
notice.)  [G.] 

CHRIST.     [Jesus.] 

CHRONICLES,  First  and  Second  Books  of 
(in  Heb.  D^DTl  ''"QT  ;  verba  dierurn,  as  Jerome 
translates  it,  and  sermones  dierurn,  as  Hilar.  Pictav. 
in  Wolf,  but  rather  acta  dierurn;  journals,  or 
diaries,  i.  e.  the  record  of  the  daily  occurrences), 
the  name  original^  given  to  the  record  made  by 
the  appointed  historiographers  in  the  kingdoms  of 
Israel  and  Judah.  In  the  LXX.  these  books  are 
called  XlapaKtnropLevoiv  irpwrov  and  Sevrepov, 
which  is  understood,  after  Jerome's  explanation,  as 
meaning  that  they  are  supplementary  to  the  books 
of  Kings.  The  Vulgate  retains  both  the  Hebrew 
and  Greek  name  in  Latin  characters,  Dabre  jam- 
mim,  or  hajamim',  and  Paralipomenon.  Jerome 
tells  us  (ad  Domnion.  et  Rogatian.)  that  in  his  time 
they  formed  only  one  book  in  the  Hebrew  MSS., 
but  had  been  divided  by  the  Christian  churches 
using  the  LXX.  for  convenience,  on  account  of 
their  length.  In  his  Ep.  to  Paulinus,  he  thus 
further  explains  the  name  Paralipomenon,  and 
eulogizes  the  book.  "  Paralipomenon  liber,  id  est 
lustrum.  Vet.  epitome,  tantus  ac  talis  est,  ut 
absque  illo  si  quis  scientiam  scripturarum  si-bi  vo- 
lueiit  arrogare,  seipsum  irrideat.  Per  singula 
quippe  nomina  juncturasque  verborum,  et  praeter- 


a  As  far  as  2  Chr.  xxi.  2,  says  the  Bam  Bathra,  as 
explained  by  R.  Gedaliah,  and  by  Buxtorf.  See  Wolf, 
Bib.  Hebr.  vol.  ii.  p.  82. 

b  For  an  explanation  of  ZerubbabePs  genealogy  in 
1  Chr.  iii.,  see  Geneal.  of  our  Lord,  by  Lord  A.  Hervey, 
p.  97,  sqq.     But  even  if  this  explanation  is  not  ac- 


CHRONICLES 

missae  in  Regum  libris  tanguntur  historiae,  et  in- 
numerabiles  explicantur  •  Evangelii  quaestiones." 
The  name  Chronica,  or  Chronicorum  liber,  which 
is  given  in  some  copies  of  the  Vulgate,  and  from 
whence  we  derive  our  English  name  of  "  Chro- 
nicles," seems  to  be  taken  from  Jerome's  saying  in 
his  prolog  us  Galeatns,  "  Dibre  hajamim,  i.e.  verba 
dierurn :  quod  significantius  Chronicon  totius  di- 
vinae  historiae  possumus  appellare."  It  was  pos- 
sibly suggested  to  him  by  his  having  translated 
the  Chronica  of  Eusebius  into  Latin.  Later  Latin 
writers  have  given  them  the  name  of  Ephemeri- 
dum  libri.  The  constant  tradition  of  the  Jews,  in 
which  they  have  been  followed  by  the  great  mass 
of  Christian  commentators,  is  that  these  books  were 
for  the  most  part  compiled  by  Ezra ; a  and  the  one 
genealogy,  that  of  Zerubbabel,  which  comes  down  to 
a  later  time,b  is  no  objection  to  this  statement,  with- 
out recurring  to  the  strange  notion  broached  by 
the  old  commentators,  and  even  sanctioned  by  I  >r. 
Davidson  (in  Kitto's  Biblical  Cyclopaedia  "  Chro- 
nicles''), that  the  knowledge  of  these  generations 
was  communicated  to  Ezra  by  inspiration.  In  fact, 
the  internal  evidence  as  to  the  time  when  the  book 
of  Chronicles  was  compiled,  seems  to  tally  remark- 
ably with  the  tradition  concerning  its  authorship. 
Notwithstanding  this  agreement  however,  the  au- 
thenticity of  Chronicles  has  been  vehemently  im- 
pugned by  De  Wette  and  other  German  critics,0 
whose  arguments  have  been  successfully  refuted  by 
Dahler,  Keil,  Movers,  and  others.  It  has  been 
clearly  shown  that  the  attack  was  grounded  not 
upon  any  real  marks  of  spuriousness  in  the  books 
themselves,  but  solely  upon  the  desire  of  the  critics 
in  question  to  remove  a  witness  whose  evidence 
was  fatal  to  their  favourite  theory  as  to  the  post- 
Babylonian  origin  of  the  books  of  Moses.  If  the 
accounts  in  the  books  of  Chronicles  of  the  courses 
of  priests  and  Levites,  and  the  ordinances  of  divine 
service  as  arranged  by  David,  and  restored  by  He- 
zekiah  and  Josiah,  are  genuine,  it  necessarily  fol- 
lows that  the  Levitical  law  as  set  forth  in  the 
Pentateuch,  was  not  invented  after  the  return  from 
the  captivity.  Hence  the  successful  vindication  of 
the  authenticity  of  Chronicles  has  a  very  important 
bearing  upon  many  of  the  very  gravest  theological 
questions.  As  regards  the  plan  of  the  book,  of  which 
the  book  of  Ezra  is  a  continuation,  forming  one 
work,  it  becomes  apparent  immediately  we  consider 
it  as  the  compilation  of  Ezra,  or  some  one  nearly 
contemporary  with  him.  One  of  the  greatest  diffi- 
culties connected  with  the  captivity  and  the  return 
must  have  been  the  maintenance  of  that  genea- 
logical distribution  of  the  lands  which  yet  was  a 
vital  point  of  the  Jewish  economy.  Accordingly 
it  appears  to  have  been  one  to  which  both  Ezra 
and  Nehemiah  gave  their  earnest  attention,  as 
David,  Hezekiah,  and  other  kings,  had  done  before 
them.  Another  difficulty  intimately  connected  with 
the  former  was  the  maintenance  of  the  temple  ser- 
vices at  Jerusalem.  This  could  only  be  effected  by 
the  residence  of  the  priests  and  Levites  in  Jeru- 
salem in  the  order  of  their  courses :  and  this  resi- 
dence was  only  practicable  in  case  of  the  payment 
of  the  appointed  tithes,  first-fruits,  and  other  offer- 
ings.    Immediately  these   ceased    the  priests  and 


eepted,  there  is  no  difficulty.  The  hand  which  added 
Neh.  xii.  10,  11,  22,  23,  might  equally  have  added 
1  Chr.  iii.  22-24. 

c  Keil  says  that  Spinoza  led  the  way,  by  suggest- 
ing that  they  were  compiled  after  Judas  Maccabeus 
(P.  0). 


CHRONICLES 

hevites  were  obliged  to  disperse  to  their  own  vil- 
lages to  obtain  a  livelihood,  and  the  temple  services 
were  neglected.  But  then  again  the  registers  of 
the  Levitical  genealogies  were  necessary,  in  order 
that  it  might  be  known  who  were  entitled  to  such 
and  such  allowances,  as  porters,  as  singers,  as 
priests,  and  so  on  ;  because  all  these  offices  went  by 
families  ;  and  again  the  payment  of  the  tithes,  first- 
fruits,  &c,  was  dependent  upon  the  different  fami- 
lies of  Israel  being  established  each  in  his  inherit- 
ance. Obviously  therefore  one  of  the  most  pressing 
wants  of  the  Jewish  community  after  their  return 
from  Babylon  would  be  trusty  genealogical  records, 
and  if  there  were  any  such  in  existence,  the  arrange- 
ment and  publication  of  them  would  be  one  of  the 
greatest  services  a  person  in  Ezra's  situation  could 
confer.  But  further,  not  only  had  Zerubbabel  (Ezr. 
iii.  v.  vi.),  and  after  him  Ezra  and  Nehemiah 
(Ezr.  ii.  viii. ;  Neh.  vii.  viii.)  laboured  most  earn- 
estly in  the  teeth  of  immense  difficulties,  to  restore 
the  temple  and  the  public  worship  of  God  there  to 
the  condition  it  had  been  in  under  the  kings  of 
Judah ;  but  it  appears  clearly  from  their  policy, 
and  from  the  language  of  the  contemporary  pro- 
phets, Haggai  and  Zechariah,  that  they  had  it  much 
at  heart  to  re-infuse  something  of  national  life  and 
spirit  into  the  heart  of  the  people,  and  to  make 
them  feel  that  they  were  still  the  inheritors  of 
God's  covenanted  mercies,  and  that  the  captivity 
had  only  temporarily  interrupted,  not  dried  up,  the 
stream  of  God's  favour  to  their  nation.  Now  no- 
thing could  more  effectually  aid  these  pious  and 
patriotic  designs  than  setting  before  the  people  a 
compendious  history  of  the  kingdom  of  David, 
which  should  embrace  a  full  account  of  its  pros- 
perity, should  trace  the  sins  which  led  to  its  over- 
throw, but  should  cany  the  thread  through  the 
period  of  the  captivity,  and  continue  it  as  it  were 
unbroken  on  the  other  side ;  and  those  -passages  in 
their  former  history  would  be  especially  important 
which  exhibited  their  greatest  and  best  kings  as  en- 
gaged in  building  or  restoring  the  temple,  in  re- 
forming all  corruptions  in  religion,  and  zealously 
regulating  the  services  of  the  house  of  God.  As 
regards  the  kingdom  of  Israel  or  Samaria,  seeing 
it  had  utterly  and  hopelessly  passed  away,  and  that 
thr  existing  inhabitants  were  among  the  bitterest 
"  adversaries  of  Judah  and  Benjamin,"  it  would 
naturally  engage  very  little  of  the  compiler's  atten- 
tion.  These  considerations  explain  exactly  the  plan 
and  scope  of  that  historical  work  which  consists  of 
the  two  books  of  Chronicles  and  the  book  of  Ezra. 
For  after  having  in  the  first  eight  chapters  given 
the  genealogical  divisions  ami  settlements  of  the 
various  tribes,  the  compiler  marks  distinctly  his 
own  age  and  his  own  purpose,  by  informing  us  in 
ch.  ix.  1  of  the  disturbance  of  those  settlements  by 
the  Babylonish  captivity,  and,  in  the  following 
verses,  of  the  partial  restoration  of  them  at  the 
return  from  Babylon  (2-24  ;  and  that  this  list 
refers  to  the  families  who  had  returned  from  Baby- 
lon is  clear,  not  only  from  the  context,  but  from  its 
reinsertion,  Neh.  xi.  3-22, ''  with  additional  matter 
evidently  extracted  from  the  public  archives,  and 
relating  to  times  subsequent  t<>  the  return  from 
Babylon,  extending  to  Neh.  xii.  27,  where  Nehe- 
miah's  narrative  is  again  resumed  in  contil 
with  Neh.  xi.  2.  Having  thus  shown  the  K 
blishmeut  of  the  returned  families,  each  in  their 


CHRONICLES 


309 


d  Compare  also  1  Chr.  ix.   19,   with   Ezr.  ii.  42, 
Neh.  vii.  45. 


own  inheritance  according  to  the  houses  of  their 
fathers,  the  compiler  proceeds  to  the  other  part  of 
his  plan,  which  is  to  give  a  continuous  history  of 
the  kingdom  of  Judah  from  David  to  his  own 
times,  introduced  by  the  closing  scene  of  Saul's  life 
(ch.  x.),  which  introduction  is  itself  prefaced  by  a 
genealogy  of  the  house  of  Said  (ix.  35-44),  ex- 
tracted from  the  genealogical  tables  drawn  up  in 
the  reign  of  king  Hezckiah,  as  is  at  once  manifest 
by  counting  the  13  or  14  geneiations,  from  Jo- 
nathan to  the  sons  of  Azel  inclusive,  exactly  corre- 
sponding to  the  14  from  David  to  Hezekiah  in- 
clusive. This  part  of  the  plan  extends  fiom  1  Chr. 
ix.  35  to  the  end  of  the  book  of  Ezra:  1  Chr. 
xv.-xvii.  xxii.-xxix. ;  2  Chr.  xiii.-xv.  xxiv.  xxvi. 
xxix.-xxxi.  and  xxxv.  are  among  the  passages 
wholly  or  in  part  peculiar  to  the  books  of  Chro- 
nicles, which  mark  the  purpose  of  the  compiler, 
and  are  especially  suited  to  the  age  and  the  work 
of  Ezra.  Many  Chaldaisms  in  the  language  of 
these  books,  the  resemblance  of  the  style  of  Chron. 
to  that  of  Ezra,  which  is,  in  parts,  avowedly  Ezra's 
composition,  the  reckoning  by  Darics  (1  Chr.  xxix. 
7)  as  most  explain  D^3T1K,  as  well  as  the  break- 
ing off  of  the  narrative  in  the  lifetime  of  Ezra,  are 
among  other  valid  arguments  by  which  the  author- 
ship, or  rather  compilation  of  1  and  2  Chr.  and 
Ezr.  is  vindicated  to  Ezra.  As  regards  the  ma- 
terials used  by  him,  and  the  sources  of  his  infor- 
mation, they  are  not  difficult  to  discover.  The 
genealogies  are  obviously  transcribed  from  some 
register,  in  which  were  preserved  the  genealogies 
of  the  tiibes  and  families  drawn  up  at  different 
times.  This  appears  from  the  veiy  different  ages 
at  which  different  genealogies  terminate,  indicating 
of  course  the  particular  reign  when  each  was  drawn 
up.  Thus  e.g.  the  genealogy  of  the  descendants  of 
Sheshan  (1  Chr.  ii.  34-41)  was  drawn  up  in  Heze- 
kiah's  reign,  since,  including  Zabad,  who  lived  in 
David's  time,  and  Azariah  in  the  time  of  Joash,  it 
ends  with  a  generation  contemporary  with  Heze- 
kiah [Azariah,  No.  13].  The  line  of  the  high- 
priests  (1  Chr.  vi.  1-15)  must  have  been  drawn  up 
during  the  captivity ;  that  in  50-53,  in  the  time  of 
David  or  Solomon  ;  those  of  Heman  and  Asaph  in 
the  same  chapter  in  the  time  of  David ;  that  of  the 
sons  of  Azel  (1  Chr.  viii.  38)  in  the  time  of  Heze- 
kiah ;  that  of  the  sons  of  Zerubbabel  (1  Chr.  iii. 
19-24)  in  the  time  of  Ezra,  and  so  on. 

The  same  wide  divergence  in  the  age  of  other 
materials  embodied  in  the  books  of  Chronicles  is 
also  apparent.  Thus  the  information  in  1  Chr.  i. 
concerning  the  kings  of  Edom  before  the  reign  of 
Saul,  was  obviously  compiled  from  very  ancient 
sources.  The  same  may  be  said  of  the  incident  of 
the  slaughter  of  the  si. us  of  Ephraim  by  the  Git- 
tites,  1  Chr.  vii.  21,  viii.  1:!,  and  of  the  account 
of  the  sons  of  Shela,  and  their  dominion  in  Moab, 
1  Chr.  iv.  21,  22.  The  curious  details  concerning 
the  Reubenites  and  Gadites  in  1  Chr.  v.  must  have 
been  drawn  from  contemporary  documents,  embo- 
died probably  in  the  genealogical  records  of  Jotham 
and  Jeroboam,  while  other  records  used  by  the 
Compiler  are  as  late  as  after  the  return  from  Baby- 
lon, such  as  1  Chr.  ix.  2sqq. ;  2  Chr.  xx.wi.  20 
sqq.;  and  others,  as  Ezr.  ii.  and  iv.  6-23,  are  as 
late  as  the  time  of  Artaxerxes  and  Nehemiah. 
Ilenee  if  is  further  manifest  that  the  books  of  Chro- 
nicles and  Ezra,  though  put  into  their  present  form 
by  one  hand,  contain  in  fact  extracts  from  the 
writings   of  many   different    writers,    which    were 


310 


CHRONICLES 


extant  at  the  time  the  compilation  was  made. 
For  the  full  account  of  the  reign  of  David,  he  made 
copious  extracts  from  the  books  of  Samuel  the  seer, 
Nathan  the  prophet,  and  Gad  the  seer  (1  Chr. 
xxix.  29).  For  the  reign  of  Solomon  he  copied  from 
"  the  book  of  Nathan,"  from  "  the  prophecy  of  Ahijah 
the  Shilonite,"  and  from  "  the  visions  of  Iddo  the 
seer  "  (2  Chr.  ix.  29).  Another  work  of  Iddo  called 
"  the  story  (or  interpretation,  Midrash,  LjmJO)  of 

the  prophet  Iddo,"  supplied  an  account  of  the  acts, 
and  the  ways,  and  sayings  of  king  Abijah  (xiii.  22)  ; 
while  yet  another  bookof  Iddo  concerning  genealogies, 
with  the  book  of  the  prophet  Shemaiah,  contained 
the  acts  of  king  Rehoboam  (xii.  1ft).  For  later 
times  the  "  Book  of  the  kings  of  Israel  and  Judah  " 
is  repeatedly  cited  (2  Chr.  xxv.  26,  xxvii.  7,  xxxii. 
32,  xxxiii.  18,  &c),  and  "  the  sayings  of  the  seers," 
or  rather  of  Chozai  (xxxiii.  19)  ;  and  for  the  reigns 
of  Uzziah  and  Hezekiah  "  the  vision  of  the  prophet 
Isaiah"  (xxvi.  22,  xxxii.  32).  In  other  cases  where 
no  reference  is  made  to  any  book  as  containing  fur- 
ther information,  it  is  probable  that  the  whole 
account  of  such  reign  is  transcribed.  Besides  the 
above  named  works,  there  was  also  the  public  na- 
tional record  called  DVOTl  '•"O'-]  "1DD,  mentioned 

in  Neh.  xii.  23,  from  which  doubtless  the  present 
books  took  their  name,  and  from  which  the  genea- 
logies and  other  matters  in  them  were  probably  de- 
rived, and  which  are  alluded  to  as  having  existed  as 
early  as  the  reign  of  David,  1  Chr.  xxvii.  24.  These 
"  Chronicles  of  David,"  TH  1J^E>S  DV3*n  n^ 
are  probably  the  same  as  the  TIT  ''"13^,  above  re- 
ferred to,  as  written  by  Samuel,  Nathan,  and  Gad. 
From  this  time  the  affairs  of  each  king's  reign 
were  regularly  recorded  in  a  book  called  at  first 
nb^  n3T  ">QD,  "  the  book  of  the  acts  of  Solo- 
mon" (1  K.  xi.  41),  by  the  name  of  the  king,  as 
before  of  David,  but  afterwards  in  both  kingdoms 
by  the  general  name  of  CD'H  "T  "D,  as  in  the  con- 
stantly recurring  formula, — "  Now  the  rest  of  the 
acts  ('•"Ql)  of  Rehoboam,  Abijam,  &c. ;  Jeroboam, 
Nadab,  &c,  are  they  not  written  in  the  book  of  the 
Chronicles  of  the  kings  of  Judah"  or  "of  Israel" 
(1  K.  xiv.  28,  xv.  f,  &c.)  ?  And  this  continues 
to  the  end  of  Jehoiakim's  reign,  as  appears  by  2  K. 
xxiv.  5 ;  2  Chr.  xxxvi.  8.  And  it  was  doubtless 
from  this  common  source  that  the  passages  in  the 
Books  of  Samuel  and  Kings  identical  with  the  Books 
of  Chronicles  were  derived.  All  these  several  works 
have  perished,  but  the  most  important  matters  in 
them  have  been  providentially  preserved  to  us  in 
the  Chronicles. 

As  regards  the  closing  chapter  of  2  Chr.  subse- 
quent to  v.  8,  and  the  1st  ch.  of  Ezra,  a  compa- 
rison of  them  with  the  narrative  of  2  K.  xxiv. 
xxv.,  will  lead  to  the  conclusion  that  while  the 
writer  of  the  narrative  in  Kings  lived  in  Judah, 
and  died  under  the  dynasty  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  the 
writer  of  the  chapter  in  Chronicles  lived  at  Baby- 
lon, and  survived  till  the  commencement  at  least 
of  the  Persian  dynasty.  For  this  last  writer  gives 
no  details  of  the  reigns  of  Jehoiachin,  or  Zedekiah, 
or  the  events  in  Judah  subsequent  to  the  burning 
of  the  temple;  but,  only  dwelling  on  the  moral 
lessons  connected  with  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem, 
passes  on  quickly  to  relate  the  return  from  captivity. 
Moreover,  he  seems  to  speak  as  one  who  had  long 
been   a   subject   of  Nebuchadnezzar,    calling   him 


CHRONICLES 

simply  "King  Nebuchadnezzar:"  and  by  the  re- 
peated use  of  the  expression  "  brought  him,  or  these, 
to  Babylon,"  rather  encourages  the  idea  that  the 
writer  was  there  himself.  The  first  chapter  of 
Ezra  strongly  confirms  this  view,  for  we  have  co- 
pious details,  not  likely  to  be  known  except  to  one 
at-  Babylon,  of  the  decree,  the  presents  made  to  the 
captives,  the  bringing  out  of  the  sacred  vessels,  the 
very  name  of  the  Chaldee  treasurer,  the  number 
and  weight  of  the  vessels,  and  the  Chaldee  name  of 
Zerubbabel,  and  in  this  chapter  the  writer  speaks 
throughout  of  the  captives  going  up  to  Jerusalem, 
and  Sheshbazzar  taking  them  up  (TO]}?\,  as  opposed 
to  N'OH).  But  with  this  clue  we  may  advance  a 
little  further,  and  ask,  who  was  there  at  Babylon, 
a  prophet,  as  the  writer  of  sacred  annals  must  be, 
an  author,  a  subject  of  Nebuchadnezzar  and  his 
sons,  and  yet  who  survived  to  see  the  Persian  dy- 
nasty, to  whom  we  can  with  probability  assign 
this  narrative  ?  Surely  the  answer  will  be  Daniel. 
Who  so  likely  to  dwell  on  the  sacred  vessels  taken 
by  Nebuchadnezzar  (Dan.  v.  2,  23) ;  who  so  likely 
to  refer  to  the  prophecy  of  Jeiemiah  (Dan.  ix.'  2); 
who  so  likely  to  bewail  the  stubbornness  of  the 
people,  and  their  rejection  of  the  prophets  (Dan. 
ix.  5-8) ;  who  so  likely  to  possess  the  text  of 
Cyrus's  decree,  to  know  and  record  the  name  of  the 
treasurer  (Dan.  i.  3,  11);  and  to  name  Zerubbabel 
by  his  Chaldee  name  (Dan.  i.  7)?  Add  to  this, 
that  Ezr.  i.  exactty  supplies  the  unaccountable  gap 
between  Dan.  ix.  and  x.  [Ezra],  and  we  may  con- 
clude with  some  confidence  that  as  Jeremiah  wrote 
the  closing  portion  of  the  Book  of  Kings,  so  did 
Daniel  write  the  corresponding  portion  in  Chro- 
nicles, and  down  to  the  end  of  Ezr.  i.  Ezra  per- 
haps brought  this  with  him  from  Babylon,  and 
made  use  of  it  to  carry  on  the  Jewish  history  from 
the  point  where  the  old  Chronicles  failed  him.  As 
regards  the  text  of  the  Chronicles  it  is  in  parts 
very  corrupt,  and  has  the  appearance  of  having 
been  copied  from  MSS.  which  were  partly  effaced 
by  age  or  injury.  Jerome  (Praef.  ad  JParal.) 
speaks  of  the  Greek  text  as  being  hopelessly  con- 
fused in  his  days,  and  assigns  this  as  a  reason  why 
he  made  a  new  translation  from  the  Hebrew.  How- 
ever, in  several  of  the  differences  between  the  text 
of  Chronicles  and  the  parallel  passages  in  the  other 
books,p  the  Chronicles  preserve  the  purest  and  truest 
reading,  as  e.  g.  2  Chr.  ix.  25,  compared  with  1  K. 
iv.  26;  1  Chr.  xi.  11  compared  with  2  Sam.  xxiii. 
8  ;  xxi.  12  comp.  with  2  Sam.  xxiv.  13 ;  2  Chr. 
xxvi.  1,  3,  8,  &c.  comp.  with  2  K.  xv.  1,  6,  &c. 
As  regards  the  language  of  these  books,  as  of 
Ezra,  Nehemiah,  Esther,  and  the  later  prophets,  it 
has  a  marked  Chaldee  colouring,  and  Gesenius  says 
of  them,  that  "  as  literary  works,  they  are  decidedly 
inferior  to  those  of  older  date"  (Introd.  to  Heb. 
Gramm.).  The  chief  Chaldaisms  are  the  use  of 
certain  words  not  found  in  old  Hebrew,  as  K'lTnn, 
j£>T  t)'lD,  &c,  or  of  words  in  a  different  sense,  as 
"ION,  !"Uy,  &C,  or  of  a  different  orthography,  as 
TH  for.^H,  nh  for  n'"l,  &c.,  and  the  inter- 
change of  N  and  n  at  the  end  and  at  the  beginning 
of  words,  and  other  peculiarities  pointed  out  by  Ge- 
senius and  others.    For  further  information  see  C.  F. 


e  For  a  careful  comparison  of  the  text  of  1  Chr.  xi. 
with  2  Sam.  v.  and  xxiii.,  see  Dr.  Kennicott's  disser 
tation. 


CHRONOLOGY 

Keil,  Apologet.  Versuch  it.  d.  Bucher  d.  Chronik ; 
C.  F.  Movers,  Kritische  Untersuchungen  u.  d.  Bibl. 
Chronik ;  Wolf's  Biblioth.  Hehr. ;  Kitto's  Bibl. 
Cyclop.  Chronicles,  and  other  works  cited  by 
the  abovenamed  writers.  [A.  C.  H.] 

CHRONOLOGY.  1.  Introduction.— The 
object  of  this  article  is  to  indicate  the  present  state 
of  biblical  chronology.  By  this  term  we  under- 
stand the  technical  and  historical  chronology  of  the 
Jews  and  their  ancestors  from  the  earliest  time  to 
the  close  of  the  New  Testament  Canon.  The  tech- 
nical division  must  be  discussed  in  some  detail,  the 
historical  only  as  far  as  the  return  from  Babylon, 
the  disputed  matters  of  the  period  following  that 
event  being  separately  treated  in  other  articles. 

The  character  of  the  inquiry  may  be  made 
clearer  by  some  remarks  on  the  general  nature  of 
the  subject.  Formerly  too  great  an  exactness  was 
hoped  for  in  the  determination  of  Hebrew  chrono- 
logy. Where  the  materials  were  not  definite  enough 
to  fix  a  date  within  a  few  years,  it  was  expected 
that  the  very  day  could  be  ascertained.  Hence 
arose  great  unsoundness  and  variety  of  results,  which 
ultimately  produced  a  general  feeling  of  distrust. 
At  present  critics  are  rather  prone  to  run  into  this 
latter  extreme  and  to  treat  this  subject  as  altogether 
vague  and  uncertain.  The  truth,  as  might  be 
expected,  lies  between  these  two  extreme  judg- 
ments. The  character  of  the  records  whence  we 
draw  our  information  forbids  us  to  hope  for  a  com- 
plete system.  The  Bible  does  not  give  a  complete 
history  of  the  times  to  which  it  refers:  in  its 
historical  portions  it  deals  with  special  and  de- 
tached periods.  The  chronological  information  is, 
therefore,  not  absolutely  continuous,  although  often, 
with  the  evident  purpose  of  forming  a  kind  of  con- 
nexion between  'these  different  portions,  it  has  a 
more  continuous  character  than  might  have  been 
expected.  It  is  rather  historical  than  strictly  chro- 
nological in  its  character,  and  thus  the  technical 
part  of  the  subject  depends,  so  far  as  the  Bible  is 
concerned,  almost  wholly  upon  inference.  It  might 
be  supposed  that  the  accuracy  of  the  information 
would  compensate  in  some  degree  for  its  scantiness 
and  occasional  want  of  continuity.  This  was, 
doubtless,  originally  the  case,  but  it  has  suffered  by 
designed  alteration  and  by  the  carelessness  of  copy- 
ists. It  is,  therefore,  of  the  highest  moment  to 
ascertain,  as  far  as  possible,  what  are  the  indications 
of  alterations  by  design,  and  the  character  of  the 
data  in  which  they  occur,  and  also  what  class  of 
data  have  been  shown  to  have  suffered  through 
the  carelessness  of  copyists.  Designed  alteration  of 
numbers  has  only  been  detected  iu  the  two  genealo- 
gical lists  of  Abraham's  ancestors  in  Genesis,  in 
which  the  character  of  the  differences  of  the  Hebrew 
text,  the  Septuagint,  and  the  Samaritan  Penta- 
teuch, is  such  as  to  indicate  separate  alteration  by 
design  of  two  out  of  the  three  records.  The  object 
oi  these  alterations  must  have  been  either  to  shorten 
or  to  lengthen  the  chronology.  With  the  same 
purpose  alterations  may  have  been  made  in  the 
prominent  detached  large  numbers  in  the  old  Tes- 
tament, and  even  in  the  smaller  numbers,  when 
forming  part  of  a  series,  or,  in  either  case,  in  the 
accompanying  words  determining  the  historical  place 
of  these  numbers.  Hence  there  is  great  value  in 
independent  evidence  in  the  New  Testament  and  in 
incidental  evidence  in  the  Old.  Of  the  former 
class  are  St.  Paul's  mentions  of  the  period  of  the 
Judges,  and  of  that  from  the  promise  to  Abraham 
until  the  Exodus,  especially  considered  in  connexion 


CHRONOLOGY 


311 


with  his  speaking  of  the  duration  of  Saul's  reign, 
as  to  which  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  are  silent.  Of 
the  latter  class  are  such  statements  as  Jephthah's 
of  the  300  years  that  the  Israelites  had  held  the 
country  of  the  Amorites  before  his  days,  and  the 
indications  of  time  afforded  by  the  growth  of  a 
tribe  or  family,  and  changes  in  national  character 
and  habits,  which  indications,  from  their  requiring 
careful  study  ami  acute  criticism,  have  been  greatly 
neglected.  The  evidence  of  the  genealogies  without 
numbers  is  weakened  not  so  much  by  designed  alteia- 
tion,  of  which  the  presence  of  the  Second  Cainan  in 
two  lists  affords  the  only  positive  instances,  but  by 
the  abundant  indications  they  show  of  the  careless- 
ness of  copyists.  Their  very  nature  also  renders 
them  guides  to  which  we  cannot  trust  since  it  appears 
that  they  may  be  in  any  case  broken  without  being 
technically  imperfect.  Even  were  this  not  the  case, 
it  must  be  proved  before  they  can  be  made  the 
grounds  of  chronological  calculation,  that  the  length 
of  man's  life  and  the  time  of  manhood  were  always 
what  they  now  are,  and  even  then  the  result  could 
only  be  approximative,  and  when  the  steps  were 
few,  very  uncertain.  This  inquiry  therefore  demands 
the  greatest  caution  and  judgment. 

2.  Technical  Chronology.  —  The  technical 
part  of  Hebrew  chronology  presents  great  difficulties. 
The  biblical  information  is  almost  wholly  inferential, 
although  in  many  cases  the  inferences  to  be  drawn 
are  of  a  very  positive  nature,  not  always  absolutely 
but  in  their  historical  application.  For  instance, 
although  the  particular  nature  of  each  year  of  the 
common  kind — for  there  appear  to  have  been  two 
years — cannot  be  fixed,  yet  the  general  or  average 
character  of  all  can  be  determined  with  a  great 
approach  to  exactness.  In  this  part  we  may  use 
with  more  than  ordinary  confidence  the  evidence 
of  the  earlier  Rabbinical  commentators,  who, 
in  such  matters,  could  scarcely  be  ill-informed. 
They  lived  near  to  the  times  at  which  all  the 
Jewish  observances  connected  with  the  calendar 
were  strictly  kept  in  the  country  for  which  they 
were  framed,  and  it  has  not  been  shown  that  they 
had  any  motive  for  misrepresentation.  We  can, 
however,  make  no  good  use  of  our  materials  if 
we  do  not  ascertain  what  character  to  expect  in 
Hebrew  technical.chronology.  There  is  no  reason 
to  look  for  any  great  change,  either  in  the  way  of 
advance  or  decline,  although  it  seems  probable  that 
the  patriarchal  division  of  time  was  somewhat  ruder 
than  that  established  in  connexion  with  the  Law, 
and  that,  after  the  time  of  Moses  until  the  establish- 
ment of  the  kingdom,  but  little  attention  was  paid 
to  science.  In  our  endeavour  to  ascertain  how 
much  scientific  knowledge  the  patriarchs  and  Is- 
raelites are  likely  to  have  had,  we  must  not  expert 
either  the  accuracy  of  modern  science  or  the  in- 
accuracy of  modern  ignorance.  As  to  scientific 
knowledge  connected  with  chronology,  particularly 
that  of  astronomy,  the  eases  of  the  Egyptians  and 
the  Chaldees  will  assist  us  to  form  a  judgment 
with  respect  to  the  Hebrews.  These  last,  how- 
ever, we  must  remember,  had  not  the  same  advan- 
tage of  being  wholly  settled,  nor  the  same  induce- 
ments of  national  religions  connected  with  the 
heavenly  bodies.  The  Arabs  "f  the  desert,  from 
somewhat  before  the  time  oi'  Mohammad — that  is, 
as  far  .-is  our  knowledge  of  them  in  this  respect  ex- 
tends— to  tin'  present  day,  afford  the  best  parallel. 
We  do  not  find  them  to  have  been  a  mathematical 
people  or  one  given  to  chronological  computation 
depending  on  astronomy,  but  to  have  regulated  their 


312 


CHRONOLOGY 


calendars  by  observation  alone.  It  might  have  been 
expected  that  their  observations  would,  from  their 
constant  recurrence,  have  acquired  an  extraordi- 
nary delicacy  and  gradually  given  place  to  compu- 
tations ;  but  such  we  do  not  find  to  have  been  the 
case,  and  these  observations  are  not  now  more  accu- 
rate than  would  be  the  earlier  ones  of  any  series  of 
the  kind.  The  same  characteristics  appear  to  have 
been  those  of  the  scientific  knowledge  and  practice, 
of  the  Hebrews.  We  have  no  reason  for  supposing 
that  they  had  attained,  either  by  discovery  or  by 
the  instruction  of  foreigners,  even  in  individual 
cases,  to  a  high  knowledge  of  mathematics  or  accu- 
racy of  chronological  computation  at  any  period  of 
their  history.  In  these  particulars  it  is  probable 
that  they  were  always  far  below  the  Egyptians  and 
the  Chaldees.  But  there  is  sufficient  evidence  that 
they  were  not  inattentive  observers  of  the  heavens 
in  the  allusions  to  stars  and  constellations  as  well- 
known  objects.  We  may  therefore  expect,  in  the  case 
of  the  Hebrews,  that  wherever  observation  could  take 
the  place  of  computation  it  would  be  employed, 
and  that  its  accuracy  would  not  be  of  more  than 
a  moderate  degree.  If,  for  instance,  a  new  moon 
were  to  be  observed  at  any  town,  it  would  be 
known  within  two  days  when  it  might  be  first 
seen,  and  one  of  the  clearest-sighted  •  men  of  the 
place  would  ascend  to  an  eminence  to  look  for  it. 
This  would  be  done  throughout  a  period  of  cen- 
turies without  any  close  average  for  computation 
being  obtained,  since  the  observations  would  not  be 
kept  on  record.  So  also  of  the  risings  of  stars 
and  of  the  times  of  the  equinoxes.  These  probable 
conclusions  as  to  the  importance  of  observation  and 
its  degree  of  accuracy  must  be  kept  in  view  in 
examining  this  section. 

Before  noticing  the  divisions  of  time  we  must 
speak  of  genealogies  ami  generations. 

It  is  commonly  supposed  that  the  genealogies 
given  in  the  Bible  are  mostly  continuous.  When, 
however,  we  come  to  examine  them  closely,  we 
find  that  many  are  broken  without  being  in  conse- 
quence technically  defective  as  Hebrew  genealogies. 
A  modern  pedigree  thus  broken  would  be  defective, 
but  the  principle  of  these  genealogies  must  have 
been  different.  A  notable  instance  is  that  of  the 
genealogy  of  our  Saviour  given  by  St.  Matthew. 
In  this  genealogy  Joram  is  immediately  followed  by 
Ozias,  as  if  his  son — Ahaziah,  Joaah,  and  Amaziah 
being  omitted  (Matt.  i.  8).  That  this  is  not  an 
accidental  omission  of  a  copyist  is  evident  from  the 
specification  of  the  number  of  generations  from 
Abraham  to  David,  from  David  to  the  Babylonish 
Captivity,  and  from  the  Babylonish  Captivity  to 
Christ,  in  each  case  fourteen  generations.  Pro- 
bably these  missing  names  were  purposely  left  out 
to  make  the  number  for  the  interval  equal  to  that 
of  the  other  intervals,  such  an  omission  being 
obvious  and  not  liable  to  cause  error.  In  Ezra's 
genealogy  (Ezr.  vii.  1-5)  there  is  a  similar  omis- 
sion, which  in  so  famous  a  line  can  scarcely  be 
attributed  to  the  carelessness  of  a  copyist.  There 
are  also  examples  of  a  man  being  called  the  son  of 
a  remote  ancestor  in  a  statement  of  a  genealo- 
gical form,  as  the  following:  "  Shebuel  the  son 
of  Gershon  [Gershom],  the  son  of  Moses"  (1  Chr, 
xxvi.  24),  where  a  contemporary  of  David  is 
placed  in  the  same  relation  to  Gershom  the  son  of 
Moses,  as  the  latter  is  to  Moses  himself.  That 
these  are  not  exceptional  instances  is  evident  from 
the  occurrence  of  examples  of  the  same  kind  in 
historical   narratives.     Thus   Jehu  is  called   "  the 


CHRONOLOGY 

son  of  Nimshi"  (1  K.  xix.  16;  2  K.  ix.  20;  2 
Chr.  xxii.  7),  as  well  as  "the  son  of  Jehoshaphat 
the  son  of  Nimshi"  (1  K.  ix.  2,  14).  In  the  same 
manner  Laban  is  called  "  the  son  of  Nahor  "  (Gen. 
xxix.  5),  whereas  he  was  his  grandson,  being  the 
son  of  Bethuel  (xxviii.  2,  5,  comp.  xsii.  20-23). 
We  cannot,  therefore,  venture  to  use  the  Hebrew 
genealogical  lists  to  compute  intervals  of  time 
except  where  we  can  prove  each  descent  to  be 
immediate.  But  even  if  we  can  do  this  we  have 
still  to  be  sure  that  we  can  determine  the  average 
length  of  eadh  generation.  {Historical  Chronology.) 
Ideler  remarks  that  Moses,  like  Herodotus,  reckons 
by  generations.  (Handbuch,  i.  p.  506.)  Certainly 
in  the  Pentateuch  generations  are  connected  with 
chronology  by  the  length  of  each  in  a  series  being 
indicated,  but  this  is  not  the  manner  of  Herodotus, 
who  reckons  by  generations,  assuming  an  average 
of  three  to  a  century  (ii.  142).  There  is  no  use 
of  a  generation  as  a  division  of  time,  in  the  Penta- 
teuch, unless,  with  some,  we  suppose  that  TH  in 
Gen.  xv.  16  is  so  used:  those,  however,  who  hold 
this  opinion  make  it  an  interval  of  a  hundred  years, 
since  it  would,  if  a  period  of  time,  seem  to  be  the 
fourth  part  of  the  400  years  of  verse  1 3 :  most 
probably,  however,  the  meaning  is  that  some  of  the 
fourth  generation  should  come  forth  from  Egypt. 
[Genealogy  ;  Generation.] 

We  have  now  to  speak  of  the  divisions  of  time, 
commencing  with  the  least.  There  is  no  evidence 
that  the  ancient  Hebrews  had  any  such  division 
smaller  than  an  hour : — 

Hour.  — The  hour  is  supposed  to  be  mentioned 
in  Daniel  (iii.  6,  15,  iv.  16,  30  A.  V.  19,  33, 
v.   5),   but  in  no  one  of  these  cases  is  a  definite 

period  of  time  clearly  intended  by  HVC^  Hr\V&y 
NFiy^'  Chald.,  the  word  employed.  The  Egyp- 
tians divided  the  day  and  night  into  hours  like  our- 
selves from  at  least  B.C.  cir.  1200.  (See  Lepsius, 
Chronologic  der  Aeg.  i.  p.  130.)  It  is  therefore  not 
improbable  that  the  Israelites  were  acquainted  with 
the  hour  from  an  early  period.  The  "  sun-dial  of 
Ahaz,"  whatever  instrument,  fixed  or  moveable,  it 
may  have  been,  implies  a  division  of  the  kind.  In 
the  N.  T.  we  find  the  same  system  as  the  modern, 
the  hours  being  reckoned  from  the  beginning  of  the 
Jewish  night  and  day.     [Hours.] 

Day. — For  the  civil  day  of  24  hours  we  find 
in  one  place  (Dan.  viii.  14)  the  term  ~lp3.  3"$, 
"  evening-morning,"  LXX.  vvx^fJ-epov  (also  in  2 
Cor.  xi.  25  A.  V.  "  a  night  and  a  day  ").  Whatever 
may  be  the  proper  meaning  of  this  Hebrew  term, 
it  cannot  be  doubted  here  to  signify  "  nights  and 
days."  ihe  common  word  for  day  as  distinguished 
from  night  is  also  used  for  the  civil  day,  or  else 
both  day  and  night  are  mentioned  to  avoid  vague- 
ness, as  in  the  case  of  Jonah's  "  three  days  and  three 
nights"  (Jon.ii.  l,A.V.i.l7;  comp.  Matt.  xii.  40). 
The  civil  day  was  divided  into  night  and  natural 
day,  the  periods  of  darkness  and  light  (Gen.  i.  5). 
It  commenced  with  night,  which  stands  first  in  the 
special  term  given  above.      The  night,   ?|?,   and 

therefore  the  civil  day,  is  generally  held  to  have 
begun  at  sunset.  Ideler,  however,  while  admitting 
that  this  point  of  time  was  that  of  the  commence- 
ment of  the  civil  day  among  all  other  nations  known 
to  us  which  followed  a  lunar  reckoning,  objects  to 
the  opinion  that  this  was  the  case  with  the  Jews. 
He  argues  in  favour  of  the  beginning  of  deep  night, 


CHRONOLOGY 

reasoning  that,  for  instance,  in  the  ordaining  of  the 
Day  of  Atonement,  on  the  10th  of  the  7th  month, 
it  is  said  "  in  the  ninth  [day]  of  the  month  at 
even,  from  even  unto  even,  shall  ye  celebrate 
(lit.  rest)  your  Sabbath  " — (Lev.  xxiii.  32),  where, 
it  the  civil  day  began  at  sunset,  it  would  have  been 
said  that  they  should  commence  the  observance  on 
the  evening  of  the  10th  day,  or  merely  on  the  10th 
day,  supposing  the  word  evening,  3iy,  to  mean  the 
Liter  part  of  our  afternoon.  He  cites,  as  probably 
supporting  this  view,  the  expression   D^"}!?!!    P3, 

"  between  the  two  evenings "  used  of  the  time 
of  offering  the  passover  and  the  daily  evening- 
sacrifice  (Ex.  xii.  6  ;  Num.  ix.  3,  xxviii.  4)  ;  for  the 
Pharisees,  whom  the  present  Jews  follow,  took  it  to  be 
the  time  between  the  9th  and  1 1th  hours  of  the  day, 
or  our  3  and  .i  p.m.,  although  the  Samaritans  and 
Karaites  supposed  it  to  be  the  time  between  sunset 
and  full  darkness,  particularly  on  account  of  the 
phrase  u'O^Tl  N'123,  "  when  the  sun  is  setting," 
used  in  a  parallel  passage  (Dent.  xvi.  6)  (see  Hand- 
bitch,  i.  pp.  482-484).  These  passages  and  expres- 
sions may,  however,  be  not  unreasonably  held  to 
support  the  common  opinion  that  the  civil  day  began 
at  sunset.  The  term  "  between  the  two  evenings  " 
can  scarcely  be  supposed  to  have  originally  indicated 
a  long  period:  a  special  short  period,  though 
scarcely  a  point,  the  time  of  sunset,  is  shown  to 
correspond  to  it.  This  is  a  natural  division  between, 
the  late  afternoon  when  the  sun  is  low,  and  the 
evening  when  his  light  has  not  wholly  disappeared, 
the  two  evenings  into  which  the  natural  evening 
would  be  cut  by  the  commencement  of  the  civil 
day  if  it  began  at  sunset.  There  is  no  difficulty  in 
the  command  that  the  observance  of  so  solemn  a  day 
as  that  of  atonement  should  commence  a  little  before 
the  true  beginning  of  the  civil  day  that  due  prepara- 
tion might  be  made  for  the  sacrifices.  In  Judaea, 
where  the  duration  of  twilight  is  very  short  at  all 
times,  the  most  natural  division  would  be  at  sunset. 
The  natural  day,  DV,  probably  was  held  to  com- 
mence at  sunrise,  morning-twilight  being  included 
in  the  last  watch  of  the  night,  according  to  the 
old  as  well  as  the  later  division ;  some,  however, 
made  the  morning-watch  part  of  the  day.  Four 
natural  periods,  smaller  than  the  civil  day,  are 
mentioned.  These  are  2~iy,  evening,  and  ~\p2 
morning,  of  which  there  is  frequent  mention,  and 
the  less  usual  D?"l!"l¥,  "  the  two  lights,"  as  though 
••  double  light,"  noun,  and  n?*?n  ITlVri,  or  —  »Sn 
"  half  the  night,"  midnight.  No  one  of  these  with 
a  people  not  given  to  astronomy  seems  to  indicate 
a  point  of  time,  but  all  to  designate  periods,  even- 
ing and  morning  being,  however,  much  longer 
than  noon  and  midnight.  The  night  was  divided 
into  watches  (n"nOB>K).     In  the  0.  T.  but  two 

are  expressly  mentioned,  and  we  have  to  infer  the 
existence  of  a  third,  the  first  watch  of  the  night." 

The  middle  watch  (nro'-rin  rnbi,;Nri)  occurs  in 


CHRONOLOGY 


313 


1  In  Lam.  ii.  19,     m"lCL"N  t'JO  of  course  refers 

to,  without  absolutely  designating,  the  first  watch. 

b  Ideler  corrects  Gesenius  (Sandwort,  s.  v.  J"12L", 

for  affirming  that  the  usual  meaning-,  "sabbath,"  is 
satisfactory  in  Lev.  xxiii.  15.  In  the  Thes.  (s.  p.), 
Kocliger,  possibly  on  the  authority  of  Gesenius,  admits 


Judg.  vii.  19,  where  the  connexion  of  watches  with 
military  affairs  is  evident — •"  And  Gideon  and  the 
hundred  men  that  [were]  with  him  went  down 
unto  the  extremity  of  the  camp  at  the  beginning  of 
the  middle  watch ;  [and]  they  had  but  set  the 
watchmen  D^P^TI  ;"  and  the  morning -watch 
("IpSn  rnbtl'K)    is   mentioned    in    Ex.    xiv.    24 

and  1  Sam.  xi.  11;  in  the  former  case  in  the 
account  of  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea,  in  the 
latter,  in  that  of  Saul's  surpr'se  of  the  Ammonites 
when  he  relieved  Jabesh-gilead.  Some  Rabbins  hold 
that  there  were  four  watches  (Ilandbuch,  i.  p.  486). 
In  the  N.  T.  four  night-watches  are  mentioned, 
which  were  probably  adopted  from  the  Romans  as 
a  modification,  of  the  old  system.  All  four  occur 
together  in  Mark  xiii.  35.  oipe,  the  late  watch ; 
/xecrovvKTiov,  midnight ;  aAeKTpocpwvia,  the  cock- 
crowing  ;  and  Trpau,  the  early  watch.  [Day, 
Night,  Watches  of  Night.] 

Week  (y-12K\  a  hebdomad). — The  Hebrew  week 

was  a  period  of  seven  days  ending  with  the  Sabbath  ; 
therefore  it  could  not  have  been  a  division  of  the 
month,  which  was  lunar,  without  intercalation. 
But  there  was  no  such  intercalation  since  the  Sabbath 
was  to  be  every  seventh  day,  its  name  is  used  for 
week,h  and  weeks  are  counted  on  without  any  addi- 
tional day  or  days.  The  mention  together  of  Sabbaths 
and  new  moons  proves  nothing  but  that  the  two 
observances  were  similar,  the  one  closing  the  week, 
the  other  commencing  the  month.  The  week, 
whether  a  period  of  seven  days,  or  a  quarter  of  the 
month,  was  of  common  use  in  antiquity.  The 
Egyptians,  however,  were  without  it,c  dividing  their 
month  of  30  days  into  decads  as  did  the  Athenians. 
The  Hebrew  week  therefore  cannot  have  been 
adopted  from  Egypt ;  probably  both  it  and  the 
Sabbath  were  used  and  observed  by  the  patriarchs. 
[Week;  Sabbath.] 

Month  (ITV,  Vnh,  WW  Ehh).— The  months 

by  which  the  time  is  measured  in  the  account  of 
the  Flood  would  seem  to  be  of  30  days  each,  pro- 
bably forming  a  year  of  360  days,  for  the  1st,  2nd, 
7th,  and  10th  months  are  mentioned  (Gen.  viii.  13, 
vii.  11,  viii.  14,  4,  5).  Ideler  contests  this,  arguing 
that  as  the  water  first  began  to  sink  after  150  days 
(and  then  had  been  15  cubits  above  all  high  moun- 
tains), it  must  have  sunk  for  some  days  ere  the  Ark 
could  have  rested  on  Ararat,  so  that  the  second 
date  must  be  more  than  150  days  later  than  the 
first  (Ilandbuch,  i.  pp.  69,  70,  478,  479).  This 
argument  depends  upon  the  meaning  of  "  high 
mountains,"  and  upon  the  height  of  those—"  the 
mountains  of  Ararat  "  (viii.  4),  on  which  the  Ark 
rested,  questions  connected  with  that  of  the  uni- 
versality of  the  Flood.  [Flood.]  On  the  other 
hand  it  must  lie  urged  that  the  exact  correspondence 
of  the  interval  to  five  months  of  30  days  each,  and 
the  use  of  a  year  of  360  days,  a  tact  strangely 
ignored  by  Ideler,  in  prophetic  passages  of  both 
Testaments,  arc  of  no  slight  weight.  That  the 
months  from  the  riving  of  the  I. aw  until  tin-  time 


that  the  signification  is  perhaps  "week."  Ideler's 
argument  seems  however  unanswerable  (Sandbueh, 
i.  p.   181,  note  1). 

0  The  passage  of  Diem  Cassias  (xxxvii.  10),  in  itself 

ambiguous,  is  of  no  value  against  the  strong  negative 
evidence  of  the  monuments.  (See  Lepsius,  Chrono' 
logie  der  Aeg.  i.  pp.  131-133.) 


314 


CHEONOLOGY 


of  the  Second  Temple,  when  we  have  certain  know- 
ledge of  their  character,  were  always  lunar,  appears 
from  the  command  to  keep  new-moons,  and  from 
the  unlikelihood  of  a  change  in  the  calendar. 
These  lunar  months  have  been  supposed  to  have 
been  always  alternately  of  29  and  30  days.  Their 
average  length  would  of  course  be  a  lunation,  or 
a  little  (44')  above  29j  days,  and  therefore  they 
would  in  general  be  alternately  of  29  and  30  days, 
but  it  is  possible  that  occasionally  months  might 
occur  of  28  and  31  days,  if,  as  is  highly  probable, 
the  commencement  of  each  was  strictly  determined 
by  observation :  that  observation  was  employed 
for  this  purpose  is  distinctly  affirmed  in  the  Ba- 
bylonian Talmud  of  the  practice  of  the  time  at 
which  it  was  written,  when,  however,  a  month 
was  not  allowed  to  be  less  than  29,  or  more  than 
30  days  in  length.  The  first  day  of  the  month 
is  called  KHII,  "new  moon;"  LXX.  veofirivia., 
from   the  root   CHIl  :  "  it  was  new  "  (as  to  the 

primary  sense  of  which,  see  Month),  and  in  speak- 
ing of  the  first  day  of  a  month  this  word  was  some- 
times used  with  the  addition  of  a  number  for  the 
whole  expression,  "  in  such  a  month  on  the  first 
day,"  as  fTTH  QV2 ^Wn  BHh3.     "  On 

the  third  new-moon  ....  on  that  day,"  badly 
rendered  by  the  LXX."  ToO  5e  fxr]pbs  rov  rpirov 
.  .  .  rrj  7]/j.4pa  ravrri  (Ex.  xix.  1):  hence  the  word 
came  to  signify  month,  though  then  it  was  sometimes 
qualified  as  WD''  KHl"!.     The  new-moon  was  kept 

as  a  sacred  festival.  [Festivals.]  In  the  Penta- 
teuch and  Josh.,  Judg.,  and  Ruth,  we  find  but  one 
mouth  mentioned  by  a  special  name,  the  rest 
being  called  according  to  their  order.  The  month 
with  a  special  name  is  the  first,  which  is  called 

I'QNH  KHH  (LXX.  fjLrjv  rSiv  veW),  "  the  month 

of  ears  of  corn,"  or  "  Abib,"  that  is  the  month 
in  which  the  ears  of  corn  became  full  or  ripe,  and 
on  the  16th  day  of  which,  the  second  day  of  the 
feast  of  unleavened  bread,  ripe  ears,  3*0£<,  were  to 

be  offered  (Lev.  ii.  14;  comp.  xxiii.  10,  11,  14). 
This  undoubted  derivation  shows  how  monstrous  is 
the  idea  that  Abib  comes  from  the  Egyptian  Epiphi. 
In  1  K.  three  other  names  of  months  occur,  Zif,  IT 

or  VT,  the  second,  Ethanim,  D'OIVN,  the  seventh, 
and  Bui,  ?13,  the  eighth.  These  names  appear,  like 
that  of  Abib,  to  be  connected  with  the  phenomena  of 
a  tropical  year.  No  other  names  are  found  in  any 
book  prior  to  the  captivity,  but  in  the  books  written 
after  the  return  the  later  nomenclature  still  in  use 
appears.  This  is  evidently  of  Babylonian  origin, 
as  the  Jews  themselves  affirm.     [Months.] 

Tear  (J\W). — It  has  been  supposed,  on  account 

of  the  dates  in  the  narrative  of  the  Flood,  as  already 
mentioned,  that  iu  Noah's  time  there  was  a  year 
of  360  days.  These  dates  might  indeed  be  ex- 
plained in  accordance  with  a  year  of  365  days. 
The  evidence  of  the  prophetic  Scriptures  is  however 
conclusive  as  to  the  knowledge  of  a  year  of  the 
former  length.  The  time  times  and  an  half  of  Dan. 
(vii.  25,  xii.  7),  where  time  means  year  (see  xi.  13), 
cannot  be  doubted  to  be  equivalent  expressions  to  the 
42  months  and  1260  davs  of  Rev.  (xi.  2,  3,  xii.  6) 
for  360  X3i  =  1260;  and  30x42  =  1260.  We 
have  also  the  testimony  of  ancient  writers  that  such 
a  year  was  known  to  some  nations,  so  that  it  is 
almost  certain  that  the  year  of  Noah  was  of  this 


CHEONOLOGY 

length. — The  characteristics  of  the  year  instituted 
at  the  Exodus  can  be  clearly  determined,  though  we 
cannot   absolutely   fix   those   of  any   single    year. 
There  can  be  no  doubt  that  it  was  essentially  tro- 
pical, since  certain  observances  connected  with  the 
produce  of  the  land  were  fixed  to  particular  davs. 
It  is  equally  clear  that   the  months  were  lunar, 
each  commencing  with  a  new  moon.     It  would  ap- 
pear therefore  that   there  must   have   been   some 
mode  of  adjustment.     To  ascertain  what  this  was,  it 
is  necessary  first  to  decide  when  the  year  commenced. 
On  the   16th  day  of  the  month  Abib,  as  already 
mentioned,  ripe  ears  of  corn  were  to  be  offered  as 
first-fruits  of  the  harvest   (Lev.  ii.  14,  xxiii.  10, 
11).     The  reaping  of  the  barley  commenced  the 
harvest  (2  Sam.  xxi.  9),  the  wheat  following  (Ruth 
ii.  23).     Josephus  expressly  says  that  the  offering 
was  of  barley  {Ant.  iii.  10,  §5).      It  is  therefore 
necessary  to  find  when  the  barley  becomes  ripe  in  Pa- 
lestine.    According  to  the  observation  of  travellers 
the  barley  is  ripe,  in  the  wannest  parts  of  the  coun- 
try, in  the  first  days  of  April.     The  barley-harvest 
therefore  commences  about  half  a  month  after  the 
vernal  equinox,  so  that  the  year  would  begin  at 
about  that  tropical  point  were  it  not  divided  into 
lunar  months.     We  may  conclude  that  the  nearest 
new  moon  about  or  after  the  equinox,  but  not  much 
before,   was  chosen  as  the  commencement  of  the 
year.     Ideler,  whom  we  have  thus  far  followed,  as 
to  this  year,  concludes  that  the  right  new  moon 
was  chosen  through  'observation  of  the  forwardness 
of  the  barley-crops  in  the  wanner  districts  of  the 
country  (H<indbuch,  i.  p.  490).     There  is  however 
this  difficulty,  that  the  different  times  of  barley- 
harvest  in  various  parts  would  have  been  liable  to 
cause  confusion.     It  seems,  therefore,  not  unlikely 
that  the  Hebrews  adopted  the  surer  means  of  deter- 
mining their  new  year's  day  by  observations  of  he- 
liacal risings  or  similar  stellar  phenomena  known 
to  mark  the  right  time  before  the  barley-harvest. 
Certainly  the   ancient    Egyptians  and    the  Arabs 
made  use  of  such  means.     The  method  of  intercala- 
tion can  only  have  been  that  which  obtained  after 
the  Captivity — the  addition  of  a  thirteenth  month, 
whenever  the  twelfth  ended  too  long   before  the 
equinox  for  the  first-fruits  of  the  harvest  to   be 
offered  in  the  middle  of  the  month  following,  and 
the  similar  offerings  at  the  times  appointed.     This 
method  would  be  in  accordance  with  the  permission 
granted  to  postpone  the  celebration  of  the  Passover 
in  the  case  of  any  one  who  was  either  legally  un- 
clean  or  journeying   at   a   distance,  for  a  whole 
month  to  the  14th  day  of  the  second  month  (Num. 
ix.  9-13),  of  which  permission  we  find  Hezekiah 
to  have  availed  himself  for  both  the  reasons  allowed, 
because  the  priests  were  not  sufficiently  sanctified 
and  the  people  were  not  collected  (2  Chr.  xxx.  1-3, 
15).     The  later  Jews  had  two  beginnings  to  the 
year,  or,  as  it  is  commonly  but  somewhat  inaccu- 
rately said,  two  years.     At  the  time  of  the  Second 
Temple  (as  Ideler  admits)  these  two  beginnings  ob- 
tained, the  seventh  month  of  the  civil   reckoning 
being  Abib,  the  first  of  the  sacred.     Hence  it  has 
been  held  that  the  institution  at  the  time  of  the 
Exodus  was  merely  a  change  of  commencement,  and 
not  the  introduction  of  a  new  year ;  and  also  that 
from  this  time  there  were  the  two  beginnings.    The 
former  opinion  is  at  present  purely   hypothetical, 
and  has  been  too  much  mixed  up  with  the  latter, 
for  which,  on  the  contrary,  there  is  some  evidence. 
The   strongest   point    in   this   evidence,   although 
strangely  unnoticed  by  Ideler  as  such,  is  the  cir- 


CHRONOLOGY 

eumstance  that  the  sabbatical  and  jubilee  years 
commenced  in  the  seventh  month,  and  doubtless  on 
its  first  day.  That  the  jubilee  year  commenced  in 
this  month  is  distinctly  stated,  since  its  solemn  pro- 
clamation was  on  the  loth  day  of  the  seventh  month, 
the  Day  of  Atonement  (Lev.  xxv.  9,  10)  ;  and  as 
this  year  immediately  followed  a  sabbatical  y ear,  the 
latter  must  have  commenced  in  the  same  manner. 
As  however  these  were  whole  years,  it  must  be  sup- 
posed that  they  began  on  the  first  day  of  the 
month,  the  Day  of  Atonement  standing  in  the 
same  relation  to  their  beginning,  and  perhaps  to 
the  civil  beginning  of  the  year,  as  did  the  Passover 
to  the  sacred  beginning.  It  is  perfectly  clear  that 
this  would  be  the  most  convenient,  if  not  the  neces- 
sary, commencement  of  single  years  of  total  cessa- 
tion from  the  labours  of  the  field,  since  each  year 
so  commencing  would  comprise  the  whole  round  of 
these  occupations  in  a  regular  order  from  seed-time 
to  harvest,  and  from  harvest  to  vintage  and  gathering 
of  fruit.  This  is  indeed  plain  from  the  injunction  as 
to  both  Sabbatical  and  Jubilee  years  apart  from  the 
mention  of  the  Day  of  Atonement,  unless  we  suppose, 
and  this  would  be  very  unwarrantable,  that  the  in- 
junction follows  the  order  of  theseasonsof  agriculture, 
but  that  the  observance  did  not.  It  might  seem, 
at  first  sight,  that  the  seventh  month  was  chosen, 
as  itself  of  a  kind  of  sabbatical  character;  but  this 
does  not  explain  the  fact  that  Sabbatical  and  Jubilee 
years  were  natural  years,  nor  would  the  seventh  of 
twelve  months  be  analogous  to  every  seventh  year. 
We  can  therefore  come  to  no  other  conclusion  but 
that  for  the  purposes  of  agriculture  the  year  was 
held  to  begin  with  the  seventh  month,  while  the 
months  were  still  reckoned  from  the  sacred  com- 
mencement in  Abib.  There  are  two  expressions 
used  with  respect  to  the  time  of  the  celebration  of 
the  Feast  of  Ingathering  on  the  15th  day  of  the 
seventh  month,  one  of  which  leads  to  the  conclu- 
sion at  which  we  have  just  arrived,  while  the  other 
is  in  accordance  with  it.     The  first  of  these  speaks 

of  this  feast  as  !"0£TI  riNV3,  "in  the  going  out" 
or  -end  "  of  the  year"  (Ex.  xxiii.  16),  and  the 
second,  as  i"l3t>'n  riD-lpFl,  "  [at]  the  change  of  the 
year"  (Ex.  xxxiv.  22),  a  vague  expression,  as  far 
as  we  can  understand  it,  but  one  fully  consistent 
with  the  idea  of  the  turning-point  of  a  natural 
year.  By  the  term  i"IS1pn  the  Rabbins  denote  the 
commencement  of  each  of  the  four  seasons  into 
which  their  year  is  divided  (Handbnch,  i.  pp.  550, 
551).  Evidence  corroborative  of  our  conclusion  is 
also  afforded  by  the  similar  distinctive  character  of 
the  first  and  seventh  months  in  the  calendar  with 
respect  to  their  observances.  The  one  was  distin- 
guished  by  the  Feast  of  Unleavened  Bread  from  the 
15th  to  the  21st  inclusive;  the  other,  by  that  of 
Tabernacles,  from  the  15th  to  the  22nd.  There  is 
besides  this  some  evidence  in  the  special  sanctifica- 
tion,  above  that  of  the  ordinary  new  moon,  of  the 
first  day  of  the  seventh  month,  which  in  the  blow- 
ing of  trumpets  bears  a  resemblance  to  the  celebra- 
tion of  the  commencement  of  the  jubilee  year  on  the 
Day  of  Atonement.  On  these  grounds  we  hold  that 
there  were  two  beginnings  to  the  year  from  the  time 
of  the  Exodus.      [YEAR.] 

Seasons. — The  ancient  Hebrews  do  not  appear  to 
have  divided  their  year  into  fixed  seasons.  We  find 
mention  of  the  natural  seasons,  pp.,  "  summer," 
and  rp!"|;  '"  winter,"  which  are  used  for  the  whole 


CHRONOLOGY 


315 


year  in  the  expression  Sp'ffl  yp  (Ps.  lxxiv.  17  ; 

Zech.  xiv.  8 ;  and  perhaps  Gen.  viii.  22).  The  former 
of  these  properly  means  the  time  of  cutting  fruits, 
and  the  latter,  that  of  gathering  fruits  ;  the  one  re- 
ferring to  the  early  fruit  season,  the  other  to  the 
late  one.  Then-  true  significations  are  therefore 
rather  summer  and  autumn  than  summer  and 
winter.  There  can  be  no  doubt,  however,  that  they 
came  to  signify  the  two  grand  divisions  of  the 
year,  both  from  their  use  together  as  the  two 
seasons,  and  from  the  mention  of  "  the  winter 
house,"  Cpn!V)V3,  and  "  the  summer  house," 
I'^pn  ]"P3  (Am.  iii.  15).     The  latter  evidence  is 

the  stronger,  since  the  winter  is  the  time  in  Palestine 
when  a  palace  or  house  of  different  construction 
would  be  needed  to  the  light  summer  pavilion,  and 
in  the  only  passage  besides  that  referred  to  in  which 
the  winter-house  is  mentioned,  we  read  that  Jehoi- 
akim  "  sat  in  the  winter-house  in  the  ninth  month :" 
that  is,  almost  at  mid-winter :  "  and  [there  was  a 
fire]  on  the  hearth  burning  before  him  "  (Jer.  xxxvi. 
22).  It  is  probable,  however,  that  Ppn,  when  used 
without  reference  to  the  year,  as  in  Job  xxix.  4, 
has  its  original  signification.     The  phrase  DlTl  "lp 

"  cold  ami  heat,"  in  Gen.  viii.  22,  is  still  more 
general,  and  cannot  be  held  to  indicate  more  than 
the  great  alternations"  of  temperature,  which,  like 
those  of  day  and  night,  were  promised  not  to 
cease.  (Comp.  Ideler,  Handbuch,  i.  p.  494-.)  There 
are  two  agricultural  seasons  of  a  more  special  cha- 
racter than  the  preceding   in    their  ordinary  use. 

These  are  JHT,  "  seed-time,"  and  "VYp,  "  harvest." 

Ideler  (loc.  cit.)  makes  these  equal  to  the  foregoing 
seasons  when  similarly  used  together ;  but  he  has 
not  proved  this,  and  the  passage  he  quotes  (Gen. 
I.  c.)  cannot  be  held  to  allord  any  evidence  of  the 
kind,  until  some  other  two  terms  in  it  are  proved 
to  be  strictly  correspondent.     [Seasons.] 

Festivals  and  holy  days. — Besides  the  sabbaths 
and  new  moons,  there  were  four  great  festivals  and 
a  fast  in  the  ancient  Hebrew  year,  the  Feast  of  the 
Passover,  that  of  Weeks,  that  of  Trumpets,  the  Day 
of  Atonement,  and  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles.  The 
Feast  of  the  Passover,  (IDS,  was  properly  only  the 
time  of  the  sacrifice  and  eating  of  the  paschal  lamb, 
tb^at  is,  the  evening,   D^iyn  |*3,  "  between  the 

two  evenings"  (Lev.  xxiii.  5) — a  phrase  previously 
considered — of  the  14th  day  of  the  first  month,  and 
the  night  following, — the  Feast  of  Unleavened  Bread, 
DV'itSn  JPi    commencing  on  the  morning  of  the 

15th  day  of  the  month,  and  lasting  seven  days  until 
the  21st  inclusive.  The  15th  and  '-'1st  days  of  the 
month  were  sabbaths,  that  is,  holy  days.  [Pass- 
over.]  The  Feast  of  Weeks,  rnj?3^  Jn,  or  Pen- 
tecost, was  kept  at  the  close  of  seven  weeks,  counted 
tii mi  the  day  inclusive  following  the  ltlth  of  the 
1st  month.  Hence  its  name  means  the  feast  of 
seven  weeks,  as  indeed  it  is  called  in  Tob.  (0710 
|7tto  e/Boo/uaoW,  ii.  1).  As  the  ears  cf  barley  as 
first-fruits  of  the  harvest  were  offered  on  the  16th 
day  of  the  1st  mouth,  so  on  this  day  thanksgiving 
was  paid  for  the  blessing  of  the  harvest,  and 
first-fruits  of  wheat  offered  as  well  as  of  fruits: 
heme  the  names  "I^Vpil  31*1,  Feast  of  Harvest,  and 
Cm-133n  D'l\  Day  of  First-fruits.— The  Feast  of 


316 


CHRONOLOGY 


Trumpets,  nj?1"iri  Di"1  (lit.  of  the  sound  of  the 
trumpet),  also  called  HV-IIPl  ]TQ)  ftn2B>,  "  a 
great  sabbath  of  celebration  by  the  sound  of  the 
trumpet,"  was  the  1st  day  of  the  7th  month, 
the  civil  commencement  of  the  year.  The  Day  of 
Atonement,  D^"IS3n  DV,  was  the  10th  day  of  the 

7th  month.  It  was  a  sabbath,  that  is  a  holy  day,  and 
also  a  fast,  the  only  one  in  the  Hebrew  year  before 
the  Babylonish  Captivity.  Upon  this  day  the  high- 
priest  made  an  offering  of  atonement  for  the  nation. 
This  annual  solemn  rite  seems  more  appropriate  to 
the  commencement  than  to  the  middle  of  the  year ; 
and  the  time  of  its  celebration  thus  affords  some 
evidence  in  favour  of  the  theory  of  a  double  begin- 
ning.— The  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  ni3pH  J  ft,  was 

kept  in  the  7th  month,  from  the  15th  to  the  22nd 
days  inclusive.  Its  chief  days  were  the  first  and  last, 
which  were  sabbaths.  Its  name  was  taken  from  the 
people  dwelling  in  tabernacles,  to  commemorate  the 
Exodus.     It  was  otherwise  called  CPDXH  Jn,  "  the 

1        *     T    T 

feast  of  gathering,"  because  it  was  also  instituted 
as  a  time  of  thanksgiving  for  the  end  of  the  gather- 
ing of  fruit  and  of  the  vintage.  The  small  number 
and  simplicity  of  these  primitive  Hebrew  festivals 
and  holy  days  is  especially  worthy  of  note.  It  is 
also  observable  that  they  are  not  ot  au  astronomical 
character ;  and  that  when  they  are  connected  with 
nature,  it  is  as  directing  the  gratitude  of  the  people 
to  Him  who,  in  giving  good  things,  leaves  not  Him- 
self without  witness.  In  later  times  many  holy  days 
were  added.  Of  these  the  most  worthy  of  remark 
are  the  Feast  of  Purim,  or  "  Lots,"  commemorating 
the  deliverance  of  the  Jews  from  Hainan's  plot, 
the  Feast  of  the  Dedication,  recording  the  cleansing 
and  re-dedication  of  the  Temple  by  Judas  Macca- 
baeus,  and  fasts  on  the  anniversaries  of  great 
national  misfortunes  connected  with  the  Baby- 
lonish Captivity.  These  last  were  doubtless  in- 
stituted during  that  period  (comp.  Zech.  vii.  1-5). 
[Festivals,  &c] 

Sabbatical  and  Jubilee  Tears. — The  sabbatical 
year,  ilEO^'n  T\2ti},  "  the  fallow  year "  or  pos- 
sibly "  year  of  remission,"   or  ntSDt^  alone,  also 

called  a  "  sabbath,"  and  a  "  great  sabbath,"  was  an 
institution  of  strictly  the  same  character  as  the 
sabbath, — a  year  of  rest,  like  the  day  of  rest.  It 
has  not  been  sufficiently  noticed  that  as  rfte 
day  has  a  side  of  physical  necessity  with  reference 
to  man,  so  the  year  has  a  side  of  physical 
necessity  with  reference  to  the  earth.  Every 
seventh  year  appears  to  be  a  very  suitable  time 
for  the  recurrence  of  a  fallow  year,  on  agricul- 
tural grounds.  Besides  the  rest  from  the  labours 
of  the  field  and  vineyard,  there  was  in  this  year 
to  be  remission,  temporary  or  absolute,  of  debts 
and  obligations  among  the  people.  The  sabbatical 
year  must  have  commenced  at  the  civil  beginning 
of  the  year,  with  the  7th  month,  as  we  have  already 
shown.  Although  doubtless  held  to  commence  with 
the  1st  of  the  month,  its  beginning  appears  to  have 
been  kept  at  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  (Deut.  xxxi. 
10),  while  that  of  the  jubilee  year  was  kept  on  the 
Day  of  Atonement.  This  institution  seems  to  have 
been  greatly  neglected.  This  was  prophesied  by 
Moses,  who  speaks  of  the  desolation  of  the  land  as 
an  enjoying  the  sabbaths  which  had  not  been  kept 
(Lev.  xxvi.  34,  35,  43).  The  seventy  years'  cap- 
tivity is  also  spoken  of  in  2  Chr.  (xxxvi.  21)  as 


CHRONOLOGY 

an  enjoying  sabbath  ;  but  this  may  !  ie  on  account 
of  the  number  being  sabbatical,  as  ten  times  seven, 
which  indeed  seems  to  be  indicated  in  the  passage. 
After  the  lapse  of  seven  sabbatical  periods,  or  forty- 
nine  years,  a  year  of  jubilee  was  to  be  kept,  imme- 
diately following  the  last  sabbatical  year.  This 
was  called  731*11  312B',  "  the  year  of  the  trumpet," 
or  ;2V  alone,  the  latter  word  meaning  either  the 
sound  of  the  trumpet  or  the  instrument  itself, 
because  the  commencement  of  the  year  was  announced 
on  the  Day  of  Atonement  by  sound  of  trumpet.  It 
was  similar 'to  the  sabbatical  year  in  its  character, 
although  doubtless  yet  more  important.  In  the 
jubilee  year  debts  were  to  be  l  emitted,  and  lands  were 
to  be  restored  to  their  former  owners.  It  is  obvious 
from  the  words  of  the  law  (Lev.  xxv.  8-11)  that  this 
year  followed  every  seventh  sabbatical  year,  so  that 
the  opinion  that  it  was  always  identical  with  a  sab- 
batical year  is  untenable.  There  is  a  further  question 
as  to  the  length  of  each  jubilee  period,  if  we  may 
use  the  term,  some  holding  that  it  had  a  duration 
of  5*0,  but  others  of  49  years.  The  latter  opinion 
does  not  depend  upon  the  supposition  that  the 
seventh  sabbatical  year  was  the  jubilee,  since  the 
jubilee  might  be  the  first  year  of  the  next  seven 
years  after.  That  such  was  the  case  is  rendered 
most  probable  by  the  analogy  of  the  weekly  sabbath, 
and  the  custom  of  the  Jews  in  the  first  and  second 
centuries  B.C.  ;  although  it  must  be  noted  that, 
according  to  Maimonides,  the  jubilee  period  was  of 
50  years,  the  51st  year  commencing  a  new  period, 
and  that  the  same  writer  mentions  that  the  Jews 
had  a  tradition  that  after  the  destruction  of  the  first 
Temple  only  sabbatical  years,  and  no  jubilee  years, 
were  observed.  (Ideler,  Handbuch,  i.  pp.  503,  504.) 
The  testimony  of  Josephus  does  not  seem  to  us  at  all 
conclusive,  although  Ideler  (I.  c.)  holds  it  to  be  so  ; 
for  the  expression  ravra  irevT-iiKovTa  /xey  ecxTtv 
tri]  to.  iravra  (Ant.  iii.  12,  §3)  cannot  be  held 
to  prove  absolutely  that  the  jubilee  year  was 
not  the  first  year  of  a  sabbatical  period  instead 
of  standing  between  two  such  periods.  It  is  im- 
portant to  ascertain  when  the  first  sabbatical  year 
ought  to  have  been  kept ;  whether  the  sabbatical 
and  jubilee  periods  seem  to  have  been  continuous ; 
what  positive  record  there  is  of  any  sabbatical  or 
jubilee  years  having  been  kept;  and  what  indi- 
cations there  are  of  a  reckoning  by  such  years  of 
either  kind.  1.  It  can  scarcely  be  contested  that  the 
first  sabbatical  year  to  be  kept  after  the  Israelites 
had  entered  Canaan  would  be  about  the  fourteenth. 
(Jennings,  Jewish  Antiquities,  bk.  iii.  cap.  9 :  and  infr. 
Historical  Chronology.)  It  is  possible  that  it  might 
have  been  somewhat  earlier  or  later  ;  but  the  narra- 
tive will  not  admit  of  much  latitude.  2.  It  is  clear 
that  any  sabbatical  anil  jubilee  years  kept  from  the 
time  of  Joshua  until  the  destruction  of  the  first 
Temple,  would  have  been  reckoned  from  the  first  one, 
but  it  may  be  questioned  if  any  kept  after  the  return 
would  be  counted  in  the  same  manner:  from  the 
nature  of  the  institutions,  it  is  rather  to  be  supposed 
that  the  reckoning,  in  the  second  case,  would  be 
from  the  first  cultivation  of  the  country  after  its  re- 
occupation.  The  recorded  sabbatical  years  do  not 
enable  us  to  test  this  supposition,  because  we  do  not 
know  exactly  the  year  of  return,  or  that  of  the  first 
cultivation  of  the  country.  The  recorded  dates  of 
sabbatical  years  would  make  that  next  alter  the 
return  to  commence  in  B.C.  528,  and  be  current  in 
B.C.  527,  which  would  make  the  first  year  of  the 
period  B.C.  534-3,  which  would  not  improbably  be 


CHRONOLOGY 

the  first  year  of  cultivation  :  but  in  the  case  of  so 
short  a  period  this  cannot  be  regarded  as  evidence 
of  much  weight.  3.  There  is  no  positive  record  of 
any  jubilee  year  having  been  kept  at  any  time.  The 
dates  of  three  sabbatical  years  have  however  been 
preserved.  These  were  current  B.C.  163,  135,  and 
37,  and  therefore  commenced  in  each  case  about 
three  months  earlier  than  the  beginning  of  these 
Julian  years.  (Jos.  Ant.  xii.  9,  §5;  xiii.  8,  §1  ; 
xiv.  16,  §2  ;  xv. 1,  §2 ;  B.  J.  i.  2,  §4;  and  1  Mace, 
vi.  49,  53.)  4.  There  are  some  chronological  in- 
dications in  the  0.  T.  that  may  not  unreasonably 
be  supposed  to  be  connected  with  the  sabbatical 
system.  The  prophet  Ezekiel  dates  his  first  pro- 
phecy of  those  in  the  book  "  in  the  thirtieth  year," 
&c,  "  which  [was]  the  fifth  year  of  king  Jehoi- 
achin's  captivity"  (i.  2);  thus  apparently  dating 
in  the  former  case  from  a  better  known  era  than 
that  of  Jehoiachin's  captivity,  which  he  employs 
in  later  places,  without  however  in  general  again 
describing  it.  This  date  of  the  30th  year  has  been 
variously  explained :  some,  with  Usher,  suppose 
that  the  era  is  the  18th  year  of  Josiah,  when  the 
book  of  the  Law  was  found,  and  a  great  passover 
celebrated.  (See  Havemick,  Comuientar  iiber  Ezech. 
pp.  12,  13.)  This  year  of  Josiah  would  certainly 
be  the  first  of  the  reckoning,  and  might  be  .used  as 
a  kind  of  reformation-era,  not  unlike  the  era  of  Simon 
the  Maccabee.  [£V«s.]  Others  suppose  that  the 
thirtieth  year  of  the  prophet's  life  is  meant ;  but 
this  seems  very  unlikely.  Others  again,  including 
Scaliger  (De  Emendatione  Temporum,  pp.  79,  218, 
ed.  1583)  and  Kosenmiiller  (Schol.  ad  foe),  hold 
that  the  date  is  from  the  commencement  of  the  reign 
of  Nabopolassar.  There  is  no  record  of  an  era  of 
Nabopolassar ;  that  king  had  been  dead  some  years  ; 
and  we  have  no  instance  in  the  0.  T.  of  the  use  of 
a  foreign  era.  The  evidence  therefore  is  in  favour 
of  Josiah's  18th  year.  There  seems  to  be  another 
reference  to  this  date  in  the  same  book,  where  the 
time  of  the  iniquity  of  Judah  is  said  to  be  40  years  ; 
for  the  final  captivity  of  Judah  (Jer.  lii.  30)  was 
in  the  40th  year  of  this  reckoning.  In  the  same 
place  the  time  of  the  iniquity  of  Israel  is  said  to 
be  390  years,  which  sum,  added  to  the  date  of  the 
captivity  of  this  part  of  the  nation  in  the  A.  V. 
B.C.  721,  goes  back  to  B.C.  1111  (Ez.  iv.  5,  6). 
This  result  leads  to  the  indication  of  possible 
jubilee  dates,  for  the  interval  between  B.C.  1111  and 
B.C.  623-2  is  488-9  years,  within  two  years  of  ten 
jubilee  periods ;  and  it  must  be  remembered  that 
the  seventy  weeks  of  the  prophet  Daniel  seem  to 
indicate  the  use  of  such  a  great  cycle.  In  the 
latter  case,  however,  as  in  that  of  the  seventy  years' 
captivity,  it  is  probable  that  the  year  of'360  days 
is  used,  so  that  the  agreement  is  not  absolute. 
{Year.)  It  remains  to  be  asked  whether  the  ac- 
counts of  Josiah's  reformation  present  any  indica- 
tions of  celebrations  connected  with  the  sabbatical 
system.  The  finding  of  the  book  of  the  Law  might 
seem  to  point  to  its  being  specially  required  for 
some  public  service.  Such  a  service  was  the  great 
reading  of  the  Law  to  the  whole  congregation  at  the 
Feast  of  Tabernacles  in  every  sabbatical  year  (Dent. 
xxxi.  10-13).  The  finding  of  the  book  was  cer- 
tainly followed  by  a  public  reading,  apparently  in 
the  first  mouth,  by  the  king  to  the  whole  people 
of  Judah  and  Jerusalem,  and  afterwards  a  solemn 
passover  was  kept.  Of  the  latter  celebration  is  it 
said  in  Kings,  "  Surely  there  was  not  holden  such  a 
passover  from  the  days  of  the  Judges  that  judged 
Israel,  nor  in  all  the  days  of  I  1m'  kings  of  Israel,  nor 


CHRONOLOGY 


!17 


of  the  kings  of  Judah"  (2  K.  xxiii.  22)  ;  and,  in 
Chronicles,  "  There  was  no  passover  like  to  that 
kept  in  Israel  from  the  days  of  Samuel  the  prophet ; 
neither  did  all  the  kings  of  Israel  keep  such  a  passover 
as  Josiah  kept"  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  18).  The  mention 
of  Samuel  is  remarkable,  since  in  his  time  the  earlier 
supposed  date  falls.  It  may  be  objected  that  the 
passover  is  nowhere  connected  with  the  sabbatical 
reckoning,  but  these  passovers  can  scarcely  have 
been  greater  in  sacrifices  than  at  least  one  in  Solo- 
mon's reign,  nor  is  it  likely  that  they  are  mentioned 
as  characterized  by  greater  zeal  than  any  others 
whatever ;  so  that  we  are  almost  driven  to  the  idea 
of  some  relation  to  chronology.  This  result  would 
place  the  Exodus  in  the  middle  of  the  17th  century 
B.C.,  a  time  for  which  we  believe  there  is  a  pre- 
ponderance of  evidence  {Historical  Chronology). 
[Sabbatical  Year  ;  Jubilee.] 

Eras. — There  are  indications  of  several  historical 
eras  having  been  used  by  the  ancient  Hebrews,  but 
our  information  is  so  scanty  that  we  are  generally 
unable  to  come  to  positive  conclusions.  Some  of 
these  possible  eras  may  be  no  more  than  dates  em- 
ployed by  writers,  and  not  national  eras  ;  others, 
however,  can  scarcely  have  been  used  in  this  special 
or  individual  manner  from  their  referring  to  events 
of  the  highest  importance  to  the  whole  people. 

1.  The  Exodus  is  used  as  an  era  in  1  K.  vi.  1, 
in  giving  the  date  of  the  foundation  of  Solomon's 
Temple.  This  is  the  only  positive  instance  of  the 
occurrence  of  this  era,  for  we  cannot  agree  with 
Ideler  that  it  is  certainly  employed  in  the  Penta- 
teuch. He  refers  to  Ex.  xix.  1,  and  Num.  xxxiii. 
38  {Handbuch,  i.  p.  507).  Here,  as  elsewhere  in 
the  same  part  of  the  Bible,  the  beginning  of  the 
Exodus-year—  not,  of  course,  the  actual  date  of  the 
Exodus  (Regnal  years,  &c.) — is  used  as  the  point 
whence  time  is  counted;  but  during  the  interval  of 
which  it  formed  the  natural  commencement  it  can- 
not be  shown  to  be  an  era,  though  it  may  have 
been,  any  more  than  the  beginning  of  a  sovereign's 
reign  is  one. 

2.  The  foundation  of  Solomon's  temple  is  conjec- 
tured by  Ideler  to  have  been  an  era.  The  passages 
to  which  he  refers  (1  K.  ix.  10;  2  Chr.  viii.  1), 
merely  speak  of  occurrences  subsequent  to  the  inter- 
val of  20  yrs.  occupied  in  the  building  of  the  temple 
and  the  king's  house,  both  being  distinctly  specified  ; 
so  that  his  reading—"  Zwanzig  Jahre,  nachdem 
Salomo  ilas  Hans  des  Herrn  erbaute" — leaves  out 
half  the  statement  and  so  makes  it  incorrect 
(Handb.  I.  c).  It  is  elsewhere  stated  that  the 
building  of  the  temple  occupied  7  yrs.  (1  K.  vi.  :I7, 
38),  and  that  of  Solomon's  house  13  (vii.  1), 
making  up  the  interval  of  20  yrs. 

3.  The  era  once  used  by  Ezekiel,  and  commencing 
in  Josiah's  1 8th  year,  we  have  previously  discussed, 
concluding  that  it  was  most  probably  connected 
with  the  sabbatical  system  (Sabbatical  and  Jubilee 
Years'). 

4.  The  era  of  Jehoiachin's  captivity  is  con- 
stantly used  by  Ezekiel.  The  earliest  date  is  the 
5th  year  (i.  2)  and  the  latest,  the  27th  (xxix.  17). 
The  prophet  generally  gives  the  date  without  ap- 
plying any  distinctive  term  to  the  era.  He  speaks, 
however,  of  "  the  fifth  year  of  king  Jehoiachin's 
captivity"  (i.  2),  and  "the  twelfth  year  of  our 
captivity"  (xxxiii.  21),  the  latter  of  which  expres- 
sions may  explain  his  constant  use  of  the  era.  The 
same  era  is  necessarily  employed,  though  not  as 
such,  where  the  advancement  of  Jehoiachin  in  the 
37th  year  of  his  captivity  is  mentioned  (2  K.  xxv. 


318 


CHRONOLOGY 


27 ;  Jer.  lii.  31).  We  have  no  proof  that  it  was 
used  except  by  those  to  whose  captivity  it  referred. 
Its  1st  year  was  current  B.C.  596,  commencing  in 
the  spring  of  that  year. 

5.  The  beginning  of  the  seventy  years'  captivity 
does  not  appear  to  have  been  used  as  an  era  (His- 
torical Chronology). 

6.  The  return  from  Babylon  does  not  appear  to 
be  employed  as  an  era:  it  is,  however,  reckoned 
from  in  Ezra  (iii.  1,  8),  as  is  the  Exodus  in  the 
Pentateuch. 

7.  The  era  of  the  Seleucidae  is  used  in  the  first 
and  second  books  of  Maccabees. 

8.  The  liberation  of  the  Jews  from  the  Syrian 
yoke  in  the  1st  year  of  Simon  the  Maccabee  is 
stated  to  have  been  commemorated  by  an  era  used 
in  contracts  and  agreements  ( 1  Mace,  xiii.  41).  The 
yrs.  1,  2,  and  3  on  the  coins  ascribed  to  Simon 
[Money  ;  Shekel]  are  probably  of  this  era, 
although  it  is  related  that  the  right  of  coining 
money  with  his  own  stamp  was  not  conceded  to 
him  until  somewhat  later  than  its  beginning  (xv. 
6),  for  it  may  be  reasonably  supposed,  either  that 
Antiochus  VII.  confirmed  privileges  before  granted 
by  his  brother  Demetrius  II.  (comp.  xv.  5),  or 
that  he  gave  his  sanction  to  money  already  issued 
(Enc.  Brit.,  8th  ed.,  Numismatics,  pp.  379,  380). 

Regnal  Years. — By  the  Hebrews  regnal  years 
appear  to  have  been  counted-Trom  the  beginning  of 
the  year,  not  from  the  day  of  the  king's  accession. 
Tims,  if  a  king  came  to  the  throne  in  the  last 
month  of  one  year,  reigned  for  the  whole  of  the 
next  year,  and  died  in  the  1st  month  of  the  3rd 
year,  we  might  have  dates  in  his  1st,  2nd,  and  3rd 
yrs.,  although  he  governed  for  no  more  than  13  or 
14  months.  Any  dates  in  the  year  of  his  accession 
before  that  event,  or  in  the  year  of  his  death,  after 
it,  would  be  assigned  to  the  last  year  of  his  pre- 
decessor and  the  1st  of  his  successor.  The  same 
principle  would  apply  to  reckoning  from  eras  or 
important  events,  but  the  whole  stated  lengths  of 
reigns  or  intervals  would  not  be  affected  by  it. 

III.  Historical  Chronology. — The  historical 
part  of  Hebrew  chronology  is  not  less  difficult  than 
the  technical.  The  information  in  the  Bible  is 
indeed  direct  rather  than  inferential,  although  there 
is  very  important  evidence  of  the  latter  kind,  but 
the  present  state  of  the  numbers  makes  absolute 
certainty  in  many  cases  impossible.  If,  for  instance, 
the  Hebrew  and  LXX.  differ  as  to  a  particular 
number  we  cannot  in  general  positively  determine 
that  the  original  form  of  the  number  has  been 
preserved,  when  we  have  decided,  and  this  we  are 
not  always  able  to  do,  which  of  the  present  forms 
has  a  preponderance  of  evidence  in  its  favour.  In 
addition  to  this  difficulty  there  are  several  gaps 
in  the  series  of  smaller  numbers  which  we  have  no 
means  of  supplying  with  exactness.  When  therefore 
we  can  compare  several  of  these  smaller  numbers 
with  a  larger  number,  or  with  independent  evidence, 
we  are  frequently  prevented  from  putting  a  con- 
clusive test  by  the  deficiencies  in  the  first  series. 
The  frequent  occurrence  of  round  numbers  is  a 
matter  of  minor  importance,  for,  although  when 
we  have  no-  other  evidence,  it  manifestly  precludes 
oar  arriving  at  positive  accuracy,  the  variation  of 
a  few  years  is  not  to  be  balanced  against  great 
differences  apparently  not  to  be  positively  resolved, 
as  those  of  the  primaeval  numbers  in  the  Hebrew, 
LXX.  and  Samaritan  Pentateuch.  Lately  some 
have  laid  great  stress  upon  the  frequent  occurrence 
of  the  number  40,  alleging   that  it  and   70   are 


CHRONOLOGY 

vague  terms  equivalent  to  "  many,"  so  that  "  40 
yrs. "  or  "  70  yrs.  "  would  mean  no  more  than 
"many  yrs."  Prima  facie  this  idea  would  seem 
reasonable,  but  on  a  further  examination  it,  will  be 
seen  that  the  details  of  some  periods  of  40  yrs.  are 
given,  and  show  that  the  number  is  not  indefinite 
where  it  would  at  first  especially  seem  to  be  so. 
Thus  the  40  years  in  the  wilderness  can  be  divided 
into  three  periods :  1 .  from  the  Exodus  to  the 
sending  out  of  the  spies  was  about  one  year  and  a 
quarter  (1  yr.  1  +  x  (2  ?)  months,  Num.  ix.  1, 
x.  11  ;  comp.  ver.  29,  showing  it  was  this  year, 
and  xiii.  20  pi'oving  that  the  search  ended  some- 
what after  midsummer)  :  2.  the  time  of  search  40 
days  (Num.  xiii.  25)  :  3.  the  time  of  the  wan- 
dering until  the  brook  Zered  was  crossed  38  yrs. 
(Dent.  ii.  14)  :  making  altogether  almost  39|  yrs. 
This  perfectly  accords  with  the  date  yr.  40  m.  11 
d.  1  of  the  address  of  Moses  after  the  conquest  of 
Sihon  and  Og  (Deut.  i.  3,  4),  which  was  sub- 
sequent to  the  crossing  of  the  brook  Zered.  So 
again  David's  reign  of  40  yrs.  is  divided  into 
7  yrs.  6  m.  in  Hebron,  and  33  in  Jerusalem 
(2  Sam.  ii.  11,  v.  5  ;  1  Chr.  iii.  4,  but  1  K.  ii.  11, 
7  yrs.,  omitting  the  months,  and  33).  This  there- 
fore cannot  be  an  indefinite  number  as  some  might 
conjecture  from  its  following  Saul's  40  yrs.  and 
preceding  Solomon's.  The  last  two  reigns  again 
could  not  have  been  much  more  or  less  from 
the  circumstances  of  the  history.  The  occurrence 
of  some  round  numbers  therefore  does  not  warrant 
our  supposing  the  constant  use  of  vague  ones.  In 
discussing  the  technical  part  of  the  subject  we  have 
laid  some  stress  upon  the  opinions  of  the  earlier 
Rabbinical  commentators :  in  this  part  we  place  no 
reliance  upon  them.  As  to  divisions  *>f  time  con- 
nected with  religious  observances  they  could  scarcely 
be  far  wrong,  in  historical  chronology  they  could 
hardly  be  expected  to  be  right,  having  a  very  small 
knowledge  of  foreign  sources.  In  fact,  by  comparing 
their  later  dates  with  the  chronology  of  the  time 
astronomically  fixed,  we  find  so  extraordinary  a  de- 
parture from  correctness  that  we  must  abandon  the 
idea  of  their  having  held  any  additional  facts  handed 
down  by  tradition,  and  serving  to  guide  them  to  a 
true  systepi  of  chronology.  There  are,  however, 
important  foreign  materials  to  aid  us  in  the  deter- 
mination of  Hebrew  chronology.  In. addition  to 
the  literary  evidence  that  has  been  long  used  by 
chronologers,  the  comparatively  recent  decipher- 
ment of  the  Egyptian  and  Assyrian  inscriptions  has 
afforded  us  valuable  additional  evidence  from  con- 
tempoiary  monuments. 

Biblical  data. — It  will  be  best  to  examine  the 
biblical  information  under  the  main  periods  into 
which  it  may  be  separated,  beginning  with  the 
earliest. 

A.  First  Period,  from  Adam  to  Abram's  depar- 
ture from  Haran. — All  the  numerical  data  in  the 
Bible  for  the  chronology  of  this  interval  are  com- 
prised in  two  genealogical  lists  in  Genesis,  the  first 
from  Adam  to  Noah  and  his  sons  (Gen.  v.  3 
ad  fin.'),  and  the  second  from  Shem  to  Abram 
(xi.  10-26),  and  in  certain  passages  in  the  same 
book  (vii.  6,  11,  viii.  13,  ix.  28,  29,  xi.  32,  xii.  4). 
The  Masoretic  Hebrew  text,  the  LXX.,  and  the 
Samaritan  Pentateuch  greatly  differ,  as  may  be  seen 
by  the  following  table,  which  we  take  from  the 
Genesis  of  the  Earth  and  of  Man  (p.  90),  adding 
nothing  essential  but  a  various  reading,  and  the 
age  of  Abram  when  he  left  Haran,  but  also  inclosing 
in  parentheses  numbers  not  stated  but  obtained  by 


CHRONOLOGY 


CHRONOLOGY 


319 


Adam 
Seth  .  . 
Enos .... 
Cainan    .  . 
Mahalaleel 
Jared 
Enoch 
Methuselah 

Lamecli  .  . 

Noah 
Shem 


Arphaxad 

Cainan 

Salah       

Eber 

Peleg       

Reu 

Serug      

Nahor      

Tevah      

Abram  leaves  Haran 


Age  of  each  when  the 
next  was  born. 


Sept. 


230 
205 
190 
170 
165 
162 
165 
187 
167 
188 
502 
100 


226-1 
2244 


135 

130 

130 

134 

130 

132 

130 

79 

179 

70 

75 


1145 
1245 


Hob. 


130 
105 

90 
70 
65 

I 
65 


182 


1309 


Years  of  each  after  the 
next  was  born. 


Sept. 


700 
707 
715 
740 
730 
800 
200 
(782) 
802 
565 
448 
500 


Heb. 


800 
807 
815 
840 
830 

I 
300 


Total  length  of  the 
life  of  each. 


Sept.      Heb.   I    Sam. 


930 

912 

905 

910 

895 

962 

365 

969 

753 

777 

950 

600 

847 
720 
653 


This  was  "  two  years  after  the  Flood." 


400 

403 

303 

(535) 

(438) 

330 

(460) 

330 

403 

303  1 

(460) 

(433) 

270 

430 

(404) 

(464) 

209 

109 

(339) 

(239) 

207 

107 

(339) 

(239) 

200 

100 

(330) 

(230) 

129 

119 

69 

(208) 

(148) 

(135) 

(135) 

(75) 

205 

438 

433 
404 
239 
239 
230 
148 

145 


computation  from  others,  and  making  some  altera- 
tions consequently  necessary.  The  advantage  of  the 
system  of  this  table  is  the  clear  manner  in  which  it 
shows  the  differences  and  agreements  of  the  three 
versions  of  the  data.  The  dots  indicate  numbers 
agreeing  with  the  LXX. 

The  number  of  generations  in  the  LXX.  is  one  in 
excess  of  the  Heb.  and  Sam.  on  account  of  the  "■  Se- 
cond Cainan,''  whom  the  best  ehronologers  are  agreed 
in  rejecting  as  spurious.  He  is  found  in  the  pre- 
sent text  of  the  LXX.  in  both  Gen.  and  1  Chr.  and 
in  the  present  text  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel.  Joseph  us, 
Philo,  and  the  earlier  Christian  writers  appear  how- 
ever to  have  known  nothing  of  him,  and  it  is  there- 
fore probable  either  that  he  was  first  introduced  by 
a  copyist  into  the  Gospel  and  thence  into  the  LXX., 
or  else  that  he  was  found  in  some  codd.  of  the 
LXX.  and  thence  introduced  into  the  Gospel,  and 
afterwards  into  all  other  copies  of  the  LXX. 
[Cainan.]  Before  considering  the  variations  of 
the  numbers  it  is  important  to  notice  that  "  as  two 
of  the  three  sources  must  have  been  corrupted,  we 
may  reasonably  doubt  whether  any  one  of  tin 'in  be 
preserved  in  its  genuine  state"  {Genesis  of  the 
Earth,  4'C;  p.  92) — a  check  upon  our  confidence 
that  has  strangely  escaped  ehronologers  in  general. 
The  variations  are  the  result  of  design  not  accident, 
as  is  evident  from  the  years  before  the  birth  of  a 
son  and  the  residues  agreeing  in  their  sums  in 
almost  all  cases  in  the  antediluvian  generations,  the 
exceptions,  save  one,  being  apparently  the  result  of 
necessity  that  lives  should  not  overlap  the  date 
of  the  Flood  (comp.  Clinton,  Fiisti  Hellen.  i.  p. 
285).  We  have  no  clue  to  the  date  or  dates 
of  the  alterations  beyond  that  we  can  trace  the 
LXX.  form  to  the  First  century  of  the  Christian 


era,  if  not  higher ,d  and  the  Heb.  to  the  Fourth  cen- 
tury: if  the  Sam.  numbers  be  as  old  as  the  text,  we  can 
assign  them  a  higher  antiquity  than  what  is  known 
as  to  the  Heb.  The  little  acquaintance  most  of  the 
early  Christian  writers  had  with  Hebrew  makes  it 
impossible  to  decide  on  their  evidence,  that  the 
variation  did  not  exist  when  they  wrote :  the  tes- 
timony of  Josephus  is  here  of  more  weight,  but  in 
his  present  text  it  shows  contradiction,  though 
preponderating  in  favour  of  the  LXX.  numbers. 
A  comparison  of  the  lists  would  lead  us  to  suppose, 
on  internal  evidence,  that  they  had  first  two  forms, 
and  that  the  third  version  of  them  originated  from 
these  two.  This  supposed  later  version  of  the  lists 
would  seem  to  be  the  Sam.,  which  certainly  is  less 
internally  consistent,  on  the  supposition  of  the  ori- 
ginal correctness  of  the  numbers,  than  the  other  two. 
The  cause  of  the  alterations  is  most  uncertain.  It 
has  indeed  been  conjectured  that  the  Jews  shortened 
the  chronology  in  order  that  an  ancient  prophecy  that 
the  Messiah  should  come  in  the  sixth  millenary  of 
the  world's  age  might  not  be  known  to  be  fulfilled  in 
the  advent  ot  our  Lord.  The  reason  may  be  suffi- 
cient in  itself,  but  it  does  not  rest  upon  sufficient  evi- 
dence. It  is,  however,  worth)'  of  remark,  that  in 
the  apostolic  age  there  were  hot  discussions  respect- 
ing genealogies  (Tit.  iii.  9),  which  would  seem  to 
indicate  that  great  importance  w:is  attached  to 
them,  perhaps  also  that  the  differences  or  some  dif- 
ference then  existed.  The  ditlerent  proportions  of  the 
generations  and  lives  in  the  LXX.  and  Heb.  have 


d  The  earliest  supposed  indication  of  the  LXX. 
numbers  is  in  the  passage  of  Polyhistor  (ap.  Euseb. 
Praep.  ix.  21,  p.  422)  giving  the  same  as  the  com- 
putation of  Demetrius  ;  but  we  cannot  place  reliance 
on  the  correctness  of  a  single  fragmentary  text. 


320 


CHRONOLOGY 


been  asserted  to  afford  an  argument  in  favour  of  the 
former.     At  a  later  period,  however,  when  we  find 
instances  of  longevity  recorded  in  all  versions,  the 
time  of  marriage  is  not  different  from  what  it  is  at 
the   present   day,   although    there   are   some   long 
generations.     A   stronger  argument  for  the  LXX., 
if  the  unity  of  the  human  race  be  admitted,  is 
found  in  the  long  period  required  from  the  Flood 
to  the  Dispersion  and  the  establishment  of  king- 
doms :    this   supposition  would,   however,   require 
that  the  patriarchal  generations  should  be  either 
exceptional   or   represent   periods :    for  the  former 
of  these  hypotheses  we    shall   see  there   is    some 
ground  in  the  similar  case  of  certain  generations, 
Just  alluded  to,  from  Abraham  downwards.     With 
respect  to  probability  of  accuracy  arising  from  the 
state  of  the  text,  the  Heb.  certainly  has  the  advantage. 
There  is  every  reason  to   think  that  the  Rabbins 
have  been  scrupulous   in   the  extreme  in  making- 
alterations:  the   LXX.,  on  the  other  hand,  shows 
signs  of  a  carelessness  that  would  almost  permit 
change,  and  we  have  the  probable  interpolation  of 
the  Second  Cainan.     If,  however,  we  consider  the 
Sam.  form  of  the  lists  as  sprung  from  the  other 
two,  the  LXX.  would  seem  to  be  earlier  than  the 
Heb.,  since  it  is  more  probable  that  the  antedilu- 
vian generations  would  have  been  shortened  to  a 
general  agreement  with  the  Heb.,  than  that  the 
postdiluvian  would  have  been  lengthened  to  suit 
the  LXX. ;  for  it  is  obviously  most  likely  that  a 
sufficient  number  of  years  having  been  deducted  from 
the  earlier  generations,  the  operation  was  not  carried 
on  with  the  later.     It  is  noticeable  that  the  stated 
sums  in  the  postdiluvian  generations  in  the  Sam. 
generally  agree  with   the  computed  sums  of  the 
Heb.  and  not  with  those  of  thq  LXX.,  which  would 
be  explained  by  the  theory  of  an  adaptation  of  one 
of  these  two  to  the  other,  although  it  would  not  give 
us  reason  for  supposing  either  form  to  be  the  eailier. 
It  is  an  ancient  conjecture  that  the  term  year  was  of 
old  applied  to  periods  short  of  true  years.     There  is 
some  plausibility  in  this  theory,  at  first  sight,  but 
the  account  of  the  Deluge  seems  fatal  to  its  adop- 
tion.    The  only  passage  that  might  be  alleged  in  its 
support  is  that  in  which  120  years  is  mentioned  as 
if  the  term  of  man's  life  after  the  great  increase  of 
wickedness  before  the  Deluge,  compared  with  the 
lives  assigned  to  the  antediluvian  patriarchs,  but 
this   from   the    context   seems  rather   to   mean   a 
period  of  probation  before  the  catastrophe  (Gen.  vi. 
3).     A  question  has  been  raised  whether  the  gene- 
rations and  numbers  may  not  be  independent,  the 
original  generations  in  Gen.  having  been  as  those  in 
1  Chr.  simply  names,  and  the  numbers  having  been 
added,  perhaps  on  traditional  authority,  by  the  Jews 
(comp.  Genesis  of  the  Earth,  tyc,  pp.  92-94).     If 
we  suppose  that  a  period  was  thus  portioned  out 
then  the  character  of  Hebrew  genealogies  as  not  of  ne- 
cessity absolutely  continuous  might  somewhat  lessen 
the  numbers  assigned  to  individuals.      Some  have 
supposed  that  the  numbers  were  originally  cyclical, 
an  idea  perhaps  originating  in  the  notion  of  the  dis- 
tribution of  a  space  of  time  to  a  certain  number  of 
generations.     This  particular  theory  can  however 
scarcely  be  reconciled  with  the  historical  character 
of  the  names.     Turning  to  the  evidence  of  ancient 
history  and  tradition,  we  find  the  numbers  of  the 
LXX.  confirmed  rather  than  those  of  the  Heb.    The 
history  and  civilization  of  Egypt  and  Assyria  with 
Babylonia  reach  to  a  time  earlier  than,  in  the  first 
case,  and  about  as  early  as,  in  the  second,  the  Heb. 
date  of  the  Flood.    Moreover  the  concurrent  evidence 


CHRONOLOGY 

of  antiquity  carries  the  origin  of  gentile  civilization 
to  the  Noachian  races.    The  question  of  the  unity  of 
the  species  does  not  therefore  affect  this  argument 
(Man),  whence  the  numbers  of  the  LXX.  up  to 
the  Deluge  would  seem  to  be  correct,  for  an  acci- 
dental  agreement   can   scarcely    be    admitted.      If 
correct,  are  we  therefore  to  suppose  them  original, 
that  is,  of  the  original  text  whence  the  LXX.  ver- 
sion was'  made  ?    This  appears  to  be  a  necessary  con- 
sequence of  their  correctness,  since  the  translators 
were    probably    not    sufficiently    acquainted    with 
external  sources  to  obtain  numbers  either  actually 
or  approximatively  true,  even  if  the;/  externally 
existed,   and   had  they   had   this  knowledge  it  is 
scarcely  likely  that  they  would  have  used  it    in 
the  manner  supposed.     On  the  whole,   therefore, 
we  are  inclined  to  prefer  the  LXX.  numbers  after 
the  Deluge,  and,  as  consistent  with  them,  and  pro- 
bably of  the  same  authority,  those  before  the  De- 
luge also.     It   remains   for  us  to    ascertain   what 
appears  to  be  the  best  form  of  each  of  the  three  ver- 
sions, and  to  state  the  intervals  thus  obtained.     In 
the  LXX.  antediluvian  generations,  that  of  Methu- 
selah is  187  or  167  yrs. :  the  former  seems  to  be 
undoubtedly   the   true    number,    since   the   latter 
would  make  this  patriarch,  if  the  subsequent  gene- 
rations be  correct,  to  survive  the  Flood  14  years. 
In  the  postdiluvian  numbers  of  the  LXX.  we  must, 
as  previously  shown,  reject  the  Second  Cainan  from 
the  preponderance  of  evidence  against  his  genuine- 
ness.    [Cainan.]     Of  the  two  forms  of  Nahor's 
generation  in  the  LXX.  we  must  prefer  79,  as  more 
consistent  with  the  numbers  near  it,  and  as  also 
found  in  the  Sam.     An  important  correction  of  the 
next  generation  has  been  suggested  in  all  the  lists. 
According    to  them   it  would   appear   that  Terah 
was  70  yrs.  old  at  Abram's  birth.      "  Terah  lived 
seventy  years,  and  begat  Abram,  Nahor,  and  Ha- 
ran"  (Gen.  3d.  26).     It  is   afterwards  said   that 
Terah  went  from  Or  of  the  Chaldees  to  Haran  and 
died  there  at  the  age  of  205  yrs.  (145  Sam.)  (vv. 
31,  32),  and  the  departure  of  Abram  from  Haran  to 
Canaan  is  then  narrated  (comp.  Acts  vii.4),  his  age 
being  stated  to  have  been  at  that  time  75  yrs.  (xii. 
1-5).     Usher  therefore  conjectures  that  Terah  was 
130  yrs.  old  at  Abram's  birth  (205—75=130) 
and  supposes  the  latter  not  to  have  been  the  eldest 
son  but  mentioned  first  on  account  of  his  eminence, 
as  is  Shem  in  several  places  (v.  32,  vi.  10,  vii.  13, 
ix.  18,  x.  1),  who  yet  appears  to  have  been  the  third 
son  of  Noah  and  certainly  not  the  eldest  (x.  21,  and 
arrangement  of  chap.).     There  is,  however,  a  se- 
rious objection  in  the  way  of  this  supposition.     It 
seems  scarcely  probable   that  if  Abram  had  been 
born  to  his  father  at  the  age  of  130   years,   he 
should  have  asked  in  wonder  "  Shall  [a  child]  be; 
born  unto  him  that  is  an   hundred  years  old  ?  and 
shall  Sarah,  that  is  ninety  years  old,  bear?"  (( i<  n. 
xvii.  17.)     Thus  to  suit  a  single  number,  that  of 
Terah's  age  at  his  death,  where  the  Sam.  does  not 
agree  with  the  Heb.   and   LXX.,  a  hypothesis  is 
adopted  that  at  least  strains  the  consistency  of  the 
narrative.     We  shoidd  rather  suppose  the  number 
might  have  been  changed  by  a  copyist,  and  take 
the  145  yrs.  of  the  Sam. — It  has  been  generally 
supposed  that  the  Dispersion  took  place  in  the  days 
of  Peleg,  on  account  of  what  is  said   in  Gen,  x. 
as  to  him:   [of  the  two  sons  of  Eber]   '•the  name 
of  one    [was]    Peleg    (J7Q,  division),    for   in   his 
days  was  the  earth  divided"  (712^33,  25)      It  can- 
not be  positively  affirmed  that  the  "  Dispersion" 


CHRONOLOGY 

spoken  of  in  Gen.  xi.  is  here  meant,  since  a  phy- 
sical catastrophe  might  be  intended,  although  the 
former  is  perhaps  the  more  natural  infeience.  The 
event,  whatever  it  was,  must  have  happened  at 
Peleg's  biith,  rather  than,  as  some  have  supposed, 
at  a  later  time  in  his  life,  for  the  easterns  have 
always  given  names  to  children  at  biith,  as  may 
be  noticed  in  the  cases  of  Jacob  and  his  sons. — 
We  should  therefore  consider  the  following  as  the 
best  forms  of  the  numbers  according  to  the  three 


CHRONOLOGY 


021 


LXX. 

Creation  --------  0 

Flood  (ocruping  chief  part 

oi  this  your) 2262 

Birth  dI  Pelee 401 

Departure  of  Abram  from 

U:, ran 616 


101  "I 

}  1017  } 

)  266  J 


3-279 


B.  Second  Period,  from  Abram's  departure 
from  Haran  to  the  Exodus. — The  length  of  this 
period  is  stated  by  St.  Paul  as  430  years  from 
the  promise  to  Abraham  to  the  giving  of  the  Law 
(Gal.  iii.  17),  the  first  event  being  held  to  be  that 
recorded  in  Gen.  xii.  1-5.  The  same  number  of 
years  is  given  in  Ex.,  where  the  Heb.  reads — 
"  Now  the  sojourning  of  the  child: en  of  Israel  who 
dwelt  in  Egypt  [was]  four  hundred  and  thirty 
years.  And  it  came  to  pass  at  the  end  of  the  four 
hundred  and  thirty  years,  even  the  selfsame  day  it 
came  to  pass,  that  all  the  hosts  of  the  Lord  went 
out  from  the  land  of  Egypt"  (xii.  40,  41).  Here 
the  LXX.  and  Sam.  add  after  "in  Egypt"  the 
words  "  and  in  Canaan,"  while  the  Alex,  and  other 
MSS.  of  the  former  also  add  after  "the  children  of 
Israel"  the  words  "and  their  fathers."  It  seems 
most  reasonable  to  regard  both  these  additions  as 
es ;  if  they  are  excluded,  the  passage  appears 
tn  make  the  duration  of  the  sojourn  in  Egypt  430 
years,  but  this  is  not  an  absolutely  certain  conclu- 
sion. The  "sojourning"  might  well  include  the 
period  after  the  promise  to  Abraham  while  that 
patriarch  and  his  descendants  "  sojourned  in  the  land 
of  promise  as  [in]  a  strange  country  "  (Heb.  xi.  9), 
for  it  is  not  positively  said  "  the  sojourning  of  the 
children  of  Israel  in  Egypt,"  but  we  may  read  "  who 
dwelt  in  Egypt."  As  for  the  very  day  of  close  being 
that  of  commencement  it  might  refer  either  to  Abra- 
ham's entrance,  or  to  the  time  of  the  promise.  A 
third  passage,  occurring  in  the  same  essential  form  in 
both  Testaments,  and  therefore  especially  satisfactory 
as  to  its  textual  accuracy,  throws  light  upon  the  ex- 
planation we  have  ottered  of  this  last,  since  it  is 
impossible  to  understand  it  except  upon  analogical 
principles.  It  is  the  divine  declaration  to  Abraham 
of  the  future  history  of  his  children: — •'  Enow  of 
a  surety  that  thy  seed  shall  be  a  stranger  in  a  land 
[that  is]  not  their's,  and  shall  serve  them  ;  and 
they  shall  afflict  them  four  hundred  years;  and 
also  that  nation,  whom  they  shall  serve,  will  I 
judge:  and  afterward  shall  they  come  out  with 
great  substance"  (<;en.  xv.  13,  14;  com]).  Acts 
vii.  i),  7  ).  The  four  hundred  years  cannot  he  held 
to  be  the  period  of  oppression  without  a  denial  of 
the  historical  character  of  the  narrative  of  that 
time,  but  can  only  be  supposed  to  mean  the  time 
From  this  declaration  to  the  Exodus.  This  reading, 
which  in  the  A.  V.  requires  no  more  than  a  slight 
change  in  the  punctuation,  if  it  suppose  an  unusual 
construction  in  Hebrew,  is  perfectly  admissible  ac- 
cording to  the  principles  of  Semitic  grammar,  and 
might  be  used  in  Arabic.  It  is  also  noticeable  that 
alter   the   citation   »iven   above   the   events  of  the 


whole  sojourn  are  repeated,  showing  that  this 
was  the  period  spoken  of,  and  perhaps,  therefore, 
the  period  defined  (15,  16).  The  meaning  of  the 
"fourth  generation"  here  mentioned  has  been  pre- 
viously consideied.  It  cannot,  therefore,  be  held 
that  the  statement  of  St.  Paul  that  from  the  pro- 
mise to  Abraham  until  the  Exodus  was  430  years 
is  irreconcileable  with  the  two  other  statements  of 
the  same  kind.  In  order  to  anive  at  as  certain  a 
conclusion  as  may  be  attainable  we  must  examine 
the  evidence  we  have  for  the  details  of  this  interval . 
First,  however,  it  will  be  necessary  to  form  a  dis- 
tinct opinion  as  to  the  length  of  life  of  the  patri- 
archs of  this  age.  The  biblical  narrative  plainly 
ascribes  to  them  lives  far  longer  than  what  is  held 
to  be  the  present  extreme  limit,  and  we  must  there- 
fore carefully  consider  the  evidence  upon  which 
the  general  correctness  of  the  numbers  rests,  and 
any  independent  evidence  as  to  the  length  of  life 
at  this  time.  The  statements  in  the  Bible  regard- 
ing longevity  may  be  separated  into  two  classes, 
those  given  in  genealogical  lists  and  those  inter- 
woven with  the  relation  of  events.  To  the  former 
class  viitually  belong  all  the  statements  relating 
to  the  longevity  of  the  patriarchs  before  Abraham, 
to  the  latter  nearly  all  l elating  to  that  of  Abia- 
ham  and  his  descendants.  In  the  case  of  the  one 
we  cannot  arrive  at  certainty  as  to  the  original 
form  of  the  text,  as  already  shown,  but  the  other 
rests  upon  a  very  difierent  kind  of  evidence.  The 
statements  as  to  the  length  of  the  lives  of  Abra- 
ham and  his  nearer  descendants,  and  some  of  his 
later,  are  so  closely  interwoven  with  the  historical 
narrative,  not  alone  in  form,  but  in  sense,  that 
their  general  truth  and  its  cannot  be  separated. 
Abraham's  age  at  the  birth  of  Isaac  is  a  great  fact 
in  his  history,  equally  attested  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment and  in  the  New.  Again,  the  longevity  as- 
cribed to  Jacob  is  confiimed  by  the  question  of 
Pharaoh,  and  the  patriarch's  remarkable  answer,  in 
which  he  makes  his  then  age  of  130  years  less  than 
the  years  of  his  ancestors  (Gen.  xlvii.  9),  a  minute 
point  of  agreement  with  the  other  chronological 
statements  to  be  especially  noted.  At  a  later  time 
the  age  of  Moses  is  attested  by  various  statements 
in  the  Pentateuch,  and  in  the  N.T.  on  St.  Stephen's 
authority,  though  it  is  to  be  observed  that  the 
mention  of  his  having  retained  his  strength  to  the 
end  of  his  120  years  (Deut.  xxxiv.  7),  is  perhaps 
indicative  of  an  unusual  longevity.  In  the  earlier 
part  of  the  period  following,  we  notice  similar  in- 
stances in  the  case  of  Joshua,  anil,  inferentially,  in 
that  of  Othniel.  Nothing  in  the  Bible  could  be 
cited  against  this  evidence,  except  it  be  the  common 
explanation  of  Ps.  xc.  (esp.  vs.  10),  combined  with 
its  ascription  to  Moses  (title).  The  title  cannot, 
analogically,  be  considered  a  very  sure  guide,  but 
the  style  and  contents  seem  to  us  to  support  it. 
It  may  lie  questioned,  however,  whether  the  gene- 
ral shortness  of  man's  life  forms  the  subject  of  this 
psalm.  A  shortness  of  life  is  lamented  as  the  re- 
sult of  God's  anger,  the  people  are  described  as 
under  ids  wrath,  and  prayer  is  made  for  a  i 
■  ohdil  ion.  Nothing  could  be  more  applicable  to  the 
shortening  of  life  in  the  deseit  in  order  that  none  who 
were  twenty  years  old  and  upwards  at  the  Exodus 
shin  Id  enter  the  Land  of  I'lomise.  With  these  the 
ordinary  term  of  life  would  be  threescore  yens  and 
ten,  or  fourscore  years.  It,  therefore,  we  ascribe 
the  psalm  to  Moses  we  cannot  he  certain  that  it 
gives  the  average  of  long  lite  at  his  time  indepen- 
dently of  the  peculiar  circumstances  of  the  wan- 


\ 


322 


CHRONOLOGY 


dering  in  the  desert.  Thus  it  is  evident  thnt  the 
two  classes  of  statements  in  the  Bible  bearing  on 
longevity  stand  upon  a  very  different  basis.  It  must 
be  observed  that  all  the  supposed  famous  modern 
instances  of  great  longevity,  as  those  of  Parr,  Jack- 
son, and  the  old  Countess  of  Desmond,  have  utterly 
broken  down  on  examination,  and  that  the  registers 
of  this  country  prove  no  greater  extreme  than  about 
110  years.  We  have  recently  had  the  good  fortune 
to  discover  some  independent  contemporary  evidence 
bearing  upon  this  matter.  There  is  an  Egyptian 
hieratic  papyrus  in  the  Bibliotheque  at  Paris  bearing 
a  moral  discourse  by  one  Ptah-hotp,  apparently  eldest 
son  ofAssa(B.C.  cir.  1910-1860),  the  fifth  king 
of  the  Fifteenth  Dynasty,  which  was  of  Shepherds 
[Egypt].  At  the  conclusion  Ptah-hotp  thus 
speaks  of  himself: — "  I  have  become  an  elder  on 
the  earth  (or  in  the  land) ;  I  have  traversed  a 
hundred  and  ten  years  of  life  by  the  gift  of  the 
king  and  the  approval  of  the  elders,  fulfilling  my 
duty  towards  the  king  in  the  place  of  favour  (or 
blessing)." — Facsimile  d'icn  Papyrus  E'gyptien, 
par  E.  Prisse  d'Avennes,  pi.  xix.,  lines  7,  8).  The 
natural  inferences  from  this  passage  are  that  Ptah- 
hotp  wrote  in  the  full  possession  of  his  mental  facul- 
ties at  the  age  of  110  years,  and  that  his  father  was 
still  reigning  at  the  time,  and,  therefore,  had  attained 
the  age  of  about  130  years,  or  more.  The  analogy 
of  all  other  documents  of  the  kind  known  to  us  does 
not  permit  a  different  conclusion.  That  Ptah-hotp 
was  the  son  of  Assa  is  probable  from  inscriptions  in 
tombs  at  Memphis ;  that  he  was  a  king's  eldest  son 
is  expressly  stated  by  himself  (Facsimile,  &c,  pi.  v., 
lines  6,  7).  Yet  he  had  not  succeeded  his  father  at 
the  time  of  his  writing,  nor  does  he  mention  that 
sovereign  as  dead.  The  reigns  assigned  by  Manetho 
to  the  Shepherd-Kings  of  this  dynasty  seem  indi- 
cative of  a  greater  age  than  that  of  the  Egyptian 
sovereigns  (Cory's  Ancient  Fragments,  2nd  ed., 
pp.  114,  136).  It  has  been  suggested  to  us  by 
Mr.  Goodwin  that  110  years  may  be  a  vague 
term,  meaning  "  a  very  long  life  ;"  it  seems  to  be 
so  used  in  papyri  of  a  later  time  (B.C.  cir.  1200). 
We  rarely  thus  employ  the  term  centenarian,  more 
commonly  employing  sexagenarian  and  octogenarian, 
and  this  term  is  therefore  indicative  of  a  greater 
longevity  than  ours  among  the  Egyptians.  If  the 
110  years  of  Ptah-hotp  be  vague,  we  must  still 
suppose  him  to  have  attained  to  an  extreme  old  age 
during  his  father's  lifetime,  so  that  we  can  scarcely 
reduce  the  numbers  110  and  about  130  more  than 
ten  years  respectively.  This  Egyptian  document 
is  of  the  time  of  the  Fifteenth  Dynasty,  and  of 
so  realistic  and  circumstantial  a  character  in  its 
historical  bearings  that  the  facts  it  states  admit  of 
no  dispute.  Other  records  tend  to  confirm  the 
inferences  we  have  here  drawn.  It  seems,  how- 
ever, probable,  that  such  instances  of  longevity 
were  exceptional,  and  perhaps  more  usual  among 
the  foreign  settlers  in  Egypt  than  the  natives, 
and  we  have  no  ground  for  considering  that  the 
length  of  generations  was  then  generally  different 
from  what  it  now  is.  For  these  reasons  we  find 
no  difficulty  in  accepting  the  statements  as  to  the 
longevity  of  Abraham  and  certain  of  his  descendants, 


c  Bun  sen  reckons  Abraham's  yr.  75  as  1,  and  yr. 
100  as  25,  and  makes  the  sum  of  this  interval  from 
the  numbers  215  [Egypt's  Place,  i.  p.  180).  This  is 
inaccurate,  since  if  75  =  1,  then  100  =  26,  and  the 
interval  is  216. 

d  Bunsen  ridicules  Dr.  Baumgarten  of  Kiel  for  sup- 


CHRONOLOGY 

and  can  go  on  to  examine  the  details  of  the  period 
under  consideration  as  made  out  from  evidence  re- 
quiring this  admission.  The  narrative  affords  the 
following  data  which  we  place  under  two  periods — 
1.  that  from  Abram's  leaving  Haran  to  Jacob's 
entering  Egypt,  and  2.  that  from  Jacob's  entering 
Egypt  to  the  Exodus. 

1.  Age  of  Abram  on  leaving  Haran     75  yrs. 

at  Isaac's  birth  .   100 

Age  of  Isaac  at  Jacob's  birth    .  .     60 
Age  of  Jacob  on  entering  Egypt  .  130 

216  or  215  yrs.c 

2.  Age  of  Levi  on  entering  Egypt        .  .     . .     cir.  45 

Residue  of  his  life       92 

Oppression  after   the  death  of  Jacob's  sons 

(Ex.  i.  6,  7,  seqq.). 
Age  of  Moses  at  Exodus 80 

172 

Age  of  Joseph  in  the  same  year     39 

Residue  of  his  life       71 

Age  of  Moses  at  Exodus 80 

151 

These  data  make  up  about  387  or  388  years,  to 
which  it  is  reasonable  to  make  some  addition,  since  it 
appeal's  that  all  Joseph's  generation  died  before  the 
oppression  commenced,  and  it  is  probable  that  it 
had  begun  some  time  before  the  birth  of  Moses.  The 
sum  we  thus  obtain  cannot  be  far  different  from 
430  years,  a  period  for  the  whole  sojourn  that 
these  data  must  thus  be  held  to  confirm.  The 
genealogies  relating  to  the  time  of  the  dwelling  in 
Egypt,  if  continuous,  which  there  is  much  reason 
to  suppose  some  to  be,  are  not  repugnant  to  this 
scheme ;  but  on  the  other  hand,  one  alone  of 
them,  that  of  Joshua,  in  1  Chi-,  (vii.  23,  25,  26, 
27)  if  a  succession,  can  be  reconciled  with  the 
opinion  that  dates  the  430  years  from  Jacob's  en- 
tering into  Egypt.  The  historical  evidence  should 
be  carefully  weighed.  Its  chief  point  is  the  increase 
of  the  Israelites  from  the  few  souls  who  went  with 
Jacob  into  Egypt,  and  Joseph  and  his  sons,  to  the 
six  hunched  thousand  men  who  came  out  at  the 
Exodus.  At  the  former  date  the  following  are  enu- 
merated— "  besides  Jacob's  sons'  wives,"  Jacob,  his 
twelve  sons  and  one  daughter  (13),  his  fifty-one 
grandsons  and  one  granddaughter  (52),  and  his  four 
great-grandsons,  making,  with  the  patriarch  himself, 
seventy  souls  (Gen.  xlvi.  8-27).  The  generation 
to  which  children  would  be  born  about  this  date 
may  thus  be  held  to  have  been  of  at  least  51  pairs,d 
since  all  are  males  except  one,  who  most  probably 
married  a  cousin.  This  computation  takes  no  ac- 
count of  polygamy,  which  was  certainly  practised 
at  the  time  by  the  Hebrews.  This  first  generation 
must,  except  there  were  at  the  time  other  female 
grandchildren  of  Jacob  besides  the  one  mentioned 
(comp.  Gen.  xlvi.  7),  have  taken  foreign  wives,  and 
it  is  reasonable  to  suppose  the  same  to  have  been  con- 
stantly done  afterwards,  though  probably  in  a  less 
degree.  We  cannot  therefore  found  our  calculation 
solely  on  these  51  pairs,  but  must  allow  for  poly- 
gamy  and   foreign   marriages.      These  admissions 


posing  a  residue  of  56  pairs  from  70  souls.  "  This 
remainder  of  56  pair  out  of  70  souls  puts  us  very 
much  in  mind  of  Falstaff's  mode  of  reckoning " 
(Egypt's  Place,  i.  p.  178).  Had  the  critic  read  Gen. 
xlvi.  he  would  not  have  made  this  extraordinary 
mistake,  and  allowed  only  three  wives  to  67  men. 


CHEONOLOGY 

being  made,  and  the  especial  blessing  which  attended 
the  people  borne  in  mind,  the  interval  of  about  215 
years  does  not  seem  too  short  for  the  increase.  On 
the  whole,  we  have  no  hesitation  in  accepting  the 
430  years  as  the  length  of  the  interval  from  Abram's 
leaving  Haran  to  the  Exodus. 

C.  Third  Period,  from  the  Exodus  to  the  Founda- 
tion of  Solomon's  Temple. — There  is  but  one  passage 
from  which  we  obtain  the  length  of  this  period  as  a 
whole.  It  is  that  in  which  the  Foundation  of  the 
Temple  is  dated  in  the  480th  (Heb.),  or  440th 
(LXX.)  year  after  the  Exodus,  in  the  4th  yr.  2nd  m. 
of  Solomon's  reign  (1  K.  vi.  1).  Subtracting  from 
480  or  440  yrs.  the  first  three  yrs.  of  Solomon  and 
the  40  of  David,  we  obtain  (480-43  =  )  437  or 
(440  —  43  =  )  397  yrs.  These  results  we  have  first 
to  compare  with  the  detached  numbers.  These  are 
as  follows  : — A.  From  Exodus  to  death  of  Moses, 
40  yrs.  B.  Leadership  of  Joshua,  7+#  yrs.  C. 
Interval  between  Joshua's  death  and  the  First  Servi- 
tude x  yrs.  D.  Servitudes  and  rule  of  Judges  until 
Eli's  death,  430  yrs.  E.  Period  from  Eli's  death  to 
Saul's  accession,  20+a;  yrs.  F.  Saul's  reign,  40  yrs. 
G.  David's  reign,  40  yrs.  H.  Solomon's  reign  to 
Foundation  of  Temple,  3  yrs.  Sum,  3.2+580  yrs. 
It  is  possible  to  obtain  approximatively  the  length 
of  the  three  wanting  numbers.  Joshua's  age  at  the 
Exodus  was  20  or  20+ar  yrs.  (Num.  xiv.  29,  30), 
and  at  his  death,  110  :  therefore  the  utmost  length 
of  his  rule  must  be  (110-20+40  =  )  50  yrs.  After 
Joshua  there  is  the  time  of  the  Elders  who  overlived 
him,  then  a  period  of  disobedience  and  idolatry,  a 
servitude  of  8  yrs.,  deliverance  by  Othniel  the  son 
of  Kenaz,  the  nephew  of  Caleb,  and  rest  for  40  yrs. 
until  Othniel's  death.  The  duration  of  Joshua's 
government  is  limited  by  the  circumstance  that 
Caleb's  lot  was  apportioned  to  him  in  the  7th  year 
of  the  occupation,  and  therefore  of  Joshua's  rule, 
when  he  was  85  yrs.  old,  and  that  he  conquered 
the  lot  after  Joshua's  death.  Caleb  cannot  be  sup- 
posed to  have  been  a  very  old  man  on  taking  his 
portion,  and  it  is  unlikely  that  he  would  have 
waited  long  before  attacking  the  heathen  who  held 
it,  to  say  nothing  of  the  portion  being  his  claimed 
reward  for  not  having  feared  the  Anakim  who  dwelt 
there,  a  reward  promised  him  of  the  Lord  by  Moses 
and  claimed  of  Joshua,  who  alone  of  his  fellow-spies 
had  shown  the  same  faith  and  courage  (Num.  xiv. 
24  ;  Deut.  i.  36  ;  Josh.  xiv.  6  ad  Jin.,  xv.  13-19 ; 
Judg.  i.  9-15,  20).  If  we  suppose  that  Caleb  set 
out  to  conquer  his  lot  about  7  years  after  its  ap- 
portionment, then  Joshua's  rule  would  be  about 
13  yrs.,  and  he  would  have  been  a  little  older  than 
Caleb.  The  interval  between  Joshua's  death  and 
the  First  Servitude  is  limited  by  the  history  of  Oth- 
niel. He  was  already  a  warrior  when  Caleb  con- 
quered his  lot;  he  lived  to  deliver  Israel  from  the 
Mesopotarnian  oppressor,  and  died  at  the  end  of  the 
subsequent  40  yrs.  of  rest.  Supposing  Othniel  to 
have  been  30  yrs.  old  when  Caleb  set  out,  and  lid 
yrs.  at  his  death,  32  yrs.  would  remain  for  the 
interval  in  question.  The  rule  of  Joshua  may  be 
therefore  reckoned  to  have  beeti  about  13  yrs.,  and  the 
subsequent  interval  to  the  First  Servitude  about  32 
yrs.,  altogether  47  yrs.  These  numbers  cannot  be 
considered  exact ;  but  they  can  hardly  be  far  wrong, 
more  especially  the  sum.  The  residue  of  Samuel's 
judgeship  after  the  20  yrs.  from  Eli's  death  until 
the  solemn  fast  and  victory  at  Mizpeh,  can  scarcely 
have  much  exceeded  20  yrs.  Samuel  must  have 
been  still  young  at  the  time  of  Eli's  death,  and  he 
died  very  near  the  close  of  Saul's  reign  (I  Sam. 


CHEONOLOGY 


323 


xxv.  1,  xxviii.  3).  If  he  were  10  yrs.  old  at  the 
former  date,  and  judged  for  20  yrs.  after  the  victory 
at  Mizpeh,  he  would  have  been  near  90  yrs.  old 
(10?  +  20+20  ?  +  38?)  at  his  death,  which  appears 
to  have  been  a  long  period  of  life  at  that  time.  If 
we  thus  suppose  the  three  uncertain  intervals,  the 
residue  of  Joshua's  rule,  the  time  after  his  death  to 
the  First  Servitude,  and  Samuel's  rule  after  the 
victory  at  Mizpeh  to  have  been  respectively  6,  32, 
and  20  yrs.,  the  sum  of  the  whole  period  will  be 
(580  +  58  =  )  638  yrs.  Two  independent  large 
numbers  seem  to  confirm  this  result.  One  is  in  St. 
Paul's  address  at  Antioch  of  Pisidia,  where,  after 
speaking  of  the  Exodus  and  the  40  yrs.  in  the 
desert,  he  adds  :  "  And  when  he  had  destroyed  seven 
nations  in  the  land  of  Chanaan,  he  divided  their 
land  unto  them  by  lot.  And  after  that  he  gave 
[unto  them]  judges  about  the  space  of  four  hundred 
and  fifty  years,  until  Samuel  the  prophet.  And  after- 
ward they  desired  a  king"  (Acts  xiii.  19,  20,  21). 
This  interval  of  450  yrs.  may  be  variously  ex- 
plained, as  commencing  with  Othniel's  deliver- 
ance and  ending  with  Eli's  death,  a  period  which 
the  numbers  of  the  earlier  books  of  the  Bible,  if 
added  together,  make  422  yrs.,  or  as  commencing 
with  the  First  Servitude,  8  yrs.  more,  430  yrs., 
or  with  Joshua's  death,  which  would  raise  these 
numbers  by  about  30  yrs.,  or  again  it  may  be 
held  to  end  at  Saul's  accession,  which  would  raise 
the  numbers  given  respectively  by  about  40  yrs. 
However  explained,  this  sum  of  450  yrs.  supports 
the  authority  of  the  smaller  numbers  as  forming  an 
essentially  correct  measure  of  the  period.  The  other 
large  number  occurs  in  Jephthah's  message  to  the 
king  of  the  Children  of  Amman,  where  the  period 
during  which  Israel  had  held  the  land  of  the  Amo- 
rites  from  the  first  conquest  either  up  to  the  begin- 
ning of  the  Servitude  from  which  they  were  about 
to  be  freed,  or  up  to  the  very  time,  is  given  as 
300  yrs.  (Judg.  xi.  26).  The  smaller  numbers,  with 
the  addition  of  38  yrs.  for  two  uncertain  periods, 
would  make  these  intervals  respectively  346  and 
364  yrs.  Here,  therefore,  there  appears  to  be  an- 
other agreement  with  the  smaller  numbers,  although 
it  does  not  amount  to  a  positive  agreement,  since 
the  meaning  might  be  either  three  centuries,  as  a 
vague  sum,  or  about  300  yrs.  So  far  as  the  evi- 
dence of  the  numbers  goes,  we  must  decide  in  favour 
of  the  longer  interval  from  the  Exodus  to  the  build- 
ing of  the  First  Temple,  in  preference  to  the  period 
of  480  or  440  yrs.  The  evidence  of  the  genea- 
logies has  been  held  by  some  to  sustain  a  different 
conclusion.  These  lists,  as  they  now  stand,  would, 
if  of  continuous  generations,  be  decidedly  in  favour 
of  an  interval  of  about  300,  400,  or  even  500  years, 
some  being  much  shorter  than  others.  It  is,  how- 
ever, impossible  to  reduce  them  to  consistency  with 
each  other  without  arbitrarily  altering  some,  and  the 
result  with  those  who  have  followed  them  as  the 
safest  guides  has  been  the  adoption  of  the  shortest 
of  the  numbers  just  given,  about  300  yrs.e  The 
evidence  of  the  genealogies  may  therefore  be  consi- 
dered as  probably  leading  to  the  rejection  of  all  nu- 
merical statements,  but  as  perhaps  less  inconsistent 
with  that  of  480  or  440  yrs.  than  with  the  rest. 
We  have  already  shown  (Technical  Chronoloijif) 
what  strong  reasons  there  are  against  using  the 

e  Both  Bunsen  [Effypfs  Place,  i.  pp.  176,  7)  and 
Lepsius  (Chron.  d.  Aeg.  i.  p.  3(i0)  suppose  the  genea- 
logy of  Shaul  the  son  of  Czziah  the  Levite  (1  Chr.  vi. 
22-24,  comp.  33-38)  to  be  that  of  Saul  the  king  of 
Israel,  an  almost  unaccountable  mistake. 

Y  2 


324 


CHRONOLOGY 


Hebrew  genealogies  to  measure  time.  We  prefer 
to  hold  to  the  evidence  of  the  numbers,  and  to  take 
as  the  most  satisfactory  the  interval  of  about  608 
yrs.  from  the  Exodus  to  the  Foundation  of  Solomon's 
Temple. 

I).  Fourth  Period,  from  the  Foundation  of  So- 
lomon's Temple  to  its  Destruction. — We  have  now 
reached  a  period  in  which  the  differences  of  chronolo- 
gers  are  no  longer  to  be  measured  by  centuries  but 
by  tens  of  years  and  even  single  years,  and  towards 
the  close  of  which  accuracy  is  attainable.  The  most 
important  numbers  in  the  Bible  are  generally  stated 
more  than  once,  and  several  means  are  afforded  by 
which  their  accuracy  can  be  tested.  The  principal 
of  these  tests  are  the  statements  of  kings'  ages  at 
their  accessions,  the  doable  dating  of  the  accessions 
of  kings  of  Judah  in  the  reigns  of  kings  of  Israel 
and  the  converse,  and  the  double  reckoning  by  the 
years  of  kings  of  Judah  and  of  Nebuchadnezzar. 
Of  these  tests  the  most  valuable  is  the  second, 
which  extends  through  the  greater  part  of  the  period 
under  consideration,  and  prevents  our  making  any 
very  serious  error  in  computing  its  length.  The  men- 
tions of  kings  of  Egypt  and  Assyria  contemporary 
with  Hebrew  sovereigns  are  also  of  importance,  and 
are  likely  to  be  more  so,  when,  as  we  may  expect, 
the  chronologrcal  places  of  all  these  contemporaries 
are  more  nearly  determined.  All  records  therefore 
tending  to  fix  the  chronologies  of  Egvpt  and  Assy- 
ria, as  well  as  of  Babylonia,  are  of  great  value 
from  their  bearing  on  Hebrew  chronology.  At 
present  the  most  important  of  such  records  is  Pto- 
lemy's Canon,  from  which  no  sound  chronologer 
will  venture  to  deviate.  If  all  the  Biblical  evi- 
dence is  carefully  collected  and  compared  it  will 
be  found  that  some  small  and  great  inconsistencies 
necessitate  certain  changes  of  the  number's.  The 
amount  of  the  former  class  has  however  been  much 
exaggerated,  since  several  supposed  inconsistencies 
depend  upon  the  non-recognition  of  the  mode  of  reck- 
oning regnal  years,  from  the  commencement  of  the 
year  and  not  from  the  day  of  the  king's  accession. 
The  greater  difficulties  and  some  of  the  smaller 
cannot  be  resolved  without  the  supposition  that 
numbers  have  been  altered  by  copvists.  In  these 
cases  our  only  resource  is  to  propose  an  emenda- 
tion. We  must  never  take  refuge  in  the  idea  of  an 
interregnum,  since  it  is  a  much  more  violent  hvpo- 
thesis,  considering  the  facts  of  the  history,  than 
the  conjectural  change  of  a  number.  Two  interreg- 
nums have  however  been  supposed,  one  of  1 1  yrs. 
between  Jeroboam  II.  and  Zaehariah,  and  the  other, 
of  9  yrs.  between  Pekah  and  Hoshea.  The  former 
supposition  might  seem  to  receive  some  support 
from  the  words  of  the  prophet  Hosea  (x.  3,  7, 
and  perhaps  15),  which  however  may  as  well  imply 
a  lax  government,  and  the  great  power  of  the 
Israelite  princes  and  captains,  as  air  absolute  anarchy, 
and  we  must  remember  the  improbability  of  a  pow- 
erful sovereign  not  haying  been  at  once  succeeded 
by  his  son,  and  of  the  people  having  been  content 


f  In  the  book  of  Daniel  (i.  1)  the  3rd  year  of 
Jehoiakim  is  given  instead  of  the  4th,  which  may  be 
accounted  for  by  tire  circumstance  that  the  Baby- 
lonian year  commenced  earlier  tlian  the  Hebrew,  so 
that  Nebuchadnezzar's  1st  would  commence  in  Jehoi- 
akim's  3rd,  and  be  current  in  his  4th.  In  other 
books  of  the  Bible  the  years  of  Babylonian  king's  seem 
to  be  generally  Hebrew  current  years.  Two  other  diffi- 
culties may  be  noticed.  The  lSth  year  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar in  Jer.  lii.  29  seems  to  be  for  the  19th.     The 


CHRONOLOGY 

to  remain  for  some  years  without  a  king.  It  is  still 
more  unlikely  that  in  Hoshea's  case  a  king's  mur- 
derer should  have  been  able  to  take  his  place  after 
an  interval  of  9  yrs.  We  prefer  in  both  cases  to 
suppose  a  longer  reign  of  the  earlier  of  the  two 
kings  between  whom  the  interregnums  are  conjec- 
tured. With  the  exception  of  these  two  interreg- 
nums, we  would  accept  the  computation  of  the 
interval  we  are  now  considering  given  in  the 
margin  of  the  A.  V.  It  must  be  added,  that 
the  date  of  the  conclusion  of  this  period  there 
given  B.C.  588  must  be  corrected  to  586.  The 
received  chronology  as  to  its  intervals  cannot  indeed 
be  held  to  be  beyond  question  in  the  time  before 
Josiah's  accession*  up  to  the  Foundation  of  the 
Temple,  but  we  cannot  at  present  attain  any 
better  positive  result  than  that  we  have  accepted. 
The  whole  period  may  therefore  be  held  to  be  of 
about  425  yrs.,  that  of  the  undivided  kingdom 
120  yrs.,  that  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah  about  088 
yrs.,  and  that  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel  about  255 
yrs.  It  is  scarcely  possible  that  these  numbers  can 
be  more  than  a  very  few  years  wrong,  if  at  all. 
(For  a  fuller  treatment  of  the  chronology  of  the 
kings,  see  Israel,  Kingdom  of,  and  Judah, 
Kingdom  of.) 

E.  Fifth  Period,  from  the  Destruction  of  Solo- 
mon's Temple  to  the  Return  from  the  Babylonish 
Captivity. —  The  determination  of  the  length  of  this 
period  depends  upon  the  date  of  the  return  to  Pa- 
lestine. The  decree  of  Cyrus  leading  to  that  event 
was  made  in  the  1st  year-  of  his  reign,  doubtless  at 
Babylon  ( Ezr.  i.  1 ),  B.C.  538,  but  it  does  not  seem 
certain  that  the  Jews  at  once  returned.  So  great  a 
migration  must  have  occupied  much  time,  and 
about  two  or  three  yrs.  would  not  seem  too  long 
an  interval  for  its  complete  accomplishment  after 
the  promulgation  of  the  decree.  Two  numbers,  held 
by  some  to  be  identical,  must  here  be  considei  ed.  One 
is  the  period  of  70  yrs.,  during  which  the  tyranny 
of  Babylon  over  Palestine  and  the  East  generally 
was  to  last,  prophesied  by  Jeremiah  (xxv.),  and  the 
other,  the  70  yrs.  captivity  (xxix.  10  ;  2  Chr.  xxxvi. 
21;  Dan.  ix.  2).  The  commencement  of  the  former 
period  is  plainly  the  1st  year  of  Nebuchadnezzar 
and  4th  of  Jehoiakim  (Jer.  xxv.  1),  when  the  suc- 
cesses of  the  king  of  Babylon  began  (xlvi.  2),  and 
the  miseries  of  Jerusalem  (xxv.  29),f  and  the  con- 
clusion, the  fall  of  Babylon  (ver.  26)..  Ptolemy's 
Canon  counts  from  the  a«cession  of  Nebuchadnezzar 
to  that  of  Cyrus  M  yrs.,  a  number  sufficiently  near 
to  the  round  sum  of  70,  which  may  indeed,  if  the 
yrs.  be  of  360  days  ( Year)  represent  at  the  utmost 
no  more  than  about  69  tropical  yrs.  The  famous  70 
years  of  captivity  would  seem  to  be  the  same  period 
as  this,  since  it  was  to  terminate  with  the  return  of 
the  captives  (Jer.  xxix.  10).  The  two  passages  in 
Zech.,  which  speak  of  such  an  interval  as  one  of 
desolation  (i.  12),  and  during  which  fasts  connected 
with  the  last  captivity  had  been  kept  (vii.  5),  are 
not  irreconcileable  with  this  explanation:  a  famous 


difficulty  of  the  37th  year  of  Jehoiachin's  captivity, 
12m.  25d.  (Jer.),  or  27  (2  K.),  falling-  according  to 
the  rendering  of  the  A.  V.  in  the  1st  year  of  Evil-jUero- 
dach  (Jer.  lii.  31  ;  2  K.  xxv.  27),  may  be  explained, 
as  Dr.  Hincks  suggests,  either  by  supposing  the  Heb., 
"  in  the  year  when  he  was  king,"  to  mean  that  he 
reigned  but  one  year  instead  of  two,  as  in  the  canon, 
or  that  Evil-Merodaeb  is  not  the  Iluarodamus  of  the 
canon  (Journ.  Sacr.  Lit.  Oct.  1858). 


CHRONOLOGY 

past  peiiod  might  be  spoken  of,  as  the  modems  j 
speak  of  the  Thirty  Years  War.  These  two  pas-  I 
sages  are,  it  must  be  noticed,  of  ditlerent  dates,  i 
the  first  of  the  2nd  year  of  Darius  Hystaspis,  the 
second  of  the  4th  year. — This  period  we  consider 
to  be  of  48+.''  yrs.,  the  doubtful  number  being  the 
time  of  the  reign  ot  Cyrus  before  the  return  to 
Jerusalem,  probably  a  space  of  about  two  or  three 
years. 

Principal  systems  of  Biblical  Chronology. — 
Upon  the  data  we  have  considered  three  principal 
systems  of  Biblical  Chronology  have  been  founded, 
which  may  be  termed  the  Long  System,  the  Short, 
and  the  Rabbinical.  There  is  a  fourth,  which, 
although  an  offshoot  in  part  of  the  last,  can  scarcely 
be  termed  biblical,  inasmuch  as  it  depends  for  the 
most  part  upon  theories,  not  only  independent  of, 
but  repugnant  to  the  Bible  :  this  last  is  at  present 
peculiar  to  Baron  Bunsen.  Before  noticing  these 
systems  it  is  desirable  to  point  out  some  character- 
istics of  those  who  have  supported  them,  which 
may  serve  to  aid  our  judgment  in  seeing  how  far 
they  are  trustworthy  guides.  All,  or  almost  all, 
have  erred  on  the  side  of  claiming  for  their  results 
a  greater  accuracy  than  the  nature  of  the  evi- 
dence upon  which  they  rested  rendered  possible. 
Another  failing  of  these  chronologers  is  a  tendency 
to  accept,  through  a  kind  of  false  analogy,  long  or 
short  numbers  and  computations  for  intervals,  rather 
according  as  they  have  adopted  the  long  or  the  short 
reckoning  of  the  patriarchal  genealogies  than  on  a 
consideration  of  special  evidence.  It  is  as  though 
they  were  resolved  to  make  the  sum  as  great  or  as 
small  as  possible.  The  Rabbins  have  in  their  chro- 
nology afforded  the  strongest  example  of  this  error, 
having  so  shortened  the  intervals,  as  even  egregiously 
to  throw  out  the  dates  of  the  time  of  the  Persian 


CHRONOLOGY 


'621 


rule.  The  German  school  is  here  an  exception, 
lor  it  has  generally  fallen  into  an  opposite  extreme 
and  required  a  far  greater  time  than  any  derivable 
from  the  Biblical  numbers  for  the  eai  lier  ages,  while 
taking  the  Rabbinical  date  of  the  Exodus,  and  so 
has  put  two  portions  of  its  chronology  in  violent 
contrast.  We  do  not  lay  much  stress  upon  the 
opinions  of  the  early  Christian  wi  iters*  or  even 
Josephus :  their  method  was  uncritical,  and  they 
accepted  the  numbers  best  known  to  them  without 
any  feeling  of  doubt.  We  shall  therefore  confine 
ourselves  to  the  moderns. 

The  principal  advocates  of  the  Long  Chronology 
are  Jackson,  Hales,  and  Des-Vignoles.  They  take 
the  LXX.  for  the  patriarchal  generations,  and  adopt 
the  long  interval  from  the  Exodus  to  the  Foundation 
of  Solomon's  Temple.  The  Short  Chronology  has 
had  a  multitude  of  illustrious  supporters  owing  to 
its  having  been  from  Jerome's  time  the  recognised 
system  of  the  West.  Ussher  may  be  consideied  as 
its  most  able  advocate.  He  follows  the  Heb.  in 
the  patriarchal  generations,  and  takes  the  480  yrs. 
from  the  Exodus  to  the  Foundation  of  Solomon's 
Temple.  The  Rabbinical  Chronology  has  lately  come 
into  much  notice  from  its  partial  reception,  chiefly 
by  the  German  school.  It  accepts  the  biblical  num- 
bers, but  makes  the  most  arbitrary  corrections.  For 
the  date  of  the  Exodus  it  has  been  virtually  accepted 
by  Bunsen,  Lepsius,  and  Lord  A.  Hervey.  The 
system  of  Bunsen  we  have  been  compelled  to  con- 
stitute a  fourth  class  of  itself.  For  the  time 
before  the  Exodus  he  discards  all  biblical  chrono- 
logical data,  and  reasons  altogether,  as  it  appears 
to  us,  on  philological  considerations.  The  follow- 
ing table  exhibits  the  principal  dates  according  to 
five  writers. 


Creation 

Flood        

Abram  leaves  Ilaran 

Exodus 

Foundation  of  Solomon's  Temple 
Destruction  of         „  ,,  .  . 


Hales. 


B.C. 

5411 
3155 
2078 
1G48 
1027 
586 


Jackson. 


B.C. 

5426 
3170 
2023 
1593 
1014 
586 


B.C. 

4004 

2348 
1921 
1491 
1012 

588 


B.C. 

3983 
2327 
1961 
1531 
1012 
589 


Bunsen. 


B.C. 

(Adam)  cir.  20,000 
(Noah)   cir.  10,000 

1320 

1004 

586 


The  principal  disagreements  of  these  chronologers, 
besides  those  already  indicated,  must  be  noticed. 
In  the  post-diluvian  period  Hales  rejects  the  Second 
Cainan  and  reckons  Terah's  age  at  Abram's  birth 
130  instead  of  70  years  ;  Jackson  accepts  the  Second 
Cainan  and  does  not  make  any  change  in  the  second 
case;  Usher  and  Petavius  follow  the  Heb.,  but  the 
former  alters  the  generation  of  Terah,  while  the  latter 
does  not.  Bunsen  requires  "  for  the  Noachian  period 
about  ten  millenia  before  our  era  and  for  the  begin- 
ning of  our  race  another  ten  thousand  years,  or  very 
little  more"  (Outlines,  vol.  ii.  p.  L2).  These  con- 
clusions necessitate  the  abandonment  of  all  belief  in 
the  historical  character  of  the  biblical  account  of 
the  times  before  Abraham.  We  cannol  hered 
the  grounds  upon  which  they  seem  to  be  founded: 
it  may  be  stated,  however,  that  those  grounds  may 
be  consideied  to  he  wholly  philological.  The  writer 
does  indeed  speak  of  "facts  and  traditions:"  his 
facts,  however,  as  far  as  we  can  perceive,  are  the 
results  of  a  theory  of  language,  and  tradition  is, 
from  its  nature,  no  guide  in  chronology.  Bow  far 
language  can  be  taken  as  a  guide  is  a   very  hard 


question.  It  is,  however,  certain  that  no  Semitic 
scholar  has  accepted  Bunsen's  theory.  For  the  time 
from  the  Exodus  to  the  Foundation  of  Solomon's 
Temple,  Ussher  alone  takes  the  480  yrs.  ;  the  rest, 
except  Bunsen,  adopt  longer  periods  according  to 
their  explanations  of  the  other  numbers  of  this 
interval  ;  but  Bunsen  calculates  by  generations.  We 
have  already  seen  the  great  risk  that  is  run  in 
adopting  Hebrew  genealogies  for  the  measure  of 
time,  both  generally  and  in  this  case.  The  pei  iod  ol 
the  kings,  from  the  foundation  of  Solomon's  Temple, 
is  very  nearly  the  same  in  the  computations. of 
Jackson, Ussher, and  Petavius:  Hales  lengthens  it 
by  supposing  an  interregnum  of  II  yrs.  after  the 
death  of  Amaziah ;  Bunsen  short  educing 

the  reign  of  Manasseh  from  55  to  45  yrs.  The 
former   theory  is  improbable  and  uncritifed;   the 

latter  is  merely  the  resi  H  of  a  sup] I  necessity, 

which  we  sh;;ll  see  has  not  been  proved  to  exist;  it 
is  thus  dless,  and  in  its  form  as  uncritical  as  the 

other. 

!'■■. '.  .  'lion  of  dates  and  intervals. — 

Having  thus  gone  over  the  biblical  data,  it  only  re- 


326 


CHRONOLOGY 


mains  for  us  to  state  what  we  believe  to  be  the 
most  satisfactory  scheme  of  chronology,  derived 
from  a  comparison  of  these  with  foreign  data. 
We  shall  endeavour  to  establish  on  independent 
evidence,  either  exactly  or  approximatively,  certain 
main  dates,  and  shall  be  content  if  the  numbers 
we  have  previously  obtained  for  the  intervals  be- 
tween them  do  not  greatly  disagree  with  those  thus 
afforded. 

1.  Date  of  the  Destruction  of  Solomon's  Temple. 
— The  Temple  was  destroyed  in  the  19th  year 
of  Nebuchadnezzar,  in  the  5th  month  of  the  Jewish 
year  (Jer.  lii.  12,  13  ;  2  K.  xrv.  8,  9).  In  Pto- 
lemy's Canon,  this  year  is  current  in  the  proleptic 
Julian  year,  B.C.  588,  and  the  5th  month  may 
be  considered  as  about  equal  to  August  of  that 
year. 

2.  Synchronism  of  Josiah  and  Pharaoh  Necho. — 
The  death  of  Josiah  can  be  clearly  shown  on 
biblical  evidence  to  have  taken  place  in  the  22nd 
year  before  that  in  which  the  temple  was  de- 
stroyed, that  is,  in  the  Jewish  year  from  the 
spring  of  B.C.  608  to  the  spring  of  607.  Necho's 
1st  year  is  proved  by  the  Apis-tablets  to  have  been 
most  probably  the  Egyptian  vague  year,  Jan.  B.C. 
609-8,  but  possibly  B.C.  610-9.  The  expedition  in 
opposing  which  Josiah  fell,  cannot  be  reasonably 
dated  earlier  than  Necho's  2nd  year,  B.C.  609-8 
or  608-7.  It  is  important  to  notice  that  no  earlier 
date  of  the  destruction  of  the  temple  than  B.C.  586 
can  be  reconciled  with  the  chronology  of  Necho's 
reign.  We  have  thus  B.C.  608-7  for  the  last  year 
of  Josiah,  and  638-7  for  that  of  his  accession,  the 
former  date  falling  within  the  time  indicated  by 
the  chronology  of  Necho's  reign. 

3.  Synchronism  of  Hezekiah  and  Tirhakah. — 
Tirhakah  is  mentioned  as  an  opponent  of  Senna- 
cherib shortly  before  the  miraculous  destruction  of 
his  army  in,  according  to  the  present  text,  the 
14th  year  of  Hezekiah.  It  has  been  lately  proved 
from  the  Apis-tablets  that  the  1st  year  of  Tirhakah' s 
reign  over  Egypt  was  the  vague  year  current  in 
B.C.  689.  The  14th  year  of  Hezekiah,  according 
to  the  received  chronology  is  B.C.  713,  and,  if  we 
correct  it  two  yrs.  on  account  of  the  lowering 
of  the  date  of  the  destruction  of  the  Temple,  B.C. 
711.  If  (Rawlinson's  Herod,  vol.  i.  p.  479,  n.  1)  we 
hold  that  the  expedition  dated  in  Hezekiah' s  14th 
year  was  different  from  that  which  ended  in  the  de- 
struction of  the  Assyrian  army,  we  must  still  place 
the  latter  event  before  B.C.  695.  There  is,  there- 
fore, a  prima  facie  discrepancy  of  at  least  6  yrs. 
Bunsen  (Bibelwerk,  i.  p.  cccvi.)  unhesitatingly  re- 
duces the  reign  of  Manasseh  from  55  to  45  yrs. 
Lepsius  (Koniijsbuch,  p.  104)  more  critically  takes 
the  35  yrs.  of  the  LXX.  as  the  true  duration. 
Were  an  alteration  demanded,  it  would  seem  best 
to  make  Manasseh's  computation  of  his  reign  com- 
mence with  his  father's  illness  in  preference  to 
taking  the  conjectural  number  45  or  the  very  short 
one  35.  The  evidence  of  the  chronology  of  the 
Assyrian  and  Babylonian  kings  is,  however,  we 
think,  conclusive  in  favour  of  the  sum  of  55.  In 
the  Bible  we  are  told  that  Shalmaneser  laid  siege 
to  Samaria  in  the  4th  year  of  Hezekiah,  and  that  it 
was  taken  in  the  6th  year  of  that  king  (2  K.  xviii.  9, 
10).  The  Assyrian  inscriptions  indicate  the  taking 
of  the  city  by  Sargon  in  his  1st  or  2nd  year,  whence 
we  must  suppose  either  that  he  completed  the  enter- 
prise of  Shalmaneser,  to  whom  the  capture  is  not 
expressly  ascribed  in  the  Scriptures,  or  that  lie  took 
the  credit  of  an  event  which  happened  just  before 


CHRONOLOGY 

his  accession.     The  1st  year  of  Sargon  is  shown  by 
the  inscriptions  to  have  been  exactly  or  nearly  equal 
to  the  1st  of  Merodach-Baladan,  Mardocempadus : 
therefore  it  was  current  B.C.  721  or  720,  and  the 
2nd  year,  720  or  719.     This  would  place  Heze- 
kiah's accession  B.C.  726,  725,  or  724,  the   3rd 
being  the  very  date   the  Hebrew  numbers   give. 
Again,  Merodach-Baladan  sent  messengers  to  Heze- 
kiah immediately  after  his  sickness,  and  therefore 
in  about  his  15th  year  B.C.  710.     According  to 
Ptolemy's  Canon,  Mardocempadus  reigned  721-710, 
and,  according  to  Berosus,  seized  the  regal  power  for 
6  mouths  before  Elibus,  the  Belibus  of  the  Canon, 
and  therefore  in  about  703,  this  being,  no  doubt, 
a  second  reign.     Here   the  preponderance  of  evi- 
dence is  in  favour  of  the  earlier  dates  of  Hezekiah. 
Thus   far   the   chronological   data   of  Egypt   and 
Assyria  appear  to  clash  in  a  manner  that  seems  at 
first  sight  to  present  a  hopeless  knot,  but  not  on 
this  account  to  be  rashly  cut.     An  examination  of 
the  facts  of  the  history  has  afforded  Dr.  Hincks 
what  we  believe  to  be  the  true  explanation.     Tir- 
hakah, he  observes,  is  not  explicitly  termed  Pha- 
raoh or  king  of  Egypt  in  the   Bible,  but  king  of 
Cush  or  Ethiopia,  from  which  it  might  be  inferred 
that  at  the  time  of  Sennacherib's  disastrous  inva- 
sion he  had  not  assumed  the  crown  of  Egypt.    The 
Assyrian  inscriptions  of  Sennacherib  mention  kings 
of  Egypt  and   a  contemporary  king  of  Ethiopia 
in  alliance  with  them.     The  history  of  Egypt  at 
the  time,  obtained  by  a  comparison  of  the  evidence 
of  Herodotus  and  others  with  that  of  Manetho's 
lists,  would   lead    to    the   same  or  a  similar  con- 
clusion, which  appears  to  be  remarkably  confirmed 
by  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah.     We  hold,  therefore, 
as   most   probable,   that,    at   the  time   of  Senna- 
cherib's disastrous  expedition,  Tirhakah  was  king 
of  Ethiopia   in   alliance  with    the   king   or   kings 
of  Egypt.     It  only  remains  to  ascertain  what  evi- 
dence   there    is  for   the  date   of  this   expedition. 
First  it  must  be  noted  that  the  warlike  operations 
of  Sennacherib  recorded  in  the   Bible  have  been 
conjectured,  as  already  mentioned,  to  be  those  of 
two   expeditions.      The  fine  paid  by  Hezekiah    is 
recorded  in  the  inscriptions  as  a  result  of  an  expe- 
dition of  Sennacherib's  3rd  year,  which,  by  a  com- 
parison of  Ptolemy's  Canon  with  Berosus,  must 
be  dated  B.C.  700,  which  would  fall  so  near  the 
close   of  the   reign  of  the  king   of  Judah,   if  no 
alteration  be  made,  that  the  supposed  second  expe- 
dition, of  which  there  would  naturally  be  no  record 
in   the  Assyrian   annals   on    account   of  its   cala- 
mitous end,  could  not  be  placed  much  later.     The 
biblical  account  would,  however,  be  most  reason- 
ably explained  by   the   supposition  that  the  two 
expeditions  were  but  two  campaigns  of  the  same 
war,  a  war  but  temporarily  interrupted  by  Heze- 
kiah's submission.     Since  the  first   expedition  tell 
in  B.C.  700,  we  have  not  to  suppose  that  the  reign 
of  Tirhakah   in    Ethiopia   commenced   more  than 
11  yrs.  at  the  utmost  before  his  accession  in  Egypt, 
a  supposition  which,  on  the  whole,  is  far  preferable 
to  the  dislocating  attempts  that  have  been  made  to 
lower  the  reign  of  Hezekiah.     This  would,  how- 
ever, necessitate  a  substitution  of  a-  later  date  in  the 
place  of  the  14th  year  of  Hezekiah  for  the  first 
expedition.    (See  especially  Dr.  Hincks's  paper  "  On 
the  Rectifications  of  Sacred  and  Profane  Chrono- 
logy, which  the  newly-discovered  Apis-steles  render 
necessary,"  in  the  Journal  of  Sacred  Literature, 
Oct.  1858  ;  and  Rawlinson's  Herod,  i.  pp.  478-480). 
The    synchronisms    of   Hoshea    and    Shalmaneser, 


CHRONOLOGY 

Pekah  and  Tiglath-Pileser,  Menahem  and  Pul, 
have  not  yet  been  approximative^  determined  on 
double  evidence. 

4.  Synchronism  of  Bchoboam  and  Shishak. — 
The  biblical  evidence  for  this  synchronism  is  as 
follows :  Kehoboam  appears  to  have  come  to  the 
throne  about  249  yrs.  before  the  accession  of 
Hezekiah,  and  therefore  B.C.  cir.  973.  The  inva- 
sion of  Shishak  took  place  in  his  5th  year,  by  this 
computation,  969.  Shishak  was  already  on  the 
throne  when  Jeroboam  fled  to  him  from  Solomon. 
This  event  happened  during  the  building  of  Millo, 
&C,  when  Jeroboam  was  head  of  the  workmen 
of  the  house  of  Joseph  (1  K.  xi.  26-40,  see  esp. 
ver.  29).  The  building  of  Millo  and  repairing  of 
the  breaches  of  the  city  of  David  was  after  the 
building  of  the  house  of  Pharaoh's  daughter,  that 
was  constructed  about  the  same  time  as  Solomon's 
house,  the  completion  of  which  is  dated  in  his  23rd 
year  (1  K.  vi.  1,  37,  38,  vii.  1 ;  2  Chr.  viii.  1). 
This  building  is  recorded  after  the  occurrences  of 
the  24th  year  of  Solomon,  for  Pharaoh's  daughter 
remained  in  Jerusalem  until  the  king  had  ended 
building  his  own  house,  and  the  temple,  and  the 
wall  of  Jerusalem  round  about  (1  K.  iii.  1),  and 
Millo  was  built  after  the  removal  of  the  queen 
(ix.  24)  ;  therefore,  as  Jeroboam  was  concerned  in 
this  building  of  Millo  and  repairing  the  breaches, 
and  was  met  "  at  that  time  "  (xi.  29)  by  Ahijah, 
and  in  consequence  had  to  flee  from  the  country, 
the  24th  or  25th  year  is  the  most  probable  date. 
Thus  Shishak  appears  to  have  come  to  the  throne 
at  least  21  or  22  yrs.  before  his  expedition  against 
Kehoboam.  An  inscription  at  the  quarries  of 
Silsilis  in  Upper  Egypt  records  the  cutting  of 
stone  in  the  22nd  year  of  Sheshonk  I.,  or  Shishak, 
for  constructions  in  the  chief  temple  of  Thebes, 
where  we  now  find  a  record  of  his  conquest  of 
Judah  (Champollion,  Lettres,  pp.  190,  191).  On 
these  grounds  we  may  place  the  accession  of  Shishak 
B.C.  cir.  990.  The  evidence  of  Manetho's  lists, 
compared  with  the  monuments,  would  place  this 
event  within  a  few  years  of  this  date,  for  they  do 
not  allow  us  to  put  it  much  before  or  after  B.C. 
1000,  an  approach  to  correctness  which  at  this 
period  is  very  valuable.  It  is  not  possible  here  to 
discuss  this  evidence  in  detail. 

5.  Exodus. — Arguments  founded  on  independent 
evidence  afford  the  best  means  of  deciding  which  is 
the  most  probable  computation  from  Biblical  evi- 
dence of  the  date  of  the  Exodus.  A  comparison  of 
the  Hebrew  calendar  with  the  Egyptian  has  led  the 
writer  to  the  following  result : — The  civil  com- 
mencement of  the  Hebrew  year  was  with  the  new- 
moon  nearest  to  the  autumnal  equinox ;  and  at  the 
approximative  date  of  the  Exodus  obtained  by  the 
long  reckoning,  we  find  that  the  Egyptian  vague 
year  commenced  at  or  about  that  point  of  time. 
This  approximative  date,  therefore,  falls  about  the 
time  at  which  the  vague  year  and  the  Hebrew  year, 
as  dated  from  the  autumnal  equinox,  nearly  or 
exactly  coincided  in  their  commencements.  It  may 
be  reasonably  supposed  that  the  Israelites  in  the 
time  of  the  oppression  had  made  use  of  the  vague 
year  as  the  common  year  of  the  country,  which 
indeed  is  rendered  highly  probable  by  the  circum- 
stance that  they  had  mostly  adopted  the  Egyptian  reli- 
gion (Josh.  xxiv.  14;  Ez.  xx.  7,  8),  the  celebrations 
of  which  were  kept  according  to  this  year.  When, 
therefore,  the  festivals  of  the  Law  rendered  a  year 
virtually  tropical  necessary,  of  the  kind  either  restored 
or  instituted  at  the  Exodus,  it  seems  most  probable 


CHRONOLOGY 


327 


that  the  current  vague  year  was  fixed  under  Moses. 
If  this  supposition  be  correct,  we  should  expect  to 
find  that  the  14th  day  of  Abib,  on  which  tell  the 
full-moon  of  the  Passover  of  the  Exodus,  corre- 
sponded to  the  14th  day  of  a  Phamenoth,  in  a  vague 
year  commencing  about  the  autumnal  equinox.  It 
has  been  ascertained  by  computation  that  a  full  moon 
fell  on  the  14th  day  of  Phamenoth,  on  Thursday, 
April  21st,  in  the  year  B.C.  1652.S  A  full  moon 
would  not  fall  on  the  same  day  of  the  vague  year  at 
a  shorter  interval  than  25  yrs.  before  or  after  this 
date,  while  the  triple  coincidence  of  the  new  moon, 
vague  year,  and  autumnal  equinox  could  not  recur 
in  less  than  1500  vague  years  (Enc.  Brit.  8th  ed. 
Egypt,  p.  458).  The  date  thus  obtained  is  but  4  yrs. 
earlier  than  Hales's,  and  the  interval  from  it  to  that 
of  the  Foundation  of  Solomon's  Temple,  B.C.  cir. 
1010,  would  be  about  642  yrs.  or  4  yrs.  in  ex- 
cess of  that  previously  obtained  from  the  numerical 
statements  in  the  Bible.  It  must  be  borne  in  mind 
that  the  inferences  from  the  celebration  of  great 
passovers  also  led  us  to  about  the  same  time. 
In  later  articles  we  shall  show  the  manner  in 
which  the  history  of  Egypt  agrees  with  this  con- 
clusion. [Egyi>t  ;  Exodus,  the.]  Setting  aside 
Usher's  preference  for  the  480  yrs.,  as  resting  upon 
evidence  far  less  strong  than  the  longer  compu- 
tation, we  must  mention  the  principal  reasons 
urged  by  Bunsen  and  Lepsius  in  support  of  the 
Rabbinical  date.  The  reckoning  by  the  genealogies, 
upon  which  this  date  rests,  we  have  already  shown 
to  be  unsafe.  Several  points  of  historical  evidence 
are,  however,  brought  forward  by  these  writers  as 
leading  to  or  confirming  this  date.  Of  these  the 
most  important  is  the  supposed  account  of  the 
Exodus  given  by  Manetho,  the  Egyptian  historian, 
placing  the  event  at  about  the  same  time  as  the 
Rabbinical  date.  This  narrative,  however,  is,  on 
the  testimony  of  Josephus,  who  has  preserved  it  to 
us,  wholly  devoid  of  authority,  being,  according  to 
Manetho's  own  showing,  a  record  of  uncertain  anti- 
quity, and  of  an  unknown  writer,  and  not  part  of  the 
Egyptian  annals.  An  indication  of  date  has  also 
been  supposed  in  the  mention  that  the  name  of  one 
of  the  treasure-cities  built  for  Pharaoh  by  the 
Israelites  during  the  oppression,  was  Raamses  (Ex. 
i.  11),  probably  the  same  place  as  the  Rameses 
elsewhere  mentioned,  the  chief  town  of  a  tract  so 
called.  [Rameses.]  This  name  is  the  same  as  that 
of  certain  well-known  kings  of  Egypt  of  the  period  to 
which  by  this  scheme  the  Exodus  would  be  referred. 
If  the  story  given  by  Manetho  be  founded  on  a  true 
tradition  the  great  oppressor  would  have  been 
Rameses  II.,  second  king  of  the  19th  dynasty, 
whose  reign  is  variously  assigned  to  the  14th  and 
13th  centuries  B.C.  It  is  further  urged  that  the 
first  king  Rameses  of  the  Egyptian  monuments  and 
Manetho's  lists  is  the  grandfather  of  this  king, 
Rameses  I.,  who  was  the  last  sovereign  of  the  18th 
dynasty,  and  reigned  at  the  utmost  about  60 
yrs.  before  his  grandson.  It  must,  however,  be 
observed,  that  there  is  great  reason  for  taking  the 
lower  dates  of  both  kings,  which  would  make  the 
reign  of  the  second  after  the  Rabbinical  date  of  the 
Exodus,  mid  that  in  this  case  both  Manetho's  state- 
ment must  be  of  course  set  aside,  as.  placing  the 
Exodus  in  the  reign  of  this  king's  son,  and  the  order 
of  the  Biblical   narrative  must  be  transposed  that 


e  Ti  is  was  calculated  for  the  writer  at  the  Roya! 
Observatory,  through  the  kindness  of  the  Astronomer- 
Royal.— JSbroe  Aiij.  p.  'J  17. 


328 


CHRONOLOGY 


the  building  of  Eaamses  should  not  fall  before  the 
accession  of  Rameses  I.  The  argument  that  there 
was  no  king  Rameses  before  Rameses  I.  is  obviously 
weak  as  a  negative  one,  more  especially  as  the  names 
of  very  many  kings  of  Egypt,  particularly  those  of 
the  period  to  which  we  assign  the  Exodus,  are 
wanting.  It  loses  almost  all  its  force  when  we 
find  that  a  son  of  Aahmes,  Amosis,  the  head  of  the 
18th  dynasty,  variously  assigned  to  the  17th  and 
16th  centuries  B.C.  bore  the  name  of  Rameses,  which 
name  from  its  meaning  (son  of  Ra  or  the  sun,  the 
god  of  Heliopolis,  one  of  the  eight  great  gods  of 
Egypt)  would  almost  necessarily  be  a  not  very  un- 
common one,  and  Raamses  might  therefore  have 
been  named  from  an  earlier  king  or  prince  bearing  the 
name  long  before  Rameses  I.  The  history  of  Egypt 
presents  great  difficulties  to  the  reception  of  the 
theory  together  with  the  Biblical  narrative,  diffi- 
culties so  great  that  we  think  they  could  only  be 
removed  by  abandoning  a  belief  in  the  historical 
character  of  that  narrative  :  if  so,  it  is  obviously 
futile  to  found  an  argument  upon  a  minute  point, 
the  occurrence  of  a  single  name.  The  historical 
difficulties  on  the  Hebrew  side  in  the  period  after  the 
Exodus  are  not  less  serious,  and  have  induced  Bunsen 
to  antedate  Moses'  war  beyond  Jordan,  and  to  com- 
press Joshua's  rule  into  the  40  yrs.  in  the  wilderness 
CBibelwerk,  pp.  ccxxviii,  ix),  and  so,  we  venture 
to  think,  to  forfeit  his  right  to  reason  on  the  details 
of  the  narrative  relating  to  the  earlier  period.  This 
compression  arises  from  the  want  of  space  for  the 
Judges.  The  chronology  of  events  so  obtained  is 
also  open  to  the  objection  brought  against  the 
longer  schemes,  that  the  Israelites  could  not  have 
been  in  Palestine  during  the  campaigns  in  the  East 
of  the  Pharaohs  of  the  18th,  19th,  and  20th 
dvnasties,  since  it  does  not  seem  possible  to  throw 
those  of  Rameses  III.  earlier  than  Bunsen's  date  of 
the  beginning  of  the  conquest  of  western  Palestine 
by  the  Hebrews.  This  question,  involving  that  of 
the  policies  and  relation  of  Egypt  and  the  Hebrews, 
will  be  discussed  in  later  articles.  [Egypt  ; 
Exodus,  the.]  We  therefore  take  B.C.  1652  as 
the  most  satisfactory  date  of  the  Exodus  (see  Duke 
of  Northumberland's  paper  in  Wilkinson's  Anc.  Eg. 
i.  pp.  77-81;  Bunsen,  Bibelwerk,  i.  pp.  ccxi-ccxiii, 
ccxxiii.  seqq. ;  Lepsius,  Chronologic  der  Aegypter, 
i.  pp.  314,  seqq.) 

6.  Date  of  the  Commencement  of  the  430  years 
of  Sojourn. — We  have  already  given  our  reasons  for 
holding  the  430  years  of  Sojourn  to  have  com- 
menced when  Abraham  entered  Palestine,  ami  that 
it  does  not  seem  certain  that  the  Exodus  was  the 
anniversary  of  the  day  of  arrival.  It  is  reasonable, 
however,  to  hold  that  the  interval  was  of  430  com- 
plete years  or  a  little  more,  commencing  about  the 
time  of  the  vernal  equinox,  B.C.  2082,  or  nearer 
the  beginning  of  that  proleptic  Julian  year.  Before 
this  date  we  cannot  attempt  to  obtain  anything 
beyond  an  approximative  chronology. 

7.  Date  of  the  Dispersion. — Taking  the  LXX. 
numbers  as  most  probable,  the  Dispersion,  if  co- 
incident with  the  birth  of  Peleg,  must  be  placed 
B.C.  cir.  2698,  or,  if  we  accept  Ussher's  correction 
of  the  age  of  Terah  at  the  birth  of  Abraham,  cir. 
2758. h  We  do  not  give  round  numbers,  since  doing 
so  might  needlessly  enlarge  the  limits  of  error. 

8.  Date  of  the  Flood. — The   Flood,    as    ending 


h  Abraham  is  said  to  have  been  7  5  years  old  when 
he  left  Haran  (Gen.  xii.  4),  but  this  docs  not  neces- 
sarily imply  that  he  had  done  more  than  enter  upon 


CHUB 

about  401  yrs.  before  the  biith  of  Peleg,  would  be 
placed  B.C.  cir.  3099  or  3159.  The  year  preceding, 
or  the  402nd,  was  that  mainly  occupied  by  the 
catastrophe.  It  is  most  reasonable  to  suppose  the 
Noachian  colonists  to  have  begun  to  spread  about 
three  centuries  after  the  Flood.  If  the  Division  at 
Peleg's  birth  be  really  the  same  as  the  Dispersion 
after  the  building  of  the  Tower,  this  supposed  in- 
terval would  not  be  necessarily  to  be  lengthened, 
for  the  text  of  the  account  of  the  building  of  the 
Tower  does  uot  absolutely  prove  that  all  Noah's 
descendants  were  concerned  in  it,  and  therefore  some 
may  have  previously  taken  their  departure  from 
the  primeval  settlement.  The  chronology  of  Egypt, 
derived  fiom  the  monuments  and  Manetho,  is  held  by 
some  to  indicate  for  the  foundation  of  its  first  king- 
dom a  much  earlier  period  than  would  be  consistent 
with  this  scheme  of  approximative  biblical  dates. 
The  evidence  of  the  mouuments,  however,  does  not 
seem  to  us  to  carry  back  this  event  earlier  than 
the  later  part  of  the  28th  century  B.C.  The  As- 
syrians and  Babylonians  have  uot  been  proved,  on 
satisfactory  grounds,  to  have  reckoned  back  to  so 
remote  a  time ;  but  the  evidence  of  their  monu- 
ments, and  the  fragments  of  their  history  pre- 
served by  ancient  writers,  as  in  the  case  of  the 
Egyptians,  cannot  be  reconciled  with  the  short 
interval  preferred  by  Usher.  As  far  as  we  can 
learn,  no  independent  historical  evidence  points 
to  an  earlier  period  than  the  middle  of  the  28th 
century  B.C.  as  the  time  of  the  foundation  of 
kingdoms,  although  the  chronology  of  Egypt  reaches 
to  about  this  period,  while  that  of  Babylon  and 
other  states  does  not  greatly  fall  short  of  the  same 
antiquity. 

9.  Date  of  the  Creation  of  Adam. — The  num- 
bers given  by  the  LXX.  for  the  antediluvian 
patriarchs  would  place  the  creation  of  Adam  2262 
yrs.  before  the  end  of  the  Flood,  or  B.C.  cir.  5361 
or  5421.  [R.  S.  P.] 

CHRYSOLITE  (Xpva-o\l6os),  the  precious 
stone  which  garnished  the  seventh  foundation  of 
the  New  Jerusalem  in  St.  John's  vision.  According 
to  Schleusner,  a  gem  of  golden  hue,  or  rather  of 
yellow  streaked  with  green  and  white.  (See  Plin. 
xxvii.  9  ;  Isidor.  Origg  xvi.  14.)  It  seems  to  have 
been  a  species  of  topaz.  [W.  D.] 

CHRYSOPRASUS  (xpvff6Trpa<ros ;  chryso- 
prasus),  an  Indian  translucent  gem,  so  called  as 
resembling  in  colour  the  juice  of  the  leek  (jrpaaov), 
with  golden  spots  (xpvaSs) — a  species  of  beryl, 
supposed  to  be  possessed  of  healing  power  in 
diseases  of  the  eyes.  The  word  occurs  only  once 
(in  Rev.  xxi.  20),  where  it  is  the  tenth  of  the 
precious  stones  with, which  the  walls  of  the  new 
Jerusalem  were  garnished.  Its  spotted  character 
may  be  inferred  from  the  name  given  to  it  by  Pliny 
(H.  N.  xxxvii.  c.  8),  pardalios,  from  its  resembling 
the  leopard-skin  (see  Braun.  de  Vest.  Sac.  Ileb.  ii. 
c.  9.  p.  509).  [W.  D.] 

CHUB  (3-13  ;  Ai'/3ues;  Chub),  a  word  occur- 
ring only  once  in  the  Heb.,  the  name  of  a  people 
in  alliance  with  Egypt  in  the  time  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar (Ez.  xxx.  5).  "  Cush,  and  Phut,  and  Lud, 
and  all  the  mingled  people  (2~}V),  and  Chub,  and 
the  children  of  the  land  of  the  covenant,  shall  fall 

his  75th  year.  (Comp.  the  case  of  Noah,  vii.  6,  11, 
13.)  All  the  dates,  therefore,  before  b.c.  20S2, 
might  have  to  be  lowered  one  year. 


CHUN 

by  the  sword  with  them "  (i.  e.  no  doubt  the 
Egyptians:  see  ver.  4).  The  first  three  of  these 
names  or  designations  are  of  African  peoples,  un- 
less, but  this  is  improbable,  the  Shemite  Lud  be  in- 
tended by  the  third  (see,  however,  xxvii.  10,  xxxviii, 
5 ;  Is.  lxvi.  19 ;  Jer.  xlvi.  9) ;  the  fourth  is  of  a 
people  on  the  Egyptian  frontier  ;  and  the  sixth  pro- 
bably applies  to  the  remnant  of  the  Jews  who  had 
tied  into  Egypt  (comp.  Dan.  xi.  28,  30,  32,  espe- 
cially the  last,  where  the  covenant  is  not  qualified 
as  "holy"),  which  was  prophesied  to  perish  for 
the  most  part  by  the  sword  and  otherwise  in  that 
country  (Jer.  xlii.  16,  17.  22,  xliv.  12,13,  14,  27, 
28).  This  fifth  name  is  therefore  that  of  a  country 
or  people  in  alliance  with  Egypt,  and  probably  of 
northern  Africa,  or  of  the  lands  near  Egypt  to  the 
south.  Some  have  proposed  to  recognise  Chub  in 
the  names  of  various  African  places  — Ko^t),  a  port 
on  tlic  Indian  Ocean  (Ptol.  iv.  7,  §10),  Xa>/3ctT  or 
Xuifld.9  in  Mauritania  (iv.  2,  §9),  and  K&fiiov  or 
KoijSiou  in  the  Mareotic  nome  in  Egypt  (iv.  5) — 
conjectures  which  are  of  no  value  except  as  showing 
the  existence  of  similar  names  where  we  might 
expect  this  to  have  had  its  place.  Others,  however, 
think  the  present  Heb.  text  corrupt  in  this  word. 
It  has  been  therefore  proposed  to  read  3/13  for 
Nubia,  as  the  Arab.  vers,  has  "  the  people  the 
Noobeh,"  whence  it  might  be  supposed  that  at 
least  one  copy  of  the  LXX.  had  v  as  the  first  letter  : 
one  Heb.  MS.  indeed  reads  31J3  (Cod.  409,  ap. 
de  Rossi).  The  Arab.  vers,  is,  however,  of  very 
slight  weight,  and  although  3123  might  be  the 
ancient  Egyptian  form  or  pronunciation  of  31} ,  as 
Winer  observes  (s.  v.),  yet  we  have  no  authority 
of  this  kind  for  applying  it  to  Nubia,  or  rather  the 
Nubae,  the  countries  held  by  whom  from  Strabo's 
time  to  our  own  are  by  the  Egyptian  inscriptions 
included  in  Keesh  or  Kesh,  that  is,  Cush :  the  Nubae, 
however,  may  not  in  the  prophet's  days  have  been 
settled  in  any  part  of  the  territory  which  has  taken 
from  them  its  name.  Far  better,  on  the  score  of 
probability,  is  the  emendation  which  Hitzig  pro- 
poses, 2>h  (Begriff  der  Kritik,  p.  129).  The 
Lubim,  doubtless  the  Mizraite  Lehabim  of  Gen.  x. 
13;  1  Chr.  i.  11,  are  mentioned  as  serving  with 
Cushim  in  the  army  of  Shishak  (2  Chr.  xii.  2, 
■">).  and  in  that  of  Zerah  (xvi.  8,  comp.  xiv.  9), 
who  was  most  probably  also  a  king  of.  Egypt, 
and  certainly  the  Leader  of  an  Egyptian  army 
[CuSH ;  Zerah].  Nahum  speaks  of  them  as 
helpers  of  Thebes,  together  .with  1'ut  (Phut),  while 
Cush  and  Egypt  were  her  strength  (iii.  8,  9);  and 
Daniel  mentions  the  Lubim  and  Cushim  as  sub- 
mitting to  or  courting  a  conqueror  of  Egypt  (xi. 
43  ).  The  Lubim  might  therefore  well  occur  among 
the  peoples  suffering  in  the  fall  of  Egypt.  There 
is,  however,  this  objection,  thai  we  have  no  instance 
of  the  supposed  form  31?,  the  noun  being  always 
given  in  the  plural — L.UBIM.  In  the  absence  of 
better  evidence  we  prefer  the  reading  of  the  pre- 
sent Hell,  text,  against  winch  little  call  be  urged 
but  that  the  woid  occurs  nowhere  else,  although 
we  should  rather  expect  a  well-known  name  in 
such  a  passage.  [R.  S.  1'.] 

CHUN      (|13    ;       6K      TWV      iKhtKTOJV      Tr6Kt<llV  \ 

Joseph.  Mdxuvt  ;  Chun.  The  words  of  the 
LXX.  look  as  if  they  had  read  l'.erothai,  a  word 
very  like  which — TT"Q-!-they  frequently  render 
by  1k\skt6s),  1  Chr.  xvni.  8.      |  BEBOTHAH.] 


CILICIA 


329 


CHUSH'AN  -  BISHATHA'TM  (JCM3 

D*nj?BH  ;    Xoucrapffadal/x  ;    Chusan  Rdsathaim  ). 

the  king  of  Mesopotamia  who  oppressed  Israel  dining 
eight  years  in  the  generation  immediately  following 
Joshua  (Judg.  iii.  8).  The  seat  of  his  dominion 
was  probably  the  region  between  the  Euphrates  and 
the  Khabour,  to  which  the  name  of  Mesopotamia 
always  attached  in  a  special  way.  In  the  early  cu- 
neiform inscriptions  this  country  appears  to  be  quite 
distinct  from  Assyria  ;  it  is  inhabited  by  a  people 
called  Nairi,  who  are  divided  into  a  vast  number 
of  petty  tribes  and  offer  but  little  resistance  to  the 
Assyrian  armies.  No  centralised  monarchy  is  found, 
but  as  none  of  the  Assyrian  historical  inscriptions 
date  earlier  than  about  B.C.  1100,  which  is  some 
centuries  later  than  the  time  of  Chushan,  it  is  of 
course  quite  possible  that  a  very  different  condition 
of  things  may  have  existed  in  his  day.  In  the  weak 
and  divided  state  of  Western  Asia  at  this  time,  it 
was  easy  for  a  brave  and  skilful  chief  to  build  up 
rapidly  a  vast  power,  which  was  apt  to  crumble 
away  almost  as  quickly.  The  case  of  Solomon  is 
an  instance.  Chushan-Rishathaim's  yoke  was  broken 
from  the  neck  of  the  people  of  Israel  at  the  end  of 
eight  years  by  Othniel,  Caleb's  nephew  (Judg.  iii. 
10),  and  nothing  more  is  heard  of  Mesopotamia  as 
an  aggressive  power.  The  lise  of  the  Assyrian  em- 
pire, about  B.C.  1270,  would  naturally  reduce  the 
bordering  nations  to  insignificance.  [G.  Pi.] 

CHU'SI  {Xovs  ;  Alex.  Xovffei ;  Vulg.  omits), 
a  place  named  only  in  Judith  vii.  18,  as  near  Ekie- 
bel,  and  upon  the  brook  Mochmur.  It  was  doubt- 
less in  central  Palestine,  but  all  the  names  appear 
to  be  very  corrupt,  and  are  not  recognisable. 

CHU'ZA  (properly  CHUZAS),  Xov(as,  the 

eirlTponos,  or  house-steward  of  Herod  (Antipas), 

whose  wife  Johanna  ('loidvva,  niVW),  having  been 

healed  by  our  Lord  either  of  possession  by  an  evil 
spirit  or  of  a  disease,  became  attached  to  that  body 
of  women  who  accompanied  Him  on  his  journeyings 
(Lukeviii.3);  and,  together  with  Mary  Magdalen  and 
Mary  the  mother  [?]  of  James,  having  come  early 
to  the  sepulchre  on  the  morning  of  the  resurrec- 
tion, to  bring  spices  and  ointments  to  complete  the 
burial,  brought  word  to  the  apostles  that  the  Lord 
was  risen  (Luke  xxiv.  10).  [H.  A.] 

CIC'CAR  ("133).  [Jordan;  Topographical 
Teems.] 

CILICTA  (KiKiKta),  a  maritime  province  in 
the  S.E.  of  Asia  Minor,  bordering  on  Pamphylia  in 
the  W.,  Lycaonia  and  Cappadocia  in  the  X.,  and 
Syria  in  the  E.  Lofty  mountain  chains  separate  it 
from  these  provinces,  Mens  Amanus  from  Syria,  and 
Antita.irus  from  Cappadocia:  these  barriers  can 
be  surmounted  only  by  a  few  difficult  passes; 
the  former  by  the  Portae  Amanides  at  the  head  of 
the  valley  of  the  I'inarus,  the  latter  by  the  Portae 
Ciliciae  near  the  sources  of  the  Cydnus;  towards 
the  S.  however  an  outlet  was  afforded  between  the 
Sinus  Issicus  and  the  spurs  of  Amanus  for  a  road, 
which  afterwards  crossed  the  Portae  Syriae  in  the 
direction  of  intioch.*  The  sea-coasi  is  rock-bound 
in  the  W.,  low  and  shelving  in  the  K.;  the  chief 
rivers,  Sarus,  Cydnus,  and  Calycadnus,  were   in- 


"  Hence  the  close  connexion  \\  hich  existed  l><  i «  een 
Syria  and  Cilicia,  as  indicated  in  Acts  w.  ■};>,  -n  ; 
Gal.  i.  21. 


330 


CINNAMON 


accessible  to  vessels  of  any  size  from  sand-bars 
formed  at  their  mouths.  The  western  portion  of 
the  province  is  intersected  with  the  ridges  of  Anti- 
taurus,  and  was  denominated  Trachaea,  rough,  in 
contradistinction  to  Pedias,  the  level  district  in 
the  E.  The  latter  portion  was  remarkable  for  its 
beauty  and  fertility,  as  well  as  for  its  luxurious 
climate :  hence  it  became  a  favourite  residence  of 
the  Greeks  after  its  incorporation  into  the  Macedo- 
nian empire,  and  its  capital  Tarsus  was  elevated 
into  the  seat  of  a  celebrated  school  of  philosophy. 
The  connexion  between  the  Jews  and  Cilicia  dates 
from  the  time  when  it  became  part  of  the  Syrian 
kingdom.  Antiochus  the  Great  is  said  to  have 
introduced  2000  families  of  the  Jews  into  Asia 
Minor,  many  of  whom  probably  settled  in  Cilicia 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  3,  §4).  In  the  Apostolic  age 
they  were  still  there  in  considerable  numbers 
(Acts  vi.  9).  Cilician  mercenaries,  probably  from 
Trachaea,  served  in  the  body-guard  of  Alexander 
Jannaeus  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  13,  §5 ;  B.  J.  i.  4, 
§3).  Josephus  identified  Cilicia  with  the  Tarshish 
of  Gen.  x.  4 ;  Qapcrbs  5«  ®apcre7s,  ovtios  yap 
eKa\e?ro  to  iraXaibv  7]  KiXiKia  (Ant.  i.  6,  §1). 
Cilicia  was  from  its  geographical  position  the  high 
load  between  Syria  and  the  West;  it  was  also  the 
native  country  of  St.  Paul ;  hence  it  was  visited  by 
him,  firstly,  soon  after  his  conversion  (Gal.  i.  21  ; 
Acts  ix.  30),  on  which  occasion  he  probably  founded 
the  church  there  ;  and  again  in  his  second  apostolical 
journey,  when  he  entered  it  on  the  side  of  Syria, 
and  crossed  Antitaurus  by  the  Pylae  Ciliciae  into 
Lycaonia  (Acts  xv.  41).  [W.  L.  B.] 

CINNAMON  (|»3j3,  JIOSj?  ;  Kivdfxtofxov  ; 
cinnamomum) ,  a  well-known  aromatic  substance, 
the  rind  of  the  Lauras  cinnamomum,  called  Ko- 
runda-gauhah  in  Ceylon.  It  is  mentioned  in  Ex. 
xxx.  23  as  one  of  the  component  parts  of  the  holy 
auointing  oil,  which  Moses  was  commanded  to  pre- 
pare— in  Prov.  vii.  17  as  a  perfume  for  the  bed — 
and  in  Cant.  iv.  14  as  one  of  the  plants  of  the 
garden  which  is  the  image  of  the  spouse.  In  Rev. 
xviii.  13  it  is  enumerated  among  the  merchandize  of 
the  great  Babylon.  "  It  was  imported  into  Judaea 
by  the  Phoenicians  or  by  the  Arabians,  and  is  now 
found  in  Sumatra,  Borneo,  China,  &c,  but  chiefly, 
and  of  the  best  quality,  in  the  S.W.  part  of  Ceylon, 
where  the  soil  is  light  and  sandy,  and  the  atmosphere 
moist  with  the  prevalent  southern  winds.  The 
stem  and  boughs  of  the  cinnamon-tree  are  sur- 
rounded by  a  double  rind,  the  exterior  being  whitish 
or  grey,  and  almost  inodorous  and  tasteless;  but 
the  inner  one,  which  consists  properly  of  two  closely 
connected  rinds,  furnishes,  if  dried  in  the  sun,  that 
much-valued  brown  cinnamon  which  is  imported 
to  us  in  the  shape  of  fine  thin  barks,  eight  or  ten 
of  which  rolled  one  into  the  other  form  sometimes 
a  quill.  It  is  this  inner  rind  which  is  called  in 
Ex.  xxx.  23,  D^'3"|03p, "spicy  cinnamon"  (Kalisch 

ad  foe).  From  the  coarser  pieces  oil  of  cinnamon 
is  obtained,  and  a  finer  kind  of  oil  is  also  got  by 
boiling  the  ripe  fruit  of  the  tree.  This  last  is  used 
in  the  composition  of  incense,  and  diiruses  a  most 
delightful  scent  when  burning. 

Herodotus  (in.  Ill)  ascribes  to  the  Greek  word 
Kivvdfj.cofji.ov  a  Phoenician,  i.  c.  a  Semitic  origin. 
His  words  are :  upviOas  8e  xiyovai  fxtydXas 
(popeeiv  ravra  toi  Kapcpea,  ra  rffiels  awb  &ov'i.ku>v 
uadSvres  KivvdfJ.U3fJ.ov  KaXeofxev. 

The  meaning  of  the  Heb.  root  D3p  is  doubtful. 


CIRCUMCISION 
The  Arab.  ^JjJ  =  to  smell  offensively  like  rancid 

nut-oil.  Gesenius  suggests  that  the  word  might 
have  had  the  notion  of  lifting  up  or  standing  up- 
right, like  njp,  j-lp,  )3p,  and  so  be  identical  with 
i"Up,  canna,  calamus,  which  the  cinnamon-rind 
resembles  in  form  when  prepared  for  the  market, 
and  has  hence  been  called  in  the  later  Latin  can- 
nella,  in  Italian  canella,  and  in  French  canelle. 
Gesenius  (Thes.  1223)  corrects  his  former  deriva- 
tion of  the  word  (in  Lex.  Man.)  from  i"l3p,  as  being 
contrary  to  grammatical  analogy.  [W.  D.] 

CIN'NEROTH,  ALL  (]Yn33  !?3  ;  iracrav  r^v 

XevvepeO  ;  universam  Ccneroth),  a  district  named 
with  the  "land  of  Naphtali"  and  other  northern 
places  as  having  been  laid  waste  by  Benhadad  king 
of  Damascus,  the  ally  of  Asa  king  of  Judah  (1  K.  xv. 
20).  It  probably  took  its  name  from  the  adjacent 
city  or  lake  of  the  same  name  (in  other  passages  of 
the  A.  V.  spelt  Chinneroth)  ;  and  was  possibly 
the  small  enclosed  district  north  of  Tiberias,  and  by 
the  side  of  the  lake,  afterwards  known  as  "  the 
plain  of  Gennesareth."  The  expression  "  All  Cin- 
neroth  "  is  unusual  and  may  be  compared  with  "  All 
Bithron," — probably,  like  this,  a  district  and  not  a 
town.  [G.] 

CIRA'MA.  The  people  of  Cirama  (4k  Kipafias  ; 
Gramas)  and  Gabdes  came  up  with  Zorobabel  from 
Babylon  (1  Esdr.  v.  20).     [RAMAH.] 

CIRCUMCISION  {rhm ;  irepnofvt) ;  circum- 

cisio)  was  peculiarly,  though  not  exclusively,  a 
Jewish  rite.  It  was  enjoined  upon  Abraham,  the 
father  of  the  nation,  by  God,  at  the  institution, 
and  as  the  token,  of  the  Covenant,  which  assured  to 
him  and  his  descendants  the  promise  of  the  Messiah 
(Gen.  xvii.).  It  was  thus  made  a  necessary  con- 
dition of  Jewish  nationality.  Every  male  child 
was  to  be  circumcised  when  eight  days  old  (Lev. 
xii.  3)  on  pain  of  death;  a  penalty  which,  in  the 
case  of  Moses,  appears  to  have  been  demanded  of 
the  father,  when  the  Lord  "sought  to  kill  him" 
because  his  son  was  uncircumcised  (Ex.  iv.  24-26). 
If  the  eighth  day  were  a  Sabbath  the  rite  was  not 
postponed  (John  vii.  22,  23).  Slaves,  whether  home- 
born  or  purchased,  were  circumcised- (Gen.  xvii. 
12,  13)  ;  and  foreigners  must  have  their  males  cir- 
cumcised before  they  could  be  allowed  to  partake  of 
the  passover  (Ex.  xii.  48),  or  become  Jewish  citizens 
( Jud.  xiv.  10.  See  also  Esth.  viii.  17,  where  for  Heb. 
D'HiTTID,  "became  Jews,"  the  LXX.  have  irfpie- 

rffxovTo  Kal  'lovSd'i(ov).  The  operation,  which 
was  performed  with  a  sharp  instrument  (Ex.  iv. 
25 ;  Josh.  v.  2  [Knife]  ),  was  a  painful  one,  at 
least  to  grown  persons  (Gen.  xxxiv.  25  ;  Josh.  v.  8). 
It  seems  to  have  been  customary  to  name  a  child 
when  it  was  circumcised  (Luke  i.  59). 

Various  explanations  have  been  given  of  the 
fact,  that,  though  the  Israelites  practised  circum- 
cision in  Egypt,  they  neglected  it  entirely  during 
their  journeying  in  the  wilderness  (Josh.  v.  5). 
The  most  satisfactory  account  of  the  matter  ap- 
pears to  be,  that  the  nation,  while  bearing  the 
punishment  of  disobedience  in  its  forty  years'  wan- 
dering, was  regarded  as  under  a  temporary  rejec- 
tion  by  God,  and  was  therefore  prohibited  from 
using  the  sign  of  the  Covenant.  This  agrees  with 
the  mention  of  their  disobedience  and  its  punish- 
ment, which   immediately  -follows    in  the    passage 


CIRCUMCISION 

in  Joshua  (v.  6),  and  with  the  words  (v.  9)  "  This 
day  have  I  rolled  away  the  reproach  of  Egypt 
from  oft'  yon."  The  "  reproach  of  Egypt"  was  the 
threatened  taunt  of  their  former  masters  that  God 
had  brought  them  into  the  wilderness  to  slay  them 
(Ex.  xxxii.  12  ;  Num.  xiv.  13-16  ;  Deut.  ix.  28), 
which,  so  long  as  they  remained  uncircumcised  and 
wanderers  in  the  desert  for  their  sin,  was  in  danger 
of  falling  upon  them.  (Other  views  of  the  pas- 
sage are  given  and  discussed  in  Keifs  Commentary 
on  Joshua,  in  Clark's  Thcol.  Libr.  129,  &c.) 

The  use  of  circumcision  by  other  nations  besides 
the  Jews  is  to  be  gathered  almost  entirely  from 
sources  extraneous  to  the  Bible.  The  rite  has  been 
found  to  prevail  extensively  both  in  ancient  and 
modern  times ;  and  among  some  nations,  as,  for 
instance,  the  Abyssiuians,  Nubians,  modern  Egyp- 
tians, and  Hottentots,  a  similar  custom  is  said  to  be 
practised  by  both  sexes  (see  the  Penny  Cyclopaedia, 
article  Circumcision).  The  biblical  notice  of  the 
rite  describes  it  as  distinctively  Jewish  ;  so  that  in 
the  N.  T.  "  the  circumcision "  (J]  TrepiTOfij])  and 
the  uncircumcision  (rj  a/cpo/3i«TTia)  are  frequently 
used  as  synonyms  for  the  Jews  and  the  Gentiles. 
Circumcision  certainly  belonged  to  the  Jews  as  it 
did  to  no  other  people,  by  virtue  of  its  divine 
institution,  of  the  religious  privileges  which  were 
attached  to  it,  and  of  the  strict  regulations  which 
enforced  its  observance.  Moreover,  the  0.  T.  his- 
tory incidentally  discloses  the  fact  that  many,  if 
not  all,  of  the  nations  with  whom  they  came  in 
contact  were  uncircumcised.  One  tribe  of  the 
Canaanites,  the  Hivites,  were  so,  as  appears  from 
the  story  of  Hamor  and  Shechem  (Gen.  xxxiv.). 
To  the  Philistines  the  epithet  "uncircumcised"  is 
constantly  applied  (Judg.  xiv.  3,  &e.  Hence  the 
force  of  the  narrative,  1  Sam.  xviii.  25-27).  From 
the  great  unwillingness  of  Zipporah  to  allow  her  son 
to  be  circumcised  (Ex.  iv.  25)  it  would  seem  that  the 
Midianites,  though  descended  from  Abraham  by  i 
Keturah  (Gen.  xxv.  2),  did  not  practise  the  rite,  j 
The  expression  "  lying  uncircumcised,"  or  "  lying 
with  the  uncircumcised,"  as  used  by  Ezekiel  (c.  I 
xxxii.)  of  the  Egyptians,  Assyrians,  and  others,  ' 
does  not  necessarily  affirm  anything  either  wav,  as  ' 
to  the  actual  practice  of  circumcision  by  those  ; 
nations.  The  origin  of  the  custom  amongst  one  I 
large  section  of  those  Gentiles  who  follow  it,  is  to 
be  found  in  the  biblical  record  of  the  circumcision 
of  Ishmael  (Gen.  xvii.  25).  Josephus  relates  that 
the  Arabians  circumcise  after  the  thirteenth  year, 
because  Ishmael,  the  founder  of  their  nation,  was 
circumcised  at  that  age  (Ant.  i.  12,  §2  ;  see  Lane's 
Mod.  Eg.  ch.  ii.).  Though  Mohammed  did  not 
enjoin  circumcision  in  the  Koran,  he  was  circum- 
cised himself,  according  to  the  custom  of  his  coun- 
try ;  and  circumcision  is  now  as  common  amongst 
the  Mohammedans  as  amongst  the  Jews. 

Another  passage  in  the  Bible  has  been  thought 
by  some  to  speak  of  certain  Gentile  nations  as  cir- 
cumcised.    In  Jer.  ix.  25,  26  (Heb.  24,  25)  the 

expression  (n?"iy2  7-10~?3,  v.  24)  which  is  trans- 
lated in  the  A.  V.  "all  them  which  are  circumcised 
with  the  uncircumcised,"  is  rendered  by  Michaclis 
and  Ewald  "  all  the  uncircumcised  circumcised 
ones,"  and  the  passage  understood  to  describe  the 
Egyptians,  Jews,  Edomites,  Ammonites,  and  Moab- 
ites,  as  alike  circumcised  in  flesh  and  uncircumcised 
in  heart.  But,  whatever  meaning  be  assigned  to 
the  particular  expression  (Rosenmuller  agrees  with 
the  A.  V.  ;   Maurer  suggests  "  circumcised  in  lore- 


CIRCUMCISION 


331 


skin  "),  the  next  verse  makes  a  plain  distinction 
between   two   classes,    of  which   all    the   Gentiles 

(D^iirr?3),  including  surely   the   Egyptians  and 

others  just  named,  was  one,  and  the  house  of 
Israel  the  other ;  the  former  being  uncircumcised 
both  in  flesh  and  heart,  the  latter,  though  possess- 
ing the  outward  rite  yet  destitute  of  the  corre- 
sponding state  of  heart,  and  therefore  to  be  visited 
as  though  uncircumcised.  The  difficulty  that  then 
arises,  viz.,  that  the  Egyptians  are  called  uncir- 
cumcised, whereas  Herodotus  and  others  state  that 
they  were  circumcised,  has  been  obviated  by  sup- 
posing those  statements  to  refer  only  to  the  priests 
and  those  initiated  into  the  mysteries,  so  that  the 
nation  generally  might  still  be  spoken  of  as  uncir- 
cumcised (Herod,  ii.  36,  37,  104  ;  and  VVesseling 
and  Bahr  in  loc).  The  testimony  of  Herodotus 
must  be  received  with  caution,  especially  as  he  asserts 
(ii.  104)  that  the  Syrians  in  Palestine  confessed  to 
having  received  circumcision  from  the  Egyptians. 
If  he  means  the  Jews,  the  assertion,  though  it  has 
been  ably  defended  (see  Spencer,  de  Ley.  Hebr.,  i. 
5.  §iv.)  cannot  be  reconciled  with  Gen.  xvii. ;  John 
vii.  22.  If  other  Syrian  tribes  are  intended,  we 
have  the  contradiction  of  Josephus,  who  writes,  "  It 
is  evident  that  no  other  of  the  Syrians  that  live  in 
Palestine  besides  us  alone  are  circumcised "  (Ant. 
viii.  10,  §3.  See  Whiston's  note  there).  Of  the 
other  nations  mentioned  by  Jeremiah,  the  Moabites 
and  Ammonites  were  descended  from  Lot,  who  had 
left  Abraham  before  he  received  the  rite  of  circum- 
cision ;  and  the  Edomites  cannot  be  shown  to  have 
been  circumcised  until  they  were  compelled  to  be  so 
by  Hyrcanus  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  9,  §1).  The  sub- 
ject is  fully  discussed  by  Michaelis  (Commentaries 
on  the  Laws  of  Moses,  iv.  3,  clxxxiv.-clxxxvi.). 

The  process  of  restoring  a  circumcised  person  to 
his  natural  condition  by  a  surgical  operation  was 
sometimes  undergone  (Celsus,  de  lie  Medica,  vii. 
25).  Some  of  the  Jews  in  the  time  of  Antiochus 
Epiphaues,  wishing  to  assimilate  themselves  to  the 
heathen  around  them,  built  a  gymnasium  (yv/xva- 
alov)  at  Jerusalem,  and  that  they  might  not  be 
known  to  be  Jews  when  they  appeared  naked  in 
the  games,  "  made  themselves  uncircumcised  "  (1 
Mace.  i.  15,  inoiricrav  eavro7s  aKpo^vcrias  ;  fece- 
runt  sibi  pracputia;  Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  §5,  1,  tt/i/ 
tuiv  alSoiooy  irepiTO/x^v  iiriKaAinrTeiv,  k.t.A.  ). 
Against  having  recourse  to  this  practice,  from  an 
excessive  anti-Judaistic  tendency,  St.  Paul  cautions 
the  Corinthians  in  the  words  "  Was  any  one  called 
being  circumcised,  let  him  not  become  uncircum- 
cised "  (fi^  iiri<nrAa6oo,  1  Cor.  vii.  18).  See  the 
Essay  of  Groddeck,  De  Judacis praepidium,  &c.,  in 
Schottgen's  Hor.  Hebr.  ii. 

The  attitude  which  Christianity,  at  its  intro- 
duction, assumed  towards  circumcision  was  one  of 
absolute  hostility,  so  far  as  the  necessity  of  the 
rite  to  salvation,  or  its  possession  of  any  religious 
or  moral  worth  were  concerned  (Acts  xv. ;  Gal.  v. 
2).  But  while  the  Apostles  resolutely  forbade  its 
imposition  by  authority  on  tin-  Gentiles,  they  made 
no  objection  to  its  practice,  as  a  mere  matter  of 
feeling  or  expediency.  St.  Paul,  who  would  by  no 
means  consent  to  the  demand  for  Titus,  who  was  a 
Greek,  to  In-  circumcised  (Gal.  ii.  3-5),  on  another 
occasion  had  Timothy  circumcised  to  conciliate  the 
Jews,  and  that  he  might  preach  to  them  with 
nunc  dicct  as  being  one  of  themselves  (Acts  xvi. 
.!).  The  Abyssinian  Christians  still  practise  cir- 
cumcision  as  a  national   custom.      In  accordance 


332 


CIS 


with  the  spirit  of  Christianity,  thosp  who  ascribed 
efficacy  to  the  mere  outward  rite,  are  spoken  of  in 
the  N.  T.  almost  with  contempt  as  "the  concision" 
or"  amputation"  (tiV  KaraTo/x^v) ;  while  the 
claim  to  be  the  true  circumcision  is  vindicated  for 
Christians  themselves  (Phil.  iii.  2,  3).  An  ethical 
idea  is  attached  to  circumcision  even  in  the  0.  T., 
where  uncircumcised  lips  (Ex.  vi.  12,  30),  or  ears 
(Jer.  vi.  10),  or  hearts  (Lev.  xxvi.  41)  are  spoken 
of,   i.  e.,  either  stammering  or  dull,  closed   as   it 

were  with  a  foreskin  (Gesen.  Ileb.  Lex.  s.  v.  ?"}V), 
or  rather  rebellious  and  unholy  (Deut.  xxx.  6; 
Jer.  iv.  4),  because  circumcision  was  the  symbol  of 
purity  (see  Is.  Hi.  1 ).  Thus  the  fruit  of  a  tree  is 
called  uncircumcised,  or  in  other  words  unclean 
(Lev.  xix.  23).  In  the  N.  T.  the  ethical  and  spi- 
ritual idea  of  puritv  and  holiness  is  fully  developed 
(Col.  ii.  11,  13;   Rom.  ii.  28,  29).        [T,  T.  P.] 

CIS  (Rec.  T.  Kls  ;  Lachm.  with  A  B  C  D,  Kels  ; 
Cis),  Acts  xiii.  21.     [Kisr,  1.] 

CI'SAI  (Kio-cu'os ;  Cis),  Esth.  xi.  2.   [Kish,  2.] 

CISTERN  0'12,  from  1X3,  dig  or  bore,  Gesen. 

176  ;  usually  Kolkkos  ;  cisterm  or  lacus),  a  re- 
ceptacle for  water,  either  conducted  from  an  external 
spring,  or  proceeding  from  rain-fall. 

The  dryness  of  the  summer  months  between  May 
and  September,  in  Syria,  and  the  scarcity  of  springs 
in.  many  parts  of  the  country,  make  it  necessary  to 
collect  'in  reservoirs  and  cisterns  the  rain-water,  of 
which  abundance  falls  in  the  intermediate  period 
( Shaw,  Travels,  335  ;  S.  Jerome,  quoted  by  Har- 
mer,  i.  148  ;  Robinson,  i.  430  ;  Kitto,  Phys.  Geogr. 
of  H.  L.  302,  303).  Thus  the  cistern  is  essentially 
distinguished  from  the  liviug  spring  ^y?  Ain;  but 
from  the  well  "1N3  Beer,  only  in  the  fact  that  Beer 
is  almost  always  used  to  denote  a  place  ordinarily 
containing  water  rising  on  the  spot,  while  "113,  Bor, 
is  often  used  for  a  dry  pit,  or  one  that  may  be  left 
dry  at  pleasure  (Stanley,  8.  fy  P.  512,  514).  [Ain.] 
The  larger  sort  of  public  tanks  or  reservoirs,  in 
Arabic,  Birkeh,  Hebr.  Berecah,  are  usually  called 
in  A.  V.  "  pool,"  while  for  the  smaller  and  more 
private  it  is  convenient  to  reserve  the  name  cis- 
tern. 

Both  birkehs  and  cisterns  are  frequent  throughout 
the  whole  of  Syria  and  Palestine,  and  for  the  con- 
struction of  them  the  rocky  nature  of  the  ground 
affords  peculiar  facilities  either  in  original  excava- 
tion, or  by  enlargement  of  natural  cavities.  Dr. 
Robinson  remarks  that  the  inhabitants  of  all  the 
hill  country  of  Judah  and  Benjamin  are  in  the 
habit  of  collecting  water  during  the  rainy  season  in 
tallies  and  cisterns,  in  the  cities  and  fields,  and  along 
the  high  roads,  for  the  sustenance  of  themselves 
and  their  flocks,  and  for  the  comfort  of  the  passing 
traveller.  Many  of  these  are  obviously  antique, 
and  exist  along  ancient  roads  now  deserted.  On 
the  long  forgotten  wav  from  Jericho  to  Bethel, 
"  broken  cisterns  "  of  high  antiquity  are  found  at 
regular  intervals.  Jerusalem,  described  by  Strabo 
as  well  supplied  with  water,  in  a  dry  neighbourhood 
(xvi.  p.  760),  depends  mainly  for  this  upon  its 
cisterns,  of  which  almost  every  private  house  pos- 
sesses  one  or  more,  excavated  in  the  rock  on  which 
the  city  is  built.  The  following  are  the  dimensions 
of  4,  belonging  to  the  house  in   which    Dr.  R.  re- 


CISTERN 

side  1.  ( 1 .)  15  ft.  X  8  X  12  deep.  (2.)  8x4x15. 
Co  10X10x15.  (4.)  30X30X20.  The  cis- 
terns have  usually  a  round  opening  at  the  top, 
sometimes  built  up  with  stonework  above  and  fur- 
nished with  a  curb  and  a  wheel  for  the  bucket  (Eccl. 
xii.  6),  so  that  they  have  externally  much  the  ap- 
pearance of  an  ordinary  well.  The  water  is  con- 
ducted into  them  from  the  roofs  of  the  houses 
during  the  rainy  season,  and  with  care  remains 
sweet  during  the  whole  summer  and  autumn.  In 
this  manner  most  of  the  larger  houses  and  public 
buildings  are  supplied  (Rob.,  i.  324,  5).  Joseph  us 
(B.  J.'w.  4,  §4)  describes  the  abundant  provision 
for  water  supply  in  the  towers  and  fortresses  of 
Jerusalem,  a  supply  which  has  contributed  greatly 
to  its  capacity  for  defence,  while  the  dryness  of  the 
neighbourhood,  verifying  Strabo's  expression  t};v 
kvkKcji  x<*>Pav  *X0V  ^vwpav  Kai  &vvBpov,  has  in 
all  cases  hindered  the  operations  of  besiegers. 
Thus  Hezekiah  stopped  the  supply  of  water  out- 
side the  city  in  anticipation  of  the  attack  of 
Sennacherib  (2  Chr.  xxxii.  3,  4).  The  progress 
of  Antiochus  Sidetes,  B.C.  134,  was  at  first  retarded 
by  want  of  water,  though  this  want  was  afterwards 
unexpectedly  relieved  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  8  §2 ; 
Clinton,  iii.  p.  331).  Josephus  also  imputes  to 
divine  interposition  the  supply  of  water  with  which 
the  aimy  of  Titus  was  furnished  after  suffering 
from  want  of  it  (B.  J.  v.  9,  §4).  The  crusaders 
also  during  the  siege  a.d.  1099,  were  harassed  by 
extreme  want  of  water  while  the  besieged  were 
fully  supplied  (Matth.  Paris,  Hist.  pp.  46,  49,  ed. 
Wat.).  The  defence  of  Masada  by  Joseph,  brother 
of  Herod,  against  Antigonus,  was  enabled  to  be  pro- 
longed, owing  to  an  unexpected  replenishing  of  the 
cisterns  by  a  shower  of  rain  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiv.  15, 
§2),  and  in  a  subsequent  passage  he  describes  the  cis- 
terns and  reservoirs,  by  which  that  fortress  was  plen- 
tifully supplied  with  water,  as  he  had  previously 
done  in  the  case  of  Jerusalem  and  Machaerus  (B.  J. 
iv.  4,  §4,  iv.  6,  §2,  vii.  8,  §3).  Benjamin  of 
Tudela  says  very  little  water  is  found  at  Jerusalem, 
but  the  inhabitants  drink  rain-water,  which  they 
collect  in  their  houses  {Early  Trav.,  84). 

Burckhardt  mentions  cisterns  belonging  to  pri- 
vate houses,  among  other  places,  at  Sermein  near 
Aleppo  (Syria,  p.  121),  El  Bara,  in  the  Orontes 
valley  (p.  132),  Dhami  and  Missema  in  the  Lejah 
(pp.  110,  112,  118),  Tiberias  (p.  331),  Kerek  in 
Moab  (p.  377),  Mount  Tabor  (p.  334).  Of  some 
at  Hableh,  near  Gilgal,  the  dimensions  .are  given 
by  Robinson:  — (1.)  7  ft.  X5x3  deep.  (2.) 
Nearly  the  same  as  (1).  (3.)  12x9x8.  They 
have  one  or  two  steps  to  descend  into  them,  as  is, 
the  case  with  one  near  Gaza,  now  disused,  described 
by  Sandys  as  "  a  mighty  cistern,  filled  only  by  the 
rain-water,  and  descended  into  by  stairs  of  stone " 
(Sandys,  p.  150;  Robinson,  ii.  39).  Of  those  at 
Hableh,  some  were  covered  with  flat  stones  resting 
on  arches,  some  entirely  open,  and  all  evidently 
ancient  (Robinson,  iii.  137). 

Empty  cisterns  were  sometimes  used  as  prisons 
and  places  of  confinement.  Joseph  was  cast  into  a 
"pit,"  113  (Gen.  xxxvii.  22),  and  his  "dungeon" 
in  Egypt  is  called  by  the  same  name  (xli.  14).  Je- 
remiah was  thrown  into  a  miry  though  empty 
cistern,  whose  depth  is  indicated  by  the  cords  used 
to  let  him  down  (Jer.  xxxviii.  6).  To  this  prison 
tradition  has  assigned  a  locality  near  the  gate  called 
Herod's  gate  ( Hasselquist,  140  ;  Maundrell,  Early 
Trav.  448).  Vitruvius  (viii.  7)  describes  the  method 
in  use  m  his  day  for  constructing  water  tanks,  but 


CITHERN 

the  native  rock  of  Palestine  usually  superseded  the 
necessity  of  more  art  iu  this  work  than  is  sufficient 
to  excavate  a  basin  of  the  required  dimensions. 

The  city  of  Alexandria  is  supplied  with  water  con- 
tained in  arched  cisterns  supported  by  pillars,  extend- 
ing under  a  peat  part  of  the  old  city  (Van  Egmont, 
Travels,  ii.  134).    [Pool;  Well.]     [H.  W.  P.] 

CITHERN  (  =  cithara,  Ki6dpa,  1  Mace.  iv. 
54),  a  musical  instrument  most  probably  of  Greek 
origin,  employed  by  the  Chaldeans  at  balls  and 
routs,  and  introduced  by  the  Hebrews  into  Pales- 
tine on  their  return  thither  after  the  Babylonian 
captivity.  The  cithern  was  of  the  guitar  species, 
and  was  known  at  a  later  period  as  the  Cittern, 
under  which  name  it  is  mentioned  by  the  old  dra- 
matists as  having  constituted  part  of  the  furniture 
of  a  barber's  shop.  Of  the  same  species  is  the 
Cither  or  Zither  of  Southern  Germany,  Tyrol,  and 
Switzerland. 

With  respect  to  the  shape  of  the  Cithern  or  Ci- 
thara mentioned  in  the  Apocrypha,  the  opinion  of  the 
learned  is  divided:  according  to  some  it  resembled 
in  form  the  Greek  delta  A,  others  represent  it  as  a 
half-moon,  and  others  again  like  the  modern  guitar. 
In  many  eastern  countries  it  is  still  in  use  with 
strings,  varying  in  number  from  three  to  twenty- 
four.  Under  the  name  of  Kootkir,  the  traveller 
Niebuhr  describes  it  as  a  wooden-plate  or  dish,  with 
a  hole  beneath  and  a  piece  of  skin 
stretched  above  like  a  drum.  Two 
sticks,  joined  after  the  manner  of 
a  fan,  pass  through  the  skin  at 
the  end,  and  where  the  two  sticks 
stand  apart,  they  are  connected 
by  a  transversal  piece  of  wood. 
From  the  upper  end  of  this  wooden 
triangle  to  the  point  below  are 
fastened  five  chords,  which  at  a 
little  distance  above  their  junc- 
tion, pass  over  a  bridge,  like  the 
strings  of  a  violin.  The  chords 
are  made  to  vibrate  by  means  of 
a  leather  thong  fastened  to  one  of  the  lateral  sticks 
of  the  triangle.  In  Mendelssohn's  edition  of  the 
Psalms,  representations  J#e  given  of  the  several 
musical  instruments  met  with  iu  the  sacred  Books, 
and  Koothir  or  Koihros  is  described  by  the  accom- 
panying figure. 

The  Cithara,  if  it  be  not  the  same  with,  resem- 
bles very  closely  the  instruments  mentioned  in  the 
book  of  Psalms,  under  the  denominations  of  "1133, 

33J?,  733,  respectively  rendered  in  the  A.V.  "  harp," 
'•  psaltery,"  "  organ."  InChaldee,  Cithara  is  trans- 
lated DilTlip,  the  Ken  for  D'TOVp  (Dan.  iii.  5). 
In  the  A.  V.,  DITHp  is  rendered  •'  harp,"  and  the 

same  word  is  employed  instead  of  Cithern  1 1  Mace, 
iv.  54)  in  Robert  Barker's  edition  of  the  English 
Bible,  London,  lfil.">.  Gesenius  considers  Cithara 
as  the  same  with  harp ;  but  Luther  translates  ki- 
Ou/iais  by  n  ::  Pfeifen,  "with  pipes."  (See  Biour 
to  Mendelssohn's  Psalms,  2nd  Pref.;  Niebuhr,  Tra- 
vels; Fiivst's  Concordance.     Gesenius  on  the  word 


CITIES 


333 


Dnnp.) 


[n.  w.  m.] 


CITIES  (1.  Dny,  plur.  of  both  "IV,  Ar,  and 
also  "Vy,  Tr,  from  "Viy,  to  keep  watch-  Ges.  1004, 
5 ;  once  (Judg.  x.  4)  in  plur.  D,T,y.  for  the  sake 


of  a    play    with    the   same   word,    plur.    of  T]} 

a  young  ass ;  irShets  ;  civitates,  orurbes.     2.  i"P"lp 

Kirjath;  once  in  dual,  D^jTHp,  Kirjatliaim  (Num. 

xxxii.    37),   from   Hip,   approach   as   an   enemy, 

prefixed  as  a  name  to  many  names  of  towns  on  both 
sides  of  the  Jordan  existing  before  the  conquest, 
as  Kirjath-Arba,  probably  the  most  ancient  name 
for  city,  but  seldom  used  in  prose  as  a  general 
name  for  town  (Ges.  1236 ;  Stanley,  S.  §  P. 
App.  §80). 

The  classification  of  the  human  race  into  dwellers 
in  towns  and  nomade  wanderers  (Gen.  iv.  20,  22) 
seems  to  be  intimated  by  the  etymological  sense  of 
both  words,  Ar,  or  Ir,  and  Kirjath,  viz.  as  places 
of  security  against  an  enemy,  distinguished  from 
the  unwallea  village  or  hamlet,  whose  resistance  is 
more  easily  overcome  by  the  marauding  tribes  of 
the  desert.  This  distinction  is  found  actually  ex- 
isting in  countries,  as  Persia  and  Arabia,  in  which 
the  tent-dwellers  are  found,  like  the  Rechabites, 
almost  side  by  side  with  the  dwellers  in  cities, 
sometimes  even  sojourning  within  them,  but  not 
amalgamated  with  ihe  inhabitants,  and  in  general 
making  the  desert  their  home,  and,  unlike  the 
Rechabites,  robbery  their  undissembled  occupation 
(Judg.  v.  7;  Jer.  xxxv.  9,11;  Fraser,  Persia, 
366,  380 ;  Malcolm,  Sketches  of  Persia,  147- 
156  ;  Burckhardt,  Notes  on  Bedouins,  i.  157  ; 
Wcllsted,  Travels  in  Arabia,  i.  335  ;  Porter,  Da- 
mascus, ii.  96, 181, 188;  Vaux,  Nineveh  and  Per- 
sepolis,  c.  ii.  note  a;  Layard,  Nineveh,  ii.  272; 
Nin.  §  Bab.  141).     [Villages.] 

The  earliest  notice  in  Scripture  of  city-building 
is  of  Enoch  by  Cain,  in  the  land  of  his  "  exile " 
(113,  Nod,  Gen.  iv.  17).  After  the  confusion  of 
tongues,  the  descendants  of  Nimrod  founded  Babel, 
Erech,  Accad,  and  Calneh,  in  the  land  of  Shinar, 
and  Asshur,  a  branch  from  the  same  stock,  built 
Nineveh,  Rehoboth-by-the-river,  Calah,  and  Resen, 
the  last  being  "  a  great  city."  A  subsequent  pas- 
sage mentions  Sidon,  Gaza,  Sodom,  Gomorrah,  A'd- 
mah,  Zeboim,  and  Lasha,  as  cities  of  the  Canaan- 
ites,  but  without  implying  for  them  antiquity  equal 
to  that  of  Nineveh  and  the  rest  (Gen.  x.  10-12,  19, 
xi.  3,  9,  xxxvi.  37).  Sir  H.  Rawlinson  supposes,  1. 
that  the  expedition  of  Chedorlaomer  (Gen.  xiv.)  was 
prior  to  the  building  of  Babylon  or  Nineveh,  indicat- 
ing a  migration  or  conquest  from  Persia  or  Assyria  ; 
2.  that  by  Nimrod  is  to  be  understood,  not  an  indi- 
vidual, but  a  name  denoting  the  "settlers"  in  the 
Assyrian  plain.;  and  3.  that  the  names  Rehoboth, 
Calah,  &c,  when  first  mentioned,  only  denoted  sites 
of  buildings  afterwards  erected.  He  supposes  that 
Nineveh  was  built  about  1250  B.C.,  and  Calah 
about  a  century  later,  while  Babylon  appears  to 
have  existed  in  the  15th  centurj  B.C.  It  this  be 
correct,  we  must  infer  that  the  places  then  attacked, 
Sodom,  Gomorrah,  &c,  were  cities  of  higher  an- 
tiquity than  Nineveh  or  Babylon,  inasmuch  as 
when  they  wen-  destroyed  a  few  years  later,  they 
were  cities  in  every  sense  of  the  term.  The  name 
Kirjathaim,  "double-city"  (Ges.  L236),  in 
an  existing  city,  and  uof  only  a  site.  It  may  be 
added  that  the  remains  of  civic  buildings  existing 
in  Moab  fly  very  ancient,  if  not,  in  some 

cases,  the  same  as  tl  by  the  aboriginal 

Fmims  and  Rephaims.  (See  also  the  name  Avith, 
"ruins,"  Ges.  1000;  Gen.  xix.  1,  2(.t,  xxxvi.  35; 
Is.  xxiii.  13;  Wilkinson,  inc.  Eg,  i.  308;  Layard, 


334 


CITIES 


Nin.  $  Bab.  532;  Porter,  Damascus,  i.  309,  ii. 
196;  Rawlinson,  Outlines  of  Assyr.  Hist.  4,  5.) 
But  though  it  appears  probable  that,  whatever 
dates  may  be  assigned  to  the  building  of  Babylon 
or  Nineveh  in  their  later  condition,  they  were  in 
fact  rebuilt  at  those  epochs,  and  not  founded  for  the 
first  time,  and  that  towns  in  some  form  or  other 
may  have  occupied  the  sites  of  the  later  Nineveh  or 
Calah ;  it  is  quite  clear  that  cities  existed  in  Syria 
prior  to  the  time  of  Abraham,  who  himself  came 
from  "  Ur,"  the  "city"  of  the  Chakteans  (Ges. 
55;  Rawlinson,  4). 

The  earliest  description  of  a  city,  properly  so 
called,  is  that  of  Sodom  (Gen.  xix.  1-22)  ;  but  it  is 
certain  that  from  very  early  times  cities  existed  on 
the  sites  of  Jerusalem,  Hebron,  and  Damascus.  The 
last,  said  to  be  the  oldest  city  in  the  world,  must 
from  its  unrivalled  situation  have  always  com- 
manded a  congregated  population ;  Hebron  is  said 
to  have  been  built  seven  years  before  Zoan  (Tanis) 
in  Egypt,  and  is  thus  the  only  Syrian  town  which 
presents  the  elements  of  a  date  for  its  foundation 
(Num.  xiii.  22 ;  Stanley,  S.  $  P.  409  ;  Joseph. 
A7it.  i.  6,  §4 ;  Conybeare  and  Howson,  Life  and  Ep. 
of  St.  Paul,  i.  94,96). 

But  there  can  be  no  doubt  that,  whatever  date 
may  be  given  to  Egyptian  civilization,  there  were 
inhabited  cities  in  Egypt  long  before  this  (Gen.  xii. 
14, 15  ;  Martineau,  East.  Life,  i.  151  ;  Wilkinson, 
i.  307  ;  Diet,  of  Geog.  art.  Tanis).  The  name,  how- 
ever, of  Hebron,  Kirjath-Arba,  indicates  its  existence 
at  least  as  early  as  the  time  of  Abraham,  as  the 
city,  or  fortified  place  of  Arba,  an  aboriginal  province 
of  Southern  Palestine  (Gen.  xadii.  2  ;  Josh.  xiv.  15). 
The  "  tower  of  Edar,"   near   Bethlehem,   or  "  of 

flocks"  "HJJ  blift  indicates  a  position  fortified 
against  marauders  (Gen.  xxxv.  21).  Whether  "  the 
city  of  Shalem"  be  a  site  or  an  existing  town  can- 
not be  determined,  but  there  can  be  no  doubt  that 
the  situation  of  Shechem  is  as  well  identified  in  the 
present  day,  as  its  importance  as  a  fortified  place  is 
plain  from  the  Scripture  narrative  (Gen.  xxxiii.  18, 
xxxiv.  20,  26  ;  Robinson,  ii.  287).  On  the  whole 
it  seems  plain  that  the  Canaanite,  who  was  "  in 
the  land "  before  the  coming  of  Abraham,  had 
already  built  cities  of  more  or  less  importance, 
which  had  been  largely  increased  by  the  time  of  the 
return  from  Egypt. 

Even  before  the  time  of  Abraham  there  were 
cities  in  Egypt  (Gen.  xii.  14,  15;  Num.  xiii.  22  ; 
Wilkinson,  i.  4,  5).  The  Israelites,  during  their 
sojourn  there,  were  employed  in  building  or  forti- 
fying the  "treasure  cities"  of  Pithom  (Abbasieh) 
and  Raamses  (Ex.  i.  11;  Herod,  ii.  158;  Winer, 
Gesenius,  s.  vv. ;  Robinson,  i.  54,  55) ;  but  their 
pastoral  habits  make  it  unlikely  that  they  should 
build,  still  less  fortify,  cities  of  their  own  in  Goshen 
(Gen.  xlvi.  34,  xlvii.  1-11). 

Meanwhile  the  settled  inhabitants  of  Syria  on 
both  sides  of  the  Jordan  had  grown  in  power  and 
in  number  of  "  fenced  cities."  In  the  kingdom  of 
Sihon  are  many  names  of  cities  preserved  to  the 
present  day  ;  and  in  the  kingdom  of  Og,  in  Bashan, 
were  60  "  great  cities  with  walls  and  brazen  bars," 
besides  unwalled  villages ;  and  also  23  cities  in 
Gilead,  which  were  occupied  and  perhaps  partly 
rebuilt  or  fortified  by  the  tribes  on  the  east  of  Jor- 
dan (Num.  xxi.  21,  32,  33,  35,  xxxii.  1-3,  34,  42 ; 
Deut.  hi.  4,  5,  14 ;  Josh.  xi.  xiii. ;  1  K.  iv.  13 ; 
1  Chr.  ii.  22  ;  Burckhardt,  Syria,  311,  457  ;  Porter, 
Damascus,  ii.  195,  196,  206,  259,  275). 


CITIES 

On  the  west  of  Jordan,  whilst  31  "  royal "  cities 
are  enumerated  (Josh,  xii.),  in  the  district  assigned 
to  Judah  125  "  cities"  with  villages  are  reckoned 
(Josh,  xv.)  ;  in  Benjamin  26 ;  to  Simeon  17  ;  Za- 
bulun  12;  Issachar  16;  Asher  22;  Naphtali  19; 
Dan  17  (Josh,  xviii.  xix.).  But  from  some  of  these 
the  possessors  were  not  expelled  till  a  late  period, 
and  Jerusalem  itself  was  not  captured  till  the  time 
of  David  (2  Sam.  v.  6-9). 

From  this  time  the  Hebrews  became  a  city- 
dwelling  and  agricultural  rather  than  a  pastoral 
people.  David  enlarged  Jerusalem,  and  Solomon, 
besides  embellishing  his  capital,  also  built  or  rebuilt 
Tadmor,  Palmyra,  Gezer,  Beth-horon,  Hazor,  and 
Megiddo,  besides  store-cities  (2  Sam.  v.  7,  9,  10  ; 

1  K.  ix.  15-18  ;  2  Chr.  viii.  6).  To  Solomon  also 
is  ascribed  by  eastern  tradition  the  building  of  Per- 
sepolis  (Chardin,  Voyage,  viii.  390  ;  Mandelslo,  i. 
p.  4;  Kuran,  c.  xxxviii.). 

•The  works  of  Jeroboam  at  Shechem  (1 K.  xii.  25 ; 
Judg.  ix.  45),  of  Rehoboam  (2  Chr.  xi.  5-10),  of 
Baasha  at  Rama,  interrupted  by  Asa  (1  K.  xv.  17, 
22),  of  Omri  at  Samaria  (xvi.  24),  the  rebuilding 
of  Jericho  in  the  time  of  Ahab  (xvi.  34),  the  works 
of  Jehoshaphat  (2  Chr.  xvii.  12),  of  Jotham  (2  Chr. 
xxvii.  4),  the  rebuilding  of  Jerusalem,  and  later 
still,  the  works  of  Herod  and  his  family,  belong  to 
their  respective  articles. 

Collections  of  houses  in  Syria  for  social  habitation 
may  be  classed  under  three  heads: — 1.  cities;  2. 
towns  with  citadels  or  towers  for  resort  and  defence  ; 
3.  unwalled  villages.  The  cities  may  be  assumed 
to  have  been  in  almost  all  cases  "  fenced  cities,"  i.  e. 
possessing  a  wall  with  towers  and  gates  (Lev.  xxv. 
29  ;  Deut.  ix.  1  ;  Josh.  ii.  15,  vi.  20 ;  1  Sam.  xxiii. 
7  ;  IK.  iv.  13  ;  2  K.  vi.  26,  vii.  3,  xviii.  8, 13  ;  Acts 
ix.  25)  ;  and  that  as  a  mark  of  conquest  was  to 
break  down  a  portion,  at  least,  of  the  city- wall  of 
the  captured  place,  so  the  first  care  of  the  defenders, 
as  of  the  Jews  after  their  return  from  captivity, 
was  to  rebuild  the  fortifications  (2  K.  xiv.  13,  22 ; 

2  Chr.  xxvi.  2,  6,  xxxiii.  14 ;  Neh.  iii.  iv.  vi.  vii. ; 

1  Mac.  iv.  60,  61,  x.  45 ;  Xen.  Hell.  ii.  2,  §15). 
But  around  the  city,  especially  in  peaceable  times, 

lay  undefended  suburbs  (ȣH!ip,  Trepi<nr6pia,  sub- 

urbana,  1  Chr.  vi.  57,  et  seqq.  ;  Num.  xxxv.  1-5; 
Josh,  xxi.),  to  which  the  privileges  of  the  city  ex- 
tended. The  city  thus  became  the  citadel,  while 
the  population  overflowed  into  the  suburbs  (1  Mac. 
xi.  61).  The  absence  of  walls  as  indicating  security 
in  peaceable  times,  combined  with  populousness,  as 
was  the  case  in  the  flourishing  period  of  Egypt,  is 
illustrated  by  the  prophet  Zechariah  (ii.  4 ;  1  K.  iv. 
25;  Martineau,  East.  Life,  i.  306). 

According  to  Eastern  custom,  special  cities  were 
appointed  to  furnish  special  supplies  for  the  service 
of  the  state ;  cities  of  store,  for  chariots,  for  horse- 
men, for  building  purposes,  for  provision  for  the 
royal  table.  Special  governors  for  these  and  their 
surrounding  districts  were  appointed  by  David  and 
by  Solomon  (1  K.  iv.  7,  ix.  19;  1  Chr.  xxvii.  25 ; 

2  Chr.  xvii.  12,  xxi.  3;  1  Mac.  x.  39  ;  Xen.  Anab. 
i.  4,  §10).  To  this  practice  our  Lord  alludes  in 
his  parable  of  the  pounds,  and  it  agrees  with  the 
theory  of  Hindoo  government,  which  was  to  be 
conducted  by  lords  of  single  townships,  of  10, 
100,  or  1000  towns  (Luke  xix.  17,  19;  Elphin- 
stoue,  India,  c.  ii.  i.  39,  and  App.  v.  p.  485). 

To  the  Levites  48  cities  were  assigned,  distributed 
throughout  the  country,  together  with  a  certain 
amount  of  suburban  ground,  and  out  of  these  48, 


CITIES 

13  wore  specially  reserved  for  the  family  of  Aaron, 
9  in  Judah  and  4  in  Benjamin,  and  6  as  refuge 
cities  (Josh.  xxi.  13,  42),  but  after  the  division  of 
the  kingdoms  the  Levites  in  Israel  left  their  cities 
and  resorted  to  Judah  and  Jerusalem  (2  Chr.  xi. 
13,  14). 

The  internal  government  of  Jewish  cities  was 
vested  before  the  captivity  in  a  council  of  elders 
with  judges,  who  were  required  to  be  priests : 
Josephus  says  seven  judges  with  two  Levites  as  offi- 
cers, virripeTcu  (Deut.  xxi.  5,  19,  xvi.  18,  xix.  17; 
Ruth  iv.  2  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  8,  §14).  Under  the 
kings  a  president  or  governor  appears  to  have  been 
appointed  (1  K.  xxii.  26 ;  2  Chr.  xv'iii.  25)  ;  and 
judges  were  sent  out  on  circuit,  who  referred  mat- 
ters of  doubt"  to  a  council  composed  of  priests,  Le- 
vites, and  elders,  at  Jerusalem  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  4,  xxvi. 
29  ;  2  Chr.  xix.  5,  8, 10,  11).  After  the  captivity 
Ezra  made  similar  arrangements  for  the  appoint- 
ment of  judges  (Ezr.  vii.  25).  In  the  time  of 
Josephus  there  appear  to  have  been  councils  in  the 
provincial  towns,  with  presidents  in  each,  under  the 
directions  of  the  great  council  at  Jerusalem  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xiv.  9,  §4;  B.J.  ii.  21,  §3;  Vit.  12,  13, 
27,  34,  57,  61,  68,  74).     [Sanhedrim.] 

In  many  Eastern  cities  much  space  is  occupied 
by  gardens,  and  thus  the  size  of  the  city  is  much 
increased  (Niebuhr,  Voyage,  ii.  172,  239  ;  Cony- 
beare  and  Howson,  i.  96  ;  Eothen,  240).  The  vast 
extent  of  Nineveh  and  of  Babylon  may  thus  be  in 
part  accounted  for  (Diod.  ii.  70 ;  Quint.  Curt.  v. 
i.  26;  Jon.  iv.  11;  Chardin,  Voy.  vii.  273,  284; 
Porter,  Damascus,  i.  153 ;  P.  della  Valle,  ii.  33). 
In  most  Oriental  cities  the  streets  are  extremely 
narrow,  seldom  allowing  more  than  two  loaded 
camels,  or  one  camel  and  two  foot  passengers,  to 
pass  each  other,  though  it  is  clear  that  some  of  the 
streets  of  Nineveh  must  have  been  wide  enough  for 
chariots  to  pass  each  other  (Nah.  ii.  4;  Olearius, 
Trav.  294,  309  ;  Burckhardt,  Trav.  in  Arabia,  i. 
188;  Buckingham,  Arab  Tribes,  330;  Mrs.  Poole, 
Englishwoman  in  Egypt,  i.  141).     The  word  for 

streets  used  by  Nahum — fil^m,  from  2H"),  broad, 

ir\are7ai  —  is  used  also  of  streets  or  broad  places 
in  Jerusalem  (Prov.  i.  20;  Jer.  v.  1,  xxii.  4; 
Cant.  iii.  2)  ;  and  it  may  be  remarked  that  the 
irAareTat  into  which  the  sick  were  brought  to 
receive  the  shadow  of  St.  Peter  (Acts  v.  15)  were 
more  likely  to  be  the  ordinary  streets  than  the 
special  piazze  of  the  city.  It  seems  likely  that  the 
immense  concourse  which  resorted  to  Jerusalem  at 
the  feasts  would  induce  wider  streets  than  in  other 
cities.  Herod  built  in  Antioch  a  wide  street  paved 
with  stone,  and  having  covered  ways  on  each  side. 
Agrippa  II.  paved  Jerusalem  with  white  stone 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xvi.  5,  §2,  3,  x.\.  9,  §7).  The  Straight 
street  of  Damascus  is  still  clearly  defined  and  recog- 
nizable (Irby  and  Mangles,  v.  81!;  Robinson,  iii. 
454,  455). 

In  building  Caesarea,  Josephus  says  that  Herod 
was  careful  to  carry  out  the  drainage  effectually 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xv.  19,  §6) ;  we  cannot  determine  whe- 
ther the  internal  commerce  of  Jewish  cili 
carried  on  as  now  by  means  of  bazars,  but  we  read 
of  the  bakers'  street  (Jer.  xxxvii.  21),  and  Josephus 
speaks  of  the  wool  market,  the  hardware  market,  a 
place  of  blacksmiths'  shops,  and  the  clothes  market, 
at  Jerusalem  (B.  J.  v.  8,  §1). 

The  open  spaces  (irAaTeTai)  near  the  gates  of 
towns  were  in  ancient  times,  as  they  are  still,  used 
as  places  of  assembly  by  the  elders,  of  holding  courts 


CITIES  OF  REFUGE 


335 


by  kings  and  judges,  and  of  general  resort  by 
citizens  ((Jen.  xxiii.  10  ;  Ruth  iv.  1  ;  2  Sam.  xv.  2, 
xviii.  24;  2  K.  vii.  1,  3,  20;  2  Chr.  xviii.  9, 
xxxii.  6  ;  Neh.  viii.  13  ;  Job  xxix.  7  ;  Jer.  xvii.  19  ; 
Matt.  vi.  5 ;  Luke  xiii.  26).  They  were  also  used 
as  places  of  public  exposure  by  way  of  punishment 
(Jer.  xx.  2  ;  Am.  v.  10). 

Prisons  were  under  the  kingly  government,  within 
the  royal  precinct  (Gen.  xxxix.  20  ;  1  K.  xxii.  27  ; 
Jer.  xxxii.  2  ;  Neh.  iii.  25  ;  Acts  xxi.  34,  xxiii.  35). 

Great  pains  were  taken  to  supply  both  Jerusalem 
and  other  cities  with  water,  both  by  tanks  and  cis- 
terns for  rain-water,  and  by  reservoirs  supplied  by 
aqueducts  from  distant  springs.  Such  was  the 
fountain  of  Gihon,  the  aqueduct  of  Hezekiah  (2  K. 
xx.  20  ;  2  Chr.  xxxii.  30  ;  Is.  xxii.  9),  and  of  Solo- 
mon (Eccl.  ii.  6),  of  which  last  water  is  still  con- 
veyed from  near  Bethlehem  to  Jerusalem  (Maun- 
drell,  Early  Trav.  457  ;  Robinson,  i.  347,  8). 
Josephus  also  mentions  an  attempt  made  by  Pilate 
to  bring  water  to  Jerusalem  (Ant.  xviii.  3,  2). 
[Conduit.] 

Burial-places,  except  in  special  cases,  were  outside 
the  city  (Num.  xix.  11,  16  ;  Matt.  viii.  28  ;  Luke 
vii.  12  ;  John  xix.  41  ;  Heb.  xiii.  12).     [H.  W.  P.] 

CITIES  of  REFUGE  (t^pBn  nV,  from 

tj?p,  contracted,  Gesen.  1216  ;  Tr6\eis  tuv  <pvya- 

SevTrjplwu,  (pvyaSevTTjpia,  (pvya.8e?a. ;  oppida  in 
ftigitivorum  auxilia, praesidia,  separata;  urbes  fu- 
gitiwrum).  Six  Levitical  cities  specially  chosen  for 
refuge  to  the  involuntary  homicide  until  released 
from  banishment  by  the  death  of  the  high-priest 
(Mum.  xxxv.  6,  13,  15;  Josh.  xx.  2,  7,  9). 
[Blood,  Avenger  of.]  There  were  three  on  each 
side  of  Jordan.  1.  Kedesh,  in  Naphtali,  Kedes, 
about  twenty  miles  E.S.E.  from  Tyre,  twelve 
S.S.W.  from  Banias  (1  Chr.  vi.  76;  Robinson, 
ii.  439;  Benj.  of  Tudela,  Early  Trav.  89).  2. 
Shechem,  in  Mount  Ephraim,  Nabulus  (Josh, 
xxi.  21;  1  Chr.  vi.  67;  2  Chr.  x.  1;  Robinson, 
ii.  287,  288).  3.  Hebron,  in  Judah,  el-Khulil. 
The  two  last  were  royal  cities,  and  the  latter  sacer- 
dotal also,  inhabited  by  David,  and  fortified  by  Re- 
hoboam  (Josh.  xxi.  13  ;  2  Sam.  v.  5 ;  1  Chr.  vi. 
55,  xxix.  27  ;  2  Chr.  xi.  10  ;  Robinson,  i.  213,  ii. 
89).  4.  On  the  E.  side  of  Jordan — Bezer,  in  the 
tribe  of  Reuben,  in  the  plains  of  Moab,  said  in  the 
Gemara  to  be  opposite  to  Hebron,  perhaps  Bosor, 
but  the  site  has  not  yet  been  found  (Deut.  iv. 
43  ;  Josh.  xx.  8,  xxi.  36;  1  Mac.  v.  26;  Joseph. 
Ant.  iv.  7,  §4;  Reland,  662).  5.  Ramotii- 
Gilead,  in  the  tribe  of  Gad,  supposed  to  be  on  or 
near  the  site  of  es-Szalt  (Deut.  iv.  43 ;  Josh.  xxi. 
38;  1  K.  xxii.  3;  Reland,  iii.  p.  966).  6.  Golan, 
in  Bashan,  in  the  half-tribe  of  Manasseh,  a  town 
whose  site  has  not  been  ascertained,  but  which 
doubtless  gave  its  name  to  the  district  of  ( !au- 
lonitis,  Jaulun  (Deut.  iv.  43 ;  Josh.  xxi.  27 ; 
1  Chr.  vi.  71;  Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  7,  §4;  Reland, 
p.  815;  Porter,  Damascus,  ii.  251,  254;  Burck- 
hardt, Syria,  p.  286). 

The  Gemara  notices  that  the  cities  on  each  side 
of  Che  Jordan  were  nearly  opposite  each  other,  in 
accordance  with  the  direction  to  divide  the  land 
into  three  parts  (Dent.  xix.  2;  Reland,  iii.  p.  662  I. 
fifaimonides  says  all  the  48  Levitical  cities  had  the 
privilege  of  asylum,  but  that  the  six  refuge-cities 
were  required  to  receive  and  lodge  the  homicide 
gratuitously  (Calmet  On  Num.  xxxv.). 


336 


CITfMS 


Most  of  the  Rabbinical  refinements  on  the  Law  are 
stated  under  Blood,  Revenger  of.  To  them  may 
be  added  the  following.  If  the  homicide  committed 
a  fresh  act  of  manslaughter,  he  was  to  flee  to  an- 
other city  ;  but  if  he  were  a  Levite,  to  wander  from 
city  to  city.  An  idea  prevailed  that  when  the  Mes- 
siah came  three  more  cities  would  be  added ;  a 
misinterpretation,  as  it  seems,  of  Deut.  xix.  8,  9 
(Lightfoot,  Cent.  Char.  clii.  208).  The  altar  at 
Jerusalem,  and,  to  some  extent  also,  the  city  itself, 
possessed  the  privilege  of  asylum  under  similar 
restrictions ;  a  privilege  claimed,  as  regards  the 
former,  successfully  by  Adonijah  and  in  vain  by 
Joab  ;  accorded,  as  regards  the  city,  to  Shimei,  but 
forfeited  by  him  (1  K.  i.  53,  ii.  28,  33,  36,  46). 

The  directions  respecting  the  refuge-cities  present 
some  difficulties  in  intei-pretation.  The  Levitical 
cities  were  to  have  a  space  of  1000  cubits  (about 
583  yards)  beyond  the  city  wall  for  pasture  and 
other  purposes.  Presently  after,  2000  cubits  are 
ordered  to  be  the  suburb  limit(Num.xxxv.4,5).  The 
solution  of  the  difficulty  may  be,  either  the  2000 
cubits  are  to  be  added  to  the  1000  as  "  fields  of  the 
suburbs"  (Lev.  xxv.  34),  as  appears  to  have  been 
the  case  in  the  gift  to  Caleb,  which  excluded  the 
city  of  Hebron,  but  included  the  "  fields  and  villages 
of  the  city"  (Josh.  xxi.  11,  12,  Patrick.),  or  that 
the  additional  2000  cubits  were  a  special  gift  to 
the  refuge-cities,  whilst  the  other  Levitical  cities 
had  only  1000  cubits  for  suburb.  Calmet  supposes 
the  line  of  2000  cubits  to  be  measured  parallel,  and 
the  1000  perpendicular  to  the  city  wall;  an  ex- 
planation, however,  which  supposes  all  the  cities  to 
be  of  the  same  size  (Calmet  On  Numbers,  xxxv.). 

The  right  of  asylum  possessed  by  many  Greek 
and  Roman  towns,  especially  Ephesits,  was  in  pro- 
cess of  time  much  abused,  and  was  curtailed  by 
Tiberius  (Tac.  Ann.  iii.  60,  63).  It  was  granted 
under  certain  limitations,  to  churches  by  Christian 
emperors  (Cod.  i.  tit.  12;  Gibbon,  c.  xx.  iii.  35 
■Smith).  Hence  came  the  right  of  sanctuary  pos- 
sessed by  so  many  churches  in  the  middle  ages 
(Hallam,  Middle  Ages,  c.  ix.  pt.  1,  vol.  iii.  302 
11th  ed.).  [H.  W.  P.] 

CIT'IMS  (Kirieoi,  Alex.  Kinatoi ;  Cetei), 
1  Mace.  viii.  5.     [Chittim.] 

CITIZENSHIP  (iroAn-efo ;  civitas).  The  use 
of  this  term  in  Scripture  has  exclusive  reference  to 
the  usages  of  the  Roman  empire ;  in  the  Hebrew 
commonwealth,  which  was  framed  on  a  basis  of 
religious,  rather  than  of  political  privileges  and  dis- 
tinctions, the  idea  of  the  commonwealth  was  merged 
in  that  of  the  congregation,  to  which  every  Hebrew, 
and  even  strangers  under  certain  restrictions,  were 
admitted.  [CONGREGATION;  STRANGERS.]  The 
privilege  of  Roman  citizenship  was  widely  extended 
under  the  emperors ;  it  was  originally  acquired  in 
various  ways,  as  by  purchase  (Acts  xxii.  28 ;  Cic. 
ad  Fam.  xiii.  36;  Dion.  Cass.  Ix.  17),  by  military 
services  (Cic.  pro  Bcdb.  22  ;  Suet.  Aug.  47),  by 
favour  (Tac.  Hist.  iii.  47),  or  by  manumission. 
The  right  once  obtained  descended  to  a  man's  children 
(Acts  xxii.  23).  The  Jews  had  rendered  signal 
services  to  Julius  Caesar  in  the  Egyptian  war 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xiv.  8,  §1,  2),  and  it  is  not  impro- 
bable that  many  obtained  the  freedom  of  the  city 
on  that  ground ;  certain  it  is  that  great  numbers  of 
Jews,  who  were  Roman  citizens,  were  scattered 
over  Greeceand  Asia  Minor  (Ant.  xiv.  10,  §13, 14). 
Among  the  privileges  attached  to  citizenship,  we 
may  note  that  a  man  could  not  be  bound  or  impri- 


CLAUDIA 

soned  without  a  formal  trial  (Acts  xxii.  29),  still 
less  be  scourged  (Acts  xvi.  37  ;  Cic.  in  Verr.  v.  63, 
66)  ;  the  simple  assertion  of  citizenship  was  suffi- 
cient to  deter  a  magistrate  from  such  a  step  (Acts 
xxii.  2.5  ;  Cic.  in  Verr.  v.  62),  as  any  infringement 
of  the  privilege  was  visited  with  severe  punish- 
ment. A  Jew  could  only  plead  exemption  from 
such  treatment  before  a  Roman  magistrate  ;  he  was 
still  liable  to  it  from  Jewish  authorities  (2  Cor.  xi. 
24;  Seld.  de  Syn.  ii.  15,  §11).  Another  privilege 
attaching  to  citizenship  was  the  appeal  from  a  pio- 
vincial  tribunal  to  the  empero*  at  Rome  (Acts  xxv. 
11).  [W.  L.  B.] 

CITKON.     [Apple  Tree.] 

CLAUDA    (KAouStj,    Acts    xxvii.  16  ;    called 

Gaudos  by  Mela  and  Pliny,  KAaDSos  by  Ptolemy, 
and  KAauSia  in  the  Stadiasmus  Maris  Magni:  it  is 
still  called  Clauda-nesa,  or  Gaudoncsi,  by  the  Greeks, 
which  the  Italians  have  -corrupted  into  Qozzd). 
This  small  island,  unimportant  iu  itself  and  in  its 
history,  is  of  very  great  geographical  importance 
in  reference  to  the  removal  of  some  of  the  diffi- 
culties connected  with  St.  Paul's  shipwreck  at  Me- 
lita.  The  position  of  Clauda  is  nearly  due  W.  of 
Cape  Matala  on  the  S.  coast  of  Crete  [Fair  Ha- 
vens], and  nearly  due  S.  of  Piioenice.  (See 
Ptol.  iii.  17,  §1;  Stadiasm.  p.  496 ;  Ed.  Gail.) 
The  ship  was  seized  by  the  gale  a  little  after  pass- 
ing Cape  Matala,  when  on  her  way  from  Fair  Ha- 
vens to  Phoenice  (Acts  xxvii.  12-17).  The  storm 
came  down  from  the  island  (tear  avrris,  v.  14), 
and  there  was  danger  lest  the  ship  should  be  driven 
into  the  African  Syrtis  (v.  17).  It  is  added  that 
she  was  driven  to  Clauda  and  ran  under  the  lee  of 
it  (v.  16).  We  see  at  once  that  this  is  in  harmony 
with,  and  confirmatory  of,  the  arguments  derivable 
from  all  the  other  geographical  circumstances  of 
the  case  (as  well  as  from  the  etymology  of  the 
word  Euroclydon  or  Euro-Aquilo),  which  lead  us  to 
the  conclusion  that  the  gale  came  from  the  N.E., 
or  rather  E.N.E.  Under  the  lee  of  Clauda  there 
would  be  smooth  water,  advantage  of  which  was 
taken  for  the  purpose  of  getting  the  boat  on  board, 
and  making  preparations  for  riding  out  the  gale. 
[Ship.]  (Smith,  Voy.  and  Shipwreck  of  St.  Paul, 
2nd  ed.  pp.  92,  98,  253.)  [J.  S.  H.] 

CLAU'DIA  (KAauS/ct),  a  Christian  female 
mentioned  in  2  Tim.  iv.  21,  as  saluting  Timotheus. 
There  is  reason  for  supposing  that  this  Claudia 
was  a  British  maiden,  daughter  of  king  Cogidub- 
nus,  an  ally  of  Rome  (Tacit.  Agricol.  14),  who 
took  the  name  of  his  imperial  patron,  Tiberius 
Claudius.  She  appears  to  have  become  the  wife  of 
Pndens,  who  is  mentioned  in  the  same  verse.  (See 
Martial,  lib.  iv.  Epigr.  13.)  This  Pudens,  we 
gather  from  an  inscription  found  at  Chichester,  and 
now  in  the  gardens  at  Goodwood,  was  at  one  time 
in  close  connexion  with  king  Cogidubims,  and  gave 
an  area  for  a  temple  of  Neptune  and  Minerva, 
which  was  built  by  that  king's  authority.  And 
Claudia  is  said  in  Martial  (xi.  53)  to  have  been 
i;imdris  liriviiriis  cdita.  Moreover,  she  is  there 
also  called  Rvfina.  Now  Pomponia,  wife  of  the 
late  commander  in  Britain,  Aulus  Plautius,  under 
whom  Claudia's  father  was  received  into  alliance, 
belonged  to  a  house  of  which  the  Rnfi  were  one  of 
the  chief  branches.  If  she  herself  were  a  Rufa, 
and  Claudia  her  protegee,  the  latter  might  well 
be  called  Rulina ;  and  we  know  that  Pomponia 
was  tried  as  superstitionis  externa®  rea  in  the  year 
57,  Tacit.  Ann.  xii.  32:  so  that  there  are  many 


CLAUDIUS 

circumstances  concurrent,  tending  to  give  verisimi- 
litude to  the  conjecture.  See  Archdeacon  Williams's 
pamphlet,  "  On  Pudens  and  Claudia;" — an  article 
in  the  Quarterly  Review  for  July,  1858,  entitled 
"  The  Romans  at  Colchester  ;" — -and  an  Excursus  in 
Alford's  Greek  Testament,  vol.  iii.  prolegg.  p.  104, 
in  which  the  contents  of  the  two  works  first  men- 
tioned are  embodied  in  a  summary  form.    [H.  A.] 

CLAUDIUS  (KXaiSios;  in  full,  Tiberias 
Claudius  Nero  Drusus  Germanicus),  fourth  Roman 
emperor,  successor  of  Caius  Caligula,  reigned 
from  41  to  54  a.d.  He  was  son  of  Nero  Drusus, 
was  born  in  Lyons  Aug.  1,  B.C.  9  or  10,  and 
lived  private  and  unknown  till  the  day  of  his 
being  called  to  the  throne,  January  24,  A.D.  41. 
He  was  nominated  to  the  supreme  power  mainly 
through  the  influence  of  Herod  Agrippa  the  First 
(Jos.  Ant.  xix.  2,  §1,  3,  4;  Suet.  Claud.  10); 
and  when  on  the  throne  he  proved  himself  not 
ungrateful  to  him :  for  he  enlarged  the  territory  of 
Agrippa  by  adding  to  it  Judaea,  Samaria,  and  some 
districts  of  Lebanon,  and  appointed  his  brother  Herod 
to  the  kingdom  of  Chalcis  (Joseph.  Ant.  xix.  5,  §6  ; 
Dion  Cassius,  Ix.  8),  giving  to  this  latter  also,  after 
his  brother's  death,  the  presidency  over  the  temple 
at  Jerusalem  (Joseph.  Ant.  xx.  1 ,  §3).  In  Claudius's 
reign  there  were  several  famines,  arising  from  unfa- 
vourable harvests  (Dion  Cass.  Ix.  1 1 ;  Euseb.  Chron. 
Armcn.  I.  269,  271;  Tacit.  Ann.  xii.  13),  and  one 
such  occurred  in  Palestine  and  Syria  (Acts  xi.  28-30) 
under  the  procurators  Cuspius  Fadus  and  Tiberius 
Alexander  (Joseph.  Ant.  xx.  2,  §6,  and  5,  §2),  which 
perhaps  lasted  some  years.  Claudius  was  induced 
by  a  tumult  of  the  Jews  in  Rome,  to  expel  them 
from  the  city  (Suet.  Claud.  25  ;  Judaeos  impul- 
sore  Chrcsto  assidue  tumultuantes  Boma  expulit ; 
cf.  Acts  xviii.  2).  It  is  probable  that  Suetonius  here 
refers  to  some  open  dissension  between  Jews  and 
Christians,  but  when  it,  and  the  consequent  edict, 
took  place,  is  very  uncertain.  Orosius  {Hist.  vii. 
6)  fixes  it  in  the  9th  year  of  Claudius,  a.d.  49  or 
50 ;  referring  to  Josephus,  who,  however,  says 
nothing  about  it.  Pearson  (Annal.  Paul.  p.  22) 
thinks  the  12th  year  more  probable  (A.D.  52  or 
53).  As  Auger  remarks  (de  ratione  temporum  in 
Actis  App.  p.  117),  the  edict  of  expulsion  would 
hardly  be  published  as  long  as  Herod  Agrippa  was 
at  Rome,  i.e.  before  the  year  49.  Claudius,  after 
a  weak  and  foolish  reign  (non  principem  se,  sed  mi- 
?i  istrum  egit,  Sueton.  29),  was  poisoned  by  his  fourth 
wife  Agrippina,  the  mother  of  Nero  (Tacit.  Ann.  xii. 
06,  7  ;  Suet.  Claud.  44,  5  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  xx.  8,  §1 ; 
/,'.  J.  ii.  12,  §8),  October  13,  a.d.  54.      [H.  A.] 

CLAU'DIUS  LYS'IAS.  [Lysias.] 
CLAY  (D^tD  ;  vr]\6s  ;  humus  or  lutum),  a  sedi- 
mentary earth,  tough  and  plastic,  arising  from  the 
disintegration  of  felspar  and  similar  minerals,  and 
always  containing  silica  and  alumina  combined  in 
variable  proportions.  As  the  sediment  of  water 
remaining  in  pits  or  in  streets,  the  word  is  used 
frequently  in  O.  T.  (e.g.  Is.  lvii.  20  ;  Jer.  xxxviii. 
6  ;  Ps.  xviii.  4-2),  and  in  N.  T.  (tt7]A6s,  John  ix.  6), 
a  mixture  of  sand  or  dust  with  spittle.  It  is  also 
found  in  the  sense  of  potter's  clay  (Is.  xii.  25). 
The  alluvial  soils  of  Palestine  would  no  doubt  supply 
material  for  pottery,  a  manufacture  which  we  know 
was,  as  it  still  is,  carried  on  in  the  country  (Jer. 
xviii.  2,  6),  but  our  knowledge  mi  the  subject  is  so 
small  as  to  afford  little  or  no  means  of  determining, 
and  the  clay  of  Palestine,  like  that  of  Egypt,  is  pro- 


CLEOPAS 


337 


bably  more  loam  than  clay  (Birch,  Hist,  of  Pottery, 
i.  55,  152).  [Pottery.]  The  word  most  com- 
monly used  for  "  potter's  clay  "  is  "1011  (Ex.  i. 
14  ;  Job  iv.  19  ;  Is.  xxix.  16  ;  Jer.  xviii.  4,  &c). 
Bituminous  shale,  convertible  into  clay,  is  said  to 
exist  largely  at  the  source  of  the  Jordan,  and  near 
the  Dead  Sea.  The  great  seat  of  the  pottery  of  the 
present  day  in  Palestine  is  Gaza,  where  are  made  the 
vessels  in  dark  blue  clay  so  frequently  met  with. 

The  use  of  clay  in  brick-making  is  described 
elsewhere.     [Bricks.] 

Another  use  of  clay  was  in  sealing  (Job  xxxviii. 
14).  The  bricks  of  Assyria  and  Egypt  are  most 
commonly  found  stamped  either  with  a  die  or  with 
marks  •  made  by  the  fingers  of  the  maker.  Wine 
jars  in  Egypt  were  sometimes  sealed  with  clay ; 
mummy  pits  were  sealed  with  the  same  substance, 
and  remains  of  clay  are  still  found  adhering  to  the 
stone  door-jambs.  Our  Lord's  tomb  may  have  been 
thus  sealed  (Matt,  xxvii.  66),  as  also  the  earthen 
vessel  containing  the  evidences  of  Jeremiah's  pur- 
chase (Jer.  xxxii.  14).  So  also  in-  Assyria  at 
Kouyunjik  pieces  of  fine  clay  have  been  found 
bearing  impressions  of  seals  with  Assyrian,  Egyp- 
tian, and  Phoenician  devices.  The  seal  used  for 
public  documents  was  rolled  on  the  moist  clay,  and 
the  tablet  was  then  placed  in  the  lire  and  baked. 
The  practice  of  sealing  doors  with  clay  to  facilitate 
detection  in  case  of  malpractice  is  still  common  in 
the  East  (Wilkinson,  Anc.  Egypt,  i.  15,  48,  ii. 
364;  Layard,  N.  §  B.  153,  158,  60S;  Herod,  ii. 
38  ;  Harmer,  06s.  iv.  376.  [Bricks  ;  Pottery  ; 
Seals.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

CLEM'ENT  (KA Vis-,  Phil-  iv.  3),  a  fellow- 
labourer  of  St.  Paul,  when  he  was  at  Philippi  (for 
so  the  text  implies).  It  was  generally  believed  in 
the  ancient  church,  that  this  Clement  was  identical 
with  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  who  afterwards  became 
so  celebrated.  Whether  this  was  so,  it  is  impossible 
to  say.  The  practice  of  supposing  N.  T.  characters 
to  be  identical  with  persons  who  were  afterwards 
known  by  the  same  names,  was  too  frequent,  and 
the  name  Clemens  too  common,  for  us  to  be  able  to 
pronounce  on  the  question.  The  identity  is  as- 
serted in  Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  4 ;  Origen,  vol.  i.  p. 
262,  ed.  Lommatzseh ;  and  Jerome,  Scriptor. 
Eccl.  p.  176,  a.  Chrysostom  does  not  mention 
it.  [H.  A.] 

CLE'OPAS  (KAeoVcw),  one  of  the  two  disciples 
who  were  going  to  Emmaus  on  the  day  of  the 
resurrection,  when  Jesus  Himself  drew  near  and 
talked  with  them  (Luke  xxiv.  18).  Eusebius  in  his 
Onomasticon  makes  him  a  native  of  Emmaus.  It 
is  a  question  whether  this  Cleopas  is  to  be  con- 
sidered as  identical  with  Cleopiias  (accur.  Clopas) 
or  Alphaeusin  John  xix.  25.  [AxPHAEUS.]  Their 
identity  was  assumed  by  the  later  fathers  and  church 
historians.  But  Eusebius  (//.  E.  iii.  11)  writes 
the  name  of  Alphaeus,  Joseph's  brother,  Clopas, 
not  Cleopas.  And  Chrysostom  and  Theodoret,  on 
the  Epistle  to  the  Gaiatians,  call  James  the  Just 
the  son  of  Clopas.  Besides  which,  Clopas,  or 
Alphaeus,  is  an  Aramaic  name,  whereas  Cleopas  is 
a  Greek  name,  probably  contracted  from  K\e6- 
iraTpos,  as  'AvTnras  from  'AcTiirarpoj.  Again, 
as  we  find  the  wife  and  children  of  Clopas  con- 
stantly with  the  family  of  Joseph  at  the  time  of 
our  Lord's  ministry,  it  is  probable  that  he  himself 
was  dead  before  that  time.  On  the  whole  (lien,  it 
■    in-  safer   to  doubt    the  identity   of  Cleopas  witli 

Z 


338 


CLEOPATRA 


Clopas.     Of  tho  further   history   of  Cleopas,  no- 
thing is  known.  [H.  A.] 

CLEOPAT'EA  (KXeoir&rpa),  the  name  of 
numerous  Egyptian  princesses  derived  from  the 
daughter  of  Antiochus  III.,  who  married  Ptolemy  V. 
Epiphaues,  B.C.  193. 

1.  "The  wife  of  Ptolemy"  (Esth.  xi.  1)  was 
probably  the  granddaughter  of  Antiochus,  and  wife 
of  Ptol.  VI.  Philometor.     [Ptol.  Philometor.] 

2.  A  daughter  of  Ptol.  VI.,  Philometor  and 
Cleopatra  (1),  who  was  married  first  to  Alex- 
ander Balas  B.C.  150  (1  Mace.  x.  58),  and  after- 
wards given  by  her  father  to  Demetrius  Nicator 
when  he  invaded  Syria  (1  Mace.  xi.  12  ;  Joseph. 
Ant.  xiii.  4,  §7).  During  the  captivity  of  Deme- 
trius in  Parthia  [Demetrius]  Cleopatra  married 
his  brother  Antiochus  VII.  Sidetes,  and  was  pro- 
bably, privy  to  the  murder  of  Demetrius  on  his 
return  to  Syria  B.C.  125  (App.  Syr.  68:  yet  see 
Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  9,  §3 ;  Just,  xxxix.  1).  She 
afterwards  murdered  Seleucus,  her  eldest  son  fey 
Demetrius  (App.  Syr.  69);  and  at  length  was 
herself  poisoned  B.C.  120  by  a  draught  which  she 
had  prepared  for  her  second  son  Antiochus  VIII., 
berau.se  he  was  unwilling  to  gratify  the  ambitious 
designs  which  she  formed  when  she  raised  him  to 
the  throne  (Justin.  xxxLx.  2).  [B.  F.  W.] 

CLE'OPHAS.     [Cleopas;  Alphaeus.] 

CLOTHING.     [Dress.] 

CLOUD  (pj?).  The  word  BWJM,  so  rendered 
in  a  few  places,  properly  means  "  vapours,"  the 
less  dense  form  of  cloud  which  rises  higher,  and 
is  often  absorbed  without  falling  in  rain ;  Arab. 

u.- 
fLii  and  fi  i*J-  The  word  2J?,  sometimes  ren- 
dered "  cloud,"  means  merely  "  darkness,"  and  is 
applied  also  to  "  a  thicket"  (Jer.  iv.  29).  The 
shelter  given,  and  refreshment  of  rain  promised,  by 
clouds,  give  them  their  peculiar  prominence  in 
Oriental  imagery,  and  the  individual  cloud  in  that 
ordinarily  cloudless  region  becomes  well  defined  and 
is  dwelt  upon  like  the  individual  tree  in  the  bare 
landscape  (Stanley,  S.  §  P.  p.  140).  Similarly, 
when  a  cloud  appears,  rain  is  ordinarily  apprehended, 
and  thus  the  "  cloud  without  rain  "  becomes  a  pro- 
verb for  the  man  of  promise  without  performance 
(Prov.  xvi.  15 ;  Is.  xviii.  4,  xxv.  5  ;  Jude  12  ;  comp. 
Prov.  xxv.  14).  The  cloud  is  of  course  a  figure  of 
transitoriness  (Job  xxx.  15;  Hos.  vi.  4),  and  of 
whatever  intercepts  divine  favour  or  human  sup- 
plication (Lam.  ii.  1,  iii.  44).  Being  the  least 
substantial  of  visible  forms,  undefined  in  shape, 
and  unrestrained  in  position,  it  is  the  one  amongst 
material  things  which  suggests  most  easily  spiritual 
being.  Hence  it  is,  so  to  speak,  the  recognised 
machinery  by  which  supernatural  appearances  are 
introduced  (Is.  xix.  1 ;  Ez.  i.  4  ;  Rev.  i.  7,  and 
passim),  or  the  veil  between  things  visible  and 
invisible;  but,  more  especially,  a  mysterious  or 
supernatural  cloud  is  the  symbolical  seat  of  the 
Divine  presence  itself — the  phenomenon  of  deity 
vouchsafed  by  Jehovah  to  the  prophet,  the  priest, 
the  king,  or  the  people.  Sometimes  thick  darkness, 
sometimes  intense  luminousness,  often,  apparently, 
and  especially  by  night,  an  actual  fire  (as  in  the 
descent  of  Jehovah  on  Sinai,  Ex.  xix.  18)  is  attri- 
buted to  this  glory-cloud  (Deut.  iv.  11 ;  Exod.  xl. 
35.  xxxiii.  22,  23;  2  Sam.  xxii.  12,  13).  Such  a 
bright  cloud,  at  any  rate  at  times,  visited  and  rested 


COAL 

on  the  Mercy  Seat  (Ex.  xxix.  42,  43;  1  K.  viii. 
11  ;  2  Chr.  v.  14;  Ez.  xliii.  4)  and  was  by  later 
writers  named  Shekinah.  For  the  curious  ques- 
tions which  the  Rabbis  and  others  have  raised  con- 
cerning it,  e.g.  whether  its  light  was  created  or  not, 
whether  the  actual  "  light  "  created  on  the  "  first 
day"  (Gen.  i.  3),  or  an  emanation  therefrom,  Bux- 
torfs  history  of  the  Ark,  chap,  xi.-xiv.  [Ugolini, 
vol.  vii.),  may  be  consulted.  [H.  H.] 

CLOUD,  PILLAE  OF  (|3J?n  1-ISy).  This 
was  the  active  form  of  the  symbolical  glory-cloud, 
betokening  God's  presence  to  lead  His  chosen  host, 
or  to  inquire  and  visit  offences,  as  the  luminous 
cloud  of  the  sanctuary  exhibited  the  same  under  an 
aspect  of  repose.  The  cloud,  which  became  a 
pillar  when  the  host  moved,  seems  to  have  rested 
at  other  times  on  the  tabernacle,  whence  God  is 
said  to  have  "come  down  in  the  pillar"  (Num. 
xii.  5;  so  Exod.  xxxiii.  9,  10).  It  preceded  the 
host,  apparently  resting  on  the  ark  which  led  the 
way  (Ex.  xiii.  21,  xl.  36,  &c. ;  Num.  ix.  15-23, 
x.  34).  So  by  night  the  cloud  on  the  tabernacle 
became  fire,  and  the  guiding  pillar  a  pillar  of  fire. 
A  remarkable  passage  in  Curtius  (v.  2,  §7),  de- 
scriptive of  Alexander's  army  on  the  march,  men- 
tions a  beacon  hoisted  on  a  pole  from  head-quarters 
as  the  signal  for  marching  ;  observabatur  ignis  noctu, 
fumus  interdiu.  This  was  probably  an  adoption  of 
an  eastern  custom.  Similarly  the  Persians  used  as 
a  conspicuous  signal,  an  image  of  the  sun  enclosed 
in  crystal  (ib.  iii.  3,  §9).  Caravans  are  still  known 
to  use  such  beacons  of  fire  and  smoke ;  the  cloud- 
lessness  and  often  stillness  of  the  sky  giving  the 
smoke  great  density  of  volume,  and  boldness  of 
outline.  [H.  H.] 

CNI'DUS  (KviSos)  is  mentioned  in  1  Mace.  xv. 
23,  as  one  of  the  Greek  cities  which  contained  Jewish 
residents  in  the  second  century  before  the  Christian 
era,  and  in  Acts  xxvii.  7,  as  a  harbour  which  was 
passed  by  St.  Paul  after  leaving  Myra,  and  before 
running  under  the  lee  of  Crete.  It  was  a  city  of 
great  consequence,  situated  at  the  extreme  S.W.  of 
the  peninsula  of  Asia  Minor  [Caria],  on  a  pro- 
montory now  called  Cape  Crio,  which  projects 
between  the  islands  of  Cos  and  Rhodes  (see  Acts 
xxi.  1).  Cape  Crio  is  in  fact  an  island,  so  joined 
by  an  artificial  causeway  to  the  mainland,  as  to 
form  two  harbours,  one  on  the  N.,  the  other  on 
the  S.  The  latter  was  the  larger,  and  its  moles 
were  noble  constructions.  All  the  remains  of  Cni- 
dus  show  that  it  must  have  been  a  city  of  great 
magnificence.  Few  ancient  cities  have  received 
such  ample  illustration  from  travels  and  engrav- 
ings. We  may  refer  to  Beaufort's  Karamania, 
Hamilton's  Researches,  and  Texier's  Asie  Mineure, 
also  Laborde,  Leake,  and  Clarke,  with  the  Draw- 
ings in  the  Ionian  Antiquities,  published  by  the 
Dilettanti  Society,  and  the  English  Admiralty 
Charts,  Nos.  1533,  1604.  [J.  S.  H.] 

COAL.  In  A.  V.  this  word  represents  no  less 
than  five  different  Heb.  words.  1.  The  first  and 
most  frequently  used  is  Gacheleth,  T\)T}\  (&v9pa£, 
avOpania  ;  pruna,  carbo),  alive  ember,  burning  fuel, 
as  distinguished  from  DPlQ  (Prov.  xxvi.  21).     It  is 

T  •       L 

written  more  fully  in  Ez.  x.  2,  tt'tf  vnS,  and  in 

Ez.  i.  i3,  n'ny'a  c;k  hn\. 

In  2  Sam.  xxii.  9, 13,  "  coals  of  fire"  are  put  meta- 
phoricallv  for  the  lightnings  proceeding  from  God 


COAL 

(Ps.  xviii.  8,  12,  t3,cxl. 

10).  Pr  Triopii 

In  Prov.  xxv.  22  we 
have  the  proverbial  ex- 
pression, "  Thou  shalt 
heap  coals  of  fire  upon 
his  head,"  which  has 
been  adopted  by  St.  Paul 
in  Rom.  xii.  20,  and  by 
which  is  metaphorically 
expressed  the  burning 
shame  and  confusion 
which  men  must  feel 
when  their  evil  is  re- 
quited by  good.  In  Ps. 
cxx.  4,  "  coals  "=  burn- 
ing brands  of  wood  (not 
''juniper,"  but  broom), 
to  which  the  false  tongue 
is  compared  (James  iii.  6 ). 

In  2  Sam.  xiv.  7  the 
quenching  of  the  live 
coal  is  used  to  indicate 
the  threatened  destruc- 
tion of  the  single  remain- 
ing branch  of  the  family* 

of  the  widow  of  Tekoah  suborned  by  Joab ;  just  as 
Lucian  {Tim.  §3)  uses  the  word  ^umvpov  in  the 
same  connexion. 

The  root  of  TwPil  is  7T\l,  which  is  possibly  the 

same  in  meaning  as  the  Arab.       _-..""•-,  to  light  a 

lire,  with  the  change  of  7  into  O. 

2.  Pecham,  pnS  (eVxapct,  &v6pa^  ;  carbo, 
prima).  In  Prov.  xxvi.  21,  this  word  clearly  sig- 
nifies fuel  not  yet  lighted,  as  contrasted  with  the 
burning  fuel  to  which  it  is  to  be  added ;  but  in 
Is.  xliv.  12,  and  liv.  16,  it  means  fuel  lighted, 
having  reference  in  both  cases  to  smiths'  work.    It  is 

-    3  - 

derived  from  DPIS  ;  Arab.       JS,  to  be  verv  black. 

The  fuel  meant  in  the  above  passages  is  probably 
charcoal,  and  not  coal  in  our  sense  of  the  word. 

3.  Rezeph, or Rizpah,  &)¥"]  i"IS^"1  (&v9pa£;  cal- 
culus in  Is.  vi.  6  ;  but  in  1  K.  six.  6,  D*QV"1  T\l)3 
is  rendered  by  the  LXX.  iynpvcpias  oXvpirris,  and 
by  the  Vulg.  pants  subciner ictus).  In  the  narrative 
of  Elijah's  miraculous  meal  the  word  is  used  to  de- 
scribe the  mode  in  which  the  cake  was  baked,  viz. 
on  a  hot  stone,  as  is  still  usual  in  the  East.    Comp. 

the  Arab.  L  j^>  ,  a  hot  stone  on  which  flesh  is  laid. 
nSV"),  in  Is.  vi.  6,  is  rendered  in  A.  V.  "  a  live 
coal,"  but  properly  means  "  a  hot  stone."  The 
root  is  F]V),  to  lay  stones  together  as  a  pavement. 

4.  P]t^"),  in  Hah.  iii.  5,  is  rendered  in  A.  V. 
"  burning  coals,"  and  in  the  margin  "  burning 
diseases."  The  former  meaning  is  supported  by  Cant. 
""iii.  0,  the  latter  by  Deut.  .xxxh.  24.  According  to 
the  Rabbinical  writers,  C]C'T  =  ft S*1, prima. 

5.  Shechor.— In  Lam.  iv.  8,  D1NFI  linU'D  -?jL*5n 
is  rendered  iii  A.  V.  '•  their  visage  is  blacker  than 
i  coal,"  or  in  the marg.  "darker  than  blackness." 
*nnt^  is  found  but  this  once,  and  signifies  to  be  black, 


COELESYRIA 


339 


Plan  of  Cnidus  and  Chart  of  the  adjoining  coast. 

from  root  "HIB*.     The  LXX.  render  it  by  acrPiXri, 

-    T 

the  Vulg.  by  carbones.  In  other  forms  the  word  is 
frequent,  and  Shihor  is  a  usual  name  for  the  Nile. 
[Shiiior.]  [W.  D.] 

COAT.     [Dress.] 

COCK  (a\4>cTwp  ;  g  alius),  the  well-known  do- 
mestic bird  mentioned  only  in  the  N.  T.  in  con- 
nexion with  the  denial  of  our  Lord  by  St.  Peter, 
but  indirectly  in  the  word  aXeKropocpoovla  in 
Mark  xiii.  35.  The  time  indicated  seems  to  have 
been  about  three  in  the  morning,  and  was  known  to 
the  Hebrews  as  "Q  3  H  ntO"]|?,  and  to  the  Latins  as 

gallicinium.  Some  persons  have  supposed  that  by 
aXlKTaip  in  the  N.  T.  is  meant  the  sounding  of  the 
Roman  trumpets  to  mark  the  watches  of  the  night, 
for  the  reason  that  cocks  were  not  permitted  to  be 
kept  at  Jerusalem  on  account  of  the  holiness  of  the 
place  :  but  this  fact  is  doubtful,  and  the  explanation 
is  fanciful  and  far-fetched.  [W.  D.] 

COCKATRICE.  See  tfllfatf-  under  Adder. 
In  Is.  xiv.  29,  the  form  of  the  word  is  jVDV. 

COCKLE  (nC5>N3 ;   faros ;   spina),  a  weed, 

named  only  in  Job  xxxi.  40,  and  probably  identical 
with  the  0C°-"ia  of  Matt.  xiii.  30.  Celsius  (Hierobot. 
ii.  199)  would  identify  it  with  the  Aconite,  but 
Gesenius  questions  this  (Jesaia,  i.  230,  ii.  304). 
The  root  of  the  word  is  t?K3,  to  stink.     [W.  D.] 

COELESYR'IA  (KofA.77  ^vpia;    Coehsyria), 

"  the  hollow  Syria,"  was  (strictly  speaking)  the 
name  given  by  the  Greeks,  after  the  time  of  Alex- 
ander, to  the  remarkable  valley  or  hollow  (koiXio) 
which  intervenes  between  Libanus  and  Anti-I.iba- 
nus,  stretching  from  lat.  33°  20'  to  34°  4C,  a 
distance  of  nearly  a  hundred  miles.  As  applied  to 
this  region  the  word  is  strikingly  descriptive.  l>iu- 
nysius  the  geographer  well  observes  upon  this,  in 
the  lines — 

He  Koi'Ani*  tvtnovaiv  eTTaJrvp-Oi',  ovvck   ap'  a{m/i> 
Mt'<r<r»)f  Kal  \9a/jLa\r)i>  opiutv  Sxio  rrpan't?  "xou<T"'- 

Perieg.  B99  900. 
A   modern  traveller   -ays,   more  particularly— 
"We  finally   looked  down  on  the  vasl  green  and 

/.  2 


340 


COFFER 


rod    valley — green  from  its   yet  unripe    corn,    red  I 
from  its  vineyards  not  yet  verdant — which  divides 
the    range   of    Lebanon    and    Anti-Lebanon ;     the  I 
former  reaching  its  highest  point  in  the  snowy  crest  t 
to  the  north,   behind   which  lie  the  Cedars ;    the  | 
latter,  in  the  still  more  snowy  crest  of  Hermon — 
the  culmination  of  the  range  being  thus  in  the  one  | 
at  the  northern,  in  the  other  at  the  southern  ex- 
tremity of  the  valley  which  they  bound.    The  view 
of  this  great  valley  is  chiefly  remarkable  as  being 
exact!  1/  to  the  eye  what  it  is  on  maps — the  '  hol- 
low '  between  the  two  mountain  ranges  of  Syria. 
A    screen   through    which   the    Leontes    (Litany) 
breaks    out    closes   the   south  end   of  the    plain. 
There  is  a  similar  screen  at  the  north  end,  but  too 
remote  to  be  visible  "  (Stanley's  Palestine,  p.  407). 
The  plain  gradually  rises  towards  its  centre,  near 
which,  but  a  little  on  the  southern  declivity,  stand 
the  ruins  of  Baalbek  or  Heliopolis.     In  the  imme- 
diate neighbourhood  of  Baalbek  rise  the  two  streams 
of  the    Orontes   (Nahr-el-Asij)    and    the   Litany, 
which  flowing  in  opposite  directions,  to  the  N.W. 
and  the  S.E.,  give  freshness  and  fertility  to  the  tract 
enclosed  between  the  mountain-ranges. 

The  term  Coele-Syria  was  also  used  in  a  much 
wider  sense.  In  the  first  place  it  was  extended  so 
as  to  include  the  inhabited  tract  to  the  east  of  the 
Anti-Libanus  range,  between  it  and  the  desert,  in 
which  stood  the  great  city  of  Damascus ;  and  then 
it  was  further  carried  on  upon  that  side  of  Jordan, 
through  Trachonitis  and  Peraea,  to  Idumaea  and 
the  borders  of  Egypt  (Strab.  xvi.  §21  ;  Polyb.  v. 
80,  §3  ;  Jos.  Ant.  i.  11,  §5).  Ptolemy  (v.  15)  and 
Josephus  (Ant.  xiii.  13,  §2)  even  place  Scythopolis 
in  Coele-Syria,  though  it  was  upon  the  west  side  of 
Jordan;  but  they  seem  to  limit  its  extent  south- 
wards to  about  lat.  31°  30',  or  the  country  of  the 
Ammonites  (Ptol.  v.  15;  Joseph,  i.  11).  Ptolemy 
distinctly  includes  in  it  the  Damascus  country. 

None  of  the  divisions  of  Syria  (Aram)  in  the 
Jewish  Scriptures  appear  to  correspond  with  the 
Coele-Syria  of  the  Greeks ;  for  there  are  no 
grounds  for  supposing,  with  Calmet  (Diet,  of 
the  Bible,  art.  Coelesijria),  that  "  Syria  of  Zobah  " 
is  Coele-Syria.  Coele-Syria  seems  to  have  been 
included  under  the  name  of  "  Syria  of  Damascus" 
(pCSTOIK),  and  to  have  formed  a  portion  of 

that  kingdom.  [Aram.]  The  only  distinct  reference 
to  the  region,  as  a  separate  tract  of  country,  which 
the  Jewish  Scriptures  contain,  is  probably  that  in 
Amos  (i.  5),  where  "  the  inhabitants  of  the  plain  of 
Aven  "  (}1N"nyp3,  Bikath-Avcn)  are  threatened, 

in  conjunction  with  those  of  Damascus.  Bikath  is 
exactly  such  a  plain  as  Coele-Syria  (Stanley's  Pa- 
lestine, Append,  p.  484),  and  the  expression  Bikath- 
Aven,  "  the  plain  of  Idols,"  would  be  well  applied 
to  the  tract  immediately  around  the  great  sanctuary 
of  Baalbek.  [Aven.]  In  the  Apocryphal  Books 
there  is  frequent  mention  of  Coele-Syria  in  a  some- 
what vague  sense,  nearly  as  an  equivalent  for  Syria 
(1  Esd.  ii.  17,  24,  27,  iv.  48,  vi.  29,  vii.  1,  viii.  67  ; 
1  Mace.  x.  69  ;  2  Mace.  iii.  5,  8,  iv.  4,  viii.  8,  x.  11). 
In  all  these  cases  the  word  is  given  in  A.  V.  as 
Celosvria.  [G.  R.] 

COFFER   (TJHN,   probably  from   Tr%    to  be 

moved ;  fle'/xa ;  capsella),  a  moveable  box  hanging 
from  the  side  of  a  cart  (1  Sam.  vi.  8,  11,  15). 
This  word  is  found  nowhere  else,  and  in  each  of  the 
above  examples  has  the  definite  article,  as  if  of  some 
special  significance.  [H.  W.  P.] 


COLOSSE 

COFFIN.     [Burial.] 

CO'LA  (XcoAa,  Alex.  KtoAa),  a  place  named 
with  Chobai  (Jud.  xv.  4,  only),  the  position  or  real 
name  of  which  has  not  been  ascertained.  Simonis 
(Onom.  N.  T.  170)  suggests  Abel-mecAofo/i. 

COLHO'ZEH  (nm-^a  ;  XoAeg  ;  Cholhoza), 

a  man  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  in  the  time  of  Nehe- 
miah  (Neh.  iii.  15,  xi.  5). 

CO'LIUS  (Kwios,  Alex.  KwXios;  Colnis),  1 
Esdr.  ix.  23.     [Kelaiah.] 

COLLAR.  For  the  proper  sense  of  this  term, 
as  it  occurs  in  Judg.  viii.  26,  see  Earrings.  The 
expression  '•QS  (as  the  collar)  in  Job  xxx.  18,  is 
better  read  as  1Q3  (comp.  Job  xxxiii.  6),  in  which 
case  the  sense  would  be  "it  bindeth  me  as  my 
coat,"  referring  to  the  close  fit  of  the  cethoneth.  The 
,S,  literally  the  "  mouth,"  as  a  part  of  a  garment, 

refers  to  the  orifice  for  the  head  and  neck,  but  we  ques- 
tion whether  it  would  be  applied  to  any  other  robe  than 
the  sacerdotal  ephod  (Ex.  xxxix.  23  ;  Ps.  exxxiii.  2). 
The  authority  of  the  LXX.  (Srairfp  t&  irepiffrS- 
/j-lov),  of  the  Vulg.  (quasi-capitio),  and  of  Gesenius 
(Thesaur.  p.  1088),  must  however  be  cited  in 
favour  of  the  ordinary  rendering.  [W.  L.  B.] 

COLONY,  a  designation  of  Philippi,  the  cele- 
brated city  of  Macedonia,  in  Acts  xvi.  12.  After 
the  battle  of  Aetium,  Augustus  assigned  to  his 
veterans  those  parts  of  Italy  which  had  espoused  ' 
the  cause  of  Antony,  and  transported  many  of  the 
expelled  inhabitants  to  Philippi,  Dyrrachium,  and 
other  cities  (Dion.  Cass.  Ii.  4).  In  this  way_ Phi- 
lippi was  made  a  Roman  colony  with  the  "  Jus 
Italicum"  (comp.  Dig.  50,  tit.  15,  s.  8),  and 
accordingly  we  find  it  described  as  a  "  colonia  " 
both  in  inscriptions  and  upon  the  coins  of  Augustus. 
(Orelli,  Inscr.  512,  3658,  3746,  4064;  Rasche, 
vol.  iii.  pt.  2,  p.  1120.)  On  the  "Jus  Italicum," 
see  Diet,  of  Ant.,  arts.  Colonia  and  Latinitas. 

COLOS'SE  (more  properly  COLOS'SAE,  Ko- 
Kocrcrai,  Col.  i.  2  ;  but  the  preponderance  of  MS. 
authority  is  in  favour  of  KoAaavai,  Colassae,  a 
form  used  by  the  Byzantine  writers,  aud  which  per- 
haps represents  the  provincial  mode  of  pronouncing 
the  name.  On  coins  and  inscriptions,  and  in  clas- 
sical writers  we  find  KoXocrcrai.  See  Ellicott,  ml 
foe).  A  city  in  the  upper  part  of  the  basin  of  the 
Maeander,  on  one  of  its  affluents  named  the  Lycus. 
Hicrapolis  and  Laodicaea  were  in  its  immediate 
neighbourhood  (Col.  ii.  1,  iv.  13,  15,  16;  see  Rev. 
i.  11,  iii.  14).  Colossae  fell,  as  these  other  two 
cities  rose,  in  importance.  Herodotus  (vii.  30) 
and  Xenophon  (Anab.  i.  2,  §6)  speak  of  it  as  a  city 
of  considerable  consequence.  Strabo  (xii.  p.  576) 
describes  it  as  only  a  ir6Xifffji.a.,  not  a  Tro'Ats  ;  yet 
elsewhere  (p.  578)  he  implies  that  it  had  some  mer- 
cantile importance;  and  Pliny,  in  St.  Paul's  time, 
describes  it  (v.  41)  as  one  of  the  "  celeberrima 
oppida"  of  its  district.  Colossae  was  situated  close 
to  the  great  road  which  led  from  Ephesus  to  the 
Euphrates.  Hence  our  impulse  would  be  to  con- 
clude that  St.  Paul  passed  this  way,  aud  founded  or 
confirmed  the  Colossian  Church  on  his  third  mission- 
ary journey  (Acts  xviii.  23,  xix.  1).  He  might 
also  easily  have  visited  Colossae  during  the  pro- 
longed stay  at  Ephesus,  which  immediately  fol- 
lowed. The  most  competent  commentators,  how- 
ver,  agree  in  thinking  that  Col.  ii.  1 ,  proves  that 


COLOSSIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 

St.  Paul  had  never  been  there,  when  the  Epistle 
was  written.  Theodoret's  argument  that  he  must 
have  visited  Colossae  on  the  journey  just  referred 
to,  because  he  is  said  to  have  gone  through  the 
whole  legion  of  Phrygia,  may  be  proved  fallacious 
from  geographical  considerations  :  Colossae,  though 
ethnologically  in  Phrygia  (Herod.  I.  c,  Xen.  I.  c), 
was  at  this  period  politically  in  the  province  of 
Asia  (see  Rev.  /.  c).  That  the  Apostle  hoped  to 
visit  the  place  on  being  delivered  from  his  Koman 
imprisonment  is  clear  from  Philemon  22  (compare 
Phil.  ii.  24).  Philemon  and  his  slave  Onesimus 
were  dwellers  in  Colossae.  So  also  were  Archip- 
pus  and  Epaphras.  From  Col.  i.  7,  iv.  12,  it 
has  been  naturally  concluded  that  the  latter  Chris- 
tian was  the  founder  of  the  Colossian  Church 
(see  Alford's  Prolegomena  to  G.  Test.  vol.  iii.  p. 
35).  [Epaphras.]  The  worship  of  angels  men- 
tioned by  the  Apostle  (Col.  ii.  18)  curiously  re- 
appears in  Christian  times  in  connexion  with  one 
of  the  topographical  features  of  the  place.  A 
church  in  honour  of  the  archangel  Michael  was 
erected  at  the  entrance  of  a  chasm  in  consequence 
of  a  legend  connected  with  an  inundation  (Hartley's 
Researches  in  Greece,  p.  52),  and  there  is  good 
reason  for  identifying  this  chasm  with  one  which  is 
mentioned  by  Herodotus.  This  kind  of  supersti- 
tion is  mentioned  by  Theodoret  as  subsisting  in  his 
time  ;  also  by  the  Byzantine  writer  Nicetas  Cho- 
niates,  who  was  a  native  of  this  place,  and  who 
says  that  Colossae  and  Chonae  were  the  same.  The 
neighbourhood  (visited  by  Pococke)  was  explored 
by  Mr.  Arundell  {Seven  Churches,  p.  158;  Asia 
Minor,  ii.  p.  160)  ;  but  Mr.  Hamilton  was  the  first 
to  determine  the  actual  site  of  the  ancient  city, 
which  appears  to  be  at  some  little  distance  from 
the  modern  village  of  Chonas  {Researches  in  A.M. 
i.  p.  508).  [J.  S.  H.] 

COLOSSIANS,  THE  EPISTLE  TO  THE, 
w;is  written  by  the  Apostle  St.  Paul  during  his  first 
captivity  at  Pome  (Acts  xxviii.  16),  and  apparently 
in  that  portion  of  it  (Col.  iv.  3,  4)  when  the 
Apostle's  imprisonment  had  not  assumed  the  more 
severe  character  which  seems  to  be  reflected  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Philippians  (ch.  i.  20,  21,  30,  ii.  27), 
and  which  not  improbably  succeeded  the  death  of 
Burrus  in  a.d.  62  (Clinton,  Fasti  Rom.  i.  44),  and 
the  decline  of  the  influence  of  Seneca. 

This  important  and  profound  epistle  was  ad- 
dressed to  the  Christians  of  the  once  large  and 
influential,  but  now  smaller  and  declining,  city  of 
Colossae,  and  was  delivered  to  them  by  Tychicus, 
whom  the  Apostle  had  sent  both  to  them  (ch.  iv. 
7,  8)  and  to  the  church  of  Ephesus  (ch.  vi.  21),  to 
inquire  into  their  state  and  to  administer  exhort- 
ation and  comfort.  The  epistle  seems  to  have  been 
called  forth  by  the  information  St.  Paul  had  re- 
ceived from  Epaphras  (ch.  iv.  12  ;  Philem.  2:1)  and 
from  Onesimus,  both  of  whom  appear  to  have  been 
natives  of  Colossae,  and  the  former  of  whom  was, 
if  not  the  special  founder,  yet  certainly  one  of  the 
\ei\  earliest  preachers  of  the  gospel  in  that  city. 
The  main  object  of  the  epistle  is  not  merely,  as  in 
the  arse  of  the  Epistle  to  Philippians,  to  exhort  and 
to  confirm,  nor  as  in  that  to  the  Ephesians,  in  set 
forth  the  great  features  of  the  church  of  tie  i 
in  Christ,  but  is  especially  designed  to  wain  the 
Colossians  against  a  spirit  of  semi-Judaistii 
semi -Oriental  philosophy  which  was  corrupting  the 
simplicity  of  their  belief,  and  was  noticeably  tending 
to  obscure  the  eternal  glory  and  dignity  of  Christ. 
This  main  design  is  thus  earrieei  out  in  detail. 


COLOSSIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE  341 

After  his  usual  salutation  (ch.  i.  1-2)  the  Apostle 
returns  thanks  to  God  for  the  faith  of  the  Colos- 
sians, the  spirit  of  love  they  had  shown,  and  the 
progress  which  the  Gospel  had  made  among  them, 
as  preached  by  Epaphras  (ch.  i.  3-8).  This  lends 
him  to  pray  without  ceasing  that  they  may  be 
fruitful  in  good  works,  and  especially  thankful  to 
the  Father,  who  gave  them  an  inheritance  with  His 
saints,  and  translated  them  into  the  kingdom  of  His 
Son — His  Son,  the  image  of  the  invisible  God,  the 
first-born  before  every  creature,  the  Creator  of  all 
things  eaithly  and  heavenly,  the  Head  of  the  chuich, 
He  in  whom  all  things  consist,  and  by  whom  all 
things  have  been  reconciled  to  the  eternal  Father 
(ch.  i.  9-20).  This  reconciliation,  the  Apostle 
reminds  them,  was  exemplified  in  their  own  cases : 
they  were  once  alienated,  but  now  so  reconciled  as 
to  be  presented  holy  and  blameless  before  God,  if 
only  they  continued  firm  in  the  faith,  and  were  not 
moved  from  the  hope  of  which  the  Gospel  was  the 
source  and  origin  (ch.  i.  21-24).  Of  this  Gospel 
the  Apostle  declares  himself  the  minister ;  the 
mystery  of  salvation  was  that  for  which  he  toiled 
and  for  which  he  suffered  (ch.  i.  24-2'J).  And  his 
sufferings  were  not  only  for  the  church  at  large, 
but  for  them  and  others  whom  he  had  not  per- 
sonally visited, — even  that  they  might  come  to  tin; 
full  knowledge  of  Christ,  and  might  not  fall  victims 
to  plausible  sophistries  :  they  were  to  walk  in  Christ 
and  to  be  built  on  Him  (ch.  ii.  1-7).  Especially 
were  they  to  be  careful  that  no  philosophy  was  to 
lead  them  fiom  Him  in  whom  dwelt  all  the  fulness 
of  the  Godhead,  who  was  the  head  of  all  spirit  mil 
poicers,  and  who  had  quickened  them,  forgiven 
them,  and  in  His  death  had  triumphed  over  all  the 
hosts  of  darkness  (ch.  ii.  8*15).  Surely  with  such 
spiritual  privileges  they  were  not  to  be  judged  in 
the  matter  of  mere  ceremonial  observances,  or 
beguiled  into  creature- worship.  Christ  was  the 
head  of  the  body ;  if  they  were  truly  united  to  Him, 
to  what  need  were  bodily  austerities  (ch.  ii.  16-23). 
They  were,  then,  to  mind  things  above — spiritual 
things,  not  carnal  ordinances,  for  their  life  was 
hidden  with  Christ  (ch.  iii.  1-4):  they  were  to 
mortify  their  members  and  the  evil  principles  in 
which  they  once  walked ;  the  old  man  was  to  be 
put  off,  and  the  new  man  put  on,  in  which  all  are 
one  in  Christ  (ch.  iii.  5-12).  Furthermore,  they 
were  to  give  heed  to  special  duties ;  they  were  to 
be  forgiving  and  loving,  as  was  Christ.  In  the 
consciousness  of  His  abiding  word  were  they  to 
sing;  in  His  name  were  they  to  be  thankful  (ch.  iii. 
13-17).  Wives  and  husbands,  children  and  parents, 
were  all  to  perform  their  duties;  servants  were  to 
be  faithful,  masters   to   be  just   (ch.  iii.  18-iv.  1). 

In  the  last  chapter  the  Apostle  gives  fui  ther  special 
precepts,  strikingly  similar'  to  those  given  to  his 
Ephesian  converts.  They  were  to  pray  for  the 
Apostle  and  for  his  success  in  preaching  the  Gospel, 
they  were  to  walk  circumspectly,  and  to  he  ready 
to  give  a  seasonable  answer  to  all  who  questioned 
them  (ch.  iv.  2-7).  Tychicus,  the  bearer  of  the 
letter,  and  Onesimus  would  tell  them  all  the  state 
of  the  Apostle  (eh.  iv.  7-9) :  Aristarchus  and  others 
sent  them  friendly  greetings  (ch.  iv.  10-14).  With 
an  injunction  to  interchange  this  letter  with  that 
sent  to  the  neighbouring  church  of  Laodicea  (ch.  iv. 
16),  a  special  message  to  Archippus  (ch.  iv.  17), 
and  an  autograph  salutation,  this  short  hut  striking 
epistle  comes  to  its  close. 

With  regard  to  if-  and  authenticity, 

it  is  satisfactory  to  lie  able  to  say  with  distinctness 


342  COLOSSIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 

that  there  are  no  grounds  for  doubt.  The  external 
testimonies  (Just.  M.  Trypho,  p.  311  b;  Theophil. 
ad  Aidol.  ii.  p.  100,  ed.  Col.  1686  ;  Irenaeus,  Hacr. 
iii.  14, 1 ;  Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  i.  p.  325,  iv.  p.  588, 
al.,  ed.  Potter  ;  Tertull.  de  Pracscr.  ch.  7 ;  de  Beswrr. 
ch.  23 ;  Origen,  contra  Cels.  v.  8)  are  explicit,  and 
the  internal  arguments,  founded  on  the  style,  balance 
of  sentences,  positions  of  adverbs,  uses  of  the  relative 
pronoun^  participial  anacolutha, — unusually  strong 
and  well  defined.  It  is  not  right  to  suppress  the 
fact  that  Mayerhoff  (der  Brief  an  die  Kol.  Berl. 
1838)  and  Baur  (der  Apostel  Paulus,  p.  417)  have 
deliberately  rejected  this  epistle  as  claiming  to  be  a 
production  of  St.  Paul.  The  first  of  these  critics, 
however,  has  been  briefly,  but,  as  it  would  seem, 
completely  answered,  by  Meyer  (Comment,  p.  7) ; 
and  to  the  second,  in  his  subjective  and  anti-historical 
attempt  to  make  individual  writings  of  the  N.  T. 
mere  theosophistic  productions  of  a  later  Gnosticism, 
the  intelligent  and  critical  reader  will  naturally 
yield  but  little  credence.  It  is  indeed  remarkable 
that  the  strongly  marked  peculiarity  of  style,  the 
nerve  and  force  of  the  arguments,  and  the  originality 
that  appears  in  every  paragraph  should  not  have 
made  both  these  writers  pause  in  their  ill-considered 
attack  on  this  epistle. 

A  few  special  points  demand  from  us  a  brief 
notice. 

1.  The  opinion  that  this  epistle  and  those  to  the 
Ephesians  and  to  Philemon  were  written  during 
the  Apostle's  imprisonment  at  Caesarea  (Acts  xxi. 
27-xxvi.  32),  i.  e.  between  Pentecost  A.D.  58  and 
the  autumn  of  A.D.  60,  has  been  recently  advocated 
by  several  writers  of  ability,  and  stated  with  such 
cogency  and  clearness  by  Meyer  (Einleit.  z.  Ephcs. 
p.  15,  sq.),  as  to  deserve  some  consideration.  It 
will  be  found,  however,  to  rest  on  ingeniously  urged 
plausibilities ;  whereas,  to  go  no  further  than  the 
present  epistle,  the  notices  of  the  Apostle's  imprison- 
ment in  ch.  iv.  3,  4,  11,  certainly  seem  historically 
inconsistent  with  the  nature  of  the  imprisonment 
at  Caesarea.  The  permission  of  Felix  (Acts  xxiv. 
23)  can  scarcely  be  strained  into  any  degree  of 
liberty  to  teach  or  preach  the  Gospel,  while  the 
facts  recorded  of  St.  Paul's  imprisonment  at  Rome 
(Acts  xxviii.  23,  31)  are  such  as  to  harmonise  ad- 
mirably with  the  freedom  in  this  respect  which  our 
present  epistle  represents  to  have  been  accorded 
both  to  the  Apostle  and  his  companions ;  see  ch.  iv. 
11,  and  comp.  De  Wette,  Einleit.  z.  Coloss.  p.  12, 
13  ;  Wieseler,  Chronol.  p.  420. 

2.  The  nature  of  the  erroneous  teaching  con- 
demned in  this  epistle  has  been  very  differently 
estimated.  Three  opinions  only  seem  to  deserve 
any  serious  consideration ;  (a)  that  these  erroneous 
teachers  were  adherents  of  Neo-Platonism,  or  of 
some  forms  of  Occidental  philosophy  ;  (b)  that  they 
leaned  to  Essene  doctrines  and  practices ;  (c)  that 
they  advocated  that  admixture  of  Christianity, 
Judaism,  and  Oriental  philosophy  which  afterwards 
became  consolidated  into  Gnosticism.  Of  these  (a) 
has  but  little  in  its  favour,  except  the  somewhat 
vague  term  <$i\oao<\>ia  (ch.  ii.  8),  which,  however, 
it  seems  arbitrary  to  restrict  to  Grecian  philosophy  ; 
(6)  is  much  more  plausible  as  far  as  the  usages 
alluded  to,  but  seems  inconsistent  both  with  the 
exclusive  nature  and  circumscribed  localities  of 
Essene  teaching ;  (c)  on  the  contrary  is  in  accord- 
ance with  the  Gentile  nature  of  the  church  of  Co- 
lossae  (ch.  i.  21),  with  its  very  locality — speculative 
and-  superstitious  Phrygia — and  with  that  tendency 
to  associate  Judaical   observances   (ch.  ii.  16)  with 


COLOURS 

more  purely  theosophistic  speculations  (ch.  ii.  18), 
which  became  afterwards  so  conspicuous  in  de- 
veloped Gnosticism.  The  portions  in  our  analysis 
of  the  epistle  marked  in  italics  serve  to  show  how 
deeply  these  perverted  opinions  were  felt  by  the 
Apostle  to  strike  at  the  doctrine  of  the  eternal  God- 
head of  Christ. 

3.  The  striking  similarity  between  many  por- 
tions of  this  epistle  and  of  that  to  the  Ephesians 
has  given  rise  to  much  speculation,  both  as  to  the 
reason  of  this  studied  similarity,  and  as  to  the 
priority  of  order  in  respect  to  composition.  These 
points  cannot  here  be  discussed  at  length,  but  must 
be  somewhat  briefly  dismissed  with  the  simple  ex- 
pression of  an  opinion  that  the  similarity  may  rea- 
sonably be  accounted  for,  (1)  by  the  proximity  in 
time  at  which  the  two  epistles  were  written ;  (2) 
by  the  high  probability  that  in  two  cities  of  Asia 
within  a  moderate  distance  from  one  another,  there 
would  be  many  doctrinal  prejudices,  and  many 
social  relations,  that  would  call  forth  and  need  pre- 
cisely the  same  language  of  warning  and  exhort- 
ation. The  priority  in  composition  must  remain  a 
matter  for  a  reasonable  difference  of  opinion.  To 
us  the  shorter  and  perhaps  more  vividly  expressed 
Epistle  to  the  Colossians  seems  to  have  been  first 
written,  and  to  have  suggested  the  more  compre- 
hensive, more  systematic,  but  less  individualizing, 
epistle  to  the  church  of  Ephesus. 

For  further  information  the  student  is  directed  to 
Davidson's  Introduction,  ii.  394,  sq. ;  Alford,  Pro- 
legom.  to  N.  T.  iii.  33,  sq.  ;  and  the  introduction 
to  the  excellent  Commentary  of  Meyer. 

The  editions  of  this  epistle  are  very  numerous. 
Of  the  older  commentaries  those  of  Davenant,  Expos. 
Ep.  Pauli  ad  Col.,  ed.  3  ;  Suicer,  in  Ep.  Pauli  «<l 
Col.  Comment.,  Tig.  1699,  may  be  specified;  and 
of  modem  commentaries,  those  of  Biihr  (Bas.  1833), 
Olshausen  (Konigsb.  1840),  Huther  (Hamb.  1 841 ,  a 
very  good  exegetical  commentary),  De  Wette  (Leipz. 
1847),  Meyer  (Gott.  1848) ;  and  in  our  own  country 
those  of  Eadie  (Glasg.  1856),  Alford  (Loud.  1857), 
and  Ellicott  (Lond.  1858).  [C.  J.  E.] 

COLOUES.  The  terms  relative  to  colour, 
occurring  in  the  Bible,  may  be  arranged  in  two 
classes,  the  first  including  those  applied  to  the  de- 
scription of  natural  objects,  the  second  those  arti- 
ficial mixtures  which  were  employed  in  dyeing  or 
painting.  In  an  advanced  state  of  art,  such  a  dis- 
tinction can  hardly  be  said  to  exist ;  all  the  hues  of 
nature  have  been  successfully  imitated  by  the  artist : 
but  among  the  Jews,  who  fell  even  below  their  con- 
temporaries in  the  cultivation  of  the  fine  arts,  and 
to  whom  painting  was  unknown  until  a  late  period, 
the  knowledge  of  artificial  colours  was  very  re- 
stricted. Dyeing  was  the  object  to  which  the  colours 
known  to  them  were  applied:  so  exclusively  indeed 
were  the  ideas  of  the  Jews  limited  to  this  applica- 
tion of  colour,  that  the  name  of  the  dye  was  trans- 
ferred without  any  addition  to  the  material  to  which 
it  was  applied.  The  Jews  were  not  however  by  any 
means  insensible  to  the  influence  of  colour:  they 
attached  definite  ideas  to  the  various  tints,  according 
to  the  use  made  of  them  in  robes  and  vestments : 
and  the  subject  exercises  an  important  influence  on 
the  interpretation  of  certain  portions  of  Scripture. 

1.  The  natural  colours  noticed  in  the  Bible  are 
white,  black,- red,  yellow,  .and  green.  It  will  be 
observed  that  only  three  of  the  prismatic  colours 
are  represented  in  this  list;  blue,  indigo,  violet, 
and  orange  are  omitted.  Of  the  three,  yellow  is 
very  seldom  noticed  ;  it  was  apparently  regarded  as 


COLOURS 

a  shade  of  greeu,  for  the  same  term  greenish 
(pip"!"1)  is  applied  to  gold  (Ps.  lxviii.  13),  and  to 
the  leprous  spot  (Lev.  xiii.  49),  and  very  probably 
the  golden  (2'i"lS)  or  yellow  hue  of  the  leprous  hair 
(Lev.  xiii.  30-32)  differed  little  from  the  greenish 
spot  on  the  garments  (Lev.  xiii.  49).  Green  is 
frequently  noticed,  but  an  examination  of  the  pas- 
sages, in  which  it  occurs,  will  show  that  the  refe- 
rence is  seldom  to  colour.  The  Hebrew  terms  are 
raanan  (pJTl)  and  yarak  (p"!"1)  ;  the  first  of  these 

applies  to  what  is  vigorous  and  flourishing  ;  hence 
it  is  metaphorically  employed  as  an  image  of 
prosperity  (Job  xv.  32;  Ps.  xxxvii.  35,  lii.  8, 
xcii.  14;  Jer.  xi.  16,  xvii.  8;  Dan.  iv.  4;  Hos. 
xiv.  8) ;  it  is  invariably  employed  wherever  the 
expression  "green  tree"  is  used  in  connexion  with 
idolatrous  sacrifices,  as  though  with  the  view  of 
conveying  the  idea  of  the  outspreading  branches, 
which  served  as  a  canopy  to  the  worshippers  (Deut. 
xii.  2  ;  2  K.  xvi.  4)  ;  elsewhere  it  is  used  of  that 
which  is  fresh,  as  oil  (Ps.  xcii.  10),  and  newly 
plucked  boughs  (Cant.  i.  16).  The  other  term, 
yarak,  has  the  radical  signification  of  putting  forth 
leaves,  sprouting  (Gesen.  Thesaur.  p.  632) :  it  is 
used  indiscriminately  for  all  productions  of  the  earth 
fit  for  food  (Gen.  i.  30,  ix.  3;  Ex.  x.  15;  Num. 
xxii.  4  :  Is.  xv.  6  ;  cf.  xAaipo's,  Rev.  viii.  7,  ix.  4), 
and  again  for  all  kinds  of  garden  herbs  (Deut.  xi. 
10;  1  K.  xxi.  2;  2  K.  xix.  26;  Prov.  xv.  17; 
Is.  xxxvii.  27 ;  contrast  the  restricted  application 
of  our  greens) ;  when  applied  to  grass,  it  means 
specifically  the  young,  fresh  grass  (KEH,  Ps.  xxxvii. 

2),  which  springs  up  in  the  desert  (Job  xxxix.  8). 
Elsewhere  it  describes  the  sickly  yellowish  hue  of 
mildewed  corn  (Deut.  xxviii.  22 ;  1  K.  viii.  37  ; 
2  Chr.  vi.  28;  Am.  iv.  9;  Hag.  ii.  17);  and 
lastly,  it  is  used  for  the  entire  absence  of  colour 
produced  by  fear  (Jer.  xxx.  6  ;  compare  x^-op0'*, 
II.  x.  376)  ;  hence  x^P^s  (Rev.  vi.  8)  describes 
the  ghastly,  livid  hue  of  death.  In  other  passages 
"  green  "  is  erroneously  used  in  the  A.  V.  for  white 
(Gen.  xxx.  37 ;  Esth.^i.  6),  young  (Lev.  ii.  14, 
xxiii.  14),  moist  (Judg.  xvi.  7,  8),  sappy  (Job  viii. 
16),  and  unripe  (Cant.  ii.  13).  Thus  it  may  be 
said  that  green  is  never  used  in  the  Bible  to  convey 
the  impression  of  proper  colour. 

The  only  fundamental  colour  of  which  the 
Hebrews  appear  to  have  had  a  clear  conception  was 
red;  and  even  this  is  not  very  often  noticed.  They 
had  therefore  no  scientific:  knowledge  of  colours, 
and  we  cannot  but  think  that  the  attempt  to 
explain  such  passages  as  Rev.  iv.  3  by  the  rules  of 
philosophical  truth,  must  fail  (see  Hengstenberg, 
Comm.  in  loc).  Instead  of  assuming  that  the 
emerald  represents  green,  the  jasper  yellow,  and 
the  sardine  ratf,  the  idea  intended  to  be  conveyed 
by  these  images  may  be  simply  that  of  pure, 
brilliant,  transparent  light.  The  emerald,  for 
instance,  was  chiefly  prized  by  the  ancients  for  its 
glittering,  scintillating  qualities  i  aryATJeis,  Orpheus 
de  lap.  p.  608),  whence  perhaps  it  derived  its 
Dame  I  a/MXpaySos,  from  nap/xaipeiv).  The  jasper  is 
characterised  by  St.  John  himself  (Rev.  xxi.  11)  as 
being  crystal-clear  (Kpvo-TaWi(aiv),  and  not  as 
having  a  certain  hue.  The  sardine  may  lie  com- 
pared with  the  amber  of  Ez.  i.  4,  27,  or  the 
burnished  brass  of  Dan.  x.  0,  or  again  the  tine 
brass,  "  as  if  burning  in  a  furnace."  of  Rev.  i.  15, 
each  conveying  the  impression  of  the  colour  of  (ire 
in  a  state   of  pure   incandescence.     Similarly  the 


COLOURS 


343 


beryl,  or  rather  the  chrysolite  (the  Hebrew  Tharsis) 
may  be  selected  by  Daniel  (x.  6)  on  account  of  its 
transparency.  An  exception  may  be  made  perhaps 
in  regard  to  the  sapphire,  in  as  far  as  its  hue 
answers  to  the  deep  blue  of  the  firmament  (Ex.  xxi  v. 
10;  cf.  Ez.  i.  26,  x.  1),  but  even  in  this  case  the 
pellucidity  (i"IJ  J?,  omitted  in  A.  V.,  Ex.  xxiv.  10) 

or  polish  of  the  stone  (compare  Lam.  iv.  7)  forms 
an  important,  if  not  the  main,  element  in  the  com- 
parison. The  highest  development  of  colour  in  the 
mind  of  the  Hebrew  evidently  was  light,  and  hence 
the  predominance  given  to  white  as  its  repre- 
sentative (compare  the  connexion  between  AtvicSs 
and  lux).  This  feeling  appears  both  in  the  more 
numerous  allusions  to  it  than  to  any  other  colour — 
in  the  variety  of  terms  by  which  they  discriminated 
the  shades  from  a  pale,  dull  tint  (HPIS,  blackish, 
Lev.  xiii.  21  ft'.)  up  to  the  most  brilliant  splendour 
pi"!T,  Ez.  viii.  2 ;  Dan.  xii.  3) — and  in  the  com- 
parisons by  which  they  sought  to  heighten  their 
ideas  of  it,  an  instance  of  which  occurs  in  the  three 
accounts  of  the  Transfiguration,  where  the  counte- 
nance and  robes  are  described  as  like  "  the  sun  " 
and  "the  light"  (Matt.  xvii.  2),  "shining,  exceed- 
ing white  as  snow"  (Mark  ix.  3),  "glistening" 
(Luke  ix.  29).  Snow  is  used  eleven  times  in  a 
similar  way ;  the  sun  five  times  ;  wool  four  times  ; 
milk  once.  In  some  instances  the  point  of  the 
comparison  is  not  so  obvious,  e.g.  in  Job  xxxviii. 
14  "  they  stand  as  a  garment"  in  reference  to  the 
white  colour  of  the  Hebrew  dress,  and  in  Ps.  lxviii. 
13,  where  the  glancing  hues  of  the  dove's  plumage 
suggested  an  image  of  the  brilliant  effect  of  the 
white  holyday  costume.  Next  to  white,  black,  or 
rather  dark,  holds  the  most  prominent  place,  not 
only  as  its  opposite,  but  also  as  representing  the 
complexion  of  the  Orientals.  There  were  various 
shades  of  it,  including  the  brown  of  the  Nile  water 
(whence  its  name  Sihor) — -the  reddish  tint  of  early 
dawn,  to  which  the  complexion  of  the  bride  is 
likened  (Cant.  vi.  10),  as  well  as  the  lurid  hue 
produced  by  a  flight  of  locusts  (Joel  ii.  2) — anil  the 
darkness  of  blackness  itself  (Lam.  iv.  8).  As 
before,  we  have  various  heightening  images,  such  as 
the  tents  of  Kedar,  a  flock  of  goats,  the  raven 
(Cant.  i.  5,  iv.  1,  v.  11)  and  sackcloth  (Rev.  vi. 
12).  Red  was  also  a  colour  of  which  the  Hebrews 
had  a  vivid  conception  ;  this  may  be  attributed 
partly  to  the  prevalence  of  that  colour  in  the  out- 
ward aspect  of  the  countries  and  peoples  with 
which  they  were  familiar,  as  attested  by  the  name 
Edom,  and  by  the  words  adamah  (earth),  and 
adam  (man),  so  termed  either  as  being  formed  out 
of  the  red  earth,  or  as  being  red  in  comparison  with 
the  fair  colour  of  the  Assyrians,  and  the  black  of 
the  Aethiopians.  Red  was  regarded  as  an  element 
of  personal  beauty:  comp.  1  Sam.  xvi.  12;  ('ant. 
ii.  1,  where  the  lily  is  the  red  one  for  which  Syria 
was  famed  (l'lin.  xxi.  11);  Cant.  iv.  3,  vi.  7, 
where  the  complexion  is  compared  to  the  red  fruit 
of  the  pomegranate;  and  Lam.  iv.  7,  where  the 
hue  of  the  skin  is  redder  than  coral  (A.V.  "  rubies"  ) 
contrasting  with  the  white  of  tin-  garments  •  k •  i < •: ■  - 
noticed.  The  three  colours,  white,  black  and  reel 
were  sometimes  intermixed  in  animals,  and  gave  rise 
to  the  terms,  "inv,  "dappled"  (A.V.  "white". 
probably  white  and  red  (Judg.  v.  10);  "IpJ? 
'•  ringstraked,"  either  with  white  bands  on  the 
legs,  or  white-footed  ;  "Ip3,"  speckled,"  and  JOD, 


344 


COLOURS 


"  spotted,"   white   and   black ;    and   lastly    THU, 

"  piebald"  (A.  V.  "  grisled"),  the  spots  being  larger 
than  in  the  two  former  (Gen.  xxx.  32,  35,  xxxi. 
10)  ;  the  latter  term  is  used  of  a  horse  (Zech.  vi. 
3,  6)  with  a  symbolical  meaning :  Hengstenberg 
(Christol.  in  loc.)  considers  the  colour  itself  to  be 
unmeaning,  and  that  the  prophet  has  added  the 
term  strong  (A,  V.  "  bay  ")  by  way  of  explanation  ; 
Hitzig  (Comm.  in  loc.)  explains  it,  in  a  peculiar 
manner,  of  the  complexion  of  the  Egyptians.  It 
remains  for  us  now  to  notice  the  various  terms 
applied  to  these  three  colours. 

1.  White.     The  most  common  term  is  J2?, 

which  is  applied  to  such  objects  as  milk  (Gen.  xlix. 
12),  manna  (Ex.  xvi.  31),  snow  (Is.  i.  18),  horses 
(Zech.  i.  8),  raiment  (Eccl.  ix.  8)  ;  and  a  cognate 
word  expresses  the  colour  of  the  moon  (Is.  xxiv.  23). 
rtV,  dazzling  white  is  applied  to  the  complexion 
(Cant.  v.  10)  ;  1-1  PI,  a  term  of  a  later  age,  to  snow 
(Dan.  vii.  9  only),  and  to  the  paleness  of  shame 
(Is.  xxix.  22,  Tin)  ;  y&,  to  the  hair  alone.  An- 
other class  of  terms  arises  from  the  textures  of  a 
naturally  white  colour,  as  K>EJ>  and  T'-13.     These 

words  appear  to  have  been  originally  of  foreign 
origin,  but  were  connected  by  the  Hebrews  with 
roots  in  their  own  language  descriptive  of  a  white 
colour  (Gesen.  Thesaur.  pp.  190, 1384).  The  terms 
were  without  doubt  primarily  applied  to  the  ma- 
terial ;  but  the  idea  of  colour  is  also  prominent, 
particularly  in  the  description  of  the  curtains  of  the 
tabernacle  (Ex.  xxvi.  1),  and  the  priests'  vestments 
(Ex.  xxviii.  6).  W  is  also  applied  to  white  marble 
(Esth.  i.  6  ;  Cant.  v.  15) ;  and  a  cognate  word, 
XfVP,  to  the  lily  (Cant.  ii.  16).  In  addition  to 
these  we  meet  with  Tin  (JSvcr<Tos,  Esth.  i.  6,  viii. 
15),  and  DS"}3  (Kapir euros  ;  A.  V.  "green,"  Esth. 
i.  6),  also  descriptive  of  white  textures. 

White  was  symbolical  of  innocence :  hence  the 
raiment  of  angels  (Mark  xvi.  5  ;  John  xx.  12),  and 
of  glorified  saints  (Rev.  xix.  8,  14),  is  so  described. 
It  was  also  symbolical  of  joy  (Eccl.  ix.  8)  ;  and, 
lastly,  of  victory  (Zech.  vi.  3  ;  Rev.  vi.  2).  In  the 
Revelations  the  term  \evic6s  is  applied  exclusively 
to  what  belongs  to  Jesus  Christ  (Wordsworth's 
Apoc.  p.  105). 

2.  Black.  The  shades  of  this  colour  are  ex- 
pressed in  the  terms  THE?,  applied  to  the  hair 
(Lev.  xiii.  31 ;  Cant.  v.  11)  ;  the  complexion  (Cant, 
i.  v.),  particularly  when  affected  with  disease  (Job 
xxx.  30)  ;  horses  (Zech.  vi.  2,  6) :  D-in,  lit.  scorched 
(cpaiSs;  A.  V.  "brown,"  Gen.  xxx.  32),  applied 
to  sheep ;  the  word  expresses  the  colour  produced 
by  influence  of  the  sun's  rays  :  Tip,  lit.  to  be  dirty, 
applied  to  a  complexion  blackened  by  sorrow  or  dis- 
ease (Job  xxx.  30)  ;  mourner's  robes  (Jer.  viii.  21, 
xiv.  2  ;  compare  sordidaevestes)  ;  a  clouded  sky  (1  K. 
xviii.  45)  ;  night  (Mic.  iii.  6  ;  Jer.  iv.  28  ;  Joel  ii.  10, 
iii.  15)  ;  a  turbid  brook  (whence  possibly  Kedron), 
particularly  when  rendered  so  by  melted  snow  (Job 
vi.  16).  Black,  as  being  the  opposite  to  white,  is 
symbolical  of  evil  (Zech.  vi.  2,  6  ;  Rev.  vi.  5). 

3.  Red.  D'lX  is  applied  to  blood  (2  K.  iii.  22)  ; 
a  garment  sprinkled  with  blood  (Is.  lxiii.  2)  ;  a  heifer 
(Num.  xix.  2)  ;  pottage  made  of  lentiles  (Gen.  xxv. 
30);  a  horse  (Zech.  i.  8,  vi.  2)  ;  wine  (Prov.  xxiii. 


COLOURS 

31)  :  the  complexion  (Gen.  xxv.  25  ;  Cant.  v.  10 ; 
Lam.  iv.  7).  DIDIN  is  a  slight  degree  of  red,  red- 
dish, and  is  applied  to  a  leprous  spot  (Lev.  xiii.  19,  xiv. 
37).      pT&*,  lit.  fox-coloured,  bay,  is  applied  to  a 

horse  (A.  V.  "  speckled  ;"  Zech.  i.  8),  and  to  a  species 
of  vine  bearing  a  purple  grape  (Is.  v.  2,  xvi.  8) :  the 
translation  "  bay  "  in  Zech.  vi.  3,  A.  V.  is  incorrect. 
The  corresponding  term  in  Greek  is  nvfipSs,  lit.  red 
as  fire.  This  colour  was  symbolical  of  bloodshed 
(Zech.  vi.  2  ;  Rev.  vi.  4,  xii.  3).  ' 

II.  Artificial  colours.  The  art  of  extract- 
ing dyes,  and  of  applying  them  to  various  textures, 
appears  to  have  been  known  at  a  very  early  period. 
We  read  of  scarlet  thread  at  the  time  of  Zarah's  birth 
(Gen.  xxxviii.  28)  ;  of  blue  and  purple  at  the  time 
of  the  Exodus  (Ex.  xxvi.  1).  There  is  however  no 
evidence  to  show  that  the  Jews  themselves  were  at 
that  period  acquainted  with  the  art  :  the  pro- 
fession of  the  dyer  is  not  noticed  in  the  Bible, 
though  it  is  referred  to  in  the  Talmud.  They  were 
probably  indebted  both  to  the  Egyptians  and  the 
Phoenicians  ;  to  the  latter  for  the  dyes,  and  to  the 
former  for  the  mode  of  applying  them.  The  purple 
dyes  which  they  chiefly  used  were  extracted  by  the 
Phoenicians  (Ez.  xxvii.  16  ;  Plin.  ix.  60),  and  in 
certain  districts  of  Asia  Minor  (Horn.  77.  iv.  141), 
especially  Thyatira  (Acts  xvi.  14).  It  does  not 
appear  that  those  particular  colours  were  used  in 
Egypt,  the  Egyptian  colours  being  produced  from 
various  metallic  and  earthy  substances  (Wilkinson, 
Anc.  Egypt,  iii.  301).  On  the  other  hand,  there 
was  a  remarkable  similarity  in  the  mode  of  dyeing 
in  Egypt  and  Palestine,  inasmuch  as  the  colour  was 
applied  to  the  raw  material,  previous  to  the  processes 
of  spinning  and  weaving  (Ex.  xxxv.  25,  xxxix.  3  ; 
Wilkinson,  iii.  125).  The  dyes  consisted  of  purples, 
light  and  dark  (the  latter  being  the  "  blue  "  of  the 
A.  V.),  and  crimson  (scarlet,  A.  V.) :  vermilion 
was  introduced  at  a  late  period. 

1.  Purple  (JDnK  ;  Chaldaic  form,  JOUTtf, 
Dan.  v.  7,  16  ;  Trop<pvpa ;  purpura).  This  colour 
was  obtained  from  the  secretion  of  a  species  of  shell- 
fish (Plin.  ix.  60),  the  Murex  trunculus  of  Linnaeus, 
which  was  found  in  various  parts  of  the  Medi- 
terranean Sea  (hence  called  wopepvpa  6a\affcria., 
1  Mace.  iv.  23),  particularly  on  the  coasts  of 
Phoenicia  (Strab.  xvi.  757),  Africa  (Strab.  xvii. 
835),  Laconia  (Hor.  Od.  ii.  18,  7),  and  Asia  Minor. 
[Elishah.]  The  derivation  of  the  Hebrew  name 
is  uncertain :  it  has  been  connected  with  the  Sanscrit 
rdgaman,  "  tinged  with  red ;"  and  again  with 
arghamdna,  "  costly "  (Hitzig,  Comment,  in  Dan. 
v.  7).  Gesenius,  however  (Thesaur.  p.  1263), 
considers  it  highly  improbable  that  a  colour  so 
peculiar  to  the  shores  of  the  Mediterranean  should 
be  described  by  a  word  of  any  other  than  Semitic 
origin,  and  connects  it  with  the  root  DJT,  to  heap 
up  or  overlay  with  colour.  The  colouring  matter 
was  contained  in  a  small  vessel  in  the  throat  of  the 
fish  ;  and  as  the  quantity  amounted  to  only  a  single 
drop  in  each  animal,  the  value  of  the  dye  was  pro- 
portionately high  :  sometimes,  however,  the  whole 
fish  was  crashed  (Plin.  ix.  60).  It  is  difficult  to 
state  with  precision  the  tint  described  under  the 
Hebrew  name.  The  Greek  equivalent  was,  we  know, 
applied  with  great  latitude,  not  only  to  all  colours 
extracted  from  the  shell-fish,  but  even  to  other  bril- 
liant colours  :  thus,  in  John  xix.  2,  l/xdrioy  irop- 
(pvpovv  =  x^-a^vs  kokkIvt],  in  Matt,  xxvii.  28  (of. 


COLOURS 

I'lin.  ix.  62).  The  same  may  be  said  of  the  Latin 
purpureas.  The  Hebrew  term  seems  to  be  applied 
in  a  similarly  broad  sense  in  Cant.  vii.  5,  where  it 
either  =  black  (compare  v.  11),  or,  still  better, 
shining  with  oil.  Generally  speaking,  however,  the 
tint  must  be  considered  as  having;  been  defined  by  the 
distinction  between  the  purple  proper,  and  the  other 
purple  dye  (A.  V.  "blue"),  which  was  produced 
from  another  species  of  shell-fish.  The  latter  was 
undoubtedly  a  dark  violet  tint,  while  the  former  had 
a  light  reddish  tinge.  Robes  of  a  purple  colour  were 
worn  by  kings  (Judg.  viii.  20),  and  by  the  highest 
officers,  civil  and  religious ;  thus  JYlordecai  (Esth. 
viii.  15),  Daniel  (A.  V. "  scarlet,"  Dan.  v.  7,  16,  29), 
and  Andronicus,  the  deputy  of  Antiochus  (2  Mace, 
iv.  38),  were  invested  with  purple  in  token  of  the 
offices  they  held  (cf.  Xen.  'Anab.  i.  5,  §8) :  so  also 
Jonathan,  as  high-priest  (1  Mace.  x.  20,  64,  xi.  58). 
They  were  also  worn  by  the  wealthy  and  luxurious 
(Jer.  x.  9  ;  Ez.  xxvii.  7  ;  Luke  xvi.  19  ;  Rev.xvii. 
4,  xviii.  16).  A  similar  value  was  attached  to 
purple  robes  both  by  the  Greeks  (Horn.  Od.  xix.  225 ; 
Herod,  ix.  22  ;  Strab.  xiv.  648),  and  by  the  Romans 
(Virg.  Georg.  ii.  495 ;  Hor.  Ep.  12,  21 ;  Suet. 
Caes.  43  ;  Nero,  32).  Of  the  use  of  this  and  the 
other  dyes  in  the  textures  of  the  tabernacle,  we  shall 
presently  speak. 

2.  Blue  (n73F]  ;  ihxkivQos,   vaKivOtvos,  oAo- 

w6p<pvpos,  Num.  iv.  7  ;  hyacinthus,  hyacinthinus). 
This  dye  was  procured  from  a  species  of  shell-fish 
found  on  the  coast  of  Phoenicia,  and  called  by  the 
Hebrews  Chi/zon  (Targ.  Pseudo-Jon.,  in  Deut.  xxxiii. 
19),  and  by  modern  naturalists  Helix  Ianthina. 
The  Hebrew  name  is  derived,  according  to  Gesenius 
(Thesaur.  p.  1502),  from  a  root  signifying  to 
unshell ;  but    according   to  Hitzig  {Comment,  in 

Ez.  xxiii.  6),   from    ?7>3,  in   the  sense  of  dulled, 

blunted,  as  opposed  to  the  brilliant  hue  of  the  pro- 
per purple.  The  tint  is  best  explained  by  the 
statements  of  Josephus  {Ant.  iii.  7,  §7)  and  Philo 
that  it  was  emblematic  of  the  sky,  in  which  case  it 
represents  not  the  light  blue  of  our  northern  climate, 
but  the  deep  dark  hue  of  the  eastern  sky  (aepos 
5e  avfxfiohov  vdiavOos,  f/.c\as  yap  ovtos  (picret, 
Phil.  Opp.  i.  536).  The  tenia  adopted  by  the  LXX. 
is  applied  by  classical  writers  to  a  colour  approach- 
ing to  black  (Horn.  Od.  vi.  231,  xxiii.  158  ;  Theoc. 
Id.  10,  28)  :  the  flower,  whence  the  name  was  bor- 
rowed, being,  as  is  well  known,  not  the  modern 
hyacinth,  but  of  a  dusky  red  colour  (ferrugineus, 
Virg.  Georg.  iv.  183;  caelestis  luminis  hyacinthus, 
Colum.  ix.  4,  4).  The  A.  V.  has  rightly  described 
the  tint  in  Esth.  i.  6  (margin)  as  violet;  the  ordi- 
nary term  blue  is  incorrect :  the  Lutheran  transla- 
tion is  still  more  incorrect  in  giving  it  gelbe  Seide 
(yellow  silk),  and  occasionally  simply  Seide  (Ez. 
xxiii.  6).  This  colour  was  used  in  the  same  way  as 
purple.  Princes  and  nobles  (Ez.  xxiii.  (i ;  Ecclus. 
xL  4),  aud  the  idols  of  Babylon  (Jer.  x.  ;»:,  were 
clothed  in  robes  of  this  tint :  the  riband  and  the 
fringe  of  the  Hebrew  dress  was  ordered  to  be  of  this 
colour  (Num.  xv.  38)  :  it  was  used  in  the  tapestries 
of  the  Persians  (Esth.  i.  6).  The  effect  of  the  colour 
is  well  described  in  Ez.  xxiii.  12,  where  such  robes 
are  termed  ?i?3Jp  ^'J?,  robes  of 'perfection,  i.  e. 
gorgeous  robes.  We  may  remark,  in  conclusion,  that 
the  LXX.  treats  the  term  trnfl  (A.  V.  "  badger  ") 

as  indicative  of  colour,  and  has  translated  it  vaniv- 
Qivos,  ianthinus  (Ex.  xxv.  5). 


COLOURS 


845 


3.  Scarlet  (Crimson,  Is.  i.  18  ;  Jer.  iv.  30). 
The  terms  by  which  this  colour  is  expressed  iu 
Hebrew  vary  ;  sometimes  ""JC  simply  is  used,  as 
in  Gen.  xxxviii.  28-30  ;  sometimes  i)&  nyVin,  as 
in  Ex.  xxv.  4  ;  and  sometimes  nj/piFl  simply,  as 
in  Is.  i.  18.     The  word  b^OIS  (A.  V.  "  crimson  ;" 

2  Chr.  ii.  7,  14,  iii.  14)  was  introduced  at  a  late 
period,  probably  from  Armenia,  to  express  the  same 
colour.  The  first  of  these  terms  (derived  from 
i"13ty,  to  shine)  expresses  the  brilliancy  of  the  colour ; 
the  second,  ny?in,  the  worm,  or  grub,  whence  the 

dye  was  procured,  and  which  gave  name  to  the 
colour  occasionally  without  any  addition,  just  as 
vermilion  is  derived  from  rermiculus.  The  LXX. 
generally  renders  it  k6kkivov,  occasionally  with  the 
addition  of  such  terms  as  KaiXuxr/xivoi/  (Ex.  xxvi. 
1),  or  Siai/eurjcr/xeuov  (Ex.  xxviii.  8)  :  the  Vulgate 
has  it  generally  coccinum,  occasionally  coccus  bis 
tinctus  (Ex.  xxviii.  8),  apparently  following  the 
erroneous  interpretation  of  Aquila  and  Symmachus, 
who  render  it  /3i{ia.<pos,  double-dyed  (Ex.  xxv.  4), 
as  though  from  T\1V},  to  repeat.     The  process  of 

double-dyeing  was  however  peculiar  to  the  Tynan 
purples  (Plin.  ix.  39).  The  dye  was  produced  from 
an  insect,  somewhat  resembling  the  cochineal,  which 
is  found  in  considerable  quantities  in  Armenia  and 
other  eastern  countries.  The  Arabian  name  of  the 
insect  is  kermez  (whence  crimson) :  the  Linnaean 
name  is  Coccus  Ilicis.  It  frequents  the  boughs  of 
a  species  of  ilex :  on  these  it  lays  its  eggs  in  groups, 
which  become  covered  with  a  kind  of  down,  so  that 
they  present  the  appearance  of  vegetable  galls  or 
excrescences  from  the  tree  itself,  and  are  described 
as  such  by  Pliny,  xvi.  12.  The  dye  is  procured  from 
the  female  grub  alone,  which,  when  alive,  is  about 
the  size  of  a  kernel  of  a  cherry  and  of  a  dark  ama- 
ranth colour,  but  when  dead  shrivels  up  to  the  size 
of  a  grain  of  wheat,  and  is  covered  with  a  bluish 
mould  (Parrot's  Journey  to  Ararat,  p.  114).  The 
general  character  of  the  colour  is  expressed  by  the 
Hebrew  term  f^JDJl  (Is.  lxiii.  1),  lit.  sharp,  and 

hence  dazzling  (compare  the  expression  xp^lxa  °l")> 
and  in  the  Greek  Aa.fji.irpd  (Luke  xxiii.  11),  com- 
pared with  kokk'ivi}  (Matt,  xxvii.  28).  The  tint 
produced  was  crimson  rather  than  scarlet.  The 
only  natural  object  to  which  it  is  applied  in  Scrip- 
ture is  the  lips,  which  are  compared  to  a  scarlet 
thread  (Cant.  iv.  3).  Josephus  considered  it  as 
symbolical  of  fire  (Ant.  iii.  7,  §7  ;  cf.  Phil.  i.  536). 
Scarlet  threads  were  selected  as  distinguishing 
marks  from  their  brilliancy  (Gen.  xxxviii.  28 ; 
Josh.  ii.  18,  21)  ;  and  hence  the  colour  is  expressive 
of  what  is  excessive  or  glaring  (Is.  i.  18).  Scarlet 
robes  were  worn  by  the  luxurious  (2  Sam.  i.  'j4  ; 
Prov.  xxxi.  21;  Jer.  iv.  30;  Lam.  iv.  5;  Lev. 
xvii.  4,  xviii.  12,  16);  it  was  also  the  appropriate 
hue  of  a  warrior's  dress  from  its  similarity  to  blood 
(  Nali.  ii.  3  ;  cf.  Is.  ix.  5),  and  was  especially  worn 
by  oiiicers  in  the  Roman  army  (Plin.  xxii.  3  ;  Matt, 
xxvii.  28). 

The  three  colours  above  described,  purple,  blue, 
and  scarlet,  together  with  white,  were  employed  in 
tin!  textures  used  for  the  curtains  of  the  tabernacle 
and  for  the  sacred  vestments  of  the  priests.  The 
four  were  used  in  combination  in  tin1  outer  curtains, 
the  vail,  the  enhance  curtain  (Ex.  xxvi.  1,  31, 
36),  and  the  gate  of  the  court  (Ex.  xxvii.  16):  as 
also  iu  the  high  priest's  ephod,    girdle   and   breast- 


346 


COMMERCE 


plate  (Ex.  xxviii.  5.  6,  8,  15).  The  three  first,  to 
the  exclusion  of  white,  were  used  in  the  pome- 
granates about  the  hem  of  the  high-priest's  robe 
(Ex.  xxviii.  33).  The  loops  of  the  curtains  (Ex. 
xxvi.  4),  the  lace  of  the  high-priest's  breastplate, 
the  robe  of  the  ephod,  and  the  lace  on  his  mitre 
were  exclusively  of  blue  (Ex.  xxviii.  28,31,  37). 
Cloths  for  wrapping  the  sacred  utensils  were  either 
blue  (Num.  iv.  6),  scarlet  (8),  or  purple  (13). 
Scarlet  thread  was  specified  in  connexion  with  the 
rites  of  cleansing  the  leper  (Lev.  xiv.  4,  6,  51),  and 
of  burning  the  red  heifer  (Num.  xix.  6),  apparently 
for  the  purpose  of  binding  the  hyssop  to  the  cedar 
wood.  The  hangings  for  the  court  (Ex.  xxvii.  9, 
xxxviii.  9),  the  coats,  mitres,  bonnets,  and  breeches 
of  the  priests  were  white  (Ex.  xxxix.  27,  28).  The 
application  of  these  colours  to  the  service  of  the 
tabernacle  has  led  writers  both  in  ancient  and  mo- 
dern  times  to  attach  some  symbolical  meaning  to 
them  :  reference  has  already  been  made  to  the  state- 
ments of  Philo  and  Josephus  on  this  subject :  the 
words  of  the  latter  are  as  follow :  rj  (ivcrcros  rr)v 
yrjv  avoarj/xaiveiv  eoiKe,  8ia  rb  e'|  avri]s  aveia- 
6ai  rb  XivoV  r\  re  iropfpvpa  tt/v  BaAaacnxv,  t<3 
TT€(poiv'ix^ai  T°v  Kox^ov  rep  u'l/xarf  rbv  Se  aepa 
PovAerai  br]\ovv  o  vo.klv6os'  Kal  6  <potVi|  5'  av 
efc/  TCK/ATipLov  rov  Trvpos,  Ant.  iii.  7,  §7.  The 
subject  has  been  followed  up  with  a  great  variety 
of  interpretations,  more  or  less  probable.  Without 
entering  into  a  disquisition  on  these,  we  will  remark 
that  it  is  unnecessary  to  assume  that  the  colours 
were  originally  selected  with  such  a  view ;  their 
beauty  and  costliness  is  a  sufficient  explanation  of 
the  selection. 

4.  Vermilion  ("It^  ;  /j.i\ros  ;  sinopis).  This 
was  a  pigment  used  in  fresco  painting's,  either  for 
drawing  figures  of  idols  on  the  walls  of  temples 
(Ez.  xxiii.  14),  for  colouring  the  idols  themselves 
(Wisd.  xiii.  14_),  or  for  decorating  the  walls  and 
beams  of  houses  (Jer.  xxii.  14).  The  Greek  term 
jui'Atos  is  applied  both  to  minium,  red  lead,  and 
rubrica,  -red  ochre ;  the  Latin  sinopis  describes 
the  best  kind  of  ochre,  which  came  from  Sinope. 
Vermilion  was  a  favourite  colour  among  the  As- 
syrians (Ez.  xxiii.  14),  as  is  still  attested  by  the 
sculptures  of  Nimroud  and  Khorsabad  (Layard,  ii. 
303).  [W.  L.  B.] 

COMMERCE  (1.  m'np,  Gesen.  p.  946;  ifi- 
■nop'.a  ;  ncgotiatio  ;  from  "1PID,  a  merchant,  from 
"iriD,  travel,  Ez.  xxvii.  15  ;  A.  V.,  merchandize, 
traffic:  2.  n^3"1,  Gesen.  p.  1289;  Ez.  xxvi.  12, 
to.  uTapxoi'Ta. ;  negotiatlones ;  in  xxviii.  5, 16, 18, 
ifiTropia,  najotiatio,  from  ?3^,  travel). 

From  the  time  that  men  began  to  live  in  cities, 
trade,  in  some  shape,  must  have  been  carried  on  to 
supply  the  town-dwellers  with  necessaries  (see 
Heeren,  Afr.  Nat.  i.  469),  but  it  is  also  clear  that 
international  trade  must  have  existed  and  affected 
to  some  extent  even  the  pastoral  nomade  races,  for 
we  find  that  Abraham  was  rich,  not  only  in  cattle, 
but  in  silver,  gold,  and  gold  and  silver  plate  and 
ornaments  (Gen.  xiii.  2,  xxiv.  22,  53)  ;  and  fur- 
ther, that  gold  and  silver  in  a  manufactured  state, 
and  silver,  not  improbably  in  coin,  were  in  use  both 
among  the  settled  inhabitants  of  Palestine  and  the  pas- 
toral  tribes  of  Syria  at  that  date  (Gen.  xx.  16,  xxiii. 
16,  xxxviii.  18  ;  Job  xiii.  1 1),  to  whom  those  metals 
must  in  all  probability  have  been  imported  from 
other  countries  (Hussey,  Anc.  Weights,  c.  xii.  3   p. 


COMMERCE 

193;   Kitto,  P/ujs.  Hist,  of  Pal.,  p.   109,   110; 
Herod,  i.  215). 

Among  trading  nations  mentioned  in  Scripture, 
Egypt  holds  in  veiy  early  times  a  prominent  posi- 
tion, though  her  external  trade  was  carried  on,  not 
by  her  own  citizens,  but  by  foreigners,  chiefly  of 
the  nomade  races  (Heeren,  Afr.  Nat.  i.  468,  ii. 
371,  372).  It  was  an  Ishmaelite  caravan,  laden 
with  spices,  which  carried  Joseph  into  Egypt,  and 
the  account  shows  that  slaves  formed  sometimes  a 
part  of  the  merchandize  imported  (Gen.  xxxvii.  25, 
xxxix.  1;  Job  vi.  19).  From  Egypt  it  is  likelv 
that  at  all  times,  but  especially  in  times  of  general 
scarcity,  corn  would  be  exported,  which  was  paid 
for  by  the  non-exporting  nations  in  silver,  which  was 
always  weighed  (Gen.  xli.  57,  xiii.  3,  25,  35,  xliii. 
11,  12,  21).  These  caravans  also  brought  the  pre- 
cious stones  as  well  as  the  spices  of  India  into  Egypt 
(Ex.  xxv.  3,  7  ;  Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  ii.  235,  237). 
Intercourse  with  Tyre  does  not  appear  to  have  taken 
place  till  a  later  period,  and  thus,  though  it  cannot 
be  determined  whether  the  purple  in  which  the 
Egyptian  woollen  and  linen  cloths  were  dyed  was 
brought  by  land  from  Phoenicia,  it  is  certain  that 
coloured  cloths  had  long  been  made  and  dyed  in 
Egypt,  and  the  use,  at  least,  of  them  adopted  by 
the  Hebrews  for  the  tabernacle  as  early  as  the  time 
of  Moses  (Ex.  xxv.  4,  5 ;  Heeren,  Asiat.  Nat.  i. 
352  ;  Herod,  i.  1).  The  pasture-ground  of  Shechem 
appears  from  the  story  of  Joseph  to  have  lain  in  the 
way  of  these  caravan  journeys  (Gen.  xxxvii.  14,  25  ; 
Saalschutz,  Hebr.  Arch.  15,  1.  159). 

At  the  same  period  it  is  clear  that  trade  was 
carried  on  between  Babylon  and  the  Syrian  cities, 
and  also  that  gold  and  silver  ornaments  were  com- 
mon among  the  Syrian  and  Arabian  races ;  a  trade 
which  was  obviously  carried  on  by  land-carriage 
(Num.  xxxi.  50  ;  Josh.  vii.  21  ;  Judg.  v.  30,  viii. 
24;  Job  vi.  19). 

Until  the  time  of  Solomon  the  Hebrew  nation 
may  be  said  to  have  had  no  foreign  trade.  Foreign 
trade  was  indeed  contemplated  by  the  Law,  and 
strict  rules  for  morality  in  commercial  dealings 
were  laid  down  by  it  (Deut.  xxviii.  12,  xxv.  13- 
16;  Lev.  xix.  35,  36),  and  the  tribes  near  the  sea 
and  the  Phoenician  territory  appear  to  have  engaged 
to  some  extent  in  maritime  atiairs  (Gen.  xlix.  13  ; 
Deut.  xxxiii.  18  ;  Judg.  v.  17),  but  the  spirit  of 
the  Law  was  more  in  favour  of  agriculture  and 
against  foreign  trade  (Deut.  xvii.  16,  17;  Lev. 
xxv.;  Joseph,  c.  Apion.  i.  12).  Solomon,  how- 
ever! organized  an  extensive  trade  with  foreign 
countries,  but  chiefly,  at  least  so  far  as  the  more 
distant  nations  were  concerned,  of  an  import  cha- 
racter. He  imported  linen  yarn,  horses,  and  cha- 
riots from  Egypt.  Of  the  horses  some  appear  to 
have  been  resold  to  Syrian  and  Canaanite  princes. 
For  all  these  he  paid  in  gold,  which  was  imported 
by  sea  from  India  and  Arabia  by  his  fleets  in  con- 
junction with  the  Phoenicians  (Heeren,  As.  Nat.  i. 
334;  1  K.  x.  22-29;  Ges.  p.  1202).  It  was  by 
Phoenicians  also  that  the  cedar  and  other  timber 
for  his  great  architectural  works  was  brought  by 
sea  to  Joppa,  whilst  Solomon  found  the  provi- 
sions necessary  for  the  workmen  in  Mount  Lebanon 
(1  K.  v.  6,  9 ;  2  Chr.  ii.  16). 

The  united  fleets  used  to  sail  into  the  Indian 
Ocean  every  three  years  from  Elath  and  Ezion- 
geber,  ports  on  the  Aelauitic  gulf  of  the  Red  Sea, 
which  David  had  probably  gained  from  Edom, 
and  brought  back  gold,  silver,  ivory,  sandal-wood, 
ebony,  precious  stones,  apes,  and  peacocks.     Some 


COMMERCE 

of  these  may  have  come  from  India  and  Ceylon, 
and  some  from  the  coasts  of  the  Persian  Gulf  and 
the  E.  coast  of  Africa  (2  Sam.  viii.  14;  IK.  ix. 
26,  x.  11,  22;  2  Chr.  viii.  17;  Her.  iii.  114; 
Livingstone,  Travels,  p.  637,  662). 
.  But  the  trade  which  Solomon  took  so  much  pains 
to  encourage  was  not  a  maritime  trade  only.  He 
built,  or  .more  probably  fortified,  Baalbec  and  Pal- 
myra ;  the  latter  at  least  expressly  as  a  caravan 
station  for  the  land-commerce  with  eastern  and 
south-eastern  Asia  (1  K.  ix.  18). 

After  his  death  the  maritime  trade  declined,  and 
an  attempt  made  by  Jehoshaphat  to  revive  it  proved 
unsuccessful  (1  K.  x.xii.  48,  49)  [Tarshish, 
Ophir].  We  know,  however,  that  Phoenicia  was 
supplied  from  Judaea  with  wheat,  honey,  oil,  and 
balm  (1  K.  v.  11;  Ezek.  xxvii.  17;  Acts  xii. 
2d;  Joseph.  B.  J.  ii.  21,  §2;  Vit.  13),  whilst 
Tyrian  dealers  brought  fish  and  other  merchan- 
dize to  Jerusalem  at  the  time  of  the  return  from 
captivity  (Neh.  xiii.  16),  as  well  as  timber  for 
the  rebuilding  of  the  temple,  which  then,  as  in 
Solomon's  time,  was  brought  by  sea  to  Joppa  (Ezr. 
iii.  7).  Oil  was  exported  to  Egypt  (Hos.  xii.  1), 
ami  line  linen  and  ornamental  girdles  of  domestic 
manufacture  were  sold  to  the  merchants  (Prov. 
xxxi.  24). 

The  successive  invasions  to  which  Palestine  was 
subjected,  involving  both  large  abstraction  of  trea- 
sure by  invaders  and  heavy  imposts  on  the  inhabit- 
ants to  purchase  immunity  or  to  satisfy  demands 
for  tribute  must  have  impoverished  the  country 
from  time  to  time  (under  Kehoboam,  1  K.  xiv.  26  ; 
Asa,  xv.  18;  Joash,  2  K.  xii.  18;  Amaziah,  xiv. 
13;  Ahaz,  xvi.  8;  Hezekiah,  xviii.  15-16;  Jeho- 
ahaz  and  Jehoiakim,  xxiii.  33,  35;  Jehoiachin, 
xxiv.  13),  but  it  is  also  clear,  as  the  denunciations 
of  the  prophets  bear  witness,  that  much  wealth 
must  somewhere  have  existed  in  the  country,  and 
much  foreign  merchandize  have  been  imported ;  so 
much  so  that,  in  the  language  of  Ezekiel,  Jerusalem 
appears* as  the  rival  of  Tyre,  and  through  its  port, 
Joppa,  to  have  carried  on  trade  with  foreign  coun- 
tries (Is.  ii.  6,  16,  iii.  11,  23;  Hos.  xii.  7;  Ez. 
xxvi.  2  ;   Jonah  i.  3  ;  Heeren,  As.  Nat.  i.  p.  328). 

Under  the  Maccabees  Joppa  was  fortified  (1  Mac. 
xiv.  34),  and  later  still  Caesarea  was  built  and 
made  a  port  by  Herod  (Joseph.  Ant.  xv.  9,  §6; 
Acts  xxvii.  2).  Joppa  became  afterwards  a  haunt 
for  pirates,  and  was  taken  by  Cestius  ;  afterwards 
by  Vespasian,  and  destroyed  by  him  (Strab.  xvi.  p. 
759  ;   Joseph.  /,'.  J.  ii.  18,  §10,  iii.  9,  §1). 

The  internal  trade  of  the  Jews,  as  well  as  the 
external,  was  much  promoted,  as  was  the  case  also 
in  Egypt,  by  the  festivals,  which  brought  large 
numbers  of  persons  to  Jerusalem,  and  caused  great 
outlay  in  victims  )  i  sacn£oes  and  m  mcense  (1  h. 
viii.  63;  Heeren,  Afr.  Nat.  ii.  363). 

The  places  of  public  market  were,  then  as  now, 
chiefly  (lie  open  spaces  near  the  gates,  to  which 
goods  were  brought  for  sale  by  those  who  came  from 
the  outside  (Neh.  xiii.   1."),  16;    Zeph.  i.  10). 

The  traders  in  later  times  were  allowed  to  in- 
trude into  the  temple,  in  the  outer  courts  of  which 

victims  were  publicly  sold  for  the  sacrifices  (Zech. 

xiv.  21;   Matt.  xxi.  12  ;    John  ii.  14). 

In  the  matter  of  buying  and  selling  great  stress 
i<  Laid  by  the  Law  on  fairness  in  dealing.  Just 
weights  and  balances  are  stringently  ordered  (Lev. 
xix.  35,  36;  Deut.  xxv.  13-16).  Kidnapping 
slaves  is  forbidden  under  lie'  severest  penalty  [Ex. 
xxi.  16;  Deut.  xxiv.  7).     Trade  in  swine  was  for- 


CONCUBINE 


347 


bidden  Ivy  the  Jewish  doctors  (Surenhus.  Mischn. 
de  damn.  c.  7,  vol.  iv.  Hn;  Lightfoot,  H.  H.  on 
Matth.vm.  33  ;  Winer,  Handel;  Saalschiitz,  Arch. 
Hebr.  c.  15,  16).  (H.  W.  P.) 

CONANI'AH  (-JiTMlS  ;    Xtownas  ;    Alex. 

X<i>Xtvia.s  ;  Chonenias),  one  of  the  chiefs  C^E?)  of 

the  Levites  in  the  time  of  Josiah  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  9). 
The  same  name  is  elsewhere  given  in  the  A.  V. 
Cononiah. 

CONCUBINE.  fc^S  appears  to  have  been 
included  under  the  general  conjugal  sense  of  the 
word  i"ltJ'N,  which  in  its  limited  sense  is  ren- 
dered "  wife."  The  positions  of  these  two  among 
the  early  Jews  cannot  be  referred  to  the  standard  of 
our  own  age  and  country ;  that  of  concubine  being 
less  degraded,  as  that  of  wife  was,  especially  owing 
to  the  sanction  of  polygamy,  less  honourable  than 
among  ourselves.  The  natural  desire  of  offspring 
was,  in  the  Jew,  consecrated  into  a  religious  hope, 
which  tended  to  redeem  concubinage  from  the 
debasement  into  which  the  grosser  motives  for  its 
adoption  might  have  brought  it.  The  whole  ques- 
tion must  be  viewed  from  the  point  which  touches 
the  interests  of  propagation,  in  virtue  of  which  even 
a  slave  concubine  who  had  many  children  would 
become  a  most  important  person  in  a  family,  espe- 
cially where  a  wife  was  barren.  Such  was  the 
true  source  of  the  concubinage  of  Nachor,  Abraham, 
and  Jacob,  which  indeed,  in  the  two  latter  cases, 
lost  the  nature  which  it  has  in  our  eyes,  through 
the  process,  analogous  to  adoption,  by  which  the 
offspring  was  regarded  as  that  of  the  wife  herself. 
From  all  this  it  follows  that,  save  in  so  far  as  the 
latter  was  generally  a  slave,  the  difference  between 
wife  and  concubine  was  less  marked,  owing  to  the 
absence  of  moral  stigma,  than  among  us.  We  must 
therefore  beware  of  regarding  as  essential  to  the 
relation  of  concubinage,  what  really  pertained  to 
that  of  bondage. 

The  concubine's  condition  was  a  definite  one,  and 
quite  independent  of  the  fact  of  there  being  another 
woman  having  the  rights  of  wife  towards  the  same 
man.  The  difference  probably  lay  in  the  absence 
of  the  light  of  the  libellus  divortii,  without  which 
the  wife  could  not  be  repudiated,  and  in  some 
particulars  of  treatment  and  consideration  of  which 
we  are  ignorant ;  also  in  her  condition  and  lights  on 
the  death  of  her  lord,  rather  than  in  the  absence  of 
nuptial  ceremonies  and  dowry,  which  were  non- 
essential ;  yet  it  is  so  probable  that  these  last  did 
not  pertain  to  the  concubine,  that  the  assertion  of 
the  Gernara  {Hicrosol.  Chetuboth,  v.)  to  that  effect, 
though  controverted,  may  he  received.  The  doe- 
trine  that  a  concubine  also  could  not  he  dismissed 
without  a  formal  divorce  is  of  later  origin — not 
that  such  dismissals  weie  move  frequent,  probably, 
than  those  of  wives-  and  negatived  by  the  silence 
of  Ex.  xxi.,  and  Dent.  .xxi.  regarding  it.  Prom 
this  it  seems  to  follow  that  a  concubine  could  not 
become  a  wife  to  the  same  man,  nor  bum  oersA, 
unless  in  the  improbable  case  of  a  wife  divorced 
returning  as  a  concubine.  With  regard  to  the 
children  of  wife  anil  concubine,  there  was  no  such 
difference  as  our  illegitimacy  implies;  the  latter 
were  a  STJ ppleiueiitarv  family  to  the  former,  their 
names  occur  in  the  patriarchal  genealogies  (Gen, 
xxii.  2  1;  1  Chr.  i.  32),  and  their  position  and 
provision,  save  in  the  case  of  detect  of  those  former 
(in    which    case  they  might    probably  succeed    to 


348 


CONDUIT 


landed  estate  or  other  chief  hostage),  would  depend 
on  the  father's  will  (Gen.  xxv.  6).  The  state  of 
concubinage  is  assumed  and  provided  for  by  the 
law  of  Moses.  A  concubine  would  generally  be 
either  (1)  a  Hebrew  girl  bought  of  her  father, 
i.  e.  a  slave,  which  alone  the  Rabbins  regard  as  a 
lawful  connexion  (Maimon.  Halach-Melakim,  iv.), 
at  least  for  a  private  person  ;  (2),  a  gentile  cap- 
tive taken  in  war ;  (3),  a  foreign  slave  bought, 
or  (4)  a  Canaanitish  woman,  bond  or  free.  The 
rights  of  (1)  and  (2)  were  protected  by  law 
(Ex.  xxi.  7  ;  Deut.  xxi.  10),  but  (3)  was  unre- 
cognised, and  (4)  prohibited.  Free  Hebrew  women 
also  might  become  concubines.  So  Gideon's  con- 
cubine seems  to  have  been  of  a  family  of  rank  and 
influence  in  Shechem,  and  such  was  probably  the 
state  of  the  Levite's  concubine  (Judg.  xx.). 
The  ravages  of  war  among  the  male  sex,  or  the 
impoverishment  of  families  might  often  induce  this 
condition.  The  case  (1)  was  not  a  hard  lot.  The 
passage  in  Ex.  xxi.  is  somewhat  obscure,  and  seems 
to  mean,  in  brief,  as  follows  : — A  man  who  bought 
a  Hebrew  girl  as  concubine  for  himself  might  not 
treat  her  as  a  mere  Hebrew  slave,  to  be  sent  "out" 
(*.  e.  in  the  seventh,  v.  2),  but  might,  if  she  dis- 
pleased him,  dismiss  her  to  her  father  on  redemp- 
tion, i.  e.  repayment  probably  of  a  part  of  what  he 
paid  for  her.  If  he  had  taken  her  for  a  concubine 
for  his  son,  and  the  son  then  married  another 
woman,  the  concubine's  position  and  rights  were 
secured,  or,  if  she  were  refused  these,  she  became 
free  without  redemption.  Further,  from  the  pro- 
vision in  the  case  of  such  a  concubine  given  by  a 
man  to  his  son,  that  she  should  be  dealt  with 
"  after  the  manner  of  daughters,"  we  see  that  the 
servile  merged  in  the  connubial  relation,  and  that 
her  children  must  have  been  free.  Yet  some  degree 
of  contempt   attached   to  the  "  handmaid's   son " 

(D?3X")3)  used  reproachfully  to  the  son  of  a  concu- 
bine merely  in  Judg.  ix.  18  ;  see  also  Ps.  cxvi.  16. 
The  provisions  relating  to  (2)  are  merciful  and  con- 
siderate to  a  rare  degree,  but  overlaid  by  the  Rabbis 
with  distorting  comments. 

In  the  books  of  Samuel  and  Kings  the  concubines 
mentioned  belong  to  the  king,  and  their  condition 
and  number  cease  to  be  a  guide  to  the  general 
practice.  A  new  king  stepped  into  the  rights  of 
his  predecessor,  and  by  Solomon's  time  the  custom 
had  approximated  to  that  of  a  Persian  harem  (2 
Sam.  xii.  8,  xvi.  21  ;  1  K.  ii.  22).  To  seize  on 
royal  concubines  for  his  use  was  thus  an  usurper's 
first  act.  Such  was  probably  the  intent  of  Abner's 
act  (2  Sam.  iii.  7),  and  similarly  the  request  on 
behalf  of  Adonijah  was  construed  (1  K.  ii.  21-24). 
For  fuller  information  Selden's  treatises  de  Uxore 
Hebraea  and  de  Jure  Natur.  et  Gent.  v.  7,  8,  and 
especially  thai;  de  Succcssionibus,  cap.  iii.,  may 
with  some  caution  (since  he  leans  somewhat  easily 
to  rabbinical  tradition)  be  consulted ;  also  the  trea- 
tises Sotah,  Kidushim,  and  Chetuboth  in  the 
Gemara  Hierosol.,  and  that  entitled  Sanhcdrin  in 
the  Gemara  Babyl.  The  essential  portions  of  all 
these  are  collected  in  Ugolini,  vol.  xxx.  de  Uxore 
Hebraea.  [H.  H.] 

CONDUIT  (rpyO ;  i/SpaycoySs ;  aquaeductus ; 

a  trench  or  watercourse,  from  TV?]},  to  ascend,  Ge- 

sen.  p.  1022). 

1 .  Although  no  notice  is  given  either  by  Scripture 
i>]  by  Josephus  of  any  connexion  between  the  pools 


CONDUIT 

of  Solomon  beyond  Bethlehem  and  a  supply  of  water 
for  Jerusalem,  it  seems  unlikely  that  so  large  a 
work  as  the  pools  should  be  constructed  merely  for 
irrigating  his  gardens  (Eccl.  ii.  6),  and  tradition, 
both  oral  and  as  represented  by  Talmudical  writers, 
ascribes  to  Solomon  the  formation  of  the  original 
aqueduct  by  which  water  was  brought  to  Jerusa- 
lem (Maundrell,  Early  Trav.  p.  458  ;  Hasselquist, 
Trav.  146;  Lighttbot,  Descr.  Tempi,  c.  xxiii.  vol. 
i.  612;  Robinson,  i.  265).  Pontius  Pilate  applied 
the  sacred  treasure  of  the  Corban  to  the  work  of 
bringing  water  by  an  aqueduct  from  a  distance, 
Josephus  says  of  300  or  400  stadia  (B.  J.  ii.  9, 
§4),  but  elsewhere  200  stadia,  a  distance  which 
would  fairly  correspond  with  the  length  of  the 
existing  aqueduct  with  all  its  turns  and  windings 
(Ant.  xviii.  3,  §2 ;  Williams,  Holy  City,  ii.  501). 
His  application  of  the  money  in  this  manner  gave 
rise  to  a  serious  disturbance.  Whether  his  work 
was  a  new  one  or  a  reparation  of  Solomon's  original 
aqueduct  cannot  be  determined,  but  it  seems  more 
than  probable  that  the  ancient  work  would  have 
been  destroyed  in  some  of  the  various  sieges  since 
Solomon's  time.  The  aqueduct,  though  much  in- 
jured, and  not  serviceable  for  water  beyond  Bethle- 
hem, still  exists:  the  water  is  conveyed  from  the 
fountains  which  supply  the  pools  about  two  miles 
S.  of  Bethlehem.  The  watercourse  then  passes 
from  the  pools  in  a  N.E.  direction,  and  winding 
round  the  hill  of  Bethlehem  on  the  S.  side,  is 
carried  sometimes  above  and  sometimes  below  the 
surface  of  the  ground,  partly  in  earthen  pipes  and 
partly  in  a  channel  about  one  foot  square  of  rough 
stones  laid  in  cement,  till  it  approaches  Jerusalem. 
There  it  crosses  the  valley  of  Hinnom  at  the  S.W. 
side  of  the  city  on  a  bridge  of  nine  arches  at  a  point 
above  the  pool  called  Birket-es-Sultdn,  then  returns 
S.E.  and  E.  along  the  side  of  the  valley  and  under 
the  wall,  and  continuing  its  course  along  the  east 
side  is  finally  conducted  to  the  Haram.  It  was  re- 
paired by  Sultan  Mohammad  Ibn-Kalaun  of  Egypt 
about  A.D.  1300  (Williams,  Holy  City,  ii.  498; 
Kaumer,  Pal.  p.  280;  Robinson,  i.  265-267,  347, 
476,  iii.  247). 

2.  Among  the  works  of  Hezekiah  he  is  said  to 
have  stopped  the  "  upper  watercourse  of  Gihon," 
and  brought  it  down  straight  to  the  W.  side  of  the 
city  of  David  (2  Chr.  xxxii.  30).  The  direction  of 
this  watercourse  of  course  depends  on  the  site  of 
Gihon.  Dr.  Robinson  identifies  this  with  the  large 
pool  called  Birkct-es-Mamilla  at  the  head  of  the 
valley  of  Hinnom  on  the  S.W.  side  of  Jerusalem, 
and  considers  the  lately-discovered  subterranean 
conduit  within  the  city  to  be  a  branch  from  Heze- 
kiah's  watercourse  (Rob.  iii.  243-4,  i.  327;  Ges. 
pp.  616,  1395).  Mr.  Williams,  on  the  other  hand, 
places  Gihon  on  the  N.  side,  not  far  from  the 
tombs  of  the  kings,  and  supposes  the  watercourse 
to  have  brought  water  in  a  S.  direction  to  the 
temple,  whence  it  flowed  ultimately  into  the  Pool 
of  Siloam,  or  Lower  Pool.  One  argument  which 
recommends  this  view  is  found  in  the  account 
of  the  interview  between  the  emissaries  of  Sen- 
nacherib and  the  officers  of  Hezekiah,  which  took 
place  "  by  the  conduit  of  the  upper  pool  in  the 
highway  of  the  fuller's  field"  (2  K.  xviii.  17), 
whose  site  seems  to  be  indicated  by  the  "  fuller's 
monument "  mentioned  by  Josephus  as  at  the 
N.E.  side  of  the  city,  and  by  the  once  well- 
known  site  called  the  Camp  of  the  Assyrians 
(Joseph.  B.  J.  v.  4,  §2,  7,  §3,  and  12,  §2). 
[Gihon  ;  Jerusalem.]  [H.  W.  P.] 


CONEY 
CONEY  (jQt? ;  Saavnovs,  x0lP°ypv^l0S' 
v.  I.  \a-)w6v;  Ckoerogryllus,  hcrinaceus,  lepus- 
culus) ;  a  gregarious  animal  of  the  class  Pachyder- 
mata,  which  is  found  in  Palestine,  living  in  the 
caves  and  clefts  of  the  rocks,  and  has  been  erro- 
neously ideiitiried  with  the  Rabbit  or  Coney.  Its 
scientific  name  is  Hyrax  Syriacus.     The  |SC  is 

mentioned  four  times  in  the  0.  T.  In  Lev.  xi.  5 
and  in  Deut.  xiv.  7  it  is  declared  to  be  unclean, 
because  it  chews  the  cud,  but  does  not  divide  the 
hoof.  In  Ps.  civ.  18  we  are  told  "  the  rocks  are  a 
refuge  for  the  coneys,"  and  in  Prov.  xxx.  26  that 
"  the  coneys  are  but  a  feeble  folk,  yet  make  they 
their  houses  in  the  rocks."     The   Hyrax    satisfies 


CONGEEGATION 


349 


Hyrax  Syriacus.    (From  a  specimen  in  the  British  Museum.) 

exactly  the  expressions  in  the  two  last  passages ; 
and  its  being  reckoned  among  the  ruminating 
animals  is  uo  difficulty,  the  hare  being  also 
erroneously  placed  by  the  sacred  writers  in  the 
same  class,  because  the  action  of  its  jaws  resembles 
that  of  the  ruminating  animals.  Its  colour  is  grey 
or  brown  on  the  back,  white  on  the  belly ;  it  is 
like  the  alpine  marmot,  scarcely  of  the  size  of  the 
domestic  cat,  having  long  hair,  a  very  short  tail, 
and  round  ears.  It  is  very  common  in  Syria,  espe- 
cially on  the  ridges  of  Lebanon,  and  is  found  also  in 
Arabia  Petraea,  Upper  Egypt,  Abyssinia  and  Pales- 
tine (^Wilson,  Lands  of  the  Bible,  ii.  28  sq.).     The 

Arabs  call  the  |2C   ^w,  wabr ;  but  among  the 

)  3 

southern  Arabs  we  find  the  term      Jj",  thofun  — 

shdphdn  (Fresnel  in  Asiatic  Journ.  June,  1838, 
p.  514).  The  Amharic  name  is  aschkoko,  under 
which  name  the  Hyrax  is  described  by  Bruce,  who 
also  gives  a  figure  of  it,  and  mentions  the  fact  that 

the  Arabs  also  called  it  V,|  _^       tj    <♦>£'  sheep 

of  the    children  of  Israel.      The   Hyrax   is  men- 

ti I   by    Robinson    (iii.    387),   as  occurring    in 

the  sides  of  the  chasm  of  the  Litany  opposite  to 
Bcldt.  He  says  that  it  is  seen  coming  out  of 
the  clefts  of  the  rocks  in  winter  at  midday ;  in 
summer  only  towards  evening.  The  derivation 
of  JSCJ'  from  the  unused  root,  |Qt^,  to  hide,  chiefly 
in  the  earth,  is  obvious.  [W.  D.] 

CONGREGATION  (iTJg,  S^,  from  ^ 
to  call  =  convocation  ;  (Tvvaywyrj ;  fKKK-qaia,  in 
1  icut. xviii.  Iti.wiii.  1  ;  congregatio,ecclesia,coeius). 
This  term  describes  the  Hebrew  people  in  its  col- 
lective capacity  under  its  peculiar  aspect  as  a  holy 
community,  held  together  by  religious  rather  than 
political  bonds.  Sometimes  it  is  used  in  abroad 
sense  as  inclusive  of  foreign  settlers  (Ex.  xii.  19); 
but  more  properly,  as  exclusively  appropriate  to 
the  Hebrew  element  of  the  population  (Num.  xv. 
15);  in  each  case  it  expresses  the  idea  of  the  Roman 


Civitas  or  the  Greek  ttoAiteio.  Every  circumcised 
Hebrew  (ITITN  ;  avrSxOoii' ',  indigena  ;  A.  V. 
"  home-born,  bora  in  the  land,"  the  term  specially 
descriptive  of  the  Israelite  in  opposition  to  the  non- 
Israelite,  Ex.  xii.  19  ;  Lev.  xvi.  29  ;  Num.  ix.  14) 
was  a  member  of  the  congregation,  and  took  part 
in  its  proceedings,  probably  from  the  time  that  he 
bore  arms.  It  is  important,  however,  to  observe 
that  he  acquired  no  political  rights  in  his  individual 
capacity,  but  only  as  a  member  of  a  house  ;  for  the 
basis  of  the  Hebrew  polity  was  the  house,  whence 
was  formed  in  an  ascending  scale  the  family  or  col- 
lection of  houses,  the  tribe  or  collection  of  fami- 
lies, and  the  congregation  or  collection  of  tribes. 
Strangers  (D^IH)  settled  in  the  land,  if  circumcised, 
were  with  certain  exceptions  (Deut.  xxiii.  1  fT.) 
admitted  to  the  privilege  of  citizenship,  and  are 
spoken  of  as  members  of  the  congregation  in  its 
more  extended  application  (Ex.  xii.  19  ;  Num.  ix. 
14,  xv.  15) ;  it  appears  doubtful  however  whether 
they  were  represented  in  the  congregation  in  its 
corporate  capacity  as  a  deliberative  body,  as  they 
were  not  strictly  speaking  members  of  any  house ; 
their  position  probably  resembled  that  of  the  irp6- 
£evot  at  Athens.  The  congregation  occupied  an 
important  position  under  the  Theocracy,  as  the 
comitia  or  national  parliament,  invested  with  legis- 
lative and  judicial  powers.  In  this  capacity  it 
acted  through  a  system  of  patriarchal  representa- 
tion, each  house,  family,  and  tribe  being  represented 
by  its  head  or  father.  These  delegates  were  named 
myn  s2p\  (irf>eer/3uTepoi;  seniores;"  elders"); 
^EW  (&pxovres  ;  principes  ;  "  princes  ")  ;  and 
sometimes   Wlp    (e7rtK\7jTO£  ;     qui    vocabantur, 

Num.  xvi.  2;  A.  V.  "renowned,"  "famous"). 
The  number  of  these  representatives  being  inconve- 
niently large  for  ordinary  business,  a  further  selec- 
tion was  made  by  Moses  of  70,  who  formed  a 
species  of  standing  committee  (Num.  xi.  16).  Oc- 
casionally indeed  the  whole  body  of  the  people  was 
assembled,  the  mode  of  summoning  being  by  the 
sound  of  the  two  silver  trumpets,  and  the  place  of 
meeting  the  door  of  the  tabernacle,  hence  usually 
called  the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation  (lyiJO,  lit. 

place  of  meeting)  (Num.  x.  3);  the  occasions  of 
such  general  assemblies  were  solemn  religious  ser- 
vices (Ex.  xii.  47  ;  Num.  xxv.  6  ;  Joel  ii.  15),  or 
to  receive  new  commandments  (Ex.  xix.  7,  8 ;  Lev. 
viii.  4).  The  elders  were  summoned  by  the  call  of 
one  trumpet  (Num.  x.  4),  at  the  command  of  tin1 
supreme  governor  or  the  high  priest  ;  they  repre- 
sented the  whole  congregation  on  various  occasions 
of  public  interest  (Ex.  iii.  16,  xii.  21,  xvii.  5,  xxiv. 
1)  ;  they  acted  as  a  court  of  judicature  in  capital 
offences  (Num.  xv.  32,  xxxv.  12),  and  were 
charged  with  the  execution  of  the  sentence  (Lev. 
xxiv.  14;  Num.  xv.  35)  :  they  joined  in  certain  of 
the  sacrifices  (Lev.  iv.  14,  15)  ;  and  they  exercised 
the  usual  rights  of  sovereignty,  such  as  declaring 
war,  making  peace  and  concluding  treaties  (Josh, 
ix.  15).  The  people  were  strictly  bound  by  the' 
acts  of  their  representatives,  even  in  eases  where 
they  disapproved  of  them  (Josh.  ix.  18).  After 
the  occupation  of  the  land  of  Canaan,  the  congrega- 
tion was  assembled  only  on  matters  of  the  highest 
importance.  The  delegates  were  summoned  by 
messengers  J  Chr.  xxx.  6)  to  such  places  as  might 
he  appointed,  most  frequently  to  Mizpeh  (Judg.  x. 
17.  xi.    11,  XX.    1  ;    1  Sam.  vii.  5,  x.    17;     1  Mace. 


350 


CONIAH 


iii.  46);  they  came  attended  each  with  his  hand  of 
retainers,  so  that  the  numher  assembled  was  very 
considerable  (Judg.  xx.  2  ff.).  On  oue  occasion  we 
hear  of  the  congregation  being  assembled  for  judicial 
purposes  (Judg.  xx.)  ;  on  other  occasions  for  reli- 
gious festivals  (2  Chr.  xxx.  5,  xxxiv.  29)  ;  on 
others  for  the  election  of  kings,  as  Saul  (1  Sam. 
x.  17),  David  (2  Sam.  v.  1),  Jeroboam  (1  K.  xii. 
20),  Joash  (2  K.  xi.  19),  Josiah  (2  K.  xxi.  24), 
Jehoahaz  (2  K.  xxiii.  30),  and  Uzziah  (2  Chr. 
xx vi.  1).  In  the  later  periods  of  Jewish  history 
the  congregation  was  represented  by  the  Sanhedrim  ; 
and  the  term  avvwyoiyt},  which  in  the  LXX.  is 
applied  exclusively  to  the  congregation  itself  (for 
the  place  of  meeting  IV'tO  7HK  is  invariably  ren- 
dered 7j  <TK7]V7i  rod  fiapTvpiov,  tabernaculum  tes- 
iiinonii,  the  word  *1J?10  being  considered  =  H-liy), 

was  transferred  to  the  places  of  worship  established 
by  the  Jews,  wherever  a  certain  number  of  fami- 
lies were  collected.  [W.  L.  B.] 

CONI'AH.     [Jeconiah.] 

CONONI'AH  (-1^3313  ;  Xwverfas  ;  Alex. 
Xux^vias',  Chonenias),  a  Levite,  ruler  (1*33)  of 
the  offerings  and  tithes  in  the  time  of  Hezekiah 
(2  Chr.  xxxi.  12,  13).     [See  Conaniaii.] 

CONSECRATION.     [Priest.] 
CONVOCATION  (MTpO,  from  Nip,  vocare ; 

t  :    •  t't 

.  comp.  Num.  x.  2  ;  Is.  i.  13).  This  term  is  applied 
invariably  to  meetings  of  a  religious  character,  in 
contradistinction  to  congregation,  in  which  political 
and  legal  matters  were  occasionally  settled.  Hence 
it  is   connected   with  t^Tp,  holy,  and  is   applied 

only  to  the  Sabbath  and  the  great  annual  festivals 
of  the  Jews  (Ex.  xii.  16  ;  Lev.  xxiii.  2  ff . ;  Num. 
xxviii.  18  ft'.,  xxix.  1  ft'.).  With  one  exception  (Is. 
i.  13),  the  word  is  peculiar  to  the  Pentateuch.  The 
LXX.  treats  it  as  an  adjective  =  kAtjtos,  eVt/cA/fj- 
ros  ;  but  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  A.  V.  is 
correct  in  its  rendering.  [W.  L.  B.] 

COOKING.  As  meat  did  not  form  an  article 
of  ordinary  diet  among  the  Jews,  the  art  of  cook- 
ing was  not  carried  to  any  perfection.  The  diffi- 
culty of  preserving  it  from  putrefaction  necessi- 
tated the  immediate  consumption  of  an  animal, 
and  hence  few  were  slaughtered  except  for  purposes 
of  hospitality  or  festivity.  The  proceedings  on 
such  occasions  appear  to  have  been  as  follow : — On 
the  arrival  of  a  guest  the  animal,  either  a  kid, 
lamb,  or  calf  was  killed  (Gen.  xviii.  7  ;  Luke  xv. 
23),  its  throat  being  cut  so  that  the  blood  might 
be  poured  out  (Lev.  vii.  26) ;  it  was  then  flayed 
and  was  ready  either  for  roasting  (iT?V),  or, boil- 
ing'(?t^3):  in   the  former   case  the  animal  was 

preserved  entire  (Ex.  xii.  46),  and  roasted  either 
over  a  fire  (Ex.  xii.  8)  of  wood  (Is.  xliv.  16),  or 
perhaps,  as  the  mention  of  fire  implies  another  me- 
i  thod,  in  an  oven,  consisting  simply  of  a  hole  dug  in 
the  earth,  well  heated,  and  covered  up  (Burckhardt, 
Notes  on  Bedouins,  i.  240) ;  the  Paschal  lamb  was 
roasted  by  the  first  of  these  methods  (Ex.  xii.  8, 
9  ;  2  Chr.  xxxv.  13).  Boiling,  however,  was  the 
more  usual  method  of  cooking,  both  in  the  case  of 
sacrifices,  other  than  the  Paschal  lamb  (Lev.  viii. 
31),  and  for  domestic  use  (Ex.  xvi.  23),  so  much 
so  that  ?J-'3  =  to  cook  generally,  including  even 


COPPER 

roasting  (Deut.  xvi.  7).  In  this  case  the  animal 
was  cut  up,  the  right  shoulder  being  first  taken  off 
(hence  the  priest's  joint,  Lev.  vii.  32),  and  the 
other  joints  in  succession  ;  the  flesh  was  separated 
from  the  bones,  and  minced,  and  the  bones  them- 
selves were  broken  up  (Mic.  iii.  3);  the  whole  mass 
was  then  thrown  into  a  caldron  (Ez.  xxiv.  4,  5) 
filled  with  water  (Ex.  xii.  9),  or,  as  we  may  infer 
from'  Ex.  xxiii.  19,  occasionally  with  milk,  as  is 
still  usual  among  the  Arabs  (Burckhardt,  Notes, 
i.  63),  the  prohibition  "  not  to  seethe  a  kid  in  his 
mother's  milk "  having  reference  apparently  to 
some  heathen  practice  connected  with  the  offering 
of  the  first-fruits  (Ex.  I.  c;  xxxiv.  26),  which  ren- 
dered the  kid  so  prepared  unclean  fool  (Deut.  xiv. 
21).  The  caldron  was  boiled  over  a  wood  fire  (Ez. 
xxiv.  10);  the  scum  which  rose  to  the  surface 
was  from  time  to  time  removed,  otherwise  the 
meat  would  turn  out  loathsome  (6)  ;  salt  or 
spices  were  thrown  in  to  season  it  (10) ;  and  when 
sufficiently  boiled,  the  meat  and  the  broth  (p~lTD  ; 

(u>Ia6s,  LXX. ;  jus,  Vulg.)  were  served  up  sepa- 
rately (Judg.  vi.  19),  the  broth  being  used  with 
unleavened  bread,  and  butter  (Gen.  xviii.  8)  as  a 
sauce  for  dipping  morsels  of  bread  into  (Burck- 
hardt's  Notes,  i.  63).  Sometimes  the  meat  was 
so  highly  spiced  that  its  flavour  could  hardly  be 
distinguished ;  such  dishes  were  called  D^ypO 
(Gen.  xxvii.  4;  Prov.  xxiii.  3).  There  is  a  strik- 
ing similarity  in  the  culinary  operations  of  the  He- 
brews and  Egyptians  (Wilkinson's  Anc.  Egypt,  ii. 
pp.  374  ff.).  Vegetables  were  usually  boiled,  and 
served  up  as  pottage  (Gen.  xxv.  29  ;  2  K.  iv.  38). 
Fish  was  also  cooked  (ix^vos  otttov  fiepos  ;  piscis 
assi ;  Luke  xxiv.  42),  probably  broiled.  The 
cooking  was  in  early  times  performed  by  the  mis- 
tress of  the  household  (Gen.  xviii.  6)  ;  professional 
cooks  (DTlSD)  were  afterwards  employed  (1  Sam. 
viii.  13,  ix.  23).  The  utensils  required  were — 
D*T3  (xuTpoVoSes  ;  chytropodes),  a  cooking  range, 
having  places  for  two  or  more  pots,  probably  of 
earthenware  (Lev.  xi.  35)  ;  "11*3  (Ae'07js,  lebes), 
a  caldron  (1  Sam.  ii.  14) ;  3?TfD  (Kpeaypa  ; 
fuscinida),  a  large  fork  or  flesh-hook  ;  "VD  (Ae'^?;s  ; 

olla),  a  wide  open,  metal  vessel,  resembling  a  fish- 
kettle,  adapted  to  be  used  as  a  wash-pot  (Ps.  Ix.  8), 
or  to  eat  from  (Ex.  xvi.  3);  "AIB,  "I-H,  T\T\S$, 
pots  probably  of  earthenware  and  high,  but  how 
differing  from  each  other  does  not  appear;  and, 
lastly,  nnW,  or  riTTI1^  dishes  (2  K.  ii.  20,  xxi. 
13 ;  Prov.  xix.  24,  A.  V.  "  bosom  ").     [W.  L.  B.] 

CO'OS  (Rec.  Text,  els  rty  Kwv ;  Lachm.  with 
ABC,  Kai),  Acts  xxi.  1.     [Cos.] 

COPPER  (nS5>n.3.  This  word  in  the  A.V.  is 
always  rendered  "brass,"  except  in  Ezr.  viii.  27. 
See  Brass).  This  metal  is  usually  found  as  pyrites 
(sulphuret  of  copper  and  iron),  malachite  (carb.  of 
copper),  or  in  the  state  of  oxide,  and  occasionally 
in  a  native  state,  principally  in  the  New  World.  It 
was  almost  exclusively  used  by  the  ancients  for 
common  purposes  ;  for  which  its  elastic  and  ductile 
nature  rendered  it  practically  available.  It  is  a 
question  whether  in  the  earliest  times  iron  was 
known  (jUf'Aas  8s  ovk  eVse  o-lS-npos,  Hes.  Opp.  et 
Dies.  14lJ  ;  Liu  r.  v.  1285,  sq.).     In  India,  however, 


COPPER 

its  manufacture  has  been  practised  from  a  very 
ancient  date  by  a  process  exceedingly  simple,  and 
possibly  a  similar  one  was  employed  by  the  ancient 
Egyptians  (Napier,  Anc.  Workers  in  Metal,  137). 
There  is  no  certain  mention  of  iron  in  the  Scriptures  ; 
and,  from  the  allusion  to  it  as  known  to  Tubalcain 
(Gen.  iv.  22),  some  have  ventured  to  doubt  whether 
in  that  place  ?P3  means  iron  (Wilkinson,  Anc. 
E:j.  iii.  242). 

We  read  in  the  Bible  of  copper,  possessed  in 
countless  abundance  (2  Chr.  iv.  18),  and  used  for 
every  kind  of  instrument ;  as  chains  (Judg.  xvi. 
21),  pillars  (1  K.  vii.  15-21),  lavers,  the  great  one 
being  called  "the  copper  sea"  (2  K.  xxv.  13; 
1  Chr.  xviii.  8),  and  the  other  temple  vessels. 
These  were  made  in  the  foundry,  with  the  assist- 
ance of  Hiram,  a  Phoenician  (1  K.  vii.  13),  although 
the  Jews  were  not  ignorant  of  metallurgy  (Ez. 
xxii.  18  ;  Dent.  iv.  20,  &c),  and  appear  to  have 
woi'ked  their  own  mines  (Deut.  viii.  9  ;  Is.  li.  1). 
We  read  also  of  copper  mirrors  (Ex.  xxxviii. 
8,;  Job  xxxvii.  18),  since  the  metal  is  susceptible 
of  brilliant  polish  (2  Chr.  iv.  16);  and  even  of 
cupper  arms,  as  helmets,  spears,  &c.  (1  Sam.  xvii. 
5,  6,  38  ;  2  Sam.  xxi.  10).  The  expression  "  bow 
of  steel,"  in  Job  xx.  24,  Ps.  xviii.  34,  should  be 
rendeied  "  bow  of  copper,"  since  the  term  for  steel 

is  rn^2  or  j'lSVp  7J"1|  (northern  iron).     They 

could  hardly  have  applied  copper  to  these  purposes 
without  possessing  some  judicious  system  of  alloys, 
or  perhaps  some  forgotten  secret  for  rendering  the 
metal  harder  and  more  elastic  than  we  can  make  it. 

It  has  been  maintained  that  the  cutting-tools  of 
the  Egyptians,  with  which  they  worked  the  granite 
and  porphyry  of  their  monuments,  were  made  of 
bronze,  in  which  copper  was  a  chief  ingredient. 
The  arguments  on  this  point  are  found  in  Wilkin- 
son, iii.  249,  &c,  but  they  are  not  conclusive. 
There  seems  no  reason  why  the  art  of  making  iron 
and  excellent  steel,  which  has  been  for  ages  prac- 
tised in  India,  may  not  have  been  equally  known 
to  the  Egyptians.  The  quickness  with  which  iron 
decomposes  will  fully  account  tor  the  non-discovery 
of  any  remains  of  steel  or  iron  implements.  For 
analyses  of  the  bronze  tools  and  articles  found  in 
Egypt  and  Assyria,  see  Napier,  88. 

The  only  place  in  the  A.  V.  where  "copper"  is 
mentioned  is  Ezr.  viii.  27,  "  two  vessels  of  fine 
copper,  precious  as  gold"  (cf.  1  Esd.  viii.  57; 
ffKiirt]  xa^K0"  ffTiKfiovTOS,  8id<popa,  iiridv- 
fx-qra  iv  xPv(T'tV !  oeris  fulgentis  ;  "  vases  of 
Corinthian  brass,"  Syr.;  "ex  orichalco,"  Jun.), 
perhaps  similar  to  those  of  "bright  brass"  in  1  K. 
vii.  45  ;  Dan.  x.  (5.  They  may  have  been  of 
orichalcum,  like  the  Hersian  or  Indian  vases  found 
among  the  treasures  of  Darius  (Aristot.  de  Mirab. 
Aitscult.).  There  were  two  kinds  of  this  metal, 
one  natural  (Serv.  ad  Acn.  xii.  87),  which  Pliny 
( 11  X.  xxxiv.  2,  2)  says  had  long  been  extinct  in 
his  time,  but  which  Cliardin  alludes  to  as  found  in 
Sumatra  under  the  name  Calmbac  (Rosenm.  /.  c): 
the  other  artificial  (identified  by  some  with 
fj\(KTpov,  whence  the  mistaken  spelling  auri- 
chalcum),  which  Bochart  [Hieroz.  vi.  ch.  16,  p.  S7 1, 

sq.)  considers  to  be  the  Hebrew  ^DL'TI.  a  word 

compounded  (he  says)  of  tM"l3  (copper),  and  Chald. 

N^D   (?  gold,    Ez.  i.  4,   27,   viii.  2);  ¥,KiKrpov, 

I.XX.  ;  electrum,  Vulg.  (aWSrvrrov  xPvaiol/' 
Hesych. ;  to  which  Suid.  adds,  fj.efxiyi.Uvov  uaKcfi 


COR BAN 


351 


Ktxl  \idl.ai).  On  this  substance  see  Pausan.  v.  12  : 
Plin.  xxxiii.  4,  §  23.  Gesenius  considers  the 
Xa^KoAlQavov  of  Rev.  i.  15  to  be  ^oAk^s  Anrapo's 
=  7DKTI ;    he    differs    from  Bochart,  and  argues 

that  it  means  merely  "  smooth  or  polished  brass." 

In  Ez.  xxvii.  13  the  importation  of  copper  ves- 
sels vto  the  markets  of  Tyre  by  merchants  of  Javan, 
Tubal,  aud  Meshech  is  alluded  to.  Probably  these 
were  the  Moschi,  &c,  who  worked  the  copper- 
mines  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Mount  Caucasus. 

In  2  Tim.  iv.  14  x<xA/ceus  is  rendered  "  copper- 
smith," but  the  term  is  perfectly  general,  and  is 
used  even  for  workers  in.  iron  (Od.  ix.  391); 
XoA/cei/s,  ttus  Ttxv'lTrls>  Ka^  &  apyvponSiros  Ka\  6 
Xp<J<r6xoos  (Hesych.). 

"  Copper"  is  used  for  money,  Ez.  xvi.  36  (A.  V. 
"  filthiness ")  ;  e|e'xeas  rbv  xa^K<$v  ffov,  LXX.  ; 
etfusum  est  acs  tuum,  Vulg. ;  and  in  N.  T.  (%aA- 
kous,  rovro  iirl  xpvo~ov  kcu  tov  apyvpov  theyov, 
Hesych.).  [F.  W.  F.] 

CORAL  (nilOKI ;  fxirioopa,  "Pa.fi.69 ;  excelsa, 

sericum).  The  word  occurs  twice  in  A.  V.,  viz. 
Job  xx  viii.  18,  and  Ez.  xxvii.  16,  and  it  is  ex- 
plained by  the  Rabbins  to  signify  red  coral.  This 
meaning  accords  well  enough  with  the  etymology 
of  the  word  (root  DN"I,  to  be  high),  because  of  the 
resemblance  of  the  growth  of  coral  to  that  of  a  tree. 
Roediger  prefers  to  understand  black  coral,  assum- 
ing that  D^B  is  red  coral  (Gesen.  Thes.  p.  1113). 

He  also  suggests  a  connexion  with  the  Sanscrit 
ramye  =  pleasant,  just  as  the  Sanscrit  for  pearl, 
ratna  =  pleasant.  Coral  was  in  higher  esteem 
formerly  as  a  precious  substance  than  now,  pro- 
bably because  the  means  of  obtaining  it  in  a  fine 
state  were  not  so  efficacious  as  those  now  practised. 
The  coral  brought  by  the  merchants  of  Syria  to 
Tyre  must  have  come  from  the  Indian  seas, 
by  the  Euphrates  and  Damascus  (comp.  Plin. 
xxxii.  2).  '     [W.  D.] 

CORBAN  QT)p  ;    SSipov ;  oblatio ;  in  N.  T. 

Kopfiav  expl.  by  8a>pov,  aud  in  Vulg.  donum  :  used 
only  in  Lev.  and  Numb.,  except  in  Ez.  xx.  28, 
xl.  43),  an  offering  to  God  of  any  sort,  bloody  or 
bloodless,  but  particularly  in  fulfilment  of  a  vow. 
The  law  laid  down  rules  for  vows,  1.  affirmative; 
2.  negative.  By  the  former,  persons,  animals, 
and  property  might  be  devoted  to  God,  but  with 
certain  limitations,  they  were  redeemable  by  money 
payments.  By  the  latter,  persons  interdicted  them- 
selves, or  were  interdicted  by  their  parents  from 
the  use  of  certain  things  lawful  in  themselves,  as 
wine,  either  for  a  limited  or  an  unlimited  period 
(Lev.  xxvii.;  Numb.  xxx. ;  Judg.  xiii.  7;  Jer. 
xxxv.;  Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  4.  §4;  B.  J.  ii.  15,  §1  ; 
Acts  xviii.  18,  xxi.  23,  24).  Upon  these  rules  the 
traditionists  enlarged,  and  laid  down  that  a  man 
might  interdict  himself  by  vow,  not  only  from 
using  for  himself,  but  from  giving  to  another,  or 
receiving  from  him  some  particular  object  whether 
of  food  or  any  other  kind   whatsoever.      The  thing 

thus  interdicted  was  considered  as  Corban,  and  the 
form  of  interdiction  was  virtually  to  this  effect: — 
"  I  forbid  myself  to  touch  or  be  concerned  in  any 
v,  i-  with  the  thing  fci bidden,  a    it  it  were  devcisd 

by  law,"  1.  e.  "  ht  it  be  Corban."     So  tin-  did  they 

cany  the  principle  that  they  even  held  as  binding 
the  incomplete  exclamations  of  anger,  and  called 
them  niT.  handles,    A  person  mighl  thus  exempt 


352 


COEBE 


himself  from  assisting  or  receiving  assistance  from 
some  particular  person  or  persons,  as  parents  in 
distress;  and  in  short  from  any  incpnvenient 
obligation  under  plea  of  coiban,  though  by  a  legal 
fiction  he  was  allowed  to  suspend  the  restriction  in 
certain  cases.  It  was  with  practices  of  this  sort 
that  our  Lord  found  fault  (Matt.  xv.  5  ;  Mark 
vii.  11),  as  annulling  the  spirit  of  the  law. 

Theophrastus,  quoted  by  Josephus,  notices  the 
system,  miscalling  it  a  Phoenician  custom,  but  in 
naming  the  word  corbau  identifies  it  with  Judaism. 
Josephus  calls  the  treasury  in  which  offerings  for 
the  temple  or  its  services  were  deposited,  tcopfiavas, 
as  in  Matt,  xxvii.  6.  Origen's  account  of  the  corban- 
system  is  that  children  sometimes  refused  assistance 
to  parents  on  the  ground  that  they  had  already 
contributed  to  the  poor  fund,  from  which  they 
alleged  their  parents  might  be  relieved  (Joseph. 
B.  J.  ii.  9.  §4 ;  Ap.  i.  22  ;  Mishna,  Surenhus. 
de  Votis,  i.  4,  ii.  2 ;  Cappellus,  Grotius,  Ham- 
mond, Lightfoot,  Hor.  Hebr.  on  Matt.  xv.  6 ; 
Jahn,  Arch.  Bibl.  v.  §392,  394).  [Alms  ;  Vows  ; 
Offerings.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

COR'BE  (Xopfie;  Choraba),  1  Esdr.  v.  12. 
This  name  apparently  answers  to  Zaccai  in  the 
lists  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah. 

cord  (bin,  -irv,  irw,  nby).    of  the 

various  purposes  to  which  cord,  including  under 
that  term  rope,  and  twisted  thongs,  was  applied,  the 
following  are  specially  worthy  of  notice.  (1.)  For 
fastening  a  tent,  in  which   sense  "IJVD  is  more 

particularly  used  (e.g.  Ex.  xxxv.  18,  xxxix.  40; 
Is.  liv.  2).  As  the  tent  supplied  a  favourite  image 
of  the  human  body,  the  cords  which  held  it  in  its 
place  represented  the  principle  of  life  (Job  iv.  21, 
"  Are  not  their  tent-cords  (A.  V.  "  excellency," 
torn  away?";  Eccl.  xii.  6).  (2.)  For  leading  or 
binding  animals,  as  a  halter  or  rein  (Ps.  cxviii.  27  ; 
Hos.  xi.  4),  whence  to  "  loosen  the  cord  "  (Job  xxx. 
11)  =  to  free  from  authority.  (3.)  For  yoking 
them  either  to  a  cart  (Is.  v.  18)  or  a  plough 
(Job  xxxix.  10).  (4.)  For  binding  prisoners,  more 
particularly  I"QJ?  (Judg.  xv.  13 ;  Ps.  ii.  3,  cxxix. 

4  ;  Ez.  iii.  25),  whence  the  metaphorical  expres- 
sion "  bands  of  love  "  (Hos.  xi.  4).  (5.)  For  bow- 
strings (Ps.  xi.  2),  made  of  catgut ;  such  are  spoken 
of  in  Judg.  xvi.  7  (QTO  D^TV,    A.  V.  "green 

withs  ;"  but  more  properly  vevpal  vypal,  fresh  or 
moist  bow-strings).  (6.)  For  the  ropes  or  "  tack- 
lings"  of  a  vessel  (Is.  xxxiii.  23).  (7.)  For  mea- 
suring ground,  the  full  expression  being  PHO  7211 

(2  Sam.  viii.  2;  Ps.  lxxviii.  55;  Am.  vii.  17; 
Zech.  ii.  1)  :  hence  to  "  cast  a  cord,"  =  to  assign  a 
property  (Mic.  ii.  5),  and  cord  or  line  became  an 
expression  for  an  inheritance  (Josh.  xvii.  14,  xix.  9  ; 
Ps.  xvi.  6  ;  Ez.  xlvii.  13),  and  even  for  any  defined 
district  (e.  g.  the  line,  or  tract,  of  Argob,  Deut.  iii. 
4).  [Chebel.]  (8.)  For  fishing  and  snaring  [Fish- 
ing, Fowling,  Hunting].  (9.)  For  attachiug 
articles  of  dress ;  as  the  wreathen  chains  (TMV), 
which  were  rather  twisted  cords,  worn  by  the  high- 
priests  (Ex.  xxviii.  14,  22,  24,  xxxix.  15,  17). 
(10.)  For  fastening  awnings  (Esth.  i.  6).  (11.)  For 
attaching  to  a  plummet.  The  line  and  plummet  are 
emblematic  of  a  regular  rule  (2  K.  xxi.  13  ;  Is. 
xxviii.  17)  ;  hence  to  destroy  by  line  and  plummet 
(Is.  xxxiv.  11  ;   Lam.  ii.  8  ;  Am.  vii.  7)  has  been 


CORINTH 

understood  as  =  regular,  systematic  destruction  (aa 
normam  et  libcllam,  Gesen.  Thesava:  p.  125):  it 
may  however  be  referred  to  the  carpenter's  level, 
which  can  only  be  used  on  a  flat  surface  (comp. 
Thenius,  Comm.  in  2  K.  xxi.  13).  (12.)  For  drawing 
water  out  of  a  well,  or  raising  heavy  weights  (Josh, 
ii.  15  ;  Jer.  xxxviii.  6,  13).  To  place  a  rope  on  the 
head  (1  K.  xx.  31)  in  place  of  the  ordinary  head- 
dress was  a  sign  of  abject  submission.  The  mate- 
rials of  which  cord  was  made  varied  according  to 
the  strength  required  ;  the  strongest  rope  was  pro- 
bably made  of  strips  of  camel  hide  as  still  used  by 
the  Bedouins  for  drawing  water  (Burckhardt's 
Notes,  i.  46) ;  the  Egyptians  twisted  these  strips 
together  into  thongs  for  sandals  and  other  pur- 
poses (Wilkinson,  Anc.  Egypt,  iii.  145).  The  finer 
sorts  were  made  of  flax  (Is.  xix.  9).  The  fibre  of 
the  date-palm  was  also  used  (Wilkinson,  iii.  210)  ; 
and  probably  reeds  and  rushes  of  various  kinds,  as 
implied  in  the  origin  of  the  word  a-^oivlov  (Plin. 
xix.  9),  which  is  generally  used  by  the  LXX.  as 
=  ?2n,  and  more  particularly  in  the  word  jlOJN 

(Job  xli.  2)  which  primarily  means  a  reed  ;  in  the 
Talmud  (Erubhin,  fol.  58)  bulrushes,  osier,  and 
flax  are  enumerated  as  the  materials  of  which  rope 
was  made;  in  the  Mishna  (Sotah.  i.  §6)  the  7211 
^¥0  is  explained  as  funis  vimineus  seu  salignus. 
In  the  N.  T.  the  term  crxoivia  is  applied  to  the  whip 
which  our  Saviour  made  (John  ii.  15),  and  to  the 
ropes  of  a  ship  (Acts  xxvii.  32).  Alford  under- 
stands it  in  the  former  passage  of  the  rushes  on 
which  the  cattle  were  littered ;  but  the  ordinary  ren- 
dering cords  seems  more  consistent  with  the  use  oi 
the  term  elsewhere.  [W.  L.  B.] 

COR'E  (Kope,  N.  T.  d  K. ;  Core),  Ecclus.  xlv. 
18  ;  Jude  11.     [Korah,  1.] 

CORIANDER   (15  ;    nipiov ;    coriandrum). 

The  plant  called  Coriandrum  sativum  is  found  in 
Egypt,  Persia,  and  India  (Plin.  xx.  82),  and  has  a 
round  tall  stalk;  it  bears  umbelliferous  white  or 
reddish  flowers,  from  which  arise  globular,  greyish, 
spicy  seed-corns,  marked  with  fine  striae.  It  is 
much  cultivated  in  the  south  of  Europe,  as  its  seeds 
are  used  by  confectioners  and  druggists.  The  Car- 
thaginians called  it  -yoi'5  =  13  (Dioscorid.  iii.  64). 

The  etymology  is  uncertain,  though  it  is  not  impos- 
sible that  the  striated  appearance  of  the  seed-vessels 
may  have  suggested  a  name  derived  from  IIH,  to  cut 

(Ges.).  It  is  mentioned  twice  in  the  Bible  (Ex.  xvi, 
31;  Num.  xi.  7).  In  both  passages  the  manna  is 
likened  to  coriander-seed  as  to  form,  and  in  the 
former  passage  as  to  colour  also.  [W.  P.] 

CORINTH  (KSpivOos).  This  city  is  alike 
remarkable  for  its  distinctive  geographical  position, 
its  eminence  in  Greek  and  Roman  history,  and  its 
close  connexion  with  the  early  spread  of  Christianity. 

Geographically  its  situation  was  so  marked,  that 
the  name  of  its  Isthmus  has  been  given  to  every 
narrow  neck  of  land  between  two  seas.  Thus  it 
was  "  the  bridge  of  the  sea"  (Pind.  Nem.an.  44) 
and  "  the  gate  of  the  Peloponnesus,"  (Xen.  Ages.  2). 
No  invading  army  could  enter  the  Morea  by  land 
except  by  this  way,  and,  without  forcing  some  of  the 
defences  which  have  been  raised  from  one  sea  to  the 
other  at  various  intervals  between  the  great  Persian 
war  and  the  recent  struggles  of  the  Turks  with  the 
modern  Greeks,  or  with  the  Venetians.  But, 
besides  this,  the  site  of  Corinth  is  distinguished  by 


CORINTH 

another  conspicuous  physical  feature — viz.  the 
Acrocorinthits,  a  vast  citadel  of  rock,  which  rises 
abruptly  to  the  height  of  2000  feet  above  the  level 
of  the  sea,  and  the  summit  of  which  is  so  extensive 
that  it  once  contained  a  whole  town.  The  view 
from  this  eminence  is  one  of  the  most  celebrated  in 
the  world.  Besides  the  mountains  of  the  Morea,  it 
embraces  those  on  the  northern  shore  of  the  Corin- 
thian gulf,  with  the  snowy  heights  of  Parnassus  con- 
spicuous above  the  rest.  To  the  east  is  the  Saronic 
gulf,  with  its  islands,  and  the  hills  round  Athens, 
the  Acropolis  itself  being  distinctly  visible  at  a  dis- 
tance of  45  miles.  Immediately  below  the  Acro- 
corinthus,  to  the  north,  was  the  city  of  Corinth,  on 
a  table-land  descending  in  terraces  to  the  low  plain, 
which  lies  between  Cenchreae,  the  harbour  on  the 
Saronic,  and  Lechaeum,  the  harbour  on  the  Corin- 
thian gulf. 

The  situation  of  Corinth,  and  the  possession  of 
these  eastern  and  western  harbours,  are  the  secrets 
of  her  history.  The  earliest  passage  in  her  progress 
to  eminence  was  probably  Phoenician.  But  at  the 
most  remote  period  of  which  we  have  any  sure 
record  we  find  the  Greeks  established  here  in  a 
position  of  wealth  (Horn.  II.  ii.  570 ;  Pind.  01. 
xiii.  4),  and  military  strength  (Thucyd.  i.  13). 
Some  of  the  earliest  efforts  of  Greek  snip-building 
arc  connected  with  Corinth  ;  and  her  colonies  to  the 
westward  were  among  the  first  and  most  flourishing 
sent  out  from  Greece.  So  too  in  the  latest  pas- 
sages  of  Greek  history,  in  the  struggles  with  Mace- 
donia and  Koine,  Corinth  held  a  conspicuous  place. 
After  the  battle  of  Chaeronea  (B.C.  338)  the  Mace- 
donian kings  placed  a  garrison  in  the  Acrocorinthus. 
After  the  battle  of  Cynoscephalae  (B.C.  197)  it  was 
occupied  by  a  Roman  garrison.  Corinth,  however, 
was  constituted  the  head  of  the  Achaean  league. 
Here  the  Roman  ambassadors  were  maltreated;  and 
the  consequence  was  the  utter  ruin  and  destruction 
of  the  city. 

It  is  not  the  true  Greek  Corinth  with  which  we 
have  to  do  in  the  life  of  St.  Paul,  but  the  Corinth 
which  was  rebuilt  and  established  as  a  Roman 
colony.  The  distinction  between  the  two  must  be 
carefully  remembered.  A  period  of  a  hundred 
years  intervened,  during  which  the  place  was 
almost  utterly  desolate.  The  merchants  of  the 
Isthmus  retired  to  Delos.  The  presidency  of  the 
isthmian  games  was  given  to  the  people  of  Sicyon. 
Corinth  seemed  blotted  from  tin' map;  till  Julius 
Caesar  refounded  the  city,  which  thenceforth  was 
called  Column  Julia  Corinthus.  The  new  city  was 
hardly  less  distinguished  than  the  old,  and  h 
acquired  a  fresh  importance  as  the  metropolis  of  the 
Roman  province  of  Aciiaia.  We  find  Gallic-, 
brother  of  the  philosopher  Seneca,  exercising  the 
functions  of  proconsul  here  (Achaia  was  a  senatorial 
province)  during  St.  Paul's  first  residence  at 
Corinth,  in  the  reign  of  Claudius. 

This  residence  continued  fur  a  year  and  six 
months,  and  the  circumstances,  which  occurred 
during  the  course  of  it,  are  related  at  some  length 
(Acts  xviii.  1-18).     St.  Paul  bad  recently  passed 

through  Macedonia.  He  came  to  Corinth  from 
Athens;  shortly  after  bis  arrival  Silas  and  Timo- 
tlu'iis  came  from  .Macedonia  and  rejoined  him;  and 
about  this  time  the  two  epistles  to  the  Thessa- 
lonians  were  ritten  (probably  A. D.  52 or  53),  li 
was  at  Corinth  that  the  apostle  first  became  ac- 
quainted with  Aquila  and  Piiscilla, — and  shortly 
after  bis  departure  Apollos  came  to  this  city  from 
Ephesus  (Acts  xviii.  27). 


CORINTH 


353 


Corinth  was  a  place  of  great  mental  activity,  as 
well  as  of  commercial  and  manufacturing  enterprise. 
Its  wealth  was  so  celebrated  as  to  be  proverbial ; 
so  were  the  vice  and  profligacy  of  its  inhabitants. 
The  worship  of  Venus  here  was  attended  with 
shameful  licentiousness.  All  these  points  are  in- 
directly illustrated  by  passages  in  the  two  epistles 
to  the  Corinthians,  which  were  written  (probably 
A.D.  57)  the  first  from  Ephesus,  the  second  from 
Macedonia,  shortly  before  the  second  visit  to 
Corinth,  which  is  briefly  stated  (Acts  xx.3)  to  have 
lasted  three  months.  During  this  visit  (probably 
A.D.  58)  the  epistle  to  the  Romans  was  written. 
From  the  three  epistles  last  mentioned,  compared 
with  Acts  xxiv.  17,  we  gather  that  St.  Paul  was 
much  occupied  at  this  time  with  a  collection  for  the 
poor  Christians  at  Jerusalem. 

There  are  good  reasons  for  believing  that  when 
St.  Paul  was  at  Ephesus  (a. p.  57)  he  wrote  to  the 
Corinthians  an  epistle  which  has  not  been  preserved 
(see  below,  p.  355,  6)  ;  and  it  is  almost  certain  that 
about  the  same  time  a  short  visit  was  paid  to  Corinth, 
of  which  no  account  is  given  in  the  Acts. 

It  has  been  well  observed  that  the  great  number 
of  Latin  names  of  persons  mentioned  in  the  epistle 
to  the  Romans  is  in  harmony  with  what  we  know 
of  the  colonial  origin  of  a  large  part  of  the  popula- 
tion of  Corinth.  From  Acts  xviii.  we  may  conclude 
that  there  were  many  Jewish  converts  in  the 
Corinthian  church,  though  it  would  appear  (1  Cor. 
xii.  2)  that  the  Gentiles  predominated.  On  the 
other  hand  it  is  evident  from  the  whole  tenor  of 
botn  epistles  that  the  Judaising  element  was  very 
strong  at  Corinth.  Party-spirit  also  was  extremely 
prevalent,  the  names  of  Paul,  Peter,  and  Apollos 
being  used  as  the  watchwords  of  restless  factions 
Among  the  eminent.  Christians  who  lived  at  Corinth 
were  Stephanas  (1  Cor.  i.  16,  xvi.  15,  17),  Crispus 
(Acts  xviii.  8;  1  Cor.  i.  14),  Caius  (Rom.  xvi. 
23;  1  Cor.  i.  14),  and  Erastus  (Rom.  xvi.  23;  2 
Tim.  iv.  20).  The  epistles  of  Clement  to  the 
Corinthians  are  among  the  most  interesting  of  the 
post-apostolic  writings.  Corinth  is  still  an  episcopal 
see.  The  cathedral  church  of  St.  Nicolas,  "a  verv 
mean  place  for  such  an  ecclesiastical  dignity,"  used 
in  Turkish  times  to  be  in  the  Acrocorinthus.  The 
city  has  now  shrunk  to  a  wretched  village,  on  the 
old  site,  and  bearing  the  old  name,  which,  however, 
is  often  corrupted  into  Gort/to. 

Pausanias,in  describing  the  antiquities  of  Corinth 
as  they  existed  in  his  day,  distinguishes  clearly 
between  those  which  belonged  to  the  old  Greek 
city,  and  those  which  were  of  Roman  origin.  Two 
relics  of  Roman  work  are  still  to  be  seen,  one  a 
heap  of  brick-work  which  may  have  been  pait  of 
the  baths  erected  by  Hadrian,  the  other  the  remains 
of  an  amphitheatre  with  subterranean  arrangements 
for  gladiators.  Far  more  interesting  are  the  ruins 
of  the  ancient  Greek  temple, — the  "old  columns, 
which  have  looked  down  on  the  rise,  the  prosperity 
and  the  desolation  of  two  [in  feet,  three]  successive 
Corinths."  At  the  time  of  Wheler's  visit  in  1676 
twelve  columns  were  standing:  before  1795  they 
were  reduced  to  live;  and  further  injury  has  very 
recently  been  inflicted  by  an  earthquake.  It  is 
believed  that  this  temple  is  the  oldest  of  which  any 

remains  are  left  in  Greece.  The  fountain  of 
Peirene,  "  full  of  sweet  and  clear  water,"  as  it  is 
described  by  Strabo,  is  still  to  be  seen  in  the  Acro- 
corinthus, as  well  as  the  fountains  in  the  lower 
city,  of  which  it  was  supposed  by  him  andPausanias 

to  be  tin-  BOUrce.      The  walls   on    (lie  Aeioeorinthus 

2   A 


354 


CORINTHIANS 


were  in  part  erected  by  the  Venetians,  who  held 
Corinth  for  twenty- rive  years  in  the  17th  century. 
This  city  and  its  neighbourhood  have  been  de- 
cribed  by  many  travellers,  but  we  must  especially 
refer  to'  Leake's  Morea,  iii.  229-3U4  (London, 
1830),  and  his  Peloponnesiaca,  p.  392  (London, 
1846),  Curtius,  Peloponnesos,  ii.  p.  514  (Gotha, 
1851-1852);  Clark,  Peloponnesus,  pp.  42-61  (Lon- 
don, 1858).  There  are  four  German  monographs 
on  the  subject,  Wilckens,  Rerum  Corinthiacarum 
specimen  ad  illustrationem  utriasque  Epistolae 
Paulinae,  Bremen,  1747  ;  Walch,  Antiquitates 
Corinthiacae,  Jena,  1761  ;  Wagner,  Rerum  Co- 
rinthiacarum specimen,  Darmstadt,  1824  ;  Barth, 
Corinthiorum  Commercii  et  Mercaturae  Historiae 
particula,  Berlin,  1844. 

This  article  would  be  incomplete  without  some 
notice  of  the  Posidonium,  or  sanctuary  of  Neptune, 
the  scene  of  the  Isthmian  games,  from  which  St. 
Paul  borrows  some  of  his  most  striking  imagery  in 
1  Cor.  and  other  epistles.  This  sanctuary  was  a 
short  distance  to  the  N.E.  of  Corinth,  at  the  nar- 
nowest  part  of  the  Isthmus,  near  the  harbour  of 
Schoenus  (now  Kalamdki)  on  the  Saronic  gulf. 
The  wall  of  the  iuclosure  can  still  be  traced.  It  is 
of  an  irregular  shape,  determined  by  the  form  of  a 
natural  platform  at  the  edge  of  a  ravine.  The 
fortifications  of  the  Isthmus  followed  this  ravine 
and  abutted  at  the  east  upon  the  inclosure  of  the 
sanctuary,  which  thus  served  a  military  as  well  as 
a  religious  purpose.  The  exact  site  of  the  temple 
is  doubtful,  and  none  of  the  objects  of  interest 
remain,  which  Pausanias  describes  as  seen  by  him 
within  the  inclosure:  but  to  the  south  are  the 
remains  of  the  stadium,  where  the  foot-races  were 
run  (1  Cor.  ix.  24) :  to  the  east  are  those  of  the 
theatre,  which  was  probably  the  scene  of  the 
pugilistic  contests  (ib.  26) :  and  abundant  on  the 
shore  are  the  small  green  pine-trees  (ireuKai)  which 
gave  the  fading  wreath  (ib.  25)  to  the  victors  in 
the  games.  An  inscription  found  here  in  1676 
(now  removed  to  Verona)  affords  a  valuable  illus- 
tration of  the  interest  taken  in  these  games  in 
Roman  times  (Boeckh,  No.  1104).  The  French 
map  of  the  Morea  does  not  include  the  Isthmus ; 
so  that,  till  recently,  Col.  Leake's  sketch  (repro- 
duced by  Curtius)  has  been  the  only  trustworthy 
representation  of  the  scene  of  the  Isthmian  games. 
But  the  ground  has  been  more  minutely  examined 
by  Mr.  Clark,  who  gives  us  a  more  exact  plan.  In 
the  immediate  neighbourhood  of  this  sanctuary  are 
the  traces  of  the  canal,  which  was  begun  and  dis- 
continued by  Nero  about  the  time  of  St.  Paul's 
first  visit  to  Corinth.  [J.  S.  H.] 


Diilrachm  of  Corinth  (Attic  talent).     Obv.,  Head  of  Minerva,  to 
right.    Rev.,  Pegasus,  to  right ;  below,  9. 

CORINTHIANS,  FIRST  EPISTLE  TO 
THE,  was  written  by  the  Apostle  St.  Paul  toward 
the  close  of  his  nearly  three-year  stay  at  Ephesus 
(Acts  xix.  10,  xx.  31;  see  the  subscription  in  B 
and  in  Copt.  Vers.),  which  we  learn  from  1  Cor. 
xvi.  8,  probably  terminated  with  the  Pentecost  of 
A.D.  57  or  58.      Some  supposed  allusions  to  the 


CORINTHIANS 

passover  in  ch.  v.  7,  8,  have  led  recent  critics  (see 
Meyer  in  toe),  not  without  a  show  of  probability, 
to  fix  upon  Easter  as  the  exact  time  of  composition. 
The  bearers  were  probably  (according  to  the  common 
subscription)  Stephanas,  Fortunatus,  and  Achaicus, 
who  had  been  'recently  sent  to  the  Apostle,  and 
who,  in  the  conclusion  of  this  epistle  (ch.  xvi.  17), 
are  especially  commended  to  the  honourable  regard 
of  the  church  of  Corinth. 

This  varied  and  highly  characteristic  letter  was 
addressed  riot  to  any  party,  but  to  the  whole  body 
of  the  large  (Acts  xviii.  8,  10)  Judaeo-Gentile 
(Acts  xviii.  4)  church  df  Corinth,  and  appears  to 
have  been  called  forth,  1st,  by  the  information  the 
Apostle'  had  received  from  members  of  the.  house- 
hold of  Chloe  (ch.  i.  11),  of  the  divisions  that  were 
existing  among  them,  which  were  of  so  grave  a 
nature  as  to  have  already  induced  the  Apostle  to 
desire  Timothy  to  visit  Corinth  (ch.  iv.  17)  after 
his  journey  to  Macedonia  (Acts  xix.  22)  ;  2ndly, 
by  the  information  he  had  received  of  a  grievous 
case  of  incest  (ch.  v.  1),  and  of  the  defective  state 
of  the  Corinthian  converts,  not  only  in  regard  of 
general  habits  (ch.  vi.  1,  sq.)  and  church  discipline 
(ch.  xi.  20,  sq.),  but,  as  it  would  also  seem,  of  doc- 
trine (ch.  xv.) ;  3rdly,  by  the  inquiries  that  had 
been  specially  addressed  to  St.  Paul  by  the  church, 
of  Corinth  on  several  matters  relating  to  Christian 
practice. 

The  contents  of  this  epistle  are  thus  extremely 
varied,  and  in  the  present  article  almost  preclude  a 
more  specific  analysis  than  we  here  subjoin.  The 
Apostle  opens  with  his  usual  salutation  and  with  an 
expression  of  thankfulness  for  their  general  state  of 
Christian  progiess  (ch.  i.  1-9).  He  then  at  once 
passes  on  to  the  lamentable  divisions  there  were 
among  them,  and  incidentally  justifies  his  own  con- 
duct and  mode  of  preaching  (ch.  i.  10,  iv.  16),  con- 
cluding with  a  notice  of  the  mission  of  Timothy, 
and  of  an  intended  authoritative  visit  on  his  own 
part  (ch.  iv.  17-21).  The  Apostle  next  deals  with 
the  case  of  incest  that  had  taken  place  among  them, 
and  had  provoked  no  censure  (cli.  v.  1-8),  noticing, 
as  he  passes,  some  previous  remarks  he  had  made 
upon  not  keeping  company  with  fornicators  (ch.  v. 
9-13).  He  then  comments  on  their  evil  practice  of 
litigation  before  heathen  tribunals  (ch.  vi.  1-8),  and 
again  reverts  to  the  plague-spot  in  Corinthian  life, 
fornication  and  uncleanness  (ch.  vi.  9-20).  The 
last  subject  naturally  paves  the  way  for  his  answers 
to  their  inquiries  about  marriage  (ch.  vii.  1-24), 
and  about  the  celibacy  of  virgins  and  widows  (ch. 
vii.  25-40).  The  Apostle  next  makes  a  transition 
to  the  subject  of  the  lawfulness  of  eating  things 
sacrificed  to  idols,  and  Christian  freedom  generally 
(ch.  viii.),  which  leads,  not  unnaturally,  to  a  di- 
gression on  the  maimer  in  which  he  waved  his 
Apostolic  privileges,  and  performed  his  Apostolic 
duties  (ch.  ix.).  He  then  reverts  to  and  concludes 
the  subject  of  the  use  of  things  offered  to  idols  (ch. 
x.-xi.  1),  and  passes  onward  to  reprove  his  converts 
for  their  behaviour  in  the  assemblies  of  the  church, 
both  in  respect  to  women  prophesying  and  praying 
with  uncovered  heads  (ch.  xi.  2-16),  and  also  their 
great  irregularities  in  the  celebration  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  (ch.  xi.  17-34).  Then  follow  full  and 
minute  instructions  on  the  exercise  of  spiritual  gifts 
(ch.  xii.-xiv.),  in  which  is  included  the  noble  pane- 
gyric of  charity  (ch.  xiii.),  and  further  a  defence  of 
the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  about 
which  doubts  and  difficulties  appeal-  to  have  arisen 
in  this  unhappily  divided  church  (ch.  xv.).     The 


CORINTHIANS 

epistle  closes  with  some  directions  concerning  the 
contributions  for  the  saints  at  Jerusalem  (eh.  xvi. 
1-4),  brief  notices  of  his  own  intended  movements 
(ch.  xvi.  5-9),  commendation  to  them  of  Timothy 
and  others  (ch.  xvi.  10-18),  greetings  from  the 
churches  (ch.  xvi.  19,  20),  and  an  autograph  saluta- 
tion and  benediction  (ch.  xvi.  21-24). 

With  regard  to  the  genuineness  and  authenticity 
of  this  epistle  no  doubt  has  ever  been  entertained. 
The  external  evidences  (Clem.  Rom.  ad  Cor.  ch.  47, 
49  ;  Polyearp,  ad  Phil.  ch.  1 1  ;  Ignat.  ad  Eph.  ch. 
2;  Irenaeus,  Haer.  iii.  11.  9,  iv.  27.  3  ;  Athenag. 
de  Eesurr.  p.  61,  ed.  Col.;  Clem.  Alex.  Paedag. 
i.  33;  Tertull.  de  Praescr.  ch.  33)  are  extremely 
distinct,  and  the  character  of  the  composition  such, 
that  if  any  critic  should  hereafter  be  bold  enough 
to  question  the  con'ectness  of  the  ascription,  he  must 
be  prepared  to  extend  it  to  all  the  epistles  that  bear 
the  name  of  the  great  Apostle.  The  baseless  as- 
sumption of  Bolten  and  Bertholdt  that  this  epistle 
is  a  translation  of  an  Aramaic  original  requires  no 
confutation.  See  further  testimonies  in  Lardner, 
Credibility,  ii.  36,  sq.  8vo,  and  Davidson,  Intro- 
duction, ii.  253,  sq. 

Two  special  points  deserve  separate  consideration  : 
1.  The  state  of  parties  at  Corinth  at  the  time 
of  the  Apostle's  writing.  On  this  much  has  been 
written,  and,  it  does  not  seem  too  much  to  say, 
more  ingenuity  displayed  than  sound  and  sober 
criticism.  The  tew  facts  supplied  to  us  by  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and  the  notices  in  the  epistle, 
appear  to  be  as  follows : — The  Corinthian  church 
was  planted  by  the  Apostle  himself  (1  Cor.  iii.  6), 
in  his  second  missionary  journey,  after  his  departure 
from  Athens  (Acts  xviii.  1,  sq.).  He  abode  in  the 
city  a  year  and  a  half  (ch.  xviii.  11),  at  first  in  the 
house  of  Aquila  and  Piiscilla  (ch.  xviii.  3),  and 
afterwards,  apparently  to  mark  emphatically  the 
factious  nature  of  the  conduct  of  the  Jews,  in  the 
house  of  the  proselyte  Justus.  A  short  time  after 
the  Apostle  had  left  the  city  the  eloquent  Jew  of 
Alexandria,  Apollos,  after  having  received,  when  at 
Ephesus,  more  exact  instruction  in  the  Gospel  from 
Aquila  and  Priscilla,  went  to  Corinth  (Acts  xix.  1), 
where  he  preached,  as  we  may  perhaps  infer  from 
St.  Paul's  comments  on  his  own  mode  of  preaching, 
in  a  manner  marked  by  unusual  eloquence  and 
persuasiveness  (comp.  ch.  ii.  1,  4).  There  is,  how- 
ever, no  reason  for  concluding  that  the  substance  of 
th.'  teaching  was  in  any  respect  different  from  that 
of  St.  Paul;  for  see  ch.  i.  18,  xvi.  12.  This  cir- 
cumstance of  the  visit  of  Apollos,  owing  to  the 
sensuous  and  carnal  spirit  which  marked  the  church 
of  Corinth,  appeal's  to  have  formed  the  commence- 
ment of  a  gradual  division  into  two  parties,  the 
followers  of  St.  Paul,  and  the  tbllgwers  of  Apollos 
(comp.  ch.  iv.  6).  These  divisions,  however,  were 
to  be  multiplied;  fur,  as  it  would  seem,  shortly 
after  the  departure  of  Apollos,  Judaizing  teachers, 
supplied  probably  with  letters  of  commendation 
(2  Cor.  iii.  1)  from  the  church  of  Jerusalem,  appear 
to  have  come  to  Corinth  and  to  have  preached  the 
Gospel  in  a  spirit  of  direct  antagonism  to  St.  Paul 
personally,  in  every  way  seeking  to  depress  his 
claims  to  he  considered  an  Apostle  (1  Cor.  xi.  2), 
and  to  exalt,  those  of  the  Twelve,  and  perhaps 
especially  of  St.  Peter  (ch.  i.  12).  To  this  third 
party,  which  appears  to  have  been  characterized  by 
a  spirit  of  excessive  bitterness  and  faction,  we  may 
perhaps  add  a  fourth  that,  under  the  name  of"  the 
followers  of  Christ"  (ch.  i.  12),  sought  at  first  to 
separate  themselves  from   the  factions  adherence  to 


CORINTHIANS 


355 


particular  teachers,  but  eventually  were  driven  by 
antagonism  into  positions  equally  sectarian  and 
inimical  to  the  unity  of  the  church.  At  this  mo- 
mentous period,  before  parties  had  become  con- 
solidated, and  had  distinctly  withdrawn  from  com- 
munion with  one  another,  the  Apostle  writes;  and 
in  the  outset  of  the  epistle  (ch.  i.— iv.  21)  we  have 
his  noble  and  impassioned  piotest  against  this  four- 
fold rending  of  the  robe  of  Christ.  This  spirit  ot 
division  -appears,  by  the  good  providence  of  God, 
to  have  eventually  yielded  to  His  Apostle's  rebuke, 
as  it  is  noticeable  that  Clement  of  Pome,  in  his 
epistle  to  this  church  (ch.  47),  alludes  to  these 
evils  as  long  past,  and  as  but  slight  compared  to 
those  which  existed  in  his  own  time.  For  further 
infoimation,  beside  that  contained  in  the  writings 
of  Neander,  Davidson,  Coiiybeaie  and  Howson,  and 
others,  the  student  may  be  referred  to  the  special 
treatises  of  Schenkel,  de  Eccl.  Cor.  (Basel,  1838), 
Kniewel,  Eccl.  Cor.  Disscnsioncs  (Gedan.  1841), 
Becker,  Partheiungen  in  die  Gemeinde  z.  Kor. 
(Altona,  1841),  Pabiger,  Ent.  Untersuch.  (Bresl. 
1847);  but  lie  cannot  be  too  emphatically  warned 
against  that  tendency  to  construct  a  definite  histoiy 
out  of  the  iewest  possible  facts,  that  marks  most  ot 
these  discussions. 

2.  The  number  of  epistles  written  by  St.  Paul  to 
the  Corinthian  church.  This  will  probably  lemairi 
a  subject  of  controversy  to  the  end  of  time.  On 
the  one  side  we  have  the  a  priori  objections  that  an 
epistle  of  St.  Paul  should  have  ever  been  lost  to 
the  church  of  Christ ;  on  the  other  we  have  certain 
expressions  which  seem  inexplicable  on  any  other 
hypothesis.  As  it  seems  our  duty  here  to  express 
an  opinion,  we  may  briefly  say  that  the  well  known 
words,  eypaTpa  xifiiv  iv  rfj  imirToAfj,  /u}j  ffvvava- 
Ixi-yvvaQai  Tt6pvois  (ch.  v.  9);  do  certainly  seem  to 
point  to  some  former  epistolary  communication  to 
the  church  of  Corinth — not  from  linguistic,  but  from 
simple  exegetical  considerations:  for  it  does  seem 
impossible  either  to  refer  the  definite  fii)  <rvvava.fxi.yv. 
k.  t.  \.  to  what  has  preceded  in  ver.  2  or  ver.  6,  or 
to  conceive  that  the  words  refer  to  the  command 
which  the  Apostle  is  now  giving  for  the  first  time. 
The  whole  context  seems  in  favour  of  a  former 
command  given  to  the  Corinthians,  but  interpreted 
by  them  so  literally  as  here  to  require  further  ex- 
planation. It  is  not  right  to  suppress  the  fact  that 
the  Greek  commentators  are  of  the  contrary  opinion, 
nor  must  we  overlook  the  objection  that  no  notice 
has  been  taken  of  the  lost  epistle  by  any  writers  of 
antiquity.  Against  this  last  objection  it  may  per- 
haps be  urged  that  the  letter  might  have  been  so 
short,  and  so  distinctly  occupied  with  specific  di- 
rections to  this  particular  church,  as  never  to  have 
gained  circulation  beyond  it.  Our  present  epistles, 
it  should  be  remembered,  are  not  addressed  exclu- 
sively to  the  Christians  at  Corinth  (see  1  Cor.  i.  2  ; 
2  Cor.  i.  1).  A  special  treatise  on  this  subject  (in 
opposition,  however,  to  the  view  here  taken),  and 
the  number  of  St.  Paul's  journeys  to  Corinth,  lias 
been  written  bv  Miiller,  de  T,Hms  Pauli  Itin.,  $C. 
(Basil,  1831)." 

The  apocryphal  letter  of  the  church  of  Corinth 
to    St.    Paul,   and    St.    Paul's    answer,   existing    in 
Armenian,  are  worthless  productions  thai  d< 
no  consideration,   but   may    be   alluded   to  only  as  . 
perhaps  affording  some  slight  evidence  of  an  early 
belief  that  the  Apostle  had  written  to  b;s  co 
more  than  twice.     The  original  Armenian,  with  a 
translation,  will  be  found  in  Aucher,  Arm.  Gram- 
mar, p.  L43-1  '11 . 

2   A   2 


356 


CORINTHIANS 


The  editions  of  these  epistles  have  been  some- 
what numerous.  Among  the  best  are  those  of 
Billroth  (Leipz.  1833),  Riickert  (Leipz.  1836), 
Olshausen  (Kbnigsb.  1840),  De  Wette  (Leipz. 
1845),  Osiander (Stuttg.  1847),  Meyer(1845),  and 
in  our  own  country,  Peile  (Lond.  1848),  Alford 
(Load.  1856),and  Stanley  (Lond.  1858).  [C.J.  E.] 

CORINTHIANS,  SECOND  EPISTLE  TO 
THE,  was  written  a  few  months  subsequently  to 
the  tirst,  in  the  same  year, — and  thus,  if  the  dates 
assigned  to  the  former  epistle  be  correct,  about  the 
autumn  of  A.D.  57  or  58,  a  short  time  previous  to 
the  Apostle's  three  months'  stay  in  Achaia  (Acts 
xx.  3).  The  place  whence  it  was  written  was 
clearly  not  Ephesus  (see  ch.  i.  8),  but  Macedonia 
(eh.  vii.  5,  viii.  1,  ix.  2),  whither  the  Apostle  went 
by  way  of  Troas  (ch.  ii.  12),  after  waiting  a  short 
time  in  the  latter  place  for  the  return  of  Titus 
(ch.  ii.  13).  The  Vatican  MS.,  the  bulk  of  later 
MSS.,  and  the  old  Syr.  version,  assign  Philippi  as 
the  exact  place  whence  it  wras  written ;  but  for  this 
assertion  we  have  no  certain  grounds  to  relv  on : 
that  the  bearers,  however,  were  Titus>  and  his 
associates  (Luke  ?)  is  apparently  substantiated  by 
ch.  viii.  23,  ix.  3,  5. 

The  epistle  was  occasioned  by  the  information 
which  the  Apostle  had  received  from  Titus,  and 
also,  as  it  would  certainly  seem  probable,  from 
Timothy,  of  the  reception  pf  the  first  epistle.  It 
has  indeed  recently  been  doubted  by  Neander, 
De  Wette,  and  others,  whether  Timothy,  who  had 
been  definitely  sent  to  Corinth  (1  Cor.  iv.  17)  by 
way  of  Macedonia  (Acts  six.  22),  really  reached  his 
destination  (comp.  1  Cor.  xvi.  10) ;  and  it  has  been 
urged  that  the  mission  of  Timothy  would  hardly 
have  been  left  unnoticed  in  2  Cor.  xii.  17,  18  (see 
Riickert,  Comm.  p.  409).  To  this,  however,  it 
has  been  replied,  apparently  convincingly,  that  as 
Timothy  is  an  associate  in  writing  the  epistle,  any 
notice  of  his  own  mission  in  the  third  person  would 
have  seemed  inappropriate.  His  visit  was  assumed 
as  a  fact,  and  as  one  that  naturally  made  him  an 
associate  with  the  Apostle  in  writing  to  the  church 
he  had  so  lately  visited. 

It  is  more  difficult  to  assign  the  precise  reason 
for  the  mission  of  Titus.  That  he  brought  back 
tidings  of  the  reception  which  St.  Paul's  first  epistle 
had  met  with  seems  perfectly  clear  (ch.  vii.  6,  sq.), 
but  whether  he  was  specially  sent  to  ascertain  this, 
or  whether  to  convey  fresh  directions,  cannot  be 
ascertained.  There  is  a  show  of  plausibility  in  the 
supposition  of  Bleek  (Stud.  u.  Krit.  for  1830, 
p.  625),  followed  more  recently  by  Neander  (Pflnnz. 
u.  Lett.  p.  437),  that  the  Apostle  had  made  Titus 
the  bearer  of  a  letter  couched  in  terms  of  decided 
severity,  now  lost,  to  which  he  is  to  be  supposed  to 
refer  in  ch.  ii.  3  (compared  with  ver.  4,  9),  vii.  8, 
11,  sq.;  but,  as  has  been  justly  urged  (see  Meyer, 
Einleit.  p.  3),  there  is  quite  enough  of  severity  in 
the  first  epistle  (consider  ch.  iv.  18-21,  v.  2,  sq., 
vi.  5-8,  xi.  17)  to  call  forth  the  Apostle's  affectionate 
anxiety.  If  it  be  desirable  to  hazard  a  conjecture 
on  this  mission  of  Titus,  it  would  seem  most  natural 
to  suppose  that  the  return  of  Timothy  and  the  in- 
telligence he  conveyed  might  have  been  such  as  to 
make  the  Apostle  feel  the  necessity  of  at  once 
despatching  to  the  contentious  church  one  of  his 
immediate  followers,  with  instructions  to  support 
and  strengthen  the  effect  of  the  epistle,  and  to  bring 
back  the  most  recent  tidings  of  the  spirit  that  was 
prevailing  at  Corinth. 


CORINTHIANS 

These  tidings,  as  it  would  seem  from  our  present 
epistle,  were  mainly  favourable ;  the  better  part, 
of  the  church  were  returning  back  to  their  spiritual 
allegiance  to  their  founder  (ch.  i.  13, 14,  vii.  9,  15, 
16),  but  there  was  still  a  faction,  possibly  of  the 
Judaizing  members  (comp.  ch.  xi.  22),  that  were 
sharpened  into  even  a  more  keen  animosity  against 
the  Apostle  personally  (ch.  x.  1,  10),  and  more 
strenuously  denied  his  claim  to  Apostleship. 

The  contents  of  this  epistle  are  thus  very  varied, 
but  may  perhaps  be  roughly  divided  into  three 
parts: — 1st,  the  Apostle's  account  of  the  character 
of  his  spiritual  labours,  accompanied  with  notices 
of  his  affectionate  feelings  towards  his  converts 
(ch.  i.-vii.)  ;  2ndly,  directions  about  the  collections 
(ch.  viii.,  ix.)  ;  3rdly,  defence  of  his  own  Apostolical 
character  (ch.  x.-xiii.  10).  A  close  analysis  is 
scarcely  compatible  with  the  limits  of  the  present 
article,  as  in  no  one  of  the  Apostle's  epistles  are  the 
changes  more  rapid  and  frequent.  Now  he  thanks 
God  for  their  general  state  (ch.  i.  3,  sq.)  ;  now  he 
glances  to  his  purposed  visit  (ch.  i.  15,  sq.);  now 
he  alludes  to  the  special  directions  in  the  first  letter 
(ch.  ii.  3,  sq.)  ;  again  he  returns  to  his  own  plans 
(ch.  ii.  12,  sq.),  pleads  his  own  Apostolic  dignity 
(ch.  iii.  1,  sq.),  dwells  long  upon  the  spirit  mid 
nature  of  his  own  labours  (ch.  iv.  1,  sq.),  his  own 
hopes  (ch.  v.  1,  sq.),  and  his  own  sufferings  (ch.  vi. 

I,  sq»),  returning  again  to  more  specific  declarations 
of  his  love  towards  his  children  in  the  faith  (ch.  vi. 

II,  sq.),  and  a  yet  further  declaration  of  his  views 
and  feelings  with  regard  to  them  (ch.  vii.).  Then 
again,  in  the  matter  of  the  alms,  he  stirs  up  their 
liberality  by  alluding  to  the  conduct  of  the  churches 
of  Macedonia  (ch.  viii.  1,  sq.),  their  spiritual  pro- 
gress (ver.  7),  the  example  of  Christ  (ver.  9),  and 
passes  on  to  speak  more  fully  of  the  present  mission 
of  Titus  and  his  associates  (ver.  18,  sq.),  and  to 
reiterate  his  exhortations  to  liberality  (ch.  ix.  1,  sq.). 
In  the  third  portion  he  passes  into  language  of 
severitv  and  reproof;  he  gravely  warns  those  who 
presume  to  hold  lightly  his  Apostolical  authority 
(ch.  x.  1,  sq.);  he  puts  strongly  forward  his  Apo- 
stolical dignity  (ch.  xi.  5,  sq.)  ;  he  illustrates  his 
forbearance  (ver.  8,  sq.)  ;  he  makes  honest  boast  of 
his  labours  (ver.  23,  sq.) ;  he  declares  the  revela- 
tions vouchsafed  to  him  (ch.  xii.  1,  sq.)  ;  he  again 
returns  to  the  nature  of  his  dealings  with  his  con- 
verts (ver.  12,  sq.),  and  concludes  with  grave  and 
reiterated  warning  (ch.  xiii.  1,  sq.),  brief  greetings, 
and  a  doxology  (ver.  11-14). 

The  genuineness  and  authenticity  is  supported  by 
the  most  decided  external  testimony  (Irenaeus,  Haer.' 
iii.  7.  1,  iv.  28.  3;  Athenagoras,  de  Resurr.  p.  61, 
ed.  Col.;  Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  iii.  94,  iv.  101; 
Tertull.  de  Pudipit.  ch.  13),  and  by  internal  evi- 
dence of  such  a  kind  that  what  has  been  said  on 
this  point  in  respect  of  the  first  epistle  is  here  even 
still  more  applicable.  The  only  doubts  that  mo- 
dern pseudo -criticism  has  been  able  to  bring  for- 
ward relate  to  the  unity  of  the  epistle,  but  are  not 
such  as  seem  to  deserve  serious  consideration  (see 
Meyer,  Einleit.  p.  7). 

The  principal  historical  difficulty  connected  with 
the  epistle  relates  to  the  number  of  visits  made  by 
the  Apostle  to  the  church  of  Corinth.  The  words 
of  this  epistle  (ch.  xii.  14,  xiii.  1,  2)  seem  distinctly 
to  imply  that  St.  Paul  had  visited  Corinth  twice 
before  the  time  at  which  he  now  writes.  St.  Luke, 
however,  only  mentions  one  visit  prior  to  that  time 
(Acts  xviii.  1,  sq.');  for  the  visit  recorded  in  Acts 
xx.  2,  3,  is  confessedly  subsequent.    If  with  Grotius 


CORMORANT 

and  others  we  assume  that  in  ch.  xii.  14  rpirov 
belongs  to  krolfxws  ^X°°r  aRd  not  to  i\6e7v  Trpos 
bfxas,  we  still  have  iu  ch.  xiii.  1  the  definite  words 
rp'iTOV  tovto  fpxop.ai,  which  seem  totally  to  pre- 
clude any  other  meaning  than  this — that  the  Apostle 
had  visited  them  twice  before,  and  was  now  ou  the 
eve  of  going  a  second  time.  The  ordinary  subterfuge 
that  epxofJ-ai  is  here  equivalent  to  froi/xcos  ex® 
iAOelv  (so  actually  A,  the  Arabic  [Erp.],  and  the 
Coptic  versions)  is  grammatically  indefensible,  and 
would  never  have  been  thought  of  if  the  narrative 
of  the  Acts  had  not  seemed  to  require  it.  We  must 
assume  then  that  the  Apostle  made  a  visit  to 
Corinth  which  St.  Luke  was  not  moved  to  record, 
and  which,  from  its  probably  short  duration,  might 
easily  have  been  omittai  in  a  narrative  that  is  more 
a  general  history  of  the  church  in  the  lives  of  its 
chief  teachers,  than  a  chronicle  of  annalistic  detail. 
So  Chrysostom  and  his  followers,  Oecumenius  and 
Theophylact,  and  in  recent  times,  Miiller  (de  Tribus 
Fault  Ttin.  Basil,  1831),  Anger  (Bat.  Temp.  p.  70, 
sq.),  Wieseler  (Chronol.  p.  239),  and  the  majority 
of  modern  critics.  It  has  formed  a  further  subject 
of  question  whether,  on  this  supposition,  the  visit 
to  Corinth  is  to  be  regarded  only  as  the  return 
there  from  a  somewhat  lengthened  excursion  during 
the  18 -month  stay  at  that  city  (Anger),  or  whether 
it  is  to  be  referred  to  the  period  of  the  3-year 
residence  at  Ephesus.  The  latter  has  most  sup- 
porters, and  seems  certainly  most  natural;  see 
Wieseler,  Chronol.  1.  c,  and  Meyer,  Einleit.  p.  6. 

The  commentaries  on  this  epistle  are  somewhat 
numerous,  and  the  same  as  those  mentioned  in  the 
article  on  the  former  epistle.  No  portion  of  the 
Apostle's  writings  deserves  more  careful  study,  as 
placing  before  us  the  striking  power  of  Christian 
rhetoric,  which  distinguished  its  great  and  inspired 
author.  [C.  J.  E.] 

CORMORANT,  the  representative  in  A.  V. 
of  two  distinct  Hebrew  words,  JINp  and  'ipCJJ.    For 

the  former  see  Is.  xxxiv.  11,  and  Zeph.  ii.  14,  where 
the  marginal  reading  is  "  pelican,"  and  the  Vulg. 
has  onocrotalns,  and  this  no  doubt  is  the  correct  ren- 
dering [Pelican].  "TpW  (Karapa.KT7is,mergalus) 
is  found  in  the  catalogues  of  unclean  birds  in  Lev. 
\i.  17;  Deut.  xiv.  17;  and  is  probably  correctly 
translated  cormorant.  The  etymology  of  the  word, 
from  TptP,  to  throw,  to  cast  down,  suits  the  plunging 

habits  of  the  cormorant  in  catching  its  prey;  and 
mi  doubt  there  is  reference  to  the  same  characteristic 
in  the  Greek  name  Karapa.KTr)s.  The  scientific 
name  of  the  cormorant  is  Pelicanus  bassamts,  Linn. 
It  belongs  to  the  family  Colymbidae  of  the  order 
Natatores.  [W.  D.] 

CORN  (J3T1).  The  most  common  kinds  were 
wheat,  n^ri;   barley,  T\y\*>  ;  spelt  (A.  V.,  Ex.  ix. 

32,  and  Is.  xxviii.  25,  "lie;"  Ez.  iv.  9,  "fitches") 
nDD3  (or  in  plur.  form  D'DEfi) ;  and  millet,  |rTl  : 
cits  are  mentioned  only  by  rabbinical  writers.     The 


CORNELIUS 


357 


a  This  seems  the  general  word  for  corn  as  it 
grows.  An  ear  is  D  ?2L'' ",  standing  corn  is  |"l£p  ;  the 
word  for  grain  in  its  final  state  as  fit  for  food  is  12 
apparently  from   the  same   word,   "12,  pure :  camp. 


the  Arab.   ^,  wheat,  and   ^,  pure,  i.  e.   as  sifted. 


doubtful  word  n"uB>,  rendered  "  principal,"  as  an 

epithet  of  wheat,  in  the  A.  V.  of  Is.  xxviii.  25, 
is  probably  not  distinctive  of  any  species  of  grain 
(see  Gesen.  sub  voc).  Corn  crops  are  still  reck- 
oned at  twentyfold  what  was  sown,  and  were 
anciently  much  more.  "  Seven  ears  on  one  stalk  " 
(Gen.  xli.  22)  is  no  unusual  phenomenon  in  Egypt 
at  this  day.  The  many-eared  stalk  is  also  common 
in  the  wheat  of  Palestine,  and  it  is  of  course  of  the 
bearded  kind.  The  "  heap  of  wheat  set  about  with 
lilies"  (which  probably  grew  in  the  field  together 
with  it)  may  allude  to  a  custom  of  so  decorating 
the  sheaves  (Cant.  vii.  2).  Wheat  (see  2  Sam. 
iv.  6)  was  stored  in  the  house  for  domestic  pur- 
poses— the  "  midst  of  the  house  "  meaning  the 
part  more  retired  than  the  common  chamber 
where  the  guests  were  accommodated.  It  is  at 
present  often  kept  in  a  dry  well,  and  perhaps  the 
"  ground  corn  "  of  2  Sam.  xvii.  19,  was  meant 
to  impiy  that  the  well  was  so  used.  From 
Solomon's  time  (2  Chr.  ii.  10,  15),  i.  e.  as  agricul- 
ture became  developed  under  a  settled  government, 
Palestine  was  a  corn-exporting  country,  and  her 
grains  were  largely  taken  by  her  commercial  neigh- 
bour Tyre  (Ez.  xxvii.  17  ;  comp.  Amos  viii.  5). 
"  Plenty  of  corn "  was  part  of  Jacob's  blessing 
(Gen.  xxvii.  28  ;  comp.  Ps.  lxv.  13).  The  "store- 
houses "  mentioned  2  Chr.  xxxii.  28  as  built  by 
Hezekiah,  were,  perhaps,  the  consequence  of  the 
havock  made  by  the  Assyrian  armies  (comp.  2  K. 
xix.  29),  without  such  protection  the  country  in  its 
exhausted  state  would  have  been  at  the  mercy  of  the 
desert  marauders. 

Grain  crops  were  liable  to  ppT1,  "  mildew,"  and 
\\ZF\V,  "blasting"  (see  1  K.  viii.  37),  as  well  as 

of  course  to  rue  by  accident  or  malice  'Ex.  xxii.  6  ; 
Judg.  xv.  5) ;  see  further  under  Agriculture. 
Some  good  general  remarks  will  be  found  in 
Saalschutz,  Archaol.  der  Hebr.  [H.  H.] 

CORNE'LIUS  (KopvyAios),  a  Roman  centurion 
of  the  Italian  cohort  stationed  in  Caesarea  (Acts 
x.  i.  &c),  a  man  full  of  good  works  and  alms-deeds, 
who  was  admonished  in  a  vision  by  an  angel  to 
send  for  St.  Peter  from  Joppa,  to  tell  him  words 
whereby  he  and  his  house  should  he  saved.  Mean- 
time the  apostle  had  himself  been  prepared  by  a 
symbolical  vision  for  the  admission  of  the  Gentiles 
into  the  Church  of  Christ.  On  his  arriving  at  the 
house  of  Cornelius,  and  while  he  was  explaining  to 
them  the  vision  which  he  had  seen  in  reference  to 
this  mission,  the  Holy  Ghost  fell  on  the  Gentiles  [ire- 
sent,  and  thus  anticipated  the  reply  to  the  question, 
which  might  still  have  proved  a  difficult  one  fur  the 
Apostle,  whether  they  were  to  be  baptised  as  Gentiles 
into  the  Christian  Church.  They  were  so  baptised, 
and  thus  Cornelius  became  the  first-fruit  of  the  l  ien- 
tile  world  to  Christ.  Tradition  has  been  busy  with 
his  life  and  acts.  According  to  Jerome  (Adv.  /(Win.  1. 
p.  301),  he  built  a  Christian  Church  at  Caesarea; 
but  later  tradition  makes  him  Bishop  of  Scainandios 
(-ria  ?),  and  ascribes  to  him  the  working  of  a  great 
miracle  (  Menolog.  Grace.  I.  p.  129).         [11.  A.] 


~)2ty  (from  "Dt^,  to  break)  means  "  grist."  "  Parched 
corn,"  useful  for  provisions,  as  not  needing  cookery, 
is   *7p,    and    XVp  ;   comp.  the  Arab.      Jjj,    to  fry. 

"Pounded  wheat,"   JYI3H,  2  Bam.  xvii.  19,  Prov. 

xxvii.  22. 


358 


CORNER 


CORNER.  The  ilNS,  or  "corner,"  i.  e.  of  the 
Held,  was  not  allowed  (Lev.  xix.  9)  to  be  wholly 
reaped.  It  formed  .1  right  of  the  poor  to  cany  off 
what  was  so  left,  and  this  was  a  part  of  the  main- 
tenance from  the  soil  to  which  that  class  were 
entitled.  Similarly  the  gleaning  of  fields  and  fruit 
trees  [Gleaning],  and  the  taking  a  sheaf  acci- 
dentally left  on  the  ground,  were  secured  to  the 
poor  and  the  stranger  by  law  (xxiii.  22;  Deut. 
xxiv.  19-21).  These  seem  to  us,  amidst  the  sharply 
defined  legal  rights  of  which  alone  civilisation  is 
cognizant,  loose  and  inadequate  provisions  for  the 
relief  of  the  poor.  But  custom  and  common  law 
had  probably  ensured  their  observance  (Job  xxiv. 
10)  previously  to  the  Mosaic  enactment,  and  con- 
tinued for  a  long  but  indefinite  time  to  give  practical 
force  to  the  statute.  Nor  were  the  "poor,"  to 
whom  appertained  the  right,  the  vague  class  of 
sufferers  whom  we  understand  by  the  term.  On 
the  principles  of  the  Mosaic  polity  every  Hebrew 
family  had  a  hold  on  a  certain  fixed  estate,  and 
could  by  no  ordinary  and  casual  calamity  be  wholly 
beggared.  Hence  its  indigent  members  had  the 
claims  of  kindred  on  the  "  corners,"  &c,  of  the 
field  which  their  landed  brethren  reaped.  Simi- 
larly the  "stranger"  was  a  recognised  dependent; 
"  within  thy  gates  "  being  his  expressive  description, 
as  sharing,  though  not  by  any  tie  of  blood,  the 
domestic  claim.  There  was  thus  a  further  security 
for  the  maintenance  of  the  right  in  its  definite  and 
ascertainable  character.  Neither  do  we,  in  the 
earlier  period  of  the  Hebrew  polity,  closely  detailed 
as  its  social  features  are,  discover  any  general  traces 
of  agrarian  distress  and  the  unsafe  condition  of  the 
country  which  results  from  it — such,  for  instance, 
as  is  proved  by  the  banditti  of  the  Herodian  period. 
David,  a  popular  leader  (1  Sam.  xviii.  30,xxi.  11), 
could  only  muster  from  four  to  six  hundred  men 
out  of  all  Judah,  though  "  every  one  that  was  in 
distress,  in  debt,  and  every  one  that  was  discon- 
tented" came  unto  him  (1  Sam.  xxii.  2,  xxv.  13). 
Further,  the  position  of  the  Levites,  who  had  them- 
selves a  similar  claim  on  the  produce  of  the  land, 
but  no  possession  in  its  soil,  would  secure  their 
influence  as  expounders,  teachers,  and  in  part 
administrators  of  the  law,  in  favour  of  such  a  claim. 
In  the  later  period  of  the  prophets  their  constant 
complaints  concerning  the  defrauding  the  poora  (Is. 
x.  2  ;  Amos  v.  11,  viii.  6)  seem  to  show  that  such 
laws  had  lost  their  practical  force.  Still  later, 
under  the  Scribes,  minute  legislation  fixed  one- 
sixtieth  as  the  portion  of  a  field  which  was  to  be 
left  for  the  legal  "corner;"  but  provided  also 
(which  seems  hardly  consistent)  that  two  fields 
should  not  be  so  joined  as  to  leave  one  corner  only 
where  two  should  fairly  be  reckoned.  The  propor- 
tion being  thus  fixed,  all  the  grain  might  be  reaped, 
and  enough  to  satisfy  the  regulation  subsequently 
separated  from  the  whole  crop.  This  "  corner " 
was,  like  the  gleaning,  tithe-free.  Certain  fruit 
trees,  e.  </.  nuts,  pomegranates,  vines  and  olives, 
were  deemed  liable  to  the  law  of  the  corner. 
Maimonides  indeed  lays  down  the  principle  (Con- 
stitutiones  do  donis  paicperum,  cap.  ii.  1)  that 
whatever  crop  or  growth  is  fit  for  food,  is  kept, 
and  gathered  all  at  once,  and   carried   into  store, 

a  The  two  latter  passages,  speaking  of  "  taking 
burdens  of  wheat  from  the  poor,"  and  of  "  selling  the 
refuse  PDD)  of  the  wheat,"  i.  e.  perhaps  the  glean- 
ing, seem  to  point  to  some  special  evasion  of  the 
harvest  laws. 


CORNET 

is  liable  to  that  law.  A  Gentile  holding  land  in 
Palestine  was  not  deemed  liable  to  the  obligation. 
As  regards  Jews  an  evasion  seems  to  have  been 
sanctioned  as  follows :  —  Whatever  field  was  con- 
secrated t'o  the  Temple  and  its  services,  was  held 
exempt  from  the  claim  of  the  poor,  an  owner 
might  thus  consecrate  it  while  the  crop  was  on 
it,  and  then  redeem  it,  when  in  the  sheaf,  to 
his  own  use.  Thus  the  poor  would  lose  the 
right  to  the  "  corner."  This  reminds  us  of  the 
"  Corban  "  (Mark  vii.  11).  For  further  infor- 
mation, see  under  Agriculture. 

The  treatise  Peak,  in  the  Mishna,  may  likewise 
be  consulted,  especially  chap.  I.  2,  3,  4,  5,  6, 
II.  iv.  7,  also  the  above-quoted  treatise  of  Mai- 
monides. [H.  H.] 

CORNER-STONE  (H33  J2K  ;  \idos  yoo- 
vicuos,  or  a.Kpoyo3Via.1os ;  lapis  angularis :  also 
H35  t'&O,  Ps.  cxviii.  22  ;  Ke<pa\^  yoivlas  ;  caput 

anguli),  a  quoin  or  corner-stone,  of  great  importance 
in  binding  together  the  sides  of  a  building.  Some 
of  the  corner-stones  in  the  ancient  work  of  the 
temple  foundations  are  17  or  19  feet  long,  and  7^ 
feet  thick  (Robinson,  i.  286).  Corner-stones  are 
usually  laid  sideways  and  endways  alternately,  so 
that  the  end  of  one  appears  above  or  below  the  side- 
face  of  the  next.  At  Nineveh  the  corners  are  some- 
times formed  of  one  angular  stone  (Layard,  Nin. 
ii.  254).  The  expression  in  Ps.  cxviii.  22  is  by 
some  understood  to  mean  the  coping  or  ridge, 
"  coign  of  vantage,"  of  a  building,  but  as  in  any 
part  a  corner-stone  must  of  necessity  be  of  great 
importance,  the  phrase  "  corner-stone "  is  some- 
times used  to  denote  any  principal  person,  as  the 
princes  of  Egypt  (Is.  xix.  13),  and  is  thus  applied 
both  to  our  Lord,  who,  having  been  once  rejected, 
was  afterwards  set  in  the  place  of  the  highest 
honour  (Is.  xxviii.  16  ;  Matt.  xxi.  42 ;  1  Pet.  ii. 
6,  7  ;  Grotius  on  Ps.  cxviii.  and  Eph.  ii.  20 ; 
Harmer,  Obs.  ii.  356).  [H.  W.  P.] 

CORNET  {Shophar,  -)BiE>;    <rd\Triyt;   buc- 

cina),  a  loud  sounding  instrument,  made  of  the 
horn  of  a  ram  or  of  a  chamois,  (sometimes  of  an 
ox)  and  used  by  the  ancient  Hebrews  for  signals, 
for  announcing  the  72V,  "  Jubile"  (Lev.  xxv.  9), 
for  proclaiming  the  new  year  (Mishna,  Rosh  Hash- 
shanah,  iii.  and  iv.),  for  the  purposes  of  war  (Jer. 
iv.  5,  19,  comp.  Job  xxxix.  25),  as  well  as  for  the 
sentinels  placed  at  the  watch-towers  to  give  notice 
of  the  approach  of  an  enemy  (Ez.  xxxiii.  4,  5). 
"ISlC'  is  generally  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  "  trumpet," 

but  "  cornet"  (the  more  correct  translation)  is  used 
in  2  Chr.  xv.  14  ;  Ps.  xcviii.  6  ;  Hos.  v.  8  ;  and 
1  Chr.  xv.  28.  "It  seems  probable  that  in  the  two 
last  instances  the  authors  of  the  A.  V.  would  also 
have  preferred  "  trumpet,"  but  for  the  difficulty 
of  finding  different  English  names  in  the  same 
passage  for  two  things  so  nearly  resembling  each 
other  in  meaning  as  "IQIE',  buccinn,  and  Chatzot- 
zerah,  m^'lVn,  tuba.  "Cornet"  is  also  employed 
in  Dan.  iii.  5,  7,  10,  15,  for  the  Chaldee  noun 
J"lp,  Keren  (literally  a  horn). 

Oriental  scholars  for  the  most  part  consider 
Shophar  and  Keren  to  be  one  and  the  same  musical 
instrument ;  but  some  biblical  critics  regard  Sho- 
phar and  Chatzotzerah  as  belonging  to  the  species 
of  Keren,  the  general  term  for  a  horn.    (Joel  Brill, 


CORNET 

in  preface  to  Mendelssohn's  version  of  the  Psalms.) 
Jahn  distinguishes  Keren,  "  the  horn,  or  crooked 
trumpet,"  from  Chatzotzerah,  the  straight  trumpet, 
an  instrument  a  cubit  in  length,  hollow  through- 
out, and  at  the  larger  extremity  so  shaped  as  to 
resemble  the  mouth  of  a  short  bill"  (Archaeolog. 
xcv.  4,  5) ;  but  the  generally  received  opinion  is, 
that  Keren  is  the  crooked  horn,  and  Shopheir  the 
long  and  straight  one. 

The   silver   trumpets  (C)D3   lYhm'n),    which 

Moses  was  charged  to  furnish  for  the  Israelites, 
were  to  be  used  for  the  following  purposes  :  for 
the  calling  together  of  the  assembly,  for  the  jour- 
neying of  the  camps,  for  sounding  the  alarm  of 
war,  and  for  celebrating  the  sacrifices  on  festivals  and 
new  moons  (Num.  x.  1-10).  The  divine  command 
through  Moses  was  restricted  to  two  trumpets  only  ; 
and  these  were  to  be  sounded  by  the  sons  of  Aaron, 
the  anointed  priests  of  the  sanctuary,  and  not  by 
laymen.  It  should  seem,  however,  that  at  a  later 
period  an  impression  prevailed,  that  "  whilst  the 
trumpets  were  suffered  to  be  sounded  only  by  the 
priests  within  the  sanctuary,  they  might  be  used 
by  others,  not  of  the  priesthood,  without  the 
sacred  edifice."  (Conrad  Iken's  Antiquitates  He- 
braicae,  par.  i.  sec.  vii.  "  Sacerdotum  cum  instru- 
mentis  ipsorum.")  In  the  age  of  Solomon  the 
"  silver  trumpets"  were  increased  in  number  to 
120  (2  Chr.  v.  12)  ;  and,  independently  of  the 
objects  for  which  they  had  been  first  introduced, 
they  were  now  employed  in  the  orchestra  of  the 
temple  as  an  accompaniment  to  songs  of  thanks- 
giving and  praise. 

Yobel,  ?2V,  used  sometimes  for  the  "  year  of 
Jubile"  C?ii*n  T\yy,  comp.  Lev.  xxv.  13,  15, 
with  xxv.  28,  30),  generally  denotes  the  institution 
of  Jubile,  but  in  some  instances  it  is  spoken  of  as 
a  musical  instrument,  resembling  in  its  object,  if 
not  in  its  shape,  the  Keren  and  the  Shophar. 
Gesenius  pronounces  Yobel  to  be  "  an  onomato- 
poetic  word,  signifying  jubilum  or  a  joyful  sound, 
and  hence  applied  to  the  sound  of  a  trumpet  signal, 
like  ny-1"iri "  ("alarm,"  Num.  x.  5) ;  and  Dr. Munk 

is  of  opinion  that  "  le  mot  yobel  n'est  qu'une 
e'pithete "  (Palestine,  456  «,  note).  Still  it  is 
difficult  to  divest  Yobel  of  the  meaning  of  a 
sounding  instrument  in  the  following  instances : 
"  When  the  trumpet  (731*11)  soundeth  long,  they 
shall  come  up  to  the  mount"  (Ex.  xix.  13)  ;  "  And 
it  shall  come  to  pass  that  when  thev  make  a  long 
blast  with  the  rain's  horn"  (?11*n  }~lp3  Josh.  vi. 
5);  "  And  let  seven  priests  bear  seven  trumpets  of 
rams'  horns"   (Dv3*V  nilQVJ'  Josh.  vi.  6). 

The  sounding  of  the  comet  ("lClu*  nypri)  was 
the  distinguishing  ritual  feature  of  the  festival  ap- 
pointed by  Muses  to  be  held  on  the  first  day  of  the 
seventh  month  under  the  denomination  of  "  a  day 
of  blowing  trumpets"  (njtt")ri  DV  Num.  xxix.  1), 
or  "a  memorial  of  blowing  of  trumpets  "  (J113T 
ny-IIFl  Lev.   xxiii.   24);   and  that  rite  is  still  ob- 

t        : 

served  by  the  Jews  in  their  celebration  of  the  same 
festival,  which  they  now  call  •'  the  day  of  me- 
morial "  (P"l3-tn  DV),  and  also  "New  rear" 
(HXTI  ^'X~)V     "  Some  commentators,"  says  Ro- 


CORNET 


359 


senmiiller,  "  have  made  this  festival  refer  to  the 
preservation  of  Isaac  (Gen.  xxii.),  whence  it  is 
sometimes  called  by  the  Jews,  "  the  Binding  of 
Isaac"  (pnV*  mpj?).      But  it  is  more  probable 

that  the  name  of  the  festival  is  derived  from  the 
usual  kind  of  trumpets  (ram's  horns)  then  in  use, 
and  that  the  object  of  the  festival  was  the  cele- 
bration of  the  new  year  and  the  exhortation  to 
thanksgivings  for  the  blessings  experienced  in  the 
year  just,  finished.  The  use  of  cornets  by  the 
priests  in  all  the  cities  of  the  land,  not  in  Jerusalem 
only  (where  two  silver  trumpets  were  added,  whilst 
the  Levites  chanted  the  81st  Psalm),  was  a  suit- 
able means  for  that  object"  (Rosenmiiller,  Das 
alte  und  neve  Morgenland,  vol.  ii.,  No.  337,  on 
Lev.  xxiii.  24). 

Although  the  festival  of  the  first  day  of  the 
seventh  month  is  denominated  by  the  Mistma  "  New 
Year;"  and  notwithstanding  that  it  was  observed 
as  such  by  the  Hebrews  in  the  age  of  the  second 
temple,  there  is  no  reason  whatever  to  believe  that 
it  had  such  a  name  or  character  in  the  times  of 
Moses.  The  Pentateuch  fixes  the  vernal  equinox 
(the  period  of  the  institution  of  the  Passover),  as 
the  commencement  of  the  Jewish  year  ;  but  for 
more  than  twenty  centuries  the  Jews  have  dated 
their  new  year  from  the  autumnal  equinox,  which 
takes  place  about  the  season  when  the  festival  of 
"  the  day  of  sounding  the  cornet"  is  held.  Rabbi- 
nical tradition  represents  this  festival  as  the  anni- 
versary of  the  creation  of  the  world,  but  the  state- 
ment receives  no  support  whatever  from  Scripture. 
On  the  contrary,  Moses  expressly  declares  that  the 
month  Abih  (the  Moon  of  the  Spring)  is  to  be 
regarded  by  the  Hebrews  as  the  first  month  of  the 
year : — "  This  month  shall  be  unto  you  the  begin- 
ning (E^N"I)  of  months  ;  it  shall  be  the  first  (t*'frP) 
month  of  the  year  to  you"  (Ex.  xii.  2).  (Munk, 
Palestine,  184  b.). 

The  intention  of  the  appointment  of  the  festival 
"  of  the  Sounding  of  the  Cornet,"  as  well  as  the 
duties  of  the  sacred  institution,  appear  to  be  set 
forth  in  the  words  of  the  prophet,  "  Sound  the 
Comet  ("lQlt^)  in  Zion,  sanctify  the  fast,  proclaim 
the  solemn  assembly"  (Joel  ii.  15).  Agreeably  to 
the  order  iu  which  this  passage  runs,  the  institution 
of  "  the  festival  of  Sounding  the  Cornet,"  seems 
to  be  the  prelude  and  preparation  for  the  awful 
Day  of  Atonement.  The  Divine  command  for  that, 
fast  is  connected  with  that  for  "  the  day  of  Sound- 
ing the  Cornet"  by  the  conjunctive  particle  T]X. 

"  Likewise  on  the  tenth  day  of  this  seventh  month 
is  the  day  of  Atonement  "  (Lev.  xxiii.  27).  Here 
"^N  (likewise)  unites  the  festival  "  of  the  day  of 
Sounding  the  Cornet"  with  the  solemnity  of  the 
day  of  Atonement  precisely  as  the  same  particle 
connects  the  "festival  of  Tabernacles"  with  the 
observance  of  the  ceremonial  of  "  the  fruit  of  the 
Radar  tree,  the  palm  branches," &c.  (Lev. xxiii.  34- 
40).  The  word  "solemn  assembly"  (iTIVy)  in  the 
verse  from  Joel  quoted  above,  applies  to  the  festival 
"  Eighth  day  of  Solemn  Assembly"  (mvy  ^VX") 

I  Lev.  xxiii.  36),  the  closing  rite  of  the  festive  evele 

of  TSshri  (see  Religious  Discourses  of  Rev.  Pro- 
fessor Marks,  vol.  i.  pp.  291-2). 

Besides  the  use  of  the  em  net  on  the  festival  of 
" blowing  the  trumpets,"  it  is  also  sounded  in  the 

synagogue  at  the  close  of  the  service  for  the  day  of 


360 


COS 


atonement,  and,  amongst  the  Jews  who  adopt  the 
ritual  of  the  Scphardim,  on  the  seventh  day  of  the 
feast  of  Tabernacles,  known  by  the  post-biblical  deno- 
mination of  "  the  Great  Hosauah"  (n3"l  i13yE'inV 

The  sounds  emitted  from  the  cornet  in  modern 
times  are  exceedingly  harsh,  although  they  produce 
a  solemn  effect.     Gesenius  derives  the  name  "IQlt^ 

from  IQt^  =   Arab.   .Jam,  "  to  be  bright,  clear " 

(compare  PHSE?,  Ps.  xvi.  6).  [D.  W.  M.] 

COS  (Kws,  now  Stanchio  or  Stanko).  This 
small  island  lias  several  interesting  points  of  con- 
nexion with  the  Jews.  It  is  specified,  in  the  edict 
which  resulted  from  the  communications  of  Simon 
Maccabaeus  with  Rome,  as  one  of  the  places  which 
contained  Jewish  residents  (1  Mace.  x\\  23).  Jo- 
sephus,  quoting  Strabo,  mentions  that  the  Jews 
had  a  great  amount  of  treasure  stored  there  during 
the  Mithridatic  war  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiv.  7,  §2). 
From  the  same  source  we  learn  that  Julius  Caesar 
issued  an  edict  in  favour  of  the  Jews  of  Cos  {ibid. 
10,  §  1 5).  Herod  the  Great  conferred  many  favours 
on  the  island  (Joseph  B.  J.i.  21,  §11);  and  an 
inscription  in  Bockh  (No.  2502)  associates  it  with 
Herod  the  tetrarch.  St.  Paul,  on  the  return  from 
his  third  Missionary  Journey,  passed  the  night  here, 
after  sailing  from  Miletus.  The  next  day  he 
went  on  to  Rhodes  (Acts  xxi.  1).  The  proximity 
of  Cos  to  these  two  important  places,  and  to 
Cnidus,  and  its  position  at  the  entrance  to  the 
Archipelago  from  the  east,  made  it  an  island  of 
considerable  consequence.  It  was  celebrated  for 
its  light  woven  fabrics  and  for  its  wines, — also  for 
a  temple  of  Aesculapius,  to  which  a  school  of  phy- 
sicians was  attached,  and  which  was  virtually,  from 
its  votive  models,  a  museum  of  anatomy  and  pa- 
thology. The  emperor  Claudius  bestowed  upon 
Cos  the  privilege  of  a  free  state  (Tac.  Ann.  xii.  61). 
The  chief  town  (of  the  same  name)  was  on  the 
N.E.  near  a  promontory  called  Scandarium:  and 
perhaps  it  is  to  the  town  that  reference  is  made  in 
the  Acts  (I.  c).  There  is  a  monograph  on  Cos  by 
Kiister  (De  Co  Insula,  Halle,  1833),  and  a  very 
useful  paper  on  the  subject  by  Col.  Leake  (in  the 
Trans,  of  the  Royal  Soc.  of  Literature,  vol.  i., 
second  series).  An  account  of  the  island  will  be 
found  in  Clarke's  Travels,  vol.  ii.,  pt.  i.,  pp.  196- 
213,  and  vol.  ii.,  pt.  ii.,  pp.  321-333  ;  but  the  best 
description  is  in  Ross,  Reisen  nach  Kos,  Halicar- 
nassus,  u.  s.  w.  (Halle,  1852)  with  which  his 
Reisen  auf  den  Griech.  Inseln  should  be  compared, 
vol.  ii.  (1843),  pp.  86-92,  vol.  iii.  (1845),  pp. 
126-139.  [J.  S.  H.] 


Tctradrachm  of  Cos  (Phoenician!  talent).  Obv.,  Head  of  young 
Hercules  to  right.  Rev.,  v  v ton  Cral>  and  how  m  ca8l>,  a11 
within  dotted  square. 

CO'SAM  (Kuaa.fi.;  Cosan,  a  name  that  occurs 
nowhere  else  either  in  the  0.  T.  or  N.  T.,  and  is 
of  doubtful    etvmology),    son    of  Elmodam,  and 


COTTON 

fifth  before  Zorobabel,  in  the  line  of  Joseph  the 
husband  of  Mary,  Luke  iii.  28.  [GENEALOGIES  OK 
Christ.]  [a.  C.  H.] 

COTTON  (DQ"}3  ;  icdpiraffos,  to  Kapivdariva, 
Esth.  i.  6,  where  the  Vulg.  has  carbasini  coloris, 
as  if  a  colour,"  not  a  material  (so  in  A.  V.  "green"), 
were  intended).  There  is  a  doubt  whether  under 
&•>£>,  Shesh,  in  the  earlier  and  ^-12,  Butz,  in  the 
later  books  of  the  0.  T.  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  by 
"  white  linen,"  "  fine  linen,"  &c,  cotton  may  have 
been  included  as  well.  Both  Shesh  and  Butz  are  said 
by  Gesen.  (s.  v.)  to  be  from  roots  signifying  originally 
mere  whiteness  ;  a  sense  said  also  to  inhere  in  the 

word  12  (perhaps  Arab,  abyad,  Jva^,  "white"), 

used  sometimes  instead  of,  and  sometimes  together 
with  Shesh  to  mean  the  fabric.  In  Ez.  xxvii.  7,  16, 
W,  Shesh  is  mentioned  as  imported  into  Tyre  from 
Egypt,  and  Butz  as  from  Syria.  Each  is  found  in 
turn  coupled  with  JDillX  (purpura^),  in  the  sense  of 

"  purple  and  tine  linen,"  i.  e.  the  most  showy  and 
costly  apparel  (comp.  Prov.  xxxi.  22  with  Esth. 
viii.  15).  The  dress  of  the  Egyptian  priests,  at  any 
rate  in  their  ministrations,  was  without  doubt  of 
linen  (Herod,  ii.  37),  in  spite  of  Pliny's  assertion 
(xix.  1,  2)  that  they  preferred  cotton.  Yet  cotton 
garments  for  the  worship  of  the  temples  is  said  to 
be  mentioned  in  the  Rosetta  stone  (Wilkinson,  A.  E. 
iii.  117).  The  same  with  the  Jewish  ephod  and  other 
priestly  attire,  in  which  we  cannot  suppose  any 
carelessness  to  have  prevailed.  If,  however,  a  Jew 
happened  to  have  a  piece  of  cotton  cloth,  he  pro- 
bably would  not  be  deterred  by  any  scruple  about 
the  heterogenea  of  Deut.  xxii.  11  from  wearing  that 
and  linen  together.  There  is,  however,  no  word 
for  the  cotton  plant  (like  itn^'S  for  flax)  in  the 
Hebrew,  nor  any  reason  to  suppose  that  there  was 
any  early  knowledge  of  the  fabric. 

The  Egyptian  mummy  swathings  also,  many  of 
which  are  said  to  remain  as  good  as  when  fresh 
from  the  loom,  are  decided,  alter  much  controversy 
and  minute  analysis,  to  have  been  of  linen,  and 
not  cotton.  The  very  difficulty  of  deciding,  how- 
ever, shows  how  easily  even  scientific  observers 
may  mistake,  and,  much  more,  how  impossible  it 
would  have  been  for  ancient  popular  writers  to 
avoid  confusion.  Even  Greek  naturalists  sometimes 
clearly  include  "cotton"  under  Xivov.  The  same 
appears  to  be  true  of  666vri,  bdoviov,  and  the  whole 
class  of  words  signifying  white  textile  vegetable 
fabrics.  The  proper  Oriental  name  for  the  article 
DQ13  (said  to  occur  with  slight  variation  in  Sansk. 
and  other  Oriental  languages  b)  is  rendered  "  green  " 
in  the  A.  V.  of  Esth.  i.  6^  butGrecised  in  the  LXX. 
by  napiracrlvois.  From  the  same  word,  with  which 
either  their  Alexandrian  or  Parthian  intercourse  m  ight 
familiarise  them,  the  Latins  borrowed  carbarns, 
completely  current  in  poetical  use  in  the  golden  anil 


a  So  Tin.  "  white  "  in  A.  V.  ibid.,  is  probably  not 
a  colour,   but   a   stuff,    possibly  silk  :    comp.  Arab. 

,.  .^^  hareer,  "silk:"  The  ]S1D,  "sheets,"  marg. 
Jr. J-*" 

"shirts,"  of  A. V.  Judg.  xiv.  12,  13,  and  "fine linen," 
Is.  iii.  23,  is  perhaps  a  form  of  the  same  word  as 
0-1V6W,  Mark  xiv.  51. 

b  Kurpasa  or  kurpasum  is  the  Sansk.  Kupas  in 
Hindee  means  the  cotton  rose  or  pod  with  seed, 
which  in  the  Bengalee  is  kapasee,  and  in  the  Bombay 
dialect,  kapoos. 


COUGH 

silver  period  of  Latinity,  for  sails,  awnings,  ,&c. 
Varro  knew  of  tree-wool  on  the  authority  of  Ctesias 
contemporary  with  Herodotus.  The  Greeks,  through 
the  commercial  consequences  of  Alexander's  con- 
quests, must  have  known  of  cotton  cloth,  and  more 
or  less  of  the  plant.  Amasis  °  indeed  (about  B.C.  540) 
sent  as  a  present  from  Egypt  a  corslet  KeKOoytTjju.eVoi' 
Xpwy  Kcd  ipiouri  curb  £v\ou  (Herod,  iii.  47),  which 
Pliny  says  was  still  existing  in  his  time  in  a  temple 
in  Rhodes,  and  that  the  minuteness  of  its  fibre  had 
provoked  the  experiments  of  the  curious.  Cotton 
was  manufactured  aud  worn  extensively  in  Egypt, 
but  extant  monuments  give  no  proof  of  its  growth, 
as  in  the  case  of  flax,  in  that  country  (Wilkinson, 
ib.  p.  116-139,  and  plate  No.  356)  ;  indeed  had  it 
been  a  general  product  we  could  scarcely  have 
missed  finding  some  trace  of  it  on  the  monumental 
details  of  ancient  Egyptian  arts,  trades,  &c. ;  but, 
especially,  when  Pliny  (a.d.  115)  asserts  that 
cotton  was  then  grown  in  Egypt,  a  statement  con- 
firmed by  Julius  Pollux  (a  century  later),  we  can 
hardly  resist  the  inference  that,  at  least  as  a 
curiosity  and  as  an  experiment,  some  plantations 
existed  there.  This  is  the  more  likely  since  we  find 
the  cotton-free  (gossypium  arboreum,  less  usual 
than,  and  distinct  from,  the  cotton  plant,  goss. 
herbac.)  is  mentioned  still  by  Pliny  as  the  only 
remarkable  tree  of  the  adjacent  Ethiopia ;  and  since 
Arabia,  on  its  other  side,  appears  to  have  known 
cotton d  from  time  immemorial  to  grow  it  in  abund- 
ance, and  in  parts  to  be  highly  favourable  to  that 
product.  In  India,  however,  we  have  the  earliest 
records  of  the  use  of  cotton  for  dress ;  of  which, 
including  the  starching  of  it,  some  curious  traces 
are  found  as  early  as  800  B.C.,  in  the  Institutes  of 
Manu  ;  also  (it  is  said,  on  the  authority  of  Prof. 
Wilson)  in  the  Rig  Veda,  105,  v.  8.  For  these 
and  some  other  curious  antiquities  of  the  subject, 
see  Royle's  Culture  and  Comrrterce  of  Cotton  in 
India,  pp.  117-122. 

Cotton  is  now  both  grown  and  manufactured  in 
various  parts  of  Syria  and  Palestine,  and,  owing 
probably  to  its  being  less  conductive  of  heat,  seems 
preferred  for  turbans  and  shirts  to  linen  ;  but  there 
is  no  proof  that,  till  they  came  in  contact  with 
Persia,  the  Hebrews  generally  knew  of  it  as  a  dis- 
tinct fabric  from  linen,  whilst  the  negative  proof  of 
language  ami  the  probabilities  of  fact  offer  a  strong 
presumption  that,  it  they  obtained  it  at  all  in  com- 
merce, they  confounded  it  with  linen  under  the 
terms  Shesh  or  Butz.  The  greater  cleanliness  and 
durability  of  linen  probably  established  its  superiority 
over  cotton  for  sepulchral  purposes  in  the  N.  T. 
period,  by  which  time  the  latter  must  have  been 
commonly  known,  and  thus  there  is  no  reason  for 
assigning  cotton  as  the  material  of  the  bd6via  and 
ivrdcpia  of  which  we  read.  For  the  whole  subject, 
see  Yates's  Textrinum  Antiquorum,  pt.  i.  chap.  vi. 
and  app.  D.  [H.  H.] 

COUCH.     [Bed.] 


COVENANT 


301 


•  So Burckhardt  (Trar.  Nub.  App.  iii.  p.  5\!i,  note) 
mentions  "a  species  of  cuirass  made  of  quilted  cotton" 
as  still  worn  by  certain  tribes  adjacent  to  the  Nile, 
o    3 

J  Arab.  Coton,      JaJ,  means:  1.  any  annual;  2. 

anything  between    two  leaves ;    3.   the  well-known 
"  cotton"  plant.     This  evolving  of  the  special  from 
the  general  sense  seems  to  indicate  that  the  name 
"  cotton "   is  originally  Arabic  ;    though   it  may  be  ■ 
true  that  the  plant  is  indigenous  in  India. 


COUNCIL.  1.  ( (rweSpLov)  the  great  council 
of  the  .Sanhedrim,  which  sat  at  Jerusalem.  [SAN- 
HEDRIM.] 2.  (ffvveSpia,  Matt.  x.  17  ;  Mark  xiii. 
9)  the  lesser  courts,  of  which  there  were  two  at 
Jerusalem,  and  one  in  each  town  of  Palestine.  The 
constitution  of  these  courts  is  a  doubtful  point ;  ac- 
cording to  Talmudical  writers  the  number  of  judges 
was  twenty-three  in  places  where  there  was  a  popu- 
lation of  120,  and  three  where  the  population  fell 
below  that  number  (Mishn.  Sanhedr.  1,  §6).  Jo- 
sephus,  however,  gives  a  different  account :  he  states 
that  the  court,  as  constituted  by  Moses  (Deut. 
xvi.  18  ;  comp.  Ant.  iv.  8,  §14),  consisted  of  seven 
judges,  each  of  whom  had  two  Levites  as  assessors ; 
accordingly  in  the  reform  which  he  carried  out  in 
Galilee,  he  appointed  seven  judges  for  the  trial  of 
minor  offences  (B.  J.,  ii.  20,  §5).  The  statement 
of  Josephus  is  generally  accepted  as  correct ;  but  it 
should  be  noticed  that  these  courts  were  not  always 
in  existence;  they  may  have  been  instituted  by 
himself  on  what  he  conceived  to  be  the  true  Mosaic 
model ;  a  supposition  which  is  rendered  probable  by 
his  further  institution  of  a  council  of  Seventy, 
which  served  as  a  court  for  capital  offences,  alto- 
gether independent  of  the  Sanhedrim  at  Jerusalem 
(  Vit.  §14 ;  B.  J.,  ii.  20,  5).  The  existence  of  local 
courts,  however  constituted,  is  clearly  implied  in 
the  passages  quoted  from  the  N.  T. ;  and  perhaps 
the  judgment  (Matt.  v.  21)  applies  to  them.  3. 
avjxfSovXiov  (Acts  xxv.  12),  a  kind  of  jury  or  privy 
council,  consisting  of  a  certain  number  of  assessors 
(consiliarii,  Suet.  Tib.  33,  55),  who  assisted  Roman 
governors  in  the  administration  of  justice  and  other 
public  matters.  [W.  L.  B.] 

COUKT,  an  open  enclosure,  applied  in  the 
A.  V.  most  commonly  to  the  enclosures  of  the 
Tabernacle  and  the  Temple. '  The  Hebrew  word  in- 
variably used  for  the  former  is  Chatzer,  "IVI"!,  from 
a  root,  IVn,  to  surround  (Ges.  512).  (See, 
amongst  others,  Ex.  xxvii.  9,  to  xl.  33  ;  Lev.  vi.  16  ; 
Num.  iii.  26,  &c.)  The  same  word  is  also  most 
frequently  used  for  the  "courts"  of  the  Temple, 
as  1  K.  vi.  36,  vii.  8,  xxiii.  12  ;  1  Chr.  xxxiii.  5  ; 
Ps.  xcii.  13,  &c.  In  2  Chr.  iv.  9  and  vi.  13,  how- 
ever, a  different  word  is  employed,  apparently,  for 
the  same  places — Azdrah,  HITS?,  from  a  root  of 
similar  meaning  to  the  above.  This  word  also 
occurs  in  Ezek.  xliii.  14,  17,  20,  xlv.  19  (A.  V. 
"settle"),  but  perhaps  with  a  different  force. 
Chatzer  also  designates  the  court  of  a  prison  (Neh. 
iii.  25  ;  Jer.  xxxii.  2,  &c),  of  a  private  house  (2 
Sam.  xvii.  18),  and  of  a  palace  (2  K.  xx.  4  ;  Esth.  i. 
5,  &c).  In  Amos  vii.  13,  where  the  Hebrew 
word  is  Beth  =  a  "house,"  our  translators,  anxious 
to  use  a  term  applicable  specially  to  a  king's  re- 
sidence, have  put  "court."  [House;  Taber- 
nacle ;  Temple.] 

The  word  Chatzer  is  very  often  employed  fur 
the  enclosures  of  the  villages  of  Palestine,  ami  under 
the  form  of  Hazer  or  Hazor  frequently  occurs  in 
the  names  of  places  in  the  A.  V.  [HAZEB;  VIL- 
LAGE.] [G.] 

COU'THA.  (Kovdd;  Phusa),  1  Esdr.  v.  .",2. 
There  is  no  name  corresponding  with  this  in  the 
lists  of  Ezra  ami  Nehemiab, 

COVENANT  (rV)3  ;  Siad^Kv  ;  once,  Wisd.  i. 

Hi,  (Tvv8i]KTi ;  in  O.  T.  foedus,  pactum-  often  inter- 
changeably, Gen.  i\.  xvii.;  Num.  xxv.  ;  in  Apocr. 
testqmentum,  bat  sacramentum,  2  Esd.  ii.  7  ;  span* 


302 


COVENANT 


siones,  Wisd.  i.  16  ;  in  N.  T.  testamentum  [absque 
foederc,  Rom.  i.  31;  Gr.  affvvderovs'])-  The 
Hebrew  wovd  is  derived  by  Gesenius  from  the  root 
JT13,  i.  q.  m3,  "  he  cut,"  and  taken  to  mean 
primarily  "  a  cutting,"  with  reference  to  the  custom 
of  cutting;  or  dividing  animals  in  two,  and  passing 
between  the  parts  in  ratifying  a  covenant  (Gen.  xv. ; 
Jer.  xxxiv.  18,  19).  Hence  the  expression  "to  cut 
a  covenant"  (7V13  m3,  Gen.  xv.  18,  or  simply  j 
m3,  with  ITHS  understood,  1  Sam.  xi.  2)  is  of  fre-  j 
.quent  occurrence.  (Comp.  'Spicta  re/xveip,  ripveiv 
cnrovS&s,  iccre,  ferire, percutere  foedus.)  Professor 
Lee  suggests  {Heb.  Lex.  s.  v.  JVO)  that  the  proper 
signification  of  the  word  is  an  eating  together,  or 
banquet,  from  the  meaning  "  to  eat,"  which  the  root 
1113  sometimes  bears,  because  among  the  Orientals 
to  eat  together  amounts  almost  to  a  covenant  of 
friendship.  This  view  is  supported  by  Gen.  xxxi. 
46,  where  Jacob  and  Laban  eat  together  on  the 
heap  of  stones  which  they  have  set  up  in  ratifying 
the  covenant  between  them.  It  affords  also  a  satis- 
factory explanation  of  the  expression  "  a  covenant  of 
salt"  (rbft  JTH3,  dtadriKT)  aAbs,  Num.  xviii.  19, 

2  Chr.  xiii.  5),  when  the  Eastern  idea  of  eating  salt 
together  is  remembered.  If,  however,  the  other 
derivation  of  JTH3  be  adopted,  this  expression  may 

be  explained  by  supposing  salt  to  have  been  eaten 
or  offered  with  accompanying  sacrifices  on  occasion 
of  very  solemn  covenants,  or  it  may  be  regarded  as 
figurative,  denoting,  either,  from  the  use  of  salt  in 
sacrifice  (Lev.  ii.  13,  Mark  ix.  49),  the  sacredness, 
or,  from  the  preserving  qualities  of  salt,  the  per- 
petuity, of  the  covenant. 

In  the  N.  T.  the  word  StaO^Kn  is  frequently, 
though  by  no  moans  uniformly,  translated  testament 
in  the  English  Authorised  Version,  whence  the  two 
divisions  of  the  Bible  have  received  their  common 
English  names.  This  translation  is  perhaps  due  to 
the  Vulgate,  which  having  adopted  testamentum  as 
the  equivalent  for  SiadyKri  in  the  Apocr.,  uses  it 
always  as  such  in  the  N.  T.  (see  above).  There 
seems,  however,  to  be  no  necessity  for  the  intro- 
duction of  a  new  word  conveying  a  new  idea.  The 
LXX.  having  rendered  JTH3  (which  never  means 
will  or  testament,  but  always  covenant  or  agree- 
ment) by  Siad^KV  consistently  throughout  the  0.  T., 
the  N.  T.  writers,  in  adopting  that  word,  may  na- 
turally be  supposed  to  intend  to  convey  to  their 
readers,  most  of  them  familiar  with  the  Greek  0.  T., 
the  same  idea.  Moreover,  in  the  majority  of  cases 
the  same  thing  which  has  been  called  a  "  covenant  " 
(nn2)  in  the  O.  T.   is  referred  to  in  the  N.  T. 

{e.  g.  2  Cor.  iii.  14:  Heb.  vii.,  ix. ;  Rev.  xi.  19)  ; 
while  in  the  same  context  the  same  word  and  thing  in 
the  Greek  are  in  the  English  sometimes  represented  by 
"  covenant,"  and  sometimes  by  "testament"  (Heb. 
vii.  22,  vhi.  8-13,  ix.  15).  In  the  confessedly  diffi- 
cult passage,  Heb.  ix.  16,  17,  the  word  SiaB-iinn  has 
been  thought  by  many  commentators  absolutely  to 
require  the  meaning  of  will  or  testament.  On  the 
other  side,  however,  it  may  be  alleged,  that  in  ad- 
dition to  what  has  just  been  said  as  to  the  usual 
meaning  of  the  word  in  N.  T.,  the  word  occurs 
twice  in  the  context,  where  its  meaning  must  neces- 
sarily be  the  same  as  the  translation  of  TVIS,  and 

in  the  unquestionable  sense  of  covenant  (cf.  SiaOriKv 
Kaiv-i),  Heb.  ix.  15,  with   the  same  expression  in 


COVENANT 

viii.  8  ;  and  StaB-qKi],  ix.  16,  17,  with  ver.  20,  and 
Ex.  xxiv.  8).  If  this  sense  of  8ia07)/cTj  be  retained, 
we  may  either  render  ewl  veicpols,  "  over,  or  in  the 
case  of,  dead  sacrifices,"  and  6  8ia.6eiJ.4vos,  "  the 
mediating  sacrifice"  (Scholefields  Hints  for  an 
improved  Translation  of  the  N.  T.),  or  (with  Ebrard 
and  others)  restrict  the  statement  of  ver.  16  to  the 

0.  T.  idea  of  a  covenant  between  man  and  God, 
in  which  man,  as  guilty,  must  always  be  represented 
by  a  sacrifice  with  which  he  was  so  completely 
identified,  that  in  its  person  he  (6  SiaOtfxevos,  the 
human  covenanter)  actually  died  (cf.  Matt.  xxvi.  28). 

In  its  Biblical  meaning  of  a  compact  or  agree- 
ment between   two    parties,   the   word    is  used — 

1 .  Improperly,  of  a  covenant  between  God  and  man. 
Man  not  being  in  any  way  in  the  position  of  an 
independent  covenanting  party,  the  phrase  is  evi- 
dently used  by  way  of  accommodation.  Strictly 
speaking,  such  a  covenant  is  quite  unconditional, 
and  amounts  to  a  promise  (Gal.  iii.  15  rl'.,  where 
iirayye\la  and  StadriKV  are  used  almost  as  sy- 
nonyms) or  act  of  mere  favour  (Ps.  lxxxix.  28, 
where  TDFI  stands  in  parallelism  with  TV*1jl)  on 
God's  part.  Thus  the  assurance  given  by  God  after 
the  Flood,  that  a  like  judgment  should  not  be  re- 
peated, and  that  the  recurrence  of  the  seasons,  and 
of  day  and  night,  should  not  cease,  is  called  a 
covenant  (Gen.  ix. ;  Jer.  xxxiii.  20).  Generally, 
however,  the  form  of  a  covenant  is  maintained,  by 
the  benefits  which  God  engages  to  bestow  being 
made  by  him  dependent  upon  the  fulfilment  of  cei- 
tain  conditions  which  he  imposes  on  man.  Thus 
the  covenant  with  Abraham  was  conditioned  by 
circumcision  (Acts  vii.  8),  the  omission  of  which 
was  declared  tantamount  to  a  breach  of  the  cove- 
nant (Gen.  xvii.)  ;  the  covenant  of  the  priesthood,  by 
zeal  for  God,  his  honour  and  service  (Num.  xxv.  12, 
13 ;  Deut.  xxxiii.  9  ;  Neh.  xiii.  29 ;  Mai.  ii.  4,  5)  ; 
the  covenant  of  Sinai,  by  the  observance  of  the  ten 
commandments  (Ex.  xxxiv.  27,  28  ;  Lev.  xxvi.  15), 
which  are  therefore  called  "  Jehovah's  covenant " 
(Deut.  iv.  13),  a  name  which  was  extended  to  all 
the  books  of  Moses,  if  not  to  the  whole  body  of 
Jewish  canonical  Scriptures  (2  Cor.  iii.  13,  14). 
This  last-mentioned  covenant,  which  was  renewed 
at  different  periods  of  Jewish  history  (Deut.  xxix. ; 
Josh.  xxiv. ;  2  Chr.  xv.  xxiii.  xxix.  xxxiv. ;  Ezr. 
x. ;  Neh.  ix.  x.),  is  one  of  the  two  principal  covenants 
between  God  and  man.  They  are  distinguished  as 
old  and  new  (Jer.  xxxi.  31-34 ;  Heb.  viii.  8-13,  x.  16), 
with  reference  to  the  order,  not  of  their  institution 
but  of  their  actual  development  (Gal.  iii.  17)  ;  and 
also  as  being  the  instruments  respectively  of  bondage 
and  freedom  (Gal.  iv.  24).  The  latter  of  these  cove- 
nants appears  to  be  represented  in  Gal.  iii.  under  a 
twofold  aspect,  as  being  a  covenant  between  the 
First  and  Second  Persons  of  the  blessed  Trinity  (ver. 
16  and  ver.  20,  as  explained  by  Scholefield,  Ellicott, 
&c),  and  also  a  covenant,  conditioned  by  faith  in 
Christ,  between  God  and  man.  (See  Bp.  Hopkins's 
Works,  vol.  fi.  pp.  299-398,  and  Wiisius  on  the 
Covenants,  for  the  theology  of  the  subject.)  Con- 
sistently with  this  representation  of  God's  dealings 
with  man  under  the  form  of  a  covenant,  such  cove- 
nant is  said  to  be  confirmed  in  conformity  to  human 
custom  by  an  oath  (Deut.  iv.  31 ;  Ps.  lxxxix.  3), 
to  be  sanctioned  by  curses  to  fall  upon  the  unfaithful 
(Deut.  xxix.  21),  and  to  be  accompanied  by  a  sign 
(TVIX),  such  as  the  rainbow  (Gen.  ix.),  circum- 
cision (Gen.  xvii.),  or  the  Sabbath  (Ex.  xxxi.  16,17). 

2.  Properly,  of  a  covenant  between  mm  and  man, 
i.  c.  a  solemn  compact  or  agreement,  either  between 


cow 

tribes  or  nations  (1  Sain.  xi.  1  ;  Josh.  ix.  6,  15), 
or  between  individuals  (Gen.  xxxi.  44),  by  which 
each  part}'  bound  himself  to  fulfil  certain  conditions, 
and  was  assured  of  receiving  certain  advantages.  In 
making  such  a  covenant  God  was  solemnly  invoked 
as  witness  (Gen.  xxxi.  50),  whence  the  expression 
"a  covenant  of  Jehovah  "  (i"liiV  n,"]2,  1  Sam.  xx. 
8,  comp.  Ez.  xvii.  19),  and  an  oath  was  sworn 
(Gen.  xxi.  31);  and  accordingly  a  breach  of  cove- 
nant was  regarded  as  a  very  heinous  sin  (Ez.  xvii. 
12-20).  A  sign  (TVIK)  or  witness  ("IJ?)  of  the 
covenant  was  sometimes  framed,  such  as  a  gift 
(Gen.  xxi.  30),  or  a  pillar,  or  heap  of  stones  erected 
(Gen.  xxxi.  52).  The  marriage  compact  is  called 
"  the  covenant  of  God,"  Prow  ii.  17  (see  Mai.  ii.  14). 
The  word  covenant  came  to  be  applied  to  a  sure 
ordinance,  such  as  that  of  the  shew-bread  (Lev. 
xxiv.  8)  ;  and  is  used  figuratively  in  such  ex- 
pressions as  a  covenant  with  death  (Is.  xxviii.  18), 
or  with  the  wild  beasts  (Hos.  ii.  18).  The  phrases 
rVQ  ^J?3,  1VO  'B^N,  "  lords  or  men  of  one's 
covenant,"  are  emploved  to  denote  confederacy  (Gen. 
xiv.  13,  Ob.  7).  [T.  T.  P.] 

COW.  The  Heb.  words  "\p2,  rbiV,  and  "liP 
have  been  treated  of  under  Bull.  The  A.  V.  ren- 
ders by  "  cow,"  both  "Ip2,  in  Ez.  iv.  15,  and  "lit? 
in  Lev.  xxii.  28  ;  Num.  xviii.  17,  where  the  feminine 
gender  is  required  by  the  sense.  In  Job  xxi.  10  and 
Is.  xi.  7,  the  A.  V.  has  "  cow"  as  the  rendering  of 
HIS,  the  fern,  form  of  "IS,  "a  bullock."   [W.  £>.] 

T  T 

COZ  (pp ;  Kwe  ;  Cos),  a  man  among  the  de- 
scendants of  Judah  (1  Chr.  iv.  8). 

COZ'BI  03T3  ;  XaffPt ;  Jos.  Xoo-pia  ;  Cozbi), 

a  Midianite  woman,  daughter  of  Zur,  one  of  the 
chiefs  of  the  nation  (Num.  xxv.  15,  18). 

CRANE  (DID,  or  D'D).  The  word  occurs  only 
twice  in  A.  V.  in  Is.  xxxviii.  14,  and  Jer.  viii.  7, 
where  the  proper  rendering  seems  to  be  swallow. 
The  former  passage  implies  that  the  bird  called 
D-1D  had  a  plaintive  voice,  the  latter  that  it  was  of 
migratory  habits.  The  northern  Italians  call  the 
swallow  zisilla  and  use  the  verb  zisillare  =  TiTvfii- 
&iv,  ypi0vpl(eiv.     [Swallow.]  [W.  D.] 

CRA'TES  (KpoLTris  ;  Vulg.  translates  praelatus 
est),  governor  of  the  Cyprians  (6  iirl  raiv  K.),  who 
was  left  in  charge  of  the  "  castle  "  (ttjs  aKpoiro- 
Aecos)  of  Jerusalem  (?),  during  the  absence  of 
Sostratus,  in  the  reign  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes 
(2  Mace.  iv.  29). 

CREDITOR.     [Loan.] 

CRES'CENS  (KpV^s,  2  Tim.  iv.  10),  an 
assistant  of  St.  Paul,  said  to  have  been  one  of  the 
seventy  disciples.  According  to  the  Apostolical 
Constitution*,  and  many  of  the  fathers,  he  preached 
the  Gospel  in  Galatia,  which  peihaps  is  only  a  <<>n- 
jecture  built  on  the  "  Crescens  to  Galatia  "  of  2  Tim. 
iv.  10.  Later  tradition  (Sophronios)  makes  him 
preach  in  Gaul  (Galatia,  see  Theodoret  on  2  Tim. 
/.  c),  and  found  the  Church  at  Vienne.     [II.  A.  | 

CRETE  (KprJTTj;  Creta),  the  modern  Candia. 
This  large  island,  which  closes  in  the  Greek  Archi- 
pelago on  the  S.,  extends  through  a  distance  of  140 
miles  between  its  extreme  points  of  Cape  SA.LMONE 
(Acts  xxvii.  7)  on  the  I-;.,  and  Cape  Criumetopon 
beyond  Phoenice  or  Phoenix  (t&.  12)  on  the  W. 
The  breadth  is  comparatively  small,  the  narrowest 


CRETE 


363 


part  (called  an  isthmus  by  Strabo,  x.  p.  475)  being 
near  Phoenix.  Though  extremely  bold  and  moun- 
tainous, this  island  has  very  fruitful  valleys,  and 
in  early  times  it  was  celebrated  for  its  hundred 
cities  (Virg.  Aen.  iii.  100).  Crete  has  a  conspi- 
cuous position  in  the  mythology  and  earliest  historv 
of  Greece,  but  a  comparatively  unimportant  one  in 
its  later  history.  It  was  reduced  (B.C.  67)  by  the 
Romans  under  Metellus,  hence  called  Creticus,  and 
united  in  one  province  with  Cyrenaica,  which  was 
at  no  great  distance  (Strabo,  x.  475)  on  the  oppo- 
site coast  of  Africa  [Cyrene].  It  is  possible  that 
in  Tit.  iii.  1,  there  may  be  an  implied  reference  to 
a  turbulent  condition  of  the  Cretan  part  of  the  pro- 
vince, especially  as  regarded  the  Jewish  residents. 

It  seems  likely  that  a  very  early  acquaintance 
took  place  between  the  Cretans  and  the  Jews.  The 
story  in  Tacitus  {Hist.  v.  2),  that  the  Jews  were 
themselves  of  Cretan  origin,  may  be  accounted  for 
by  supposing  a  confusion  between  the  Philistines 
and  the  Jews,  and  by  identifying  the  Cherethites, 
of  1  Sam.  xxx.  14  ;  2  Sam.  viii.  18  ;  Ezek.  xxv.  16  ; 
Zeph.  ii.  5,  with  Cretan  emigrants.  In  the  two 
last  of  these  passages  they  are  expressly  called 
Kprires  by  the  LXX.,  and  in  Zeph.  ii.  6,  we  have 
the  word  Kpr^rr}.  Whatever  conclusion  we  may 
arrive  at  on  this  point,  there  is  no  doubt  that  Jews 
were  settled  in  the  island  in  considerable  numbers 
during  the  period  between  the  death  of  Alexander 
the  Great  and  the  final  destruction  of  Jerusalem. 
Gortyna  seems  to  have  been  their  chief  residence  ; 
for  it  is  specially  mentioned  (1  Mace.  xv.  23)  in 
the  letters  written  by  the  Romans  on  behalf  of  the 
Jews,  when  Simon  Maccabaeus  renewed  the  treaty 
which  his  brother  Judas  had  made  with  Rome. 
[Goutyna.]  See  1  Mace.  x.  67.  At  a  later  period 
Josephus  says  (Ant.  xvii.  12,  §1,  B.  J.  ii.  7,  §1) 
that  the  Pseudo-Alexander,  Herod's  supposed  son, 
imposed  upon  the  Jews  of  Crete,  when  on  his  way 
to  Italy.  And  later  still,  Philo  (Leg.  ad  Cat. 
§3'6)  makes  the  Jewish  envoys  say  to  Caligula  that 
all  the  more  noted  islands  of  the  Mediterranean, 
including  Crete,  were  full  of  Jews.  Thus  the 
special  mention  of  Cretans  (Acts  ii.  11)  among 
those  who  were  in  Jerusalem  at  the  great  Pentecost 
is  just  what  we  should  expect. 

No  notice  is  given  in  the  Acts  of  any  more  direct 
evangelisation  of  Crete  ;  and  no  absolute  proof  can 
be  adduced  that  St.  Paul  was  ever  there  before  his 
voyage  from  Caesarea  to  Puteoli ;  though  it  is  quite 
possible  that  he  may  have  visited  the  island  in  the 
course  of  his  residences  at  Corinth  and  Ephesus. 
For  the  speculations  which  have  been  made  in  refer- 
ence to  this  point,  we  must  refer  to  what  is  written 
in  the  articles  on  Titus,  and  Tins.  EPISTLE  to. 

The  circumstances  of  St.  Paul's  recorded  visit 
were  briefly  as  follows.  The  wind  being  contrary 
when  he  was  off  CNIDUS  (Acts  xxvii.  7),  the  ship 
was  forced  to  run  down  to  Cape  Salmone,  and 
thence  under  the  lee  of  Crete  to  Ewi:  Havens, 
which  was  near  a  city  called  Lasaka  (v.  8). 
Thence,  after  some  delay,  an  attempt  was  made, 
on  the  wind  becoming  favourable,  to  reach  Phoe- 
nice tor  tlie  purpose  of  wintering  there  (v.  12); 
but  a  sudden  gale  i'rom  the  N.E.  [Winds]  coming 
down  from  the  high  ground  of  Crete  (/car'  aurvjs), 
in  the  neighbourhood  of  Mount  Ida.  drove  the 
ship  to  the  little  island  of  Clauda  (yv.  13-16), 
win  nee  she  drifted  to  Malta.  It  is  impossible  to 
Bay  how  far  this  short  stay  at  Fair  Havens  may 
have  afforded  opportunities  for  preaching  the  Gos- 
pel at  Lasaea  or  elsewhere. 


364 


CRIMSON 


The  next  point  of  connexion  between  St.  Paul 
and  this  island  is  found  in  the  epistle  to  Titus.  It 
is  evident  from  Tit.  i.  5,  that  the  Apostle  himself 
was  here  at  no  long  interval  of  time  before  he  wrote 
the  letter.  We  believe  this  to  have  been  between  the 
first  and  second  imprisonments.  In  the  couise  of 
the  letter  (Tit.  i.  12)  St.  Paul  adduces  from  Epi- 
menides,  a  Cretan  sage  and  poet  (Oeios  avijp,  Plat. 
Legg.  i.  642),  a  quotation  in  which  the  vices  of  his 
countrymen  are  described  in  dark  colours.  The 
truth  of  what  is  said  by  Epimenides  is  abundantly 
confirmed  by  the  passages  collected  (iv.  10)  in 
Meursius's  great  work  on  Crete  (Meursii  Opera, 
Florence.  1744,  vol.  hi.).  He  has  also  a  chapter 
(iv.  4)  on  the  early  Christian  history  of  the  island. 
Titus  was  much  honoured  here  during  the  middle 
ages.  The  cathedral  of  Megalo-Castron  was  dedi- 
cated to  him :  and  his  name  was  the  watchword  of 
the  Cretans,  when  they  fought  against  the  Vene- 
tians, who  themselves  seem  to  have  placed  him 
|ibove  St.  Mark  in  Candia,  when  they  became  mas- 
ters of  the  island.  See  Pashley's  Travels  in  Crete, 
i.  pp.  6,  175  (London,  1837).  In  addition  to  this 
valuable  work,  we  must  refer  to  Hoeck's  Krcta 
(Gottingen,  1829),  and  to  some  papers  translated 
from  the  Italian,  and  published  by  Mr.  E.  Falkener 
in  the  second  volume  of  the  Museum  of  Classical 
Antiquities  (London,  1856).  [J.  S.  H.] 

CRIMSON.     [Colours.] 

CRIS'PUS  (Kplcriros  ;  found  also  in  the  Tal- 
mudists  under  the  forms  NQD,_lp  and  ^SD'Hp), 
ruler  of  the  Jewish  synagogue  at  Corinth  (Acts 
xviii.  8) ;  baptized  with  his  family  by  St.  Paul 
(1  Cor.  i.  14).  According  to  tradition,  he  became 
afterwards  Bishop  of  Aegina  {Const.  Apost.  vii. 
46).  [H.  A.] 

CROSS  (ffravp6s,  (TK6\oip).  Except  the  Latin 
crux  there  was  no  word  definitively  and  invariably 
applied  to  this  instrument  of  punishment.  The 
Greek  word  ffravpos  is  derived  from  '/(rrrjyut,  and 
properly,  like  o~K6\o\p,  means  merely  a  stake  (Horn. 
Od.  xiv.  11  ;  II.  xxiv.  453).  Hence  Eustathius 
defines  ffravpol  to  be  opOa.  nal  air(o^v/xjj.eva  £vAa, 
and  Hesych.  ol  KaTaireirriyoTes  ffKoAoires,  xapa/ces. 
The  Greeks  use  the  word  to  translate  both  palus 
and  crux;  e.  g.  crravp^i  ■wpocr'Seiv  in  Dion.  Cass, 
(xlix.  22)  is  exactly  equivalent  to  the  Latin  ad 
palum  deligare.  In  Livy  even  crux  means  a  mere 
stake  (mi  tres  sustolli  cruces,  xxviii.  29),  just  as 
vice  versa  the  Fathers  use  <tk6\oi\/,  and  even  stipes 
(de  stipite  pendens)  of  a  cross  proper.  (In  con- 
sequence of  this  vagueness  of  meaning,  impaling 
(Herod,  ix.  76)  is  sometimes  spoken  of,  loosely,  as 
a  kind  of  crucifixion,  and  ava<TKo\oiri£eiv  is  nearly 
equivalent  to  avaaravpovv  ;  alii  per  obscoena  sti- 
pitem  egerunt,  alii  brachia  patibulo  explicuerunt, 
Sen.  Consol.  ad  Marc.  xx. ;  and  Ep.  xiv.).  Other 
words  occasionally  applied  to  the  cross  are  pati- 
buliim  and  furca,  pieces  of  wood  in  the  shape  of 
n  (or  Y)  and  A  respectively  (Big.  48,  tit.  13  ; 
Plant.  Mil.  Gl.  ii.  47  ;  and  in  Sail.  fr.  ap.  Non.  iv. 
355,  patibulo  cminens  affligebatur  seems  clearly 
to  imply  crucifixion).  After  the  abolition  of  this 
mode  of  death  by  Constantine,  Trebonianus  sub- 
stituted furca  figendos  for  crucifigendos,  wherever 
the  word  occurred.  More  generally  the  cross  is 
called  arbor  infelix  (Liv.  i.  26  ;  Sen.  Ep.  101), 
or  lignum  infelix  (Cic.  per  Bab.  3)  ;  and  in  Greek 
1-vXov  (Dent.  xxi.  22).  The  Fathers  in  controversy 
used  to  quote  the   words  d  Kvoios    if}acri\evo-*v 


CROSS 

(anb  rov  |uAou),  from  Ps.  xiv.  10,  or  Ps. 
xcvi.,  as  a  prophecy  of  the  cross  ;  but  these  words 
are  adulterina  et  Christiana  clevotiona  addita  ; 
though  Genebrardus  thought  them  a  prophetic 
addition  of  the  LXX.,  and  Agellius  conjectures  that 
they  read  yV  for  C]N  (Schleusner's  Thes.).  The 
Hebrews  had  no  word  for  a  cross  more  definite 
than  y]},  "  wood"  (Gen.  xl.  19,  &c),  and  so  they 
called   the    transverse    beams    2"ty)  TMJ,  "  warp 

and  woof"  (Pearson,  On  the  Creed,  art.  iv.),  like 
£v\oi>  SiSvixoy,  LXX.  Crux  is  the  root  of  crucio, 
and  is  often  used  proverbially  for  what  is  most 
painful  (as  summum  jus,  summa  crux,  Colum. 
i.  7  ;  quaerere  in  malo  crucem,  Ter.  Phorm.  iii. 
3,  11),  and  as  a  nickname  for  villains  (Quid  ais, 
cruxf  Plaut.  Pen.  ii.  5,  17).  Rarer  terms  are 
"iKpiov  (Euseb.  viii.  8),  ffavts  (?),  and  Gabalus 
(VaiTo  ap.  Non.  ii.   373 ;    Macrinus  ap.  Capitol. 

Macr.  11).  This  last  word  is  derived  from  ?3H, 
"  to  complete." 

As  the  emblem  of  a  slave's  death  and  a  mur- 
derer's punishment,  the  cross  was  naturally  looked 
upon  with  the  profoundest  horror,  and  closely  con- 
nected "  with  the  ideas  of  pain,  of  guilt,  and  of 
ignominy"  (Gibbon,  ii.  153;  Nomen  ipsurn  crucis 
absit  non  modo  a  corpore  civium  Pomanorum,  sed 
etiam  a  cogitatione,  oculis,  auribus,  Cic.  pro  Rob. 
5).  But  after  the  celebrated  vision  of  Constantine 
(Euseb.  V.  Const,  i.  27-30),  he  ordered  his  friends 
to  make  a  cross  of  gold  and  gems,  such  as  he  had 
seen,  and  "  the  towering  eagles  resigned  the  flags 
unto  the  cross"  (Pearson),  and  "the  tree  of  cursing 
and  shame  "  "  sat  upon  the  sceptres  and  was  en- 
graved and  signed  on  the  foreheads  of  kings  "  ( Jer. 
Taylor,  Life  of  Christ,  iii.  xv.  1).  The  new 
standards — 
"  In  quibus  effigies  crucis  aut  gemmata  refulget, 

Aut  longis  solido  ex  auro  praefertur  ab  hastis," 
(Prudent,  in  Symm.  ii.  464,  sq.) 
were  called  by  the  name  Labarum,  and  may  be 
seen    engraved    in    Baronius 
(Ann.   Eccl.   a.d.   312,  No. 
36),   or   represented   on    the 
coins  of  Constantine  the  Great 
and  his  nearer  successors.  The 
Labarum  is  described  in  Eu- 
seb. (  V.  Constant,  i.  25),  and, 
besides    the    pendent    cross,' 
supported       the 

•vK»         celebrated     em- 
"  <st^   ■fl  broidered  mono- 
X  gram   of  Christ 

(Gibbon,  ii.  154; 
Transversa  X  litterd,  sum- 
mo  capite  circumflexo,  Cae- 
cil.),  which  was  also  inscribed 
on  the  shields  and  helmets  of 
the  legions : — 
"  Christus  purpureum  gem- 
manti  tectus  in  auro 

Signabat  labarum  ;  elypeo- 
rum  insignia  Christus 

Scripserat,  ardebat  summis 
crux  addita  cristas." 

(Prudent.  I.  e.) 
Nay,  the  <rvfj.fioXov  aonripiov 
was  even  more  prominently 
honoured ;  for  Jerome  says,  Begum  purpuras  et 
ardentes  diadematum  gemmas  patibuli  Salvatoris 
pictura  condecorat  (Ep.  ad  Loetam.). 


(Fr, 


CROSS 

We  may  tabulate  thus  the  various  descriptions  of 
cross   (Lips,  de  Cruce,  i. ;    Godwyn's   Moses  and 

'"won)  : — 

Crux. 
I 


CROSS 


305 


Simplex. 


Compacta. 
I 


2.  Decussata.  3.  Commissa.  4.  Immissa, 
Andreana,  or  and  ansata.  or  capitata. 
Burgundian. 

1 .  The  crux  simplex,  or  mere  stake  "  of  one  single 
piece  without  transom,"  was  probably  the  original 
of  the  rest.  Sometimes  it  was  merely  driven 
through  the  man's  chest,  but  at  other  times  it 
was  driven  longitudinally,  oia.  pdx^cos  Kal  vwtov 
(Hesych.  s.  v.  <tk6\o\I/),  coming  out  at  the  mouth 
(Sen.  Ep.  xdv.),  a  method  of  punishment  called 
avaffKivovAevffts,  or  infixio.  The  affixio  consisted 
merely  of  tying  the  criminal  to  the  stake  (ad  pedum 
ieligare,  Liv.  xxvi.  13),  from  which  he  hung  by 
his  arms :  the  process  is  described  in  the  little  poem 
of  Ausonius,  Cupido  crucifixus.  Trees  were 
naturally  convenient  for  this  purpose,  and  we  read 
of  their  being  applied  to  such  use  in  the  Martyr- 
ologies.  Tertulliau  too  tells  us  (Apol.  viii.  16)  that 
to  punish  the  priests  of  Saturn,  Tiberius  in  eisdem 
arboribus,  obumbratricibus  scelerum,  votivis  cru- 
cibles explicuit  (cf.  Tac.  Germ,  xii.,  Proditores  et 
transfugas  arboribus  suspendunt).  How  far  the 
expression  "  accursed  tree  "  is  applicable  under  this 
head  is  examined  under  the  word  Crucifixion. 

2.  The  crux  decussata  is  called  St.  Andrew's 
cross,  although  on  no  good  grounds,  since,  according 
to  some,  he  was  killed  with  the  sword ;  and  Hip- 
polytus  says  that  he  was  crucified  upright,  ad 
arborem  olivae.  It  is  in  the  shape  of  the  Greek 
letter  X  (Jerome,  in  Jer.  xxxi. ;  X  littera  et  in 
figurd  crucem,  et  in  numero  decern  denwnstrat, 
Isidor.  Orig.  i.  3).  Hence  Just.  Mart.  (Dial.  c. 
Tryph.  p.  200)  quotes  Plato's  expression,  ixia^ev 
dvrbv  iv  rip  irdvTi,  with  reference  to  the  cross. 
The  Fathers,  with  their  usual  luxuriant  imagination, 
discover  types  of  this  kind  of  cross  in  Jacob's 
blessing  of  Joseph's  sons,  -^epffiv  ivriWayixivais 
(cf.  Tert.  de  Baptismo,  viii.)  ;  in  the  anointing  of 
priests  "  decussatively "  (Sir  T.  Browne,  Garden 
of  Cyrus) ;  for  the  rabbis  say  that  kings  were 
anointed  in  forma  coronae,  sacerdotes  autem 
*2  p03,  i.  e.  ad  formain  X  Graecorum  (Schoett- 
geu's  Hor.  Hebr.  et  Talm.  iv.  ad  f.) ;  and  in  the 
crossing  of  the  hands  over  the  head  of  the  goat  on 
the  day  of  expiation  (Targ.  Jonath.  ad  Lev.  xvi. 
21,  &c). 

3.  The  crux  commissa,  or  St.  Anthony's  cross 
(so  called  from  being  embroidered  on  that  saint's 
cope,  Mrs.  Jameson's  Sacred  Art,  i.  xxxv.),  was  in 
the  shape  of  a  T.  Hence  Lucian,  in  his  aitinaing 
AiK7j  <poivt)ivru>v,  jocosely  derives  ffTavpos  from 
ToO  (curb  tSvtov  .  .  Kal  rep  Texvyi/aaTt  t<j5  ttovtjp^ 
ttjv  Trovwpav  inoivv/xtav  ffvv(\6e?v),  and  makes 
mankind  accuse  it  bitterly  for  suggesting  to  tyrants 
the  instrument  of  torture  (Jud.  Vocal.  12).  This 
shape  is  often  alluded  to  as  "  the  mystical  Tan" 
(Garden  of  Cyrus;  nostra  autem  T species  crucis, 
Tert.  adv.  Marc.  iii.  22  ;  Jer.  in  Ezech.  ix.,  &c). 
As  that  letter  happens  to  stand  for  300,  iippm-- 
t unity  was  given  for  more  elaborate  trifling ;  thus 
the  300  cubits  of  the  ark  are  considered  typical 
(Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  vi.  ;  S.  l'aullin.  Ep.  ii.  :  and 
even  Abraham's  318  servants  (!) ;  since  318  is  re- 
presented  by  Ti7j,   they  deduced  rbv  p.ev  'lyffovv 


iv  roiis  Svffi  ypafJ-fiacriv  Kal  iv  kvi  rbv  aravpdv 
(Barnab.  Ep.  ix.  ;  Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  vi.  ;  Ambros. 
Prol.  in  I.  i.  de  Fide. ;  Pearson  (art.  iv.)  on  the 
Creed,  in  whose  notes  these  passages  are  quoted). 

A  variety  of  this  cross  (the  crux  ansata,  "  crosses 
with  circles  on  their  heads")  is  found  "  in  _a 
the  sculptures  from  Khorsabad  and  the 
ivories  from  Nimrod.  M.  Lajard  (Observa- 
tions sur  la  Croix  anse'e)  refers  it  to  the  Assyrian 
symbol  of  divinity,  the  winged  figure  in  a  circle  ;  but 
Egyptian  antiquaries  quite  reject  the  theory  "  (Lay- 
ard's  Nineveh,  ii.  213,  note).  In  the  Egyptian  sculp- 
tures, a  similar  object,  called  a  crux  ansata,  is  con- 
stantly borne  by  divinities,  and  is  variously  called 
"  the  key  of  the  Nile  "  (Dr.  Young  in  Encycl.  Bri- 
tan.~),  "  the  character  of  Venus,"  and  more  correctly 
(as  by  Lacroze)  "  the  emblem  of  life."  Indeed  this  was 
the  old  explanation  (epfj.yjvfvde'iffav  ffvp-avat  Tdvrrjv 
ypa<pr)v  ZcoJ;  iirepxoiu-tvn,  Sozomen,  Hist.  Eccl. 
vii.  15 ;  so  too  Rufrinus  (ii.  29),  who  says  it  was 
one  of  the  "  UpariKal  vel  sacerdotales  litterae  "). 
"  The  Egyptians  thereby  expressed  the  powers  and 
motion  of  the  spirit  of  the  world,  and  the  diffusion 
thereof  upon  the  celestial  and  elemental  nature " 
(Sir  T.  Browne,  Gard.  of  Cyrus).  This  too  was 
the  signification  given  to  it  by  the  Christian  con- 
verts in  the  army  of  Theodosius,  when  they  re- 
marked it  on  the  temple  of  Serapis,  according  to 
the  story  mentioned  in  Suidas.  The  same  symbol 
has  been  also  found  among  the  Copts,  and  (perhaps 
accidentally)  among  the  Indians  and  Persians.. 

4.  The  crux  immissa  (or  Latin  cross)  differed 
from  the  former  by  the  projection  of  the  Sopv 
v\i/T]Aov  (or  stipes)  above  the  Ktpas  iyKapcriov,  or 
patibulum  (Euseb.  de  V.  Constant,  i.  31).  That 
this  was  the  kind  of  cross  on  which  our  Lord  died 
is  obvious  (among  other  reasons)  from  the  mention 
of  the  "  title,"  as  placed  above  our  Lord's  head, 
and  from  the  almost  unanimous  tradition  ;  it  is 
repeatedly  found  on  the  coins  and  columns  of 
Constantine.  Hence  ancient  and  modern  imagi- 
nation has  been  chiefly  tasked  to  find  symbols  for 
this  sort  of  cross,  and  has  been  eminently  success- 
ful. They  find  it  typified,  for  instance,  in  the  atti- 
tude of  Moses  during  the  battle  of  Kephidim  (Ex. 
xvii.  12),  saying  that  he  was  bidden  by  the  Spirit, 
'Lva  TToe/jfTr;  tvttov  ffravpov  Kal  rod  fxiWovros 
irdffx€l,/  (Barnab.  Ep.  12  ;  Just.  Mart.  Dial.  c. 
Tryph.  89  ;  habitus  crucis,  Tert.  adv.  Marc.  iii. 
18).  Finnic.  Maternus  (de  Errore,  xxi.)  says  (from 
the  Talmudists  ?)  that  Moses  made  a  cross  of  his 
rod,  ut  facilius  impetraret  quod  magnopere  postu- 
laret,  crucem  sibi  fecit  ex  virgd.  He  also  fantas- 
tically applies  to  the  cross  expressions  in  Hab.  iii. 
3-5 ;  Is.  ix.  6,  &c.  Other  supposed  types  are 
Jacob's  ladder  (Jer.  Com.  in  Ps.  xci. ;  Dominus 
amicus  scdae  Christus  crucifixus  ostenditur, 
August.  Serin,  de  Temp,  lxxix.)  ;  the  paschal  lamb, 
pierced  by  transverse  spits  (axrlnaTi£6p.ivov  6fxoiws 
rep  ffxyft-ari  tov  ffravpov  o-Krarai,  Just.  M.  Dial. 
c.  Tryph.  xl.) ;  and  "  the  Hebrew  Tenupha,  or 
ceremony  of  their  oblations  waved  by  the  priest 
into  the  four  quarters  of  the  world  after  the  form 
bfa  cross"  (Vitringa,  Obs.Sacr.  ii.  9  ;  Schoettgen, 
/.  c).  A  truer  type  (John  iii.  14)  is  the  elevation 
fniQ^p*,  Chald.)  of  the  fiery  serpent  (Num.  xxi. 
s,  9).  For  seme  strange  applications  of  texts  to 
this  figure  see  Cypr.  Testim.  ii.  rx.  sq.  In  Matt. 
v.  18,  twTa  iv  •?)  fila  Kepaia  is  also  made  to  repre- 

■  n)    a   Cross   (I  eVn  to  opObv  £i)Kov  Kal  Ktpaia  rb 
nkdyiov,  Theophyl.  m  he,  &c).     To  the  four 

&Kpa   of  the    CrOSS    they    also    applied  the   ityor  Kal 


366 


CItOSS 


fidOos  teal  irXdros  teal  ixyikos  of  Eph.  iii.  18  (as 
Greg.  Nyss.  and  Aug.  Ep.  120) ;  and  another  oi 
their  fancies  was  that  there  was  a  mystical  signi- 
ficance in  this  S6pv  TerpdirAeupov  (Nonn.  In  Joh. 
xix.  18),  because  it  pointed  to  the  four  corners  of 
the  world  (Quatuor  indc  plagas  quadrati  colligit 
orbis,  Sedul.  iii.).  In  all  nature  the  sacred  sign 
was  found  to  be  indispensable  (KaTavoriaaTt  iravra 
eV  t<£>  k6(T/j.<p  €i  avev  rod  o~xvtjLaTOS  tovtov  Sloi- 
keitou,  Just.  M.  Apol.  i.  72),  especially  in  such 
things  as  involve  dignity,  energy,  or  deliverance  ; 
as  the  actions  of  digging,  ploughing,  &c,  the 
human  face,  the  antennae  of  a  ship  in  full  sail,  &c. 
Aves  quando  volant  ad  aethera  signum  cruris 
assumunt.  Homo  natans,  vel  orans,  forma  cruris 
visittir  (Jer.  in  Marc.  xi.).  Signa  ipsa  et 
cantabra  et  vexilla  quid  aliud  quam  inauratae 
cruces  sunt  ?  (Mia.  Fel.  Oct.  xxix.).  Similar  ana- 
logies are  repeated  in  Firm.  Maten.  de  Errore,  xxi. ; 
Tert.  ado.  Nat.  i.  12  ;  Apol.  16  ;  de  Coron.  Mil.  iii., 
and,  in  answer  to  the  sneers  of  those  to  whom  the 
cross  was  "  foolishness,"  were  considered  sufficient 
proof  that  signo  cruris  aut  ratio  naturalis  nititur 
aut  vestra  religio  formatur  (Min.  Fel.,  &c).  The 
types  adduced  from  Scripture  were  valuable  to 
silence  the  difficulties  of  the  Jews,  to  whom,  in 
consequence  of  Deut.  xxi.  22  (iirtKardparos  6 
OTavpovjXQVOs),  the  cross  was  an  especial  "  stum- 
bling-block" (Tert.  ado.  Jud.  ix.).  Many  such 
fancies  (e.  g.  the  harmlessness  of  cruciform  flowers, 
the  southern  cross,  &c.)  are  collected  in  '  Communi- 
cations with  the  Unseen  World.' 

Besides  the  four  &Kpa  (or  apices,  Tert.)  of  the 
cross,  was  a  fifth  (ir^yfia),  projecting  out  of  the 
central  stem,  on  which  the  body  of  the  sufferer 
rested  (e</>'  $  ivoxowrai  ol  ffravpovfxevoi,  Just. 
M.  Trgph.  xci.,  who  {more  suo)  compares  it  to  the 
horn  of  a  rhinoceros  ;  sedilis  excessus,  Tert.  adv. 
Nat.  i.  12  ;  ubi  requiescit  qui  clavis  affigitur, 
Iren.  adv.  Haeres.  i.  12).  This  was  to  prevent  the 
weight  of  the  body  from  tearing  away  the  hands, 
since  it  was  impossible  that  it  "  should  rest  upon 
nothing  but  four  great  wounds"  (Jer.  Taylor,  Life 
of  Christ,  iii.  xv.  2,  who  erroneously  quotes  the 
S6pv  TtTpdirXevpov  of  Nonnus).  This  projection 
is  probably  alluded  to  in  the  famous  lines  of  Mae- 
cenas (ap.  Sen.  Ep.  10 1): — 

"  Vita  dum  superest  bene  est ; 

Hanc  mihi  vel  acuta 

Si  sedeam  crucc,  sustine." 

Ruhkopf  (ad  loc.)  so  explains  it,  and  it  is  not  so 
probable  that  it  refers  to  auaffKiuSvAevcns  as 
Lipsius  thinks  (de  Cruce,  i.  6).  Whether  there 
was  also  a  i/ttoitSSlov  or  support  to  the  feet 
(as  we  see  in  pictures),  is  doubtful.  Gregory  of 
Tours  mentions  it ;  but  he  is  the  earliest  authority, 
and  has  no  weight  (G.  J.  Voss.  Harm.  Passion. 
ii.  7.  28). 

An  inscription,  titulus  or  elogium  (eiriypaipr], 
Luke  xxiii.  ;  alria,  Matt,  xxvii. ;  ri  iiriypa(p^  ttjs 
curias,  Mark ;  tItAos,  John  xix. ;  Qui causam  poenae 
indicavit,  Suet.  Cal.  32  ;  7riVa£,  Euseb.  ;  ypd^ixara 
t))v  alriav  tt)s  BavaTiiaecos  SrjAovvTa,  Dion  Cass. 

liv.  3  ;  irTvx'iov  eVi-ypo/Xjua  Zxov>  Hesych.  TYw)  was 
generally  placed  above  the  person's  head,  and  briefly 
expressed  his  guilt,  as  ovt6s  4o~tii>  "AttoXos  6 
Xpicrriavos  (Euseb.  v.  1),  Impie  locutus  parmitr 
larius  (Suet.  Horn,  x.),  and  generally  was  carried 
before  the  criminal  (praecedente  titulo,  Suet.).  It 
was  covered  with  white  gypsum,  and  the  letters 
were   black  ;    hence    Sozomen    calls    it    AevKupa 


CROSS 

(Hist.  Eccl.  ii.  1),  and  Nicephorus  a  Acvkt)  ffdvis 
(H.  Eccl.  viii.  29).  But  Nicquetus  (Tit.  Sanct. 
Cruris,  i.  6)  says  it  was  white  with  red  letters. 

A  common  tradition  assigns  the  perpetual  shiver 
of  the  aspen  to  the  fact  of  the  cross  having  been 
formed  of  its  wood.  Lipsius,  however  (de  Cruce,  iii. 
13),  thinks  it  was  of  oak,  which  was  strong  enough, 
and  common  in  Judea.  Few  will  attach  any  con- 
sequence to  his  other  reason,  that  the  relics  appear 
to  be  of  oak.     The  legend  to  which  he  alludes, 

"  Pes  crucis  est  cedrus,  corpus  tenet  alta  cupressus, 
Palma  manus  retinet,  titulo  laetatur  oliva," 

hardly  needs  refutation.  It  must  not  be  overlooked 
that  crosses  must  have  been  of  the  meanest  and  rea- 
diest materials,  because  they  were  used  in  such  mar- 
vellous numbers.  Thus  we  are  told  that  Alexander 
Jannaeus  crucified  800  Jews  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  14, 
§2) ;  and  Varus  2000  (id.  xvii.  10,  §10)  ;  and  Hadrian 
500  a-day  ;  and  Titus  so  many  that  xuP d  te  ive- 
AenreTo  rots  ffravpois  teal  ffravpol  to?s  awfiaaiu 
(Joseph.  Bell.  Jud.  vi.  28,  where  Keland  rightly 
notices  the  strange  retribution,  "  so  that  they  who 
had  nothing  but  '  crucify '  in  their  mouth,  were 
therewith  paid  home  in  their  own  bodies,"  Sir 
T.  Browne,  Vulg.  Err.  v.  21).  In  Sicily,  Augustus 
crucified  600  (Oros.  vi.  18). 

It  is  a  question  whether  tying  or  binding  to  the 
cross  was  the  more  common  method.  In  favour  of 
the  first  are  the  expressions  ligare  and  deligare  ;  the 
description  in  Ausouius,  Cupido  Crucif.  ;  the  Egyp- 
tian custom  (Xen.  Ephes.  iv.  2) ;  the  mention  by 
Pliny  (xxviii.  11)  of  spartum  e  cruce  among 
magical  implements  ;  and  the  allusion  to  crucifixion 
noted  by  the  fathers  in  John  xix.  24  (Theophyl. 
ad  loc.  and  Tert.  Tunc  Pctrus  ab  altero  cingitur 
cum  cruci  astringitur).  On  the  other  side  we 
have  the  expression  irpoo-7]Aovo-8ai,  and  numberless 
authorities  (Sen.  de  Vit.  Beatd,  xix.  ;  Artemidor. 
Oneirocr.,  in  several  passages  ;  Apul.  Met.  iii.  60  ; 
Plaut.  Mostel.  ii.  1,  13,  et  passim).  That  our 
Lord  was  nailed,  according  to  prophecy,  is  certain 
(John  xx.  25,  27,  &c. ;  Zech.  xii.  10  ;  Ps.  xxii.  16  : 
Eoderunt  manus  meas  et  pedes,  quae  propria 
atrocitas  crucis,  Tert.  adv.  Marc.  iii.  19,  &c.  ; 
Hipv^av,  LXX.  ;  although  the  Jews  vainly  endeavour 
to  maintain  that  here  'HXS,  "  like  a  lion,"  is  the 
true  reading.  Sixt.  Senensis  Bibl.  Sanct.  viii.  5, 
p.  640).  It  is,  however,  extremely  probable  that 
both  methods  were  used  at  once :  thus  in  Lucan 
(vi.  547,  sq.)  we  have  mention  both  of  nodos 
nocentes  and  of  insertum  manibus  chalubem ; 
and  Hilary  (de  Trin.  x.)  mentions  together  colli- 
gantam  funium  vincula  et  adactorum  clavorum 
vulnera.  We  may  add  that  in  the  crucifixion 
(as  it  is  sometimes  called,  Tert.  adv.  Marc.  i.  1, 
cf.  Manil.  de  Androm.  v.)  of  Prometheus,  Aeschylus, 
besides  the  nails,  speaks  of  a  jUacrxaAicrTTJp  {Prom. 
79).  When  either  method  was  used  alone,  the 
tying  was  considered  more  painful  (as  we  find  in 
the  Martyrologies),  since  it  was  a  diutinus  cru- 
ciatus. 

It  is  doubtful  whether  three  or  four  nails  were 
employed.  The  passage  in  Plaut.  Most.  ii.  1,  13, 
is,  as  Lipsius  (de  Cruce,  ii.  9)  shows,  indecisive. 
Nonnus  speaks  of  the  two  feet  (6/j.o-n-AoKees)  being 
fastened  with  one  nail  (&Cvyi  yofKpw),  and  Greg. 
Naz.  (De  Christ,  pat.)  calls  the  cross  a  £v\ov  rpio-- 
rjKov  ;  hence  on  gold  and  silver  crosses  the  nails 
were  represented  by  one  ruby  or  carbuncle  at  each 
extremity  (Mrs.  Jameson,  /.  c).  In  the  "  inven- 
tion "   of  the  cross,   Socrates   (H.  E.  i.  17)   only 


CROSS 

mentions  the  hand-nails  ;  and  that  only  two  were 
found  is  argued  by  Winer  (s.  v.  Kreuzigitng)  from 
the  ra  fjiev,  ra  Se  (instead  of  rovs  fih-)  in  Theodor. 
If.  E.  i.  17.  Romish  writers,  however,  generally 
follow  Gregory  of  Tours  (De  Olor.  Mart,  VI.)  in 
maintaining  four,  which  may  also  be  implied  by 
the  plural  in  Cypr.  de  Passione  (claws  .  .  ■  pedes 
terebrantibus),  who  also  mentions  three  more, 
used  to  nail  on  the  title.  Cyprian  is  a  very  good 
authority,  because  he  had  often  been  a  witness  of 
executions.  There  is  a  monograph  on  the  subject 
by  Corn.  Curtius  (de  clavis  dominicis,  Antw.  1670). 
What  has  been  said  sufficiently  disproves  the  ca- 
lumny against  the  Albigenses  in  the  following  very 
curious  passage  of  Lucas  Tudensis  (li.  contra  Albig.)  : 
Albigensis  primi  pinxerunt  imaginem  crucifixi 
una  claw  simul  utrumque  pedem  configente,  et  vir- 
giiiem  Mariam  Monoculam  (!) ;  utrumque  in  deri- 
sionem :  sed  postea  prior  figura  retenta  est,  et 
iirepsit  in  vulgarem  famam.  (Quoted  by  Jer. 
Taylor,  I.  c.)  On  the  supposed  fate  of  the  nails, 
see  Theodor.  H.  E.  i.  17.  Constantine  fastened  one 
as  a  (pvAaKTiipiov  on*  his  horse's  bridle,  and  one 
(Zouaras  says  some)  on  the  head  of  the  statue  which 
he  intended  to  be  the  palladium  of  Constantinople, 
and  which  the  people  used  to  surround  with  lighted 
torches  (Mosheim,  Eccl.  Hist.  ii.  1,  3,  and  notes). 
The  clavus  pedis  dextri  is  shown  at  Treves  (Lips, 
ii.  9,  note). 

The  story  of  the  so-called  "  invention  of  the 
cross,"  a.d.  326,  is  too  famous  to  be  altogether 
passed  over.  Besides  Socrates  and  Theodoret,  it  is 
mentioned  by  Rufinus,  Sozomen,  Paulinus,  Snip. 
Severus,  and  Chrysostom,  so  that  Tillemont  (Mem. 
Ecc.  vii.)  says  that  nothing  can  be  more  certain ; 
but,  even  if  the  story  were  not  so  intrinsically 
absurd  (for  among  other  reasons  it  was  a  law 
among  the  Jews  that  the  cross  was  to  be  burnt. 
Othonis  Lex.  Jlab.  ser.  Supplicia),  it  would 
require  far  more  probable  evidence  to  outweigh 
the  silence  of  Eusebius.  It  clearly  was  to  the 
interest  of  the  Church  of  Rome  to  maintain 
the  belief,  and  invent  the  story  of  its  miracu- 
lous multiplication,  because  the  sale  of  the  relics 
was  extremely  profitable.  The  story  itself  is 
too  familiar  to  need  repeating.  To  this  day 
the  supposed  title,  or  rather  fragments  of  it,  are 
shown  to  the  people  once  a  year  in  the  church  of 
Sta.  Croce  in  Gerusalemme  at  Rome.  On  the  cap- 
ture of  the  true  cross  by  Chosroes  II. ,  and  its  rescue 
by  Heraclius,  with  even  the  seals  of  the  case  un- 
broken, and  the  subsequent  sale  of  a  large  fragment 
to  Louis  IX.,  see  Gibbon,  iv.  326,  vi.  66.  Those 
sufficiently  interested  in  the  annals  of  ridiculous 
imposture  may  see  further  accounts  in  Baronius 
(Ann.  Ecc.  a.d.  326,  No.  42-50),  Jortin,  and 
.Schmidt  (Problem,  de  Crucis  Dominicae  Pnven- 
tione,  rlelmst.  1724)  ;  and  on  the  fate  of  the  true 
cross  a  paper  read  by  Lord  Mahon  before  the 
Society  of  Antiquaries,  Feb.  1831  (cited  by  Dean 
Milman  I. 

It  was  not  till  the  6th  century  that  the  emblem 
of  the  cross  became  the  im  ige  of  the  crucilix.  As 
a  symbol  the  use  of  it  was  frequent  in  the  early 
Church  {frontem  crucis  signacuto  terimus,  Tert. 
de  <'-jr.  Mil.  iii.t.  It  was  not  till  the  2nd  century 
that  any  particular  efficacy  was  attached  to  it 
(Cypr.  Testim.  ii.  21,  22  ;  1  act.  Tnst.  iv.  27.  &c.  j 
Mosheim,  ii.  4,  5).  On  its  subsequent  worship 
(latria)  by  the  Church  of  Rome,  see  Jer.  Taylor's 
Diss,  from  Popery,  i.  ii.  7.  12  ;  and  on  the  use  of  the 
sign  in  OUT  Church,  Hooker's  Eccl.  Pol.  V,  65.    Some 


CROWN 


367 


suppose  an  allusion  to  the  custom  in  Ez.  i.\.  4 
(l'oli,  Synops.  ad  loc. ;  Gesen.  s.  v.,  in  ;  signum 
spec,  cruciforme,  Sixt.  Sen.  ii.  p.  120). 

Besides  the  noble  monograph  of  Lipsius  de  Cruce 
(from  which  we  have  largely  borrowed,  and  whose 
wealth  of  erudition  has  supplied  every  succeeding 
writer  on  the  subject  with  abundant,  authorities), 
there  are  works  by  Salmasius  (de  Cruce,  Epp.  3) ; 
Kippiugius  {de  Cruce  et  Cruciariis,  Brem.  1671)  ; 
Bosius  (de  Cruce  triumphante  et  gloriosd,  Ant- 
werp, 1617);  Gretser  (de  Cruce  jChristi);  and 
Bartholinus  (Hijpomnemata  de  Cruce)  ;  very  much 
may  also  be  gleaned  from  the  learned  notes  of 
Bishop  Pearson  (On  the  Creed,  art.  iv.).  Other 
authorities  are  cited  or  alluded  to  in  the  article 
itself.     [Crucifixion.]  [F.  W.  F.] 

CROWN  (mOg).     This  ornament,  which  is 

both  ancient  and  universal,  probably  originated 
from  the  fillets  used  to  prevent  the  hair  from  being 
dishevelled  by  the  wind.  Such  fillets  are  still 
common,  and  they  may  be  seen  on  the  sculptures 
of  Persepolis,  Nineveh,  and  Egypt ;  they  gradually 
developed  into  turbans  (Jos.  Ant.  iii.  7,  §7),  which 
by  the  addition  of  ornamental  or  precious  materials 
assumed  the  dignity  of  mitres  or  crowns.  The  use 
of  them  as  ornaments  probably  was  suggested  by 
the  natural  custom  of  encircling  the  head  with 
flowers  in  token  of  joy  and  triumph.  ("  Let  us 
crown  ourselves  with  rosebuds,"  Wisd.  ii.  8  ; 
3  Mace.  vii.  16  ;  Jud.  xv.  13,  and  the  classical 
writers,  passim ;  Winer  s.v.Kranze).  The  first 
crown  was  said  to  have  been  woven  for  Pandora  by 
the  Graces  (comp.  aritpavos  Xapirwv,  Prov.  iv.  9 
~ffTt<pavos  twv  irvevixaTiKwv  xaPt-afJLarwv>  Lex. 
Cyr.)  According  to  Pherecydes,  Saturn  was  the 
first  to  wear  a  crown  ;  Diodorus  says  that  Jupiter 
was  first  crowned  by  the  gods  after  theconquestofthe 
Titans.  Pliny,  Harpocration,  &c,  ascribe  its  earliest 
use  to  Bacchus,  who  gave  to  Ariadne  a  crown  of 
gold  and  Indian  gems,  and  assumed  the  laurel  after 
his  conquest  of  India.  Leo  Aegyptius  attributes 
the  invention  to  Isis,  whose  wreath  was  cereal. 
These  and  other  legends  are  collected  by  Ter- 
tullian  from  the  elaborate  treatise  on  crowns  by 
Claud.  Saturnius  (praestantissimus  is  hdc  ma- 
teria commentator).  Another  tradition  says  that 
Nimrod  was  the  first  to  wear  a  crown,  the  shape 
of  which  was  suggested  to  him  by  a  cloud 
(Eutychius  Alexandr.  Ann.  i.  p.  6'.\).  Tertulliau 
in  his  tract  De  Cor.  Militis  (c.  vii  sq.)  argues 
against  them  as  unnatural  and  idolatrous.  He 
is,  however,  singularly  unsuccessful  in  trying  to 
disprove  the  countenance  given  to  them  in  Scrip- 
ture, where  they  are  constantly  mentioned.  He 
says  (Juts  .  .  .  episcopus  invenitur  coronatus  ? 
(chap.  9).  But  both  tin?  ordinary  priests  and  the 
high-priest  wore  them.  The  common  mitre 
(i"iy230,  KiSapis,  Ex.  xxviii.  37,  xxix.  6,  &c. 
Taivta,  Jos.  arp6<piov  o  ol  lepels  <popovai,  Hesych.  I 
wasairiXos  &ko>vo$,  forming  a  sort  of  linen  taenia  or 
crown  (<tt e<pavn),  Jos.  Ant.  iii.  7.  The  JlSJJVJp 
(frvaaivi)   Tidpa)   of  the   high-priest    (used    also   ,.!' 

;i  regal  crown.  Ez.  .\xi.  26)  was  much  men  splen- 
did (Ex.  wviii.  36;  Lev.  viii.  9  ;  "an  ornament 
of  honour,  a  costly  work,  the  desire  of  the  eyes," 

Eeclus.  xlv.  12;  "the  holy  crown,"  Lew  viii.  9, 
so  called  from  the  Tetra^rammaton  inscribed   on   it, 

Sopranes  de  re   Vest.  Jud.,  p.  441).     It   bad  a 

second    fillet    of    blue    lace    (e"£    vclk'ivQov     irenoi- 


368 


CROWN 


KtXfxeuos,  the  colour  being  chosen  as  a  type  of 
heaven),  and  over  it  a  golden  diadem  ("1T3,  Ex. 
xxix.  6),  "  on  which  blossomed  a  golden  calyx  like 
the  flower  of  the  vocrKva/j-os  "  (Jos.  Ant.  iii.  6). 
The  gold  band  (}"•¥,  LXX.  ircraAov,  Orig.  iAav- 
rripiov,  Das  Stirnblat,  Luther)  was  tied  behind  with 
blue  lace  (embroidered  with  flowers),  and  being 
two  fingers  broad,  bore  the  inscription  (not  in  bas- 
relief  as  Abarbanel  says)  "  Holiness  to  the  Lord." 
(Comp.  Rev.  xvii.  5  ;  Braunius  de  Vest.  Sacerd.  ii. 
22 ;  Maimon.  de  Apparatu  Templi,  ix.  1  ;  Re- 
land.  Antiq.  ii.  10 ;  Carpzov,  Appar.  Grit.  p. 
85;  Jos.  Bell.  Jud.  v.  5,  §7;  Philo,  de  Vit. 
Mosis,  iii.  519.)  Some  suppose  that  Josephus  is 
describing  a  later  crown  given  by  Alexander  the 
Great  to  Jaddua.  (Jennings'  Jew.  Ant.  p.  158.) 
The  use  of  the  crown  by  priests  and  in  religious 
services  was  universal,  and  perhaps  the  badge  be- 
longed at  first  "  rather  to  the  pontificalia  than  the 
regalia."  Thus  Q.  Fabius  Pictor  says  that  the  first 
crown  was  used  by  Janus  when  sacrificing.  "  A 
striped  head-dress  and  queue,"  or  "  a  short  wig,  on 
which  a  band  was  fastened,  ornamented  with  an  asp, 
the  symbol  of  royalty,"  was  used  by  the  kings 
of  Egypt  in  religious  ceremonies  (Wilkinson's 
Anc.  Eggpt.  iii.  354,  fig.  13).  The  crown  worn 
by  the  kings  of  Assyria  was  "  a  high  mitre  .  .  . 
frequently  adorned  with  flowers,  &c,  and  arranged 
in  1  lands  of  linen  or  silk.  Originally  there  was 
only  one  band,  but  afterwards  there  were  two,  and 
the  ornaments  were  richer  "  (Layard,  ii.  320,  and 
the  illustrations  in  Jahn,  Arch.  Germ.  ed.  Part 
i.  vol.  ii.  tab.  ix.  4  and  8). 


Crowns  worn  by  Assy 


Nimroud  and  Kouyunjik.) 


There  are  several  words  in  Scripture  for  a  crown 
besides  those  mentioned  ;  as  "IX  S,  the  head-dress 
of  bridegrooms,  Is.  lxi.  10,  filrpa,  LXX. ;  Bar.  v. 
2  ;  Ez.  xxiv.  17  (rplxcfia),  and  of  women,  Is. 
iii.  20  (ifj.ir\6Kiov?)  ;  JYVVDy,  a  head-dress  of 
great  splendour  (Is.  xxviii.  5)  ;  PW,  a  wreath  of 
flowers  ;  (arecpavos)  Prov.  i.  9,  iv.  9 :  such  wreaths 
were  used  on  festal  occasions  (Is.  xxviii.  1).  f^JV, 
a  common  tiara  or  turban,  Job  xxix.  14  ;  Is.  iii. 
23  (but  LXX.  5iirXo'/s,  64pi<npov).  The  words 
"IT3,  iri3,  and  N73"]3,  are  spoken  of  under 
Diadem.     The  general  word  is   iTlDy,  and  we 

must  attach  to  it  the  notion  of  a  costly  turban  irra- 
diated with  pearls  and  gems  of  priceless  value, 
which  often  form  aigrettes  for  feathers,  as  in  the 
crowns  of  modern  Asiatic  sovereigns.  Such  was 
probably  the  crown,  which  witii  its  precious  stones 
weighed  (or  rather  "  was  worth  ")  a  talent,  taken 
bv  David  from  the  king  of  Amnion  at  Kabbah,  and 


CROWN 

used  as  the  state  crown  of  Judah  (2  Sam.  xii.  30). 
Some  groundlesslv  suppose  that  being  too  heavy  to 
wear,  it  was  suspended  over  his  head.  The  royal 
crown  was  sometimes  buried  with  the  king 
(Schickard.  Jus  Reg.  vi.  19,  p.  421).  Idolatrous 
nations  also  "  made  crowns  for  the  head  of  their 
gods"  (Ep.  Jer.  9). 

The  Jews  boast  that  three  crowns  were  given  to 
them,  min  "ID3,  the  crown  of  the  Law,  "\T)"2 
n3"li"D,  the  crown  of  priesthood,  and  ni37D,  the 
royal  crown,  better  than  all  which  is  21D  Dt^  ""iri3, 
the  crown  of  a  good  name  (Carpzov.  Apparat.  Critic. 
p.  60;  Othonis  Lex.  Talm.  s.  v.  Corona). 

~2.ri<pavos  is  used  in  the  X.  T.  for  every  kind  of 
crown  ;  but  o-refj.fia  only  once  (Acts  xiv.  13)  for 
the  garlands  used  with  victims.  In  the  Byzantine 
Court  the  latter  word  was  confined  to  the  imperial 
crown  (Du  Fresne,  Gloss.  Graec.  p.  1442).  The 
use  of  funeral  crowns  is  not  mentioned  in  the 
Bible. 

In  Rev.  xii.  3,  xix.  12,  allusion  is  made  to 
"many  crowns"  worn  in«token  of  extended  do- 
minion. Thus  the  kings  of  Egypt  itsed  to  be 
crowned  with  the  "  pshent "  or  united  crowns  of 
Upper  and  Lower  Egypt  (Wilk.,  Anc.  Egypt,  iii. 
351  sq. ;  comp.  Layard,  ii.  320);  and  Ptolemy 
Philometor  wore  two  diadems,  one  for  Europe  and 
one  for  Asia.  Similarly  the  three  crowns  of  the 
Papal  tiara  mark  various  accessions  of  power : 
the  first  corona  was  added  to  the  mitra  by  Alex- 
ander III.,  in  1159  ;  the  second  by  Boniface  VIII., 
in  1303  ;  and  the  third  by  Urban  V.,  in  13G2. 

The  laurel,  pine,  or  parsley  crowns  given  to 
victors  in  the  s'reat  games  of  Greece  are  finely 
alluded  to  by  St.  Paul  (1  Cor.  ix.  25  ;  2  Tim.  ii. 
5,  &c).  They  are  said  to  have  originated  in  the 
laurel-wreath  assumed  by  Apollo  on  conquering 
the  Python  (Tert.  de  Cor.  Mil.  7,  15).  "  Crown  " 
is  often  used  figuratively  m  the  Bible  (Prov. 
xii.  4,  xvii.  6;  Is.  xxviii.  5;  Phil.  iv.  1,  &c). 
The  term  is  also  applied  to  the  rims  of  altars, 
tables,  &c.  (Ex.  xxv.  25,  &c. ;  Deut.  xxii.  8,  ttoitj- 
creis  (TTMpavnv  t$  5dp.aTl  o~ov.  Projectura  co- 
ronarum,  Vitr.  ii.  8  ;  Angusti  muri  corona,  Q. 
Curt.  ix.  4,  30).  The  ancients  as  well  as  the 
moderns  had  a  coin  called  "  a  crown  "  (top  ffTtcpa.- 
vov  bv  6<pel\ere,  1  Mace,  siii,  39,  x.  29,  A.  V. 
"  Crown-tax,"  v.  Suid.  s.  v.  (TTttyaviKOv  r4\ecrpa). 
[Diadem.] 

The  chief  writers  on  crowns  are  Gaschalius  (de 
Coronis  librix.)  and  Meursius  (de  Corona,  Hafniae. 
1671).  For  others,  see  Fabricius,  Bibl.  Ant.  xiv. 
13.  [F.  W.  F.] 

CROWN  OF  THORNS  (ar4<pavos  !£  b.Kav- 
Qcov,  Matt,  xxvii.  29).  Our  Lord  was  crowned 
with  thorns  in  mockery  by  the  Roman  soldiers. 
The  object  seems  to  have  been  insult,  and  not  the 
infliction  of  pain  as  has  generally  been  supposed. 
The  Rhamnus  or  Spina  Christi,  although  abundant 
in. the  neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem,  cannot  be  the 
plant  intended,  because  its  thorns  are  so  strong  and 
large  that  it  could  not  have  been  woven  (irhe- 
Zavres)  into  a  wreath.  The  large-leaved  acanthus 
(bear's-foot)  is  totally  unsuited  for  the  purpose. 
Had  the  acacia  been  intended,  as  some  suppose,  the 
phrase  would  have  been  c|  aKavO-qs.  Obviously 
some  small  flexile  thorny  shrub  is  meant ;  perhaps 
cappares  spinosae  (Reland's  Palcstin.  ii.  523). 
Hasselquist  (Travels,  p.  260)  says  that  the  thorn 
used  was  the  Arabian  Nahk.  "  It  was  very  suit- 
able for  their  purpose,  as  it  has  many  sharp  thorns 


CRUCIFIXION 

which  inflict  painful  wounds ;  and  its  flexible, 
pliant,  and  round  branches  might  easily  be  plaited 
in  the  form  of  a  crown."  It  also  resembles  the 
rich  dark  green  of  the  triumphal  ivy-wreath,  which 
would  give  additional  pungency  to  its  ironical  pur- 
pose (liosenmiiller,  Botany  of  Script,  p.  202,  Eng. 
ed.).  On  the  Empress  Helena's  supposed  discovery 
of  the  crown  of  thorns,  and  its  subsequent  fate,  see 
Gibbon,  ii.  306, -vi.  66,  ed.  Milman.    [F.  W.  F.] 

CRUCIFIXION  ((Travpovv,  avaffravpovv, 
r Ko\oiri{eii',  izpo(T7)\ovv  (and,  less  properly, 
avaffKivSvKtvtiv) ;  cruc.i  or  patibulo  afficere,  suf- 
jlgere,  or  simply  figere  (Tert.  de  Put.  iii.),  crueiare 
(Auson.)  ad palum  alligare,  crucem  alicui  statuere , 
in  crucem  agere,  tollere,  &c. :  the  sufferer  was  called 
cruciarius).  The  variety  of  the  phrases  shews  the 
extreme  commonness  of  the  punishment,  the  inven- 
tion of  which  is  traditionally  ascribed  to  Semiramis. 
It  was  in  use  among  the  Egyptians  (as  in  the  case 
of  [narus.'Thuc.  i.  30  ;  Gen.  xl.  19),  the  Carthagi- 
nians (as  in  the  case  of  Hauno,  &c,  Val.  Max.  ii. 
7;  Sil.  Ital.  ii.  344).  The  Persians  (Polycrates,  &c. 
Herod,  iii.  12,5,  iv.  43  ;  Esth.  vii.  10,  aravpaidrjTw 
rV  avro,  LXX.  v.  14),  the  Assyrians  (Diod.  Sic. 
i..  1),  Scythians  (id.  ii.  44),  Indians  (id.  ii.  18), 
!  Winer,  s.  v.  Kreuzigung),  Germans  (possibly  Tac. 
Germ.  12),  and  very  frequent  from  the  earliest 
•imes  {rcstc  suspendito,  Liv.  i.  26)  among  the 
Greeks  and  Romans.  Cicero,  however,  refers  it, 
not  (as  Livy)  to  the  early  kings,  but  to  Tarquinius 
.  ii]ierbus  (pro  Rob.  4);  Aurel.  Victor  calls  it 
Vetus  rctcrrinuimque  (an  teterr.f)  patibulor'im 
s'ipplicium.  Both  Kpsfxav  and  snspendere  (Ov. 
rbis,  299)  refer  to  death  by  crucifixion;  thus  in 
i  peaking  of  Alexander's  crucifixion  of  2000  Tynans, 
aveKpffiaffef  in  Diod.  Sic.  answers  to  the  Crucibus 
affixus,  Q.  Curt.  iv.  4. 

Whether  this  mode  of  execution  was  known  to 
thr  ancient  .lews  is  a  matter  of  dispute,  on  which 
Winer  quotes  a  monograph  by  Bormitius.  It  is 
asserted  to  have  been  so  by  Baronius  (Annul,  i. 
xxxiv.),  Sigonius  (de  Rep.  Hebr.  vi.  8),  &c, 
who  are  refuted  by  Casaubon  (c.  Baron.  Exerc. 
xvi. ;  Carpzov.  Apparat.  C'rit.  p.  591).  The  He- 
brew words  said  to  allude  to  it  are  i"PFl  (some- 
times with  the  addition  of  |*yn  ?]}  ;  hence  the 
.lews  in  polemics  call  our  Lord  l|1?ri)  and  Christians 
*i?fl  'HIIJ?,  "  worshippers  of  the  crucified  ")  and 
Vps,  both  of  which  in  A.  V.  are  generally  rendered 
"  to  hang"  (2  Sam.  xviii.  10  ;  Deut.  xxi.  22  ;  Num. 
xxv.  4;  .lob  xxvi.  7);  for  which  (rravp6ai  occurs 
in  the  LXX.  (Esth.  rii.  10),  and  crucifixeruni 
in  the  Vulg.  (2  Sam.  xxi.  6,  9).  The  Jewish  ac- 
count of  the  matter  (in  Maimonides  and  the  Rabbis) 
is,  that  the  exposure  of  the  body  tied  to  a  stake  by 
its  hands  (which  might  loosely  be  called  cruci- 
fixion), took  place  after  death  (Lightfoot,  Hor. 
Hebr.  in  Matt,  xxvii.  '>1  ;  Othom's  Lex.  Bab.  s.  v. 
Supplicia  ;  Reland,  Ant.  ii.  6 ;  SirT.  Browne,  Vulg, 
Errors,  v.  21).      Even   the  placing  of  a  head  on  a 

single   upright  pole  has   1 n   called   crucifixion. 

This  custom  of  crucifixion  after  death  'which  eems 
to  be  implied  in  Deut.  xxi.  22,  23),  was  by  do 
means  rare  ;  men  were  first  killed  in  mercy 
(Suet.  Caes.\  Herod,  iii.  125;  Plut.  Cleom. 
38).  According  to  a  strange  story  in  Pliny  (xxxvi. 
1">.  §24),  it  was  adopted  by  Tarquin,  as  a  post 
mortem  disgrace,  to  prevent  the  prevalence  of 
suicide.  It  seems  on  the  whole  that  the  Rabbis 
are  correct  in  asserting  that  this  exposure  is  in- 


CRUCIFIXION 


:36v> 


tended  in  Scripture,  since  the  Mosaic  capital  pu- 
nishments were  four  (viz.  the  sword,  Ex.  xxi., 
strangling,  tire,  Lev.  xx.,  and  stoning,  Deut.  xxi.). 
l'hilo  indeed  says  (De  leg.  spec.)  that  Moses 
adopted  crucifixion  as  a  murderer's  punishment, 
because  it  was  the  -worst  he  could  discover ;  but 
the  passage  in  Deut.  (xxi.  23)  does  not  prove  his 
assertion.  Probably  therefore  the  Jews  borrowed 
it  from  the  Romans  (Jos.  Ant.  xx.  6,  §2  ;  de  Bell. 
Jud.  ii.  12,  §6;  Vit,  75,  &c),  although  there 
may  have  been  a  few  isolated  instances  of  it  before 
(Jos.  Ant.  xiii.  14,  §2). 

It  was  unanimously  considered  the  most  horrible 
form  of  death,  worse  even  than  burning,  since  the 
"  cross "  precedes  "  burning "  in  the  law-books 
(Lips,  dc  Cruc.  ii.  1).  Hence  it  is  called  crudelis- 
simwn  teterrimumque  supplicium  (Cic.  Verr.  v. 
66),  extreme  poena  (Apul.  de  Aur.  Asin.  x.), 
summum  supplicium  (Paul.  Sent.  v.  tit.  xxi.,  &c.) ; 
and  to  a  Jew  it  would  acquire  factitious  horror 
from  the  curse  in  Deut.  xxi.  23.  Among  the 
Romans  also  the  degradation  was  a  part  of  the  in- 
fliction, since  it  was  especially  a  servile  supplicium 
(Tac.  If.  iv.  11  ;  Juv.  vi.  218  ;  Hor.  Sat.  i.  3,  8, 
&c.  ;  Plaut.  passim),  so  that  even  a  freedman 
ceased  to  dread  it  (Cic.  pro  Rab.  5) ;  or  if  applied 
to  freemen,  only  in  the  case  of  the  vilest  criminals, 
thieves,  &c.  (Jos.  Ant.  xvii.  10,  §10;  Bell.  Jud. 
v.  11,  §1;  Paul.  Sent.  v.  tit.  xxiii. ;  Lamprid. 
Alex.  Lex.  23).  Indeed  exemption  from  it  was 
the  privilege  of  every  Roman  citizen  by  the  jus 
civitatis  (Cic.  Verr.  ii.  1,  3).  Our  Lord  was  con- 
demned to  it  by  the  popular  cry  of  the  Jews 
(Matt,  xxvii.  23,  as  often  happened  to  the  early 
Christians)  on  the  charge  of  sedition  against  Caesar 
(Luke  xxiii.  2),  although  the  Sanhedrim  had  pre- 
viously condemned  him  on  the  totally  distinct, 
charge  of  blasphemy.  Hundreds  of  .lews  were 
crucified  on  this  charge,  as  by  Florus  (Jos.  Bell. 
Jud.  ii.  14,  §9)  and  Varus,  who  crucified  2000  at 
once  (Ant.  xvii.  10,  §10). 

We  now  purpose  briefly  to  sketch  the  steps  of 
the  punishment,  omitting  only  such  parts  of  it  as 
have  been  already  detailed  under  Cross, 

The  scarlet  robe,  crown  of  thorns,  and  other 
!  insults  to  which  our  Lord  was  subjected  were 
illegal,  and  arose  from  the  spontaneous  petulance 
of  the  brutal  soldiery.  But  the  punishment  pro- 
perly commenced  with  scourging,  after  the  cri- 
minal had  been  stripped  ;  hence  in  the  common 
form  of  sentence  we.  find  "  summove,  lictor,  de- 
spolia,  verbera,"  &c.  (Liv.  i.  26).  For  this  there 
are  a  host  of  authorities,  Liv.  xxvi.  13;  Q.  Curt. 
vii.  11;  Luc.  de  Piscat.  2;  Jer.  Comment,  ad 
Matt,  xxvii.  26,  &c.  It  was  inflicted  not  with 
the  comparatively  mild  virgae,  but  the  more  ter- 
rible fiagellum  QAor.Sat.  i.  3;  2 Cor.  xi.  24.  25), 
which  was  not  used  by  the  Jews  (Deut.  xxv.  3). 
Into  these  scourges  the  soldiers  often  stuck  nails, 
pieces  of  bone,  &c.  to  heighten  the  pain  (the 
fj-dcml;  affTpayaXuiT^)  mentioned  by  Athenaeiis. 
&c ;  flagrum  pecuinis  ossibus  catenation,  Apul.  . 
which  was  often  so  intense  that  the  sufferer  died 
under  it  (Dip.  de  Poenis,  1.  viii.).  The  scourging 
generally  took  place  at  a  column,  and  the  one  to 
which  our  Lord  was  bound  was  seen  by  Jerome, 
Prudentius,  Gregory  of  Tours,  &c  ami  is  still 
shown  at  several  churches  among  the  relics.  |M 
our  Lord's  case,  however,  this  infliction 
neither  to  have  been  the  legal  scourging  after  the 
sentence  (Val.  Max.  i.  7;  Jos.  Bell.  Jud.  v.  28, 
ii.    14,  §9),   nor   vet    the   examination   by    torture 

2  B' 


370 


CRUCIFIXION 


(Acts  xxii.  24),  but  rather  a  scourging  before  the 
sentence,  to  excite  pity  and  procure  immunity 
from  further  punishment  (Luke  xxiii.  22  ;  John 
xix.  1);  and  if  this  view  be  correct,  the  (ppa- 
ysWuHTas  in  Matt,  xxvii.  26  is  retrospective,  as 
so  great  an  anguish  could  hardly  have  been  en- 
dured twice  (see  Poli  Synopsis,  ad  he).  How 
severe  it  was  is  indicated  in  prophecy  (Ps.  xxxv. 
15  ;  Is.  1.  6).  Vossius  considers  that  it  was  partly 
legal,  partly  tentative  (Harm.  Pass.  v.  13). 

The  criminal  carried  his  own  cross,  or  at  any 
rate  a  part  of  it  (Plat,  de  Us  qui  sero,  &c.  9  ; 
Artemid.  Oneirocr.  ii.  61  ;  John  xix.  17,  Pati- 
rdum  ferut  per  urbem,  deinde  affigatur  cruci, 
Plant.  Ctirlniii  ir.).  Hence  the  term  Farcifer, — 
crossbeam-.  This  was  prefigured  by  Isaac  carry- 
ing the  wood  in  Gen.  xxii.  6,  where  even  the  Jews 
notice  the  parallel ;  and  to  this  the  lathers  fantas- 
tically applied  the  expression  in  Is.  ix.  6,  "  the  go- 
vernment shall  be  upon  his  shoulder."  They  were 
sometimes  scourged  and  goaded  on  the  way  (Plaut. 
Mostel.  i.  1,  52).  "In  some  old  figures  we  see 
our  Lord  described  with  a  table  appendent  to  the 
fringe  of  his  garment,  set  full  of  nails  and  pointed 
iron "  (Jer.  Taylor,  Life  of  Christ,  iii.  xv.  2. 
Haerebas  ligno  quod  tuteras.  Cypr.  de  Pas.  p.  50). 
[Simon  of  Cyrkxe.] 

The  place  of  execution  was  outside  the  city 
("  post  urbem,"  Cic.  Verr.  v.  66  ;  "  extra  portam," 
Plaut.  MilsGl.  ii.  4,  6  ;  1  K.  xxi.  13  ;  Acts  vii. 
58  ;  Heb.  xiii.  12  ;  and  in  camps  "  extra  vallum  "), 
often  in  some  public  road  (Quinct.  Decl.  275)  or 
other  conspicuous  place  like  the  Campus  Martins 
(Cic.  pro  Rabirio"),  or  some  spot  set  apart  for  the 
purpose  (Tac.  Ann.  xv.).  This  might  sometimes  be 
a  hill  (Val.  Max.  vi.) ;  it  is  however  merely  tra- 
dition to  call  Golgotha  a  hill;  in  the  Evangelists  it 
is  called  t6ttos  [Calvary].  Arrived  at  the 
place  of  execution,  the  sufferer  was  stripped  naked 
(Artemid.  Oneirocr.  ii.  58),  the  dress  being  the  per- 
quisite of  the  soldiers  (Matt,  xxvii.  35  ;  Dig.  xlviii. 
20,  6)  ;  possibly  not  even  a  cloth  round  the  loins 
was  allowed  him  ;  at  least  among  the  Jews  the  rule 
was  "  that  a  man  should  be  stoned  naked,"  where 
what  follows  shows  that  "  naked "  must  not  be 
taken  in  its  restricted  sense.  The  cross  was  then 
driven  into  the  ground,  so  that  the  feet  of  the 
condemned  were  a  foot  or  two  above  the  earth 
(in  pictures  of  the  crucifixion  the  cross  is  gene- 
rally much  too  large  and  high),  and  he  was  lifted 
upon  it  (agere,  excurrere,  tollere,  ascendere  in 
crucem ;  Prudent,  wepl  <TTe<p.  Plaut.  Hostel. 
'Crucisalus.'  Id.  Bacch.  2,  3',  128.  av^yov,  i\yov, 
tyov  eiy  &Kpov  reAos,  (ireg.  Naz.),  or  else  stretched 
upon  it  on  the  ground,  and  then  lifted  with  it, 
to  which  there  seems  to  be  an  allusion  in  a  lost 
prophecy  quoted  by  Barnabas  (Ep.  12),  orav 
£vAoi>  k\l6?i  Kal  avaffTT)  (Pearson  on  Creed,  Acts 
iv.).  The  former  method  was  the  commoner,  for 
we  often  read  (as  in  Esth.  vii.  10,  &c.)  of  the  cross 
being  erected  beforehand,  in  terrorem.  Before  the 
nailing  or  binding  took  place  (for  which  see 
Cross),  a  medicated  cup  was  given  out  of  kindness 
to  confuse  the  senses  and  deaden  the  pangs  of  the 
sufferer  (Prov.  xxxi.  6),  usually  of  olvos  ifffxvp- 
fucr/xeVos  or  AeAt^avcofidvos,  as  among  the  Jews 
(Lightfoot,  Hor.  Hebr.  ad  Matt,  xxvii.),  because 
myrrh  was  soporific.  Our  Lord  refused  it  that  his 
senses  might  be  clear  (Matt,  xxvii.  34;  Mark  xv. 
23.  Maimon.  Sanhed.  xiii.)  St.  Matt,  calls  it  u£os- 
fieTa  xoA?}s  (VDT1),  an  expression  used  in  reference 
to    Ps.   lxix.    21,   but   not   strict  I  v  accurate.      This 


CRUCIFIXION 

mercifully  intended  draught  must  not  be  confounded 
with  the  spongeful  of  vinegar  (or  posca,  the  common 
drink  of  Roman  soldiers,  Spart.  Hadr.  ;  Plaut.  Mil. 
Gl.  iii.  2,  23),  which  was  put  on  a  hyssop-stalk  and 
offered  to  our  Lord  in  mocking  and  contemptuous 
pity  (Matt,  xxvii.  48  ;  Luke  xxiii.  36) ;  this  He 
tasted  to  allay  the  agonies  of  thirst  (John  xix.  29). 

Our  Lord  was  crucified  between  two  "thieves" 
or  "malefactors"  (then  so  common  in  Palestine, 
Jos.  Bell.  Jud.  ii.  6,  &c),  according  to  prophecy  (Is. 
liii.  12)  ;  and  was  watched  according  to  custom  by 
a  party  of  four  soldiers  (John  xix.  23)  with  their 
centurion  ( KovffTcoSia,  Matt,  xxvii.  66;  miles  qui 
cruces  assurabat,  Petr.  Sat.  iii.  6 ;  Plut.  Vit. 
Cleom.  38),  whose  express  office  was  to  prevent 
the  siu'reption  of  the  body.  This  was  necessary 
from  the  lingering  character  of  the  death,  which 
sometimes  did  not  supervene  even  for  three  days, 
and  was  at  last  the  result  of  gradual  benumbing 
and  starvation  (Euseb.  viii.  8  ;  Sen.  Prov.  3). 
But  for  this  guard,  the  persons  might  have  been 
taken  down  and  recovered,  as  was  actually  done 
in  the  case  of  a  friend  of  Josephus,  though  only 
one  survived  out  of  three  to  which  the  same 
BtpaTreia  eVijueAeo-TaTT)  was  applied  ( Vit.  75). 
Among  the  Convulsionnaires  in  the  reign  of  Louis 
XV.  women,  would  be  repeatedly  crucified,  and 
even  remain  on  the  cross  three  hours  ;  we  are  told 
of  one  who  underwent  it  23  times  (Encycl.  Metr. 
s.  v.  ( 'ross)  ;  the  pain  consisted  almost  entirely  in 
the  nailing,  and  not  more  than  a  basonful  of 
blood  was  lost.  Still  we  cannot  believe  from  the 
Martyrologies  that  Victorinus  (crucified  head- 
downwards)  lived  three  days,  or  Timotheus  and 
.Maura  nine  days.  Fracture  of  the  legs  (Plant, 
Poen.  iv.  2,  64)  was  especially  adopted  by  the 
Jews  to  hasten  death  (John  xix.  31),  and  it  was 
a  mitigation  of  the  punishment,  as  observed  by 
Origen.  But  the  unusual  rapidity  of  our  Lord's 
death  was  due  to  the  depth  of  His  previous  agonies 
(which  appears  from  his  inability  to  bear  his  own 
cross  far)  and  to  his  mental  anguish  (Schoettgen, 
Hon.  Heb.  vi.  3  ;  De  pass.  Messiae),  or  may  be 
sufficiently  accounted  for  simply  from  peculiarities 
of  constitution.  There  is  no  need  to  explain  the 
"  giving  up  the  ghost "  as  a  miracle  (Heb.  v.  7  ?), 
or  say  with  Cyprian,  Prenento  cariiificis  officio,  spi- 
ritum  sponte  aimisit  (adv.  Demctr.)  Still  less  can 
the  common  cavil  of  infidelity  be  thought  note- 
worthy, since  had  our  Lord  been  in  a  swoon  the 
piercing  of  his  pericardium  (proved  by  the  appear- 
ance of  lymph  and  blood)  would  have  ensured  death. 
(See  Eschenbach  Opusc.  Med.  de  Servatore  nun  ap- 
parentcr  sed  vere  mortno,  and  Gruner  de  morte 
Christi  non  synopticd,  quoted  by  Jahn  in  the  Arch. 
Bibl.)  Pilate  expressly  satisfied  himself  of  the  actual 
death  by  questioning  the  centurion  (Mark  xv.  44)  ; 
and  the  omission  of  the  breaking  of  the  legs  in  this 
ease  was  the  fulfilment  of  a  type  (Ex.  xii.  46). 
Other  modes  of  hastening  death  were  by  lighting 
fires  under  the  cross  (hence  the  nicknames  Sar- 
mentitii  and  Semaxii,  Tert.  Apolog.  50),  or  letting 
loose  wild  beasts  on  the  crucified  (Suet,  Ner.  49). 

Generally  the.  body  was  suffered  to  rot  on  the 
cross  (Cic.  Tusc.  Q.  i.  43;  Sil.  Ital.  viii.  486),  by 
the  action  of  sun  and  rain  (Herod,  iii.  12),  or  to  be 
devoured  by  birds  and  beasts  (Apul.  de  Aiir.  Asin. 
6;  Hor.  Ep.  i.  16,  48;  Juv.  xiv.  77).  Sepulture 
was  generally  therefore  forbidden,  though  it  might 
be  granted  as  a  special  favour  or  on  grand  occasions 
(Ulp.  1.  ix.  De  off.  Pascons.}.  Put  in  consequence 
of  Deut.  xxi.  22,  23,  an  express  national  exception 


CRUSE 

was  made  in  favour  of  the  Jews  (Matt,  xxvii.  58  ; 
cf.  Joseph.  Bell.  Jud.  iv.  5,  §2). 

Having  thus  traced  the  whole  process  of  cruci- 
fixion, it  only  remains  to  speak  of  the  manner  of 
death,  and  the  kind  of  physical  suffering  endured, 
which  we  shall  very  briefly  abridge  from  the  trea- 
tise of  the  physician  Richter  (in  Jahn's  Arch.  Hihl.). 
These  are,  1.  The  unnatural  position  and  violent 
tension  of  the  body,  which  cause  a  painful  sensation 
from  the  least  motion.  2.  The  nails  being  driven 
through  parts  of  the  hands  and  feet  which  are 
full  of  nerves  and  tendons  (and  yet  at  a  distance 
from  the  heart),  create  the  most  exquisite  anguish. 
3.  The  exposure  of  so  many  wounds  and  lacera- 
tions brings  on  inflammation,  which  tends  to  become 
gangrene,  and  every  moment  increases  the  poignancy 
of  suffering.  4.  In  the  distended  parts  of  the  body 
more  blood  flows  through  the  arteries  than  can  be 
carried  back  into  the  veins  :  hence  too  much  blood 
iimls  its  way  from  the  aorta,  into  the  head  and 
stomach,  and  the  blood-vessels  of  the  head  become 
pressed  and  swollen.  The  general  obstruction  of 
circulation  which  ensues  causes  an  internal  excite- 
ment, exertion,  and  anxiety,  more  intolerable  than 
death  itself.  5.  The  inexpressible  misery  of  gra- 
dually increasing  and  lingering  anguish.  To  all 
which  we  may  add,  6.  Burning  and  raging  thirst. 

This  accursed  and  awful  mode  of  punishment 
was  happily  abolished  by  Constantine  (Sozom.  i.  8), 
probably  towards  the  end  of  his  reign  (see  Lips. 
da  Cruce,  iii.  15),  although  it  is  curious  that  we 
have  no  more  definite  account  of  the  matter.  "  An 
edict  so  honourable  to  Christianity,"  says  Gibbon, 
"  deserved  a  place  in  the  Theodosian  code,  instead 
of  the  indirect  mention  of  it  which  seems  to  result 
from  tin.'  comparison  of  the  5th  and  18th  titles  of 
the  9th  book"  (ii.  154,  note). 

An  explanation  of  the  other  circumstances  attend- 
ing the  crucifixion  belongs  rather  to  a  commentary 
than  a  dictionary.  On  the  types,  and  prophecies 
of  it,  besides  those  adduced,  see  Cypr.  Testim.  ii. 
20.  On  the  resurrection  of  the  saints,  see  Lightfoot 
ad  Matt,  xxvii.  52  (there  is  a  monograph  by  Geba- 
verius — Dissert,  de  R<  sur.  sanctorum  cum  Christ/,). 
On  other  concomitant  prodigies,  see  Schoettgen, 
Hbr.  Hebr.  et  Talmud,  vi.  .1,  8.  [Darkness  ; 
CROSS.]  The  chief  authorities  are  quoted  in  the 
article,  and  the  ancient  ones  are  derived  in  part 
from  Lipsius ;  of  whose  mos1  interesting  treatise, 
/•>  Cruc$j  an  enlarged  and  revised  edition, 
with  notes,  would  1"'  very  acceptable.  On  the 
points  in  which  our  Lord's  crucifixion  di 
from  the  ordinary  Jewish  customs  see  Othonis 
Lex.  Rabbinicum,  s.  o.  Supplicia;  Bynaeus  de 
Morte  J.  Christi ;  Vossius,  Harm.  Passionis : 
Carpzov,  Apparat.  Crit.  p.  591,  sq.  &c  [F.W.P.] 

CRUSE,  a  word  employed  in  the  A.  V.,  appa- 
rently without  any  special  intention,  to  translate 
three  distinct  Hebrew  words. 

1.  Tzappachath,  nnSV  (from  P1DV.  a  root  with 
fine  idea  of  width;  comp.  ampulla,  from amplus). 
Some  clue  to  the  nature  of  this  vessel  is  perhaps 
afforded  by  its  mention  as  being  full  of  water  at 
the  head  of  Saul  when  on  his  night  expedition  after 
David  l  1  Sam.  xxvi.  1 1,  12,  16),  and  also  of  Elijah 
( 1  K.  xix.  6).  In  a  similar  case  in  the  present  day 
this  would  be  a  globular  vessel  of  blue  porous  clay 
— the  ordinary  Gaza  pottery — about  t*  inches  dia- 
meter, with  a  neck  of  about  :'■  inches  long,  a  small 
handle  below  the  neck,  and  opposite  the  handle  a 
straight  spout,  with  an   orifice  about   the  size  of  a 


CUCUMBERS 


371 


straw,  through  which  the  water  is  drunk  or  sucked. 
The  form  is  common  also  in  Spain,  and  will  be 
familiar  to  many  from  pictures  of  Spanish  life.  A 
similar  globular  vessel  probably  contained  the  oil 
of  the  widow  of  Zarephath  (1  K.  xvii.  12,  14,  16). 
Lor  the  "  box  "  or  "  horn  "  in  which  the  consecrated 
oil  was  carried  on  special  occasions  see  Oil. 

2.  The  noise  which  these  vessels  make  when 
emptied  through  the  neck  is  suggestive  of  the 
second  term,  Bakbook,   p-12p2,  probably  like  the 

Greek  bombidos,  /36fj.fiv\os,  an  onomatopoietic  word. 
This  is  found  but  twice — a  "  cruse  of  honey,"  1  K. 
xiv.  3  ;  and  an  "  earthen  bottle,"  Jer.  xix.  1. 

3.  Apparently  very  different  from  both  these  is 
the  other  term,  Tzellachah,  f"in?Y  (found  also  in 
the  forms  nTl'^V  and  nr]W)'  from  a  root  nW), 
signifying  to  sprinkle  ;  or  perhaps  from  7?¥,  to 
ring,  the  root  of  the  word  for  cymbal.  This  was 
probably  a  flat  metal  saucer  of  the  form  still  com- 
mon in  the  East.  It  occurs  2  K.  ii.  20,  "  cruse  ;" 
xxi.  13,  "  dish  ;"  2  Chr.  xxxv.  13,  "  pans  ;"  also 
Prov.  xix.  24,  xxvi.  15,  where  the  figure  is  ob- 
scured by  the  choice  of  the  word  "  bosom."      [G.] 

CRYSTAL  (ITO-IDT,  rnp  ;  va\os,  KpvaraX- 
\os ;  ritruni,  cristallus).  The  word  IVS-IST  is 
translated  "  crystal"  in  Job  xxviii.  17,  where  some 
precious  substance  is  meant.  It  comes  from  the 
root  T]3T,  to  be  pure,  and  probably  signifies  glass  of 

the  purest  and  most  precious  kind.  It  occurs  only 
in  this  passage.     [Glass.] 

n")p  is  rendered  "  crystal"  in  Ez.  i.  22,  but  in 

other  passages  of  the  0.  T.  "  ice  and  frost."     It  is 

derived  from  n~lp,  to  make  smooth,  to  make  bald. 

The  word  Kpi/ffraAAos,  in  Lev.  iv.  6,  xxii.  1,  means 
ice  (Hesych.  KpvffTaAAos  rb  ireirriybs  iiScop  virb  Kpv- 
ovs).  But  it  also  has  a  second  meaning,  and  sig- 
nifies a  mineral  substance  clear  and  transparent 
like  ice,  and  is  so  used  by  St.  John.  [W.  I).] 

CUBIT.     [Measures.] 

CUCKOO;    A.  V.    Cuckow    (f]nt>;    \dpos; 

!<in(s),  a  bird  found  in  the  list  of  unclean  birds  in 
Lev.  xi.  16  and  Dent.  xiv.  15.  Referring  it  to  the 
root  C)nt!',  to  make  thin,  Gesenius  considers  that  the 

sea-gull  is  meant,  because  of  the  smallness  of  its 
body  in  comparison  with  its  apparent  size  and 
spread  of  wing.  Bochart  suggests  the  bird  called 
by  the  Greeks  Keircpos.  This  is  a  light  sea-bird  of 
the  petrel  kind,  the  character  of  which  agrees  with 
the  etymology  of  P]nC.     (Suidas:   Keir<pos  elSos 

bpviov   o^uraTov   [6   KeyS/xevos    Aapos]    tffrt   Se   « 
Kov<pov    Kai    tiriirAeou    toTs    nvfiCMTiv.)       KsV^os 
is  the  rendering  of  the  Graeco-Venetian  version  in 

Lev.  [W.    D.] 

CUCUMBERS  are  named  twice  in  the  A.  V., 
and  once  in  the  Apocrypha,  where  iv  (TiKvvpaTQ.  is 
■  i  •■  in  a  garden  of  cucumbers."  !n 
Num.  xi.  5  encumbers  are  mentioned  amon 
vegetable  products  of  Egypt,  which  the  mixed 
multitude     regretted,     when     in     the     wilderness. 

The  Hebrew  word   is   D"XL!,p   '  <tikvoI  or  aiKvts. 

res),  which    is   the  plant]  form  of  NLvp. 

The  Talmudists  have  niC'p.  and  the  Phoenicians 

•J    I'.  2 


372 


CUMMIN 


had  the  word  KoiKTijue^ao  (Diosc.  iv.  152),  which 
is  probably  TSD  NK'p  "  cucumber  of  Egypt" 
=  ff'iKvs  aypios.  The  same  name  for  cucumber 
exists  in  all  the  cognate  languages.  For  an  ac- 
count of  the  cucumbers  of  Syria  and  Egypt,  see 
Forskal,  Flora  Aegypt.  p.  169;  Celsii,  Hierobot. 
ii.  2+9.  The  root  of  the  word  is  NtPp,  which 
seems  to  contain  the  notion  of  hardness  and 
heaviness. 

From   the   same  root  comes    TW'pft,    a 

t    :    • 

garden  of  cucumbers,  which  ocelli's  in  Is. 
i.  8.     The  LXX.  render   iTJ'pO  by  triKvfi- 

parov,  and  the  Vulg.  by  cucumerarium. 
The  plant  referred  to  is  the  cucumis  chate 
of  Linnaeus.  It  is  abundant  in  Egypt, 
where  it  grows  and  ripens  rapidly.    [W.  D.] 


CURTAINS 

Voyage,\\.  106;  (Jhardin,  Voyages,  viii.  p.  268; 
PI.  lviii.).  The  great  laver ,  or  "sea,"  was  made 
with  a  lim  like  the  rim  of  a  cup  (Cos),  "with 
flowers  of  lilies"  (1  K.  vii.  26),  a  foim  which  the 
Persepolitan  cups  resemble  (Jahu,  Arch.  §144;. 
The  common  form  of  modern  Oriental  cups  is  re- 
presented in  the  accompanying  drawing : — 


Modem  Egyptian  drinking-cups,  one-fifth  of  the  real  size.    (Lane.) 


point     of 
from    the 


CUMMIN  (}J33 ;  kv/javov  ;  cyminum),  one  of 
the  cultivated  plants  of  Palestine,  mentioned  by 
Isaiah  (xxviii.  25,  27)  as  not  being  threshed  in  the 
ordinary  way  in  which  wheat  was  threshed,  but 
with  a  rod ;  and  again  by  our  Saviour  as  one  of 
the  crops  of  which  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees  paid 
tithe.  It  is  an  umbelliferous  plant  something  like 
fennel  (Cuminum  sativum,  Linn.).  The  seeds  have 
a  bitterish  warm  taste  with  an  aromatic  flavour. 
It  was  used  in  conjunction  with  salt  as  a  same 
(Plin.  xix.  8).  The  Maltese  are  said  to  grow 
cummin  at  the  present  day,  and  to  thresh  it  in  the 
manner  described  by  Isaiah.  [W.  D.l 

CUP.  The  chief  words  rendered  "  cup"  in  the 
A.V.  are,  1.  D13  ;  Trorripiov ;  calix :  2.  TVib'p, 
only  in  plural  ;  airovb'e'ia. ;  crate  res :  3.  ])*2)  ; 
KouSv ;  scyphus :  see  also  further  words  Basin 
and  Bowl.  The  cups  of  the  Jews,  whether  of 
metal  or  earthenware,  were  possibly  borrowed,  in 
shape  and  design,  from  Egypt  and 
Phoenicians,  who  were  celebrated  in 
that  branch  of  workmanship 
(II.  xxiii.  743;  Od.  iv.  615, 
618).  Egyptian  cups  were  of 
various  shapes,  either  having 
handles  or  without  them.  In 
Solomon's  time  all  his  drink- 
ing vessels  were  of  gold,  none 
of  silver  (1  K.  x.  21).  Babylon 
is  compared  to  a  golden  cup 
(Jer.  Ii.  7). 

Assyrian  cups  from  Khorsa- 
bad  and  Nimroud  may  be  seen 
figured  in  Layard  (Nin.  ii.  303, 
304  ;  Nin.  and  Bab.  186, 190. 
192),  some  perhaps  of  Phoeni- 
cian workmanship,  from  which 
source  both  Solomon  and  the 
Assyrian  monarch  possibly  de- 
rived both  their  workmen  and 
the  works  themselves.  The 
cups  and  other  vessels  brought 
to  Babylon  by  Nebuchadnezzar 
may  thus  have  been  of  Phoe- 
nician origin  (Dan.  v.  2). 

On  the  bas-reliefs  at  Perse- 
polis  many  figures  are  repre- 
sented bearing  cups  or  vases 
which  may  fairly  be  taken  as 
types  of  the  vessels  of  that  sort 
of  Esther  I Ksth.  i.  7  ;  Niebuhr, 


Assyrian  drinkin^-cu; 
(Layard,  ii.  304.) 


described  in  the  1 


The  use  of  gold  and  silver  cups  was  introduced 
into  Greece  after  the  time  of  Alexander  (Athen.  vi. 
229,  30  ;  xi.  446,  465  ;  Birch,  Anc.  Pott.,  ii.  109). 

The  enps  of  the  N.  T.,  -Kor^pia,  were  often  no 
doubt  formed  on  Greek  and  Roman  models.  They 
were  sometimes  of  gold  (Rev.  xvii.  4).  Diet  of 
Antiq.  art.  Patera.  [H.  W.  P.] 

CUP-BEARER    (T\p}lfo  ;    olvoX6os  ;    pia- 

ccrna),  an  officer  of  high  rank  with  Egyptian, 
Persian,  Assyrian,  as  well  as  Jewish  monarchs. 
The  chief  cupbearer,  or  butler,  to  the  king  of  Egypt 
was  the  means  of  raising  Joseph  to  his  high  position 
(Gen.  xl.  1-21,  xli.  9).  Rabshakeh,  who  was  sent 
by  Sennacherib  to  Hezekiah,  appears  from  his  name 
to  have  filled  a  like  office  in  the  Assyrian  court 
(2  K.  xviii.  17;  Ges.  p.  1225),  and  it  seems 
probable,  from  his  association  with  Rab-saris,  chief 
of  the  eunuchs  (D*1D"!n),  and  from  Eastern  cus- 
tom in  general,  that  he  was,  like  him,  an  eunuch 
(Ges.  p.  973).  Herod  the  Great  had  an  establish- 
ment of  eunuchs,  of  whom  one  was  a  cupbearer 
/Joseph.  Ant.  xvi.  8,  1).  Nehemiah  was  cup- 
bearer to  Artaxerxes  Longimanus  king  of  Persia 
(Neh.  i.  11,  ii.  1).  Cupbearers  are  mentioned 
among  the  attendants  of  Solomon  (1  K.  x.  5  ; 
comPr  Layard,  Nin.  ii.  324,  326).       [H.  W.  P.] 

CURTAINS.  The  Hebrew  terms  translated  in 
the  A.  V.  by  this  word  are  three : 

1.  Tereeoth,  ni^T1  ;  the  ten  "curtains"  of  fine 
linen,  &c,  each  28  cubits  long  and  4  wide,  and  also 
the  eleven  of  goats'  hair,  which  covered  the  Taber- 
nacle of  Moses  (Ex.  xxvi.  1-13  ;  xxxvi.  8-17).  The 
charge  of  these  curtains  and  of  the  other  textile 
fabrics  of  the  Tabernacle  was  laid  on  the  Gershonites 
(Num.  iv.  25).  Having  this  definite  meaning,  the 
word  came  to  be  used  as  a  synonym  for  the  Taber- 
nacle— its  transitoriness  and  slightness  ;  and  is  so 
employed  in  the  sublime  speech  of  David,  2  Sam. 
vii.  2  (where  "  cm-tains  "  should  be  "the  curtain"), 
and  1  Chr.  xvii.  1.  In  a  few  later  instances  the 
word  bears  the  more  general  meaning  of  the  sides  of 
a  tent ;  as  in  the  beautiful  figure  of  Is.  liv.  2  (where 
"habitations"  should  be  "  tabernacles,"  D133CD, 
poetic  word  for  "  tents  ")  :  Jer.  iv.  20,  x.  20  (here 
"  tabernacle"  and  "  tent"  are  both  one  word,  7flX 
=  tent);  Ps.  civ.  2  (where  "stretch,"  )DJ,  is  the 
word  usually  employed  for  extending  a  tent).  Also 
specially  of  nomadic  people,  Jer.  xlix.  29;  Hab.  iii. 
7  ;  Cant.  i.  5  (of  the  black  hair-cloth  of  which  the 
tents  of  the  real  Bedoueen  are  still  composed). 


CUSH 

2.  Masac,  T]DD  ;  the  "  hanging"  for  the  door- 
way of  the  tabernacle,  Ex.  xxvi.  36,  7,  xxxv.  15, 
xxxvi.  37,  xxxix.  cJ8,  xl.  5  ;  Num.  iii.  25,  iv.  25 : 
and  also  for  the  gate  of  the  court  round  the  taber- 
nacle, Ex.  xxvii.  1(5,  xxxv.  17,  xxxviii.  18,  xxxix. 
40,  xl.  33 ;  Num.  iii.  26,  iv.  26.  Amongst  these 
the  rendering  "  curtain"  occurs  but  once,  Num.  iii. 
2(1;  while  "hanging"  is  shared  equally  between 
Masac  and  a  very  different  word — Kelai,  ''V/p. 
The  idea  in  the  root  of  Masac  seems  to  be  of  shield- 
ing or  protecting  (~pD  ;  Ges.  951).  If  this  be  so, 
the  Masac  may  have  been  not  a  curtain  or  veil, 
but  an  awning  to  shade  the  entrances — a  thing  na- 
tural and  common  in  the  fierce  sun  of  the  East  (see 
one  figured  in  Fergusson's  Nineveh  and  Persepolis, 
p.  184).  But  the  nature  of  this  and  the  other 
textile  fabrics  of  the  tabernacle  will  be  best  examined 

t     under  Tabernacle. 

Besides  "  curtain"  and  "  hanging,"  Masac  is 
rendered  "covering"  in  Ex.  xxxv.  12,  xxxix.  34, 
xl.  21  ;  Num.  iv.  5  ;  2  Sam.  xvii.  19  ;  Ps.  cv.  39 ; 
Is.  xxii.  8. 

3.  Dok,  pi.  There  is  nothing  to  guide  us  to 
the  meaning  of  this  word.  It  is  found  but  once  (Is. 
xl.  22),  in  a  passage  founded  on  the  metaphor  of  a 
tent.  [G.] 

CUSH  (Ji'-lS  ;  Xovirl ;  Aethiopis,  and  Chusi), 
a  Benjamite  mentioned  only  in  the  title  to  Ps.  vii. 
There  is  every  reason  to  believe  this  title  to  be  of 
great  antiquity  (Eicald,  Psalmen,  9).  Cush  was 
probably  a  follower  of  Saul,  the  head  of  his  tribe, 
and  had  sought  the  friendship  of  David  for  the 
purpose  of  "  rewarding  evil  to  him  who  was  at 
peace  with  him" — an  act  in  which  no  Oriental  of 
ancient  or  modern  times  would  see  any  shame,  but, 
if  successful,  the  reverse.  Happily,  however,  we 
may  gather  from  verse  15  that  he  had  not  suc- 
ceeded. 

CUSH  (B>}3 ;  Xois  ;  Chus  (Gen.  x.  6,  7,  8  ; 
1  Chr.  i.  8,  9,  10)  ;  AlOtoiria,  AifliWes,  Aethi- 
opia;   Cushite    '•^'■13,    Aldioxp,    Aethiops ;    pi. 

D^;13,  W*V3  ;  fern.  TW-13),  the  name  of  a  son 

of  Ham,  apparently  the  eldest,  and  of  a  territory  or 
territories  occupied  by  his  descendants.  1 .  In  the 
genealogy  of  Noah's  children  Cush  seems  to  be  an 
individual,  for  it  is  said  "Cush  begat  Nimrod" 
(Cen.  x.  8;  1  Chr.  i.  10).  If  the  name  be  older 
than  his  time  he  may  have  been  called  after  a  country 
allotted  to  him.  The  following  descendants  of  Cush 
are  enumerated: — his  sons,  Seba,  Havilah,  Sabtah 
or  Sabta,  Raamah,  and  Sabtechah  or  Sabtecha;  his 
grandsons,  the  sons  of  Raamah,  Sheba  and  Dedan; 
and  Nimrod,  who,  as  mentioned  after  the  rest, 
seems  to  have  been  a  remoter  descendant  than  they, 
the  text  not  necessarily  proving  him  to  have  been 
a  son.  The  only  direct  geographical  information 
given  in  this  passage  is  with  reference  to  Nimrod, 
the  beginning  of  whose  kingdom  was  in  Babylonia, 
and  who  afterwards  went,  according  to  the  reading 
which  we  prefer,  into  Assyria,  and  founded  Ni- 
neveh and  other  cities.  The  reasons  tin-  our  pre- 
ference are,  (1.)  that  if  we  read  "  (Jut  of  that 
land  went  forth  Asshur,"  instead  of  "he  went 
forth  [into]  Asshur,"  i.  e.  Assyria,  there  is  no  ac- 
count given  but  of  the  "beginning"  of  Nimrod's 
kingdom:  and  (2.)  that  Asshur  the  patriarch  would 
seem  here  to  be  quite  out  of  place  in  the  genealogy. 
2.  Cush  as  a  country  appears  to  he  African  in  all 


CUSH 


373 


passages  except  Gen.  ii.  13.  We  may  thus  distin- 
guish a  primaeval  and  a  post-diluvian  Cush.  The 
former  was  encompassed  by  Gihon,  the  second  river 
of  Paradise :  it  would  seem  therefore  to  have  been 
somewhere  to  the  northward  of  Assyria.  It  is 
possible  that  Cush  is  in  this  case  a  name  of  a 
period  later  than  that  to  which  the  history  relates, 
but  it  seems  more  probable  that  it  was  of  the  earliest 
age,  and  that  the  African  Cush  was  named  from 
this  older  country.  Most  ancient  nations  thus  con- 
nected their  own  lands  with  Paradise,  or  with 
primaeval  seats.  In  this  maimer  the  future  Para- 
dise of  the  Egyptians  was  a  sacred  Egypt  watered 
by  a  sacred  Nile  ;  the  Arabs  have  told  of  the  ter- 
restrial Paradise  of  Sheddad  the  son  of  'A'd,  as 
sometimes  seen  in  their  deserts  ;  the  Creeks  located 
the  all-destroying  floods  of  Ogyges  and  Deucalion  in 
Greece ;  and  the  Mexicans  seem  to  have  placed  a 
similar  deluge  in  America ;  all  carrying  with  them 
their  traditions  and  fixing  them  in  the  territories 
where  they  established  themselves.  The  Cushan 
mentioned  in  Hab.  (iii.  7)  has  been  thought  to  be 
an  Asiatic  post-diluvian  Cush,  but  it  is  most  rea- 
sonable to  hold  that  Cushaii-rishathaira  is  heie  in- 
tended [Cushan].  In  the  ancient  Egyptian  in- 
scriptions Ethiopia  above  Egypt  is  termed  Keesh  or 
Kesh,  and  this  territory  probably  perfectly  corre- 
sponds to  the  African  Cush  of  the  Bible.  The 
Cushites  however  had  clearly  a  wider  extension,  like 
the  Ethiopians  of  the  Greeks,  but  apparently  with 
a  more  definite  ethnic  relation.  The  settlements 
of  the  sons  and  descendants  of  Cush  mentioned  in 
Gen.  x.  may  be  traced  from  Meroe  to  Babylon,  and 
probably  on  to  Nineveh.  We  have  not  alone  the 
African  Cush,  but  Seba  appears  to  correspond  to 
Meroe,  other  sons  of  Cush  are  to  be  traced  in  Ara- 
bia [Arabia,  Raamah,  &c],  and  Nimrod  reigned 
in  Babylonia,  and  seems  to  have  extended  his  rule 
over  Assyria.  Thus  the  Cushites  appear  to  have 
spread  along  tracts  extending  from  the  higher  Nile 
to  the  Euphrates  and  Tigris.  Philological  and 
ethnological  data  lead  to  the  same  conclusion. 
There  are  strong  reasons  for  deriving  the  non-Se- 
mitic primitive  language  of  Babylonia,  variously 
called  by  scholars  Cushite  and  Scythic,  from  an 
ante-Semitic  dialect  of  Ethiopia,  and  for  supposing 
two  streams  of  migration  from  Africa  into  Asia  in 
very  remote  periods  ;  the  one  of  Nigritians  through 
the  present  Malayan  region,  the  other  and  later 
one,  of  Cushites,  "from  Ethiopia  properly  so  called, 
through  Arabia,  Babylonia,  and  Persia,  to  Western 
India"  (Genesis  of  the  Earth,  i)<\,  pp.  214,  5). 
Sir  H.  Rawlinson  has  brought  forward  remarkable 
evidence  tending  to  trace  the  early  Babylonians  to 
Ethiopia;  particularly  the  similarity  of  their  mode 
of  writing  to  the  Egyptian,"  and  the  indication  in 
the  traditions  of  Babylonia  and  Assyria  of  "a  con- 
nexion in  very  early  times  between  Ethiopia, 
Southern  Arabia,  and  the  cities  on  the  Lower  Eu- 
phrates," the  Cushite  name  of  Nimrod  himself  as  a 
deified  hero,  being  the  same  as  that  by  which 
Mer::  is  called  in  the  Assyrian  inscriptions  (law 
linson's  Herod,  i.  pp.  442,  3).  History  affords 
many  traces  of  this  relation  of  Babylonia,  Arabia, 

and  Ethiopia.  Zerah  the  Cushite  (A.  V.  "  Ethio- 
pian") who  was  defeated  by  Asa,  was  most  probably 
a  king  of  Egypt,  certainly  the  leader  of  an  Egyptian 

"  Ideographic  writing  seems  characteristic  of  Tu- 
ranian nations  ;  at  least  such  alone  have  kept  to  it, 
partly  or  wholly,  in  spite  of  their  alter  knowledge  of 

phonetic  characters. 


374 


(JTSHAN 


army :  the  dynasty  then  ruling  (the"  22nd)  bears 
names  that  have  caused  it  to  be  supposed  to  have  had 
a  Babylonian  or  Assyrian  origin,  as  Sheshonk,  Shi- 
shak,  Sheshak;  Xamuret,  Nimrod;  Tekrut,  Teklut, 
Tiglath,  The  early  spread  of  the  Mizraites  illus- 
trates that  of  the  Cushites  [Caphtoii]  :  it  may 
be  considered  as  a  part  of  one  great  system  of  mi- 
grations. On  these  grounds  we  suppose  that  these 
Hainite  races,  very  soon  after  their  arrival  in  Africa, 
began  to  spread  to  the  east,  to  the  north,  and  to  the 
west ;  the  Cushites  establishing  settlements  along 
the  southern  Arabian  coast,  on  the  Arabian  shore 
of  the  Persian  Gulf  and  in  Babylonia,  and  thence 
onwards  to  the  Indus,  and  probably  northward  to 
Nineveh  ;  and  the  Mizraites  spreading  along  the 
south  and  east  shores  of  the  Mediterranean,  on  part 
of  the  north  shore,  and  in  the  great  islands.  These 
must  have  been  sea-faring  peoples,  not  wholly  un- 
like the  modern  Malays,  who  have  similarly  spread 
on  the  shores  of  the  Indian  Ocean.  They  may  be 
always  traced  where  very  massive  architectural  re- 
mains are  seen,  where  the  native  language  is  partly 
Turanian  and  partly  Semitic,  and  where  the  native 
religion  is  partly  cosmic  or  high-nature  worship, 
and  partly  fetishism  or  low  nature-worship.  These 
indications  do  not  fail  in  any  settlement  of  Cushites 
or  .Mizraites  with  which  we  are  well  acquainted. 
[Ethiopia.]  [K.  S.  P.] 

CUSH'AN(}^-13;  AlOioves  ;  Aethiopia,  Hab. 

iii.  7),  possibly  the  same  as  Cushan-rishathaim 
(A.  V.  Chushan-)  king  of  Mesopotamia  (Judg.  iii. 
8,  10).  The  order  of  events  alluded  to  by  the  pro- 
phet seems  to  favour  this  supposition.  First  he 
appears  to  refer  to  former  acts  of  Divine  favour 
(ver.  2)  ;  he  then  speaks  of  the  wonders  at  the 
giving  of  the  Law,  "  God  came  from  Ternan,  and 
the  Holy  One  from  mount  Paran  "  ;  and  he  adds, 
"  I  saw  the  tents  of  Cushan  in  affliction:  [and]  the 
tent-curtains  of  the  land  of  Midian  did  tremble,"  as 
though  referring  to  the  fear  of  the  enemies  of 
Israel  at  the  manifestations  of  God's  favour  for 
His  people.  Cushan-rishathaim,  the  first  recorded 
oppressor  of  the  days  of  the  Judges,  may  have  been 
already  reigning  at  the  time  of  the  entrance  into 
Palestine.  The  Midiauites,  certainly  allied  with  the 
Moabites  at  that  time,  feared  the  Israelites  and 
plotted  against  them  (Num.  xxii.,  xxiii.,  xxiv.,  xxv.)  ; 
and  it  is  noticeable  that  Balaam  was  sent  for  from 
Aram  (xxiii.  7),  perhaps  the  Aram-naharaim  of  the 
oppressor.  Habakkuk  afterwards  alludes  to  the 
crossing  of  Jordan  or  the  Red  Sea,  or  both  (ver. 
8-10,  15),  to  the  standing  still  of  the  sun  and 
moon  (11),  and  apparently  to  the  destruction  of  the 
Canaanites  (12,  13,  14).  There  is  far  less  reason  for 
the  supposition  that  Cushan  here  stands  for  an  Asiatic 
Cush.     [Chushan  Rishathaim.]        [R.  S.  P.] 

CUSHT  C^'-IS  ;  Xov<ri ;  Chusi),  a  name  occur- 
ring more  than  once  in  the  0.  T.  1.  One  of  the 
ancestors  of  Jehudi,  a  man  about  the  court  of  king 
Jehoiakim  (Jer.  xxxvi.  14).  2.  Father  of  Zepha- 
niah  the  Prophet  (Zeph.  i.  1).  3.  (With  the 
article,  ^'-ISil,  i.e.  "  the  .Cushite,"  "the  Ethio- 
pian ;"  oXovai;  Chusi)  a  man  apparently  attached 
to  Joab's  person,  but  unknown  and  unaccustomed 
to  the  king,  as  may  be  inferred  from  his  not  being 
recognised  by  the  watchman,  and  also  from  the 
abrupt  manner  in  which  he  breaks  his  evil  tidings 
to  David,  unlike  Ahimaaz  who  was  well  aware  of 
the  effect  they  were  sure  to  produce.  That  Cushi 
was  a  foreigner — as  we  should  infer  from  his  name 


CUTTINGS  IN  THE  FLESH 

— is  also  slightly  corroborated  by  his  ignorance  of 
the  ground  in  the  Jordan  valley — "  the  way  of  the 
'  Ciccar '  "  —  by  knowing  which  Ahimaaz  was 
enabled  to  outrun  him  (2  Sam.  xviii.  21,  22,  211, 
31,  32).  Ewald,  however,  conjectures  that  a  mode 
of  running  is  here  referred  to,  peculiar  to  Ahimaaz, 
and  by  which  he  was  recognised  a  long  distance  off 
by  the  watchman. 

CUTH'AH  or  CUTH  (nni3,  ri-12  ;  XovBd, 

Xovd  ;  Joseph.  Xov9os  ;  Cutha),  one  of  the  coun- 
tries whence  Shalmaneser  introduced  colonists  into 
Samaria  (2  K.  xvii.  24,  30);  these,  intermixing 
with  the  remnant  of  the  ten  tribes,  were  the  pro- 
genitors of  the  Samaritans,  who  were  called  Cu- 
thaeans  by  the  Jews,  and  are  so  described  in  the 
Chaldee  and  Talmud  (ot  Kara  tV  ''E.fipo.iwv 
yXSiTTav  Xovdcuoi,  Karh  Se  tr\v  'EWrivuv  'S.a/j.a- 
ptTrai,  Joseph.  Ant.  ix.  14,  §3).  The  position  of 
Cuthah  is  undecided ;  Josephus  speaks  of  a  river  of 
that  name  in  Persia,  and  fixes  the  residence  of  the 
Cuthaeaus  in  the  interior  of  Persia  and  Media 
( Ant.  ix.  14,  §3,  x.  9,  §7).  Two  localities  have  been 
proposed,  each  of  which  corresponds  in  part,  but 
neither  wholly,  with  Josephus'  account.  For  the  one 
we  depend  on  the  statements  of  Arabian  geographers, 
who  speak  of  a  district  and  town  named  Kutha, 
between  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates,  after  which  one 
of  the  canals  (the  fourth  in  Xen.  Anab.  i.  7)  was 
named;  the  town  existed  in  the  time  of  Abulfeda, 
and  its  site  has  been  identified  with  the  ruins  of 
Tawibdh  immediately  adjacent  to  Babylon  (Aius- 
worth's  Assyria,  p.  165;  Knobel,  VBlkertafel,  p. 
252)  ;  the  canal  may  be  the  river  to  which  Jo- 
sephus refers.  The  other  locality  corresponds  with 
the  statement  that  the  Cuthaeans  came  from  the 
interior  of  Persia  and  Media.  They  have  been 
identified  with  the  Cossaei,  a  warlike  tribe,  who 
occupied  the  mountain  ranges  dividing  those  two 
countries,  and  whose  lawless  habits  made  them  a 
terror  even  to  the  Persian  emperors  (Stiab.  xi.  524, 
xvi.  744).  They  were  never  wholly  subdued  until 
Alexander's  expedition;  and  it  therefore  appears 
doubtful  whether  Shalmaneser  could  have  gained 
sufficient  authority  over  them  to  effect  the  removal 
of  any  considerable  number ;  their  habits  would 
have  made  such  a  step  highly  expedient,  if  prac- 
ticable. The  connexion  between  the  Samaritans  and 
the  Sidonians,  as  stated  in  their  letter  to  Alexander 
the  Great  (Joseph.  Ant.  xi.  8,  §6,  xii.  5,  §5),  and 
between  the  Sidonians  and  the  Cuthaeans  as  expressed 
in  the  version  of  the  Chaldee  Paraph  rast  Pseudo- 
Jonathan  in  Gen.  x.  19,  who  substitutes  D^fTD 
for  JITS,  and  in  the  Targum,  1  Chr.  i.  13,  where 
a  similar  change  is  made,  is  without  doubt  to  be 
referred  to  the  traditional  belief  that,  the  original 
seat  of  the  Phoenicians  was  on  the  shores  of  the 
Persian  Gulf  (Her.  i.  1).  [W.  L.  B.] 

CUTTING  OFF  FROM  THE  PEOPLE. 

[Excommunication.] 

CUTTINGS  [IN  THE  FLESH]  (1.  flDX*, 
S.  /'.  DT,  s.  m.,  both  from  EX"  (Buxforf),  "IDC 
(Gesen.' p.  1395),  cut:  2.  niTTJ,  from  T73,  ''"'"' 
(Gesen.  p.  264);  iprofiides ;  incisurae :  .'!.  >'pj?p, 
s.,  from  y-1p,  engrave  (Gesen.  p.  1208)  ;  ypdn/xaTa 
ffTiKTa ;  stigmata).  The  prohibition  (Lev.  xix.  L'8) 
against  marks  or  cuttings  in  the  flesh  for  the  dead 
must  be  taken  in  connexion  with  the  parallel  pas- 
sages (Lev.  xxi.  5;   Deut.  xiv.  1),  in  which  sh'av- 


CUTTINGS  IN  THE  FLESH 

iu]j-  the  head  with  the  same  view  is  equally  tor- 
bidden.  But  it  appears  from  Jer.  xvi.  6,  7,  that 
some  outward  manifestation  of  grief  in  this  way 
was  not  wholly  forbidden,  or  was  at  least  tolerated. 
The  ground,  therefore,  of  the  prohibition  must  be 
.-ought  elsewhere,  and  will  be  found  in  the  super- 
stitious or  inhuman  practices  prevailing  among 
heathen  nations.  A  notion  apparently  existed  that 
self-inflicted  baldness  or  mutilation  had  a  propitia- 
tory efficacy  in  respect  of  the  manes  of  the  dead, 
perhaps  as  representing,  in  a  modified  degree,  the 
solemnity  of  human  or  animal  sacrifices.  Heiodotus 
(iv.  71)  describes  the  Scythian  usage  in  the  ease  of 
a  deceased  king,  for  whose  obsequies  not  fewer  than 
six  human  victims,  besides  offerings  of  animals  and 
other  effects,  were  considered  necessary.  An  ex- 
treme case  of  funereal  bloodshed  is  represented  on 
the  occasion  of  the  buiial  of  Patroclus,  when  four 
horses,  two  dogs,  and  twelve  Trojan  captives  are 
of'ered  up  (//.  xxiii.  171,  17G).  Together  with 
human  or  animal  sacrifices  at  funerals,  and  after 
these  had  gone  out  of  use,  the  minor  propitiatory 
acts  of  sell-laceration  and  depilation  continued  in 
use  (//.  xxiii.  141  ;  Od.  iv.  197;  Virg.  Aen.  iii. 
67,  with  Servius  ad  loc.  xii.  605;  Eurip.  Ale.  425; 
Seneca,  Hippol.  v.  1176,  1191!).  Plutarch  says 
that  some  barbarians  mutilate  themselves  (De  Con- 
sol,  ad  Apollon.  p.  113,  vol.  vi.  Reiskc).  He  also 
says  that  Solon,  by  the  advice  of  Epimenides,  cur- 
tailed the  Athenian  practice  in  this  lespect  (Solon. 
12-21,  vol.  i.  p.  184,  194).  Cicero  quotes  a  law 
of  the  twelve  tables  to  the  same  effect;  "  mulieres 
genas  ne  radunto"  (De  Leg.  ii.  23). 

Such  being  the  ancient  heathen  practice  it  is  not 
surprising  that  the  Law  should  forbid  similar  prac- 
tices in  every  case  in  which  they  might  be  used  or 
misconstrued  in  a  propitiatory  sense.  "  Ye  shall 
not  make  cuttings  for  {propter)   the   dead   t'23? 

(Lev.  xix.  28  ;  Ges.  731 ;  Spencer  de  Leg.  Hebr.  ii. 
xix.  404,  405). 

But  the  practice  of  self-mutilation  as  an  act  of 
worship  belonged  also  to  heathen  religious  ceremo- 
nies not  funereal.  The  priests  of  Baal,  a  Syrian 
and  also  an  Assvrian  deity,  cut  themselves  with 
knives  to  propitiate  the  god  "after  their  manner" 
(1  K.  xviii.  28).  Herodotus  says  the  Carians,  who 
resided  in  Europe,  cut  their  foieheads  with  knives 
at  festivals  of  Isis ;  in  this  respect  exceeding  the 
Egyptians,  who  beat  themselves  on  these  occasions 
(Herod,  ii.  61).  This  shows  that  the  practice  was 
not  then  at  least  an  Egyptian  one.  Lucian,  speak- 
ing of  the  Syrian  priestly  attendants  of  this  mock 
deity,  says,  that  using  violent  gestures  they  cut 
their  arms  and  tongues  with  swords  (Lucian, 
Asinus,c.  17,  vol.  ii.  102,  Amst. ;  de  Dea  Syr. 
ii.  658,  681;  comp.  Ez.  viii.  14).  Similar  prac- 
tices in  the  worship  of  Bellona  an'  mentioned  by 
Lucan  (Phars.  i.  560),  and  alluded  to  by  Aelius 
Lampridius  (Comm.  p.  209),  by  Tertullian  \p 
9),  ami  Lactantfus  {Dw.  Instit.  i.  c.  21,  29, 
Paris).  Herodotus,  speaking  of  means  used  for 
allaying  a  storm,  uses  the  words  Hvrofia  irouvvTes, 
which  may  mean  cutting  tie'  flesh,  but  more  pro- 
bably offering  human  sacrifices  (Herod,  vii.  191, 
ii.  119,  with  Sch weigh aeuser's  note  :  see  also  Virg. 
Aen.  ii.  1  It; ;  Lucr.  i.  85  , 

The  prohibition,  therefore,  is  directed  against 
practices  pi. 'vailing  not  among  the  Egyptians 
whom  the  Israelites  were  leaving,  but  among  the 
Syrians,  to  whom  they  were  about  to  become 
neighbours  (Selden,  de  Diis  Sgris,  Syn.  ii.  c.  1). 


CYMBAL 


375 


Practices  of  self-mutilation,  whether  propitiatory 
or  simply  funereal,  i.  e.  expressive  of  highly  excited 
feeling,  are  mentioned  of  the  modern  Persians  on 
the  occasion  of  the  celebration  of  the  death  of  Ho- 
seyn,  at  which  a  man  is  paraded  in  the  character  of 
the  saint,  with  points  of  lances  thrust  into  his 
flesh.  At  funerals  also  in  general  the  women  tear 
their  hair  and  faces.  The  Circassians  express  grief 
by  tearing  the  flesh  of  their  foreheads,  arms,  and 
bieasts,  The  Mexicans  and  Peruvians  offered 
human  sacrifices  both  at  funerals  and  festivals. 
The  Gosfiyeus  of  India,  a  class  of  Brahminical 
friars,  endeavour  in  some  cases  to  extort  alms  by 
gashing  their  limbs  with  knives.  Among  the 
native  negro  African  tribes  also  the  practice  ap- 
pears to  prevail  of  offering  human  sacrifices  at  the 
death  of  chiefs  (Chardin,  Vbyayes,  vi.  482,  i\.  58, 
490;  Olearius,  Travels,  p.  237;  Lane,  Mod.  Eg. 
ii.  59  ;  Prescott,  Mexico,  i.  53,  63  ;  Peru,  i.  86  : 
Elphinstone,  Hist,  of  India,  l.  116;  St: ah.  xv. 
711,  et  seq. ;  Niebuhr,  Voyages,  ii.  54:  Living- 
stone, Travels,  p.  318,  588;  Col.  Ch.  Cliron.no. 
exxxi.  179;   Muratori,  Anecd.  iv.  99,  1 1 n >). 

But  there  is  another  usage  contemplated  more 
remotely  by  the  prohibition,  viz.,  that  of  printing 
marks  ((niypara),  tattooing,  to  indicate  allegiance 
to  a  deity,  in  the  same  manner  as  soldiers  and 
slaves  bore  tattooed  marks  to  indicate  allegiance  or 
adscription.  This  is  evidently  alluded  to  in  the 
Revelation  of  St.  John  (xiii.  16,  xix.  20,  xvii.  5), 
Xapayfxa  eirl  rffs  x€lP^s  TVS  8e£ios  Kal  iirl  twv 
/j.€Tcinraiv,  and,  though  in  a  contrary  direction,  by 
Ezekiel  (ix.  4),  by  St.  Paul  (Gal.  vi.  17),  in  the 
Revelation  (vii.  3),  and  peihaps  by  Isaiah  (xliv.  5) 
and  Zechariah  (xiii.  6).  Lucian,  speaking  of  the 
piirsts  of  the  Syrian  deity,  says,  ari^ovrat  irdvTes, 
ol  /j.lv  is  Kapwovs,  oi  5e  is  avx^vas,  Kal  dtro  Tovfie, 
airuvTes  'Aaavpiui  (riy/j.a.To<poptov(Ti  (de  Dea  Syr. 
ii.  p.  684).  A  tiadition,  mentioned  by  Jerome, 
was  cuirent  among  the  Jews,  that  king  Jehoiakim 
bore  on  his  body  marks  of  this  kind  which  were 
discovered  after  his  death  (Spencer,  de  Leg.  Hebr. 
ii.  xx.  410).  Philo,  quoted  by  Spencer,  describes 
the  marks  of  tattooing  impressed  on  those  who  sub- 
mitted to  the  process  iu  their  besotted  love  for  idol- 
WOlship,  as  being  made  by  branding  (ffiS'opw  Treirv- 
poifxivw,  Philo,  de  Mon  trch.  i.  819  ;  Spencer,  41  (i). 
The  Arabs,  both  men  and  women,  are  in  the  habit 
of  tattooing  their  faces,  and  other  pal  ts  of  the  body, 
and  the  members  of  Brahminical  sects  in  India  are 
distinguished  by  marks  on  the  forehead,  often  er- 
roneously supposed  by  Europeans  to  be  marks  of 
caste  Niebuhr,  Descr.  'A-  I'Ar.  58  ;  Voyages,  i.  242  ; 
Wellsted,  Arabia,  ii.  206,  445  ;  Olearius,  Iravels, 
299  ;  Elphinstone,  Tndia,  i.  195).        [H.  \Y.  P.j 

CY'AMON  ( Kvdfj.wv  ;  Chelmon),  a  place  named 
only  in  Judith  vii.  •!,  as  lying  in  the  plain  {avXuiv, 
A.  V.  "  valley  ")  over  against  anivavTi  i  Esdrelom. 
If  by  •■  Esdrelom"  we  may  understand  Jezreel  this 
description  answers  to  the  situation  of  the  modern 
village  Tell  Kaimon,  on  the  eastern  slopes  of 
Carmel,  on  a  conspicuous  position  overlooking  the 
Kishon  and  the  greal  plain  Rob.  hi.  1 14  :  Van  de 
Velde,  i.  "•■'iii'.  The  place  was  known  to  Eusebius 
i  Kafj.fj.wvd)  and  Jerome  ( (  'imana),  and  is  mentioned 
by  them  in  the  Onomasticon.  They  identify  it 
with  Camon,  the  burial-place  of  lair  the  Gileaditc. 
Robinson  suggests  its  ideutity  with  Ji  >kn  bah,  [G.] 

(  YMBAL, CYMBALS  (D^yorDjn^O); 

a    percussive   musical    instrument,   from   7?)i,    to 


376  CYMBAL 

tinkle  (comp.  his  two  ears  shall  tingle,  ni^VPl, 

1  Sam.  iii.  11,  and  a  fish-spear,  ?¥?¥,  Job  xli.  7  ) ; 

possibly  so  called  from  its  tinkling  sound.  The 
three  instruments  which  appear  to  have  been  most 
in  common  use  amongst  the  Hebrews  were  Nebel, 

^33,  Cinnoor,  "1133,  and  Tzilzel,  bi&X.  Two 
kinds  of  cymbals  are  mentioned  in  Ps.  cl.  5, 
yJDE^  v¥?¥,  "  loud  cymbals,"  cymbalo,  bene- 
sonantia,  or  castagnettes,  and  ny-IIH  vV?X 
"  high-sounding  cymbals,"  cymbala  jubilationis. 
The  former  consisted  of  four  small  plates  of  brass 
or  of  some  other  hard  metal ;  two  plates  were  at- 
tached to  each  hand  of  the  performer,  and  were 
smote  together  to  produce  a  loud  noise.  The  latter 
consisted  of  two  larger  plates,  one  held  in  each  hand, 
and  struck  together  as  an  accompaniment  to  other 
instruments.  Asaph,  Heman,  and  .Teduthun,  tlie 
renowned  conductors  of  the  music  of  the  sanctuary, 
employed  the  "  loud  cymbals"  possibly  to  beat  time, 
and  to  give  the  signal  to  the  choir  when  it  was  to 
take  part  in  the  sacred  chant.  Lewis  says— but 
he  does  not  support  his  statement  by  any  authority 
— that  "  there  was  allowed  but  one  cymbal  to  be 
in  choir  at  once."  The  use  of  cymbals  was  not 
necessarily  restricted  to  the  worship  of  the  Temple 
or  to  sacred  occasions :  they  were  employed  for 
military  purposes,  as  also  by  the  Hebrew  women 
as  a  musical  accompaniment  to  their  national  dances. 
The  "  loud  cymbals"  are  the  same  with  D^W-VfO, 
A.  V.  "  cymbals,"  performed  on  by  the  band  which 
accompanied  David  when  he  brought  up  the  ark  of 
God  from  Kii  jath-Jearim  (1  Chr.  xiii.  8). 

Both  kinds  of  cymbals  are  still  •common  in  the 
East  in  military  music,  and  Niebuhr  often  refers  to 
them  in  his  travels.  "  II  y  a  chez  les  Orientaux," 
says  Munk,  "  deux  especes :  l'une  se  compose  de 
deux  petits  morceaux  de  bois  ou  de  fer  creux  et 
ronds  qu'on  tient  entre  les  doigts  et  qui  sont 
connus  sous  le  nom  de  castagnettes ;  l'autre  est 
composee  de  deux  demi-spheres  creuse's  en  metal." 
Lampe  has  written  a  copious  dissertation  on  ancient 
cymbals,  and  his  work  may  be  consulted  with  ad- 
vantage by  those  who  desire  fuller  information  on 
the  subject. 

The  cymbals  used  in  modern  orchestras  and 
military  bands,  and  which  are  called  in  Italian 
piatti,  are  two  metal  plates  of  the  size  and  shape  of 
saucers,  one  of  which  is  fixed,  and  the  other  is  held 
by  the  performer  in  his  left  hand.  These  resemble 
very  closely  the  "  high-sounding  cymbals  "  of  old, 
and  thejr  are  used  in  a  similar  manner  to  mark  the 
rhythm,  especially  in  music  of  a  loud  and  grand 
character.  They  are  generally  played  by  the  person 
who  performs  on  the  large  side  drum  (also  an  instru- 
ment of  pure  percussion) ;  and  whilst  he  holds  one 
cymbal  in  his  left  hand,  he  strikes  it  against  the 
other  which  is  fixed  to  the  drum,  his  right  hand 
remaining  free  to  wield  the  drumstick,  as  the  laige 
drum  is  only  struck  on  one  side  and  with  one  stick. 
In  practice  the  drum  and  the  cymbals  are  struck 
simultaneously,  and  an  erlect  of  pel  cussion  is  thus 
produced  which  powerfully  .marks  the  time. 

The  noun  metzilloth,  JT1?^0,  found  in  Zech.  xiv. 
20,  is  regarded  by  some  critics  as  expressive  of  certain 
musical  instruments  known  in  the  age  of  the  second 
Temple,  and  probably  introduced  by  the  Israelites 
on  their  return  from  Babylon.  The  A.  V.  renders 
the  word  "  bells,"  supposing  it   to  be  derived  from 


CYPRUS 

Tv¥.  The  most  generally  received  opinion,  how- 
ever, is,  that  they  were  concave  pieces  or  plates  of 
brass  which  the  people  of  Palestine  and  Syria  at- 
tached to  horses  by  way  of  ornament.  (See  Men- 
delssohn's Preface  to  Book  of  Psalms  ;  Kimchi,  Com- 
ment, in  foe;  Lewis,  Origines  Hebraeae,  Lond. 
1724,  176-7;  Forkel,  Geschichte  d.  Musik;  Jahn, 
Archaeology,  American  ed.,  cap.  v.  §96,  2;  Munk, 
Palestine,  456;  Esendier,  Diction,  of  Music,  i. 
112.)  [D.  W.  M.] 

CYPRESS  (npFl ;  LXX.  omits  ;  ilex).  Celsius 

(Hierob.  ii.  269,  70)  defends  the  rendering  of  the 
Vulg.  in  Is.  xliv.  14,  but  the  etymology  of  the 
word  from  PR,  to  be  hard  (as  in  Latin  we  get 

robur,  an  oak)  equally  well  suits  the  cypress. 
Van  de  Velde  describes  the  cypresses  of  Lebanon, 
and  there  is  great  probability  that  the  tree  men- 
tioned by  Isaiah  with  the  cedar  and  the  oak  is 
identical  with  the  Kvirapifftros  of  Eccles.  xxiv.  13, 
1.  10.  The  evergreen  cypress  {cup.  sempervirens  of 
Linnaeus)  is  a  large  coniferous  tree  very  common  in 
Palestine.  Its  wood  is  fragrant,  very  compact  and 
heavy.  It  hardly  ever  rots,  and  was  much  used 
by  the  ancients  in  making  the  statues  of  their  gods. 
Pococke  has  observed  that  the  cypress  is  the  only 
tree  which  grows  towards  the  summits  of  Lebanon, 
and  that  at  a  considerable  altitude  its  form  is 
modified,  so  as  to  resemble  a  small  oak.     [Cedar.] 

[W.  D.] 

CY'PRUS  (Kvirpos).  This  island  was  in  early 
times  in  close  commercial  connexion  with  Phoenicia ; 
and  there  is  little  doubt  that  it  is  referral  to  in 
such  passages  of  the  0.  T.  as  Ez.  xxvii.  6. 
["Chittim.]  Josephus  makes  this  identification 
in  the  most  express  terms  (Xe0t/j.a  .  .  .  Kvirpos 
aim}  vvv  KaKiiTai;  Ant.  i.  6,  §1;  so  Epiphan. 
Hacr.  xxx.  25).  Possibly  Jews  may  have  settled 
in  Cyprus  before  the  time  of  Alexander.  Soon 
after  his  time  they  were  numerous  in  the  island,  as 
is  distinctly  implied  in  1  Mace.  xv.  23.  The  first 
notice  of  it  in  the  N.  T.  is  in  Acts  iv.  36,  where  it 
is  mentioned  as  the  native  place  of  Barnabas.  In 
Acts  xi.  19,  20  it  appears  prominently  in  connexion 
with  the  earliest  spreading  of  Christianity,  first  as 
receiving  an  impulse  among  its  Jewish  population 
from  the  persecution  which  drove  the  disciples  from 
Jerusalem,  at  the  death  of  Stephen,  ami  then  as 
furnishing  disciples  who  preached  the  gospel  to 
Gentiles  at  Antioch.  Thus  when  Paul  was  sent 
with  Barnabas  from  Antioch  on  his  first  missionaiy 
journey,  Cyprus  was  the  first  scene  of  their  labouis 
(Acts  xiii.  4-13).  Again  when  Paul  and  Barnabas 
separated  and  took  different  routes,  the  latter  went 
to  his  native  island,  taking  with  him  his  relative 
Mark,  who  had  also  been  there  on  the  previous 
occasion  (Acts  xv.  39).  Another  Christian  of 
Cyprus,  Mnason,  called  "  an  old  disciple,"  and  there- 
fore probably  an  early  convert,  is  mentioned  Acts 
xxi.  16.  The  other  notices  of  the  island  are  purely 
geographical.  On  St.  Paul's  return  from  the  third 
missionary  journey,  they  "sighted"  Cyprus,  and 
sailed  to  the  southward  of  it  on  the  voyage  from 
Patara  to  Tyre  (ib.  3).  At  the  commencement 
of  the  voyage  to  Rome,  they  sailed  to  the  north- 
ward of  it,  on  leaving  Sidon,  in  order  to  be  under 
the  lee  of  the  land  (Acts  xxvii.  4),  and  also  in 
order  to  obtain  the  advantage  of  the  current, 
which  sets  northerly  along  the  coast  of  Phoenicia, 
and  westerly  with  considerable  force  along  Cilicia. 


CYPRUS 

All  the  notices  of  Cyprus  contained  in  ancient 
writers  are  diligently  collected  in  the  great  work  of 
Meursius  (Meursii  Opera,  vol.  iii.  Flor.  1744). 
Situated  in  the  extreme  eastern  corner  of  the 
Mediten-anean,  with  the  range  of  Lebanon  on  the 
east,  and  that  of  Taurus  on  the  north,  distinctly 
visible,  it  never  became  a  thoroughly  Greek  island. 
Its  religious  rites  were  half  Oriental  [PAPHOS], 
and  its  political  history  has  almost  always  been 
associated  with  Asia  and  Africa.  Cyprus  was  a 
rich  and  productive  island.  'Its  fruits  and  flowers 
were  famous.  The  mountains  also  produced  metals, 
especially  copper.  This  circumstance  gives  us  an 
interesting  link  between  this  island  and  Judaea. 
The  copper  mines  were  at  one  time  farmed  to 
Herod  the  Great  (Joseph.  Ant.  rvi.  4,  §5),  and 
there  is  a  Cyprian  inscription  (Boeckh,  No.  2628) 
which  seems  to  refer  to  one  of  the  Herods.  The 
history  of  Cyprus  is  briefly  as  follows : — After 
being  subject  to  the  Egyptian  king  Amasis  (Herod, 
ii.  182)  it  became  a  part  of  the  Persian  empire 
(ib.  iii.  19,  91),  and  furnished  ships  against  Greece 
in  the  expedition  of  Xerxes  (ib.  vii.  9u).  For  a 
time  it  was  subject  to  Greek  influence,  but  agaiu 
became  tributary  to  Persia.  After  the  battle  of 
Issns,  it  joined  Alexander,  and  after  his  death  fell  to 
the  share  of  Ptolemy.  In  a  desperate  sea-fight  off 
SALAMIS  at  the  east  end  of  Cyprus  (B.C.  306)  the 
victory  was  won  by  Demetrius  Poliorcetes, —  but 
the  island  was  recovered  by  his  rival,  and  after- 
wards it  remained  in  the  power  of  the  Ptolemies, 
and  was  regarded  as  one  of  their  most  cherished 
possessions.  It  became  a  Roman  province  (B.C. 
58)    under  circumstances   discreditable   to   Rome. 


CYPvENE 


377 


Copper  Coin  of  Cyprus,  under  Emp.  Claudius. 
Obr.  [CLjAVDIVS  .  CAESA[R].    Head  of  Emp.  to  left.  Rev. 
EIII  KoMIJsIoY  n[POKA]OY  ANQYIIA  KYIIPICCN. 

At  first  its  administration  was  joined  with  that  of 
Cilicia,  but  after  the  battle  of  Actium  it  was 
separately  governed.  In  the  first  division  it  was 
made  an  imperial  province  (Dion  Cass.  liii.  12). 
From  this  passage  and  from  Strabo  (xiv.  p.  683)  it 
has  been  supposed  by  sonic,  as  by  Baronius,  that 
St.  Luke  used  the  word  avOinraros  {proconsul), 
because  the  island  was  still  connected  with  Cilicia, 
by  others,  as  by  Grotius  and  Hammond,  that  the 
evangelist  employs  the  word  in  a  loose  and  general 
mi r.  But,  in  fact,  Dion  Cassius  himself  dis- 
tinctly tells  us  (iii.  and  liv.  4i  that  the  emperor 
afterwards  made  this  island  a  senatorial  province; 

so   th,it  St.  Luke's  language  is  in  the  strictest  sense 

correct.     Further  confirmation  is  supplied  by  coins 

and  inscriptions,  which  mention  other  proconsuh 
ofCyprus  not  very  remote  from  tin1  time  of  Sergius 
Paulus.  Tin;  governor  appears  to  have  resided  at 
Paphos  on  the  west,  of  the  island.  Under  the 
Roman  empire  a  road  connected  the  two  towns  of 
Paphos  and  Salamis,  as  appears  from  the  Pent. 
Table.  One  of  the  most  remarkable  events  in  this 
part  of  the  history  of  Cyprus  was  a  terrible  insur- 


rection of  the  Jews  in  the  reign  of  Trajan,  which 
led  to  a  massacre,  first  of  the  Greek  inhabitants, 
and  then  of  the  insurgents  themselves  (Milman, 
Hist,  of  Jews,  iii.  Ill,  112).  In  the  9th  century 
Cyprus  fell  into  the  power  of  the  Saracens.  In  the 
12th  it  was  in  the  hands  of  the  Crusaders,  under 
our  king  Richard  1.  Materials  for  the  description  of 
Cyprus  are  supplied  by  Pococke  and  Von  Hammer. 
But  see  especially  Engel's  Kypros,  Berlin,  1843,  and 
Ross's  Reisen  ruxch  Kos,  Halikamassos,  Rhodos,  n. 
do-  Insel  Cypcm,  Halle,  1852.  [J.  S.  H.] 

CYRE'NE  (Kvpfrn),  the  principal  city  of  that 
part  of  northern  Africa,  which  was  anciently  called 
Cyrenaica,  and  also  (from  its  five  chief  cities) 
Pentapolitana.  This  district  was  that  wide  pro- 
jecting portion  of  the  coast  (corresponding  to  the 
modern  Tripoli),  which  was  separated  from  the 
territory  of  Carthage  on  the  one  hand,  and  that  of 
Egypt  on  the  other.  Its  surface  is  a  table-land 
descending  by  terraces  to  the  sea ;  and  it  was  cele- 
brated for  its  climate  and  fertility.  It  is  ob- 
servable that  the  expression  used  in  Acts  ii.  10, 
"  the  parts  of  Libya  about  (Kara)  Cyrene,"  exactly 
corresponds  with  a  phrase  used  by  Dion  Cassius 
(Ai/Jurj  t]  irepl  YLvpi]vi}v,  liii.  12),  and  also  with 
the  language  of  Josephus  (t]  irpbs  KvpTivrjv  Aifiinj ; 
Ant.  xvi.  6,  §1).     [Libya.] 

The  points  to  be  noticed  in  reference  to  Cyrene 
as  connected  with  the  N.  T.  are  these, — that,  though 
on  the  African  coast,  it  was  a  Greek  city ;  that  the 
Jews  were  settled  there  in  large  numbers,  and  that 
under  the  Romans  it  was  politically  connected  with 
Crete,  from  which  it  is  separated  by  no  great  space 
of  sea.  The  Greek  colonisation  of  this  part  of 
Africa  under  Battus  began  as  early  as  B.C.  631  ; 
and  it  became  celebrated  not  only  for  its  commerce, 
but  for  its  physicians,  philosophers,  and  poets. 
After  the  death  of  Alexander  the  Great,  it  became 
a  dependency  of  Egypt.  It  is  in  this  period  that 
we  find  the  Jews  established  there  with  great  privi- 
leges. Ptolemy,  the  son  of  Lagus, introduced  them, 
because  he  thought  they  would  contribute  to  the 
security  of  the  place  (Joseph,  c.  Apiun.  ii.  4)  :  they 
became  a  prominent  and  influential  class  of  the  com- 
munity (Ant.  xiv.  7,  §2);  and  they  afterwards 
received  much  consideration  from  the  Romans  (xvi. 
6,  §5).  See  1  Mace.  xv.  23.  We  learn  from 
Josephus  (Life,  76)  that  soon  after  the  Jewish 
war  they  rose  against  the  Roman  power.  Another 
insurrection  in  the  reign  of  Trajan  led  to  great 
disasters,  and  to  the  beginning  of  the  decav  which 
was  completed  under  the  Mohammedans.  It  was  in 
the  year  B.C.  75  that  the  territory  of  Cyrene 
(having  previously  been  left  to  the  Romans  as  a 
legacy  by  Apion,  son  of  Ptolemy  Physcon),  was 
reduced  to  the  form  of  a  province.  <  )n  the  con- 
quest of  Crete  (b.c.  67)  the  two  were  united  in  one 
province,  and  together  frequently  called  Creta- 
Cyrene.  •  Under  Constantine  they  were  agmu 
separated.     [Crete.] 

'fhe  notices  above  given  of  the  numbers  ami  posi- 
tion of  the  .lews  in  Cyrene  (confirmed  by  I'liilo, 
who  speaks  of  the  diffusion  of  the  Jews  airb  rov 
irpbs  Ai/3i/7jr  Kara^adjxov  ^XP1  T^"/  opicoy 
Ai0io7riar.  adv.  Flacc.  y.  523)  prepare  us  for  the 
frequent  mention  of  the  place  in  the  X.  T.  in  con- 
nexion  with  Christianity,     Simon,   who    b< or 

Saviour's  cross  'Matt,  xxvii.  32;  Mark  xv.  21: 
Luke  wiii.  26)  was  a  native  of  Cyrene.  Jewish 
dwellers  iii  Cyrenaica  were  in  Jerusalem  at  Pente- 
cost Acts  ii.  Iii).  They  even  gave  their  name  to 
one    of    the    synagogues    in    Jerusalem    (ib.    vi.   9). 


378 


CYRENIUS 


Christian  converts  ftom  Gyrene  wen-  among  those 
who  contribute!  activelj  to  the  formation  of  the 
first  Gentile  church  at  Antioch  (ib.  .\i.  20),  and 
among  those  who  are  specially  mentioned  as  labour- 
ing at  Autioch  when  Barnabas  and  Saul  were  sent 
on  their  missionary  journey  is  Lucius  of  Cyrene  (ib. 
xiii.  I),  traditionally  said  to  have  been  the  first 
bishop  of  his  native  district.  Other  traditions  con- 
nect Mark  with  the  first  establishment  of  Chris- 
tianity in  this  part  of  Africa. 

The  antiquities  of  Cyrene  have  been  illustrated 
in  a  series  of  recent  works.  See  Delia  Cella,  Viaggio 
di  Tripoli,  &c.  Genoa,  1819;  Pacho,  Voyage  dans 
la  Miinii  trique,  la  Cyre'naique,  &c.  Paris,  1827- 
1829;  Trige,  Res  Cyrencnses.  Hafii.  1848; 
Beechey,  Expedition  to  explore  the  north  coast  of 
Africa,  &c.  London,  1828;  Barth,  Wanderungen 
dn.rch  das  Punisclie  u.  Kyreriaische  Kiistenlond, 
Berlin,  1849;  Hamilton,  Wanderings  in  North 
Africa,  London,  1856.  [J.  S.  H.] 


Ti-tradr.iclu 
nilpbium  plan 

Jupiter  A 


(Attic  talent)  of  Cyrene. 
it.     Rev.  KYPA.     Head  of  bearded 
mon  to  the  right. 


CYRE'NIUS  (YLvpfotos,  Luke  ii.  2),  the  literal 
English  rendering  in  the  A.  V.  of  the  Greek  name, 
which  is  itself  the  Greek  form  of  the  Roman  name 
QuiRiNUS  (not  Quirinius ;  see  Meyer,  in  loc. ; 
Sueton.  Tiber.  49  ;  Tac.  Ann.  ii.  30,  iii.  48).  The 
full  name  is  Publius  Sulpicius  Quirinus.  He  was 
consul  A.u.C.  742,  B.C.  12,  and  made  governor  of 
Syria  after  the  banishment  of  Archelaus  in  A. P.  6 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xvii.  13,  §5).  He  was  sent  to  make 
an  enrolment  of  property  in  Syria,  and  made  ac- 
cordingly, both  there  and  in  Judaea,  a  census  or 
airoypa<pi]  (Joseph.  I.  c.,  and  xviii.  1,  §1).  But 
this  census  seems  in  Luke  (ii.  2)  to  be  identified 
with  one  which  took  place  at  the  time  of  the  birth 
of  ( 'hrist,  when  Sentius  Saturninus  was  governor 
of  Syria.  Hence  has  arisen  a  considerable  difficulty, 
which  has  been  variously  solved,  either  by  sup- 
posing some  corruption  in  the  text  of  St.  Luke  (a 
supposition  which  is  not  countenanced  by  any  ex- 
ternal critical  evidence),  or  by  giving  some  unusual 
sense  to  his  words,  a\nr\  r\  a-rroypacpri  izpuirn 
iyevero  7]y€govevovTOS  tt)S  'Svplas  Kvprjviov. 
Many  commentators  and  chronologists,  e.  g.  Peri- 
zonius,  Usher,  Petavius,  Storr,  Tholuck,  -Wieseler, 
would  render  this,  "  was  made  before  Q.  was  go- 
vernor of  Syria,"  by  a  usage  otherwise  confined  to 
St.  John  among  the  Evangelists.  But  this  is  very 
improbable,  both  in  itself  and  because  thus  there. 
would  have  been  no  adequate  ground  for  inserting 
the  notice. 

An  unexpected  light  has  been  thrown  on  the 
matter  lately,  which  renders  it  only  necessary  to 
refer  to  summaries  and  criticisms  of  the  various 
-  hypotheses,  such  as  that  in  Winer,  art.  Quirinius. 
A.  W.  Zumpt,  of  Berlin,  the  nephew  of  the  dis- 
tinguished grammarian,  in  his  Commentatio  de 
Syria  Romanorum  provincia  a  Caesare  Angus!"  ail 
T.  Vespasianum,  has  shown  it  to  be  probable  that 


CYRENIUS 

Quirinus  was  twice   governor  of  Syria.     This  l.e 
supports  by  the  following  considerations: — 

In  9  B.C.  Sentius  Saturninus  succeeded  M.Titius 
in  the  province  of  Syria,  and  governed  it  three 
years.  He  was  succeeded  by  T.  Quintilius  Varus 
(Joseph,  Ant.  xvii.  5,  §2),  who,  as  it  appears,  re- 
mained governor  up  to  the  end  of  4  B.C.  Thence- 
forward we  lose  sight  of  him  till  he  is  appointed  to 
the  command  in  Germany,  in  which  he  lost  his  life 
in  a.d.  7.  We  also  lose  sight  of  the  governors  ot 
Syria  till  the  appointment  of  P.' Sulpicius  Quirinus, 
in  A.D.  6.  Now  from  the  maxim  acted  on  by  Au- 
gustus (Dion.  Cass.  Iii.  23),  that  none  should  hold 
an  imperial  province  for  less  than  three  or  more 
than  five  years,  Varus  cannot  have  been  goveinoi 
of  Syria  during  the  twelve  yeais  from  B.C.  *i  to 
a.d.  (i.  Who  then  were  the  missing  governors? 
One  of  them  has  been  found,  L.  Volusius  Saturninus, 
whose  name  occurs  as  "  legatus  Syriae  "  on  a  coin 
of  Antioch,  a.d.  4  or  5.  But  his  proconsulate  will 
not  fill  the  whole  time,  and  one  or  two  governors 
must  be  supplied  between  Varus,  ending  4  B.C.,. 
and  Volusius,  4  or  5  A.D. 

Just  in  that  interval  falls  the  census,  of  which  it 
is  said  in  Luke  ii.  2,  that  it  irpdrv  iyivero  r,y^- 
jxovevovTos  tt)s  Supias  Kvpvviov.  Could  Qui- 
rinus have  been  governor  at  any  such  time?  From 
Jan.  to  Aug.  B.C.  12  he  was  consul.  Soon  after 
that  he  triumphed  over  the  Homonadenses  (mux 
expvgnatis  per  Ciliciam  Homonadensinm  castellis 
insignia  triumphi  adeplrts,  Tac.  Ann.  iii.  48). 
Now  Zumpt  applies  the  exhaustive  process  to  the 
provinces  which  could  by  any  possibility  have  been 
under  Quirinus  at  this  time,  and  eliminates  from 
the  inquiry  Asia, — Pontus  and  Bithynia — and  Ga~ 
latia.  Cilicia  only  remains.  But  at  this  time,  as 
he  shows,  that  province  had  been  reduced  by  suc- 
cessive diminutions,  had  been  separated  (Dion. 
Cass.  liv.  4)  from  Cyprus,  and — as  is  shown  by  the 
history  of  the  misconduct  of  Piso  soon  afterwards, 
who  was  charged  with  having,  as  ex-governor  of 
Syria,  attempted  repetere  provinciam  armis  (Tac. 
Ann.  iii.  12),  because  he  had  attacked  Celenderis,  a 
fort  in  Cilicia  (ib.  ii.  78-80) — attached  to  the  pro- 
vince of  Syria.  This  Zumpt  also  confirms  by  the 
accounts  in  Tacitus  (Ann.  vi.  41,  xii.  55)  of  the 
Clitae,  a  seditious  tribe  of  Cilicia  aspera,  who  on 
two  occasions  were  repressed  by  troops  sent  by  the 
governors  of  Syria. 

Quirinus  then  appears  to  have  been  governor  of 
Syria  at  some  time  during  this  interval.  But  at 
what  time '?  We  find  him  in  the  East  (Tac.  Ann. 
iii.  48),  as  datus  rector  C.  Caesari  Armeniam  ob- 
tinenti :  and  this  cannot  have  been  during  his 
well-known  governorship  of  Syria,  which  began  in 
A.D.  6 ;  for  Caius  Caesar  died  in  a.d.  4.  Zumpt, 
bv  arguments  too  long  to  be  reproduced  here,  but 
very  striking  and  satisfactory,  fixes  the  time  of  his 
fii st  governorship  at  from  B.C.  4  to  B.C.  1,  when 
he  was  succeeded  by  M.  Lollius. 

It  is  true  this  does  not  quite  remove  our  diffi- 
culty. But  it  brings  it  within  such  narrow  limits, 
that  any  slight  error  in  calculation,  or  even  the  lati- 
tude allowed  by  the  words  irpwrn  iyevero,  might 
well  cover  it. 

in  the  passage  of  Tacitus  referred  to  more  than 
once  (Ann.  iii.  48),  we  learn  that  in  a.d.  21, 
Tiberius  asked  of  the  Senate  the  honour  of  a  public 
funeral  for  Quirinus.  The  historian  describes, 
however,  his  memory  as  not  being  popular  for  other 
reasons  (see  Ann.  iii.  22),  and  because  of  his  "  sor- 
dida.  et p  -acpotens  senectus." 


CYRUS 

For  the  controversy  respecting  the  census  under 
Quirinus,  as  it  stood  before  Zumpt's  discovery,  see 
Winer,  ut  supra:  Greswell,  vol.  i.  Dissertation 
xii.  ;  Browne's  Ordo  Saeclorum,  Appendix  ii.  40  it'. ;  j 
and  Wieseler,  Chronologische  Synapse  der  oier  Evaii- 
gelien,  109  if.  [H.  A.] 

CY'RUS  (C2H2,  or  D:TI3,  i.e.  Corcsh;  Kvpos  ; 

probably. from  the  root  contained  in  the  Pers.  kohr, 
the  sun  ;  Sans,  sura  :  so  l'lut.  Art  ax.  c  1  ;  cf. 
Gesen.  T/ws.  s.  v.),  the  founder  of  the  Persian  em- 
pire (cf.  Dan.  vi.  28,  x.  1,  13;  2  Chr.  xxxvi.  22, 
23),  was.  according  to  the  common  legend  (Herod,  i. 
107  ;  Xen.  Cyrop.  i.  2,  1),  the  son  of  Mandane,  the 
daughter  of  Astyages,  the  last  king  of  Media,  and 
Cambyses  a  Persian  of  the  royal  family  of  the  Aehae- 
menidae.a  In  consequence  of  a  dream,  Astyages,  it. 
is  said,  designed  the  death  of  his  infant  grandson,  but 
the  child  was  spared  by  those  whom  he  charged  with 
the  commission  of  the  crime  (Herod,  i.  109  fl'.), 
anl  Cyrus  grew  up  in  obscurity  under  the  name  of 
Agradates  (Strab.  xv.  729).  His  real  parentage 
was  discovered  by  the  imperious  spirit  which  he 
displayed  while  yet  a  boy  (Herod,  i.  114),  and 
when  he  grew  up  to  manhood  his  courage  and 
genius  placed  him  at  the  head  of  the  Persians.     The 


CYRUS 


379 


tyranny  of  Astyages  had  at  that  time  alienated 
a  large  faction  of  the  Medes,  and  Cyrus  headed  a 
revolt  which  ended  in  the  defeat  and  capture  of  the 
Median  king  rs.C.  559,  near  Pasargadae  (Murgh-Avb, 
Strab.  xv.  730).  After  consolidating  the  empire 
which  he  thus  gained,  Cyrus  entered  on  that  career 
of  conquest  which  has  made  him  the  hero  of  the 
east.  In  B.C.  546  (?)  he  defeated  Croesus,  and  the 
kingdom  of  Lydia  was  the  prize  of  his  success. 
While  his  general  Harpagus  was  engaged  in  com- 
pleting the  reduction  of  Asia  Minor,  Cyrus  turned 
his  arms  against  the  Babylonians.  Babylon  fell 
before  his  army,  and  the  ancient  dominions  of 
Assyria  were  added  to  his  empire  (B.C.  538).  The 
conquest  of  Babylon  opened  the  way  for  greater 
designs.  It  is  probable  that  Cyrus  planned  an 
invasion  of  Egypt ;  and  there  are  traces  of  campaigns 
in  Central  Asia,  in  which  he  appears  to  have 
attempted  to  extend  his  power  to  the  Indus  (Ctes. 
Pers.  cc.  5  ff.).  Afterwards  he  attacked  the  Mas- 
sagetae,  and  according  to  Herodotus  (i.  214 ;  cf. 
Joseph.  Ant.  xi.  2,  1)  he  fell  in  a  battle  against 
them  B.C.  529  (Clinton,  F.  H.  vol.  ii.  301  ff.). 
His  tomb  is  still  shown  at  Pasargadae  (Arr.  Exp. 
Al.  vi.  29),  the  scene  of  his  first  decisive  victory 
(Kawlmsou,  Herod,  i.  p.  351). 


Tomb  of  Cyrus  at  Murg-Auh,  the  ancient  Pasargadae. 


It  is  impossible  to  insist  upon  the  details  of  the 
outline  thus  sketched.  In  the  time  of  Herodotus 
Cyrus  was  already  regarded  as  the  national  hero  of 
Persia,  ami  Ids  history  hail  received  various  popular 
embellishments  (Herod,  i.  95;  >-t'.  iii.  is,  160; 
Xen.  Cyrop.  i.  2,  1 ).  In  tin'  next  century  Xeno- 
phon   chose  him  as  the   hero  of  his  romance,  and 

fact  and  fiction  becami  thenceforth  hopelessly  i - 

fused  in  classical  writers.  Bui  in  the  absence  of 
authentic  details  of  his  actions,  the  empire  which  he 
left     is    the    best     record    of    his    power    and     plans. 

Like  an  Oriental  Alexander  he  aimed  at  universal 
dominion;  and  the  influence  of  Persia,  like  thai  of 

»  In  an  inscription  he  is  described  as  "  Son  of 
Cambyses,  the  powerful  king"  (Col.  Rawlinson,  on 

Herod,  i.  lit"). 

b  It  seems  unnecessary  to  enter  into  the  question 
of  tl.e  identity  of  the  Cyrus  of  Scripture  and  profane 
history,  though  the  opinion  of  the  Duke  of  Minchcs- 


Greece,  survived  the  dynasty  from  which  it  sprung. 
In  every  aspect  the  reign  of  Cyrus  marks  an  epoch 
in  universal  history.  The  fall  of  Sardis  and  Baby- 
lon was  the  starting-point  of  European  life;  and  it 
is  a  singular  coincidence  thai  the  beginning  oft  !  redan 
ait  ■ind  philosophy,  and  the  foundation  of  the  Roman 
constitution  synchronize  with  the  triumph  of  the  Arian 
race  in  the  easl  (cf.  N'iebuhr,  Oesch.  Ass.  p.  232), 

Bui     while    the    position    which    Cyrus   occupied 

with  regard  to  the  nations  of  the  world  is  strikingly 
significant,  the  personal  relations  to  God's  people, 
with  which  he  is  invested  in  the  Scriptures*  are 
full  of  a  more  peculiar  interest." 


ter  that  the  Cyrils  of   Herodotus  is  the  Nchm  hadnez- 
/ar    of  the    Bible    has    found    advocates   in   Germany 

Pressel,  s.  v.  Cyrus  in  Herzog'e  Encyklop.).  It  Is 
impossible  that  the  great  conqueror  of  [uaiaa  can  be 
merely  a  satrap  of  Xerxes. 


380 


CYRUS 


Hitherto  the  great  kings,  with  whom  the  Jews 
had  been  brought  into  contact,  had  been  open 
oppressors  or  seductive  allies ;  but  Cyrus  was  a 
generous  liberator  and  a  just  guardian  of  their  rights. 
An  inspired  prophet  (Is.  xliv.  28)  recognised 
in  him  "a  shepherd"  of  the  Lord,  an  "anointed" 
king  (Is.  xlv.  1  ;  JT'tJ'O,  Messiah.  ;  tw  xp'CT<S  ,uoD; 
Ghristo  meo) ;  and  the  title  seemed  to  later  writers 
to  invest  him  with  the  dignity  of  being  in  some 
tense  a  type  of  Christ  himself  (Hieron.  Cvmn.  in 
Is.  xlv.  I).  His  successes  are  connected  in  the  pro- 
phecy with  their  religious  issue;  and  if  that  appear 
to  be  a  partial  view  of  history  which  represents  the 
restoration  of  a  poor  remnant  of  captive  Israelites 
to  their  own  land  as  the  final  cause  of  his  victories 
(Is.  xliv.  28-xh\  4),  it  may  be  answered  that  the 
permanent  efforts  which  Persia  has  wrought  upon 
the  world  can  be  better  traced  through  the  Jewish 
people  than  through  any  other  channel.  The  laws, 
the  literature,  the  religion,  the  very  ruins  of  the 
material  grandeur  of  Persia  have  passed  away  ;  and 
still  it  is  possible  to  distinguish  the  effects  which 
they  produced  in  preparing  the  Jews  for  the  fulfil- 
ment of  their  last  mission.  In  this  respect  also 
the  parallel,  which  has  been  already  hinted,  holds 
good.  Cyrus  stands  out  clearly  as  the  repre- 
sentative of  the  east,  as  Alexander  afterwards  of  the 
west.  The  one  led  to  the  development  of  the  idea 
of  order,  and  the  other  to  .that  of  independence. 
Ecclesiastically  the  first  crisis  was  signalised 
by  the  consolidation  of  a  Church ;  the  second  by 
the  distinction  of  sects.  The  one  found  its  outward 
embodiment  in  "  the  great  Synagogue  ;"  the  other 
in  the  dynasty  of  the  Asmonaeans. 

The  edict  of  Cyrus  for  the  rebuilding  of  the 
Temple  (2  Chr.  xxxvi.  22-3;  Ez.r.  i.  1-4,  iii.  7, 
iv.  •'>,  v.  13,  17,  vi.  3)  was  in  fact  the  beginning 
of  Judaism  ;  and  the  great  changes  by  which  the 
nation  was  transformed  into  a  church  are  clearly 
marked. 

1 .  The  lesson  of  the  kingdom  was  completed  by 
the  captivity.  The  sway  of  a  temporal  prince  was 
at  length  felt  to  be  at  best  only  a  faint  image  of 
that  Messianic  kingdom  to  which  the  prophets 
pointed.  The  royal  power  had  led  to  apostasy  in 
Israel,  and  to  idolatry  in  Judah ;  and  men  looked 
for  some  other  outward  form  in  which  the  law 
might  be  visibly  realized.  Dependence  on  Persia 
excluded  the  hope  of  absolute  political  freedom  and 
offered  a  sure  guarantee  for  the  liberty  of  religious 
organization. 

2.  The  captivity  which  was  the  punishment 
of  idolatry  was  also  the  limit  of  that  sin.  Thence- 
forth the  Jews  apprehended  fully  the  spiritual 
nature  of  their  faith,  and  held  it  fast  through  per- 
secution. At  the  same  time  wider  views  were 
opened  to  them  of  the  unseen  world.  The  powers 
of  good  and  evil  were  recognised  in  their  action  in 
the  material  world,  and  in  this  way  some  preparation 
was  made  for  the  crowning  doctrine  of  Christianity. 

3.  The  organization  of  the  outward  Church  was 
connected  with  the  purifying  of  doctrine,  and 
served  as  the  form  in  which  the  truth  might  be 
realised  by  the  mass.  Prayer— public  and  private 
— assumed  a  new  importance.  The  prophetic  work 
came  to  an  end.  The  Scriptures  were  collected. 
The  "law  was  fenced"  by  an  oral  tradition. 
Synagogues  were  erected,  and  schools  formed. 
Scribes  sharer]  the  respect  of  priests,  if  they  did  not 
supersede  them  in  popular  regard. 

4.  Above  all,  the  bond  by  which  "  the  people 
of  God"  was  held  together  was  at  length  felt  to 


DAGON 

be  religious  and  not  local,  nor  even  primarily 
national.  The  Jews  were  incorporated  in  different 
nations,  and  still  looked  to  Jerusalem  as  the  centre 
of  their  faith.  The  boundaries  of  Canaan  were 
passed ;  and  the  beginnings  of  a  Spiritual  dispensa- 
tion were  already  made  when  the  "Dispersion" 
was  established  among  the  kingdoms  of  the  earth 
(comp.  Niebuhr's  Gesch.  Assurs  unci  Babels,  224  ff. ; 
Ewald,  Gesch.  d.  Volkes  Israel,  iv.  GO  ft";  Jost, 
Gesch.  d.  Judenthums,  i.  13  ft'.).  [Dispersion 
of  the  Jews.]  [B.  F.  W.] 


D 


DAB'AREH  (IT^H;  AejSfld;  Alex.  AePpd6; 

Dabereth),  Josh.  xxi.  28.  This  name  is  incorrectly 
spelt  in  the  A.  V.,  and  should  be  Daberath  ; 
which  see. 

DAB'BASHETH  {TWtt  ;  BaiddpaPa;  Alex. 

Aafldcrdai ;  Debbaseth),  a  town  on  the  boundary  of 
Zebulun  (Josh.  xix.  11  only). 

DAB'ERATH  (with  the  art.  in  Josh.  m^n ; 
AafiipoiQ ;  Alex.  AafipdQ  ;  in  Chron.  by  double 
copying,  tV  Aefiepl  Kal  rrjv  Aafiwp  ;  Dabereth), 
a  town  on  the  boundary  of  Zebulun  (Josh.  xix.  12) 
named  as  next  to  Chisloth-Tabor.  In  the  list  of 
Levitical  cities  however  in  1  Chr.  vi.  72,  and  in 
Josh.  xxi.  28  (where  the  name  in  the  original  is 
the  same,  though  in  the  A.  V.  "  Dabareh  "),  it  is 
stated  as  belonging  to  Issachar.  It  is  no  doubt  the 
Dabaritta  (Aa^apiTTtiiv  K(ip.r])  mentioned  by  Jo- 
sephus  (B.  J.  ii.  21,  §3).  Under  the  name  of 
Debdrieh  it  still  lies  at  the  western  foot  of  Tabor 
(ii.  350).  A  tradition  mentioned  by  Van  de  Velde 
(ii.  S74)  makes  this  the  scene  of  the  miracle  on  the 
lunatic  child  performed  by  our  Lord  after  His  de- 
scent from  the  Mount  of  Transfiguration  (Matt.  xvii. 
14).     But  this  event  probably  took  place  far  away. 

[G.] 

DA'BRIA,  one  of  the  five  swift  scribes  who 
recorded  the  visions  of  Esdras  (2  Esd.  xiv.  24 ; 
comp;  37,  42). 

DACO'BI  (Aa/coi5/3;  Alex.  AaKovfii;  Accuba), 
1  Esd.  v.  28,     [Akkub.] 

DADDE'US,  or  SADDE'US  (1  Esd.  viii. 
45,  46),  a  name  which  answers  to  the  Greek 
AoSSalos,  or  Ao\8cuos,  which  is  itself  a  corruption 
of  Iddo  (Ezr.  viii.  17),  arising  out  of  the  preceding 
word  b]}.     [Iddo.]  [B.  E.  W.] 

DA'GON  (}TJn,  Adyoiv,  a  diminutive  of  Jm 

a  fish,  used  in  a  sense  of  endearment:  cf.  Cesen. 
Thes.  s.  ».),  apparently  the  masculine  (1  Sam.  v. 
3,  4  ;  Sanction,  p.  28  ;  Movers,  Phoeniz.  i.  144)  cor- 
relative of  Atargatis  [ATARGATis],  was  the  na- 
tional god  of  the  Philistines.  The  most  famous 
temples  of  Dagon  were  at  Gaza  (Judg.  xvi.  21-30) 
and  Ashdod  (1  Sam.  v.  5,  fi  ;  1  Chr.  x.  10).  The 
latter  temple  was  destroyed  by  Jonathan  in  the 
Maccabaean  wars  (1  Mace.  x.  83,  4,  xi.  4;  Joseph. 
Ant.  xiii.  4,  §5).  Traces  of  the  worship  of  Dagon 
likewise  appear  in  the  names  Caphar-Dagon  (near 
Jamnia),  and  Beth-Dagon  in  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  41) 
and  Asher  (Josh.  xix.  27 ).   [Beth-Dagon.]    Dagon 


DAGON 

was   represented  with  the  thee  and  hands  <>t"  a  man 
and  the  tail  of  a  tish  (1  Sam.  v.  5). 

In  the  Babylonian 
mythology  the  name 
Dagon,  Odakon  (TlSa.- 
koiv)  is  applied  to  a 
fish-like  being  who 
"  rose  from  the  waters 
of  the  Red  Sea  (Be- 
rosus,  in  Niebnhr, 
Gesch.  Assurs,  p.  477) 
as  one  of  the  great 
benefactors  of  men." 
Niebuhr  appears  to 
identify  this  being  with 
the  Phoenician  god,  but 
13  if.)  regards  them  as 
wholly  distinct.  It  may  have  been  from  a  confusion 
with  the  Babylonian  deity  that  the  Phoenician  Dagon 
has  been  compared  with  Zehs  apSrpios,  the  author 
of  agriculture  (Philo  Bybl.  ap.  Euseb.  Praep.  Ev.  i. 
10  ;  Sanchon.  p.  32),  as  if  the  name  were  connected 
with  p"1!,  corn  (Si'tcoj/,  Philo). 


DAMASCUS 


381 


Fish-^od.     From  Khorsahud 
(Layard.) 


Rawlinson  (Herodotus,  i. 


Fish-god.     From  Nimroud.     (Layartl.) 

The  fish-like  form  was  a  natural  emblem  of  fruit- 
fulness,  and  as  such   was  likely  to  be  adopted  by 


Klah-god  on  gems  in  British  Museum.     (Layard.) 


seafaring  tribes  in  the  representation  of  their  gods. 
Various  kinds  of  fish  were,  as  is  well  known, 
objects  of  general  worship  among  the  Egyptians 
(Herod,  ii.  72  ;  Strab.  xvii.  p.  812).     [B.  F.  W.] 

DAI'SAN  (Aaicrdv  ;  Alex.  Aecriv  ;  Desanori), 
I  Esd.  v.  31.  [REZDS  ;  by  the  commonly  repeated 
change  of  K,  "I,  to  1),  *7.] 

DALAI  AH  (mbn  ;  AaXaala.  ;  Dalaia).  The 
sixth  son  of  Elioenai,  a  descendant  of  the  royal 
liimily  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  iii.  24). 

DALMANU'THA  (AaXpavovB*).  In  Matt, 
xv.  39  it  is  said  that  Jesus  "  came  into  the  borders 
of  Magdala,"  while  in  Mark  viii.  10  we  read  that 
He  "  came  into  the  regions  (eis  ra  pipf])  of  Dal- 
manutha."  From  this  we  may  conclude  that  Dal- 
manutha  was  a  town  on  the  west  side  of  the  Sea  of 
Galilee  .near  Magdala.  The  latter  stood  close  upon 
the  shore,  at  the  southern  end  of  the  little  plain  of 
Gennesaret.  [Magdala.]  Immediately  south  of  it 
a  precipitous  hill  juts  out  into  the  sea.  Beyond 
this,  about  a  mile  from  Magdala,  a  narrow  glen 
breaks  down  from  the  west.  At  its  mouth  are 
some  cultivated  fields  and  gardens,  amid  which, 
just  by  the  beach,  are  several  copious  fountains, 
surrounded  by  heavy  ancient  walls,  and  the  ruins 
of  a  village.  The  place  is  called  ' Ain-el-Barideh, 
"  the  cold  Fountain."  Here  in  all  probability  is 
the  site  of  the  long  lost  Dalmanutha.      [J.  L.  P.] 

DALMA'TIA  (AaAjuaTi'a),a  mountainous  dis- 
trict on  the  eastern  coast  of  the  Adriatic  Sea,  ex- 
tending from  the  river  Naro  in  the  S.  to  the  Savus 
in  the  N.  It  formed  a  portion  of  the  Roman  pro- 
vince of  Illyricum  subsequently  to  Tiberius'  expe- 
dition, A.D.  9.  St.  Paul  sent  Titus  there  (2  Tim. 
iv.  10):  he  himself  had  preached  the  Gospel  in  its 
immediate  neighbourhood  (Rom.  xv.  19),  for  the 
boundaries  of  Illyricum  and  Dalmatia  were  not  well 
defined,  and  the  two  names  were,  at  the  time  St. 
Paul  wrote,  almost  identical.  [W.  L.  B.] 

DAL'PHON  (jiD^;  AeX<p6v,  some  MSS. 
iced  aSeXcfxiv  ;  Delphon),  the  second  of  the  ten  sons 
of  Haman  ;  killed  by  the  Jews  on  the  13th  of  Adar 
(Esth.  ix.  7). 

DAM'AEIS  (Aafxapis),  an  Athenian  woman 
converted  to  Christianity  by  St.  Paul's  preaching 
(Acts  xvii.  34).  Chrysostom  (de  Sacerdotio,  iv. 
7),  and  otheis  held  her  to  have  been  the  wife  of 
Dionysius  the  Areopagite,  but  apparently  for  no 
other  reason  than  that  she  is  mentioned  together 
with  him  in  this  passage.  Grotius  and  Hemsterhuis 
think  the  name  should  be  AapaXis,  which  is  fre- 
quently found  as  a  woman's  name;  but  the  per- 
mutation of  A  and  p  was  not  uncommon  both  in 
pronunciation  and  writing.  We  have  icpifiavos 
and  KXlPavos,  B(T)k6\os  and  A€oic6pos,  /3ovkoXos 
and  alyiKopevs,  from  the  obsolete  i<6pa>  or  k6Xu>, 
euro,  Colo  (Lobeck  on  Phrym'chus,  p.  §52).  [11.  A.] 

DAMAS'CUS  (pb'EH;  AapatruSs ;  Damas- 
cus) is  one  of  the  most  ancient,  and  has  at  all  times 
been  one  of  the  most  important,  of  the  cities  of 
Syria.  It.  is  situated  in  a  plain  of  vast  size  and  of 
extreme  fertility,  which  lies  east' of  the  great  chain 
of  Anti-Libanus,-  on  the  edge  of  the  desert.  This 
fertile  plain,  which  is  nearly  circular,  and  about 
30  miles  in  diameter,  is  due  to  the  river  Barada, 
which  is  probably  the  "Abana"  of  Scripture.  This 
stream,  rising  high  up  on  the  western  Bank  of  Anti- 
Libanus,  forces  its  way  through  the  chain,  running 


382 


DAMASCUS 


for  some  time  among  the  mountains,  till  suddenly 
it  bursts  through  a  narrow  cleft  upon  the  open 
country  east  of  the  hills,  and  diffuses  fertility  far  and 
wide.  [Auana.]  "  From  the  edge  of  the  moun- 
tain-range," says  a  modern  traveller,  "  you  look 
down  on  the  plain  of  Damascus.  It  is  here  seen  in 
its  widest  and  fullest  perfection,  with  the  visible 
explanation  of  the  whole  secret  of  its  great  and  en- 
during charm,  that  which  it  must  have  had  when 
it  was  the  solitary  seat  of  civilisation  in  Syria,  and 
which  it  will  have  as  long  as  the  world  lasts.  The 
river  is  visible  at  the  bottom,  with  its  green  banks, 
rushing  through  the  cleft;  it  bursts  forth,  and  as  if 
in  a  moment  scatters  over  the  plain,  through  a 
circle  of  30  miles,  the  same  verdure  which  had 
hitherto  been  confined  to  its  single  channel.  .  .  . 
Far  and  wide  in  front  extends  the  level  plain,  its 
horizon  bare,  its  lines  of  surrounding  hills  bare,  all 
bare  far  away  on  the  road  to  Palmyra  and  Bagdad. 
In  the  midst  of  this  plain  lies  at  your  feet  the  vast 
lake  or  island  of  deep  verdure,  walnuts  and  apricots 
waving  above,  corn  and  grass  below ;  and  in  the 
midst  of  this  mass  of  foliage  rises,  striking  out  its 
white  amis  of  streets  hither  and  thither,  and  its 
white  minarets  above  the  trees  which  embosom 
them,  the  city  of  Damascus.  On  the  right  towers 
the  snowy  height  of  Hermon,  overlooking  the  whole 
scene.  Close  behind  are  the  sterile  limestone  moun- 
tains— so  that  you  stand  literally  between  the  living 
and  the  dead"  (Stanley,  S.  and  P.,  p.  41 0).  Another 
writer  mentions  among  the  produce  of  the  plain  in 
question  "  walnuts,  pomegranates,  figs,  plums,  apri- 
cots, citrons,  pears,  and  apples"  (Addison's  Dam. 
and  Palmyra,  ii.  92).  Olive-trees  are  also.a  prin- 
cipal feature  of  the  scene.  Besides  the  main  stream 
of  the  Barada,  which  runs  directly  through  the 
town,  supplying  its  public  cisterns,  baths,  and  foun- 
tains, a  number  of  branches  are  given  off  to  the  right 
and  to  the  left,  which  irrigate  the  meadows  and 
corn-fields,  turning  what  would  otherwise  be  a 
desert  into  a  garden.  The  various  streams  reunite, 
but  greatly  weakened  in  volume,  at  a  little  distance 
beyond  the  town  ;  and  the  Barada  flows  on  towards 
the  east  in  a  single  channel  for  about  15  miles, 
when  it  separates,  ami  pours  its  waters  into  two 
small  and  shallow  lakes,  which  lie  upon  the  verge 
of  the  desert.  Two  other  streams,  the  Wady 
Helbon  upon  the  north,  and  tlie  Awaj  upon  the 
south,  which  flows  direct  from  Hermon,  increase 
the  fertility  of  the  Damascene  plain,  and  contend 
for  the  honour  of  representing  the  "  Pharpar"  of 
Scripture.     [Pharpar.] 

According  to  Josephus  {Ant.  i.  6)  Damascus 
was  founded  by  Uz,  the  son  of  Aram,  and  grandson 
ot  Shem.  It  is  first  mentioned  in  Scripture  in  con- 
nexion with  Abraham,  whose  steward  was  a  native  of 
the  place  (Gen.  xv.  2).  We  may  gather  from  the 
name  of  this  person,  as  well  as  from  the  statement  of 
Josephus,  which  connects  the  city  with  the  Ara- 
maeans, that  it  was  a  Semitic  settlement.  Accord- 
ing to  a  tradition  preserved  in  the  native  writer, 
Nicolaiis,  Abraham  stayed  for  some  time  at  Da- 
mascus, after  leaving  Charran  and  before  entering 
the  promised  land,  and  during  his  stay  was  king  of 
the  place.  "  Abraham's  name  was,"  he  says,  "  even 
in  his  own  day  familiar  in  the  mouths  of  the  Da- 
mascenes, and  a  village  was  shown  where  he  dwelt, 
Which  was  called  after  him  "  (Fr.  30).  This  last 
circumstance  would  seem  however  to  conflict  with 
thf  notion  of  Abraham  having  been  king,  since  in 
that  case  he  would  have  dwelt  in  the  capital.  No- 
thing more  is  known  of  Damascus  until  the  time  of 


DAMASCUS 

David,  when  "  the  Syrians  of  Damascus  came  to 
succour  Hadadezer,  king  of  Zobah,"  with  whom 
David  was  at  war  (2  Sam.  viii.  5  ;  1  Chr.  xviii.  5). 
On  this  occasion  David  "  slew  of  the  Syrians 
22,000  men  ;"  and  in  consequence  of  this  victory 
became  completely  master  of  the  whole  territory, 
which  he  garrisoned  with  Israelites.  "  David  put 
garrisons  in  Syria  of  Damascus ;  and  the  Syrians 
became  servants  to  David,  and  brought  gifts " 
(2  Sam.  viii.  6).  Nicolaiis  of  Damascus  said  that 
the  name  of  the  king  who  reigned  at  this  time,  was 
Hadad  ;  and  he  ascribes  to  him  a  dominion,  not  only 
over  Damascus,  but  over  "all  Syria  except  Phoe- 
nicia" {Fr.  31).  He  noticed  his  attack  upon 
David ;  and  related  that  many  battles  were  fought 
between  them,  the  last,  wherein  he  suffered  defeat, 
being  "  upon  the  Euphrates."  According  to  this 
writer  Hadad  the  first  was  succeeded  by  a  son,  who 
took  the  same  name,  as  did  his  descendants  for  ten 
generations.  But  this  is  irreconcileable  with  Scrip- 
ture. It  appears  that  in  the  reign  of  Solomon,  a 
certain  Rezon,  who  had  been  a  subject  of  Hadad- 
ezer, king  of  Zobah,  and  had  escaped  when  David 
conquered  Zobah,  made  himself  master  of  Da- 
mascus, and  established  his  own  rule  there  (1  K. 
xi.  23-5).  He  was  "  an  adversary  to  Israel  all  the 
days  of  Solomon  .  .  .  and  he  abhorred  Israel,  and 
reigned  over  Syria."  Afterwards  the  family  of 
Hadad  appears  to  have  recovered  the  throne,  and  a 
Benhadad,  who  is  probably  Hadad  III.  ot  Nicolaiis, 
a  grandson  of  the  antagonist  of  David,  is  found  in 
league  with  Baasha,  king  of  Israel,  against  Asa 
(1  K.  xv.  19;  2  Chr.  xvi.  3),  and  afterwards  in 
league  with  Asa  against  Baasha  (1  K.  xv.  20). 
He  made  a  successful  invasion  of  the  Israelite  terri- 
tory in  the  reign  of  that  king ;  and  in  the  reign  of 
Omri  he  not  only  captured  a  number  of  Israelite 
cities  which  he  added  to  his  own  dominions,  but 
even  seems  to  have  exercised  a  species  of  lordship 
over  Samaria  itself,  in  which  he  acquired  the  right 
of  "  making  himself  streets  "  (1  K.  xx.  34;  comp. 
Nic.  D.  Fr.  31,  ad  fin!)  He  was  succeeded  by  his 
son,  Hadad  IV.  (the  Benhadad  II.  of  Scripture,  and 
the  Ben-idri  of  the  Assyrian  inscriptions),  who  came 
at  the  head  of  thirty-two  subject  kings  against 
Ahab,  and  laid  siege  to  Samaria  (1  K.  xx.  1).  The 
attack  was  unsuccessful ;  and  was  followed  by  wars, 
in  which  victory  declared  itself  unmistakably  on 
the  side  of  the  Israelites  ;  and  at  last  Benhadad  was 
taken  prisoner,  and  forced  to  submit  to  a  treaty 
whereby  he  gave  up  all  that  his  father  had  gained, 
and  submitted  in  his  turn  to  the  suzerainty  of 
Ahab  (ib.  xx.  13-34).  The  terms  of  the  treaty 
were  perhaps  not  observed.  At  any  rate  three 
years  afterwards  war  broke  out  afresh,  through 
the  claim  of  Ahab  to  the  city  of  Ramoth-Gilead 
(1  K.  xxii.  1-4).  The  defeat  and  deatli  of  Ahab 
at  that  place  (ib.  15-37)  seems  to  have  enabled  the 
Syrians  of  Damascus  to  resume  the  offensive.  Their 
hands  ravaged  the  lands  of  Israel  dining  the  reign 
of  Jehoram  ;  and  they  even  undertook  at  this  time 
a  second  siege  of  Samaria,  which  was  frustrated 
miraculously  (2  K.  vi.  24,  vii.  6-7).  After  this, 
we  do  not  hear  of  any  more  attempts  against  the 
Israelite  capital.  The  cuneifoim  inscriptions  show 
that  towards  the  close  of  his  reign  Benhadad  was 
exposed  to  the  assaults  of  a  great  conqueror,  who 
was  bent  on  extending  the  dominion  of  Assyria 
over  Syria  .and  Palestine.  Three  several  attacks 
appear  to  have  been  made  by  this  prince  upon  Ben- 
hadad, who.  though  lie  hail  the  support  of  the 
Phoenicians,  the  Hittites,  and  the  Hamathites,  was 


DAMASCUS 

unable  to  offer  any  effectual  opposition  to  the 
Assyrian  arms.  His  troops  were  worsted  in  se- 
veral engagements,  and  in  one  of  them  he  lost  as 
many  as  20,000  men.  It  may  have  been  these 
circumstances  which  encouraged  Hazael,  the  servant 
of  Benhadad,  to  murder  him,  and  seize  the  throne, 
which  Elisha  had  declared  would  certainly  one  day 
be  his  (2  K.  viii.  15).  He  may  have  thought 
that  the  Syrians  would  willingly  acquiesce  in  the 
removal  of  a  ruler  under  whom  they  had  suffered  so 
many  disasters.  The  change  of  riders  was  not  at 
first  productive  of  any  advantage  to  the  Syrians. 
Shortly  after  the  accession  of  Hazael  (about  B.C. 
884),  he  was  in  his  turn  attacked  by  the  Assyrians, 
who  defeated  him  with  great  loss  amid  the  fast- 
nesses of  Anti-Libanus.  However,  in  his  other 
wars  he  was  more  fortunate.  He  repulsed  an  attack 
on  Ratnoth-Gilead,  made  by  Ahaziah  king  of  Judah 
and  Jehoram  king  of  Israel  in  conjunction  (2  K. 
viii.  28-9)  ;  ravaged  the  whole  Israelite  territory 
east  of  Jordan  (ib.  x.  32-3);  besieged  and  took 
Gath  (ib.  xii.  17;  comp.  Am.  vi.  2);  threatened 
Jerusalem,  which  only,  escaped  by  paying  a  heavy 
ransom  (2  K.  xii.  18)  ;  and  established  a  species  of 
suzerainty  over  Israel,  which  he  maintained  to  the 
day  of  his  death,  and  handed  down  to  Benhadad, 
his  son  (2  K.  xiii.  3-7,  and  22).  This  prince  in 
the  earlier  part  of  his  reign  had  the  same  good  for- 
tune as  his  father.  Like  him,  he  "  oppressed 
Israel,"  and  added  various  cities  of  the  Israelites  to 
his  own  dominion  (2  K.  xiii.  25)  ;  but  at  last  a  de- 
liverer appeared  (verse  5),  and  Joash,  the  son  of 
Jehoahaz,  "  beat  Hazael  thrice,  and  recovered  the 
cities  of  Israel''  (verse  25).  In  the  next  reign  still 
further  advantages  were  gained  by  the  Israelites. 
Jeroboam  II.  (ab.  B.C.  836)  is  said  to  have  "reco- 
vered Damascus"  (ib.  xiv.  28),  and  though  this 
may  not  mean  that  he  captured  the  city,  it  at  least 
implies  that  he  obtained  a  certain  influence  over  it. 
The  mention  of  this  circumstance  is  followed  by  a 
long  pause,  during  which  we  hear  nothing  of  the 
Syrians,  and  must  therefore  conclude  that  their  re- 
lations  with  the  Israelites  continued  peaceable. 
When  they  reappear  nearly  a  century  later  (ab. 
B.C.  742)  it  is  as  allies  of  Israel  against  Judah 
(2  K.  xv.  37).  We  may  suspect  that  the  chief 
cause  of  the  union  now  established  between  two 
powers  which  had  been  so  lung  hostile,  was  the  ne- 
cessity of  combining  to  resist  the  Assyrians,  who  at 
the  time  were  steadily  pursuing  a  policy  of  en- 
croachment in  this  quarter.  Scripture  mentions 
the  invasions  of  Pul  (2  K.  xv.  19;  1  Chr.  v.  26), 
and  Tiglath-Pileser  (2  K.  xv.  29;  1  Chr.  v.  26); 
and  there  is  reason  to  believe  that  almost  every 
Assyrian  monarch  of  the  period  made  war  in  this 
direction.  It  seems  to  have  been  daring  a  pause  in 
the  struggle  that  Rezin  king  of  Damascus,  and 
Pekab  king  of  Israel,  resolved  conjointly  to  attack 
Jerusalem,  intending  to  depose  AhaZ  and  set  up  as 
kin-  a  creature  of  their  own  (Is.  vii.  1-ii  ;  l'  K. 
xvi.  5).  Abaz  may  have  been  already  suspected 
of  a  friendly  feeling  towards  Assyria,  or  the  object 
may  simply  have  been  to  consolidate  a  power  ca- 
llable nt'  effectually  opposing  the  arms  of  that 
country.     In  either  case  the  attempt  signally  tailed, 

and   only   brought   about   more    rapidly   tl \il 

against  which  the  two  kings  wished  to  guard.  Je- 
rusalem successfully  maintained  itself  against  the 
combined  attack;  but  Elath,  which  had  been  for- 
merly built  by  Azariah,  king  of  Judah,  in  territory 
regarded  as  Syrian  (2  K.  xiv.  22).  having  been 
taken  and  retained  by  Rezin  (ib.  xvi.  6) — Ahazwas 


DAMASCUS 


383 


iulueed  to  throw  himself  into  the  arms  of  Tiglath- 
Pileser,  to  ask  aid  from  him,  and  to  accept  volun- 
tarily the  position  of  an  Assyrian  feudatory  (ib. 
xvi.  7-8).  The  aid  sought  was  given,  with  the  im- 
portant result,  that  Rezin  was  slain,  the  kingdom  of 
Damascus  brought  to  an  end,  and  the  city  itself 
destroyed — the  inhabitants  being  carried  captive 
into  Assyria  (ibid,  verse  9  ;  comp.  Is.  vii.  8  and 
Am.  i.  5). 

It  was  long  before  Damascus  recovered  from  this 
serious  blow.  As  Isaiah  and  Amus  had  prophesied 
in  the  day  of  her  prosperity,  that  Damascus  should 
be  "  taken  away  from  being  a  city  and  be  a  ruinous 
heap"  (Is.  xvii.  1),  that  "a  tire  should  be  sent 
into  the  house  of  Hazael,  which  should  devour  the 
palaces  of  Benhadad  "  (Am.  i.  4) ;  so  Jeremiah, 
writing  about  B.C.  600,  declares  "  Damascus  is 
waxed  feeble  and  ttumeth  herself  to  flee,  and  fear 
hath  seized  on  her;  anguish  and  sorrows  have  taken 
her,  as  a  woman  in  travail.  How  is  the  city  of 
praise  not  left,  the  city  of  my  joy  I"  (Jer.  xlix. 
24-5.)  We  do  not  know  at  what  time  Damascus 
was  rebuilt;  but  Strabo  says  that  it  was  the  most 
famous  place  in  Syria  during  the  Persian  period 
(xvi.  2,  §19);  and  we  find  that  before  the  battle 
of  Issus  it  was  selected  by  Darius  as  the  city  to 
which  he  should  send  for  better  security  the  greater 
part  of  his  treasures  and  valuables  (Ait.  Exp.  Al. 
ii.  11).  Shortly  after  the  battle  of  Issus  it  was 
taken  by  Parmenio  (ibid.)  ;  and  from  this  time  it 
continued  to  be  a  place  of  some  importance  under 
the  Greeks  ;  becoming  however  decidedly  second  to 
Antioch,  which  was  raised  up  as  a  rival  to  it  by 
the  Seleucida?.  From  the  monarchs  of  this  house 
it  passed  to  the  Romans,  who  became  masters  of  it 
in  the  war  between  Pompey  and  Mithridates  (Mos. 
Choren.  i.  14  ;  comp.  Joseph.  Ant.  Jud.  xiv.  2, 
§3  ;  and  App.  Bell.  Mithr.  p.  244).  At  the  time 
of  the  Gospel  history,  and  of  the  apostle  Paul, 
it  formed  a  part  of  the  kingdom  of  Aretas  (2  Cor. 
xi.  32),  an  Arabian  prince,  who  like  the  princes 
of  the  house  of  Herod,  held  his  kingdom  under  the 
Romans  (Joseph.  Ant.  Jud.  xvi.  11,  §9).  A  little 
later  it  was  reckoned  to  Decapolis  (Plin.  //.  A'. 
v.  16),  after  which  it  became  a  part  of  the  province 
known  as  Phoenicia  Libanesia  (Hierocl.  Synecd.  p. 
717).  It  grew  in  magnificence  under  the'  Greek 
emperors,  and  when  taken  by  the  Mahometan  Arabs 
in  a.d.  634,  was  one  of  the  first  cities  of  the 
eastern  world.  It  is  not  necessary  to  trace  its  sub- 
sequent glories  under  the  Caliphs,  the  Saracens,  and 
the  Turks.  It  may  however  be  noticed  that  there 
has  scarcely  been  an  interruption  to  its  prosperity, 
and  that  it  is  still  a  city  of  150,000  inhabitants. 

Damascus  has  always  been  a  great  centre  for 
trade.  The  difficulties  and  dangers  of  the  moun- 
tain passes  to  the  west  of  Anti-Libanus  made  the 
line  of  traffic  between  Egypt  and  Upper  Svi  ia 
follow  the  circuitous  route  by  Damascus  rather 
than  the  direct  one  through  ( 'oele-Syria,  while  the 
trade  of  Tyre  with  Assyria  and  the  East  generally, 
passed  naturally  through  Damascus  on  its  way  to 
Palmyra  and  the  Euphrates.  Ezekiel,  speaking  of 
Tyre,  says,  "  Damascus  was  thy  merchant  in  the 
multitude  of  the  wares  of  thy  making,  tor  the  Mul- 
titude of  "II  riches}  in  the  wine  of  llelbon,  and 
white  wool."  It  would  appear  from  this  that  Da- 
mascus took  manufactured  goods  from  the  Phoeni- 
cians, and  supplied  them  in  exchange  with  wool 
and  wine.  The  former  would  be  produced  in 
abundance  in  Coele-Syria  and  the  valleys  of  the 
Anti-Libanus  range,  while  the  latter  M'ems  to  have 


:}S4 


DAMASCUS 


been  grown  in  the  vicinity  of  Helbon,  a  village  still 
famous  for  the  produce  of  its  vines,  10  or  12  miles 
from  Damascus  to  the  north-west  (Geograph.Jow. 
vol.  xxvi.  p.  44).  But  the  passage  trade  of  Da- 
mascus has  probably  been  at  all  times  more  im- 
portant than  its  direct  commerce.  Its  merchants 
must  have  profited  largely  by  the  caravans  which 
continually  passed  through  it  on  their  way  to 
distant  countries.  It  is  uncertain  whether  in  early 
times  it  had  any  important  manufactures  of  its 
own.  According  to  some  expositors,  the  passigv  in 
Amos  iii.  12,  which  we  translate  "  in  Damascus 
on  a  couch"  (W"\]}  pC'SIH-l),  means  really  "on 
the  damask  couch,"  which  would,  indicate  that 
the  Syrian  city  had  become  famous  for  a  textile 
fabric  as  early  as  the  eighth  century  B.C.  There 
is  no  doubt  that  such  a  fabric  gave  rise  to  our 
own  word,  which  has  its  -counterpart  in  Arabic 
as  well  as  in  most  of  the  languages  of  modern  Eu- 
rope ;  but  it  is  questionable  whether  either  this,  or 
the  peculiar  method  of  working  in  steel,  which  has 
impressed  itself  in  a  similar  way  upon  the  speech 
of  the  world,  was  invented  by  the  Damascenes 
before  the  Mahometan  era.  In  ancient  times  they 
were  probably  rather  a  consuming  than  a  pro- 
ducing people,  as  the  passage  in  Ezekiel  clearly 
indicates. 

Certain  localities  in  Damascus  are  shown  as  the 
site  of  those  Scriptural  events  which  especially  in- 
terest us  in  its  history.  A  "  long  wide  thorough- 
fare " — leading  direct  from  one  of  the  gates  to  the 
Castle  or  palace  of  the  Pasha — is  "  called  by  the 
guides  'Straight'"  (Acts  ix.  11);  but  the  natives 
know  it  among  themselves,  as  "  the  Street  of 
Bazaars"  (Stanley,  p.  412).  The  house  of  Judas 
is  shown,  but  it  is  not  in  the  street  "Straight" 
(Pococke,  ii.  1 19).  That  of  Ananias  is  also  pointed 
out.  The  scene  of  the  conversion  is  confidently 
said  to  be  "  an  open  green  spot,  surrounded  by  trees," 
and  used  as  the  Christian  burial-ground  ;  but  this 
spot  is  on  the  eastern  side  of  the  city,  whereas  St. 
Paul  must  have  approached  from  the  south  or  west. 
Again  it  appears  to  be  certain  that  "four  distinct 
spots  have  been  pointed  out  at  differeut  times" 
(Stanley,  p.  412)  as  the  place  where  the  "  great 
light  suddenly  shined  from  heaven  "  (Acts  ix.  3)  ; 
so  that  little  confidence  can  be  placed  in  any  of 
them.  The  point  of  the  walls  at  which  St.  Paul 
was  let  down  by  a  basket  (Acts  ix.  25  ;  2  Cur.  \i. 
33)  is  also  shown  ;  and,  as  this  locality  is  free 
from  objection,  it  may  be  accepted,  if  we  think 
that  the  tradition,  which  has  been  so  faithless  or 
so  uncertain  in  other  cases,  has  any  value  here. 

In  the  vicinity  of  Damascus  certain  places  are 
shown,  traditionally  connected  with  the  prophet 
Elisha ;  but  these  local  legends  are  necessarily  even 
more  doubtful  than  those  which  have  reference  to  the 
comparatively  recent  age  of  the  Apostles. 

(See  Stanley's  Sinai  and  Palestine;  Maundrell's 
Journey  to  Damascus ;  Addison's  Damascus  and 
Palmyra;  Pococke's  Travels;  and  especially  Pos- 
ter's Five  Years  in  Damasctis,  and  his  account  of 


a  Gesenius  has  pointed  out  a  slight  difference  be- 
tween the  two  deiivations  ;  the  verb  being  active  in 
the  latter  and  passive  in  the  former  [Thcs.  336). 
This  is  quite  in  keeping  with  the  uncertainty  which 
attends  many  of  these  ancient  paronomastic  deriva- 
tions (compare  Abel,  Benjamin,  and  others). 

b  The  frequent  variations^  in  the  LXX.  forbid  ab- 
solute reliance  on  these  numbers  ;  and,  in  addition, 
it  should  not  be  overlooked  that  the  census  in  Num. 


DAN 

the  country  round  Damascus  in  the  Geographical 
Journal,  vol.  xxvi.)  [G.  R.] 

DAN.  1.  {y\  ;  Aav  ;  Joseph.  Aav,  BedKptroy 
av  rives  eiVoiei/  Kara  tt\v  'EAA.  yXoiTrav ;  Dan). 
The  fifth  son  of  Jacob,  and  the  first  of  Bilhah,  Ra- 
chel's maid  (Gen.  xxx.  6).  The  origin  of  the  name 
is  given  in  the  exclamation  of  Rachel — " '  God  hath 
judged  me  (^"l,  dananni)  .  .  .  and  given  me  a  son,' 
therefore  she  called  his  name  Dan,"  i.  c.  "  judge."  In 
the  blessing  of  Jacob  (Gen.  xlis.  16)  this  play  on  the 
name  is  repeated — "  Dan  shall3  judge  (P"l\  yadiri) 
his  people."  Dan  was  own  brother  to  Naphtali ;  and 
as  the  son  of  Rachel's  maid,  in  a  closer  relation  with 
Rachel's  sons,  Joseph  and  Benjamin,  than  with  the 
other  members  of  the  family.  It  may  be  noticed 
that  there  is  a  close  affinity  between  his  name  and 
that  of  Dinah,  the  only  daughter  of  Jacob  whose 
name  is  preserved. 

The  records  of  Dan  are  unusually  meagre.  Of 
the  patriarch  himself  no  personal  history  is,  unfor- 
tunately, preserved.  Only  one  son  is  attributed  to 
him  (Gen.  xlvi.  23) ;  but  it  may  be  observed  that 
"  Hushim  "  is  a  plural  form,  as  if  the  name,  not  of 
an  individual,  but  of  a  family  ;  and  it  is  remarkable 
— whether  as-  indicating  that  some  of  the  descend- 
ants of  Dan  are  omitted  in  these  lists,  or  from  other 
causes — that  when  the  people  were  numbered  in 
the  wilderness  of  Sinai,  this  was,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  Judah,  the  most  numerous  of  all  the  tribes, 
containing  62,700  men  able  to  serve.  The  position 
of  Dan  during  the  march  through  the  desert  was  on 
the  north  side  of  the  tabernacle  (Num.  ii.  25). 
Here,  with  his  brother  Naphtali,  and  Asher,  the 
son  of  Zilpah,  before  him,  was  his  station,  the 
hindmost  of  the  long  procession  (ii.    31,    x.    25). 

The  names  of  the  "captain  "  (N*L?3)  of  the  tribe 
at  this  time,  and  of  the  "  ruler  "  (the  Hebrew  word 
is  the  same  as  before),  who  was  one  of  the  spies 
(xiii.  12),  are  preserved.  So  also  is  the  name  of 
one  who  played  a  promiment  part  at  that  time, 
"  Aholiab  the  son  of  Ahisamach,  of  the  tribe 
of  Dan,"  associated  with  Bezaleel  in  the  design 
and  construction  of  the  fittings  of  the  tabernacle 
(Exod.  xxxi.  6,  &c).  The  n umbel's  of  this  tribe 
were  not  subject  to  the  violent  fluctuations  which 
increased  or  diminished  some  of  its  brethren  (conip. 
the  figures  given  in  Num.  i.  and  xxvi.),  and  it 
arrived  at  the  threshold  of  the  Promised  Land,  and 
passed  the  ordeal  of  the  rites  of  Baal-peor  (Num. 
xxv.)  with  an  increase  of  1700  on  the  earlier 
census.b  The  remaining  notices  of  the  tribe  before 
the  passage  of  the  Jordan  are  unimportant.  It 
furnished  a  ''prince"  (Nasi,"  as  before)  to  the 
apportionment  of  the  land  ;  and  it  was  appointed 
to  stand  on  Mount  Ebal,  still  in  company  with 
Naphtali  (but  opposite  to  the  other  related  tribes), 
at  the  ceremony  of  blessing  and  cursing  (Deut. 
xxvii.  13).  After  this  nothing  is  heard  of  Dan  till 
the  specification  of  the  inheritance  allotted  to  him 
(Josh.  xix.  48).  He  was  the  last  of  the  tribes  to  re- 
ceive his  portion,  and  that  portion,  according  to  the 
record  of  Joshua — strange  as  it  appears  in  the  face 
of  the  numbers  just  quoted — was  the  smallest  of  the 


i.  is  of  fighting  men,  that  of  xxvi.  of  the  "  children 
of  Reuben,"  &e.,  and  therefore  probably  without  that 
limitation. 

c  This  one  word  is  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  by 
"  prince,"  "  ruler,"  "  captain,"  "  chief,"  and  "  go- 
vernor." 


DAN 

twelve. d  But  notwithstanding  its  smallness  it  had 
eminent  natural  advantages.  On  the  north  and  east  it 
was  completely  embraced  by  its  two  brother-tribes 
Ephraim  and  Benjamin,  while  on  the  south-east 
and  south  it  joined  Judah,  and  was  thus  surrounded 
by  the  three  most  powerful  states  of  the  whole 
confederacv.  Of  the  towns  enumerated  as  forming 
"the  '  border'  of  its  inheritance,"  the  most  easterly 
which  can  now  be  identified  are  Ajalon,  Zorah  (Za- 
reah),  and  Ir-Shemesh  (or  Beth-shemesh ;  which 
see).  These  places  are  on  the  slopes  of  the  lower 
ranges  of  hills  by  which  the  highlands  of  Benjamin 
and  Judah  descend  to  the  broad  maritime  plain, 
that  plain  which  on  the  S.  bore  the  distinctive 
name  of  "the  Shefelah,"  and  more  to  the  N.,  of 
"  Sharon."  From  Japho — afterwards  Joppa,  and 
now  Yafa — on  the  north,  to  Ekron  and  Gath- 
rimmon  on  the  south — a  length  of  at  least  14  miles — 
that  noble  tract,  one  of  the  most  fertile  in  the  whole 
of  Palestine,  was  allotted  to  this  tribe.  By  Josephus 
(Ant.  v.  1,  §22,  and  3,  §1)  this  is  extended  to  Ash- 
dod  on  the  south,  and  Dor,  at  the  foot  of  Carmel,  on 
the  north,  so  as  to  embrace  the  whole,  or  nearly  the 
whole,  of  the  great  plain.  But  this  rich  district,  the 
corn-field  and  the  garden  of  the  whole  south  of  Pales- 
tine (Stanley,  S.  and  P.  258),  which  was  the  richest 
prize  of  Phoenician  conquest  many  centuries  later,e 
and  which  even  in  the  now  degenerate  state  of  the 
country  is  enormously  productive,  was  too  valuable 
to  be  given  up  without  a  struggle  by  its  original 
possessors.  The  Amorites  accordingly  "  forced  the 
children  of  Dan  into  the  mountain,  for  they  would 
not  suffer  them  to  come  down  into  the  valley " 
(Judg.  i.  34) — forced  them  up  from  the  corn-fields 
of  the  plain,  with  their  deep  black  soil,  to  the  vil- 
lages whose  ruins  still  crown  the  hills  that  skirt  the 
lowland.  True,  the  help  of  the  great  tribe  so  closely 
connected  with  Dan  was  not  wanting  at  this  junc- 
ture, and  "  the  hand  of  the  children  of  Joseph," 
i.  e.  Ephraim,  "prevailed  against  the  Amorites" 
for  the  time.  But  the  same  thing  soon  occurred 
again,  and  in  the  glimpse  with  which  we  are  after- 
wards favoured  into  the  interior  of  the  tribe,  in  the 
history  of  its  great  hero,  the  Philistines  have  taken 
the  place  of  the  Amorites,  and  with  the  same  result. 
Although  Samson  "comes  down"  to  the  "vine- 
yards of  Timnath "  and  the  valley  of  Sorek,  yet 
it  is  from  Mahaneh-Dan — the  fortified  camp  of 
Dan,  between  Zorah  and  Eshtaol,  behind  Kirjath- 
jearim — that  he  descends,  and  it  is  to  that  natural 
fastness,  the  residence  of  his  father,  that  he  "goes 
up  "  again  after  his  encounters,  and  that  he  is  at 
last  borne  to  his  family  sepulchre,  the  burving-place 
of  Manoah  (Judg.  xiv.  1,  5,  19,  xiii.  25,  xvi.  4; 
COmp.  xviii.  12,  xvi.  31). 

These  considerations  enable  us  to  understand  how 
it  happened  that  long  after  the  partition  of  the  land 
"  a.l  the  inheritance  of  the  Danites  had  not  fallen  to 
them  among  the  tribes  of  Israel"  (Judg.  xviii.  1). 


DAN 


385 


'i  The  enumeration  of  the  tribes  in  this  record  is 
in  the  order  of  their  topographical  position,  from  S. 
to  N.  It  is  remarkable  that  Dan  is  named  after 
Naphtali  and  Ashrr,  as  if  already  associated  with  the 
northern  position  afterwards  occupied  by  the  city 
Dan.  This  is  also  the  case  in  Judg.  i.  34,  and  1  Chr. 
xii.  35.  The  writer  is  not  aware  that  any  explana- 
tion has  been  offered  of  this  apparent  anomaly. 

•  See  the  inscription  of  king  Esmunazar,  as  inter- 
preted by  Stanley  [S.  <$-  P.  27 B,  258). 

'  Ewald  ascribes  it  to  their  being  engaged  in  com- 
merce [Dichter,  i.  130).  This  may  have  been  the 
case  with  Asher,  but  can  hardly,  for  the  reasons  ad- 


They  perhaps  furnish  a  reason  for  the  absence  of 
Dan  from  the  great  gathering  of  the  tribes  against 
Sisera '  (Judg.  v.  17).  They  also  explain  the  war- 
like and  independent  character  of  the  tribe  be- 
tokened in  the  name  of  their  head-quarters,  as 
just  quoted — Mahaneh-Dan,  "  the  camp,  or  host, 
of  Dan" — in  the  fact  specially  insisted  on  and  re- 
iterated (xviii.  11,  1(3,  17)  of  the  complete  equip- 
ment of  their  600  warriors  s  "appointed  with  wea- 
pons of  war," — and  the  lawless  freebooting  style 
of  their  behaviour  to  Micah.  There  is  something 
very  characteristic  in  the  whole  of  that  most  fresh 
and  interesting  story  preserved  to  us  in  Judg.  xviii. 
— a  narrative  without  a  parallel  for  the  vivid  glance 
it  affords  into  the  manners  of  that  distant  time — 
characteristic  of  boldness  and  sagacity,  with  a  vein 
of  grim  sardonic  humour,  but  undeformed  by  any 
unnecessary  bloodshed. 

In  the  "security"  and  "quiet"  (Judg.  xviii.  7, 
10)  of  their,  rich  northern  possession  the  Danites 
enjoyed  the.  leisure  and  repose  which  had  been 
denied  them  in  their  original  seat.  But  of  the  fate 
of  the  city  to  which  they  gave  "  the  name  of  their 
father"  (Josh.  xix.  47),  we  know  scarcely  anything. 
The  strong  religious  feeling  which  made  the  Danites 
so  anxious  to  ask  counsel  of  God  from  Micah 's 
Levite  at  the  commencement  of  their  expedition 
(Judg.  xviii.  5),  and  afterwards  take  him  away  with 
them  to  be  "  a  priest  unto  a  tribe  and  a  family  in 
Israel,"  may  have  pointed  out  their  settlement  to 
the  notice  of  Jeroboam  as  a  fit  place  for  his  north- 
em  sanctuary.  But  beyond  the  exceedingly  ob- 
scure notice  in  Judg.  xviii.  30,  we  have  no  infor- 
mation h  on  this  subject.  From  2  Chi-,  ii.  14  it  would 
appear  that  the  Danites  had  not  kept  their  purity 
of  lineage,  but  had  intermarried  with  the  Phoeni- 
cians of  the  country.  (See  an  elaboration  of  this 
in  Blunt,  Coincidences,  Pt.  II.  iv.) 

In  the  time  of  David  Dan  still  kept  its  place 
among  the  tribes  (1  Chr.  xii.  35).  Asher  is  omitted, 
but  the  "  prince  of  the  tribe  of  Dan  "  is  mentioned 
in  the  list  of  1  Chr.  xxvii.  22.  But  from  this  time 
forward  the  name  as  applied  to  the  tribe  vanishes  ; 
it  is  kept  alive  only  by  the  northern  city.  In  the 
genealogies  of  1  Chr.  ii.  to  xii.  Dan  is  omitted  en- 
tirely, which  is  remarkable  when  the  great  fame  of 
Samson  and  the  warlike  character  of  the  tribe  are 
considered,  and  can  only  be  accounted  for  by  sup- 
posing that  its  genealogies  had  perished.  It  is  per- 
haps allowable  to  suppose  that  little  care  would  be 
taken  to  preserve  the  records  of  a  tribe  which  had 
left  its  original  seat  near  the  head-quarters  of  the 
nation,  and  given  its  name  to  a  distant  city  notorious 
only  as  the  seat  of  a  rival  and  a  forbidden  worship. 
Lastly,  Dan  is  omitted  from  the  list  of  those  who 
were  sealed  by  the  Angel  in  the  vision  of  St.  John 
(Rev.  vii.  5-7). 

The  mention  of  this  tribe  in  the  "blessings"  of 
Jacob  and  Closes  must  not  be  overlooked,  but  it  is 


vanced  above,  have  been  so  with  Dan.  The  "  ships " 
of  Deborah's  song  are  probably  only  a  bold  figure,  in 
allusion  to  Joppa. 

f  The  complete  appointment  of  these  warriors  is 
perhaps  a  more  certain  sign  of  the  tribe  being  prac- 
tised in  war,  when  we  recollect  that  it  was  the  Phi- 
listine policy  to  deprive  of  their  arms  those  whom 
thej  had  conquered  (comp.  1  Sam.  xiii.  19-21,  and 
]>■  1  liaji-  also  Samson's  rude  weapon,  the  jaw-bone). 

h  For  "the  captivity  of  the  land,"  f*~IX,  Ewald 
proposes  to  read  "  of  the  ark,"  jilX  ;  that  is,  till  the 
time  of  Samuel  (1  Sam.  iv.  11),  Grscli.  ii.  pt.  2.  233. 

2  C 


386 


DAN 


difficult  to  extract  any  satisfactory  meaning  from 
them.  Herder's  interpretation  as  given  by  Prof. 
Stanley  will  fitly  close  this  notice. 

"  It  is  doubtful  whether  the  delineation  of  Dan 
in  Jacob's  blessing  relates  to  the  original  settlement 
on  the  western  outskirts  of  Judah,  or  to  the  north- 
ern outpost.  Herder's  explanation  will  apply 
almost  equally  to  both.  '  Dan,'  the  judge,  '  shall 
judge  his  people  ;'  he  the  son  of  the  concubine  no 
less  than  the  sons  of  Leah  ;  he  the  frontier  tribe  no 
less  than  those  in  the  places  of  honour  shall  be  '  as 
one  of  the  tribes  of  Israel.'  '  Dau  shall  be  a  serpent 
by  the  way,  an  adder  in  the  path,'  that  is  of  the 
invading  enemy  by  the  north  or  by  the  west, 
'  that  biteth  the  heels  of  the  horse,'  the  indigenous 
-serpent  biting  the  foreign  horse  unknown  to  Israelite 
warfare,  '  so  that  his  rider  shall  fall  backwards.' 
And  his  war-cry  as  from  the  frontier  fortresses 
shall  be  '  For  Thy  salvation,  0  Lord,  I  have 
waited  !' '  In  the  blessing  of  Moses  the  southern 
Dan  is  lost  sight  of.  The  northern  Dan  alone  ap- 
pears, with  the  same  characteristics  though  under 
a  different  image  ;  '  a  lion's  whelp  '  in  the  far  north, 
us  Judah  in  the  fm-  south:  '  he  shall  leap  from  Ba- 
shan  ' — from  the  slopes  of  Hermon,  where  he  is 
couched  watching  for  his  prey." 

2.  Qft  ;  Adv  ;  Joseph,  rb  Advov ;  Dan.)  The 
well-known  city,  so  familiar  as  the  most  northern 
landmark  of  Palestine,  in  the  common  expression 
"  from  Dan  even  to  Beersheba."  The  name  of  the 
place  was  originally  Laish  or  Leshem  (Josh.  xix. 
47).  Its  inhabitants  lived  "  after  the  manner  of 
the  Zidonians,"  i.  e.  engaged  in  commerce,  and 
without  defence.  But  it  is  nowhere  said  that  they 
were  Phoenicians,  though  it  may  perhaps  be  in- 
ferred from  the  parentage  of  Huram — his  mother 
"  of  the  daughters  of  Dan,"  his  father  "  a  man  of 
Tyre"  (2  Chr.  ii.  14).  Living  thus  "quiet  and 
secure,"  they  fell  an  easy  prey  to  the  active  and 
practised  freebooters  of  the  Danites.  They  con- 
ferred upon  their  new  acquisition  the  name  of 
their  own  tribe,  "  after  the  name  of  their  father 
who  was  born  unto  Israel"  (Judg.  xviii.  29; 
Josh.  xix.  47),  and  Laish  became  Dan. 

•The  locality  of  the  town  is  specified  with  some 
minuteness.     It  was  "  far  from  Zidon,"  and  "  in  the 

valley  (pEJJ,  Emek)  that  is  by  (?)  Beth-rehob," 
but  as  this  latter  place  has  not  been  identified  with 
certainty,  the  position  of  Dan  must  be  ascertained 
by  other  means. 

The  graven  image  which  the  wandering  Danites 
had  stolen  from  Micah  they  set  up  in  their  new 
home,  and  a  line  of  priests  was  established,  which, 
though  belonging  to  the  tribe  of  Levi  and  even 
descended  from  Moses,k  was  not  of  the  family  of 
Aaron,  and  therefore  not  belonging  to  the  regular 
priesthood.  To  the  form  of  this  image  and  the 
nature  of  the  idolatry  we  have  no  clue,  nor  to  the 
relation,  if  any,  which  existed  between  it  and  the 
calt-worship  afterwards  instituted  there  by  Jero- 
boam (1  K.  xii.  29,  30).  The  latter  is  alluded  to  by 
Amos  (viii.  14)  in  a  passage  which  possibly  preserves 


1  According  to  Jewish  tradition,  Jacob's  blessing  on 
Dan  is  a  prophetic  allusion  to  Samson,  the  great 
"  Judge "  of  the  tribe ;  and  the  ejaculation  with 
which  it  closes  was  that  actually  uttered  by  Samson 
when  brought  into  the  temple  at  Gaza.  (See  the 
Targum  Ps.  Jonathan  on  Gen.  xlix.  16,  17  ;  and  the 
quotations  in  Kalisch's  Genesis  ad  loc.)  Modern  critics 
likewise  see  an  allusion  to  Samson  in  the  terms  of  the 


DAN 

a  formula  of  invocation  or  adjuration  in  use 
among  the  worshippers  ;  but  the  passage  is  very 
obscure. 

After  the  establishment  of  the  Danites  at  Dan 
it  became  the  acknowledged  extremity  of  the 
country,  and  the  formula  "  from  Dan  even  to 
Beersheba"  is  frequent  throughout  the  historical 
books  (Judg.  xx.  1  ;  1  Sam.  iii.  20  ;  2  Sam.  iii. 
10,  xvii.  11,  xxiv.  2,  15;  1  K.  iv.  25).  In  the 
later  records  the  form  is  reversed,  and  becomes 
"  from  Beersheba  even  to  Dan  "  (1  Chr.  xxi.  2  ; 
2  Chr.  xxx,  5). 

Dan  was,  with  other  northern  cities,  laid  waste 
by  Benhadad  (1  K.  xv.  20  ;  2  Chi-,  xvi.  4),  and 
this  is  the  last  mention  of  the  place. 

Various  considerations  would  incline  to  the  sus- 
picion that  Dan  was  a  holy  place  of  note  from  a 
far  earlier  date  than  its  conquest  by  the  Danites. 
These  are: — (1.)  the  extreme  reluctance  of  the 
Orientals  —  apparent  in  numerous  cases  in  the 
Bible — to  initiate  a  sanctuary,  or  to  adopt  for 
worship  any  place  which  had  not  enjoyed  a  repu- 
tation for  holiness  from  pre-historic  times.  (2.) 
The  correspondence  of  Dan  with  Beersheba  in  con- 
nexion with  the  lite  of  Abraham — the  origin  of 
Beersheba  also  being,  as  has  been  noticed,  enve- 
loped in  some  diversity  of  statement.  (3.)  More 
particularly  its  incidental  mention  in  the  very  clear 
and  circumstantial  narrative  of  Gen.  xiv.  14,  as  if 
well  known  even  at  that  very  early  period.  Its 
mention  in  Deut.  xxxiv.  1  is  also  before  the  events 
related  in  Judg.  xviii.,  though  still  many  centuries 
later  than  the  time  of  Abraham.  But  the  subject 
is  very  difficult,  and  we  can  hardly  hope  to  arrive 
at  more  than  conjecture  upon  it. 

With  regard  to  Gen.  xiv.  14  three  explanations 
suggest  themselves.  1.  That  another  place  of  the 
same  name  is  intended.  (See  Kalisch,  ad  loc.  for 
an  ingenious  suggestion  of  Dan-jaan ;  another  is 
disposed  of  by  Prof.  Stanley,  S.  §  P.  400.) 
Against  this  may  be  put  the  belief  of  Josephus 
(comp.  Ant.  i.  10,  §1,  with  v.  3,  §1)  and  of 
Jerome  (Onomast.  Laisa,  comp.  with  Quaest. 
Hebr.  in  Genesim,  xiv.  14),  who  both  unhesi- 
tatingly identify  the  Dan  of  the  Danites,  near 
Paneas,  with  the  Dan  of  Abraham.  2.  That  it  is 
a  prophetic  anticipation  by  the  saci  ed  historian  of  a 
name  which  was  not  to  exist  till  centuries  later, 
just  as  Samson  has  been  held  to  be  alluded  to  in 
the  blessing  of  Dan  by  Jacob.  3.  That  the  pas- 
sage originally  contained  an  older  name,  as  Laish  ; 
aud  that  when  that  was  superseded  by  Dan,  the 
new  name  was  inserted  in  the  MSS.  This  last  is 
Ewald's  (Gesch.  i.  73),  and  of  the  three  is  the 
most  feasible,  especially  when  we  consider  the  cha- 
racteristic, genuine  air  of  the  stoi  y  in  Judges,  which 
fixes  the  origin  of  the  name  so  circumstantially. 
Josephus  (Ant.  v.  3,  §1)  speaks  positively  of  the 
situation  of  Laish  as  "  not  far  from  Mount  Libanus 
and  the  springs  of  the  lesser  Jordan,  near  (koto) 
the  great  plain  of  the  city  of  Sidon"  (compare 
also  Ant.  viii.  8,  §4);  and  this,  as  just  said,  he 
identifies  with  the  Dan  in  Gen.  xiv.   14  (Ant.  i. 


blessing,  which  they  presume  on  that  account  to  have 
been  written  after  the  days  of  the  Judges  (Ewald, 
Gesch.  i.  92).  Jerome's  observations  (Qu.  in  Gen.)  on 
this  passage  are  very  interesting. 

k  Moses  is  doubtless  the  genuine  reading  of  the 
name,  which,  by  the  insertion  of  an  N,  was  changed 
by  the  Jews  into  Manasseh,  as  it  stands  in  the  A.  V. 
of  Judg.  xviii.  30.     [Manasseh,  5.] 


DAN-JAAN 

10,  §1).  In  consonance  with  this  are  the  notices 
of  St.  Jerome,  who  derives  the  word  "  Jordan " 
from  the  names  of  its  two  sources.  Dan,  the 
westernmost  and  the  smaller  of  the  two,  he  places 
at  four  miles  from  Paneas  on  the  road  to  Tyre. 
In  perfect  agreement  with  this  is  the  position  of 
Tell  el-Kadi,  a  mound  from  the  foot  of  which 
gushes  out  "  one  of  the  largest  fountains  in  the 
world,"  the  main  source  of  the  Jordan  (Rob.  iii. 
390-3  ;  Stanley,  394,  5).  The  Tell  itself,  rising 
from  the  plain  by  somewhat  steep  terraces,  has  its 
long,  level  top  strewed  with  ruins,  and  is  very  pro- 
bably the  site  of  the  town  and  citadel  of  Dan.  The 
spring  is  called  el  Ledddn,  possibly  a  corruption  of 
Dan  (Rob.  iii.  392),  and  the  stream  from  the  spring 
Nahr  ed  Dhan  (Wilson,  ii.  173),  while  the  name, 
Tell  el  Kadi,  "  the  Judge's  mound,"  agrees  in 
signification  with  the  ancient  name.1  Both  Dr. 
Robinson  and  Prof.  Stanley  give  the  exact  agree- 
ment of  the  spot  with  the  requirements  of  the 
story  in  Judg.  xviii. — "  a  good  land  and  a  large, 
where  there  is  no  want  of  anything  that  is  on  the 
earth"  (Rob.  396;   Stanley,  as  above).  [G.] 

DAN-JA'AN  QJ£"p  ;  AavtSav  Ka\  OvSav  ; 
Alex.  Aaviapav  Kal  lovSdu ;  Dan  silvestrid),  a 
place  named  only  in  2  Sam.  xxiv.  6  as  one  of  the 
points  visited  by  Joab  in  taking  the  census  of  the 
people.  It  occurs  between  Gilead  and  Zidon — and 
therefore  may  have  been  somewhere  in  the  direc- 
tion of  Dan  (Laish),  at  the  sources  of  the  Jordan. 
The  reading  of  the  Alex.  LXX.  and  of  the  Vulg. 
was  evidently  "1JJ*  J1,  Dan-jaar,  the  nearest  trans- 
lation of  which  is  "  Dan  in  the  wood."  This  read- 
ing is  approved  by  Gesenius,  and  agrees  with  the 
character  of  the  country  about  Tel  el-Kadi.  Fiirst 
(Hiindworterbuch,  303)  compares  Dan-jaan  with 
Baal-jaan,  a  Phoenician  divinity  whose  name  is 
found  on  coins.  Thenius  suggests  that  Jaan  was 
originally  Laish,  the  ?  having  fallen  away,  and  jy 
having  been  substituted  for  C  (Exeg.  Hdbuch. 
on  Sam.  257).a  There  seems  no  reason  for  doubts 
ing  that  the  well  known  Dan  is  intended.  We  have 
no  record  of  any  other  Dan  in  the  north,  and  even  if 
this  were  not  the  case,  Dan,  as  the  accepted  northern 
limit  of  the  nation,  was  too  important  a  place 
to  escape  mention  in  such  a  list  as  that  in  the 
text.  Dr.  Schultz,  the  late  Prussian  Consul  at 
Jerusalem,  discovered  an  ancient  site  called  Danian 
or  Danyal,  in  the  mountains  above  Khan-ai- 
Nakura,  south  of  Tyre,  which  he  proposes  to 
identify  with  Dan-jaan  (Van  de  Velde,  Memoir, 
306),  but  this  requires  confirmation.  [G.J 

DANCE.  As  emotions  of  joy  and  sorrow 
universally  express  themselves  in  movements  and 
gestures  of  the  body,  efforts  have  been  made  among 
all  nations,  but  especially  among  those  of  the  south 
and  east,  in  proportion  as  they  seem  to  be  more 
demonstrative,  to  reduce  to  measure  and  to  strengthen 
by  unison  the  more  pleasurable — those  of  joy. 
The  dance  is  spoken  of  in  Holy  Scripture  uni- 
versally   as   symbolical  of  some  rejoicing,    and   is 


DANCE 


387 


1  This  agreement  in  meaning  of  the  modern  name 
with  the  ancient  is  so  rare,  that  little  dependence  can 
be  placed  on  it.  Indeed,  Stanley  (S.  <$■  P.  394  note)  has 
shown  grounds  for  at  least  questioning  it.  The  modern 
names,  when  representatives  of  the  ancient,  generally 
agree  in  sound,  though  often  disagreeing  in  meaning. 

*  Not  a  bad  specimen  of  the  wild  and  gratuitous 
suggestions  which  sometimes  occur  even  in  these, 
generally,  careful  Manuals. 


often  coupled  for  the  sake  of  contrast  with  mourn- 
ing, as  in  Eccles.  iii.  4,  "  a  time  to  mourn  and 
a  time  to  dance"  (comp.  Ps.  xxx.  11  ;  Matt.  xi. 
17).  In  the  earlier  period  it  is  found  combined 
with  some  song  or  refrain  (Ex.  xv.  20,  xxxii.  18, 
19  ;  1  Sam.  xxi.  11);  and  with  the  C]fl,  or  tam- 
bourine (A.  V.  "  timbrel"),  more  especially  in  those 
impulsive  outbursts  of  popular  feeling  which  can- 
not find  sufficient  vent  in  voice  or  in  gesture 
singly.b  Nor  is  there  any  more  strongly  popular 
element  traceable  in  the  religion  of  the  ancient 
Jews  than  the  opportunity  so  given  to  a  prophet  or 
prophetess  to  kindle  enthusiasm  for  Jehovah  on 
momentous  crises  of  national  joy,  and  thus  root  the 
theocracy  in  their  deepest  feelings,  more  especially  in 
those  of  the  women,  themselves  most  easily  stirred, 
and  most  capable  of  exciting  others.  The  dance  was 
regarded  even  by  the  Romans  as  the  worship  of  the 
body,  and  thus  had  a  place  amongst  sacred  things  : 
"  Sane  ut  in  religionibus  saltaretur,"  says  Servius  ad 
Virg.  Bucol.  v.  73,  "  haec  ratio  est,  quod  nullam 
majores  nostri  partem c  corporis  esse  voluerunt, 
quae  non  sentiret  religionem."  A  similar  sentiment 
is  conveyed  in  Ps.  xxxv.  10, — "  All  my  bones  shall 
say,  Lord,  who  is  like  unto  thee  ?"  So  the  "  tongue  " 
is  the  best  member  among  many,  the  "  glory  "  (Ps. 
lvii.  8)  of  the  whole  frame  of  fiesh,  every  part  of 
which  is  to  have  a  share  in  the  praises  of  God. 
Similarly  among  the  Greeks  is  ascribed  by  Athenaeus 
to  Socrates  the  following  fragment — 

oi  Se  x°Pot?  KaXKurra  Oeovs  rifuamv  aptoroc 
iv  TroXe'/aa)1 

who  also  praises  among  styles  of  dancing  to  evyeves 
Kal  avdpuSes  (Athen.  xiv.  627  ;  comp.  Arr.  Alex, 
iv.  11). 

Dancing  formed  a  part  of  the  religious  ceremonies 
of  the  Egyptians,  and  was  also  common  in  private 
entertainments.  Many  representations  of  dances 
both  of  men  and  women  are  found  in  the  Egyptian 
paintings.  The  "  feast  unto  the  Lord,"  which  Moses 
proposed  to  Pharaoh  to  hold,  was  really  a  dance 
(  jn  ;  see  below). 

Plato  certainly  (Leg.  vii.  6)  reckons  dancing 
(opxyo-is)  as  part  of  gymnastics  (yvfjLvao-riKTi).  So 
far  was  the  feeling  of  the  purest  period  of  antiquity 
from  attaching  the  notion  of  efl'eminacy  to  dancing, 
that  the  ideas  of  this  and  of  warlike  exercise  are 
mutually  interwoven,  and  their  terms  almost  cor- 
respond as  synonyms  (Horn.  II.  xvi.  617  ;  comp. 
Creuzer,  Sijmb.  ii.  367,  iv.  474  ;  and  see  especially 
Lucian  de  Salt.,  passim).  Women,  however,  among 
the  Hebrews  made  the  dance  their  especial  means  of 
expressing  their  feelings  ;  and  when  their  husbands 
or  friends  returned  from  a  battle  on  behalf  of  life  and 
home,  felt  that  they  too  ought  to  have  some  share 
in  the  event,  and  found  that  share  in  the  dance  of 
triumph  welcoming  them  back.  The  "eating  and 
drinking  and  dancing  "  of  the  Amalekites  is  recorded, 
as  is  the  people's  "  rising  up  to  play "  (pnV, 
including  a  revelling  dance),  with  a  tacit  censure  ; 
the  one  seems  to  mark  the  lower  civilization  of  the 

6  The  proper  word  for  this  combination  is  pnt)> 
(Judg.  xvi.  25  ;  1  Sam.  xviii.  6  ;  2  Sam.  vi.  5,  21  ; 
1  Chr.  xiii.  8,  xv.  29  ;  Jer.  xxx.  19),  though  it  also 
includes  other  senses. 

0  Among  Komans  of  a  late  period  the  sentiment 
had  expired.  "  Nemo  fere  saltat  sohrins,  nisi  forte 
insanit"  (t'ie.  pro  Kur.  14).  Perhaps,  however,  the 
standard  of  morals  would  rather  lead  us  to  expect  that 
drunkenness  was  common  than  that  dancing  was  rare. 
2  C   2 


388 


DANCE 


Amalekites,  the  other  the  looseness  of  conduct  into 
which  idolatry  led  the  Israelites  (Ex.  xxxii.  6  ; 
1  Cor.  x.  7  ;  1  Sam.  xxx,  16).  So  among  the 
Bedouins,  native  dances  of  men  are  mentioned 
(Lynch,  Dead  Sea,  295  ;  Stanley,  56, 466),  and  are 
probably  an  ancient  custom.  The  Hebrews,  how- 
ever, save  in  such  moments  of  temptation,  seem  to 
have  left  dancing  to  the  women.  But  more  espe- 
cially on  such  occasions  of  triumph,  any  woman 
whose  nearness  of  kin  to  the  champion  of  the 
moment  gave  her  a  public  character  among  her 
own   sex,   seems   to   have    felt    that    it   was   her 


Egyptian  dances.    (Wilk 


part  to  lead  such  a  demonstration  of  triumph, 
or  of  welcome ;  so  Miriam  (Ex.  xv.  20)  and  so 
Jephthah's  daughter  (Judg.  xi.  34),  and  simi- 
larly there  no  doubt  was,  though  none  is  men- 
tioned a  chorus  and  dance  of  women  led  by  De- 
borah, as  the  song  of  the  men  by  Barak  (comp. 
Judg.  v.  1  with  Ex.  xv.  1,  20).  Similarly,  too, 
Judith  (xv.  12,  13)  leads  her  own  song  and  dance 
of  triumph  over  Holofernes.  There  was  no  such 
leader  of  the  choir  mentioned  in  the  case  of  David 
and  Saul.  Hence  whereas  Miriam  "  answered " 
the  entire  chorus  in  Ex.  xv.  21,  the  women  in  the 
latter  case  "  answered  one  another  as  they  played  " 


DANCE 

(1  Sam.  xviii.  7),  that  "answer"  embodying  the 
sentiment  of  the  occasion,  and  forming  the  burden 
of  the  song.  The  "  coming  out  "  of  the  women  to 
do  this  (Judg.  xi.  34;  1  Sam.  xviii.  6;  comp. 
"  went  out,"  Ex.  xv.  20)  is  also  a  feature  worthy 
of  note,  and  implies  the  object  of  meeting,  attend- 
ing upon,  and  conducting  home.  So  Jephthah's 
daughter  met  her  father,  the  "  women  of  all  the 
cities  "  came  to  meet  and  celebrate  Saul  and  David, 
and  their  host,  but  Miriam  in  the  same  way  "  goes 
out"  before  "Jehovah"  the  "man  of  war," 
whose  presence  seems  implied.  This  marks  the 
peculiarity  of  David's  conduct,  when,  on  the  return 
of  the  Ark  of  God  from  its  long  sojourn  among 
strangers  and  borderers,  he  (2  Sam.  vi.  5-22) 
was  himself  choregus  ;  and  here  too  the  women, 
with  their  timbrels d  (see  especially  v.  5,  19,  20, 
22),  took  an  important  share.  This  fact  brings  out 
more  markedly  the  feelings  of  Saul's  daughter 
Michal,  keeping  aloof  from  the  occasion,  and  "  look- 
ing through  a  window  "  at  the  scene.  She  should, 
in  accordance  with  the  examples  of  Miriam,  &c;, 
have  herself  led  the  female  choir,  and  so  come  out 
to  meet  the  Ark,  and  her  lord.  She  stays  with  the 
"  household  "  (ver.  20),  and  "  comes  out  to  meet " 
him  with  reproaches,  perhaps  feeling  that  his  zeal 
was  a  rebuke  to  her  apathy.  It  was  before  "  the 
handmaids,"  i.  e.  in  leading  that  choir  which  she 
should  have  led,  that  he  had  "  uncovered"  him- 
self; an  unkingly  exposure  as  she  thought  it,  which 
the  dance  rendered  necessary6 — the  wearing  merely 
the  ephod  or  linen  tunic.  The  occasion  was  meant 
to  be  popularly  viewed  in  connexion  with  David's 
subjugation  of  various  enemies  and  accession  to  the 
throne  of  Israel  (see  1  Chr.  xii.  23 — xiii.  8) ;  he 
accordingly  thinks  only  of  the  honour  of  God  who 
had  so  advanced  him,  and  in  that  forgets  self  (comp. 
Miiller,  de  Davide  ant.  Arc.  Ugolini,  xxxii.).  From 
the  mention  of"  damsels,"  "  timbrels,"  and  "  dances" 
(Ps.  lxviii.  25,  cxlix.  3,  cl.  4),  as  elements  of 
religious  worship,  it  may  perhaps  be  inferred  that 
David's  feeling  led  him  to  incorporate  in  its  rites 
that  popular  mode  of  festive  celebration.  This 
does  not  seem  to  have  survived  him,  for  as  Saal- 
schiitz  remarks  (Archacol.  der  Hebr.  vol.  i.  p.  299), 
in  the  mention  of  religious  revivals  under  Hezekiah 
and  Josiah,  no  notice  of  them  occurs ;  and  this, 
although  the  "  words,"  the  "  writing,"  and  the 
"commandment  of  David"  on  such  subjects,  aie 
distinctly  alluded  to  (2  Chr.  xxix.  30,  xxxv.  4,  15). 
It  is  possible  that  the  banishing  of  this  popular 
element,  which  found  its  vent  no  doubt  in  the 
idolatrous  rites  of  Baal  and  Astarte  (as  it  certainly 
did  in  those  of  the  golden-calf,  Ex.  xxxii.  19),  made 
those  efforts  take  a  less  firm  hold  on  the  people 
than  they  might  have  done ;  and  that  David's  more 
comprehensive  scheme  might  have  retained  some  ties 
of  feeling  which  were  thus  lost.  On  the  other  hand 
was  doubtless  the  peril  of  the  loose  morality  which 
commonly  attended  festive  dances  at  heathen  shrines. 
Certainly  in  later  Judaism  the  dance  was  included 
among  some  religious  festivities,  e.  rj.  the  feast  of  Ta- 
bernacles (Mishna,  Succah,  v.  3, 4),  where,  however, 
the  performers  were  men.  This  was,  probably,  a  mere 
following  the  example  of  David  in  the  letter.     Also 


d  The  F|H  was  clearly  the  women's  instrument. 
See  the  allotment  of  the  other  different  instruments 
to  men  in  1  Chr.  xv.  16-21,  and  xvi.  G,  42  ;   comp. 

also  the  niSSlD  T\V^>V  of  Ps-  lxviii.  25. 

e  Some  commentators  have  been  at  pains  to  point 


out  that  it  was  not  the  act  of  dancing,  but  the  dress 
divested  of  upper  robes  which  was  the  subject  of 
remark.  But  clearly  the  "  dancing  with  all  his 
might "  could  hardly  be  done  in  the  dignified  costume 
of  royalty  :  every  Hebrew  would  see  that  the  one 
implied  the  other.     Comp.  Ex.  xxxii.  6,  25 


DANCE 

in  the  earlier  period  of  the  Judges  the  dances  of  the 
virgins  in  Shiloh  (Judg.  xxi.  19-23)  were  certainly 
part  of  a  religious  festivity.  It  seems  also  from 
this  last  instance  clear,  aud  from  the  others  pro- 
bable, that  such  dances  were  performed  by  maidens 
apart  from  men,  which  gives  an  additional  point  to 
the  reproach  of  Michal.  What  the  fashion  or 
figure  of  the  dance  was  is  a  doubtful  question  ;  nor 
is  it  likely  to  have  lacked  such  variety  as  would 
adapt  it  to  the  various  occasions  of  its  use.  The 
word  iin  means  to  move  in  a  ring,  or  round  ; 
whence  in  Ps.  xlii.  4  we  rind  22)r\  jiDH,  meaning  a 
festive  crowd,  apparently  as  dancing  in  a  ring. 
So  >in,  whence  i"l?iriQ,  means  to  turn.  In 
modern  Oriental  dances  a  woman  leads  off  the 
dance,  the  others  then  follow  her  with  exact  imita- 
tion of  her  artistic  and  graceful  attitudes.  A 
parallelism  of  movement  is  also  incident  to  it 
(Saalschutz,  ib.  p.  301).  Possibly  Miriam  so  led 
her  countrywomen.  The  same  writer  thinks  that 
in  Cant.  vi.  13,  the  words  D^nGH  rbh'O  (A.  V. 
"  company  of  two  armies")  imply  two  rows  of 
dancing  girls,  and  that  the  address  in  the  singular 
number,  "  return,  return,"  and  again  in  vii.  1  ap- 
plies to  the  movements  of  the  individual  performer 
in  a  kind  of  contre-danse.  The  interpretation,  how- 
ever, does  not  remove  the  obscurities  of  the  passage. 
Dancing  also  had  its  place  among  merely  festive 
amusements  apart  from  any  religious  character 
(Jer.  xxxi.  4,  13;  Lam.  v.  15;  Mark  vi.  22  ,  Luke 
xv.  25).  The  accomplishments  exhibited  by  Hero- 
dias's  daughter  seem,  however,  to  show  that  Dean 
Trench's  remark  on  the  last-named  passage  that  the 
dancers  were  of  course  not  the  guests  but  hired 
performers  is  hardly  to  be  received  with  strictness  ; 
although  the  tendency  of  luxury  in  the  east  has  no 
doubt  been  to  reduce  the  estimation  in  which  the 
pastime,  as  shared  in,  is  there  held.  Children,  of 
course,  always  did  and  always  will  dance  (Job  xxi. 
11  ;  Matt.  xi.  17  ;  Luke  vii.' 32).  Whilst  in  their 
"dancing  dervishes"  the  Turks  seem  to  have 
adopted  into  their  system  the  enthusiastic  raptures, 
at  once  martial  and  sacred,  which  (e.g.  in  the 
Roman  Salii)  seem  indigenous  in  many  southern 
aud  eastern  races  from  the  earliest  times.  For 
further  remarks  Spencer,  de  Saltat.  vet.  Hehr., 
may  be  consulted  (Ugolini,  xxx.)  ;  and,  for  the 
Greek  and  Roman  dances,  see  Diet,  of  Ant.  Sal- 

TATIO.  [H.  H.] 

DANCE.  By  this  word  is  rendered  in  the  A.  V. 
the  Hebrew  term  Machol,  7\TXO,  a  musical  instru- 
ment of  percussion,  supposed  to  have  been  used  by 
the  Hebrews  at  an  early  period  of  their  historv. 
Some  modern  lexicographers,  who  regard  Machol  as 
synonymous  with  Bakdd,  *lip"T(Eccl.  iii.  4),  restrict 
its  meaning  to  the  exercise  or  amusement  of  dancing. 
But  according  to  many  scholars,  it  also  signifies  a 
musical  instrument  used  for  accompanying  the 
dance,  and  which  the  Hebrews  therefore  called  by 
the  same  name  as  the  dance  itself.  The  Septuagint 
generally  renders  Machol  x°p6s,  "  dancing:"  occa- 
sionally, however,  it  gives  a  different  meaning,  as 
in  Ps.  xxx.  11  (Ileb.  Bible,  ver.  12),  where  it  is 
translated  xaP°->  "  j"}'>"  ;ini'  m  ^Pr-  xxxi.  4  and 
14,  where  it  is  rendered  "Swaywyf),  "  assembly." 
The  Semitic  versions  of  the  O.  T.  almost  invariably 
interpret  the  word  as  a  musical  instrument. 

On  the  joyous  occasion  when  the  Israelites  escape 
from  their  Egyptian  pursuers,  and  reach  the  Arabian 


DANCE 


389 


shore  of  the  Red  Sea  in  safety,  Miriam  is  represented 
as  going  forth  striking  the  Pjfl,  and  followed  by  her 
sisters  in  faith,  who  join  in  "  with  timbiels  and 
dances"  (Ex.  xv.  20).  Here  the  sense  of  the 
passage  seems  to  be,  agreeably  to  the  Auth.  Vers., 
that  the  Hebrew  women  came  forth  to  dance,  and 
to  accompany  their  dance  by  a  performance  on  tim- 
brels ;  and  this  is  the  view  adopted  by  the  majority 
of  the  Latin  and  English  commentators.  Parkhurst 
aud  Adam  Clark  do  not  share  this  opinion.  Ac- 
cording to  the  former,  Machol  is  "  some  fistular 
wind-instrument  of  music,  with  holes,  as  a  flute, 

pipe,  or  fife,  from  7T1,  to  make  a  hole  or  opening ;" 
and  the  latter  says,  "  I  know  no  place 'in  the  Bible 
where  Machol  and  Machalath  mean  dance  of  any 
kind  ;  they  constantly  signify  some  kind  of  pipe." 
The  Targumists  very  frequently  render  Machol  as 
.a  musical  instrument.  In  Ex.  xv.  20,  Onkelos 
gives  for  Machalath  the  Aramaic  word  J*1  J  J  It, 
which  is  precisely  the  same  employed  by  him  in 
Gen.  xxxi.  27  for  Cinnor  (A.  V.  "harp").  The 
Arabic   version    has   for   Machol   in    most    places 

J^aIs'  l'l-  ^xis'  translated  by  Freytag,  in  his 
Arabic  Lexicon,  "  a  drum  with  either  one  or  two 
faces ;"  and  the  word  JYITTICQI  (Judg.  xi.  34,  A.  V. 

"  and  with  dances")  is  rendered  by  f  \j£,  "  songs." 

Gesenius,  Fiirst,  and  others,  adopt  for  the  most 
pai't  the  Septuagint  rendering;  but  Rosenmiiller, 
in  his  commentary  on  Ex.  xv.  20,  observes  that, 
on  comparing  the  passages  in  Judg.  xi.  34  ;  1  Sam. 
xviii.  6 ;  and  Jer.  xxxi.  4,  and  assigning  a  rational 
exegesis  to  their  contexts,  Machol  must  mean  in 
these  instances  some  musical  instrument,  probably 
of  the  flute  kind,  and  principally  played  on  by 
women. 

In  the  grand  Hallelujah  Psalm  (cl.)  which  closes 
that  magnificent  collection,  the  sacred  poet  exhorts 
mankind  to  praise  Jehovah  in  His  sanctuary  with 
all  kinds  of  music  ;  and  amongst  the  instruments 
mentioned  at  the  3rd,  4th,  and  5th  verses  is  found 
Machol,  which  cannot  here  be  consistently  ren- 
dered in  the  sense  of  dancing.  Joel  Brill,  whose 
second  preface  (!"PJ£>  nEnpn)  to  Mendelssohn's 
Psalms  contains  the  best  treatise  extant  on  the 
musical  instruments  mentioned  in  the  Hebrew  Bible, 
remarks :  "  It  is  evident  from  the  passage,  '  Praise 
Him  with  the  Tof  and  the  Machol,'  that  Machol 
must  mean  here  some  musical  instrument,  and  this 
is  the  opinion  of  the  majority  of  scholars."  Men- 
delssohn derives  Machol  from  ?Y?T\,  "  hollow,"  on 
account  of  its  shape  ;  and  the  author  of  SMlte 
Haggibborim  denominates  it  DIIDD^D,  which  he 
probably  intends  for  icidapa. 

The  musical  instrument  used  as  an  accompani- 
ment to  dancing  is  generally  believed  to  have  been 
made  of  metal,  open  like 
a  ring :  it  had  many 
small  bells  attached  to 
its  border,  and  was 
played  at  weddings  and 
merry-makings  by  wo- 
men, who  accompanied 
it  with  the  voice.  Ac- 
cording to  the  author  of 
ShQte  HagQitiborim,  the 

Machol     had     tinkling       Murieallntnimaiu.    Dane 
metal  plates  fastened  on  (MendelnohnO 


390 


DANIEL 


wires,  at  intervals,  within  the  circle  that  formed  the 
instrument,  like  the  modern  tambourine ;  according 
to  others,  a  similar  instrument,  also  formed  of  a 
circular  piece  of  metal  or  wood,  but  furnished  with 
a  handle,  which  the  performer  might  so  manage  as 
to  set  in  motion  several  rings  strung  on  a  metal  bar, 
passing  from  one  side  of  the  instrument  to  the  other, 
the  waving  of  which  produced  a  loud,  merry  sound. 
Some  modern  critics  consider  Machalath  the 
same  with  Machol.  Gesenius,  however,  translates 
the  latter  "dancing,"  whilst  the  former  he  renders 

"  a   stringed   instrument,"   from   the   root    iT?n 
Aethiopic  ^ftP,  "  to  sing."  [D.  W.  M.] 

DAN'IEL  &WH,  Dan.  i.  6,  7,  8,  &c. ;  Ezr. 
viii.  2;  Neh.  x.  6 ;  1  Chr.  iii.  1  ;  and  bitTl,  Ez. 
xiv.  14,  20;  xxviii.  3),  the  name  of  three  (or  four) 
persons  in  the  Old  Testament. 

1.  The  second  son  of  David  (Aafxviri\,  Alex. 
AaXovia),  "  born  unto  him  in  Hebron,"  "  of  Abi- 
gail the  Carmelitess "  (1  Chr.  iii.  1).  In  the 
parallel  passage,  2  Sam.  iii.  3,  he  is  called  Chileab 
(2K?3,  i.  e.  like  his  father(?) ;  Aa\ovia).  For  the 
Jewish  explanation  of  the  origin  of  the  two  names 
see  Patrick  ;  Bochart,  Hierozoic.  ii.  55,  p.  663. 

2.  The  fourth  of  "the  greater  prophets"  (cf. 
Matt.  xxiv.  15,  irpo(pi)rris).  Nothing  is  known  of 
the  parentage  or  family  of  Daniel.  He  appears, 
however,  to  have  been  of  royal  or  noble  descent 
(Dan.  i.  3 ;  cf.  Joseph.  Ant.  x.  10,  §l),and  to  have 
possessed  considerable  personal  endowments  (.Dan. 
i.  4).  He  was  taken  to  Babylon  in  "  the  third 
year  of  Jehoiakim  (B.C.  604),"  and  trained  for  the 
king's  service  with  his  three  companions.  Like 
Joseph  in  earlier  times,  he  gained  the  favour  of  his 
guardian,  and  was  divinely  supported  in  his  resolve 
to  abstain  from  the  "  king's  meat  "  for  fear  of  de- 
filement (Dan.  i.  8-16).  At  the  close  of  his  three 
years'  discipline  (Dan.  i.  5,  18),  Daniel  had  an 
opportunity  of  exercising  his  peculiar  gift  (Dan.  i. 
17)  of  interpreting  dreams,  on  the  occasion  of  Ne- 
buchadnezzar's decree  against  the  Magi  (Dan.  ii. 
14  ft'.).  In  consequence  of  his  success  he  was  made 
"  ruler  of  the  whole  province  of  Babylon,"  and 
"  chief  of  the  governors  over  all  the  wise  men  of 
Babylon"  (ii.  48).  He  afterwards  interpreted  the 
second  dream  of  Nebuchadnezzar  (iv.  8-27),  and 
the  handwriting  on  the  wall  which  disturbed  the 
feast  of  Belshazzar  (v.  10-28),  though  he  no  longer 
held  his  official  position  among  the  magi  (Dan.  v. 
7,  8,  12),  and  probably  lived  at  Susa  (Dan.  viii.  2  ; 
c'f.  Joseph.  Ant.  x.  11,  §7 ;  Bochart,  Geogr.  Sacr. 
iii.  14).  At  the  accession  of  Darius  [Darius] 
he  was  made  first  of  the  "  three  presidents  "  of  the 
empire  (cf.  1  Esdr.  iii.  9),  and  was  delivered  from 
.the  lions'  den,  into  which  he  had  been  cast  for  his 
faithfulness  to  the  rites  of  his  faith  (vi.  10-23 ;  cf. 
Bel  &  Dr.  29-42).  At  the  accession  of  Cyrus  he 
still  retained  his  prosperity  (vi.  28  ;  cf.  i.  21 ;  Bel 


a  This  date  has  given  rise  to  many  objections, 
because  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim  is  identified 
with  the  first  of  Nebuchadnezzar  (Jer.  xxv.  1). 
Various  solutions  have  been  proposed  (cf.  Keil,  EM. 
§133,  2)  ;  but  the  text  of  Daniel  itself  suggests  the 
true  explanation.  The  second  year  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar's reign  (ii.  1 )  falls  after  the  completion  of  the 
three  years'  training  of  Daniel  which  commenced 
with  his  captivity  (i.  1,  5)  ;  and  this  is  a  clear  indi- 
cation that  the  expedition  mentioned  in  i.  1,  was 
undertaken  in  the  last  year  of  the  reign  of  Nabu- 


DANIEL 

&  Dr.  2) ;  though  he  does  not  appear  to  have  re- 
mained at  Babylon  (cf.  Dan.  i.  21),  and  in  "the 
third  year  of  Cyrus"  (B.C.  534)  he  saw  his  last 
recorded  vision  on  the  banks  of  the  Tigris  (x.  1,  4). 
According  to  the  Mahommedan  tradition  Daniel 
returned  to  Judaea,  held  the  government  of  Syria, 
and  finally  died  at  Susa  (Rosenmiiller,  Schol.  p. 
5,  n.),  where  his  tomb  is  still  shown,  and  is  visited 
by  crowds  of  pilgrims.  In  the  prophecies  of  Ezekiel 
mention  is  made  ot  Daniel  as  a  pattern  of  righteous- 
ness (xiv.  14,  20)  and  wisdom  (xxviii.  3);  and 
since  Daniel  was  still  young  at  that  time  (c.  B.C. 
588-584),  some  have  thought  that  another  prophet 
of  the  name  must  have  lived  at  some  earlier  time 
(Bleek),  perhaps  during  the  captivity  of  Nineveh 
(Ewald,  Die  Propheten,  ii.  560),  whose  fame 
was  transferred  to  his  later  namesake.  Hitzig 
imagines  ( Vorbemerk.  §3)  that  the  Daniel  of 
Ezekiel  was  purely  a  mythical  personage,  whose 
prototype  is  to  be  sought  in  Melchizedek,  and  that 
the  character  was  borrowed  by  the  author  of  the 
book  of  Daniel  as  suited  to  his  design.  These  sup- 
positions are  favoured  by  no  internal  probability, 
and  are  unsupported  by  any  direct  evidence.  The 
order  of  the  names  "  Noah,  Daniel,  and  Job"  (Ez. 
xiv.  14)  seems  to  suggest  the  idea  that  they  repre- 
sent the  first  and  last  historic  types  of  righteous- 
ness before  the  law  and  under  it,  combined  with  the 
ideal  type  (cf.  Delitzsch,  p.  271).  On  the  other 
hand  the  narrative  in  Dan.  i.  11,  implies  that 
Daniel  was  conspicuously  distinguished  for  purity 
and  knowledge  at  a  very  early  age  (cf.  Hist.  Sus. 
45),  and  he  may  have  been  nearly  forty  years  old 
at  the  time  of  Ezekiel's  prophecy. 

Allusion  has  been  made  already  to  the  compa- 
rison which  may  be  instituted  between  Daniel  and 
Joseph,  who  stand  at  the  beginning  and  the  close  of 
the  divine  history  of  the  Jews,  as  representatives  of 
the  true  God  in  heathen  courts  (Auberlen,  Daniel, 
p.  32,  3).  In  this  respect  the  position  of  Daniel 
must  have  exercised  a  powerful  influence  upon 
the  form  of  the  revelations  conveyed  through  him. 
And  in  turn  the  authority  which  he  enjoyed  renders 
the  course  of  the  exile  and  the  r.eturn  clearly  intel- 
ligible. By  station,  by  education,  and  by  cha- 
racter, he  was  peculiarly  fitted  to  fulfil  the  work 
assigned  to  him.  He  was  not  only  a  resident  in  a 
foreign  land,  like  Jeremiah  or  Ezekiel,  but  the 
minister  of  a  foreign  empire,  and  of  successive 
dynasties  (Dan.  ii.  48  ;  vi.  28).  His  political  ex- 
perience would  naturally  qualify  him  to  give  dis- 
tinct expression  to  the  characteristics  of  nations  in 
themselves,  and  not  only  in  their  relation  to  God's 
people.  His  intellectual  advantages  were  as  re- 
markable as  his  civil  dignity.  Like  the  great  Law- 
giver who  was  "  trained  in  all  the  wisdom  of  the 
Egyptians,"  the  great  seer  was  trained  in  the  secrets 
of  Chaldaean  wisdom,  and  placed  at  the  head  of  the 
school  of  the  Magi  (Dan.  ii.  48).  He  was  thus  en- 
abled to  preserve  whatever  was  true  in  the  traditional 
teaching  of  the  East,  and  to  cast  his  revelations  into 


palassar,  while  as  yet  Nebuchadnezzar  was  not  pro- 
perly king.  But  some  further  difficulties  remain, 
which  appear,  however,  to  have  been  satisfactorily  re- 
moved by  Kiebuhr  (Gescli.  Assur's,  86  ff.).  The  date 
in  Jer.  xlvi.  2,  is  not  that  of  the  battle  of  Carchemish, 
but  of  the  warning  of  the  prophet ;  and  the  threats 
and  promises  in  Jer.  xxv.  are  consistent  with  the 
notion  of  a  previous  subjection  of  Jerusalem  to  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, which  maj'  have  been  accomplished 
without  resistance  (cf.  Niebuhr,  a.  a.  O.  ff.  368  ff.). 


DANIEL,  THE  BOOK  OP 

a  form  suited  to  their  special  character.  But  though 
engaged  in  the  service  of  a  heathen  prince  and  familiar 
with  Oriental  learning,  Daniel  was  from  the  first 
distinguished  by  his  strict  observance  of  the  Mosaic 
law  (i.  8-16;  cf.  vi.  10,  11).  In  this  way  the 
third  outward  condition  for  his  work  was  satisfied, 
and  at  the  close  of  the  exile  he  offered  a  pattern  of 
holiness  for  the  instruction  of  the  Dispersion  of 
after  times.     (Cf.  Auberlen,  Daniel,  24,  &c.) 

The  exact  meaning  of  the  name  is  disputed.  The 
full  form  (yN'H/l)  is  probably  more  correct,  and  in 
this  the  yod  appears  to  be  not  merely  formative,  but 
a  pronominal  suffix  (as  m^HX,  ^"T-IS),  so  that 
the  sense  will  be  God  is  my  Judge  (C.  B.  Michaelis 
ap.  Kosenmiiller,  Schol.  §1).  Others  interpret  the 
word  the  Judge  of  God,  and  the  use  of  a  yod  for- 
mative is  justified  by  the  parallel  of  Melchizedek, 
&c.  (Hitzig,  §2).  This  interpretation  is  favoured  by 
the  Chaldaean  name,  Belteshazzar  ("IVNE^P?I1? 
i.  7,  i.  e.  the  prince  of  Bel ;  Thcod.  LXX. ;  BoX- 
rdaap ;  Vulg.  Baltassar),  which  was  given  to 
Daniel  at  Babylon  (Dan.  i.  7),  and  contains  a  clear 
reference  to  his  former  name.  HitzigVinterpreta- 
tion  ("  Pala  tschagara  =  Emdhrer  mid  Verzehrer") 
has  nothing  to  recommend  it.  Such  changes  have 
been  common  at  all  times  ;  and  for  the  simple 
assumption  of  a  foreign  name  compare  Gen.  xli.  45  ; 
Ez.  i.  11,  v.  14  (Sheshbazzar). 

Various  apocryphal  fragments  attributed  to  Da- 
niel are  collected  by  Fabricius  {Cod.  Pseud.  V.  T. 
i.  1 124),  but  it  is  surprising  that  his  fame  in  later 
times  seems  to  have  been  obscured  (Hottinger,  Hist. 
Orient.  92).  Cf.  Epiph.  Vit.  Dan.  ii.  p.  243,  ed. 
Petav. ;   Vit.  Dan.  ap.  Fabric. ;  Joseph.  Ant.  x.  11. 

3.  A  descendant  of  Ithamar,  who  returned  with 
Ezra  to  Judaea  in  the  time  of  "  Artaxerxes."  [Ar- 
TAXERXES.]     (Ezr.  viii.  2.) 

4.  A  priest  who  sealed  the  covenant  drawn  up 
by  Nehemiah  B.C.  445  (Neh.  x.  6).  He  is  pro- 
bably the  same  as  (3)  ;  and  is  confounded  with  the 
prophet  in  the  apociyphal  addenda  to  Daniel :  Dan. 
xiv.  1  (LXX.,  not  Theodot.),  [B.  F.  W.] 

DANIEL,  THE  BOOK  OF,  is  the  earliest 
example  of  apocalyptic  literature,  and  in  a  great 
degree  the  model,  according  to  which  all  later  apo- 
calypses were  constructed.  In  this  aspect  it  stands 
at  the  head  of  a  series  of  writings  in  which  the 
deepest  thoughts  of  the  Jewish  people  found  ex- 
pression after  the  close  of  the  prophetic  era.  The 
book  of  Enoch  [Enoch],  the  Jewish  Sibyllines, 
and  the  fourth  book  of  Ezra  [2  Esdras],  carry 
out  with  varied  success  and  in  different  direc- 
tions, the  great  outlines  of  universal  history  which 
it  contains ;  and  the  "  Revelation  "  of  Daniel  re- 
ceived at  last  its  just  completion  in  the  Revelation 
of  St.  John.  Without  an  inspired  type  it  is  diffi- 
cult to  conceive  how  the  later  writings  could  have 
been  framed;  and  whatever  judgment  be  formed  as 
to  the  composition  of  the  book,  there  can  be  no 
doubt  that  it  exercised  a  greater  influence  upon 
the  early  Christian  Church  than  any  other  writing 
of  the  Old  Testament,  while  in  the  Gospels  it  is 
specially  distinguished  by  the  emphatic  quotation  of 
the  Lord  (Matt.  xxiv.  15,  rb  f>ri8hi>  ha  AavniA 
rov  irpo<f>T)TOu.  .   .  6  avayivwcTKCDV  yoetrw.   .   .). 

1.  In  studying  the  book  of  Daniel  it  is  of  the 
utmost  importance  to  recognise  its  apocalyptic  cha- 
racter. It  is  at  once  an  end  and  a  beginning,  the 
last  form  of  prophecy  and  the  first  "  philosophy  of 
history."     The  nation  is  widened  into  the  world  : 


DANIEL,  THE  BOOK  OF        391 

the  restored  kingdom  of  Judah  into  a  universal 
kingdom  of  God.  To  the  old  prophets  Daniel 
stands,  in  some  sense,  as  a  commentator  (Dan.  ix. 
2-19):  to  succeeding  generations,  as  the  herald  of 
immediate  deliverance.  The  form,  the  style,  and 
the  point  of  sight  of  prophecy,  are  relinquished 
upon  the  verge  of  a  new  period  in  the  existence  of 
God's  people,  and  fresh  instruction  is  given  to  them 
suited  to  their  new  fortunes.  The  change  is  not 
abrupt  and  absolute,  but  yet  it  is  distinctly  felt. 
The  eye  and  not  the  ear  is  the  organ  of  the  Seer : 
visions  and  not  words  are  revealed  to  him.  His 
utterance  is  clothed  in  a  complete  and  artificial 
shape,  illustrated  by  symbolic  imagery  and  pointed 
by  a  specific  purpose.  The  divine  counsels  are 
made  known  to  him  by  the  ministry  of  angels  (vii. 
16,  viii.  16,  ix.  21),  and  not  by  "the  Word  of  the 
Lord."  The  seer  takes  his  stand  in  the  future 
rather  than  in  the  present,  while  the  prophet  seized 
on  the  elements  of  good  and  evil  which  he  saw 
working  around  him  and  traced  them  to  their  final 
issue.  The  one  looked  forward  from  the  present  to 
the  great  "  age  to  come ;"  the  other  looked  backward 
from  "  the  last  days  "  to  the  trials  in  which  he  is 
still  placed.  In  prophecy  the  form  and  the  essence, 
the  human  and  divine  were  inseparably  interwoven ; 
in  revelation  the  two  elements  can  be  contemplated 
apart,  each  in  its  greatest  vigour, — the  most  con- 
summate art,  and  the  most  striking  predictions. 
The  Babylonian  exile  supplied  the  outward  training 
and  the  inward  necessity  for  this  last  form  of  divine 
teaching ;  and  the  prophetic  visions  of  Ezekiel  form 
the  connecting  link  between  the  characteristic  types 
of  revelation  and  prophecy.  (Cf.  Liicke,  Versuch, 
i.  17  ff.;  Hitzig,  Daniel,  Vorbem.  §9;  Hilgenfeld, 
Die  Jud.  Apok.,  1  ff.)    [Daniel.] 

2.  The  language  of  the  book,  no  less  than  its 
general  form,  belongs  to  an  era  of  transition.  Like 
the  book  of  Ezra,  Daniel  is  composed  partly  in  the 
vernacular  Aramaic  (Chaldee),  and  partly  in  the 
sacred  Hebrew.  The  introduction  (i. — ii.  4  a)  is 
written  in  Hebrew.  On  the  occasion  of  the  "  Sy- 
riac"  (rPJDIN,  crvpLcrri,  syriace,  i.e.  Aramaic) 
answer  of  the  Chaldaeans,  the  language  changes  to 
Aramaic,  and  this  is  retained  till  the  close  of  the 
seventh  chapter  (ii.46 — vii.).  The  personal  intro- 
duction of  Daniel  as  the  writer  of  the  text  (viii.  1) 
is  marked  by  the  resumption  of  the  Hebrew,  which 
continues  to  the  close  of  the  book  (viii. — xii.).  The 
character  of  the  Hebrew  bears  the  closest  affinity  to 
that  of  Ezekiel  and  Habakkuk,  or  in  other  words  to 
those  prophets  who  lived  nearest  to  the  assumed 
age  of  Daniel ;  but  it  is  less  marked  by  peculiar 
forms  and  corruptions  than  that  of  Ezekiel.  The 
Aramaic,  like  that  of  Ezra,  is  also  of  an  earlier 
form  (cf.  Maurer,  Comm.  in  Dan.  87)  than  exists 
in  any  other  Chaldaic  document,  but  as  the  Tar- 
gums — the  next  most  ancient  specimens  of  the  lan- 
guage— were  not  committed  to  writing  till  about 
the  Christian  era,  this  fact  cannot  be  insisted  on  as 
a  proof  of  remote  antiquity.  It  is,  however,  worthy 
of  notice  that  J.  D.  Michaelis  affirmed,  on  purely 
linguistic  grounds,  that  the  book  was  no  late 
compilation,  though  he  questioned  the  authenticity 
of  some  part  of  it  (c.  iii.- — vii. ;  cf.  Keil,  Lehr.  d. 
i'.iul.  §135,  n.  4).  In  addition  to  these  two  great 
elements — Aramaic  and  Hebrew — the  book  of  Da- 
niel contains  traces  of  other  languages  which  in- 
dicate the  peculiar  position  of  the  writer.  The  use 
of  Greek  technical  teims  (cf.  §10)  marks  a  period 
when  commerce  had  already  united  Persia  and 
Greece;  and  the  occurrence  of  peculiar  words  which 


392        DANIEL,  THE  BOOK  OF 

admit  of  an  explanation  by  reference  to  Aran  and 
not  to  Semitic  roots  (Delitzsch,  p.  274)  is  almost  in- 
explicable on  the  supposition  that  the  prophecies  are 
a  Palestinian  forgery  of  the  Maccabaean  age. 

3.  The  book  is  generally  divided  into  two  nearly 
equal  parts.  The  first  of  these  (i. — vi.)  contains 
chiefly  historical  incidents,  while  the  second  (vii. — 
xii.)  is  entirely  apocalyptic.  This  division  is  fur- 
ther supported  by  the  fact  that  the  details  of  the 
two  sections  are  arranged  in  order  of  time,  and  that 
the  commencement  of  the  second  section  falls  earlier 
than  the  close  of  the  first,  as  if  the  writer  himself 
wished  to  mark  the  division  of  subject.  But  on 
the  other  hand  this  division  takes  no  account  of  the 
difference  of  language,  nor  of  the  change  of  person 
at  the  beginning  of  c.  viii.  And  though  the  first 
section  is  mainly  historical,  yet  the  vision  of  c.  vii. 
finds  its  true  foundation  and  counterpart  in  c.  ii. 
From  these  circumstances  it  seems  better  to  divide 
the  book  (Auberlen,  pp.  36  ff.)  into  three  parts. 
The  first  chapter  forms  an  introduction.  The  next 
six  chapters  (ii. — vii.)  give  a  general  view  of  the 
progressive  history  of  the  powers  of  the  world,  and 
of  the  principles  of  the  divine  government  as  seen 
in  events  of  the  life  of  Daniel.  The  remainder  of 
the  book  (viii. — xii.)  traces  in  minuter  detail  the 
fortunes  of  the  people  of  God,  as  typical  of  the  for- 
tunes of  the  Church  in  all  ages.  The  second  section 
is  distinguished  by  a  remarkable  symmetry.  It 
opens  with  a  view  of  the  great  kingdoms  of  the 
earth  revealed  to  a  heathen  sovereign,  to  whom 
they  appeared  in  their  outward  unity  and  splendour, 
and  yet  devoid  of  any  tine  life  (a  metal  colossus) ; 
it  closes  with  a  view  of  the  same  powers  as  seen  by 
a  prophet  of  God,  to  whom  they  were  displayed  in 
their  distinct  characters,  as  instinct  with  life,  though 
of  a  lower  nature,  and  displaying  it  with  a  terrible 
energy  of  action  (drjpia,  four  beasts).  The  image 
under  which  the  manifestation  of  God's  kingdom  is 
foreshown  corresponds  exactly  with  this  twofold 
exhibition  of  the  worldly  powers.  "  A  stone  cut 
without  hands,"  "  becoming  a  great  mountain  and 
filling  the  whole  earth"  (Dan.  ii.  34,  35) — a  rock 
and  not  a  metal — is  contrasted  with  the  finite  pro- 
portions of  a  statue  moulded  by  man's  art,  as  "  the 
Son  of  man,"  the  representative  of  humanity,  is  the 
true  Lord  of  that  lower  creation  (Gen.  i.  30)  which 
symbolizes  the  spirit  of  mere  earthly  dominions 
(Dan.  vii.  13,  14).  The  intermediate  chapters 
(hi. — vi.)  exhibit  a  similar  correspondence,  while 
setting  forth  the  action  of  God  among  men.  The  de- 
liverance of  the  friends  of  Daniel  from  the  punish- 
ment to  which  they  were  condemned  for  refusing 
to  perform  an  idolatrous  act  at  the  command  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  (ch.  iii.),  answers  to  the  deliverance 
of  Daniel  from  that  to  which  he  was  exposed  by 
continuing  to  serve  his  God  in  spite  of  the  edict  of 
Darius  (ch.  vi.);  and  in  the  same  way  the  degra- 
dation, the  repentance,  and  the  restoration  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar (ch.  iv.)  forms  a  striking  contrast  to  the 
sacrilegious  pride  and  death  of  Belshazzar  (ch.  v. 
22-31).  The  arrangement  of  the  last  section  (viii. — 
xii.)  is  not  equally  distinct,  though  it  offers  traces 
of  a  similar  disposition.  The  description  of  the 
progress  of  the  Grecian  power  in  c.  viii.  is  further 
developed  in  the  last  vision  (x. — xii.),    while  the 


b  The  Jewish  doctors  of  later  times  were  divided 
as  to  the  degree  of  the  inspiration  of  Daniel.  Abar- 
banel  maintained  against  Maimonides  that  he  was 
endowed  with  the  highest  prophetic  power  (Fabric. 
God.  Pseudep.  V.  T  i.  897,  n.). 

c  Eichhorn  attributed  ch.  ii.-vi.,  vii. -xii.,   to  dif- 


DANIEL,  THE  BOOK  OF 

last  chapter  appears  to  cany  on  the  revelation  to 
the  first  coming  of  Messiah  in  answer  to  the  prayer 
of  Daniel. 

4.  The  position  which  the  book  of  Daniel  occu- 
pies in  the  Hebrew  Canon  seems  at  first  sight  re- 
markable. It  is  placed  among  the  Holy  writings 
[Kethumm,  aytoypacpa)  between  Esther  and  Ezra, 
or  immediately  before  Esther  (cf.  Hody,  Be  Bibl. 
text.  p.  644,  5),  and  not  among  the  prophets.  This 
collocation,  however,  is  a  natural  consequence  of 
the  right  apprehension  of  the  diffeient  functions  of 
the  prophet  and  seer.  It  is  not,  indeed,  certain  at 
what  time  the  triple  division  of  the  Scriptures 
which  is  preserved  in  the  Hebrew  Bibles  was  first 
made ;  but  the  characteristics  of  the  classes  show 
that  it  was  not  based  on  the  supposed  outward  au- 
thority, but  on  the  inward  composition  of  the  books 
[Canon].  Daniel,  as  the  truth  has  been  well 
stated,  had  the  spirit  but  not  the  work  of  a  pro- 
phet ;  and  as  his  work  was  a  new  one,  so  was  it 
carried  out  in  a  style  of  which  the  Old  Testament 
offers  no  other  example.  His  Apocalypse  is  as 
distinct  from  the  prophetic  writings  as  the  Apoca- 
lypse of  Si»  John  from  the  Apostolic  epistles.  The 
heathen  court  is  to  the  one  seer  what  the  isle  of 
Patmos  is  to  the  other,  a  place  of  exile  and  isola- 
tion, where  he  stands  alone  with  his  God,  and  is 
not  like  the  prophet  active  in  the  midst  of  a  strug- 
gling nation  (Auberlen,  34). b 

5.  The  unity  of  the  book  in  its  present  form, 
notwithstanding  the  difference  of  language,  is  gene- 
rally acknowledged  (De  Wette,  Einl.  §256  ;  Hitzig, 
§4).°  Still  there  is  a  remarkable  difference  in  its 
internal  character.  In  the  first  seven  chapters 
Daniel  is  spoken  of  historically  (i.  8-21,  ii.  14-49, 
iv.  8-27,  v.  13-29,  vi.  2-28,  vii.  1,  2):  in  the  last 
five  he  appears  personally  as  the  writer  (vii.  15-28, 
viii.  1-ix.  22,  x.  1-19,  xii.  5).  This  peculiarity, 
howrever,  is  not  without  some  precedents  in  the 
writings  of  the  earlier  prophets  (e.  g.  Is.  vii.  3, 
xx.  2),  and  the  seventh  chapter  prepares  the  way 
for  the  change ;  for  while  Daniel  is  there  spoken  of 
in  the  third  person  (vii.  1,  2),  the  substance  of  the 
chapter  is  given  in  his  words,  in  the  first  person 
(vii.  2,  15,  28).  The  cause  of  the  difference  of 
person  is  commonly  supposed  to  lie  in  the  nature 
of  the  case.  The  prophet  narrates  symbolic  and 
representative  events  liistorically,  for  the  event  is 
its  own  witness  ;  but  revelations  and  visions  need 
the  personal  attestation  of  those  to  whom  they  are 
communicated.  It  is,  however,  more  probable  that 
the  peculiarity  arose  from  the  manner  in  which  the 
book  assumed  its  final  shape  (§11). 

6.  Allusion  has  been  made  already  to  the  in- 
fluence which  the  book  exercised  upon  the  Christian 
Church.  Apart  from  the  general  type  of  Apoca- 
lvptic  composition  which  the  Apostolic  writers  de- 
rived from  Daniel  (2  Thess.  ii. ;  Rev.  passim  ;  cf. 
Matt.  xxvi.  64,  xxi.  44?),  the  New  Testament  in- 
cidentally acknowledges  each  of  the  characteristic 
elements  of  the  book,  its  miracles  (Hebr.  xi.  33, 
34),  its  predictions  (Matt.  xxiv.  15),  and  its  doc- 
trine of  angels  (Luke  i.  19,  26).  At  a  still  earlier 
time  the  same  influence  may  be  traced  in  the  Apo- 
crypha. The  book  of  Baruch  [Baruoii]  exhibits 
so  many  coincidences  with   Daniel,  that  by  some 


ferent  authors  ;  and  Eertholdt  supposed  that  each 
section  was  the  work  of  a  distinct  writer,  though  he 
admitted  that  each  successive  writer  was  acquainted 
with  the  composition  of  his  predecessors,  recognizing 
in  this  way  the  unity  of  the  book  [Einl.). 


DANIEL,  THE  BOOK  OF  . 

the  two  books  have  been  assigned  to  the  same 
author  (cf.  Fritzsche,  Handb.  zu  d.  Apok.  i.  173)  ; 
and  the  first  book  of  Maccabees  represents  Matta- 
thias  quoting  the  marvellous  deliverances  recorded 
in  Daniel,  together  with  those  of  earlier  times 
(1  Mace.  ii.  59,  CO),  and  elsewhere  exhibits  an  ac- 
quaintance with  the  Greek  version  of  the  book 
(1  Mace.  i.  54  =  Dan.  ix.  27).  The  allusion  to 
the  guardian  angels  of  nations,  which  is  introduced 
into  the  Alexandrine  translation  of  the  Pentateuch 
(Deut.  xxxii.  8  ;  LXX.).  and  recurs  in  the  Wisdom 
of  Sirach  (Ecclus.  xvii.  17),  may  have  been  derived 
from  Dan.  x.  21,  xii.  1,  though  this  is  uncertain  as 
the  doctrine  probably  formed  part  of  the  common 
belief.  According  to  Josephus  {Ant.  xi.  8,  §4)  the 
prophecies  of  Daniel  gained  for  the  Jews  the  favour 
of  Alexander  [Alexander  the  Great];  and 
whatever  credit  may  be  given  to  the  details  of  his 
narrative,  it  at  least  shows  the  unquestioning  belief 
in  the  prophetic  worth  of  the  book  which  existed 
among  the  Jews  in  his  time. 

7.  The  testimony  of  the  Synagogue  and  the 
Church  gave  a  clear  expression  to  the  judgment 
implied  by  the  early  and  authoritative  use  of  the 
book,  and  pronounced  it  to  contain  authentic  pro- 
phecies of  Daniel,  without  contradiction,  with  one 
exception,  till  modern  times.  Porphyry  alone  (tc. 
305  a.d.)  assailed  the  book,  and  devoted  the  12th 
of  his  fifteen  Discourses  against  Christians  (\6yoi 
Kara  Xpuxriavcii')  to  a  refutation  of  its  claims  to 
be  considered  a  prophecy.  "  The  history,"  he  said, 
"  is  true  up  to  the  date  of  Antioclms  Epiphanes, 
and  false  afterwards ;  therefore  the  book  was  written 
in  his  time"  (Hieron.  Pracf.  in  Dan.).  The  argu- 
ment of  Porphyry  is  an  exact  anticipation  of  the 
position  of  many  modern  critics,  and  involves  a 
twofold  assumption,  that  the  whole  book  ought  to 
contain  predictions  of  the  same  character,  and  that 
definite  predictions  are  impossible.  Externally  the 
book  is  as  well  attested  as  any  book  of  Scripture, 
and  there  is  nothing  to  show  that  Porphyry  urged 
any  historical  objections  against  it ;  but  it  brings 
the  belief  in  miracle  and  prediction,  in  the  divine 
power  and  foreknowledge  as  active  among  men,  to 
a  startling  test,  and  according  to  the  character  of 
this  belief  in  the  individual  must  be  his  judgment 
upon  the  book. 

8.  The  history  of  the  assaults  upon  the  pro- 
phetic worth  of  Daniel  in  modern  times  is  full  of 
interest.  In  the  first  instance  doubts  were  raised  as 
to  the  authorship  of  the  opening  chapters,  i. — vii. 
(Spinoza,  Newton),  which  are  perfectly  compatible 
with  the  fullest  recognition  of  their  canonicity. 
Then  the  variations  in  the  LXX.  suggested  the 
belief  that  cc.  iii. —  vi.  were  a  later  interpolation 
(J.  D.  Michaelis).  As  a  next  step  the  last  six 
chapters  only  were  retained  as  a  genuine  book  of 
Scripture  (Eichhoru,  1st  and  2nd  edits.);  and  at 
last  the  whole  book  was  rejected  as  the  work  of  an 
impostor,  who  lived  in  the  time  of  Antiochus 
Epiphanes  (Corrodi.  1783.  Hitzig  fixes  the  date 
more  exactly  from  170  B.C.  to  the  spring  of  104 
B.C.).  This  last  opinion  has  found,  especially  in 
Germany,  a  very  wide  acceptance,  and  Liicke  ven- 
tures to  pronounce  it  "  a  certain  result  of  histoi  teal 
criticism." 

9.  The  real  grounds  on  which  most  modern 
critics   rely   in   rejecting  the  book,  are  the  "  I'alm- 


d  The  special  prophecies  of  Balaam  (Num.  xxiv. 
24)  and  Isaiah  (xliv.,  xlv.)  centre  in  Daniel  (cf.  Dan. 
si.  30)  ;    and  the  prediction  of  Balaam  offers  a   re- 


DANIEL,  THE  BOOK  OF        393 

lousness  of  its  narratives  "  and  "  the  minuteness  of 
its  prophetic  history."  "  The  contents  of  the  book," 
it  is  said,  "  are  irrational  and  impossible"  (Hitzig, 
§5).  It  is  obvious  that  it  is  impossible  to  an- 
swer such  a  statement  without  entering  into 
general  views  of  the  Providential  government  of  the 
world.  It  is  admitted  that  the  contents  of  the 
book  are  exceptional  and  surprising;  but  revelation 
is  itself  a  miracle,  however  it  be  given,  and  essen- 
tially as  inconceivable  as  any  miracle.  There  are 
times,  perhaps,  when  it  is  required  that  extraor- 
dinary signs  should  arrest  the  attention  of  men  and 
fix  their  minds  upon  that  Divine  Presence  which  is 
ever  working  around  them.  Prodigies  may  become  a 
guide  to  nature.  Special  circumstances  may  deter- 
mine, and,  according  to  the  Bible,  do  determine, 
the  peculiar  form  which  the  miraculous  working  of 
God  will  assume  at  a  particular  time  ;  so  that  the 
question  is,  whether  there  is  any  discernible  rela- 
tion between  the  outward  wonders  and  the  moral 
condition  of  an  epoch.  Nor  is  it  impossible  to 
apply  this  remark  to  the  case  of  Daniel.  The  posi- 
tion which  he  occupied  [Daniel]  was  as  excep- 
tional as  the  book  which  bears  his  name.  He  sur- 
vived the  exile  and  the  disappointment  which  at- 
tended the  first  hopes  of  the  Jews.  The  glories 
which  had  been  connected  with  the  return  in  the 
foreshoi  tened  vision  of  earlier  prophets  were  now 
felt  to  be  far  off,  and  a  more  special  revelation  may 
have  been  necessary  as  a  preparation  for  a  period  of 
silence  and  conflict.11  The  very  character  of  the 
Babylonian  exile  seems  to  have  called  for  some  signal 
exhibition  of  divine  power.  As  the  first  exodus 
was  distinguished  by  great  marvels,  it  might  appear 
natural  that  the  second  should  be  also  (cf.  Mic.  vii. 
15;  Delitzsch,  p.  272,  &c).  National  miracles, 
so  to  speak,  formed  the  beginning  of  the  theocracy : 
personal  miracles,  the  beginning  of  the  church.  To 
speak  of  an  "  aimless  and  lavish  display  of  wonders  " 
is  to  disregard  the  representative  significance  of  the 
different  acts,  and  the  relation  which  they  bore 
to  the  future  fortunes  of  the  people.  A  new  era 
was  inaugurated  by  fresh  signs.  The  Jews,  now 
that  they  are  left  among  the  nations  of  the  world, 
looked  for  some  sure  token  that  God  was  able  to 
deliver  them  and  work  out  His  own  purposes.  The 
persecution  of  Antiochus  completed  the  teaching  of 
Daniel ;  and  the  people  no  longer  sought  without 
that  which  at  length  they  had  found  within.  They 
had  withstood  the  assault  of  one  typical  enemy,  and 
now  they  were  prepared  to  meet  all.  The  close  of 
special  predictions  coincided  with  the  consolidation 
of  the  national  faith.   [ANTIOCHUS  Epiph.] 

10.  The  general  objections  against  the  "  legend- 
ary" miracles  and  specific  predictions  of  Daniel  are 
strengthened  by  other  objections  in  detail,  which 
cannot,  however,  be  regarded  in  themselves  as  of 
any  consi  lerable  weight.  Some  of  these  have  been 
already  answered  incidentally.  Some  still  require 
a  short  notice,  though  it  is  evident  that  they  are 
often  afterthoughts,  the  results  and  not  the  causes 
of  the  rejection  of  the  book.  Net  only,  it  is  said, 
is  the  book  placed  among  the  Eagiographa,  but 
Daniel  is  omitted  in  the  list  of  prophets  given  in  the 
Wisdom  of  Sirach  ;  the  language  is  corrupted  by  an 
intermixture  of  Greek  words;  the  details  are  essen- 
tially unhistorical ;  the  doctrinal  and  moral  teaching 

betrays  a  late  date. 


markable  parallel  to  those  of  Daniel,  both  from  their 
particularity,  and  from  the  position  which  the  prophet 
occupied  (cf.  Delitzsch,  p.  273). 


394        DANIEL,  THE  BOOK  OF 

In  reply  to  these  remarks,  it  may  be  urged,  that 
if  the  book  of  Daniel  was  already  placed  among  the 
Hagiographa  at  the  time  when  the  Wisdom  of 
Sirach  was  written,  the  omission  of  the  name  of 
Daniel  (Eeclus.  xlix.)  is  most  natural,  and  that 
under  any  circumstances  the  omission  is  not  more 
remarkable  than  that  of  Ezra  and  the  twelve  lesser 
prophets,  for  xlix.  10  is  probably  an  interpolation 
intended  to  supply  a  supposed  defect.  Nor  is  the 
mention  of  Greek  musical  instruments  (iii.  5,  7,  10, 
DIJVp  Kidapa,  JC2D  <ra/j.f)vKri,  fTO'sp-lD  ffv/x- 
(pwvia,  pirODS  tyaATTipiov),  for  these  words  only 
can  be  shown  to  be  derived  from  the  Greek  (De 
Wette,  Einl.  255  b.),  surprising  at  a  time  when 
the  intercourse  of  the  East  and  West  was  already 
considerable,  and  when  a  brother  of  Alcaeus  (c.  600- 
500  B.C.)  had  gained  distinction  "  at  the  farthest  end 
of  the  world,  aiding  the  Babylonians  "  (Brandis,  in 
Delitzsch,  p.  274;  Ale.  Frag.  33,  Bergk.).  Yet 
further  the  scene  and  characters  of  the  book  are 
Oriental.  The  colossal  image  (D?¥,  iii.  1,  not 
necessarily  a  human  figure  ;  the  term  is  applied 
familiarly  to  the  cross :  Buxtf.  Lex.  Rabb.  s.  v .), 
the  fiery  furnace,  the  martyr-like  boldness  of  the 
three  confessors  (iii.  16),  the  decree  of  Darius 
(vi.  7),  the  lions'  den  (vi.  7,  19,  ")iil),  the  demand 
of  Nebuchadnezzar  (ii.  5),  his  obeisance  befoie 
Daniel  (ii.  46),  his  sudden  fall  (iv.  33 ;  cf. 
Euseb.  Praep.  Ev.  ix.  41 ;  Jos.  c.  Ap.  i.  20),  are  not 
only  consistent  with  the  nature  of  Eastern  life,  but 
in  many  instances  directly  confirmed  by  other  evi- 
dence (cf.  Daniel  n.  and  Darius  the  Mede  for 
the  difficulties  of  i.  1,  ii.  1,  v.  31).  In  doctrine, 
again,  the  book  is  closely  connected  with  the  writ- 
ings of  the  Exile,  and  form's  a  last  step  in  the  de- 
velopment of  the  ideas  of  Messiah  (vii.  13,  &c), 
of  the  resurrection  (xii.  2,  3),  of  the  ministry  of 
angels  (viii.  16,  xii.  1,  &c),  of  personal  devotion 
(vi.  10,  11,  i.  8),  which  formed  the  basis  of 
later  speculations,  but  received  no  essential  addition 
in  the  interval  before  the  coming  of  our  Lord. 

Generally  it  may  be  said  that  while  the  book 
presents  in  many  respects  a  startling  and  exceptional 
character,  yet  it  is  far  more  difficult  to  explain  its 
composition  in  the  Maccabaean  period  than  to  con- 
nect the  peculiarities  which  it  exhibits  with  the 
exigencies  of  the  Return.  It  appeals  as  a  key  to 
the  later  history  and  struggles  of  the  Jews,  and 
not  as  a  result  from  them.  The  peculiarities  of 
language,  the  acquaintance  with  Eastern  manners 
and  history,  which  is  seen  more  clearly  as  our  know- 
ledge widens,  the  reception  into  the  canon,  the  phe- 
nomena of  the  Alexandrine  version,  all  point  in  the 
same  direction;  and  a  sounder  system  of  interpreta- 
tion, combined  with  a  more  worthy  view  of  the 
divine  government  of  men  and  nations,  will  pro- 
bably do  much  to  remove  those  undefined  doubts 
as  to  the  inspired  character  of  the  Revelation 
which  naturally  arise  at  first  in  the  minds  of 
thoughtful  students. 

11.  But  while  all  historical  evidence  supports 
the  canonicity  of  the  book  of  Daniel,  it  does  not 
follow  that  the  recognition  of  the  unity  and  authority 
of  the  book  is  necessarily  connected  with  the  belief 
that  the  whole  is  to  be  assigned  to  the  authorship 
of  Daniel.  According  to  the  Jewish  tradition  (Bava 
Bathra,  f.  146)  "  the  books  of  Ezekiel,  the  twelve 
minor  prophets,  Daniel  and  Esther,  were  written 
(J.  e.  drawn  up  in  their  present  form)  by  the  men 
of  the  great  synagogue,"  and  in  the  case  of  Daniel 
the  tradition  is  supported  by  strong  internal  evi- 


DANIEL,  THE  BOOK  OF 

dence.  The  manner  in  which  Daniel  is  spoken  of 
(i.  17,  19,  20,  v.  11,  12;  the  title  in  ix.  23,  xii.  is 
different)  suggests  the  notion  of  another  writer; 
and  if  Daniel  wrote  the  passages  in  question,  they 
cannot  be  satisfactorily  explained  by  1  Cor.  xv.  10  ; 
2  Cor.  xi.  5,  6,  xii.  2  (Keil,  §136),  or  by  the 
consciousness  of  the  typical  position  which  he  occu- 
pied (Auberlen,  p.  37).  The  substantial  authorship 
of  a  book  of  Scripture  does  not  involve  the  subordi- 
nate work  of  arrangement  and  revision  ;  and  it  is 
scarcely  conceivable  that  a  writer  would  purposely 
write  one  book  in  two  languages,  though  there  may 
have  been  an  obvious  reason  why  he  should  treat  in 
separate  records  of  events  of  general  history  in  the 
vernacular  dialect,  and  of  the  special  fortunes  of 
God's  people  in  Hebrew.  At  the  return  we  may 
suppose  that  these  records  of  Daniel  were  brought 
into  one  whole,  with  the  addition  of  an  introduction 
and  a  fuller  narrative,6  when  the  other  sacred  writ- 
ings received  their  final  revision.  The  visions  them- 
selves would  be  necessarily  preserved  in  their  ori- 
ginal form,  and  thus  the  later  chapters  (vii. — xii.) 
exhibit  no  traces  of  any  subsequent  recension,  with 
the  exception,  perhaps,  of  two  introductory  verses, 
vii.  1,  x.  1. 

12.  The  interpretation  of  Daniel  has  hitherto 
proved  an  inexhaustible  field  for  the  ingenuity  of 
commentators,  and  the  certain  results  are  com- 
paratively few.  According  to  the  traditional  view, 
which  appears  as  early  as  the  fourth  book  of  Ezra 
[2  Esdras]  and  the  epistle  of  Barnabas  (c.  4), 
the  four  empires  described  in  cc.  ii.  vii.  are  the 
Babylonian,  the  Medo-Persian,  the  Greek,  and  the 
Roman.  With  nearly  equal  consent  it  has  been 
supposed  that  there  is  a  change  of  subject  in  the 
eleventh  chapter  (xi.  31  ff.),  by  which  the  seer 
passes  from  the  persecutions  of  Antiochus  to  the 
times  of  Antichrist.  A  careful  comparison  of  the 
language  of  the  prophecy  with  the  history  of  the 
Syrian  kings  must,  however,  convince  every  candid 
student  of  the  text  that  the  latter  hypothesis  is 
wholly  unfounded  and  arbitrary.  The  whole  of  the 
eleventh  chapter  forms  a  history  of  the  struggles  of 
the  Jewish  church  with  the  Greek  powers  up  to 
the  death  of  its  great  adversary  (xi.  45).  This 
conflict,  indeed,  has  a  typical  import,  and  fore- 
shows in  its  characteristic  outlines  the  abiding  and 
final  conflict  of  the  people  of  God  and  the  powers 
of  evil,  so  that  the  true  work  of  the  interpreter  must 
be  to  determine  historically  the  nature  of  each 
event  signalized  in  the  prophetic  picture,  that  he 
may  draw  from  the  past  the  lesson  of  the  futuie. 
The  traditional  interpretation  of  "  the  four  empires  " 
seems  to  spring  from  the  same  error  as  the  other, 
though  it  still  finds  numerous  advocates  (Hofmann, 
Auberlen,  KeiI,Havernick,  Hengstenberg,  and  most 
English  commentators).  It  originated  at  a  time 
when  the  triumphant  advent  of  Messiah  was  the 
object  of  immediate  expectation,  and  the  Roman 
empire  appeared  to  be  the  last  in  the  series  of 
earthly  kingdoms.  The  long  interval  of  conflict 
which  has  followed  the  first  Advent  formed  no  place 
in  the  anticipations  of  the  first  Christians,  and  in 
succeeding  ages  the  Roman  period  has  been  un- 
naturally prolonged  to  meet  the  requirements  of  a 
theory  which  took  its  rise  in  a  state  of  thought  which 
experience  has  proved  false.  It  is  a  still  more  fatal 
objection  to  this  interpretation  that  it  destroys  the 


e  The  letter  of  Nebuchadnezzar  (c.  iv.)  appears  to 
present  clear  traces  of  the  interweaving  of  a  com- 
mentary with  the  original  text. 


DANIEL,  THE  BOOK  OF 

great  idea  of  a  cyclic  development  of  history  which 
lies  at  the  basis  of  all  prophecy.  Great  periods 
(alcoves)  appear  to  be  marked  out  in  the  fortunes 
of  mankind  which  answer  to  another,  so  that  that 
divine  utterance  which  receives  its  first  fulfilment  in 
one  period,  receives  a  further  and  more  complete 
fulfilment  in  the  corresponding  part  of  some  later 
period.  Thus  the  first  coining  of  Christ  formed 
the  close  of  the  last  age,  as  His  second  coming  will 
form  the  close  of  the  present  one.  The  one  event 
is  the  type  and,  as  it  were,  the  spring  of  the  other. 
This  is  acknowledged  with  regard  to  the  other  pro- 
phecies, and  yet  the  same  truth  is  not  applied  to  the 
revelations  of  Daniel,  which  appear  then  first  to 
gain  their  full  significance  when  they  are  seen  to 
contain  an  outline  of  all  history  in  the  history  of 
the  nations  which  ruled  the  world  before  Christ's 
coming.  The  first  Advent  is  as  much  a  fulfilment 
of  the  visions  of  Daniel  as  of  those  of  the  other 
prophets.  The  four  empires  precede  the  coming 
of  Messiah  and  pass  away  before  him.  At  the 
same  time  their  spirit  survives  (cf.  vii.  12),  and 
the  forms  of  national  existence  which  were  de- 
veloped on  the  plains  of  Mesopotamia  again  repro- 
duce themselves  in  later  history.  According  to 
this  view  the  empires  of  Daniel  can  be  no  other 
than  those  of  the  Babylonians,  Medes,  Persians,  and 
Greeks,  who  all  placed  the  centre  of  their  power 
at  Babylon,  and  appear  to  have  exhibited  on 
one  stage  the  great  types  of  national  life.  The 
Roman  power  was  at  its  height  when  Christ  came, 
but  the  Egyptian  kingdom,  the  last  relic  of  the 
empire  of  Alexander,  had  just  been  destroyed,  and 
thus  the  "  stone  cut  without  hands  struck  the  feet 
of  the  image,"  and  Christianity  destroyed  for  ever 
the  real  supremacy  of  heathen  dominion.  But  this 
first  fulfilment  of  the  vision  was  only  inchoative, 
and  the  correlatives  of  the  four  empires  must  be 
sought  in  post-Christian  history.  The  corresponding 
symbolism  of  Babylon  and  Rome  is  striking  at  first 
sight,  and  other  parallels  may  be  drawn.  The 
Byzantine  empire,  for  instance,  "  inferior  "  to  the 
Roman  (Dan.  ii.  39)  may  be  compared  with  that  of 
the  Medes.  The  Teutonic  races  with  their  divided 
empire  recal  the  image  of  Persia  (vii.  6).  Nor  is  it 
difficult  to  see  in  the  growing  might  of  the  northern 
powers,  a  future  kingdom  which  may  rival  in 
terrible  energy  the  conquests  of  Alexander.  With- 
out insisting  on  such  details  as  these,  which  still 
require  careful  examination,  it  appears  that  the 
true  interpretation  of  Dmiiel  is  to  be  sought  in  the 
recognition  of  the  principle  which  they  involve. 
In  this  way  the  took  remains  a  "  prophecy,"  while 
it  is  also  a  "revelation;"  and  its  most  special  pre- 
dictions acquire  an  abiding  significance/ 

13.  There  is  no  Chaldee  translation  of  Daniel,  and 
the  deficiency  is  generally  accounted  for,  as  in  the 
parallel  case  of  Ezra,  by  the  danger  which  would 
have  existed  in  such  a  case  of  confusing  the  original 
text  with  the  paraphrase  ;  but  on  the  other  hand 
the  whole  book  has  been  published  in  Hebrew.  The 
Greek  version  has  undergone  singular  changes.  At 
an  early  time  the  LXX.  version  was  supplanted  in 


'  An  example  of  the  recurrent  and  advancing  com- 
pletion of  the  predictions  of  Daniel  occurs  in  Matt. 
xxiv.  15,  compared  with  1  Mace.  i.  54.  The  same  truth 
is  also  implied  in  the  interpretation  of  "  the  seventy 
sevens,"  as  springing  out  of  the  "seventy"  (yens) 
of  Jeremiah.  On  this  there  are  some  good  remarks  in 
Browne's  Ordo  Sacclorum,  though  his  interpretation 
of  the  four  empires  as  signifying  the   Babylonian, 


DANIEL,  THE  BOOK  OF        39  S 

the  Greek  Bibles  by  that  of  Theodotion,s  and 
in  the  time  of  Jerome  the  version  of  Theodotion 
was  generally  "  read  by  the  Churches"  (c.  Baffin. 
ii.  33;  Praef.  in  Comm.  Illud  quoque  lectorem 
admoneo,  Danielem  non  juxta  LXX.  interpretes  sed 
juxta  .  .  .  Theodotionem  ecclesias  legere  .  .  .)  This 
change,  for  which  Jerome  was  unable  to  account 
(hoc  cur  accident  nescio,  Praef.  in  Vers.  Dim.)., 
may  have  been  made  in  consequence  of  the  objections 
which  were  urged  against  the  corrupt  LXX.  text  in 
controversy  with  Jews  and- heathen.  The  LXX. 
version  was  certainly  very  unfaithful  (Hieron.  /.  c.)  ; 
and  the  influence  of  Origen,  who  preferred  the  trans- 
lation of  Theodotion  (Hieron.  in  Dan.  iv.  6),  was 
probably  effectual  in  bringing  about  the  substitution 
(cf.  Credner,  Beitr.  ii.  256  ft'.)  In  the  course  of  time, 
however,  the  version  of  Theodotion  was  interpolated 
from  the  LXX.,  so  that  it  is  now  impossible  to 
recover  the  original  text.  [Daniel,  Apocryphal 
additions  TO.]  Meanwhile  the  original  LXX. 
translation  passed  entirely  out  of  use,  and  it  was 
supposed  to  have  been  lost  till  the  last  century, 
when  it  was  published  at  Rome  from  a  Codex 
Chisianus  (Daniel  secundum  LXX.  .  .  .  Romae, 
1772,  ed.  P.  de  Magistris),  together  with  that  of 
Theodotion,  and  several  illustrative  essays.  It  has 
since  been  published  several  times  (ed.  Michaelis, 
Gotting.  1774;  ed.  Segaar,  1775;  Hahn,  1845), 
and  lastly  by  Tischendorf  in  the  second  edition  of 
his  Septuagint.  Another  recension  of  the  text  is 
contained  in  the  Syro-Hexaplaric  version  at  Milan 
(ed.  Bugatus,  1788),  but  a  critical  comparison  of 
the  several  recensions  is  still  required. 

14.  The  commentaries  on  Daniel  are  very  nu- 
merous. The  Hebrew  commentaries  of  R.  Saadijah 
Haggaon  (f  942),  Rashe  (fc  1105),  and  Aben 
Ezra  (f  c.  1167),  are  printed  in  the  great  Rabbinic 
Bibles  of  Bomberg  and  Basle.  That  of  Abarbanel 
(fc.  1507)  has  been  printed  separately  several 
times  (Amstelod.  1G47,  4to) ;  and  others  are 
quoted  by  Rosenmiiller,  Scholia,  pp.  39,  40. 
Among  the  patristic  commentaries  the  most  im- 
portant are  those  of  Jerome  (vol.  v.  ed.  Migne), 
who  noticed  especially  the  objections  of  Porphyry, 
Theodoiet  (ii.  1053  ff.  ed.  Schulze),  and  Ephrem 
Syrus  (Op.  Syr.  ii. ;  Romae,  1740).  Considerable 
fragments  remain  of  the  commentaries  of  Hippo- 
lytus  (collected  in  Migne's  edition,  Paris,  1857) 
and  Polychronius  (Mai,  Script.  Vet.  Nov.  Coll. 
vol.  i.) ;  and  Mai  has  published  (1.  c.)  a  catena 
on  Daniel,  containing  fragments  of  Apollinarius, 
Athanasius,  Basil,  Eusebius,  and  many  others. 
The  chief  reformers,  Luther  (Auslegung  d.  Proph. 
Dan.  1530-1546;  Op.  Germ.  v'i.  Ed.  Walch), 
Oecolampadius  (In  Dan.  libri  duo,  Basil.  1530), 
Melancthon  ( Comm.  in  Dan.  proph.  Vitemb.  1543), 
and  Calvin  (Praelect.  in  Dan.  Genevae,  1563,  &c. ; 
in  French,  1565;  in  English,  1852-3),  wrote  on 
Daniel;  ami  Rosenmiiller  enumerates  nearly  fifty 
other  special  commentators,  and  his  list  now  re- 
quires considerable  additions.  The  combination 
of  the  Revelations  of  Daniel  and  St.  John  (Sir  I. 
Newton,  Observations  upon   the  Prophecies.  \. ., 


Grecian,  Roman,  and  some  future  empire  (pp.  675  ff.), 
seems  very  unnatural.  The  whole  force  of  his  argu- 
ment (after  Ben  Ezra  and  Maitland)  lies  in  the  proof 
that  the  Roman  was  not  the  fourth  empire. 

e  The  version  bears  in  the  tetraplar  text  the  singular 
title,  to  Eip  aypvirvos  AarujA.  ~V])  is  the  term  which 
Daniel  applies  to  the  angels,  "watchers"  (Dan.  iv 
13,  17,  23).     Cf.  Daniel,  Sec.  LXX.  125  ff. 


396 


DANIEL,  APOCRYPHAL  ADDITIONS  TO 


Lond.  1733 ;  M.  F.  Roos,  Ausl.  d.  Weissag. 
Dan.  u.  s.  w.  Leipz.  1771)  opened  the  way  to  a 
truer  understanding  of  Daniel ;  but  the  edition  of 
Bertholdt  {Daniel,  aus  clem  Hebr.-Aram.  neu 
iibersetzt  unci  erkliirt,  u.  s.  w.  Erlangen,  1806-8), 
in  spite  of  all  its  grave  faults,  marks  the  beginning 
of  a  new  era  in  the  study  of  the  book.  Bertholdt 
was  decidedly  unfavourable  to  its  authenticity  ;  and 
he  was  followed  on  the  same  side  by  von  Lengerke 
{D.  B.  Dan.  verd.  u.  ausgel.  Konigsb.  1835). 
Maurer  (Comm.  Gramm.  Crit.  ii.  Lips.  1838)  and 
Hitzig  {Knrzgef.  Excg.  Handb.  Leipz.  1850), 
whose  commentary  is  among  the  worst  specimens  of 
supercilious  criticism  which  his  school  has  pro- 
duced. On  the  other  side  the  commentary  of 
Havemick  {Comm.  iib.  d.  B.  Dan.  Hamb.  1832) 
is  the  most  complete,  though  it  leaves  much  to  be 
desired.  Auberlen  {Der  Proph.  Dan.  v.  d.  Ojfen- 
barunq  Joh.  u.  s.w.  2te  Aufl.  Basel,  1857,  trans- 
lated into  English  from  the  1st  ed.  by  A.  Saphir, 
1856)  has  thrown  considerable  light  upon  the 
general  construction  and  relations  of  the  book.  Cf 
Hofmann,  Weissag.  u.  Erfilllung,  i.  276  ff.  The 
question  of  the  authenticity  of  the  book  is  dis- 
cussed in  most  of  the  later  commentaries ;  and 
specially  by  Hengstenberg  {Die  Authentic  d.  Dan. 
....  erwiesen.  1831,  translated  by  E.  B. 
Pratten,  Edinb.),  Havemick  {Neue  krit.  Unter- 
such.  Hamb.  1838),  Delitzsch  (Herzog's  Encyklop. 
s.  v.  1854),  Keil  {Lehrb.  d.  Einl.  in  d.  A.  T. 
Frankf.  1853),  Davidson  {Introduction  to  the  0.  T. 
ii.  Lond.  1846),  who  maintain  the  affirmative; 
and  by  Bleek  {Berl.  Theolog.  Zeitschr.  iii.  1822), 
Bertholdt  {Einleit.  Erlang.  1814),  Liicke  (  Versuch 
einer  vollstdnd.  Einl.  u.  s.  w.  2te.  Aufl.  Bonn, 
1852),  De  Wette  {Einleit.  7te.  Aufl.  Berl.  1852), 
who  deny  its  authenticity.  Cf.  E wald,  Die  Proph. 
d.  Alt.  Bund.  ii.  559  ff.  Among  English  works 
may  be  mentioned  the  Essays  of  T.  R.  Birks — The 
four  prophetic  Empires,  &c,  1844,  and  The  two 
later  Visions  of  Daniel,  &c„  1846  ;  of  E.  B.  El- 
liott, Home  Apocalypticae,  1844 ;  of  S.  P.  Tre- 
gelles,  Remarks  on  the  prophetic  Visions  of  Daniel, 
1852  ;  and  the  Commentary  of  Stuart  (Boston, 
1850).  -[B.  F.  W.] 

DANIEL,  APOCRYPHAL  ADDITIONS 

TO.  The  Greek  translations  of  Daniel,  like  that  of 
Esther,  contain  several  pieces  which  are  not  found 
in  the  original  text.  The  most  important  of  these 
additions  are  contained  in  the  Apocrypha  of  the 
English  Bible  under  the  titles  of  The  Song  of  the 
three  Holy  Children,  The  History  of  Susannah,  and 
The  History  of  .  .  .  Bel  and  the  Dragon. 

1.  a.  The  first  of  these  pieces  is  incorporated  into 
the  narrative  of  Daniel.  After  the  three  confessors 
were  thrown  into  the  furnace  (Dan.  iii.  23), 
Azarias  is  represented  praying  to  God  for  deliverance 
{Song  of  Three  Children,  3-22)  ;  and  in  answer  the 
angel  of  the  Lord  shields  them  from  the  fire  which 
consumes  their  enemies  (23-27),  whereupon  "  the 
three,  as  out  of  one  mouth,"  raise  a  triumphant 
song  (29-68),  of  which  a  chief  part  (35-66)  has 
been  used  as  a  hymn  {Benedicite)  in  the  Christian 
Church  since  the  4th  century  {Rufin.  Apol.  ii.  35  ; 
cf.  Concil.  Tolet.  iv.  Can.  14).  Like  several 
similar  fragments,  the  chief  parts  of  this  composition 
are  given  at  the  end  of  the  Psalter  in  the  Alexan- 
drine MS.  as  separate  psalms,  under  the  titles  "  The 
prayer  of  Azarias"  and  "The  hymn  of  our  Fathers  ;" 
and  a  similar  arrangement  occurs  in  other  Greek 
and  Latin  Psalters. 


6.  The  two  other  .pieces  appeal-  more  distinctly 
as  appendices,  and  offer  no  semblance  of  forming 
part  of  the  original  text.  The  History  of  Susanna 
(or  The  judgment  of  Daniel")  is  generally  found  at 
the  beginning  of  the  book  (Gk.  MSS.  Vet.  Lat.)  ; 
though  it  also  occurs  after  the  12th  chapter  (  Vulg. 
ed.  Compl.).  The  History  of  Bel  and  the  Dragon 
is  placed  at  the  end  of  the  book;  and  in  the  LXX. 
version  it  bears  a  special  heading  as  "part  of  the 
prophecy  of  Habakkuk "  {eK  irpo<pT)Telas  'A/x/Sct- 
kov/j.  vlov  'lvrrov  e/c  rrjs  (pvXijs  Aeuf). 

2.  The  additions  are  found  in  both  the  Greek 
texts — the  LXX.  and  Theodotion,  in  the  Old  Latin 
and  Vulgate,  and  in  the  existing  Syriac  and  Arabic 
versions.  On  the  other  hand  there  is  no  evidence 
that  they  ever  formed  part  of  the  Hebrew  text,  and 
they  were  originally  wanting  in  the  Syriac  (Poly- 
chronius,  ap.  Mai,  Script.  Vett.  Nov.  Coll.  i.  p. 
113,  says  of  the  hymn  expressly  ob  Ke7rai  iv  to?s 
ifipaiKols  ^  e»  ro7s  avpia.Ko'is  fiil3\iois).  From 
the  LXX.  and  Vulgate  the  fragments  passed  into 
common  use,  and  they  are  commonly  quoted  by 
Greek  and  Latin  fathers  as  parts  of  Daniel  (Clem. 
Alex.  Eel.  proph.  i.  ;  Orig.  Ep.  ad  Afric. ; 
Tertull.  de  Pudic.  17,  &c),  but  rejected  by  those 
who  adhered  to  the  Hebrew  canon.  Jerome  in 
particular  called  attention  to  their  absence  from  the 
Hebrew  Bible  {Praef.  in  Dan.),  and  instead  of  any 
commentary  of  his  own  adds  shortly  Origen's  re- 
marks "  on  the  fables  of  Bel  and  Susanna  "  {Comm. 
in  Dan.  xiii.  1).  In  a  similar  manner  he  notices, 
shortly  the  Song  of  the  Three  Children,  "  lest  he 
should  seem  to  have  overlooked  it "  {Comm.  in 
Dan.  iii.  23). 

3.  Various  conjectures  have  been  made  as  to  the 
origin  of  the  additions.  It  has  been  supposed  that 
they  were  derived  from  Aramaic  originals  (Wette, 
Einl.  ii.  2,  Kap.  8,  gives  the  arguments  at  length), 
but  the  intricate  evidence  is  wholly  insufficient  to 
establish  the  point.  The  character  of  the  additions 
themselves  indicates  rather  the  hand  of  an  Alexan- 
drine writer;  and  it  is  not  unlikely  that  the  trans- 
lator of  Daniel  wrought  up  traditions  which  were 
already  current,  and  appended  them  to  his  work 
(cf.  Fritzsche,  Exeg.  Handb.  zu  den  Apok.  i.  121). 
The  abruptness  of  the  narrative  in  Daniel  furnished 
an  occasion  for  the  introduction  of  the  prayer  and 
hymn  ;  and  the  story  of  the  Dragon  seems  like  a 
strange  exaggeration  of  the  record  of  the  deliverance 
of  Daniel  (Dan.  vi.),  which  may  naturally  have 
formed  the  basis  of  different  legends.  Nor  is  it 
difficult  to  see  in  the  history  of  Susanna  a  pointed 
allusion  to  the  name  of  the  prophet,  though  the 
narrative  may  not  be  wholly  fictitious. 

4.  The  LXX.  appears  to  be  the  original  source 
from  which  all  the  existing  recensions  of  the  frag- 
ments were  derived  (cf.  Hody,  de  Bibl.  text.  p.  583). 
Theodotion  seems  to  have  done  little  more  than 
transcribe  the  LXX.  text  with  improvements  in 
style  and  language,  which  are  considerably  greater 
in  the  appended  narratives  than  in  the  Song  incor- 
porated into  the  canonical  text.  Thus  while  the 
history  of  Susanna  and  Bel  and  the  Dragon  con- 
tain large  additions  which  complete  and  embel- 
lish the  story  {e.  g.  Hist.  Bus.  w.  15-18  ;  20,  2 1  ; 
24-27  ;  46-47,  49,  50  ;  Bel  Sf  Dr.  vv.  1,  9-13  ; 
Eichh.  pp.  431  ff.),  the  text  of  the  Song  is  little 
more  than  a  repetition  of  that  of  the  LXX.  {ct\  De 
Magistris,  Daniel,  &c,  pp.  234  ff. ;  Eichh.  Einl., 
in  d.  Apok.  Schrift.  422  ff.).  The  Polygloti-Syi  iac, 
Arabic  and  Latin  versions  are  derived  from  Theodo- 


DANNAH 

tion :    and   the   Hexaplar-Syriac    from    the    LXX. 
(Eichh.  430,  &c). 

5.  The  stories  of  Bel  and  Susanna  received  various 
embellishments  in  later  times,  which  throw  some 
light  upon  the  manner  in  which  they  were  original  ly 
composed  (cf.  Orig.  Ep.  ad  Afric.  §§7,  8 ;  Boch- 
art,  Hicroz.  iii.  3 ;  Eichhorn,  446,  &c.) ;  just 
as  the  change  which  Theodotion  introduced  into 
the  narrative  of  Bel,  to  give  some  consistency 
to  the  facts,  illustrates  the  rationalising  process 
through  which  the  legends  passed  (cf.  Delitzsch, 
Be  Habacuci  vita  et  aetate,  1844).  It  is  thus 
useless  'to  institute  any  inquiry  into  the  historic 
foundation  which  lies  below  the  popular  traditions ; 
for  though  the  stories  cannot  be  regarded  as  mere 
fables,  it  is  evident  that  a  moral  purpose  determined 
the  shape  which  they  assumed.  A  later  age  found 
in  them  traces  of  a  deeper  wisdom,  and  to  Chris- 
tian commentators  Susanna  appeared  as  a  type  of 
the  true  Church  tempted  to  infidelity  by  Jewish 
and  Pagan  adversaries,  and  lifting  up  her  voice  to 
God  in  the  midst  of  persecution  (Hippol.  In  Susann. 
pp.  089  ft.  ed.  Migne).  [B.  F.  W.] 

DAN'NAH  (H3T  ;  "Pevud  ;  Banna),  a  city  in 
the  mountains  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  49),  and,  from 
its  mention  with  Debir  and  Socoh,  probably  south, 
or  south-west  of  Hebron.  No  trace  of  its  name  has 
been  discovered.  [G.] 

DAPH'NE  (Aa<J>i/?j),  a  celebrated  grove  and 
sanctuary  of  Apollo,  near  Antioch  in  Syria  [An- 
TIOCh].  Its  establishment,  like  that  of  the  city, 
was  due  to  Seleucus  Nicator.  The  distance  between 
the  two  places  was  about  5  miles,  and  in  history 
they  are  associated  most  intimately  together.  Just 
as  Autioch  was  frequently  called  'A.  €7rl  Ad<pvij, 
and  t]  Trphi  Ad<pu-nv,  so  conversely  we  find  Daphne 
entitled  A.  7]  irpbs  'AvTioxt't-cw  (Joseph.  B.  J .  i. 
12,  §5).  The  situation  was  of  extreme  natural 
beauty,  with  perennial  fountains  and  abundant 
wood.  Seleucus  localised  here,  and  appropriated 
to  himself  and  his  family,  the  fables  of  Apollo  and 
the  river  Peneus  and  the  nymph  Daphne.  Here  he 
erected  a  magnificent  temple  and  colossal  statue  of 
the  god.  The  succeeding  Seleucid  monarchs,  espe- 
cially Antiochus  Epiphanes,  embellished  the  place 
still  further.  Among  other  honours,  it  possessed 
the  privileges  of  an  asylum.  It  is  in  this  character 
that  the  place  is  meiitioned,  2  Mace.  iv.  33.  In 
the  reign  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  (is.C.  171)  the 
aged  and  patriotic  high-priest  Onias,  having  rebuked 
Menelans  for  his  sacrilege  at  Jerusalem,  took  refuge 
at  Daphne  ;  whence  he  was  treacherously  brought 
out,  at  the  instance  of  Menelaus,  and  murdered  by 
Andronicus,  who  was  governor  of  Antioch  during 
the  king's  absence  on  a  campaign.  Josephus  does 
not  give  this  account  of  the  death  of  Onias  (Ant.  xii. 
5,  §1).  When  Syria  became  Roman,  Daphne  con- 
tinued to  be  famous  as  a  place  of  pilgrimage  and 
vice.  "  Baphnici  nvjrcs  "  was  a  proverb  |  sir  <  ;ili- 
bon's  23rd  chapter).  The  beginning  of  the  decay  of 
Daphne  must  be  dated  from  the  time  of  Julian, 
when  Christianity  in  the  Empire  began  to  triumph 
over  Heathenism.  The  site  has  been  well  identi- 
fied by  Pococke  and  other  travellers  at  Beit-el- 
Man,  "the  House  of  the  Water,"  on  the  left  bank 
of  the  Orontes,  to  the  S.W.  of  Antioch,  and  on 
higher  ground;  where  the  fountains  and  the  wild 
fragrant  vegetation  are  in  harmony  with  all  that 
we  read  of  the  natmal  characteristics  of  Apollo's 
sanctuary,  [■'•  S.  H.] 


DARIC 


307 


DA'RA  (jrn  ;  AapdS  ;  Alex.  Aapd ;  Compl. 
AapaSe;  Syr.  Pesch.  X>  » jj  ;  Arab.  cbX>  %S$  J 
Dara),  1  Chr.  ii.  6.     [Darda.] 

DAR  DA  (JP1YT  ;  Aapd\a  ;  Alex,  rbv  Sdpaa  • 
Joseph.  AdpSavos  ;  Borda),  a  son  of  Mahol,  one 
of  four  men  of  great  fame  for  their  wisdom,  but 
who  were  excelled  by  Solomon  (1  K.  iv.  31). 
Ethan  the  first  of  the  four  is  called  "  the  Ezra- 
chite  ;"  but  it  is  uncertain  whether  the  designation 
extends  to  the  others.  [Ethan.]  In  1  Chr.  ii.  6, 
however,  the  same  four  names  occur  again  as 
"sons  of  Zerach,"  of  the  great  family  of  Pharez  in 
the  tribe  of  Judah,  with  the  slight  difference  that 
Darda  appears  as  Dara.  The  identity  of  these  per- 
sons with  those  in  1  K.  iv.  has  been  greatly  de- 
bated (see  the  arguments  on  both  sides  in  Burling- 
ton, i.  206-8)  ;  but  there  cannot  be  much  reason- 
able doubt  that  they  are  the  same. 

(1.)  A  great  number  of  Hebr.  MSS.  read  Darda 
in  Chr.  (Davidson,  Hebr.  Text,  210),  in  which 
they  are  followed  by  the  Targum  and  the  Syria  c 
and  Arabic  versions.     [Dara.] 

(2.).  The  son  of  Zerach  would  be  without  diffi- 
culty called  in  Hebrew  the  Ezrachite,  the  change 
depending  merely  on  the  position  of  a  vowel  point. 
[Ezrahite.]  And  further,  the  change  is  actually 
made  by  the  Targum  Jonathan,  which  in  Kings 
has  "  sou  of  Zerach." 

(3.)  The  word  "  son"  is  used  in  Hebrew  so  often 
to  denote  a  descendant  beyond  the  first  generation, 
that  no  stress  can  be  laid  on  the  "  son  of  Mahol," 
as  compared  with  "  son  of  Zerach."  For  instance, 
of  the  five  "  sons  of  Judah  "  in  1  Ch.  iv.  1,  the  first 
was  really  Judah 's  son,  the  second  his  grandson, 
the  third  his  grea*>grandson,  and  the  fourth  and 
fifth  still  later  descendants.  Besides  there  is  great 
plausibility  in  the  conjecture  that  "  Bene  Mahol  " 
meaus  "  sons  of  the  choir  ;"  in  which  case  the  men 
in  question  were  the  famous  musicians,  two  of 
whom  are  named  in  the  titles  to  Psalms  lxxxviii. 
and  Lxxxix.    [Mahol.]  [G.] 

DARIC  (|i03"n,  fBTJK,  only  in  pi. ;  Talm. 
flSTI  ;  XPV(T0^S  >  solidus,  drachma;  Ezr.  ii.  69  ; 
viii.27  ;  Neh.  vii.  70,  71 ,  72  ;  1  Chr.  xxix.  7),  a  gold 
coin  current  in  Palestine  in  the  period  after  the  re- 
turn from  Babylon.  That  the  Hebrew  word  is,  in  the 
Bible,  the  name  of  a  coin  and  not  of  a  weight  appears 
from  its  similarity  to  the  Greek  appellation  of  the 
only  piece  to  which  it  could  refer.  The  mentions 
in  Ezr.  and  Neh.  show  that  the  coin  was  current 
in  Palestine  under  Cyrus  and  Artaxerxes  Longi- 
manus.  At  these  times  there  was  no  large  issue  of 
gold  money  except  by  the  Persian  kings,  who 
struck  the  coin  known  to  the  Greeks  as  the  (rrar-fip 
AuptiKSs,  or  Aapeih-Jy.  The  Darics  which  have 
been  discovered  are  thick  pieces  of  pure  gold, 
of  archaic  style,  bearing  on  the  obverse  the  figure 
of  a  king  with  bow  and  javelin,  on  bow  and  dagger, 
and  on  the  reverse  an  irregular  incuse  square. 
Their  full  weighl  is  about  128  grains  troy,  or  a 
little  less  than  thai  of  an  Attic  stater,  and  is  most 
probably  that  of  an  early  didrachm  of  the  Phoe- 
1 1 : <  1 : 1 1 1  talent.  They  must  have  been  the  common 
gold  pieces  of  the  Persian  empire.  The  oldest  that 
We  have  seen  cannot  be  referred  to  an  earlier  period 
than  about  the  time  of  Cyrus,  Cambyses  or  Darius 

Hystaspis,  and  it  is re  probable  that  they  are  not 

anterior  to  the  reign  of  Xerxes,  or  even  that  of  Arta- 


398 


DARIUS 


xerxes  Longimanus.  There  are,  howeverrgold  pieces 
of  about  the  same  weight,  but  of  an  older  style, 
found  about  Sardis,  which  cannot  be  doubted  to  be 
either  of  Croesus  or  of  an  earlier  Lydian  king,  in  the 
former  case  the  Kpourewi  ((rraTrjpes)  of  the 
Greeks.  It  is  therefore  probable,  as  these  followed 
a  Persian  standard,  that  Darics  were  struck  under 
Cyrus  or  his  nearer  successors.  The  origin  of  this 
coin  is  attributed  by  the  Greeks  to  a  Darius,  sup- 
posed by  the  moderns  to  be  either  Darius  the  Mede, 
or  Darius  Hystaspis.  That  the  Greeks  derived  their 
distinctive  appellation  of  the  coin  from  this  proper 
name  cannot  be  doubted ;  but  the  difference  of  the 
Hebrew  forms  of  the  former  from  that  of  the  latter 
tWTI  renders  this  a  questionable  derivation.  Ge- 
senius  suggests  the  ancient  Persian  word  Dara 
(Handw.  s.  v.),  "  king ;"  but  (in  his  Thes.  s.  v.) 
inclines  to  connect  the  Heb.  names  of  the  coin  and 
that  of  Darius.  In  favour  of  the  derivation  from 
Dara,  it  must  be  noted  that  the  figure  borne  by 
these  coins  is  not  that  of  any  one  king,  but  of  the 
king  of  Persia  in  an  abstract  sense,  and  that  on  the 
same  principle  the  coins  would  rather  be  called 
regal  coins  than  Darics.  The  silver  Darics  mentioned 
by  Plutarch  (Cim.  10)  are  probably  the  Persian  silver 
pieces  similar  in  types  to  the  gold  Darics,  but 
weighing  a  drachm  and  a  third  of  the  same 
standard.  See  Money  and  Diet,  of  Ant.  art. 
Daricus.  [R.  S.  P.] 


Daric.    Obv. :_  King  of  Persia  to  the  right,  kneeling,  bearing  bow 
and  javelin.     Rev. :  Irregular  incuse  square. 

DARI'US  (B,V^'si ;  Darayawush,  Tariyavaus, 
in  Inscr. ;  AapeTos,  LXX. ;  Aapii)K7}s,  Strab.  xvi. 
p.  785  ;  Aapiaios,  Ctes.),  the  name  of  several  kings 
of  Media  and  Persia.  Herodotus  (vi.  98)  says  that 
the  name  is  equivalent  to  ep^elrjs  (etpyai)  the 
restrainer  ;  and  this  is  probably  correct  from  the 
analogy  of  the  Persian  darvesh,  "  restraint :"  Sanscr. 
dhdri,  "  firmly  holding  "  (Gesen.  Thes.  s.  «.)  Hesy- 
chius  gives  a  double  derivation :  Aapelos  virb 
XlfpffSiv  b  (ppSvifios  ;  virb  5t  $pvyu>v  e/croip.  Others 
have  regarded  the  word  as  another  form  of  the 
modem  Persian  Dara,  darab,  "a  king;"  but  this 
sense  of  dara  is  not  justified  by  usage,  and  it  is 
rather  the  epithet  of  a  king  (the  holder,  restrainer, 
as  above)  than  the  title  itself  (Ges.  I.  c).  Three 
kings  bearing  this  name  are  mentioned  in  the  0.  T. 

1.  Darius  the  Mede  (**]73n  "f,  Dan.  xi.  1 ; 
Chald.  nNIO"1!,  vi.  1),  "the  son  of  Ahasuerus  of 

T    T    T  y 

the  seed  of  the  Medes,"  (ix.  1),  who  succeeded  to 
(?3JP)  the  Babylonian  kingdom  on  the  death  of 
Belshazzar,  being  then  sixty-two  years  old  (Dan. 
v.  31  (LXX.  'Apratepfys);  ix.  1).  Only  one  year 
of  his  reign  is  mentioned  (Dan.  ix.  1,  xi.  1)  ;  but 
that  was  of  great  importance  for  the  Jews.  Daniel 
was  advanced  by  the  Icing  to  the  highest  dignity 
(Dan.  vi.  1  if.),  probably  in  consequence  of  his 
former  services  (cf.  Dan.  v.  17);  and  after  his 
miraculous    deliverance,    Darius    issued    a    decree 

a  It  is  most  worthy  of  notice  that  Aeschylus  cha- 
racterises Cyaxares  (I.)  as  Mrjoos  .  .  .  o  npiurbs  riyefiiuv 
o-TparoO,  while  Sir  II.  Kawlinson  (Notes  on  the  History 


DARIUS 

enjoining  throughout  his  dominions  "  reverence  for 
the  God  of  Daniel  "  (Dan.  vi.  25  ff.). 

The  extreme  obscurity  of  the  Babylonian  annals 
has  given  occasion  to  three  different  hypotheses  as 
to  the  name  under  which  Darius  the  Mede  is  known 
in  history.  The  first  of  these  which  identifies 
him  with  Darius  Hystaspis  rests  on  no  plausible 
evidence,  and  may  be  dismissed  at  once  (Lengerke, 
Dan.  219  ff.).  The  second,  which  was  adopted 
by  Josephus  {Ant.  x.  11,  §4),  and  has  been  sup- 
ported by  many  recent  critics  ( Bertholdt ;  Yon 
Lengerke ;  Havernick  ;  Hengstenberg  ;  Auberlen, 
Daniel  und  d.  Offenbarung,  pp.  16  ff.)  is  more 
deserving  of  notice.  According  to  this  he  was 
{Cyaxares  II.)  "the  son  and  successor  of  As- 
tyages "  (Jos.  /.  c.  ?iv  'Aarvdyovs  vibs,  'irtpov 
5e  irapa  toIs  "EWrjaiv  eK<x\*?TO  ovojjlo),  who 
is  commonly  regarded  as  the  last  king  of  Media. 
It  is  supposed  that  the  reign  of  this  Cyaxares  has 
been  neglected  by  historians  from  the  fact  that 
through  his  indolence  and  luxury  he  yielded  the 
real  exercise  of  power  to  his  nephew  Cyrus,  who 
married  his  daughter,  and  so  after  his  death  re- 
ceived the  crown  by  direct  succession  (Xen.  Cyrop. 
i.  5,  §2,  iv.  5,  §8,  viii.  5,  §19).  But  it  appears  to 
be  a  fatal  objection  to  this  hypothesis  that  the  only 
direct  evidence  for  the  existence  of  a  second  Cy- 
axares is  that  of  Xenophon's  romance  (cf.  Niebuhr, 
Gesch.  Ass.  u.  Bab.  p.  61).  The  title  Cyrus 
[filius]  Cyaxaris,  which  has  been  quoted  from 
an  inscription  (Auberlen,  Daniel  u.  d.  Offenbarung, 
p.  18),  is  either  a  false  reading  or  certainly  a 
false  translation  (Niebuhr,  Gesch.  Ass.  u.  Bab. 
214,  n.  4);  and  the  passage  of  Aeschylus  (Pers. 
766  f.)  is  inconsistent  with  the  character  assigned 
to  Cyaxares  II.  On  the  other  hand,  Herodotus 
expressly  states  that  "  Astyages  "  was  the  last  king 
of  the  Medes,  that  he  was  conquered  by  Cyrus, 
and  that  he  died  without  leaving  any  male  issue 
(Herod,  i.  73,  109,  127  ff.) ;  and  Cyrus  appears 
as  the  immediate  successor  of  "  Astyages  "  in  the 
Chronicle  of  Eusebius  (Chron.  ad  01.  54  ;  Syncell. 
188  ;  cf.  Bel  and  Dragon,  i.).  A  third  identifica- 
tion (Winer,  Realwort.  s.  v.;  Niebuhr,  Gesch. 
Ass.  u.  Bab.  pp.  45,  92)  remains,  by  which 
Darius  is  represented  as  the  personal  name  of 
"  Astyages,"  the  last  king  of  the  Medes,  and  this 
appears  to  satisfy  all  the  conditions  of  the  problem. 
The  name  "  Astyages  "  was  national  and  not  per- 
sonal [Astyages],  and  Ahasuerus  (Achashvcrosh) 
represents  the  name  (Suwak'hshatra)  Cyaxares, 
borne  by  the  father  of"  Astyages  "  (Tob.  xiv.  15). 
The  description  of  the  unnamed  king  in  Aeschylus  a 
(/.  c.)  as  one  whose  "  feelings  were  guided  by 
wisdom"  (<pp4vts  yap  airov  Ovfibv  cpa.Koo~Tp6<povi>), 
is  applicable  to  the  Darius  of  Scripture  and  the 
Astyages  of  Herodotus.  And  as  far  as  the  name' 
itself  is  concerned,  there  are  traces  of  the  existence 
of  an  older  king  Darius  before  the  time  of  Darius 
Hystaspis  (Schol.  ad  Arist.  Eccles.  598  Aapet/cot 
— ovk  avb  Aapeiov  rov  Ee'p|ou  irarpbs,  aAA  cup' 
irepov  rivbs  iraKaiorepov  f$a.o~i\t(i>s  wvo/j.aadrio'av. 
cf.  Suidas.  s.  v.  Aapti/co'r).  If,  as  seems  most 
probable,  Darius  (Astyages)  occupied  the  throne  of 
Babylon  as  supreme  sovereign  with  Nerigalsavassar 
as  vassal-prince,  after  the  murder  of  Evilmeiodach 
(Belshazzar)  B.C.  559,  one  year  only  remains  for 
this  Median  supremacy  before  the  victory  of  Cyrus 


of  Babylonia,  p.  30,  n.)  shows  that  the  foundation  of 
the  Median  empire  was  really  due  to  Huwakhshutra 
(Cyaxares),  in  spite  of  the  history  of  Herodotus. 


DARIUS 

B.C.  558,  in  exact  accordance  with  the  notices  in 
Daniel  (Niebuhr,  /.  c),  and  the  apparent  incom- 
pleteness of  the  political  arrangements  which 
Darius  "purposed"  to  make  (Dan.  vi.  3,  JV&'Jh. 
For  the  short  duration  ot  his  supreme  power  may 
have  caused  his  division  of  the  empire  (Dan.  vi. 
1  ft'.) — a  work  congenial  to  his  character — to  fall 
into  abeyance,  so  that  it  was  not  earned  out  till 
the  time  of  his  namesake  Darius  Hystaspis :  a  sup- 
position at  least  as  probable  as  that  there  is  any 
confusion  of  the  two  monarchs  in  the  book  of 
Daniel. 

The  chronological  difficulties  which  have  been 
raised  (Rawlinsou,  Herodotus,  i.  p.  418)  against 
the  identification  of  Darius  with  Astyages  on  the 
assumption  that  the  events  in  Dan.  v.  relate  to 
the  taking  of  Babylon  by  Cyrus  (B.C.  538),  in 
which  case  he  would  have  ascended  the  throne  at 
seven  years  of  age,  are  entirely  set  aside  by  the 
view  of  Marcus  Niebuhr,  which  has  been  adopted 
above ;  and  this  coincidence  serves  to  confirm  the 
general  truth  of  the  hypothesis. 

2.  Darius  the  son  of  Hystaspes  (Vashtaspa), 
the  fifth  in  descent  from  Achaemenes,  the  founder 
of  the  Perso-Arian  dynasty,  was,  according  to  the 
popular  legend  (Herod,  i.  209,  210),  already  marked 
out  for  empire  during  the  reign  of  Cyrus.  Upon 
the  usurpation  of  the  Magian  Smerdis  [ar- 
TAXERXES],  he  conspired  with  six  other  Persian 
chiefs  to  overthrow  the  impostor,  and  on  the  suc- 
cess of  the  plot  was  placed  upon  the  throne  B.C. 
521.  He  devoted  himself  to  the  internal  organisa- 
tion of  his  kingdom,  which  had  been  impeded  by 
the  wars  of  Cyrus  and  Catnbyses,  and  the  con- 
fusion of  the  reign  of  Smerdis.  His  designs  of 
foreign  conquest  were  interrupted  by  a  revolt  of 
the  Babylonians,  under  a  pretender  who  bore  the 
royal  name  of  Nabukudrassar  (Niebuhr,  Gesch. 
Ass.  u.  Bab.  94),  which  was  at  length  put  down, 
and  punished  with  great  severity  (c.  B.C.  516). 
After  the  subjugation  of  Babylon  Darius  turned 
his  arms  against  Scythia,  Libya  (Herod,  iv.  145  ft'.) 
and  India  (Herod,  iv.  44).  Thrace  and  Mace- 
donia acknowledged  his  supremacy,  and  some  of  the 
islands  of  the  Aegaean  were  added  to  his  dominion 
in  Asia-Minor  and  the  seaboard  of  Thrace  (B.C. 
513-505).  Shortly  afterwards  he  came  into  colli- 
sion with  Greece,  and  the  defeat  of  Marathon  (b.c. 
490)  only  roused  him  to  prepare  vigorously  for 
that  decisive  struggle  with  the  West  which  was 
now  inevitable.  His  plans  were  again  thwarted 
by  rebellion.  Domestic  quarrels  (Herod,  vii.  2) 
followed  on  the  rising  in  Egypt,  and  he  died  B.C. 
485  before  his  preparations  were  completed  (Herod. 
vii.  4). 

With  regard  to  the  Jews,  Darius  Hystaspis  pur- 
sued the  same  policy  as  Cyrus,  and  restored  to 
them  the  privileges  which  they  had  lost.  For 
the  usurpation  of  Smerdis  involved  a  religious  as 
well  as  a  political  revolution,  and  the  restorer 
of  the  Magian  faith  willingly  listened  to  the  enemies 
of  a  people  who  had  welcomed  Cyras  as  their 
deliverer  (Ezr.  iv.  17  ft'.).  But  in  the  second  year 
of  Darius,  B.C.  520,  as  soon  as  his  power  had  as- 
sumed some  solidity,  Haggai  (Hag.  i.  1,  ii.  1,  10) 
and  Zechariah  encouraged  their  countrymen  to 
resume  the  work  of  restoration  (Ezr.  v.  1  ft".),  and 
when  their  proceedings  came  to  the  king's  know- 
ledge, he  confirmed  the  decree  of  Cyrus  by  a  new 
edict,  and  the  temple  was  finished  in  four  years 
(u.C.  516.  Ezr.  vi.  15),  though  it  was  apparently 
used  before  that  time  (Zech.  vii.  2,  3). 


DARKNESS 


399 


3.  Darius  the  Persian  (Neh.  xii.  22, 
,D"lSn"':l)  may  be  identified  with  Darius  II.  No- 
thu's  (Ochus),  king  of  Persia  B.C.  424-3 — 405-4,  if 
the  whole  passage  in  question  was  written  by  Nehe- 
miah.  If,  however,  the  register  was  continued  to 
a  later  time,  as  is  not  improbable,  the  occurrence  of 
the  name  Jaddua  (vv.  11,  22),  who  was  high- 
priest  at  the  time  of  the  invasion  of  Alexander 
[Alexander],  points  to  Darius  III.  Codomannus, 
the  antagonist  of  Alexander,  and  last  king  of  Persia 
B.C.  336-330  (1  Mace.  i.  1).  Cf.  Jahn,  Archdol. 
ii.  1,  272  fF.;  Keil,  Lehrb.  d.  Einl.  §152,  7,  who 
defends  at  length  the  integrity  of  the  passage. 
[Nehemiaii.]  [B.  F.  W.] 

DARKNESS  (TJt^n,  fern,  form  H3^n,  and 
with  much  variation  in  the  vowel  points  ;  ctk6tos), 
is  spoken  of  as  encompassing  the  actual  presence  of 
God,  as  that  out  of  which  He  speaks,  the  envelope, 
as  it  were,  of  Divine  glory  (Ex.  xx.  21 ;  IK.  viii. 
12).  The  cloud  symbol  of  His  guidance  offered  an 
aspect  of  darkness  to  the  enemy  as  of  light  to  the 
people  of  Israel.  In  the  description  of  His  coming 
to  judgment,  darkness  overspreading  nature  and 
blotting  the  sun,  &c,  is  constantly  included  (Is. 
xiii.  9,  10;  Joel  ii.  31,  iii.  15;  Matt.  xxiv.  29; 
Mark  xiii.  24  ;  Luke  xxi.  25  ;  Rev.  vi.  12). 

The  plague  of  darkness  in  Egypt  has  been 
ascribed  by  various  neologistic  'commentators  to 
non-miraculous  agency,  but  no  sufficient  account  of 
its  intense  degree,  long  duration,  and  limited  area, 
as  proceeding  from  any  physical  cause,  has  been 
given.  The  darkness  iirl  izaffav  tV  yyv  of  Matt. 
xxvii.  45  attending  the  crucifixion  has  been  similarly 
attributed  to  an  eclipse.  Phlegon  of  Tralles  indeed 
mentions  an  eclipse  of  intense  darkness,  and  which 
began  at  noon,  combined,  he  says,  in  Bithynia, 
with  an  earthquake,  which  in  the  uncertain  state  of 
our  chronology  (see  Clinton's  Fasti  Romani,  Olymp. 
202)  more  or  less  nearly  synchronises  with  the 
event.  Nor  was  the  account  one  without  reception 
in  the  early  church.  See  the  testimonies  to  that 
effect  collected  by  Whiston  {Testimony  of  Phlegon 
vindicated,  Lond.  1732).  Origen,  however,  ad  loc. 
(Latin  commentary  on  St.  Matt.)  denies  the  possi- 
bility of  such  a  cause,  arguing  that  by  the  fixed 
Paschal  reckoning  the  moon  must  have  been  about 
full,  and  denying  that  Luke  xxiii.  45  by  the  words 
fCTKoriirOri  u  tjAios  means  to  allege  that  fact  as  the 
cause.  The  genuineness  of  this  commentary  has 
been  impeached,  nor  is  its  tenor  consistent  with 
Origen  adv.  Ccls.  p.  80 ;  but  the  argument,  unless 
on  such  an  assumption  as  that  mentioned  below, 
seems  decisive,  and  has  ever  since  been  adhered  to. 
He  limits  ■na.oa.v  t))u  "yrjvto  Judaea.  Dean  Alford 
(ad  loc),  though  without  stating  his  reason,  prefers 
the  wider  interpretation  of  all  the  earth's  surface 
on  which  it  would  naturally  have  been  day.  That 
Phlegon 's  darkness,  perceived  so  intense  in  Tralles 
and  Bithynia,  was  felt  in  Judaea  is  highly  probable; 
and  the  Evangelist's  testimony  to  similar  phenomena 
of  a  coincident  darkness  and  earthquake,  taken  in 
connexion  with  the  near  agreement  of  time,  gives  a 
probability  to  the  supposition  that  the  former  speaks 
of  the  same  circumstances  its  the  latter.  Wieseler 
(C/tron.Synvp.  388)  however,  and  DeWette  (  Comm. 
on  Matt.),  consider  the  year  of  Phlegon' s  eclipse  an 
impossible  one  for  the  crucifixion,  and  reject  that 
explanation  of  the  darkness.  The  argument  from 
the  duration  C-i  hours)  is  also  of  great  force;  t"i'  an 
eclipse  seldom  lasts  in  great  intensity  more  than  6 
minutes.   On  the  other  hand,  Seyffarth  (Chronohg. 


400 


DARKON 


Sacr.  p.  58,  9)  maintains  that  the  Jewish  calendar, 
owing  to  their  following  the  sun,  had  become  so  tar 
out  that  the  moon  might  possibly  have  been  at  new, 
and  thus,  admitting  the  year  as  a  possible  epoch, 
revives  the  argument  for  the  eclipse  as  the  cause. 
He  however  views  this  rather  as  a  natural  basis  than 
as  a  full  account  of  the  darkness,  which  in  its  degree 
at  Jerusalem  was  still  preternatural  (ib.  p.  138). 
The  pamphlet  of  Whiston  above  quoted,  and  two 
by  Dr.  Sykes,  Dissertation  on  the  Eclipse  men- 
tioned by  Phlegon,  and  Defence  of  same,  Lond. 
17 .; 3  and  1734,  may  be  consulted  as  regards  the 
statement  of  Phlegon. 

Darkness  is  also,  as  in  the  expression  "  land  of 
darkness,"  used  for  the  state  of  the  dead  (Job  x. 
21,  22);  and  frequently  figuratively,  for  iguorance 
and  unbelief,  as  the  privation  of  spiritual  light 
(Johni.  5;  iii.  19).  [H.  H.] 

DAE'KON  (fipTl ;  Aapkwv,  AopK&v  ;  Der- 
con).  Children  of  Darkon  were  among  the  "  ser- 
vants of  Solomon,"  who  returned  from  Babylon  with 
Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  56  ;  Neh.  vii.  58).     [Lozon.] 

DATES,  margin  of  2  Chr.  xxxi.  5  only. 
[Palm  Tree.] 

DA'THAN  (f HI  ;  AaBdv ;  Dathan),  a  Reu- 
benite  chieftain,  son  of  Eliab,  who  joined  the  con- 
spiracy of  Korah  the  Levite  (Num.  xvi.  1,  xxvi.  9  ; 
Deut.  xi.  6;  Ps.  cvi.  17).  [R.  W.  B.] 

DATH'EMA  (Aiafle^ua ;  Alex,  and  Josephus, 
Aa0e,ua  ;  other  MSS.  Aa./j.f8a ;  Dathema),  a  fort- 
ress (to  oxvpw/J-a;  Jos.  (ppovpiov)  in  which  the 
Jews  of  Gilead  took  refuge  from  the  heathen 
(1  Mace.  v.  9).  Here  they  were  relieved  by  Judas 
and  Jonathan  (24).  They  marched  from  Bozora 
to  Dathema  (28,  9)  and  left  it  for  Maspha  (Mizpeh) 
(35).  The  reading  of  the  Peschito,  Ramtha,  points 
to  Ramoth-Gilead,  which  can  hardly  fail  to  be  the 
correct  identification.  Ewald  however  (iv.  359,  note) 
would  correct  this  to  Damtha,  which  he  compares 
with  Dhami,  a  place  reported  by  Burekhardt.   [G.] 

DAUGHTER  (Bath,  J13,  contr.  from  n;2, 
fem.  of  p  ;  Qvyari\p;  filia).  1.  The  word  is  used 
in  Scripture  not  only  for  daughter,  but  for  grand- 
daughter or  other  female  descendant,  much  in  the 
same  way  and  like  extent  with  j3,  son  (Gen.  xxiv. 
48,  xxxi.  43).  [See  Children;  Education; 
Women.] 

2.  In  a  kindred  sense  the  female  inhabitants  of  a 
place,  a  country,  or  the  females  of  a  particular  race 
are  called  daughters  (Gen.  vi.  2,  xxvii.  46,  xxviii. 
6,  xxxvi.  2 ;  Num.  xxv.  1  ;  Deut.  xxiii.  17  ;  Is.  iii. 
16  ;  Jer.  xlvi.  11,  xlix.  2,  3,  4;  Luke  xxiii.  28). 

3.  Women  in  general  (Prov.  xxxi.  29). 

4.  Those  addicted  to  particular  forms  of  ido- 
latrous worship  (1  Sam.  i.  16;  Mai.  ii.  11). 

5.  The  same  notion  of  descent  explains  the  phrase 
"  daughters  of  music,"  i.  e.  singing  birds  (Eccl. 
xii.  4),  and  the  use  of  the  word  for  branches  of  a 
tree  (Gen.  xlix.  22),  the  pupil  of  the  eye,  K.6pi\ 
(Lam.  ii.  18;  Ps.  xvii.  8),  and  the  expression 
"  daughter  of  90  years,"  to  denote  the  age  of  Sarah 
(Gen.  xvii.  17). 

6.  It  is  also  used  of  cities  in  general,  agreeably 
to  their  very  common  personification  as  belonging 
to  the  female  sex  (Is.  x.  32,  xxiii.  12,  xxxvii.  22, 
xlvii.  1,  Hi.  2  ;  Jer.  vi.  2,  26,  ix.  1,  xxxi.  4,  xlvi. 
11,  24,  xlviii.  18,  li.  33;  Nah.  iii.  4,  7  ;  Zech.  ix. 
9  ;  Ez.  xvi.  3,  44,  48,  xxiii.  4). 

7.  But  more  specifically  of  dependent  towns  or 


DAVID 

hamlets,  while  to  the  principal  city  the  correlative 
"  mother"  is  applied  (Num.  xxi.  25  ;  Josh.  xvii.  11, 
16  ;  Judg.  i.  27  ;  1  Chr.  vii.  28  ;  2  Sam.  xx.  19). 
Hazerim  is  the  word  most  commonly  employed 
for  the  "  villages  "  lying  round,  and  dependent  on, 
a  "city"  (Ir;  TJJ).  But  in  one  place  Bath  is 
used  as  if  for  something  intermediate,  in  the  case 
of  the  Philistine  cities  Ekron,  Ashdod,  and  Gaza 
(Josh.  xv.  45-7) — "  her  daughter-towns  and  her 
villages."  Without  this  distinction  from  Hazerim, 
the  word  is  also  employed  for  Philistine  towns  in 
1  Chr.  xviii.  1 — Gath  ;  2  Chr.  xxviii.  18 — Shocho, 
Timnath,  and  Gimzo.  In  Neh.  xi.  25-31,  the  two 
terms  are  employed  alternately,  and  to  all  appearance 
quite  indiscriminately.    [Village.]     [H.  W.  P.] 

DA'VIDOH,  T)1[;'  LXX.  AaviS  ;  N.  T. 
Aa/3i'8,  Aauei'5),  the  son  of  Jesse,  is  the  best  known 
to  us  of  any  of  the  characters  in  the  0.  T.  In  him, 
as  in  the  case  of  St.  Paul  in  the  N.  T.,  we  have  the 
advantage  of  comparing  a  detailed  narrative  of  his 
life  with  undoubted  works  of  his  own  composition, 
and  the  combined  result  is  a  knowledge  of  his  per- 
sonal character,  such  as  we  probably  possess  of  no 
historical  personage  before  the  Christian  era,  with 
the  exception  of  Cicero,  and  perhaps  of  Caesar. 

The  authorities  for  the  life  of  David  may  be 
divided  into  six  classes  : — 

I.  The  original  Hebrew  authorities  : — 

1.  The  Davidic  portion  of  the  Psa!ms,b 
including  such  fragments  as  are  preserved  to 
us  from  other  sources,  viz.  2  Sam.  i.  19-27, 
iii.  33,  34,  xxii.  1-51,  xxiii.  1-7.   [Psalms.] 

2.  The  "Chronicles"  or  "State-papers"  of 
David  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  24),  and  the  original 
biographies  of  David  by  Samuel,  Gad,  and 
Nathan  (1  Chr.  xxix.  29).  These  are  lost, 
but  portions  of  them  no  doubt  are  pre- 
served in 

3.  The  narrative  of  1  Sam.  xvi.  to  1  K.  ii.  10 ; 
with  the  supplementary  notices  contained  in 
1  Chr.  xi.  1  to  xxix.  30. 

II.  The  two  slight  notices  in  the  heathen  his- 
torians, Nicolaus  of  Damascus  in  his  Universal 
History  (Jos.  Ant.  vii.  5,  §2),  and  Eupolemus  in 
his  History  of  the  Kings  of  Judah  (Eus.  Praep. 
Ev.  Ix.  30). 

III.  David's  apocryphal  writings,  contained  in 
Fabricius,  Codex  Apocryphus  V.  Test.  p.  906-1006. 
(1)  Ps.  cli.,  on  his  victory  over  Goliath.  (2)  Col- 
loquies with  God,  on  madness,  on  his  temptation,  and 
on  the  building  of  the  Temple.  (3)  A  charm  against 
foe.    Of  these  the  first  alone  deserves  any  attention. 

IV.  The  Jewish  traditions,  which  may  be  divided 
into  three  classes  : — 

1.  The  additions  to  the  Biblical  narrative  con- 
tainer! in  Josephus,  Ant.  vi.  8-vii.  15. 

2.  The  Hebrew  traditions  preserved  in  Jerome's 
Quaestiones  Hebraicae  in  Libros  Begum  et 
Paralipomenon  (vol.  iii.,  Venice  ed.). 


a  The  shorter  form  is  used  in  the  earlier  books ; 
indeed,  everywhere  except  in  1  K.  iii.  14,  and  in  Chr., 
Ezr.,  Neh.,  Cant.,  Hos.,  Am.,  Ezek.  xxxiv.  23,  and 
Zech.,  in  which  the  longer  form  is  found.    The  Arabic 

3  3  ~- 

form  of  the  name,  in  common  use,  is  ^    \$ ,  Ddood. 

b  In  quoting  the  Fsalms  in  connexion  with  the 
history,  we  have  been  guided  partly  by  the  titles  (as 
expressing  the  Jewish  traditions),  partly  by  the 
internal  evidence,  as  verified  by  the  judgment  of 
Hebrew  scholars. 


DAVID 

3.  The  Rabbinical  traditions  reported  in  Bas- 
Dage,  Hist,  des  Juifs,  lib.  v.  c.  2  ;  Calmet's 
Dictionary  (David). 

V.  The  Mussulman  traditions,  chiefly  remark- 
able for  their  extravagance,  are  contained  in  the 
Koran,  ii.  250-252,  xxxviii.  20-24,  xxi.  79-82, 
xxii.  15,  and  explained  in  Lane's  Selections  from  the 
Koran,  p.  228-242  ;  or  amplified  in  Weil's  Legends, 
Eng.  Tr.  p.  152-170. 

VI.  In  modern  times  his  life  has  been  often 
treated,  both  in  separate  treatises  and  in  histories  of 
Israel.  Winer's  article  on  David  refers  to  mono- 
graphs on  almost  every  point  in  his  life.  In  English, 
the  best  known  is  Dr.  Chandler's  Life,  written  in 
the  last  century;   in  French,  De  Choisi's,  and  that 


DAVID 


401 


in  Bayle's  Dictionary.  The  most  recent,  and  pro- 
bably the  best,  treatment  is  that  in  Ewald's 
Geschichte  des  Volkes  Lsrael,  iii.  71-257. 

His  life  may  be  divided  into  three  portions,  more 
or  less  corresponding  to  the  three  old  lost  biographies 
by  Samuel,  Gad,  and  Nathan: — I.  His  youth  before 
his  introduction  to  the  court  of  Saul.  II.  His  re- 
lations with  Saul.     III.  His  reign. 

I.  The  early  life  of  Daoid  contains  in  many  im- 
portant respects  the  antecedents  of  his  future  career. 

1.  Unlike  most  of  the  characters  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, his  family  are  well  known  to  us  by  name,  and 
are  not  without  bearing  on  his  subsequent  career. 
They  may  best  be  seen  in  the  form  of  a  genealogy. 


or  Salmah 
(Ruth  iv.  n, 
1  Chr.  ii.  11) 


F.linulech  =  Na 


I  I 

Boaz    =    Ruth    =    Mahlon 

|  (Ruin  iv.  10) 

Obed  (Ruth  iv.  17) 


Chilion    =     Orpah 


(2  Sam.  xvii.  23")  Nahash  =  unknown  =  Je 
I  I 


Jonathan  (I  Chr.  xxvii.  32). 


Zeruiah 

( I  Chr. 
ii.  16) 


Abigail  =  Jether 
(1  Chr. 
11.  17) 


(Jerome, 

Qu.  Heb. 

on  1  Chr. 

xi.  40) 


Eliab 
Elihu 
(1  Chr. 


Abinadab     Shamniah  Nethaneel      Raddai         Ozem 

Shimma  (Rael,       (Asam, 

Shimeab,  Jos. /Inf.    J<s.  Avt 

I                       (-2  Sam.  vi.8.  1       vi.  8.  1) 

xxi.  21)  Rei,  En-aid  ) 


VVID 


i  not 


L-n 


Abinhui  Joab    Asahel 


Zebadii 
(1  Chr.  xxv 


I 
Abihail  z=  Iichobuam 
(2  Chr.  xi.  19). 


Jonathan 
(2  Sam.  xxi.  21, 
1  Chr.  xxvii.  32) 

l  Nathan?? 

Jer.  Qu.  Heb. 

on  1  Sam.  xvi.  12) 


Jonadab 
(2  Sam. 
xiii.  3) 


I 
Joel  ?  ? 
(Jerome, 
Qu.  Heb. 
on  1  Chr. 
xi.38) 


unless 

Elihu, 

Svr.  and 

Arab. 

1  Chr.  ii.  15). 


,  It  thus  appears  that  David  was  the  youngest 
son,  probably  the  youngest  child,  of  a  family  of  ten. 
His  mother's  name  is  unknown.  His  father,  Jesse, 
was  of  a  great  age  when  David  was  still  young 
(1  Sam.  xvii.  12).  His  parents  both  lived  till 
after  his  final  rupture  with  Saul  (1  Sam.  xxii.  3). 
Through  them  David  inherited  several  points  which 
he  never  lost,  (a)  His  connexion  with  Moab  through 
his  great-grandmother  Ruth.  This  he  kept  up  when 
he  escaped  to  Moab  and  entrusted  his  aged  parents  to 
the  care  of  the  king  (1  Sam.  xxii.  3),  and  it  may  not 
have  been  without  its  use  in  keeping  open  a  wider 
view  in  his  mind  and  history  than  if  he  had  been 
of  purely  Jewish  descent.  Such  is  probably  the 
design  of  the  express  mention  of  Ruth  in  the  gene- 
alogy in  Matt.  i.  5. 

(6)  His  birthplace,  Bethlehem.  His  recollec- 
tion of  the  well  of  Bethlehem  is  one  of  the  most 
touching  incidents  of  his  later  life  (1  Chr.  xi.  17). 
From  the  territory  of  Bethlehem,  as  from  his  own 
patrimony,  he  gave  a  property  as  a  reward  to  Chim- 
ham,  son  of  Barzillai  (2  Sam.  xix.  :;7,  38;  Jer.  xli. 
17)  ;  and  it  is  this  connexion  of  David  with  Beth- 
lehem that  brought  the  place  again  in  later  times 
into  universal  fame,  when  Joseph  went  up  to  Beth- 
lehem, "  because  he  was  of  the  house  and  lineage  of 
David"  (Luke  ii.  4). 

(c)  His  general  connexion  with  the  tribe  of 
Judah.  In  none  of  the  tribes  does  the  tribal  feel- 
ing appear  to  have  been  stronger;  and  it  n  osl  be 
borne  in  mind  throughout  the  story  both  of  his 
security  amongst  the  hills  (if  Judah  during  Ins 
flight  from   Saul,  and  of  the  early  period  of  his 


c  The  later  rabbis  represent  him  as  born  in  adul- 
tery. This  is  probably  a  coarse  inference  from  Ps. 
Ii.  5;  but  it  may  possibly  have  reference  to  a  tradi- 
tion of  the  above.  On  the  other  hand,  in  the  earlier 
rabbis  we  have  an  attempt  at  "  immaculate  concep- 


reign  at  Hebron ;  as  well  as  of  the  jealousy  of  the 
tribe  at  having  lost  their  exclusive  possession  of 
him,  which  broke  out  in  the  revolt  of  Absalom. 

(d)  His  relations  to  Zeruiah  and  Abigail.  Though 
called  in  1  Chr.  ii.  16,  sisters  of  David,  they  are 
not  expressly  called  the  daughters  of  Jesse ;  and 
Abigail,  in  2  Sam.  xvii.  25,  is  called  the  daughter 
of  Nahash.  Is  it  too  much  to  suppose  that  David's 
mother  had  been  the  wife  or  concubine  c  of  Nahash, 
and  then  married  by  Jesse  ?  This  would  agree 
with  the  difference  of  age  between  David  and  his 
sisters,  and  also  (if  Nahash  was  the  same  as  the 
king  of  Ammon)  with  the  kindnesses  which  David 
received  first  from  Nahash  (2  Sam.  x.  2),  and  then 
from  Shobi,  son  of  Nahash  (xvii.  27). 

2.  As  the  youngest  of  the  family  he  may  pos- 
sibly have  received  from  his  parents  the  name, 
which  first  appears  in  him,  of  David,  the  beloved, 
the  darling.  But,  perhaps  for  this  same  reason, 
he  was  never  intimate  with  his  brethren.  The 
eldest  brother,  who  alone  is  mentioned  in  connexion 
with  him,  and  who  was  afterwards  made  by  him 
head  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  18), 
treated  him  scornfully  and  imperiously  (1  Sam. 
\\  ii.  28),  as  the  eldest  brothers  of  large  families  are 
apt  to  do ;  his  command  was  regarded  in  the  family 
as  law  ( xx.  20)  ;  and  the  father  looked  upon  the 
youngest  son  as  hardly  one  of  the  family  at  all 
(xvi.  11),  and  as  a  mere  attendant  on  the  rest 
(xvii.  17).  The  familiarity  which  he  lost  with  his 
brothers,  he  gained  with  his  nephews.  The  three 
sons  of  his  sister  Zeruiah,  and  the  one  son  of  his 
sister  Abigail,  seemingly  from  the  fact  that  their 


tion."  They  make  Nahash — "the  serpent  "—to  be 
another  name  oi  Jesse,  because  he  had  no  sin  except 
that  which  he  contracted  from  the  original  Berpent  ; 
and  thus  David  inherited  none.  (Jerome,  Qu.  Heb. 
in  2  Sam.  xvii.  25.) 

2   D 


402 


DAVID 


mothers  were  the  eldest  of  the  whole  family,  were 
probably  of  the  same  age  as  David  himself,  and 
they  accordingly  were  to  him — especially  the  three 
sons  of  Zeruiah — throughout  life  in  the  relation 
usually  occupied  by  brothers  and  cousins.  In  them 
we  see  the  rougher  qualities  of  the  family,  which 
1  tavid  shared  with  them,  whilst  he  was  distinguished 
from  them  by  qualities  of  his  own,  peculiar  to 
himself.  The  two  sons  of  his  brother  Shimeah  are 
both  connected  with  his  after  history,  and  both 
celebrated  for  the  gift  of  sagacity  in  which  David 
himself  excelled.  One  was  Jonadab,  the  friend  and 
adviser  of  his  eldest  son  Amnon  (2  Sam.  xiii.  3). 
The  other  was  Jonathan  (2  Sam.  xxi.  21),  who 
afterwards  became  the  counsellor  of  David  himself 
(1  Chr.  xxvii.  32).  It  is  a  conjecture  or  tradition 
of  the  Jews  preserved  by  Jerome  (Qu.  Hcb.  on 
1  Sam.  xvii.  12)  that  this  was  no  other  thanNathan 
the  prophet,  who,  being  adopted  into  Jesse's  family, 
makes  up  the  eighth  son,  not  named  in  1  Chr.  ii. 
13-15.     But  this  is  hardly  probable. 

The  first  time  that  David  appears  in  history  at 
once  admits  us  to  the  whole  family  circle.  There 
was  a  practice  once  a  year  at  Bethlehem,  probably 
at  the  first  new  moon  of  the  year,  of  holditig  a 
sacrificial  feast,  at  which  Jesse,  as  the  chief  pro- 
prietor of  the  place,  would  preside  (1  Sam.  xx.  6), 
with  the  elders  of  the  town.  At  this  or  such  like 
feast  (xvi.  1 )  suddenly  appeared  the  great  prophet 
Samuel,  driving  a  heifer  before  him,  and  having  in 
his  hand  a  horn  of  the  consecrated  oil d  •  of  the 
Tabernacle.  The  elders  of  the  little  town  were 
terrified  at  this  apparition,  but  were  reassured  by 
the  august  visitor,  and  invited  by  him  to  the  cere- 
mony of  sacrificing  the  heifer.  The  heifer  was 
killed.  The  party  were  waiting  to  begin  the  feast. 
Samuel  stood  with  his  horn  to  pour  forth  the  oil, 
as  if  for  an  invitation  to  begin  (comp.  ix.  22). 
He  was  restrained  by  divine  intimation  as  son  after 
son  passed  by.  Eliab,  the  eldest,  by  "  his  height" 
and  "  his  countenance,"  seemed  the  natural  counter- 
part of  Saul,  whose  rival,  unknown  to  them,  the 
prophet  came  to  select.  But  the  day  was  gone 
when  kings  were  chosen  because  they  were  head 
and  shoulders  taller  than  the  rest.  "  Samuel  said 
unto  Jesse,  Are  these  all  thy  children?  And  he 
said,  There  remaineth  yet  the  youngest,  and  behold 
he  keepeth  the  sheep.'' 

This  is  our  first  ami  most  characteristic  introduc- 
tion to  the  future  king.  The  boy  was  brought  in. 
We  are  enabled  to  fix  his  appearance  at  once  in  cur 
minds.  He  was  of  short  stature,  thus  contrasting 
with  his  tall  brother  Eliab,  with  his  rival  Saul, 
and  with  his  gigantic  enemy  of  Gath.  He  had  rede 
or  auburn  hair,  such  as  is  not  unfrequently  seen  in 
his  countrymen  of  the  East  at  the  present  day.  In 
later  life  he  wore  a  beard.f  His  bright  eyes  6  are 
especially  mentioned  (xvi.  12),  and  generally  he  was 
remarkable  for  the  grace  of  his  figure  and  counte- 
nance ("  fair  of  eyes,"  "-comely,"  "goodly,"  xvi. 
12,   18,  xvii.  42),   well   made,   and    of  immense 


d  "The  oil;"  so  Joseph.  Ant.  vi.  8,  §1. 

e  1  Sam.  xvi.  12,  xvii.  42.  Ruddy  =  red-haired  ; 
7ruppa/cT)5,  LXX.  ;  rufus,  Vulg.  :  the  same  word  as 
for  Esau,  Gen.  xxv.  25.  The  rabbis  (probably  from 
this)  say  that  he  was  like  Esau.  Josephus  (Ant.  vi.  8, 
1 )  makes  it  his  tawny  complexion  (f ai/flbs  Tqv  xpoat>). 

f  1  Sam.  xxi.  13. 

s  "  Fierce,  quick ;"  yopybs  ras  oi^ei's  (Joseph.  Ant. 
vi.  8,  1). 

h  The  same  word  as  is  used  in  Gen.  xxx.  37,  Jer. 
i.  11,  Hos.  iv.  12. 


DAVID 

strength  and  agility.  His  swiftness  and  activity 
made  him  (like  his  nephew  Asahel)  like  a  wild  ga- 
zelle, his  feet  like  harts'  feet,  and  his  arms  strong 
enough  to  break  a  bow  of  steel  (Ps.  xviii.  33, 
34).  He  was  pursuing  the  occupation  allotted  in 
Eastern  countries  usually  to  the  slaves,  the  females, 
or  the  despised  of  the  family  (comp.  the  case  of 
Moses,  of  Jacob,  of  Zipporah,  and  Rachel,  and  in 
later  times,  of  Mahomet;  Sprenger,  p.  8).  The 
pastures  of  Bethlehem  are  famous  throughout  the 
sacred  history.  The  Tower  of  Shepherds  (Gen. 
xxxv.  21),  the  shepherds  abiding  with  their  flocks 
by  night  (Luke  ii.),  were  both  there.  He  usually 
carried  a  switch  or  wand  h  in  his  hand  (1  Sam. 
xvii.  40),  such  as  would  be  used  for  his  dogs  (xvii. 
43),  and  a  scrip  or  wallet  round  his  neck,  to  carry 
anything  that  was  needed  for  his  shepherd's  life 
(xvii.  40).  Such  was  the  outer  life  of  David  when 
(as  the  later  Psalmists  described  his  call)  he  was 
"  taken  from  the  sheepfolds,  from  following  the 
ewes  great  with  young,  to  feed  Israel  according  to 
the  integrity  of  his  heart,  and  to  guide  them  by 
the  skilfulness  of  his  hands"  (Ps.  lxxviii.  70-72). 
The  recollection '  of  the  sudden  and  great  eleva- 
tion from  this  humble  station  is  deeply  impressed 
on  his  after  life.  "  The  man  who  was  raised  up 
on  high"  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  1) — "  I  have  exalted  one 
chosen  out  of  the  people  "  (Ps.  lxxxix.  19) — "  I 
took  thee  from  the  sheepcote  "  (2  Sam.  vii.  8). 

3.  But  there  was  another  preparation  still  more 
needed  for  his  office,  which  possibly  had  made  him 
already  known  to  Samuel,  and  which  at  any  rate  is 
his  next  introduction  to  the  history.  When  the 
body-guard  of  Saul  were  discussing  with  their 
master  where  the  best  minstrel  could  be  found  to  " 
chase  away  his  madness  by  music,  one  of  the  young 
men  in  the  guard  suggested  David.  Saul,  with  the 
absolute  control  inherent  in  the  idea  of  an  Oriental 
king,  instantly  sent  for  him,  and  in  the  successful 
effort  of  David's  harp  we  have  the  first  glimpse 
into  that  genius  for  music  and  poetry  which  was 
afterwards  consecrated  in  the  Psalms.  It  is  im- 
possible not  to  connect  the  early  display  of  this 
gift  with  the  schools  of  the  prophets,  who  exercised 
their  vocation  with  tabret,  psaltery,  pipe,  and  harp 
(  1  Sam.  x.  5),  in  the  pastures  (Naioth  ;  comp.  Ps. 
xxiii.  2),  to  which  he  afterwards  returned  as  to  his 
natural  home  (1  Sam.  xix.  18).k 

Whether  any  of  the  existing  Psalms  can  be 
referred  to  this  epoch  of  David's  life  is  uncertain. 
The  23rd,  from  its  subject  of  the  shepherd,  and 
from  its  extreme  simplicity  (though  placed  by 
Ewald  somewhat  later),  may  well  have  been  sug- 
gested by  this  time.  The  8th,  19th,  and  29th,1 
which  are  universally  recognised  as  David's,  de- 
scribe the  phenomena  of  nature,  and  as  such 
may  more  naturally  be  referred  to  this  tranquil 
period  of  his  life  than  to  any  other.  The  imagery 
of  danger  from  wild  beasts,  lions,  wild  bulls,  &c. 
(Ps.  vii.  2,  xxii.  20,  21),  must  be  reminiscences  of 
this  time.     And  now,  at  any  rate,  he  must  have 


'  It  is  useless  to  speculate  on  the  extent  to  which 
his  mission  was  known  to  himself  or  to  others. 
Josephus  (Ant.  vi.  8,  1)  says  that  Samuel  whispered 
it  into  his  ear. 

k  The  Mussulman  traditions  represent  him  as  skilled 
in  making1  haircloth  and  sackcloth — the  usual  occu- 
pations of  the  prophets.  See  the  notes  to  Bethle- 
hem, p.  202  a. 

1  The  Mussulman  traditions  describe  him  as  un- 
derstanding- the  language  of  birds  (Kurrm,  xxi.  9, 
xxii.  16). 


DAVID 

first  acquired  the  art  which  gave  him  one  of  His  I 

chief  claims  to  mention  in  after  times — "  the  sweet 
singer  of  Israel "  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  1),  "  the  inventor 
of  instruments  of  music"  (Am.  vi.  5)  ;  "  with  his 
whole  heart  he  sung  songs  and  loved  him  that  made 
him"  (Ecclus.  xlvii.  8).m 

4.  One  incident  alone  of  his  solitary  shepherd  life 
has  come  down  to  us — his  conflict  with  the  lion 
and  the  bear  in  defence  of  his  father's  flocks  (1  Sam. 
xvii.  34,  35).  But  it  did  not  stand  alone.  He  was 
already  known  to.  Saul's  guards  for  his  martial 
exploits,  probably  against  the  Philistines  (xvi.  18), 
and  when  he  suddenly  appeared  in  the  camp,  his 
elder  brother  immediately  guessed  that  he  had  left 
the  sheep  in  his  ardour  to  see  the  battle  (xvii.  28). 
To  this  new  aspect  of  his  character  we  are  next 
introduced. 

There  is  no  perfectly  satisfactory  means  of  re- 
conciling the  apparently  contradictory  accounts  in 
I  Sam.  xvi.  14-23,  and  xvii.  12-31,  55-58.  The 
first  states  that  David  was  made  known  to  Saul  and 
became  his  armour-bearer  in  consequence  of  the 
charm  of  his  music  in  assuaging  the  king's  melan- 
choly. The  second  implies  that  David  was  still  a 
shepherd  with  his  father's  flocks,  and  unknown  to 
Saul.  The  Vatican  MS.  of  the'LXX.,  followed  by 
Kennicott  (who  argues  the  question  at  length,  Dis- 
sertation on  Hebrew  Text,  418-432,  554-558),  re- 
jects the  narrative  in  1  Sam.  xvii.  12-31,  55-58,  as 
spurious.  But  the  internal  evidence  from  its  graphic 
touches  is  much  in  its  favour,  and  it  must  at  least 
be  accepted  as  an  ancient  tradition  of  David's  life. 
Horsley,  but  with  no  external  authority,  transposes 
1  Sam.  xvi.  14-23.  Another  explanation  supposes 
that  Saul  had  forgotten  him.  But  this  only  solves 
half  the  difficulty,  and  is  evidently  not  the  intention 
of  the  narrative.  It  may  therefore  be  accepted  as 
an  independent  statement  of  David's  first  appear- 
ance, modified  by  the  counter-statement  already 
noticed. 

The  scene  of  the  battle  is  at  Ephes-dammim,  in 
the  frontier-hills  of  Judah,  called  probably  from  this 
or  similar  encounters  "  the  bound  of  blood."  Saul's 
army  is  encamped  on  one  side  of  the  ravine,  the  Phi- 
listines on  the  other,  the  watercourse  of  Elah  or  "  the 
Terebinth  "  runs  befVeen  them.n  A  Philistine  of 
gigantic  stature,  and  clothed  in  complete  armour,  in- 
sults the  comparatively  defenceless  Israelites,  amongst 
whom  the  king  alone  appears  to  be  well  armed  (xvii. 
38;  comp.  xiii.  20).  No  one  can  be  found  to  take 
up  the  challenge.  At  this  juncture  David  appears  in 
the  camp,  sent  by  his  father  with  ten  loaves  and 
ten  slices  of  milk-cheese  to  his  three  eldest  brothers, 
fresh  from  the  sheepfol'ls.     Just  as  he  comes  to  the 


DAVID 


403 


m  In  Mussulman  traditions,  as  Abraham  is  called 
"  the  Friend,"  and  Mohammed  "  the  Apostle,"  so 
David  is  "  the  Prophet  of  God."  In  Weil's  Legi  nds, 
p.  157,  is  a  striking:  Oriental  description  of  his 
powers  as  a  psalmist :  "  He  could  imitate  the  thunders 
of  heaven,  the  roar  of  the  lion,  the  notes  of  the 
nightingale." 

n    Variations    in    the    common    account    are    sug- 
gested by  two  other  passages.     1.  In  '2  Sam.  xxi.  19, 
it  is  stated  that  "  (loliath  of  Gath,  the  Staff  "I 
spear  was  like  a  weaver's  beam,"  was  killed  (not  by 
David,   but)   by  Klhanan  of  Bethlehem.     iii,  . 
bined  with  the  fact  that  the  Philistine  whom  David 

slew    is    usually    nameless,    has   suggested   to    Ewald 

fii.  23,  (ill)  the  ingenious  conjecture  that  the  name  of 
Goliath  (which  is  only  given  twice  to  David'i  enemy, 
1  Sam.  xvii.  4,  xxi.  9)  was  borrowed  from  tbe  conflict 
of  the  real  Goliath  with  Elhanan,  whose  Bethlebemite 


circle  of  waggons  which  formed,  as  in  Arab  settle- 
ments, a  rude  fortification  round  the  Israelite  camp 
(xvii.  20),  he  hears  the  well  known  shout  of  the 
Israelite  war-cry  (comp.  Num.  xxiii.  21).  The 
martial  spirit  of  the  boy  is  stirred  at  the  sound; 
he  leaves  his  provisions  with  the  baggage-master, 
and  darts  to  join  his  brothers  (like  one  of  the  royal 
messengers  °)  into  the  midst  of  the  lines. p  Then 
he  hears  the  challenge,  now  made  for  the  fortieth 
time — sees  the  dismay  of  his  countrymen — hears 
the  reward  proposed  by  the  king — goes  with  the 
impetuosity  of  youth  from  soldier  to  soldier  talking 
of  the  event,  in  spite  of  his  brother's  rebuke — he  is 
introduced  to  Saul — undertakes  the  combat.  His 
victory  over  the  gigantic  Philistine  is  rendered 
more  conspicuous  by  his  own  diminutive  stature, 
and  by  the  simple  weapons  with  which  it  was 
accomplished — not  the  armour  of  Saul,  which  he 
naturally  found  too  large,  but  the  shepherd's 
sling,  which  he  always  carried  with  him,  and 
the  five  polished  pebbles  which  he  picked  up  as 
he  went  from  the  watercourse  of  the  valley,  and 
put  in  his  shepherd's  wallet.q  Two  trophies  long 
remained  of  the  battle — one,  the  huge  sword  of  the 
Philistine,  which  was  hung  up  behind  the  ephod  in 
the  Tabernacle  at  Nob  (1  Sam.  xxi.  9)  ;  the  other, 
the  head,  which  he  bore  away  himself,  and  which 
was  either  laid  up  at  Nob,  or  subsequently  at  Jeru- 
salem. [Nob.]  Ps.  cxliv.,  though  by  its  contents 
of  a  much  later  date,  is  by  the  title  in  the  LXX. 
"  against  Goliath."  But  there  is  also  a  psalm,  pre- 
served in  the  LXX.  at  the  end  of  the  Psalter,  and 
which,  though  probably  a  mere  adaptation  from  the 
history,  well  sums  up  this  early  period  of  his  life : 
"  This  is  the  psalm  of  David's  own  writing  (?) 
(l8i6ypa<pos  els  AaviS),  and  outside  the  number, 
when  he  fought  the  single  combat  with  Goliath." 
"  I  was  small  amongst  my  brethren,  and  the 
youngest  in  my  father's  house.  I  was  feeding  my 
father's  sheep.  My  hands  made  a  harp,  and  my 
fingers  fitted  a  psaltery.  And  who  shall  tell  it  to 
my  Lord?  He  is  the  Lord,  He  heareth.  He  sent 
his  messenger  (angel  ?)  and  took  me  from  my 
father's  flocks,  and  anointed  me  with  the  oil  of  His 
anointing.  My  brethren  were  beautiful  and  tall, 
but  the  Lord  was  not  well  pleased  with  them.  I 
went  out  to  meet  the  Philistine,  and  he  cursed  me 
by  his  idols.  But  I  drew  his  own  sword  and  be- 
headed him,  and  took  away  the  reproach  from  the 
children  of  Israel." ' 

II.  Relations  with  Saul. — We  now  enter  on  a 
new  aspect  of  David's  life.  The  victory  over 
Goliath  had  been  a  turning  point  of  his  career. 
Saul  inquired  his  parentage,  and  took  him  finally 


origin  has  led  to  the  confusion.     Jerome  (Qu.  IM>. 
ad  !<><■.)  makes  Elhanan   the  same  as  David.     2.  In 

1  Chr.  xi.  12,  Eleazar  (or  more  probably  Shammah, 

2  Sam.  xxiii.  1 1 )  is  said  to  have  fought  with  David  at 

ammim  against  the  Philistines.  It  is  of  course 
po  sible  that  the  same  scene  may  have  witnessed  two 
encounters  between  Israel  and  the  Philistines  ;  but  it 
may  also  indicate  that  David's  first  acquaintance  with 

Eleazar,   afterwards  one    of    his   chief   captains,  was 
made  on  this  memorable  occasion. 

°  The  same  word  is  used  ;is  in  1   Sam.  xxii.  17. 

P   A.8  in  I  Sam.  iv.  Hi,  2  Sam.  xviii.  22. 

a  for  the  Mussulman  legend,  see  Weil's  Legends, 
p.  153. 

r  Of  these  and  of  like  songs,  Bunsen  [Bibeltverk, 
Pref.  p.  el.)  interprets  the  expression  in  2  Sam.  xxiii. 
I,  net  "the  sweet  singer  of  Israel,"  but  "the  darling 
of  the  songs  of  Israel." 

2   f)  2 


404 


DAVID 


to  his  court.  Jonathan  was  inspired  by  the  ro- 
mantic friendship  Which  bound  the  two  youths 
together  to  the  end  of  their  lives.  The  triumphant 
songs3  of  the  Israelitish  women  announced  that 
they  felt  that  in  him  Israel  had  now  found  a 
deliverer  mightier  even  than  Saul.  And  in  those 
songs,  and  in  the  fame  which  David  thus  acquired, 
was  laid  the  foundation  of  that  unhappy  jealousy 
of  Saul  towards  him  which,  mingling  with  the 
king's  constitutional  malady,  poisoned  his  whole 
future  relations  to  David. 

Three  new  qualities  now  began  to  develope 
themselves  in  David's  character.  The  first  was  his 
prudence.  It  had  been  already  glanced  at  on  the 
first  mention  of  him  to  Saul  (1  Sam.  xvi.  18), 
"  prudent  in  matters."  But  it  was  the  marked 
feature  of  the  beginning  of  his  public  career.  Thrice 
over  it  is  emphatically  said,  "  he  behaved  himself 
wisely,"  and  evidently  with  the  impression  that  it 
was  the  wisdom  called  forth  by  the  necessities  of 
his  delicate  and  difficult  situation.  It  was  that 
peculiar  Jewish  caution  which  has  been  compared 
to  the  sagacity  of  a  hunted  animal,  such  as  is 
remarked  in  Jacob,  and  afterwards  in  the  persecuted 
Israelites  of  the  middle  ages.  One  instance  of  it 
appears  immediately,  in  Iris  answer  to  the  trap  laid 
fur  him  by  Saul's  servants,  "  Seemcth  it  to  you  a 
light  thing  to  be  the  king's  son-in-law,  seeing  that 
I  am  a  poor  man  and  lightly  esteemed?"  (xviii. 
23).  Secondly,  we  now  see  his  magnanimous  for- 
bearance called  forth,  in  the  first  instance,  towards 
Saul,  but  displaying  itself  (with  a  few  painful  ex- 
ceptions) in  the  rest  of  his  life.  He  is  the  first 
example  of  the  virtue  of  chivalry.  Thirdly,  his 
hairbreadth  escapes,  continued  through  so  many 
years,  impressed  upon  him  a  sense  of  dependence 
on  the  Divine  help,  clearly  derived  from  this  epoch. 
His  usual  oath  or  asseveration  in  later  times  was, 
"  As  the  Lord  liveth  who  hath  redeemed  my  soul 
out  of  adversity"  (2  Sam.  iv.  9  ;  1  K.  i.  29);  and 
the  Psalms  are  filled  with  imagery  taken  even 
literally  from  shelter  against  pursuers,  slipping 
down  precipices  (Ps.  xviii.  36),  hiding-places  in 
rocks  and  caves,  leafy  coverts  (xxxi.  20),  strong 
fastnesses  (xviii.  2). 

This  course  of  life  subdivides  itself  into  four 
portions : — 

1.  His  life  at  the  court  of  Saul  till  his  final 
escape  (1  Sam.  xviii.  2-xix.  18).  His  office  is  not 
exactly  defined.  But  it  would  seem  that,  having 
been  first  armour-bearer  (xvi.  21,  xviii.  2),  then 
made  captain  over  a  thousand — the  subdivision  of  a 
tribe — (xviii.  13),  he  finally,  on  his  marriage  with 
Michal,  the  king's  second  daughter,  was  raised  to 
the  high  office  of  captain  of  the  king's  body-guard,' 
second  only,  if  not  equal,  to  Abner,  the  captain  of 
the  host,  and  Jonathan,  the  heir  apparent.  These 
three  formed  the  usual  companions  of  the  king  at 
his  meals  (xx.  25).  David  was  now  chiefly  known 
for  his  successful  exploits  against  the  Philistines,  by 
on.'  of  which  he  won  his  wife,  and  drove  back  the 


8  See  Fabricius,  Cod.  Apoc.  V.  T.  906. 

1  1  Sam.  xx.  '2.5,  xxii.  14,  as  explained  by  Ewald, 
iii.  98.  I 

"  The  story  of  his  wooing  Merab,  and  other  marriage 
with  Adriel  (1  Sam.  xviii.  17-19),  is  omitted  in  LXW 
and  Joseph.  (Ant.  vi.  10,  §1).  There  is  the  same  obli- 
teration of  her  name  in  the  existing  Text  of  2  Sam. 
xxi.  8. 

v  The  first  of  these  (1  Sam.  xviii.  9-11)  is  omitted 
in  the  Vatican  MS.  of  the  LXX.  and  Joseph.  (Ant.  vi. 
10,  §1). 


DAVID 

Philistine  power  with  a  blow  from  which  it  only 
rallied  at  the  disastrous  close  of  Saul's  reign."  He 
also  still  performed  from  time  to  time  the  office  of 
minstrel.  But  the  successive  snares  laid  by  Saul 
to  entrap  him,  and  the  open  violence  into  which 
the  king's  madness  twice  broke  out,v  at  last  con- 
vinced him  that  his  life  was  no  longer  safe.  He 
had  two  faithful  allies,  however,  in  the  court — the 
son  of  Saul,  his  friend  Jonathan — the  daughter  of 
Saul,  his  wife  Michal.  Warned  by  the  one,  and 
assisted  by  the  other,  he  escaped  by  night,w  and 
was  from  thenceforward  a  fugitive.  Jonathan  he 
never  saw  again  except  by  stealth.  Michal  was 
given  in  marriage  to  another  (Phaltiel),  and  he  saw 
her  no  more  till  long  after  her  father's  death 
[Michal].  To  this  escape  the  traditional  title 
assigns  Ps.  lix.  Internal  evidence  (according  to 
Ewald)  gives  Ps.  vi.x  and  vii.  to  this  period.  In 
the  former  he  is  first  beginning  to  contemplate  the 
necessity  of  flight ;  in  the  latter  he  is  moved  by 
the  plots  of  a  person  not  named  in  the  history 
(perhaps  those  alluded  to  in  1  Chr.  xii.  17) — ac- 
cording to  the  title  of  the  psalm,  Cush,  a  Ben- 
jamite,  and  therefore  of  Saul's  tribe. 

2.  His  escape  (1  Sam.  xix.  18-xxi.  15). — -(a) 
He  first  fled  to  Naioth  (or  the  pastures)  of 
Ramah,  to  Samuel.  This  is  the  first  recorded 
occasion  of  his  meeting  with  Samuel  since  the 
original  interview  during  his  boyhood  at  Bethlehem. 
It  might  almost  seem  as  if  he  had  intended  to 
devote  himself  with  his  musical  and  poetical  gifts 
to  the  prophetical  office,  and  give  up  the  cares  and 
dangers  of  public  life  But  he  had  a  higher  destiny 
still.  Up  to  this  time  both  the  king  and  himself 
had  thought  that  a  reunion  was  possible  (see  xx. 
5,  26).  But  the  madness  of  Saul  now  became 
more  settled  and  ferocious  in  character ;  and  David's 
danger  proportionably  greater.  The  secret  interview 
with  Jonathan,  of  which  the  recollection  was  pro- 
bably handed  down  through  Jonathan's  descendants 
when  they  came  to  David's  court,  confirmed  the 
alarm  already  excited  by  Saul's  endeavour  to  seize 
him  at  Ramah,  and  he  now  determined  to  leave  his 
country,  and  take  refuge,  like  Coriolanus,  or  The- 
mistocles  in  like  circumstances,  in  the  court  of  his 
enemy.  Before  this  last  resolve,  he  visited  Nob, 
the  seat  of  the  tabernacle,  partly  to  obtain  a  final 
interview  with  the  High-priest  (1  Sam.  xxii.  9,  15) 
partly  to  obtain  food  and  weapons.  On  the  pretext 
of  a  secret  mission  y  from  Saul,  he  gained  an  answer 
from  the  oracle,  some  of  the  consecrated  loaves, 
and  the  consecrated  sword  of  Goliath.  "  There  is 
none  like  that :  give  it  me."  The  incident  was  of 
double  importance  in  David's  career.  First  it  esta- 
blished a  connexion  between  him  and  the  only 
survivor  from  the  massacre  in  which  David's  visit 
involved  the  house  of  Ahimelech.  Secoudly,  from 
Ahimelech's  surrender  of  the  consecrated  bread  to 
David's  hunger  our  Lord  drew  the  inference  of  the 
superiority  of  the  moral  to  the  ceremonial  law, 
which  is  "the  only  allusion  made  to  David's  life  in 


w  For  the  Mussulman  legend,  sec  Weil's  Legends, 
p.  154. 

1  The  allusions  to  his  danger  from  the  Benjamite 
archers  (Ps.  xi.  2),  to  his  flight  like  a  bird  to  the 
mountains  (xi.  1,  comp.  1  Sam.  xxvi.  20),  and  prjbiibly 
to  the  neighbourhood  of  the  Dead  Sea  (xi.  G),  rather 
point  to  the  time  when  he  was  at  Engedi. 

y  The  statement  of  his  pretended  mission  is  dif- 
ferently given  in  the  Hebrew  and  in  the  LXX.  It 
must  be  observed  that  the  young  men  spoken  of  as 
his  companions  were  imaginary.    He  was  quite  alone. 


DAVID 

the  N.  T.2  (Matt.  xii.  3 ;  Mark  ii.  25;  Luke  vi.  •">, 
4).  It  is  also  commemorated  by  the  traditional  title 
of  Ps.  lii. 

His  stay  at  the  court  of  Acmsii  was  short. 
Discovered  possibly  by  "  the  sword  of  Goliath," 
his  presence  revived  the  national  enmity  of  the 
Philistines  against  their  former  conqueror;  and  he 
only  escaped  by  feigning  madness,3  violent  ges- 
tures, playing  on  the  gates  of  the  city,  or  on  a 
drum  or  cymbal,  letting  his  beard  grow,  and  foam- 
ing at  the  mouth  (1  Sam.  xxi.  13,  LXX.).  The 
56th  and  34th  psalms  are  both  referred  by  their 
titles  to  this  event,  and  the  titles  state  (what  does 
not  appear  in  the  narrative)  that  he  hail  been  seized 
as  a  prisoner  by  the  Philistines,  and  that  he  was,  in 
consequence  of  this  stratagem,  set  free  by  Achish, 
or  (as  he  is  twice  called)  Abimelech. 

3.  His  life  as  an  independent  outlaw  (xxii.  1- 
xxvi.  25.  (a)  His  first  retreat  was  the  cave  of 
Adullam,  probably  the  large  cavern  (the  only  very 
large  one  in  Palestine),  not  far  from  Bethlehem, 
now  called  Khureituii  (see  Bonar's  Land  of  Promise, 
p.  ■_'44).  From  its  vicinity  to  Bethlehem,  he  was 
joined  there  by  his  whole  family,  now  feeling  them- 
selves insecure  from  Saul's  fury  (xxii.  1).  This 
was  probably  the  foundation  of  his  intimate  con- 
nexion with  his  nephews,  the  sons  of  Zeruiah. 

Of  these,  Abishai,  with  two  other  companions, 
was  amongst  the  earliest  (1  Ch.  xi.  15,  20  ;  1  Sam. 
xxvi.  6;  2  Sam.  xxiii.  13,  18).  Besides  these, 
were  outlaws  and  debtors  from  every  part,  including 
doubtless  some  of  the  original  Canaanites — of  whom 
the  name  of  one  at  least  has  been  preserved, 
Ahimelech  the  Hittite  (1  Sam.  xxvi.  6).b 

(b)  His  next  move  was  to  a  stronghold,  either 
the  mountain,  afterwards  called  Herodium,  close  to 
Adullam,  or  the  fastness  called  by  Josephus  (B.  J. 
vii.  8,  §3)  Masada,  the  Grecised  form  of  the  Hebrew 
word  A/atzed  (1  Sam.  xxii.  4,  5  ;  1  Chr.  xii.  16), 
in  the  neighbourhood  of  En-gedi.  Whilst  there,  he 
had  deposited  his  aged  parents  for  the  sake  of  greater 
security,  beyond  the  Jordan,  with  their  ancestral 
kinsman  of  Moab  (ib.  3).  The  neighbouring  king, 
Nahashof  Ammon,also  treated  him  kindly  (2  Sam. 
x.  2).  Here  another  companion  appears  for  the 
first  time,  a  schoolfellow,  if  we  may  use  the  word, 
from  the  schools  of  Samuel,  the  prophet  Gad,  his 
subsequent  biographer  (1  Sam.  xxii.  5)  ;  and  whilst 
he  was  there,  occurred  the  chivalrous  exploit  of  the 
three  heroes  just  mentioned  to  procure  water  from 
the  well  of  Bethlehem,  and  David's  chivalrous 
answer,  like  that  of  Alexander  in  the  desert  of 
(iediosia  '1  Chr.  xi.  16-19 ;  -  Sam.  xxiii.  14-17). 
He  was  joined  here  by  two  separate  bands.  One  a 
little  body  of  eleven  fierce  Gaditec  mountaineers, 
who  swam  the  Jordan  in  flood-time  to  reach  him 
( 1  Chr.  xii.  8).  Another  was  a  detachment  of  men 
from  Judah  and  Benjamin  under  his  nephew  Amasai, 
who  henceforth  attached  himself  to  David's  fortunes 
(1  Chr.  xii.  16-18). 

(c)  At  the  Warning  of  Cad.  he  fled  next  to  the 
forest  of  Hareth  (somewhere  in  the  hills  of  Judah, 
but  its  exact  site  unknown!,  and  then  again  fell  in 
with  the  Philistines,  ami  again,  apparently  advised 
by  Gad  (xxiii.  4)  made  a  descent  on  their  foraging 

1  It  is  a  characteristic  Jewish  comment  (as  distin- 
guished from  the  lesson  drawn  by  Christ)  that  the 
bread  was  useless  to  him  (Jerome,  Qu.  Web.  in  Inc.). 

*  This  is   the  subject  of  one  of  David's  apocryphal 

colloquies  (Fabricius,  Cod.  Apoc.  V.  Test.  p.  1002  . 

h  Sibbechai,  who  kills  the  gianl  at  Gob  (2  Sam 
xxi.  18),  is  said  by  Josephus  to  have  been  a  Hittite. 


DAVID 


405 


parties,  and  relieved  Keilah  (also  unknown),  in 
which  he  took  up  his  abode.  Whilst  there,  now 
for  the  first  time,  in  a  fortified  town  of  his  own 
l  xxiii.  7),  he  was  joined  by  a  new  ami  most  impor- 
tant ally — Abiathar,  the  last  survivor  of  the  house 
of  Ithamar,  who  came  with  the  High-priest"s  Ephod, 
and  henceforth  gave  the  oracles,  which  David  had 
hitherto  received  from  Gad  (xxiii.  6,  9,  xxii.  23). 
By  this  time,  the  400  who  had  joined  him  at 
Adullam  (xxii.  2)  had  swelled  to  600  (xxiii.  13). 

((/)  The  situation  of  David  was  now  changed  by 
the  appearance  of  Saul  himself  on  the  scene. 
Apparently  the  danger  was  too  great  for'. the  little 
army  to  keep  together.  They  escaped  from  Keilah, 
and  dispersed,  "  whithersoever  they  could  go," 
amongst  the  fastnesses  of  Judah.  Henceforth  it 
becomes  difficult  to  follow  his  movements  with 
exactness,  partly  from  ignorance  of  the  localities, 
partly  because  the  same  event  seems  to  be  twice 
narrated  (1  Sam.  xxiii.  19-24,  xxvi.  1-4,  and 
perhaps  1  Sam.  xxiv.  1-22,  xxvi.  5-25).  But 
thus  much  we  discern.  He  is  in  the  wilderness  of 
Ziph.  Once  (or  twice)  the  Ziphites  betray  his 
movements  to  Saul.  From  thence  Saul  literally 
hunts  him  like  a  partridge,  the  treacherous  Ziphites 
beating  the  bushes  before  him,  and  3000  men, 
stationed  to  catch  even  the  print,  of  his  footsteps  on 
the  hills  (1  Sam.  xxiii.  14,  22  (Heb.),  24  (LXX.), 
xxiv.  11,  xxvi.  2,  20).  David  finds  himself  driven 
to  the  extreme  south  of  Judah,  in  the  wilderness  of 
Maon.  On  two,  if  not  three  occasions,  the  pursuer 
and  pursued  catch  sight  of  each  other.  Of'  the 
first  of  these  escapes,  the  memory  was  long  pre- 
served in  the  name  of  the  "  Cliff  of  Divisions,"  given 
to  the  cliff  down  one  side  of  which  David  climbed, 
whilst  Saul  was  surrounding  the  hill  on  the  other 
side  (.xxiii.  25-29),  and  was  suddenly  called  away 
by  a  panic  of  a  Philistine  invasion.  On  another 
occasion,  David  took  refuge  in  a  cave  "  by  the 
spring  of  the  wild  goats"  (Engedi)  immediately 
above  the  Dead  Sea  (1  Sam.  xxiv.  1,  2).  The 
rocks  were  covered  with  the  pursuers.  Saul 
entered,  as  is  the  custom  in  Oriental  countries,  for 
a  natural  necessity.  The  followers  of  David,  seated 
in  the  dark  recesses  of  the  cave,  seeing,  yet  not 
seen,  suggest  to  him  the  chance  thus  thrown  in 
their  way.  David,  with  a  characteristic  mixture 
of  humour  and  genei  osity,  descends  and  silently  cuts 
off  the  skirt  of  the  long  robe,  spread,  as  is  usual  in 
the  East  on  such  occasions,  before  and  behind  the 
person  so  occupied — and  then  ensued  the  pathetic 
scene  of  remonstrance  and  forgiveness  (xxiv.  8-22)d. 
The  third  (if  it  can  be  distinguished  from  the  one 
just  given)  was  in  the  wilderness  further  south. 
There  was  a  regular  camp,  formed  with  its  usual 
fortification  of  waggon  and  baggage.  Into  this 
enclosure  David  penetrated  by  night,  and  carried 
oil  the  cruse  of  water,  and  the  well  known  lova) 
spear  of  Saul,  which  had  twice  so  nearly  transfixed 
him  to  the  wall  in  former  days  (xxvi.  7,  11,  22). 
[Arms,  Ghanith.~\  The  same  scene  is  repeated  as 
at  Engedi— and  this  is  the  last  interview  between 
Saul  and  David  (xxvi.  25).  He  had  already  parted 
with  Jonathan  in  the  forest  of  Ziph  (xxiii.  18). 

To  this   period   are  annexed    by  their  trad- 


c  Cad,  as  Jerome's  Jewish  commentators  observe 

ijn.  Web.  in  loe.  ,  appears  suddenly,  without  intro- 
duction, like  Elijah.  N  it  possible  that  he,  like  Elijah, 
may  have  been  from  beyond  the  Jordan,  and  some, 
as  his  name  implies,  with  tin    eleven  Gaditesl 

>'  For  the  Mussulman  legend,  so  Weil,  p.  \'>a. 


40  G 


DAVID 


titles  Psalm  liv.  ("  When  the  Ziphim  came  and 
said,  Doth  not  David  hide  himself  with  us?")  ;  lvii., 
("  When  he  fled  from  Saul  in  the  cave,"*  though 
this  may  refer  also  to  Adullam)  ;  lxiii.  "  When  he 
was  in  the  wilderness  of  Judah "  (or  Idumaea, 
LXX.),  cxlii.  ("  A  prayer  when  he  was  in  the 
cave").  It  is  probably  these  psalms  which  made 
the  Psalter  so  dear  to  Alfred  and  to  Wallace 
during  their  like  wanderings. 

Whilst  he  was  in  the  wilderness  of  Maon  occurred 
David's  adventure  with  Nabal,  instructive  as 
showing  his  mode  of  carrying  on  the  freebooter's 
life,  and  Iris  marriage  with  Abigail.  His  marriage 
with  Ahinoam  from  Jezreel,c*  also  in  the  same 
neighbourhood  (Josh.  xv.  50),  seems  to  have 
taken  place  a  short  time  before  (1  Sam.  xxv.  43, 
xxvii.  3  ;   '-'  Sam.  iii.  2). 

4.  His  sendee  under  Achishf  (1  Sam.  xxvii.  1  :  2 
Sam.  i.  27). — -Wearied  with  his  wandering  life  he 
•.at  last  crosses  the  Philistine  frontier,  not  as  before,  in 
the  capacity  of  a  fugitive,  but  the  chief  of  a  powerful 
band — his  600  mennowgrownintoan  organised  force, 
with  their  wives  and  families  around  them  (xxvii.  11- 
4).  After  the  manner  of  Eastern  potentates,  Achish 
gave  him,  for  his  support,  a  city — Ziklag  on  the 
frontier  of  Philistia  — and  it  was  long  remembered 
that  to  this  curious  arrangement  the  kings  of  Judah 
owed  this  appanage  of  their  dynasty  (xxvii.  6). 
There  we  meet  with  the  first  note  of  time  in  David's 
life.  He  was  settled  there  for  a  year  8  and  four 
months  (xxvii.  7),  and  his  increasing  importance  is 
indicated  by  the  fact  that  a  body  of  Benjamite 
archers  and  slingers,  twenty-two  of  whom  are  spe- 
cially named,  joined  him  from  the  very  tribe  of  his 
rival  (1  Chr.  xii.  1-7).  Possibly  during  this  stay  he 
may  have  acquired  the  knowledge  of  military 
organisation,  in  which  the  Philistines  surpassed  the 
Israelites,  and  in  which  he  surpassed  all  the  .pre- 
ceding rulers  of  Israel. 

He  deceived  Achish  into  confidence  by  attacking 
the  old  Nomadic  inhabitants  of  the  desert  frontier, 
and  representing  the  plunder  to  be  of  portions  of 
the  southern  tribes  or  the  Nomadic  allied  tribes  of 
Israel.  But  this  confidence  was  not  shared  by  the 
Philistine  nobles;  and  accordingly  David  was  sent 
back  by  Achish  from  the  last  victorious  campaign 
against  Saul.  In  this  manner  David  escaped  the 
difficulty  of  being  present  at  the  battle  of  Gilboa, 
but  found  that  during  his  absence  the  Bedouin 
Amalekites,  whom  he  had  plundered  during  the 
previous  year,  had  made  a  descent  upon  Ziklag, 
burnt  it  to  the  ground,  and  earned  off  the  wives 
and  children  of  the  new  settlement.  A  wild  scene 
of  frantic  grief  and  recrimination  ensued  between 
David  and  his  followers.  It  was  calmed  by  an 
oracle  of  assurance  from  Abiathar.  It  happened 
that  an  important  accession  had  just  been  made  to 
his  force.  On  his  march  with  the  Philistines 
northward  to  Gilboa,  he  had  been  joined  by  some 
chiefs  of  the  Manassites,  through  whose  territory  he 
was  passing.  Urgent  as  must  have  been  the  need 
for  them  at  home,  yet  David's  fascination  carried 
them  oft',  and  they  now  assisted  him  against  the 
plunderers  (1  Chr.  xii.  19-21).  They  .overtook 
the  invaders  in  the  desert,  and  recovered  the 
spoil.  These  were  the  gifts  with  which  David 
was   now  able  tin-  the  first  time  to   requite   the 


e  Joseph.  Ant.  vi.  13,  §8,  calls  it  Ahcssar. 

f  According  to  the  Jewish  tradition  (Jerome,  Qit. 
Hob.  on  2  Sam.  viii.  10),  he  was  the  son  of  the  former 
Achish  ;   his  mother's  name  Maacah. 


DAVID 

friendly  inhabitants  of  the  scene  of  his  wanderings 
(  1  Sam.  xxx.  26-31).  A  more  lasting  memorial  was 
the  law  which  tiaced  its  origin  to  the  arrangement, 
made  by  him,  formerly  in  the  attack  mi  Nabal,  but 
now  again,  moie  completely,  for  the  equal  division 
of  the  plunder  amongst  the  two-thirds  who  followed 
to  the  field,  and  one-third  who  remained  to  guard 
the  baggage  (1  Sam.  xxx.  25,  xxv.  1:3).  Two 
days  after  this  victory  a  Bedouin  arrived  from  the 
North  with  the  fatal  news  of  the  defeat  of  Gilboa. 
The  reception  of  the  tidings  of  the  death  of  his  rival 
and  of  his  friend,  the  solemn  mourning,  the  vent 
of  his  indignation  against  the  bearer  of  the  message, 
the  pathetic  lamentation  that  followed,  well  close 
the  second  period  of  David's  life  (2  Sam.  i.  1-27). 

III.  David's  reign. 

(I.)  As  king  of  Judah  at  Hebron,  7^  years 
(2  Sam.  ii.  11);   (2  Sam.  ii.  1-v.  5). 

Hebron  was  selected,  doubtless,  as  the  ancient 
sacved  city  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  the  burial  place 
of  the  patriarchs  and  the  inheritance  of  Caleb.  Here 
David  was  first  formally  anointed  king — by  whein 
is  not  stated — but  the  expression  seems  to  limit 
the  inauguration  to  the  tribe  of  Judah,  and  there- 
fore to  exclude  fuiy  intervention  of  Abiathar  (2 
Sam.  ii.  4).  To  Judah  his  dominion  was  nominally 
confined.  But  probably  for  the  first  rive  years  of 
the  time  the  dominion  of  the  house  of  Saul,  whose 
seat  was  now  at  Mahanaim,  did  not  extend  to  the 
west  of  the  Jordan ;  and  consequently  David  would 
be  the  only  Israelite  potentate  amongst  the  western 
tribes.  Gradually  his  power  increased,  and  during 
the  two  years  which  followed  the  elevation  of  Ishbo- 
sheth,  a  series  of  skirmishes  took  place  between  the 
two  kingdoms.  First  came  a  successful  inroad 
into  the  territory  of  Ishbosheth  (2  Sam.  ii.  28). 
Next  occurred  the  defection  of  Abner  (2  Sam.  iii. 
12),  and  the  surrender  of  Michal,  who  was  now 
separated  from  her  second  husband  to  return  to 
her  first  (2  Sam.  iii.  15).  Then  rapidly  followed, 
though  without  David's  consent,  the  successive 
murders  of  Abner  and  of  Ishbosheth  (2  Sam. 
iii.  30,  iv.  5)'.'  The  throne,  so  long  waiting  for 
him,  was  now  vacant,  and  the  united  voice  of  the 
whole  people  at  once  called  him  to  occupy  it.  A 
solemn  league  was  made  between  him  and  his 
people  (2  Sam.  v.  3).  For  the  third  time  David 
was  anointed  king,  and  a  festival  of  three  days 
celebrated  the  joyful  event  (1  Chr.  xii.  39).  His 
little  band  hail  now  swelled  into  "  a  great  host,  like 
the  host  of  God"  (1  Chr.  xii.  22).  The  command 
of  it,  which  had  formerly  rested  on  David  alone,  he 
now  devolved  on  his  nephew  Joab  (2  Sam.  ii.  28). 
It  was  formed  by  contingents  from  every  tribe  of 
Israel.  Two  are  specially  mentioned  as  bringing  a 
weight  of  authority  above  the  others.  The  sons 
of  Issachar  had  "understanding  of  the  times  to 
know  what  Israel  ought  to  do,"  and  with  the 
adjacent  tribes  contributed  to  the  common  feast  the 
peculiar  pioducts  of  their  rich  territory  (1  Chr. 
xii.  32,  40).  The  Levitical  tribe,  formerly  repre- 
sented in  David's  following  only  by  the  solitary  fugi- 
tive Abiathar,  now  came  in  strength,  represented  by 
the  head  of  the  rival  branch  of  Eleazar,  the  High- 
priest,  the  aged  Jehoiada  and  his  youthful  and  war- 
like kinsman  Zadok  (1  Chr.  xii.  27,  28;   xxvii.  5). 


5  But  the  value  of  this  is  materially  damaged  by 
the  variations  in  the  LXX.  to  "  4  months,"  and 
Joseph,  Ant.  vi.  13,  to  "  \  months  and  20  days." 


DAVID 

The  only  psalm  directly  referred  to  this  epoch 
is  the  27th  (by  its  title  in  the  LXX.  Upb  rov 
XpHrdrivat  — "  before  the  anointing "  i.  e.  at 
Hebron). 

Underneath  this  show  of  outward  prosperity, 
two  cankers,  incident  to  the  royal  state  which 
David  now  assumed,  had  first  made  themselves 
apparent  at  Hebron,  which  darkened  all  the  rest  of 
his  career.  The  first  was  the  formation  of  a 
harem,  according  to  the  usage  of  Oriental  kings. 
To  the  two  wives  of  his  wandering  life,  he  hail  now 
added  four,  and  including  Michal,  rive  (2  Sam.  ii.  2  ; 
iii.  2-5,  15).  The  second  was  the  increasing  power  of 
his  kinsmen  and  chief  officers,  which  the  king  strove 
to  restrain  within  the  limits  of  right,  and  thus  of  all 
the  incidents  of  this  part  of  his  career  the  most 
plaintive  and  characteristic  is  his  lamentation  over 
Ins  powerlessness  bo  prevent  the  murder  of  Abner 
(2  Sam.  iii.  31-36). 

II.  Reign  over  all  Israel  33  years  (2  Sam.  v.  5, 
to  1  K.  if.  11). 

(T)  The  foundation  of  Jerusalem.  —  It  must 
have  been  with  no  ordinary  interest  that  the  sur- 
rounding nations  watched  for  the  prey  on  which 
the  Lion  of  Judah,  now  about  to  issue  from  his 
native  lair,  and  establish  himself  in  a  new  home, 
would  make  his  first  spring.  One  fastness  alone 
in  the  centre  of  the  land  had  hitherto  defied  the 
anus  of  Israel.  On  this,  with  a  singular  prescience, 
David  fixed  as  his  future  capital.  By  one  sudden 
assault  Jehus  was  taken,  and  became  henceforth 
known  by  the  names  (whether  borne  by  it  befoie 
or  not  we  cannot  tell)  of  Jerusalem  and  Zion.  Of 
all  the  cities  of  Palestine  great  in  former  ages, 
Jerusalem  alone  has  vindicated  by  its  long  perma- 
nence the  choice  of  its  founder.  The  importance  of 
the  capture  was  marked  at  the  time.  The  reward 
bestowed  on  the  successful  scaler  of  the  precipice, 
was  the  highest  place  in  the  army.  Joab  hence- 
forward became  captain  of  the  host  (1  Clir.  xi.  6). 
The  loyal  residence  was  instantly  fixed  there — 
fortifications  were  added  by  the  king  and  by  Joab — 
ami  it  was  known  by  the  special  name  of  the  "city 
of  David"  (1  Chr.  xi.  7;   2  Sam.  v.  9). 

.  The  neighbouring  nations  were  partly  enraged 
and  partly  awestruck.  The  Philistines'1  made  two 
ineffectual  attacks  on  the  new  king  (2  Sam.  v.  17- 
20),'  and  a  retribution  on  their  former  victories 
took  place  by  the  capture  and  conflagration  of  their 
own  idols  (1  Chr.  xiv.  12).  Tyre,  now  for  the 
first  time  appearing  in  the  sacred  history,  allied 
herself  with  Israel;  and  Hiram k  sent  cedarwood  for 
the  buildings  of  the  new  capital  (2  Sam.  v.  11) 
especially  for  the  palace  of'  David  himself'  l  2  Sam. 
vii.  2).  Unhallowed  and  profane  as  the  city  had 
been  before,  it  was  al  once  elevated  to  a  sanctity 
which  it  lias  never  lost,  above  any  of  the  ancient 
sanctuaries  of  the  land.  The  ark  was  now  removed 
fr:  m  its  olis  ,in:\  it  kn  |;i h ■p-anm  with  marked 
solemnity.  A  temporary  halt  (owing  to  the  death 
of  Uzza)  detained  it  at  Obed-edom's  house,  after 


DAVID 


407 


h  The  importance  of  the  victory  is  indicated  by  the 

(probable)  allusion  to  it  in  Isa.  xxviii.  21. 

1  In  1  Chr.  xiv.  S,  the  incoherent  words  of  -  Sam. 
v.  17,  "  David  went  down  into  the  hold,"  are  omitted. 

k  Eupolemus  (Eus.  Praep.  I'.r.  i\.  30)  mentions  an 
cspaditisa  against  Hiram  kiisg  of  lue  and  Bidon 
and  a  letter  to  Vafjres  kin;,'  of  Egypt  to  make  an 
alliance. 

1  1  Chr.  xvi.  1,  says  "  they  offered;"  2  Sam.  \i. 
17,  "he  ottered."  Both  say  "he  blessed."  The 
I. XX.,  by  a  slight  variation  of  the  text,  reads  both  in 


which  it  again  moved  forward  with  great  state  to 
Jerusalem.  An  assembly  of  the  nation  was  con- 
vened, and  (according  to  1  Chr.  xiii.  2,  xv.  2-27) 
especially  of  the  Levites.  The  musical  arts  in 
which  David  himself  excelled  were  now  developed 
on  a  great  scale  (1  Chr.  xv.  16-22;  2  Sam.  vi.  ."ij. 
Zadok  and  Abiathar,  the  representatives  of  the  two 
Aaronic  families,  were  both  present  (1  Chr.  xv.  11). 
Chenaniah  presided  over  the  music  (1  Chr.  xv. 
22,  27).  Obed-edom  followed  his  sacred  charge 
(1  Chr.  xiii.  18,  21,  24).  The  prophet  Nathan 
appears  for  the  first  time  as  the  controlling  adviser 
of  the  futuie  (2  Sam.  vii.  3).  A  sacrifice  was 
offered  as  soon  as  a  successful  start  was  made  ( 1  Chr. 
xv.  2(3  ;  2  Sam.  vi.  13).  David  himself  was  dressed 
in  the  white  linen  dress  of  the  priestly  order,  with- 
out his  royal  robes,  and  played  on  stringed  instru- 
ments (1  Chr.  xv.  27  ;  2  Sam.  vi.  14,  20).  As  in 
the  prophetic  schools  where  he  had  himself  been 
hi  ought  up  (1  Sam.  x.  5),  and  as  still  in  the 
impressive  ceremonial  of  some  Eastern  Dervishes, 
and  of  Seville  cathedra]  (probably  derived  from  the 
East),  a  wild  dance  was  part  of  the  religious 
solemnity'.  Into  this  David  threw  himself  with 
unreserved  enthusiasm,  and  thus  conveyed  the 
symbol  of  the  presence  of  Jehovah  into  the  ancient, 
heathen,  fortress.  In  the  same  spirit  of  uniting 
the  sacerdotal  with  the  royal  functions,  he  offered 
sacrifices  on  a  large  scale,  and  himself  gave  the 
benediction  to  the  people  (2  Sam.  vi.  17,  8; 
1  Chr.  xvi.  2).1  The  scene  of  this  inauguration 
was  on  the  hill  which  from  David's  habitation 
was  specially  known  as  the  "City  of  David."  As 
if  to  mark  the  new  era  he  had  not  brought  the 
ancient  tabernacle  from  Gibeon,  but  hail  erected 
a  new  tent  or  tabernacle  (1  Chr.  xv.  1)  for  the 
reception  of  the  ark.  It  was  the  first  beginning 
of  the  great  design,  of  which  we  will  speak  pre- 
sently, afterwards  carried  out  by  his  son,  of 
erecting  a  permanent  temple  or  palace  for  the  ark, 
corresponding  to  the  state  in  which  he  himself 
was  to  dwell.  -It  was  the  greatest  day  of  David's 
life.  One  incident  only  tarnished  its  splendour — 
the  reproach  of  Michal,  his  wife,  as  he  was  finally 
entering  his  own  palace,  to  carry  to  his  own  house- 
hold the  benediction  which  he  had  already  pro- 
nounced on  his  peoplp.  [Michal.]  His  act  of 
severity  towards  her  was  an  additional  mark  of 
the  stress  which  he  himself  laid  on  the  solemnity 
(2  Sam.  vi.  2(1-23;    1  Chr.  xv.  29). 

No  less  than  eleven  psalms,  either  in  their  tra- 
ditional titles,  or  in  the  irresistible  evidence  of 
their  contents,  bear  traces  of  this  greai  festival. 
The  29th  psalm  (by  its  title  in  the  LXX.)  is 
said  to  he  on  the  "  Going  forth  of  the  tabernacle."™ 
The  30th  (by  its  title),  the  15th,  and  101st  by 
their  contents,  express  the  feelings  of  David  on  his 
occupation  of  his  new  home.  The  68th,  at  least  in 
part,  and  the  24th n  seem  to  have  been  actually 
composed  for  the  entrance  of  the  ark  into  the 
ancient,  gates  of  the   heathen  fortress — and  the   last 


2  Sam.  vi.  ii  and  2  Chr.  xxx.  21,  "instruments  oi 
praise,"  for  "all  his  might." 

"'As    "the   tabernacle"   was  never  moved  from 
( libeon  in  David's  time,  "  tin-  ark  "  is  probahfj  meant. 

It  is  the  Psalm  which  describes  a  thunderstorm.      Is 

it  possible  to  connect  this  with  the  event  described  in 

2  Sam.  vi.  (I  .'      A  similar    allusion    may  he   found    in 

PS.  Lxviii.  ' .  33.  See  Chandler,  ii.  21  I.) 

"   In  the  l.XX.  title   said   to  he  "on  the  Sabbath- 
day." 


408 


DAVID 


words  of  the  second  of  these  two  psalms  °  may  be 
regarded  as  the  Inauguration  of  the  new  name  b)r 
which  God  henceforth  is  called,  The  Lord  of  hosts. 
"  Who  is  this  king  of  glory  ?  "  "  The  Lord  of 
hosts,  He  is  the  king  of  glory"  (Ps.  xxiv.  10; 
comp.  2  Sam.  vi.2).  Fragments  of  poetry  worked 
up  into  psalms  (xcvi.  2-13, p  cv.,  cvi.  1,  47,  48), 
occur  in  1  Chr.  xvi.  8-36,  as  having  been  delivered 
by  David  "  into  the  hands  of  Asapti  and  his  bro- 
ther "  after  the  close  of  the  festival,  and  the  two 
mysterious  terms  in  the  titles  of  Ps.  v^  and  xlvi. 
(.Sheminith  and  Alamoth)  appear  in  the  lists  of 
those  mentioned  on  this  occasion  in  1  Chr.  xv. 
20,  21.  The  132nd  is,  by  its  contents,  if  not  by 
its  authorship,  thrown  back  to  this  time.  The 
whole  progress  of  the  removal  of  the  ark  is  traced 
in  David's  vein. 

(2)  Foundation  of  the  Court  and  Empire  of 
Israel,  2  Sam.  viii.  to  xii. — The  erection  of  the 
new  capital  at  Jerusalem  introduces  us  to  a  new 
era  in  David's  life  and  in  the  history  of  the  mo- 
narchy. Up  to  this  time  he  had  been  a  king,  such 
as  Saul  had  been  before  him,  or  as  the  kings  of  the 
neighbouiing  tribes,  each  ruling  over  his  territory, 
unconcerned  with  any  foreign  relations  except  so  far 
as  was  necessary  to  defend  his  own  nation.  But 
David,  and  through  him  the  Israelitish  monarchy, 
now  took  a  wider  range.  He  became  a  king  on  the 
scale  of  the  great  Oriental  sovereigns  of  Egypt  and 
Persia,  with  a  regular  administration  and  organiza- 
tion of  court  and  camp  ;  and  he  also  founded  an  im- 
perial dominion  which  for  the  first  time  realized 
the  prophetic  description  of  the  hounds  of  the  chosen 
people  (Gen.  xv.  18-21).  The  internal  organization 
now  established  lasted  till  the  final  overthrow  of 
the  monarchy.  The  empire  was  of  much  shorter 
duration,  continuing  only  through  the  reigns  of 
David  and  his  successor  Solomon.  But,  for  the 
period  of  its  existence,  it  lent  a  peculiar  character 
to  the  sacred  history.  For  once,  the  kings  of  Israel 
were  on  a  level  with  the  great  potentates  of  the 
world.  David  was  an  imperial  conqueror,  if  not  of 
the  same  magnitude,  yet  of  the  same  kind,  as  Ra- 
meses  or  Cyrus, — "  I  have  made  thee  a  great  name 
like  unto  the  name  of  the  great,  men  that  are  in  the 
earth  "  (2  Sam.  vii.  9).  "  Thou  hast  shed  blood 
abundantly,  and  hast  made  great  wars"  (1  Chr. 
xxii.  8).  And  as,  on  the  one  hand,  the  external 
relations  of  life,  and  the  great  incidents  of  war  and 
conquest  receive  an  elevation  by  their  contact  with 
the  religious  history,  so  the  religious  history  swells 
into  larger  and  broader  dimensions  from  its  contact 
with  the  course  of  the  outer  world.  The  enlarge- 
ment of  territory,  the  amplification  of  power  and 
state,  leads  to  a  corresponding  enlargement  and 
amplification  of  ideas,  of  imagery,  of  sympathies  ; 
and  thus  (humanly  speaking),  the  magnificent  fore- 
bodings of  a  wider  dispensation  in  the  prophetic 
writings  first  became  possible  through  the  court  and 
empire  of  David. 

(«.)  In  the  internal  organization  of  the  kingdom 
the  first  new  element  that  has  to  be  considered  is 
the  royal  family,  the  dynasty,  of  which  David  was 


°  Ewald,  Hi.  164.  For  an  elaborate  adaptation  of 
the  68th  Psalm  to  this  event,  see  Chandler,  ii.  54. 

p  In  the  title  of  the  LXX.  said  to  be  David's 
"  when  the  house  was  built  after  the  captivity."  It 
is  possible  that  by  "  the  captivity  "  may  be  meant  the 
captivity  of  the  ark  in  Philistia,  as  in  .Tudg.  xviii.  30. 

i  Compare  the  legends  in  Weil's  Legends,  p.  155, 
and  Lane's  Selections  front  the  Koran,  p.  '-20.     Thus 


DAVID 

the  founder,  a  position  which  entitled  him  to  the 
name  of  "  Patriarch  "  (Acts  ii.  29)  and  (ultimately) 
of  the  ancestor  of  the  Messiah. 

Of  these,  Absalom  and  Adonijah  both  inherited 
their  father's  beauty  (2  Sam.  xiv.  25 ;  1  K.  i.  6) ;  but 
Solomon  alone  possessed  any  of  his  higher  qualities. 
It  was  from  a  union  of  the  children  of  Solomon  and 
Absalom  that  the  royal  line  was  carried  on  (1  K. 
xv.  2).  The  princes  were  under  the  charge  of 
Jehiel  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  32),  perhaps  the  Levite  (1  Chr. 
xv.  21 ;  2  Chr.  xx.  14),  with  the  exception  of  So- 
lomon, who  (according  at  least  to  one  rendering) 
was  under  the  charge  of  Nathan  (2  Sam.  xii.  25). 
David's  strong  parental  all'ection  for  all  of  them  is 
very  remarkable,  2  Sam.  xiii.  31,  33,  36,  xiv.  33, 
xviii.  5,  33,  xix.  4;  IK,  i.  6. 

(6.)  The  military  organization,  which  was  in 
fact  inherited  from  Saul,  but  greatly  developed  by 
David,  was  as  follows : 

(1.)  "The  Host,"  i.  e.  the  whole  available  mili- 
tary force  of  Israel,  consisting  of  all  males,  capable 
of  bearing  arms,  and  summoned  only  for  war.  'This 
had  always  existed  from  the  time  of  the  first  settle- 
ment in  Canaan, .and  had  been  commanded  by  the 
chief  or  the  judge,  who  presided  over  Israel  for  the 
time.  Under  Saul,  we  first  find  the  recognised 
post  of  a  captain  or  commander-in-chief- — in  the 
person  of  Abner ;  and  under  David,  this  post  was 
given  as  a  reward  for  the  assault  on  Jerusalem, 
to  his  nephew  Joab  (1  Chr.  xi.  6,  xxvii.  34), 
who  conducted  the  army  to  battle  in  the  ab- 
sence of  the  king  (2  Sam.  xii.  26).  There  were  12 
divisions  of  24,000  each,  who  were  held  to  be  in 
duty  month  by  month  ;  and  over  each  of  them  pre- 
sided an  officer,  selected  for  this  purpose,  from  the 
other  military  bodies  formed  by  David  (1  Chr. 
xxvii.  1-15).  The  army  was  still  distinguished  from 
those  of  surrounding  nations  by  its  primitive  aspect 
of  a  force  of  infantry  without  cavalry.  The  only 
innovations  as  yet  allowed  were,  the  introduction  of 
a  very  limited  number  of  chariots  (2  Sam.  viii.  4) 
and  of  mules  for  the  princes  and  officers  instead  of 
the  asses  (2  Sam.  xiii.  29,  xviii.  9").  According  to 
a  Mussulman  tradition  (Kortin,  xxi.  80),  David  in- 
vented chain  armour.i  The  usual  weapons  were 
still  spears  and  shields,  as  appeal  s  from  the  Psalms. 
For  the  general  question  of  the  numbers  and  equip- 
ment of  the  army,  see  Arms  and  Army. 

(2.)  The  Body-guard.  This  also  had  existed  in 
the  court  of  Said,  and  David  himself  had  pro- 
bably been  its  commanding  officer  (1  Sam.  xxii.  14  ; 
Ewald).  But  it  now  assumed  a  peculiar  organi- 
zation. They  were  at  least  in  name  foreigners,  as 
having  been  drawn  from  the  Philistines,  probably 
during  David's  residence  at  the  court  of  Gath.  They 
are  usually  called  from  this  circumstance  "  Che- 
rethites  and  Pelethites,"  but  had  alsor  a  body  espe- 
cially from  Gath  s  amongst  them,  of  whom  the  name 
of  one,  Ittai,  is  preserved,  as  a  faithful  servant  of 
David  (2  Sam.  xv.  19).  The  captain  of  the  force 
was,  however,  not  only  not  a  foreigner,  but  an 
Israelite  of  the  highest  distinction  and  purest  de- 
scent, who  first  appears  in  this  capacity,  but  who 

a  good  coat  of  mail  is  often  called  by  the  Arabs 
"  Daoodee,"  i.  c.  Davidean. 

r  A  tradition  in  Jerome  (Qu.  Ileh.  on  1  Chr.  xviii. 
1 7 )  speaks  of  their  being  in  the  place  of  the  seventy 
judges  appointed  by  Moses. 

s  But  here  the  reading  is  doubtful  (Ewald,  iii.  177, 
note.) 


DAVID 


DAVID 


409 


(I.)  Wives  of  the  Wanderings. 
(I  Sam.  xxvii.  3,  I  Chr.  iii.  1 1 

Ahinoam  of  Jezreel    =    Abigail  of  Carmel 


(11.)  Wives  at   Hebron. 

(2  Sam.  iii.  2-5  ;  1  Chr.  iii.  1-4) 
=     Haggith     =     Abitnl     =     Eglah  u  =     Miehal 


imnon  or  Jchiel  ?  ? 

(.ler.  Qu.  H'-h. 
n  1  Chr.  xxvii.  32) 


Chileab  or  Daniel 

(I  Chr.  iii.  1 
Jos.  tint.  vii.  I,  4) 


N  B  — There  were,  besides,  in  concubtac-a 
(2Sam  v.  13,  xv.  IB),  whose  children  (.1  Llir. 
iii.  9)  are  not  named. 


1  i  i 

Absalom  Tamar      Adonijah      Shephatiah       Ithream 


I 

3  sons  who 

died  (2  Sain. 

xiv.  27, 

xviii.  18) 


Tamar  =  Ri: 

Maacah) 

(2  Sam. 
xiv.  27, 
Jos.  Aid. 
vii.  8,  5) 

Ann 


(III.)  Wives  at  Jerusalem. 

(2  S:(m.  v.  13-16  i   1  Chr.  iii.  5-8.  xiv.  4-7 

I 


1 

Ibliar 
Ebcar 
(LXX,) 

1 
Elishu 
Ehsha 
(IChr 
iii.  6) 

v                   1 

y          Eliphelet         N< 

(1  Ch 

i                 1 
gah         Neph 
r.  iii.  3) 

1 
.g         Japhia 

(2.)  Bathsheba 

(1  Chr.  iii.  5) 

Bathshua. 

1 

El 

1 
Bhama 

1                         1                           1 
Eliada           Eliphelet          Jcnmotli 
Heehada                          (2  Chr.  xi.  18) 
(IChr                                           | 
xiv.  7) 

M. ill. .1. Ill     =    1,' ■.■■!■■ 

1 

one  died 

as  a  child 

(2  Sam.  xii.  15) 

1 

Shammua 

Shimea 

(1  Chr.  iii.  5) 

1 
Shoba 

i 

Nathan 

Jedidiah 

SOI.OSION 

(2  Sam.  xii.  25) 

Mai 

alath  =  Rehoboam  =  Tamar  (or 
1     Maacah) 
(1  k.  xv.  2) 

1 

outlived  David,  and  became  the  chief  support  of  the 
throne  of  his  son,  namely  Benaiah,  son  of  the  chief 
priest  Jehoiada,  representative  of  the  eldest  branch 
of  Aaron's  house  (2  Sam.  viii.  18,  xv.  18,  xx.  23  ; 
1  K.  i.  38,  4-4). 

(3.)  The  most  peculiar  military  institution  in 
David's  army  was  that  which  arose  out  of  the  pecu- 
liar circumstances  of  his  early  life.  As  the  nucleus 
of  the  Russian  army  is  the  Preobajinsky  regiment 
formed  by  Peter  the  Great  out  of  the  companions 
who  gathered  round  him  in  the  suburb  of  that 
name  in  Moscow,  so  the  nucleus  of  what  afterwards 
became  the  only  standing  army  in  David's  forces 
was  the  baud  of  (300  men  who  had  gathered  round 
him  in  his  wanderings.  The  number  of  600  was 
still  preserved,  with  the  name  of  Gibborirn,  "heroes  " 
or  "mighty  men."  It  became  yet  further  subdi- 
vided z  into  3  large  bands  of  200  each,  and  small 
bands  of  20  each.  The  small  bands  were  com- 
manded by  30  officers,  one  for  each  band,  who 
together  formed  "  the  thirty,"  and  the  3  large  bands 
by  3  officers,  who  together  formed  "  the  three,"  and 
the  whole  bv  one  chief,  "  the  captain  of  the  mighty 
men"  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  8-39;  1  Chr.  xi.  9-47).  This 
commander  of  the  whole  force  was  Abishai,  David's 


1  Taken  in  war  (Jerome,  Qu.  Ileb.  ad  2  Sam. 
xiii.  37). 

"  Eglah  alone  is  called  "  David's  wife "  in  the 
enumeration  2  Sam.  iii.  5.  The  tradition  in  Jerome 
(Qu.  Heb.  ad  loo.)  says  that  she  was  Michal  ;  and 
(ib.  ad  2  Sam.  vi.  23)  that  she  died  in  giving  birth 
to  Ithream. 

x  The  LXX.  in  2  Sam.  v.  lfi,  after  having  given 
substantially  the  same  list  as  the  present  Hebrew  text, 
repeats  the  list,  with  strange  variations,  as  follows : 
Samae,  Iessibath,  Nathan,  Galamaan,  lebaar,  Tue'e- 
,  sus,  Elphalat,  Naged,  Naphek,  lanathan,  Leasamys, 
Baalimath,  Eliphaath. 


nephew  (1  Chr.  xi.  20;  and  comp.  2  Sam.  xvi.  9). 
"  The  three"  were  Jashobeam  (1  Chr.  xi.  11)  or 
Adino  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  8),  Eleazar  (1  Chr.  xi.  12; 
2  Sam.  xxiii.  9),  Shammah  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  ll).a  Of 
"  the  thirty,"  some  few  only  are  known  to  fame  else- 
where. Asahel,  David's  nephew  (1  Chr.  xi.  26;  2 
Sam.  ii.  18);  Elhanan,  the  victor  of  at  least  one 
Goliath  (1  Chr.  xi.  26 ;  2  Sam.  xxi.  19)  ;  Joel,  the 
brother  or  son  (LXX.)  of  Nathan  (1  Chr.  xi.  38)  ; 
Naharai,  the  armour-bearer  of  Joab  (1  Chr.  xi.  39; 
2  Sam.  xxiii.  37)  ;  Eliam,b  the  son  of  Ahitophel  (2 
Sam.  xxiii.  34);  Ira,  one  of  David's  priests  (1  Chr. 
xi.  40 ;  2  Sam.  xxiii.  38,  xx.  26)  ;  Uriah  the  Hittite 
(1  Chr.  xi.  41  ;  2  Sam.  xxiii.  39,  xi.  3). 

(c.)  Side  by  side  with  this  military  organization 
were  established  social  and  moral  institutions. 
Some  were  entirely  for  pastoral,  agricultural,  and 
financial  purposes  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  25-31),  others  for 
judicial  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  29-32).  Some  few  are 
named  as  constituting  what  would  now  be  called 
the  court,  or  council  of  the  king  ;  the  councillors, 
Ahitophel  of  Gilo,  and  Jonathan  the  king's  ne- 
phew (1  Chr.  xxvii.  32,33);  the  companion  or 
"friend"  Hushai  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  33;  2  Sam.  xv. 
37,  xvi.    19;    the  scribe,   Sheva,   or  Seraiah,  and 


y  Josephus  (Ant.  vii.  3,  §3)  pives  the  following  list, 
of  which  only  four  names  arc  identical.  He  states 
that  the  two  last  were  sons  of  the  concubines  : — 
Amnus,  Emnus,  Eban,  Nathan,  Solomon,  Iebar,  Elien, 
Phalna,  Ennapnen,  Ienae,  Eliphale. 

1  See  Ewald,  iii.  178. 

"  The  I.XX.  (cf.  2  Sam.  xxiii.  S)  make  them  : 
1.  Isboseth  the  Canaanite;  2.  Adino  the  Asonite; 
3.   Eleazar,  son  of  Oodo. 

b  Perhaps  the  father  of  Bathsheba,  whose  marriage 
with  Uriah  would  thus  he  accounted  lor.  (Sec  lilunt, 
Qrincidenct  ■-.  II.  \. 


410 


DAVID 


at  one  time  Jonathan  (2  Sam.  xx.  25;  1  Chr. 
xxvii.  32)  ;  Jehoshaphat,  the  recorder  or  historian,0 
2  Sam.  xx.  24- ;  and  Adoram  the  tax  collector,  both 
of  whom  survived  him  (2  Sam.  xx.  24;  1  K.  zii. 
18,  iv.  3,  6).  Each  tribe  had  its  own  head  (1  Chr. 
xxvii.  16-22).  Of  these  the  most  remarkable  were 
Elihu,  David's  brother  (probably  Eliab),  Prince  of 
Judah  (ver.  18),  and  Jaasiel,  the  son  of  Abner,  of 
Benjamin  (ver.  21). 

But  the  more  peculiar  of  David's  institutions 
were  those  directly  bearing  on  religion.  Two 
prophets  appear  as  the  king's  constant  advisers. 
Of  these,  Gad,  who  seems  to  have  been  the  elder, 
had  been  David's  companion  in  exile ;  and  from 
his  being  called  "  the  seer,"  belongs  probably  to 
the  earliest  form  of  the  prophetic  schools.  Nathan, 
who  appears  for  the  first  time  after  the  establish- 
ment of  the  kingdom  at  Jerusalem  (2  Sam.  vii. 
2),  is  distinguished  both  by  his  title  of  "  pro- 
phet," and  by  the  nature  of  the  prophecies  which 
he  utters  (2  Sam.  vii.  5-17,  xii.  1-14),  as  of  the 
purest  type  of  prophetic  dispensation,  and  as  the 
hope  of  the  new  generation,11  which  he  supports  in 
the  person  of  Solomon  (1  K.  i.)  Two  high  priests 
also  appear — representatives  of  the  two  rival  houses 
of  Aaron  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  3)  ;  here  again,  as  in  the 
case  of  the  two  prophets,  one,  Abiathar,6  who  at- 
tended him  at  Jerusalem,  companion  of  his  exile, 
and  connected  with  the  old  time  of  the  judges, 
(1  Chr.  xxvii.  34),  joining  him  after  the  death  of 
Saul,  aud  becoming  afterwards  the  support  of  his 
son,  the  other  Zadok,  who  ministered  at  Gibeon 
(I  Chr.  xvi.  39),  and  who  was  made  the  head  of 
the  Aaronie  family  ( xxvii.  17).  Besides  these  four 
great  religious  functionaries  there  were  two  elates 
of  subordinates — prophets,  specially  instructed  in 
singing  and  music,  under  Asaph,  Heman,  the 
grandson  of  Samuel,  and  Jeduthun  (1  Chr.  xxv. 
1-31) —  Levites,  or  attendants  on  the  sanctuary, 
who  again  were  subdivided  into  the  guardians  of 
the  gates  and  guardians  of  the  treasures  (1  Chr. 
xxvi.  i.-28)  which  had  been  accumulated,  since  the 
re-establishment  of  the  nation,  by  Samuel,  Saul, 
Abner,  Joab,  and  David  himself  (1  Chr.  xxvi. 
26-28). 

The  collection  of  those  various  ministers  and  re- 
presentatives of  worship  round  the  capital  must 
have  given  a  new  aspect  to  the  history  in  David's 
time,  such  as  it  had  not  borne  under  the  discon- 
nected  period  of  the  Judges.  But  the  main  pecu- 
liarity of  the  whole  must  have  been,  that  it  so  well 
harmonized  with  the  character  of  him  who  was  its 
centre.  As  his  early  martial  life  still  placed  him 
at  the  head  of  the  military  organization  which  had 
sprung  up  around  him,  so  his  early  education  aud 
his  natural  disposition  placed  him  at  the  head  of 
his  own  religious  institutions.  Himself  a  prophet, 
a  psalmist,  he  was  one  in  heart  with  those  whose 
advice  he  sought,  and  whose  arts  he  fostered.    And, 

c  As  in  the  court  of  Persia  (Herod,  vi.  100,  vii.  90, 
viii.  100). 

d  2  Sam.  xii.  25,  is  by  some  interpreters  rendered, 
"  He  put  him  (Solomon)  under  the  hand  of  Nathan  ;" 
thus  making  Nathan  Solomon's  preceptor.  (See 
Chandler,  ii.  272.) 

e  Compare  Blunt,  II.  TV. 

f  6  iepeus  to!  yeVet  (Joseph.  Ant.  vii.  12,  §4). 

s  By  the  reduction  of  Gath,  1  Chr.  xviii.  1. 

h  The  punishment  on  the  Moabitcs  is  too  obscurely 
worded  to  he  explained  at  length.  A  Jewish  tradition 
(which  shows  that  there  was  a  sci^e  of  its  being  cx- 
cessive)  maintained  that  it  was  in  consequence  of  the 


DAVID 

more  remarkably  still,  though  not  himself  a  priest, 
he  yet  assumed  almost  all  the  functions  usually 
ascribed  to  the  priestly  office.  He  wore,  as  we  have 
seen,  the  priestly  dress,  offered  the  sacrifices,  gave 
the  priestly  benediction  (2  Sam.  vi.  14,  17,  18); 
and,  as  if  to  include  his  whole  court  within  the 
same  sacerdotal  sanctity,  Benaiah  the  captain  of  his 
guard  was  a  priest f  by  descent  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  5), 
and  joined  in  the  sacred  music  (1  Chr.  xvi.  6); 
David  himself  and  "  the  captains  of  the  host "  ar- 
ranged the  prophetical  duties  (1  Chr.  xxv.  1);  and 
his  sous  are  actually  called  "  priests"  (2  Sam.  viii. 
18;  1  Chr.  xviii.  17,  translated  "chief,"  and 
av\apxai,  "chief  rulers"),  as  well  as  Ira,  of 
Manasseh  (2  Sam.  xx.  26,  translated  "  chief  ruler," 
but  LXX.  lepevs).  Such  a  union  was  never  seen 
before  or  since  in  the  Jewish  history.  Even  Solo- 
mon fell  below  it  in  some  important  points.  But 
from  this  time  the  idea  took  possession  of  the  Jewish 
mind  and  was  never  lost.  What  the  heathen  his- 
torian Justin  antedates,  by  referring  it  back  to 
Aaron,  is  a  just  description  of  the  eflect  of  the  reign 
of  David : — Sacerdos  mox  rex  creatur ;  semperque 
exinde  hie  mos  apud  Judaeos  fuit  ut  eosdem  reges 
et  sacerdotes  haberent ;  quorum  justitid  religione 
permixtd,  incredibile  quantum  coaluere  (Justin, 
xxxvi.  2). 

(d.)  From  the  internal  state  of  David's  kingdom, 
we  pass  to  its  external  relations.  These  will  lie 
found  at  length  under  the  various  countries  to 
which  they  relate.  It  will  be  here  only  necessary 
to  briefly  indicate  the  enlargement  of  his  domi- 
nions. Within  10  years  from  the  capture  of  Jeru- 
salem, he  had  reduced  to  a  state  of  permanent  sub- 
jection the  Philistines8  on  the  west  (2  Sam.  viii. 
1);  the  Moabites  h  on  the  east  (2  Sam.  viii.  2), 
by  the  exploits  of  Benaiah  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  20);  the 
&YRIANS  on  the  north-east  as  far  as  the  Euphrates  ' 
(2  Sam.  viii.  3)  ;.  the  EDOMITESk  (2  Sam.  viii. 
14),  on  the  south;  and  finally  the  AMMONITES,1 
who  had  broken  their  ancient  alliance,  and  made 
one  grand  resistance  to  the  advance  of  his  em- 
pire (2  Sam.  x.  1-19,  xii.  26-31).  These  three  last 
wars  were  entangled  nl  with  each  other.  The  last 
and  crowning  point  was  the  siege  of  Kabbah. 
The  ark  went  with  the  host  (2  Sam.  xi.  11).  David 
himself  was  present  at  the  capture  of  the  city 
(2  Sam.  xii.  29).  The  savage  treatment  of  the 
inhabitants — the  only  instance  as  far  as  appears  of 
cruel  severity  against  his  enemies — is  perhaps  to 
be  explained  by  the  formidable  nature  of  their  re- 
sistance— as  the  like  stain  on  the  generosity  of 
the  Black  Prince  in  the  massacre  of  Limoges. 
The  royal  crown,  or  "  crown  of  Milcom, " 
was  placed  on  David's  head  (2  Sam.  xii.  30),  and 
according  to  Josephus  {Ant.  vii.  5)  was  always 
worn  by  him  afterwards.  The  Hebrew  tradition 
(Jerome,  Qu_  Heb.  ad  1  Chr.  xx.  2)  represents  it 
as  having  been  the  diadem  of  the  Ammonite  go  I 

Moabites  having  murdered  David's  parents,  when 
confided  to  them,  1  Sam.  xxii.  3  (Chandler,  ii. 
1G3). 

'  Described  briefly  in  a  fragment  of  Nicolaus  of 
Damascus,  in  Joseph.  Ant.  vii.  5,  §2,  and  Eupolemus, 
in  Eus.  Pracp.  Ev.  ix.  30. 

k  To  these  Eupolemus  adds  the  Nabateans  and  Ncb- 
daeans. 

1  For  the  details  of  the  punishment,  see  Rabuaii  , 
Chandler  (ii.  237,  23S)  interprets  it  of  hard  servitude. 
Ewald  (iii.  204),  of  actual  torture  and  slaughter. 

'"  The  story  appears  to  be  told  twice  over  (2  Sam, 
viii.  3-14,  x.  1— xi.  1,  xii.  26-31). 


DAVID 

Milcom,  or  Moloch ;  and  that  Ittai  the  Gittite 
(doing  what  no  Israelite  could  have  done,  for  fear 
of  pollution)  tore  it  from  the  idol's  head,  and 
brought  it  to  David.  The  general  peace  which 
followed  was  commemorated  in  the  name  of  "  the 
Peaceful"  (Solomon),  given  to  the  son  horn  to  him 
at  this  crisis.11 

To  these  wars  in  general  may  be  ascribed  Ps.  ex., 
as  illustrating  both  the  sacerdotal  character  of  David, 
and  also  his  mode  of  going  forth  to  battle.  To  the 
Edomite  war,  both  by  its  title  and  contents  must 
be  ascribed  Ps.  Ix.  6-12  (cviii.  7-13),  describing 
the  assault  on  Petra.  Ps.  lxviii.  may  probably 
have  received  additional  touches,  as  it  was  sung  on 
the  return  of  the  ark  from  the  siege  of  Kabbah." 
Ps.  xviii.P  (repeated  in  2  Sam.  xxii.)  is  ascribed  by 
its  title,  and  appears  from  some  expressions  to 
belong  to  the  day  "  When  the  Lord  had  delivered 
him  out  of  the  hand  of  all  his  enemies,"  as  well 
as  "out  of  the  hand  of  Saul "  (2  Sam.  xxii.  1  ;  Ps. 
xviii.  1).  That  "  day"  may  be  either  at  this  time 
or  at  the  end  of  his  life.  Ps.  xx.  (Syr.  Vers.)  and 
xxi.  relate  to  the  general  union  of  religious  and  of 
military  excellencies  displayed  at  this  time  of  his 
career. (Ps.  xxi.  3;  "Thou  settest  a  crown  of  pure 
gold  upon  his  head,"  not  improbably  refers  to  the 
golden  crown  of  Amnion,  2  Sam.  xii.  3(J-) 

(3.)  In  describing  the  incidents  of  the  life  of 
David  after  his  accession  to  the  throne  of  Israel, 
most  of  the  details  will  be  best  found  under  the 
names  to  which  they  refer.  Here  it  will  be  needful 
only  to  give  a  brief  thread,  enlarging  on  those  points 
in  which  David's  individual  character  is  brought 
out. 

Three  great  calamities  may  be  selected  as  marking 
the  beginning,  middle,  and  close,  of  David's  other- 
wise prosperous  reign ;  which  appears  to  be  inti- 
mated in  the  question  of  Gad,  2  Sam.  xxiv.  13, 
*'  a  three q  years'  famine,  a  three  months'  flight,  or 
a  three  days'  pestilence."  r 

(a.)  Of  these,  the  first  (the  three  years'  famine) 
introduces  us  to  the  last  notices  of  David's  rela- 
tions8 with  the  house  of  Saul.  There  has  often 
arisen  a  painful  suspicion  in  later  times,  as  theie 
seems  to  have  been  at  the  time  (xvi.  7),  that  the 
oracle  which  gave  as  the  cause  of  the  famine  Saul's 
massacre  of  the  Gibeonites,  may  have  been  con- 
nected with  the  desire  to  extinguish  the  last  remains 
of  the  fallen  dynasty.  But  such  an  explanation  is 
not  needed.  The  massacre  was  probably  the  most 
recent  national  crime  that  had  left  any  deep  im- 
pression ;  and  the  whole  tenor  of  David's  conduct 
towards  Saul's  family  is  of  an  opposite  kind.  It  was 
then  that  he  took  tin'  opportunity  of  removing  the 
bodies  of  Saul  and  Jonathan  to  their  own  anees- 


DAVID 


411 


n  The  golden  shields  taken  in  the  Syrian  wars 
remained  long  afterwards  as  trophies  in  the  temple 
at  Jerusalem  (2  Sam.  viii.  7  ;  Cant.  iv.  4).  [Arms, 
Shelet,  p.  112.]  The  brass  was  used  for  the  brazen 
basins  and  pillars  (2  Sam.  viii.  8  ;  LXX.). 

°  See  Hengstenberg  on  Ps.  lxviii. 

P  The  imagery  of  the  thunderstorm,  Ts.  xviii.7-14, 
may  possibly  allude  to  the  events  cither  of  2  Sam.  v. 
20-24  (Chandler,  ii.  211),  or  of  2  Sam.  vi.  8. 

i  So  LXX.  and  1  Chr.  xxi.  12,  instead  of  seven. 

r  Ewald,  iii.  207. 

s  That  this  incident  took  place  early  in  the  reign, 
appears  (1)  from  the  freshness  of  the  allusion  to 
Saul's  act  (2  Sam.  xxi.  1-8)  ;  (2)  from  the  allusions 
to  the  massacre  of  Saul's  sons  in  nix.  'j8  ;  (3)  from 
the  apparent  connexion  of  the  story  with  eh.  ix. 

1  The  mention  of  Advul  necessitates  the  reading  of 


tral  sepulchre  at  Zela£  (2  Sam.  xxi.  14) ;  and  it  was 
then,  or  shortly  before,  that  he  gave  a  permanent 
home  and  restored  all  the  property  of  the  family  to 
Mephibosheth,  the  only  surviving  son  of  Jonathan 
(2  Sam.  ix.  1-13,  xxi.  7).  The  seven  who  perished 
were,  two  sons  of  Saul  by  Rizpah,  and  five  grand- 
sons— sons  of  Merab1  and  Adriel  (2  Sam.  xxi.  8). 

(b.)  The  second  group  of  incidents  contains  the 
tragedy  of  David's  life,  which  grew  in  all  its  parts 
out  of  the  polygamy,  with  its  evil  consequences,  into 
which  he  had  plunged  on  becoming  king.  Under- 
neath the  splendour  of  his  last  glorious  campaign 
against  the  Ammonites,  was  a  dark  story,  known  pro- 
bably at  that  time  only  to  a  very  few ;  and  even  in 
later  times,"  kept  as  much  as  possible  out  of  the 
view  of  the  people,  but  now  recognised  as  one  of 
the  most  instructive  portions  of  his  career — the 
double  crime  of  adultery  with  Bathsheba,  and  of  the 
virtual  murder  of  Uriah.  The  crimes"  are  undoubt- 
edly those  of  a  common  Oriental  despot.  But  the 
rebuke  of  Nathan  ;  the  sudden  revival  of  the  king's 
conscience  ;  his  grief  for  the  sickness  of  the  child  ; 
the  gathering  of  his  uncles  and  elder  brothers 
around  him  ;  his  return  of  hope  and  peace ;  are  cha- 
racteristic of  David,  and  of  David  only.  And  if  we 
add  to  these  the  two  Psalms,  the  32nd  and  the  51st, 
of  which  the  first  by  its  acknowledged  internal 
evidence,  the  2nd  by  its  title7  also  claim  to  belong 
to  this  crisis  of  David's  life,  we  shall  feel  that  the 
instruction  drawn  from  the  sin  has  more  than  com- 
pensated to  us  at  least  for  the  scandal  occasioned 
by  it. 

But,  though  the  "  free  spirit"  and  "  clean  heart '' 
of  David  returned,  and  though  the  birth  of  Solomon 
was  as  auspicious  as  if  nothing  had  occurred  to 
trouble  the  victorious  festival  which  succeeded  it ; 
the  clouds  from  this  time  gathered  over  David's 
fortunes,  and  henceforward  "  the  sword  never  de- 
parted from  his  house"  (2  Sam.  xii.  10).  The 
outrage  on  his  daughter  Tamar  ;  the  murder  of  his 
eldest  son  Amnon ;  and  then  the  revolt  of  his  best 
beloved  Absalom,  brought  on  the  crisis,  which  once 
more  sent  him  forth  a  wanderer,  as  in  the  days 
when  he  fled  from  Saul;  and  this,  the  heaviest  trial 
of  his  life  was  aggravated  by  the  impetuosity  of  Joab, 
now  perhaps  from  his  complicity  in  David's  crime 
more  unmanageable  z  than  ever.  The  rebellion  was 
fostered  apparently  by  the  growing  jealousy  of  the 
tribe  of  Judah  at  seeing  their  king  absorbed  into 
the  whole  nation ;  and  if,  as  appears  from'1  2  Sam. 
xi.  3,  xxiii.  34,  Ahithophel  was  the  grandfather  of 
Bathsheba,  its  main  supporter  was  one  whom  David 
had  provoked  by  his  own  crimes.  For  its  general 
course,  the  reader  is  referred  to  the  names  just  men- 
tioned.    But  two  or  three  of  its  scenes  relate  so 


Merah  for  Michal. 

u  It  is  omitted  in  the  Chronicles. 

x  This  is  the  subject  of  one  of  the  apocryphal  col- 
loquies of  David  (Fabric.  Cod,  Apo'C.  I'.  Test.  p.  1000). 
The  story  is  also  told  in  the  Koran  (xxxviii.  20-24), 
and  w  ild  legends  are  formed  out  of  it  (Weil's  Legends, 
p.  1.-.S-1G0,  170). 

y  Ewald  places  it  after  the  captivity.  From  the  two 
last  verses  (li.  IS,  10)  this  would  be  the  almost  cer- 
tain conclusion,  But  is  it  not  allowable  to  suppose 
these  verses  to  be  an  adaptation  of  the  psalm  to  that 
later  time  ? 

1  See  Blunt's  Coincidences,  II.  xi.  for  a  theory  per- 
haps loo  much  elaborated,  yet  not  without  some 
foundation. 

■  Blunt,  II.  x.;  Jerome,  Qti.  Heb.  on  2  Sam. 
xi.  3. 


412 


DAVID 


touchingly  and  peculiarly  to  David,  that  this  is  the 
place  for  dwelling  upon  them. 

The  first  is  the  most  detailed  description  of  any 
single  day  that  we  rind  in  the  Jewish  history. 

It  was  apparently  early  on  the  morning  of  the 
day  after  he  had  received  the  news  of  the  rebellion 
at  Hebron  that  the  king  left  tire  city  of  Jerusalem 
on  foot.  He  was  accompanied  by  a  vast  concourse; 
in  the  midst  of  which  he  and  his  body-guard  were 
conspicuous.  They  started  from  a  house  on  the 
outskirts  of  the  city  (2  Sam.  xv.  17,  LXX.),  and 
every  stage  of  the  mournful  procession  was  marked 
by  some  incident  which  called  forth  a  proof  of  the 
deep  and  lasting  affection  which  the  king's  peculiar 
character  had  the  power  of  inspiring  in  all  who 
knew  him.  The  first  distinct  halt  was  by  a  solitary 
olive-tree  (2  Sam.  xv.  18,  LXX.)  that  marked  the 
road  to  the  wilderness  of  the  Jordan.  Amongst 
his  guard  of  Philistines  mid  his  faithful  company  of 
600  b  he  observed  Ittai  of  Gath,  and  with  the  true 
nobleness  of  his  character  entreated  the  Philistine 
chief  not  to  peril  his  own  or  his  countrymen's  lives 
in  the  service  of  a  fallen  and  a  stranger  sovereign. 
But  Ittai  declared  his  resolution  (with  a  fervour 
which  almost  inevitably  recalls  a  like  profession 
made  almost  on  the  same  spot  to  the  great  de- 
scendant of  David  centuries  afterwards)  to  follow 
him  in  life  and  in  death.  They  all  passed  over  the 
ravine  of  the  Kedron ;  and  here,  when  it  became 
apparent  that  the  king  was  really  bent  on  depar- 
ture, "  the  whole  land  wept  with  a  loud  voice  " — 
the  mountain  and  the  valley  resounded  with  the 
wail  of  the  people.  At  this  point  they  were  over- 
taken by  the  two  priests,  Zadok  and  Abiathar, 
bringing  the  ark  from  its  place  on  the  sacred  hill 
to  accompany  David  on  his  flight — Abiathar,  the 
elder,  going  forward  up  the  mountain,  as  the  mul- 
titude defiled  past  him.  Again,  with  a  spirit 
worthy  of  the  king,  who  was  prophet  as  well  as 
priest,  David  turned  them  back.  He  had  no  su- 
perstitious belief  in  the  ark  as  a  charm  ;  he  had  too 
much  reverence  for  it  to  risk  it  in  his  personal 
peril.  And  now  the  whole  crowd  turned  up  the 
mountain  pathway;  all  wailing,  all  with  their  heads 
muffled  as  they  went ;  the  king  only  distinguished 
from  the  rest  by  his  unsandalled  feet.  At  the  top 
of  the  mountain,  consecrated  by  an  altar  of  worship, 
they  were  met  by  Hushai  the  Archite,  "  the  friend," 
as  he  was  officially  called,  of  the  king.  The  priestly 
garment,  which  lie  worec  after  the  fashion  as  it 
would  seem  of  David's  chief  officers,  was  torn,  and 
his  head  was  smeared  with  dust,  in  the  bitterness 
of  his  grief.  In  him  David  saw  his  first  gleam 
of  hope.  A  moment  before,  the  tidings  had  come 
of  the  treason  of  Ahithophel ;  and  to  frustrate  his 
designs  Hushai  was  sent  back,  just  in  time  to  meet 
Absalom  arriving  from  Hebron.  It  was  noon 
when  David  passed  over  the  mountain  top,  and 
now,  as  Jerusalem  was  left  behind,  and  the  new 
scene  opened  before  him,  two  new  characters  ap- 
peared, both  in  connexion  with  the  hostile  tribe  of 
Benjamin,  whose  territory  they  were  entering.  One 
was  Ziba,  servant  of  Mephibosheth,  taking  advantage 
of  the  civil  war  to  make  his  own  fortunes.  At  Ba- 
hui'im,  also  evidently  on  the  downward  pass,  came 


b  Ewald,  iii.  177,  note.  According  to  the  reading 
of  Gibborim  for  Gittim. 

c  2  Sam.  xv.  32.  Cutaneth;  -rov  \i-Toiva  ;  A.  V. 
"  coat." 

d  Blunt,  II.  x. 

0  Comp.    2   Sam.   xv.    28,   xix.    is    (both   Chetib ; 


DAVID 

forth  one  of  its  inhabitants,  Shimei,  in  whose  furious 
curses  broke  out  the  long  suppressed  hatred  of  the 
fallen  family  of  Saul,  as  well  perhaps  as  the  po- 
pular feeling  against  the  murderer d  of  Uriah.  With 
characteristic  replies  to  both,  the  king  descended  to 
the  Jordan  valley  (2  Sam.  xvi.  14;  and  comp.  xvii. 
22  ;  Jos.  Ant.  vii,  9,  §4)  and  there  rested  alter  the 
long  and  eventful  day  at  the  ford  or  bridge6 
(Abara)  of  the  river.  At  midnight  they  were 
aroused  by  the  arrival  of  the  two  sons  of  the  high 
priests,  and  by  break  of  dawn  they  had  reached  the 
opposite  side  in  safety. 

To  the  dawn  of  that  morning  is  to  be  ascribed 
Ps.  iii.,  and  (according  to  .Ewald,  though  this 
seems  less  certain)  to  the  previous  evening,  Ps. 
iv.  Ps.  cxliii.  by  its  title  in  the  LXX. — "  When 
his  sou  was  pursuing  him,"  belongs  to  this  time. 
Also  by  long  popular  belief  the  trans- Jordanic  exile 
of  Ps.  xlii.  has  been  supposed  to  be  David,  and  the 
complaints  of  Ps.  Iv.,  lxix.,  and  cix.,  to  be  levelled 
against  Ahithophel. 

The  history  of  the  remaining  period  f  of  the 
rebellion  is  compressed  into  a  brief  summary.  Ma- 
hanaim  was  the  capital  of  David's  exile,  as  it  had 
been  of  the  exiled  house  of  Saul. (2  Sam.  xvii.  24, 
com]),  ii.  8,  12).  Three  great  chiefs  of  that  pastoral 
district  are  specially  mentioned  as  supporting  him  ; 
one,  of  great  age,  not  before  named,  Barzillai  the  Gi- 
leadite  ;  the  two  others,  bound  to  him  by  former  ties, 
Shobi,  the  son  of  David's  ancient  friend  Xahash, 
probably  put  by  David  in  his  brother's  place  (xii.  30, 
x.  2)  ;  and  Machir,  the  son  of  Ammiel,  the  former 
protector  of  the  child  of  David's  friend  Jonathan 
(2  Sam.  xvii.  27,  ix.  4).  His  forces  were  arranged 
under  the  three  great  military  officers  who  remained 
faithful  to  his  fortunes — Joab,  captain  of  the  host ; 
Abishai,  captain  of  "  the  mighty  men  ;"  and  Ittai, 
who  seems  to  have  taken  the  place  of  Benaiah 
(had  he  wavered  in  his  allegiance,  or  was  he  ap- 
pointed afterwards  ?),  as  captain  of  the  guard 
(2  Sam.  xviii.  2).  On  Absalom's  side,  was  David's 
nephew,  Amasa  (ib.  xvii.  25).  The  wailike  spirit 
of  the  old  king  and  of  his  faithful  followers  at  this 
extremity  of  their  fortunes  is  well  depicted  by 
Hushai,  "  chafed  in  their  minds,  as  a  bear  robbed 
of  her  whelps  in  the  '  field '  (or  a  fierce  wild  boar 
in  the  Jordan  valley,  LXX.) :"  the  king  himself, 
as  of  old,  "  lodging  not  with  the  people,"  but  "  hid 
in  some  pit  or  some  other  place"  (2  Sam.  xvii.  8, 
9).  The  final  battle  was  fought  in  the  "forest  of 
Ephraim,"  which  terminated  in  the  accident  leading 
to  the  deaths  of  Absalom.  At  this  point  the  nar- 
rative resumes  its  minute  detail.  As  if  to  mark  the 
greatness  of  the  calamity,  every  particular  of  its 
first  reception  is  recorded.  David  was  waiting  the 
event  of  the  battle  in  the  gateway  of  Mahanaim. 
Two  messengers,  each  endeavouring  to  outstrip  the 
other,  were  seen  running  breathless  from  the  held. 
The  first  who  arrived  was  Ahimaaz,  the  son  of 
Zadok,  already  employed  as  a  messenger  on  the  first 
day  of  the  king's  flight.  He  had  been  entreated  by 
Joab  not  to  make  himself  the  bearer  of  tidings  so 
mournful ;  and  it  would  seem  that  when  he  came  to  the 
point  his  heart  failed,  and  he  spoke  only  of  the  great 
confusion  in  which  he  had  left  the  army.     At  this 


the  Keri  has  Araboth,  i.e.  the  "plains"  or  "de- 
serts"). 

1  If  Ewald's  interpretation  of  2  Sam.  xxiv.  13,  be 
correct,  it  was  3  months.  The  Jewish  tradition  (in 
Jerome,  Qu.  Heb.  on  2  Sam.  iv.  4)  makes  it  0. 

K  For  the  Mussulman  legend,  sec  Weil,  p.  161. 


DAVID 

moment  the  other  messenger  burst  in — a  stranger, 
perhaps  an  Ethiopian  h — and  abruptly  revealed  the 
fatal  news  (2  Sam.  xviii.  19-32).  [Cusm.]  The 
passionate  burst  of  grief  which  followed,  is  one  of 
the  best  proofs  of  the  deep  arlection  of  David's  cha- 
racter. He  wrapt  himself  up  in  his  sorrow  ;  and 
even  at  the  very  moment  of  his  triumph,  he  could 
not  forget  the  hand  that  had  slain  his  son.  He 
made  a  solemn  vow  to  supersede  Joab  by  Amasa, 
and  in  this  was  laid  the  lasting  breach  between 
himself  and  his  powerful  nephew,  which  neither  the 
one  nor  the  other  ever  forgave  (2  Sam.  xix.  13). 

The  return  was  marked  at  every  stage  by  rejoic- 
ing and  amnesty, — Shimei  forgiven,  Mephibosheth' 
partially  reinstated,  Barzillai  rewarded  by  the  gifts 
long  remembered, to  his  son  Chimiiam  (2  Sam.. xix. 
16-40;  1  K.  ii.  7).  Judah  was  first  reconciled. 
The  embers  of  the  insurrection  still  smouldering 
(2  Sam.  xix.  41-43)  in  David's  hereditary  enemies 
of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  were  trampled  out  by 
the  mixture  of  boldness  and  sagacity  in  Joab,  now, 
after  the  murder  of  Amasa,  once  more  in  his  old 
position.  And  David  again  reigned  in  undisturbed 
peace  at  Jerusalem  (2  Sam.  xx.  1-22).  J 

(c.)  The  closing  period  of  David's  life,  with  the 
exception  of  one  great  calamity,  may  be  considered 
as  a  gradual  preparation  for  the  reign  of  his  suc- 
cessor. This  calamity  was  the  three  days'  pesti- 
lence which  visited  Jerusalem  at  the  warning  of  the 
prophet  Gad.  The  occasion  which  led  to  this  warn- 
ing was  the  census  of  the  people  taken  by  Joab  at 
the  king's  orders  (2  Sam.  xxi v.  1-9;  1  Chr.  xxi. 
1-7,  xxvii.  23,  24)  ;  an  attempt  not  unnaturally 
suggested  by  the  increase  of  his  power,  but  imply- 
ing a  confidence  and  pride  alien  to  the  spirit  incul- 
cated on  the  kings  of  the  chosen  people  [see  Num- 
BERS].  Joab's  repugnance  to  the  measure  was 
such  that  he  refused  altogether  to  number  Levi  and 
Benjamin  (1  Chr.  xxi.  6).  The  king  also  scrupled 
to  number  those  who  were  under  20  years  of  age 
(1  Chr.  xxvii.  23),  and  the  final  result  never  was 
recorded  in  the  "  Chronicles  of  King  David " 
(1  Chr.  xxvii.  24).  The  plague,  however,  and  its 
cessation  were  commemorated  down  to  the  latesttimes 
of  the  Jewish  nation.  Possibly  Ps.  xxx.  and  xci. 
had  reference  (whether  David's  or  not)  to  this  time. 
But  a  more  certain  memorial  was  preserved  on  the 
exact  spot  which  witnessed  the  close  of  the  pesti- 
lence,  or,  as  it  was  called,  like  the  Black  Death  of 
L348,  "  The  Death."  Outside  the  walls  of  Jerusa- 
lem, Araunah  or  Oman,  a  wealthy  Jebusite — per- 
haps even  the  ancient  king  of  Jebus  (2  Sam.  xxiv. 
■_■:;,'< — possessed  a  threshing-floor;  there  he  and  his 

h  "  Cushi" — or  Hebrew  ha-Cushi,  with  the  article. 
It  is  doubtful  whether  it  is  a  proper  name. 

1  The  injustice  done  to  Mephibosheth  by  this  divi- 
sion of  his  property  was  believed  in  later  traditions 
to  be  the  sin  which  drew  down  the  division  of  David's 
kingdom  (Jerome,  Qu.  Heb.  on  2  Sam.  xix.).  The 
question  is  argued  at  length  by  Selden,  De  Successione, 
c.  25,  pp.  G7,  68.      (Chandler,  ii.  376.) 

i  To  many  English  readers,  the  events  and  names 
of  this  period  have  acquired  a  double  interest  from 
the  power  and  skill  with  which  Dryden  has  made  the 
story  of  "  Absalom  and  Ahithophet"  the  basis  of  his 
political  poem  on  the  Court  of  King  Charles  II. 

k  In  the  original  the  expression  is  much  stronger 
than  in  the  A.  V. — "  Araunah,  the  king."  [Sec 
Aravnah.] 

1  This  apparition  is  also  described  in  a  fragment 
of  the  heathen  historian  Eupolemus  (Eus.  Praep.  Kr. 
ix.  30),  but  is  confused  with  the  warning  of  Nathan 


DAVID 


41; 


sons  were  engaged  in  threshing  the  corn  gathered  in 
from  the  harvest  (1  Chr.  xxi.  20).  At  this  spot 
an  awful  vision  appeared,  such  as  is  described  in 
the  later  days  of  Jerusalem,  of  the  Angel  of  the 
Lord  stretching  out  a  drawn  sword  between  earth 
and  sky  over  the  devoted  city.1  The  scene  of  such 
an  apparition  at  such  a  moment  was  at  once  marked 
out  for  a  sanctuary.  David  demanded,  and  Araunah 
willingly  granted,  the  site;  the  altar  was,  erected 
on  the  rock  of  the  threshing-floor ;  the  place  was 
called  by  the  name  of  "  Moriah  "  (2  Chr.  iii.  1)  ; 
and  for  the  first  time  a  holy  place,1"  sanctified  by  a 
vision  of  the  Divine  presence,  was  recognised  in 
Jerusalem.  It  was  this  spot  which  afterwards 
became  the  altar  of  the  Temple,  and  therefore  the 
centre  of  the  national  worship,  with  but  slight 
interruption,  for  more  than  1000  years,  and  it  is 
even  contended  that  the  same  spot  is  the  rock,  still 
regarded  with  almost  idolatrous  veneration,  in  the 
centre  of  the  Mussulman  "  Dome  of  the  Kock  "  (see 
Professor  Willis  in  Williams'  Holy  City,  ii.). 

The  selection  of  the  site  of  this  altar  probably 
revived  the  schemes  of  the  king  for  the  building  of 
a  permanent  edifice  to  receive  the  ark,  which  still 
remained  inside  his  own  palace  in  its  temporary 
tent.  Such  schemes,  we  are  told,  he  had  enter- 
tained after  the  capture  of  Jerusalem,  or  at  the  end 
of  his  wars.  Two  reasons  were  given  for  their 
delay.  One,  that  the  ancient  nomadic  form n  of 
worship  was  not  yet  to  be  abandoned  (2  Sam.  vii.  6) ; 
the  other,  that  David's  wars0  unfitted  him  to  be 
the  founder  of  a  seat  of  peaceful  worship  (1  Chr. 
xxii.  8).  But  a  solemn  assurance  was  given  that 
his  dynasty  should  continue  "  for  ever"  to  continue 
the  work  (2  Sam.  vii.  13  ;  1  Chr.  xxii.  9,  10).  Such 
a  founder,  and  the  ancestor  of  such  a  dynasty,  was 
Solomon  to  be,  and  to  him  therefore  the  stores  v  and 
the  plans  of  the  future  Temple  (according  to  1  Chr. 
xxii.  2-19,  xxviii.  1-xxix.  19)  were  committed. 

A  formidable  conspiracy  to  interrupt  the  succes- 
sion broke  out  in  the  last  days  of  David's  reign 
[see  Adoxijah],  which  detached  from  his  person 
two  of  his  court,  who  from  personal  ollence  or  ad- 
herence to  the  ancient  family  had  been  alienated 
from  him — Joab  and  Abiathar.  But  Zadok,  Nathan, 
Benaiah,  Shimei,  and  Rei  q  remaining  firm,  the  plot 
was  stifled,  and  Soioriion's  inauguration  took  place 
under  his  father's  auspices  r  (]  K.  i.  1-53). 

The  Psalms  which  relate  to  this  period  are,  by 
title,  Ps.  xcii. ;  by  internal  evidence,  Ps.  ii. 

By  this  time  David's  infirmities  hail  grown  upon 
him.  The  warmth  of  his  exhausted  frame  was 
attempted  to  be  restored  by  the  introduction  of  a 


against  building  the  temple.  "  An  angel  pointed  out 
the  place  where  the  altar  was  to  be,  but  forbad  him 
to  build  the  temple,  as  being  stained  with  blood,  and 
having  fought  many  wars.    His  name  was  Dianathan." 

m  In  1  Chr.  xxi.  26.  a  fire  from  heaven  descends  to 
sanctify  the  altar.  This  is  not  mentioned  in  2  Sam. 
xxiv. 

n  This  is  the  subject  of  one  of  the  apocryphal  col- 
loquies (Fab.  Apoc.  v.  i.  p.  1004). 

°   In  this  respect  David  still  belonged   to  the  older 

generation  of  heroes.    See  Jerome,  Qu.  Web.  ad  Inc.) 
r  Eupolemus  (Eus.  Praep.  AV.ix.  SO)  makes  David 

send  tleets  for  these  stores  to  Elath  and  to  Ophir. 
i  Jerome  ( Qu.  Heb.adloc.)  renders  Rei  =  Ira,  not 

improbably.    Ewald's  conjecture   iii.  266,  note)  is  that 

he  is  identical  with  Raddai. 

'  Eupolemus  (Eus.  Praep.  Bo.)  ix.  30)  adds,  "  in 

the  presence  of  the  high-priest  Eli.'1 


414 


DAVID 


young  Shunammite,  of  the  name  of  Abishag,  men- 
tioned apparently  for  the  sake  of  an  incident  which 
grew  up  in  connexion  with  her  out  of  the  later 
events  (1  K.  i.  1,  ii.  17).  His  last  song  is  pre- 
served— a  striking  union  of  the  ideal  of  a  just  ruler 
which  he  had  placed  before  him,  and  of  the  diffi- 
culties which  he  had  felt  in  realizing  it  ('2  Sam. 
xxiii.  1-7).  His  last  words,  as  recorded,  to  his 
successor,  are  general  exhortations  to  his  duty,  com- 
bined with  warnings  against  Joab  and  Shimei,  and 
charges  to  remember  the  children  of  Barzillai  (1  K. 
ii.  1-9). 

He  died,  according  to  Josephus  [Ant.  viii.  15, 
2),  at  the  age  of  70,  and  "was  buried  in  the  city 
of  David."  s  After  the  return  from  the  captivity, 
"the  sepulchres  of  David"  were  still  pointed  out 
'  •  between  Siloah  and  the  house  of  the  '  mighty  men,"  " 
in-  -tin.' guardhouse.'  (Neh.iii.  16.)  His  tomb,  which 
became  the  general  sepulchre  of  the  kings  of  Judah, 
was  pointed  out  in  the  latest  times  of  the  Jewish 
people.  "  His  sepulchre  is  with  us  unto  this 
day,"  says  St.  Peter  at  Pentecost  (Acts  ii.  29)  ;  and 
Josephus  (Ant.  vii.  15,  3;  siii.  8,  4;  svi.  7,  1) 
states  that,  Solomon  having  buried  a  vast  treasure 
in  the  tomb,  one  of  its  chambers  was  broken  open 
by  Hyrcanus,  and  another  by  Herod  the  Great.  It 
is  said  to  have  fallen  into  ruin  in  the  time  of  Ha- 
drian  (Dio  Cassius,  lxix.  14).  In  Jerome's  time  a 
tomb,  so  called,  was  the  object  of  pilgrimage  (Ep. 
ad  Marcell.  17  (46),  but  apparently  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  Bethlehem.  The  edifice  shown  as  such 
from  the  Crusades  to  the  present  day  is  on  the 
southern  hill  of  modern  Jerusalem  commonly  called 
Mount  Zion,  under  the  so-called  "  Coenaculum." 
For  the  description  of  it  see  Barclay's  City  of  the 
Great  King,  p.  209.  For  the  traditions  concerning 
it  see  Williams'  Holy  City,  ii.  509-513.  The  so- 
called  "Tombs  of  the  Kings"  have  of  late  been 
claimed  as  the  royal  sepulchre  by  De  Saulcy  (ii. 
162-215),  who  brought  to  the  Louvre  (where  it 
may  bo  seen)  what  he  believed  to  be  the  lid  oi 
David's  sarcophagus.  But  these  tombs  are  outsidt 
the  walls,  and  therefore  cannot  be  identified  with 
the  tomb  of  David,  which  was  emphatically  within 
the  walls  (see  Robinson,  iii.  p.  252,  note). 

The  character  of  David  has  been  so  naturally 
brought  out  in  the  incidents  of  his  life  that  it  need 
not  be  here  described  in  detail.  In  the  complexity  of 
its  elements,1  passion,  tenderness,  generosity,  fierce- 
ness— the  soldier,  the  shepherd,  the  poet,  the  states- 
man, the  priest,  the  prophet,  the  king — the  ro- 
mantic friend,  the  chivalrous  leader,  the  devoted 
father — there  is  no  character  of  the  0.  T.  at  all 
to  be  compared  to  it.  Jacob  comes  nearest  in 
the  variety  of  elements  included  within  it.  But 
David's  character  stands  at  a  higher  point  of  the 
sacred  history,  and  represents  the  Jewish  people 
just  at  the  moment  of  their  transition  from  the 
lofty  virtues  of  the  older  system  to  the  fuller  civi- 
lisation and  cultivation  of  the  later.     In  this  man- 

s  A  striking  legend  of  his  death  is  preserved  in 
Weil's  Legends,  169,  170  ;  a  very  absurd  one,  in  Bas- 
nage,  Hist,  des  Juifs,  bk.  v.  ch.  2. 

1  This  variety  of  elements  is  strikingly  expressed 
in  "  the  Song  of  David,"  a  poem  written  by  the  un- 
fortunate Christopher  Smart  in  charcoal  on  the  walls 
of  his  cell,  in  the  intervals  of  madness. 

"  It  may  be  remarked  that  the  name  never  appears 
as  given  to  any  one  else  in  the  Jewish  history,  as  if, 
like  "  Peter  "  in  the  Papacy,  it  was  too  sacred  to  be 
appropriated. 

v  For  some  just  remarks  in  answer  to  Bayle  on  the 


DAVID 

ner  he  becomes  naturally,  if  one  may  so  say,  the 
likeness  or  portrait  of  the  last  and  grandest  de- 
velopment of  the  nation  and  of  the  monarchy  is 
the  person  and  the  period  of  the  Messiah,  in  a 
sense  more  than  figurative,  he  is  the  type  and  pro- 
phecy of  Jesus  Christ.  Christ  is  not  called  the  son 
of  Abraham,  or  of  Jacob,  or  of  Moses,  but  he  wis 
truly  "  the  son  of  David." 

To  his  own  people  his  was  the  name  most  dearly 
cherished  after  their  first  ancestor  Abraham.  "The 
city  of  David,"  "  the  house  of  David,"  "  the  throne 
of  David,"  "  the  seed  of  David,"  "  the  oath  sworn 
unto  David  "  (the  pledge  of  the  continuance  of  his 
dynasty),  are  expressions  which  pervade  the  whole 
of  the  Old  Testament  and  all  the  figurative  lan- 
guage of  the  New,  and  they  serve  to  mark  the 
lasting  significance  of  his  appearance  in  history." 

His  Psalms  (whether  those  actually  written  by 
himself  be  many  or  few)  have  been  the  source  of 
consolation  and  instruction  beyond  any  other  part 
of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures.  In  them  appear  qualities 
of  mind  and  religious  perceptions  not  before  ex- 
pressed in  the  sacred  writings,  but  eminently  cha- 
racteristic of  David,— the  love  of  nature,  the  sense 
of  sin,  and  the  tender,  ardent  trust  in,  and  com- 
munion with,  God.  No  other  part  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament comes  so  near  to  the  spirit  of  the  New. 
The  Psalms  are  the  only  expressions  of  devotion 
which  have  been  equally  used  through  the  whole 
Christian  Church  —  Abyssinian,  Greek,  Latin, 
Puritan,  Anglican. 

The  difficulties  which  attend  on  his  character  are 
valuable  as  proofs  of  the  impartiality  of  Scripture  in 
recording  them,  and  as  indications  of  the  union  of 
natural  power  and  weakness  which  his  character  in- 
cluded. The  Iiabbis  in  former  times,  and  critics  (like 
Bayle)"  in  later  times,  have  seized  on  its  dark  features 
and  exaggerated  them  to  the  utmost.  And  it  has 
been  often  asked,  both  by  the  scoffers  and  the  serious, 
how  the  man  after  God's  x  own  heart  could  have 
murdered  Uriah,  and  seduced  Bathsheba,  and  tor- 
tured the  Ammonites  to  death?  An  extract  from 
one  who  is  not  a  too-indulgent  critic  of  sacred  cha- 
racters expresses  at  once  the  common  sense  and  the 
religious  lesson  of  the  whole  matter.  "  Who  is 
called  '  the  man  after  God's  own  heart?'  David, 
the  Hebrew  king,  had  fallen  into  sins  enough — 
blackest  crimes — there  was  no  want  of  sin.  And 
therefore  the  unbelievers  sneer,  and  ask  '  Is  this 
your  man  according  to  God's  heart  ?  '  The  sneer, 
I  must  say,  seems  to  me  but  a  shallow  one.  What 
are  faults,  what  are  the  outward  details  of  a  life,  if 
the  inner  secret  of  it,  the  remorse,  temptations,  the 
often  baffled,  never  ended  struggle  of  it  be  for- 
gotten ?  .  .  .  David's  life  and  history  as  written 
for  us  in  those  Psalms  of  his,  I  consider  to  be  the 
truest  emblem  ever  given  us  of  a  man's  moral 
progress  and  warfare  here  below.  All  earnest  souls 
will  ever  discern  in  it  the  faithful  struggle  of  an 
earnest  human  soul  towards  what  is  good  and  best. 


necessity  of  taking  into  account  the  circumstances  of 
David's  age  and  country,  see  Dean  Milman's  Hist,  of 
the  Jews,  i.  247. 

x  This  expression  has  been  perhaps  too  much 
made  of.  It  occurs  only  once  in  the  Scriptures 
(1  Sam.  xiii.  14,  quoted  again  in  Acts  xiii.  22), 
where  it  merely  indicates  a  man  whom  God  will 
approve,  in  distinction  from  Saul  who  was  rejected. 
A  much  stronger  and  more  peculiar  commendation  of 
David  is  that  contained  in  1  K.  xv.  3-5,  anil  implied 
in  Ps.  lxxxix.  20-28. 


DAVID,  CITY  OF 

Struggle  often  baffled — sore  baffled — driven  as  into 
entire  wreck:  yet  a  struggle  never  ended,  ever 
with  tears,  repentance,  true  unconquerable  purpose 
begun  anew"  (Carlyle's  Heroes  and  Hero-  Worship, 
p.  72).  [A.  P.  S.] 

DAVD3,  CITY  OF.     [Jerusalem.] 

DAY  (Tom,  UY,  perhaps  from  Dn\  laivu,  to 
be  warm) .  The  variable  length  of  the  natural  day 
("  ab  exortu  ad  occasum  solis,"  Censor,  de  Die  Nat. 
23)  at  different  seasons  led  in  the  very  earliest 
times  to  the  adoption  of  the  civil  day  (or  one  revo- 
lution of  the  sun)  as  a  standard  of  time.  The 
commencement  of  the  civil  day  varies  in  different 
nations:  the  Babylonians  (like  the  people  of  Nu- 
remberg) reckoned  it  from  sunrise  to  sunrise  (Isidor. 
Orig.  v.  30);  the  Umbrians  from  noon  to  noon; 
the  Romans  from  midnight  to  midnight  (Plin.  ii. 
79);  the  Athenians  and  others  from  sunset  to  sun- 
set (Macrob.  Saturn,  i.  3  ;  Gell.  iii.  2). 

The  Hebrews  naturally  adopted  the  latter  reckon- 
ing (Lev.  xxiii.  32,  "  from  even  to  even  shall  ye 
celebrate  your  sabbath")  from  Gen.  i.  5,  "the 
evening  and  the  morning  were  the  first  day " 
(a  passage  which  the  Jews  are  said  to  have  quoted 
to  Alexander  the  Great  (Gem.  Jamid.  00,  1  ; 
Reland,  Ant.  llcbr.  iv.  15).  Some  (as  in  God- 
wyn's  Moses  and  Aaron)  argue  foolishly  from 
Matt,  xxviii.  1,  that  they  began  their  civil  day 
in  the  morning;  but  the  expression  iirupuffKovari 
shows  that  the  natural  day  is  there  intended. 
Hence  the  expressions  "  evening-morning  "  =  day 
(Dan.  viii.  14;  LXX.  vvx^V^pov ;  also  2  Cor. 
xi.  25),  the  Hindoo  ahoratra  (Von  Bohlen  on 
(ien.  i.  4),  and  wx^vfJ-epov  (2  Cor.  xi.  25). 
There  was  a  similar  custom  among  the  Athenians, 
Arabians,  and  ancient  Teutons  (Tac.  Germ,  xi., 
"  nee  dierum  numerum  ut  apud  nos,  sed  noctium 
computant  .  .  .  nox  ducere  diem  videtur ")  and 
Celtic  nations  (Caes.  de  B.  G.  vi.  18,  "  ut  noctem 
dies  subsequatur  ").  This  mode  of  reckoning  was 
widely  spread  ;  it  is  found  in  the  Roman  law  (Gaius, 
i.  112),  in  the  Niebelungenlied,  in  the  Salic  law 
(inter  decern  nodes),  in  our  own  terms  "  fort- 
night,"  "  seven-nights "  (see  Orelli,  &c.  in  loc. 
Tac),  and  even  among  the  Siamese  ("  they  reckon 
by  nights,"  Bowriug,  i.  137)  and  New  Zealanders 
(Taylor's  Te-Ika-Maui,  p.  20).  No  doubt  this 
arose  from  the  general  notion  "  that  the  first  day 
in  Eden  was  36  hours  long''  (Lightfoot's  Works, 
ii.  334,  ed.  Pitman;  Hes.  Theogon.  123;  Aristoph. 
,\r.  693;  Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  iv.  274).  Kalisch 
plausibly  refers  it  to  the  use  of  lunar  years  (Gi  n.  p. 
67).  Sometimes  however  they  reckoned  from  sun- 
rise    qp.epovvKTiov.  comp.  Ps.  i.  2  ;  Lev.  vii.  15). 

The  Jews  are  supposed,  like  the  modern  Arabs, 
to  have  adopted  from  an  early  period  minute 
specifications  of  the  parts  of  the  natural  day. 
Roughly  indeed  they  wore  content  to  divide  it  into 
"morning,  evening,  and  noonday"  (l's.  Iv.  17V 
but  when  they  wished  for  greater  accuracy  they 
pointed  to  six  unequal  parts,  each  of  which  was 
again  subdivided.    These  are  held  to  have  been: — 

I.  Nesheph,  SjtJO  (from  »]l"J,  "  to  Mow  '*)  and 
8h  toluxr,  1K1X&,  or  the  dawn.  After  their  acquaint- 
ance with  Persia  they  divided  this  into,  (a)  the  time 
when  the  eastern,  and  (6)  when  the  western  horizon 
was  illuminated,  like  the  Greek  Leucothea — Matuta 
— and  Aurora;  or  "  the  gray  dawn "  (Milton),  and 
the  rosy  dawn.  Hence  we  find  the  dual  Shaha- 
raim    as    a    proper    name    (1    (lir.    viii.    8).      The 


DAY 


415 


writers  of  the  Jems.  Talmud  divide  the  dawn  into 
four  parts,  of  which  the  (1.)  was  Aijeleth  hasha- 
char,  "  the  gazelle  of  the  morning  "  [Aijeleth 
Shaiiar],  a  name  by  which  the  Arabians  call  the 
sun  (comp.  "  eyelids  of  the  dawn,"  Job  iii.  9  ; 
a/x(pas  [iAecpapov,  Soph.  Antig.  109).  This  was 
the  time  when  Christ  arose  (Mark  xvi.  2  ;  John 
xx.  1  ;  Rev.  xxii.  16  ;  r)  iTTKpwaKOvffv,  Matt. 
xxviii.  1). 

The  other  three  divisions  of  the  dawn  were,  (2.) 
"  when  one  can  distinguish  blue  from  white  "  (irpon, 
aKoTias  !V(  ovctt)s,  John  xx.  1  ;  "  obscurum  adhuc 
coeptae  lucis,"  Tac.  H.  iv.  2).  At  this  time  they 
began  to  recite  the  phylacteries.  (3.)  Cum  lucescit 
oriens  (opQpos  fladvs,  Luke).  (4.)  Oriente  sole 
(\iav  Trpoo't,  avareiAavTos  rov  tjAiov,  Mark  xvi.  2  ; 
Lightfoot,  Hor.  Hebr.  ad  Marc.  xvi.  2). 

II.  Boker,  "Ip3,  "sunrise."  Some  suppose  that 
the  Jews,  like  other  Oriental  nations,  commenced 
their  civil  day  at  this  time  until  the  Exodus 
(Jennings'  Jewish  Ant.). 

III.  Chom  Hayom,  Di*n  DPI,  "  heat  of  the 
day "  (eccs  diedep/xdvOr]  t]  fjfjL^pa,  LXX.),  about 
9  o'clock. 

IV.  Tzaharaim,  DpHV,  "the  two  noons" 
(Gen.  xliii.  16  ;  Deut.  xxviii.  29). 

V.  Buach  hayom,  DY7}  (TH,  "the  cool  (lit. 
wind)  of  the  day,"  before  sunset  (Gen.  iii.  8)  ;  so 
called  by  the  Persians  to  this  day  (Chardin,  Voy. 
iv.  8  ;   Jahn,  Arch.  Bibl.  §29). 

VI.  Ercb,  S^y,  "  evening."  The  phrase  "  be- 
tween the  two  evenings"  (Ex.  xvi.  12,  xxx.  8), 
being  the  time  marked  for  slaying  the  paschal  lamb 
and  offering  the  evening  sacrifice  (Ex.  xii.  6,  xxix. 
39),  led  to  a  dispute  between  the  Karaites  and 
Samaritans  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  Pharisees  on 
the  other.  The  former  took  it  to  mean  between 
sunset  and  full  darkness  (Deut.  xvi.  6);  the  Rab- 
binists  explained  it  as  the  time  between  the  be- 
ginning (Sei'Arj  Trpwia,  "  little  evening,"  Hab.)  and 
end  of  sunset  (5.  oipia,  or  real  sunset:  Jos.  B.  J. 
vi.  9,  §3;  Gesen.  s.v.;  Jahn,  Arch.  Bibl.  §101  ; 
Bochart,  Hieroz.  i.  p.  558). 

Since  the  sabbaths  were  reckoned  from  sunset  to 
sunset  (Lev.  xxiii.  32),  the  Sabbatarian  Pharisees, 
in  that  spirit  of  scrupulous  superstition  which  so 
often  called  forth  the  rebukes  of  our  Lord,  were  led 
to  settle  the  minutest  rules  for  distinguishing  the 
actual  instant  when  the  sabbath  began  (6\pia,  Matt, 
viii.  16  =  ot€  e5u  6  ijAios,  Mark).  They  therefore 
called  the  time  between  the  actual  sunset  and  the 
appearance  of  three  stars  (Maimon.  in  Shabb. 
cap.  5,  comp.  Nehem.  iv.  21,  22),  and  the  Tal- 
niudists  decided  that  "  if  on  the  evening  of  the 
sabbath  a  man  did  any  work  after  one  star  had 
appealed,  lie  was  torgiveii  ;  it'  alter  the  appearance 
of  two,  he  mi  ifice  for  a  doubtful  trans- 

:  if  after  three  stars  were  risible,  he  must 
oiler  a  sin-offering:"  the  order  being  reversed  for 
works  done  on  the  evening  after  the  actual  sabbath 
(Lightfoot,  Hor.  Hebr.  ad  Matt.  viii.  16;  Otho, 
/.<  r.  I;  ,/,.  5,  r.  SabbatAum ). 

Before  the  captivity  the  Jews  divided  the  night 
into  three  watches  t  Ps.  briii.  6,  xc.  -!  i,  \  \/..  the  first 
wat .1 1,  Listing  till  midnight  (Lam.  ii.  lit.  A.  V.  •■  the 
beginning  of  the  watches")  -  apxv  vvktos  :  the 
•'  middle  wateh  "  (which  proves  the statement  i,  last- 
ing nil  cock-crow  (Judg.  vii.  19)=/i4<tov  vvkto>i>  ; 
and  the  morning  wateh.  lasting  till  sunrise  (Ex. 


416 


DAYSMAN 


xiv.  24)  =  afjL<pi\vKri  vv£  (Horn.  LI.  vii.  433). .  These 
divisions  were  probably  -connected  with  the  Levitical 
duties  in  the  Temple  service.  The  Jews,  however, 
say  (in  spite  of  their  own  definition,  "  a  watch  is 
the  third  part  of  the  night ")  that  they  always  had 
four  night-watches  (comp.  Neh.  ix.  3),  but  that  the 
fourth  was  counted  as  a  part  of  the  morning  (Bux- 
torf's  Lev.  Talm.  s.  v.  Carpzov.  Appar.  Grit.  p. 
347  ;  Keland,  iv.  18). 

In  the  N.  T.  we  have  allusions  to  four  watches, 
a  division  borrowed  from  the  Greeks  (Herod,  ix. 
51)  and  Romans  (<pv\a.KT],  to  rirapTOv  ixcpos  ttjs 
vvkt6s,  Suid.).  These  were,  1.  ovj/e,  oipia,  or  oxpia 
(!>pa,  from  twilight  till  9  o'clock  (Mark  xi.  11; 
John  xx.  19);  2.  fieaovvKTiov,  midnight,  from  9 
till  12  o'clock  (Mark  xiii.  35)  ;  3.  a\^Kropo<pwvla, 
till  3  in  the  morning  (Mark  xiii.  35,  air.  \ey. ; 
3  Mace.  v.  23)  ;  4.  irpai't,  till  daybreak,  the  same  as 
■Kpw'ia  (wpa)  (John  xviii.  28;  Jos.  Ant.  v.  6,  §5, 
xviii.  9,  §6). 

The  word  held  to  mean  "hour"  is  first  found 

in  Dan.  iii.  6,  15,  v.  5  (Sha'ah,  i"iy£;,  also  "  a 
moment,"  iv.  19).  Perhaps  the  Jews,  like  the 
Greeks,  learnt  from  the  Babylonians  the  division  of 
the  day  into  12  parts  (Herod,  ii.  109).  In  our 
Lord's  time  the  division  was  common  (John  xi.  9). 
It  is  probable  that  Ahaz  introduced  the  first  sun- 
dial from  Babylon  (wpo\6yiov,  TVwVP,  Is.  xxxviii. 
8  ;  2  K.  xx.  11),  as  Anaximenes  did  the  first  aicia- 
Oripov  into  Greece  (Jahn,  Arch.  §101).  Possibly  the 
Jews  at  a  later  period  adopted  the  clepsydra  (Jos. 
Ant.  xi.  6).  The  third,  sixth,  and  ninth  hours  were 
devoted  to  prayer  (Dan.  vi.  10;  Acts  ii.  15,  iii. 
1,  &c). 

On  the  Jewish  way  of  counting  their  week-days 
from  the  sabbath,  see  Lightfoot's  Works,  ii.  334, 
ed.  Pitman.     [Week.] 

The  word  "  day"  is  used  of  a  festal  day  (Hos.  vii. 
5);  a  birthday  (Job  iii.  1)  ;  a  day  of  ruin  (Hos.  i. 
1 1  ;  Job  xviii.  20  ;  comp.  ternpus,  tempora  rei- 
ptiblicae,  Cic,  and  dies  Cannensis~)  ;  the  judgment- 
day  (Joel  i.  15;  1  Thess.  v.  2);  the  kingdom 
of  Christ  (John  viii.  56;  Rom.  xiii.  12)  ;  and  in 
other  senses  which  are  mostly  self-explaining.  In 
1  Cor.  iv.  3,  virb  av8panr'.vr)s  rjfxepas  is  rendered 
"  by  man's  judgment."  Jerome,  ad  Algas.  Duaest. 
x.  considers  this  a  Cilicism  (Bochart,  Hieroz.  ii. 
471).  On  the  prophetic  or  year-day  system  (Lev. 
xxv.  3,  4;  Num.  xiv.  34  ;  £z.  iv.  2-6,  &c),  see  a 
treatise  in  Elliot's  Hor.  Apoc.  iii.  154,  sq.  The 
expression  {-movaiov,  rendered  "daily"  in  Matt, 
vi.  11,  is  a  air.  Asy.,  and  has  been  much  disputed. 
It  is  unknown  to  classical  Greek  (eo«f  ■KeivXacrBai 
virb  tSiv  EiiayyeXio'Tcev,  Orig.  Orat.  16).  The 
Vulg.  has  s'tpersubstantialcm,  a  rendering  recom- 
mended by  Abelard  to  the  nuns  of  the  Paraclete. 
Theophyl.  explains  it  as  6  inl  rfj  ouaia  Kai  crvcr- 
rdaei  rjfj.S>v  avTapK-qs,  and  he  is  followed  by  most 
commentators  (cf.  Chrysost.  Horn,  in  Or.  Domin. 
Suid.  &  Etym.  M.  s.  v.).  Salmasius,  Grotius,  &c, 
arguing  from  the  rendering  "II1D  in  the  Nazarene 
Gospel,  translate  it  as  though  it  were  =  ttjs  eirtov- 
crns  71/j.epas,  or  els  avpiov  (Sixt.  Senensis  Bibl. 
Sanct.  p.  444  a).  But  see  the  question  examined  at 
full  length  (after  Tholuck)  in  Alford's  Greek  Test. 
ad  loc.  ;  Schleusner,  Lex.  s.  v. ;  Wetsten,  N.  T. 
i.  p.  461,  &c.     See  Chuoxology.        [F.  W.  F.] 

DAYSMAN,  an  old  English  term,  meauiug 
umpire  or  arbitrator  (Job  ix.  33).  It  is  derived 
from  ant',  in  the  specific  sense  of  a  day  fixed  for 


DEACON 

a  trial  (comp.  1  Cor.  iv.  3,  where  avQpoowiuri 
rifiepa — lit.  man's  day,  and  so  given  in  Wycliffe's 
translation — is  rendered  "  man's  judgment"  in  the 
A.  V.).  Similar  expressions  occur  in  German  (eine 
sache  tagen  =  to  bring  a  matter  before  a  court 
of  justice)  and  other  Teutonic  languages.  The 
word  "  daysman "  is  found  in  Spenser's  Faerie 
Queene,  ii.  c.  8,  in  the  Bible  published  in  1551 
(1  Sam.  ii.  25),  and  in  other  works  of  the  same 
age.  [\V.  L.  B.] 

DEACON  (Aiixkovos  ;  Diaconus).  The  office 
described  by  this  title  appears  in  the  N.  T.  as  the 
correlative  of  iirianoiTos  [Bishop].  The  two  are 
mentioned  together  in  Phil.  i.  1  ;  1  Tim.  iii.  2,  8. 
The  union  of  the  two  in  the  LXX.  of  Is.  Ix.  17, 
may  have  suggested  both  as  fit  titles  for  the  officers 
of  the  Christian  Church,  or  have  led  to  the  adoption 
of  one  after  the  other  had  been  chosen  on  inde- 
pendent grounds.  The  coincidence,  at  all  events, 
soon  attracted  notice,  and  was  appealed  to  by  Cle- 
ment of  Rome  (1  Cor.  xiii.)  as  prophetic.  Like 
most  words  of  similar  import,  it  appears  to  have 
been  first  used  in  its  generic  sense,  implying  subor- 
dinate activity  (1  Cor.  iii.  5 ;  2  Cor.  vi.  4),  and 
afterwards  to  have  gained  a  more  defined  connota- 
tion, as  applied  to  a  distinct  body  of  men  in  the 
Christian  society. 

The  narrative  of  Acts  vi.  is  commonly  referred  to 
as  giving  an  account  of  the  institution  of  this  office. 
The  Apostles,  in  order  to  meet  the  complaints  of 
the  Hellenistic  Jews,  that  their  widows  were  neg- 
lected in  the  daily  ministration  (SiaKovia),  call  on 
the  body  of  believers  to  choose  seven  men  "  full  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  and  of  wisdom,"  whom  they  "may 
appoint  over  this  business."  The  seven  are  accor- 
dingly appointed,  and  it  is  left  to  them  "  to  serve 
tables" — to  attend  to  the  distribution  of  the  alms 
of  the  Church,  in  money  or  in  kind  (Neander, 
Pfl-inz.  u.  Leit.  i.  p.  51,  ed.  1847),  while  the 
ministry  (piaKovia)  of  the  word  is  reserved  for  the 
Apostles.  On  this  view  of  the  narrative  the  seven 
were  the  first  deacons,  and  the  name  and  the  office 
were  derived  by  other  Churches  from  that  of 
Jerusalem.  At  a  later  period,  the  desire  to  repro- 
duce the  Apostolic  pattern  led  in  many  instances  to 
a  limitation  of  the  deacons  in  a  given  diocese  to  the 
original  number  (Cone.  Keocaes.  c.  14). 

It  may  be  questioned,  however,  whether  the 
seven  were  not  appointed  to  higher  functions  than 
those  of  the  deacons  of  the  N.  T.  They  are  spoken 
of  not  by  that  title  but  as  "the  seven"  (Acts  xxi. 
8).  The  gifts  implied  in  the  words  "  full  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  and  of  wisdom"  are  higher  than  those 
required  for  the  office  of  deacon  in  1  Tim.  iii. 
Two  out  of  the  seven  do  the  work  of  preachers  and 
evangelists.  It  has  been  inferred  accordingly 
(Stanley,  Apostolic  Ajjes,  p.  62),  that  we  meet  in 
this  narrative  with  the  record  of  a  special  institution 
to  meet  a  special  emergency,  and  that  the  seven 
were  not  deacons,  in  the  later  sense  of  the  term, 
but  commissioners  who  were  to  superintend  those 
that  did  the  work  of  deacons.  There  are  indications, 
however,  of  the  existence  of  another  body  in  the 
Church  of  Jerusalem  whom  we  may  compare  with 
the  deacons  of  Phil.  i.  1,  and  1  Tim.  iii.  8.  As 
the  irpefff&vrepoi  of  Acts  xiv.  23,  xv.  6  ;  1  Pet. 
v.  1,  were  not  merely  men  advanced  in  years,  so 
the  vedirepoi  or  veavicncoi  of  Acts  v.  6,  10  were 
probably  not  merely  young  men,  but  persons  occu- 
pying a  distinct  position  and  exercising  distinct 
functions  (cf.  Mosheim  de  lich.  Christ,  p.  118). 
The   identity   of  iirlfficoTrot   and    Trpe<r/3uTef>oi   has 


DEACON 


DEACONESS 


417 


been  shown  under  Bishop;  and  it  is  natural  to 
infer  from  this  that  there  was  a  similar  relation 
between  the  two  titles  of  Sio/cofoi  and  ved>Ttpoi. 
The  parallelism  of  6  vzcarepos  and  b  Suxkovuiv  in 
Luke  xxii.  '26,  tends  to  the  same  conclusion. 

Assuming  on  these  data  the  identity  of  the  two 
names  we  have  to  ask — 

(1),  to  what  previous  organisation,  if  any,  the 
order  is  traceable  ? 

(2),  what  were  the  qualifications  and  functions 
of  the  men  so  designated  ? 

I.  As  the  constitution  of  the  Jewish  synagogue 
had  its  elders  (D^pt)  or  pastors  (ppyiS),  so  also  it 
had  its  subordinate  officers  (D^-Tn),  the  imripeTcu 
of  Luke  iv.  20,  whose  work  it  was  to  give  the 
reader  the  rolls  containing  the  lessons  for  the  day, 
to  clean  the  synagogue,  to  open  and  close  it  at  the 
right  times  (Synagogue  ;  and  see  Winer).  It  was 
natural  that  when  the  Galilean  disciples  found 
themselves  at  the  head  of  congregations  of  their 
own,  they  should  adopt  this  as  well  as  other  parts 
of  the  arrangements  with  which  they  were  familiar, 
and  accordingly  the  ve&Ttpoi  of  Acts  v.  do  what 
the  viTTiptTai  of  the  synagogue  would  have  done 
under  like  circumstances. 

II.  The  moral  qualifications  described  in  1  Tim. 
iii.,  as  necessary  for  the  office  of  a  deacon,  are  sub- 
stantially the  same  as  those  of  the  bishop.     The 
deacons,  however,  were  not  required  to  be  "  given  to 
hospitality,"   nor   to  be  "apt  to  teach."     It  was 
enough  for  them  to  "  hold  the  mystery  of  the  faith 
in  a  pure  conscience."     They  were  not  to  gain  their 
living   by    disreputable   occupations    (/jl^j    alo~xpo- 
KepdeTs).     On  offering  themselves  for  their  work 
they  were  .to  be  subject  to  a  strict  scrutiny  (1  Tim. 
iii.  10),  and  if  this  ended  satisfactorily  were  to  enter 
on  it.     On    the  view  that  has  been  taken  of  the 
events  of  Acts  vi.,  there  is  no  direct  evidence  in  the 
N.  T.  that  they  were  appointed  by  the  laying  on  of 
hands,  but  it  is  at  least  probable  that  what  was  so 
familiar  as   the   outward  sign  of  the  bestowal  of 
spiritual  gifts  or  functions  would  not  have   been 
omitted  in  this  instance,  and  therefore  that  in  this 
respect  the  later  practice  of  the  Church    was  in 
harmony  with  the  earlier.     What  the  functions  of 
the  deacons  were  we  are  left  to  infer  from   that 
later  practice,  from  the  analogy  of  the  synagogue 
and  from  the  scanty  notices  of  the  N.  T.     From 
these  data  we  may   think  of  the  vewrepoi   in  the 
Church  of  Jerusalem   as    preparing  the  rooms   in 
which  the  disciples  met,  taking  part  in  the  distribu- 
tion of  alms  out  of  the  common  fund,  at  first  with 
no  direct  supervision,  then  under  that  of  the  Seven, 
and  afterwards  under  the  elders,  maintaining  order 
at  the  daily  meetings  of  tin-  disciples  to  break  bread, 
baptising  new  converts,  distributing  the  bread  and 
the  wine  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  which  the  Apostle  or 
his  representative  had  blessed.     In  the  Asiatic  and 
Greek  Churches,  in  which  the  surrender  of  property 
and  consequent,  dependence  of  large  numbers  on  the 
common   treasury   had   never    been    carried    to   the 
same  extent,  this  work  would  be  one  of  less  diffi- 
culty than  it  was  when  "the  Grecians  murmured 
against  the  Hebrews,"  and  hence  probably  it  was 
that  the  appointment  of  the  Seven  stand--  out  as  a 
solitary   fact  with  nothing   answering  to   it   in   the 
later  organisation.     Whatever  alms  there  were  to 
be  distributed  would  naturally  pass  through  their 
hands,  and  the  other  functions  continued  probablj 
as  before.     It  does  not  appear  to  have  belonged  to 
the  office  of 


Church.  The  possession  of  any  special  ^dpirrfia 
would  lead  naturally  to  a  higher  work  ami  office, 
but  the  idea  that  the  diaconate  was  but  a  probation 
through  which  a  man  had  to  pass  before  he  could 
be  an  elder  or  bishop  was  foreign  to  the  constitution 
of  the  Church  of  the  1st  century.  Whatever 
countenance  it  may  receive  from  the  common 
patristic  interpretation  of  1  Tim.  iii.  13  (of. 
Estius  and  Hammond  ad  foe),  there  can  be  little 
doubt  (as  all  the  higher  order  of  expositors  have 
felt,  cf.  Wiesinger  and  Ellicott  ad  foe.)  that  when 
St.  Paul  speaks  of  the  tcaKbs  fia6[j.bs,  which  is 
gained  by  those  who  "  do  the  office  of  a  deacon 
well,"  he  refers  to  the  honour  which  belongs 
essentially  to  the  lower  work,  not  to  that  which 
they  were  to  find  in  promotion  to  a  higher. 
Traces  of  the  primitive  constitution  and  of  the 
permanence  of  the  diaconate  are  found  even  in  the 
more  developed  system  of  which  we  find  the  com- 
mencement in  the  Ignatian  epistles.  Originally 
the  deacons  had  been  the  helpers  of  the  bishop- 
elder  of  a  Church  of  a  given  district.  When  the 
two  names  of  the  latter  title  were  divided  and  the 
bishop  presided,  whether  as  primus  inter  pares,  or 
with  a  more  absolute  authority  over  many  elders, 
the  deacons  appear  to  have  been  dependent  directly 
on  him  and  not  on  the  presbyters,  and  as  being 
his  ministers,  the  "  eyes  and  ears  of  the  bishop " 
(Const.  Apost.  ii.  44),  were  tempted  to  set  them- 
selves up  against  the  elders.  Hence  the  necessity 
of  laws  like  those  of  Cone.  Nic.  c.  18 ;  Cone. 
Carth.  iv.  c.  37,  enjoining  greater  humility,  and 
hence  probably  the  strong  language  of  Ignatius  as 
to  the  reverence  due  to  deacons  {Ep.  ad  Trail,  c.  3  ; 
ad  Smyrn.  c.  8).  [E.  H.  P.] 

DEACONESS  (Ahxkovos;  Diaconissa,  Tert.). 
The  word  SiaKovos  is  found  in  Rom.  xvi.  1  asso- 
ciated with  a  female  name,  and  this  has  led  to  the 
conclusion  that  there  existed  in  the  Apostolic 
age,  as  there  undoubtedly  did  a  little  later  (Pliny, 
Ep.  ad  Traj.),  an  order  of  women  bearing  that 
title,  and  exercising  in  relation  to  their  own  sex 
functions  which  were  analogous  to  those  of  the 
deacons.  On  this  hypothesis  it  has  been  inferred 
that  the  women  mentioned  in  Rom.  xvi.  6,  12 
belonged  to  such  an  order  (Herzog,  Bcal-Encycl. 
sub  voc).  The  rules  given  as  to  the  conduct  of 
women  in  1  Tim  iii.  11,  Tit.  ii.  3,  have  in  like 
manner  been  referred  to  them  (Chrysost.  Theophvl . 
Hamm.  Wiesinger.  ad  foe),  and  they  have  been 
identified  even  with  the  "widows"  of  1  Tim.  v. 
3-10  (Schaff,  Apost.  Kirche,  p.  356). 

In  some  of  these  instances,  however,  it  seems 
hardly  doubtful  that  writers  have  transferred  to  the 
earliest  age  of  the  Church  the  organisation  of  a. 
later.  It  was  of  course  natural  that  the  example 
recorded  in  Luke  viii.  2,  3,  should  be  followed  br- 
others, even  when  the  Lord  was  no  longer  with  His 
disciples.  The  new  life  which  pervaded  the  whole 
Christian  society  (Acts  ii.  44,  45-,  iv.  31.  32) 
Would  lead  women  as  well  as  men  to  devote  them- 
selves to  labours  of  love.  The  strong  feeling  that 
the  true  6pr](rKe(a  of  Christians  consisted  in  "visit- 
ing the  fatherless  and  the  widow"  would  make  this 
the  special  duty  of  those  who  were  best  fitted  to 
undertake  it.  The  social  relations  of  flic  sexes  in 
the  cities  of  the  empire  (cf.  Grot,  on  Ram.  xvi.  1) 
would  make  it  fitting  that  the  agency  of'  women 
should  be  employed  largely  in  the  direct  personal 
implication    of'    Christian     truth    (Tit.    ii. 


possibly  in  the  preparation  of  female  catechumens. 

deacon    to   teach    publicly  in    the  I  Even   the    later    organisation    implies   the   previous 

2   E 


418 


DEAD  SEA 


existence  of  the  germs  from  which  it  was  developed. 
It  may  be  questioned,  however,  whether  the  pas- 
sages referred  to  imply  a  recognised  body  bearing  a 
distinct  name.  The  "widows"  of  1  Tim.  v.  3-10 
were  clearly,  so  far  as  the  rule  of  ver.  9  was  acted 
on,  women  who  were  no  longer  able  to  discharge  the 
active  duties  of  life,  and  were  therefore  maintained 
by  the  Church  that  they  might  pass  their  remaining 
days  in  "  prayers  night  and  day."  The  conditions 
of  v.  10  may,  however,  imply  that  those  only  who 
had  been  previously  active  in  ministering  to  the 
brethren,  who  had  in  that  sense  been  deaconesses, 
were  entitled  to  such  a  maintenance.  For  the  fuller 
treatment  of  this  subject,  see  Widows.  On  the 
existence  of  deaconesses  in  the  Apostolic  age,  see 
Mosheim  de  Reb.  Christ,  p.  118;  Neander,  Pflanz. 
u.  Lett.  i.  p.  265 ;,  Augusti.  Handb.  der  Christ. 
Archdol.  ii.  3.  [E.  H.  P.] 

DEAD  SEA.  This  name  nowhere  occurs  in 
the  Bible,  and  appears  not  to  have  existed  until 
the  2nd  century  after  Christ.  It  originated  in  an 
erroneous  opinion,  and  there  can  be  little  doubt 
that  to  the  name  is  due  in  a  great  measure  the  mis- 
takes and  misrepresentations  which  were  for  so  long 
prevalent  regarding  this  lake,  and  which  have  not 
indeed  yet  wholly  ceased  to  exist. 

In  the  0.  T.  the  lake  is  called  "  the  Salt  Sea," 
and  "  the  Sea  of  the  Plain"  (Arabah)  ;  and  under 
the  former  of  these  names  it  will  be  found  described. 
[Salt  Sea.]  [G.] 

DEARTH.     [Famine.] 

DE'BIR,  the  name  of  three  places  of  Palestine. 
1.  ("ll'l,  but  in  Judg.  and  Chr.  Tl^j  Aafilp; 
Alex.  AajSeip  ;  Dabir),  a  town  in  the  mountains  of 
Judah  (Josh.  xv.  49),  one  of  a  group  of  eleven 
cities  to  the  west  of  Hebron.  In  the  narrative  it  is 
mentioned  as  being  the  next  place  which  Joshua 
took  after  Hebron  (x.  38).  It  was  the  seat  of  a 
king  (x.  39,  xii.  13)  and  was  one  of  the  towns  of 
the  Anakim,  and  from  which  they  were  utterly 
destroyed  by  Joshua  (xi.  21).  The  earlier  name 
of  Debir  was  Kirjath-sepher,  "  city  of  book  "  (Josh. 
xv.  15  ;  Judg.  i.  11),  and  Kirjath-sannah,  "  city  of 
palm  "  (Josh.  xv.  49).  The  records  of  its  con- 
quest vary,  though  not  very  materially.  In  Josh, 
xv.  17  and  Judg.  i.  13  a  detailed  account  is  given 
of  its  capture  by  Othniel  son  of  Kenaz,  for  love  of 
Achsah  the  daughter  of  Caleb,  while  in  the  general 
history  of  the  conquest  it  is  ascribed  to  the  great 
commander  himself  (Josh.  x.  38,  39.  In  the  last 
two  passages  the  name  is  given  in  the  Hebrew- 
text  as  Debirah  (mS"1!).  It  was  one  of  the  cities 
given  with  their  "  suburbs  "  (EJHiD)  to  the  priests 
(Josh.  xxi.  15;  1  Chr.  vi.  58).  Debir  does  not 
appear  to  have  been  known  to  Jerome,  nor  has  it 
been  discovered  with  certainty  in  modern  times. 
About  three  miles  to  the  W.  of  Hebron  is  a  deep 
and  secluded  valley  called  the  Wady  Nunb'tr, 
enclosed  on  the  north  by  hills  of  which  one  bears 
a  name  certainly  suggestive  of  Debir, — Dewir-ban. 
(See  the  narrative  of  Rosen  in  the  Zeitsch.  D.  M .  G . 
IK.'w,  p.  50-64.)  The  subject,  and  indeed  the 
whole  topography  of  this  district,  requires  further 
examination:  in  the  meantime  it  is  perhaps  some 
confirmation  of  Dr.  Rosen's  suggestion  that  a 
village  or  site  on  one  of  these  hills  was  pointed 
out  to  the  writer  as  called  feet,  the  Arabic  name 
for  Joshua.  Schwarz  (86)  speaks  of  a  Wady 
Dibir  in  this  direction.     Van  de  Velde   (Memoir, 


DEBORAH 

307)  finds  Debir  at  Dilbeh,  six  miles  S.W.  of 
Hebron,  where  Stewart  mentions  a  spring  brought 
down  from  a  high  to  a  low  level  by  an  aqueduct. 

2.  ("O"'!  >  *lr*  T^  TtTpa-pTov  rrjs  (pdpayyos 
'Ax<6p ;  Dcbera),  a  place  on  the  north  boundary 
of  Judah,  near  the  "  Valley  of  Achor  "  (Josh.  xv. 
7),  and  therefore  somewhere  in  the  complications 
of  hill  and  ravine  behind  Jericho.  De  Saulcy  (ii. 
139)  attaches  the  name  Thour-ed-Dabour  a  to  the 
ruined  khan  on  the  right  of  the  road  from  Jeru- 
salem to  Jericho,  at  which  travellers  usually  stop 
to  refresh,  but  this  is  not  corroborated  by  any 
other  traveller.  The  name  given  to  it  by  the 
Arabs  when  the  writer  passed  (1858)  was  Khan 
Hatherurah.  A  Wady  Dabor  is  marked  in  Van  de 
Velde's  map  as  close  to  the  S.  of  Neby  31  its  I.  at  the 
N.W.  corner  of  the  Dead  Sea. 

3.  The  "  border  (P-133J  of  Debir"  is  named  as 
forming  part  of  the  boundary  of  Gad  (Josh.  xiii. 
26)  ami  as  apparently  not  far  from  Mahanaim. 
Reland  (734)  conjectures  that  the  name  may  pos- 
sibly be  the  same  as  Lodebar  (121/),  but  no 
identification  has  yet  taken  place  (LXX.  Aaifiwv, 
Alex.  Aafieip  ;  Dabir).  Lying  in  the  grazing 
country  on  the  high  downs  east  of  Jordan,  the 
name  may  be  derived  from  ""Q'l,  Dabar,  the  same 
word  which  is  the  root  of  Midbar,  the  wilderness 
or  pasture  (see  Ges.  318).     [Desert.]  [G.] 

DE'BIR  (Tin  ;  Aa£iV;  Alex.Aa,8eip;  Dabir), 
King  of  Eglon,  a  town  in  the  low  country  of 
Judah  ;  one  of  the  five  kings  hanged  by  Joshua 
(Josh.  x.  3,  23). 

DEB'ORA  (AefrScopct),  a  woman  of  Naphtali, 
mother  of  Tobiel,  the  father  of  Tobit  (Tob.  i.  8). 
The  same  name  as 

DEB'ORAH  (rrQT;  Aefrofta,  Ae£/3£pa; 
Debbora).  1.  The  nurse  of  Rebekah  (Gen.  xxxv. 
8).  Nurses  held  a  high  and  honourable  place 
in  ancient  times,  and  especially  in  the  East  (2 
K.  xi.  2;  Horn.  Od.  i.  429;  Virg.  Aen.  vii. 
2;  "  Aeneia  nutiix  ;"  Ov.  Met.  xiv.  441), 
where  they  were  often  the  principal  members 
of  the  family  (2  Chr.  xxii.  11 ;  Jahn,  Arch.  Bibl. 
§166).  Deborah  accompanied  Rebekah  from  the 
house  of  Bethuel  (Gen.  xxiv.  59),  and  is  only  men- 
tioned by  name  on  the  occasion  of  her  burial,  under 
the  oak-tree  of  Bethel,  which  was  called  in  her  honour 
Allon-Bachuth  (BaAavos  irtvOovs,  LXX.).  Such 
spots  were  usually  chosen  for  the  purpose  (Gen.  xxiii. 
17, 18  ;  1  Sam.  xxxi.  13  ;  2  K.  xxi.  18,  Sec.).  Many 
have  been  puzzled  at  finding  her  in  Jacob's  family; 
it  is  unlikely  that  she  was  sent  to  summon  Jacob 
from  Haran  (as.Jarchi  suggests),  or  that  she  had 
returned  during  the  lifetime  of  Rebekah,  and  was 
now  coming  to  visit  her  (as  Abarbanel  and  others 
say)  ;  but  she  may  very '  well  have  returned  at 
Rebekah's  death,  and  that  she  was  dead  is  probable 
from  the  omission  of  her  name  in  Gen.  xxxv.  27 ; 
and  if,  according  to  the  Jewish  legend,  Jacob  first 
heard  of  his  mother's  death  at  this  spot,  it  will  be 
an  additional  reason  for  the  name  of  the  tree,  and 
may  possibly  be  implied  in  the  expression  ^"]T1, 
comforted,  A.  V.  "blessed"  (Gen.  xxxv.  9  ;  see  too 
Ewald,  Gesch.  i.  390). 

a  De  Sauley  quotes  the  name  in  Joshua  as  "  Da- 
bor ;"  but  on  what  authority  is  not.  apparent.  Cer- 
tainly not  that  of  the  Hebrew  or  the  Vulgate. 


DEBORAH 

2.  A  prophetess  who  judged  Israel  (Judg.  iv.  v.). 
Her  name,  m^T,  means  "a  bee"  (or  ffcpy]^,  "a 
wasp"),  just  as  MeAifrtra  and  Melitilla  were  proper 
names.  This  name  may  imply  nothing  whatever, 
being  a  mere  appellative,  derived  like  Itachel  (a 
lamb),  Tamar  (a  palm),  &c,  from  natural  objects; 
although  she  was  (as  Corn,  a  Lapide  quaintly  puts 
it)  suis  mellea,  hostibus  aculeata.  Some,  how- 
ever, see  in  the  name  an  official  title,  implying  her 
prophetic  authority.  A  bee  was  an  Egyptian  sym- 
bol of  regal  power  (cf.  Call.  Jov.  u'6,  and  Et.  Mag. 
s.  v.  eff<ri)v)  ;  and  among  the  Greeks  the  term  was 
applied  not  only  to  poets  {more  apis  Matiiwc, 
Hor.),  ami  to  those  peculiarly  chaste  (as  by  the 
Neoplatonists),  but  especially  to  the  priestesses  of 
Delphi  (xp7W^s  fieXiaa as  Ae\(piSos,  Find.  P. 
iv.  106),  Cybele,  and  Artemis  (Creuzer,  Symbolik. 
iii.  354,  &c),  just  as  eVcV  was  to  the  priests 
(Liddell  and  Scott,  s.  v.).  In  both  these  senses  the 
name  suits  her,  since  she  was  essentially  a  vates 
or  seer,  combining  the  functions  of  poetry  and 
prophecy. 

She  lived  under  the  palm-tree  ("  such  tents  the 
patriarchs  loved,"  Coleridge)  of  Deborah,  between 
Kamah  and  Bethel  in  Mount  Ephraim  (Judg.  iv.  5), 
which,  as  palm-trees  were  rare  in  Palestine,  "  is 
mentioned  as  a  well-known  and  solitary  landmark, 
and  was  probably  the  same  spot  as  that  called 
(Judg.  xx.  33)  Baal-Tamar,  or  the  sanctuary  of  the 
palm"  (Stanley,  S.  and  P.  146).  Von  Bohlen 
(p.  334)  thinks  that  this  tree  is  identical  with 
Allon-Bachuth  (Gen.  xxxv.  8),  the  name  and  locality 
being  nearly  the  same  (Ewald,  Gesch.  i.  391, 
405),  although  it  is  unhistorical  to  say  that  this 
"  may  have  suggested  a  name  for  the  nurse" 
(Havernick's  Introd.  to  Pent.  p.  201  ;  Kalisch, 
Gen.  ad  loc).  Possibly  it,  is  again  mentioned  as 
"  the  oak  of  Tabor,"  in  1  Sam.  x.  3,  where  Thenius 
would  read  iTO"7!  for  >13fl.  At  any  rate  it  was 
a  well-known  tree,  and  she  may  have  chosen  it 
from  its  previous  associations. 

She  was  probably  a  woman  of  Ephraim,  although 
from  the  expression  in  Judg.  v.  15,  some  suppose 
her  to  have  belonged  to  Issachar  (Ewald,  Gesch. 
ii.  4S9).  The  expression  D^YS?  DPN  is  much 
disputed;  it  is  generally  thought  to  mean  "wife 
of  Lapidoth,"  as  in  A.  V. ;  but  other  versions 
render  it  "  uxor  principis,"  or  "  Foemina  Lapidoth- 
ana"  ("  that  great  dame  of  Lapidoth,"  Tennyson), 
or  inulier  splendorum,  i.  e.  one  divinely  illuminated, 

since  JIITS?  =  lightnings.  But  the  most  prosaic 
notion  is  that  of  the  Rabbis,  who  take  it  to  mean 
that  she  attended   to  the  tabernacle  lamps,  from 

"VBa  lipid,  a  lamp  !  The  fern,  termination  is  often 
found  in  men's  names,  as  in  Shelomith  (1  Chr. 
xxiii.  9),  Koheleth,  &e.  Lapidoth  then  was  pro- 
bably her  husband,  and  not  Barak,  as  some  sav. 

She  was  not  so  much  a  judge  (a  title  which 
belongs  rather  to  Barak,  Heb.  xi.  32)  as  one 
gifted  with  prophetic  command  (Judg.  iv.  6,  14, 
v.  7),  and  by  virtue  of  her  inspiration  "a  mother 
in  Israel."  Her  sex  would  give  her  additional 
weight,  as  it  did  to  Veleda  and  Alaurinia  among 
the  Germans,  from  an  instinctive  belief  in  the 
divinity  of  womanhood  (Tac.  Germ.  viii.).  Com- 
pare tin'  instances  of  Miriam,  Huldah,  Anna,  Noa- 
diah  (2  K.  xrii.  14;   Neh.  vi.  14). 

Jabin's  tyranny  was  peculiarly  felt  in  the  northern 
tribes,  who  were  near  his  capital  and   under  her 


DECAPOLIS 


419 


jurisdiction,  viz.  Zebulon,  Nephthali,  and  Issachar: 
hence,  when  she  summoned  Barak  to  the  deliverance, ' 
"  it  was  on  them  that  the  brunt  of  the  battle  fell- 
but  they  were  joined  by  the  adjacent  central  tribes, 
Ephraim,  Manasseh,  and  Benjamin,  though  not  by 
those  of  the  extreme  west,  south,  and  east"  (Stan- 
ley, p.  339).  Under  her  direction  Barak  encamped 
on  "  the  broad  summit  of  Tabor  "  (Jos.  De  B.  ,/.  ii. 
20,  §6).  When  asked  to  accompany  him,  "  she  an- 
swered indignantly,  Thou,  oh  Barak,  deliverest  up 
meanly  the  authority  which  God  hath  given  thee 
into  the  hands  of  a  woman ;  neither  do  I  reject  it " 
(Jos.  Ant.  v.  5,  §2).  The  LXX.  interpolate  the 
words  on  ovk  olSa  t\\v  ^ipav  iv  y  tvoSo7  6 
Kvpios  tov  ayytXov  fier  i/xov  as  a  sort  of  excuse 
for  Barak's  request  (iv.  8,  cf.  14,  v.  23).  When  the 
small  band  of  ill-armed  (Judg.  v.  8)  Israelites  saw 
the  dense  iron  chariots  of  the  enemy,  "  they  were  so 
frightened  that  they  wished  to  march  off  at  once,  had 
not  Deborah  detained  them,  and  commanded  them 
to  fight  the  enemy  that  very  day  "  (Jos.  I.  c).  They 
did  so,  but  Deborah's  prophecy  was  fulfilled  (Judg. 
iv.  9),  and  the  enemy  s  general  perished  among 
the  "  oaks  of  the  wanderers  (Zaanaim),"  in  the 
tent  of  the  Bedouin  Kenite's  wife  (Judg.  iv.  21)  in 
the  northern  mountains.  "  And  the  land  had  rest 
forty  years  "  (Judg.  v.  31).  For  the  natural  phe- 
nomena which  aided  (Judg.  v.  20,  21)  the  victory, 
and  the  other  details  (for  which  we  have  ample 
authority  in  the  twofold  narration  in  prose  and 
poetry),  see  Barak,  where  we  have  also  entered  or. 
the  difficult  question  of  the  chronology  (Ewald, 
Gesch.  ii.  489-494). 

Deborah's  title  of  "  prophetess"  (n&033)  in- 
cludes the  notion  of  inspired  poetry,  as  in  Ex.  xv. 
20  ;  and  in  this  sense  the  glorious  triumphal  ode 
(Judg.  v.)  well  vindicates  her  claim  to  the  office. 
On  this  ode  much  has  been  written,  and  there  are 
separate  treatises  about  it  by  Hollmann,  Kalkar,  and 
Kenrick.  It  is  also  explained  by  Ewald  (die  Poet. 
Bucher  des  Alt.  Bundes.  i.  125),  and  Gumpach 
(Alttestament.  Studien,  pp.  -1-140).    [F.  W.  F.l 

DEBTOR.     [Loan.] 

DECAP'OLIS  (AtKdrroMs,  "the  ten  cities"). 
This  name  occurs  only  three  times  in  the  Scrip- 
tures, Matt.  iv.  25  ;  Mark  v.  20,  and  vii.  31  ;  but 
it  is  frequently  mentioned  by  Josephus  and  other 
ancient  writers.  Immediately  after  the  conquest 
of  Syria  by  the  Piomans  (B.C.  65),  ten  cities  appear 
to  have  been  rebuilt,  partially  colonized,  and  en- 
dowed with  peculiar  privileges;  the  country  around 
them  was  hence  called  Decapolis.  The  limits  of 
the  territory  were  not  very  clearly  defined  ;  and 
probably  in  the  course  of  time  other  neighbouring 
cities  received  similar  privileges.  This  may  account 
for  the  fact  that  ancient  geographers  speak  so  in- 
definitely of  the  province,  and  do  not  even  agree  as 
to  the  names  of  the  cities  themselves.  Pliny  (v. 
18)  admitting  that  "  non  omnes  cadem  observant," 
enumerates  them  as  follows:  Scythopolis,  Hippos, 
Gadara,  Bella,  Philadelphia,  Serosa,  Dion.  Ca- 
natha,  Damascus,  and  Rapfuma.  Ptolemy  (v.  17) 
makes  Capitolias  our  of  the  ten  :  and  an  old  Pal- 
myrene  inscription  quoted  by  Reland  (Pal.  p.  525) 
includes  Ahil i,  a  town  which,  according  to  Euse- 
bius  (Ononi,  s.  v.  Abila)  was  12  Roman  miles  east 
of  Gadara.  Josephus  (/-'../.  iii.  '.»,  §7)  calls  Scy- 
thopolis tin'  largest  city  ofDecapolis,  thus  manifestly 
excluding  Damascus  from  the  number.  All  the 
2  E  2 


420 


DEDAN 


cities  of  Decapolis,  with  the  single  exception  of 
Scythopolis,  lay  on  the  east  of  the  Jordan  ;  and 
both  Eusebius  and  Jerome  (Onom.  s.  v.  Decapolis) 
say  that  the  district  was  situated  "  beyond  the 
Jordan,  around  Hippos,  Pella,  and  Gadara,"  that 
is,  to  the  east  and  south-east  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee. 
With  this  also  agrees  the  statement  in  Mark  v.  20, 
that  the  demoniac  who  was  cured  at  Gadara  "  began 
to  publish  in  Decapolis  how  great  things  Jesus  had 
done  to  him."  It  would  appear,  however,  from 
Matt.  iv.  25,  and  Mark  vii.  31,  that  Decapolis  was 
a  general  appellation  for  a  large  district  extending 
along  both  sides  of  the  Jordan.  Pliny  (v.  18)  says 
it  reached  from  Damascus  on  the  north  to  Phila- 
delphia on  the  south,  and  from  Scythopolis  on  the 
west  to  Canatha  on  the  east — thus  making  it  no 
less  than  100  miles  long  by  60  broad  ;  and  he  adds, 
that  between  and  around  these  cities  are  tetrarchies, 
each  like  a  kingdom ;  such  as  Trachonitis,  Paneas, 
Abila,  Area,  &o. 

This  region,  once  so  populous  and  prosperous, 
from  which  multitudes  flocked  to  hear  the  Saviour, 
and  through  which  multitudes  followed  His  foot- 
steps—is now  almost  without  an  inhabitant.  Six 
out  of  the  ten  cities  are  completely  ruined  aud  de- 
serted. Scythopolis,  Gadara,  and  Canatha  have 
still  a  few  families,  living,  more  like  wild  beasts 
than  human  beings,  amid  the  crumbling  ruins  of 
palaces,  and  in  the  cavernous  recesses  of  old  tombs. 
Damascus  alone  continues  to  flourish,  like  an  oasis 
in  a  desert.  [J.  L.  P.] 

DEDAN  (fn  ;  AaiSdv,  AaiUfi,  Aa5aV, 
AeSav ;  Dedan,  Dadan).  1.  The  name  of  a  son 
of  Kaamah,  son  of  Cush  (Gen.  x.  7  ;  1  Chr.  i.  9, 
"the  sons  of  Raamah,  Sheba,  and  Dedan").  2. 
That  of  a  son  of  Jokshan,  son  of  Keturah  (Gen. 
xxv.  3,  and  "  Jokshan  begat  Sheba  and  Dedan. 
And  the  sons  of  Dedan  were  Asshurim,  Letushim, 
and  Leummim."  Cf.  1  Chron.  i.  32).  The  usual 
opinion  respecting  these  founders  of  tribes  is  that 
the  first  settled  among  the  sons  of  Cush,  wherever 
these  latter  may  be  placed ;  the  second,  on  the 
Syrian  borders,  about  the  territory  of  Edom.  But 
Gesenius  and  Winer  have  suggested  that  the  name 
may  apply  to  one  tribe ;  and  this  may  be  adopted 
as  probable  on  the  supposition  that  the  descendants 
of  the  Keturahite  Dedan  intermarried  with  those  of 
the  Cushite  Dedan,  whom  the  writer  places,  pre- 
sumptively, on  the  borders  of  the  Persian  Gulf. 
[Arabia,  Cush,  Kaamah,  &c]  The  theory  of 
this  mixed  descent  gains  weight  from  the  fact  that 
in  each  case  the  brother  of  Dedan  is  named  Sheba. 
It  may  be  supposed  that  the  Dedanites  were  among 
the  chief  traders  traversing  the  caravan-route  from 
the  head  of  the  Persian  Gulf  to  the  south  of  Pales- 
tine, bearing  merchandise  of  India,  and  possibly  of 
Southern  Arabia ;  and  hence  the  mixture  of  such  a 
tribe  with  another  of  different  (and  Keturahite) 
descent  presents  no  impossibility.  The  passages  in 
the  Bible  in  which  Dedan  is  mentioned  (besides  the 
genealogies  above  referred  to)  are  contained  in 
the  prophecies  of  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  and  Ezekiel,  and 
are  in  every  case  obscure.  The  Edomite  settlers 
seem  to  be  referred  to  in  Jer.  xlix.  8,  where  Dedan 
is  mentioned  in  the  prophecy  against  Edom ;  again 
in  xxv.  23,  with  Tenia  and  Buz;  in  Ez.  xxv.  13, 
with  Teman,  in  the  prophecy  against  Edom ;  and 
in  Isa.  xxi.  13  ("  The  burden  upon  Arabia.  In 
the  forest  in  Arabia  shall  ye  lodge,  O  ye  travel- 
ling companies  of  Dedanim"),  with  Tenia  and 
Kedar.     This  last  passage  is  by  some  understood  to 


DEDICATION,  FEAST  OF  THE 

refer  to  caravans  of  the  Cushite  Dedan  ;  and  although 
it  may  only  signify  the  wandering  propensities 
of  a  nomad  tribe,  such  as  the  Edomite  portion  of 
Dedan  may  have  been,  the  supposition  that  it 
means  merchant-caravans  is  strengthened  by  the 
remarkable  words  of  Ezekiel  in  the  lamentation  for 
Tyre.  This  chapter  (xxvii.)  twice  mentions  De- 
dan; first  in  ver.  15,  where,  after  enumerating 
among  the  traffickers  with  the  merchant-city  many 
Asiatic  peoples,  it  is  said,  "  The  children  of  Dedan 
were  thy  merchants,  many  isles  (D*'N)  were  the 
merchandise  of  thine  hand :  they  brought  thee  for  a 
present  horns  of  ivory,  and  ebony."  Passing  thence 
to  Syria  and  western  and  northern  peoples,  the 
prophet  again  (in  ver.  20)  mentions  Dedan  in  a 
manner  which  seems  to  point  to  the  wide  spread  and 
possibly  the  mixed  ancestry  of  this  tribe.  Ver.  15 
may  be  presumed  to  allude  especially  to  the  Cushite 
Dedan  (cf.  ch.  xxxviii.  13,  where  we  rind  Dedan 
with  Sheba  and  the  merchants  of  Tarshish  ;  appa- 
rently, from  the  context,  the  Dedan  of  ch.  xxvii. 
15);  but  the  passage  commencing  in  v.  20  appears 
to  include  the  settlers  on  the  borders  of  Edom  (i.  e. 
the  Keturahite  Dedanl.  The  whole  of  the  passage 
is  as  follows  :  "  Dedan  [was]  thy  merchant  in 
precious  clothes  for  chariots.  Arabia,  and  all  the 
princes  of  Kedar,  they  occupied  with  thee  in  lambs, 
and  rams,  and  goats :  in  these  [were  they]  thy 
merchants.  The  merchants  of  Sheba  and  Raamah 
they  [were]  thy  merchants:  they  occupied  in  thy 
fairs  with  chief  of  all  spices,  and  with  all  precious 
stones,  and  gold.  Haran,  and  Canneh,  and  Eden, 
the  merchants  of  Sheba,  Asshur,  [and]  Chilmad, 
[were]  thy  merchants."  (Ez.  xxvii.  20-23.)  We 
have  here  a  De  Ian  connected  with  Arabia  (probably 
the  north-western  part  of  the  peninsula)  and  Kedar, 
and  also  with  the  father  and  brother  of  the  Cushite 
Dedan  (Raamah  and  Sheba),  and  these  latter  with 
Asiatic  peoples  commonly  placed  in  the  regions  bor- 
dering the  head  of  the  Persian  gulf.  This  Dedan 
moreover  is  a  merchant,  not  in  pastoral  produce,  in 
sheep  and  goats,  but  in  "  precious  clothes,"  in  con- 
tradistinction to  Arabia  and  Kedar,  like  the  far-off 
eastern  nations  who  came  with  "  spices  and  pre- 
cious stones  and  gold,"  "  blue  clothes  and  broi- 
dered  work,"  and  "  chests  of  rich  apparel." 

The  probable  inferences  from  these  mentions  of 
Dedan  support  the  argument  first  stated,  namely, 

1 .  That  Dedan  son  of  Raamah  settled  on  the  shores 
of  the  Persian  gulf,  and  his  descendants  became  ca- 
ravan-merchants between  that  coast  and  Palestine. 

2.  That  Jokshan,  or  a  son  of  Jokshan,  by  inter- 
marriage with  the  Cushite  Dedan  formed  a  tribe  of 
the  same  name,  which  appears  to  have  had  its  chief 
settlement  in  the  borders  of  Idumaea,  and  perhaps 
to  have  led  a  pastoral  life. 

All  traces  of  the  name  of  Dedan,  whether  in 
Idumaea  or  on  the  Persian  gulf,  are  lost  in  the 
works  of  Arab  geographers  and  historians.  The 
Greek  and  Roman  geographers  however  throw  some 
light  on  the  eastern  settlement ;  and  a  native  indi- 
cation of  the  name  is  presumed  to  exist  in  the 
island  of  Dadan,  on  the  borders  of  the  gulf.  The 
identification  must  be  taken  in  connexion  with  the 
writer's  recovery  of  the  name  of  Sheba,  the  other  son 
of  Raamah,  on  the  island  of  Aicdl,  near  the  Arabian 
shore  of  the  same  gulf.  This  is  discussed  in  the 
art.  Raamah.  [E.  S.  P.] 

DEDICATION,    FEAST    OF   THE   (to 

ejKuLvia,  John  x.  22,  Encaenia,  Vulg. ;  6  iyiccu- 
ytcrfiSs  rov  dvcriaa-rrjpiov,  1  Mace.  iv.  56  and  59 


DEER 

[the  same  terra  as  is  used  in  the  LXX.  for  the  de- 
dication of  the  altar  by  Moses,  Num.  vii.  10]  ;  6 
Kada.pitTfj.os  rov  vaov,  2  Mace.  x.  5 ;  Mishna,  113311, 

i.  e.  dedication ;  Joseph,  (pcora,  Ant.  xii.  7,  §7), 
the  festival  instituted  to  commemorate  the  purging 
of  the  temple  and  the  rebuilding  of  the  altar  after 
Judas  Maccabaeus  had  driven  out  the  Syrians,  B.C. 
164.  It  is  named  only  once  in  the  Canonical  Scrip- 
tures, John  x.  22.  'Its  institution  is  recorded 
1  Mace.  iv.  52-59.  It  commenced  on  the  25th  of 
Chisleu,  the  anniversary  of  the  pollution  of  the 
temple  by  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  B.C.  167.  Like  the 
great  Mosaic  feasts,  it  lasted  eight  days,  but  it  did 
not  require  attendance  at  Jerusalem.  It  was  an  oc- 
casion of  much  festivity.  The  writer  of  2  Mace,  tells 
us  that  it  was  celebrated  in  nearly  the  same  man- 
ner as  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  with  the  carrying 
of  branches  of  trees,  and  with  much  singing  (x.  6, 
7).  Josephus  states  that  the  festival  was  called 
"  Lights,"  and  that  he  supposes  the  name  was 
given  to  it  from  the  joy  of  the  nation  at  their 
unexpected  liberty — ttjv  eopTrjv  ayojj.^v  KaXovvres 
avT-))v  Qwra,  eK  rov  Trap'  i\vi5os  ol/j.ai  TavTnv 
rijxiv  (paviji/ai  rr)V  i^ovfriav  (Ant.  xii.  7,  §7). 
The  Mishna  informs  us  that  no  fast  on  account  of 
any  public  calamity  could  be  commenced  during  this 
feast.  In  the  Gemara  a  story  is  related  that  when 
the  Jews  entered  the  temple,  after  driving  out  the 
Syrians,  they  found  there  only  one  bottle  of  oil 
which  had  not  been  polluted,  and  that  this  was 
miraculously  increased,  so  as  to  feed  the  lamps  of 
the  sanctuary  for  eight  days.  Maimonides  ascribes 
to  this  the  custom  of  the  Jews  illuminating  each 
house  with  one  candle  on  the  first  day  of  the 
feast,  two  on  the  second  day,  three  on  the  third, 
and  so  ou.  Some  had  this  number  of  candles  for 
each  person  in  the  house.  Neither  the  books  of 
Maccabees,  the  Mishna,  nor  Josephus  mention  this 
custom,  and  it  would  seem  to  be  of  later  origin, 
probably  suggested  by  the  name  which  Josephus 
gives  to  the  festival.  In  the  temple  at  Jerusalem, 
the  "Hallel"  was  sung  every  day  of  the  feast. 

In  Ezra  (vi.  16)  the  word  !13Jn,  applied  to  the 
dedication  of  the  second  temple,  on  the  third  of 
Adar,  is  rendered  in  the  LXX.  by  ejKalvta,  and  in 
the  Vulg.  by  dedicatio.  But  the  anniversary  of  that 
day  was  not  observed.  The  dedication  of  the  first 
Temple  took  place  at  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  (1 
K.  viii.  2 ;  2  Chr.  v.  3).    [Tabernacles,  Feast 

OF.] 

See  Lightfoot,  Temple  Service,  sect.  v. ;  florae 
//,  '..  on  John  x.  22,  an  I  his  Sermon  on  the  same 
texl  ;  Mishna,  vol.  ii.  369,  ed.  Surenhus.  andlloutin- 
gius'  note,  317  ;  Kuinoel  on  John  x.  22.      [S.  (_'.] 

DEEK.     [Fallow-deer.] 

DEGREES,  SONGS  of  (n^yDH  n»0),  a 
title  given  to  fifteen  Psalms,  from  cxx.  to  exxxiv. 
inclusive.  Four  of  them  are  attributed  to  David, 
one  is  ascribed  to  the  pen  of  Solomon,  and  the  other 
ten  give  no  indication  of  their  author.  Eichhorn 
supposes  them  all  to  be  the  work  of  one  and  the 
same  bard  i  Eini.  m  das  A.  T.),  and  he  also  shares 
the  opinion  of  Herder  (Geiste  der  hebraischer 
Poesie),  who  interprets  the  title,  •'  Hymns  foe  a 
journey."  "The  headings  of  the  Psalms,  how- 
ever, are  not  to  be  relied  on,  as  many  of  these 
titles  were  superadded ilong  alter  the  authors  of  the 
Psalms  had  passed  away.  The  words  'of  David,' 
or  'of  Solomon,'  do  not  of  themselves  establish  the 


DEHAVITES 


421 


fact  that  the  Psalm  was  written  by  the  person 
named,  since  the  very  same  phraseology  woidd  be 
employed  to  denote  a  hymn  composed  in  honour  of 
David  or  of  Solomon"  (Marks'  Sermons,  i.  208-9). 
Bellermann  (Metrik  der  Ilebraer)  calls  these  Psalms 
"  trochaic  songs." 

With  respect  to  the  term  n'l'pyfSn,  A.  V.  "de- 
grees," a  great  diversity  of  opinion  prevails  amongst 
Biblical  critics.  According  to  some  it  refers  to  the 
melody  to  which  the  Psalm  was  to  be  chanted. 
.Others,  including  Gesenius,  derive  the  word  from 
the  poetical  composition  of  the  song,  and  from  the 
circumstance  that  the  concluding  words  of  the  pre- 
ceding sentence  are  often  repeated  at  the  commence- 
ment oPthe  next  verse.     Thus  Psalm  exxi. : — 

I  will  lift  up  mine  eyes  unto  the  hills 

From  whence  cometh  my  help. 
My  help  cometh  even  from  Jehovah,  &c. 

And  so  in  other  passages  (comp.  exxi.  4,  5,  and 
exxiv.  1-2  and  3-4).  Aben  Ezra  quotes  an  ancient 
authority,  which  maintains  that  the  degrees  allude 
to  the  fifteen  steps  which,  in  the  temple  of  Jeru- 
salem, led  from  the  court  of  the  women  to  that  of 
the  men,  and  on  each  of  which  steps,  one  of  the 
fifteen  songs  of  degrees  was  chanted.  Adam 
Clarke  (Comment,  on  Ps.  cxx.)  refers  to  a  similar 
opinion  as  found  in  the  Apocryphal  Gospel  of  the 
birth  of  Mart/  :  "  Her  parents  brought  her  to  the 
temple,  and  set  her  upon  one  of  the  steps.  Now 
there  are  fifteen  steps  about  the  temple,  by  which 
they  go  up  to  it,  according  to  the  fifteen  Psalms  of 
degrees." 

The  most  generally  accredited  opinion,  however, 
is  that  n?y?0  is  etymologically  connected  with 
il?y,  "  to  go  up,"  or  to  travel  to  Jerusalem  ;  that 
some  of  these  hymns  were  preserved  from  a  period 
anterior  to  the  Babylonish  captivity ;  that  others 
were  composed  in  the  same  spirit  by  those  who  re- 
turned to  Palestine,  on  the  conquest  of  Babylon  by 
Cyrus,  and  that  a  few  refer  even  to  a  later  date, 
but  were  all  incorporated  into  one  collection,  be- 
cause they  had  one  and  the  same  object.  This  view 
is  adopted  by  Rosenmiiller,  Herder,  Mendelssohn, 
Joel  Brill,  &c.  &c.  Luther  translates  the  words 
"  Ein  Lied  im  hohern  Chor,"  thus  connecting  the 
Psalm  with  the  manner  of  its  execution ;  and  Mi- 
chaelis  compares  il^yJO  with  the  Syriac  NH^t^ 
(Scala)  which  would  likewise  characterize  the  metre 
or  the  melody.  [D.  W.  M.] 

DEHAVITES  (JttiT'l ;  Aavaloi ;  Diem)  are 
mentioned  but  once  in  Scripture  (Ear.  iv.  9).  They 
were  among  the  colonists  planted  iu  Samaria  by 
the  Assyrian  monarch  Esarhaddon,  after  the  com- 
pletion of  the  Captivity  of  Israel.  From  their 
name,  taken  in  conjunction  with  the  fact  that  they 
are  coupled  with  the  Susanchites  (Susianians,  or 
people  of  Susa)  and  the  Elamites  (Elymaeans, 
natives  of  the  same  country),  it  is  fairly  concluded 
that  they  are  the  Dai  or  Dahi,  mentioned  by  Hero- 
dotus (i.  125)  among  the  nomadic  tribes  of  Persia. 
This  people  appeals  to  have  been  widely  diffused, 
being  found  as  Dahae  (Adcu)  both  in  the  country 
east  of  the  Ca  pian  Strab.  \i.  8,  §2;  Arrian. 
Exped.  A/,  iii.  11,  &<•.).  and  in  the  vicinity  of  the 
Sea  of  Azof  (Strab.  \i.  9,  §3 1 :  and  again  as  1  >ii  |  a?oi, 
Thucyd.  ii.  96),  Dai  iAdoi,  Strab.),  or  Daci 
iAokoi,  Strab.  1).  Cass.  &e.)  upon  the  Danube. 
They  were  an  Aiian  race,  and  are  regarded  by  some 
as  bavins'  their  lineal  descendants  in  tin'  modem 


422 


DEKAR 


Danes  (see  Grimm's  Geschicht.  d.  Dcutsch.  Sprach. 
i.  192-3).  The  Septuagint  form  of  the  name — Da- 
vaeus,  may  compare  with  the  Davus  (  —  AaFos)  of 
Latin  comedy.  [G.  R.] 

DE'KAR.  The  son  of  Deker,  i.  e.  Ben-Dekek 
("IpTjH  ;  vlbs  AaKap  ;  Bendecar),  was  Solomon's 
commissariat  officer  in  the  western  part  of  the  hill- 
country  of  Judah  and  Benjamin,  Shaalbim  and 
Bethshemesh  (1  K.  iv.  9). 

DELAI'AH  (-IH^  and  H^H  =  "  Jehovah's 
freedman " — comp.  airtAevdepos  Kvpiov,  1  Cor. 
vii.  22  ;  also  the  Phoenician  name  AeXcuaffrdpros, 
quoted  from  Menander  by  Josephus,  Cont.  Ap.  i. 
18,  and  the  modern  name  Godfrey  =  Gofxesfrey  ; 
LXX.  AaXala  ;  AaXaias  ;  Dalaiau,  Dalaid),  the 
name  of  several  persons. 

1.  Delaiahu  (LXX.  Vat.  ASaXAoi) ;  a  priest 
in  the  time  of  David,  leader  of  the  twenty-third 
course  of  priests  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  18). 

2.  Delaiah  ;  "children  of  Delaiah  "  were 
among  the  people  of  uncertain  pedigree  who  re- 
turned from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii. 
60 ;  Neh.  vii.  62).  In  1  Esdr.  the  name  is 
Laddan. 

3.  Delaiah;  son  of  Mehetabeel  and  father  of 
Shemaiah  (Neh.  vi.  10). 

4.  Delaiahu  (AaXaias  and  ToZoXlas);  son  of 
Shemaiah,  one  of  the  "  princes"  (D'HCj  about  the 
court  of  Jehoiakim  (Jer.  xxxvi.  12,  25). 

The  name  also  occurs  in  the  A.  V.  as  Dalaiah. 

DELI'LAH  (rhh^  ;  AaXcSa  ;  Joseph. 
AaXiXri ;  Dalila),  a  woman  who  dwelt  in  the  valley 
of  Sorek,  beloved  by  Samson  (Judg.  xvi.  4-18). 
Her  connexion  with  Samson  forms  the  third  and  last 
of  those  amatory  adventures  which  in  his  history  are 
so  inextricably  blended  with  the  craft  and  prowess  of 
a  judge  in  Israel.  She  was  bribed  by  the  "  lords  of 
the  Philistines  "  to  win  from  Samson  the  secret  of 
his  strength,  and  the  means  of  overcoming  it. 
[Saiison.] 

It  is  not  stated,  either  in  Judges  or  in  Josephus, 
whether  she  was  an  Israelite  or  a  Philistine.  Nor 
can  this  question  be  determined  by  reference  to  the 
geography  of  Sorek ;  since  in  the  time  of  the  Judges 
the  frontier  was  shifting  and  indefinite.  [Sorek.] 
The  following  considerations,  however,  supply  pre- 
sumptive evidence  that  she  was  a  Philistine: — 

1.  Her  occupation,  which  seems  to  have  been 
that  of  a  courtesan  of  the  higher  class,  a  kind  of 
political  Hetaera.  The  hetaeric  and  political  view 
of  her  position  is  more  decided  in  Josephus  than  in 
Judges.  He  calls  her  yvvri  fTaipL^o/xefri ,  and  as- 
sociates  her  influence  over  Samson  with  tt6tos  and 
(Tvvovaia  {Ant.  v.  8,  §11).  He  also  states  more 
clearly  her  relation  as  a  political  agent  to  the 
"  lords    of    the    Philistines"    (^"ID,    Joseph,    oi 

TrpoefTTCtfTes,  ro?s  &pxov(Ti  YlaXaimivcov ;  LXX. 
apxovres  ;  Sutrapae;  ol  rov  koivoTj  ;  magistrates, 
politician  lords,  Milton,  Sams.  Ag.  850,  1195), 
employing  under  their  directions  "  liers  in  wait" 
(3"1XH,  to  evedpov ;  insidiis ;  cf.  Josh.  viii.  14; 
(TTpaTiwrwv).  On  the  other  hand,  Chrysostom 
and  many  of  the  Fathers  have  maintained  that 
Delilah  was  married  to  Samson  (so  Milton,  227), 
a  natural  but  uncritical  attempt  to  save  the 
morality  of  the  Jewish  champion.  See  Judg. 
xvi.   9,   18,   as    showing    an    exclusive   command 


DEMETRIUS 

of  her  establishment  inconsistent  with  the  idea  of 
matrimonial  connexion  (Patrick,  ad  foe).  There 
seems  to  be  little  doubt  that  she  was  a  courtesan; 
and  her  employment  as  a  political  emissaiy,  to- 
gether with  the  large  sum  which  was  otieied  for 
her  services  (1100  pieces  of  silver  from  each  lord 
=  5500  shekels;  cf.  Judg.  iii.  3),  and  the  tact 
which  is  attributed  to  her  in  Judges,  but  more 
especially  in  Josephus,  indicates  a  position  not  likely 
to  be  occupied  by  any  Israelitish  woman  at  that 
period  of  national  depression. 

2.  The  general  tendency  of  the  Scripture  narra- 
tive :  the  sexual  temptation  represented  as  acting 
upon  the  Israelites  from  without  (Num.  xxv.  1,  6, 
xxxi.  15,  16). 

3.  The  special  case  of  Samson  (Judg.  xiv.  1 , 
xvi.  1). 

In  Milton  Delilah  appears  as  a  Philistine,  and 
justifies  herself  to  Samson  on  the  ground  of 
patriotism  (Sams.  Ag.  850,  980).         [T.  E.  B.] 

DELUGE.    [Flood.] 

DE'LUS  (Af;Aos),  mentioned  in  1  Mace.  xv.  23, 
is  the  smallest  of  the  islands  called  Cyclades  in  the 
Aegaean  Sea.  It  was  one  of  the  chief  seats  of  the 
worship  of  Apollo,  and  was  celebrated  as  the  birth- 
place of  this  god  and  of  his  sister  Artemis  (Diana). 
We  learn  from  Josephus  (Ant.  xiv.  10,  §8)  that 
Jews  resided  in  this  island,  which  may  be  accounted 
for  by  the  fact,  that  after  the  fall  of  Corinth  (b.c. 
146)  it  became  the  centre  of  an  extensive  com- 
merce. The  sanctity  of  the  spot  and  its  consequent 
security,  its  festival  which  was  a  kind  of  fair,  the 
excellence  of  its  harbour,  and  its  convenient  situa- 
tion on  the  highway  from  Italy  and  Greece  to 
Asia,  made  it  a  favourite  resort  of  merchants.  So 
extensive  was  the  commerce  carried  on  in  the 
island,  that  10,000  slaves  are  said  to  have  changed 
hands  there  in  one  day  (Strab.  xiv.  p.  668).  Delus 
is  at  present  uninhabited,  except  by  a  few  shepherds. 
(For  details,  see  Diet,  of  Gr.  fy  Rom.  Geogr.  s.  v.) 

DE'MAS  (Atj/iSs),  most  probably  a  contraction 
from  ArifiriTpios,  or  perhaps  from  Arj,uapxos,  a 
companion  of  St.  Paul  (called  by  him  his  ffvvepyos 
in  Philem.  24 ;  see  also  Col.  iv.  14)  during  his 
first  imprisonment  at  Rome.  At  a  later  period 
(2  Tim.  iv.  10)  we  find  him  mentioned  as  having 
deserted  the  apostle  through  love  of-  this  present 
world,  and  gone  to  Thessalonica.  This  departure 
has  been  magnified  by  tradition  into  an  apostasy 
from  Christianity  (so  Epiphan.  fiacres.  41 .  6  .  .  . 
k<x\  ArjjJMV,  ko.1  'Ep/xoyevyu,  rovs  ayaTrricravras 
top  ivravOa  alwva,  Kal  naTaXeirpai'Tas  ryu  68bv 
rf;s  aXriOeias),  which  is  by  no  means  implied  in 
the  passage.  [H.  A.] 

DEMET'RIUS  (A^rpios),  a  maker  of  silver 
shrines  of  Artemis  at  Ephesus  (Acts  xix.  24). 
These  vaoi  apyvpol  were  small  models  of  the  great 
temple  of  the  Ephesian  Artemis,  with  her  statue, 
which  it  was  customary  to  carry  on  journeys,  and 
place  on  houses,  as  charms.  Demetrius  and  his 
fellow  craftsmen,  in  fear  for  their  trade,  raised  a 
tumult  against  St.  Paul  and  his  missionary  com- 
panions. [H.  A.] 

DEMET'RIUS    I.    (Awhrpios),    surnamed 

"The  Saviour"  (2a>T7;p,  in  recognition  of  his  ser- 
vices to  the  Babylonians),  king  of  Syria,  was  the  son 
of  Seleucus  Philopator,  and  gritadson  of  Antiochus  the 
Great.  While  still  a  boy  he  was  sent  by  his  father 
as  a  hostage  to  Rome  (B.C.  175)  in  exchange  for  his 


DEMETRIUS 

uncle  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  From  his  position  he 
was  unable  to  offer  any  opposition  to  the  usurpation 
pt'the  Syrian  throne  by  Antiochus  IV.;  but  on  the 
death  of  that  monarch  (B.C.  164)  he  claimed  his 
liberty  and  the  recognition  of  his  claim  by  the 
Roman  senate  in  preference  to  that  of  his  cousin 
Antiochus  V.  His  petition  was  refused  from  selfish 
policy  (Polyb.  xxxi.  12)  ;  and  by  the  advice  and 
assistance  of  Polybius,  whose  friendship  he  had 
gained  at  Rome  (Polyb.  xxxi.  19;  Just,  xxxiv.  3), 
he  left  Italy  secretly,  and  landed  with  a  small  force 
at  Tripolis  in  Phoenicia  (2  Mace.  xiv.  1 ;  1  Mace, 
vii.  1 ;  Jos.  Ant.  xii.  10,  1).  The  Syrians  soon  de- 
clared in  his  favour  (b.c.  162),  and  Antiochus  and 
his  protector  Lysias  were  put  to  death  (1  Mace.  vii. 
2,3;  2  Mace.  xiv.  2).  Having  thus  gained  pos- 
session of  the  kingdom  Demetrius  succeeded  in 
securing  the  favour  of  the  Romans  (Polyb.  xxxii.  4), 
and  he  turned  his  attention  to  the  internal  organisa- 
tion of  his  dominions.  The  Graecizing  party  were 
still  powerful  at  Jerusalem,  and  he  supported  them 
by  arms.  In  the  first  campaign  his  general  Bac- 
chides  established  Alcimus  in  the  high-priesthood 
(1  Mace.  vii.  5-20);  but  the  success  was  not  per- 
manent. Alcimus  was  forced  to  take  refuge  a 
second  time  at  the  court  of  Demetrius,  and  Nicanor, 
who  was  commissioned  to  restore  him,  was  defeated 
in  two  successive  engagements  by  Judas  Maccabaeus 
(1  Mace.  vii.  31,  2,  43-5),  and  fell  on  the  field. 
Two  other  campaigns  were  undertaken  against  the 
Jews  by  Bacchides  (b.c.  161;  158);  but  in  the 
meantime  Judas  had  completed  a  treaty  with  the 
Romans  shortly  before  his  death  (b.c.  161),  who 
forbade  Demetrius  to  oppress  the  Jews  (1  Mace, 
viii.  31).  Not  long  afterwards  Demetrius  further 
incurred  the  displeasure  of  the  Romans  by  the  ex- 
pulsion of  Ariarathes  from  Cappadocia  (Polyb.  xxxii. 
20;  Just.  xxxv.  1);  and  he  alienated  the  affection 
of  his  own  subjects  by  his  private  excesses  (Just. 
I.  c.  ;  cf.  Polyb.  xxxiii.  14).  When  his  power  was 
thus  shaken  (b.c.  1 52),  Alexander  Balas  was  brought 
forward,  with  the  consent  of  the  Roman  senate,  as  a 
claimant  to  the  throne,  with  the  powerful  support 
of  Ptolemy  Philometor,  Attalus,  and  Ariarathes. 
Demetrius  vainly  endeavoured  to  secure  the  services 
of  Jonathan,  who  had  succeeded  his  brother  Judas 
as  leader  of  the  Jews,  and  now,  from  the  recollec- 
tion of  his  wrongs,  warmly  favoured  the  cause  of 
Alexander  (1  Mace.  x.  1-6).  The  rivals  met  in  a 
decisive  engagement  (B.C.  150),  and  Demetrius, 
after  displaying  the  greatest  personal  bravery,  was 
defeated  and  slain  (1  Mace.  x.  48-50;  Jos.  Ant. 
xiii.  2,  §4;  Polyh.  iii.  5).  Jn  addition  to  the  very 
interesting  fragments  of  Polybius  the  following  re- 
ferences may  be  consulted:  Just,  xxxiv.  :'.,  xxxv.  1 ; 
App.  Syr.  46,  47,  67.  [B.  F.  W.] 


DEMON 


423 


Tctrailrachin  (Attic  talent!  of  Demi  trius  I. 
bv.   Head  of  Demetrius  to  the  right      Rev.    BA2IAEOS   AII- 
MHTPIcY    SfJTHPoS;    '»   field  monogram  and    MI;    la 
exergue  ASP   (ltsi  of  Era  Seleuc.).    Seated  female  figure  to  the 
left  with  sceptre  and  cornucopia. 

DEMET'RIUS   II.  (A^rpto^,  "The  Vic- 


torious" (NtKctTwp),  was  the  elder  son  of  Demetiius 
Soter.  He  was  sent  by  his  father,  together  with  his 
brother  Antiochus,  with  a  large  treasure,  to  Cnidus 
(Just.  xxxv.  2),  when  Alexander  Balas  laid  claim  to 
the  throne  of  Syria.  When  he  was  grown  up,  the 
weakness  and  vices  of  Alexander  furnished  him  with 
an  opportunity  of  recovering  his  father's  dominions. 
Accompanied  by  a  force  of  Cretan  mercenaries 
(Just.  I.  c. ;  cf.  1  Mace.  x.  67),  he  made  a  descent 
on  Syria  (B.C.  148),  and  was  received  with  general 
favour  (1  Mace.  x.  67  ff.).  Jonathan,  however, 
still  supported  the  cause  of  Alexander,  and  defeated 
Apollomus,  whom  Demetrius  had  appointed  governor 
of  Coele-Syria  (1  Mace.  x.  74-82).  In  spite  of  these 
hostilities,  Jonathan  succeeded  in  gaining  the  favour 
of  Demetrius  when  he  was  established  in  the  king- 
dom (1  Mace.  xi.  23-27),  and  obtained  from  him  an 
advantageous  commutation  of  the  royal  dues  and 
other  concessions  (1  Mace.  xi.  32-37).  In  return 
for  these  favours  the  Jews  rendered  important 
service's  to  Demetrius  when  Tryphon  first  claimed 
the  kingdom  for  Antiochus  VI.,  the  son  of  Alexander 
(1  Mace.  xi.  42),  but  afterwards  being  offended 
by  his  faithless  ingratitude  (1  Mace.  xi.  53),  they 
espoused  the  cause  of  the  young  pretender.  In  the 
campaign  which  followed,  Jonathan  defeated  the 
forces  of  Demetrius  (B.C.  144 ;  1  Mace.  xii.  28) ; 
but  the  treachery  to  which  Jonathan  fell  a  victim 
(B.C.  143)  again  altered  the  policy  of  the  Jews. 
Simon,  the  successor  of  Jonathan,  obtained  very 
favourable  terms  from  Demetrius  (B.C.  142)  ;  but 
shortly  afterwards  Demetrius  was  himself  taken 
prisoner  (B.C.  138)  by  Arsaces  VI.  (Mithridates), 
whose  dominions  he  had  invaded  (1  Mace.  xiv.  1-3  ; 
Just,  xxxvi.).  Mithridates  treated  his  captive 
honourably,  and  gave  him  his  daughter  in  marriage 
(App.  Syr.  67) ;  and  after  his  death,  though  De- 
metrius made  several  attempts  to  escape,  he  still 
received  kind  treatment  from  his  successor,  Phraates. 
When  Antiochus  Sidetes,  who  had  gained  possession 
of  the  Syrian  throne,  invaded  Parthia,  Phraates  em- 
ployed Demetrius  to  effect  a  diversion.  In  this 
Demetrius  succeeded,  and  when  Antiochus  fell  in 
battle,  lie  again  took  possession  of  the  Syrian  crown 
(B.C.  128).  Not  long  afterwards  a  pretender,  sup- 
ported by  Ptol.  Physcon,  appeared  in  the  field 
against  him,  and  after  suffering  a  defeat  he  was 
assassinated,  according  to  some  by  his  wife  (App. 
Syr.  68),  while  attempting  to  escape  by  sea  (Just. 
xxxix.  1;  Jos.  Ant.  xiii.  9,  3).     [Cleopatra.] 

[B.  F.  W.] 


Tetradrachm  (Attic  talent)  of  Demetrius  II. 
Obv.  Head  of  Demetrius  to  the  «ight,    Kef.   BA2IAEQ2  AH- 
MIITl'IoV    ©KoY    <MAAAKA0>oY     NIKAToPOS;    in 
exergue  gP©  (I6°f  <><  Era  Selene).    Apollo  to  the  left,  seated 
on  corona,  with  arrow  and  bow. 

DEMON  fl.XX.  Seu/toViov;  N.  T.  Sat^Sviov, 
or  rarely  daipuv.  Derivation  uncertain.  Plato 
(  Crat.  i.  p.  398)  connects  it  with  daiifiuv,  "  intel- 
ligent," of  which  indeed  the  form  Sai/j.wi'  is  found 
in  Archil,  (b.c.  650) ;  but  if  seems  more  probably 
derived   from   Saiw,   to  "divide"    or  "assign,"   in 


424 


DEMON 


which  case  it  would  be  similar  to  Moipa).  In  | 
sketching  out  the  Scriptural  doctrine  as  to  the 
nature  and  existence  of  the  demons,  it  seems  natural, 
1st,  to  consider  the  usage  of  the  word  Saifitau  in 
classical  Greek ;  2ndly,  to  notice  any  modification 
of  it  in  Jewish  hands;  and  then,  ordly,  to  refer  to 
the  passages  in  the  N.  T.  in  which  it  is  employed. 

I.  Its  usage  in  classical  Greek  is  various.  In 
Homer,  where  the  gods  are  but  supernatural  men, 
it  is  used  interchangeably  with  6e6s  ;  afterwards  in 
Hesiod  {Op.  121),  when  the  idea  of  the  gods  had 
become  more  exalted  and  less  familiar,  the  Sai/xoves 
are  spoken  of  as  intermediate  beings,  the  messengers 
of  the  gods  to  men.  This  latter  usage  of  the  word 
evidently  prevailed  afterwards  as  the  correct  one, 
although  in  poetry,  and  even  in  the  vague  language 
of  philosophy,  rb  SaifiSviov  was  sometimes  used  as 
equivalent  to  rb  Qsiov  for  any  superhuman  nature. 
Plato  (Symp,  pp.  2Q2,  203)  fixes  it  distinctly  in 
the  more  limited  sense :  -way  rb  Scu/aovlov  fxera^v 

iari  ®eov  teal  6vr)Tov debs  avOpwizo?  ov 

ixiyvvrai,  aWa  5ia  Sat/xovlcnv  iraaa  iffriv  r)  dfitAia 
Kal  t)  SidAeKTOs  Seois  trpbs  avQpwirovs.  Among 
them  were  numbered  the  spirits  of  good  men, 
"  made  perfect"  after  death  (Plat.  Crat.  p.  398, 
quotation  from  Hesiod).  It  was  also  believed  that 
they  became  tutelary  deities  of  individuals  (to  the 
piuest  form  of  which  belief  Socrates  evidently  re- 
ferred in  the  doctrine  of  his  Saifi6viov) ;  and  hence 
8aLfj.au'  was  frequently  used  in  the  sense  of  the 
"  fate  "  or  "  destiny  "  of  a  man  (as  in  the  tragedians 
constantly),  thus  recurring,  it  would  seem,  directly 
to  its  original  derivation. 

The  notion  of  evil  demons  appears  to  have  be- 
longed to  a  later  period,  and  to  have  been  due,  both 
to  Eastern  influence,  and  to  the  clearer  separation 
of  the  good  and  evil  in  men's  thoughts  of  the  super- 
natural." They  were  supposed  to  include  the  spirits 
of  evil  men  after  death,  and  to  be  authors,  not  only 
of  physical,  but  of  moral  evil. 

II.  In  the  LXX.  the  words  Sat/xwu  and  SaifxSviov 
are  not  found  very  frequently,  but  yet  employed  to 
render  different  Hebrew  words  ;  generally  in  re- 
ference to  the  idols  of  heathen  worslup ;  as  in  Ps. 

xcv.  3,  for  DvvN,  the  "  empty,"  the  "  vanities,'' 
rendered  xeipo7roi7)Tois,  &c,  in  Lev.  xix.  4,  xxvi.  1  ; 
in  Deut.  xxxii.  17,  for  DHC>,  "lords"  (comp.  1  Cor. 
viii.  5);  in  Is.lxv.  11,  for  Til,  Gad,  the  goddess  of 
Fortune  :  sometimes  in  the  sense  of  avenging  or  evil 
spirits,  as  in  Ps.  xci.  6,  for  3t}j?_,  "  pestilence," 
i.  e.  evidently  "  the  destroyer;"  also  in  Is.  xiii.  21, 
xxxiv.  14,  for  "pytJ\  "  hairy,"  and  D*!,V,  "dwellers 
in  the  desert,"  in  the  same  sense  in  which  the  A.  V. 
renders  "  satyrs." 

In  Josephus  we  find  the  word  "demons"  used 
always  of  evil  spirits ;  in  Bell.  Jvd.  vii.  6,  §3,  he 
defines  them  as  ret  irvev/LLaTu  toiu  irouripcov,  and 
speaks  of  their  exorcism  by  fumigation  (as  in  Tob. 
viii.  2,  3).  See  also  Ant.  vi.  c.  8,  §2,  viii.  c.  2,  §5. 
Writing  as  he  did  with  a  constant  view  to  the  Gen- 
tiles, it  is  not  likely  that  lie  would  use  the  word  in 
the  other  sense,  as  applied  to  heathen  divinities. 

By  Philo  the  word  appears  to  be  used  in  a  more 
general  sense,  as  equivalent  to  "  angels,"  and  re- 
ferring to  both  good  and  evil. 

a  Those  who  imputed  lust  and  envy  of  man  to  their 
pods  were  hardly  likely  to  have  a  distinct  view  of 
supernatural  powers  of  good  and  evil,  as  eternally 
opposed  to  each  other. 


DEMON 

The  change,  therefore,  of  sense  in  the  Hellenistic 
usage  is,  first,  the  division  of  the  good  and  evil 
demons,  and  the  more  general  application  of  the, 
word  to  the  latter;  secondly,  the  extension  of  the 
name  to  the  heathen  deities. 

III.  We  now  come  to  the  use  of  the  term  in  the 
N.  T.  In  the  Gospels  generally,  in  James  ii.  19, 
and  in  Piev.  xvi.  14,  the  demons  are  spoken  of  as 
spiritual  beings,  at  enmity  with  God,  and  having 
power  to  afflict  man,  not  only  with  disease,  but,  as 
is  marked  by  the  frequent  epithet  "  unclean,"  with 
spiritual  pollution  also.  In  Acts  xix.  12,  13,  &c, 
they  are  exactly  defined  as  to.  Trvev/jara  ra  irovripd. 
They  "  believe  "  the  power  of  God  "  and  tremble  " 
(James  ii.  19);  they  recognise  our  Lord  as  the  Son 
of  God  (Matt.  viii.  29  ;  Luke  iv.  41),  and  acknow- 
ledge the  power  of  His  name,  used  in  exorcism,  in 
the  place  of  the  name  of  Jehovah,  by  His  appointed 
messengers  (Acts  xix.  15)  ;  and  look  forward  in 
terror  to  the  judgment  to  come  (Matt.  viii.  29). 
The  description  is  precisely  that  of  a  nature  akin  to 
the  angelic  [see  Angels]  in  knowledge  and  powers, 
but  with  the  emphatic  addition  of  the  idea  of  positive 
and  active  wickedness.  Nothing  is  said  either  to 
support  or  to  contradict  the  common  Jewish  belief, 
that  in  their  ranks  might  be  numbered  the  spirits  of 
the  wicked  dead.  In  support  of  it  are  sometimes 
quoted  the  fact  that  the  demoniacs  sometimes  haunted 
the  tombs  of  the  dead  (Matt.  viii.  28),  and  the  sup- 
posed reference  of  the  epithet  aKadapra  to  the  cere- 
monial uncleanness  of  a  dead  body. 

In  1  Cor.  x.  20,  21,  1  Tim.  iv.  1,  and  Rev.  ix. 
20,  the  word  dat/j.6via  is  used  of  the  objects  of 
Gentile  worship,  and  in  the  first  passage  opposed  to 
the  word  ®eql  (with  a  reference  to  Deut.  xxxii.  17). 
So  also  is  it  used  by  the  Athenians  in  Acts  xvii.  18. 
The  same  identification  of  the  heathen  deities  with 
the  evil  spirits  is  found  in  the  description  of  the 
damsel  having  irvevfia  ■nvOwva,  or  ttvOwvos,  at 
Philippi,  and  the  exorcism  of  her  as  a  demoniac  by 
St.  Paul  (Acts  xvi.  16)  ;  and  it  is  to  be  noticed 
that  in  1  Cor.  x.  19,  20,  the  apostle  is  arguing  with 
those  who  declared  an  idol  to  be  a  pure  nullity, 
and  while  he  accepts  the  truth  that  it  is  so,  yet 
declares  that  all,  which  is  offered  to  it,  is  offered 
to  a  "  demon."  There  can  be  no  doubt  then  of  its 
being  a  doctrine  of  Scripture,  mysterious  (though  not 
necessarily  impossible)  as  it  maybe,  that  in  idolatry 
the  influence  of  the  demons  was  at  work  and  per- 
mitted by  God  to  be  effective  within  certain  bounds. 
There  are  not  a  few  passages  of  profane  history  on 
which  this  doctrine  throws  light;  nor  is  it  incon- 
sistent with  the  existence  of  remnants  of  truth  in 
idolatry,  or  with  the  possibility  of  its  being,  in 
the  case  of  the  ignorant,  overruled  by  God  to 
good. 

Of  the  nature  and  origin  of  the  demons,  Scripture 
is  all  but  silent.  On  one  remarkable  occasion. 
recorded  by  the  first  three  Evangelists  (Matt.  xii. 
24-30;  Mark  iii.  22-30;  Luke  xi.  14-26),  our 
Lord  distinctly  identifies  Satan  with  Beelzebub, 
tg?  apxovTi  toiv  Baifxovloov  ;  and  there  is  a  similar 
though  less  distinct  connexion  in  Rev.  xvi.  14.  From 
these  we  gather  certainly  that  the  demons  are  agents 
of  Satan  in  his  work,  of  evil,  subject  to  the  kingdom 
of  darkness,  and  doubtless  doomed  to  share  in  its 
condemnation  ;  and  we  conclude  probably  (though 
attempts  have  been  made  to  deny  the  inference) 
that  thev  must  be  the  same  as  "  the  angels  of  the 
devil"  (Matt.  xxv.  41  ;  Rev.  xii.  7,  9),  "  the  prin- 
cipalities and  powers  "  against  whom  we  "  vvrestje  " 
(Eph.  vi.  12.  &c).     As  to  the  question  of  their 


DEMONIACS 

fall,  see  Satan  ;  and  on  the  method  of  their  action 
on  the  souls  of  men,  see  DEMONIACS. 

The  language  of  Scripture,  as  to  their  existence 
and  their  enmity  to  man,  lias  suffered  the  attacks 
of  scepticism,  merely  on  the  ground  that,  in  the  re- 
searches of  natural  science,  there  are  no  traces  of  the 
supernatural,  and  that  the  fall  of  spirits,  created 
doubtless  in  goodness,  is  to  us  inconceivable.  Both 
facts  are  true,  but  the  inference  false.  The  very 
darkness  in  which  natural  science  ends,  when  it 
approaches  the  relation  of  mind  to  matter,  not  only 
does  not  contradict,  but  rather  implies  the  exist- 
ence of  supernatural  influence.  The  mystery  of 
the  origin  of  evil  in  God's  creatures  is  inconceivable  ; 
but  the  difficulty  in  the  case  of  the  angels  differs 
only  in  degree  from  that  of  the  existence  of  sin  in 
man,  of  which  nevertheless  as  a  fact  we  are  only  too 
much  assured.  The  attempts  made  to  explain  the 
words  of  our  Lord  and  the  Apostles  as  a  mere  accom- 
ni"  latum  to  the  belief  of  the  Jews  are  incompatible 
*  with  the  simple  and  direct  attribution  of  personality 
to  the  demons,  as  much  as  to  men  or  to  God,  and 
(if  carried  out  in  principle)  must  destroy  the  truth 
and  honesty  of  Holy  Scripture  itself.  [A.  B.] 

DEMONIACS  (8a.ifj.ovL{6/j.fvui,  Sai/jiSvia  *xov~ 
res).  This  word  is  frequently  used  in  the  N:  T., 
and  applied  to  persons  suffering  under  the  posses- 
sion of  a  demon  or  evil  spirit  [see  Demon],  such 
possession  generally  showing  itself  visibly  in  bodily 
disease  or  mental  derangement.  The  word  Sai^o- 
yav  is  used  in  a  nearly  equivalent  sense  in  classical 
Greek  (as  in  Aesch.  Choeph.  566 ;  Sept.  c.  Theb. 
1001  ;  Eur.  Plioen.  888,  &c),  except  that  as  the 
idea  of  spirits  distinctly  evil  and  rebellious,  hardly 
existed,  such  possession  was  referred  to  the  will  of 
tin.1  a;ods  or  to  the  vague  prevalence  of  an  "'Attj. 
Neither  word  is  employed  in  this  sense  by  the 
LXX.,  but  in  our  Lord's  time  (as  is  seen,  for  ex- 
ample, constantly  in  .Tosephus)  the  belief  in  the 
possession  of  men  by  demons,  who  were  either  the 
souls  of  wicked  men  after  death,  or  evil  angels,  was 
thoroughly  established  among  all  the  Jews  with 
the  exception  of  the  Sadducees  alone.  With  regard 
to  the  frequent  mention  of  demoniacs  in  Scripture 
three  main  opinions  have  been  started. 

I.  That  of  Strauss  and  the  mythical  school, 
which  makes  the  whole  account  merely  symbolic, 
without  basis  of  fact.  The  possession  of  the  devils 
is,  according  to  this  idea,  only  a  lively  symbol  of  the 
prevalence  of  evil  in  the  world,  the  casting  out  the 
devils  by  our  Lord  a  corresponding  symbol  of  His  con- 
quest over  that  evil  power  by  His  doctrine  and  His 
life.  The  notion  stands  or  falls  with  the  mythical 
theory  as  a  whole:  with  regard  to  the  special  form 
(if  it,  it  is  sufficient  to  remark  the  plain,  simple,  and 
prosaic  relation  of  the  facts  as  facts,  which,  what- 
ever might  be  conceived  as  possible  in  highly  poetic 
and  avowedly  figurative  passages,  would  make  their 
assertion  here  not  a  symbol  or  a  figure,  but  a  lie. 
It  would  be  as  reasonable  to  expect  a  myth  or 
symbolic  fable  from  Tacitus  or  Thucydides  in  their 
accounts  of  contemporary  history. 

H.  The  second  theory  is,  that  our  Lord  and 
the  Evangelists,  in  referring  to  demoniacal  pos- 
session, spoke  only  in  accommodation  to  the 
belief  of  the  Jews,  without  any  assert  ion  as  to  its 
truth  or  its  falsity.  It  is  concluded  that,  since 
the  symptoms  of  the  affliction  were  frequently 
those  of  bodily  disease  (as  dumbness.  Matt.  ix. 
32;  blindness,  Matt.  \ii.  '_'-!  ;  epilepsy,  Mark  ix. 
17-27),  or  those  seen  in  cases  of  ordinary  in- 
sanity   (as    ia    Matt.    viii.    28;     Mark    v.    1-5), 


DEMONIACS 


425 


since  also  the  phrase  "  to  have  a  devil  "  is  con- 
stantly used  in  connexion  with,  and  as  apparently 
equivalent  to,  "  to  be  mad"  (see  John  vii.  20, 
viii.  48,  x.  20,  and  perhaps  Matt.  xi.  18;  Luke 
vii.  33) ;  and  since,  lastly,  cases  of  demoniacal 
possession  are  not  known  to  occur  iu  our  own 
days,  therefore  we  must  suppose  that  our  Lord 
spoke,  and  the  Evangelists  wrote,  in  accordance 
with  the  belief  of  the  time,  and  with  a  view  to 
be  clearly  understood,  especially  by  the  sufferers 
themselves,  but  that  the  demoniacs  were  merely 
persons  suffering  under  unusual  diseases  of  body 
and  mind. 

With  regard  to  this  theory  also,  it  must  be  re- 
marked that  it  does  not  accord  either  with  the 
general  principles  or  with  the  particular  language 
of  scripture.  Accommodation  is  possible  when,  in 
things  indifferent,  language  is  used  which,  although 
scientifically  or  etymologically  inaccurate,  yet  con- 
veys a  true  impression,  or  when,  in  things  not 
indifferent,  a  declaration  of  truth  (1  Cor.  iii.  I,  2), 
or  a  moral  law  (Matt.  xix.  8),  is  given,  true  or 
right  as  far  as  it  goes,  but  imperfect,  because  of 
the  imperfect  progress  of  its  recipients.  But  cer- 
tainly here  the  matter  was  not  indifferent.  The 
age  was  one  of  little  faith  and  great  superstition ; 
its  characteristic  the  acknowledgment  of  God  as  a 
distant  Lawgiver,  not  an  inspirer  of  men's  hearts. 
This  superstition  in  things  of  far  less  moment  was 
denounced  by  our  Lord ;  can  it  be  supposed  that 
He  would  sanction,  and  the  Evangelists  be  per- 
mitted to  record  for  ever,  an  idea  in  itself  false, 
which  has  constantly  been  the  very  stronghold  of 
superstition  ?  Nor  was  the  language  used  such 
as  can  be  paralleled  with  mere  conventional  ex- 
pression. There  is  no  harm  in  our  "  speaking  of 
certain  forms  of  madness  as  lunacy,  not  thereby 
implying  that  we  believe  the  moon  to  have  or  to 
have  had  any  influeuce  upon  them  ;  .  .  .  but  if 
we  began  to  describe  the  cure  of  such  as  the  moon's 
ceasing  to  afflict  them,  or  if  a  physician  were 
solemnly  to  address  the  moon,  bidding  it  abstain 
from  injuring  his  patient,  there  would  be  here  a 
passing  over  to  quite  a  different  region,  .  .  .  there 
would  be  that  gulf  between  our  thoughts  and  words 
in  which  the  essence  of  a  lie  consists.  Now  Christ 
does  everywhere  speak  such  language  as  this." 
(Trench  On  Miracles,  p.  153,  where  the  whole 
question  is  most  ably  treated.)  Nor  is  there,  in 
the  whole  of  the  New  Testament,  the  least  indica- 
tion that  any  "economy"  of  teaching  was  employed 
on  account  of  the  "  hardness  "  of  the  Jews' 
"hearts."  Possession  and  its  cure  are  recorded 
plainly  and  simply;  demoniacs  are  frequently  dis- 
tinguished from  those  afflicted  with  bodily  sickness 
(see  Mark  i.  32,  xvi.  17,  18;  Luke  vi.  17,  18), 
even,  it  would  seem,  from  the  epileptic  (<T(Kr)via- 
(6/j.tvoi,  Matt.  iv.  24);  the  same  outward  signs 
are  sometimes  referred  to  possession,  sometimes 
merelv  to  disease  (comp.  Matt.  iv.  24,  with  xvii. 
15;  Matt.  xii.  22,  with  Mark  vii.  32,  &c.);  the 
demons  are  represented  as  speaking  in  their  own 
persons  with  superhuman  knowledge,"  and  acknowi 
[edging  our  Lord  to  be,  not  as  the  Jews  generally 
called  him,  son  of  David,  but  Son  of  God  (Matt, 
viii.  29j  Mark  i.  24,  v.  7;  Luke  iv.  41,  &&). 
All  these  things  speak  of  a  personal  power  of  evil, 

*  Compare  also  the  case  of  the  damsel  with  the 
spirit  of  divination  (irvevpa  ttv9wio<;)  at  l'hilippi  ; 
where  also  the  power  of  the  evil  spirit  is  referred  to 
under  the  well-known  name  of  the  supposed  inspira- 
tion of  Delphi. 


426 


DEMONIACS 


and,  if  in  any  case  they  refer  to  what  we  might 
call  mere  disease,  they  at  any  rate  tell  ns  of 
something  in  it  more  than  a  morbid  state  of  bodily 
organs  or  self-caused  derangement  of  mind.  Nor 
does  our  Lord  speak  of  demons  as  personal  spirits  of 
evil  to  the  multitude  alone,  but  in  His  secret  con- 
versations with  His  disciples,  declaring  the  means 
and  conditions  by  which  power  over  them  could  be 
exercised  (Matt.  xvii.  21).  Twice  also  He  dis- 
tinctly connects  demoniacal  possession  with  the 
power  of  the  evil  one;  once  in  Luke  x.  18,  to  the 
seventy  disciples,  where  He  speaks  of  his  power  and 
theirs  over  demoniacs  as  a  "  fall  of  Satan,"  and 
again  in  Matt.  xii.  25-30,  when  He  was  accused  of 
casting  out  demons  through  Beelzebub,  and,  instead 
of  giving  any  hint  that  the  possessed  were  not 
really  under  any  direct  and  personal  power  of  evil, 
He  uses  an  argument,  as  to  the  division  of  Satan 
against  himself,  which,  if  possession  be  unreal, 
becomes  inconclusive  and  almost  insincere.  Lastly, 
the  single  fact  recorded  of  the  entrance  of  the  de- 
mons at  Gadara  (Mark  v.  10-14)  into  the  herd  of 
swine,b  and  the  effect  which  that  entrance  caused, 
is  sufficient  to  overthrow  the  notion  that  our  Lord 
and  the  Evangelists  do  not  assert  or  imply  any 
objective  reality  of  possession.  In  the  face  of  this 
mass  of  evidence  it  seems  difficult  to  conceive  how 
the  theory  can  be  reconciled  with  anything  like 
truth  of  scripture. 

But  besides  this  it  must  be  added,  that  to  say 
of  a  case  that  it  is  one  of  disease  or  insanity,  gives 
no  real  explanation  of  it  at  all ;  it  merely  refers  it 
to  a  class  of  cases  which  we  know  to  exist,  but 
gives  no  answer  to  the  further  question,  how  did 
the  disease  or  insanity  arise?  Even  in  disease, 
whenever  the  mind  acts  upon  the  body  (as  e.  g. 
in  nervous  disorders,  epilepsy,  &c.)  the  mere  de- 
rangement of  the  physical  organs  is  not  the  whole 
cause  of  the  evil ;  there  is  a  deeper  one  lying 
in  the  mind.  Insanity  may  indeed  arise,  in  some 
cases,  from  the  physical  injury  or  derangement 
of  those  bodily  organs  through  which  the  mind 
exercises  its  powers,  but  fir  oftener  it  appears  to 
be  due  to  metaphysical  causes,  acting  upon  and 
disordering  the  mind  itself.  In  all  cases  where  the 
evil  lies  not  in  the  body  but  in  the  mind,  to  call  it 
"  only  disease  or  insanity  "  is  merely  to  state  the 
fact  of  the  disorder,  and  give  up  all  explanation  of 
its  cause.  It  is  an  assumption,  therefore,  which 
requires  proof,  that,  amidst  the  many  inexplicable 
phenomena  of  mental  and  physical  disease  in  our 
own  days,  there  are  none  in  which  one  gifted  with 
"  discernment  of  spirits  "  might  see  signs  of  what 
the  Scripture  calls  "  possession." 

The  truth  is,  that  here,  as  in  many  other  in- 
stances, the  Bible,  without  contradicting  ordinary 
experience,  yet  advances  to  a  region  whither  human 
science  cannot  follow.  As  generally  it  connects 
the  existence  of  mental  and  bodily  suffering  in  the 
world  with  the  introduction  of  moral  corruption  by 
the  Fall,  and  refers  the  power  of  moral  evil  to  a 
spiritual  and  personal  source ;  so  also  it  asserts  the 
existence  of  inferior  spirits  of  evil,  and  it  refers 
certain  cases  of  bodily  and  mental  disease  to  the 
influence  which  they  are  permitted  to  exercise 
directly  over  the  soul  and  indirectly  over  the  body. 
Inexplicable  to  us  this  influence  certainly  is,  as  all 


b  It  is  almost  needless  to  refer  to  the  subterfuges  of 
interpretation  by  which  the  force  of  this  fact  is  evaded. 

c  It  is  to  be  noticed  that  almost  all  the  cases  of 
demoniac  possession  are  recorded  as  occurring  among 


DEMONIACS 

action  of  spirit  on  spirit  is  found  to  be ;  but  no  one 
can  pronounce  a  priori  whether  it  be  impossible  or 
improbable,  and  no  one  has  a  right  to  eviscerate 
the  strong  expressions  of  Scripture  in  order  to 
reduce  its  declarations  to  a  level  with  our  own 
ignorance. 

III.  We  are  led,  therefore,  to  the  ordinary  and 
literal  interpretation  of  these  passages,  that  there 
are  evil  spirits  [Demons],  subjects  of  the  Evil 
One,  who,  in  the  days  of  the  Lord  Himself  and  His 
Apostle's  especially,  were  permitted  by  God  to 
exercise  a  direct  influence  over  the  souls  and  bodies 
of  certain  men.  This  influence  is  clearly  distin- 
guished from  the  ordinary  power  of  corruption  and 
temptation  wielded  by  Satan  through  the  permis- 
sion of  God.  [Satan.]  Its  relation  to  it,  indeed, 
appears  to  be  exactly  that  of  a  miracle  to  God's 
ordinary  Providence,  or  of  special  prophetic  inspira- 
tion to  the  ordinary  gifts  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
Both  (that  is)  are  actuated  by  the  same  geneial 
principles,  and  tend  to  the  same  general  object ; 
but  the  former  is  a  special  and  direct  manifestation 
of  that  which  is  worked  out  in  the  latter  by  a  long 
course  of  indirect  action.  The  distinguishing  fea- 
ture of  possession  is  the  complete  or  incomplete 
loss  of  the  sufferer's  reason  or  power  of  will ;  his 
actions,  his  words,  and  almost  his  thoughts  are 
mastered  by  the  evil  spirit  (Mark  i.  24,  v.  7. 
Acts  six.  15),  till  his  personality  seems  to  be 
destroyed,  or,  if  not  destroyed,  so  overborne  as  to 
produce  the  consciousness  of  a  twofold  will  within 
him,  like  that  sometimes  felt  in  a  dream.  In  the 
ordinary  temptations  and  assaults  of  Satan,  the 
will  itself  yields  consciously,  and  by  yielding  gra- 
dually assumes,  without  losing  its  apparent  free- 
dom of  action,  the  characteristics  of  the  Satanic 
nature.  It  is  solicited,  urged,  and  persuaded  against 
the  strivings  of  grace,  but  not  overborne. 

Still,  however,  possession  is  only  the  special  and, 
as  it  were,  miraculous  form  of  the  "  law  of  sin  in 
the  members,"  the  power  of  Satan  over  the  heart 
itself,  recognised  by  St.  Paul  as  an  indwelling  and 
agonising  power  (Rom.  vii.  21-24).  Nor  can  it 
be  doubted  that  it  was  rendered  possible  in  the 
first  instance  by  the  consent  of  the  sufferer  to 
temptation  and  to  sin.  That  it  would  be  most 
probable  in  those  who  yielded  to  sensual  tempta- 
tions may  easily  be  conjectured  from  general  obser- 
vation of  the  tyranny  of  a  habit  of -sensual  indul- 
gence.0 The  cases  of  the  habitually  lustful,  the 
opium-eater,  and  the  drunkard  (especially  when 
struggling  in  the  last  extremity  of  delirium  tre- 
mens) bear,  as  has  been  often  noticed,  many  marks 
very  similar  to  those  of  the  Scriptural  possession. 
There  is  in  them  physical  disease,  but  there  is  often 
something  more.  It  is  also  to  be  noticed  that  the 
state  of  possession,  although  so  awful  in  its  wretched 
sense  of  demoniacal  tyranny,  yet,  from  the  very 
fact  of  that  consciousness,  might  be  less  hopeless 
and  more  capable  of  instant  cure  than  the  delibe- 
rate hardness  of  wilful  sin.  The  spirit  might  still 
retain  marks  of  its  original  purity,  although 
through  the  flesh  and  the  demoniac  power  acting 
by  the  flesh  it  was  enslaved.  Here  also  the  ob- 
servation of  the  suddenness  and  completeness  of 
conversion,  seen  in  cases  of  sensualism,  compared 
with  the  greater  difficulty  in  cases  of  more  refined 


the  rude  and  half-Gentile  population  of  Galilee. 
St.  John,  writing  mainly  of  the  ministry  in  Judea, 
mentions  none. 


DEMOPHON 

aud  spiritual  sin,  tends  to  confirm  the  record  of 
Scripture. 

It  was  but  natural  that  the  power  of  evil  should 
show  itself,  in  more  open  and  direct  hostility  than 
ever,  in  the  age  of  our  Lord  and  His  Apostles,  when 
its  time  was  short.  It  was  natural  also  that  it 
should  take  the  special  form  of  possession  in  an 
age  of  such  unprecedented  and  brutal  sensuality  as 
that  which  preceded  His  coming,  aud  continued 
till  the  leaven  of  Christianity  was  felt.  Nor  was 
it  less  natural  that  it  should  have  died  away  gra- 
dually before  the  great  direct,  and  still  greater 
indirect  influence  of  Christ's  kingdom.  Accord- 
ingly we  find  early  fathers  (as  Just.  Mart.  Dial.  c. 
Tri/ph.  p.  311  B.;  Tertullian,  Apol.  23,  37,  43) 
alluding  to  its  existence  as  a  common  thing,  men- 
tioning the  attempts  of  Jewish  exorcism  in  the 
name  of  Jehovah  as  occasionally  successful  (see 
Matt.  xii.  27  ;  Acts  xix.  13),  but  especially  dwell- 
ing on  the  power  of  Christian  exorcism  to  cast  it 
out  from  the  country  as  a  test  of  the  truth  of 
the  Gospel,  and  as  one  well-known  benefit  which 
it  already  conferred  on  the  empire.  By  degrees 
the  mention  is  less  and  less  fiequent,  till  the  very 
idea  is  lost  or  perverted. 

Such  is  a  brief  sketch  of  the  Scriptural  notices 
of  possession.  That  round  the  Jewish  notion  of 
it  there  grew  up,  in  that  noted  age  of  superstition, 
many  foolish  and  evil  practices,  and  much  super- 
stition as  to  fumigations,  &c.  (comp.  Tob.  viii.  1-3  ; 
Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  c.  2  §5),  of  the  "  vagabond 
exorcists"  (see  Acts  xix.  13)  is  obvious  and  would 
be  inevitable.  It  is  clear  that  Scripture  does  not  in 
the  least  sanction  or  even  condescend  to  notice  such 
things ;  but  it  is  certain  that  in  the  Old  Testament 
(see  Lev.  xix.  31 ;  1  Sam.  xxviii.  7,  &c. ;  2  K.  xxi. 
G,  xxiii.  24,  &c.)  as  well  as  in  the  New,  it  recog- 
nises possession  as  a  real  and  direct  power  of  evil 
spirits  upon  the  heart.  [A.  B.] 

DE'MOPHON  (ArifjLo<pwv),  a  Syrian  general 
in  Palestine  under  Antiochus  V.  Eupator  (2  Mace, 
xii.  2). 

DENA'KIUS  (b~nvapiov ;  denarim ;  A.  V. 
"penny,"  Matt,  xviii.  28,  xx.  2,  9,  13,  xxii.  19; 
Mark  vi.  37,  xii.  15,  xiv.  5  ;  Luke  vii.  41,  x.  35, 
xx.  24;  John  vi.  7,  xii.  5  ;  Rev.  vi.  6),  a  Unman 
silver  coin,  in  the  time  of  Our  Saviour  and  the 
Apostles.  It  took  its  name  from  its  being  first 
equal  to  ten  "  asses,"  a  number  afterwards  in- 
creased to  sixteen.  The  earliest  specimens  are  of 
about  the  commencement  of  the  2nd  century  B.C. 
From  this  time  it  was  the  principal  silver  coin  of 
the  commonwealth.  It  continued  to  hold  the  same 
position  under  the  Empire  until  long  after  the  close 
of  the  New  Testament  Canon.  In  the  time  of  Au- 
gustus eighty-four  denarii  were  struck  from  the 
pound  of  silver,  which  would  make  the  standard 
weightabout  60*  grs.  This  Nero  reduced  by  striking 
ninety-six  from  the  pound,  which  would  give  a 
standard  weight  of  about  52-  grs.,  results  confirmed 
by  the  coins  of  the  periods,  which  are,  however,  not 
exactly  true  to  the  standard.  The  drachm  of  the 
Attic  talent,  which  from  the  reign  of  Alexandei 
until  the  Roman  domination,  was  the  nm-i  import- 
ant Greek  standard,  had,  by  gradual  reduction, 
become  equal  to  the  denarius  of  Augustus,  so  that 
the  two  coins  came  to  be  regarded  as  identical. 
Under  the  same  emperor  tin'  Roman  coin  super- 
seded the  Greek,  and  many  of  the  few  cities  which 
yet  struck  silver  money,  took  for  it  the  form  and 
general  character  of  the  denarius  and  of  its  half  the 


DEPOSIT 


427 


quinarius.  In  Palestine  in  the  N.  T.  period,  we 
learn  from  numismatic  evidence  that  denarii  must 
have  mainly  formed  the  silver  currency.  It  is 
therefore  probable  that  in  the  N.  T.  by  dpaxfiri  and 
apyvpiov,  both  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  "  piece  of  sil- 
ver," we  are  to  understand  the  denarius  [Drachma; 
Silver,  piece  of].  The  5i5pax/Lt0»'  °*  the  tribute 
(Matt.  xvii.  24)  was  probably  in  the  time  of  Our 
Saviour  not  a  current  coin,  like  the  ffrarrip  men- 
tioned in  the  same  passage  (ver.  27).  [Money.] 
From  the  parable  of  the  labourers  in  the  vineyard 
it  would  seem  that  a  denarius  was  then  the  ordi- 
nary pay  for  a  day's  labour  (Matt.  xx.  2,  4,  7,  9, 
10,  13).  The  term  denarius  aureus  (Plin.  xxxiv. 
17,  xxxvii.  3)  is  probably  a  corrupt  designation  for 
the  aureus  (nummus) :  in  the  N .  T.  the  denarius 
proper  is  always  intended.  (See  Money,  and 
Diet,  of  Ant.  Denarius.)  [R.  S.  P.]' 


Denarius  of  Tiberius. 

Obv.  TI  CAESAR  DIVI  AVG  F  AVGVSTVS.  Head  of  Tiberius, 
laureate,  to  the  right  (Matt.  xxii.  19.  20,  21).  Kev.  PONTIF 
MAXIM  Seated  female  figure  to  the  right. 

DEPOSIT  (fnpS  ;  Trapa9riKr],  rrapaKaraer}Kr] ; 
deposit  urn),  the  arrangement  by  which  one  man 
kept  at  another's  request  the  property  of  the  latter, 
until  demanded  back,  was  one  common  to  all  the 
nations  of  antiquity ;  and  the  dishonest  dealing  with 
such  trusts  is  marked  by  profane  writers  with  ex- 
treme reprobation  (Herod,  vi.  86  ;  Juv.  xiii.  199, 
&c. ;  Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  7,  §38  ;  de  B.  J.  iv.  8,  §5, 
7).  Even  our  Saviour  seems  (Luke  xvi.  12)  to 
allude  to  conduct  in  such  cases  as  a  test  of  honesty." 
In  later  times,  when  no  banking  system  was  as 
yet  devised,  shrines  were  often  used  for  the  custody 
of  treasure  (2  Mace.  iii.  10,  12,  15;  Xenoph.  Anab. 
v.  3,  §7  ;  Cic.  Legg.  ii.  1G  ;  Plut.  Lys.  c.  18).;  but, 
especially  among  an  agricultural  people,  the  exi- 
gencies of  war  and  other  causes  of  absence  must 
often  have  rendered  such  a  deposit,  especially  as 
regards  animals,  an  owner's  only  course.  Nor  was 
the  custody  of  such  property  burdensome ;  for,  the 
use  of  it  was  no  doubt,  so  far  as  that  was  consistent 
with  its  unimpaired  restoration,  allowed  to  the  de- 
positary, which  olfice  also  no  one  was  compelled  to 
accept.  The  articles  specified  by  the  Mosaic  law 
are,  (1.)  "  money  or  stuff;"  and  (2.)  "an  ass,  or  an 
ox,  or  a  sheep,  or  any  beast."  The  first  case  was 
viewed  as  only  liable  to  loss  by  theft  (probably  for 
loss  by  accidental  fire,  &c,  no  compensation  could 
be  claimed),  and  the  thief,  if  found,  was  to  pay 
double,  ».  c,  probably  to  compensate  the  owner's 
loss,  and  the  unjust  suspicion  thrown  on  the  depo- 
sitary. If  no  theft  could  be  proved,  the  depositary 
was  to  swear  before  the  judges  that  lie  had  not  ap- 
propriated the  article,  and  then  was  quit.b  In  the 
second,  if  the  beast  were  to  "die  or  be  hurt,  or 


a  Such  is  probably  the  meaning  of  the  words 
ev  to!  oAAoTptu)  7rio-TOi.  It  may  also  be  remarked  that, 
in  the  parable  of  the  talents,  the  "  slothful  servant  " 
affects  to  consider  himself  as  a  mere  depositarius,  in 
the  words  tSe  «X"?  T0  <T°V  (Matt.  xxv.  25). 

b  The   Hebrew    expression    N?  DK,    Ex.    xxii.  s. 

rendered  in  the  A.  V.  "to  see  whether,"  is  a  common 
formula  jurandi. 


428 


DEM3E 


driven  away,  no  man  seeing  it," — accidents  to  which 
beasts  at  pasture  were  easily  liable, — the  depositary 
was  to  purge  himself  by  a  similar  oath.  (Such 
oaths  are  probably  alluded  to  Heb.  vi.  16,  as  "  an 
end  of  all  strife.")  In  case,  however,  the  animal 
were  stolen,  the  depositary  was  liable  to  restitution, 
which  probably  was  necessary  to  prevent  collusive 
theft.  If  it  were  torn  by  a  wild  beast,  some  proof 
was  easily  producible,  and,  in  that  case,  no  restitu- 
tion was  due  (Ex.  xxii.  7-13).  In  case  of  a  false 
oath  so  taken,  the  perjured  person,  besides  making 
restitution,  was  to  "add  the  fifth  part  more  there- 
to," to  compensate  the  one  injured,  and  to  "  bring 
a  ram  for  a  trespass-offering  unto  the  Lord"  (Lev. 
vi.  5,  6).  In  the  book  of  Tobit  (v.  3)  a  written 
acknowledgment  of  a  deposit  is  mentioned  (i.  14 
(17),  iv.  20  (21)  ).  This,  however,  merely  facili- 
tated the  proof  of  the  fact  of  the  original  deposit, 
leaving  the  law  untouched.  The  Mishna  (Baba 
Metzia,  c.  iii.,  Shebuoth,  v.  1),  shows  that  the  law 
of  the  oath  of  purgation  in  such  cases  continued  in 
force  among  the  later  Jews.  Michaelis  on  the 
laws  of  Moses,  ch.  162,  may  be  consulted  on  this 
subject.  [H.  H.] 

DER'BE  (A<fP)37j,  Acts  xiv.  20,  21,  xvi.  1  ; 
Eth.  Aepfialos,  Acts  xx.  4).  The  exact  position  of 
this  town  has  not  yet  been  ascertained,  but  its  ge- 
neral situation  is  undoubted.  It  was  in  the  eastern 
part  of  the  great  upland  plain  of  LYCAONIA,  which 
stretches  from  Iconium  eastwards  along  the  north 
side  of  the  chain  of  Taurus.  It  must  have  been 
somewhere  near  the  place  where  the  pass  called  the 
Cilician  Gates  opened  a  way  from  the  low  plain  of 
Cilicia  to  the  table-land  of  the  interior  ;  and  pio- 
bably  it  was  a  stage  upon  the  great  road  which 
passed  this  way.  It  appears  that  Cicero  went 
through  Derbe  on  his  route  from  Cilicia  to  Ico- 
nium (Cic.  ad  Fam.  xiii.  73).  Such  was  St.  Paul's 
route  on  his  second  missionary  journey  (Acts  xv. 
41,  xvi.  1,  2),  and  probably  also  on  the  third 
(xviii.  23,  xix.  1).  In  his  first  journey  (xiv.  20, 
21)  he  approached  from  the  other  side,  viz.,  from 
Iconium,  in  consequence  of  persecution  in  that 
place  and  at  Lystra.  No  incidents  are  recorded 
as  having  happened  at  Derbe.  In  harmony  with 
this,  it  is  not  mentioned  in  the  enumeration  of 
places  2  Tim.  iii.  11.  "In  the  apostolic  history 
Lystra  and  Derbe  are  commonly  mentioned  toge- 
ther: in  the  quotation  from  the  epistle,  Lystra  is 
mentioned  and  not  Derbe.  The  distinction  is  accu- 
rate ;  for  St.  Paul  is  here  enumerating  his  persecu- 
tions "  (Paley,  Horae  Paulinae,  in  foe). 

Three  sites  have  been  assigned  to  Derbe.  (1.)  By 
Col.  Leake  {Asia  Minor,  101),  it  was  supposed  to 
be  at  Bin-bir-Kilissch,  at  the  foot  of  the  Kura- 
dagh,  a  remarkable  volcanic  mountain  which  rises 
from  the  Lycaonian  plain ;  but  this  is  almost  cer- 
tainly the  site  of  Lystra.  (2.)  In  Kiepert's  Map, 
Derbe  is  marked  farther  to  the  east,  at  a  spot 
where  there  are  ruins,  and  which  is  in  the  line  of  a 
Roman  road.  (3.)  Hamilton  (Researches  in  Asia 
Minor,  ii.  313)  and  Texier  (Asie  Mineure,  ii.  129, 
130)  are  disposed  to  place  it  at  Divle,  a  little  to 
the  S.W.  of  the  last  position  and  nearer  to  the  roots 
of  Taurus.  In  favour  of  this  view  there  is  the 
important  fact  that  Steph.  Byz.  says  that  the  place 
was  sometimes  called  AeA/3ei'a,  which  in  the  Ly- 
caonian language  (see  Acts  xiv.  11)  meant  a 
"juniper  tree."  Moreover,  he  speaks  of  a  Xi/n^v 
here,  which  (as  Leake  and  the  French  translators 
of  Strnho  suggest)  ought  probably  to  lie  \ifivr)  ; 
and  if  this  is  correct,  the  requisite  condition   is  sa- 


DESEET 

tisfied  by  the  proximity  of  the  Lake  Ak  Gol. 
Wieseler  (Chronol.  der  Apost.  Zeitalter,  p.  24) 
takes  the  same  view,  though  he  makes  too  much  of 
the  possibility  that  St.  Paul,  on  his  second  journey, 
travelled  by  a  minor  pass  to  the  W.  of  the  Cilician 
Gates.  It  is  difficult  to  say  why  Winer  (Real- 
u-orterbiich,  s.  v.)  states  that  Deibe  was  "  S.  of  Ico- 
nium and  S.E.  of  Lystra." 

Strabo  places  Derbe  at  the  edge  of  Isauria ;  but 
in  the  Synecdemus  of  Hieiocles  (Wesseling,  p.  675, 
where  the  word  is  Ae'pjSoi)  it  is  placed,  as  in  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles,  in  Lycaonia.  The  boundaries 
of  these  districts  were  not  very  exactly  defined. 
The  whole  neighbourhood,  to  the  sea-coast  of 
Cilicia,  was  notorious  for  robbery  and  piracy. 
Antipater,  the  friend  of  Cicero  (ad  Fain.  xiii.  73)  was 
the  bandit  chieftain  of  Lycaonia.  Amyntas,  king  of 
Galatia  (successor  of  Deiotarus  II.),  murdered  An- 
tipater and  incorporated  his  dominions  with  his  own. 
Under  the  Roman  provincial  government  Derbe 
was  at  first  placed  in  a  corner  of  Cappadocia  ; 
but  other  changes  were  subsequently  made.  [Ga- 
latia.] Derbe  does  not  seem  to  be  mentioned  in 
the  Byzantine  writers.  Leake  says  (102)  that  its 
bishop  was  a  suffragan  of  the  metropolitan  of  Ico- 
nium. [J.  S.  H.] 

DESEET,  a  word  which  is  sparingly  em- 
ployed in  the  A.  V.  to  translate  four  Hebrew  terms, 
of  which  three  are  essentially  different  in  significa- 
tion. A  "  desert,"  in  the  sense  which  is  ordi- 
narily attached  to  the  word,  is  a  vast,  burning, 
sandy ,a  plain,  alike  destitute  of  trees  and  of  water. 
This  idea  is  probably  derived  from  the  deserts  of 
Africa — that,  for  example,  which  is  overlooked  by 
the  Pyramids,  and  with  which  many  travellers  are 
familiar.  But  it  should  be  distinctly  understood  that 
no  such  region  as  this  is  ever  mentioned  in  the  Bible 
as  having  any  connexion  with  the  history  of  the 
Israelites,  either  their  wanderings  or  their  settled 
existence.  With  regard  to  the  sand,  the  author  of 
"  Sinai  and  Palestine"  has  given  the  fullest  correction 
to  this  popular  error,  and  has  shown  that  "  sand  is 
the  exception  and  not  the  rale  of  the  Arabian 
desert"  of  the  Peninsula  of  Sinai  (S.  fy  P.,  8,  9, 
64).  And  as  to  the  other  features  of  a  desert,  cer- 
tainly the  Peninsula  of  Sinai  is  no  plain,  but  a 
region  extremely  variable  in  height,  and  diversified, 
even  at  this  day,  by  oases  and  valleys  of  verdure 
and  vegetation,  and  by  frequent  wells,  which  were 
all  probably  far  more  abundant  in  those  earlier 
times  than  they  now  are.  This  however  will  be 
more  appropriately  discussed  under  the  head  of 
Wilderness  of  the  Wanderings.  Here,  it  is 
simply  necessary  to  show  that  the  words  rendered 
in  the  A.  V.  by  "  desert,"  when  used  in  the  histo- 
rical books,  denoted  definite  localities ;  and  that 
those  localities  do  not  answer  to  the  common  con- 
ception of  a  "desert." 

1.  Arabah  (nmy).  The  root  of  this  word, 
according  to  Gesenius  (Thes.  1066),  is  Arab,  2~}V, 

to  be  dried  up  as  with  heat;  and  it  has  been 
already  shown  that  when  used,  as  it  invariably  is 
in  the  historical  and  topographical  records  of  the 
Bible,  with  the  definite  article,  it  means  that  very 
depressed  and  enclosed  region — the  deepest  and 
the  hottest  chasm  in  the  world — the  sunken  valley 
north  and  south  of  the  Dead  Sea,  but  more  parti- 
cularly the  former.  [Aeabah.]     True,  in  the  pre- 


a  "  The  sea  of  sand."     See  Coleridge's  parable  on 
Mystics  and  Mysticism  (Aids  to  Iieji.    Conclusion.) 


DESERT 

sent  depopulated  and  neglected  state  of  Palestine 
the  Jordan  valley  is  as  arid  and  desolate  a  region 
as  can  be  met  with,  but  it  was  not  always  so.  On 
the  contrary,  we  have  direct  testimony  to  the  tact 
that  when  the  Israelites  were  flourishing,  and  later 
in  the  Roman  times,  the  case  was  emphatically  the 
reverse.  Jericho,  "  the  city  of  Palm  trees,"  at  the 
lower  end  of  the  valley,  Bethshean  at  the  upper, 
and  Phasaelis  in  the  centre,  were  famed  both  in 
Jewish  and  profane  history  for  the  luxuriance  of 
their  vegetation  (Jos.  Ant.  xviii.  2,  §2  ;  xvi.  5,  §2  ; 
Bethshean  ;  Jericho).  When  the  abundant 
water-resources  of  the  valley  were  properly  hus- 
banded and  distributed,  the  tropical  heat  caused 
not  barrenness  but  tropical  fertility,  and  here 
grew  the  baisam,  the  sugar-cane,  and  other  plants 
requiring  great  heat,  but  also  rich  soil,  for  their 
culture.  Arabah  in  the  sense  of  the  Jordan 
Valley  is  translated  by  the  word  "desert"  only 
in  Ez.  xlvii.  8.  In  a  more  general  sense  of  waste, 
deserted  country — a  meaning  easily  suggested  by 
the  idea  of  excessive  heat  contained  in  the  root — 
"  Desert,"  as  the  rendering  of  Arabah,  occurs  in 
the  prophets  and  poetical  books  ;  as  Is.  xxxv.  1,  6, 
xl.  3,  xli.  19,  li.  3;  Jer.  ii.  6,  v.  6,  xvii.6,  1.  12; 
but  this  general  sense  is  never  found  in  the  his- 
torical books.  In  these,  to  repeat  once  more, 
Arabah  always  denotes  the  Jordan  valley,  the 
Ghor  of  the  modern  Arabs.  Professor  Stanley 
proposes  to  use  "desert"  as  the  translation  of 
Arabah  whenever  it  occurs,  and  though  not  exactly 
suitable,  it  is  difficult  to  suggest  a  better  word. 

2.  But  if  Arabah  gives  but  little  support  to  the 
ordinary  conception  of  a  "  desert,"  still  less  does 
the  other  word  which  our  translators  have  most 
frequently  rendered  by  it.  Midbar  ("I3"1JD)  is 
accurately  the  "  pasture  ground,"  deriving  its 
name  from  a  root  dabar  ("O'1!),  "to  drive,"  signi- 
ficant of  the  pastoral  custom  of  driving  the  flocks 
out  to  feed  in  the  morning,  and  home  again  at 
night;  and  therein  analogous  to  the  German  word 
trift,  which  is  similarly  derived  from  trciben,  to 
drive.  With  regard  to  the  Wilderness  of  the 
Wanderings — for  which  Midbar  is  almost  inva- 
riably used — this  signification  is  most  appropriate  ; 
for  we  must  never  forget  that  the  Israelites  had 
flocks  and  herds  with  them  during  the  whole  of 
their  passage  to  the  Promised  Land.  They  had 
them  when  they  left  Egypt  (Ex.  x.  26,  xii.  38), 
they  had  them  at  Hazeroth,  the  middle  point 
of  the  wanderings  (Num.  xi.  22),  and  some  of 
the  tribes  possessed  them  in  large  numbers  im- 
mediately before  the  transit  of  the  Jordan  (Num. 
xxxii.  1  j.  Midbar  is  not  often  rendered  by  "de- 
sert" in  the  A.  V.  Its  usual  and  certainly  more 
appropriate  translation  is  "  wilderness,"  a  word  in 
which  the  idea  of  vegetation  is  present.  In  speak- 
ing of  the  Wilderness  of  the  Wanderings  tin-  word 
"desert"  occurs  as  the  rendering  of  Midbar,  in 
Ex.  iii.  1,  v.  3,  xix.  2;  Num.  xxxiii.  15,  16;  ami 
in  more  than  one  of  these  it  is  evidently  employed 
for  the  sake  of  euphony  merely. 

Midbar  is  mot  frequently  used  for  those  tracts 
of  waste  land  which  lie  beyond  the  cultivated 
ground  in  the  immediate  neighbourhood  of  the 
towns  and  villages  of  Palestine,  and  which  are 
a  very  familiar  feature  to  the  traveller  in  that 
country.  In  spring  these  tracts  are  covered  with 
a  rich  green  verdure  of  turf,  and  small  shrub 
herbs  of  various  kinds.  But  at  the  end  of  summer 
the  herbage  withers,  the  turf  dries  up  and  is  pow- 


DEUEL 


420 


dered  thick  with  the  dust  of  the  chalky  soil,  and 
the  whole  has  certainly  a  most  dreary  aspect.  An 
example  of  this  is  furnished  by  the  hills  through 
which  the  path  from  Bethany  to  Jericho  pursues 
its  winding  descent.  In  the  spring  s<5  abundant  is 
the  pasturage  of  these  hills,  that  they  are  the 
resort  of  the  flocks  from  Jerusalem  on  the  one 
hand  and  Jericho  on  the  other,  and  even  from 
the  Arabs  on  the  other  side  of  the  Jordan.  And 
even  in  the  month  of  September — when  the  writer 
made  this  journey — though  the  turf  was  only 
visible  on  close  inspection,  more  than  one  large 
flock  of  goats  and  sheep  was  browsing,  scattered 
over  the  slopes,  or  stretched  out  in  a  long  even 
line  like  a  regiment  of  soldiers.b  A  striking 
example  of  the  same  thing,  and  of  the  maimer 
in  which  this  waste  pasture  land  gradually  melts 
into  the  cultivated  fields,  is  seen  in  making  one's 
way  up  through  the  mountains  of  Benjamin,  due 
west,  from  Jericho  to  Mukhmas  or  Jeba.  These 
Mldbars  seem  to  have  borne  the  name  of  the  town 
to  which  they  were  most  contiguous,  for  example 
Bethaven  (in  the  region  last  referred  to)  ;  Ziph, 
Maon,  and  Paran,  in  the  south  of  Judah;  Gibeon, 
Jeruel,  &c.  &c. 

In  the  poetical  books  "  desert"  is  found  as  the 
translation  of  Midbar  in  Deut.  xxxii.  10  ;  Job  xxiv. 
5  ;  Is.  xxi.  1  ;  Jer.  xxv.  24. 

3.  Char'bah  (ill-Tin).  This  word  is  perhaps 
related  to  Arabah,  with  the  substitution  of  one 
guttural  for  another  ;  at  any  rate  it  appears  to  have 
the  same  force,  of  dryness,  and  thence  of  desola- 
tion. It  does  not  occur  in  any  historical  passages. 
It  is  rendered  "desert"  in  Ps.  cii.  G;  Is.  xlviii. 
21 ;  Ezek.  xiii.  4.  The  term  commonly  employed 
for  it  in  the  A.  V.  is  "waste  places"  or  "deso- 
lation." 

4.  JeshImon  (jiD^'j).  This  word  in  the  his- 
torical books  is  used  with  the  definite  article,  appa- 
rently to  denote  the  waste  tracts  on  both  sides  of 
the  Dead  Sea.  In  all  these  cases  it  is  treated  as  a 
proper  name  in  the  A.  V.  [Jeshimon  ;  Beth- 
JESfittOTH.]  Without  the  article  it  occurs  in  a 
few  passages  of  poetry ;  in  the  following  of  which 
it  is  rendered  "  desert."  Ps.  lxxviii.  40  ;  cvi.  14  ; 
Is.  xliii.  19,  20.  [G.] 

DES'SAU  (Aeccraou;  Alex.  Aecr aaov;  Dessaii), 
a  village  (not  "  town;"  Kcifiri,  casteMum)  at  which 
Nieanor's  army  was  once  encamped  during  his 
campaign  with  Judas  (2  Mace.  xiv.  16).  There  is 
no  mention  of  it  in  the  account  of  these  transac- 
tions in  1  Mace,  or  in  Josephus.  Ewald  conjec- 
tures that  it  may  have  been  Adasa  (Gesch.  iv. 
368,  note). 

DEU'EL  (bx-II?^  ;  Vat,  and  Alex.  'Payovfa  ; 
Dehuel),  father  of  Eliasaph,  the  "captain"  (&Ol."J) 
of  the  tribe  of  Gad  at  the  time  of  the  number- 
ing of  the  people  at  Sinai  (Num.  i.  14,  v.i.  42, 
47,  x.  20).  The  same  man  is  mentioned  again  in 
ii.  14,  but  here  the  name  appears  as  Reuel,  owing 
to  an  interchange  of  the  two  very  similar  Hebrew 
letters  ■)  ami  -p  In  this  latter  passage  the  Sama- 
ritan, Arabic  and  Vulg.  retain  the  1>;  the  I. XX., 
as  in  the  other  places,  has  K.      [Repel.]     Which 

b  This  practice  is  not  peculiar  to  Palestine.  Mr. 
Blakesley  observed  it  in  Algeria  ;  and  gives  the  reason 
for  it,  namely,  a  more  systematic,  and  therefore  com- 
plete, consumption  of  the  scanty  herbage.  {Four 
Months  in  Algeria,  303.) 


430 


DEUTERONOMY 


of  the  two  was  really  his  Dame  we  have  no  means 
of  deciding. 

Deuteronomy  (nnn^n  r&K,  or  cnn^, 

so  called  from  the  first  words  of  the  book  ;  Aeurc- 
pov6fxiov,  as  being  a  repetition  of  the  Law  ;  Deuic- 
ronium  :  called  also  by  the  later  Jews  DIITI  .ilJ^'O 

and  nii-Din  iqd). 

A.  Contents.  The  Book  consists  chiefly  of  three 
discourses  delivered  by  Moses  shortly  before  his 
death.  They  were  spoken  to  all  Israel  in  the  plains 
of  Moab  on  the  eastern  side  of  the  Jordan  (i.  1),  in 
the  eleventh  month  of  the  last  year  of  their  wan- 
derings, the  fortieth  year  after  their  exodus  from 
Egypt  (i.  3). 

Subjoined  to  these  discourses  are  the  Song  of 
Moses,  the  Blessing  of  Moses,  and  the  story  of  his 
death. 

I.  The  first  discourse  (i.  1 — iv.  40).  After  a 
brief  historical  introduction,  the  speaker  recapitu- 
lates the  chief  events  of  the  last  40  years  in  the 
wilderness,  and  especially  those  events  which  had 
the  most  immediate  bearing  on  the  entry  of  the 
ptople  into  the  promised  land.  He  enumerates  the 
contests  in  which  they  had  been  engaged  with  the 
various  tribes  who  came  in  their  way,  and  in  which 
their  success  had  always  depended  upon  their  obe- 
dience ;  and  reminds  them  of  the  exclusion  from 
the  promised  land,  first  of  the  former  generation 
because  they  had  been  disobedient  in  the  matter  of 
the  spies,  and  next  of  himself  with  whom  the  Lord 
was  wroth  for  their  sakes  (iii.  26).  On  the  appeal 
to  the  witness  of  this  past  history  is  then  based  an 
earnest  and  powerful  exhortation  to  obedience :  and 
especially  a  warning  against  idolatry  as  that  which 
had  brought  God's  judgment  upon  them  in  times 
past  (iv.  3),  and  would  bring  yet  sorer  punishment 
in  the  future  (iv.  26-28).  To  this  discourse  is 
appended  a  brief  notice  of  the  severing  of  the  three 
cities  of  refuge  on  the  east  side  of  the  Jordan  (iv. 
41-43). 

II.  The  second  discourse  is  introduced  like  the 
first  by  an  explanation  of  the  circumstances  under 
which  it  was  delivered  (iv.  44-49).  It  extends  from 
chap.  v.  1 — xxvi.  19,  and  contains  a  recapitula- 
tion, with  some  modifications  and  additions,  of  the 
Law  already  given  on  Mount  Sinai.  Yet  it  is  not 
bare  recapitulation,  or  naked  enactment,  but  every 
word  shows  the  heart  of  the  lawgiver  full  at  once  of 
zeal  for  God  and  of  the  most  fervent  desire  for  the 
welfare  of  his  nation.  It  is  the  Father  no  less  than 
the  Legislator  who  speaks.  And  whilst  obedience 
and  life  are  throughout  bound  up  together,  it  is 
the  obedience  of  a  loving  heart,  not  a  service  of 
formal  constraint  which  is  the  burden  of  his  exhor- 
tations. The  following  are  the  principal  heads  of 
discourse:  (a.)  He  begins  with  that  which  formed 
the  basis  of  the  whole  Mosaic  code, — the  Ten  Com- 
mandments, and  impressively  repeats  the  circum- 
stances under  which  they  were  given  (v.  1 — vi.  3). 
(o.)  Then  follows  an  exposition  of  the  spirit  of  the 
First  Table.  The  love  of  Jehovah  who  has  done 
so  great  things  for  them  (vi.),  and  the  utter  up- 
rooting of  all  idol-worship  (vii.)  are  the  points 
chiefly  insisted  upon.  But  they  are  also  reminded 
that  if  idolatry  be  a  snare  on  the  one  hand,  so  is 
self-righteousness  on  the  other  (viii.  10  ff  x.),  and 
therefore  lest  they  should  be  lifted  up,  the  speaker 
enters  at  length  on  the  history  of  their  past  rebel- 
lions (ix.  7,  22-24),  and  especially  of  their  sin  in 
the  matter  of  the  golden  calf  (ix.  9-21).  The  true 
nature  of  obedience  is  again  emphatically  urged  (x. 


DEUTERONOMY 

12 — xi.  32),  and  the  great  motives  to  obedience  set 
forth  in  God's  love  and  mercy  to  them  as  a  people 
(x.  15,  21,  22),  as  also  his  signal  punishment  of 
the  rebellious  (xi.  3-6).  The  blessing  and  the  curse 
(xi.  26-32)  are  further  detailed,  (c.)  From  the 
general  spirit  in  which  the  Law  should  be  observed, 
Moses  passes  on  to  the  several  enactments.  Even 
these  are  introduced  by  a  solemn  charge  to  the 
people  to  destroy  all  objects  of  idolatrous  worship 
in  the  land  (xii.  1-3).  They  are  upon  the  whole 
arranged  systematically.  We  have  (1.)  first  the 
laws  touching  religion  (xii.— xvi.  17)  ;  (2.)  then 
those  which  are  to  regulate  the  conduct  of  the  go- 
vernment and  the  executive  (xvi.  18 — xxi.  23)  ; 
and  (3.)  lastly  those  which  concern  the  private  and 
social  life  of  the  people  (xxii.  1 — xxvi.  19).  The 
whole  are  framed  with  express  reference  to  the 
future  occupation  of  the  land  of  Canaan. 

(1.)  There  is  to  be  but  one  sanctuary  where  all 
offerings  are  to  be  offered.  Flesh  may  be  eaten 
anywhere,  but  sacrifices  may  only  be  slain  in  "  the 
place  which  the  Lord  thy  God  shall  choose"  (xii. 
5-32).  All  idol  prophets,  all  enticers  to  idolatry 
from  among  themselves,  even  whole  cities,  if  idol- 
atrous, are  to  be  cut  off  (xiii.)  ;  and  all  idolatrous 
practices  to  be  eschewed  (xiv.  1,  2).  Next  come 
regulations  respecting  clean  and  unclean  animals, 
tithe,  the  year  of  release  and  the  three  feasts  of  the 
Passover,  of  Weeks,  and  of  Tabernacles  (xiv.  3 — 
xvi.  17). 

(2.)  The  laws  affecting  public  personages  and 
defining  the  authority  of  the  Judges  (xvi.  18-20) 
and  the  Priests  (xvii.  8-13),  the  way  of  proceeding 
in  courts  of  justice  (xvii.  1-13);  the  law  of  the 
King  (xvii.  14-20),  of  the  Priests  and  Levites  and 
Prophets  (xviii.)  ;  of  the  cities  of  refuge  and  of 
witnesses  (xix.).  The  order  is  not  very  exact,  but 
on  the  whole  the  section  xvi.  18 — xix.  21  is  judi- 
cial in  its  character.  The  passage  xvi.  21 — xvii. 
1,  seems  strangely  out  of  place.  Baumgarten 
(Comm.  in  he.)  tries  to  account  for  it  on  the 
ground  of  the  close  connexion  which  must  subsist 
between  the  true  worship  of  God  and  righteous 
rule  and  judgment.  But  who  does  not  feel  that 
this  is  said  with  more  ingenuity  than  truth  ? 

Next  come  the  laws  of  war  (xx.),  both  as  waged 
(a)  generally  with  other  nations,  and  (6)  especially 
with  the  inhabitants  of  Canaan  (ver.  17). 

(3.)  Laws  touching  domestic  life  and  the  relation 
of  man  to  man  (xxi.  15 — xxvi.  19).  So  Ewald 
divides,  assigning  the  former  part  of  chap.  xxi.  to 
the  previous  section.  Havernick  on  the  other  hand 
includes  it  in  the  present.  The  fact  is,  that  ver. 
10-14  belong  to  the  laws  of  war  which  are  treated 
of  in  chap,  xx.,  whereas  1-9  seem  more  naturally 
to  come  under  the  matters  discussed  in  this  sec- 
tion. It  begins  with  the  relations  of  the  family, 
passes  on  to  those  of  the  friend  and  neighbour,  and 
then  touches  on  the  general  principles  of  justice 
and  charity  by  which  men  should  be  actuated 
(xxiv.  16-22).  It  concludes  with  the  solemn  con- 
fession which  every  Israelite  is  to  make  when  he 
offers  the  first  fruits,  and  which  reminds  him  of 
what  he  is  as  a  member  of  the  theocracy;  as  one  in 
covenant  with  Jehovah  and  greatly  blessed  by  Je- 
hovah. 

Finally,  the  whole  long  discourse  (v.  1— xxvi. 
19)  is  wound  up  by  a  brief  but  powerful  appeal 
(16-19),  which  reminds  us  of  the  words  with 
which  it  opened.  It  will  be  observed  that  no  pains 
are  taken  here,  or  indeed  generally  in  the  Mosaic 
legislation,  to  keep  the  several  portions  of  the  law, 


DEUTERONOMY 

considered  as  moral,  ritual,  and  ceremonial,  apart 
from  each  other  by  any  clearly  marked  line.  Bnt 
there  is  in  this  discourse  a  very  manifest  gradual 
descent  from  the  higher  ground  to  the  lower.  The 
speaker  begins  by  setting  forth  Jehovah  Himself  as 
the  great  object  of  love  and  worship,  thence  he 
passes  (1.)  to  the  Religious,  (2.)  to  the  Political, 
and  (3.)  to  the  Social  economy  of  his  people. 

III.  In  the  third  discourse  (xxvii.  1 — xxx.  20), 
the  Elders  of  Israel  are  associated  with  Moses.  The 
people  are  commanded  to  set  up  stones  upon  Mount 
Ebal,  and  on  them  to  write  "  all  the  words  of  this 
law."  Then  follow  the  several  curses  to  be  pro- 
nounced by  the  Levites  on  Ebal  (xxvii.  14-26),  and 
tjie  blessings  on  Gerizim  (xxviii.  1-14).  How  ter- 
rible will  be  the  punishment  of  auy  neglect  of  this 
law,  is  further  pourtrayed  in  the  vivid  words  of  a 
prophecy  but  too  fearfully  verified  in  the  subse- 
quent history  of  the  people.  The  subject  of  this 
discourse  is  briefly  "  The  Blessing  and  the  Curse." 

IV".  The  delivery  of  the  Law  as  written  by 
Moses  (for  its  still  further  preservation)  to  the 
custody  of  the  Levites,  and  a  charge  to  the  people 
to  hear  it  read  once  every  seven  years  (xxxi.)  :  the 
Song  of  Moses  spoken  in  the  ears  of  the  people 
(xxxi.  30 — xxxii.  44)  :  and  the  blessing  of  the 
twelve  tribes  (xxxiii.). 

V.  The  Book  closes  (xxxiv.)  with  an  account  of 
the  death  of  Moses,  which  is  first  announced  to 
him  in  xxxii.  48-52.  On  the  authorship  of  the 
last  chapter  we  shall  speak  below. 

B.  Relation  of  Deuteronomy  to  the  preceding 
books. 

It  has  been  an  opinion  very  generally  entertained 
by  the  more  modern  critics,  as  well  as  by  the 
earlier,  that  the  book  of  Deuteronomy  forms  a  com- 
plete whole  in  itself,  and  that  it  was  appended  to 
the  other  books  as  a  later  addition.  Only  chapters 
xxxii.,  xxxiii.,  xxxiv.,  have  been  in  whole  or  in  part 
called  in  question  by  De  Wette,  Ewald,  and  Von 
Lengerke.  De  Wette  thinks  that  xxxii.  and  xxxiii. 
have  been  borrowed  from  other  sources,  and  that 
xxxiv.  is  the  work  of  the  Elohist  [Pentateuch]. 
Ewald  also  supposes  xxxii.  to  have  been  borrowed 
from  another  writer,  who  lived,  however  (in  ac- 
cordance with  his  theory,  which  we  shall  notice 
lower  down),  after  Solomon.  On  the  other  hand, 
he  considers  xxxiii.  to  be  later,  whilst  Bleek  {Report. 
i.  25)  and  Tuch  {Gen.  556)  decide  that  it  is 
Elohistic.  Some  of  these  critics  imagine  that  these 
chapters  originally  formed  the  conclusion  of  the 
book  of  Numbers,  and  that  the  Deuteronomist 
[PENTATEUCH]  tore  them  away  from  their  proper 
position  in  order  the  better  to  incorporate  his  own 
work  with  the  rest  of  the  Pentateuch,  and  to  give 
it  a  fitting  conclusion.  Gesenius  ami  his  followers 
are  of  opinion  that  the  whole  book  as  it  stands  at 
present  is  by  the  same  hand.  But  it  is  a  question 
of  some  interest  and  importance  whether  the  book 
of  j>euteronomy  should  lie  assigned  to  the  author, 
or  one  of  the  authors,  of  the  former  portions  of  the 
Pentateuch,  or  whether  it  is  a  distinct  and  inde- 
pendent  work.  The  more  conservative  critics  of 
the  school  of  Hengstenberg  contend  that  Deuter- 
onomy forms  an  integral  part  of  the  Pentateuch, 
which  is  throughout  to  lie  ascribed  to  Moses. 
Others,  as  Stahelin  and  Delitzsch,  have  given  reasons 
for  believing  that  it  was  written  by  the  Jehovist ; 
whilst  others  again,  as  Ewald  and  !>.•  Wette,  are  in 
favour  of  a  different  author. 

The  chief  grounds  on  which  the  last  opinion 
rests  are  the  many  variations  and  additions  to  !„• 


DEUTERONOMY 


431 


found  in  Deuteronomy,  both  in  the  historical  and 
legal  portions,  as  well  as  the  observable  difference 
of  style  and  phraseology.  It  is  necessary  therefore, 
before  we  come  to  consider  more  directly  the  ques- 
tion of  authorship,  to  take  into  account  these  alleged 
peculiarities ;  and  it  may  be  well  to  enumerate  the 
principal  discrepancies,  additions,  &c,  as  given  by 
De. Wette  in  the  last  edition  of  his  Einleitung 
(many  of  his  former  objections  he  afterwards  aban- 
doned), and  to  subjoin  the  replies  and  explanations 
which  they  have  called  forth. 

I.  Discrepancies.  —  The  most  important  dis- 
crepancies alleged  to  exist  between  the  historical 
portions  of  Deuteronomy  and  the  earlier  books  are 
the  following: — 

(1.)  The  appointment  of  judges  (i.  6-18)  is  at 
variance  with  the  account  in  Ex.  xviii.  It  is  re- 
ferred to  a  different  time,  being  placed  after  the 
departure  of  the  people  from  Horeb  (ver.  6),  whereas 
in  Exodus  it  is  said  to  have  occurred  during  their 
encampment  before  the  mount  (Ex.  xviii.  5).  The 
circumstances  are  different,  and  apparently  it  is 
mixed  up  with  the  choosing  of  the  seventy  elders 
(Num.  xi.  11-17).  To  this  it  has  been  answered, 
that  although  Dent.  i.  6  mentions  the  departure 
from  Sinai,  yet  Deut.  i.  9-17  refers  evidently  to 
what  took  place  during  the  abode  there,  as  is  shown 
by  comparing  the  expression  "  at  that  time,"  ver.  9, 
with  the  same  expression  ver.  18.  The  speaker,  as 
is  not  unnatural  in  animated  discourse,  checks 
himself  and  goes  back  to  take  notice  of  an  im- 
portant circumstance  prior  to  one  which  he  has 
already  mentioned.  This  is  manifest,  because  ver. 
19  is  so  clearly  resumptive  of  ver.  6.  Again,  there 
is  no  force  in  the  objection  that  Jethro's  counsel  is 
here  passed  over  in  silence.  When  making  allusion 
to  a  well-known  historical  fact,  it  is  unnecessary 
for  the  speaker  to  enter  into  details.  This  at  most 
is  an  omission,  not  a  contradiction.  Lastly,  the 
story  in  Exodus  is  perfectly  distinct  from  that  in 
Num.  xi.,  and  there  is  no  confusion  of  the  two  here. 
Nothing  is  said  of  the  institution  of  the  seventy  in 
Deut.,  probably  because  the  office  was  only  tempo- 
rary, and  if  it  did  not  cease  before  the  death  of 
Moses,  was  not  intended  to  be  perpetuated  in  the 
promised  land.  (So  in  substance  Banke,  v.  Len- 
gerke, Hengst.,  Havern.,  Stahelin.) 

(2.)  Chap.  i.  22  is  at  variance  with  Num.  xiii.  2, 
because  here  Moses  is  said  to  have  sent  the  spies 
into  Canaan  at  the  suggestion  of  the  people,  whereas 
there  God  is  said  to  have  commanded  the  measure. 
The  explanation  is  obvious.  The  people  make  the 
request ;  Moses  refers  it  to  God,  who  then  gives  to 
it  His  sanction.  In  the  historical  book  of  Numbers 
the  divine  command  only  is  mentioned.  Here, 
where  the  lawgiver  deals  so  largely  with  the  feelings 
and  conduct  of  the  people  themselves,  he  reminds 
them  both  that  the  request  originated  with  them- 
selves, and  also  of  the  circumstances  out  of  which 
that  request  sprang  (ver.  20,  21).  These  are  not 
mentioned  in  the  history.  The  objection,  it  may 
be  remarked,  is  precisely  of  the  same  kind  as  that 
which  in  the  N.  T.  is  urged  against  the  reconcilia- 
tion of  Gal.  ii.  2  with  Acts  xv.  2,  ."..  Both  admit 
of  a  similar  explanation. 

(3.)  Chap.  i.  4+,  "  And  the  Amorites  which  dwelt 
in  that  mountain,"  &c.,  whereas  in  the  story  of 
tin' same  event,  Num.  xiv.  43-45,  Amalekites  are 
mentioned.  Answer:  in  this  latter  passage  not 
only  Amalekites,  but  Canaanites.  are  said  to  have 
come  down  against  the  Israelites.  The  Amorites 
stand  here  not  for  "  Amalekites,"  but  for  "  Canaan- 


432 


DEUTERONOMY 


ites,"  as  being  the  most  powerful  of  all  the  Canaan- 
itish  tribes  (cf.  Gen.  xv.  16  ;  Deut.  i.  7) ;  and  the 
Amalekites  are  not  named,  but  hinted  at,  when  it  is 
said,  "  they  destroyed  you  in  Seir,"  where,  according 
to  1  Chr.  iv.  42,  they  dwelt  (so  Hengst.  iii.  421). 

(4.)  Chap.  ii.  2-8,  confused  and  at  variance  with 
Num.  xx.  14-21,  and  xxi.  4.  In  the  former  we 
read  (ver.  4),  "  Ye  are  to  pass  through  the  coast 
of  your  brethren,  the  children  of  Esau."  In  the 
latter  (ver.  20),  "And  he  said,  Thou  shalt  not  go 
through.-  And  Edom  came  out  against  him,"  &c. 
But,  according  to  Deut.,  that  part  of  the  Edomite 
territory  only  was  traversed  which  lay  about  Elath 
and  Ezion-geber.  In  this  exposed  part  of  their 
territory  any  attempt  to  prevent  the  passage  of  the 
Israelites  would  have  been  useless,  whereas  at  Ka- 
desh,  where,  according  to  Numbers,  the  opposition 
was  offered,  the  rocky  nature  of  the  country  was  in 
favour  of  the  Edomites.  (So  Hengst.  iii.  283  ff., 
who  is  followed  by  Winer,  i.  293,  note  3.)  To 
this  we  may  add,  that  in  Deut.  ii.  8,  when  it  is 
said,  "  we  passed  by  from  our  brethren  the  children 
of  Esau  .  .  .  through  the  way  of  the  plain  from 
Elath,"  the  failure  of  an  attempt  to  pass  elsewhere 
is  implied.  Again,  according  to  Deut.,  the  Israelites 
purchased  food  and  water  of  the  Edomites  and 
Moabites  (ver.  6,  28),  which,  it  is  said,  contradicts 
the  story  in  Num.  xx.  19,  20.  But  in  both  ac- 
counts the  Israelites  offer  to  pay  for  what  they 
have  (cf.  Deut.  ii.  6  with  Num.  xx.  19).  And  if 
in  Deut.  xxiii.  4  there  seems  to  be  a  contradiction 
to  Deut.  ii.  29,  with  regard  to  .the  conduct  of  the 
Moabites,  it  may  be  removed  by  observing  (with 
Hengst.  iii.  286)  that  the  unfriendliness  of  the 
Moabites  in  not  coming  out  to  meet  the  Israelites 
with  bread  and  water  was  the  very  reason  why  the 
latter  were  obliged  to  buy  provisions. 

(5.)  More  perplexing  is  the  difference  in  the  ac- 
count of  the  encampments  of  the  Israelites,  as  given 
Deut.  x.  6,  7,  compared  with  Num.  xx.  23,  xxxiii. 
30  and  37.  In  Deut.  it  is  said  that  the  order  of 
encampment  was,  (1)  Bene-jaakan,  (2)  Mosera 
(where  Aaron  dies),  (3)  Gudgodah,  (4)  Jotbath. 
In  Numbers  it  is,  (1)  Moseroth,  (2)  Bene-jaakan, 
(3)  Hor-hagidgad,  (4)  Jotbath.  Then  follow  the 
stations  Ebronah,  Ezion-geber,  Kadesh,  and  Mount 
Hor,  and  it  is  at  this  last  that  Aaron  dies.  (It  is 
remarkable  here  that  no  account  is  given  of  the 
stations  between  Ezion-geber  and  Kadesh  on  the 
return  route.)  Various  attempts  have  been  made 
to  Reconcile  these  accounts.  The  explanation  given 
by  Kurtz  (Atlas  zur  Gesch.  d.  A.  B.  20)  is  on  the 
whole  the  most  satisfactory.  He  says:  "  In  the 
first  mouth  of  the  fortieth  year  the  whole  congre- 
gation comes  a  second  time  to  the  wilderness  of  Zin, 
which  is  Kadesh,  Num.  xxxiii.  36.  On  the  down- 
route  to  Ezion-geber  they  had  encamped  at  the 
several  stations  Moseroth  (or  Moserah),  Bene-Jaakan, 
Chor-hagidgad,  and  Jotbath.  But  now  again  de- 
parting from  Kadesh,  they  go  to  Mount  Hor,  '  in 
the  edge  of  the  land  of  Edom'  (ver.  37,  38),  or  to 
Moserah  (Deut.  x.  6,  7),  this  last  being  in  the 
desert  at  the  foot  of  the  mountain.  Bene-Jaakan, 
Gudgodah,  and  Jotbath  were  also  visited  about  this 
time,  i.  e.  a  second  time,  after  the  second  halt  at 
Kadesh."  This  seems  a  not  improbable  explanation, 
and  our  knowledge  of  the  topography  of  the  desert 
is  so  inaccurate  that  we  can  hardly  hope  for  a 
better.     More  may  be  seen  in  Winer,  art.  Wiiste. 

(6.)  But  this  is  not  so  much  a  discrepance  as  a 
peculiarity  of  the  writer:  in  Deut.  the  usual  name 
for  the  mountain  on  which  the  law  was  given  is 


DEUTERONOMY 

Horeb,  only  once  (xxxiii.  2)  Sinai ;  whereas  in  the 
other  books  Sinai  is  far  more  common  than  Horeb. 
The  answer  given  is,  that  Horeb  was  the  general 
name  of  the  whole  mountain -range  ;  Sinai,  the  par- 
ticular mountain  on  which  the  law  was  delivered  ; 
and  that  Horeb,  the  more  general  and  well-known 
name,  was  employed  in  accordance  with  the  rhe- 
torical style  of  this  book,  in  order  to  bring  out  the 
contrast  between  the  Sinaitic  giving  of  the  law, 
and  the  giving  of  the  law  in  the  land  of  Moab 
(Deut.  i.  5,  xxix.  1).  So  Keil.  Of  this  last  ex- 
planation it  is  net  too  much  to  say  that  it  is 
neither  ingenious  nor  satisfactory. 

It  must  be  remembered,  with  regard  to  all  the 
answers  above  given,  that  so  far  as  they  reconcile 
alleged  contradictions,  they  tend  to  establish  the 
veracity  of  the  writers,  but  they  by  no  means  prove 
that  the  writer  of  the  book  of  Deuteronomy  is  no 
other  than  the  writer  of  the  earlier  books.  So  far  in- 
deed there  is  nothing  to  decide  one  way  or  the  other. 
The  additions  both  to  the  historical  and  legal  sec- 
tions are  in  this  respect  of  far  more  importance,  and 
the  principal  of  them  we  shall  here  enumerate. 

II.  Additions. — These  are  to  be  found  both  in 
the  History  and  in  the  Law. 

1.  In  the  History.  («)  The  command  of  God 
to  leave  Horeb,  Deut.  i.  6,  7,  not  mentioned  Num. 
x.  1 1.  The  repentance  of  the  Israelites,  Deut.  i.  45, 
omitted  Num.  xiv.  45.  The  intercession  of  Moses 
in  behalf  of  Aaron,  Deut.  ix.  20,  of  which  nothing 
is  said  Ex.  xxxii., xxxiii.  These  are  so  slight,  how- 
ever, that,  as  Keil  suggests,  they  might  have  been 
passed  over  very  naturally  in  the  earlier  books, 
supposing  both  accounts  to  be  by  the  same  hand. 
But  of  more  note  are:  (6)  The  command  not  to 
fight  with  the  Moabites  and  Ammonites,  Deut.  ii. 
9,  19,  or  with  the  Edomites,  but  to  buy  of  then? 
food  and  water,  ii.  4-8.  The  valuable  historical 
notices  which  are  .given  respecting  the  earlier  in- 
habitants of  the  countries  of  Moab  and  Amnion  and 
of  Mount  Seir,  ii.  10-12,  20-23;  the  sixty  fortified 
cities  of  Bashan,  iii.  4  ;  the  king  of  the  country 
who  was  "  of  the  remnant  of  giants,"  iii.  1 1 ;  the 
different  names  of  Hermon,  iii.  9 ;  the  wilderness 
of  Kedemoth,  ii.  26  ;  and  the  more  detailed  account 
of  the  attack  of  the  Amalekites,  xxv.  17,  18,  com- 
pared with  Ex.  xvii.  8. 

(2)  In  the  Law.  The  appointment  of  the  cities 
of  refuge,  Deut.  xix.  7-9,  as  compared  with  Num. 
xxxv.  14  and  Deut.  iv.  41 ;  of  one.  particular  place 
for  the  solemn  worship  of  God,  where  all  offerings, 
tithes,  &c,  are  to  be  brought,  Deut.  xii.  5,  &c, 
whilst  the  restriction  with  regard  to  the  slaying  of 
animals  only  at  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the 
congregation  (Lev.  xvii.  3,  4)  is  done  away,  15, 
20,  21  ;  the  regulations  respecting  tithes  to  be 
brought  with  the  sacrifices  and  burnt-offerings  to 
the  appointed  place,  Deut.  xii.  6,  11,  17,  xiv.  22, 
&C,  xxvi.  12 ;  concerning  false  prophets  and  seducers 
to  idolatry  and  those  that  hearken  unto  them,  xffi.  ; 
concerning  the  king  and  the  manner  of  the  king- 
dom, xvii.  14,  &c. ;  the  prophets,  xviii.  15,  &c. ; 
war  and  military  service,  xx. ;  the  expiation  of  secret 
murder ;  the  law  of  female  captives  ;  of  first-born 
sons  by  a  double  marriage  ;  of  disobedient  sons;  of 
those  who  suffer  death  by  hanging,  xxi. ;  the  laws 
in  xxii.  5-8,  13-21  ;  of  divorce,  xxiv.  1,  and  va- 
rious lesser  enactments,  xxiii.  and  xxv.  ;  the  form  of 
thanksgiving  in  offering  the  first-fruits,  xxvi.  ;  the 
command  to  write  the  law  upon  stones,  xxvii.,  and 
to  read  it  before  all  Israel  at  the  Feast  of  Taber- 
nacles,  xxxi.  10-13. 


DEUTERONOMY 

Many  others  are  rather  extensions  or  modifica- 
tions of,  than  additions  to,  existing  laws,  as  for  in- 
stance the  law  of  the  Hebrew  slave,  Deut.  xv.  12, 
&c,  compared  with  Ex.  xxi.  2,  &c.  See  also  the 
fuller  directions  in  Deut.  xv.  19-23,  xxvi.  l-ll,  as 
compared  with  the  briefer  notices,  Ex.  xiii.  12, 
xxiii.  19. 

C.  Author.  1.  It  is  generally  agreed  that  by 
far  the  greater  portion  of  the  book  is  the  work  of 
one  author.  The  only  parts  which  have  been  ques- 
tioned as  possible  interpolations  are,  according  to  De 
Wette,  iv.  41-3,  x.  6-9,  xxxii.  and  xxxiii.  Internal 
evidence  indeed  is  strongly  decisive  that  this  book  of 
the  Pentateuch  was  not  the  work  of  a  compiler. 

2.  It  cannot  be  denied  that  the  style  of  Deuter- 
onomy is  very  different  from  that  of  the  other  four 
books  of  the  Pentateuch.  It  is  more  flowing,  more 
rhetorical,  more  sustained.  The  rhythm  is  grand, 
and  the  diction  more  akin  to  the  sublimer  passages 
of  the  prophets,  than  to  the  sober  prose  of  the 
historians. 

3.  Who  then  was  the  author?  On  this  point 
the  following  principal  hypotheses  have  been  main- 
tained : — 

(1.)  The  old  traditional  view  that  this  book,  like 
the  other  books  of  the  Pentateuch,  is  the  work  of 
Moses  himself.  Of  the  later  critics,  Hengstenberg, 
Havernick,  Ranke,  and  others,  have  maintained  this 
view.  Moses  Stuart  writes :  "  Deuteronomy  appears 
to  my  mind,  as  it  did  to  that  of  Eichhorn  and 
Herder,  as  the  earnest  outpourings  and  admonitions 
of  a  heart  which  felt  the  deepest  interest  in  the 
welfare  of  the  Jewish  nation,  and  which  realized 
that  it  must  soon  bid  farewellto  them  .  .  .  Instead 
of  bearing  upon  its  face,  as  is  alleged  by  some,  evi- 
dences of  another  authorship  than  that  of  Moses, 
I  must  regard  this  book  as  being  so  deeply  fraught 
with  holy  and  patriotic  feeling,  as  to  convince  any 
unprejudiced  reader  who  is  competent  to  judge  of 
its  style,  that  it  cannot,  with  any  tolerable  degree 
of  probability,  be  attributed  to  any  pretender  to 
legislation,  or  to  any  mere  imitator  of  the  great 
legislator.  Such  a  glow  as  runs  through  all  this 
book  it  is  in  vain  to  seek  for  in  any  artificial  or 
supposititious  composition "  (Hist,  of  the  0.  T. 
Canon,  §3). 

In  support  of  this  opinion  it  is  said:  a.  That 
supposing  the  whole  Pentateuch  to  have  been  writ- 
ten by  Moses,  the  change  in  style  is  easily  accounted 
for  when  we  remember  that  the  last  book  is  hor- 
tatory in  its  character,  that  it  consists  chiefly  of 
orations,  and  that  these  were  delivered  under  very 
peculiar  circumstances,  b.  That  the  icsus  loquendi 
is  not  only  generally  in  accordance  with  that  of  the 
earlier  books,  and  that  as  well  in  their  Elohistic  as 
in  their  Jehovistic  portions,  but  that  there  are  cer- 
tain peculiar  forms  of  expression  common  only  to 
these  five  books,  c.  That  the  alleged  discrepant  ies 
in  matters  of  fact  between  this  and  the  earlier  books 
may  all  be  reconciled  (see  above),  and  that  the 
additions  and  corrections  in  the  legislation  are  only 
such  as  would  necessarily  be  made  when  the  people 
were  just  about  to  enter  the  promised  land.  Thus 
Bertheau  observes:  "It  is  hazardous  to  conclude 
from  contradictions  in  the  laws  that  they  are  to  lie 
ascribed  to  a  different  age  ...  He  who  made  ad- 
ditions must  have  known  what  it  was  he  «:i- 
making  additions  to,  and  would  either  have  avoided 
all  contradiction,  or  would  have  altered  the  earlier 
laws  to  make  them  agree  with  the  later "  (Die 
Sieben  Gruppen  Mos.  Gesetze,  p.  19,  aote). 
d.  That  the  book  bears  witness  to  its  own  author* 


DEUTERONOMY 


433 


ship  (xxxi.  19),  and  is  expressly  cited  in  the  N.  T.  as 
the  work  of  Moses  (Matt.  xix.  7,  8  ;  Mark  x.  3 ; 
Acts  iii.  22,  vii.  37). 

The  advocates  of  this  theory  of  course  suppose 
that  the  last  chapter,  containing  an  account  of  the 
death  of  Moses,  was  added  by  a  later  hand,  and 
perhaps  formed  originally  the  beginning  of  the  book 
of  Joshua. 

(2.)  The  opinion  of  Stahelin  (and  as  it  would  seem 
of  Bleek)  that  the  author  is  the  same  as  the  writer 
of  the  Jehovistic  portions  of  the  other  books.  He 
thinks  that  both  the  historical  and  legislative  por- 
tions plainly  show  the  hand  of  the  supplementist 
(Krit.  Unters.  s.  76).  Hence  he  attaches  but  little 
weight  to  the  alleged  discrepancies,  as  he  considers 
them  all  to  be  the  work  of  the  reviser,  going  over, 
correcting,  and  adding  to  the  older  materials  of  the 
Elohistic  document  already  in  his  hands. 

(3.)  The  opinion  of  De  Wette,  Gesenius,  and 
others,  that  the  Deuteronomist  is  a  distinct  writer 
from  the  Jehovist.  De  Wette's  arguments  are  based, 
a,  on  the  difference  in  style ;  6,  on  the  contra- 
dictions already  referred  to  as  existing  in  matters 
of  history,  as  well  as  in  the  legislation,  when  com- 
pared with  that  in  Exodus  ;  c,  on  the  peculiarity 
noticeable  in  this  book,  that  God  does  not  speak  by 
Moses,  but  that  Moses  himself  speaks  to  the  people, 
and  that  there  is  no  mention  of  the  angel  of  Jehovah 
(cf.  i.  30,  vii.  20-23,  xi.  13-17,  with  Ex.  xxiii. 
20-33)  ;  and  lastly  on  the  fact  that  the  Deuterono- 
mist ascribes  his  whole  work  to  Moses,  while  the 
Jehovist  assigns  him  only  certain  portions. 

(4.)  From  the  fact  that  certain  phrases  occurring 
in  Deut.  are  found  also  in  the  prophecy  of  Jeremiah, 
it  has  been  too  hastily  concluded  by  some  critics 
that  both  books  were  the  work  of  the  prophet.  So 
Von  Bohlen,  Gesenius  (Gesch.  d.  Hebr.  Spr.  32), 
and  Hartmann  (Hist.  Krit.  Forsch.  660).  Konig, 
on  the  other  hand  (Alttest.  Stud.  ii.  12  ff.),  has 
shown  not  only  that  this  idiomatic  resemblance  has 
been  made  too  much  of  (see  also  Keil,  Einl.  p.  117), 
but  that  there  is  the  greatest  possible  difference  of 
style  between  the  two  books.  And  De  Wette  re- 
marks (Einl.  p.  191),  "  Zu  viel  behauptet  fiber 
diese  Verwandtschaft  von  Bohlen,  Gen.  s.  clxvii." 

(5.)  Ewald  is  of  opinion  that  it  was  written  by  a 
Jew  living  in  Egypt  during  the  latter  half  of  the 
reign  of  Manasseh  (Gesch.  des  V.  I.  i.  171).  He 
thinks  that  a  pious  Jew  of  that  age,  gifted  with 
prophetic  power  and  fully  alive  to  all  the  evils  of 
his  time,  sought  thus  to  revive  and  to  impress 
more  powerfully  upon  the  minds  of  his  countrymen 
the  great  lessons  of  that  Law  which  he  saw  they 
were  in  danger  of  forgetting.  He  avails  himself 
therefore  of  the  groundwork  of  the  earlier  history, 
and  also  of  the  Mosaic  mode  of  expression.  But 
as  his  object  is  to  rouse  a  corrupt  nation,  he  only 
makes  use  of  historical  notices  tor  the  purpose  of 
introducing  his  warnings  and  exhortations  with  the 
more  effect.  This  he  does  with  great  skill  and  as 
a  master  of  his  subject,  whilst  at,  the  same  time  he 
gives  fresh  vigour  and  life  to  the  old  law  by  means 
of  those  new  prophetic  truths  which  had  so  lately 
become  the  heritage  of  his  people.  Ewald  further 
considers  that  there  arc  passages  in  Deuteronomy 
borrowed  from  the  books  of  Job  and  Isaiah  (iv.  32 
from  Job  viii.  8,  and  xxviii.  29,  30,  35  from  Job  v. 
14,  \v\i.  10,  ii.  7,  and  xxviii.  ■!'.»,  &c.  from  Is.  v. 
26  ff.,  xxxiii.  19),  and  much  of  it  akin  to  Jeremiah 
(Gesch.  i.  171,  note).  The  song  of  Moses  (\xxii.) 
is,  according  to  him,  not  by  the  Deuteronomist,  but 
is  nevertheless  later  than  the  time  of  Solomon. 

2  V 


434 


DEUTERONOMY 


D.  Date  of  Composition.  Was  the  Book  really- 
written,  as  its  language  certainly  implies,  before 
the  entry  of  Israel  into  the  Promised  Land  ?  Not 
only  does  the  writer  assert  that  the  discourses  con- 
tained in  the  Book  were  delivered  in  the  plains  of 
Moab,  in  the  last  month  of  the  40  years'  wan- 
dering, and  when  the  people  were  just  about  to 
enter  Canaan  (i.  1-5),  but  he  tells  us  with  still 
further  exactness  that  all  the  words  of  this  Law 
were  written  at  the  same  time  in  the  Book  (xxxi.  9). 
Moreover,  the  fact  that  the  goodly  land  lay  even 
now  before  their  eyes  seems  everywhere  to  be 
uppermost  in  the  thoughts  of  the  legislator,  and  to 
lend  a  peculiar  solemnity  to  his  words.  Hence  we 
Constantly  meet  with  such  expressions  as  "  When 
Jehovah  thy  God  bringeth  thee  into  the  land 
which  He  hath  sworn  to  thy  fathers  to  give  thee," 
or  "  whither  thou  goest  in  to  possess  it."  This 
phraseology  is  so  constant,  and  seems  to  fall  in  so 
naturally  with  the  general  tone  aud  character  of 
the  Book,  that  to  suppose  it  was  written  long  after 
the  settlement  of  the  Israelites  in  Canaan,  in  the 
reign  of  Solomon  (De  Wette,  v.  Lengerke  and  others), 
or  in  that  of  Manasseh  (Ewald  as  above),  is  not 
only  to  make  the  Book  an  historical  romance,  but 
to  attribute  very  considerable  inventive  skill  to  the 
author  (as  Ewald  in  fact  does). 

De  Wette  argues,  indeed,  that  the  character  of 
the  Laws  is  such  as  of  itself  to  presuppose  a  long 
residence  in  the  land  of  Canaan.  He  instances  the 
allusion  to  the  temple  (xii.  and  xvi.  1-7),  the  pro- 
vision for  the  right  discharge  of  the  kingly  and 
prophetical  offices,  the  rules  for  civil  and  military 
organisation  and  the  state  of  the  Levites,  who  are 
represented  as  living  without  cities  (though  such 
are  granted  to  them  in  Num.  xxxv.)  and  without 
tithes  (allotted  to  them  in  Num.  xviii.  20,  &c). 
But  in  the  passages  cited  the  temple  is  not  named, 
much  less  is  it  spoken  of  as  already  existing:  on 
the  contrary,  the  phrase  employed  is  "  The  place 
which  the  Lord  your  God  shall  choose."  Again, 
to  suppose  that  Moses  was  incapable  of  providing 
for  the  future  and  very  different  position  of  his 
people  as  settled  in  the  land  of  Canaan,  is  to  deny 
him  even  ordinary  sagacity.  Without  raising  the 
question  about  his  divine  commission,  surely  it  is 
not  too  much  to  assume  that  so  wise  and  great  a 
legislator  would  foresee  the  growth  of  a  polity  and 
would  be  anxious  to  regulate  its  due  administration 
in  the  fear  of  God.  Hence  he  would  guard  against 
false  prophets  and  seducers  to  idolatry.  As  regards 
the  Levites,  Moses  might  have  expected  or  even 
desired  that,  though  possessing  certain  cities  (which, 
however,  were  inhabited  by  others  as  well  as  them- 
selves), they  should  not  be  confined  to  those  cities 
but  scattered  over  the  face  of  the  country.  This 
must  have  been  the  case  at  first,  owing  to  the  very 
gradual  occupation  of  the  new  territory.  The  mere 
fact  that  in  giving  them  certain  rights  in  Deut. 
nothing  is  said  of  an  earlier  provision  in  Num.  does 
not  by  any  means  prove  that  this  earlier  provision 
was  unknown  or  had  ceased  to  be  in  force. 

Other  reasons  for  a  later  date,  such  as  the 
mention  of  the  worship  of  the  sun  and  moon  (iv. 
19,  xvii.  3);  the  punishment  of  stoning  (xvii.  5, 
x.xii.  21,  &c.);  the  name  Feast  of  Tabernacles; 
and  the  motive  for  keeping  the  Sabbath,  are  of 
little  force.  In  Amos  v.  26,  Saturn  is  said  to  have 
been  worshipped  in  the  wilderness  ;  the  punishment 
of  stoning  is  found  also  in  the  older  documents; 
the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  agrees  with  Lev.  xxiii. 
34 ;  and  the  motive  alleged  for  the  observance  of 


DEW 

the    Sabbath    at    least    does    not    exclude    other 
motives. 

A  further  discussion  of  the  question  of  author- 
ship, as  well  as  of  the  date  of  the  legislation  in 
Deuteronomy,  must  be  reserved  for  another  article. 
[Penta.teuch.1  [J.  j.  g.  p.] 

DEVIL  (Aid/ioKos  ;  Diabolns  ;  properly  "  one 
who  sets  at  variance,"  SiafidWei ;  comp.  Plat. 
Sijmp.  p.  222,  C.  D. ;  and  generally  a  "  slanderer" 
or  "  false  accuser"). 

The  word  is  found  in  the  plural  number  and 
adjective  sense  in  1  Tim.  iii.  11;  2  Tim.  iii.  3 ; 
and  Tit.  ii.  3.  In  all  other  cases  it  is  used  with 
the  article  as  a  descriptive  name  of  Satan  [Satan], 
excepting  that  iu  John  vi.  70  it  is  applied  to 
Judas  (as  "  Satan"  to  St.  Peter  in  Matt.  xvi.  23), 
because  they — the  one  permanently,  and  the  othei 
for  the  moment — were  doing  Satan's  work. 

The  name  describes  him  as  slandering  God  to 
man,  and  man  to  God. 

The  former  work  is,  of  course,  a  part  of  his 
great  work  of  temptation  to  evil ;  and  is  not  only 
exemplified  but  illustrated  as  to  its  general  nature 
and  tendency  by  the  narrative  of  Gen.  iii.  We 
find  there  that  its  essential  characteristic  is  the 
representation  of  God  as  an  arbitrary  and  selfish 
Ruler,  seeking  His  own  good  and  not  that  of  His 
creatures.  The  effect  is  to  stir  up  the  spirit  of 
freedom  in  man  to  seek  a  fancied  independence ; 
and  it  is  but  a  slight  step  further  to  impute  false- 
hood or  cruelty  to  Him.  The  success  of  the  devil's 
slander  is  seen,  not  only  in  the  Scriptural  narrative 
of  the  Fall,  but  in  the  conniptions  of  most  mytho- 
logies, and  especially  in  the  horrible  notion  of  the 
divine  <pQ6vos,  which  ran  through  so  many.  (See 
c.  g.  Herod,  i.  32,  vii.  4G.)  The  same  slander  is 
implied  rather  than  expressed  in  the  temptation  of 
our  Lord,  and  overcome  by  the  faith,  which  trusts 
in  God's  love  even  where  its  signs  may  be  hidden 
from  the  eye.  (Comp.  the  unmasking  of  a  similar 
slander  by  Peter  in  Acts  v.  4.) 

The  other  work,  the  slandering  or  accusing  man 
before  God,  is,  as  it  must  necessarily  be,  unin- 
telligible to  us.  The  All-Seeing  Judge  can  need 
no  accuser,  and  the  All-Pure  could,  it  might  seem, 
have  no  intercourse  with  the  Evil  One.  But  in 
truth  the  question  touches  on  two  mysteries,  the 
relation  of  the  Infinite  to  the  Finite  spirit,  and  the 
permission  of  the  existence  of  evil  under  the  govern- 
ment of  Him  who  is  "  the  Good."  As  a  part  of 
these  it  must  be  viewed,— to  the  latter  especially 
it  belongs  ;  and  this  latter,  while  it  is  the  great 
mystery  of  all,  is  also  one  iu  which  the  facts  are 
proved  to  us  by  incontrovertible  evidence. 

The  fact  of  the  devil's  accusation  of  man  to  God 
is  stated  generally  in  Rev.  xii.  10,  where  he  is 
called  "  the  accuser  (icaTTiywp)  of  our  brethren,  who 
accused  them  before  our  God  day  and  night,"  and 
exemplified  plainly  in  the  case  of  Job.  Its  essence  as 
before  is  the  imputation  of  selfish  motives  (Job  i.  9, 
10),  and  its  refutation  is  placed  in  the  self-sacrifice 
of  those  "  who  loved  not  their  own  lives  unto  death." 

For  details  see  Satan.  [A.  B.] 

DEW  (7D  ;  SpSffos,  r0s).  This  in  the  summer 
is  so  copious  in  Palestire  that  it  supplies  to  some 
extent  the  absence  of  rain  (Eeelus.  xviii.  16,  xliii. 
22),  and  becomes  important  to  the  agriculturist;  as 
a  proof  of  this  copiousness  the  well-known  sign  of 
Gideon  (Judg.  vi.  37,  39,  40)  may  be  adduced. 
Thus  it  is  coupled  in  the  divine  blessing  with  rain, 
or  mentioned  as  a  prime  source  of  fertility  (Gen. 


DIADEM 

xxvii.  28;  Deut.  xxxiii.  13;  Zech.  viii.  12),  and  its 
withdrawal  is  attributed  to  a  curse  (2  Sam.  i.  21  ; 
1  K.  xvii.  1 ;  Hag.  1.  10).  It  becomes  a  leading 
object  in  prophetic  imagery  by  reason  of  its  pene- 
trating moiscure  without  the  apparent  effort  of  rain 
(Deut.  xxxii.  2;  Job  xxix.  19;  Ps.  cxxxiii.  3; 
Prov.  xix.  12  ;  Is.  xxvi.  19  ;  Hos.  xiv.  5  ;  Mic.  v. 
7) ;  while  its  speedy  evanescence  typifies  the  tran- 
sient goodness  of  the  hypocrite  (Hos.  vi.  4,  xiii.  3). 
It  is  mentioned  as  a  token  of  exposure  in  the  night 
(Cant.  v.  2  ;  Dan.  iv.  15,  23,  25-33,  v.  21).    [H.  H.] 

DIADEM  (P)»:iy5  fpV,  or  nsjjy??  ;  also 
n"VQS)»  a  word  employed  in  the  A.  V.  as  the 
translation  of  the  above  Hebrew  terms.  They 
occur  in  poetical  passages,  in  which  neither  the 
Hebrew  nor  the  English  words  appear  to  be  used 
with  any  special  force.  HQ3VD  is  strictly  used 
for  the  "  mitre  "  of  the  high-priest.     [MlTRE.j 

What  the  "  diadem  "  of  the  Jews  was  we  know 
not.  That  of  other  nations  of  antiquity  was  a 
fillet  of  silk,  two  inches  broad,  bound  round  the 
head  •  and  tied  behind,  the  invention  of  which  is 
attributed  to  Liber  (Plin.  H.  N,  vii.  56,  57).  Its 
colour  was  generally  white  (Tac.  An.  vi.  37  ;  Sil. 
Ital.  xvi.  241)  ;  sometimes,  however,  it  was  of  blue, 
like  that  of  Darius,  cerulea  fascia  albo  distincta 
(Q.  Curt.  hi.  3,  vi.  20 ;  Xen.  Cyr.  viii.  3,  §13)  ; 
and  it  was  sown  with  pearls  or  other  gems  (Gibbon, 
i.  392  ;  Zech.  ix.  16),  and  enriched  with  gold 
(Rev.  ix.  7).  It  was  peculiarly  the  mark  of  Oriental 
sovereigns  ( 1  Mace.  xiii.  32,  to  SiaSrjjUa  rrjs  'Aco'as), 
and  hence  the  deep  offence  caused  by  the  attempt  of 
Caesar  to  substitute  it  for  the  laurel  crown  appro- 
priated to  Roman  emperors  (sedebat  .  .  .  coro- 
natus;  .  .  .  diadema  osteiidis,  Cic.  Phil.  ii.  34): 
when  some  one  crowned  his  statue  with  a  laurel- 
wreath,  candidae  fasciae  praeligatam,  the  tribunes 
instantly  ordered  the  fillet  or  diadem  to  be  removed, 
and  the  man  to  be  thrown  into  prison  (Suet.  Caes. 
79).  Caligula's  wish  to  use  it  was  considered  an 
act  of  insanity  (Suet.  Cal.  22).  Heliogabalus  only 
wore  it  in  private,  Antony  assumed  it  in  Egypt 
(Flor.  iv.  11),  but  Diocletian  (or,  according  to 
Aurel.  Victor,  Aurelian)  first  assumed  it  asa.bo.dge 
of  the  empire.  Representations  of  it  may  be  seen 
on  the  coins  of  any  of  the  later  emperors  (Tillemont, 
Hist.  Imp.  iii.  531). 

A  crown  was  used  by  the  kings  of  Israel,  even  in 
battle  (2  Sam.  i.  10  ;  similarly  it  is  represented  on 
coins  of  Theolosius  as  encircling  his  helmet)  ;  but  in 
all  probability  this  was  not  the  state  crown  (2  Sam. 
.\ii.  in),  although  used  in  the  coronation  of  Joash 
(2  K.  xi.  12).  Kitto  supposes  that  the  state  crown 
may  have  been  in  the  possession  of  Athaliah  ;  but 
perhaps  we  ought  not  to  lay  any  great  stress  on  the 
word  "ip  in  this  place,  especially  as  it  is  very  likely 
that  the  state  crown  was  kept  in  the  Temple. 

In  Esth.  i.  11,  ii.  17,  we  have  1H3  (/drapis, 
KiSapis)  for  the  turban  (o~to\})  [Svcraivri,  vi.  8) 
worn  by  the  Persian  king,  queen,  or  other  eminent 
persons  to  whom  it  was  conceded  as  a  special  favour 
(viii.  15,  SidSn/xa  $ihto~ivov  Trop<pvpovv).  The 
diadem  of  the  king  differed  from  that  of  others  in 
having  an  erect  triangular  peak  ( Kvp^aaia,  Alistoph. 
Ar.  487  ;  *qv  ol  fiaaiXtis  fx6vov  6p8^v  icpSpovv 
irapa  Tlepffais,  ol  Sh  o~Tpa.Tr]yol  k(k\i/j.4vt]v,  Suid. 

s.  v.  rlapa,  andHesych.).  Possibly  the  X7313  of 
Dan.  iii.  21  is  a  tiara  (as  in  LXX.,  where  however 
Drusius  and  others  invert  the  words  Ka\   ridpais 


DIAL 


435 


Koi  ireptKfn/x'io-t),  A.  V.  "hat."  Some  render  it 
by  tibiale  or  calceamentum.  Schleusner  suo-o-ests 
that  KpwfivAos  may  be  derived  from  it.  The  tiara 
generally  had  pendent  flaps  falling  on  the  shoulders. 
(See  Paschalius,  de  Corona,  p.  573  ;  Brissonius,  de 
Regn.  Pers.,  &c. ;  Layard,  ii.  320;  Scacchus 
Myrothec.  iii.  38;  Fabricius,  Bibl.  Ant.  xiv.  13). 

The  words  D^-13p  ''nnp  in  Ez.  xxiii.  15 
mean  long  and  flowing  turbans  of  gorgeous  colours 
(LXX.  Trapd&aTTTa,  where  a  better  reading  is 
Tidpai  fiairral).     [CROWN.]  [F.  W.  F.l 


Obverse  of  Tetradrachm  of  Tigranes,  king  of  Syria.    Head  of  kins 
with  diadem,  to  the  right. 

DIAL  (nvJ?D  ;  avaPaO/Aol ;  horologiiun).  The 
word  is  the  same  as  that  rendered  "steps"  in 
A.  V.  (Ex.  xx.  26  ;  1  K.  x.  19),  and  "  degrees"  in 
A.  V.  (2  K.  xx.  9,  10,  11-;  Is.  xxxviii.  8),  where, 
to  give  a  consistent  rendering,  we  should  read  with 
the  margin  the  "  degrees"  rather  than  the  "  dial" 
of  Ahaz.  In  the  absence  of  any  materials  for  de- 
termining the  shape  and  structure  of  the  solar  in- 
strument, which  certainly  appears  intended,  the 
best  course  is  to  follow  the  most  strictly  natural 
meaning  of  the  words,  and  to  consider  with  Cyril 
of  Alexandria  and  Jerome  (Comm.  on  Is.  xxxviii. 
8),  that  the  DPytO  were  really  stairs,  and  that 
the  shadow  (perhaps  of  some  column  or  obelisk 
on  the  top)  fell  on  a  greater  or  smaller  number 
of  them  according  as  the  sun  was  low  or  high. 
The  terrace  of  a  palace  might  easily  be  thus  or- 
namented. Ahaz's  tastes  seem  to  have  led  him 
in  pursuit  of  foreign  curiosities  (2  K.  xvi.  10), 
and  his  intimacy  with  Tiglath-Pileser  gave  him 
probably  an  opportimity  of  procuring  from  As- 
syria the  pattern  of  some  such  structure ;  and 
this  might  readily  lead  the  "princes  of  Babvlon" 
(2  Chr.  xxxii.  31)  to  "  inquire  of  the  wonder,"  viz. 
the  alteration  of  the  shadow,  in  the  reign  of  Heze- 
kiah.  Herodotus  (ii.  109)  mentions  that  the  Egyp- 
tians received  from  the  Babylonians  the  woKos  and 
the  yvw/jLcav ,  anil  the  division  of  the  day  into  twelve 
hours.  Of  such  division,  however,  the  O.  T.  con- 
tains no  undoubted  trace,  nor  does  any  word  proved 
to  be  equivalent  to  the  "  hour  "  occur  in  the  course 
of  it,  although  it  is  possible  that  Ps.cii.  1  1,  and  cix. 
23,  may  contain  allusion  to  the  progress  of  a  shadow 
as  measuring  diurnal  time.  In  John  xi.  9  the  day 
is  spoken  of  as  consisting  of  twelve  hours.  As 
regards  the  physical  character  of  the  sign  of  the 
retrogression  of  the  shadow  in  Is.  xxxviii.  8,  it 
seems  useless  to  attempt  to  analyse  it  ;  no  doubt 
an  alteration  in  the  inclination  of  the  gnomon,  or 
column,  &c.,  might  easily  effect  such  an  apparent 
retrogression  ;  but  the  whole  idea,  which  is  that  of 
Divine  interference  with  the  course  of  nature  in 
behalf  of  the  king,  resists  sueh  an  attempt  to  bring 
it  within  the  compass  of  mechanism. 

It  has  been  suggested  that  the  D'Ofm  of  Is.  mi. 
2   F  2 


436  DIAMOND 

8,  xxvii.  9  ;  Ez.  vi.  4,  6,  rendered  in  the  margin  of 
the  A.  V.  "  sun-images,"  were  gnomons  to  measure 
time  (Jahn,  Archaeol.  i.  i.  539),  but  there  seems 
no  adequate  ground  for  this  theory.  [H.  H.J 

DIAMOND  (t&?V ;  Xaxriris  ;  jaspis),  a  pre- 
cious stone,  the  third  in  the  second  row  on  the 
breast-plate  of  the  High-priest  (Ex.  xxviii.  18, 
xxxix.  11),  and  mentioned  by  Ezekiel  (xxviii.  13) 
among  the  precious  stones  of  the  king  of  Tyre. 
Gesenlus  has  noticed  the  difficulty  of  identifying 
the  terms  used  in  the  versions  for  each  of  the 
Hebrew  names  of  precious  stones  in  the  above  pas- 
sages, the  translators  or  transcribers  having  appa- 
rently altered  the  order  in  which  they  stand. 
laa-ius  seems  to  be  the  word  in  the  LXX.  corre- 
sponding to  Cf?i"l\  but  most  ancient  commentators 
give  £Vu|,  ovvxiov,  onychinus.  Our  translation, 
"  diamond,"  is  derived  from  Eben  Esra,  and  is 
defended  by  Braun  (de  Vest.  Sacerd.  ii.  13). 
Kalisch  (on  Ex.  p.  536)  says  "  perhaps  Emerald." 
The  etymology  (from  D?i"l,  to  strike,  or  crush) 
leads  us  to  suppose  a  hard  stone.  The  emerald, 
which  is  of  a  green  colour,  of  various  depths,  is 
nearly  as  hard  as  the  topaz,  and  stands  next  to  the 
ruby  in  value.  The  same  authority  doubts  whether 
the  art  ot  engraving  on  the  diamond  was  known  to 
the  ancients,  since  they  did  not  even  understand 
how  to  cut  the  ruby. 

Respecting  "VIDE?,  which  is  translated  "  diamond" 
in  Jer.  xvii.  1,  see  under  Adamant.         [W.  D.] 

DIA'NA.  This  Latin  word,  properly  denoting 
a  Roman  divinity,  is  the  representative  of  the 
Greek  Artemis  ("ApT€juis),  the  tutelary  goddess  of 
the  Ephesians,  who  plays  so  important  a  part  in 
.the  narrative  of  Acts  six.  The  Ephesian  Diana 
was,  however,  regarded  as  invested  with  very  dif- 
ferent attributes,  and  made  the  object  of  a  different 
worship,  from  the  ordinary  Diana  of  the  Greeks, 
and  is  rather  perhaps  to  be  identified  with  Astarte 
and  other  female  divinities  of  the  East.  K.  0.  Miiller 
says  {Hist,  of  the  Dorians,  i.  403,  Eng.  trans.), 
"  everything  that  is  related  of  this  deity  is  singular 
and  foreign  to  the  Greeks." 

Guhl,  indeed  {Ephesiaca,  78-86),  takes  the  con- 
trary view,  and  endeavours  in  almost  all  points  to 
identify  her  with  the  true  Greek  goddess.  And  in 
some  respects  there  was  doubtless  a  fusion  of  the 
two.  Diana  was  the  goddess  of  rivers,  of  pools, 
and  of  harbours ;  and  these  conditions  are  satisfied 
by  the  situation  of  the  sanctuary  at  Ephesus. 
Coressus,  one  of  the  hills  on  which  the  city  stood, 
is  connected  by  Stephanus  Byzantinus  with  K6pi). 
We  may  refer  also  to  the  popular  notion  that, 
when  the  temple  was  burnt  on  the  night  of  Alex- 
ander's birth,  the  calamity  occurred  because  the 
goddess  was  absent  in  the  character  of  Lucina. 
Again,  on  coins  of  Ephesus  we  sometimes  find  her 
exhibited  as  a  huntress  and  with  a  stag.  But  the 
true  Ephesian  Diana  is  represented  in  a  form  en- 
tirely alien  from  Greek  art.  St.  Jerome's  words 
are  (Praefat.  ad  Ephes.),  "  Scribebat  Paulus  ad 
Ephesios  Dianam  colentes,  non  hanc  venatricem, 
quae  arcum  tenet  et  succincta  est,  sed  istam 
multimammiam,  quam  Graeci  ■xoAv/j.aaiov  vocant, 
ut  scilicet  ex  ipsa  efrigie  mentirentur  omnium  earn 
bestiarum  et  viventium  esse  nutricem."  Guhl  in- 
deed supposes  this  mode  of  representation  to  have 
reference  simply  to  the  fountains  over  which  the 
goddess  presided,  conceiving  the  multiplication  of 


DIANA 

breasts  to  be  similar  to  the  multiplication  of  eyes 
in  Argus  or  of  heads  in  Typhoeus.  But  the  correct 
view  is  undoubtedly  that  which  treats  this  peculiar 
form  as  a  symbol  of  the  productive  and  nutritive 
powers  of  nature.  This  is  the  form  under  which 
the  Ephesian  Diana,  so  called  for  distinction,  was 
always  represented,  wherever  worshipped  ;  and  the 
worship  extended  to  many  places,  such  as  Samos, 
Mitylene,  Perga,  Hierapolis,  and  Gortyna,  to  men- 
tion those  only  which  occur  in  the  N.  T.  or  the 
Apocrypha.     The  coin  below  will  give  some  notion 


Greek  imperial  copper  coin  cf  Ephesus  ami  Smyrna  allied 

('Oju-oyoia.)  ;  Domitia,  with  name  of  proconsul. 

Obv. :  AOMITIA  CIBACTH.    Bust  to  right.    Rev. :  AN©Y 

KAIC6N   IIAITOY  OMONOIA    £<J>£  ZMYP.      Ephesian 

Diana. 

of  the  image,  which  was  grotesque  and  archaic  in 
character.  The  head  wore  a  mural  crown,  each 
hand  held  a  bar  of  metal,  and  the  lower  part  ended 
in  a  rude  block  covered  with  figures  of  animals 
and  mystic  inscriptions.  This  idol  was  regarded  as 
an  object  of  peculiar  sanctity,  and  was  believed  to 
have  fallen  down  from  heaven  (rot)  AioireTovs, 
Acts  xix.  35). 

The  Oriental  character  of  the  goddess  is  shown 
by  the  nature  of  her  hierarchy,  which  consisted  of 
women  and  eunuchs,  the  former  called  MeAiVrrat, 
the  latter  Mfydl3v(oi.  At  their  head  was  a  high- 
priest  called  'EfrcrV.  These  terms  have  probably 
some  connexion  with  the  fact  that  the  bee  was 
sacred  to  the  Ephesian  Diana  (Aristoph.  Ran. 
1273).  For  the  temple  considered  as  a  work  of 
art  we  must  refer  to  the  article  Ephesus.  No 
arms  were  allowed  to  be  worn  in  its  precincts. 
No  bloody  sacrifices  were  offered.  Here  also,  as  in 
the  temple  of  Apollo  at  Daphne,  were  the  privileges 
of  asylum.  This  is  indicated  on  some  of  the  coins 
of  Ephesus  (Akerman,  in  Trans,  of  the  Numismatic 
Soc.  1841)  ;  and  we  find  an  interesting  proof  of 
the  continuance  of  these  privileges  in  imperial 
times  in  Tac.  Ann.  iii.  61  (Strab.  xiv.  641  ;  Pans, 
vii.  2 ;  Cic.  Verr.  ii.  33).  The  temple  had  a  large 
revenue  from  endowments  of  various  kinds.  It  was 
also  the  public  treasury  of  the  city,  and  was  re- 
garded as  the  safest  bank  for  private  individuals. 

The  cry  of  the  mob  (Acts  xix.  28),  "  Great  is 
Diana  of  the  Ephesians  !"  and  the  strong  expression 
in  ver.  27,  "  whom  all  Asia  and  the  world  wor- 
shippeth,"  may  be  abundantly  illustrated  from  a 
variety  of  sources.  The  term  fnyaKt)  was  evi- 
dently a  title  of  honour  recognised  as  belonging  to 
the  Ephesian  goddess.  We  find  it  in  inscriptions 
(as  in  Boeckh,  Corp.  Insc.  2963,  a),  and  in 
Xenophon's  Ephesiaca,  i.  11.  (For  the  Ephesian 
Xeiiophon,  see  Diet,  of  Biog.  ami  Mythol.)  As  to 
the  enthusiasm  with  which  "  all  Asia  "  regarded 
this  worship,  independently  of  the  fact  that  Ephesus 
was  the  capital  of  the  province,  we  may  refer  to 
such  passages  as  the  following:  6  ttjs  'Adas  t'aos, 
Corp.  Insc.  I.  c.  ;  "  communiter  a  civitatibus  Asiae 
factum,"  Liv.  i.  45;  "tota  Asia  extruente,"  Plin. 
xvi.  79  ;  "  factum  a  tota  Asia,"  ib.  xxxvi.  21.  As 
to  the  notoriety  of  the  worship  throughout  "  the 


DIBLAIM 

world,"  Pausanias  tells  us  (iv.  31)  that  the  Ephe- 
sian  Diana  was  moi'e  honoured  privately  than  any 
other  deity,  which  accounts  for  the  large  manu- 
facture and  wide-spread  sale  of  the  "  silver  shrines" 
mentioned  by  St.  Luke  (ver.  24),  and  not  by  him 
only.  This  specific  worship  was  publicly  adopted 
also,  as  we  have  seen,  in  various  and  distant  places : 
nor  ought  we  to  omit  the  games  celebrated  at 
Ephesus  in  connexion  with  it,  or  the  treaties  made 
with  other  cities  on  this  half-religious,  half-political 
basis.  [J.  S.  H.] 

DIBLA'IM  (D^nT  ;  Ae/3-nAcun  ;  Debelaim), 
mother  of  Hosea's  wife  Gomer  (Hos.  i.  3). 

DIB'LATH  (accurately  Diblah,   rbll,  the 

L  T  :  ' 

word  in  the  text  being  nD72',J  =  "  to  Diblah  ; 

Ae/3Aa0a ;  Dcblatha),  a  place  named  only  in  Ez. 
vi.  14,  as  if  situated  at  one  of  the  extremities  of 
the  land  of  Israel : — "  I  will  ....  make  the  land 
desolate  .  .  .  .  '  from '  the  wilderness  (Midbar)  to 
Diblah."  The  word  Midbar  being  frequently  used 
for  the  nomad  country  on  the  south  and  south-east 
of  Palestine,  it  is  natural  to  infer  that  Diblah 
was  in  the  north.  To  this  position  Beth-diblathaim 
or  Almon-diblathaim  in  Moab  on  the  east  of  the 
I  tead  Sea,  are  obviously  unsuitable  ;  and  indeed  a 
place  which  like  Diblathaim  was  on  the  extreme 
east  border  of  Moab,  and  never  included  even  in 
the  allotments  of  Reuben  or  Gad,  could  hardly  be 
chosen  as  a  landmark  of  the  boundary  of  Israel. 
The  only  name  in  the  north  at  all  like  it  is  Riblah, 
and  the  letters  D  (1)  and  R  ("1)  are  so  much 
alike  and  so  frequently*  interchanged,  owing  to 
the  carelessness  of  copyists,  that  there  is  a  strong 
probability  that  Riblah  is  the  right  reading.  The 
conjecture  is  due  to  Jerome  (Comm.  in  loc),  but  it 
has  been  endorsed  by  Michaelis,  Gesenius,  and  other 
scholars  (Ges.  Thes.  312  ;  and  see  Davidson,  Heb. 
Text,  Ez.  vi.  14).  Riblah,  though  an  old  town,  is  not 
heard  of  during  the  early  and  middle  course  of  Jewish 
history,  but  shortly  before  the  date  of  Ezekiel's  pro- 
phecy it  had  started  into  a  terrible  prominence 
from  its  being  the  scene  of  the  cruelties  inflicted  on 
the  last  king  of  Judah,  and  of  the  massacres  of  the 
priests  and  chief  men  of  Jerusalem  perpetrated  there 
by  order  of  the  king  of  Babylon.  [G.] 

DIBON  (pH;  Aai/3cov,  AtiPwv;  Dibon),  a 
town  on  the  east  side  of  Jordan,  in  the  rich  pas- 
toral country,  which  was  taken  possession  of  and 
rebuilt  by  the  children  of  Gad  (Num.  xxxii.  3, 
34).  From  this  circumstance  it  possibly  received 
the  name  of  Dibon-gad.  Its  first  mention  is  in 
the  ancient  fragment  of  poetry  Num.  xxi.  30,  and 
from  this  it  appears  to  have  belonged  originally  to 
the  Moabites.  The  tribes  of  Reuben  and  Gad 
being  both  engaged  in  pastoral  pursuits  are  not 
likely  to  have  observed  the  division  of  towns  ori- 
giuallv  made  with  the  same  strictness  as  the  more 
settled  people  on  the  west,  and  accordingly  we  find 
Dibon  counted  to  Keuben  in  the  lists  of  Joshua 
(xiii.  9 — LXX.  omits — 17).  In  the  time  of  Isaiah 
ami  Jeremiah,  however,  it  was  again  in  possession 
of  Moab  (Is.  xv.  2  ;  Jer.  xlviii.  IS,  '."J,  comp.  24). 
In  the  same  denunciations  of  Isaiah  it  appears, 
probably,  under  the  name  of  DiMON,   M   and   P> 


DIKLAH 


437 


■  See  Deuel,  Dijinaii,  &c.  It  is  in  the  LXX.  ver- 
sion that  the  corruption  of  D  into  It  is  most  frequently 
to  be  observed;  Dishon  to  Rhison,  Dodanim  to  Bho- 
dioi,  &:e.  &c.  A  case  in  point  is  Riblah  itself,  which 
in  the  LXX.  is  more  often  Ae/3Aa0<i  than  TejSAafla. 


being  convertible  in  Hebrew,  and  the  change  ad- 
mitting of  a  play  characteristic  of  the  poetry  of 
Isaiah.  The  two  names  were  both  in  existence  in 
the  time  of  Jerome  (comm.  in  Josh,  xv.,  quoted  by 
Reland,  735).  The  last  passages  appear  to  indicate 
that  Dibon  was  on  an  elevated  situation  :  not  only  is 
it  expressly  said  to  be  a  "  high  place"  (Is.  xv.  2), 
but  its  inhabitants  are  bid  to  "  come  dowu  "  from 
their  glory  or  their  stronghold.  Under  the  name 
of  Dabon  or  Debon  it  is  mentioned  by  Eusebius 
and  Jerome  in  the  Onomasticon.  It  was  then  a 
very  large  village  (kw/xt]  Tra/x/xeyeOris)  beyond  the 
Anion.  In  modern  times  the  name  Dhiban  has 
been  discovered  by  Seetzen,  Irby  and  Mangles 
(142),  and  Burckhardt  (Syr.  372)  as  attached  to 
extensive  ruins  on  the  Roman  road,  about  three 
miles  north  of  the  Arnon  (Wady  Mudjeb).  All 
agree,  however,  in  describing  these  ruins  as  lying 
low. 

2.  One  of  the  towns  which  was  re-inhabited  by 
the  men  of  Judah  after  the  return  from  captivity 
(Neh.  xi.  25).  From  its  mention  with  Jekab- 
zeel,  Moladah,  and  other  towns  of  the  south, 
there  can  be  no  doubt  that  it  is  identical  with 
DlMONAH.  [G.] 

DI'BON-GAD(na  \y\\  AaifavTaS;  Dibon- 
gad),  one  of  the  halting-places  of  the  Israelites. 
It  was  in  Moab  between  Ije-abaium  and  Aljkjx- 
DIBLATHAIM  (Num.  xxxiii.  45,  46).  It  was  no 
doubt  the  same  place  which  is  generally  called 
Dibon  ;  but  whether  it  received  the  name  of  Gad 
from  the  tribe,  or  originally  possessed  it,  cannot  be 
ascertained.  [(*•} 

DIB'EI  Cnin  ;  AaPpei ;  Dihri),  a  Danite, 
father  of  Shelomith,  a  woman  who  had  married  an 
Egyptian  and  whose  sou  was  stoned  for  having 
"  blasphemed  the  Name  "  [i.  e.  of  Jehovah]  (Lev. 
xxiv.  11). 

DIDRACHMON  (Sitipaxpov  ;  didrachma). 
[Money  ;  Shekel.] 

DID'YMUS  (AiSv/xos),  that  is,  the  Twin,  a 
surname  of  the  apostle  Thomas  (John  xi.  16,  xx.  24, ' 
xxi.  2).     [Thomas.] 

DIK'LAH  (fftjW;  A€/cA<£;  Decla ;  Gen.  x. 
27;  1  Chr.  i.  21),  a  son  of  Joktan,  whose  settle- 
ments, in  common  with  those  of  the  other  sons  of 
Joktan,  must  be  looked  for  in  Arabia.  The  name 
in  Hebrew  signifies  "  a  palm-tree,"  and  the  cognate 

word  in  Arabic  (£\j>.i)>  "  a  palm-tree  abounding 
with  fruit :"  hence  it  is  thought  that  Diklah  is  ? 
part  of  Arabia  containing  many  palm-trees.  The 
city  $oivlkg0i/,  in  the  north-west  of  Arabia  Felix, 
has  been  suggested  as  preserving  the  Joktanite 
name  (Boch.  Phaleg,  ii.  22)  ;  but  Bochart,  and 
after  him  Gesenius,  refer  the  descendants  of  Diklah 
to  the  Minaei,  a  people  of  Arabia  Felix  inhabit- 
ing a  palmiferous  country.  Whether  we  follow 
Bochart  and  most  others  in  placing  the  Minaei  on 
the  east  borders  of  the  ffijdz,  southwards  towards 
the  Yemen,  or  follow  Frasnel  in  his  identification 
of  the  Wddee  Dodn  with  the  territory  of  this 
people,  the  connexion  of  the  latter  with  Diklah  is 
uncertain  and  unsatisfactory.  No  trace  of  Diklah 
is  known  to  exist  in  Arabic  works,  except  the  men- 
tion of  a  place  called  Dakalah  £\jf,s  =  rOpTi  in 
/.'/■  Yemdmeh  (Kamoos,  s.  v.),  with  many  palin- 


438 


DILEAN 


trees  (Marasid,  s.  v.).  "Nakhleh"  (XXW)  a'so 
signifies  a  palm-tree,  and  is  the  name  of  many  places, 
especially  Nakhleh  el-Yemdneeyeh,  and  Nakhleh 
esh-Shdmeeyeh  (here  meaning  the  Southern  and 
Northern  Nakhleh),  two  well-known  towns  situate 
near  each  other.  According  to  some,  the  former 
was  a  seat  of  the  worship  of  El-L&tt,  and  a  settle- 
ment of  the  tribe  of  Thakeef ;  and  in  a  tradition  of 
Mohammad's,  this  tribe  was  not  of  unmixed  Ish- 
maelite  blood,  but  one  of  four  which  he  thus  ex- 
cepts: — "All  the  Arabs  are  [descended]  from  Ish- 
mael,  except  four  tribes:  Sulaf  [Sheleph],  Had- 
ramiiwt  [Hazarmaveth],  El-Arwdh  [?],  and  Tha- 
keef" (Mir-dt  ez-Zemdn,  bis). 

Therefore,  1.  Diklah  may  probably  be  recovered 
in  the  place  called  Dakalah  above  mentioned ;  or, 
possibly,  2.  in  one  of  the  places  named  Nakhleh. 

A  discussion  of  the  vexed  and  intricate  question 
of  the  Minaei  is  beyond  the  limits  of  this  article ; 
but  as  they  are  regarded  by  some  authorities  of 
high  repute  as  representing  Diklah,  it. is  important 
to  record  an  identification  of  their  true  position. 
This  has  hitherto  never  been  done  ;  those  who  have 
written  on  the  subject  having  argued  on  the  vague 
and  contradictory  statements  of  the  Greek  geo- 
graphers, from  the  fact  that  no  native  mention  of 
so  important  a  people  as  the  Minaei  had  been  dis- 
covered (cf.  Bochart,  Phalcg ;  Fresnel's  Lettres, 
Journal  Asiatique ;  Jomard,  Essai,  in  Mengin's 
Hist,  de  I'Egypte,  vol.  iii. ;  Caussin,  Essai,  &c). 
There  is,  however,  a  city  and  people  in  the  Yemen 
which  appear  to  correspond  in  every  respect  to  the 
position  and  name  of  the  Minaei.  The  latter  is 
written  Meipouoi,  Mivcuoi,  and  Mivvaioi,  which 
may  be  fairly  rendered  "  people  of  Vletu,  of  Mif, 
and  of  Mivv  ;"  while  the  first  exhibits  the  sound  of 
a  diphthong,  or  an  attempt  at  a  diphthong.  The 
Greek  account  places  them,  generally,  between  the 
Sabaeans  (identified  with  Seba,  or  Ma-rib:  see 
Arabia)  and  the  Erythraean  Sea.  Jt  is  therefore 
remarkable  that  where  it  should  be  sought  we  find 
a  city  with  a  fortress,  called  Ma'een,  or  Main, 

OU«  (Kdmoos,  Marasid,  s.v.),  well-known,  and 

therefore  not  carefully  described  in  the  Arabic  geo- 
graphical dictionaries,  but  apparently  near  San' a  ; 
and  further  that  in  the  same  province  are  situate  the 

O-  3 


town  of  Mo'eyn  ( 


0A 


,,  abbr.  dim.  of  the  former), 


whence  the  Benee-Mo'eyn ;  and  the  town  of 
Ma'eeneh  (fern,  of  Ma'een).  The  gent.  n.  would 
be  Ma'ecnee,  &c.  The  township  in  which  are  the 
.after  two  places  is  named  Sinhdn  (comp.  Niebuhr, 
Bescr,   201)  which  was  one  of  the  confederation 

o  - 
formed  by  the  ancient  tribe  of  Jenb,  <_,sJo»  (Ma- 
rasid, s.  v.),  grandson  of  Kahldn,  who  was  brother 
of  Himyer  the  Joktanite.  This  identification  is 
reconcileable  with  all  that  is  known  of  the  Minaei. 
See  further  in  art.  Uzal.  [E.  S.  P.] 

DIL'EAN  (JJJT'I  ;  Aa\d5;  Alex.  AaXadv; 
Dclcaii),  one  of  the  cities  of  Judah,  in  the  Shcfelah 
or  low  country  (Josh.  xv.  38).  If  Gesenius's  inter- 
pretation, "  gourd,"  or  "  cucumber,"  be  correct,  the 
name  is  very  suitable  for  a  place  situated  in  that 
rich  district.  It  is  not  elsewhere  mentioned,  nor 
has  it  been  subsequently  identified  with  certainty. 
Van  de  Velde   (ii.  160)   suggests  that  it  may  be 


DINAH 

the  modem  place  Tina  (Kiepert's  map  in  Robinson. 
B.  Tima),  about  three  miles  north  of  Tett-es-Bafieh  in 
the  maritime  plain  of  Rhilistia,  south  of  Ekron.  [G.] 
DIM'NAH  (i"I3OT  ;  Vat.  omits;  Alex.  Za^va ; 
Damna),  a  city  in  the  tribe  of  Zebulun,  given  to 
the  Merarite  Levites  (Josh.  xxi.  35).  The  name, 
does  not  occur  in  the  list  of  cities  belonging  to 
the  tribe  (Josh.  xix.  10-16).  In  the  list  of  Le- 
vitical  cities  in  ]  Chr.  vi.  77  occurs  Rimmon, 
accurately  Rimmono  (13iS"1),  which  may  possibly 
be  a  variation  of  Dimnah,  1  being  often  changed 
into  "1.  In  this  case  Rimmon  is  probably  the  real 
name  (Bertheau,  Chronik,  72,  3;  Movers,  Chronik 
72).  [G.] 

DIMON,  THE  WATERS  OF  (flOH  *JD  ;  TO 
uSojp  to  AeijUtov;  Alex.  'Pe/UjU&w ;  Dibon),  some 
streams  on  the  east  of  the  Dead  Sea,  in  the  land 
of  Moab,  against  which  Isaiah  is  here  uttering 
denunciations  (Is.  xv.  9).  From  Dibon  being 
named  in  verse  2  of  this  chapter,  as  well  as  in  the 
lists  of  Moabite  towns  in  Jer.  xlviii.,  and  no  place 
named  Dimon  being  elsewhere  mentioned  as  be- 
longing to  Moab,  Gesenius  (Comment,  iiber  Jes. 
534)  conjectures  that  the  two  names  are  the 
same,  the  form  "Dimon"  being  used  for  the  sake 
of  the  play  between  it  and  the  word  Dam  (D*7) 
"blood."     [Dibon,  1.]  [G.] 

DIMO'NAH  (nyi'BH  ;  'Pey/id;  Alex. Si^ava; 

Dimona),  a  city  in  the  south  of  Judah,  the  part 
bordering  on  the  desert  of  Idumaea  (Josh.  xv.  22). 
Dimonah  is  mentioned  in  the  Onomasticon,  but 
was  evidently  not  known  to  Eusebius  and  Jerome, 
nor  has  it  been  identified  in  later  times.  It  pro- 
bably occurs  under  the  altered  name  of  Dibon  in 
Neh.  xi.  25.  [G.] 

DI'NAH  (i"l3'|,,T,  judged  or  avenged,  from  the 
same  root  as  Dan  ;  Aeiva ;  Dina),  the  daughter 
of  Jacob  by  Leah  (Gen.  xxx.  21).  She  accom- 
panied her  father  from  Mesopotamia  to  Canaan, 
and,  having  ventured  among  the  inhabitants,  was 
violated  by  Shechem  the  son  of  Hamor,  the  chief- 
tain of  the  territory  in  which  her  father  had 
settled  (Gen.  xxxiv.).  Her  age  at  this  time, 
judging  by  the  subsequent  notice  of  Joseph's  age 
(Gen.  xxxvii.  2),  may  have  been  from  13  to  15, 
the  ordinary  period  of  marriage  in  Eastern  coun- 
tries (Lane's  Mod.  Egypt,  i.  208).  Shechem  pro- 
posed to  make  the  usual  reparation  by  paying  a 
sum  to  the  father  and  marrying  her  (Gen.  xxxiv. 
12);  such  reparation  would  have  been  deemed 
sufficient  under  the  Mosaic  law  (Deut.  xxii.  28,  29) 
among  the  members  of  the  Hebrew  nation.  But 
in  this  case  the  suitor  was  an  alien,  and  the  crown 
of  the  offence  consisted  in  its  having  been  com- 
mitted by  an  alien  against  the  favoured  people  of 
God  ;  he  had  "  wrought  folly  in  Israel "  (xxxiv.  7). 
The  proposals  of  Hamor,  who  acted  as  his  deputy, 
were  framed  on  the  recognition  of  the  hitherto 
complete  separation  of  the  two  peoples;  he  pro- 
posed the  fusion  of  the  two  by  the  establishment 
of  the  rights  of  intermarriage  and  commerce;  just 
as  among  the  Romans  the^s  conmibii  and  the  jus 
commercii  constituted  the  essence  of  civitas.  The 
sons  of  Jacob,  bent  upon  revenge,  availed  them- 
selves of  the  eagerness,  which  Shechem  showed, 
to  effect  their  puipose  ;  they  demanded,  as  a  condi- 
tion of  the  proposed  union,  the  circumcision  of  the 
Shi  chemites :    the    practice    could    not   have   been 


DINAITES 

unknown  to  the  Hivites,  for  the  Phoenicians  (Her.  ii. 
104),  and  probably  most  of  the  Canaanite  tribes 
were  circumcised.  They  therefore  assented ;  and 
on  the  third  day,  when  the  pain  and  fever  result- 
in-'  from  the  operation  were  at  the  highest  [Cir- 
cumcision], Simeon  and  Levi,  own  brothers  to 
Dinah,  as  Josephus  observes  {Ant.  i.  21,  §1 ;  6/j.o- 
fj.r]Tpioi  aSeAtpoi),  attacked  them  unexpectedly, 
slew  all  the  males  and  plundered  their  city.  Jacob's 
remark  (ver.  30)  does  not  imply  any  guiltiness  on 
the  part  of  his  sons  in  this  transaction ;  for  the 
brothers  were  regarded  as  the  proper  guardians  of 
their  sister's  honour,  as  is  still  the  case  among  the 
Bedouins  ;  but  he  dreaded  the  revenge  of  the  neigh- 
bouring peoples,  and  even  cf  the  family  of  Hamor, 
some  of  whom  appear  to  have  survived  the  mas- 
sacre (Judg.  is.  28).  His  escape,  which  was  won- 
derful, considering  the  extreme  rigour  with  which 
the  laws  of  blood-revenge  have  in  all  ages  prevailed 
in  the  East  [Blood-revenge],  is  ascribed  to  the 
special  interference  of  Jehovah  (xxxv.  5).  Jo- 
sephus omits  all  reference  to  the  treachery  of  the 
sons  of  Jacob  and  explains  the  easy  capture  of  the  city 
as  occurring  during  the  celebration  of  a  feast  {Ant. 
i.  21,  §2).  The  object  for  which  this  narrative 
is  introduced  into  the  book  of  Genesis  probably  is, 
partly  to  explain  the  allusion  in  Gen.  xlix.  5-7,  and 
partly  to  exhibit  the  consequences  of  any  associa- 
tion on  the  part  of  the  Hebrews  with  the  heathens 
about  them.  Ewald  {Geschichte,  i.  488)  assumes 
that  the  historical  foundation  of  the  narrative  was 
furnished  by  an  actual  fusion  of  the  nomad  Israelites 
with  the  aborigines  of  Shechem,  on  the  ground  that 
the  daughters  of  the  patriarchs  are  generally  no- 
ticed with  an  ethnological  view ;  the  form  in  which 
the  narrative  appears  being  merely  the  colouring  of 
a  late  author :  such  a  view  appears  to  us  perfectly 
inconsistent  with  the  letter  and  the  spirit  of  the 
text.  [W.  L.  B.] 

UI'NAITES  (W^J  ;  Aetva7oi ;  Dinaei,  Ezr. 
ir.  9),  the  name  of  some  of  the  Cuthaean  colonists 
who  were  placed  in  the  cities  of  Samaria  by  the 
Assyrian  governor,  after  the  conquest  and  captivity 
of  the  ten  tribes  under  Shalmaneser.  They  remained 
under  the  dominion  of  Persia,  and  united  with  their 
fellow-colonists  in  opposition  to  the  Jews  ;  but 
nothing  more  is  known  of  them.  Junius  (Comm. 
in  foe),  without  any  authority,  identifies  them 
with  the  people  known  to  geographers  by  the  name 
Dennani.  [W.  A.  W.] 

DINHABAH  (nnrW;  Aewa/3<£;  Denaba; 
Gen.  xxxvi.  .".'J  ;  1  Chr.  i.  4:'.).  the  capital  city,  and 
probably  the  birthplace,  of  Bela,  son  of  Beor,  king 
of  Edom.  Eusebius  (Onomasticon,  s.  v.)  mentions 
a  village  Dannea  (Damnaba,  Jerome),  eight  miles 
from  Areopolis,  or  Ar  of  Moab  (on  the  road  to  Anion : 
Jerome),  and  another  on  Mount  Peor,  seven  miles 
from  Esbus  (Heshbon)  ;  but  neither  of  these  has 
claim  to  be  the  Dinhabah  of  Scripture.  R.  Joseph,  in 
his  Targum  (on  1  Chr.  i.  4.".,  ed.  Wilkins),  finds  a  sig- 
nificance in  the  name.  After  identifying  Balaam  the 
son  of  Beor  with  Laban  the  Syrian,  he  adds,  "  And 
the  name  of  his  capital  city  was  Dinhabah,  for  it 
was  given  (rQTTTVJO  him  as  a  present."  With 
as  little  probability  Gesenius  conjectured  that  it 
might  signify  dominus,  i.  e.  locus  direptionis,  i.e. 
praedonum  iatibulum  The  name  is  nol  uncommon 
aiming  Semitic  races.  Ptolemy  (v.  15,  §24)  men- 
tions Aavafia.  in  Palmyrene  Syria,  afterwards  a 
bishop's  see ;  and  according  to  Zosimus  (iii.  27)  there 


DIONYSUS  439 

was  a  Aavdfir)  in   Babylonia.    (Knobel,  GcJicsis.) 

7  7 

The  Peshito Syriac  hasOCT_»»,  Daihab,  probably 

a  mistake  for  <-^OT_l>.  [W.  A.  \Y\] 

DIONYS'IA  (Awvvffia,  Bacchanalia),  "  the 
feast  of  Bacchus,"  which  was  celebrated,  especially 
in  later  times,  with  wild  extravagance  and  licen- 
tious enthusiasm.  Women,  as  well  as  men,  joined 
in  the  processions  (Olcuroi),  acting  the  part  of 
Maenads,  crowned  with  ivy  and  bearing  the  thyrsus 
(cf.  Ovid,  Fast.  iii.  767  ff. ;  Broudkh.  ad  Tib.  iii. 
6.  2,  who  gives  a  coin  of  Maroneia,  bearing  a 
head  of  Dionysus  crowned  with  ivy)  ;  and  the 
phallus  was  a  principal  object  in  the  train  (Herod. 
ii.  48,  49).  Shortly  before  the  persecution  of 
Antiochus  Epiphanes,  168  B.C.,  in  which  the  Jews 
"  were  compelled  to  go  in  procession  to  Bacchus 
carrying  ivy"  (2  Mace.  vi.  7),  the  secret  cele- 
bration of  the  Bacchanalia  in  Italy  had  been  re- 
vealed to  the  Roman  senate  (B.C.  186).  The 
whole  state  was  alarmed  by  the  description  of  the 
excesses  with  which  the  festival  was  attended  (Liv. 
xxxix.  8  ff.),  and  a  decree  was  passed  forbidding  its 
observance  ill  Home  or  Italy.  This  fact  offers  the 
best  commentary  on  the  conduct  of  Antiochus  ;  tin- 
it  is  evident  that  rites  which  were  felt  to  be  in- 
compatible with  the  comparative  simplicity  of  early 
Roman  worship  must  have  been  peculiarly  revolt- 
ing to  Jews  of  the  Hasmonaean  age  (cf.  Herod,  iv. 
79,  2/cu0cu  tov  BaKxeveiv  Tr4pi"E\Arj(ny  oveiSi- 
(ovfft).  [B.  F.  W.] 

DIONYSIUS      THE      AEEOPAGI'TE 

(Aloviktios  6  ' ApeoTrayiT-ns,  Acts  xvii.  34),  an 
eminent  Athenian,  converted  to  Christianity  by 
the  preaching  of  St.  Paul.  Euseb.  (77.  E.  iii.  4) 
makes  him,  on  the  authority  of  Dionysius,  bishop  of 
Corinth,  to  have  been  first  bishop  of  Athens  (see 
also  //.  E.  iv.  2.'i).  According  to  a  later  tradition 
given  in  the  martyrologies  on  the  authority  of 
Aristides  the  apologist,  he  suffered  martyrdom  at 
Athens.  On  the  writings  which  were  once  supposed 
to  have  had  Dionysius  for  their  author,  but  which 
are  now  confessed  to  be  spurious,  and  the  produc- 
tion of  some  neo-Platonists  of  the  6th  century,  see 
an  elaborate  discussion  in  Herzog's  Encyclopadie  : 
and  for  further  legends  respecting  himself,  Suidas 
sub  voce,  and  the  article  in  the  Dictionary  nf.Bio- 
graphy  and  Mythology.  [H.  A.] 

DIONY'SUS  (Ai6vvaos,  Aidwffos,  of  uncer- 
tain derivation),  also  called  Bacchus  (Bdnxos, 
'lanxos,  the  noisy  </<»/:  after  the  time  of  Hero- 
dotus),  was  properly  the  god  of  wine.  In  Homer 
he  appears  simply  as  the  " frenzied "  god  (It.vi. 
132),  and  yet  "a  joy  to  mortals"  {II.  xiv.  325  ; 
but  in  later  times  the  most  varied  attributes  were 
centred  in  him  as  the  source  of  the  luxuriant  fer- 
tility of  nature,  and  the  god  of  civilization,  glad- 
ness, and  inspiration.  The  eastern  wandeiin 
Dionysus  are  well  known  (Strab.  xv.  7,  p.  687; 
Diet.  Biogr.  s.  v.),  but  they  do  not  seem  to  have 
left  any  special  trace  in  Palestine  (yet  cf.  Luc. 
<i<-  Syria  Dea,  p.  886,  ed.  P>ened.).  His  worship, 
however,  was  greatly  modified  by  the  incorporation 
of  Eastern  elements,  and  assumed  the  twofold  form 
of  wild  orgies  [Diontsia]  and  mystic  rites.    To 

the. lew  Dionysus  wonld  necessarily  appear  as  the 
embodiment  of  paganism  in  its  most  material  shape, 
sanctioning  the  most  tumultuous  passions  and  the 
worst  excesses.     Thus  Tacitus  (Hist.  v.  5)  rejects 


440 


DIOSCORINTHIUS 


the  tradition  that  the  Jews  worshipped  Bacchus 
(Liberum  patrem ;  cf.  Plut.  Quaest.  Conv.  iv.  6), 
on  the  ground  of  the  "  entire  diversity  of  their 
principles"  (nequaquam  congruentibus  institutis), 
though  he  interprets  this  difference  to  their  dis- 
credit. The  consciousness  of  the  fundamental  oppo- 
sition of  the  God  of  Israel  and  Dionysus  explains  the 
punishment  which  Ptolemaeus  Philopator  inflicted 
on  the  Jews  (3  Mace.  ii.  29),  "  branding  them  with 
the  ivy-leaf  of  Dionysus,"  though  Dionysus  may 
have  been  the  patron  god  of  the  Ptolemies  (Grimm, 
on  the  J/rtcc).  And  it  must  have  been  from  the 
same  circumstance  that  Nicanor  is  said  to  have 
threatened  to  erect  a  temple  of  Dionysus  upon  the 
site  of  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem  (2  Mace.  xiv.  33). 

[B.  F.  W.] 

DIOSCORINTHIUS.     [Months.] 

DIOT'REPHES  (Aiorpe^s),  a  Christian 
mentioned  in  3  John  9,  as  (pLXoirpcoTtvcw  in  some 
church  to  which  St.  John  had  written,  and  which, 
on  account  of  his  influence,  did  not  receive  the 
apostle's  authority,  nor  the  messengers  which  he 
had  sent.  It  is  entirely  uncertain  what  church 
is  meant,  as  it  is  who  Gaius  was,  to  whom  the 
epistle  is  addressed.     [Gaius.]  [H.  A.] 

DISCIPLE.     [Education;  Schools.] 

DISCUS  (SlffKos),  one  of  the  exercises  in  the 
Grecian  gymnasia,  which  Jason  the  high-priest  in- 
troduced among  the  Jews  in  the  time  of  Antiochus 
Epiphanes,  and  which  he  induced  even  the  priests 
to  practise  (2  Mace.  iv.  14).  The  discus  was  a 
circular  plate  of  stone  or  metal,  made  for  throwing 
to  a  distance  as  an  exercise  of  strength  and  dex- 
terity. It  was  indeed  one  of  the  principal  gym- 
nastic exercises  of  the  Greeks,  and  was  practised  in 
the  heroic  age.  (For  details  and  authorities,  see 
Diet,  of  Gr.  §  Rom.  Ant.  s.  v.) 


Dlscobcluf.    tDstcrtey,  Denk.  der  ult.  Kunst,  vol.  i.  no.  139.) 

DISEASES.     [Medicine.] 

DISH.     1.   "PQD,  Gesen.  p.  965:  see  Basin. 

2.  nr6v,  in  piur.  only  nir6v,  rvr6y.  or  nn^v ; 

v5f)L(TKT],    6  aXafiaffTpos,    A.e'/8?]s ;    vas,  lebes.      ■">. 
mj?|p :  see  Charger. 


DISPERSION,  JEWS  OF  THE 

In  N.  T.  rpv&Kiov,  Matt.  xxvi.  23,  Mark  xiv. 
20.  In  ancient  Egypt,  and  also  in  Judaea,  guests 
at  the  table  handled  their  food  with  the  fingers, 
but  spoons  were  used  for  soup  or  other  liquid  food, 
when  required  (Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  i.  181,  2nd 
ed.).  The  same  is  the  case  in  modern  Egypt.  Eacli 
person  breaks  off  a  small  piece  of  bread,  dips  it  in 
the  dish,  and  then  conveys  it  to  his  mouth,  together 
with  a  small  portion  of  the  meat  or  other  contents 
of  the  dish.  To  pick  out  a  delicate  morsel  and 
hand  it  to  a  friend  is  esteemed  a  compliment,  and  to 
refuse  such  an  offering  is  contrary  to  good  manners. 
Judas  dipping  his  hand  in  the  same  dish  with  our 
Lord  was  showing  especial  friendliness  and  intimacy. 
rpvfixlov  is  used  in  LXX.  for  n"IJ?p,  sometimes  in 
A.  V.  "  charger"  (Ex.  xxv.  29;  Num.  iv.  7,  vii. 
13,  19).  This  is  also  rendered  kotv\t]  or  half 
sextarius,  i.  e.  probably  a  cup  or  flask  rather  than  a 
dish.  Tpv/iKiov  is  in  Vulg.  Matt.  xxvi.  23, 
paropsis ;  in  Mark  xiv.  20,  catinus.  Schleusner, 
Lex.  in  K  T.  rpvfrxlov  (Lane,  Mod.  Eg.  i.  193 ; 
Chardin,  Voy.  iv.  53,  54 ;  Niebuhr,  D'escr.  de 
VArab.  46).     [Basin.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

DIS'HAN  (JiTH ;  'Vht&v;  Disan),  the  youngest 
son  of  Seir  the  Horite  (Gen.  xxxvi.  21,  28,  30; 
1  Chr.  i.  38,  42).  [W.  L.  B.] 

DIS'HON  (JltS'H  ;  Av<rd>v  ;  Dlson).     1.  The 

fifth  son  of  Seir  (Gen.  xxxvi.  21,  26,  30 ;  1  Chr.  i. 
38).  2.  The  son  of  Anah  and  grandson  of  Seir 
(Gen.  xxxvi.  25 ;  1  Chr.  i.  38).  Dishon  and  Dishan 
belong  to  the  same  root,  which  may  possibly  re- 
appear in  the  name  Deisch  noticed  by  Abulfeda 
(Hist.  Anteisl.  p.  196).  The  geographical  posi- 
tion of  the  tribes  descended  from  these  patriarchs  is 
uncertain.  Knobel  (Comm.  in  foe.)  places  them  to 
E.  and  S.E.  of  the  Gulf  of  Akaba,  on  the  ground 
that  the  names  of  the  sons  of  Dishon,  Eshban,  and 
Hemdan  may  be  identified  with  Usbany  and  IIu- 
meidg,  branches  of  the  tribe  of  Omran.  Such 
identifications  must  be  received  with  caution,  as 
similar  names  are  found  in  other  parts  of  Arabia— 
Hamde,  for  instance,  near  Tayf,  and  again  Ham- 
dan,  which  bears  a  still  closer  resemblance  to  the 
original  name,  near  Sana  (Burckhardt's  Arabia,  i. 
156,  ii.  376).  [W.  L.  B.] 

DISPERSION,   THE  JEWS   OF   THE, 

or  simply  The  Dispersion,  was  the  general  title 
applied  to  those  Jews  who  remained  settled  in 
foreign  countries  after  the  return  from  the  Baby- 
lonian exile,  and  during  the  period  of  the  second 
Temple.  The  original  word  applied  to  these  foreign 
settlers  (fl-1?;l ;  cf.  Jer.  xxiv.  5,  xxviii.  4,  &c,  from 
TOi,  to  strip  naked;  so  NJVlpJ  ''JS,  Ezr.  vi.  16) 
conveys  the  notion  of  spoliation  and  bereavement,  as 
of  men  removed  from  the  Temple  and  home  of  their 
fathers;  but  in  the  LXX.  the  ideas  of  a  "sojourn- 
ing" (fj.eToiKf(ria)  and  of  a  "  colony  "  (airoi/a'a) 
were  combined  with  that  of  a  "  captivity  "  (ai'x/"«Ao)- 
ffia),  while  the  term  "dispersion''  (Siacnropa,  first 
in  Deut.  xxviii.  25,  mj?T  ;  cf.  Jer.  xxxiv.  17),  which 
finally  prevailed,  seemed  to  imply  that  the  people 
thus  scattered  "  to  the  utmost  parts  of  heaven " 
(Deut.  xxx.  4),  "  in  bondage  among  the  Gentiles" 
(2  Mace.  i.  27),  and  shut  out  from  the  full  privi- 
leges of  the  chosen  race  (John  vii.  35),  should  yet 
be  as  the  seed  sown  for  a  future  harvest  (cf.  Is. 
xlix.  6  Hcli.)  iii  the  strange  lands  where  they 
found    a    temporary    resting-place    (1   Pet.    i.   1, 


DISPERSION,  JEWS  OF  THE 

irap€7n57),uois  Siacnropas).  The  schism  which  had 
divided  the  first  kingdom  was  forgotten  in  the 
results  of  the  general  calamity.  The  dispersion 
was  not  limited  to  the  exiles  of  Judah,  but  included 
"the  twelve  tribes"  (Jam.  i.  1,  TaTy  SwSeica. 
cpvAcus  reus  iv  rfj  Siacnropa.),  which  expressed  the 
completeness  of  the  whole  Jewish  nation  (Acts  xxvi. 
7,  rb  5u>$eKa<pv\uu). 

The  Dispersion,  as  a  distinct  element  influencing 
the  entire  character  of  the  Jews,  dates  from  the 
Babylonian  exile.  Uncertain  legends  point  to  earlier 
settlements  in  Arabia,  Ethiopia,  and  Abyssinia;  but 
even  if  these  settlements  were  made,  they  were 
isolated  and  casual,  while  the  Dispersion,  of  which 
Babylon  was  the  acknowledged  centre,  was  the  out- 
ward proof  that  a  faith  had  succeeded  to  a  kingdom. 
Apart  from  the  necessary  influence  which  Jewish 
communities  bound  by  common  laws,  ennobled  by 
the  possession  of  the  same  truths,  and  animated  by 
kindred  hopes,  must  have  exercised  on  the  nations 
among  whom  they  were  scattered,  the  difficulties 
which  set  aside  the  literal  observance  of  the  Mosaic 
ritual  led  to  a  wider  view  of  the  scope  of  the  law, 
and  a  stronger  sense  of  its  spiritual  significance. 
Outwardly  and  inwardly,  by  its  effects  both  on  the 
Gentiles  and  on  the  people  of  Israel,  the  Dispersion 
appears  to  have  been  the  clearest  providential  pre- 
paration for  the  spread  of  Christianity. 

But  while  the  fact  of  a  recognised  Dispersion 
must  have  weakened  the  local  and  ceremonial  in- 
fluences which  were  essential  to  the  first  training 
of  the  people  of  God,  the  Dispersion  was  still  bound 
together  in  itself  and  to  its  mother  country  by 
religious  ties.  The  Temple  was  the  acknowledged 
centre  of  Judaism,  and  the  faithful  Jew  everywhere 
contributed  the  half-shekel  towards  its  maintenance 
{rb  5i'5f)aXi"o^,  Matt.  xvii.  24  ;  cf.  Mishna^  She- 
kalim,  7,  4  ;  Jos.  Ant.  xvi.  G)  ;  and,  in  part  at 
least,  the  ecclesiastical  calendar  was  fixed  at  Jeru- 
salem, whence  beacon-fires  spread  abroad  the  true 
date  of  the  new-moons  (Mishna,  EosK-Hashana,  2, 
4).  The  tribute  was  indeed  the  simplest  and 
most  striking  outward  proof  of  the  religious  unity 
of  the  nation.  Treasuries  were  established  to  receive 
the  payments  of  different  districts  (Jos.  Ant.  xviii. 
!),  1  ;  cf.  Ant.  xvi.  6,  5,  6),  and  the  collected  sums 
were  forwarded  to  Jerusalem,  as  in  later  times  the 
Mahometan  offerings  were  sent  to  Mecca  (Jost, 
Gesch.  d.  Judcnth.  337  n.;  Cicero  Flacco,  xxviii.). 

At  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  era  the  Dis- 
persion was  divided  into  three  great  sections,  the 
Babylonian,  the  Syrian,  the  Egyptian.  Precedence 
was  yielded  to  the  first.  The  jealousy  which  had 
originally  existed  between  the  poor  who  returned 
to  Palestine  and  their  wealthier  countrymen  at 
Babylon  had  passed  away,  and  Gamaliel  wrote  "  to 
the  sons  of  the  Dispersion  in  Babylonia,  and  to 
our  brethren  in  Media  .  .  .  and  to  all  the  Dispersion 
of  Israel"  (Frankel,  Monatsschrift,  1853,  p.  413). 
From  Babylon  the  Jews  spread  throughout  Persia, 
Media,  and  Parthia;  but  the  settlements  in  China 
belong  to  a  modem  date  (Frankel,  1.  c.  p.  4G3). 
The  few  details  of  their  history  which  have  been 
preserved  bear  witness  to  their  prosperity  and  in- 
fluence (Jos.  Ant.  xiii.  2,  2  f.  xviii.  9).  No  schools 
of  learning  are  noticed,  but  Hillel  the  Elder  and 
Nahum  the  Mede  are  mentioned  as  coming  from 
Babylon  to  Jerusalem  (Frankel). 

The  Greek  conquests  in  Asia  extended  the  limits 
of  the  Dispersion.  Seleucus  Nicator  transplanted 
large  bodies  of  Jewish  colonists  from  Babylonia  to 
the  capitals  of  his  western  provinces.     Hi-  polic} 


DISPERSION,  JEWS  OF  THE    441 

was  followed  by  his  successor  Antiochus  the  Great ; 
and  the  persecutions  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  only 
served  to  push  forward  the  Jewish  emigration  to 
the  remoter  districts  of  his  empire.  In  Armenia 
the  Jews  arrived  at  the  greatest  dignities,  and 
Nisibis  became  a  new  centre  of  colonization  (Frankel, 
pp.  454-6).  The  Jews'  of  Cappadocia  (1  Pet.  i.  1  ) 
are  casually  mentioned  in  the  Mishna;  and  a  prince 
and  princess  of  Adiabene  adopted  the  Jewish  faith 
only  30  years  before  the  destruction  of  the  Temple 
(Jos.  Ant.  xx.  2).  Large  settlements  of  Jews  were 
established  in  Cyprus,  in  the  islands  of  the  Aegaean 
(Cos,  Delos:  Jos.  Ant.  xiv.  10),  and  on  the  western 
coast  of  Asia  Minor  (Ephesus,  Miletus,  Pergamus, 
Halicarnassus,  Sardis:  Jos.  Ant.  1.  c).  The  Romans 
confirmed  to  them  the  privileges  which  they  had 
obtained  from  the  Syrian  kings ;  and  though  they 
were  exposed  to  sudden  outbursts  of  popular  vio- 
lence (Jos.  Ant.  xviii.  9;  B.J.  vii.  3),  the  Jews 
of  the  Syrian  provinces  gradually  formed  a  closer 
connexion  with  their  new  homes,  and  together  with 
the  Greek  language  adopted  in  many  respects  Greek 
ideas.     [Hellenists.] 

This  Hellenizing  tendency,  however,  found  its 
most  free  development  at  Alexandria  [Alex- 
andria]. The  Jewish  settlements  established 
there  by  Alexander  and  Ptolemy  I.  became  the 
source  of  the  African  dispersion,  which  spread  over 
the  north  coast  of  Africa,  and  perhaps  inland  to 
Abyssinia  (the  Falasha).  At  Cyrene  (Jos.  Ant. 
xiv.  7,  2.  Jason)  and  Berenice  (Tripoli)  the  Jewish 
inhabitants  formed  a  considerable  portion  of  the 
population,  and  an  inscription  lately  discovered  at 
the  latter  place  (Frankel,  p.  422)  speaks  of  the 
justice  and  clemency  which  they  received  from  a 
Roman  governor  (cf.  Jos.  Ant.  xvi.  G,  5).  The 
African  Dispersion,  like  all  other  Jews,  preserved 
their  veneration  for  the  "  holy  city  "  ( Philo,  Leg. 
ad  Caidum,  §36;  in  Flacc.  c.  7),  and  recognised 
the  universal  claims  of  the  Temple  by  the  annual 
tribute  (Jos.  l.'c).  But  the  distinction  in  language 
led  to  'wider  differences,  which  were  averted  in 
Babylon  by  the  currency  of  an  Aramaic  dialect. 
The  Scriptures  were  no  longer  read  on  the  Sabbath 
(Frankel,  420;  Vorstudien,  52  ff.),  and  no  fire- 
signals  conveyed  the  dates  of  the  new-moons  to 
Egypt  (cf.  Frankel,  419  n.).  Still  the  national 
spirit  of  the  African  Jews  was  not  destroyed. 
After  the  destruction  of  the  Temple  the  Zealots 
found  a  reception  in  Cyrene  ( Joseph.  D.  J.  vii.  1 1) ; 
and  towards  the  close  of  the  reign  of  Trajan,  A.D. 
115,  the  Jewish  population  in  Africa  rose  with  ter- 
rible ferocity  (Dion,  68,  32).  The  insurrection  was 
put  down  by  a  war  of  extermination  (Euseb.  H.  E. 
iv.  2)  ;  and  the  remnant  who  escaped  established 
themselves  on  the  opposite  coast  of  Europe,  as  the 
beginning  of  a  new  Dispersion. 

The  Jewish  settlements  in  Rome  were  consequent 
upon  the  occupation  of  Jerusalem  by  Pompey,  B.C. 
63.  The  captives  and  emigrants  whom  he  brought 
with  him  were  located  in  the  trans-Tiberine quarter, 
and  by  degrees  rose  in  station  and  importance  (Philo, 
Leg.  ad  Caium,  §§23  ff.).  They  were  favoured  by 
Augustus  and  Tiberius  after  the  fall  of  Sejanus 
(Philo,  1.  c);  and  a  Jewish  school  was  founded  at 
Rome  (Frankel,  459).  In  the  reign  of  Claudius 
[CLAUDIUS]  the  Jews  became  objects  of  suspicion 
from  their  immense  numbers  (Dion,  60,  6);  and 
the  internal  disputes  consequent,  perhaps,  upon  the 
preaching  of  Christianity,  led  to  their  banishment 
from  the  city  (Suot.  ('haul.  '_;.'>  :    Imlm-ns  im/mlstm- 

Chresto  assidue  tumultuantes  Ii<nn<t  expulit.    Acts 


442 


DIVINATION 


xviii.  2).  This  expulsion,  it' general,  can  only  have 
been  temporary,  for  in  a  few  years  the  Jews  at  Rome 
were  numerous  (Acts  xxvfii.  17  ff.),and  continued  to 
be  sufficiently  conspicuous  to  attract  the  attention 
of  the  satirists  (Mart.  Ep.  xi.  94 ;  Juv.  Sat.  iii.  14). 

The  influence  of  the  Dispersion  on  the  rapid  pro- 
mulgation of  Christianity  can  scarcely  be  overrated. 
The  course  of  the  apostolic  preaching  followed  in  a 
regular  progress  the  line  of  Jewish  settlements. 
The  mixed  assembly  from  which  the  first  converts 
were  gathered  on  the  day  of  Pentecost  represented 
each  division  of  the  Dispersion  (Acts  ii.  9-11  ;  (1) 
Parthians  .  .  .  Mesopotamia ;  (2)  Judaea  (i.  e. 
Syria)  .  .  .  Pamphylia ;  (3)  Egypt  .  .  .  Greece ; 
(4)  Romans  .  .  .  ),  and  these  converts  naturally 
prepared  the  way  for  the  apostles  in  the  interval 
which  preceded  the  beginning  of  the  separate 
apostolic  missions.  The  names  of  the  seven  dea- 
cons are  all  Greek,  and  one  is  specially  described 
as  a  proselyte  (Acts  vi.  5).  The  church  at  An- 
tioch,  by  which  St.  Paul  was  entrusted  with  his 
great  work  among  the  heathen  (Acts  xiii.  1),  in- 
cluded Barnabas  of  Cyprus  (Acts  iv.  36),  Lucius 
of  Cyrene,  and  Simeon,  surnamed  Niger ;  and 
among  his  '  fellow-labourers '  at  a  later  time  are 
found  Aquila  of  Pontus  (Acts  xviii.  2),  Apollos  of 
Alexandria  (Acts  xviii.  24;  cf.  1  Cor.  iii.  6),  and 
Urbanus  (Rom.  xvi.  9),  aud  Clement  (Phil.  iv.  3), 
whose  names,  at  least,  are  Roman.  Antioch  itself 
became  a  centre  of  the  Christian  Church  (Acts 
xiii.  1,  xiv.  26,  xv.  22,  xviii.  22),  as  it  had 
been  of  the  Jewish  Dispersion  ;  and  throughout 
the  apostolic  journeys  the  Jews  were  the  class  to 
whom  "  it  was  necessary  (avayKaAov)  that  the 
Word  of  God  should  be  first  spoken"  (Acts  xiii. 
46),  and  they  in  turn  were  united  with  the  mass 
of  the  population  by  the  intermediate  body  of  "  the 
devout"  (ot  aefi&iAevoi),  which  had  recognised  in 
various  degrees  "  the  faith  of  the  God  of  Israel." 

The  most  important  original  authorities  on  the 
Dispersion  are  Joseph.  Ant.  xiv.  *10,  xiv.  7  ;  c. 
Apion.  ii.  5  ;  Philo,  Leg.  ad  Caium ;  id.  c.  Flac- 
cum.  Frankel  has  collected  the  various  points 
together  in  an  exhaustive  essay  in  his  Monatsschrift, 
Nov.  Dec.  1853,  409-11  ;  449-51.  Cf.  Jost. 
Gesch.  d.  Judenth.  336 ;  344.  Ewald,  Gesch.  d. 
Volkes  Isr.  iv.  [B.  F.  YV\] 

DIVINATION  (0Di?E> ;  fiavrtla,  Ez.  xiii.  7  ; 
/.layeia,  Wisd.  xvii.  7  ;  D^Qt^'S,  <pa.pixa.Ktia,  vene- 
fcium,  dininatio,  Is.  xlvii.  9  ;  WTw,  ^i6vpKrfj.bs, 
&c).  This  art  "  of  taking  an  aim  of  divine  matters 
by  human,  which  cannot  but  breed  mixture  of  ima- 
ginations "  (Bacon,  Ess.  xvii.)  has  been  universal 
in  all  ages,  and  all  nations  alike  civilized  and 
savage.  It  arises  from  an  impression  that  in  the 
absence  of  direct,  visible  guiding  Providence,  the 
Deity  suffers  His  will  to  be  known  to  men,  partly  by 
inspiring  those  who  from  purity  of  character  or  ele- 
vation of  spirit  were  susceptible  of  the  divine  afflatus 
(9ao/xa.vTeis,  evQovtnacrrai,  zKcrraTiKoi),  and  partly 
by  giving  perpetual  indications  of  the  future,  which 
must  be  learnt  from  experience  and  observation 
(Cic.  Div.  i.  18  ;  Plin.  xxx.  5).  The  first  kind  of 
divination  was  called  Natural  (arexvos,  aSi'Sa/c- 
ros),  in  which  the  medium  of  inspiration  was  trans- 
ported from  his  own  individuality,  and  became  the 
passive  instrument  of  supernatural  utterances  (Aen. 
vi.  47  ;  Ov.  Met.  ii.  640,  &c).  As  this  process 
involved  violent  convulsions,  the  word  /j.ai/TiK^j  is 
derived  from  /xaifscrOai,  aud  alludes  to  the  foaming 
mouth    and  streaming  hair  of  the  possessed  seer 


DIVINATION 

(Plat.  Tim.  72.  B.,  where  the  fxavris  is  carefully 
distinguished  from  the  -Kpo(pi\T7]s).  But  even  in 
the  most  passionate  and  irresistible  prophecies  of 
Scripture  we  have  none  of  these  unnatural  distortions 
(Num.  xxiii.  5  ;  Ps.  xxxix.  3  ;  Jer.  xx.  9),  although, 
as  we  shall  see,  they  were  characteristic  of  pre- 
tenders to  the  gift. 

The  other  kind  of  divination  was  artificial  (t6^- 
vikt]),  and  probably  originated  in  an  honest  convic- 
tion that  external  nature  sympathised  with  and  fre- 
quently indicated  the  condition  and  prospects  of 
mankind  ;  a  conviction  not  in  itself  ridiculous,  and 
fostered  by  the  accidental  synchronism  of  natural 
phenomena  with  human  catastrophes  (Thuc.  iii. 
89  ;  Jos.  B.  J.  vi.  5,  §3  ;  Foxe's  Martyrs,  iii.  406, 
&c).  When  once  this  feeling  was  established  the 
supposed  manifestations  were  infinitely  multiplied, 
and  hence  the  numberless  forms  of  imposture  or 
ignorance  called  kapnomancy,  pyromancy,  arithmo- 
mancy,  libanomaucy,  botanomancy,  kephalomancy, 
&c,  of  which  tnere  are  abundant  accounts  in  Cic. 
de  Div. ;  Cardan  de  Sapientia ;  Anton,  v.  Dale,  de 
Orig.  Idol. ;  Fabricius,  Bibl.  Ant.  pp.  409-426  ; 
Carpzov.  App.  Crit.  540-549  ;  Potter's  Antiq.  i. 
ch.  viii.  sq.  Indeed  there  was  scarcely  any  possible 
event  or  appearance  which  was  not  pressed  into  the 
service  of  augury,  and  it  may  be  said  of  the  ancient 
Greeks  and  Romans,  as  of  the  modern  New  Zea- 
landers,  that  "  after  uttering  their  karakias  (or 
charms)  the  whistling  of  the  wind,  the  moving  of 
trees,  the  flash  of  lightning,  the  peal  of  thunder, 
the  flying  of  a  bird,  even  the  buzz  of  an  insect 
would  be  regarded  as  an  answer"  (Taylor's  New 
Zealand,  p.  74;  Bowring's  Siam,  i.  153  sq.).  A 
system  commenced  in  fanaticism  ended  in  deceit. 
Hence  Cato's  famous  saying  that  it  was  strange 
how  two  augurs  could  meet  without  laughing  in 
each  other's  face.  But  the  supposed  knowledge 
became  in  all  nations  an  engine  of  political  power, 
and  hence  interest  was  enlisted  in  its  support  (Cic. 
de  Legg.  ii.  12  ;  Liv.  vi.  27  ;  Soph.  Ant.  1055; 
Mic.  iii.  11).  It  fell  into  the  hands  of  a  priestly 
caste  (Gen.  xli.  8  ;  Is.  xlvii.  13  ;  Jer.  v.  31  ;  Dan. 
ii.  2),  who  in  all  nations  made  it  subservient  to 
their  own  purposes.  Thus  in  Persia,  Chardin  says 
that  the  astrologers  would  make  even  the  Shah  rise 
at  midnight  and  travel  in  the  worst  weather  in 
obedience  to  their  suggestions. 

The  invention  of  divination  is  ascribed  to  Prome- 
theus (Aesch.  Pr.  Vinct.  492),  to  the  Phrygians 
and  Etrurians,  especially  sages  (Cic.  de  Div.  1 ; 
and  Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  i.  326,  where  there  is  a 
great  deal  more  on  the  subject),  or  (as  by  the 
Fathers  generally)  to  the  devil  (Finnic.  Matemus 
de  Errore,  Prooem ;  Lactant.  ii.  16  :  Mimic.  Felix. 
Oct.  27).  In  the  same  way  Zoroaster  ascribes  all 
magic  to  Ahriman  (Nork,  Bram.  und  Sab.  p.  97). 
Similar  opinions  have  prevailed  in  modern  times 
(Sir  Thomas  Browne,  Vulg.  Err.  i.  xi.). 

Many  forms  of  divination  are  mentioned  in  Scrip- 
ture, and  the  subject  is  so  frequently  alluded  to 
that  it  deserves  careful  examination.  We  shall 
proceed  to  give  a  brief  analysis  of  its  main  aspects 
as  presented  in  the  sacred  writers,  following  as  far 
as  possible  the  order  of  the  books  in  which  the  pro- 
fessors of  the  art  are  spoken  of. 

They  are  first  mentioned  as  a  prominent  body  m 
the  Egyptian  court,  Gen.  xli.  8.  1.  C'ELnn 
(e^VyVTa.1;  Hesych.  <5irepl  Upeiviv  ko.\  SiouTiixdwv 
i^riyovfj.(vos  ;  Aqu.  Kpv<pta<TTa\).  They  were  a 
class  of  Egyptian  priests,  eminent  for  learning 
(LepoypaMJ.aTe'is).     The  name  may  be  derived  from 


DIVINATION 

D"in,  a  style;  or,  according  to  Jablonski,  from  an 
Egyptian  word  Chertom  =  thcsumaturgus  (Gesen. 
s.  v.).  For  other  conjectures  see  Kalisch,  Gen.  p. 
047;  Heidegger.  Hist.  Pair.  xx.  23.  Of  course  it 
must  have  the  same  derivation  in  Dan.  i.  20,  and 
therefore  cannot  be  from  the  Chaldee  Dhardamand 
=  skilled  in  science  (Jahn,  Arch.  Bibl.  §402).  If 
their  divination  was  connected  with  drawn  figures, 
it  is  paralleled  by  the  Persian  Eummal  (Calmet)  ; 
the  modern  Egyptian  Zd'irgeh,  a  table  of  letters 
ascribed  to  I  drees  or  Enoch  (Lane,  i.  354),  the  re- 
nowned Chinese  y-King,  lines  discovered  by  Fouhi 
on  the  back  of  a  tortoise,  which  explain  everything, 
and  on  which  1450  learned  commentaries  have  been 
written  (Hue's  China,  i.  123  sq.);  and  the  Jamassu 
or  marks  on  paper,  of  Japan  (Kempfer's  Hist. 
eh.  xv.). 

2.  D^DI"!  (<To<pi<TT<x\,  Ex.  vii.  11  ;  Suid.  ovtcos 
eKtyov  irdvTas  robs  Trtircu5evp:4vovs  ;  conjectores). 
Possibly  these,  as  well  as  their  predecessors,  were 
merely  a  learned  class,  invested  by  vulgar  super- 
stition with  hidden  power.  Daniel  was  made  head 
of  the  college  by  Nebuchadnezzar  (Dan.  v.  11). 

3.  D^SKbp  (hraoiSol,  Ex.  vii.  11,  D*BB>3, 
(pap/j.aico\  ;  incantatores  :  the  variety  of  words 
used  in  the  versions  to  render  these  names,  shows 
how  vague  was  the  meaning  attached  to  them). 
The  original  meaning  of  P|t'3  is  to  mutter;  and 
in  Ex.  vii.  11,  the  word  seems  to  denote  mere 
jugglers,  of  the  class  to  which  belonged  Jannes  and 
Jambres  (2  Tim.  iii.  8).     How  they  produced  the 

•  wonders  which  hardened  the  heart  of  Pharaoh,  whe- 
ther by  mechanical  or  chemical  means,  or  by  mere 
legerdemain,  or  by  demoniacal  assistance  (as  sup- 
posed by  the  Fathers,  and  Joseph.  Ant,  ii.  5),  it 
is  idle  to  conjecture.  Michaelis  (adopting  an  Arabic 
derivation  of  P|C3)  explains  them  to  be  "  astro- 
logers," such  as  in  ancient  times  were  supposed 
(from  their  power  to  foretel  eclipses,  &c.)  to  be 
able  to  control  the  sun  and  moon  by  spells  (Virg. 
Aen.  iv.  489;  Ov.  Met.  xii.  263.  "While  the 
labouring  moon  eclipses  at  their  charms,"  Milton. 
"  A  witch,  and  one  so  strong  she  could  control  the 
moon,"  Shaksp.  The  Tempest).  Women  were  sup- 
posed to  be  peculiarly  addicted  to  these  magical  arts 
(Ex.  xxii.  18),  which  were  forbidden  to  the  Jews 
ou  theocratic  grounds,  independently  of  their  liabi- 
lity to  abuse. 

4.  D'OITP,  Lev.  xix.  31,  xx.  6  (yvoxnal, 
sciolae  •  wizards,  from  JHV  to  know  :  cf.  wciscr 
Mann,  Huge  Frau,  as  Sai/xccv,  from  Sdri/xt) :  those 
that  could  by  whatever  means  reveal  the  future. 
The  Pabbis  derive  this  word  from  a  certain  beast 
Jaddua,  in  shape  like  a  man  (KaTa/3Ae7ra5a),  the 
bones  of  which  the  diviner  held  in  his  teetli 
(  Maimon.  <le  ['Id.  vi.  3  ;  Bulenger,  de  Div.  iii.  3:; ; 
Delrio,  Disquis.  Mag.  iv.  2  ;  Godwyn's  Mos.  Sf  Aar. 
iv.  10).  The  Greek  diviner  ate  rot  tcvptwTara 
p.6pia  £&u>v  fiavriK&v  (Porphyr.  de  Abstinent,  ii.). 
For  other  bone  divinations  see  Rubruquis'  China,  p. 
05,  ami  Pennant's  Scotland,  p.  88  (in  Pinkerton). 

5.  n'UIX,  Lev.  xx.  0;  Is.  viii.  19,  xix.  3; 
iyya<TTp[jxv6oL,  vcKpop.dvTtis  ;  qui  Pythones  con- 
sulet,  nentriloqui)  [D*t3K,  Is-  xix.  3].  The  word 
properly  means  "  spirits  of  the  dead,"  and  then 
by  an  easy  metonomy  those  who  consulted  them 
(3/IX  btp,  Dent,  xviii.  10;    D^SH  bii  P'J'Tl  ; 


DIVINATION 


443 


oc  €irepaiT<A>vT€s  rovs  vexpovs,  quaerens  a  mortuis 
veritatem.  But  Shuckford,  who  denies  that  the 
Jews  in  early  ages  believed  in  spirits,  makes  it 
mean  "consulters  of  dead  idols,"  Connect,  ii.  395, 
sq.).  They  are  also  called  Pythones;  tyyaarp. 
ird\ai  vvvl  YlvQoivas  Ka\ovfi4vovs  (Pint,  de  Def. 
Or.  414;  Cic.  de  Div.  i.  19).  Hence  the  irvevfxa 
Xlvdwvos,  Acts  xvi.  16.  These  ventriloquys 
"peeped  and  muttered"  (cf.  rpi£eiv,  II.  w\\\. 
101,  "  squeak  and  gibber,"  Shaksp.  Jul.  Cues.) 
from  the  earth  to  imitate  the  voice  of  the  revealing 
"familiar"  (Is.  xxix.  4,  &c. ;  1  Sam.  xxviii.  8^ 
Lev.  xx.  27,  cf.  (Trepfo/navris,  Soph.  Fraij.)  y\H 
properly  means  a  bottle  (Job  xxxii.  19),  and  was 
applied  to  the  magician,  because  he  was  supposed 
to  be  inflated  by  the  spirit  (baifxovoK-nTTTbs),  like 
the  ancient  EvpvK\e?s  {fls  aWorpias  yavrtpas 
evbvs,  At.  Vesp.  1017 .malum  spiritum  per  vcrenda 
naturae  excipicbat.  Schol.  in  Ar.  Plut.).  Of  this 
class  was  the  witch  of  Endor  (Jos.  Ant.  vi.  14,  §2), 
in  whose  case  intended  imposture  may  have  been 
overruled  into  genuine  necromancy  (Ecclus.  xlvi. 
2d).  On  this  wide  subject  see  Chrysost.  ad  1  Cor. 
xii. ;  Tert.  adv.  Marc.  iv.  25,  de  Anima,  57  ;  Aug. 
dedoctr.  Christ.  §33  ;  Cic.  Tusc.  Disp.  i.  10,  and  the 
commentators  on  Aen.  vi. ;  Critici  Sacri,  vi.  331  ; 
Winer,  s.  r.  TodtenbescKworer ;  Le  Moyne,  Var. 
Sacr,  p.  993,  sq. ;  Selden,  de  Diis  Syr.'i.  2,  and 
above  all  Bottcher,  de  Inferis,  pp.  101-121,  where 
the  research  displayed  is  marvellous.  Those  who 
sought  inspiration,  either  from  the  demons  or  the 
spirits  of  the  dead,  haunted  tombs  and  caverns  (Is. 
lxv.  4),  and  invited  the  unclean  communications  by 
voluntary  fasts  (Maimon.  de  Idol.  ix.  15  ;  Lightfoot, 
Hor.  Hebr.  ad  Matt.  x.  1).  That  the  supposed  tyv- 
XOfJ-avrela  was  often  efiected  by  ventriloquism  and 
illusion  is  certain ;  for  a  specimen  of  this  even  in 
modem  times  see  the  Life  of  Benvenuto  Cellini. 

6.  DV3Dp  EDp  (iJ-avTevS/j.ei'oi  ixavriiav;  qui 
ariolos  sciscitetur :  Deut.  xviii.  10).  (As  the 
most  complete  list  of  diviners  is  given  in  this 
passage,  we  shall  follow  the  order  of  the  kinds 
there  enumerated.)  This  word  involves  the  notion 
of"  cutting,"  and  therefore  may  be  connected  with 
the  Chald.  p")T3  (from  ITS,  to  cut),  Dan.  ii.  27, 
iv.  4,  &c,  and  be  taken  to  mean  astrologers,  magi, 
genethliaci,  &c.  {Diet,  of  Ant.  Art.  Astroloyia ; 
Juv.  vi.  582,  sq. ;  Diod.  Sic.  ii.  30;  Winer,  s.  rv. 
Magier,  Sterne).  Others  refer  it  to  the  KK-npo- 
fj-avrtis  (Schol.  ad  Eur.  Hipp.  1057),  since  the 
use  of  lots  was  very  familiar  to  the  Jews  (Gataker 
"//  Lots,  adinit.)  ;  but  it  required  no  ait  to  explain 
their  use,  for  they  were  regarded  as  directly  uudei 
God's  control  (Num.  xxvi.  55  ;  Esth.  iii.  7  ;  Prov. 
\vi.  33,  xviii.  18).  Both  lots  and  digitorum 
micatio  (odd  and  even)  were  used  in  distributing 
the  duties  of  the  Temple  (Otho,  Lee.  Bab.  s.  v. 
Digitis  micando). 

7.  piyp,  Mic.  v.  12;  2  K.  xxi.  6;  observans 
somnia ;  A.  V.  "an  observer  of  times;"  k\t)- 
Sovi£o/xevos  (always  in  I. XX.,  except  in  Lev.  xix.  26, 
wheie  probably  they  followed  a  differenl  reading, 
from  Spl?,  a  hint,  opvidoo-KowfTv)  =  6  (K  TWV  \a- 
\ovp.ivaiv  err oxo-^6 /xivos,  Lex.  ('fir.;  anb  okotjs, 
Hesych.  It  is  derived  from  py,  to  cover,  ami  may 
mean  gen  rally  "using  hidden  aits"  i  Is.  ii.  ii  ; 
Jer.  xxvii.  Hi.  If  the  I, XX.  understand  it  cor- 
rectly, it  liters  to  that  \6ywv  irapcnripritTis  (Suid.), 
which  was  common  among  the  Jews,  and  which 


444 


DIVINATION 


they  called  Bath  Kol ;  of  which  remarkahle  in- 
stances are  found  in  Gen.  xxiv.  14;  1  Sam.  xiv.  9, 
10;  IK.  xx.  33.  After  the  extinction  of  the 
spirit  of  prophecy  it  was  considered  by  the  Jews  as 
a  sort  of  substitute  for  the  loss.  For  a  curious  dis- 
sertation on  it  see  Lightfoot,  ad  Matt.  iii.  13.  A 
belief  in  the  significance  of  chance  words  was  very 
prevalent  among  the  Egyptians  (Clem.  Alex.  Strom. 
i.  304 ;  Plut.  de  Is.  14),  and  the  accidental  sigh 
of  the  engineer  was  sufficient  to  prevent  even 
Amasis  from  removing  the  monolithic  shrine  to 
Sais  (Wilkinson,  Anc.  Egypt,  iv.  144).  The  uni- 
versality of  the  belief  among  the  ancients  is  known 
to  every  scholar  (Cic.  de  Div.  i. ;'  Herod,  ii.  90  ; 
Virg.  Aen.  vii.  116,  &c).  From  the  general  theory 
of  the  possibility  of  such  omens  sprang  the  use  of  the 
Sortes  Biblicae,  &c.  (Niceph.  Greg.  viii.  Aug.  Ep. 
119  ;  Prideaux,  Connect,  ii.  376,  &c. ;  Cardan,  de 
Varietate,  p.  1040). 

If  }3ij70  be  derived  from  J^J?,  it  will  mean  "  one 
who  fascinates  with  the  eyes,"  as  in  the  Syr.  Vers, 
(cf.  Vitringa,  Comment,  ad  Is.  ii.  6).  A  belief  in 
the  6(p6aKfj.bs  pdcncavos  QTl  )*)))  was  universal, 
and  is  often  alluded  to  in  Scripture  (Deut.  xxiii. 
6;  Matt.  xx.  15;  ToK  iv.  7,  jur/  (pOorniaaToo  aov 
5  6<pda\fj.6s,  1  Sam.  xviii.  9.  "  Saul  eyed  David  "). 
The  well-known  passages  of  Pliny  and  the  ancients 
on  the  subject  are  collected  in  Potter's  Ant.  i. 
383,  sq. 

Others  again  make  the  W'ii]}  (Is.  ii.  6,  &c), 
"soothsayers,"  who  predicted  "times"  as  in 
A.  V.,  from  the  observation  of  the  clouds  (Aben 
Ezra  on  Lev.  xix.  26)  and  other  Stotrtifiiai,  as  light- 
nings, comets,  meteors,  &c.  (Jer.  x.  2),  like  the 
Etruscan  Fulguratores  (Cic.  Div.  i.  18 ;  Plin.  ii. 
43, 53  ;  Plut.  de  Superst. ;  Horn.  Od.  v.  102  ;  Virg. 
Eel.  i.  16;  Humboldt's  Cosmos,  ii.  135,  ed.  Sabine). 
Possibly  the  position  of  the  diviner  in  making  these 
observations  originated  the  Jewish  names  for  East 
and  West,  viz.,  front  and  back  (Godwyn,  iv.  10, 
but  Carpzov  disputes  the  assertion,  Ap.  Crit.  p. 
541).  The  practice  naturally  led  to  the  tabulation 
of  certain  days  as  lucky  or  unlucky  (Job  iii.  5, 
"monthly  prognosticators ;"  Is.  xlvii.  13,  rifiepas 
irapa.Tripe'iffde,  Gal.  iv.  10),  just  as  the  Greeks  and 
Romans  regarded  some  days  as  candidi,  others  as 
atri  (Hes.  Opp.  et  D.  770  ;  Suet.  Aug.  92,  &c). 
If  we  had  space,  every  one  of  the  superstitions 
alluded  to  might  be  paralleled  in  modern  times. 

In  Judg.  ix.  37,  the  expression  "  terebinth  of 
Meoncnim  (enchantments) "  refers  not  so  much  to 
the  general  sacredness  of  great  trees  (Horn.  Od.  xiv. 
328,  habitae  Graiis  oracula  quercus,  Virg.  Georg.), 
as  to  the  fact  that  (probably)  here  Jacob  had  buried 
his  amulets  (Gen.  xxxv.  4 ;  Stanley,  Sin.  §  Pal. 
p.  142). 

8.  0^1130  {olwvi^Sfiivoi ;  observantes  au- 
guria;  Ps.  lvi'ii.  5;  2  K.  xvii.  17,  xxi.  6,  &c.)  : 
A.  V.  enchanters ;  ophiomants  (Bochart,  Hicroz. 
ii.  p.  383),  from  5JTIJ,  to  hiss;  people  who,  like 
the  ancient  Psylli  (Plin.  //.  N.  vii.  2,  xviii.  4)  and 
Marmaridae  (Sil.  Ital.  iii.  301), 

"  Ad  quorum  cantus  serpens  oblita  veneni, 
Ad  quorum  tactum  mites  jacuere  cerastae," 

were  supposed  to  render  serpents  innocuous  and 
obedient  (Ex.  vii.  9  ;  Jer.  viii.  17;  Eccl.  x.  11), 
chiefly  by  the  power  of  music  (Nicand.  Meriac. 
162;  Luc.  ix.  891 ;  Sil.  Ital.  8,  495;  Am.  vii.  753; 
Nielmhr's  Travels,  i.  189);  but  also  no  doubt  by 


DIVINATION 

the  possession  of  some  genuine  and  often  hereditary 
secret  (Lane,  Mod.  Egypt,  ii.  106,  sq. ;  Arnob. 
adv.  Gent.  ii.  32).  They  had  a  similar  power  over 
scorpions  (Francklen's  Tour  to  Persia).  The  whole 
subject  is  exhausted  by  Bochart  {Hicroz.  Tom.  II. 
iii.  6,  de  As.  fide  Surdd). 

CTI3  has,,  however,  a  general  meaning  of  "  learn- 
ing by  experience,"  like  "  to  augur,"  in  English,  Gen. 
xxx.  27  ;  either  because  ophiomancy  (Ter.  I'horm. 
iv.  4,  26)  was  common,  or  because  the  word  meant 
(as  the  Rabbis  say)  an  observation -of  eYoSta  (tvjx- 
fioXa,  &c.  (Jer.  x.  2;  Plin.  xxviii.  5,  7).  Some 
understand  it  of  divinatio  ex  pelvibus  (Plin.  H.  N. 
xxx.  2  ;  Poli  Syn.  ad  Deut.  xviii.  10). 

9.  C'Q&'DD  (tpapfiaKol  ;  malefici,  venefici ; 
A.  V.  wizards),  from  the  Arabic,  "  to  reveal," 
meaning  not  only  astrologers  proper  (Chaldaeans), 
but  generally  all  the  professed  occult  means  of  dis- 
covering the  unknown.  It  might  no  doubt  in- 
volve the  use  of  divining-rods  for  the  purpose  of 
Aquaelicium,  &c,  dependent  on  physical  laws  only 
partially  understood  (Mayo's  Pop.  Superstitions). 

10.  D"H3n  "On  (eiraeltiovTes  iiraoiS^v;  in- 
cantatores),  from  *13n,  to  bind  (cf.  bannen  =  binden, 
Gesen.  s.  v.).  Those  who  acquired  power  by  utter- 
ing spells,  &c.  (/caTaSea) ;  and  v/xvos  Seff/xios,  Aesch. 
Eum.  296  ; 

"  So  the  spell  now  works  around  thee, 
And  the  clankless  chain  hath  bound  thee." 

Manfred,  i.  1.) 

Ill  Onkelos  it  is  rendered  pD"l,  a  mutterer ;  and 
this  would  connect  these  "  enchanters"  with  the 
Nekromanteis  (No.  5.  Is.  xxix.  4). 

11.  Belomants.  Alluded  to  in  Ez.  xxi.  21, 
where  Nebuchadnezzar,  at  the  parting  of  two  ways, 
uses  divination  to  decide  whether  he  shall  proceed 

against  Jerusalem  or  Rabbah,  and  D'^'nS  /p7i? 
(rov  avafip&g  at.  bafibov,  LXX. ;  but  it  should  be 
rather  pityai  jii\T),  or  as  Vulg.  commiscens  sagittas; 
the  other  explanations  are  untenable).  Jerome  [ad 
he.)  explains  it  of  mingling  in  a  quiver  arrows  on 
which. were  inscribed  the  names  of  various  cities, 
that  city  being  attacked  the  name  of  which  was 
drawn  out  (Prid.  Connect,  i.  85).  Estius  says  "  he 
threw  up  a  bundle  of  arrows  to  see  which  way 
they  would  light,  and  falling  on  the  right  hand  he 
marched  towards  Jerusalem,  The  A.  V.  "made 
his  arrows  bright,"  seems  to  allude  to  a  sort  of 
fftSr^pofiavrela, — incorrectly.  The  arrows  .used 
were  particoloured  and  7  such  were  kept  at  Mecca. 
Pietro  della  Valle  saw  a  divination  derived  from 
the  changes  of  8  arrows  at  Aleppo,  and  attributed 
it  to  diabolical  agency.  We  read  of  a  somewhat 
similar  custom  in  use  among  the  ancient  Teutons 
(Tac.  Germ,  x.),  and  among  the  Alani  (Am.  Marcell. 
xxxi.)  :  also  among  the  modern  Egyptians  (Lane, 
ii.  111.).  "  But  of  another  kind  was  that  practised 
by  Elisha,"  2  K.  xiii.  15"  (Sir  Thos.  Browne, 
Vulg.  Errors,  v.  23,  7). 

12.  Closely  connected  with  this  was  £v\ofi.  or 
paPSo/xavTeia  (Hos.  iv.  12)  ?j?D  ?N£*.  Alio 
iffTaures  pd&Sovs  .  .  .  TrntTOvffas  iirsTTipovv  oirov 
(pepoivro,  Cyr.   Alex,  (ad  loc),  and  so  too  Theo- 

■  phylact.  Another  explanation  is  that  the  positive 
or  negative  answer  to  the  required  question  was 
decided  by  the  equal  or  unequal  number  of  spam 
in  the  stall'  (Godwyn,  I.  c).  Parallels  are  found 
among  the  Scythians  (Herod,  iv.  67,  and  Schol. 


DIVINATION 

Nicandri  'S.Kvdat  fivpiKlvcy  /xavTevovTat  £vhai), 
Persians  (Strab.  xv.  p.  847),  Assyrians  (A  then. 
Deipn.  xii.  7),  Chinese  (Stavorinus'  Java  ;  Pinker- 
ton,  xi.  132),  and  New  Zealanders  (called  Niu, 
Taylor's  New  Zeal.  91).  These  kinds  of  divination 
are  expressly  forbidden  in  the  Koran,  and  are  called 
al  Meisar  (ch.  v.  Sale's  Prelim.  Dissert,  p.  89). 

13.  Kv\iKo/.iavreia,  Gen.  xliv.  5  (to  kovSv  rb 
apyvpovv  .  .  .  avTOs  Se  oloiviff/xovs  olavi^erai  iv 
avrcp  ;  Hesych.  k6vSv,  iroTripiov  fiaffihMbv.  In 
quo  augurari  solet.  Parkhurst  aud  others,  deny- 
ing that  divination  is  intended,  make  it  a  mere 
cup  of  office  (Bruce' s  Travels,  ii.  657)  "  for  which 
he  would  search  carefully"  (a  meaning  which  KTIJ 
may  bear).  But  in  all  probability  the  A.  V.  is 
right.  The  Nile  was  called  the  cup  of  Egypt, 
and  the  silver  vessel  which  symbolised  it  had 
prophetic  and  mysterious  properties  (Havernick, 
Introd.  to  the  Pentateuch,  ad  loc).  The  divi- 
nation was  by  means  of  radiations  from  the  water, 
or  from  magically  inscribed  gems,  &c.  thrown  into 
it ;  a  sort  of  vSpofiavreia,  KaToirrpofxavrela,  or 
KpvffraWo/xavreia  (Cardan,  de  rerum  Variet. 
cap.  93),  like  the  famous  mirror  of  ink  (Lane,  ii. 
362),  and  the  crystal  divining  globes,  the  proper- 
ties of  which  depend  on  a  natural  law  brought 
into  notice  in  the  recent  revivals  of  Mesmerism. 
The  jewelled  cup  of  Jemsheed  was  a  divining  cup, 
and  such  a  one  was  made  by  Merlin  (Faerie  Queen, 
iii.  2,  19).  Jul.  Serenus  (de  Fato,  ix.  18)  says 
that  after  certain  incantations,  a  demon  vocem  in- 
star  sibili  edebat  in  aquis.  It  is  curious  to  find 
KvAtKOfiavTela  even  in  the  South  Sea  Islands  (Daily 
Bib.  Tllustr.  i.  424).  For  illustrations  of  Egyp- 
tian cups  see  Wilkinson,  iii.  258.  This  kind  of 
divination  must  not  be  confused  with  Cyathoman- 
teia  (Suid.  s.  v.  KOTTajUfav). 

14.  Consultation  of  TerapTrim  (Zech.  x.  2  ;  Ez. 
xxi.  21  ;  (TrepwrTJaat  iv  tois  yXvirrols  ;  1  Sam. 
xv.  23,  5) "in  =  an  inquirer).  These  were  wooden 
images  (1  Sam.  xix.  13)  consulted  as  "idols," 
from  which  the  excited  worshippers  fancied  that 
they  received  oracular  responses.  The  notion  that 
they  were  the  embalmed  heads  of  infants  on  a  gold 
plate  inscribed  with  the  name  of  an  unclean  spirit, 
is  Rabbi  Eliezer's  invention.  Other  Rabbis  think 
that  they  may  mean  "  astrolabes,  &c."  [Tera- 
piiim.] 

15.  'HiraTOffKoiria,  or  e.rtispicium  (Ez.  xxi.  21, 
KaraffKOTrqcracrQaiA  .riiraTi  /c.,LXX.,  "1233  i"IN~l). 
The  liver  was  the  most  important  part  of  the  sacri- 
fice (Artemid.  Oneirocr.  ii.  74;  Suet.  Aug.  95; 
Cic.  de  Die.  ii.  13;  Sen.  Oedip.  360).  Thus  the 
deaths  of  both  Alexander  and  Hephaestion  were 
foretold  '6ri  &\o/3ov  rb  rjirap  i)v  Upeiov  (Arrian, 
Alex.  vii.  18). 

16.  'OveipofjLavTtla  (Dent.  xiii.  2,  3;  Judg.  vii. 
13;  Jer.  xxiii.  32;  Jos.  Ant.  xvii. 6,  4).  God  fre- 
quently revealed  Himself  by  dreams  when  the  soul 
was  thought  to  be  least  debased  by  contact  with  the 
body  (eSBovtra  yap  <pp^v  6/j.fj.aa'tv  \afxtrpvverai. 
Aesch.  Fimi.).  Many  warnings  occur  in  Scripture 
against  the  impostures  attendant  on  the  interpreta- 
tion of  dreams  (Zech.  x.  2,  &c).  We  find  how- 
ever no  direct  trace  of  seeking  tor  dreams  such  as 
occurs  in  Virg.  Aen.  vii.  81  ;  Plant.  Curcul.  i.  1, 
2,  61.     [Dreams.] 

17.  The  consultation  of  oracles  may  be  consi- 
sidered  as  another  form  of  divination  (Is.  xli.  21- 
24,  xliv.  7).     The  term   oracle   is  applied  to  the 


DIVINATION 


445 


Holy  of  Holies  (1  K.  vi.  16  ;  Ps.  xxviii.  2,  TIT 
Safirjp  to.  ay  la  rwv  aylaiv  bvojxa^i,  Lex.  Ms.  ; 
Hottinger,  Tiies.  Phil.  p.  366).  That  there  were 
several  oracles  of  heathen  gods  known  to  the  Jews 
we  may  infer  both  from  the  mention  of  that  of 
Baal-zebub  at  Ekron  (2  K.  i.  2-6),  and  from  the 
towns  named  Debir.  "  Debir  quod  nos  oraculum 
sive  responsum  possumus  appellare,  et  ut  con- 
tentiosius  verbum  exprimamus  e  verbo  \aK-nri\pwv, 
vel  locutorium  dicere  "  (Hieron.  ad  Eph.  i.).  The 
word  "  oracles "  is  applied  in  the  N.  T.  to  the 
Scriptures  (Acts  vii.  38;  Rom.  iii.  2,  &c).  On 
the  general  subject  of  oracles  see  Anton,  v.  Dale 
de  oraculis ;  Diet,  of  Ant.  Art.  Oraculum  ;  Potter's 
Antiq.  i.  286-326  ;  Sir  T.  Browne,  Tract  xi.,  and 
Vulg.  Err.  vii.  12,  &c. 

18.  It  only  remains  to  allude  to  the  fact  that 
superstitious  importance  was  peculiarly  attached  to 
the  words  of  dying  men.  And  although  the  ob- 
served fact  that  "  men  sometimes  at  the  hour  of 
their  departure  do  speak  and  reason  above  them- 
selves "  (Relig.  Medici,  xi.)  does  not  of  course  take 
away  from  the  death -bed  prophecies  of  Scripture 
their  supernatural  character  (Gen.  xlix. ;  2  K.  xiii., 
&c),  yet  it  is  interesting  to  find  that  there  are 
analogies  which  resemble  them  (II.  xxii.  355  ;  and 
the  story  of  Calanus ;  Cic.  de  Div.  i.  30 ;  Shaksp. 
Rich.  ii.  2,  1 ;   Daniell,  Civil  Wars,  iii.  62,  &c). 

Moses  forbade  every  species  of  divination  (cf. 
Koran,  ch.  v.  ;  Cato  de  Re  Rust.  5,  vand  super- 
stitione  rudes  animus  infestant,  Columell.  ii.  1), 
because  a  prying  into  the  future  clouds  the  mind 
with  superstition,  and  because  it  would  have  been 
(as  indeed  it  proved  to  be,  Is.  ii.  6 ;  2  K.  xxi.  6) 
an  incentive  to  idolatry;  indeed  the  frequent  de- 
nunciations of  the  sin  in  the  prophets  tend  to 
prove  that  these  forbidden  arts  presented  peculiar 
temptations  to  apostate  Israel  (Hottinger,  Jur. 
Hebr.  Lex.  253,  254).  But  God  supplied  his 
people  with  substitutes  for  divination,  which 
would  have  rendered  it  superfluous,  and  left  them 
in  no  doubt  as  to  his  will  in  circumstances  of 
danger,  had  they  continued  faithful.  It  was  only 
when  they  were  unfaithful  that  the  revelation  was 
withdrawn  (1  Sam.  xxviii.  6 ;  2  Sam.  ii.  1  ;  v.  23, 
&c.).  According  to  the  Rabbis  the  Urim  and 
Thummim  lasted  until  the  temple;  the  spirit  of 
prophecy  until  Malachi ;  and  the  Bath  Kol,  as  the 
sole  means  of  guidance  from  that  time  downwards 
(Lightfoot,  I.  c.  ;  Maimonides,  de  Fundam.  Leg. 
cap.  7;   Abarbanel  Prolegg.  in  Daniel.). 

How  far  Moses  and  the  Prophets  believed  in  the 
reality  of  necromancy,  &c,  as  distinguished  from 
various  forms  of  imposture  is  a  question  which  at 
present  does  not  concern  us.  But  even  if,  in  those 
times,  they  did  hold  such  a  belief,  no  one  will  now 
urge  that  we  are  bound  to  do  so  at  the  present  day. 
And  yet  such  was  the  opinion  of  Bacon,  Bp.  Hall, 
Baxter,  Sir  Thos.  Browne,  Lavater,  Glanville.  Henry 
More,  and  numberless  other  eminent  men.  Such  also 
was  the  opinion  which  led  Sir  M.  Hale  to  burn  Amy 
Dunyand  Rose  Cullenden  at  Bury  in  1664;  and 
caused  even  Wesley  to  say,  that  "  to  give  up  a 
belief  in  witchcraft  was  to  give  up  the  Bible." 
We  recommend  this  statement,  in  contrast  with  the 
nil  but  universal  disbelief  in  such  superstitions  now, 
ti.  thoughtful  consideration.  (For  a  curious  statute 
against  witchcraft  (.">  Kli/.  cap.  15),  see  Collier's 
/  ocl  Hist.  vi.  366.) 

Superstition  not  unfrequently  goes  hand  in  hand 
with  scepticism,  and  hence,  amid  the  general  infi- 
delity prevalent  through  the  Roman  empire  at  our 


446 


DIVORCE 


Lord's  coming,  imposture  was  rampant ;  as  a  glance 
at  the  pages  of  Tacitus  will  suffice  to  prove.  Hence 
the  lucrative  trades  of  such  men  as  .Simon  Magus 
(Acts  viii.  9),  Bar-jesus  (Acts  xiii.  6,  8),  the  slave 
with  the  spirit  of  Python  (Acts  xvi.  10),  the  vaga- 
bond Jews,  exorcists  (Luke  xi.  19  ;  Acts  xix.  13), 
and  other  y6i)T£S  (2  Tim.  iii.  13;  Rev.  xix.  20, 
&c),  as  well  as  the  notorious  dealers  in  magical 
)3i'/8\oi  ('E</>e'<na  ■ypa^ixara)  and  -rrepiepya  at 
Ephesus  (Acts  xix.  19).  Among  the  Jews  these 
flagrant  impostors  (awaTeuv^s,  Jos.)  had  become 
dangerously  numerous,  especially  during  the  Jew- 
ish war ;  and  we  find  them  constantly  alluded  to 
in  Josephus  (De  Bell.  Jud.  vi.  5,  §1,  2 ;  cf.  Matt, 
xxiv.  23-24;  Tac.  H.  v.  12  ;  Ant.  xx.  5,  §1,  &c). 
As  was  natural,  they,  like  most  Orientals,  espe- 
cially connected  the  name  of  Solomon  with  their 
spells  aud  incantations  (Jos.  Ant.  viii.  2).  The 
names  of  the  main  writers  on  this  wide  and  inte- 
resting subject  will  be  found  mentioned  in  the 
course  of  the  article,  and  others  are  referred  to  in 
Fabricius  Bibl.  Antiq.  cap.  xii.,  and  Bottcher,  de 
Inferis,  pp.  101  sq.  [F.  W.  F.] 

DIA^ORCE.  The  law  regulating  this  subject  is 
found  Deut.  xxiv.  1-4, and  the  cases  in  which  the  right 
of  a  husband  to  divorce  his  wife  was  lost,  are  stated 
ib.  xxii.  19,  29.  The  ground  of  divorce  was  what 
the  text  calls  a  "D"5!  JTnj},  on  the  meaning  of 
which  the  Jewish  doctors  of  the  period  of  the  N.  T. 
widely  differed  ;  the  school  of  Shammai  seeming  to 
limit  it  to  a  moral  delinquency  in  the  woman, 
whilst  that  of  Hillel  extended  it  to  trifling  causes, 
e.  g.,  if  the  wife  burnt  the  food  she  was  cooking 
for  her  husband.1  The  Pharisees  wished  perhaps 
to  embroil  our  Saviour  with  these  rival  schools  by 
their  question  (Matt.  xix.  3);  by  His  answer  to 
which,  as  well  as  by  His  previous  maxim  (v.  31), 
he  declares  that  but  for  their  hardened  state  of 
heart,  such  questions  would  have  no  place.  Yet 
from  the  distinction  made,  "  but  I  say  unto  you," 
v.  31,  32,  it  seems  to  follow,  that  He  regarded  all 
the  lesser  causes  than  "  fornication"  as  standing  on 
too  weak  ground,  and  declined  the  question  of  how 
to  interpret  the  words  of  Moses.  It  would  be  unrea- 
sonable, therefore,  to  suppose  that  by  "I}"!  HIIV, 
to  which  he  limited  the  remedy  of  divorce,  Moses 
meant  "  fornication,"  i.e.  adultery,  for  that  would 
have  been  to  stultify  the  law  "  that  such  should  be 
stoned  "  (John  viii.  5  ;  Lev.  xx.  10).  The  practical 
difficulty,  however,  which  attends  on  the  doubt 
which  is  now  found  in  interpreting  Moses'  words 
will  be  lessened  if  we  consider,  that  the  mere  giving 
"  a  bill  (or  rather  "book,"  "IQD)  of  divorcement") 
(comp.  Is.  1.  1 ;  Jer.  iii.  8),  would  in  ancient  times 
require  tfte  intervention  of  a  Levite,  not  only  to 
secure  the  formal  correctness  of  the  instrument,  but 
because  the  art  of  writing  was  then  generally 
unknown.  This  would  bring  the  matter  under  the 
cognizance  of  legal  authority,  and  tend  to  check  the 
rash  exercise  of  the  right  by  the  husband.  Tradi- 
tional opinion  and  prescriptive  practice  would  pro- 
bably fix  the  standard  of  the  HIIJ?,  and  doubtless 
with  the  lax  general  morality  which  marks  the 
decline  of  the  Jewish  polity,  that  standard  would  be 
lowered  (Mai.  ii.  14-16).  Thus  the  Gemar.  Babyl. 
Gittin.  9  (ap.  Selden,  de  ux.  Heb.  iii.  17)  allows 

a  Mishna  Gittin,  ix.  10.  R.  Akibah  allows  divorce 
if  the  husband  merely  saw  a  wife  -whose  appearance 
pleased  him  better.  , 


DOCUS 

divorce  for  a  wife's  spinning  in  public,  or  going  out 
with  head  uncovered  or  clothes  so  torn  as  not  pro- 
perly to  conceal  her  person  from  sight.  But  the 
absence  of  any  case  in  point,  in  the  period  which  lay 
nearest  to  the  lawgiver  himself,  or  in  any,  save  a 
much  more  recent  one,  makes  the  whole  question 
one  of  great  uncertainty.  The  case  of  Phalti  and 
Michal  is  not  in  point,  being  merely  an  example  of 
one  arbitrary  act  redressed  by  another  (1  Sam.  xxv. 
44;  comp.  2  Sam.  iii.  14-16).  Selden,  quoting  {de 
ux.  Heb.  iii.  19)  Zohar,  Praef.  p.  8  b,  &c,  speaks 
of  an  alleged  custom  of  the  husband,  when  going  to 
war,  giving  the  wife  the  libeling  divortii ;  but  the 
authority  is  of  slight  value,  and  the  fact  improbable. 
It  is  contrary  to  all  known  Oriental  usage  to  sup- 
pose that  the  right  of  quitting  their  husband  and 
choosing  another  was  allowed  to  women  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xv.  7,  §10).  Salome  is  noted  (ibid.)  as  the 
first  example  of  it ; — one,  no  doubt,  derived  from  the 
growing  prevalence  of  heathen  laxity.  Hence  also, 
probably,  the  caution  given  1  Cor.  vii.  10.  Winer 
is  surely  mistaken  (s.  v.  Ehescheiditng)  in  supposing 
that  a  man  might  take  back  as  wife  her  whom  he 
had  divorced,  except  in  the  cases  when  her  second 
husband  had  died  or  had  divorced  her.  Such  re- 
sumption is  contemplated  by  the  lawgiver  as  only 
possible  in  those  two  cases,  and  therefore  is  in  them 
only  expressly  forbidden  (Jer.  iii.  1). 

For  the  view  taken  among  later  Jews  on  this  sub- 
ject, see  Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  8,  §23,  xvi.  7,  §3  ;  Yit.  76, 
a  writer  whose  practice  seems  to  have  been  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  views  of  Hillel.  On  the  general 
subject  Buxtorf,  de  Spousal,  et  Divort.  82-85  ;  Sel- 
den, Uxor  Hebr.  iii.  17  ff . ;  and  Michaelis,  Laws  of 
Moses,  ii.  336,  may  be  consulted.  [H.  H.] 

DIZ'AHAB  (3HT  ^  ;  KaTaxpvcrea ;  ubi  auri 
est  plurimum),  a  place  in  the  Arabian  Desert,  men- 
tioned Deut.  i.  1,  as  limiting  the  position  of  the 
spot  in  which  Moses  is  there  represented  as  address- 
ing the  Israelites.  It  is  by  Robinson  (i.  147,  ii. 
187,  note)  identified  with  Dahab,  a  cape  on  the  W. 
shore  of  the  Gulf  of  Akabah  about  two-thirds  down 
its  length  ;  see  further  under  Wilderness.  The 
name  seems  to  mean  "  lord,"  i.  e.   "  possessor  of 

(Arab.  «i  and  t?i  =  Heb.  7^2)  gold  ;"  probably 

given  from  that  metal  having  been  there  found. 
Gesen.  s.  v.  [H.  H.] 

DO'CUSb  (Aco/c;  Jos.  Aayoiv;  Doch ;  Syr. 
tOjQ.»;    Doak),   a   "little   hold"    (to    oxvpo- 

fxaTiov ;  munitiunculum)  near  Jericho  (1  Mace.  xvi. 
15,  comp.  verse  14)  built  by  Ptolemeus  the  son  of 
Abubus,  and  in  which  he  entertained  and  murdered 
his  father-in-law  Simon  Maccabaeus,  with  his  two 
sons.  By  Josephus  (Ant.  xiii.  8,  1  ;  B.  J.  i.  2,  3) 
it  is  called  Dagon,  and  is  said  to  have  been  "  one 
of  the  fortresses  (ipvfia.Ta>v)  above  Jericho.  The 
name  still  remains  in  the  neighbourhood,  attached 
to  the  copious  and  excellent  springs  of  Ain-Diik, 
which  burst  forth  in  the  Wady  Nawaimeh,  at  the 
foot  of  the  mountain  of  Quarantania  (Kumntid), 
about  4  miles  N.W.  of  Jericho.  Above  the  springs 
are  traces  of  ancient  foundations, '  which  may  be 
those  of  Ptolemy's  castle,  but  more  probably  of  that 
of  the  Templars,  one  of  whose  stations  this  was : 
it  stood  as  late  as  the  latter  end  of  the  13th  century, 


b  It  would  be  interesting  to  know  whence  the  form 
of  the  name  used  in  the  A   V.  was  derived. 


DODAI 

when  it  was  visited  by  Brocardus.     (See  Rob.  i.  f 
571,  and  the  quotations  in  572,  note.)  [G.] 

DOD'AI  (Hil;  AuSla;  Dudi),  an  Ahohite 
who  commanded  the  course  of  the  2nd  month 
(1  Chr.  xxvii.  4).  It  is  probable  that  he  is  the 
same  as  Dodo,  whose  name  in  the  Ccti'o  and  in  the 
LXX.  is  Dodai,  and  that  the  words  "  Eleazar  son 
of"  have  been  omitted  from  the  above  passage  in 
Chronicles.     [Dodo,  2.] 

DODANIM  (D^n'l  ;  'Po'Sioi  ;  Dodanim), 
(Jen.  x.  4  ;  1  Chr.  i.  7  (in  some  copies  and  in  marg. 
of  A.  V.  1  Chr.  i.  7,  Rodanim,  D»3TL),  a  family 
or  race  descended  from  Javan,  the  son  of  Japhet 
(Gen.  x.  4;  1  Chr.  i.  7).  Authorities  vary  as  to 
the  form  of  the  name:  the  Hebrew  text  has  both. 
Dodanim  appears  in  the  Syriac,  Chaldee,  Vulgate, 
Persian,  and  Arabic  versions,  and  in  the  Targum  of 
Onkelos ;  Rodanim  is  supported  by  the  LXX.,  the 
Samaritan  version,  and  some  early  writers,  as  Euse- 
bius  and  Cosmas.  The  weight  of  authority  is  in 
favour  of  the  former ;  the  substitution  of  'P68iui  in 
the  LXX.  may  have  arisen  from  familiarity  with  that 
name  (comp.  Ez.  xxvii.  15,  where  it  is  again  sub- 
stituted for  Dedan).  Dodanim  is  regarded  as  identical 
with  Dardani  (Gesen.  Thesaur.j).  1266),  the  latter, 
which  is  the  original  form,  having  been  modified  by 
the  change  of  the  liquid  r  into  o,  as  in  Barmilcar  and 
Bomilear.  Hamilcar  and  Hamilco.  Thus  the  Tar- 
gum of  Jonathan,  that  on  Chronicles,  and  the  Jeru- 
salem Talmud  give  Dardania  for  Dodanim.  The 
Dardani  were  found  in  historical  times  in  Illyricum 
and  Troy :  the  former  district  was  regarded  as  their 
original  seat.  They  were  probably  a  semi-Pelasgic 
race,  and  are  grouped  with  the  Chittim  in  the 
genealogical  table,  as  more  closely  related  to  them 
than  to  the  other  branches  of  the  Pelasgic  race 
(Knobel,  VSlkertafel,  pp.  104  tf.).  The  similarity 
of  the  name  Dodona  in  Epirus  has  led  to  the  identi- 
fication of  Dodanim  with  that  place ;  but  a  mere 
local  designation  appears  too  restricted  for  the 
general  tenour  of  Gen.  x.  Kalisch  (Comm.  on 
Gen.)  identities  Dodanim  with  the  Daunians,  who 
occupied  the  coast  of  Apulia:  he  regards  the  name 
as  referring  to  Italy  generally.  The  wide  and  un- 
explained difference  of  the  names,  and  the  compara- 
tive unimportance  of  the  Daunians  form  objections 
to  this  view.  [W.  L.  B.] 

DODA'VAH  (ace  Dodavahu;  -inVTn  ;  Aa>- 
3 ia  ;  Alex.  'ClSia  ;  Dodoau),  a  man  of  Maresha  in 
Judah,  father  of  Eliezer  who  denounced  Jehosha- 
phat's  alliance  with  Ahaziah  (2  Chr.  xx.  37).  In 
the  Jewish  traditions  Dodavah  is  the  son  of  Jeho- 
shaphat,  who  was  also  his  uncle  (Jerome,  Qu. 
Heb.  ad  foe). 

DODO.  1.  ("nil ;  AouSi  and  AuScoe ;  patrwis 
ejus),  a  man  of  Bethlehem,  father  of  Elhanan,  who 
was  one  of  David's  "  thirty"  captains  (2  Sam.  xxiii. 
24  :    1  Chr.  xi.  26).     He  is  a  different  person  from 

2.  Dodo  the  Aiioiitte,  father  of  Eleazar,  the 
2nd  of  the  three  "  mighty  men"  who  were  over  the 
"  thirty"  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  9  ;  1  Chr.  xi.  12).  He,  or 
his  son — in  which  case  we  must  suppose  the  words 
"  Eleazar  son  of"  to  have  escaped  from  the  text — 
probably  had  the  command  of  the  second  monthly 
course  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  4).  In  the  latter  passage  the 
name  is  Dodai  ("'111  ;  AcoSi'a,  Alex.  Acdo'/o)  ; 
but  this  form  occurs  in  the  Hebrew  text  (Cetib)  of 
2  Sam.  xxiii.  9  (HI),  and  in  the  LXX.  of  all; 
and  in  Josephus  (Ant.  vii.  12,  §4;  AtoSei'os)  ;  and 


DOG 


447 


is  believed  by  Kehnicott  (Dissertation,  $c.  134), 
who  lias  examined  these  lists  with  great  minute- 
ness, to  be  the  correct  one.  The  Jewish  tradition 
(Jerome,  Qu.  Hebr.  on  1  Chr.  xi.  12)  was,  that 
Dodo  was  the  brother  of  Jesse. 

3.  A  man  of  Issachar,  forefather  of  Tola  the 
Judge  (Judg.  x.  1).  The  LXX.  and  Vulg.  render- 
ings are  remarkable  ;  TrarpaSeAcpov  avTOv  :  patrui 
Abimelech.  [G.] 

DO'EG  (JN/T ;  A«V ;  Doeg),  an  Idumean 
(LXX.  and  Joseph.  Ant.  vi.  12,  §1,  6  ~2,vpos)  chief 
of  Saul's  herdmen  ("  having  charge  of  the  mules"). 
He  was  at  Nob  when  Abimelech  gave  David  the 
sword  of  Goliath,  and  not  only  gave  information  to 
Saul,  but  when  others  declined  the  office,  himself 
executed  the  king's  order  to  destroy  the  priests  of 
Nob,  with  their  families,  to  the  number  of  85 
persons,  together  with  all  their  property  (1  Sam. 
xxi.  7,  xxii.  9,  17,  22;  Ps.  lii.).  A  question  has 
arisen  on  the  nature  of  the  business  by  which  lie 
was  "detained  before  the  Lord"  (Ti>'J?3,  crvvex^- 
fievos  Nfeaaapav ;  intus  in  tabernaculo  Domini). 
The  difficulty  which  lies  in  the  idea  that  Doeg  was 
a  foreigner,  and  so  incapable  of  a  Nazarite  vow 
(Mischn.  de  Votis.  ix.  1,  Surenh.),  is  explained  by 
the  probable  supposition  that  he  was  a  proselyte, 
attending  under  some  vow  or  some  act  of  purifica- 
tion at  the  Tabernacle  (1  Sam.  xx.  18  ;  Ant.  Sacr., 
Patrick,  Calmet;  Ges.  p.  1059  ;  Winer,  s.  v.  Doeg. ; 
Thenius,  adloc.  in  kurzg.  exeg.  1Mb.),  [H.  W.  P.] 

DOG  (3?3  ;  kvwv,  Kvvapiov  ;  canis),  an  animal 
frequently  mentioned  in  Scripture.  It  was  used  by 
the  Hebrews  as  a  watdi  for  their  houses  (Is.  lvi. 
10),  and  for  guarding  their  flocks  (Job  xxx.  1). 
Then  also  as  now,  troops  of  hungry  and  semi-wild 
dogs  used  to  wander  about  the  fields  and  streets  of 
the  cities,  devouring  dead  bodies  and  other  offal 
(1  K.  xiv.  11,  xvi.  4,  xxi.  19,  23,  xxii.  38,  2  K. 
ix.  10,  36;  Jer.  xv.  3,  Ps.  lix.  6,  14),  and  thus 
became  such  objects  of  dislike  that  fierce  and  cruel 
enemies  are  poetically  styled  dogs  in  Ps.  xxii.  16, 
20.  Moreover  the  dog  being  an  unclean  animal 
(Is.  lxvi.  3 ;  Hor.  Ep.  i.  2,  26,  canis  immundus 
et  arnica  luto  sus),  the  terms  dog,  dead  dog,  dog's 
head  were  used  as  terms  of  reproach,  or  of  humility 
in  speaking  of  one's  self  (1  Sam.  xxiv.  14;  2  Sam. 
iii.  8,  ix.  8,  xvi.  9  ;  2  K.  viii..  13).  Knox  relates 
a  story  of  a  nobleman  of  Ceylon  who  being  asked  by 
the  king  how  many  children  "  lie  had,  replied — 
"  Your  Majesty's  dog  has  three  puppies."  Through- 
out the  whole  East  "  dog  "  is  a  term  of  reproach  for 
impure  and  profane  persons,  and  in  this  sense  is  used 
by  the  Jews  respecting  the  Gentiles  (Rev.  xxii.  15  ; 
comp.  Schottgen,  Hor.  Heb.  i.  1145),  and  by  Mo- 
hammedans respecting  Christians.  The  wanton  na- 
ture of  the  dog  is  another  of  its  characteristics,  and 
there  can  be  no  doubt  that  2?3  in  Deut.  xxiii.  18 
means  scortum  virile,  i.  q.  tiHH ;  comp.  Ecclus. 
xxvi.  25 — "  A  shameless  woman  shall  be  counted  lis 
<i  dog"  Hesych.  KiWs  avai8e7s.  Stanley  |  S.  .V  /'. 
p.  350)  mentions,  to  have  seen  on  the  very  site  of 
Jezreel  the  descendants  of  the  dogs  that  devoured 

Jezebel,  prowling  on  tile  mounds  without  tin1  walls 
for  offal  and  carrion  thrown  out  to  them  to  con- 
sume ;  and  Wood,  in  his  Journal  to  the  source  of  the 
(>xns.  complains  that  the  dog  has  not  yet  arrived  at 
his  natural  position  in  the  social  state.  We  still 
usr  the  name  of  one  of  the  noblest  creatures  in  the 
world  as  a  term  of  contempt.     To  ask  an  Uzbek  to 


448 


DOOKS 


sell  Us  wife  would  be  no  affront,  but  to  ask  him  to 
sell  his  dog  an  unpardonable  insult — Suggecferosh 
or  dog-seller  being  the  most  offensive  epithet  that 
one  Uzbek  can  apply  to  another.  The  addition 
of  the  article  (to?s  Kvvapiois,  Matt.  xv.  26;  Mark 
vii.  27)  implies  that  the  presence  of  dogs  was  an 
ordinary  feature  of  Eastern  life  in  our  Saviour's  time. 
As  to  the  etymology  of  the  word,  Bochart  thinks 
that  it  has  reference  to  the  firmness  and  tenacity  of 

a  dog's  bite,  and  compares   xi,l<^,  =  forcipcs ; 
but  this  word  is  more  probably  itself  derived  from 

The  root  of  3?3  is  an  unused  verb  3?  3,  to 
strike  =  Germ,  klappen ;  and  thence  to  bark  —  Germ. 
klaffen.  Fr.  clapir.  [W.  D.] 

DOOKS.    [Gates.] 

DOPH'KAH  (JlgD**  ;  'Parana,  the  LXX.  ap- 
parently reading  ~)  for  T  ;  Daphca),  a  place  men- 
tioned Num.  xxxiii.  12,  as  a  station  in  the  De- 
sert where  the  Israelites  encamped  ;  see  Wil- 
derness. [H.  H.] 

DOE  (in  and  "1X1,  Josh.  xvii.  11,  1  K.  iv.  11  ; 
Adip,  Awpa,  1  Mace.  xv.  11),  an  ancient  royal  city 
of  the  Canaanites  (Josh.  xii.  23),  whose  ruler  was 
an  ally  of  Jabin  king  of  Hazor  against  Joshua 
(Josh.  xi.  1,  2).  It  was  probably  the  most  southern 
settlement  of  the  Phoenicians  on  the  coast  of  Syria 
(Jos.  Vit.  8  ;  Ant.  xv.  9,  §8).  Joseph  us  describes 
it  as  a  maritime  city,  on  the  west  border  of  Ma- 
nasseh  and  the  north  border  of  Dan  (Ant.  v.  1, 
§22,  viii.  2,  §3,  B.  J.  i.  7,  §7),  near  Mount 
Carmel  (  c.  Ap.  ii.  10).  One  old  author  tells  us 
that  it  was  founded  by  Dorus  a  son  of  Neptune, 
while  another  affirms  that  it  was  built  by  the 
Phoenicians,  because  the  neighbouring  rocky  shore 
aboundel  in  the  small  shell-fish  from  which  they 
got  the  purple  dye  (Steph.  B.  s.  v. ;  Reland,  Pal. 
p,  730).  It  appears  to  have  been  within  the  ter- 
ritory of  the  tribe  of  Asher,  though  allotted  to 
Manasseh  (Josh.  xvii.  1 1 ;  Judg.  i.  27 ).  The  original 
inhabitants  were  never  expelled ;  but  during  the 
prosperous  leigns  of  David  and  Solomon  they  were 
made  tributary  (Judg.  i.  27,  28),  and  the  latter 
monarch  stationed  at  Dor  one  of  his  twelve  pur- 
veyors (1  K.  iv.  11).  Tryphon,  the  murderer  of 
Jonathan  Maccabaeus  and  usurper  of  the  throne  of 
Syria,  having  sought  an  asylum  in  Dor,  the  city 
was  besieged  and  captured  by  Antiochus  Sidetes 
(1  Mace.  xv.  11).  It  was  subsequently  rebuilt  by 
Gabinius  the  Roman  general,  along  with  Samaria, 
Ashdod,  and  other  cities  of  Palestine  (Joseph.  Ant. 
xiv.  5,  §3),  and  it  remained  an  important  place 
during  the  early  years  of  the  Roman  rule  in  Syria. 
Its  coins  are  numerous,  bearing  the  legend  Aoopa 
Upa  (Vaillant,  Num.  Impp.).  It  became  an  epis- 
copal city  of  the  province  of  Pol.  test  inn  Prima, 
but  was  already  ruined  and  deserted  in  the  fourth 
century  (Hieron.  in  Epitaph.  Paulae). 

Of  the  site  of  Dor  there  can  be  no  doubt.  The 
descriptions  of  Josephus  and  Jerome  are  clear  and 
full.  The  latter  places  it  on  the  coast,  "  in  the 
ninth  mile  from  Caesarea,  on  the  way  to  Ptole- 


a  This  passage  was  a  great  puzzle  to  the  old  geo- 
grapher';, not  only  from  the  corrupt  reading,  'lov&aias, 
mentioned  above,  but  also  from  the  expression,  still 
found  in  the  text,  tov  irpi'oros  tou  /ueydAov  ;  A.  V.  "  the 
great  strait ;"  literally,  "  the  great  saw."     The  knot 


DOTHA.N 

mais  "  (Onom.  s.  v.  Dora).  Just  at  the  point  in- 
dicated is  the  small  village  of  Tantura,  probably  an 
Arab  corruption  of  Dora,  consisting  of  about  thirty 
houses,  wholly  constructed  of  ancient  materials. 
Three  hundred  yards  north  are  low  rocky  mounds 
projecting  into  the  sea,  covered  with  heaps  of  rub- 
bibh,  massive  foundations,  and  fragments  of  columns. 
The  most  conspicuous  ruin  is  a  section  of  an  old 
tower,  30  ft.  or  more  in  height,  which  forms  the 
landmark  of  Tantura.  On  the  south  side  of  the 
promontory,  opposite  the  village,  is  a  little  harbour, 
partially  sheltered  by  two  or  three  small  islands. 
A  spur  of  Mount  Carmel,  steep  and  partially 
wooded,  runs  parallel  to  the  coast  line,  at  the  dis- 
tance of  about  a  mile  and  a  half.  Between  its 
base  and  the  sandy  beach  is  a  rich  and  beautiful 
plain — this  is  possibly  the  "  border,"  "  coast,"  or 
"  region "  of  Dor  (7123  in  Hebrew,  Josh.  xi.  2, 

xii.  23  ;  1  K.  iv.  11)  referred  to  in  Scripture.  The 
district  is  now  almost  wholly  deserted,  being  ex- 
posed to  the  raids  of  the  wild  Bedawin  who  pasture 
their  flocks  on  the  rich  plain  of  Sharon.  [J.  L.  P.] 

DOR'CAS.  [Tabitha.] 

DOEYM'ENES  (Aopv/xeyris),  father  of  Pto- 
lemy, surnamed  Macron  (1  Mace.  iii.  3S  ;  2  Mace, 
iv.  45).  As  this  Ptolemy  was  in  the  service  of 
Ptolemy  Philometor,  king  of  Egypt,  before  he  de- 
serted to  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  it  is  probable  that 
his  father  Dorymenes  is  the  same  Dorymenes  who 
fought  against  Antiochus  the  Great  (Polyb.  v.  61). 

DOSITH'EUS  (Aocrideos),  "  a  priest  and 
Levite,"  who  carried  the  translation  of  Esther  to 
Egypt  (Esth.  xi.  1,  2).  It  is  scarcely  likely  that 
he  is  identical  with  the  Dositheus  who  is  men- 
tioned by  Josephus  (c.  Ap.  ii.  5)  as  one  of  the 
"  commanders  of  the  forces "  of  Ptol.  VI.  Philo- 
metor, though  he  probably  lived  in  the  reign  of  that 
monarch.  [B.  F.  W.] 

DO'THABI.     [Dothan.] 

DO'THAN  (once  ]Th,  Dothain,  and  in  con- 
tracted fomi  |  HI  ;  =  possibly  "two  wells" — Ges. 
332,568;  AwOaein,  Awdaifj. ;  Dothain),  a  place, 
first  mentioned  (Gen.  xxxvii.  17)  in  connexion  with 
the  history  of  Joseph,  and  apparently  as  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Shechem.  It  next  appears  as  the 
residence  of  Elisha  (2  K.  vi.  13),  and  the  scene  of 
a  remarkable  vision  of  horses  and  chariots  of  fire 
surrounding  "the  mountain"  (inn),  on  which 
the  city  stood.  It  is  not  again  mentioned  in  the 
0.  T. ;  but  later  still  we  encounter  it- — then  evi- 
dently well  known — as  a  landmark  in  the  account 
of  Holofernes'  campaign  against  Bethulia  (Jud.  iv. 
6,  vii.  3,  18,  viii.  3).  The  change  in  the  name 
Dothaim  is  due  to  the  Greek  text,  from  which  this 
book  is  translated.  In  the  Vat.  and  Alex,  and  Vulg. 
text— it  is  also  mentioned  in  Jud.  iii.  9,  where  the 
A.  V.  has  "  Judea"  {'lovSaias  for  AaiTaias).*  and 
all  these  passages  testify  to  its  situation  being  in 
the  centre  of  the  country  near  the  southern  edge  of 
the  great  plain  of  Esdraelon. 

Dothain  was  known  to  Eusebius  (OnomasUcon), 
who  places  it  12  miles  to  the  N.  of  Sebaste  (Sa- 
maria; ;  and  here  it  has  been  at  length  discovered 


was  cut  by  Reland,  who  conjectured  most  ingeniously 
that  irpCwv  was  the  translation  of  "WD,  Matior  —  a 
saw,  which  was  a  corruption  of  "IIK'^D,  Mishor  = 
"the  plain"  (Reland,  742,  3). 


DOVE 

in  our  own  times  b  by  Mr.  Van  de  VeMe  (i.  364,  &c.) 

and  Dr.  Robinson  (Hi.  122),  still  bearing  its  ancient 
name  unimpaired,  and  situated  at  the  south  end  of 
a  plain  of  the  richest  pasturage,  4  or  5  miles  S.W. 
of  Jenin,  and  separated  only  by  a  swell  or  two  of 
hills  from  the  plain  of  Esdraelon.  The  Tell  or 
mound  on  which  the  ruins  stand  is  described  as 
very  large — ("  huge,"  Van  de  Velde,  i.  364)  ;  at  its 
southern  foot  is  still  a  fine  spring.  Close  to  it  is 
an  ancient  road,  running  N.  and  S.,  the  remains  of 
the  massive  (Jewish?)  pavement  of  which  are  still 
distinguishable  (V.  de  Velde,  369,  70).  The  great 
road  from  Beisdn  to  Egypt  also  passes  near  Dothdn 
(Rob.  iii.  122).  The  traditional  site  was  at  the 
Khan  Jubb  Yus'/f  near  Tell  Hum,  at  the  N.  of  the 
Sea  of  Galilee.  (See  the  quotations  in  Rob.  ii. 
419.)  It  need  hardly  be  said  that  this  position  is 
not  in  accordance  with  the  requirements  of  the 
narrative.  [G.] 

DOVE  (Yona/i,  D^V ;  irepurrepd;  columba). 
The  first  mention  of  this  bird  occurs  in  Gen.  viii., 
where  it  appears  as  Noah's  second  messenger  sent 
forth  from  the  ark  to  ascertain  if  the  waters  had 
abated,  and  returns  from  its  second  mission  with  an 
olive  leaf  in  its  mouth.  The  dove's  rapidity  of  flight 
is  alluded  to  in  Ps.  Iv.  6  ;  the  beauty  of  its  plumage 
in  Ps.  Ixviii .  1 3 ;  its  dwelling  in  the  rocks  and  valleys 
in  Jer.  xlviii.  28,  and  Ez.  vii.  16;  its  mournful 
voice  in  Is.  xxxviii.  14,  lix.  11;  Nah.  ii.  7:  its 
harmlessness  in  Matt.  x.  16;  its  simplicity  in  Hos. 
vii.  11,  and  its  amativeness  in  Cant.  i.  15,  ii.  14, 
&c.  The  last  characteristic,  according  to  Gesenius, 
is  the  origin  of  the  Hebrew  word,  from  an  unused 

root  }V  (|V),  to  grow  warm  (comp.  Arab.      ^ 

to  burn  with  anger,  and  Gr.  laivoi).  None  of  the 
other  derivations  proposed  for  the  word  are  at  all 
probable ;  nor  can  we  with  Winer  regard  a  word 
of  this  form  as  primitive.  It  is  similar  to  11310 
from  the  root  3"ltD.  Doves  are  kept  in  a  domesti- 
cated state  in  many  parts  of  the  East.     The  pig - 

cot  is  an  universal  feature  in  the  houses  of  Upper 
Egypt.  In  Persia  pigeon-houses  are  erected  at  a  dis- 
tance from  the  dwellings,  for  the  purpose  of  collect- 
ing the  dung  as  manure.  There  is  probably  an  allu- 
sion to  such  a  custom  in  Is.  lx.  8.  Stanley  (S.  fy  P., 
p.  257),  speaking  of  Ascalon  as  the  haunt  of  the 
Syrian  Venus,  says:  "  Her  temple  is  destroyed,  but 
the  sacred  doves — sacred  by  immemorial  legends  on 
the  spot  and  celebi  ated  there  even  as  late  as  Eusebius 
— still  fill  with  their  cooings  the  luxuriant  gardens 
which  grow  in  the  sandy  hollow  within  the  ruined 
walls."  It  is  supposed  that  the  dove  was  placed 
upon  the  standards  of  the  Assyrians  and  Baby- 
lonians in  honour  of  Semiramis.  Tibullus  (i.  7) 
says : 

"  Quid  referam  ut  volitet  crebras  intacta  per  urbes 
Alba  Palaestino  sancta  columba  Syro." 

This    explains    the    expression    in    Jer.    xxv.   38, 

HJViJ  ji"in  ^3tD,  "from  before  the  fierceness  of 
the  dove,"  i.e.  the  Assyrian  (comp.  Jer.  xlvi.  l<i, 
1.  16).     There  is,  howevi  entation  of  the 

dove  among  the  sculptures  of  Nineveh,  so  that  it 
could  hardly  have  been  a  common  emblem  of  the 
nation  at  the  time  whertthey  were  executed  ;  and  the 


h  It  is  right  to  say  that  the  true  site  of  Dothan  was 

known  to  the  Jewish  traveller  Rabbi  ha-1'archi,  \.n. 
1300  (see  Zun/.'s  extracts  in  notes  to  Benjamin  of 
Tudela,  Asher's  ed.  ii.  434),   and   to  Schwarz,  \.\>. 


DRAGON  449 

word  in  the  above  three  passages  of  Jeremiah  admits 
another  interpretation.     (See  Ges.  Thcs.  p.  601  «.) 

In  2  K.  vi.  25,  in  describing  the  famine  in  Sa- 
maria, it  is  stated  that  "  the  fourth  part  of  a  cab 
of  dove's  dung  was  sold  for  five  pieces  of  silver  " 
(D^VHn,  Keri  D'OV^I ;  ic6irpov  -ireptaTepwv, 
stercoris  columbamtn).  DW'Hn  *■  <-'■  D,3V  '"in, 
is  from  a  root  signifying  to  deposit  ordure.  There 
seems  good  reason  for  taking  this  as  a  literal  state- 
ment, and  that  the  straits  of  the  besieged  were 
such  that  they  did  not  hesitate  even  to  eat  such  re- 
volting food  as  is  heie  mentioned  (comp.  Cels.  Siero- 
bot.  ii.  p.  32 ;  Maurer  on  2  K.  vi.  25).  The  notion  that 
some  vegetable  production  is  meant  which  was  calle  I 
by  this  name,  may  be  compared  with  the  tact  thai 
the  Arabs  call  the  herb  Kali  yoLaxM  »wi.  = 
sparrows'  dung,  and  in  German  the  asafdetida  i- 
called  Teufelsdreck.  [W.  D.] 

DOWRY.     [Marriage.] 

DRACHMA  (Spux/J-Ti;  drachma;  2  Mace.  iv. 
19,  x.  20,  xii.  43  ;c  Luke  xv.  8,  9),  a  Greek  silver 
coin,  varying  in  weight  on  account  of  the  use  ot 
different  talents.  The  Jews  must  have  been  ac- 
quainted with  three  talents,  the  Ptolemaic,  used  in 
Egypt  and  at  Tyre,  Sidon,  and  Berytus,  and  adopted 
for  their  own  shekels;  the  Phoenician,  used  at 
Aradus  and  by  the  Persians;  and  the  Attic,  which 
was  almost  universal  in  Europe,  and  in  great  part 
of  Asia.  The  drachmae  of  these  talents  weigh  re- 
spectively, during  the  period  of  the  Maccabees, 
about  55  grs.  troy,  58-5,  and  66.  The  drachms 
mentioned  in  2  Mace,  are  probably  of  the  Seleu- 
cidae,  and  therefore  of  the  Attic  standard  ;  but  in 
Luke  denarii  seem  to  he  intended,  for  the  Attic 
drachma  had  been  at  that  time  reduced  to  about 
the  same  weight  as  the  Roman  denarius  as  well  as 
the  Ptolemaic  drachma,  and  was  wholly  or  almost 
superseded  by  it.  This  explains  the  remark  of 
Josephus,  criKXhs  .  .  .  'Attikcls  Several  SpdxfJi-as 
reacrapas  (Ant.  iii.  8,  §2),  for  the  four  Ptolemaic 
drachmae  of  the  shekel,  as  equal  to  four  denarii  of 
his  time,  were  also  equal  to  four  Attic  drachmae 
[Monet  ;  Silver,  piece  of].  [R.  S.  P.] 

DRAGON.  The  translators  of  the  A.  V., 
apparently  following  the  Vulgate,  have  rendered  by 
the  same  word  "dragon"  the  two  Hebrew  words 
Tan,  \F\,  and  Tannin,  p3fl.  The  similarity  of  the 
forms  of  the  words  may  easily  account  for  this  con- 
fusion, especially  as  the  masculine  plural  of  the 
former,  Tannim,  actually  assumes  (in  Lam.  iv.  3) 
the  form  Tannin,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  Tannim 
is  evidently  written  for  the  singular  Tannin  in  Ez. 
xxix.  3,  xxxii.  2.  But  the  words  appear  to  be  quite 
distinct  in  meaning;  and  the  distinction  is  gene- 
rally, though  not  universally,  preserved  by  the 
LXX. 

I.  The  former  is  used,  always  in  the  plural, 
in  Job  xxx.  29  ;  Is.  xxxiv.  13,  xliii.  20  (aeipr\P(s)  ; 
in  Is.  xiii.  22  {&)ffvoi)  ;  in  Jer.  x.  22,  xlix.  33 
(ffrpovBoi)  ;  in  Ps.  xliv.  1°  {t6tt(i>  KaKc&fffws) ;  and 
in  Jer.  ix.  I  1,  xiv.  6,  li.  -".7  ;  Mic.  i.  U  (5pa.KO>^res). 
The  feminine  plural  ITl3n  is  found  in  Mai.  i.  3;  a 
altogether    differently    translated   by   the 

1845  (p.  1()8)  ;  but  neither  of  these  travellers 
any  account  of  the  site. 
c  In  the  first  and  second  of  these  passages  the 

Vulg.  has  iliilrachnm. 

2    G 


450 


DRAGON 


LXX.  It  is  always  applied  to  some  creatures 
inhabiting  the  desert,  and  connected  generally  with 
the  words  HJJP  ("  ostrich  ")  and  "W  ("jackal"?). 
We  should  conclude  from  this  that  it  refers  rather 
to  some  wild  beast  than  to  a  serpent,  and  this  con- 
clusion is  rendered  almost  certain  by  the  comparison 
of  the  tannim  in  Jer.  xiv.  6,  to  the  wild  asses  snuffing 
the  wind,  and  the  reference  to  their  "  wailing  "  in 
Mic.  i.  8,  and  perhaps  in  Job  xxx.  29.  The  Syriac 
(see  Winer,  Iiealw.  s.  v.  Schakal)  renders  it  by  a 
word  which,  according  to  Pococke,  means  a  "jackal  " 
(a  beast  whose  peculiarly  mournful  howl  in  the 
desert  is  well  known),  and  it  seems  most  probable 
that  this  or  some  cognate  species  is  to  be  understood 
whenever  the  word  tan  occurs. 

II.  The  word  tannin,  \<17\  (plur.  D^Sn),  is 
always  rendered  as  SpaKaiv  in  the  LXX.,  except  in 
Gen.  i.  21,  where  we  find  kt}tos.  It  seems  to  refer 
to  any  great  monster,  whether  of  the  land  or  the  sea,d 
being  indeed  more  usually  applied  to  some  kind  of 
serpent  or  reptile,  but  not  exclusively  restricted  to 
that  sense.     When  referring  to  the  sea  it  is  used  as 

a  parallel  to  jrPl/  ("Leviathan"),  as  in  Is.  xxvii. 
1 ;  and  indeed  this  latter  word  is  rendered  in  the 
LXX.  by  SpaKoiu,  in  Ps.  lxxiv.  14,  civ.  26 ;  Job 
xl.  20  ;  Is.  xxvii.  1  ;  and  by  fxtya  k?)tos  in  Job 
iii.  8.  When  we  examine  special  passages  we  find 
the  word  used  in  Gen.  i.  21,  of  the  great  sea-mon- 
sters, the  representatives  of  the  inhabitants  of  the 
deep.  The  same  sense  is  given  to  it  in  Ps.  lxxiv. 
13  (where  it  is  again  connected  with  "Levia- 
than "),  Ps.  exlviii.  7,  and  probably  in  Job  vii.  12 
(Vulg.  cetus).  On  the  other  hand,  in  Ex.  vii. 
9,  10,  12,  Deut.  xxxii.  33,  Ps.  ?ci.  13,  it  refers 
to  land-serpents  of  a  powerful  and  deadly  kind. 
It  is  also  applied  metaphorically  to  Pharaoh  or  to 
Egypt  (Is.  li.  9  ;  Ez.  xxix.  3,  xxxii.  2 ;  perhaps 
Ps.  lxxiv.  13),  and  in  that  case,  especially  as  feet 
are  attributed  to  it,  it  most  probably  refers  to  the 
crocodile  as  the  well-known  emblem  of  Egypt. 
When,  however,  it  is  used  of  the  king  of  Babylon, 
as  in  Jer.  li.  3-1,  the  same  propriety  would  lead  us 
to  suppose  that  some  great  serpent,  such  as  might 
inhabit  the  sandy  plains  of  Babylonia,  is  intended.0 

Such  is  the  usage  of  the  word  in  the  0.  T.  in 
the  N.  T.  it  is  only  found  in  the  Apocalypse  (Rev. 
xii.  3,  4,  7,  9,  16,  17,  &c),  as  applied  metaphori- 
cally to  "  the  old  serpent,  called  the  Devil,  and 
Satan,"  the  description  of  the  "  dragon  "  being  dic- 
tated by  the  symbolical  meaning  of  the  image 
rather  than  by  any  reference  to  any  actuallv  exist- 
ing creature.  Of  similar  personification,  either  of  an 
evil  spirit  or  of  the  powers  of  material  Nature  as 
distinct  from  God,  we  have  traces  in  the  extensive 
prevalence  of  dragon-worship,  and  existence  of  dra- 
gon-temples of  peculiar  serpentine  form,  the  use  of 
dragon-standards  both  in  the  east,  especially  in 
Egypt  (see  also  the  apocryphal  history  of  Bel  and 
the  Dragon),  and  in  the  west,  more  particularly 
among  the  Celtic  tribes.  The  most  remarkable  of 
all,  perhaps,  is  found  in  the  Greek  legend  of  Apollo 
as  the  slayer  of  the  Python,  and  the  supplanter  of 
the  serpent-worship  by  a  higher  wisdom.  The 
reason,  at  least  of  the  scriptural  symbol,  is  to  be 
sought  not  only  in  the  union  of  gigantic  power  with 


d  Gesenius  derives  it  from  an  obsolete  root  pFI. 
"  to  extend." 

e  The  application  of  Is.  xxvii.  1,  appears  more 
uncertain. 


DREAMS 

craft  and  malignity,  of  which  the  serpent  is  the 
natural  emblem,  but  in  the  record  of  the  serpent's 
agency  in  the  temptation  (Gen.  iii.).     TSerpext.] 

"     [A.B.] 

DREAMS  (niefcn  ;  evvirvia  ;  somnia  ;  Kaff 
vitvov  in  LXX.,  and  tear'  uvap  in  St.  Matthew,  are 
generally  used  for  "in  a  dream").  The  Scriptural 
record  of  God's  communication  with  man  by  dreams 
has  been  so  often  supposed  to  involve  much  diffi- 
culty, that  it  seems  not  out  of  place  to  refer  briefly 
to  the  nature  and  characteristics  of  dreams  gene- 
rally, before  enumerating  and  classifying  the  dreams 
recorded  in  Scripture. 

I.  The  main  difference  between  our  sleeping  and 
waking  thoughts  appears  to  lie  in  this, — that,  in 
the  former  case,  the  perceptive  faculties  of  the  mind 
(the  sensational  powers,"  and  the  imagination  which 
combines  the  impressions  derived  from  them)  are 
active,  while  the  reflective  powers  (the  reason  or 
judgment  by  which  we  control  those  impressions. 
and  distinguish  between  those  which  are  imaginary 
or  subjective  and  those  which  correspond  to,  and 
are  produced  by,  objective  realities)  are  generally 
asleep.  Milton's  account  of  dreams  (in  Par.  Lost, 
Book  v.  100—113)  seems  as  accurate  as  it  is 
striking: — 

"But  know,  that  in  the  mind 
Are  many  lesser  faculties,  that  serve 
Reason  as  chief :  among  these  fancy  next 
Her  office  holds ;  of  all  external  things, 
Which  the  five  watchful  senses  represent, 
She  forms  imaginations,  airy  shapes, 
Which  reason,  joining  or  disjoining,  frames 
All  what  we  affirm,  oi  what  deny,  and  call 
Our  knowledge  or  opinion  ;  then  retires 
Into  her  private  cell,  when  nature  sleeps." 

Thus  it  is  that  the  impressions  of  dreams  are  in 
themselves  vivid,  natural,  and  picturesque,  occa- 
sionally gifted  with  an  intuition  beyond  our  ordi- 
nary powers,  but  strangely  incongruous  and  often 
grotesque ;  the  emotion  of  surprise  or  incredulity, 
which  arises  from  a  sense  of  incongruity,  or  of 
unlikeness  to  the  ordinary  course  of  events,  being  in 
dreams  a  thing  unknown.  The  mind  seems  to  be 
surrendered  to  that  power  of  association  by  which, 
even  in  its  waking  hours,  if  it  be  inactive  and 
inclined  to  "  musing,"  it  is  often  carried  through  a 
series  of  thoughts  connected  together  by  some  vague 
and  accidental  association,  until  the  reason,  when  it 
starts  again  into  activity,  is  scarcely  able  to  trace 
back  the  slender  line  of  connexion.  The  difference 
is,  that,  in  this  latter  case,  we  are  aware  that  the 
connexion  is  of  our  own  making,  while  in  sleep  it 
appears  to  be  caused  by  an  actual  succession  of 
events. 

Such  is  usually  the  case,  yet  there  is  a  class  of 
dreams,  seldom  noticed  and  indeed  less  common, 
but  recognised  by  the  experience  of  many,  in  which 
the  reason  is  not  wholly  asleep.  In  these  cases  it 
seems  to  look  on  as  it  were  from  without,  and  so 
to  have  a  double  consciousness:  on  the  one  hand 
we  enter  into  the  events  of  the  dream,  as  though 
real,  on  the  other  we  have  a  sense  that  it  is  but  a 
dream,  and  a  fear  lest  we  should  awake  and  its 
pageant  should  pass  away. 

In  either  case  the  ideas  suggested  are  accepted 


a  These  potvers  are  to  be  carefully  distinguished 
(as  in  Butler's  Analogy,  part  i.  c.  1)  from  the 
organs  through  which  they  arc  exercised  when  we 
are  awake. 


DREAMS 

by  the  mind  in  dreams  at  once  and  inevitably, 
instead  of  being  weighed  and  tested,  as  in  our 
waking  hours.  But  it  is  evident  that  the  method 
of  such  suggestion  is  still  undetermined,  and  in 
fact  is  no  more  callable  of  being  accounted  for  by 
any  single  cause  than  the  suggestion  of  waking 
thoughts.  The  material  of  these  latter  is  supplied 
either  by  ourselves,  through  the  senses,  the  me- 
mory, and  the  imagination,  or  by  other  men, 
generally  through  the  medium  of  words,  or  lastly 
by  the  direct  action  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  or  of 
created  spirits  of  orders  superior  to  our  own,  or  the 
spirit  within  us.  So  also  it  is  in  dreams.  In  the 
first  place,  although  memory  and  imagination  sup- 
ply most  of  the  material  of  dreams,  yet  physical 
sensations  of  cold  and  heat,  of  pain  or  of  relief, 
even  actual  impressions  of  sound  or  of  light  will 
often  mould  or  suggest  dreams,  and  the  physical 
organs  of  speech  will  occasionally  be  made  use  of 
to  express  the  emotions  of  the  dreamer.  In  the 
second  place,  instances  have  been  known  where  a 
few  words  whispered  into  a  sleeper's  ear  have  pro- 
duced a  dream  corresponding  to  their  subject.  On 
these  two  points  experience  gives  undoubted  testi- 
mony ;  as  to  the  third,  it  can,  from  the  nature  of 
the  case,  speak  but  vaguely  and  uncertainly.  The 
Scripture  declares,  not  as  any  strange  thing,  but 
as  a  thing  of  course,  that  the  influence  of  the 
Spirit  of  God  upon  the  soul  extends  to  its  sleep- 
ing as  well  as  its  waking  thoughts.  It  declares 
that  God  communicates  with  the  spirit  of  man 
directly  in  dreams,  and  also  that  He  permits 
created  spirits  to  have  a  like  communication  with 
it.  Its  declaration  is  to  be  weighed,  not  as  an 
isolated  thing,  but  in  connexion  with  the  general 
doctrine  of  spiritual  influence  ;  because  any  theory 
of  dreams  must  be  regarded  as  a  part  of  the  general 
theory  of  the  origination  of  all  thought. 

II.  It  is,  of  course,  with  this  last  class  of  dreams 
that  we  have  to  do  in  Scripture.  The  dreams  of 
memory  or  imagination  are  indeed  referred  to  in 
Eccl.  v.  3  ;  Is.  xxix.  8 ;  hut  it  is  the  history  of 
the  Revelation  of  the  Spirit  of  God  to  the  spirit  of 
man,  whether  sleeping  or  waking,  which  is  the 
proper  subject  of  Scripture  itself. 

It  must  be  observed  that,  in  accdrdance  with  the 
principle  enunciated  by  S.  Paul  in  1  Cor.  xiv.  15, 
dreams,  in  which  the  understanding  is  asleep,  are 
recognised  indeed  as  a  method  of  divine  revelation, 
but  placed  below  tl:e  visions  of  prophecy,  in  which 
the  understanding  plays  its  part.h  It  is  true  that 
the  book  of  .bib,  standing  as  it  does  on  the  basis  of 
"natural  religion,"  dwells  on  dreams  and  "visions 
in  deep  sleep"  as  the  chosen  method  of  God's  reve- 
lation of  Himself  to  man  (see  Job  iv.  1:5,  vii.  14, 
xxxiii.  15).  But  in  Num.  xii.  G;  Dent.  xiii.  1,  .'!, 
.r>;  der.  xxvii.  9 ;  Joel  ii.  28,  &c.,  dreamers  of  dreams, 
whether  true  or  falsi',  are  placed  below  "  prophets/' 
ami  even  below  "  diviners ;"  and  similarly  in  the 
climax  of  1  Sam.  xxviii.  <>,  we  read  that  "the  Lord 
answered  Saul  not,  neither  by  dreams,  nor  by  Trim 
[by  symbol],  nor  by  prophets."  Under  the  Christian 
dispensation,  while  we  read  frequently  of  trances 
(f/co-Totreis)  and  visions  (dnrafflaL,  <5pa,uara), 
dreams  are  never  referred  to  as  vehicles  of  divine 
revelation.     In  exact  accordance  with  this  principle 


DRESS 


451 


b  The   same  order,   as   being   the   natural  one,  is 
found  in  the  earliest  record  of  European  mythology  — 

'AAA'  a-ye  St)  ni'a  pavTiV  epeio^O',  V  ^PVa 

*II  ical  bveip6iro\ov.  xai  yap  rovap  e<  Ato's  cirri. 

Hom.  V.  i.  63. 


are  the  actual  records  of  the  dreams  sent  by  God. 
The  greater  number  of  such  dreams  were  granted, 
for  prediction  or  for  warning,  to  those  who  were 
aliens  to  the  Jewish  covenant.  Thus  we  have  the 
record  of  the  dreams  of  Abimelech  (Gen.  xx.  3-7)  ; 
Laban  (Gen.  xxxi.  24)  ;  of  the  chief  butler  and 
baker  (Gen.  xl.  5)  ;  of  Pharaoh  (Gen.  xli.  1-8)  ;  of 
the  Midianite  (Judg.  vii.  13);  of  Nebuchadnezzar 
(Dan.  ii.  1,  &c,  iv.  10-18);  of  the  Magi  (Matt.  ii. 
12),  and  of  Pilate's  wife  (Matt,  xxvii.  19).  Many 
of  these  dreams,  moreover,  were  symbolical  and 
obscure,  so  as  to  require  an  interpreter.  And,  where 
dreams  are  recorded  as  means  of  God's  revelation 
to  His  chosen  servants,  they  are  almost  always 
referred  to  the  periods  of  their  earliest  and  most 
imperfect  knowledge  of  Him.  So  it  is  in  the  case 
of  Abraham  (Gen.  xv.  12,  and  perhaps  1-9),  of 
Jacob  (Gen.  xxviii.  12-15),  of  Joseph  (Gen.  xxxvii. 
5-10),  of  Solomon  (1  K.  hi.  5),  and,  in  the  N.  T., 
of  Joseph  (Matt.  i.  20,  ii.  13,  19,  22).  It  is  to  be 
observed,  moreover,  that  they  belong  especial!}-  to 
the  earliest  age,  and  become  less  frequent  as  the 
revelations  of  prophecy  increase.  The  only  excep- 
tion to  this  is  found  in  the  dreams  and  "  visions  of 
the  night"  given  to  Daniel  (ii.  19,  vii.  ^.appa- 
rently in  order  to  put  to  shame  the  falsehoods  of  the 
Chaldaean  belief  in  prophetic  dreams  and  in  the 
power  of  interpretation,  and  yet  to  bring  out  the 
truth  latent  therein  (comp.  S.  Paul's  miracles  at 
Ephesus,  Acts  xix.  11,  12,  and  their  effect,  18-2(<). 
The  general  conclusion  therefore  is,  first,  that 
the  Scripture  claims  the  dream,  as  it  does  every 
other  action  of  the  human  mind,  as  a  medium 
through  which  God  may  speak  to  man  either  di- 
rectly, that  is,  as  we  call  it,  "  providentially,"  or  in- 
directly in  virtue  of  a  general  influence  upon  all  his 
thoughts;  and  secondly,  that  it  lays  far  greater 
stress  on  that  divine  influence  by  which  the  under- 
standing also  is  affected,  and  leads  us  to  believe  that 
as  such  influence  extends  more  and  more,  revelation 
by  dreams,  unless  in  very  peculiar  circumstances, 
might  be  expected  to  pass  away.  [A.  B.] 

DRESS.  This  subject  includes  the  following 
particulars: — 1.  Materials.  2.  Colour  and  decora- 
tion. 3.  Name,  form,  and  mode  of  wearing  the 
various  articles.  4.  Special  usages  relating  thereto. 
1.  The  materials  were  various,  and  multiplied  with 
the  advance  of  civilization.  The  earliest  and  simplest 
robe  was  made  out  of  the  leaves  of  a  tree  (i"l3NF), 
"  A.  V.  fig-tree" — and  comp.  the  present  Arabic 
name  for  the  fig,  tin,  or  teen),  portions  of  which 
were  sewn  together,  so  as  to  form  an  apron  (Gen.  iii. 
7).  Ascetic  Jews  occasionally  used  a  similar  material 
in  later  times.  Josephus  (  Vita,  §2)  records  this  of 
Banus  (e<r0?JTi  fx.iv  curb  84v8pa>v  xpiifnevov)  \  ''ut 
whether  it  was  made  of  the  Leaves,  or  the  bark,  is 
uncertain.  After  the  tall,  the  skins  of  animals  sup- 
plied a  more  durable  material  (den.  iii.  '_' I  i,  which 
was  adapted  to  a  rude  state  of  society,  and  is  slated 
to  have  been  used  by  various  ancient  nations  (Diod. 
Sic.  i.  4:i,  ii.  38  ;  A  man,  Tnd.  cap.  7,  §3).  Skins 
were  not  wholly  disused  at  later  periods:  the  adde- 
reth  (n~nN)  worn  by  Elijah  appears  to  have  been 
the  skin  ut'  a  sheep  or  some  other  animal  with  the 
wool  left  on:  in  the  1,\.\.  the  won!  is  rendered 
/Lt7jAa>i~>7  1 1  K.  xix.  1:;,  Hi ;  '_'  K.  ii.  13),  Sopd  (Gen. 
XXV.  25),  and  Stpfiis  (Zech.  xiii.  4i;  and  it  may 
lie  connected  with  Sopd  etymologically  (Saalehutz, 
ArchaeoL  i.  19);  Gesenius,  however,  prefers  the 
notion  of  amplitude,  T7X.  in  which  case  it  =  "HX 
2  G  '-' 


452 


DRESS 


(Mic.  ii.  8;  Thesaur.  p.  29).  The  same  material 
is  implied  in  the  description  (1]iW  ?V3  tS^X ;  av$]p 
Saavs,  LXX. ;  A.  V.  "hairy  man,"  2  K.  i.  8), 
though  these  words  may  also  be  understood  of  the 
hair  of  the  Prophet ;  and  in  the  comparison  of 
Esau's  skin  to  such  a  robe  (Gen.  xxv.  25).  It 
was  characteristic  of  a  prophet's  office  from  its 
mean  appearance  (Zech.  xiii.  4;  cf.  Matt.  vii. 
15).  Pelisses  of  sheep-skin a  still  form  an  ordi- 
nary article  of  dress  in  the  East  (Burckhardt's 
Notes  on  Bedouins,  i.  50).  The  addereth  worn  by 
the  king  of  .Nineveh  (Jon  iii.  6),  and  the  "  goodly 
Babylonish  garment"  found  at  Ai  (Josh.  vii.  21), 
were  of  a  different  character,  either  robes  trimmed 
with  valuable  furs,  or  the  skins  themselves  orna- 
mented with  embroidery.  The  art  of  weaving  hair 
was  known  to  the  Hebrews  at  an  early  period  (Ex. 
xxvi.  7,  xxxv.  6)  ;  the  sackcloth  used  by  mourners 
was  of  this  material  [Sackcloth],  and  by  many 
writers  the  addereth  of  the  prophets  is  supposed  to 
have  been  such.  John  the  Baptist's  robe  was  of 
camel's  hair  (Matt.  iii.  4),  and  a  similar  material 
was  in  common  use  among  the  poor  of  that  day 
(Joseph.  B.  J.  i.  24,  §3),  probably  of  goats'  hair, 
which  was  employed  in  the  Roman  cUicium.  At 
what  period  the  use  of  wool,  and  of  still  more  arti- 
ficial textures,  such  as  cotton  and  linen,  became 
known  is  uncertain :  the  first  of  these,  we  may  pre- 
sume, was  introduced  at  a  very  early  period,  the 
flocks  of  the  pastoral  families  being  kept  partly  for 
their  wool  (Gen.  xxxviii.  12)  :  it  was  at  all  times 
largely  employed,  particularly  for  the  outer  gar- 
ments (Lev.  xiii.  47  ;  Dent.  xxii.  11 ;  Ez.  xxxiv.  3; 
Job  xxxi.  20 ;  Prov.  xxvii.  26,  xxxi.  13).  [WOOL.] 
The  occurrence  of  the  term  cetoneth  in  the  book  of 
Genesis  (iii.  21,  xxxvii.  3,  23)  seems  to  indicate  an 
acquaintance,  even  at  that  early  day,  with  the  finer 
materials ;  for  that  term,  though  significant  of  a 
particular  robe,  originally  appears  to  have  referred 
to  the  material  employed  (the  root  being  preserved 
in  our  cotton;  cf.  Bohlen's  Introd.  ii.  51;  Saal- 
chutz,  Archaeol.  i.  8),  and  was  applied  by  the  later 
Jews  to  flax  or  linen,  as  stated  by  Josephus  {Ant. 
iii.  7,  §2,  XeOofxevrr  /J.ev  KaAeircu.  Aiveov  tovto 
<TWfJ.ct.ivei,  x*®ov  7"P  T^  ^ivov  t}jx<hs  Ka\ovfj.ev). 
No  conclusion,  however,  can  be  drawn  from  the 
use  of  the  word :  it  is  evidently  applied  generally, 
and  without  any  view  to  the  material,  as  in  Gen. 
iii.  21.  It  is  probable  that  the  acquaintance  of  the 
Hebrews  with  linen,  and  perhaps  cotton,  dates  from 
the  period  of  the  captivity  in  Egypt,  when  they 
were  instructed  in  the  manufacture  (1  Chr.  iv.  21). 
After  their  return  to  Palestine  we  have  frequent 
notices  of  linen,  the  finest  kind  bemg  named  shesh 
(WW),  and  at  a  later  period  butz  (f-13),  the  latter 
a  word  of  Syrian,  and  the  former  of  Egyptian 
origin,  and  each  indicating  the  quarter  whence  the 
material  was  procured :  the  term  chur  ("lit"!)  was 
also  applied  to  it  from  its  brilliant  appearance 
(Is.  xix.  9 ;  Esth.  i.  6,  viii.  15).  It  is  the  jSiWos 
of  the  LXX.  and  the  N.  T.  (Luke  xvi.  19 ;  Rev. 
xviii.  1 2, 16),  and  the  '■'  fine  linen"  of  the  A.  V.  It 
was  used  in  the  vestments  ofrthe  high-priests  (Ex. 
xxviii.  5  ft".),  as  well  as  by  the  wealthy  (Gen.  xli. 
42;  Prov.  xxxi.  22;  Luke  xiv.  19).  [Linen.] 
A  less  costly  kind  was  named  bad  (*?3  ;  Kiveos), 

a  The  sheep-skin  coat  is  frequently  represented  in 
the  sculptures  of  Khorsahad  :  it  was  made  with 
sleeves,  and  was  worn  over  the  tunic  :   it  fell  over 


DRESS 

which  was  used  for  certain  portions  of  the  high- 
priest's  dress  (Ex.  xxviii.  42  ;  Lev.  xvi.  4,  23,  32), 
and  for  the  ephods  of  Samuel  (1  Sam.  ii.  18)  and 
David  (2  Sam.  vi.  14):  it  is  worthy  of  notice,  in 
reference  to  its  quality  and  appearance,  that  it  is 
the  material  in  which  angels  are  represented  (Ez. 
ix.  3,  11,  x.  2,  6,  7  ;  Dan.  x.  5,  xii.  6 ;  Rev.  xv.  6). 
A  coarser  kind  of  linen,  termed  wfiu\ivov  (Ecclus. 
xl.  4),  was  used  by  the  very  poor  [Linen].  The 
Hebrew  term  sadin  (J^D  =  uivStiv,  and  satin) 
expresses  a  fine  kind  of  linen,  especially  adapted  for 
summer  wear,  as  distinct  from  the  saraballa,  which 
was  thick  (Talmud,  Menach.  p.  41,  1).  What  may 
have  been  the  distinction  between  shesh  and  sadin 
(Prov.  xxxi.  22,  24)  we  know  not :  the  probability 
is  that  the  latter  name  passed  from  the  material  to 
a  particular  kind  of  robe.  Silk  was  not  introduced 
until  a  very  late  period  (Rev.  xviii.  12):  the  term 
meshi  ('K'D;  rpixaiTTov ;  Ez.  xvi.  10)  is  of  doubt- 
ful meaning  [Silk].  The  use  of  a  mixed  material 
(T3DJ?&' ;  KipSn\ov,  i.  e.  spurious,  LXX. ;  avri- 
Si.aKeiiJ.svov,  Aquil.  ;  ipi6\ivov,  Gr.  Ven.),  such 
as  wool  and  flax,  was  forbidden  (Lev.  xix.  19  ; 
Deut.  xxii.  11),  on  the  ground,  according  to 
Josephus  (Ant.  iv.  8,  §11),  that  such  was  reserved 
for  the  priests,  or  as  being  a  practice  usual  among 
idolaters  (Spencer,  Leg.  Heb.  Bit.  ii.  32),  but  more 
probably  with  the  view  of  enforcing  the  general 
idea  of  purity  and  simplicity. 

2.  Colour  and  decoration.  The  prevailing  colour 
of  the  Hebrew  dress  was  the  natural  white  of  the 
materials  employed,  which  might  be  brought  to  a 
high  state  of  brilliancy  by  the  art  of  the  fuller 
(Mark  ix.  3).     Some  of  the  terms  applied  to  these 

materials  (e.  g.  W,  )>;13,  "Tin)  are  connected  with 
words  significant  of  whiteness,  while  many  of  the 
allusions  to  garments  have  special  reference  to  this 
quality  (Job  xxxviii.  14  ;  Ps.  civ.  1,  2  ;  Is.  lxiii.  3)  : 
white  was  held  to  be  peculiarly  appropriate  to 
festive  occasions  (Eccl.  ix.  8  ;  cf.  Hor.  Sat.  ii.  2, 
60),  as  well  as  symbolical  of  purity  (Rev.  iii.  4,  5, 
iv.  4,  vii.  9,  13).  It  is  uncertain  when  the  art  of 
dyeing  became  known  to  the  Hebrews  ;  the  cetoneth 
passim  worn  by  Joseph  (Gen.  xxxvii.  3,  23)  is 
variously  taken  to  be  either  a  "coat  of  divers 
colours  "  (ttoiki'Aos  ;  polymita,  Vulg. ;  comp.  the 
Greek  irdffo-fiv,  II.  iii.  126,  xxii.  441),  or  a  tunic 
furnished  with  sleeves  and  reaching  down  to  the 
ankles,  as  in  the  versions  of  Aquila,  affrpayaXetos, 
Kap-wwr6s,  and  Symmachus,  ^etpiScoT^s,  and  in 
the  Vulg.  (2  Sam.  xiii.  18),  talaris,  and  as  de- 
scribed by  Josephus  (Ant.  vii.  8,  §1).  The  latter 
is  probably  the  correct  sense,  in  which  case  we 
have  no  evidence  of  the  use  of  variegated  robes 
previously  to  the  sojourn  of  the  Hebrews  in  Egypt, 
though  the  notice  of  scarlet  thread  (Gen.  xxxviii. 
28)  implies  some  acquaintance  with  dyeing,  and 
the  light  summer  robe  (Pl^yV  ;  Bipiffrpov ;  veil, 
A.  V.)  worn  by  Rebecca  and  Tamar  (Gen.  xxiv.  65, 
xxxviii.  14,  19)  was  probably  of  an  ornamental 
character.  The  Egyptians  had  carried  the  art  of 
weaving  and  embroidery  to  a  high  state  of  per- 
fection,  and  from  them  the  Hebrews  learned  various 
methods  of  producing  decorated  stuffs.  The  ele- 
ments of  ornamentation  were — (1)   weaving  with 


the  back,  and  terminated  in  its  natural  state.  The 
people  wearing  it  have  been  identified  with  the 
Sagartii  (Bonomi's  Nineveh,  p.  193). 


DRESS 

threads  previously  dyed  (Ex.  xxxv.  25  ;  cf.  Wilkin- 
son's Egyptians,  iii.  125)  ;  (2)  the  introduction 
of  gold  thread  or  wire  (Ex.  xxviii.  0  if.);  (3)  the 
addition  of  figures,  probably  of  animals  and  hunt- 
ing or  battle  scenes  (of.  Layard,  ii.  297),  in  the 
case  of  garments,  in  the  same  manner  as  the 
cherubim  were  represented  in  the  curtains  of  the 
tabernacle  (Ex.  xxvi.  1,  31,  xxxvi.  8,  35).  These 
devices  may  have  been  either  woven  into  the  stuff, 
or  cut  out  of  other  stuff  and  afterwards  attached 
by  needlework :  in  the  former  case  the  pattern 
would  appear  only  on  one  side,  in  the  latter  the 
pattern  might  be  varied.  Such  is  the  distinction, 
according  to  Talmudical  writers,  between  cunning- 
work  and  needlework,  or  as  marked  by  the  use  of 
the  singular  and  dual  number,  i"lOpT,  needlework, 
and  DTlDpl,  needlework  on  both  sides  (Judg.  v. 
30,  A.  V.),  though  the  latter  term  may  after  all 
be  accepted  in  a  simpler  way  as  a  dual  =  two  em- 
broidered  robes  (Bertheau,  Comm.  in  I.  c).  The 
account  of  the  corslet  of  Amasis  (Her.  iii.  47) 
illustrates  the  processes  of  decoration  described  in 

Exodus.  Robes  decorated  with  gold  (m^3C'D, 
Ps.  xlv.  13),  and  at  a  later  period  with  silver 
thread  (Joseph.  Ant.  xix.  8,  §2  ;  cf.  Acts  xii.  21), 
were  worn  by  royal  personages :  other  kinds  of 
embroidered  robes  were  worn  by  the  wealthy  both 
of  Tyre  (Ez.  xvi.  13)  and  Palestine  (Judg.  v.  30; 
Ps.  xlv.  14).  The  art  does  not  appeal-  to  have 
been  maintained  among  the  Hebrews:  the  Baby- 
lonians and  other  eastern  nations  (Josh.  vii.  21; 
Ez.  xxvii.  24),  as  well  as  the  Egyptians  (Ez.  xxvii. 
7),  excelled  in  it.  Nor  does  the  art  of  dyeing- 
appear  to  have  been  followed  up  in  Palestine :  dyed 
robes  were  impoited  from  foreign  countries  (Zeph. 
i.  8),  particularly  from  Phoenicia,  and  were  not 
much  used  on  account  of  their  expensiveness:  purple 
(Prov.  xxxi.  22  ;  Luke  xvi.  19)  and  scarlet  (2  Sam. 
i.  24)  were  occasionally  worn  by  the  wealthy.  The 
surrounding  nations  were  more  lavish  in  their  use 
of  them:  the  wealthy  Tyrians  (Ez.  xxvii.  7),  the 
Midianitish  kings  (Judg.  viii.  26),  the  Assyrian 
nobles  (Ez.  xxiii.  G),  and  Persian  officers  (Est.  viii. 
15),  are  all  represented  in  purple.  The  general 
hue  of  the  Persian  dress  was  more  brilliant  than 
that  of  the  Jews :  hence  Ezekiel  (xxiii.  1 2)  describes 

the  Assyrians  as  ?1?3JD  *E???,  lit-  clot/nil  in 
perfection ;  according  to  the  LXX.  evird.pv<pa, 
wearing  robes  with  handsome  hunli-rs.  With  re- 
gard to  the  head-dress  in  particular,  described  as 

D^l^P  *tti*1p  (ridpai  Pa-Krai  ;  A.  V.  "  dyed 
attire;"  cf.  Ov.  Met.  xiv.  654,  mitrapicta),  some 
doubt  exists  whether  the  word  rendered  dyed  does 
not  rather  mean  flowing  (Gesen.  Thesaur.  p.  542  ; 
Layard,  ii.  308). 

3.  The  names,  forms,  and  mode  of  wearing  the 
robes.  It  is  difficult  to  give  a  satisfactory  account 
of  the  various  articles  of  dress  mentioned  in  the 
Bible:  the  notices  are  for  the  most  part  incidental, 
and  refer  to  a  Lengthened  period  of  time,  during 
which  the  fashions  must  have  fivmicntlv  changed: 
while  the  collateral  sources  of  information,  such  as 
sculpture,  painting,  or  contemporary  records,  are 
but  scanty.  The  general  characteristics  of  Oriental 
dress  have  indeed  preserved  a  remarkable  uniformity 
in  all  ages :  the  modern  Arab  dresses  much  as 
the  ancient  Hebrew  did  ;  there  are  the  same  Rowing 
robes,  the  same  distinction  between  the  outer  and 
inner  garments,  the  former  heavy  and  warm,  the 


DRESS 


453 


latter  light,  adapted  to  the  rapid  and  excessive 
changes  of  temperature  in  those  countries ;  and 
there  is  the  same  distinction  between  the  costume 
of  the  rich  and  the  poor,  consisting  in  the  multipli- 
cation of  robes  of  a  finer  texture  and  more  ample 
dimensions.  Hence  the  numerous  illustrations  of 
ancient  costume,  which  may  be  drawn  from  the 
usages  of  modem  Orientals,  supplying  in  great 
measure  the  want  of  contemporaneous  representa- 
tions. With  regard  to  the  figures  which  some  have 
identified  as  Jews  in  Egyptian  paintings  and  Assy- 
rian sculptures,  we  cannot  but  consider  the  evidence 
insufficient.  The  figures  in  the  painting  at  Beni 
Hassan,  delineated  by  Wilkinson  (Anc.  Egypt.,  ii. 
296),  and  supposed  by  him  to  represent  the  arrival 
of  Joseph's  brethren,  are  dressed  in  a  manner  at 
variance  with  our  ideas  of  Hebrew  costume :  the 
more  important  personages  wear  a  double  tunic,  the 
upper  one  constructed  so  as  to  pass  over  the  left 
shoulder  and  under  the  right  arm,  leaving  the  right 
shoulder  exposed :  the  servants  wear  nothing  more 
than  a  skirt  or  kilt,  reaching  from  the  loins  to  the 
knee.  Wilkinson  suggests  some  collateral  reasons 
for  doubting  whether  they  were  really  Jews :  to 
which  we  may  add  a  further  objection  that  the 
presents,  which  these  persons  bring  with  them,  are 
not  what  we  should  expect  from  Gen.  xliii.  11. 
Certain  figures  inscribed  on  the  face  of  a  rock  at 
Behistun,  near  Kermanshah,  were  supposed  by  Sir 
R.  K.  Porter  to  represent  Samaritans  captured  by 
Shalmanezer:  they  are  given  in  Vaux's  Nineveh, 
p.  372.  These  sculptures  are  now  recognised  as  of 
a  later  date,  and  the  figures  evidently  represent 
people  of  different  nations,  for  the  tunics  are  alter- 
nately short  and  long.  Again,  certain  figures  dis- 
covered at  Nineveh  have  been  pronounced  to  be 
Jews:  in  one  instance  the  presence  of  hats  and 
boots  is  the  ground  of  identification  (Bonomi, 
Nineveh,  p.  197  ;  comparing  Dan.  iii.  21)  ;  but  if, 
as  we  shall  hereafter  show,  the  original  words  in 
Dan.  have  been  misunderstood  by  our  translators, 
no  conclusion  can  be  drawn  from  the  presence  of 
these  articles.  In  another  instance  the  figures  are 
simply  dressed  in  a  short  tunic,  with  sleeves  reach- 
ing nearly  to  the  elbow,  and  confined  at  the  waist 
by  a  girdle,  a  style  of  dress  which  was  so  widely 
spread  throughout  the  East  that  it  is  impossible  to 
pronounce  what  particular  nation  they  may  have 
belonged  to  :  the  style  of  head-dress  seems  an  objec- 
tion to  the  supposition  that  they  are  Jews.  These 
figures  are  given  in  Bonomi's  Nineveh,  p.  381. 

The  costume  of  the  men  and  women  was  very 
similar  ;  there  was  sufficient  difference,  however,  to 
mark  the  sex,  and  it  was  strictly  forbidden  to  a 

woman  to  wear  the  appendages  (v3  ;  (TKcun), 
such  as  the  staff,  signet-ring,  and  other  ornaments, 
or,  according  to  Josephus  [Ant.  iv.  8,  §43),  the 
weapons  of  a   man  ;  as  well  as  to  a  man  to  wear 

the  outer  robe  (rPDti')  of  a  woman  (Dent.  xxii. 
5):  the  reason  of  the  prohibition,  according  to 
Maimonides  (  M<n\  Neboch.  iii.  37),  being  that  such 
was  the  practice  of  idolaters  (cf.  Carpzov,  Appar. 
p.  .'.1  M:  but  more  probably  it  was  based  upon  the 
general  principle  of  propriety.  Wo  shall  first  describe 
tic-  robes  which  were  common  to  the  two  sexes,  and 
then  those  which  were  peculiar  to  women. 

(1.)  The  cetoneth  (fUJlS,  whence  the  Creek 
Xitoji/)  was  the  most  essential  article  of  dress.  It 
was  a  closely  lilting  garment,  resembling  in  form 
and  use  our  shirt,  though  unfortunately  translated 


454 


DRESS 


coat  in  the  A.  V.  The  material  of  which  it  was 
made  was  either  wool,  cotton,  or  linen.  From 
Josephus'  observation  (Ant.  iii.  7,  §4)  with  regard 
to  the  meil,  that  it  was  ouk  £k  Svo7p  ■K^pirfxrifxa/roiv, 
we  may  probably  inter  that  the  ordinary  cetoneth 
or  tunic  was  made  in  two  pieces,  which  were  sewn 
together  at  the  sides.  In  this  case  the  xnwv 
&ppa<pos  worn  by  our  Lord  (John  six.  23)  was 
either  a  singular  one,  or,  as  is  more  probable,  was 
the  upper  tunic  or  meil.  The  primitive  cetoneth 
was  without  sleeves  and  reached  only  to  the  knee, 
like  the  Doric  x'lTa>vi  it  ma7  also  ^ave  been,  like 
the  latter,  partially  opened  at  one  side,  so  that  a 
person  in  rapid  motion  was  exposed  (2  Sam.  vi.  20). 
Another  kind,  which  we  may  compare  with  the 
Ionian  yiruiv,  reached  to  the  wrists  and  ankles: 
such  was  probably  the  cetoneth  passim  worn  by 
Joseph  (Gen.  xxxvii.  3,  23),  and  Tamar  (2  Sam. 
xiii.  18),  and  that  which  the  priests  wore  (Joseph. 
Ant.  iii.  7,  §2).  It  was  in  either  case  kept  close 
to  the  body  by  a  girdle  [Girdle],  and  the  fold 
formed  by  the  overlapping  of  the  robe  served  as  an 
inner  pocket,  in  which  a  letter  or  any  other  small 
article  might  be  earned  (Joseph.  Ant.  xvii.  5,  §7). 
A  person  wearing  the  cetoneth  alone  was  described 
as  D"1J7,  nuked,  A.  V.:  we  may  compare  the  use 
of  the  term  yvfivai  as  applied  to  the  Spartan  virgins 
(Pint.  Lye.  14),  of  the  Latin  nudus  (Virg.  Georg. 
i.  299"),  and  of  our  expression  stripped.  Thus  it  is 
said  ut'  Saul  after  having  taken  oft'  his  upper  gar- 
ments (V1J3,  1  Sam.  xix.  24);  of  Isaiah  (Is.  xx. 
2)  when  he  had  put  oft'  his  sackcloth,  which  was 
usually  worn  over  the  tunic  (cf.  Jon.  iii.  6),  and 
only  on  special  occasions  next  the  skin  (2  K.  vi. 
30);  of  a  warrior  who  has  cast  oft'  his  military 
cloak  (  \m  n  11;  ^ct  I  r-  in  2  .tienncr  ?t>tL.(:u 
and  of  Peter  without  his  fisher's  coat  (John  xxi.  7). 
The  same  expression  is  elsewhere  applied  to  the 
poorly  clad  (Job  x\ii.  6;  Is.  lviii.7;  James  ii.  15). 
Tlie  annexed  woodcut  (rig.  1)  represents  the 
simplest  style  of  Oriental  dress,  a  long  loose  shirt 
or  cetoneth  without  a  girdle,  reaching  nearly  to  the 
ankle.  The  same  robe,  with  the  addition  of  the 
girdle,  is  shown  in  tig.  4. 


DRESS 

the  waist  leaving  an  ample  fold,  which  serves  as  a 
pocket.  Over  the  tunic  he  wears  the  abba,  or 
striped  plaid,  which  completes  his  costume. 


I"ig.  1.    An  Egyptian.    (.Lanu's  Modern  %|i|i«jj 

fn    fig.    2    we   have   the   ordinary  dress   of  the 
modern  Bedouin:  the  tunic  overlaps  the  girdle.at 


(Lynch.  /»<W  Sea.) 


(2.)  The  sadin  (P"]D)  appeals  to  have  been  a 
wrapper  of  tine  linen  (ffivSwv,  LXX.),  which  might 
be  used  in  various  ways,  but  especially  as  a  night- 
shirt (Mark  xiv.  51  ;  cf.  Her.  ii.  95;  Schleusner's 
Lex.  in  N.  T.  s.  v.).  The  Hebrew  term  is  given 
in  the  Syriac  N.  T.  as  =  ffovSapiov  (Luke  xix.  20), 
and  XfVTiov  (John  xiii.  4).  The  material  or  robe 
is  mentioned  in  Judg.  xiv.  12,  13  (sheet,  shirt, 
A.  V.),  Prov.  xxxi.  24,  aud  Is.  iii.  23  (fine  linen, 
A.  V.);  but  in  none  of  these  passages  is  there  any- 
thing to  decide  its  specific  meaning.  The  Tal- 
mudical  writers  occasionally  describe  the  taliih 
under  that  name,  as  being  made  of  fine  linen : 
hence  Lightfoot  (Excrcitations  on  JMark  xiv.  51) 
identifies  the  aivdwv  worn  by  the  young  man  as  a 
taliih,  which  he  had  put  on  in  his  haste  without 
his  other  garments. 

(3.)  The  meil  (7^J2)  was  an  upper  or  second 
tunic,  the  difference  being  that  it  was  longer 
than  the  first.  It  is  hence  termed  in  the  LXX. 
Lnro8vT7)s  irofirip-qs,  and  probably  in  this  sense 
the  term  is  applied  to  the  cetoneth  passim  (2  Sam. 
xiii.  18\  implying  that  it  reached  down  to  the 
feet.  The  sacerdotal  meil  is  elsewhere  described. 
[Priest.]  As  an  article  of  ordinary  dress  it  was 
worn  by  kings  (1  Sam.  xxiv.  4),  prophets  (1  Sam. 
xxviii.  14),  nobles  (Job  i.  20),  and  youths  (1  Sam. 
ii.  19).  It  may,  however,  be  doubted  whether  the 
term  is  used  in  its  specific  sense  in  these  passages, 
and  not  rathei  in  its  broad  etymological  sense  (from 
?])ft,  to  cove>-),  for  any  robe  that  chanced  to  be 
worn  over  the  cetoneth.  In  the  LXX.  the  ren- 
derings vary  between  e7rei>8irr7js  (1  Sam.  xviii.  4  ; 
2  Sam.  xiii.  18;  1  Sam.  ii.  19,  Theodot.),  a  term 
properly  applied  to  an  upper  garment,  and  specially 
used  in  John  xxi.  7  for  the  linen  coat  worn  by  the 
Phoenician  and  Syrian  fishermen  (Theophyl.  in 
I.e.),  SnrXoh  (1  Sam.  ii.  19,  xv.  27,  xxiv.  4, 
11,  xxviii.  14;  Job  xxix.  14).  l/xdrta  (Job  i.  20), 
o-t6\t)  (1  Chr.  xv.  27;  Job  ii.  12),  and  vitoSvttis 
(Ex.  xxxix.  21;  Lev.  viii.  7),  showing  that  gene- 
rally   speaking  it   was  regarded   as   an    upper    gar- 


DRESS 

merit.     This  farther  appears  from  the  passages  in 

which  notice  of  it  occurs  :  in  1  Sam.  .wiii.4  it  is  the 
"robe"  which  Jonathan  first  takes  oh";  in  1  Sam. 
xxviii.  14  it  is  the  "mantle"  in  which  Samuel  is 
enveloped;  in  1  Sam.  xv.  27,  it  is  the  "  mantle," 
the  skirt  of  which  is  rent  (cf.  1  K.  xi.  30,  where 
the  n?J?ty  is  similarly  treated)  ;  in  1  Sam.  xxiv. 
4,  it  is  the  "  robe,"  under  which  Saul  slept  (gene- 
rally the  "733  was  so  used) ;  and  in  Job  i.  20,  ii. 
12,  it  is  the  "  mantle"  which  he  rends  (cf.  Ezr.  ix. 
•">.  5)  ;  in  these  passages  it  evidently  describes  an  outer 
robe,  whether  the  simlah,  or  the  meil  itself  used  as 
a  simlah.  Where  two  tunics  are  mentioned  (Luke 
iii.  11)  as  being  worn  at  the  same  time,  the  second 
would  be  a  meil ;  travellers  generally  wore  two 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xvii.  5,  §7),  but  the  practice  was 
forbidden  to  the  disciples  (Matt.  x.  10;  Luke  ix.  3). 
The  dress  of  the  middle  and  upper  classes  in 
modern  Egypt  (fig.  3)  illustrates  the  customs  of 
the  Hebrews.  In  addition  to  the  shirt,  they  wear 
a  long  vest  of  striped  silk  and  cotton,  called  kaftan, 
descending  to  the  ankles,  and  with  ample  sleeves, 
so  that  the  hands  may  be  concealed  at  pleasure. 
The  girdle  surrounds  this  vest.  The  outer  robe 
consists  of  a  long  cloth  coat,  called  gibbeh,  with 
sleeves  reaching  nearly  to  the  wrist.  In  cold 
weather  the  abba  is  thrown  over  the  shoulders. 


DRESS 


455 


Fig.  3.    An  Egyptian  of  the  upper  cltusaes,    (Lime.) 

(4.)  The  ordinary  outer  garment  consisted  of  a 
quadrangular  piece  of  woollen  cloth,  probably  re- 
sembling in  shape  a  Scotch  plaid.  The  size  and 
texture  would  vary  with  tin'  means  of  the  wearer. 
The  Hebrew  terms  referring  to  it  are — simlah 
(!"6?X>,  occasionally  i"lu?t^),  which  appears  to 
have  had  the  broadest  sense,  and  sometimes  is  put 
for  clothes  generally  ((Jen.  xxxv.  2,  xxxvii.  :'>4  ; 
Ex.  iii.  22,  xxii.  0;  Dent.  \.  18  ;  Is.  iii.  7,  iv.  1), 
though  once  used  specifically  of  the  warrior's  cloak 
(Is.  ix.  5);  beged  iT?3).  which  is  more  usual  in 
speaking  of  robes  of  a  handsome  and  substantial 
character  (Gen.  xxvii.  15,  xli.  42  ;  Kx.  xxviii.  2 ; 
IK.  xxii.  Id;  2  Chr.  xviii.  9  ;  Is.  Ixiii.  1 )  ;  Cesuth 
(n-1D3),  appropriate  to  passages  where  covering  or 
protection  is  the  prominent  idea  (Ex.  xxii.  26; 
Job  xxvi.  6,    xxxi.  19);    and   lastly  leb&sfl  (B^?), 


usual  in  poetry,  but  specially  applied  to  a  warrior's 
cloak  (2  Sam.  xx.  8),  priests'  vestments  (2  K.  x. 
22),  and  royal  apparel  (Esth  vi.  11,  viii.  15). 
A  cognate  term  (malbush  (ti'-13?)0)  describes  speci- 
fically a  state-dress,  whether  as  used  in  a  royal 
household  (1  K.  x.  5;  2  Chr.  ix.  4),  or  for  reli- 
gious festivals  (2  K.  x.  22):  elsewhere  it  is  used 
generally  for  robes  of  a  handsome  character  (Job 
xxvii.  16;  Is.  Ixiii.  3;  Ez.  xvi.  13;  Zeph.  i.  8). 
Another  term,  mad  (112),  with  its  derivatives 
HTO   (Ps.  csxxiii.  2),  and  HO   (2   Sam.  x.  4; 

1  Chr.  six.  4),  is  expressive  of  the  length  of  the 
Hebrew  garments  (1  Sam.  iv.  12,  xviii.  4),  and  is 
specifically  applied  to  a  long  cloak  ( Judg.  iii.  16  ; 

2  Sam.  xx.  8),  and  to  the  priest's  coat  (Lev.  vi.  10). 
The  Greek  terms  l/xdriov  and  ar6\r]  express  the 
corresponding  idea,  the  latter  being  specially  appro- 
priate to  robes  of  more  than  ordinary  grandeur 
(1  Mace.  x.  21,  xiv.  9  ;  Mark  xii.  38,  xvi.  5 ;  Luke 
xv.  22,  xx.  46;  Rev.  vi.  11,  vii.  9,  13);  the 
XiTCtii/  and  IfxaTtov  (tunica,  pallium,  Vulg. ;  coat, 
cloak,  A.  V.)  are  brought  into  juxta-position  in 
Matt.  v.  40,  and  Acts  ix.  39.  The  beged  might  be 
worn  in  various  ways,  either  wrapped  round  the 
body,  or  worn  over  the  shoulders,  like  a  shawl! 
with  the  ends  or  "  skirts  "  (lVQ32  ;  irrepvyia ; 
anguli)  hanging  down  in  front ;  or  it  might  be 
thrown  over  the  head,  so  as  to  conceal  the  face 
(2  Sam.  xv.  30;  Esth.  vi.  12).  The  ends  were 
skirted  with  a  fringe  and  bound  with  a  dark  purple 
riband  (Num.  xv.  38):  it  was  confined  at  the 
waist  by  a  girdle,  and  the  fold  (pTl ;  k6\-kos  ; 
sinus),  formed  by  the  overlapping  of  the  robe, 
seryed  as  a  pocket  in  which  a  considerable  quantity 
of  articles  might  be  carried  (2  K.  iv.  39  ;  Ps.  lxxix. 
12  ;  Hag.  ii.  12;  Niebuhr,  Description,  p.  50),  or 
as  a  puree  (Prov.  xvii.  23,  xxi.  14  ;  Is.  lxv.  6,  7  : 
Jer.  xxxii.  18  ;   Luke  vi.  38). 

The  ordinary  mode  of  wearing  the  outer  robe, 
called  abba  or  abdyeh,  at  the  present  time,  is  ex- 
hibited in  figs.  2  and  5.  The  arms,  when  falling- 
down,  are  completely  covered  by  it,  as  in  fig.  5  : 
but  in  holding  any  weapon,  or  in  active  work,  the 
lower  part  of  the  arm  is  exposed,  as  in  fig.  2. 


456 


DRESS 


The  dress  of  the  women  differed  from  that  of  the 
men  in  regard  to  the  outer  garment,  the  cetoneth 
being  worn  equally  by  both  sexes  (Cant.  v.  3). 
The  names  of  their  distinctive  robes  were  as  fol- 
lows:—(1)  mitpachath  (rinSQD  ;  Trepi^a ; 
pallium,  linteamen ;  veil,  wimple,  A.  W),  a  kind 
of  shawl  (Ruth  iii.  15;  Is.  iii.  22)  ;  (2)  maatapha 
(HOD^C  ;  pallioltim;  mantle,  A.  V.),  another 
kind  of  shawl  (Is.  iii.  22),  but,  how  differing  from 
the  one  just  mentioned,  we  know  not;  the  ety- 
mological meaning  of  the  first  name  is  expansion, 
of  the  second  enveloping:  (3)  tsaiph  (CpJ?  V ;  64pia- 
rpov ;  veil,  A.  V.),  a  robe  worn  by  Rebecca  on 
approaching  Isaac  (Gen.  xxiv.  65), 'and  by  Tamar 
when  she  assumed  the  guise  of  a  harlot  (Gen. 
xxxviii.  14,  19);  it  was  probably,  as  the  LXX. 
represents  it,  a  light  summer  dress  of  handsome 
appearance  (7repie'0aAe  to  Oepiffrpov  Kofi  e/caA.- 
AunriffaTo,  Gen.  xxxviii.  14),  and  of  ample  dimen- 
sions, so  that  it  might  be  thrown  over  the  head  at 
pleasure ;  (4)  raclid  (TH~I ;  A.  V.  "  veil "),  a 
similar  robe  (Is.  iii.  23 ;  Cant.  v.  7),  and  substi- 
tuted for  the  tsaiph  in  the  Chaldee  version :  we 
may  conceive  of  these  robes  as  resembling  the 
peplum  of  the  Greeks,  which  might  be  worn  over 
the  head,  as  represented  in  Diet,  of  Ant.  p.  885,  or 
again  as  resembling  the  habarah  and  mildyeh  of 
the  Modern  Egyptians  (Lane,  i.  73,  75)  ;  (5) 
pethigil  (P^JlS ;  xiT<*"/  /J.eo-uir6p<pvpos ;  sto- 
macher, A.  Y.),  a  term  of  doubtful  origin,  but 
probably  significant  of  a  gay  holiday  dress  (Is.  iii. 
24) ;  to  the  various  explanations  enumerated  by 
Gesenius  (Thesaur.  p.  1137),  we  may  add  one 
proposed  by  Saalchutz  (Archaeol.  i.  31),  T)3 
wide  or  foolish,  and  ?l,3,  pleasure,  in  which  case  it 
=  unbridled  pleasure,  and  has  no  reference  to  dress 
at  all;  (6)  gilyonim  (D^V?:!,  Is.  iii.  23),  also 
a  doubtful  word,  explained  in  the  LXX.  as  a  trans- 
parent dress,  i.  e.  of  gauze  (Stacpavrj  AaKcoviKti) ; 
Schroeder  (de  Vest,  mul.  Heb.  p.  311)  supports 
this  view,  but  more  probably  the  word  means,  as 
in  the  A.  V.,  glasses.  The  garments  of  females 
were  terminated  bv  an  ample  border  or  fringe 
y  ■  2K>,  AW;  otriadia;  skirts),  which  concealed  the 
feet  (Is.  xlvii.  2;  Jer.  xiii.  22). 

Figs.  G  and  7  illustrate  some  of  the  peculiarities 


DRESS 

of  female  dress :  the  former  is  an  Egyptian  woman 
(in  her  walking  dress)  :  the  latter  represents  a  dress, 
probably  of  great  antiquity,  still  worn  by  the  pea- 
sants in  the  south  of  Egypt :  the  outer  robe,  or 
hulaleeyeh,  is  a  large  piece  of  woollen  stuff  wound 
round  the  body,  the  upper  parts  being  attached  at 
the  shoulders:  another  piece  of  the  same  stuff  is 
used  for  the  head-veil,  or  tarhah. 


Fig.  7.    A  woman  of  the  southern  province  of  Upper  Egypt.     (  Lane. ) 

Having  now  completed  our  description  of  Hebrew 
dress,  we  add  a  few  remarks  relative  to  the  selection 
of  equivalent  terms  in  our  own  language.  It  must 
at  once  strike  every  Biblical  student  as  a  great  defect 
in  our  Authorised  Version  that  the  same  English 
word  should  represent  various  Hebrew  words  ;  e.  g. 
that  "  veil  "  should  be  promiscuously  used  for  radid 
(Is.  iii.  23),  tsaiph  (Gen.  xxiv.  65),  mitpachath 
(Ruth  iii.  15), masveh  (Ex.  xxxiv.  33)  ;  "  robe"  for 
meil  (1  Sam.  xviii.  4),  cetoneth  (Is.  xxii.  21),  ad- 
dercth  (Jon.  iii.  6),  salmah  (Mic.  ii.  8)  ;  "  mantle  " 
for  meil  (1  Sam.  xv.  27),  addereth  (1  K.  xix.  13), 
maatapha  (Is.  iii.  22);  and  "coat"  for  meil 
(1  Sam.  ii.  19),  cetoneth  (Gen.  iii.  21):  and 
conversely  that  different  English  words  should  be 
promiscuously  used  for  the  same  Hebrew  one,  as 
meil  is  translated  "  coat,"  "  robe,"  mantle  ;"  ad- 
dereth "  robe,"  "  mantle."  Uniformity  would  be 
desirable,  in  as  far  as  it  can  be  attained,  so  that 
the  English  reader  might  understand  that  the  same 
Hebrew  term  occurred  in  the  original  text,  where 
the  same  English  term  was  found  in  the  translation. 
Beyond  uniformity,  correctness  of  translation  would 
also  be  desirable:  the  difficulty  of  attaining  this  in 
the  subject  of  dress,  with  regard  to  which  the  cus- 
toms and  associations  are  so  widely  at  variance  in 
our  own  country  and  in  the  East,  is  very  great. 
Take,  for  instance,  the  cetoneth :  at  once  an  under- 
garment, and  yet  not  unfrequently  worn  without 
anything  over  it ;  a  shirt,  as  being  worn  next  the 
skin  ;  and  a  coat,  as  being  the  upper  garment  worn 
in  a  house :  deprive  the  Hebrew  of  his  cetoneth,  and 
he  was  positively  naked  ;  deprive  the  Englishman 
of  his  coat,  and  he  has  under  garments  still.  The 
beged  again :  in  shape  probably  like  a  Scotch  plaid, 
but  the  use  of  such  a  term  would  be  unintelligible 
to  the  minds  of  English  peasantry;  in   use  unlike 

-       - 


DRESS 

any  garment  with  which  we  are  familiar,  for  we 
only  wear  a  great-coat  or  a  cloak  in  bad  weather, 
whereas  the  Hebrew  and  his  beged  were  inseparable. 
With  such  difficulties  attending  the  subject,  any 
attempt  to  render  the  Hebrew  terms  must  be,  more 
or  less,  a  compromise  between  correctness  and  mo- 
dern usage  ;  and  the  English  terms  which  we  are 
about  to  propose  must  be  regarded  merely  in  the 
light  of  suggestions.  Cetoneth  answers  in  many 
respects  to  "frock;"  the  sailor's  "frock"  is  con- 
stantly worn  next  the  skin,  and  either  with  or  with- 
out a  coat  over  it ;  the  "smock-frock"  is  familiar 
to  us  as  an  upper-garment,  and  still  as  a  kiud  of 
undress.  In  shape  and  material  these  correspond 
with  cetoneth,  and  like  it,  the  term  "  frock"  is 
applied  to  both  sexes.  In  the  sacerdotal  dress  a 
more  technical  term  might  be  used  :  "  vestment," 
in  its  specific  sense  as  =  the  chasible,  or  casula 
would  represent  it  very  aptly.  Mail  may  perhaps 
be  best  rendered  "gown,"  for  this  too  applies  to 
both  sexes,  and,  when  to  men,  always  in  an  official 
sense,  as  the  academic  gown,  the  alderman's  gown, 
the  barrister's  gown,  just  as  meil  appears  to  have 
represented  an  official,  or,  at  all  events,  a  special 
dress.  In  sacerdotal  dress  "  alb  "  exactly  meets  it, 
and  retains  still,  in  the  Greek  church,  the  very 
name,  poderis,  by  which  the  meil  is  described  in  the 
LXX.  The  sacerdotal  ephod  approaches,  perhaps, 
most  nearly  to  the  term  "  pall,"  the  oo/xo(p6pLov  of 
the  Greek  church,  which  we  may  compare  with  the 
iitoojjiis  of  the  LXX.  Addcreth  answers  in  several 
respects  to  "pelisse,"  although  this  term  is  now 
applied  almost  exclusively  to  female  dress.  Sadin 
=  "linen  wrapper."  Simlah  we  would  render  "  gar- 
ment," and  in  the  plural  "clothes,"  as  the  broadest 
term  of  the  kind ;  beged  "  vestment,"  as  being  of 
superior  quality  ;  lebush  "  robe,"  as  still  superior  ; 
mad  "  cloak,"  as  being  long ;  and  malbush  "  dress," 
in  the  specific  sense  in  which  the  term  is  not  un- 
frequently  used  as  =  fine  dress.  In  female  costume 
mitpachath  might  be  rendered  "shawl,"  maatapha 
"mantle,"  tsaiph  "  handsome  dress,  radid  "cloak." 

In  addition  to  these  terms,  which  we  have  thus 
far  extracted  from  the  Bible,  we  have  in  the  Tal- 
mudical  writers  an  entirely  new  nomenclature. 
The  talith  (l"lvt3)  is  frequently  noticed;  it  was 
made  of  tine  linen,  and  had  a  hinge  attached  to  it, 
like  the  beged ;  it  was  of  ample  dimensions,  so  that 
the  head  might  be  enveloped  in  it,  as  was  usual 
among  the  Jews  in  the  act  of  prayer.  The  kolbin 
(pjPIp)  was  probably  another  name  for  the  talith, 
derived  from  the  Greek  ko\6(Siov;  Epiphanius 
(i.  15)  represents  the  <rro\ai  of  the  Pharisees  as 
identical  with  the  Dalmatica  or  the  Colobium; 
the  latter,  as  known  to  us,  was  a  close  tunic  with- 
out sleeves.  The  chaluk  (p1?n)  was  a  woollen 
shirt,  worn  as  an  under  tunic.  The  mactoren 
(pltipO)  was  a  mantle  or  outer  garment  (cf. 
Lighttoot,  Exercitation  on  Matt.  v.  -in  ;  Mark  xiv. 
51;  Luke  i.\.  :'>,  &c).  Gloves  (iVDp  or  »p)  are 
also  noticed  (Chelim,  xvi.  (>,  xxiv.  15,  xxvi.  '■'<  ),  nol . 
however,  as  worn  for  luxury,  but  for  the  protection 
of  the  hands  in  manual  labour. 

With  regard  to  other  articles  of  dress,  see  Girdle  ; 
Handkerchief;  Headdress;  Hem  of  Gar- 
ment; Sandals;  Shoes;  Veil. 

The  dresses  of  foreign  nations  are  occasionally 
referred  to  in  the  Bible;  thai  of  the  Persians  is 
described  in  Dan.  iii.  21  in  terms  which  have  been 
variously  understood,  but  which  may  be  identified 
with  the  statements  of  Herodotus  (i.  195,  vii.  61  > 


DEESS 


457 


in  the  following  manner: — (1)  The  sarbalin 
(JvSlD;  A.  V.  "coats")  =  ava^vpiSes  or  drawers, 
which  were  the  distinctive  feature  in  the  Persian  as 
compared  with  the  Hebrew  dress ;  (2)  the  patish 
(ti^LSB;  A.  V.  "hosen")  —  kiOwv  iroS-nvacris  \lveos 
or  inner  tunic;  (3)  the  carbala  (NT>2~)3  ;  -A.  V. 
"  hat  ")  =  aWos  elpiveos  Kiddov  or  upper  tunic, 
corresponding  to  the  meil  of  the  Hebrews  ;  (4)  the 

lebush  (EJ'-Ij?  ;  A.  V.  "  garment ")  =  xAai/iSioi/ 
Xevn6v  or  cloak,  which  was  worn,  like  the  beged, 
over  all.  In  addition  to  these  terms,  we  have 
notice  of  a  robe  of  state  of  fine  linen,  tachrich. 
(^HDP)  ;  5id.5rif.ia  ;  sericum  pallium),  so  called 
from  its  ample  dimensions  (Esth.  viii.  15).  The 
same  expression  is  used  in  the  Chaldee  for  purple 
garments  in  Ez.  xxvii.  16. 

The  references  to  Greek  or  Roman  dress  are  few  : 
the  x^aH-vs  (2  Mace.  xii.  35  ;  Matt,  xxvii.  28) 
was  either  the  paludamentum,  the  military  scarf  of 
the  Roman  soldiery,  or  the  Greek  chlamys  itself, 
.which  was  introduced  under  the  Emperors  [Diet,  of 
Ant.  Art.  Chlamys]  ;  it  was  especially  worn  by 
officers.  The  travelling  cloak  {<pe\6vns)  referred 
to  by  St.  Paul  (2  Tim.  iv.  13)  is  generally  iden- 
tified with  the  Roman  paenula,  of  which  it  may  be 
a  corruption;  the  Talmudical  writers  have  a 
similar  name  (jIvG  or  S*3?3).  It  is,  however, 
otherwise  explained  as  a  travelling  case  for  carrying 
clothes  or  books  (Conybeare,  St.  Paul,  ii.  499). 

4.  The  customs  and  associations  connected  with 
dress  are  numerous  and  important,  mostly  arising 
from  the  peculiar  form  and  mode  of  wearing  the 
outer  garments.  The  beged,  for  instance,  could  be 
applied  to  many  purposes  besides  its  proper  use  as 
a  vestment;  it  was  sometimes  used  to  carry  a 
burden  (Ex.  xii.  34  ;  Judg.  viii.  25  ;'  Prov.  xxx.  4), 
as  Ruth  used  her  shawl  (Ruth  iii.  15)  ;  or  to 
wrap  up  an  article  (1  Sam.  xxi.  9) ;  or  again  as  an 
impromptu  saddle  (Matt.  xxi.  7).  Its  most  im- 
portant use,  however,  was  a  coverlet  at  night  (Ex. 
xxii.  27  ;  Ruth  iii.  9  ;  Ez.  xvi.  8),  whence  the  word 
is  sometimes  taken  for  bed-clothes  (1  Sam.  xix.  13  ; 
1  K.  i.  1)  :  the  Bedouin  applies  his  abba  to  a 
similar  purpose  (Niebuhr,  Description,  p.  56). 
On  this  account  a  creditor  could  not  retain  it  after 
sunset  (Ex.  xxii.  26;  Deut.  xxiv.  12,  13;  cf.  Job 
xxii.  6,  xxiv.  7  ;  Am.  ii.  8).  The  custom  of  placing 
garments  in  pawn  appears  to  have  been  very  com- 
mon, so  much  so  that  U)2V,  pledge  =  a  garment 
(Deut.  xxiv.  12,  13)  ;  the  accumulation  of  such 
pledges  is  referred  to  in  Hab.  ii.  6  (that  hadeth 
himself  with  t^D^J?,  i.  e.  pledges  ;  where  the  A.  A', 
following  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  reads  LTD,  2V, 
"  thick  clav  " ) ;  this  custom  prevailed  in  the  time  of 
OUT  Lord,  who  bids  his  disciples  give  up  the  l/xdrtov 
=  beged,  in  which  they  slept,  as  well  as  the 
Xfrd>i>  (Matt.  v.  40).  At  the  present  day  it  is  not 
unusual  to  seize  the  abba  as  compensation  for  an 
injury:  an  instance  is  given  in  Woitabet's  Syria, 
i.  293. 

The  loose  flowing  character  of  the  Hebrew  robes 
admitted  of  a  variety  of  symbolical  actions  ;  rending 
them  was  expressive  of  various  emotions,  as  griei 
(Gen.  xxxvii.  -J'.'.  34;  Job  i.  20;  2  Sam.  i.  2) 
[Mourning],  fear  (l  K.  xxi.  27  ;  ■_'  K.  xxii.  II, 

111),   indignation  (2    K.   v.   7.  xi.    14;   Matt.   xxvi. 
65),  or  despair  (Judg.  xi.  35;  Esth.  iv.  I): 
rally  the  outer  garment  alone  was  thus  rent  (Gen. 


458 


DRESS 


xx.ivii.  34  ;  Job  i.  20,  ii.  12),  occasionally  the 
inner  (2  Sam.  sv.  32),  and  occasionally  both 
(Ezr.  ix.  3  ;  Matt.  xxvi.  65,  compared  with  Mark 
xiv.  63).  Shaking  the  garments  or  shaking  the 
dust  on"  them,  was  a  sign  of  renunciation  (Acts 
xviii.  6)  ;  spreading  them  before  a  person,  of  loyalty 
and  joyous  reception  (2  K.  ix.  13  ;  Matt.  ssi.  8)  ; 
wrapping  them  round  the  head,  of  awe  (1  K.  xix. 
13),  or  "of  grief  (2  Sam.  xv.  30;  Esth.  vi.  12; 
Jer.  xir.  3,  4)  ;  casting  them  or!',  of  excitement 
(Acts  xxii.  23)  ;  laying  hold  of  them,  of  supplica- 
tion (1  Sam.  sv.  27  ;  Is.  iii.  6,  iv.  1 ;  Zech.  viii. 
23). 

The  length  of  the  dress  rendered  it  inconvenient 
for  active  exercise  ;  hence  the  outer  garments  were 
either  left  in  the  house  by  a  person  wTorking  close 
by  [Matt.  xxiv.  18)  or  were  thrown  otf  when  the 
occasion  arose  (Mark  x.  50  ;  John  xiii.  4 ;  Acts 
vii.  58),  or,  if  this  was  not  possible,  as  in  the  case 
of  a  person  travelling,  they  were  girded  up  (1  K. 
xviii.  46  ;  2  K.  iv.  29,  is.  1  ;  1  Pet.  i.  13) ;  on 
entering  a  house  the  upper  garment  was  probably 
laid  aside  and  resumed  on  going  out  (Acts  xii.  8). 
In  a  sitting  posture,  the  garments  concealed  the 
feet ;  this  was  held  to  be  an  act  of  reverence  (Is.  vi. 
2  ;  see  l.owth's  note).  The  proverbial  expression 
in  1  Sam.  xsv.  22;  IK.  xiv.  10,  xxi.  21  ;  2  K. 
ix.  8,  probablv  owes  its  origin  to  the  length  of  the 
garments,  wlrich  made  another  habit  more  natural 
(cf.  Her.  ii.  35  ;  Xen.  Cyrop.  i.  2,  §16 ;  Am- 
mian.  Marcell.  xxiii.  6)  ;  the  expression  is  va- 
riously understood  to  mean  the  lowest  or  the 
youngest  of  the  people  (Gesen.  Thesaur.  p.  1397 ; 
Jahn,  Archaeol.  i.  8,  §120).  To  cut  the  garments 
short  was  the  grossest  insult  that  a  Jew  could 
receive  (2  Sam.  x.  4  ;  the  word  there  used  pO 
is  peculiarly  expressive  of  the  length  of  the  gar- 
ments). To  raise  the  border  or  skirt  of  a  woman's 
dress  was  a  similar  insult,  implying  her  unchastity 
( Is.  xlvii.  2  ;  Jer.  xiii.  22,  26  ;  Nah.  iii.  5). 

The  putting  on  and  off  of  garments,  and  the 
ease  with  which  it  was  accomplished,  are  fre- 
quently referred  to ;  the  Hebrew  expressions  for  the 
tirst  of  these  operations,  as  regards  the  outer  robe, 

are  Kab,  to  put  on,  HDy,  HD3,  and  C]t0y,  lit.  to 
cover,  the  three  latter  having  special  reference  to 
the  amplitude  of  the  robes ;  and  for  the  second 
L2*J'S,  lit.  to  expand,  which  was  the  natural  result 
of  taking  off  a  wide,  loose  garment.  The  ease 
of  these  operations  forms  the  point  of  comparison 
in  Ps.  cii.  26  ;  Jer.  sliii.  12.  In  the  case  of 
closely  fitting  robes  the  expression  is  "On,  lit. 
to  gird,  which  is  applied  to  the  ephod  (1  Sam. 
ii.  18;  2  Sam.  vi.  14),  to  sackcloth  (2  Sam.  iii. 
31  :  Is.  xxxii.  11;  Jer.  iv.  8);  the  use  of  the 
term  may  illustrate  Gen.  iii.  7,  where  the  garments 
used  by  our  first  parents  are  called  JYTJn  (A.  V. 
'•aprons"),  probably  meaning  such  as  could  be 
wound  round  the  body.  The  converse  term  is  I"in3, 
to  loosen,  or  unbind  (Ps.  xxx.  11  ;  Is.  xx.  2). 

The  number  of  suits  possessed  by  the  Hebrews 
was  considerable :  a  single  suit  consisted  of  an 
under  and  upper  garment,  and  was  termed  "^"Ij? 
0"H32  (cttoAt)  ijUctTiW,  i.  e.  apparatus  vestium, 
I. XX.;  Juclg.  xvii.  10).  Where  more  than  one  is 
spoken  of,  the  suits  are  termed  DI-D'On  (aAAacrcrd- 
fxtvai  (TTO\al ;  cf.  Horn.  Od.  viii.  249,  el/j-ara 
ffijuoiSa;    changes   of  raiment,    A.    V.)     These 


DRINK 

formed  in  ancient  times  one  of  the  most  usual 
presents  among  Orientals  (Harmer,  Observation*, 
ii.  379  If.) ;  five  (Gen.  xiv.  22)  and  even  ten 
changes  (2  K.  v.  5)  were  thus  presented,  while  as 
many  as  thirty  were  proposed  as  a  wager  Jodg. 
xiv.  12,  19).  The  highest  token  of  affection  was 
to  present  the  robe  actually  worn  by  the  giver 
(1  Sam.  xviii.  4;  cf.  Horn.  It.  vi.  230  ^  Harmer, 
ii.  388).  The  presentation  of  a  robe  in  many 
instances  amounted  to  installation  or  investiture 
(Gen.  sli.  42;  Esth.  viii.  15;  Is.  xxii.  21;  cf. 
Morier,  Second  Journey,  p.  93)  ;  on  the  other  hand, 
taking  it  away  amounted  to  dismissal  from  office 

-  Mace.  iv.  38).  The  production  of  the  best  robe 
was  a  mark  of  special  honour  in  a  household  (Luke 
xv.  22).  The  number  of  robes  thus  received  or 
kept  in  store  for  presents  was  very  large,  and  formed 
one  of  the  main  elements  of  wealth  in  the  East 
v  Job  xxvii.  16  ;  Matt.  vi.  19  ;  James  v.  2),  so  that 
to  hare    clothing  =  to   be  wealthy  and   powerful 

Is.  iii.  6,  7).  On  grand  occasions  the  entertainer 
offered  becoming  robes  to  his  guests  (Trench  on 
Parables,  p.  231).     Hence  in  large  households  a 

wardrobe  (i"infl?D)  was  required  for  their  pre- 
servation (2  K.  x.  22  ;  cf.  Harmer,  ii.  382),  super- 
intended by  a  special  officer,  named  D^JBH  IDC. 
keeper  of  the  wardrobe  (2  Chr.  xxxiv.  22).  Robes 
reserved  for  special  occasions  are  termed  filsPriD 
(A,  V.  "  changeable  suits"  ;  Is.  iii.  22  ;  Zech.  iii.  4) 
because  laid  aside  when  the  occasion  was  past. 

The  colour  of  the  garment  was,  as  we  have 
already  observed,  generally  white  ;  hence  a  spot  or 
stain  readily  showed  itself  (Is.  lxiii.  3  ;  Jude  23  ; 
Rev.  iii.  4) ;  reference  is  made  in  Lev.  xiii.  47  ff. 
to  a  greenish  or  reddish  spot  of  a  leprous  cha- 
racter. Jahn  (Archaeol.  i.  8,  §135)  conceives  this 
to  be  not  the  result  of  leprosy,  but  the  depredations 
of  a  small  insect ;  but  Schiling  (de  Lepra,  p.  192) 
states  that  leprosy  taints  clothes,  and  adds  sunt 
maculae  omnino  indebiles  et  potius  incrementum 
capere  quam  minui  sub  his  lavationibus  videntur 
(Knobel,  Comm.  in  I.  c).  Frequent  washings 
and  the  application  of  the  fuller's  art  were  neces- 
sary to  preserve  the  purity  of  the  Hebrew  dress. 
[Soap;  Poller.] 

The  business  of  making  clothes  devolved  upon 
women  in  a  family  (Prov.  xxxi.  22  ;  Acts  ix.  39) ; 
little  art  was  required  in  what  we  may  term  the 
tailoring  department :  the  garments  came  forth  for 
the  most  part  ready  made  from  the  loom,  so  that 
the  weaver  supplanted  the  tailor.  The  references 
to  sewing  are  therefore  few  :  the  term  "1£F1  (Gen. 
iii.  7  ;  Job  xvi.  15  ;  Eccl.  iii.  7  ;  Ez.  xiii.  18)  was 
applied  by  the  later  Jews  to  mending  rather  than 
making  clothes. 

The  Hebiew7s  were  liable  to  the  charge  of  ex- 
travagance in  dress;  Isaiah  in  particular  (iii.  16 
ff.)  dilates  on  the  numerous  robes  and  ornaments 
worn  by  the  women  of  his  day.  The  same  subject 
is  referred  to  in  Jer.  iv.  30  ;  Ez.  xvi.  10  ;  Zeph.  i. 
8,  and  Ecclus.  xi.  4.  and  in  a  later  age  1  Tim.  ii.  9  ; 
1  Pet.  iii.  3.  [W.  L.  P..] 

DRINK,  STRONG  ("OB>;    trUtpa).      The 

Hebrew  .term  shechar,  in  its  etymological  sense, 
applies  to  any  beverage  that  had  intoxicating  qua- 
lities: it  is  generally  found  connected  with  wine, 
cither  as  an  exhaustive  expression  for  all  other 
liquors  (e.  g.  Judg.  xiii.  4;  Luke  i.  15),  or  as 
parallel  to  it,  particularly  in  poetical  passages  <e.g. 


DROMEDARY 

Is.  v.  11;  Mic.  ii.  11);  in  Num.  xxviii.  7  and 
Ps.  lxix.  12,  however,  it  stands  by  itself  and  must 
be  regarded  as  including  wine.  The  Bible  itself 
throws  little  tight  upon  the  nature  of  the  mixtures 
described  under  this  term.  We  may  infer  from 
Cant.  viii.  2  that  the  Hebrews  were  in  the  habit 
of  expressing  the  juice  of  other  fruits  besides  the 
grape  for  the  purpose  of  making  wine:  the  pome- 
granate, which  is  there  noticed,  was  probably  one 
out  of  many  fruits  so  used.  In  Is.  xxiv.  9  there 
may  be  a  reference  to  the  siceetness  of  some  kind 
of  strong  drink.  In  Num.  xxviii.  7  strong  drink 
is  clearly  used  as  equivalent  to  wine,  which  was 
ordered  in  Ex.  xxix.  40.  With  regard  to  the 
application  of  the  term  in  later  times  we  have  the 
explicit  statement  of  Jerome  (Ep.  ad  Nepot.*'),  as 
well  as  other  sources  of  information,  from  which 
we  may  state  that  the  following  beverages  were 
known  to  the  Jews: — 1.  Beer,  which  was  largely 
consumed  in  Egypt  under  the  name  of  zythus 
I  Herod,  ii.  77  ;  Diod.  Sic.  i.  34),  and  was  thence 
introduced  into  Palestine  (Mischn.  Pesctch.  3,  §1). 
It  was  made  of  barley ;  certain  herbs,  such  as 
lupin  and  skirrett,  were  used  as  substitutes  for 
hops  (Colum.  x.  114).  The  boozcth  of  modern 
Egypt  is  made  of  barley-bread,  crumbled  in  water 
and  left  until  it  has  fermented  (Lane,  i.  131):  the 
Arabians  mix  it  with  spices  (Burckhardt's  Arabia, 
i.  213),  as  described  in  Is.  v.  22.  The  Mischna 
(I.  c.)  seems  to  apply  the  term  shechar  more  espe- 
cially to  a  Median  drink,  probably  a  kind  of  beer 
made  in  the  same  manner  as  the  modern  boozah ; 
the  Edomite  chomets,  noticed  in  the  same  place, 
was  probably  another  kind  of  beer,  and  may  have 
held  the  same  position  among  the  Jews  that  bitter 
beer  does  among  ourselves.  2.  Cider,  which  is 
noticed  in  the  Mischna  (Tenon.  11,  §2)  as  apple- 
<nine.  •">.  Honey-wine,  of  which  there  were  two 
sorts,  one  like  the  o\v6ix*\l  of  the  Greeks,  which 
is  noticed  in  the  Mischna  (Schabb.  20,  §2  ;  Terum. 
11,  §1)  under  a  Hebraized  form  of  that  name, 
consisting  of  a  mixture  of  wine,  honey,  and  pepper  ; 
the  other  a  decoction  of  the  juice  of  the  grape, 
termed  debash  (honey)  by  the  Hebrews,  and  dibs 
by  the  modern  Syrians,  resembling  the  '4\\infxa  of 
the  Greeks  and  the  defrutum  of  the  Romans,  and 
similarly  used,  being  mixed  either  with  wine,  milk, 
or  water.  4.  Date-wine,  which  was  also  manufac- 
tured in  Egypt  (olvos  (poivwh'LOS,  Herod,  ii.  8(1, 
iii.  20).  It  was  made  by  mashing  the  fruit  in 
water  in  certain  proportions  (Plin.  xiv.  19,  §3). 
A  similar  method  is  still  used  in  Arabia,  except 
that  the  fruit  is  not  mashed  (Burckhardt's  Arabia, 
ii.  204):  the  palm-wine  of  modern  Egypt  is  the 
sap  of  the  tree  itself,  obtained  by  making  an 
incision  into  its  heart  (Wilkinson,  ii.  174).  5. 
Various  other  fruits  and  vegetables  are  enumerated 
by  Pliny  (xiv.  19)  as  supplying  materials  for 
factitious  or  home-made  wine,  such    as   figs,  millet, 

the  carob  fruit,  &c.  It  is  not  improbable  that 
the  Hebrews  applied  raisins  to  this  purpose  in  the 
simple  manner  followed  by  the  Arabians  (Burck- 
hardt,  ii.  .">77),  viz.,  by  putting  their,  in  jars  of 
water  and  burying  them  in  the  ground  until  fer- 
mentation takes  place.  [\V.  L.  B.] 
DROMEDARY.    [Camel.] 

DRUSIL'LA  (Apovo-iAA-ri),  daughter  of  fferod 

Agrippa  I.   (Acts   \ii.   1,  10  1).  i   and  Cypres  ;   sister 

a  "  Sicera  Ilebraeo  sermone  onmis  potio,  quae  in- 
ebriare  potest,  sive  ilia,  quae  frumento  confleitur  sivc 
pomorum  suceo,  aut  cum  favi  decoquuntnr  in  dulcem 


DUMAH 


459 


of  Herod  Agrippa  II.  She  was  at  first  betrothed  to 
Antiochus  Epiphanes,  prince  of  Commagene,  but,  he 
refusing  to  become  a  Jew,  she  was  married  to 
Azizus,  king  of  Emesa,  who  complied  with  that 
condition  {Ant.  xx.  7.  §1).  Soon  after,  Felix,  pro- 
curator of  Judaea,  brought  about  her  seduction  bv 
means  of  the  Cyprian  sorcerer  Simon,  and  took  her 
as  his  wife  (ib.  7.  §2).  In  Acts  xxiv.  24,  we  find 
her  in  company  with  Felix  at  Caesarea,  on  occasion  of 
St.  Paul  being  brought  before  the  latter  ;  and  the 
narrative  implies  that  she  was  present  at  the 
apostle's  preaching.  Felix  had  by  Drusilla  a  son 
named  Agrippa,  who,  together  with  his  mother, 
perished  in  the  eruption  of  Vesuvius  under  Titus, 
(Joseph.  I.  c. ;  comp.  Tac.  Hist.  v.  9).     [H.  A.] 

DULCIMER  (Smnphoniah,  iTOIBOlD),  a 
musical  instrument,  not  in  use  amongst  the  Jews  of 
Palestine,  but  mentioned  in  Daniel,  iii.  5,  15,  and 
at  ver.  10  under  the  shorter  form  of  X^D^D,  along 
with  several  other  instruments,  which  Nebuchad- 
nezzar ordered  to  be  sounded  before  a  golden  image 
set  up  for  national  worship  during  the  period  of 
the  captivity  of  Judah.  Luther  translates  it  lute. 
Grotius  adopts  the  view  of  Servius,  who  considers 
simp/wnia  to  be  the  same  with  tibia  obliqua  (irAa- 
■yiavKos) ;  he  also  quotes  Isidorus  (ii.  22),  who 
speaks  of  it  as  a  long  drum.  Rabbi  Saadia  Gaon 
(Comm.  on  Dan.)  describes  the  Sumphoniah  as  the 
bag-pipe,  an  opinion  adopted  by  the  author  of 
Schilte-hag-giborim  (Joel  Brill's  Preface  to  Men- 
delssohn's version  of  the  Psalms)  by  Kircher,  Bar- 
tholoccius,  and  the  majority  of  biblical  critics.  The 
same  instrument  is  still  in  use  amongst  peasants  in 
the  N.W.  of  Asia  and  in  Southern  Europe,  where 
it  is  known  by  the  similar  name  Sampogna  or  Zam- 
pogna.  With  respect  to  the  etymology  of  the  word 
a  great  difference  of  opinion  prevails.  Some  trace  it 
to  the  Greek  avjityoivia,  and  Calmet,  who  inclines  to 
this  view,  expresses  astonishment  that  a  pure  Greek 
word  should  have  made  its  way  into  the  Chaldee 
tongue  :  it  is  probable,  he  thinks,  that  the  instru- 
ment Dulcimer  (A.  V.)  was  introduced  into  Baby- 
lon by  some  Greek  or  Western-Asiatic  musician 
who  was  taken  prisoner  by  Nebuchadnezzar  during 
one  of  his  campaigns  on  the  coast  of  the  Mediterra- 
nean. Others,  with  far  greater  probability,  regard 
it  as  a  Semitic  word,  and  connect  it  with  JQDD, 
"a  tube"  (Fiirst).  The  word  }1Q£D  occurs  in 
the  Talmud  (Succa  36  a),  where  it  evidently  has 
the  meaning  of  an  air-pipe.  Laudau  (Aruch.  Art. 
(12JDD)  considers  it  synonymous  with  siphon. 
ibu  Yahia,  in  his  commentary  on  Dan.  iii.  5, 
renders  it  by  t^13XJ*TlN  (opyava),  organ,  the 
well-known  powerful  musical  instrument,  composed 
of  a  series  of  pipes.  Rabb.  Elias,  whom  Buxtorf 
quotes  (Dexic.  Talmud,  p.  1  ">o4),  translates  it  by 
the  German  word  Leier  (lyre). 

The  old  fashioned  spinet,  the  precursor  of  the 
harpsichord,  is  said  to  have  resembled  in  tone  the 
ancient  dulcimer.  The  modern  dulcimer  is  de- 
scribed by  l>r.  Busby  (Diet,  of  Music)  as  a  triangular 
instrument,  consisting  of  a  little  chest.,  strung  with 
about  fifty  wires  cast  over  a  bridge  fixed  at  each 
cud;  the  shortest  wire  is  IS  inches  in  length,  the 
longest  .">(i:    it    is   played  with   t wo  small  hammers 

held  in  the  bands  of  the  performer.      [D.  W.  M.] 
I  (TTMAH (flOVl ;   Aov/xa,  'iSou^ua,  'lSovfiaia 


ct  barbaram  potionem,  aut  palmarum  fruetus  expri- 
muntur  in  liqnorem,  coctisqucfrugibusaqiiapinguioi 
coloratur." 


460 


DUMAH 


Duma),  a  son  of  Ishmael,  most  probably  the 
founder  of  an  Ishmaelite  tribe  of  Arabia,  and 
thence  the  name  of  the  principal  place,  or  dis- 
trict, inhabited  by  that  tribe.  In  Gen.  xxv.  14, 
and  1  Chr.  i.  30,  the  name  occurs  in  the  list  of 
the  sons  of  Ishmael;  and  in  Isaiah  (xxi.  11),  in 
the  "  burden  of  Dumah,"  coupled  with  Seir,  the 
forest  of  Arabia,  and  Kedar.  The  name  of  a 
town  in  the  north-western  part  of  the  peninsula, 
Doomat-el-Jendel*  is  held  by  Gesenius,  and  other 
European  authorities,  to  have  been  thus  derived  ; 
and  the  opinion  is  strengthened  by  Arab  tra- 
ditionists,  who  have  the  same  belief  (Mir-dt  ez- 
Zemdii).      The    latter,    however,    err    in   writing 

" Dawmat- el-Jendel"  (\jv^.|    3Lc».i)  >   while 

the  lexicographers  and  geographers  of  their  nation 
expressly  state  that   it  is   correctly  "  Doomat-el- 

-  o-         .-    J 
Jendcl,"  or  "  Doomd-cl-Jendel"  (^Jsj^.^   £»«».i 

or    \jsiil    ^Lo.i))   signifying  "  Dumah  of  the 

stones  or  blocks  of  stone,"  of  which  it  is  said  to 
have  been  built  (Sihdh  M.  S.,  Mardsid,  and  Mush- 
tarak,  s.  v.)  ;  not  the  "  stony  Dumah,"  as  Europeans 
render  it.  El-Jendel  is  said  by  some  to  mean 
"  stones  such  as  a  man  can  lift"  (Kdmoos),  and 
seems  to  indicate  that  the  place  was  built  of  un- 
hewn or  Cyclopean  masonry,  similar  to  that  of  very 
ancient  structures.  The  town  itself,  which  is  one 
of  the  "  Kureiydt  "  of  Wddi-l-Kurd  b  (Mardsid, 
s.  v.  Doomah),  appears  to  be  called  "  Doomat-el- 
Jendel ;"  and  the  fortress  which  it  contains,  to  have 

the  special  appellation  of  "  Marid"  (^  ,L$). 

It  should  be  observed  that  there  are  two 
"  Doomahs  ;"  that  named  in  this  article,  and  D.  el- 
'Erdk.  The  chief  of  one,  a  contemporary  of  Mo- 
hammad, is  said  to  have  founded  the  other,  or  to 
have  given  it  the  name  of  D. ;  but  most  Arab  autho- 
rities, and  probability  also,  are  in  favour  of  the  prior 
antiquity  of  the  former.  [E.  S.  P.] 

DU'MAH  (HOn  ;  'Pefxvd  ;  Alex.  'Povfxd  ; 
liiiina),  a  city  in  the  mountainous  district  of  Judah, 
near  Hebron  (Josh.  xv.  52).  In  the  Onomasticon 
of  Eusebius  and  Jerome  it  is  named  as  a  very  large 
place  {KwfMi)  fj.ey((TT7)),  17  miles  from  Eleuthero- 
polis,  in  the  district  of  Daroma  {i.e.  "  the  south," 
from  the  Hebrew  DIIT).  Eleutheropolis  not  being 
certainly  known,  this  description  does  not  afford 
much  clue.  Robinson  passed  the  ruins  of  a  village 
called  cd-Daumeh,  6  miles  south-west  of  Hebron 
(Rob.  i.  212),  and  this  may  possibly  be  Dumah. 
(See  also  Kiepert's  Map,  1856  ;  and  Van  de  Velde's 
Memoir,  308).  [G.] 

DUNG  $?a,  \hl,  PIN!*,  the  latter  always, 
and  the  two  former  geneially,  applied  to  men ; 
|OM  CHS  y*QV  to  brute  animals,  the  second  ex- 
clusively to  animals  offered  in  sacrifice,  and  the  third 
to  the  dung  of  cows  or  camels).  The  uses  of  dung 
were  twofold,  as  manure,  and  as  fuel.  The  manure 
consisted  either  of  straw  steeped  in  liquid  manure 
(  POEHO  '•DB,  lit.  in  dung  water,  Is.  xxv.  10),  or  the 

a  The  '•  t"  in  Doomat  is  thus  written  for  "  h"  by 
grammatical  construction. 

b  Winer,    in    his    art.    '  Duma,'    quoting    Hitzig 


DURA 

sicccpings  (Pin-ID,  Is.  v.  25)  of  the  streets  and 
roads,  which  were  carefully  removed  from  about 
the  houses  and  collected  in  heaps  (nSki'N)  outside 
the  walls  of  the  towns  at  fixed  spot's  (hence  the 
dung-gate  at  Jerusalem,  Neh.  ii.  13),  and  thence 
removed  in  due  course  to  the  fields  (Mischn.  Sheb. 
3,  §1-3).  To  sit  on  a  dung-heap  was  a  sign  of  the 
deepest  dejection  ( 1  Sam.  ii.  8  ;  Ps.  cxiii.  7  ;  Lam. 
iv.  5  ;  cf.  Job  ii.  8,  LXX.  and  Vulg.).  The  mode 
of  applying  manure  to  trees  was  by  digging  holes 
about  their  roots  and  inserting  it  (Luke  xiii.  8),  as 
still  practised  in  Southern  Italy  (Trench,  Parables, 
p.  356).  In  the  case  of  sacrifices  the  dung  was 
burnt  outside  the  camp  (Ex.  xxix.  14;  Lev.  iv.  11, 
viii.  17  ;  Num.  xix.  5)  :  hence  the  extreme  oppro- 
brium of  the  threat  in  Mai.  ii.  3.  Particular  direc- 
tions were  laid  down  in  the  law  to  enforce  cleanliness 
with  regard  to  human  ordure  (Deut.  xxiii.  12  ff.) : 
it  was  the  grossest  insult  to  turn  a  man's  house 
into  a  receptacle  for  it  (n&OI"p,  2  K.  x.  27  ;  •1I?,I3, 
Ezr.  vi.  11;  Dan.  ii.  5,  iii.  29,  "dunghill" 
A.  V.)  ;  public  establishments  of  that  nature  are  still 
found  in  the  large  towns  of  the  East  (Russell's 
Aleppo,  i.  34).  The  expression  to  "  cast  out  as 
dung  "  implied  not  only  the  offensiveness  of  the 
object,  but  also  the  ideas  of  removal  (1  K.  xiv.  10), 
and  still  more  exposure  (2  K.  ix.  37  ;  Jer.  viii. 
2).  The  reverence  of  the  later  Hebrews  would  not 
permit  the  pronunciation  of  some  of  the  terms  used 
in  Scripture,  and  accordingly  more  delicate  words 
were  substituted  in  the  margin  (2  K.  vi.25,  x.  27, 
xviii.  27  ;  Is.  xxxvi.  12).  The  occurrence  of  such 
names  as  Gilalai,  Dimnah,  Madmenah,  and  Mad- 
mannah,  shows  that  these  ideas  of  delicacy  did  not 
extend  to  ordinary  matters.  The  term  ctcvfiaXa 
("  dung,"  A.  V.,  Phil.  iii.  8)  applies  to  refuse  of 
any  kind  (cf.  Ecclus.  xxvii.  4). 

The  difficulty  of  procuring  fuel  in  Syria,  Arabia, 
and  Egypt,  has  made  dung  in  all  ages  valuable  as  a 
substitute  :  it  was  probably  used  for  heating  ovens 
and  for  baking  cakes  (Ez.  iv.  12,  15),  the  equable 
heat,  which  it  produced,  adapting  it  peculiarly  for 
the  latter  operation.  Cow's  and  camel's  dung  is 
still  used  for  a  similar  purpose  by  the  Bedouins 
(Burckhardt's  Notes,  i.  57) :  they  even  form  a 
species  of  pan  for  frying  eggs  out  of  it  (Russell,  i. 
39)  :  in  Egypt  the  dung  is  mixed  with  straw  and 
formed  into  fiat  round  cakes,  which  are  dried  in  the 
sun  (Lane,  i.  252,  ii.  141).  [W.  L.  B.] 

DUNGEON.     [Prison.] 

DU'EA  (Kin  ;  Aeetpd ;  Dura),  the  plain 
where  Nebuchadnezzar  set  up  the  golden  image 
(Dan.  iii.  1),  has  been  sometimes  identified  with  a 
tract  a  little  below  Tekrit,  on  the  left  bank  of  the 
Tigris  (Layard,  Nin.  fy  Bab.  p.  469),  where  the 
name  Dur  is  still  found.  But  1.  this  tract  pro- 
bably never  belonged  to  Babylon  ;  2.  at  any  rate  it 
is  too  far  from  the  capital  to  be  the  place  where  the 
image  was  set  up ;  for  the  plain  of  Dura  was  in  the 
province  or  district  of  Babylon  (733  rOHES), 
and  therefore  in  the  vicinity  of  the  city  ;  3.  the 
name  Dur,  in  its  modern  use,  is  applicable  to  any 
plain.  M.  Oppert  places  the  plain  (or,  as  he  calls 
it,  the  "  valley")  of  Dura  to  the  south-east  of  Ba- 
bylon in  the  vicinity  of  the  mound  of  Don-air  or 


(Zeller's  Jahrb.  1848),  has  complicated  the  question 
by  making  D.  el-Jendel  distinct  from  D.  of  W&di-l- 
Kura. 


DUST 

Duair.  He  has  discovered  on  this  site  the  pedestal 
of  a  colossal  statue,  and  regards  the  modern  name 
as  a  corruption  of  the  ancient  appellation.    [G.  R.] 

DUST.    [Mourning.] 


E. 

EAGLE  {Nesher,  ~\W1 ;  Otero's ;  aquila),  an 
unclean  bird  distinguished  from  the  ossifrage,  the 
osprey,  the  vulture,  and  the  gier  eagle,  in  Lev.  xi. 
13-18,  and  Deut.  >:iv.  12-17.  In  these  two  passages 
therefore  it  means  a  particular  species,  probably  the 
Xpuffaieros  or  golden  eagle  (Aquila  chrysaeetos, 
Linn.) ;  but  in  many  passages  in  which  it  occurs, 
Nesher  must  be  taken  for  a  generic  term  embracing 
many  different  species  of  the  order  Raptores.  Thus 
eagle,  in  Mic.  i.  16,  means  the  Vultur  barbatus, 
which  is  bald ;  while  in  Job  xxxix.  27  ;  Prov.  xxx. 
17  ;  and  Matt.  xxiv.  28,  the  eagle  which  is  repre- 
sented as  feeding  on  the  slain,  is  the  Neophron  perc- 
nopterus,  or  Egyptian  vulture  (see  Flin.  H^N. 
10,  3,  "quarti  generis  est  percnopterus  .  .  .  vul- 
turina1   specie — sola  aquilarum   exanima   fert    cor- 

pora").  In  Arabic  w*<  is  a  generic  as  well  as 
a  specific  term,  the  root  being  in  Heb.  IIJ'j,  in 
Arab.  1jW,  \.  to  tear  with  the  beak.  The  charac- 
teristics of  eagles  referred  to  in  Scripture  are  their 
swiftness  of  flight  (Deut.  xxviii.  49),  their  strength 
(Hos.  viii.  1 ;  Hab.  i.  8),  their  loftily  placed  nests 
(Jer.  xlix.  16),  their  care  of  their  young  both  in 
the  nest  and  in  training  them  to  fly  (Deut.  xxxii. 
11  ;  Ex.  xix.  4),  and  their  moulting  (Ps.  ciii.  5). 
The  eagle  was  an  Assyrian  emblem,  and  hence  pro- 
bably the  reference  in  Hab.  i.  8.  The  eagle- 
headed  deity  of  the  Assyrian  sculptures  is  that 
of  the  god  Nisroch  ;  and  in  the  representations  of 
battles  trained  birds  of  this  order  are  frequently 
shown  accompanying  the  Assyrian  warriors  in  their 
attacks,  and  in  one  case  bearing  oft' the  entrails  of 
the  slain.  From  the  Assyrians  the  use  of  the  eagle 
as  a  standard  descended  to  the  Persians,  and  from 
them  probably  to  the  Romans.  [W.  D.] 

E'ANES  (VLdvns;   Esses),   1  Esd.  ix.  21,  a 

name  which  stands  in  the  place  of  Hapjm,  Maa- 
SEIAH,  and  ELIJAH,  in  the  parallel  list  of  Ezra  x. 
It  does  not  appear  whence  the  translators  obtained 
the  form  of  the  name  given  in  the  A.  V. 

EARNEST.  This  term  occurs  cnly  thrice  in 
the  A.  V.  (2  Cor.  i.  22,  v.  5  ;  Eph.  i.  14).  The 
equivalent  in  the  original  is  afyafidbv,  a  Graecised 
form  of  |12"iy.  which  was  introduced  by  the  Phoe- 
nicians into  ( ireece,  and  also  into  Italy,  where  it  re- 
appears under  the  forms  arrhdbo  and  arr/ta.  It 
may  again  be  traced  in  the  French  arrhes,  and  in 
the  old  English  expression  EarVs  or  Arle's  money. 
The  Hebrew  word  was  used  generally  for  pledge 
(<  ien.  xxxviii.  17),  and  in  its  cognate  forms  for  surety 
(Prov.  xvji.  18)  and  hostage  (2  K.  xiv.  14).  The 
Greek  derivative,  however,  acquired  a  more  tech- 
nical sense  as  signifying  the  deposit  paid  by  the 
purchase!-  on  entering  into  an  agreement  for  the 
purchase  of  any  thing  (Snid.  Lex.  s.  v.).  A  similar 
legal  anil  technical  sense  attaches  to  earnest,  the 
payment  of  which  places  both  the  vendor  and  the 


EARKINGS 


461 


purchaser  in  a  position  to  enforce  the  carrying  out 
of  the  contract  (Blackstone,  ii.  30).  There  is  a 
marked  distinction  between  pledge  and  earnest  in 
this  respect,  that  the  latter  is  a  part-payment, 
and  therefore  implies  the  identity  in  kind  of  the 
deposit  with  the  future  full  payment ;  whereas  a 
pledge  may  be  something  of  a  totally  different 
nature,  as  in  Gen.  xxxviii.,  to  be  resumed  by  the 
depositor  when  he  has  completed  his  contract.  Thus 
the  expression  "  earnest  of  the  Spirit "  implies,  be- 
yond the  idea  of  security,  the  identity  in  kind, 
though  not  in  degree,  and  the  continuity  of  the 
Christian's  privileges  in  this  world  and  in  the  next. 
The  payment  of  eaniest-mouey  under  the  name 
of  arrabon  is  still  one  of  the  common  occurrences 
of  Arab  life.  [W.  L.  B.] 

EARRINGS.  The  word  DM,  by  which  these 
ornaments  are  usually  described,  is  unfortunately 
ambiguous,  originally  referring  to  the  nose-ring 
(as  its  root  indicates),  and  thence  transferred  to 
the  earring.  The  Ml  expression  for  the  latter  is 
D^TN3  ISPS  Dt:  (Gen.  xxxv.  4),  in  contradis- 
tinction  to  P|N"?J?  DT3  (Gen.  xxiv.  47).  In  the 
majority  of  cases,  however,  the  kind  is  not 
specified,  and  the  only  clue  to  the  meaning  is 
the  context.  The  term  occurs  in  this  undefined 
sense  in  Judg.  viii.  24;  Job  xlii.  11;  Prov.  xxv. 
12 ;  Hos.  ii.  13.  The  material  of  which  the 
earring  was  made  was  generally  gold  (Ex.  xxxii. 
2),  and  its  form  circular,  as  we  may  infer 
from  the  name  7^V,  hy  which  it  is  described 
(Num.  xxxi.  50  ;  Ez.  xvi.  12):  such  was  the  shape 
usual  in  Egypt  (Wilkinson's  Egyptians,  iii.  37u). 
They  were  worn  by  women  and  by  youth  of  both 
sexes  (Ex.  I.  c).  It  has  been  inferred  from  the 
passage  quoted,  and  from  Judg.  viii.  24,  that  they 
were  not  worn  by  men :  these  passages  are,  how- 
ever, by  no  means  conclusive.  In  the  former  an 
order  is  given  to  the  men  in  such  terms  that  they 
could  not  be  mentioned,  though  they  might  have 
been  implicitly  included  ;  in  the  latter  the  amount 
of  the  gold  is  the  peculiarity  adverted  to,  and  not 
the  character  of  the  ornament,  a  peculiarity  which 
is  still  noticeable  among  the  inhabitants  of  southern 
Arabia  (Wellsted's  Travels,  i.  321 ).  The  mention  of 
the  sows  in  Ex.  xxxii.  2  (which,  however,  is  omitted 
in  the  LXX.)  is  in  favour  of  their  having  been 
worn ;  and  it  appears  unlikely  that  the  Hebrews 
presented  an  exception  to  the  almost  universal 
practice  of  Asiatics,  both  in  ancient  and  modern 
times  (Winer,  Iiealwort.,  s.  v.  Ohrringc).  The 
earring  appeal's  to  have  been  regarded  with  super- 
stitious reverence  as  an  amulet:  thus  it  is  named 
in  the  Chaldee  and  Samaritan  versions  N^'Hp,  a 
holy  thing;  and  in  Is.  iii.  20  the  word  D^L'TP. 
prop,  amulets,  is  rendered  in  the  A.  V.,  after  the 
LXX.  and  Vuig.,  earrings.  [Akulet.]  On  this 
account  they  were  surrendered  along  with  the  idols  by 
Jacob's  household  (den.  xxxv. 4).  Chardin  describes 
earrings,  with  talismanic  figures  and  characters  on 
them,  as  still  existing  in  the  East,  (Brown's  Anti- 
quities, ii.  305).  Jewels  were  sometimes  attached 
to  the  rings  :  they  were  called  n'lS'Oi  (  from  S]t-3 
to  drop)  a  word  rendered  in  Judg.  viii.  26  vpynirKoi.; 
monilia;  collars  or  sweet  jewels,  A.  A'.,  and  in 
I.-,  iii.  l'.i.  Ka0eyua ;  torques;  chains  or  sweet  balls, 
A.  V.  The  si/e  of  the  earrings  still  worn  in 
eastern  countries  Bu    exceeds  what  is  usual  among 


462 


EARTH 


ourselves  (Harmer's  Observations,  iv.  pp.  311, 
314)  ;  hence  they  formed  ii  handsome  present  (Job 
jelii.  11),  or  offering  to  the  service  of  God  (Num. 
xxxi.  50).  [W.  L.  B.] 


Egyptian  Earrings,  from  Wilkinson 


EARTH.  This  term  is  used  in  two  widely 
different  senses:  (1)  for  the  material  of  which  the 
earth's  surface  is  composed  ;  (2)  as  the  name  of  the 
planet  on  which  man  dwells.  The  Hebrew  language 
discriminates  between  these  two  by  the  use  of  se- 
parate terms,  Adamah  (HOIN)  for  the  former, 
Erets  (V*"].^)  for  the  latter.  As  the  two  are  essen- 
tially distinct  we  shall  notice  them  separately. 

I.  Adamah  is  the  earth  in  the  sense  of  soil  or 
ground,  particularly  as  being  susceptible  of  culti- 
vation ;  hence  the  expression  ish  adamah  for  an 
agriculturist  (Gen.  ix.  20).  The  earth  supplied 
the  elementary  substance  of  which  man's  body  was 
formed,  and  the  terms  adam  and  adamah  are 
brought  into  juxtaposition,  implying  an  etymolo- 
gical connexion  (Gen.  ii.  7).  [Adam.]  The  opinion 
that  man's  body  was  formed  of  earth  prevailed 
among  the  Greeks  (Hesiod.  Op.  et  Di.  61,  70; 
Plat.  Rep.  p.  269),  the  Romans  (Virg.  Georg.  ii. 
341;  Ovid,  Met.  i.  82),  the  Egyptians  (Diod.  Sic. 
i.  10),  and  other  ancient  nations.  It  is  evidently 
based  on  the  observation  of  the  material  into  which 
the  body  is  resolved  after  death  (Job  x.  9  ;  Eccl. 
xii.  7).  The  law  prescribed  earth  as  the  material 
out  of  which  altars  were  to  be  raised  (Ex.  xx.  24)  ; 
Bahr  {Symb.  i.  488)  sees  in  this  a  reference  to  the 
name  adam :  others  with  more  reason  compare  the 
ara  de  cespite  of  the  Romans  (Ov.  Trist.  v.  5,  9  ; 
Hor.  Od.  iii.  8.  4,  5),  and  view  it  as  a  precept  of 
simplicity.  Naaman's  request  for  two  mules' 
burthen  of  earth  (2  K.  v.  17)  was  based  on  the 
idea  that  Jehovah,  like  the  heathen  deities,  was  a 
local  god  and  could  be  worshipped  acceptably  only 
on  his  own  soil. 

II.  Erets  is  explained  by  Von  Bohlen  (Introd. 
to  Gen.  ii.  6)  as  meaning  etymologic-ally  the  low 
in  opposition  to  the  high,  i.  e.  the  heaven.  It  is 
applied  in  a  more  or  less  extended  sense: — 1.  to 
the  whole  world  (Gen.  i.  1);  2.  to  land  as  op- 
posed to  sea  (Gen.  i.  10)  ;  3.  to  a  country  (Gen. 
xxi.  32) ;  4.  to  a  plot  of  ground  (Gen.  xxiii.  15)  ; 
and  5.  to  the  ground  on  which  a  man  stands  (Gen. 
xxxiii.  3).  The  two  former  senses  alone  concern 
us,  the  first  involving  an  inquiry  into  the  opinions 
of  the  Hebrews  on  Cosmogony,  the  second  on  Geo- 
graphy. 

I.  Cosmogony. — The  views  of  the  Hebrews  on 
this  subject  are  confessedly  imperfect  and  obscure. 
This  arises  partly  from  the  ulterior  objects  which 
led  them  to  the  study  of  natural  science,  and  still 
more  from  the  poetical  colouring  with  which  they  ex- 
pressed their  opinions.  The  books  of  Genesis,  Job,  and 


EARTH 

Psalms  supply  the  most  numerous  notices  :  of  these, 
the  two  latter  are  strictly  poetical  works  and  their 
language  must  be  measured  by  the  laws  of  poetical 
expression ;  in  the  first  alone  have  we  anything  ap- 
proaching to  an  historical  and  systematic  statement, 
and  even  this  is  but  a  sketch — an  outline — which 
ought  to  be  regarded  at  the  same  distance,  from  the 
same  point  of  view,  and  through  the  same  religious 
medium  as  its  author  regarded  it.  The  act  of  crea- 
tion itself,  as  recorded  in  the  first  chapter  of  Ge- 
nesis, is  a  subject  beyond  and  above  the  experience 
of  man  ;  human  language,  derived,  as  it  originally 
was,  from  the  sensible  and  material  world,  fails  to 
find  an  adequate  term  to  describe  the  act ;  for,  our 
word  "  create"  and  the  Hebrew  bara,  though  most 
appropriate  to  express  the  idea  of  an  original  crea- 
tion, are  yet  applicable  and  must  necessarily  be 
applicable  to  other  modes  of  creation  ;  nor  does  the 
addition  of  such  expressions  as  "  out  of  things  that 
were  not "  (e'|  ovk  ovraiv,  2  Mace.  vii.  28),  or  "  not 
from  things  which  appear "  (pi]  e'fc  (paivopevwv, 
Heb.  xi.  3)  contribute  much  to  the  force  of  the  de- 
claration. The  absence  of  a  term  which  shall  de- 
scribe exclusively  an  original  creation  is  a  neces- 
sary infirmity  of  language :  as  the  event  occurred 
but  once,  the  corresponding  term  must,  in  order  to 
be  adequate,  have  been  coined  for  the  occasion  and 
reserved  for  it  alone,  which  would  have  been  im- 
possible. The  same  observation  applies,  though  in 
a  modified  degree,  to  the  description  of  the  various 
processes  subsequent  to  the  existence  of  original 
matter.  Moses  viewed  matter  and  all  the  forms  of 
matter  in  their  relations  primarily  to  God,  and 
secondarily  to  man — as  manifesting  the  glory  of 
the  former,  and  as  designed  for  the  use  of  the 
latter.  In  relation  to  the  former,  he  describes 
creation  with  the  special  view  of  illustrating  the 
Divine  attributes  of  power,  goodness,  wisdom,  and 
accordingly  he  throws  this  narrative  into  a  form 
which  impresses  the  reader  with  the  sense  of  these 
attributes.  In  relation  to  the  latter  he  selects  his 
materials  with  the  special  view  of  illustrating  the 
subordination  of  all  the  orders  of  material  things 
to  the  necessities  and  comforts  of  man.  With  these 
objects  in  view,  it  ought  not  to  be  a  matter  of 
surprise,  if  the  simple  narrative  of  creation  omits 
much  that  scientific  research  has  since  supplied, 
and  appears  in  a  guise  adapted  to  those  objects. 
The  subject  itself  is  throughout  one  of  a  transcend- 
ental character ;  it  should  consequently  be  subjected 
to  the  same  standard  of  interpretation  as  other  pas- 
sages of  the  Bible,  descriptive  of  objects  which  are 
entirely  beyond  the  experience  of  man,  such  as  the 
day  of  judgment,  the  states  of  heaven  and  hell,  and 
the  representations  of  the  Divine  Majesty.  The 
style  of  criticism  applied  to  Gen.  i.  by  the  oppo- 
nents, and  not  unfrequently  by  the  supporters  of 
Revelation,  is  such,  as  would  be  subversive  of  many 
of  the  most  noble  and  valuable  portions  of  the 
Bible.  With  these  prefatory  remarks  we  proceed 
to  lay  down  what  appear  to  us  to  be  the  leading 
features  of  Hebrew  Cosmogony. 

1.  The  earth  was  regarded  not  only  as  the  cen- 
tral point  of  the  universe,  but  as  the  universe . 
itself,  every  other  body— the  heavens,  sun,  moon, 
and  stars — being  subsidiary  to,  and,  as  it  wore, 
the  complement  of  the  earth.  The  Hebrew  lan- 
guage has  no  expression  equivalent  to  our  universe: 
"the  heavens  and  the  earth"  (Gen.  i.  1,  xiv.  19  ; 
Ex.  xxxi.  17)  lias  been  regarded  as  such ;  but  it  is 
clear  that  the  heavens  were  looked  upon  as  a  neces- 
sary adjunct  of  the  earth — the  curtain  of  the  tent 


EARTH 

in  which  man  dwells  (Is.  xl.  22),  the  sphere  above 
which  fitted  the  sphere  below  (comp.  Job  xxii.  14, 
and  Is.  xl.  22) — designed  solely  for  purposes  of  be- 
neficence in  the  economy  of  the  earth.  This  appears 
from  the  account  of  its  creation  and  offices :  the  ex- 
istence of  the  heaven  was  not  prior  to  or  contempo- 
raneous with  that  of  the  earth,  but  subsequent  to 
it ;  it  was  created  on  the  second  day  (Gen.  i.  6). 
The  term  under  which  it  is  described,  rakia 
(y*PT)»  is  significant  of  its  extension,  that  it  was 
stretched  out  as  a  curtain  (Ps.  civ.  2)  over  the  sur- 
face of  the  earth.  Moreover  it  depended  upon  the 
earth ;  it  had  its  "  foundations  "  (2  Sam.  xxii.  8) 
on  the  edges  of  the  earth's  circle,  where  it  was  sup- 
ported by  the  mountains  as  by  massive  pillars  (Job 
xxvi.  11).  Its  offices  were  (1.)  to  support  the 
waters  which  were  above  it  (Gen.  i.  7  ;  Ps.  cxlviii. 
4),  and  thus  to  form  a  mighty  reservoir  of  rain  and 
snow,  which  were  to  pour  forth  through  its  win- 
dows (Gen.  vii.  11;  Is.  xxiv.  18)  and  doors  (Ps. 
lxxviii.  23),  as  through  opened  sluice-gates,  for  the 
fructification  of  the  earth  ;  (2.)  to  serve  as  the  sub- 
stratum ((TTepewfj-a  or  "firmament")  in  which  the 
celestial  bodies  were  to  be  fixed.  As  with  the 
heaven  itself,  so  also  with  the  heavenly  bodies  ; 
they  were  regarded  solely  as  the  ministers  of  the 
earth.  Their  offices  were  (1.)  to  give  light ;  (2.) 
to  separate  between  day  and  night ;  (3.)  to  be  for 
signs,  as  in  the  case  of  eclipses  or  other  extraordi- 
nary phenomena ;  for  seasons,  as  regulating  seed- 
time and  harvest,  summer  and  winter,  as  well  as 
religious  festivals;  and  for  days  and  years,  the 
length  of  the  former  being  dependent  on  the  sun, 
the  latter  being  estimated  by  the  motions  both  of 
sun  and  moon  (Gen.  i.  14-18);  so  that  while  it 
might  truly  be  said  that  they  held  "  dominion " 
over  the  earth  (Job  xxxviii.  33),  that  dominion  was 
exercised  solely  for  the  convenience  of  the  tenants 
of  earth  (Ps.  civ.  19-23).  So  entirely  'indeed  was 
the  existence  of  heaven  and  the  heavenly  bodies  de- 
signed for  the  earth,  that  with  the  earth  they  shall 
.simultaneously  perish  (2  Pet.  iii.  10):  the  curtain 
of  the  tent  shall  be  rolled  up  and  the  stars  shall  of 
necessity  drop  off  (Is.  xxxiv.  4 ;  Matt.  xxiv.  29) — 
their  sympathy  with  earth's  destruction  being  the 
counterpart  of  their  joyous  song  when  its  founda- 
tions were  laid  (Job  xxxviii.  7). 

2.  The  earth  was  regarded  in  a  twofold  aspect ; 
in  relation  to  God,  as  the  manifestation  of  His  in- 
finite  attributes  ;  in  relation  to  man,  as  the  scene  of 
his  abode.  (1.)  The  Hebrew  cosmogony  is  based 
,upon  the  leading  principle  that  the  universe  exists. 
not  independently  of  God,  by  any  necessity  or  any 
inherent  power,  nor  yet  contemporaneously  with 
God,  as  being  co-existent  with  Him,  nor  vet  in  oppo- 
sition to  God,  as  a  hostile  element,  but  dependency 
upon  Him,  subsequently  to  Him,  and  in  subjection 
to  Him.  The  opening  words  of  Genesis  express  in 
broad  terms  this  leading  principle;  however  difficult 
it  may  be,  as  we  have  already  observed,  to  express 
this  truth  adequately  in  human  language,  yet  there 
can  be  no  doubt  that  the  subordination  of  matter  to 
God  in  every  respect  is  implied  in  that  passage,  as 
well  as  in  other  passages,  too  numerous  to  quote, 
which  comment  upon  it.  The  same  great  principle 
runs  through  the  whole  history  of  creation  :  matter 
owed  all  its  forms  and  modifications  to  the  will 
of  God:  in  itself  dull  and  inert,  it  received  its  first 
vivifying  capacities  from  the  influence  of  tie'  Spirit 
of  God  brooding  over  the  deep  (Gen.  i.  2);  the  pro- 
gressive improvements  in -its  condition  were  the 
direct  and  miraculous  effects  of  God's  will;  no  iu- 


EARTH 


463 


terposition  of  secondary  causes  is  recognised  ;  "  He 
spake  and  it  was"  (Ps.  xxxiii.  9) ;  and  the  pointed 
terseness  and  sharpness  with  which  the  writer  sums 
up  the  whole  transaction  in  the  three  expressions 
"  God  said,"  "  it  was  so,"  "  God  saw  that  it  was 
good  " — the  first  declaring  the  divine  volition,  the 
second  the  immediate  result,  the  third  the  perfect- 
ness  of  the  work — harmonises  aptly  with  the 
view  which  he  intended  to  express.  Thus  the  earth 
became  in  the  eyes  of  the  pious  Hebrew  the  scene 
on  which  the  Divine  perfections  were  displayed: 
the  heavens  (Ps.  xix.  1),  the  earth  (Ps.  xxiv.  1, 
civ.  24),  the  sea  (Job  xxvi.  10  ;  Ps.  lxxxix.  9 ;  Jer. 
v.  22),  "  mountains  and  hills,  fruitful  trees  and  all 
cedars,  beasts  and  all  cattle,  creeping  things  aud 
flying  fowl"  (Ps.  cxlviii.  9,  10),  all  displayed  one 
or  other  of  the  leading  attributes  of  His  character. 
So  also  with  the  ordinary  operations  of  nature — the 
thunder  was  His  voice  (Job  xxxvii.  5),  the  light- 
nings His  arrows  (Ps.  lxxvii.  17),  wind  and  storm 
His  messengers  (Ps.  cxlviii.  8),  the  earthquake,  the 
eclipse  and  the  comet,  the  signs  of  His  presence 
(Joel  ii.  10 ;  Matt.  xxiv.  29  ;  Luke  xxi.  25). 

(2.)  The  earth  was  regarded  in  relation  to  man, 
and  accordingly  each  act  of  creation  is  a  preparation 
of  the  earth  for  his  abode — light,  as  the  primary 
condition  of  all  life ;  the  heavens,  for  purposes 
already  detailed  ;  the  dry  land,  for  his  home : 
"  grass  for  the  cattle  and  herb  for  the  service  of  man  " 
(Fs.  civ.  14) ;  the  alternations  of  day  and  night, 
the  one  for  his  work  and  the  other  for  his  rest  (Ps. 
civ.  23)  ;  fish,  fowl,  and  flesh  for  his  food ;  the 
beasts  of  burden,  to  lighten  his  toil.  The  work  of 
each  day  of  creation  has  its  specific  application  to 
the  requirements  and  the  comforts  of  man,  and  is 
recorded  with  that  special  view. 

3.  Creation  was  regarded  as  a  progressive  work 
— a  gradual  development  from  the  inferior  to  the 
superior  orders  of  things.  Thus  it  was  with  the 
earth's  surface,  at  first  a  chaotic  mass,  waste  and 
empty,  well  described  in  the  paronomastic  terms 
tohu,  bohu,  overspread  with  waters  and  enveloped 
in  darkness  (Gen.  i.  2),  and  thence  gradually 
brought  into  a  state  of  order  and  beauty  so  conspi- 
cuous, as  to  have  led  the  Latins  to  describe  it  by 
the  name  Mundus.  Thus  also  with  the  different 
portions  of  the  universe,  the  earth  before  the  light, 
the  light  before  the  firmament,  the  firmament 
before  the  dry  land.  Thus  also  with  light  itself, 
at  first  the  elementary  principle,  separated  from 
the  darkness,  but  without  defined  boundaries ; 
afterwards  the  illuminating  bodies  with  their  dis- 
tinct powers  and  offices — a  progression  that  is  well 
expressed  in  the  Hebrew  language  by  the  terms  or 
and  moor  (lIKi  "I1KO).  Thus  also  with  the  orders 
of  living  beings  ;  firstly,  plants  ;  secondly,  fish  and 
birds;  thirdly,  cattle;  and  lastly,  man.  From 
"  good"  in  the  several  parts  to  "  very  good  "  as  a 
whole  ((Jen.  i.  Ml),  such  was  its  progress  in  the 
judgment  of  the  Omnipotent  workman. 

4.  Order  involves  time;  a  succession  of  events 
implies  a  succession  of  periods;  and  accordingly  Moses 
assigns  tin1  work  of  creation  to  six  days,  each  \a!K  ing 
its  specific  portion — light  to  the  first,  the  firma- 
ment to  tin'  second,  the  dry  land  and  plants  to  the 

third,  the  heavenly  bodies  to  the  fourth,  fish  and 

fowl  to  the  fifth,  beasts  and  man  tip  the  sixth.  The 
manner,  id  whicb  these  arts  are  described  as  having 
been  done,  precludes  all  idea  of  time  in  relation  to 
their  performance:  it  was  miraculous  and  instanta- 
neous: "God  said"  and  then  "it  was."  But  tie 
progressiveness,  and  consequently  the  individuality 


4fi4 


EARTH 


of  the  acts,  does  involve  an  idea  of  time  as  elapsing 
between  the  completion  of  one  and  the  commence- 
ment of  another ;  otherwise  the  work  of  creation 
would  have  resolved  itself  into  a  single  continuous 
act.  The  period  assigned  to  each  individual  act  is 
a  day — the  only  period  which  represents  the  entire 
cessation  of  a  work  through  the  interposition  of 
night.  That  a  natural  day  is  represented  under 
the  expression  "  evening  was  and  morning  was," 
admits,  we  think,  of  no  doubt ;  the  term  "  day  " 
alone  may  refer  sometimes  to  an  indefinite  period 
contemporaneous  with  a  single  event ;  but  when 
the  individual  parts  of  a  day,  "  evening  and  morn- 
ing" are  specified,  and  when  a  series  of  such  days 
are  noticed  in  their  numerical  order,  no  analogy  of 
language  admits  of  our  understanding  the  term  in 
anything  else  than  its  literal  sense.  The  Hebrews 
had  no  other  means  of  expressing  the  civil  day  of 
24  hours  than  as  "evening,  morning"  (")p2  3"iy, 
Dan.  viii.  14),  similar  to  the  Greek  wxB'finepov , 
and  although  the  alternation  of  light  and  darkness 
lay  at  the  root  of  the  expression,  yet  the  Hebrews 
in  their  use  of  it  no  more  thought  of  those  elements 
than  do  we  when  we  use  the  terms  fortnight  or 
se'nnight;  in  each  case  the  lapse  of  a  certain  time, 
and  not  the  elements  by  which  that  time  is  calcu- 
lated, is  intended  ;  so  that,  without  the  least  incon- 
sistency either  of  language  or  of  reality,  the  expression 
may  be  applied  to  the  days  previous  to  the  creation 
of 'the  sun.  The  application  of  the  same  expres- 
sions to  the  events  subsequent  to  the  creation  of 
the  sun,  as  well  as  the  use  of  the  word  "day"  in 
the  4th  commandment  without  any  indications  that 
it  is  used  in  a  different  sense,  or  in  any  other  than 
the  literal  acceptation  of  Gen.  i.  5  ff.,  confirm  the 
view  above  stated.  The  interpretation  that  "  even- 
ing and  morning "  =  beginning  and  end,  is  opposed 
not  only  to  the  order  in  which  the  words  stand, 
but  to  the  sense  of  the  words  elsewhere. 

5.  The  Hebrews,  though  regarding  creation  as 
the  immediate  act  of  God,  did  not  ignore  the 
evident  fact  that  existing  materials  and  intermediate 
agencies  were  employed  both  then  and  in  the  sub- 
sequent operations  of  nature.  Thus  the  simple 
fact  "  God  created  man"  (Gen.  i.  27)  is  amplified 
by  the  subsequent  notice  of  the  material  substance 
of  which  his  body  was  made  (Gen.  ii.  7) ;  and  so 
also  of  the  animals  (Gen.  i.  24,  ii.  19).  The 
separation  of  sea  and  land,  attributed  in  Gen.  i.  6 
to  the  Divine  fiat,  was  seen  to  involve  the  process  of 
partial  elevations  of  the  earth's  surface  (Ps.  civ.  8, 
"  the  mountains  ascend,  the  valleys  descend  ;"  comp. 
Prov.  viii.  25-28).  The  formation  of  clouds  and 
the  supply  of  moisture  to  the  earth,  which  in  Gen. 
i.  7  was  provided  by  the  creation  of  the  firmament, 
was  afterwards  attributed  to  its  true  cause  in  the 
continual  return  of  the  waters  from  the  earth's 
surface  (Eccl.  i.  7).  The  existence  of  the  element 
of  light,  as  distinct  from  the  sun  (Gen.  i.  3,  14; 
Job  xxxviii.  19),  has  likewise  been  explained  as  the 
result  of  a  philosophically  correct  view  as  to  the 
nature  of  light ;  more  probably,  however,  it  was 
founded  upon  the  incorrect  view  that  the  light  of 
the  moon  was  independent  of  the  sun. 

6.  With  regard  to  the  earth's  body,  the  Hebrews 
conceived  its  surface  to  be  an  immense  disc,  sup- 
ported like  the  flat  roof  of  an  Eastern  house  by 
pillars  (Job  ix.  C;  Ps  lxxv.  3),  which  rested  on 
solid  foundations  (Job  xxxviii.  4,  6;  Ps.  civ.  5; 
Prov.  viii.  29) ;  but  where  those  foundations  were 
on  which  the  "sockets"  of  the  pillars  rested,  none 
could  tell  (Job  xxxviii.  6).     The  more-philosophical 


EARTH 

view  of  the  earth  being  suspended  in  free  space 
seems  to  be  implied  in  Job  xxvi.  7  ;  nor  is  there 
any  absolute  contradiction  between  this  and  the 
former  view,  as  the  pillars  of  the  earth's  surface 
may  be  conceived  to  have  been  founded  on  the  deep 
bases  of  the  mountains,  which  bases  themselves 
were  unsupported.  Other  passages  (Ps.  xxiv.  2, 
exxxvi.  6)  seem  to  imply  the  existence  of  a  vast 
subterraneous  ocean ;  the  words,  however,  are 
susceptible  of  the  sense  that  the  earth  was  elevated 
above  the  level  of  the  seas  (Hengstenberg,  Coram. 
in  loc),  and,  that  this  is  the  sense  in  which  they 
are  to  be  accepted,  appears  from  the  converse  ex- 
pression "  water  under  the  earth  "  (Ex.  xx.  4), 
which,  as  contrasted  with  "heaven  above"  and 
"  earth  beneath,"  evidently  implies  the  comparative 
elevation  of  the  three  bodies.  Beneath  the  earth's 
surface  was  sheol  QINt^),  the  hollow  place,  "  hell " 
(Num.  xvi.  30;  Deut.'  xxxii.  22;  Job  xi.  8),  the 
"  house  appointed  for  the  living  "  (Job  xxx.  23),  a 
"land  of  darkness"  (Job  x.  21),  to  which  were 
ascribed  in  poetical  language  gates  (Is.  xxxviii.  10) 
and  bars  (Job  xvii.  16),  and  which  had  its  valleys 
or  deep  places  (Prov.  ix.  18).  It  extended  beneath 
the  sea  (Job  xxvi.  5,  6),  and  was  thus  supposed  to 
be  conterminous  with  the  upper  world. 

II.  Geography. — We  shall  notice  (1)  the  views 
of  the  Hebrews  as  to  the  form  and  size  of  the  earth, 
its  natural  divisions,  and  physical  features;  (2) 
the  countries  into  which  they  divided  it  and  their 
progressive  acquaintance  with  those  countries.  The 
world  in  the  latter  sense  was  sometimes  described 
by  the  poetical  term  tebel  (73FI),  corresponding  to 
the  Greek  oiKou/xeVrj  (Is.  xiv.  21). 

(1.)  In  the  absence  of  positive  statements  we 
have  to  gather  the  views  of  the  Hebrews  as  to  the 
form  of  the  earth  from  scattered  allusions,  and 
these  for  the  most  part  in  the  poetical  books, 
where  it  is  difficult  to  decide  how  far  the  language 
is  to  be  regarded  as  literal,  and  how  far  as  meta- 
phorical. There  seem  to  be  traces  of  the  same 
ideas  as  prevailed  among  the  Greeks,  that  the  world 
was  a  disk  (Is.  xl.  22;  the  word  Mil,  circle,  is 
applied  exclusively  to  the  circle  of  the  horizon 
whether  bounded  by  earth,  sea  or  sky),  bordered 
by  the  ocean  (Deut.  xxx.  13 ;  Job  xxvi.  10 ;  Ps. 
exxxix.  9  ;  Prov.  viii.  27),  with  Jerusalem  as  its 
centre  (Ez.  v.  5),  which  was  thus  regarded,  like 
Delphi,  as  the  navel  (1-1313 ;  Judg.  ix.  37  ;  Ez. 
xxxviii.  12:  LXX. ;  Vulg.),  or,  according  to  ano- 
ther view  (Gesen.  TJiesaur.  s.  v.),  the  highest  point 
of  the  world.  The  passages  quoted  in  support  of 
this  view  admit  of  a  different,  interpretation  ;  Jeru- 
salem might  be  regarded  as  the  centre  of  the  world, 
not  only  as  the  seat  of  religious  light  and  truth, 
but  to  a  certain  extent  in  a  geographical  sense  ;  for 
Palestine  was  situated  between  the  .important  em- 
pires of  Assyria  and  Egypt ;  and  not  only  between 
them  but  above  them,  its  elevation  above  the  plains 
on  either  side  contributing  to  the  appearance  of  its 
centrality.  A  different  view  has  been  gathered 
from  the  expression  "four  corners"  (]"I1Q33,  gene- 
rally applied  to  the  skirts  of  a  garment),  as  though 
implying  the  quadrangular  shape  of  a  garment 
stretched  out,  according  to  Eratosthenes'  comparison ; 
but  the  term  "  corners  "  may  be  applied  in  a  meta- 
phorical sense  for  the  extreme  ends  of  the  world 
(Job  xxxvii.  3,  xxxviii.  13;  Is.  xi.  12,  xxiv.  16; 
Ez.  vii.  2).  Finally,  .it  is  suggested  by  Biihr 
(Symbolik,  i.  170)  that  these  two  views  may  have 


EARTH 

been  held  together,  the  tinnier  as  the  actual  and  the 
latter  as  the  symbolical  representation  of  the  earth's 
form.  As  to  the  size  of  the  earth,  the  Hebrews 
bad  but  a  very  indefinite  notion  ;  in  many  passages 
the  "  earth,"  or  "  whole  earth,"  is  used  as  co-exten- 
sive with  the  Babylonian  (Is.  xiii.  5,  xiv.  7,  ff., 
xxiv.  17),  or  Assyrian  empires  (Is.  x.  14,  xiv.  26, 
xxxvii.  18),  just  as  at  a  later  period  the  Roman 
empire  was  styled  orbis  terrarwm  ;  the  "  ends  of  the 
earth"  (JYl^jp)  in  the  language  of  prophecy  ap- 
plied to  the  nations  on  the  border  of  these  king- 
doms, especially  the  Medes  (Is.  v.  26,  xiii.  5)  in  the 
east,  and  the  islands  and  coasts  of  the  Mediterranean 
in  the  west  (Is.  xli.  5,  9)  ;  but  occasionally  the 
boundary  was  contracted  in  this  latter  direction  to 
the  eastern  shores  of  the  Mediterranean  (Is.  xxiv.  16  ; 
Zech.  ix.  10  ;  Ps.  lxxii.  8).  Without  unduly  press- 
ing the  language  of  prophecy,  it  may  be  said  that 
the  views  of  the  Hebrews  as  to  the  size  of  the  earth 
extended  but  little  beyond  the  nations  with  which 
they  came  in  contact ;  its  solidity  is  frequently 
noticed,  its  dimensions  but  seldom  (Job  xxxviii.  18; 
Is.  xiii.  5).  We  shall  presently  trace  the  progress 
of  their  knowledge  in  succeeding  ages. 

The  earth  was  divided  into  four  quarters  or 
regions  corresponding  to  the  four  points  of  the 
compass ;  these  were  described  in  various  ways, 
sometimes  according  to  their  positions  relatively  to 
a  person  facing  the  east,  before  (Dip),  behind 
("linK),  the  right  hand  tf*D*),  and  the'  left  hand 

OfcOOb'),  representing  respectively  E.,  W.,  S., 
and  N.  (Job  xxiii.  8,  9)  ;  sometimes  relatively  to 
the  sun's  course,  the  rising  (mTO),  the  setting 
(NDD,  Ps.  1.  1),  the  brilliant  quarter  (DVTJ,  Ez. 
xl.  2ft),  and  the  dark  quarter  (flSV,  Ex.  xxvl.  20 ; 
comp.  the  Greek  £6<pos,  Horn.  II.  xii.  240)  ;  some- 
times as  the  seat  of  the  four  winds  (Ez.  xxxvii.  9)  ; 
and  sometimes  according  to  the  physical  cha- 
racteristics, the  sea  (D*)  for  the  W.  (Gen.  xxviii. 
14),  the  parched  (233  ">  for  the  S.  (Ex.  xrvii.  9), 
and  the  mountains  (CHIT)  for  the  N.  (Is.  xiii.  4). 
The  north  appears  to  have  been  regarded  as  the 
highest  part  of  the  earth's  surface,  in  consequence 
perhaps  of  the  mountain  ranges  which  existed 
there,  and  thus  the  heaviest  part  of  the  earth 
(Job  xxvi.  7).  The  north  was  also  the  quarter  in 
which  the  Hebrew  el-Dorado  lay,  the  land  of  gold 
mines  (Job  xxxvii.  22;  margin;  comp.  Her.  iii. 
1 16). 

These  terms  are  very  indistinctly  used  when 
applied  to  special  localities;  for  we  find  the  north 
assigned  as  the  quarter  of  Assyria  (Jer.  iii.  18), 
Babylonia  (Jer.  vi.  22),  and  the  Euphrates  (Jer. 
xlvi.  10),  and  more  frequently  Media  (Jer.  1.  3; 
comp.  li.  11),  while  the  south  is  especially  repre- 
sented by  Egypt  (Is.  xxx.  6;  l>an.  xi.  5).  The 
Hebrews  were  not  more  exact  in  the  use  of  terms 
descriptive  of  the  physical  features  of  the  earth's 
surface;  for  instance,  the  same  term  (D')  is  applied 
to  the  sea  (Mediterranean),  to  the  lakes  of  Palestine, 
and  to  groat  rivers,  such  as  the  Nile  |  Is.  xxiii.  2), 
and  perhaps  the  Euphrates  (Is.  xxvii.  1):  mountain 
("lil)  signifies  not  only  high  ranges,  such  as  Sinai  or 
Ararat,  but  an  elevated  region  (Josh.  xi.  16):  river 
("IH3)  is  occasionally  applied  to  the  sea  (Jon.  ii.  3  ; 
Ps.  wiv.  2)   and    to  Canals   fed    by  rivers  (Is.  \liv. 

27).     Their  vocabulary,  however,  was  ample  for 


EARTH 


465 


describing  the  special  features  of  the  lands  with 
which  they  were  acquainted,  the  terms  for  the 
different  sorts  of  valleys,  mountains,  rivers,  and 
springs  being  very  numerous  and  expressive.  We 
cannot  fail  to  be  struck  with  the  adequate  ideas  of 
descriptive  geography  expressed  in  the  directions 
given  to  the  spies  (Num.  xiii.  17-20)  and  in  the 
closing  address  of  Moses  (Deut.  viii.  7-9) ;  nor 
less,  with  the  extreme  accuracy  and  the  variety  of 
almost  technical  terms,  with  which  the  boundaries 
of  the  various  tribes  are  described  in  the  book  of 
Joshua,  warranting  the  assumption  that  the  He- 
brews had  acquired  the  art  of  surveying  from  the 
Egyptians  (Jahn,  i.  6,  §104). 

(2.)  We  proceed  to  give  a  brief  sketch  of  the 
geographical  knowledge  of  the  Hebrews  down  to  the 
period  when  their  distinctive  names  and  ideas  were 
superseded  by  those  of  classical  writers.  The  chief 
source  of  information  open  to  them,  beyond  the 
circle  of  their  own  experience,  was  their  inter- 
course with  the  Phoenician  traders.  While  the  first 
made  them  acquainted  with  the  nations  from  the 
Tigris  to  the  African  desert,  the  second  informed 
them  of  the  coasts  of  the  Mediterranean,  the  regions 
of  the  north,  and  the  southern  districts  of  Arabia. 
From  the  Assyrians  and  Babylonians  they  gained 
some  slight  knowledge  of  the  distant  countries  of 
India,  and  perhaps  even  China.8 

Of  the  physical  objects  noticed  we  may  make  the 
following  summary,  omitting  of  course  the  details 
of  the  geography  of  Palestine: — 1.  Seas  —  the 
Mediterranean,  which  was  termed  the  "  great  sea  " 
(Num.  xxxiv.  6),  the  "sea  of  the  Philistines"  (Ex. 
xxiii.  31),  and  the  "western  sea"  (Deut.  xi.  24)  ; 
the  Hed  Sea,  under  the  names  of  the  "  sea  of  Suph," 
sedge  (Ex.  x.  19),  and  the  "Egyptian  sea"  (Is. 
xi.  15) ;  the  Dead  Sea,  under  the  names  "  Salt 
Sea "  (Gen.  xiv.  3),  "  Eastern  Sea "  (Joel  ii. 
20),  and  "  Sea  of  the  Desert "  (Deut.  iv.  49) ; 
and  the  Sea  of  Chinnereth,  or  Galilee  (Num.  xxxiv. 
11);  2.  Rivers — the  Euphrates,  which  was  spe- 
cifically "the  river"  (Gen.  xxxi.  21),  or  "the 
great  river"  (Deut.  i.  7);  the  Nile,  which  was 
named  either  Yor  (Gen  xli.  1),  or  Sihor  (Josh. 
xiii.  3) ;  t|re  Tigris,  under  the  name  of  Hiddekel 
(Dan.  x.  4);  the  Chebar,  Chaboras,  a  tributary  to 
the  Euphrates  (Ez.  i.  3) ;  the  Habor,  probably 
the  same,  but  sometimes  identified  with  the  Cha- 
boras that  falls  into  the  Tigris  (2  K.  xvii.  6) ; 
the  river  of  Egypt  (Num.  xxxiv.  5) ;  and  the 
rivers  of  Damascus,  Abana  (Barada),  and  Pharpar 
(2  K.  v.  12).  For  the  Gihon  and  Pison  (Gen. 
ii.  11,  13),  see  Eden.  3.  Mountains — Ararat  or 
Armenia  (Gen.  viii.  4);  Sinai  (Ex.  xix.  2)  ;  Horeb 
(Ex.  iii.  1);  Hor  (Num.  xx.  22)  near  Petra ; 
Lebanon  (Deut.  iii.  25);  and  Sephar  (Gen.  x.  30) 
in  Arabia. 

The  distribution  of  the  nations  over  the  face  of 
the  earth  is  systematically  described  in  Gen.  x.,  to 
which  account  subsequent,  though  not  very  import- 
ant, additions  are  made  in  caps.  xxv.  and  xxxvi., 
and  in  the  prophetical  and  historical  books.  Al- 
though the  table  in  Gen.  x.  is  essentially  ethno- 
graphical,  yet   the  geographical   element    is   also 

t iv  developed:   the  writer  had  in  bis  mind's 

eye  uol  only  the  descenl  but  the  residence  of  the 
various  nations.  Some  of  the  names  indeed  seem  to 
be  purely  geographical  designations;   Aram,  t'm-  in. 


a  The   geographical   questions   arising   out   of   the 
description  of  the  garden  of  Eden  are  discussed  in  a 
te  ai  tide,       i  i 

2  II 


466 


EARTH 


stance,  means  high  lands  •  Canaan,  low  lands  ; 
Eber,  the  land  across,  or  beyond;  Sidon,  fishing 
station ;  Madai,  central  land  ;  Tarshish,  probably 
conquered ;  Mizraim,  still  more  remarkably  from  its 
dual  form,  the  two  Egypts ;  Ophir,  the  rich  land. 
It  has  indeed  been  surmised  that  the  names  of  the 
three  great  divisions  of  the  family  of  Noah  are  also 
in  their  origin  geographical  terms  ;  Japhet,  the 
widely  extended  regions  of  the  north  and  west; 
Ham,  the  country  of  the  black  soil,  Egypt;  and 
Shem  the  mountainous  country ;  the  last  is,  how- 
ever, more  than  doubtful. 

In  endeavouring  to  sketch  out  a  map  of  the 
world,  as  described  in  Gen.  x.,  it  must  be  borne  in 
mind  that,  in  cases  where  the  names  of  the  races 
have  not  either  originated  in  or  passed  over  to  the 
lands  they  occupied,  the  locality  must  be  more  or 
less  doubtful.  For,  the  migrations  of  the  various 
tribes  in  the  long  lapse  of  ages  led  to  the  transfer  of 
the  name  from  one  district  to  another,  so  that  even 
in  Biblical  geography  the  same  name  may  at  diffe- 
rent periods  indicate  a  widely  different  locality. 
Thus  Magog  in  the  Mosaic  table  may  have  been 
located  south  of  the  Caucasus,  and  in  Ezekiel's 
time,  north  of  that  range  ;  Gomer  at  the  former 
period  in  Cappadocia,  at  the  latter  in  the  Crimea. 
Again,  the  terms  may  have  varied  with  the  extend- 
ing knowledge  of  the  earth's  surface;  Chittim, 
originally  Cyprus,  was  afterwards  applied  to  the 
more  westerly  lands  of  Macedonia  in  the  age  of  the 
Maccabees,  if  not  even  to  Italy  in  the  prophecies  of 
Daniel,  while  Tarshish  may  without  contradiction 
have  been  the  sea-coast  of  Cilicia  in  the  Mosaic 
table,  and  the  coast  of  Spain  in  a  later  age.  Pos- 
sibly a  solution  may  be  found  for  the  occurrence  of 
more  than  one  Dedan,  Sheba,  and  Havilah,  in  the 
fact  that  these  names  represent  districts  of  a  certain 
character,  of  whicli  several  might  exist  in  different 
parts.  From  the  above  remarks.it  will  appear  how 
numerous  are  the  elements  of  uncertainty  introduced 
into  this  subject ;  unanimity  of  opinion  is  almost 
impossible ;  nor  need  it  cause  surprise,  if  even  in 
the  present  work  the  views  of  different  writers,  are 
found  at  variance.  The  principle  on  which  the 
following  statement  has  been  compiled  as  this— to 
assign  to  the  Mosaic  table  the  narrowest  limits 
within  which  the  nations  have  been,  according  to 
the  best  authorities,  located,  and  then  to  trace  out, 
as  far  as  our  means  admit,  the  changes  which  those 
nations  experienced  in  Biblical  times. 

Commencing  from  the  west,  the  "  isles  of  the 
Gentiles,"  i.  e.the  coasts  and  islands  of  the  Mediter- 
ranean sea,  were  occupied  by  the  Japhetites  in  the 
following  order: — Javan,  the  lonians,  in  parts  of 
Greece  and  Asia  Minor ;  Elishah,  perhaps  the 
Aeolians,  in  the  same  countries  ;  Dodanim,the  Dar- 
dani,  in  Illyricum  :  Tiras  in  Thrace  ;  Kittim,  at 
Citiitm,  in  Cyprus  ;  Ashkenaz  in  Phrygia  ;  Gomer 
in  Cappadocia,  and  Tarshish  in  Cilicia.  In  the 
north,  Tubal,  the  Tibareni,  in  Pontus  ;  Meshech, 
the  Moschici  in  Colchis ;  Magog,  Gogarene,  in 
northern  Armenia;  Togarmah  in  Armenia;  and 
Madai  in  Media.  The  Hamites  represent  the 
southern  parts  of  the  known  world ;  Cush,  pro- 
bably an  appellative  similar  to  the  Greek  Aethiopia, 
applicable  to  all  the  dark  races  of  Arabia  and 
eastern  Africa ;  Mizraim  in  Egypt ;  Phut  in 
Libya ;  Naphtuhim  and  Lehabim,  on  the  coast  of 
the  Mediterranean,  west  of  Egypt ;  Caphtorim, 
in  Egypt ;  Casluhim  from  the  Nile  to  the  border 
of  Palestine  ;  Pathrusim  in  Egypt ;  Seba  in  Meroe  ; 
Sabtah,  on    the    western    coast    of  the   straits   of 


EARTH 

Bab-el-mandeb  ;  Havilah,  more  to  the  south  ;  and 
Sabtechah  in  the  extreme  south,  where  the  So- 
mauli  now  live;  Nimrod  in  Babylonia;  Kaamah 
and  Dedan  on  the  south-western  coast  of  the  Per- 
sian gulf.  In  the  central  part  of  the  world  were 
the  Shemites :  Elam,  Elymais,  in  Persia ;  Asshur 
in  Assyria;  Arphaxad,  Arrapachitis,  in  northern 
Assyria ;  Lud  in  Lydia ;  Aram  in  Syria  and 
Mesopotamia,  and  the  descendants  of  Joktan  in  the 
peninsula  of  Arabia. 

This  sketch  is  filled  up,  as  far  as  regards  northern 
Arabia,  by  a  subsequent  account,  in  cap.  xxv.,  of 
the  settlement  of  the  descendants  of  Abraham  by 
Keturah  and  of  Ishmael ;  the  geographical  position 
of  many  is  uncertain  ;  but  we  are  acquainted  with 
that  of  the  Midiauites  among  the  sons  of  Abraham, 
and  of  Nebaioth,  Nabaiaea  ;  Kedar,  Kedrei  (Plin. 
v.  12);  Dumah,  Dumaitha  (Ptol.  v.  19),  among 
the  sons  of  Ishmael.  Some  of  the  names  in  this 
passage  have  a  geographical  origin,  as  Mibsam,  a 
spice-bearing  land,  Tenia,  an  arid  or  southern  land. 
Again,  in  cap.  xxxvi.  we  have  some  particulars 
with  regard  to  the  country  immediately  to  the 
south  of  Palestine,  where  the  aboriginal  Horites, 
the  Troglodytes  of  the  mountainous  districts  in  the 
eastern  part  of  Arabia  Petraea,  were  displaced  by 
the  descendants  of  Esau.  The  narrative  shows  an 
intimate  acquaintance  with  this  district,  as  we  have 
the  names  of  various  towns,  Dinhabah,  Bozrah, 
Avith,  Masrekah,  Rehoboth,  and  Pau,  few  of  which 
have  any  historical  importance.  The  peninsula 
of  Sinai  is  particularly  described  in  the  book  of 
Exodus. 

The  countries,  however,  to  which  historical  in- 
terest attaches  are  Mesopotamia  and  Egypt.  The 
hereditary  connexion  of  the  Hebrews  with  the 
former  of  these  districts,  and  the  importance  of  the 
dynasties  which  bore  sway  in  it,  make  it  by  far  the 
most  prominent  feature  in  the  map  of  the  ancient 
world ;  its  designation  in  the  book  of  Genesis  is 
Padan-aram,  or  Aram-Naharaim  ;  in  the  north  was 
Ur  of  the  Chaldees,  and  the  Haran  to  which  Terah 
migrated  ;  in  the  south  was  the  plain  of  Shinar,  and 
the  seat  of  Nimrod's  capital,  Babel ;  on  the  banks  of 
the  Tigris  were  the  cities  of  Accad,  Calneh,  Nineveh, 
Calah,  and  Resen  ;  and  on  the  banks  of  the  Eu- 
phrates, Erech  and  Rehoboth  (Gen.  x.  10-12). 
From  the  same  district  issued  the  warlike  expe- 
dition headed  by  the  kings  of  Shinar,  Ellasar, 
Elam,  and  Tidal,  the  object  of  which  apparently 
was  to  open  the  commercial  route  to  the  Aelanitic 
gulf  (Gen.  xiv.),  and  which  succeeded  in  the  tem- 
porary subjection  of  all  the  intervening  nations, 
the  Rephaim  in  Ashteroth-Karnaim  (Bashan),  the 
Zuzim  in  Ham  (between  the  Arnon  and  Jabbok), 
the  Emim  in  Shaveh  (near  the  Arnon),  and  the 
district  of  the  Amalekites  (to  the  south  of  Pales- 
tine). It  is,  in  short,  to  the  early  predominance 
of  the  eastern  dynasties  that  we  are  indebted 
for  the  few  geographical  details  which  we  possess 
regarding  those  and  the  intervening  districts.  The 
Egyptian  captivity  introduces  to  our  notice  some 
of  the  localities  in  Lower  Egypt,  viz.  the  pro- 
vince of  Goshen,  and  the  towns  Rameses  (Gen. 
xlvii.  11);  On,  Heliopolis  (Gen.  xli.  45);  Pithom, 
Patumns'?  (Ex.  i.  11);  and  Migdol,  Magdotwn? 
(Ex.  xiv.  2). 

During  the  period  of  the  Judges  the  Hebrews 
had  no  opportunity  of  advancing  their  knowledge 
of  the  outer  world  ;  but  with  the  extension  of  their 
territory  under  David  and  Solomon,  and  the  com- 
mercial  treaties  entered  into  by  the  latter  with  the 


EARTH 

Phoenicians  in  the  north  and  the  Egyptians  in  the 
smith,  a  new  era  commenced.  It  is  difficult  to 
estimate  the  amount  of  information  which  the 
Hebrews  derived  from  the  Phoenicians,  inasmuch 
as  the  general  policy  of  those  enterprising»traders 
was  to  keep  other  nations  in  the  dark  as  to  the 
localities  they  visited ;  but  there  can  be  no  doubt 
that  it  was  from  them  that  the  Hebrews  learned 
the  route  to  Ophir,  by  which  the  trade  with  India 
and  South  Africa  was  carried  on,  and  that  they 
also  became  acquainted  with  the  positions  and  pro- 
ductions of  a  great  number  of  regions  comparatively 
unknown.  From  Ez.  xxvii.  we  may  form  some 
idea  of  the  extended  ideas  of  geography  which  the 
Hebrews  had  obtained :  we  have  notice  of  the 
mineral  wealth  of  Spain,  the  dyes  of  the  Aegaean 
Sea,  the  famed  horses  of  Armenia,  the  copper-mines 
of  Colchis,  the  yarns  and  embroideries  of  Assyria, 
the  cutlery  of  South  Arabia,  the  spices  and  precious 
stones  of  the  Yemen,  and  the  caravan  trade  which 
was  carried  on  with  India  through  the  entrepots 
on  the  Persian  Gulf.  As  the  prophet  does  not 
profess  to  give  a  systematical  enumeration  of  the 
places,  but  selects  some  from  each  quarter  of  the 
earth,  it  may  fairly  be  inferred  that  more  infor- 
mation  was  obtained  from  that  source.  Whether 
it  was  from  thence  that  the  Hebrews  heard  of 
the  tribes  living  on  the  northern  coasts  of  the 
Euxine — the  Scythians  (Magog),  the  Cimmerians 
(Gome)-),  and  the  Roxolani  (?),  or  perhaps  Russians 
(  Rosch,  Ez.  xxxviii.  2,  Hebrew  text),  is  uncertain: 
the  inroad  of  the  northern  hordes,  which  occurred 
about  Ezekiel's  time,  may  have  drawn  attention  to 
that  quarter. 

'flic  progress  of  information  on  the  side  of  Afiica 
is  clearly  marked :  the  distinction  between  Upper 
and  Lower  Egypt  is  shown  by  the  application  of 
the  name  Pathros  to  the  former  (Ez.  xxix.  14). 
Memphis,  the  capital  of  lower  Egypt,  is  first  men- 
tioned in.  Hosea  (ix.  6)  under  the  name  Moph, 
and  afterwards  frequently  as  Noph  (Is.  xix.  13) ; 
Thebes,  the  capital  of  tipper  Egypt,  at  a  later 
period,  as  No-Ammon  (Nah.  iii.  8)  and  No  (Jer. 
xlvi.  25);  and  the  distant  Syene  (Ez.  xxix.  Jo). 
Several  other  towns  are  noticed  in  the  Delta ;  Sin, 
Pelusium  (Ez.  xxx.  15);  Pibeseth,  Bubastis  (Ez. 
xxx.  17) ;  Zoan,  Tanis  (Is.  xix.  11);  Tahapanes,  or 
Tahpanhes,  Daphne  (Jer.  ii.  16)  ;  Heliopolis,  under 
the  Hebraised  form  Bethshemesh  (Jer.  xliii.  13); 
and,  higher  up  the  Nile,  Hanes',  Seracleopolis  (Is. 
xxx.  4).  The  position  of  certain  nations  seems  to 
have  been  better  ascertain''!.  Cush  (Aethiopid) 
was  fixed  immediately  to  the  south  of  Egypt,  where 
Tirhakah  held  sway  with  Napata  for  his  capital 
(■_'  K".  xix.  ',();  the  Lubim  (Lihyans,  perhaps  rather 
Nubians,  who  may  also  be  noticed  under  the  cor- 
rupted form  <'hul),  Ez.  xxx.  5)  appear  as  allies  of 
Egypt;  and  with  them  a  people  not  previously 
noticed,  the  Sukkiims,  the  Troglodytes  of  the 
western  coast  of  the  Red  Sea  (-'  Chr.  xii.  3) ;  the 
Ludim  and  l'hut  are  mentioned  in  the  same  con- 
nexion (Ez.  xxx.  5). 

The  wars  with  the  Assyrians  and  Babylonian  . 
and  the  captivities  which  followed,  bring  us  back 
again  to  the  geography  of  the  East.  Incidental 
notice  is  taken  of  several  important  places  in  con- 
nexion with  these  events:  the  capital  of  Persia, 
Shushan,  Susa  (Dan.  viii.  '_')  ;  that  of  Media, 
Achmetha,  Ecbatana  (Ezr.  vi.  •_');  rlena,  Ivan, 
and Sepharvaim,  on  the  Euphrates  (2  K.  xviii.  34  I; 
Carchemish,  Circesium,  on  the  same  river  (Is.  x. 
9)  ;   Gozan  and   Halah,  on'  the  borders  of  Media 


EARTHQUAKE 


4G7 


(2  K.  xrii.  6)  ;  Kir,  perhaps  on  the  banks  of  the 
Cyrus  (2  K.  xvi.  9).  The  names  of  Persia  (2  Chr. 
xxxvi.  20)  and  India  (Esth.  i.  1)  now  occur: 
whether  the  far-distant  China  is  noticed  at  an 
earlier  period  under  the  name  Sinini  (Is.  xlix.  12) 
admits  of  doubt. 

The  names  of  Greece  and  Italy  are  hardly  noticed 
in  Hebrew  geography :  the  earliest  notice  of  the 
former,  subsequently  to  Gen.  x.,  occurs  in  Is.  lxvi. 
19,  under  the  name  of  Javau  ;  for  the  Javan  in 
Joel  iii.  6  is  probably  in  South  Arabia,  to  which 
we  must  also  refer  Ez.  xxvii.  13,  and  Zech.  ix.  13. 
In  Dan.  viii.  21,  the  term  definitely  applies 
to  Greece,  whereas  in  Is.  lxvi.  it  is  indefinitely 
used  for  the  Greek  settlements.  If  Italy  is  de- 
scribed at  all,  it  is  under  the  name  Chittim  (Dan. 
xi.  30). 

In  the  Maccabaean  era  the  classical  names  came 
into  common  use:  Crete,  Sparta,  Delos,  Sicyon, 
Caria,  C'ilicia,  and  other  familiar  names  are  noticed 
(1  Mace.  x.  67,  xi.  14,  xv.  23) ;  Asia,  in  a  re- 
stricted sense,  as  =  the  Syrian  empire  (1  Mace.  viii. 
6)  ;  Hispania  and  Rome  (1  Mace.  viii.  1-3).  Hence- 
forward the  geography  of  the  Bible,  as  far  as  foreign 
lands  are  concerned,  is  absorbed  in  the  wider  field 
of  classical  geography.  It  is  hardly  necessary  to 
add  that  the  use  of  classical  designations  in  our 
Authorized  Version  is  in  many  instances  a  departure 
from  the  Hebrew  text:  for  instance,  Mesopotamia 
stands  for  Aram-Naharaim  (Gen.  xxiv.  In)  ; 
Ethiopia  for  Cush  (2  K.  xix  9)  ;  the  Chaldaeans 
for  Chasdim  (Job  i.  17);  Graecia  for  Javan  (Dan. 
viii.  21);  Eyypt  for  Mizraim  (Gen.  xiii.  10); 
Armenia  for  Ararat  (2  K.  xix.  37) ;  Assyria  for 
Asshur  (Gen.  ii.14) ;  Idumaea  for  Edom  (Is.  xxxiv. 
5) :  and  Syria  for  Aram.  Arabia,  it  may  be  observed, 
does  occur  as  an  original  Hebrew  name  in  the  later 
books  (Is.  xxi.  13),  but  probably  in  a  restricted  sense 
as  applicable  to  a  single  tribe.  [W.  L.  B.] 

EARTHENWARE.     [Pottery.] 

EARTHQUAKE  (L''jn).  Earthquakes,  more 
or  less  violent,  are  of  frequent  occurrence  in 
Palestine,  as  might  be  expected  from  the  numerous 
traces  of  volcanic  agency  visible  in  the  features  of 
that  country.  The  recorded  instances,  however, 
are  but  few ;  the  most  remarkable  occurred  in  the 
reign  of  Uzziah  (Am.  i.  1  ;  Zech.  xiv.  5),  which 
Josephus  (Ant.  ix.  10,  §4)  connected  with  the 
sacrilege  and  consequent  punishment  of  that  mo- 
narch (2  Chr.  xxvi.  16  ff.).  From  Zech.  xiv.  4  we 
are  led  to  infer  that  a  great  convulsion  took  place 
at  this  time  in  the  Mount  of  Olives,  the  mountain 
being  split  so  as  to  leave  a  valley  between  its  sum- 
mits. Josephus  records  something  of  the  sort,  but 
his  account  is  by  no  means  clear,  for  his  words 
(rov  opovs  airoppayTJvai  to  r/p.:av  rov  Kara  t^v 
Svaiv)  can  hardly  mean  the  western  half  of  the 
mountain,  as  Winston  seems  to  think,  but  the  half 
of  the  western  mountain,  i.  e.,  of  the  Mount  of 
Evil   Counsel,    though    it    is    not    clear   why    this 

particularly  should  be  ten 1  the  western 

mountain.  We  cannot  but  think  that  the  two 
accounts   have    the  same   foundation,   and   that   the 

Mount  of  Olives  was  really  affected  by  the  earth- 
quake, llit/.ig  (Comm.  in  Zt <■/,.)  suggests  that 
the  name  D^n^'O,  "corruption"  may  have  origi- 
nated at  this  time,  the  rolling  down  of  tic  side  of 
the  hill,  as  described  by  Josephus,  entitling  it  to  be 

described  as  the  destroying  mountain,  in' thi 
in  which  the  term  occurs  in  Jer.  Ii.  25.     An  earth- 
2  H  2 


468 


EAST 


quake  occurred  at  the  time  of  our  Saviour's  cruci- 
fixion (Matt,  xxvii.  51-54),  which  may  be  deemed 
miraculous  rather  from  the  conjunction  of  circum- 
stances than  from  the  nature  of  the  phenomenon 
itself,  for  it  is  described  in  the  usual  terms  {rj  yrj 
£o-ei<T0Ti).  Josephus  {Ant.  xv.  5,  §2)  records  a 
very  violent  earthquake,  that  occurred  B.C.  31,  in 
which  10,000  people  perished.  Earthquakes  are 
not  unfrequently  accompanied  by  fissures  of  the 
earth's  surface ;  instances  of  this  are  recorded  in 
connexion  with  the  destruction  of  Koran  and  his 
company  (Num.  xvi.  32  ;  cf.  Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  3, 
§3),  and  at  the  time  of  our  Lord's  death  (Matt, 
xxvii.  51);  the  former  may  be  paralleled  by  a 
similar  occurrence  at  Oppido  in  Calabria  A. D.  1783, 
where  the  earth  opened  to  the  extent  of  500,  and  a 
depth  of  more  than  200  feet:  and  again  by  the 
sinking  of  the  bed  of  the  Tagus  at  Lisbon,  in  which 
the  quay  was  swallowed  up  (Pfaff,  SchSpfungsgesch. 
p.  115).  These  depressions  are  sometimes  on  a 
very  large  scale  ;  the  subsidence  of  the  valley  of 
Siddim  at  the  southern  extremity  of  the  Dead  Sea 
may  be  attributed  to  an  earthquake ;  similar  de- 
pressions have  occurred  in  many  districts,  the  most 
remarkable  being  the  submersion  and  subsequent 
re-elevation  of  the  temple  of  Serapis  at  Puteoli. 
The  frequency  of  earthquakes  about  the  Dead  Sea  is 
testified  in  the  name  Bela  (Gen.  xiv.  2  ;  comp. 
Jerome  ad  Is.  xv.).  Darkness  is  frequently  a  con- 
comitant of  earthquake.  [Darkness.  |  The  awe, 
which  an  earthquake  never  fails  to  inspire,  "  con- 
veying the  idea  of  some  universal  and  unlimited 
danger"  (Humboldt's  Kosmos,  i.  212),  rendered  it 
a  fitting  token  of  the  presence  of  Jehovah  (1  K. 
xix.  11);  hence  it  is  frequently  noticed  in  con- 
nexion with  His  appearance  (Judg.  v.  4  ;  2  Sam. 
xxii.  8  ;  Ps.  lxxvii.  18,  xcvii.  4,  civ.  32  ;  Am. 
viii.  8  ;  Hab.  iii.  10).  [W.  L.  B.] 

EAST  (D1£;  rnr»).  The  Hebrew  terms, 
descriptive  of  the  east,  differ  in  idea,  and,  to  a 
certain  extent,  in  application ;  (1)  kedem  properly 
means  that  which  is  before  or  in  front  of  a  person, 
and'  was  applied  to  the  east  from  the  custom  of 
turning  in  that  direction  when  describing  the 
points  of  the  compass,  before,  behind,  the  right  and 
the  left,  representing  respectively  E.,  W.,  S.,  and  N. 
(Job  xxiii.  8,  9)  ;  (2)  mizrach  means  the  place  of 
the  sun's  rising,  and  strictly  answers  to  the  Greek 
avaro\r]  and  the  Latin  oricns ;  sometimes  the  full 
expression  K'D^'"mTO  is  used  (Judg.  xi.  18 ; 
Is.  xli.  25),  and  sometimes  kedem  and  mizrach  are 
used  together  (e.g.  Ex.  xxvii.  13;  Josh.  xix.  12), 
which  is  after  all  not  so  tautologous  as  it  appears  to 
be  in  our  translation  "  on  the  east  side  eastward." 
Bearing  in  mind  this  etymological  distinction,  it  is 
natural  that  kedem  should  be  used  when  the  fotir 
quarters  of  the  world  are  described  (as  in  Gen.  xiii. 
14,  xxviii.  14  ;  Job  xxiii.  8,  9  ;  Ez.  xlvii.  18  ft'.), 
and  mizrach  when  the  east  is  only  distinguished 
from  the  west  (Josh.  xi.  3  ;  Ps.  1.  1,  ciii.  12,  cxiii. 
3  ;  Zech.  viii.  7),  or  from  some  other  one  quarter 
(Dan.  viii.  9,  xi.  44  ;  Am.  viii.  12)  ;  exceptions  to 
this  usage  occur  in  Ps.  cvii.  3,  and  Is.  xliii.  5, 
each,  however,  admitting  of  explanation.  Again, 
kedem  is  used  in  a  strictly  geographical  sense  to 
describe  a  spot  or  country  immediately  before 
another  in  an  easterly  direction  ;  hence  it  occurs  in 
such  passages  as  Gen.  ii.  8,  iii.  24,  xi.  2,  xiii.  11, 
xxv.  6  ;  and  hence  the  subsequent  application  of  the 
term,  as  a  proper  name  (Gen.  xxv.  6,  eastward, 


EBAL 

vnto  the  land  of  Kedem),  to  the  lands  lying  imme- 
diately eastward  of  Palestine,  viz.  Arabia,  Mesopo- 
tamia and  Babylonia  [Bene-kedem]  ;  on  the  other 
hand  mizrach  is  used  of  the  far  east  with  a  less  de- 
finite signification  (Is.  xli.  2,  25,  xliii.  5,  xlvi.  11). 
In  describing  aspect  or  direction  the  terms  are  used 
indifferently  (compare  kedem  in  Lev.  i.  16,  and  Josh, 
vii.  2  with  mizrach  in  2  Chr.  v.  12,  and  1  Chr.  v. 
10).  The  east  seems  to  have  been  regarded  as 
symbolical  of  distance  (Is.  xlvi.  11),  as  the  land 
stretched  out  in  these  directions  without  any  known 
limit.  In  Is.  ii.  6  it  appears  as  the  seat  of  witchery 
and  similar  arts  (comp.  Job  xv.  2);  the  correct 
text  may,  however,  be  DDJ30,  which  gives  a  better 
sense  (Gesen.  Thesaur.  p.  1193).  In  the  LXX. 
avaroXai  is  used  both  for  kedem  and  mizrach.  It 
should  be  observed  that  the  expression  is,  with  but 
few  exceptions  (Dan.  viii.  9  ;  Rev.  xxi.  13  ;  comp. 
vii.  2,  xvi.  12,  from  which  it  would  seem  to  have 
been  St.  John's  usage  to  insert  yAlov),  avaroXal 
(Matt.  ii.  1,  viii.  11,  xxiv.  27;  Luke  xiii.  29), 
and  not  waroXi].  It  is  hardly  possible  that  St. 
Matthew  would  use  the  two  terms  indifferently  in 
succeeding  verses  (ii.  1,  2),  particularly  as  he  adds 
the  article  to  avaroA-ti,  which  is  invariably  absent 
in  other  cases  (cf.  Rev.  xxi.  13).  He  seems  to 
imply  a  definiteness  in  the  locality — that  it  was  the 
country  called  Dip,  or  avaroAri  (comp.  the  mo- 
dern Anatolia)  as  distinct  from  the  quarter  or  point 
of  the  compass  (avaroXai)  in  which  it  lay.  In  con- 
firmation of  this  it  may  be  noticed  that  in  the  only 
passage  where  the  article  is  prefixed  to  kedem  (Gen. 
x.  30),  the  term  is  used  for  a  definite  and  restricted 
locality,  namely,  Southern  Arabia.       [W.  L.  B.] 

EASTER  (irdirxa ;  pascha).     The  occurrence 

of  this  word  in  the  A.  V.  of  Acts  xii.  4 — "  Intend- 
ing after  Easter  to  bring  him  forth  to  the  people  " 
—  is  chiefly  noticeable  as  an  example  of  the  want  of 
consistency  in  the  translators.  In  the  earlier  Eng- 
lish versions  Easter  had  been  frequently  used  as  the 
translation  of  irdaxo-  At  the  last  revision  Pass- 
over was  substituted  in  all  passages  but  this.  It 
would  seem  from  this,  and  from  the  use  of  such 
words  as  "robbers  of  churches"  (Acts  xix.  37), 
"town-clerk"  (xix.  35),  "Serjeants"  (xvi.  35), 
"  deputy "  (xiii.  7,  &c),  as  if  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles  had  fallen  into  the  hands  of  a  translator 
who  acted  on  the  principle  of  choosing,  not  the 
most  correct,  but  the  most  familiar  equivalents. 
(Comp.  Trench,  On  the  Authorised  Version  of  the 
N.  T.  p.  21).  For  all  that  regards  the  nature  and 
celebration  of  the  Feast  thus  translated,  see  Pass- 
over. [E.  H.  P.] 

EAST  WIND.     [Winds.] 

E'BAL,  MOUNT  i^TV  in  ;  Zpos  Taifr&A ; 
Joseph.  TifidAos ;  Mbns  Hebal),  a  mount  in  the 
promised  land,  on  which,  according  to  the  command 
of  Moses,  the  Israelites  were,  after  their  entrance  on 
the  promised  land,  to  "  put "  the  curse  which  should 
fall  upon  them  if  they  disobeyed  the  commandments 
of  Jehovah.  The  blessing  consequent  on  obedience 
was  to  be  similarly  localised  on  Mount  Gerizim 
(Deut.  xi.  26-29).  This  was  to  be  accomplished 
by  a  ceremonial  in  which  half  the  tribes  stood  on 
the  one  mount  ami  half  on  the  other;  those  on 
Gerizim  responding  to  and  affirming  blessings,  those 
on  Ebal  curses,  as  pronounced  by  the  1  .evit.es,  who 
remained  with  the  ark  in  the  centre  of  the  interval 
(comp.  Deut.  xxvii.  11-26  with  Josh,  i-iii.  30-35, 


EBAL 

with  Joseph.  Ant .  iv.  8,  §44,  and  with  the  comments 
of  the  Talmud  {Sota,  30),  quoted  in  Herxheimer's 
Pentateuch).  But  notwithstanding  the  ban  thus 
apparently  laid  on  Ebal,  it  was  further  appointed 
to  be  the  site  of  the  first  great  altar  to  be  erected 
to  Jehovah ;  an  altar  of  large  unhewn  stones  plas- 
tered with  lime  and  inscribed  with  the  words  of 
the  kvw  (Deut.  xxvii.  2-S).  On  this  altar  peace- 
offerings  were  to  be  offered,  and  round  it  a  sacrificial 
feast  was  to  lake  place,  with  other  rejoicings  (ver. 
6,  7).  Scholars  disagree  as  to  whether  there  were 
to  be  two  erections — a  kind  of  cromlech  and  an 
altar — or  an  altar  only,  with  the  law  inscribed  on 
its  stones.  The  latter  was  the  view  of  Josephus 
(Ant.  iv.  8,  §44,  v.  1,  §19),  the  former  is  unhesi- 
tatingly adopted  by  the  latest  commentator  (Keil, 
on  Josh.  viii.  32).  The  words  themselves  may  per- 
haps bear  either  sense. 

The  terms  of  Moses'  injunction  seem  to  infer 
that  no  delay  was  to  take  place  in  carrying  out 
this  symbolical  transaction.  It  was  to  be  "  on 
the  day"  that  Jordan  was  crossed  (xxvii.  2),  before 
they  "  went  in  unto  the  land  flowing  with  milk 
and  honey"  (ver.  3).  And  accordingly  Joshua 
appears  to  have  seized  the  earliest  practicable  mo- 
ment, after  the  pressing  affairs  of  the  siege  of 
Jericho,  the  execution  of  Achan,  and  the  destruction 
of  Ai  had  been  despatched,  to  carry  out  the  com- 
mand (Josh.  viii.  30-35).  After  this  Ebal  appears 
no  more  in  the  sacred  story. 

The  question  now  arises,  where  were  Ebal  and 
Gerizim  situated?  The  all  but  unanimous  reply  to 
this  is,  that  they  are  the  mounts  which  form  the 
sides  of  the  fertile  valley  in  which  lies  Nablus,  the 
ancient  Shechem — Ebal  on  the  north  and  Gerizim 
on  the  south. 

(1)  It  is  plain  from  the  passages  already  quoted 
that  they  were  situated  near  together,  with  a  valley 
between. 

(2)  Gerizim  was  very  near  Shechem  (Judg.  ix. 
7),  and  in  Josephus's  time  their  names  appear  to 
have  been  attached  to  the  mounts,  which  were  then, 
as  now,  Ebal  on  the  north  and  Gerizim  on  the 
smith.  Since  that  they  have  been  mentioned  by 
Benjamin  of  Tudela  (Asher,  i.  66),  and  Sir  John 
Maundeville,  and  among  modem  travellers  by 
Maundrell  (Mori.  Tram.  432). 

The  main  impediment  to  our  entire  reception  of 
this  view  rests  in  the  terms  of  the  first  mention 
of  the  place  by  Moses  in  Dent.  xi.  :i0:  A.  V.  "  Are 
they  not  on  the  other  side  Jordan,  by  the  way 
where  the  sun  goeth  down,  in  the  land  of  the 
Canaanites,  which  dwell  in  the  champaign  over 
against  Gilgal,  beside  the  plains  of  Moreh?"  Here 
the  mention  of  Gilgal,  which  was  in  the  valley  of 
the  Jordan  near  Jericho,  of  the  valley  itself  (Arabah, 
mistranslated  here  only,  "champaign"),  and  of  the 
Canaanites  who  dwelt  there,  and  also  the  other 
terms  of  the  injunction  of  Moses,  as  already  noticed, 
seem  to  imply  that  Ebal  and  Gerizim  were  in  the 
immediate  neighbourhood  of  Jericho.  And  this  is 
strengthened  by  the  narrative  of  Joshua,  who  ap- 
pears to  have  carried  out  the  prescribed  ceremonial 
on  tin'  mounts  while  his  camp  was  at  Gilgal  (comp. 
vii.  2,  ix.  6),  and  before  he  had  (at  least  before  any 
account  of  his  having)  made  his  way  so  far  into 
the  interior  of  the  country  as  Shechem. 

This  is  the  view  taken  by  Eusebius  I  ' 

TfiSaA).  lie  does  not  quote  the  passage  in  Dent., 
but  seems  to  lie  led  to  his  opinion  rather  by  the 
difficulty  of  the  mountains  at  Shechem  being  to.. 
far  apart  t..  admit  of  the  blessings  and  cursings 


EBAL 


469 


being  heard,  and  also  by  his  desire  to  contradict 
the  Samaritans ;  add  to  this  that  he  speaks  from 
no  personal  knowledge,  but  simply  from  hearsay 
(Aeyerai),  as  to  the  existence  of  two  such  hills  in 
the  Jordan  valley.  The  notice  of  Eusebius  is  merely 
translated  by  Jerome,  with  a  shade  more  of  ani- 
mosity to  the  Samaritans  (vehementer  errant),  and 
expression  of  difficulty  as  to  the  distance,  but  with- 
out any  additional  information.  Procopius  and 
Epiphanius  also  followed  Eusebius,  but  their  mis- 
takes have  been  disposed  of  by  Reland  {Pal.  503-4  ; 
Miscell.  129-133). 

With  regard  to  the  passage  in  Deut.,  it  will 
perhaps  assume  a  different  aspect  on  examination. 
(1)  Moses  is  represented  as  speaking  from  the  east 
side  of  the  Jordan,  before  anything  was  known  of 
the  country  on  the  west,  beyond  the  exaggerated 
reports  of  the  spies,  and  when  everything  there  was 
wrapped  in  mystery,  and  localities  and  distances 
had  not  assumed  their  due  proportions.  (2)  A 
closer  rendering  of  the  verse  is  as  follows:  "Are 
they  not  on  the  other  side  the  Jordan,  beyond  — 
("HIIX,  the  word  rendered  "  the  backside  of  the 
desert,"  in  Ex.  iii.  1) — the  way  of  the  sunset,  in  the 
land  of  the  Canaanite  who  dwells  in  the  Arabah 
over  against  Gilgal,  near  the  terebinths  of  Moreh." 
If  this  rendering  is  correct,  a  great  part  of  the 
difficulty  has  disappeared.  Gilgal  no  longer  marks 
the  site  of  Ebal  and  Gerizim,  but  of  the  dwelling 
of  the  Canaanites,  who  were,  it  is  true,  the  first  to 
encounter  the  Israelites  on  the  other  side  the  river, 
in  their  native  lowlands,  but  who,  we  have  it  ac- 
tually on  record,  were  both  in  the  time  of  Abraham 
(Gen.  xii.  6)  and  of  the  conquest  (Josh.  xvii.  18) 
located  about  Shechem.  The  word  now  rendered 
"beyond"  is  not  represented  at  all  in  the  A.  V., 
and  it  certainly  throws  the  locality  much  further 
back  ;  and  lastly  there  is  the  striking  landmark  of 
the  trees  of  Moreh,  which  were  standing  by  She- 
chem when  Abraham  first  entered  the  land,  and 
whose  name  probably  survived  iu  Morthia,  or  Ma- 
mortha,  a  name  of  Shechem  found  on  coins  of  the 
Roman  period  (Reland,  Miscell.  137,  9). 

In  accordance  with  this  is  the  addition  in  the 
Samaritan  Pentateuch,  after  the  words  "  the*tere- 
binths  of  Moreh,"  at  the  end  of  Deut.  xi.  30,  of  the 
words  "  over  against  Shechem."  This  addition  is 
the  more  credible  because  there  is  not,  as  in  the 
case  noticed  afterwards,  any  apparent  motive  for  it. 
If  this  interpretation  be  accepted,  the  next  verse 
(31)  gains  a  fresh  force: — "  Fur  ye  shall  pass  over 
Jordan  [not  only  to  meet  the  Canaanites  imme- 
diately on  the  other  side,  but]  to  go  in  to  posse  - 
the  land  [the  whole  of  the  country,  even  the  heart 
of  it,  where  these  mounts  are  situated  (glancing 
back  to  ver.  29)],  the  land  which  Jehovah  your 
God  giveth  you  ;  and  ye  shall  possess  it,  and  dwell 
therein."  And  it  may  also  be  asked  whether  the 
significance  of  the  whole  solemn  ceremonial  of  the 
blessing  and  cursing  is  not  missed  if  we  understand 
it  as  taking  place  directly  a  footing  had  been  ob- 
tained on  the  outskirts  of  the  country,  ami  no1  as 
acted  in  (he  heart  of  the  conquered  land,  in  its 
most  prominent  natural  position,  and  close  to  its 
oldest  city      Shechem. 

This  is  evidently  the  view  taken  by  Josephus. 
His  statement   (Aftt.  V.  1,  §19     is  that  it  tool 

alter  the  subjugation  of  the  country  and  the  esta- 
blishment of  the  Tabernacle  at  Shiloh.  He  has  no 
misgivings  as  to  the  situation  of  the  mountains.  Thej 
were  at  Shechem  (4irl  Shu'/uup).  and  from  thence, 
after  the  ceremony,  the  people  returned  to  Shiloh. 


470 


EBAL 


The  narrative  of  Joshua  is  more  puzzling.  But 
even  with  regard  to  this  something  may  be  said. 
It  will  be  at  once  perceived  that  the  book  contains 
no  account  of  the  conquest  of  the  centre .  of  the 
country,  of  those  portions  which  were  afterwards 
the  mountain  of  Ephraim,  Esdraelon,  or  Galilee. 
We  lose  Joshua  at  Gilgal,  after  the  conquest  of  the 
south,  to  find  him  again  suddenly  at  the  waters  of 
Mt'iom  in  the  extreme'north  (x.  43,  xi.  7).  Of  his 
intermediate  proceedings  the  only  record  that  seems 
to  have  escaped  is  the  fragment  contained  in  viii. 
30-35.  Nor  should  it  be  overlooked  that  some  doubt 
is  thrown  on  this  in  Josh.  viii.  30-35,  by  its  omission 
in  both  the  Vat.  and  Alex.  MSS.  of  the  LXX. 

The  distance  of  Ebal  and  Gerizim  from  each 
other  is  not  such  a  stumbling-block  to  us  as  it  was 
to  Eusebius;  though  it  is  difficult  to  understand 
how  he  and  Jerome  should  have  been  ignorant  of 
the  distance  to  which  the  voice  will  travel  in  the 
clear  elastic  atmosphere  of  the  East.  Prof.  Stanley 
lias  given  some  instances  of  this  (S.  fy  P.  13); 
others  equally  remarkable  were  observed  by  the 
writer ;  and  he  has  been  informed  by  a  gentleman 
long  resident  in  the  neighbourhood  that  a  voice  can 
be  heard  without  difficulty  across  the  valley  sepa- 
rating the  two  spots  in  question  (see  also  Bonar, 
371). 

It  is  well  known  that  one  of  the  most  serious 
variations  between  the  Hebrew  text  of  the  Penta- 
teuch and  the  Samaritan  text,  is  in  reference  to 
Ebal  and  Gerizim.  In  Deut.  xxvii.  4,  the  Sama- 
ritan has  Gerizim,  while  the  Hebrew  (as  in  A.  V.) 
has  Ebal,  as  the  mount  on  which  the  altar  to  Je- 
hovah, and  the  inscription  of  the  law  were  to  be 
erected.  Upon  this  basis  they  ground  the  sanctity 
of  Gerizim  and  the  authenticity  of  the  temple  and 
holy  place,  which  did  exist  and  still  exist  there. 
The  arguments  upon  this  difficult  and  hopeless 
question  will  be  found  in  Kennicott  (Dissert.  2.), 
and  in  the  reply  of  Verschuir  (Leovard.  1775  ; 
quoted  by  Gesenius  de  Pent.  Sam.  61).  Two 
points  may  merely  be  glanced  at  here  which  have 
apparently  escaped  notice.  1.  Both  agree  that 
Ebal  was  the  mount  on  which  the  cursings  were  to 
rest,  Gerizim  that  for  the  blessings.  It  appears 
inconsistent,  that  Ebal,  the  mount  of  cursing, 
should  be  the  site  of  the  altar  and  the  record 
of  the  law,  while  Gerizim,  the  mount  of  bless- 
ing, should  remain  unoccupied  by  sanctuary  of 
any  kind.  2.  Taking  into  account  the  known  pre- 
dilection- of  Orientals  for  ancient  sites  on  which  to 
fix  their  sanctuaries,  it  is  more  easy  to  believe  (in 
the  absence  of  any  evidence  to  the  contrary)  that 
in  building  their  temple  on  Gerizim,  the  Sama- 
ritans were  making  use  of  a  spot  already  enjoying 
a  reputation  for  sanctity,  than  that  they  built  on  a 
place  upon  which  the  curse  was  laid  in  the  records 
which  they  received  equally  with  the  Jews.  Thus 
the  very  fact  of  the  occupation  of  Gerizim  by  the 
Samaritans  would  seem  an  argument  for  its  original 
sanctity. 

Ebal  is  rarely  ascended  by  travellers,  and  we  are 
therefore  in  ignorance  as  to  how  far  the  question 
may  be  affected  by  remains  of  ancient  buildings 
thereon.  That  such  remains  do  exist  is  certain, 
even  from  the  very  meagre  accounts  published 
(Bartlett,  Watts  about  Jerusalem,  App.  251,  2; 
and  Narrative  of  Rev.  J.  Mills  in  Trans.  Pal.  Ar- 
chaeol.  Assoc.  1855),  while  the  mountain  is  evi- 
dently of  such  extent  as  to  warrant  the  belief  that 
there  is- a  great  deal  still  to  discover. 

The  report  of  the  old  travellers  was  that  Ebal 


EBEN-EZER 

was  more  barren  than  Gerizim  (see  Benjamin  of 
Tudela,  &c),  but  this  opinion  probably  arose  from 
a  belief  in  the  effects  of  the  curse  mentioned  above. 
At  any  rate  it  is  not  borne. out  by  the  latest  ac- 
counts, according  to  which  there  is  little  or  no  per- 
ceptible difference.  Both  mountains  are  terraced, 
and  Ebal  is  ''  occupied  from  bottom  to  top  by 
beautiful  gardens "  (Mills;  see  also  Porter,  Hand- 
book, 332).  The  slopes  of  Ebal  towards  the  valley 
appear  to  be  steeper  than  those  of  Gerizim  (Wilson, 
45,  71).  It  is  also  the  higher  mountain  of  the  two. 
There  is  some  uncertainty  about  the  measurements, 
but  the  following  are  the  results  of  the  latest  ob- 
servations (Van  de  Velde,  Memoir,  178). 
JVabliis,  above  sea,     1672  ft. 

Gerizim      do.  2600  „..  above  Nablus,  928  ft. 

Ebal  do.  about  2700  „  ..  do.         1028  „ 

According  to  Wilson  (Lands,  ii.  71, — but  see 
Rob.  ii.  277,  280,  note)  it  is  sufficiently  high  to 
shut  out  Hermon  from  the  highest  point  of  Ge- 
rizim. The  structure  of  Gerizim  is  nummulitic 
limestone  with  occasional  outcrops  of  igneous  rock 
(Poole,  in  Geogr.  Journ.  xxvj.  56),  and  that  of 
Ebal  is  probably  similar.  At  its  base  above  the 
valley  of  Nablus  are  numerous  caves  and  sepulchral 
excavations.  The  modern  name  of  Ebal  is  Sitti  Sa- 
lamiyah,  from  a  Mohammedan  female  saint,  whose 
tomb  is  standing  on  the  eastern  part  of  the  ridge,  a 
little  before  the  highest  point  is  reached  (Wilson, 
71,  note).  By  others,  however,  it  is  reported  to 
be  called ' Imdd-ed-Dcen,  "  the  pillar  of  the  religion  " 
(Stanley,  238,  note).  The  tomb  of  another  saint 
called  Amad  is  also  shown  (Kitter,  641),  with 
whom  the  latter  name  may  have  some  connexion.  On 
the  south-east  shoulder  is  a  ruined  site  bearing  the 
name  of  'Askar  (Rob.  iii.  132).  [Sychar.]    [G.] 

E'BED,  1.  (nij?  =  "  slave ;"  but  many  MSS., 
and  the  Syr.  and  Arab.  Versions,  have  ~QJ?,  Eber  ; 
'IcojStJA  ;  Alex.  'A/8e'5  ;  Ebed  and  Obed),  father  of 
Gaal,  who  with  his  brethren  assisted  the  men  of 
Shechem  in  their  revolt  against  Abimelech  (Judg. 
ix.  26,28,  30,  31,  35). 

2,  02V;  'tlfi-fiO  ;  Alex.'np-f)"]  Abed),  son  of 
Jonathan;  one  of  the  Bene-Adin  who  returned  from 
Babylon  with  Ezra  (Ezr.  viii.  6).  In  1  Esdras  the 
name  is  given  Obeth. 

It  would  add  greatly  to  the  force  of  many 
passages  in  the  O.  T.  if  the  word  "slave"  or 
"  bondman"  were  appropriated  to  the  Hebrew  term 
Ebed, while  "servant,"  "attendant,"  or  "minister," 
were  used  to  translate  Na'ar,  Mesharet,  &c.  In 
the  addresses  of  subjects  to  a  ruler,  the  Oriental 
character  of  the  transaction  would  come  home  to 
us  at  once  if  we  read  "  what  saith  my  lord  to  his 
slave" — the  very  form  still  in  use  in  the  East,  and 
familiar  to  us  all  in  the  Arabian  Nights  and  other 
Oriental  works — instead  of  "  his  servant."     [*>■] 

E'BED-ME'LECH  pfxn^)  ;  'ApSepeAex ; 
AbdcmelecK),  an  Aethiopian  eunuch  in  the  service 
of  king  Zedekiah,  through  whose  interference  Jere- 
miah was  released  from  prison,  and  who  was  on 
that  account  preserved  from  harm  at  the  taking  of 
Jerusalem  (Jer.  xxxviii.  7  ff.,  xxxix.  15  ff.).  His 
name  seems  to  be  an  official  title  =  King's  slave,  i.e. 
minister. 

EBEN-E'ZEB  (">TVna  }3K,  "  the  stone  of 

a  For  a  peculiarity  in  the  Hebrew  name  in  iv.  1 
— the  definite  article  to  both  words — see  Ewald, 
Ausfdhrl.  Lcbrb.  §290  d. 


EBER 

help ;"  'Afieve(ep ;  Joseph,  \l6os  l<rxvp6s  ;  lapis 
Adjntorii),  a  stone  set  up  by  Samuel  after  a  signal  de- 
feat of  the  Philistines,  as  a  memorial  of  the  "  help" 
received  on  the  occasion  from  Jehovah  ( 1  Sam .  vii .  12 ) . 
"  He  called  the  name  of  it.  Ebenezer,  saying, '  hitherto 
hath  Jehovah  helped  us'"  (azaranu,  -IJITX).  Its 
position  is  carefully  defined  as  between  Mizpeh — ■ 
"  the  watch-tower,"  one  of  the  conspicuous  emi- 
nences a  few  miles  N.  of  Jerusalem — and  Siien, 
"the  tooth"  or  "crag."  Neither  of  these  points, 
however,  have  been  identified  with  any  certainty — ■ 
the  latter  not  at  all.  According  to  Josephus's 
record  of  the  transaction  (Ant.  vi.  2,  2),  the  stone 
was  erected  to  mark  the  limit  of  the  victory,  a  spot 
which  he  calls  Korraia,  but  in  the  Hebrew  Beth- 
car.  It  is  remarkable  that  of  the  occurrences 
of  the  name  Eben-ezer,  two  (1  Sam.  iv.  1,  v.  1) 
are  found  in  the  order  of  the  narrative  before 
the  place  received  its  title.  But  this  would  not 
unnaturally  happen  iri  a  record  written  after  the  ■ 
event,  especially  in  the  case  of  a  spot  so  noted  as 
Eben-ezer  must  have  been.  [G.] 

E'BER  ("OV  ;  "E£ep,  *E/3ep  ;  Ilcbcr),  son  of 
Salah,  and  great-grandson  of  Shem  (Gen.  x.  24  ; 
1  Chr.  i.  19).  For  confusion  between  Eber  and 
Heber  see  Heber  ;  and  for  the  factitious  importance 
attached  to  this  patriarch,  and  based  upon  Gen.  x. 
21,  Num.  xxiv.  24,  see  Hebrew.         [T.  E.  B.] 

EBI'ASAPH  (5JD*3N  ;  'APuurdtp  and  'A0«- 
<rd<p  ;  AbiasapK),  a  Kchathite  Levite  of  the  family 
of  Koran,  one  of  the  forefathers  of  the  prophet  Sa- 
muel and  of  Heman  the  singer  (1  Chr.  vi.  23,  37). 
The  same  man  is  probably  intended  in  ix.  19.  The 
name  appears  also  to  be  identical  with  Abiasaph 
(which  see),  and  in  one  passage  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  1)  to 
be  abbreviated  to  Asaph. 

EBONY  (Eabcnim,  D*33iT),  a  dark  very  hard 
kind  of  wool,  mentioned  only  in  Ez.  xxvii.  15,  as 
brought  with  ivory  to  Tyre  by  the  men  ot  Dedan. 
It  is  the  timber  of  the  Diospyros  ebcnum,  Linn., 
and  is  found  both  in  Aethiopia  and  India,  though 
Virgil  (Georg.  ii.  115)  says 

"  sola  India  nigrum 

Fert  ebenum." 
It  was  highly  esteemed  by  the  ancients:  see 
Theophr.  Hist.  PI.  iv.  5  ;  Plin.  H.  N.,  vi.  30,  §35, 
xii.  4,  §8,  9.  There  is  an  affinity  between  Habenim 
and  Oben  or  Eben,  a  stone.  Hence  perhaps  Ha- 
benim in  the  above  passage  may  have  the  force  of 
"  stony  wood,"  i.  e.  as  hard  as  stone,  lithoxyle, 
Genu.  Steinholz.  The  Semitic  word  is  the  origin 
of  trie  Greek  e/3ei/o.9,  and  the  Latin  ebenum,  and 
it   has   come    back    into    the   Arabic  and    Persian 

,„,-Jj|      ,  i«JL)l     w*th   its  Greek    termination. 

The  Hebrew  use  of  the  plural  arose  from  the  fact 
that  this  wood  was  exported  cut  into  logs  (comp. 
(paAayyes  ifiivov,  in  Herod,  iii.  97).  The  tint 
black  ebony  of  commerce  is  imported  from  Mauritius 
anil  the  East  Indies.  Other,  but  inferior,  kinds,  air 
derived  from  Africa  and  Jamaica.  [\Vr.  D.] 

EBRONAH.     [Abronaii.] 

ECA'NUS,  one  of  the  five  swift  scribes  who 

attended  on  Ksdias  (2  Esdr.  xiv.  2  1). 

ECBAT'ANA  (NripnX;  'A^add,  'Exfldrava  : 
Ecbatana).  It  is  doubtful  whether  the  name  of  this 
place  is  really  contained  in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures. 
Many  of  the  best   commentators    understand   the 


ECBATANA 


471 


expression  NH?3nX3,  in  Ezra  vi.  2,  differently, 
and  translate  it  in  area,  "  in  a  coffer  "  (see  Buxtorf 
and  others,  and  so  our  English  Bible  in  themargiri). 
The  LXX.,  however,  give  iv  iz6\a,  "  in  a  city,"  or 
(in  some  MSS.)  iv'Afiada  iv  ird\ei,  which  favours 
the  ordinary  interpretation.  If  a  city  is  meant, 
there  is  little  doubt  of  one  of  the  two  Ecbatanas 
being  intended,  for  except  these  towns  there  was 
no  place  in  the  province  of  the  Medes  "  which  con- 
tained a  palace"  (rTV2),  or  where  records  are  likely 
to  have  been  deposited.  The  name  ' Achmetha  too, 
which  at  first  sight  seems  somewhat  remote  from 
Ecbatana,  wants  but  one  letter  of  Hagmatana,  which 
was  the  native  appellation.  In  the  apocryphal 
books  Ecbatana  is  frequently  mentioned  (Tob.  iii. 
7,  xiv.  12,  14;  Jud.  i.  1,  2  ;  2  Mac.  ix.  3,  &c.)  ; 
and  uniformly  with  the  later  and  less  correct  spell- 
ing of  'EKfidrava,  instead  of  the  earlier  and  more 
accurate  form,  used  by  Herodotus,  Aeschylus,  and 
Ctesias,  of  'AyPdrava. 

Two  cities  of  the  name  of  Ecbatana  seem  to  have 
existed  in  ancient  times,  one  the  capital  of  Northern 
Media,  the  Media  Atropatene  of  Strabo  ;  the  other 
the  metropolis  of  the  larger  and  more  important 
province  known  as  Media  Magna  (see  Sir  H.  Raw- 
linson's  paper  on  the  Atropatenian  Ecbatana,  in  the 
loth  volume  of  the  Journal  of  the  Geographical 
Society,  art.  ii.).  The  site  of  the  former  appears 
to  be  marked  by  the  very  curious  rains  at  Takht-i- 
Suleiman  (lat.  36°  28',  long.  47°  9')  ;  while  that 
of  the  latter  is  occupied  by  Hamadan,  which  is 
one  of  the  most  important  cities  of  modern  Persia. 
There  is  generally  some  difficulty  in  determining, 
when  Ecbatana  is  mentioned,  whether  the  northern 
or  the  southern  metropolis  is  intended.  Few  writers 
are  aware  of  the  existence  of  the  two  cities,  and 
they  lie  sufficiently  near  to  one  another  for  geo- 
graphical notices  in  most  cases  to  suit  either  site. 
The  northern  city  was  the  "  seven-walled  town " 
described  by  Herodotus,  and  declared  by  him  to 
have  been  the  capital  of  Cyras  (Herod,  i.  98-99, 
153  ;  comp.  Mos.  Choren.  ii.  84)  ;  and  it  was  thus 
most  probably  there  that  the  roll  was  found  which 
proved  to  Darius  that  Cyrus  had  really  made  a 
decree  allowing  the  Jews  to  rebuild  their  temple. 

Various  descriptions  of  the  northern  city  have 
come  down  to  us,  but  none  of  them  is  completely 
to  be  depended  on.  That  of  the  Zendavesta  (Ven- 
didad,  Fargard  II.)  is  the  oldest,  and  the  least 
exaggerated.  "  Jemshid,"  it  is  said,  "  erected  a 
Var,  or  fortress,  sufficiently  large,  and  formed  of 
squared  blocks  of  stone ;  he  assembled  in  the  place 
a  vast  population,  and  stocked  the  surrounding 
country  with  cattle  for  their  use.  He  caused  the 
water  of  the  great  fortress  to  flow  forth  abundant]  v. 
And  within  the  var,  or  fortress,  he  erected  a  lofty 
palace,  encompassed  with  walls,  and  laid  it  out  in 
many  separate  divisions,  and  there  was  no  place, 
either  in  front  or  rear,  to  command  and  overawe 
the  fortress."  Herodotus,  who  ascribes  the  found- 
ation of  the  city  to  his  king  I  leSoces,  says  : — "  The 
Medes  were  obedient  to  De'ioces,  and  built  the  cit] 
now  called  Agbatana,  the  walls  of  which  are  of 
great  size  and  strength,  rising  in  circles  one  within 
the  other.  The  plan  of  the  place  is  that  each  of 
the  walls  should  out-top  the  one  beyond  it  by  the 
battlements.  The  nature  of  the  ground,  which  is 
a  gentle  hill,  favours  this  arrangement  in  some 
but  it  was  mainly  effected  by  art.  The 
number  of  the  circles  is  seven,  the  royal  palace  and 
the  treasuries  standing  within  the  last.    The  circuit 


472 


ECBATANA 


ECBATANA 


of  the  outer  wall  is  nearly  the  same  with  that  of  description,  recent  discoveries  show  that  Buoh  n 
Athens.  Of  this  outer  wall  the  battlements  are  J  mode  of  ornamentation  was  actually  in  use  at  the 
white,  of  the  next  black,  of  the  third  scarlet,  of  the  ;  period  in  question  in  a  neighbouring  country.  The 
fourth  blue,  of  the  fifth  orange:  all  these  are  !  temple  of  the  Seven  Spheres  at  Borsippa  was 
coloured  with  paint.  The  two  last  have  their  i  adorned  almost  exactly  in  the  manner  which  He- 
battlements  coated  respectively  with  silver  and  \  rodotus  assigns  to  the  Median  capital  [Babel, 
gold.  All  these  fortifications  Deioces  caused  to  be  ■,  Toweii  of]  ;  and  it  does  not  seem  at  all  improbable 
raised  for  himself  and  his  own  palace.  The  people  I  that,  with  the  object  of  placing  the  city  under  the 
were  required  to  build  their  dwellings  outside  the    protection  of  the  Seven  Planets,"  the  seven  walls  may 


circuit  of  the  walls"  (Herod,  i.  98-99).  Finally, 
the  book  of  Judith,  probably  the  work  of  an  Alexan- 
drian Jew,  professes  to  give  a  number  of  details, 
which  appear  to  be  drawn  chiefly  from  the  imagi- 
nation of  the  writer  (Jud.  i.  2-4). 

The  peculiar  feature  of  the  site  of  Takht-i-Sulci- 
man,  which  it  is  proposed  to  identify  with  the 
northern  Ecbatana,  is  a  conical  hill  rising  to  the 
height  of  about  150  feet  above  the  plain,  and 
covered  both  on  its  top  and  sides  with  massive 
ruins  of  the  most  antique  and  primitive  character. 
A  perfect  enceinte,  formed  of  large  blocks  of  squared 
stone,  may  be  traced  round  the  entire  hill  along  its 
brow ;  within  there  is  an  oval  enclosure  about 
800  yards  in  its  greatest  and  400  in  its  least 
diameter,  strewn  with  ruins,  which  cluster  round 
a  remarkable  lake.  This 
is  an  irregular  basin, 
about  300  paces  in  cir- 
cuit, filled  with  water 
exquisitely  clear  and  plea- 
sant to  the  taste,  which 
is  supplied  in  some  un- 
known way  from  below, 
and  which  stands  uni- 
formly at  the  same  level, 
whatever  the  quantity 
taken  from  it  for  irri- 
gating the  lands  which 
lie  at  the  loot  of  the  hill. 
This  hill  itself  is  not  per- 
fectly isolated,  though  it 
appears  so  to  those  who 
approach  it  by  the  ordi- 
nary route.  On  three 
sides  —  the  south,  the 
west,  and  the  north — 
.the  acclivity  is  steep  and 
the  height  above  the 
plain  uniform,  but  on 
the  east  it  abuts  upon 
a  hilly  tract  of  ground, 

and  here  it  is  but  slightly  elevated  above  the  ad- 
jacent country.  It  cannot  therefore  have  ever 
answered  exactly  to  the  description  of  Herodotus, 
as  the  eastern  side  could  not  anyhow  admit  of 
seven  walls  of  circnmvallation.  It  is  doubted 
whether  even  the  other  sides  were  thus  defended. 
Although  the  flanks  on  these  sides  are  covered  with 
ruins,  "  no  traces  remain  of  any  wall  but  the 
upper  one  "  {As.  Joum.  x.  p.  52).  Still,  as  the 
nature  of  the  ground  on  three  sides  would  allow 
this  style  of  defence,  and  as  the  account  in  Hero- 
dotus is  confirmed  by  the  Armenian  historian, 
writing  clearly  without  knowledge  of  the  earlier 
author,  it  seems  best  to  suppose,  that  in  the  peace- 
ful times  of  the  Persian  empire  it  was  thought 
sufficient  to  preserve  the  upper  enceinte,  while  the 
others  were  allowed  to  fell  into  decay,  and  ulti- 
mately were  superseded  by  ""domestic  buildings. 
With  regard  to  the  colouring  of  the  walls,  or  rather 
of  the  battlements,  which  has  been  considered  to 
mark  especially  the  fabulous  character  of  Herodotus' 


have  been  coloured  nearly  as  described.  Herodotus 
has  a  little  deranged  the  order  of  the  hues,  which 
should  have  been  either  black,  orange,  scarlet,  gold, 
white,  blue,  silver — as  at  the  Borsippa  temple — or 
black,  white,  orange,  blue,  scarlet,  silver,  gold — 
if  the  order  of  the  days  dedicated  to  the  planets 
were  followed.  Even  the  use  of  silver  and  gold  in 
external  ornamentation — which  seems  at  first  sight 
highly  improbable — is  found  to  have  prevailed. 
Silver  roofs  were  met  with  by  the  Greeks  at  the 
southern  Ecbatana  (Polyb.  x.  27,  §10-12);  and 
there  is  reason  to  believe  that  at  Borsippa  the  gold 
and  silver  stages  of  the  temple  were  actually  coated 
with  those  metals. 

The  northern  Ecbatana  continued  to  be  an  im- 
portant   place   down    to   the    1 3th   century   after 


1.  Remains  of  a  Fire-Temple. 

2.  Ruined  Mosque. 

3.  Ancient  buildings  with  shafts 

4.  Ruins  of  the  Palace  of  Abaka 


Prison." 
"  the  Stable.' 


Explanation. 

.">.  Cemetery. 

e.  Ridge  of  Hock  called  "  tin 
Mid  rapitals.  7.  Hill  called  "Tawilah,"  or 

i  Khan.  8.  Ruins  of  Kalisiah. 

.  Rocky  hill  of  Zindani-Solelman. 

Christ.  By  the  Greeks  and  Romans  it  appears  to 
have  been  known  as  Gaza,  Gazaca,  or  Canzaca, 
"  the  treasure  city,"  on  account  of  the  wealth  laid 
up  in  it ;  while  by  the  Orientals  it  was  termed 
Shiz.  Its  decay  is  referable  to  the  Mogul  con- 
quests, ab.  a.d.  1200  ;  and  its  final  ruin  is  sup- 
posed to  date  from  about  the  15th  or  16th  century 
{As.  Soc.  Joum.  vol.  x.  part  i.  p.  49). 

In  the  2nd  book  of  Maccabees  (ix.  3,  &c.)  the 
Ecbatana  mentioned  is  undoubtedly  the  southern 
city,  now  represented  both  in  name  and  site  by 
Hamadan.  This  place,  situated  on  the  northern 
flank  of  the  great  mountain  called  formerly  ( (routes, 
and  now  Elwend,  was  perhaps  as  ancient  as  the 
other,  and  is  far  better  known  in  history.  If  not 
the  Median  capital  of  Cyrus,  it  was  at  any  rate 
regarded  from  the  time  of  Darius  Hystaspis  as  the 
chief  city  of  the  Persian  satrap}/  of  Media,  and  as 
such  it  became  the  summer  residence  of  the  Persian 
kings  from  Darius  downwards.  It  was  occupied 
bv  Alexander  soon  after  the  battle  of  Arbela  (Arr. 


J 


ECCLESIASTES 

Exp.  Alex.  iii.  19),  and  at  his  decease  passed  under 
the  dominion  of'  the  Seleucidae.  In  the  wars  between 
his  successors  it  was  more  than  once  taken  and  re- 
taken, each  time  suffering  largely  at  the  hands  of 
its  conquerors  (Polyb.  x.  27).  It  was  afterwards 
recognised  as  the  metropolis  of  their  empire  by  the 
Parthiaus  (Oros.  vi.  4).  During  the  Arabian  period, 
from  the  rise  of  Baghdad  on  the  one  hand  and  of 
Isfahan  on  the  other,  it  sank  into  comparative 
insignificance ;  but  still  it  has  never  descended 
below  the  rank  of  a  provincial  capital,  and  even 
in  the  present  depressed  condition  of  Persia,  it 
is  a  city  of  from  20,000  to  30,000  inhabitants. 
The  Jews,  curiously  enough,  regard  it  as  the 
residence  of  Ahasuerus  (Xerxes?) — which  is  in 
Scripture  declared  to  be  Susa  (Est.  i.  2,  ii.  3, 
&c.) — and  show  within  its  precincts  the  tombs 
of  Esther  and  Mordecai  (Ker  Porter,  vol.  ii.  pp. 
105-1 10).  It  is- not  distinguished  by  any  remark- 
able peculiarities  from  other  Oriental  cities  of  the 
same  size. 

The  Ecbatana  of  the  book  of  Tobit  is  thought 
by  Sir  H.  Rawlinson  to  be  the  northern  city  (see 
As.  Soc.  Journ.  x.  pt.  i.  pp.  137-141).      [G.  K.] 

ECCLESIASTES  (D^Hp,  Koheleth ;  'EkkAtj- 
(TiaffT^s ;  Ecclesiastes).  I.  Title. — The  title  of 
this  book  is  taken  from  the  name  by  which  the 
son  of  David,  or  the  writer  who  personates  him, 
speaks  of  himself,  throughout  it.  The  apparent 
anomaly  of  the  feminine  termination  n  indicates 
that  the  abstract  noun  has  been  transferred  from 
the  office  to  the  person  holding  it  (Gesen.  sub  voc), 
and  has  thus  become  capable  of  use  as  a  masculine 
proper  name,  a  change  of  meaning  of  which  we 
find  other  instances  in  Sophereth  (Neh.  vii.  57), 
Pochcreth  (Ezr.  ii.  57);  and  hence,  with  the  single 
exception  of  Eccl.  vii.  27,  the  noun,  notwithstand- 
ing its  form,  is  used  throughout  in  the  masculine. 
Ewald,  however  {Poet.  Biich.  iv.  p.  189),  connects 
the  feminine  termination  with  the  noun  nODIl 
(  wis  lom),  understood,  and  supposes  a  poetic  licence 
in  the  use  of  the  word  as  a  kind  of  symbolic  pro- 
per name,  appealing  to  Prov.  xxx.  1,  xxxi.  1,  as 
examples  of  a  like  usage.  As  connected  with  the 
root  ?7X\),  "  to  call  together,"  and  with  ?Hp 
"  assembly,"  the  word  has  been  applied  to  one  who 
speaks  publicly  in  an  assembly,  and  there  is,  to 
say  the  least,  a  tolerable  agreement  in  "favour  of  this 
interpretation.  Thus  we  have  the  comment  of  the 
Midi-ash,  stating  that  the  writer  thus  designates 
himself,  "  because  his  words  were  spoken  in  the 
assembly"  (quoted  in  Preston's  Ecclesiastes,  note 
on  i.  1);  the  rendering  'EKKArjinao-TTJs  by  the 
LXX. ;  the  adoption  of  this  title  by  Jerome  (Praef. 
in  Eccl.),  as  meaning  "  qui  coetum,  i.  e.  ecclesiam 
congregat  quern  nos  nuncupare  possumus  Con- 
cionatorem ;"  the  »*'  of  "  Prediger"  by  Luther, 
of  "Preacher"  in  the  Authorised  Version.  On  the 
other  hand,  taking  Sip  in  the  sense  of  collecting 
things,  not  of  summoning  persons,  and  led  perhaps 
by  his  inability  to  see  in  the  book  itself  any  greater 
unity  of  design  than  in  the  chapters  of  Proverbs, 
( rrotius  ( in  Eccles.  i.  1)  has  suggested  'ZwaQpoiariis 
(compiler)  as  a  better* -equivalent.  In  this  he  has 
been  followed  by  Herder  ami  Jahn.  ami  Mendelssohn 

has  adopted  the  same  rendering  (notes  on  i.  1,  and 
\  ii.  27,  in  Preston  ),  seeing  in  it  the  statement  partly 
that  the  writer  had  compiled  the  sayings  of  wise 
men  who  had  gone  before  him,  partly  that  lie  was, 


ECCLESIASTES 


473 


by  an  inductive  process,  gathering  truths  from  the 
facts  of  a  wide  experience. 

II.  Canonicity. — In  the  Jewish  division  of  the 
books  of  the  Old  Testament,  Ecclesiastes  ranks  as 
one  of  the  five  Megilloth  or  Rolls  [Bible],  and  its 
position,  as  having  canonical  authority,  appears  to 
have  been  recognised  by  the  Jews  from  the  time  in 
which  the  idea  of  a  canon  first  presented  itself. 
We  find  it  in  all  the  Jewish  catalogues  of  the 
sacred  books,  and  from  them  it  has  been  received 
universally  by  the  Christian  Church.  Some  sin- 
gular passages  in  the  Talmud  indicate,  however, 
that  the  recognition  was  not  altogether  unhesi- 
tating, and  that  it  was  at  least  questioned  how  far 
the  book  was  one  which  it  was  expedient  to  place 
among  the  Scriptures  that  were  read  publicly. 
Thus  we  find  the  statements  (Mishna,  Shabbas, 
c.  x.,  quoted  by  Mendelssohn  in  Preston,  p.  74 ; 
Midrash,  fol.  114  a;  Preston,  p.  13)  that  "the 
wise  men  sought  to  secrete  the  book  Koheleth,  be- 
cause they  found  in  it  words  tending  to  heresy," 
and  "  words  contradictory  to  each  other  ;"  that  the 
reason  they  did  not  secrete  it  was  "  because  its  be- 
ginning and  end  were  consistent  with  the  law;'' 
that  when  they  examined  it  more  carefully  they 
came  to  the  conclusion,  "  We  have  looked  closely 
into  the  book  Koheleth,  and  discovered  a  meaning 
in  it."  The  chief  interest  of  such  passages  is  of 
course  connected  with  the  inquiry  into  the  plan  and 
teaching  of  the  book,  but  they  are  of  some  import- 
ance also  as  indicating  that  it  must  have  com- 
mended itself  to  the  teachers  of  an  earlier  genera- 
tion, either  on  account  of  the  external  authority 
by  which  it  was  sanctioned,  or  because  they  had 
a  clearer  insight  into  its  meaning,  and  were  less 
startled  by  its  apparent  difficulties.  Traces  of  this 
controversy  are  to  be  found  in  a  singular  discussion 
between  the  schools  of  Shammai  and  Hillel,  turning 
on  the  question  whether  the  book  Koheleth  were 
inspired,  and  in  the  comments  on  that  question  by 
R.  Ob.  de  Bartenor  and  Maimonides  (Surenhus.  iv. 
349). 

III.  Author  and  Date. — The  questions  of  the 
authorship  and  the  date  of  this  book  are  so  closely 
connected  that  they  must  be  treated  of  together, 
and  it  is  obviously  impossible  to  discuss  the  points 
which  they  involve  without  touching  also  on  an 
inquiry  into  the  relation  in  which  it  stands  to 
Hebrew  literature  generally. 

The  hypothesis  which  is  naturally  suggested  by 
the  account  that  the  writer  gives  of  himself  in 
eh.  i.  and  ii.  is  that  it  was  written  by  the  only 
"son  of  David"  (i.  1),  who  was  "  king  over  Israel 
in  Jerusalem"  (i.  12).  According  to  this  notion 
we  have  in  it  what  may  well  be  called  the  Con- 
fessions of  King  Solomon,  the  utterance  of  a  repent- 
ance which  some  have  even  ventured  to  compare 
with  that  of  the  51st  psalm.  Additional  internal 
evidence  lias  been  found  for  this  belief  in  the  lan- 
guage of  vii.  26-28,  as  harmonising  with  the  his- 
tory of  1  K.  \i.  ;;,  and  in  an  interpretation  i  some- 
what forced  perhaps)  which  refers  iv.  L3-15  to  the 
murmurs  of  the  people  againsf  Solomon  ami  the 

popularity  of  Jeroboam  as  the  leader  of  the  j pie, 

already  recognised  as  their  future  king  (Mendelssohn 

ami  Preston  in  Inc.).    The  belief  that  Solomon  was 

actually   the  .author   was.   it    need   hardly   be  said, 

I   generally  by  the  Rabbinic  commentators 

and    the    whole    series    of    Patriotic    writers.       Tie 
apparent  exceptions  to  tins  in    the  passages  by  Tal- 

die  writers  which  ascribe  it   to  Hezekiah  (Baba 

Bathra,  c.  i.  I<d.  l.">>,  or  Isaiah  (Shalsh.  Hakkab, 


474 


ECCLESIASTES 


fol.  66  b,  quoted  by  Michaelis),  can  hardly  be 
understood  as  implying  more  than  a  share  in  the 
work  of  editing,  like  that  claimed  for  the  "  men  of 
Hezekiah"  in  Prov.  xxv.  1.  Grotius  (Praef.  in 
Eccles.)  was  indeed  almost  the  first  writer  who 
called  it  in  question,  and  started  a  different  hypo- 
thesis. It  can  hardly  be  said,  however,  that  this 
consensus  is  itself  decisive.  In  questions  of  this 
kind  the  later  witnesses  add  nothing  to  the  au- 
thority of  the  earlier,  whose  testimony  they  simply 
repeat,  and  unless  we  had  clearer  knowledge  than 
we  have  as  to  the  sources  of  information  or  critical 
discernment  of  those  by  whom  the  belief  was 
adopted,  we  ought  not  to  look  on  their  acceptance 
of  it  as  closing  all  controversy.  The  book  which 
bears  the  title  of  the  "Wisdom  of  Solomon"  asserts, 
both  by  its  title  and  its  language  (vii.  1-21),  a 
claim  to  the  same  authorship,  and,  though  the 
absence  of  a  Hebrew  original  led  to  its  exclusion 
from  the  Jewish  canon,  the  authorship  of  Solomon 
was  taken  for  granted  by  all  the  early  Christian 
writers  who  quote  it  or  refer  to  it,  till  Jerome  had 
asserted  the  authority  of  the  Hebrew  text  as  the 
standard  of  canonicity,  and  by  not  a  few  afterwards. 
It  may  seem,  however,  as  if  the  whole  question 
were  settled  for  all  who  recognise  the  inspiration  of 
Scripture  by  the  statement,  in  a  canonical  and 
inspired  book,  as  to  its  own  authorship.  The  book 
purports,  it  is  said  (Preston,  Prolog,  in  Eccles.  p.  5), 
to  be  written  by  Solomon,  and  to  doubt  the  literal 
accuracy  of  this  statement  is  to  call  in  question  the 
truth  and  authority  of  Scripture.  It  appears  ques- 
tionable, however,  whether  we  can  admit  an  a 
priori  argument  of  this  character  to  be  decisive. 
The  hypothesis  that  every  such  statement  in  a 
canonical  book  must  be  received  as  literally  true, 
is,  in  fact,  an  assumption  that  inspired  writers  were 
debarred  from  forms  of  composition  which  were 
open,  without  blame,  to  others.  In  the  literature 
of  every  other  nation  the  form  of  personated 
authorship,  where  there  is  no  animus  decipicndi, 
has  been  recognised  as  a  legitimate  channel  for  the 
expression  of  opinions,  or  the  quasi-dramatic  repre- 
sentation of  character.  Why  should  we  venture 
on  the  assertion  that  if  adopted  by  the  writers  of 
the  Old  Testament  it  would  have  made  them 
guilty  of  a  falsehood,  and  been  inconsistent  with 
their  inspiration?  The  question  of  authorship  does 
not  involve  that  of  canonical  authority.  A  book 
written  by  Solomon  would  not  necessarily  be 
inspired  and  canonical.  There  is  nothing  that  need 
startle  us  in  the  thought  that  an  inspired  writer 
might  use  a  liberty  which  has  been  granted  without 
hesitation  to  the  teachers  of  mankind  in  every  age 
and  country. 

The  preliminary  difficulty  being  so  far  removed, 
we  can  enter  on  the  objections  which  have  been 
urged  against  the  traditional  belief  by  Grotius  and 
later  critics,  and  the  hypotheses  which  they  have 
substituted  for  it.  In  the  absence  of  adequate  ex- 
ternal testimony,  these  are  drawn  chiefly  from  the 
book  itself. 

1.  The  language  of  the  book  is  said  to  be  incon- 
sistent with  the  belief  that  it  was  written  by  Solo- 
mon. It  belongs  to  the  time  when  the  older  Hebrew 
was  becoming  largely  intermingled  with  Aramaic 
forms  and  words  (Grotius,  De  Wette,  Ewald,  and 
nearly  the  whole  series  of  German  critics),  and  as 
such  takes  its  place  in  the  latest  group  of  books  of 
the  Old  Testament,  along  with  Ezra,  Nehemiah, 
Daniel,  Esther:  it  is  indeed  more  widely  different 
from  the  language  of  the  older  books  than  any  of 


ECCLESIASTES 

them  (Ewald).  The  prevalence  of  abstract  forms 
again,  characteristic  of  the  language  of  Ecclesiastes, 
is  urged  as  belonging  to  a  later  period  than  that 
of  Solomon  in  the  development  of  Hebrew  thought 
and  language.  The  answers  given  to  these  ob- 
jections by  the  defenders  of  the  received  belief  are 
(Preston,  Eccles.  p.  7),  («)  that  many  of  what  we 
call  Aramaic  or  Chaldee  forms  may  have  belonged 
to  the  period  of  pure  Hebrew,  though  they  have 
not  come  down  to  us  in  any  extant  writings ;  and 
(6)  that  so  far  as  they  are  foreign  to  the  Hebrew 
of  the  time  of  Solomon,  he  may  have  learnt  them 
from  his  '"  strange  wives,"  or  from  the  men  who 
came  as  ambassadors  from  other  countries. 

2.  It  has  been  asked  whether  Solomon  would 
have  been  likely  to  speak  of  himself  as  in  i.  12,  or 
to  describe  with  bitterness  the  misery  and  wrong 
of  which  his  own  misgovernment  had  been  the 
cause,  as  in  iii.  16,  iv.  1  (Jahn,  Einl.  ii.  p.  840). 
On  the  hypothesis  that  he  was  the  writer,  the  whole 
book  is  an  acknowledgment  of  evils  which  he  had 
occasioned,  while  yet  there  is  no  distinct  confession 
and  repentance.  The  question  here  raised  is,  of  course, 
worth  considering,  but  it  can  hardly  be  looked  on  as 
leading  in  either  direction  to  a  conclusion.  There 
are  forms  of  satiety  and  self-reproach,  of  which  this 
half-sad,  half-scornful  retrospect  of  a  man's  own 
life — this  utterance  of  bitter  words  by  which  he  is 
condemned  cut  of  his  own  mouth — is  the  most 
natural  expression.  Any  individual  judgment  on 
this  point  cannot,  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  be 
otherwise  than  subjective,  and  ought  therefore  to 
bias  our  estimate  of  other  evidence  as  little  as 
possible. 

3.  It  has  been  urged  that  the  state  of  society 
indicated  in  this  book  leads  to  the  same  conclusion 
as  its  language,  and  carries  us  to  a  period  after  the 
return  from  the  Babylonian  captivity,  when  the 
Jews  were  enjoying  comparative  freedom  from 
invasion,  but  were  exposed  to  the  evils  of  mis- 
government  under  the  satraps  of  the  Persian  king 
(Ewald,  Poet.  Pucker;  Keil,  Einl.  in  das  A.  T.  under 
Eccles.).  The  language  is  throughout  that  of  a 
man  who  is  surrounded  by  many  forms  of  misery 
(iii.  16,  iv.  1,  v.  8,  viii.  11,  ix.  12).  There  are 
sudden  and  violent  changes,  the  servant  of  to-day 
becoming  the  ruler  of  to-morrow  (x.  5-7).  All 
this,  it  is  said,  agrees  with  the  glimpses  into  the 
condition  of  the  Jews  under  the  Persian  empire  in 
Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  and  with  what  we  know  as  to 
the  general  condition  of  the  provinces  under  its 
satraps.  The  indications  of  the  religions  condition 
of  the  people,  their  formalism,  and  much-speaking 
(v.  1,  2),  their  readiness  to  evade  the  performance 
of  their  vows  by  casuistic  excuses  (v.  5),  represent 
in  like  manner  the  growth  of  evils,  the  germs  of 
which  appeared  soon  after  the  captivity,  and  which 
we  find  in  a  folly  developed  form  in  the  prophecy 
of  Malachi.    In  addition  to  this  general  resemblance 

there  is  the  agreement  between  the  use  of  ^fcOE>n 
for  the  "  angel"  or  priest  of  God  (v.  6,  Ewald,  in  foe), 
and  the  recurrence  in  Malachi  of  the  terms  TJ}Oft 
ill!"!*,  the  "angel"  or  messenger  of  the  Lord,  as  a 
synonyme  for  the  priest  (Mai.  ii.  7),  the  true  priest 
being  the  great  agent  in  accomplishing  God's  pur- 
poses. Significant,  though  not  conclusive,  iu  either 
direction, "is  the  absence  of  all  reference  to  any  con- 
temporaneous prophetic  activity,  or  to  any  Mes- 
sianic hopes.  This  might  indicate  a  time  before 
such   hopes    had    become   prevalent    or    after    they 


ECCLESIASTES 

were,  for  a  time,  extinguished.  It  might,  on  the 
other  hand,  be  the  natural  result  of  the  experience 
through  which  the  son  of  David  had  passed,  or  fitly 
take  its  place  in  the  dramatic  personation  of  such  a 
character.  The  use  throughout  the  book  of  Elo- 
him  instead  of  Jehovah  as  the  divine  Name,  though 
characteristic  of  the  book  as  dealing  with  the  prob- 
lems of  the  universe  rather  than  with  the  relations 
between  the  Lord  God  of  Israel  and  His  people,  and 
therefore  strikiug  as  an  idiosyncrasy,  leaves  -the 
question  as  to  date  nearly  where  it  was.  The  indi- 
cations of  rising  questions  as  to  the  end  of  man's 
life,  and  the  constitution  of  his  nature,  of  doubts  like 
those  which  afterwards  developed  into  Sadduceism 
(iii.  19-21),  of  a  copious  literature  connected  with 
those  questions,  confirm,  it  is  urged  (Ewald),  the 
hypothesis  of  the  later  date.  It  may  be  added  too, 
that  the  absence  of  any  reference  to  such  a  work  as 
this  in  the  enumeration  of  Solomon's  writings  in 
1  K.  iv.  32,  tends,  at  least,  to  the  same  conclusion. 

In  this  case,  however,  as  in  others,  the  argu- 
ments of  recent  criticism  are  stronger  against  the 
traditional  belief  than  in  support  of  any  rival  theory, 
and  the  advocates  of  that  belief  might  almost  be 
content  to  rest  their  case  upon  the  discordant  hy- 
potheses of  their  opponents.  On  the  assumption 
that  the  book  belongs,  not  to  the  time  of  Solomon, 
but  to  the  period  subsequent  to  the  captivity,  the 
dates  which  have  been  assigned  to  it  occupy  a  range 
of  more  than  300  years.  Grotius  supposes  Zerub- 
babel  to  be  referred  to  in  xii.  11,  as  the  "One 
Shepherd."  (C'omm.  in  Eccles.  in  loc),  and  so  far 
agrees  with  Keil  (Einleitung  in  das  A.  T.),  who 
fixes  it  in  the  time  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah.  Ewald 
and  De  Wette  conjecture  the  close  of  the  period  of 
Persian  or  the  commencement  of  that  of  Macedonian 
rule  ;  Bertholdt  the  period  between  Alexander  the 
Great  and  Antiochus  Epiphanes  ;  Hitzig,  circ.  204 
B.C.,  Hartmann,  the  time  of  the  Maccabees.  On 
the  other  hand  it  must  be  remembered  in  comparing 
these  discordant  theories  that  -the  main  facts  relied 
upon  by  these  critics  as  fatal  to  the  traditional 
belief  are  compatible  with  any  date  subsequent  to 
the  captivity,  while  they  are  inconsistent,  unless  we 
admit  the  explanation,  given  as  above,  by  Preston, 
with  the  notion  of  the  Salomonic  authorship. 

IV.  Plan. — The  book  of  Ecclesiastes  comes  before 
us  as  being  conspicuously,  among  the  writings  of 
the  0.  T.  the  great  stumbling-block  of  commenta- 
tors. Elsewhere  there  are  different  opinions  as  to 
the  meaning  of  single  passages.  Here  there  is  the 
widest  possible  divergence  as  to  the  plan  and  pur- 
pose of  the  whole  book.  The  passages  already 
quoted  from  the  Mishna  show  that  some,  at  least, 
of  the  Rabbinical  writers  were  perplexed  by  its 
teaching — did  uot  know  what  to  make  of  it-^-but 
_i.  >.\  i  to  the  authority  of  men  more  discerning 
than  themselves.  The  traditional  statement,  how- 
ever,  that  this  was  among  the  scriptures  which 
were  nut  read  by  any  one  under  the  age  of  thirty 
(Crit.  Sac'.  Amama  in  Eccles.,  but  with  a  "ne  cio 
ubi"  as  to  his  authority),  indicate;  the  continuance 
of  the  eld  difficulty,  and  the  remarks  of  Jerome 
(Praef.  in  Eccles.,  Comrn.  in  Eccles.  xii.  13)  show 
that  it  was  not  forgotten.  Little  can  lie  gathered 
from  the  series  of  Patristic  interpreters.  The  book  is 
comparatively  seldom  quoted  by  them.  No  attempt 
is  made  to  master  its  plan  and  to  enter  into  the 
spirit  of  its  writer.  The  charge  brought  by  Phi- 
lastrius  of  Brescia  (circ.  380)  against  some  heretics 
who  rejected  it  as  teaching  a  false  morality,  shows 
that  the  obscurity  which  had  been  a  stumbling- 


ECCLESIASTES  475 

block  to  Jewish  teachers  was  not  removed  for 
Christians.  The  fact  that  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia 
was  accused  at  the  Fifth  General  Council  of  calling 
in  question  the  authority  and  inspiration  of  this 
book,  as  well  as  of  the  Canticles,  indicates  that  in 
this  respect  as  in  others  he  was  the  precursor  of 
the  spirit  of  modern  criticism.  But  with  these 
exceptions,  there  are  no  traces  that  men's  minds 
were  drawn  to  examine  the  teachings  of  the 
book.  When,  however,  we  descend  to  the  more 
recent  developments  of  criticism,  we  meet  with 
an  almost  incredible  divergence  of  opinion.  Luther, 
with  his  broad  clear  insight  into  the  workings 
of  a  man's  heart,  sees  in  it  (Praef.  in  Eccles.) 
a  noble  "  Politica  vel  Oeconomica,"  leading  men 
in  the  midst  of  all  the  troubles  and  disorders  of 
human  society  to  a  true  endurance  and  reasonable 
enjoyment.  Grotius  (Praef.  in  Eccles.)  gives  up 
the  attempt  to  trace  in  it  a  plan  or  order  of  thought, 
and  finds  in  it  only  a  collection  of  many  maxims, 
connected  more  or  less  closely  with  the  great  prob- 
lems of  human  life,  analogous  to  the  discussion  of 
the  different  definitions  of  happiness  at  the  opening 
of  the  Nicomachean  Ethics.  Some  (of  whom  War- 
burton  may  be  taken  as  the  type,  Works,  vol.  iv. 
p.  154)  have  seen  in  the  language  of  ii.  18-21,  a 
proof  that  the  belief  in  the  immortality  of  the  soul 
was  no  part  of  the  transmitted  creed  of  Israel. 
Others  (Patrick,  Des  Voeux,  Davidson,  Mendels- 
sohn) contend  that  the  special  purpose  of  the  book 
was  to  assert  that  truth  against  the  denial  of  a  sen- 
sual scepticism.  Others,  the  later  German  critics, 
of  whom  Ewald  may  be  taken  as  the  highest  ami 
best  type,  reject  these  views  as  partial  and  one- 
sided, and  while  admitting  that  the  book  contains 
the  germs  of  later  systems,  both  Pharisaic  and  Sad- 
ducaean,  assert  that  the  object  of  the  writer  was  to 
point  out  the  secret  of  a  true  blessedness  in  the 
midst  of  all  the  distractions  and  sorrows  of  the 
world  as  consisting  in  a  tranquil  calm  enjoyment  of 
the  good  that  comes  from  God  (Poet.  Pitch,  iv. 
180). 

The  variety  of  these  opinions  indicates  sufficiently 
that  the  book  is  as  far  removed  as  possible  from  the 
character  ot  a  formal  treatise.  It  is  that  which  it 
professes  to  be — the  confession  of  a  man  of  wide 
experience  looking  back  upon  his  past  life  and  look- 
ing out  upon  the  disorders  and  calamities  which 
surround  him.  Such  a  man  does  not  set  forth  his 
premises  and  conclusions  with  a  logical  complete- 
ness. While  it  may  be  true  that  the  absence  of  a 
formal  arrangement  is  characteristic  of  the  Hebrew 
mind  in  all  stages  of  its  developement  (Lowth,  de 
Sac.  Poet.  Hch.  Proel.  xxiw),  or  that  it  was  the 
special  mark  of  the  declining  literature  of  the  period 
that  followed  the  captivity  (Ewald,  Poet.  I'd  h.  iv, 
p.  177),  it  is  also  true  that  it  belongs  generally  to 
all  writings  that  are  addressed  to  the  spiritual 
lather  than  the  intellectual  element  in  man's  na- 
ture, and  thai  it  is  found  accordingly  in  many  of 
the  greatest  works  that  have  influenced  the  spi- 
ritual lit'e  of  mankind.  In  proportion  as  a  man  has 
passed  out  of  the  region  of  a  traditional,  easilv- 
systematized  knowledge,  and  has  lived  under  tin' 
influence  of  great  thoughts — possessed  by  them,  yet 
hardly  mastering  them  s..  as  to  bring  them  under  a 
scientific  classification — are  we  likely  to  find  this 
apparent  want  of  method.  The  true  utterances  of 
such  a  man  are  the  records  of  his  struggles  after 
truth,  ot'  his  occasional  glimpses  of  it,  of  his  ulti- 
mate discovery.  The  treatise  de  Imitatione  ChrisH, 
the  Pense'cs   of   Pascal,    Augustine's    Confessions, 


476 


ECCLESIASTES 


widely  as  they  differ  in  other  points,  have  this 
feature  in  common.  If  the  writer  consciously 
reproduces  the  stages  through  which  he  has 
passed,  the  form  he  adopts  may  either  be  essen- 
tially dramatic,  or  it  may  record  a  statement 
of  the  changes  which  have  brought  him  to  his 
present  stats,  or  it  may  repeat  and  renew  the 
oscillations  from  one  extreme  to  another  which  had 
marked  that  earlier  experience.  The  writer  of 
Ecclesiastes  has  adopted  and  interwoven  both  the 
latter  methods,  and,  hence,  in  part,  the  obscurity 
which  has  made  it  so  pre-eminently  the  stumbling- 
block  of  commentators.  He  is  not  a  didactic  moral- 
ist writing  a  Homily  on  Virtue.  He  is  not  a  pro- 
phet delivering  a  message  from  the  Lord  of  Hosts 
to  a  sinful  people.  He  is  a  man  who  has  sinned  in 
giving  way  to  selfishness  and  sensuality,  who  has 
paid  the  penalty  of  that  sin  in  satiety  and  weariness 
of  life  ;  in  whom  the  mood  of  spirit,  over-reflective, 
indisposed  to  action,  of  which  iShakespere  has  given 
us  in  Hamlet,  Jaques,  Richard  [I.,  three  distinct 
examples,  has  become  dominant  in  its  darkest  form, 
but  who  has  through  all  this  been  under  the  disci- 
pline of  a  divine  education,  and  has  learnt  from  it 
the  lesson  which  God  meant  to  teach  him.  What 
that  lesson  was  will  be  seen  from  an  examination  of 
the  book  itself. 

•  Leaving  it  an  open  question  whether  it  is  possible 
to  arrange  the  contents  of  this  book  (as  Kosler  and 
Vaihinger  have  done)  in  a  carefully  balanced  series  of 
strophes  and  antistrophes,  it  is  tolerably  clear  that 
the  recurring  burden  of  "  Vanity  of  vanities  "  and 
the  teaching  which  recommends  a  life  of  calm  enjoy- 
ment, mark,  whenever  they  occur,  a  kind  of  halting- 
place  in  the  succession  of  thoughts.  It  is  the  sum- 
ming up  of  one  cycle  of  experience ;  the  sentence 
passed  upon  one  phase  of  life.  Taking  this,  ac- 
cordingly, as  our  guide,  we  may  look  on  the  whole 
book  as  falling  into  five  divisions,  each,  to  a  cer- 
tain extent,  running  parallel  to  the  others  in  its 
order  and  results,  and  closing  with  that  which,  in 
its  position  no  less  than  its  substance,  is  "  the  con- 
clusion of  the  whole  matter." 

(1.)  Ch.  i.andii.  This  portion  of  the  book  more 
than  any  other  has  the  character  of  a  personal  con- 
fession. The  Preacher  starts  with  reproducing  the 
phase  of  despair  and  weariness  into  which  his  ex- 
perience had  led  him  (i.  2,  3).  To  the  man  who 
is  thus  satiated  with  life  the  order  and  regularity 
of  nature  are  oppressive  (i.  4-7)  ;  nor  is  he  led, 
as  in  the  90th  Psalm,  from  the  things  that  are 
transitory  to  the  thought  of  One  whose  years  are 
from  eternity.  In  the  midst  of  the  ever-recurring 
changes  he  finds  no  progress;  That  which  seems 
to  be  new  is  but  the  repetition  of  the  old  (i.  8-11). 
Then,  having  laid  bare  the  depth  to  which  he  had 
fallen,  he  retraces,  the  path  by  which  he  had  tra- 
velled thitherward.  First  he  had  sought  after 
wisdom  as  that  to  which  God  seemed  to  call  him 
(i.  13),  but  the  pursuit  of  it  was  a  sore  travail, 
and  there  was  no  satisfaction  in  its  possession.  It 
could  not  remedy  the  least  real  evil,  nor  make  the 
crooked  straight  (i.  15).  The  first  experiment  in 
the  search  after  happiness  had  failed  and  he  tried 
another.  It  was  one  to  which  men  of  great  intel- 
lectual gifts  and  high  fortunes  are  continually 
tempted— to  surround  himself  with  all  the  appli- 
ances of  sensual  enjoym.ent  and  yet  in  thought  to 
hold  himself  above  it  (ii.  1-9),  making  his  very 
voluptuousness  part  of  the  experience  which  was  to 
enlarge  his  store  of  wisdom.  This — which  one 
may  perhaps  call  the  Goethe  idea  of  life — was  what 


ECCLESIASTES 

now  possessed  him.  But  this  also  failed  to  give 
him  peace  (ii.  11).  Had  he  not  then  exhausted  all 
human  experience  and  found  it  profitless?  (ii.  12). 
If  for  a  moment  he  found  comfort  in  the  thought 
that  wisdom  excelleth  folly,  and  that  he  was  wise 
(ii.  13,  14),  it  was  soon  darkened  again  by  the 
thought  of  death  (ii.  15).  The  wise  man  dies  as 
the  fool  (ii.  16).  This  is  enough  to  make  even 
him  who  has  wisdom  hate  all  his  labour  and  sink 
into  the  outer  darkness  of  despair  (ii.  20).  Yet 
this  very  despair  leads  to  the  remedy.  The  first 
section  closes  with  that  which,  in  different  forms, 
is  the  main  lesson  of  the  book — to  make  the  best  of 
what  is  actually  around  one  (ii.  24) — to  substitute 
for  the  reckless  feverish  pursuit  of  pleasure  the 
calm  enjoyment  which  men  may  yet  find  both  for 
the  senses  and  the  intellect.  This,  so  far  as  it 
goes,  is  the  secret  of  a  true  life ;  this  is  from  the 
hand  of  God.  On  everything  else  there  is  written, 
as  before,  the  sentence  that  it  is  vanity  and  vexa- 
tion of  spirit. 

(2.)  Ch.  iii.  1— vi.  9.  The  order  of  thought  in 
this  section  has  a  different  starting-point.  One 
who  looked  out  upon  the  infinitely  varied  pheno- 
mena of  man's  life  might  yet  discern,  in  the  midst 
of  that  variety,  traces  of  an  order.  There  are 
times  and  seasons  for  each  of  them  in  its  turn,  even 
as  there  are  for  the  vicissitudes  of  the  world  of 
nature  (iii.  1-8).  The  heart  of  man  with  its 
changes  is  the  mirror  of  the  universe  (iii.  11),  and 
is,  like  that,  inscrutable.  And  from  this  there 
comes  the  same  conclusion  as  from  the  personal  ex- 
perience. Calmly  to  accept  the  changes  and«hance.s 
of  life,  entering  into  whatever  joy  they  bring,  as 
one  accepts  the  order  of  nature,  this  is  the  way  of 
peace  (iii.  13).  The  thought  of  the  ever-recurring 
cycle  of  nature,  which  had  before  been  irritating 
and  disturbing,  now  whispers  the  same  lesson.  If 
we  suffer,  others  have  suffered  before  us  (iii.  15). 
God  is  seeking  out  the  past  and  reproducing  it.  If 
men  repeat  injustice  and  oppression,  God  also  in 
the  appointed  season  repeats  His  judgments  (iii.  16, 
17).  It  is  true  that  this  thought  has  a  dark  as 
well  as  a  bright  side,  and  this  cannot  be  ignored. 
If  men  come  and  pass  away,  subject  to  laws  and 
changes  like  those  of  the  natural  world,  then,  it 
would  seem,  man  has  no  pre-eminence  above  the 
beast  (iii.  19).  One  end  happens  to  nil.  All  are 
of  the  dust  and  return  to  dust  again  (iii.  20). 
There  is  no  immediate  denial  of  that  conclusion.  It 
was  to  that  that  the  preacher's  experience  and  re- 
flection had  led  him.  But  even  on  the  hypothesis 
that  the  personal  being  of  man  terminates  with  his 
death,  he  has  still  the  same  counsel  to  give.  Admit 
that  all  is  darkness  beyond  the  grave,  and  still  there 
is  nothing  better  on  this  side  of  it  than  the  temper 
of  a  tranquil  enjoyment  (iii.  22).  The  transition 
from  this  to  the  opening  thoughts  of  ch.  iv.  seems 
at  first  somewhat  abrupt.  But  the  preacher  is  re- 
tracing the  paths  by  which  he  had  been  actually 
led  to  a  higher  truth  than  that  in  which  he  had 
then  rested,  and  he  will  not,  for  the  sake  of  a  formal 
continuity,  smooth  over  its  ruggedness.  The  new 
track  on  which  he  was  entering  might  have  seemed 
less  promising  than  the  old.  Instead  of  the  self- 
centred  search  after  happiness  he  looks  out  upon 
the  miseries  and  disorders  of  the  world,  and  learns 
to  sympathise  with  suffering  (iv.  1).  At  first  this 
does  but  multiply  his  perplexities.  The  world  is 
out  of  joint.  Men  are  so  full  of  misery  that 
death  is  better  than  life  (iv.  2).  Successful  energy 
exposes  men  to  envy   (iv.  4).     Indolence  leads  to 


EUCLESIASTES 

poverty  (iv.  5).  Here  too  he  who  steers  clear  of 
both  extremes  lias  the  best  portion  (iv.  (5).  The  man 
who  heaps  up  riches  stands  alone  without  kindred 
to  share  or  inherit  them,  and  loses  all  the  blessings 
and  advantages  of  human  fellowship  (iv.  8-12). 
And  in  this  survey  of  life  oil  a  large  scale,  as 
in  that  of  a  personal  experience,  there  is  a  cycle 
which  is  ever  being  repeated.  The  old  and  foolish 
king  yields  to  the  young  man,  poor  and  wise,  who 
steps  from  his  prison  to  a  throne  (iv.  13,  14).  But 
he  too  has  his  successor.  There  are  generations 
without  limit  before  him,  and  shall  be  after  him 
(iii.  15,  1G).  All  human  greatness  is  swallowed 
up  in  the  great  stream  of  time.  The  opening  of 
ch.  v.  again  presents  the  appearance  of  abruptness, 
but  it  is  because  the  survey  of  human  life  takes  a 
yet  wider  range.  The  eye  of  the  Preacher  passes 
i'rom  the  dwellers  in  palaces  to  the  worshippers  in 
the  Temple,  the  devout  and  religious  men.  Have 
they  found  out  the  secret  of  life,  the  path  to  wis- 
dom and  happiness  ?  The  answer  to  that  question 
is  that  there  the  blindness  and  folly  of  mankind 
show  themselves  in  their  worst  forms.  Hypocrisy, 
unseemly  prayers,  idle  dreams,  broken  vows,  God's 
messenger,  the  Priest,  mocked  with  excuses — that 
was  what  the  religion  which  the  Preacher  witnessed 
presented  to  him  (v.  1-6).  The  command  "Fear 
thou  God,"  meant  that  a  man  was  to  take  no  part 
in  a  religion  such  as  this.  But  that  command  also 
suggested  the  solution  of  another  problem,  of  that 
prevalence  of  injustice  and  oppression  which  had 
before  weighed  down  the  spirit  of  the  inquirer. 
Above  all  the  tyranny  of  petty  governors,  above 
the  might  of  the  king  himself  there  was  the  power 
of  the  Highest  (v.  8);  and  His  judgment  was  ma- 
nifest even  upon  earth.  Was  there  after  all  so 
great  an  inequality  ?  Was  God's  purpose  that  the 
earth  should  be  for  all,  really  counteracted?  (v.  9). 
Was  the  rich  man  with  his  cares  and  fears  happier 
thanthe  labouring  man  whose  sleep  was  sweet  without 
riches?  (v.  10-12).  Was  there  anything  permanent 
in  that  wealth  of  his  ?  Did  he  no*-  leave  the  world 
naked  as  he  entered  it?  And  if  so,  did  not  all  this 
bring  the  inquirer  round  to  the  same  conclusion  as 
before?  Moderation,  self-control,  freedom  from  all 
disturbing  passions,  these  are  the  conditions  of  the 
maximum  of  happiness  which  is  possible  for  man 
on  earth.  Let  this  be  received  as  from  God.  Not 
the  outward  means  only,  but  the  very  capacity  of 
enjoyment  is  His  gift  (v.  18,  19).  Short  as  life 
may  be,  if  a  man  thus  enjoys,  he  makes  the  most 
of  it.  God  approves  and  answers  his  cheerfulness. 
Is  not  this  better  than  the  riches  or  Length  of  days 
on  which  men  set  their  hearts?  (vi.  1-5).  All  are 
equal  in  death;  all  are  nearly  equal  in  life  (vi.  6). 
To  feed  the  eyes  with  what  is  actually  before  them 
is  better  than  the  ceaseless  wanderings  of  the  spirit 
(vi.  9). 

(:;.)  Ch.  vi.  lo— viii.  15.  So  far  the  lines  of 
thought  all  seemed  to  converge  to  one  result.  The 
ethical  teaching  thai  grew  out  of  the  vise  man's 
experience  had  in  it  something  akin  to  the  higher 
forms -of  Epicureanism.  But  the  seeker  could  not 
rest  in  this,  and  found  himself  beset  with  thoughts 
at  mice  more  troubling  and  leading  to  a  higher 
truth.  The  spirit  of  man  looks  before  and  after, 
and  the  uncertainties  of  the  future  ves  it  (vi.  L2). 
A  good  name  is  better,  as  being  more  perm 
than  riches  (vii.  1);  death  is  better  than  life,  tie- 
house  of  mourning  than  the  house  of  feasting  (vii. 
2).  Self-command  and  the  spirit  of  calm  endur- 
ance are  a  better  safe-guard  against  vain  speculations 


ECCLESIASTES 


477 


than  any  form  of  enjoyment  (vii.  8,  9,  10).  This 
wisdom  is  not  only  a  defence,  as  lower  things,  in 
their  measure  may  be,  but  it  gives  life  to  them 
that  have  it  (vii.  12).  So  far  there  are  signs  of  a 
clearer  insight  into  the  end  of  life.  Then  conies 
an  oscillation  which  carries  him  back  to  the  old 
problems  (vii.  15).  Wisdom  suggests  a  half-so- 
lution of  them  (vii.  18"),  suggests  also  calmness, 
caution,  humility  in  dealing  with  them  (vii.  22) ; 
but  this  again  is  followed  by  a  relapse  into  the 
bitterness  of  the  sated  pleasure-seeker.  The  search 
alter  wisdom,  such  as  it  had  been  in  his  experience, 
had  led  only  to  the  discovery  that  though  men 
were  wicked,  women  were  more  wicked  still  (vii. 
20-29).  The  repetition  of  thoughts  that  had  ap- 
peared before,  is  perhaps  the  natural  consequence 
of  such  an  oscillation,  and  accordingly  in  ch.  viii. 
we  find  the  seeker  moving  in  the  same  round  as 
before.  There  are  the  old  reflections  on  the  misery 
of  man  (viii.  6),  and  the  confusions  in  the  moral 
order  of  the  universe  (viii.  10,  11),  the  old  conclu- 
sion that  enjoyment  (such  enjoyment  as  is  com- 
patible with  the  fear  of  God)  is  the  only  wisdom, 
viii.  15. 

(4.)  Ch.  viii.  16 — xii.  8.  After  the  pause  im- 
plied in  his  again  arriving  at  the  lesson  of  v.  1 5. 
the  Preacher  retraces  the  last  of  his  many  wander- 
ings. This  time  the  thought  with  which  he  started 
was  a  profound  conviction  of  the  inability  of  man 
to  unravel  the  mysteries  by  which  he  is  surrounded 
(viii.  17),  of  the  nothingness  of  man  when  death  is 
thought  of  as  ending  all  things  (ix.  3-6),  of  the 
wisdom  of  enjoying  life  while  we  may  (ix.  7-10),  of 
the  evils  which  affect  nations  or  individual  man 
(ix.  11,  12).  The  wide  experience  of  the  Preacher 
suggests  sharp  and  pointed  sayings  as  to  these  evils 
(x.  1-20),  each  true  and  weighty  in  itself,  but  not 
leading  him  on  to  any  firmer  standing-ground  or 
clearer  solution  of  the  problems  which  oppressed 
him.  It  is  here  that  the  traces  of  plan  and  method 
in  the  book  seem  most  to  fail  us.  Consciously  or 
unconsciously  the  writer  teaches  us  how  clear  an 
insight  into  the  follies  and  sins  of  mankind  may  co- 
exist with  doubt  and  uncertainty  as  to  the  great 
ends  of  life,  and  give  him  no  help  in  his  pursuit  after 
truth.  In  ch.  xi.  however  the  progress  is  more 
rapid.  The  tone  of  the  Preacher  becomes  more 
that  of  direct  exhortation,  and  he  speaks  in  clearer 
and  higher  notes.  The  conclusions  of  previous 
trains  of  thought  are  not  contradicted,  but  are 
placed  under  a  new  law  and  brought  into  a  more 
harmonious  whole.  The  end  of  man's  life  is  not  to 
seek  enjoyment  for  himself  only,  but  to  do  good  to 
others,  regardless  of  the  uncertainties  or  disappoint- 
ments that  may  attend  his  efforts  (xi.  1-4).  His 
wisdom  is  to  remember  that  there  are  things  which 
he  cannot  know,  problems  which  he  cannot  solve 
(xi.  5),  to  enjoy,  in  the  brightness  of  his  youth, 
whatever  blessings  God  bestows  on  him  (xi.  9). 
But  beyond  all  these  there  lie  the  days  of  darkness, 
of  failing  powers  and  incapacity  for  enjoyment,  and 
the  joy' of  youth,  though  it  is  not  to  be  crushed, 
is  yet  to  be  tempered  by  the  thought  that  it  cannot 

last  for  ever,  arid  th.it  it  tOO  is  subject  to  <  iod's  law 
of  retribution  (\i.  '.»,  1")-  The  secret  of  a  true 
Life  is  that  a  man  should  consecrate  (&e  vigour  of 
his  youth  to  God  i  xii.  1).  It  is  well  to  do  that 
before  the  night  comes,  before  the  slow  decay  of 
age  benumbs  all  the  faculties  of  sense  (xii.  2,  6  , 
before  the  spirit,  returns  t"  tied  who  gave  it.  The 
thought  of  that  end  rings  out  once  more  the  knell 
of  the  nothingness  of  all  things  earthly  (xii.  8); 


478 


ECCLESIASTES 


but  it  lends  also  to  "  the  conclusion  of  the  whole 
matter,"  to  that  to  which  all  trains  of  thought  and 
all  the  experiences  of  life  had  been  leading  the 
seeker  after  wisdom,  that  "  to  fear  God  and  keep 
his  commandments  "  was  the  highest  good  attain- 
able ;  that  the  righteous  judgment  of  God  would  in 
the  end  fulfil  itself  and  set'right  all  the  seeming 
disorders  of  the  world  (xii.  13,  14). 

If  one  were  to  indulge  conjecture,  there  would 
perhaps  be  some  plausibility  in  the  hypothesis  that 
xii.  8  had  been  the  original  conclusion,  and  that 
the  epilogue  of  xii.  9-14  had  been  added,  either  by 
another  writer,  or  by  the  same  writer  on  a  subse- 
quent revision.  The  verses  (9-12)  have  the  cha- 
racter of  a  panegyric  designed  to  give  weight  to 
the  authority  of  the  teacher.  The  two  that  now 
stand  as  the  conclusion,  may  naturally  have  ori- 
ginated in  the  desire  to  furnish  a  clue  to  the  per- 
plexities of  the  book,  by  stating  in  a  broad  intelli- 
gible form,  not  easy  to  be  mistaken,  the  truth 
which  had  before  been  latent. 

If  the  representation  which  has  been  given  of 
the  plan  and  meaning  of  the  book  be  at  all  a  true 
one,  we  find  in  it,  no  less  than  in  the  book  of  Job, 
indications  of  the  struggle  with  the  doubts  and 
difficulties  which  in  all  ages  of  the  world  have  pre- 
sented themselves  to  thoughtful  observers  of  the 
condition  of  mankind.  In  its  sharp  sayings  and 
wise  counsels,  it  may  present  some  striking  affinity 
to  the  Proverbs,  which  also  bear  the  name  of  the  son 
of  David,  but  the  resemblance  is  more  in  form  than 
in  substance,  and  in  its  essential  character  it  agrees 
with  that  great  inquiry  into  the  mysteries  of  God's 
government  which  the  drama  of  Job  brings  before 
us.  There  are  indeed  characteristic  differences.  In 
the  one  we  find  the  highest  and  boldest  forms  of 
Hebrew  poetry,  a  sustained  unity  of  design;  in  the 
other  there  are,  as  we  have  seen,  changes  and 
oscillations,  and  the  style  seldom  rises  above  the 
rhythmic  character  of  proverbial  forms  of  speech. 
The  writer  of  the  book  of  Job  deals  with  the  great 
mystery  presented  by  the  sufferings  of  the  righteous 
and  writes  as  one  who  has  known  those  sufferings 
in  their  intensity.  In  the  words  of  the  Preacher, 
we  trace  chiefly  the  weariness  or  satiety  of  the 
pleasure-seeker,  and  the  failure  of  all  schemes  of 
life  but  one.  In  spite  of  these  differences  however 
the  two  books  illustrate  each  other.  In  both, 
though  by  very  diverge  paths,  the  inquirer  is  led 
to  take  refuge  (as  all  great  thinkers  have  ever 
done)  in  the  thought  that  God's  kingdom  is  infi- 
nitely great,  and  that  man  knows  but  the  smallest 
fragment  of  it;  that  he  must  refrain  from  things 
which  are  too  high  for  him  and  be  content  with 
that  which  it  is  given  him  to  know,  the  duties  of 
his  own  life  and  the  opportunities  it  presents  for 
his  doing  the  will  of  God. 

Literature. — Every  Commentary  on  the  Bible  as 
a  whole ;  every  introduction  to  the  study  of  the 
O.  T.  contains  of  course  some  materials  for  the 
history  and  interpretation  of  this  as  of  other  books. 
It  is  not  intended  to  notice  these,  unless  they  pos- 
sess some  special  merit  or  interest.  As  having 
that  claim  may  be  specified  the  commentary  by 
Jerome  addressed  to  Paula  and  Eustochium,  as 
giving  an  example  of  the  Patristic  interpretation  of 
the  book  now  before  us  ;  the  preface  and  annotations 
of  Grotius  {Opp.  vol.  iii.)  as  representing  the 
earlier,  the  translation  and  notes  of  Ewald  (Poet. 
Jiiich.  vol.  iv.)  as  giving  the  later  results  of 
philosophical  criticism.  The  Critici  Sacri  here, 
as  elsewhere,  will  be  found  a  great  storehouse  of 


ECCLESIASTIGUS 

the  opinions  of  the  Biblical  scholars  of  the  1  Gth 
and  17th  centuries.  The  sections  on  Ecclesiastes  in 
the  Introductions  to  the  0.  T.  by  Eichhorn,  De 
Wette,  Jahn,  Havemick,  Keil,  Davidson,  will  fur- 
nish the  reader  with  the  opinions  of  the  chief 
recent  critics  of  Germany  as  to  the  authorship  and 
meaning  of  the  book.  Among  the  treatises  spe- 
cially devoted  to  this  subject  may  be  mentioned 
the  characteristic  Commentary  by  Luther  already 
referred  to  {Opp.  vol.  ii.  Jena,  1580),  that  by 
Anton.  Corranus  in  the  16th  century,  interesting 
as  one  of  the  earliest  attempts  to  trace  a  distinct 
plan  and  order  in  it,  and  as  having  been  adopted  by 
Bishop  Patrick  as  the  basis  of  his  interpretation, 
the  Annotations  in  Koheleth  by  J.  Drusius,  1635, 
the  Translation  and  Notes  of  Moses  Mendelssohn 
published  in  German  by  Rabe  (Anspach,  1771), 
the  Philosophical  and  Critical  Essay  on  Ecclesiastes 
by  Des  Voeux  (Lond.  1760),  written  chiefly  to 
meet  the  attacks  of  sceptics,  and  to  assert  that  the 
doctrine  of  the  book  is  that  of  the  Immortality 
of  the  Soul,  the  Scholia  of  Maldonatus,  better 
known  for  his  Commentary  on  the  Gospels  (Paris, 
1767),  the  commentaries  of  Knobel  (Leipzig.  1836), 
Zirkel  (Wurzb.  1792),  Schmidt,  J.  E.  Ch.  (1794), 
Nachtigal,  J.  Ch.  (Halle,  1798),  van  der  Palm 
(1784),  Kaiser  (Erlang.  1823),  Koster  (1831), 
Umbreit  (Gotha,  1818),  and  the  article  by  Vai- 
hinger,  in  the  Stud,  and  Crit.  of  1848.  English 
Biblical  literature  is  comparatively  barren  in  rela- 
tion to  this  book,  and  the  only  noticeable  recent 
contributions  to  its  exegesis  are  the  Commentary  by 
Stuart,  the  translation  of  Mendelssohn  with  Prolego- 
mena, &c,  by  Preston  (Cambridge,  1853),  and  the 
"  Attempt  to  Illustrate  the  Book  of  Ecclesiastes"  by 
Holden.  As  growing  out  of  the  attempt  to  fathom 
its  meaning,  though  not  taking  the  form  of  criticism 
or  exegesis,  may  be  mentioned  the  metrical  para- 
phrases which  are  found  among  the  works  of  the 
minor  English  poets  of  the  17th  century,  of  which 
the  most  memorable  are  those  by  Quarles  (1645) 
and  Sandys  (1648).  [E.  H.  P.] 

ECCLESIASTIGUS,  the  title  given  in  the 
Latin  Version  to  the  book  which  is  called  in  the 
Septuagint  The  Wisdom  of  Jesus  the  Son  of 
SlRACH  {~2.o<pia  'Ir/troC  viov  ~S.Lpa.Xi  A.C. ;  Itocpia 
leipdx,  B.  Rufinus  Vers.  Orig.  Horn,  in  Num. 
xvii.  3.  In  libro,  qui  apud  nos  quidem  inter  Salo- 
monis  volumina  haheri  solet,  et  Ecclesiasticus 
dici,  apud  Graecos  vero  Sapientia  Jesu  Jilii  Sirach 
appellator  scriptum  est  .  .  .).  The  word,  like 
many  others  of  Greek  origin,  appears  to  have  been 
adopted  in  the  African  dialect  (e.  g.  Tertull.  de 
pudic.  c.  22,  p.  435),  and  thus  it  may  have  been 
applied  naturally  in  the  Vetus  Latina  to  a  church 
reading  -  book ;  and  when  that  translation  was 
adopted  by  Jerome  [Praef.  in  Libro  Sal.  juxta 
LXX.  x.  p.  404,  ed.  Migne),  the  local  title  became 
current  throughout  the  West,  where  the  book  was 
most  used.  The  right  explanation  of  the  word  is 
given  by  Rufinus,  who  remarks  that  "  it  does  not 
designate  the  author  of  the  book,  but  the  cha- 
racter of  the  writing,"  as  publicly  used  in  the  ser- 
vices of  the  Church  (Comm.  in  Symb.  §38.  Sa- 
pientia, quae  dicitur  filii  Sirach  .  .  .  apud  Latinos 
hoc  ipso  generali  vocabulo  Ecclesiasticus  appellator, 
quo  vocabulo  non  auctor  libelli  sed  scripturae  qua- 
litas  cognominata  est).  The  special  application  by 
Rufinus  of  the  general  name  of  the  class  (ecclesias- 
tici  as  opposed  to  canonici)  to  the  single  book  may 
be  explained  by  its  wide  popularity".  Athanasius, 
for  instance,  mentions  the  book  (Ep.  Ecst.  s.  /.)  as 


ECCLESIASTICUS 

one  of  those  "framed  by  the  fathers  to  be  read  by 
those  who  wish  to  be  instructed  (K<XT7jxe?<r0at)  in 
the  word  of  godliness."  According  to  Jerome 
(Praef.  in  Libr.  Sol.  ix.  1242)  the  original  He- 
brew title  was  Proverbs  (Dvti'D,  cf.  inf.  §9) ; 
and  the  Wisdom  of  Sirach  shared  with  the  canonical 
book  of  Proverbs  and  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon  the 
title  of  The  book  of  all  virtues  (t;  Travaperos  crocpia, 
r)  TravdpfTos.  Hieron.  1.  c.  Cf.  Routh,  Bell.  Sacr. 
i.  p.  278).  In  the  Syriac  version  the  book  is  en- 
titled The  book  of  Jesus  the  son  of  Simeon  Asiro 
ft.  e.  the  bound)  ;  and  the  same  book  is  called  the 
wisdom  of  the  Son  of  Asiro.  In  many  places  it  is 
simply  styled  Wisdom  (Orig.  in  Matt.  xiii.  §4  ; 
cf.  Clem.  Al.  Paed.  i.  8,  §§69,  72,  &c),  and 
Jesus  Sirach  (August,  ad  Simplic.  i.  20). 

2.  The  writer  of  the  present  book  describes  him- 
self as  Jesus  (i.  e.  Jeshua)  the  son  of  Sirach,' of 
Jerusalem*  (c.  1.  27),  but  the  conjectures  which 
have  been  made  to  fill  up  this  short  notice  are 
either  unwarranted  {c.  g.  that  he  was  a  physician 
from  xxxviii.  1—15)  or  absolutely  improbable. 
There  is  no  evidence  to  show  that  he  was  of  priestly 
descent ;  and  the  similarity  of  names  is  scarcely  a 
plausible  excuse  for  confounding  him  with  the 
Helleniziug  high-priest  Jason  (2  Mace.  iv.  7-11  ; 
Georg.  Sync.  Chronogr.  276).  In  the  Talmud  the 
name  of  Ben  Sira  (N"VD  \2,  for  which  p)"VD  is  a 
late  error,  Jost,  Gesch.  d.  Judenth.  311)  occurs  in 
several  places  as  the  author  of  proverbial  sayings 
which  in  part  are  parallel  to  sentences  in  Ecclesias- 
ticus  (cf.  §4),  but  nothing  is  said  as  to  his  date  or 
person  [Jesus  the  Son  of  Sirach],  and  the  tra- 
dition which  ascribes  the  authorship  of  the  book  to 
Eliezer  (B.C.  260)  is  without  any  adequate  founda- 
tion (Jost,  a.  a.  0;  yet  see  note  1).  The  Pales- 
tinian origin  of  the  author  is,  however,  sub- 
stantiated by  internal  evidence,  e.  g.  xxiv.  10  f. 

3.  The  language  in  which  the  book  was  originally 
composed  was  Hebrew  ('E/3pai'<TTi ;  this  may  mean, 
however,  the  vernacular  Aramaean  dialect,  John 
v.  2,  xix.  13,  &c).  This  is  the  express  statement 
of  the  Creek  translator,  and  Jerome  says  {Praef.  in 
Libr.  Sal.  1.  c.)  that  he  had  met  with  the  "  He- 
brew "  text ;  nor  is  there  any  reason  to  doubt  that 
he  saw  the  book  in  its  original  form.  The  internal 
character  of  the  present  book  bears  witness  to  its 
foreign  source.  Not  only  is  the  style  Hebraistic  in 
general  form  (cf.  Lowth,  de  s-tcra  Poesi,xxiv.)  and 
idiom  (e.  g.  6e/j.4\tov  alwvos,  i.  15;  Krifffxacdoivos, 
xxxviii.  34;  airo  irporrunrov  \/>yov,  xix.  11  ;  cf. 
Eichhorn,  Einl.  iii  d.  Apok.  57)  as  distinguished 
from  the  Greek  of  the  Introduction,  but  in  several 
instances  it  is  possible  to  point  out  mistakes  and 
allusions  which  are  cleared  up  by  the  reconstruction 
of  the  Hebrew  phrases:  e.  a.  xxiv.  25—27,  ais  <£<£r, 
i.e.  -I1N3  for  "lk»3,  as  Am.  viii.  8,  xliii.  8;  ITV, 


ECCLESIASTICUS 


470 


jU.tjj',   IT"I\    <rt\4]vr]    (cf.   Eichhorn,   1.  c.  ;   Ewald. 
Gesch.  d.  Volkes  Tsr.  iv.  299  n.). 

4.  Nothing  however  remains  of  the  original 
proverbs  of  Ben  Sira  except  the  few  fragments  in 
pure  Hebrew  (Jost,  Gesch.  d.  Judenth.  311  n.) 
which  occur  in  the  Talmud  and  later  Rabbinic 
writers ;  and  even  these  may  have  been  derived 
from  tradition  and  not  from  any  written  collec- 
tion.11 The  Greek  translation  incorporated  in  the 
LXX.,  which  is  probably  the  source  from  which 
the  other  translations  were  derived,  was  made  by 
the  grandson  of  the  author  in  Egypt  "  in  the  reign 
of  Euergetes,"0  for  the  instruction  of  those  "in  a 
strange  country  ( iv  wapotKia)  who  were  previously 
prepared  to  live  after  the  law."  The  date  which  is 
thus  given  is  unfortunately  ambiguous.  Two  kings 
of  Egypt  bore  the  surname  Euergetes.  Ptol.  III., 
the  son  and  successor  of  Ptol.  II.  Philadelphia, 
B.C.  247-222  ;  and  Ptol.  VII.  Physcon,  the  brother 
of  Ptol.  VI.  Philometor,  B.C.  170-117.  And  the 
noble  eulogy  on  "  Simon  the  son  of  Onias,  the 
high-priest,"  who  is  described  as  the  last  of  the 
great  worthies  of  Israel  (c.  1.),  and  apparently 
removed  only  by  a  short  interval  from  the  times  of 
the  author  is  affected  by  a  similar  ambiguity,  so 
that  it  cannot  be  used  absolutely  to  fix  the  reign  in 
which  the  translation  was  made.  Simon  I.,  the 
son  of  Onias,  known  by  the  title  of  the  Just,  was 
high-priest  about  310-290  B.C.,  and  Simon  II., 
also  the  son  of  Onias,  held  the  same  office  at  the 
time  when  Ptol.  IV.  Philopator  endeavoured  to 
force  an  entrance  into  the  Temple,  B.C.  217 
(3  Mace.  i.  2).  Some  have  consequently  sup- 
posed that  the  reference  is  to  Simon  the  Just,  and 
that  the  grandson  of  Ben  Sirach,  who  is  supposed 
to  have  been  his  younger  contemporary,  lived  in 
the  reign  of  Ptolemy  III.  (Jahn,  Vaihinger  in  Her- 
zog's  Encycl.  s.  v.)  ;  others  again  have  applied 
the  eulogy  to  Simon  II.,  and  fixed  the  translation 
in  the  time  of  Ptolemy  VII.  (Eichhorn,  Einl.  38). 
But  both  suppositions  are  attended  with  serious 
difficulties.  The  description  of  Simon  can  scarcely 
apply  to  one  so  little  distinguished  as  the  second 
high-priest  of  the  name,  while  the  first,  a  man  of 
representative  dignity,  is  passed  over  without 
notice  in  the  list  of  the  benefactors  of  his  nation. 
And  on  the  other  hand  the  manner  in  which  the 
translator  speaks  of  the  Alexandrine  version  of  the 
Old  Testament,  and  the  familiarity  which  he  shows 
with  its  language  {e.g.  xliv.  16,  'Euwx  fxerfTtOri, 
Gen.  v.  24;  cf.  Linde,  ap.  Eichhorn,  p.  41-2)  is 
scarcely  consistent  with  a  date  so  early  as  the 
middle  of  the  third  century.  From  these  considera- 
tions it  appears  best  to  combine  the  two  views. 
The  p-andson  of  the  author  was  already  past 
middle-age  when  he  came  to  Egypt,  and  if  his  visit 
took  place  early  in  the  reign  oi  Ptolemy  Physcon, 


•  The  reading  of  Cod.  A.  and  six  other  MSS.  is 
remarkable  :  'It)<toOs  vi.  Sipax  EAeoifap  (2  MSS.  EAea- 
£apos;  Aid.  1  MS.  'EAea^dpou)  o 'Icpo<r.  Cf.  Eichh.  p. 
fiS,  n.  The  words  are  wanting  in  the  Syriac  and 
Arabic,  but  are  supported  by  all  other  authorities. 

b  The  "  Alphabet,"  ox  "  />'»«/.'  of  l"»  Sira,"  which 
exists  at  present,  is  a  Inter  compilation  (Zuiiz, 
Oottesd.  Vortr.  <l.  ./»</<»,  100-105)  of  proverbs  in 
Hebrew  and  Chaldee,  containing  some  genuine  frag- 
ments, among  much  that  is  worthless  (Dukes,  Rab- 
binische  Blumenlese,  pp.  :il  ff.).  Ben  Sira  is  called  in 
the  preface  the  son  of  Jeremiah.     The  sayings  are 

Collected  by  Dukes,  1.  c.  pp.  1.7  If.    '1  hey  otter  parallels 
to  Ecclus.  iii.  21  ;   vi.  li  ;  ix.  8  ff.  ;   xi.  1  ;  xiii.  1.")  ; 


xxv.  2  ;  xxvi.  1  ;  xxx.  23  ;  xxxviii.   1,  4,   S  ;  xiii. 

>j  r. 

c  Sirac.  Prol.  ev  yap  tw  6-yS6<o  *ai  Tpoxxdorco  eret  iirl 
toO  Euep-ytVou  /3aoaAe'uj<;,  7rapayci'7)#ew  ct?  Aiyv7TTOi> .... 
It  is  strange  that,  any  doubt  should  have  been  raised 
about  the  meaning  of  the  words,  which  can  only  be, 
that  the  translator  "  in  his  thirty-eighth  year  came  to 
Egypt  during   the  reign  of  Euergetes  ;"   though   it   is 

impossible  now  to  give  any  explanation  of  the  specifi- 
cation of  his  age.  The  translation  of  Eichhorn  (1.  e. 
40),  and  several  others,  "  in  the  thirty-eighth  year  of 
the  reign  of  Euergetes,"  is  absolutely  at  variance  with 
the  grammatical  structure  of  the  sentence. 


480 


ECCLESIASTICUS 


ECCLESIASTIC  US 


it  is  quite  possible  that  the  book  itself  was  written 
while  the  name  and  person  of  the  last  of  "  the  men 
of  the  great  synagogue"  was  still  familiar  to  his 
countrymen."  d  Even  if  the  date  of  the  book  be 
brought  somewhat  lower,  the  importance  of  the 
position  which  Simon  the  Just  occupied  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  Jews  would  be  a  sufficient  explanation 
of  the  distinctness  of  his  portraiture;  and  the  poli- 
tical and  social  troubles  to  which  the  book  alludes 
(li.  6,  12,  xxxvi.  ff.)  seem  to  point  to  the  disorders 
which  marked  the  transference  of  Jewish  allegiance 
from  Egypt  to  Syria  rather  than  to  the  period  of 
prosperous  tranquillity  which  was  enjoyed  during 
the  supremacy  of  the  earlier  Ptolemies  (c.  B.C. 
200). 

5.  The  name  of  the  Greek  translator  is  unknown. 
He  is  commonly  supposed  to  have  borne  the  same 
name  as  his  grandfather,  but  this  tradition  rests 
only  on  conjecture  or  misunderstanding  (Jerome, 
1.  c.  inf.  §7,  Synops.  S.  Script,  printed  as  a  Pro- 
logue in  the  Compl.  ed.  and  in  A.  V.). 

6.  It  is  a  more  important  fact  that  the  book 
itself  appears  to  recognise  the  incorporation  of 
earlier  collections  into  its  text.  Jesus  the  son  of 
Sirach,  while  he  claims  for  himself  the  writing  of 
the  book  (ex<*pa£a),  characterises  his  father  as  one 
"  who  poured  forth  a  shower  of  wisdom  (avwfj.- 
{Sprirre  ffocpiau)  from  his  heart ;"  and  the  title  of 
the  book  in  the  Vatican  MS.  and  in  many  others 
may  be  more  than  a  familiar  abbreviation  (o~o(pla 
Seipax-  Yet  Cod.  C  has  irp6\oyos  Sipax  com- 
bined with  the  usual  heading,  2o<p.  'irjcrou  v.  2.). 
From  the  very  nature  of  his  work  the  author  was 
like  "  a  gleaner  after  the  grape-gatherers"  (xxxiii. 
16),  and  Bretschneider  has  endeavoured  to  show 
(pp.  28  ft'.)  from  internal  discrepancies  of  thought 
and  doctrine  that  he  made  use  of  several  smaller 
collections,  differing  widely  in  their  character, 
though  all  were  purely  Hebrew  in  their  origin. 

7.  The  Syriac  and  Old  Latin  versions,  which 
latter  Jerome  adopted  without  alteration  (Praef. 
in  Lib/:  Sal.  juxta  LXX.  1.  c.  ...  in  Ecclesias- 
tico,  quern  esse  Jesu  filii  Sirach,  nullus  ignorat, 
calamo  temperavi,  tantummodo  Canonicas  scripturas 
emcndare  desiderans  .  .  .),  differ  considerably  from 
the  present  Greek  text,  and  it  is  uncertain  whether 
they  were  derived  from  some  other  Greek  recension 
(Eichhorn,  p.  84)  or  from  the  Hebrew  original 
(Bertholdt,  2304  ff.).  The  language  of  the  Latin 
version  presents  great  peculiarities.  Even  in  the 
first  two  chapters  the  following  words  occur 
which  are  found  in  no  other  part  of  the  Vulgate : 
defunctio  (i.  13),  religiositas  (i.  17,  18,  26), 
compartior  (i.  24),  inhonoratio  (i.  38),  obductio 
(ii.  2,  v.  1,  10),  receptibilis  (ii.  5).  The  Arabic 
version  is  directly  derived  from  the  Syriac  (Bret- 
schn.  p.  702  f.). 

8.  The  existing  Greek  MSS.  present  great  dis- 
crepancies in  order,  and  numerous  interpolations. 
The  arrangement  of  cc.  xxx.  25 — xxxvi.  17,  in  the 
Vatican  and  Complutensian  editions  is  very  dif- 
ferent. The  English  version  follows  the  latter, 
which  is  supported  by  the  Latin  and  Syriac  versions 
against  the  authority  of  the  Uncial  MSS.  The  extent 
of  the  variation  is  seen  in  the  following;  table : 


A  If  indeed  the  inscription  in  B.  "  The  Wisdom  of 
Sirach  "  (so  also  Epiph.  Hair.  viii.  ^  <ro(j>ia  toO  Sipax), 
as  distinguished  from  the  prayer  in  c.  li.  ('Irjo-oO  ut.  2.) 
i*  based  upon  any  historic  tradition,  another  genera- 
tion will  he  added  to  carry  us  back  to  the  first  ele- 
ments of  the  book.     Srr  ijfi. 


Ed.  Vat.  A.B.  C. 
xxxiii.  13,  AapTrpd  KapSia, 

K.  T.  A. 

xxxiv.,  xxxv. 
xxxvi.  1-16. 
xxx.  25  ff. 
xxxi.,  xxxii. 
xxxiii.  1-13. 
xxxvi.  17  ft'. 


KA.  Compl.  Lett.  Syr.  E.  V. 
xxx.  25       ...... 

xxxi.,  xxxii 

xxxiii.  16,  17,  ^ypuirnjira    . 
xxxiii.  10  ff.  tus  KaAajuai/xei'Os 

xxxiv.,  xxxv 

xxxvi.  1-11, 0uAa?'Ia/«o(3     . 
xxxvi.  12  ff.  koI  Kare/cAijpo- 
voixriaa. 


The  most  important  interpolations  are:  i.  5,  7; 
186,  21 ;  iii.  25 ;  iv.  236;  vii.  266;  x.  21  ;  xii.  6c;  ■ 
xiii.  256 ;  xvi.  15,  16,  22c ;  xvii.  5,  9,  16,  17a,  18, 
21,  23c,  266;  xviii.  26,  3,  27c,  33c;  xix.  56,  6a, 
136,  14a,  18,  19,  2 1,  25c;  xx.  3,  146,  176,  32  ; 
xxii.  9,  10,  23c;  xxiii.  3c,  4c,  56,  28;  xxiv.  18, 
24;  xxv.  12,  26c;  xxvi.  19-27  ;  1.  296. '  All  these 
passages,  which  occur  in  the  A.  V.  and  the  Compl. 
texts,  are  wanting  in  the  best  MSS.  The  edition 
of  the  Syro-Hexaplaric  MS.  at  Milan,  which  is  at 
present  reported  to  be  in  preparation  (1858),  will 
probably  contribute  much  to  the  establishment  of  a 
sounder  text. 

9.  It  is  impossible  to  make  any  satisfactory  plan 
of  the  book  in  its  present  shape.  The  latter  part, 
c.  xlii.  15 — 1.  21,  is  distinguished  from  all  that  pre- 
cedes in  style  and  subject.;  and  "the  praise  of 
noble  men"  {iraripoiv  v/xuos)  seems  to  form  a 
complete  whole  in  itself  (ch.  xliv. — 1.  24).  The 
words  of  Jerome,  Pracf.  in  Libr.  Salom.  (Quorum 
priorem  [vavaptTov  Jesu  filii  Sirach  libram]  He- 
braicum  reperi,  non  Ecclcsiasticum  ut  apud  La- 
tinos, sed  Parabolas  praenotatum,  cui  juncti  erant 
Ecclesiastes  et  Canticum  Canticorum,  ut  simili- 
tudinem  Salomonis  non  solum  librorum  numero, 
sed  etiam  materiarum  genere  coaequaret),  which 
do  not  appear  to  have  received  any  notice,  imply 
that  the  original  text  presented  a  triple  character 
answering  to  the  three  works  of  Solomon,  the 
Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  and  Canticles ;  and  it  is, 
perhaps,  possible  to  trace  the  prevalence  of  the 
different  types  of  maxim,  reflection,  and  song  in 
successive  parts  of  the  present  book.  In  the  cen- 
tral portion  of  the  book  (xviii.  29,  iyKparzia  ipvxris, 
xxxii.  (xxxv.)  Trep}  7]yov/j.4vwv)  several  headings 
are  introduced  in  the  oldest  MSS.,  and  similar  titles 
preface  c.  xliv.  (iraTcpav  vfxvos)  and  c.  li.  (irpoa- 
tvxh  'Inaov  vlov  'Seipdx)-  These  sections  may 
have  contributed  to  the  disarrangement  of  the 
text,  but  they  do  not  offer  any  sufficient  clue  to 
its  true  subdivisions.  Eichhorn  supposed  that  the 
book  was  made  up  of  three  distinct  collections  which 
were  afterwards  united  :  i. — xxiii. ;  xxiv. —  xlii.  14 ; 
xlii.  15—1.  24  (EM.  50  ff.).  Bretschneider  sets 
aside  this  hypothesis,  and  at  the  same  time  one 
which  he  had  formerly  been  inclined  to  adopt  that 
the  recurrence  of  the  same  ideas  in  xxiv.  .;_'  f£  ; 
xxxiii.  16,  17  (xxx.);  1.  27,  mark  the  conclusion  of 
three  parts.  The  last  five  verses  of  c.  1.  (1.  25-29) 
form  a  natural  conclusion  to  the  book ;  and  the 
prayer,  which  forms  the  last  chapter  (li.),  is  want- 
ing in  two  MSS.  Some  have  supposed  that  it  was 
the  work  of  the  translator;  but  it  is  more  probable 
that  he  found  it  attached  to  the  larger  work,  though 
it  may  not  have  been  designed  originally  for  the 
place  which  it  occupies. 

10.  The  earliest  clear  coincidence  with  the  con- 
tents of  the  book  occurs  in  the  epistle  of  Barnabas 
(c.  xix.  =  Ecclus.  iv.  31 ;  cf.  Const.  Apost.  vii.  11), 
but  in  this  case  the  parallelism  consists  in  the 
tin  night  and  not  in  the  words,  ami  there  is  no 
mark  of  quotation.  The  parallels  which  have  been 
discovered  in  the  New  Testament  are  too  general 


ECCLESIASTICUS 

to  show  that  they  were  derived  from  the  written 
text,  and  not  from  popular  language ;  and  the 
same  remark  applies  to  the  other  alleged  coin- 
cidences with  the  Apostolic  fathers  (e.  <j.  Ecclus. 
v.  13  =  James  i.  19;  xi.  18,  19  =  Luke  xii.  19). 
There  is  no  sign  of  the  use  of  the  book  in  Justin 
Martyr,  which  is  the  more  remarkable  as  it  o tiers 
several  thoughts  congenial  to  his  style.  The  first 
distinct  quotations  occur  in  Clement  of  Alexandria ; 
but  from  the  end  of  the  second  century  the  book 
was  much  used  and  cited  with  respect,  and  in  the 
same  terms  as  the  canonical  Scriptures;  and  its 
authorship  was  often  assigned  to  Solomon  from  the 
similarity  which  it  presented  to  his  writings  (Au- 
gust. Ik  Cura  pro  Mart.  18).  Clement  speaks  of 
it  continually  as  Scripture  (Paed.  i.  8  §62  ;  ii. 
2  §34;  5  §46;  8  §69,  &c.)>  as  the  work  of 
Solomon  (Strom,  ii.  5  §24),  and  as  the  voice  of 
the  great  Master  (iraiSaycoySs,  Paed.  ii.  10  §98). 
Origen  cites  passages  with  the  same  formula  as  the 
Canonical  books  (yeypairrai,  In  Johann.  xxxii. 
§14;  In  Matt.  xvi.  §8),  as  Scripture  (C'umm. 
in  Matt.  §44;  In  Ep.  < id  Pom.  is.  §17,  &c), 
and  as  the  utterance  of"  the  divine  word"  (c.  Cels. 
viii.  50).  The  other  writers  of  the  Alexandrine 
school  follow  the  same  practice.  Dionysius  calls 
its  words  "  divine  oracles"  (Frag.de  Nat.m.j). 
1258  ed.  Migne),  and  Peter  Martyr  quotes  it  as 
the  work  of  "  tlte  Preacher"  (Frag.  i.  §5,  p. 
515,  ed.  Migne).  The  passage  quoted  from  Ter- 
tullian  (de  exhort,  cast.  2,  sicut  scriptum  est :  ecce 
posui  ante  te  bonum  et  malum;  gustasti  enim  de 

arbore   agnitionis cf.  Ecclus.  xv.    17, 

Vulg.)  is  not  absolutely  conclusive ;  but  Cyprian 
constantly  brings  forward  passages  from  the  book 
as  Scripture  (de  bono  pat.  17;  de  mortalitate,  9, 
§13)  and  as  the  work  of  Solomon  (Ep.  lxv.  2). 
The  testimony  of  Augustine  sums  up  briefly  the 
result  which  follows  from  these  isolated  autho- 
rities. He  quotes  the  book  constantly  himself  as 
the  work  of  a  prophet  (Scrm.  xxxix.  1),  the  word 
of  God  (Serin,  lxxxvii.  11),  "Scripture"  (Lib.  de 
Nat.  33),  and  that  even  in  controversy  (c.  Jul. 
Pelag.  v.  36),  but  he  expressly  notices  that  it  was 
not  in  the  Hebrew  Canon  (De  Cura  pro  Mart.  1 8) 
"  though  the  Church,  especially  of  the  West,  had 
received  it  into  authority"  (De  Civit.  xvii.  20,  cf. 
Speculum,  iii.  1127,  ed.  Paris).  Jerome,  in  like 
manner  (I.  c.  §7),  contrasts  the  book  with  "  the 
Canonical  Scriptures"  as  "doubtful,"  while  they 
are  "sure;"  and  in  another  place  (Prol.  Galeat.) 
he  says  that  it  "  is  not  in  the  Qauon,"  and  again 
(Prol.  in  Lihr.  Sol.)  that  it  should  be  read  "  for 
the  instruction  of  the  people  (jplebis),  not  to  sup- 
port the  authority  of  ecclesiastical  doctrines."  The 
book  is  not  quoted  by  Irenaeus,  Hippolytus,  or 
Eusebius;  and  is  not  contained  in  the  ('anon  of 
Melitn,  Origen,  Cyiil,  Laodicea,  Hilary,  or  Rufinus. 
[Cam in.]  It  was  never  included  by  the  Jews 
among  their  Scriptures ;  for  though  it  is  quoted  in 
the  Talmud,  and  at  time,  like  the  Kethubim,  the 
study  "f  it  was  forbidden,  and  it  was  i 
among  '"the  outer  books "  (D^jivn  D^TBD),  that 
is  probably,  those  which  were  not  admitted  into  the 
('aiiuu  :  Duies,  Rabb,  Blumenl  ■<■,  -j>.  5). 

11.  But  while  the  book  is  destitute  of  the 
highest  canonical  authority,  it  is  a  most  important 
monument  of  the  religious  state  of  the  Jews  at  the 

period   of  its   composition.     As  an   expressi t 

Palestinian  theology  it  stands  alone;  tin-  there  i- 
no  sufficient  reason  tor  assuming  Alexandrine  inter- 
polations or  direci  Alexandrine  influence  (Gfrorer, 


ECLIPSE 


481 


Philo,  ii.  18  ff.).  The  translator  may,  perhaps, 
have  given  an  Alexandrine  colouring  to  the  doc- 
trine, but  its  great  outlines  are  unchanged  (cf. 
Daehne,  Eelig.  Philos.  ii.  129  ff.).  The  concep- 
tion of  God  as  Creator,  Preserver,  and  Governor 
is  strictly  conformable  to  the  old  Mosaic  type; 
but  at  the  same  time  His  mercy  is  extended  to  all 
mankind  (xviii.  11-13).  Little  stress  is  laid  upon 
the  spirit-world,  either  good  (xlviii.  21;  xiv.  2; 
xxxix.  28?)  or  evil  (xxi.  27  ?) ;  and  the  doctrine  of 
a  resurrection  fades  away  (xiv.  16;  xvii.  27,28; 
xliv.  14,  15.  Yet  cf.  xlviii.  11).  In  addition  to  the 
general  hope  of  restoration  (xxxvi.  1,  &c.)  one  trait 
only  of  a  Messianic  faith  is  preserved  in  which  the 
writer  contemplates  the  future  work  of  Elias  (xlviii. 
10).  The  ethical  precepts  are  addressed  to  the 
middle  class  (Eichhorn,  Einl.  44  ff.).  The  praise 
of  agriculture  (vii.  15)  and  medicine  (xxxviii.  1  ff.), 
anil  the  constant  exhortations  to  cheei  fulness,  seem 
to  speak  of  a  time  when  men's  thoughts  were 
turned  inwards  with  feelings  of  despondency  and 
perhaps  (Dukes,  I.  c.  27  ff.)  of  fatalism.  At  least 
the  book  marks  the  growth  of  that  anxious  legalism 
which  was  conspicuous  in  the  sayings  of  the  later 
doctors.  Life  is  already  imprisoned  in  rules : 
religion  is  degenerating  into  ritualism :  knowledge 
has  taken  refuge  in  schools  (cf.  Ewald,  Gcsch.  d. 
Volkes  Isr.  iv.  298  ff.).        v 

12.  Numerous  commentaries  on  Ecclesiasticus 
appeared  in  the  16th  and  17th  centuries  (cf. 
Bretschneider,  Lib.  Sirac.  Praef.  x.  note,  for  a 
list  of  these),  of  which  the  most  important  were 
those  of  Camerarius  (Lipsiae,  1570,  8vo.),  Corn,  a 
Lapide  (Antverpiae,  1687,  &c,  fol.),  and  Drusius 
(Franekerae,  1596,  4to) ;  but  nothing  moie  was 
done  for  the  criticism  of  the  book  till  the  editions 
of  Linde  (a  German  translation  and  notes,  Lipsiae, 
1785, 1795,  Svo,  followed  by  a  Greek  text,  Gedani, 
1795,  8vo.).  Linde's  labours  left  much  to  be 
supplied,  and  in  1806  Bretschneider  published  his 
edition,  which  still  remains  the  most  complete 
(Liber  Jesu  Siracidae  Graece  ad  fidem  Codd.  et 
verss.  emend,  et  perpet.  coinm.  illustratus  a  Car. 
Gottl.  Bretschneider  .  .  .  Ratisbonae,  MDCCCVI.)  ; 
hut  this  will  probably  he  superseded  by  the  promised 
(1858)  Commentary  of  Fritzsche  in  the  Eurzg. 
/.'■ .  r.  Handbuch,  for  both  in  style  and  scholarship 
it  labours  under  serious  defects.  [B.  F.  W.] 

ECLIPSE  OF  THE  SUN.  No  historical 
notice  of  an  eclipse  occurs  in  the  Bible,  but  there 
are  passages  in  the  prophets  which  contain  mani- 
fest allusion  to  this  phenomenon.  They  describe 
it  in  the  following  terms: — "The  sun  goes  down 
at  noon,"  "  the  earth  is  darkened  in  the  clear  day  " 
(Am.  viii.  9),  "the  day  shall  be  dark"  (Mic.  iii. 
6),  "  the  light  shall  not  be  clear  nor  dark"  (Zech. 
xiv.  ii),  "  the  sun  shall  be  dark"  (Joel  ii.  10,  31, 
iii.  15).  Some  of  these  notices  probably  refer  to 
eclipses  that  occurred  about  the  time  of  the  re- 
spective compositions:  thus  tin'  date  of  Amos 
coincides  with  a  total  eclipse,  which  occurred  Feb. 
9,  B.C.  784,  and  was  risible  at  Jerusalem  shortly 
after  noon  (Hitzig,  ('•■mm.  in  Proph.) ;  that  of 
Mieah  with  the  eh]  I         i,  B.C.  716,  referred 

to  by  Dionys.  lhd.  ii.  56,  to  which  same  period  tin' 
latter  part  of  the  book  of  Zecbariah  may  te  pro- 
bably assigned.  A  passing  notice  in  Jer.  xv.  9  coin- 
cides in  date  with  the  eclipse  of  Sept.  30,  !•..('.  610, 
so  well  known  from  Herodotus' account  u.  74.103), 
The  darkness  that  overspread  the"world  at  the  cruci- 
fixion cannot  with  reason  be  attributed  to  an  eclipse, 

as    the    moon    Was    at    the    t'ull    at    the   time   of  the 

2   I 


482 


ED 


Passover.  [Darkness'.]  The  awe  which  is  natu- 
rally inspired  by  an  eclipse  in  the  minds  of  those 
who  are  unacquainted  with  the  cause  of  it,  rendered 
it  a  token  of  impending  judgment  in  the  Prophetical 
books.  [W.  L.  B.] 

ED,  i.  e.  "  witness,"  a  word  inserted  in  the 
A  nth.  Vers,  of  Josh.  xxii.  34,  apparently  on  the 
authority  of  a  few  MSS.,  and  also  of  the  Syriac  and 
Arabic  Versions,  but  not  existing  in  the  generally- 
received  Hebrew  Text.  The  passage  is  literally  as 
follows :  "  And  the  children  of  Keuben  and  the 
children  of  Gad  named  (LXX.  eVcoj/OjUacrei')  the 
altar:  because  that  is  a  witness  (Ed)  between  us 
that  Jehovah  is  God."  The  rendering  of  the  LXX.. 
though  in  some  respects  differing  materially  from 
the  present  text,  shows  plainly  that  at  that  time 
the  word  Ed  stood  in  the  Hebrew  in  its  present 
place.  The  word  K")p,  to  call  or  proclaim,  has 
not  invariably  (though  generally)  a  transitive  force, 
but  is  also  occasionally  an  intransitive  verb.  (For 
a  further  investigation  of  this  passage,  see  Keil, 
Joshua,  ad  foe.)  [G.] 

E'DAR,  TOWER  OF  (accur.  Eder,  b;MB 
"HP  ;  Vat.  omits  ;  Alex,  'irvpyos  TaSep  ;  Tunis 
Eder),  a  place  named  only  in  Gen.  xxxv.  21. 
Jacob's  first  halting-place  between  Bethlehem  and 
Hebron  was  "  beyond  (nfcOHO)  the  tower  Eder." 
According  to  Jerome  (Onomasticon,  Bethlehem)  it 
was  1000  paces  from  Bethlehem.  The  name  sig- 
nifies a  "  flock  "  or  "  drove,"  and  is  quite  in  keep- 
ing with  the  pastoral  habits  of  the  district.  Jerome 
sees  in  it  a  prophecy  of  the  announcement  of  the 
birth  of  Christ  to  the  shepherds ;  and  there  seems 
to  have  been  a  Jewish  tradition  that  the  Messiah 
was  to  be  bora  there  (Targum  Ps.  Jon.).         [G.] 

EDDI'AS  ('Iefias  ;  Alex.  'USSias  ;  Geddias), 
1  Esdr.  ix.  26.     [Jeziah.] 

E'DEN  (fiy  ;  'E8e»,  the  first  residence  of 
man.  It  would  be  difficult,  in  the  whole  history 
of  opinion,  to  find  any  subject  which  has  so  invited, 
and  at  the  same  time  so  completely  baffled,  conjec- 
ture, as  the  Garden  of  Eden.  The  three  continents 
of  the  old  world  have  been  subjected  to  the  most 
rigorous  search ;  from  China  to  the  Canary  isles, 
from  the  Mountains  of  the  Moon  to  the  coasts  of 
the  Baltic,  no  locality  which  in  the  slightest  degree 
corresponded  to  the  description  of  the  first  abode  of 
the  human  race  has  been  left  unexamined.  The  great 
rivers  of  Europe,  Asia,  and  Africa,  have  in  turn  done 
service  as  the  Pison  and  Gihon  of  Scripture,  and  there 
remains  nothing  but  the  New  World  wherein  the  next 
adventurous  theorist  may  bewilder  himself  in  the 
mazes  of  this  most  difficult  question. 

In  order  more  clearly  to  understand  the  merit  of 
the  several  conjectures,  it  will  be  necessary  to  sub- 
mit to  a  careful  examination  the  historic  narrative 
on  which  they  are  founded.  Omitting  those  por- 
tions of  the  text  of  Gen.  ii.  8-14  which  do  not 
bear  upon  the  geographical  position  of  Eden,  the 
description  is  as  follows: — "And  the  Lord  God 
planted  a  garden  in  Edeu  eastward.  .  .  .  And  a  river 
goeth  forth  from  Eden  to  water  the  garden  ;  and 
from  thence  it  is  divided  and  becomes  four  heads 
(or  arms).  The  name  of  the  first  is  Pison:  that  is 
it  which  compasseth  the  whole  land  of  Havilah, 
where  is  the  gold.  And  the  gold  of  that  land  is 
good :  there  is  the  bdellium  and  the  onyx  stone. 
And  the  name  of  the  second  river  is  Gihon  ;  that  is 


EDEN 

it  which  compasseth  the  whole  land  of  Cush.  And 
the  name  of  the  third  river  is  Hiddekel  ;  that  is  it 
which  floweth  before  Assyria.  And  the  fourth  river, 
that  is  Euphrates."  In  the  eastern  portion  then 
of  the  region  of  Eden  was  the  garden  planted.  The 
river  which  flowed  through  Edeu  watered  the  gar- 
den, and  thence  branched  off  into  four  distinct 
streams.  The  first  problem  to  be  solved  then  is 
this: — To  find  a  river  which,  at  some  stage  of  its 
course,  is  divided  into  four  streams,  two  of  which 
are  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates.  The  identity  of  these 
rivers  with  the  Hiddekel  and  P'rath  has  never 
been  disputed,  and  no  hypothesis  which  omits  them 
is  worthy  of  consideration.  Setting  aside  minor 
differences  of  detail,  the  theories  which  have  been 
framed  with  regard  to  the  situation  of  the  terrestrial 
paradise  naturally  divide  themselves  into  two  classes. 
The  first  class  includes  all  those  which  place  the 
garden  of  Eden  below  the  junction  of  the  Euphrates 
and  Tigris,  and  interpret  the  names  Pison  and 
Gihon  of  certain  portions  of  these  rivers:  the 
second,  those  which  seek  for  it  in  the  high  table- 
land of  Armenia,  the  fruitful  parent  of  many  noble 
streams.  These  theories  have  been  supported  by 
most  learned  men  of  all  nations,  of  all  ages,  and 
representing  every  shade  of  theological  belief;  but 
there  is  not  one  which  is  not  based  in  some  degree 
upon  a  forced  interpretation  of  the  words  of  the 
narrative.  Those  who  contend  that  the  united 
stream  of  the  Euphrates  and  Tigris  is  the  "river" 
which  "  goeth  forth  from  Eden  to  water  the  gar- 
den," have  committed  a  fatal  error  in  neglecting 
the  true  meaning  of  KV,  which  is  only  used  of  the 
course  of  a  river  from  its  source  downwards  (cf.  Ez. 
xlvii.  1).  Following  the  guidance  which  this  word 
supplies,  the  description  in  ver.  10  must  be  ex- 
plained in  this  manner :  the  river  takes  its  rise  in 
Eden,-  flows  into  the  garden,  and  from  thence  is 
divided  into  four  branches,  the  separation  taking 
place  either  in  the  garden  or  after  leaving  it.  If 
this  be  the  case,  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates  before 
junction  cannot,  in  this  position  of  the  garden,  be 
two  of  the  four  branches  in  question.  But,  though 
they  have  avoided  this  error,  the  theorists  of  the 
second  class  have  been  driven  into  a  Charybdis 
not  less  destructive.  Looking  for  the  true  site  of 
Eden  in  the  highlands  of  Armenia,  near  the  sources 
of  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates,  and  applying  the 
names  Pison  and  Gihon  to  some  one  or  other  of  the 
rivers  which  spring  from  the  same  region,  they 
have  been  compelled  to  explain  away  the  meaning 
of  "iriJ,  the  "river,"  and  to  give  to  D^'NT  a  sense 
which  is  not  supported  by  a  single  passage.  In  no 
instance  is  £'JO  (lit.  "  head  ")  applied  to  the  source 
of  a  river.  On  several  occasions  (cf.  Judg.  vii.  1G  ; 
Job  i.  17,  &c.)  it  is  used  of  the  detachments  into 
which  the  main  body  of  an  army  is  divided,  and 
analogy  therefore  leads  to  the  conclusion  that 
D^'frO  denotes  the  "  branches "  of  the  parent 
stream.  There  are  other  difficulties  in  the  details 
of  the  several  theories,  which  may  be  obstacles  to 
their  entire  reception,  but  it  is  manifest  that  no 
theory  which  foils  to  satisfy  the  above-mentioned 
conditions  can  _ be  allowed  to  take  its  pkee  among 
things  that  are  probable. 

The  old  versions  supply  us  with  little  or  no 
assistance.  The  translators  appear  to  have  halted 
between  a  mystical  and  literal  interpretation.  The 
word  py  is  rendered  by  the  LXX.  as  a  proper 
name  in  three  passages  only,  Gen.  ii.  8,  10,  iv.  16, 
where   it  is  represented  by  'ESeu.     In  all   others, 


EDEN 

with  the  exception  of  Is.  Ii.  3,  it  is  translated 
Tpvcpri.  In  the  Vulgate  it  never  occurs  as  a  proper 
name,  but  is  rendered  "  voluptas,"  "  locus  volvp- 
tatis,"  or  "deliciae."  The  Targura  of  Onkelos  gives 
it  uniformly  py,  and  in  the  Peshito  Syriac  it  is  the 
same,  with  the  slight  variation  in  two  passages  of 

r  J  *— ^.  for  *  «— ^». 

It  would  be  a  hopeless  task  to  attempt  to  chronicle 
the  opinions  of  all  the  commentators  upon  this 
question :  their  name  is  legion.  Philo  (tie  Mundi 
O/iif.  §54)  is  the  first  who  ventured  upon  an 
allegorical  interpretation.  He  conceived  that  by 
paradise  is  darkly  shadowed  forth  the  governing 
faculty  of  the  soul ;  that  the  tree  of  life  signifies 
religion,  whereby  the  soul  is  immortalised  ;  and  by 
the  faculty  of  knowing  good  and  evil  the  middle 
sense,  by  which  are  discerned  things  contrary  to 
nature.  In  another  passage  (de  Plant  at.  §9)  he  ex- 
plains Eden,  which  signifies  "  pleasure,"  as  a  symbol 
of  the  soul,  that  sees  what  is  light,  exults  in  virtue, 
and  prefers  one  enjoyment,  the  worship  of  the  only 
wise,  to  myriads  of  men's  chief  delights.  And  again 
(Let/is  Allegor.  i.  §14)  he  says,  "  now  virtue  is 
tropically  called  paradise,  and  the  site  of  paradise 
is  Eden,  that  is,  pleasure."  The  four  rivers  he 
explains  (§19)  of  the  several  virtues  of  prudence, 
temperance,  courage,  and  justice ;  while  the  main 
stream  of  which  they  are  branches  is  the  generic 
virtue,  goodness,  which  goeth  forth  from  Eden,  the 
wisdom  of  God.  The  opinions  of  Philo  would  not 
be  so  much  worthy  of  consideration,  were  it  not 
that  he  has  been  followed  by  many  of  the  Fathers. 
Origen,  according  to  Luther  (Coram,  ia  Gen.), 
imagined  paradise  to  be  heaven,  the  trees  angels, 
and  the  livers  wisdom.  Papias,  Irenaeus,  Pantaenus, 
and  Clemens  Alexandrinus  have  all  favoured  the 
mystical  interpretation  (Huet.  Oritjcniana,  ii.  167). 
Ambrosius  followed  the  example  of  Origen,  and 
placed  the  terrestrial  paradise  in  the  third  heaven, 
in  consequence  of  the  expression  of  St.  Paul  (2  Cor. 
xii.  2,  4)  ;  but  elsewhere  he  distinguishes  between 
the  terrestrial  paradise  and  that  to  which  the 
apostle  was  caught  up  (De  Farad,  c.  3).  In 
another  passage  (Ep.  ad  Sabinurn)  all  this  is  ex- 
plained as  allegory.  Among  the  Hebrew  traditions 
enumerated  by  Jerome  (Trad,  ffebr.  in  Gen.)  is 
one  that  paradise  was  created  before  the  world  was 
formed,  and  is  therefore  beyond  its  limits.  Moses 
Bar  Cepha  (De  Parad.)  assigns  it  a  middle  place 
between  the  earth  and  the  firmament.  .Some  affirm 
that  paradise  was  on  a  mountain,  which  reached 
nearly  to  the  moon;  while  others,  struck  by  the 
manifest  absurdity  of  such  an  opinion,  held  that  it 
was  situated  in  the  third  region  of  the  air,  and  was 
higher  than  all  the  mountains  of  the  earth  by 
twenty  cubits,  so  that  the  waters  of  the  flood  could 
Dot  reach  it.  Others  again  have  thought  that  para- 
dise was  twofold,  one  corporeal  and  the  other  incor- 
poreal :  others  that  it  was  formerly  on  earth,  but 
had  been  taken  away  by  the  judgment  of  <!od 
(Hopkinson,  Descr.  Parad.  in  Ugol.  T/ics.  vii.). 
Among  the  opinions  enumerated  by  Morinus  (Diss, 
de  Parad.  Terrest.  CJgol.  Tins,  viij  is  one,  that, 
before  the  fall,  the  whole  earth  was  paradise,  and 
was  really  situated  in  Eden,  in  the  midst  of  all 
kinds  of  delights.  Ephraem  Syrus  i  Comm.  in  Gen.) 
expresses  himself  doubtfully  upon  this  point.  Whe- 
ther the  trees  of  paradise,  being  spiritual,  drank  of 
spiritual  water,  he  does  not  undertake  to  decade; 
but  he  seems  to  be  of  opinion  that  the  four  rivers 
have  lost  their  original  virtue  in  consequence  of  the 


EDEN 


483 


curse  pronounced  upon  the  earth  for  Adam's  trans- 
gression. 

Conjectures  with  regard  to  the  dimensions  of  the 
garden  have  differed  as  widely  as  those  which 
assign  its  locality.  Ephraem  .Syrus  maintained  that 
it  surrounded  the  whole  earth,  while  Johannes 
Tostatus  restricted  it  to  a  circumference  of  thirty- 
six  or  forty  miles,  and  others  have  made  it  extend 
over  Syria,  Arabia,  and  Mesopotamia.  (Hopkinson, 
as  above.)  But  of  speculations  like  these  there  is 
no  end. 

What  is  the  river  which  goes  forth  from  Eden 
to  water  the  garden  ?  is  a  question  which  has  been 
often  asked,  and  still  waits  for  a  satisfactory  answer. 
That  the  ocean  stream  which  surrounded  the  earth 
was  the  source  from  which  the  four  rivers  flowed 
was  the  opinion  of  Josephus  (Ant.  i.  1,  §3)  and 
Johannes  Damascenus  (De  Orthod.  Fid.  ii.  9).  It 
was  the  Shat-el-Arab,  according  to  those  who  place 
the  garden  of  Eden  below  the  junction  of  the  Tigris 
and  Euphrates,  and  their  conjecture  would  deserve 
consideration  were  it  not  that  this  stream  cannot, 
with  any  degree  of  propriety,  be  said  to  rise  in 
Eden.  By  those  who  refer  the  position  of  Eden 
to  the  highlands  of  Armenia,  the  "  river "  from 
which  the  four  streams  diverge  is  conceived  to  mean 
"  a  collection  of  springs,"  or  a  well-watered  district. 
It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  say  that  this  signification 
of  "li"0  (ndhar)  is  wholly  without  a  parallel ;  and 
even  if  it  could,  under  certain  circumstances,  be 
made  to  adopt  it,  such  a  signification  is,  in  the 
present  instance,  precluded  by  the  fact  that,  what- 
ever meaning  we  may  assign  to  the  word  in  ver.  10, 
it  must  be  the  same  as  that  which  it  has  in  the 
following  verses,  in  which  it  is  sufficiently  definite. 
Sickler  (Augusti,  Theol.  Monatschrift.  i.  1,  quoted 
by  Winer),  supposing  the  whole  narrative  to  be  a 
myth,  solves  the  difficulty  by  attributing  to  its 
author  a  large  measure  of  ignorance.  The  "  river" 
was  the  Caspian  Sea,  which  in  his  apprehension 
was  an  immense  stream  from  the  east,  Bertheau, 
applying  the  geographical  knowledge  of  the  ancients 
as  a  test  of  that  of  the  Hebrews,  arrived  at  the 
same  conclusion,  on  the  ground  that  all  the  people 
south  of  the  Armenian  and  Persian  highlands  place 
the  dwelling  of  the  gods  in  the  extreme  north,  and 
the  regions  of  the  Caspian  were  the  northern  limit 
of  the  horizon  of  the  Israelites  (Knobel,  Genesis). 
But  he  allows  the  four  rivers  of  Eden  to  have  been 
real  rivers,  and  not,  as  Sickler  imagined,  oceans 
which  bounded  the  earth  east  and  west  of  the  Nile. 

That  the  Hiddekel8  is  the  Tigris,  and  the  Phrath 
the  Euphrates,  has  never  been  denied,  except  by 
those  who  assume  that  the  whole  narrative  is  a 
myth  which  originated  elsewhere,  and  was  adapted 
by  the  Hebrews  to  their  own  geographical  notions. 
As  the  former  is  the  name  of  the  great  river  by 
which  Daniel  sat  (Dan.  x.  4),  and  the  latter  is  the 
term  uniformly  applied  to  the  Euphrates  in  the 
Old  Testament,  there  seems  no  reason  to  suppose 
that  the  appellations  in  Gen.  ii.  14  are  to  be  under- 
stood in  any  other  than  the  ordinary  'sense.  One 
circumstance  in  the  description  is  worthy  of  ob- 
seivaiiuii.  Of  the  four  rivers,  one,  the  Euphrates, 
is  mentioned  by  name  only,  as  if  thai  were  suffi- 
cient to  identify  it.  The  other  three  are  defined 
according  to  their  geographical  positions,  and  it  is 
fair  to  conclude  that    they   were  therefore   rivers 


"  This  name   i<   said   to  be   still   in   use  among  the 

tribes  who  live  upon  is  kinks  (Ceil.  Chesney,  V.rp.  to 
Tigris  and  Euphrates,  i.  13). 

2  I  2 


484 


EDEN 


with  which  the  Hebrews  were  less  intimately  ac- 
quainted. It' this  be  the  case,  it  is  scarcely  possible 
to  imagine  that  the  Gihon,  or,  as  some  say,  the 
Fison,  is  the  Nile,  for  that  must  have  been  even 
move  familiar  to  the  Israelites  than  the  Euphrates, 
and  have  stood  as  little  in  need  of  a  definition. 

With  regard  to  the  Pison,  the  most  ancient  and 
most  universally  received  opinion  identifies  it  with 
the  Ganges.  Josephus  (Ant.  i.  1  §3),  Eusebius 
(Onomast.  s.v.),  Ambrosius  (<lc  Parad.  c.  :>),  Epi- 
phanius  (Ancor.  c.  58),  Ephr.  Syr.  (Op.  Syr.  i. 
23),  Jerome  (Ep.  4  ad  Bust,  and  Quaes}.  Hub.  in 
Gen.),  and  Augustine  (de  Gen.  ad  lit.  viii.  7)  held 
this.  But  Jarchi  (on  Gen.  ii.  11),  Saadiah  Gaon, 
I!.  Moses'  ben  Nachman,  and  Abr.  Peritsol  (Ugol. 
Thes.  vii.),  maintained  that  the  Fison  was  the 
Nile.  The  first  of  these  writers  derives  the  word 
from  a  root  which  signifies  "  to  increase,"  "  to 
overflow  "  (cf.  Hab.  i.  8),  but  at  the  same  time 
quotes  an  etymology  given  in  Bereshith  rabba,  §16, 
in  which  it  is  asserted  that  the  river  is  called  Pison 
"because  it  makes  the  flax  (jnt^'3)  to  grow." 
Josephus  explains  it  by  Trkrjdvs,  Scaliger  by  ttAtj/x- 
fivpa.  The  theory  that  the  Pison  is  the  Ganges  is 
thought  to  receive  some  confirmation  from  the 
author  of  the  book  of  Ecclesiasticus,  who  metitions 
(xxiv.  25,  27)  in  order  the  Pison,  the  Tigris,  the 
Euphrates,  Jordan,  and  Gihon,  and  is  supposed  to 
have  commence;!  his  enumeration  in  the  east  and 
to  have  terminated  it  in  the  west.  That  the 
Pison  was  the  Indus  was  an  opinion  current  long 
before  it  was  revived  by  Ewald  (Gesch.d.  Volk. 
Isr.  i.  331,  note  2)  and  adopted  by  Kalisch 
(Genesis,  p.  96).  Philostorgius,  quoted  by  Huet 
(Ugolin.  vol.  vii.),  conjectured  that  it  was  the 
Hydaspes;  and  Wiltbrd  (As.  Bes.  vol.  vi.)5  follow- 
ing the  Hindoo  tradition  with  regard  to  the  origin 
of  mankind,  discovers  the  Pison  in  the  Landi-Sindh, 
the  Ganges  of  Isidorus,  called  also  Nildb  from  the 
colour  of  its  waters,  and  known  to  the  Hindoos 
by  the  name  of  NiM-Gangfi  or  Ganga  simply. 
Severianus  (de  Mundi  Creat.)  and  Ephraem  Syrus 
(Comm.  on  Gen.)  agree  with  Caesarius  in  identi- 
fying the  Pison  with  the  Danube.  The  last-men- 
tioned father  seems  to  have  held,  in  common  with 
others,  some  singular  notions  with  regard  to  the 
course  of  this  river.  He  believed  that  it  was  also 
the  Ganges  and  Indus,  and  that,  after  traversing 
Ethiopia  and  Elymais,  which  he  identified  with 
Havilah,  it  fell  into  the  ocean  near  Cadiz.  Such  is 
also  the  opinion  of  Epiphanius  with  regard  to  the 
course  of  the  Pison,  which  he  says  is  the  Ganges  of  the 
Ethiopians  and  Indians  and  the  Indus  of  the  Greeks 
(Ancor.  c.  58).  Some,  as  Hopkinson  (Ugol.  vol. 
vii.),  have  found  the  Pison  in  the  Naharmalca,  one 
of  the  artificial  canals  which  formerly  joined  the 
Euphrates  with  the  Tigris.  This  canal  is  the 
fluinen  regium  of  Amm.  Marc,  (xxiii.  6  §25,  and 
xxiv.  6  §1),  and  the  Armalchar  of  Pliny  (N.  H. 
vi.  30).  Grotius,  on  the  contrary,  considered  it  to 
be  the  Gihon.  Even  those  commentators  who 
agree  in  placing  the  terrestrial  Paradise  on  the 
Shot-el- Arab,  the  stream  formed  by  the  junction 
of  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates,  between  Ctesiphon 
and  Apamea,  are  by  no  means  unanimous  as  to 
which  of  the  hranches,  into  which  this  stream  is 
again  divided,  the  names  Pison  and  Gihon  are  to  be 
applied.  Calvin  (Comm,  in  Gen.)  was  the  fiist  to 
conjecture  that  the  Pison  was  the  most  easterly  of 
these  channels,  and  in  this  opinion  he  is  lollowed 
by  Scaliger  and  many  others.  Huet,  on  the  other 
hand,  conceived  that  he   proved  beyond  doubt   that 


EDEN 

Calvin  was  in  error,  and  that  the  Pison  was  the 
westernmost  of  the  two  channels  by  which  the 
united  stream  of  the  Euphrates  and  Tigris  falls  into 
the  Persian  Gulf.  He  was  confirmed  by  the  au- 
thority of  Bochart  (Hieroz.  pt.  ii.  1.  5,  c.  5). 
Junius  (Prael.  in  Gen.)  and  Kask  discovered  a 
relic'  of  the  name  Pison  in  the  Pasitigris.  The 
advocates  of  the  theory  that  the  true  position  of 
Eden  is  to  be  sought  for  in  the  mountains  of 
Armenia  have  been  induced,  from  a  certain  resem- 
blance in  the  two  names,  to  identify  the  Fison  with 
the  Phasis,  which  rises  in  the  elevated  plateau  at 
the  foot  of  Mount  Ararat,  near  the  sources  of  the 
Tigris  and  Euphrates.  Reland  (de  Situ  parad.  terr. 
Ugol.  vii.),  Calmet  (Diet.  s.  v.),  Link  (Ur<rell, 
i.  307),  Kosenmiiller  (Handb.  d.  Bibl.  Alt.),  and 
Hartmann  have  given  their  suffrages  in  favour  of 
this  opinion.  Raumer  (quoted  by  Delitzsch,  Ge- 
nesis) endeavoured  to  prove  that  the  Pison  was  the 
Phasis  of  Xenophon  (Anab.  iv.  6),  that  is,  the  Arks 
or  Araxes,  which  flows  into  the  Caspian  Sea. 
There  remain  yet  to  be  noticed  the  theories  of 
Leclerc  (Comm.  in  Gen.~)  that  the  Pison  was  the 
Chrysorrhoas,  the  modern  Barada,  which  takes  its 
rise  near  Damascus ;  and  that  of  Buttmann  (Aelt. 
Erdk.  p.  32)  who  identified  it  with  the  Besynga  or 
Irabatti,  a  river  of  Ava.  Mendelssohn  (Comm.  on 
Gen.)  mentions  that  some  affirm  the  Pison  to  be 
the  Gozan  of  2  K.  xvii.  6  and  1  Chr.  v.  26,  which 
is  supposed  to  be  a  river,  and  the  same  with  the 
Kizil-Uzen  in  Hyrcania.  Colonel  Chesuey,  from 
the  results  of  extensive  observations  in  Armenia, 
was  '"led  to  infer  that  the  rivers  known  by  the 
comparatively  modem  names  of  Halys  and  Araxes 
are  those  which,  in  the  book  of  Genesis,  have  the 
names  of  Pison  and  Gihon ;  and  that  the  country 
within  the  former  is  the  land  of  Havilah,  whilst 
that  which  borders  upon  the  latter  is  the  still  more 
remarkable  country  of  Cush."  (Exp.  to  Etiphr. 
and  Tigris,  i.  267.) 

Such,  in  brief,  is  a  summary  of  the  various  con- 
jectures which  have  been  advanced,  with  equal 
degrees  of  confidence,  by  the  writers  who  have 
attempted  to  solve  the  problem  of  Eden.  The 
majority  of  them  are  characterised  by  one  common 
defect.  In  the  narrative  of  Genesis  the  river 
Pison  is  defined  as  that  which  surrounds  the  whole 
land  of  Havilah.  It  is,  then,  absolutely  necessary 
to  fix  the  position  of  Havilah  before  proceeding  to 
identify  the  Pison  with  any  particular  river.  But 
the  process  followed  by  most  critics  has  been  first  to 
find  the  Pison  and  then  to  look  about  for  the  land 
of  Havilah.  The  same  invei  ted  method  is  charac- 
teristic of  their  whole  manner  of  treating  the 
problem.  The  position  of  the  garden  is  assigned, 
the  rivers  are  then  identified,  and  lastly  the  coun- 
tries mentioned  in  the  description  are  so  chosen  as 
to  coincide  with  the  rest  of  the  theory. 

With  such  diversity  of  opinion  as  to  the  river 
which  is  intended  to  be  represented  by  the  Pison, 
it  was  scarcely  possible  that  writers  on  this  subject 
should  be  unanimous  in  their  selection  of  a  country 
possessing  the  attributes  of  Havilah.  In  Gen.  ii. 
11,  12,  it  is  described  as  the  land  where  the  best 
gold  was  found,  and  which  was  besides  rich  in  the 
treasures  of  the  b'dolach  and  the  stone  shoham.  A 
country  of  the  same  name  is  mentioned  as  forming 
one  of  the  boundaries  of  Ishmael's  descendants 
(Cen.  xxv.  18),  and  the  scene  of  Saul's  war  of 
extermination  against  the  Amalekites  ( 1  Sam.  xv. 
7).  In  these  passages  Havilah  seems  to  denote  the 
desert    region    south-east   of  Palestine.      But    the 


EDEN 

word  occurs  also  as  the  proper  name  of  a  son  of 
Joktan,  in  close  juxtaposition  with  Sheba  and 
Ophir,  also  sons  of  Joktan  and  descendants  of  Shorn 
(Gen.  x.  "21)),  who  gave  their  names  to  the  spice 
and  gold  countries  of  the  south.  Again,  Havilah 
is  enumerated  among  the  Hamites  as  one  of  the 
sous  of  Cush  ;  and  in  this  enumeration  his  name 
stands  in  close  connexion  with  Seba,  Sheba,  and 
Dedan,  the  first  founders  of  colonies  in  Ethiopia  and 
Arabia  which  afterwards  bore  their  names.  If, 
therefore,  the  Havilah  of  Gen.  ii.  be  identical  with 
any  one  of  these  countries,  we  must  look  for  it  on 
the  east  or  south  of  Arabia,  and  probably  not  far 
from  the  Persian  Gulf.  In  other  respects,  too,  this 
region  answers  to  the  conditions  required.  Bochart, 
indeed,  thought  the  name  survived  in  Chaula, 
which  was  situated  on  the  east  side  of  the  Arabian 
Gulf,  and  which  he  identified  with  the  abode  of 
the  Shemitic  Joktanites ;  but  if  his  etymology  be 
correct,  in  which  he  connects  Havilah  with  the 
root  7lH  "  sand,"  the  appellation  of  "  the  sandy  " 
region  would  not  necessarily  be  restricted  to  one 
locality.  That  the  name  is  derived  fiom  some 
natural  peculiarity  is  evident  from  the  presence  of 
the  article.  Whatever  may  be  the  true  meaning  of 
b'dolach,  be  it  caibuncle,  crystal,  bdellium,  ebony, 
pepper,  cloves,  beryl,  pearl,  diamond,  or  emerald, 
all  critics  detect  its  presence,  under  one  or  other  of 
these  forms,  in  the  country  which  they  select  as 
the  Havilah  most  appropriate  to  their  own  theory. 
As  little  difficulty  is  presented  by  the  shoham:  call 
it  onyx,  sardonyx,  emerald,  sapphire,  beryl,  or 
sardius,  it  would  be  hard  indeed  if  some  ot  these 
precious  stones  could  not  be  found  in  any  conceiv- 
able locality  to  support  even  the  most  far-fetched 
and  improbable  conjecture.  That  Havilah  is  that 
part  of  India  through  which  the  Ganges  flows,  and, 
more  generally,  the  eastern  region  of  the  earth ; 
that  it  is  to  be  found  in  Susiana  (Hopkinson),  in 
Ava  (But'tmann),  or  in  the  Ural  region  (Raumer), 
are  conclusions  necessarily  following  upon  the  as- 
sumptions with  regard  to  the  Pison.  Haitmann, 
Keland,  and  Rosenmuller  are  in  favour  of  Colchis, 
the  scene  of  the  legend  of  the  Golden  Kleece.  The 
Phasis  was  said  to  flow  over,  golden  sands,  and 
gold  was  carried  down  by  the  mountain-tun  cuts 
(Strains  xi.  :.',  §11)).  The  crystal  {b'dolach  of 
Scythia  was  renowned  (Solinus,  c.  xx.:,  and  the 
emeralds  {shoham)  of  this  country  were  as  far 
superior  to  other  emeralds,  as  the  latter  were  to 
other  precious  stones  (Plin.  //.  A",  xxxvii.  17  i,  all 
which  proves,  say  they,  that  Havilah  was  Colchis, 
Rosenmuller argues,  rather  strangely,  //the  Phasis 
he  the  Pison,  the  land  of  Havilah  must  be  Colchis, 
supposing  that  by  this  country  the  Hebrews  had 
the  idea  of  a  Pontic  or  Northern  India.  In  like 
manner  Leclerc,  having  previously  determined  thai 
the  Pison  must  lie  the  Chrysorrhoas,  finds  Havilah 
not  tin-  from  Coele  Syria.  llnsM'  (Entdeck.  pp. 
49,  50,  quoted  by  Rosenmuller)  compares  Havilah 
with  the  "tKala.  of  Herodotus  (iv.  9),  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  the  Arimaspians,  and  the 
winch  guarded  the  land  of  gold.  For  all  these 
hypotheses  there  is  uo  more  support  than  the 
m<',  est  conjecture. 

The  second  river  of  Paradise  presents  difficulties 
not  less  insurmountable  than  the  Pison.  Those 
who  maintained  that  the  Pison  is  the  Ganges  held 
also  that  the  Gihon  was  the  Nile.  One  objection 
to  this  theory  has  been  already  mentioned.  Ann- 
tier,  equally  strong,  is,  that  although  in  the  bonks 
of  the  Old  Testament  frequeni  allusion  is  made  to 


EDEN 


4S5 


this  river,  it  nowhere  appears  to  have  been  known 
to  the  Hebrews  by  the  name  Gihon.  The  idea 
seems  to  have  originated  with  the  LXX.  rendering 
of  "hITB'  by  Yy&v  in  Jer.  ii.  18;  but  it  is  clear 
from  the  manner  in  which  the  translators  have 
given  the  latter  clause  of  the  same  passage  that 
they  had  no  conception  of  the  true  meaning. 
Among  modern  writers,  Bertheau  (quoted  by  De- 
litzsch,  Genesis)  and  Kalisch  {Genesis)  have  not 
hesitated  to  support  this  interpretation,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  principle  they  adopt,  that  the  de- 
scription of  the  garden  of  Eden  is  to  be  explained 
according  to  the  most  ancient  notions  of  the  earth's 
surface,  without  reference  to  the  advances  made  in 
later  times  in  geographical  knowledge.  If  this 
hypothesis  be  adopted,  it  certainly  explains  some 
features  of  the  narrative ;  but,  so  far  from  re- 
moving the  ditliculty,  it  introduces  another 'equally 
great.  It  has  yet  to  be  proved  that  the  opinions 
of  the  Hebrews  on  these  points  were  as  contradic- 
tory to  the  now  well-known  relations  of  land  and 
water  as  the  recorded  impressions  of  other  nations 
at  a  much  later  period.  At  present  we  have 
nothing  but  categorical  assertion.  Pausanias  (ii. 
5),  indeed,  records  a  legend  that  the  Euphrates, 
after  disappearing  in  a  marsh,  rises  again  beyond 
Ethiopia,  and  flows  through  Egypt  as  the  Nile. 
Arrian  {Exp.  Alex.  vi.  1)  relates  that  Alexander, 
on  finding  crocodiles  in  the  Indus,  and  beans  like 
those  of  Egypt  on  the  banks  of  the  Acesines,  ima- 
gined that  he  had  discovered  the  sources  of  the 
Nile  ;  but  he  adds,  what  those  who  make  use  of 
this  passage  do  not  find  it  convenient  to  quote, 
that  on  receiving  more  accurate  information  Alex- 
ander abandoned  his  theory,  and  cancelled  the  letter 
he  had  written  to  his  mother  Olympias  on  the 
subject.  It  is  but  fair  to  say  that  there  was  at  one 
time  a  theory  afloat  that  the  Nile  lose  in  a  moun- 
tain of  Lower  Mauretania  (Plin.  H.  N.  v.  10). 

The  etymology  of  Gihon  (ITU,  to  burst  forth) 
seems  to  indicate  that  it  was  a  swiftly-flowing  im- 
petuous stream.    According  to  Golius  {Lex.  And).), 

,,i(LSVAi»  {Jichoon)  is  the  name  given  to  the 
Oxus,  which  has,  on  this  account,  been  assumed  by 
Rosenmuller,  Hartmann,  and  Michael  is  to  be  the 
Gihon  of  Scripture.  But  the  Araxes,  too,  is  called 
I  by  the  Persians  Jichoon  ar-Mas,  and  from  this  cir- 
cumstance it  has  been  adopted  by  Reland,  Calmet, 
and  Col.  Chesney  as  the  modern  representative  of 
the  Gihon.  It  is  clear,  therefore,  that  the  question 
is  nut  to  be  decided  by  etymology  alone,  as  the  name 
might  be  appropriately  applied  to  many  rivers.  That 

tin'  Gihon  should  be  one  of  the  channels  hy  which  the 

united  stream  of  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates  falls  into 
the  Persian  Gulf,  was  essential  to  the  theory  which 
places  the  garden  of  Eden  on  the  Sliat-l-Arab. 
Bochart  and  Huef  contended  thai  it  was  th< 
eramost  of  these  channels,  while  Calvin  considered 
it. to  be  the  must  westei ly.  Hopkinson  and  Junius, 
conceiving  that  Eden  was  to  he  tumid  in  the 
region  of  Auranitis  i Edenitis)  on 

the  Euphrates,  were  compelled  to  make  the  Gihon 
coincide  with  the  Naharsar,  the  Marses  of  Amm. 
Marc,  (xxiii.  6,  §25).  Thai  it  should  be  the 
( hontes  |  Lecl  i c  .  the  ( langes  Buttmann  and 
Ewald),  the  Kur,  or  Cyrus,  which  rises  from  the 
-ile  of  the  Saghanlou  mountain,  a  few  miles 
northward   of  the   sources  of  the  Ara 

ih    followed    from    the  of   the 

several  theories.  Rask  and  Verbruggc  are  in 
favour  of  the  Gyndes  of  the  ancients  (Her.  i.  189), 


486 


EDEN 


now  called  the  Diyalah,  one  of  the  tributaries  of 
the  Tigris.  Abraham  Peritsol  (Ugol.  vol.  vii.)  was 
of  opinion  that  the  garden  of  Eden  was  situated  in 
the  region  of  the  Mountains  of  the  Moon.  Identi- 
fying the  Pison  with  the  Nile,  and  the  Gihon  with 
a  river  which  his  editor,  Hyde,  explains  to  be  the 
Niger,  he  avoids  the  difficulty  which  is  presented 
by  the  fact  that  the  Hiddekel  and  P'rath  are  rivers 
of  Asia,  by  conceiving  it  possible  that  these  rivers 
actually  take  their  rise  in  the  Mountains  of  the 
Moon,  and  run  underground  till  they  make  their 
appearance  in  Assyria.  Equally  satisfactory  is  the 
explanation  of  Ephraem  Syrus  that  the  four  rivers 
have  their  source  in  Paradise,  which  is  situated  in 
a  very  lofty  place,  but  are  swallowed,  up  by  the 
surrounding  districts,  and  after  passing  underneath 
the  sea,  come  to  light  again  in  different  quarters  of 
the  globe.  It  may  be  worth  while  remarking,  by 
the  way,  that  the  opinions  of  this  father  are  fre- 
quently misunderstood  in  consequence  of  the  very 
inadequate  Latin  translation  with  which  his  Syriac 
works  are  accompanied,  and  which  often  does  not 
contain  even  an  approximation  to  the  true  sense. 
(For  an  example,  see  Kalisch,  Genesis,  p.  95.) 

From  etymological  considerations,  Huet  was  in- 
duced to  place  Cush  in  Chusistan  (called  Cutha, 
2  K.  xvii.  24),  Leclerc  in  Cassiotis  in  Syria,  and 
Reland  in  the  "  regio  Cossaeorum."  Bochart  iden- 
tified it  with  Susiana,  Link  with  the  country  about 
the  Caucasus,  and  Hartmann  with  Bactria  or  Bfilkh, 
the  site  of  Paradise  being,  in  this  case,  in  the  cele- 
brated vale  of  Kashmir.  The  term  Cush  is  gene- 
rally applied  in  the  Old  Testament  to  the  countries 
south  of  the  Israelites.  It  was  the  southern  limit 
of  Egypt  (Ez.  xxix.  10),  and  apparently  the  most 
westerly  of  the  provinces  over  which  the  rule  of 
Ahasuerus  extended,  "  from  India,  even  unto  Ethi- 
opia" (Esth.  i.  1,  viii.  9).  Egypt  and  Cush  are 
associated  in  the  majority  of  instances  in  which  the 
word  occurs  (Ps.  lxviii.  31  :  Is.  xviii.  1 ;  Jer.  xlvi. 
9,  &c.)  ;  but  in  two  passages  Cush  stands  in  close 
juxtaposition  with  Elam  (Is.  xi.  11),  and  Persia 
(Ez.  xxxviii.  5).  The  Cushite  king,  Zerah,  was 
utterly  defeated  by  Asa  at  Mareshah,  and  pursued 
as  far  as  Gerar,  a  town  of  the  Philistines,  on  the 
southern  border  of  Palestine,  which  was  apparently 
under  his  sway  (2  Chr.  xiv.  9,  &c).  In  2  Chr. 
xxi.  16,  the  Arabians  are  described  as  dwelling 
"  beside  the  Cushites,"  and  both  are  mentioned  in 
connexion  with  the  Philistines.  The  wife  of  Moses, 
who,  we  leara  from  Ex.  ii.,  was  the  daughter  of  a 
Midianite  chieftain,  is  in  Num.  xii.  1  denominated 
a  Cushite.  Further,  Cush  and  Seba  (Is.  xliii.  3), 
Cush  and  the  Sabaeans  (Is.  xlv.  14)  are  associated 
in  a  maimer  consonant  with  the  genealogy  of  the 
descendants  of  Ham  (Gen.  x.  7),  in  which  Seba  is 
the  son  of  Cush.  From  all  these  circumstances  it 
is  evident  that  under  the  denomination  Cush  were 
included  both  Arabia  and  the  country  south  of 
Egypt  on  the  western  coast  of  the  Red  Sea.  It  is 
possible,  also,  that  the  vast  desert  tracts  west  "of 
Egypt  were  known  to  the  Hebrews  as  the  land  of 
Cush,  but  of  this  we  have  no  certain  proof.  The 
Targumist  on  Is.  xi.  11,  sharing  the  prevailing 
error  of  his  time,  translates  Cush  by  India,  but  that 
a  better  knowledge  of  the  relative  positions  of  these 
countries  was  anciently  possessed  is  clear  from  Esth. 
i.  1.  With  all  this  evidence  for  the  southern  situa- 
tion of  Cush,  on  what  grounds  are  Rosenmiiller  and 
others  justified  in  applying  the  term  to  a  more 
northern  region  on  the  banks  of  the  Oxus?  We 
are  told  that,  in  the  Hindoo  mythology,  the  gardens 


EDEN 

and  metropolis  of  India  are  placed  around  the  moun- 
tain Meru,  the  celestial  north  pole;  that,  among 
the  Babylonians  and  Medo-Persians,  the  gods'  moun- 
tain, Albordj,  "  the  mount  of  the  congregation," 
was  believed  to  be  "  in  the  sides  of  the  north"  (Is. 
xiv.  13);  that  the  oldest  Greek  traditions  point 
northwards  to  the  birthplace  of  gods  and  men  ;  and 
that,  for  all  these  reasons,  the  Paradise  of  the  He- 
brews must  be  sought  for  in  some  far  distant  hy- 
perborean region.  Guided  by  such  unerring  indi- 
cations, Hasse  (Entdeckungen,  pp.  49,  50,  n.~) 
scrupled  not  to  gratify  his  national  feeling  by 
placing  the  garden  of  Eden  on  the  coast  of  the 
Baltic ;  Rudbeck,  a  Swede,  found  it  in  Scandinavia, 
and  the  inhospitable  Siberia  has  not  been  without 
its  advocates  (Morren,  Rosenmuller's  Geog.  i.  96). 
But,  with  all  this  predilection  in  favour  of  the  north, 
the  Greeks  placed  the  gardens  of  the  Hesperides  in 
the  extreme  west,  and  there  are  strong  indications 
in  the  Puritnas  "  of  a  terrestrial  paradise,  different 
from  that  of  the  general  Hindu  system,  in  the 
southern  parts  of  Africa"  (As.  lies.  iii.  300). 
Even  Meru  was  no  further  north  than  the  Hima- 
layan range,  which  the  Aryan  race  crossed  in  their 
migrations. 

In  the  midst  of  this  diversity  of  opinions,  what 
is  the  true  conclusion  at  which  we  arrive?  Theory 
after  theory  has  been  advanced,  with  no  lack  of  con- 
fidence, but  none  has  been  found  which  satisfies  the 
required  conditions.  All  share  the  inevitable  fate 
of  conclusions  which  are  based  upon  inadequate  pre- 
mises. The  problem  may  be  indeterminate  because 
the  data  are  insufficient.  It  would  scarcely,  on  any 
other  hypothesis,  have  admitted  of  so  many  appa- 
rent solutions.  Still  it  is  one  not  easy  to  be  aban- 
doned, and  the  site  of  Eden  will  ever  rank,  with 
the  quadrature  of  the  circle  and  the  interpretation 
of  unfulfilled  prophecy,  among  those  unsolved,  and 
perhaps  insoluble,  problems,  which  possess  so  strange 
a  fascination. 

It  must  not  be  denied,  however,  that  other  me- 
thods of  meeting  the  difficulty,  than  those  above 
mentioned,  have  been  proposed.  Some,  ever  ready 
to  use  the  knife,  have  unhesitatingly  pronounced 
the  whole  narrative  to  be  a  spurious  interpolation 
of  a  later  age  (Granville  Penn,  Mm.  and  Mos. 
Geol.  p.  184).  But,  even  admitting  this,  the  words 
are  not  mere  unmeaning  jargon,  and  demand  expla- 
nation. Ewald  (Gesch.  i.  331,  note)  affirms,  and 
we  have  only  his  word  for  it,  that  the  tradition 
originated  in  the  far  East,  and  that  in  the  course 
of  its  wanderings  the  original  names  of  two  of  the 
rivers  at  least  were  changed  to  others  with  which 
the  Hebrews  were  better  acquainted.  Hartmann 
regards  it  as  a  product  of  the  Babylonian  or  Persian 
period.  Luther,  rejecting  the  forced  interpretations 
on  which  the  theories  of  his  time  were  based,  gave 
it  as  his  opinion  that  the  garden  remained  under 
the  guardianship  of  angels  till  the  time  of  the 
deluge,  and  that  its  site  was  known  to  the  descend- 
ants of  Adam  ;  but  that  by  the  flood  all  traces  of  it 
were  obliterated.  On  the  supposition  that  this  is 
correct,  there  is  still  a  difficulty  to  be  explained. 
The  narrative  is  so  worded  as  to  convey  the  idea 
that  the  countries  and  rivers  spoken  of  were  still 
existing  in  the  time  of  the  historian.  It  has  befn 
suggested  that  the  description  of  the  garden  of 
Eden  is  part  of  an  inspired  antediluvian  document 
(Morren,  Rosenmuller's  Geogr.  i.  92).  The  conjec- 
ture is  beyond  criticism;  it  is  equally  incapable  of 
proof  or  disproof,  and  has  not  much  probability  to 
recommend  it.     The  effects  of  the  flood  in  changing 


EDEN 

the  face  of  countries,  and  altering  the  relations  of 
land  and  water,  are  too  little  known  at  present  to 
allow  any  inferences  to  be  drawn  from  them. 
Meanwhile,  as  every  expression  of  opinion  results 
in  a  confession  of  ignorance,  it  will  be  more  honest 
to  acknowledge  the  difficulty  than  to  rest  satisfied 
with  a  fictitious  solution. 

The  idea  of  a  terrestrial  paradise,  the  abode  of 
purity  and  happiness,  has  forme!  an  element  in  the 
religious  beliefs  of  all  nations.  The  image  of 
"  Eden,  the  garden  of  God,"  retained  its  hold  upon 
the  minds  of  the  poets  and  prophets  of  Israel  as  a 
thing  of  beauty  whose  joys  had  departed  (Ez.  xxviii. 
13  ;  Joel  ii.  3),  and  before  whose  gates  the  cherubim 
still  stood  to  guard  it  from  the  guilty.  Arab  legends 
tell  of  a  garden  in  the  East,  on  the  summit  of  a 
mountain  of  jacinth,  inaccessible  to  man  ;  a  garden 
of  rich  soil  and  equable  temperature,  well  watered, 
and  abounding  with  trees  and  flowers  of  rare  colours 
and  fragrance.  In  the  centre  of  Jambu-dwipa,  the 
middle  of  the  seven  continents  of  the  Puranas,  is 
the  golden  mountain  Me'ru,  which  stands  like  the 
seed -cup  of  the  lotus  of  the  earth.  On  its  summit 
is  the  vast  city  of  Brahma,  renowned  in  heaven, 
and  encircled  by  the  Ganges,  which,  issuing  from 
the  foot  of  Vishnu,  washes  the  lunar  orb,  and  falling 
thither  from  the  skies,  is  divided  into  four  streams, 
that  flow  to  the  four  corners  of  the  earth.  These 
rivers  are  the  Bhadra,  or  Oby  of  Siberia  ;  the  Sita,  or 
Hoangho,  the  great,  river  of  China  ;  the  Alakananda, 
a  main  branch  of  the  Ganges  ;  and  the  Chakshu,  or 
Oxus.  In  this  abode  of  divinity  is  the  Nandana,  or 
grove  of  Indra ;  there  too  is  the  Jambu  tree,  from 
whose  fruit  are  fed  the  waters  of  the  Jambu  river, 
which  give  life  and  immortality  to  all  who  drink 
thereof.  (  Vishnu  I'urdna,  trans.  Wilson,  pp.  166- 
171.)  The  enchanted  gardens  of  the  Chinese  are 
placed  in  themidst  of  the  summits  of  Houanlun,  a  high 
chain  of  mountains  further  north  than  the  Himalaya, 
and  further  east  than  Iliudukush.  The  fountain  of 
immortality  which  waters  these  gardens  is  divided 
into  four  streams,  the  fountains  of  the  supreme 
spirit,  Tychin.  Among  the  Medo-Persians  the  gods' 
mountain  Albordj  is  the  dwelling  of  Ormuzd,  and 
the  good  spirits,  and  is  called  "  the  navel  of  the 
waters."  The  Zend  books  mention  a  region  called 
Heden,  and  the  place  of  Zoroaster's  birth  is  called 

Wedenesh,  or,  according  to  another  passage,  Airjaua 

Yeedjo  (Knobel,  Genesis). 

All  these  and  similar  traditions  are  but  mere 
mocking  echoes  of  the  old  Hebrew  story,  jarred  and 
broken  notes  of  the  same  strain  ;  but,  with  all  their 
'rations,  "they  intimate  how  in  the  back- 
ground of  man's  visions  lay  a  Paradise  of  holy  joy, — 
a  Paradise  secured  from  every  kind  of  profanation, 
and  made  inaccessible  to  the  guilty;  a  Paradise  full 
of  objects  that  were  calculated  to  delight  the  senses 
and  to  elevate  the  mind;  a  Paradise  that  granted 
to  its  tenant  rich  and  rare  immunities,  and  that 
fed  with  its  perennial  streams  the  tree  of  life  and 
immortality"  (Hardwick,  Christ  and  other  masters, 
pt.  ii.  p.  133).  [W.  A.  W.] 

EDEN,  1.  (]"!]};  *E8e>;  Eden;  omitted  by 
I. XX.  in  Is.  xxxvii.  L2,  and  Ez.  .\xvii.  23),  one 
of  the  marts  which  supplied  the  luxury  of  Tyre 
with  richly  embroidered  stuffs.  It  is  associated  with 
Haran,  Sheba,  and  Asshui  ;  and  in  Am.  i.  "•.  Beth- 
Eden,  or  "  the  house  of  Eden,"  is  rendered  in  the 
LXX.  by  Xappdv.  In  2  K.  xix.  12,  and  Is.  xxxvii. 
L2,  "the  sons  ot  Eden"  are  mentioned  with  Gozan, 
Haran,  and  Rezeph,  as  victims  of  the  Assyrian  greed 


EDER 


487 


of  conquest.  Telassar  appears  to  have  been  the 
head-quarters  of  the  tribe;  and  Knobel's  (Comm.  on 
Isaiali)  etymology  of  this  name  would  point  to  the 
highlands  of  Assyria  as  their  whereabouts.  But 
this  has  no  sound  foundation,  although  the  view 
which  it  supports  receives  confirmation  from  the 
version  of  Jonathan,  who  gives  2^*1  n  (  Chadih)  as 
the  equivalent  of  Eden.  Bochari  proved  (Phaleg, 
pt.  i.  p.  274)  that  this  term  was  applied  by  the 
Talmudic  writers  to  the  mountainous  district  of 
Assyria,  which  bordered  on  Media,  and  was  known 
as  Adiabene.  But  if  Gozan  be  Gausanitis  in  Meso- 
potamia, and  Haran  be  Carrhae,  it  seems  more 
natural  to  look  for  Eden  somewhere  in  the  same 
locality.  Keil  (Comm.  on  Kings,  ii.  97,  English 
translation)  thinks  it  may  be  .«.VO  (Ma'doii), 

which  Assemani  (Bib!.  Or.  ii.  224)  places  in  Meso- 
potamia, in  the  modern  province  of  Diarbekr. 
Bochart,  considering  the  Eden  of  Genesis  and 
Isaiah  as  identical,  argues  that  Gozan,  Haran, 
Rezeph,  and  Eden,  are  mentioned  in  order  of 
geographical  position,  from  north  to  south ;  and, 
identifying  Gozan  with  Gausanitis,  Haran  with 
Carrhae,  a  little  below  Gausanitis  on  the  Chabor, 
and  Rezeph  with  Reseipha,  gives  to  Eden  a  still 
more  southerly  situation  at  the  confluence  of  the 
Euphrates  and  Tigris,  or  even  lower.  According 
to  him,  it  may  be  Addan,  or  Addana,  which  geo- 
graphers place  on  the  Euphrates.  Michaelis  (Suppl. 
No.  1826)  is  in  favour  of  the  modern  Aden,  called 
by  Ptolemy  'ApajSi'as  ifj.ir6pi.ov,  as  the  Eden  of 
Ezekiel.  In  the  absence  of  positive  evidence,  pro- 
bability seems  to  point  to  the  N.W.  of  Mesopotamia 
as  the  locality  of  Eden. 

2.  Beth-Eden  (pJJ  1V3,  "house  of  pleasure;" 
&v5pes  Xappdv ;  domus  nohiptatis),  probably  the 
name  of  a  country  residence  of  the  kings  of  Da- 
mascus (Am.  i.  -5).  Michaelis  (Suppl.  ad  Leg. 
Hebr.  s.  v.),  following  Laroque's  description,  and 
misled  by  an  apparent  resemblance  in  name, 
identified  it  with  Ehden,  about  a  day's  journey 
from  Baalbek,  on  the  eastern  slope  of  the  Li- 
banus,  and  near  the  old  cedars  of  Bshirrai.  Baur 
(Amos,  p.  224),  in  accordance  with  the  Moham- 
medan tradition,  that  one  of  the  four  terrestrial 
paradises  was  in  the  valley  between  the  ranges  of 
the  Libanus  and  Anti-Libanus,  is  inclined  to  favour 
the  same  hypothesis.  But  Grotius,  with  greater 
appearance  of  probability,  pointed  to  the  irapaSfiffos 
of  Ptolemy  (v.  15)  as  the  locality  of  Eden.  The 
ruins  of  the  village  of  Jusieh  cl-Kadlmeh,  now  a 
paradise  no  longer,  aie  supposed  by  Dr.  Robinson  to 
mark  the  site  of  the  ancient  Paradisus,  and  his  sug- 
gestion is  approved  by  Mr.  Porter  (  Uandb.  p.  577  ). 
Again,  it  has  been  conjectured  that  Beth  Eden  is 
no  other  than  Bcit-Jenn,  "  the  house  of  Paradise." 
not  far  to  the  south-west  of  Damascus,  on  the 
eastern  slope  of  the  Hermon,  and  a  short  distance 
from  Medjel.  It  stands  on  a  branch  of  the  ancient 
Pharpar,  near  its  source  (Rosenmiiller,  BM.  Alt. 
ii.  291  ;  Hitzig,  Amos,  in  loc. ;  Porter,  Damascus, 
i  1  1  ).  1  ut  all  tins  a  mere  conjecture  ;  it  is  mi- 
possible,  with  any  degree  ot'  certainty,  to  connect  the 
Arabic  name,  bestowed  since  the  time  of  Mohammed, 
with  the  more  ancient  Hebrew  appellation,  whatever 
be  the  apparent  resemblai  i  [W.  A.  \V.] 

E'DEK  (T1J?,  "a  flock;"  Vat,  omits;  Alex. 
'E8po.ii> ;  Eder),  one  of  the  towns  of  Judah  in 
the  extreme  south,  and  on  the  borders  of  Edom 
(Josh.  .w.  _M  ).     No  trace  of  it  has  been  discovered 


488 


EDES 


in  modern  times,  unless,  as  has  been  suggested,  it  is 
identical  with  Arad,  by  a  transposition  of  letters. 

2.(!E$ep,l£der).  ALevite  of  the  family  of  Me- 
rari,  in  the  time  of  David  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  23,  xxiv. 
30).  [G.] 

E'DES  ('H5afr;  Esmi),  1  Esdr.  ix.  35.     [Ja- 

DAU.] 

ED'NA  C'EBva,  i.  e.  iiny,  pleasure ;  Anna), 
the  wife  of  Raguel  (Tob.  vii."  2,  8,  14,  16  ;  x.  12; 
xi.  1).  [B.  F.  W.] 

E'DOM,  IDUME'A,  or  IDUMAE'A  (DHN, 

red;  'ESwfi;  N.  T.  'l5ovjj.a(a,  only  in  Mark  iii.  8). 
The  name  Edom  was  given  to  Esau,  the  first- 
born son  of  Isaac,  and  twin  brother  of  Jacob,  when 
he  sold  his  birthright  to  the  latter  for  a  meal  of 
lentile  pottage.  The  peculiar  colour  of  the  pottage 
gave  rise  to  the  name  Edom,  which  signifies  "  red." 
"  And  Esau  said  to  Jacob,  Feed  me,  I  pray  thee, 
with  that  same  red  pottage;  for  I  am  faint;  there- 
fore was  his  name  called  Edom"  (Gen.  xxv.  29-34). 
The  country  which  the  Lord  subsequently  gave  to 
Esau  was  hence  called  the  "  field  of  Edom  "  (mt^ 
DHX,  Gen.  xxxii.  3),  or  "land  of  Edom"  (pN 
DIIX,  Gen.  xxxvi.  1G;  Num.  xxxiii.  37).  Pro- 
bably its  physical  aspect  may  have  had  something 
to  do  with  this.  The  Easterns  have  always  been, 
and  to  the  present  day  are,  accustomed  to  apply 
names  descriptive  of  the  localities.  The  ruddy  hue 
of  the  mountain-range  given  to  Esau  would  at  once 
suggest  the  word  Edom,  and  cause  it  to  be  pre- 
ferred to  the  better-known  Esau.  The  latter  was 
also  occasionally  used,  as  in  Obad.  8,  9,  19;  and  in 
21,  we  have  "  the  Mount  of  Esau"  ()k>])  1HT1X). 
Edom  was  previously  called  Mount  Seir  ("V^C 
rugged;  Gen.  xxxii.  3,  xxxvi.  8),  from,  Seir  the 
progenitor  of  the  Horites  (Gen.  xiv.  6,  xxxvi.  20- 
22).  The  name  Seir  was  perhaps  adopted  on  ac- 
count of  its  being  descriptive  of  the  "  rugged  "  cha- 
racter of  the  territory.  Josephus  {Ant.  i.  18,  §1) 
confounds  the  words  Seir  and  Esau,  and  seems  to 
affirm  that  the  name  Seir  was  also  derived  from 
Isaac's  son ;  but  this  idea  is  opposed  to  the  express 
statement  of  Moses  (Gen.  xiv.  6).  The  original 
inhabitants  of  the  country  were  called  Horites, 
from  Hori,  the  grandson  of  Seir  (Gen.  xxxvi.  20, 
22),  because  that  name  was  descriptive  of  their 
habits  as  "  Troglodytes,"  or  "dwellers  in  caves" 
("Hn,  Horites).  Timna,  the  daughter  of  Seir 
and  aunt  of  Hori,  became  concubine  to  Eliphaz, 
Esau's  oldest  son,  and  bare  to  him  Amalek,  the 
progenitor  of  the  Amalekites  (Gen.  xxxvi.  12,  20, 
22).  Immediately  after  the  death  of  Isaac,  Esau 
left  Canaan  and  took  possession  of  Mount  Seir  (Gen. 
xxxv.  28,  xxxvi.  6,  7,  8).  When  his  descendants 
increased  they  extirpated  the  Horites,  and  adopted 
their  habits  as  well  as  their  country  (Deut.  ii.  12  ; 
Jer.  xlix.  1(3;  Obad.  3,4). 

The  boundaries  of  Edom,  though  not  directly, 
are  yet  incidentally  defined  with  tolerable  distinct- 
ness in  the  Bible.  The  country  lay  along  the 
route  pursued  by  the  Israelites  from  the  peninsula 
of  Sinai  to  Kadesh-barnea,  and  thence  back  again 
to  Elath  (Deut.  i.  2,  ii.  1-8)  ;  that  is,  along  the 
east  side  of  the  great  valley  of  Arabah.  It  reached 
southward  as  tar  as  Elath,  which  stood  at  the 
northern  end  of  the  gulf  of  Elath,  and  was  the  sea- 
port of  the  Edomites  ;  but  it  does  not  seem  to  have 


EDOM 

extended  farther,  as  the  Israelites  on  passing  Elath 
struck  out  eastward  into  the  desert,  so  as  to  pass 
round  the  land  of  Edom  (Deut.  ii.  8).  On  the 
north  of  Edom  lay  the  territory  of  Moab,  through 
which  the  Israelites  were  also  prevented  from  going, 
and  were  therefore  compelled  to  go  from  Kadesh 
by  the  southern  extremity  of  Edom  (Judg.  xi.  17, 
18  ;  2  K.  iii.  6-9).  The  boundary  between  Moab 
and  Edom  appears  $o  have  been  the  "brook  Zered" 
(Deut.  ii.  13,  14,  18),  probably  the  modern  Wady- 
el-Ahsy,  which  still  divides  the  provinces  of  Kerak 
(Moab)  and  Jebal  (Gebalene).  But  Edom  was 
wholly  a  mountainous  country.  "Mount  Seir" 
(Gen.  xiv.  6,  xxxvi.  8,  9  ;  Deut.  i.  2,  ii.  1,  5,  &c.) 
and  "the  Mount  of  Esau"  (Obad.  8,  9,  19,  21), 
are  names  often  given  to  it  in  the  Bible,  while 
Josephus  and  later  writers  called  it  Gebalene  ("the 
mountainous").  This  shows  that  it  only  embraced 
the  narrow  mountainous  tract  (about  100  miles 
long  by  20  broad)  extending  along  the  eastern  side 
of  the  Arabah  from  the  northern  end  of  the  gulf  of 
Elath  to  near  the  southern  end  of  the  Dead  Sea.  A 
glance  at  the  more  modern  divisions  and  names 
corroborates  this  view.  Josephus  divides  Edom, 
or  Idumaea,  into  two  provinces ;  the  one  he  calls 
Gobolitis  (To^o\irts),  and  the  other  Amalekitis 
{Ant.  ii.  1,  §2).  The  former  is  Edom  Proper,  or 
Mount  Seir;  the  latter  is  the  region  south  of  Pa- 
lestine now  called  the  desert  of  et-Tih,  or  "  Wan- 
dering," originally  occupied  by  the  Amalekites 
(Num.  xiii.  29  ;  1  Sam.  xv.  1-7,  xxvii.  8),  but 
afterwards,  as  we  shall  see,  possessed  by  the  Edom- 
ites. Eusebius  also  gives  the  name  Gabalene,  or 
Gebalene,  as  identical  with  Edom  (Onom.  s.  v. 
Seir,  Idumaea,  Alius,  &c),  and  in  the  Samaritan 
Pentateuch  the  word  Gabla  is  substituted  for  -Seir 
in  Deut.  xxxiii.  2.     Gebalene  is  the  Greek  form  of 

the  Hebrew  Gebal  (?2D,  mountain!),  and  it  is  still 

retained  in  the  Arabic  Jebal  (  \l_v~,,  mountains). 

The  mountain  range  of  Edom  is  at  present  divided 
into  two  districts.  The  northern  is  called  Jebal. 
It  begins  at'  Wady-el-Ahsy  (the  ancient  brook  Ze- 
ro/ |,  which  separates  it  fiom  Kerak  (the  ancient 
Moab),  and  it  terminates  at  or  near  Petra.  The 
southern  district  is  called  esh-Sherah,  a  name 
which,  though  it  resembles,  bears  no  radical  rela- 
tion to  the  Hebrew  Seir. 

The  physical  geography  of  Edom  is  somewhat 
peculiar.  Along  the  western  base  of  the  mountain- 
range  are  low  calcareous  hills.  To  these  succeed 
lofty  masses  of  igneous  rock,  chiefly  porphyry,  over 
which  lies  red  and  variegated  sandstone  in  irregular 
ridges  and  abrupt  cliffs,  with  deep  ravines  between. 
The  latter  strata  give  the  mountains  their  most 
striking  features  and  remarkable  colours.  The 
average  elevation  of  the  summits  is  about  2000  feet 
above  the  sea.  Along  the  eastern  side  runs  an 
almost  unbroken  limestone  ridge,  a  thousand  feet 
or  more  higher  than  the  other.  This  ridge  sinks 
down  with  an  easy  slope  into  the  plateau  of  the 
Arabian  desert.  While  Edom  is  thus  wild,  nigged, 
and  almost  inaccessible,  the  deep  glens  and  flat 
terraces  along  the  mountain  sides  are  covered  with 
rich  soil,  from  which  trees,  shrubs,  and  flowers  now 
spring  up  luxuriantly.  No  contrast  could  be  greater 
than  that  between  the  bare,  parched  plains  on  the 
east  and  west,  and  the  ruddy  clilis,  and  verdant, 
flower-spangled  glens  and  terraces  of  Edom.  This 
illustrates  Bible  topography,  and  reconciles  seem- 
ino'lv  discordant  statements  in  the  sacred  volume. 


EDOM 

While  the  posterity  of  Esau  dwelt  amid  rocky  fast- 
nesses and  on  mountain  heights,  making  their 
houses  like  the  eyries  of  eagles,  and  living  by  their 
sword  (Jer.  xlix.  1(3  ;  Gen.  xxvii.  40),  yet  Isaac,  in 
his  prophetic  blessing,  promised  his  disappointed 
son  that  his  dwelling  should  be  "  of  the  fatness  of 
the  earth,  and  of  the  dew  of  heaven  from  above" 
(Gen.  xxvii.  39).  Some  other  passages  of  Scripture 
are  also  illustrated  by  a  glance  at  the  towering  pre- 
cipices and  peaks  of  Edom.  The  border  of  the 
Amorites  was  from  "  the  ascent  of  scorpions  (Ak- 
rabbirn),  from  the  rock" — that  is,  from  the  rocky 
boundary  of  Edom  (Judg.  i.  36).  And  we  read  that 
Amaziah,  after  the  conquest  of  Seir,  took  ten  thou- 
sand of  the  captives  to  the  "  top  of  the  cliff,"  and 
thence  cast  them  down,  dashing  them  all  to  pieces 
(2  Chi-,  xxv.  11,  12). 

The  ancient  capital  of  Edom  was  Bozrah  [Boz- 
RAH],  the  site  of  which  is  most  probably  marked 
by  the  village  of  Buscireh,  near  the  northern  border, 
about  25  miles  south  of  Kerak  (Gen.  xxxvi.  .'!:;  ;  Is. 
xxxiv.  6,  lxiii.  1 ;  Jer.  xlix.  13,  22).  But  Sela, 
better  known  by  its  Greek  name  Petra,  appears  to 
have  been  the  principal  stronghold  in  the  days  of 
Amaziah  (B.C.  838 ;  2  K.  xiv.  7  ;  see  Petra). 
Elath,  and  its  neighbour  Ezion-geber,  were  the  sea- 
ports; they  were  captured  by  king  David,  and  here 
Solomon  equipped  his  merchant-fleet  (2  Sam.  viii. 
14;   1  K.  ix.  26). 

When  the  kingdom  of  Israel  began  to  decline,  the 
Edomites  not  only  reconquered  their  lost  cities,  but 
made  frequent  inroads  upon  southern  Palestine 
(2  K.  xvi.  6  ;  where  Edomites  and  not  Syrians 
(Arameans)  is  evidently  the  true  reading ;  2  Chr. 
xxviii.  17).  It  was  probably  on  account  of  these 
attacks,  and  of  their  uniting  with  the  Chaldeans 
against  the  Jews,  that  the  Edomites  were  so  fear- 
fully denounced  by  the  later  prophets  (Ob.  1  sq. ; 
Jer.  xlix.  7  sq. ;  Ezek.  xxv.  12  sq.,  xxxv.  3  sq.). 
During  the  Captivity  they  advanced  westward,  oc- 
cupied the  whole  territory  of  their  brethren  the 
Amalekites  (Gen.  xxxvi.  12;  1  Sam.  xv.  1  sq. ; 
Joseph.  Ant.  ii.  1,  §2),  and  even  took  possession  of 
many  towns  in  southern  Palestine,  including  He- 
bron (Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  8,  §6  ;  B.  J.  iv.  9,  §7  ; 
c.  Apion.  ii.  10).  The  name  Edom,  or  rather  its 
Greek  form,  Idumaea,  was  now  given  to  the  coun- 
try lying  between  the  valley  of  Arabah  and  the 
shores  of  the  Mediterranean.  Thus  Josephus  writes 
{Ant.  v.  1,  §22) — "  the  lot  of  Simeon  included  that 
part  of  Idumea  which  bordered  upon  Egypt  and 
Arabia;"  and  though  this  is  true  it  does  not  con- 
tradict the  language  of  Scripture — "  I  will  not  give 
you  of  their  land,  no,  not  so  much  as  a  footbrea  Ith, 
becausi  1  have  given  Mount  Seir  unto  Esau  for  a 
possession"  (Dent.  ii.  •">).  Not  a  footbreadth  of 
Edom  Proper,  or  Mount  Seir,  was  ever  given  to  the 
Jews.  Jerome  also  (in  Obad.)  says  that  the  Edom- 
ites possessed  the  whol mntry  from   Eleuther- 

opulis  to  Petra  and  Elath  ;  and  Roman  authors 
sometimes  give  the  name  Idumaea  to  all  Palestine, 
and  even  call  the  Jews  Idumaeans  (Virg.  Georg. 
iii.  12;   Juven.  viii.  160;  Martial,  ii.  2). 

While  Idumaea  thus  extended  westward,  Edom 
Proper  was  taken  possession  of  by  the  Nabs 
an  Arabian  tribe,  descended  from  Nebaioth,  [sh- 
mael's  oldest  sun  and  Ivan's  brother-in-law  (Gen. 
xxv.  13;  1  Chr.  i.  29;  Gen.  xxxvi.  3).  The  Na- 
batheans  were  a  powerful  people,  and  hell 
part  of  southern  Arabia  (.lush.  Ant.  i.  12,  §4N. 
They  took  Petra  and  established  themselves  there 
at  least  three  centuries  before  Christ,  fo'r  Antigonus, 


EDOM 


489 


one  of  the  successors  of  Alexander  the  Great,,  after 
conquering  Palestine,  sent  two  expeditions  against 
the  Nabatheans  in  Petra  (I)iod.  Sic.  19).  This 
people,  leaving  off  their  nomad  habits,  settled 
down  amid  the  mountains  of  Edom,  engaged  in 
commerce,  and  founded  the  little  kingdom  called 
by  Roman  writers  Arabia  Petraea,  which  embraced 
nearly  the  same  territory  as  the  ancient  Edom. 
Some  of  its  monarchs  took  the  name  Aretas  (2  Mace. 
v.  8;  Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  15,  §1,  2;  xiv.  5,  §1), 
and  some  Obodas  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  13,  §5). 
Aretas,  king  of  Arabia,  was ,  father-in-law  of  He- 
rod Antipas  (Matt.  xiv.  3,  4),  and  it  was  the 
same  who  captmed  the  city  of  Damascus  and  held 
it  at  the  time  of  Paul's  conversion  (2  Cor.  xi.  32  ; 
Acts  ix.  25).  The  kingdom  of  Arabia  was  finally 
subdued  by  the  Romans  in  a.d.  105.  Under  the 
Romans  the  transport  trade  of  the  Nabatheans  in- 
creased. Roads  were  constructed  through  the 
mountain-defiles  from  Elath  on  the  coast  to  Petra, 
and  thence  northward  and  west wai  d.  Traces  of  them 
still  remain,  with  ruinous  military  stations  at  inter- 
vals, and  fallen  milestones  of  the  times  of  Trajan 
and  Marcus  Aurelius  (Peutinger  Tables;  Laborde's 
Voyage;  Burckhardt's  Syria,  pp.  374,419;  Irby 
and  Mangles'  Travels,  pp.  371,  377,  1st  ed.).  To 
the  Nabatheans  Petra  owes  those  great  monuments 
I  which  are  still  the  wonder  of  the  woild. 

When  the  Jewish  power  revived  under  the  war- 
like Asmonean  princes,  that  section  of  Idumaea 
which  lay  south  of  Palestine  fell  into  their  hands. 
Judas  Blaccabaeus  captured  Hebron,  Marissa,  and 
Ashdod ;  and  John  Hyrcanus  compelled  the  in- 
habitants of  the  whole  region  to  conform  to  Jew- 
ish law  (Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  8,  §6,  xiii.  9,  §2 ; 
1  Mace.  v.  G5,  68).  The  country  was  henceforth 
governed  by  Jewish  prefects  ;  one  of  these,  Anti- 
pater,  an  Idumaean  by  birth,  became,  through  the 
friendship  of  the  Roman  emperor,  procurator  of  all 
Judaea,  and  his  son  was  Herod  the  Great,  "  King 
of  the  Jews"  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiv.  1,  §3,  8,  §5,  xv. 
7,  §9,  xvii.  11,  §4). 

Early  in  the  Christian  era  Edom  Proper  was  in- 
cluded by  geographers  in  Palestine,  but  in  the  fifth 
century  a  new  division  was  made  of  the  whole 
country  into  Palaestina  Prima, Secnnda,  and  Tertia. 
The  last  embraced  Edom  and  some  neighbouring 
provinces,  and  when  it  became  an  ecclesiastical  di- 
vision its  metropolis  was  Petra.  In  the  seventh 
century  the  Mohammedan  conquest  gave  a  death- 
blow to  the  commerce  and  prosperity  of  Edom. 
Under  the  withering  influence  of  Mohammedan 
rule  the  great  cities  tell  to  ruin,  and  the  country 
became  a  desert.  The  followers  of  the  false  prophet 
were  here,  as  elsewhere,  the  instruments  in  God's 
hands  for  the  execution  of  His  judgments.  "Thus 
saith  the  Lord  God,  Behold,  <i  Mount  Seir,  1  am 
against  thee,  ami  1  will  make  thee  most  desolate. 

I  will  lay  thy  cities  waste,  and  when  the  whoje 
earth  rejuicefh  I  will  make  thee  desolate.  ...  1  will 
make  Mount  Seir  most  desolate,  and  cut  off  from  it 

him  that  passeth  out  and  him  that  returneth 

I  will  make  thee  perpetual  desolations,  and  thy  cities 
shall  not  return,  and  ye  shall  know  that  I  am  the 
Lord"  (Ezek.  xxxv.  3,  4.  7.  9,  14). 

The   ( Irusaders   m  ditions    into 

Edom,  penetrating  as  far  as  Petra,  to  which  they 
gave  the  name  it  still  bears,  Wady  Mitsa,  "  Valley 
ot   Mm  Dei  i  ■  r   Fran  .  pp.  405,  518, 

581).  <  in  a  commanding  height  about  !_' 
miles  north  of  Petra  they  built  a  strong  fortress 
called  Mens  Regalis,  now  Sh6beh  [Gesta  l'ii,  p. 


490 


EDOMITES 


611).  At  that  time  so  little  was  known  of  the 
geography  of  the  country  that  the  Crusaders  occu- 
pied and  fortified  Kcrah  (the  ancient  Kir  Moab) 
under  the  impression  that  it  was  the  site  of  Petra. 

From  that  time  until  the  present  century  Edom 
remained  an  unknown  land.  In  the  year  1812 
Burckhardt  entered  it  from  the  north,  passed  down 
through  it,  and  discovered  the  wonderful  ruins  of 
Petra.  In  1828  Laborde,  proceeding  northward 
from  Akabah  through  the  defiles  of  Edom,  also 
visited  Petra,  and  brought  away  a  portfolio  of 
splendid  drawings,  which  proved  that  the  descrip- 
tions of  Burckhardt  had  not  been  exaggerated. 
Many  have  since  followed  the  footsteps  of  the  first 
explorers,  and  a  trip  to  Petra  now  forms  a  necessary 
part  of  the  eastern  traveller's  grand  tour. 

For  the  ancient  geography  of  Edom  consult  Ee- 
landi  Palaestina,  pp.  48,  66  sq.,  78,  82  ;  for  the 
history  and  commerce  of  the  Nabatheans,  Vincent's 
Commerce  and  Navigation  of  the  Ancients,  vol.  ii.; 
for  the  present  state  of  the  country  and  descriptions 
of  Petra,  Burckhardt' s  Travels  in  Syria,  Laborde's 
Voyage,  Robinson's  Biblical  Researches,  Porter's 
Handbook  for  Syria  and  Palestine.        [J.  L.  P.] 

EDOMI'TES  (*D*TK,  D*?£TIK,  pi. ;  and  »J3 

It^y,  Deut.  ii.  4  ;  'iSov/xciioi),  the  descendants  of 
Esau,  or  Edom.  [Edom.]  Esau  settled  in  Mount 
Seir  immediately  after  the  death  of  his  father  Isaac 
(Gen.  xxxvi.  6,  8).  Before  that  time,  however,  he 
had  occasionally  visited,  and  even  resided  in,  that 
country;  for  it  was  to  the  "land  of  Seir"  Jacob 
sent  messengers  to  acquaint  his  brother  of  his  ar- 
rival from  Padan-aram  (Gen.  xxxii.  3).  The  Edom- 
ites  soon  became  a  numerous  and  powerful  nation 
(Gen.  xxxvi.  1  sq.).  Their  first  form  of  govern- 
ment appears  to  have  resembled  that  of  the  modern 
Bedawln  ;  each  tribe  or  clan  having  a  petty  chief  or 

sheikh  (Pl'IPX,  "Duke"  in  the  A.  V.,  Gen.  xxxvi. 
15).  The  Horites,  who  inhabited  Mount  Seir  from 
an  early  period,  and  among  whom  the  Edomites 
still  lived,  had  their  sheikhs  also  (Gen.  xxxvi.  29 
sq.).  At  a  later  period,  probably  when  the  Edom- 
ites began  a  war  of  extermination  against  the  Hor- 
ites, they  felt  the  necessity  of  united  action  under 
one  competent  leader,  and  then  a  king  was  chosen. 
The  names  of  eight  of  their  kings  are  given  in  the 
book  of  Genesis  (xxxvi.  31-39),  with  their  native 
cities,  from  which  it  appears  that  one  of  them  was 
a  foreigner  ("  Saul  of  Rehoboth-by-the-river"),  or, 
at  least,  that  his  family  were  resident  in  a  foreign 
city.  (See  also  1  Chr.  i.  43-50.)  Against  the 
Horites  the  children  of  Edom  were  completely  suc- 
cessful. Having  either  exterminated  or  expelled 
them  they  occupied  their  whole  country  (Deut.  ii. 
12).  A  statement  made  in  Gen.  xxxvi.  31,  serves 
to  fix  the  period  of  the  dynasty  of  the  eight  kings. 
They  "  reigned  in  the  land  of  Edom  before  there 
reigned  any  king  over  the  children  of  Israel ;"  that 
is,  before  the  time  of  Moses,  who  may  be  regarded 
as  the  first  virtual  king  of  Israel  (comp:  Deut. 
xxxiii.  5  ;  Ex.  xviii.  16-19).  Other  circumstances, 
however,  prove  that  though  the  Edomite  kings  had 
the  chief  command,  yet  the  old  patriarchal  govern- 
ment by  sheikhs  of  tribes  was  still  retained.  Most 
of  the  large  tribes  of  Bedawin  at  the  present  day 
have  .one  chief,  with  the  title  of  Emir,  who  takes 
the  lead  in  any  great  emergency  ;  while  each  divi- 
sion of  the  tribe  enjoys  perfect  independence  under 
its  own  sheikh.  So  it  would  seem  to  have  been 
with  the   Edomites.     Lists  of  dukes  (or  sheikhs, 


EDOMITES 

''S-VPX)  are  given  both  before  and  after  the  kings 
(Gen.  xxxvi.  15,  sq. ;  1  Chr.  i.  51  sq.),  and  in  the 
triumphant  song  of  Israel  over  the  engulphed  host 
of  Pharaoh,  when  describing  the  effect  this  fearful 
act  of  divine  vengeance  would  produce  on  the  sur- 
rounding nations,  it  is  said — "Then  the  dukes  of 
Edom  shall  be  amazed"  (Ex.  xv.  15),  while,  only 
a  few  years  afterwards,  Moses  "sent  messengers 
from  Kadesh  unto  the  king  C?]?0)  of  Edom  "  to 
ask  permission  to  pass  through  his  country  (Judg. 
xi.  17). 

Esau's  bitter  hatred  to  his  brother  Jacob  for 
fraudulently  obtaining  his  blessing  appears  to  have 
been  inherited  by  his  latest  posterity.  The  Edom- 
ites peremptorily  refused  to  permit  the  Israelites  to 
pass  through  their  land,  though  addressed  in  the 
most  friendly  terms — "  thus  saith  thy  brother 
Israel"  (Num.  xx.  14) — and  though  assured  that 
they  would  neither  drink  of  their  waters  nor  tres- 
pass on  their  fields  or  vineyards  (ver.  17).  The 
Israelites  were  expressly  commanded  by  God  neither 
to  resent  this  conduct,  nor  even  to  entertain  feelings 
of  hatred  to  the  Edomites  (Deut.  ii.  4,  5,  xxiii.  7). 
The  Edomites  did  not  attempt  actual  hostilities, 
though  they  prepared  to  resist  by  force  any  intru- 
sion (Num.  xx.  20).  Their  neighbours  and  brethren 
(Gen.  xxxvi.  12),  the  Amalekites,  were  probably 
urged  on  by  them,  and  proved  the  earliest  and 
most  determined  opponents  of  the  Israelites  during 
their  journey  through  the  wilderness  (Ex  xvii.  8,  9). 

For  a  period  of  400  years  we  hear  no  more  of 
the  Edomites.  They  were  then  attacked  and  de- 
feated by  Saul  (1  Sam.  xiv.  47).  Some  forty  years 
later  David  overthrew  their  army  in  the  "  Valley 
of  Salt,"  and  his  general,  Joab,  following  up  the 
victory,  destroyed  nearly  the  whole  male  popula- 
tion (IK.  xi.  15,  16),  and  placed  Jewish  garrisons 
in  all  the  strongholds  of  Edom  (2  Sam.  viii.  13, 
14;  in  ver.  13  theHeb.  should  evidently  be  DTIX 
instead  of  D"1X ;  comp.  14 ;  .2  K.  xiv.  7  ;  and 
Jos.  Ant.  vii.  5,  §4).  In  honour  of  that  victory 
the  Psalmist-warrior  may  have  penned  the  words  in 
Ps.  lx.  8,  "  over  Edom  will  I  cast  my  shoe."  Ha- 
dad,  a  member  of  the  royal  family  of  Edom,  made 
his  escape  with  a  few  followers  to  Egypt,  where  he 
was  kindly  received  by  Pharaoh.  After  the  death 
of  David  he  returned,  and  tried  to  excite  his  coun- 
trymen to  rebellion  against  Israel,  but  failing  in 
the  attempt  he  went  on  to  Syria,  where  he  became 
one  of  Solomon's  greatest  enemies  (1  K.  xi.  14-22  ; 
Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  7,  §6).  The  Edomites  continued 
subject  to  Israel  from  this  time  till  the  reign  of 
Jehoshaphat  (B.C.  914),  when  they  attempted  to 
invade  Israel  in  conjunction  with  Ammon  and 
Moab,  but  were  miraculously  destroyed  in  the 
valley  of  Berachah  (2  Chr.  xx.  22).  A  few  years 
later  they  revolted  against  J  eh  oram,  elected  a  king, 
and  for  half  a  century  retained  their  independence 
(2  Chr.  xxi.  8).  They  were  then  attacked  by 
Amaziah,  10,000  were  slain  in  battle,  Sela,  their 
great  stronghold,  was  captured,  and  10,000  more 
were  dashed  to  pieces  by  the  conqueror  from  the 
cliffs  that  surround  the  "city  (2  K.  xiv.  7  ;  2  Chr. 
xxv.  11,  12).  Yet  the  Israelites  were  never  able 
again  completely  to  subdue  them  (2  Chr.  xxviii. 
17).  When  Nebuchadnezzar  besieged  Jerusalem 
the  Edomites  joined  him,  and  took  an  active  part 
in  the  plunder  of  the  city  and  slaughter  of  the  poor 
Jews.  Their  cruelty  at  that  time  seems  to  be  spe- 
cially referred  to  in  the  137th  Psalm — "Remember, 


EDOMITES 

0  Lord,  the  children  of  Edom  in  the  day  of  Jeru- 
salem ;  who  said,  Raze  it,  Haze  it,  even  to  the 
foundation  thereof."  As  the  first  part  of  Isaac's 
prophetic  blessing  to  Esau — "  the  elder  shall  serve 
the  younger" — was  fulfilled  in  the  long  subjection 
of  the  Edomites  to  the  kings  of  Israel,  so  now  the 
second  part  was  also  fulfilled — "It  shall  come  to 
pass  when  thou  shalt  have  the  dominion  that  thou 
shalt  break  his  yoke  from  off  thy  neck "  (Gen. 
xxvii.  40).  It  was  on  account  of  these  acts  of 
cruelty  committed  upon  the  Jews  in  the  day  of 
their  calamity  that  the  Edomites  were  so  fearfully 
denounced  by  the  later  prophets  (Is.  xxxiv.  5-8, 
lxiii.  1-4;  Jer.  xlix.  17;  Lam.  iv.  21  ;  Ezek.  xxv. 
13,  14;  Am.  i.  11,  12  ;   Obad.  10  sq.). 

On  the  conquest  of  Judah  by  the  Babylonians, 
\he  Edomites,  probably  in  reward  for  their  services 
during  the  war,  were  permitted  to  settle  in  south- 
ern Palestine,  and  the  whole  plateau  between  it  and 
Egypt ;  but  they  were  about  the  same  time  driven 
out  of  Edom  Proper  by  the  Nabatheans.  [Edom  ;  Na- 
batheans.] For  more  than  four  centuries  they 
continued  to  prosper,  and  retained  their  new  pos- 
sessions with  the  exception  of  a  few  towns  which 
the  Persian  monarchs  compelled  them  to  restore 
to  the  Jews  after  the  captivity.  But  during  the 
warlike  rule  of  the  Maccabees  they  were  again 
completely  subdued,  and  even  forced  to  conform 
to  Jewish  laws  and  rites  (Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  8, 
§6,  xiii.  9,  §1  ;  1  Mace.  v.  65),  and  submit  to 
the  government  of  Jewish  prefects.  The  Edom- 
ites were  now  incorporated  with  the  Jewish  nation, 
and  the  whole  province  was  often  termed  by  Greek 
and  Koman  writers  Mum  tea  (Ptol.  Geog.  v.  16; 
Mar.  iii.  8).  According  to  the  ceremonial  law  an 
Edomite  was  received  into  "  the  congregation  of 
the  Lord" — that  is,  to  all  the  rites  and  privileges 
of  a  Jew — "in  the  third  generation"  (Dent,  xxiii. 
8).  Antipater,  a  clever  and  crafty  Idumaean,  suc- 
ceeded, through  Koman  influence,  in  obtaiuing  the 
government  of  Judaea  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiv.  8,  §5). 
His  oldest  son,  Phasaelus,  he  made  governor  of 
Jerusalem,  and  to  his  second  son  Herod,  then  only 
in  his  15th  year,  he  gave  the  province  of  Galilee. 
Herod,  afterwards  named  the  Great,  was  appointed 
"king  of  the  Jews"  by  a  decree  of  the  Roman 
senate  (B.C.  37;  Joseph.  Ant.  xiv.  14,  §5;  Matt. 
ii.  1).  Immediately  before  the  siege  of  Jerusalem 
by  Titus,  in  consequence  of  the  influence  of  John 
of  Gischala,  20,000  Idumaeans  were  admitted  to 
the  Holy  City,  which  they  filled  with  robbery  and 
bloodshed  (Joseph.  /<'. ./.  iv.  4  and  5).  From  this 
time  the  Edomites,  as  a  separate  people,  disappear 
from  the  page  of  history,  though  tin'  name  Idumaea 
still  continued  to  be  applied  to  the  country  south  of 
Palestine  as  late  as  the  time  of  Jerome  (in  Obad.  I. 

The  character  of  the  Edomites  was  drawn  by 
Isaac  in  his  prophetic  blessing  to  Esau — "  By  thy 
sword  shalt  thou  live"  (Gen.  xxvii.  40).  War 
and  rapine  were  tin-  only  professions  of  the  Edom- 
ites. By  the  sword  they  '_r"t  Mount  Seir — by 
tin'  sword  they  exterminated  the  Horites — by  the 
sword  they  long  battled  with  their  brethren  of 
Israel,  and  finally  broke  oil'  their  yoke — by  the 
sword  they  won  southern  Palestine — and  by  tin' 
sword  they  performed  tin'  last  aii  ill  their  lung  his- 
toric drama,  massacred  the  guards  in  tin'  temple, 
and  pillaged  the  city  of  Jerusalem. 

Little  is  known  of  their  religien;  but  that  little 
shows  them  to  have  been  idolatrous.  It  is  probable 
that  Esau's  marriage  with  the  "daughters  oi  Ca- 
naan," who  •■  were  a  grief  of  mind"  t<>  his  father 


EDREI 


491 


and  mother  (Gen.  xxvi.  34,  35),  induced  him  to 
embrace  their  religion,  and  when  Esau  ami  his  fol- 
lowers took  possession  of  Mount  Seir  they  seem  to 
have'  followed  the  practice  common  among  ancient 
nations  of  adopting  the  country's  gods,  for  we  read 
that  Amaziah,  king  of  Judah,  after  his  conquest  of 
the  Edomites,  "  brought  the  gods  of  the  children  ot 
Seir,  and  set  them  up  to  be  his  gods"  (2  Chr.  xxv. 
14,  15,  20).  Joseph  us  also  refers  to  both  the  idols 
and  priests  of  the  Idumaeans  (Ant.  xv.  17,  §9). 

The  habits  of  the  Idumaeans  were  singular.  The 
Horites,  their  predecessors  in  Mount  Seir,  were,  as 
their  name  implies,  troglodytes,  or  dwellers  in 
caves ;  and  the  Edomites  seem  to  have  adopted 
their  dwellings  as  well  as  their  country.  Jeremiah 
and  Obadiah  both  speak  of  them  as  "  dwelling  in 
the  clefts  of  the  rocks,"  and  making  their  habita- 
tions high  in  the  cliffs,  like  the  eyries  of  eagles 
(Jer.  xlix.  16;  Obad.  3,  4),  language  which  is 
strikingly  illustrated  by  a  survey  of  the  mountains 
and  glens  of  Edom.  Everywhere  we  meet  with 
caves  and  grottoes  hewn  in  the  soft  sandstone 
strata.  Those  at  Petra  are  well  known.  [Petra.] 
Their  form  and  arrangements  show  that  most  of 
them  were  originally  intended  for  habitations. 
They  have  closets  and  recesses  suitable  for  family 
uses,  and  many  have  windows.  The  nature  of  the 
rock  and  the  form  of  the  cliffs  made  excavation  an 
easier  work. than  erection,  besides  the  additional 
security,  comfort,  and  permanence  of  such  abodes. 
Indeed  there  is  reason  to  believe  that  the  com- 
mercial Nabatheans  were  the  first  who  introduced 
buildings  into  Edom.  It  is  worthy  of  remark  also 
that  the  Edomites,  when  they  took  possession  of 
southern  Palestine,  followed  even  there  their  old 
mode  of  life,  and  excavated  caves  and  grottoes 
everywhere  through  the  country.  So  Jerome  in 
his  Commentary  on  Obadiah  writes — "  Omnis  Aus- 
tralis  rcgio  Idumaeorum  dc  Eleutheropoli  vsque  ad 
Petratn  ct  Ailam  (Jiaec  est  possessio  Esau)  in  spe- 
cubus  habitatiunculas  habet  :  et  propter  nimios 
calores  solis,  quia  meridiana  provincia  est,  subter- 
raneis  tuguriis  utitur."  During  a  visit  to  this 
region  in  1857  the  writer  of  this  article  had  an 
opportunity  of  inspecting  a  large  number  of  these 
caverns,  and  has  no  hesitation  in  ranking  them 
among  the  most  remarkable  of  their  kind  in  the 
world.  [Eleutheropolis.]  The  nature  of  the 
climate,  the  dryness  of  the  soil,  and  their  great 
size,  render  them  healthy,  pleasant,  and  commo- 
dious habitations,  while  their  security  made  them 
specially  suitable  to  a  country  exposed  in  every  age 
to  incessant  attacks  of  robbers.  [J.  L.  P.] 

ED'REI,   1.   0in"IJ*  ;  'ESpaelv,  and  'ESpatu  ; 

Euseb.  Onom.  ASpaa  ;   Arab.  ^   ,i|)>  one  of  the 

two  capital  cities  of  Bashan  (Num.  xxi.  33  ;  Deut 
i.  -4,  iii.  10  ;  Josh.  xii.  4).  In  Scripture  it  is  only 
mentioned  in  connexion  with  the  victory  gained  by 
the   Israelites  over  the  Amorites  under  0g  their 

king,  and  the  territory  thus  acquired.  Nut  a  single 
allusion  is  made  to  it  in  the  subsequent  history  of 
God's  people,  though  it  was  within  the  territory 
allotted  to  the  half  tribe  of  Manasseh  (Num.  xxxii. 
:'.•!).  and  it  continued  to  be  a  large  and  important 
city  down  to  the  seventh  century  of  OUT  era. 

The  ruins  of  this  ancient  city,  still  hearing  the 
name  Edr'a,  stand  on  a  rocky  promontory  which 
projects  from  the  S.W.  corner  of  the  Lejah.  [Ait- 
GOB.]  The  site  is  a  strange  one — without  water, 
without  access,  excepl  over  rocks  ami  through  de- 


492 


EDREI 


files  all  but  impracticable.  Strength  and  security  ! 
seem  to  have  been  the  grand  objects  in  view.  The  i 
rocky  promontory  is  about  a  mile  and  a  half  wide  ■ 
by  two  miles  and  a  half  long ;  it  has  an  elevation  j 
of  from  twenty  to  thirty  feet  above  the  plain, 
which  spreads  out  from  it  on  each  side,  flat  as  a 
sea,  and  of  rare  fertility.  The  ruins  are  nearly 
three  miles  in  circumference,  and  have  a  strange 
wild  look,  rising  up  in  black  shattered  masses  from 
the  midst  of  a  wilderness  of  black  rocks.  A  num- 
ber of  the  old  houses  still  remain  ;  they  are  low, 
massive,  and  gloomy,  .and  some  of  t'hem  are  half 
buried  beneath  heaps  of  rubbish.  In  these  the  pre- 
sent inhabitants  reside,  selecting  such  apartments  as 
are  best  fitted  for  comfort  and  security.  The  short 
Greek  inscriptions  which  are  here  and  there  seen 
over  the  doors  prove  that  the  houses  are  at  least  as 
old  as  the  time  of  Roman  dominion.  Edr'a  was  at 
one  time  adorned  with  a  considerable  number  of 
public  edifices,  but  time  and  the  chances  of  war 
have  left  most  of  them  shapeless  heaps  of  ruin. 
Many  Greek  inscriptions  are  met  with;  the  greater 
part"  of  them  are  of  the  Christian  age,  and  of  no 
historic  value. 

The  identity  of  this  site  with  the  Edrei  of  Scrip- 
ture has  been  questioned  by  many  writers,  who 
follow  the  doubtful  testimony  of  Eusebius  (Onom. 
s.  v.  Esdrei  and  Astarotli),  and  place  the  capital 
of  Bashan  at  the  modern  Der'a,  a  few  miles  farther 
south.  The  following  reasons  have  induced  the 
present  writer  to  regard  Edr'a  as  the  true  site  of 
Edrei.  1st.  The  situation  is  such  as  would  na- 
turally be  selected  for  a  capital  city  in  early  and 
troublous  times  by  the  rulers  of  a  warlike  na- 
tion. The  principles  of  fortification  were  then 
little  known,  and  consequently  towns  and  villages 
were  built  on  the  tops  of  hills  or  in  the  midst  of 
rocky  fastnesses.  The  advantages  of  Edr'a  in  this 
respect  are  seen  at  a  glance.  Der'a,  on  the  other 
hand,  lies  in  the  open  country,  without  any  natural 
advantages,  exposed  to  the  attack  of  every  invader. 
It  is  difficult  to  believe  that  the  warlike  Rephaims 
would  have  erected  a  royal  city  in  such  a  position. 
2nd.  The  dwellings  of  Edr'a  possess  all  the  charac- 
teristics of  remote  antiquity — massive  walls,  stone 
roofs,  stone  doors.  3rd.  The  name  Edrei, "  strength," 
is  not  only  descriptive  of  the  site,  but  it  corre- 
sponds more  exactly  to  the  Arabic  Edr'a  than  to 
Der'a.  In  opposition  to  these  we  have  the  state- 
ment in  Eusebius  that  Edrei  was  in  his  day  called 
Adara,  and  was  24  Roman  miles  from  Bostra. 
There  can  be  no  doubt  that  he  refers  to  Der'a, 
which,  as  lying  on  a  great  road,  was  better  known 
to  him  than  Edr'a,  and  thus  he  was  led  hastily  to 
identify  it  with  Edrei. 

It  is  probable  that  Edrei  did  not  remain  long  in 
possession  of  the  Israelites.  May  it  not  be  that 
they  abandoned  it  in  consequence  of  its  position 
within  the  borders  of  a  wild  region  infested  by 
numerous  robber  bands?  The  Lejah  is  the  ancient 
Argob,  and  appears  to  have  been  the  stronghold  of 
the  Geshurites ;  and  they  perhaps  subsequently 
occupied  Edrei  (Josh.  xii.  4,  5).  The  monuments 
now  existing  show  that  it  must  have  been  an  im- 
portant town  from  the  time  the  Romans  took  pos- 
session of  Bashan;  ami  that  it,  and  not  Der'a,  was 
the  episcopal  city  of  Adraa,  which  ranked  next  to 
Bostra  (Reland,  Pal.  pp.  219,  228,  548).  In  A.n. 
1142,  the  Crusadeis  under  Baldwin  III.  made  a 
sudden  attack  upon  Adraa,  then  popularly  called 
( 'ivitas  Bernardi  </<■  Stampis,  but  they  encountered 
such  obstacles  in  the  difficult  nature  of  the  ground, 


EDT.  CATION 

the  scarcity  of  water,  and  the  valour  of  the  inha- 
bitants, that  they  were  compelled  to  retreat.  At 
the  time  of  the  visit  of  the  present  writer  in  1 854 
the  population  amounted  to  about  fifty  families,  of 
which  some  eight  or  ten  were  Christian,  and  the  rest 
Mohammedan.  A  full  account  of  the  history  and 
antiquities  of  Edrei  is  given  in  Porter's  Fire  Years 
in  lhtmascus,  vol.  ii.  pp.  220  sq.,  and  Handbook  for 
Syria  and  Palestine,  pp.  532  sq.  See  also  Burck- 
hardt's  Travels  in  Syria,  pp.  57  sq.  ;  Bucking- 
ham's Travels  among  the  Arab  Tribes,  p.  274. 

2.  A  town  of  northern  Palestine,  allotted  to  the 
tribe  of  Naphtali,  and  situated  near  Kedesh.  It  is 
only  once  mentioned  in  Scripture  (Josh.  xix.  37). 
The  name  signifies  "strength,"  or  a  "stronghold." 
About  two  miles  south  of  Kedesh  is  a  conical  rocky 
hill  called  Tell'  Khuraibeh,  the  "  Tell  of  the  ruin;" 
with  some  remains  of  ancient  buildings  on  the 
summit  and  a  rock-hewn  tomb  in  its  side.  It  is 
evidently  an  old  site,  and  it  may  be  that  of  the 
long-lost  Edrei.  The  strength  of  the  position,  and 
its  nearness  to  Kedesh,  giy,e  probability  to  the  sup- 
position. Dr.  Robinson  (Bib/.  Pes.  vol.  iii.  p.  365) 
suggests  the  identity  of  Tell  Khuraibeh  with  Hazor. 
For  the  objections  to  this  theory  see  Porter's  Hand- 
booh  for  Syria  and  Palestine,  p.  442.     [J.  L.  P.] 

EDUCATION.  Although  nothing  is  more 
carefully  inculcated  in  the  Law  than  the  duty  of 
parents  to  teach  their  children  its  precepts  and 
principles  (Ex.  xii.  26,  xiii.  8,  14 ;  Deut.  iv.  5,  9, 
10,  vi.  -2,  7,  20,  xi.  19,  21;  Acts  xxii.  3;.  2 
Tim.  iii.  15;  Hist,  of  Susanna,  3  ;  Joseph,  c.  Ap. 
ii.  16,  17,  25),  yet  there  is  little  trace  among 
the  Hebrews  in  earlier  times  of  education  in  any 
other  subjects.  The  wisdom,  therefore,  and  in- 
struction, of  which  so  much  is  said  in  the  Book  of 
Proverbs,  is  to  be  understood  chiefly  of  moral  and 
religious  discipline,  imparted,  according  to  the  di- 
rection of  the  Law,  by  the  teaching  and  under  the 
example  of  parents  (Prov.  i.  2,  8,  ii.  2,  10,  iv.  1, 
7,  20,  viii.  1,  ix.  1,  10,  xii.  1,  xvi.  22,  xvii.  24, 
xxxi.).  Implicit  exceptions  to  this  statement  may 
perhaps  be  found  in  the  instances  of  Moses  himself, 
who  was  brought  up  in  all  Egyptian  learning 
(Acts  vii.  22);  of  the  writer  of  the  book  of  Job, 
who  was  evidently  well  versed  in  natural  history 
and  iu  the  astronomy  of  the  day  (Job  xxxviii.  81, 
xxxix.  xl.  xii.)  ;  of  Daniel  and  his  companions  in 
captivity  (Dan.  i.  4,  17);  and  above  all,  in  the 
intellectual  gifts  and  acquirements  of  Solomon, 
which  were  even  more  renowned  than  his  political 
greatness  (1  K.  iv.  29,  34,  x.  1-9  ;  2  Chr.  ix. 
1-8),  and  the  memory  of  which  has,  with  much 
exaggeration,  been  widely  preserved  in  Oriental 
tradition.  The  statement  made  above  may,  how- 
ever, in  all  probability  be  taken  as  representing 
the  chief  aim  of  ordinary  Hebrew  education,  both 
at  the  time  when  the  Law  was  best  observed,  and 
also  when,  after  periods  of  national  decline  from  the 
Mosaic  standard,  attempts  were  made  by  monarchs, 
as  Jehoshaphat  or  Josiah,  or  by  prophets,  as  Elijah 
or  Isaiah,  to  enforce,  or  at  least  to  inculcate  reform 
in  the  moral  condition  of  the  people  on  the  basis 
of  that  standard  (2  K.  xvii.  13,  xxii.  8-20 ;  2  Chr. 
xvii.  7,  9  ;   1  K.  xix.  14  ;  Is.  i.  et  seq.). 

In  later  times  the  prophecies,  and  comments  on 
them  as  well  as  on  the  earlier  Scriptures,  together 
with  other  subjects,  were  studied  (Prol.  to  Ecclus., 
and  Ecclus.  xxxviii.  24,  26,  xxxix.  1-11).  St. 
Jerome  adds  that  Jewish  children  were  taught  to 
say  by  heart  the  genealogies  (Hieronym.  on  Titus, 


EDUCATION 

lii.  9 ;  Calmet,  Diet.  Genealogie).  Parents  were 
required  to  teach  their  children  some  trade,  and  he 
who  failed  to  do  so  was  said  to  be  virtually 
teaching  his  child  to  steal  (Mishn.  Kiddush.  ii. 
2,  vol.  iii.  p.  413;  Surenhus.;  Lightfoot,  Chron. 
Temp,  on  Acts  xviii.  vol.  ii.  p.  79). 

The  sect  of  the  Essenes,  though  themselves  ab- 
juring marriage,  were  anxious  to  undertake  and 
careful  in  carrying  out  the  education  of  children, 
but  confined  its  subject  matter  chiefly  to  morals 
and  the  Divine  Law  (Joseph.  B.  J.  ii.  8,  §1-'; 
Philo,  Quod  omnis  .probus  liber,  vol.  ii.  458,  ed. 
Mangey ;   §12,  Tauchn.). 

Previous  to  the  captivity,  the  chief  depositaries 
of  learning  were  the  schools  or  colleges,  from  which 
in  most  cases  (see  Am.  vii.  14)  proceeded  that 
succession  of  public  teachers,  who  at  various  times 
endeavoured  to  reform  the  moral  and  religious 
conduct  of  both  rulers  and  people.  [Schools  of 
Prophets.]  In  these  schools  the  Law  was  pro- 
bably the  chief  subject  of  instruction  ;  the  study  of 
languages  was  little  followed  by  any  Jews  till  after 
the  captivity,  but  from  that  time  the  number  of 
Jews  residing  in  foreign  countries  must  have  made 
the  knowledge  of  foreign  languages  more  common 
than  before  (see  Acts  xxi.  37).  Prom  the  time  of 
the  outbreak  of  the  last  war  with  the  Romans, 
parents  were  forbidden  to  instruct  their  children  in 
Greek  literature  (Mishn.  Sotah,  c.  ix.  15,  vol.  iii. 
p.  307,  308,  Sureuh.). 

Besides  the  prophetical  schools  instruction  'was 
given  by  the  priests  in  the  Temple  and  elsewhere, 
but  their  subjects  were  doubtless  exclusively  con- 
cerned with  religion  and  worship  (Lev.  x.  11; 
Ez.  xliv.  23,  24;  1  Chr.  xxv.  7,  8;  Mai.  ii.  7). 
Those  sovereigns  who  exhibited  any  anxiety  for  the 
maintenance  of  the  religious  element  in  the  Jewish 
polity,  were  conspicuous  in  enforcing  the  religious 
education  of  the  people  (2  Chr.  xvii.  7,  8,  9,  xix. 
5,  8,  11;   2  K.  xxiii.  '.'). 

From  the  time  of  the  settlement  in  Canaan  there 
must  have  been  among  the  Jews  persons  skilled  in 
writing  and  in  accounts.  Perhaps  the  neighbour- 
hood of  the  ti'ibe  of  Zebulun  to  the  commercial 
district  of  Phoenicia  may  have  been  the  occasion  of 
their  reputation  in  this  respect.  The  "  writers  " 
of  that  tribe  are  represented  (Judg.  v.  14)  by  the 
same  word  ~)SD,  used  in  that  passage  of  the  levying 
of  an  army  or,  perhaps,  of  a  military  officer  (Ges. 
p.  966)  as  is  applied  to  Ezra,  in  reference  to  the 
Law  (Ezr.  vii.  6);  to  Scraiah,  David's  scribe  or 
secretary  (2  Sam.  viii.  17);  to  Shebna,  scribe  to 
Hezekiah  (2  K.  xviii.  37) ;  Shemaiah  (1  Chr.  xxiv. 
6);  Baruch,  scribe  to  Jeremiah  (Jer.  xxxvi.  32), 
and  others  tilling  like  offices  at  various  times. 
The  municipal  officers  of  the  kingdom,  especially  in 
the  time  of  Solomon,  must  have  required  a  staff  of 
well-educated  persons  in  their  various  departments 
under  the  recorder  T3TO,  or  historiographer,  whose 
business  was  to  compile  memorials  of  the  reign  ('_' 
Sam.  viii.  16,  xx.  24;  2  K.  xviii.  ls;  2  Chr. 
xxxiv.  8).  Learning,  in  the  sense  above  men- 
tioned, was  at  all  times  highly  esteemed,  and 
educated  persons  were  treated  with  great  respect, 
and,  according  to  Rabbinical  tradition,  wen 
"sons  of  the  noble,"  and  allowed  to  take  precedence 
of  others  at  table  (Lightfoot,  Chr.  Temp.  \<t- 
xvii.  vol.  ii.  79,  fol. ;  //<</■.  Hebr.  Luke  xiv.  8-24, 
ii.  54").  Tin'  same  authority  deplores  the  de- 
generacy of  later  times  in  this  respect  [Mishn. 
Sotah,  ix.  15,  vol.  iii.  3Q8,  Suren.). 


EDUCATION 


493 


To  the  schools  of  the  Prophets  succeeded,  after 
the  captivity,  the  synagogues,  which  were  either 
themselves  used  as  schools  or  had  places  near  them 
for  that  purpose.  In  most  cities  there  was  at  leas-t 
one,  and  in  Jerusalem,  according  to  some,  394, 
according  to  others,  460  (Calmet,  Diet.  Ecoles.). 
It  was  from  these  schools  and  the  doctrines  of  the 
various  teachers  presiding  over  them,  of  whom 
Gamaliel,  Sammai,  and  Hillel  were  among  the 
most  famous,  that  many  of  those  traditions  and 
refinements  proceeded  by  which  the  Law  was  in 
our  Lord's  time  encumbered  and  obscured,  and 
which  may  be  considered  as  represented,  though 
in  a  highly  exaggerated  degree,  by  the  Talmud. 
After  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  colleges  in- 
heriting and  probably  enlarging  the  traditions  of 
their  predecessors,  were  maintained  for  a  long  time 
at  Japhne  in  Galilee,  at  Lydda;  at  Tiberias,  the 
most  famous  of  all,  and  Sepphoris.  These  schools 
in  process  of  time  were  dispersed  into  other  coun- 
tries, and  by  degrees  destroyed.  According  to  the 
principles  laid  down  in  the  Mishna,  boys  at  five 
years  of  age  were  to  begin  the  Scriptures,  at  ten 
the  Mishna,  at  thirteen  they  became  subject  to 
the  whole  Law  (see  Luke  ii.  46),  at  fifteen  they 
entered  the  Gemara  (Mishna  Pirk.  Ab.  iv.  20, 
v.  21,  vol.  iv.  pp.  460,  482,  486,  Surenhus.). 
Teachers  were  treated  with  great  respect,  and  both 
pupils  and  teachers  were  exhorted  to  respect  each 
other.  Physical  science  formed  part  of  the  course 
of  instruction  (16.  iii.  18).  Unmarried  men  and 
women  were  not  allowed  to  be  teachers  of  boys 
{Kiddush.  iv.  13,  vol.  iii.  p.  383).  In  the  schools 
the  Rabbins  sat  on  raised  seats,  and  the  scholars, 
according  to  their  age,  sat  on  benches  below  or  on 
the  ground  (Lightfoot  on  Luke  ii.  46;  Philo,  ibid. 
12,  ii.  458,  Mangey). 

Of  female  education  we  have  little  account  in 
Scripture,  but  it  is  clear  that  the  prophetical 
schools  included  within  their  scope  the  instruction 
of  females,  who  were  occasionally  invested  with 
authority  similar  to  that  of  the  Prophets  them- 
selves (Judg.  iv.  4  ;  2  K.  xxii.  14).  Needlework 
formed  a  large  but  by  no  means  the  only  subject 
of  instruction  imparted  to  females,  whose  position 
in  society  and  in  the  household  must  by  no  means 
be  considered  as  represented  in  modern  Oriental — 
including  Mohammedan — usage  (see  Prov.  xxxi.  16, 
26 ;  Hist,  of  Sus.  3  ;  Luke  viii.  2,  3,  x.  39  ;  Acts 
xiii.  50;   2  Tim.  i.  5). 

Among  modern  Mohammedans,  education,  even 
of  boys,  is  of  a  most  elementary  kind,  and  of 
females  still  more  limited.  In  one  respect  it  may 
be  considered  as  the  likeness  or  the  caricature  of 
the  Jewish  system,  viz.  that  besides  the  most 
common  rules  of  arithmetic,  the  Kuran  is  made 
the  staple,  if  not  the  only  subject  of  instruction. 
In  Oriental  schools,  both  Jewish  and  Mohamme- 
dan, the  lessons  are  written  by  each  scholar  with 
chalk    on   tablets    which    are    cleaned    for    a    fresh 

lev All    recite    their    lessons    together  aloud  ; 

faults  are  usually  punished  by  stripes  on  the  feet. 
Female  children  are,  among  Mohammedans,  seldom 
tin  lit  to  read  or  write.  A  few  chapters  of  lie 
Koran   are    learnt   by   heart,   ami    in    some   schools 

they  are  taught   embroidery  and  n Ilework.     In 

Persia  there  are  many  public  schools  and  colleges, 
but    the   children   .if  the    wealthier    parent 
mostly  taught  at  home.     The    Kuian    forms    the 
staple  of  instruction,  beinj  ,     the   mod.-l 

not  only  of  doctrine  bui  of  style,  and  the  lextr 
book   of  all   science.      |n   the   colleges,  however, 


494 


EGLAH 


mathematics  are  taught  to  some  extent  (Jahn, 
Arch.  Bibl.  §§106,  166,  Engl.  Tr. ;  Shaw,  Tra- 
vels, p.  194- ;  Rauwolff,  Travels,  c.  vii.  p.  60  ; 
Burckhardt,  Syria,  p.  326  ;  Travels  in  Arabia,  i. 
275;  Porter,  Damascus,  ii.  p.  95  ;  Lane,  Mod. 
Eg.,  i.  p.  89,  93;  Englishw.  in  Eg.,  ii.  28,  31  ; 
Wellsted,  Arabia,  ii.  6,  395;  Chardin,  Voyages, 
iv.  224  (Langle's);  Olearius,  Travels,?.  214,  215  ; 
Pietro  della  Valle,  Viaggi,  ii.  p.  188).  [Schools 
OF  PROI'HETS.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

EG'LAH  (jhlV,  "a heifer;"  Aly<L\mA'Ay\d; 

Ei /lii),  one  of  David's  wives  during  his  reign  in 
Hebron,  and  the  mother  of  his  son  Ithream  (2  Sam. 
iii.  5 ;  1  Chr.  iii.  3).  In  both  lists  the  same  order 
is  preserved,  Eglah  being  the  sixth  and  last,  and  in 
both  is  she  distinguished  by  the  special  title  of 
David's  "  wife."  According  to  the  ancient  Hebrew 
tradition  preserved  by  Jerome  (Qnaest.  Hebr.  on 
2  Sam.  iii.  5,  vi.  23)  she  was  Michal,  the  wife  of 
his  youth  ;  and  she  died  in  giving  birth  to  Ithream. 
A  name  of  this  signification  is  common  amongst 
the  Arabs  at  the  present  day. 

EGLA'IM  (D^JN  =  "  two  ponds ;"  'AyaXelfx. ; 
Gallim),  a  place  named  only  in  Is.  xv.  8,  and  there 
apparently  as  one  of  the  most  remote  points  on  the 
boundary  of  Moab.  It  is  probably  the  same  as 
En-eglaim.  A  town  of  this  name  was  known  to 
Eusebius  (Onom.  Agallim),  who  places  it  8  miles 
to  the  south  of  Areopolis,  i.  e.  Ar-Moab  (Rabba). 
Exactly  in  that  position,  however,  stands  Kerak, 
the  ancient  Kir  Moab. 

A  town  named  Agalla  is  mentioned  by  Josephus 
with  Zoar  and  other  places  as  in  the  country  of  the 
Arabians  (Ant.  xiv.  1,  §4). 

With  most  of  the  places  on  the  east  of  the  Dead 
Sea,  Eglaim  yet  awaits  further  research  for  its 
identification.  [G.] 

EG'LON  {\ViV\  'E7A<V.;  Joseph.  'E-yA<J>j>; 

Eglon),  a  king  of' the  Moabites  (Judg.  iii.  12  ff.), 
who,  aided  by  the  Ammonites  and  the  Amalekites, 
crossed  the  Jordan  and  took  "  the  city  of  palm- 
trees,"  or  Jericho  (Joseph.).  Here  he  built  him- 
self a  palace  (Joseph.  Ant.  v.  4,  §1  ff.),  and 
continued  for  eighteen  years  (Judg.  and  Joseph.) 
to  oppress  the  children  of  Israel,  who  paid  him 
tribute  (Joseph.).  Whether  he  resided  at  Jericho 
permanently,  or  only  during  the  summer  months 
(Judg.  iii.  20;  Joseph.),  he  seems  to  have  formed 
a  familiar  intimacy  ((tvvt}6t]s,  Joseph,  not  Judg.) 
with  Ehud,  a  young  Israelite  (veavias,  Joseph.), 
who  lived  in  Jericho  (Joseph,  not  Judg.),  and 
who,  by  means  of  repeated  presents,  became  a 
favourite  courtier  of  the  monarch.  Josephus  re- 
presents this  intimacy  as  having  been  of  long  con- 
tinuance ;  but  in  Judges  we  find  no  mention  of 
intimacy,  and  only  one  occasion  of  a  present  being 
made,  viz.,  that  which  immediately  preceded  the 
death  of  Eglon.  The  circumstances  attending  this 
tragical  event  are  somewhat  differently  given  in 
Judges  and  in  Josephus.  That  Ehud  had  the  entree 
of  the  palace  is  implied  in  Judges  (iii.  19),  but 
more  distinctly  stated  in  Josephus.  In  Judges 
the  Israelites  send  a  present  by  Ehud  (iii.  15);  in 
Josephus  Ehud  wins  his  favour  by  repeated  pre- 
sents of  his  own.  In  Judges  we  have  two  scenes, 
the  offering  of  the  present  and  the  death  scene, 
which  are  separated  by  the  temporary  withdrawal 
of  Ehud  (18,  19);  in  Josephus  there  is  but  one 
scene.     The  present  is  offered,  the  attendants  are 


EGYPT 

dismissed,  and  the  king  enters  into  fiiendly  conver- 
sation (ofiiXtav)  with  Ehud.  In  Judges  the  place 
seems  to  change  from  the  reception-room  into  the 
"  summer-parlour,"  where  Ehud  found  him  upon 
his  return  (cf.  18,  20).  In  Josephus  the  entire 
action  takes  place  in  the  summer- parlour  (Sai/j.a- 
tiov).  In  Judges  the  king  exposes  himself  to  the 
dagger  by  rising  apparently  in  respect  for  the  divine 
message  which  Ehud  professed  to  communicate 
(Patrick,  ad  loc.)  :  in  Josephus  it  is  a  dream  which 
Ehud  pretends  to  reveal,  and  the  king,  in  delighted 
anticipation,  springs  up  from  his  throne.  The 
obesity  of  Eglon,  and  the  consequent  impossibility 
of  recovering  the  dagger,  are  not  mentioned  by 
Josephus  (vid.  Judg.  iii.  17,  fat,  atrreios,  LXX. ; 
but  "  crassus,"  Vulg.,  and  so  Gesen.  Lex.). 

After  this  desperate  achievement  Ehud  repaired 
to  Seirah  (improp.  Seirath ;  vid.  Gesen.  Lex.  sub 
v.),  in  the  mountains  of  Ephraim  (iii.  26,  27),  or 
Mount  Ephraim  (Josh.  xix.  50).  To  this  wild 
central  region,  commanding,  as  it  did,  the  plains 
E.  and  W.,  he  summoned  the  Israelites  by  sound 
of  hom  (a  national  custom  according  to  Joseph. ; 
A.  V.  "a  trumpet").  Descending  from  the  hills 
they  fell  upon  the  Moabites,  dismayed  and  demo- 
ralized by  the  death  of  their  king  (Joseph,  not 
Judg.).  The  greater  number  were  killed  at  once, 
but  10,000  men  made  for  the  Jordan  with  the 
view  of  crossing  into  their  own  country.  The 
Israelites,  however,  had  already  seized  the  fords, 
and  not  one  of  the  unhappy  fugitives  escaped.  As 
a  reward  for  his  conduct  Ehud  was  appointed  Judge 
(Joseph,  not  Judg.). 

Note. — The  "  quarries  that  were  by  Gilgal " 
(iii.  19) :  in  the  margin  better,  as  in  Deut.  vii.  25, 
"  graven  images"  (Patrick  ad  loc:  cf.  Gesen.  Heb. 

Lex.  sub  v.  D^DS).  [T.  E.  B.] 

EG'LON  (fbty ;  in  Josh.  x.  'OSoAAc^,  Vat. 

and  Alex.;  Al\d/x,  'EyKw/x;  Eglon,  Aglon), atown 
of  Jndah  in  the  Shefelah  or  low  country  (Josh. 
xv.  39).  During  the  struggles  of  the  conquest, 
Eglon  was  one  of  a  confederacy  of  five  towns, 
which  under  Jerusalem  attempted  resistance,  by 
attacking  Gibeon  after  the  treaty  of  the  latter  with 
Israel.  Eglon  was  then  Amorite,  and  the  name  of 
its  king  Debir  (Josh.  x.  3-5).  The  story  of  the 
overthrow  of  this  combination  is  too  well-known  to 
need  notice  here  (x.  23-25,  &c).  Eglon  was  soon 
after  visited  by  Joshua  and  destroyed  (x.  34,  35, 
xii.  12).  The  name  doubtless  survives  in  the  mo- 
dern Ajlan,  "  a  shapeless  mass  of  ruins,"  "  pot- 
sherds," and  "  scattered  heaps  of  unhewn  stones," 
covering  a  "  round  hillock  "  (Porter,  Handb.  ;  Van 
de  Velde,  ii.  188;  Rob.  ii.  49),  about  10  miles 
from  Beit  Jibrin  (Eleutheropolis)  and  14  from 
Gaza,  on  the  south  of  the  great  maritime  plain. 

In  the  Onomasticon  it  is  given  as  Eglon  quae  et 
Odollam ;  and  its  situation  stated  as  10  miles  east 
of  Eleutheropolis.  The  identification  with  Adullam 
arose  no  doubt  from  the  reading  of  the  LXX.  in 
Josh,  x.,  as  given  above;  and  it  is  to  the  site  of 
that  place,  and  not  of  Eglon,  that  the  remarks  of 
Eusebius  and  Jerome  refer.  This  will  be  seen  on 
comparing  Adollam.  No  reason  has  been  assigned 
for  the  reading  of  the  LXX.  [G.j 

E'GYPT  (D^VO,  DnVP  HN,  I'l^,  gen*-  »• 
,_1VD  ;  AlyvKTos ;  Aeggptus),  a  country  occupy- 
ing the  north-eastern  angle  of  Africa,  and  lying 
between  N.  lat.  31°  37'  and  24°  1',  and  E.  long. 


EGYPT 

27°  13'  and  34°  12'.  Its  limits  appear  to  have  been 
always  very  nearly  the  same.  In  Ezekiel  (xxix.  10, 
xxx.  6),  according  to  the  obviously-correct  render- 
ing [MlGDOL],  the  whole  country  is  spoken  of  as 
extending  from  Migdol  to  Syene,  which  indicates  the 
same  limits  to  the  east  and  the  south  as  at  present. 
Egypt  seems,  however,  to  have  been  always  held,  ex- 
cept  by  the  modern  geographers,  to  include  no  more 
than  the  tract  irrigated  by  the  Nile  lying  within  the 
limits  we  have  specified.  The  deserts  were  at  all  times 
wholly  diffeient  from  the  valley,  and  their  tribes, 
more  or  less  independent  of  the  rulers  of  Egypt. 

Names. — The  common  name  of  Egypt  in  the 
Bible  is  "Mizraim,"  or  more  fully  "  the  land  of  Miz- 
raim."  In  form  Mizraim  is  a  dual,  and  accordingly 
it  is  general!}'  joined  with  a  plural  verb.  When, 
therefore,  in  Gen.  x.  6,  Mizraim  is  mentioned  as  a  son 
of  Ham,  we  must  not  conclude  that  anything  more 
is  meant  than  that  Egypt  was  colonized  by  de- 
scendants of  Ham.  The  dual  number  doubtless 
indicates  the  natural  division  of  the  country  into  an 
upper  and  a  lower  region,  the  plain  of  the  Delta  and 
the  narrow  valley  above,  as  it  has  been  commonly 
divided  at  all  times.  The  singular  Mazor  also 
occurs,  and  some  suppose  that-  it  indicates  Lower 
Egypt,  the  dual  only  properly  meaning  the  whole 
country  (thus  Gesenius,  Thes.  s.  vv.  "I1VD-  D'HVO), 
but  there  is  no  sure  ground  for  this  assertion.  The 
mention  of  Mizraim  and  Pathros  together  (Is.  xi. 
1 1  ;  Jer.  xliv.  1,  15),  even  if  we  adopt  the  explana- 
tion which  supposes  Mizraim  to  be  in  these  places  by 
a  late  usage  put  for  Mazor,  by  no  means  proves  that 
since  Pathros  is  a  part  of  Egypt,  Mizraim,  or  rather 
Mazor,  is  here  a  part  also.  The  mention  together 
of  a  part  of  a  country  as  well  as  the  whole  is  very 
usual  in  Hebrew  phraseology.  Gesenius  thinks 
that  the  Hebrews  supposed  the  word  "11  ¥0  to 
mean  a  limit,  although  he  admits  it  may  have 
had  a  different  Egyptian  origin.  Since  we  cannot 
trace  it  to  Egyptian,  except  as  a  translation,  we 
consider  it  a  purely  Semitic  word,  as  indeed 
would  be  most  likely.  Gesenius  finds  the  signi- 
fication "limit"  in   the  Arabic  name  of  Egypt, 

o 
yj&so  i  but  this  word  also  means  "  red  mud,"  the 

colour  intended  being  either  red  or  reddish  brown. 

Egypt  is  also  called  in  the  Bible  D!l  |'"IX 
"the  land  of  Ham"  (Ps.  cv.  23,  27  T  comp. 
lxxviii.  51),  a  name  most  probably  referring  to 
Ham  the  son  of  Noah  [Ham]  ;  and  2H1,  Rahab, 
"the  proud"  or  "insolent"  [Rahab]  :  both 
these  appear  to  be  poetical  appellations.  The 
common  ancient  Egyptian  name  of  the  country  is 
written  in  hieroglyphics  K'EM,  which  was  perhaps 
pronounced  Chem  ;  the  demotic  form  is  KEMEE  a 
(Brugsch,  Geographisc/ie  Inschriften,  i.  p.  73,  No. 
362);  and  the  Coptic  forms  are  'V'A.JULH? 
XHAJLKM,;   k'HJLte,  KHJULH  (S),  and 

KHJULI  (B).b  This  name  signifies,  alike  in  the 
ancient  language  and  in  Coptic,  "  black,"  and  maj 
be  supposed  to  have  been  given  to  the  land  on  ac- 
count of  the  blackness  of  its  alluvial  soil  (comp. 
Plat,  de  Ts.  et  Osir.  c.  33.  tri  tt\v  htywn-Tov  *v 
to?s  fxaKicrra  fieXayyeiov  ovaav,  Sieve  p  to  fue- 
\av  tov  6(pda\fiov,  Xrifxlav  KaAof'trt).      It  would 


EGYPT 


495 


seem,  as  thus  descriptive  of  the  physical  character 
of  the  land,  to  be  the  Egyptian  equivalent  of  Mazor, 
if  the  meaning  we  have  assigned  to  that  word  be 
the  true  one.  In  this  case  it  would  appear  strange 
that  it  should  correspond  in  sound  to  flam,  and  in 
sense  to  Mazor  or  Mizraim.  It  is  probable,  however 
(comp.  Plut.  I.  c),  that  it  also  corresponded  in 
sense  to  Ham,  implying  warmth  as  well  as  dark- 

ness.     In  Arabic  we  find  the  cognate  word  1^-^ 

"  black  fetid  mud"  (A'«moos),  or  "black  mud" 
(Sihdh,  MS.),  which  suggests  the  identity  of  Ham 
and  Mazor.  Therefore  we  may  reasonably  conjec- 
ture that  Kern  is  the  Egyptian  equivalent  of  Ham, 
and  also  of  Mazor,  these  two  words  being  similar  or 
even  the  same  in  sense.  The  name  Ham  may  have 
been  prophetically  given  to  Noah's  son  as  the  proge- 
nitor of  the  inhabitants  of  Egypt  and  neighbouring 
hot  or  dark  countries.  The  other  hieroglyphic  names 
of  Egypt  appear  to  be  of  a  poetical  character. 

Under  the  Pharaohs  Egypt  was  divided  into 
Upper  and  Lower,  "  the  two  regions  "  TA-TEE  ? 
called  respectively  "  the  Southern  Region "  TA- 
RES, and  "  the  Northern  Region"  TA-MEHEET. 
There  were  different  crowns  for  the  two  regions, 
that  of -Upper  Egypt  being  white,  and  that  of 
Lower  Egypt  red,  the  two  together  composing 
the  pschent.  The  sovereign  had  a  special  title 
as  ruler  of  each  region  :  of  Upper  Egypt  he  was 
SUTEN,  "  king,"  and  of  Lower  Egypt  SHEBT, 
"  bee,"  the  two  combined  forming  the  common 
title  SUTEN-SHEBT.  The  initial  sign  of  the 
former  name  is  a  bent  reed,  which  illustrates  what 
seems  to  have  been  a  proverbial  expression  in  Pales- 
tine as  to  the  danger  of  trusting  to  the  Pharaohs 
and  Egypt  (1  K.  xviii.  21  ;  Is.  xxxvi.  6  ;  Ez. 
xxix.  6  ) :  the  latter  name  may  throw  light  upon  the 
comparison  of  the  king  of  Egypt  to  a  fly,  and  the 
king  of  Assyria  to  a  bee  (Is.  vii.  18).  It  must  be 
remarked  that  Upper  Egypt  is  always  mentioned 
before  Lower  Egypt,  and  that  the  crown  of  the 
former  in  the  pschent  rises  above  that  of  the  latter. 
In  subsequent  times  this  double  division  obtained. 
Manetho  speaks  of  T7ji/  re  &voo  Kal  Karoi  x&f>av 
(ap.  Jos.  c.  Apion.  i.  14),  and  under  the  Ptolemies 
fiao~i\evs  tSiv  re  &voi  Kal  twv  icarco  xwP^p 
(Rosetta  Stone)  occurs,  as  equivalent  to  the  title 
mentioned  above.  In  the  time  of  the  Greeks  ami 
Romans  Upper  Egypt  was  divided  into  the  Hepta- 
nomis  and  the  Thebais,  making  altogether  tine. 
provinces,  but  the  division  of  the  whole  couutry 
into  two  was  even  then  the  most  usual. 

Superficies. — Egypt  has  a  superficies  of  about 
9582  square  geographical  miles  of  soil,  which  the 
Nile  either  does  or  can  water  and  fertilise.  This  com- 
putation includes  the  river  and  lakes  as  well  as  sandy 
tracts  which  can  be  inundated,  and  the  whole  space 
either  cultivated  or  fit  for  cultivation  is  no  more  than 
about  5()2'i  square  miles.  Anciently  2735  square 
miles  more  may  have  been  cultivated,  and  now  it 
would  be  possible  at  once  to  reclaim  about  1295 
square  miles.  These  computations  are  those  of 
Colonel  Jacotin  and  M.  Estfeve,  given  in  the  Memoir 
of  the  former  in  the  great  French  work  (Description 
'A'  VEgypte,  2nd  ed.  xviii.  pt.  ii.  pp.  L01,  et  seqq. ). 
They  must  be  very  nearly  tine  of  the  actual  state  of 
the  country  at  the  present  time.  Mr.  Lane  calcu- 
lated the  extent  of  the  cultivate!  lam!  in  a.  ii.  777, 


a  The  system  of  transcribing  ancient  Egyptian  is 
that  sdven  by  the  writer,  in  the  Encyclopaedia  Bri- 
tannica,  sth  ed.  art.  "  Hieroglyphics." 


b  The  letters  M,  S,  anil  1!  denote  here  and  else- 
where the  Mrmphitic,  Saliidic,  and  Bashmuric  dia- 
lects. 


496 


EGYPT 


A.D.  1375-6,'  to  be  5500  square  geographical  miles, 
from  a  list  of  the  cultivated  lands  of  towns  and 
villages  appende  I  to  De  Sacy's  Abel  Allatif.  He 
thinks  this  list  may  be  underrated.  M.  Mengin 
made  the  cultivated  laud  much  less  in  1821,  but 
since  then  much  waste  territory  has  been  reclaimed 
(Mrs.  Poole,  Englishwoman  in  Egypt,  i.  p.  85). 
The  chief  differences  in  the  character  of  the  surface 
in  the  times  before  the  Christian  era  were  that  the 
long  valley  through  which  flowed  the  canal  between 
the  Nile  and  the  Red  Sea  was  then  cultivated,  and 
that  the  Gulf  of  Suez  extended  much  further  north 
than  at  present. 

Nomes. — From  a  remote  period  Egypt  was  di- 
vided into  Nomes,  HESPU,  sing.  HESP,  each  one 
of  which  had  its  special  objects  of  worship.  The 
monuments  show  that  this  division  was  as  old  as 
the  earlier  part  of  the  Twelfth  Dynasty,  which  began 
B.C.  cir.  2082.  They  are  said  to  have  been  first  36 
in  number.  Ptolemy  enumerates  44,  and  Pliny  46  ; 
afterwards  they  were  further  increased.  There  is  no 
distinct  reference  to  them  in  the  Bible.    In  the  LXX 

version  indeed,  i"D?pID  (Is.  xix.  2)  is  rendered  by 
v6j.los,  but  we  have  no  warrant  lor  translating  it 
otherwise  than  "  kingdom."  It  is  probable  that  at 
that  time  there  were  two,  if  not  three,  kingdoms  in 
the  country.  Two  provinces  or  districts  of  Egypt 
are  mentioned  in  the  Bible,  Pathros  and  Caphtor ; 
the  former  appears  to  have  been  pail  of  Upper  Egypt, 
the  latter  was  certainly  so,  and  must  be  represented 
by  the  Coptite  Nome,  although  no  doubt  of  greater 
extent.     [Pathros  ;  Caphtok.] 

General  appearance,  Climate,  $c. — The  general 
appearance  of  the  country  cannot  have  greatly 
changed  since  the  days  of  Moses.  The  Delta  was 
always  a  vast  level  plain,  although  of  old  more 
perfectly  watered  than  now  by  the  branches  of 
the  Nile  and  numerous  canals,  while  the  narrow 
valley  of  Upper  Egypt  must  have  suffered  still  less 
alteration.  Anciently,  however,  the  rushes  must 
have  been  abundant;  whereas  now  they  have  al- 
most disappeared,  except  in  the  lakes.  The  whole 
country  is  remarkable  for  its  extreme  fertility, 
which  especially  strikes  the  beholder  when  the  rich 
green  of  the  fields  is  contrasted  with  the  utterly-bare 
yellow  mountains  or  the  sand-strewn  rocky  desert 
on  either  side.  Thus  the  plain  of  Jordan  before  the 
cities  were  destroyed  was,  we  read,  "  well  watered 
every  where"  .  .  .  .  "  [even]  like  a  garden  of  the 
Lord,  like  the  laud  of  Egypt"  (Gen.  xiii.  10).  The 
climate  is  equable  and  healthy.  Pain  is  not  very 
unfrequent  on  the  northern  coast,  but  inland  very 
rare.  Cultivation  nowhere  depends  upon  it.  This 
absence  of  rain  is  mentioned  in  Deut.  Cxi.  10,  11) 
as  rendering  artificial  irrigation  necessary,  unlike 
the  case  of  Palestine,  and  in  Zech.  (xiv.  18)  as 
peculiar  to  the  country.  Egypt  has  been  visited 
at  all  ages  by  severe  pestilences,  but  it  cannot  be 
determined  that  any  of  those  of  ancient  times  were 
of  the  character  of  the  modern  Plague.  The  plague 
with  which  the  Egyptians  are  threatened  in  Zech. 
(/.  c.)  is  described  by  a  word,  nQ30,  which  is 
not  specially  applicable  to  a  pestilence  of  their 
country  (see  ver.  12).  Cutaneous  disorders,  which 
have  always  been  very  prevalent  in  Egypt,  are 
distinctly  mentioned  as  peculiar  to  the  Wintry 
(Deut.  vii.  15,  xxviii.  27,  35,  60,  and  perhaps 
Ex.  xv.  20,  though  here  the  reference  may  be 
to  the  Plague  of  Boils),  and  as  punishments  to  the 
Israelites  in  case  of  disobedience,  whereas  if  they 


EGYPT 

obeyed  they  were  to  be  preserved  from  them. 
The  Egyptian  calumny  that  made  the  Israelites  a 
body  of  lepers  and  unclean  (Jos.  c.  Apion.)  is  thus 
refuted,  and  the  traditional  tale  as  to  the  Exodus 
given  by  Manetho  shown  to  be  altogether  wrong  in 
its  main  facts  which  depend  upon  the  truth  of  this 
assertion.  Famines  are  frequent,  and  one  in  the 
middle  ages,  in  the  time  of  the  Fatimee  Khaleefeh 
El-Mustansir-billah,  seems  to  have  been  even  more 
severe  than  that  of  Joseph.     [Famine.] 

Geology. — The  fertile  plain  of  the  Delta  and  the 
valley  of  Upper  Egypt  are  bounded  by  rocky  deserts 
covered  or  strewn  with  sand.  On  either  side  of  the 
plain  they  are  low,  but  they  overlook  the  valley, 
above  which  they  rise  so  steeply  as  from  the  river 
to  present  the  aspect  of  cliffs.  The  formation  is 
limestone  as  far  as  a  little  above  Thebes,  where 
sandstone  begins.  The  First  Cataract,  the  southern 
limit  of  Egypt,  is  caused  by  granite  and  other 
primitive  rocks,  which  rise  through  the  sandstone 
and  obstruct  the  river's  bed.  In  Upper  Egypt 
the  mountains  near  the  Nile  rarely  exceed  300 
feet  in  their  height,  but  far  in  the  eastern  desert 
they  often  attain  a  much  greater  elevation.  The 
highest  is  Gebel  Ghdrib,  which  rises  about  6000 
feet  above  the  sea.  Limestone,  sandstone,  and 
granite  were  obtained  from  quarries  near  the  river; 
basalt,  breccia,  and  porphyry  from  others  in  the 
eastern  desert  between  the  Thebai's  and  the  Red 
Sea.  An  important  geological  change  has  in  the 
course  of  centuries  raised  the  country  near  the  head 
of  the  Gulf  of  Suez,  and  depressed  that  on  the 
northern  side  of  the  isthmus.  Since  the  Christian 
era  the  head  of  the  Gulf  has  retired  southwards, 
as  prophesied  by  Isaiah — "  The  Lord  shall  utterly 
destroy  the  tongue  of  the  Egyptian  sea"  (xi.  15)  ; 
"  the  waters  shall  fail  from  the  sea"  (xix.  5). 
The  Delta  is  of  a  triangular  form,  its  eastern  and 
western  limits  being  nearly  marked  by  the  courses 
of  the  ancient  Pelusiac  and  Canopic  branches  of  the 
Nile  :  Upper  Egypt  is  a  narrow  winding  valley, 
varying  in  breadth,  but  seldom  more  than  12  miles 
across,  and  generally  broadest  on  the  western  side. 
Anciently  there  was  a  fertile  valley  on  the  course 
of  the  Canal  of  the  Red  Sea,  the  Land  of  Goshen, 
now  called  Wddi-t  Tamei/Idt :  this  is  covered  with 
the  sands  of  the  desert.  [Goshen.]  To  the  south, 
on  the  opposite  side,  is  the  oasis  now  called  the 
Fev/oom,  the  old  Arsinoite  Nome,  connected  with 
the  valley  by  a  neck  of  cultivated  land. 

The  Nile.— The  Nile  is  called  in  the  Bible  Shihor, 
"lirW,  or  "  the  black  (river);"  Year,  TW,  "lfc», 
"  the  river,"  probably  derived  from  the  Egyptian 
ATUR,  AUR ;  DnX?  "'L1?-  "  the  river  of  Egypt ;" 
and  D'HVD  'Pl'U,  either""  the  brook,"  if  the  first  word 
be  not  a  proper  name;  or  else  the  "  Nahal  (Nile)  of 
Egypt,"  to  which,  if  the  latter  rendering  be  correct, 
7l"0  alone  must  be  added.  These  names  are  dis- 
cussed in  another  article.  [Nile.]  In  Egyptian 
the  Nile  bore  the  sacred  appellation  HAPEE  or 
HAPEE-MU,  "the  abyss,"  or  "the  abyss  of 
waters."  As  Egypt  was  divided  into  two  regions, 
we  find  two  Niles,  HAPEE-EES,  "  the  Southern 
Nile,"  and  HAPEE-MEHEET  "' the  Northern 
Nile,"  the  former  name  being  given  to  the  river 
in  Upper  Egypt  ami  in  Nubia.  The  common  appel- 
lation is  ATUR,  or  AUR,  "  the  river,"  which  may 
be  compared  to  the  Hebrew  Year.  This  word  has 
been  preserved  in  the  Coptic  appellation   GIGpOi 


EGYPT 

I<LpO,  I<LpU)  CM),  IGpO  (S),  which  like- 
wise also  signifies  "  the  river."  The  inundation, 
HAPEE-UR,  "  great  Nile,"  or  "  high  Nile,"  fer- 
tilizes and  sustains  the  country,  and  makes  the  river 
its  chief  blessing ;  a  very  low  inundation  or  failure  of 
rising  being  the  cause  of  famine.  The  Nile  was  on 
this  account  anciently  worshipped,  and  the  plague 
in  which  its  waters  were  turned  into  blood,  while 
injurious  to  the  river  itself  and  its  fish  (Ex.  vii. 
'21  ;  Ps.  cv.  29),  was  a  reproof  to  the  superstition 
of  the  Egyptians.  The  rise  begins  in  Egypt  about 
the  summer  solstice,  and  the  inundation  commences 
about  two  months  later.  The  greatest  height  is 
attained  about  or  somewhat  after  the  autumnal 
equinox.  The  inundation  lasts  about  three  mouths. 
During  this  time,  and  especially  when  near  the 
highest,  the  river  rapidly  pours  along  its  red  turbid 
waters,  and  spreads  through  openings  in  its  banks 
over  the  whole  valley  and  plain.  The  prophet  Amos, 
speaking  of  the  ruin  of  Israel,  metaphorically  says 
that  "  the  land  .  .  .  shall  be  drowned,  as  [by]  the 
flood  [river]  of  Egypt"  (viii.  8,  ix.  5).  The  rate  at 
which  the  Nile  deposits  the  alluvial  soil  of  Egypt 
has  been  the  subject  of  interesting  researches,  which 
have  as  yet  led  to  no  decisive  result. 

Cultivation,  Agriculture,  $c. — The  ancient  pros- 
perity of  Egypt  is  attested  by  the  Bible  as  well  as  by 
the  numerous  monuments  of  the  country.  As  early 
as  the  age  of  the  Great  Pyramid  it  must  have  been 
densely  populated  and  well  able  to  support  its  inha- 
bitants, for  it  cannot  be  supposed  that  there  was 
then  much  external  traffic.  In  such  a  climate  the 
wants  of  man  are  few,  and  nature  is  liberal  in  neces- 
sary food.  Even  the  Israelites  in  their  hard  bond- 
age did  "eat  freely"  the  fish  and  the  vegetables 
and  fruits  of  the  country,  and  ever  afterwards  they 
longed  to  return  to  the  idle  plenty  of  a  land  where 
even  now  starvation  is  unknown.  The  contrast  of 
the  present  state  of  Egypt  to  its  former  prosperity 
is  more  to  be  ascribed  to  political  than  to  physical 
causes.  It  is  true  that  the  branches  of  the  Nile 
have  failed,  the  canals  and  the  artificial  lakes  and 
ponds  for  fish  are  dried  up  ;  that  the  reeds  and  other 
water-plants  which  were  of  value  in  commerce,  and 
a  shelter  for  wild-fowl,  have  in  most  parts  perished  ; 
that  the  land  of  Goshen,  once,  at  least  for  pasture, 
"  the  best  of  the  land  "  (Gen.  xlvii.  6,  11),  is 
now  sand-strewn  and  unwatered  so  as  scarcely  to 
be  distinguished  from  the  desert  around,  and  that 
the  predictions  of  the  prophets  have  thus  received 
a  literal  fulfilment  (sec  especially  Is.  xix.  5-10), 
yet  this  has  not  been  by  any  irresistible  aggression 
nt'  nature,  but  because  Egypt,  smitten  and  accursed, 
has  lost  all  strength  and  energy.  The  population 
is  not  large  enough  for  the  cultivation  of  the  land 
now  fit  for  culture,  and  long  oppression  has  taken 
from  it  the  power  and  the  will  to  advance. 

Egypt  is  naturally  an  agricultural  country.  As 
far  back  as  the  days  of  Abraham,  we  find  thai  when 
the  produce  failed  in  Palestine,  Egypt  was  the 
natural  resource.  In  the  time  of  Joseph  it  was 
evidently  the  granary — at  least  during  famines — of 
the  nations  around.  Tin'  inundation,  as  taking  the 
place  of  rain,  has  always  rendered  the  system  of 
agriculture  peculiar;  and  the  artificial  irrigation 
during  the  time  of  low  Nile  is  necessarily  on  the 
same  principle.  We  read  of  the  Land  of  Promise 
that  it  is  "not  as  the  land  of  Egypt,  from  whence 
ye  came  out,  where  thou  sowedst  thy  seed,  and 
wateredst  [it]  with  thy  foot,  as  a  garden  of  herbs: 
but  the  land  whither  thou   goest   in  to  possess   it. 


EGYPT 


497 


[is]  a  land  of  hills  and  valleys,  [and]  drinketh 
water  of  the  rain  of  heaven"  (Deut.  xi.  10,  11). 
Watering  with  the  foot  may  refer  to  some  mode  of 
irrigation  by  a  machine,  but  we  are  inclined  to 
think  that  it  is  an  idiomatic  expression  implying  a 
laborious  work.  The  monuments  do  not  afford  a 
representation  of  the  supposed  machine.  That  now 
called  the  shadoof,  which  is  a  pole  having  a  weight 


Shddoof,  or  pole  and  bucket,  for  watering  the  garden.    (Wilkinson.) 

at  one  end  and  a  bucket  at  the  other,  so  hung  that 
the  labourer  is  aided  by  the  weight  in  raising  the 
full  bucket,  is  depicted,  and  seems  to  have  been  the 
common  means  of  artificial  irrigation.  There  are 
detailed  pictures  of  breaking  up  the  earth,  or 
ploughing,  sowing,  harvest,  threshing,  and  storing 


.-"Wry^ug: 


Granary,  showing  how  the  grain  was  put  in,  and  that  the  doors  a  b 
were  intended  for  taking  it  out.     (Wilkinson.) 

the  wheat  in  granaries.  The  threshing  was  simply 
treading  out  by  oxen  or  cows,  unmuzzled  (comp. 
Deut.  xxv.  4).  The  processes  of  agriculture  began 
as  soon  as  the  water  of  the  inundation  had  sunk 
into  tin'  soil,  about  a  month  after  tho  autumnal 
equinox,  ami  the  harvest-time  was  about  and  soon 
after  the  venial  equinox  (Ex.  ix.  31,  32).  Vines 
were  extensively  cultivated,  and  there  were  several 

different  kinds  of  wine,  oi f  which,  tho  Ms 

was  famous  among  the  Romans.  Of  other  fruit- 
trees,  tlio  date-palm  was  the  most  common  and 
valuable.  The  gardens  resembled  the  fields,  being 
l  in  tlir  same  manner  by  irrigation.  On  the 
tenure  of  land  much  light   is  thrown  by  tho  history 

2  K 


498 


EGYPT 


of  Joseph.  Before  the  famine  each  city  and  large 
village — for  "VJ?  must  be  held  to  have  a  wider  sig- 
nification than  our  "city" — had  its  field  (Gen.  xli. 
48)  ;  but  Joseph  gained  for  Pharaoh  all  the'  land, 
except  that  of  the  priests,  in  exchange  for  food,  and 
required  for  the  right  thus  obtained  a  fifth  of  the 
produce,  which  became  a  law  (xlvii.  20-2  G).  The 
evidence  of  the  monuments,  though  not  very  explicit, 
seems  to  show  that  this  law  was  ever  afterwards  in 
force  under  the  Pharaohs.  The  earliest  records  afford 
no  information  as  to  the  tenure  of  land  ;  but  about 
Joseph's  time  we  find  frequent  mention  of  villages 
with  their  lands,  the  two  being  described  under  one 
designation,  as  held  by  the  great  officers  of  the 
crown,  apparently  by  the  royal  gift.  There  does 
not  seem  to  have  been  any  hereditary  aristocracy, 
except  perhaps  at  an  earlier  time,  and  it  is  not 
impossible  that  these  lands  may  have  been  held 
during  tenure  of  olfice  or  for  life.  The  temples 
had  lands  which  of  course  were  inalienable.  Dio- 
dorus  Siculus  states  that  all  the  lands  belonged  to 
the  crown  except  those  of  the  priests  and  the 
soldiers  (i.  73).  It  is  probable  that  the  latter, 
when  not  employed  on  active  service,  received  no 
pay,  but  were  supporte  1  by  the  crown-lands,  and 
occupied  them  for  the  time  as  their  own.  [Joseph.] 
The  great  lakes  in  the  north  of  Egypt  were  au- 
cientlv  of  high  importance,  especially  for  their 
fisheries  and  the  growth  of  the  papyrus.  Pake 
Menzeleh,  the  most  eastern  of  the  existing  lakes, 
has  still  large  fisheries,  which  support  the  people 
who  live  on  its  islands  and  shore,  the  rude  succes- 
sors of  the  independent  Egyptians  of  the  Bucolia. 
Lake  Moeris,  anciently  so  celebrated,  was  an  arti- 
ficial lake  between  P>eneo-Suweyf  and  Medeenet  El- 
Feiyoom.  It  was  of  use  to  irrigate  the  neighbour- 
ing country,  and  its  fisheries  yielded  a  great 
revenue.  It  is  now  entirely  dried  up.  The  canals 
are  now  far  less  numerous  than  of  old,  and  man}7  of 
them  are  choked  and  comparatively  useless.  The 
Bahr  Yoosuf,  or  "  river  of  Joseph" — not  the  pa- 
triarch, but  the  famous  Sultan  Yoosuf  Salah-ed- 
deen,  who  repaired  it — is  a  long  series  of  canals, 
near  the  desert  on  the  west  side  of  the  river,  ex- 
tending northward  from  Farshoot  for  about  350 
miles  to  a  little  below  Memphis.  This  was  pro- 
bably a  work  of  very  ancient  times.  There  can  be 
no  doubt  of  the  high  antiquity  of  the  Canal  of  the 
Red  Sea,  upon  which  the  land  of  Goshen  mainly 
depended  for  its  fertility.  It  does  not  follow,  how- 
ever, that  it  originally  connected  the  Nile  and  the 
Red  Sea. 

Botany. — The  cultivable  land  of  Egypt  consists 
almost  wholly  of  fields,  in  which  are  very  few  trees. 
There  are  no  forests  and  few  groves,  except  of  date- 
palms,  and  in  Lower  Egypt  a  few  of  orange  and 
lemon-trees.  There  are  also  sycomores.  mulberry- 
trees,  and  acacias,  either  planted  on  the  sides  of 
mads  or  standing  singly  in  the  fields.  The  Theban 
palm  grows  in  the  Thebais,  generally  in  clumps. 
These  were  all,  except,  perhaps,  the  mulberry-tree, 
of  old  common  in  the  country.  The  two  palnis  are 
represented  on  the  monuments,  and  sycomore  and 
acacia-wood  are  the  materials  of  various  objects  made 
by  the' ancient  inhabitants.  The  chief  fruits  are  the 
date,  sp'ape,  fig,  sycomore-fig,  pomegranate,  banana, 
many  kinds  of  melons,  and  the  olive  ;  and  there  are 
many  others  less  common  or  important.    These  were 


c  It  may  be  well  to  mention  that  the  writer  knows 
no  satisfactory  instance  of  wheat  found  in  ancient 


EGYPT 

also  of  old  produced  in  the  country.  Anciently  gar- 
dens seem  to  have  received  great  attention,  to  have 
been  elaborately  planned,  and  well  filled  with  trees 
and  shrubs.  Now  horticulture  is  neglected,  although 
the  modern  inhabitants  are  as  fond  of  flowers  as 
were  their  predecessors.  The  vegetables  are  of  many 
kinds  and  excellent,  and  form  the  chief  food  of 
the  common  people.  Anciently  cattle  seem  to  have 
been  more  numerous,  and  their  meat,  therefore, 
more  usually  eaten,  bat  never  as  much  so  as  in  colder 
climates.  The  Israelites  in  the  desert,  though  they 
looked  back  to  the  time  when  they  "sat  by  the 
flesh  pots"  (Ex.  xvi.  3),  seem  as  much  to  have 
regretted  the  vegetables  and  fruits,  as  the  flesh  and 
fish  of  Egypt.  "  Who  shall  give  us  flesh  to  eat 
We  remember  the  fish  which  we  did  eat  in  Egypt 
freely,  the  cucumbers,  and  the  melons,  and  the  leeks, 
and  the  onions,  and  the  garlick  "  (Num.  xi.  4,  5). 
The  chief  vegetables  now  are  beans,  peas,  lentils, 
of  which  an  excellent  thick  pottage  is  made  (Gen. 
xxv.  34),  leeks,  onions,  garlic,  radishes,  carrots, 
cabbages,  gourds,  cucumbers,  the  tomata,  and  the 
egg-fruit.  There  are  many  besides  these.  The 
most  important  field-produce  in  ancient  times  was 
wheat  ;c   after  it   must   be   placed  barley,   millet, 


Vineyard.     (Wilkinson.) 

flax,  and  among  the  vegetables,  lentils,  peas,  and 
beans.  At  the  present  day  the  same  is  the  case ; 
but  maize,  rice,  oats,  clover,  the  sugar-cane,  roses, 
the  tobacco-plant,  hemp,  and  cotton,  must  be  added  ; 
some  of  which  are  not  indigenous.  In  the  account 
of  the  Plague  of  Hail  four  kinds  of  field-produce  are 
mentioned — flax,  barley,  wheat,  and  ]"IDD3  (Ex. 
ix.  31,  32),  which  is  variously  rendered  in  the  A.  V. 
"rye"  (/.  c),  "spelt"  (Is.  xxviii.  25), and  "fitches" 
(Is.  xxviii.  27).  It  is  doubted  whether  the  last  be  a 
cereal  or  a  leguminous  product:  we  incline  to  the 
former  opinion.  (See  Rye.)  It  is  clear  from  the 
evidence  of  the  monuments  and  of  ancient  writers 
that,  of  old,  reeds  were  far  more  common  in  Egypt 
than  now.  The  byblus  or  papyrus  is  almost  or 
quite  unknown.  Anciently  it  was  a  common  and 
most  important  plant  :  boats  were  made  of  its 
stalks,  and  of  their  thin  leaves  the  famous  paper  was 
manufactured.  It  appears  to  be  mentioned  under 
two  names  in  the  Bible,  neither  of  which,  however, 
can  be  proved  to  be  a  peculiar  designation  for  it. 


Egyptian  tombs  having  germinated  on  being  sown  in 
our  own  time. 


EGYPT 

ri.)  The  mother  of  Moses  made  HK>'&  Fl^fy  "an 
ark"  or  "  skiff"  "of  papyrus"  in  which  to  put 
her  child  (Ex.  ii.  3),  and  Isaiah  tells  of  messen- 
gers sent  apparently  from  furthest  Ethiopia  in 
XQJvS,  "  vessels  of  papyrus"  (xviii.  2),  in  both 
which  cases  XJOJ  must  mean  papyrus,  although  it 
would  seem  in  other  places  to  signify  "reeds" 
generically.d  (2.)  Isaiah  prophesies  "  the  papyrus- 
reeds  (n'nj?J  in  the  river  (""lijO),  on  the  edge  of 
the  river,  and  everything  growing  [lit.  sown]  in 
the  river  shall  be  dried  up,  driven  away  [by  the 
wind],  and  [shall]  not  be"  (six.  7).  Gesenius 
renders  my  a  naked  or  bare  place,  here  grassy  places 
on  the  banks  of  the  Nile.  Apart  from  the  fact  that 
little  grass  grows  on  the  banks  of  the  Kile,  in  Egypt, 


EGYPT 


499 


and  that  little  only  during  the  cooler  part  of  the 
year,  instead  of  those  sloping  meadows  that  must 
have  been  in  the  European  scholar's  mind,  this 
word  must  mean  some  product  of  the  river  which 
with  the  other  water-plants  should  be  dried  up, 
and  blown  away,  and  utterly  disappear.  Like  the 
fisheries  and  the  flax  mentioned  with  it,  it  ought  to 
hold  an  important  place  iu  the  commerce  of  ancient 
Egypt.  It  can  therefore  scarcely  be  reasonably 
held  to  intend  anything  but  the  papyrus.  The 
marine  and  fluvial  product  F|-1D,  from  which  the 
Red  Sea  was  called  P|-1D"D\  will  be  noticed  in 
art.  Red  Sea.  The  lotus  was  anciently  the 
favourite  flower,  and  at  feasts  it  took  the  place 
of  the  rose  among  the  Greeks  and  Arabs :  it  is  now 
very  rare. 


Boat  of  the  Nile,  showing  how  the  sail  was  fastened  to  the  yards,  and  the  nature  of  the  rigging.     (Wilkinson.) 


Zoology. — Of  old  Egypt  was  far  more  a  pastoral 
country  than  at  present .  The  neat  cattle  are  still  ex- 
cellent, but  lean  kine  are  more  common  among  them 
than  they  seem  to  have  boon  in  the  days  of  Joseph's 
Pharaoh  (Gen.xli.  19).  Sheep  and  goats  have  always 
been  numerous.  Anciently  swine  were  kept,  but  not 
in  great  numbers;  now  there  are  none, or  scarcely  any, 
except  a  few  in  the  houses  of  Copts  and  Franks.0 — 
Under  the  Pharaohs  the  horses  of  the  country  were 
in  repute  among  the  neighbouring  nations,  who  pur- 
chased them  as  well  as  chariots  out  of  Egypt.  Thus  it 
is  commanded  respecting  a  king  of  Israel :  "  he  shall 
not  multiply  horses  to  himself,  nor  cause  the  people 


d  In  Job  viii.  11,  Ps.  xxxv.  7,  the  word  is  probably 
used  generic-ally. 

e  In  a  tomb  near  the  Pyramids  of  El-Geezeh,  of  the 
time  of  Shaf-ra,'  second  kins  of  the  vth  dynasty,  the 
flocks  and  herds  of  the  chief  occupant  arc  represented 
and  their  numbers  thus  jriven  :  835  oxen,  220  cows 
with  their  calves,  2234   goats,   760  asses  with  their 


to  return  to  Egypt,  to  the  end  that  he  should  mul- 
tiply horses :  forasmuch  as  the  Lord  hath  said  unto 
you,  Ye  shall  henceforth  return  no  more  that  way" 
(Deut.  xvii.  1G), — which  shows  that  the  trade  in 
horses  was  with  Egypt]  and  would  necessitate  a  close 
alliance.  "  Solomon  had  horses  brought  out  of 
Egvpt,  and  linen  yarn  :  the  king's  merchants  re- 
ceived the  linen  yarn  at  a  price.  And  a  chariot 
came  up  and  went  out  of  Egypt  for  six  hundred 
[shekels]  of  silver,  and  an  horse  lor  an  hundred 
and  fifty;  and  so  for  all  the  kings  of  the  Hittites 
and  for  the  kings  of  Syria  did  thev  bring  [them] 
out  by  their  hand  "  (1  K.  x.  28,  29).     The  num- 


youn<r,  and  974  sheep.  Job  had  at  the  first  7000 
sheep,  3000  camels,  500  yoke  of  oxen,  500  Bbe-asses 
(i.  3),  and  afterwards  double  in  each  case  i  xlii.  12). 
The  numbers  are  round,  but  must  be  taken  as  an 
estimate  of  a  large  property  of  this  kind  iu  tbe 
patriarchal  times. 

2  K  2 


500 


EGYPT 


ber  of  horses  kept  by  this  king  for  chariots  and 
cavalry  was  large  (iv.  26,  x.  26;  2  Chr.  i.  14, 
ix.  25). r  Some  of  these  horses  came  as  yearly 
tribute  from  his  vassals  (1  K.  x.  25).  In  later 
times  the  prophets  reproved  the  people  for  trusting 
in  the  help  of  Egypt,  and  relying  on  the  aid  of 
her  horses  and  chariots  and  horsemen,  that  is.  pro- 
bably, men  in  chariots,  as  we  shall  show  in  speak- 
ing of  the  Egyptian  armies.  The  kings  of  the 
Hittites,  mentioned  in  the  passage  quoted  above, 
and  in  the  account  of  the  close  of  the  siege  of 
Samaria  by  Benhadad,  where  we  read — "  the  Lord 
had  made  the  host  of  the  Syrians  to  hear  a  noise 
of  chariots,  and  a  noise  of  horses,  [even]  the  noise 
of  a  great  host  :  and  they  said  one  to  another,  Lo, 
the  king  of  Israel  hath  hired  against  us  the  kings 
of  the  Hittites,  and  the  kings  of  the  Egyptians  to 
come  upon  us"  (2  K.  vii.  6) — these  kings  ruled 
the  Hittites  of  the  valley  of  the  Orontes,  who  were 
called  by  the  Egyptians  SHETA  or  KHETA.  The 
Pharaohs  of  the  xviiith,  xixth,  and  xxth  dynasties 
waged  tierce  wars  with  these  Hittites,  who  were  then 
ruled  by  a  great  king  and  many  chiefs,  and  whose 
principal  arm  was  a  force  of  chariots,  resembling 
those  of  the  Egyptian  army. — Asses  were  anciently 
numerous :  the  breed  at  the  present  time  is  excellent. 
Dogs  were  formerly  more  prized  than  now,  for 
being  held  by  most  of  the  Muslims  to  be  extremely 
unclean,  they  are  only  used  to  watch  the  houses  in  the 
villages.  The  camel  has  nowhere  been  found  men- 
tioned in  the  inscriptions  of  Egypt,  or  represented 
on  the  monuments.  Iu  the  Bible  Abraham  is 
spoken  of  as  having  camels  when  in  Egypt,  appa- 
rently as  a  gift  from  Pharaoh  (Gen.  xii.  16),  and 
before  the  Exodus  the  camels  of  Pharaoh  or  his 
subjects  were  to  be  smitteu  by  the  murrain  (Ex. 
ix.  3,  comp.  6).  Both  these  Pharaohs  were  pro- 
bably .Shepherds.  The  Ishmaelites  or  Midianites 
who  took  Joseph  into  Egypt,  carried  their  mer- 
chandise on  camels  (Gen.  xxxvii.  25,  28,  36),  and 
the  land-traffic  of  the  Arabs  must  always  have  been 
by  caravans  of  camels ;  but  it  is  probable  that 
camels  were  not  kept  in  Egypt,  but  only  on  the 
frontier.  On  the  black  obelisk  from  Nemrood,  now 
in  the  British  Museum,  which  is  of  Shalmanubar, 
king  of  Assyria,  contemporary  with  Jehu  and 
Hazael,  camels  are  represented  among  objects  sent 
as  tribute  by  Egypt.  They  are  of  the  two-humped 
sort,  which,  though  perhaps  then  common  in  As- 
syria, has  never,  as  far  as  is  known,  been  kept  in 
Egypt.  The  deserts  have  always  abounded  in  wild 
animals,  especially  of  the  canine  and  antelope  kinds. 
Anciently  the  hippopotamus  was  found  in  the  Egyp- 
tian'Nile,  and  hunted.  This  is  a  tact  of  importance 
for  those  who  suppose  it  to  be  the  behemoth  of  the 
book  of  Job,  especially  as  that  book  shows  evidence 
of  a  knowledge  of  Egypt.  Now,  this  animal  is 
rarely  seen  even  in  Lower  Nubia.  The  elephant 
may  have  been,  in  the  remotest  historical  period, 
an  inhabitant  of  Egypt,  and,  as  a  land  animal, 
have  been  driven  further  south  than  his  brother 

I  The  number  of  Solomon's  chariots  is  given  as 
1400,  and  his  horsemen  12,000.  Thfi  stalls  of  horses 
are  stated  as  40,000  (1  K.  iv.  26),  or  4000  (2  Clir. 
ix.  25)  :  the  former  would  seem  to  be  the  correct 
number. 

s  It  is  supposed  by  commentators  to  mean  the 
country  also ;  but  this  cannot,  we  think,  be  proved. 

II  Gesenius  (Thes.  s.  v.)  would  take  f  J"^"!}  for  a 
serpent  in  .Tob  iii.  8,  Is.  xxvii.  1,  and  in  the  latter 
case  supposes  the  king  of  Babylon  to  be  meant.  In 
the  first  passage  the  meaning  "  crocodile  "  is,  how- 


EGYPT 

pachyderm,  for  the  name  of  the  Island  of  Ele- 
phantine, just  below  the  First  Cataract,  in  hiero- 
glyphics, AB  .  .  "Elephant-land,"  seems  to  show 
that  he  was  anciently  found  there.  Bats  abound  in 
the  temples  and  tombs,  filling  the  dark  and  dese- 
crated chambers  and  passages  with  the  unearthly 
whirr  of  their  wings.  Such  desolation  is  repre- 
sented by  Isaiah  when  he  says  that  a  man  shall 
cast  his  idols  "  to  the  moles  and  to  the  bats  " 
(ii.  20). 

The  birds  of  Egypt  are  not  remarkable  for  beauty 
of  plumage :  in  so  open  a  country  this  is  natural. 
The  Rapaces  are  numerous,  but  the  most  common 
are  scavengers,  as  vultures  and  the  kite.  The 
Grallatores  and  Anseres  abound  on  the  islands 
and  sandbanks  of  the  river  and  in  the  sides  of  the 
mountains  which  approach  or  touch  the  stream. 

Among  the  reptiles,  the  crocodile  must  be  espe- 
cially mentioned.  Iu  the  Bible  it  is  usually  called 
P3D,  D^fl,  "  dragon,"  a  generic  word  of  almost 
as  wide  a  signification  as  "  reptile,"  and  is  used 
as  a  symbol  of  the  king  of  Egypt.8  Thus  in  Eze- 
kiel,  "  Behold  I  am  against  thee,  Pharaoh  king  of 
Egypt,  the  great  dragon  that  lieth  in  the  midst  of 
his  rivers,  which  hath  said,  My  river  [is]  mine 
own,  and  I  have  made  [it]  for  myself.  But  I  will 
put  hooks  in  thy  jaws,  aud  I  will  cause  the  fish  of 
thy  rivers  to  stick  unto  thy  scales,  and  I  will  bring 
thee  up  out  of  the  midst  of  thy  rivers,  and  all  the 
fish  of  thy  rivers  shall  stick  unto  thy  scales.  And  I 
will  leave  thee  [thrown]  into  the  wilderness,  thee  and 
all  the  fish  of  thy  rivers.  ...  I  have  given  thee 
for  meat  to  the  beasts  of  the  field  and  to  the  fowls 
of  the  heaven"  (xxix.  3,  4,  5).  Here  there  seems 
to  be  a  retrospect  of  the  Exodus,  which  is  thus 
described  in  Is.  Ii.  9,  10,  and  15?  and  with  a  more 
close  resemblance  in  Ps.  Ixxiv.  13, 14,  "  Thou  didst 
divide  the  sea  by  thy  strength  :  thou  brakest  the 
heads  of  the  dragons  (CO^ll)  in  the  waters. 
Thou  brakest  the  heads  of  leviathan  (}J"Hp)  in 
pieces,  [and]  gavest  him  [to  be]  meat  to  the 
dwellers  in  the  wilderness  "(D1**^,  I.  e.  to  the  wild 
beasts,  comp.  Is.  xiii.  21).  The  last  passage  is 
important  as  indicating  that  whereas  |*3n  is  the 
Hebrew  generic  name  of  reptiles,  and  therefore 
used  for  the  greatest  of  them,  the  crocodile,  JjVI/ 
is  the  special  name  of  that  animal.  The  description 
of  leviathau  in' Job  (xli.)  fully  bears  out  this  opi- 
nion, and  it  is  doubtful  if  any  passage  can  be  ad- 
duced in  which  a  wider  signification  of  the  latter 
word  is  required.11  In  Job  (xxvi.  12)  also  there 
is  an  apparent  allusion  to  the  Exodus  in  words 
similar  to  those  in  Isaiah  (li.  9,  10,  and  15?), 
but  without  a  mention  of  the  dragon.  In  this  case 
the  division  of  the  sea  and  the  smiting  of  2 iTI 
the  proud  or  insolent,  are  mentioned  in  connexion 
with  the  wonders  of  creation  (vs.  7-11, 13)  :  so  too 
in  Is.  (vs.  13,  15).     The  crossing  of  the  Ked  Sea 


ever,  especially  applicable.  The  patriarch  speaks  of 
desperate  men  as  those  "  who  are  ready  to  stir  up 
leviathan  :"  comp.  xli.  2  ;  A.  V.  10,  "  None  [is  so] 
fierce  as  to  stir  him  up.  Who  then  can  stand  before 
me?"  The  argument  is,  that  if  the  creature  be  so 
terrible,  who  shall  resist  the  Creator !  The  second 
passage  seems  to  refer  not  to  the  king  of  Babylon, 
but  to  the  enemies  of  God's  people  at  a  remote  time 
(Is.  xxiv.,  xxv.,  xxvi.,  esp.  ver.  19,  and  xxvii.  esp.  vs. 
12,  13  :  comp.  the  similar  use  of  Egypt,  &c,  in  Rev. 
xi.  8). 


EGYPT 

could  be  thus  spoken  of  as  a  signal  exercise  of  the 
Divine  power. — Frogs  are  very  numerous  in  Egypt, 
and  their  loud  and  constant  croaking  in  the  autumn 

in  "  the  streams,"  mi"l3,  "  the  rivers,"  D*"1N*, 
and    "  the   ponds "    or   "  marshes,"    D'QJN  '   (Ex. 

viii.  1,  A.  V.  5)  makes  it  not  difficult  to  picture 
the  Plague  of  Frogs.  Serpents  and  snakes  are  also 
common,  but  the  more  venomous  have  their  home, 
like  the  scorpion,  in  the  desert  (comp.  Deut.  viii. 
15). — The  Mle  and  lakes  have  an  abundance  of 
fishes ;  and  although  the  fisheries  of  Egypt  have 
very  greatly  fallen  away  their  produce  is  still  a 
common  article  of  food. — Among  the  insects  the 
locusts  must  be  mentioned,  which  sometimes  come 
upon  the  cultivated  land  in  a  cloud,  and,  as  in  the 
plague,  eat  every  herb  and  fruit  and  leaf  where 
they  idight ;  but  they  never,  as  then,  overspread  the 
whole  land  (Ex.  x.  3-0,  12-19).  They  disappear 
as  suddenly  as  they  come,  and  are  carried  away  by 
the  wind  (vs.  19).  As  to  the  lice  and  flies,  they 
are  now  plagues  of  Egypt ;  but  it  is  not  certain 
that  the  words  D33  and  2  "1JJ  designate  them  (Ex. 
viii.  16-31). 

Ancient  Inhabitants. — The  old  inhabitants  of 
Egypt  appear  from  their  monuments  and  the  testi- 
mony of  ancient  wi iters  to  have  occupied  in  race 
a  place  between  the  Nigricans  and  the  Caucasians. 
The  constant  immigrations  of  Arab  settlers  have 
greatly  diminished  the  Nigritian  characteristics  in 
the  generality  of  the  modern  Egyptians.  The  an- 
cient dress  was  far  more  scanty  than  the  modern, 
and  in  this  matter,  as  in  manners  and  character, 
the  influence  of  the  Arab  race  is  also  very  apparent. 
The  ancient  Egyptians  in  character  were  very  reli- 
gious and  contemplative,  but  given  to  base  super- 
stition, patriotic,  respectful  to  women,  hospitable, 
generally  frugal,  but  at  times  luxurious,  very  sen- 
sual, lying,  thievish,  treacherous,  and  cringing, 
and  intensely  prejudiced,  through  pride  of  race, 
against  strangers,  although  kind  to  them.  This 
is  very  much  the  character  of  the  modern  inhabit- 
ants, except  that  Mohammadanism  has  taken  away 
the  respect  for  women.  The  ancient  Egyptians  are 
indeed  the  only  early  eastern  nation  that  we  know 
to  have  resembled  the  modem  westerns  in  this  par- 
ticular; but  we  find  the  same  virtue  markedly  to 
characterize  the  Nigritians  of  our  day.  That  the 
Egyptians,  in  general,  treated  the  Israelites  with 
kindness  while  they  were  in  their  country,  even 
during  the  oppression,  seems  almost  certain  from 
the  privilege  of  admission  info  the  congregation  in 
the  third  generation,  •.•■ranted  to  them  in  the  Law, 
with  the  Edomites,  while  the  Ammonites  and 
Moabites  were  absolutely  excluded,  the   reference 

in  thn at  of  the  four  cases  being  to  the  stay  in 

Egypt  and  the  entrance  into  Palestine  (Deut.  xxiii. 
3-8).  This  supposition  is  important  in  its  bearinc 
on  the  history  of  the  oppression. 

Language. — The  am  ient  Egyptian  languagi  . 
the  earliest  period  at  which  it  is  known  to  us.  is  an 
agglutinate  monosyllabic  form  of  speech.  It  is  ex- 
pressed by  thesigns  which  wo  call  hieroglyphics.  The 
•  hi;  icter  ot'  the  language  is  compound  :  it  consists  of 
elements  resembling  tho.se  of  the  Nigritian  Ian 
and  the  <  Ihinese  language,  on  the  one  hand,  and  those 
of  the  Semitic  languages  on  tie- other.    All  those  who 


EGYPT 


501 


1  Geseniua  {Thes.  s.  v„)  understands  this  word  here 
and  in  Ex.  vii.  19  to  mean  the  stagnant  pools  left  by 
the  Nile  after  the  inundation.  At  the  season  to  which 
the  narrative  refers  these  would  have  been  dried  up, 


have  studied  the  African  languages  make  a  distinct 
family  of  several  of  those  languages,  spoken  in  the 
north-east  quarter  of  the  continent,  in  which  family 
they  include  the  ancient  Egyptian;  while  every 
Semitic  scholar  easily  recognises  in  Egyptian  Semitic 
pronouns  and  other  elements,  and  a  predominantly 
Semitic  grammar.  As  in  person,  character,  ami 
religion,  so  in  language  we  find  two  distinct  ele- 
ments, mixed  but  not  fused,  and  here  the  Nigritian 
element  seems  unquestionably  the  earlier.  Bunsen 
asserts  that  this  language  is  "  ante-historical  Se- 
nilism :"  we  think  it  enough  to  say  that  no  Semitic 
scholar  has  accepted  his  theory.  For  a  full  dis- 
cussion of  the  question  see  The  Genesis  of  the 
Earth  and  of  Man,  ch.  vi.  As  early  as  the  age 
of  the  xxvith  dynasty  a  vulgar  dialect  was  expressed 
in  the  demotic  or  enchorial  writing.  This  dialect 
forms  the  link  connecting  the  old  language  with 
the  Coptic  or  Christian  Egyptian,  the  latest  phasis. 
The  Coptic  does  not  very  greatly  differ  from  the 
monumental  language,  distinguished  in  the  time  of 
the  demotic  as  the  sacred  dialect,  except  in  the 
presence  of  many  Greek  words. 

Religion. — The  basis  of  the  religion  was  Nigritian 
fetishism,  the  lowest  kind  of  nature-worship,  differing 
in  different  parts  of  the  country,  and  hence  obviously 
indigenous.  Upon  this  were  engrafted,  first,  cosmic 
worship,  mixed  up  with  traces  of  primeval  revela- 
tion, as  in  Babylonia ;  and  then,  a  system  of  per- 
sonifications of  moral  and  intellectual  abstractions. 
The  incongruous  character  of  the  religion  necessi- 
tates this  supposition,  and  the  ease  with  which  it 
admitted  extraneous  additions  in  the  historical  period 
confirms  it.  There  were  three  orders  of  gods — the 
eight  great  gods,  the  twelve  lesser,  and  the  Osirian 
group.  They  were  represented  in  human  forms, 
sometimes  having  the  heads  of  animals  sacred  to 
them,  or  bearing  on  their  heads  cosmic  or  other 
objects  of  worship.  The  fetishism  included,  besides 
the  worship  of  animals,  that  of  trees,  rive:  s,  and  hills. 
Each  of  these  creatures  or  objects  was  appropriated 
to  a  divinity.  There  was  no  prominent  hero-wor- 
ship, although  deceased  kings  and  other  individuals 
often  received  divine  honours — in  one  case,  that  of 
Sesertesen  III.,  of  the  xiith  dynasty,  the  old  Sesostris, 
of  a  very  special  character.  Sacrifices  of  animals, 
and  offerings  of  all  kinds  of  food,  and  libations  of 
wine,  oil,  and  the  like,  were  made.  The  great  doc- 
trines of  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  man's  respon- 
sibility, and  future  rewards  and  punishments,  were 
taught.  Among  the  rites,  circumcision  is  the  most 
remarkable :  it  is  as  old  as  the  time  of  the  ivth 
dynasty. 

The  Israelites  in  Egypt  appear  during  the  op- 
pression, for  the  most  part,  m  have  adopted  the 
Egyptian  religion  (Josh.  x.\iv.  14;  Kz.  xx.  7,  8). 
The  golden  calf,  or  rather  steer,  ?2y,  was  probably 
taken  from  the  bull  Apis,  certainly  from  one  of  the 
sacre  1  bulls.  Remphan  and  <  Ihiun  were  foreign  divi- 
nities adopted  into  the  Egyptian  Pantheon,  and  called 
in  the  hieroglyphics  RENPU  (probably  pronounced 
REMPU)  and  KEN.  It  can  hardly  be' doubted  that 
they  were  w  orshipped  by  the  Shepherds ;  but  there  is 
no  satisfactory  evidence  that  there  was  any  separate 

hit  IV.    [lll.MHIAN.  ]     Am 

was  worshipped  at  Memphjs,  as  is  shown  bya  tablet  of 
Amenoph  II..  B.C.  dr.  1400,31  the  quarries  of  Turk, 

although  there  would  be  many  marshy  places,  espe- 
cially near  the  north  coast  and  towards  the  ancient 
head  of  the  Red  Sea. 


502 


EGYPT 


opposite  that  city  (Vyse's  Pyramids,  iii.  "Tourah 
tablet  2  "),  in  which  she  is  represented  as  an  Egyp- 
tian goddess.  The  temple  of  "  the  Foreign  Venus  " 
in  "  the  Tyrian  camp"  in  Memphis  (Herod,  ii.  112) 
must  have  been  sacred  to  her.  Doubtless  this  wor- 
ship was  introduced  by  the  Phoenician  Shepherds. 

As  there  are  prominent  traces  of  primeval  reve- 
lation in  the  ancient  Egyptian  religion,  we  cannot 
be  surprised  at  finding  certain  resemblances  to 
the  Mosaic  Law,  apart  from  the  probability  that 
whatever  was  unobjectionable  in  common  belief 
and  usages  would  be  retained.  The  points  in  which 
the  Egyptian  religion  shows  strong  traces  of  truth 
are,  however,  doctrines  of  the  very  kind  that  the 
Law  does  not  expressly  teach.  The  Egyptian  reli- 
gion, in  its  reference  to  man,  was  a  system  of  respon- 
sibility, mainly  depending  on  future  rewards  and 
punishments.  The  Law,  in  its  reference  to  man, 
was  a  system  of  responsibility  mainly  depending 
on  temporal  rewards  and  punishmeuts.  All  we 
learn,  but  this  is  of  the  utmost  importance,  is  that 
every  Israelite  who  came  out  of  Egypt  must  have 
been  fully  acquainted  with  the  universally-recog- 
nised doctrines  of  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  man's 
responsibility,  and  future  rewards  and  punishments, 
truths  which  the  Law  does  not,  and  of  course  could 
not,  contradict.  The  idea  that  the  Law  was  an 
Egyptian  invention  is  one  of  the  worst  examples  of 
modern  reckless  criticism. 

Laws. — We  have  no  complete  account  of  the  laws 
of  the  ancient  Egyptians  either  in  their  own  records 
or  in  works  of  ancient  writers.  The  passages  in  the 
Bible  which  throw  light  upon  the  laws  in  force 
during  the  sojourn  of  the  Israelites  in  Egypt  most 
probably  do  not  relate  to  purely  native  law,  nor  to 
law  administered  to  natives,  for  during  that  whole 
period  they  appear  to  have  been  under  Shepherd 
rulers,  and  in  any  case  it  cannot  be  doubted  that 
they  would  not  be  subject  to  absolutely  the  same 
system  as  the  Egyptians.  The  paintings  and  sculp- 
tures of  the  monuments  indicate  a  very  high  degree 
of  personal  safety,  showing  us  that  the  people  of  all 
ranks  commonly  went  unanned,  and  without  mili- 
tary protection.  We  must  therefore  infer  that  the 
laws  relating  to  the  maintenance  of  order  were  suffi- 
cient and  strictly  enforced.  The  punishments  seem 
to  have  been  lighter  than  those  of  the  Mosaic  Law, 
and  very  different  in  their  relation  to  crime  and  in 
their  nature.  Capital  punishment  appears  to  have 
been  almost  restricted,  in  practice,  to  murder. 
Crimes  of  violence  were  more  severely  treated 
than  offences  against  religion  and  morals.  Popular 
feeling  seems  to  have  taken  the  duties  of  the  judge 
upon  itself  in  the  case  of  impiety  alone.  That  in 
early  times  the  Egyptian  populace  acted  with  re- 
ference to  any  offence  against  its  religion  as  it  did 
under  the  Greeks  and  Romans,  is  evident  from  the 
answer  of  Moses  when  Pharaoh  proposed  that  the 
Hebrews  should  sacrifice  in  the  land.  "  It  is  not 
meet  so  to  do ;  for  we  shall  sacrifice  the  abomina- 
tion of  the  Egyptians  to  the  Lord  our  God :  lo, 
shall  we  sacrifice  the  abomination  of  the  Egyptians 
before  their  eyes,  and  will  they  not  stone  us?" 
(Ex.  viii.  26). 

Government. — The  government  was  monarchical, 
but  not  of  an  absolute  character.  The  sovereign 
was  not  superior  to  the  laws,  and  the  priests  had 
the  power  to  check  the  undue  exercise  of  his 
authority.  The  kings  under  whom  the  Israelites 
lived  seem  to  have  been  absolute,  but  even 
Joseph's  Pharaoh  did  not  venture  to  touch  the 
independence  of  the  priests.     Nomes  and  districts 


EGYPT 

were  governed  by  officers  whom  the  Greeks  called 
nomarchs  and  toparchs.  There  seems  to  have  been 
no  hereditary  aristocracy,  except  perhaps  at  the 
earliest  period,  for  indications  of  something  of  the 
kind  occur  in  the  inscriptions  of  the  ivth  and  xiith 
dynasties. 

Foreign  Policy. — The    foreign   policy   of    the 
Egyptians  must  be  regarded  in  its  relation  to  the 
admission  of  foreigners  into  Egypt  and  to  the  treat- 
ment of  tributary  and  allied  nations.   In  the  former 
aspect  it  was  characterized  by  an  exclusiveness  which 
sprang  from  a  national  hatred  of  the  yellow  and 
white  races,  and  was  maintained  by  the  wisdom  of 
preserving  the  institutions  of  the  country  from  the 
influence  of  the  pirates  of  the  Mediterranean  and  the 
Indian  Ocean,  and  the  robbers  of  the  deserts.  Hence 
the  jealous  exclusion  of  the  Greeks  from  the  northern 
ports   until    Naucratis   was   opened  to  them,   and 
hence  too  the  restriction  of  Shemite  settlers  in  earlier 
times  to  the  land  of  Goshen,  scarcely  regarded  as 
part  of  Egypt.     It  may  be  remarked  as  a  proof  of 
the  strictness  of  this  policy  that  during  the  whole  of 
the  sojourn  of  the  Israelites  they  appeal'  to  have  been 
kept  to   Goshen.     The  key  to  the  policy  towards 
foreign   nations,   after   making   allowance  for   the 
hatred  of  the  yellow  and  white  races  balanced  by 
the  regard  for  the  red  and  black,  is  found  in  the 
position  of  the  great  oriental  rivals  of  Egypt.     The 
supremacy   or  influence  of  the  Pharaohs  over  the 
nations  lying  between  the  Nile  and  the  Euphrates 
depended  as  much  on  wisdom  in  policy  as  prowess 
in  arms.     The  kings  of  the  ivth,  vith,  and  xvth 
dynasties  appear  to  have  uninterruptedly  held  the 
peninsula  of  Sinai,  where  tablets  record  their  con- 
quest of  Asiatic  nomads.     But    with  the   xviiith 
dynasty  commences  the  period  of  Egyptian  supre- 
macy.    Very  soon  after  the  accession  of  this  pow- 
erful line  most  of  the  countries  between  the  Egyp- 
tian border  and   the   Tigris  were  reduced  to  the 
condition  of  tributaries.    The  empire  seems  to  have 
lasted  for  nearly  three  centuries,  from  about  B.C. 
1500  to  about  1200.     The  chief  opponents  of  the 
Egyptians  were  the  Hittites  of  the  valley   of  the 
Orontes  with  whom  the  Pharaohs  waged  long  and 
fierce  wars.     After  this  time  the  influence  of  Egypt 
declined ;  and  until  the  reign  of  Shishak  (B.C.  cir. 
990-967),  it  appears  to  have  been  confined,  to  the 
western  borders  of  Palestine.     No  doubt  the  rising 
greatness   of  Assyria  caused  the  decline.     Thence- 
forward to  the  days  of  Pharaoh  Necho  there  was  a 
constant   struggle   for   the    tracts    lying    between 
Egypt,  and  Assyria  and  Babylonia,  until  the  dis- 
astrous battle  at  Carchemish  finally  destroyed  the  su- 
premacy of  the  Pharaohs.    It  is  probable  that  during 
the  period  of  the  empire  an  Assyrian  or  Babylonian 
king  generally  supported  the  opponents  of  the  rulers 
of  Egypt.    Great  aid  from  a  powerful  ally  can  indeed 
alone  explain  the  strong  resistance  offered  by  the 
Hittites.     The  general  policy  of  the  Egyptians  to- 
wards their  eastern  tributaries  seems  to  have  been 
marked  by  great  moderation.     The  Pharaohs  inter- 
married with  them,  and  neither  forced  upon  them 
Egyptian  garrisons,  except  in  some  important  posi- 
tions, nor  attempted  those  deportations  that  are  so 
marked  a  feature  of  Asiatic  policy.     In  the  case  of 
those  nations  which  never  attacked  t Ii*in  they  do 
not  appear  to  have  even  exacted  tribute.     So  long  as 
their  general  supremacy  was  uncontested  they  would 
not  be  unwise  enough  to  make  favourable  or  neutral 
powers  their  enemies.      Of  their   relation  to   the 
Israelites  we  have  for  the  earlier  part  of  this  period 
no  direct  information.     The  explicit  account  of  the 


EGYPT 

later  part  is  fully  consistent  with  what  we  have  said 
of  the  general  policy  of  the  Pharaohs.  Shishak  and 
Zerah,  if  the  latter  were,  as  we  believe,  a  king  of 
Egypt  or  a  commander  of  Egyptian  forces,  are  the 
only  exceptions,  in  a  series  of  friendly  kings,  and 
they  were  almost  certainly  of  Assyrian  or  Babylo- 
nian extraction.  One  Pharaoh  gave  his  daughter 
in  marriage  to  Solomon,  another  appears  to  have 
been  the  ally  of  Jehoram,  king  of  Israel  (2  K. 
vii.  6),  So  made  a  treaty  with  Hoshea,  Tirhakah 
aided  Hezckiah,  Pharaoh  Necho  fought  Josiah  against 
his  will,  and  did  not 
treat  Judah  with  the 
severity  of  the  Oriental 
kings,  and  his  second 
successor,  Pharaoh  Ho- 
phra,  maintained  the 
alliance,  notwithstand- 
ing this  break,  as  firmly 
as  before,  and  although 
foiled  in  his  endeavour 
to  save  Jerusalem  from 
the  ( 'haldeans,  received 
the  fugitives  of  Judah, 
who,  like  the  fugitives 
of  Israel  at  the  capture 
of  Samaria,  took  refuge 
in  Egypt.  It  is  pro- 
bable that  during  the 
earlier  period  the  same 
friendly  relations  exist- 
ed. The  Hebrew  re- 
cords of  that  time  afford 
no  distinct  indication  of 
hostility  with  Egypt, 
nor  have  the  Egyptian 
lists  of  conquered  re» 
gions  and  towns  of  the 
same  age  been  found 
to  contain  any  Israelite 
name,  whereas  in  Shi- 
shak's  list  the  kingdom 
of  Judah  and  some  of 
its  towns  occur.  The 
route  of  the  earlier 
Pharaohs  to  the  east 
seems  always  to  have 
been  along  the  Palesti- 
nian coast,  then  mainly 
held  by  the  Philistines 
and  Phoenicians,  both 
of  whom  they  subdued, 
and  across  Syria  north- 
ward of  the  territories 
occupied  by  the  He- 
brews.-—With  respect 
to  the  African  nations  a 
different  policy  appeal's 
to  I i;ive  been  pursued. 
The  Rebu  (Lebu)  or 
Lubim,  to  the  west  of 

Egypt,    on    the    north 
Coast,   were   reduced  to 

subjection,  and  probably  employed,  like  the  Shay- 
retana  or  Cherethim,  as  mercenaries.  Ethiopia 
was  made  a  purely  Egyptian  province,  ruled  by 
a  viceroy,  "  the  Prince  of  Kesh  (Cush),"  and 
the  assimilation  was  so  complete  that  Ethiopian 
sovereigns  seem  to  have  been  received  by  the  Egyp- 
tians as  native  rulers.  Further  south,  the  Negroes 
were  subject  to  predatory  attacks  like  the  slave- 
hunts  of  modern  times,  conducted  not  so  much  from 


EGYPT 


503 


motives  of  hostility  as  to  obtain  a  supply  of  slaves. 
In  the  Bible  we  find  African  peoples,  Lubim,  Phut, 
Sukkiim,  Cush,  as  mercenaries  or  supporters  of 
Egypt,  but  not  a  single  name  that  can  be  positively 
placed  to  the  eastward  of  that  country. 

Army. — There  are  some  notices  of  the  Egyptian 
army  in  the  0.  T.  They  show,  like  the  monuments, 
that  its  most  important  branch  was  the  chariot- 
force.  The  Pharaoh  of  the  Exodus  led  600  chosen 
chariots  besides  his  whole  chariot-force  in  pursuit 
of  the  Israelites.     The  warriors  fighting  in  chariots 


are  probably  the  "horsemen"  mentioned  in  the 
relation  of  this,  event  and  elsewhere,  for  in  Egyptian 
they  are  called  the  "horse"  or  "cavalry."'  We 
have  no  subsequent  indication  in  the  Bible  of 
the  constitution  of  an  Egyptian  amy  until  the 
time  of  the  xxiind  dynasty,  when  we  find  that 
Shishak's  invading  force  was  partly  composed  ot 
foreigners  ;  whi  ther  mercenaries  or  allies,  cannot  as 
yet  be  positively  determined,  although  the  monu- 


504 


EGYPT 


ments  make  it  most  probable  that  they  were  of 
the  former  character.  The  army  of  Necho,  de- 
feated at  Carchemish,  seems  to  have  been  similarly 


EGYPT 

composed,  although  it  probably  contained  Greek 
mercenaries,  who  soon  afterwards  became  the  most 
important  foreign  element  in  the  Egyptian  forces. 


Disciplined  troops  of  the  time  of  the  XVIIIth  Dynasty.     (Wilkinson.) 


Domestic  Life. — The  sculptures  and  paintings  of 
the  tombs  give  us  a  very  full  insight  into  the  do- 
mestic life  of  the  ancient  Egyptians,  as  may  be  seen 
in  Sir  G .  Wilkinson's  great  work.  What  most  strikes 
us  in  their  manners  is  the  high  position  occupied  by 
women,  and  the  entire  absence  of  the  hareem-system 
of  seclusion.  The  wife  is  called  "  the  lady  of  the 
house."  Marriage  appears  to  have  been  universal, 
at  least  with  the  richer  class  ;  and  if  polygamy  were 
tolerated  it  was  rarely  practised.  Of  marriage-cere- 
monies no  distinct  account  has  been  discovered,  but 
there  is  evidence  that  something  of  the  kind  was 
usual  in  the  case  of  a  queen  (De  Rouge',  Essai  sur 
une  Stele  E'gypticnne,  pp.  53,  54).  Concubinage 
was  allowed,  the  concubines  taking  the  place  of  infe- 
rior wives.  There  were  no  castes,  although  great 
classes  were  very  distinct,  especially  the  prints,  sol- 
diers, artisans,  and  herdsmen,  with  labourers.  A 
man  of  the  upper  class  might,  however,  both  hold  a 
command  in  the  army  and  be  a  priest;  and  therefore 
the  caste-system  cannot  have  strictly  applied  in  the 
case  of  the  subordinates.  The  general  manner  of  life 
does  not  much  illustrate  that  of  the  Israelites  from 
its  great  essential  difference.  The  Egyptians  from 
the  days  of  Abraham  were  a  settled  people,  occupy- 
ing a  land  which  they  had  held  for  centuries  without 
question,  except  through  the  aggression  of  foreign 
invaders.  The  occupations  of  the  higher  class  were 
the   superintendence    of  their    fields   and  gardens, 


their  diversions,  the  pursuit  of  game  in  the  deserts, 
or  on  the  river,  and  fishing.  The  tending  of  cattle 
was  left  to  the  most  despised  of  the  lower  class. 
The  Israelites  on  the  contrary  were  from  the  very 
first  a  pastoral  people  :  in  time  of  war  they  lived 
within  walls ;  when  there  was  peace  they  "  dwelt 
in  their  tents"  (2  K.  xiii.  5).  The  Egyptian  feasts, 
and  the  dances,  music,  and  feats  which  accompanied 
them,  for  the  diversion  of  the  guests,  as  well  as  the 
common  games,  were  probably  introduced  among  the 
Hebrews  in  the  most  luxurious  days  of  the  kingdoms 
of  Israel  and  Judah.  The  account  of  the  noontide 
dinner  of  Joseph  (Gen.  xliii.  1G,  31-34)  agrees  with 
the  representations  of  the  monuments,  although  it 
evidently  describes  a  far  simpler  repast  than  would 
be  usual  with  an  Egyptian  minister.  The  attention 
to  precedence,  which  seems  to  have  surprised 
Joseph's  brethren  (ver.  33),  is  perfectly  cha- 
racteristic of  Egyptian  customs.  The  funeral 
ceremonies  were  far  more  important  than  any 
events  of  the  Egyptian  life,  as  the  tomb  was  re- 
garded as  the  only  true  home.  The  body  of  the 
deceased  was  embalmed  in  the  form  of  Osiris,  the 
judge  of  the  dead,  and  conducted  to  the  burial- 
place  with  great  pomp  and  much  display  of  lamen- 
tation. The  mourning  lasted  seventy-two  days  or 
less.  Both  Jacob  and  Joseph  wen-  embalmed,  and 
the  mourning  for  the  former  continued  seventy  days. 
Literature   and   Art. — The    Egyptians    were    a 


EGYPT 

very  literary  people,  and  time  has  preserved 
to  us,  besides  the  inscriptions  of  their  tombs  and 
temples,  many  papyri,  of  a  religious  or  historical 
character,  and  one  tale.  They  bear  no  resemblance 
to  the  books  of  the  0.  T.,  except  such  as  arises 
from  their  sometimes  enforcing  moral  truths  in  a 
manner  not  wholly  different  from  that  of  the  Book 
of  Proverbs.  The  moral  and  religious  system  is, 
however,  essentially  different  in  its  principles  and 
their  application.  Some  have  imagined  a  great 
similarity  between  the  0.  T.  and  Egyptian  lite- 
rature, and  have  given  a  show  of  reason  to  their 
idea  by  dressing  up  Egyptian  documents  in  a  garb 
of  Hebrew  phraseology,  in  which,  however,  they 
have  gone  so  awkwardly  that  no  one  who  had  not 
prejudged  the  question  could  for  a  moment  be 
deceived.  In  science,  Egyptian  influence  may  be 
distinctly  traced  in  the  Pentateuch.  Moses  was 
"  learned  in  all  the  wisdom  of  the  Egyptians"  (Acts 
vii.  22),  and  probably  derived  from  them  the  astro- 
nomical knowledge  which  was  necessary  for  the 
calendar.  [CHRONOLOGY.]  His  acquaintance  with 
chemistry  is  shown  in  the  manner  of  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  golden  calf.  The  Egyptians  excelled  in 
geometry  and  mechanics :  the  earlier  books  of  the 
Bible,  however,  throw  no  light  upon  the  degree  in 
which  Moses  may  have  made  use  of  this  part  of  his 
knowledge.  In  medicine  and  surgery,  the  high  pro- 
ficiency of  the  Egyptians  was  probably  of  but  little 
use  to  the  Hebrews  after  the  Exodus:  anatomy, 
practised  by  the  former  from  the  earliest  ages,  was 
repugnant  to  the  feelings  of  Shemites,  and  the 
simples  of  Egypt  and  of  Palestine  would  be  as 
different  as  the  ordinary  diseases  of  the  .country. 
In  the  arts  of  architecture,  sculpture,  and  painting, 
the  former  of  which  was  the  chief,  there  seems  to 
have  been  but  a  very  slight  and  material  influence. 
This  was  natural,  for  with  the  Egyptians  archi- 
tecture was  a  religious  art,  embodying  in  its 
principles  their  highest  religious  convictions,  and 
mainly  devoted  to  the  service  of  religion.  Durable 
construction,  massive  and  grand  form,  and  rich, 
though  sober,  colour,  characterize  their  temples  and 
tombs,  the  abodes  of  gods,  and  "  homes  "  of  men. 
To  adopt  such  an  architecture  would  have  been  to 
adopt  the  religion  of  Egypt,  and  the  pastoral 
Israelites  had  no  need  of  buildings.  When  they 
came  into  the  Promised  Land  they  found  cities 
ready  for  their  occupation,  and  it  was  not  until  the 
days  of  Solomon  that  a  temple  took  the  place  of 
tin'  tent,  which  was  the  sanctuary  of  the  pastoral 
people.  Details  of  ornament  were  of  course  bor- 
rowed from  Egypt;  but  separated  from  the  vast 
system  in  which  they  were  found,  they  lost  their 
significance,  and  became  harmless,  until  modern 
sciolists  made  them  prominent  in  support  of  a 
theory  which  no  mind  capable  of  broad  views  can 
for  a  moment  tolerate. 

Magicians. — We  find  frequent  reference  in  the 
Bible  to  the  magicians  of  Egypt.  The  Pharaoh  of 
Joseph  laid  his  dream  before  the  magicians,  who  could 
not  interpret  it  (Gen.  xli.  8);  the  Pharaoh  of  the 
Exodus  used  them  as  opponents  of  Moses  and  Aaron, 
when,  after  what  appears  to  have  been  a  seeming 
success,  they  failed  as  before  (Ex.  vii.  11,  12,  22  ; 
viii.  18,  19;  ix.  11;  2  Tim.  iii.  8,  9).  The 
monuments  do  not  recognise  any  such  art,  and 
we  must  conclude  that  magic  was  secretly  prac- 
tised, not  because  it  was- thought  to  be  unlawful, 
but  in   order  to  give   it  importance.      [See  MAGIC, 

Jambres,  Jannes.] 

Industrial  Art*. — The  industrial  arts  held  an 


EGYPT 


50; 


important  place  in  the  occupations  of  the  Egyptians. 
The  workers  in  fine  flax  and  the  weavers  of  white 
linen  are  mentioned  in  a  manner  that  shows  they 
were  among  the  chief  contributors  to  the  riches  of 
the  country  (Is.  xix.  9).  The  fine  linen  of  Egypt 
found  its  way  to  Palestine  (Prov.  vii.  16).  Pottery 
was  a  great  branch  of  the  native  manufactures,  and 
appears  to  have  furnished  employment  to  the  He- 
brews during  the  bondage  (Ps.  lxxxi.  6,  lxviii.  13  ; 
comp.  Ex.  i.  14). 

Festivals. — The  religious  festivals  were  numerous, 
and  some  of  them  were,  in  the  days  of  Herodotus,  kept 
with  great  merry-making  and  license.  His  descrip- 
tion of  that  of  the  goddess  Bubastis,  kept  at  the  city 
of  Bubastis  in  the  eastern  part  of  the  Delta,  would 
well  apply  to  some  of  the  great  Mohammadan  festi- 
vals now  held  in  the  country  (ii.  59,  60).  The  feast 
which  the  Israelites  celebrated  when  Aaron  had  made 
the  golden  calf  seems  to  have  been  very  much  of  the 
same  character:  first  offerings  were  presented,  and 
then  the  people  ate  and  danced  and  sang  (Ex.  xxxii. 
5,  6,  17,  18,  19),  and  even  it  seems  stripped  them- 
selves (ver.  25),  as  appears  to  have  been  not  un- 
usual at  the  popular  ancient  Egyptian  festivals. 

Manners  of  Modern  Inhabitants. — The  manners 
of  the  modern  inhabitants  are,  we  are  disposed  to 
believe  after  much  consideration,  more  similar  to 
those  of  the  ancient  Hebrews,  on  account  of  Arab 
influence,  than  the  manners  of  their  predecessors. 
How  remarkably  they  illustrate  the  Bible  is  seen  in 
the  numerous  references  given  in  the  Modern  Egyp- 
tians (see  its  index),  and  in  the  great  general  value 
of  that  work  in  Biblical  criticism. 

Chronology  and  History. — In  treating  of 
the  chronology  and  history  of  ancient  Egypt  it  is 
our  endeavour  to  avoid  as  much  as  possible  the 
statement  of  doubtful  matters,  and  to  give  the 
greater  prominence  to  those  points  on  which  the 
generality  of  sound  Egyptologers  are  virtually 
agreed.  The  subject  may  be  divided  into  three 
main  branches,  technical  chronology,  historical 
chronology,  and  history  : — 

1.  Technical  Chronology. — It  is  impossible  here 
to  treat  in  much  detail  the  difficult  subject  of 
Egyptian  technical  chronology.  That  the  Egyptians 
used  various  periods  of  time,  and  made  astronomical 
observations  from  a  remote  age,  is  equally  attested 
by  ancient  writers,  and  by  their  monuments.  It  is, 
however,  very  difficult  to  connect  periods  mentioned 
by  the  former  with  the  indications  of  the  same  kind 
offered  by  the  latter ;  and  what  we  may  term  the 
recorded  observations  of  the  monuments  cannot  be 
used  for  the  determination  of  chronology  without  a 
previous  knowledge  of  Egyptian  astronomy  that  we 
have  not  wholly  attained.  The  testimony  of  ancient 
writers  must,  moreover,  be  carefully  sifted,  and 
we  must  not  take  their  statements  as  a  positive 
basis  without  the  strongest  evidence  of  correctness. 
Without  that  testimony,  however,  we  could  not  at 
present  prosecute  the  inquiry.  The  Egyptians  do 
not  appear  to  have  had  any  common  era.  Every 
document  that  bears  the  date  of  a  year,  gives  the 
year  of  the  reigning  sovereign,  counted  from  that 
current  year  in  winch  he  came  to  the  throne,  which 
was  called  his  first  year.  There  is  therefore  no 
general  means  of  testing  deductions  from  the  chrono- 
logical indications  of  the  monuments. 

There  appear  to  have  been  at  least  three  years 
in  use  with  the  Egyptians  before  the  Roman  domi- 
nation, the  Vague  Fear,  the  Tropical  Year,  and 
the  Sothic  Year:  but  it  is  not  probable  that  nunc 
than  two  of  these  were;  employed  at  the  same  time. 


506 


EGYPT 


The  Vague  Year  contained  365  days  without  any 
additional  fraction,  and  therefore  passed  through  all 
the  seasons  in  about  1500  years.  It  was  both  used 
for  civil  and  for  religious  purposes.  .  Probably  the 
Israelites  adopted  this  year  during  the  sojourn  in 
Egypt,  and  that  instituted  at  the  Exodus  appears  to 
have  been  the  current  Vague  Year  fixed  by  the 
adoption  of  a  method  of  intercalation.  [Chrono- 
logy.] The  Vague  Year  was  divided  into  twelve 
months,  each  of  thirty  days,  with  five  epagomenae, 
or  additional  days,  utter  the  twelfth.  The  months 
were  assigned  to  three  seasons,  each  comprising  four 
months,  called  respectively  the  1st,  2nd,  3rd,  and 
4th  of  those  seasons.  The  names  by  which  the 
Egyptian  months  are  commonly  known,  Thoth, 
Paophi,  &c,  are  taken  from  the  divinities  to  which 
they  were  sacred.  The  seasons  are  called,  according 
to  our  rendering,  those  of  Vegetation,  Manifestation, 
and  the  Waters  or  the  Inundation:  the  exact  mean- 
ing of  their  names  has  however  been  much  disputed. 
They  evidently  refer  to  the  phenomena  of  a  Tro- 
pical Year,  and  such  a  year  we  must  therefore  con- 
clude the  Egyptians  to  have  had,  at  least  in  a 
remote  period  of  their  history.  If,  as  we  believe, 
the  third  season  represents  the  period  of  the  inunda- 
tion, its  beginning  must  be  dated  about  one  month 
before  the  autumnal  equinox,  which  would  place 
the  beginning  of  the  year  at  the  Winter  Solstice,  an 
especially  lit  time  in  Egypt  for  the  commencement 
of  a  tropical  year.  The  Sothic  Year  was  a  supposed 
sidereal  year  of  365|  days,  commencing  with  the 
so-called  heliacal  rising  of  Sothis.  The  Vague  Year, 
having  no  intercalation,  constantly  retreated  through 
the  Sothic  Year,  until  a  period  of  1461  years  of  the 
former  kind,  and  1460  of  the  latter  had  elapsed, 
from  one  coincidence  of  commencements  to  another. 
The  Egyptians  are  known  to  have  used  two  great 
cycles,  the  Sothic  Cycle  and  the  Tropical  Cycle. 
The  former  was  a  cycle  of  the  coincidence  of  the 
Sothic  and  Vague  Years,  and  therefore  consisted  of 
1460  years  of  the  former  kind.  This  cycle  is  men- 
tioned by  ancient  writers,  and  two  of  its  commence- 
ments recorded,  the  one,  called  the  Era  of  Menophres, 
July  20,  B.C.  1322,  and  the  other,  on  the  same 
day,  a.d.  139.  Menophres  is  supposed  to  be  the 
name  of  an  Egyptian  king,  and  this  is  most  probable. 
The  nearest  name  is  Men-ptah,  or  Men-phthah, 
which  is  part  of  that  of  Sethee  Menptah,  the  father 
of  Kameses  II.,  and  also  that  of  the  son  of  the  latter, 
all  these  being  kings  of  the  sixth  dynasty.  We  are 
of  opinion  that  chronological  indications  are  con- 
clusive in  favour  of  the  earlier  of  the  two  sovereigns. 
The  Tropical  Cycle  was  a  cycle  of  the  coincidence  of 
the  Tropical  and  Vague  Years.  We  do  not  know 
the  exact  length  of  the  former  year  with  the  Egyp- 
tians, noi-  indeed  that  it  was  used  in  the  monumental 
age  ;  but  from  the  mention  of  a  period  of  500  years, 
the  third  of  the  cycle,  and  the  time  during  which  the 
Vague  Year  would  retrograde  through  one  season, 
we  cannot  doubt  that  there  was  such  a  cycle,  not 
to  speak  of  its  analogy  with  the  Sothic  Cycle.  It 
has  been  supposed  by  M.  Biot  to  have  had  a  dura- 
tion of  1505  years  ;  but  the  length  of  1500  Vague 
Years  is  preferable,  since  it  contains  a  number  of 
complete  lunations,  besides  that  the  Egyptians  could 
scarcely  have  been  more  exact,  and  that  the  period 
of  500  years  is  a  subdivision  of  1500.  Ancient 
writers  do  not  fix  any  commencements  of  this 
cycle.  If  the  characteristics  of  the  Tropical  Year 
are  what  we  suppose,  the  cycle  would  have  begim 
B.C.  2005  and  507  :  two  hieroglyphic  inscriptions 
record,  as  we   believe,  the  former  of  these  epochs 


EGYPT 

(Home  Aegyptiacae,  p.  12  seqq.,  pi.  i.  Nos.  5,  6).k 
The  return  of  the  Phoenix  has  undoubtedly  a  chro- 
nological meaning.  It  has  been  supposed  to  refer  to 
the  period  last  mentioned,  but  we  are  of  opinion  that 
the  Phoenix  Cycle  was  of  exactly  the  same  character, 
and  therefore  length,  as  the  Sothic,  its  commence- 
ment being  marked  by  the  so-called  heliacal  rising 
of  a  star  of  the  constellation  BENNU  HESAR,  "the 
Phoenix  of  Osiris,"  which  is  placed  in  the  astro- 
nomical ceiling  of  the  Rameseum  of  El-Kurneh  six 
months  distant  from  Sothis.  The  monuments 
make  mention  of  Panegyrical  Months,  which  can 
only,  we  believe,  be  periods  of  thirty  years  each, 
and  divisions  of  a  year  of  the  same  kind.  We  have 
computed  the  following  dates  of  commencements  of 
these  Panegyrical  Years : — 1st.  B.C.  2717,  ist  dy- 
nasty, era  of  Menes  (not  on  monuments) ;  2nd. 
B.C.  2352,  ivth  dynasty,  Sfiphis,  I.  and  II.  ;  3rd. 
B.C.  1986  (xiith  dynasty,  Sesertesen  III.  ?  not  on 
monuments)  ;  the  last-mentioned  date  being  also  the 
beginning  of  a  Phoenix  Cycle,  which  appears  to  have 
compiised  four  of  these  Panegyrical  Years.  The 
other  important  dates  of  the  system  of  Panegyries 
which  occur  on  the  monuments  are  B.C.  1442, 
xviiith  dynasty,  Queen  Amen-nemt;  and  B.C.  1412, 
xviiith  dynasty,  Thothmes  III. 

Certain  phenomena  recorded  on  the  monuments 
have  been  calculated  by  M.  Biot,  who  has  obtained 
the  following  dates: — Rising  of  Sothis  in  reign  of 
Thothmes  III.,  xviiith  dynasty,  B.C.  1445  ;  supposed 
Venial  Equinox,  Thothmes  III.,  B.C.  cir.  1441  ; 
rising  of  Sothis,  Rameses  III.,  xxth  dynasty,  B.C. 
1301  ;  star-risings,  Rameses  VI.  and  IX.,  xxth 
dynasty,  B.C.  cir.  1241.  Some  causes  of  uncer- 
tainty affect  the  exactness  of  these  dates,  and  that  of 
Rameses  III.  is  irrecbncileable  with  the  two  of 
Thothmes  III.,  unless  we  hold  the  calendar  in  which 
the  inscription  supposed  to  record  it  occurs  to  be 
a  Sothic  one,  in  which  case  no  date  could  be  ob- 
tained. 

Egyptian  technical  chronology  gives  us  no  direct 
evidence  in  favour  of  the  high  antiquity  which  some 
assign  to  the  foundation  of  the  first  kingdom.  The 
earliest  record  which  all  Egyptologers  are  agreed  to 
regard  as  affording  a  date  is  of  the  fifteenth  century 
B.C.,  and  no  one  has  alleged  any  such  record  to  be 
of  any  earlier  time  than  the  twenty-fourth  century 
B.C.  The  Egyptians  themselves  seem  to  have  placed 
the  beginning  of  the  1st  dynasty  in-the  twenty-eighth 
century  B.C.,  but  for  determining  this  epoch  there  is 
no  direct  monumental  evidence. 

2.  Historical  Chrcmohgy.  —  The  materials  for 
historical  chronology  are  the  monuments  and  the 
remains  of  the  historical  work  of  Manetho.  Since 
the  interpretation  of  hieroglyphics  has  been  dis- 
covered the  evidence  of  the  monuments  has  been 
brought  to  bear  on  this  subject,  but  as  yet  it  has 
not  been  sufficiently  full  ami  explicit  to  enable  us 
to  set  aside  other  aid.  We  have  had  to  look  else- 
where for  a  general  framework,  the  details  of  which 
the  monuments  might  fill  up.  The  remains  of 
Manetho  are  now  generally  held  to  supply  this 
want.  A  comparison  with  the  monuments  has 
shown  that  he  drew  his  information  from  original 
sources,  the  general  authenticity  of  which  is  vindi- 
cated by  minute  points  of  agreement.  The  infor- 
mation Manetho  gives  us,  in  the  present  form  of  his 
work,  is,  however,  by  no  means  explicit,  and  it  is 
only  by  a  theoretical  arrangement  of  the  materials 


k  For  the  reasons  for  fixing  on  these  years,  see 
Horae  Aeg.  I.  c. 


EGYPT 

that  they  take  a  definite  form.  The  remains  of 
Manethos  historical  work  consist  of  a  list  of  the 
Egyptian  dynasties  and  two  considerable  fragments, 
one  relating  to  the  Shepherds,  the  other  to  a  tale  of 
the  Exodus.  The  list  is  only  known  to  us  in  the 
epitome  given  by  Africanus,  preserved  by  Syncellus, 
and  that  given  by  Eusebius.  These  present  such 
great  differences  that  it  is  not  reasonable  to  hope 
that  we  can  restore  a  correct  text.  The  series  of 
dynasties  is  given  as  if  they  were  successive,  in 
which  case  the  commencement  of  the  first  would  be 
placed  full  5000  years  B.C.,  and  the  reign  of  the  king 
who  built  the  Great  Pyramid,  4000.  The  monu- 
ments do  not  warrant  so  extreme  an  antiqtrity, 
and  the  great  majority  of  Egyptologers  have  there- 
fore held  that  the  dynasties  were  partly  contem- 
porary. A  passage  in  the  fragment  of  Manetho 
respecting  the  Shepherds,  where  he  speaks  of  the 
kings  of  the  Thebai's  and  of  the  rest  of  Egypt  rising 
against  these  foreign  rulers,  makes  it  almost  certain 
that  he  admitted  at  least  three  contemporary  lines 
at  that  period  (Jos.  c.  Apion.  i.  14).  The  naming  of 
the  dynasties  anterior  to  the  time  of  a  certain  single 
kingdom,  and  that  of  the  later  ones,  which  we  know  to 
have  generally  held  sway  over  all  Egypt,  or  the  first 
seventeen,  and  the  xviiith  and  following  dynasties, 
lends  support  to  this  opinion.  The  former  are  named 
in  groups,  first  a  group  of  Thinites,  then  one  of  Mem- 
phites,  broken  by  a  dynasty  of  Elephantinites,  next  a 
Heraeleopolite  line,  &c,  the  dynasties  of  a  particular 
city  being  grouped  together ;  whereas  the  latter 
generally  present  but  one  or  two  together  of  the  same 
name,  and  the  dynasties  of  different  cities  recur.  The 
earlier  portion  seems  therefore  to  represent  parallel 
lines,  the  later,  a  succession.  The  evidence  of  the 
monuments  leads  to  the  same  conclusion.  Kings 
who  unquestionably  belong  to  different  dynasties 
are  shown  by  them  to  be  contemporary.  In  the 
present  state  of  Egyptology  this  evidence  has  led  to 
various  results'  as  to  the  number  of  contemporary 
dynasties,  and  the  consequent  duration  of  the  whole 
history.  One  great  difficulty  is  that  the  character 
of  the  inscriptions  makes  it  impossible  to  ascertain, 
without  the  explicit  mention  of  two  sovereigns,  that 
any  one  king  was  not  a  sole  ruler.  For  example, 
it  has  been  lately  discovered  that  the  xiith  dynasty 
was  for  the  greatest  part  of  its  rule  a  double  line. 
Vet  its  numerous  monuments  in  general  give  no 
hint  hi'  more  than  one  king,  although  there  was 
almost  always  a  recognised  colleague.  Therefore, 
■a  fortiori,  no  notice  would  be  taken,  if  possible, 
on  any  monument  of  a  ruler  of  another  house  than 
that  of  tin.'  king  in  whose  territory  it  was  made. 
We  'in  therefore  scarcely  expect  very  full  evidence 
on  this  subject.  Mr.  Lane,  as  long  ago  as"1830, 
proposed  an  arrangement  of  the  first  seventeen  dy- 
nasties based  upon  their  numbers  and  names.  This 
scheme  the  writer  believes  to  be  strikingly  con- 
firmed by  the  monuments.  The  table  in  the  following 
page  contains  the  dynasties  thus  arranged,  with  the 
approximative  dates  we  assign  to  their  commence- 
ments, and  the  dates  of  chief  events  in  Hebrew 
history  connected  with  that  of  Egypt,  according  to 
the  system  preferred  in  ait.  Cheonology. 

The  monuments  will  not.  in  our  opinion,  justify 
an\  great  extension  of  the  period  assigned  in  the 
table  to  the  first  seventeen  dynasties.  The  lasf  date, 
that  of  the  commencement  of  the  xviiith  dynasty, 
cannot  be  changed  more  than  a  few  years.  Baron 
Bunsen  and  Dr.  Lepsius  indeed  place  it  much  earlier, 
but  they  do  so  in  opposition  to  positive  monu- 
mental evidence.     The  date  of'  the  beginning  of  the 


EGYPT 


507 


1st  dynasty,  which  we  are  disposed  to  place  a  little, 
before  B.C.  2700,  is  more  doubtful,  but  a  con- 
currence of  astronomical  evidence  points  to  the 
twenty-eighth  century.  The  interval  between  the 
two  dates  cannot  therefore  be  greatly  more  or  less 
than  twelve  hundred  years,  a  period  quite  in  accord- 
ance with  the  lengths  of  the  dynasties  according  to 
the  better  text,  if  the  arrangement  here  given  be 
correct.  Some  have  supposed  a  much  greater  anti- 
quity for  the  commencement  of  Egyptian  history. 
Lepsius  places  the  accession  of  Menes  B.C.  3892,  and 
Bunsen,  two  hundred  years  later.  Their  system  is 
founded  upon  a  passage  in  the  chronological  work  of 
Syncellus,  which  assigns  a  duration  of  3555  to  the 
thirty  dynasties  (Chron.  p.  51b).  It  is  by  no  means 
certain  that  this  number  is  given  on  the  authority 
of  Manetho,  but  apart  from  this,  the  whole  state- 
ment is  unmistakably  not  from  the  true  Manetho, 
but  from  some  one  of  the  fabricators  of  chronology, 
among  whom  the  Pseudo-Manetho  held  a  prominent 
place  (Enc.  Brit.  8th  ed.  Egypt,  p.  452  ;  Quarterly 
Review,  No.  210,  p.  395-7).  If  this  number  be 
discarded  as  doubtful  or  spurious  there  is  nothing 
definite  to  support  the  extended  system  so  confi- 
dently put  forth  by  those  who  adopt  it. 

3.  History. — Passing  from  chronology  to  history 
we  have  first  to  notice  the  indications  in  the  Bible 
which  relate  to  the  earliest  period.  That  Egypt  was 
colonised  by  the  descendants  of  Noah  in  a  very  re- 
mote age  is  shown  by  the  mention  of  the  migration  of 
the  Philistines  from  Caphtor,  which  had  taken  place 
before  the  arrival  of  Abraham  in  Palestine.  Before 
this  migration  could  occur  the  Caphtorim  and  other 
Mizraites  must  have  occupied  Egypt  for  some  time. 
A  remarkable  passage  points  to  a  knowlalge  of  the 
date  at  which  an  ancient  city  of  Egypt  was  founded  : 
— "  Hebron  was  built  seven  years  before  Zoan  in 
Egypt"  (Num.  xiii.  22).  We  find  that  Hebron 
was  originally  called  Kirjath-arba,  and  was  a  city 
of  the  Anakim  (Josh.  xiv.  15),  and  it  is  mentioned 
under  that  appellation  in  the  history  of  Abraham 
(Gen.  xxiii.  2  J :  it  had  therefore  been  founded  by 
the  giant-race  before  the  days  of  that  patriarch. 

The  evidence  of  the  Egyptians  as  to  the  primeval 
history  of  their  race  and  country  is  extremely  inde- 
finite. They  seem  to  have  separated  mankind  into 
two  great  stocks,  and  each  of  these  again  into  two 
branches,  for  they  appear  to  have  represented  them- 
selves and  the  Negroes,  the  red  and  black  races, 
as  the  children  of  the  god  Horns,  and  the  Shemites 
and  Europeans,  the  yellow  and  white  races,  as  the 
children  of  the  goddess  Pesht  (comp.  Brugsch, 
Geogr.  Inschr.  ii.  pp.  90,  91).  They  seem  there- 
fore to  have  held  a  double  origin  of  the  species. 
The  absence  of  any  important  traditional  period 
is  ysrj  remaik  ibli  in  the  t  igmeiits  oi  Egyptian 
history.  These  commence  with  the  divine  dy- 
nasties, and  pass  abruptly  to  the  human  dynasties. 
The  latest  portion  of  the  first  may  indeed  lie  t,.i- 
ilitional,  not  mythical,  and  the  earliest  part  of  the 

< 1     may     be     traditional     and     nut     historical, 

though  this  last  conjecture  we  are  hardly  disposed 
to  admit.  In  any  ease,  however,  there  i^  a  very 
short  and  extremely  obscure  time  of  tradition,  and 
nt  no  great  distance  from  the  earliest  date  at  which 
it  can  be  held  to  oiid  we  come  upon  tie 
lighf  of  history  in  the  days  of  the  pyramids,  'file 
indications  are  of  a  sudden  change  of  seat,  and  the 
at  in  Egypt  of  a  civilized  race,  which, 
either  wishing  to  be  believed  autochthonous,  or 
having  losl  all  ties  that  could  keep  up  the  traditions 
of  its  first  dwellin]  -place,  tilled   up  the  commence- 


508 


EGYPT 

TABLE  OF  THE  FIRST  SEVENTEEN  DYNASTIES. 


B.C. 

THINITES 

2700 

.2717 
(eraofMenaO  " 

MEMPHITES 

2600 

2500 

III.  cir.  2650 

ELEPHAN- 
TIN1TE8 

II.  cir.  2470 

2400 
2300 

2200 
2100 

IV.  cir.  2440 

V.  cir.  2440 

2352.     Date  in 
reign  of 
Suphises 

HERACLEO- 
POLITES 

DIOS- 

POI.ITES 

VI.  cir.  2S0O 

IX.  cir.  2200 

XI.  cir.  2200 

XOITES 

SHEP 

HERDS 

cir.  2081. 
Abraham 
visits  Kgypt 

2000 

XII.  cir.  2080 

•2005.          Date 
in     reign     of 
Amenemhall 
1986.     Date  in 
reign  of  Scser- 
tesen  III.! 

XIV.  i  ir.  S080 

XV.  cir.  2080 

XVI.  cir.  2080 

1900 

1800 

XIII.  cir.  192(1 



/ 

1876.      Joseph 

governor. 
1867-         Jacob 

Egypt 

VII.  cir.  l,«)(i 
VIII.  cir.  1800 

< 

(215  vears) 

1700 

X   cir.  1750 

\ 

1652.    Exodus. 

1GO0 

1 

1500 

XVIII.  cir.  152 

1 

EGYPT 

ment  of  its  history  with  materials  drawn  from 
mythology.  There  is  no  trace  of  the  tradition  of 
the  Deluge  which  is  found  in  almost  every  other 
country  of  the  world.  The  priests  are  indeed  re- 
ported to  have  told  Solon  when  he  spoke  of  one 
deluge  that  many  had  occurred  (Plat.  Tim.  23), 
but  the  reference  is  more  likely  to  have  been  to 
great  floods  of  the  Nile  than  to  any  extraordinary 
catastrophes. 

The  history  of  the  dynasties  preceding  the  xviiith 
is  not  told  by  any  continuous  series  of  monuments. 
Except  those  of  the  ivth  and  xiith  dynasties  there 
are  scarcely  any  records  of  the  age  left  to  the  present 
day,   and   thence   in    a   great   measure   arises   the 
difficulty  of  determining  the  chronology.    From  the 
time  of  Menes,  the  first  king,  until  the  Shepherd- 
invasion,  Egypt  seems  to  have  enjoyed  perfect  tran- 
quillity.   During  this  age  the  Memphite  line  was  the 
most  powerful,  and  by  it,  under  the  ivth  dynasty, 
were  the  most  famous  pyramids  raised.     The  Shep- 
herds were  foreigners  who  came  from  the  East,  and, 
in  some  manner  unknown  to  Manetho,  gained  the  rule 
of  Egvpt.     Those  whose  kings  composed  the  xvth 
dynasty  were  the  first  and  most  important.     They 
appear  to  have  been  Phoenicians,  and  it  is  probable 
that  their  migration  into  Egypt,  and  thence  at  last 
into  Palestine,  was  part  of  the  great  movement  to 
which    the   coming    of  the   Phoenicians  from   the 
Erythraean  Sea,  and  the  Philistines  from  Caphtor, 
belong.     It  is  not  impossible  that  the  war  of  the 
four   kings  —  Chedorlaomer  and    his   allies  —  was 
directed  against  the  power  of  the  kings  of  the  xvth 
dynasty.     Most  probably  the  Pharaoh  of  Abraham 
was  of  this  line,  which  lived  at  Memphis,  and  at 
the  great  fort  or  camp  of  Avaris  on  the  eastern 
frontier.     The  period  of  Egyptian  history  to  which 
the  Shepherd-invasion  should  be  assigned  is  a  point 
of  dispute.     It  is  generally  placed  after  the  xiith 
dynasty,  for  it  is   argued  that  this  powerful  line 
could  not  have  reigned  at  the  same  time  as  one  or 
more  Shepherd-dynasties.     We  are  of  opinion  that 
this  objection  is  not  valid,  and  that  the  Shepherd- 
invasion  was  anterior  to  the  xiith  dynasty.     It  is 
not  certain  that  the  foreigners  were  at  the  outset 
hostile  to  the  Egyptians,  for  they  may  have  come 
in   by  marriage,  and  it  is  by  no  means  unlikely 
that  they  may   have   been   long  in  a  position  of 
secondary  importance.     The  rule  of  the  xiith  dy- 
nasty, which  was  of  Thebans,  lasting  about  160 
years,  was  a  period    of   prosperity  to  Egypt,    but 
alter    its    close    those    calamities    appear    to    have 
occurred  which  made  the  Shepherds  hated  by  the 
Egyptians.       During   the    interval   to    the  xviiith 
dynasty  there  seems  to  have  been  no  native  line  of 
any  importance  but  that  of  the  Thebans,  and  more 
than  one  Shepherd  dynasty  exercised  a  severe  rule 
nver  the  Eg]  ptians.    The  paucity  of  the  monuments 
proves  the  troubled  nature  of  this  period. 

We  must  here  notice  the  history  of  the  Israelites 
in  Egypt  witli  reference  to  the  dynasty  of  the 
Pharaohs  who  favoured  them,  and  thai  of  their 
oppressors.  According  to  the  scheme  of  Biblical 
Chronology  which  we  believe  to  he  the  most  pro- 
bable [Chronology],  the  whole  sojourn  in  Egypt 
would  belong  to  the  period  hetiire  the  xviiith  dy- 
nasty. The  Israelites  would  have  come  in  and 
gone  forth  during  that  obscure  age  for  the  history 
of  which  we  have  little  or  no  monumental  evidence. 
This  would  explain  the  absence  of  any  positive 
mention  of  them  on  the  Egyptian  monuments. 
Some  assert  that  they  were  an  nnimportanl  Arab 
tribe, 'and  therefore  would  nol   l"1  mentioned,  and 


EGYPT 


509 


that  the  calamities  attending  their  departure  could 
not  be  commemorated.  These  two  propositions  are 
contradictory,  and  the  difficulties  are  unsolved.  It', 
as  Lepsius  supposes,  the  Israelites  came  in  under  the 
xviiith  dynasty,  and  went  #out  under  the  xixth,  or 
if,  as  Bunsen  holds,  they  came  in  under  the  xiith, 
and  (after  a  sojourn  of  1434-  years  !)  went  out  under 
the  xixth,  the  oppression  in  both  cases  falling  in  a 
period  of  which  we  have  abundant  contemporary 
monuments,  sometimes  the  records  of  every  year, 
it  is  impossible  that  the  monuments  should  be 
wholly  silent  if  the  Biblical  narrative  is  true.  Let 
us  examine  the  details  of  that  narrative.  At  the 
time  to  which  we  should  assign  Joseph's  rule,  Egypt 
was  under  Shepherds,  and  Egyptian  kings  of  no 
great  strength.  Since  the  Pharaoh  of  Joseph  must 
have  been  a  powerful  ruler  and  held  Lower  Egypt, 
there  can  be  no  question  that  he  was,  if  the  dates  be 
correct,  a  Shepherd  of  the  xvth  dynasty.  How  does 
the  Biblical  evidence  atfect  this  inference  ?  Nothing 
is  more  striking  throughout  the  ancient  Egyptian  in- 
scriptions and  writings  than  the  bitter  dislike  of  most 
foreigners,  especially  Easterns.  They  are  constantly 
spoken  of  in  the  same  terms  as  the  inhabitants  of 
the  infernal  regions,  not  alone  when  at  war  with 
the  Pharaohs,  but  in  time  of  peace  and  in  the  case 
of  friendly  nations.  It  is  a  feeling  alone  paralleled 
in  our  days  by  that  of  the  Chinese.  The  accounts  of 
the  Greek  writers,  and  the  whole  history  of  the 
later  period,  abundantly  confirm  this  estimate  of  the 
prejudice  of  the  Egyptians  against  foreigners.  It 
seems  to  us  perfectly  incredible  that  Joseph  should 
be  the  minister  of  an  Egyptian  king.  In  lesser 
particulars  the  evidence  is  not  less  strong.  The 
Pharaoh  of  Joseph  is  a  despot,  whose  will  is  law, 
who  kills  and  pardons  at  his  pleasure,  who  not  only 
raises  a  foreign  slave  to  the  head  of  his  administra- 
tion, but  through  his  means  makes  all  the  Egyptians, 
except  the  priests,  serfs  of  the  crown.  The  Egyp- 
tian kings  on  the  contrary  were  restrained  by  the 
laws,  shared  the  public  dislike  of  foreigners,  and 
would  have  avoided  the  very  policy  Joseph  followed, 
which  would  have  weakened  the  attachment  of 
their  fellow-countrymen  by  the  loosening  of  local  ties 
and  complete  reducing  to  bondage  of  the  population, 
although  it  would  have  greatly  strengthened  the 
power  of  an  alien  sovereign.  Pharaoh's  conduct 
towards  Joseph's  family  points  to  the  same  con- 
clusion. He  gladly  invites  the  strangers,  and  gives 
them  leave  to  dwell,  not  among  the  Egyptians,  but 
in  Goshen,  where  his  own  cattle  seem  to  have  been 
(Gen.  xlvi.  34,  xlvii.  6).  His  acts  indicate  a  fellow- 
feeling  and  a  desire  to  strengthen  himself  against 
the  national  party. 

The  "new  king"  "which  knew  not  Joseph,"  is 
generally  thought  by  those  who  hold  with  us  as  to 
the  previous  history,  to  have  been  an  Egyptian,  and 
head  of  the  xviiith  dynasty.  It  seems  at  first 
sight  extremely  probable  that  the  king  who 
crushed,  if  lie  did  not  expel,  the  Shepherds, 
would  be  the  first  oppressor  of  the  nation  which 
they  protected.  Plausible  as  this  theory  appears, 
a  close  examination  of  the  Bible-narrative^  seems 
to  us  to  overthrow  it.  We  read  of  the  new 
king  that — "he  said  unto  his  people,  Behold,  the 
people  of  the  children  of  Israel  fare]  more  ami 
mightier  than  we:   come  on,  let  us  deal  wisely  with 

them,  lest  they  multiply,  and  it  come  to  pass, 
that,  when  there  falleth  out  any  war,  they  join  also 
unto  our  enemies,  and  light  against  us,  and  [so] 
git  them  up  out  of  the  land"  (Ex.  i.  9,  In).  The 
Israelites  are  therefore  more  and  stronger  than  the 


510 


EGYPT 


people  of  the  oppressor,  the  oppressor  fears  war  in 
Egypt,  and  that  the  Israelites  would  join  his  eneT 
mies,  he  is  not  able  at  once  to  adopt  open  violence, 
and  he  therefore  uses  a  subtle  system  to  reduce  them 
by  making  them  perform  forced  labour,  and  soon 
after  takes  the  stronger  measure  of  killing  their 
male  children.  These  conditions  point  to  a  divided 
country  and  a  weak  kingdom,  and  cannot,  we 
think,  apply  to  the  time  of  the  xviiith  and  xixth 
dynasties.  The  whole  narrative  of  subsequent 
events  to  the  Exodus  is  consistent  with  this  con- 
clusion, to  which  the  use  of  universal  terms  does 
not  olfer  any  real  objection.  When  all  Egypt  is 
spoken  of,  it  is  not  necessary  either  in  Hebrew  or  in 
Egyptian  that  we  should  suppose  the  entire  country 
to  be  strictly  intended.  If  we  conclude  therefore 
that  the  Exodus  most  probably  occurred  before  the 
xviiith  dynasty,  we  have  to  ascertain,  if  possible, 
whether  the  Pharaohs  of  the  oppression  appear  to 
have  been  Egyptians  or  Shepherds.  The  change  of 
policy  is  in  favour  of  their  having  been  Egyptians, 
but  is  by  no  means  conclusive,  for  there  is  no  reason 
that  all  the  foreigners  should  have  had  the  same 
feeling  towards  the  Israelites,  and  we  have  already 
seen  that  the  Egyptian  Pharaohs  and  their  subjects 
seem  in  general  to  have  been  friendly  to  them 
throughout  their  history,  and  that  the  Egyptians 
were  privileged  by  the  Law,  apparently  on  this  ac- 
count. It  may  be  questioned  whether  the  friend- 
ship of  the  two  nations,  even  if  merely  a  matter  of 
policy,  would  have  been  as  enduring  as  we  know  it 
to  have  been  had  the  Egyptians  looked  back  on 
their  conduct  towards  the  Israelites  as  productive  of 
great  national  calamities,  or  had  the  Israelites  looked 
back  upon  the  persecution  as  the  work  of  the  Egyp- 
tians. If  the  chronology  be  correct  we  can  only 
decide  in  favour  of  the  Shepherds.  During  the 
time  to  which  the  events  are  assigned  there  were  no 
important  lines  but  the  Theban,  and  one  or  more  of 
Shepherds.  Lower  Egypt,  and  especially  its  eastern 
part,  must  have  been  in  the  hands  of  the  latter. 
The  land  of  Goshen  w,as  in  the  eastern  part  of  Lower 
Egypt:  it  was  wholly  under  the  control  of  the 
oppressors,  whose  capital,  or  royal  residence,  at 
least  in  the  case  of  the  Pharaoh  of  the  Exodus,  lay 
very  near  to  it.  Manetho,  according  to  the  tran- 
script of  Africanus,  speaks  of  three  Shepherd-dy- 
nasties, the  xvth,  xvith,  and  xviith,  the  last  of  which, 
according  to  the  present  text,  was  of  Shepherds  and 
Thebans,  but  this  is  probably  incorrect,  and  the 
dynasty  should  rather  be  considered  as  of  Shepherds 
alone.  It  is  difficult  to  choose  between  these  three: 
a  passage  in  Isaiah,  however,  which  has  been 
strangely  overlooked,  seems  to  afford  an  indication 
which  narrows  the  choice.  "  My  people  went 
down  aforetime  into  Egypt  to  sojourn  there ;  and 
the  Assyrian  oppressed  them  without  cause  "  (lii. 
4).  This  indicates  that  the  oppressor  was  an 
Assyrian,  and  therefore  not  of  the  xvth  dynasty, 
which,  according  to  Manetho,  in  the  epitomes,  was 
of  Phoenicians,  and  opposed  to  the  Assyrians  (Jos. 
c.  Apion.  i.  14).  Among  the  names  of  kings  of 
this  period  in  the  Royal  Turin  Papyrus  (ed.  Wil- 
kinson) are  two  which  appear  to  be  Assyrian,  so 
that  we  may  reasonably  suppose  that  some  of  the 
foreign  rulers  were  of  that  race.  It  is  not  possible 
at  present  to  decide  whether  they  were  of  the 
xvith  or  the  xviith  dynasty.  It  cannot  be  objected 
to  the  explanation  we  have  offered  that  the  title 
Pharaoh  is  applied  to  the  kings  connected  with  the 
Israelites,  and  that  they  must  therefore  have  been 
natives,  for  it  is  almost  certain  that  at  least  some  of 


EGYPT 

the  Shepherd-kings  were  Egyptianized,  like  Joseph, 
who  received  an  Egyptian  name,  and  Moses,  who 
was  supposed  by  the  daughters  of  Jethro  to  be  an 
Egyptian  (Ex.  ii.  19).  It  has  been  urged  by 
the  opponents  of  the  chronological  schemes  that 
place  the  Exodus  before  the  later  part  of  the  four- 
teenth century  B.C.  that  the  conquests  of  the 
Pharaohs  of  the  xviiith,  xixth,  and  xxth  dynasties 
would  have  involved  collisions  with  the  Israelites 
had  they  been  in  trfose  times  already  established  in 
Palestine,  whereas  neither  the  Bible  nor  the  monu- 
ments of  Egypt  indicate  any  such  event.  It  has 
been  overlooked  by  the  advocates  of  the  Rabbinical 
date  of  the  Exodus  that  the  absence  of  any  positive 
Palestinian  names,  except  that  of  the  Philistines,  in 
the  lists  of  peoples  and  places  subject  to  these  Pha- 
raohs, and  in  the  records  of  their  wars,  entirely  de- 
stroys their  argument,  for  while  it  shows  that  they 
did  not  conquer  Palestine,  it  makes  it  impossible 
for  us  to  decide  on  Egyptian  evidence  whether  the 
Hebrews  were  then  in  that  country  or  not.  Shishak's 
list,  on  the  contrary,  presents  several  well-known 
names  of  towns  in  Palestine,  besides  that  of  the 
kingdom  of  Judah.  The  policy  of  the  Pharaohs,  as 
previously  explained,  is  the  key  to  their  conduct 
towards  the  Israelites.  At  the  same  time  the  cha- 
racter of  the  portions  of  the  Bible  relating  to  this 
period  prevents  our  being  sure  that  the  Egyptians 
may  not  have  passed  through  the  country,  and  even 
put  the  Israelites  to  tribute.  It  is  illustrative  of 
the  whole  question  under  consideration,  that  in 
the  most  flourishing  days  of  the  sole  kingdom  of 
Israel,  a  Pharaoh  should  have  marched  unopposed 
into  Palestine  and  captured  the  Canaanite  city 
Gezer  at  no  great  distance  from  Jerusalem,  and 
that  this  should  be  merely  incidentally  mentioned 
at  a  later  time  instead  of  being  noticed  in  the  regular 
course  of  the  narrative  (1  K.  ix.  15,  16). 

The  main  arguments  for  the  Rabbinical  or  latest 
date  of  the  Exodus  have  been  discussed  in  a  previous 
article  (CHRONOLOGY).  The  objections  to  a  much 
earlier  date,  that  of  B.C.  1652,  may  be  considered 
as  favourable  to  the  latest  rather  than  to  Usher's 
date,  although  not  unfavourable  to  both.  The  main 
objection  to  these  in  our  opinion  is  that  the  details 
of  the  Biblical  narrative  do  not,  even  with  the 
utmost  latitude  of  interpretation,  agree  with  the 
history  of  the  country  if  the  Exodus  be  supposed  to 
have  taken  place  under  the  xviiith  or  xixth  dynasty. 
As  to  the  account  of  the  Exodus  given  by  Manetho, 
it  was  confessedly  a  mere  popular  story,  for  he 
admitted  it  was  not  a  part  of  the  Egyptian  records, 
but  a  tale  of  uncertain  authorship  (v-wip  Siv  6 
MaveOwv  ovk  4k  twv  -nap'  Alyv-Kriois  ypafx/xdroiv, 
dAA.'  is  uvrbs  oifxoXSyrjKtv,  4k  tcov  aSetrTrdroos 
fivdoKoyovfxivccv  TrpoaTeQeMfv,  k.t.A. Jos.  c.  Apion. 
i.  16).  A  critical  examination  shows  that  it  cannot 
claim  to  be  a  veritable  tradition  of  the  Exodus : 
it  is  indeed,  if  based  on  any  such  tradition,  so 
distorted  that  it  is  impossible  to  be  sure  that  it 
relates  to  the  king  to  whose  reign  it  is  assigned. 
Yet  upon  the  supposition  that  the  king  is  really 
Meiiptah,  son  of  Rameses  II.,  the  advocates  of  the 
Rabbinical  date  entirely  base  their  adjustment  ot 
Hebrew  with  Egyptian  history  at  this  period. 

The  history  of  the  xviiith,  xixth,  and  xxth  dy- 
nasties is  that  of  the  Egyptian  empire.  Aahmes, 
the  head  of  the  first  of  these  (B.C.  cir.  1525),  over- 
threw the  power  of  the  Shepherds,  and  probably 
expelled  them.  Queen  Amen-nemt  and  Thothmes 
II.  and  III.  are  the  earliest  sovereigns  of  whom 
great   monuments   remain    in   the   temple   of  El- 


EGYPT 

Karnak,  the  chief  sanctuary  of  Thebes.     The  last 
of  these  rulers  was  a  great  foreign  conqueror,  and 
reduced  Nineveh,  and  perhaps  Babylon  also,  to  his 
sway.     Amenoph  111.,  his  great-grandson,  states  on 
scarabaei,  struck  apparently  to  commemorate  his 
marriage,  that  his  northern  boundary  was  in  Meso- 
potamia, his  southern  in  Kara  (Choloe?).     By  him 
was  raised  the  great  temple  on  the  west  bank  at 
Thebes,  the  site  of  which  is  now  only  marked  by 
the  gigantic  pair  the  Vocal  Memnou  and  its  fel- 
low.   The  head  of  the  sixth  dynasty,  Sethee  I.,  or 
Sethos,  B.C.   cir.   1340,  waged  great  foreign  wars, 
particularly  with  the  Hittites  of  the  valley  of  the 
Orontes,  whose  capital  Ketesh,  situate  near  Emesa, 
he  captured.     By  him  the  great  hypostyle  hall   of 
El-Karuak  was  built,  and  on  its  northern  wall  is  a 
most  interesting  series  of  bas-reliefs  recording  his 
successes.     His  son  Rameses  II.  was  the  most  illus- 
trious of  the  Pharaohs.     If  he  did  not  exceed  all 
others  in  foreign  conquests,  he  far  outshone  them  in 
the  grandeur  and  beauty  of  the  temples  with  which 
he  adorned  Egypt  and  Nubia.     His  chief  campaign 
was  against  the  Hittites  and  a  great  confederacy 
they   had  formed.     He  defeated  their  army,  cap- 
tured Ketesh,  and  forced  them  to  conclude  a  treaty 
with   him,  though 
this  last  object  does 
not   seem    to  have 
been     immediately 
attained.  Menptah, 
the  son  and  succes- 
sor of  Rameses  II., 
is  supposed  by  the 
advocates     of    the 
Rabbi  ideal  date  of 
the  Exodus  to  have 
been    the    Pharaoh 
in  whose  time  the 
Israelites  went  out. 
One  other  king  of 
this     period    must 
be  noticed,  Rameses 
III.,    of    the   xxth 
dynasty,    B.C.   cir. 
1200,    whose   con- 
quests, recorded  on 
the    walls    of    his 
great  temple  of  lledeenet  Haboo  in  western  Thebes 
seem  to  have  been  not  less  important  than  those 
of  Rameses  II.     The  most  remarkable  of  the  sculp- 
tures commemorating  them  represents  a  naval  vic- 
tory in   the  Mediterranean,  gained  by   the   Egyp- 
tian fleet  over  that  of  the  Tokkaree,  probably  the 
Carians,  and  Shairetana  (Khairetana),  or  Cretans. 
Other  Shairetana,  whom  we  take  to  correspond  to 
the  Cherethim  of  Scripture,  serve  in  the  Egyptian 
forces.     This  king  also  subdued  the  Philistines  and 
the  Rebu  (Lebu),  or  Lubim,  to  the  west  of  Egypt. 
Under  his  successors  the  power  of  Egypt  evidently 
declined,  and  towards  the  close  of  the  dynasty  the 
country  seems  to   have  fallen    into   anarchy,   the 
high-priests  of  Amen  having  usurped  regal  power 
at  Thebes  and  a  Lower  Egyptian  dynasty,  the  xxist, 
arisen  at  Tarn's.     Probably  the   Egyptian  princess 
who  became  Solomon's  wife  was  a  daughter  of  a 
late  king  of  the  Tanite  dynasty.     The  head  of  the 
xxiind  dynasty,  Sheshonk  I.,  the  Shishak  of  the, 
Bible,   restored    the    unity   of   the   kingdom,   and 
revived    the   credit    of   the    Egyptian    arms,    B.C. 
cir.  990.       Early  in  his  reign    he    received  Jero- 
boam, the  enemy  of  Solomon  (1  K.  xi.  40),  and 
perhaps  it  was  by  his  advice  that  he  afterwards 


EGYPT 


oil 


attacked  Judah.  It  is  doubtful,  however,  whether 
Jeroboam  did  not  suffer  by  the  invasion  as  well  as 
Rehoboam.  On  the  outside  of  the  south  wall  of  the 
temple  of  El-Karnak  is  a  list  of  the  conquests  of 
Sheshonk  I.,  comprising  "  the  kingdom  of  Judah," 
and  several  Hebrew  towns,  some  of  which  must  have 
been  taken  from  Jeroboam.  [Shishak.]  Probably 
his  successor,  Osorkon  I.,  is  the  Zerah  of  Scripture, 
defeated  by  Asa.  The  army  that  Zerah  led  can 
only  have  been  that  of  Egypt,  and  his  overthrow 
will  explain  the  decline  of  the  house  of  Sheshonk. 
[Zerah.]  Egypt  makes  no  figure  in  Asiatic  his- 
tory during  the  xxiiird  and  xxivth  dynasties  :  under 
the  xxvth  it  regained,  in  part  at  least,  its  ancient 
importance.  This  was  an  Ethiopian  line,  the  war- 
like sovereigns  of  which  strove  to  the  utmost  to 
repel  the  onward  stride  of  Assyria.  So,  whom  we 
are  disposed  to  identify  with  Shebek  II.  or  Sebichus, 
the  second  Ethiopian,  rather  than  with  Shebek  I. 
or  Sabaco,  the  first,  made  an  alliance  with  Hoshea 
the  last  king  of  Israel.  [So.]  Tehrak  or  Tirhakah, 
the  third  of  this  house,  advanced  against  Senna- 
cherib in  support  of  Hezekiah.  [Tirhakah.]  After 
this,  a  native  dynasty  again  occupied  the  throne, 
the  xxvith,  of  Saite  kings.    Psametek  I.  or  Psamme- 


with  his  chnriotcer.     (Wilkinson.) 


tichus  I.  (B.C.  664),  who  may  be  regarded  as  the 
head  of  this  dynasty,  warred  in  Palestine,  and  took 
Ashdod,  Azotusj  after  a  siege  of  twenty-nine  years 
(Herod,  ii.  157).  Probably  it 'was  held  by  an  Assy- 
rian garrison,  having  been  previously  taken  from  the 
Egyptians  by  Sargon  (Is.  xx.).  Neku  or  Necho,  the 
son  of  Psammetichus,  continued  the  war  in  the  East, 
and  maiched  along  the  coast  of  Palestine  to  attack 
the  king  of  Assyria.  At  Megiddo  Josiah  encountered 
him  (B.C.  608-7),  notwithstanding  the  remonstrance 
of  the  Egyptian  king,  which  is  very  illustrative  of  the 
policy  of  the  Pharaohs  in  the  east  (2  Chr.  xxxv. 
21)  no  less  than  is  his  lenient  conduct  after  the 
defeat  and  death  of  the  king  of  Judah.  The  army  of 
Necho  was  after  a  short  space  routed  at  Carchemish 
by  Nebuchadnezzar,  B.C.  605-4  (Jer.  xlvi.  2i.  We 
read  of  a  time  not  long  subsequent  that  "  the  king 
of  Egypt  came  not  again  any  more  out  of  his 
laud  ;  for  the  king  of  Babylon  had  taken  from  the 
river  of  Egypt  unto  the  river  Euphrates  all  that 
pertained   to  the   king  of  Egypt  (2  K.  xxiv.  7). 

[Pharaoh- Necho. J     The  se I   successor  of 

necho,  Apries,  or  Pharaoh-Hophra,  sent  his  army 
into  Palestine  to  the  aid  of  Zedekiah  (Jer.  xxxvii. 
5,  7,  11),   so   that   the   siege   of  Jerusalem  was 


512 


EGYPT 


raised  for  a  time,  and  kindly  received  the  fugitives 
from  the  captured  city.  He  seems  to  have  been 
afterwards  attacked  by  Nebuchadnezzar  in  his  own 
country.  There  is,  however,  no  certain  account  of 
a  complete  subjugation  of  Egypt  by  the  king  of 
Babylon,  and  it  is  probable  that  the  prophecies  of 
Ezekiel  (for  the  fulfilment  of  which  commentators 
have  looked  to  this  time)  refer  to  a  later  period, 
and  chiefly  to  the  conquest  by  Cambyses  and  the 
calamities  which  followed  the  revolt  of  Inaros. 
[I'haraoh-Hophra.]  Amasis,  the  successor  of 
Apries,  had  a  long  and  prosperous  reign,  and  taking 
advantage  of  the  weakness  and  fall  of  Babylon 
somewhat  restored  the  weight  of  Egypt  in  the  East. 
But  the  new  power  of  Persia  was  to  prove  even 
more  terrible  to  his  house  than  Babylon  had  been  to 
the  house  of  Psammitichus,  and  the  son  of  Amasis 
had  reigned  but  six  months  when  Cambyses  re- 
duced the  country  to  the  condition  of  a  province  of 
his  empire  B.C.  525. 

It  is  not  necessary  here  to  give  an  outline  of  the 
subsequent  history  of  Egypt.  Its  connexion  with  the 
history  and  literature  of  the  Jews  is  discussed  in  the 
articles  on  the  Greek  kings  of  Egypt  [Ptolemy] 
and  Alexandria.  The  relation  of  Egypt  and  Pa- 
lestine during  the  period  from  the  accession  of  the 
first  Ptolemy  until  the  age  of  the  Apostles  is  full  of 
interest,  but  it  does  not  offer  any  serious  difficulties 
that  require  it  to  be  here  discussed. — It  would  not 
be  within  the  province  of  this  article  to  enter  upon 
a  general  consideration  of  the  prophecies  relating  to 
Egypt :  we  must,  however,  draw  the  reader's  atten- 
tion to  their  remarkable  fulfilment.  The  visitor  to 
the  country  needs  not  to  be  reminded  of  them  : 
everywhere  he  is  struck  by  tire  precision  with  which 
they  have  come  to  pass.  We  have  already  spoken 
of  the  physical  changes  which  have  verified  to  the 
letter  the  words  of  Isaiah.  In  like  manner  we 
recognise,  for  instance,  in  the  singular  disappearance 
of  the  city  of  Memphis  and  its  temples  in  a  country 
where  several  primeval  towns  yet  stand,  and  scarce 
any  ancient  site  is  unmarked  by  temples,  the  fulfil- 
ment of  the  words  of  Jeremiah :  "  Noph  shall  be 
waste  and  desolate  without  an  inhabitant "  (xlvi. 
19),  and  those  of  Ezekiel,  "Thus  saith  the  Lord 
God ;  I  will  also  destroy  the  idols,  and  I  will  cause 
[their]  images  to  cease  out  of  Noph  "  (xxx.  13). 
Not  less  signally  are  the  words  immediately  follow- 
ing the  last  quotation — "And  there  shall  be  no 
more  a  prince  of  the  land  of  Egypt"  (I.  c.) — ful- 
filled in  the  history  of  the  country,  for  from  the 
second  Persian  conquest,  more  than  two  thousand 
years  ago,  until  our  own  days,  not  one  native  ruler- 
has  occupied  the  throne. 

Literature. — The  following  are  the  most  useful 
works  upon  Egypt,  excepting  such  as  relate  to  its 
modern  history:  for  a  very  full  list  of  the  literature 
of  the  subject  the  reader  is  referred  to  Jolowicz's 
(Dr.  H.)  Bibliotheca   Aegyptiaca,   1858.     Egypt 
generally:  Description  de  I  E'gypte,  2nd  ed.  1821- 
9  ;  Encyclopaedia  Britannica,  8th  ed.  art.  Egypt. 
Description,   Productions,  and   Topography :    Abd- 
Allatitj  Relation  de  I'Egyptc,  ed.  Silvestre  de  Sacy, 
1810;    d'Anville,  Me'moires  sur  VEgypte,  1766; 
Belzoni    (G.),    Narrative   of    Operations,    1820  ; 
Brugsch    (H.),     Geographische    Inschriftcn   Alt- 
dgyptischer  Denkmaler,  1857; — Reiseberichto  aus 
Aegypten,  1855;  Champol'lion  le  Jeune,  L'E'gypte  j 
sous  les,  Pharaons,  1814; — Lettres  ecrites  pendant  \ 
son  Voyage  en  E'gypte,  2de  ed.  1833  ;   Ehrenberg,  , 
Ch.  G.,  und  Hemprich,  F.  W.,  Naturgeschicktliche  | 
Reisen — P.eisen   in  Aeyyplen,    &c,   1828  —Sym- 


EHUD 

bolae  Physicac,  1829-1845  ;  Forskal,  Pt.  Descrip- 
tiones  animalium,  &c,  1775-6 ;— Flora  Aegyptiaco- 
arabica,  1775;  Harris,  A.  C.,  Hieroglyphical 
Standards,  1852  ;  Liuant  de  Bellefonds,  Memoire 
sur  le  Lac  de  Moeris,  1843 ;  Makreezee  El,  Takee- 
ed-deen,  Khitat':  Quatremere,  E.  Memoires  Ge'ogra- 
phiques  et  Historiques,  1811;  Russegger,  Reisen, 
1841-8;  Vyse,  H.  Col.,  and  Perring,\l.  S.,  Pyra- 
mids of  Gizeh,  1839-42  ;  Perring,  J.  S.,  58  Large 
views,  fyc,  of  the  Pyramids  of  Gizeh;  Wilkinson, 
Sir  J.  G.,  Modern  Egypt  and  Thebes,  1843; — 
Handbook  for  Egypt,  2nd  ed.  1858; — Survey  of 
Thebes  (plan)  ; — on  the  Eastern  Desert,  Journ. 
Geogr.  Soc.  ii.  1832,  pp.  28  ff.  Monuments  and 
Inscriptions:  Champollion  le  Jeune,  Monuments, 
1829-47; — Notices  descriptives,  1844  ;  Lepsius,  R., 
Denkmaler,  1849,  in  progress  ;  Letronne,  J.  A., 
Recueil  des  inscriptions  grccques  et  latines  d' 
E'gypte,  1842;  Rosellini,  Monumenti ;  Select  Pa- 
pyri, 1844.  Language:  Brugsch,  H.,  Grammaire 
Demotique,  1855  ;  Champollion  le  Jeune,  Gram- 
maire E'gyptienne,  1836-41 ;  Dictionnaire  E'gyp- 
tien,  1841 ;  Encyc.  Brit.  8th  ed.  art.  Hieroglyphics  ; 
Parthey,  G.,  Vocabularium  Coptico-Latinum,  &c. ; 
Peyron,  A.,  Grammatica  linguae  Copticae,  1841  ; 
Lexicon,  1835 ;  Schwartze,  M,  G.,  Das  Alte 
Aegypten,  1843.  Ancient  Chronology,  History, 
and  Manners:  Bunsen,  C.  C.  J.,  Egypt's  Place, 
1850-59  ;  Cory.,  I.  P.,  Ancient  Fragments,  2nd 
ed.,  1832  ;  Herodohis,  ed.  Rawlinson,  vols,  i.-iii. ; 
Hengstenberg,  E.  W.,  Egypt  and  the  Books  of 
Moses,  1843;  Ideler,  L.,  Handbuch  der  Chro- 
nologic, 1825;  Lepsius,  R.,  Chronologie  der 
Aegypter,  vol.  i.  1849 ;  Konigsbuch  der  alten 
Acgypter,  1858;  Poole,  R.  S.,  Horae  Aegyptiacae, 
1851  ;  Wilkinson,  Sir  J.G.,  Manners  and  Customs 
of  the  Ancient  Egyptians,  1837,  1841 ;  Popular 
Account  of  the  Ancient  Egyptians,  1855.  .  To 
these  must  be  added,  for  the  manners  of  the  mo- 
dern inhabitants :  Lane,  E.W.,  Modem  Egyptians, 
ed.  184  ;  Thousand  and  One  Nights,  2nd  ed.,  by 
E.  S.  Poole,  1859  ;  Poole,  Mrs.,  Englishwoman  in 
Egypt,  1844.  It  is  impossible  to  specify  a  large 
number  of  valuable  papers  by  Dr.Hincks,  Mr. Birch, 
M.  de  Rouge,  and  others.     '  [R.  S.  P.] 

E'HI  (TIN  ;  'Ayxis  ;  Echi),  head  of  one  of  the 
Benjamite  houses  according  to  the  list  in  Gen.  xlvi. 
21,  and  son  of  Belah  according  to  the  LXX.  ver- 
sion of  that  passage.  He  seems  to  be  the  same  as 
Ahi-ram,  DITIN,  in  the  list  in  Num.  xxvi.  38, 
and  if  so,  Ahiram  is  probably  the  right  name,  as 
the  farrkly  were  called  Ahiramites.  In  1  Chr.  viii. 
1,  the  same  person  seems  to  be  called  mnN,  Aha- 
rah,  and  perhaps  also  niriN,  Ahoah,  in  ver.  4  ('Ax'a, 
LXX.,  and  in  Cod.  Vatic.  'Axtpav),  ilTlX  ('Axia), 
Ahiah,  ver.  7,  and  "MMi  ('Abp),  Aher,  l'Chr.  vii. 
12.  These  fluctuations  in  the  orthography  seem  to 
indicate  that  the  original  copies  were  paitly  effaced 
by  time  or  injury.     [Becher;  Chronicles.] 

[A.  C.  H.] 

E'HUD  (1-iriN  ;  'Au5  ;  Joseph.  'HuvSr,s  ; 
Aod),  like  Gera,  an  hereditary  name  among  the 
Benjamites. 

1.  Ehud,  the  son  of  Bilhan,  and  great-grandson 
of  Benjamin  the  Patriarch  (1  Chr.  vii.  10, 
viii.  6). 

2.  Ehud,  the  son  of  Gera  (N"ljl  ;  Trjpa;  Gera; 
three  others  of  the  name,  Gen.   xlvi.   Jl  ;   2  Sam. 


EKER 

xvi.  5 ;  1  Chr.  viii.  3),  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin 
(Judg.  in.  15,  marg.  "son  of  Jemini,"  but  vid. 
Gesen.  Lex.  sub  v.  J*D*32),  the  second  Judge  of 
the  Israelites  (B.C.  1336).  In  the  Bible  he  is  not 
called  a  Judge  but  a  deliverer  (1.  c.)  :  so  Othniel 
(Judg.  iii.  9)  and  all  the  Judges  (Neh.  ix.  27).  As 
a  Benjamite  he  was  specially  chosen  to  destroy  Eg- 
lon,  who  had  established  himself  in  Jericho,  which 
was  included  in  the  boundaries  of  that  tribe.  [Eo 
LON.]  In  Josephus  he  appears  as  a  young  man 
(veavlas).  He  was  very  strong,  and  left-handed. 
So  A.  V. ;  but  the  more  literal  rendering  is,  as  in 
margin,  "  shut  of  his  right  hand."  The  words  are 
differently  rendered: — 1.  left-handed,  and  unable  to 
use  his  right;  2.  using  his  left  hand  as  readily  as 
his  right.  For  1.  Targum,  Joseph.,  Syr.  (impotem), 
Arab.  (aridum),and  Jewish  writers  generally;  Cajet., 
Buxtorf,  Parish.,  Gesen.  (impeditus) :  derivation 
of  "l£3N  from  1DK,  the  latter  only  in  Ps.  lxix.  16, 
where  it  =  to  shut.  For  2.  LXX.  (afi<pide^tos), 
Vulg.  (qui  utrdqm  manu  pro  dextrd  utebatur), 
Corn,  a  Lap.,  Bonfrer.,  Patrick,  (cf.  irepi5e|ios, 
Horn.  II.  xxi.  163,  Hipp.  Aph.  7.  43)  ;  Judg.  xx. 
16,  sole  recurrence  of  the  phrase,  applied  to  700 
Benjamites,  the  picked  men  of  the  army,  who  were 
not  likely  to  be  chosen  for  a  physical  defect.  As 
regards  Ps.  lxix.  16,  it  is  urged  that  *1t3X  may  = 
corono  =  aperio ;  hence  ")t2N  =  apertus  =  expeditus, 
q.  d.  expedita  dextra;  or  if  "  claicsus,"  clausus 
dextrd  =  cinches  dextrd  =  TrtpiSe^ios,  ambidexter 
(vid.  Pol.  Syn.).  The  feint  of  drawing  the  dagger 
from  the  right  thigh  (Judg.  iii.  21)  is  consistent 
with  either  opinion.  For  Ehud's  adventures  see 
Eglon  ;  and  for  the  period  of  eighty  years'  rest 
which  his  valour  is  said  to  have  procured  for  the 
Israelites,  see  Judges.  [T.  E.  B.] 

E'KER  OpJJ ;  'AicSp  ;  Achar),  a  descendant  of 
Judah  through  the  families  of  Hezron  and  Jerah- 
meel  (1  Chr.  ii.  27). 

EK'REBEL  ('Ek^A  ;  Pesch.  A.-2S.J-.*Xi, 

Ecrabat ;  Vulg.  omits),  a  place  named  in  Jud. 
vii.  18  only,  as  "  near  to  Chusi  which  is  on 
the  brook  Mochmur ;"  apparently  somewhere  in 
the  hill  country  to  the  south-east  of  the  Plain  of 
Esdraelon  and  of  Dothain.  The  Syriac  reading  of 
the  word  points  to  the  place  Acrabbein,  mentioned 
by  Eusebius  in  the  Onornasticon  as  the  capital  of 
a  district  called  Acrabattine,  and  still  standing 
as  Ahrabih,  about  6  miles  south-east  of  Nablus 
(Shechem)  in  the  Wady  Makfuriyeh,  on  the  road 
In  the  Jordan  valley  (Van  de  Velde,  ii.  304,  and 
Map).  Though  frequently  mentioned  by  Josephus 
(B.  J.  ii.  20,  §4  ;  iii.  3,  §5,  &c),  neither  the  place 
nor  the  district  are  named  in  the  Bible,  and  they 
must  not  be  confounded  with  those  of  the  same  name 
in  the  South  of  Judah.  [Akuabbim  ;  Akabat  i  l  x  i:  ; 
Maaleii-acraisbim.]  [G.] 

EK'RON  (Jllpy  ;  !n  'Aioca-putt;  Accaron),  one 
of  the  five  towns  belonging  to  the  lords  of  the  Phi- 
listines, and  the  most  northerly  of  the  live  (Josh, 
xiii.  3).  Like  the  other  Philistine  cities  its  situa- 
tion was  in  the  Shefclah.     It  fell  to  the   lot  ot 


ELAH 


513 


Judah  (Josh.  xv.  45,  46  ;  Judg.  i.  18),  and  indeed 
formed  one  of  the  landmarks  on  his  north  border, 
the  boundary  running  from  thence  to  the  sea  at 
Jabneel  (Yebna).  We  afterwards,  however,  find 
it  mentioned  among  the  cities  of  Dan  (xix.  43). 
But  it  mattered  little  to  which  tribe  it  nominally 
belonged,  for  before  the  monarchy  it  was  again  in 
full  possession  of  the  Philistines  (1  Sam.  v.  10). 
Ekron  was  the  last  place  to  which  the  ark  was 
carried  before  its  return  to  Israel,  and  the  morta- 
lity there  in  consequence  seems  to  have  been  more 
deadly  than  at  either  Ashdod  or  Gath.a  From 
Ekron  to  Bethshemesh  was  a  straight  high- 
way. Henceforward  Ekron  appears  to  have  re- 
mained uninterruptedly  in  the  hands  of  the  Philis- 
tines (1  Sam.  xvii.  52 ;  2  K.  i.  2,  16 ;  Jer.  xxv. 
20).  Except  the  casual  mention  of  a  sanctuary  of 
Baal-zebub  existing  there  (2  K.  i.  2,  3,  6,  16)  there 
is  nothing  to  distinguish  Ekron  from  any  other 
town  of  this  district — it  was  the  scene  of  no 
occurrence,  and  the  native  place  of  no  man  of 
fame  in  any  way.  The  following  complete  the 
references  to  it,  Am.  i.  8 ;  Zeph.  ii.  4 ;  Zech.  ix. 
5,  7. 

'Akir,  the  modern  representative  of  Ekron,  lies 
at  about  5  miles  S.W.  of  Ramleh,  and  3  due  E. 
of  Yebna,  on  the  northern  side  of  the  important 
valley  Wady  Surar.  "  The  village  contains  about 
50  mud  houses,  without  a  remnant  of  antiquity 
except  two  large  finely  built  wells."  The  plain 
south  is  rich,  but  immediately  round  the  village 
it  has  a  dreary  forsaken  appearance,  only  relieved 
by  a  few  scattered  stunted  trees  (Porter,  Handb. 
275  ;  and  see  Van  de  Velde,  ii.  169  ;  Rob.  ii.  228). 
In  proximity  to  Jabneh  ( Yebna)  and  Bethshemesh 
(AinShems),  Akir  agrees  with  the  requirements  of 
Ekron  in  the  O.  T.,  and  also  with  the  indications 
of  the  Onornasticon  (sub  voc.  Accaron).  Jerome 
there  mentions  a  tradition  that  the  Turris  Stratonis, 
Caesarea,  was  Ekron. 

In  the  Apocrypha  it  appears  as  Accaron 
(I  Mace.  x.  89,  only),  bestowed  with  its  borders 
(to.  opia  outtjs)  by  Alexander  Balas  on  Jonathan 
Maccabaeus  as  a  reward  for  his  sen-ices. 

It  was  known  in  the  middle  ages  by  the  same 
name.     (See  the  quotation  in  Kob.  ii.  228,  note.) 

The  word  Ekronites  appears  in  Josh.  xiii.  3, 
and  1  Sam.  v.  10.  In  the  former  it  should  be  sin- 
gular— "the  Ekronite."   In  the  latter  D^lpy.   [G.] 

E'LA  ('HAa;  Jolaman),  1  Esd.  ix.  27.  [Elam.] 

EL'ADAH  (rnj&N;  'EAaScS,  Alex.  "BKeaU; 
Eladd),  a  descendant  of  Ephraim  through  Shuthe- 
lah  (1  Chr.  vii.  20). 

E'LAH.  1.  (H^N;  'HAa;  Joseph.  "HXavos  ; 
Ela),  the  son  and  successor  of  Baasha,  king  of  Israel 
(1  K.  xvi.  8-10);  his  reign  lasted  for  little  more 
than  a  year  (comp.  ver.  8  with  10).  He  was 
killed,  while  drunk,  by  Zimri,  in  the  house  of  his 
steward  Arsa,  who  was  probably  a  confederate  in 
the  plot.  This  occurred,  according  to  Josephus 
(Ant.  viii.  12,  §4),  while  his  army  and  officers 
were  absent  at  the  siege  of  Gibbcthon. 

2.  Father  of  Hoshea,  the  last  king  of  Israel  ('.'  K. 
xv.  30,  xvii.  1).  [W.  L.  B.] 


»  The  LXX.  in  both  MSS.,  and  Josephus  (Ant.  vi.  1, 
§1),  substitute  Asealon  for  Kkron  throughout  this 
passage  (1  Sam.  v.  10-12).  In  support  of  this  it 
should  be  remarked  that,  according  to  the  Hebrew 
text,   the  golden  trespass  offerings  were  given   for 


Askelon,  though  it  is  omitted  from  the  detailed  nar- 
rative of  the  journeyings  of  the  ark.  There  are  other 
important  differences  between  the  LXX.  and  Hebrew 
texts  of  this  transaction.     See  especially  v.  6. 

2   I. 


514  EL  AH 

E'LAH.  1.  (rbn ;  'H\ds ;  Eld),  one  of  the 
dukes  of  Edom  (Gen.  xxxvi.  41 ;  1  Chr.  i.  52).  By 
Knobel  {Genesis,  ad  he.)  the  name  is  compared 
with  Elath  on  the  Red  Sea. 

2.  Shimei  ben-Elah  (accur.  Ela,  fc6tf  ;  'H\d) 
was  Solomon's  commissariat  officer  in  Benjamin 
(1  K.  iv.  18). 

3.  ('A£a,  Alex.  'A\d),  a  son  of  Caleb  the  son  of 
Jephunneh  (1  Chr.  iv.  15).  His  sons  were  called 
Kenaz  or  Uknaz  ;  but  the  words  may  be  taken  as 
if  Kenaz  was,  with  Elah,  a  son  of  Caleb.  The 
names  of  both  Elah  and  Kenaz  appear  amongst  the 
Edomite  "  dukes." 

4.  ('HX«6,  Ales.  *HA.a),  son  of  Uzzi,  a  Benjamite 
( 1  Chr.  is.  8) ,  and  one  of  the  chiefs  of  the  tribe  at 
the  settlement  of  the  country. 

E'LAH,  THE  VALLEY  OF  (nf?Ni1  pW 

=  Valley  of  the  Terebinth  ;  H\  KoiXas  'HAct,  or 
tijs  SpvSs,  once  ev  rfj  KotXaSi ;  Vallis  Tere- 
binthi),  a  valley  in  (not  "  by,"  as  the  A.  V.  has  it) 
which  the  Israelites  were  encamped  against  the 
Philistines  when  David  killed  Goliath  (1  Sam.  xvii. 
2,  19).  It  is  once  more  mentioned  in  the  same  con- 
nexion (xxi.  9).  We  have  only  the  most  general 
indications  of  its  position.  It  lay  somewhere  near 
Socoh  of  Judah,  and  Azekah,  and  was  nearer 
Ekron  than  any  other  Philistine  town.  So  much 
may  be  gathered  from  the  narrative  of  1  Sam. 
xvii.  Socoh  has  been  with  great  probability  iden- 
tified with  Smocikeh,  near  to  Beit  Netif,  some  14 
miles  S.W.  of  Jerusalem,  on  the  road  to  Beit  jibrin 
and  Gaza,  among  the  more  western  of  the  hills  of 
Judah,  not  far  from  where  they  begin  to  descend 
into  the  great  Philistine  Plain.  The  village  stands 
on  the  south  slopes  of  the  Wady  es  Sumt,  or  valley 
of  the  acacia,  winch  runs  off  in  a  N.W.  direction 
across  the  plain  to  the  sea  just  above  Ashdod. 
Below  Suweikeh  it  is  joined  by  two  other  wadys, 
large  though  inferior  in  size  to  itself,  and  the  junc- 
tion of  the  three  forms  a  considerable  open  space 
of  not  less  than  a  mile  wide  cultivated  in  fields  of 
grain.  In  the  centre  is  a  wide  torrent  bed  thickly 
strewed  with  round  pebbles,  and  bordered  by  the 
acacia  bushes  from  which  the  valley  derives  its 
present  name. 

There  seems  no  reason  to  doubt  that  this  is  the 
Valley  of  the  Terebinth.  It  has  changed  its  name 
and  is  now  called  after  another  kind  of  tree,  but 
the  terebinth  {Butin)  appears  to  be  plentiful  in 
the  neighbour-hood,  and  one  of  the  largest  specimens 
in  Palestine  still  stands  in  the  immediate  neigh- 
bourhood of  the  spot.  A  mile  down  the  valley 
from  Suweikeh  is  Tell  zakariyeh,  which  Schwarz 
(102)  and  Van  de  Velde  propose  to  identify  with 
Azekah.  If  this  could  be  maintained,  the  site  of 
the  valley  might  be  regarded  as  certain.  Ekron  is 
17  miles,  and  Bethlehem  12  miles  distant  from 
Socoh.  For  the  valley,  see  Rob.  ii.  20,  21  ;  Van 
de  Velde,  ii.  191 ;  Porter,  Handb.  249,  250,  280. 

There  is  a  point  in  the  topographical  indications 
of  1  Sam.  xvii.,  which  it  is  very  desirable  should 
be  carefully  examined  on  the  spot.  The  Philistines 
were  between  Socoh  and  Azekah,  at  Ephes-dam- 
mim,  or  Pas-dammim,  on  the  mountain  on  the  S. 
side  of  the  Wady,  while  the  Israelites  were  in  the 
"  valley  "  (pOJJ)  of  the  terebinth,  or  rather  on  the 
mountain  on  the  X.  side,  and  "  the  ravine  "  or  "  the 
glen"  (fc03!"l)  was  between  the  two  armies  (ver.  2, 
3).   Again  (52),  the  Israelites  pursued  the  Philistines 


ELAM 

"  till  you  come  to  '  the  ravine  '"  (the  same  word). 
There  is  evidently  a  marked  difference  between  the 
"  valley  "  and  the  "  ravine,"  and  a  little  attention 
on  the  spot  might  do  much  towards  elucidating  this, 
and  settling  the  identification  of  the  place. 

The  traditional  "  Valley  of  the  Terebinth "  is 
the  Wady  Beit  Hanina,  which  lies  about  4  miles 
to  the  N.W.  of  Jerusalem,  and  is  crossed  by  the 
road  to  Nchi  Samuel.  The  scene  of  David's  conflict 
is  pointed  out  a  little  north  of  the  "  Tombs  of  the 
Judges"  and  close  to  the  traces  of  the  old  paved 
road.  But  this  spot  is  in  the  tribe  of  Benjamin 
and  otherwise  does  not  correspond  with  the  narra- 
tive of  the  text.  [G.] 

E'LAM  (D^V;  'EAa,u;    Aclam),  like  Aram, 

seems  to  have  been  originally  the  name  of  a  man — 
the  son  of  Shem  (Gen.  x.  22  ;  1  Chr.  i.  17).  Com- 
monly, however,  it  is  used  as  the  appellation  of  a 
country  (Gen.  xiv.  1,  9  ;  Is.  xi.  11  ;  xxi.  2  ;  Jer. 
xxv.  25  ;  xlix.  34-39 ;  Ez.  xxxii.  24 ;  Dan.  viii.  2), 
and  will  be  so  treated  in  this  article. 

The  Elam  of  Scripture  appears  to  be  the  pro- 
vince lying  south  of  Assyria  and  east  of  Persia 
Proper,  to  which  Herodotus  gives  the  name  of 
Cissia  (iii.  91,  v.  49,  &c),  and  which  is  termed 
Susis  or  Susiana  by  the  geographers  (Strab.  xv.  3, 
§12  ;  Ptolem.  vi.  3,  &c).  It  includes  a  portion 
of  the  mountainous  country  separating  between 
the  Mesopotamian  plain  and  the  high  table-land  of 
Iran,  together  with  a  fertile  and  valuable  low  tract 
at  the  foot  of  the  range,  between  it  and  the  Tigris. 
The  passage  of  Daniel  (viii.  2)  which  places  Shu- 
shan  (Susa)  in  "  the  province  of  Elam,"  may  be 
regarded  as  decisive  of  this  identification,  which  is 
further  confirmed  by  the  frequent  mention  of 
Elymaeans  in  this  district  (Strab.  xi.  13,  §6,  xvi. 
1,  §17  ;  Ptolem.  vi.  3  ;  Plin.  If.  N.  vi.  26,  &c), 
as  well  as  by  the  combinations  in  which  Elam  is 
found  in  Scripture  (see  Gen.  xiv.  1 ;  Is.  xxi.  2 ; 
Ez.  xxxii.  24).  It  appears  from  Gen.  x.  22,  that 
this  country  was  originally  peopled  by  descendants 
of  Shem,  closely  allied  to  the  Aramaeans  (Syrians) 
and  the  Assyrians ;  and  from  Gen.  xiv.  1-12,  it  is 
evident  that  by  the  time  of  Abraham  a  very  im- 
portant power  had  been  built  up  in  the  same 
region.  Not  only  is  "  Chedor-laomer,  king  of 
Elam,"  at  the  head  of  a  settled  government,  and 
able  to  make  war  at  a  distance  of  two  thousand 
miles  from  his  own  country,  but  he  manifestly 
exercises  a  supremacy  over  a  number  of  other 
kings,  among  whom  we  even  find  Amraphel,  king 
of  Shinar,  or  Babylonia.  It  is  plain  then  that  at 
this  early  time  the  predominant  power  in  Lower 
Mesopotamia  was  Elam,  which  for  a  while  held 
the  place  possessed  earlier  by  Babylon  (Gen.  x.  10), 
and  later  by  either  Babylon  or  Assyria.  Discoveries 
made  in  the  country  itself  confirm  this  view.  They 
exhibit  to  us  Susa,  the  Elamitic  capital,  as  one  of 
the  most  ancient  cities  of  the  East,  and  show  its 
monarchs  to  have  maintained,  throughout  almost 
the  whole  period  of  Babylonian  and  Assyrian  great- 
ness, a  quasi-independent  position.  Traces  are  even 
thought  to  have  been  found  of  Chedor-laomer  him- 
self, whom  some  are  inclined  to  identify  with  an 
early  Babylonian  monarch,  who  is  called  the 
"  Ravager  of  the  West,"  and  whose  name  reads  as 
Kwlur-mapula.  The  Elamitic  empire  established 
at  this  time  was,  however,  but  of  short  duration. 
Babylon  and  Assyria  proved  on  the  whole  stronger 
powers,  and  Elam  during  the  period  of  their  great- 
ness can  only  be  regarded  as  the  foremost  of  their 


ELAM 

feudatories.  Like  the  other  subject  nations  she 
retained  her  own  monarchs,  and  from  time  to  time, 
for  a  longer  or  a  shorter  space,  asserted  and  main- 
tained her  independence.  But  generally  she  was 
content  to  acknowledge  one  or  other  of  the  two 
leading  powers  as  her  suzerain.  Towards  the  close 
of  the  Assyrian  period  she  is  found  allied  with 
Babylon  and  engaged  in  hostilities  with  Assyria ; 
but  she  seems  to  have  declined  in  strength  after 
the  Assyrian  empire  was  destroyed,  and  the  Median 
and  Babylonian  arose  upon  its  ruins.  Elam  is 
clearly  a  "  province  "  of  Babylonia  in  Belshazzar's 
time  (Dan.  viii.  2),  and  we  may  presume  that  it 
had  been  subject  to  Babylon  at  least  from  the  reign 
of  Nebuchadnezzar.  The  desolation  which  Jeremiah 
(xlix.  30-34)  and  Ezekiel  (xxxii.  24-25)  foresaw, 
was  probably  this  conquest,  which  destroyed  the 
last  semblance  of  Elamitic  independence.  It  is  un- 
certain at  what  time  the  Persians  added  Elam  to 
their  empire.  Possibly  it  only  fell  under  their  do- 
minion together  with  Babylon  ;  but  there  is  some 
reason  to  think  that  it  may  have  revolted  and  joined 
the  Persians  before  the  city  was  besieged.  The  pro- 
phet Isaiah  in  two  places  (xxi.  2 ;  .xxii.  6)  seems  to 
speak  of  Elam  as  taking  part  in  the  destruction  of 
Babylon  ;  and  unless  we  are  to  regard  him  with  our 
translators  as  using  the  word  loosely  for  Persia,  we 
must  suppose  that  on  the  advance  of  Cyrus  and  his 
investment  of  the  Chaldaean  capital,  Elam  made 
common  cause  with  the  assailants.  She  now  be- 
came merged  in  the  Persian  empire,  forming  a  dis- 
tinct satrapy  (Herod,  iii.  91),  and  furnishing  to  the 
crown  an  annual  tribute  of  300  talents.  Susa,  her 
capital,  was  made  the  ordinary  residence  of  the 
court,  and  the  metropolis  of  the  whole  empire,  a 
curious  circumstance,  the  causes  of  which  will  be 
hereafter  considered.  [Shushan.]  This  mark  of 
favour  did  not,  however,  prevent  revolts.  Not 
only  was  the  Magian  revolution  organised  and 
carried  out  at  Susa,  but  there  seem  to  have  been 
at  least  two  Elamitic  revolts  in  the  early  part  of 
the  reign  of  Darius  Hystaspes  (Behistun  Inscr. 
col.  i.  par.  16,  and  col.  ii.  par.  3).  After  these 
futile  efforts,  Elam  acquiesced  in  her  subjection, 
and,  as  a  Persian  province,  followed  the  fortunes 
of  the  empire. 

It  has  been  already  observed  that  Elam  is  called 
Cissia  by  Herodotus,  and  Susiana  by  the  Greek  and 
Roman  geographers.  The  latter  is  a  term  formed 
artificially  from  the  capital  city,  but  the  former  is 
a  genuine  territorial  title,  ami  marks  probably  an 
important  fact  in  the  history  of  the  country.  The 
Elamites,  a  Semitic  people,  who  were  the  primi- 
tive inhabitants  (Gen.  x.  22),  appear  to  have  been 
invaded  and  conquered  at  a  very  early  time  by  a 
Hamitic  or  Cushite  race  from  Babylon,  which  was 
the  ruling  element  in  the  territory  from  a  date 
anterior  to  Chedor-laomer.  These  Cns/iites  were 
called  by  the  Greeks  Ctssians  (KiWioi)  or  Cossaeans 
{Kooffaioi),  and  formed  the  dominant  race,  while 
the  Elamites  or  Elymaeans  were  in  a  depressed 
condition.  In  Scripture  the  country  is  called  by 
its  primitive  title  without  reference  to  subsequent 
changes;  in  the  Greek  writers  it  takes  its  name 
from  tin'  conquerors.  The  (neck  traditions  of 
Memnon  and  his  Ethiopians  are  based  upon  this 
Cushite  conquest,  and  rightly  connect  the  Cissians 
or  Cossaeans  of  Susiana  with  the  Cushite  inhabit- 
ants of  the  upper  valley  of  the  Nile.  [G.  R.] 

2.  A  Korbite  Levite,  fifth  son  of  Meshelemiah  ; 
me  of  the  Benc-Asaph,  in  the  time  of  king  l»a\  hi 
(1  Chr.  xxvi.  3). 


ELASAH 


515 


3.  A  chief  man  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  one  of 
the  sons  of  Shashak  (1  Chr.  viii.  24). 

4.  ('Ai'AajU,  'HAajU  ;  Aelam).  "  Children  of 
Elam,"  Benc-Elam,  to  the  number  of  1254,  re- 
turned with  Zembbabel  from  Babylon  (Ezr.  ii.  7  ; 
Neh.  vii.  12  ;  1  Esd.  v.  12),  and  a  further  detach- 
ment of  71  men  with  Ezra  in  the  second  caravan 
(Ezr.  viii.  7  ;  1  Esd.  viii.  33).  It  was  one  of  this 
family,  Shechaniah,  son  of  Jehiel,  who  encouraged 
Ezra  in  his  efforts  against  the  indiscriminate  mar- 
riages of  the  people  (x.  2,  Cetib,  u?)]},  Olam),  and 
six  of  the  Bene-Elam  accordingly  put  away  their 
foreign  wives  (x.  26).  Elam  occurs  amongst  the 
names  of  those,  the  chief  of  the  people,  who  signed 
the  covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  14).  The 
lists  of  Ezr.  ii.  and  Neh.  vii.  contain  apparently  an 
irregular-  mixture  of  the  names  of  places  and  of 
persons.  In  the  former,  ver.  21-34,  with  one  or 
two  exceptions,  are  names  of  places  ;  3-19,  on  the 
other  hand,  are  not  known  as  names  of  places,  and 
are  probably  of  persons.  No  such  place  as  Elam  is 
mentioned  as  in  Palestine,  either  in  the  Bible  or  in 
the  Onomasticon  of  Eusebius,  nor  has  since  been 
discovered  as  existing  in  the  country.  We  may 
therefore  conclude  that  it  was  a  person. 

5.  In  the  same  lists  is  a  second  Elam,  whose  sons, 
to  the  same  number  as  in  the  former  case,  returned 
with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  31  ;  Neh.  vii.  34),  and 
which  for  the  sake  of  distinction  is  called  "  the 
other  Elam"  (inN  D?^;  'HAa^ap,  'RAa.fj.adp; 
Aelam  alter).  The  coincidence  of  the  numbers  is 
curious,  and  also  suspicious. 

6.  One  of  the  priests  who  accompanied  Nehemiah 
at  the  dedication  of  the  new  wall  of  Jerusalem 
(Neh.  xii.  42).  [G.] 

E'LAMITES  (KM^g  ;  'EAi^aToi,  Strab. 
Ptol. ;  Aelamitae).  This  word  is  found  only  in 
Ezra  iv.  9 ;  and  is  omitted  in  that  place  by  the 
Septuagint  writers,  who  probably  regarded  it  as  a 
gloss  upon  "  Susanchites,"  which  had  occurred  only 
a  little  before.  The  Elamites  were  the  original 
inhabitants  of  the  country  called  Elam  ;  they  were 
descendants  of  Shem,  and  perhaps  drew  their  name 
from  an  actual  man,  Elam  (Gen.  x.  22).  It  has 
been  observed  in  the  preceding  article  that  the 
Elamites  yielded  before  a  Cossaean  or  Cushite  in- 
vasion. They  appear  to  have  been  driven  in  part 
to  the  mountains,  where  Strabo  places  them  (xi. 
13,  §6  ;  xvi.  1,  §17),  in  part  to  the  coast,  where 
they  are  located  by  Ptolemy  (vi.  3).  Little  is 
known  of  their  manners  and  customs,  or  of  their 
ethnic  character.  Strabo  says  they  were  skilful 
archers  (xv.  3,  §10),  and  with  this  agree  the 
notices  both  of  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah,  the  latter  of 
whom  speaks  of  "  the  bow  of  Elam "  (xlix.  35), 
while  the  former  says  that  "  Elam  bare  the  quiver" 
(xxii.  6).  Isaiah  adds  also  in  this  place,  that  they 
fought  both  on  horseback  and  from  chariots.  They 
appear  to  have  retained  their  nationality  with  pe- 
culiar tenacity;  for  it  is  plain  from  the  mention  of 
them  on  the' day  of  Pentecost  (Ads  ii.  9),  that 
they  still  at  that  time  kept  their  own  language, 
and  the  distinct  notice  of  them  by  Ptolemy  more 
than  a  century  later  seems  to  show  that  they  were 
not  even  then  merged  in  the  Cossaeans.  In  Jud. 
i.  6  the  name  is  given  in  the  Greek  form  as  l'.i.v- 
m.\ i.ANS.  [(;-  '>'•] 

EL'ASAH  (nry^N;  Ehtsa).  1.  CH\a<r&) 
One  of  the   Bene-Pashur,  a  priest,  in  the  time  of 

2  I.  2 


516 


ELATH 


Ezra,  who  had  married  a  Gentile  wife  (Ezra  x.  22). 
In  the  apocryphal  Esdras,  the  name  is  corrupted 
to  Talsas. 

2.  ('EAeaffoe,  Alex.  'EAecwap),  son  of  Shaphan  ; 
one  of  the  two  men  who  were  sent  on  a  mission 
by  King  Zedekiah  to  Nebuchadnezzar  at  Babylon 
after  the  first  deportation  from  Jerusalem,  and 
who  at  the  same  time  took  charge  of  the  letter  of 
Jeremiah  the  Prophet  to  the  captives  in  Babylon 
(Jer.  xxix.  3). 

Elasah  is  precisely  the  same  name  as  Eleasah, 
the  latter  being  the  more  correct  rendering  of  the 
Hebrew  word. 

E'LATH,  E'LOTH  (rh%  ITl^N  ;  Al\dv, 

Al\dd  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  Al\avf)  ;  Elath,  Ailath, 
Aelath,  Aild),  the  name  of  a  town  of  the  land  of 
Edom,  commonly  mentioned  together  with  Ezion- 
geber,  and  situate  at  the  head  of  the  Arabian  Gulf, 
which  was  thence  called  the  Elanitic  Gulf.  It  first 
occurs  in  the  account  of  the  wanderings  (Deut.  ii. 
8),  and  in  later  times  must  have  come  under  the 
rule  of  David  in  his  conquest  of  the  land  of  Edom, 
when  "  he  put  garrisons  in  Edom,  throughout  all 
Edom  put  he  garrisons,  and  all  they  of  Edom  be- 
came David's  servants  "  (2  Sam.  viii.  14).  We  find 
the  place  named  again  in  connexion  with  Solomon's 
navy,  "  in  Eziongeber,  which  is  beside  Eloth,  on 
the  shore  of  the  Red  Sea,  in  the  land  of  Edom  " 
(1  K.  ix.  26,  cf.  2  Chr.  viii.  17).  It  was  appa- 
rently included  in  the  revolt  of  Edom  against  Joram 
recorded  in  2  K.  viii.  20  ;  but  it  was  taken  by  Aza- 
riah,  who  "  built  Elath,  and  restored  it  to  Judah  " 
(xiv.  22).  After  this,  however,  "  Rezin  king  of 
Syria  recovered  Elath,  and  drave  out  the  Jews  from 
Elath,  and  the  Syrians  came  to  Elath  and  dwelt 
there  to  this  day  "  (xvi.  6).  From  this  time  the 
place  is  not  mentioned  until  the  Roman  period, 
during  which  it  became  a  frontier  town  of  the  south, 
and  the  residence  of  a  Christian  bishop.    The  Arabic 

name  is  Eyleh  (£Xj|). 

In  the  geography  of  Arabia,  Eyleh  forms  the  ex- 
treme northern  limit  of  the  province  of  the  Hijaz 
(El-Makreezee,  Khitat ;  and  Mardsid,  s.  v. ;  cf. 
Arabia),  and  is  connected  with  some  points  of 
the  history  of  the  country.  According  to  several 
native  writers  the  district  of  Eyleh  was,  in  very 
ancient  times,  peopled  by  the  Sameyda',  said  to  be 
a  tribe  of  the  Amalekites  (the  first  Amalek).  The 
town  itself,  however,  is  stated  to  have  received  its 
name  from  Eyleh,  daughter  of  Midian  (El-Makree- 
zee's  Khitat,  s.  v. ;  Caussin's  Essai  sur  l' Hist, 
des  Arabes,  i.  23).  The  Amalekites,  if  we  may 
credit  the  writings  of  Arab  historians,  passed  in  the 
earliest  times  from  the  neighbourhood  of  the  Persian 
Gulf  through  the  peninsula  (spreading  over  the 
greater  part  of  it),  and  thence  finally  passed  into 
Arabia  Petraea.  Future  researches  may  trace  in 
these  fragments  of  primeval  tradition  the  origin  of 
the  Phoenicians.  Herodotus  seems  to  strengthen 
such  a  supposition  when  he  says  that  the  latter 
people  came  from  the  Erythraean  Sea.  Were  the 
Phoenicians  a  mixed  Cushite  settlement  from  the 
Persian  Gulf,  who  carried  with  them  the  known 
maritime  characteristics  of  the  .peoples  of  that 
stock,  developed  in  the  great  commerce  of  Tyre, 
and  in  that  of  the  Persian  Gulf,  and,  as  a  link 
between  their  extreme  eastern  and  western  settle- 
ments, in  the  fleets  that  saded  from  Eziongeber  and 
Elath,  and  from  the  southern  ports  of  the  Yemen  ? 


ELDAD 

[See  Arabia,  Capiitor,  Mizraim.]  It  should 
be  observed,  however,  that  Tyrian  sailors  manned 
the  fleets  of  Solomon  and  of  Jehoshaphat. 

By  the  Greeks  and  Romans,  Elath  was  called 
'ZXdva  (Ptol.  v.  17,  §1),  M\ava  (Strabo,  xvi.  768  ; 
Plin.  v.  12 ;  vi.  32).  Under  their  rale  it  lost  its 
former  importance  with  the  transference  of  its  trade 
to  other  ports,  such  as  Berenice,  Myos  Hormos, 
and  Arsinoe  ;  but  in  Mohammadan  times  it  again 
became  a  place  of  some  note.  It  is  now  quite  in- 
significant. It  lies  on  the  route  of  the  Egyptian 
pilgrim-caravan,  and  the  mountain-road  or  'Akabah 
named  after  it,  was  improved,  or  reconstructed,  by 
Ahmad  Ibn-Tooloon,  who  ruled  Egypt  from  a.d. 
cir.  840  to  848.  [E.  S.  P.] 

EL-BETH'EL  (^riV3  'PN  =  "  God  of  the 
House  of  God:"  LXX.,  both  MSS.  omit  the  "  El," 
Baid-fjK ;  and  so  also  Vulg.,  Domus  Dei,  Syr.  and 
Arabic  versions),  the  name  which  Jacob  is  said  to 
have  bestowed  on  the  place  at  which  God  appeared 
to  him  when  he  was  flying  from  Esau  (Gen.  xxxv. 
7).  This  account  differs  from  the  more  detailed 
narrative  in  chap,  xxviii.,  inasmuch  as  it  places  the 
bestowal  of  the  name  after  the  return  from  Meso- 
potamia. A  third  version  of  the  transaction  is 
given  in  xxxv.  15.  [Bethel.]  [G.] 

EL'CIA  ('EAki'o),  one  of  the  forefathers  of 
Judith,  and  therefore  belonging  to  the  tribe  of 
Simeon  (Jud.  viii.  1) ;  what  Hebrew  name  the 
word  represents  is  doubtful.  Hilkiah  is  probably 
Chelkias,  two  steps  back  in  the  genealogy.  The 
Syriac  version  has  Elkana.  In  the  Vulgate  the 
names  are  hopelessly  altered. 

EL'DAAH  (njn^*,  "  whom  God  called  ;" 
''E\5ayd,  'EA.5o5a  ;  Eldaa;  Gen.  xxv.  4;  1  Chr. 
i.  33),  the  last,  in  order,  of  the  sons  of  Midian. 
The  name  does  not  occur  except  in  the  two  lists  of 
Midian's  offspring ;  and  no  satisfactory  trace  of  the 
tribe  which  we  may  suppose  to  have  taken  the 
appellation  has  yet  been  found.  [E.  S.  P.] 

EL'DAD  and  MEDAD  (T^K  ;  'E\Sa5  kuI 
Mo>5a5  ;  Eldad  et  Medad),  two  of  the  70  elders 
to  whom  was  communicated  the  prophetic  power  of 
Moses  (Num.  xi.  16,  26).  Although  their  names 
were  upon  the  list  which  Moses  had  drawn  up  (xi. 
26),  they  did  not  repair  with  the  rest  of  their 
brethren  to  the  tabernacle,  but  continued  to  pro- 
phesy in  the  camp.  Moses  being  requested  by 
Joshua  to  forbid  this,  refused  to  do  so,  and  ex- 
pressed a  wish  that  the  gift  of  prophecy  might  be 
diffused  throughout  the  people.  The  great  fact  of 
the  passage  is  the  more  general  distribution  of  the 
spirit  of  prophecy,  which  had  hitherto  been  concen- 
trated in  Moses  ;  and  the  implied  sanction  of  a  ten- 
dency to  separate  the  exercise  of  this  gift  from  the 
service  of  the  tabernacle,  and  to  make  it  more 
generally  available  for  the  enlightenment  and  in- 
struction of  the  Israelites,  a  tendency  which  after- 
wards led  to  the  establishment  of  "  schools  of  the 
prophets."  The  circumstance  is  in  strict  accord- 
ance with  the  Jewish  tradition  that  all  prophetic 
inspiration  emanated  originally  from  Moses,  and 
was  transmitted  from  him  by  a  legitimate  succes- 
sion down  to  the  time  of  the  captivity.  The  mode 
of  prophecy  in  the  case  of  Eldad  and  Medad  was 
probably  the  extempore  production  of  hymns, 
chanted  forth  to  the  people  (Hammond)  :  comp.  the 
case  of  Saul,  1  Sam.  x.  11. 

From   Num.   xi.  25,  it   appears  that  the   gift 


ELDER 

was  not  merely  intermittent,  but  a  continuous 
energy,  though  only  occasionally  developed  in  ac- 
tion. [T.  E.  B.] 

ELDER  (fpT ;  TrptoPvTtpos  ;  senior).  The 
term  elder  or  old  man,  as  the  Hebrew  literally 
imports,  was  one  of  extensive  use,  as  an  official 
title,  among  the  Hebrews  and  the  surrounding 
nations.  It  applied  to  various  offices  ;  Eliezer,  for 
instance,  is  described  as  the  "  old  man  of  the 
house,"  i.  e.  the  majordomo  (Gen.  xxiv.  2)  ;  the 
officers  of  Pharaoh's  household  (Gen.  1.  7),  and,  at 
a  later  period,  David's  head  servants  (2  Sam.  xii. 
17)  were  so  termed  ;  while  in  Ez.  xxvii.  9  the 
"old  men  of  Gebal  "  are  the  master-workmen.  As 
betokening  a  political  office,  it  applied  not  only  to 
the  Hebrews,  but  also  to  the  Egyptians  (Gen.  1.  7), 
the  Moabites  and  Midianites  (Num.  xxii.  7). 
Wherever  a  patriarchal  system  is  in  force,  the 
office  of  the  elder  will  be  found,  as  the  keystone  of 
the  social  and  political  fabric  ;  it  is  so  at  the  pre- 
sent day  among  the  Arabs,  where  the  Sheikh  (  =  the 
old  man)  is  the  highest  authority  in  the  tribe. 
That  the  title  originally  had  reference  to  age,  is 
obvious;  and  age  was  naturally  a  concomitant  of 
the  office  at  all  periods  (Josh.  xxiv.  31  ;  IK.  xii. 
6),  even  when  the  term  had  acquired  its  secondary 
sense.  At  what  period  the  transition  occurred,  in 
other  words  when  the  word  elder  acquired  an 
official  signification,  it  is  impossible  to  say.  The 
earliest  notice  of  the  elders  acting  in  concert  as  a 
political  body  is  at  the  time  of  the  Exodus.  We 
need  not  assume  that  the  order  was  then  called  into 
existence,  but  rather  that  Moses  availed  himself  of 
an  institution  already  existing  and  recognised 
by  his  countrymen,  and  that,  in  short,  "  the 
elders  of  Israel"  (Ex.  iii.  16,  iv.  29)  had  been  the 
senate  (yepovcria,  LXX.)  of  the  people,  ever  since 
they  had  become  a  people.  The  position  which  the 
elders  held  in  the  Mosaic  constitution,  and  more  par- 
ticularly in  relation  to  the  people,  is  described  under 
Congregation  ;  they  were  the  representatives 
of  the  people,  so  much  so  that  elders  and  people 
are  occasionally  used  as  equivalent  terms  (comp. 
Josh.  xxiv.  1  with  2,  19,  21 ;  1  Sam.  viii.  4  with 
7,  10,  19).  Their  authority  was  undefined,  and 
extended  to  all  matters  concerning  the  public  weal ; 
nor  did  the  people  question  the  validity  of  their 
acts,  even  when  they  disapproved  of  them  (Josh. 
ix.  18).  When  the  tribes  became  settled  the 
elders  were  distinguished  by  different  titles  accord- 
ing as  they  were  acting  as  national  representatives 
("  elders  of  Israel,"  1  Sam.  iv.  3  ;  1  K.  viii.  1,  3; 
" of  the  land,"  1  K.  xx.  7  ;  "of  Judah,"  2  K. 
xxiii.  1 ;  Ez.  viii.  1),  as  district  governors  over  the 
several  tribes  (Deut.  xxxi.  28  ;  2  Sam.  xix.  11),  or 
as  local  magistrates  in  the  provincial  towns, 
appointed  in  conformity  with  Deut.  xvi.  18,  whose 
duty  it  was  to  sit  in  the  gate  and  administer 
justice  (Deut.  xix.  12,  xxi.  3  ff.,  xxii.  15  ;  Ruth 
iv.  9,  11  ;  1  K.  xxi.  8;  Jud.  x.  6)  ;  their  number 
and  influence  may  be  inferred  from  1  Sam.  xxx. 
26  ff.  They  retained  their  position  under  all  the 
political  changes  which  the  Jews  undenvent : 
under  the  Judges  (Judg.  ii.  7,  viii.  14,  xi.  5  ; 
1  Sam.  iv.  3,  viii.  4);  under  the  kings  (2  Sam. 
xvii.  4;  1  K.  xii.  6,  xx.  8,  xxi.  11);  during  the 
captivity  (Jer.  xxix.  1  ;  Ez.  viii.  1,  xiv.  1,  xx.  1)  ; 

a  Some  difficulty  arises  at  this  period  from  the 
notice  in  1  Mace.  xiv.  28  of  a  double  body,  apvoMTc? 
c0i>ous,  and  Trpea-jSuTepoi  t»j<;  \wpas  ;  and  again  in 
3  Mace.  i.  8,yepou(rio  and  7rpt<r/3uTfpoi :  the  second  term 


ELEASAH 


517 


subsequently  to  the  return  (Ezr.  v.  5,  vi.  7,  14, 
x.  8,  14)  ;  under  the  Maccabees,"  when  they  were 
described  sometimes  as  the  senate  (yepovvia;  1 
Mace.  xii.  6  ;  2  Mace.  i.  10,  iv.  44,  xi.  27  ;  Joseph. 
Ant.  xii.  3,  §3),  sometimes  by  their  ordinary  title 
(1  Mace.  vii.  33,  xi.  23,  xii.  35)  ;  and,  lastly,  at 
its  commencement  of  the  Christian  era,  when  they 
are  noticed  as  a  distinct  body  from  the  Sanhedrim, 
but  connected  with  it  as  one  of  the  classes  whence 
its  members  were  selected,  and  always  acting  in 
conjunction  with  it  and  the  other  dominant  classes. 
[Sanhedrim.]  Thus  they  are  associated  some- 
times with  the  Chief  Priests  (Matt.  xxi.  23),  some- 
times with  the  Chief  Priests  and  the  Scribes  (Matt, 
xvi.  21),  or  the  Council  (Matt.  xxvi.  59),  always 
taking  an  active  part  in  the  management  of  public 
affairs.  St.  Luke  describes  the  whole  order  by 
the  collective  term  TrpeaflvTTipiov  (Luke  xxii.  60  ; 
Acts  xxii.  5).  In  Matt.  xv.  2  and  Heb.  xi.  2 
"  elders  "  is  expressive  of  time  rather  than  office. 
For  the  position  of  the  elders  in  the  synagogue 
and  the  Christian  Church,  see  Synagogue, 
Bishop.  [W.  L.  B.] 

EL'EAD  Ol6X;  'EAec£5;  Elad),  a  descendant 
of  Ephraim  (1  Chr.  vii.  21),  but  whether  through 
Shuthelah,  or  a  son  of  the  patriarch  (the  second 
Shuthelah  being  taken  as  a  repetition  of  the  first, 
and  Ezer  and  Elead  as  his  brothers)  is  not  to  be  de- 
termined (see  Bertheau,  Chronik,  82). 

ELEA'LEH  (H^K  ;  'EAeaAtf  ;  Eleale),  a 
place  on  the  east  of  Jordan,  in  the  pastoral  country, 
taken  possession  of  and  rebuilt  by  the  tribe  of  Reuben 
(Num.  xxxii.  3,  37).  We  lose  sight  of  it  till  the  time 
of  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah,  by  both  of  whom  it  is  men- 
tioned as  a  Moabite  town,  and,  as  before,  in  close 
connexion  with  Heshbon  (Is.  xv.  4,  xvi.  9  ;  Jer. 
xlviii.  34).  The  extensive  ruins  of  the  place  are  still 
to  be  seen,  bearing  very  nearly  their  ancient  name, 
El-A'al,  though  with  a  modem  signification,  '•  the 
high,"  a  little  more  than  a  mile  N.  of  Heshbon. 
It  stands  on  the  summit  of  a  rounded  hill  com- 
manding a  very  extended  view  of  the  plain,  and 
the  whole  of  the  Southern  Belka  (Burckli.  Syr. 
805;  Seetzen,  1854,  p.  407).  It  is  from  this 
commanding  situation  that  it  doubtless  derives  its 
name,  which,  like  many  other  names  of  modern 
Palestine,  is  as  near  an  approach  to  the  ancient 
sound  as  is  consistent  with  an  appropriate  mean- 
ing. [G.] 

ELE'ASA  CEKeaffd,  Alex.  'AAcura  ;  Laisa), 
a  place  at  which  Judas  Maccabaeus  encamped  before 
the  fatal  battle  with  Bacchides,  in  which  he  lost 
his  life  (1  Mace.  ix.  5).  It  was  apparently  not  far 
from  Azotus  (comp.  15).  Josephus  (Ant.  xii.  11, 
§1)  has  Bethzetho,  by  which  he  elsewhere  renders 
Bezeth.  But  this  may  be  but  a  corrupt  reading  of 
Berzetha  or  Bethzetha,  which  is  found  in  Borne 
MSS.  tin-  Berea  in  1  Mace.  ix.  4.  Another  reading 
is  Adasa,  where  Judas  had  encamped  on  a  former 
memorable  occasion  (vii.  40).  It  is  singular  that 
Bezeth  should  be  mentioned  in  this  connexion  also 
(see  verse  19).  [<;.] 

ELE'AS AH  (flL"J&K;  Elasa).  1.  ('EXemnf). 
Son  of  Helez,  one  of  the  descendants  of  Judah,  of  the 
family  of  Hezron  ( 1  Chr.  ii.  39). 


may  refer  to  the  municipal  authorities,  as  is  perhaps 
implied  in  the  term  X"Pa-  The  identity  of  the 
yepoveri'a   and    the   irpeo-fivTepoi.   in    other    passages    i 

den  from  l  Mace.  xii.  8,  compared  with  35. 


518 


ELEAZAR 


2.  ('EAa<rc£  ;  Alex.  EAeatra)  Son  of  Kapha,  or 
Rephaiah  ;  a  descendant  of  Saul  through  Jonathan 
and  Merib-baal  or  Mephibosheth  (1  Chr.  viii.  37, 
ix.  43). 

This  name  is  elsewhere  rendered  in  the  A.  V. 
Elasah. 

ELEA'ZAR  (ITJ^N;  'EAedCap ;  Eleazar). 
1.  Third  son  of  Aaron,  by  Elisheba,  daughter  of 
Amminadab,  who  was  descended  from  Judah, 
through  Fharez  (Ex.  vi.  23,  25 ;  xxviii.  1 ;  for 
his  descent  see  Gen.  xxxviii.  29,  xlvi.  12  ;  Ruth, 
iv.  18,  20).  After  the  death  of  Nadab  and  Abihu 
without  children  (Lev.  x.  1  ;  Num.  iii.  4),  Eleazar 
was  appointed  chief  over  the  principal  Levites,  to 
have  the  oversight  of  those  who  had  charge  of  the 
sanctuary  (Num.  iii.  32).  With  his  brother  Itha- 
mar  he  ministered  as  a  priest  during  their  father's 
lifetime,  and  immediately  before  his  death  was  in- 
vested on  Mount  Hor  with  the  sacred  garments,  as 
the  successor  of  Aaron  in  the  office  of  High-priest 
(Num.  xx.  28).  One  of  his  first  duties  was  in 
conjunction  with  Moses  to  superintend  the  census 
of  the  people  (Num.  xxvi.  3).  He  also  assisted  at 
the  inauguration  of  Joshua,  and  at  the  division  of 
spoil  taken  from  the  Midianites  (Num.  xxvii.  22, 
xxxi.  21).  After  the  conquest  of  Canaan  by  Joshua 
he  took  part  in  the  distribution  of  the  land  (Josh, 
xiv.  1).  The  time  of  his  death  is  not  mentioned  in 
Scripture ;  Josephus  says  it  took  place  about  the 
same  time  as  Joshua's,  25  years  after  the  death  of 
Moses.  He  is  said  to  have  been  buried  in  "  the 
hill  of  Phinehas"  his  son  (Ges.  p.  260),  where 
Josephus  says  his  tomb  existed  (Ant.  v.  1,  §29)  ; 
or  possibly  a  town  called  Gibeath- Phinehas  (Josh, 
xxiv.  33).  The  High-priesthood  is  said  to  have 
remained  in  the  family  of  Eleazar  until  the  time  of 
Eli,  a  descendant  of  Ithamar,  into  whose  family, 
for  some  reason  unknown,  it  passed  until  it  was 
restored  to  the  family  of  Eleazar  in  the  person  of 
Zadok  (1  Sam.  ii.  27  ;  1  Chr.  vi.  8,  xxiv.  3 ;  1  K. 
ii.  27  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  1,  §3). 

2.  The  son  of  Abinadah,  of  the  "hill"  (nj?33) 
of  Kirjath-jearim,  appointed  by  the  inhabitants  of 
that  place  to  take  care  of  the  ark  after  its  return 
from  the  Philistines  (1  Sam.  vii.  1). 

3.  The  son  of  Dodo  the  Ahohite  (*nhX"}3),  i.e. 
possibly  a  descendant  of  Ahoah  of  the  tribe  of 
Benjamin  (1  Chr.  viii.  4)  ;  one  of  the  three  prin- 
cipal mighty  men  of  David's  army,  whose  exploits 
are  recorded  2  Sam.  xxiii.  9  ;  1  Chr.  xi.  12. 

4.  A  Merarite  Levite,  son  of  Mahli,  and  grandson 
of  Merari.  He  is  mentioned  as  having  had  only 
daughters,  who  were  married  by  their  "  brethren" 
(*.  e.  their  cousins)  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  21,  22;  xxiv.  28). 

5.  A  priest  who  took  part  in  the  feast  of  dedica- 
tion under  Nehemiah  (Neh.  xii.  42.) 

6.  One  of  the  sons  of  Parosh  ;  an  Israelite  (i.  e.  a 
layman)  who  had  married  a  foreign  wife,  and  had 
to  put  her  away  (  Ezra  x.  25 ;  1  Esdr.  ix.  26). 

7.  Son  of  Phinehas  a  Levite  (Ezr.  viii.  33 ; 
1  Esdr.  viii.  63). 

8.  Eleazar  ('E\ed£ap;  Joseph.  'EAea^apos), 
surnamed  Avaran  (1  Mace.  ii.  5  Avapdv,  or  Avpdv, 
and  so  Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  6,  1  ;  9,  4.  In  1  Mace, 
vi.  43,  the  common  reading  6  3,avapav  arises  either 
from  the  insertion  of  C  by  mistake  after  0,  or  from 
a  false  division  of  'EAea^opos  Avapdv).  The  fourth 
son  of  Mattatnias,  who  fell  by  a  noble  act  of  self- 
ilevotion  in  an  engagement  with  Autiochus  Eupator, 


ELEPHANT 

B.C.  164  (1  Mace.  vi.  43  ff. ;  Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  19, 
§4 ;  de  B.  J.  i.  1,  §5 ;  Ambr.  Be  offic.  mm.  40).  In 
a  former  battle  with  Nicanor,  Eleazar  was  appointed 
by  Judas  to  read  "  the  holy  book  "  before  the  attack, 
and  the  watchword  in  the  tight — "  the  help  of  God" 
— was  his  own  name  (2  Mace.  viii.  23). 

The  surname  is  probably  connected  with  Arab. 
havar,  "  to  pierce  an  animal  behind  "  (Mich,  sub 
voc).  This  derivation  seems  far  better  than  that 
of  Rodiger  (Ersch  u.  Gruber,  s.  v.)  from  Arab. 
khavaran,  "  an  elephant-hide."  In  either  case  the 
title  is  derived  from  his  exploit. 

9.  A  distinguished  scribe  ('EXed^apos  .  .  .  twv 
■wpwTzvSvTiev  ypafifjiaTfoov,  2  Mace.  vi.  18)  of 
great  age,  who  suffered  martyrdom  during  the 
persecution  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  (2  Mace.  vi. 
18-31).  His  death  was  marked  by  singular  con- 
stancy and  heroism,  and  seems  to  have  produced 
considerable  effect.  Later  traditions  embellished 
the  narrative  by  representing  Eleazar  as  a  priest 
(Be  Mace.  5),  or  even  high-priest  (Grimm.,  ad 
Mace.  1.  a).  He  was  also  distinguished  by  the 
nobler  title  of  "  the  proto-rnartyr  of  the  old  cove- 
nant," "  the  foundation  of  martyrdom"  (Chrys. 
Horn.  3  in  Mace.  iuit.  Cf.  Ambr.  de  Jacob,  ii. 
10). 

For  the  general  credibility  of  the  history  compare 
Grimm.  Excurs.  iiber  2  Mace.  vi.  18-viii.  in  Exeg. 
Handb. ;  also  Ewald,  Gesch.  iv.  341,  532.  [Mac- 
cabees.] 

The  name  Eleazar  in  3  Mace.  vi.  appears  to  have 
been  borrowed  from  this  Antiochian  martyr,  as 
belonging  to  one  weighed  down  by  age  and  suffer- 
ing and  yet  "  helped  by  God."  (For  the  name 
comp.  Lazarus,  Luke  xvi.  19-25.) 

10.  The  father  of  Jason,  ambassador  from  Judas 
Maccabaeus  to  Rome.  (1  Mace.  viii.  18.) 

11.  The  son  of  Eliud,  three  generations  above 
Joseph,  the  husband  of  the  Virgin  Mary  (Matt. 
i.  15).  [B.F.W.j 

ELEAZU'RUS  CEXidffe^os ;  Alex.  'EA;a<nj8os ; 
Eliasib),  1  Esd.  ix.  24.  [Euashib.]  It  is  difficult 
to  see  where  the  translators  of  the  A.  V.  got  the 
form  of  this  name  there  given. 

EL  ELO'HE  IS'RAEL  (^t»)  >!${*  ^>X  = 
"  Almighty,  God  of  Israel ;"  Kal  iireKaXeaaro  rbv 
6ebv  'lo-pa-i)/\ ;  Fortissimum  Beam  Israel),  the 
name  bestowed  by  Jacob  on  the  altar  which  he 
erected  facing  the  city  of  Shechem,  in  the  piece  of 
cultivated  land  upon  which  he  had  pitched  his 
tent,  and  which  he  afterwards  purchased  from  the 
Bene-Hamor  (Gen.  xxxiii.  19,  20). 

E'LEPH  (t^Kn  =  the  Ox ;  SfAW".  Alex. 
27jA.aA.e0 — both  by  including  the  preceding  name  ; 
Eleph),  one  of  the  towns  allotted  to  Benjamin, 
and  named  next  to  Jerusalem  (Josh,  xviii.  28). 
The  signification  of  the  name  may  be  taken  as 
an  indication  of  the  pastoral  pursuits  of  its  inha- 
bitants. The  LXX.  read  Zelah  and  Eleph  as  one 
name,  possibly  owing  to  the  "  and  "  between  them 
having  been  dropt ;  but  if  this  is  done,  the  number 
of  Unities  cannot  be  made  up.  The  Peschito  has 
J^a^n-  Gcblro,  for  Eleph;  but  what  the  origin 
of  this  can  be  is  not  obvious.  [G.] 

ELEPHANT.  The  word  does  not  occur  in 
the  text  of  the  canonical  Scriptures  of  A.  V.,  but 
is  found  as  the  marginal  reading  to  Behemoth,  in 
Job  xl.  15.  "Elephants'  teeth"  is  the  marginal 
reading  for  "  ivory  "  in  IK.  x.  22  ;  2  Chr.  ix.  41 . 


ELEUTHEROPOLIS 

Elephants  however  are  repeatedly  mentioned  in  the 
1st  and  2nd  books  of  Maccabees,  as  being  used  in 
warfare.  The  way  in  which  they  were  used  in 
battle,  and  the  method  of  exciting  them  to  fight,  is 
described  in  the  6th  chap,  of  1  Mace.  For  the 
meaning  of  Behemoth,  see  Behemoth.  For  the 
meaning  of  D*3n3E?,  see  Ivory.  [W.  D.] 

ELEUTHEROPOLIS  ('EA.6u0epoinfA.is,  the 

free  city),  a  town  of  southern  Palestine,  situated  at 
the  foot  of  the  hills  of  Judah,  ou  the  borders  of  the 
great  plain  of  Philistia.  It  is  about  25  miles  from 
Jerusalem  on  the  road  to  Gaza.  It  is  not  men- 
tioned in  Scripture ;  but  it  became  in  the  early  cen- 
turies of  the  Christian  era  one  of  the  most  important 
and  flourishing  towns  in  the  country.  Its  ancient 
name  was  Betogahra  (Bairoydfipa,  the  House  of 
Gabra  or  Gabrael),  which  first  occurs  in  the  writ- 
ings of  Ptolemy  in  the  beginning  of  the  2nd  century 
(ch.  xvi.).  Josephus  refers  to  a  large  village  called 
Brirapis  (in  Rufinus'  copy  Briyafipis)  in  this 
region,  which  may  be  the  same  (Z>.  /.  iv.  8,  §1). 
It  is  found  in  the  Peutinger  Tables  as  Betogabri 
(Reland,  Pal.  p.  421).  Its  new  name,  Eleuthero- 
polis,  first  occurs  upon  coins  in  the  time  of  the 
emperor  Septimius  Severus  (a.D.  202-3  ;  Eckhel, 
iii.  488).  That  emperor  during  his  visit  to  Pales- 
tine conferred  important  privileges  on  several  cities ; 
and  this  was  one  of  the  number.  Eusebius  is  the 
first  writer  who  mentions  Eleutheropolis  {Onom. 
s.  ■».),  which  was  in  his  time  the  capital  of  a  large 
province.  It  was  the  seat  of  a  bishop,  and  was  so 
well  known  that  he  made  it  the  central  point  in 
Southern  Palestine  from  which  the  positions  of 
more  than  20  other  towns  were  determined.  Epipha- 
nius,  the  well-known  writer,  was  born  in  a  village 
three  miles  from  the  city,  in  the  beginning  of  the 
4th  century  ;  and  is  often  called  an  Eleutheropolitan 
(Reland,  pp.  751-2).  In  the  year  a.d.  796,  little 
more  than  a  century  and  a  half  after  the  Saracenic 
conquest,  Eleutheropolis  was  razed  to  the  ground, 
and  left  completely  desolate.  The  Greek  language 
now  gave  place  to  the  Arabic ;  and  this  city  lost  its 
proud  name,  and  its  prouder  rank  together  (Reland, 
p.  987).  Like  so  many  other  cities,  the  old  name, 
which  had  probably  never  been  lost  to  the  pea- 
santry, was  revived  among  writers ;  and  we  thus 
find  Beigeberin,  or  some  form  like  it,  constantly  in 
use  after  the  8th  century.  In  the  12th  century 
the  Crusaders  found  the  place  in  ruins,  and  built  a 
fortress  on  the  old  foundations ;  the  remains  of 
which,  and  the  chapel  connected  with  it,  still  exist. 
After  the  battle  of  Hattin,  Beit  Jibrin,  for  such  is 
its  Arabic  name,  fell  iuto  the  hands  of  the  Saracens. 
It  was  retaken  by  King  Richard  of  England,  but  it 
was  finally  captured  by  Bibars  (see  Will.  Tyr.  14, 
22  ;  Jac.  de  Vit.  in  Gcsta  Dei,  pp.  1070,  1071 ; 
Bohaeddin,  Vit.  Salad,  p.  229).  It  has  since  crum- 
4  bled  to  ruin  under  the  blight  of  Mohammedan 
rule. 

Several  curious  traditions  have  found  a  "  local 
habitation  "  at  Beit  Jibrin.  One  places  here  the 
miraculous  fountain  which  sprang  from  the  jaw- 
bone Samson  wielded  with  such  success  against  the 
Philistines  (Anton.  Mant.  Itin.  30,  32). 

The  modern  village  contains  some  50  or  60 
houses.  It  is  situated  in  a  little  nook,  in  the  side 
of  a  long  green  valley.  The  ancient  ruins  are  of  consi- 
derable extent ;  they  consist  of  the  remains  of  a  strong 
fortress  standing  within  an  irregular  enclosure  en- 
compassed by  a  massive  wall.  A  great  part  of 
this  outer  wall    is  completely   ruinous  ;    but   the 


ELEUTHERUS 


519 


north  side,  which  skirts  the  bank  of  the  valley,  is 
still  several  feet  high.  The  enclosure  is  about 
600  ft.  in  diameter.  The  fortress  is  about  200  ft. 
square,  and  is  of  a  much  later  date  than  the  outer 
wall ;  an  Arabic  inscription  over  the  gateway  bears 
the  date  A.H.  958  (a.d.  1551).  Along  its  south 
side  are  the  walls  and  part  of  the  groined  roof  of  a 
fine  old  chapel — the  same,  doubtless,  which  was 
built  by  the  Crusaders. 

The  valley,  on  the  side  of  which  the  ruins  of 
Eleutheropolis  lie,  runs  up  among  the  hills  for  two 
miles  or  more  south-by-east.  On  each  side  of  it 
are  low  ridges  of  soft  limestone,  which  rises  here 
and  there  in  white  bare  crowns  over  the  dark 
shrubs.  In  these  ridges  are  some  of  the  most  re- 
markable caverns  in  Palestine.  They  are  found 
together  in  clusters,  and  form  subterranean  villages. 
Some  are  rectangular,  100  ft.  and  more  in  length, 
with  smooth  walls  and  lofty  arched  roofs.  Others 
are  bell-shaped — from  40  to  70  ft.  in  diameter,  by 
nearly  60  ft.  in  height — all  connected  together 
by  arched  doorways  and  winding  subterranean  pas- 
sages. A  few  are  entirely  dark  ;  but  most  of  them 
are  lighted  by  a  circular  aperture  at  the  top.  They 
occur  at  short  intervals  along  both  sides  of  the 
whole  valley ;  and  the  writer  also  saw  them  at  several 
other  neighbouring  villages.  We  learn  from  history 
that  the  Idumaeans  [Edomites]  came,  during  the 
Babylonish  captivity,  and  occupied  the  greater  part 
of  Southern  Palestine.  Jerome  says  they  inhabited 
the  whole  country  extending  from  Eleutheropolis 
to  Petra  and  Elah  ;  and  that  they  dwelt  in  caves — 
preferring  them  both  on  account  of  their  security, 
and  their  coolness  during  the  heat  of  summer 
{Comm.  in  Obad.).  These  remarkable  caves,  there- 
fore, were  doubtless  the  work  of  the  Idumaeans. 
(See  Handbook  for  Syria  and  Palestine,  pp.  255, 
sq. ;  Robinson's  Biblical  Researches,  2nd  ed.  vol. 
ii.  pp.  23,  57,  sq.)  [J.  L.  P.] 

ELEU'THERUS  ('EAeuflepos),  a  river  of 
Syria  mentioned  in  1  Mace.  xi.  7  ;  xii.  30.  In 
early  ages  it  was  a  noted  border  stream.  According 
to  Strabo  it  separated  Syria  from  Phoenicia  (xvi. 
p.  753),  and  formed  the  northern  limit  of  Coele- 
syi'ia.  Josephus  informs  us  that  Antony  gave 
Cleopatra  "  the  cities  that  wrere  within  the  river 
Eleutherus,  as  far  as  Egypt,  except  Tyre  and 
Sidon"  {Ant.  xv.  4,  §1,  'B.  J.  i.  18,  §5).  A 
careful  examination  of  the  passages  in  Num.  xxxiv. 
8-10,  and  Ezek.  xlvii.  15-17,  and  a  comparison  of 
them  with  the  features  of  the  country,  lead  the 
present  writer  to  the  conclusion  that  this  river 
also  formed,  for  so  far,  the  northern  border  of 
the  "  Promised  Land"  {Five  Years  in  Damascus, 
vol.  ii.  pp.  354,  sq.).  Pliny  says  that  at  a  cer- 
tain season  of  the  year  it  swarmed  with  tortoise 
(ix.  10). 

Of  the  identity  of  the  Eleutherus  with  the  mo- 
dem Nahr-cl-h'cbir,  "Great  River,"  there  cannot 
be  a  doubt.  Its  highest  source  is  at  the  north- 
eastern base  of  Lebanon;  it  sweeps  round  the 
northern  end  of  the  range,  through  the  opening 
called  in  Scripture  "the  entrance  of  Hamath  " 
(Num.  xxxiv.  8);  and,  after  receiving  Beveral  small 

tributaries  from  t lie  heights  of  Lebanon,  it  tails  into 
the   Mediterranean    about    18   miles   north    of  Tri- 

polis.  It  still  forms  the  boundary  between  the 
provinces  of  Akkar  and  el-Husn.  During  summer 
and  autumn  it  is  but  a  small  stream, easily  forded  ; 
I. lit  iii  winter  it  swtdls  into  a  large  and  rapid 
river.  [J.  L.  1>.] 


520  ELHANAN 

ELHA'NAN  Qifbi<  ;  'EXeavctv ;  Adeodatus). 
1.  A  distinguished  warrior  in  the  time  of  King 
David,  who  performed  a  memorable  exploit  against 
the  Philistines,  though  in  what  that  exploit  exactly 
consisted,  and  who  the  hero  himself  was,  it  is  not 
easy  to  determine. 

1.  2  Sam.  xxi.  19  says  that  he  was  the  "  son  of 
Jaare  Oregim  the  Bethlehemite,"  and  that  he 
"slew  Goliath  the  Gittite,  the  staff  of  whose  spear 
was  like  a  weaver's  beam."  Here,  in  the  A.  V. 
the  words  "  the  brother  of"  are  inserted,  to  bring 
the  passage  into  agreement  with, 

2.  1  Chr.  xx.  5,  which  states  that  "  Elhanan 
son  of  Jair  (or  Jaor)  slew  Lahmi  the  brother  of 
Goliath  the  Gittite,  the  staff  of  whose  spear,"  &c. 

Of  these  two  statements  the  latter  is  probably 
the  more  correct — the  differences  between  them 
being  much  smaller  in  the  original  than  in  English. 
We  must  refer  the  reader  to  the  Hebrew  for  the 
comparison  of  the  two,"  the  discrepancies  in  which 
are  not  greater  than  those  known  to  exist  in  other 
corrupt  passages,  but  the  following  are  the  grounds 
of  our  decision. 

(a.)  The  word  Oregim  exists  twice  in  the  verse 
in  Samuel,  first  as  a  proper  name,  and  again  at  the 
end — "  weavers."  The  former  has  probably  been 
taken  in  by  an  early  transcriber  from  the  latter, 
i.  e.  from  the  next  line  of  the  MSS.  To  the  end 
of  the  verse  it  certainly  belongs,  since  it  is  found  in 
the  parallel  passage  of  Chron.,  and  also  forms  part 
of  what  seems  to  have  been  a  proverbial  descrip- 
tion of  Goliath  (comp.  1  Sam.  xvii.  7).  The  chances 
are  very  much  against  the  same  word — and  that  not 
a  common  one — forming  part  of  one  verse  in  two 
capacities. 

(6.)  The  statement  in  Samuel  is  in  contradiction 
to  the  narrative  of  1  Sam.  xvii.,  according  to  which 
Goliath  the  Gittite  was  killed  by  David.  True, 
Ewald  (Gesch.  iii.91,  2) — from  the  fact  that  David's 
antagonist  is,  with  only  3  exceptions  (one  of  them 
in  the  doubtful  verses,  xvii.  12-32),  called  "  the 
Philistine,"  and  for  other  linguistic  reasons — has 
suggested  that  Elhanan  was  the  real  victor  of  Go- 
liath, and  that  after  David  became  king  the  name 
of  Goliath  was  attached  to  the  nameless  champion 
whom  he  killed  in  his  youth.  But  against  this  is 
the  fact  that  Goliath  is  named  thrice  in  1  Sam. 
xvii.  and  xxi. — thrice  only  though  it  be ;  and  also 
that  Elhanan' s  exploit,  from  its  position  both  in  Sa- 
muel and  in  Chronicles,  and  from  other  indications, 
took  place  late  in  David's  reign,  and  when  he  had 
been  so  long  king  and  so  long  renowned,  that  all  the 
brilliant  feats  of  his  youth  must  have  been  brought 
to  light,  and  well  known  to  his  people.  It  is  re- 
corded as  the  last  but  one  in  the  series  of  encounters 
of  what  seems  to  have  been  the  closing  struggle  with 
the  Philistines.  It  was  so  late  that  David  had  ac- 
quired among  his  warriors  the  fond  title  of  "  the  light 
of  Israel"  (2  Sam.  xxi.  17),  and  that  his  nephew 
Jonathan  was  old  enough  to  perform  a  feat  rivalling 
that  of  his  illustrious  uncle  years  before.  It  was  cer- 
tainly after  David  was  made  king,  for  he  goes  down 


ELI 

to  the  fight,  not  with  his  "  young  men  "  ('HJ?3),b  as 
when  he  was  leading  his  band  during  Saul's  life, 
but  with  his  "  servants "  (**13J?),  literally  his 
"  slaves,"  a  term  almost  strictly  reserved  for  the 
subjects  of  a  king.  The  vow  of  his  guard,  on  one 
of  these  occasions,  that  it  should  be  his  last  appear- 
ance in  the  field,  shows  that  it  must  have  been 
after  the  great  Ammonite  war,  in  which  David 
himself  had  led  the  host  to  the  storming  of  Rab- 
bah  (2  Sam.  xii.  29).  It  may  have  been  between 
this  last  event  and  the  battle  with  Absalom  beyond 
Jordan,  though  there  are  other  obvious  reasons 
why  David  stayed  within  the  walls  of  Mahanaim 
on  that  occasion. 

On  the  whole,  therefore,  though  the  question  is 
beset  with  difficulties,  the  just  conclusion  appears 
to  be  that  the  reading  in  Chronicles  is  the  more 
correct  one,  according  to  which  Elhanan  is  the  son 
of  Jair,c  and  slew  Lachmi  the  brother  of  Goliath. 

Jerome  in  his  Qnaest.  Hebr.  on  both  passages — 
he  does  not  state  whether  from  ancient  tradition  or 
not — translates  Elhanan  into  Adeo-datus,  and  adds 
filius  saltus  Pobjmitarius  Bethleliemites — "  the  son 
of  a  wood,  a  weaver,  a  Bethlehemite."  Adeo- 
datus he  says  is  David,  which  he  proves  not  only 
by  arguments  drawn  from  the  meaning  of  each  of 
the  above  words,  but  also  from  the  statement  in 
the  concluding  verse  of  the  record  that  all  these 
giants  "  fell  by  the  hand  of  David  and  by  the  hand 
of  his  servants,"  and  as  Elhanan  slew  Goliath,  El- 
hanan must  be  David. 

2.  The  son  of  Dodo  of  Bethlehem,  one  of  "the 
thirty "  of  David's  guard,  and  named  first  on  the 
list  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  24 ;  1  Chr.  xi.  26).  See  Kenni- 
cott's  Dissertation,  179. 

The  same  name  is  also  found  with  Baal  sub- 
stituted for  El, — Baal-hanan.  (Comp.  Bee- 
liada.)  [G.] 

ELI  ("hV;  'HAl;  'H\e£,  Joseph.;  Heli),  was  de- 
scended from  Aaron  through  Ithamar,  the  youngest 
of  his  two  surviving  sons  (Lev.  x.  1,  2,  12),  as  ap- 
pears from  the  fact  that  Abiathar,  who  was  certainly 
a  lineal  descendant  of  Eli  (1  K.  ii.  27),  had  a  son 
Ahimelech,  who  is  expressly  stated  to  have  been  "  of 
the  sons  of  Ithamar"  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  3 ;  cf.  2  Sam. 
viii.  17).  With  this  accords  the  circumstance  that 
the  names  of  Eli  and  his  successors  in  the  high- 
priesthood  up  to,  and  including,  Abiathar,  are  not 
found  in  the  genealogy  of  Eleazar  (1  Chr.  vi.  4-1 5  ; 
cf.  Ezr.  vii.  1-5).  As  the  history  makes  no  men- 
tion of  any  high-priest  of  the  line  of  Ithamar 
before  Eli,  he  is  generally  supposed  to  have  been 
the  first  of  that  line,  who  held  the  office.  ("'HAel 
TrpwTov  raxiTnv  [apx^p(^crvv7iv'\  Trapa\a^6vros,  ' 
Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  i.  §3.~)  From  him,  his  sons 
having  died  before  him,  it  appears  to  have  passed 
to  his  grandson,  Ahitub  ( 1  Sam.  xiv.  3 ;  Jo- 
sephus,  however,  says  "  $ive£o~ins  8e  ^5r7  koX 
hparo,  tov  irarphs  o.vt<2  TrapaKex^pVKoros  Sia 
rb  yvpas,"  Ant.  v.  xi.  §2),  and  it  certainly  re- 
mained in  his  family  till  Abiathar,  the  grandson 


a  It  will  be  found  fully  examined  in  Kennioott's 
Dissertation,  78. 

b  Nothing  can  be  more  marked  than  this  distinction. 
Na'ar  ("lj?3)  is  used  almost  invariably  for  David's 
followers  up  to  the  death  of  Saul,  and  then  at  once 
the  term  changes,  and  Ebed  (13$?).  a  "slave,"  is  as 
exclusively  employed.  Even  Absalom's  people  go  by 
the  former  name.    This  will  be  evident  to  any  one  who 


will  look  into  the  quotations  under  the  two  words  in 
that  most  instructive  book,  The  Englishman's  Hebrew 
Concordance. 

c  Ewald  has  overcome  the  difficulty  of  the  two  dis- 
crepant passages  by  a  curious  eclectic  process.  From 
Chronicles  he  accepts  the  name  "  Jair,"  but  rejects 
"  Lahmi,  the  brother  of."  From  Samuel  he  takes 
"  the  Bethlehemite,"  and  rejects  "  Oregim." 


ELIAB 

of  Ahitub,  was  "  thrust  out  from  being  priest 
unto  the  Lord,"  by  Solomon  for  his  share  in 
Adonijah's  rebellion  (1  K.  ii.  26,  27  ;  i.  7),  and 
the  high-priesthood  passed  back  again  to  the  family 
of  Eleazar  in  the  person  of  Zadok  (1  K.  ii.  35). 
How  the  office  ever  came  into  the  younger  branch 
of  the  house  of  Aaron  we  are  not  informed,  though 
there  is  reason  to  suppose  that  its  doing  so  was 
sanctioned  by  God  (1  Sam.  ii.  30).  Its  return 
to  the  elder  branch  was  one  part  of  the  punish- 
ment which  had  been  denounced  against  Eli  during 
his  lifetime,  for  his  culpable  negligence  in  content- 
ing himself  with  mere  verbal  reprimand  (1  Sam. 
ii.  22-25)  instead  of  active  paternal  and  judicial 
restraint  (iii.  13),  when  his  sons  by  their  rapa- 
city and  licentiousness  profaned  the  priesthood, 
and  brought  the  rites  of  religion  into  abhorrence 
among  the  people  (1  Sam.  ii.  27-36,  with  1  K.  ii. 
27).  Another  part  of  the  same  sentence  (ver.  31- 
33)  appears  to  have  been  taking  effect  in  the  reign 
of  David,  when  we  read,  that  "  there  were  more 
chief  men  found  of  the  sons  of  Eleazar  than  of  the 
sons  of  Ithamar,"  sixteen  of  the  former,  and  only 
eight  of  the  latter  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  4).  Notwithstand- 
ing this  one  great  blemish,  the  character  of  Eli  is 
marked  by  eminent  piety,  as  shown  by  his  meek 
submission  to  the  divine  judgment  (1  Sam.  iii.  18), 
and  his  supreme  regard  for  the  ark  of  God  (iv. 
18).  In  addition  to  the  office  of  high-priest  he 
held  that  of  judge,  being  the  immediate  pre- 
decessor of  his  pupil  Samuel  (1  Sam.  vii.  6,  15- 
171,  the  last  of  the  judges.  The  length  of  time 
during  which  he  judged  Israel  is  given  as  40  years 
in  our  present  Hebrew  copies,  whereas  the  LXX. 
make  it  20  years  (elKOtnv  errj,  1  Sam.  iv.  18). 
It  has  been  suggested  in  explanation  of  the  discre- 
pancy, that  he  was  sole  judge  for  20  years,  after 
having  been  co-judge  with  Samson  for  20  years 
(Judg.  xvi.  31).  He  died  at  the  advanced  age 
of  98  years  (1  Sam.  iv.  15),  overcome  by  the 
disastrous  intelligence  that  the  ark  of  God  had 
been  taken  in  battle  by  the  Philistines,  who  had 
also  slain  his  sons  Hophni  and  I'hinehas.  [ABIA- 
thar,  Eleazar,  Ithamar.J  (See  Lightfoot's 
Works,  vol.  i.  pp.  53,  907,  fol.  Lond.  1684; 
Selden,  de  Success,  in  Pontif.  Hebr.  lib.  i.  cap. 
4.)  [T.  T.  P.] 

ELI'AB  (iwbii  ;  'EA<c£/S  ;  Eliab).  1.  Son 
of  Helon  and  leader  of  the  tribe  of  Zebulun  at  the 
time  of  the  census  in  the  wilderness  of  Sinai  (Num. 
i.  9,  ii.  7,  vii.  24,  29,  x.  10). 

2.  A  Reubenite,  son  of  Pallu  or  Phallu,  whose 
family  was  one  of  the  principal  in  the  tribe;  and 
father  or  progenitor  of  Dathan  and  Abiram,  the 
leaden  in  the  revolt  against  Moses  (Num.  xxvi. 
8,  9,  xvi.  1.  12;  Deut.  xi.  6).  Eliab  had  another 
son  named  Nemeel,  and  the  record  of  Num. 
xxvi.  is  interrupted  expressly  to  admit  a  statement 
regarding  his  sons. 

3.  One  of  David's  brothers,  the  eldest  of  the 
family  (1  Chr.  ii.  13  ;  1  Sam.  xvi.  6,  xvii.  13,28). 
His  daughter  Abihail  married  her  second  cousin 
Kehoboam,  and  bore  him  three  children  (2  Chr. 
xi.  18)  ;  although,  taking  into  account  the  length  of 
the  reigns  of  David  and  Solomon,  it  is  difficult  not 
to  suspect  that  the  word  "  daughter"  is  here  used  in 
the  less  strict  sense  of  granddaughter  or  descendant. 
In  1  Chr.  xxvii.  18,  we  find  mention  of  "  Elihu,  of 
the  brethren  of  David,"  as  "ruler"  (*V32),  or 
"prince"  (IK*)  of  the  tribe  of  Judah.     According 


ELIAHBA 


521 


to  the  ancient  Hebrew  tradition  preserved  by  Je- 
rome (Quaest.  Hebr.  ad  loc),  this  Elihu  was  iden- 
tical with  Eliab.  "  Brethren  "  is  however  often 
used  in  the  sense  of  kinsman,  e.  gr.  1  Chr.  xii.  2. 

4.  A  Levite  in  the  time  of  David,  who  was  both 

a  "  porter "  (TSJIK',  Sliuer,  i.  e.  a  doorkeeper)  and 

a  musician  on  the  "  psaltery"  (1  Chr.  xv.  18,  20, 
xvi.  5). 

5.  One  of  the  warlike  Gadite  leaders  who  came 
over  to  David  when  he  was  in  the  wilderness  taking 
refuge  from  Saul  (1  Chr.  xii.  9). 

6.  An  ancestor  of  Samuel  the  Prophet ;  a  Ko- 
hathite  Levite,  son  of  Nahath  (1  Chr.  vi.  27  ;  heb. 
12).  In  the  other  statements  of  the  genealogy 
this  name  appears  to  be  given  as  Elihu  (1  Sam. 
i.  1)  and  Eliel  (1  Chr.  vi.  34;  heb.  19.). 

7.  Son  of  Nathanael,  one  of  the  forefathers  of 
Judith,  and  therefore  belonging  to  the  tribe  of 
Simeon  (Jud.  viii.  1). 

ELIADA  OH^N;    'EAiW,    and    repeated, 

Baa\ifj.d6 ;  Chr.  'EAiaoa  ;  Alex.  EAieSa ;  Elioda, 
Eliadd).  1.  One  of  David's  sons  ;  according  to  the 
lists,  the  youngest  but  one  of  the  family  born  to 
him  after  his  establishment  in  Jerusalem  (2  Sam. 
v.  16  ;  1  Chr.  iii.  8).  From  the  latter  passage  it 
appears  that  he  was  the  son  of  a  wife  and  not  of  a 
concubine.  In  another  list  of  David's  family  we 
find  the  name  Eliada  changed  to  Beeliada,  Baal 
being  substituted  for  El,  the  false  god  for  the  true 
(1  Chr.  xiv.  7).  What  significance  there  may  be 
in  this  change  it  is  impossible  to  say,  at  any  rate 
the  present  is  the  only  instance  occurring,  and  even 
there  Eliada  is  found  in  one  Heb.  MS.,  also  in  the 
LXX.  and  Syr.  versions.  [Beeliada.]  The  name 
appears  to  be  omitted  by  Josephus  in  his  list  of 
David's  family  {Ant.  vii.  3,  §3). 

2.  A  mighty  man  of  war  (?*n  1133),  a  Ben- 
jamite,  who  led  200,000  of  his  tribe  to  the  army 
of  Jehoshaphat  (2  Chr.  xvii.  17). 

ELI'ADAH  (JH$>N  ;  Alex.  'EAiaoW ;  Eliadd), 
apparently  an  Aramite  of  Zobah  ;  father  of  Rezon 
the  captain  of  a  marauding  band  which  annoyed 
Solomon  (1  K.  xi.  23). 

ELI'ADAS  ('EAiaSas ;  Eliadas),  1  Esd.  ix.  28. 
[Elioenai.] 

ELIADUN  ('HKtaSovS ;  Vulg.  omits),  1  Esd. 
v.  58.     Possibly  altered  from  Henadad. 

ELI'AH.  (PI^K;  Elia).  l.CEpi'o.Alex.'HAi'o) 
A  Benjamite  ;  one  of  the  sons  of  Jeroham,  and  a 
chief  man  (l"N*i,  literally  "head")  of  the  tribe 
(1  Chr.  viii.  27). 

2.  QH\(d)  One  of  the  Bene-Elam  ;  an  Israelite 
(».  e.  a  layman)  in  the  times  of  Ezra,  who  had 
married  a  foreign  wife  (Ezr.  x.  26). 

This  name  is  accurately  Elijah,  and  the  trans- 
lators of  the  A.  V.  have  so  expressed  it,  not  only 
in  the  name  of  the  Prophet  (most  frequently  spelt 
with  a  final  u),  but  in  another  case  (Ezr.  x.  21). 
[Elijah.] 

ELI'AHBA  (X3n^X,  in  Chr.  Narv'pX ; 
'EKtafid,  'Efiaa-oi,  'EA.io/3;  Eliaba),  a  Shaalbo- 
nite.  i.e.  probably  from  Shaalblh;  one  of  the 
Thirty  of  David's  guard  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  32;  1  Chr. 
xi.  33). 


522 


ELIAKIM 


ELI'AKIM  (D'j^K,  whom  God  will  establish ; 
'EXtaKl/x  and  'EAia/cefyt ;  Eliaciin).  1.  Son  of 
Hilkiah;  master  of  Hezekiah's  household  (rV2!T?y 
=  "  over  the  house,"  as  Is.  xxxvi.  3),  2  K.  xviii. 
18,  26,  37.  He  succeeded  Shehna  in  this  office, 
after  he  had  been  ejected  from  it  (Grotius  thinks 
by  reason  of  his  leprosy)  as  a  punishment  for  his 
pride  (Is.  xxii.  15-20).  Eliakim  was  a  good  man, 
as  appears  by  the  title  emphatically  applied  to 
him  by  God,  "  my  servant  Eliakim "  (Is.  xxii. 
20),  and  as  was  evinced  by  bis  conduct  on  the 
occasion  of  Sennacherib's  invasion  (2  K.  xviii.  37, 
xix.  1-5),  and  also  in  the  discharge  of  the  duties  of 
his  high  station,  in  which  he  acted  as  a  "  father 
to  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem,  and  to  the  house 
of  Judah"  (Is.  xxii.  21).  It  was  as  a  special  mark  of 
the  Divine  approbation  of  his  character  and  conduct, 
of  which  however  no  further  details  have  been  pre- 
served to  us,  that  he  was  raised  to  the  post  of  au- 
thority and  dignity  which  he  held  at  the  time  of 
the  Assyrian  invasion.  What  this  office  was  has 
been  a  subject  of  some  perplexity  to  commentators. 
The  ancients,  including  the  LXX.  and  Jerome, 
understood  it  of  the  priestly  office,  as  appears 
by  the  rendering  of  pb  (Is.  xxii.  15,  A.  V. 
"  treasurer ")  by  Tra.<TTO<$>6ptov,  the  "  priest's 
chamber,"  by  the  former,  and  of  JVHiVT'y  by 
"praepositus  templi"  by  the  latter.  Hence  Nice- 
phorus,  as  well  as  the  author  of  the  Alexandrian 
Chronicle,  includes  in  the  list  of  high-priests,  Somnas 
or  Sobnas  (»".  e.  Shebna\  and  Eliakim,  identifying 
the  latter  with  Shallum  or  Meshullam.  His  12th 
high-priest  is,  Somnas,  ille  impius  et  perditus,  reg- 
nante  Ezcchid,  and  his  13th,  Eliakim  Muselum. 
But  it  is  certain  from  the  description  of  the  office 
in  Is.  xxii.,  and  especially  from  the  expression  in 
ver.  22,  "  the  key  of  the  house  of  David  will  I  lay 
upon  his  shoulder  ;"  that  it  was  the  King's  house, 
and  not  the  House  of  God,  of  which  Eliakim  was 
praefect,  as  Ahishar  had  been  in  the  reign  of  Solo- 
mon, 1  K.  iv.  6,  and  Azrikam  in  that  of  Ahaz, 
2  Chr.  xxviii.  7.  And  with  this  agrees  both  all  that 
is  said,  and  all  that  is  not  said,  of  Eliakim's  func- 
tions. The  office  seems  to  have  been  the  highest 
under  the  king,  as  was  the  case  in  Egypt,  when 
Pharaoh  said  to  Joseph,  "  Thou  shalt  be  over  my 
house  (*JV3~?y)  .  .  .  only  in  the  throne  will  I  be 
greater  than  thou,"  Gen.  xli.  40,  comp.  xxxix.  4. 
In  2  Chr.  xxviii.  7,  the  officer  is  called  "  governor 
(T'JJ)  of  the  house."  It  is  clear  that  the  "  Scribe" 
was  inferior  to  him,  for  Shebna,  when  degraded 
from  the  praefecture  of  the  house,  acted  as  scribe 
under  Eliakim,3  2  K.  xviii.  37.  The  whole  de- 
scription of  it  too  by  Isaiah  implies  a  place  of  great 
eminence  and  power.  This  description  is  trans- 
ferred in  a  mystical  or  spiritual  sense  to  Christ  the 
son  of  David  in  Rev.  iii.  7 ;  thus  making  Eliakim 
in  some  sense  typical  of  Christ.  This  it  is  perhaps 
which  gave  rise  to  the  interpretation  of  Eliakim's 
name  mentioned  by  Origen,  6  ®e6s  /xov  avdffTrf 
or  as  Jerome  has  it,  Dei  resurrectio,  or  Resurgens 
Deus ;  and  also  favoured  the  mystical  interpreta- 
tion of  the  passage  in  Isaiah  given  by  Jerome  in 
his  commentary,  based  upon  the  interpretation  of 
pD  (A.  V.  "treasurer")  as  "  habitans  in  taber- 
niiculo,"  as  if  it  imported  the  removal  of  the  Jewish 


a  Bp.  Lowth  thinks,  but  without  sufficient  reason, 
that  this  Shebna  is  a  different  person  from  the  other. 


ELIAS 

dispensation,  and  the  setting  up  of  the  Gospel  in  its 
place.  The  true  meaning  of  pb  is  very  doubtful. 
"  Friend,"  i.  e.  of  the  king,  and  "  Steward  of  the 
provisions,"  are  the  two  most  probable  significations. 
Eliakim's  career  was  a  most  honourable  and  splendid 
one.  Most  commentators  agree  that  Is.  xxii.  25 
doe  not  apply  to  him,  but  to  Shebna.  Eliakim's 
name  also  occurs  2  K.  xix.  2  ;  Is.  xxxvi.  3,  11,  22, 
xxxvii.  2.  (See  further  Jerome  de  nom.  Hebr.  and 
Coram,  on  Is.  xxii.  15  sq. ;  Rosenmiill.  ib. ;  Bp. 
Lowth's  Notes  on  Is. ;  Selden,  de  success,  in  Pont  if. 
Hebr. ;  Winer,  sub  voc.) 

2.  The  original  name  of  Jehoiakim  king  of 
Judah  (2  K.  xxiii.  34;  2  Chr.  xxxvi.  4).  [Je- 
hoiakim.] 

3.  A  priest  in  the  days  of  Nehemiah,  who  assisted 
at  the  dedication  of  the  new  wall  of  Jerusalem  (Neh. 
xii.  41). 

4.  Eldest  son  of  Abiud,  or  Judah  ;  brother  of 
Joseph,  and  father  of  Azor,  Matt.  i.  13.  [Genea- 
logy of  Christ.] 

5.  Son  of  Melea,  and  father  of  Jonan,  Luke  iii. 
30,  31.     [Ibid.]  [A.  C.  H.] 

ELI'ALI  ('EAtaAi,    Alex.  'E\ia\tl;  Dielus), 

1  Esd.  ix.  34.     [Binnui.] 

ELI' AM  (DJf^K ;  'EAtc£;S,  Vat.  and  Alex.  ; 
Eliani).  1.  Father  of  Bathsheba,  the  wife  of  David 
(2  Sam.  xi.  3).  In  the  list  of  1  Chr.  iii.  5,  the 
names  of  both  father  and  daughter  are  altered,  the 
former  to  Ammiel  and  the  latter  to  Batiishua  : 
and  it  may  be  noticed  in  passing,  that  both  the 
latter  names  were  also  those  of  non-Israelite  per- 
sons, while  Uriah  was  a  Hittite.  (Comp.  Gen. 
xxxviii.  12;  1  Chr.  ii.  3;  in  both  of  which  "the 
daughter  of  Shua "  is  JMC  ]"I3,  Bath-shua ;  also 

2  Sam.  xvii.  27.)  The  transposition  of  the  two 
parts  of  the  name  El-i-am  in  Amm-i-el,  does  not 
alter  its  Hebrew  signification,  which  may  be  "  God 
is  my  people." 

2.  Son  of  Ahithophel  the  Gilonite  ;  one  of  David's 
"  thirty"  warriors  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  34).  The  name 
is  omitted  in  the  list  of  1  Chi-,  xi.,  but  is  now  pro- 
bably dimly  discernible  as  "  Ahijah  the  Pelonite  " 
(ver.  36)  (see  Kennicott,  Dissertation,  207).  The 
ancient  Jewish  tradition  preserved  by  Jerome  {Qu. 
Hebr.  on  2  Sam.  xi.  3,  and  1  Chr.  iii.  5)  is  that 
the  two  Eliams  are  one  and  the  same  person.  An 
argument  has  been  founded  on  this  to  account  for 
the  hostility  of  Ahitophel  to  King  David,  as  having 
dishonoured  his  house  and  caused  the  death  of  his 
son-in-law  (Blunt,  Coincidences,  Pt.  II.  x.).  But 
such  arguments  are  frequently  grounded  on  igno- 
rance of  the  habits  and  modes  of  feeling  of  Orientals, 
who  often  see  no  shame  in  that  which  is  the  greatest 
disgrace  to  us. 

ELIAO'NIAS  ('E\iawvlas ;  Moabilionis,  in- 
cluding preceding  name),  1  Esd.  viii.  31.  [Eli- 
hoenai.] 

ELIAS  ('HAias,  in  Maccabees,  and  Lachm.  in 
N.  T.  'HAias ;  Elias,  but  in  Cod.  Amiat.  Helias), 
the  form  in  which  the  name  of  Elijah  is  given  in 
the  A.  V.  of  the  Apocrypha  and  N.  Test. :  Ecclus. 
xlviii.  1,  4,  12  ;  1  Mace.  ii.  58  ;  Matt,  xi.  14, 
xvi.  14,  xvii.  3,  4,  10,  11,  12,  xxvii.  47,  49  ; 
Mark  vi.  15,  viii.  28,  ix.  4,  5,  11,  12,  13,  xv. 
35,  36,  Luke  i.  17,  iv.  25,  26,  ix.  8,  19,  30, 
33,  54 ;  John  i.  21,  25  ;  Rom.  xi.  2  ;  James  v.  17. 
In  Rom.  xi.  2,  the  reference  is  not  to  the  prophet, 


ELIASAPH 

but  to  the  portion  of  Scripture  designated  by  his 
name,  the  words  being  eV  'HAia,  "  in  Elias,"  not 
as  in  A.  V.  "  of  Elias."     [Bible,  212  b.J 

ELI'ASAPH  (ejO^N  ;  'K\i<rdcp;  EliasapK). 
1.  Son  of  Deuel  ;  head  of  the  tribe  of  Dan  at  the 
time  of  the  census  in  the  Wilderness  of  Sinai  (Num. 
i.  14,  ii.  14,  vii.  42,  47,  x.  20). 

2.  Son  of  Lael ;  a  Levite,  and  "  chief  of  the 
house  of  the  father  of  the  Gershonite  "  at  the  same 
time  (Num.  iii.  24). 

ELIASHIB  (1HJ»!?N  ;  'EAtaffe^y,  'E\ia&l, 
'EAia(rei/3,  'EAiacrovP,  ktA.  ;  Eliasub,  Eliasib),  a 
common  name  at  the  later  period  of  the  0.  T.  history. 

1.  A  priest  in  the  time  of  King  David,  eleventh 
in  the  order  of  the  "  governors "  (*"X')  of  the 
sanctuary  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  12). 

2.  A  son  of  Elioenai ;  one  of  the  latest  descend- 
ants of  the  royal  family  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  iii.  24). 

3.  High-priest  at  Jerusalem  at  the  time  of  the 
rebuilding  of  the  walls  under  Nehemiah  (Neh.  iii. 
1,  20,  21).  His  genealogy  is  given  in  xii.  10,  22, 
23.  Eliashib  was  in  some  way  allied  (21"lp  =  near) 
to  Tobiah  the  Ammonite,  for  whom  he  had  pre- 
pared a  room  in  the  Temple,  a  desecration  which 
excited  the  wrath  of  Nehemiah  (Neh.  xiii.  4,  7). 
One  of  the  grandsons  of  Eliashib  had  also  married 
the  daughter  of  Sanballat  the  Horonite  (xiii.  28). 
There  seems  no  reason  to  doubt  that  the  same 
Eliashib  is  referred  to  in  Ezra  x.  6. 

4.  A  singer  in  the  time  of  Ezra  who  had  mar- 
ried a  foreign  wife  (Ezr.  x.  24).    [ELEAZURUS.] 

5.  A  son  of  Zattu  (Ezr.  x.  27),  [Elisimcs] 
and 

6.  A  son  of  Bani  (x.  36),  [Eliasib]  both  of 
whom  had  transgressed  in  the  same  manner. 

ELIASTS  ('EAia<m,  'EXiacreis  ;  Eliasis), 
1  Esd.  ix.  34.  This  name  answers  to  Mattenai 
in  Ezr.  x.  33  ;  but  is  probably  merely  a  repetition 
of  Enasibos,  just  preceding  it. 

ELIATHAH  (nJlS^S  and  7\T\h$  ;  'EAi- 
aOd  ;  Eliatha),  one  of  the  sons  of  Heman,  a  musi- 
cian in  the  Temple  in  the  time  of  King  David 
(1  Chr.  xxv.  4),  who  with  twelve  of  his  sons  and 
brethren  had  the  twentieth  division  of  the  temple- 
service  (xxv.  27).  In  Jerome's  Qitaest.  Hebr.  on 
ver.  27,  the  name  is  given  as  Eliaba  and  explained 
accordingly ;  but  not  so  in  the  Vulgate. 

ELI'DAD  Oybii  ;  'EA5<£8 ;  Elided),  son  of 
Chislon  ;  the  man  chosen  to  represent  the  tribe  of 
Benjamin  in  the  division  of  the  land  of  Canaan 
(Num.  xxxiv.  21). 

E'LIEL  (bwbit ;  'EKi-f,\ ;  ElicT).  1.  One  of 
the  heads  of  the  tribe  of  Manasseh — of  that  portion 
of  the  tribe  which  was  on  the  east  of  Jordan  (1  Chr. 
v.  24). 

2.  Son  of  Toah  ;  a  forefather  of  Samuel  the  Pro- 
phet (1  Chr.  vi.  34,  heb.  19).  Probably  identical 
with  Elihu,  2,  and  Eliab,  6. 

3.  ('EAitjAi),  one  of  the  Bene-Shimhi ;  a  chief 
man  in  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  (1  Chr.  viii.  20). 

4.  ('EAeTjA),  like  the  preceding,  a  Ben  jamite,  but 
belonging  to  the  Bene-Shashak  (1  Chr.  viii.  22). 

5.  (Alex.  'IeAirjA),  "  the  Mahavitc  :"  one  >f  the 


ELIEZER 


523 


heroes  of  David's  guard  in  the  extended  list  of 
1  Chr.  (xi.  46). 

6.  (AoAitjA,  Alex.  'AAc/jA),  another  of  the  same 
guard,  but  without  any  express  designation  (xi.  47  j. 

7.  ('EAia/8),  one  of  the  Gadite  heroes  who  came 
across  Jordan  to  David  when  he  was  in  the  wilder- 
ness of  Judah  hiding  from  Saul  (1  Chr.  xii.  11). 

8.  A  Kohathite  Levite,  "chief"  ("lb)  of  the 
Bene-Chebron  at  the  time  of  the  transportation  of 
the  Ark  from  the  House  of  Obed-edom  to  Jerusalem 
(1  Chr.  xv.  9,  11). 

9.  A  Levite  in  the  time  of  Hezekiah  ;  one  of  the 
"overseers"  D'T^pS)  of  the  offerings  made  in  the 
Temple  (2  Chr.  xxxi.'l3). 

ELIE'NAI  (»3^K;  'EXiwvcd ;  Elioenai), 
one  of  the  Bene-Shimhi ;  a  descendant  of  Benjamin, 
and  a  chief  man  in  the  tribe  (1  Chr.  viii.  20). 

ELIE'ZER  ("ITJ^K ;  'EAie'Cep  ;   my  God  (is 

my)  help).  1.  Abraham's  chief  servant,  called  by 
him,  as  the  passage  is  usually  translated,  "  Eliezer 
of  Damascus,"  or  "that  Damascene,  Eliezer"  (Gen. 
xv.  2).  There  is  a  contradiction  in  the  A.  V.,  for 
it  does  not  appear  how,  if  he  was  "  of  Damascus," 
he  could  be  "  born  in  Abraham's  house  "  (ver.  3). 
But  the  phrase  '•TVB'JS,  "  son  of  my  house,"  only 
imports  that  he  was  one  of  Abraham's  household, 
not  that  he  was  born  in  his  house.  In  the  preced- 
ing verse  'JV2  p^'JD  ]2,  &c„  should  probably  be 
rendered  "the  son  of  possession,''  i.e.  possessor  "of 
my  house,  shall  be  .  .  .  Eliezer."  It  was,  most  likely, 
this  same  Eliezer  who  is  described  in  Gen.  xxiv.  2, 
as  the  eldest  servant  of  Abraham's  house,  that  ruled 
over  all  that  he  had,  and  whom  his  master  sent  to 
Padan-Aram  to  take  a  wife  for  Isaac  from  among 
his  own  kindred.  With  what  eminent  zeal  and 
faithfulness  he  executed  his  commission,  and  how 
entirely  he  found  the  truth  of  what  his  own  name 
expressed,  in  the  Providential  aid  he  met  with  on 
his  errand,  is  most  beautifully  told  in  Gen.  xxiv. 
It  should  however  be  said  that  the  passage  (Gen. 
xv.  2),  in  which  the  connexion  of  Eliezer  with  Da- 
mascus seems  to  be  asserted,  is  one  of  extreme  ob- 
scurity and  difficulty.  The  sense  above  ascribed 
to  p^'JO  (after  Simonis  and  Gesenius)  rests  only 
upon  conjecture,  the  use  of  "  Damascus  "  for  "  Da- 
mascene "  is  very  unusual,  and  the  whole  arrange- 
ment of  the  sentence  very  harsh.  There  is  pro- 
bably something  at  the  bottom  of  it  all,  besides  the 
alliteration  between  Meshek  and  Dammeshek,  which 
we  are  ignorant  of,  and  which  is  wanting  to  clear  up 
the  sense.  The  two  passages,  "  Judaeis  origo  Da- 
mascena,  Syriae  nobilissima  civitas  .  .  .  Nomen  tain 
a  Damasco  rege  inditum  .  .  .  Post  Damascum  Aze- 
lus,  mox  Adores  ct  Abraham  et  Tsrahel  reges 
fuerc "  (Justin,  lib.  xxxvi.  cap.  2) :  and  'A/3po- 
,u7js  ij$affi\£v(T€  AajxaaKov  .  .  .  tov  8e  'Afipdfxov 
6TI  Kal  vvv  eV  rfj  Aa/xaffKT]irij  to  ovojxa  5o£a- 
£erac  Kal  ku>/j.ij  cur'  avrov  SelKvvraL  'A  0  p  dfx  o  v 
oturio-is  Xeyo/xtvri  (Joseph.  Ant.  i.  7,  §2, 
quoting  Nicol.  Damascen.)  have  probably  some  re- 
lation to  the  narrative  in  (leu.  xv.  (See  Gesen, 
Thes.  s.v.  pt'D  ;  Kosenmull.  on  Gen.  xv. ;  Knobel, 
Genesis.) 

2.  Second  son  of  Moses  and  Zipporah,  to  whom 
his  father  gave  this  name,  "because,  said  he,  the 
<.;<>d  of  my  father  was  my  help,  that  delivered  me 
from  the  sword  of  Pharaoh  "  (Ex.  xviii.  4  ;  1  Chr. 


524 


ELIHOENAI 


xxiii.  15,  17).  He  remained  with  his  mother  and 
brother  Gershom,  in  the  care  of  Jethro  his  grand- 
father, when  Moses  returned  to  Egypt  (Ex.  iv.  18), 
she  having  been  sent  back  to  her  father  by  Moses 
(Ex.  xviii.  2),  though  she  set  off  to  accompany 
him,  and  went  part  of  the  way  with  him.  Jethro 
brought  back  Zipporah  and  her  two  sons  to  Moses 
in  the  wilderness,  after  he  heard  of  the  departure 
of  the  Israelites  from  Egypt  (xviii.).  Eliezer  had  one 
son,  Rehabiah,  from  whom  sprang  a  numerous  pos- 
terity (1  Chr.  xxiii.  17,  xxvi.  25,  26).  Shelomith 
in  the  reigns  of  Saul  and  David  (ver.  28),  who  had 
the  care  of  all  the  treasures  of  things  dedicated  to 
God,  was  descended  from  Eliezer  in  the  6th  genera- 
tion, if  the  genealogy  in  1  Chr.  xxvi.  25  is  complete. 

3.  One  of  the  sons  of  Becher,  the  son  of  Ben- 
jamin (1  Chr.  vii.  8). 

4.  A  priest  in  the  reign  of  David,  one  of  those 
appointed  to  sound  with  trumpets  before  the  Ark 
on  its  passage  from  the  house  of  Obed-edom  to  the 
city  of  David  (1  Chr.  xv.  24). 

5.  Son  of  Zichri,  "ruler"  (TJ3)  of  the  Reu- 
benites  in  the  reign  of  David  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  16). 

6.  Son  of  Dodavah,  of  Mareshah  in  Judah  (2  Chr. 
xx.  37),  a  prophet,  who  rebuked  Jehoshaphat  for  join- 
ing himself  with  Ahaziah  king  of  Israel,  "  who  did 
very  wickedly,"  in  making  a  combined  expedition  of 
ships  of  Tarshish  to  go  to  Ophir  for  gold ;  and  foretold 
the  destruction  of  his  fleet  at  Ezion-geber,  which 
accordingly  came  to  pass.  When  Ahaziah  proposed 
a  second  expedition,  Jehoshaphat  refused  (2  Chr. 
xx.  35-37;  1  K.  xxii.  48,49).  The  combination 
of  the  names  Eliezer  and  Dodavah,  almost  suggests 
that  he  may  have  been  descended  from  David's 
mighty  man  Eleazar  the  son  of  Dodo  (2  Sam. 
xxiii.  9). 

7.  A  chief  Israelite — a  "  man  of  understand- 
ing " — whom  Ezra  sent  with  others  from  Ahava 
to  Casiphia,  to  induce  some  Levites  and  Nethinim 
to  accompany  him  to  Jerusalem  (Ezr.  viii.  16). 
In  1  Esdr.  viii.  43,  the  name  is  given  as  Eleazar. 

8.  9,  10.  A  Priest,  a  Levite,  and  an  Israelite  of 
the  sons  of  Harim,  who,  in  the  time  of  Ezra,  had 
married  foreign  wives  (Ezr.  x.  18,  23,  31).  The 
former  is  called  Eleazar,  the  second  Eleazurus, 
and  the  third  Elionas,  in  1  E&dr.  ix.  19,  23,  32. 

11.  Son  of  Jorim,  13th  in  descent  from  Nathan 
the  son  of  David,  in  the  genealogy  of  Christ  (Luke 
ii.  29).  [A.  C.  H.] 

ELIHOE'NAI  Oyyin^X ;  'EMavd,  Alex. 
'E\iaavd ;  Elioenai),  son  of  Zerahiah,  one  of  the 
Bene-Pahath-moab,  who  with  200  men  returned 
from  the  Captivity  with  Ezra  (Ezr.  viii.  4).  In 
the  apocryphal  Esdras  the  name  is  Eliaonias. 

ELIHO'KEPH  (^h^N;  'EA«fy>,  Alex. 
'Evape^ ;  ElihorepK),  son  of  Shisha.  He  and  his 
brother  Ahiah  were  scribes  (D^ISDD)  to  Solomon  at 
the  commencement  of  his  reign  (1  K.  iv.  3). 

ELI'HU  (N-liT^X;  'EAiois;  Eliu).  1.  One 
of  the  interlocutors  in  the  book  of  Job.  He  is 
described  as  the  "son  of  Barachel  the  Buzite," 
and  thus  apparently  referred  to  the  family  of  Buz, 
the  son  of  Nahor,  and  nephew  of  Abraham  (Gen. 

a  The  connexion  of  Dedan  and  Tema  with  Buz  in  I  °  Stanley,  S.  <£  P.  328.  In  the  Acta  Sanctor.  he 
Jer.  xxv.  23,  is  also  to  be  noticed.  I  is  called  Prodigiosus  Thesbites. 

b  By  Chrysostom  and  others  the  name  is  Grecised  d  "  Omnium  suae  aetatis  Prophetarum  facile  prin- 
into  'HA.IOS,  as  if  signifying  the  brightness  of  the  ceps;  et,  si  aMose  discessevis,  nulli  seeundus*,(Frisch- 
sim.  muth,  in  Crit.  Sacri,  quoting  from  AbarbanelJ. 


ELIJAH 

xxii.  21).  This  supposition  suits  well  with  the 
description  of  the  other  personages  [Eliphaz  ; 
Bildad],"  and  the  probable  date  to  be  assigned 
to  the  scenes  recorded.  In  his  speech  (cc.  xxxii.- 
xxxvii.)  he  describes  himselt  as  younger  than  the 
three  friends,  and  accordingly  his  presence  is  not 
noticed  in  the  first  chapters.  He  expresses  his  desire 
to  moderate  between  the  disputants  ;  and  his  words 
alone  touch  upon,  although  they  do  not  thoroughly 
handle,  that  idea  of  the  disciplinal  nature  of  suffer- 
ing, which  is  the  key  to  Job's  perplexity  and  doubt ; 
but,  as  in  the  whole  book,  the  greater  stress  is  laid 
on  God's  unsearchable  wisdom,  and  the  implicit  faith 
which  He  demands.     [Job,  Book  of.]      [A.  B.] 

2.  ('HAiou).  SonofTohu;  a  forefather  of  Samuel 
the  Prophet  (1  Sam.  i.  1).  In  the  statements  of  the 
genealogy  of  Samuel  in  1  Chr.  vi.  the  name  Eliel 
occurs  in  the  same  position — son  of  Toah  and  father 
of  Jeroham  (vi.  34 — Heb.  19) ;  and  also  Eliab 
(vi.  27 — Heb.  12),  father  of  Jeroham  and  grandson 
of  Zophai.  The  general  opinion  is  that  Elihu  is  the 
original  name,  and  the  two  latter  forms  but  copyists' 
variations  thereof. 

3.  (Vat.  and  Alex.  'EA(c£/3).  A  similar  variation 
of  the  name  of  Eliab,  the  eldest  son  of  Jesse,  is 
probably  found  in  1  Chr.  xxvii.  18,  where  Elihu 
"  of  the  brethren  of  David  "  is  mentioned  as  the 
chief  of  the  tribe  of  Judah.  But  see  1  Chr.  xii.  2, 
where,  in  a  similar  connexion,  the  word  "  brethren  " 
is  used  in  its  widest  sense.  The  LXX.  retains  Eliab. 
[Eliab,  3.]  In.  this  place  the  name  is  without  the 
final  Aleph— liTON. 

4.  ('EAijUoM  ;  Alex.  EMovS).  One  of  the  "  cap- 
tains" CCN"),  i.  e.  heads)  of  the  "thousands  of 
Manasseh"  (1  Chr.  xii.  20)  who  followed  David  to 
Ziklag  after  he  had  left  the  Philistine  army  on  the 
eve  of  the  battle  of  Gilboa,  and  who  assisted  him 
against  the  marauding  band  (l-HJ)  of  the  Ama- 
lekites  (comp.  1  Sam.  xxx.). 

5.  (IHvX  ;  "EXiov).  A  Korhite  Levite  in  the 
time  of  David  ;  one  of  the  doorkeepers  (A.  V. 
"  porters  ")  of  the  house  of  Jehovah.  He  was  a 
son  of  Shemaiah,  and  of  the  family  of  Obed-edom 
(1  Chr.  xxvi.  7).  Terms  are  applied  to  all  these 
doorkeepers  which  appear  to  indicate  that  they 
were  not  only  "  strong  men,"  as  in  A.V.,  but  also 
nVhtino;  men.  (See  vers.  6,  7,  8,  12,  in  which  OCCUl- 
the  words  ?jn  =  army,  and  H"i3i  =  warriors  or 
heroes.)  [G.] 

ELI'JAH.  1.  (generally  -IH^S,  Eliyahu,  but 
sometimes  iTvN,  Eliyah  ;  'HAiou  ;  Aquila,  HA/a;b 
N.  T.  'HAias ;  Elias).  Elijah  the  Tishbite  has 
been  well  entitled  "  the  grandest  and  the  most  ro- 
mantic character  that  Israel  ever  produced."0  Cer- 
tainly there  is  no  personage  in  the  0.  T.  whose  career 
is  more  vividly  portrayed,  or  who  exercises  on  us  a 
more  remarkable  fascination.  His  rare,  sudden,  and 
brief  appearances — his  undaunted  courage  and  fiery 
zeal — the  brilliancy  of  his  triumphs — the  pathos  of 
his  despondency — the  glory  of  his  departure,  and  the 
calm  beauty  of  his  reappearance  on  the  Mount  of 
Transfiguration — throw  such  a  halo  of  brightness 
around  him  as  is  equalled  by  none  of  his  compeers 
in  the  sacred  story .d     The  ignorance  in  which  we 


ELIJAH 

are  left  of  the  circumstances  and  antecedents  of  the 
man  who  did  and  who  suffered  so  much,  doubtless 
contributes  to  enhance  our  interest  in  the  story  and 
the  character.  "  Elijah  the  Tishbite  of  the  inha- 
bitants of  Gilead,"  is  literally  all  that  is  given  us 
to  know  of  his  parentage  and  locality.1-'  It  is  in 
remarkable  contrast  to  the  detail  with  which  the 
genealogies  of  other  prophets  and  leaders  of  Israel 
are  stated.  Where  the  place — if  it  was  a  place — 
lay,  which  gave  him  this  appellation  we  know  not, 
nor  are  we  likely  to  know.  It  is  not  again  found 
in  the  Bible,  nor  has  any  name  answering  to  it  been 
discovered  since.'     [Thisbe.] 

The  mention  of  Gilead,  however,  is  the  key-note 
to  much  that  is  most  characteristic  in  the  story  of 
the  Prophet.  Gilead  was  the  country  on  the  further 
side  of  the  Jordan — a  country  of  chase  and  pasture, 
of  tent-villages,  and  mountain-castles,  inhabited  by 
a  people  not  settled  and  civilised  like  those  who 
formed  the  communities  of  Ephraim  and  Judah,  but 
of  wandering,  irregular  habits,  exposed  to  the  attacks 
of  the  nomad  tribes  of  the  desert,  and  gradually  con- 
forming more  and  more  to  the  habits  of  those 
tribes;  making  war  with  the  Hagarites,  and  taking 
the  countless  thousands  of  their  cattle  and  then 
dwelling  in  their  stead  (1  Chr.  v.  10,  19-22).  To 
an  Israelite  of  the  tribes  west  of  Jordan  the  title 
"  Gileadite"  must  have  conveyed  a  similar  impres- 
sion, though  in  a  far  stronger  degree,  to  that  which  the 
title  "  Celt"  does  to  us.  What  the  Highlands  were 
a  century  ago  to  the  towns  in  the  Lowlands  of  .Scot- 
land, that, and  more  than  that,  must  Gilead  have  been 
to  Samaria  or  Jerusalem.s  One  of  the  most  famous 
heroes  in  the  early  annals  of  Israel  was  "  Jephthah 


e  The  Hebrew  text  is  'J  »3GJ>nt3  nBTin  lfl^K. 
The  third  word  may  be  pointed  (1)  as  in  the  present 
Masoretic  text,  to  mean  "  from  the  inhabitants  of 
Gilead,"  or  (2)  "  from  Tishbi  of  Gilead  ;"  which,  with 
a  slight  change  in  form,  is  what  the  LXX.  has.  The 
latter  is  followed  by  Ewald  (iii.  486,  note).  Lightfoot 
assumes,  but  without  giving  his  authority,  that  Elijah 
was  from  Jabesh  Gilead.  By  Josephus  he  is  said  to 
have  come  from  Thesbon — ck  n-dAeus  ©eo-^wn);  t>); 
raAaaSiViSos  x^Pas  (viii.  13,  §2).  Perhaps  this  may 
have  been  read  as  Heshbon,  a  city  of  the  priests,  and 
have  given  rise  to  the  statement  of  Epiphanius,  that 
he  was  "of  the  tribe  of  Aaron,"  and  grandson  of Zadok. 
See  also  the  Chran.  Pasch.  in  Fabricius,  Cod.  Pseudep. 
V.  T.  1070,  &c. ;  and  Quaresmius,  JElucid.  ii.  605. 
According  to  Jewish  tradition — grounded  on  a  certain 
similarity  between  the  fiery  zeal  of  the  two — Elijah  was 
identical  with  I'hinehas  the  son  of  Eleazar  the  priest. 
He  was  also  the  angel  of  Jehovah  who  appeared  in  fire 
to  Gideon  (Lightfoot  on  John  i.  21  ;  Eisenmenger,  i. 
686).  Arab  tradition  places  his  birthplace  at  Oilhad 
Gilhood,  a  few  milts  X.  of  cs-Salt  (Irby,  98),  and  his 
tomb  near  Damascus  (Mislin,  i.  490). 

'  The  common  assumption — perhaps  originating 
with  Ililler  (Onom.  947)  or  Reland  (Pal.  1035) — is 
that  he  was  born  in  the  town  Thisbe  mentioned  in 
Tob.  i.  2.  But  not  to  insist  on  the  fact  that  this 
Thisbe  was  not  in  Gilead  but  in  Naphtali,  it  is  nearly 
certain  that  the  name  has  no  real  existence  in  that 
passage,  but  arises  from  a  mistaken  translation  of  the 
same  Hebrew  word  which  is  rendered  "inhabitants" 
in  1  K.  xvii.  1.    [Thisbb.] 

B  See  a  good  passage  illustrative  of  this  in  Rob  Roy, 
chap.  xix. 

h  Erom  a  comparison  of  2  K.  iv.  34,  with  1  K. 
xvii.  21,  it  would  seem  as  if  Elislia  approached  nearer 
than  Elijah  to  the  stature  of  the  child.  But  the 
inference  is  not  to  be  relied  on.  Chrysostom  applied 
the  same  epithet  to  him  as  to  St.  Paul,  T(>i.nr\\vv 
av6ptx>irov. 


ELIJAH  525 

the  Gileadite,"  in  whom  all  these  characteristics  were 
prominent ;  and  Professor  Stanley  has  well  remarked 
how  impossible  it  is  rightly  to  estimate  his  character 
without  recollecting  this  fact  (S.  $  P.  327). 

With  Elijah,  of  whom  so  much  is  told,  and  whose 
part  in  the  history  was  so  much  more  important, 
this  is  still  more  necessary.  It  is  seen  at  every 
turn.  Of  his  appearance  as  he  "stood  before" 
Ahab — with  the  suddenness  of  motion  to  this  day 
characteristic  of  the  Bedouins  from  his  native  hills, 
we  can  perhaps  realise  something  from  the  touches, 
few,  but  strong,  of  the  narrative.  Of  his  height 
little  is  to  be  interred — that  little  is  in  favour  of  its 
being  beyond  the  ordinary  size.h  His  chief  cha- 
racteristic was  his  hair,  long  and  thick,  and  hanging 
down  his  back,'  and  which,  if  not  betokening  the 
immense  strength  of  Samson,  yet  accompanied 
powers  of  endurance.)  no  less  remarkable.  His 
ordinary  clothing  consisted  of  a  girdle  of  skin k 
round  his  loins,  which  he  tightened  when  about 
to  move  quickly  (1  K.  xviii.  46).  But  in  addition 
to  this  he  occasionally  wore  the  "  mantle,"  or  cape,m 
of  sheep-skin,  which  has  supplied  us  with  one  of 
our  most  familiar  figures  of  speech.11  In  this  mantle, 
in  moments  of  emotion,  he  would  hide  his  face 
(1  K.  xix.  13),  or  when  excited  would  roll  it  up  as 
into  a  kind  of  staff.0  On  one  occasion  we  find  him 
bending  himself  down  upon  the  ground  with  his 
face  between  his  knees.P  Such,  so  far  as  the  scanty 
notices  of  the  record  will  allow  us  to  conceive  it, 
was  the  general  appearance  of  the  great  Prophet, 
an  appearance  which  there  is  no  reason  to  think 
was  other  than  uncommon  even  at  that  time.q 
"  Vir  qui  curationem  et  cultum  corporis  despiceret ; 


'  2  K.  i.  8,  "  a  hairy  man ;"  literally,  "  a  lord  of 
hair."  This  might  be  doubtful,  even  with  the  sup- 
port of  the  LXX.  and  Josephus — avSpunrov  Sacrvv — 
and  of  the  Targum  Jonathan — p}JD  "133 — the  same 
word  used  for  Esau  in  Gen.  xxvii.  11.  But  its  appli- 
cation to  the  hair  of  his  head  is  corroborated  by  the 
word  used  by  the  children  of  Bethel  when  mocking 
Elisha.  "  Bald-head  "  is  a  peculiar  term  (PHp) 
applied  only  to  want  of  hair  at  the  back  of  the  head  ; 
and  the  taunt  was  called  forth  by  the  difference 
between  the  bare  shoulders  of  the  new  prophet  and 
the  shaggy  locks  of  the  old  one.     [Elisha.] 

i  Running  before  Ahab's  chariot ;  the  hardships  of 
the  Cherith  ;  the  forty  days'  fast. 

1  "tfy  (2  K.  i.  8),  rendered  "leather"  in  this  one 
place  only.     See  Gen.  iii.  21,  &c. 

m  Addereth,  JYTIN  ;  LXX.  /utjAwttjs  ;  always  used 
for  this  garment  of  Elijah,  but  not  for  that  of  any 
prophet  before  him.  It  is  perhaps  a  trace  of  the  per- 
manent impression  which  he  left  on  some  parts  of  the 
Jewish  society,  that  a  hairy  cloak  became  afterwards 
the  recognized  garb  of  a  prophet  of  Jehovah  (Zech. 
xiii.  4  ;  A.  V.  "  rough  garment ;"  where  the  Hebrew 
word  is  the  same  which  in  Elijah's  history  is  rendered 
"mantle"). 

■  Various  relics  of  the  mantle  are  said  to  exist. 
The  list  of  claimants  will  be  found  in  the  Acta  Sanc- 
torum (July  20).  One  piece  is  shown  at  Oviedo  in 
Spain. 

°   D?3  (2  K.  ii.  8) ;  "  wrapped  "  is  a  different  word. 

*  This  is  generally  taken  as  having  been  in  prayer ; 
but  kneeling  apparently  was  not  (certainly  is  not)  an 
attitude  of  prayer  in  the  East.  "  When  ye  stand 
praying,  forgive"  (Mark  xi.  15  ;  and  see  Matt.  vi.  5, 
&c). 

i  This  is  to  be  inferred,  as  we  shall  see  afterwards, 
from  king  Ahaziah's  recognition  of  him  by  mere  de- 
scription. 


526 


ELIJAH 


facie  squallente,  quae  multitudine  suorum  crinium 
obumbraretur  ....  pelle  caprinS,  tantum  de  corpore 
tegentem  quantum  abscondi  decorum  erat,  reliqua 
corporis  ad  aera  perdurantem  "  (Gregory  Nyss. 
quoted  by  Willemer  de  Pallio  Eliae  in  Crit.  Sacri). 

The  solitary  life  in  which  these  external  pecu- 
liarities had  been  assumed  had  also  nurtured  that 
fierceness  of  zeal  and  that  directness  of  address 
which  so  distinguished  him.  It  was  in  the  wild 
loneliness  of  the  hills  and  ravines  of  Gilead  that  the 
knowledge  of  Jehovah,  the  living  God  of  Israel,  had 
been  impressed  on  his  mind,  which  was  to  form  the 
subject  of  his  mission  to  the  idolatrous  court  and 
country  of  Israel. 

The  northern  kingdom  had  at  this  time  forsaken 
almost  entirely  the  faith  in  Jehovah.  The  worship 
of  the  calves  had  been  a  departure  from  Him,  it 
was  a  violation  of  His  command  against  material 
resemblances ;  but  still  it  would  appear  that  even 
in  the  presence  of  the  calves  Jehovah  was  acknow- 
ledged, and  they  were  at  any  rate  a  national  insti- 
tution, not  one  imported  from  the  idolatries  of  any 
of  the  surrounding  countries.  [Calf.]  They 
were  announced  by  Jeroboam  as  the  preservers  of 
the  nation  during  the  great  crisis  of  its  existence : 
"  Behold  thy  gods,  0  Israel,  that  brought  thee  up 
out  of  the  land  of  Egypt "  (1  K.  xii.  28).  But  the 
case  was  quite  different  when  Ahab,  not  content 
with  the  calf-worship — "  as  if  it  had  been  a  light 
thing  to  walk  in  the  sins  of  Jeroboam,  the  son  of 
Nebat " — married  the  daughter  of  the  king  of  Sidon, 
and  introduced  on  the  most  extensive  scale  (Joseph. 
Ant.  ix.  6,  §6)  the  foreign  religion  of  his  wife's 
family,  the  worship  of  the  Phoenician  Baal.  What 
this  worship  consisted  of  we  are  ignorant — doubtless 
it  was  of  a  gay,  splendid,  and  festal  character,  and 
therefore  very  opposite  to  the  grave,  severe  service 
of  the  Mosaic  ritual.  Attached  to  it  and  to  the 
worship  of  Asherah  (A.  V.  "  Ashtaroth,"  and  "  the 
groves")  were  licentious  and  impure  rites,  which  in 
earlier  times  had  brought  the  heaviest  judgments  on 
the  nation  (Num.  xxv. ;  Judg.  ii.  13, 14,  iii.  7,  8). 
But  the  most  obnoxious  and  evil  characteristic  of 
the  Baal-religion  was  that  it  was  the  worship  of 
power,  of  mere  strength,  as  opposed  to  that  of  a  God 
of  righteousness  and  goodness — a  foreign  religion, 
imported  from  nations,  the  hatred  of  whom  was 
inculcated  in  every  page  of  the  law,  as  opposed  to 
the  religion  of  that  God  who  had  delivered  the 
nation  from  the  bondage  of  Egypt,  had  "  driven  out 
the  heathen  with  His  hand,  and  planted  them  in ;" 
and  through  whom  their  forefathers  had  "trodden 
down  their  enemies,  and  destroyed  those  that  rose 
np  against  them."  It  is  as  a  witness  against  these 
two  evils  that  Elijah  comes  forward. 

1.  What  we  may  call  the  first  Act  in  his  life 
embraces  between  three  and  four  years — three  years 
and  six  months  for  the  duration  of  the  drought, 
according  to  the  statements  of  the  New  Testament 


r  Jerome,  quoted  by  Kennicott,  581.  See  these 
hypotheses  brought  together  in  Keil  ad  loc. 

'  This  subject  is  exhausted  in  a  dissertation  entitled 
Elias  corvorum  convietor  in  the  Criticl  Sacri. 

'  Lightfoot  quaintly  remarks  on  this  that  Elijah 
was  the  first  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles. 

a  The  traditional  scene  of  his  meeting  with  the 
widow  was  in  a  wood  to  the  south  of  the  town 
(Mislin,  i.  532,  who  however  does  not  give  his 
authority).  In  the  time  of  Jerome  the  spot  was 
marked  by  a  tower  (Jerome,  Ep.  Paulae).  At  a  later 
period  a  church  dedicated  to  the  Prophet  was  erected 
over  the  house  of  the  widow,  in  which  his  chamber 


ELIJAH 

(Luke  iv.  25  ;  James  v.  17),  and  three  or  four 
months  more  for  the  journey  to  Horeb,  and  the 
return  to  Gilead  (1  K.  xvii.  1 — xix.  21).  His  intro- 
duction is  of  the  most  startling  description :  he  sud- 
denly appears  before  Ahab,  as  with  the  unrestrained 
freedom  of  eastern  manners  he  would  have  no 
difficulty  in  doing,  and  proclaims  the  vengeance  of 
Jehovah  for  the  apostasy  of  the  king.  This  he  does 
in  the  remarkable  formula  evidently  characteristic  of 
himself,  and  adopted  after  his  departure  by  his  fol- 
lower Elisha — a  formula  which  includes  everything 
at  issue  between  himself  and  the  king — the  name 
of  Jehovah — His  being  the  God  of  Israel — the  Living 
God — Elijah  being  His  messenger,  and  then — the 
special  lesson  of  the  event — that  the  god  of  power 
and  of  nature  should  be  beaten  at  his  own  weapons. 
"  As  Jehovah,  God  of  Israel,  liveth,  before  whom  I 
stand,"  whose  constant  servant  I  am,  "  there  shall 
not  be  dew  nor  rain  these  years,  but  according  to 
my  word."  What  immediate  action  followed  on 
this  we  are  not  told ;,  but  it  is  plain  that  Elijah  had 
to  fly  before  some  threatened  vengeance  either  of  the 
king,  or  more  probably  of  the  queen  (comp.  xix.  2). 
Perhaps  it  was  at  this  juncture  that  Jezebel  "  cut 
oft' the  prophets  of  Jehovah"  (1  K.  xviii.  4).  He 
was  directed  to  the  brook  Cherith,  either  one  of  the 
torrents  which  cleave  the  high  table-lands  of  his 
native  hills,  or  on  the  west  of  Jordan,  more  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Samaria.  [Cherith.]  There 
in  the  hollow  of  the  torrent-bed  he  remained, 
supported  in  the  miraculous  manner  with  which 
we  are  all  familiar,  till  the  failing  of  the  brook 
obliged  him  to  forsake  it.  How  long  he  remained 
in  the  Cherith  is  uncertain.  The  Hebrew  expression 
is  simply  "  at  the  end  of  days,"  nor  does  Josephus 
afford  us  any  more  information.  A  vast  deal  of 
ingenuity  has   been   devoted   to   explaining   away 

Elijah's    "  ravens."      The  Hebrew   word,   LV3"iy 

Orebim,  has  been  interpreted  as  "  Arabians,"  as 
"  merchants,"  as  inhabitants  of  some  neighbouring 
town  of  Orbo  or  Orbi."  By  others  Elijah  has  been 
held  to  have  plundered  a  raven's  nest- — and  this 
twice  a-day  regularly  for  several  months !  There 
is  no  escape  from  the  plain  meaning  of  the  words — 
occurring  as  they  do  twice,  in  a  passage  otherwise 
displaying  no  tinge  of  the  marvellous — or  from  the 
unanimity  of  all  the  Hebrew  MSS.,  of  all  the  ancient 
versions,  and  of  Josephus.8 

His  next  refuge  was  at  Zarephath,  a  Phoenician 
town  lying  between  Tyre  and  Sidon,  certainly  the 
last  place  at  which  the  enemy  of  Baal  would  be 
looked  for.1  The  widow  woman  in  whose  house  he 
lived"  seems,  however,  to  have  been  an  Israelite,  and 
no  Baal-worshipper,  if  we  may  take  her  adjuration 
by  "  Jehovah  thy  God"  as  an  indication/  Here 
Elijah  performed  the  miracles  of  prolonging  the  oil 
and  the  meal ;  and  restored  the  son  of  the  widow 
to  life  after  his  apparent  death.  y 


and  her  kneading-trough  were  shown  (Anton.  Martyr, 
and  Phocas,  in  Keland,  985).  This  church  was  called 
to  \<r/peioi>  [Acta  Sanctorum). 

1  This  must  not  be  much  relied  on.  Zedekiah,  son 
of  Chenaanah,  one  of  Ahab's  prophets,  uses  a  similar 
form  of  words,  "  Thus  saith  Jehovah  "  (1  K.  xxii.  11). 
The  apparent  inference  however  from  Luke  iv.  26  is 
that  she  was  one  of  the  widows  of  Israel.  In  the 
Jewish  traditions  her  son  was  the  Messiah  (Eisen- 
menger,  Entd.  Judenth.  ii.  725). 

y  This  is  warranted  by  the  expression  "his  sick- 
ness was  so  sore  that  there  was  no  breath  left  in  him," 
a  form  of  words  not  elsewhere  found ;   while  in  the 


ELIJAH 

Here  the  prophet  is  first  addressed  by  the  title, 
which,  although  occasionally  before  used  to  others, 
is  so  frequently  applied  to  Elijah  as  to  become  the 
distinguishing  appellation  of  himself  and  his  suc- 
cessor:— "0  thou  man  of  God" — "Now  I  know 
that  thou  art  a  man  of  God  "  (1  K.  xvii.  18,  24). 

In  this,  or  some  other  retreat,  an  interval  of 
more  than  two  years  must  have  elapsed.  The 
drought  continued,  and  at  last  the  full  horrors  of 
famine,  caused  by  the  failure  of  the  crops,  descended 
on  Samaria.  The  king  and  his  chief  domestic  officer 
divide  between  them  the  mournful  duty  of  ascer- 
taining that  neither  round  the  springs,  which  are  so 
frequent  a  feature  of  central  Palestine,  nor  in  the 
nooks  and  crannies  of  the  most  shaded  torrent- 
beds,  was  there  any  of  the  herbage  left,  which  in 
those  countries  is  so  certain  an  indication  of  the  pre- 
sence of  moisture.  No  one  short  of  the  two  chief 
persons  of  the  realm  could  be  trusted  with  this 
quest  for  life  or  death — "  Ahab  went  one  way  by 
himself,  and  Obadiah  went  another  way  by  him- 
self." It  is  the  moment  for  the  reappearance  of  the 
prophet.  He  shows  himself  first  to  the  minister. 
There,  suddenly  planted  in  his  path,  is  the  man 
whom  he  and  his  master  have  been  seeking  for  more 
than  three  years.  "  There  is  no  nation  or  king- 
dom," says  Obadiah  with  true  Eastern  hyperbole, 
"  whither  my  lord  hath  not  sent  to  seek  thee ;" 
and  now  here  he  stands  when  least  expected.  Be- 
fore the  sudden  apparition  of  that  wild  figure,  and 
that  stern,  unbroken  countenance,  Obadiah  could 
not  but  fall  on  his  face.z  Elijah,  however,  soon 
calms  his  agitation — "  As  Jehovah  of  hosts  liveth, 
before  whom  I  stand,  I  will  surely  show  myself  to 
Ahab ;"  and  thus  relieved  of  his  fear  that,  as  on 
a  former  occasion,  Elijah  would  disappear  before 
he  could  return  with  the  king,  Obadiah  departs  to 
inform  Ahab  that  the  man  they  seek  is  there. 
Ahab  arrived,  Elijah  makes  his  charge — "  Thou 
hast  forsaken  Jehovah  and  followed  the  Baals." 
He  then  commands  that  all  Israel  be  collected  to 
Mount  Carmel  with  the  four  hundred  and  fifty 
prophets  of  Baal,  and  the  four  hundred  of  Asherah 
(Ashtaroth),  the  latter  being  under  the  especial 
protection  of  the  queen.  Why  Mount  Carmel, 
which  we  do  not  hear  of  until  now,  was  chosen 
in  preference  to  the  nearer  Ebal  or  Gerizim,  is 
not  evident.  Possibly  Elijah  thought  it  wise  to 
remove  the  place  of  the  meeting  to  a  distance  from 
Samaria.  Possibly  in  the  existence  of  the  altar  of 
Jehovah  (xviii.  30) — in  ruins,  and  therefore  of 
earlier  erection — we  have  an  indication  of  an  ancient 
sanctity  attaching  to  the  spot.  On  the  question  of 
the  particular  part  of  the  ridge  of  Carmel,  which 
formed  the  site  of  the  meeting,  there  cannot  be  much 
doubt.     It  is  elsewhere  examined.     [CABMEL.] 

There  are  few  more  sublime  stories  in  history 
than  this.  On  the  one  hand  the  solitary  servant  of 
Jehovah,  accompanied  by  his  one  attendant ;  with 
his  wild  shaggy  hair,  his  scanty  garb,  and  sheep- 
skin cloak,  but  with  calm  dignity  of  demeanour 


ELIJAH 


527 


story  of  the  Shunammite's  son  it  is  distinctly  said  the 
child  "died."  Josephus's  language  (viii.  ]:?,  &S) 
shows  that  he  did  not  understand  the  child  to  have 
died.  The  Jewish  tradition,  quoted  by  Jerome,  was 
that  this  boy  was  the  servant  who  afterwards  accom- 
panied Elijah,  and  finally  became  the  prophet  Jonah. 
(Jerome,  Prcf.  to  Jonah;  and  see  the  citations  from 
the  Talrauds  in  Eisenmenger,  Entd.  Jud.  ii.  725.) 

*  The  expressions  of  Obadiah,  "lord"  and  "slave," 
show  his  fear  of  Elijah  ;  they  are  those  ordinarily 
used  in  addressing  a  potentate. 


and  the  minutest  regularity  of  procedure,  repairing 
the  ruined  altar  of  Jehovah  with  twelve  stones, 
according  to  the  number  of  the  twelve  founders  ot 
the  tribes,  and  recalling  in  his  prayer  the  still 
greater  names  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Israel — on 
the  other  hand  the  850  prophets  of  Baal  and  Ash- 
taroth, doubtless  in  all  the  splendour  of  their  vest- 
ments (2  K.  x.  22),  with  the  wild  din  of  their 
"  vain  repetitions"  and  the  maddened  fury  of  their 
disappointed  hopes,  and  the  silent  people  surround- 
ing all — these  things  form  a  picture  with  which  we 
are  all  acquainted,  but  which  brightens  into  fresh 
distinctness  every  time  we  consider  it.  The  con- 
clusion of  the  long  day  need  only  be  glanced  at.a 
The  frre  of  Jehovah  consuming  both  sacrifice  and 
altar — the  prophets  of  Baal  killed,  it  would  seem  by 
Elijah's  own  hand  (xviii.'  40) — the  king,  with  an 
apathy  almost  unintelligible,  eating  and  drinking  in 
the  very  midst  of  the  carnage  of  his  own  adherents — 
the  rising  storm — the  ride  across  the  plain  to  Jez- 
reel,  a  distance  of  at  least  16  miles;  the  prophet, 
with  true  Arab  endurance,  running  before  the 
chariot,  but  also  with  true  Arab  instinct  stopping 
short  of  the  city,  and  going  no  further  than  the 
"  entrance  of  Jezreel." 

So  far  the  triumph  had  been  complete  ;  but  the 
spirit  of  Jezebel  was  not  to  be  so  easily  overcome, 
and  her  first  act  is  a  vow  of  vengeance  against 
the  author  of  this  destruction.  "  God  do  so  to 
me,  and  more  also,"  so  ran  her  exclamation, 
"  if  I  make  not  thy  life  as  the  life  of  one  of 
them  by  to-morrow  about  this  time."  It  was  no 
duty  of  Elijah  to  expose  himself  to  unnecessary 
dangers,  and,  as  at  his  first  introduction,  so  now, 
he  takes  refuge  in  flight.  The  danger  was  great, 
and  the  refuge  must  be  distant.  The  first  stage 
on  the  journey  was  Beersheba — "  Beersheba  which 
belongeth  to  Judah,"  says  the  narrative,  with  a 
touch  betraying  its  Israelitish  origin.  Here,  at 
the  ancient  haunt  of  those  fathers  of  his  nation 
whose  memory  was  so  dear  to  him,  and  on  the 
very  confines  of  cultivated  country,  Elijah  halted. 
His  servant — according  to  Jewish  tradition  the  boy 
of  Zarephath — he  left  in  the  town  ;  while  he  himself 
set  out  alone  into  the  wilderness — the  waste  unin- 
habited region  which  surrounds  the  south  of  Pales- 
tine. The  labours,  anxieties,  and  excitement  of  the 
last  few  days  had  proved  too  much  even  for  that 
iron  frame  and  that  stern  resolution.  His  spirit  is 
quite  broken,  and  he  wanders  forth  over  the  dreary 
sweeps  of  those  rocky  hills  wishing  for  death — "  It 
is  enough  !  Lord,  let  me  die,  for  I  am  not  better 
than  my  fathers."h  It  is  almost  impossible  not  to 
conclude  from  the  terms  of  the  story  that  he  was 
entirely  without  provisions  for  this  or  any  journey. 
P.ut  God,  who  had  brought  His  servant  into  this 
difficulty,  provided  him  with  the  means  of  escaping 
from  it.  Whether  we  are  to  take  the  expression  of 
the  story  literally  or  not  is  comparatively  of  little 
consequence.  In  some  way  little  short  of  mira- 
culous— it  might  well  seem  to  the  narrator  that  it 


a  The  more  so  as  the  whole  of  this  scene  is  admir- 
ably drawn  out  by  Stanley  (<S.  $  P.  355,  6). 

b  Although  to  some  it  may  seem  out  of  place  in  a 
work  of  this  nature,  yet  the  writer  cannot  resist  re- 
ferring to  the  Oratorio  of  Elijah  by  Mendelssohn, 
one  of  the  most  forcible  commentaries  existing  on 
the  history  of  the  Prophet.  The  scene  in  which 
the  occurrences  at  Beersheba  are  embodied  is  per- 
haps the  most  dramatic  and  affecting  in  the  whole 
work. 


528 


ELIJAH 


could  be  by  nothing  but  an  angel0 — the  prophet 
was  wakened  from  his  dream  of  despondency  beneath 
the  solitary  bushd  of  the  wilderness,  was  fed  with 
the  bread  and  the  water  which  to  this  day  are  all 
a  Bedouin's  requirements,6  and  went  forward,  "in 
the  strength  of  that  food,"  a  journey  of  forty  days 
"  to  the  mount  of  God,  even  to  Horeb."  Here,  in 
"the  cave,"'  one  of  the  numerous  caverns  in  those 
awful  mountains,  perhaps  some  traditional  sanc- 
tuary of  that  hallowed  region  at  any  rate  well 
known — he  remained  for  certainly  ones  night.  In 
the  morning  came  the  "  word  of  Jehovah  " — the 
question,  "  what  doest  thou  here,  Elijah  ?  driven  by 
what  hard  necessity  dost  thou  seek  this  spot  on 
which  the  glory  of  Jehovah  has  in  former  times 
been  so  signally  shown?"  In  answer  to  this  invi- 
tation the  Prophet  opens  his  griefs.  He  has  been 
very  zealous  for  Jehovah  ;  but  force  has  been  vain ; 
one  cannot  stand  against  a  multitude  ;  none  follow 
him,  and  he  is  left  alone,  flying  for  his  life  from  the 
sword  which  has  slain  his  brethren.  The  reply 
comes  in  that  ambiguous  and  indirect  form  in  which 
it  seems  necessary  that  the  deepest  communications 
with  the  human  mind  should  be  couched,  to  be 
effectual.  He  is  directed  to  leave  the  cavern  and 
stand  on  the  mountain  in  the  open  air  (els  rb 
vircudpov,  Josephus),  face  to  face  COS?)  w^n 
Jehovah.  Then,  as  before  with  Moses  (Ex.  xxxiv. 
6),  "The  Lord  passed  by;"  passed  in  all  the 
terror  of  His  most  appalling  manifestations.  The 
fierce  wind  tore  the  solid  mountains  and  shivered 
the  granite  cliffs  of  Sinai ;  the  earthquake  crash 
reverberated  through  the  defiles  of  those  naked 
valleys ;  the  fire  burnt  in  the  incessant  blaze  of 
Eastern  lightning.  Like  these,  in  their  degree, 
had  been  Elijah's  own  modes  of  procedure,  but  the 
conviction  is  now  forced  upon  him  that  in  none  of 
these  is  Jehovah  to  be  known.  Then,  penetrating 
the  dead  silence  which  followed  these  manifestations, 
came  the  fourth  mysterious  symbol — the  "  still 
small  voice."  What  sound  this  was — whether 
articulate  voice  or  not,  we  cannot  even  conjecture  ; 
but  low  and  still  as  it  was  it  spoke  in  louder 
accents  to  the  wounded  heart  of  Elijah  than  the 
roar  and  blaze  which  had  preceded  it.  To  him  no 
less  unmistakeably  than  to  Moses,  centuries  before, 
it  was  proclaimed  that  Jehovah  was  "  merciful  and 
gracious,  long-suffering  and   abundant  in  goodness 


c  "HfcOD  is  both  a  "messenger"  and  an  "  angel." 
LXX.  ver.  5,  ti's;  and  so  Josephus  (viii.  13,  7). 

d  "  One  Rotem  tree,"  Hebrew,  TPIX  Dm.  The 
indented  rock  opposite  the  gate  ofthe  Greek  convent, 
Deir  Mar  Elyas,  between  Jerusalem  and  Bethlehem, 
which  is  now  shown  to  travellers  as  the  spot  on  which 
the  prophet  rested  on  this  occasion  (Bonar  ;  Porter, 
Handbook,  &c),  appears  at  an  earlier  date  not  to 
have  been  so  restricted,  but  was  believed  to  be  the 
place  on  which  he  was  "  accustomed  to  sleep  "  (Sandys, 
lib.  iii.  p.  176;  Maundrell,  Ear.  Trav.,  456),  and  the 
site  of  the  convent  as  that  where  he  was  born  (Gays- 
forde,  1506,  in  Bonar,  117).  Neither  the  older  nor 
the  later  story  can  be  believed ;  but  it  is  possible  that 
they  may  have  originated  in  some  more  trustworthy 
tradition  of  his  having  rested  here  on  his  southward 
journey,  in  all  probability  taken  along  this  very  route. 
See  a  curious  statement  by  Quaresmius  of  the  extent  to 
which  the  rock  had  been  defaced  in  his  own  time  "  by 
the  piety  or  impiety  "  of  the  Christian  pilgrims.  (Elu- 
cidatio,  ii.  605  ;  comp.  Doubdan,  Voyage,  &c,  144.) 

e  The  LXX.  adds  to  the  description  the  only  touch 
wanting  in  the  Hebrew  text — "a  cake  of  meal" — 

oAupiVrjs. 


ELIJAH 

and  truth."  Elijah  knew  the  call,  and  at  once 
stepping  forward  and  hiding  his  face  in  his  mantle, 
stood  waiting  for  the  Divine  communication.  It  is 
in  the  same  words  as  before,  and  so  is  his  answer ; 
but  with  what  different  force  must  the  question 
have  fallen  on  his  ears,  and  the  answer  left  his 
lips !  "  Before  his  entrance  to  the  cave,  he  was 
comparatively  a  novice  ;  when  he  left  it,  he  was  an 
initiated  man.  He  had  thought  that  the  earth- 
quake, the  fire,  the  wind,  must  be  the  great  wit- 
nesses of  the  Lord.  But  he  was  not  in  them ;  not 
they,  but  the  still  small  voice  had  that  awe  in  it 
which  forced  the  Prophet  to  cover  his  face  with  his 
mantle.  What  a  conclusion  of  all  the  past  history  ! 
What  an  interpretation  of  its  meaning !  "  (Maurice, 
Prophets  and  Kings,  136).  Not  in  the  persecu- 
tions of  Ahab  and  Jezebel,  nor  in  the  slaughter  of 
the  Prophets  of  Baal,  but  in  the  7000  unknown 
worshippers  who  had  not  bowed  the  knee  to  Baal, 
was  the  assurance  that  Elijah  was  not  alone  as  he 
had  seemed  to  be. 

Three  commands  were  laid  on  him — three  changes 
were  to  be  made.  Instead  of  Ben-hadad,  Hazael 
was  to  be  king  of  Syria ;  instead  of  Ahab,  Jehu 
the  son  of  Nimshi  was  to  be  king  of  Israel ;  and 
Elisha  the  son  of  Shaphat  was  to  be  his  own  suc- 
cessor. Of  these  three  commands  the  two  fiist 
were  reserved  for  Elisha  to  accomplish,  the  last 
only  was  executed  by  Elijah  himself.  It  would 
almost  seem  as  if  his  late  trials  had  awakened  in 
him  a  yearning  for  that  affection  and  companionship 
which  had  hitherto  been  denied  him.  His  first 
search  was  for  Elisha.  Apparently  he  soon  found 
him  ;  we  must  conclude  at  his  native  place,  Abel- 
meholah,  probably  somewhere  about  the  centre  of 
the  Jordan  valley.  [Abel-meiiolah.]  Elisha  was 
ploughing  at  the  time,h  and  Elijah  "  passed  over  to 
him  " — possibly  crossed  the  river ' — and  cast  his 
mantle,  the  well-known  sheepskin  cloak,  upon  him, 
as  if,  by  that  familiar k  action,  claiming  him  for  his 
sou.  A  moment  of  hesitation — but  the  call  was 
quickly  accepted,  and  then  commenced  that  long 
period  of  service  and  intercourse  which  continued  till 
Elijah's  removal,  and  which  after  that  time  procured 
for  Elisha  one  of  his  best  titles  to  esteem  and  reve- 
rence— "  Elisha  the  son  of  Shaphat,  who  poured 
water  on  the  hands  of  Elijah." 

2.  Ahab  and  Jezebel  now  probably  believed  that 


f  The  Hebrew  word  has  the  article,  niytSH  ;  and 
,  tt   :  - 

so  too  the  LXX.,  to  cnnjAaioi'.  The  cave  is  now 
shown  "  in  the  secluded  plain  below  the  highest  point 
of  Jebel  Musa ;"  "a  hole  just  large  enough  for  a 
man's  body,"  beside  the  altar  in  the  chapel  of  Elijah 
(Stanley,  49  ;  Bob.  i.  103). 

e  Hebrew,  Jv.  A.  V.  "  lodge  ;"  but  in  Gen.  xix. 
2,  accurately,  "  tarry  all  night." 

h  The  words  of  the  text  are  somewhat  obscured  in 
the  A.  V.  They  bear  testimony  at  once  to  the  solid 
position  of  Elisha,  and  to  the  extent  of  the  arable  soil 
of  the  spot.  According  to  the  Masoretic  punctuation 
the  passage  is  :  "  And  he  departed  thence,  and  found 
Elisha  the  son  of  Shaphat,  who  was  ploughing.  Twelve 
yoke  were  before  him  {i.  e.  either  12  ploughs  were 
before  him  with  bis  servants,  or  12  yoke  of  land  were 
already  ploughed),  and  he  was  with  the  last." 

1  The  word  is  that  always  employed  for  crossing 
the  Jordan. 

k  See  also  Ruth  iii.  4-14.  Ewald,  Alterthiimer, 
191,  note.  A  trace  of  a  similar  custom  survives  in 
the  German  word  Mantel -kind. 


ELIJAH 

their  threats  had  been  effectual,  and  that  they  had 
seen  the  last  of  their  tormentor.  At  any  rate  this 
may  be  inferred  from  the  events  of  chap.  xxi. 
Foiled  in  his  wish  to  acquire  the  ancestral  plot  of 
ground  of  Naboth  by  the  refusal  of  that  sturdy 
peasant  to  alienate  the  inheritance  of  his  lathers, 
Ahab  and  Jezebel  proceed  to  possess  themselves  of 
it  by  main  force,  and  by  a  degree  of  monstrous  in- 
justice which  shows  clearly  enough  how  far  the 
elders  of  Jezreel  had  forgotten  the  laws  of  Jehovah, 
how  perfect  was  their  submission  to  the  will  of 
their  mistress.  At  her  orders  Naboth  is  falsely  ac- 
cused of  blaspheming  God  and  the  king,  is  with 
his  sons™  stoned  and  killed,  and  his  vineyard  then 
— as  having  belonged  to  a  criminal — becomes  at 
once  the  property  of  the  king.     [Xav.otii.] 

Ahab  loses  no  time  in  entering  on  his  new  acqui- 
sition. Apparently  the  very  next  day  after  the 
execution  he  proceeds  in  his  chariot  to  take  pos- 
session of  the  coveted  vineyard.  Behind  him — pro- 
bably in  the  back  pait  of  the  chariot — ride  his  two 
pages  Jehu  and  Bidkar  (2  K.  ix.  26).  But  the 
triumph  was  a  short  one.  Elijah  had  received  an 
intimation  from  Jehovah  of  what  was  taking  place, 
and  rapidly  as  the  accusation  and  death  of  .Naboth 
had  been  hurried  over,  he  was  there  to  meet  his 
ancient  enemy,  and  as  an  enemy  he  does  meet  him 
— as  David  went  out  to  meet n  Goliath — on  the 
very  scene  of  his  crime  ;  suddenly,  when  least  ex- 
pected and  least  wished  for,  he  confronts  the  miseiable 
king.  And  then  follows  the  curse,  in  terms  tearful 
to  any  Oriental — peculiarly  terrible  to  a  Jew — and 
most  of  all  significant  to  a  successor  of  the  apostate 
princes  of  the  northern  kingdom — "  I  will  take  away 
thy  posterity  ;  I  will  cut  off  from  thee  even  thy  very 
dogs ;  I  will  make  thy  house  like  that  of  Jeroboam 
and  Baasha ;  thy  blood  shall  be  shed  in  the  same 
spot  where  the  blood  of  thy  victims  was  shed  last 
night ;  thy  wife  and  thy  children  shall  be  torn  in 
this  very  garden  by  the  wild  dogs  of  the  city,  or  as 
common  carrion  devoured  by  the  birds  of  the  sky  " 
— the  large  vultures  which  in  eastern  climes  are 
always  wheeling  aloft  under  the  clear  blue  sky,  and 
doubtless  suggested  the  expression  to  the  prophet. 
How  tremendous  was  this  scene  we  may  gather  from 
the  fact  that  after  the  lapse  of  at  least  20  years 
Jehu  was  able  to  recal  the  very  words  of  the  pro- 
phet's burden,  to  which  he  and  his  companion  had 
listened  as  they  stood  behind  their  master  in  the 
chariot.  The  whole  of  Elijah's  denunciation  mav 
possibly  be  recovered  by  putting  together  the  words 
recalled  by  Jehu,  2  K.  ix.  26,  36,  7,  and  those  given 
in  1  K.  xxi.  19-25. 

3.  A  space  of  three  or  four  years  now  elapses 
(comp.  1  K.  xxii.  1,  xxii.  .r>l  ;  2  K.  i.  17),  before  we 
again  catch  a  glimpse  of  Elijah.  The  denunciations 
uttered  in  the  vineyard  of  Naboth  have  been  partly 
fulfilled.  Ahab  is  dead,  and  his  son  and  successor, 
Ahaziah,  has  met  with  a  fatal  accident,  and  is  on 
his  death-bed,  after  a  short  and  troubled  reign  of 
less  than  two  years  (2  K.  i.  1,  2;  1  K.  xxii.  51). 
In  his  extremity  he  sends  to  an  oracle  or  shrine  of 
Baal  at  the  Philistine  town  of  Ekron  to  ascertain 
the  issue  of  his  illness.  But  the  oracle  is  nearer  at 
hand   than   the   distant   Ekron.      An   intimation   is 


ELIJAH 


529 


m  "  The  blood  of  Naboth  and  the  blood  of  his  sons  " 
(2  K.  ix.  26  ;  comp.  Josh.  vii.  24).  From  another 
expression  in  this  verse — yesternight  (ti'OX,  A.  V. 
"  yesterday  "),  we  may  perhaps  conclude  that  like  a 
later  trial  on  a  similar  charge,  also  supported  by  two 
false  witnesses — the  trial  of  our  Lord—  it  was  conducted 


conveyed  to  the  prophet,  probably  at  that  time  in- 
habiting one  of  the  recesses  of  Carmel,  and,  as  on 
the  former  occasions,  he  suddenly  appears  on  the 
path  of  the  messengers,  without  preface  or  inquiry 
utters  his  message  of  death,  and  as  rapidly  dis- 
appears. The  tone  of  his  words  is  as  national  on 
this  as  on  any  former  occasion,  and,  as  before,  they 
are  authenticated  by  the  name  of  Jehovah — "  Thus 
saith  Jehovah,  Is  it  because  there  is  no  God  in 
Israel  that  ye  go  to  enquire  of  Baalzebub,  god  of 
Ekron?"  The  messengers  returned  to  the  king 
too  soon  to  have  accomplished  their  mission.  They 
were  possibly  strangers ;  at  any  rate  they  were 
ignorant  of  the  name  of  the  man  who  had  thus  in- 
terrupted their  journey.  But  his  appearance  had 
fixed  itself  in  their  minds,  and  their  description  at 
once  told  Ahaziah,  who  must  have  seen  the  prophet 
about  his  father's  court  or  have  heard  him  de- 
descrihed  in  the  harem,  who  it  was  that  had 
thus  reversed  the  favourable  oracle  which  he  was 
hoping  for  from  Ekron.  The  "hairy  man" — the 
"lord  of  hair,"  so  the  Hebrew  reading0  runs — 
with  a  belt  of  rough  skin  round  his  loins,  who 
came  and  went  in  this  secret  manner,  and  uttered 
his  fierce  words  in  the  name  of  the  God  of  Israel, 
could  be  no  other  than  the  old  enemy  of  his  father 
and  mother,  Elijah  the  Tishbite.  But  ill  as  he  was 
this  check  only  roused  the  wrath  of  Ahaziah,  and, 
with  the  spirit  of  his  mother,  he  at  once  seized  the 
opportunity  of  possessing  himself  of  the  person  of 
the  man  who  had  been  for  so  long  the  evil  genius 
of  his  house.  A  captain  was  despatched,  with  a 
party  of  fifty,  to  take  Elijah  prisoner.  He  was 
sitting  on  the  top  of  "  the  mount,"  p  i.  e.  probably 
of  Carmel.  The  officer  approached  and  addressed 
the  prophet  by  the  title  which,  as  before  noticed,  is 
most  frequently  applied  to  him  and  Elisha— "O 
man  of  God,  the  king  hath  spoken:  come  down." 
"  And  Elijah  answered  and  said,  If  I  be  a  man  of 
God,  then  let  fire  come  down  from  heaven  and  con- 
sume thee  and  thy  fifty  !  And  there  came  down  file 
from  heaven  and  consumed  him  and  his  fifty."  A 
second  party  was  sent,  only  to  meet  the  same  fate. 
The  altered  tone  of  the  leader  of  a  third  party,  and 
the  assurance  of  God  that  His  servant  need  not  fear, 
brought  Elijah  down.  But  the  king  gained  nothing. 
The  message  was  delivered  to  his  face  in  the  same 
words  as  it  had  been  to  the  messengers,  and  Elijah, 
so  we  must  conclude,  was  allowed  to  go  harmless. 
This  was  his  last  interview  with  the  house  of  Ahab. 
It  was  also  his  last  recorded  appearance  in  person 
against  the  Baal-worshippers. 

Following  as  it  did  on  Elijah's  previous  course 
of  action,  this  event  must  have  been  a  severe  blow 
to  the  enemies  of  Jehovah.  But  impressive  as  it 
doubtless  was  to  the  contemporaries  of  the  prophet, 
the  story  possesses  a  far  deeper  significance  for  us 
than  it  could  have  had  for  them.  While  it  is 
most  characteristic  of  the  terrors  of  the  earlier  dis- 
pensation under  which  men  were  then  living,  it  is 
remai  kable  as  having  served  to  elicit  from  the  mouth 
of  a  greater  than  even  Elijah  an  exposition,  no  less 
characteristic,  of  the  distinction  between  that  severe 
role  and  the  gentler  dispensation  which  He  came  to 
introduce.    It  was  when  our  Lord  and  His  disciples 

at  night.  The  same  word — yesternight — prompts  the 
inference  that  Ahab'a  visit  and  encounter  with  Elijah 
happened  on  the  very  day  following  the  murder. 

n  The  Hebrew  word  is  the  same. 

°  See  note  to  p.  .137. 

t  "inn  (2  K.  i.  9  ;   A.  V.,  inaccurately,  "an  bill." 

2  M 


530 


ELIJAH 


were  on  their  journey,  through  this  very  district, 
from  Galilee  to  Jerusalem,  and  when  smarting  from 
the  churlish  inhospitality  of  some  Samaritan  vil- 
lagers, that — led  to  it  by  the  distant  view  of  the 
heights  of  Carmel,  or,  perhaps,  by  some  traditional 
name  on  the  road — the  impetuous  zeal  of  the  two  j 
"sons  of  thunder"  burst  forth — "  Lord,  wilt  thou 
that  we  command  fire  to  come  down  from  heaven 
and  consume  them,  even  as  Elijah  did  ?"  But  they 
little  knew  the  Master  they  addressed.  "  He  turned 
and  rebuked  them,  and  said,  Ye  know  not  what 
manner  of  spirit  ye  are  of.  For  the  Son  of  Man  is 
not  come  to  destroy  men's  lives  but  to  save  them  " 
(Lukeix.  51-56).  As  if  He  had  said,  "  Ye  are  mis- 
taking and  confounding  the  different  standing  points 
of  the  Old  and  New  Covenauts  ;  taking  your  stand 
upon  the  Old — that  of  an  avenging  righteousness, 
when  you  should  rejoice  to  take  it  upon  the  New — 
that  of  a  forgiving  love  "  (Trench,  Miracles,  ch.  iv.). 
4.  It  must  have  been  shortly  after  the  death  of 
Ahaziah  that  Elijah  made  a  communication  with 
the  southern  kingdom.  It  is  the  only  one  of  which 
any  record  remains,  and  its  mention  is  the  first  and 
last  time  that  the  name  of  the  prophet  appears  in 
the  Books  of  Chronicles.  Mainly  devoted,  as  these 
books  are,  to  the  affairs  of  Judah,  this  is  not  sur- 
prising. The  alliance  between  his  enemy  Ahab  and 
Jehoshaphat  cannot  have  been  unknown  to  the  pro- 
phet, and  it  must  have  made  him  regard  the  pro- 
ceedings of  the  kings  of  Judah  with  more  than 
ordinary  interest.  When,  therefore,  Jehoram  the 
son  of  Jehoshaphat,  who  had  married  the  daughter 
of  Ahab,  began  "  to  walk  in  the  ways  of  the  kings 
of  Israel,  as  did  the  house  of  Ahab,  and  to  do  that 
which  was  evil  in  the  sight  of  Jehovah,"  Elijah 
sent  him  a  letterq  denouncing  his  evil  doings,  and 
predicting  his  death  (2  Chr.  xxi.  12-15).  This 
letter  has  been  considered  as  a  great  difficulty,  on 
the  ground  that  Elijah's  removal  must  have  taken 
place  before  the  death  of  Jehoshaphat  (from  the 
terms  of  the  mention  of  Elisha  in  2  K.  iii.  11),  and 
therefore  before  the  accession  of  Joram  to  the  throne 
of  Judah.  But  admitting  that  Elijah  had  been 
translated  before  the  expedition  of  Jehoshaphat 
against  Moab,  it  does  not  follow  that  Joram  was 
not  at  that  time,  and  before  his  father's  death,  king 
of  Judah,  Jehoshaphat  occupying  himself  during 
the  last  six  or  seven  years  of  his  life  in  going  about 
the  kingdom  (2  Chr.  xix.  4-11),  and  in  conducting 
some  important  wars,  amongst  others  that  in  ques- 
tion against  Moab,  while  Joram  was  concerned  with 
the  more  central  affairs  of  the  government  (2  K. 
iii.  7,  &c).  That  Joram  began  to  reign  during  the 
lifetime  of  his  father  Jehoshaphat  is  stated  in  2  K. 
viii.  16.      According  to  one  record   (2  K.  i.  17), 


q  3D3D,  "  a  writing,"  almost  identical  with  the 
word  used  in  Arabic  at  the  present  day.  The  ordi- 
nary Hebrew  word  for  a  letter  is  Sepher,  "ISD, 
a  book. 

r  The  second  statement  of  Jehoram's  accession  to 
Israel  (in  2  K.  iii.  1)  seems  inserted  there  to  make 
the  subsequent  narrative  more  complete.  Its  position 
there,  subsequent  to  the  story  of  Elijah's  departure, 
has  probably  assisted  the  ordinary  belief  in  the  diffi- 
culty in  question. 

*  The  ancient  Jewish  commentators  get  over  the 
apparent  difficulty  by  saying  that  the  letter  was 
written  and  sent  after  Elijah's  translation.  Others 
believed  that  it  was  the  production  of  Elisha,  for 
whose  name  that  of  Elijah  had  been  substituted  by 
copyists.  The  first  of  these  requires  no  answer.  To 
the  second,  the  severity  of  its  tone,  as  above  noticed, 


ELIJAH 

which  immediately  precedes  the  account  of  Elijah's 
last  acts  on  earth,  Joram  was  actually  on  the  throne 
of  Judah  at  the  time  of  Elijah's  intei  view  with  Aha- 
ziah ;  and  though  this  is  modified  by  the  statements 
of  other  places r  (2  K.  iii.  1,  viii.  16),  yet  it  is  not 
invalidated,  and  the  conclusion  is  almost  inevitable, 
as  stated  above,  that  Joram  ascended  the  throne 
some  years  before  the  death  of  his  father.  [See 
Joram,  Jehoshaphat,  Jodah.]  In  its  contents 
the  letter  bears  a  strong  resemblance  to  the  speeches 
of  Elijah,'  while  in  the  details  of  style  it  is  very 
peculiar,  and  quite  different  from  the  narrative  in 
which  it  is  imbedded  (Bertheau,  Chronik  ad  loc). 

5.  The  closing  transaction  of  Elijah's  life  intro- 
duces us  to  a  locality  heretofore  unconnected  with 
him.  Hitherto  we  have  found  him  in  the  neighbour- 
hood of  Samaria,  Jezreel,  Carmel,  only  leaving  these 
northern  places  on  actual  emergency,  but  we  now 
find  him  on  the  frontier  of  the  two  kingdoms,  at 
the  holy  city  of  Bethel,  with  the  sons  of  the  pro- 
phets at  Jericho,  and  in  the  valley  of  the  Jordan 
(2  K.  ii.  1,  &c). 

It  was  at  Gilgal — probably  not  the  ancient 
place  of  Joshua  and  Samuel,  but  another  of  the 
same  name  still  surviving  on  the  western  edge  ot 
the  hills  of  Ephraim' — that  the  prophet  received  the 
divine  intimation  that  his  departure  was  at  hand. 
He  was  at  the  time  with  Elisha,  who  seems  now  to 
have  become  his  constant  companion.  Perhaps  his 
old  love  of  solitude  returned  upon  him,  perhaps  he 
wished  to  spare  his  friend  the  pain  of  a  too  sudden 
parting ;  in  either  case  he  endeavours  to  persuade 
Elisha  to  remain  behind  while  he  goes  on  an  errand 
of  Jehovah.  "Tarry  here,  I  pray  thee,  for  Je- 
hovah hath  sent  me  to  Bethel."  But  Elisha  will 
not  so  easily  give  up  his  master, — "  As  Jehovah 
liveth  and  as  thy  soul  liveth  I  will  not  leave  thee." 
They  went  together  to  Bethel."  The  event  which 
was  about  to  happen  had  apparently  been  commu- 
nicated to  the  sons  of  the  prophets  at  Bethel,  and 
they  inquire  if  Elisha  knew  of  his  impending  loss. 
His  answer  shows  how  fully  he  was  aware  of  it. 
"  Yea,"  says  he,  with  all  the  emphasis  possible, 
"  indeed  /  do  *  know  it,  hold  ye  your  peace."  But 
though  impending,  it  was  not  to  happen  that  day. 
Again  Elijah  attempts  to  escape  to  Jericho,  and  again 
Elisha  protests  that  he  will  not  be  separated  from 
him.  Again,  also,  the  sons  of  the  prophets  at 
Jericho  make  the  same  unnecessarv  inquiries,  and 
again  he  replies  as  emphatically  as  before.  Elijah 
makes  a  final  effort  to  avoid  what  they  both  so 
much  dread.  "  Tarry  here,  I  pray  thee,  for  Je- 
hovah hath  sent  me  to  the  Jordan."  But  Elisha 
is  not  to  be  conquered,  and  the  two  set  off'  across 
the  undulating  plain  of  burning  sand,  to  the  distant 


is  a  sufficient  reply.  Josephus  (Ant.  ix.  5,  §2)  says 
that  the  letter  was  sent  while  Elijah  was  still  on  earth. 
(See  Lightfoot,  CJiro?ric!e,  &c.  "  Jehoram."  Other 
theories  will  be  found  in  Fabrieius,  Cod.  Pseudepig. 
1075,  andOtho,  Lex.  Rabb.  1G7.) 

'  The  grounds  for  this  inference  are  given  under 
Elisha  (p.  538).     See  also  Gilgal. 

u  The  Hebrew  word  "  went  down "  is  a  serious 
difficulty,  if  Gilgal  is  taken  to  be  the  site  of  Joshua's 
camp  and  the  resting-place  of  the  ark,  since  that  is 
more  than  3000  feet  below  Bethel.  But  this  is  avoided 
by  adopting  the  other  Gilgal  to  the  N.W.  of  Bethel, 
and  on  still  higher  ground,  which  also  preserves  the 
sequence  of  the  journey  to  Jordan.  (See  Stanley, 
S.  <$•  P.  308,  note.)  Some  considerations  in  favour  of 
this  adoption  will  be  found  under  Elisha. 

1  ^nyT"  ^X"DJ1  =  "  Also  I  know  it ;"  Kdyw  tyvuina. 


ELIJAH 

river, — Elijah  in  his  mantle  or  cape  of  sheep-skin, 
Elisha  in  ordinary  clothes  (133,  ver.  12).  Fifty 
men  of  the  sons  of  the  prophets  ascend  the  abrupt 
heights  behind  the  town — the  same  to  which  a 
late  tradition  would  attach  the  scene  of  our  Lord's 
temptation — and  which  command  the  plain  below, 
to  watch  with  the  clearness  of  Eastern  vision  what 
happens  in  the  distance.  Talking  as  they  go,  the 
two  reach  the  river,  and  stand  on  the  shelving  bank 
beside  its  swift  brown  current.  But  they  are  not 
to  stop  even  here.  It  is  as  if  the  aged  Gileadite 
cannot  rest  till  he  again  sets  foot  on  his  own  side 
of  the  river.  He  rolls  up  y  his  mantle  as  into  a 
staff,  and  with  his  ol  I  energy  strikes  the  waters 
as  Moses  had  done  before  him, — strikes  them  as  if 
they  were  an  enemy ; z  and  they  are  divided  hither 
and  thither,  and  they  two  go  over  on  dry  ground. 
What  follows  is  best  told  in  the  simple  words  of 
the  narrative.  "  Ami  it  came  to  pass  when  they 
were"  gone  over,  that  Elijah  said  to  Elisha,  'Ask 
what  I  shall  do  for  thee  before  I  be  taken  away 
from  thee.'  Ami  Elisha  said,  '  I  pray  thee  let  a 
double  portion  of  thy  spirit  be  upon  me.'  And  he 
said,  'Thou  hast  asked  a  hard  thing:  if  thou  see 
me  taken  from  thee,  it  shall  be  so  unto  thee,  but  if 
not,  it  shall  not  be  so.'  And  it  came  to  pass  as 
they  still  went  on  and  talked,  that,  behold,  a  chariot 
of  fire  and  horses  of  fire,  and  parted  them  both 
asunder,  and  Elijah  went  up  by  the  whirlwind  into 
the  skies."  b  Well  might  Elisha  cry  with  bitter- 
ness,c  "  My  father,  my  father."  He  was  gone 
who,  to  the  discerning  eye  and  loving  heart  of  his 
disciple,  had  been  "the  chariot  of  Israel  and  tin' 
horsemen  thereof "  for  so  many  years  ;  and  Elisha 
was  at  last  left  alone  to  carry  on  a  task  to  which 
he  must  often  have  looked  forward,  but  to  which 
in  this  moment  of  grief  he  may  well  have  felt 
unequal.  He  saw  him  no  more;  but  his  mantle 
had  fallen,  and  this  he  took  up  — at  once  a  personal 
relic  and  a  symbol  of  the  double  portion  of  the 
spirit  of  Elijah  with  which  he  was  to  be  clothed. 
Little  could  he  have  realise!,  had  it  been  then  pre- 
sented to  him,  that  he  whose  greatest  claim  to 
notice  was  that  he  had  '"poured  water  on  the 
hands  of  Elijah  "  should  hereafter  possess  an  influ- 
ence which  had  been  denied  to  his  master — should, 


ELIJAH 


531 


y  a?i-     The  above  is  quite  the  force  of  the  word. 

1  The  word  is  fTDj,  used  of  Bmiting  in  battle  ; 
generally  with  the  sense  of  wounding  (Gcs.  883). 

1  LXX.  "  As  they  wire  going  over,"  et>  ra  Sia- 
ffivtu.. 

b  The  statements  of  the  text  hardly  give  support 
to  the  usual  conception  of  Elijah's  departure  as  repre- 
sented by  painters  and  in  popular  discourses.  It  was 
not  in  the  chariot  of  lire  that  he  went  up  into  the 
skies.  The  tire  served  to  part  the  master  from  the 
diseiple,  to  show  that  the  severance  had  arrived,  but 
Elijah  was  taken  up  by  the  tierce  wind  of  the  tempest. 
The  word  HiyD  involves  no  idea  of  whirling,  and 
i^    frequently    rendered   in   the  A.  v.    "storm"   or 

"tempest."  The  term  "the  skies"  has  been  employed 
above  to  translate  the  Hebrew  D'OUTI,  because  we 
attach  ai)  idea  U<  the  word  "heaven"  which  does 
not  appear  to  have  been  present    to   the   mind  of  the 

ancient  Hebrew-. 
c    pyv,   the  wmd  used  amongst  others  for   the 

"  greal  and  hitter  cry"  when  the  tirst-born  were 
killed  in  Egypt. 

d  The  expression  in  Malachi  is  "  Elijah  the  Pro- 
phet." From  this  unusual  title  some  have  believed 
that  another  Elijah  was  intended.      The  T.W.,  how - 


instead  of  the  terror  of  kings  and  people,  be  theii 
benefactor,  adviser,  and  friend,  and  that  over  his 
death-bed  a  king  of  Israel  should  be  found  to 
lament  with  the  same  words  that  had  just  burst 
from  him  on  the  departure  of  his  stern  and  silent 
master,  "My  father,  my  father,  the  chariot  of 
Israel  and  the  horsemen  thereof !" 

And  here  ends  all  the  direct  information  which 
is  vouchsafed  to  us  of  the  life  and  work  of  this  great 
Prophet.  Truly  he  "  stood  up  as  a  fire,  and  his 
word  burnt  as  a  lamp"  (Ecclus.  xlviii.  1).  How 
deep  was  the  impression  which  he  made  on  the 
mind  of  the  nation  may  be -judged  of  from  the 
fixed  belief  which  many  centuries  after  prevailed 
that  Elijah  would  again  appear  for  the  relief  and 
restoration  of  his  country.  The  prophecy  of  Ma- 
lachi (iv.  6)d  was  possibly  at  once  a  cause  and  an 
illustration  of  the  strength  of  this  belief.  What  it 
had  grown  to  at  the  time  of  our  Lord's  birth,  and 
Jjow  continually  the  great -Prophet  was  present  to 
the  expectations  of  the  people,  we  do  not  need  the 
evidence  of  the  Talmud  to  assure  us,e  it  is  patent 
on  every  page  of  the  Gospels.  Each  remarkable 
person,  as  he  arrives  on  the  scene,  be  his  habits  and 
characteristics  what  they  may — the  stern  John 
equally  with  his  gentle  Successor — is  proclaimed  to 
be  Elijah  (Matt.  xvi.  14 ;  Mark  vi.  15  ;  John  i.  21). 
His  appearance  in  glory  on  the  Mount  of  Transfigu- 
ration does  not  seem  to  have  startled  the  disciples. 
They  were  "  sore  afraid,"  but  not  apparently  sur- 
prised. On  the  contrary,  St.  Peter  immediately 
proposes  to  erect  a  tent  for  the  Prophet  whose 
arrival  they  had  been  so  long  expecting.  Even  the 
cry  of  our  Lord  from  the  Cross,  containing  as  it  did 
but  a  slight  resemblance  to  the  name  of  Elijah, 
immediately  suggested  him  to  the  bystanders.  "  He 
calleth  for  Elijah."  "  Let  be,  let  us  see  if  Elijah 
will  come  to  save  him." 

How  far  this  expectation  was  fulfilled  in  John, 
and  the  remarkable  agreement  in  the  characteristics 
of  these  two  men,  will  be  considered  under  John 
the  Baptist. 

But  on  the  other  hand,  the  deep  impression 
which  Elijah  had  thus  made  on  his  nation  only 
renders  more  remarkable  the  departure  which  the 
image   conveyed   by  the    later   references   to  him 


ever,  cither  following  a  different  Hebrew  text  from 
that  which  we  possess,  or  falling  in  with  the  belief  of 
their  times,  insert  the  usual  designation,  "  the  Tish- 
bite."     (See  Lightfoot,  Exerc.  on  Luke  i.  1"). 

c  He  is  recorded  as  having  often  appeared  to  the 
wise  and  pood  Rabbis — at  prayer  in  the  wilderness, 
or  on  their  journeys — generally  in  the  form  of  an 
Arabian  merchant  (Eisenmenger,  i.  11;  ii.  402-7). 
At  the  circumcision  of  a  child  a  scat  was  always 
piaced  for  him,  that  as  the  zealous  champion  and 
messenger  of  the  "  covenant  "  of  circumcision  (1  K. 
\ix.  14  ;  Mai.  iii.  1)  he  might  watch  over  the  due 
performance  of  the  rite.  During  certain  prayers  the 
doov  of  the  house  was  set  open  that  Elijah  might 
enter  and  announce  the  Messiah  (Eisenmenger,  i. 
cs.'i  .  His  coming  will  be  three  days  before  that  of 
tin  Messiah,  and  on  each  of  the  three  he  will  pro- 
claim, in  a  voice  which  shall  he  heard  all  over  the 
earth,  peace,  happiness,  salvation,  respectively  (Eisen- 
menger, 696).  So  firm  was  the  conviction  of  his 
speedy  arrival,  that  when  goods  were  found  and  no 
owner  appeared  to  claim  them,  the  common  saying 
was,  "Put  them  by  till  Elijah  comes"  (Lightfoot, 
Exercit.  .Matt.  xvii.  10;  John  i.  21).  The  Bame 
customs  and  expressions  arc  even  still  in  u-e  among 
the  stricter  .lews  of  this  and  other  countries.  (See 
Revue  des  deux  Mondes,  wiv.  131,  &c.) 

2  M  2 


532 


ELIJAH 


evinces,  from  that  so  sharply  presented  in  the 
records  of  his  actual  life.  With  the  exception 
of  the  eulogiums  contained  in  the  catalogues  of 
worthies  in  the  book  of  Jesus  the  son  of  Sirach 
(xlviii.)  and  1  Mace.  ii.  58,  and  the  passing 
allusion  in  Luke  ix.  54,  none  of  these  later  re- 
ferences allude  to  his  works  of  destruction  or 
of  portent.  They  all  set  forth  a  very  different 
side  of  his  character  to  that  brought  but  in  the 
historical  narrative.  They  speak  of  his  being  a 
man  of  like  passions  with  ourselves  (James  v. 
17)  ;  of  his  kinduess  to  the  widow  of  Sarepta 
(Luke  iv.  25);  of  his  "restoring  all  things"  (Matt. 
xvii.  11);  "  turning  the  hearts  of  the  fathers  to 
the  children,  and  the  disobedient  to  the  wisdom  of 
the  just"  (Mai.  iv.  5,  6;  Luke  i.  17).  The 
moral  lessons  to  be  derived  from  these  tacts  must 
be  expanded  elsewhere  than  here ;  it  will  be  suffi- 
cient in  this  place  to  call  attention  to  the  great 
differences  which  may  exist  between  the  popular 
and  contemporary  view  of  an  eminent  character, 
and  the  real  settled  judgment  formed  in  the  progress 
of  time,  when  the  excitement  of  his  more  brilliant 
but  more  evanescent  deeds  has  passed  away.  Pre- 
cious indeed  are  the  scattered  hints  and  faint 
touches  which  enable  us  thus  to  soften  the  harsh 
outlines  or  the  discordant  colouring  of  the  earlier 
picture. x  In  the  present  instance  they  are  pecu- 
liarly so.  That  wild  figure,  that  stern  voice,  those 
deeds  of  blood,  which  stand  out  in  such  startling 
relief  from  the  pages  of  the  old  records  of  Elijah, 
are  seen  by  us  all  silvered  over  with  the  "  white 
and  glistering"  light  of  the  Mountain  of  Trans- 
figuration. When  he  last  stool  on  the  soil  of  his 
native  Gileadf  he  was  destitute,  afflicted,  tor- 
mented, wandering  about  "  in  sheep-skins  and  goat- 
skins, in  deserts  and  mountains,  and  dens  and  caves 
of  the  earth."  But  these  things  have  passed  away 
into  the  distance,  and  with  them  has  receded  the 
fiery  zeal,  the  destructive  wrath,  which  accom- 
panied them.  Under  that  heavenly  light  they  fall 
back  into  their  proper  proportions,  and  Ahab  and 
Jezebel,  Baal  and  Ashtarothare  forgotten,  as  we  listen 
to  the  Prophet  talking  to  our  Lord — talking  of  that 
event  which  was  to  be  the  consummation  of  all  that 
he  had  suffered  and  striven  for — "  talking  of  His  de- 
cease which  He  should  accomplish  at  Jerusalem." 

Elijah  has  been  canonized  in  both  the  Greek  and 
Latin  churches.  Among  the  Greeks  Mar  Elyas 
is  the  patron  of  elevated  spots,  and  many  a  con- 
spicuous summit  in  Greece  is  called  by  his  name.5 
The  service  for  his  day — -'HXias  /xeya.Xcci'viJ.os — 
will  be  found  in  the  Menaion  on  July  20,  a  date 
recognised  by  the  Latin  church  also.h  The  convent 
bearing  his  name,  Deir  Mar  Elyas,  between 
Jerusalem  and  Bethlehem,  is  well  known  to  tra- 
vellers in  the  Holy  Land.  It  purports  to  be 
situated  on  the  spot  of  his  birth,  as  already  observed. 
Other  convents  bearing  his  name  once  existed  in 
Palestine:  mJebel  Ajliia,  the  ancient  Gilead  (Bitter, 
Syrien,  1029,  1066,  &c.) ;  at  Ezra  in  the  Hawaii 
(Burckhardt,  Syria,  59),  and  the  more  famous  esta- 
blishment on  Carmel. 


ELIM 

It  is  as  connected  with  the  great  Order  of  the 
barefooted  Carmelites  that  Elijah  is  celebrated  in 
the  Latin  church.  According  to  the  statements  of 
the  Breviary  {Off.  B.  Mariae  Virginis  de  Monte 
Carmelo,  Julii  16)  the  connexion  arose  from  the 
dedication  to  the  Virgin  of  a  chapel  on  the  spot 
from  which  Elijah  saw  the  cloud  (an  accepted  type 
of  the  Virgin  Mary)  rise  out  of  the  sea.  But  other 
legends  trace  the  origin  of  the  order  to  the  great 
Prophet  himself  as  the  head  of  a  society  of  ancho- 
rites inhabiting  Carmel  ;  and  even  as  himself  dedica- 
ting the  chapel  in  which  he  worshipped  to  the 
Virgin  ! '  These  things  are  matters  of  controversy 
in  the  Roman  church,  Baronius  and  others  having 
proved  that  the  Order  was  founded  in  1181,  a  date 
which  is  repudiated  by  the  Carmelites  (see  extracts 
in  Fabricius,  Cod.  Pseudcpig.  1077). 

In  the  Mahometan  traditions  Ilyas  is  said  to 
have  drunk  of  the  Fountain  of  Life,  "  by  virtue 
of  which  he  still  lives,  and  will  live  to  the  day  of 
Judgment."  He  is  by  some  confounded  with  St. 
George  and  with  the  mysterious  el-Khidr,  one  of 
the  most  remarkable  of  the  Muslim  saints  (see 
Lane's  Arabian  Nig/ds,  Introd.  note  2;  also  Selec- 
tions from  the  Kuran,  221,  222).  The  Persian  Bofis 
are  said  to  trace  themselves  back  to  Elijah  (Fabri- 
cius, 1077). 

Among  other  traditions  it  must  not  be  omitted 
that,  the  words  "  Eye  hath  not  seen,"  &c.,  1  Cor. 
ii.  9,  which  are  without  doubt  quoted  by  the  Apostle 
from  Isaiah  lxiv.  4,  were,  according  to  an  ancient 
belief,  from  "  the  Apocalypse,  or  mvsteries  of 
Elijah,"  Ttt  'HAi'a  airoKpvcpa..  The  first  mention 
of  this  appears  to  be  Origen  (Horn,  on  Matt,  xxvii. 
9\  and  it  is  noticed  with  disapproval  by  Jerome, 
ad  Pammachium  (see  Fabricius,  1072). 

By  Epiphanius,  the  words  "  awake,  thou  that 
sleepest,"  &c,  Eph.  v.  14,  are  inaccurately  alleged 
to  be  quoted  "from  Elijah,"  i.e.  the  portion  of  the 
O.  T.  containing  his  history — 7rapa  Tip  'H\la 
(comp.  Piom.  xi.  2). 

Two  monographs  on  Elijah  must  not  be  over- 
looked: (1.)  that  of  Frischmuth,  De  Eliae  Pro- 
phetae  Nom., $c,  in  the  Critici  Sacri ;  and  (2.)  Elias 
Thesbites,  by  AegidiusCamartus,  4to.  Paris,  1631. 
There  aie  also  dissertations  of  great  interest  on 
the  ravens,  the  mantle,  and  Naboth,  in  the  Critici 
Sacri.  [G.] 

ELI'KA  (Nj^X  ;  Alex.  'Ew/ca ;  Elica),  a 
Harodite,  i.  e.  from  some  place  called  Charod  ;  one 
of  David's  guard  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  25).  The  name  is 
omitted  in  the  corresponding  list  of  1  Chr.  xi. — to 
account  for  which  see  Kennicott's  conjecture  {Dis- 
sertation, fyc,  182). 

E'LLM(D',l?''Ntt;  AlXelfi),  mentioned  Ex.  xv. 
27  ;  Num.  xxxiii.  9,  as  the  second  station  where 
the  Israelites  encamped  after  crossing  the  Red  Sea. 
It  is  distinguished  as  having  had  "  twelve  wells 
(rather  "  fountains,"  ni^y)  of  water,  and  three- 
score and  ten  palm-trees."  Laborde  (Geographical 
Commentary  on  Exod.  xv.  27)   supposed    Wady 


f  See  the  considerations  adduced  by  Stanley  (S.  $ 
P.)  in  favour  of  the  mountain  of  the  Transfiguration 
being'  on  the  east  of  Jordan. 

b  See  this  fact  noticed  in  Clark's  Peloponnesus  and 
Morea,  p.  190. 

h  See  the  Acta  Sanctorum,  July  20.  By  Cornelius 
a  Lapide  it  is  maintained  that  his  ascent  happened 
on  that  day,  in  the  19th  year  of  Jehoshaphat  (Keil, 
331). 


'  S.  John  of  Jerusalem,  as  quoted  by  Mislin,  Lieux 
Saints,  ii.  49  ;  and  the  Bulls  of  various  Popes  enu- 
merated by  Quaresmius,  vol.  ii. 

a  Root  >1X»  or  7*X,  "  to  be  strong,"  hence  "  a 
strong  tree,"  properly  either  an  "oak"  or  "terebinth," 
but  also  genepally  "tree;"  here  in  plur.  as  "the trees 
of  the  desert"  (Stanley,  S.  ■$•  P.  515,  §76).  Eloth  or 
Elath  is  another  plur.  form  of  same. 


ELIMELECH 

Use  it  to  be  Elim,  the  second  of  four  wadys  lying 
between  '29°  7',  and  29°  20' ,b  which  descend  from 
the  range  of  et  Tih  (here  nearly  parallel  to  the 
shore),  towards  the  sea,  and  which  the  Israelites, 
going  from  N.W.  to  S.E.  along  the  coast  would 
come  upon  in  the  following  order  : —  W.  Ghurundel 
(where  the  "  low  hills  "  begin,  Stanley,  S.  fy  P. 
35),  W.  Useit,  W.  Thai,  and  W.  Shubeikeh ;  the 
last  being  in  its  lower  part  called  also  W.  Taiyibeh, 
or  having  a  junction  with  one  of  that  name.  Be- 
tween Useit  and  Taiyibeh,  the  coast- range  of  these 
hills  rises  into  the  Gebel  Rwrnmam,  "  lofty  and 
precipitous,  extending  in  several  peaks  along  the 
shore,  apparently  of  chalky  limestone,  mostly 
covered  with  flints  .  .  .  its  precipices  .  .  .  cut  on1' 
all  passage  alongshore  from  the  hot  springs  (lying 
a  little  W.  of  S.  from  the  mouth  of  Wady  Useit, 
along  the  coast)  to  the  mouth  of  W.  Taiyibeh  " 
(Rob.  i.  102  ;  comp.  Stanley,  S.  #  P.  35).  Hence, 
between  the  courses  of  these  wadys  the  track  of 
the  Israelites  must  have  been  inland.  Dr.  Stanley 
says  "  Elim  must  be  Ghurundel,  Useit,  or  Taiyi- 
beh," 35  ;  elsewhere,  66,  that  "  one  of  two  valleys, 
or  perhaps  both,  must  be  Elim  ;"  these  appear 
from  the  sequel  to  be  Ghurundel  and  Useit,  "  fringed 
with  trees  and  shrubs,  the  first  vegetation  he  had 
met  with  in  the  desert ; "  among  these  are  "  wild 
palms,"  not  stately  trees,  but  dwarf  or  savage, 
"  tamarisks,"  and  the  "  wild  acacia."  Lepsius 
takes  another  view,  that  Ghurundel  is  Mara,  by 
others  identified  with  Howarac  (2J  hours  N.W. 
from  Ghurundel,  and  reached  by  the  Israelites, 
therefore,  before  it),  and  that  Elim  is  to  be  found 
in  the  last  of  the  four  above  named,  W.  Shubeikeh 
(Leps.  Travels,  Berlin,  1845,  8.  1.  27  ff.)  [WIL- 
DERNESS OF  THE  Wan'DEPJNG.]  [H.  H.] 

ELTM'ELECH  of?Ei>!?X,  'EA^eAe*),  a  man 
of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  and  of  the  family  of  the 
Hezronites  and  the  kinsman  of  Boaz,  who  dwelt  in 
Bethlehem-Ephratah  in  the  days  of  the  Judges.  In 
consequence  of  a  great  dearth  in  the  land  he  went 
with  his  wife  Naomi,  and  his  two  sons,  Jlahlon 
and  Chilion,  to  dwell  in  Moab,  wheie  he  and  his 
sons  died  without  posterity.  Naomi  returned  to 
Bethlehem  with  Ruth,  her  daughter-in-law,  whose 
marriage  with  Boaz,  "  a  mighty  man  of  wealth,  of 
the  family  of  Elimelech,"  "  her  husband's  kinsman," 
firms  the  subject  of  the  book  of  Ruth.     (Kiith  i. 

•_'. :;.  ii.  i, ;;,  iv.  3,9.)  [A.  c.  II.] 

ELIOE'NAI  OJyVbs ;;  'E\««rj«/ol ;  Alex.'EAi- 
wved  znA  — rjl).  1.  Head  of  one  of  the  families  of 
the  sons  of  Becher,  the  son  of  Benjamin  (1  Chr. 
vii.  8). 

2.  Head  of  a  family  of  the  Simeonites  (1  Chr. 
iv.  36).  _ 

3.  (accur.  Ei.iiioi:\.\i,  ^'yinvXt.  Seventhson 
of  Mesbelemiah,  the  son  of  Kore,  of  the  sons  of 
Asaph,  a  Korhite  Levite,  and  one  of  the  doorkeepers 
of  the  "house  of  Jehovah"  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  :'.).  It 
appears  from  ver.  14  that  the  lot  fell  to  ftleshele- 
miah  (Shelemiah)  to  have  tin'  east-gate;  and  as  we 
learn  from  ver.  9  that  he  bad  eighteen  stron 

of  his  sons  and  brethren  under  him,  we  may  con- 
clude that  all  his  sons  except  Zechariah  the  first- 


ELIPHAZ 


533 


born  (ver.  14)  served  with  him,  and  theiefore  Eli- 
oenai  likewise.  There  were  six  Levites  daily  on 
guard  at  the  east-gate,  whose  turn  would  therefore 
come  every  third  day. 

4.  Eldest  son  of  Neariah,  the  son  of  Shemaiah, 
1  Chr.  iii.  23,  24.  According  to  the  present  Heb. 
text  he  is  in  the  seventh  generation  from  ZSrubbabel, 
or  about  contemporary  with  Alexander  the  Great ; 
but  there  are  strong  grounds  for  believing  that  She- 
maiah is  identical  with  Shimei  (ver.  19),  Zerub- 
babel's  brother.  (See  Geneal.  of  our  Lord,  107-109, 
and  ch.  vii.) 

5.  A  priest  of  the  sons  of  Pashur,  in  the  days  of 
Ezra,  one  of  those  who  had  married  foreign  wives, 
but  who,  at  Ezra's  instigation,  put  them  away 
with  the  children  born  of  them,  and  offered  a  ram 
for  a  trespass  offering  (Ezr.  x.  22).  He  is  possibly 
the  same  as  is  mentioned  in  Neh.  xii.  41,  as  one  of 
the  priests  who  accompanied  Nehemiah  with  trum- 
pets at  the  dedication  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem.  He 
is  called  Elionas,  1  Esdr.  ix.  22. 

6.  OJyvbx).  An  Israelite,  of  the  sons  of  Zattu, 
who  had  also  married  a  strange  wife  (Ezr.  x.  27). 
From  the  position  of  Zattu  in  the  lists,  Ezr.  ii.  8 ; 
Neh.  vii.  13,  x.  14,  it  was  probably  a  family  of 
high  rank.  Elioenai  is  corrupted  to  Eliadas, 
1  Esdr.  ix.  28.  [A.  C.  H.] 

ELIO'NAS.  1.  ('EAiwfcus,  Alex.  "EMwvds  ; 
Vulg.  omits),  1  Esd.  ix.  22.     [Elioenai.] 

2.  ('EAtcoj/as ;  Noneas),  1  Esd.  ix.  32.  [Eli- 
ezer.] 

EL'IPHAL  (t?3,t7X  ;  'E\<par,  Alex.  'EA<- 
<paa\  ;  Eliphal),  son  of  Ur  ;  one  of  the  members 
of  David's  guard  (1  Chr.  xi.  35).  In  the  parallel 
list  in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  the  name  is  given  Eliphelet, 
and  the  names  in  connexion  with  it  are  much 
altered.     [Ur.] 

•ELIPHALAT  ('EAicfaAaT ;  Eliphalach),  1 
Esd.  ix.  33.     [Eliphelet.] 

ELIPH'ALET  (ts!?B^N  J  'EA«/>aa0,  and'EAi- 
cpaka  ;  Eliphaleth).  1.  The  last  of  the  thirteen  sous 
born  to  David,  by  his  wives,  after  his  establish- 
ment in  Jerusalem  (2  Sam.  v.  16  ;  1  Chr.  xiv.  7). 
Elsewhere,  when  it  does  not  occur  at  a  pause,  the 
name  is  given  with  the  shorter  vowel — Eliphelet 
(1  Chr.  iii.  8).  Equivalent  to  Eliphalet  are  the 
names  Elpalet  and  PHALTIEL. 

2.  1  Esdr.  viii.  39.     [Eliphelet,  5.] 

EL'IPHAZ  (TQ^N  ;  'EAtc^s  ;  Eliphaz).     1. 

The  son  of  Esau  and  Adah,  and  father  of  Teman 
(Gen.  xxxvi.  4;   1  Chr.  i.  35,  36). 

2.  The  chief  of  the  "  three  friends  "  of  Job.  He 
is  called  "the  Temanitc;"  hence  it  is  naturally 
inferred  that  he  was  a  descendant  of  Teman  (the 
son  of  the  rust  Eliphaz),  from  whom  a  portion  of 
Arabia  Retraea  took  its  name,  and  whose  name  is 
used  as  a  poetical  parallel  to  Edom  in  Jer.  xlix. 
20.  On  him  falls  the  main  burden  of  the  argu- 
ment, that  God's  retribution  in  this  world  is  perfect 
and  certain,  and  that  consequently  suffering  must 


b  Seetzcn  (Reiscii,  1S54,  iii.  114-117)  traversed 
them  all,  and  reached  Howara  in  about  a  six  hours' 
ride.     He  was  going  in  the  opposite  direction  to  the 


c  Seetzen  alleges  that  the  scanty  quantity  of  the 
water  :it  Ilowa'ru  is  against  this  identity, — a  weak 
reason,  tor  the  water  supply  flf  these  regions  i*  highly 


routes  of  Robinson  and  Stanley;   and  it  is  interesting     variable.      He  also   rejects   (.huruiukl   as   the  site  of 
to  compare  his  notes  of  the  local  features,  caught  in     Klim  (iii.  117). 
the  inverse  order,  with  theirs. 


534 


ELIPHELEH 


be  a  proof  of  previous  sin  (Job  iv.  v.  xv.  xxii.). 
His  words  are  distinguished  from  those  of  Bildad 
and  Zophar  by  greater  calmness  and  elaboration, 
and  in  the  first  instance  by  greater  gentleness 
towards  Job,  although  he  ventures  afterwards,  ap- 
parently from  conjecture,  to  impute  to  him  special 
sins.  The  great  truth  brought  out  by  him  is  the 
unapproachable  majesty  and  purity  of  God  (iv.  12-21, 
xv.  12-1(3).  [Job,  Book  of.]  But  still,  with  the 
other  two  friends,  he  is  condemned  for  having,  in  de- 
fence of  God's  providence,  spoken  of  Him  "  the  thing 
that  was  not  right,"  i.  e.  by  refusing  to  recognise  the 
facts  of  human  life,  and  by  contenting  himself  with 
an  imperfect  retribution  as  worthy  to  set  forth  the 
righteousness  of  God.  On  sacrifice  and  the  inter- 
cession of  Job  all  three  are  pardoned.  [A.  B.] 

ELIPH'ELEH  (-irTPQ^K,  i.e.   Eliphelehu; 

'EAi^fz/a,  'EAi^nxAou,  Alex.  'E\i<pa\d;  Eliphalu), 
a  Merarite  Levite  ;  one  of  the  gatekeepers  (D'Hjnt^ 
A.  V.  "  porters")  appointed  by  David  to  play  on 
tlie  harp  "  on  the  Sheminith"  on  the  occasion  of 
bringing  up  the  Ark  to  the  city  of  David  (1  Chr, 
xv.  18,  21). 

ELIPH'ELET  (t^S^K  ;   'EAi^aAeV ;    Eli 

phaleth,  Eliphelet). 

1.  QE\i<pa\ri9,  Alex.  'E\i(pa\4r).  The  name  of 
a  sun  of  David,  one  of  the  children  born  to  him,  by 
his  wives,  after  his  establishment  in  Jerusalem 
(1  Chr.  iii.  6).  In  the  list  in  2  Sam.  v.  15,  16, 
this  name  and  another  are  omitted ;  while  in  an- 
other list  in  1  Chr.  xiv.  5,  6,  it  is  given  as  El- 

I'ALET. 

2.  CE\i<pa\d),  another  son  of  David,  belonging 
also  to  the  Jerusalem  family,  and  apparently  the 
last  of  his  sons  (1  Chr.  iii.  8).  In  the  other  list, 
occurring  at  the  pause,  the  vowel  is  lengthened  and 
the  name  becomes  Eliphalet. 

It  is  believed  by  some  that  there  were  not  two 
sons  of  this  name ;  but  that,  like  Nogah,  one  is 
merely  a  transcriber's  repetition.  The  two  are  cer- 
tainly omitted  in  Samuel,  but  on  the  other  hand 
they  are  inserted  in  two  separate  lists  in  Chro- 
nicles, and  in  both  cases  the  number  of  sons  is 
summed  up  at  the  close  of  the  list. 

3.  ('A\i<pa\4r),  son  of  Ahasbai,  son  of  the 
Maachathite.  One  of  the  thirty  warriors  of  David's 
guard  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  34).  In  the  list  in  1  Chr.  xi. 
the  name  is  abbreviated  into  ELIPHAL. 

4.  Son  of  Eshek,  a  descendant  of  king  Saul 
through  Jonathan  (1  Chr.  viii.  39). 

5.  One  of  the  leaders  of  the  Bene-Adonikam, 
who  returned  from  Babylon  with  Ezra  (Ezr.  viii. 
13).     [Eliphalet,  2.] 

6.  A  man  of  the  Bene-Hashum  in  the  time  of 
Ezra  who  had  married  a  foreign  wife  and  had  to 
relinquish  her  (Ezr.  x.  33).     [EliphalaT.] 

ELIS'ABETH  {'EXtffdPeT,  Luke  i.  off.),  the 
wife  of  Zacharias  and  mother  of  John  the  Baptist. 
She  was  herself  of  the  priestly  family,  4k  tuiv 
dvyaTtpwv  ''Aapiiv,  and  a  i  elation  (<rvyyevf)S,  Luke 
i.  36)  of  the  mother  of  our  Lord.  [Mary/,  1.]    She 


a  The  story  in  the  Citron.  Paschale  and  Epiphanius 
is  that  when  Elisha  first  saw  the  light  the  golden  calf 
at  Gilgal  roared,  so  loud  as  to  be  heard  at  Jerusalem, 
"  He  shall  destroy  their  graven  and  their  molten 
linages"  (Fabricius,  1071). 

b  So  our  translation,  ami  so  the  latest  Jewish  ren- 
dering (Zunz).  Other  versions  interpret  the  passage 
differently. 


ELISHA 

is  described  as  a  person  of  great  piety,  and  was  the 
first  to  greet  Mary,  on  her  coming  to  visit  her,  as 
the  mother  other  Lord  (Luke  i.  42  ff).     [H.  A.] 

•ELISE'US  ('EAicrcue;  N.  T.  Rec.  Text  with 
B  C,  'EXtffffalov ;  Lachm.  with  A  D,  'E\taaiov  ; 
Eliseus,  but  in  Cod.  Amiat.  Helisaeus) :  the  form 
in  which  the  name  Elisha  appears  in  the  A.  V.  of 
the  Apocrypha  and  the  N.  T.  (Ecclus.  xlviii.  12 ; 
Luke  iv.  27). 

ELI'SHA(J?^X;  'EAjoW;  Alex.'EA«ro-ai<f; 
Joseph.  'EAiffcralos  ;  Elisaeus),  son  of  Shaphat  of 
Abel-meholah.a  The  attendant  and  disciple  (ical 
fxadfjT7)s  Kal  SiaKovos,  Jos.  Ant.  viii.  13,  §7)  of 
Elijah,  and  subsequently  his  successor  as  prophet 
of  the  kingdom  of  Israel. 

The  earliest  mention  of  his  name  is  in  the  com- 
mand to  Elijah  in  the  cave  at  Horeb  (1  K.  xix.  16, 
17).  But  our  first  introduction  to  the  future  pro- 
phet is  in  the  fields  of  his  native  place.  Abel- 
meholah — the  "  meadow  of  the  dance  " — was  pro- 
bably in  the  valley  of  the  Jordan,  and,  as  its  name 
would  seem  to  indicate,  in  a  moist  or  watered  situ- 
ation. [Abel.]  Elijah,  on  his  way  from  Sinai  to 
Damascus  by  the  Jordan  valley,  lights  on  his  suc- 
cessor engaged  in  the  labours  of  the  field,  twelve 
yoke  before  him,  i.  e.  either  twelve  ploughs  at  work 
in  other,  pacts  of  the  field,  or  more  probably  twelve 
"  yokes"  of  land  already  ploughed,  and  he  himself 
engaged  on  the  last.  To  cross  to  him,  to  throw 
over  his  shoulders  the  rough  mantle — a  token  at 
once  of  investiture  with  the  prophet's  office,  and  of 
adoption  as  a  son — was  to  Elijah  but  the  work  of 
an  instant,  and  the  prophet  strode  on  as  if  what  he 
had  done  were  nothing  b — "  Go  back  again,  for  what 
have  I  done  unto  thee  ?" 

So  sudden  and  weighty  a  call,  involving  the 
relinquishment  of  a  position  so  substantial,  and 
family  ties  so  dear,  might  well  have  caused  hesita- 
tion. But  the  parley  was  only  momentary.  To 
use  a  figure  which  we  may  almost  believe  to  have 
been  suggested  by  this  very  occurrence,  Elisha  was 
not  a  man  who,  having  put  his  hand  to  the  plough, 
was  likely  to  look  back  ;c  he  delayed  merely  to  give 
the  farewell  kiss  to  his  father  and  mother,  and  pre- 
side at  a  parting  feast  with  his  people,  and  then 
followed  the  great  prophet  on  his  northward  road 
to  become  to  him  what  in  the  earlier  times  of  his 
nation  Joshua d  had  been  to  Moses. 

Of  the  nature  of  this  connexion  we  know  hardly 
anything.  "  Elisha  the  son  of  Shaphat,  who  poured 
water  on  the  hands  of  Elijah,"  is  all  that  is  told  us. 
The  characters  of  the  two  men  were  thoroughly  dis- 
similar, but  how  far  the  lion-like  daring  and  courage 
of  the  one  had  infused  itself  into  the  other,  we  can 
judge  from  the  few  occasions  on  which  it  blazed 
forth,  while  every  line  of  the  narrative  of  Elijah's 
last  hours  on  earth  bears  evidence  how  deep  was 
the  personal  affection  which  the  stern,  rough,  re- 
served master  had  engendered  in  his  gentle  and 
pliant  disciple. 

Seven  or  eight  years  must  have  passed  between 
the  call  of  Elisha  and  the  removal  of  his  master, 
and  during  the  whole  of  that  time  we  hear  nothing 


c  According  to  Josephus  (Ant.  viii.  13,  §7)  he  began 
to  prophesy  immediately. 

d  The  word  •1!"imK>1'  (A.V.  "ministered  to  him") 
is  the  same  that  is  employed  of  Joshua.  Gehazi's 
relation  to  Elisha,  except  once,  is  designated  by  a 
different  word,  "\]}i  =  "  lad  "  or  "  youth." 


ELISHA 

of  him.  But  when  that  period  had  elapsed  he  re- 
appears, to  become  the  most  prominent  figure  in 
the  history  of  his  country  during  the  rest  of  his 
long  life,  in  almost  every  respect  Elisha  presents 
the  most  complete  contrast  to  Elijah.  The  copious 
collection  of  his  sayings  and  doings  which  are 
preserved  in  the  3rd  to  the  9th  chapter  of  the 
2nd  book  of  Kings,  though  in  many  respects  defi- 
cient in  that  remarkable  vividness  which  we  have 
noticed  in  the  records  of  Elijah,  is  yet  full  of 
testimonies  to  this  contrast.  Elijah  was  a  true 
Bedouin  child  of  the  desert.  The  clefts  of  the 
Cherith,  the  wild  shrubs  of  the  desert,  the  cave  at 
Horeb,  the  top  of  Carmel,  were  his  haunts  and  his 
resting-places.  If  he  enters  a  city,  it  is  only  to 
deliver  his  message  of  fire  and  be  gone.  Elisha,  on 
the  other  hand,  is  a  civilised  man,  an  inhabitant  of 
cities.  He  passed  from  the  translation  of  his  master 
to  dwell  (3B»,  A.  V.  "tarry")  at  Jericho  (2  K. 
ii.  18);  from  thence  he  "returned"  to  Samaria 
(ver.  '-'5).  At  Samaria  (v.  3,  vi.  32,  comp,  ver.  24) 
and  at  Dothan  (vi.  14)  he  seems  regularly  to  have 
resided  in  a  house  (v.  9,  24,  vi.  32,  xiii.  17)  with 
"doors"  and  "windows,"  in  familiar  intercourse 
with  the  sons  of  the  prophets,  with  the  elders 
(vi.  32),  with  the  lady  of  Shunem,  the  general  of 
Damascus,  the  king  of  Israel.  Over  the  king  and  the 
"  captain  of  the  host "  he  seems  to  have  possessed 
some  special  influence,  capable  of  being  turned  to 
material  advantage  if  desired  (2  K.  iv.  13).  And 
as  with  his  manners  so  with  his  appearance.  The 
touches  of  the  narrative  are  very  slight,  but  we  can 
gather  that  his  dress  was  the  ordinary  garment  of  an 
Israelite,  the  begcd,  probably  similar  in  form  to  the 
long  abbeyeh  of  the  modern  Syrians  (2  K.  ii.  12), 
that  his  hair  was  worn  trimmed  behind,  in  contrast 
to  the  disordered  locks  of  Elijah  (ii.  23,  as  explained 
below),  and  that  he  used  a  walking-staff  (iv.  29) 
of  the  kind  ordinarily  carried  by  grave  or  aged 
citizens  (Zech.  viii.  4).  What  use  he  made  of  the 
rough  mantle  of  Elijah,  which  came  into  his  pos- 
session at  their  parting,  does  not  anywhere  appear, 
but  there  is  no  hint  of  his  ever  having  worn  it. 

If  from  these  external  peculiarities  we  turn  to 
the  internal  characteristics  of  the  two,  and  to  the 
results  which  they  produced  on  their  contemporaries, 
the  differences  which  they  present  are  highly  in- 
structive. Elijah  was  emphatically  a  destroyer. 
His  mission  was  to  slay  and  to  demolish  whatever 
opposed  or  interfered  with  the  rights  of  Jehovah, 
the  Lord  of  Hosts.  The  nation  had  adopted  a  god 
"t  power  and  force,  and  they  were  shown  that  he 
was  feebleness  itself  compared  with  the  God  whom 
they  had  forsaken.  But  after  Elijah  the  destroyer 
comes  Elisha  the  healer.  "  There  shall  not  be  dew 
nor  rain  these  years"  is  the  proclamation  of  the 
one.  '•  There  shall  not  be  from  thence  any  dearth 
or  barren  land"  is  the  first  miracle  of  the  oilier. 
What  wt\\  have  been  the  disposition  of  Elijah  when 
not  engaged  in  the  actual  service  of  his  mission  we 
have  unhappily  no  means  of  knowing.     Like  most 


ELISHA 


535 


c  The  ordinary  meaning  put  upon  this  phrase  see, 
for  example,  •!.  It.  Newman,  Sutj,  ofthe  I'm/,  p.  191)  is 
that  Elisha  possessed  double  the  power  of  Elijah,  This, 
though  sanctioned  by  the  renderings  of  the  Vulgate 
and  Luther,  and  adopted  by  a  long  series  of  commen- 
tators from  S.  Ephraem  Syrus  to  Pastor  Krummacher, 
would  appear  not  to  be  the  real  force  of  the  words. 

D'Ot)'    ''S,    literally   "a  month  of  two" — a  double 

mouthful— is  the  phrase  employed  in  Dent.  \\i.  17 

to  denote    the  amount  id  a  father's  goods  which  were 


men  of  strong  stern  character,  he  had  probably 
affections  no  less  strong.  But  it  is  impossible  to 
conceive  that  he  was  accustomed  to  the  practice  of 
that  beneficence  which  is  so  strikingly  characteristic 
of  Elisha,  and  which  comes  out  at  almost  every  step 
of  his  career.  Still  more  impossible  is  it  to  con- 
ceive him  exercising  the  tolerance  towards  the  per- 
son and  the.  religion  of  foreigners  for  which  Elisha  is 
remarkable, — in  communication,  for  example,  with 
Naamau  or  Hazael ;  in  the  one  case  calming  with 
a  word  of  peace  the  scruples  of  the  new  proselyte, 
anxious  to  reconcile  the  due  homage  to  llimmon 
with  his  allegiance  to  Jehovah ;  in  the  other 
case  contemplating  with  tears,  but  still  with 
tears  only,  the  evil  which  the  future  king  of 
Syria  was  to  bring  on  his  country.  That  Baal- 
worship  was  prevalent  in  Israel  even  after  the 
efforts  of  Elijah,  and  that  Samaria  was  its  chief 
seat,  we  have  the  evidence  of  the  narrative  of  Jehu 
to  assure  us  (2  K.  x.  18-27),  but  yet  not  one  act 
or  word  in  disapproval  of  it  is  recorded  of  Elisha. 
True,  he  could  be  as  zealous  in  his  feelings  and  as 
cutting  in  his  words  as  Elijah.  "  What  have  I  to 
do  with  thee?"  says  he  to  the  son  of  Ahab — "this 
son  of  a  murderer,"  as  on  another  occasion  he  called 
him— s-"  What  have  I  to  do  with  thee  ?  get  thee  to 
the  prophets  of  thy  father  and  to  the  prophets  of 
thy  mother.  As  the  Lord  of  hosts  liveth  before 
whom  I  stand " — the  very  formula  of  Elijah — 
"  siu-ely  were  it  not  that  I  regard  the  presence  of 
Jehoshaphat  king  of  Judah  I  would  not  look  toward 
thee  nor  see  thee  1"  But  after  this  expression  of 
wrath  he  allows  himself  to  be  calmed  by  the  music 
of  the  minstrel,  and  ends  by  giving  the  three  kings 
the  counsel  which  frees  them  from  their  difficulty. 
So  also  he  smites  the  host  of  the  Syrians  with 
blindness,  but  it  is  merely  for  a  temporary  purpose  ; 
and  the  adventure  concludes  by  his  preparing  great 
provision  for  them,  and  sending  these  enemies  of 
Israel  and  worshippers  of  false  gods  back  unharmed 
to  their  master. 

In  considering  these  differences  the  fact  must  not 
be  lost  sight  of  that,  notwithstanding  their  greater 
extent  and  greater  detail,  the  notices  of  Elisha  really 
convey  a  much  more  imperfect  idea  ofthe  man  than 
those  of  Elijah.  The  prophets  of  the  nation  of  Israel 
— both  the  predecessors  of  Elisha,  like  Samuel  and 
Elijah,  and  his  successors,  like  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah 
— are  represented  to  us  as  preachers  of  righteousness, 
or  champions  of  Jehovah  against  false  gods,  or 
judges  and  deliverers  of  their  country,  or  counsellors 
of  their  sovereign  in  times  of  peril  and  difficulty. 
Their  miracles  and  wonderful  acts  are  introduced  as 
means  towards  these  ends,  and  are  kept  in  the  most 
complete  subordination  thereto.  But  with  Elisha, 
as  lie  is  pictured  in  these  narratives,  the  case  is 
completely  reversed.  With  him  the  miracles  are 
everything,  the  prophet's  work  nothing.  The  man 
who  wa.  for  years  the  intimate  companion  of  Elijah, 
on  whom  Elijah's  mantle  descended,  and  who  was 
gifted  with  a  double  portion  of  his  spirit,''  appears 


the  right  and  token  of  a  firstborn  son.  Thus  the  gift 
of  the  "  double  portion"  of  Elijah's  spirit  was  but 
the  1<  gitimate  conclusion  of  the  act  of  adoption  which 
ing  of  the  mantle  at  Abel-meholah 
years  before.  This  explanation  is  given  by  Grotius 
and  others.  (See  Keil  nil  lor.)  Kwald  (6V.sc//.  iii. 
.")(17)  gives  it  as  nur  Zweidrittel,  und  ouch  diesekaum 
— two-thirds,  and  hardly  that.  For  a  curious  calcu- 
lation by  s.  Peter  Damianus,  that  Elijah  performed 
12  miracles  and  Elisha  24,  sec  the  Acta  Sanctorum, 
July  Jo. 


536 


ELISHA 


in  these  records  chiefly  as  a  worker  of  prodigies,  a 
predicter  of  future  events,  a  revealer  of  secrets,  and 
tilings  happening  out  of  sight  or  at  a  distance. 
The  working  of  wonders  seems  to  be  a  natural  ac- 
companiment of  false  religions,  and  we  may  be  sure 
that  the  Baal-worship  of  Samaria  and  Jezreel  was 
not  free  from  such  arts.  The  story  of  1  K.  xxii. 
shows  that*  even  before  Elisha's  time  the  prophets 
had  come  to  be  looked  upon  as  diviners,  and  were 
consulted,  not  on  questions  of  truth  and  justice,  nor 
even  as  depositaries  of  the  purposes  and  will  of  the 
Deity,  but  as  able  to  foretell  how  an  adventure  or 
a  project  was  likely  to  turn  out,  whether  it  might 
be  embarked  in  without  personal  danger  or  loss. 
But  if  this  degradation  is  inherent  in  false  worship, 
it  is  no  less. a  principle  in  true  religion  to  accom- 
modate itself  to  a  state  of  things  already  existing, 
and  out  of  the  forms  of  the  alien  or  the  false  to 
produce  the  power  of  the  true.f  And  thus  Elisha 
appears  to  have  fallen  in  with  the  habits  of  his 
fellow-countrymen.  He  wrought,  without  reward 
and  without  ceremonial,  the  cures  and  restorations 
for  which  the  soothsayers  of  Baalzebub  at  Ekron 
were  consulted  in  vain :  he  warned  his  sovereign 
of  dangers  from  the  Syrians  which  the  whole  four 
hundred  of  his  prophets  had  not  succeeded  in  pre- 
dicting to  Ahab,  and  thus  in  one  sense  we  may  say 
that  no  less  signally  than  Elijah  he  vanquished  the 
false  gods  on  their  own  field.  But  still  even  with 
this  allowance  it  is  difficult  to  help  believing  that 
the  anecdotes  of  his  life  (if  the  word  may  be  per- 
mitted, for  we  cannot  be  said  to  possess  his  bio- 
graphy) were  thrown  into  their  present  shape  at 
a  later  period,  when  the  idea  of  a  prophet  had  been 
lowered  from  its  ancient  elevation  to  the  level  of  a 
mere  worker  of  wonders.  A  biographer  who  held  this 
lower  idea  of  a  prophet's  function  would  regard  the 
higher  duties  above  alluded  to  as  comparatively 
unworthy  of  notice,  and  would  omit  all  mention 
of  them  accordingly.  In  the  eulogium  of  Elisha 
contained  in  the  catalogue  of  worthies  of  Ecclus. 
\lviii.  12-14 — the  only  later  mention  of  him  save 
the  passing  allusion  of  Luke  iv.  27 — this  view  is 
more  strongly  brought  out  than  in  the  earlier  nar- 
rative:— "  Whilst  he  lived,  he  was  not  moved  by 
the  presence  of  any  prince,  neither  could  any  bring 
him  into  subjection.  No  word -could  overcome  him, 
and  after  his  death  his  body  prophesied.  He  did 
wonders  in  his  life,  and  at  his  death  were  his  works 
marvellous." 

But  there  are  other  considerations  from  which 
the  incompleteness  of  these  records  of  Elisha  may 
be  inferred: — (1.)  The  absence  of  marks  by  which 
to  determine  the  dates  of  the  various  occurrences. 
The  "king  of  Israel"  is  continually  mentioned, 
but  we  are  left  to  infer  what  king  is  intended 
( 2  K.  v.  5,  6,  7,  &c,  vi.  8,  9,  21,  26,  vii.  2,  viii. 
3,  5,  G,  &c).  This  is  the  case  even  in  the  story 
of  the  important  events  of  Naaman's  cure,  and  the 
capture  of  the  Syrian  host  at  Dothan.  The  only 
exceptions  are  iii.  12  (comp.  6),  and  the  narrative 


f  See  Stanley's  Canterbury  Sermons,  p.  320. 
s  The   figures   given    above    are    arrived    at    as 
follows  : — 

Ahab's  reign  after  Elisha's  call,  say     4  years. 

Ahaziah's  do 2     ,, 

Jovam's  do 12     „ 

Jehu's  do 28     „ 

Jehoahaz's  do.  17      ,, 

Joash,  before  Elisha's  death,  say  .  .     2     ,, 


65 


ELISHA 

ol  the  visit  of  Jehoash  (xiii.  14,  &c.),  but  this 
latter  story  is  itself  a  proof  of  the  disarrangement 
of  these  records,  occurring  as  it  does  after  the  men- 
tion of  the  death  of  Jehoash  (ver.  13),  and  being 
followed  by  an  account  of  occurrences  in  the  reign 
of  Jehoahaz  his  father  (ver.  22,  23).  (2.)  The 
absence  of  chronological  sequence  in  the  narratives. 
The  story  of  the  Shunammite  embraces  a  lengthened 
period,  from  before  the  birth  of  the  child  till  he  was 
some  years  old.  Gehazi's  familiar  communication  with 
the  king,  and  therefore  the  story  which  precedes  it 
(viii.  1,  2),  must  have  occurred  before  he  was  struck 
with  leprosy,  though  placed  long  after  the  relation 
of  that  event  (v.  27).  (3.)  The  different  stories 
are  not  connected  by  the  form  of  words  usually 
employed  in  the  consecutive  narrative  of  these 
books.  (See  Keil,  Kings,  348,  where  other  indi- 
cations will  be  found.) 

With  this  preface  we  pass  to  the  consideration  of 
the  several  occurrences  preserved  to  us  in  the  life 
of  the  prophet. 

The  call  of  Elisha  seems  to  have  taken  place 
about  four  years  before  the  death  of  Ahab.  He 
died  in  the  reign  of  Joash,  the  grandson  of  Jehu. 
This  embraces  a  period  of  not  less  than  65  years, 
for  certainly  55  of  which  he  held  the  office  of 
"prophet  in  Israel"  (2  K.  v.  8).e 

1.  After  the  departure  of  his  master,  Elisha  re- 
turned to  dwell h  at  Jericho  (2  K.  ii.  18).  The 
town  had  been  lately  rebuilt  (1  K.  xvi.  34),  and 
was  the  residence  of  a  body  of  the  "  sons  of  the 
prophets-"  (2  K.  ii.  5, 15).  No  one  who  has  visited 
the  site  of  Jericho  can  forget  how  prominent  a 
feature  in  the  scene  are  the  two  perennial  springs 
which,  rising  at  the  base  of  the  steep  hills  of  Qua- 
rantania  behind  the  town,  send  their  streams  across 
the  plain  towards  the  Jordan,  scattering,  even  at 
the  hottest  season,  the  richest  and  most  grateful 
vegetation  over  what  would  otherwise  be  a  bare 
tract  of  sandy  soil.  At  the  time  in  question  part 
at  least  of  this  charm  was  wanting.  One  of  the 
springs  was  noxious — had  some  properties  which 
rendered  it  unfit  for  drinking,  and  also  prejudicial 
to  the  land  (ii.  19,  D*jn  =  bad,  A.  V.  "naught"). 
At  the  request  of  the  men  of  Jericho  Elisha 
remedied  this  evil.  He  took  salt  in  a  new  vessel, 
and  cast  it  into  the  water  at  its  source  in  the  name 
of  Jehovah.  From  the  time  of  Josephus  (B.  J.  iv. 
8,  §3)  to  the  present  (Saewulf,  Mod.  Trav.  17  ; 
Mandeville;  Maundrell ;  Kob.  i.  554,  5),  the  tradi- 
tion of  the  cure  has  been  attached  to  the  large  spring 
N.W.  of  the  present  town,  and  which  now  bears, 
probably  in  reference  to  some  later  event,  the  name 
of  Ain  es-Stdtan.1 

2.  We  next  meet  with  Elisha  at  Bethel,  in 
the  heart  of  the  country,  on  his  way  from  Jericho 
to  Mount  Carmel  (2  K.  ii.  23).  His  last  visit 
had  been  made  in  company  with  Elijah 'on  their 
road  down  to  the  Jordan  (ii.  2).  Sons  of  the 
prophets  resided  there,  but  still  it  was  the  seat  of 


Out  of  the  above  Elijah  lived  probably  9  years  ;  the 
4  of  Ahab,  the  2  of  Ahaziah,  and  say  3  of  Joram  : 
which  leaves  56  years  from  the  ascent  of  Elijah  to  the 
death  of  Elisha. 

h  Hebr.  2&<>  ;  A.  V.  generally  "  dwelt,"  but  here 
"  tarried."     "  T 

1  This,,  or  A  in  Sajla,  in  the  same  neighbourhood, 
is  probably  the  spring  intended  by  Scott  in  the  opening 
chapter  of  the  Talisman,  under  the  name  of  the  "  Dia- 
mond of  the  Desert."  But  his  knowledge  of  the  topo- 
graphy is  evidently  most  imperfect. 


ELISHA 

the  calf-worship,  and  therefore  a  prophet  of  Jehovah 
might  expect  to  meet  with  insult,  especially  if  not 
so  well  known  and  so  formidable  as  Elijah.  The 
road  to  the  town  winds  up  the  defile  of  the  WmIij 
Suweinit,  under  the  hill  which  still  bears  what  in 
all  probability  are  the  ruins  of  Ai,  and  which,  even 
now  retaining  some  trees,  was  at  that  date  shaded 
by  a  forest,  thick,  and  the  haunt  of  savage  animals.11 
Here  the  boys  of  the  town  were  clustered,  waiting, 
as  they  still  wait  at  the  entrance  of  the  villages  of 
Palestine,  for  the  chance  passer-by.  In  the  short- 
trimmed  locks  of  Elisha,  how  were  they  to  recog- 
nise the  successor  of  the  prophet,  with  whose  shaggy 
hair  streaming  over  his  shoulders  they  were  all 
familiar?  So  with  the  license  of  the  Eastern 
children  they  scotf  at  the  new  comer  as  he  walks 
by — "Go  up,m  roundhead!  go  up,  roundhead!" 
For  once  Elisha  assumed  the  sternness  of  his  master. 
He  turned  upon  them  and  cursed  them  in  the  name 
of  Jehovah,  and  we  all  know  the  catastrophe  which 
followed.  The  destruction  of  these  children  has 
In',. n  always  felt  to  be  a  difficulty.  It  is  so  entirely 
different  from  anything  elsewhere  recorded  of  Elisha 
— the  one  exception  of  severity  in  a  life  of  mildness 
and  beneficence — that  it  is  perhaps  allowable  to  con- 
clude that  some  circumstances  have  been  omitted 
in  the  narrative,  or  that  some  expression  has  lost 
its  special  force,  which  would  have  explained  and 
justified  the  apparent  disproportion  of  the  punish- 
ment to  the  offence. 

3.  Elisha  extricates  Jehoram  king  of  Israel,  and 
the  kings  of  Judah  and  Edom,  from  their  difficulty 
in  the  campaign  against  Moab,  arising  from  want 
of  water  (iii.  4-27).  The  revolt  of  Moab  occurred 
very  shortly  after  the  death  of  Ahab  (iii.  5,  comp. 
i.  1),  and  the  campaign  followed  immediately — "  the 
same  day"  (iii.  t; ;  A.  V.  '•  time").  The  prophet 
was  with  the  army;  according  to  Joseph  us  tAitt. 
ix.  3,  §1),  he  "happened  to  be  in  a  tent  (eri>x6 
KaTefficqMffKdis)  outside  the  camp  of  Israel." 
Joram  he  refuses  to  hear  except  out  of  respect  for 
Jehoshaphat  the  servant  of  the  true  God  ;  but  a 
minstrel  is  brought,  and  at  the  sound  of  music  the 
hand  of  Jehovah  comes  upon  him,  and  he  predicts 
a  fall  of  rain,  and  advises  a  mode  of  procedure  in 
connexion  therewith  which  results  in  the  complete 
discomfiture  of  Moab.  This  incident  probably  took 
place  at  the  S.E.  end  of  the  Dead  Sea. 

4.  The  widow  of  one  of  the  sons  of  the  prophets 
— according  to  Josephus,  of  Obadiah,  the  steward  of 
Ahab— is  in  debt,  and  her  two  sons  are  about  to  be 
taken  from  her  and  sold  as  slaves.  She  has  no  pro- 
perty but  a  pot  of  oil.  This  Klisha  causes  (in  his 
absence,  iv.  5)  to  multiply,  until  the  widow  has 
tilled  with  it  all  the  vessels  which  she  could  borrow. 
No  invocation  of  Jehovah  is  mentioned,  nor  any 
place  or  date  of  the  miracle. 

5.  The  next  occurrence  is  at  Shunem  and  Mount 
Carmel  (iv.  8-.S7).  The  story  divides  itself  into 
two  parts,  separated   from   each  other   by  several 

k  The  "lion"  and  the  "bear"  are  mentioned  i- 
not  uncommon  by  Amos  v.  19),  who  resided  certainly 
for  some  time  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Bethel  (see 
vii.  10  ;  also  iv.  I  ;  v.  5,  (i).  The  word  used  for  the 
"forest"  is  "ly,  ya'nr,  implying  a  denser  growth 
than  choresh,  more  properly  a  "wood"  (Stanley, 
S.  4-  P.  App.  §73). 

m  i"Py,  "go  up,"  can  hardly,  as  Abarbanel  would 
have  it,  be  a  scoff  at  the  recent  ascent  of  Elijah.  The 
word  rendered  above  by   "roundhead''   I [flip     is   D 


ELISHA 


537 


years.  («.)  Elisha,  probably  on  his  way  between 
Carmel  and  the  Jordan  valley,  calls  accidentally  at 
Shunem,  now  Solam,  a  village  on  the  southern 
slopes  of  Jebcl  ed  Duhy,  the  little  Hermon  of 
modern  travellers.  Here  he  is  hospitably  enter- 
tained by  a  woman  of  substance,  apparently  at  that 
time  ignorant  of  the  character  of  her  guest.  There 
is  no  occasion  here  to  quote  the  details  of  this 
charming  narrative,  or  the  manner  in  which,  as  a 
recompense  for  her  care  of  the  Prophet,  she  was 
saved  from  that  childless  condition  which  was 
esteemed  so  great  a  calamity  by  every  Jewish  wife, 
and  permitted  to  "  embrace  a  son." 

(b.)  An  interval  has  elapsed  of  several  years. 
The  boy  is  now  old  enough  to  accompany  his  father 
to  the  corn-field,  where  the  harvest  is  proceeding. 
The  fierce  rays  of  the  morning  sun  are  too  powerful 
for  him,  and  he  is  carried  home  to  his  mother  only  . 
to  die  at  noon.  She  says  nothing  of  their  loss  to 
her  husband,  but  depositing  her  child  on  the  bed 
of  the  man  of  God,  at  once  starts  in  quest  of  him 
to  Mount  Carmel.  The  distance  is  fifteen  or  six- 
teen miles,  at  least  four  hours'  ride  ;  but  she  is 
mounted  on  the  best  ass  n  in  the  stable,  and  she  does 
not  slacken  rein.  Elisha  is  on  one  of  the  heights  of 
Carmel  commanding  the  road  to  Shunem,  and 
from  his  position  opposite  to  her  (133ft)  he  recog- 
nises in  the  distance  the  figure  of  the  regular 
attendant  at  the  services  which  he  holds  here  at 
"new  moon  and  sabbath"  (comp.  ver.  23).  He 
sends  Gehazi  clown  to  meet  her,  and  inquire  the 
reason  of  her  unexpected  visit.  But  her  distress  is 
for  the  ear  of  the  master,  and  not  of  the  servant, 
and  she  presses  on  till  she  comes  up  to  the  place 
where  Elisha  himself  is  stationed,0  then  throwing 
herself  down  in  her  emotion  she  clasps  him  by  the 
feet.  Misinterpreting  this  action,  or  perhaps  with 
an  ascetic  feeling  of  the  unholiness  of  a  woman, 
Gehazi  attempts  to  thrust  her  away.  But  the 
prophet  is  too  profound  a  student  of  human  nature 
to  allow  this — "  Let  her  alone,  for  her  soul  is  vexed 
within  her,  and  Jehovah  hath  hid  it  from  me,  and 
hath  not  told  me."  "And  she  said" — with  the 
enigmatical  form  of  Oriental  speech — "  did  I  desire 
a  son  of  my  lord?  did  I  not  say  do  not  deceive 
me  ?  "  No  explanation  is  needed  to  tell  Elisha  the 
exact  state  of  the  case.  The  heat  of  the  season  will 
allow  of  no  delay  in  taking  the  necessary  steps, 
and  Gehazi  is  at  once  despatched  to  run  back  to 
Shunem  with  the  utmost  speed. p  He  takes  the 
prophet's  walking-staff  in  his  hand  which  he  is  to 
lay  on  the  face  of  the  child.  The  mother  and 
Klisha  follow  in  haste.  Before  they  reach  the  vil- 
lage the  Sun  of  that  long,  anxious,  summer  after- 
noon must  have  set.  Gehazi  meets  them  on  the 
road,  but  he  has  no  reassuring  report  to  give,  the 
placing  of  the  staff  on  the  face  of  the  dead  boy  had 
called  forth  no  sign  of  life.  Then  Klisha  enters  the 
bouse,  goes  up  to  his  own  chamber,  "  and  he  shut 
tic  door  on  them  twain,  an.l  prayed  unto  Jehovah." 


peculiar  Hebrew  term  for  shortness  of  hair  at  the 
back  of  the  head,  as  distinguished  from  1133,  bald  in 

front ;  A.  V.  "  forehead-bald."    This  is  due  to  Ewald 
(iii.  512). 

n  pnNn  =  "  the  shc-ass."  She-asses  were,  and 
still  are,  most  esteemed  in  the  East. 

0  The  A.  V.  in  iv.  27,  perversely  renders  ~li"li"l, 
"the  mount,"  by  "the  hill,"  thus  obSCUling  the 
connexion  with  ver.  2.">,  "  Mount  Carmel." 

*  "  Gird  up  thy  loins  and  l;o." 


538 


ELISHA 


It  was  what  Elijah  had  done  on  a  .similar  occasion, 
and  in  this  and  his  subsequent  proceedings  Elisha 
was  probably  following  a  method  which  lie  had 
heard  of  from  his  master.  The  child  is  restored  to 
life,  the  mother  is  called  in,  and  again  falls  at  the 
feet  of  the  prophet,  though  with  what  different 
emotions — "  and  she  took  up  her  son  and  went 
out." 

There  is  nothing  in  the  narrative  to  fix  its  date 
with  reference  to  other  events.  We  here  first 
encounter  Gehazi  the  "servant"  of  the  man  of 
God.11  It  must  of  course  have  occurred  before  the 
events  of  viii.  1-6,  and  therefore  before  the  cure 
of  Naaman,  when  Gehazi  became  a  leper. 

6.  The  scene  now  changes  to  Gilgal,  apparently  at 
a  time  when  Elisha  was  residing  there  (iv.  38-41). 
The  sons  of  the  prophets  are  sitting  round  him.  It 
is  a  time  of  famine,  possibly  the  same  seven  years' 
scarcity  which  is  mentioned  in  viii.  1,  2,  and  during 
which  the  Shunammite  woman  of  the  preceding 
story  migrated  to  the  Philistine  country.  The  food 
of  the  party  must  consist  of  any  herbs  that  can  be 
found.  The  great  caldron  is  put  on  at  the  com- 
mand of  Elisha,  and  one  of  the  company  brings  his 

blanket  (133;  not  "lap"  as  in  A.  V.)  full  of  such 

wild  vegetables  as  he  has  collected,  and  empties  it 
into  the  pottage.  But  no  sooner  have  they  begun 
their  meal  than  the  taste  betrays  the  presence  of 
some  noxious  herb,r  and  they  cry  out,  "  there  is 
death  in  the  pot,  oh  man  of  God  ! "  In  this  case 
the  cure  was  effected  by  meal  which  Elisha  cast  into 
the  stew,  in  the  caldron.  Here  again  there  is  no 
invocation  of  the  name  of  Jehovah. 

7.  (iv.  42-44).  This  in  all  probability  belongs 
to  the  same  time,  and  also  to  the  same  place  as 
the  preceding.  A  man  from  Baal-shalisha  brings 
the  man  of  God  a  present  of  the  first-fruits,  which 
under  the  law  (Num.  xviii.  8,  12,  Deut.  xviii.  3,4) 
were  the  perquisite  of  the  ministers  of  the  sanctuary 
— 20  loaves  of  the  new  barley,  and  some  delicacy, 
the  exact  nature  of  which  is  disputed,  but  which 
seems  most  likely  to  have  been  roasted  ears  of  corn 
not  fully  ripe,s  brought  with  care  in  a  sack  or  bag.1 
This  moderate  provision  is  by  the  word  of  Jehovah 
rendered  more  than  sufficient  for  a  hundred  men. 

This  is  one  of  the  instances  in  which  Elisha  is 
the  first  to  anticipate  in  some  measure  the  miracles 
of  Christ. 

The  mention  of  Baal-shalisha  gives  great  support 
to  the  supposition  that  the  Gilgal  mentioned  here 
(ver.  38)  as  being  frequented  by  the  sons  of  the 
prophets,  and  therefore  the  same  place  with  that 
in  ii.  1,  was  not  that  near  Jericho  ;  since  Baal- 
shalisha  or  Beth-shalisha  is  fixed  by  Eusebius  at 

q  "1^3,  i-  e.  the  lad  or  youth,  a  totaffy  different 
term  to  that  by  which  the  relation  of  Efisha  to  Elijah 
is  designated — see  above  ;  though  the  latter  is  also 
occasionally  applied  to  Gehazi. 

r  For  a  full  discussion  of  the  nature  of  this  herb 
see  the  article  "  Pakyoth  "  by  the  late  Dr.  Forbes  Royle 
in  Kitto's  Cyclop.  One  kind  of  small  gourd  has  re- 
ceived the  name  Cucumis  prophet  arum  in  allusion  to 
this  circumstance  ;  but  Dr.  R.  inclines  to  favour 
ft  coloct/nthis,  the  colocynth,  or  Momordica  elateriwm, 
the  squirting  cucumber.     This  is  surely  impossible. 

8  The  Hebrew  expression  ;>0"I3  seems  to  be  ellip- 
tical for  '3  BH3  (Lev.  ii.  14  ;' A.  V.  "  green  ears  of 
corn").  The  same  ellipsis  occurs  in  Lev.  xxiii.  14 
(A.V.  "green  ears") .  The  old  Hebrew  interpretation 
is  "tender  and   fresh  ears."     Gesenius  (Thes.  713) 


ELISHA 

fifteen  Roman  miles  north  of  Lydda,  the  very  posi- 
tion in  which  we  still  find  the  name  of  Gilgal 
lingering  as  Jiljilieh.      [Gilgal.] 

8.  The  simple  records  of  these  domestic  incidents 
amongst  the  sons  of  the  prophets  are  now  inter- 
rupted by  an  occurrence  of  a  more  important  cha- 
racter (v.  1-27). 

The  chief  captain  of  the  army  of  Syria,  to  whom 
his  country  was  indebted  for  some  signal  success," 
was  afflicted  with  leprosy,  and  that  in  its  most 
malignant  form,  the  white  variety  (v.  27).  In 
Israel  this  would  have  disqualified  him  from  all 
employment  and  all  intercourse  (2  K.  xv.  5;  2 
Chr.  xxvi.  20,  21).  But  in  Syria  no  such  practice 
appears  to  have  prevailed  ;  Naaman  was  still  a 
"  great  man  with  his  master,"  "  a  man  of  counte- 
nance." One  of  the  members  of  his  establishment 
is  an  Israelite  girl,  kidnapped  by  the  marauders  * 
of  Syria  in  one  of  their  forays  over  the  border,  and 
she  brings  into  that  Syrian  household  the  fame  of 
the  name  and  skill  of  Elisha.  "  The  prophet  in 
Samaria,"  who  had  raised  the  dead,  would,  if 
brought  "  face  to  face " y  with  the  patient,  have 
no  difficulty  in  curing  even  this  dreadful  leprosy. 
The  news  is  communicated  by  Naaman  himself1 
to  the  king.  Benhadad  had  yet  to  learn  the  posi- 
tion and  character  of  Elisha.  He  writes  to  the 
king  of  Israel  a  letter  very  characteristic  of  a 
military  prince,  and  curiously  recalling  words 
uttered  by  another  military  man  in  reference  to 
the  cure  of  his  sick  servant  many  centuries  later — 
"  I  say  to  this  one,  go,  and  he  goeth,  and  to  my 
servant  do  this,  and  he  doeth  it."  "  And  now " 
— so  ran  Benhadad's  letter  after  the  usual  com- 
plimentary introduction  had  probably  opened  the 
communication — "  and  now,  when  this  letter  is 
come  unto  thee,  behold  I  have  sent  Naaman,  my 
slave,  to  thee,  that  thou  mayest  recover  him  of 
his  leprosy."  With  this  letter,  and  with  a  present, 
in  which  the  rich  fabrics,a  for  which  Damascus  has 
been  always  in  modern  times  so  famous,  form  a 
conspicuous  feature,  and  with  a  full  retinue  of 
attendants  (13,  15,  23),  Naaman  proceeds  to 
Samaria.  The  king  of  Israel — his  name  is  not 
given,  but  it  was  probably  Joram — is  dismayed  at 
the  communication.  He  has  but  one  idea,  doubt- 
less the  result  of  too  frequent  experience — "  Consider 
how  this  man  seeketh  a  quarrel  against  me ! " 
The  occurrence  soon  reaches  the  ears  of  the  prophet, 
and  with  a  certain  dignity  he  "  sends  "  to  the  king — 
"  Let  him  come  to  me,  and  he  shall  know  that  there 
is  a  prophet  in  Israel."  To  the  house  of  Elisha 
Naaman  goes  with  his  whole  cavalcade,  the  "  horses 
and  chariot"  of  the  Syrian  general  fixing  themselves 
particularly  in  the  mind  of  the  chronicler.     Elisha 


makes  it  out  to  be  grains  or  grits.  The  passage  in  Lev. 
ii.  14,  compared  with  the  common  practice  of  the  East 
in  the  present  day,  suggests  the  meaning  given  above. 

'  p?p¥  j  LXX.  Trijpa.  The  word  occurs  only  here. 
The  meaning  given  above  is  recognized  by  the  ma- 
jority of  the  versions  and  by  Gesenius,  and  is  stated  in 
the  margin  of  A.  V. 

u  The  tradition  of  the  Jews  is  that  it  was  Naaman 
who  killed  Ahab  (Midrash  Tehillim,  p.  29  b,  on  Ps. 
lxxviii). 

1  Hebr.  Q^"l-'n3  i-  e.  plunderers,  always  (or  irre- 
gular parties  of  marauders. 

*  So  the  Hebrew.     A.  V.  "  with." 

1  A.  V.  "  one  went  in  "  is  quite  gratuitous. 

■  The  word  used  is  C'-llP    -  .'  dress  of  ceremony. 


ELISHA 

still  keeps  in  the  background,  and  while  Naaman 
stands  at  the  doorway,  contents  himself  with  send- 
ing out  a  messenger  with  the  simple  direction  to 
bathe  seven  times  in  the  Jordan.  The  independent 
behaviour  of  the  prophet,  and  the  simplicity  of  the 
prescription — not  only  devoid  of  any  ceremonial, 
but  absolutely  insulting  to  the  native  of  a  city 
which  boasted,  as  it  still  boasts,  of  the  riuest  water- 
supply  of  any  city  of  the  East,  all  combined  to 
enrage  Naaman.  His  slaves,  however,  knew  how 
to  deal  with  the  quick  but  not  ungenerous  temper 
of  their  master,  and  the  result  is  that  he  goes  down 
to  the  Jordan  and  dips  himself  seven  times,  "  and 
his  flesh  came  again  like  the  flesh  of  a  little  child, 
and  he  was  clean."  His  first  business  after  his 
cure  is  to  thank  his  benefactor.  He  returns  with 
his  whole  following  (i"OriD,  i.  e.  "host,"  or 
"  camp  "),  and  this  time  he  will  not  be  denied  the 
presence  of  Elisha,  but  making  his  way  in,  and 
standing  before  him,  he  gratefully  acknowledges 
the  power  of  the  God  of  Israel,  and  entreats  him  to 
accept  the  present  which  he  has  brought  from 
Damascus.  But  Elisha  is  rirm,  and  refuses  the 
oiler,  though  repeated  with  the  strongest  adjuration. 
Naaman,  having  adopted  Jehovah  as  his  God,  begs 
to  be  allowed  to  take  away  some  of  the  earth  of 
His  favoured  country,  of  which  to  make  an  altar. 
He  then  consults  Elisha  on  a  ditliculty  which  he 
foresees.  How  is  he,  a  servant  of  Jehovah,  to  act 
when  he  accompanies  the  king  to  the  temple  of  the 
Syrian  god  Rinrmon?  He  must  bow  before  the 
god  ;  will  Jehovah  pardon  this  disloyalty  ?  Elisha's 
answer  is  "  Go  in  peace,"  and  with  this  farewell 
the  caravan  moves  off.  But  Gehazi,  the  attendant 
of  Elisha,  cannot  allow  such  treasures  thus  to 
".scape  him.  "  As  Jehovah  liveth"  —  an  expression, 
in  the  lips  of  this  vulgar  Israelite,  exactly  equiva- 
lent to  the  oft-repeated  Wallah — "  by  God  " — of 
the  modern  Arabs,  "  I  will  run  after  this  Syrian 
and  take  somewhat  of  him."  So  he  frames  a 
story  by  which  the  generous  Naaman  is  made  to 
send  back  with  him  to  Elisha's  house  a  considerable 
present  in  money  and  clothes.  He  then  went  in 
and  stood  before  his  master  as  if  nothing  had 
happened.  But  the  prophet  was  not  to  be  so 
deceived.  His  heart  had  gone  after  his  servant 
through  the  whole  transaction,  even  to  its  minutest 
details,  and  he  visits  Gehazi  with  the  tremendous 
punishment  of  the  leprosy,  from  which  he  has  just 
relieved  Naaman. 

This  cure  of  leprosy — the  only  one  which  he 
effected  I  Luke  i  v.  27  | — is  a  second  miracle  in  which 
Elisha,  and  Elisha  only,  anticipated  our  Lord.'1 

Tin'  date  of  the  transaction  must  have  been  at 
[easi  seven  years  after  the  raising  of  the  Shunammfte's 
son.  This  is  evident  from  a  comparison  of  viii.  4, 
with  1,  2,  :>.  Gehazi' S  familiar  conversation  with 
the  king  must  have  taken  place  before  he  was  a 
leper. 

9.  (vi.  1-7).  We  now  return  to  the-sons  of  the  pro- 
phets, but  this  time  the  scene  appears  to  he  changed, 
and  is  probably  at  Jericho,  and  during  the  residence 
of  Elisha  there.  Whether  from  the  increase  of  the 
scholars  consequent  on  the  estimation  in  which  the 


ELISHA 


539 


b  The  case  of  Miriam  (Num.  xii.  10-15)  is  different. 
Human  agency  appears  to  have  done  nothing  towards 
her  cure. 

c  So  the  Hebrew,  D^n. 

ll  The  Hebrew  word  3Vp  occurs  only  once  besides 
this  place.  Its  exact  force  is  not  clear,  but  the  I. XX. 
vender  it  airiKvure,  "  he  pinched  off." 


master  was  held,  or  from  some  other  cause,  their 
habitation  had  become  too  small — "the  place  in 
which  we  sit  before  thee  is  too  narrow  for  us." 
They  will  therefore  move  to  the  close  neighbour- 
hood of  the  Jordan,   and   cutting  down  beams 

each  man  one,  as  with  curious  minuteness  the  text 
relates — make  there  a  new  dwelling-place.  Why 
Jordan  was  selected  is  not  apparent.  Possibly 
for  its  distance  from  the  distractions  of  Jericho — 
possibly  the  spot  was  one  sanctified  by  the  crossing 
of  Israel  with  the  ark,  or  of  Elijah,  only  a  few 
years  before.  Urged  by  his  disciples  the  man  of  God 
consents  to  accompany  them.  When  they  reach 
the  Jordan,  descending  to  the  level  of  the  stream, 
they  commence  felling  the  trees "  of  the  dense 
belt  of  wood  in  immediate  contact  with  the  water. 
[Jordan.]  As  one  of  them  was  cutting  at  a  tree 
overhanging  the  stream,  the  iron  of  his  axe  (a  bor- 
rowed tool)  flew  off  and  sank  into  the  water.  His 
cry  soon  brought  the  man  of  God  to  his  aid.  The 
stream  of  the  Jordan  is  deep  up  to  the  very  bank, 
especially  when  the  water  is  so  low  as  to  leave  the 
wood  dry,  and  is  moreover  so  turbid  that  search 
would  be  useless.  But  the  place  at  which  the  lost 
axe  entered  the  water  is  shown  to  Elisha ;  he 
breaks  offd  a  stick  and  casts  it  into  the  stream,  and 
the  iron  appears  on  the  surface,  and  is  recovered  by 
its  possessor.  No  appeal  to  Jehovah  is  recorded 
here. 

10.  (vi.8-23).  Elisha  is  now  residing  at  Dothan, 
halfway  on  the  road  between  Samaria  and  Jezreel. 
The  incursions  of  the  Syrian  marauding  bands c 
(comp.  v.  2)  still  continue  :  but  apparently  with 
greater  boldness,  and  pushed  even  into  places  which 
the  king  of  Israel  is  accustomed  to  frequent. f  But 
their  manoeuvres  are  not  hid  from  the  man  of  God, 
and  by  his  warnings  he  saves  the  king  "  not  once 
nor  twice."  So  baffled  were  the  Syrians  by  these 
repeated  failures,  as  to  make  their  king  suspect 
treachery  in  his  own  camp.  But  the  true  explana- 
tion is  given  by  one  of  his  own  people — possibly  one 
of  these  who  had  witnessed  the  cure  wrought  on 
Naaman,  and  could  conceive  no  power  too  great  to 
ascribe  to  so  gifted  a  person  :  "  Elisha,  the  prophet 
in  Israel,  telleth  the  king  of  Israel  the  words  that 
thou  speakest  in  thy  bed-chamber."  So  powerful 
a  magician  must  be  seized  without  delay,  and  a 
strong  party  with  chariots  is  despatched  to  effect 
his  capture.  They  march  by  night,  and  before 
morning  take  up  their  station  round  the  base  of  the 
eminence  on  which  the  ruins  of  Dothan  still  stand. 
Elisha's  servant — not  Gehazi,  but  apparently  a  new 
comer,  unacquainted  with  the  powers  of  his  master 
— is  the  first  to  discover  the  danger.  But  Elisha 
remains  unmoved  by  his  fears  ;  and  at  his  request 
the  eyes  of  the  youth  are  opened  to  behold  the 
spiritual  guards  which  are  protecting  them,  In  uses 
and  chariots  of  fire  filling  the  whole  of  the  mountain. 
But  this  is  not  enough.  Elisha  again  prays  to  Je- 
bovah,  and  the  whole  of  (he  Syrian  warrinrs  are 
Struck  blind.  He  then  descends,  and  offers  t"  lead 
them  to  the  person  and  the  place  which  they  seek. 
He  conducts  them  to  Samaria.    There,  at  the  prayer 

of  the  prophet,  their  sight  is  rest,, red.  and  they  find 


e  D^Tl"!]!,  always  with  the  force  of  irregular 
ravaging.     See  ver.  23. 

'  The  expression  is  peculiar — "beware  thou  pass 
not  by  such  a  place."  Josephue  fix.  4,  §3)  says  that 
the  king  was  obliged  to  give  up  hunting  in  conse- 
quence. 


540 


ELISHA. 


themselves  not  in  a  retired  country  village,  but  in  j 
the  midst  of  the  capital  of  Israel,  and  in  the  pre- 
sence of  the  king  and  his  troops.     His  enemies  thus 
completely  in  his  grasp,  the  king  of  Israel  is  eager 
to  destroy  them.     "  Shall  1  slay  ?  shall  I  slay,  my  | 
father?"     But  the  end  of  Elisha  has  been  answered  j 
when  he  has  shown  the  Syrians  how  futile  are  all 
their  attempts  against  his  superior  power.     "  Thou 
shalt  not  slay.     Thou  mayests  slay  those  whom 
thou  hast  taken  captive  in  lawful  tight,  but  not 
these:    feed  them,  and  send  them  away  to  their 
master."     After  such  a  repulse  it  is  not  surprising 
that  the  marauding  forays  of  the  Syrian  troops 
ceased. 

1 1 .  (vi.  24 — vii.  2).  But  the  king  of  Syria  could 
not  rest  under  such  dishonour.  He  abandons  his 
marauding  system,  and  gathers  a  regular  army, 
with  which  he  lays  siege  to  Samaria.  The  awful 
extremities  to  which  the  inhabitants  of  the  place 
were  driven  need  not  here  be  recalled.  Roused  by 
an  encounter  with  an  incident  more  ghastly  than 
all,  and  which  remained  without  parallel  in  Jewish 
records  till  the  unspeakable  horrors  of  the  last  days 
of  Jerusalem  (Joseph.  B.  J.  v.  10,  §3  ;  13,  §7,  &c), 
the  king  vents  his  wrath  on  the  prophet,  probably 
as  having  by  his  share  in  the  last  transaction,11  or  in 
some  other  way  not  recorded,  provoked  the  invasion  ; 
possibly  actuated  by  the  spite  with  which  a  weak  bad 
man  in  difficulty  often  regards  one  better  and  stronger 
than  himself.  The  king's  name  is  not  stated  in  the 
Bible,  but  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  Josephus  is 
correct  in  giving  it  as  Joram  ;  and  in  keeping  with 
this  is  his  employment  of  the  same  oath  which  his 
mother  Jezebel  used  on  an  occasion  not  dissimilar 
(1  K.  xix.  2),  "  God  do  so  to  me  and  more  also,  if 
the  head  of  Elisha  the  son  of  Shaphat  shall  stand  on 
him  this  day."  No  sooner  is  the  word  out  of  the 
king's  mouth  than  his  emissary  starts  to  execute 
the  sentence.  Elisha  is  in  his  house,  and  round  him 
are  seated  the  elders  of  Samaria,  doubtless  receiving 
some  word  of  comfort  or  guidance  in  their  sore 
calamity.  He  receives  a  miraculous  intimation  of 
the  danger.  Ere  the  messenger  could  reach  the 
house,  he  said  to  his  companions,  "  See  how  this 
son  of  a  murderer '  hath  sent  to  take  away  my 
head  !  Shut  the  door,  and  keep  him  from  entering  : 
even  now  I  hear  the  sound  of  his  master's  feet 
behind  him,  hastening  to  stay  the  result  of  his  rash 
exclamation  !"  k  As  he  says  the  words  the  mes- 
senger arrives  at  the  door,  followed  immediately,  as 
the  prophet  had  predicted,  by  the  king  and  by  one 
of  his  officers,  the  lord,  on  whose  hand  he  leaned. 
What  follows  is  very  graphic.  The  king's  hereditary 
love  of  Baal  bursts  forth,  and  he  cries,  "  This  evil 
is  from  Jehovah,"  the  ancient  enemy  of  my  house, 
"  why  should  I  wait  for  Jehovah  any  longer?"  To 
this  Elisha  answers:  "  Hear  the  word  of  Jehovah" 
—He  who  has  sent  famine  can  also  send  plenty — 
"  to-morrow  at  this  time  shall  a  measure  of  tine 
flour  be  sold  for  a  shekel,  and  two  measures  of 
barley  for  a  shekel,  in  the  gate  of  this  very  city." 


ELISHA 

"  This  is  folly,"  says  the  officer  :  "  even  if  Jehovah 
were  to  make  windows  in  heaven  and  pour  down 
the  provisions,  it  could  not  be."  "  It  can,  it  shall," 
replies  Elisha;  "  and  you,  you  shall  see  it  all,  but 
shall  not  live  even  to  taste  it." 

12.  (viii.  1-6).  We  now  go  back  several  years  to 
an  incident  connected  with  the  lady  of  Shunem,  at 
a  period  antecedent  to  the  cure  of  Naaman  and  the 
transfer  of  his  leprosy  to  Gehazi  (v.  1,  27). 

Elisha  had  been  made  aware  of  a  famine  which 
Jehovah  was  about  to  bring  upon  the  land  for  seven 
years;  and  he  had  warned  his  frie:.d  the  Shunammite 
thereof  that  she  might  provide  for  her  safety.  Ac- 
cordingly she  had  left  Shunem  with  her  family, 
and  had  taken  refuge  in  the  land  of  the  Philistines, 
that  is  in  the  rich  corn-growing  plain  on  the  sea- 
coast  of  Judah,  where  secure  from  want  she  re- 
mained during  the  dearth.  At  the  end  of  the  seven 
years  she  returned  to  her  native  place,  to  find  that 
during  her  absence  her  house  with  the  field-land 
attached  to  it — the  corn-fields  of  the  former  story — 
had  been  appropriated  by  some  other  person.  In 
Eastern  countries  kings  are  (or  were)  accessible  to 
the  complaints  of  the  meanest  of  their  subjects  to 
a  degree  inconceivable  to  the  inhabitants  of  the 
Western  world. m  To  the  king  therefore  the  Shu- 
nammite had  recourse,  as  the  widow  of  Tekoah  on 
a  former  occasion  to  king  David  (2  Sam.  xiv.  4). 
And  now  occurred  one  of  those  rare  coincidences 
which  it  is  impossible  not  to  ascribe  to  something 
more  than  mere  chance.  At  the  very  moment 
the  entrance  of  the  woman  and  her  son — clamour- 
ing, as  Oriental  suppliants  alone  clamour,"  for 
her  home  and  her  land — the  king  was  listening 
to  a  recital  by  Gehazi  of  "  all  the  great  things 
which  Elisha  had  done,"  the  crowning  feat  of  all 
being  that  which  he  was  then  actually  relating 
— the  restoration  to  life  of  the  boy  of  Shunem. 
The  woman  was  instantly  recognized  by  Gehazi. 
"  My  lord,  0  king,  this  is  the  woman  and  this  is 
her  son  whom  Elisha  restored  to  life."  From  her 
own  mouth  the  king  hears  the  repetition  of  the 
wonderful  tale,  and,  whether  from  regard  to  Elisha, 
or  struck  by  the  extraordinary  coincidence,  orders 
her  land  to  be  restored,  with  the  value  of  all  its 
produce  during  her  absence. 

13.  (viii.  7-15).  Hitherto  we  have  met  with 
the  prophet  only  in  his  own  country.  We  now 
find  him  at  Damascus.0  He  is  there  to  cany 
out  the  command  given  to  Elijah  on  Horeb  to 
"  anoint  Hazael  to  be  king  over  Syria."  At  the 
time  of  his  arrival  Benhadad  was  prostrate  with 
his  last  illness.  This  marks  the  time  of  the 
visit  as  after  the  siege  of  Samaria,  which  was 
conducted  by  Benhadad  in  person  (comp.  vi.  24). 
The  memory  of  the  cure  of  Naaman,  and  of  the 
subsequent  disinterestedness  of  the  prophet,  were  no 
doubt  still  fresh  in  Damascus ;  and  no  sooner  does 
he  enter  the  city  than  the  intelligence  is  carried  to 
the  king — "  the  man  of  God  is  come  hither."  The 
kind's  first  desire  is  naturally  to  ascertain  his  own 


6  This  interpretation  is  that  of  the  Targum,  De 
Wette,  and  others,  and  gives  a  better  sense  than 
that  of  the  A.  V.  The  original  will  perhaps  bear 
either. 

h  Josephus,  Ant.  ix.  4,  §4. 

'  Surely  an  allusion  to  Ahab  (Joram's  father)  and 
Naboth. 

k  Josephus  {Ant.  ix.  4,  §4). 

m  Instances  of  this  are  frequent  in  the  Arabian 
Nights.  Ibrahim  I'acha,  the  famous  son  of  Mehcmet 
\li,  used  to  hold  an  open  court  in  the  garden  of  his 


palace  at  Akka  (Acre),  for  complaints  of  all  kinds  and 
from  all  classes. 

n  py¥  (A.  V.   "cry");    a   word   denoting   great 

vehemence. 

0  The  traditional  spot  of  his  residence  on  this  occa- 
sion is  shown  in  the  synagogue  at  Jobar  (1  Hobah), 
a  village  about  2  miles  E.  of  Damascus.  The  same 
village,  if  not  the  same  building,  also  contains  the 
cave  in  which  Elijah  was  fed  by  ravens  and  the  tomb 
of  Gehazi  (Stanley,  412;  Quarcsmius,  ii.  881 — "  vana 
et  mendaeia  Hcbracorum"). 


ELISHA 

fate;  and  Hazael,  who  appears  to  have  succeeded 
Naaman,  is  commissioned  to  be  the  bearer  of  a  pre- 
sent to  the  prophet,  and  to  ask  the  question  on  the 
part  of  his  master,  "  Shall  I  recover  of  this  disease  ?" 
The  present  is  one  of  royal  dimensions ;  a  caravan 
of  40  camels,P  laden  with  the  riches  and  luxuries 
which  that  wealthy  city  could  alone  furnish.  Tbe 
terms  of  Hazael's  ad  Iress  show  the  respect  in  which 
the  prophet  was  held  even  in  this  foreign  and  hostile 
country.  They  are  identical  with  those  in  which 
Naaman  was  a  Idressed  by  his  slaves,  and  in  which 
the  king  of  Israel  iu  a  moment  of  the  deepest  grati- 
tude and  reverence  had  addressed  Elisha  himself. 
"  Thy  son  Benhadad  hath  sent  me  to  thee,  saying, 
'  Shall  I  recover  of  this  disease  ?'  "  The  reply, 
probably  originally  ambiguous,  is  doubly  uncertain 
in  the  present  doubtful  state  of  the  Hebrew  text ; 
but  the  general  conclusion  was  unmistakeable : — 
"  Jehovah  hath  showed  me  that  he  shall  surely  die." 
But  this  was  not  all  that  had  been  revealed  to  the 
prophet.  If  Benhadad  died,  who  would  be  king  in 
his  stead  but  the  man  who  now  stood  before  him  ? 
The  prospect  was  one  which  drew  forth  the  tears 
of  the  man  of  God.  This  man  was  no  rash  and 
imprudent  leader,  who  could  be  baffled  and  de- 
ceived as  Benhadad  had  so  often  been.  Behind  that 
"steadfast"  impenetrable  countenance  was  a  steady 
courage  and  a  persistent  resolution,  in  which  Elisha 
could  not  but  foresee  the  greatest  danger  to  his 
country.  Here  was  a  man  who,  give  him  but  the 
power,  would  "oppress"  and  "cut  Israel  short," 
would  "  thresh  Gilead  with  threshing  instruments  of 
iron,''  and  "  make  them  like  the  dust  by  threshing" 
as  no  former  king  of  Syria  had  done,  and  that  at  a 
time  when  the  prophet  would  be  no  longer  alive  to 
warn  and  to  advise.  At  Hazael's  request  Elisha 
confesses  the  reason  of  his  tears.  But  the  prospect 
is  one  which  has  no  sorrow  for  Hazael.  How  such 
a  career  presented  itself  to  him  may  be  inferred  from 
his  answer.  His  only  doubt  is  the  possibility  of  such 
good  fortune  for  one  so  mean.  "  But  what  is  thy 
slave, q  dog  that  he  is,  that  he  should  do  this  great 
thing?"  To  which  Elisha  replies,  "Jehovah  hath 
showed  me  that  thou  wilt  be  king  over  Syria." 

Returning  to  the  kin^,  Hazael  tells  him  only  half 
the  dark  saying  of  the  man  of  God — "He  told  me 
that  thou  shouldest  surely  recover."  But  that  was 
the  last  day  of  Benhadad's  life.  From  whose  hand 
he  received  his  death,  or  what  were  the  circum- 
stances attending  it,  whether  in  the  bath  as  has 
been  recently  suggested,  we  cannot  tell.*  The 
general  inference,  in  accordance  with  the  account 
of  Josephus,  is  that  Hazael  himself  was  the  mur- 
derer, but  the  statement  in  the  text  does  not  neces- 
sarily beui-  that  interpretation;  and.  ind 1,  from 

the   mention  of  Hazael's  name  at  the  end  of  the 
•  !       e,  the  conclusion  is  rather  the  reverse. 

14.  (ix.  1-10).     Two  of  the  injunctions  laid  on 


ELISHA 


541 


p  Josephus,  Ant.  ix.  4,  §6. 

i  The  A.  V.,  by  omitting,  as  usual,  the  definite 
article  before  "  dog,"  and  by  its  punctuation  of  the 
sentence,  completely  misrepresents  the  very  charac- 
teristic turn  of  the  original — given  above  and  also 
differs  from  all  the  versions.  In  the  Hebrew  the 
word  "dog"  has  the  force  of  meanness,  in  the  A.  V. 
of  cruelty.  For  a  long  comment  founded  on  the  read- 
ing of  the  A.  V.,  see  II.  Blunt,  Lectures  on  Elisha, 
p.  222,  &c. 

r  The  word  "I33?3n,  A.  V.  "  a  thick  cloth,"  has 
been  variously  conjectured  to  be  a  carpet,  a  mosquito- 
net  (Michaelis),  and  a  bath-mattress.  The  last  is 
Kwald's  suggestion  (iii.  523,  note),  and,  taken  in  con- 


Elijah  had  now  been  carried  out;  the  third  still 
remained.  Hazael  had  begun  his  attacks  on  Israel 
by  an  attempt  to  recover  the  stronghold  of  Itamoth- 
Gilead  (viii.  28),  or  Ramah,  among  the  mountains 
on  the  east  of  Jordan.  But  the  fortress  was  held 
by  the  kings  of  Israel  and  Judah  in  alliance,  and 
though  the  Syrians  had  wounded  the  king  of  Israel, 
they  had  not  succeeded  in  capturing  the  place  (viii. 
28,  ix.  15).  One  of  the  captains  of  the  Israelite 
army  in  the  garrison  was  Jehu,  the  son  of  Jeho- 
shaphat,  the  son  of  Nimshi.  At  the  time  his  name 
was  mentioned  to  Elijah  on  Horeb  he  must  have 
been  but  a  youth  ;  now  he  is  one  of  the  boldest 
and  best  known  of  all  the  warriors  of  Israel.  He 
had  seen  the  great  prophet  once,  when  with  his 
companion  Bidkar  he  attended  Ahab  to  take  pos- 
session of  the  field  of  Naboth,  and  the  scene  of  that 
day  and  the  words  of  the  curse  then  pronounced  no 
subsequent  adventure  had  been  able  to  efface  (ix. 
25,  36V  The  time  was  now  come  for  the  fulfilment 
of  that  curse  by  his  being  anointed  king  over  Israel. 
Elisha's  personal  share  in  the  transaction  was  con- 
fined to  giving  directions  to  one  of  the  sons  of  the 
prophets,  and  the  detailed  consideration  of  the  story 
will  therefore  be  more  fitly  deferred  to  another 
place.5     [Jehu.] 

15.  Beyond  this  we  have  no  record  of  Elisha's 
having  taken  any  part  in  the  revolution  of  Jehu, 
or  the  events  which  followed  it.  He  does  not 
again  appear  till  we  find  him  on  his  deathbed  in 
his  own  house  (xiii.  14-19).  Joash,  the  grand- 
son of  Jehu,  is  now  king,  and  he  is  come  to 
weep  over  the  approaching  departure  of  the  great 
and  good  prophet.  His  words  are  the  same  as 
those  of  Elisha  when  Elijah  was  taken  away — 
"  My  father !  my  father !  the  chariot  of  Israel 
and  the  horsemen  thereof!"  But  it  is  not  a 
time  for  weeping.  One  though^  fills  the  mind  of 
both  king  and  prophet.  Syria  is  the  fierce  enemy 
who  is  gradually  destroying  the  country,  and  against 
Syria  one  final  effort  must  be  made  before  the  aid 
of  Elisha  becomes  unobtainable.  What  was  the 
exact,  significance  of  the  ceremonial  employed,  our 
ignorance  of  Jewish  customs  does  not  permit  us  to 
know,  but  it  was  evidently  symbolic.  The  window 
is  opened  towards  the  hated  country,  the  bow  is 
pointed  in  the  same  direction,  and  the  prophet 
laying  his  hands  on  the  string  as  if  to  convey  force 
to  the  shot,  "  the  arrow  of  Jehovah's  deliverance, 
the  arrow  of  deliverance  from  Syria,"  is  discharged. 
This  done,  the  king  takes  up  the  bundle  of  arrows, 
and  at  the  command  of  Elisha  beats  them  on  the 
ground.  But  he  does  it  with  no  energy,  and  the 
successes  of  Israel,  which  might  have  been  so  pro- 
longed as  completely  to  destroy  the  foe,  are  limited 
to  three  victories. 

16.  (xiii.  20-22).  The  power  of  the  prophet, 
however,  does  not  terminate  with  his  death.     Even 


nexion  with  the  "water,"  and  with  the  inference  to 
be  drawn  from  the  article  attached  to  the  Hebrew 
word,  is  more  probable  than  the  others.  Abbas 
Pacha  is  said  to  have  been  murdered  in  the  same 
manner. 

&£  to  the  person  who  committed  the  murder,  Ewald 
justly  remarks  that  as  a  high  officer  of  state  Hazael 
would  have  no  business  in  the  king's  bath.  Some 
suppose  thai  Benhadad  killed  himself  by  accident, 
having  laid  a  wet  towel  over  his  face  while  sleeping. 
See  Ceil,  lid  Inc. 

•  The  connexion  and  the  contrast  between  Elisha 
anil  Jehu  are  well  brought  out  by  Maurice  [Vruphetn 
and  Kings,  serm.  ix.). 


542 


ELISHA 


in  the  tomb'  he  restores  the  dead  to  life.  "Moab  had  j 
recovered  from  the  tremendous  reverse  inflicted  on  I 
her  by  the  three  kings  at  the  opening  of  Elisha's 
career  (2  K.  iii.),  and  her  marauding  bands  had 
begun  again  the  work  of  depredation  which  Syria 
so  long  pursued  (2  K.  v.  2,  vi.  23).  The  text 
perhaps  infers  that  the  spring — that  is,  when  the 
early  crops  were  ripening — was  the  usual  period 
for  these  attacks ;  but,  be  this  as  it  may,  on  the 
present  occasion  they  invaded  the  land  ''  at  the 
coming  in  of  the  year."  A  man  was  being  buried 
in  the  cemetery  which  contained  the  sepulchre  of 
Elisha.  Seeing  the  Moabite  spoilers  in  the  distance, 
the  friend's  of  the  dead  man  hastened  to  conceal  his 
corpse  in  the  nearest  hiding-place.  They  chose — 
whether  by  design  or  by  accident  is  not  said — the 
tomb  of  the  prophet,  and  as  the  body  was  pushed  u 
into  the  cell,  which  formed  the  receptacle  for  the 
corpse  in  Jewish  tombs,  it  came  in  contact  witli  his 
bones.  The  mere  touch  of  those  hallowed  remains 
was  enough  to  effect  that  which  in  his  lifetime  had 
cost  Elisha  both  prayers  and  exertions — the  man 
"  revived  and  stood  up  on  his  feet."  Other  miracles 
of  the  prophet  foreshadow,  as  we  have  remarked, 
the  acts  of  power  and  goodness  of  our  Saviour,  but 
this  may  be  rather  said  to  recal  the  marvels  of  a 
later  period — of  the  early  ages  of  the  Christian 
church.  It  is  in  the  story  of  SS.  Gervasius  and 
Protasius,"  and  not  in  any  occurrence  in  the  life  of 
our  Lord  or  of  the  Aposties,  that  we  must  look  for 
a  parallel  to  the  last  recorded  miracle  of  Elisha. 

Before  closing  this  account  of  Elisha  we  must 
not  omit  to  notice  the  parallel  which  he  presents  to 
our  Lord — the  more  necessary  because,  unlike  the 
resemblance  between  Elijah  and  John  the  Baptist, 
no  attention  is  called  to  it  in  the  New  Testament. 
Some  features  of  this  likeness  have  already  been 
spoken  of.y  But  if.  is  not  merely  because  he  healed 
a  leper,  raised  a  dead  man,  or  increased  the  loaves, 
that  Elisha  resembled  Christ,  but  rather  because 
nf  that  loving  gentle  temper  and  kindness  of  dis- 
position— characteristic  of  him  above  all  the  saints 
of  the  0.  T. — ever  ready  to  soothe,  to  heal,  and  to 
conciliate,  which  attracted  to  him  women  and  simple 
people,  and  made  him  the  universal  friend  and 
"  lather,"  not  only  consulted  by  kings  and  generals, 
but  resorted  to  by  widows  and  poor  prophets  in 
their  little  troubles  and  perplexities.  We  have 
spoken  above  of  the  fragmentary  nature  of  the 
records  of  Elisha,  and  of  the  partial  conception  of 
his  work  as  a  prophet  which  they  evince.  Be  it  so. 
For  that  very  reason  we  should  the  more  gladly 
welcome  those  engaging  traits  of  personal  goodness 
which  are  so  often  to  be  found  even  in  those 
fragments,  and  which  give  us  a  reflection,  feeble  it 
is  true,  but  still  a  reflection,  in  the  midst  of  the 
sternness  of  the  Old  dispensation,  of  the  love  and 
mercy  of  the  New. 

Elisha  is  canonized  in  the  Greek  Church ;  his  day 
is  tue  14th  June.  Under  that  date  his  life,  and  a 
collection  of  the  few  traditions  concerning  him — few 


1  Josephus  says  that  Elisha  had  a  magnificent 
funeral  (tow/)-*;;  /xcyaAo7rpe7rovs,  Ant.  ix.  8,  §6).  Is 
this  implied  in  the  expression  (xiii.  20),  "they  buried 
him"?  The  rich  man  in  the  Gospel  is  also  particu- 
larly said  to  have  been  "  buried  "  (Luke  xvi.  22) 
i.  e.  probably  in  a  style  befitting  his  rank. 

u  The  expression  of  the  A.  V.  "  let  down  "  is  founded 
on  a  wrong  conception  of  the  nature  of  an  Eastern 
sepulchre,  which  is  excavated  in  the  vertical  face  of  a 
rock,  so  as  to  be  entered  by  a  door  ;  not  sunk  below  the 


ELISHAMA 

indeed  when  compared  with  those  of  Elijah — will 
be  found  in  the  Acta  Sanctorum.  In  the  time  of 
Jerome  a  "  mausoleum  "  containing  his  remains  was 
shown  at  Samaria  (Reland,  980).  Under  Julian  the 
bones  of  Elisha  were  taken  from  their  receptacle  and 
burnt.  But  notwithstanding  this  his  relics  are  heard 
of  subsequently,  and  the  church  of  S.  Apollinaris  at 
Ravenna  still  boasts  of  possessing  his  head.  The 
Carmelites  have  a  special  service  in  honour  of 
Elisha.  [G.] 

ELI'SHAH  (nB>^K  ;  'EA«ra,  'EAe«rai'  ;  Jo- 
seph. 'EAicras  ;  Elisa),  the  eldest  son  of  Javan 
(Gen.  x.  4).  The  residence  of  his  descendants  is 
described  in  Ez.  xxvii.  7,  as  the  "isles  of  Elisha" 
(D^fc{  =  maritime  regions),  whence  the  Phoenicians 
obtained  their  purple  and  blue  dyes.  Josephus 
identified  the  race  of  Elishah  with  the  Aeolians 
( 'EAicras  fj.ei>  'EAiccu'ous  e/caAecrei/,  wv  rfpxei', 
AioAeis  5e  vvv  elai,  Ant.  i.  0,  §1).  His  view 
is  adopted  by  Knobel  (  Volkertafcl,  pp.  81  ff.)  in 
preference  to  the  more  generally  received  opinion 
that  Elisha  =  Elis,  and  in  a  more  extended  sense 
Peloponnesus,  or  even  Hellas.  It  certainly  appeals 
correct  to  treat  it  as  the  designation  of  a  race 
rather  than  of  a  locality ;  and  if  Javan  represents 
the  Ioninns,  then  Elisha  the  Aeolians,  whose  name 
presents  considerable  similarity  (AjoAeTs  having 
possibly  been  AiXeTs),  and  whose  predilection  for 
maritime  situations  quite  accords  with  the  expres- 
sion in  Ezekiel.  In  early  times  the  Aeolians  were 
settled  in  various  parts  of  Greece,  Thessaly,  Boeotia, 
Aetolia,  Locris,  Elis,  and  Messenia : .  from  Greece 
they  emigrated  to  Asia  Minor,  and  in  Ezekiel's  age 
occupied  the  maritime  district  in  the  N.W.  of  that 
country,  named  after  them  Aeolis,  together  with 
the  islands  Lesbos  and  Tenedos.  .  The  purple  shell- 
fish was  found  on  this  coast,  especially  at  Abydus 
(Virg.  Georg.  i.  207),  Phocaea  (Ovid,  Metam.  vi. 
9),  Sigeum  and  Lectum  (Athenaeus,  iii.  p.  88). 
Not  much,  however,  can  be  deduced  from  this  as 
to  the  position  of  the  "  isles  of  Elishah,"  as  that 
shell-fish  was  found  in  many  parts  of  the  Mediter- 
ranean, especially  on  the  coast  of  Laconia  (Pausan. 
iii.  21,  §6).  [W.  L.  B.] 

ELISHAMA  (J?>X»^ ;  'EKio-a/xd,  'EA«r- 
a/xae,  'EAeacd,  ktA.),  the  name  of  several  men. 

1.  Son  of  Ammihud,  the"  prince"  or  "cap- 
tain "  (both  JOtJ>3)  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim  in  the 
Wilderness  of  Sinai  (Num.  i.  10,  ii.  18,  vii.  48, 
x.  22).  From  the  genealogy  preserved  in  1  Chr.  vii. 
26,  we  find  that  he  was  grandfather  to  the  great 
Joshua. 

2.  A  son  of  King  David.  One  of  the  thirteen, 
or,  according  to  the  record  of  Samuel,  the  eleven, 
sons  born  to  him  of  his  wives  after  his  establish- 
ment in  Jerusalem  (2  Sam.  v.  16  ;  1  Chr.  iii.  8, 
xiv.  7). 

3.  ('EAio-a).  By  this  name  is  also  given  (in 
the  Heb.  text)    in   1    Chr.   iii.   6,  another  son  of 


surface  of  the  ground  like  our  graves.  The  Hebrew 
word  -pi  is  simply  "went,"  as  in  the  margin. 

1  Augustine's  Confessions  (ix.  §16). 

y  These  resemblances  arc  drawn  out,  with  great 
beauty,  but  in  some  instances  rather  fancifully,  by 
J.  H.  Newman  (Sermons  on  Subj.  of  the  Day,  Elisha 
a  Type  of  Christ,  &c).  See  also  Rev.  Isaac  Williams 
(Old  Test.  Characters). 


ELISHAPHAT 

the  same  family,  who  in  the  other  lists  is  called 
Er.isiiuA. 

4.  A  descendant  of  Judah;  the  son  of  Jekamiab 
(1  Chr.  ii.  41).  In  the  Jewish  traditions  pro- 
served  by  Jerome  (Qu.  Hebr.  on  1  Chr.  ii.  41),  he 
appears  to  be  identified  with 

5.  The  father  of  Nethaniah  and  grandfather  of 
Ishmael  "  of  the  seed  royal,"  who  lived  at  the  time 
of  the  great  captivity  (2  K.  xxv.  25;  Jer.  xli.  1). 

6.  Scribe  to  King  Jehoiakim  (Jer.  xxxvi.  12, 
20,  21). 

7.  A  priest  in  the  time  of  Jehoshaphat,  one  of 
the  party  sent  by  that  king  through  the  cities  of 
Judah,  with  the  book  of  the  law,  to  teach  the 
people  (2  Chr.  xvii.  8). 

ELISH'APHAT  (BBtS^N  ;  6  E\ura<pdv, 
Alex.  'EAiacupdr  ;  Elisaphat),  son  of  Zichri ;  oue 
of  the  "  captains  of  hundreds,"  whom  Jehoiada  the 
priest  employed  to  collect  the  Levites  and  other 
principal  people  to  Jerusalem  before  bringing  for- 
ward Joash  (  2  Chr.  xxiii.  1). 

ELI'SHEBA  (tf3B^«i  'E\i<ra$e6 ;  Elisa- 
beth), the  wife  of  Aaron  (Ex.  vi.  23).  She  was  the 
daughter  of  Amminadab,  and  sister  of  Nahshon  the 
captain  of  the  host  of  Judah  (Num.  ii.  3),  and  her 
marriage  to  Aaron  thus  united  the  royal  and  priestly 
tribes/  [W.  A.  W.] 

ELISH'UA  (XW'ta  ,  'EKiffove,  'E\urd, 
Alex.  'EXiaav ;  Elisua),  on?  of  David's  family  by 
his  later  wives;  born  after  his  settlement  in  Jeru- 
salem (2  Sam.  v.  15;  1  Chr.  xiv.  5).  In  the  list 
of  1  Chr.  iii.  6,  the  name  is  given  with  a  slight 
difference  as  Elishama. 

ELT'SIMUS  CEAidcrLfxos  ;    Liasumus),  1  Esd. 

ix.  28.       [EUASIIIB.] 

ELI'U  CHXiov  =  Hebr.  Elihu),  one  of  the  fore- 
fathers of  Judith  (Jud.  viii.  1),  and  therefore  of 
the  tribe  of  Simeon. 

ELIUD  QEXiobB,  from  the  Hob.  THl^K, 
which  however  does  not  occur,  God  of  the  Jens), 
smi  of  Achim  in  the  genealogy  of  Christ  (Matt.  i. 
15),  four  generations  above  Joseph.  His  name  is 
of  the  same  formation  as  Abiud,  and  is  probably 
an  indication  of  descent  from  him.  [A.  C.  II.] 

ELIZAPHAN  QBV^X  ;  'EXitraQdv ;  Elisa- 
phari).  1.  A  Levite,  son  of  Uzziel,  chief  of  the 
house  of  the  Kohathites  at  the  time  of  the  census 
in  the  Wilderness  of  Sinai  (Num.  iii.  30).  His 
family  was  known  and  represented  in  the  days  of 
King  I 'avid  (1  Chr.  xv.  8),  and  took  part  in  the 
revivals  of  Hezekiah  (2  Chr.  xxix.  13).  His  name 
is  also  found  in  the  contracted  form  of  ELZAPHAN. 

2.  Son  of  Parnach ;   "prince"  (SCHJO)  of  the 

tribe  of  Zebulun,  o >f  the  men  appointed  to  assist 

Moses  in  apportioning  the  land  of  Canaan  (Num. 
xxxiv.  25). 

ELl'ZUB  ("HX*?K;  'E\«r6uP;  Elisor),  son 
ofShedeur;  "prince"  (tOBO)  of  the  tribe,  and 
over  the  host  of  Reuben,  at  the  time  of  the  census 
,n  the  Wilderness  of  Sinai  (Num.  i.  5,  ii.  10,  vii. 
30,  35,  x.  18). 

EL'KANAH  (PWK  ;  'EXxava  ;  Elcana). 
1.  Son  of  Korah,  the  son  of  Izhar,  the  son  of 
Kohath,  the  son  of  Levi,  according  to  Ex.  vi.  24, 
where  his  brothers  are  represented  as  being  Assir 


ELKOSH 


543 


and  Abiasaph.  But  in  1  Chr.  vi.  22,  23  (Hebr.  7. 
8)  Assir,  Elkanah,  and  Ebiasaph  are  mentioned  in 
the  same  order,  not  as  the  three  sons  of  Korah, 
but  as  son,  grandson,  and  great-grandson,  respect- 
ively;  and  this  seems  to  be  undoubtedly  correct. 
If  so,  the  passage  in  Exodus  must  be  understood  as 
merely  giving  the  families  of  the  Korhites  existing 
at  the  time  the  passage  was  penned,  which  must,  in 
this  case,  have  been  long  subsequent  to  Moses.  In 
Num.  xxvi.  58,  "  the  family  of  the  Korhites  "  (A.  V. 
"  Korathites ")  is  mentioned  as  one  family.  As 
regards  the  fact  of  Korah' s  descendants  continuing, 
it  may  be  noticed  that  we  are  expressly  told  in 
Num.  xxvi.  11,  that  when  Korah  and  his  company 
died,  "  the  children  of  Korah  died  not." 

2.  A  descendant  of  the  above  in  the  line  of  Ahi- 
moth,  otherwise  Mahath,  1  Chr.  vi.  26, 35  (Hebr.  1 1 , 
20).    (See  Hervey,  Genealogies,  210,  214,  note.) 

3.  Another  Kohathite  Levite,  in  the  line  of 
tleman  the  singer.  He  was  son  of  Jeroham,  and 
father  of  Samuel  the  illustrious  Judge  and  Prophet 
(1  Chr.  vi.  27,  34).  All  that  is  known  of  him  is 
contained  in  the  above  notices  and  in  1  Sam.  i.  1,  4, 
8,  19,  21,  23,andii.  2,  20,  where  we  learn  that  he 
lived  at  Ramathaim-Zophim  in  Mount  Ephraim, 
otherwise  called  Ramah;  that,  he  had  two  wives, 
Hannah  and  Peninnah,  but  had  no  children  by  the 
former,  till  the  birth  of  Samuel  in  answer  to  Hannah's 
prayer.  We  learn  also  that  he  lived  in  the  time  of 
Eli  the  high-priest,  and  of  his  sons  Hophni  and 
Phinehas ;  that  he  was  a  pious  man  who  went  up 
yearly  from  Ramathaim-Zophim  to  Shiloh,  in  the 
tribe  ot  Ephraim,  to  worship  and  sacrifice  at  the 
tabernacle  there  ;  but  it  does  not  appear  that  he  per- 
formed any  sacred  functions  as  a  Levite;  a  circum- 
stance quite  in  accordance  with  the  account  which 
ascribes  to  David  the  establishment  of  the  priestly  and 
Levitical  courses  for  the  Temple  service.  He  seems 
to  have  been  a  man  of  some  wealth  from  the  nature  of 
his  yearly  sacrifice  which  enabled  him  to  give  portions 
out  of  it  to  all  his  family,  and  from  the  costly  offer- 
ing of  three  bullocks  made  when  Samuel  was  brought, 
to  the  House  of  the  Lord  at  Shiloh.  After  the 
birth  of  Samuel,  Elkanah  and  Hannah  continued  to 
live  at  Ramah  (where  Samuel  afterwards  had  his 
house,  1  Sam.  vii.  7),  and  had  three  sons  and  two 
daughters.  This  closes  all  that  we  know  about 
Elkanah. 

4.  A  Levite  (1  Chr.  ix.  16). 

5.  Another  man  of  the  family  of  the  Korhites  who 
joined  David  while  he  was  at  Ziklag  (1  Chi-,  xii.  6). 
From  the  terms  of  ver.  2  it  is  doubtful  whether  this 
can  be  the  well-known  Levitical  family  of  Korhites. 
Perhaps  the  same  who  afterwards  was  one  of  the 
doorkeepers  for  the  ark,  xv.  23. 

6.  An  officer  in  the  household  of  Ahaz,  king  of 
Judah,  who  was  slain  by  Zichri  the  Hphniiniito, 
when  Pekah  invaded  Judah.  He  seems  to  have 
been  the  second  in  command  under  the  praefecf  of 
the  palace  (2  Chr.  xxviii.  7).  j  \.  C.  II.] 

EL'KOSH  (tftj&$),  the  birthplace  of  the  pro- 
phet Xahum,  hence  called  "  the  Elkoshite,"  Nah.  i.  1 
(6  'EAk€(tcuos ;  Elcesaeus).  Two  widely  differing 
Jewish  traditions  assign  as  widely  diPai  m*  Localities 
to  this  place.  In  the  time  of  Jerome  it  was  be- 
lieved t"  exist  in  a  small  village  of  Galilee.  The 
ruins  of  some  old  buildings  were  pointed  out  to 
this  father  by  his  guide  as  the  remains  of  the 
ancient  Elkosh  (Jerome,  on  Nah.i.  1).  Cyril  ot 
Alexandria   [Cotnm.   on   Nahum)    says    that  the 


544 


ELLASAR 


village  of  Elkosh  was  somewhere  or  other  in  the 
country  of  the  Jews,  l'seudo  Epiphanius  (de  Vitis 
prophetarum,  Op.  ii.  247)  places  Elkosh  on  the 
east  of  the  Jordan,  at  Bethabara  (els  B-qya&ap, 
Ghron.  Pasch.  p.  150,  Cod.  B.  has  els  jii)Ta.fSap-r)v), 
where  he  says  the  prophet  die;.!  in  peace.  According 
to  Schwartz  (Descr.  of  Palestine,  p.  188),  the 
grave  of  Nahum  is  shown  at  Kefr  Tanchum,  a 
village  2J  English  miles  north  of  Tiberias.  But 
mediaeval  tradition,  perhaps  for  the  convenience  of 
the  Babylonian  Jews,  attached  the  fame  of  the  pro- 
phet's burial  place  to  Alkush,  a  village  on  the  east 
bank  of  the  Tigris,  near  the  monastery  of  Rabban 
Hormuzd,  and  about  two  miles  north  of  Mosul. 
Benjamin  of  Tudela  (p.  53.  ed.  Asher)  speaks  of 
the  synagogues  of  Nahum,  Obadiah,  and  Jonah  at 
Asshur,  the  modern  Mosul.  R.  Petachia  (p.  35, 
ed.  Beniseh)  was  shown  the  prophet's  grave,  at  a 
distance  of  four  parasangs  from  that  of  Baruch,  the 
son  of  Neriah,  which  was  itself  distant  a  mile  from 
the  tomb  of  Ezekiel.  It  is  mentioned  in  a  letter  of 
Masius,  quoted  by  Asseman  (Bibt  Orient,  i.  525). 
Jews  from  the  surrounding  districts  make  a  pil- 
grimage to  it  at  certain  seasons.  The  synagogue 
which  is  built  over  the  tomb  is  described  by  Co- 
lonel Shiel,  who  visited  it  in  his  journey  through 
Kurdistan  (Journ.  Geog.  Soc.  viii.  93).  Rich  evi- 
dently believed  in  the  correctness  of  the  tradition, 
considering  the  pilgrimage  of  the  Jews  as  almost 
sufficient  test  (Kurdistan,  i.  101).  The  tradition 
which  assigns  Elkosh  to  Galilee  is  more  in  accord- 
ance with  the  internal  evidence  afforded  by  the  pro- 
phecy, which  gives  no  sign  of  having  been  written 
in  Assyria.  [W.  A.  W.] 

EL'LASAR  pD?N  ;  'EWacrdp  ;  Pontus)  has 
been  considered  the  same  place  with  the  Thelassar 
(ib'N^)  of  2  K.  xix.  12,  but  this  is  very  im- 
probable. Ellasar — the  city  of  Arioch  (Gen.  xiv. 
1) — -seems  to  be  the  Hebrew  representative  of  the 
old  Chaldaean  town  called  in  the  native  dialect 
Larsa  or  Larancha,  and  known  to  the  Greeks  as 
Larissa  (Adpurcra)  or  Lavachon  (Aapdxcov).  This 
emplacement  suits  the  connexion  with  Elam  and 
Shinar  (Gen.  xiv.  1);  and  the  identification  is 
orthographically  defensible,  whereas  the  other  is 
not.  Larsa  was  a  town  of  Lower  Babylonia  or 
Chaldaea,  situated  neaily  half-way  between  Ur 
(Mughcir)  and  Erech  (  Warka),  on  the  left  bank 
of  the  Euphrates.  It  is  now  Senkereh.  The  in- 
scriptions show  it  to  have  been  one  of  the  primitive 
capitals — of  earlier  date,  probably,  than  Babylon 
itself;  and  we  may  gather  from  the  narrative  in 
Gen.  xiv.  that  in  the  time  of  Abraham  it  was  the 
metropolis  of  a  kingdom  distinct  from  that  of  Shinar, 
but  owning  allegiance  to  the  superior  monarchy  of 
Elam.  That  we  hear  no  more  of  it  after  this  time 
is  owing  to  its  absorption  into  Babylon,  which  took 
place  soon  aftei wards.  [G.  R.] 

ELM  (H?X).  Only  once  rendered  elms  in  Hos. 
iv.  13.     See  Oak. 

ELMO'DAM  ('EA/xuiSa/j.,  or  'E\/j.a5afi,  appa- 
rently the  same  as  the  Heb,  "niuPX,  Gen.  x.  26  ; 
'EAjUcuSaS,  LXX.),  son  of  Er,  six  generations  above 
Zerubbabel,  in  the  genealogy  of  Joseph  (Luke  iii. 
28).      [almo'dad.]  [A.  C.  H.] 

EL'NAAM  (DJ?^X  ;  'EWadfi,  Alex.  'EA- 
I'adp. :  Elnaern),  the  father  of  Jeribai  and  Joshaviah, 
two  of  David's  guard,  according  to  the  extended 
lust  in  1  Chr.  xi.  46-      In   the   LXX.    the   second 


ELPALET 

warrior  is  said  to  be  the  son  of  the  first,  and  Elnaarc 
is  given  as  himself  a  member  of  the  guard. 

ELNA'THAN  (fn^N ;  'EXvaoddv,  'luvdBav, 
NdBav;  Elnathan).  1.  the  maternal  grandfather 
of  Jehoiachin,  distinguished  as  "  E.  of  Jerusalem  " 
(2  K.  xxiv.  8).  He  is  doubtless  the  same  man  with 
"  Elnathan  the  son  of  Achbor,"  one  of  the  leading 
men  in  Jerusalem  in  Jehoiakim's  reign  (Jer.  xxvi. 
22,  xxxvi.  12,  25).  The  variations  in  the  LXX. 
arise  from  the  names  Elnathan,  Jonathan,  and  Na- 
than having  the  same  sense,  God's  gift  (Theodore). 
2.  The  name  of  three  persons,  apparently  Le- 
vites,  in  the  time  of  Ezra  (Ezr.  viii.  16).  In 
1  Esdr.  they  are  corrupted  to  Alnathan,  and  Eu- 
natan.  [W.  L.  B.] 

E'LON,  1.  (j^N;  'E\div,  AlAcb/x,  Alex. 
'EXwjx ;  Elon),  a  Hittite,  whose  daughter  was  one 
of  Esau's  wives  (Gen.  xxvi.  34,  xxxvi.  2).  For 
the  variation  in  the  name  of  his  daughter,  see  Ba- 

S1IEMATH. 

2.  (p^N  ;  'AAAcSj/,  Alex.  'Affpwv ;  Elon),  the 
second  of  the  three  sons  attributed  to  Zebulun 
(Gen.  xlvi.  14  ;  Num.  xxvi.  26)  ;  and  the  founder  of 
the  family  (TinSE'D)  of  the  Elonites  (^Nlt). 
From  this  tribe  came 

3.  Elon  the  (not  "a")  Zebulonite  (fl7*X  ; 
Al\dfj.;  Joseph.  yHAco^;  Aliialon),  who  judged 
Israel  for  ten  years,  and  was  buried  in  Aijalon  in 
Zebulun  (Judg.  xii.  1 1,  12).  The  names  "  Elon" 
and  "  Aijalon"  in  Hebrew,  are  composed  of  pre- 
cisely the  same  letters,  and  differ  only  in  the  vowel 
points,  so  that  the  place  of  Elon's  burial  may  have 
been  originally  called  after  him.  It  will  be  remarked 
that  the  Vulgate  does  assimilate  the  two. 

E'LON  (ji^X ;  'E\<iv ;  Elon),  one  of  the 
towns  in  the  border  of  the  tribe  of  Dan  (Josh.  xix. 
43).  To  judge  from  the  order  of  the  list,  its 
situation  must  have  been  between  Ajalon  (Ydlo), 
and  Ekion  (Ahir)  ;  but  no  town  corresponding  in 
name  has  yet  been  discovered.  The  name  in  He- 
brew signifies  a  great  oak  or  other  strong  tree,  and 
may  theiefore  be  a  testimony  to  the  wooded  cha- 
racter of  the  district.    It  is  possibly  the  same  place  as 

E'LON-BETH'-HANAN  (^rj-n^  »  "oak 
of  the  house  of  grace  ;"  'EKwv  ecus  BTjOai/dv,  Alex. 
AlaXw/x  e.  B.),  which  is  named  with  two  Danite 
towns  as  foiming  one  of  Solomon's  commissaiiat 
districts  (1  K.  iv.  9).  For  "  Beth-hanan  "  some 
Hebrew  MSS.  have  "  Ben-hanan,"  and  some  "and 
Beth-hanan  ;"  the  latter  is  followed  by  the  Vul- 
gate. [G.] 

ELONITES, THE.  Ni.m.xxvi.26.  [Elon,2.] 

ELOTH.  1  K.  ix.  26;  2  Chr.  viii.  17; 
xxvi.  2.     [Elath.] 

ELTAAL  (^S1?^  ;  'AAtfaaA  ;  Elphaal),  o 
Benjamite,  son  of  Hushim  and  brother  of  Abitub 
(1  Chr.  viii.  11).  He  was  the  founder  of  a  nu- 
merous family.  The  Bene-Elpaal  appear  to  have 
lived  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Lydda  (Lod),  and  on 
the  outposts  of  the  Benjamite  hills  as  far  as  Ajalon 
(Ydlo)  (viii.  12-18),  near  the  Danite  frontier. 
Hushim  was  the  name  of  the  principal  Danite 
family.  If  the  forefather  of  Elpaal  was  the  same 
person,  his  mention  in  a  Benjamite  genealogy  is  an 
evidence  of  an  intermarriage  of  the  two  tribes. 

EL'PALET  (o|?qSk  ;  'EXicpaK^d  ;  Eliphalet), 
one  of  David's   sons    born  in  Jerusalem   (1   Chr. 


ELTEKEH 

xiv.  5).  In  the  parallel  list,  1  Chr.  iii.  G,  the  name 
is  given  more  fully  as  Eliphelkt. 

EL'TEKEH  (njtt^N! ;  'AArcafla,  and  y  'EX- 
KcoOalfi,  Alex.  'EAOekw  ;  Elthece),  one  of  the  cities 
in  the  border  of  Dan  (Josh.  xix.  44),  which  with  its 
"suburbs"  (tJHJO)  was  allotted  to  the  Kohathite 
Levites  (xxi.  23).  It  is  however  omitted  from  the 
parallel  list  of  1  Chr.  vi.  No  trace  of  the  name  has 
yet  been  discovered.  [G.] 

EL'TEKON  (ppbi*  ;  ©(kov/j.,  Alex.'EAfle/ceV, 

Eltecon),  one  of  the  towns  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  in 
the  mountains  (Josh.  xv.  59).  From  its  mention 
in  company  with  Hauiul  and  BeTH-ZUR,  it  was 
probably  about  the  middle  of  the  country  of  Judah, 
3  or  4  miles  north  of  Hebron  ;  but  it  has  not  yet 
been  identified.  [G-] 

EL'TOLAD  ("tan^  ;   'EA,8a>t/5a8  and  'Ep- 

6ovXa,  Alex.  'EXOwXad  and  'EXOovXaS  ;  EUholad), 
one  of  the  cities  in  the  south  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv. 
30)  allotted  to  Simeon  (Josh.  xix.  4)  ;  and  in  pos- 
session of  that  tribe  until  the  time  of  David  ( 1  Chr. 
iv.  29).  It  is  named  with  Beersheba  and  other 
places  which  we  know  to  have  been  in  the  extreme 
south,  on  the  border  of  the  country  ;  but  it  has  not 
yet  been  identified.  In  the  passage  of  Chronicles 
above  quoted,  the  name  is  given  as  Tolad.    [G.] 

ELU'L  (b'bii  ;  6  'EXoix  ;  Elul),  Neh.  vi.  15 ; 
1  Mace.  xiv.  27."   [Months.] 

ELU'ZAI  PT-iy'pN;  ;  'ACal  ;  Alex.  'EAta-Ci  ; 
Eluzai),  one  of  the  warriors  of  Benjamin,  who 
joined  David  at  Ziklag  while  he  was  being  pursued 
by  Saul  (1  Chr.  xii.  5). 

ELYMAE'ANS  ('EXvfia7oi),  Jud.  i.  6.  [ISLA- 
MITES.] 

EL'YMAS  (EXvuas),  the  Arabic  name  of  the 
Jewish  mage  or  sorcerer  Barjesus,  who  had  attached 
himself  to  the  proconsul  of  Cyprus,  Sergius  Paulus, 
when  St.  Paul  visited  the  island  (Acts  xiii.  C  ff.). 
On  his  attempting  to  dissuade  the  proconsul  from 
embracing  the  Christian  faith,  he  was  struck  with 
miraculous  blindness  by  the  Apostle.  The  name 
Elymas,  "  the  wise  man,"  is  from  the  same  root  as  the 
Arabic  "  Ulema."  On  the  practice  generally  then 
prevailing,  in  the  decay  of  faith,  of  consulting*  hienta] 
impostors  of  this  kind,  see  Conyheare  and  Howson, 
Life  of  St.  Paul,  i.  177-180,  2nd  ed.       [H.  A.] 

EL'ZABAD  (*'3T^K;    'EXia(4p,    'EAfajScfc, 

Alex.  'EXtCafiaS;  Elzab'ad).  1.  The  ninth  of  the 
eleven  Gadite  heroes  who  came  across  the  Jordan 
to  David  when  he  was  in  distress  in  the  wilderness 
of  Judah  (  1  Chr.  xii.  12). 

2.  A  Korhite  I.cvite,  son  of  Shemaiah  and  of 
the  family  of  Obed-edom  ;  one  of  the  doorkeepers  of 
tl house  of  Jehovah  "  ( I  Chr.  x.wi.  7). 

EL'ZAPHAN  QBS!?K  ;  'EXura<pdv  ;  EUa- 
phan),  second  son  of  Uzziel,  who  was  the  son  of 
Kohatli  son  of  Levi  (Ex.  vi.  22).  lie  was  thus 
cousin  to  Muses  and  Aaron,  as  is  distinctly  stated. 
Elzaphan  assisted  his  brother  Mishael  to  cany  the 
unhappy  Nadab  and  Abihu  in  their  priestly  tunics 
out  of  the  camp  (Lev.  x.  4).  The  name  is  $ 
contracted  form  of  Eltzaphan,  in  which  it  most 
frequently  occurs. 

EMBALMING,  the  process  by  which  dead 
bodies  are  preserved  from  putrefaction  and  decav. 


EMBALMING  545 

The  Hebrew  word  t33n  (chahat),  employed  to  de- 
note this  process,  is  connected  with  the  Arabic  U,I-^> 
which  in  conj.  1  signifies  "  to  be  red,"  as  leather 
which  has  been  tanned;  and  in  conj.  2,  "  to  pre- 
serve with  spices."  In  the  1st  and  4th  conjuga- 
tions it  is  applied  to  the  ripening  of  fruit,  and  this 
meaning  has  been  assigned  to  the  Hebrew  root  in 
Cant.  ii.  13.  In  the  latter  passage,  however,  it 
probably  denotes  the  fragrant  smell  of  the  ripening 
rigs.     The  word  is  found  in  the  Chaldee  and  Syriac 

dialects,  and  in  the  latter  I,£^.ajQla,  (chunetto)  is 

the  equivalent  of  /j.ly/j.a,  the  confection  of  myrrh 
and  aloes  brought  by  Nicodemus  (John  xix.  39) . 


Different  forms  of  mummy  crises.    (Wilkinson.) 
I,  2,  4.  Of  wood.  s,  5,  6,  7,  8.  Of  stone. 

9.  Of  wood,  and  of  early  time — before  tile  IStli  dynasty. 
10.  Of  burnt  earthenware. 

The  practice  of  embalming  was  most  general 
among  the  Egyptians,  and  it  is  in  connexion  with 
this  people  that  the  two  instances  which  we  meet 
with  in  the  0.  T.  are  mentioned  (Gen.  1.  2,  26). 
Of  the  Egyptian  method  of  embalming  there  remain 
two  minute  accounts,  which  have  a  general  kind  of 
agreement,  though  they  differ  in  details. 

Herodotus  (ii.  8(3-89)  describes  three  modes, 
varying  jn  completeness  and  expense,  and  prac- 
tised  by  persons  regularly  trained  to  the  profes- 
sion, who  were  initiated  into  the  mysteries  of 
the  art  by  their  ancestors.  The  most  costly  mode, 
which  is  estimated  by  Kodorus  Siculus  (i.  91) 
at  a  talent  of  silver,  was  said  by  the  Egyptian 
priests  to  belong  to  him  whose  name  in  such  a 
matter  it  was  not  lawful  to  mention,  viz.  Osiris. 
The  emhalmers  lirst  removed  part  of  the  brain 
through  the  nostrils,  by  means  of  a  crooked  iron, 
and  destroyed  the  rest  by  injecting  caustic  drugs. 
An  incision  was  then  made  along  the  Hank  with  a 
sharp  Ethiopian  stone,  and  the  whole  of  the  intes- 
tines removed.  The  cavity  was  rinsed  out  with 
palm-wine,  and  afterwards  scoured  with  pounded 
perfumes.  It  was  then  filled  with  pure  myrrh 
Dounded,  cassia,  and  ether  aromatics,  except  frank- 

2   \ 


546 


EMBALMING 


incense.  This  done,  the  body  was  sewn  up  and 
steeped  in  natron  tor  seventy  days.  When  the 
seventy  days  were  accomplished,  the  embalmers 
washed  the  corpse  and  swathed  it  in  bandages  of 
linen,  cut  in  strips  and  smeared  with  gum.  They 
then  gave  it  up  to  the  relatives  of  the  deceased, 
who  provided  for  it  a  wooden  case,  made  in  the 
shape  of  a  man,  in  which  the  dead  was  placed,  and 
deposited  in  an  erect  position  against  the  wall  of 
the  sepulchral  chamber.  Diodorus  Siculus  gives 
some  particulars  of  the  process  which  are  omitted 
by  Herodotus.  When  the  body  was  laid  out  on 
the  ground  for  the  purpose  of  embalming,  one  of  the 
operators,  called  the  scribe  (ypa/xfjiarevs),  marked 
out  the  part  of  the  left  flank  where  the  incision 
was  to  be  made.  The  dissector  (jrapaffx'i-crrii) 
then,  with  a  sharp  Ethiopian  stone  (black  flint,  or 
Ethiopian  agate,  Kawlinson,  Herod,  ii.  141),  hastily 
cut  through  as  much  flesh  as  the  law  enjoined,  and 
fled,  pursued  by  curses  and  volleys  of  stones  from 
the  spectators.  When  all  the  embalmers  (rapixtv- 
rai)  were  assembled,  one  of  them  extracted  the 
intestines,  with  the  exception  of  the  heart  and 
kidneys ;  another  cleansed  them  one  by  one,  and 
rinsed  them  in  palm-wine  and  perfumes.  The  body 
was  then  washed  with  oil  of  cedar,  and  other  things 
worthy  of  notice,  for  more  than  thirty  days  (ac- 
cording to  some  MSS.  forty),  and  afterwards 
sprinkled  with  myrrh,  cinnamon,  and  other  sub- 
stances, which  possess  the  property  not  only  of 
preserving  the  body  for  a  long  period,  but  also  of 
communicating  to  it  an  agreeable  smell.  This  pro- 
cess was  so  effectual  that  the  features  of  the  dead 
could  be  recognised.  It  is  remarkable  that  Diodorus 
omits  all  mention  of  the  steeping  in  natron. 


The  mummy's  bead,  seen  at  an  open  panel  of  the  coffin.  (Willi 


The  second  mode  of  embalming  cost  about  20 
minae.  In  this  case  no  incision  was  made  in  the 
body,  nor  were  the  intestines  removed,  but  cedar- 
oil  was  injected  into  the  stomach  by  the  rectum. 
The  oil  was  prevented  from  escaping,  and  the  body 
was  then  steeped  in  natron  for  the  appointed  number 
of  days.  On  the  last  day  the  oil  was  withdrawn, 
and  carried  off  with  it  the  stomach  and  intestines  in 
a  state  of  solution,  while  the  flesh  was  consumed 
by  the  natron,  and  nothing-  was  left  but  the  skin 
and  bones.  The  body  in  this  state  was  retm-ned 
to  the  relatives  of  the  deceased. 

The  third  mode,  which  was  adopted  by  the  poorer 
classes,  and  cost  but  little,  consisted  in  rinsing  out 
the  intestines  with  syrmaea,  an  infusion  of  senna 
and  cassia  (Pettigrew,  p.  69),  and  steeping  the  body 
for  the  usual  number  of  days  in  natrum. 

Porphyry  (De  Abst.  iv.  10)  supplies  an  omission 
of  Herodotus,  who  neglects  to  mention  what  was 


EMBALMING 

done  with  the  intestines  after  they  were  removed 
from  the  body.  In  the  case  of  a  person  of  respect- 
able rank  they  were  placed  in  a  separate  vessel  and 
thrown  into  the  river.  This  account  is'  confirmed 
by  Plutarch  (Sept.  Sap.  Conv.  c.  16). 

Although  the  three  modes  of  embalming  are  so 
precisely  described  by  Herodotus,  it  has  been  found 
impossible  to  classify  the  mummies  which  have 
been  discovered  and  examined  under  one  or  other 
of  these  three  heads.  Dr.  Pettigrew,  from  his  own 
observations,  confirms  the  truth  of  Herodotus'  state- 
ment that  the  brain  was  removed  through  the 
nostrils.  But  in  many  instances,  in  which  the  body 
was  carefully  preserved  and  elaborately  ornamented, 
the  brain  had  not  been  removed  at  all  ;  while  in 
some  mummies  the  cavity  was  found  to  be  filled 
with  resinous  and  bituminous  matter. 

M.  Rouyer,  in  his  Notice  sur  les  Embaumements 
dcs  A?iciens  Egypticns,  quoted  by  Pettigrew,  en- 
deavoured to  class  the  mummies  which  he  examined 
under  two  principal  divisions,  which  were  again 
subdivided  into  others.  These  were — I.  Mummies 
with  the  ventral  incision,  preserved,  1.  by  balsamic 
matter,  and  2.  by  natron.  The  first  of  these  are 
filled  with  a  mixture  of  resin  and  aromatics,  and 
are  of  an  olive  colour — the  skin  dry,  flexible,  and 
adhering  to  the  bones.  Others  are  filled  with 
bitumen  or  asphaltum,  and  are  black,  the  skin  hard 
and  shining.  Those  prepared  with  natron  are  also 
filled  with  resinous  substances  and  bitumen.  II. 
Mummies  without  the  ventral  incision.  This  class 
is  again  subdivided,  according  as  the  bodies  were, 
1.  salted  and  filled  with  pisasphaltum,  a  compound 
of  asphaltum  and  common  pitch ;  or  2.  salted  only. 
The  former  are  supposed  to  have  been  immersed  in 
the  pitch  when  in  a  liquid  state. 

The  medicaments  employed  in  embalming  were 
various.  From  a  chemical  analysis  of  the  sub- 
stances found  in  mummies,  M.  Rouelle  detected 
three  modes  of  embalming — 1.  with  asphaltum,  or 
Jew's  pitch,  called  also  funeral  gum,  or  gum  of 
mummies;  2.  with  a  mixture  of  asphaltum  and 
cedria,  the  liquor  distilled  from  the  cedar;  3.  with 
this  mixture  together  with  some  resinous  and  aro- 
matic ingredients.  The  powdered  aromatics  men- 
tioned by  Herodotus  were  not  mixed  with  the 
bituminous  matter,  but  sprinkled  into  the  cavities 
of  the  body. 

It  does  not  appear  that  embalming,  properly  so 
called,  was  practised  by  the  Hebrews.  Asa  was 
laid  "  in  the  bed  which  was  filled  with  sweet  odours 
and  divers  kinds  of  spices  prepared  by  the  apothe- 
caries' art"  (2  Chr.  xvi.  14);  and  by  the  tender 
care  of  Nicodemus  the  body  of  Jesus  was  wrapped 
in  linen  cloths,  with  spices,  "  a  mixture  of  myrrh, 
and  aloes,  about  an  hundred  pound  weight  ...  as 
the  manner  of  the  Jews  is  to  bury"  (John  xix. 
39,  40). 

The  account  given  by  Herodotus  has  been  supposed 
to  throw  discredit  upon  the  narrative  in  Genesis.  He 
asserts  that  the  body  is  steeped  in  natron  for 
seventy  days,  while  in  Gen.  1.  3  it  is  said  that  only 
forty  days  were  occupied  in  the  whole  process  of 
embalming,  although  the  period  of  mourning  ex- 
tended over  seventy  days.  Diodorus,  on  the  con- 
trary, omits  altogether  the  steeping  in  natron  as  a 
part  of  the  operation,  and  though  the  time  which, 
according  to  him,  is  taken  up  in  washing  the  body 
with  cedar  oil  and  other  aromatics  is  more  than 
thirty  days,  yet  this  is  evidently  only  a  portion  of 
the  whole  time  occupied  in  the  complete  process. 
Hengstenberg   (Egypt   and   the   Books  of  Moses, 


EMBROIDERER 

p.  69,  Eng.  tr.)  attempts  to  reconcile  this  dis- 
crepancy by  supposing  that  the  seventy  days  of 
Herodotus  include  the  whole  time  of  embalming, 
and  not  that  of  steeping  in  natron  only.  But  the 
differences  in  detail  which  characterize  the  descrip- 
tions of  Herodotus  and  Diodorus,  and  the  impossi- 
bility of  reconciling  these  descriptions  in  all  points 
with  the  results  of  scientific  observation,  lead  to 
the  natural  conclusion  that,  if  these  descriptions  be 
correct  in  themselves,  they  do  not  include  every 
method  of  embalming  which  was  practised,  and 
that,  consequently,  any  discrepancies  between  them 
and  the  Bible  narrative  cannot  be  fairly  attributed 
to  a  want  of  accuracy  in  the  latter.  In  taking 
this  view  of  the  case  it  is  needless  to  refer  to  the 
great  interval  of  time  which  elapsed  between  the 
date  claimed  tor  the  events  of  Genesis  and  the  age 
of  Herodotus,  or  between  the  latter  and  the  times 
of  Diodorus.  If  the  four  centuries  which  separated 
the  two  Greek  historians  were  sufficient  to  have 
caused  such  changes  in  the  mode  of  embalming  as 
are  indicated  in  their  different  descriptions  of  the 
process,  it  is  not  unreasonable  to  conclude  that  the 
still  greater  interval  by  which  the  celebration  of 
the  funeral  obsequies  of  the  patriarch  preceded  the 
age  of  the  father  of  history  might  have  produced 
changes  still  greater  both  in  kind  and  in  degree. 

It  is  uncertain  what  suggested  to  the  Egyptians 
the  idea  of  embalming.  That  they  practised  it  in 
accordance  with  their  peculiar  doctrine  of  the  trans- 
migration of  souls  we  are  told  by  Herodotus.  The 
actual  process  is  said  to  have  been  derived  from 
"  their  first  merely  burying  in  the  sand,  impreg- 
nated with  natron  and  other  salts,  which  dried  and 
preserved  the  body"  (Kawlinson,  Herod,  ii.  p.  142). 
Drugs  and  bitumen  were  of  later  introduction,  the 
latter  not  being  generally  employed  before  the  18th 
dynasty.  When  the  practice  ceased  entirely  is  un- 
certain. 

The  subject  of  embalming  is  most  fully  discussed, 
and  the  sources  of  practical  information  well  nigh 
exhausted,  in  Dr.  Pettigrew's  Histon/  of  Egyptian 
Mummies.  '[W.  A.  W.] 

EMBROIDERER.  This  term  is  given  in  the 
A.  V.  as  the  equivalent  of  rokem  (Dpi),  the  pro- 
ductions of  the  art  being  described  as  "  needle- 
work" (ilDpl).  In  Exodus  the  embroiderer  is 
contrasted  with  the  "cunning  workman,"  chosheb 
(2^'n):  and  the  consideration  of  one  of  these 
terms  involves  that  of  the  other.  Various  explana- 
tions have  been  offered  as  to  the  distinction  between 
them,  but  most  of  these  overlook  the  distinction 
marked  in  the  Bible  itself,  viz.,  that  the  rokem  wove 
simply  a  variegated  texture,  without  gold  thread  or 
figures,  and  that  the  chosheb  interwove  gold  thread  or 
figures  into  the  variegated  texture.  We  conceive  that 
tin'  use  of  the  gold  thread  was  for  delineating  figures, 
as  is  implied  in  the  description  of  the  corslet  of 
Amasis  (Her.  hi;  47),  and  that  the  notices  of  gold 
thread  in  some  instances  and  of  figures  in  others 
were  but  different  methods  of  describing  the  same 
thing.  It  follows,  then,  that  the  application  of  the 
term  "embroiderer"  to  rokem  is  false;  if  it  be- 
longs to  either  it  is  to  chosheb,  or  the  "cunning 
workman,"  who  added  the  figures.  But  if  "em- 
broidery" be  strictly  confined  to  the  work  of  the 
needle,  we  doubt  whether  it  can  be  applied  to 
either,  for  the  simple  addition  of  gold  thread,  or  of 

a  figure,  does  not  involve  the  use  of  the  needle, 

The  pattern.-  may  have   been   worked   into  the  Stufl 


EMBROIDERER 


547 


by  the  loom,  as  appears  to  have  been  the  case  in 
Egypt  (Wilkinson,  iii.  128 ;  cf.  Her.  he.  cit.), 
where  the  Hebrews  learned  the  art,  and  as  is  stated 
by  Josephus  (avdtj  ivxxpavTai,  Ant.  iii.  7,  §2). 
The  distinction,  as  given  by  the  Talmudists,  and 
which  has  been  adopted  by  Gesenius  (Thesaur.  p. 
1311)  and  Biihr  (Symbolik,  i.  266)  is  this— that 
rikmah,  or  "  needlework,"  was  where  a  pattern 
was  attached  to  the  stuff  by  being  sewn  on  to  it  on 
one  side,  and  the  work  of  the  chosheh  when  the 
pattern  was  worked  into  the  stuff  by  the  loom,  and 
so  appeared  on  both  sides.  This  view  appears  to 
be  entirely  inconsistent  with  the  statements  of  the 
Bible,  and  with  the  sense  of  the  word  rikmah  else- 
where. The  absence  of  the  figure  or  the  gold 
thread  in  the  one,  and  its  presence  m  the  other, 
constitutes  the  essence  of  the  distinction.  In  sup- 
port of  this  view  we  call  attention  to  the  passages 
in  which  the  expressions  are  contrasted.  Rikmah 
consisted  of  the  following  materials,  "blue,  purple, 
scarlet,  and  fine  twined  linen "  (Ex.  xxvi.  36, 
xxvii.  16,  xxxyi.  37,  xxxviii.  18,  xxxix.  29).  The 
work  of  the  chosheb  was  either  "  fine  twined  linen, 
blue,  purple,  and  scarlet,  with  chernbims"  (Ex. 
xxvi.  1,  31  ;  xxxvi.  8,  35),  or  "  gold,  blue,  purple, 
scarlet,  and  fine  twined  linen"  (xxviii.  6,  8,  15, 
xxxix.  2,  5,  8).  Again,  looking  at  the  general 
sense  of  the  words,  we  shall  find  that  chosheb  in- 
volves the  idea  of  invention,  or  designing  patterns  ; 
rikmah  the  idea  of  texture  as  well  as  variegated 
colour.  The  former  is  applied  to  other  arts  which 
demanded  the  exercise  of  inventive  genius,  as  in 
the  construction  of  engines  of  war  (2  Chr.  xxvi. 
15);  the  latter  is  applied  to  other  substances,  the 
texture  of  which  is  remarkable,  as  the  human  body 
(Ps.  exxxix.  15).  Further  than  this,  rikmah  in- 
volves the  idea  of  a  regular  disposition  of  colours, 
which  demanded  no  inventive  genius.  Beyond  the 
instances  already  adduced  it  is  applied  to  tessellated 
pavement  (1  Chr.  xxix.  2),  to  the  eagle's  plumage 
(Ez.  xvii.  3),  and,  in  the  Targums,  to  the  leopard's 
spotted  skin  (Jer.  xiii.  23).  In  the  same  sense  it 
is  applied  to  the  coloured  sails  of  the  Egyptian 
vessels  (Ez.  xxvii.  16),  which  were  either  chequered 
or  worked  according  to  a  regularly  recurring  pat- 
tern (Wilkinson,  iii.  211).  Gesenius  considers  this 
passage  as  conclusive  for  his  view  of  the  distinction, 
but  it  is  hardly  conceivable  that  the  patterns  were 
on  one  side  of  the  sail  only,  nor  does  there  appear 
any  ground  to  infer  a  departure  from  the  usual 
custom  of  working  the  colours  by  the  loom.  The 
ancient  versions  do  not  contribute  much  to  the 
elucidation  of  the  point.  The  LXX.  varies  between 
ttoiki\tt]s  and  pa<pi8euTT)s.  as  representing  rokem, 
and  ttoiki\t7}s  and  v<pavTr\s  for  chosheb,  combining 
the  two  terms  in  each  case  for  the  work  itself.  ?; 
■jrotKiAia  tov  {>a<pi5fUTOv  for  the  first,  epyov  xxpav- 
rbu  noiKi\r6v  for  the  second.  The  distinction,  as 
for  as   it   is   observed,    consisted   in    the    one   being 

needle-teork  and  the  other  loom-work.  The  Vul- 
gate gives  generally  plumaritts  for  the  first,  and 
polymitarius  for  the  second;  but  in  Ex.  xxvi.  1, 
31,  plumaritts  is  used  for  the  second.  The  first  of 
these  terms  {  fluiixirius  is  well  chosen  to»express 
rokem,  but  polymitarius,  i.  e.  a  weaver  who  works 
together  threads  of  divers  colours,  is  as  applicable 
to  one  as  to  the  other.  The  rendering  in  Ez.  xxvii. 
16,  scutulata,  i.  e.  "  chequered,"  correctly  describes 
one  of  the  productions  of  tic  rokem.  We  have, 
lastly  to  notice  the  incorrect  rendering  of  the  word 
]'2L"  in  the  \.  \  ,     "  broider,"  "embroider"    Ex. 

2  N  2 


548 


EMERALD 


xxviii.  4,  39).  It  means  stuff  worked  in  a  tessel- 
lated manner,  i.  e.  with  square  cavities  such  as 
stones  might  be  set  in  (comp.  ver.  20).  The  art 
of"  embroidery  by  the  loom  was  extensively  prac- 
tised among  the  nations  of  antiquity.  In  addition 
to  the  Egyptians,  the  Babylonians  were  celebrated 
lor  it,  but  embroidery  in  the  proper  sense  of  the 
term,  i.e.  with  the  needle,  was  a  Phrygian  inven- 
tion of  later  date  (Plin.  viii.  48).  [W.  L.  B.] 

EMERALD  CHSJ  ;  LXX.,  dvdpa^  ;  N.  T.  and 
Apoc,  cr/j.dpaySos),  a  precious  stone,  first  in  the 
2nd  row  on  the  breastplate  of  the  high-priest  (Ex. 
xxviii.  18,  xxxix.  11),  imported  to  Tyre  from  Syria 
(Ez.  xxvii.  16),  used  as  a  seal  or  signet  (Ecclus. 
xxxii.  6),  as  an  ornament  of  clothing  and  bedding 
(Ez.  xxviii.  13;  Jud.  x.  21),  and  spoken  of  as  one 
of  the  foundations  of  Jerusalem  (Rev.  xxi.  19  ; 
Tob.  xiii.  16).  The  rainbow  round  the  throne  is 
compared  to  emerald  in  Rev.  iv.  3,  '6p.oios  bpdaa. 
tr/aapayBlvip. 

The  etymology  of  t]Q3  is  uncertain.  Gesenius  sug- 
gests a  comparison  with  the  word  TJ-1S,  a  paint  with 
which  the  Hebrew  women  stained  their  eye-lashes. 
Kalisch  on  Exodus  xxviii.  follows  the  LXX.,  and  trans- 
lates it  carbuncle,  transferring  the  meaning  emerald 
to  D/iT  in  the  same  ver.  18.  The  Targum  Jeru- 
salem on  the  same  ver.  explains  ^Q3  by  N2T313  = 
carchedonius,  carbuncle.  [W.  D.] 

EMERODS  (P'hhV.,  Dninp;  edpa;  anus, 
nates ;  Dent,  xxviii.  27  ;  1  Sam.  v.  6,  9,  12,  vi.  4, 
5,  11).  The  probabilities  as  to  the  nature  of  the 
disease  are  mainly  dependent  on  the  probable  roots 
of  these  two  Hebrew  words  ;  the  former  of  which3 
evidently  means  "  a  swelling ;"  the  latter,  though 
less  certain,  is  most  probably  from  a  Syriac  verb, 

7 
'*— ***fa,  meaning  "  anhelavit  sub  onere,  enixus  est  in 
exonerando  ventre"  (Parkhurst  and  Gesenius);  and 

the  Syriac  noun  J)Q-*/>_\.  from  the  same  root,  de- 
notes, 1.  such  effort  as  the  verb  implies,  and,  2.  the 
intestinum  rectum.  Also,  whenever  the  former  word 
occurs  in  the  Hebrew  Cetib,b  the  Keri  gives  the 
latter,  except  in  1  Sam.  vi.  11,  where  the  latter 
stands  in  the  Cetib.  Now  this  last  passage  speaks  of 
the  images  of  the  emerods  after  they  were  actually 
made,  and  placed  in  the  ark.  It  thus  appears  pro- 
bable that  the  former  word  means  the  disease,  and 
the  latter  the  part  affected,  which  must  necessarily 
have  been  included  in  the  actually  existing  image, 
and  have  struck  the  eye  as  the  essential  thing 
represented,  to  which  the  disease  was  an  incident.  As 
some  morbid  swelling,  then,  seems  the  most  probable 
nature  of  the  disease,  so  no  more  probable  conjecture 
has  been  advanced  than  that  hemorrhoidal  tumours, 
or  bleeding  piles,  known  to  the  Romans  as  mariscae 
(Juv.  ii.  13),  are  intended.  These  are  very  common 
in  Syria  at  present,  oriental  habits  of  want  of  exer- 
cise and  improper  food,  producing  derangement  of 
the  liver,  constipation,  &c,  being  such  as  to  cause 


"  Closely  akin  to  it  is  the  Arab.   Vj^,  which  means 

tumor  qui  apud  viros  oritur  in  posticis  partibus,  apud 
mulieres  in  anterior*  parte  vulvae  similis  herniae 
virorum. 

b  Parkhurst,  however,  s.  v.  D  vQJJ,  thinks,  on  the 
authority  of  Dr.  Kennicott's  Codices,  that  ^"WILD  is 


EMMATJS 

them.  The  words  of  1  Sam  v.  12,  "  the  men  that 
died  not  were  smitten  with  emerods,"  show  that 
the  disease  was  not  necessarily  fetal.  It  is  clear  from 
its  parallelism  with  "  botch  "  and  other  diseases  in 
Deut.  xxviii.  27,  that  Dvbj?  is  a  disease,  not  a  part 
of  the  body;  but  the  translations  of  it  by  the  most  ap- 
proved authorities  are  various  and  vague.0  Thus  the 
LXX.  and  Vulg.,  as  above,  uniformly  render  the  word 
as  bearing  the  latter  sense.  The  mention  by  Hero- 
dotus (i.  105)  of  the  malady,  called  by  him  6r]\eta 
vovffos,  as  afflicting  the  Scythians  who  robbed  the 
temple  (of  the  Syrian  Venus)  in  Ascalon,  has  been 
deemed  by  some  a  proof  that  some  legend  con- 
taining a  distortion  of  the  Scriptural  account  was 
current  in  that  country  down  to  a  late  date. 
The  Scholiast  on  Aristophanes  (Acham.  231) 
mentions  a  similar  plague  (followed  by  a  similar 
subsequent  propitiation  to  that  mentioned  in  Scrip- 
ture), as  sent  upon  the  Athenians  by  Bacchus.1* 
The  opinion  mentioned  by  Winer  (s.  v.  Philister'), 
as  advanced  by  Lichtenstein,  that  the  plague  of 
emerods  and  that  of  mice  are  one  and  the  same, 
the  former  being  caused  by  an  insect  (solpugd)  as 
large  as  a  field-mouse,  is  hardly  worth  serious 
attention.  [H.  H.] 

E'MIM  (D^N  ;  'Oy.fj.a7oi,  and  '0/xfj.lv),  a  tribe 
or  family  of  gigantic  stature  which  originally  in- 
habited the  region  along  the  eastern  side  of  the  Dead 
Sea.  It  would  appeal',  from  a  comparison  of  Gen.  xiv. 
5-7  with  Deut.  ii.  10-12,  20-23,  that  the  whole 
country  east  of  the  Jordan  was,  in  primitive  times, 
held  by  a  race  of  giants,  all  probably  of  the  same 
stock,  comprehending  the  Rephaim  on  the  north,  next 
the  Zuzim,  after  them  the  Emim,  and  then  the 
Horim  on  the  south ;  and  that  afterwards  the  king- 
dom of  Bashan  embraced  the  territories  of  the  first ; 
the  country  of  the  Ammonites  the  second  ;  that  of 
the  Moabites  the  third ;  while  Edom  took  in  the 
mountains  of  the  Horim.  The  whole  of  them  were 
attacked  and  pillaged  by  the  eastern  kings  who  de- 
stroyed Sodom  and  Gomorrah. 

The  Emim  were  related  to  the  Anakim,  and 
were  generally  called  by  the  same  name ;  but  their 
conquerors  the  Moabites  termed  them  Emim— that 
is  "Terrible  men"  (Deut.  ii.  11) — most  pro- 
bably en  account  of  their  fierce  aspect.  [  Reph  aim  ; 
Anakim.]  [J.  L.  1'.] 

EMMAN'UEL  ('Eftuaeour/A. ;  Emmanuel), 
Matt.  i.  23.     [Emmanuel.] 

EMMA'US  ('E/xnaovs),  the  village  to  which  the 
two  disciples  were  going  when  our  Lord  appeared 
to  them  on  the  way,  on  the  day  of  His  resurrection 
(Luke  xxiv.  13).  Luke  makes  its  distance  from  Jeru- 
salem sixty  stadia  (A.  V.  "  threescore  furlongs"),  or 
about  7j  miles ;  and  Josephus  mentions  "  a  village 
called  Emmaus  "  at  the  same  distance  IB.  J.  vii. 
6,  §6).  These  statements  seem  sufficiently  defi- 
nite ;  and  one  would  suppose  no  great  mistake 
could  be  made  by  geographers  in  fixing  its  site.  It 
is  remarkable,  however,  that  from  the  earliest 
period  of  which  we  have  any  record,  the  opinion 


in  all  these  passages  a  very  ancient  Hebrew  varia 
lectio. 

c  Josephus,  Ant.  vi.  1,  §1,  Sva-evrepia  ;  Aquila, 
TO  tt)s  (frayeSaivqs  cAkos. 

d  Pollux,  Onom.  iv.  25,  thus  describes  what  he  calls 
fiovfiiov.  oiSr\ixa  fieri.  </>Aey;uoi'7/;  alp.oppov  yii'erai  Kara 
rqv  eSpav  epros,  earl  Be  ojudia  /uvpots  <o/uois.  comp. 
Bochart,  Hierozoic.  i.  381. 


EMMAUS 

prevailed  among  Christian  writers,  that  the  Em- 
tnaus  of  Luke  was  identical  with  the  Emmaus  on 
the  border  of  the  plain  of  Philistia,  afterwards 
called  Nicopolis,  and  which  was  some  20  miles 
from  Jerusalem.  Both  Eusebius  and  Jerome  adopted 
this  view  (Onom.  s.  v.  Emctus)  ;  and  they  were  fol- 
lowed by  all  geographers  down  to  the  commence- 
ment of  the  14th  century  (Keland,  p.  758).  Then, 
for  some  reason  unknown  to  us,  it  began  to  be 
supposed  that  the  site  of  Emmaus  was  at  the  little 
village  of  Kvbeibeh,  about  3  miles  west  of  Neby 
Samwll  (the  ancient  Mizpeii),  and  9  miles  from 
Jerusalem  (Sir  J.  Maund.  in  Early  Travels  in 
Palestine,  175 ;  Ludolph.  deSuchem,  Itin.;  Quares- 
mius,  ii.  719  i.  There  is  riot,  however,  a  shadow 
of  evidence  for  this  supposition.  In  fact  the  site  of 
Emmaus  remains  yet  to  be  identified. 

Dr.  Robinson  has  recently  revived  the  old  theory, 
that  the  Emmaus  of  Luke  is  identical  with  Nico- 
polis; and  has  supported  it  with  his  wonted  learn- 
ing, but  not  with  his  wonted  conclusiveness.  He 
first  endeavours  to  cast  doubts  on  the  accuracy  of 
the  leading  ^TiKovra  in  Luke  xxiv.  13,  because 
two  uncial  MSS.  (K  and  N),  and  a  few  unimport- 
ant cursive  MSS.  insert  knardv,  thus  making  the 
distance  160  stadia,  which  would  nearly  correspond 
to  the  distance  of  Nicopolis.  But  the  best  MSS. 
have  not  this  word,  and  the  best  critics  regard 
it  as  an  interpolation.  There  is  a  strong  proba- 
bility that  some  copyist  who  was  acquainted  with 
the  city,  but  not  the  village  of  Emmaus,  tried 
thus  to  reconcile  Scripture  with  his  ideas  of  geo- 
graphy. The  opinions  of  Eusebius,  Jerome,  and 
their  followers,  on  a  point  such  as  this,  are  not  of 
very  great  authority.  When  the  name  of  any 
noted  place  agreed  with  one  in  the  Bible,  they  were 
not  always  careful  to  see  whether  the  position  cor- 
responded in  like  maimer.  [Edrei.]  Emmaus- 
Nicopolis  being  a  noted  city  in  their  day,  they 
were  led  somewhat  rashly  to  confound  it  with  the 
Emmaus  of  the  Gospel.  The  circumstances  of  the 
narrative  are  plainly  opposed  to  the  identity.  The 
two  disciples  Inning  journeyed  from  Jerusalem  to 
Emmaus  in  part  of  a  day  (Luke  xxiy.  28,  29),  left 
the  latter  again  after  the  evening  meal,  and  reached 
Jerusalem  before  it  was  very  late  (verses  33.  42, 
+3).  Now,  if  we  take  into  account  the  distance, 
and  the  nature  of  the  road,  leading  up  a  steep  and 
difficult  mountain,  we  must  admit  that  such  a 
journey  could  not  be  accomplished  in  less  than  from 
six  fo  seven  hours,  so  that  they  could  not  have  ar- 
rived in  Jerusalem  till  long  past  midnight.  This 
tint  seems  to  US  conclusive  against  the  identity  of 
Nicopolis  and  the  Emmaus  of  Luke.  (Robinson,  iii. 
147,  sq.  ;  keland,  Pal.  427.  sq.)  [J.  L.  P.] 

KM  MAT'S,  or  NICOPOLIS  ('E^miJs, 
1  Mir,',  iii. 40;  'Appaois,  Joseph.  B.  J.  ii.  20,  §4i, 
a  town  in  the  plain  of  Philistia,  at  the  foot  of  the 
mountains  of'  Judah,  22  Roman  miles  from  Jeru- 
salem, and  In  from  Lydda  {Itin.  //irn>*. ;  Reland, 

309  ).     The  nai loes  not  occur  in  the  0.  T. ;   but 

thi'  town  rose  to  importance  dining  the  later  his- 
torv  of  the  Jews,  and  wi>  a  place  of  note  in  the 
wars  of  the  Asmoneans.  It  was  fortified  by  Bac- 
chides,  the  general  of  Antiochus  Epiphaues,  when 
he  was  engaged  in  the  war  with  Jonathan  Macea- 
baeus  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  1,  §3;  1  Mace.  ix.  50).  It 
was  in  the  plain  beside  this  city  that  Judas  Mnc- 
cabaeus  so  signally  defeated  tin- Syrians  with  a  mere 
handful  of  men,  as  related  in  1  Mace.  iii.  57,  i\\  3, 
lie.  Under  the  Romans  Emmaus  became  the  capital 
of  a  toparchy  ( Joseph.  B.J.  iii.  3,  §.">;  i'lin.  v.  14). 


ENCAMPMENT 


549 


It  was  burned  by  the  Roman  general  Varus  about 
A.D.  4.  In  the  3rd  century  (about  A.d.  220)  it 
was  rebuilt  through  the  exertions  of  Julius  Afri- 
canus,  the  well-known  Christian  writer  ;  and  then 
received  the  name  Nicopolis.  Eusebius  and  Jerome 
frequently  refer  to  it  in  defining  the  positions  of 
neighbouring  towns  and  villages  (Chron.  Pas.  ad 
A.c.  223  ;  Reland,  p.  759).  Early  writers  men- 
tion a  fountain  at  Emmaus,  famous  far  and  wide 
for  its  healing  virtues  ;  the  cause  of  this  Theophanes 
ascribes  to  the  fact,  that  Our  Lord  on  one  occasion 
washed  His  feet  in  it  (CAron.  41.)  The  Cru- 
saders confounded  Emmaus  with  a  small  fortress 
farther  south,  on  the  Jerusalem  road  now  called 
Latron  (Will.  Tyr.  Hist.  vii.  24).  A  small  miserable 
village  called  'Arnicas  still  occupies  the  site  of  the 
ancient  city.  It  stands  on  the  western  declivity  of 
a  low  hill,  and  contains  the  ruins  of  an  old  church. 
The  name  Emmaus  was  also  borne  by  a  village  of 
Galilee  close  to  Tiberias ;  probably  the  ancient 
HAMMATH,  i.  e.  hot  springs — of  which  name  Em- 
maus was  but  a  corruption.  The  hot  springs  still 
remained  in  the  time  of  Josephns,  and  are  men- 
tioned by  him  as  giving  its  name  to  the  place 
(B.  J.  iv.  1,  §3  ;  Ant.  xviii.  2,  §3).      [J.  L.  I'.] 

EM'MEE  QEfifi-qp;  Semmeri),  1  Esd.  ix.  21. 
[Immee.] 

EM'MOR  (Rec.  Text  with  E,  'Efi/x6p;  Lachm. 
with  A  B  C  D,  'E/x/xdp  ;  Eiumo?-),  the  father  of 
Sychem  (Acts  vii.  1(3).     [Hamor.] 

E'NAM  (with  the  article,  D^l?""  =  "  the  double 
spring;"  Ges.  Thes.  1019  a,  Matavi;  Alex.  'Uuaei/x; 
Enaim,  one  of  the  cities  of  Judah  in  the  Skefelah  or 
lowland  (Josh.  xv.  34).  From  its  mention  with 
towns  (Jarmuth  and  Eshtaol  for  instance)  which 
are  known  to  have  been  near  Timnath,  this  is  very 
probably  the  place  in  the  "  doorway "  of  which 
Tamar  sat  before  her  interview  with  her  father-in- 
law  (Gen.  xxxviii.  14).  In  the  A.  V.  the  words 
Pathach  enayim  (D^y  PinE)  are  not  taken  as  a 
proper  name,  but  are  rendered  "  an  open  place," 
lit.  "  the  doorway  of  Enayim,"  or  the  double  spring, 
a  translation  adopted  by  the  LXX.  (reus  irvAais 
hlvdv)  and  now  generally.  In  Josh.  xv.  34.  for 
"  Tappuah  and  Enam,"  the  Peschitohas  "  Pathuch- 
Elam,"  which  supports  the  identification  suggested 
above.     [Ain.]  [G.] 

E'NAN  (P'Jf;  Alvdv;  Enan).  Ahira  ben- 
Enan  was  "  prince"  of  the  tribe  of  Naphtali  at  the 
time  of  the  numbering  of  Israel  in  the  wilderness 
of  Sinai  (Num.  i.  15). 

ENA'SLBTJS  ('E^o-^os;  Eliasib),  1  Esd.  ix. 
34.     [Eliashib.] 

ENCAMPMENT  (iUTO,  mach&neh,  in  all 
places  except  2  K.  vi.  8,  where  JYOnFl,  tachan&th, 
is  used.  The  wool  primarily  denoted  the  resting- 
place  of  an  army  or  company  of  travellers  at  night" 
(Ex.  xvi.  13;  Gen.  xxxii.  21),  and  was  hence 
applied  to  the  army  or  caravan  when  on  its  match 
(Ex.  xiv.  19;  Josh.  x.  .">,  xi.  4;  Gen.  xxxii.  7, 
8).  Among  nomadio  tribes  war  never  attained  to 
the  dignity  of  •  eience,  and  their  encampments 
consequently  devoid  of  all  the  appliances  of 
more  systematic  warfare.  The  description  of  the 
camp  of' the  Israelites,  on   their   inarch   from  Egypt 

(Num.  ii.,  iii.),  supplies  tin'  greatesl   amount  of 


a  Whence   Dl'H    1*11311    [eh&nSth   hayyom),   "  the 
camping-time  of  day,"  i.e.  the  evening,  .Tu<1r.  xix.9. 


550 


ENCAMPMENT 


information  on  the  subject:  whatever  else  maybe 
gleaned  is  from  scattered  hints.  The  tabernacle, 
corresponding  to  the  chieftain's  tent  of  an  ordinary 
encampment,  was  placed  in  the  centre,  and  around 
and  facing  it  (Num.  ii.  l),b  arranged  in  four  grand 
divisions,  corresponding  to  the  four  points  of  the 
compass,  lay  the  host  of  Israel,  according  to  their 
standards  (Num.  i.  52,  ii.  2).  On  the  east  the 
post  of  honour  was  assigned  to  the  tribe  of  Judah, 
and  round  its  standard  rallied  the  tribes  of  Issachar 
and  Zebulon,  descendants  of  the  sons  of  Leah.  On 
the  south  lay  Reuben  and  Simeon,  the  representa- 
tives of  Leah,  and  the  children  of  Gad,  the  son 
of  her  handmaid.  Rachel's  descendants  were  en- 
camped on  the  western  side  of  the  tabernacle,  the 
chief  place  being  assigned  to  the  tribe  of  Ephraim. 
To  this  position  of  Ephraim,  Manasseh,  and  Ben- 
jamin, allusions  are  made  in  Judg.  v.  14,  and  Ps. 
lxxx.  2.  On  the  north  were  the  tribes  of  Dan  and 
Naphtali,  the  children  of  Bilhah,  and  the  tribe  of 
Asher,  Gad's  younger  brother.  All  these  were  en- 
camped around  their  standards,  each  according  to 
the  ensign  of  the  house  of  his  fathers.  In  the 
centre,  round  the  tabernacle,  and  with  no  standard 
but  the  cloudy  or  fiery  pillar  which  rested  over  it, 
were  the  tents  of  the  priests  and  Levites.  The 
former,  with  Moses  and  Aaron  at  their  head,  were 
encamped  on  the  eastern  side.  On  the  south  were 
the  Kohathites,  who  had  charge  of  the  ark,  the  table 
of  shewbread,  the  altars  and  vessels  of  the  sanctuary. 
The  Gershonites  were  on  the  west,  and  when  on  the 
march  carried  the  tabernacle  and  its  lighter  furni- 
ture ;  while  the  Merarites,  who  were  encamped  on 
the  north,  had  charge  of  its  heavier  appurtenances. 
The  order  of  encampment  was  preserved  on  the 
march  (Num.  ii.  17),  the  signal  for  which  was  given 
by  a  blast  of  the  two  silver  trumpets  (Num.  x.  5). 
The  details  of  this  account  supply  Prof.  Blunt  with 
some  striking  illustrations  of  the  undesigned  coinci- 
dences of  the  books  of  Moses  (  Uncles.  Coincid.  pp. 
75-86). 

In  this  description  of  the  order  of  the  encamp- 
ment no  mention  is  made  of  sentinels,  who,  it  is 
reasonable  to  suppose,  were  placed  at  the  gates 
(Ex.  xxxii.  26,  27)  in  the  four  quarters  of  the 
camp.  This  was  evidently  the  case  in  the  camp 
of  the  Levites  (comp.  1  Chr.  ix.  18,  24;  2  Chr. 
xxxi.  2). 

The  sanitary  regulations  of  the  camp  of  the 
Israelites  were  enacted  for  the  twofold  purpose  of 
preserving  the  health  of  the  vast  multitude  and  the 
purity  of  the  camp  as  the  dwelling  -place  of  God 
(Num.  v.  3  ;  Deut.  xxiii.  14).  With  this  object 
the  dead  were  buried  without  the  camp  (Lev.  x.  4, 
5)  :  lepers  were  excluded  till  their  leprosy  departed 
from  them  (Lev.  xiii.  46,  xiv.  3;  Num.  xii.  14, 
5),  as  were  all  who  were  visited  with  loathsome 
diseases  (Lev.  xiv.  3).  All  who  were  defiled  by 
contact  with  the  dead,  whether  these  were  slain  in 
battle  or  not,  were  kept  without  the  camp  for 
seven  days  (Num.  xxxi.  19).  Captives  taken  in 
war  were  compelled  to  remain  for  a  while  outside 
(Num.  xxxi.  19;  Josh.  vi.  23).  The  ashes  from 
the  sacrifices  weie  poured  out  without  the  camp  at 
an  appointed  place,  whither  all  uneleanness  was 
removed  (Deut.  xxiii.  10,  12),  and  where  the 
entrails,  skins,  horns,  &c,  and  all  that  was  not 
offered  in  sacrifice  were  burnt  (Lev.  iv.  11,  12, 
vi.  11,  viii.  17). 

b  The  form  of  the  encampment  was  evidently  cir- 
cular, and  not  square,  as  it  is  generally  represented. 


ENCAMPMENT 

The  execution  of  criminals  took  place  without 
the  camp  (Lev.  xxiv.  14;  Num.  xv.  3.3,  36  ; 
Josh.  vii.  24),  as  did  the  burning  of  the  young 
bullock  for  the  sin-offering  (Lev.  iv.  12).  These 
circumstances  combined  explain  Heb.  xiii.  12,  and 
John  xix.  17,  20. 

The  encampment  of  the  Israelites  in  the  desert 
left  its  traces  in  their  subsequent  history.  The 
temple,  so  late  as  the  time  of  Hezekiah,  was  still 
"  the  camp  of  Jehovah  "  (2  Chr.  xxxi.  2  ;  cf.  Ps. 
lxxviii.  28);  and  the  multitudes  who  flocked  to 
David  were  "  a  great  camp,  like  the  camp  of  God  " 
(1  Chr.  xii.  22). 

High  ground  appears  to  have  been  uniformly 
selected  for  the  position  of  a  camp,  whether  it  weie 
on  a  hill  or  mountain  side,  or  in  an  inaccessible 
pass  (Judg.  vii.  18).  So,  in  Judg.  x.  17,  the 
Ammonites  encamped  in  Gi  lead,  while  Israel  pitched 
in  Mizpeh.  The  very  names  are  significant.  The 
camps  of  Saul  and  the  Philistines  were  alternately 
in  Gibeah,  the  "  height "  of  Benjamin,  and  the  pass 
of  Michmash  (1  Sam,  xiii.  2,  3,  16,  23).  When 
Goliath  defied  the  host  of  Israel,  the  contending 
armies  were  encamped  on  hills  on  either  side  of 
the  valley  of  Elah  (1  Sam.  xvii.  3);  and  in  the 
fatal  battle  of  Gilboa  Saul's  position  on  the  moun- 
tain was  stormed  by  the  Philistines  who  had 
pitched  in  Shunem  (1  Sam.  xxviii.  4),  on  the  other 
side  of  the  valley  of  Jezreel.  The  carelessness  ot 
the  Midianites  in  encamping  in  the  plain  exposed 
them  to  the  night  surprise  by  Gideon,  and  resulted 
in  their  consequent  discomfiture  (Judg.  vi.  33,  vii. 
8,  12).  But  another  important  consideration  in 
fixing  upon  a  position  for  a  camp  was  the  propin- 
quity of  water:  hence  it  is  found  that  in  most 
instances  camps  were  pitched  near  a  spring  or  well 
(Judg.  vii.  3  ;  1  Mace.  ix.  33).  The  Israelites  at 
Mount  Gilboa  pitched  by  the  fountain  in  Jezreel 
(1  Sam.  xxix.  1),  while  the  Philistines  encamped 
at  Aphek,  the  name  of  which  indicates  the  exist- 
ence of  a  stream  of  water  in  the  neighbourhood, 
which  rendered  it  a  favourite  place  of  encampment 
(1  Sam.  iv.  1  ;  1  K.  xx.  26;  2  K.  xiii.  17).  In 
his  pursuit  of  the  Amalekites,  David  halted  his 
men  by  the  brook  Besor,  and  there  left  a  detach- 
ment with  the  camp  furniture  (1  Sam.  xxx.  9). 
One  of  Joshua's  decisive  engagements  with  the 
nations  of  Canaan  was  fought  at  the  waters  of 
Merom,  where  he  surprised  the  confederate  camp 
(Josh.  xi.  5,  7;  comp.  Judg.  v.  19,  21).  Gideon, 
before  attacking  the  Midianites,  encamped  beside 
the  well  of  Harod  (Judg.  vii.  1),  and  it  was  to 
draw  water  from  the  well  at  Bethlehem  that 
David's  three  mighty  men  cat  their  way  through 
the  host  of  the  Philistines  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  16). 

The  camp  was  surrounded  by  the  H/JiyD,  ma'- 

gdldh  (1  Sam.  xvii.  20),  or  7iiyO,  ma' gal  (1  Sam. 

xxvi.  5,  7),  which  some,  and  Thenius  among  them, 
explain  as  an  earthwork  thrown  up  round  the  en- 
campment, others  as  the  barrier  formed  by  the 
baggage- waggons.  The  etymology  of  the  word 
points  merely  to  the  circular  shape  of  the  enclosure 
formed  by  the  tents  of  the  soldiers  pitched  around 
their  chief,  whose  spear  marked  his  resting-place 
(1  Sam.  xxvi.  5,  7),  and  it  might  with  propriety 
be  used  in  either  of  the  above  senses,  according  as 
the  camp  was  fixed  or  temporary.  We  know  that, 
in  the  case  of  a  siege,  the  attacking  army,  it  pos- 
sible, surrounded  the  place  attacked  (1  .Mace.  xiii. 
43).  and  drew  about  it  a  lino  of  circumvallation 
(p^T,  dayek,  2  K.  xxv.  I  ),  which  was  marked  by 


ENCHANTMENTS 

a  breastwork  of  earth  (n?DJ3,  tn'sillah,  Is.  lxii. 
10;  rbhb,  svl'lah,  Ez.  xxi.  27  (22)  ;  eonrp.  Job 
xix.  12),  tor  the  double  purpose  of  preventing  the 
escape  of  the  besieged  and  of  protecting  the  be- 
siegers from  their  sallies.0  But  there  was  not  so 
much  need  of  a  formal  entrenchment,  as  but  few 
instances  occur  in  which  engagements  were  fought 
in  the  camps  themselves,  and  these  only  when  the 
attack  was  made  at  night.  Gideon's  expedition 
against  the  Midianites  took  place  in  the  early  morn- 
ing (Judg.  vii.  19),  the  time  selected  by  Saul  for 
his  attack  upon  Nahash  (1  Sam.  xi.  11),  and  by 
David  for  surprising  the  Amalekites  (1  Sam.  xxx. 
.  17;  comp.  Judg.  ix.  33).  To  guard  against  these 
night  attacks,  sentinels  (CHOit;',  siwiiirim)  were 
posted  (Judg.  vii.  20;  1  Mace.  xii.  27)  round  the 
camp,  and  the  neglect  of  this  precaution  by  Zebah 
and  Zalmunna  probably  led  to  their  capture  by 
Gideon  and  the  ultimate  defeat  of  their  army  (Judg. 
vii.  19). 

The  valley  which  separated  ■  the  hostile  camps 
was  generally  selected  as  the  lighting  ground  (niC 
sddeh,  "  the  battle-field,"  1  Sam.  iv.  2,  xiv.  15; 
2  Sam.  xviii.  6),  upon  which  the  contest  was 
decided,  and  hence  the  valleys  of  Palestine  have 
played  so  conspicuous  a  part  in  its  history  (Josh, 
viii.  13;  Judg.  vi.  33;  2  Sam.  v.  22,  viii.  13, 
&c.).  When  the  lighting  men  went  forth  to  the 
•place  of  marshalling  (HDIVD,  ma'&r&c&h,  1  Sam. 
xvii.  20),  a  detachment  was  left  to  protect  the  camp 
and  baggage  (1  Sam.  xvii.  22.xxTi.24).  The  beasts 
of  burden  were  probably  tethered  to  the  tent  pegs 
('_!  K.  vii.  10;   Zech.  xiv.  15). 

The  rOPIQ,  mach&neh,  or  moveable  encampment, 
is  distinguished  from  the  Q-VD,  matstsab,  or  3*X3 
n'tsib  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  14;  1  (1'hr.  xi.  16),  which 
appear  to  have  been  standing  camps,  like  those 
which  Jehoshaphat  established  throughout  Judah 
(2  Chr.  xvii.  2),  or  advanced  posts  in  an  enemy's 
country  (1  Sam.  xiii.  17;  2  Sam.  viii.  6),  from 
which  skirmishing  parties  made  their  predatory 
exclusions  and  ravaged  the  crops.  It  was  in  re- 
sisting one  of  these  expeditions  that  Sliammah  won 
himself  a  name  among  David's  heroes  (2  Sam. 
xxiii.  12).  Mach&neh  is  still  further  distinguished 
from  "IX30i  mibhtsdr,  "a  fortress"  or  "walled 
town  "  (  Num.  xiii.  19). 

Camps  left  behind  them  a  memorial  in  the  name 
of  the  place  where  they  were  situated,  as  among 
Ives  (cf.  Chester,  Grantchester,  kc).  Ma- 
haneh-Dan  'Judg.  xiii.  25)  was  so  called  from  the 
encampment  of  the  '  toites  mentioned  in  Judg.  xviii. 
12.  [Maiianaim.]  The  mure  important  camps 
at  Gilgal  (Josh.  v.  1",  be.  6)  and  Shiloh  (Josh, 
xviii.  9;  Judg.  xxi.  12,  19)  left  do  such  ii 
the  military  traditions  of  these  places  we  e  eelips  .1 
by  the  greater  splendour  of  the  religious  associations 
which  surrounded  them.  [^-A.W.] 

ENCHANTMENTS,     1.  U*vb.  or  D'on^, 

•  t  :  •   t  : " 

Ex.  vii.  11,22,  viii.  7  ;  (pap/xaKeiat,  I. XX.  (Grotius 
compares  the  word  with  the  Greek  Airal ,  : 
arts,  from  D-1?,  t<>  cover;  though  others  incorrectly 
connect  it  with  Dl"l7,  a  flame,  or  the  glittering 


ENCHANTMENTS 


551 


c  The  Ohahlee  renders  TDi^  (1  Sam.  xvii.  20) 
and  pH  (2  K.  xxv.  1)  by  the  same  word,  Dlp"l3, 
or  NQ1p~l2.  the  Greek  \ap6.Kioiia. 


blade  of  a  sword,  as  though  it  implied  a  sort  of 
dazzling  cheironomy  which  deceives  spectators. 
Several  versions  render  the  word  by  "  whisperings," 
insusurrationes,  but  it  seems  to  be  a  more  ge- 
neral word,  and  hence  is  used  of  the  various  means 
(some  of  them  no  doubt  of  a  quasi-scientific  cha- 
racter) by  which  the  Egyptian  Chartummim  im- 
posed on  the  credulity  of  Pharaoh. 

2.  DISC'S  ;  (pap/jLUKeiai,  (pdp/xaKa,  LXX.  (2  K. 
ix.  22  ;  Mic.  v.  12  ;  Nah.  iii.  4)  ;  veneficia,  male- 
ficia,  Vulg.  ;  "  maleticae  artes,"  "  praestigiae," 
"  muttered  spells."  Hence  it  is  sometimes  ren- 
dered by  iiraoiSal  as  in  Is.  xlvii.  9,  12.  The  belief 
in  the  power  of  certain  formulae  was  universal  in 
the  ancient  world.  Thus  there  were  carmina  to 
evoke  the  tutelary  gods  out  of  a  city  (Macrob.  Sa- 
turnal.  iii.  9),  others  to  devote  hostile  armies  (Id.), 
others  to  raise  the  dead  (Maimon.  da  Idol.  xi.  15; 
Senec.  Oedip.  547),  or  bind  the  gods  (Se<r/j.ol 
9ea>v)  and  men  (Aesch.  Fur.  331),  and  even  in- 
fluence the  heavenly  bodies  (Ov.  Met.  vii.  207  s</., 
xii. 203  ;  "  Te  quoque  Luna  traho,"  Virg.  Eel.  viii., 
Aen.  iv.  489;  Hor.  Epod.  v.  45).  They  were  a 
recognised  part  of  ancient  medicine,  even  among  the 
Jews,  who  regarded  certain  sentences  of  the  Law  as 
efficacious  in  healing.  The  Greeks  used  them  as 
one  of  the  five  chief  resources  of  pharmacy  (Pind. 
Pyth.  iii.  8,  9  ;  Soph.  Aj.  582),  especially  in  obste- 
trics (Plat.  Theaet.  p.  145)  and  mental  diseases 
(Galen  dc  Sanitat.  tuendd,  i.  8).  Homer  mentions 
them  as  used  to  check  the  flow  of  blood  (Od.  xix. 
456),  and  Cato  even  gives  a  charm  to  cure  a  dis- 
jointed limb  {Be  Be  Rust.  160;  cf.  Plin.  IT.  X. 
xxviii.  2).  The  belief  in  charms  is  still  all  but 
universal  in  uncivilised  nations ;  see  Lane's  Mod. 
Egypt,  i.  300,  306,  &c,  ii.  177,  Sec;  Beeckman's 

Voyage  to  Borneo,  ch.  ii.;  Meroller's  Congo  (in 
Pinkerton's  Voyages,  xvi.  pp.  221,  273);  Hue's 
China,  i.  223,  ii.  326  ;  Taylor's  New  Zealand,  and 
Livingstone's  Africa,  passim,  i£:e. ;  and  hundreds  of 
such  remedies  still  exist,  and  are  considered  effica- 
cious among  the  uneducated. 

3.  t^ETI?,  Eccl.  x.  11;  tyiBvpurrfs,  LXX.,  from 
L'TD.  This  word  is  especially  used  of  the  charm- 
ing" of  serpents,  Jer.  viii.  17  (cf.  Ps.  lviii.  5; 
Ecclus.  xii.  13,  Eccl.  x.  11,  Luc.  ix.  891 — a  pa- 
rallel to  " cantando rumpitur anguis,"  and  "Vipereas 
rumpo  verbis  et  carmine  fauces,"  Ov.  Met.  t.  c). 
Maimonides  {de  Idol.  xi.  2)  expressly  defines  an  en- 
chanter as  one  "  who  uses  strange  and  meaningless 
words,  by  which  he  imposes  on  the  folly  of  the  cre- 
dulous. They  say,  for  instance,  that  if  one  utter 
the  words  before  a  serpent  or  scorpion  it  will 
harm"  (Carpzov.  Annot.  in  Godwynum,  iv.  11). 
An  account  of  the  Marsi  who  excelled  in  this  art  is 
given  by  Augustin  (ad  den.  ix.  28),  and  of  the 
l'sylli  by  Amobius  (ad Nat.  ii.  32);  and  they  are 
alluded  to  by  a  host  of  other  authorities  (  Plin.  vii. 
2,  xxviii.  6  ;  Aelian.  //.  A.  i.  57  ;  Virg.  Aen.  vii. 
750;  Sil.  Ital.  viii.  495.  They  were  called 
'OfpioSiaj/cTcu).  The  secret  is  still  understood  in 
the  Last  (Lane,  ii.  ll      . 

4.  The  word  D^KTO  is  used  of  the  en.  Iiant- 
ments  sought  by  Balaam,  Num.  xxiv.  I,  It  pro- 
perly allude,  to  ophiomancy,  but  in  this  place  has 

aning  of  endeavouring  to  gain  omens 
{tU  avvavTf\<nv  To?y  olwvuls,  LXX.). 

5.  "Iin  is  used  for  magi.-,  Is.  dvii.  9,  12.  It. 
comes  from  "IZiH,  to  bind  (cf.  KaTaStw.  f3a<TKaii>oo, 


552 


ENDOK 


banneu),  and  means  generally  the  process  of"  ac- 
quiring power  over  some  distant  object  or  person  ; 
but  this  word  seems  also  to  have  been  sometimes 
used  expressly  of  serpent  charmers,  for  R.  Sol. 
Jarchi  on  Deut.  xviii.  11,  defines  the  "DPI  "Din 
to  be  one  "  who  congregates  serpents  and  scorpions 
into  one  place." 

Any  resort  to  these  methods  of  imposture  was 
strictly  forbidden  in  Scripture  (Lev.  six.  26;  Is. 
xlvii.  9,  &c),  but  to  eradicate  the  tendency  is 
almost  impossible  (2  K.  xvii.  17;  2  Chr.  xxxiii. 
6),  and  we  find  it  still  flourishing  at  the  Christian 
era  (Acts  xiii.  6,  8,  viii.  9,  11,  yorireia;  Gal.  v. 
20  ;  Rev.  ix.  21). 

The  chief  sacramenta  daemoniaca  were  a  rod,  a 
magic  circle,  dragon's  eggs,  certain  herbs,  or  "  insane 
roots,"  like  the  henbane,  &e.  The  fancy  of  poets  both 
ancient  and  modern  has  been  exerted  in  giving  lists  of 
them  (Ovid,  and  Hor.  II.  cc. ;  Shakspeare's  Macbeth, 
Act  iv.  1 ;  Kirke  White's  Gondoline ;  Southey's 
Curse  of  Kehama,  Cant.  iv.  &c.) .  [Witchcrafts  ; 
Amulets  ;  Divination.]  [F.  W.  F.] 

EN'-DOR  ("lVpj?  =  "  spring  of  Dor ;"  'Aev- 
Sdp;  Endor),  a  place  which  with  its  "daughter- 
towns"  (11133)  was  in  the  territory  of  Issachar, 
and  yet  possessed  by  Manasseh  (Josh.  xvii.  11). 
This  was  the  case  with  five  other  places  which  lay 
partly  in  Asher,  partly  in  Issachar,  and  seem  to 
have  formed  a  kind  of  district  of  their  own  called 
"  the  three,  or  the  triple,  Nepheth." 

Endor  was  long  held  in  memory  by  the  Jewish 
people  as  connected  with  the  great  victory  over 
Sisera'  and  Jabin.  Taanach,  Megiddo,  and  the  tor- 
rent Kishon  all  witnessed  the  discomfiture  of  the 
huge  host,  but  it  was  emphatically  to  Endor  that  the 
tradition  of  the  death  of  the  two  chiefs  attached  itself 
(Ps.  lxxxiii.  9,  10).  Possibly  it  was  some  recollection 
of  this,  some  fame  of  sanctity  or  good  omen  in 
Endor,  which  drew  the  unhappy  Saul  thither  on 
the  eve  of  his  last  engagement  with  an  enemy  no 
less  hateful  and  no  less  destructive  than  the  Mi- 
dianites  (1  Sam.  xxviii.  7).  Endor  is  not  again 
mentioned  in  the  Scriptures ;  but  it  was  known  to 
Eusebius,  who  describes  it  as  a  large  village  4  miles 
S.  of  Tabor.  Here  to  the  north  of  Jebel  Dtthy 
(the  "  Little  Hermon "  of  travellers),  the  name 
still  lingers,  attached  to  a  considerable  but  now  de- 
serted village.  The  rock  of  the  mountain,  on  the 
slope  of  which  Endur  stands,  is  hollowed  into  caves, 
one  of  which  may  well  have  been  the  scene  of  the 
incantation  of  the  witch  (Van  de  Yelde,  ii.  383  ; 
Rob.  ii.  360 ;  Stanley,  345).  The  distance  from 
the  slopes  of  Gilboa  to  Endor  is  7  or  8  miles,  over 
difficult  ground.  [G.] 

EN-EGLA'IM  (D^jrpy  =  "  spring  of  two 
heifers;"  ' E vaya A.A e l/x  ;  Engallim),  a  place  named 
only  by  Ezekiel  (xlvii.  10),  apparently  as  on  the 
Dead  Sea  ;  but  whether  near  to  or  far  from  Engedi, 
on  the  west  or  east  side  of  the  Sea,  it  is  impossible 
to  ascertain  from  the  text.  In  his  comment  on  the 
passage,  Jerome  locates  it  at  the  embouchure  of  the 
Jordan ;  but  this  is  not  supported  by  other  evi- 
dence. By  some  (<?.  g.  Gesenius,  Thes.  1019)  it  is 
thought  to  be  identical  with  Eglaim,  but  the  two 
words  are  different,  En-eglaim  containing  the  Ain, 
which  is  rarely  changed  for  any  other  aspirate.  [G.] 

ENEMES'SAR  ('Evefieffadp,  "Evep.4<r<Tapos) 
is  the  name  under  which  Shalmaneser  appears  in 
the  book  of  Tobit  (i.  2,  15,  &c).  This  book  is  not 
of  any  historical  authority,  being  a  mere  work  of 


ENGEDI 

imagination  composed  probably  by  an  Alexandrian 
Jew,  not  earlier  than  B.C.  300.  The  change  of 
the  name  is  a  corruption — the  first  syllable  Shal 
being  dropped  (compare  the  Bupalussor  of  Aby- 
denus,  which  represents  lYt/bopolassar),  and  the 
order  of  the  liquids  m  and  n  being  reversed.  The 
author  of  Tobit  makes  Enemessar  lead  the  children 
of  Israel  into  captivity  (i.  2),  following  the  appa- 
rent narrative  of  the  book  of  Kings  (2  K.  xvii. 
3-6,  xviii.  9-11).  He  regards  Sennacherib  not 
only  as  his  successor  but  as  his  son  (i.  15),  for 
which  he  has  probably  no  authority  beyond  his 
own  speculations  upon  the  text  of  Scripture.  As 
Sennacherib  is  proved  by  the  Assyrian  inscriptions 
to  be  the  son  of  Sargon,  no  weight  can  be  properly 
attached  to  the  historical  statements  in  Tobit.  The 
book  is,  in  the  fullest  sense  of  the  word,  apo- 
cryphal.  [G.  R.] 

ENE'NIUS  {'Evrjveos  ;  Emmanius),  one  of  the 
leaders  of  the  people  who  returned  from  captivity 
with  Zorobabel  (1  Esdr.  v.  8).  There  is  no  name 
corresponding  in  the  lists  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah. 

ENGAD'DI  {iv  aiyiaXoh  ;  in  Cades),  Ecclus. 
xxiv.  14.     [Engedi.] 

EN-GAN'NIM  (D*HT8  =  "  spring  of  gar- 
dens"). 1.  A  city  in  the  low  country  of  Judah, 
named  between  Zanoah  and  Tappuah  (Josh.  xv. 
34).  The  LXX.  in  this  place  is  so  different  from 
the  Hebrew  that  the  name  is  not  recognizable. 
Vulg.  Aen-Gannim. 

2.  A  city  on  the  border  of  Issachar  (Josh.  six. 
21  ;  'lecliv  Kal  Tofxjxdv,  Alex,  ^v  Vavvijx ;  En-Gan- 
nirri) ;  allotted  with  its  "  suburbs "  to  the  Ger- 
shonite  Levites  (xxi.  29  ;  Xlr\y)}  ypap.jj.drwv  ;  En- 
Gannini).  These  notices  contain  no  indication  of 
the  position  of  Engannim  with  reference  to  any 
known  place,  but  there  is  great  probability  in  the 
conjecture  of  Robinson  (ii.  315)  that  it  is  identical 
with  the  Ginaia  of  Josephus  {Ant.  xx.  6,  §1), 
which  again,  there  can  be  little  doubt,  survives  in 
the  modern  Jenin,  the  first  village  encountered  on 
the  ascent  from  the  great  plain  of  Esdraelon  into 
the  hills  of  the  central  country.  Jenin  is  still  sur- 
rounded by  the  "orchards"  or  "gardens"  which 
interpret  its  ancient  name,  and  the  "spring"  is  to 
this  day  the  characteristic  object  in  the  place  (Rob. 
ii.  315  ;  Stanley,  349,  note;  Van  de  Velde,  359). 
The  position  of  Jenin  is  also  in  striking  agreement 
with  the  requirements  of  Beth-hag-Gan  (A.  V.  "  the 
garden-house;"  Bcudydv)  in  the  direction  of  which 
Ahaziah  fled  from  Jehu  (2  K.  ix.  27).  The  rough 
road  of  the  ascent  was  probably  too  much  for  his 
chariot,  and  keeping  the  more  level  ground  he  made 
for  Megiddo,  where  he  died  (see  Stanley,  349). 

In  the  lists  of  Levitical  cities  in  1  Chr.  vi.  Anem 
is  substituted  for  Engannim.  Possibly  it  is  merely 
a  contraction.  [G.] 

EN'GEDI  (»"]!  pj?,  "the  fountain  of  the  kid;" 

'E77a55t  and  E7-ya55c»  ;  Arabic,  Cf*Xs»  ^f^-), 
a  town  in  the  wilderness  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  62), 
on  the  western  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea  (Ezek.xlvii. 
10).  Its  original  name  was  Hazazon-Tamar  (]l^Vn 
"IDn,  "the  pruning  of  the  palm"),  doubtless,  as 
Josephus  says,  on  account  of  the  palm  groves 
|  which  surrounded  it  (2  Chr.  xx.  2  ;  Ecclus.  xxiv. 
14;  Joseph.  Ant.  ix.  1,  §2).  Some  doubt  seems 
to  have  existed  in  the  early  centuries  of  our  era  as 
to    its    true     po'sition.      StephanuS    places    it     near 


ENGEDI 

Sodom  (Steph.  B.  s.  v.)  ;  Jerome  at  the  south  end 
of  the  Dead  Sea  (Gomm.  in  Ezek.  xlvii.)  ;  but 
Josephus  more  correctly,  at  the  distance  of  300 
stadia  from  Jerusalem  (Ant.  ix.  1,  §2).  Its  site 
is  now  well  known.  It  is  about  the  middle  of 
the  western  shore  of  the  lake.  Here  is  a  rich 
plain,  half  a  mile  square,  sloping  very  gently  from 
the  base  of  the  mountains  to  the  water,  and  shut 
in  on  the  north  by  a  lofty  promontory.  About  a 
mile  up  the  western  acclivity,  and  at  an  elevation 
of  some  400  feet  above  the  plain,  is  the  fountain 
of  Ain  Jidy,  from  which  the  place  gets  its  name. 
The  water  is  sweet,  but  the  temperature  is  81° 
Fah.  It  bursts  from  the  limestone  rock,  and 
rushes  down  the  steep  descent,  fretted  by  many  a 
rugged  crag,  and  raining  its  spray  over  verdant 
borders  of  acacia,  mimosa,  and  lotus.  On  reaching 
the  plain,  the  brook  crosses  it  in  nearly  a  straight 
line  "to  the  sea.  During  a  greater  part  of  the  year, 
however,  it  is  absorbed  in  the  thirsty  soil.  Its 
banks  are  now  cultivated  by  a  few  families  of 
Arabs,  who  generally  pitch  their  tents  near  this 
spot.  The  soil  is  exceedingly  fertile,  and  in  such  a 
climate  it  might  be  made  to  produce  the  rarest 
fruits  of  tropical  climes.  Traces  of  the  old  city 
exist  upon  the  plain  and  lower  declivity  of  the 
mountain,  on  the  south  bank  of  the  brook.  They 
are  rude  and  uninteresting,  consisting  merely  of 
foundations  and  shapeless  heaps  of  unhewn  stones. 
A  sketch  by  M.  Belly,  taken  from  the  fountain,  and 
embracing  the  plain  on  the  shore,  and  the  south- 
west border  of  the  Dead  Sea,  will  be  found  in 
the  Atlas  of  Plates  accompanying  the  original  edi- 
tion of  De  Saulcy's  Voyage,  pi.  viii. 

The  history  of  Engedi,  though  it  reaches  back 
nearly  4000  years,  may  be  told  in  a  ivw 
sentences.  It  was  imme- 
diately alter  an  assault  upon 
the  "  Amorites,  that  dwelt  in 
Hazazon-Tamar,"  that  the 
live  Mesopotamian  kings  were 
attacked  by  the  rulers  of  the 
plain  of  Sodom  (Gen.  xiv.  7; 
comp.  2  Chr.  xx.  2).  It  is 
probable  that  the  fountain 
was  always  called  Engedi, 
and  that  the  ancient  town 
built  on  the  plain  below  it 
got  in  time  the 
Saul  was  told  that 
in  the  "  wilder 
gedi  ;"  and  he  took  "  3000 
men,  and  went  to  seek  David 
and  his  men  upon  the  rocks  of 
the  wild  goats"  ( 1  Sam.  xxiv. 
1-4).  These  animals  still  frequent  the  cliffs  aboveand 
around  the  fountain;  the  Arabs  call  them  Beden. 
At  a  later  period  Engedi  was  the  gathering-place  of 
the  Moabites  and  Ammonites  who  went  up  against 
Jerusalem,  and  fell  in  the  valley  of  Berachah  (2 
Chr.  xx.  2).  It  is  remarkable  that  this  is  the 
usual  route  taken  in  the  present  day  by  such 
predatory  bands  from  Moab  as  make  incursions  into 
Southern  Palestine.  They  pass  round  the  southern 
end  of  the  Dead  Sea,  then  up  the  road  along  its 
western  shore  to  Ain  Jidy,  and  thence  toward 
Hebron,  Tekoa,  or  Jerusalem,  as  the  prospects  of 
plunder  seem  most  inviting. 

The  vineyards  of  Engedi  were  celebrated  by 
Solomon  (Cant.  i.  14);  its  balsam  by  Josephus 
(Ant.  ix.  I,  §2),  and  its  palms  by  Pliny — '•  En- 
gadda  oppidum   fuit,   secundum    ab   Hierosolyrais 


ENGINE 


553 


fertilitate  palmetorumque  nemoribus"  (v.  17). 
But  vineyards  no  longer  clothe  the  mountain-side, 
and  neither  palm-tree  nor  balsam  is  seen  on  the 
plain.  In  the  fourth  century  there  was  still  a  large  • 
village  at  Engedi  (Onom.  s.  v.) ;  it  must  have  been 
abandoned  very  soon  afterwards,  for  there  is  no 
subsequent  reference  to  it  in  history,  nor  are  there 
any  traces  of  recent  habitation  (Porter's  Handbook, 
242  ;  Rob.  i.  507).  There  is  a  curious  reference  to  it 
in  Mandeville  (Earl;/  Truv.  179),  who  says  that  the 
district  between  Jericho  and  the  Dead  Sea  is  "  the  land 
of  Dengadda"  (Fr.  d'Engndda),  and  that  the  balm 
trees  were  "  still  called  vines  ofGady."    [J.  L.  P.] 

ENGINE,  a  term  exclusively  applied  to  mili- 
tary affairs  in  the  Bible.  The  Hebrew  j'lDCTn 
(2  Chr.  xxvi.  15)  is  its  counterpart  in  etymolo- 
gical meaning,  each  referring  to  the  ingenuity  (en- 
gine, from  ingenimn)  displayed  in  the  contrivance. 
The  engines  to  which  the  term  is  applied  in  2  Chr. 
were  designed  to  propel  various  missiles  from  the 
walls  of  a  besieged  town;  one,  like  the  balista,  was 
for  stones,  consisting  probably  of  a  strong  spring 
and  a  tube  to  give  the  right  direction  to  the  stone ; 
another,  like  the  catapulta,  for  arrows,  an  enor- 
mous stationary  bow.  The  invention  of  these  is 
assigned  to  Uzziah's  time— a  statement,  which  is 
supported  both  by  the  absence  of  such  contrivances 
in  the  representations  of  Egyptian  and  Assyrian 
warfare,  and  by  the  traditional  belief  that  the  ba- 
lista was  invented  in  Syria  (Pliny,  vii.  56).  Luther 
gives  briistwehren,  i.  e.  "  parapets,"  as  the  meaning 
of  the  term.  Another  war-engine,  with  which  the 
Hebrews  were  acquainted,  was  the  battering-ram, 
described  in  Ez.  xxvi.  9,  as  \P2p  TTO,  lit.  a  beat- 
ing of  that  which  is  in  front,   hence  a  ram  for 


same  name,  j'  r^x/1-1 •  ^X^^rT.  ** V 
it  David  was  I «f  n  J  \ij  \a/  \ 
mess   of  En-  I  \-f        t/        t-t         H 


.r-en^incs,  from  Botta,  pL  160. 


striking  walls;  and  still  more  precisely  in  Ez.  iv.  2. 
xxi.  22,  as  13,  a  ram.  The  use  of  this  instrument 
was  well  known  both  to  the  Egyptians  I  Wilkinson, 
i.  359)  and  the  Assyrians.  The  references  in  Eze- 
kiel  are  to  the  one  used  by  the  Litter  people,  con- 
sisting of  a  high  and  stoutly  built  framework  on 
four  wheels,  covered  in  at  the  sides  in  order  to 
protect  the  men  moving  it.  and  armed  with  one  or 
two  pointed  weapons.  Their  appearance  was  very 
different  from  that  of  the  Woman  arid  with  which 
the  Jews  afterwards  became  acquainted  (Joseph, 
B.  J.  iii.  7,  §19).  No  notice  is  taken  of  the  tea- 
tudo  or  the  r'ui, -a  (ef.  Ez.  xxvi.  9,  Yidj.;;  but 
it  is  not  improbable  that  the  1  lei. reus  were  ac- 
quainted wjth  them  (cf.  Wilkinson,  i.  361).  The 
marginal  rendering  "engines  of  shot"  (Jer.  vi.  'i, 
wxii.  24  :  Ez.  xxvi.  8)  is  incorrect.      [W.  L.  B.] 


554 


ENGRAVER 


ENGRAVER.  The  term  t'"in,  so  translated 
in-  the  A.  V.,  applies  broadly  to  any  artificer, 
whether  in  wood,  stone,  or  metal :  to  restrict  it  to 
the  engraver  in  Ex.  xxxv.  35,  xxxviii.  23,  is  im- 
proper :  a  similar  latitude  must  be  given  to  the 
term  riFIS,  which  expresses  the  operation  of  the 
artificer :  in  Zech.  iii.  9,  ordinary  stone-cutting  is 
evidently  intended.  The  specific'  description  of  "an 
engraver  was  J3X  t^'in  (Ex.  xxviii.  11),  and  his 
chief  business  was  cutting  names  or  devices  on  rings 
and  seals  ;  the  only  notices  of  engraving  are  in  con- 
nexion with  the  high-priest's  dress — the  two  onyx- 
stones,  the  twelve  jewels,  and  the  mitre-plate 
having  inscriptions  on  them  (Ex.  xxviii.  11,  '-'1, 
36).  The  previous  notices  of  signets  (Gen.  xxxviii. 
18,  xli.  42)  imply  engraving.  The  art  was  widely 
spread  throughout  the  nations  of  antiquity,  parti- 
cularly among  the  Egyptians  (Diod.  i.  78  ;  Wilkin- 
son, iii.  373),  the  Aethiopians  (Her.  vii.  69),  and  the 
Indians  (Von  Bohlen,  Indian,  ii.  122).    [W.  L.  B.] 

EN-HAD'DAH  (iT^-py  =  "sharp,  or  swift 
spring;"  Gesen.  AlfxaptK  ;  Alex.  rfv'ASSa),  one  of 
the  cities  on  the  border  of  Issachar  named  next  to 
Engannim  (Josh.  xix.  21).  Van  de  Velde  (i.  315) 
would  identity  it  with  Ain-haud  on  the  western 
side  of  Carmel,  and  about  2  miles  only  from  the  sea. 
But  this  is  surely  out  of  the  limits  of  the  tribe  of 
Issachar,  and  rather  in  Asher  or  Manasseh.     [G.] 

EN-HAK-KO'RE  QHfpn  |*S>  =  "  the  spring 
of  the  crier;"  Trny^i  rov  i-7nKa\ovfj.^uov),  the 
spring  which  burst  out  in  answer  to  the  "  cry"  of 
Samson  after  his  exploit  with  the  jawbone  (Judg. 
xv.  19).  The  name  is  a  pun  founded  on  the  word 
in  verse  18,  yikera  (Nip),  A.  V.  "he  called"). 
The  word  Maktesh,  which  in  the  story  denotes  the 
"hollow  place"  (literally,  the  "mortar")  in  the 
jaw,  and  also  that  for  the  "jaw"  itself,  Lechi,  are 
1 10th  names  of  places.  Van  de  Velde  {Memoir,  3-4: ! ) 
endeavours  to  identify  Lechi  with  Teil-el-Lekiyeh 
4  miles  N.  of  Beersheba,  and  Enhakkore,  with  the 
large  spring  between  the  Tell  and  Khewelfeh.  But 
Samson's  adventures  appear  to  have  been  confined 
to  a  narrow  circle,  and  there  is  no  ground  for  ex- 
tending them  to  a  distance  of  some  30  miles  from 
<J;iza,  which  Lekiyeh  is,  even  in  a  straight 
line.  [G/] 

EN-HA'ZOR  (liXn  pj>  =  "  spring  of  the  vil- 
lage ;"  irnyii  'Aa6p  ;  En-Asor),  one  of  the  "  fenced 
cities  "in  the  inheritance  of  Naphtali,  distinct  from 
Hazor,  named  between  Edrei  and  Iron,  and  appa- 
rently not  far  from  Kedesh  (Josh.  xix.  37).  It  has 
not  yet  been  identified.  [G.] 

EN-MISHPAT  (BSB>»  ]*$;  v  ttt?^  -rijs 
KpicT(cas),  Gen.  xiv.  7.     [KADESH.l 

EN-RIM'MON  {f\1S-\  py  ;  Vat.  omits,  Alex. 
eV  "Pefxfxwv  ;  et  in  Rimmon),  one  of  the  places  which 
the  men  of  Judah  re-inhabited  after  their  return 
from  the  Captivity  (Neh.  si.  29).  From  the -towns 
in  company  with  which  it  is  mentioned,  it  seems 
very  probable  that  the  name  is  the  same  which  in 
the  earlier  books  is  given  in  the  Hebrew  and  A.  V. 
in  the  separate  form  of  "  Ain  and  Rimmon  "  (Josh. 
xv.  32),  "  Am,  Rernmon"  (xix.  7  ;  and  see  1  Chr. 
iv.  32),  but  in  the  LXX.  combined,  as  in  Nehe- 
miah.      [AtN;  2.]  [G.] 

E'NOCH,  and  once  HENOCH  (Tjijn  =  Cha- 
uoc ;   l'hilo,   de    Post.    Caini,    §11,   ipfLvviv^rai 


ENOCH 

'Ecojx  X«P'S  ffov;  'Ej/c^x ;  Joseph.  "Avuxos ; 
Henoch).  1.  The  eldest  son  of  (Jain  (Gen.  iv. 
17),  who  called  the  city  which  he  built  after 
his  name  (18).  Ewald  (Gesch.  i.  356  note) 
fancies  that  there  is  a  reference  to  the  Phrygian 
Iconium,  in  which  city  a  legend  of  "Awacos  was 
preserved,  evidently  derived  from  the  Biblical  ac- 
count of  the  father  of  Methuselah  (Steph.  Byz.  s.  v. 
'i/foVioy,  Suid.  s.v.  NdvvaKos).  Other  places  have 
been  identified  with  the  site  of  Enoch  with  little 
probability;  e.g.  .Anuchta  in  Susiana,  the  Jleni- 
ochi  in  the  Caucasus,  &c. 

2.  The  son  of  Jared  (TV,  a  descent,  cf.  Jordan), 
and  father  of  Methuselah  {TVH^Ti'O,  a  man  of 
arms,  l'hilo.  1.  c.  §12,  MaOovaaAe/j.  i^anoa-roAy 
da.va.Tov  (Gen.  v.  21  ff. ;  Luke  iii.  28).  In  the  Epistle 
of  Jude  (v.  14,  cf.  Enoch,  lx.  8)  he  is  described  as 
"  the  seventh  from  Adam;"  and  the  number  is»pro- 
bably  noticed  as  conveying  the  idea  of  divine  comple- 
tion and  rest  (cf.  August,  c.  Faust,  xii.  14),  while 
Enoch  was  himself  a  type  of  perfected  humanity, 
"  a  man  raised  to  heaven  by  pleasing  God,  while 
angels  fell  to  earth  by  transgression"  (Iren.  iv. 
16,  2).  The  other  numbers  connected  with  his 
history  appear  too  symmetrical  to  be  without 
meaning.  He  was  bom  when  Jared  was  162 
(9x6x3)  years  old,  and  after  the  birth  of  his 
eldest  son  in  his  65th  (5x6  +  7)  year  he  lived  300 
years.  From  the  period  of  365  years  assigned  to 
his  life,  Ewald  (i.  356),  with  very  little  probability, 
regards  him  as  "  the  god  of  the  new-year,"  but  the 
number  may  have  been  not  without  influence  on 
the  later  traditions  which  assigned  to  Enoch  the 
discovery  of  the  science  of  astronomy  (aarpoAoyia, 
Eupolemus  ap.  Euseb.  Praep.  Ev.  ix.  17,  where  he  is 
identified  with  Atlas).  After  the  birth  of  Methu- 
selah it  is  said  (Gen.  v.  22-4)  that  Enoch  "  walked 
with  God  300  years  .  .  .  and  he  was  not;  for 
God  took  him  "  (np7,  fj.eTeOyKEi',  LXX.  (here 
only);  tulit,  Vulg.).  The  phrase  "  walked  with 
God"  (D^NiTnX  ^nnn)  is  elsewhere  only 
used  of  Noah  (Gen.  vi.  9;  cf.  Gen.  xvii.  1,  &c), 
and  is  to  be  explained  of  a  prophetic  life  spent 
in  immediate  converse  with  the  spiritual  world 
(Enoch,  xii.  2,  "  All  his  action  teas  with  the  holy 
ones,  and  with  the  watchers  during  his  life"). 
There  is  no  further  mention  of  Enoch  in  the  O.  T., 
but  in  Ecclesiasticus  (xlix.  14)  he  is  brought  for- 
ward as  one  of  the  peculiar  glories  (ovSh  els  e/c- 
Tio-dw  oTos  'E.)  of  the  Jews,  for  he  was  taken  up 
(ai>eAT)<p0Ti,  Alex,  fj.tr ereOn)  from  the  earth.  "  He 
pleased  the  Lord  and  was  translated  [into  Paradise, 
Vulg.]  being  a  pattern  of  repentance"  (Ecclus.  xliv. 
14).  In  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  the  spring  and 
issue  of  Enoch's  life  are  clearly  marked.  "  By  faith 
Enoch  was  translated  (/xererdOri,  translatus  est, 
Vulg.)  that  he  should  not  see  death  .  .  .  for  before 
his  translation  (/j.eTa.6eo~e<us)  he  had  this  testimony, 
that  he  pleased  God."  The  contrast  to  this 
divine  judgment  is  found  in  the  constrained  words 
of  Josephus:  "Enoch  departed  to  the  Deity  (at/e- 
Xtopycre  irpbs  to  dtiov),  whence  [the  sacred 
writers]  have  not  recorded  his  death  "  {Ant.  1, 
3,  4). 

The  biblical  notices  of  Enoch  were  a  fruitful 
source  of  speculation  in  later  times.  Some  theolo- 
gians disputed  with  subtilty  as  to  the  place  to 
which  he  was  removed;  whether  it  was  to  paradise 
#r  to  the  immediate  presence  of  God  (cf.  Feuarden- 
tius  ad  Iren.  v.  5.),  though  others  more  wisely 


ENOCH,  THE  BOOK  OF 

declined  to  discuss  the  question  (Thilo,  Cod.  Apocr. 
N.  T.,  p.  758).  On  other  points  there  was  greater 
unanimity.  Both  the  Latin  and  Greek  fathers 
commonly  coupled  Enoch  and  Elijah  as  historic  wit- 
nesses of  the  possibility  of  a  resurrection  of  the  body 
and  of  a  true  human  existence  in  glory  (Iren.  iv.  5, 
1 ;  Tertull.  de  Resurr.  Cam.  58  ;  Hieron.  c.  Joan. 
Hierosol.  §§29,  32,  pp.  437,  440) ;  and  the  voice 
of  early  ecclesiastical  tradition  is  almost  unanimous 
in  regarding  them  as  "the  two  witnesses"  (Rev. 
xi.  3  ff.)  who  should  fall  before  "  the  beast,"  and 
afterwards  be  raised  to  heaven  before  the  great 
judgment  (Hippol.  Frag,  in  Dan.  xxii.;  de  An- 
tichr.  xliii.  Cosmas  Indie,  p.  75,  ap.  Thilo,  Kara 
t^v  iKK\t)cria<TTiK)]v  irapaSomv  ;  Tertull.  de 
Anima,  59  ;  Ambros.  in  Psalm,  xlv.  4  ; 
Evang.  Nicod.  c.  xxv.  on  which  Thilo  has  almost 
exhausted  the  question:  Cod.  Apoc.  iV.  T.  pp. 
765  f.).  This  belief  removed  a  serious  difficulty 
which  was  supposed  to  attach  to  their  translation  ; 
for  thus  it  was  made  clear  that  they  would  at  last 
discharge  the  common  debt  of  a  sinful  humanity, 
from  which  they  were  not  exempted  by  their 
glorious  removal  from  the  earth  (Tertull.  da  Ani- 
ma, 1.  c. ;  August.  Op.  imp.  c.  Jul.  vi.  30). 

In  later  times  Enoch  was  celebrated  as  the  in- 
ventor of  writing,  arithmetic,  and  astronomy 
(Euseb.  Praep.  Ev.  ix.  17).  He  is  said  to  have 
tilled  300  books  with  the  revelations  which  he 
received,  and  is  commonly  identified  with  Edris 
(i.e.  the  learned),  who  is  commemorated  in  the 
Koran  (cap.  19)  as  one  "  exalted  [by  God]  to  a  high 
place"  (cf.  Sale,  1.  c. ;  Hottinger,  Hist.  Orient. 
pp.  30  ff.).  But  these  traditions  were  probably 
due  to  the  apocryphal  book  which  bears  his  name 
(of.  Fabric.  Cod.  Pseudep.  1".  7'.  i.  215  ff.). 

Some  (Buttm.  Mythol.i.  176  ff.;  Ewald,  I.e.) 
have  found  a  trace  of  the  history  of  Enoch  in  the 
Phrygian  legend  of  Annacus  ("AwaKos,  Ndwaicos), 
who  was  distinguished  for  his  piety,  lived  300 
years,  and  predicted  the  deluge  of  Deucalion. 
[Enoch,  1.]  In  the  A.  V.  of  1  Chr.  i.  3,  the  name 
is  given  as  Henoch. 

3.  The  third  son  ofMidian,  the  son  of  Abraham 
l.y  Keturah  (Gen.  xxv.  4,  A.  V.  Hanoch;  *1  Chr. 
i.  33,  A.  X.  Henoch). 

4.  The  eldest  son  of  Reuben  (A.  V.  Hanoch; 
Gen.  xlvi.  'J;  Ex.  vi.  14;  1  Chr.  v.  3),  from  whom 
came  "  the  family  of  the  Ilanochites "  (Num. 
sexvi.  5  i. 

5.  In  2  Esdr.  vi.  4'.»,  51,  Enoch  stands  in  the 
Latin  (and  Eng.)  Version  for  Behemoth  in  the 
Aethiopic.  [B.  F.  \\\] 

ENOCH,  THE  HOOK  OF,  is  one  of  the  most 
important  remains  of  that  early  apocalyptic  litera- 
ture of  which  the  l k  of  Daniel  ^  thegreai  pro- 
totype. From  its  vigorous  style  and  wide  range 
of  speculation  fin'  book  is  well  worthy  of  the  atten- 
tion which  it  received  in  the  firsl  ■<.>■■;  and  recent 
investigations  have  .--till  hit  many  points  forfur- 
quiry. 

1.  The  history  of  the  book  is  remarkable.  Tin' 
firal  trace  of  its  existence  is  generally  found  in  the 
Epistle  of  St.  Judei  it.  15;  cf.  Enoch,  i.  9),bui  the 
words  of  the  Apostle  leave  it  uncertain  whether  be 
derived  his  quotation  from  tradition  (Ilot'niann. 
Schriftbeweis,  i.  1-20  or  from  writing  (hrpotfyfirev- 
a^v .  . .  'livux  A.e'yftH'),  though  the  wide  spread  of 
the  book  in  the  second  century  seems  almost  decish  e 
in  favour  of  the  latter  supposition.  It  appears  to 
have  been  known  to  Fustin  (Apol.  ii.  5),  Irenaeus 


ENOCH,  THE  BOOK  OF 


555 


("Adv.  Haer\  iv.  10,  2), and  Anatolius  (Euseb.  II.  E. 
vii.  32).  Clement  of  Alexandria  (Eclog.  p,  801  |  and 
Origen  (yetcomp.  c.  Gels.  v.  p.  2(57,  ed.  Spenc.) 
both  make  use  of  it,  and  numerous  references  occur 
to  the  "  writing,"  "books,"  and  "words"  of  Enoch 
in  the  Testaments  of  the  XII.  Patriarchs,  which 
present  more  or  less  resemblance  to  passages  in  the 
present  book  (Fabr.  Cod.  Pseudep.  V.  T.  i.  161 
ff.  ;  Gfrorer,  Proph.  Pseudep.  273  f.).  Tertul- 
lian  (De  Cult.  Fern.  i.  3  ;  cf.  De  Idol.  4)  expressly 
quotes  the  book  as  one  which  was  "  not  received  by 
some,  nor  admitted  into  the  Jewish  canon"  (in 
armarium  Judaicum),  but  defends  it  on  account  of 
its  reference  to  Christ  (legimus  omnem  scripturam 
aedificationi  habilem  divinitus  inspirari).  Augustine 
(De  Civ.  xv.  23,  4)  and  an  anonymous  writer 
whose  work  is  printed  with  Jerome's  (Breo.  in 
Psalm,  exxxii.  2;  cf.  Hil.  ad  Psalm.  1.  c.)  weie 
both  acquainted  with  it;  but  from  their  time  till 
the  revival  of  letters  it  was  known  in  the  Western 
Church  only  by  the  quotation  in  St.  Jude  (Dill- 
mann,  Einl.  lvi.).  In  the  Eastern  Church  it 
was  known  some  centuries  later.  Considerable  frag- 
ments are  preserved  in  the  Chronographia  of  Geor- 
gius  Syncellus  (c.  792  a.d.),  and  these,  with  the 
scanty  notices  of  earlier  writers,  constituted  the  sole 
remains  of  the  book  known  in  Europe  till  the  close 
of  the  last  century.  Meanwhile,  however,  a  report 
was  current  that  the  entire  book  was  preserved  in 
Abyssinia;  and  at  length,  in  1773,  Bruce  brought 
with  him  on  his  return  from  Egypt  three  MSS., 
containing  the  complete  Aethiopic  translation. 
Notwithstanding  the  interest  which  the  discovery 
excited,  the  first  detailed  notice  of  this  translation 
was  given  by  Silvestre  de  Sacy  in  1800,  and  it  was 
not  published  till  the  edition  of  Archbishop  Law- 
rence in  1838  (Libri  Enoch  versio  Aethiopica  .  .  . 
Oxon.).  But  in  the  interval  Lawrence  published 
an  English  translation,  with  an  introduction  and 
notes,  which  passed  through  three  editions  (The 
Book  of  Enoch,  Sue.  by  K.  Lawrence.  Oxford, 
1821,  1833,  1838).  The  translation  of  Lawrence 
formed  the  basis  of  the  German  edition  of  Hoff- 
mann (Des  Buck  Henoch,  ...  A.  E.  Hoffmann. 
Jena,  1833-38);  and  Gfrorer,  in  1840,  gave  a 
Latin  translation  constructed  from  the  translations 
of  La  wrenceand  Hoffmann  |  Prophetae  veteres  Pseud- 
epigraphi. . .  ed.  A.  F.  Gfrorer,  Stuttgartiae,  184-0). . 
All  these  editions  were  superseded  by  those  of 
Dillmann,  who  edited  the  Aethiopic  text  from  five 
MSS.  (Liber  lh>i<><it,  Asethiopice,  Lipsiae,  1851), 
and  afterwards  gave  a  German  translation  of  the 
book  with  a  good  introduction  and  commentary 
(Das  Bitch  Henoch,  ...  von  Dr.  A.  Dillmann, 
Leipzig,  1853).  The  work  of  Dillmann  gave  a 
fresh  impulse  to  the  study  of  the  book.  Among 
the  essays  which  were  called  out  by  it  the  most 
important  were  those  of  Ewald  (i  Aethio- 

pischen  Bitches  Hen  *ch  Entstehung,  &c.,  Gottingen, 
1856)  and  FJUgenfeld  I  /'.  Judi  Lj      ilyptik, 

Jena,    1*">7>.     The  older  Literature  on  the  subject 
is  reviewed  by  Fabricius  (CW.  Pseudep.    I.  /'.  i. 

2.  THe  Aethiopic  translation  was  made  from  the 
Greek,  and  it  was  probably  made  about  the  same 
time  as  the  translation  of  the  Bible  with  which  it 
was  afterwards  connected',  or  in  other  words, 
towards  the  middle  or  close  of  the  fourth  century. 
'fhe  general  coincidence  of  the  translation  with  the 
c  quotations  of  corresponding  passages  shows 
satisfactorily  that  the  text  from  which  it  was 
derived  \\  ■-  the  same  as  that  current  in  the  early 


556 


ENOCH,  THE  BOOK  OF 


Church,  though  one  considerable  passage  quoted 
by  Georg.  Syncell.  is  wanting  in  the  present  book 
(Dillin.  p.  85).  But  it  is  still  uncertain  whether 
the  Greek  text  was  the  original,  or  itself  a  transla- 
tion. One  of  the  earliest  references  to  the  book 
occurs  in  the  Hebrew  Book  of  Jubilees  (Dillm.  in 
Ewald's  Jahrb.  18.50,  p.  90),  and  the  names  of  the 
angels  and  winds  are  derived  from  Aramaic  roots 
(cf.  Dillm.  pp.  236  ff.).  In  addition  to  this  a 
Hebrew  book  of  Enoch  was  known  and  used  by 
Jewish  writers  till  the  thirteenth  century  (Dillm. 
Einl.  lvii.),  so  that  on  these  grounds,  among 
others,  many  have  supposed  (J.  Scaliger,  Lawrence, 
Hoffmann,  Dillmann)  that  the  book  was  first  com- 
posed in  Hebrew  (Aramaean).  In  such  a  case  no 
stress  can  be  laid  upon  the  Hebraizing  style,  which 
may  be  found  as  well  in  an  author  as  in  a  trans- 
lator ;  and  in  the  absence  of  direct  evidence  it  is 
difficult  to  weigh  mere  conjectures.  On  the  one 
hand,  if  the  book  had  been  originally  written  in 
Hebrew  it  might  seem  likely  that  it  would  have 
been  more  used  by  Rabbinical  teachers ;  but,  on 
the  other  hand,  the  writer  certainly  appears  to 
have  been  a  native  of  Palestine,3  and  therefore 
likely  to  have  employed  the  popular  dialect.  If 
the  hypothesis  of  a  Hebrew  original  be  accepted, 
which  as  a  hypothesis  seems  to  be  the  more  plau- 
sible, the  history  of  the  original  and  the  version 
finds  a  good  parallel  in  that  of  the  Wisdom  of 
Sirach.    [Ecclesiasticus.] 

3.  In  its  present  shape  the  book  consists  of  a 
series  of  revelations  supposed  to  have  been  given  to 
Enoch  and  Noah,  which  extend  to  the  most  varied 
aspects  of  nature  and  life,  and  are  designed  t<> 
offer  a  comprehensive  vindication  of  the  action  of 
Providence.  [Enoch.]  It  is  divided  into  five  parts. 
The  first  part  (Cc.  1-36  Dillm.),  after  a  general 
introduction,  contains  an  account  of  the  fall  of  the 
angels  (Gen.  vi.  1)  and  of  the  judgment  to  come 
upon  them  and  upon  the  giants,  their  offspring 
(6-16);  and  this  is  followed  by  the  description  of 
the  journey  of  Enoch  through  the  earth  and  lower 
heaven  in  company  with  an  angel,  who  showed  to 
him  many  of  the  great  mysteries  of  nature,  the 
treasure-houses  of  the  storms  and  winds,  and  fires 
of  heaven,  the  prison  of  the  fallen  and  the  land  of 
the  blessed  (17-36).  The  second  part  (37-71)  is 
styled  "  a  vision  of  wisdom,"  and  consists  of  three 
"  parables,"  in  which  Enoch  relates  the  revelations 
of  the  higher  secrets  of  heaven  and  of  the  spiritual 
world  which  were  given  to  him.  The  first  parable 
(38-44)  gives  chiefly  a  picture  of  the  future  bless- 
ings and  manifestation  of  the  righteous,  with  fur- 
ther details  as  to  the  heavenly  bodies :  the  second 
(45-57)  describes  in  splendid  imagery  the  coming 
of  Messiah  and  the  results  which  it  should  work 
among  "  the  elect "  and  the  gainsayers :  the  third 
(58-69)  draws  out  at  further  length  the  blessedness 
of  "  the  elect  and  holy,"  and  the  confusion  and 
wretchedness  of  the  sinful  rulers  of  the  world.  The 
third  part  (72-82)  is  styled  "  the  book  of  the 
course  of  the  lights  of  heaven,"  and  deals  with  the 
motions  of  the  sun  and  moon,  and  the  changes  of 
the  seasons ;  and  with  this  the  narrative  of  the 
journey  of  Enoch  closes.  Thefourth  part  (83-91) 
is  not  distinguished  by  any  special  name,  but  con- 
tains the  record  of  a  dream  which  was  gi  anted  to 
Enoch  in  his  youth,  in  which  he  saw  the  history 
of  the  kingdoms  of  God  and  of  the  world  up  to  the 


a  The  astronomical  calculations  by  which  Lawrence 
endeavoured  to  fix  the  locality  of  the  writer  in  the 


ENOCH,  THE  BOOK  OF 

final  establishment  of  the  throne  of  Messiah.  The 
fifth  part  (92-105)  contains  the  last  addresses  of 
Enoch  to  his  children,  in  which  the  teaching  of 
the  former  chapters  is  made  the  ground-work  of 
earnest  exhortation.  The  signs  which  attended 
the  birth  of  Noah  are  next  noticed  (106-7)  ;  and 
another  short  "writing  of  Enoch"  (108)  forms 
the  close  to  the  whole  book  (cf.  Dillm.  Einl. 
i.  ff. ;  Liicke,  Versuch  eincr  vollstand.  Einl.  &c, 
i.  93  ff.) 

4.  The  general  unity  which  the  book  possesses 
in  its  present  form  marks  it,  in  the  main,  as  the 
work  of  one  man.  The  several  parts,  while  they 
are  complete  in  themselves,  are  still  connected  by 
the  development  of  a  common  purpose.  But  in- 
ternal coincidence  shows  with  equal  clearness  that 
different  fragments  were  incorporated  by  the  author 
into  his  work,  and  some  additions  have  been  proba- 
bly made  afterwards.  Different  "books"  are  men- 
tioned in  early  times,  and  valuations  in  style  and 
lauguage  are  discernible  in  the  present  book.  To 
distinguish  the  original  elements  and  later  interpo- 
lations is  the  great  problem  which  still  remains  to 
be  solved,  for  the  different  theories  which  have  been 
proposed  are  barely  plausible.  In  each  case  the 
critic  seems  to  start  with  pieconceived  notions  as 
to  what  was  to  be  expected  at  a  particular  time, 
and  forms  his  conclusions  to  suit  his  prejudices. 
Hofmann  and  Weisse  place  the  composition  of  the 
whole  work  after  the  Christian  era,  because  the  one 
thinks  that  St.  Jude  could  not  have  quoted  an  apo- 
cryphal book  (Hofmann,  Schriftbeireis,  i.  420  If.), 
and  the  other  seeks  to  detach  Christianity  altogether 
from  a  Jewish  foundation  (Weisse,  Evangelienfrage, 
214  ft'.).  Stuart  (American  JJibl.  Repert.  1840) 
so  far  anticipated  the  argument  of  Weisse  as  to 
regard  the  Christology  of  the  book  as  a  clear  sign 
of  its  post-Christian  origin.  Ewald,  according  to 
his  usual  custom,  picks  out  the  different  elements 
with  a  daring  .confidence,  and  leaves  a  result  so 
complicated  that  no  one  can  accept  it  in  its  details, 
while  it  is  characterised  in  its  great  features  by 
masterly  judgment  and  sagacity.  He  places  the 
composition  of  the  giound-woik  of  the  book  at 
various  intervals  between  144  B.C.  and  cir.  120  B.C., 
and  supposes  that  the  whole  assumed  its  present 
form  in  the  first  half  of  the  century  before  Christ. 
Liicke  (2nd  ed.)  distinguishes  two  great  parts,  an 
older  part  including  cc.  1-36,  and  72-105,  which 
he  dates  from  the  beginning  of  the  Maccabeean 
struggle,  and  a  later,  cc.  37-71,  which  he  assigns 
to  the  period  of  the  rise  of  Herod  the  Great 
( 141 ,  &c).  He  supposes,  however,  that  later  inter- 
polations were  made  without  attempting  to  ascer- 
tain their  date.  Dillmann  upholds  more  decidedly 
the  unity  of  the  book,  and  assigns  the  chief  part  of 
it  to  an  Aramaean  writer  of  the  time  of  John  Hyr- 
canus  (c.  110  B.C.).  To  this,  according  to  him, 
"historical"  and  "Noachian  additions"  weie 
made,  probably  in  the  Greek  translation  {Einl. 
lii.).  Kostlin  (quoted  by  Hilgenfeld,  96,  &e.) 
assigns  cc.  1-16,  21-36,  72-105,  to  about  110 
B.C.;  cc.  37-71  to  c.  B.C.  100-64;  and  the 
"Noachian  additions"  and  c.  108  to  the  time  of 
Herod  the  Great.  Hilgenfeld  himself  places  the 
original  book  (cc.  1-16;  20-36;  72-90;  91,  1-19; 
93;  94-105)  about  the  beginning  of  the  first  cen- 
tury before  Christ  (a.  a.  O.  p.  145  n.).  This  book 
he  supposes  to  have  passed  through  the  hands  of  a 


neighbourhood  of  the  Caspian  are  inconclusive. 
Dillm.  p.  li. 


Cf. 


ENOCH,  THE  BOOK  OF 

Christian  writer  who  lived  between  the  times  "of 
Saturninus  and  Mansion. "  (p.  181),  who  added  the 
chief  remaining  portions,  including  the  gieat  Mes- 
sianic section,  cc.  37-71.  In  the  face  of  these 
conflicting  theories  it  is  evidently  impossible  to 
dogmatize,  and  the  evidence  is  insufficient  for  con- 
clusive reasoning.  The  interpretation  of  the  Apo- 
calyptic histories  (cc.  56,  57;  85-90),  on  which 
the  chief  stress  is  laid  for  fixing  the  date  of  the 
book,  involves  necessarily  minute  ciitieism  of  de- 
tails, which  belongs  rather  to  a  commentary  than 
to  a  general  Introduction ;  hut  notwithstanding  the 
arguments  of  Hilgenfeld  and  Jost  {Gesch.  J  ml.  ii. 
218  n.),  the  whole  book  appears  to  be  distinctly  of 
Jewish  origin.  Some  inconsiderable  interpolations 
may  have  been  made  in  successive  translations,  and 
large  fragments  of  a  much  earlier  date  were  un- 
doubtedly incorporated  into  the  work,  but  as  a 
whole  it  may  b«  regarded  as  describing  an  important 
phase  of  Jewish  opinion  shortly  before  the  coming  of 
Christ. 

.">.  In  doctrine  the  Book  of  Enoch  exhibits  a 
great  advance  of  thought  within  the  limits  of 
revelation  in  each  of  the  great  divisions  of'  know- 
ledge. The  teaching  on  nature  is  a  curious  attempt 
to  reduce  the  scattered  images  of  the  0.  T.  to  a 
physical  system.  The  view  of  society  aud  man,  of 
the  temporary  triumph  and  final  discomfiture  of  the 
oppressors  of  God's  people,  carries  out  into  elabo- 
rate detail  the  pregnant  images  of  Daniel.  The 
figure  of  the  Messiah  is  invested  with  majestic  dig- 
nity as  "  the  Son  of  God  "  (c.  105,  2  only),  "  whose 
name  was  named  before  the  sun  was  made"  (48, 
3),  and  who  existed  "  aforetime  in  the  presence  of 
(bid"  (62,  6;  cf.  Lawrence,  Prel.  Diss.  Ii.  f.). 
And  at  the  same  time  His  human  attributes  as  "  the 
son  of  man,"  "  the  son  of  woman  "  (c.  62,  5  only), 
"  the  elect  one,"  "  the  righteous  one,"  "  the 
anointed,"  are  brought  into  conspicuous  notice. 
The  mysteries  of  the  spiritual  world,  the  connexion 
of  angels  and  men,  the  classes  and  ministries  of  the 
hosts  of  heaven,  the  power  of  Satan  (40,  7;  65, 
6),  and  the  legions  of  darkness,  the  doctrines  of 
resurrection,  retribution,  and  eternal  punishment 
(V.  •_'_',  cf.  Dillm.  ]>.  xix.),  are  dwelt  upon  with 
growing  earnestness  as  the  horizon  of  speculation 
was  extended  by  intercourse  with  Greece.  But  the 
message  of  the  book  is  emphatically  one  of  "  faith 
and  truth"  (cf.  Dillm.  p.  32),  and  while  the 
writer  combines  and  repeats  the  thoughts  of  scrip- 
ture,  hi>  adds  in>  new  element  to  the  teaching  of 
the  prophets.  His  errors  spring  from  an  undisci- 
plined attempt  to  explain  their  words,  and  from  a 
proud  exultation  in  present  success.  For  the  great 
characteristic  by  which  the  book  is  distinguished  from 
the  later  apocalypse  of  Ezra  [Esdras,  2nd  Book] 
is  the  tone  of  triumphant  expectation  by  which  it 
i>  pervaded.  It  seems  to  repeat  m  every  form 
the  -reat  principle  that   the   world,  natural,  moral, 

and  spiritual,  is  under  the  immediate  government 

of  God.  Hence  it  follows  th.lt  there  is  a  terrible 
retribution  reserved  for  sinners,  and  a  glorious  king- 
dom prepared  lor  tin'  righteous,  and  Messiah  is  re- 
garded as  tin'  divine  mediator  of  this  double  issue 
(c. 90,91).  Nor  is  it  without  a  striking  fitue  tl  •• 
a  patriarch  translated  from  earth,  and  admitted  to 
look  upon  the  divine  majesty,  is  chosen   as  "the 

herald  of  wisdom,  righteousness,  and   judgment  to  a 

people  who,  even  in  suffering,  saw  ill  their  tyrants 
only  the  victims  of  a  coming  vengeance." 

<;.  Notwithstanding  tin-  quotation  in  St.  Jude, 
and   the    wide   circulation    of  the   book    itself,    the 


EN-ROGEL 


557 


apocalypse  of  Enoch  was  uniformly  and  distinctly 
separated  from  the  canonical  scriptures.  Tertul- 
lian  alone  maintained  its  authority  (1.  c),  while  he 
admitted  that  it  was  not  received  by  the  Jews. 
Origen,  on  the  other  hand  (c.  Cels.  v.  p.  267,  ed. 
Spenc),  and  Augustine  (de  Civ.  xv.  23,  4),  defini- 
tively mark  it  as  apocryphal,  and  it  is  reckoned 
among  the  apocryphal  books  in  the  Apostolic  Con- 
stitutions (vi.  16),  and  in  the  catalogues  of  the 
Synopsis  S.  Scripturae,  Nicephorus  (Credner,  Z<<r 
Gesch.  d.  Kan.  145),  and  Montfaucou  (Bibl.  Coislin. 
p.  193). 

7.  The  literature  of  the  subject  has  been  already 
noticed  incidentally.  The  German  edition  of  Dill- 
mann  places  within  the  reach  of  the  student  all 
the  most  important  materials  for  the  study  of  the 
book.  Special  points  are  discussed  by  Gfrorer,  Bus 
Jahrh.  d.  Heils.  i.  3  ff. ;  C.  Wieseler,  Die  70 
Wochen  des  Daniel,  1839.  An  attempt  was  made 
by  the  Rev.  E.  Murray  {Enoch  restitutus,  &c.,  Lond. 
1838)  to  "  separate  from  the  books  of  Enoch  the 
book  quoted  by  St.  Jude,"  which  met  with  little 
favour.  [B.  F.  \V.] 

ENOCH,  CITY.     [Enoch,  No.  1.] 

ENON.     [Aenon.] 

EN-ROGEL  {bp  PJJ ;  7.7777;  'P&^tjA ;  Fons 
Rogel),  a  spring  which  formed  one  of  the  land- 
marks on  the  boundary-line  between  Judah  (Josh. 
xv.  7)  and  Benjamin  (xviii.  16).  It  was  the  point 
next  to  Jerusalem,  and  at  a  lower  level,  as  is 
evident  from  the  use  of  the  words  "  ascended  "  and 
"descended"  in  these  two  passages.  Here,  appa- 
rently concealed  from  the  view  of  the  city,  Jonathan 
and  Ahimaaz  remained,  after  the  flight  of  David, 
awaiting  intelligence  from  within  the  walls  ('_'  Sam. 
xvii.  17),  and  here,  "  by  the  stone  Zoheleth,  which 
is  'close  to'  (?VN)  En-rogel,"  Adonijah  held  the 
feast,  which  was  the  first  and  last  act  of  his  attempt 
on  the  crown  (1  K.  i.  9).  These  are  all  the  occur- 
rences of  the  name  in  the  Bible.  By  Josephus 
on  the  last  incident  {Ant.  vii.  14,  §4)  its  situation 
is  given  as  "without  the  city,  in  the  royal  garden." 
and  it  is  without  doubt  referred  to  by  him  in  the 
same  connexion,  in  his  description  of  the  earthquake 
which  accompanied  the  sacrilege  of  Uzziah  {Ant. 
ix.  10,  §4),  and  which,  "at  the  place  called 
Froge,"  a  shook  down  a  part  of  the  Eastern  hill, 
"  so  as  to  obstruct  the  roads,  and  the  royal  gardens." 

In  the  Targum,  and  the  Arabic  and  Syriac  ver- 
sions, the  name  is  commonly  given  as  "  the  spring 

of  the  fuller"  (K^Vi?,  >UV).  and  this  is  generally 

accepted  as  the  signification  of  the  Hebrew  nam< — 
/,'"/<  /  being  derived  from  /,'</;/•</,  to  tread,  in  allusion 
to  the  practice  of  the  Orientals  in  washing  linen. 

In  more  modern  times,  a  tradition,  apparently 
first  recorded  by  Brocardus,  would  make  En-rogel 
the  well  of  Job  or  Nehemiah  I  Btr  I  w  .  below  the 
junction  of  the  valleys  of  Eedron  and  llinnoin,  and 
south  of  the  l'ool  of  Siloam.  In  favour  of  this  is 
tie'  taet  that  in  the  Arabic  version  of  Josh.  xv.  7  the 
name  "f  Ain-Eyub,  or  ••  spring  of  Job,"  is  given  for 
En-rogel,  and  also  tint  in  -iii  early  Jewish  Itinerary 
(Uri  of  I'.iel,  in  Hottinger's  Cippi   Hebraici)  the 

name  is  given  as  "  well  of  Joab,"  as  if  retaining  the 

He  I j  of  Joab's  connexion  with  Adonijah — a  name 


»   This    natural    interpretation    of    a    name    only 
slightly  corrupt  appears  t.>  have  first  suggested  itself 

to  Stank  \    [S.fP.  184). 


558 


EN-SHEMESH 


which  it  still  retains  in  the  traditions  of  the  Greek 
Christians  (Williams,  Holy  ( 'ity,  490).  Against  this 
general  belief,  fome  strong  arguments  are  urged  by 

1  r.  Bonar  in  favour  of  identifying  En-rogel  with 
the  present  "  Fountain  of  the  Virgin,"  '  Ain  Ummed- 
Daraj  =  "spring  of  the  mother  of  steps" — the 
perennial  source  from  which  the  Pool  of  Siloam  is 
supplied  {Land  of  Promise,  App.  v.).  These  argu- 
ments are  briefly  as  follows  : — 

1.  The  Bir  Eyvb  is  a  well  and  not  a  spring  (En), 
while,  on  theother  hand,  the  "Fountain  of  the  Virgin" 
is  the  only  real  spring  close  to  Jerusalem.  Thus  if 
the  latter  be  not  En-rogel,  the  single  spring  of  this 
locality  has  escaped  mention  in  the  Bible. 

2.  The  situation  of  the  Fountain  of  the  Virgin 
agrees  better  with  the  course  of  the  boundary  of 
Benjamin  than  that  of  the  Bir  Eyvb,  which  is  too 
far  south. 

3.  Bir  Eyvb  does  not  suit  the  requirements  of 

2  Sam.  xvii.  17.  It  is  too  far  oil' both  from  the  city, 
and  from  the  direct  road  over  Olivet  to  the  Jordan; 
and  is  in  full  view  of  the  city  (Van  de  Velde,  i.  475), 
which  the  other  spot  is  not. 

4.  The  martyrdom  of  St.  James  was  effected  by 
casting  him  down  from  the  temple  wall  into  the 
valley  of  Kedron,  where  he  was  finally  killed  by  a 
fuller  with  his  washing-stick.  The  natural  inference 
is  that  St.  James  fell  near  where  the  fullers  were  at 
work.  Now  Bir  Eyvb  is  too  far  off  from  the  site 
of  the  temple  to  allow  of  this,  but  it  might  very 
well  have  happened  at  the  Fountain  of  the  Virgin. 
( See  Stanley's  Sermons  on  the  Apost.  Age,  p.  333-4.) 

5.  Daraj  and  Rogel  are  both  from  the  same  root, 
and  therefore  the  modern  name  may  be  derived 
from  the  ancient  one,  even  though  at  present  it  is 
token  to  allude  to  the  "steps"  by  which  the  reser- 
voir of  the  Fountain  is  reached. 

Add  to  these  considerations  (what  will  have  more 
significance  when  the  permanence  of  Eastern  habits 
is  recollected) — 6.  That  the  Fountain  of  the  Virgin 
is  still  the  great  resort  of  the  women  of  Jerusalem 
for  washing  and  treading  their  clothes  :  and  also — 
7.  That  the  level  of  the  king's  gardens  must  have 
been  above  the  Bir  Eyub,  even  when  the  water  is  at 
the  mouth  of  the  well — and  it  is  generally  seventy 
or  eighty  feet  below ;  while  they  must  have  been 
lower  than  the  Fountain  of  the  Virgin,  which  thus 
might  be  used  without  difficulty  to  irrigate  them. 
(See  Robinson,  i.  331-334;  and  for  the  best  de- 
scription of  the  Bir  Eyub,  see  Williams,  Holy  City, 
ii.  489-495.)     [Jerusalem.]  [G.j 

EN-SHE'MESH  (Gy»B>-rsy  =  «  spring  of  the 

sun  ;"  7)  irvyr]  tov  fi\iov,  irnyr)  Bsadera/uvs  ;  En- 
semes,  id  est,  Fons  Solis),  a  spring  which  formed 
one  of  the  landmarks  on  the  north  boundary  of 
Judah  (Josh.  xv.  7)  and  the  south  boundary  of 
Benjamin  (xviii.  17).  From  these  notices  it  appears 
to  have  been  between  the  "  ascent  of  Adummim  " — 
the  road  leading  up  from  the  Jordan  valley  south 
of  the  Wady  Kelt — and  the  spring  of  En-rogel, 
in  the  valley  of  Kedron.  It  was  therefore  east 
of  Jerusalem  and  of  the  Mount  of  Olives.  The 
only  spring  at  present  answering  to  this  position 
is  the  Ain-Haud  or  Ain-Chot— the  "Well  of  the 
Apostles," — about  a  mile  below  Bethany,  the  tra- 
veller's first  halting-place  on  the  road  to  Jericho. 
Accordingly  this  spring  is  generally  identified  with 
En-Shemesh.  The  aspect  of  Ain-havd  is  such 
that  the  rays  of  the  sun  are  on  it  the  whole  day. 
This  is  not  inappropriate  in  a  fountain  dedicated  to 
that  luminary.  [0.1 


ENSIGN 

ENSIGN  (DJ  ;  in  the  A.  V.  generally  "  ensign," 
sometimes  "  standard  ;"  7)1,  "  standard,"  with  the 
exceptiouof Cant. ii.4,  "banner;"  ]"I1X,  ''ensign"). 
The  distinction  between  these  three  Hebrew  terms 
is  sufficiently  marked  by  their  respective  uses:  nes 
is  a  signal ;  dcgel  a  military  standard  for  a  large 
division  of  an  army  ;  and  oth,  the  same  for  a  small 
one.  Neither  of  them,  however,  expresses  the  idea 
which  "standard"  conveys  to  our -minds,  viz.,  a 
flag;  the  standards  in  use  among  the  Hebrews  pro- 
bably resembled  those  of  the  Egyptians  and  Assy- 
rians— a  figure  or  device  of  some  kind  elevated  on  a 
pole.  (1.)  The  notices  of  the  nes  or  "ensign"  are 
most  frequent ;  it  consisted  of  some  well  understood 
signal  which  was  exhibited  on  the  top  of  a  pole 
from  a  bare  mountain  top  (Is.  xiii.  2,  xviii.  3) — the 
very  emblem  of  conspicuous  isolation  (Is.  xxx.  17). 
Around  it  the  inhabitants  mustered,  whether  for 
the  purpose  of  meeting  an  enemy  (Is.  v.  2(3,  xviii. 
3,  xxxi.  9),  which  was  sometimes  notified  by  the 
blast  of  a  trumpet.  (Jer.  iv.  21,  li.  27);  or  as  a 
token  of  rescue  (Ps.  lx.  4;  Is.  xi.  10;  Jer.  iv. 
6)  ;  or  for  a  public  proclamation  (Jer.  1.  2)  ;  or 
simply  as  a  gathering  point  (Is.  xlix.  22,  lxii.  10); 
What  the  nature  of  the  signal  was,  we  have  no 
means  of  stating ;  it  has  been  inferred  from  Is. 
xxxiii.  23,  and  Ez.  xxvii.  7,  that  it  was  a  flag :  we 
do  not  observe  a  flag  depicted  either  in  Egyptian  or 
Assyrian  representations  of  vessels  (Wilkinson,  iii. 
211 ;  Bonomi,  pp.  166,  167)  ;  but,  in  lieu  of  a  flag, 
certain  devices,  such  as  the  phoenix,  flowers,  &c, 
were  embroidered  on  the  sail  ;  whence  it  appears 
that  the  device  itself,  and  perhaps  also  the  sail 
bearing  the  device,  was  the  nes  ov  "ensign."  It 
may  have  been  sometimes  the  name  of  a  leader,  as 
implied  in  the  title  which  Moses  gave  to  his  altar 
"  Jehovah-nissi "  (Ex.  xvii.  15).  It  may  also  have 
been,  as  Michaelis  (Suppl.  p.  1648)  suggests,  a 
blazing  torch.  The  important  point,  however,  to 
be  observed  is,  that  the  nes  was  an  occasional 
signal,  and  not  a  military  standard,  and  that  eleva- 
tion and  conspicuity  are  implied  in  the  use  of  the 
term:  hence  it  is  appropriately  applied  to  the 
"  pole  "  on  which  the  brazen  serpent  hung  (Num. 
xxi.  8),  which  was  indeed  an  "  ensign"  of  deliver- 
ance to  the  pious  Israelite  ;  and  again  to  the  censers 
of  Korah  and  his  company,  which  became  a  "  sign  " 
or  beacon  of  warning  to  Israel  (Num.  xvi.  38).  (2.) 
The  term  degel  is  used  to  describe  the  standards 
which  were  given  to  each  of  the  four  divisions  of  the 
Israelite  army  at  the  time  of  the  Exodus  (Num.  i. 
52,  ii.  2  ff.,  x.  14  ff.).  Some  doubt  indeed  exists 
as  to  its  meaning  in  these  passages,  the  LXX.  and 
Vulgate  regarding  it  not  as  the  standard  itself,  but 
as  a  certain  military  division  annexed  to  a  standard, 
just  as  vexillum  is  sometimes  used  for  a  body  of 
soldiers  (Tac.  Hist.  i.  70 ;  Liv.  viii.  8).  The  sense 
of  compact  and  martial  array  does  certainly  seem 
to  lurk  in  the  word;  for  in  Cant.  vi.  4,  10,  the 
brilliant  glances  of  the  bride's  eyes  are  compared  to 
the  destructive  advance  of  a  well-arrayed  host, 
and  a  similar  comparison  is  employed  in  reference 
to  the  bridegroom  (Cant.  v.  10)  ;  but  on  the  other 
hand,  in  Cant.  ii.  4,  no  other  sense  than  that  of  a 
"  banner "  will  suit,  and  we  therefore  think  the 
rendering  in  the  A.  V.  correct.  No  reliance  can 
be  placed  on  the  term  in  Ps.  xx.  5,  as  both  the 
sense  and  the  text  are  matters  of  doubt  (see  Ols- 
hausen  and  lleugstenberg,  in  /or.).  A  standard 
implies,  of  course,  a  standard-bearer ;  but  the  sup- 
posed notice  to  that  officer  in  Is.  x.  18,  is  incorrect, 


EX-TAPPUAPf 

the  words  meaning  rather  '■  as  a  sick  man  pineth 
away;"  in  a  somewhat  parallel  passage  (Is.  lis.  19) 
tin- marginal  version  is  to  be  followed,  lather  than 
the  text.     The  character  of  the  Hebrew  military 

standards  is  quite  a  matter  of  conjecture ;  they  pro- 
bably resembled  tlie  Egyptian,  which  consisted  of  a 
sacred  emblem  such  as  an  animal,  a  boat,  or  the 
king's  name  (Wilkinson,  i.  294).  Rabbinical  writers 
state  the  devices  to  have  been  as  follows  :  for  the 
tribe  of  Judah  a  lion;  for  Reuben  a  man;  for 
F.phraim  an  ox;  and  for  Dan  an  eagle  (Carpzov, 
Crit.  App.  p.  667)  ;  but  no  reliance  can  be  placed 
on  this.  As  each  of  the  four  divisions,  consisting 
of  three  tribes,  bail  its  standard,  so  had  each  tribe 
its  "sign"  (otli)  or  "ensign,"  probably  in  imita- 
tion of  the  Egyptians,  among  whom  not  only  each 
battalion,  but  even  each  company  had  its  particular 
ensign  ^Wilkinson,  /.  c).  We  know  nothing  of  its 
nature.  The  word  occurs  figuratively  in  Ps.  Ixxiv. 
4,  apparently  in  reference  to  the  images  of  idol 
gods.  [W.  L.  B.] 


EPHAH 


559 


Egypl 


is,  from  Wilkin«wtn. 


en-taptuah  (n-isn-py  =  "  sp,i, 

apple."  or  "citron;"  irr)yi)  Qa(p6u8 ;  FbtlS  '/''/»- 
/<"'<<•).  The  boundary  of  Manasseh  went  from  feeing 
Shechem  "to  the  inhabitants  of  En-tappuah" 
(Josh.  xvii.  7).  It  is  probably  identical  with  Tap- 
puah.  the  position  of  which  will  be  elsewhere  ex- 
amined. [Tappdab7.]  This  place  must  not  bi 
confounded  with  Beth-tappuah  in  the  mountain 
of  Judah.  [(!.] 

EPAE'XKTFS   ('Ettu.Wos';.   a   Christian   at 
Rome,  greeted  by  St.  Paul  in    Rom.  xvi,  :..  and 


designated  as  his  belove  I,  and  the  first  fruit  of  Asia 
(so  the  majority  of  ancient  MSS.  and  the  critical 
editors:  the  received  text  has  'Axa'ias)  unto  Christ. 
The  Synopsis  of  the  Pseudo-DorotheuS  makes  him 
first  bishop  of  Carthage,  but  Justinian  remarks  that 
the  African  churches  do  not  recognise  him .    [H .  A.] 

EP'APHRAS  CE-n-acjipas),   a . fellow-labourer 

with  the  Apostle  Paul,  mentioned  Col.  i.  7,  as 
having  taught  the  Colossiau  church  the  grace  of 
Cod  in  truth,  and  designated  a  faithful  minister 
(Suxkovos)  of  Christ  on  their  behalf.  (On  the 
question  whether  Epaphras  was  the  founder  of  the 
( lolossian  church,  see  the  prolegomena  to  the  Epistle, 
in  Alford's  Greek  Testament,  iii.  '■>■>  ff.)  He  was 
at  that  time  with  St.  Paul  at  Rome  (Col.  iv.  12), 
and  seems  by  the  expression  6  e|  bfx&v,  there  used, 
to  have  been  a  Colossian  by  birth.  We  find  him 
again  mentioned  in  the  Epistle  to  Philemon  (ver. 
'_':'.),  which  was  sent  at  the  same  time  as  that  to 
the  Colossians.  St.  Paul  there  calls  him  6  crvvaix- 
/xaXwTSs  /xov,  but  whether  the  word  represents 
matter  of  fact,  or  is  only  a  tender  and  delicate  ex- 
pression of  Epaphras's  attention  to  the  Apostle  in 
his  imprisonment  (cf.  Rom.  xvi.  13),  we  cannot  say. 
Epaphras  may  be  the  same  as  Epaphroditus,  who 
is  called,  in  Phil.  ii.  25,  the  Apostle  of  the  Phi- 
lippians,  and  having  come  from  Philippi  to  Rome 
with  contributions  for  St.  Paul,  was  sent  back  with 
the  Epistle.  It  has  been  supposed  by  many,  and 
among  them  by  Grotins.  In  all  probability  the 
ii'/iuc  Epaphras  is  an  abbreviation  of  Epaphroditus : 
but  on  the  question  of  the  identity  of  the  persons, 
the  very  slight  notices  in  the  N.  T.  do  not  enable 
us  to  speak  with  any  confidence.  The  name  Epa- 
phroditus was  sufficiently  common:  see  Tacit.  Ann. 
xv.  55;  Sueton.  Domit.  14;  Joseph.  Life,  §7G. 
The  martyrologies  make  Epaphras  to  have  been  first 
bishop  of  Colossae,  and  to  have  suffered  martyrdom 
there.  '  [H.  A.] 

EPAPHEODI TUS  C^acppSSiros,  Phil.  ii. 
25,  iv.  18).    See  above  under  EPAPHRAS.  [II.  A.] 

E'PHAH  (n^y  ;  Te<pap,  Taupd;  Epha),  the 
first,  in  order,  of  the  sons  of  Midian  (Gen.  xxv.  4, 
1  Chr.  i.  33),  afterwards  mentioned  by  Isaiah  in  the 
following  words: — "  The  multitude  of  camels  shall 
cover  thee,  the  dromedaries  of  Midian  and  Ephah  ; 
all  they  from  Sheba  shall  come :  they  shall  bring  gold 
and  incense;  and  they  shall  shew  forth  the  praises  of 
tie.'  I. old.  All  the  flocks  of  Kedar  shall  be  gathered 
together  unto  thee,  the  rams  of  Xebaioth  shall 
minister  unto  thee:  they  shall  come  up  with  ac- 
ceptance on  mine  altar,  and  I  will  glorify  the  house 
of  my  glory"  (Is.  h.  (i,  7).  This  passage  clearly 
connects  the  descendants  of  Ephah  with  tin-  Mi- 
dianites,  the  Keturahite  Sheba,  and  the  [shmaelites, 
both  in  the  position  of  their  settlements,  and  in  their 
wandering  habits  ;  and  shows  that,  as  usual,  they 
formed  a  tribe  bearing  his  name.  Rut  no  satisfactoi  y 
identification  of  this  tribe  has  been  discovered.    The 

Vrabic  word  %A/,_c    '  which  has  been  sup- 

posed to  be  the  game  as  Ephah,  is  the  name  of  a 
town,  or  \  ill'  the  modem  Bilbeys ), 

a  place  in  Egypt,  in  the  province  of  the  Sharkeeyeh, 
not  far  from  Cairo :  but  the  tradition  that  Ephah 
settled  in  Africa  does  not  ie-t  on  sufficient  authority. 
[Midian  :  Sheba.  |  [E.  s.  p.] 

E  I  MIA  1 1  (PIB^;  ra«pd;  Epha).  1.  Con- 
cubine of  Caleb,  in  the  line  of  Judah  I  1  Chr.  ii.  46  |. 


560 


EPHAH 


2.  Son  of  Jahdai  ;  also  in  the  line  of  Judah 
(IChr.  ii.  47). 

EPHAH.     [Measures.] 

E'PHAI  (following  the  Keri,  iQiy  ;  but  the 

original  text  is  <lQiy  =  O.PHAl  ;  and  so  LXX.  'lu<pe  ; 
Ophi),  a  Netophathite,  whose  sons  were  among 
the  "captains  ('IB')  of  the  forces"  left  in  Judah 
after  the  deportation  to  Babylon  (Jer.  si.  8).  They 
submitted  themselves  to  Gedaliah,  the  Babylonian 
governor,  and  were  apparently  massacred  with  him 
by  Ishmael  (xti.  3,  comp.  xl.  13). 

ETHER  pay ;  'A<peto,  'Ocptp  ;  Opher, 
Epher),  the  second,  in  order,  of  the  sons  of  Mi- 
dian  (Gen.  xxv.  4,  1  Chr.  i.  33),  not  mentioned 
in  the  Bible  except  in  these  genealogical  passages. 
His  settlements  have  not  been  identified  with  any 
probability.     According  to  Gesenius,  the  name  is 

o 
equivalent   to   the  Arabic  Ghifr,  J^,   signifying 

"  a  calf,"  and  "  a  certain  little  animal,  or  insect,  or 
animalcule."     Two  tribes  bear  a  similar'  appellation, 

Ghifdr  ( ,lxc) ;  but  one  was  a  branch  of  the  first 

Amalek,  the  other  of  the  Ishmaelite  Kinaneh  (cf. 
Caussin,  Essai  sur  I'Hist.  des  Arabes,  i.  20,  297, 
and  298  ;  and  Abulfeda,  Hist,  Anteislamica,  ed. 
Fleischer,  196) :  neither  is  ascribed  to  Midian. 
The  first  settled  about  Yethrib  ( El-Medeeneh)  ;  the 
second,  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Mekkeh.    [E.  S.  P.] 

ETHER  pay ;  "A<f>ep,  Alex.  Tacpep;  Epher). 

1.  A  son  of  Ezra,  among  the  descendants  of  Judah  ; 
possibly,  though  this  is  not  clear,  of  the  family  of 
the  great  Caleb  (1  Chr.  iv.  17). 

2.  {'Ocpcp).  One  of  the  heads  of  the  families  of 
Manasseh  on  the  east  of  Jordan  (1  Chr.  v.  24). 
The  name  may  be  compared  with  that  of  Ophrah, 
the  native  place  of  Gideon,  in  Manasseh,  on  the 
west  of  Jordan.  In  the  original  the  two  are  iden- 
tical except  in  termination  (lay.  may) ;  and 
according  to  the  LXX.  (as  above)  the  vowel-points 
were  once  the  same.  [G.] 

ETHES-DAMMIM(D''EH  DBK;  'E<pep/*eV; 
Alex.  'AcpecrSofifMiLv;  in  finibus  Dommiin),  a  place 
between  Socoh  and  Azekah,  at  which  the  Philistines 
were  encamped  before  the  affray  in  which  Goliath 
was  killed  (1  Sam.  xvii.  1).  The  meaning  of  the 
word  is  uncertain,  but  it  is  generally  explained  as  the 
"  end  "  or  "  boundary  of  blood,"  in  that  case  pro- 
bably derived  from  its  being  the  scene  of  frequent 
sanguinary  encounters  between  Israel  and  the  Phi- 
listines. Under  the  shorter  form  of  Pas-dammim 
it  occurs  once  again  in  a  similar  connexion  (1  Chr. 
xi.  13).  For  the  situation  of  the  place  see  El  AH, 
Valley  of.  [G.] 

EPHESIANS,  THE  EPISTLE  TO  THE, 

was  written  by  the  apostle  St.  Paul  during  his  rirst 
captivity  at  liome  (Acts  xxviii.  16),  apparently 
immediately  after  he  had  written  the  epistle  to  the 
Colossians  [Colossians,  ep.  to],  and  during  that 
period  (perhaps  the  early  part  of  A.D.  62)  when 
his  imprisonment  had  not  assumed  the  severer  cha- 
racter which  seems  to  have  marked  its  close. 

This  sublime  epistle  was  addressed  to  the  Chris- 
tian  church   at  the  ancient   and   famous    city  of 


EPHESIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 

Ephesus  (see  below),  that  church  which  the  apostle 
had  himself  founded  (Acts  xix.  1  sq.,  comp.  xviii. 
19),  with  which  he  abode  so  long  (rpieriav,  Acts 
xx.  31),  and  from  the  elders  of  which  he  parted 
with  such  a  warm-heaited  and  affecting  farewell 
(Acts  sx.  18-35).  It  does  not  seem  to  have  been 
called  out  by  any  special  circumstances,  nor  even 
to  have  involved  any  distinctly  precautionary  teach- 
ing (comp.  Schneckenburger,  Beitrage,  p.  135  sq.), 
whether  against  Oriental  or  Judaistic  theosophy, 
but  to  have  been  suggested  by  the  deep  love  which 
the  apostle  felt  for  his  converts  at  Ephesus,  and 
which  the  mission  of  Tychicus,  with  an  epistle  to 
the  Church  of  Colossae,  afforded  him  a  convenient 
opportunity  of  evincing  in  written  teaching  and  ex- 
hortation. The  epistle  thus  contains  many  thoughts 
that  had  pervaded  the  nearly  contemporaneous 
epistle  to  the  Colossians,  reiterates  many  of  the 
same  practical  warnings  and  exhortations,  bears 
even  the  tinge  of  the  same  diction,  but  at  the 
same  time  enlarges  upon  such  profound  mysteries  of 
the  divine  counsels,  displays  so  fully  the  origin  and 
developments  of  the  Church  in  Christ,  its  union, 
communion,  and  aggregation  in  Him,  that  this  ma- 
jestic epistle  can  never  be  rightly  deemed  otherwise 
than  one  of  the  mostsublimeand  consolatory  outpour- 
ings of  the  Spirit  of  God  to  the  children  of  men.  To 
the  Christian  at  Ephesus  dwelling  under  the  shadow 
of  the  great  temple  of  Diana,  daily  seeing  its  out- 
ward grandeur,  and  almost  daily  hearing  of  its 
pompous  ritualism,  the  allusions  in  this  epistle  to 
that  mystic  building  of  which  Christ  was  the 
corner-stone,  the  apostles  the  foundations,  and  him- 
self and  his  fellow  Christians  portions  of  the  august 
superstructure  (ch.  ii.  19-22),  must  have  spoken 
with  a  force,  an  appropriateness,  and  a  reassuring 
depth  of  teaching  that  cannot  be  over  estimated. 

The  contents  of  this  epistle  easily  admit  of  being 
divided  into  two  portions,  the  first  mainly  doctrinal 
(ch.  i. — iii.),  the  second  hortatory  and  practical. 

The  doctrinal  portion  opens  with  a  brief  address 
to  the  saints  in  Ephesus  (see  below),  and  rapidly 
passes  into  a  sublime  ascription  of  praise  to  God 
the  Father,  who  has  predestinated  us  to  the  adop- 
tion of  sons,  blessed  and  redeemed  us  in  Christ,  and 
made  known  to  us  His  eternal  purpose  of  uniting 
all  in  Him  (ch.  i.  3-14).  This  not  unnaturally 
evokes  a  prayer  from  the  apostle  that  his  con- 
verts may  be  enlightened  to  know  the  hope  of  God's 
calling,  the  riches  of  His  grace,  and  the  magnitude 
of  that  power  which  was  displayed  in  the  resurrec- 
tion and  transcendent  exaltation  of  Christ, — the 
Head  of  His  body,  the  Church  (ch.  i.  15-23). 
Then,  with  a  more  immediate  address  to  his  con- 
verts, the  apostle  reminds  them  how,  dead  as  they 
had  been  in  sin,  God  had  quickened  them,  raised 
them,  and  even  enthroned  them  with  Christ, — and 
how  all  was  by  grace,  not  by  works  (ch.  ii.  1-10). 
They  were  to  remember,  too,  how  they  had  once 
been  alienated  and  yet  were  now  brought  nigh  in 
the  blood  of  Christ ;  how  He  was  their  Peace,  how 
by  Him  both  they  and  the  Jews  had  access  to  the 
Father,  and  how  on  Him  as  the  comer-stone  they 
had  been  built  into  a  spiritual  temple  to  God  (ch. 
ii.  11-22).  On  this  account,  having  heard,  as  they 
must  have  done,  how  to  the  apostle  was  revealed 
the  profound  mystery  of  this  call  of  the  Gentile 
world,  they  were  not  to  faint  at  his  troubles  (ch. 
iii.  1-13) :  nay,  he  prayed  to  the  great  Father  of  all 
to  give  them  inward  strength  to  teach  them  with 
the  love  of  Christ  and  fill  them  with  the  fulness  of 
God  (ch.  iii.  13-19).     The  prayer  is  concluded  by 


EPIIESIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 

a  sublime  doxology  (ch.  iii.  20,  21),  which  serves 
to  usher  in  the  more  directly  practical  portion. 

This  the  apostle  commences  by  entreating  them 
to  walk  worthy  of  this  calling,  and  to  keep  the 
unity  of  the  .Spirit:  there  was  but  one  body,  one 
Spirit,  one  Lord,  and  one  God  (ch.  iv.  1-6).  Each 
too  had  his  portion  of  grace  from  God  (ch.  iv. 
7-10),  who  had  appointed  ministering  orders  in  the 
Church,  until  all  come  to  the  unity  of  the  faith,  aad 
grow  up  and  become  united  with  the  living  Head, 
even  Christ  (ch.  iv.  11-16).  Surely  then  they 
were  to  walk  no  longer  as  darkened,  feelingless 
heathen  ;  they  were  to  put  oil  the  old  man,  and  put 
on  the  new  (ch.  iv.  17-24).  This  too  was  to 
be  practically  evinced  in  their  outward  actions; 
they  were  to  be  truthful,  gentle,  honest,  pure,  and 
forgiving;  they  were  to  walk  in  love  (ch.  iv.  25- 
v.  2).  Fornication,  covetousness,  and  impurity, 
were  not  even  to  be  named;  they  were  once  in 
heathen  darkness,  now  they  are  light,  and  must  re- 
prove the  deeds  of  the  past  (ch.  v.  3-14).  Tims 
were  they  to  walk  exactly,  to  be  filled  with  joy,  to 
sing,  and  to  give  thanks  (ch.  v.  15-21).  Wives 
were  to  be  subject  to  their  husbands,  husbands  to 
love  and  cleave  to  their  wives  (ch.  v.  22-33)  ;  chil- 
dren were  to  honour  their  parents,  parents  to  bring 
up  holily  their  children  (ch.  vi.  1-4)  ;  servants  and 
masters  were  to  perform  to  each  other  their  reci- 
procal duties  (ch.  vi.  5-9). 

With  a  noble  and  vivid  exhortation  to  arm  them- 
selves against  their  spiritual  foes  with  the  armour 
of  God  (ch.  vi.  10-20),  a  brief  notice  of  the  coming 
of  Tychicus  (ch.  vi.  21,  22),  and  a  twofold  dox- 
ology (ch.  vi.  23,  24),  this  sublime  epistle  comes  to 
its  close. 

With  regard  to  the  authenticity  and  genuineness 
of  this  epistle,  it  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  there 
are  no  just  grounds  for  doubt.  The  testimonies  of 
antiquity  are  unusually  strong.  Even  if  we  do  not 
press  the  supposed  allusions  in  Ignatius,  Eph.  ch. 
12,  and  Polycarp,  Philipp.  ch.  1 2,  we  can  confidently 
adduce  Irenaeus,  Haer.  v.  2,  3,  v.  14,  3,  Clem.  Alex. 
Paeda,/.  i.  p.  108  (ed.  Pott.),  Strom,  iv.  p.  592 
(ed.  Pott.),  Origen,  Con'tr.  Gels.  iii.  20,  Tertull. 
de  Praescr.  liner,  ch.  36,  and  after  them  the  con- 
stant and  persistent  tradition  of  the  ancient  Church. 
Even  Marcion  did  not  deny  that  the  epistle  was 
written  by  St.  Paul,  nor  did  heretics  refuse  occa- 
sionally to  cite  it  as  confessedly  due  to  him  as  its 
author;  comp.  Irenaeus,  Haer.  i.  8,  ">.  In  recent 
times,  however,  its  genuineness  1ms  bi.cn  somewhat 
vehemently  called  in  question.  De  Wette,  both  in 
the  introductory  pages  of  his  Commentary  on  this 
Ep.  (ed.  2,  1^47  .  and  in  his  Introduction  to  the 
A'.  T.  (ed.  5,  1848),  labours  to  prove  thai  it  is  a 
mere  spiritless  expansion  of  the  Ep.  to%he  Colos- 
sians,  though  compiled  in  the  Apostolic  age: 
Schwegler  Nachapost.  Zeitalt.  ii.  330  sq.);  Baur 
5,  p.  418  sq.),  and  others  advance  a  step 
further  and  reject  both  epistles  as  of  no  higher  an- 
tiquity than  the  age  of  Montanism  and  early  Gnos- 
ticism. Without  here  entering  into  the  detail-,  it 
seems  just  to  say  that  the  adverse  arguments  have 
been  urged  with  a  certain  amount  of  specious  plau- 
sibility, but  that  the  replies  have  been  so  clear,  sa- 
tisfactory, and  in  soi ases  crushing,  as  to  leave 

no  reasonable  and  impartial  inquirer  in  doubt  as  to 
the  authorship  of  the  epistle.     On  the  one  baud  we 
have  mere  subjective  judgments,  not  unmai 
arrogance,  relying  mainly  on  supposed  divergences 

in  doctrine  and  presumed  insipidities  of  dicti but 

wholly  destitute  of  any  sound   historical   basi 


EPHESIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE     561 

the  other  hand  we  have  unusually  convincing  coun- 
ter-investigations, and  the  unvarying  testimony  of 
the  ancient  Church.  If  the  discrepancies  in  matter 
and  style  are  so  decided  as  to  lead  a  writer  of  the 
lyth  century  to  deny  confidently  the  genuineness 
of  this  epistle,  how  are  we  to  account  for  its  uni- 
versal reception  by  writers  of  the  2nd  and  3rd  cen- 
turies, who  spoke  the  language  in  which  it  was 
written,  and  who  were  by  no  means  unacquainted 
with  the  phenomena  of  pious  fraud  and  literary 
imposture  ? 

For  a  detailed  reply  to  the  arguments  of  De  Wette 
and  Baur,  the  student  may  be  referred  to  Meyer, 
Einleit.  z.  Eph.  p.  19  sq.  (ed.  2),  Davidson,   In- 
trod.  to  N.  T.  ii.  p.  352  sq.,  and  Alford,  Prolt  » 
men  i,  p.  8. 

Two  special  points  require  a  brief  notice. 

( 1 .)  The  readers  for  whom  this  epistle  was  de- 
signed. In  the  opening  words,  ITaCAos  awoaToAos 
XpiffTov  'Irjffov  5io  O^Arj/xaros  Qeov  to?s  ayiois 
rots  ovaiv  iv  'E<|>e<r&>  Kal  7ri(rro?S  iv  XpiCTcS 
'Irjffov,  the  words  iv  'Ecpecroi  are  omitted  by  B. 
67,  Basil  (expressly),  and  possibly  Tertullian, 
This,  combined  with  the  somewhat  noticeable  omis- 
sion of  all  greetings  to  the  members  of  a  Church 
with  which  the  apostle  stood  in  such  affectionate 
relation,  and  some  other  internal  objections,  have 
suggested  a  doubt  whether  these  words  really  formed 
•a  part  of  the  original  text.  At  first  sight  these 
doubts  seem  plausible ;  but  when  we  oppose  to 
them  («)  the  overwhelming  weight  of  diplomatic: 
evidence  for  the  insertion  of  the  words,  (Jj)  the  tes- 
timony of  all  the  versions,  (c)  the  universal  desig- 
nation of  this  epistle  by  the  ancient  Church  (Mar- 
cion standing  alone  in  his  assertion  that  it  was 
written  to  the  Laodiceans)  as  an  epistle  to  the 
Ephesians,  {d)  the  extreme  difficulty  in  givingany 
satisfactory  meaning  to  the  isolated  participle,  and 
the  absence  of  any  parallel  usage  in  the  Apostle's 
writings, — we  can  scarcely  feel  any  doubt  as  to  the 
propriety  of  removing  the  brackets  in  which  these 
words  are  enclosed  in  the  2nd  edition  of  Tischen- 
dorf,  and  of  considering  them  an  integral  part  ol 
the  original  text.  If  called  upon  to  supply  an  an- 
swer to,  or  an  explanation  of  the  internal  objections, 
we  must  record  the  opinion  that  none  on  the  whole 
seems  so  free  from  objection  as  that  which  regards 
the  Epistle  as  also  designed  for  the  benefit  of 
churches  either  conterminous  to,  or  dependent  on 
that  of  Ephesus.  The  counter-arguments  of  Meyer, 
though  ably  urged,  are  not  convincing.  Nor  can 
an  appeal  to  the  silence  of  writers  of  the  ancient 
church  on  this  further  destination  be  conceived  of 
much  weight,  as  their  references  are  to  the  usual 
and  titular  designation  of  the  Epistle,  but  do  not, 
and  are  not  intended  to  affect  the  question  of  its 
wider  or  narrower  destination.  It  is  not  unnatural 
to  suppose  that  the  special  greetings  might  have 
been  separately  entrusted  to  the  bearer  Tychicus, 
possibly  himself  an  Ephesian,  and  certainly  com- 
missioned by  the  Apostle  (ch.  vi.  22)  to  inform  the 
Ephesians  of  his  state  and  circumstances. 

(2.)  The  question  of  priority  in  respect  of  com- 
position between  this  Epistle  and  thai  to  the  Co- 
iossians  is  very  difficult  to  adjust.  On  the  whole, 
both  internal  and  external  considerations  seem  some- 
what in  favour  of  the  prioi  ity  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Colossians.  Comp.  Neandei,,i>/ant««  ;.  . 
Schleiermacher, Stu  !.  u.  Krit.  for  1832,  p.50i 

'.  sq.     <  in  the  similarity 
of  conte  ,  I'n. 

(3.)  The  opinion  that  tin-  Epistle  and  those  to  the 

2  O 


562 


EPHESUS 


Colossians  and  to  Philemon  were  written  during;  the 
Apostle's  imprisonment  at  Caesarea  (Acts  xxi.  27 
-xxvi.  32)  has  already  been  noticed  [Colossians, 
Ei>.  to],  and  on  deliberation  rejected.  The  weight 
of  probability  seems  distinctly  on  the  side  of  the 
opinion  of  the  ancient  Church,  that  the  present 
Epistle  was  written  during  the  Apostle's  first 
imprisonment  in  Rome. 

The  editions  of  this  Epistle  have  been  numerous. 
We  may  specify  those  of  Riickert  (Leipz.  1834), 
Harless  (Esl.  1834), — an  admirable  edition,  com- 
pletely undervalued  by  De  Wette ;  Olshausen  (Ko- 
nigsb.  1840),  De  Wette  (Leipz.  1847),  Stier  (Berl. 
1848),  Meyer  (Gott.  1853);  and  in  our  own  coun- 
try those  of  Eadie  (Glasg.  1854),  Ellicott  (Lond. 
1855),  and  Alford  (Lond.^lSS?).  [C.  J.  E.] 

EPH'ESUS  ("EQerros),  an  illustrious  city  in 
the  district  of  Ionia  (irS\ts  'Iwvlas  iin(pavi(Tr6.T7). 
Steph.  Byz.  s.  v.),  nearly  opposite  the  island  of 
Samos,  and  about  the  middle  of  the  western  coast 
of  the  peninsula  commonly  called  Asia  Minor. 
Not  that  this  geographical  term  was  known  in  the 
first  century.  The  Asia  of  the  N.  T.  was  simply 
the  Roman  province  which  embraced  the  western 
part  of  the  peninsula.  Of  this  province  Ephesus 
was  the  capital.  [Ephesus.] 


EPHESUS 

Among  the  more  marked  physical  features  of 
the  peninsula  are  the  two  large  rivers,  Hermus  and 
Maeander,  which  flow  from  a  remote  part  of  the 
interior  westward  to  the  Archipelago,  Smyrna 
(Rev.  ii.  8)  being  near  the  mouth  of  one  and  Mi- 
letus (Acts  xx.  17)  of  the  other.  Between  the 
valleys  drained  by  these  two  rivers  is  the  shorter 
stream  and  smaller  basin  of  the  Cayster,  called  by 
the  Turks  Kutschuk-Mendere,  or  the  Little  Maean- 
der. Its  upper  level  (often  called  the  Caystrian 
meadows)  was  closed  to  the  westward  by  the  gorge 
between  Gallesus  and  Pactyas,  the  latter  of  these 
mountains  being  a  prolongation  of  the  range  of 
Messogis  which  bounds  the  valley  of  the  Maeander 
on  the  north,  the  former  more  remotely  connected 
with  the  range  of  Tmolus  which  bounds  the  valley 
of  the  Hermus  on  the  south.  Beyond  the  gorge 
and  towards  the  sea  the  valley  opens  out  again  into 
an  alluvial  flat  (Herod,  ii.  10),  with  hills  rising  ab- 
ruptly from  it.  The  plain  is  now  about  5  miles 
in  breadth,  but  formerly  it  must  have  been  smaller  ; 
and  some  of  the  hills  were  once  probably  islands. 
Here  Ephesus  stood,  partly  on  the  level  ground  and 
partly  on  the  hills. 

Of  the  hills,  on  which  a  large  portion  of  the  city 
was  built,  the  two  most  important  were  Prion  and 


Site  ul  Ephesus.     From  Laborde. 


Coressus,  the  latter  on  the  S.  of  the  plain,  and 
being  in  fact  almost  a  continuation  of  Pactyas,  the 
former  being  in  front  of  Coressus  and  near  it, 
though  separated  by  a  deep  and  definite  valley. 
Further  to  the  N.E.  is  another  conspicuous  emi- 
nence. It  seems  to  be  the  hill  mentioned  by  Pro- 
copius  (de  Acdif.  v.  i.)  as  one  on  which  a  church 
dedicated  to  St.  John  was  built ;  and  its  present 
name  Ayasaluk  is  thought  to  have  reference  to  him, 
and  to  be  a  corruption  of  6  ayios  6e6\oyos. 
Ephesus  is  closely  connected  with  this  apostle,  not 
only  as  being  the  scene  (Rev.  i.  11,  ii.  1)  of  the  most 
prominent  of  the  churches  of  the  Apocalypse,  but 
also  in  the  story  of  his  later  life  as  given  by  Euse- 
bius.  Possibly  his  Gospel  and  Epistles  were  written 
here.  There  is  a  tradition  that  the  mother  of  our 
Lord  was  buried  at  Ephesus,  as  also  Timothy  and 
St.  John  :  and  Ignatius  addressed  one  of  his  epistles 
to  the  church  of  this  place  (rfj  iKK\r)<rla  rfj  d|io- 
HaKapicrTO),  rfj  ovcrri  iv  'E(pe<T(ji  rrjs  'Acrias,  He- 
fele,  Pat.  Apostol.  p.  1 54),  which  held  a  conspicuous 


position  during  the  early  ages  of  Christianity,  and 
was  in  fact  the  metropolis  of  the  churches  of 
this  part  of  Asia.  But  for  direct  Biblical  illustration 
we  must  turn  to  the  life  and  writings  of  St.  Paul, 
in  following  which  minutely  it  is  remarkable  how 
all  the  most  characteristic  features  of  ancient  Ephesus 
come  successively  into  view. 

1 .  Geographical  Relations. — These  may  be  viewed 
in  connexion,  first  with  the  sea  and  then  with  the 
land. 

All  the  cities  of  Ionia  were  remarkably  well 
situated  for  the  growth  of  commercial  prosperity 
(Herod,  i.  142),  and  none  more  so  than  Ephesus. 
With  a  fertile  neighbourhood  and  an  excellent  cli- 
mate, it  was  also  most  conveniently  placed  for  traffic 
with  all  the  neighbouring  parts  of  the  Levant.  In 
the  time  of  Augustus  it  was  the  great  emporium  of 
all  the  regions  of  Asia  within  the  Taurus  (Strab. 
xiv.  p.  950)  :  its  harbour  ^named  Panormus)  at  the 
mouth  of  the  Cayster,  was  elaborately  constructed  ; 
though  alluvial    matter  caused  serious    hindrances 


EPHESUS 

both  in  the  time  of  Attains,  and  in  St.  Paul's  own 
time  (Tac.  Aim,  xvi.  23).  The  Apostle's  liti'  alone 
furnishes  illustrations  of  its  mercantile  relations 
with  Achaia  on  the  \V.,  Macedonia  on  the  N.,  and 
Syria  on  the  E.  At  the  close  of  his  second  mis- 
sionary circuit,  he  sailed  across  from  Corinth  to 
Ephesus  (Acts  xviii.  19)  when  on  his  way  to 
Syria  («6.  21,  22) :  and  there  is  some  reason  for  be- 
lieving that  he  once  made  the  same  short  voyage 
over  the  Aegean  in  the  opposite  direction  at  a  later 
period  [Corinthians,  First  Ep.  to].  On  thethird 
missionary  circuit,  besides  the  notice  of  the  journey 
from  Ephesus  to  Macedonia  (xix.  21,  xx.  1),  we 
have  the  coast  voyage  on  tin-  return  to  Syria  given 
in  detail  (xx.  xxi.)  and  the  geographical  relations 
of  this  city  with  the  islands  and  neighbouring  parts 
of  the  coast  minutely  indicated  (xx.  15-17).  To 
these  passages  we  must  add  1  Tim.  i.  3;  2  Tim. 
iv.  12,  20;  though  it  is  difficult  to  say  confi- 
dently whether  the  journeys  implied  there  were 
by  land  or  bv  water.  See  likewise  Acts  xix.  27. 
xx.  1. 

As  to  the  relations  of  Ephesus  to  the  inland 
regions  of  tin1  continent,  these  also  are  prominently 
brought  before  us  in  the  Apostle's  travels.  The 
'•  upper  coasts"  (to  avwrepiKa  fxepr].  Acts  xix.  1) 
through  which  he  passed, when  about  to  take  up  his 
residence  in  the  city,  were  tie'  Phrygian  table-lands 
of  the  interior;  ami  it  was  probably  in  the  same 
district  that  on  a  previous  occasion  (Act  xvi.  li)  he 
formed  the  unsuccessful  project  of  preaching  the 
Gospel  in  the  district  of  Asia.  Two  great  roads  at 
least,  in  the  Roman  times,  led  eastward  from  Ephe- 
sus ;  one  through  the  passes  of  T mollis  to  Sardis 
(Rev.  iii.  1)  and  thence  to  Galatia  and  the  N.E., 
the  other  round  the  extremity  of  Pactyas  to  Mag- 
nesia, and  so  up  the  valley  of  the  Maeander  to  [co- 
iniim,  whence  the  communication  was  direct  to  the 
Euphrates  and  to  the  Syrian  Antioch.  There  seem 
to  have  I n  Snrdian and  Magnesian  gates  on  the  K. 

side  of  Ephesus  Corresponding  to  these  loads  re- 
spectively. There  were  also  coast-roads  leading 
northwards  to  Smyrna  and  southward-  to  Miletus. 
By  the  latter  of  these  it  is  probable  that  the  Ephe- 
siau  elders  travelled,  when  summoned  to  meet  Paul 
at  the  latter  city  (Acts  xx.  17,  18).  Part  of  the 
pavement  of  the  Sardian  road  has  been  noticed  by 
travellers  under  the  cliffs  of  (iallesus.  All  these 
roads,  and  others,  are  exhibited  on  the  ma]'  in  Leake's 
isia   Minor. 

2.  Temple  <ik<i  worship  of  Diana.— Conspi- 
cuous at  the  lead  of  t  he  harbour  of  EpheSUS  Was 
the  great  temple  of  Diana  or  Artemis,  the  tutelary 
divieit\  o|  the  :  d\  I  Ins  laid  lin.,  was  r  used  on 
immense  substructions,  in  consequence  of  the  swampy 

nature  of  the  g ad.     The  earlier  temple,  which 

had  been  begun  before  the  Persian  war,  was  burnt 

down  in  the  night  when  Alexander  the  Great  was 
born;  and  another  structure,  raised  hy  the  enthu- 
siastic co-operation  of  all  the  inhabitant-  of  ••  Asia  " 

had     taken     its    place.       Its    dimensions    weri 

In  length  it  wa-  425  feet,  and  in  breadth 
220.  The  columns  wen'  1  J 7  in  number,  and  eai  b 
of  them  was  60  feet  high.  In  style  too  it  consti- 
tuted an  epoch  in  Greek  ait  Vitruv.  iv.  1  ) ;  since 
it  was  here  fust  that  the  graceful  Ionic  order  was 
perfected.     The  magnificence  of  this  sanctuary  was 

a  proverb  throughout    the  civilised  world.      ('O  rf)9 
'  AprtptSos     vabs     iv     E(p4ay    fx6t/os    i<n\    Oewv 
oIkos,   l'hilo  Byz.   Sped.  Mund.    7 .)     All   these 
circumstances  gi\ ■•  increased  force  i"  the  ai i 
tural  allegory  in  the  great  epistle  which  St.  Paul 


EPHESUS 


5(33 


wrote  in  this  place  (1  Cor.  iii.  9-17),  to  the  pis- 
sages  where  imagery  of  this  kind  is  used  in  the 
epistles  addressed  to  Ephesus  (Ephes.  ii.  19-22; 
1  Tim.  iii.  15,  vi.  19  ;  2  Tim.  ii.  19,  20),  and  to 
the  words  spoken  to  the  Ephesian  elders  at  Miletus 
(Acts  xx.  32). 

The  chief  points  connected  with  the  uproar  at 
Ephesus  (Acts  xix.  23-41)  are  mentioned  in  the 
article  Diana  ;  but  the  following  details  must  be 
added,  in  consequence  of  this  devotion  the  city  of 
Ephesus  was  called  veaiKopos  (ver.  35)  or  "  war- 
den "  of  Diana.  This  was  a  recognised  title  applied 
in  such  cases,  not  only  to  individuals,  but  to  com- 
munities. In  the  instance  of  Ephesus,  the  term  is 
abundantly  found  both  on  coins  and  on  inscriptions. 
Its  neocorate  was,  in  fact,  as  the  "  town-clerk  " 
said,  proverbial.  Another  consequence  of  the  cele- 
brity of  Diana's  worship  at   Ephesus  was,  that  a 


Plnn  of  tin-  Temple  of  Dmna  al  Eptaa 


(FmmRulil'B  Vphr 


large  manufactory  grew  up  there  of  portable  shrines 
ivaol,  ver.  24,  the  a.(piSpv/j.aTa of  Dionys.  Halicarn. 
ii.  2.  and  other  writers)  which  strangers  pur- 
chased, and  devotees  carried  with  th<  m  on  journeys 
or    set    up   in    their  houses.      Of  the  manufacturers 

I   in   this  business,    perhaps   Alexandei    the 
"  coppersmith "  (6  xa^Ke'ls^  2  Tim.  i\.  It 
one.     The  case  of  Demetrius  the  "  silversmith " 
\apyvpoTro7os    in    the    Acts)    is  explicit.      He   was 

I  for  his  trade,  when  he  saw  the  Gospel, 
under  the  preaching  of  St.  Paul,  gaining  ground 
upon  idolatry  and  superstition;   and  he  spn 

panic  an g  the  craftsmen  of  various  grades,  the 

Tf'xciTOi  (ver.  24)  or  designer-,   and   the   ipyarai 

2  O  2 


564 


EPHESUS 


(v.  25)  or  common  workmen,  if  this  is  the  distinc- 
tion between  them. 

3.  The  Asiarclis. — Public  games  were  connected 
with  the  worship  of  Diana  at  Ephesus.  The  month 
of  May  was  sacred  to  her.  The  uproar  mentioned 
in  the  Acts  very  probably  took  place  at  this  season. 
St.  Paul  was  certainly  at  Ephesus  about  that  time 
of  the  year  (1  Cor.  xvi.  8);  and  Demetrius  might 
well  be  peculiarly  sensitive,  if  he  found  his  trade 
failing  at  the  time  of  greatest  concourse.  However 
this  may  be,  the  Asiarclis  ('Amapxou,  A.  V. 
"chiefs  of  Asia),"  were  present  (Acts  xix.  31). 
These  were  officers  appointed,  after  the  manner 
of  the  aediles  at  Pome,  to  preside  over  the  games 
which  were  held  in  different  parts  of  the  pro- 
vince of  Asia,  just  as  other  provinces  had  their 
Galatarchs,  Lyciarchs,  &c.  Various  cities  would 
require  the  presence  of  these  officers  in  turn.  In 
the  account  of  Polycarp's  martyrdom  at  Smyrna 
(Hefele,  Pat.  Apost.  p.  286)  an  important  part  is 
played  by  the  Asiarch  Philip.  It  is  a  remarkable 
proof  of  the  influence  which  St.  Paul  had  gained  at 
Ephesus,  that  the  Asiarclis  took  his  side  in  the  dis- 
turbance.    See   Dr.   Wordsworth's   note    on    Acts 

Xix.  31.    [ASIARCHAE.] 

4.  Study  and  practice  of  magic. — Not  uncon- 
nected with  the  preceding  subject  was  the  remarkable 
prevalence  of  magical  arts  at  Ephesus.  This  also 
comes  conspicuously  into  view  in  St.  Luke's  nar- 
rative. The  peculiar  character  of  St.  Paul's  mira- 
cles (Swdfieis  ov  ras  Tvxov<ras,  ver.  11) 
would  seem  to  have  been  intended  as  anta- 
gonistic to  the  prevalent  superstition.  In 
illustration  of  the  magical  books  which  were 
publicly  burnt  (ver.  19)  under  the  influence 
of  St.  Paul's  preaching,  it  is  enough  here  to 
refer  to  the  'E(p4aia  ypafifnara  (mentioued 
by  Plutarch  and  others),  which  were  re- 
garded as  a  charm  when  pronounced,  and 
when  written  down  were  carried  about  as 
amulets.  The  faith  in  these  mystic  syllables 
continued,  more  or  less,  till  the  sixth  cen- 
tury. See  the  Life  of  Alexander  of  Tralles  in  the 
Diet,  of  Biog. 

5.  Provincial  and  municipal,  government. — It  is 
well  known  that  Asia  was  a  proconsular  province ; 
and  in  harmony  with  this  fact  we  find  proconsuls 
(avdinraroi,  "/deputies,"  A.  V.)  specially  men- 
tioned (ver.  38).  Nor  is  it  necessary  to  inquire  here 
whether  the  plural  in  this  passage  is  generic,  or 
whether  the  governors  of  other  provinces  were  pre- 
sent in  Ephesus  at  the  time.  Again  we  learn  from 
Pliny  (v.  31)  that  Ephesus  was  an  assize-town 
i(forum  or  conventus) ;  and  in  the  sacred  narrative 
(ver.  38)  we  find  the  court-days  alluded  to  as  ac- 
tually being  held  (ayopaioi  ayovrai,  A.  V.  "  the 
law  is  open")  during  the  uproar;  though  perhaps 
it  is  not  absolutely  necessary  to  give  the  ex- 
pression this  exact  reference  as  to  time  (see  Words- 
worth). Ephesus  itself  was  a  "  free  city,"  and 
had  its  own  assemblies  and  its  own  magistrates. 
The  senate  (yepovffia  or  f3ov\i])  is  mentioned,  not 
only  by  Strabo,  but  by  Josephus  (Ant.  xiv.  10, 
§25,  xvi.  (i,  §§4,  7);  and  St.  Luke,  in  the  narra- 
tive before  us,  speaks  of  the  Stjlios  (ver.  30,  33, 
A.  V.  "  the  people")  and  of  its  customary  assem- 
blies (lvv6ficp  iicK\r](ria,  ver.  39,  A.  V.  "a  lawful 
assembly").  That  the  tumultuary  meeting  which 
was  gathered  on  the  occasion  in  question  should 
take  place  in  the  theatre  (ver.  29,  31)  was  nothing 
extraordinary.  It  was  at  a  meeting  in  the  theatre 
at  Caesarea   that  Agrippa   I.  received    his   death- 


EPHESUS 

stroke  (Acts  xii.  23),  and  in  Greek  cities  this  was 
often  the  place  for  large  assemblies  (Tac.  Hist.  ii. 
80;  Val.  Max.  ii.  2).  We  even  find  conspicuous 
mention  made  of  one  of  the  most  important  mu- 
nicipal officers  of  Ephesus,  the  "  Town-Clerk  " 
(ypa.fj.fAa.Tevs)  or  keeper  of  the  records,  whom  we 
know  from  other  sources  to  have  been  a  person  of 
great  influence  and  responsibility. 

It  is  remarkable  how  all  these  political  and  reli- 
gious characteristics  of  Ephesus,  which  appear  in 
the  sacred  narrative,  are  illustrated  by  inscriptions 
and  coins.  An  a.pxe'iov  or  state-paper  office  is  men- 
tioned on  an  inscription  in  Chishull.  The  ypaii- 
fiarevs  frequently  appears  ;  so  also  the  'Aaiapxai 
and  avOinraroi.  Sometimes  these  words  are  com- 
bined iii  the  same  inscription :  see  for  instance 
Bockh.  Corp.  Insc.  2999,  2994.  The  following  is 
worth  quoting  at  length,  as  containing  also  the 
words  Srifios  and  vec&Kopos : — 'H  <pi\offe[ia<JTOs 
Ecpzaicov  /3oi/Ar;  Kal  6  vewKopos  8fj,uos  KadUpiiiffaf 
iirl  avOvTrdrov  TltSovKaiov  YlpeiaKtivov  ^rncpiaa- 
fievov  Ti/3.  KA.  'lraAiKov  rov  ypafifa6.Tsa>s  tov 
5t)iaov.  2966.  The  coins  of  Ephesus  are  full  of 
allusions  to  the  worship  of  Diana  in  various  aspects. 
The  word  veuKopos  is  of  frequent  occurrence.  That 
which  is  given  below  has  also  the  word  avOvTraros : 
it  exhibits  an  image  of  the  temple,  and,  bearing  as 
it  does  the  name  and  head  of  Nero,  it  must  have 
been  struck  about  the  time  of  St.  Paul's  stay  in 
Ephesus. 


Coin  of  Ephesus,  exhibiting  the  Temple  of  Diana 


We  should  enter  on  doubtful  ground  if  we  were 
to  speculate  on  the  Gnostic  and  other  errors  which 
grew  up  at  Ephesus  in  the  later  Apostolic  age,  and 
which  are  foretold  in  the  address  at  Miletus,  and 
indicated  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  and  more 
distinctly  in  the  Epistles  to  Timothy.  It  is  more 
to  our  purpose  if  we  briefly  put  down  the  actual 
facts  recorded  in  the  N.  T.  as  connected  with  the 
rise  and  early  progress  of  Christianity  in  this  city. 

That  Jews  were  established  there  in  con- 
siderable numbers  is  known  from  Josephus  (11.  c), 
and  might  be  inferred  from  its  mercantile  eminence  ; 
but  it  is  also  evident  from  Acts  ii.  9,  vi.  9.  In 
harmony  with  the  character  of  Ephesus  as  a  place 
of  concourse  and  commerce,  it  is  here,  and  here 
only,  that  we  find  disciples  of  John  the  Baptist 
explicitly  mentioned  after  the  ascension  of  Christ 
(Acts  xviii.  25,  xix.  3).  The  case  of  Apollos  (xviii. 
24)  is  an  exemplification  further  of  the  intercourse 
between  this  place  and  Alexandria.  T.he  first  seeds 
of  Christian  truth  were  possibly  sown  at  Ephesus 
immediately  after  the  Great  Pentecost  (Acts  ii.). 
Whatever  previous  plans  St.  Paul  may  have  enter- 
tained (xvi.  6),  his  first  visit  was  on  his  'return 
from  .the  second  missionary  circuit  (xviii.  19-21): 
and  his  stay  on  that  occasion  was  very  short:  nor 
is  there  any  proof  that  he  found  any  Christians  at 
Ephesus;  but  he  left  there  Aquila  and  Priscilla 
(ver.  19),  who  both  then  and  at  a  later  period 
(2  Tim.  iv.  19)   were   of  signal   service.     In  St. 


EPHESUS 

Paul's  own  stay  of  more  than  two  years  (xix.  8,  10,  I 
sx.  31),  which  formed  the  most  important  passage  | 
of  his  third  circuit,  and  during  which  he  laboured,  j 
first  in  the  synagogue  (six.  8),  and  then  in  the 
school  of  Tyiannus  (ver.  9),  ami  also  in  private 
houses  (xx.  20),  and  during  which  he  wrote  the 
First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  we  have  the  period 
of  the  chief  evangelization  of  this  shore  of  the 
Aegean.  The  direct  narrative  in  Acts  xix.  receives 
but  little  elucidation  from  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephe- 
sians,  which  was  written  after  several  years  from 
Rome ;  but  it  is  supplemented  in  some  important 
particulars  (especially  as  regards  the  Apostle's  per- 
sonal habits  of  self-denial,  xx.  34)  by  the  address 
at  Miletus.  This  address  shows  that  the  church 
at  Ephesus  was  thoroughly  organised  under  its 
presbyters.  At  a  later  period  Timothy  was  set 
over  them,  as  we  learn  from  the  two  epistles  ad- 
dressed  to  him.  Among  St.  Paul's  other  com- 
panions, two,  Trophimus  and  Tychicus,  were  natives 
of  Asia  _( xx.  4),  and  the  latter  probably  (2  Tim.  iv. 
12),  the  former  certainly  (Acts  xxi.  29),  natives  of 
Ephesus.  in  the  same  connexion  we  ought  to  men- 
tion Onesiphorus  (2  Tim.  i.  10-18)  and  his  house- 
hold (iv.  19).     On  the  other  hand  must  be  noticed 


EPHOD 


505 


certain  specified  Ephesian  antagonists  of  the  Apostle, 
the  sons  of Sceva  and  his  party  (Acts  xix.  14),  Hyme- 
neus  and  Alexander  ( 1  Tim.  i.  20  ;  2  Tim.  iv.  14), 
and  Phygellus  and  Hennogenes  (2  Tim.  i.  15). 

The  site  of  ancient  Ephesus  has  been  visited 
and  examined  by  many  travellers  during  the  last 
200  years;  and  descriptions,  more  or  less  co- 
pious, have  been  given  by  Pococke,  Tournefort, 
Spon  and  Wheler,  Chandler,  Poujoulat,  Prokesch, 
Beaujour,  Schubert,  Arundell,  Fellows,  and  Hamil- 
ton. The  fullest  accounts  are,  among  the  older 
travellers,  in  Chandler,  and  among  the  more  recent, 
in  Hamilton.  Some  views  are  given  in  the  second 
volume  of  the  Ionian  Antiquities,  published  by  the 
Dilettanti  Society.  Leake,  in  'his  Asia  Minor,  has 
a  discussion  on  the  dimensions  and  style  of  the 
Temple.  The  whole  place  is  now  utterly  desolate, 
with  the  exception  of  the  small  Turkish  village  at 
Ayasaluk.  The  ruins  are  of  vast  extent,  both  on 
Coressus  and  on  the  plain ;  but  there  is  great  doubt 
as  to  many  topographical  details.  In  Kiepert's 
Hellas  is  a  map,  more  or  less  conjectural,  the  sub- 
stance of  which  will  be  found  in  the  Diet,  of  Geog. 
s.  v.  Ephesus.  Guhl's  plans  also  are  mostly  from 
Kiepert. 


It  is  satisfactory,  however,  that  the  position  of 
tire  theatre  on  .Mount  Prion  is  absolutely  certain. 
Fellows  savs  it  must  havi  of  the  largest 

in  the  world.    A  view  of  it.  from  Laborde,  i 
above.     The  situation  of  the  temple  is  doubtful,  bui 
it  probably  stood  where  certain    large  ma 
main  on  the  low  ground,  full  in  view  of  the  theatre. 
The  disappearance  of  the   temple   may  easily  lie 

I  for,  partly  by  the  rising  of  the  soil,  and 

partly  by  the  incessant  use  of    its   materials  for 
mediaeval  building  ires  lid 

to  be  in  St.  Sophia  at  Constantinople,  and  even  in 
lis  of  Italy. 

To  the  works  abo 
Perry,  De  rebus  /.<  I  '  slight 

sketch  ;    '  luhl  I  Beil.    18  13  .   ■■<    very 

tte  work ;    Hemsen's   Pa 
which  contains  a  good  chapter  on  Epl 
On  the  Acts(Oxf.  1829),  pp.  274-285;   Mr.Aker- 
man's  paper  on  the  Coin-  of  Ephesus  in  the  Trans. 


of  the  Numismatic  Soc.  1841 ;  Gronov.  Antiq. 
(iriiiv.  vii.  :;87-401  ;  and  an  article  by  Ampere 
in  the  Rev.  des  Deux  Mondes  for  Jan.  1842. 

An  elaborate  work  on  Ephesus  is  understood  to  be  in 
preparation  by  Mr.  Falkener,  [J.  S.  H.] 

EPH'LAL  (bbztt ;  ' AQa/xfa;  Alex.  '0<p\d5; 
Ophlal  ,  a  descendant  of  Judah,  of  the  family  of 
Hezron  and  of  Jerahmeel  (1  Chr.  ii.  "7). 

EPHOD  (TlSN  ..  a  sacred  vestment  originally 

appropriate  to  the  High-pries!   !  Ex.  xxviii.  4),  but 

rds  worn   by  ordinary  priests  I  1  Sam.  xxii. 

deemed  chai  cb  i  istic  ol  I  be  office    I  Sam, 

ii.  28,  xiv.  3  ;  Hos.  iii.4i.     For  a  description  of 

.ii-[-i:i!  ST.     a  kind  of  ephod 

was  worn   by  Samuel     1    Sam.  ii.    is,,   and   by 

David,   when   he    I ight    the  ark    to   Jerusalem 

(2  Sam.  vi.  14;  l  Chr.  iv.  27) ;  it  differed  from 
the  priestly  ephod  in  material,  being  made  of 
ordinary  linen    bad),  whereas  the  other  was  of  line 


566 


EPHOD 


linen  (shcsh)  ;  it  is  noticeable  that  the  LXX.  does 
not  give  eirwfils  or  'E(f>uv5  in  the  passages  last 
quoted,  but  terms  of  more  general  import,  cttoK)] 
e|aA.Aoy.  CToArj  fivaffivT).  Attached  to  the  ephod 
of  the  High-priest  was  the  breast-plate  with  the 
Uiim  and  Thummim  ;  this  was  the  ephod  year' 
*I°X^">  which  Abiathar  carried  oft"  (1  Sam.  xxiii. 
6)  from  the  tabernacle  at  Nob  (1  8am.  xxi.  9), 
and  which  David  consulted  (1  Sam.  xxiii.  9,  xxx. 
7).  The  importance  of  the  ephod  as  the  receptacle 
of  the  breast-plate  led  to  its  adoption  in  the 
idolatrous  forms  of  worship  instituted  in  the  time 
of  the  Judges  (Judg.  viii.  27,  xvii.  5,  xviii.  14  ft'.). 
The  amount  of  gold  used  by  Gideon  in  making  his 
ephod  (Judg.  viii.  26)  has  led  Gesenius  (Thesaur. 
p.  135),  following  the  Peschito  version,  to  give 
the  word  the  meaning  of  an  idol-image,  as  though 
that  and  not  the  priest  was  clothed  with  the  ephod : 
but  there  is  no  evidence  that  the  idol  was  so  in- 
vested, nor  does  such  an  idea  harmonise  with  the 
general  use  of  the  ephod.  The  ephod  itself  would 
require  a  considerable  amount  of  gold  (Ex.  xxviii. 
6  ff.,  xxxix.  2  fi°.)  ;  but  certainly  not  so  large 
a  sum  as  is  stated  to  have  been  used  by  Gideon ; 
may  we  not  therefore  assume  that  to  make  an 
ephod  implied  the  introduction  of  a  new  system 
of  worship  with  its  various  accessories,  such  as  the 
graven  image,  which  seems  from  the  prominence 
assigned  to  it  in  Judg.  xviii.  31  to  represent  the 
Urim  and  Thummim,  the  molten  image,  and  the 
Teraphim  (xvii.  4,  5),  which  would  require  a  large 
consumption  of  metai?  [W.  L.  B.] 

ETHOD  O'SN;  2ov<pi,  Alex.  OvcpiS;  Ephod). 
Hanniel  the  son  of  Ephod,  as  head  of  the  tribe  of 
Manasseh,  was  one  of  the  men  appointed  to  assist 
Joshua  and  Eleazar  in  the  apportionment  of  the 
land  of  Canaan  (Num.  xxxiv.  23). 

E'PHRAIM  (DnSN  ;  'E<j>patfji ;  Joseph.  'E<p- 
pa'/'/xTjs ;  Ephraim),  the  second  son  of  Joseph  by 
his  wife  Asenath.  He  was  born  during  the  seven 
years  of  plenteousness,  and  an  allusion  to  this  is 
possibly  latent  in  the  name,  though  it  may  also 
allude  to  Joseph's  increasing  family : — "  The  name 
of  the  second  he  called  Ephraim  (i.  e.  double  fruit- 
fulness),  for  God  hath  caused  me  to  be  fruitful 
C3~lSn,  hiphrani)  in  the  land  of  my  affliction" 
(Gen:  xli.  52,  xlvi.  20).a 

The  first  indication  we  have  of  that  ascendancy 
over  his  elder  brother  Manasseh,  which  at  a  later 
period  the  tribe  of  Ephraim  so  unmistakeably  pos- 
sessed, is  in  the  blessing  of  the  children  by  Jacob, 
Gen.  xlviii. — a  passage  on  the  age  and  genuineness 
of  which  the  severest  criticism  has  cast  no  doubt 
(Tuch,  Genesis,  548;  Ewald,  i.  534,  note).  Like 
his  own  father,  on  an  occasion  not  dissimilar,  Jacob's 
eyes  were  dim  so  that  he  could  not  see  (xlviii.  10, 


*  Josephus  (Ant.  ii.  6,  §1)  gives  the  derivation  of 
the  name  somewhat  differently — "  restorer,  because 
lie  was  restored  to  the  freedom  of  his  forefathers  ;" 

airooioWs  .  .  .  5ta  to  airoSoOrivai     kt\. 

b  "  I  will  make  thee  fruitful,"  T"IQD,  Maphraeh, 
Gen.  xlviii.  4. ;  "  Be  thou  fruitful,'"'  HID,  Phreh, 
xxxv.  11;  both  from  the  same  root  as  the  name 
Ephraim. 

c  There  seems  to  have  been  some  connexion  between 
Ephrath,  or  Bethlehem,  and  Ephraim,  the  clue  to 
which  is  now  lost  (Ewald,  Oesch.  i.  493,  note). 

The  expression  "Ephrathite"  is  generally  applied 
to  a  native  of  Ephrath,  i.  e.  Bethlehem  ;  but  there 
are   sonic  instances  of  its  meaning  an   Ephraimite. 


EPHRAIM 

comp.  x.wii.  1).  The  intention  of  Joseph  was  evi- 
dently that  the  right  hand  of  Jacob  should  convey 
its  ampler  blessing  to  the  head  of  Manasseh,  his 
first-born,  and  he  had  so  arranged  the  young  men. 
But  the  result  was  otherwise  ordained.  Jacob  had 
been  himself  a  younger  brother,  and  his  words  show 
plainly  that  he  had  not  forgotten  this,  and  that 
his  sympathies  were  still  with  the  younger  of  his 
two  grandchildren.  He  recalls  the  time  when  he 
was  flying  with  the  bhthright  from  the  vengeance 
of  Esau ;  the  day  when,  still  a  wanderer,  God 
Almighty  had  appeared  to  him  at  "  Luz  in  the  land 
of  Canaan,"  and  blessed  him  in  words  which  fore- 
shadowed the  name  of b  Ephraim ;  the  still  later 
day  when  the  name  of  Ephrath  °  became  bound  up 
with  the  sorest  trial  of  his  life  (xlviii.  7,  xxxv.  10). 
And  thus,  notwithstanding  the  pre-arrangement  and 
the  remonstrance  of  Joseph,  for  the  second  time  in 
that  family,  the  younger  brother  was  made  greater 
than  the  elder — Ephraim  was  set  before  Manasseh 
(xlviii.  19,  20). 

Ephraim  would  appear  at  that  time  to  have  been 
about  21  years  old.  He  was  born  before  the  be- 
ginning of  the  seven  years  of  famine,  towards  the 
latter  part  of  which  Jacob  had  come  to  Egypt, 
17  years  before  his  death  (Gen.  xlvii.  28).  Before 
Joseph's  death  Ephraim's  family  had  reached  the 
third  generation  (Gen.  1.  23),  and  it  must  have 
been  about  this  time  that  the  affray  mentioned  in 
1  Chr.  vii.  21  occurred,  when  some  of  the  sons 
were  killed  on  a  plundering  expedition  along  the 
sea-coast  to  rob  the  cattle  of  the  men  of  Gath ,  and 
when  Ephraim  named  a  son  Beriah,  to  perpetuate 
the  memory  of  the  disaster  which  had  fallen  on  his 
house.  [Beriah.]  Obscure  as  is  the  interpreta- 
tion of  this  fragment,  it  enables  us  to  catch  our 
last  glimpse  of  the  Patriarch,  mourning  incon- 
solable in  the  midst  of  the  circle  of  his  brethren, 
and  at  last  commemorating  his  loss  in  the  name  of 
the  new  child,  who,  unknown  to  him,  was  to  be  the 
progenitor  of  the  most  illustrious  of  all  his  descend- 
ants— Jehoshua,  or  Joshua,  the  son  of  Nun  (1  Chr. 
vii.  27;  see  Ewald,  i.  491).  To  this  early  period 
too  must  probably  be  referred  the  circumstance 
alluded  to  in  Ps.  lxxviii.  9,  when  the  "children  of 
Ephraim,  carrying  slack  bows,d  turned  back  in  the 
day  of  battle."  Certainly  no  instance  of  such  beha- 
viour is  recorded  in  the  later  history. 

The  numbers  of  the  tiibe  do  not  at  once  fulfil  the 
promise  of  the  blessing  of  Jacob.  At  the  census  in 
the  wilderness  of  Sinai  (Num.  i.  32,  33,  ii.  19)  its 
numbers  were  40,500,  placing  it  at  the  head  of  the 
children  of  Rachel  —  Manasseh's  number  being 
32,200,  and  Benjamin's  35,400.  But  forty  years 
latci',  on  the  eve  of  the  conquest  (Num.  xxvi.  ;!7), 
without  any  apparent  cause,  while  Manasseh  had  ad- 
vanced to  52,700, and  Benjamin  to  45, '500,  Ephraim 
had  decreased  to  32,500,  the  only  smaller  number 


These  are  1  Sam.  i.  1,  1  K.  xi.  26  ;  in  both  of  which 
the  word  is  accurately  transferred  to  our  version. 
But  in  Judg.  xii.  5,  where  the  Hebrew  word  is  the 
same,  and  with  the  definite  article  prnSHil),  it  is 
incorrectly  rendered  "  an  Ephraimite."  In  the  other 
occurrences  of  the  word  "  Ephraimite  "  in  vers.  4,  5,  6 
of  the  same  chapter,  the  Hebrew  is  "  Ephraim." 
This  narrative  raises  the  curious  inquiry,  which  wc 
have  no  means  of  satisfying,  whether  the  Ephraimites 
had  not  a  peculiar  accent  or  patois — similar  to  that 
which  in  later  times  caused  "  the  speech  "  of  the  Gali- 
leans to  "betray"  them  to  the  inhabitants  of  Jeru- 
salem. 

d  This  is  the  rendering  of  Ewald, 


EPHRAIM 

being  that  of  Simeon,  22,200.  At  this  period  the 
families  of  both  the  brother  tribes  are  enumerated, 
and  Manasseh  has  precedence  over  Ephraim  in  order 
of  mention.  During  the  march  through  the  wilder- 
ness the  position  of  the  sons  of  Joseph  and  Benjamin 
was  on  the  west  side  of  the  tabernacle  (Num.  ii. 
18-24),  and  the  prince  of  Ephraim  was  Elishama 
the  son  of  Ammihud  (Num.  i.  10). 

It  is  at  the  time  of  the  sending  of  the  spies  that  we 
are  first  introduced  to  the  great  hero  to  whom  the 
tribe  owed  much  of  its  subsequent  greatness.  The 
representative  of  Ephraim  on  this  occasion  was 
"  Oshea  the  son  of  Nun,"  whose  name  was  at  the 
termination  of  the  affair  changed  by  Moses  to  the 
more  distinguished  form  in  which  it  is  familiar  to 
us.  As  among  the  founders  of  the  nation  Abram 
had  acquired  the  name  of  Abraham,  and  Jacob  of 
Israel,  so  Oshea,  "help,"  became  Jehoshua  or 
Joshua,  "  the  help  of  Jehovah"  (Ewald,  ii.  306). 

Under  this  great  leader,  and  in  spite  of  the  small- 
ness  of  its  numbers,  the  tribe  must  have  taken  a 
high  position  in  the  nation,  to  judge  from  the  tone 
which  the  Ephraimites  assumed  on  occasions  shortly 
subsequent  to  the  conquest.  These  will  be  referred 
to  in  their  turn. 

According  to  the  present  arrangement  of  the  re- 
cords of  the  book  of  Joshua — the  "  Domesday  book 
of  Palestine  " — the  two  great  tribes  of  Judah  and 
Joseph  (Ephraim  and  Manasseh)  first  took  then-  in- 
heritance ;  and  after  them,  the  seven  other  tribes 
entered  on  theirs  (Josh,  xv.,  xvi.,  xvii.,  xviii.  5). 
The  boundaries  of  the  portion  of  Ephraim  are  given 
in  xvi.  1-10.  The  passage  is  evidently  in  great 
disorder,  and  in  our  ignorance  of  the  landmarks, 
and  of  the  force  of  many  of  the  almost  technical 
terms  with  which  these  descriptions  abound,  it.  is 
unfortunately  impossible  to  arrive  at  more  than  an 
approximation  to  the  case.  The  south  boundary 
was  coincident  for  part  of  its  length  with  the  north 
boundary  of  Benjamin.  Commencing  at  the  Jordan, 
at  the  reach  opposite  Jericho,e  it  ran  to  the  "  water 
of  Jericho,"  probably  the  A  in  Dull  or  Am  Sultan; 
thence  by  one  of  the  ravines,  the  Wady  Harith  or 
W.  Suweinit,  it  ascended  through  the  wilderness — 
Midbar,  the  uncultivated  waste  hills — to  Mount 
Bethel  and  Luz;  and  thence  by  Ataroth,  "the 
Japhletite,"  Bethhoron  the  lower,  and  Gezer — all 
with  one  exception  unknown — to  the  Mediterranean, 
probably  about  Joppa.  This  agrees  with  the  enu- 
meration in  1  Chr.  vii.,  in  which  Bethel  is  given  as 
the  Eastern,  and  Gezer — somewhere  about  Ramleh 
— as  the  Western,  limit.  The  general  direction  of 
this  line  is  N.E.  by  E.  In  Josh.  xvi.  8,  we  pro- 
bahly  have  a  fragment  of  the  northern  boundary 
(comp.  xvii.  10),  the  torrent  K'anah  being  the 
STahr  el  AAhdar  just  below  the  ancient  Caesarea. 
But  it  is  very  possible  that  there  never  was  any 
definite  subdivision  of  the  territory  assigned  to  the 
two  brother  tribes.  Such  is  certainly  the  inference 
to  be  drawn  from  the  very  old  fragmenl  pre- 
served in  Josh.  xvii.  14-18,  i"  which  tin.'  two  are 
represented  as  complaining  that  only  one  portion 
had  been  allotted  to  them.  At  any  rate  if  any 
such  subdivision  did  exist,  it  is  net  possible  new  to 
make  out  what  it  was,  except,  generally,  that 
Ephraim  lay  to  the  south  and  Manasseh  to  the 
north.  Among  the  towns  named  as  Mai 
were  Bethshean  in  the  Jordan   Valley,    Endor  on 


EPHRAIM 


5G7 


c  The  expression  "  Jordan-Jericho "  is  a  common 
one  (Num.  xxvi.  3,  (i3  ;  xxxiii.  18,  &0.)  :  the  "by" 
or  "near"  in  the  A.  V.  has  no  business  there. 


the  slopes  of  the  "  Little  Ilermon,"  Taanach  on  the 
north  side  of  Carmel,  and  Dor  on  the  sea-coast 
south  of  the  same  mountain.  Here  the  boundary — 
'the  north  boundary — joined  that  of  Asher,  which 
dipped  below  Carmel  to  take  in  an  angle  of  the 
plain  of  Sharon:  N.  and  N.W.  of  Manasseh  lay 
Zebulun  and  Issnchar  respectively.  The  territory 
thus  allotted  to  the  "house  of  Joseph"  may  be 
roughly  estimated  at  55  miles  from  E.  to  W.  by 
70  from  N.  to  S.,  a  portion  about  equal  in  extent  to 
the  counties  of  Norfolk  and  Sutlolk  combined.  But 
though  similar  in  size,  nothing  can  be  more  different 
in  its  nature  from  those  level  counties  than  this 
broken  and  hilly  tract.  Central  Palestine  consists  of 
an  elevated  district  which  rises  from  the  flat  ranges 
of  the  wilderness  on  the  south  of  Judah,  and  termi- 
nates on  the  north  with  the  slopes  which  descend  into 
the  great  plain  of  Esdraelon.  On  the  west  a  flat  strip 
separates  it  from  the  sea,  and  on  the  east  another  flat 
strip  forms  the  valley  of  the  Jordan.  Of  this  district 
the  northern  half  was  occupied  by  the  great  tribe  we 
are  now  considering.  This  was  the  Har-Ephraim, 
the  "  Mount  Ephraim,"  a  district  which  seems  to  ex- 
tend as  far  south  as  Kamah  and  Bethel  (1  Sam.  i.  1, 
vii.  17  ;  2  Chr.  xiii.  4,  19,  compared  with  xv.  8), 
places  but  a  few  miles  north  of  Jerusalem,  and 
within  the  limits  of  Benjamin.  In  structure  it  is 
limestone — rounded  hills  separated  by  valleys  of 
denudation,  but  much  less  regular  and  monotonous 
than  the  part  more  to  the  south,  about  and  below 
Jerusalem ;  with  "wide  plains  in  the  heart  of  the 
mountains,  streams  of  running  water,  and  conti- 
nuous tracts  of  vegetation"  (Stanley,  229).  All 
travellers  bear  testimony  to  the  "  general  growing 
richness  "  and  beauty  of  the  country  in  going  north- 
wards from  Jerusalem,  the  "  innumerable  foun- 
tains" and  streamlets,  the  villages  more  thickly 
scattered  than  anywhere  in  the  south,  the  conti- 
nuous cornfields  and  orchards,  the  moist,  vapoury 
atmosphere  (Martineau,  516,  521  ;  Van  deVelde,  i. 
386, 8  ;  Stanley,  234,  5).  These  are  the  "  precious 
things  of  the  earth,  and  the  fulness  thereof,"  which 
are  invoked  on  the  "  ten  thousands  of  Ephraim " 
and  the  "  thousands  of  Manasseh  "  in  the  blessing 
of  Moses.  These  it  is  which,  while  Dan,  Judah,  and 
Benjamin  are  personified  as  lions  and  wolves,  making 
their  lair  and  tearing  their  prey  among  the  barren 
rocks  of  the  south,  suggested  to  the  Lawgiver,  :b  they 
had  done  to  the  Patriarch  before  him,  the  patient 
"  bullock  "-  and  the  "  bough  by  the  spring,  whose 
branches  ran  over  the  wall"  as  fitter  images  for 
Ephraim  (Gen.  xlix.  22 ;  Deut.  xxxiii.  17).  And 
centuries  after,  when  its  great  disaster  had  fallen  on 
the  kingdom  of  Israel,  the  same  images  recur  to  the 
prophets.  The  "flowers"  are  still  there  in  the 
"olive  valleys,"  "faded"  though  they  be  (Is. 
xxviii.  1).  The  vine  is  an  empty  unprofitable  vine, 
whose  very  abundance  is  evil  (Hos.  x.  1  ) :  Ephraim 
is  still  the  "bullock,"  now  "unaccustomed  to  the 
yoke,"  but  waiting  a  restoration  to  the  ''plea-ant 

"of  his  former  "pasture"  i.ler.  \\\i.  IS;  Hos. 

ix.  13,  iv.  16)— "the  heifer  that  is  taught  and  loveth 
to  tread  oul  the  corn,"  the  heifer  with  the  " 
tiiiil  neck"   (Hos.  x.  Ill,  or  the  "  kino  of   B 
on  the  mountain  of  Samaria  "     \mos  iv.  1 ). 
The  wealth  of  their  possession  had  not  the 
immediately  degrading  effect  on  this  tribe  that  it 
had  on  some  of  its  northern  brethren.     [Asm  i:. ) 
Various  causes  may  have  helped  to  avert  this  <•  il. 
l .  The  central  situation  of  Ephraim,  in  the  bi 
of  all  communications  from  one  part  ofthecountrj 
to  another.    From  north  to  SOU  th,  from  Jordan  to  the 


568 


EPHRAIM 


Sea — from  Galilee,  or  still  more  distant  Damascus, 
to  Philistia  and  Egypt — these  roads  all  lay  more  or 
less  through  Ephraim,  and  the  constant  traffic  along 
them  must  have  always  tended  to  keep  the  district 
from  sinking  into  stagnation.  2.  The  position  of 
Shechem,  the  original  settlement  of  Jacob,  with  his 
well  and  his  "  parcel  of  ground,"  with  the  two 
sacred  mountains  of  Ebal  and  Gerizim,  the  scene 
of  the  impressive  and  signiticant  ceremonial  of 
blessing  and  cursing  ;  and  of  Shiloh,  from  whence 
the  division  of  the  land  was  made,  and  where  the 
ark  remained  from  the  time  of  Joshua  to  that  of 
Eli ;  and  further  of  the  tomb  and  patrimony  of 
Joshua,  the  great  hero  not  only  of  Ephraim  but  of  the 
nation — the  fact  that  all  these  localities  were  deep 
in  the  heart  of  the  tribe,  must  have  made  it  always 
the  resort  of  large  numbers  from  all  parts  of  the 
country — of  larger  numbers  than  any  other  place, 
until  the  establishment  of  Jerusalem  by  David. 
3.  But  there  was  a  spirit  about  the  tribe  itself 
which  may  have  been  both  a  cause  and  a  conse- 
quence of  these  advantages  of  position.  That  spirit, 
though  sometimes  taking  the  form  of  noble  remon- 
strance and  reparation  (2  Chr.  xxviii.  9-15),  usually 
manifests  itself  in  jealous  complaint  at  some  enter- 
pnze  undertaken  or  advantage  gained  in  which 
they  had  not  a  chief  share.  To  Gideon  (Judg. 
viii.  1),  to  Jephthah  (xii.  1),  and  to  David  (2  Sam. 
xix.  41-43),  the  cry  is  still  the  same  in  etfect — 
almost  the  same  in  words — "Why  did  ye  despise 
us  that  our  advice  should  not  have  been  first  had?" 
"  Wiry  hast  thou  served  us  thus  that  thou  calledst  us 
not?"  The  unsettled  state  of  the  country  in  ge- 
neral, and  of  the  interior  of  Ephraim  in  particular 
(Judg.  ix.),  and  the  continual  incursions  of  foreigners, 
prevented  the  power  of  the  tribe  from  manifesting 
itself  in  a  more  formidable  manner  than  by  these 
murmurs,  during  the  time  of  the  Judges  and  the 
first  stage  of  the  monarchy.  Samuel,  though  a 
Levite,  was  a  native  of  Kamah  in  Mount  Ephraim, 
and  Saul  belonged  to  a  tribe  closely  allied  to  the 
family  of  Joseph,  so  that  during  the  priesthood  of 
the  former  and  the  reign  of  the  latter  the  supre- 
macy of  Ephraim  may  be  said  to  have  been  prac- 
tically maintained.  Certainly  in  neither  case  had 
any  advantage  been  gained  by  their  great  rival  in 
the  south.  Again,  the  brilliant  successes  of  David 
and  his  wide  influence  and  religious  zeal,  kept 
matters  smooth  for  another  period,  even  in  the  face 
of  the  blow  given  to  both  Shechem  and  Shiloh  by 
the  concentration  of  the  civil  and  ecclesiastical 
capitals  at  Jerusalem.  Twenty  thousand  and  eight 
hundred  of  the  choice  warriors  of  the  tribe,  "  men 
of  name  throughout  the  house  of  their  father," 
went  as  far  as  Hebron  to  make  David  king  over 
Israel  (1  Chr.  xii.  30).  Among  the  officers  of  his 
court  we  find  more  than  one  Ephraimite  (1  Chr. 
xxvii.  10,  14),  and  the  attachment  of  the  tribe  to 
his  person  seems  to  have  been  great  (2  Sam.  xix. 
41-43).  But  this  could  not  last  much  longer,  and 
the  reign  of  Solomon,  splendid  in  appearance  but 
oppressive  to  the  people,  developed  both  the  cir- 
cumstances of  revolt,  and  the  leader  who  was  to 
turn  them  to  account.  Solomon  saw  through  the 
crisis,  and  if  he  could  have  succeeded  in  killing  Je- 
roboam as  he  tried  to  do  (1  K.  xi.  40),  the  disrup- 
tion might  have  been  postponed  for  another  cen- 
tury. As  it  was,  the  outbreak  was  deferred  for  a 
time,  but  the  irritation  was  not  allayed,  and  the 
insane  folly  of  his  son  brought  the  mischief  to  a 
head.  Rehoboam  probably  selected  Shechem  — the 
"Id  capital  of  the  country — for  his  coronation,  in 


EPHEAIM 

the  hope  that  his  presence  and  the  ceremonial  might 
make  a  favourable  impression,  but  in  this  he  failed 
utterly,  and  the  tumult  which  followed  shows  how 
complete  was  the  breach — "  To  your  tents,  0 
Israel !  now  see  to  thine  own  house,  David  !"  Re- 
hoboam was  certainly  not  the  last  king  of  Judah 
whose  chariot  went  as  far  north  as  Shechem,  but 
he  was  the  last  who  visited  it  as  a  part  of  his  own 
dominion,  and  he  was  the  last  who,  having  come  so 
far,  returned  unmolested  to  his  own  capital.  Jeho- 
shaphat  escaped,  in  a  manner  little  short  of  miracu- 
lous, from  the  risks  of  the  battle  of  Ramoth-Gilead, 
and  it  was  the  fate  of  two  of  his  successors,  Ahaziah 
and  Josiah —  differing  in  everything  else,  and  agreeing 
only  in  this — that  they  were  both  carried  dead  in  their 
chariots  from  the  plain  of  Esdraelon  to  Jerusalem. 

Henceforward  in  two  senses  the  history  of 
Ephraim  is  the  history  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel, 
since  not  only  did  the  tribe  become  a  kingdom,  but 
the  kingdom  embraced  little  besides  the  tribe.  This 
is  not  surprising,  and  quite  susceptible  of  explana- 
tion. North  of  Ephraim  the  country  appeal's  never 
to  have  been  really  taken  possession  of  by  the 
Israelites.  Whether  from  want  of  energy  on  their 
part,  or  great  stubbornness  of  resistance  on  that  of 
the  Canaanites,  certain  it  is  that  of  the  list  of  towns 
from  which  the  original  inhabitants  were  not  expelled, 
the  great  majority  belong  to  the  northern  tribes, 
Manasseh,  Asher,  Issachar,  and  Naphtali.  And  in 
addition  to  this  original  defect  there  is  much  in  the 
physical  formation  and  circumstances  of  the  upper 
portion  of  Palestine  to  explain  why  those  tribes 
never  took  any  active  part  in  the  kingdom.  They 
were  exposed  to  the  inroads  and  seductions  of  their 
surrounding  heathen  neighbours — on  one  side  the 
luxurious  Phoenicians,  on  the  other  the  plundering 
Bedouins  of  Midiau;  they  were  open  to  the  attacks 
of  Syria  and  Assyria  from  the  north,  and  Egypt 
from  the  south  ;  the  great  plain  of  Esdraelon,  which 
communicated  more  or  less  with  all  the  northern 
tribes,  was  the  natural  outlet  of  the  no  less  natural 
high  roads  of  the  maritime  plain  from  Egypt,  and  the 
Jordan  valley  for  the  tribes  of  the  East,  and  formed 
an  admirable  base  of  operations  for  an  invading  army. 

But  on  the  other  hand  the  position  of  Ephraim 
was  altogether  different.  It  was  one  at  once  of 
great  richness  and  great  security.  Her  fertile  plains 
and  well  watered  valleys  could  only  be  reached  by 
a  laborious  ascent  through  steep  and  narrow 
ravines,  all  but  impassable  for  an  army.  There  is 
no  record  of  any  attack  on  the  central  kingdom, 
either  from  the  Jordan  valley  or  the  maritime 
plain.  On  the  north  side,  from  the  plain  of  Es- 
draelon, it  was  more  accessible,  and  it  was  from  this 
side  that  the  final  invasion  appears  to  have  been 
made.  But  even  on  that  side  the  entrance  was  so 
difficult  and  so  easily  defensible — as  we  learn  from 
the  description  in  the  book  of  Judith  (iv.  6,  7) — 
that,  had  the  kingdom  of  Samaria  been  less  weakened 
by  internal  dissensions,  the  attacks  even  of  the  great 
Shalmaneser  might  have  been  resisted,  as  at  a  later 
date  were  those  of  Holofernes.  How  that  kingdom 
originated,  how  it  progressed,  aud  how  it  fell,  will 
be  elsewhere  considered.  [Israel,  Kingdom  of.] 
There  are  few  things  more  mournful  in  the  sacred 
story  than  the  descent  of  this  haughty  and  jealous 
tribe,  from  the  culminating  point  at  which  it  stood 
when  it  entered  on  the  fairest  portion  of  the  Land 
of  Promise — the  chief  sanctuary  and  the  chief  set- 
tlement of  the  nation  within  its  limits,  its  leader 
the  leader  of  the  whole  people — through  the  dis- 
trust which  marked  its  intercourse  with,  its  fellows, 


EPHRADt 

while  it  was  a  member  of  the  confederacy,  and  the 
tumult,  dissension,  and  ungodliness  which  charac- 
terised its  independent  existence,  down  to  the  sudden 
captivity  and  total. oblivion  which  closed  its  career. 
Judah  had  her  times  of  revival  and  of  recurring 
prosperity,  but  here  the  course  is  uniformly  down- 
ward— a  sad  picture  of  opportunities  wasted  and 
personal  gifts  abused.  "  When  Israel  was  a  child, 
then  I  loved  him,  and  called  my  son  out  of  Egypt. 
...  I  taught  Ephraim  also  to  go,  taking  them  by 
their  arms,  but  they  knew  not  that  I  healed  them. 
I  drew  them  with  cords  of  a  man,  with  bands  of 
love  .  .  but  the  Assyrian  shall  be  then-  king,  be- 
cause they  refused  to  return.  .  .  .  How  shall  I  give 
thee  up,  Ephraim  ?  how  shall  I  deliver  thee,  Israel? 
how  shall  I  make  thee  as  Adman?  how  shall  I  set 
thee  as  Zeboim  ?  "  (Hos.  xi.  1-8).  [G.] 

ETHRAIM  (DnSX  ;  'EQpa'i/j. ;  Ephraim). 
In  "Baal-hazor  \\hich  is  '  by '  Ephraim"  was  Ab- 
salom's sheep-farm,  at  which  took  place  the  murder 
of  Amnon,  one  of  the  earliest  precursors  of  the  great 
revolt  (2  Sam.  xiii.  23).  The  Hebrew  particle  DJ? 
rendered  above  "  by "  (A.  V.  "  beside "),  always 
seems  to  imply  actual  proximity,  and  therefore  we 
should  conclude  that  Ephraim  was  not  the  tribe  of 
that  name,  but  a  town.  Ewald  conjectures  that  it 
is  identical  with  Ephrain,  EPHRON,and  Ophrah 
of  the  0.  T.,  and  also  with  the  Ephraim  which 
was  for  a  time  the  residence  of  our  Lord  (Gesch. 
iii.  '219,  note).  But  with  regard  to  the  three  first 
names  there  is  the  difficulty  that  they  are  spelt 
with  the  guttural  letter  ain,  which  is  very  rarely 
exchanged  for  the  aleph,  which  commences  the 
name  before  us.  There  is  unfortunately  no  clue  to 
its  situation.  The  LXX.  make  the  following  ad- 
dition to  verse  34 : — "  And  the  watchman  went 
and  told  the  king,  and  said,  I  have  seen  men  on  the 
mad  of  the  Oronen  (ttjs  wpwvTJv,  Alex,  rwv 
upfwvrjv)  by  the  side  of  the  mountain."  Ewald 
considers  this  to  be  a  genuine  addition,  and  to  refer 
to  Beth-horon,  N.W.  of  Jerusalem,  off  the  Nablus 
road,  but  the  indication  is  surely  too  slight  for  such 
an  inference.  Any  force  it  may  have  is  against  the 
identity  of  this  Ephraim  with  that  in  John  xi.  54, 
which  was  probably  in  the  direction  N.E.  of  Jeru- 
salem.  [G.] 

ETHRAIM  ('Efpai/j. ;  Ephrem  ;  Cod.  Amiat. 
Efrem),  a  city  ('E.  Aeyontvyv  ir6\iv)  "  in  the 
district  near  the  wilderness"  to  which  our  Lord 
retired  with  His  disciples  when  threatened  with 
violence  by  the  priests  (John  xi.  54).  By  the 
"wilderness"  (£piifj.os)  is  probably  meant  the  wild 
uncultivated  hill-country  N.E.  of  Jerusalem,  lying 
between  the  central  towns  and  the  Jordan  valley. 
In  this  case  the  conjecture  of  Dr.  Robinson  is  very 
admissible  thai  Ophrah  and  Ephraim  arc  identical, 
and  ili.it  their  modern  representation  is  et-Taiyibeh, 
;i  village  "ii  a  conspicuous  conical  hill,  commanding 
a  view  "over  the  whole  eastern  slope,  the  valley  of 
the  Jordan  and  the  Dead  Sea"  (Rob.  i.  444).  It 
is  situated  4  or  5  mil's  easl  of  Bethel,  and  Hi  from 

Jerusalem;  a  | tion  agreeing  tolerably  with  the 

indications  of  Jerome  in  tb  on  i  Ephraim, 

Ephron),  and  is  too  conspicuous  to  have  escaped 
mention  in  the  Bible.  [(!.] 

ETHRAIM,  GATE  OF  (DnSK  TgB> ;  iri\v 
'E(ppai/x;  porta  Ephraim  I,  one  of  the  gates  of  the 
city  of  Jerusalem  (2  K.  \iv.  13;  2  Chr.  \.\v.  •_':'.; 
Neh.  viii.  16,  xii.  39),  doubtless,  according  to  the 
Oriental  practice,  on  the  side  looking  toward    the 


EPHRATAH 


569 


locality  from  which  it  derived  its  name,  and  therefore 
at  the  north,  probably  at  or  near  the  position  of  the 
present  "  Damascus  gate."     [Jerusalem.]     [G.] 

ETHRAIM,  THE  WOOD  OF  (DnSN  TJP  ; 

5pvp.bs  'E<ppaifi  ;  saltus  Ephraim),  a  wood,  or 
rather  a  forest  (the  word  ya'ar  implying  dense 
growth),  in  which  the  fatal  battle  was  (ought  be- 
tween the  armies  of  David  and  of  Absalom  (2  Sam. 
xviii.  G),  and  the  entanglement  in  which  added 
greatly  to  the  slaughter  of  the  latter  (ver.  8).  It 
would  be  very  tempting  to  believe  that  the  forest 
derived  its  name  from  the  place  near  which  Absa- 
lom's sheep-farm  was  situated  (2  Sam.  xiii.  23), 
and  which  would  have  been  a  natural  spot  for  his 
head-quarters  before  the  battle,  especially  associated 
as  it  was  with  the  murder  of  Amnon.  But  the 
statements  of  rvii.  24,  26,  and  also  the  expression 
of  xviii.  3,  •'  that  thou  succour  us  out  of  the  city," 
i.  e.  Mahanaim,  allow  no  escape  from  the  conclusion 
that  the  locality  was  on  the  east  side  of  Jordan, 
though  it  is  impossible  to  account  satisfactorily  for 
the  presence  of  the  name  of  Ephraim  on  that  side 
of  the  river.  The  suggestion  is  due  to  Grotius  that 
the  name  was  derived  from  the  slaughter  of  Ephraim 
at  the  fords  of  Jordan  by  the  Gileadites  under 
Jephthah  (Judg.  xii.  1,4,  5) ;  but  that  occurrence 
took  place  at  the  very  brink  of  the  river  itself, 
while  the  city  of  Mahanaim  and  the  wooded  country 
must  have  lain  several  miles  away  from  the  stream, 
and  on  the  higher  ground  above  the  Jordan  valley. 
Is  it  not  at  least  equally  probable  that  the  forest 
derived  its  name  from  this  very  battle?  The  great 
tribe  of  Ephraim,  though  not  specially  mentioned 
in  the  transactions  of  Absalom's  revolt,  cannot  fail 
to  have  taken  the  most  conspicuous  part  in  the  affair, 
and  the  reverse  was  a  more  serious  one  than  had  over-  • 
taken  the  tribe  for  a  very  long  time,and  possibly  com- 
bined with  other  circumstances  to  retard  materially 
their  rising  into  an  independent  kingdom.        [G.] 

ETHRAIN  (jnDy,  Ephron;  Keri,  pQy  ; 
'E<ppcx>v\  Ephron),  a  city  of  Israel,  which  with  its 
dependent  hamlets  (J"11J2  =  "  daughters,"  A.  V. 
"  towns")  Abijah  and  the  army  of  Judah  captured 
from  Jeroboam  (2  Chr.  xiii.  19).  It  is  mentioned 
with  Bethel  and  Jeshanah,  but  the  latter  not  being 
known,  little  clue  to  the  situation  of  Ephrain  is 
obtained  from  this  passage.  It  has  been  conjectured 
that  this  Ephrain  or  Ephron  is  identical  with  the 
Ephraim  by  which  Absalom's  sheep-farm  of  Baal- 
hazor  was  situated;  with  the  city  called  Ephraim 
near  the  wilderness  in  which  our  Lord  lived  for 
some  time  ;  and  with  Ophrah  (HISJ?),  a  city  of 
Benjamin,  apparently  not  far  from  Bethel  (Josh, 
xviii.  2:;  ;  comp.Joseph.  U.J.  iv.  9,  §9), and  which 
has  been  located  by  Dr.  Robinson  (i.  447),  with 
some  probability,  at  the  modern  village  of  ct-Tai- 
yibch.  But  nothing  more  than  conjecture  can  be 
arrived  at  on  these  points.  (See  Ewald,  Gcschichte, 
in.  219,  166,  \.  365;  Stanley,  214.)  [G.] 

EPHRATAH,  or  EPH'RATH  (nJTlSN,  or 
mDN;  'E<ppa6d  and  'EfpaO;  Ephratha,  Jero'm.). 
1.  Second  wife  of  Caleb  the  son  of  Hezron,  mother 
of  Hut,  and  grandmother  of  Caleb  the  spy,  accord- 
in  to  I  i  lir.  ii.  19,  .'"i,  and  probably  24,  and  iv. 4. 
[Caleb-Epkratah.] 

2.  The  ancient  name  of  Bethlehem-Judah, 
manifest  from    Gen.    XXXV.    16,  19,   \lviii.7,   both 
which  passages  distinctly  prove  that  it  was  called 
Kphrath  or  Ephratah  in  Jacob's  time,   and   use  the 


570 


EPHRATAH 


regular  formula  for  adding  the  modern  name, 
DPPTV2  NTl,  ivhich  is  Bethlehem,  comp.  e.  g. 
Gen.  xxiii.  2,  xxxv.  27;  Josh.  xv.  10.  It  can- 
not therefore  have  derived  its  name  from  Ephratah, 
the  mother  ot  Hur,  as  the  author  of  Quaest,  Hcbr. 
in  Paraleip.  says,  and  as  one  might  otherwise  have 
supposed  from  the  connexion  of  her  descendants, 
Salma  and  Hur,  with  Bethlehem,  which  is  some- 
what obscurely  intimated  in  1  Chr.  ii.  50,  51,  iv.  4. 
It  seems  obvious  therefore  to  inter  that,  on  the  con- 
trary, Ephratah  the  mother  of  Hur  was  so  called 
from  the  town  of  her  birth,  and  that  she  probably 
was  the  owner  of  the  town  and  district.  In  fact, 
that  her  name  was  really  geutilitious.  But  if  this 
be  so,  it  would  indicate  more  communication  be- 
tween the  Israelites  in  Egypt  and  the  Canaanites 
than  is  commonly  supposed.  When,  however,  we 
recollect  that  the  land  of  Goshen  was  the  border 
country  on  the  Palestine  side ;  that  the  Israelites  in 
Goshen  were  a  tribe  of  sheep  and  cattle  drovers  (Gen. 
xlvii.  3)  ;  that  there  was  an  easy  communication  be- 
tween Palestine  and  Egypt  from  the  earliest  times 
(Gen.  xii.  10,  xvi.  1,  xxi.  21,  &c.)  ;  that  there  are 
indications  of  communications  between  the  Israelites 
in  Egypt  and  the  Canaanites,  caused  by  their  trade 
as  keepers  of  cattle,  1  Chr.  vii.  21,  and  that  in  the 
nature  of  things  the  owners  or  keepers  of  large  herds 
and  flocks  in  Goshen  would  have  dealings  with  the 
nomad  tribes  in  Palestine,  it  will  perhaps  seem  not 
impossible  that  a  son  of  Hezron  may  have  married 
a  woman  having  property  in  Ephratah.  Another 
way  of  accounting  for  the  connexion  between  Ephra- 
tah's  descendants  and  Bethlehem,  is  to  suppose  that 
the  elder  Caleb  was  not  really. the  son  of  Hezron, 
but  merely  reckoned  so  as  the  head  of  a  Hezronite 
house.  He  may  in  this  case  have  been  one  of  an 
Edomitish  or  Horite  tribe,  an  idea  which  is  favoured 
by  the  name  of  his  son  Hur  [Caleb],  and  have 
married  an  Ephrathite.  Caleb  the  spy  may  have 
been  their  grandson.  It  is  singular  that  "  .Salma 
the  father  of  Bethlehem  "  should  have  married  a 
Canaarritish  woman.  Could  she  have  been  of  the 
kindred  of  Caleb  in  any  way  ?  If  she  were,  and  if 
Salma  obtained  Bethlehem,  a  portion  of  Hur's  in- 
heritance, in  consequence,  this  would  account  for 
both  Hur  and  Salma  being  called  "  father  of  Beth- 
lehem." Another  possible  explanation  is,  that 
Ephratah  may  have  been  the  name  given  to  some 
daughter  of  Benjamin  to  commemorate  the  circum- 
stance of  Rachel  his  mother  having  died  close  to 
Ephrath.  This  would  receive  some  support  from 
the  son  of  Rachel's  other  son  Joseph  being  called 
Ephraim,  a  word  of  identical  etymology,  as  appears 
from  the  fact  that  ^niQN  means  indifferently  an 
Ephrathite,  i.e.  Bethlemite  (Ruth  i.  1,  2),  or  an 
Ephraimite  (1  Sam.  i.  1).  But  it  would  not  account 
tin-  Ephratah's  descendants  being  settled  at  Beth- 
lehem. The  author  of  the  Quaest.  Hcbr.  in  Pa- 
ralip.  derives  Ephrata  from  Ephraim,  "  Ephrath, 
quia  de  Ephraim  fuit."  But  this  is  not  consistent 
witli  the  appearance  of  the  name  in  Gen.  It  is 
perhaps  impossible  to  come  to  any  certainty  on  the 
subject.  It  must  suffice  therefore  to  note,  that  in 
Gen.,  and  perhaps  in  Chron.,  it  is  called  Ephrath 
or  Ephrata,  in  Ruth,  Bethlehem-Judah,  but  the 
inhabitants,  Ephrathites ;  in  Micah  (v.  2),  Beth- 
lehem-Ephratah ;  in  Matt.  ii.  6,  Bethlehem  in  the 
land  of  Juda.  Jerome,  and  after  him  Kalisch,  ob- 
serve that  Ephratah,  fruitful,  has  the  same  meaning 
as  Bethlehem,  house  of  bread;  a  view  which  is  fa- 
voured by  Stanley's  description  (if  the  neighbouring 


EPICUREANS 

corn-fields    {Palest.    $  Sin.   p.    164).      [Beth- 
lehem.]  . 

3.  Gesenius  thinks  that  in  Ps.  exxxii.  6,  Ephra- 
tah means  Ephraim.  [A.  C.  H.] 

EPHRATHITE  Crinex ;  'EQpadcuos ;  Eph- 
rathaeus).  1.  An  inhabitant  of  Bethlehem  (Ruth 
i.  2).  2.  An  Ephraimite  (1  Sam.  i.  1  ;  Jud.  xii. 
4,  &c).  [A.  C.  H.] 

E'PHRON  (fnQJJ  ;  'K<pp<bv\  Ephron),  the  son 
of  Zochar,  a  Hittite  ;  the  owner  of  a  field  which  lay 
facing  Mamie  or  Hebron,  and  of  the  cave  therein 
contained,  which  Abraham  bought  from  him  for 
400  shekels  of  silver  (Gen.  xxiii.  8-17;  xxv.  9; 
xlix.  29,  30  ,  1.  13)  By  Josephus  (Ant.  i.  14)  the 
name  is  given  as  Ephraim  ;  and  the  purchase-money 
40  shekels. 

E'PHRON  Q~E<pp&v  ;  Ephron),  a  very  strong 
city  (noAis  fxeyd\rj  oxvpa  <T<p6b'pa)  on  the  east  of 
Jordan  between  Carnaim  (Ashteroth-Karnaim)  and 
Bethshean,  attacked  and  demolished  by  Judas  Mac- 
cabaeus  (1  Mace.  v.  46-52  ;  2  Mace.  xii.  27).  From 
the  description  in  the  former  of  these  two  passages 
it  appears  to  have  been  situated  in  a  defile  or  valley, 
and  to  have  completely  occupied  the  pass.  Its  site 
has  not  been  yet  discovered.  [G.] 

E'PHRON,  MOUNT  ( jTlQJpn  ;  to  Zpos 
'E(ppciv  ;  Mons  Ephron).  The  "  cities  of  Mount 
Ephron "  formed  one  of  the  landmarks  on  the 
northern  boundary  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv. 
9),  between  the  "water  of  Nephtoah  "  and  Kirjath- 
jearim.  As  these  latter  are  with  great  probability 
identified  with  Ain  Lifta  and  Kuriet  el-enab,  Mount 
Ephron  is  probably  the  range  of  hills  on  the  west 
side  of  the  Wady  Beit-Hanina  (traditional  valley 
of  the  Terebinth),  opposite  Lifta,  which  stands  on 
the  eastern  side.  It  may  possibly  be  the  same  place 
as  Ephrain.  [G.] 

EPICURE' ANS,  THE  ('EiriKovp^oi)  derived 
their  name  from  Epicurus  (.142-271  B.C.),  a 
philosopher  of  Attic  descent,  whose  "  Garden  "  at 
Athens  rivalled  in  popularity  the  "  Porch  "  and 
the  "  Academy."  The  doctrines  of  Epicurus  found 
wide  acceptance  in  Asia  Minor  (Lampsacus,  Mity- 
lene,  Tarsus,  Diog.  L.  x.  1,  11  ff.)  and  Alexandria 
(Diog.  L.  I.  c),  and  they  gained'  a  brilliant  advo- 
cate at  Rome  in  Lucretius  (95-50  B.C.).  The 
object  of  Epicurus  was  to  find  in  philosophy  a 
practical  guide  to  happiness  ( evepyeia  .  .  .  tov 
evSalfMOva  f5iov  irepnroiovcra,  Sext.  Emp.  adv. 
Math.  xi.  169).  True  pleasure  and  not  absolute 
truth  was  the  end  at  which  he  aimed ;  experience 
and  not  reason  the  test  on  which  he  relied.  He 
necessarily  cast  aside  dialectics  as  a  profitless  science 
(Diog.  L.  x.  30,  31),  and  substituted  in  its  place 
(as  to  ko.vovik6v,  Diog.  L.  x.  19)  an  assertion  of 
the  right  of  the  senses,  in  the  widest  acceptation  of 
the  term,  to  be  considered  as  the  criterion  of  truth 
( KpiTr\pia  ttjs  aXnOelas  itvai  to.s  aiaO^ffeis  ical  tos 
7rpoA.75i|/€is  (general  notions)  kuI  to.  iradn).  He 
made  the  study  of  physics  subservient  to  the  uses 
of  life,  and  especially  to  the  removal  of  supersti- 
tious fears  (Lucr.  i.  146  ff.) ;  and  maintained  that 
ethics  are  the  proper  study  of  man,  as  leading  him 
to  that  supreme  and  lasting  pleasure  which  is  the 
common  object  of  all. 

It  is  obvious  that  a  system  thus  framed  would 
degenerate  by  a  natural  descent  into  mere  mate- 
rialism ;  and    in    this    form   Epicureism    was   the 


EPIPHANES 

popular  philosophy  at  the  beginning  of  the  Christian 
era  (of.  Diog.  L.  x.  5,  9 ).  When  St.  Paul  addressed 
"  Epicureans  and  Stoics"  (Acts  xvii.  18  )  at  Athens, 
the  philosophy  of  life  was  practically  reduced  to 
the  teaching  of  those  two  antagonistic  schools, 
which  represented  in  their  final  separation  the  dis- 
tinct and  complementary  elements  which  the 
Gospel  reconciled.  For  it  is  unjust  to  regard  Epi- 
cuieism  as  a  mere  sensual  opposition  to  religion. 
it  was  a  necessary  step  in  the  development  of 
thought,  and  prepared,  the  way  for  the  reception  of 
Christianity,  not  only  negatively  but  positively. 
it  not  only  weakened  the  hold  which  polytheism 
retained  on  the  mass  of  men  by  daring  criticism, 
but  it  maintained  with  resolute  energy  the  claims 
of  the  body  to  be  considered  a  necessary  part  of 
man's  nature  co-ordinate  with  the  soul,  and  affirmed 
the  existence  of  individual  freedom  against  the  Stoic 
doctrines  of  puie  spiritualism  and  absolute  fate. 
Yet  outwardly  Epicureism  appears  further  re- 
moved from  Christianity  than  Stoicism,  though 
essentially  it  is  at  least  as  near  ;  and  in  the  address 
of  St.  Paul  (Acts  xvii.  22  if.)  the  affirmation  of 
the  doctrines  of  creation  (v.  24),  providence  (v. 
26),  inspiration  (v.  28),  resurrection,  and  judgment 
(v.  31),  appears  to  be  directed  against  the  cardinal 
errors  which  it  involved. 

The  tendency  which  produced  Greek  Epicure- 
ism, when  carried  out  to  its  fullest  development,  is 
peculiar  to  no  age  or  country.  Among  the  Jews 
it  led  to  Sadduceeism  [Sadducees],  and  Josephus 
appears  to  have  drawn  his  picture  of  the  sect,  with 
a  distinct  regard  to  the  Greek  prototype  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xviii.  1,  §4;  de  B.  J.  ii.  8,  §14;  cf.  Ant.  x. 
11,  §7,  de  Epicureis).  In  modern  times  the  essay 
of  Gassendi  (Syntagma  Philosophiae  Epicnri,  Hag. 
Com.  1659)  was  a  significant  symptom  of  the  restora- 
tion of  sensationalism. 

The  chief  original  authority  for  the  philosophy  of 
Epicurus  is  Diogenes  I.aertius  (Lib.  x.),  who  has  pre- 
served some  of  his  letters  and  a  list  of  his  principal 
writings.  The  poem  of  Lucretius  must  be  used  with 
caution,  and  the  notices  in  Cicero,  Seneca,  and  Plu- 
tarch are  ondisgnisedly  hostile.  [B.  F.  W.] 

EPIPH'ANKS  (1  Mace.  i.  10,  x.  1).  [Anti- 
ochds  Epiphanes.] 

l; TIPHI  ('Ettu/ji,  3  Mace,  vi.38),  name  of  the 
eleventh  month  of  the  Egyptian  Vague  year,  and 
tin-   Alexandrian   or  Egyptian  Julian  year-:   Copt. 

t 
GITHn.)   Arab.  c_*aj\-     In  ancient  Egyptian  it 

is  called  "  the  third  month  [of]  the  season  of  the 
waters."  [Egypt.]  The  name  Epiphi  is  derived 
from  that  of  the  goddess  of  the  month,  Apap-1 
(Lepsius,  Chron.  d.  Aeg.  i.  141).  The  supposed 
derivation  of  the  Hebrew  month-name  Abib  from 
Epiphi  is  discussed  in  other  articles.  [Chro- 
nology; Months.]  [R.  S.  P.] 

EPISTLE.     The  Epistles  of  the  X.  T. 

I  under  the  names  oi'  the  Apostles  by  whom, 
or  the  churches  to  whom,  they  were  addressed.  It 
is  proposed  in  the  present  article  to  speak  'if  the 
Epistle  or  letter  as  a  means  of  communication. 

The  use  of  written  letters  implies,  it  needs  hardly 
he  said,  a  considerable  progress  in  the  development 
of  civilised  life.      Therein  ionised  system 

of  notation,  phonetic  or  symbolic;  men  must  lie 
taught  to  write,  and  have  writing  materials  at 
hand.      In    the   early   nomadic    stages   oi    society 


EPISTLE 


57] 


accordingly,  like  those  which  mark  the  period  of  the 
patriarchs  of  the  O.  T.,  we  rind  no  traces  of  any 
but  oral  communications.  Messengers  are  sent 
instructed  what  to  say  from  Jacob  to  Esau  (Gen. 
xxxii.  3),  from  P.alak  to  Balaam  (Num.  xxii.  5,  7, 
16),  bringing  back  in  like  manner  a  verbal,  not  a 
written  answer  (Num.  xxiv.  12).  The  negotiations 
between  Jephthah  and  the  king  of  the  Ammonites 
(Judg.  xi.  12,  13)  are  conducted  in  the  same  way. 
It  is  still  the  received  practice  in  the  time  of  Saul 
(1  Sam.  xi.  7,  9).  The  reign  of  David,  bringing 
the  Israelites,  as  it  did,  into  contact  with  the  higher 
civilisation  of  the  Phoenicians,  witnessed  a  change 
in  this  respect  also.  The  first  recorded  letter 
("1QD  =  "book;"  comp.  use  of  fiifiALov,  Herod,  i. 
123)  in  the  history  of  the  0.  T.  was  that  which 
"  David  wrote  to  Joab,  and  sent  by  the  hand  of 
Uriah  "  (2  Sam.  xi.  14),  and  this  must  obviously, 
like  the  letters  that  came  into  another  history  of 
crime  (in  this  case  also  in  traceable  connexion  with 
Phoenician  influence,  1  K.  xxi.  8,  9),  have  been 
''  sealed  with  the  king's  seal,"  as  at  once  the 
guarantee  of  their  authority,  and  a  safeguard  against 
their  being  read  by  any  but  the  persons  to  whom 
they  were  addressed.  The  material  used  for  the 
impression  of  the  seal  was  probably  the  "  clay"  of 
Job  xxxviii.  14.  The  act  of  sending  such  a  letter 
is,  however,  pre-eminently,  if  not  exclusively,  a 
kingly  act,  wheie  authority  and  secrecy  were  neces- 
sary. Joab,  e.g.  answers  the  letter  which  David 
had  sent  him  after  the  old  plan,  and  receives  a 
verbal  message  in  return.  The  demand  of  Ben- 
hadad  and  Ahab's  answer  to  it  are  conveyed  in  the 
same  way  (1  K.  xx.  2,  5").  Written  communica- 
tions, however,  become  more  frequent  in  the  later 
history.  The  king  of  Syria  sends  a  letter  to  the 
king  of  Israel  (2  K.  v.  5,  6).  Elijah  the  prophet 
sends  a  writing  (2fi3p)  to  Jehoram  (2  Chr.  xxi. 
12).  Hezekiah  introduces  a  system  of  couriers  like 
that  afterwards  so  fully  organised  under  the  Persian 
kings  (2  Chr.  xxx.  6,  In  ;  comp.  Herod,  viii.  98, and 
Esth.  viii.  lt»,  14),  and  receives  from  Sennacherib 
the  letter  which  he  "spreads  before  the  Lord" 
(2  K.  xix.  14).  Jeremiah  writes  a  letter  to  the 
exiles  in  Babylon  (Jer.  xxix.  1,3).  The  books  of  Ezra 
and  Nehemiah  contain  or  refer  to  many  such  docu- 
ments (Ezr.  iv.  6,  7,  11,  v.  6,  vii.  11 ;  Neh.  ii.  7, 
9,  vi.  5).  The  stress  laid  upon  the  "  open  letter  " 
Miit  by  Sanballat  (Neh.  vi.  5)  indicates  that  this 
was  a  breach  of  the  customary  etiquette  of  the 
Persian  court.  The  influence  of  Persian,  and  yet 
more,  perhaps,  that  of  Creek  civilisation,  led  to  the 
more  frequent  use  of  letters  as  a  means  of  inter- 
course. Whatever  doubts  may  be  entertained  as  to 
the  genuineness  of  the  Epistles  themselves,  their 
occurrence  in  1  Mace.  xi.  30,  xii.  6,  20,  XV.  1,  16; 
2  Mace.  xi.  16,  34,  indicates  that  they  weie  recog- 
nised as  having  altogether  sup  c  eded  the  older  plan 
of  messages  orally  delivered.  The  two  sta 
the  history  of  the  N.  T.  present  in  this  respect  a 

very  striking  contrast.     The  list  of  the  Ca deal 

Books  shows  how  largely  Epistles  were  nsed  in  the 
expansion  and  organisation  of  the  Church.  Those 
which  have  survived  may  !«•  regarded  as  the  repre- 
sentatives of  many  others  that  are  lost.  We  are 
perhaps  too  much  in  the  habil  oi  forgetting  (hat  the 
of  all  mention  of  written  letters  from  the 
Gospel    history    is    just    as   noticeable.     With    tin' 

exception     of    the     spurious      letter     to     AbgaiMIS     oi' 

Edessa  (Euseb.  //.  /..  i.  13)  there  are  no  Epistles 
of  Jesus.     The  explanation  of  this  is  to  be  found 


572 


ER 


partly  in  the  circumstances  of  one  who,  known  as 
the  "  carpenter's  son,"  was  training  as  His  disciples, 
those  who,  like  himself,  belonged  to  the  class  of 
labourers  and  peasants,  partly  in  the  fact  that  it 
was  by  personal,  rather  than  by  written,  teaching 
that  the  work  of  the  prophetic  office,  which  He 
reproduced  and  perfected,  had  to  be  accomplished. 
The  Epistles  of  the  N.  T.  in  their  outward  form 
are  such  as  might  be  expected  from  men  who  were 
brought  into  contact  with  Greek  and  Roman 
customs,  themselves  belonging  to  a  different  race, 
and  so  reproducing  the  imported  style  with  only 
partial  accuracy.  They  begin  (the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  and  1  John  excepted)  with  the  names  of 
the  writer,  and  of  those  to  whom  the  Epistle  is 
addressed.  Then  follows  the  formula  of  salutation 
(analogous  to  the  eS  irpaTTziv  of  Greek,  the  S., 
S.  D.,  or  S.  D.  M.,  salutem,  salutem  dicit,salutcm 
dicit  multam,  of  Latin  correspondence) — generally 
in  St.  ]  aul's  Epistles  in  some  combination  of  the 
words  X<*PIS>  eteos,  elp-f)yrj ;  in  others,  as  in  Acts 
xv.  23,  Jam.  i.  1,  with  the  closer  equivalent  of 
XaipeLV.  Then  the  letter  itself  commences,  in  the 
first  person,  the  singular  and  plural  being  used,  as 
in  the  letters  of  Cicero,  indiscriminately  (comp. 
1  Cor.  ii.  ;  2  Cor.  i.  8,  15  ;  1  Thess.  iii.  1,  2  ;  and 
passim).  Then  when  the  substance  of  the  letter  has 
been  completed,  questions  answered,  truths  enforced, 
come  the  individual  messages,  characteristic,  in  St. 
Paul's  Epistles  especially,  of  one  who  never  allowed 
his  personal  affections  to  be  swallowed  up  in  the 
greatness  of  his  work.  The  conclusion  in  this  case 
was  probably  modified  by  the  fact  that  the  letters 
were  dictated  to  an  amanuensis.  When  he  had  done 
his  work,  the  Apostle  took  up  the  pen  or  reed,  and 
added,  in  his  own  large  characters  (Gal.  vi.  11),  the 
authenticating  autograph,  sometimes  with  special 
stress  on  the  fact  that  this  was  his  writing  (1  Cor. 
xvi.  21;  Gal.  vi.  11;  Col.  iv.  18;  2  fhess.  iii. 
17),  always  with  one  of  the  closing  formulae  of 
salutation,  "  Grace  be  with  thee  " — "  the  Grace  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  be  with  your  spirit."  In 
one  instance,  Rom.  xvi.  22,  the  amanuensis  in  his 
own  name  adds  his  salutation.  In  the  eppaxro 
of  Acts  xxiii.  30,  the  cppaxrde  of  Acts  xv.  29  we 
have  the  equivalents  to  the  vale,  valete,  which 
formed  the  customary  conclusion  of  Romau  letters. 
It  need  hardly  be  said  that  the  fact  that  St.  Paul's 
Epistles  were  dictated  in  this  way  accounts  for 
many  of  their  most  striking  peculiarities,  the  frequent 
digressions,  the  long  parentheses,  the  vehemence  and 
energy  as  of  a  man  who  is  speaking  strongly  as  his 
feelings  prompt  him  rather  than  writing  calmly. 
An  allusion  in  2  Cor.  iii.  1  brings  before  us  another 
class  of  letters  which  must  have  been  in  frequent 
use  in  the  early  ages  of  the  Christian  Church,  the 
iiriffroXcd  <rv<TTa.TiK.a\,  by  which  travellers  or 
teachers  were  commended  by  one  church  to  the 
good  offices  of  others.  Other  persons  (there  miy  be 
a  reference  to  Apollos,  Acts  xviii.  27)  had  come  to 
the  Church  of  Corinth  relying  on  these.  St.  Paul 
appeals  to  his  converts,  as  the  emo-ToA??  Xpiffrov 
(2  Cor.  iii.  3),  written  "  not  with  ink  but  with  the 
spirit  of  the  living  God."  Eor  other  particulars  as 
to  the  material  and  implements  used  for  Epistles, 
see  Writing.  i  !•;.  h.  P.l 

ER  (ly,  watchful;  "Up;  Her).  1.  First-born 
of  Judah.  His  mother  was  Bath-Shuah  (daughter 
of  Shuah),  a  Canaanite.  His  wife  was  Tamar,  the 
mother,  after  his  death,  of  Pharez  an  1  Zarah,  by 
Judah.     Er  "  was  wicked  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord: 


ESAR-HADDON 

and  the  Lord  slew  him."  It  does  not  appear  what 
the  nature  of  his  sin  was ;  but,  from  his  Canaan- 
itish  birth  on  the  mother's  side,  it  was  probably 
connected  with  the  abominable  idolatries  of  Canaan 
(Gen.  xxxviii.  3-7;  Num.  xxvi.  19). 

2.  Descendant  of  Shelah  the  son  of  Judah  (1  Chr. 
iv.  21). 

3.  With  a  final  yod,  Eri,  perhaps  designating  a 
family,  son  of  Gad  (Gen.  xlvi.  16). 

4.  Son  of  Jose,  and  father  of  Elmodam,  in  our 
Lord's  genealogy  (Luke  iii.  28),  about  contemporary 
with  Qzziah  king  of  Judah.  [A.  C.  H.] 

E'RAN  (J"iy  ;  but  Sam.  and  Syr.  pj?  Edan  ; 

'ESeV ;  Herein),  son  of  Shuthelah,  eldest  son  of 
Ephraim  (Num.  xxvi.  36).  The  name  does  not 
occur  in  the  genealogies  of  Ephraim  in  1  Chr.  vii. 
20-29,  though  a  name,  Ezer  (ITJ?),  is  found  which 
may  possibly  be  a  corruption  of  it.  Eran  was  the 
head  of  the  family  of 

ERAN'ITES,  THE  (^H  ;  Sam.  ^*tyn  ;  5 
'E5e^t ;  Hcranitae),  Num.  xxvi.  36. 

E'RECH  (IpK  ;  'Ope'x  ;  Arach),  one  of  the 
cities  of  Nimrod's  kingdom  in  the  land  of  Shinai 
(Gen.  x.  10).  Until  recently,  the  received  opinion, 
following  the  authority  of  St.  Ephrem,  Jerome, 
and  the  Targumists,  identified  it  with  Edessa  or 
CaUirhoe  (  Urfali),  a  town  in  the  noith-west  of 
Mesopotamia.  This  opinion  is  supported  by  Von 
Bohlen  (fntrod.  to  Gen.  p.  233),  who  connects 
the  name  Callirhoe  with  the  Biblical  Erech  through 
the  Syrian  form  Eurhok,  suggesting  the  Greek 
word  iiippoos.  Tins  identification  is,  however, 
untenable  :  Edessa  was  probably  built  by  Seleucus, 
and  could  not,  therefore,  have  been  in  existence  in 
Ezra's  time  (Ezr.  iv.  9),  and  the  extent  thus  given 
to  the  land  of  Shinar  presents  a  great  objection. 
Erech  must  be  sought  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
Babylon:  Gesenius  (Thesaur.  p.  151)  identifies  it 
with  Aracca  on  the  Tigris  in  Susiana;  but  it  is 
doubtless  the  same  as  Orchoe,  82  miles  S.,  and 
43  E.  of  Babylon,  the  modern  designations  of  the 
site,  Warka,  Irka,  and  Irak,  bearing  a  considerable 
affinity  to  the  original  name.  This  place  appears  to 
have  been  the  necropolis  of  the  Assyrian  kings,  the 
whole  neighbourhood  being  covered  with  mounds, 
and  strewed  with  the  remains  of  bricks  and  coffins. 
Some  of  the  bricks  bear  a  monogram  of  "  the 
moon,"  and  Col.  Kawlinson  surmises  that  the  name 
Erech  may  be  nothing  more  than  a  form  of  /"IT 
(Bonomi,  Nineveh,  p.  45,  508).  The  inhabitants 
of  this  place  were  among  those  who  were  trans- 
planted to  Samaria  by  Asnapper  (Ezr.  iv. 
9).  [W.  L.  B.] 

ESA'IAS  (Rec.  T.  'Hcraias;  Lachm.  with  B 
'Ho-cuas  ;  Isaias ;  Cod.  Amiat.  Esaias),  Matt.  iii. 
3,  iv.  14,  viii.  17,  xii.  17,  xiii.  14,  xv.  7;  Mark 
vii.  6 ;  Luke  iii.  4,  iv.  17  ;  John  i.  23,  xii.  38,  39, 
41 ;  Acts  viii.  28,  30  ;  xxviii.  25  ;  Rom.  ix.  27,  29  ; 
x.  16,  20;  xv.  12.     [Isaiah.] 

E'SAR-HA'DDON  (pn"1DX  ;  'A<rop8dv  ; 
2a%€p5<Ws,  LXX.  ;  'AtrapiSauos,  1'tol.  ;  Asshur- 
akh-iddina,  Assyr.  ;  Asar-haddon),  one  of  the 
greatest  of  the  kings  of  Assyria.  He  was  the  son 
of  Sennacherib  (2  K.  xix.  37)  and  the  grandson  of 
Sargon  who  succeeded  Shalmaneser.  It  has  been 
genera] lv  thought  that  he  was  Sennacherib's  eldest 
son ;  and  this  seems  to  have  been  the  view  of 
Polyhistor,    who    made   Sennacherib    place    a    son, 


ESAR-HADDON 

Asordanes,  on  the  throne  of  Babylon  during  his 
own  lifetime  (ap.  Euseb.  Chron.  Can.  i.  5).  The 
contrary,  however,  appears  by  the  inscriptions, 
which  show  the  Babylonian  viceroy— called  Asor- 
danes by  Polyhistor,  but  Aparanadius  (Assarana- 
dius?)  by  Ptolemy — to  have  been  a  distinct  person 
from  Esar-haddon.  Thus  nothing  is  really  known 
of  Esar-haddon  until  his  succession  (ab.  B.C.  680), 
which  seems  to  have  followed  quietly  and  without 
difficulty  on  the  murder  of  his  father  and  the  Might 
of  his  guilty  brothers  (2  K.  xix.  37  ;  Is.  \xxvii. 
38).  It  ma)',  perhaps,  be  concluded  from  this  that 
he  was  at  the  death  of  his  father  the  eldest  son, 
Assaranadius,  the  Babylonian  viceroy,  having  died 
previously. 

Esar-haddon  appears  by  his  monuments  to  have 
been  one  of  the  most  powerful — if  not  the  most 
powerful — of  all  the  Assyrian  monarchs.  He  car- 
ried his  arms  over  all  Asia  between  the  Persian 
Gulf,  the  Armenian  mountains,  and  the  Mediter- 
ranean. Towards  the  east  he  engaged  in  wars 
with  Median  tribes  "  of  which  his  fathers  had  never 
heard  the  name  ;"  towards  the  west  he  extended 
nis  influence  over  Cilicia  and  Cyprus  ;  towards  the 
south  he  claims  authority  over  Egypt  and  over 
Ethiopia.  In  consequence  of  the  disaffection  of 
Babylon,  and  its  frequent  revolts  from  former 
Assyrian  kings,  Esar-haddon,  having  subdued  the 
sons  of  Merodach-Baladan  who  headed  the  national 
party,  introduced  the  new  policy  of  substituting 
tor  the  former  government  by  viceroys,  a  direct 
dependance  upon  the  Assyrian  crown.  He  did  not 
reduce  Babylonia  to  a  province,  or  attempt  its 
actual  absorption  into  the  empire,  but  united  it  to 
his  kingdom  in  the  way  that  Hungary  was,  until 
1848,  united  to  Austria,  by  holding  both  crowns 
himself  and  residing  now  at  one  and  now  at  the 
other  capital.  He  is  the  only  Assyrian  monarch 
whom  we  rind  to  have  actually  reigned  at  Babylon, 
where  he  built  himself  a  palace,  bricks  from  which 
have  been  recently  recovered  bearing  his  name. 
His  Babylonian  reign  lasted  thirteen  years,  from 
B.C.  680  to  B.C.  667  ;  and  it  was  undoubtedly 
within  this  space  of  time  that  Manasseh,  king  of 
Judah,  having  been  seized  by  his  captains  at  Jeru- 
salem on  a  charge  id'  rebellion,  was  brought  before 
him  at  Babylon  (2  Chr.  xxxiii.  11)  and  detained 
for  a  time  as  prisoner  there.  Eventually  Esar- 
haddon,' persuaded  ct' his  innocence,  or  excusing  his 
guilt,  restored  him  to  his  throne,  thus  giving  a 
.  proof  of  clemency  not  very  usual  in  an  Oriental 
monarch.  It  seems  to  have  been  in  a  similar  spirit 
that  Esarhaddon,  according  to  the  inscriptions,  gave 
a  territory  upon  the  Persian  Gulf  to  a  son  of  Me- 
rodach-Baladan, who  submitted  to  his  authority  and 
became  a  refugee  aj  hi-  court. 

As  a  builder  of  great  works  Esar-haddon  is  par- 
ticularly distinguished.  Besides  his  palace  at 
Babylon,   which    has    been     already   mentioned,    he 

built  at  least  tin. there  in  different  parts  of  his 

dominions,  either  for  himself  or  his  sun  :  while  in 
a  single  inscription  he  mentions  the  erection  by  his 
hands  of  no  fewer  than  thirty  temples  in  Assyria 
and  Mesopotamia.  His  work-  appear  to  have 
possessed  a  peculiar  magnificence.  He  describes 
his  temples  as  "shining  with  silver  and  u'old," 
and  boasts  of  his  Nineveh  palace  that  it  was  "a 
building  such  as  tin'  kin-.'s  Ins  fathers  who  w  •■nt 
before  him  had  never  made."  The  south-west 
palace  at  Nimrud  is  the  lust  preserved  of  his 
constructions.  This  building,  which  was  excavated 
by  Mr.  Layard,  is  remarkable  from  the  peculiarity 


ESAU 


573 


of  its  plan  as  well  as  from  the  scale  on  which  it 
is  constructed.  It  corresponds  in  its  general  design 
almost  exactly  with  the  palace  of  Solomon  (1  K. 
vii.  1-12),  but  is  of  larger  dimensions,  the  great 
hall  being  220  feet  long  by  100  broad  (Layard's 
Nin.  4'  -Bab.  p.  034),  and  the  porch  or  ante- 
chamber 160  feet  by  GO.  ft  had  the  usual  adorn- 
ment of  winged  bulls,  colossal  sphinxes, -and  sculp- 
tured slabs,  but  has  furnished  less  to  our  collections 
than  many  inferior  buildings,  from  the  circumstance 
that  it  had  been  originally  destroyed  by  fire,  by 
which  the  stones  and  alabaster  were  split  and  cal- 
cined. This  is  the  more  to  be  regretted  as  there  is 
reason  to  believe  that  Phoenician  and  Greek  aitists 
took  part  in  the  ornamentation. 

It  is  impossible  to  fix  the  length  of  Esar-haddon' s 
reign  or  the  order  of  the  events  which  occurred 
in  it.  Little  is  known  to  us  of  his  history  but 
from  his  own  records,  and  they  have  not  come 
down  to  us  in  the  shape  of  annals,  but  only  in  the 
form  of  a  general  summary.  That  he  reigned 
thirteen  years  at  Babylon  is  certain  from  the 
Canon  of  Ptolemy,  and  he  cannot  have  reigned 
a  shorter  time  in  Assyria.  He  may,  however, 
have  reigned  longer ;  for  it  is  not  improbable  that 
alter  a  while  he  felt  sufficiently  secure' of  the 
affections  of  the  Babylonians  to  re-establish  the  old 
system  of  vice-regal  government  in  their  country. 
Saosduchinus  may  have  been  set  up  as  ruler  of 
Babylon  by  his  authority  in  B.C.  667,  and  he  may 
have  withdrawn  to  Nineveh  and  continued  to  reign 
there  for  some  time  longer.  His  many  expeditions 
and  his  great  works  seem  to  indicate,  if  not  even 
to  require,  a  reign  of  some  considerable  duration. 
It  has  been  conjectured  that  he  died  about  B.C. 
600,  after  occupying  the  throne  for  twenty  years. 
He  appears  to  have  been  succeeded  by  his  son 
Asshur-bani-pal,  or  Sardanapalus  11.,  the  prince 
for  whom  he  had  built  a  palace  in  his  own  life- 
time. [G.  R.] 

ESAU,  the  oldest  son  of  Isaac,  and  twin-brother 
of  Jacob.  The  singular  appearance  of  the  child  at 
his  birth  originated  the  name:  "  And  the  first  came 
out  red  ("OIDIX),  all  over  like  an  hairy  garment, 
and  they  called  his  name  Esau  "  (It^J/,  i.  e.  "  hairy," 
''rough."  Gen.  xxv.  25).  This  was  not  the  only 
remarkable  circumstance  connected  with  the  birth 
of  the  infant.  Even  in  the  womb  the  twin-brothers 
struggled  together  (xxv.  22).  Esau  was  the  first- 
born; but  as  he  was  issuing  into  life  Jacob's  hand 
grasped  his  heel.  The  bitter  enmity  of  two  brothers, 
and  the  increasing  strife  of  two  great  nations,  were 
thus  foreshadowed  (xxv.  23,  26).  Esau's  robust 
fiame  and  "rough"  aspect  were  the.  types  of  a  wild 
and  daring  nature.  The  peculiarities  of  his  character 
soon  began  to  develope  themselves.  Scorning  the 
peaceful  and  commonplace  occupations  of  the  shep- 
herd, he  revelled  in  tin1  excitement  of'  the  chase, 
and  in  the  martial  exercises  of  the  ( 'anaauitos  (xxv. 
27).  He  was,  in  fact,  a  thorough  Beda  oy,  a  "  on 
of  the  desert"  (so  we  may  translate  n"lC*  l'"X), 
who  delighted  to  roam  free  as  the  wind  of  heaven, 
and  who  was  impatient  of  the  restraints  of  civilized 
or  -ettled  life.  His  old  father,  bya  caprii f affec- 
tion not  uncommon,  loved  bis  wilful,  vagrant  boy: 
and  his  keen  relish  for  savoury  food  being  gratified 
ie,  Esau's  venison,  he  liked  him  all  the  better  for 
;  js ),  An  event  occurred 
which  exhibited  the  feckless  character  of  Esau  on 
the  one  hand,  and  the  selfish,  grasping  nature  of  tkUj 


574 


ESAU 


brother  on  the  other.  The  former  returned  from 
the  Held,  exhausted  by  the  exercise  of  the  chase, 
and  faint  with  hunger.  Seeing  some  pottage  of 
lentiles  which  Jacob  had  prepared,  he  asked  for  it. 
Jacob  only  consented  to  give  the  food  on  Esau's 
swearing  to  him  that  he  would  ill  return  give  up 
his  birthright.  There  is  something  revolting  in  this 
whole  transaction.  Jacob  takes  advantage  of  his 
brother's  distress  to  rob  him  of  that  which  was  dear 
as  life  itself  to  an  Eastern  patriarch.  The  birthright 
not  only  gave  him  the  headship  of  the  tribe,  both 
spiritual  and  temporal,  and  the  possession  of  the 
great  bulk  of  the  family  property,  but  it  carried 
with  it  the  covenant  blessing  (xxvii.  28,  29,  36; 
Heb.  xii.  16,  17).  Then  again  whilst  Esau,  under 
the  pressure  of  temporary  suffering,  despises  his 
birthright  by  selling  it  for  a  mess  of  pottage  (Gen. 
xxv.  34),  he  afterwards  attempts  to  secure  that 
which  he  had  deliberately  sold  (xxvii.  4,  34,  38  ; 
Heb.  xii.  17). 

It  is  evident  the  whole  transaction  was  public, 
for  it  resulted  in  a  new  name  being  given  to  Esau. 
He  said  to  Jacob,  "  Feed  me  with  that  same  red 
(D1XH);  therefore  was  his  name  called  Edom" 
(DHN,  Gen.  xxv.  30).  It  is  worthy  of  note, 
however,  that  this  name  is  seldom  applied  to  Esau 
himself,  though  almost  universally  given  to  the 
country  he  settled  in,  and  to  his  posterity.  [Edom  ; 
Edomites.]  The  name  "  Children  of  Esau"  is  in 
a  few  cases  applied  to  the  Edomites  (Deut.  ii.  4 ; 
Jer.  xlix.  8;  Obad.  18)  ;  but  it  is  rather  a  poetical 
expression. 

Esau  married  at  the  age  of  40,  and  contrary  to 
the  wish  of  his  parents.  His  wives  were  both  Ca- 
uaanites  ;  and  they  "  were  bitterness  of  spirit  unto 
Isaac  and  to  Rebekah"  (Gen.  xxvi.  34,  35). 

The  next  episode  in  the  history  of  Esau  and  Jacob 
is  still  more  painful  than  the  foimer,  as  it  brings 
fully  out  those  bitter  family  rivalries  and  divisions, 
which  were  all  but  universal  in  ancient  times,  and 
which  are  still  a  disgrace  to  Eastern  society.  Jacob, 
through  the  craft  of  his  mother,  is  again  successful, 
and  secures  irrevocably  the  covenant  blessing.  Esau 
vows  vengeance.  But  fearing  his  aged  father's  pa- 
triarchal authority,  he  secretly  congratulates  him- 
self: "  The  days  of  mourning-for  my  father  are  at 
hand,  then  will  I  slay  my  brother  Jacob"  (Gen. 
xxvii.).  Thus  he  imagined  that  by  one  bloody  deed 
he  would  regain  all  that  had  been  taken  from  him 
by  artifice.  But  he  knew  not  a  mother's  watchful 
care.  Not  a  sinister  glance  of  his  eyes,  not  a  hnsty 
expression  of  his  tongue,  escaped  Rebekah.  She  felt 
that  the  life  other  darling  son,  whose  gentle  nature 
and  domestic  habits  had  won  her  heart's  affections, 
was  now  in  imminent  peril;  and  she  advised  him 
to  flee  for  a  time  to  her  relations  in  Mesopotamia. 
The  sins  of  both  mother  and  child  were  visited  upon 
them  by  a  long  and  painful  separation,  and  all  the 
attendant  anxieties  ami  dangers.  By  a  characteristic 
piece  of  domestic  policy  Rebekah  succeeded  both  in 
exciting  Isaac's  anger  against  Esau,  and  obtaining 
his  consent  to  Jacob's  departure — "  and  Rebekah 
said  to  Isaac,  I  am  weary  of  my  life  because  of  the 
daughters  of  Heth ;  if  Jacob  take  a  wife  such  as 
these,  what  good  shall  my  life  do  me?"  Her  object 
was  attained  at  once.  The  blessing  was  renewed 
to  Jacob,  and  he  received  his  father's  commands  to 
go  to  1'adan-aram  (Gen.  xxvii.  4tJ,  xxviii.  1-5). 

When  Esau  heard  that  his  father  had  commanded 
Jacob  to  take  a  wife  of  the  daughters  of  his  kins- 
mau  I.aban,  he  also  resolved  to  try  whether  by  a 


ESDRAELON 

new  alliance  he  could  propitiate  his  parents.  He 
accordingly  married  his  cousin  Mahalath,  the  daugh- 
ter of  Ishmael  (xxviii.  8,  9).  This  marriage  appears 
to  have  brought  him  into  connexion  with  the  Ish- 
maelitish  tribes  beyond  the  valley  of  Arabah.  He 
soon  afterwards  established  himself  in  Mount  Seir  : 
still  retaining,  however,  some  interest  in  his  father's 
property  in  Southern  Palestine.  It  is  probable 
that  his  own  habits,  and  the  idolatrous  practices  of 
his  wives  and  rising  family,  continued  to  excite 
aud  even  increase  the  anger  of  his  parents  ;  and 
that  he,  consequently,  considered  it  more  prudent 
to  remove  his  household  to  a  distance.  He  was  re- 
siding in  Mount  Seir  when  Jacob  returned  from 
Padan-aram,  and  had  then  become  so  rich  and  pow- 
erful that  the  impressions  of  his  brother's  early 
offences  seem  to  have  been  almost  completely  effaced. 
His  reception  of  Jacob  was  cordial  and  honest ; 
though  doubts  and  fears  still  lurked  in  the  mind 
of  the  latter,  and  betrayed  him  into  something  of 
his  old  duplicity  ;  for  while  he  promises  to  go  to 
Seir,  he  carefully  declines  his  brother's  escort,  and 
immediately  after  his  departure,  turns  westward 
across  the  Jordan  (Gen.  xxxii.  7,  8,  11  ;  xxxiii.  4. 
12,  17). 

It  does  not  appear  that  the  brothers  again  met 
until  the  death  of  their  father,  about  20  years  after- 
wards. Mutual  interests  and  mutual  fear  seem  to 
have  constrained  them  to  act  honestly,  and  even 
generously  towards  each  other  at  this  solemn  inter- 
view. They  united  in  laying  Isaac's  body  in  the 
cave  of  Machpelah.  Then  "  Esau  took  all  his 
cattle,  and  all  his  substance,  which  he  had  got  in 
the  land  of  Canaan" — such,  doubtless,  as  his  father 
with  Jacob's  consent  had  assigned  to  him- — ''  and 
went  into  the  country  from  the  face  of  his  brother 
Jacob"  (xxxv.  29  ;  xxxvi.  6).  He  now  saw  clearly 
that  the  covenant  blessing  was  Jacob's ;  that  God 
had  inalienably  allotted  the  land  of  Canaan  to 
Jacob's  posterity  ;  and  that  it  would  be  folly  to 
strive  against  the  Divine  will.  He  knew  also  that 
as  Canaan  was  given  to  Jacob,  Mount  Seir  was 
given  to  himself  (comp.  xxvii.  39,  xxxii.  3 ;  and 
Deut.  ii.  5)  ;  and  he  was,  therefore,  desirous  with 
his  increased  wealth  and  power  to  enter  into  full 
possession  of  his  country,  and  drive  out  its  old  inha- 
bitants (Deut.  ii.  12).  Another  circumstance  may 
have  influenced  him  in  leaving  Canaan.  He  "  lived 
by  his  sword"  (Gen.  xxvii.  40);  and  he  felt  that 
the  rocky  fastnesses  of  Kdom  would  be  a  safer  and 
more  suitable  abode  for  such  as  by  their  habits  pro- 
voked .the  hostilities  of  neighbouring  tribes,  than 
the  open  plains  of  Southern  Palestine. 

There  is  a  difficulty  connected  with  the  names 
of  Esau's  wives,  which  is  discussed  under  Aholi- 
BAMAH  and  Bashematu.  Of  his  subsequent,  his- 
tory nothing  is  known  ;  for  that  of  his  descendants 
seeEDOM  aud  Edomites.  [J.  L.  P.] 

E'SAU  {'H<rai;  Sel),  1  Esd.  v.  29.    [Ziba.] 

ESA'Y  {"Hffaias;  Isaia,  Isaias),  Ecclns.  xlviii. 
20,  22  ;   2  Esd.  ii.  18.     [Isaiaii.] 

ESDEAE'LON.  This  name  is  merely  the 
Greek  form  of  the  Hebrew  word  Jezreel.  It 
occurs  in  this  exact  shape  only  twice  in  the  A.  V. — 
(Jud.  iii.  9,  iv.  ti).  In  Jud.  iii.  ■'!  it  is  ESDRAELOM, 
and  in  i.  8  Esdrelom,  with  the  addition  of  "the 
great  plain."  In  the  O.  T.  the  plain  is  called  the 
Valley  of  Jezreel;  by  Josephus  the  great 
plain,  to  ireSiov  fxiya.  The  name  is  derived  from 
the  old  royal  city  of  Jezreel,  which  occupied  a 


ESDRAELON 

commanding  site,  near  the  eastern  extremity  of  the 
plain,  on  a  spur  of  Mount  Gilboa. 

"The  Great  plain  of  Esdraelon"  extends  across 
Central  Palestine  from  the  Mediterranean  to  the 
Jordan,  separating  the  mountain  ranges  of  Carmel 
and  Samaria  from  those  of  Galilee.  The  western 
section  of  it  is  properly  the  plain  of  Accho,  or  'Akka. 
The  main  body  of  the  plain  is  a  triangle.  Its  base 
on  the  east  extends  from  Jcn'm  (the  ancient  Eugan- 
nim)  to  the  foot  of  the  hills  below  Nazareth,  and  is 
about  15  miles  long;  the  north  side,  formed  by  the 
hills  of  Galilee,  is  about  12  miles  long ;  and  the 
south  side,  formed  by  the  Samaria  range,  is  about 
IS  miles.  The  apex  on  the  west  is  a  narrow  pass 
opening  into  the  plain  of  'Akka.  This  vast  expanse 
has  a  gently  undulating  surface — in  spring  all 
green  with  com  where  cultivated,  and  rank  weeds 
and  grass  where  neglected — dotted  with  several  low 
gray  tells,  and  near  the  sides  with  a  few  olive  gri  >ves. 
This  is  that  Valley  of  Megiddo  (H20  nyj?3,  so 
called  from  the  city  of  Megiddo,  which  stood  on 
its  southern  bolder),  where  Barak  triumphed,  and 
where  king  Josiah  was  defeated  and  received  his 
death  wound  (Judg.  v.;  2  Chr.  xxxv.).  Probably, 
too,  it  was  before  the  mind  of  the  Apostle  John 
when  he  figuratively  described  the  final  conflict 
between  the  hosts  of  good  and  evil  who  were  ga- 
thered to  a  place  called  Ar-mageddon  ('Ap/^ayeS- 
Swv,  from  the  Heb.  HJO  "iy,  that  is,  the  city  of 
Megiddo;  Rev.  xvi.  16).  The  river  Kishon — 
"  that  ancient  river"  so  fatal  to  the  army  of  Sisera 
(Judg.  v. 21) — drains  the  plain, and  flows  off through 
the  pass  westward  to  the  Mediterranean. 

Prom  the  base  of  this  triangular  plain  three 
branches  stretch  out  eastward,  like  lingers  from  a 
hand,  divided  by  two  bleak,  grey  ridges — one  bear- 
ing the  familiar  name  of  Mount  Gilboa;  the  other 
called  by  Franks  Little  Hermon,  but  by  natives 
ed-Duhy.  The  northern  branch  has  Tabor 
on  the  one  side,  and  Little  Hermon  on  the  other ; 
into  it  the  troops  ot  Barak  defiled  from  the  heights 
of  Tabor  (Judg.  iv.  6)  ;  and  on  its  opposite  side  are 
the  sites  of  Nain  and  Endor.  The  southern  branch 
lies  between  Jenin  and  Gilboa,  terminating  in  a 
point  among  the  hills  to  the  eastward ;  it  Was  across 
it  Ahaziab  tied  from  Jehu  (2  K.  ix.  27).  The 
central  branch  is  the  richest  as  well  as  t lie  most 
celebrated  ;  it  descends  in  green,  fertile  slopes  to  the 
banks  of  the  Jordan,  having  Jezreel  and  Shuneiu 
on  opposite  sides  at  the  western  end,  and  Beth- 
shean  in  its  midst  towards  the  east.  This  is  the 
"Valley  of  Jezreel"  proper  -the  battle-field  on 
which  Gideon  triumphed,  and  Saul  and  Jonathan 
were  overthrown  (Judg.  vii.  I,  sq. ;  1  Sam.  wi\. 
and  xxxi.). 

Two  things  are  worthy  of  special  notice  in  the 
plain  of  Esdraelon.  1.  its  wonderful  richness. 
Its  unbroken  expanse  of  verdure  contrasts  strangely 
with   the  grey,  bleak  crowns  of  Gilboa,  and  the 

I  ranges  on  the  north  and  south.  The  . 
thistles,  the  luxuriant  grass,  and  the  exuberance  of 
the  crops  on  the  few  cultivated  -pots,  show  the  fer- 
tility of  the  soil,  It  was  the  frontier  of  Zebulun — 
■•  Rejoice,  Zebulun,  in  thy  going  out"  <  Deut.  xwiii. 
18  .  I  > 1 1 1  it  was  the  special  portion  of  Issachar — 
"  And  be  saw  thai  resl  was  good,  and  the  land  that 
it  was  pleasant;  and  bowed  his  shoulder  to  bear, 
and  became  a  servant  unto  tribute"  (Gen.  slix, 
15).  2.  its  desolation.  If  we  except  the  eastern 
branches,  there  is  not  a  single  inhabited  village 
on  its   whole   surface,   and    not    mora  than    one- 


ESDRAS,  FIRST  BOOK  OF      575 

sixth  of  its  soil  is  cultivated.  It  is  the  home  of 
the  wild,  wandering  Bedawin,  who  scour  its  smooth 
turf  on  their  fleet  horses  in  search  of  plunder  ;  and 
when  hard  pressed  can  speedily  remove  their  tents 
and  Hocks  beyond  the  .Ionian,  and  beyond  the  reach 
of  a  weak  government.  It  has  always  been  inse- 
cure since  history  began.  The  old  Canaanite  tribes 
drove  victoriously  through  it  in  their  iron  chariots 
(Judg.  iv.  3,  7)  ;  the  nomad  Midianites  and  Ama- 
lekites — those  "  children  of  the  east,"  who  were 
"  as  grasshoppers  for  multitude,"  whose  "  camels 
wire  without  number" — devoured  its  rich  pastures 
(Judg.  vi.  1-6,  vii.  1) ;  the  Philistines  long  held  it, 
establishing  a  stronghold  at  Bethshean  (1  Sam. 
xxix.  1,  xxxi.  10)  ;  and  the  Syrians  frequently 
swept  over  it  with  their  armies  (1  K.  xx.  26  ;  2  K. 
xiii.  17).  In  its  condition,  thus  exposed  to  every 
hasty  incursion,  and  to  every  shock  of  war,  we  read 
the  fortunes  of  that  tribe  which  for  the  sake  of  its 
richness  consented  to  sink  into  a  half-nomadic  state 
— "  Rejoice,  0  Issachar,  in  thy  tents  .  .  .  Issachar 
is  a  strong  ass,  couching  down  between  two  bur- 
dens ;  and  he  saw  that  rest  was  good,  and  the  land 
that  it  was  pleasant,  and  bowed  his  shoulder  to 
bear,  and  became  a  servant  unto  tribute"  (Gen. 
xlix.  14,  15  ;  Deut.  xxxiii.  18).  Once  only  did  this 
tribe  shake  off  the  yoke  ;  when  under  the  heavy 
pressure  of  Sisera,  "  the  chiefs  of  Issachar  were 
with  Deborah  "  (Judg.  v.  15).  Their  exposed  posi- 
tion and  valuable  possessions  in  this  open  plain 
made  them  anxious  for  the  succession  of  David  to 
the  throne,  as  one  under  whose  powerful  protection 
they  would  enjoy  that  peace  and  rest  they  loved  ; 
and  they  joined  with  their  neighbours  of  Zebulun 
and  Xaphtali  in  sending  to  David  presents  of  the 
richest  productions  of  their  rich  country  (1  Chr. 
xii.  32,  40). 

The  whole  borders  of  the  plain  of  Esdraelon  are 
dotted  with  places  of  high  historic  and  sacred  in- 
terest. Here  we  group  them  together,  while  re- 
ferring the  reader  for  details  to  the  separate  articles. 
On  the  east  we  have  Endor,  Nain,  and  Shuneiu, 
ranged  round  the  base  of  the  "hill  of  Moreh ;" 
then  Bethshean  in  the  centre  of  the  "  Valley  of 
Jezreel  ;"  then  Gilboa,  with  the  "  well  of  Harod," 
and  the  ruins  of  Jezreel  at  its  western  base.  On 
the  south  are  Engannim,  Taanach,  and  Megiddo. 
At  the  western  apex,  on '  the  overhanging  brow  of 
'  irmel,  is  the  scene  of  Elijah's  sacrifice  ;  and  close 
by  the  foot  of  the  mountain  below,  runs  the  Kishon, 
on  whose  banks  the  false  prophets  of  Baal  were 
slain.  On  the  north,  among  places  of  less  note, 
are  Nazareth  and  Tabor.  The  modern  Syrians 
have  forgotten  the  ancient  name  as  they  have  for- 
gotten the  ancient  history  of  Esdraelon  ;  and  it  is 
now  known  among  them  only  as  Merj  ibn  'Amer, 
"the  Plain  of  the  Son  of  'Amer."  A  graphic 
sketch  of  Esdraelon  is  given  in  Stanley's  S.  $  J'. 
:;:!.">,  si|.  See  also  the  Ifumlli,,,,!;  for  Syria  and 
Pali  time,  pp.  351,  scj, ;  Robinson,  ii.  315-30,  366, 
iii.  L13,  sq.  [J.  L.  P.] 

ES'DRAS  ("EaSpas;  Esdras),  I  Esd.  viii.  1, 

3,  7,  8,  9,  19,  2::,  2:.,  91,  92,  96;  ix.  1,  7,  16, 
39,  to,  42,  4:.,  46,  49  ;  2  Esd.  i.  1  ;  ii.  1".  33, 
t2;  m.  1<>:  vii.  2,  2;.;  viii.  2.  19;  siv.  l.  38. 
[Ezra.] 

ES'DRAS,  FIRST  BOOK  OP,  the  fust  in 

mder  of  the  \  poo  vphal  books  in  the  English  Bible, 
which  follows   Luther  and   the  German  Bibles  in 

separating  the  Apocrj  phaJ  from  the  <  !anonical  I ks, 

instead  of  binding  them  up  together  according  to 


576     ESDRAS,  FIRST  BOOK  OF 

historical  order  (Walton's  Prolegom.  dc  vers. 
Graec.  §9).  The  classification  of  the  4  books 
which  have  been  named  after  Ezra  is  particularly 
complicated.  In  the  Vatican  and  other  quasi-mo- 
dern editions  of  the  LXX.,  our  1st  Esdr.  is  called 
the  first  book  of  Esdras,  in  relation  to  the  Canonical 
book  of  Ezra  which  follows  it,  and  is  called  the 
second  Esdras.  But  in  the  Vulgate,  1st  Esdr. 
means  the  canonical  Book  of  Ezra,  and  2nd  Esdr. 
means  Nehemiah,  according  to  the  primitive  He- 
brew arrangement,  mentioned  by  Jerome,  in  which 
Ezra  and  Nehemiah  made  up  two  parts  of  the  one 
book  of. Ezra;  and  3rd  and  4th  Esdr.  are  what  we 
now  call  1  and  2  Esdras.  These  last,  with  the 
prayer  of  Manasses,  are  the  only  apocryphal  books 
admitted  co  nomine  into  the  Romish  Bibles,  the 
other  apocrypha  being  declared  canonical  by  the 
Council  of  Trent.  The  reason  of  the  exclusion  of 
3rd  Esdras  from  the  Canon  seems  to  be  that  the 
Tridentine  fathers  in  1546,  were  not  aware  that  it- 
existed  in  Greek.  For  it  is  not  in  the  Compluten- 
sian  edition  (1515),  nor  in  theBiblia  Regia ;  Vatablus 
(about  1540)  had  never  seeu  a  Greek  copy,  and,  in 
the  preface  to  the  apocryphal  books,  speaks  of  it  as 
only  existing  in  some  MSS  and  printed  Latin 
Bibles.a  Baduel  also,  a  French  Protestant  divine 
{Bibl.  Grit.)  (about  1550),  says  that  he  knew  of 
no  one  who  had  ever  seen  a  Greek  copy.  For  this 
reason  it  seems  it  was  excluded  from  the  Canon, 
though  it  has  certainly  quite  as  good  a  title  to  be 
admitted  as  Tobit,  Judith,  &c.  It  has  indeed  been 
stated  (Bp.  Marsh,  Comp.  View.  ap.  Soames  Hist, 
of  Ref.  ii.  608)  that  the  Council  of  Trent  in  ex- 
cluding the  2  Books  of  Esdras  followed  Augustine's 
Canon.  But  this  is  not  so.  Augustine  {de  Doctr. 
Christ,  lib.  ii.  13)  distinctly  mentions  among  the 
libri  Canonici,  Esdrae  duo  ;b  and  that  one  of  these 
was  our  first  Esdras  is  manifest  from  the  quota- 
tion fiom  it  given  below  from  Be  Civit.  Dei. 
Hence  it  is  also  sure  that  it  was  included  among 
those  pronounced  as  Canonical  by  the  3rd  Council 
of  Carthage  A.D.  397,  or  419,  where  the  same  title 
is  given,  Esdrae  libri  duo  :  where  it  is  to  be  no- 
ticed by  the  way  that  Augustine  and  the  Council 
of  Carthage  use  the  term  Canonical  in  a  much 
broader  sense  than  we  do ;  and  that  the  manifest 
ground  of  considering  them  Canonical  in  any  sense, 
is  their  being  found  in  the  Greek  copies  of  the 
LXX.  in  use  at  that  time.  In  all  the  earlier  edi- 
tions of  the  English  Bible  the  books  of  Esdras  are 
numbered  as  in  the  Vulgate.  In  the  6th  Article 
of  the  Church  of  England  (first  introduced  in  1571) 
the  first  and  second  books  denote  Ezra  and  Nehe- 
miah, and  the  3rd  and  4th,  among  the  Apocrypha, 
are  our  present  1st  and  2nd.  In  the  list  of  re- 
visers or  translators  of  the  Bishops  Bible,  sent  by 
Archbishop  Parker  to  Sir  William  Cecil,  with  the 
portion  revised  by  each,  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  Esther, 
and  the  apocryphal  books  of  Esdras,  seem  to  be  all 
comprised  under  the  one  title  of  Esdras.  Barlow, 
Bp.  of  Chichester,  was  the  translator,  as  also  of  the 
books  of  Judith,  Tobias,  and  Sapientia  (Corresp.  of 
Archbp.  Parker,  Park.  Soc.  p.  335).  The  Geneva 
Bible  first  adopted  the  classification  used  in  our 
present  Bibles,  in  which    Ezra   and    Nehemiah 


a  "  Oratio  Manassae,  neenon  libri  duo  qui  sub  libri 
tertii  et  quarti  Esdrae  nomine  cireumferuntur,  hoc 
in  loco,  extra  scilicet  seriem  cunonicorum  libroruni, 
quos  sancta  Tridentina  synodus  snscepit,  et  pro  ca- 
nouicis  suscipiendos  decrevit,  sepositi  sunt,  ne  prorsus 
interirent,  quippe  qui   a  nonnullis   Sanctis  Patribus 


ESDRAS,  FIRST  BOOK  OF 

give  their  names  to  the  two  Canonical  books,  and 
the  two  Apocryphal  become  1  and  2  Esdras;  where 
the  Greek  form  of  the  name  marks  that  these  books 
do  not  exist  in  Hebrew  or  Chaldee. 

As  regards  the  antiquity  of  this  book  and  the 
rank  assigned  to  it  in  the  early  Church,  it  may 
suffice  to  mention  that  Josephus  quotes  largely  from 
it,  and  follows  its  authority,  even  in  contradiction 
to  the  canonical  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  by  which  he 
has  been  led  into  hopeless  historical  blunders  and 
anachronisms.  It  is  quoted  also  by  Clemens  Alex- 
ander {Strom,  i.) ;  and  the  famous  sentence  "  Ve- 
ritas manet,  et  invalescit  in  aeternum,  et  vivit  el 
obtinet  in  saecula  saeculorum  :"  is  cited  by  Cyprian 
as  from  Esdras,  prefaced  by,  ut  scriptum  est : 
(Epist.  lxxiv.).  Augustine  also  refers  to  the  same 
passage  {De  Civit.  Dei,  xviii.  36),  and  suggests 
that  it  may  be  prophetical  of  Christ  who  is  the 
truth.  He  includes  under  the  name  of  Esdras  our 
1  Esdr.,  and  the  Canonical  books  of  Ezra  and  Ne- 
hemiah. 1  Esdr.  is  also  cited  by  Athanasius  and 
other  fathers  ;  and  perhaps  there  is  no  sentence  that 
has  been  more  widely  divulged  than  that  of  1  Esdr. 
iv.  41,  "  Magna  est  Veritas  et  praevalebit."  But 
though  it  is  most  strange  that  the  Council  of  Trent 
should  not  have  admitted  this  book  into  their  wide 
Canon,  nothing  can  be  clearer  on  the  other  hand 
than  that  it  is  rightly  included  by  us  among  the 
Apocrypha,  not  only  on  the  ground  of  its  historical 
inaccuracy,  and  contradiction  of  the  true  Ezra,  but 
also  on  the  external  evidence  of  the  early  Church. 
That  it  was  never  known  to  exist  in  Hebrew,  and 
formed  no  part  of  the  Hebrew  Canon,  is  admitted 
by  all.  Jerome,  in  his  preface  to  Ezr.  and  Neh., 
speaks  contemptuously  of  the  dreams  (somnia)  of 
the  3rd  and  4th  Esdras,  and  says  they  are  to  be 
utterly  rejected.  In  his  Prologus  Galeatus  he 
clearly  defines  the  number  of  books  in  the  Canon, 
xxii,  corresponding  to  the  xxii  letters  of  the  Hebrew 
alphabet,  and  says  that  all  others  are  Apocryphal. 
This  of  course  excludes  1  Esdras.  Melito,  Origeu, 
Eusebius,  Athanasius,  Gregory  Nazianzen,  Hilary 
of  Poitiers,  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  the  Council  of 
Laodicea,  and  many  other  fathers,  expressly  follow 
the  same  Canon,  counting  as  apocryphal  whatever  is 
not  comprehended  in  it. 

As  regards  the  contents  of  the  book,  and  the 
author  or  authors  of  it — the  first  chapter  is  a 
transcript  of  the  two  last  chapters  of  2  Chr.  for 
the  most  part  verbatim,  and  only  in  one  or  two 
parts  slightly  abridged  and  paraphrased,  and  show- 
ing some  corruptions  of  the  text,  the  use  of  a 
different  Greek  version,  and  some  various  readings, 
as  e.g.  1 .  5  /u.eya\ei6TriTa,  for  diet.  %eipbs,  indi- 
cating a  various  reading  in  the  Hebrew ;  perhaps 
"Q33  for  3R3D,  or,  as  Bretschneider  suggests, 
DnilO;  irpmvov' {~\\>?h),  for  the  Heb.  of  2  Chr. 
xxxv.  12,  1p37,  "  with  the  oxen,"  &c.  Chapters 
iii.,  iv.,  and  v.,  to  the  end  of  v.  6,  are  the  original 
portions  of  the  book,  containing  the  legend  of  the 
three  young  Jews  at  the  court  of  Darius ;  and  the 
rest  is  a  transcript  more  or  less  exact  of  the  book 
of  Ezra,  with  the  chapters  transposed  and  quite 
otherwise  arranged,  and  a  portion  of  Nehemiah. 


interdum  citantur,  et  in  aliquibus  Bibliis  Latinis,  tain 
manuscriptis  quam  impressis,  reperiuntur." 

b  Jerome,  in  his  preface  to  his  Latin  version  of 
Ezra  and  JVchemiah,  says,  "  Uncs  a  nobis  liber  editus 
est,"  etc. ;  though  he  implies  that  they  were  some- 
times called  1  and  2  Esdras. 


ESDRAS,  FIRST  BOOK  OF 

Hence  a  twofold  design  in  the  compiler  is  dis- 
cernible.  One  to  introduce  and  give  Scriptural 
sanction  to  the  legend  about  Zerubbabel,  which 
may  or  may  not  have  an  historical  base,  and  may 
have  existed  as  a  separate  work  ;  the  other  to  ex- 
plain the  great  obscurities  of  the  book  of  Ezra,  and 
to  present  the  narrative,  as  the  author  understood 
it,  in  historical  order,  in  which  however  he  has 
signally  foiled.  For,  not  to  advert  to  innumerable 
other  contradictions,  the  introducing  the  opposition 
of  the  heathen,  as  offered  to  Zerubbabel  after  he 
had  been  sent  to  Jerusalem  in  such  triumph  by 
Darius,  and  the  describing  that  opposition  as  last- 
ing '•  until  the  reign  of  Darius"  (v.  73),  and  as 
pat  down  by  an  appeal  to  the  decree  of  Cyrus,  is 
such  a  palpable  inconsistency,  as  is  alone  sufficient 
quite  to  discredit  the  authority  of  the  book.  It 
even  induces  the  suspicion  that  it  is  a  fan-ago  made 
op  of  scraps  by  several  different  hands.  At  all 
events,  attempts  to  reconcile  the  different  portions 
with  each  other,  or  with  Scripture,  is  lost  labour. 

As  regards  the  time  and  place  when  the  compila- 
tion was  made,  the  original  portion  is  that  which 
alone  affords  much  clue.  This  seems  to  indicate 
that  the  writer  was  thoroughly  conversant  with 
Hebrew,  even  if  he  did  not  write  the  book  in  that 
language.  He  was  well  acquainted  too  with'  the 
books  of  Esther  and  Daniel  (1  Esdr.  iii.  1,  2  sqq.), 
and  other  books  of  Scripture  (ib.  20,  21,  39, 
41,  &c),  and  45  compared  with  I's.  cxx.wii.  7. 
lint  that  he  did  not  live  under  the  Persian  kings, 
and  was  not  contemporary  with  the  events  nar- 
rated, appears  by  the  undiscriminating  way  in 
which  he  uses  promiscuously  the  phrase  Medcs  and 
Persians,  or,  Persians  and  Medcs,  according  as  he 
happened  to  be  imitating  the  language  of  Daniel  or 
of  the  book  of  Esther.  The  allusion  in  ch.  iv.  23 
to  "sailing  upon  the  sea  and  upon  the  rivers,"  for 
the  purpose  of"  robbing  and  stealing,"  seems  to  in- 
dicate residence  in  Egypt,  and  acquaintance  with 
the  lawlessness  of  Greek  pirates  there  acquired. 
The  phraseology  of  v.  73  savours  also  strongly  of 
Greek  rather  than  Hebrew.  If,  however,  as  seems 
very  probable,  the  legend  of  Zerubbabel  appeared 
first  as  a  separate  piece,  and  was  afterwards  incor- 
porated into  the  narrative  made  up  from  the  book 
of  Ezra,  this  (.'reek  sentence  from  ch.  v.  would 
not  prove  anything  as  to  the  language  in  which 
the  original  legend  was  written.  Tin1  expressions 
in  iv.  40,  "  She  is  the  strength,  kingdom,  power, 
and  majesty  of  all  ages,"    is  very  like  the  doxolc    j 

found  in  some  copies  of  the  1, or. I's  Prayer,  an» re- 
tained by  as,  "  thine  is  the  kingdom,  and  the  power 
and  the  glory  for  ever."  lint  Lightfoof  .-ays  that 
the  Jews  in  the  temple  service,  instead  of  saying 

A a.  oscd  this  antiphon,  Blessed  be  the  Name  of 

the  Glory  of  His  Kingdom  for  ever  and  ever  (vi. 
427).  So  that  the  resemblance  may  be  accounted 
lor   by    their    being    both    taken    from   a   common 

source. 

For  a  farther  account  of  the  history  of  the  times 

embraced  in  this   l I<,    see    Ezra;    Esdjras  2; 

Joseph.  Antiq.Jud.  xi.  ;  Qcrvey'sGenealog.  <>/  our 
L.  ./.  i'/ir.  ch.  \i.;  Bp.  Cosh)  on  the  Canon  of 
Scr.;  Kulke's  Defend  of  Transl.  of  Bible;  Park. 
Soc.    p.    is  sqq.;    Kitto,    /•'■■  Esdras; 

and  the  authorities  cited  in  the  course  of  this 
article.  [A.  C.  II.  | 


*  Gfrorer  obtained  a  transcript  of  a  Greek  MS.  at 
Paris,  bearing  the  title-,  which  proved  to  lie  a  worth- 
less compilation  of  late  date.   Jahrb.  ll.  Heils,  i.  7o,  n,  ; 


ESDRAS,  SECOND  BOOK  OF     577 

ESDRAS,  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF,  in 

the  English  Version  of  the  Apocrypha,  and' so  called 
by  the  author  (2  Esdr.  i.  1),  is  more  commonly 
known,  according  to  the  reckoning  of  the  Latin 
Version,  as  the  fourth  book  of  Ezra  [see  above, 
Esdras  I.] ;  but  the  arrangement  in  the  Latin 
MSS.  is  not  uniform,  and  in  the  Arabic  and  Aethiopic 
versions  the  book  is  called  the  first  of  Ezra.  The 
original  title,  ' AttokolKv^is  "EaSpa  (or  npo<pr]Tela 
'EaSpa),  "  the  Revelation  of  Ezra,"  which  is  pie- 
served  in  some  old  catalogues  of  the  canonical  and 
aprocryphal  books  (Nicephorus,  ap.  Fabric.  Cod. 
Pseud.  V.  T.,  ii.  176.  Montfaucon,  Biblioth.  Ctiis- 
lin.  p.  194)  is  far  more  appropriate,  and  it  were  to 
be  wished  that  it  could  be  restored." 

1 .  For  a  long  time  this  Book  of  Ezra  was  known 
only  by  an  old  Latin  version,  which  is  preserved  in 
some  MSS.  of  the  Vulgate.  This  version  was  used 
by  Ambrose,  and,  like  the  other  parts  of  the  Fetus 
Patina,  is  probably  older  than  the  time  of  Tertul- 
lian.  A  second  Arabic  text  was  discovered  by  Mr. 
Gregory  about  the  middle  of  the  17th  century  in  two 
Bodleian  MSS.,  and  an  English  version  made  from 
this  by  Simon  Ockley  was  inserted  by  Winston  in 
the  last  volume  of  his  Primitive  Christianity 
(London,  1711).  Fabricius  added  the  various  read- 
ings of  the  Arabic  text  to  his  edition  of  the  Latin 
in  1723  {Cod.  Pseudep.  V.  T.  ii.  174  ff.).  A 
third  Aethiopic  text  was  published  in  1820  by 
[Archbp.]  Lawrence  with  English  and  Latin  trans- 
lations, likewise  from  a  Bodleian  MS.  which  had 
remained  wholly  disregarded,  though  quoted  by 
Ludolf  in  his  Dictionary  (Primi  Esrae  libri,  versio 
Aethiopica  .  .  .  Latine  Angliccque  reddita.  Oxon. 
1820).  The  Latin  translation  has  been  reprinted 
by  Gfrorer,  with  the  various  readings  of  the  Latin 
and  Arabic  (Praef.  Pseudep.  Stuttg.  1840,  60 
tf.)  ;  but  the  original  Arabic  text  had  not  yet  been 
published. 

2.  The  three  versions  were  all  made  directly 
from  a  Greek  text.  This  is  evidently  the  case  with 
regard  to  the  Latin  (Liicke,  Versuch  einer  vollst. 
Einleitung,  j.  149)  and  the  Aethiopic  (Van  der  Ylis, 
Disputatio  critka  de  Ezrae  lib.  apocr.  Amstel., 
1839,  75  ff.),  and  apparently  so  with  regard  to 
the  Arabic.  A  clear  tiace  of  a  Cheek  text  occurs  in 
the  Epistle  of  Barnabas  (c.  xii.  =  2  Ezr.  v.  5),  but 
the  other  supposed  references  in  the  Apostolic  Fathers 
are  very  uncertain  (e.  •/.  Clem.  i.  20  ;  Herm.  Past. 
i.  1,  3,  &c).  The  next  witness  to  the  Greek  text  is 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  who  expressly  quotes  the 
book  as  the  work  of  "  the  prophet  Ezra"  (Strom. 
iii.  10.  §100).  A  question,  however,  has  been 
raised  whether  the  Greek  text  was  not  itself  a 
translation  from  the  Hebrew  (Bretschneider,  in 
llenke's  Miis.  iii.  478  ff.  ap.  Liicke  /.  <•.) ;  but  the 
arguments  from  language  by  which  the  hypothesis 
of  a  Hebrew  (Aramaic)  original  is  supported,  are 
wholly  unsatisfactory;  and  in  default  oi  direct  evi- 
dence to  the  contrary,  it  must  be  supposed  that  the 
book  was  composed  in  Greek.  This  conclusion  is 
further  strengthened  by  its  internal  character, 
which  points  to  Egypt  as  the  pla.e  of  its  compo- 
sition. 

3.  The  common  Latin  text,  which  is  followed  in 
the  English  version,  contains  two  important  inter- 
polations (Ch.  i.  ii. ;  xv.  xvi.)  which  are  not  fo I 

i  i  thi    Arabic  and   Aethiopic  versions,  and  are  sepa- 


\  ui  der   Vlis,    JHsp.  crit.  </•    Esrae  fill. 
Pref.  pp.  G  ff. 


578  ESDRAS,  SECOND  BOOK  OF 

rated  from  the  genuine  Apocalypse  in  the  best 
Latin  MSS.  Both  of  these  passages  are  evidently 
of  Christian  origin :  they  contain  traces  of  the  use 
of  the  Christian  Scriptures  (e.  g.  i.  30,  33,  37,  ii. 
13,  26,  45  if.,  xv.  8,  35,  xvi.  54),  and  still  more 
they  are  pervaded  by  an  anti-Jewish  spirit.  Thus, 
in  the  opening  chapter,  Ezra  is  commanded  to 
reprove  the  people  of  Israel  for  their  continual 
rebellions  (i.  1-23),  in  consequence  of  which  God 
threatens  to  cast  them  off  (i.  24-34)  and  to  "  give 
their  houses  to  a  people  that  shall  come."  But  in 
spite  of  their  desertion,  God  offers  once  more  to 
receive  them  (ii.  1-32).  The  offer  is  rejected  (ii. 
33),  and  the  heathen  are  called.  Then  Ezra  sees 
"  the  Son  of  God  "  standing  in  the  midst  of  a  great 
multitude  "  wearing  crowns  and  bearing  palms  in 
their  hands  "  in  token  of  their  victorious  confession 
of  the  truth.  The  last  two  chapters  (xv.  xvi.) 
are  different  in  character.  They  contain  a  stern 
prophecy  of  the  woes  which  shall  come  upon 
Egypt,  Babylon,  Aria,  and  Syria,  and  upon  the 
whole  earth,  with  an  exhortation  to  the  chosen  to 
guard  their  faith  in  the  midst  of  all  the  trials  with 
which  they  shall  be  visited  (?  the  Decian  perse- 
cution. Cf.  Lucke,  186,  &c).  Another  smaller 
interpolation  occurs  in  the  Latin  version  in  vii.  28, 
where  filius  metis  Jesus  answers  to  "  My  Messiah  " 
in  the  Aethiopic,  and  to  "  My  Son  Messiah  "  in 
the  Arabic  (cf.  Lucke,  170  n.  &c).  On  the 
other  hand,  a  long  passage  occurs  in  the  Aethiopic 
and  Arabic  versions  after  vii.  35,  which  is  not 
found  in  the  Latin  (Aethiop.  c.  vi.),  though  it 
bears  all  the  marks  of  genuineness,,  and  was  known 
to  Ambrose  (de  bono  mart.  10,  11).  In  this  case 
the  omission  was  probably  due  to  dogmatic  causes. 
The  chanter  contains  a  strange  description  of  the 
intermediate  state  of  souls,  and  ends  with  a  per- 
emptory denial  of  the  efficacy  of  human  inter- 
cession after  death.  Vigilantius  appealed  to  the 
passage  in  support  of  his  views,  and  called  down 
upon  himself  by  this  the  severe  reproof  of  Jerome 
(Lib.  c.  Vigil,  c.  7).  This  circumstance,  combined 
with  the  Jewish  complexion  of  the  narrative,  may 
have  led  to  its  rejection  in  later  times  (cf.  Lucke, 
155  ff.) 

4.  The  original  Apocalypse  (iii.-xiv.)  consists  of 
a  series  of  angelic  revelations  and  visions  in  which 
Ezra  is  instructed  in  some  of  the  great  mysteries  of 
the  moral  world,  and  assured  of  the  final  triumph 
of  the  righteous.  The  first  revelation  (iii.-v.  15, 
according  to  the  A.  V.)  is  given  by  the  angel 
Uriel  to  Ezra,  in  "  the  thirtieth  year  after  the  ruin 
of  the  city,"  in  answer  to  his  complaints  (c.  iii.) 
that  Israel  was  neglected  by  God  while  the  heathen 
were  lords  over  them  ;  and  the  chief  subject  is  the 
unsearchableness  of  God's  purposes,  and  the  signs 
of  the  last  age.  The  second  revelation  (v.  20-vi. 
34)  carries  out  this  teaching  yet  further,  and  lays 
open  the  gradual  progress  of  the  plan  of  Provi- 
dence, and  the  nearness  of  the  visitation  before 
which  evil  must  attain  its  most  terrible  climax. 
The  third  revelation  (vi.  35-ix.  25)  answers  ^the 
objections  which  arise  from  the  apparent  narrowness 
of  the  limits  within  which  the  hope  of  blessedness 
is  confined,  and  describes  the  coming  of  Messiah 
and  the  last  scene  of  Judgment.  After  this  follow 
three  visions.  The  first  vision  (ix.  26-x.  59)  is 
of  a  woman  (Sion)  in  deep  sorrow,  lamenting  the 


ESDRAS,  SECOND  BOOK  OF 

death,  upon  his  bridal  day,  of  her  only  son  (the 
city  built  by  Solomon),  who  had  been  born  to  her 
after  she  had  had  no  child  for  thirty  years.  But 
while  Ezra  looked,  her  face  "  upon  a  sudden  shined 
exceedingly,"  and  "  the  woman  appeared  no  more, 
but  there  was  a  city  builded."  The  second  vision 
(xi.-xii.),  in  a  dream,  is  of  an  eagle  (Rome)  which 
"came  up  from  the  sea"  and  "  spread  her  wings 
over  all  the  earth."  As  Ezra  looked,  the  eagle 
suffered  strange  transformations,  so  that  at  one 
time  "  three  heads  and  six  little  wings  "  remained  ; 
and  at  last  only  one  head  was  left,  when  suddenly 
a  lion  (Messiah)  came  forth,  and  with  the  voice  of 
a  man  rebuked  the  eagle,  and  it  was  burnt  up. 
The  third  vision  (xiii.),  in  a  dream,  is  of  a  man 
(Messiah)  "  flying  with  the  clouds  of  heaven," 
against  whom  the  nations  of  the  earth  are  ga- 
thered, till  he  destroys  them  with  the  blast  of  his 
mouth,  and  gathers  together  the  lost  tribes  of  Israel 
and  offers  Sion,  "  prepared  and  builded,"  to  His 
people.  The  last  chapter  (xiv.)  recounts  an  ap- 
pearance to  Ezra  of  the  Lord  who  showed  Himself 
to  Moses  in  the  bush,  at  whose  command  he 
receives  again  the  law  which  had  been  burnt,  and 
with  the  help  of  scribes  writes  down  ninety-four 
books  (the  twenty-four  canonical  books  of  the  0.  T. 
and  seventy  books  of  secret  mvsteries),  and  thus 
the  people  is  prepared  for  its  last  trial,  guided  by 
the  recovered  Law. 

5.  The  date  of  the  book  is  much  disputed, 
though  the  limits  within  which  opinions  vary  are 
narrower  than  in  the  case  of  the  book  of  Enoch. 
Lucke  ( Versuch  einer  vollst.  Einl.  &c,  ed.  2, 
i.  209)  places  it  in  the  time  of  Caesar;  Van  der 
Vlis  (Disput.  crib.  I.  c.)  shortly  after  the  death  of 
Caesar.  Lawrence  (I.  c.)  brings  it  down  somewhat 
lower,  to  28-25  B.C.,  and  Hilgenfeld  (Jud.  Apok. 
p.  221)  agrees  with  this  conclusion,  though  he 
arrives  at  it  by  very  different  reasoning.  On  the 
other*  hand  Gfrorer  (Jahrh.  d.  Heils,  i.  69  f.) 
assigns  the  book  to  the  time  of  Domitian,  and  in 
this  he  is  followed  by  Wieseler  and  by  Bauer 
(Lucke,  p.  189,  &c),  while  Lucke  in  his  first 
edition  had  regarded  it  as  the  work  of  a  Hellenist 
of  the  time  of  Trajan.  The  interpretation  of  the 
details  of  the  vision  of  the  eagle,  which  furnishes 
the  chief  data  for  determining 'the  time  of  its  com- 
position, is  extremely  uncertain  from  the  difficulty 
of  regarding  the  history  of  the-  period  from  the 
point  of  view  of  the  author ;  and  this  difficulty  is 
increased  by  the  allusion  to  the  desolation  of  Jeru- 
salem, which  may  be  merely  suggested  by  the 
circumstances  of  Ezra,  the  imaginary  author :  or, 
on  the  contrary,  the  last  destruction  of  Jerusalem 
may  have  suggested  Ezra  as  the  medium  of  the 
new  revelation.  (Cf.  Fabricius,  Cod.  Pseudep.  ii. 
pp.  189  ff.  and  Lucke,  187  n.  &c,  for  a  sum- 
mary of  the  earlier  opinions  on  the  composition  of 
the  book.) 

6.  The  chief  characteristics  of  the  "  three-headed 
eagle,"  which  refer  apparently  to  historic  details,1" 
are  "  twelve  feathered  wings  "  (duodecim  alae  pen- 
narum),  "eight  founter-feathers "  (contrariae  pen- 
nae),  and  "three  heads;"  but  though  the  writer 
expressly  interprets  these  of  kings  (xii.  14,  20)  and 
"kingdoms"  (xii.  23),  he  is,  perhaps  intentionally, 
so  obscure  in  his  allusions,  that  the  interpretation 
only  increases  the  difficulties  of  the  vision   itself. 


b  The  description  of  the  duration  of  the  world  as 
'■divided  into  twelve  (ten  Aeth.)  parts,  of  which  ten 
parts  are  gone   already,  and   half  of  a  tenth  part  " 


(xiv.  11),   is  so   uncertain  in   its  reckoning,  that  no 
argument  can  he  based  upon  it. 


ESDRAS,  SECOND  BOOK  OF 

One  point  only  may  be  considered  certain, — the 
eagle  can  typify  no  other  empire  than  Rome.  Not- 
withstanding the  identification  of  the  eagle  with 
the  fourth  empire  of  Daniel  (cf.  Barn.  ep.  4; 
Daniel,  Book  of),  it  is  impossible  to  suppose 
that  it  represents  the  Greek  kingdom  (Hilgeuteld; 
cf.  Volkmar,  Das  vicrte  Buck  Esra,  pp.  .'iii  ff. 
Zurich,  1858).  The  power  of  the  Ptolemies  could 
Scarcely  have  been  described  in  language  which 
may  be  rightly  applied  to  Rome  (xi.  2,  6,  40); 
and  the  succession  of  kings  quota!  by  Hilgen- 
feld  to  represent  "the  twelve  wings"  preserves 
only  a  faint  resemblance  to  the  imagery  of  the 
vision.  But  when  it  is  established  that  the  inter- 
pretation of  the  vision  is  to  be  sought  in  the 
history  of  Rome,  the  chief  difficulties  of  the  problem 
begin.  The  second  wing  (i.  e.  king)  rules  twice 
as  long  as  the  other  (xi.  17).  This  fact  seems 
to  point  to  Octavian  and  the  line  of  the  .Caesars ; 
but  thus  the  line  of  "  twelve  "  leads  to  no  plausible 
conclusion.  If  it  is  supposed  to  close  with  Trajan 
(Lucke,  \tc  Aufl.),  the  "  three  heads"  receive  no 
satisfactory  explanation.  If,  again,  the  "  three 
heads"  represent  the  three  Flavii,  then  "the 
twelve "  must  be  composed  of  the  nine  Caesars 
(Jul.  Caesar — Vitellius)  and  the  three  pretenders 
Piso,  Vindex,  andNympHdius(Gfrorer),  who  could 
scarcely  have  been  brought  within  the  range  of 
a  Jewish  Apocalypse.  Volkmar  proposes  a  new 
interpretation,  by  which  two  wings  are  to  re- 
present one  king,  and  argues  that  this  symbol 
was  chosen  in  order  to  conceal  better  from  strange 
eves  the  revelation  of  the  seer.  The  twelve  wings 
thus  represent  the  six  Caesars  (Caesar — Nero) ; 
the  eight  "  counter-feathers,"  the  usurping  empe- 
rors Galba,  Otho,  Vitellius,  and  Nerva;  and  the 
three  heads  the  three  Flavii.  This  hypothesis 
offers  many  striking  coincidences  with  the  text,  but 
at  the  same  time  it  is  directly  opposed  to  the  form 
of  intcipretatian  giv:n  i>\  E&ra  (xii  14  regnabunt 
.  .  .  duodecim  reges  ...  v.  18  octo  reges),  and 
Volkmar's  hypothesis  that  the  twelve  and  eight 
were  marked  in  the  original  MS.  in  some  way  so 
as  to  suggest  the  notion  of  division,  is  extremely 
improbable.  Van  der  Vlis  and  Lucke  in  his  later 
edition  regard  the  twelve  kings  as  only  generally 
symbolic  of  the  Roman  power;  and  while  they 
identify  the  three  heads  with  the  Triumvirs  seek 
no  explanation  of  the  other  details.  All  is  evi- 
dently as  yet  vague  and  uncertain,  and  will  pro- 
bably remain  so  till  some  clearer  light  can  be 
thrown  upon  Jewish  thought  and  history  during 
the  critical  period  100  B.c-100  a.c. 

7.  But  while  the  date  of  the  book  must  be  left 
undetermined,  there  ran  be  no  doubt  that  it  is 
a    genuine   product   of   Jewish    thought.     Weisse 

.  122 )  alone  dissents  on  this  point 
fiom  the  unanimous  judgment  of  recent  scholars 
(Hilgenfeld,  190,  &c.)i  and  the  contrast  between 
the  ton-' ami  style  of  the  Christian  interpolations 
and  the  remainder  of  the  took  is  in  itself  sufficient 
to  prove  the  fact.  The  Apocalypse  was  probably 
written  in  Egypt ;  the  opening  and  closing  chapters 
certainly  were. 

8.  In  tone  and  character  the  Apocalypse  of  Ezra 

offers  a  striking  i trast   to  that  of  Enoch  [The 

Book  or  Enoch].    Triumphant  anticipatioi 
overshadowed  by  glooniv  forebodings  of  the  destiny 
of  the  world.     The  idea  of  victory  is  lost  in  that  of 

Future  blessedness  is  reserved  only  for 
'"a  very  few"  i  \  ii  70,  viii.  1,  3,  52-55),  vii. 
1-13).     The    great    question    is   "  not    how    the 


ESDRAS,  SECOND  BOOK  OF  579 

ungodly  shall  be  punished,  but  how  the  righteous 
shall  be  saved,  for  whom  the  world  is  created  " 
(ix.  13).  The  "woes  of  Messiah"  are  described 
with  a  terrible  minuteness  which  approaches  the 
despairing  traditions  of  the  Talmud  (v.,  xiv.  10  ti'., 
ix.  3  ff.)  ;  and  after  a  reign  of  400  years  (vii. 
28-35;  the  clause  is  wanting  in  Aeth.  v.  29) 
"  Christ,"  it  is  said,  "  My  Son,  shall  die  (Arab. 
omits),  and  all  men  that  have  breath  ;  and  the 
world  shall  be  turned  into  the  old  silence  seven 
days,  like  as  in  the  first  beginning,  and  no  man 
shall  remain"  (vii.  29).  Then  shall  follow  the 
resurrection  and  the  judgment,  "  the  end  of  this 
time  and  the  beginning  of  immortality"  (vii.  43). 
In  other  points  the  doctrine  of  the  book  orleis 
curious  approximations  to  that  of  St.  Paul,  as  the 
imagery  does  to  that  of  the  Apocalypse  (e.  g.  2 
Esdr.  xiii.  43  8. ;  v.  4).  The  relation  of  "the 
first  Adam"  to  his  sinful  posterity,  and  the  opeia- 
tion  of  the  Law  (iii.  20  ff.,  vii.  48,  ix.  36)  ;  the 
transitoriness  of  the  world  (iv.  26);  the  eternal 
counsels  of  God  (vi.  ff.);  His  Providence  (vii.  11) 
and  long-suffering  (vii.  64) ;  His  sanctification  of 
His  people  "  from  the  beginning  "  (ix.  8)  and  their 
peculiar  and  lasting  privileges  (vi.  59)  are  plainly 
stated ;  and  on  the  other  hand  the  efficacy  of  good 
works  (viii.  33)  in  conjunction  with  faith  (ix.  7)  is 
no  less  clearly  affirmed. 

9.  One  tradition  which  the  book  contains  ob- 
tained a  wide  reception  in  early  times,  and  served 
as  a  pendant  to  the  legend  of  the  origin  of  the 
LXX.  F]zra,  it  is  said,  in  answer  to  his  prayer 
that  he  might  be  inspired  to  write  again  all  the 
Law  which  was  burnt,  received  a  command  to  take 
with  him  tablets  and  five  men,  and  retire  for  forty 
days.  In  this  retirement  a  cup  was  given  him  to 
drink,  and  forthwith  his  understanding  was  quick- 
ened and  his  memory  strengthened  ;  and  for  forty 
days  and  forty  nights  he  dictated  to  his  scribes, 
who  wrote  ninety-four  books  (Latin,  204),  of 
which  twenty-four  were  delivered  to  the  people  in 
place  of  the  books  which  were  lost  (xiv.  20-48). 
This  strange  story  was  repeated  in  various  forms 
by  Irenaeus  (ado.  Ilaer.  iii.  21,  2),  Tertullian  (Be 
cult.  foem.  i.  3,  omne  instrumentum  Judaicae 
literaturae  per  Esdiam  constat  restauratum),  Cle- 
ment of  Alexandria  (Strom,  i.  22,  p.  410,  P.  cf. 
p.  392),  Jerome  (adv.  Helv.  7,  cf.  Pseudo-Augus- 
tine,  de  Mirab.S.  Scr.  ii.  32),  and  many  others; 
and  probably  owed  its  origin  to  the  tradition  which 
regarded  Ezra  as  the  representative  of  the  men  of 
"  the  Great  Synagogue,"  to  whom  the  final  revision 
of  the  canonical  books  was  universally  assigned  in 
early  times.     [Canon.] 

10.  Though  the  book  was  assigned  to  the  "  pro- 
phet" Ezra  by  Clement  of  Alexandria  (Strom,  iii. 
l<i,  p. 556  P.)  and  quoted  with  respect  by  Irenaeus 
(/.  c),  Tertullian  (?  /.  c.  Cf.  adv.  Marc.  iv.  16), 
and  Ambrose  (Ep.  xxxiv.  2 ;  de  bono  Mortis,  L0  ff.  . 
it  did  not  maintain  its  ecclesiastical  position  in  the 
Church.  Jerome  speaks  of  if  with  contempt,  and 
it  is  rarely  found  in  MSS.  of'  the  Latin  Bible. 
Archbishop  Lawrence  examined  180  MSS.  and  the 
book  was  contained  only  in  thirteen,  and  in  these 
it  was  arranged  very  differently.  If  is  found, 
however,  in  the  printed  copies  of  the  Vulgate  older 
than  the  Council  of'  Trent,  by  which  it  was  ex- 
cluded from  the  Canon:  and  quotations  from  it 
still  occur  in   the  Roman   sen  ice  (Basnage,  ap. 

Fabr.  Cod.  Pseud,  ii.  191).     On  tl ther  hand, 

tho  gh  this  Look  i..  included  among  those  which 
.nc  ••read  for  examples  of  life"   bj    the   English 

2    I'   2 


oBO 


ESEBON 


Church,  no  use  of  it  is  there  made  in  public  wor- 
ship. Luther  and  the  Reformed  Church  rejected 
the  book  entirely  ;  but  it  was  held  in  high  estimation 
by  numerous  mystics  (Fabric.  I.  c.  178  tf.)  for 
whom  its  contents  naturally  had  great  attractions. 

11.  The  chief  literature  of  the  subject  has  been 
noticed  in  the  course  of  the  article.  Liicke  has, 
perhaps,  given  the  best  general  account  of  the  book ; 
but  the  essay  of  Van  der  Vlis  is  the  most  important 
contribution  to  the  study  of  the  text,  of  which  a 
critical  edition  is  still  needed,  though  the  Latin  ma- 
terials for  its  construction  are  abundant.    [B.  F.  W.] 

ES'EBON,  they  OF  (robs  'E<Te/3a>eiTas,  Alex. 
Tous'Ea-ejSau';  Eesebon),  Jud.  v.  15.   [Heshbon.] 

ES'EBRIAS  ('Ea-epe/Sias ;  Scdebias),  1  Esd. 
viii.  54.     [Sherebiaii.] 

E'SEK  (pb'V  ;  'ASiKi'a  ;  Calumnid),  a  well 
(1X3)  containing  a  spring  of  water  ;  which  the 
herdsmen  of  Isaac  dug  in  the  valley  of  Gerar,  and 
which  received  its  name  of  Esek,  or  "  strife,"  be- 
cause the  herdmen  of  Gerar  "  strove"  (-IpES'ynn) 
with  him  for  the  possession  ofita  (Gen.  xxvi.  20). 

ESH'-BAAL  (^J73B>N  =  "  Baal's  man  ;"  'A<m- 
fia\,  Alex.  'Ie/SaA. ;  EsbaaV),  the  fourth  son  of 
.Saul,  according  to  the  genealogy  of  1  Chr.  viii.  33 
and  ix.  39.  He  is  doubtless  the  same  person  as 
Ish-BOSHETH,  since  it  was  the  practice  to  change 
the  obnoxious  name  of  Baal  into  Bosheth  or  Besheth, 
as  in  the  case  of  Jernb-besheth  for  Jerub-baal,  and 
(in  this  very  genealogy)  of  Merib-baal  for  Mephi- 
bosheth:  compare  also  Hos.  ix.  10,  where  Bosheth 
(A.  V.  "  shame")  appears  to  be  used  as  a  synonym 
for  Baal.  If  EsTi-baal  is  not  identical  with  Ish- 
bosheth,  the  latter  has  been  omitted  entirely  from 
these  lists  of  Saul's  descendants,  which,  considering 
his  position,  is  not  likely.  Which  of  the  two  names 
is  the  earlier  it  is  not  possible  to  decide.  [G.] 

ESH'BAN  (|3£'X' ;  'A<r$du,  'AtrepSv,  Alex. 
Ece/3di/ ;  Eseban),  a  Horite  ;  one  of  the  four  sons 
of  Dishan  (so  the  Hebrew  in  Gen. ;  but  A.  V.  has 
Dishon),  the  son  of  Seir  the  Horite  (Gen.  xxxvi.  2(3 ; 
1  Chr.  i.  41).  No  trace  of  the  name  appears  to 
have  been  discovered  among  the  modern  tribes  of 
Idumaea. 

ESH'COL  (.^2B>X  ;  'EffX<&\  ;  Josephus  'Etr- 
XaJA.77s ;  Eschol),  brother  of  Mam  re  the  Amorite, 
and  of  Aner  ;  and  one  of  Abraham's  companions  in 
his  pursuit  of  the  four  kings  who  had  carried  off 
Lot  (Gen.  xiv.  13,  24).  According  to  Josephus 
(Ant.  i.  10,  §2)  he  was  the  foremost  of  the  three 
brothers,  but  the  Bible  narrative  leaves  this  quite 
uncertain  (comp.  13  with  24).  Their  residence 
was  at  Hebron  (xiii.  18),  and  possibly  the  name  of 
Eshcol  remained  attached  to  one  of  the  fruitful 
valleys  in  that  district  till  the  arrival  of  the  Israel- 
ites, who  then  interpreted  the  appellation  as  signifi- 
cant of  the  gigantic  "  cluster  "  (in  Hebr.  Eshcol) 
which  they  obtained  there. 

ESH'COL,  THE  VALLEY,  OR  THE 
BROOK,  OF  (VtoBforto53.  or'^X;  <pdPayZ 
fUrpvos;  Nehelescol,  id  est  torrens  botri),  a  wady 
in  the  neighbourhood  of  Hebron,  explored  by  the  spies 
who  were  sent  by  Moses  from  Kadesh-barnea.    From 


a  The  word  rendered  "strive"  W"))  in  the  former 
part  of  ver.  20,  and  in  21  and  22  is  not  the  same  as 
that  from  which  Esek  derived  its  name,   and  should  |  in  connexion  with  these  ancient  and  peculiar  records. 


ESHTAOL 

the  terms  of  two  of  the  notices  of  this  transaction 
(Num.  xxxiii.  9  ;  Dent.  i.  24)  it  might  be  gathered 
that  Eshcol  was  the  furthest  point  to  which  the  spies 
penetrated.  But  this  would  be  to  contradict  the 
express  statement  of  Num.  xiii.  21 ,  that  they  went 
as  far  as  Rehob.  From  this  fruitful  valley  they 
brought  back  a  huge  cluster  of  grapes,  an  incident 
which,  according  to  the  narrative,  obtained  for  the 
place  its  appellation  of  the  "  valley  of  the  cluster  " 
(Num.  xiii.  23,  24).  It  is  true  that  in  Hehiew 
Eshcol  signifies  a  cluster  or  bunch,  but  the  name 
had  existed  in  this  neighbourhood  centuries  before, 
when  Abraham  lived  there  with  the  chiefs  Aner, 
Eshcol,  and  Mamie,  not  Hebrews  but  Amorites  ;  and 
this  was  possibly  the  Hebrew  way  of  appropriating 
the  ancient  name  derived  from  that  hero  into  the 
language  of  the  conquerors,  consistently  with  the  pa- 
ronomastic  turns  so  much  in  favour  at  that  time,  and 
with  a  practice  of  which  traces  appear  elsewhere. 

In  the  Onomasticon  of  Eusebius  the  <papayt, 
f}6rpvos  is  placed,  with  some  hesitation,  at  Gophna, 
fifteen  miles  north  of  Jerusalem,  on  the  Neapolis 
road.  By  Jerome  it  is  given  as  north  of  Hebron, 
on  the  road  to  Bethsur  (Epitaph.  Paulac).  The 
Jewish  traveller  Ha-Parchi  speaks  of  it  as  north  of 
the  mountain  on  which  the  (ancient)  city  of  Hebron 
stood  (Benjamin  of  Tudela,  Asher,  ii.  437)  ;  and 
here  the  name  has  been  lately  observed  still  attached 
to  a  spring  of  remarkably  fine  water  called  'Ain- 
Eshkali,  in  a  valley  which  crosses  the  vale  of 
Hebron  N.E.  and  S.W.,  and  about  two  miles  north 
of  the  town  (Van  cle  Velde,  ii.  64).  It  is  right  to 
say  that  this  interesting  intelligence  has  not  been 
yet  confirmed  by  other  observers.  [G.] 

ESH'EAN  QyWK;  2o/xa,  Alex.  'Eirdv; 
Esaan),  one  of  the  cities  of  Judah,  in  the  moun- 
tainous district,  and  in  the  same  group  with  Hebron 
(Josh.  xv.  52).  The  name  does  not  occur  again, 
nor  has  it  been  met  with  in  modern  times.      [G.] 

E'SHEK  (p&y  ;  'A<r^A,  Alex.  'E<reA.€K ;  Esec), 

a  Benjamite,  one  of  the  late  descendants  of  Saul ; 
the  founder  of  a  large  and  noted  family  of  archers, 
lit.  "  treaders  of  the  bow"  (1  Chr.  viii.  39).  The 
name  is  omitted  in  the  parallel  list  of  1  Chr.  ix. 

ESHKAL'ONITES,  THE  (accurately  "  the 
Eshklonite,"  ^vptTK!"!,  in  the  singular  number  ; 
t<£  ' AaKaKdiv'ny ;  Ascalonitas),  Josh.  xiii.  3. 
[Ashkelon.] 

ESH'TAOL  ("piXfl^N  and  bttAPK  ;  'A<r- 
raa>\,  '  Aard,  ''EaBaSx ;  Esthaol,  Asthaol),  a  town 
in  the  low  country — the  Shefelah — of  Judah.  It 
is  the  first  of  the  first  group  of  cities  in  that  district 
(Josh.  xv.  33)  enumerated  with  Zoreah  (Heb. 
ZareaK),  in  company  with  which  it  is  commonly 
mentioned.  Zorah  and  Eshtaol  were  two  of  the 
towns  allotted  to  the  tribe  of  Dan  out  of  Judah 
(Josh.  xix.  41).  Between  them,  ami  behind  Kirjath- 
jearim,  was  situated  Mahaneh-Dan,  the  camp  or 
stronghold  which  formed  the  head-quarters  of  that 
little  community  during  their  constant  encounters 
with  the  Philistine.-.  Here,  among  the  old  warriors 
of  the  tribe,  Samson  spent  his  boyhood,  and  expe- 
rienced the  first  impulses  of  the  Spirit  of  Jehovah  ; 
and  hither  after  his  last  exploit  his  body  was  brought, 
up  the  long  slopes  of  the  western  hills,  to  its  last  rest 


be    translated    by  a   different  English   word.      Such 
points,  though  small,  are  anything  but  unimportant 


ESHTAULITES 

in  the  burying-place  of  Manoah  his  father  (Judg. 
\iii.  25,  xvi.  31,  xviii.  2,  8,  11,  12).  [Dan.]  In 
the  genealogical  records  of  1  Chum,  the  relationship 
between  Eshtaol,  Zareah,  and  Kirjath-jearim  is  still 

maintained.      [ESHTAULITES.] 

In  the  Onomasticon  of  Eusebius  and  Jerome 
Eshtaol  is  twice  mentioned — ( 1)  as  Astaol  of  Judah, 
described  as  then  existing  between  Azotus  and 
Ascalon  under  the  name  of  Astho ;  (2)  as  Esthaul 
of  Han,  ten  miles  N.  of  Eleutheropolis.  The  latter 
position  is  quite  in  accordance  with  the  indications 
of  tin-  Bible.  In  more  modern  times,  however,  the 
name  has  vanished.  Zorah  has  been  recognized  as 
S&rah  (Rod.  ii.  14,  1G,  ■.'•_'4,  iii.  153),  but  the  iden- 
tification of  Eshtaol  has  yet  to  be  made.  Schwarz 
(102)  mentions  a  village  named  Stual,  west  of 
Zorah,  but,  apart  from  the  tact  that  this  is  corro- 
borated by  no  other  traveller  and  by  no  map,  the 
situation  is  too  far  west  to  be  "  behind  Kirjath- 
jearim  "  if  Euryet  el-enab  be  Kirjath-jearim.  The 
village  marked  on  the  map-  of  Robinson  and  Vande 
Velde,  Yeshua,  and  alluded  to  by  the  former  (iii. 
I  ."i.'i  i.  is  nearer  the  requisite  position  ;  but  the  resem- 
blance between  the  two  names  is  too  Hunt  to  admit 
of  identification.  [G.J 

ESH  TAULTTES,  THE  (^KflB>Kn,  accur. 
"the  Eshtaulite,"  in  sing,  number;  viol  "EaOad/j., 
Alex,  oi  'EaOacnAcuoi ;  Esthaolitae),  with  the  Za- 
reathites,  were  among  the  families  of  Kirjath-jearim 
(,  1  Chr.  ii.  53).     [ESHTAOL.] 

ESHTEMO'A,  and  in  shorter  form,  without 
the  final  guttural.  ESHTEMOH'  Qrt»F)B>K  and 
I10JT1L"{<  ;  the  filter  occurs  in  Josh.  xv.  only: 
'Effdafxai ;  Alex.  'EaOefiw  ;  corruptly "Es  ko.1  Mac; 
Kal  Tr/p  Te/xa,  'Ecrflie;  Fstemo,  Estcmo),  a  town 
of  Judah,  in  the  mountains;  one  of  the  group 
containing  DEBIR  (Josh.  XV.  50).  With  its 
"suburbs"  Eshtemoa  was  allotted  to  the  priests 
(x\i.  14;  1  Chr.  vi.  57).  It  was  one  of  the 
places  frequented  by  David  and  his  followers  during 
the  long  period  of  their  wanderings;  and  to  his 
friends  there  he  sent  presents  of  the  spoil  of  the 
Amalekites  (1  Sain.  xxx.  28,  comp.  31).  The 
was  known  in  the  time  of  Eusebius  and 
Jerome  (praegrandis  vicus),  though  their  descrip- 
tion of  its  locality  is  too  vague  to  enable  us  to 
determine  ii  (Onom.  Esthemd).  Bat  there  is  little 
doubt  that  it  has  been  discovered  by  Dr.  Rol 

nu'a,  a  village  seven  miles  south  of  Hebron, 
on  the  great  road  from  el-Milh,  containing  con- 
siderable ancient  remains,  and  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  other  villages  still  bearing  the  names  of  its  com- 

pai -    in   the    list   of  Josh,    xv.;    Anab,  Socoh, 

Jattir,  &c.  See  Robin  on,  i.  494,  ii.  2U4,  o  ; 
Schwarz,  I 

In  the  lists — hall'  genealogical,  half  topographical 
— of  the  descendants  of  Judah  in  1  Chron.  Esh- 
temoa OCCUrS  as  derived  from  Ishbah,  "  the  father 
of  Eshtemoa"  (1  Chr.  iv.  17  1;  Gedor, 

Zanoah,  all  towns  in  the  sa Locality  being  named 

in  the  follow  pears  to  have 

founded   by    the  descendants    ol'  the    I. 
wife  of  a  certain    Meied,   the  three  other  towns  by 

those  "f  his  Jewish  wife.     See  the  explanations  of 
Bertheao  (Chronik,  adloc.).    I;! 
appears  to  belong  to  an  actual  person,  '•  !■'.>.  1  ; 
the  Maachathite."  [G.] 

ESH'TON  (I'lflE^  ;  'Ao-aaOwp  ; 

which  occurs   in  the  ol    Judah 

(I  Chr.  iv.  11.  12).     Mehir  was  -the  father  of 


ESSENES 


581 


Eshton,"  and  amongst  (he  names  of  his  four  children 
are  two — Beth-rapha  and  Ir-nahash — which  have 
the  appearance  of  being  names,  not  of  persons,  hut 
of  places.  [*-»•] 

ES'LI  (Rec.  T.  'EaXi,  B  'EcrAei,  probably  = 
•IHvVX  Azaliah  ;  Esli,  Cod.  Amiat.  Hesli),  son 
of  Nagge  or  Naggai,  and  father  of  Naum,  in  the 
genealogy  of  Christ  (Luke  iii.  25).  See  Hervey, 
'.1  ne  '/"ijics,  &c,  136. 

ESO'BA  (Alo-wpd  ;  Vulg.  omits  :  the  Peschito 
Syriac  reads  Bethchorn),  a  place  fortified  by  the 
Jews  on  the  approach  of  the  Assyrian  army  under 
Holofernes  (Jud.  iv.  4).  The  name  may  be  the 
representative  of  the  Hebrew  word  Hazor,  or  Zorah 
(Simonis,  Onom.  N.  T.  19),  but  no  identification 
has  yet  been  arrived  at.  The  Syriac  reading  sug- 
gests Beth-horon,  which  is  not  impossible. 

ES'KIL  QEo-pi\,  Alex.  'Ef/piA  ;  Vulg.  omits), 
1  Esd.  ix.  154.     [Azareel,  or  Siiauai.] 

ES'EOM  (Rec.  T.  'Eo-pwjx;  in  Luke,  Lachm. 
with  B,  'Effpwv;  Esroni),  Matt.  i.  3  ;  Luke  iii.  33. 
[Hezron.] 

ESSE'NES.  1.  In  describing  the  different 
sects  which  existed  among  the  Jews  in  his  own 
time,  Josephus  dwells  at  great  length  and  with 
especial  emphasis  on  the  faith  and  practice  of  the 
Essenes,  who  appear  in  his  description  to  combine 
the  ascetic  virtues  of  the  Pythagoreans  and  Stoics 
with  a  spiritual  knowledge  of  the  Divine  Law. 
An  analogous  sect,  marked,  however,  by  charac- 
teristic differences,  appears  in  the  Egyptian  Thera- 
peutae,  and  from  the  detailed  notices  of  Josephus 
(B.J.  ii.  8  ;  Ant.  xiii.  o,  §9,xv.  In,  §4  f.,xviii.  1, 
§_'  ff.)  and  Philo  (Quod  omn.prob.  liber,  §12  If. 
Wragm.  ap.  Euseb.  Praep.  Ev.  he  vita  contem- 
platiea),  and  the  casual  remarks  of  Pliny  (H.  N.  v. 
17),  later  writers  have  frequently  discussed  the 
relation  which  these  Jewish  mystics  occupied  to- 
wards the  popular  religion  of  the  time,  and  more 
particularly  towards  the  doctrines  of  Christianity. 
For  it  is  a  most  remarkable  fact  that  the  existence 
of  such  sects  appears  to  be  unrecognised  both  in  the 
Apostolic  writings  and  in  early  Hebrew  literature. 

_'.  The  name  Essene  ('Eaa-qvoi,  Joseph.  Esseni, 
Plin.)  or  Essaean  ('Ecrcraioi  Philo;  Jos.  B.J.  i. 
3,  ."1,  &c.)  is  itself  full  of  difficulty.  Various  de- 
rivations have  been  proposed  for  it,  and  all  are 
more  or  less  open  to  objection.  Some  have  con- 
nected it  with  T'Dn  i'Ao-tSa7os)  "puritan"  or 
pyiJV,  "  the  retiring,"  or  Jfn,  "  the  servant  (of 
God  :"  othe.s.  again,  find  tie  root  in  XDX''<o 
u  "  1  Baur),  or  HDU  "  to  bathe"  (Gratz).  Philo, 
according  to  his  fashion,  saw  in  the  word  a  possible 
connexion  with  the  Greek  onios,  holy 
prob.  Ii1'.  §12);  and  Epiphanius  interpreted  the 
collateral  form  'Oo~(TT)vol  as  meaning  u  the  stout 
race"  1 <nifiapbv  ytvos,  //<*<,■.  xix.  i.e.  PDHj.  It 
seems  more  likely  that  Essene  represents  pin, 
(so  Suidas  =:  OfciiprjriKoi,  Hilgenfeld)  or 
l"N^*n.    -  the    silent,    th  '  "    (Jost). 

Josephus  represents  |S5Tl  (LXX.  \oyeiov  ,   "the 
by  'EfftHivys,  interpreting 
the  word  as  equivalent  to  \6ytov  '* oracle "    Ant. 
iii.  7,  §•">).     Comp.  .lost.  1  I  nth.  i.  207 

/(. .-  Hilgenfeld,  ,//'/.  Apok.  J77  1'.:  Ewald,  1 

Tar.  iv.'4'ju  a. 

•_'.  'fhe  obscurity  of  the  Es  lenes  as   a   d 
bo  Iv  ai  ises  from   th.-  fact   that    the;. 
origmally  a  tendency  rather  than  an  organisation. 
Thi    communities  which  were  formed  out  of  them 


582  ESSENES 

were  a  result  of  their  practice,  and  not  a  neces- 
sary part  of  it.  As  a  sect  they  were  distinguished 
by  an  aspiration  after  ideal  purity  rather  than  by 
any  special  code  of  doctrines ;  and  like  the  Cha- 
sidim  of  earlier  times  [Assideans],  they  were 
confounded  in  the  popular  estimation  with  the 
great  body  of  the  zealous  observers  of  the  Law 
^Pharisees).  The  growth  of  Essenism  was  a 
natural  result  of  the  religious  feeling  which  was 
called  out  by  the  circumstances  of  the  Greek  do- 
minion ;  and  it  is  easy  to  trace  the  process  by 
which  it  was  matured.  From  the  Maccabaean  age 
there  was  a  continuous  effort  among  the  stricter 
Jews  to  attain  an  absolute  standard  of  holiness. 
Each  class  of  devotees  was  looked  upon  as  prac- 
tically impure  by  their  successors,  who  carried  the 
laws  of  purity  still  further;  and  the  Essenes  stand 
at  the  extreme  limit  of  the  mystic  asceticism  which 
was  thus  gradually  reduced  to  shape.  The  asso- 
ciations of  the  "Scribes  and  Pharisees"  (C'-Qn 
"  the  companions,  the  wise")  gave  place  to  others 
bound  by  a  more  rigid  rule ;  and  the  rule  of  the 
Essenes  was  made  gradually  stricter.  Judas,  the 
earliest  Essene  who  is  mentioned  (c.  110  B.C.)., 
appears  living  in  ordinary  society  (Jos.  B.  J.  i.  3, 
§5).  Menahem,  according  to  tradition  a  colleague 
of  Hillel,  was  a  friend  of  Herod,  and  brought  upon 
his  sect  the  favour  of  the  king  (Jos.  Ant.  xv.  In, 
§5).  But  by  a  natural  impulse  the  Essenes  with- 
drew from  the  dangers  and  distractions  of  business. 
From  the  cities  they  retired  to  the  wilderness  to 
realize  the  conceptions  of  religion  which  they  formed, 
but  still  they  remained  on  the  whole  true  to  their 
ancient  faith.  To  the  Pharisees  they  stood  nearly 
in  the  same  relation  as  that  in  which  the  Pharisees 
themselves  stood  with  regard  to  the  mass  of  the 
people.  The  differences  lay  mainly  in  rigour  of 
practice,  and  not  in  articles  of  belief. 

3.  The  traces  of  the  existence  of  Essenes  in  com- 
mon society  are  not  wanting  nor  confined  to  indivi- 
dual cases.  Not  only  was  a  gate  at  Jerusalem  named 
from  them  (Jos.  B.  J.  v.  4,  §2,  'fctra-quwu  ttuAtj). 
but  a  later  tradition  mentions  the  existence  of  a  con- 
gregation there  which  devoted  "  one  third  of  the 
day  to  study,  one  third  to  prayer,  and  one  third 
to  labour"  (Frankel,  Zcitschrift,  1846,  p.  458). 
Those,  again,  whom  Josephus  speaks  of  as  allowing 
marriage  may  be  supposed  to  have  belonged  to 
such  bodies  as  had  not  yet  withdrawn  from  inter- 
course with  their  fellow-men.  But  the  practice 
of  the  extreme  section  was  afterwards  regarded  as 
characteristic  of  the  whole  class,  and  the  isolated 
communities  of  Essenes  furnished  the  type  which 
is  preserved  in  the  popular  descriptions.  These 
were  regulated  by  strict  rules,  analogous  to  those 
of  the  monastic  institutions  of  a  later  date.  The 
candidate  for  admission  first  passed  through  a 
year's  noviciate,  in  which  he  received,  as  symbolic 
gifts,  an  axe,  an  apron,  and  a  white  robe,  and  gave 
proof  of  his  temperance  by  observing  the  ascetic 
rules  of  the  order  (r)}V  avriiv  Slairav).  At  the 
close  of  this  probation,  his  character  (to  $6os)  was 
submitted  to  a  fresh  trial  of  two  years,  and  mean- 
while he  shared  in  the  lustra!  rites  of  the  initiated, 
but  not  in  their  meals.  The  full  membership  was 
imparted  at  the  end  of  this  second  period  when  the 
novice  bound  himself  "  by  awful  oaths  " — though 
oaths  were  absolutely  forbidden  at  all  other  times 
— to  observe  piety,  justice,  obedience,  honesty,  and 
secresy,  "  preserving  alike  the  books  of  their  sect,  and 
the  names  of  tin:  angels"  (Joseph.  B.  J.  ii.  8,  §7). 
4.  The  order  itself  was  regulated  by  an  internal 


ESSENES 

jurisdiction.  Excommunication  was  equivalent  to 
a  slow  death,  since  an  Essene  could  not  take  food 
prepared  by  strangers  for  fear  of  pollution.  All 
tilings  were  held  in  common,  without  distinction  of 
property  or  house  ;  and  special  provision  was  made 
for  the  relief  of  the  poor.  Self-denial,  temperance, 
and  labour — especially  agin  culture — were  the  marks 
of  the  outward  life  of  the  Essenes ;  purity  and 
divine  communion  the  objects  of  their  aspiration. 
Slavery,  war,  and  commerce  were  alike  forbidden 
(Philo,  Quod  am.  prob.  1.  §12.  p.  877  M.)  ;  and, 
according  to  Philo,  their  conduct  generally  was 
directed  by  three  rules,  "  the  love  of  God,  the  love 
of  virtue,  and  the  love  of  man"  (Philo,  I.  c). 

5.  In  doctrine,  as  has  been  seen  already,  they 
did  not  differ  essentially  from  strict  Pharisees. 
Moses  was  honoured  by  them  next  to  God  (Joseph. 
B.  J.  ii.  8,  9).  They  observed  the  Sabbath  with 
singular  strictness  ;  and  though  they  were  unable 
to  offer  sacrifices  at  Jerusalem,  probably  from 
regard  to  purity  (5ia<pop6T7iri  ayvtiuw),  they  sent 
gifts  thither  (Jos.  Ant.  xviii.  2,  5):  at  the  same 
time,  like  most  ascetics,  they  turned  their  attention 
specially  to  the  mysteries  of  the  spiritual  world, 
and  looked  upon  the  body  as  a  mere  prison  of  the 
soul.  They  studied  and  practised  with  signal 
success,  according  to  Josephus,  the  art  of  prophecy 
(Joseph.  B.  J.  ii.  8;  cf.  Ant.  xv.  10,  §5;  B.  J. 
i.  3,  §5)  ;  and  familiar  intercourse  with  nature 
gave  them  an  unusual  knowledge  of  physical 
truths.  They  asserted  with  peculiar  boldness  the 
absolute  power  and  foreknowledge  of  God  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xiii.  5,  §9,  xviii.  1,  §5)  ;  and  disparaged  the 
various  forms  of  mental  philosophy  as  useless  or 
beyond  the  range  of  man  (Philo,  I.  c.  p.  877). 

6.  The  number  of  the  Essenes  is  roughly  esti- 
mated by  Philo  at  4000  (Philo,  /.  c),  and  Jose- 
phus says  that  there  were  "  more  thau  4000  "  who 
observed  their  ride  (Ant.  xviii.  2,  §5).  Their  best- 
known  settlements  were  on  the  N.W.  shore  of  the 
Dead  Sea  (Philo;  Plin.  11.  cc),  but  others  lived  in 
scattered  communities  throughout  Palestine,  and 
perhaps  also  in  cities  (Jos.  B.  J.  ii.  8,  §4.  Cf. 
[Hippol.]  Philos.  ix.  20). 

7.  In  the  Talmadic  writings  there  is,  as  has 
been  already  said,  no  direct  mention  of  the  Essenes, 
but  their  existence  is  recognised  by  the  notice  of 
peculiar  points  of  practice  and  teaching.  Under 
the  titles  of"  the  pious,"  "  the  weakly"  (i.  c.  witli 
study),  "  the  retiring,"  their  maxims  are  quoted 
with  respect,  and  many  of  the  traits  preserved 
in  Josephus  find  parallels  in  the  notices  of  the 
Talmud  (Z.  Frankel,  Zcitschrift,  Dec.  1846,  pp. 
451  ff.  Mmatsschrift,  1853,  pp.  37  fi'.).  The 
four  stages  of  purity  which  are  distinguished  by 
the  doctors  (Chagiga,  18  a,  ap.  Frankel,  I.  c.  451) 
correspond  in  a  singular  manner  with  the  four 
classes  into  which  the  Essenes  are  said  to  have 
been  divided  (Joseph.  B.  J.  ii.  8,  §10) ;  and  the 
periods  of  probation  observed  in  the  two  cases  ofler 
similar  coincidences. 

8.  But  the  best  among  the  Jews  felt  the  peril  of 
Essenism  as  a  system,  and  combined  to  discourage 
it.  They  shrank  with  an  instinctive  dread  from 
the  danger  of  connecting  asceticism  with  spiritual 
power,  and  cherished  the  great  truth  which  lay  in 
the  saying  "  Doctrine  is  not  in  heaven."  The 
miraculous  energy  which  was  attributed  to  mystics 
was  regarded  by  them  rather  as  a  source  of  sus- 
picion than  of  respect;  and  theosophic  speculations 
were  condemned  with  emphatic  distinctness  (Frankel, 
Monatsschrift,  1853,  pp.  b'2  if.,  68,  71). 


ESTHER 

9.  The  character  of  Essenism  limited  its  spread. 
Out  of  Palestine,  Levitical  purity  was  impossible, 
for  the  very  land  was  impure ;  and  thus  there  is 
no  trace  of  the  sect  in  Babylonia.  The  case  was 
different  in  Egypt,  where  Judaism  assumed  a  new 
shape  from  its  intimate  connexion  with  Greece. 
Here  the  original  form  in  which  it  was  moulded 
was  represented  not  by  direct  copies,  but  by  ana- 
logous forms  ;  and  the  tendency  which  gave  birth 
to  the  Essenes  found  a  fresh  development  in  the 
pure  speculation  of  the  Therapeutae.  These  Alex- 
andrine mystics  abjured  the  practical  labours  which 
rightly  belonged  to  the  Essenes,  and  gave  them- 
selves up  to  the  study  ot  the  inner  meaning  of  the 
Sciiptures.  The  impossibility  of  fulfilling  tin'  law 
naturally  led  them  to  substitute  a  spiritual  for  a 
literal  interpretation ;  and  it  was  their  object  to 
ascertain  its  meaning  by  intense  labour,  and  then 
to  satisfy  its  requirements  by  absolute  devotion. 
The  "  whole  day,  from  sunrise  to  sunset,  was 
spent  in  mental  discipline."  Bodily  wants  were 
often  forgotten  in  the  absorbing  pursuit  of  wisdom, 
and  "  meat  and  drink"  were  at  all  times  held  to  be 
unworthy  of  the  light  ( l'hilo,  [)■:  ait.  contempt.  §4-). 

10.  From  the  nntuie  of  the  case  Essenism  in 
its  extreme  form  could  exercise  very  little  influence 
on  Christianity.  In  all  its  practical  bearings  it 
was  diametrically  opposed  to  the  Apostolic  teach- 
ing. The  dangers  which  it  involved  were  far 
more  clear  to  the  eye  of  the  Christian  than  they 
were  to  the  Jewish  doctors.  The  only  real  simi- 
larity between  Essenism  and  Christianity  lay  in 
the  common  element  of  true  Judaism;  and  there 
is  little  excuse  for  modern  writers  who  follow  the 
error  of  Eusebius,  and  confound  the  society  of  the 
Therapeutae  with  Christian  brotherhoods.  Nation- 
ally, however,  the  Essenes  occupy  the  same  position 
as  that  to  which  John  the  Baptist  was  personally 
called.  They  mark  the  close  of  the  old,  the 
longing  for  the  new,  but  in  this  case  without  the 
promise.  In  place  of  the  message  of  the  coming 
'•kingdom"  they  coidd  proclaim  only  individual 
purity  and  isolation.  At  a  later  time  traces  of 
Essenism  appear  in  the  Clementines,  and  the 
strange  account  which  Epiphanius  gives  of  the 
Osseni  ,  'O<r<ri\voi j  appears  to  point  to  some  combina- 
tion of  Essene  and  pseudo-Christian  doctrines  ffaer. 
six.).  After  the  Jewish  war  the  Essenes  disappear 
from  history.  The  character  of  Judaism  was  changed, 
and  ascetic  Pharisaism  became almosl  impossible. 

11.  The  original  sources  for  the  history  of  the 
Essenes  have  been  already  noticed.  Of  modern 
essays,  the  most  original  and  important  are  those 
of  Frankel  in  his  Zeitschrift,  1846,  pp.  441-461, 
and  Monatsschrift,  L853,  30  ff.,  taken  in  con- 
junction with  the  wider  view  of  .lost,  Gcach.  d. 
Judenth.  i.  207  IF.  The  account  of  Hilgenfeld 
{.hid.  Apokalyptik.  '_'4.')  if.  i  is  interesting  and  inge- 
nious, but  essentially  one-sided  and  subservient  to 
the  writer's  theory  (cf.  Volkmar,  Das  oierte  /■'. 
Ezra,  60).  Gfrorer  (Phib,  ii.  ^M  ff.),  Dahne 
(Jud.-Alex.  Relig.-Philos.  i.  467  ff.),  and  Ewald 
[Oesch.  "'.  Volk.  Tsr.  iv.  420  IF.),  all  contribute 
important  sketches  from  their  respective  points  of 
view.  The  earlier  literature,  as  far  as  it  is  of  any 
value,  is  embodied  in  these  works.       [B.  V.  W.J 

ESTHER  OFlpX,  the  planet  Venus;  'Eo-^p), 

the  Persian  nan f  Hadassah,  daughter  of  Abi- 

hail  the  son  ot'  Shimei,  the  s"i,  ot'  Bash,  a  Benjamite 
[MORDECAI,  and  cousin  of  Mordecai].  The  ex- 
planation of  her  oW  name  Hadassah,  by  the  addition 


ESTHER 


583 


of  her  new  name,  by  which  she  was  better  known, 
with  the  formula,  IfiDN  NT!,  "that  is  Esther" 
(Est.  ii.  7),  is  exactly  analogous  to  the  usual  ad- 
dition of  the  modern  names  of  towns  to  explain  the 
use  of  the  old  obsolete  ones  (Gen.  xxxv.  lit,  27; 
Josh.  xv.  10,  &c).  Esther  was  a  beautiful  Jewish 
maiden,  whose  ancestor  Kish  had  been  among  the 
captives  led  away  from  Jerusalem  (part  of  which 
was  in  the  tribe  of  Benjamin)  by  Nebuchadnezzar 
when  Jehoiachin  was  taken  captive.  She  was  an 
orphan  without  father  or  mother,  and  had  been 
brought  up  by  her  cousin  Mordecai,  who  had  an 
office  in  the  household  of  Ahasuerus  king  of  Persia, 
and  dwelt  at  "Shushan  the  palace."  When  Vashti 
was  dismissed  from  being  queen,  and  all  the  fairest 
virgins  of  the  kingdom  had  been  collected  at  Shu- 
shan for  the  king  to  make  choice  of  a  successor  to 
her  from  among  them,  the  choice  fell  upon  Esther, 
and  she  was  crowned  queen  in  the  room  of  Vashti 
with  much  pomp  and  rejoicing.  The  king  was  not 
aware,  however,  of  her  race  and  parentage  ;  and  so, 
with  the  careless  profusion  of  a  sensual  despot,  on 
the  representation  of  Haman  the  Agagite,  his  prime 
minister,  that  the  Jews  scattered  through  his  em- 
pire were  a  pernicious  race,  he  gave  him  full  power 
and  authority  to  kill  them  all,  young  and  old, 
women  ami  children,  and  take  possession  of  all  their 
property.  The  means  taken  by  Esther  to  avert 
this  great  calamity  from  her  people  and  her  kindred, 
at  the  risk  of  her  own  life,  and  to  turn  upon 
Haman  the  destruction  he  had  plotted  against  the 
Jews,  and  the  success  of  her  scheme,  by  which  she 
changed  their  mourning,  fasting,  weeping,  and  wail- 
ing, into  light  and  gladness  ,and  joy  and  honour, 
and  became  for  ever  especially  honoured  amongst 
her  countrymen,  are  fully  related  in  the  book  of 
Esther.  The  feast  of  Purim,  i.  c.  of  Lots,  was 
appointed  by  Esther  and  Mordecai  to  be  kept  on  the 
14th  and  15th  of  the  month  Adar  (February  and 
March)  in  commemoration  of  this  great  deliverance. 
[Purim.]  The  decree  of  Esther  to  this  effect  is  the 
last  thing  recorded  of  her  (v.  32).  The  continuous 
celebration  of  this  least  by  the  Jews  to  the  present 
day  is  thought  to  be  a  strong  evidence  of  the  his- 
torical truth  of  the  book.     [Esther,  Book  of.] 

The  questions  which  arise  in  attempting  to  give 
Esther  her  place  in  profane  histoiy  are — 

I.  Who  is  Ahasuerus?  This  question  is  answered 
under  AHASUERUS,  and  the  reasons  there  given 
lead  to  the  conclusion  that  he  was  Xerxes  the  sou 
of  1  >aiius  Hystaspis. 

II.  The  second  inquiry  is,  who  then  was  Esther? 
Artissona,  Atossa,  and  others  are  indeed  excluded 
by  the  above  decision  ;  but  are  we  to  conclude  with 
Scaliger,  that  because  Ahasuerus  is  Xerxes,  there- 
fore Esther  is  Amestris?  Surely  not.  None  of  the 
historical  particulars  related  by  Herodotus  concern- 
ing Amestiis  make  it  possible  to  identity  her  with 
Esther.      Amestiis   was   the   daughter   ot'  Otanes 

(OnophaS    in    Ctesias),   one  ot'  Xerxes'  generals,  and 

brother  to  hi.-,  father  Darius  (Herod,  vii.  61,  82). 
Esther's  lather  and  mother  had  been  Jews. 
tris  was  wit'e  to  Xerxes  before  the  Greek  expedition 
(Herod,  vii.  61),  and  her  sons  accompanied  Xerxes 
to  Greece    Herod,  vii.  39),  and  had  all  tin., 

to  man's   .state  at   the  death  ot'  Xerxes    in  the  20th 
war  of  his   reign.      Darius,  the  eldest,  had  married 

immediately  after  the  return  ti Greece.      Esther 

did   not  enter  the    kind's   palace  till    his   7th 

just  the  time  of  Darius's  marriage.    These  object  ions 

elusive,  without  adding  the  dill.ien.  .•  ot'  cha- 
racter of  the  two  queens.     The  truth   is  that  his- 


584 


ESTHER 


tory  is  wholly  silent  both  about  Vashti  and  Esther. 
Herodotus  only  happens  to  mention  one  of  Xerxes' 
wives ;  Scripture  only  mentions  two,  if  indeed 
either  of  them  were  wives  at  all.  But  since  we 
know  that  it  was  the  custom  of  the  Persian  kings 
before  Xerxes  to  have  several  wives,  besides  their 
concubines;  that  Cyrus  had  several  (Herod,  iii.  3) ; 
that  Cambyses  had  four  whose  names  are  men- 
tioned, and  others  besides  (iii.  31,  32,  68);  that 
Smerdis  had  several  (ib.  68,  69)  ;  and  that  Darius 
had  six  wives,  whose  names  are  mentioned  (ib. 
passim),  it  is  most  improbable  that  Xerxes  should 
have  been  content  with  one  wife.  Another  strong 
objection  to  the  idea  of  Esther  being  his  one  legiti- 
mate wife,  and  perhaps  to  her  being  strictly  his 
wife  at  all,  is  that  the  Persian  kings  selected  their 
wives  not  from  the  harem,  but,  if  not  foreign  prin- 
cesses, from  the  noblest  Persian  families,  either 
their  own  nearest  relatives,  or  from  one  of  the  seven 
great  Persian  houses.  It  seems  therefore  natural 
to  conclude  that  Esther,  a  captive,  and  one  of  the 
harem,  was  not  of  the  highest  rank  of  wives,  but 
that  a  special  honour,  with  the  name  of  queen,  may 
have  been  given  to  her,  as  to  Vashti  before  her,  as 
the  favourite  concubine  or  inferior  wife,  whose 
offspring,  however,  if  she  had  any,  would  not  have 
succeeded  to  the  Persian  throne.  This  view,  which 
seems  to  be  strictly  in  accordance  with  what  we 
know  of  the  manners  of  the  Persian  court,  removes 
all  difficulty  in  reconciling  the  history  of  Esther 
with  the  scanty  accounts  left  us  by  profane  authors 
of  the  reign  of  Xerxes. 

It  only  remains  to  remark  on  the  character  of 
Esther  as  given  in  the  Bible.  She  appears  there  as 
■  a  woman  of  deep  piety,  faith,  courage,  patriotism, 
and  caution,  combined  with  resolution  ;  a  dutiful 
daughter  to  her  adoptive  father,  docile  and  obedient 
to  his  counsels,  and  anxious  to  share  the  king's 
favour  with  him  for  the  good  of  the  Jewish  people. 
That  she  was  a  virtuous  woman,  and,  as  far  as  her 
situation  made  it  possible,  a  good  wife  to  the  king, 
her  continued  influence  over  him  for  so  long  a  time 
warrants  us  to  infer.  And  there  must  have  been  a 
singular  grace  and  charm  in  her  aspect  and  manners, 
since  she  "obtained  favour  in  the  sight  of  all  that 
looked  upon  her"  (ii.  15).  That  she  was  raised 
up  as  an  instrument  in  the  hands  of  God  to  avert 
the  destruction  of  the  Jewish  people,  and  to  afford 
them  protection,  and  forward  their  wealth  and 
peace  in  their  captivity,  is  also  manifest  from  the 
Scripture  account.  But  to  impute  to  her  the  senti- 
ments put  into  her  mouth  by  the  apocryphal  author 
of  ch.  xiv.,  or  to  accuse  her  of  cruelty,  because  of 
the  death  of  Haman  and  his  sons,  and  the  second 
day's  slaughter  of  the  Jews'  enemies  at  Shushan, 
is  utterly  to  ignore  the  manners  and  feelings  of  her 
age  and  nation,  and  to  judge  her  by  the  standard 
of  Christian  morality  in  our  own  age  and  country 
instead.  In  fact  the  simplicity  and  truth  to  nature 
nt'  the  Scriptural  narrative  afford  a  striking  con- 
trast, both  with  the  forced  and  florid  amplifications 
of  the  apocryphal  additions,  and  with  the  senti- 
ments of  some  later  commentators.  It  may  be 
convenient  to  add  that  the  3rd  year  of  Xerxes  was 
B.C.  488,  his  7th,  479,  and  his  12th,  474  (Clinton, 
F.  H.),  and  that  the  simultaneous  battles  of  Plataea 
and  Mycale,  which  frightened  Xerxes  from  Sardis 
(Diod.  Sic.  xi.  §36)  to  Susa,  happened,  according  to 


ESTHER,  BOOK  OF 

Prideaux  and  Clinton,  in  September  of  his  7th  year. 
For  a  fuller  discussion  of  the  identity  of  Esther,  and 
different  views  of  the  subject,  see  Prideaux's  Con- 
nexion, i.  236,  243,  297,  s'qq.,  and  Petav.  de  doctr. 
letup,  xii.  27,  28,  who  make  Esther  wife  of 
Artaxerxes  Longim.,  following  Joseph.  Ant.  xi.  6, 
as  he  followed  the  LXX.  and  the  apocryphal  Esther  ; 
J.  Scalig.  (de  emend,  temp.  vi.  591;  Animadv. 
Eiiscb.  100)  making  Ahasuerus,  Xerxes ;  Usher 
(Annul.  Vet.  Test.)  making  him  Darius  Hystaspis  ; 
Loftus,  Chaldaea,  &c.  Eusebius  (Canon.  Chron. 
338,  ed.  Mediol.)  rejects  the  hypothesis  of  Artaxerxes 
Longim.,  on  the  score  of  the  silence  of  the  books  of 
Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  and  adopts  that  of  Artaxerxes 
Mnemon,  following  the  Jews,  who  make  Darius 
Codomanus  to  be  the  same  as  Darius  Hystaspis, 
and  the  son  of  Artaxerxes  by  Esther!  It  is  most 
observable  that  all  Petavius's  and  Prideaux's  argu- 
ments against  Scaliger's  view  apply  solely  to  the 
statement  that  Esther  is  Amestris.         [A.  C.  H.] 

ESTHER,  BOOK  OF,  one  of  the  latest  of 
the  canonical  books  of  Scripture,  having  been 
written  late  in  the  reign  of  Xerxes,  or  early  m  that 
of  his  son  Artaxerxes  Longimanus.  The  author  is 
not  known,  but  may  very  probably  have  been 
Mordeeai  himself.  The  minute  details  given  of  the 
great  banquet,  of  the  names  of  the  chamberlains  and 
eunuchs,  and  Hainan's  wife  and  sons,  and  of  the 
customs  and  regulations  of  the  palace,  betoken 
that  the  author  lived  at  Shushan,  and  probably  at 
court,  while  his  no  less  intimate  acquaintance 
with  the  most  private  affairs  both  of  Esther  and 
Mordeeai  well  suits  the  hypothesis  of  the  latter 
being  himself  the  writer.  It  is  also  in  itself  pro- 
bable that  as  Daniel,  Ezra,  and  Nehemiah,  who 
held  high  offices  under  the  Persian  kiugs,  wrote  an 
account  of  the  affairs  of  their  nation,  in  which  they 
took  a  leading  part,  so  Mordeeai  should  have  re- 
corded the  transactions  of  the  book  of  Esther  like- 
wise. The  termination  of  the  book  with  the  men- 
tion of  Mordecai's  elevation  and  government,  agrees 
also  well  with  this  view,  which  has  the  further 
sanction  of  many  great  names,  as  Aben  Ezra,  and 
most  of  the  Jews,  Vatablus,  Carpzovius,  and  many 
others.  Those  who  ascribe  it  to  Ezra,  or  the  men 
of  the  great  Synagogue,  may  have  merely  meant 
that  Ezra  edited  and  added  it  to  the  canon  of  Scrip- 
ture, which  he  probably  did,  bringing  it,  and  per- 
haps the  book  of  Daniel,  with  him  from  Babylon  to 
Jerusalem. 

The  book  of  Esther  appears  in  a  different  form 
in  the  LXX.,a  and  the  translations  therefrom, 
from  that  in  which  it  is  found  in  the  Hebrew 
Bible.  In  speaking  of  it  we  shall  first  speak  of  the 
canonical  book  found  in  Hebrew,  to  which  also  the 
above  observations  refer ;  and  next  of  the  Greek 
book  with  its  apocryphal  additions.  The  canonical 
Esther  then  is  placed  among  the  hagiographa  or 
D'Q-trG  by  the  Jews,  and  in  that  first  portion  of 
them  which  they  call  the  five  volumes,  n'l?3D.  It 
is  sometimes  emphatically  called  Megillah,  without 
other  distinction,  and  was  held  in  such  high  repute 
by  the  Jews  that  it  is  a  saying  of  Maimonides  that 
in  the  days  of  Messiah  the  prophetic  and  hagio- 
graphical  books  will  pass  away,  except  the  book  of 
Esther,  which  will  remain  with  the  Pentateuch. 
This  book  is  read  through  by  the  Jews  in  their 
synagogues  at  the  feast  of  Purim,  when  it  was.  and 


a  It  is  not  intended  by  this  expression  to  imply 
that  the  translators  of  the  Hebrew  Bible  into  Creek 
were  also  the  authors  of  the  apocryphal  additions. 


The  term  LXX.  is  used  to  indicate  the  whole  Greek 
volume  as  we  now  have  it. 


ESTHER,  BOOK  OF 

is  still  in  some  synagogues,  the  custom  at  the  men- 
tion of  Hainan's  name  to  hiss,  and  stamp,  and 
clench  tin"  list,  and  cry,  Let  his  name  he  blotted 
out,  may  the  name  of  the  wicked  int.  It  is  said 
also  that  the  names  of  Hainan's  ten  sous  are  read 
in  our  breath,  to  signify  that  they  all  expired  at  the 
same  instant  of  time.  Even  in  writing  the  names 
of  Hainan's  sons  in  the  7th,  8th,  and  9th  verses  of 
Esth.  ix.,  the  Jewish  scribes  have  contrived  to  ex- 
press their  abhorrence  of  the  rare  of  Hainan.  For 
these  ten  names  are  written  in  three  perpendicular 
columns  of  :\,  Li,  4.  as  if  they  were  hanging  upon 
three  parallel  cords,  three  upon  each  cord,  one 
above  another,  to  represent  the  hanging  of  Hainan's 
sons  (Stehelin's  Rabbin.  Literat.  vol.  ii.  p.  349). 
The  Targum  of  Esth.  ix.,  in  Walton's  Polyglott,b 
inserts  a  very  minute  account  of  the  exact  position 
occupied  by  Hainan  and  his  sons  on  the  gallows, 
the  height  from  the  ground,  and  the  interval  be- 
tween each ;  according  to  which  they  all  hung  in 
one  line.  Hainan  at  the  top,  and  his  ten  sons  at 
intervals  of  half  a  cubit  under  him.  It  is  added 
that  Zeresh  and  Hainan's  seventy  surviving  sons  tied, 
and  begged  their  bread  from  door  to  door,  in  evi- 
dent allusion  to  Ps.  cix.  9,  10.  It  has  often  been 
remarked  as  a  peculiarity  of  this  hook  that  the 
name  of  God  does  not  once  occur  in  it.  Some  of 
the  ancient  Jewish  teachers  were  somewhat  stag- 
gered  at  this,  but  others  accounted  for  it  by  saying 
that  it  was  a  transcript,  under  Divine  inspiration, 
from  the  Chronicles  of  the  Medes  ami  Persians,  and 
that  being  meant  to  be  read  by  heathen,  the  Sacred 
name  was  wisely  omitted.  Baxter  (Sainfs  Nest, 
pt.  iv.  eh.  iii.)  speaks  of  the  Jews  using  to  cast  to 
♦  ho  ground  the  book  of  Esther,  because  the  name  of 
Cod  was  not  in  it.  But  Wolf  (U.  If.  pt.  ii. 
p.  90)  denies  this,  and  says  that  if  any  such  custom 
prevailed  among  the  Oriental  Jew--,  to  whom  it  is 
ascribed  by  Sandys,  it  must  have  been  rather  to 
express  their  hatred  of  Hainan.  Certain  it  is  that 
this  book  was  always  reckoned  in  the  Jewish  (anon, 
and  is  named  or  implied  in  almost  every  enumera- 
tion of  the  books  composing  it,  from  Josephus 
downwards.  Jerome  mentions  it  by  name  in  the 
Prolog.  Gal.,  in  his  Epistle  to  l'aulinus,  and  in  the 
preface  to  Esther;  as  does  Augustine,  de  Citnt.  Dei, 
and  de  Doctr.  Christ.,  and  Origen,  as  cited  by 
Eusebius  (//<'•■/.  Eccles.  vi.  25  ,  and  many  others. 
Some  modern  commentators,  both  English  and 
German,  have  objected  to  the  contents  of  the  book 
as  improbable;  but  it'  it  be  true,  as  Diodorus  Sic. 
relates,  teat  Xerxes  put  the  Medians  foremost  at 
Thermopylae  on  purpose  that  they  might  !»■  all 
killed,  because  he  thought  they  were  not  thoroughly 

re( ile  1  to  the  loss  of  their  national  supremacy,  it 

Iv  not  incredible  that  he  should  have  given 
permission  to   Hainan  to  destroy  a  few   thi 
strange  people  like  the  Jews,  who  were  represented 
to  be  injurious  to  his  empire,  ai    '  t  to  his 

laws.     Nor  again,  when  we  remember  what  Hero- 
dotus relates  of  Xerxes  in  respect  to  promisi 
at  banquets,  can    we   deem  it   incredible  that   lie 
should   perform  his  promise  to  Esther  to  reverse 

the  decree  in  the  only  way  that  seei I  pi 

It  is  liki  Iv  t.m  thai  the  secret  friends  and  adherents 
of  Hainan  would  be  the  persons  to  attack  the  Jews, 
which  would  be  a  reason  why  Ahasuevus  would 
rather  rejoice  at  their  destruction.      In  all  oth 

h  There  are  two  Targuma  to  Esther,  both  of  late 
date,     see  Wolfs  /;,/,/.  ilrhr.  Pars  11,  1171-81. 

'  Dr.  W.  Lee  also  has  some  remarks  on  the  proof 
of  the  hiatotical  character  of  the  book  derived  from 


ESTHER,  BOOK  OF 


585 


spects'the  writer  shows  such  an  accurate  acquaint- 
ance with  Persian  manners,  and  is  so  true  to  history 
and  chronology,  as  to  afford  the  strongest  internal 
evidences  to  the  truth  of  the  book.  The  casual 
way  in  which  the  author  of  2  Mace.  xv.  3G  alludes 
to  the  feast  of  Purim,  under  the  name  of  "  Mar- 
dochaeus's  day,"  as  kept  by  the  Jews  in  the  time  of 
Nicanor,  is  another  strong  testimony  in  its  favour, 
and  tends  to  justify  the  strong  expression  of  Dr. 
Pee  (quoted  in  Winston's  Josephus,  xi.  ch.  vi.!, 
that  "  the  truth  of  this  history  is  demonstrated  by 
the  feast  of  Purim,  kept  up  from  that  time  to  this 
very  day."  c 

The  style  of  writing  is  remarkably  chaste  and 
simple,  and  the  narrative  of  the  struggle  in  Esther's 
mind  between  fear  and  the  desire  to  save  her  people, 
and  of  the  final  resolve  made  in  the  strength  of 
that  help,  which  was  to  be  sought  in  prayer  and 
lasting,  is  very  touching  and  beautiful,  and  without 
any  exaggeration.  It  does  not  in  the  least  savour 
of  romance.  The  Hebrew  is  very  like  that  of 
Ezra  and  parts  of  the  Chronicles  ;  generally  pure, 
but  mixed  with  some  words  of  Persian  origin,  and 
some  ofChaldaic  affinity,  which  do  not  occur  in  older 
Hebrew,  such  as  "lONE,  j'"P-T2,  t^flS,  B*3TB\ 

In  short  it  is  just  what  one  would  expect  to 
find  in  a  work  of  the  age  which  the  hook  of  Esther 
pretends  to  belong  to. 

As  regards  the  LXX.  version  of  the  hook  (of 
which  there  are  two  texts,  called  by  Dr.  Fritzsehe, 
A.  and  B.),  it  consists  of  the  canonical  Esther  with 
various  interpolations  prefixed,  interspersed,"1  and 
added  at  the  close.  Head  in  Greek  it  makes  a 
complete  and  continuous  history,  except  that  here 
and  there,  as  e.g.  in  the  repetition  of  Mordecai's 
pedigree,  the  patch-work  betrays  itself.  The  chief 
additions  are,  Mordecai's  pedigree,  his  dream,  and 
his  appointment  to  sit  in  the  king's  gate,  in  the 
second  year  of  Artaxerxes,  prefixed.  Then,  in  the 
third  chapter,  a  pretended  copy  of  Artaxerxes's 
decree  for  the  destruction  of  the  Jews  added, 
written  in  thorough  Greek  style,  a  prayer  of  Mor- 
decai  inserted  in  the  fourth  chapter,  followed  by  a 
prayer  of  Esther,  in  which  she  excuses  herself  for 
being  wife  to  the  uncircumcised  king,  and  denies 
having  eaten  anything  or  drunk  wine  at  the  table 
of  Hainan  ;  an  amplification  of  v.  1-3  :  a  pretended 
copy  of  Artaxerxes's  letter  for  reversing  the  previous 
decree,  also  of  manifestly  Greek  origin  in  ch.  viii., 
in  which  Hainan  is  called  a  Macedonian,  and  is 
accused  of  having  plotted  to  transfer  the  empire 
from  the  Persians  to  the  Macedonians,  a  palpable 
proof  of  this  portion  having  been  composed  after 
the  overthrow  of  the  Persian  empire  by  the  (  I  reeks  ; 
and  lastly  an  addition  to  the  tenth  chapter,  in 
which  Mordecai  shows  how  his  dream  was  fulfilled 
in  the  events  that  had  happened,  gives  glorj  to 
God,  and  prescribes  the  observations  of  the  ('east  of 
the  Nth  and  1 5th  Adar.  'file  whole  book  is 
with  the  following  entry: — "In  the  fourth 
of  the  reign  of  Ptolemaeus  and  <  1. 1 
s,  who  said  he  was  a  priest  ami  Levite, 
and  Ptolemy  his  son,  brought  this  epistle  ofPh 

which  they  said  was  the  same,  and  that  l.v  in 

the  son  of  Ptolemy,  that  was  in  Jerusalem,  had 
interpreted  it."  This  entry  was  apparently  in- 
tende  I   I  thority  to  this  Gr» 


the  feast  of  Purim,  as  well  as  on  otln  i  |pni>:|s 

of  II.  S.  430,  sqi 

*  The  Targum   to   i    ther   contains  othei   copious 
embellishments  ana  amplifications.     [Mobdecai.] 


586 


ESTHER,  BOOK  OF 


Esther,  by  pretending  that  it  was  a  certified 
translation  from  the  Hebrew  original.  Ptolemy 
Philometor,  who  is  here  meant,6  began  to  reign 
B.C.  181.  Though,  however,  the  interpolations  of 
the  Greek  copy  are  thus  manifest,  they  make  a 
consistent  and  intelligible  story.  But  the  Apocry- 
phal additions  as  they  are  inserted  in  some  editions 
of  the  Latin  Vulgate,  and  in  the  English  Bible,  are 
incomprehensible;  the  history  of  which  is  this: — 
When  Jerome  translated  the  book  of  Esther,  he 
first  gave  the  version  of  the  Hebrew  aloue  as  being 
alone  authentic.  He  then  added  at  the  end  a  ver- 
sion in  Latin  of  those  several  passages  which  he 
found  in  the  LXX.,  and  which  were  not  in  the 
Hebrew,  stating  where  each  passage  came  in,  and 
marking  them  all  with  an  obelus.  The  first  pas- 
sage so  given  is  that  which  forms  the  continuation 
of  chapter  x.  (which  of  course  immediately  pre- 
cedes it),  ending  with  the  above  entry  about  Dosi- 
theus.  Having  annexed  this  conclusion,  he  then 
gives  the  Prooemium,  which  he  says  forms  the 
beginning  of  the  Greek  Vulgate,  beginning  with 
what  is  now  verse  2  of  chapter  xi. ;  and  so  pro- 
ceeds with  the  other  passages.  But  in  subsequent 
editions  all  Jerome's  explanatory  matter  has  been 
swept  away,  and  the  disjointed  portions  have  been 
printed  as  chapters  xi.,  xii.,  xiii.,  xiv.,  xv.,  xvi.,  as 
if  they  formed  a  narrative  in  continuance  of  the 
Canonical  book.  The  extreme  absurdity  of  this 
arrangement  is  nowhere  more  apparent  than  in 
chapter  xi.,  where  the  verse  (1),  which  closes  the 
whole  book  in  the  Greek  copies,  and  in  St.  Jerome's 
Latin  translation,  is  actually  made  immediately  to 
precede  that  (ver.  2),  which  is  the  very  first  verse 
of  the  Prooemium.  As  regards  the  place  assigned 
to  Esther  in  the  LXX.,  in  the  Vatican  edition,  and 
most  others,  it  comes  between  Judith  and  Job.  Its 
place  before  Job  is  a  remnant  of  the  Hebrew  order, 
Esther  there  closing  the  historical,  and  Job  begin- 
ning the  metrical  Megilloth.  Tobit  and  Judith 
have  been  placed  between  it  and  Nehemiah,  doubt- 
less for  chronological  reasons.  But  in  the  very 
ancient  Codex  published  by  Tischendorf,  and  called 
C.  Friderico-Augustaniis,  Esther  immediately  fol- 
lows Nehemiah  (included  under  Esdras  B),  and 
precedes  Tobit.  This  Codex,  which  contains  the 
Apocryphal  additions  to  Esther,  was  copied  from 
one  written  by  the  martyr  Pamphilus  with  his  own 
hand,  as  far  as  to  the  end  of  Esther,  and  is  ascribed 
by  the  editor  to  the  fourth  century. 

As  regards  the  motive  which  led  to  these  addi- 
tions, one  seems  evidently  to  have  been  to  supply 
what  was  thought  au  omission  in  the  Hebrew  book, 
by  introducing  copious  mention  of  the  name  of  God. 
It  is  further  evident  from  the  other  Apocryphal 
books,  and  additions  to  Canonical  Scripture,  which 
appear  in  the  LXX.,  such  as  Bel  and  the  Dragon, 
Susannah,  the  Song  of  the  Three  Children,  &c, 
that,  the  Alexandrian  Jews  loved  to  dwell  upon  the 
events  of  the  Babylonish  captivity,  and  especially 
upon  the  Divine  interpositions  in  their  behalf, 
probably  as  being  the  latest  manifestations  of  God's 
special  care  for  Israel.  Traditional  stories  would  be 
likely  to  be  current  among  them,  and  these  would 
be  sure  sooner  or  later  to  be  committed  to  writing, 
with  additions  according  to  the  fancy  of  the  writers. 


e  He  is  the  same  as  is  frequently  mentioned  in 
1  Mace.  ;  e.  g.  x.  57,  xi.  12  ;  cf.  Joseph.  A.  J.  xiii. 
4,  §1,  5,  and  Clinton,  F.  E.  iii.  p.  393.  Dositheus 
seems  to  be  a  Greek  version  of  Mattithiah ;  Ptolemy 


ESTHER,  BOOK  OF 

The  most  popular  among  them,  or  those  which  had 
most  of  an  historical  basis,  or  which  were  written 
by  men  of  most  weight,  or  whose  origin  was  lust 
in  the  most  remote  antiquity,  or  which  most  grati- 
fied the  national  feelings,  would  acquire  something 
of  sacred  authority  (especially  in  the  absence  of  real 
inspiration  dictating  fresh  Scriptures),  and  get  ad- 
mitted into  the  volume  of  Scripture,  less  rigidly 
fenced  by  the  Hellenistic  than  by  the  Hebrew  Jews. 
No  subject  would  be  more  likely  to  engage  the 
thoughts,  and  exercise  the  pens  of  such  writers, 
than  the  deliverance  of  the  Jews  from  utter  de- 
struction by  the  intervention  of  Esther  and  Mor- 
decai,  and  the  overthrow  of  their  enemies  in  their 
stead.  Those  who  made  the  additions  to  the  He- 
brew narrative  according  to  the  religious  taste  and 
feeling  of  their  own  times,  probably  acted  in  the 
same  spirit  as  others  have  often  done,  who  have 
added  florid  architectural  ornaments  to  temples 
which  were  too  plain  for  their  own  corrupted  taste. 
The  account  which  Josephus  follows  seems  to  have 
contained  yet  further  particulars,  as,  e.g.  the  name 
of  the  Eunuch's  servant,  a  Jew,  who  betrayed  the 
conspiracy  to  Mordecai ;  other  passages  from  the 
Persian  Chronicles  read  to  Ahasuerus,  besides  that 
relating  to  Mordecai,  and  amplifications  of  the  king's 
speech  to  Haman,  &c.  It  is  of  this  LXX.  version 
that  Athanasius  (Fest.  Epist.  39,  Oxf.  transl.) 
spoke  when  he  ascribed  the  book  of  Esther  to  the 
non-canonical  books  ;  and  this  also  is  perhaps  the 
reason  why  in  some  of  the  lists  of  the  Canonical 
books,  Esther  is  not  named,  as,  e.  g.  in  those  of 
Melito  of  Sardis  and  Gregory  Nizanzen,  unless  in 
these  it  is  included  under  some  other  book,  as 
Ruth,  or  Esdras f  (see  Whitaker,  Disput.  on  H. 
Scr.  Park.  Soc.  57,58;  Cosins  on  the  Canon  of 
Scr.  49,  50).  Origen,  singularly  enough,  takes  a 
different  line  in  his  Ep.  to  Africanus  (Oper.  i.  14). 
He  defends  the  canonicity  of  these  Greek  additions, 
though  he  admits  they  are  not  in  the  Hebrew. 
His  sole  argument,  unworthy  of  a  great  scholar,  is 
the  use  of  the  LXX.  in  the  churches,  an  argument 
which  embraces  equally  all  the  Apocryphal  books. 
Africanus,  in  his  Ep.  to  Origen,  had  made  the  being 
in  the  Hebrew  essential  to  canonicity,  as  Jerome 
did  later.  The  Council  of  Trent  pronounces  the 
whole  book  of  Esther  to  be  canonical,  and  Vata- 
blus  says  that  prior  to  that  decision  it  was  doubtful 
whether  or  no  Esther  was  to  be  included  in  the 
Canon,  some  authors  affirming,  and  some  denying 
it.  He  afterwards  qualifies  the  statement  by  saying 
that  at  all  events  the  seven  last  chapters  were 
doubtful.  Sixtus  Senensis,  in  spite  of  the  decision 
of  the  Council,  speaks  of  these  additions,  after  the 
example  of  Jerome,  as  "  lacinias  hinc  inde  quo- 
rumdam .  Scriptorum  temeritate  insertas,"  and 
thinks  that  they  are  chiefly  derived  from  Josephus, 
but  this  last  opinion  is  without  probability.  The 
manner  and  the  order  in  which  Josephus  cites 
them  {Ant.  xi.  vi.)  show  that  they  had  al- 
ready in 'his  days  obtained  currency  among  the 
Hellenistic  Jews  as  portions  of  the  Book  of  Esther  ; 
as  we  know  from  the  way  in  which  he  cites  other 
Apocryphal  books  that  they  were  current  like- 
wise ;  with  others  which  are  now  lost.  For  it  was 
probably  from  such  that  Josephus  derived  his  stories 


was  also  a  common  name  for  Jews  at  that  time. 

f  "  This  book  of  Esther,  or  sixth  of  Esdras,  as  it  is 
placed  in  some  of  the  most  ancient  copies  of  the 
Vulgate." — Lee's  Dissert,  on  '2d  Esdras,  p.  25. 


ETAM 

about  Moses,  about  Sanballat,  and  the  temple  on 
Mount  Gerizim,  ami  the  meeting  of  the  High-priest 
and  Alexander  the  Great.  But  these,  not  having 
happened  to  be  bound  up  with  the  LXX.,  perished. 
However,  the  marvellous  purity  with  which  the 
Hebrew  Canon  has  been  preserved,  under  the  Pro- 
vidence of  God,  is  brought  out  into  very  strong 
Ligljt,  by  the  contrast  of  the  Greek  volume.  Nor 
is  it  uninteresting  to  observe  how  the  relaxation  of 
the  peculiarity  of  their  national  character,  by  the 
Alexandrian  .lews,  implied  in  the  adoption  of  the 
Greek  language,  and  Greek  names,  seems  to  have 
been  accompanied  with  a  less  jealous,  and  con- 
sequently a  less  trustworthy  guardianship  of  their 
great  national  treasure,  "  the  oracles  of  God." 

See  further,  Bishop  Cosins,  on  the  Canon  of 
ILS.;  Wolf's  Bibl.  Hebr.  11,  88,  and  passim; 
Hotting.  Thesaur.  494;  Walton,  Proleg.  ix.  §13 ; 
Wbitaker,  Disput.  of  Script,  ch.  viii. ;  Dr.  O.  F. 
Fritzsche,  2htsatze  zum  lluohc  Esther ;  Baumgarten 
de  Fid<    Lib.  Esther,  &c.  [A.  C.  H.] 

E'TAM  [TXPy  ;  Mrdv  ;  Etam).  1.  A  village 
("l^rij  of  the  tribe  of  Simeon,  specified  only  in  the 
list  in  1  Chr.  iv.  32  (comp.  Josh.  xix.  7);  but 
that  it  is  intentionally  introduced  appears  from  the 
fact  that  the  number  of  places  is  summed  as  live, 
though  in  the  parallel  list  as  tour.  The  cities  of 
Simeon  appear  all  to  have  been  in  the  extreme  south 
of  the  country  (see  Joseph.  Ant.  v.  1,  §22),  Dif- 
ferent from  this,  therefore,  was : — 

2.  A  place  in  Judah,  fortified  and  garrisoned  by 
Rehoboam  (2  Chr.  xi.  6).  From  its  position  in 
this  list  we  may  conclude  that  it  was  near  Beth- 
lehem and  Tekoah  ;  and  in  accordance  with  this  is 
the  mention  of  the  name  among  the  ten  cities  which 
the  LXX.  insert  in  the  text  of  Josh.  xv.  60,  "  The- 
coa  and  Ephratha  which  is  Bethlehem,  Phagor  and 
Aitan  (Ethan)."  Reasons  are  shown  below  for 
believing  it  possible  that  this  may  have  been  the 
scene  of  Samson's  residence,  the  cliff  Etam  being 
one  of  the  numerous  bold  eminences  which  abound 
in  this  part  of  the  country;  and  the  spring  of  En- 
hak-kore  one  of  those  abundant  fountains  which  have 
procured  for  Etam  its  chief  fame.  For  here,  ac- 
cording to  the  statements  of  Josephus  (Ant.  viii. 
7,  §3)  and  the  Talmudists,  were  the  sources  of 
the  water  from  which  Solomon's  gardens  and  plea- 
sure-grounds were  fed,  and  Bethlehem  and  the 
Temple  supplied.     (See  Light  loot,  on  John  v.) 

3.  A  name  occurring  in  the  lists  of  Judah's 
descendants  I  1  Chr.  iv.  3),  but  probably  referring 
to  the  place  named  above  I  .  Bethlehem  being 
mentioned  in  the  following  verse. 

E'TAM,  THE  ROGK(DB*JJ  vho;  v  n4rPa 

'Hraju,  for  Alex,  see  below;  Joseph,  Alrdp ; 
Petra,  and  silex,  Etam),  a  cliff  or  lofty  rock  (such 
seems  to  be  the  special  force  of/8  '  '  into  a  cleft, 
or  chasm  (»pyp  J  A.  V.  "  top")  Of  which,  Samson 
retired  after  his  slaughter  of  the  Philistines,  in 
revenge  for  their  burning  the  Timnite  woman  who 

was  to  have  1 a   his  wife  [Judg.  w.  8,   11"). 

This  Datura!  stronghold  (irirpa  5'   iarlv  6x"pd, 

Jos.  Ant.  V.  8,  §8)  was  in  the  tribe  of  Judah; 
and  near  it,  probably  at  its  foot,  was  l.ehi  01' 
Raraath-lehi,  and  En-hak-kore  (xv.  9,  I  !,  17.  19  . 
These  names  have  all  vanished;  at  any  rate  none 
of  them  have  been  yet  discovered  within  that  com- 

a  There  is  some  uncertainly  about  the  text  ol  this 

passage,  the   Alex.  MS.  of  the  LXX,  inserting  the 

words  -no-pa.  joi)  \etfiappov,  "by  the  torrent,"   before 


ETKBAAL 


587 


paratively  narrow  circle  to  which  Samson's  ex- 
ploits appear  to  have  been  confined.  Van  de 
Velde  (ii.  141)  would  identify  Lehi  with  Lekiyeh, 
a  short  distance  north  of  Beersheba,  but  this  has 
nothing  beyond  its  name  to  recommend  it.  The 
name  Etam,  however,  was  held  by  a  city  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Bethlehem,  fortified  by  Hehoboam 
(2  Chr.  xi.  6),  and  which  from  other  sources  is 
known  to  have  been  situated  in  the  extremely 
uneven  and  broken  country  round  the  modem 
Urtas.  Here  is  a  fitting  scene  for  the  adventure 
of  Samson.  It  was  sufficiently  distant  from  Timnah 
to  have  seemed  a  safe  refuge  from  the  wrath  of  the 
Philistines,  while  on  the  other  hand  it  was  not  too 
far  for  them  to  reach  in  search  of  him  ;  for  even  at 
Bethlehem,  still  more  distant  from  Philistia,  they 
had  a  garrison,  and  that  in  the  time  of  their  great 
enemy  king  David.  In  the  abundant  springs  and 
the  numerous  eminences  of  the  district  round  Urtas, 
the  cliff  Etam,  Kamath-lehi,  and  En-hak-kore  may 
be  yet  discovered.  [(*•] 

E'THAM.  [Exodus,  the,  p.  599.] 
E'THAN  (jrV!*  ;  TaiOdv,  Aledp ;  Ethan).  The 
name  of  several  persons.  1.  Ethan  the  Ezrahite, 
one  of  the  four  sons  of  Mahol,  whose  wisdom  was  ex- 
celled by  Solomon  (1  K.  iv.  31).  His  name  is  in  the 
title  of  Ps.  lxxxix.  There  is  little  doubt  that  this  is 
the  same  person  who  in  1  Chr.  ii.  6  is  mentioned — 
with  the  same  brothers  as  before — asasonof  Zerah, 
the  son  of  Judah.  [Darda  ;  Ezrahite.]  But 
being  a  son  of  Judah  he  must  have  been  a  different 
person  from 

2.  Son  of  Kishi  or.  Kushaiah  ;  a  Merarite  Levite, 
head  of  that  family  in  the  time  of  king  David 
(1  Chr.  vi.  44;  hebr.  29),  and  spoken  of  as  a 
"  singer."  With  Heman  and  Asaph  the  heads  of 
the  other  two  families  of  Levites  Ethan  was  ap- 
pointed to  sound  with  cymbals  (xv.  17,  19).  From 
the  fact  that  in  other  passages  of  these  books  the 
three  names  are  given  as  Asaph,  Heman,  and 
Jeduthun,  it  has  been  conjectured  that  the  two 
names  both  belonged  to  the  one  man,  or  are  iden- 
tical ;  but  there  is  no  direct  evidence  of  this,  nor  is 
there  any  thing  to  show  that  Ethan  the  singer  was 
the  same  person  as  Ethan  the  Ezrahite,  whose 
name  stands  at  the  head  of  Ps.  lxxxix.,  though  it  is 
a  curious  coincidence  that  there  should  be  two  per- 
sons named  Heman  and  Ethan  so  closely  connected 
in  two  different  tribes  and  walks  of  life. 

3.  A  Gershonite  Levite,  one  of  the  ancestors  of 
Asaph  the  singer  (1  Chr.  vi.  42,  heb.  271.  In  the 
reversed  genealogy  of  the  Gershonites  (ver.  21  of 
this  chap.)  Joah  stands  in  the  place  of  Ethan  as  thu 
son  of  Zimmah. 

KTIIAXIM.      [Months.] 

ETHP.A  AL  (^riX;  *E0/8aaA.;  Joseph.  '166- 
fiaAos  ;  EthbaaF),  king  of  Sidon  and  father  of 
Jezebel,   wile   of   Ahab   (1    K.    \vi.    .".!).      Josephus 

(Ant.  viii.  13,  §1)  represents  him  as  king  of  the 
Tyrians  as  well  as  the  Sidouians.     We  may  thus 

identify   him  with  ]•  lthohalus  (I /0k,/3aAos).  n I 

by  Menander  (Joseph,  c.  Apion.  i.  18),  a  priest  of 
Astaite,    who,    after   having  assassinated    Pheles, 

Usurped    the    tin-one   of  Tyre  for  32  years.       As  .">(  I 

years  elapsed  between  the  death,  of  Hiram  and 
Pheles,  the  date  of  Ethbaal's  reign  may  be  given 
as  about  B.C.  940-908.     The  variation  in  the  name 


the  mention  of  the  rock.      In  ver.   11   tin-  reading 
agrees  with  the  Hebrew. 


588 


ETHER 


is  easily  explained  ;  Ethbaal  =  wtf/t  Baal;  Ithobalus 
(^yiiriN)  =  Baal  with  him,  which  is  preferable 
in  point  of  sense  to  the  other.  The  position  which 
Ethbaal  held  explains,  to  a  certain  extent,  the  idola- 
trous zeal  which  Jezebel  displayed.       [W.  L.  B.] 

ETHER  pnj?  ;  '18<Lk,  'U6ep,  Alex.  'A<pep, 
Befle'p  ;  Ether,  Athar),  one  of  the  cities  of  Judah 
in  the  low  country,  the  Shefelah  (Josh.  xv.  42) 
allotted  to  Simeon  (xix.  7).  In  the  parallel  list 
of  the  towns  of  Simeon  in  1  Chr.  iv.  32,  TpCHEN 
is  substituted  for  Ether.  In  his  Onomasticon 
Eusebius  mentions  it  twice,  as  Ether  and  as  Jether 
(in  the  latter  case  confounding  it  with  Jattir,  a 
city  of  priests  and  containing  friends  of  David  during 
his  troubles  under  Saul ).  It  was  then  a  considerable 
place  (koJjUtj  fjieylffTT]),  retaining  the  name  of  Jethira 
or  Etera,  very  near  Malatha  in  the  interior  of  the 
district  of  Daroma,  that  is  in  the  desert  country  below 
Hebron  and  to  the  east  of  Beersheba.  The  name  of 
Ether  has  not  yet  been  identified  with  any  existing 
remains;  but  Van  de  Velde  heard  of  a  Tel  Athar 
in  this  direction  {Memoir,  311).  [G.] 

ETHIOTIA  (C'13  ;  AlOtonla ;  Aethiqpid). 
The  country,'  which  the  Greeks  and  Romans  de- 
scribed as  "  Aethiopia"  and  the  Hebrews  as  "Cush," 
lay  to  the  S.  of  Egypt,  and  embraced,  in  its  most 
extended  sense,  the  modern  Nubia,  Sennaar,  Kor- 
dofan,  and  northern  Abyssinia,  and  in  its  more 
definite  sense  the  kiugdom  of  Meroe,  from  the 
junction  of  the  Blue  and  White  branches  of  the 
Nile  to  the  border  of  Egypt.  The  only  direction 
in  which  a  clear  boundary  can  be  fixed  is  in 
the  N.,  where  Syene  marked  the  division  between 
Ethiopia  and  Egypt  (Ez.  xxix.  10):  in  other  direc- 
tions the  boundaries  can  be  only  generally  described 
as  the  Red  Sea  on  the  E.,  the  Libyan  desert  on 
the  W.,  and  the  Abyssinian  highlands  on  the  S. 
The  name."  Ethiopia"  is  probably  an  adaptation  of 
the  native  Egyptian  name  "  Ethaush,"  which  bears 
a  tolerably  close  resemblance  to  the  gentile  form 
"Aethiops;"  the  Greeks  themselves  regarded  it  as 
expressive  of  a  dark  complexion  (from  aWoi,  "  to 
burn,"  and  w\p,  "a  countenance").  The  Hebrews 
transformed  the  ethnical  designation  "  Cush  "  into  a 
territorial  one,  restricting  it,  however,  in  the  latter 
sense  to  the  African  settlements  of  the  Cushite  race. 
[Ccsh.]  The  Hebrews  do  not  appear  to  have  had 
much  practical  acquaintance  with  Ethiopia  itself, 
though  the  Ethiopians  were  well  known  to  them 
through  their  intercourse  with  Egypt.  They  were, 
however,  perfectly  aware  of  its  position  (Ez.  xxix. 
lo) ;  and  they  describe  it  as  a  well-watered  country 
lying"  by  the  side  of"  (A.  V.  "beyond")  the 
waters  of  Cush  (Is.  xviii.  1  ;  Zeph.  iii.  10),  being 
traversed  by  the  two  branches  of  the  Nile,  and  by 
the  Astaboras  or  Tacazze.  The  Nile  descends  with 
a  rapid  stream  in  this  part  of  its  course,  forming  a 
series  of  cataracts  :  its  violence  seems  to  be  referred 
to  in  the  words  of  Is.  xviii.  2,  "  whose  land  the 
rivers  have  spoiled."  The  Hebrews  seem  also  to 
have  been  aware  of  its  tropical  characteristics,  the 
words  translated  in  the  A.  V.  "  the  land  shadowing 
with  wings"  (Is.  xviii.  1),  admitting  of  the  sense 
"  the  land  of  the  shadow  of  both  sides,"  the  shadows 
t'all  ing  towards  the  north  and  south  at  different  periods 
of  the  year — a  feature  which  is  noticed  by  many 
early  writers  (conip.  the  expression  in  Strabo,  ii. 
p.  133,  a,u</n'<r/aoi ;  Virg.  Eel.  x.  68  ;  Plin.  ii.  75). 
The  papyrus  boats  ( '•  vessels  of  bulrushes,"  Is.  xviii. 
2),  which  were  peculiarly  adapted  to  the  navigation 
of  the  Upper' Kile,  admitting  of  being  carried  on 


ETHIOPIA 

men's  backs  when  necessary,  were  regarded  as  a 
characteristic  feature  of  the  countrv.  The  Hebrews 
carried  on  commercial  intercourse  with  Ethiopia,  its 
"merchandise"  (Is.  xlv.  14)  consisting  of  ebony, 
ivory,  frankincense  and  gold  (Herod,  iii.  97,  114), 
and  precious  stones  (Job  xxviii.  19;  Joseph.  Ant. 
viii.  6,  §5).  The  country  is  for  the  most  part 
mountainous,  the  ranges  gradually  increasing  in 
altitude  towards  the  S.,  until  they  attain  an  eleva- 
tion of  about  8000  feet  in  Abyssinia. 

The  inhabitants  of  Ethiopia  were  a  Hamitic  race 
(Gen.  x.  6),  and  are  described  in  the  Bible  as  a 
dark-complexioned  (Jer.  xiii.  23)  and  stalwart  race 
(Is.  xlv.  14,  "  men  of  stature ;"  xviii.  2,  for 
"scattered,"  substitute  "  tall ").  Their  stature  is 
noticed  by  Herodotus  (iii.  20,  114),  as  well  as  their 
handsomeness.  Not  improbably  the  latter  quality 
is  intended  by  the  term  in  Is.  xviii.  2,  which  in  the 
A.  V.  is  rendered  "  peeled,"  but  which  rather  means 
"  fine-looking."  Their  appearance  led  to  their  being 
selected  as  attendants  in  royal  households  (Jer. 
xxxviii.  71.  The  Ethiopians  are  on  one  occasion 
coupled  with  the  Arabians,  as  occupying  the  opposite 
shores  of  the  Red  Sea  (2  Chr.  xxi.  16) ;  but  elsewhere 
they  are  connected  with  African  nations,  particularly 
Egypt  (Ps.  lxviii.  31  ;  Is.xx.  3,4,  xliii.  3,  xlv.  14), 
Phut  (Jer.  xlvi.  9),  Lub  and  Lud  (Ez.  xxx.  5),  and 
the  Sukkiims  (2  Chr.  xii.  3).  They  were  divided 
into  various  tribes,  of  which  the  Sabaeans  were  the 
most  powerful.     [Seba;   Sukkim.] 

The  history  of  Ethiopia  is  closely  interwoven  with 
that  of  Egypt.  The  two  countries  were  not  un- 
frequently  united  under  the  rule  of  the  same 
sovereign.  The  first  Egyptian  king  who  governed 
Ethiopia  was  one  of  the  12th  dynasty,  named 
Osirtasen  I.,  the  Sesostris  of  Herod,  ii.  1 10.  During 
the  occupation  of  Egypt  by  the  Hyksos,  the  13th 
dynasty  retired  to  the  Ethiopian  capital,  Napata; 
and  again  we  find  the  kings  of  the  18th  and  19th 
dynasties  exercising  a  supremacy  over  Ethiopia,  and 
erecting  numerous  temples,  the  ruins  of  which  still 
exist  at  Semneh,  Amada,  Soleb,  Aboosimbel,  and 
Jebel  Berhel.  The  tradition  of  the  successful  ex- 
pedition of  Moses  against  the  Ethiopians,  recorded 
by  Josephus  {Ant.  ii.  10),  was  doubtless  founded  on 
the  general  superiority  of  the  Egyptians  over  the 
Ethiopians  at  that  period  of  their  history.  The 
22nd  dynasty  still  held  sway  over  Ethiopia,  as  we 
find  Ethiopians  forming  a  portion  of  Shishak's  army 
(2  Chr.  xii.  3),  and  his  successor  Osorkon  apparently 
described  as  Zenih  "  the  Ethiopian "  (2  Chr.  xiv. 
9).  The  kings  of  the  25th  dynasty  were  certainly 
Ethiopians,  who  ruled  the  whole  of  Upper  Egypt, 
and  at  one  period  Lower  Egypt  also,  from  their 
northern  capital,  Napata.  Two  of  these  kings  are 
connected  with  sacred  history,  viz.,  So,  probably 
Sebichas,  who  made  an  alliance  with  Hoshea  king  of 
Israel  (2  K.  xvii.  4),  and  Tirhakah,  or  Tarcus,  who 
advanced  against  Sennacherib  in  aid  of  Hezekiah  king 
of  Judah  (2  K.  six.  9).  The  prophets  appear  to 
refer  to  a  subjection  of  Ethiopia  by  the  Assyrians 
as  occurring  about  this  period  (Is.  xx.  4),  and  parti- 
cularly to  the  capture  of  Thebes  at  a  time  when  the 
Ethiopians  were  among  its  defenders  (Nab.  iii.  8,  9). 
We  find,  in  confirmation  of  these  notices,  that  Esar- 
haddon  is  stated  in  the  Assyrian  inscriptions  to  have 
conquered  both  Egypt  and  Ethiopia.  At  the  time  of 
the  conquest  of  Egypt,  Cambyses  advanced  against 
Meroe  and  subdued  it;  but  the  Persian  rule  did  not 
take  any  root  there,  nor  did  the  influence  of  the 
Ptolemies gpnerally extend  beyond  northern  Ethiopia. 
Shortly  before  our  Saviour's  birth,  a  native  dynasty 


ETI1MA 

(if  females,  holding  the  official  title  of  Candace  (Plin. 
vi.  35),  held  sway  in  Ethiopia,  and  even  resisted  the 
advance  of  the  Roman  arms.  One  of  these  is  the  queen 

noticed  in  Acts  viii.  27.  [CANDACE.]    [W.  L.  B.] 

ETH'MA  ('Edna,  Alex.  Noo/xci ;  Nobei),  1  Esd. 
be.  :!.'>;  apparently  a  corruption  of  Nebo  in  the 
parallel  list  of  Ezra  x.  43, 

ETH'NAN  (pflN  ;  'EvOavd/j.,  Alex.  'EvOaSi; 
Ethnan),  a  descendant  of  Judah  ;  one  of  the  sons 
of  Helah  the  wife  of  Ashur,  "  the  father  of  Tekoa  " 
(1  Chr.  iv.  7). 

ETH'NI  03HN  ;  'ABavl,  Alex.  'ABavei  ; 
Athanai),  a  Gershonite  Levite,  one  of  the  fore- 
fathers of  Asaph  the  singer  (1  Chr.  vi.  41  ; 
Heb.  26). 

EUBU'LUS  (EvPovhos),  a  Christian  at  Rome 
mentioned  by  St.  Paul  (2  Tim.  iv.  21). 

EUERGETES  (Efiepyenjs,  a  benefactor; 
Ptolemaeus  Euergetes),  a  common  surname  and 
title  of  honour  (cf.  Plato,  Gon/.  p.  506  C,  and 
Stallb.  ad  toe.)  in  Greek  states,  conferred  at  Athens 
by  a  public  vote  (Dem.  p.  475),  and  so  notorious 
as  t.)  pass  into  a  proverb  (Luke  xxii.  25).  The  title 
was  borne  by  two  of  the  Ptolemies,  Ptol.  III., 
Euergetes  I.,  B.C.  247-222,  and  Ptol.  VII.,  Euer- 
getes II.,  B.C.  (170)  146-117.  The  Euergetes  men- 
tioned in  the  prologue  to  Ecclesiasticus  has  been 
identified  with  each  of  these,  according  to  the  different 
views  taken  of  the  history  of  the  book.  [Eccle- 
siasticus ;  Jesus  son  of  Siracii.]    [B.  F.  W.] 

EU'MENES  II.  (Eu/xe'i/rjs),  king  of  Pergamus, 
succeeded  his  father  Attalus  I.,  B.C.  197,  from 
whom  he  inherited  the  favour  and  alliance  of  the 
Romans.  In  the  war  with  Antiochus  the  Great 
he  rendered  the  most  important  services  to  the 
growing  republic;  and  at  the  battle  of  Magnesia 
(B.C.  190)  commanded  his  contingent  in  person 
(Just.  xxxi.  8,  5;  App.  Syr.  34).  After  peace 
was  made  (B.C.  189)  he  repaired  to  Rome  to  claim 
the  reward  of  his  loyalty  ;  and  the  Senate  conferred 
on  him  the  provinces  of  Mysia,  Lydia,  and  Ionia 
(with  some  exceptions),  Phrygia,  Lycaonia,  and 
the  Thracian  Chersonese  (App.  Syr.  44;  Polyb. 
xxn  7,  Li>,  xxxvni  :l  )  HlC  influence  at  Borne 
continued  uninterrupted  till  the  war  with  Perseus, 
with  whom  he  is  said  to  have  entertained  treason- 
able correspondence  (Liv.  xxiv.  24,  25);  and  after 
the  defeat  of  Perseus  (B.C.  167)  he  was  looked 
upon  with  suspicion  which  he  vainly  endeavoured  to 
remove.  The  exact  date  of  Ids  death  is  not  men- 
tioned, but  it  musf  have  taken  place  in  B.C.  159. 

The  large  accession  of  territory  which  was 
granted  to  Eumenes  from  the  former  dominions  of 
Antiochus  is  mentioned  1  Mace.  viii.  8,  but  the 
present  reading  of  the  Greek  and  Latin  texts  offers 
insuperable  difficulties.  "The  Etonians  gave  him," 
it  is  said,  ••  the  country  of  India  and  Media,  and 
Lydia  and  parts  of  his  (Antiochus)  fairesl  countries 
(awb  tSiv  kol\\.  x<*>p<*>v  a  v  t  o  £>)."  Various  con- 
jectures have  been  proposed  to  remove  these  i 
errors;  but  though  it  maj  be  reasonably  allowed 
that  Mysia  may  have  stood  originally  for  Media 
('DO  for  HO.  Michaelis),  it  is  not  equally 
explain  the  origin  of  x®Pav  TV  'IvHik^v.     It  is 

a  So  Whiston,  Joseph.  Ant.  x.  10,  §2,  note. 
b  The  Jewish  tradition  is  that  Joseph  was  made  a 
eunuch  on  his  first  introduction  to  Egypt;  and  yel 

the  accusation  of  Potiphar's  wife,    his   manic 


EUNUCH 


589 


barely  possible  that  'Ii'Siktjv  may  have  beet!  suh- 
stituted  for  '\oiviK-r]v  after  M-nSiav  was  alreadv 
established  in  the  text.  Other  explanations  axe 
given  by  Grimm,  Exeg.  Handb.  ad  toe. ;  Werns- 
dorf,  l)e  fide  Libr.  Mace.  p.  50  if.,  but  they  have 
little  plausibility.  ■  [B.  F.  \V.] 

EU'NATAN  {'Evvardv,  Alex.  'E\va8du;  En- 
nag  am),  1  Esd.  viii.  44.      [Elnathan.] 

EUNICE  {Evvixri),  mother  of  Timotheus, 
2  Tim.  i.  5  ;  there  spoken  of  as  possessing  unfeigned 
faith  ;  and  described  in  Acts  xvi.  1,  as  a  -yvvi) 
'lovSaia  irtffTr].  [H.  A.  ] 

EUNUCH  (DHD  ;  eui/ovxos,  BXaSias ;  spado , 
variously  rendered  in  the  A.V.  "eunuch,"  "officer," 
and  "  chamberlain,"  apparently  as  though  the  word 
intended  a  class  of  attendants  who  were  not  always 
mutilated)."    The  original  Hebrew  word  (root  Arab. 

ijhjm*,  impotens  esse  ad  venerem,  Gesen.  s.  v.) 
clearly  implies  the  incapacity  which  mutilation  in- 
volves, and  perhaps  includes  all  the  classes  men- 
tioned in  Matt.  xix.  12,  not  signifying,  as  the 
Greek  evvovxos,  an  office  merely.  The  law,  Dent. 
xxiii.  1  (eomp.  Lev.  xxii.  24),  is  repugnant  to  thus 
treating  any  Israelite  ;  and  Samuel,  when  describing 
the  arbitrary  power  of  the  future  king  (1  Sam.  viii. 
15,  marg.),  mentions  "  his  eunuchs,"  but  does  not 
say  that  he  would  make  "  their  sons"  such.  This, 
if  we  compare  2  K.  xx.  18,  Is.  xxxix.  7,  possibly 
implies  that  these  persons  would  be  foreigners.  It 
was  a  barbarous  custom  of  the  East  thus  to  treat 
captives  (Herod,  iii.  49,  vi.  32),  not  only  of  tender 
age  (when  a  non-development  of  beard,  and  feminine 
mould  of  limbs  and  modulation  of  voice  ensues),  but, 
it  should  seem,  when  past  puberty,  which  there 
occurs  at  an  early  age.  Physiological  considerations 
lead  to  the  supposition  that  in  the  latter  case  a 
remnant  of  animal  feeling  is  left ;  which  may  explain 
Ecclus.  xx.  4,  xxv.  20  (eomp.  Juv.  vi.  366,  and 
Mart.  vi.  67;  Philostr.  Apoll.  Tyan.  i.  37  ; '  Tcr. 
Eun.  iv.  3,  24),  where  a  sexual  function,  though 
fruitless,  is  implied.  Busbequius  (Ep.  iii.  122, 
Ox.  1660)  seems  to  ascribe  the  absence  or  presence 
of  this  to  the  total  or  partial  character  of  the 
mutilation  ;  but  modern  surgery  would  rather  assign 
the  earlier  or  later  period  of  the  operation  as  the 
real  explanation.  It  is  total  among  modern  Turks 
(Tournefort,  ii.  8,  9,  10,  ed.  Par.  1717,  taille's  a 
fleur  de  ventre)  ;  a  precaution  arising  from  mixed 
ignorance  and  jealousy.  The  "officer"  Potiphar 
(Gen.  xxwii.  36,  xxxix.  l,  marg.  "eunucb")  was 
an  Egyptian,  was  married,  and  was  the  "captain 
of  the  guard;"  and  in  the  Assyrian  monuments  an 
eunuch  often  appears,  sometimes  armed,  and  in  a 
warlike  capacity,  or  as  a  scribe,  noting  the  number 
of  heads  and  amount  of  spoil,  as  receiving  the  pri- 
soners, and  even  as  officiating  in  religious  cere- 
monies (l.ayard,  Nineveh,  ii.  324-6,334  )'.  A  bloated 
beardless  face  and  double  chin  is  there  their  con- 
ventional type.  Chardin  (  Voyages  en  Perse,  ii. 
283,  ed.  Amsterd.  171 1  |  speaks  of  eunuchs  having 
a  harem  of  their  own.  If  Potiphar  had  bee, .me 
such  by  operation  for  disease,  by  accident,  or  even 

by  malice,  such  a  marriage  seem.,  therefore,  i rd- 

ingto  Easter tions,  supposable.h     (See  Grotius 

on  Deut.  xxiii.  1  ;  eomp.  Burckhardt,  Trav.  fa 


the  birth  of  his  children,  are  related  subsequently 
without  any  explanation,  see  Targum  Pseudojon. 
on  Gen.  \\\ix.  1,  x!i.  50,  and  the  detail-  given  at 
xxxix.  1  :;. 


590 


eunuch 


i.  290.)  Nor  is  it.  wholly  repugnant  to  that  bar- 
barous social  standard  to  think  that  the  prospect 
of  rank,  honour,  and  royal  confidence,  might  even 
induce  parents  to  thus  treat  their  children  at  a  later 
age,  it' they  showed  an  aptness  for  such  preferment. 
The  characteristics  as  regards  beard,  voice,  &c, 
might  then  perhaps  be  modified,  or  might  gradually 
follow.  The  Poti-pherah  of  Gen.  xli.  50,  whose 
daughter  Joseph  married,  was  "priest  of  On,"  and 
no  doubt  a  different  person. 

The  origination  of  the  practice  is  ascribed  to 
Semiramis  (Amm.  Marcell.  xiv.  6),  and  is  no  doubt 
as  early,  or  nearly  so,  as  Eastern  despotism  itself. 
Their  incapacity,  as  in  the  case  of  mutes,  is  the 
ground  of  reliance  upon  them  (Clarke's  Travels, 
part  ii.  §1,  13  ;  Busbeq.  Ep.  l.  p.  33).  By  reason 
of  the  mysterious  distance  at  which  the  sovereign 
sought  to  keep  his  subjects  (Herod,  i.  99,  comp.  Esth. 
iv.  11),  and  of  the  malignant  jealousy  fostered  by 
the  debased  relation  of  the  sexes,  such  wretches, 
detached  from  social  interests  and  hopes  of  issue 
(especially  when,  as  commonly,  and  as  amongst  the 
Jews,  foreigners),  the  natural  slaves  of  either  sex 
(Esth.  iv.  5),  and  having  no  prospect  in  rebellion 
save  the  change  of  masters,  were  the  fittest  props 
of  a  government  resting  on  a  servile  relation,  the 
most  complete  upyava  %fi.ipuxa  of  its  despotism  or 
its  lust,  the  surest  (but  see  Esth.  ii.  21)  guardians 
(Xenoph.  Cyrop.  vii.  5,  §15;  Herod,  viii.  105)  of 
the  monarch's  person,  and  the  sole  confidential  wit- 
nesses of  his  unguarded  or  undignified  moments. 
Hence  they  have  in  all  ages  frequently  risen  to  high 
offices  of  trust.  Thus  the  "  chief" c  of  the  cup- 
bearers and  of  the  cooks  of  Pharaoh  were  eunuchs, 
as  being  near  his  person,  though  their  inferior  agents 
need  not  have  been  so  (Gen.  xl.  1).  The  complete 
assimilation  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  and  latterly  d 
of  Judah,  to  the  neighbouring  models  of  despotism, 
is  traceable  in  the  rank  and  prominence  of  eunuchs 
(2  K.  viii.  6,  ix.  32,  xxiii.  11,  xxv.  19  ;  Is.  Ivi.  3,  4  ; 
Jer.  xxix.  2,  xxxiv.  19,  xxxviii.  7,  xli.  16,  Hi.  '25). 
They  mostly  appear  in  one  of  two  relations,  either 
military  as  "  set  over  the  men  of  war,"  greater 
trustworthiness  possibly  counterbalancing  inferior 
courage  and  military  vigour,  or  associated,  as  we 
mostly  recognise  them,  with  women  and  children. 
We  find  the  Assyrian  Rab-Saris,  or  chief  eunuch 
(2  K.  xviii.  17),  employed  together  with  other  high 
officials  as  ambassador.  Similarly,  in  the  details  of 
the  travels  of  an  embassy  sent  by  the  Duke  of 
Holstein  (p.  136),  we  find  a  eunuch  mentioned  as 
sent  on  occasion  of  a  state-marriage  to  negotiate, 
and  of  another  (p.  273)  who  was  the  Mehetcr,  or 
chamberlain  of  Shah  Abbas,  who  was  always  near 
his  person,  and  had  his  ear  (comp.  Chardin,  iii.  37), 
and  of  another,  originally  a  Georgian  prisoner, 
who  officiated  as  supreme  judge.  Fryer  (Travels 
in  India  and  Persia,  1698)  and  Chardin  (ii. 
283)  describe  them  as  being  the  base  and  ready 
tools  of  licentiousness,  as  tyrannical  in  humour, 
and  pertinacious  in  the  authority  which  they  exer- 
cise ;  Clarke  (Travels  in  Europe,  &c,  part  ii.  §1, 
}>.  22),  as  eluded  and  ridiculed  by  those  whom  it 
is  their  office  to  guard.     A  great  number  of  them 

c  Wilkinson  (Ane.  Egypt,  ii.  61)  denies  the  use  of 
eunuchs  in  Egypt.  Herodotus,  indeed  (ii.  92),  con- 
firms his  statement  as  regards  Egyptian  monogamy  ; 
but  if  this  as  a  rule  applied  to  the  kings,  they 
seemed  at  any  rate  to  have  allowed  themselves 
concubines  (ib.  181).  From  the  general  beardless 
character  of  Egyptian  heads  it  is  not  easy  to  pro- 


EUNUCH 

accompany  the  Shah  and  his  ladies  when  hunting, 
and  no  one  is  allowed,  on  pain  of  death,  to  come 
within  two  leagues  of  the  field,  unless  the  king 
sends  an  eunuch  for  him.  So  eunuchs  run  before 
the  closed  arabahs  of  the  sultanas  when  abroad,  cry- 
ing out  to  all  to  keep  at  a  distance.  This  illustrates 
Esth.  i.  10,  12,  15,  16,  ii.  3,  8,  14.  The  moral 
tendency  of  this  sad  condition  is  well  known  to  be 
the  repression  of  courage,  gentleness,  shame,  and 
remorse,  the  development  of  malice,  and  often  of 
melancholy,  and  a  disposition  to  suicide.  The  fa- 
vourable description  of  them  in  Xenophon  (I.  c.)  is 
overcharged,  or  at  least  is  not  confirmed  by  modem 
observation.  They  are  not  more  liable  to  disease 
than  others,  unless  of  such  as  often  follows  the  foul 
vices  of  which  they  are  the  tools.  The  operation 
itself,  especially  in  infancy,  is  not  more  dangerous 
than  an  ordinary  amputation.  Chardin  (ii.  285) 
says  that  only  one  in  four  survives ;  and  Clot  Bey, 
chief  physician  of  the  Pasha,  states  that  two-thirds 
die.  Burckhardt,  therefore  (Nub.  329),  is  mis- 
taken, when  he  says  that  the  operation  is  ouly  fatal 
in  about  two  out  of  a  hundred  cases. 

It  is  probable  that  Daniel  and  his  companions 
were  thus  treated,  in  fulfilment  of  2  K.  xx.  17,  18  ; 
Is.  xxxix.  7  ;  comp.  Dan.  i.  3,  7.  The  court  of 
Herod  of  course  had  its  eunuchs  (Joseph.  Ant. 
xvi.  8,  §1,  xv.  7,  §4),  as  had  also  that  of  Queen 
Candace  (Acts  viii.  27).  Michaelis  (ii.  180)  regards 
them  as  the  proper  consequence  of  the  gross  poly- 
gamy of  the  East,  although  his  further  remark  that, 
they  tend  to  balance  the  sexual  disparity  which 
such  monopoly  of  women  causes  is  less  just,  since 
the  countries  despoiled  of  their  women  for  the  one 
purpose  are  not  commonly  those  which  furnish  male 
children  for  the  other. 

In  the  three  classes  mentioned  in  Matt.  xix.  12 
the  first  is  to  be  ranked  with  other  examples  of 
defective  organisation,  the  last,  if  taken  literally,  as 
it  is  said  to  have  been  personally  exemplified  in 
Origen  (Euseb.  Eccl.  Hist.  vi.  8),  is  an  instance  of 
human  ways  and  means  of  ascetic  devotion  being 
valued  by  the  Jews  above  revealed  precept  (see 
Schottgen,  Hor.  Heb.  i.  159).  But  a  figurative 
sense  of  ewovxos  (comp.  1  Cor.  vii.  32,  34)  is  also 
possible. 

In  the  A.  V.  of  Esther  the  word  "  chamberlain" 
(marg.  "eunuch")  is  the  coustant  rendering  of 
D'HD  ;  and  as  the  word  also  occurs  in  Acts  xii.  20 
and  Rom.  xvi.  23,  where  the  original  expressions 
are  very  different,  some  caution  is  required.  In 
Acts  xii.  20  tov  eirl  tov  kolt&vos  tov  jSacnAeais 
may  mean  a  "  chamberlain  "  merely.  Such  were 
persons  of  public  influence,  as  we  learn  from  a  Greek 
inscription,  preserved  in  Walpcle's  Turkey  (ii.  559), 
in  honour  of  P.  Aelius  Alcibiades,  "  chamberlain  of 
the  emperor"  (eirl  koitwvos  2e/3.),  the  epithets  in 
which  exactly  suggest  the  kind  of  patronage  ex- 
pressed. In  Rom.  xvi.  23  the  word  iiriTpoiros 
is  the  one  commonlv  rendered  "  steward  "  (e.  g. 
.Matt.  xx.  8;  Luke  viii.  3),  and  means  the  one  to 
whom  the  care  of  the  city  was  committed.  For 
further  information,  Salden,  Otia  Theol.  de  Eu- 
nuchis,  may  be  consulted.    '  [H.  H.] 


nounce  whether  any  eunuchs  appear   in   the   sculp- 
tures or  not. 

d  2  Chr.  xxviii.  1,  is  remarkable  as  ascribing 
eunuchs  to  the  period  of  David,  nor  can  it  be  doubted 
that  Solomon's  polygamy  made  them  a  necessary 
consequence  ;  but  in  the  state  they  do  not  seem  to 
have  played  an  important  part  at  this  period. 


EUODIAS 

EUO'DIAS  (EuttiSia),  a  Christian  woman  at 
Philippi  (Phil.  iv.  2).  The  name  however  is  cor- 
rectly EUODIA,  that  being  the  nominative  case 
nt'  EvwSiav.  The  two  persons  whom  St.  Paul 
there  wishes  to  bring  into  accordance  are  both 
women,  referred  to  in  the  following  verse  by  aureus 
and  drives.  [H.  A.] 

EUPHRATES  (ITIS  ;  EvQpiTris ;  Euphrates) 
is  probably  a  word  of  Arian  origin,  the  initial  ele- 
ment being  'u,  which  is  in  Sanscrit  su,  in  Zend  hu, 
and  in  Greek  «3;  and  the  second  element  being  fra, 
the  particle  of  abundance.  The  Euphrates  is  thus 
"  the  good  and  abounding  river."  It  is  not  impro- 
bable that  in  common  parlance  the  name  was  soon 
shortened  to  its  modern  form  of  Frdt,  which  is' 
almost  exactly  what  the  Hebrew  literation  expresses, 
But  it  is  most  frequently  denoted  in  the  Bible  by 
the  term  "lHSn,  han-jnahar,  i.e.  "the  river,"  the 
river  of  Asia,  in  grand  contrast  to  the  shortlived 
torrents  of  Palestine.  (For  a  list  of  the  occurrences 
of  this  term,  see  Stanley,  S.  <$•  P.  App.  §34.) 

The  Euphrates  is  the  largest,  the  longest,  and 
by  far  the  must  important  of  the  rivers  of  Western 
Asia.  It  rises  from  two  chief  sources  in  the  Ar- 
menian mountains,  one  of  them  at  Domli,  25  miles 
N.E.  of  Erzeroum,  and  little  more  than  a  degree 
from  the  Black  Sea ;  the  other  on  the  northern 
slope  of  the  mountain  range  Killed  Ala-Tagh,  near 
the  village  of  Diyadin,  and  not  far  from  Mount 
Ararat.  The  former,  or  Northern  Euphrates,  has 
the  name  Frdt  'from  the  first,  but  is  known  also  as 
the  Kara-Su  (Black  River)  ;  the  latter,  or  Southern 
Euphrates,  is  not  called  the  Frdt  but  the  Murad 
('It'll,  yet  it  is  in  reality  the  main  river.  Both 
branches  flow  at  first  towards  the  west  or  south-west, 
passing  through  the  wildest  mountain-districts  of 
Armenia;  they  meet  at  Kebban-Maden,  nearly  in 
long.  39°  E.  from  Greenwich,  having  run  respect- 
ively 400  and  270  miles.  Here  the  stream  formed 
by  their  combined  waters  is  1-0  yards  wide,  rapid, 
and  very  deep;  it  now  flows  nearly  southward,  but 
in  a  tortuous  course,  forcing  a  way  through  the 
ranges  of  Taurus  and  anti-Taurus,  and  stdl  seeming 
as  it'  it  would  empty  itself  into  the  Mediterranean  ; 
but  prevented  from  so  doing  by  the  longitudinal 
ranges  of  Amanus  and  Lebanon,  which  (jere  run 
parallel  to  the  Syrian  coast,  and  at  no  great  dis- 
tance from  it  :  the  river  at  last  desists  from  its  en- 
deavour, and  in  about  lat.  36°  turns  towards  the 
south-east,  and  proceeds  in  this  direction  for  above 
1000  miles  to  its  embouchure  in  the  Peisian  Gulf. 
'file  last  part  of  its  course,  from  Hit  downwards, 
is  through  a  low.  flat,  ami  alluvial  plain,  over 
which   it   has  a  tendency   to   spread   and  stagnate; 

above  /Jir,  and  from  thence  to  Sumeisat     -< 

sata),  the  country  along  its  banks  is  for  the  most 
part  open  but  hilly;  north  of  Sumeisat,  the  stream 
runs  in  a  narrow  valley  among  high  mountains. 
and  is  interrupted  by  numerous  rapids.  Theentire 
course  is  calculated  at  1 780  iuile<.  neat  [y  650 more 
than  that  of  the  Tigris,  and  only  2nd  short  of  that 
of  the  Indus;  and  of  this  distance  more  than  two- 
thirds  (1200  miles)  is  navigable  for  boats,  and 
even,  as  the  expedition  ofCol.  Chesney  proved,  for 
small  steamers.  The  width  of  the  river  is  greatest 
at  the  distance  of  700  or  Si  n  i  miles  from  its  month 
— that  is  to  say,  from  its  junction  with  the  Kha- 
bour  to  the  village  of  Werai.  It  there  averages 
400  yards,  while'  lower  down,  from  Werfli  to 
Lamlun,  it  continually  decreases,  until  at  tin-  last 
named  place  its  width  is  not  more  Chan  L20  yards, 


EUPHRATES 


.01 


its  depth  having  at  the  same  time  diminished  from 
an  average  of  18  to  one  of  12  feet.  The  causes  of 
this  singular  phenomenon  are  the  entire  lack  of 
tributaries  below  the  Khabour,  and  the  employ- 
ment of  the  water  in  irrigation.  The  river  has  also 
in  this  part  of  its  course  the  tendency  already 
noted,  to  run  off  and  waste  itself  in  vast  marshes, 
which  every  year  more  and  more  cover  the  alluvial 
tract  west  and  south  of  the  stream.  From  this 
cause  its  lower  course  is  continually  varying,  and 
it  is  doubted  whether  at  present,  except  in  the 
season  of  the  inundation,  any  portion  of  the  Eu- 
phrates water  is  poured  iuto  the  Shat-el-Arab. 

The  annual  inundation  of  the  Euphrates  is  caused 
by  the  melting  of  the  snows  in  the  Armenian  high- 
lands. It  occurs  in  the  month  of  May.  The  rise 
of  the  Tigris  is  earlier,  since  it  drains  the  southern 
flank  of  the  great  Armenian  chain.  The  Tigris 
scarcely  ever  overflows  [Hiddekel],  but  the  Eu- 
phrates inundates  large  tracts  on  both  sides  of  its 
course  from  Hit  downwards.  The  great  hydraulic 
works  ascribed  to  Nebuchadnezzar  (Abyden.  Fr.  8) 
had  for  their  great  object  to  control  the  inunda- 
tion by  turning  the  waters  through  -sluices  into 
canals,  prepared  for  them,  and  distributing  them  in 
channels  over  a  wide  extent  of  country. 

The  Euphrates  has  at  all  times  been  of  some  im- 
portance as  furnishing  a  line  of  traffic  between  the 
East  and  the  West.  Herodotus  speaks  of  persons,  pro- 
bably merchants,  using  it  regularly  on  their  passage 
from  the  Mediterranean  to  Babylon  (Her.  i.  185). 
He  also  describes  the  boats  which  were  in  use  upon 
the  stream  (i.  194) — and  mentions  that  their  prin- 
cipal freight  was  wine,  which  he  seems  to  have 
thought  was  furnished  by  Armenia.  It  was,  how- 
ever, more  probably  Syrian,  as  Armenia  is  too  cold 
tor  the  vine.  Boats  such  as  he  describes,  of  wicker 
work,  aud  coated  with  bitumen,  or  sometimes  co- 
vered  with  skins,  still  abound  on  the  river.  Alex- 
ander appears  to  have  brought  to  Babylon  by  the 
Euphrates  route  vessels  of  some  considerable  size, 
which  he  had  had  made  in  Cyprus  and  Phoenicia. 
They  were  so  constructed  that  they  could  take  to 
pieces,  and  were  thus  tarried  piecemeal  to  Thnp- 
sacus,  where  they  were  put  together  and  launched 
(Aristobul.  ap.  Strab.  xvi.  L,  §11).  The  disad- 
vantage of  the  route  was  the  difficulty  of  conveying 
return  cargoes  against  the  current.  According  to 
Herodotus  tlie  boats  which  descended  the  river 
were  broken  to  pieces  and  sold  at  Babylon,  and  the 
owners  returned  on  foot  to  Armenia,  taking  with 
them  only  the  skins  (i.  194).  Aristobulus  how- 
ever related  (ap.  Strab.  xvi.  .",.  §.">)  that  the  Ger- 
rhaeans ascended  the  river  in  their  rafts  not  only  to 
Babylon,  but  to  Thapsacus,  whence  they  carried 
their  wares  on  foot  in  all  directions.  The  spices 
and  other  products  of  Arabia  Formed  their  principal 
men  bandize.  On  the  whole  there  are  sufficient 
-round-  for  believing  that  throughout  the  Babylo- 
nian and  Persian  periods  this  loud'  was  made  use 
of  by  the  merchants  of  various  nations, and  that   by 

it  tl ast  ami  west  continually  interchanged  their 

mportant products.     (See  Layard's  A 
<t,i*i  Babylon,  pp.  536-7.  < 

The  Euphrates  is  first  mentioned  in  Scripture  as 
one  of  the  four  rivers  of  Eden  (Gen.  ii.  14  .  Its 
eel,  laity  is  there  sufficiently  indicate  I  by  the  ab- 
sence of  any  explanatory  phrase,  Buch  as  accom- 
'  In-  names  of  the  other  streams.  We  next 
hear  ot'  it  in  the  covenant  mad"  with  Abraham 
(Hen.  \v.  IS  ),  where  the  whole  country  from  "  the 
great    liver,   the  river  Euphrates "   to  the  river  of 


592 


EUPHRATES 


Egypt  is  promised  to  the  chosen  race.  In  Deu- 
teronomy and  Joshua  we  find  that  this  promise  was 
borne  in  mind  at  the  time  of  the  settlement  in  Canaan 
(Deut.  i.  7  ;  xi.  24;  Josh.  i.  4);  and  from  an  im- 
portant passage  in  the  first  Book  of  Chronicles  it 
appears  that  the  tribe  of  Reuben  did  actually  extend 
itself  to  the  Euphrates  in  the  times  anterior  to  Saul 
(1  Chr.  v.  9).  Here  they  came  in  contact  with 
the  Hagarites,  who  appear  upon  the  middle  Eu- 
phrates in  the  Assyrian  inscriptions  of  the  later 
empire.  It  is  David,  however,  who  seems  for  the 
first  time  to  have  entered  on  the  full  enjoyment  of 
the  promise,  by  the  victories  which  he  gained  over 
Hadadezer,  king  of  Zobah,  and  his  allies,  the  Sy- 
rians of  Damascus  (2  Sam.  viii.  3-8 ;  1  Chr. 
xviii.  3).  The  object  of  his  expedition  was  "to 
recover  his  border,"  and  "  to  stablish  his  dominion 
by  the  river  Euphrates  ;"  and  in  this  object  he  ap- 
pears to  have  been  altogether  successful ;  in  so  much 
that  Solomon,  his  son,  who  was  not  a  man  of  war, 
but  only  inherited  his  father's  dominions,  is  said  to 
have  "  reigned  over  all  kingdoms  from  the  river 
(J.  e.  the  Euphrates)  unto  the  land  of  the  Philis- 
tines and  unto  the  border  of  Egypt "  (1  K.  iv.  21  ; 
compare  2  Chr.  ix.  26).  Thus  during  the  reigns 
of  David  and  Solomon  the  dominion  of  Israel  ac- 
tually attained  to  the  full  extent  both  ways  of  the 
original  promise,  the  Euphrates  forming  the  boun- 
dary of  their  empire  to  the  north-east,  and  the  river 
of  Egypt  {torrens  Aegypti)  to  the  south-west. 
This  wide-spread  dominion  was  lost  upon  the  dis- 
ruption of  the  empire  under  Rehoboam ;  and  no 
more  is  heard  in  Scripture  of  the  Euphrates  until 
the  expedition  of  Necho  against  the  Babyloniaus 
in  the  reigu  of  Josiah.  The  "  Great  River  "  had 
meanwhile  served  for  some  time  as  a  boundary  be- 
tween Assyria  and  the  country  of  the  Hittites  (see 
Assyria),  but  had  been  repeatedly  crossed  by  the 
armies  of  the  Ninevite  kings,  who  gradually  esta- 
blished their  sway  over  the  countries  upon  its  right 
bank.  The  crossing  of  the  river  was  always  diffi- 
cult ;  and  at  the  point  where  certain  natural  faci- 
lities fixed  the  ordinary  passage,  the  strong  fort  of 
Carchemish  had  been  built,  probably  in  very  early 
times,  to  command  the  position.  [Carchemish.] 
Hence,  when  Necho  determined  to  attempt  the  per- 
manent conquest  of  Syria,  his  march  was  directed 
upori  "  Carchemish  by  Euphrates  "  (2  Chr.  xxxv. 
20),  which  he  captured  and  held,  thus  extending 
the  dominion  of  Egypt  to  the  Euphrates,  and  re- 
newing the  old  glories  of  the  Ramesside  kings. 
His  triumph,  however,  was  short-lived.  Three 
years  afterwards  the  Babylonians — who  had  inhe- 
rited the  Assyrian  dominion  in  these  parts — made 
an  expedition  under  Nebuchadnezzar  against  Necho, 
defeated  his  army,  "  which  was  by  the  river  Eu- 
phrates in  Carchemish"  (Jer.  xlvi.  2),  aud  reco- 
vered all  Syria  and  Palestine.  Then  "  the  king  of 
Egypt  came  no  more  out  of  his  laud,  for  the  king 
of  Babylon  had  taken  from  the  river  of  Egypt  unto 
the  river  Euphrates  all  that  pertained  to  the  king 
of  Egypt "  (2  K.  xxiv.  7). 

These  are  the  chief  events  which  Scripture  dis- 
tinctly connects  with  the  "  Great  River."  It  is 
probably  included  among  the  "  rivers  of  Babylon," 
by  the  side  of  which  the  Jewish  captives  "  remem- 
bered Zion"  and  "  wept  "  (Ps.  cxxxvii.  1)  ;  and  no 
doubt  is  glanced  at  in  the  threats  of  Jeremiah 
against  the  Chaldaean  "waters"  and  "springs," 
upon  which  there  is  to  be  a  "  drought,"  that  shall 
"dry  them  up"  (Jer.  1.  38;  li.  26).  The  fulfil- 
ment of  these  prophecies  has  been  noticed  under  the 


EUROCLYDON 

head  of  Cualdaea.  The  liver  still  brings  down 
as  much  water  as  of  old,  but  the  precious  element 
is  wasted  by  the  neglect  of  man  ;  the  various  water- 
courses along  which  it  was  in  former  times  con- 
veyed are  dry  ;  the  main  channel  has  shrunk  ;  and 
the  water  stagnates  in  unwholesome  marshes.  ' 

It  is  remarkable  that  Scripture  contains  no  clear 
and  distinct  reference  to  that  striking  occasion, 
when,  according  to  prolane  historians  (Herod,  i. 
191  ;  Xen.  Cyrop.  vii.  5),  the  Euphrates  was  turned 
against  its  mistress,  and  used  to  effect  the  ruin  of 
Babylon.'  The  brevity  of  Daniel  (v.  30-31)  is  per- 
haps sufficient  to  account  for  his  silence  on  the 
point;  but  it  might  have  been  expected  from  the 
fulness  of  Jeremiah  (chs.  1.  and  li.)  that  so  remark- 
able a  feature  of  the  siege  would  not  have  escaped 
mention.  We  must,  however,  remember,  in  the 
first  place,  that  a  clear  prophecy  may  have  been 
purposely  withheld,  in  order  that  the  Babylonians 
might  not  be  put  upon  their  guard.  And  secondly, 
we  may  notice,  that  there  does  seem  to  be  at  least 
one  reference  to  the  circumstance,  though  it  is 
covert,  as  it  was  necessary  that  it  should  be.  In 
immediate  conjunction  with  the  passage  which  most 
clearly  declares  the  taking  of  the  city  by  a  surprise 
is  found  an  expression,  which  reads  very  obscurely 
in  our  version — "the  passages  are  stopped"  (Jer. 
li.  32).  Here  the  Hebrew  term  used  (n'TiayO) 
applies  most  properly  to  "  fords  or  ferries  over 
rivers"  (comp.  Judg.  iii.  28);  and  the  whole  pas- 
sage may  best  be  translated,  "  the  ferries  are  seized  " 
or  "  occupied  ;"  which  agrees  very  well  with  the 
entrance  of  the  Persians  by  the  river,  and  with  the 
ordinary  mode  of  transit  in  the  place,  where  there 
was  but  one  bridge  (Herod,  i.  186). 

(See,  for  a  general  account  of  the  Euphrates, 
Col.  Chesney's  Euphrates  Expedition,  vol.  i. ;  and 
for  the  lower  course  of  the  stream,  compare  Loftus's 
Chaldaea  and  Susiana.  See  also  Rawlinson's  Hero- 
dotus, vol.  i.  Essay  ix.,  and  Layard's  Nineveh  and 
Babylon,  chs.  xxi.  and  xxii.)  [G.  R.] 

EUPOL'EMUS  (Evir6X€ixos),  the  "  son  of 
John,  the  son  of  Accos "  ('Akkc&s  ;  cf.  Neh.  iii. 
4,  21,  &c),  one  of  the  envoys  sent  to  Rome  by 
Judas  Maccabaeus,  cir.  B.C.  Kil  (1  Mace.  viii.  17  ; 
2  Mace.  iv.  11 ;  Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  10,  §6).  He  has 
been  identified  with  the  historian  of  the  same  name 
(Euseb.  Praep.  Er.  ix.  17  ff.) ;  but  it  is  by  no 
means  clear  that  the  historian  was  of  Jewish  de- 
scent (Joseph,  c.  Ap.  i.  23  ;  yet  cf.  Hieron.  de  I  ir. 
Illustr.  38).  [B.  F.  W.] 

EUROCLYDON  (EvPokAv8coj>),  the  name 
given  (Acts  xxvii.  14)  to  the  gale  of  wind,  which  off 
the  South  coast  of  Crete  seized  the  ship  in  which 
St.  Paul  was  ultimately  wrecked  on  the  coast  of 
Malta.  The  circumstances  of  this  gale  are  described 
with  much  particularity;  and  they  admit  of 
abundant  illustration  from  the  experience  of  mo- 
dern seamen  in  the  Levant.  In  the  first  place  it 
came  down  from  the  island  (tear'  avrrjs),  ami 
therefore  must  have  blown,  more  or  less,  from  the 
Northward,  since  the  ship  was  sailing  along  the 
South  coast,  not  far  from  Mount  Ida,  and  on  the 
way  from  Fair-Havexs  toward  Phoenice.  So 
Captain  Spratt,  R.N.,  after  leaving  Fair-Havens 
with  a  light  southerly  wind,  fell  in  with  "a  strong 
northerly  breeze,  blowing  direct  from  Mount  Ida  " 
(Smith,  Voy.  and  Shipwreck  of  St.  Paul,  1856,  pp. 
li?.  24,">).  Next,  the  wind  is  described  as  being  like 
a  typhoon  or  whirlwind  (rvtpcwiic6s,  A*.  Y.  "tem- 
pestuous");   and    the  same   authority    speaks   of 


EUTYCHUS 

such  gales  in  the  Levant  as  being  generally  "accom- 
panied by  terrific  gusts  and  squalls  from  those 
high  mountains"  {Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul, 
1856,  ii.  401).  It.  is  also  observable  that  the 
change  of  wind  in  the  voyage  before  us  (xxvii. 
13,  14)  is  exactly  what  might  have  been  expected  ; 
for  Captain  J.  Stewart,  R.N.,  observes,  in  his 
remarks  on  the  Archipelago,  that  "  it  is  always  safe 
to  anchor  under  the  lee  of  an  island  with  a  northerly 
wind,  as  it  dies  away  gradually,  but  it  would  be 
extremely  dangerous  with  southerly  winds,  as  they 
almost  invariably  shift  to  a  violent  northerly  wind  " 
(  Purdy's  Sailing  Directory,  pt.  ii.  p.  (il).  The 
hmg  duration  of  the  gale  ("  the  fourteenth  night," 
27),  the  overclouded  state  of  the  sky  ("  neither 
sun  nor  stars  appealing,"  20),  and  even  the 
heavy  rain  which  concluded  the  storm  {rhv  vzrhv, 
xxviii.  2)  could  easily  be  matched  with  parallel 
instances  in  modern  times  (see  Voy.  and  S/u/>- 
wreck,  p.  144;  Life  and  Epp.  p.  412).  We 
have  seen  that  the  wind  was  more  or  less  northerly. 
Tiie  context  gives  us  full  materials  for  determin- 
ing its  direction  with  great  exactitude.  The  vessel 
was  driven  from  the  coast  of  Crete  to  Clauda 
(xxvii.  16),  and  apprehension  was  felt  that  she 
would  be  driven  into  the  African  Syrtis  (v.  17). 
Combining  these  two  circumstances  with  the  fact 
that  she  was  less  than  halt'  way  from  Fair-Havens 
to  Phoenice  when  the  storm  began  (v.  14),  we 
come  to  the  conclusion  that  it  came  from  the  N.E. 
or  E.N.E.  This  is  quite  in  harmony  with  the 
natural  sense  of  EvpaKv\a>i/  (Euroaquilo,  Yulg.), 
which  is  regai ded  as  the  true  reading  by  Bentley, 
ami  is  found  in  some  of  the  best  MSS,  ;  but  we  are 
disposed  to  adhere  to  the  Received  Text,  more  espe- 
cially as  it  is  the  more  difficult  reading,  and  the  phrase 
used  by  St.  Luke  (6  Ka\ov/xfvos  EvpoKXvSuv)  seems 
to  point  to  some  peculiar  word  in  use  among  the 
sailors.  Dean  Alford  thinks  that  the  true  name  of 
the  wind  was  tvpanvKaiv,  but  that  the  Greek  sailors, 
not  understanding  the  Latin  termination,  corrupted 
the  woid  into  eupoKAvSivv,  and  that  so  St.  Luke  wrote 
it.     [Winds.]  [J.  S.  H.] 

EU'TYCIIUS  (Zvtvxos),  a  youth  at  Troas 
(Acts  xx.  9),  who  sitting  in  a  window,  and  having 
fallen  asleep  while  St.  Paul  was  discoursing  far  into 
the  night,  tell  from  the  third  story,  and  being  taken 
up  dead,  was  miraculously  restored  to  life  by  the 
Apostle.  The  plain  statement,  tfpdri  vacp6s,  and 
the  proceeding  of  St.  Paul  with  the  body  (ct'.  2  K. 
iv.  .'!4i,  forbid  us  tin-  a  moment  to  entertain  tin.-  view 
of  De  Wette,  .Meyer,  and  Olshausen,  who  suppose 
that  animation  was  merely  suspended.        [H.  A.] 

EVANGELIST.  The  constitution  of  the 
Apostolic  Church  included  an  order  or  body  of 
men  known  as  Evangelists.  The  absence  of  any 
detailed  account  of  the  organisation  ami  practical 
working  of  the  ('lunch  of  the  first  Century  leaves 
us  iii  some  uncertainty  as  to  their  functions  ami 
positions.  The  meaning  of  the  name,  "  The  pub- 
lishers of  glad  tidings,"  seems  common  to  the  work 
of  the  Christian  ministry  generally,  yet  in  Eph. 
iv.  1  1  the  evayyeAiffT ai  appear  on  the  one  hand 
alter  the  airoffToAoi  and  TTp6<p-qTai\  on  the  other 
before  the  Tro'i/devcs  and  8i5d(TKa\oi.  Assuming 
that  the  Apostles  here,  whether  limited  to  the 
Twelve  or  not,  ax-  those  who  weir  looked  on  as 
the  special  delegates  and  representatives  of  Christ, 
and  therefore  higher  than  all  others  in  their 
authority,  am!  that  the  Prophets  were  men  speaking 
under  the  immediate   impulse  of  the  Spirit  words 


EVANGELIST 


593 


that  were  mighty  in  their  effects  on  men's  hearts 
and  consciences,  it  would  follow  that  the  Evange- 
lists had  a  function  subordinate  to  theirs,  yet  more 
conspicuous,  and  so  tar  higher  than  that  of  the 
Pastors  who  watched  over  a  church  that  had  been 
founded,  and  of  the  Teachers  who  carried  on  the 
work  of  systematic  instruction.  This  passage 
accordingly  would  lead  us  to  think  of  them  as 
standing  between  the  two  other  groups — sent  forth 
as  missionary  preachers  of  the  (iospel  by  the  first, 
and  as  such  preparing  the  way  for  the  labours  of 
the  second.  The  same  inference  would  seem  to 
follow  the  occurrence  of  the  word  as  applied  to 
Philip  in  Acts  xxi.  8.  He  had  been  one  of  those 
who  had  gone  everywhere,  evayyfKi£6fj.evoi  rbv 
\6yov  (Acts  viii.  4),  now  in  one  city,  now  in 
another  (viii.  40) ;  but  he  has  not  the  power 
or  authority  of  an  Apostle,  does  not  speak  as  a 
prophet  himself,  though  the  gift  of  prophecy 
belongs  to  his  four  daughteis  (xxi.  9),  exercises 
apparently  no  pastoral  superintendence  over  any 
portion  of  the  Hock.  The  omission  of  Evange- 
lists in  the  list  of  1  Cor.  xii.  may  be  ex- 
plained on  the  hypothesis  that  the  nature  of  St. 
Paul's  argument  led  him  there  to  speak  of  the 
settled  organisation  of  a  given  local  Church,  which 
of  course  presupposed  the  work  of  the  missionary 
preacher  as  already  accomplished,  while  the  train  of 
thought  in  Eph.  iv.  11  brought  before  his  mind  all 
who  were  in  any  way  instrumental  in  building  up 
the  Church  universal.  It  follows  from  what  has 
been  said  that  the  calling  of  the  Evangelist  is  ex- 
pressed by  the  word  K-qpvaaeiv  rather  than  SiSd- 
gkziv,  or  izapaKdKiiv  ;  it  is  the  proclamation  of 
the  glad-tidings  to  those  who  have  not  known  them, 
rather  than  the  instruction  and  pastoral  care  of 
those  who  have  believed  and  been  baptised.  And 
this  is  also  what  we  gather  from  2  Tim.  iv.  2,  5. 
Timotheus  is  "  to  preach  the  word  ;"  in  doing  this 
he  is  to  fulfil  "  the  work  of  an  Evangelist."  It  fol- 
lows also  that  the  name  denotes  a  work  rather  than 
an  order.  The  Evangelist  might  or  might  not  be 
a  Bishop-Elder  or  a  Deacon.  The  Apostles,  so  far 
as  they  evangelized  (Acts  viii.  25,  xiv.  7;  1  Cor. 
i.  17),  might  claim  the  title,  though  there  were 
many  evangelists  who  were  not  Apostles.  The 
brother,  "  whose  praise  was  in  the  Gospel  "  (2  Cor. 
viii.  18),  may  be  looked  on  as  one  of  St.  Paul's 
companions  in  this  work,  and  known  probably  by 
the  same  name.  In  this,  as  in  other  points  con- 
nects! with  the  organisation  of  the  Church  in  the 
Apostolic  age,  but  little  information  is  to  be  gained 
fiom  later  writers.  The  name  was  no  longer  ex- 
plained by  the  presence  of  those  to  whom  it  had 
been  specially  applied,  and  came  to  he  variously 
interpreted.  Theodoret  (on  Eph.  iv.  11)  describes 
the  Evangelists  (as  they  have  been  described  above) 
as  travelling  missionaries.  Chrysostom,  as  men 
who  preached  the  Gospel  fir)  vepiiofTts  iravraxov. 
The  account  given  by  Eusebius  (//.  A',  iii.  37), 
though  somewhat  rhetorical  and  vague,  gives  pro- 
minence to  the  idea  of  itinerant  missionary  pi«ai 
.Men  "  do  the  work  of  Evangelists,  leaving  their 
homes  to  proclaim  Christ,  and  deliver  the  written 
Gospels  to  those  who  were  ignorant  of  the  faith." 
The  last  clause  of  this  description  indicates  a  change 
in  tlie  work,  which  before  long  affected  the  mean- 
ing of  the  name.  If  tlie  (Jo-pel  was  a  Written 
hook,  and  the  office  of  the  Evangelists  was  to  read 
or  distribute  it,  then  the  writers  of  such  books 
were  koct'  i^oxw  |m:  Evangelists.  It  is  thus 
accordingly  that  Eusebius  (/.  c.)  speaks  of  them. 

2  Q 


594 


EVE 


though  the  old  meaning  of  the  word  (as  in  //.  E. 
v.  10,  where  he  applies  it  to  Pantaenus)  is  not 
forgotten  by  him.  Soon  this  meaning  so  over- 
shadowed the  old  that  Oecumenius  (Estius  on  Eph. 
iv.  11)  has  no  other  notion  of  the  Evangelists 
than  as  those  who  have  written  a  Gospel  (comp. 
Harless  on  Eph.  iv.  11).  Augustine,  though  com- 
monly using  the  word  in  this  sense,  at  times  re- 
members its  earlier  signification  (Serm.  xcix.  and 
cclxvi.).  Ambrosianus  (Estius,  /.  c„)  identities 
them  with  Deacons.  In  later  liturgical  language 
the  work  was  applied  to  the  reader  of  the  Gospel 
for  the  day.  (Comp.  Neander,  Pflanz.  u.  Lett.  iii. 
5  ;   Hooker,  E.  P.  Bk.  lxxviii.  7,  9.)      [E.  H.  P.] 

EVE  (rtin,  i.  e.  Chavvah,  LXX.  in  Gen.  iii.  20, 
Zom),  elsewhere  E5a  ;  ffcva),  the  name  given  in 
Scripture  to  the  first  woman.  It  is  simply  a  feminine 
form  of  the  adjective  TI,  living,  alive,  which  more 
commonly  makes  HTl  ;  or  it  may  be  regarded  as  a 
variation  of  the  noun  iTTl,  which  means  life.  The 
account  of  Eve's  creation  is  found  at  Gen.  ii.  21, 
22.  Upon  the  failure  of  a  companion  suitable 
for  Adam  among  the  creatures  which  were 
brought  to  him  to  be  named,  the  Lord  God  caused 
a  deep  sleep  to  fall  upon  him,  and  took  one  of  his 
nbs  from  him,  which  he  fashioned  into  a  woman, 
and  brought  her  to  the  man.  Various  expla- 
nations of  this  narrative  have  been  offered.  Per- 
haps that  which  we  are  chiefly  intended  to  learn 
from  it  is  the  foundation  upon  which  the  union 
between  man  and  wife  is  built,  viz.  identity  of 
nature  and  oneness  of  origin. 

Through  the  subtlety  of  the  serpent,  Eve  was  be- 
guiled into  aviolation  of  the  one  commandment  which 
had  been  imposed  upon  her  and  Adam.  She  took 
of  the  fruit  of  the  forbidden  tree  and  gave  it  her 
husband  (Comp.  2  Cor.  xi.  3;  1  Tim.  ii.  13,  14). 
[Adam].  The  different  aspects  under  which  Eve 
regarded  her  mission  as  a  mother  are  seen  in  the 
names  of  her  sons.  At  the  birth  of  the  first  sh« 
said  "  I  have  gotten  a  man  from  the  Lord,"  or 
perhaps,  "  I  have  gotten  a  man,  even  the  Lord," 
mistaking  him  for  the  Redeemer.  When  the 
second  was  born,  finding  her  hopes  frustrated,  she 
named  him  Abel,  or  vanity.  When  his  brother  had 
slain  him,  and  she  again  bare  a  son,  she  called  his 
name  Seth,  and  the  joy  of  a  mother  seemed  to  out- 
weigh the  sense  of  the  vanity  of  life:  "  For  God," 
said  she,  "  hath  appointed  jie  another  seed  instead 
of  Abel,  for  Cain  slew  him."  The  Scripture  account 
of  Eve  closes  with  the  birth  of  Seth.  [S.  L.] 

E'VI  (*1K;  Eut;  Evi,  Hcvacus),  one  of  the 
five  kings  or  princes  of  Midian,  slain  by  the  Israelites 
in  the  war  after  the  matter  of  Baal-peor,  and  whose 
lands  were  afterwards  allotted  to  Reuben  (Num. 
xxxi.  8  ;  Josh.  xifi.  21).    [Midian.]       [E.  S.  P.] 

ETIL-MER'ODACH  (^Y1E>  ^X  ;  Evia\- 

yuapo)5e'/c.  OiiAataaSdxap  ;  Abyden.  'AfxtX/xapov- 
Sokos  ;  Beros.  EveiAfiapdSovxos  ;  Euilmerodach), 
according  to  Berosus  and  Abydenus,  was  the  son 
and  successor  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  We  learn  from 
the  second  book  of  Kings  (2  K.  xxv.  27)  and 
from  Jeremiajj  (Jer.  Iii.  31),  that  in  the  first 
year  of  his  reign  this  king  had  compassion  upon 
his  father's  enemy,  Jehoiachin,  and  released  him 
from  prison  where  he  had  languished  for  thirtv- 
seven  years,  "spake  kindly  to  him,"  and  gave  him 
a  portion  at  his  table  for  the  rest  of  his  life.  He 
reigned  but  a  short  time  having  ascended  the  throne 


EXODUS 

on  the  death  of  Nebuchadnezzar  in  B.C.  561,  and 
being  himself  succeeded  by  Neriglissar  in  B.C.  559. 
(See  the  Canon  of  Ptolemy,  given  under  Babylon.) 
He  thus  appears  to  have  reigned  but  two  years, 
which  is  the  time  assigned  to  him  by  Abydenus  (Fr. 
9)  and  Berosus  (Fr.  14).  At  the  end  of  this  brief 
space  Evil-Merodach  was  murdered  by  Neriglissnr 
[Nergal-SHAREZER] — a  Babylonian  noble  married 
to  his  sister — who  then  seized  the  crown.  Ac- 
cording to  Berosus,  Evil-Merodach  provoked  his 
fate  by  lawless  government  and  intemperance. 
Perhaps  the  departure  from  the  policy  of  his  father, 
and  the  substitution  of  mild  for  severe  measures, 
may  have  been  viewed  in  this  light.  [G.  R.] 

EXECUTIONER  (11313  ;  <nreKov\d™P). 
The  Hebrew  iabbach  describes  in  the  first  instance 
the  office  of  executioner,  and,  secondarily,  the  gene- 
ral duties  of  the  body-guard  of  a  monarch.  Thus 
Potiphar  was  "  captain  of  the  executioners  "  (Gen. 
xxxvii.  36  ;  see  margin),  and  had  his  official  resi- 
dence at  the  public  gaol  (Gen.  xl.  3).  Nebuzaradan 
(2  K.  xxv.  8 ;  Jer.  xxxix.  9)  and  Arioch  (Dan.  ii. 
14)  held  the  same  office.  That  the  "  captain  of 
the  guard"  himself  occasionally  performed  the  duty 
of  an  executioner  appears  from  1  K.  ii.  25,  34. 
Nevertheless  the  post  was  one  of  high  dignity,  and 
something  beyond  the  present  position  of  the  zdbit 
of  modern  Egypt  (comp.  Lane,  i.  163),  with  which 
Wilkinson  (ii.  45)  compares  it.  It  is  still  not  un- 
usual for  officers  of  high  rank  to  inflict  corporal 
punishment  with  their  own  hands  (Wilkinson,  ii. 
43).  The  LXX.  takes  the  word  in  its  original 
sense  (cf.  1  Sam.  ix.  23),  and  terms  Potiphar  chief  - 
cook,  apXL/J-dyeipos. 

The  Greek  (nreKovXarccp  (Mark  vi.  27)  is  bor- 
rowed from  the  Latin  speculator;  originally  a 
military  spy  or  scout,  but  under  the  emperors 
transferred  to  the  body-guard,  from  the  vigilance 
which  their  office  demanded  (Tac.  Hist.  ii.  11; 
Suet.  Claud.  35).  [W.  L.  B.l 

EXILE.     [Captivity.] 

EX'ODUS  (n'l)X>  n^XI,  being  the  first  words 
of  the  Book,  or  abbr.  fl'lDC  ;  in  the  Masora  to 
Gen.  xxiv.  8  called  pp"TJ,  see  Buxt.  Lex.  Tal.  p. 
1325;  "EloSos;  Exodus),  the  second  book  of  the 
Law  or  Pentateuch. 

A.  Contents. — The  book  maybe  divided  into  two 
principal  parts,  I.  Historical,  i.  1 — xviii.  27  ;  and 
II.  Legislative,  xix.  1 — xl.  38.  The  former  of  these 
may  be  subdivided  into  (1.)  the  preparation  for  the 
deliverance  of  Israel  from  their  bondage  in  Egypt ; 
(2.)  the  accomplishment  of  that  deliverance. 

I.  (1.)  The  first  section  (i.  1 — xii.  36)  contains  an 
account  of  the  following  particulars : — The  great 
increase  of  Jacob's  posterity  in  the  land  of  Egypt, 
and  their  oppression  under  a  new  dynasty,  which 
occupied  the  throne  after  the  death  of  Joseph  (ch. 
i.)  ;  the  birth,  education,  and  flight  of  Moses  (ii.)  ; 
his  solemn  call  to  be  the  deliverer  of  his  people 
(iii.  1 — iv.  17),  and  his  return  to  Egypt  in  con- 
sequence (iv.  18-31)  ;  his  first  ineffectual  attempt 
to  prevail  upon  Pharaoh  to  let  the  Israelites  go, 
which  only  resulted  in  an  increase  of  their  burdens 
(v.  1-21)  ;  a  further  preparation  of  Moses  and  Aaron 
for  their  office,  together  with  the  account  of  their 
genealogies  (v.  22 — vii.  7);  the  successive  signs 
and  wonders,  by  means  of  which  the  deliverance  of 
Israel  from  the  land  of  bondage  is  at  length  accom- 
plished, and  the  institution  of  the  Passover  (vii. 
8— xii.  3p). 


EXODUS 

(2.)  A  narrative  of  events  from  the  departure 
out  of  Egypt  to  the  arrival  of  the  Israelites  at 
Mount  Sinai.  We  have  in  this  section  (a.)  the 
departure  and  (mentioned  in  connexion  with  it)  the 
injunctions  then  given  respecting  the  Passover  and 
the  sanctification  of  the  first-born  (xii.  37 — xiii. 
16) ;  the  march  to  the  Red  Sea, the  passage  through 
it,  and  the  destruction  of  Pharaoh  and  his  host  in 
the  midst  of  the  sea,  together  with  Moses'  song  of 
triumph  upon  the  occasion  (xiii.  17 — xv.  21);  (6.) 
the  principal  events  on  the  journey  from  the  Red 
Sea  to  Sinai,  the  bitter  waters  at  Marah,  the  giving 
of  quails  and  of  the  manna,  the  observance  of  the 
sabbath,  the  miraculous  supply  of  water  from  the 
rock  at  Rephidim,  and  the  battle  there  with  the 
Amalekites  |  xv.  22 — xvii.  16)  ;  the  arrival  of  Jethro 
iu  the  Israelitish  camp,  and  his  advice  as  to  the 
civil  government  of  the  people  (xviii.). 

II.  The  solemn  establishment  of  the  Theocracy 
on  Mount  Sinai.  The  people  are  set  apart  to  God 
as  "  a  kingdom  of  priests  and  an  holy  nation"  (xix. 
6)  ;  the  ten  commandments  are  given,  and  the  laws 
which  are  to  regulate  the  social  life  of  the  people  are 
enacted  (xxi.  1 — xxiii.  19)  ;  an  Angel  is  promised  as 
their  guide  to  the  Promised  Land,  and  the  covenant 
between  God  and  Moses,  Nadab  and  Abihu,  and 
seventy  elders,  as  the  representatives  of  the  people, 
is  most  solemnly- ratified  (xxiii.  20 — xxiv.  IS);  in- 
structions are  given  respecting  the  tabernacle,  the 
ark,  the  mercy-seat,  the  altar  of  burnt-offering, 
the  separation  of  Aaron  and  his  sons  for  the  priest's 
office,  the  vestments  which  they  are  to  wear,  the 
ceremonies  to  be  observed  at  their  consecration,  the 
altar  of  incense,  the  laver,  the  holy  oil,  the  selection 
of  Bezaleel  and  Aholiab  for  the  work  of  the  taber- 
nacle, the  observance  of  the  sabbath  and  the  de- 
livery of  the  two  tobies  of  the  Law  into  the  hands  of 
Moses  (xxv.  1 — xxxi.  18) ;  the  sin  of  the  people  in 
the  matter  of  the  golden  calf,  their  rejection  in  con- 
sequence, and  their  restoration  to  God's  favour  at 
the  intercession  of  Moses  (xxxii.  1  —  xxxiv.  35)  ; 
lastly,  the  construction  of  the  tabernacle,  and  all 
pertaining  to  its  service  in  accordance  with  the  in- 
junctions previously  given  (xxxv.  1  — xl.  38). 

This  Book  in  short  gives  a  sketch  of  the  early 
history  of  Israel  as  a  nation :  and  the  history  has 
three  clearly  marked  stages.  First  we  see  a  nation 
enslaved  ;  next  a  nation  redeemed  ;  lastly  a  nation 
set  apart,  and  through  the  blending  of  its  reli- 
gious and  political  life  consecrated  to  the  sen-ice 
of  God. 

B.  Integrity.  —  According  to  von  Lengerke 
(Kenaan,  Ixxxviii.  xc.)  the  following  portions  of 
the  book  belong  to  the  original  or  Elohistic  docu- 
ment:— Chap.  i.  1-14,  ii.  23-25,  vi.  2 — vii.  7, 
xii.  1-28,  37,  38,  40-51  (xiii.  1,  2,  perhaps),  xvi., 
xix.  1,  xx.,  xxv. -xxxi.,  xxxv. -xl.  Stahelin  (h'rit. 
Onterss.")  and  De  Wette  (Einieitnnj)  agree  in  the 
main  with  this  division.  Knobel,  the  most  recent 
writer  on  the  subject,  in  the  introduction  to  his 
commentary  on  Exodus  and  Leviticus,  has  sifted 
these  books  still  more  carefully,  and  with  regard  to 
many  passages  has  formed  a  different  jud 
He  assigns  to  the  Elohist: — i.  1-7,  18,  14,  ii.  23- 
25  from  irUtfl,  vi.  2 — vii.  7,  except  vi.  8,  vii.  8- 
13,  19-22,  viii.  1-3,  11  from  tib).  and  12-15, 
ix.  8-12  and  35,  xi.  9,  10,  xii.  1-23,  28,  37  a, 
40-42,  43-51,  xiii.  1,2,  20,  xiv.  1-4,  8,  9,  15-18, 
(except  "ha  pV£T\  HO  in  ver.  15,  and  JIN  W)T] 
1  "pD  in  ver.  16),  21-23.  and  26-29  (except  27  from 


EXODUS 


595 


2W)),  xv.  19,  22,  23,  27,  xvi.  1.  2,  9-26,  31-36, 
xvii.  1,  xix.  2  a,  xxv. -xxxi.  11,  12-17  in  the  main  : 
xxxv.  1 — xl.  38. 

A  mere  comparison  of  the  two  lists  of  pas- 
sages selected  by  these  different  writers  as  be- 
longing to  the  original  document  is  sufficient  to 
show  how  very  uncertain  all  such  critical  processes 
must  be.  The  first,  that  of  v.  Lengerke,  is  open 
to  many  objections,  which  have  been  urged  by 
Havernick  (EinL  in  dcr  Pent.  §117),  Ranke,  and 
others.  Thus,  for  instance,  chap.  vi.  6,  which  all 
agree  in  regarding  as  Elohistic,  speaks  of  "  great 

judgments"  (D^'l|  DESK'S  in  the  plur.),  where- 
with God  would  redeem  Israel,  and  yet  not  a  word 
is  said  of  these  in  the  so-called  original  document. 
Again  xii.  12,  23,  27  contains  the  announcement 
of  the  destruction  of  the  fust-born  of  Egypt,  but 
the  fulfilment  of  the  threat  is  to  be  found,  according 
to  the  critics,  only  in  the  later  Jehovistic  additions. 
Hupfcld  has  tried  to  escape  this  difficulty  by  sup- 
posing that  the  original  documents  did  contain  an 
account  of  the  slaying  of  the  first-born,  as  the  in- 
stitution of  the  Passover  in  xii.  12,  &c,  has  clearly 
a  reference  to  it :  only  he  will  not  allow  that  the 
story  as  it  now  stands  is  that  account.  But  even 
then  the  difficulty  is  only  partially  removed,  for 
thus  one  judgment  only  is  mentioned,  not  many 
(vi.  6).  Knobel  has  done  his  best  to  obviate  this 
glaring  inconsistency.  Feeling  no  doubt  that  the 
ground  taken  by  his,  predecessors  was  not  tenable, 
he  retains  as  a  part  of  the  original  work  much  which 
they  had  rejected.  It  is  especially  worthy  of  notice 
that  he  considers  some  at  least  of  the  miraculous 
portions  of  the  story  to  belong  to  the  older  docu- 
ment, and  so  accounts  for  the  expression  in  vi.  6. 
The  changing  of  Aaron's  rod  into  a  serpent,  of  the 
waters  of  the  Nile  into  blood,  the  plague  of  frogs, 
of  mosquitoes  (A.  V.  lice),  and  of  boils,  and  the  de- 
struction of  the  first-born,  are,  according  to  Knobel, 
Elohistic.  He  points  out  what  he  considers  here 
links  of  connexion,  and  a  regular  sequence  in  the 
narrative.  He  bids  us  observe  that  Jehovah  always 
addresses  Moses,  and  that  Moses  directs  Aaron  how 
to  act.  The  miracles,  then,  are  arranged  in  order 
of  importance:  first  there  is  the  sign  which  serve, 
to  accredit  the  mission  of  Aaron;  next  follow  three 
plagues,  which,  however,  do  not  touch  men,  and 
these  are  sent  through  the  instrumentality  of  Aaron  ; 
the  fourth  plague  is  a  plague  upon  man,  and  here 
Moses  takes  the  most  prominent  part  ;  the  fifth 
and  last  is  accomplished  by  Jehovah  himself.  Thus 
the  miracles  increase  in  intensity  as  they  go  on. 
The  agents  likewise  rise  in  dignity.  If  Aaron  with 
his  rod  of  might  begins  the  work,  he  gives  way 
afterwards  to  his  greater  brother,  whilst  for  the 
last  act  of  redemption  Jehovah  employs  no  human 
agency,  buf  Himself  with  a  mighty  hand  and  out- 
stretched arm  effects  the  deliverance  of  his  people. 

The  passages  thus   selected  have   no   doubt  a  soil  of 

connexion,  but  it  is  in  the  highest  degree  arbitrary 
to  conclude  that  because  portions  of  a  work  may 
be  omitted  without  seriously  disturbing  the  sense, 
the  e  portions  do  not  belong  to  the  original  work, 
buf  must  be  regarded  as  subsequent  embellishments 
and  additions. 

all  a|  i  e  in  assigning  chaps,  hi.  and  iv.  to 
the  Jehovist.  The  call  of  Moses,  as  there  described, 
is  said  I  the  Jehovistic  parallel  to  vi.  2 — 

vii.  7.     Yet  it  seems  improbable  that  the  Elohist 
'i.  dd  intro  with  the  bare  words.  "  And 

I,"   vi.  2,  without   a  single  word 
2  Q  2 


596 


EXODUS 


as  to  the  previous  histov y  of  so  remarkable  a  man .  So 
argues  Havemick,  and  as  it  appears  to  us,  not  with- 
out reason.  It  will  be  observed  that  none  of  these 
critics  attempt  to  make  the  Divine  names  a  criterion 
whereby  to  distinguish  the  several  documents. 
Thus  in  the  Jehovistic  portion,  chap.  i.  15-22,  De 
Wette  is  obliged  to  remark,  with  a  sort  of  uneasy 
candour,  "but  vers.  17,  20,  Elohim  (?),"  and 
again  chap.  iii.  4,  6,  11-15,  "here  seven  times 
Elohim."  In  other  places  there  is  the  same  diffi- 
culty as  in  chap.  xix.  17,  19,  which  Stahelin,  as 
well  as  Knobel,  gives  to  the  Jehovist.  In  the  pas- 
sages in  chaps,  vii.,  viii.,  ix.,  which  Knobel.  classes 
in  the  earlier  record,  the  name  Jehovah  occurs 
throughout.  It  is  obvious  then  that  there  must  be 
other  means  of  determining  the  relative  antiquity 
of  the  different  portions  of  the  book,  or  the  attempt 
to  ascertain  which  are  earlier  and  which  are  later 
must  entirely  fail.  Accordingly  certain  pecu- 
liarities of  style  are  supposed  to  be  characteristic  of 
the  two  documents.  Thus,  for  instance,  De  Wette 
(Einl.  §151,  S.  183)  appeals  to  mil  iT"IQ,  i.  7, 
nTH  "Tl  DSJJ2,  xii.  17,  41,  ]V"Q  D'pH,  vi.  4, 
the  formula  "lOwS1?  T\W&  *?N  ^  "DTI,  xxv.  1, 
xxx.  11,  &c,  niN2¥,  vi.  26,  vii.  4,  xii.  17,  41, 
51  ;  DH2"iyn  \s2,  xii.  6,  xxix.  41,  xxx.  8,  and  other 
expressions,  as  decisive  of  the  Elohist.  Stahelin  also 
proposes  on  very  similar  grounds  to  separate  the  first 
from  the  second  legislation.  Wherever,  he  says,  I 
find  mention  of  a  pillar  of  fire,  or  of  a  cloud,  Ex. 
xxxiii.  9,  10,  or  an  "  Angel  of  Jehovah,"  as  Ex.  xxiii., 
xxxiv.,  or  the  phrase  "  flowing  with  milk  and  honey, 
as  Ex.  xiii.  5,  xxxiii.  3  .  .  .  where  mention  is  made 
of  a  coming  down  of  God,  as  Ex.'  xix.,  xxxiv.  5,  or 
where  the  Canaanite  nations  are  numbered,  or  the 
tabernacle  supposed  to  be  without  the  camp,  Ex. 
xxxiii.  7,  I  feel  tolerably  certain  that  I  am  reading 
the  words  of  the  Author  of  the  Second  Legislation 
(i.  e.  the  Jehovist)."  But  these  nice  critical  dis- 
tinctions are  very  precarious,  especially  in  a  stereo- 
typed language  like  the  Hebrew. 

Unfortunately,  too,  dogmatical  prepossessions 
have  been  allowed  some  share  in  the  controversy . 
De  Wette  and  his  school  chose  to  set  down  every 
thing  which  savoured  of  a  miracle  as  proof  of  later 
authorship.  The  love  of  the  marvellous,  which  is  all 
they  see  in  the  stories  of  miracles,  according  to  them 
could  not  have  existed  in  an  earlier  and  simpler  age. 
But  on  their  owu  hypothesis  this  is  a  very  extra- 
ordinary view.  For  the  earlier  traditions  of  a  people 
are  not  generally  the  least  wonderful,  but  the  re- 
verse. And  one  cannot,  thus,  acquit  the  second 
writer  of  a  design  in  embellishing  his  narrative. 
However,  this  is  not  the  place  to  argue  with  those 
who  deny  the  possibility  of  a  miracle,  or  who  make 
the  narration  of  miracles  proof  sufficient  of  later  au- 
thorship. Into  this  error  Knobel  it  is  true  has  not 
fallen.  By  admitting  some  of  the  plagues  into  his 
Elohistic  catalogue,  he  shows  that  he  is  at  least  free 
from  the  dogmatic  prejudices  of  critics  like  De 
Wette.  But  his  own  critical  tests  are  not  conclu- 
sive. And  the  way  in  which  he  cuts  verses  to 
pieces,  as  in  viii.  1 1",  and  xiii.  15,  16,  27,  where  it 
suits  his  purpose,  is  so  completely  arbitrary,  and 
results  so  evidently  from  the  stern  constraint  of  a 
theory,  that  his  labours  in  this  direction  are  not 
more  satisfactory  than  those  of  his  predecessors. 

On  the  whole  there  seems  much^-eason  to  doubt 
whether  critical  acumen  will  ever  be  able  plausibly 
to  distinguish  between  the  original  and  the  supple- 
ment in  the  book  of  Exodus.     There  is  nothing  in- 


EXODUS 

deed  forced  or  improbable  in  the  supposition,  either 
that  Moses  himself  incorporated  in  his  memoirs 
ancient  tradition  whether  oral  or  written,  or  that  a 
writer  later  than  Moses  made  use  of  materials  left 
by  the  great  legislator  in  a  somewhat  fragmentary 
form.  There  is  an  occasional  abruptness  in  the 
narrative,  which  suggests  that  this  may  possibly 
have  been  the  case,  as  in  the  introduction  of  the 
genealogy  vi.  13-27.  The  remarks  in  xi.  3,  xvi. 
35,  36  lead  to  the  same  conclusion.  The  apparent 
confusion  at  xi.  1-3  may  be  explained  by  regarding 
these  verses  as  parenthetical. 

We  shall  give  reasons  hereafter  for  concluding 
that  the  Pentateuch  in  its  present  form  was  not 
altogether  the  work  of  Moses.  [Pentateuch.] 
For  the  present  it  is  sufficient  to  remark,  that  even 
admitting  the  hand  of  an  editor  or  compiler  to  be 
visible  in  the  book  of  Exodus,  it  is  quite  impossible 
accurately  to  distinguish  the  documents  from  each 
other,  or  from  his  own  additions. 

C.  Credibility. — Almost  every  historical  fact 
mentioned  in  Exodus  has  at  some  time  or  other 
been  called  in  question.  But  it  is  certain  that  all 
investigation  has  hitherto  tended  only  to  establish  the 
veracity  of  the  narrator.  A  comparison  with  other 
writers  and  an  examination  of  the  monuments 
confirm,  or  at  least  do  not  contradict,  the  most  ma- 
tei  ial  statements  of  this  book.  Thus,  for  instance, 
Manetho's  story  of  the  Hyksos,  questionable  as 
much  of  it  is,  and  differently  as  it  has  been  inter- 
preted by  different  writers,  points  at  least  to  some 
early  connexion  between  the  Israelites  and  the 
Egyptians,  and  is  corroborative  of  the  fact  implied 
in  the  Pentateuch  that,  at  the  time  of  the  Israelitish 
sojourn,  Egypt  was  ruled  by  a  foreign  dynasty. 
[Egypt.]  Manetho  speaks,  too,  of  strangers  from 
the  East  who  occupied  the  eastern  part  of  Lower 
Egypt.  And  his  account  shows  that  the  Israelites 
had  become  a  numerous  and  formidable  people. 
According  to  Ex.  xii.  37,  the  number  of  men 
beside  women  and  children  who  left  Egypt  was 
600,000.  This  would  give  for  the  whole  na- 
tion about  two  millions  and  a  half.  There  is  no 
doubt  some  difficulty  in  accounting  for  this  im- 
mense increase,  if  we  suppose  (as  on  many  accounts 
seems  probable)  that  the  actual  residence  of  the 
children  of  Israel  was  only  215  years.  We  must 
remember  indeed  that  the  number  who  went  into 
Egypt  with  Jacob  was  considerably  more  than 
""threescore  and  ten  souls"  [see  Chronology]; 
we  must  also  take  into  account  the  extraordinary 
fruitfulness  of  Egypt a  (concerning  which  all  writers 
are  agreed),  and  especially  of  that  part  of  it  in 
which  the  Israelites  dwelt.  Still  it  would  be  more 
satisfactory  if  we  could  allow  430  years  for  the 
increase  of  the  nation  rather  than  any  shorter 
period. 

According  to  De  Wette,  the  story  of  Moses'  hirth 
is  mythical,  and  arises  from  an  attempt  to  account 
etymologically  for  his  name.  But  the  beautiful 
simplicity  of  the  narrative  places  it  far  above  the 
stories  of  Romulus,  Cyrus,  and  Semiramis,  with 
which  it  has  been  compared  (Knobel,  p.  14).  And 
as  regards  the  etymology  of  the  name,  there  can  be 
very  little  doubt"that  it  is  Egyptian  (from  the  Copt. 
JULCO.  "water,"  and  XI  or  (5V  " to  take;" 
cf.  Gesen.  Thes.  in  v.,  and  Knobel,  Comm.  in  loc.) ; 
and  if  so,   the  author  has  either  played  upon  the 

a  Cf.  Strabo,  xv.  p.  478;  Aristot.  Hist.  Anim.  vii. 
4  ;  PHn.  IT.  iV.  vii.  3  ;  Seneca,  Qu.  Nat.  iii.  25, 
quoted  by  Huvernick. 


EXODUS 

name  or  is  mistaken  in  his  philology.  But  this 
does  not  prove  that  the  whole  story  is  nothing  but 
a  myth.  Philology  as  a  science  is  of  very  modern 
growth,  and  the  truth  of  history  does  not  stand  or 
fall  with  the  explanation  of  etymologies.  BThe  same 
remark  applies  to  De  Wette's  objection  to  the  ety- 
mology in  ii.  22. 

Other  objections  are  of  a  very  arbitrary  kind. 
Thus  Knobel  thinks  the  command  to  destroy  the 
male  children  (i.  15  ft'.)  extremely  improbable,  be- 
cause the  object  of  the  king  was  not  to  destroy  the 
people,  but  to  make  use  of  them  as  slaves.  To  re- 
quire the  midwives  to  act  as  the  enemies  of  their 
own  people,  and  to  issue  an  injunction  that  every 
son  born  of  Israelitish  parents  should  be  thrown 
into  the  Nile,  was  a  piece  of  downright  madness  of 
which  he  thinks  the  king  would  not  be  guilty.  But 
we  do  not  know  that  the  midwives  were  Hebrew, 
they  may  have  been  Egyptian ;  and  kings,  like 
other  slave-owners,  may  act  contrary  to  their  in- 
terest in  obedience  to  their  fears  or  their  passions ; 
indeed,  Knobel  himself  compares  the  stoiy  of 
King  Bocchoris,  who  commanded  all  the  unclean 
in  his  land  to  be  cast  into  the  sea  (Lysim.  ap. 
Joseph,  c.  Apion.  i.  34),  and  the  destruction  of 
the  Spartan  Helots  (Plutarch,  Lycurg.  28).  He 
objects  further  that  it  is  not  easy  to  reconcile  such 
a  command  with  the  number  of  the  Israelites 
at  their  exodus.  But  we  may  suppose  that  in  very 
many  instances  the  command  of  the  king  would 
be  evaded,  and  probably  it  did  not  long  continue 
in  force. 

Again,  De  Wette  objects  to  the  call  of  Moses 
that  he  could  not  have  thus  formed  the  resolve  to 
become  the  saviour  of  his  people — which,  as  Haver- 
nick  justly  remarks,  is  a  dogmatical,  not  a  critical 
decision. 

The  ten  plagues  are  physically,  many  of  them, 
what  might  be  expected  in  Egypt,  although  in  their 
intensity  and  in  their  rapid  succession,  they  are 
clearly  supernatural.  Even  the  order  in  which 
they  occur  is  an  order  in  which  physical  causes  are 
allowed  to  operate.  The  corruption  of  the  river 
is  followed  by  the  plague  of  frogs.  From  the  dead 
frogs  are  bred  the  gnats  and  flies,  from  these  came 
the  murrain  among  the  cattle  and  the  boils  on  men, 
and  so  on. 

Most  of  the  plagues  indeed,  though  of  course  in 
a  much  less  aggravated  form,  and  without  such  suc- 
cession, are  actually  experienced  at  this  day  in 
Egypt.  Of  the  plague  of  locusts  it  is  expressly 
remarked  that  "  before  them  were  no  such  locusts, 
neither  after  them  shall  be  such."  And  all  tra- 
vellers in  Egypt  have  observed  swarms  of  locusts, 
brought  generally  by  a  south-west  wind  (Denon, 
however,  mentions  their  coming  with  an  fix?  wind), 
and  in  the  winter  or  spring  of  the  year.  This  last 
fact  agrees  also  with  our  narrative.  Lepsius  speaks 
of  being  in  a  "  regular  snow-drift  of  locusts,"  which 
came  from  the  desert  in  hundreds  of  thousands  to 
the  valley.  "At  the  edge  of  the  fruitful  plain," 
he  says,  "  they  fell  down  in  showers."  And  this 
continued  for  six  days,  indeed  in  weaker  flights 
much  longer.  He  also  saw  hail  in  Egypt.  In  Ja- 
nuary 1843,  he  and  his  party  were  surprised  by  a 
storm.  "Suddenly,"  he  writes,  "  the  storm  grew 
to  a  tremendous  hurricane,  such  as  I  have  never 
seen  in  Europe,  and  hail  fell  upon  us  iii  such 
masses,  as  almost  to  turn  day  into  night"  He  no 
ti.rs,  tdo  an  extraordinary  cattle  murrain  "which 
carried  off  40,000  head  of  cattle"  I  Letters  from 
Egypt,  Eng.  Transl.  pp.  49,  27,  W  • 


EXODUS,  THE  597 

The  institution  of  the  Passover  (ch.  xii.)  has 
been  subjected  to  severe  criticism.  This  has  also 
been  called  a  mythic  fiction.  The  alleged  circum- 
stances are  not  historical  it  is  said,  but  arise  out  of 
a  later  attempt  to  explain  the  origin  of  the  cere- 
mony and  to  refer  it  to  the  time  of  Moses.  The 
critjes  rest  mainly  on  the  difference  between  the 
directions  given  for  the  observance  of  this  the  first, 
and  those  given  for  subsequent  passovers.  But 
there  is  no  reason  why,  considering  the  very  re- 
markable circumstances  under  which  it  .was  insti- 
tuted, the  first  Passover  should  not  have  had  its 
own  peculiar  solemnities,  or  why  instructions 
should  not  then  have  been  given  for  a  somewhat 
different  observance  for  the  future.  [Passover,.] 

In  minor  details  the  writer  shows  a  remarkable 
acquaintance  with  Egypt.  Thus,  for  instance,  Pha- 
raoh's daughter  goes  to  the  river  to  bathe.  At  the 
present  day  it  is  true  that  only  women  of  the  lower 
orders  bathe  in  the  river.  But  Herodotus  (ii.  35) 
tells  us  (what  we  learn  also  from  the  monuments) 
that  in  ancient  Egypt  the  women  were  under  no 
restraint,  but  apparently  lived  more  in  public 
than  the  men.  To  this  must  be  added  that  the 
Egyptians  supposed  a  sovereign  virtue  to  exist  in 
the  Nile-waters.  The  writer  speaks  of  chariots 
and  "chosen  chariots"  (xiv.  7)  as  constituting  an 
important  element  in  the  Egyptian  army,  and  of 
the  king  as  leading  in  person.  The  monuments 
amply  confirm  this  representation.  The  Pharaohs 
lead  their  armies  to  battle,  and  the  armies  consist 
entirely  of  infantry  and  chariots. 

Many  other  facts  have  been  disputed,  such  as 
the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea,  the  giving  of  the 
manna,  &c.  But  respecting  these  it  may  suffice  to 
refer  to  other  articles  in  which  they  are  discussed. 
[The  Exodus  ;  Manna  ;  The  Red  Sea.] 

D.  The  authorship  and  date  of  the  book  are  dis- 
cussed under  Pentateuch.  [J.  J.  S.  P.] 

EX'ODUS,  THE.  The  object  of  this  article  is 
to  give  a  combined  view  of  the  results  stated  in  the 
various  articles  relating  or  referring  to  the  Exodus 
of  the  children  of  Israel  from  Egypt.  It  may  be 
divided  into  three  parts,  treating  of  the  chronolo- 
gical, the  historical,  and  the  geographical  aspect  of 
the  event. 

1.  Date. — The  date  of  the  Exodus  is  discussed 
under  Chronology,  where  it  is  held  that  a  pre- 
ponderance of  evidence  is  in  favour  of  the  year 
B.C.  1652.  The  historical  questions  connected  with 
this  date  are  noticed  under  Egypt.  Hales  places 
the  Exodus  B.C.  1648,  Usher  B.C.  1491,  and  Bunsen 
B.C.  1320. 

2.  History. — The  Exodus  is  a  great  turning-point 
in  Biblical  history.  With  it  the  Patriarchal  dis- 
pensation ends  and  the  Law  begins,  and  with  it  the 
Israelites  cease  to  be  a  family  and  become  a  nation. 
It  is  therefore  important  to  observe  how  the  pre- 
vious history  led  up  to  this  event.  The  advance- 
ment of' .Joseph,  and  the  placing  of  his  kinsmen  in 
what  was  to  a  pastoral  people,  at  least.  "  the  best 
of  the  land,"  yet,  as  far  as  possible,  apart  from 
Egyptian  influence,  favoured  the  multiplying  of 
the  Israelites  and  the  preservation  of  their  na- 
tionality. 'I'he  subsequent  persecution  bound  them 
mine  firmly  together,  and  at  tin- same  time  loosened 
the  hold  that  Egypt  had  gained  upon  them.  It 
was  thus  that  the  Israelites  were  ready  when  Moses 

declared  his  mission  to  go  forth  as  one  man  fi 

the    land    of  their    bondage.       [JOSEPH;   Musis; 
Eoi 1  1    ! 


598 


EXODUS,  THE 


The  history  of  the  Exodus  itself  commences  with 
the  close  of  that  of  the  Ten  Plagues  [Plagues  of 
Egypt].  In  the  night  in  which,  at  midnight,  the 
firstborn  were  slain  (Ex.  xii.  '29),  Pharaoh  urged 
the  departure  of  the  Israelites  (ver.  31,  32).  They 
at  once  set  forth  fiom  Rameses  (ver.  37,  39),  ap- 
parently during  the  night  (ver.  42),  but  towards 
morning,  on  the  15th  day  of  the  first  month  (Num. 
xxxiii.  3).  They  made  three  journeys  and  en- 
camped by  the  Red  Sea.  Here  Pharaoh  overtook 
them,  and  the  great  miracle  occurred  by  which 
they  were  saved,  while  the  pursuer  and  his  army 
were  destroyed.  It  has  been  thought  by  some  that 
Pharaoh  did  not  perish  in  the  Red  Sea,  but  not  only 
does  the  narrative  seem  to  forbid  such  a  supposition 
(Ex.  xiv.  18,  23,  28),  but  it  is  expressly  contradicted 


EXODUS,  THE 

in  Ps.  cxxxvi.  (ver.  15).  RecenHy  it  has  been  sug 
gested  that  the  Israelites  crossed  by  a  ford.  If, 
however,  their  safe  passage  could  thus  be  accounted 
for,  the  drowning  of  the  Egyptians  would  become 
more  extraordinary  than  before.  Obviously  ordinary 
causes  are  not  sufficient  to  explain  the  deliverance  of 
the  former  and  the  destruction  of  the  latter.  But 
even  were  it  so,  the  question  would  have  to  be  asked 
whether  the  occurrence  of  the  event  at  the  fit  time 
could  reasonably  be  considered  as  due  to  such  ordinary 
causes,  and  the  necessary  negative  reply  would  show 
the  fallacy  of  attempting  a  naturalistic  explanation 
of  the  event  on  account  of  the  use  of  natural  means. 
It  would  be  more  reasonable  to  deny  the  event,  but 
this  could  not  be  attempted  in  the  face  of  the  over- 
whelming evidence  of  its  occurrence. 


Map  to  illustrate  the  Exudus  of  the  Braulitea. 


3.  Geography. — The  determination  of  the  route 
by  which  the  Israelites  left  Egypt  is  one  of  the 
most  difficult  questions  in  Biblical  geography.  The 
following  points  must  be  settled  exactly  or  approxi- 
mately:— the  situation  of  the  Land  of  Goshen,  the 
length  of  each  day's  march,  the  position  of  the  first 
station  (Rameses),  and  thediiection  of  the  journey. 

The  Land  of  Goshen  may  be  concluded  from  the 
Biblical  narrative  to  have  been  part  of  Egypt,  but 
not  of  what  was  then  held  to  be  Egypt  Proper. 
It  must  therefoie  have  been  an  outer  eastern  pro- 


vince of  Lower  Egypt.  The  Israelites,  setting  out 
from  a  town  of  Goshen,  made  two  days'  journey 
towards  the  Red  Sea,  and  then  entered  the  wilder- . 
ness,  a  day's  journey  or  less  from  the  sea.  They 
could  only  therefore  have  gone  by  the  valley  now 
called  the  Y\'ddi-t-Tumeyldt,  for  every  other  culti- 
vated or  cultivable  tract  is  too  far  from  the  Red 
Sea.  Rameses,  as  we  shall  see,  must  have  lain  in 
this  valley,  which  thus  corresponded  in  part  at  least 
to  Goshen.  That  it  wholly  corresponded  lo  that 
reriort  is  evident  from    ts  osing  linrkj-Lv  a  single: 


EXODUS,  THE 

valley,  and  from  the  insufficiency  of  any  smaller 
territory  to  support  the  Israelites.     [Goshen.] 

It  is  not  difficult  to  fix  very  nearly  the  length  of 
each  day's  march  of  the  Israelites.  As  they  had 
with  them  women,  children,  and  cattle,  it  cannot 
be  supposed  that  they  went  more  than  iifteen  miles 
daily  ;  at  the  same  time  it  is  unlikely  that  they 
fell  far  short  of  this.  The  three  journeys  would 
therefore  give  a  distance  of  about  forty-rive  miles. 
There  seems,  however,  as  we  shall  see,  to  have 
been  a  deflexion  from  a  direct  course,  so  that  we 
cannot  consider  the  whole  distance  from  the  start- 
iug-point,  Kameses,  to  the  shore  of  the  Red  Sea 
as  much  more  than  about  thirty  miles  in  a  direct 
line.  Measuring  from  the  ancient  western  shore 
of  the  Arabian  Gulf  due  east  of  the  ]Vddi-t-Tu- 
meyldt,  a  distance  of  thirty  miles  in  a  direct  line 
places  the  site  of  Rameses  near-  the  mound  called 
in   the  present  day  El-'Abbdseeyeh,  not  far  from 


EXODUS,  THE 


599 


three  miles  from  the  western  side  of  the  ancient 
head  of  the  gulf.  The  Patumos  of  Herodotus  and 
Strabo,  which  appears  to  have  been  the  same  as  the 
Thoum  or  Thou  of  the  Itinerary  of  Antoninus, 
is  more  likely  to  be  the  Pithom  than  the  Etham 
of  Scripture.  [PlTHOM.]  It  is  too  fin-  west  for 
the  latter. 

After  leaving  Etham  the  direction  of  the  route 
changed.  The  Israelites  were  commanded  "  to  turn 
and  encamp  before  Pi-hahiroth,  between  Migdol  and 
the  sea,  over  against  Baal-zephon "  (Ex.  xiv.  2). 
Therefore  it  is  most  probable  that  they  at  once 
turned,  although  they  may  have  done  so  later  in 
the  march.  The  diiection  cannot  be  doubted,  if  our 
description  of  the  route  thus  far  be  correct,  for 
they  would  have  been  entangled  (ver.  3)  only  by 
turning  southward,  not  northward.  They  encamped 
for  the  night  by  the  sea,  probably  after  a  full  day's 
journey.  The  place  of  their  encampment  and  of 
the  western  end  of  the  valley.     That  the  Israelites  I  the  passage  of  the  sea  would  therefore  be  not  far 


started  from  a  place  in  this  position  is  further 
evident  from  the  account  of  the  two  routes  that 
lay  before  them: — "And  it  came  to  pass,  when 
Pharaoh  had  let  the  people  go,  that  God  led  them 
not  [by]  the  way  of  the  land  of  the  Philistines, 
although  that  [was]  near ;  for  God  said,  Lest 
perad venture  the  people  repent  when  they  see  war, 
and  they  return  to  Egypt :  but  God  let  the  people 
turn  to  the  way  of  the  wilderness  of  the  Red  Sea  " 


from  the  Persepolitan  monument,  which  is  made  in 
Linant's  map  the  site  of  the  Serapeum.  We  do 
not  venture  to  attempt  the  identification  of  the 
places  mentioned  in  the  narrative  with  modern 
sites.  Nothing  but  the  discovery  of  ancient  Egyptian 
names,  and  their  positive  appropriation  to  such 
sites,  could  enable  us  to  do  so.  Something,  how- 
ever, may  be  gathered  from  the  names  of  the 
places.     The  position  of  the  Israelite  encampment 


(Ex.  xiii.  17,  18).    The  expression  used,  2D*1,  does  j  was  before  or  at   Pi-hahiroth,   behind  which  was 
not  necessarily  imply  a  change  in  the  direction  of   Migdol_,_and  on  the  other  hand  Baal-zephon  and  the 


the  journey,  but  may  mean  that  God  did  not  lead 
the  Israelites  into  Palestine  by  the  nearest  route, 
but  took  them  about  by  the  way  of  the  wilderness. 
Were  the  meaning  that  the  people  turned,  we  should 
have  to  suppose  Kameses  to  have  been  beyond  the 
valley  to  the  west,  and  this  would  probably  make 
the  distance  to  the  Red  Sea  too  great  for  the  time 
occupied  in  traversing  it,  besides  overthrowing  the 
reasonable  identification  of  the  land  of  Goshen. 
[Rameses.]  Hence  it  is  clear  that  they  must  have 
started  from  near  the  eastern  side  of  the  ancient 
Delta,  along  which  lies  the  commencement  of  the 
route  to  the  Philistine  territory. 

Kameses  is  evidently  the  Raamses  of  Ex.  i.  11. 
It  seems  to  have  been  the  chief  town  of  the  land 
of  Goshen,  for  that  region,  or  possibly  a  part  of  it, 
is  called  the  land  of  Rameses  in  Gen.  xlvii.  11,  comp. 

4,  (5.    [Rameses;  Goshen.] 

After  the  first  day's  journey  the  Israelites  en- 


sea.  [Baal-zephon.]  Pi-hahiroth  or  -Hahiroth 
is  probably  the  name  of  a  natural  locality.  The 
separable  prefix  is  evidently  the  Egyptian  masculine 
article,  and  we  therefore  hold  the  name  to  be 
Egyptian.  Jablonsky  proposed  the  Coptic  ety- 
mology, TU-<?JX^-ptJOT,  "  the  place  where 

sedge  grows,"  which,  or  a  similar  name,  the  cri- 
tical sagacity  of  Fresuel  recognised  in  the  modern 
( ) h  uweybet-el-boos,  "  the  bed  of  reeds."  We  cannot, 
however,  hold  that  the  Ghuweybet-el-boos  in  the 
neighbourhood  where  we  place  the  passage  of  the 
sea  is  the  Pi-hahiroth  of  the  Bible:  theie  is  an- 
other Ghuwegbet-cl-boos  near  Suez,  and  such  a 
name  would  of  course  depend  for  its  permanence 
upon  the  continuance  of  a  vegetation  subject  to 
change.  [Pi-iiaiiiroth.]  Migdol  appears  to  have 
briii  a  common  name  for  a  frontier  watch-tower. 
[Migdol.]  Baal-zephon  we  take  to  have  had  a 
similar    meaning    to    that    of    Migdol.      [Baal- 


camped  at  Succoth   (Ex.  xii.  37,  xiii.  20;  Num 

xxxiii.  5,  G).     This  was   probably  a  mere  resting-  zepiion.]       We   should  expect   therefore  that  the 

place  of  caravans,  or  a  military  station,  or  else  a  encampment    would    have    been    in    a   depression, 

town  named  from  one  of  the   two.     Such  names  as  partly  marshy,  having  on  either  hand  an  elevation 

the  Scenae  Veteranorum  (which  has  been  rashly  marked  by  a  watch-tower. 

identified  with  Succoth),  and  the  Scenae  Maudrae  I      The  actual  passage  of  the  sea  forms  the  subject 

of  the  Itinerary  of  Antoninus,  and  the  settlement  of  another  article.     [Red   Sea,    Passage  of.] 

of  Ionian  and  Caiian  mercenaries  called  to.  '2,rpar6-  There  can   be  no  doubt  that  the  direction  was  fiom 

ireSa  (Herod,  ii.  154),  may   be  compared  to  this,  tie-  west  to  the  east,  and  that  the  breadth  at  the 

Obviously  such  a  name  is  very  difficult  of  identiri-  place  of  crossing  was  great,  since  the  wh(  li 

cation.     [Succoth.]  tian  army  perished. 

The  next  camping-place  was  Etham,  the  position  ,      We  do  not  propose  to  examine  the  various  the- 

of  which  may  he  yery  nearly  fixed  in  consequence  ones  that  have  been  put  forth  respecting  the  route 

of  its  being  described  as  "  in  the  edge  of  the  wilder-  of  the  Israelites.     We  have  though!  it  enough  to 

ness"  (Ex.  xiii.  20;  Num.  xxxiii.  ii,  7).     The  cul-  state  all  the  points  of  evidence  which  can,  in  our 

tivable  land  now  extends  very  nearly  to  the  western  judgment,  leal    to  a   satisfactory  conclusion.      It 

side  of  the  ancient  head  of  the  gulf.     At  a  period  might,  however,  he  thought  neglectful  it'  we  did 

when  the  eastern  pari  of  Lower  Egypl  was  largely  not  allude  to  what  Prof.  Lepsius  has  written  on 

inhabited  by  Asiatic  settlers,  there  can  he  no  doubt  the  subject.      He  does  not   enter  into  any  detailed 

that  this  tract  was  under  cultivation.    It  is  therefore  exposition  of  the  geography  of  the   Exodus,  and 

reasonable  to  place  Etham  where  the  cultivable  land  attempts  but  one  identification  with  any   modern 

et-ases,  near  the  Seba  Bidr,  or  Seven   Welts,  aboul  site — that  of  Rameses,  with  the  ancient  Egyptian 


000 


EXORCIST 


site  now  culled  Aboo-Kesheyd,  about  eight  miles 
from  the  old  head  of  the  gulf.  The  argument  he 
adduces  for  this  identification  is  that  a  monolith  is 
found  here  representing  Kameses  II.  seated  between 
the  gods  Turn  and  Ra,  and  that  therefore  he  was 
worshipped  at  the  place  which  must  have  borne  his 
name.  It  might  equally,  however,  have  been  called 
Pa-tum,  from  Turn,  and  have  corresponded  in  ety- 
mology to  Patumos  or  else  Pithom.  The  conclu- 
sion to  which  Prof.  Lepsius  arrives,  that  because 
Aboo-Kesheyd  is  Kameses,  therefore  the  land  of 
Goshen  must  have  been  within  the  eastern  part 
o'f  Lower  Egypt  below  Heliopolis,  is  singularly 
illogical,  for  Kameses  was  in  the  land  of  Goshen, 
and  not  20  miles  east  of  it,  and  it  occupied  the 
Israelites  more  than  two  days  to  journey  from  it 
to  the  Red  Sea,  which  makes  its  allocation  within 
about  eight  miles  of  the  sea  absurd.  The  suppo- 
sition involves  therefore'a  double  impossibility.- 

The  preceding  map  exhibits  the  main  features 
of  the  country  in  which  we  place  the  route  of  the 
Israelites,  and  the  places  referred  to  in  this  article. 
The  best  map  is  Linant's  in  the  Atlas  of  the  Perce- 
ment  de  I'Isthme  de  Suez.  [R.  S.  P.] 

EXORCIST  (Qopicio-Tris  ;  exorcista).  The 
verb  i£opicify  occurs  once  in  the  N.  Test,  and  onee 
in  the  LXX.  version  of  the  0.  T.  In  both  cases  it 
is  used,  not  in  the  sense  of  exorcise,  but  as  a  synonym 
of  the  simple  verb  opicifa,  to  charge  with  an  oath, 
to  adjure.  Comp.  Gen.  xxiv.  3  (JPSB'n,  A.  V.  "  I 
will  make  thee  swear")  with  37,  and- Matt.  xxvi. 
63,  with  Mark  v.  7  ;  and  see  1  Tliess.  v..  27 
(ivopKifa,  Lachm.  Tischend.).  The  cognate  noun, 
however,  together  with  the  simple  veib,  is.  found 
once  (Acts  xix.  13)  with  reference  to  the  ejection  of 
evil  spirits  from  persons  possessed  by  them  (cf. 
i^opKdoais,  6pK6a,  Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  2,  §5).  The 
use  of  the  term  exorcists  in  that  passage  as  the  de- 
signation of  a  well-known  class  of  persons,  to  which 
the  individuals  mentioned  belonged,  confirms  what 
we  know  from  other  sources  as  to  the  common 
piactice  of  exorcism  amongst  the  Jews.  That  some, 
at  least,  of  them  not  only  pretended  to,  but  possessed, 
the  power  of  exorcising,  appears  by  our  Lord's  ad- 
mission when  he  asks  the  Pharisees,  "  If  I  by  Beel- 
zebub cast  out  devils,  by  whom  do  your  disciples 
[viol)  cast  them  out?"  (Matt.  xii.  27.)  What 
means  were  employed  by  real  exorcists  we  are  not 
informed.  David,  by  playing  skilfully  on  a  harp, 
procured  the  temporary  departure  of  the  evil  spirit 
which  troubled  Saul  (1  Sam.  xvi.  23).  Justin 
Martyr  has  an  interesting  suggestion  as  to  the  pos- 
sibility of  a  Jew  successfully  exorcising  a  devil,  by 
employing  the  name  of  the  God  of  Abraham, 
Isaac,  and  Jacob.  (aU'  el  &pa  <=|opKi£bi  ris  V*" 
Kara  rov  Beov  'Afipaafi  Kal  Oeov  'Iffaa/c  /cat 
0eof>  'IaKai/3,  (ffws  viroTayiiaeTai  [to  Sai/xovtov^, 
Dial,  cum  Trijph.  c.  85,  p.  311,  G.  See  also 
Apol.  II.  c.  6,  p.  45,  B,  where  he  claims  for  Chris- 
tianity superior  but  not  necessarily  exclusive  power 
in  tin's  respect.  Compare  the  statements  of  lren. 
adv.  Ilaeres.  ii.  5,  and  the  authorities  quoted  by 
Grotius  on  Matt.  xii.  27.)  But  Justin  goes  on  to 
say  that  the  Jewish  exorcists,  as  a  class,  had  sunk 
down  to  the  superstitious  rites  and  usages  of  the 
heathen  ('H5tj  /j.£Vtoi  oi  e£  v/xoiv  iTropKiarai  rfj 
rexvn,  tixnrep  kcu  ra  tQvr),  xpw/J-tvoL  i^opKi^ovfft 
Ka)  dv/xid/xaai  Kal  KaTaSerr/xots  xp^vrah  elirov). 
With  this  agrees  the  account  given  by  Josephus 
'  Ant.  viii.  2,  §5)  of  an  exorcism  which  he  saw  per- 
formed by  Eleazar,  a  Jew.  in  the  presence  of  Ves- 


EZEKIEL 

pasian  and  his  sons,  though  the  virtue  of  the  cure  is 
attributed  to  the  mention  of  the  name  of  Solomon, 
and  to  the  use  of  a  root,  and  of  certain  incantations 
said  to  have  been  prescribed  by  him.  It  was  the 
profane  use  of  the  name  of  Jesus  as  a  mere  charm  or 
spell  which  led  to  the  disastrous  issue  recorded  in 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  (xix.  13-16). 

The  power  of  casting  out  devils  was  bestowed  by 
Christ  while  on  earth  upon  the  apostles  (Matt. 
x.  8),  and  the  seventy  disciples  (Luke  x.  17-19), 
and  was,  according  to  His  promise  (Mark  xvi.  17), 
exercised  bv  believeis  after  His  Ascension  (Acts  xvi. 
18);  but  to  the  Christian  miracle,  whether  as  per- 
formed by  our  Lord  himself  or  by  His  followers,  the 
N.  T.  writers  never  apply  the  terms  "  exoicise"  or 
"  exorcist."  [T.  T.  P.] 

EXPIATION.     [Sacrifice.] 

EZBAI  03TX  ;    'A(ol3al;    Asbai),    father  of 

Naarai,  who  was  one  of  David's  thirty  mighty  men 
(1  Chr.  xi.  37).  In  the  parallel  list  (2  Sam.  xxiii. 
35)  the  names  are  given  "  Paarai  the  Arbite," 
which  Kennicott  decides  to  be  a  corruption  of  the 
reading  in  Chronicles.    {Dissertation,  &c,  209.) 

EZ'BON  (|3VN  ;  Qaffofiav,  and  'Eae&wv,  or 
'Aat/icbv ;  Esebon).  1.  Son  of  Gad,  and  founder 
of  one  of  the  Gadite  families  (Gen.  xlvi.  16  ;  Num. 
xxvi.  16).  In  the  latter  passage  the  name  is  written 
'OTN  (A.  V.  Ozni),  probably  by  a  corruption  of  the 

text  of  very  early  date,  since  the  LXX.  have  'Afeei. 
The  process  seems  to  have  been  the  accidental  omission 
of  the  2  in  the  first  instance  (as  in  "ITy'QN,  Abiezer 
(Josh.  xvii.  2),  which  in  Num.  xxvi.  is  written 
"ITPN,  Jeezer),  and  then,  when  'OVN  was  no 
longer  a  Hebrew  form,  the  changing  it  into  ^TX. 

2.  SonofBela,  the  son  of  Benjamin,  according 
to  1  Chr.  vii.  7.  It  is  singular,  however,  that  while 
Ezbon  is  nowhere  else  mentioned  among  the  sons 
of  Bela,  or  Benjamin,  he  appears  here  in  company 
with  "•"Vy,  Iri,  which  is  not  a  Benjamite  family 
either,  according  to  the  other  lists,  but  which  is 
found  in  company  with  Ezbon  among  the  Gadite 
families,  both  in  Gen.  xlvi.  16  (Eri,  *"$),  and 
Num.  xxvi.  16.  Were  these  two  Gadite  families 
incorporated  into  Benjamin  after  the  slaughter  men- 
tioned Judg.  xx.  ?  Possibly  they  were  from  Jabesh- 
Gilead  (comp.  xxi.  12-14).  [Becher.]  1  Chr. 
vii.  2,  seems  to  fix  the  date  of  the  census  as  in  king 
David's  time.  [A-  C.  H.] 

EZECHI'AS    ('ECeiclas  ;     Ozias,    Ezechias). 

1.  1  Esd.  ix.  14;   put  for  Jahaziah  in  Ezr.  x.  15. 

2.  2  Esd.  vii.  40.     [Hezekiah.] 
EZECI'AS     ('E&Kias  ;     Ezechias),     1    Esd. 

ix.  43  ;  for  Hilkiaii  in  the  parallel  passage,  Neh. 
viii.  4. 

EZEKIAS  (ECekuu,  and  so  Codex  B  in 
N  T.  ;  Ezechias),  Ecclus.  xlviii.  17,  22;  xlix.  4 ; 
2  Mace.  xv.  22  ;  Matt.  i.  9,  10.       [Hezekiah.] 

EZE'KIEL  (bapTriN    i.  e.    Techezekel,    for 

bit  [MIT1,  God  will  strengthen,  or  from  ?Ki1  pfh, 
the  strength  of  God;  'u(tKifr  !  Ezechiel),  one  of 
the  four  greater  prophets.  There  have  been  various 
fancies  about  his  name;  according  to  Abarbancl 
(  Praef.  in  Ezech.)  it  implies  "  one  who  narrates  the 


EZEKIEL 

might  of  God  to  be  displayed  in  the  future,"  and  some 
(as  Villalpandus,  Praef.  in  Ezech.  p.  x.)  see  a  play 
on  the  word  m  the  expressions  D",p|n,  and  '•pTPI 
(iii.  7,  8,  9),  whence  the  groundless  conjecture  of 
Sanctius  (Prolegom,  in  Ezech.  p.  2,  n.  2)  that  the 
name  was  given  him  subsequently  to  the  commence- 
ment of  his  career  (Carpzov.  Introd.  ad  Libr.  Bibl. 
Vet.  Testnm.  ii.  Part.  iii*ch.  v.).  He  was  the  son 
of  a  priest  named  Buzi,  respecting  whom  fresh  con- 
jectures have  been  recorded,  although  nothing  is 
Known  about  him  (as  Archbp.  Newcome  observes) 
beyond  the  fact  that  he  must  have  given  his  son  a 
careful  and  learned  education.  The  Rabbis  had  a 
rule  that  every  prophet  in  Scripture  was  also  the 
son  of  a  prophet,  and  hence  they  (as  R  Dav. 
Kimchi  in  his  Commentary)  absurdly  identity  Buzi 
with  Jeremiah,  who  they  say  was  so  called,  because 
he  was  rejected  and  despised.  Another  tradition 
makes  Ezekiel  the  servant  of  Jeremiah  (Greg.  Naz. 
Or.  xlvii.),  and  Jerome  supposes  that  the  prophets 
being  contemporaries  during  a  part  of  their  mission 
interchanged  their  prophecies,  sending  them  re- 
spectively to  Jerusalem  and  Chaldaea  for  mutual 
confirmation  and  encouragement,  that  the  Jews 
might  hear  as  it  were  a  strophe  and  antistrophe  of 
warning  and  promise',  "  velut  ac  si  duo  cantores 
alter  ad  alterius  vocem  sese  componerent "  (Calvin, 
Comment,  ad  Ezech.  i.  2).  Although  it.  was  only 
towards  quite  the  close  of  Jeremiah's  lengthened 
office  that  Ezekiel  received  his  commission,  yet 
these  suppositions  are  easily  accounted  for  by  the 
internal  harmony  between  the  two  prophets,  in 
proof  of  which  Havernick  (Introd.  to  Ezech.) 
quotes  Ez.  xiii.  as  compared  with  Jer.  xxiii.  9  sq., 
and  Ez.  xxxiv.  with  Jer.  xxxiii.,  &c.  This  inner 
resemblance  is  the  more  striking  from  the  otherwise 
wide  difference  of  character  which  separates  the  two 
prophets  ;  for  the  elegiac  tenderness  of  Jeremiah  is 
the  reflex  of  his  gentle,  calm,  and  introspective 
spirit,  while  Ezekiel  in  that  age  when  true  pro- 
phecy was  so  rare  (Ez.  xii.  21  ;  Lam.  ii.  9), 
"  comes  forward  with  all  abruptness  and  iron  con- 
sistency. Has  he  to  contend  with  a  people  of  brazen 
front  and  unbending  neck  ?  He  possesses  on  his 
own  part  an  unbending  nature,  opposing  the  evil 
with  an  unflinching  spirit  of  boldness,  with  words 
full  of  consuming  fire"  (Havernick's  Introd.  trans- 
lated by  Rev.  F.  W.  Gotch  in  Joumalof  S.  L.  i.  23). 
Unlike  his  predecessor  in  the  prophetic  office, 
wlin  gives  us  the  amplest  details  of  his  personal 
history,  Ezekiel  rarely  alludes  to  the  facts  of  his 
own  life,  and  we  have  to  complete  the  imperfect 
picture  by  the  colours  of  late  and  dubious  tradition. 
We  .'■hall  mention  both  sources  of  information,  con- 
tenting  ourselves  with  this  general  caution  against 
tin'  latter.  He  was  taken  captive  e'/c  yr)s  2ap- 
Tjpa  (Isidor.  de  ]'d.  et  Ob.  Sonet.  39 ;  Epiphan. 
./.  17/.  et  Mart.  Prophet,  be.  ap.  Carpzov.)  in  the 
captivity  (or  transmigration,  as  Jerome  more  accu- 
rately prefers  to  render  rVPJ,  i.  2)  of  Jehoiaehin 
(not  Jehoiachim  as  Josephus  (Ant.  x.  6,  §3) 
states,  probably  by  a  slip  of  memory)  with  other 
distinguished  exiles  ( _'  K.  xxiv.  15)  eleven  years 
before  the  destruction  of'  Jerusalem,  Josephus 
(I.  c.)  says  that  this  removal  happened  when  he 
was  a  boy,  and  although  we  cannot  consider  the 
assertion  to  be  refuted  by  Havernick's  argument 
from  the  matured  vigorous  priestly  character  of  his 
writings,  and  feel  still  less  ini  lined  to  say  that  he 
hid  "  undoubtedly  "  exercised  for  some  considerable 
time  the  function  of  a  priest,  yet  tin:  statement  is 


EZEKIEL 


601 


questionable,  because  it  is  improbable  (as  Haver- 
nick  also  points  out)  that  Ezekiel  long  survived 
the  27th  year  of  his  exile  (xxix.  17),  so  that  if  Jo- 
sephus be  correct  he  must  have  died  very  younc. 
He  was  a  member  of  a  community  of  Jewish  exiles 
who  settled  on  the  banks  of  the  Chebar,  a  "  river" 
or  stream  of  Babylonia,  which  is  sometimes  taken 
to  be  the  Khabour,  but  which  the  latest  investi- 
gators suppose  to  be  the  Nahr  Malcha  or  Royal 
canal  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  [Chebar.]  The  actual 
name  of  the  spot  where  he  resided  was  ^SX  ?T\ 
("  acervus  novarum  frugum,"  Vulg.  /ueTe'copos 
koI  irtpirjAOoi'  (?)  LXX.,  "  the  hill  of  grief,"  Syr.) 
a  name  which  Jerome,  as  usual,  allegorises ;  it 
is  thought  by  Michaelis  to  be  the  same  as  Thal- 
laba  in  D'Anville's  map  (Rosenmull.  Schol.  in 
Ezek.  iii.  15).  It  was  by  this  river  "in  the 
land  of  the  Chaldaeans  "  that  God's  message  first 
reached  him  (i.  3)  ;  the  Chaldee  version  however 
interpolates  the  words  "  in  the  land  [of  Israel :  and 
again  a  second  time  he  spake  to  him  in  the  land]  of 
the  Chaldeans,"  because  the  Jews  had  a  notion  that 
the  Shechinah  could  not  overshadow  a  prophet  out 
of  the  Holy  Land.  Hence  R.  Jarchi  thinks  that 
eh.  xvii.  was  Ezeldel's  first  prophecy,  and  was 
uttered  before  the  captivity,  a  view  which  he  sup- 
ports by  the  Hebrew  idiom  ilTl  i"Pn  (A.  V.  "came 
expressly  ")  in  i.  3.  R.  Kimchi,  however,  makes  an 
exception  to  the  rule  in  case  the  prophecy  was  in- 
spired in  some  pure  and  quiet  spot  like  a  river's  bank 
(cf.  Ps.  exxxvii.  1).  His  call  took  place  "  in  the  fifth 
year  of  king  Jehoiachin's  captivity"  B.C.  595 
(i.  2),  "  in  the  thirtieth  year  in  the  fourth  month." 
The  latter  expression  is  very  uncertain.  Most  com- 
mentators take  it  to  mean  the  30th  year  of  his  age, 
the  recognised  period  for  assuming  full  priestly 
functions  (Num.  iv.  23,  30).  Origen,  following 
this  assumption,  makes  the  prophet  a  type  of  Christ, 
to  whom  also  "  the  heavens  were  opened  "  when  he 
was  baptised  in  Jordan.  But,  as  Pradus  argues, 
such  a  computation  would  be  unusual,  and  would 
not  be  sufficiently  important  or  well  known  as  a 
mark  of  genuineness,  and  would  require  some  moi  e 
definite  addition.  The  Chald.  paraphrase  by  Jon. 
ben  Uzziel  has — "  30  years  after  Hilkiah  the  high 
priest  had  found  the  book  of  the  Law  in  the  sanc- 
tuary in  the  vestibule  under  the  porch  at  midnight 
after  the  setting  of  the  moon  in  the  days  of  Josiah, 
&c,  in  the  month  Thammuz,  in  thetifthday  of  the 
month"  (cf.  2  K.  xxii.).  This  view  is  adopted  by 
Jerome,  Ussher,  Havernick,  &c. ;  but  had  this  been 
a  recognised  era,  we  should  have  found  traces  of  it 
elsewhere,  whereas  even  Ezekiel  never  refers  to  it 
again.  There  are  similar  and  more  forcible  objec- 
tionsto  its  being  the  30th  year  from  the  Jubilee, 
as  Hitzig  supposes,  following  many  of  the  early 
commentators.  It  now  seems  generally  agreed  that 
it  was  the  30th  year  from  the  new  era  of  Nabopo- 
lassar,  father  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  who  began  to 
reign  B.C.  025  (Kawlinson's  Hand.  i.  p.  508). 
The  use  of  this  Chaldee  epoch  is  the  more  appro- 
priate as  the  prophet  wrote  in  Babylonia,  and  he  gives 
a  Jewish  chronology  in  ver.  2.  Compare  the  notes 
of  time  in  Dan.  ii.  1,  vii.  1  ;  Ez.  vii.  7  ;  Neh.  ii. 
1,  v.  14  (Hosenmiiller,  Schol.  •  Poli  Synopa.  in 
loc. ;  Scaliger  de  emend.  Temp.  Prolegom,  p.  xii.). 
The  decision  of  the  question  is  the  less  important, 
because  in  all  other  places  Ezekie]  dates  from  the 
year  of  Jehoiachin's  captivity  (xxix.  17,  xxx.  20, 
et  passim  ,.  We  learn  from  an  incidental  allusion 
(xxiv.  is, — the  only  reference  which  he  makes  to 


602 


EZEKIEL 


his  personal  history — that  he  was  married,  and  had 
a  house  (viii.  1)  in  his  place  of  exile,  and  lost  his 
wife  by  a  sudden  and  unforeseen  stroke.     He  lived' 
in  the  highest  consideration  among  his  companions 
in  exile,  and  their  elders  consulted  him  on  all  occa- 
sions (viii.  1,  xi.  25,  xiv.  1,  xx.  1,  &c),  because 
in  his  united  ottices  of  priest  and  prophet,  he  was  a 
living  witness  to  "  them  of  the  captivity  "  that  God 
had  not  abandoned  them.     Vitringa  even  says  (de 
Synag.  Vet.  p.  332)  that  "in  aedibus  suis  ut  in 
schola  quadam  publica  conventus  instituebat,  ibique 
coram   frequenti  concione  divinam   interpretabatur 
voluntatem  oiatione  facunda"  (quoted  by  Hiiver- 
nick).     There  seems  to  be  little  ground  for  Theo- 
doret's  supposition  that  he  was  a  Nazarite.     The 
last  date  he  mentions  is  the  27th  year  of  the  cap- 
tivity (xxix.  17),  so  that  his  mission  extended  over 
twenty-two    years,   during   part  of  which   period 
Daniel"  was  probably  living,   and   already  famous 
(Ez.  xiv.  14,  xxviii.  3).    Tradition  ascribes  various 
miracles  to  him,  as,  for  instance,  escaping  from  his 
enemies  by  walking  dry-shod  across  the  Chebar ; 
feeding    the   famished   people    with   a   miraculous 
draught  of  fishes,  &c.    He  is  said  to  have  been  mur- 
dered in  Babylon  by  some  Jewish  prince  (?  b  riyov- 
fievos  tov  \dov,  called  in  the  Roman  martyrology 
for  vi.  Id.  Apr.  "judex  populi."  Carpzov. Introd. 
I.  c),  whom  he  had  convicted  of  idolatry  ;  and  to 
have  been  buried  in  a  airr)\ctiov  SnrAovv,  the  tomb 
of  Shem   and  Arphaxad,  on  the  banks  of  the  Eu- 
phrates (Epiphan.  de  Vit.  ct  Mort.  Prophet.).  The 
tomb,  said  to  have  been  built  by  Jehoiachin,  was 
shown  a  few  days'  journey  from  Bagdad   (Menasse 
ben  Israel  de  Resur.  Mori.  p.  23),  and  was  called 
"  habitaculum  elegantiae."     A  lamp  was  kept  there 
continually  burning,  and  the  autograph  copy  of  the 
prophecies  was  said  to  be  there  preserved.     This 
tomb  is  mentioned  by  Pietro  de  la  Valle,  and  fully 
described  in  the  Itinerary  of  R.  Benjamin  of  Tudela 
(Hottinger,  Thes.  Phil.  II.  i.  3  ;   Cippi  Ilebraici,  p. 
82).     A  curious  conjecture  (discredited  by  Clemens 
Alexandrinus   (Strom,  i.),  but  considered  not  im- 
possible by  Selden  (Syntagm.  de  Diis  Syr. ii.  p  120), 
Meyer,  and  others)  identifies  him  with  "  Nazaratus 
the    Assyrian,"    the   teacher  of  Pythagoras.     We 
need  hardly  mention  the  ridiculous  suppositions  that 
he  is  identical  with  Zoroaster,  or  with  the  'E^W-rj- 
\os  6  twv  lovSaiKcov  rpayoiSloiv  ironjTTjs  (Clem. 
Alex.  Strom,  i. ;  Euseb.  Praep.  Evang.  ix.  28,  29) 
who  wrote  a  play  on  the  Exodus,  called  ''E.^aywyi) 
(Fabricius,  Bibl.  Grec.  ii.  19).     This  Ezelriel  lived 
B.C.  40  (Sixt.  Sen.  Bibl.  Sand.  iv.  p.  235). 

But,  as  Havernick  remarks,  "  by  the  side  of  the 
scattered  data  of  his  external  life,  those  of  his  in- 
ternal life  appear  so  much  the  richer."  We  have 
already  noticed  his  stern  and  inflexible  energy  of 
will  and  character ;  and  we  also  observe  a  devoted 
adherence  to  the  rites  and  ceremonies  of  his  national 
religion.  Ezekiel  is  no  cosmopolite,  but  displays 
everywhere  the  peculiar  tendencies  of  a  Hebrew 
educated  under  Levitical  training.  The  priestly 
bias  is  always  visible,  especially  in  chaps,  viii. — 
xi.,  xl.-xlviii.,  and  in  iv.  13  sq.,  xx.  12  sq.,  xxii. 
8,  &c.  It  is  strange  of  De  Wette  and  Gesenius  to 
attribute  this  to  a  "  contracted  spirituality,"  and 
of  Ewald  to  see  in  it  "  a  one-sided  conception  of  an- 
tiquity which  he  obtained  merely  from  books  and 
traditions,"  and  "  a  depression  of  spirit  (!)  enhanced 
by  the  long  continuance  of  the  banishment  and 
bondage  of  the  people  "  (Hiiverniek's  Introd.).  It 
was  surely  this  very  intensity  of  patriotic  loyalty 
to  a  system  whose  partial  suspension  he  both  pre- 


EZEKIEL 

dieted  and  survived,  which  cheered  the  exiles  with 
the  confidence  of  his  hopes  in  the  future,  and  tended 
to  preserve  their  decaying  nationality.  Mr.  F. 
Newman  is  even  more  contemptuous  than  the  Ger- 
man critics.  "  The  writings  of  Ezekiel,"  he  sa\*b 
(Hebr.  Monarchy,  p.  330,  2nd  ed.),  "painfully 
show  the  growth  of  what  is  merely  visional'}-,  and 
an  increasing  value  of  hajd  sacerdotalism  ;"  and  he 
speaks  of  the  "  heavy  materialism "  of  Ezekiel's 
temple,  with  its  priests,  sacrifices,  &c,  as  "  tedious 
and  unedifyiug  as  Leviticus  itself."  His  own  le- 
mark  that  Ezekiel's  predictions  "  so  kept  alive  on 
the  minds  of  the  next  geneiation  a  belief  in  certain 
return  from  captivity,  as  to  have  tended  exceed- 
ingly towards  the  result,"  is  a  sufficient  refutation 
of  such  criticisms. 

We  may  also  note  in  Ezekiel  the  absorbing  recog- 
nition of  his  high  calling  which  enabled  him  cheer- 
fully to  endure  any  deprivation  or  misery  (except 
indeed  ceremonial  pollution,  from  which  he  shrinks 
with  characteristic  loathing,  iv.  14),  if  thereby  he 
may  give  any  warning  or  lesson  to  his  people  (iv., 
xxiv.  15,  16,  &c),  whom  he  so  ardently  loved  (ix. 
8,  xi.  13).  On  one  occasion,  and  on  one  only,  the 
feelings  of  the  man  burst,  in  one  single  expression, 
through  the  self-devotion  of  the  prophet;  and  while 
even  then  his  obedience  is  unwavering,  yet  the  in- 
expressible depth  of  submissive  pathos  in  the  brief 
words  which  tell  how  in  one  day  "  the  desire  of  his 
eyes  was  taken  from  him"  (xxiv.  15-18),  shows 
what  well-springs  of  the  tenderest  human  emotion 
were  concealed  under  his  uncompromising  opposi- 
tion to  every  form  of  sin. 

His  predictions  are  marvellously  varied.  He  has 
instances  of  visions  (viii. — xi.),  symbolical  actions 
(as  iv.  8),  similitudes  (xii.,  xv.),  parables  (as  xvii.), 
proverbs  (as  xii.  22,  xviii.  1  sq.),  poems  (as  xix.), 
allegories  (as  xxiii.,  xxiv.),  open  prophecies  (as  vi., 
vii.,  xx.  &c),  "tantaque  ubertate  et  ligurarum  va- 
riatione  floret  ut  unus  omnes  piophetici  sermonis 
numeros  ac  modos  explevisse,  jure  suo  sit  dicendus 
(Carpzov.  Introd.  ii.  pt.  iii.  5).  It  is  therefore  un- 
just to  charge  him  with  plagiarism,  as  is  done  by 
Michaelis  and  others,  although  no  doubt  his  language 
(in  which  several  Aramaisms  and  aira£  \ey6fieva 
also  occur)  is  coloured  largely  both  by  the  Pentateuch 
and  by  the  writings  of  Jeremiah.  His  style  is  charac- 
terised by  "numberless  particularisms,"  as  may  be 
clearly  observed  by  contrasting  his  prophecy  against 
Tyre  (xxviii.)  with  that  of  Isaiah  (xxiii.)  (Fairbairn's 
Ezekiel).  Grotius  (in  Critici  Sacri,  iv.  8)  com- 
pares him  to  Homer  for  his  knowledge,  especially 
of  architecture,  from  which  he  repeatedly  draws  his 
illustrations;  and  Witsius  (Misc.  Sacr.  i.  243) 
says,  that  besides  his  "  incomparabile  donum  pro- 
phetiae,"  he  deserves  high  literary  reputation  for 
the  learning  and  beauty  of  his  style.  Michaelis  on 
the  other  hand  is  very  disparaging,  and  Lowth 
(referring  to  the  ditfuseness  of  his  details)  says  "  he 
is  oftener  to  be  classed  with  the  orators  than  the 
poets."  Few  will  agree  with  Archbishop  Newcome's 
depreciation  of  such  remarks  on  the  ground  (appa- 
rently) that  even  the  language  of  a  sacred  writer  is 
a  matter  of  inspiration  ;  for  it  is  clear  that  inspiia- 
tion  in  no  way  supersedes  the  individualities  of  the 
divine  messenger.  Ewald  (Die  Proph.  des  Alten 
Bundes,  ii.  212),  though  not  enthusiastic,  admits 
that  "simply  as  a  writer  he  shows  great  excel- 
lencies, particularly  in  this  dismal  period,"  and  he 
points  out  his  "  evenness  and  repose  "  of  style  to 
which  we  suppose  Jerome  alludes  when  he  says 
"  Senno  ejus  n«c  satis  disertns  nee  admodum  rus- 


EZEKIEL 

tic-us,  sed  ex  utroque  genere  medie  temperate" 
(Praef.  in  Ezech.).     Havernick  seems  to  us   too 

strong  in  saying,  that  "  the  glow  of  the  divine  in- 
dignation, the  mighty  rushing  of  the  spirit  of  the 
Lord,  the  holy  majesty  of  Jehovah,  as  the  seer  be- 
held it,  are  remarkably  reflected  in  his  writings.  .  . 
The  lofty  action,  the  torrent  of  his  eloquence  .  .  . 
rests  on  this  combination  of  power  and  consistency, 
the  one  as  unwearied  as  the  other  is  imposing." 
Among  the  most  splendid  passages  are  chapter  i. 
(called  by  the  Rabbis  rOSID),  the  prophecy  against 

Tyrus  (xxvi.-xxviii.),  that  against  Assyria,  "  the 
noblest  monument  of  Eastern  history"  (xxxi.),  and 
eh.  viii.,  the  account  of  what  he  saw  in  the  temple- 
porch, 

"  when,  by  the  vision  led, 

His  eye  surveyed  the  dark  idolatries 

Of  alienated  Judah." — Milton,  Par.  Lost,  i. 

Certain  phiases  constantly  recur  in  his  writings,  as 
••  Sun  of  Man,"  "They  shall  know  that  I  am  the 
Lord,"  "  the  hand  of  the  Lord  was  upon  me," 
"  Set  thy  lace  against,"  &c. 

The  depth  of  his  matter,  and  the  marvellous 
nature  of  his  visions,  make  him  occasionally  obscure. 
Hence  his  prophecy  was  placed  by  the  Jews  among 
the  PT33  (treasures),  those  portions  of  Scripture 

which  (like  the  early  part  of  Genesis,  and  the  Can- 
ticles) were  not  allowed  to  be  read  till  the  age 
of  30  (Jer.  Ep.  ad  Enstoch.  ;  Orig.  proem,  homil. 
iv.  mi  Cantic. ;  Hottinger,  Thes.  Phil.  ii.  1,  3). 
Hence  Jerome  compares  the  "  inextricabilis  error  " 
of  his  writings  to  Virgil's  labyrinth  ("  Oceanus 
Script urarum,  mysteriorumque  Dei  labyrinthus  "), 
ami  also  to  the  catacombs.  The  Jews  classed  him 
in  the  very  highest  rank  of  prophets.  Gregory 
Naz.  (Or.  23)  calls  him  6  irpocpTiTciii'  davp.ao-iu>- 
toltos  leal  vip-q\6Ta.Tos,  and  again  6  twv  /xeydKcov 
€7ro7TT7)s  Kal  i^riyriTYis  /jLvaTTjpiwv.  Isidore  (de  Vit. 
et  ob.  Sonet.  39)  makes  him  a  type  of  Christ  from 
the  title  "  Son  of  Man,"  but  that  is  equally  applied 
to  Daniel  (viii.  17).  Other  similar  testimonies  are 
quoted  by  Carpzov  (Introd.  ii.  193  sq.).  The  San- 
hedrim is  said  to  have  hesitated  long  whether  his 
book  should  form  part  of  the  canon,  from  the  occa- 
sional obscurity,  and  from  the  supposed  contradic- 
tion of  xviii.  20  to  Ex.  xx.  5,  xxxiv.  7;  Jer.  xxxii. 
IS.  But  in  point  of  fact  these  apparent  opposi- 
tions are  the  mere  expression  of  truths  comple- 
mentary to  each  other,  as  Moses  himself  might 
have  taught  them  (Deut.  xxiv.  16).  Although 
generally  speaking  comments  on  this  book  wen' 
forbidden,  a  certain  R.  Nananiaa  undertook  to  re- 
concile the  supposed  differences.  (Spinosa,  Tract. 
Theol.  Polit.  ii.  27,  partly  from  these  considera- 
tions, inters  that  the  present  book  is  made  up 
of  mere  air oo~fi.a.<TiJ.d.Tia,  but  his  argument  from  its 
commencing  witli  a  1,  and  from  the  expression 
in  i.  3  above  alluded  to,  hardly  needs  refutation.) 

Of  the  authenticity  of  EzekiePs  prophecy  there 
lias  been  no  real  dispute,  although  a  few  rash 
critics  (as  Oeder,  Vogel,  and  Corrodi)  have  raised 
questions  about  the  last  cbaptei  jesting 

that  they  might  have  been  written  by  a  Samai  itan, 
to  incite  the  Jews  to  suffer  the  cooperation  in  re- 
building the  Temple.  There  is  hardly  a  shadow 
of  argument  in  favour  of  this  view,  and  absolutely 
none  to  support  the  anonymous  objections  in  the 
Monthly  Magazine  (or  L798  against  the  genuine- 
ness of  other  ehapteis ;  which  never  would  have  at- 
tracted any   notice  had  no!   Jahn  taken  the  super- 


EZEKIEL 


603 


fluous  trouble  to  answer  them.  The  specific  nature 
of  some  of  his  predictions  (xii.  12,  xxvii.  6,  &c. ; 
on  the  former  passage  and  its  apparent  contradic- 
tion to  Jer.  xxxii.  4,  see  Joseph.  Ant.  x.  H,  §2)  is 
also  in  a  very  unhistorical  manner  made  a  ground 
for  impugning  the  authenticity  of  the  book  of  Eze- 
kiel  by  Zunz  and  others.  This  style  of  criticism  is 
very  much  on  the  increase,  and  we  have1  had  some 
audacious  instances  of  it  lately :  but  though  it  is 
quite  true  that  the  prophets  deal  far  more  in  eternal 
principles  than  specific  announcements,  yet  some 
show  of  argument  must  be  adduced  before  we  settle 
the  date  of  a  sacred  book  as  necessarily  subsequent 
to  an  event  which  it  professes  to  foretel. 

The  book  is  divided  into  two  great  parts — of 
which  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  is  the  turning- 
point  ;  chapters  i.-xxiv.  contain  predictions  deli- 
vered before  that  event,  and  xxv.-xlviii.  after  it, 
as  we  see  from  xxvi.  2.  Again,  chapters  i. -xxxii. 
are  mainly  occupied  with  correction,  denunciation, 
and  reproof,  while  the  remainder  deal  chiefly  in 
consolation  and  promise.  A  parenthetical  section 
in  the  middle  of  the  book  (xxv.-xxxii.)  contains  a 
group  of  prophecies  against  seven  foreign  nations, 
the  septenary  arrangement  being  apparently  (as 
elsewhere  in  Scripture)  intentional  (see  an  art.  on 
this  subject  in  the  Journal  of  Sacr.  Literature). 
De  Wette,  Carpzov,  &c.  have  adopted  various  ways 
of  grouping  the  prophecies,  but  the  best  synopsis  is 
that  of  Havernick,  who  divides  the  book  into  nine 
sections  distinguished  by  their  superscriptions,  as 
follows: — I.  Ezekiel's  call,  i.,  iii.  15.  II.  The  ge- 
neral carrying  out  of  the  commission,  iii.  lG-vii. 
III.  The  rejection  of  the  people,  because  of  their 
idolatrous  worship,  viii.-xi.  IV.  The  sins  of  the 
age  rebuked  in  detail,  xii.-xix.  V.  The  nature  of 
the  judgment,  and  the  guilt  which  caused  it  xx.- 
xxiii.  VI.  The  meaning  of  the  now  commencing 
punishment,  xxiv.  VII.  God's  judgment  denounced 
on  seven  heathen  nations  (Amnion,  xxv.  1-7  ;  Moab 
8-14;  the  Philistines,  15-17;  Tyre,  xxvi.-xxviii. 
19;  Sidon,  20-24;  Egypt,  xxix.-xxxii.).  VIII. 
Prophecies,  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  con- 
cerning the  future  condition  of  Israel,  xxxiii.- 
xxxix.     IX.  The  glorious  consummation,  xl.-xlviii. 

Chronological  order  is  followed  throughout  (the 
date  of  the  prediction  being  constantly  referred  to), 
except  in  the  section  devoted  to  prophecies  against 
heathen  nations  (xxix.-xxxii.),  where  it  is  several 
times  abandoned  (xxix.  17;  cf.  xxvi.  1,  xxix.  1), 
so  that  in  the  prediction  against  Egypt,  one  uttered 
in  the  27th  year  of  the  captivity  is  inserted  be- 
tween two  uttered  in  the  10th  and  11th  years. 
Hence  Jahn  supposes  a  purely  "accidental"  order, 
which  Eichhom  expands  into  an  economical  arrange- 
ment of  the  sepaiate  scrolls  on  which  the  prophe- 
cies were  written.  But  there  is  no  necessity  to 
resort  to  such  arbitrary  hypotheses.  The  general 
unity  of  subject  in  the  arrangement  is  obvious,  and 
Jerome  (although  he  assumes  some  mystery  in  the 
violation  of  chronology  throughout  the  warnings 
addressed  to  Pharaoh)  correctly  remarks,  '•  in  pro- 
phetis  nequaquam  historiae  ordo  servatur;  neque 
enim  nariaut  praeterita  Bed  future  pnniuntiant, 
prout  voluntas  Spiritus  Sancti  fuerit"  (Com.  in 
□ux.  17,  where  he  especially  adduces  the  in- 
stance of  Jeremiah).  Rosenmiiller  (Scholia  in  he.) 
think-,  that  the  causes  of  the  destruction  of  Egypt 

are  put  together   (xxix.  2-21  |,  and  then  the  actual 
i  li.it  predicted  judgment  is  described. 
Josephus  i  .1//.'.  \.  6)  has  the  following  pa 
oi/  fi6vov  84  outos  (Jeremiah)  TTfjoeOfo-niae  ravra 


604 


EZEKIEL 


aWa  Kal  6  irpoty^T-qs  'Ie(,'e/ci7;Aos  [os]  irpwTOS  Trepl 
Tovrdiv  Svo  fiijiKia.  ypdtyas  KaTeAnrtv.  The  un- 
doubted meaning  seems  to  be  that  Ezekiel  (although 
Eichhorn  on  various  grounds  applies  the  word  to 
Jeremiah)  left  tiro  books  of  prophecy ;  which  is 
also  stated  by  Zonaras,  and  the  Latin  translation  of 
Athanasius, where,  after  mentioning  other  lost  books, 
and  two  of  Ezekiel,  the  writer  continues,  "  nunc 
vero  jam  unum  duntaxat  inveniri  scimus.  Itaque 
haec  omnia  per  impiorum  Judaeorum  amentiam  et 
iucuriam  peiiisse  manifestum  est"  (Synops.  p. 
136,  but  the  passage  does  not  occur  in  the  Greek). 
In  continuation  of  this  view  (which  is  held  by 
Maldonatus  and  others)  we  have  a  passage  quoted 
in  Clem.  Alex.  Paedag.  i.  20,  iv  $  tvpw  <re  ii> 
auT&3  Ka\  Kpivw  <re,  and  again  TeTOKev  Kal  ov  Te- 
TOKev  <pr]<nv  ri  ypacpri  (Id.  Strom,  vii.  p.  756) ; 
a  prophecy  also  mentioned,  as  alluding  to  the 
Virgin  .Mary,  in  Tertullian,  who  says  "  Legimus 
apud  Ezechielem  de  vacca  ilia  quae  peperit  et  non 
peperit "  (De  Cam.  Christi,  cf.  Epiphan.  Haeres. 
xxx.  30.  The  attempt  to  refer  it  by  an  error  of 
memory  to  Job  xxi.  10,  seems  a  failure).  That 
these  passages  (quoted  by  Fabricius,  Cod.  Pseudepigr. 
Vet.  Test.  mem.  221)  can  come  from  a  lost  genuine 
book  is  extremely  improbable,  since  we  know  from 
Philo  and  Justin  Martyr  the  extraordinary  care 
with  which  the  Jews  guarded  the  \6yia  £uu>ra. 
They  may  indeed  come  from  a  lost  apocryphal 
book,  although  we  rind  no  other  trace  of  its 
existence  (Sixtus  Sen.  Bibl.  S'mct.,  ii.  p.  61). 
Le  Moyne  ( Var.  Sacra,  ii.  p.  332  sq.)  thinks 
that  they  undoubtedly  belong  to  the  collec- 
tion of  traditionary  Jewish  apophthegms  called 
Pirkc  Aboth,  or  "  chapters  of  the  lathers."  Just  in 
the  same  way  we  rind  certain  ayptxpa  SSyfxara  attri- 
buted to  our  Lord  by  the  Fathers,  and  even  by  the 
Apostles  (Acts  xx.  35),  on  which  see  a  monograph 
by  Kuinoel.  The  simplest  supposition  about  the 
passage  in  Josephus  is  either  to  assume  that  he  is 
in  error,  or  to  admit  a  former  division  of  Ezekiel 
into  two  books,  possibly  at  ch.  xl.  Le  Moyne  adopts 
the  latter  view,  and  supports  it  by  analogous  cases. 
There  is  nothing  which  militates  against  it  in  the 
tact  that  Josephus  mentions  Svo  fx6va  Kal  e'dcofft 
PiPAia  (c.  Apion.  i.  22)  as  forming  the  canon. 

There  are  no  direct  quotations  from  Ezekiel  in 
the  New  Testament,  but  in  the  Apocalypse  there 
are  many  parallels  and  obvious  allusions  to  the 
later  chapters  (xl.-xlviii.).  We  cannot  now  enter 
into  the  difficulties  of  these  or  other  chapters  (for 
which  we  must  refer  to  some  of  the  commentaries 
mentioned  below)  ;  but  we  will  enumerate,  follow- 
ing Fahbairn,  the  four  main  lines  of  interpretation, 
viz.,  1.  The  Historico-literal,  adopted  by  Villal- 
panclus,  Grotius,  Lowth,  &c,  who  make  them  a 
prosaic  description  intended  to  preserve  the  me- 
mory of  Solomon's  temple.  2.  The  Historico-ideal 
(of  Eichhorn,  Dathe,  &c),  which  reduces  them  "  to 
a  sort  of  vague  and  well-meaning  announcement  of 
future  good."  3.  The  Jewish-carnal  (of  Lightfoot, 
Hoffman,  &c),  which  maintains  that  their  outline 
was  actually  adopted  by  the  exiles.  4.  The  Chris- 
tian-spiritual (or  Messianic),  followed  by  Luther, 
Calvin,  Cocceius,  and  most  modem  commentators, 
which  makes  them  "  a  grand  complicated  symbol 
of  the  good  God  had  in  reserve  for  his  Church." 
Eosenmiiller,  who  disapproves  alike  of  the  liter- 
alism of  Grotius,  and  the  arbitrary,  ambiguous 
allegorising  of  others,  remarks  (Schol.  in  xxviii. 
26)  "  Nobis  quideni  oleum  et  operam  perdere 
videntur,  qui  hujusmodi  oracula  ad  certos  eventus 


EZIONGABER 

referre  student,  aut  poetica  ornamenta  ad  factorum 
fidem  explorant."  Other  prophecies  of  a  general 
Messianic  character  are  xxxiv.  11-19,  and  xxxvi.- 
xxxix. 

The  chief  commentators  on  this  "  most  neglected 
of  the  prophets "  are,  among  the  fathers,  Origen, 
Jerome  (Comment,  in  Ezech.  LI.  xiv.),  and  Th'eo- 
doret  ,•  among  the  Jews,  Rabbis  Dav.  Kimchi  and 
Abarbanel ;  of  the  Reformers,  Oecolampadius  and 
Calvin ;  and  of  the  Romanists,  Pradus  and  Villal- 
pandus  (Rome,  1596).  More  modern  commentaries 
are  those  of  Marck  (1731),  Venema  (1790),  New- 
come,  W.  Greenhill,  Fairbairn,  Henderson,  Haver- 
nick  (Comm.  iiber  EzcchieT),  Hitzig  (Per  Prophet 
Ezechiel  crhldrt).     [Jehezekel.]       [F.  W.  F.] 

E'ZEL,  THE  STONE  ('pTXH  jnxn  ;  to  'Ep- 
ya/i  inelvo ;   Alex,   tpyov  ;    lapis   cui  nomen   est 

Ezel).  A  well-known  stone  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  Saul's  residence,  the  scene  of  the  parting  of 
David  and  Jonathan  when  the  former  finally  fled 
from  the  court  (1  Sam.  xx.  19).  At  the  second 
mention  of  the  spot  (verse  41)  the  Hebrew  text 
(233n  ?SKO  ;  A.V.  "  out  of  a  place  toward  the 

south,"  literally  *'  from  close  to  the  south "), 
is,  in  the  opinion  of  critics,  undoubtedly  corrupt, 
'fhe  true  reading  is  indicated  by  the  LXX.,  which 
in  both  cases  has  Ergab  or  Argab — in  ver.  19  for 
the  Hebrew  Ebcn,  "  stone,"  and  in  ver.  41  for 
han-negeb,  "the  south."  Ergab  is  doubtless  the 
Greek  rendering  of  the  Hebrew  Argob  =  a  heap  of 
stones.  The  true  reading  of  ver.  41  will  there- 
fore be  as  follows :  "  David  arose  from  close  to  the 
stone  heap," — close  to  which  (the  same  preposition, 
?VX,  A.V.  "by")  it  had  been  arranged  before- 
hand that  he  should  remain  (ver.  19).  The  change 
in  41  from  33"lXi"I,  as  the  text  stood  at  the  time 
of  the  LXX.,  to  233!"!,  as  it  now  stands,  is  one 
which  might  easily  take  place.  [G.] 

E'ZEM  (DVJ)  ;  Alffefj.,  Alex.  Boa<ro>  ;  Asom), 
one  of  the  towns  of  Simeon  (1  Chr.  iv.  29).  In 
the  lists  of  Joshua  (xix.  3)  the  name  appears  in  the 
slightly  different  form  of  Azem  (the  vowel  being 
lengthened  before  the  pause). 

E'ZER  ("in?;    'ECf>;   Ezer).      1.  A  son  of 

Ephraim,  who  was  slain  by  the  aboriginal  inhabit- 
ants of  Gath,  while  engaged  in  a  foray  on  their 
cattle  (1  Chr.  vii.  21).  Ewald  (Geschichte,  i.  490) 
assigns  this  occurrence  to  the  pre-Egyptian  period. 
2.  A  priest  noticed  in  the  book  of  Nehemiah  (xii. 
42  ;  'U&ip,  LXX.).  3.  1  Chr.  iv.  4.  [W.  L.  B.] 

EZERIAS  (6  Zexpias,  Alex.  6  'E&plas ; 
Azarias),  1  Esd.  viii.  1.     [Azariah,  7.] 

EZI'AS  (6  '0{ias,  Alex.  'Eft'as ;  Azahel),  1  Esd. 
viii.  2.     [Azariah;  Aziei.] 

E'ZIONGA'BEE,  or  ...  GE'BER  (}VVy 
"123  ;  =  "  the  giant's  back-bone,"  Yaffiwv  Taj3ep  ; 
Asiongaber ;  Num.  xxxiii.  35  ;  Deut.  ii.  8  :  1  Iv. 
ix.  26,  xxii.  48  ;  2  Chr.  viii.  17),  the  last  station 
named  for  the  encampment  of  the  Israelites  before 
they  came  to  "  the  wilderness  of  Zin,  which  is 
Kadesh,"  subsequently  the  station  of  Solomon's 
navy,  described  as  "  besides  Eloth,  on  the  shore  of 
the  Red  Sea,  in  the  land  of  Edom  ;"  and  where 
that  of  Jehoshaphat  was  afterwards  "broken," — 
probably  destroyed  on  the  rocks  which  lie  in 
"jagged  ranges  on  each  side"  (Stanley,  S.  8/  P.  2). 


KZNITE,  THE 

Wellsted  (ii.  ch.  ix.  p.  153)  would  find  it  in  Dahab 

[Dizahau],  but  this  could  hardly  be  regarded  as 
"  in   the  land  of  Edoin  "  (although    possibly  the 

rocks  which  Wellsted  describes  may  have  be  n  the 
actual  scene  of  tlie  wreck),  nor  would  it  accord  with 
Josephus  {Ant.  viii.  6,  §4)  *  as  "  not  far  from 
Elath."  According  to  the  latest  map  of  Kiepert 
(in  Robinson,  1856),  it  stands  at  Aia  el-Ghudyan, 
about  ten  miles  up  what  is  now  the  dry  bed 
of  the  Arabah,  but,  as  he  supposed,  was  then 
the  northern  end  of  the  gulf,  which  may  have 
anciently  had,  like  that  of  Suez,  a  further  extension. 
This  probably  is  the  best  site  for  it.  By  com- 
paring 1  K.  ix.  26,  27  with  2  Chr.  viii.  17,  18,  it 
is  probable  that  timber  was  floated  from  Tyre  to 
the  nearest  point  on  the  Mediterranean  coast,  and 
then  conveyed  over  land  to  the  head  of  the  Gulf  of 
Akabah,  where  the  ships  seem -to  have  been  built; 
for  there  can  hardly  have  been  adequate  forests  in 
the  neighbourhood.  [WILDERNESS  of  THE  Wan- 
dering.] [H.  H.] 

EZ'NITE,  THE  (tiT)m,  Eeri  *3$n  ;  8  'A<ra>- 
i/dios).  According  to  the  statement  of  2  Sam. 
xxiii.  8,  "  Adino  the  Eznite  "  was  another  name 
for  "  Josheb-basshebeth  a  Tachcemonite  (A. V.  "  the 
Tachmonite  that  sate  in  the  seat"),  chief  among 
the  captains."  The  passage  is,  however,  one  of  the 
most  disputed  in  the  whole  Bible,  owing  partly  to 
the  difficulty  of  the  one  man  bearing  two  names  so 
distinct  without  any  assigned  reason,  and  partly  to 
the  discrepancy  between  it  and  the  parallel  sentence 
in  1  Chr.  xi.  11,  in  which  for  the  words  "  Adino 
the  Eznite"  other  Hebrew  words  are  found,  not 
very  dissimilar  in  appearance  but  meaning  "  he 
shook  (A.V.  '  lifted  up  ' )  his  spear."  The  ques- 
tion naturally  arises  whether  the  words  in  Chro- 
nicles aie  an  explanation  by  a  later  writer  of  those 
in  Samuel,  or  whether  they  preserve  the  original 
text  which  in  the  latter  has  become  corrupted. 
The  form  of  this  particular  word  is  in  the  original 
text  (the  Chetib)  Etzno,  which  has  been  altered  to 
Etzni  by  the  Masoret  scribes  (in  the  Kcri)  appa- 
rently to  admit  of  some  meaning  being  obtained 
from  it.  .Jerome  read  it  Etzno,  and  taking  it  to 
be  a  declension  of  Etz  ( =  "  wood  ")  has  rendered  the 
words  quasi  tenerrimus  ligni  vermiculus.  The 
I. XX.  and  some  Hebrew  MSS.  (see  Davidson's  Hcb. 
Text)  add  the  words  of  Chronicles  to  the  text  of 
Samuel,  a  course  followed  by  the  A.V. 

The  passage  has  been  examined  at  length  by 
Kennieott  {Dissertation  1,  71-128)  and  Gesenius 
(Thes.  994-995),  to  whom  the  reader  must  be 
referred  for  details.  Their  conclusion  is  that  the 
reading  of  the  Chronicles  is  correct.  Ewald  does 
not  mention  it  (Gesch.  iii.  18<»,  note).  [£■•] 

EZ'RA  (60$  =  help  ;  "E<r8paj).  1.  The  head 
of  one  of  the  twenty-two  courses  of  priests  which 
returned  from  captivity  with  Zerubbabel  and  Jeshua, 
i  Neb..  \ii.  -).  But  in  the  somewhat  parallel  list  of 
N  >h.  x.  2-8,  the  name  of  the  same  person  is  written 
rP"lJJ?,  Azariah,  as  it  is  probably  in  Ezr.  vii.  1. 

2.  'A  man  of  Judah  (  1  Chr.  iv.  17). 

3.  The  famous  Scribe  and  Priest,  descended  from 
Ililkiah  the  high-priest  in  Josiah's  reign,  from 
whose  younger  son  Azariah,  sprung  Seraiah,  Ezra's 
father,  quite  a  different  person  from  Seraiah  the 
high-priest  (Ezr.  vii,  1).  All  that  is  really  known 
of  Ezra  is  contained  in  the  four  last  chapters  of  the 


a  'Ao'twyya^apo?,  auri)   BepectV»j   KaAetTai,   ou   iropput 
AiAajo}?  iroAeais. 


EZRA  605 

book  of  Ezra  and  in  Neh.  viii.  and  xii.  26.  From  these 
passages  we  learn,  that  he  was  a  learned  and  pious 
priest  residing  at  Babylon  in  the  time  of  Artaxerxes 
Longimanus.  The  origin  of  his  influence  with  the 
king  does  not  appeal-,  but  in  the  seventh  year  of  his 
reign,  in  spite  of  the  unfavourable  report  which 
had  been  sent  by  Rehum  and  Shimshai,  he  obtained 
leave  to  go  to  Jerusalem,  and  to  take  with  him  a 
company  of  Israelites,  together  with  priests,  Levites, 
singers,  porters,  and  Nethinim.  Of  these  a  list, 
amounting  to  1754,  is  given  in  Ezr.  viii. ;  and 
these,  also,  doubtless  form  a  part  of  the  full  list  of 
the  returned  captives  contained  in  Neh.  vii.,  and  in 
duplicate  in  Ezr.  ii.  The  journey  of  Ezra  and  his 
companions  from  Babylon  to  Jerusalem  took  just 
four  months  ;  and  they  brought  up  with  them  a 
large  free-will  offering  of  gold  and  silver,  and  silver 
vessels,  contributed,  not  only  by  the  Babylonian 
Jews,  but  by  the  king  himself  and  his  counsellors. 
These  offerings  were  for  the  house  of  God,  to 
beautify  it,  and  for  the  purchase  of  bullocks,  rams, 
and  the  other  offerings  required  for  the  temple- 
service.  In  addition  to  this  Ezra  was  empowered 
to  draw  upon  the  king's  treasurers  beyond  the  river 
for  any  further  supplies  he  might  require;  and  all 
priests,  Levites,  and  other  ministers  of  the  temple 
were  exempted  from  taxation.  Ezra  had  also  au- 
thority given  him  to  appoint  magistrates  and  judges 
in  Judaea,  with  power  of  life  and  death  over  all 
offenders.  This  ample  commission  was  granted 
him  at  his  own  request  (v.  6),  and  it  appeals  that 
his  great  design  was  to  effect  a  religious  r<  formation 
among  the  Palestine  Jews,  and  to  "bring  them  back 
to  the  observation  of  the  law  of  Moses,  from  which 
they  had  grievously  declined.  His  first  step,  accord- 
ingly, was  to  enforce  a  separation  from  their  wives 
upon  all  who  had  made  heathen  marriages,  in  which 
number  were  many  priests  and  Levites,  as  well  as 
other  Israelites.  This  was  effected  in  little  more 
than  six  months  after  his  arrival  at  Jerusalem. 
With  the  detailed  account  of  this  important  trans- 
action Ezra's  auto-biography  ends  abruptly,  and  we 
hear  nothing  more  of  him  till,  13  years  afterwards, 
in  the  20th  of  Artaxerxes,  we  find  him  again  at 
Jerusalem  with  Nehemiah  "  the  Tirshatha."  It  is 
generally  assumed  that  Ezra  had  continued  governor 
till  Nehemiah  superseded  him ;  but  as  Ezra's  com- 
mission was  only  of  a  temporary  nature,  '•  to 
inquire  concerning  Judah  and  Jerusalem"  (Ezr. 
vii.  14),  and  to  carry  thither  "  the  silver  and 
gold  which  the  king  and  his  counsellors  had 
freely  offered  unto  the  God  of  Israel"  (15),  and 
as  there  is  no  trace  whatever  of  his  presence  at 
Jerusalem  between  the  bth  and  the  20fch  of  Arta- 
xerxes, it  seems  probable  that  after  he  had  effected  the 
above-named  reformation,  and  had  appointed  com- 
petent judges  and  magistrates,  with  authority  to 
maintain  it,  he  himself  returned  to  the  king  of 
Persia.  This  is  in  itself  what  one  would  expect, 
and  what  is  borne  out  by  the  parallel  case  of  Nehe- 
miah, and  it  also  accounts  for  the  abrupt  termination 
of  Ezra's  narrative,  and  for  that  relapse  of  the  Jews 
into  their  former  irregularities  which  is  apparent  in 
the  book  of  Nehemiah.  Such  a  relapse,  and  such  a 
state  of  affairs  at  Jerusalem  in  general,  oould 
carcely  have  occurred  if  Ezra  had  continued  there. 
Whither  he  returned  to  Jerusalem  with  Nehe- 
miah. or  separately,  does  n.'t  appear  certainly,  but 
as  he  is  not  mentioned  in  Nehemiah'a  narrative  till 
after  the  completion  of  the  wall  (  Neh.  viii.  1  \  it  is 
perhaps  probable  thai  be  followed  the  latter  some 
months  later,  having,  perhaps,  been  sent  for  to  aid 


006 


EZRA 


him  in  his  work.  The  functions  lie  executed  under 
Nehemiah's  government  were  purely  of  a  priestly 
and  ecclesiastical  character,  such  as  reading  and' 
interpreting  the  law  of  Moses  to  the  people  during 
the  eight  days  of  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  praying 
in  the  congregation,  and  assisting  at  the  dedication 
of  the  wall,  and  in  promoting  the  religious  reforma- 
tion so  happily  effected  by  the  Tirshatha.  But  in 
such  he  tilled  the  first  'place ;  being  repeatedly 
coupled  with  Nehemiah  the  Tirshatha  (viii.  9,  xii. 
26),  while  Eliashib  the  high-priest  is  not  mentioned 
as  taking  any  part  in  the  reformation  at  all.  In 
the  sealing  to  the  covenant  described  Neh.  x.,  Ezra 
probably  sealed  under  the  patronymic  Seraiah  or 
Azariah  (v.  2).  As  Ezra  is  not  mentioned  after 
Nehemiah's  departure  for  Babylon  in  the  32nd 
Artaxerxes,  and  as  everything  fell  into  confusion 
during  Nehemiah's  absence  (Neh.  xiii.),  it  is  not  un- 
likelv  that  Ezra  may  have  died  or  returned  to 
Babylon  before  that  year.  Josephus,  who  should 
be  our  next  best  authority  after  Scripture,  evidently 
knew  nothing  about  the  time  or  the  place  of  his 
death.  He  vaguely  says,  "he  died  an  old  man, 
and  was  buried  in  a  magnificent  manner  at  Jerusa- 
lem" (Ant.  xi.  5,  §5),  and  places  his  death  in  the 
high-priesthood  of  Joacim,  and  before  the  govern- 
ment of  Nehemiah  !  But  that  he  lived  under  the 
high-priesthood  of  Eliashib  and  the  government  of 
Nehemiah  is  expressly  stated  in  Nehemiah ;  and 
there  was  a  strong  Jewish  tradition  that  he  was 
buried  in  Persia.  Thus  Benjamin  of  Tudela  says  of 
Nehar-Samorah — apparently  some  place  on  the 
lower  Tigris,  on  the  frontier  of  Persia ;  Zamuza 
according  to  the  Talmudists,  otherwise  Zamzumu — 
"The  sepulchre  of  Ezra  the  priest  and  scribe  is  in 
this  place,  where  he  died  on  his  journey  from  Jeru- 
salem to  king  Artaxerxes  "  (vol.  i.  p.  1 16),  a  tradition 
which  certainly  agrees  very  well  with  the  narrative 
of  Nehemiah.  This  sepulchre  is  shown  to  this 
day  ( ib.  vol.  ii.,  note  p.  116).  As  regards  the  tra- 
ditional history  of  Ezra,  it  is  extremely  difficult  to 
judge  what  portion  of  it  has  any  historical  founda- 
tion. The  principal  works  ascribed  to  him  by  the 
Jews,  and,  on  the  strength  of  their  testimony,  by 
Christians  also,  are: — 1.  The  institution  of  the 
Great  Synagogue,  of  which,  the  Jews  say,  Ezra  was 
president,  and  Daniel,  Haggai,  Zechariah,  Malachi, 
Zorobabel,  Mordecai,  Jeshua,  Nehemiah,  &c,  were 
members,  Simeon  the  Just,  the  last  survivor,  living 
on  till  the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great !  2.  The 
settling  the  canon  of  Scripture,  and  restoring,  cor- 
recting, and  editing,  the  whole  sacred  volume 
according  to  the  threefold  arrangement  of  the  Law, 
the  Prophets,  and  the  Hagiographa,  with  the  divi- 
sions of  the  Pesukim,  or  verses,  the  vowel-points 
handed  down  by  tradition  from  Moses,  and  the  emen- 
dations of  the  Keri.  3.  The  introduction  of  the 
Chaldee  character  instead  of  the  old  Hebrew  or  Sa- 
maritan. 4.  The  authorship  of  the  books  of  Chro- 
nicles, Ezra,  Nehemiah,  and,  some  add,  Esther  ;  and, 
many  of  the  Jews  say,  also  of  the  books  of  Ezekiel, 
Daniel,  and  the  12  prophets.  5.  The  establishment 
of  synagogues.  Of  most  of  these  works  a  full  ac- 
count is  given  in  Prideaux's  Connexion,  i.  308-348, 
and  355-376  ;  also  in  Buxtorf's  TibtH'ias.  Refer- 
ences to  the  chief  rabbinical  and  other  authorities 
will  be  found  in  Winer.  A  compendious  account 
of  the  arguments  by  which  most  of  these  Jewish 
statements  are  proved  to  be  fabulous  is  given  in 
Stehelin's  Babbin.  Literat.  p.  5-8 ;  of  which  the 
chief  are  drawn  from  the  silence  of  the  sacred 
writers  themselves,  of  the  apocryphal  books,  and 


EZRA,  BOOK  OF 

of  Josephus — and  it  might  be  added,  of  Jerome — 
and  from  the  fact  that  they  may  lie  traced  to  the 
author  of  the  chapter  in  the  Mishna  called  Pirke 
Avoth.  Here,  however,  it  must  suffice  to  observe 
that  the  pointed  description  of  Ezra  (vii.  6)  as  "  a 
ready  scribe  in  the  law  of  Moses,"  repeated  in 
11,  12,  21,  added  to  the  information  concerning 
him  that  "  he  had  prepared  his  heart  to  seek  the 
law  of  the  Lord,  and  to  do  it,  and  to  teach  in  Israel 
statutes  and  judgments"  (vii.  10),  and  his  commis- 
sion "  to  teach  the  laws  of  his  God  to  such  as  knew 
them  not  "  (25),  and  his  great  diligence  in  read- 
ing the  Scriptures  to  the  people,  all  gives  the  ut- 
most probability  to  the  account  which  attributes  to 
him  a  corrected  edition  of  the  Scriptures,  and  the 
circulation  of  many  such  copies.  The  books  of 
Nehemiah  and  Malachi  must  indeed  have  been 
added  later  ;  possibly  by  Malachi's  authority. 
Some  tradition  to  this  effect  may  have  given  rise 
to  the  Jewish  fable  of  Malachi  being  the  same 
person  as  Ezra.  But  we  cannot  affirm  that  Ezra 
inserted  in  the  Canon  any  books  that  were  not 
already  acknowledged  as  inspired,  as  we  have  no 
sufficient  ground  for  ascribing  to  him  the  prophetic 
character.  Even  the  books  of  which  he  was  the 
author  may  not  have  assumed  definitely  the  cha-. 
racter  of  Scripture  till  they  were  sanctioned  by 
Malachi.  There  does  not,  however,  seem  to  be 
sufficient  ground  for  forming  a  definite  opinion  on 
the  details  of  the  subject.  In  like  manner  one  can 
only  say  that  the  introduction  of  the  Chaldee  cha- 
racter, and  the  commencement  of  such  stated  meet- 
ings for  hearing  the  Scriptures  read  as  led  to  the 
regular  synagogue-service,  are  things  likely  to  have 
occurred  about  this  time.  For  the  question  of 
Ezra's  authorship,  see  Chronicles  ;  also  Ezra, 
book  OF.  [A.  C.  H.] 

EZ'RA,  BOOK  OF.  The  book  of  Ezra  speaks 
for  itself  to  any  one  who  reads  it  with  ordinary  intel- 
ligence, and  without  any  prejudice  as  to  its  nature 
and  composition.  It  is  manifestly  a  continuation  of 
the  books  of  Chronicles,  as  indeed  it  is  called  by 
Hilary,  bishop  of  Poitiers,  Sermoncs  dierum  Esdrae 
(ap.  Cosin's  Canon  of  Scr.  51).  It  is  naturally  a 
fresh  book,  as  commencing  the  history  of  the  returned 
captives  after  seventy  years  of  suspension,  as  it  were, 
of  the  national  life.  But  when  we  speak  of  the  book 
as  a  cJironicle,  we  at  once  declare  the  nature  of  it, 
which  its  contents  also  abundantly  confirm.  Like 
the  two  books  of  Chronicles,  it  consists  of  the  con- 
temporary historical  journals  kept  from  time  to  time 
by  the  prophets,  or  other  authorized  persons,  who 
were  eye-witnesses  for  the  most  part  of  what  they 
record,  and  whose  several  narratives  were  afterwards 
strung  together,  and  either  abridged  or  added  to,  as 
the  case  required,  by  a  later  hand.  That  later  hand, 
in  the  book  of  Ezra,  was  doubtless  Ezra's  own,  as 
appears  by  the  four  last  chapters,  as  well  as  by  other 
matter  inserted  in  the  previous  chapters.  While 
therefore,  in  a  certain  sense,  the  whole  book  is 
Ezra's,  as  put  together  by  him,  yet,  strictly,  only 
the  four  last  chapters  are  his  original  work.  Nor 
will  it  be  difficult  to  point  out  with  tolerable  cer- 
tainty several  of  the  writers  of  whose  writings  the 
first  six  chapters  are  composed.  It  has  already 
been  suggested  [Chronicles]  that  the  chief  por- 
tion of  the  last  chapter  of  2  Chr.  and  Ezr.  i. 
may  probably  have  been  written  by  Daniel.  The 
evidences  of"  this  in  Ezr.  i.  must  now  be  given 
more  fully.  No  one  probably  can  read  Daniel  as  a 
genuine  book,  and  not  be  struck  with  the  very 
singular  circumstance  that,  while   he  tells   us  in 


EZRA,  BOOK  OE 

ch.  ix.  that  lie  was  aware  that  the  seventy  years' 
captivity,  foretold  by  Jeremiah,  was  near  its  close, 
and  was  led  thereby  to  pray  earnestly  for  the 
restoration  of  Jerusalem,  and  while  he  records  the 
remarkable  vision  in  answer  to  his  prayer,  yet  he 
takes  not  the  slightest  notice  of  Cyrus's  decree,  by 
which  Jeremiah's  prophecy  was  fulfilled,  and  his 
own  heart's  desire  and  prayer  to  God  tor  Israel  was 
accomplished,  and  which  must  have  been  the  most 
stirring  event  in  his  long  life,  not  even  excepting  the 
incident  of  the  den  of  lions.  He  passes  over  in  utter 
silence  the  first  year  of  Cyrus,  to  which  pointed 
allusion  is  made  in  Dan.  i.  '_'  1 ,  and  proceeds  in  ch.  x. 
to  the  third  year  of  Cyrus.  Such  silence  is  utterly 
unaccountable.  But  Ezr.  i.  supplies  the  missing 
notice.  If  placed  between  Dan.  ix.  and  x.  it  exactly 
fills  up  the  gap,  and  records  the  event  of  the  first 
year  of  Cyrus,  in  which  Dauiel  was  so  deeply  in- 
terested. And  not  only  so,  but  the  manner  of  the 
lecord  is  exactly  Daniel's.  Ezr.  i.  1 :  "  And  in  the 
first  year  of  Cyrus  K.  of  Persia,"  is  the  precise 
formula  used  in  Dan.  i.  1,  ii.  1,  vii.  1,  viii.  1,  ix.  1, 
x.  1,  xi.  1.  The  designation  (ver.  1,  2,  8)  "  Cyrus 
king  of  Persia"  is  that  used  Dan.  x.  1  ;  the  reference 
to  the  prophecy  of  Jeremiah  in  ver.  1  is  similar  to 
that  in  Dan.  ix.  2.  and  the  natural  sequence  to  it. 
The  giving  the  text  of  the  decree,  ver.  2-4  (cf.  Dan. 
iv.),  the  mention  of  the  name  of  "  Mithredath  the 
treasurer,"  ver.  8  (cf.  Dan.  i.  3,  11),  the  allusion  to 
the  sacred  vessels  placed  by  Nebuchadnezzar  in  the 
house  of  his  god,  ver.  7  (cf.  Dan.  i.  2),  the  giving 
the  Chaldee  name  of  Zerubbabel,  ver.  8,  11  (cf. 
Dan.  i.  7),  and  the  whole  locus  standi  of  the  nar- 
rator, who  evidently  wrote  at  Babylon,  not  at 
Jerusalem,  are  all  circumstances  which  in  a  marked 
manner  point  to  Daniel  as  the  writer  of  Ezr.  i. 
Nor  is  there  the  least  improbability  in  the  sup- 
position that  if  Ezra  edited  Daniel's  papers  he 
might  think  the  chapter  in  question  more  con- 
veniently placed  in  its  chronological  position  in 
the  Chronicles  than  in  the  collection  of  Daniel's 
prophecies.  It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  add  that 
several  chapters  of  the  prophets  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah 
are  actually  found  in  the  book  of  Kings,  as  e.  g. 
Is.  xxxvi.-xxxix.  in  2  K.  xviii.-xx. 

Ezr.  i.  then  was  by  the  hand  of  Daniel. 

As  regards  Ezr.  ii.,  and  as  far  as  iii.  1,  where 
the  change  of  name  from  Sheshbazzar  to  Zerub- 
babel in  ver.  2,  the  mention  of  Nehemiah  the 
Tirshatha  in  ver.  2  and  63,  and  that  of  Mordecai 
in  ver.  2,  at  once  indicate  a  different  and  much 
later  hand,  we  need  not  seek  long  to  discover 
where  it  came  from,  because  it  is  found  in  ex- 
tenso,  verbatim  et  literatim  (with  the  exception 
of  clerical  errors),  in  the  7th  ch.  of  Nehemiah, 
where  it  belongs  beyond  a  shadow  of  doubt  [Ne- 
hemiah, Book  of].  This  portion  then  was  writ- 
ten by  Nehemiah,  and  was  placed  by  Ezra,  or 
possibly  by  a  still  later  hand,  in  this  position,  as 
bearing  upon  the  return  from  captivity  lelated  in 
ch.  i.,  though  chronologically  oul  of  place.  Whe- 
ther the  extract  originally  extended  so  fir  as  iii.  1 
may  be  doubted.  The  next  portion  extends  from 
iii.  -  to  the  end  id'  ell.  vi.  With  the  exception  of 
One  large  explanatory  addition  by  Ezra,  extending 
from  iv.  Ii  to  23,  which  has  cruelly  but  most  need- 
lessly perplexed  commentators,  this  portion  is  the 
work  of  a  writer  contemporary  with  Zerubbabel 
and  Jeshua,  and  an  eve-witness  of  the  rebuilding 
of  the  Temple  in  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of 
Darius  Bystaspis.  The  minute  details  given  of  all 
the  circumstances,  such  as  the  weening  of  the  old 


EZRA,  BOOK  OF 


007 


men  who  had  seen  the  first  Temple,  the  names  of 
the  Levites  who  took  part,  in  the  work,  of  the 
heathen  governors  who  hindered  it,  the  expression 
(vi.  15)  "  This  house  was  finished,"  &c,  the  num- 
ber of  the  sacrifices  offered  at  the  dedication,  and 
the  whole  tone  of  the  narrative,  bespeak  an  actor 
in  the  scenes  described.  Who  then  was  so  likely 
to  record  these  interesting  events  as  one  of  those 
prophets  who  took  an  active  part  in  promoting 
them,  and  a  branch  of  whose  duty  it  would  be  to 
continue  the  national  chronicles  ?  That  it  was  the 
prophet  Haggai  becomes  tolerably  sure  when  we 
observe  further  the  following  coincidences  in  style. 

1.  The  title  "the  prophet,"  is  throughout  this 
portion  of  Ezra  attached  in  a  peculiar  way  to  the 
name  of  Haggai.  Thus  chapter  v.  1  we  read 
"  Then  the  prophets,  Haggai  the  prophet,  and 
Zechariah  the  son  of  Iddo,  piophesied,  &c. ;"  and 
vi.  14,  "  They  prospered  through  the  prophesying 
of  Haggai  the  prophet,  and  Zechariah  the  son  of 
Iddo."  And  in  like  manner  in  Hagg.  i.  1,3,  12, 
ii.  1,  10,  he  is  called  "  Haggai  the  prophet." 

2.  The  designation  of  Zerubbabel  and  Jeshua  is 
identical  in  the  two  writers.  "  Zerubbabel  the  son 
of  Shealtiel,  and  Jeshua  the  son  of  Jozadak  "  (comp. 
Ezr.  iii.  2,  8,  v.  2,  with  Hagg.  i.  1,  12,  14,  ii.  2,  4, 
23).  It  will  be  seen  that  both  writers  usually  name 
them  together,  and  in  the  same  order :  Zechariah,  on 
the  contrary,  does  not  once  name  them  together,  and 
calls  them  simply  Zerubbabel,  and  Jeshua.  Only 
in  vi.  11  he  adds  "  the  son  of  Josedech." 

3.  The  description  in  Ezr.  v.  1,  2  of  the  effect  of 
the  preaching  of  Haggai  and  Zechariah  upon  Zerub- 
babel, Jeshua,  and  the  people,  is  identical  with  that 
in  Hagg.  i.,  only  abbreviated.  And  Hagg.  ii.  3 
alludes  to  the  interesting  circumstance  recorded  in 
Ezr.  iii.  12. 

4.  Both  writers  mark  the  date  of  the  trans- 
actions they  record  by  the  year  of  "  Darius  the 
king  "  (Ezr.  iv.  24,  vi.  15,  compared  with  Hagg.  i. 
1,  15,  ii.  10,  &c.). 

5.  Ezr.  iii.  8  contains  exactly  the  same  enumera- 
tion of  those  that  worked,  viz.  "  Zerubbabel,  Jeshua, 
and  the  remnant  of  their  brethren,"  as  Hagg.  i.  12, 
14,  where  we  have  "  Zerubbabel,  and  Jeshua,  with 
all  the  remnant  of  the  people"  (comp.  too  Ezr.  vi. 

16,  and  Hagg.  ii.  2). 

6.  Both  writers  use  the  expression  "  the  work  of 
the  house  of  the  Lord"  (Ezr.  iii.  8  and  9,  com- 
pared with  Hagg.  i.  14)  ;  and  both  use  the  phrase 
"  the  foundation  of  the  temple  was  laid  "  (Ezr.  iii. 
0,  10,  11,  12,  compared  with  Hagg.  ii.  18). 

7.  Both  writers  use  indifferently  the  expressions 
the  "  house  of  the  Lord,"  and  the  "temple  of  the 
Lord,"  but  the  former  much  more  frequently  than 
the  latter.  Thus  the  writer  in  Ezra  uses  the  expres- 
sion "the  house"  (JV3)  twenty-five  times,  to  six  in 
which  he  speaks  of  "  the  temple"  (7DTI).  Haggai 
speaks  of  "  the  house  "  seven  times,  of  "  the  temple" 
twice. 

8.  Both  writers  make  marked  and  frequent 
reference  to  the  law  of  Moses.  Thus  comp.  Ezr.  iii. 
'-'.  3-6,  8,  vi.  14,  16-22,  with  Hagg.  i.  s,  lo,  ii.  ;., 

17,  11-13,  &c. 

Such  strongly  marked  resemblances  in  the  com- 
pass of  two  such  brief  portions  of  Scripture  seem  to 
prove  that  they  are  from  the  pen  of  the  same  writer. 

But  the  above  observations  do  not  apply  t<> 
Ezr.  iv.  6-23,  which  is  a  parenthetic  addition  bv  a 
much  later  hand,  ami.  as  the  passage  most  clearly 
shows,    made    in   the   reign    of  Artaxerxes    Longi- 


008 


EZRAHITE 


manus.  The  compiler  who  inserted  chapter  ii., 
a  document  drawn  up  in  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes, 

to  illustrate  the  return  of  the  captives  under  Zerub- 
babel,  here  inserts  a  notice  of  two  historical  facts, — 
of  which  one  occurred  in  the  reign  of  Xerxes,  and  the 
other  in  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes — to  illustrate  the 
opposition  offered  by  the  heathen  to  the  re-buildiug 
of  the  temple  in  the  reign  of  Cyrus  and  Cambyses. 
He  tells  us  that  in  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of 
Xerxes,  i.  e.  before  Esther  was  in  favour,  they  had 
written  to  the  king  to  prejudice  him  against  the 
Jews — a  circumstance,  by  the  way,  which  may 
rather  have  inclined  him  to  listen  to  Haman's  pro- 
position ;  and  he  gives  the  text  of  letters  sent  to 
Artaxerxes,  and  of  Artaxerxes'  answer,  on  the 
strength  of  which  Rehum  and  Shimshai  forcibly 
hindered  the  Jews  from  rebuilding  the  city. 
These  letters  doubtless  came  into  Ezra's  hands  at 
Babylon,  and  may  have  led  to  those  endeavours  on 
his  part  to  make  the  king  favourable  to  Jerusalem 
which  issued  in  his  owu  commission  in  the  seventh 
year  of  his  reign.  At  ver.  24  Haggai's  narrative 
proceeds  in  connexion  with  ver.  5.  The  mention  of 
Artaxerxes  iu  chapter  vi.  14,  is  of  the  same  kind. 
The  last  four  chapters,  beginning  with  chapter  vii., 
are  Ezra's  own,  and  continue  the  history  after  a 
gap  of  fifty-eight  years — from  the  sixth  of  Darius 
to  the  seventh  of  Artaxerxes.  The  only  history  of 
Judaea  during  this  interval  is  what  is  given  in  the 
above-named  parenthesis,  from  which  we  may  infer 
that  during  this  time  there  was  no  one  in  Pales- 
tine to  write,  the  Chronicles.  The  history  of  the 
Jews  in  Persia  for  the  same  period  is  given  in  the 
book  of  Esther. 

The  text  of  the  book  of  Ezra  is  not  in  a  good 
condition.  There  are  a  good  many  palpable  cor- 
•ruptions  both  in  the  names  and  numerals,  and 
perhaps  in  some  ether  points.  It  is  written  partly 
in  Hebrew,  and  partly  in  Chaldee.  The  Chaldee 
begins  at  iv.  8,  and  continues  to  the  end  of  vi.  18. 
The  letter  or  decree  of  Artaxerxes  vii.  12-26,  is  also 
given  in  the  original  Chaldee.  There  has  never  been 
ar.y  doubt  about  Ezra  being  canonical,  although 
there  is  no  quotation  from  it  in  the  N.  T.  Au- 
gustine says  of  Ezra  "  magis  rerum  gestarum 
scriptor  est  habitus  quam  propheta  "  (De  Civ.  Dei, 
xviii.  36).  The  period  covered  by  the  book  is 
eighty  years,  from  the  first  of  Cyrus  B.C.  536  to 
the  beginning  of  the  eighth  of  Artaxerxes  B.C.  456. 
It  embraces  the  governments  of  Zerubbabel  and 
Ezra,  the  high-priesthood  of  Jeshua,  Joiakim,  and 
the  early  part  of  Eliashib ;  and  the  reigns  of  Cyras, 
Cambyses,  Smerdis,  Darius  Hystaspis,  Xerxes,  and 
part  of  Artaxerxes.  Of  these  Cambyses  and  Smerdis 
are  not  named.      Xerxes  is  barely  named   iv.   6. 

[ESDRAS,    FIRST  BOOK  OF.]  [A.  C.  H.] 

EZ  EAHITE,  THE  (TTimn  ;  <5  Zapmjs, 
Alex.  'E(pa7j\iT7)s  ;  Ezrahita),  a.  title  attached  to 
two  persons — Ethan  (1  K.  iv.  31  ;  Ps.  lxxxix. 
title)  and  Heman  (Ps.  lxxxviii.  title).  The  word  is 
naturally  derivable  fiom  Ezrah,  or— which  is  almost 
the  same  in  Hebrew — Zerach,  mt ;  and  accordingly 
in  1  Chr.  ii.  6,  Ethan  and  Heman  are  both  given 
as  sons  of  Zerah  the  son  of  Judah.  Another  Ethan 
and  another  Heman  are  named  as  Levites  and 
musicians  in  the  lists  of  1  Chr.  vi.  and  elsewhere. 

EZ'BI  (n?JJ  ;  'EcrSpi,  Alex.  'ECpat ;  Ezri), 
son  of  Chelub,  superintendent  for  King  David  of 
those  "  who  did  the  work  of  the  field  for  tillage  of 
the  ground  "  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  26). 


FABLE 


FABLE  OC0os  ;  fabula).  Taking  the  words 
fable  and  parable,  not  in  their  strict  etymological 
meaning,  but  in  that  which  has  been  stamped  upon 
them  by  current  usage,  looking,  i.  e.  at  the  Aesopic 
table  as  the  type  of  the  one,  at  the  Parables  of  the 
N.  T.  as  the  type  of  the  other,  we  have  to  ask 
(1.)  in  what  relation  they  stand  to  each  other,  as 
instruments  of  moral  teaching?  (2.)  what  use  is 
made  in  the  Bible  of  this  or  of  that  form  ?  That 
they  have  much  in  common  is,  of  course,  obvious 
enough.  In  both  we  find  "  statements  of  facts, 
which  do  not  even  pretend  to  be  historical,  used  as 
vehicles  for  the  exhibition  of  a  general  truth " 
(Neander,  Lebcn  Jcsu,  p.  68).  Both  differ  from 
the  Mythus,  in  the  modern  sense  of  that  word,  in 
being  the  result  of  a  deliberate  choice  of  such  a 
mole  of  teaching,  not  the  spontaneous,  unconscious 
evolution  of  thought  in  some  symbolic  form.  They 
take  their  place  so  far  as  species  of  the  same  genus. 
What  are  the  characteristic  marks  by  which  one 
differs  from  the  other,  it  is  perhaps  easier  to  feel 
than  to  define.  Thus  we  have  (comp.  Trench  On 
Parables,  p.  2)  (1.)  Lessing's  statement  that  the 
fable  takes  the  form  of  an  actual  narrative,  while 
the  Parable  assumes  only  that  what  is  related  might 
have  happened  ;  (2.)  Herder's,  that  the  difference 
lies  in  the  fable's  dealing  with  brute  or  inanimate 
nature,  in  the  parable's  drawing  its  materials  exclu- 
sively from  human  life  ;  (3.)  Olshausen's  (on  Matt, 
xiii.  1),  followed  by  Trench  {I.e.),  that  it  is  to  be 
found  in  the  higher  truths  of  which  the  parable  is 
the  vehicle.  Perhaps  the  most  satisfactory  sum- 
ming up  of  the  chief  distinctive  features  of  each  is 
to  be  found  in  the  following  extract  from  Neander 
(I.e.): — "The  parable  is  distinguished  from  the 
fable  by  this,  that,  in  the  latter,  qualities,  or  acts  of 
a  higher  class  of  beings  may  be  attributed  to  a 
lower  (c.  g.  those  of  men  to  brutes)  ;  while  in  the 
former,  the  lower  sphere  is  kept  perfectly  distinct 
from  that  which  it  seems  to  illustrate.  The  beings 
and  powers  thus  introduced  always  follow  the  law 
of  their  nature,  but  their  acts,  according  to  this 

law,  are  used  to  figure  those  of  a  higher  race 

The  mere  introduction  of  brutes  as  personal  agents, 
in >the  fable,  is  not  sufficient  to  distinguish  it  from 
the  parable  which  may  make  use  of  the  same  con- 
trivance ;  as,  for  example,  Christ  employs  the  sheep 
in  one  of  his  parables.  The  great  distinction  here, 
also,  lies  in  what  has  already  been  remarked  ;  brutes 
introduced  in  the  parable  act  according  to  the  law 
of  their  nature,  and  the  two  spheres  of  nature  and 
of  the  kingdom  of  Cod  are  carefully  separated  from 
each  other.  Hence  the  reciprocal  relations  of  brutes 
to  each  other  are  n#t  made  use  of,  as  these  could 
furnish  no  appropriate  image  of  the  relation  between 
man  and  the  kingdom  of  God." 

Of  the  fable,  as  thus  distinguished  from  the 
Parable,  we  have  but  two  examples  in  the  Bible, 
(1.)  that  of  the  trees  choosing  their  king,  addressed 
by  Jotham  to  the  men  of  ^-hechem  (Judg.  ix.  8-15  ; 
(2.)  that  of  the  cedar  of  Lebanon  and  the  thistle,  as 
the  answer  of  Jehoash  to  the  challenge  of  Amaziah 
(2  K.  xiv.  9).  The  narrative  of  Ezek.  xvii.  1-10, 
though,  in  common  with  the  fable,  it  brings  before 
us  the  lower  forms  of  creation  as  representatives  of 
human  characters  and  destinies,  diners  from  it,  in 
the  points  above  noticed,  (1.)  in  not  introducing 


FABLE 

them  as  having  human  attributes,  {'2.)  in  the 
higher  prophetic  character  of  the  truths  conveyed 
by  it.  The  great  eagle,  the  cedar  of  Lebanon,  the 
spreading  vine,  are  Dot  grouped  together  as  the 
agents  in  a  fable,  but  are  simply,  like  the  bear,  the 
leopard,  and  the  lion  in  the  visions  of  Daniel,  sym- 
bols of  the  great  monarchies  of  the  world. 

In  the  two  instances  referred  to,  the  fable  has 
more  the  character  of  the  Qpeek  alvos  (Quintil, 
/nst.  Orat.  V.  11)  than  of  the  fxvOos  ;  that  is,  is  less 
the  fruit  of  a  vivid  imagination,  spoiling  with  the 
analogies  between  the  worlds  of  nature  and  of  men, 
than  a  covert  reproof,  making  the  sarcasm  which  it 
affects  to  hide  all  the  sharper  i  Miiller  and  Donald- 
son, Hist,  of  Greek  Literature,  vol.  i.  c.  xi.). 
The  appearauce  of  the  fable  thus  early  iu  the  his- 
tory of  Israel,  and  its  entire  absence  from  the  direct 
teaching  both  of  the  0.  and  N.  T.  are,  each  of 
them  in  its  way,  significant.  Taking  the  received 
chronology,  the  fable  of  Jotham  was  spoken  about 
1209  is.c.  The  Arabian  traditions  of  Lokman  do 
not  assign  to  him  an  earlier  date  than  that  of  David. 
The  earliest  Greek  aivos  is  that  of  Hesiod  (Op.  et 
1).  v.  202'),  and  the  prose  form  of  the  fable  does 
not  meet  us  till  we  come  (aboul  550  b.c.)  to  Ste- 
sicborns  and  Aesop.  The  first  example  in  the  his- 
tory of  Rome  is  the  apologue  of  Menenius  Agrippa 
is.c.  494,  and  its  genuineness  has  been  questioned  on 
the  ground  that  the  table  could  hardly  at  that  time 
have  found  its  way  to  Latium  (  Miiller  ami  Donald- 
son, /.  c).  It  may  be  noticed  too  that  when  col- 
lections of  fables  became  familiar  to  the  Greeks  they 
were  looked  on  as  imported,  not  indigenous.  The 
traditions  that  surround  the  name  of  Aesop,  the 
absence  of  any  evidence  that  he  wrote  fables,  the 
traces  of  Eastern  origin  in  those  ascribed  to  him, 
leave  him  little  more  than  the  representative  of  a 
period  when  the  forms  of  teaching,  which  had  long 
been  familiar  to  the  more  Eastern  nations,  were 
travelling  westward,  and  were  adopted  eagerly  by 
the  Greeks.  The  collections  themselves  are  de- 
scribed by  titles  that  indicate  a  foreign  origin. 
They  are  Libyan  (Arist.  Rhet.  ii.  20),  Cyprian, 
Cilician.  All  these  facts  lead  to  the  conclusion 
that  the  Hebrew  mind,  gifted,  as  it  was,  in  a  special 
measure,  with  the  power  of  perceiving  analogies  in 
things  apparently  dissimilar,  attained,  at  a  very 
early  stage  of  its  growth,  the  power  which  does 
not  appear  in  the  history  of  other  nations  till  a  later 
period.  Whatever  antiquity  may  be  ascribed  to 
toe  failles  in  the  comparatively  later  collection  of 
the  Pancha  Tantra,  the  land  of  Canaan  is,  so  far  as 
we  have  any  data  to  conclude  from,  the  father- 
land of  fable.  To  conceive  brutes,  or  inanimate 
objects  as  representing  human  characteristics,  to 
personify  them  as  acting,  speaking,  reasoning,  to 
draw  lessons  from  them  applicable  to  human  life. 
— this  must  have  been  common  among  the  Israelites 
in  the  time  of  the  Judges.  The  pari  assigned  in 
the  earliest  records  of  the  Bible  to  the  impressions 
made   by   the   brute   creation   on   tin1  mind   of  man 

when  '"the  Lord  God  formed  every  beast  of  the 
lielil  and  every  fowl  of  the  air,  and  brought  them 
unto  Adam  to  see  what  he  would  call  them" 
(lieu.  ii.  19),  and  the  apparent  symbolism  of  the 
serpent  in  the  narrative  of  tne  ball  [Gen.  iii.  1) 
are  at  once  indications  of  teaching  adapted  to  men 
in  the  possession  of  this  power,  and  must  have 
helped  to  dei  elope  it  i  Herder,  G 

II  ,       wiv.     p.      I':,     ed.      1826    .        The 

large  number  of  proverbs  in  which  analogies  of  this 
kind  are  made  the  bases  of  a  moral  precept,  and 


FABLE 


609 


some  of  which  (e.g.  Frov.  xxvi.  1  1,  xxx.  15,  25- 
28)  are  of  the  nature  of  condensed  fables,  show 
that  there  was  no  decline  of  this  power  as  the 
intellect  of  the  people  advanced.  The  absence  of 
fables  accordingly  from  the  teaching  of  the  0.  T. 
must  be  ascribed  to  their  want  of  fitness  to  be  the 
media  of  the  truths  which  that  teaching  was  to 
convey.  The  points  in  which  brutes  or  inanimate 
objects  present  analogies  to  man  are  chiefly  those 
which  belong  to  his  lower  nature,  his  pride,  indo- 
lence, cunning,  and  the  like,  and  the  lessons  derived 
from  them  accordingly  do  not  rise  higher  than  the 
prudential  morality  which  aims  at  repressing  such 
defects  (comp.  Trench  on  the  Parables,  I.  c). 
Hence  the  fable,  apart  from  the  associations  of  a 
grotesque  and  ludicrous  nature  which  gather  round 
it,  apart  too  from  its  presenting  narratives,  which 
are  "  nee  verae  nee  verisimiles"  (Cic.  de  Invent. 
i.  19),  is  inadequate  as  the  exponent  of  the  higher 
truths  which  belong  to  man's  spiritual  life.  It 
may  serve  to  exhibit  the  relations  between  man 
and  man  ;  it  fails  to  represent  those  between  man 
and  Cod.  To  do  that  is  the  office  of  the  PARABLE, 
finding  its  outward  framework  in  the  dealings  of 
men  with  each  other,  or  in  the  world  of  nature  as 
it  is,  not  in  an)-  grotesque  parody  of  nature,  and 
exhibiting,  in  either  case,  real  and  not  fanciful 
analogies.  The  Fable  seizes  on  that  which  man  has 
in  common  with  the  creatures  below  him ;  the 
Parable  rests  on  the  truths  that  man  is  made  in  the 
image  of  God,  and  that  "all  things  are  double  one 
against  another." 

It  is  noticeable,  as  confirming  this  view  of  the 
office  of  the  fable,  that,  though  those  of  Aesop 
(so  called)  were  known  to  the  great  preacher  of 
righteousness  at  Athens,  though  a  metrical  para- 
phrase of  some  of  them  was  among  the  employ- 
ments of  his  imprisonment  (Plato,  Phaedon,  pp. 
60,  01),  they  were  not  employed  by  him  as  illus- 
trations, or  channels  of  instruction.  While  Socrates 
shows  an  appreciation  of  the  power  of  such  fables 
to  represent  some  of  the  phenomena  of  human  life, 
he  was  not,  he  says,  in  this  sense  of  the  word, 
/xvdoKoyiKos.  The  myths,  which  appear  in  the 
Gorgias,  the  Phaedrus,  the  Phaedon,  the  Rep 
are  as  unlike  as  possible  to  the  Aesopic  fables,  are 
(to  take  his  own  account  of  them)  oil  fxv6ot  ix\Xa 
Aoyoi,  true,  though  figurative,  representations  of 
spiritual  realities,  while  the  illustrations  from  the 
common  tacts  of  life  which  were  so  conspicuous  in 
his  ordinary  teaching,  though  differing  in  being 
comparisons  rather  than  narratives,  come  nearer  to 
the  parables  of  the  Bible  (comp.  the  contrast  be- 
tween to  2ct)«paTiKa,  as  examples  of  the  ieapa.Bo\4t 
and  the  \6yoi  Al<Tu>w(ioi.  Arist.  Rhet.  ii.  20).  It 
may  be  said  indeed  that  the  use  of  the  Fable  as  an 
instrument  of  teaching  (apart  from  the  embel 
ments  of  wit  and  fancy  with  which  it    is  associated 

by  such  writers  as  Lessing  and  La  Font I 

rather  to  childhood,  and   the  child-like  pel 
national  life, than  to  a  more  advanced  development. 
In  the  earlier  stages  of  political  change,  as   in    the 
cases  of  Jotham,  Stesichorus     Wist.   Rhet, 
Menenius  Agrippa.  it  is  used  as  an  element  of  per- 
suasion or  reproof.     It  ceases   to  appear  in   the 

higher  eloqueno  of  orators  and  statesmen,  'lie 
special  excellence  of  tables  is  that  they  are  57jjitT)70- 
piKol  (Arist.  Rhet.  I.  c.   :    that   " ducere  amnios 

solent,    praecipue     rusti um    et    imperitorum" 

(Quint. 

The  fiidoi  o  iming  to  belong  to 

the  Christian  church,  alluded  to  by  writers  of  the 

•2  i; 


610 


FAIR  HAVENS 


N.  T.  in  connexion  with  yeveaAoyicu  atrepavrot 
(1  Tim.  i.  4),  or  with  epithets  '\ov8cukoI  (Tit.  i. 
14),  ypaaiSels  (1  Tim.  iv.  7),  <re(To<f>io>i.eVo(  (2 
Pet.  i.  16),  do  not  appear  to  have  had  the  cha- 
racter of  fables,  properly  so  called.  As  applied  to 
them,  the  word  takes  its  general  meaning  of  any- 
thing false  or  unreal,  and  it  does  not  fall  within 
the  scope  of  the  present  article  to  discuss  the  nature 
of  the  falsehoods  so  referred  to.  [E.  H.  P.] 

FAIR  HAVENS  (KaXol  Aleves),  a  harbour 
in  the  island  of  Crete  (Acts  xxvii.  8),  not  men- 
tioned in  any  other  ancient  writing.  There  seems 
no  probability  that  it  is,  as  Biscoe  suggested  (on  the 
Acts,  p.  347,  ed.  1829),  the  KaArj  'Kkt^  of  Steph. 
Byz. — for  that  is  said  to  be  a  city,  whereas  Fair 
Havens  is  described  as  "  a  place  near  to  which  was  a 
city  called  Lasaea "  (r6iros  tis  <£  eyyvs  i]v  tt6Xis 
A.).  Moreover  Mr.  Pashley  found  {Travels  in 
Crete,  vol.  ii.  p.  57)  a  district  called  Acte  ;  and  it 
is  most  likely  that  Kahr]  'Akt$i  was  situated  there; 
but  that  district  is  in  the  W.  of  the  island,  whereas 
Fair  Havens  was  on  the  S.  Its  position  is  now  quite 
certain.  Though  not  mentioned  by  classical  writers, 
it  is  still  known  by  its  old  Greek  name,  as  it  was  in 
the  time  of  Pococke,  and  other  early  travellers  men- 
tioned by  Mr.  Smith  (  Voy.  and  Shipw.  of  St.  Paul, 
2nd  ed.  pp.  80-82).  Lasaea  too  has  recently  been 
most  explicitly  discovered.  In  fact  Fair  Havens 
appears  to  have  been  practically  its  harbour.  These 
places  are  situated  four  or  five  miles  to  the  E.  of 
Cape  Matala,  which  is  the  most  conspicuous  head- 
land on  the  S.  coast  of  Crete,  and  immediately  to 
the  W.  of  which  the  coast  trends  suddenly  to  the  N. 
This  last  circumstance  explains  why  the  ship  which 
conveyed  St.  Paul  was  brought  to  anchor  in  Fair 
Havens.  In  consequence  of  violent  and  continuing 
N.  W.  winds  she  had  been  unable  to  hold  on  her 
course  towards  Italy  from  Cnidus  (v.  7),  and  had 
run  down,  by  Salmone,  under  the  lee  of  Crete.  It 
was  possible  to  reach  Fair  Havens:  but  beyond 
Cape  Matala  the  difficulty  would  have  recurred,  so 
long  as  the  wind  remained  in  the  same  quarter. 
A  considerable  delay  took  place  (v.  9)  during  which 
it  is  possible  that  St.  Paul  may  have  had  oppor- 
tunities of  preaching  the  Gospel  at  Lasaea,  or  even 
at  Gorty/na,  where  Jews  resided  (1  Mace.  xv. 
23  I,  and  which  was  not  far  distant ;  but  all  this  is 
conjectural.  A  consultation  took  place,  at  which  it 
was  decided,  against  the  Apostle's  advice,  to  make  an 
attempt  to  reach  a  good  harbour  named  Phenice, 
their  present  anchorage  being  avevderos  7rpbs  wapa- 
Xttfiacrlav  (v.  12).  All  such  terms  are  compara- 
tive :  and  there  is  no  doubt  that,  as  a  safe  winter 
harbour,  Fair  Havens  is  infinitely  inferior  to 
Phenice ;  though  perhaps  even  as  a  matter  of 
seamanship  St.  Paul's  advice  was  not  bad.  How- 
ever this  may  be,  the  south  wind,  which  sprang- up 
afterwards  (v.  13),  proved  delusive;  and  the  vessel 
was  caught  by  a  hurricane  [Euuoclydon]  on  her 
way  towards  Phenice,  and  ultimately  wrecked. 
Besides  a  view  (p.  81)  Mr.  Smith  gives  a  chart  of 
Fair  Havens  with  the  soundings  (p.  257),  from 
which  any  one  can  form  a  judgment  for  himself  of 
the  merits  of  the  harbour.  [J.  S.  H.] 

FAIRS  (D^'nTS?  ;  ayopd  ;  nundinae,  forum), 
a  word  which  occurs  only  in  Ez.  xxvii.  and  there 
no  less  than  seven  times  (ver.  12,  14,  16,  19,  22, 
27,  33)  :  in  the  last  of  these  verses  it  is  rendered 
"  wares,"  and  this  we  believe  to  be  the  true 
meaning  of  the  word  throughout.      It  will  be  ob- 


FAMINE 

served  that  the  word  stands  in  some  sort  of  relation 
to  2"li?0  throughout  the  whole  of  the  chapter,  the 
latter  word  also  occurring  seven  times,  and  translated 
sometimes  ''market"  (ver.  13,  17,  19),  and  else- 
where "merchandise"  (ver.  9,27,33,34).  The 
words  are  used  alternately,  and  represent  the  alter- 
nations of  commercial  business  in  which  the  mer- 
chants of  Tyre  were  engaged.  That  the  first  of 
these  words  cannot  signify  "  fairs"  is  evident  from 
ver.  1 2 ;  for  the  inhabitants  of  Tarshish  did  not 
visit  Tyre,  but  vice  versa.  Let  the  reader  substi- 
tute "  paid  "  or  "  exchanged  for  thy  wares,"  for 
"  occupied  in  thy  fairs,"  and  the  sense  is  much 
improved.  The  relation  which  this  term  bears  to 
maarab,  which  p;  operly  means  barter,  appears  to 
be  pretty  much  the  same  as  exists  between  expoits 
and  imports.  The  requirements  of  the  Tynans 
themselves,  such  as  slaves  (13),  wheat  (17),  steel 
(19),  were  a  matter  of  maarab;  but  where  the 
business  consisted  in  the  exchange  of  Tyrian  wares 
for  foreign  productions,  it  is  specified  in  this  form, 
"  Tarshish  paid  for  thy  wares  with  silver,  iron, 
tin,  and  lead."  The  use  of  the  terms  would  pro- 
bably have  been  more  intelligible  if  the  prophet 
had  mentioned  what  the  Tyrians  gave  in  exchange : 
as  it  is,  he  only  notices  the  one  side  of  the  bargain, 
viz.,  what  the  Tyrians  received,  whether  they  were 
buyers  or  sellers.  [W.  L.  B.] 

FALLOW-DEER  ("l-IIOn*;  PuifiaAos ;  bu- 
balus),  mentioned  among  the  beasts  that  may  be 
eaten,  in  Deut.  xiv.  5,  and  among  the  provisions  for 
Solomon's  table  in  1  K.  iv.  23.  An  animal  of  the 
deer  tribe  (probably  Cervus  dama),  of  a  reddish 
colour  (from  "IDII,  to  be  red),  shedding  its  horns 
every  year.  The  Cervus  dama  is  found  wild  in 
Barbary,  and  is  still  very  generally  spread  over 
Western  and  Southern  Asia  (Boch.  Hieroz.  p.  910 
sq.,  ii.  260  sq.).  The  female  is  called  in  the 
Talmud  XmiD\  and  is  identified  by  Lewysohn 
with  the  German  Damhirsch.  [W.  ©.] 

FAMINE.  When  the  sweet  influences  of  the 
Pleiades  are  bound,  and  the  bands  of  Scorpio  cannot 
be  loosed,3  then  it  is  that  famines  generally  prevail 
in  the  lands  of  the  Bible.  In  Egypt  a  deficiency 
in  the  rise  of  the  Nile,  with  drying  winds,  pro- 
duces the  same  results.  The  famines  recorded  in 
the  Bible  are  traceable  to  both  these  phenomena ; 
and  we  generally  find  that  Egypt  was  resorted  to 
when  scarcity  afflicted  Palestine.  This  is  notably 
the  case  in  the  first  three  famines,  those  of  Abra- 
ham, of  Isaac,  and  of  Jacob,  although  in  the  last 
case  Egypt  was  involved  in  the  calamity,  and  only 
saved  from  its  horrors  by  the  providential  policy  of 
Joseph.  In  this  instance,  too,  the  famine  was  wide- 
spread, and  Palestine  further  suffered  from  the 
restriction  which  must  have  been  placed  on  the 
supplies  usually  derived,  in  such  circumstances,  from 
Egypt. 

In  the  whole  of  Syria  and  Arabia,  the  fruits  of 
the  earth  must  ever  be  dependent  on  rain ;  the 
watersheds  having  few  large  springs,  and  the  small 
rivers  not  being  sufficient  for  the  irrigation  of  even 

a  That  is  to  say,  when  the  hest  and  most  fertilizing 
of  the  rains,  which  fall  when  the  Pleiades  set  at  dawn 
(not  exactly  heliacally)  at  the  end  of  autumn,  fail ; 
rain  scarcely  ever  falling  at  the  opposite  season,  when 
Scorpio  sets  at  dawn.  ?*D3  is  clearly  Scorpio,  or 
Cor  Scorpionis,  as  Aben  Ezra  >ays. 


FAMINE 

the  level  lands.  It'  therefore  the  heavy  rains  of 
November  and  December  fail,  the  sustenance  of  the 
people  is  cut  off  in  the  parching  drought  of  harvest- 
time,  when  the  country  is  almost  devoid  of  moisture. 
Further,  the  pastoral  tribes  rely  on  the  scanty  herb- 
age of  the  desert-plains  and  valleys  for  their  flocks 
and  herds  ;  for  the  desert  is  interspersed  in  spring- 
time with  spontaneous  vegetation,  which  is  the  pro- 
duct of  the  preceding  rain-fall,  and  fails  almost  totally 
without  it.  it  is  therefore  not  difficult  to  conceive 
the  frequent  occurrence  and  severity  of  famines  in 
ancient  times,  when  the  scattered  population,  rather 
of  a  pastoral  than  an  agricultural  country,  was 
dependent  on  natural  phenomena  which,  however 
regular  in  their  season,  occasionally  failed,  and  with 
them  the  sustenance  of  man  and  beast. 

Egypt,  again,  owes  all  its  fertility — a  fertility 
that  gained  for  it  the  striking  comparison  to  the 
"garden  of  the  Lord" — to  its  mighty  river,  whose, 
annual  rise  inundates  nearly  the  whole  land  and 
renders  its  cultivation  an  easy  certainty.  But  this 
very  bounty  of  nature  has  not  unfrequently  exposed 
the  country  to  the  opposite  extreme  of  drought. 
With  scarcely  any  rain,  and  that  only  on  the  Medi- 
terranean coast,  and  with  wells  only  supplied  by 
filtration  from  the  river  through  a  nitrous  soil, 
a  failure  in  the  rise  of  the  Nile  almost  certainly 
entails  a  degree  of  scarcity,  although  if  followed 
by  cool  weather,  and  if  only  the  occurrence  of  a 
single  year,  the  labour  of  the  people  may  in  a 
great  measure  avert  the  calamity.  The  causes  of 
dearth  and  famine  in  Egypt  are  occasioned  by  de- 
fective inundation,  preceded  and  accompanied  and 
followed  by  prevalent  easterly  and  southerly  winds. 
Both  these  winds  dry  up  the  earth,  and  the  latter, 
keeping  back  the  rain-clouds  from  the  north,  are 
perhaps  the  chief  cause  of  the  defective  inundation, 
as  they  are  also  by  their  accelerating  the  current  of 
the  river — the  northerly  winds  producing  the  con- 
trary effects.  Famines  in  Egypt  and  Palestine  seem 
to  be  aiteeted  by  drought  extending  from  northern 
Syria,  through  the  meridian  of  Egypt,  as  tar  as  the 
highlands  of  Abyssinia. 

The  first  famine  recorded  in  the  Bible  is  that  of 
Abraham  after  lie  had  pitched  his  tent  on  the  east 
of  Bethel:  "  And  there  was  a  famine  in  the  land: 
and  Abram  went  down  into  Egypt  to  sojourn 
there,  for  the  famine  was  grievous  in  the  laud" 
(Gen.  xii.  10).  We  may  conclude  that  this  famine 
was  extensive,  although  this  is  not  quite  proved  by 
the  fact  of  Abraham's  going  to  Egypt ;  for  on  the 
occasion  of  the  second  famine,  in  the  days  of  Isaac, 
this  patriarch  found  refuge  with  Abimelech  king  of 
the  Philistines  in  Gerar,  and  was  warned  by  God 
oo1  to  go  down  into  Egypt,  whither  therefore  we 
may  suppose  he  was  journeying  Gen.  xxvi,  I  s§r.). 
We  hear  no  more  of  times  of  scarcity  until  the 
great   famine'   of  Egypt   which  "  was   over  all   the 

face  of  tl arth;"  ''and  all  countries  came  into 

Egypt  to  Joseph  to  buy  [corn J,  because  that  the 
famine  was  [so]  sore  in  all  lands"  (Gen.  \li.  .r>i>, 
57).  "  And  the  sons  of  Israel  came  to  buy  [com] 
among  those  that  came  ;  for  the  famine  was  in  the 
land  of  Canaan"  (xlii.  5).  Thus,  in  the  third 
it  ion,  Jacob  is  afflicted  by  the  famine,  and 
sends  from  Hebron  to  Egypt  when  he  hears  that 

there    is    corn    there;    and    it    is  added    in   a   later 
passage,  on  the  occasion  of  his  sending  the  second 
time  tor  corn  to  Egypt,  "  and  the  famine  w: 
in  the  land,"  i,  e.  I  h  bi  on. 

The  famine  of  Joseph  is  discussed  in  art.  EGYPT, 
so  far  as  Joseph's  history  and  policy  is  con 


FAMINE 


till 


It  is  only  necessary  here  to  consider  its  physical 
characteristics.  We  have  mentioned  the  chief  causes 
of  famines  in  Egypt:  this  instance  differs  in  the 
providential  recurrence  of  seven  years  of  plenty, 
whereby  Joseph  was  enabled  to  provide  against  the 
coming  dearth,  and  to  supply  not  only  the  popu- 
lation of  Egypt  with  corn,  but  those  of  the  sur- 
rounding countries:  "  And  the  seven  years  of  plen- 
tcousness,  that  were  in  the  land  of  Egypt,  were 
ended.  And  the  seven  years  of  dearth  began  to 
come,  according  as  Joseph  had  said :  and  the  dearth 
was  in  all  lands  ;  but  in  all  the  land  of  Egypt  there 
was  bread.  And  when  all  the  land  of  Egypt  was 
famished,  the  people  cried  to  Pharaoh  for  bread  ; 
and  Pharaoh  said  unto  all  the  Egyptians,  Go  unto 
Joseph,  and  what  he  saith  to  you,  do.  And  the 
famine  was  over  all  the  face  of  the  earth:  and 
Joseph  opened  all  the  storehouses,  and  sold  unto 
the  Egyptians ;  and  the  famine  waxed  sore  in  the 
land  of  Egypt.  And  all  countries  came  into  Egypt 
to  Joseph  for  to  buy  [corn],  because  that  the 
famine  was  [so]  sore  in  all  lands"  (Gen.  -\li.  53-57). 

The  modern  history  of  Egypt  throws  some  curious 
light  on  these  ancient  records  of  famines ;  and  in- 
stances of  their  recurrence  may  be  cited  to  assist  us 
in  understanding  their  course  and  extent.  They  have 
not  been  of  very  rare  occurrence  since  the  Moham- 
madan  conquest,  according  to  the  testimony  of  Arab 
historians :  one  of  great  severity,  following  a  de- 
ficient rise  of  the  Nile,  in  the  year  of  the  Flight 
597  (a.d.  1200),  is  recorded  by  'Abd-El-Lateef, 
who  was  an  eye-witness,  and  is  regarded  justly  as 
a  trustworthy  authority.  He  gives  a  most  interest- 
ing account  of  its  horrors,  states  that  the  people 
throughout  the  country  were  driven  to  the  last 
extremities,  eating  offal,  and  even  their  own  dead, 
and  mentions,  as  an  instance  of  the  diie  straits  to 
which  they  were  driven,  that  persons  who  were 
burnt  alive  for  eating  human  flesh  were  themselves, 
thus  ready  roasted,  eaten  by  others.  Multitudes 
fled  the  country,  only  to  perish  in  the  desert-road 
to  Palestine. 

But  the  most  remarkable  famine  was  that  of  the 
reign  of  the  Fatimee  Khaleefeh,  El-Mustansir  billaii, 
which  is  the  only  instance  on  record  of  one  of  seven 
years' duration  in  Egypt  since  the  time  of  Joseph 
(A.H.  4.".7-4ii4,  a.d.  1064-1071).  This  famine 
exceeded  in  severity  all  others  of  modern  times,  and 
was  aggravated  by  the  anarchy  which  then  ravaged 
the'  country.  Vehement  drought  and  pestilence  lj  - 
Es-Suyootee,  in  his  Ilosn  el  Mohddarah,  ~S\>. 
tinned  for  seven  consecutive  years,  so  that  they 
[the  people]  ate  corpses,  and  animals  that  died  of 
themselves;  the  cattle  perished;  a  dog  was  sold 
tin-  5  deeuars,  and  a  cat  for  '■'>  deendrs  .  .  .  and  an 
ardebb  (about  ">  bushels)  of  wheat  for  l'"'  deen&rs, 
and  then  it  failed  altogether.  He  adds,  that  all  the 
horses  of  the  Khaleefeh,  save  three,  perished,  and 
gives  numerous  instances  of  the  >treits  to  which 
the  wretched  inhabitants  were  driven,  and  of  the 
organised  hands  of  kidnappers  who  infested  Cairo 
and  caught  passengers  in  the  streets  by  ropes  fur- 
nished with  hooks  and  let  down   from  1 1 

This  account  is  confirmed  by  El  Makreezee  in  Ins 
Khii.it  ,h  from  whom  we  further  leam  that  the 
family,  and  even  the  women  of  the  Khaleefeh  fled, 
by  the  way  of  Syria,  on    toot,   to   escape   the   peril 

b  Since  writing  the  above,  we  find  that  Quatremtoe 

lias  g^ven  a  translation  of  El-Makreezee's  account  of 

ine.  in  the  life  of  El-Mustansir,  contained  in  his 

ifemoires  Geographiques  ei  Historiquet  stir  VS'gy/itc. 

2  i :  2 


612 


FARTHING 


that  threatened  all  ranks  of  the  population.  The 
whole  narrative  is  worthy  of  attention,  since  it  con- 
tains a  parallel  to  the  duration  of  the  famine  of  i 
Joseph,  and  at  the  same  time  enables  us  to  form 
an  idea  of  the  character  of  famines  in  the  East. 
The  famine  of  Samaria  resembled  it  in  many  par- 
ticulars; and  that  very  briefly  recorded  in  2  K. 
viii.  1,  2,  affords  another  instance  of  one  of  seven, 
years  :  "  Then  spake  Elisha  unto  the  woman  whose 
son  he  had  restored  to  life,  saying,  Arise,  and  go 
thou  and  thy  household,  and  sojourn  wheresoever 
thou  canst  sojourn:  for  the  Lord  hath  called  for  a 
famine;  and  it  shall  also  come  upon  the  land  seven 
years.  And  the  woman  arose,  and  did  after  the 
saying  of  the  man  of  God  :  and  she  went  with  her 
household  and  sojourned  in  the  land  of  the  Philis- 
tines seven  years."  Bunsen  (Egypt's  Place,  &c, 
ii.  334)  quotes  the  record  of  a  famine  in  the  reign 
of  Sesertesen  I.,  which  he  supposes  to  be  that  of 
Joseph;  but  it  must  be  observed  that  the  instance 
in  point  is  expressly  stated  not  to  have  extended 
over  the  whole  land,  and  is  at  least  equally  likely, 
apart  from  chronological  reasons,  to  have  been  that 
of  Abraham. 

in  Arabia,  famines  are  of  frequent  occurrence. 
The  Arabs,  in  such  cases,  when  they  could  not  afford 
to  slaughter  their  camels,  used  to  bleed  them,  and 
drink  the  blood,  or  mix  it  with  the  shorn  fur,  making 
a  kind  of  black-pudding.  They  ate  also  various  plants 
and  grains,  which  at  other  times  were  not  used  as 
articles  of  food.  And  the  tribe  of  Haneefeh  were 
taunted  with  having  in  a  famine  eaten  their  god, 
which  consisted  of  a  dish  of  dates  mashed  up  with 
clarified  butter  and  a  preparation  of  dried  curds  of 

milk  (Sikdli,  MS.,  art.  *aj).  [E.  S.  P.] 

FARTHING-.  Two  names  of  coins  in  the 
N.  T.  are  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  by  this  word. 

1.  KoSpdvT-qs,  quadrans  (Matt.  v.  26;  Mark 
xii.  42),  a  coin  current  in  Palestine  in  the  time  of 
Our  Lord.  It  was  equivalent  to  two  lepta  (A.e7rra 
Svo,  '6  idTiv  KoSpdurr)?,  Mark,  /.  c).  The  name 
qua  bans  was  originally  given  to  the  quarter  of  the 
Unman  as,  or  piece  of  three  unciae,  therefore  also 
called  teruncius.  The  A67ttoV  was  originally  a 
very  small  Greek  copper  coin,  seven  of  which  with 
the  Athenians  went  to  the  x^kovs.  The  copper 
currency  of  Palestine  in  the  reign  of  Tiberius  was 
partly  of  Roman  coins,  partly  of  Graeco-Roman 
(technically,  Greek  Imperial).  In  the  former  class 
there  was  no  common  piece  smaller  than  the 
as,  equivalent  to  the  a<r<rdpioi>  of  the  N.  T.  (infra), 
but  in  the  latter,  there  ware  two  common  smaller 
pieces,  the  one  apparently  the  quarter  of  the  affffd- 
piov,  and  the  other  its  eighth,  though  the  irregu- 
larity with  which  they  were  struck  makes  it  difficult 
to  pronounce  with  certainty:  the  former  piece  was 
doubtless  called  the  KoSpdvT-qs,  and  the  latter  the 
\eirr6v. 

2.  dtradpiov  (Matt.  x.  20;  Luke  xii.. 6),  pro- 
perly a  small  as,  assarium,  but  in  the  time  of  Our 
Loj  d  used  as  the  Gr.  equivalent  of  the  Lat.  as.  The 
Vulg.  in  Matt.  x.  29  renders  it  by  as,  and  in  Luke  xii. 
6,  puts  dipondius  for  two  assaria,  the  dipondius  or 
dupondius  being  equal  to  two  asses.  The  affadpiov 
is  therefore  either  the  Roman  as,  or  the  more  com- 
mon equivalent  in  Palestine  in  the  Graeco-Roman 
series,  or  perhaps  both  ;  the  last  supposition  we  are 
inclined  to  think  the  most  likely.  The  rendering 
of  the  Vulg.  in  Luke  xii.  6  makes  it  probable  that 
a  single  coin  is  intended  by  two  assaria,  and  this 
opinion  is  strengthened  by' the  occurrence,  on  coins 


FASTS 

of  Chios,  struck  during  the  imperial  period,  but 
without  the  heads  of  emperors,  and  therefore  of  the 
Greek  autonomous  class,  of  the  words  ACCAPION, 
ACCAPIA  ATO,  ACCAPIA  TPIA.       [R.  S.  P.] 

FASTS.  The  word  D-1V,  vrjerreia,  jejunium, 
is  not  found  in  the  Pentateuch,  but  it  often  occurs 
in  the  historical  books  and  the  Prophets  (2  Sam. 
xii.  16  ;  1  K  xxi.  9-12  ;  Ezr.  viii.  21 ;  Ps.  lxix.  10  ; 
Is.  lviii.  5;  Joel  i.  14,  ii.  15;  Zech.  viii.  19,  &c). 
In  the  Law,  the  only  term  used  to  denote  the 
religious  observance  of  fasting  is  the  more  signi- 
ficant one,  tJ'SJ  H3J?  ;  rcmeivovv  ttjv  ipvxv" ; 
affligere  animam;  "  afflicting  the  soul"  (Lev.  xvi. 
29-31,  xxiii.  27  ;  Num.  xxx.  13).  The  word 
JVjyfi,  i.  e.  affliction,  which  occurs  Ezr.  ix.  5  where 
it  is  rendered  in  A.  V.  "  heaviness,"  is  commonly 
used  to  denote  fasting  in  the  Talmud,  and  is  the  title 
of  one  of  its  treatises. 

I.  One  fast  only  was  appointed  by  the  law,  that 
on  the  day  of  Atonement.  [Atonement,  Day 
of.]  There  is  no  mention  of  any  other  periodical 
fast  in  the  0.  T.,  except  in  Zech.  vii.  1-7,  viii.  19. 
From  these  passages  it  appears  that  the  Jews, 
during  their  captivity,  observed  four  annual  fasts  in 
the  fourth,  fifth,  seventh,  and  tenth  months.  When 
the  building  of  the  second  temple  had  commence. 1. 
those  who  remained  in  Babylon  sent  a  message  to 
the  priests  at  Jerusalem  to  inquire  whether  the 
observance  of  the  fast  in  the  fifth  month  should  not 
be  discontinued.  The  prophet  takes  the  occasion 
to  rebuke  the  Jews  for  the  spirit  in  which  they 
had  observed  the  fast  of  the  seventh  month  as  well 
as  that  of  the  fifth  (vii.  5-6) ;  and  afterwards  (viii. 
19), giving  the  subject  an  evangelical  turn, he  declares 
that  the  whole  of  the  four  fasts  shall  be  turned  to 
"joy  and  gladness,  and  cheerful  feasts."  Zechariah 
simply  distinguishes  the  fasts  by  the  months  in  which 
they  were  observed ;  but  the  Mishna  (  Taanith,  iv. 
6)  and  S.  Jerome  (in  Zachariam  viii.)  give  state- 
ments of  certain  historical  events  which  they  were 
intended  to  commemorate  : — ■ 

The  fast  of  the  fourth  month. — The  breaking  of 
the  tables  of  the  law  by  Moses  (Ex.  xxxii.),  and 
the  storming  of  Jerusalem  by  Nebuchadnezzar 
(Jer.  lii.). 

The  fast  of  the  fifth  month. — The  return  of  the 
spies,  &c.  (Num.  xiii.,  xiv.),  the  temple  burnt  by  Ne- 
buchadnezzar, and  again  by  Titus";  and  the  plough- 
ing up  of  the  site  of  the  temple,  with  the  capture  of 
Bether,  in  which  a  vast  number  of  Jews  from  Je- 
rusalem had  taken  refuge  in  the  time  of  Hadrian. 

The  fast  of  the  seventh  month. — The  complete 
sack  of  Jerusalem  by  Nebuchadnezzar  and  the  death 
ofGedaliah(2  K.  xxv.). 

The  fast  of  the  tenth  month.— The  receiving  by 
Ezekiel  and  the  other  captives  in  Babylon  of  the 
news  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem. 

Some  other  events  mentioned  in  the  Mishna  are 
omitted  as  unimportant.  Of  those  here  stated 
several  could  have  had  nothing  to  do  with  the  fasts 
in  the  time  of  the  prophet.  It  would  seem  most 
probable,  from  the  mode  in  which  he  has  grouped 
them  together,  that  the  original  purpose  of  all  four 
was  to  commemorate  the  circumstances  connected 
with  the  commencement  of  the  captivity,  and  that 
the  other  events  were  subsequently  associated  with 
them  on  the  ground  of  some  real  or  fancied  coin- 
cidence of  the  time  of  occurrence.  As  regards  the 
fast  of  the  fifth  month,  at  least,  it  can  hardly  be 
doubted  that  the  captive  Jews  applied  it  exclusively 
to  the  destruction  of  the  temple,  and  that  S.  Jerome 


FASTS 

was  right  in  regarding  as  the  reason  of  their  request 
to  be  released  from  its  observance,  the  fact  that 
it  had  no  longer  any  purpose  after  the  new  temple 
was  begun.  As  this  fast  (as  well  as  the  three 
others)  is  still  retained  in  the  Jewish  Calendar,  we 
must  infer  either  that  the  priests  did  not  agree  with 
the  Babylonian  Jews,  or  that  the  fast  having  been 
discontinued  for  a  time,  was  renewed  after  the  de- 
struction of  the  temple  by  Titus. 

The  number  of  annual  fasts  in  the  present  Jewish 
Calendar  has  been  multiplied  to  twenty-eight,  a  list 
of  which  is  given  by  Reland  (Antiq.  p.  274). 

II.  Public  fists  were  occasionally  proclaimed  to 
express  national  humiliation  on  account  of  sin  or 
misfortune,  and  to  supplicate  divine  favour  in  re- 
gard to  some  great  undertaking  or  threatened 
danger.  In  the  case  of  public  danger,  the  procla- 
mation appears  to  have  been  accompanied  with  the 
blowing  of  trumpets  (Joel  ii.  1-15;  cf.  7'<  mith,  i. 
6).  The  following  instances  are  recorded  of  strictly 
national  fasts: — Samuel  gathered  "all  Israel"  to 
Mizpeh  and  proclaimed  a  'fast,  performing  at  the 
same  time  what  seems  to  have  been  a  rite  sym- 
bolical of  purification,  when  the  people  confessed 
their  sin  in  having  worshipped  Baalim  and  Ashta- 
roth  (1  Sam.  vii.  6);  Jehoshaphat  appointed  one 
"  throughout  all  Judah"  when  he  was  preparing 
for  war  against  Moab  and  Amnion  (2  Chr.  xx.  3) ; 
in  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim,  one  was  proclaimed  for 
"  all  the  people  in  Jerusalem  and  all  who  came 
thither  out  of  the  cities  of  Judah,"  when  the  pro- 
phecy of  Jeremiah  was  publicly  read  by  Baruch 
(Jer.  xxxvi.  6-10  ;  cf.  Baruch  i.  5) ;  three  days 
after  the  feast  of  Tabernacles,  when  the  second 
temple  was  completed,  "  the  children  of  Israel  as- 
sembled with  tasting  and  with  sackclothes  and  earth 
upon  them  "  to  hear  the  law  read,  and  to  confess 
their  sins  (Neh.  ix.  1).  There  are  references  to 
general  fasts  in  the  Prophets  (Joel  i.  14,  ii.  15  ; 
Is.  lviii.),  and  two  are  noticed  in  the  books  of 
the  Maccabees  (1  Mace.  iii.  46-47;  2  Maec.  xiii. 
10-12). 

There  are  a  considerable  number  of  instances  of 
cities  and  bodies  of  men  observing  lasts  on  occasions 
in  which  they  were  especially  concerned.  In  the 
days  of  Phinehas,  the  grandson  of  Aaron,  when  the 
men  of  Judah  hail  been  defeated  by  those  of  Ben- 
jamin, they  fasted  in  making  preparation  for  an- 
other battle  (Judg.  xx.  26).  David  and  his  men 
fasted  for  a  day  on  account  of  the  death  of  Saul 
1 2  Sam.  i.  12),  and  the  men  of  Jabesh  Gilead 
fasted  seven  days  on  Saul's  burial  i  1  Sain.  xxxi.  1:!). 
Jezebel,  in  the  name  of  Ahab,  appointed  a  fast  for 
the  inhabitants  of  Jezreel,  to  render  more  striking, 
as  it  would  seem,  the  punishment  about  to  lie  in- 
flicted ou  Naboth  (1  K.  .\.\i.  9-12"):  Ezra  pro- 
claimed a  fast  for  his  companions  at  the  river  of 
Ahava,  when  he  was  seeking  for  God's  help  and 
guidance  in  the  work  he  was  about  to  undertake 
(Ezr.  viii.  21-23).  Esther,  when  she  was  going  to 
intercede  with  Ahasuerus,  commanded  the  Jews  of 
Shushan  neither  to  eat  nor  drink  for  three  days 
(Esth.  iv.  16). 

Public  lasts  expressly  on  account  of  unseasonable 
weather  and  of  famine,  may  perhaps  be  traced  in 
the  first  and  second  chapters  of  Joel.  In  later 
times,  they  assumed  great  importance  and  form  the 
main  subject  of  the  treatise  Taanith  in  the  Mishna. 

111.  Private  occasional  fasts  are  recognised  in 
one  passage  of  the  law  i  Num.  \.w.  13).  The  in- 
stances given  (if  individuals  fasting  under  the  influ- 
ence of  grief,  vexation,  or  anxiety,  are  numerous 


FAT 


613 


(1  Sam.  i.  7,  xx.  34;  2  Sam.  iii.  35,  xii.  16;  IK. 
xxi.  27  ;  Ezr.  x.  6  ;  Neh.  i.  4;  Dan.  x.  3;.  The 
fasts  of  forty  days  of  Moses  (Ex.  xxiv.  18,  xxxiv. 
28;  Deut.  ix.  18)  and  of  Elijah  (1  K.  xix.  8)  are, 
of  course,  to  be  regarded  as  special  acts  of  spiritual 
discipline,  faint  though  wonderful  shadows  of  that 
fast  in  the  wilderness  of  Judaea,  in  which  all  true 
fasting  finds  its  meaning. 

IV.  In  the  N.  T.  the  only  references  to  the 
Jewish  fasts  are  the  mention  of  "  the  Fast,"  in  Acts 
xxvii.  9  (generally  understood  to  denote  the  Day  of 
Atonement),  aud  the  allusions  to  the  weekly  fasts 
(Matt.  ix.  14;  Mark  ii.  18;  Luke  v.  33,  xviii.  12; 
Acts  x.  30).  These  fasts  originated  some  time 
after  the  captivity.  They  were  observed  on  the 
second  and  fifth  days  of  the  week,  which  being 
appointed  as  the  days  for  public  fasts  {Taanith, 
ii.  9),  seem  to  have  been  selected  for  these  private 
voluntary  fasts.  The  Gemara  states  that  thev 
were  chosen  because  Moses  went  up  Mount  Sinai 
on  the  fifth  day,  and  came  down  on  the  second. 
All  that  can  be  known  on  the  subject  appears  to  be 
given  by  Grotius,  Lightfoot,  and  Schoettgen  on 
Luc.  xviii.  12;  and  Lightfoot  on  Matt.  ix.  14. 

A  time  of  fasting  for  believers  in  Christ  is  fore- 
told Matt.  ix.  15,  and  a  caution  on  the  subject  is 
given  Matt.  vi.  16-18.  Easting  and  prayer  are 
spoken  of  as  the  great  sources  of  spiritual  strength, 
Matt.  xvii.  21;  Mark  ix.  29;  1  Cor.  vii.  5;  and 
they  are  especially  connected  with  ordination,  Acts 
xiii.  3,  xiv.  23. 

V.  The  Jewish  fasts  were  observed  with  va- 
rious degrees  of  strictness.  Sometimes  there  was 
entire  abstinence  from  food  (Esth.  iv.  16,  &c). 
On  other  occasions,  there  appeals  to  have  been 
only  a  restriction  to  a  very  plain  diet  (Dan.  x.  3). 
Rules  are  given  in  the  Talmud  (both  in  Joma  and 
Taanith)  as  to  the  mode  in  which  fasting  is  to  be 
observed  on  particular  occasions.  The  fast  of  the 
day  according  to  Josephus  was  considered  to  termi- 
nate at  sun-set,  and  St.  Jerome  speaks  of  the  fasting 
Jew  as  anxiously  waiting  for  the  rising  of  the  stars, 
lasts  were  not  observed  on  the  Sabbaths,  the  new 
moons,  the  great  festivals,  or  the  leasts  of  Purim 
and  Dedication  (Jud.  viii.  6  ;  Taanith,  ii.  10). 

Those  who  fasted,  frequently  dressed  in  sack- 
cloth or  rent  their  clothes,  put  ashes  on  their  head 
and  went  barefoot  (1  K.  xxi.  27  ;  cf.  Joseph.  Ant. 
viii.  13,  §8;  Neh.  ix.  1  ;  Ps.  xxxv.  13).  The  rab- 
binical directions  for  the  ceremonies  to  be  obse,  red 
in  public  fasts,  and  the  prayers  to  be  used  in  them, 
may  he'  seen  in   Taanith,  ii.  1-4. 

VI.  The  sacrifice  of  the  personal  will,  which 
gives  to  fasting  all  its  value,  is  expressed  in  the  old 
term  used  in  the  law,  afflicting  the  soul.  The 
faithful  son  of  Israel  realised  the  blessing  of  "chas- 
tening his  soul  with  fasting"  (Ps.  lxix.  10).  But 
the  frequent  admonitions  and  stem  denunciations  of 
the  prophets  may  show  us  how  prone  the  Jew-  we  ,■ 
in  their  formal  fasts,  to  lose  the  idea  of  a  spiritual 
discipline,  and  to  regard  them  as  being  in  themselves 
a  means  of  winning  favour  from  God,  or,  in  a  still 
worse  spirit,  to  make  a  parade  of  them  in  order  to 
appear  religious  before  men  ,  Is.  lviii.  :; ;  Zech.  vii. 
5,  6  :  Mai.  iii.  14  ;  comp.  Matt.  vi.  Hi;.     [S.  C.] 

FAT.  The  lb-brews  distinguished  between  the 
suet  or  pure  fat  of  an  animal  (2?n),  and  the  fat 
which  was  intermixed  with  the  lean  (D*3l3tJ>D 
Neh.  viii.  10).     <  •  oposed 

upon  them  in  reference  to  tie'  former:  son* 
ol  the  suet,  viz., about  the  stoinaeh.  the  entrails,  the 


614 


FAT 


kidneys,  and  the  tail  of  a  sheep,  uduth  grows  to  an 
excessive  size  in  many  eastern  countries,  and  produces 
a  large  quantity  of  rich  fat  [Sheep],  were  forbidden 
to  be  eaten  in  the  case  of  animals  offered  to  Jehovah 
in  sacrifice  (Lev.  iii.  3,  9,  17,  vii.  3,  23).  The 
ground  of  the  prohibition  was  that  the  fat  was  the 
richest  part  of  the  animal,  and  therefore  belonged 
to  Him  (iii.  16).  It  has  been  supposed  that 
other  reasons  were  superadded,  as  that  the  use  of 
fat  was  unwholesome  in  the  hot  climate  of  Pales- 
tine. There  appears,  however,  to  be  no  ground  for 
such  an  assumption.  The  presentation  of  the  fat 
as  the  richest  part  of  the  animal  was  agreeable  to 
the  dictates  of  natural  feeling,  and  was  the  ordinary 
practice  even  of  heathen  nations,  as  instanced  in 
the  Homeric  descriptions  of  sacrifices  (II.  i.  460,  ii. 
423  ;  Od.  iii.  457),  and  in  the  customs  of  the 
Egyptians  (Her.  ii.  47),  and  Persians  (Strab.  xv.  p. 
732).  Indeed,  the  term  cheleb  is  itself  significant 
of  the  feeling  on  which  the  regulation  was  based ; 
for  it  describes  the  best  of  auy  production  (Gen. 
xlv.  18;  Num.  xviii.  12;  Ps.  lxxxi.  16,  c.xlvii. 
14 ;  compare  2  Sam.  i.  22  ;  Judg.  iii.  29 ;  Is.  x. 
16).  With  regard  to  other  parts  of  the  fat  of 
sacrifices  or  the  fat  of  other  animals,  it  might  be 
consumed,  with  the  exception  of  those  dying 
either  by  a  violent  or  a  natural  death  (Lev.  vii. 
'24!,  which  might  still  be  used  in  any  other  way. 
The  burning  of  the  fat  of  sacrifices  was  particularly 
specified  in  each  kind  of  offering,  whether  a  peace- 
offering  (Lev.  iii.  9),  consecration  offering  (viii. 
25  ),  sin-offering  (iv.  8),  trespass-offering  (vii.  3),  or 
redemption-offering  (Num.  xviii.  17).  The  Hebrews 
fully  appreciated  the  luxury  of  well-fatted  meat,  and 
had  their  stall-fed  oxen  and  calves  (1  K.  iv.  23  ; 
Jer.  xlvi.  21  ;  Luke  xv.  23):  nor  is  there  any  rea- 
son to  suppose  its  use  unwholesome.     [W.  L.  B.] 

FAT,  i.  e.  Vat.  The  word  employed  in  the 
A.  V.  to  translate'  the  Hebrew  term  ^p1",  Yekeb, 
in  Joel  ii.  24,  iii.  13  only.  The  word  commonly 
used  for  yekeb.  indiscriminately  with  gath,  fin,  is 
"winepress"  or  "  winefat,"  and  once  "  pressfat " 
(Hag.  ii.  16)  ;  but  the  two  appear  to  be  distinct — 
gath  the  upper  receptacle  or  "  press"  in  which  the 
grapes  were  trod,  and  yekeb  the  "  vat,"  on  a  lower 
level,  into  which  the  juice  or  must  was  collected. 
The  word  is  derived  by  Gesenius  (Thes.  619  6) 
from  a  root  signifying  to  hollow  or  dig  out:  and  in 
accordance  with  this  is  the  practice  in  Palestine, 
where  the  "winepress"  and  "vats"  appear  to 
have  been  excavated  out  of  the  native  rock  of  the 
hills  on  which  the  vineyards  lay.  One  such,  ap- 
parently ancient,  is  described  by  Robinson  as  at 
ILiblck  in  central  Palestine  (iii.  137),  and  another, 
probably  more  modern,  in  the  Lebanon  (603). 
The  word  rendered  "  winefat  "  in  Mark  xii.  1  is 
vwoX-i]vwv,  which  is  frequently  used  by  the  LXX. 
to  translate  yekeb  in  the  0.  T.  [G.] 

FATHER  (Ab,  3K,  Chald.  Abba,  N3N,  Mark 
xiv.  36,  Rom.  viii.  15  ;  Trarrjp ;  pater:  a  primitive 
word,  but  following  the  analogy  of  fQK,  to  show 
kindness,  Gesen.  Thes.  6-8). 

The  position  and  authority  of  the  father  as  the 
head  of  the  family  is  expressly  assumed  and  sanc- 
tioned in  Scripture,  as  a  likeness  of  that  of  the 
Almighty  over  His  creatures,  an  authority — as 
Philo  remarks — intermediate  between  human  and 
divine  (Philo,  -nepi  yoviwv  Tifj.rjs,  §1).  It  lies 
of  course  at  the  root  of  that  so-called  patriarchal 
government  (Gen.   iii.   16;   1   Cor.   xi.  3),   which 


FATHOM 

was  introductory  to  the  more  definite  systems 
which  followed,  and  which  in  part,  but  not  wholly, 
superseded  it.  When  therefore  the  name  of  "  fa- 
ther of  nations"  (Dn~13K)  was  given  to  Abram, 

he  was  thereby  held  up  not  only  as  the  ancestor, 
but  as  the  example  to  those  who  should  come 
"after  him  (Gen.  xviii.  18,  19;  Rom.  iv.  17). 
The  father's  blessing  was  regarded  as  conferring 
special  benefit,  but  his  malediction  special  injury, 
on  those  on  whom  it  fell  (Gen.  ix.  25,  27,  xxvii. 
27-40,  xlviii.  15,  20,  xlix.) ;  and  so  also  the  sin  of  ' 
a  parent  was  held  to  affect,  in  certain  cases,  the 
welfare  of  his  descendants  (2  K.  v.  27),  though  the 
law  was  forbidden  to  punish  the  son  for  his  father's 
transgression  (Deut.  xxiv.  16;  2  K.  xiv.  6;  Ez. 
xviii.  20).  The  command  to  honour  parents  is 
noticed  by  St.  Paul  as  the  only  one  of  the  Deca- 
logue which  bore  a  distinct  promise  (Ex.  xx.  12  ; 
Eph.  vi.  2),  and  disrespect  towards  them  was  con- 
demned by  the  Law  as  one  of  the  worst  of  crimes 
(Ex.  xxi.  15,  17  ;  1  Tim.  1,9;  comp.  Virg. 
Aen.  vi.  609  ;  Aristoph.  Ran.  274-773).  Instances 
of  legal  enactment  in  support  of  parental  authority 
are  found  in  Ex.xxii.  17  ;  Num.  xxx.  3,  5,  xii.  14  ; 
Deut.  xxi.  18,  21;  Lev.  xx.  9,  xxi.  9,  xxii.  12; 
and  the  spirit  of  the  law  in  this  direction  may  be 
seen  in  Prov.  xiii.  1,  xv.  5,  xvii.  25,  xix.  13,  xx. 
20,  xxviii.  24,  xxx.  17  ;  Is.  xlv.  10  ;  Mai.  i.  6. 
The  father,  however,  had  not  the  power  of  death 
over  his  child  (Deut.  xxi.  18-21  ;  Philo,  I.  c). 

From  the  patriarchal  spirit  also  the  principle  of 
respect  to  age  and  authority  in  general  appears  to 
be  derived.  Thus  Jacob  is  described  as  blessing 
Pharaoh  (Gen.  xlvii.  7,  10;  comp.  Lev.  xix.  32; 
Prov.  xvi.  31 ;  Philo,  I.  c.  §6). 

It  is  to  this  well  recognised  theory  of  parental 
authority  and  supremacy  that  the  very  various 
uses  of  the  term  "  father  "  in  Scripture  are  due. 
(1.)  As  the  source  or  inventor  of  an  art  or  practice 
(Gen.  iv.  20,  21  ;  John  viii.  44  ;  Job  xxxviii.  28, 
xvii.  14 ;  2  Cor.  1,  3).  (2.)  As  an  object  of  respect 
or  reverence  (Jer.  ii.  27  ;  2  K.  ii.  12,  v.  13,  vi. 
21).  (3.)  Thus  also  the  pupils  or  scholars  of  the 
prophetical  schools,  or  of  anv  teacher,  are  called 
sons  (2  K.  ii.  3,  iv.  1  ;  1  Sam.  x.  12,  27  ;  1  K. 
xx.  35;  Heb.  xii.  9  ;  1  Tim.  i.  2).  (4.)  The  term 
father  and  also  mother  is  applied  to  any  ancestor 
of  the  male  or  female  line  respectively  (Is.  Ii.  2 ; 
Jer.  xxxv.  6,  18  ;  Dan.  v.  2  ;  2  Sam.  ix.  7  ;  2  Chr. 
xv.  16).  (5.)  In  the  Talmud  the  term  father  is 
used  to  indicate  the  chief,  e.g.  the  principal  of  cer- 
tain works  are  termed  "fathers."  Objects  whose 
contact  causes  pollution  are  called  "  fathers  "  of 
defilement  (Mishn.  Shabb.  vii.  2,  vol.  ii.  p.  29; 
Pesach,  i.  6,  vol.  ii.  p.  137,  Surenh.).  (6.)  A  pro- 
tector or  guardian  (Job  xxix.  16  ;  Ps.  lxviii.  5  ; 
Deut.  xxxii.  6).  Many  personal  names  are  found 
with  the  prefix  2X,  as  Absalom,  Abishai,  Abiram, 
&c,  implying  some  quality  or  attribute  possessed, 
or  ascribed  (Gesen.  8,  10). 

"  Fathers"  is  used  in  the  sense  of  seniors  (Acts 
vii.  2,  xxii.  1),  and  of'parents  in  general,  or  ances- 
tors (Dan.  v.  2  ;  Jer.  xxvii.  7  ;  Matt.  ariii.  30,  32). 

Among  Mohammedans  parental  authority  has 
great  weight  during  the  time  of  pupilage.  The  son 
Ts  not  allowed  to  eat,  scarcely  to  sit  in  his  father's 
presence.  Disobedience  to  parents  is  reckoned  one 
of  the  most  heinous  of  crimes  (Burckhardt,  Notes 
on  Bed.  i.  355  ;  Lane,  Mod.  Eg.  i.  84  ;  Atkinson, 
Travels  in  Siberia,  &c.  559).  [H.  W.  P.] 

FATHOM.      Measures.] 


FEASTS 

FEASTS.     [Festivals.] 

FE'LIX  c*fjAi|,  Acts  xxiii.-xxiw;  inTac.  Hist. 
v.  9,  called  Antouius  Felix  ;  in  Suidas,  Claudius 
Felix  ;  in  Josephus  and  Acts,  simply  Felix  :  so  also 
in  Tac.  Ann.  xii.  54  ),  a  Roman  procurator  of  Judaea, 
appointed  by  the  Emperor  Claudius,  whose  freed- 
man  he  was,  on  the  banishment  of  Ventidius 
Cumanus  in  a.i>.  53.  Tacitus  (Ann.  xii.  54; 
states  that  Felix  and  Cumanus  were  joint  procu- 
rators, Cumanus  having  Galilee,  and  Felix,  Samaria. 
In  this  account  Tacitus  is  directly  at  issue  with 
Josephus  (Ant.  XX.  6,  2-7,  1),  and  is  generally 
supposed  to  be  in  error;  but  his  account  is  very 
circumstantial,  and  by  adopting  it  we  should  gain 
some  little  justification  for  the  expression  of  St. 
Paul,  Acts  xxiv.  10,  that  Felix  had  been  judge  of 
the  nation  "for  many  years."  Those  words,  how- 
ever, must  not  even  thus  be  closely  pressed  ;  for 
Cumanus  himself  only  went  to  Judaea  in  the 
eighth  year  of  Claudius  (Jos.  Ant.  xx.  5,  §2). 
Felix  was  the  brother  of  Claudius's  powerful  freed- 
man  Pallas  (B.  J.  ii.  12,  §8  ;  Ant.  xx.  7,  §1) ; 
and  it  was  to  the  circumstance  of  Pallas' s  influence 
surviving  his  master's  death  (Tacit.  Ann.  xiv.  65) 
that  Felix  was  retained  in  his  procuratorship  by 
Nero.  He  ruled  the  province  in  a  mean,  cruel,, 
and  profligate  manner ,  "  per  omnem  saevitiam  et 
libidinem  jus  regium  servili  ingenio  exercuit" 
(Tacit.  Hist.x.  9,  and  Ann.  xii.  54).  With  this 
compendious  description  the  fuller  details  or  Jose- 
phus agree,  though  his  narrative  is  tinged  with  his 
hostility  to  the  Jewish  patriots  and  zealots,  whom, 
under  the  name  of  robbers,  he  describes  Felix  as 
putting  down  and  crucifying  by  hundreds.  His 
period  of  ollice  was  full  of  troubles  and  seditions. 
\Ve  read  of  his  putting  down  false  Messiahs 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xx.  8,  §5  ;  B.  J.  ii.  13,  §4)  ;  the 
followers  of  an  Egyptian  magician  (Ant.xx.  8,  §6  ; 
B.  J.  ii.  13,  §5  ;  Acts  xxi.  38),  riots  between  the 
Jews  and  Syrians  in  Caesarea  (Ant.  xx.  8,  §7.; 
B.  J.  ii.  3,  §7)  and  between  the  priests  and  the 
principal  citizens  of  Jerusalem  (Ant.  xx.  8,  §8; 
Joseph.  Life,  3).  He  once  employed  the  sicarii 
for  his  own  purposes,  to  bring  about  the  murder  of 
the  high-priest  Jonathan  (Ant.  xx.  8,  §5).  His 
severe  measures  and  cruel  retributions  seemed  only 
to  accelerate  the  already  rapid  course  of  the  Jews 
to  rain:  " intempestivis  remediis  delicta  accende- 
bat  "  (Tacit.  Ann.  xii.  54  ;  6  Tr6\ffibs  ko.6' 
■il/j.4pav  aveppnri&TO,  Joseph.  /.'.  ,/.  ii.  13,  §6). 
St.  Paul  was  brought  before  Felix  in  Caesarea, 
having  been  seut  thither  out  of  the  way  of  the 
Jews  at  Jerusalem  by  the  "chief  captain"  Clau- 
dius Lysias.  Some  effect  was  produced  on  the 
guilty  conscience  of  the  procurator,  as  the  Apostle 
reasoned  of  righteousness,  and  temperance,  and 
judgment  to  come ;  but  St.  Paul  was  remanded  to 
prison  and  kept  there,  in  hopes  of  extorting  money 
from  him,  two  years  (Acts  xxiv.  26,  27).  At  the 
end  of  that  time  Porcius  Pectus  [Fi.srrs]  was 
appointed  to  supersede  Felix,  who,  on  his  return  to 
Rome,  was  accused  by  the  Jews  in  Caesarea,  and 
would  have  suffered  "the  penalty  due  to  his  atro- 
cities, had  not  his  brother  Pallas  prevailed  with  the 
Emperor  Nero  to  spare  him  (Ant.  xx.  8,  §9i.  This 
was  probably  in  the  year  60  4..D.  (Anger,  I 
porum  in  I ■■■'.  Apt  ' .  r  ' :  n  ,  &c.,  p.  [00 ;  Wie- 
seler,  Chronohgie  d  ,  pp.  66-82). 

The  wife  of  Felix  was  Drusilla,  daughter  of  Herod 
Vgrippa  I.  the  former  wife  of  Azizus  KingofEmesa. 
[Drdsilla.]  [H.  A.] 


FENCED  CITIES 


615 


FENCED  CITIES  (DnVID,  or  nhV2», 
Pan.  xi.  15,  from  "IV2,  cut  off,  separate,  equiva- 
lent to  nny  n'mzi,  TGes.  231 ;  *6\us  dXvpa\, 

Teixiijpets,  TeTeixitr^eVat  ;  urbes,  or  civitates,  mu- 
ratae,  munitae,  munitissimae ,  firmae).  The  broad 
distinction  between  a  city  and  a  village  in  Bib- 
lical language  has  been  .shown  to  consist  in  the 
possession  of  walls.  [City.]  The  City  had  walls, 
the  village  was  unwalled,  or  had  only  a  watchman's 

tower  (p'a'JQ  ;  irvpyos  ;  turris  custodian  ;  com- 
pare (iesen.  267),  to  which  the  villagers  re- 
sorted in  times  of  danger.  A  threefold  distinction 
is  thus  obtained — 1.  cities;  2.  unwalled  villages; 
3.  villages  with  castles  or  towers  (1  Chr.  xxvii. 
25).  The  district  east  of  the  Jordan,  forming  the 
kingdoms  of  Moab  and  P>ashnu,  is  said  to  have 
abounded  from  very  early  times  in  castles  and 
fortresses,  such  as  were  built  by  Uzziah  to  protect 
the  cattle,  and  to  repel  the  inroads  of  the  neigh- 
bouring tribes,  besides  unwalled  towns  (Ainm. 
Marc.  xiv.  9  ;  Deut.  iii.  5 ;  2  Chr.  xxvi.  10).  Of 
these  many  remains  are  thought  by  Mr.  Porter  to 
exist  at  the  present  day  (Damascus,  ii.  197).  The 
dangers  to  which  unwalled  villages  are  exposed 
from  the  marauding  tribes  of  the  desert,  and  also 
the  fortifications  by  which  the  inhabitants  some- 
times protect  themselves  are  illustrated  by  Sir  J. 
Malcolm  (Sketches  of  Persia,  c.  xiv.  148  ;  and 
Frazer,  Persia,  379,  380  ;  eomp.  Judg.  v.  7). 
Villages  in  the  Haurdn  are  sometimes  enclosed  by 
r.  wall,  or  rather  the  houses  being  joined  together 
form  a  defence  against  Arab  robbers,  and  the  entrance 
is  closed  by  a  gate  (Burckhardt,  Syria,  212). 

A  further  characteristic  of  a  city  as  a  fortified 
place  is  found  in  the  use  of  the  word  1132,  Build, 
and  also  fortify.  So  that  to  "  build  "  a  city  appears 
to  be  sometimes  the  same  thing  as  to  fortify  it 
(comp.  Gen.  viii.  20,  and  2  (  'hr.  xvi,  6  with 
2  Chr.  xi.  5-10,  and  1  K.  xv.  17). 

The  fortifications  of  the  cities  of  Palestine,  thus 
regularly  "  fenced,"  consisted  of  one  or  more  walls 
crowned  with  battlemented  parapets,  fllllS,  having 
towers  at  regular  intervals  (2  Chr.  xxxii.  5  ;  Jer. 
xxxi.  38),  on  which  in  later  times  engines  of  war 
were  placed,  and  watch  was  kept  by  day  and  night 
in  time  of  war  (2  Chr.  xxvi.  9,  15  ;  Judg.  ix.  4  5  ; 

2  K.  ix.  17).  Along  the  oldest  of  the  three  walls 
of  Jerusalem,  there  were  90  towers;  in  the  second,- 
14;  and  in  the  third,  GO  (Joseph.  B.  J.  v.  4,  §2). 
One  such  tower,  that  of  Hananeel,  is  repeatedly 
mentioned  (Jer.  xxxi.  38;  Zech.  xiv.  10),  as  also 
others  (Neh.  iii.  1,  11,  27).  The  gateways  of 
fortified  towns  were  also  fortified  and  closed  with 
strong  doors  (Neh.  ii.  8,  iii.  3,  6,  &c.  ;  Judg.  xvi.  2, 

3  :  1  Sam  xxiii.  7;  2  Sam.  xviii.  24,  3;!;  2  Chr. 
xiv.  7  ;  1  Mace.  xiii.  33,  xv.  39).  In  advance  of  the 
wall  there  appeal's  to  have  been  sometimes  an  out- 
work (7TI,  TrporeixKTfJ-a),  in  A.  V.  "ditch" 
(1  K.  x.xi.  '_':'>;  2  Sam.  xx.  15;  Cos.  Tins.  454), 
which  was  perhaps  either  a  palisade  or  wall  lining 
the  ditch,  or  a  wall  raised  midway  within  the  ditch 
itself.  B&th  of  these  methods  of  strengthening 
fortified  places,  by  hindering  the  near  approach  of 
machines,  wire  us  ial  in  earlier  Egyptian  fortifica- 
tion (Wilkinson,  Anr.  Eg.  i.  408  ,  but  would 
generally  lie  of  less  use  in  the  hill  forts  of  Palestine 
than  in  Egypt.     In  many  towns  there  was  a 

or  citadel  tor  a  last  n  source  to  the  defenders. 
Those  remaining   in   the   ffaurdn  and   Ledja  are 


616 


FENCED  CITIES 


square.  Such  existed  at  Shechem  and  Thebez  (Judg.  I 
ix.  40,  51,  viii.  17  ;  2  K.  ix.  17),  and  the  great 
torts  or  towers  of  Psephinus,  Hippicus,  and  espe- 
cially  Antonia,  served  a  similar  purpose,  as  well  as 
that  of  overawing  the  town  at  Jerusalem.  These 
foils  were  well  furnished  with  cisterns  (Acts  xxi. 
34;  2  Mace.  v.  5;  Joseph.  Ant.  xviii.  -4,  §3; 
/.'.  J.  i.  5,  §4,  v.  4,  §2,  vi.  2,  §1).  At  the  time 
of  the  entrance  of  Israel  into  Canaan  there  were 
many  fenced  cities  existing,  which  first  caused 
great  alarm  to  the  exploring  party  of  searchers 
(Num.  xiii.  28),  and  afterwards  gave  much  trouble 
to  the  people  in  subduing  them.  Many  of  these 
were  refortified,  or,  as  it  is  expressed,  rebuilt  by  the 
Hebrews  (Num.  xxxii.  17,  34-42;  Deut.  iii.  4,  5; 
Josh.  xi.  12,  13;  Judg.  i.  27-33),  and  many,  es- 
pecially those  on  the  sea-coast,  remained  for  a  long 
time  in  the  possession  of  their  inhabitants,  who 
were  enabled  to  preserve  them  by  means  of  their 
strength  in  chariots  (Josh.  xiii.  3,  6,  xvii.  16  ; 
Judg.  i.  19;  2  K.  xviii.  8  ;  2  Chr.  xxvi.  6).  The 
strength  of  Jerusalem  was  shown  by  the  fact  that 
that  city,  or  at  least  the  citadel,  or  "  stronghold  of 
Zion,"  remained  in  the  possession  of  the  Jebusites 
until  the  time  of  David  (2  Sam.  v.  6,  7  ;  1  Chr. 
xi.  5).  Among  the  kings  of  Israel  and  Judah 
several  are  mentioned  as  fortifiers  or  "  builders"  of 
cities.  Solomon  (1  K.  ix.  17-19;  2  Chr.  viii. 
4-6),  Jeroboam  I.  (1  K."  xii.  25),  Uehoboam  (2 
Chr.  xi.  5,  12),  Baasha  (1  K.  xv.  17),  Omri 
(  1  K.  xvi.  24),  Hezekiah  (2  Chr.  xxxii.  5),  Asa  (2 
Chr.  xiv.  6,  7),  Jehoshaphat  (2  Chr.  xvii.  12),  but 
especially  Uzziah  (2  K.  xiv.  22  ;  2  Chr.  xxvi.  2,  9, 
15),  and  in  the  reign  of  Ahab,  the  town  of  Jericho 
was  rebuilt  and  fortified  by  a  private  individual, 
Hiel  of  Bethel  (1  K.  xvi.  34).  Herod  the  Great 
was  conspicuous  in  fortifying  strong  positions,  as 
Masada,  Machaerus,  Herodium,  besides  his  great 
works  at  Jerusalem  (Joseph.  B.  J.  vii.  6,  §§1,  2, 
and  8,  §3  ;  B.  J.  i.  21,  §10  ;  Ant.  xiv.  13.  9). 


FENCED  CITIES 

But  the  fortified  places  of  Palestine  served  only 
in  a  few  instances  to  check  effectually  the  progress 
of  an  invading  force,  though  many  instances  of 
determined  and  protracted  resistance  are  on  record, 
as  of  Samaria  for  three  years  (2  K.  xviii.  10), 
Jerusalem  (2  K.  xxv.  3)  for  four  months,  and  in 
later  times  of  Jotapata,  Gamala,  Machaerus,  Masada, 
and  above  all  Jerusalem  itself,  the  strength  of 
•whose  defences  drew  forth  the  admiration  of  the 
conqueror  Titus  (Joseph.  B.J.  iii.  6,  iv.  1  and  9, 

i.  6,  §§2-4  and  8  ;  Hobinson,  i.  232). 


The    earlier    Egyptian    fortifications     consisted 

usually  of  a  quadrangular  and  sometimes  dun  hie 
wall  of  sun-dried  brick,  fifteen  feet  thick,  and  often 
fifty  feet  in  height,  with  square  towers  at  intervals, 


Assyrian  Fortificati 


FERRET 

of  the  same  height  as  the  walls,  both  crowned  with 
a  parapet,  and  a  round-headed  battlement  in  shape 
like  a  shield.  A  second  lower  wall  with  towers  at 
the  entrance  was  added,  distant  13  or  'Jo  feel 
from  the  main  wall,  and  sometimes  another  was 
made  of  7i>  or  100  feet  in  length,  projecting  at 
right  angles  from  the  main  wall  to  enable  the 
defenders  to  annoy  the  assailants  in  flank.  The 
ditch  was  sometimes  fortified  by  a  sort  of  tenaille 
in  the  ditch  itself,  or  a  ravelin  on  its  edge.  In 
later  times  the  practice  of  fortifying  towns  was  laid 
aside,  and  the  large  temples  with  their  enclosures 
were  made  to  serve  the  purpose  of  forts  (Wilkinson, 
Anc.  Egypt,  i.  408,  409,  abridgm.). 

The  fortifications  of  Nineveh,  Babylon,  Ecbatana, 
and  of  Tyre  and  Sidou  are  all  mentioned,  either  in 
the  Canonical  books  or  the  Apocrypha.  In  the 
sculptures  of  Nineveh  representations  are  found  of 
walled  towns,  of  which  one  is  thought  to  represent 
Tyre,  and  all  illustrate  the  mode  of  fortification 
adopted  both  by  the  Assyrians  and  their  enemies 
(Jer.  li.  30-32,  58;  Am.  i.  10;  Zech.  ix.  :i  ; 
Ez.  xxvii.  11;  Nah.  iii.  14;  Tob.  i.  17,  xiv.  14, 
15;  Jud.  i.  1,4;  Layard,  Sin.  vol.  ii.  275,  279, 
388,  395  ;  Sin.  §■  Bab.  231,  358  ;  Man.  of  Nin. 
pt.  ii.  39,  43).     '  [H.  W.  P.] 

FERRET  (np3N  ;  fivya\ri ;  mygale),  one  of 
the  unclean  creeping  things  mentioned  in  Lev. 
xi.  30.  The  fxvyakTi  of  Aristotle  (Hist.  An.  viii. 
24)  is  the  Mus  araneus,  or  shrew-mouse;  but  it  is 
more  probable  that  the  animal  referred  to  in  Lev. 
was  a  reptile  of  the  lizard  tribe,  deriving  its  name 
from  the  mournful  civ,  or  wail,  which  some  lizards 
utter.  The  root  is  p3N,  to  sigh  or  groan.  The 
Rabbinical  writers  seem  to  have  identified  this 
animal  with  the  hedgehog;  see  Lewysohn,  Zool.  des 
Talmuds,  §§129,  134.    "  [W.  D.] 

FESTIVALS  (D^n).a  The  object  of  this 
article  is  merely  to  give  a  classification  of  the  sacred 
times  of  the  Hebrews,  accompanied  by  seine  general 
remarks.  A  particular  account  of  each  festival  is 
given  in  its  proper  place. 

I.  The  religious  times  ordained  in  the  Law  tall 
under  three  heads: — (1.)  Those  formally  com  a  ted 
with  the  institution  of  the  Sabbath;  (2.)  The  his- 
torical or  great  festivals;  (3.)  The  Day  of  Atonement. 

(1.)  Immediately  connected  with  the  institution  of 
the  Sabbath  are — 

(«)  The  weekly  Sabbath  itself. 

(b)  The  seventh  new  moon  or  Feast  of  Trumpets. 

'  c)  The  Sabbatical  Year. 

(d)  The  Year  of  Jubilee. 

(2.)  The  great  feasts  (DHJTlD  ;  in  the  Talmud. 
□  V-l"},  pilgrimage  f,  vtsts )  are : — 

(<»)  The  Passover. 

(b)  The  Feast  of  Pentecost,  of  Weeks,  of  Wheat- 
harvest,  01',  of  the  First  fruits. 

(c)  The  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  or  of  Ingathering. 
On  each  of  these  occasions  every  male  Israelite 

was  commanded  '■  to  appeal'  before  the  Lord,"  that 
is,  to  attend  hi  the  court  of  the  tabernacle  d  the 
temple,  and  to  make  his  offering  with  a  joyful 
heart  (Dent,  xxvii.  7  ;  Xeh.  viii.  9-12;  cf.  Jot  iph. 
Ant.  xi.  5,  §.">).  The  attendance  of  women  was 
voluntary,   but  the  zealous  often  went    up  to  the 


FESTIVALS 


617 


Passover.  Thus  Mary  attended  it  (Luke  ii.  41  ,, 
and  Hannah  (1  Sam.  i.  7,  ii.  19).  As  might  be 
supposed,  there  was  a  stricter  obligation  regarding 
the  Passover  than  the  other  feasts,  and  hence  there 
was  an  express  provision  to  enable  those  who,  by 
unavoidable  circumstances  or  legal  impurity,  had 
been  prevented  from  attending  at  the  proper  time. 
to  observe  the  feast  on  the  same  day  of  the  succeed- 
ing month  (Num.  ix.  10-11). 

On  all  the  days  of  Holy  Convocation  there  was 
to  be  an  entire  suspension  of  ordinal  y  labour  of  all 
kinds  (Fx.  xii.  16;  Lev.  xvi.  29,  xxiii.  21,  24,  25, 
35).  But  on  the  intervening  days  of  the  longer 
festivals  work  might  be  carried  on.b 

Besides  their  religious  purpose,  the  great  festi- 
vals must  have  had  an  important  bearing  on  the 
maintenance  of  a  feeling  of  national  unity.  This 
may  be  traced  in  the  apprehensions  of  Jeroboam 
(1  K.  xii.  26,  27),  and  in  the  attempt  at  reform- 
ation by  Hezekiah  (2  Chr.  xxx.  1 ),  as  well  as  in 
the  necessity  which,  in  later  times,  was  felt  by  the 
Roman  government  of  mustering  a  considerable 
military  force  at  Jerusalem  during  the  festivals 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xvii.  9,  §3  ;  xvii.  10,  §2;  cf.  Matt. 
xxvi.  5  ;  Luke  xiii.  1). 

The  frequent  recurrence  of  the  sabbatical  num- 
ber in  the  organization  of  these  festivals  is  too 
remarkable  to  be  passed  over,  and  (as  Ewald  has 
observed)  seems,  when  viewed  in  connexion  with 
the  sabbatical  sacred  times,  to  furnish  a  strong 
proof  that  the  whole  system  of  the  festivals  of  the 
Jewish  law  was  the  product  of  one  mind.  Pente- 
cost occurs  seven  weeks  after  the  Passover  ;  the 
Passover  and  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  last  seven 
days  each  ;  the  days  of  Holy  Convocation  are  seven 
in  the  year — two  at  the  Passover,  one  at  Penteco  t. 
one  at  the  Feast  of  Trumpets,  one  on  the  Day  of 
Atonement,  and  two  at  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  ; 
the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  as  well  as  the  Day  of 
Atonement,  falls  in  the  seventh  month  of  the  sacred 
year;  and,  lastly,  the  cycle  of  annual  feasts  occu- 
pies s,.Ven  months,  from  Nisan  to  Tisri. 

The  agricultural  significance  of  the  three  great 
festivals  is  clearly  set  forth  in  the  account  of  the 
Jewish  sacred  year  contained  in  Lev.  xxiii.  The 
prominence  which,  not  only  in  that  chapter  but 
elsewhere,  is  given  to  this  significance,  in  the  names 
by  which  Pentecost  and  Tabernacles  are  often  called, 
and  also  by  the  offering  of  "  the  first  fruits  of 
wheat-harvest"  at  Pentecost  (Ex.  xxxiv.  22),  and 
of  "  the  first  of  the  first  fruits  "  at  the  Passover 
(  Fx.  xxiii.  19,  xxxiv.  26),  might  easily  suggest  that 
th  origin  of  the  feasts  was  patriarchal  (  Ewald,  Al- 
terth&mer,  p.  385),  and  that  the  historical  associa- 
tions with  winch  Moses  endowed  them  were  grafted 
upon  their  primitive  meaning.  It  is  perhaps,  how- 
ever, a  difficulty  in  the  way  of  this  view,  that  we 
should  rather  look  for  the  institution  of  agricultural 
festivals  amongst  an  agricultural,  than  a  pastoral 
people,  such  as  the  Israelites  and  their  ancestors 
wei-.'  before  the  settlement  iii  the  land  of  promise. 

The  times  ut' the  festivals  were  evidently  ordained 
in  wisdom,  so  as  to  interfere  as  little  as  possible 
with  the  industry  of  the  people.  The  Passover  was 
held  just  before  the  work  of  harvest  commenced, 
Pentecost  al  the  conclusion  of  the  corn-harvest  and 
before  the  vintage,  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  after  all 


"  The  original  meaning  of  the  word  in  is  a 
"  dance."  The  modern  Arabic  term  Kin//  is  derived 
from  the  same  root  (Gesen.  Thes.  1-44). 

h  The  Law  always  speaks  of  the  l>ays  of  Holy  Con- 
vocation as  Sabbaths.     But  the  Mishna  makes  :i  dis- 


tinction, and  states  in  detail  what  acts  may  be 
performed  on  the  former,  which  are  unlawful  on  the 
sahrttith,  in  the  treatise  PSwn  Toh ;  while  in  Moed 
Katan,  it  lays  down  strange  and  burdensome  condi- 
tions in  reference  to  the  intermediate  days. 


618 


FESTUS 


the  fruits  of  the  ground  were  gathered  in.  Jn  win- 
ter, when  travelling  was  difficult,  there  were  no 
festivals. 

(3.)  For  the  Day  of  Atonement  see  that  article. 

II.  After  the  captivity,  the  Feast  of  Purim  (Esth. 
ix.  20  sq.)  and  that  of  the  Dedication  (1  Mace.  iv. 
56)  were  instituted.  The  Festivals  of  Wood-carry- 
ing, as  they  were  called  (topTal  t£>v  £v\o<popia>v), 
are  mentioned  by  Josephus  {Bell.  Jud.  ii.  17,  §6) 
and  the  Mishna  (  Taanith,  iv.  5).  What  appears  to 
have  been  their  origin  is  found  in  Neh.  x.  34.  The 
term,  "the  Festival  of  the  Basket"  (lopTr;  Kap- 
tixWov)  is  applied  by  Philo  to  the  offering  of  the 
First  Fruits  described  in  Dent.  xsvi.  1-11  {Philo, 
vol.  v.  p.  51).    [First  Fruits.] 

The  system  of  the  Hebrew  festivals  is  treated  at 
large  by  Bahr  {Symbolik  des  Mosaischen  cultus, 
b.  iv.),  by  Ewald  {Alterthumer,  p.  379  sq.),  and 
by  Philo,  in  a  characteristic  manner  (Tlepl  rr\s 
'El356/j.ris,  Op.  vol.  v.  p.  21,  edit.  Tauch,)'.   [S.  ( '.] 

FESTUS,  POR'CIUS  I JlSpmos  *r,aros,  Acts 
xxiv.  27),  successor  of  Felix  as  procurator  of  Judaea 
(Acts  /.  c. ;  Jos.  Ant.  xx.  8,  §9  ;  B.  J.  ii.  14,  §1), 
sent  by  Nero,  probably  in  the  autumn  of  the  year 
60  a.d.  (See  Felix.)  A  few  weeks  after  Festus 
reached  his  province  he  heard  the  cause  of  St. 
Paul,  who  had  been  left  a  prisoner  by  Felix,  in  the 
presence  of  Herod  Agrippa  II.  and  Bernice  his  sister. 
Not  finding  any  thing  in  the  Apostle  worthy  of  death 
or  of  bonds,  and  being  confirmed  in  this  view  by  his 
guests,  he  would  have  set  him  free,  had  it  not  been 
that  Paul  had  himself  previously  (Actsxxv.  11,12) 
appealed  to  Caesar.  In  consequence,  Festus  sent  him 
to  Pome.  Judaea  was  in  the  same  disturbed  state 
during  the  procuratorship  of  Festus,  which  had  pre- 
vailed through  that  of  his  predecessor.  Sicarii, 
robbers,  and  magicians  were  put  down  with  a  strong 
hand  {Ant.  xx.  8,  §10).  Festus  had  a  difference  with 
the  Jews  at  Jerusalem  about  a  high  wall  which 
they  had  built  to  prevent  Agrippa  seeing  from  his 
palace  into  the  court  of  the  Temple.  As'  this  also 
hid  the  view  of  the  Temple  from  the  Roman  guard 
appointed  to  watch  it  during  the  festivals,  the  pro- 
curator took  strongly  the  side  of  Agrippa ;  but 
permitted  the  Jews  to  send  to  Rome  for  trie  decision 
of  the  emperor.  He  being  influenced  by  Poppaea, 
who  was  a  proselyte,  decided  in  favour  of  the  Jews. 
Festus  died  probably  in  the  summer  of  62  a.d., 
having  ruled  the  province  less  than  two  years. 
The  chronological  questions  concerning  his  entrance 
on  the  province  and  his  death  are  too  intricate  and 
difficult  to  be  entered  on  here,  but  will  be  found 
fully  discussed  by  Anger,  de  temporum  in  Act. 
Aposi.  ratione,  pp.  99  ff.,  and  Wieseler,  Chrono- 
loijie  der  Apostelgeschichte,  pp.  89-99.  Josephus 
implies  {B.  J.  ii.  14  §1)  that  Festus  was  a  just  as 
well  as  an  active  magistrate.  [~H.  A.] 

FETTERS  (D»fiB>n3;  ^>33 ;  D*R).~  1.  The 
first  of  these  Hebrew  words,  nechushtaim,  expresses 
the  material  of  which  fetters  were  usually  made, 
viz.  brass  (ireSai  xa^Ka'li  >  -A.  V.  "  fetters  of 
brass " ),  and  also  that  they  were  made  iu 
pairs,  the  word  being  in  the  dual  number:  it  is 
the  most  usual  term  for  fetters  (Judg.  xvi.  21  ; 
2  Sam.  iii.  34;  2  K.  xxv.  7  ;  2  Chr.  xxxiii.  11, 
xxxvi.  6;  Jer.  xxxix.  7,  lii.  11).  Iron  was  occa- 
sionally employed  for  the  purpose  (Ps.  cv.  18,  cxlix. 
8).  2.  Cebej  occurs  only  in  the  above  Psalms, 
and,  from  its  appearing  in  the  singular  nuuier, 
may  perhaps  apply  to  the  link  which  connectf  J  the  I 
tetters.     Zikkim  (•'  fetters,"  Job  xxxvi.  8)  is  more  J 


FIELD 

usually  translated  "  chains"  (Ps.  cxlix.  8  ;  Is.  xiv- 
14;  Nab.  iii.  10),  but  its  radical  sense  appeal's  to 
refer  to  the  contraction  of  the  feet  by  a  chain 
(Gesen.  Thesaur.  p.  424).  [\\\  L.  B.J 

fever  (nrnp,  r\rhn,  -iron ;   Xkt^o, 

piyos,  ipedLcr/xbs;  Lev.  xxvi.  16,  Deut.  xxviii.  22). 
These  words,  from  various  roots"  signifying  heat  or 
inflammation,  are  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  by  various 
words  suggestive  of  fever,  or  a  feverish  affection. 
The  word  piyos  ("  shuddering  ")  suggests  the  ague 
as  accompanied  by  fever,  as  in  the  opinion  of  the 
LXX.  probably  intended  ;  and  this  is  still  a  very 
common  disease  in  Palestine  ;  the  third  word,  which 
they  render  ipeOi<rfj.bs  (a  term  still  known  to 
pathology),  a  feverish  irritation,  and  which  in  the 
A.  V.  is  called  burning  fever,  may  perhaps  be 
erysipelas.  Fever  constantly  accompanies  the 
bloody  flux,  or  dysentery  (Acts  xxviii.  8  ;  comp. 
De  Mandelslo,  Travels,  ed.  1669,  p.  65).  Fevers 
of  an  inflammatory  character  are  mentioned  (Burck- 
hardt,  Arab.  i.  446)  as  common  at  Mecca,  and 
putrid  ones  at  Djidda.  Intermittent  fever  and 
dysentery,  the  latter  often  fatal,  are  ordinary  Arabian 
diseases.  For  the  former,  though  often  fatal  to 
strangers,  the  natives  care  little,  but  much  dread  a 
relapse.  These  fevers  sometimes  occasion  most 
troublesome  swellings  in  the  stomach  and  legs  (ii. 
290-291).  [H.  H.] 

FIELD  (ITlb).  The  Hebrew  "  sadeh  "  is  not 
adequately  represented  by  our  "field:"  the  two 
words  agree  in  describing  cultivated  land,  but  they 
differ  in  point  of  extent,  the  sadeh  being  specifically 
applied  to  what  is  unenclosed,  while  the  opposite 
notion  of  enclosure  is  involved  in  the  word  field. 
The  essence  of  the  Hebrew  word  has  been  variously 
taken  to  lie  in  each  of  these  notions,  Gesenius 
{Thesaur.  p.  1321)  giving  it  the  sense  of  freedom, 
Stanley  (p.  490)  that  of  smoothness,  comparing 
arvum  from  arare.  On  the  one  hand  sadeh  is 
applied  to  any  cultivated  ground,  whether  pasture 
(Gen.  xxix.  2,  xxxi.  4,  xxxiv.  7  ;  Ex.  ix.  3),  tillage 
(Gen.  xxxvii.  7,  xlvii.  24  ;  Ruth  ii.  2,  3  ;  Job  xxiv. 
6;  Jer.  xxvi.  18  ;  M:c.  iii.  12),  woodland  (1  Sam. 
xiv.  25,  A.V.  "ground  ;"  Ps.  exxxii.  6),  or  mountain- 
top  (Judg.  ix.  32,  36  ;  2  Sam.  i.  21) ;  and  in  some 
instances  in  marked  opposition  to  the  neighbouring 
wilderness  (Stanley,  p.  236,  490),  as  in  the  instance 
of  Jacob  settling  in  the  field  of  Shechem  (Gen. 
xxxiii.  19),  the  field  of  Moab  (Gen.  xxxvi.  35; 
Num.  xxi.  20,  A.  V.  "  country  ;"  Ruth  i.  1),  and  the 
vale  of  Siddim,  i.  e.  of  the  cultivated  fields,  which 
formed  the  oasis  of  the  Pentapolis  (Gen.  xiv.  3,  8), 
though  a  different  sense  has  been  given  to  the  name 
(by  Gesenius,  Thesaur.  p.  1321).  On  the  other  hand 
the  sadeh  is  frequently  contrasted  with  what  is 
enclosed,  whether  a  vineyard  (Ex.  xxii.  5  ;  Lev. 
xxv.  3,  4;  Num.  xvi.  14,  xx.  17;  compare  Num. 
xxii.  23,  "  the  ass  went  into  the  field,"  with  verse 
24,  "  a  path  of  the  vineyards,  a  wall  being  on  this 
side  and  a  wall  on  that  side"),  a  garden  (the  very 
name  of  which,  }3,  implies  enclosure),  or  a  walled 
town  (Deut.  xxviii.  3,  16):  unwalled  villages  or 
scattered  houses  ranked  in  the  eye  of  the  law  as 


■\Viner  suggests  the  Arabic 


which  he 


renders  Stickflitss,  i.  e.  choking  phlegm.  It  rather 
seems  to  mean  the  frothing  at  the  mouth  which 
accompanies  the  violent  religious  exercitations  of  the 
fanatical  Arabs  on  the  occasion  of  the  festival  of  the 
Nebi-Mousa. 


FIELD 

fields  (Lev.  xxv.  31),  and  hence  the  expression  els 
tuvs  aypovs  =  houses  in  the  fields  (in  villas,  Vulg. ; 
Mark  vi.  36,  56).  In  many  passages  the  term 
implies  what  is  remote  from  a  house  (Gen.  iv.  8, 
xxiv.  03;  Deut.  xxii.  25)  or  settled  habitation,  as 
in  the  case  of  Esau  (Gen.  xxv.  27  ;  the  LXX.,  how- 
ever, refers  it  to  his  character,  aypolKos)  :  this  is 
more  fully  expressed  by  fVWrl  'JS,  "  the  open 
field"  (Lev.  xiv.  7,  53,  xvii.  5;  Num.  xix.  16; 
'_'  Sam.  xi.  1 1 ),  with  which  is  naturally  coupled 
tin-  notion  of  exposure  and  desertion  (Jer.  ix.  22  ; 
Ez.  xvi.  5,  xxxii.  4,  xxxiii.  '_'7,  xxxix.  5). 

The  separate  plots  of  ground  were  marked  off  by 
stones,  which  might  easily  be  removed  (Deut.  xix. 
14,  xxvii.  17;  cf.  Job  xxiv.  2;  Prov.  xxii.  28, 
xxiii.  10) :  the  absence  of  fences  rendered  the  fields 
liable  to  damage  from  straying  cattle  (Ex.  xxii. 
5)  or  fire  (ver.  0;  2  Sam.  xiv.  30):  hence  the 
necessity  of  constantly  watching  flocks  and  herds, 
the  people  so  employed  being  in  the  present  day 
named  Natoor  (Wovtabet,  Syria,  i.  293).  A  cer- 
tain amount  of  protection  was  gained  by  sowing  the 
tallest  and  strongest  of  the  grain  crops  on  the  out- 
side: "spelt"  appears  to  have  been  most  commonly 
used  for  this  purpose  (Is.  xxviii.  25,  as  in  the 
margin).  From  the  absence  of  enclosures,  cultivated 
land  of  any  size  might  be  termed  a  field,  whether 
it  were  a  piece  of  ground  of  limited  area  (Gen. 
xxiii.  13,  17  ;  Is.  v.  8),  a  man's  whole  inheritance 
(Lev.  xxvii.  16  ff.  ;  Ruth  iv.  5  ;  Jer.  xxxii.  9,  25; 
Prov.  xxvii.  26,  xxxi.  16),  the  ager  publicus  of  a 
town  (Gen.  xli.  48  ;  Neh.  xii.  29),  as  distinct,  how- 
ever, from  the  ground  immediately  adjacent  to  the 
walls  of  the  Levitical  cities,  which  was  called  tJHJO 

(  A.  V.  suburbs),  and  was  deemed  an  appendage  of 
the  town  itself  (Josh.  xxi.  11,  12),  or  lastly  the 
territory  of  a  people  (Gen.  xiv.  7,  xxxii.  3,  xxxvi 
35  ;  Num.  xxi.  20  ;  Ruth  i.  6,  iv.  3  ;  1  Sam.  vi.  1, 
xxvii.  7,  11).  In  1  Sam.  xxvii.  5,  "a  town  in  the 
field"  (A.  V.  country)  =  a  provincial  town  as  dis- 
tinct from  the  royal  city.  A  plot  of  ground  sepa- 
rated from  a  larger  one  was  termed  mC  np?n 
(Gen.  xxxiii.  19;  Ruth  ii.  3;  1  Chr.  xi.  13),  or 
simply  np?n  (2  Sam.  xiv.  30,  xxiii.  12  ;  cf.  2  Sam. 

xix.  29).  Fields  occasionally  received  names  after 
remarkable  events,  as  Helkath-Hazzurim,  the  field  of 
the  strong  men,  or  possibly  of  swords  (2  Sam.  ii.  16), 
or  from  the  use  to  which  they  may  have  been  ap- 
i ■';    I    2  K.  xviii.  17  ;  Is.  vii.  3  ;  Matt,  xxvii.  7). 

It  should  be  observed  that  the  expressions  "  fruit- 
ful Held"  (Is.  x.  18,  xxix.  17,  xxxii.  15,  16),  and 
"  plentiful  Held"  (Is.  xvi.  10;  Jer.  xlviii.  33),  are 
not  connected  with  sadeh,  but  with  carmel,  mean- 
ing a  park  or  well-kept  wood,  as  distinct  from  a 
wilderness  or  a  forest.  The  same  term  occurs  in 
2  K.  xix.  23,  and  Is.  xxxvii.  2-1  A.V.  Ca 
Is.  x.  18  (forest),  and  Jer.  iv.  26  {fruitful place) 
[Carmel].  Distinct  from  this  is  the  expression 
in  Ez.  xvii.  5,  jnTTI'lK'  (A.  V.  fruitful  field), 
wliii  h  means  a  Held  suited  for  planting  suckers. 

We  have  further  to  notice  other  terms-  (1.)  8he- 
demoth  (TWZrfiP),  translated  "  fields,"  and  connected 
by  I  iesenius  with  the  idea  of  enclosure.  It  is  doubt- 
ful, however,  whether  the  notion  of  burning  does  not 
rather  lie  at  the  bottom  of  the  word.  This  gives  a 
more  consistent  sense  throughout.  In  Is.  xvi.  8,  it 
would  thus  mean  the  withered  grape ;  in  !  lab.  iii.  I  7. 
I  o  m;  in  Jer.  xxxi.  40,  the  burnt  parts  of 


FIG 


(J19 


the  city  (no  "  fields"  intervened  between  the  south- 
eastern angle  of  Jerusalem  and  the  Kidron);  while 
in  2  K.  xxiii.  4,  and  Deut.  xxxii.  32,  the  sense  of  a 
place  of  burning  is  appropriate.  It  is  not  there- 
fore necessary  to  treat  the  word  in  Is.  xxxvii.  27, 
"  blasted,"  as  a  corrupt  reading.  (2.)  Abel  (?2N),  a 
well-watered  spot,  frequently  employed  asa prefix  in 
proper  names.  (3.)  Achu  (-HIK),  a  word  of  Egyptian 
origin,  given  in  the  LXX.  in  aGraecised  form,  &xfi 
(Gen.  xli.  2,  18,  "  meadow;"  Job  viii.  11,  "  Hag;" 
Is.  xix.  7,  LXX.),  meaning  the  flags  and  rushes  that 
grow  in  the  marshes  of  lower  Egypt.  (4.)  Maareh 
(myD),,  which  occurs  only  once  (Judg.  xx.  33, 
"meadows"):  it  has  been  treated  as  a  corruption 
either  of  myp,  cave,  or  3"iyO,  from  the  west 
(a7rb  Svcrfiwv,  LXX.).  But  the  sense  of  openness 
or  exposure  may  be  applied  to  it :  thus,  "  they  came 
forth  on  account  of  the  exposure  of  Gibeah,"  the 
Benjamites  having  been  previously  enticed  away 
(ver.  31).  [W.  L.  B.]' 

FIG,  FIG-TREE,  njJSR  a  word  of  frequent 
occurrence  in  the  O.  T.,  where  it  signiHes  the  tree 
Ficus  Carica  of  Linnaeus,  and  also  its  fruit.  The 
LXX.  render  it  by  <tvkt}  and  (tvkov,  and  when  it 
signifies  fruit  by  avK-fi — also  by  avKedv  or  crvKciv, 
ficetum,  in  Jer.  v.  17  and  Am.  iv.  9.  In  N.  T. 
ffvKTJ  is  the  fig-tree,  and  avKa  the  figs  (Jam.  iii. 
12).  The  fig-tree  is  very  common  in  Palestine 
(Deut.  viii.  8).  Mount  Olivet  was  famous  for  its 
fig-trees  in  ancient  times,  and  they  are  still  found 
there  (see  Stanley,  S.  cf  P.  p.  187,  421,  422). 
"  To  sit  under  one's  own  vine  and  one's  own  fig-tree  " 
became  a  proverbial  expression  among  the  Jews  to 
denote  peace  and  prosperity  (1  K.  iv.  25;  Jlic. 
iv.  4;  Zech.  iii.  10).  The  character  of  the  tree, 
with  its  wide-spreading  branches,  accords  well  with 
the  derivation  of  the  name  from  JNF1,  to  stretch  out, 
porrexit  brachia.  In  Gen.  iii.  7  the  identification 
of  iliNfl  D  ;?y  with  the  leaves  of  the  Ficus  Carica 
has  been  disputed  by  Geseuius,  Tuch,  and  others, 
who  think  that  the  large  leaves  of  the  Indian  Musa 
Paradisiaca  are  meant  (Germ.  Adamsfeige — Fr. 
figuier  d'Adam).  These  leaves,  however,  would 
not  have  needed  to  be  strung  or  sewn  together,  and 
the  plant  itself  is  not  of  the  same  kind  with  the 
fig-tree. 

When  figs  are  spoken  of  as  distinguished  from 
the  fig-tree,  the  plur.  form  □'•JXPl  is  used  (see  Jer. 
viii.  13).  2.  There  are  also  the  words  PI"V133,  33, 
and  n?3'Tl,  signifying  different  kinds  of  figs,  (a) 
In  Hos.  ix.  10,  nJNFQ  rn-122  signifies  the  first 
ripe  of  the  fig-tree,  and  the  same  word  occurs  in 
Is.  xxviii.  4,  and  in  Mic.  vii.  1  (comp.  Jer.  xxiv.  2). 
Lowth  on  Is.  xxviii.  4,  quotes  from  Shaw's  Jrav. 
p.  370,  fol.,  a  notice  of  the  early  fig  called  bo 
and  in  Spanish  Albacora.  (6)  JQ  is  the  unripe  fig, 
which  hangs  through  the  winter.  It  is  mentioned 
only  in  Cant.  ii.  13,  and  its  name  comes  from  the 
root  JiS.  crudusfuit.  The  LXX.  render  it  uKvvQoi. 
It  is  found  in  the  Greek  word  BvOcpayn  =  JV3 
' ilNS,  " house  of  greei  ee  Buxt.  p.  1691  . 

Iii  the  historical  I f  the  ' >.  T.  mention 

of  cakes  of  figs,  used  as  articles  of  food,  and 

c pressed  into  that  form  for  the  sake  of  1. 

them.     They  also  appear  to  have  been   used 
diallv    for    boils    (2    K.   xx.    7;     Is.    xxxviii.    21). 


020  FIR 

Such   a   cake   was    called    iT?^,   ov   more    fully 

rVJXn  Tw2r\,  on  account  of  its  shape  from  root 

721,  to  make  round.     Hence,  or  rather  from  the 

Syriac  Nrp2"l,  the  first  letter  being  dropt,  came 
the  Gk.  word  na.Aa.dr).  Athenaeus  (xi.  p.  500,  ed. 
Casaub.)  makes  express  mention  of  the  ira.Aa.dri  2u- 
piaKr).  Jerome  on  Ez.  vi.  describes  the  rraAaQi)  to 
be  a  mass  of  (igs  and  rich  dates,  formed  into  the 
shape  of  bricks  or  tiles,  and  compressed  in  order 
that  they  may  keep.  Such  cakes  harden  so  as 
to  need  cutting  with  an  axe.  [W.  D.] 

FIR  (C^'n3— or  ni"Q,  probably  an  Aramaic 
form — from  £H2,  cut,  Gesen.  246  ;  variously  in 
LXX.  irirvs,  irevKri,  KVTrdpiacros,  and  (Ez.  xxvii. 
5)  /ce'Spor  ;  in  Is.  xiv.  8,  |uAa  Xifiavov:  in  Vulg. 
chiefly  abies,  cupressns).  As  the  term  "  cedar  "  is 
in  all  probability  applicable  to  more  than  one  tree, 
so  also  "fir"  in  A.  V.  represents  more  than  one 
sort  of  wood.  The  opinion  of  Celsius  that  Berosh 
exclusively  means  "cedar"  is  probably  incorrect ; 
but  it  is  highly  probable  that  some  of  the  purposes 
for  which  cedar  is  said  to  have  been  used  can 
scarcely  have  been  fulfilled,  except  by  a  tree  like 
the  pine  or  fir.  Besides  the  woods  above  mentioned 
there  are  one  or  two  passages  in  which  Berosh  is 
rendered  in  LXX.  by  Ixpnevdos,  Juniper.  The 
passages  from  which  any  special  account  of  its  use 
can  be  derived  are: — 1.  Of  musical  instruments 
(2  Sam.  vi.  5);  2.  Of  doors  (irevKLva,  1  K.  vi. 
34);  3.  Of  gilded  ceilings  (iceSpivois,  2  Chr.  iii. 
5);  4.  Boards  or  decks  of  ships,  iceSpos  (Gesen. 
748;  Ez.  xxvii.  5).  It  seems  probable  that  the 
ceilings  in  (3)  would  be  of  deal,  the  wood  either  of 
the  Scotch  fir  {pinus  sylvestris),  or  possibly  larch 
(irevKri),  while  in  (2)  the  material  is  likely  to  have 
been  of  cypress  (cupressus  sempervirens,  or  cupr. 
tliyioides),  a  tree  of  a  harder  and  finer  quality,  not 
unlike  the  juniper  (apicevdos). 

On  the  whole  therefore  it  seems  likely  that  by 
Berosh  or  Beroth  is  intended  one  or  other  of  the 
following  trees: — 1.  Pinus  sylvestris,  or  Scotch 
fir;  2.  larch;  3.  Cupressus  sempervirens,  or  cy- 
press, all  which  are  at  this  day  found  in  the  Lebanon 
(Balfour,  Trees  of  Scripture,  p.  11 ;  Winer,  s.  v. 
Tanne  ;  Thenius  on  1  K.  vi.  34 ;  Saalschiitz,  Arch. 
Hebr.  i.  280,  note  4;  Miller,  Gardeners  Diet. 
Cupressus ;  Stephens,  Thcs.  Ling.  Gr.  wevKri ; 
Belon.  06s.  c.  110,  p.  165;  Loudon,  Arboretum, 
iv.  2163).  [H.  W.  P.] 

FIRE  (1.  E'K  ;  irvp;  ignis:  2.  "TIN,  and  also 
"T185  ;  <pws  ;  lux ;  flame  or  light.  The  applications 
of  fire  in  Scripture  may  be  classed  as : — 

I.  Religious.  (1.)  That  which  consumed  the 
burnt  sacrifice,  and  the  incense-offering,  begin- 
ning with  the  sacrifice  of  Noah  (Gen.  viii.  20), 
and  continued  in  the  ever  burning  fire  on  the  altar, 
first  kindled  from  heaven  (Lev.  vi.  9,  13,  ix.  H4), 
and  rekindled  at  the  dedication  of  Solomon's  Temple 
(2  Chr.  vii.  1,  3).  (2.)  The  symbol  of  Jehovah's 
presence,  and  the  instrument  of  his  power,  in  the 
way  either  of  approval  or  of  destruction  (Ex.  iii.  2, 
xiv.  19,  xix.  18  ;  Num.  xi.  1,  3  ;  Judg.  xiii.  20  ; 
1  K.  xviii.  38;  2  K.  i.  10,  12,  ii.  11,  vi.  17; 
comp.  Is.  Ii.  6,  lxvi.  15,  24;  Joel  ii.  30;  Mai.  iii. 
2,  3,  iv.  1  ;  Mark  ix.  44  ;  2  Pet.  iii.  10  ;  Rev.  xx. 
14,  15  ;  Keland,  Ant.  Sacr.  i.  8,  p.  26  ;  Jennings, 
Jewish  A)d.  ii.  1,  p.  301;  Joseph.  Ant.  iii.  8, 
§6,  viii.  4,  §4).  Parallel  with  this  application  of 
rire  and  with  its  symbolical  meaning  is  to  be  noted 


FIRE 

the  similar  use  for  sacrificial  purposes,  and  the 
respect  paid  to  it,  or  to  the  heavenly  bodies  as 
symbols  of  deity,  which  prevailed  among  so  many 
nations  of  antiquity,  and  of  which  the  traces  are 
not  even  now  extinct:  e.  g.  the  Sabaean  and  Ma- 
gian  systems  of  worship,  and  their  alleged  con- 
nexion with  Abraham  (Spencer,  de  Leg.  Hebr.  ii. 
1,2);  the  occasional  relapse  of  the  Jews  themselves 
into  sun-,  or  its  corrupted  form  of  fire-worship 
(Is.  xxvii.  9  ;  comp.  Gesen.  \&T\,  p.  489  ;  Deut. 
xvii.  3  ;  Jer.  viii.  2  ;  Ez.  viii.  16  ;  Zeph.  i.  5  ; 
2  K.  xvii.  16,  xxi.  3,  xxiii.  5,  10,  11,  13  ;  Jahn, 
Arch.  Bibl.  c.  vi.  §§405,  408)  [Moloch]  ;  the 
worship  or  deification  of  heavenly  bodies  or  of  fire, 
prevailing  to  some  extent,  as  among  the  Persians, 
so  also  even  in  Egypt  (Her.  iii.  16 ;  Wilkinson, 
Anc.  Eg.  i.  328,  abridgm.)  ;  the  sacred  fire  of  the 
Greeks  and  Romans  (Thuc.  i.  24,  ii.  15  ;  Cic.  de  Leg. 
ii.  8,  12  ;  Liv.  xxviii.  12  ;  Dionys.  ii.  67  ;  Plut. 
Numa,  9,  i.  263,  ed.  Reiske)  ;  the  ancient  forms  and 
usages  of  worship,  differing  from  each  other  in  some 
important  respects,  but  to  some  extent  similar  in 
principle,  of  Mexico  and  Peru  (Prescott,  Mexico,  i. 
60,  64;  Peru,  i.  101);  and  lastly  the  theory  of 
the  so-called  Guebres  of  Persia,  and  the  Parsees  of 
Bombay.  (Frazer,  Persia,  c.  iv.  p.  141,  162,  164 ; 
Sir  R.  Porter,  Travels,  ii.  50,  424  ;  Chardin, 
Voyages,  ii.  310,  iv.  258,  viii.  367,  and  foil. ; 
Xiebuhr,  Voyages,  ii.  pp.  36,  37  ;  Mandelslo, 
Travels,  b.  i.  p.  76 ;  Gibbon,  Hist.  c.  viii.,  i.  335, 
ed.  Smith  ;  Benj.  of  Tudela,  Early  Trav.  pp.  114, 
116;  Burckhardt,  Syria,  p.  156.) 

The  perpetual  fire  on  the  altar  was  to  be  reple- 
nished with  wood  every  morning  (Lev.  A'i.  12  ; 
comp.  Is.  xxxi.  9).  According  to  the  Gemara,  it 
was  divided  into  3  parts,  one  for  burning  the  vic- 
tims, one  for  incense,  and  one  for  supply  of  the 
other  portions  (Lev.  vi.  15  ;  Reland,  Antiq.  Hebr. 
i.  4,  8,  p.  26  ;  and  ix.  10,  p.  98).  Fire  for  sacred 
purposes  obtained  elsewhere  than  from  the  altar 
was  called  "  strange  fire,"  and  for  use  of  such 
Xadab  and  Abihu  were  punished  with  death  by 
fire  from  God  (Lev.  x.  1,  2  ;  Num.  iii.  4,  xxvi.  61). 

(3.)  In  the  case  of  the  spoil  taken  from  the  Mi- 
dianites,  such  articles  as  could  bear  it  were  purified 
by  fire  as  well  as  in  the  water  appointed  for  the 
purpose  (Num.  xxxi.  23).  The  victims  slain  for 
sin-offerings  were  afterwards  consumed  by  fire  out- 
side the  camp  (Lev.  iv.  12,  21,  vi.  30,  xvi.  27  ; 
Heb.  xiii.  11).  The  Nazarite  who  had  completed 
his  vow,  marked  its  completion  by  shaving  his  head 
and  casting  the  hair  into  the  fire  on  the  altar  on 
which  the  peace-offerings  were  being  sacrificed 
(Num.  vi.  18). 

II.  Domestic.  Besides  for  cooking  purposes,  fire 
is  often  required  in  Palestine  for  warmth  (Jer. 
xxxvi.  22  ;  Mark  xiv.  54  ;  John  xviii.  18  ;  Harmer, 
Obs.  i.  125;  Raiimer,  p.  79).  For  this  purpose 
a  hearth  with  a  chimney  is  sometimes  constructed, 
on  which  either  lighted  wood  or  pans  of  charcoal 
are  placed  (Harmer,  i.  405).  In  Persia,  a  hole 
made  in  the  floor  is  sometimes  filled  with  char- 
coal, on  which  a  sort  of  table  is  set  covered  with 
a  carpet ;  and  the  company  placing  their  feet  under 
the  carpet  draw  it  over  themselves  (Oleariu.s,  Tra- 
vels, p.  294;  Chardin,  Voyages,  viii.  190).  Looms 
in  Egypt  are  warmed,  when  necessary,  with  pans 
of  charcoal,  as  there  are  no  fire-places  except  in  the 
kitchens  (Lane,  Mod.  Eg.  i.  41  ;  /.'»/.  in  Eg.  ii. 
11). 

On  the  Sabbath,  the  Law  forbade  anv  fire  to  be 


FIREPAN 

kindled  even  for  cooking  (Ex.  xxxv.  .">  ;  Num.  xv. 
32).  To  this  general  prohibition  the  Jews  added 
various  refinements,  e.g.  that  on  the  eve  of  the 
Sabbath  no  one  might  read  with  a  light,  though 
passages  to  be  read  on  the  Sabbath  by  children  in 
schools  might  he  looked  out  by  the  teacher.  If  a 
Gentile  Lighted  a  lamp,  a  Jew  might  use  it,  but 
not  it'  it  had  been  lighted  tor  the  use  of  the  .lew. 
If  a  festival  day  fell  on  the  Sabbath  eve  no  cooking 
was  to  be  done  (Mishn.  Shabb.  i.  3,  xvi.  8,  vol. 
ii.  pp.  4,  50,  Moed  Katan,  ii.  vol.  ii.  p.  287, 
Surenhus.). 

III.  The  dryness  of  the  land  in  the  hot  season  in 
Syria,  of  course  increases  liability  to  accident  from 
fire.  The  Law  therefore  ordered  that  any  one 
kindling  a  fire  which  caused  damage  to  corn  in  a 
field,  should  make  restitution  (Ex.  xxii.  6;  comp. 
Judg.  xv.  4,  5 ;  2  Sam.  xfv.  30  ;  Mishn.  Maccoth, 
vi.  5,  ii,  vol.  iv.  48,  Surenh. ;  Burckhardt,  Syria, 
pp.  496,  622). 

IV.  Punishment  of  death  by  fire  was  awarded 
by  the  Law  only  in  the  cases  of  incest  with  a 
mother-in-law,  and  of  unehastity  on  the  part  of  a 
daughter  of  a  priest  (Lev.  xx.  14,  xxi.  9).  In  the 
former  case  both  the  parties,  in  the  latter,  the 
woman  only,  was  to  suffer.  This  sentence  appears 
to  have  been  a  relaxation  of  the  original  practice  in 
such  cases  (Gen.  xxxviii.  24).  Among  other  na- 
tions, burning  appears  to  have  been  no  uncommon 
mode  if  not  of  judicial  punishment,  at  least  of 
vengeance  upon  captives ;  and  in  a  modiiied  form 
was  not  unknown  in  war  among  the  Jews  them- 
selves (2  Sam.  xii.  81  ;  Jer.  xxix.  22  ;  Dan.  iii.  20, 
21).  In  certain  cases  the  bodies  of  executed  cri- 
minals and  of  infamous  persons  were  subsequently 
burnt  (Josh.  vii.  25;  2  K.  xxiii.  10). 

The  Jews  were  expressly  ordered  to  destroy  the 
idols  of  the  heathen  nations,  and  especially  any  city 
of  their  own  relapsed  into  idolatry  (Ex.  xxxii.  20; 
2  K.  x.  26;  Deut.  vii.  5,  xii.  :i,  xiii.  10).  In  some 
cases,  the  cities,  and  in  the  case  of  Hazor,  the  cha- 
riots also,  were,  bv  God's  order,  consumed  with  fire 
(Josh.  vi.  24,  viii.  28,  si.  6,  9,  13).  One  of  the 
expedients  of  war  in  sieges  was  to  set  fiie  to  the 
gate  of  the  besieged  place  (Judg.  ix.  49,  52). 
[Sieges.] 

V.  Incense  was  sometimes  burnt  in  honour  of 
the  dead,  especially  royal  personages,  as  is  men- 
tioned specially  in  the  cases  of  Asa  and  Zedekiah, 
and  negatively  in  that  of  Jehoram  (2  Car.  xvi.  14, 
v.xi.  19;  Jer.  xxxiv.  5). 

VI.  The  use  of  fire  in  metallurgy  was  well 
known  to  the  Hebrews  at  the  time  of  the  Exodus 
'  Ex.  xxxii.  24,  xxxv.  32,  xxxvii.  2,  »'■,  17,  xxxviii. 
2,  8  ;  Num.  xvi.  38,  39).      [HANDICRAFT.] 

VII.  Fire  or  flame  is  used  in  a  metaphorical 
sense  to  express  excited  feeling  ami  divine  inspira- 
tion, and  also  to  describe  temporal  calamities  and 
future  punishments  (Ps.  lxvi.  12  ;  Jer.  xx.  it  ;  Joel 
ii.  30;  Mai.  iii.  2  ;  Matt.  xxv.  41  :  Mark  ix.  4:'.; 
Rev.  xx.  15).  [H.W.  P.] 

FIREPAN  (nnnO;  irvpriov,  Qvfjuariiptov  ; 
ignium  receptaculum  •  thuribulum),  one  of  the 
vessels  of  the  Temple  service  (  Ex.  \xvii.  :!,  xxxviii. 
3;  2  K.  xxv.  15;  "Jer.  iii.  19).  The  sane'  word 
is  elsewhere  rendered  "snuff-dish"  (Ex.  xxv.  3.x, 
xxxvii.  23;  Num.  iv.  9;  (TrapvffTTjp ;  em 
riven)  and  "censer"  (Lev.  x.  1,  xvi.  12;  Num. 
xvi.  6  ft'.).  There  appear,  therefore,  to  have 
been  two  articles  so  called;  one,  like  a  chafing- 
dish,  to  carry  live  coals  for  the  purpose  of  burning 


FIRMAMENT 


621 


incense ;  another,  like  a  snuffer-dish,  to  be  used  in 
trimming  the  lamps,  in  order  to  carry  the  snuffers 
and  convey  away  the  snuff.  [W.  L.  B.l 

FIRKIN.     [Measures.] 

FIRMAMENT.  This  term  was  introduced 
iuto  our  language  from  the  Vulgate,  which  givi  s 
firmamentum  as  the  equivalent  of  the  CTeptuifia  of 
the  LXX.  and  the  rakia  (J?*|T1)  of  the  Hebrew  text 
(Gen.  i.  6).  The  Hebrew  term  first  demands 
notice.  It  is  generally  regarded  as  expressive  of 
simple  expansion,  and  is  so  rendered  in  the  margin 
of  the  A.  V.  (I.  c.) ;  but  the  true  idea  of  the  word  is 
a  complex  one,  taking  in  the  mode  by  which  the 
expansion  is  effected,  and  consequently  implying 
the  nature  of  the  material  expanded.  The  verb 
raka  means  to  expand  by  beating,  whether  by  the 
hand,  the  foot,  or  any  instrument.  It  is  especially 
used,  however,  of  beating  out  metals  into  thin 
plates  (Ex.  xxxix.  3;  Num.  xvi.  39),  and  hence 
the  substantive  D^j?"]  =  "broad  plates"  of  metal 
(Num.  xvi.  38).  It  is  thus  applied  to  the  flattened 
surface  of  the  solid  earth  (Is.  xlii.  5,  xliv.  24 ;  Ps. 
cxxxvi.  6),  and  it  is  in  this  sense  that  the  term  is 
applied  to  the  heaven  in  Job  xxxvii.  18 — "Hast 
thou  spread  (rather  hammered)  out  the  sky  which 
is  strong,  and  as  a  molten  looking-glass " — the 
mirrors  to  which  he  refers  being  made  of  metal. 
The  sense  of  solidity,  therefore,  is  combined  with 
the  ideas  of  expansion  and  tenuity  in  the  term 
rakia.  Saalschiitz  (Archaeol.  ii.  67)  conceives  that 
the  idea  of  solidity  is  inconsistent  with  Gen.  ii.  6, 
which  implies,  according  to  him,  the  passage  of  the 
mist  through  the  rakia  ;  he  therefore  gives  it  the 
sense  of  pure  expansion — it  is  the  large  and  lofty- 
room  in  which  the  winds,  &c,  have  their  abode. 
But  it  should  be  observed  that  Gen.  ii.  6  implies 
the  very  reverse.  If  the  mist  had  penetrated  the 
rakia  it  would  have  descended  in  the  form  of  rain : 
the  mist,  however,  was  formed  under  the  rakia, 
and  resembled  a  heavy  dew — a  mode  of  fructifying 
the  earth  which,  from  its  regularity  and  quietude, 
was  more  appropriate  to  a  state  of  innocence  than 
vain,  the  occasional  violence  of  which  associated  it 
with  the  idea  of  divine  vengeance.  But  the  same 
idea  of  solidity  runs  through  all  the  references  to 
the  rakia.  In  Ex.  xxi  v.  10,  it  is  represented  as  a 
solid  floor — "a  paved  work  of  a  sapphire  stone;" 
nor  is  the  image  much  weakened  if  we  regard  the 
word  J"132?  as  applying  to  the  transparency  of  the 
stone  rather  than  to  the  paving  as  in  the  A.  V., 
either  sense  being  admissible.  So  again,  in  Ez.  i. 
22-26,  the  "firmament"  is  the  floor  on  which  the 
throne  of  the  Most  High  is  placed.  That  the  rakia 
should  be  transparent,  as  implied  in  the  comparisons 
with  the  sapphire  (Ex.  /.  c.)  and  with  crystal  (Ez. 
/.  c. ;  comp.  Rev.  iv.  6),  is  by  no  means  inconsis- 
tent with  its  .solidity.  Further,  the  olfice  of  the 
iii  the  economy  of  the  world  demanded 
ance.  It  was  to  serve  as  a  divi- 
sion between  the  waters  above  .and  the  waters  below 

(Gen.  i.  7).  In  order  to  enter  int..  this  description 
we  must  carry  our  ideas  back  to  the  time  when  the 
earth  was  a  chaotic  mass,  overspread  with  water, 
in  which  the  material  elements  of  the  heavens  were 
intermingled.  The  first  step,  therefore,  in  the 
work  <.f  ni.lerly  arrangement  was  to  separate  the 
elements  of  heaven  and  earth,  and  to  fix  a  floor  of 
partition  between  the  waters  of  the  heaven  and  the 
waters  of  the  earth  ;  and  accordingly  the  rakia  was 


622 


FIRST-BORN 


created  to  support  the  upper  reservoir  (Ps.  cxlviii. 
4;  comp.  Ps.  civ.  ','>,  where  Jehovah  is  represented 

as  "  building  his  chambers  of  water,"  not  simply 
"  in  water,"  as  the  A.  V. ;  the  prep.  2  signifying 
the  material  out  of  which  the  beams  and  joists 
were  made),  itself  being  supported  at  the  edge  or 
rim  of  the  earth's  disk  by  the  mountains  (2  Sam. 
xxii.  8  ;  Job  xxvi.  11).     In  keeping  with  this  view 
the  rakia  was  provided  with  "  windows  "  (Gen.  vii. 
11  ;  Is.  xxiv.  18;  Mai.  iii.   10)  and  "doors"  (Ps. 
lxxviii.  23),  through  which  the  rain  and  the  snow 
might  descend.     A   secondary   purpose  which    the 
rakia  served  was  to  support  the  heavenly  bodies, 
sun,  moon,  and  stars  (Gen.  i.  14),  in  which  they 
were  fixed  as  nails,  and  from  which,  consequently, 
they  might  be  said  to  drop  off  (Is.  xiv.  12,  xxxiv. 
4;  Matt.  xxiv.  '_'9).     In  all  these  particulars  we 
recognise  the  same  view  as  was  entertained  by  the 
Greeks  and,  to  a  certain  extent,  by  the  Latins.    The 
former   applied    to   the    heaven    such    epithets    as 
"  brazen  "  (xa-KKiov,  II.  xvii.  425  ;  iro\vxaAKov, 
Tl.   v.   504)  and  "  iron  "  (ffiSripeov,  Od.  xv.  328, 
xvii.  565) — epithets  also  used  in  the  Scriptures  (Lev. 
xxvi.    19) — and  that  this  was  not  merely  poetical 
embellishment  appears  from  the  views  promulgated 
by  their  philosophers,  Empedocles  (Plutarch,  Plac. 
Phil.  ii.  11)  and  Artemidorus  (Senec.  Quaest.  vii. 
13).    The  same  idea  is  expressed  in  the  caelo  affixa 
sidera  of  the  Latins  (Plin.  ii.  39,  xviii.  57).     If  it 
he  objected  to  the  Mosaic  account  that  the  view 
embodied   in  the   word  rakia  does  not  harmonize 
with  strict  philosophical  truth,  the  answer  to  such 
an  objection  is,  that  the  writer  describes  things  as 
they  appear  rather  than  as  they  are.     But  in  truth 
the  same  absence  of  philosophic  truth  may  be  traced 
throughout  all  the  terms  applied  to  this  subject, 
and  the  objection  is  levelled  rather  against  the  prin- 
ciples of  language  than  anything  else.    Examine  the 
Latin    coclum    (ko?\ov),    the  "hollow   place"    or 
cave  scooped  out  of  solid  space  ;  our  own  "  heaven," 
i.e.  what  is  heaved  up;  the  Greek  oiipav6s,  simi- 
larly significant  of  height  (Pott.  Etym.  Forsch.  i. 
12:;) ;  or  the  German  "  himmel,"  from  heimeln,  to 
cover — the  "roof"  which  constitutes  the"heim" 
or  abode  of  man :  in  each  there  is  a  large  amount  of 
philosophical  error.     Correctly  speaking,  of  course, 
the  atmosphere  is  the  true  rakia  by  which   the 
clouds  are   supported,    and   undefined  space  is   the 
abode  of  the  celestial  bodies.     There  certainly  ap- 
pears an  inconsistency  in  treating  the  rakia  as  the 
support  both  of  the  clouds  and  of  the  stars,  for  it 
could  not  have  escaped  observation  that  the  clouds 
were   below"   the   stars  :    but  perhaps  this  may   be 
referred  to  the  same  feeling  which  is  expressed  in 
the  caelum  ruit  of  the    Latins,   the   downfall    of 
the  rakia  in  stormy  weather.     Although  the  rakia 
and  the  shamayim  ("  heavens")  are  treated  as  iden- 
tical in  Gen.  i.  8,  vet  it  was  more  correct  to  recog- 
nise a  distinction  between   them,  as  implied  in  the 
expression   "firmament  of  the  heavens"  (Gen.   i. 
14),  the  former  being  the  upheaving  power  and  the 
litter  the  upheaved  Jbody— the  former  the  line  of 
demarcation  between  heaven  and  earth,  the  latter 
the  strata  or  stories  into  which  the  heaven  was 
divided.  [W.  L.  B.] 

FIRST-BORN  ("VD3 :  TrpcuToVo/coj ;  primo- 
genitus ;  from  "133,  early,  ripe,  Gesen.  p.  206), 
applied  equally  both  to  animals  and  human  beings. 
That  some  rights  of  primogeniture  existed  in  very 
early  times  is  plain,  but  it  not  so  clear  in  what  they 


FIRST-BORN 

consisted.  They  have  been  classed  as,  a.  authority 
over  the  rest  of  the  family;  6.  priesthood;  c.  a 
double  portion  of  the  inheritance.  The  birthright 
of  Esau  and  of  Reuben,  set  aside  by  authority  or 
forfeited  by  misconduct,  prove  a  general  privilege 
as  well  as  quasi -saeredness  of  primogeniture  (Gen. 
xxv.  23,  31,  34,  xlix.  3  ;  1  Chr.  v.  1  ;  Heb.  xii.  16), 
and  a  precedence  which  obviously  existed,  and  is 
alluded  to  in  various  passages  (as  Ps.  lxxxix.  27 ; 
Job  xviii.  13;  Rom.  viii.  29 ;  Col.  i.  15;  Heb.  xii. 
23) ;  but  the  story  of  Esau's  rejection  tends  to  show 
the  supreme  and  sacred  authority  of  the  parent 
irrevocable  even  by  himself,  rather  than  inherent 
right  existing  in  the  eldest  son,  which  was  evidently 
not  inalienable  (Geu.  xxvii.  29,  33,  36;  Grotius, 
Calmet,  Patrick,  Knobel,  on  Gen.  xxv.). 

Under  the  law,  in  memory  of  the  Exodus,  the 
eldest  son  was  regarded  as  devoted  to  God,  and  was 
in  every  case  to  be  redeemed  by  an  offering  not 
exceeding  5  shekels,  within  one  month  from  birth. 
If  he  died  before  the  expiration  of  30  days,  the 
Jewish  doctors  held  the  father  excused,  but  liable 
to  the  payment  if  he  outlived  that  time  (Ex.  xiii. 
12-15,  xxii.  29  ;  Num.  viii.  17,  xviii.  15,16  ;  Lev. 
xxvii.  6 ;  Lightfoot,  Hor.  Hcbr.  on  Luke  ii.  22  ; 
Philo,  de  Pr.  Sacerd.  i.  ii.  233 ;  Mangey).  This 
devotion  of  the  first-born  was  believed  to  indicate 
a  priesthood  belonging  to  the  eldest  sons  of  families, 
which  being  set  aside  in  the  case  of  Reuben,  was 
transferred  to  the  tribe  of  Levi.  This  priesthood 
is  said  to  have  lasted  till  the  completion  of  the 
Tabernacle  ( Jahn,  Arch.  Bibl.  x.  §165,  387 ;  Patrick, 
Selden,  de  Syn.  c.  16;  Mishn.  Zebachim,  xiv.  4, 
vol.  v.  58  ;  comp.  Ex.  xxiv.  5). 

The  ceremony  of  redemption  of  the  first-born  is 
described  by  Calmet  from  Leo  of  Modena  (Calm. 
on  Num..  xviii.).  The  eldest  son  received  a  double 
portion  of  the  father's  inheritance  (Deut.  xxi.  17), 
but  not  of  the  mother's  (Mishn.  Becoroth,  viii.  9). 
If  the  father  had  married  two  wives,  of  whom  he 
preferred  one  to  the  other,  he  was  forbidden  to  give 
precedence  to  the  son  of  the  one,  if  the  child  of  the 
other  were  the  first-born  (Deut.  xxi.  15,  16).  In 
the  case  of  levirate  marriage,  the  son  of  the  next 
brother  succeeded  to  his  uncle's  vacant  inheritance 
(Deut.  xxv.  5,  6).  Under  the  monarchy,  the  eldest 
son  usually,  but  not  always,  as  appears  in  the  case 
of  Solomon,  succeeded  his  father  in. the  kingdom 
(1  K.  i.  30,  ii.  22). 

The  male  first-born  of  animals  (Dm  "It33  ; 
Siavo'iyov  fxrjrpau ;  quod  aperit  vulvam)  was  also 
devoted  to  God  (Ex.  xiii.  2,  12,  13,  xxii.  29,  xxxiv. 
19,  20;  Philo,  I.e.,  and  quis  rerum  dir.  haeres. 
24,  i.  489,  Mang.).  Unclean  animals  were  to  be 
redeemed  with  the  addition  of  one-fifth  of  the  value, 
or  else  put  to  death  ;  or  if  not  redeemed,  to  be  sold, 
and  the  price  given  to  the  priests  (Lev.  xxvii.  13, 
27,  28)..  The  first-born  of  an  a^s  was  to  be 
redeemed  with  a  lamb,  or,  if  not  redeemed,  put  to 
death  (Ex.  xiii.  IS,  xxxiv.  20;  Num.  xviii.  15). 
Of  cattle,  goats,  or  sheep,  the  first-born  from  eight 
days  to  twelve  months  old  were  not  to  be  used,  but 
ottered  in  sacrifice.  After  the  burning  of  the  fat, 
the  remainder  was  appropriated  to  the  priests  (Ex. 
xxii.  30  ;  Num.  xviii.  17,  18;  Deut.  xv.  19,  20; 
Neh.  x.  36).  If  there  were  any  blemish,  the  animal 
was  not  to  be  sacrificed,  but  eaten  at  home  (  Deut.  xv. 
21,  22,  and  xii.  5-7,  xiv.  23).  Various  refinements 
on  the  subject  of  blemishes  are  to  be  found  in 
Mishn.  Becoroth.  (See  Mai.  i.  8.  By  "  firstlings," 
Deut.  xiv.  2.3,  compared  with  Num.  xviii.  17,  are 


FIRST-FRUITS 

meant  tithe  animals:  see  Reland,  Antiq.  iii.  10, 
p.  327;  Jahn,  Arch.  Bibl.  §387.)       [H.  W.  P.] 

FIEST- FRUITS.  1.  HWl,  from  C?K"I, 
shake,  Gesen.  pp.  1249,  1252  ;  sometimes  rVC'X"! 
Dn-na.  2.  Dn-133  in  p!.  only,  or  Dn33,  Ges'. 
p.  206  :  usually  ■KpwToy^vwi]^.ara,  airapx0^  r<*>v 
TrpwToyevfq/xa.Twi'  (Ex.  xxiii.  19)  ;  primitiae,  frur 
gum  initia,  primitiva.  3.  HO-nn,  ties,  p.  1276: 
cupaipefACt,  anapxv  ',  primitiae. 

Besides  the  first  born  of  man  and  of  beast,  the 
Law  required  that  offerings  of .first-fruits  of  produce 
should  be  made  publicly  by  the  nation  at  each  of 
the  3  great  yearly  festivals,  and  also  by  individuals 
without  limitation  of  time.  No  ordinance  appears 
to  have  been  more  distinctly  recognised  than  this, 
so  that  the  use  of  the  term  in  the  way  of  illustra- 
tion carried  with  it  a  full  significance  even  in 
N.  T.  times  (Prov.  iii.  9;  Tob.  i.  6  ;  1  Mace.  iii. 
49;  Rom.  viii.  23,  .\i.  16;  Jam.  i.  18;  Rev. 
xiv.  4). 

1.  The  Law  ordered  in  general,  that  the  first  of 
all  ripe  fruits  and  of  liquors,  or,  as  it  is  twice  ex- 
pressed, the  first  of  first-fruits,  should  be  offered  in 
God's  house  (Ex.  xxii.  29,  xxiii.  19,  xxxiv.  26; 
Philo,  de  Monarch ia,  ii.  3  (ii.  224,  Mang.)  ). 

2.  On  the  morrow  after  the  Passover  sabbath, 
i.  c.  on  the  16th  of  Nisan,  a  sheaf  of  new  corn  was 
to  be  brought  to  the  priest,  and  waved  before  the 
altar,  in  acknowledgment  of  the  gift  of  fruitful- 
ness  (Lev.  xxiii.  5,  6,  10,  12,  ii.  12).  Josephus 
tells  us  that  the  sheaf  was  of  barley,  and  that  until 
this  ceremony  had  been  performed,  no  harvest  work 
was  to  be  begun  (Joseph.  Ant.  iii.  10,  §5). 

3.  At  the  expiration  of  7  weeks  from  this  time, 
i.e.  at  the  Feast  of  Pentecost,  an  oblation  was  to 
be  made  of  2  loaves  of  leavened  bread  made  from 
the  new  flour,  which  were  to  be  waved  in  like 
manner  with  the  Passover  sheaf  (Ex.  xxxiv.  22  ; 
Lev.  xxiii.  1."),  17;  Num.  x.wiii.  26  |. 

4.  The  feast  of  ingathering,  I.  e.  the  Feast  of 
Tabernacles  in  the  7th  month,  was  itself  an  acknow- 
ledgment of  the  fruits  of  tin-  harvest  (  Ex.  xxiii.  16, 
xxxiv.  22  ;  Lev.  xxiii.  39). 

These  four  sorts  of  offerings  Were  national.  Be- 
sides them,  the  two  following  were  of  an  individual 
kind,  but  the  last  was  made  by  custom  tu  assume 
also  a  national  character. 

5.  A  cake  of  the  first  dough  that  was  baked, 
was  to  be  offered  as  a  heave-offering  ('Num.  xv. 
19,  21). 

6.  The  first-fruits  of  the  land  were  to  be  b 

in  a  basket  to  the  holy  place  of  God's  choice,  ami 
there  presented  to  the  priest,  who  was  to  set  the 
basket  down  before  the  altar.  The  ofierer  was 
then,  m  words  of  which  the  outline,  if  not  the 
whole  form  was  prescribed,  to  recite  the  story  of 
Jacob's  descent  into  Egypt,  and  the  deliverance 
therefrom  of  his  posterity  ;  and  to  acknowledge  the 
blessings  with  which  God  had  visited  him  Deut. 
xxvi.  2-11). 

The  offerings,  both  public  and  private,  resolve 
themselves  into  2  classes,  <t.  produce  in  general, 
in  the  Mishna  D,~1-1D3,  Bicurim,  first-fruits, 
primitivi  fructus,  irpooToysvvripio.Ta.,  raw  produce. 
'>.  DDDnn,  Teriimnth,  offerings,  primitiae,  iwap- 
xo-l,  prepared  produce  (Gesen.  p.  1276;  Augus- 
tine, QiKicst.  in  Ifc/'t.  iv.  32,  vol.  iii.  p,  732; 
Spencer,   de  Leg.   Hebr.  iii.  9,  p.  713;    Reland, 


FIRST-FRUITS 


623 


Antiq.   iii.   7  ;   Philo,  dc  Pr.  Sacerd.  i.  (ii.  233, 
Mang.)  de  Sacrific.  Abel,  et  Cain,  21  (i.  177,  M.)  j. 

a.  Of  the  public  offerings  of  first-fruits,  the  Law 
defiued  no  place  from  which  the  Passover  sheaf 
should  be  chosen,  but  the  Jewish  custom,  so  far  as 
it  is  represented  by  the  Mishna,  prescribed  that 
the  wave-sheaf  or  sheaves  should  be  taken  from  the 
neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem  (  Terwmoth,  x.  2).  De- 
puties from  the  Sanhedrim  went  out  on  the  eve  of 
the  festival,  and  tied  the  growing  stalks  in  bunches. 
In  the  evening  of  the  festival  day  the  sheaf  was  cut 
with  all  possible  publicity,  and  carried  to  the 
Temple,  it  was  there  threshed,  and  an  omer  of 
grain  after  being  winnowed,  was  bruised  and  roasted : 
after  it  had  been  mixed  with  oil  and  frankincense 
laid  upon  it,  the  priest  waved  the  offering  in  all 
directions.  A  handful  was  thrown  on  the  altar- 
fire,  and  the  rest  belonged  to  the  priests,  to  be 
eaten  by  those  who  were  free  from  ceremonial  de- 
filement. After  this  the  harvest  might  be  carried 
on.  After  the  destruction  of  the  Temple  all  this 
was  discontinued,  on  the  principle,  as  it  seems, 
that  the  House  of  God  was  exclusively  the  place  for 
oblation  (Lev.  ii.  14,  x.  14,  xxiii.  13;  Num.  xviii. 
11  ;  Mishn.  Tervm.  v.  6,  x.  4,  5  ;  Schekcdim,  viii. 
8  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  iii.  10,  §5  ;  Philo,  de  proem,  sac. 
i.  (ii.  233,  Mang.)  ;  Reland,  Antiq.  iii.  7,  3,  iv. 
3,  8). 

I  he  offering  made  at  the  feast  of  the  Pentecost, 
was  a  thanksgiving  for  the  conclusion  of  wheat 
harvest.  It  consisted  of  2  loaves  (according  to  Jo- 
sephus one  loaf)  of  new  flour  baked  with  leaven, 
which  were  waved  by  the  priest  as  at  the  Passover. 
The  size  of  the  loaves  is  fixed  by  the  Mishna  at 
7  palms  long  and  4  wide,  with  horns  of  4  fingers 
length.  No  private  offerings  of  first-fruits  were 
allowed  before  this  public  oblation  of  the  2  loaves 
■Lev.  xxiii.  15,20;  Mishn.  Terum.  x.  6,  xi.  4; 
Joseph.  Ant.  iii.  lit,  §6;  Reland,  Antiq.  iv.  4,  5). 
The  private  oblations  of  first-fruits  may  be  classed 
in  the  same  manner  as  the  public.  The  directions 
of  the  Law  respecting  them  have  been  stated  gene- 
rally above.  To  these  the  Jews  added  or  deduced 
the  following.  Seven  sorts  of  produce  were  consi- 
dered liable  to  oblation,  viz.  wheat,  barley,  grapes, 
figs,  pomegranates,  olives,  and  dates  (Gesen.  p. 
219;  Dent.  viii.  8;  Mishn.  Bicurim  i.  3;  Has- 
selquist,  Travels,  p.  417),  but  the  law  appears  to 
have  contemplated  produce  of  all  sorts,  and  to  have 
been  so  understood  by  Nehemiah  (Deut.  xxvi.  2; 
Neb.  x.  35,  37).  The  portions  intended  to  be 
offered  were  decided  by  inspection,  and  the  selected 
fruits  were  fastened  to  the  stem  by  a  band  of 
rushes  (Bic.  iii.  1).  A  proprietor  might,  it  he 
thought  lit.  devote  the  whole  of  his  produce  as 
first-fruits  '  ibid.  ii.  1 1.  Bui  though  the  Law  laid 
down  no  nil  •  as  to  quantity,  the  minimum  lived  by 
custom  was  J,  |  Reland,  Antiq.  iii.  s.  4  ).  No  offer- 
ings were  to  be  made  before  Pentecost ,  nor  ait.  r  the 
feast  of  the  Dedication,  on  the  25th  of  Cisleu  I  E*. 
xxiii.  16  :  Lev.  xxiii.  16,  17  :  Bic.  i.  3,  6  .  The 
practice  was  for  companies  of  24  persons  to  assemble 
in  the  evening  at  a  central  station,  and  pa-  the 
night  in  the  open  air.      In   the  1110111111-  they  were 

mmoned  by  the  leader  of  the  feast  with  the  words, 
••  Let  us  arise  and  go  up  to  Mount  Zion,  the  House 
of  the  Lord  our  God."  On  the  road  to  Jerusalem 
they  recital  portions  of  Psalms  exxii.  and  el.  Each 
party  was  preceded  bj  a  piper,  a  sacrificial  h 
having  the  tips  "f  hi-  horns  gill  and  crowned  with 
"live.  At  their  approach  to  the  <it\  they  were 
net   by  priests  appointed  to  inspect  the  offerings 


024 


FIRST-FRUITS 


and  were  welcomed  by  companies  of  '-itizens  pro- 
portioned to  the  number  of  the  pilgrims.  On 
ascending  the  Temple  mount  each  person  took  his 
basket,  containing  the  first-fruits  and  an  offering 
of  turtle  doves,  on  his  shoulders,  and  proceeded  to 
the  court  of  the  Temple,  where  they  were  met 
by  Levites  singing  Ps.  xxx.  2.  The  doves  were 
sacrificed  as  a  burnt-offering,  and  the  first-fruits 
presented  to  the  priests  with  the  words  appointed 
in  Deut.  xxvi.  The  baskets  of  the  rich  were  of 
gold  or  silver  ;  those  of  the  poor  of  peeled  willow. 
The  baskets  of  the  latter  kind  were,  as  well  as  the 
offerings  they  contained,  presented  to  the  priests, 
who  waved  the  offerings  at  the  S.  W.  corner  of  the 
altar :  the  more  valuable  baskets  were  returned  to 
the  owners  (Bio.  iii.  G,  8  ).  After  passing  the  night 
at  Jerusalem,  the  pilgrims  returned  on  the  follow- 
ing day  to  their  homes  (Deut.  xvi.  7  ;  Terum. 
ii.  4).  It  is  mentioned  that  King  Agrippa  bore  his 
part  in  this  highly  picturesque  national  ceremony 
by  carrying  his  basket  like  the  rest,  to  the  Temple 
(Bic.  iii.  4).  Among  other  bye-laws  were  the  fol- 
lowing: 1.  He  who  ate  his  first-fruits  elsewhere 
than  in  Jerusalem  and  without  the  proper  form 
was  liable  to  punishment  (Maccoth,  iii.  3,  vol.  iv. 
284,  Surenh.).  2.  Women,  slaves,  deaf  and  dumb 
persons,  and  some  others  were  exempt  from  the 
verbal  oblation  before  the  priest,  which  was  not 
generally  used  after  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  (Bic. 
i.  5,  6). 

b.  The  first-fruits  prepared  for  use  were  not 
required  to  be  taken  to  Jerusalem.  They  consisted 
of  wine,  wool,  bread,  oil,  date-honey,  onions,  cucum- 
bers (Terum.  ii.  5,  ft ;  Num.  xv.  19,21;  Deut. 
xviii.  4).  They  were  to  be  made,  according  to  some, 
only  by  dwellers  in  Palestine ;  but  according  to 
others,  b}r  those  also  who  dwelt  in  Moab,  in  Am- 
monitis,  and  in  Egypt  (Terum.  i.  1).  They  were 
not  to  be  taken  from  the  portion  intended  for  tithes, 
nor  from  the  corners  left  for  the  poor  (ibid.  i.  5, 
iii.  7).  The  proportion  to  be  given  is  thus  estimated 
in  that  treatise :  a  liberal  measure,  ^,  or,  according 
to  the  school  of  Shammai,  ^  ;  a  moderate  portion, 
:-'fj ;  a  scanty  portion,  ^.  (See  Ez.  xlv.  13.)  The 
measuring-basket  was  to  be  thrice  estimated  dining 
the  season  (j'6.  iv.  3).  He  who  ate  or  drank  his  offer- 
ing by  mistake  was  bound  to  add  1,  and  present  it  to 
the  priest  (Lev.  v.  16,  xxii.  14),  who  was  forbidden 
to  remit  the  penalty  (Terum.  vi.  1,  5).  The  offer- 
ings were  the  perquisite  of  the  priests,  not  only  at 
Jerusalem,  but  in  the  provinces,  and  were  to  be 
eaten  or  used  only  by  those  who  were  clean  from 
ceremonial  defilement  (Num.  xviii.  11  ;  Deut. 
xviii.  4). 

The  corruption  of  the  nation  after  the  time  of 
Solomon  gave  rise  to  neglect  in  these  as  well  as  in 
other  ordinances  of  the  haw,  and  restoration  of  them 
was  among  the  reforms  brought  about  by  Hezekiah 
(2  Chr.  xxxi  5, 11).  Nehemiah  also,  at  the  Return 
from  Captivity,  took  pains  to  reorganize  the  offer- 
ings of  first-fruits  of  both  kinds,  and  to  appoint 
places  to  receive  them  (Neh.  x.  35,  37,  xii.  44). 
Perversion  or  alienation  of  them  is  reprobated,  as 
care  in  observing  is  eulogized  by  the  prophets,  and 
specially  mentioned  in  the  sketch  of  the  restoration 
of  the  Temple  and  Temple-service  made  bv  Ezekiel 
(Ez.  xx.  40,  xliv.  30,  xlviii.  14 ;  Mai.  iii.  8). 

An  offering  of  first-fruits  is  mentioned  as  an 
acceptable  one  to  the  prophet  Elisha  (2  K.  iv.  42). 

Besides  the  offerings  of  first-fruits  mentioned 
above,  the  Law  directed  that  the  fruit  of  all  trees 
fresh  planted  should   be  regarded  as  uncircumcised, 


FISH 

or  profane,  and  not  to  be  tasted  by  the  owner  for 
three  years.  The  whole  produce  of  the  fourth  year 
was  devoted  to  God  ;  and  did  not  become  free  to 
the  owner  till  the  fifth  year  (Lev.  xix.  23-25). 
The  trees  found  growing  by  the  Jews  at  the  con- 
quest were  treated  as  exempt  from  this  rule. 
(Mishn.  Orlah,\.  2.) 

Offerings  of  first-fruits  were  sent  to  Jerusalem 
by  Jews  living  in  foreign  countries  (Joseph.  Ant. 
xvi.  6,  §7). 

Offerings  of  first-fruits  were  also  customary  in 
heathen  systems  of  worship.  (See,  for  instances 
and  authorities,  Patrick,  On  Deut.  xxvi.  ;  and  a 
copious  list  in  Spencer,  de  Leg.  Hebr.  iii.  9,dePri- 
mitiarum  Origine ;  also  Leslie,  On  Tithes,  Works, 
vol.  ii. ;  Winer,  s.  v.  Erstlinge.)  [H.  W.  P.] 

FISH  ;  FISHING.  The  Hebrews  recognized 
fish  as  one  of  the  great  divisions  of  the  animal  king- 
dom, and,  as  such,  give  them  a  place  in  the  account 
of  the  creation  (Gen.  i.  21,  28),  as  well  as  in  other 
passages  where  an  exhaustive  description  of  living 
creatures  is  intended  (Gen.  ix.  2  ;  Ex.  xx.  4  ;  Deut. 
iv.  18  ;  1  K.  iv.  33).  They  do  not,  however, 
appear  to- have  acquired  any  intimate  knowledge  of 
this  branch  of  natural  history.  Although  they  were 
acquainted  with  some  of  the  names  given  by  the 
Egyptians  to  the  different  species  (for  Josephus.  B.  J. 
hi.  10,  §8,  compares  one  found  in  the  Sea  of  Galilee 
to  the  coracinus),  they  did  not  adopt  a  similar 
method  of  distinguishing  them  ;  nor  was  any  classi- 
fication attempted  beyond  the  broad  divisions  of 
clean  and  uuclean,  great  and  small.  The  former 
was  established  by  the  Mosaic  law  (Lev.  xi.  9,  10), 
which  pronounced  unclean  such  fish  as  were  devoid 
of  fins  and  scales :  these  were  and  are  regarded  as  un- 
wholesome food  in  Egypt  (Wilkinson,  Anc.  Egypt. 
iii.  58,  59),  so  much  so  that  one  of  the  laws  of  El- 
Hakim  prohibited  the  sale,  or  even  the  capture  of 
them  (Lane,  Modern  Egyptians,  i.  132).  This 
distinction  is  probably  referred  to  in  the  terms 
ffairpd  (esui  non  idonca,  Schleusner's  Lex.  s.  v. ; 
Trench,  On  Parables,  p.  137)  and  Ka\d  (Matt, 
xiii.  48).  Of  the  various  species  found  in  the  Sea 
of  Galilee  (as  enumerated  by  Raumer,  Palastma, 
p.  93),  the  silurus  would  be  classed  among  the 
former,  while  the  sparus  Galilacus,  a  species  of 
bream,  and  the  mugil,  chub,  would  be  deemed 
"  clean  "  or  "  good."  The  second  .division  is  marked 
in  Gen.  i.  21  (as  compared  with  verse  28),  where 
the  great  marine  animals  (DvlJH  D,,J,'3Jrl  ;  kt]ti) 

fx.eya.Aa),  generically  described  as  whales  in  the 
A.  V.  (Gen".  I.  c;  Job  vii.  12)  [Whale],  but  in- 
cluding also  other  animals,  such  as  the  crocodile 
[Leviathan]  and  perhaps  some  kinds  of  serpents, 
are  distinguished  from  "  every  living  creature 
that  creepeth"  (Jlb^'in  ;  A.  V.  "  moveth  "),  a 

description  applying  to  fish,  along  with  other  rep- 
tiles, as  having  no  legs.  To  the  former  class  we 
may  assign  the  large  fish  referred  to  in  Jon.  ii.  1 
(^'nS  31  ;  kJitos  iieya,  Matt.  xii.  40)  which  Winer, 
(art.  Eische),  after  Bochart,  identifies  with  a  species 
of  shark  (canis  carcharias) ;  and  also  that  referred 
to  inTob.  vi.  2  ff,  identified  by  Bochart  (Hieroz. 
iii.  p.  697  ff.)  with  the  sUurus  glanis,  but  by  Kitto 
(art.  Fish)  with  a  species  of  crocodile  (the  scow) 
found  in  the  Indus.  The  Hebrews  were  struck 
with  the  remarkable  fecundity  of  fish,  and  have 
expressed  this  in  the  term  31,  the  root  of  which 
signifies  increase  (comp.  Gen.  xlviii.  16),  and  in 


FISH 

the  secondary  sense  of  }*"lt^,  lit.  to  creep,  thence  to 
multiply  (Gen.  i.  20,  viii.  17,  ix.  7  ;  Ex.  i.  7),  as 
well  as  in  the  allusions  in  Ez.  xlvii.  10.  Doubtless 
they  became  familiar  with  this  fact  in  Egypt,  where 
the  abundance  of  fish  in  the  Nile,  and  the  lake  and 
canals  (Strab.  xvii.  p.  823;  Diod.  i.  36,  4:!,  52  ; 
Her.  ii.  93,  149),  rendered  it  one  of  the  staple  com- 
modities of  food  (Num.  xi.  5  ;  comp.  Wilkinson,' iii. 
62).  The  destruction  of  the  fish  was  on  this  ac- 
count a  most  serious  visitation  to  the  Egyptians 
(Ex.  vii.  21;  Is.  xix.  8).  Occasionally  it  is  the 
result  of  natural  causes  :  thus  St.  John  (  Travels  in 
Valley  of  the  Nile,  ii.  24-6)  describes  a  vast  de- 
struction of  tiiii  from  cold,  .and  Wellsted  (Travels 
in  Arabia,  i.  310)  states  that  in  Oman  the  fish  are 
visited  with  an  epidemic  about  every  five  years, 
which  destroys  immense  quantities  of  them.  It  was- 
perhaps  as  an  image  of  fecundity  that  the  fish  was 
selected  as  an  object  of  idolatry :  the  worship  of  it 
was  widely  spread,  from  Egypt  (Wilkinson,  iii.  58) 
to  Assyria  (Layard,  Nineveh,  ii.  467),  and  even 
India  (Baur,  Mythologie,  ii.  58).  Among  the  Phi- 
listines, Dagon  (  =  little  fis/t)  was  represented  by  a 
figure,  half  man  and  half  fish  (1  Sam.  v.  4).  On 
this  account  the  worship  of  fish  is  expressly  pro- 
hibited (Deut.  iv.  18).  In  Palestine,  the  Sea  of 
Galilee  was  and  still  is  remarkably  well  stored  with 
fish,  and  the  value  attached  to  the  fishery  by  the 
Jews  is  shown  by  the  traditional  belief  that  one  of 
the  ten  laws  of  Joshua  enacted  that  it  should  be 
open  to  all  comers  (Lightfoot's  Talmudical  Exer- 
citations  on  Watt.  iv.  lo).  No  doubt  the  inhabit- 
ants of  northern  J  udaea  drew  large  supplies  thence 
for  their  subsistence  in  the  earlier  as  well  as  the 
later  periods  of  the  Bible  history.  Jerusalem  de- 
rived its  supply  chiefly  from  the  Mediterranean 
(comp.  Ez.  xlvii.  10),  at  one  time  through  Phoe- 
nician traders  (Xeh.  xiii.  16),  who  must  have  pre- 
viously salted  it  (in  which  form  it  is  termed  PlvfO 
in  the  Talmud;  Lightfoot  on  Matt.  xiv.  17):  the 
existence  of  a  regular  fish-market  is  implied  in  the 
notice  of  the  fish-gate,  which  was  probably  con- 
tiguous to  it  (2  Chr.  xxxiii.  14;  Neh.  iii.  3,  xii.  39  ; 
Zcph.  i.  10).  In  addition  to  these  sources,  the 
reservoirs  formed  in  the  neighbourhood  of  towns 
may  have  been  stocked  with  fish  (  2  Sam.  ii.  1.3, 
iv.  12;  Is.  vii.  '■'<,  xxii.  9,  1 1  ;  Cant.  vii.  4,  where, 
however,  "fish"  is  interpolated  in  the  A.  V.). 
With  regard  to  fish  as  an  article  of  food,  see  EoOD. 
Numerous  allusions  to  the  art  of  fishing  occur 
in  the  Bible:  in  the  O.  T.  these  allusions  are  of  a 
metaphorical  character,  descriptive  either  of  the 
conversion  (Jer.  xvi.  16;  Ez.  xlvii.  10),  or  of  the 
destruction  (Ez.  xxix.  .">  ff.;  Eccl.  ix.  12;  Am.  iv. 
2 ;  Hab.  i.  14 1  of  tin-  enemies  of  God.  In  the 
N.  T.  the  allusions  are  of  a  historical  character  for 
the  most  part,  though  the  metaphorical  application 
is  still  maintained  in  Matt.  xiii.  47  ff.  The  most 
usual  method  of  catching  fish  was  by  the  use  of  the 
net,  either  the  castini/  net  (Din,  Hab.  i.  l.">;  Ez. 
xxvi.  .">,  14,  xlvii.  in;  SIktvov,  Matt.  iv.  20,21; 
Mark  i.  18,  19;  Luke  v.  2  IE;  John  xxi.  6  ff. ; 
a/j.<pil3\r)<TTpov,  Matt.  iv.  is  ;  Mark  i.  161,  probably 
resembling  the  one  used  in  Egypt,  as  shown  in 
Wilkinson  (iii.  55),  or  the  r/,-,r//<  or  drag  nei 
(n~lb30,  Is.  xix.  S  ;    Hab.   i.    15;   ffayiw    Matt. 

xiii.  47),  which  was  larger  and  required  the  use  of  a 
boat:  the  latter  was  probably  mosi  used  on  the  Sea 
of  Galilee,  as  the  number  of  boats  kept  on  it  was  very 
considerable  (Joseph.  B.  J.  iii.  10,  §9).     On  other 


PITCHES 


G25 


waters  a  method,  analogous  to  the  use  of  the  weir 
in  our  country,  was  pursued  :  a  fence  of  canes  or 
reeds  was  made,  within  which  the  fish  were  caught : 
this  was  forbidden  on  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  in  conse- 


lliliii 


IlllilllPii 


i 


An  Egyptian  Landing-Net.    (Wilkinson.) 

quence  of  the  damage  done  to  the  boats  bv  the 
stakes  (Lightfoot  on  Matt.  iv.  18).  Angling  was  a 
favourite  pursuit  of  the  wealthy  in  Egypt,  as  well 
as  followed  by  the  poor  who  could  not  afford  a  net 
(Wilkinson,  iii.  53  ff.) :  the  requisites  were  a  hook 
(H3n,  Is.  xix.  8  ;  Hab.  i.  15  ;  Job  xli.  1 ;  H3V  and 
TD,  so  called  from  its  resemblance  to  a  thorn, 
Am.  iv.  2;  &yKi(TTpov,  Matt.  xvii.  27),  and  a  line 
(73PI,  Job  xli.  1)  made  perhaps  of  reeds:  the  rod 

was  occasionally  dispensed  with  (Wilkinson,  iii.  53), 
ainl  is  not  mentioned  in  the  Bible:  ground-bait 
alone  was  used,  fly-fishing  being  unknown:  A  still 
more  scientific  method  was  with  the  trident  (HSL'' 
A.  V.  "  barbed  iron")  or  the  spear  pivV),  as  prac- 
tised in  Egypt  in  taking  the  crocodile  (Job  xli.  7) 
or  the  hippopotamus  (Wilkinson,  iii.  72  ).  A  similar 
custom  of  spearing  fish  still  exists  in  Arabia  (Well- 
sted, ii.  347).  The  reference  in  Job  xli.  2  is  not  to 
the  use  of  the  hook  in  fishing,  but  to  the  custom 
of  keeping  fish  alive  in  the  water,  when  not  required 
for  immediate  use,  by  piercing  the  gills  with  a  ring 
(Plin  ;  A.  V.  "  thorn")  attached  to  a  stake  by  a 
rope  of  reeds  (jDJN  ;  A.  V.  "hook").     The  night 

was  esteemed  the  best  time  for  fisliing  with  the  net 
(Luke  v.  5;  Plin.  ix.  23).  "  [W.  L.  B.] 

FITCHES.  This  word  occurs  three  times  in 
Is.  xxviii.  25,  27  as  the  representative  of  the  I  lob. 
word  nVp,  which  the  LXX.  render  by  fj.eKav8iov, 
ami  tlio  Vulg.  by  gith  (perhaps  from  the  Heb.  HH 
coriander,  see  Plant.  Rud.  ■">.  •".,  39).  It  is  the  black 
popp]  ,  in  Latin  nigella ;  in  Germ.  Schwarz-kummel, 
and  has  a  seed  like  cummin,  much  used  in  sauces 
(Plin.  19,  §8;  I>iose.  :;.  93).  [saiah  tolls  us  that 
fitches  were  not  threshed  with  a  threshing  in  i 
ment,  but  beaten  out  with  a  staff. 

In  Ez.  iv.  9  "fitches"  an'  mentioned  amor 
materials  of  the  bread  tin'  prophet  was  bidden  to 

make,  but  there  it  represent-  t  he  Heb.  word  DOD3. 
This  word  is  incorrectly  translated  in  A.  A'.  ••  rie, 
in  Ez.  ix.  32,  and  Is.  xxviii.  '_'.">;  bat  in  the  latter 
as  in  Ez.  iv.  9,  we  have  the  marginal  reading 
"spelt,"  which  is  the  trai'  meaning  of  the  word. 
The  root  of  ri£D3  is  DD2,  to  shear,  a ncl  the  species 
of  corn,  to  which    it  gives  a  name,  is  the   Trii 

2   S 


626 


FLAG 


Spelta  of  Linnaeus — in  Greek  (ta ;  in  Latin  far, 
and  odor.  "  Spelt  has  a  four-leaved  blunted  calix, 
small  blossoms,  with  little  awns,  and  a  smooth, 
slender  ear  (as  it  were  shorn),  the  grains  of  which 
sit  so  firmly  in  the  husks  that  they  must  be  freed 
from  them  by  peculiar  devices ;  it  grows  about  as 
high  as  barley,  and  is  extensively  cultivated  in  the 
southern  countries  of  Europe,  in  Egypt,  Arabia, 
and  Palestine,  in  more  than  one  species.  The  LXX. 
translate  it  by  6\vpa,  in  Pliny  arinca,  which 
corresponds  with  the  French  riguet;  and  Hero- 
dotus (ii.  36)  observes  that  it  was  used  by  the 
Egyptians  for  baking  bread."  See  Kalisch  on  Ex. 
ix  32.  [W.  D.] 

FLAG.  In  Job  viii.  11  it  is  asked,  "Can  the 
flag  grow  without  water?"  the  word  rendered 
"  flag"  being  the  Heb.  WW,  Achu.  This  is  an  Egyp- 
tian word,  as  Gesenius  has  proved  {Thes.  p.  67), 
and  signifies  marsh  vegetation  of  every  kind,  or,  as 
Jerome  on  Is.  xix.  7  says,  "  quicquid  in  palude 
virens  nascitur."  In  Gen.  xli.  2,  the  LXX.  render 
the  word  by  &xil  ^A-  V-  "  meadow.")  Theodotion 
in  Job  viii.  11  has  axi;  and  a%i  occurs  in  the. 
LXX.  (Is.  xix.  7)  also  as  the  representative  of 
niiy  (A.  V.  "paper  reeds")  which  word  is  ex- 
plained by  Gesenius,  naked  places  without  trees — 
the  grassy  places  on  the  banks  of  the  Nile. 
in  Ex.  ii.  3,  5,  and  Is.  xix.  6  the  Heb.  5|-1D  (Suph; 
the  word  from  which  the  Red  Sea  derives  its  Scrip- 
ture name  of  Yam-Suph,  the  "  weedy  sea ")  is 
rendered  flag.  The  reference  in  both  cases  is  to  a 
water-plant  growing  in  Egypt  at  the  river-side. 
This  plant  was  probably  the  Alga  Nilotica,  called 
by  the  Egvptians  Sari.  Pliny  (xiii.  23)  describes 
it,     (See  Kalisch  on  Ex.  I.  c.)  [W.  D.] 

FLAGON,  a  word  employed  in  the  A.  V.  to 
render  two  distinct  Hebrew  terms:  1.  Ashishah, 
n^K'X  (2  Sam.  vi.  19  ;  1  Chr.  xvi.  3  ;  Cant.  ii.  5 ; 
Hos.  iii."  1).  The  real  meaning  of  this  word,  ac- 
cording to  the  conclusions  of  Gesenius  (Thes.  166), 
is  a  cake  of  pressed  raisins.  He  derives  it  from  a 
root  signifying  to  compress,  and  this  is  confirmed 
by  the  renderings  of  the  LXX.  (\ayavov,  a^oplrr], 
ire'/UjUaTa)  and  of  the  Vulgate,  and  also  by  the 
indications  of  the  Targum  Pseudojon.  and  the  Mishna 
(Nedarim,  6,  §10).  -In  the  passage  in  Hosea  there 
is  probably  a  reference  to  a  practice  of  offering 
such  cakes  before  the  false  deities.  The  rendering 
of  the  A.  V.  is  perhaps  to  be  traced  to  Luther,  who 
in  the  first  two  of  the  above  passages  has  ein  Ndssel 
Wein,  and  in  the  last  Kanne  Wein ;  but  primarily 
to  the  interpretations  of  modem  Jews  (e.  g.  Ge- 
mara,  Baba  Bathra,  and  Targum  on  Chronicles), 
grounded  on  a  false  etymology  (see  Michaelis, 
quoted  by  Gesenius,  and  the  observations  of  the 
latter,  as  above).  It  will  be  observed  that  in  the 
two  first  passages  the  words  "  of  wine "  are  inter- 
polated, and  that  in  the  last  "  of  wine"  should  be 
"  of  grapes." 

2.  Nebel,  723  (Is.  xxii.  24  only).  Nebel  is 
commonly  used  for  a  bottle  or  vessel,  originally 
probably  a  skin,  but  in  later  times  a  piece  of 
pottery  (Is.  xxx.  14).  But  it  also  frequently  occurs 
with  the  force  of  a  musical  instrument  (A.  V.  gene- 
rally "  psaltery,"  but  sometimes  "  viol "),  a  mean- 
ing which  is  adopted  by  the  Targum,  and  the 
Arabic  and  Vulgate  versions,  and  Luther,  and  given 
in  the  margin  of  the  A.  V.  The  text,  however, 
follows  the  rendering  of  the  LXX.,  and  with  this 


FLAX 

agrees  Gesenius's  rendering,  "  Becken  und  Flaschen, 
von  allerhand  Art."  [G.] 

FLAX.  Two  Hebrew  words  are  used  for  this 
plant  in  0.  T.,  or  rather  the  same  word  slightly 
modified — HPl^'S,  and  riFOS.  About  the  former 
there  is  no  question.  It  occurs  only  in  three  places 
(Ex.  ix.  31  ;  Is.  xiii.  3,  xliii.  17).  As  regards  the 
latter,  there  is  probably  only  one  passage  where  it 
stands  for  the  plant  in  its  undressed  state  (Josh.  ii. 
6).  Eliminating  all  the  places  where  the  words 
are  used  for  the  article  manufactured  in  the  thread, 
the  piece,  or  the  made  up  garment  [Linen  •  Cot- 
ton], we  reduce  them  to  two:  Ex.  ix.  31,  certain, 
and  Josh.  ii.  6,  disputed. 

In  the  former  the  flax  of  the  Egyptians  is  re- 
corded to  have  been  damaged  by  the  plague  of  hail. 
The  word  7jn3  is  retained   by  Onkelos  ;  but  is 

rendered  in  LXX.  oTrepjuaTifoj/,  and  in  Vulg.  folli- 
culos  germinahat.  The  A.  V.  seems  to  have  fol- 
lowed the  LXX.  (boiled  =  (rTrepfj.ari(ov)  ;  and  so 
Rosenm.  "  globulus  seu  nodus  lini  maturescentis  " 
(Schol.  ad  loc.).  Gesen.  makes  it  the  calix,  or  co- 
rolla ;  refers  to  the  Mishna,  where  it  is  used  for  the 
calix  of  the  hyssop,  ami  describes  this  explanation  as 
one  of  long  standing  among  the  more  learned  Rabbins 
(Thes.  p.  261). 

For  the  flax  of  ancient  Egypt,  see  Herodot.  ii. 
37,  105  ;  Cels.  ii.  p.  285  ft'.;  Heeren,  Ideen,  ii.  2, 
p.  368  ff.  For  that  of  modem  Egypt,  see  Hassel- 
quist,  Journey,  p.  500  ;  Olivier,  Voyage,  iii.  p. 
297  ;  Girard's  Observations  inDescript.  de  I'Egypte, 
T.  xvii.  (etat  moderne),  p.  98 ;  Paul  Lucas, 
Voyages,  P.  ii.  p.  47. 

From  Ritter's  Erdkunde,  ii.  p.  916  (comp.  his 
Vorhalle,  &c,  45-48),  it  seems  probable  that  the 
cultivation  of  flax  for  the  purpose  of  the  manu- 
facture of  linen  was  by  no  means  confined  to 
Egypt ;  but  that  originating  in  India  it  spread  over 
the  whole  continent  of  Asia  at  a  very  early  period 
of  antiquity.  That  it  was  grown  in  Palestine  even 
before  the  conquest  of  that  country  by  the  Israelites 
appears  from  Josh.  ii.  6,  the  second  of  the  two  pas- 
sages mentioned  above.  There  is,  however,  some 
dilierence  of  opinion  about  the  meaning  of  the 
words  }*yn  *fit^3  ;  \tvoKa\dfi7) ;  Vulg.  stipidae 
lini ;  and  so  A.  V.  "  stalks  of  flax  ;"  Joseph,  speaks 
of  Kivov  ayKa\L8as,  armfuls,  or  bundles  of  flax ; 
but  Arab.  Vers.  "  stalks  of  cotton."  Gesenius,  how- 
ever, and  Rosenmiiller  are  in  favour  of  the  render- 
ing "  stalks  of  flax."  If  this  be  correct,  the  place 
involves  an  allusion  to  the  custom  of  drying  the 
flax-stalks  by  exposing  them  to  the  heat  of  the 
sun  upon  the  flat  roofs  of  houses;  and  so  expressly 
in  Joseph.  (Ant.  v.  i.  §2),  Xiuov  yap  aytcaAiSas 
iir\  tov  Ttyovs  e\f/vxe.  In  later  times  this  drying 
was  done  in  ovens  (Rosenm.  Alterthumsk.').  There 
is  a  decided  reference  to  the  raw  material  in  the 
LXX.  rendering  of  Lev.  xiii.  47,  IfMarlcc  aTVTnrviua). 
and  Judg.  xv.  14,  crrvn-iriov,  comp.  Is.  i.  31. 

The  various  processes  employed  in  preparing  the 
flax  for  manufacture  into  cloth  are  indicated — 
1.  The  drying  process  (see  above).  2.  The  peel- 
ing of  the  stalks,  and  separation  of  the  fibres  (the 
name  being  derivable  either,  as  Parkh.  from  t3t^Q, 
to  strip,  peel,  or  as  Gesen.  from  EJ'P'S,  to  separate 
into  parts)  ;  3.  The  hackling  (Is.  xix.  9  :  LXX. 
Xivov  to  ffx^rhv;  vid.  Gesen.  Lex.  s.  v.  p1")^ 
and  for  the  combs  used  in  the  process,  comp.  Wil- 
kinson, Anc.  Egypt,  iii.  p.  140).     The   flax,  how- 


FLEA 

ever,  was  not  always  dressed  before  weaving  (see 
Keel  us.  xl.  4.  where  wfidKivov  is  mentioned  as  a 
species  of  clothing  worn  by  the  poor.)  That  the 
use  of  the  coarser  fibres  was  known  to  the  Heb. 
may  be  inferred  from  the  mention  of  tow  (T)~\]}}), 
in  Judg.  xvi.  9;  Is.  i.  31.  That  tlax  was  an- 
ciently one  of  the  most  important  crops  in  Pales- 
tine appears  from  Hos.  ii.  5,  9;  that  it  continued 
to  be  grown,  and  manufactured  into  linen  in 
N.  Palestine  down  to  the  Middle  Ages  we  have  the 
testimony  of  numerous  Talmudists  and  Rabbins. 
At  present  it  does  not  seem  to  be  so  much  cul- 
tivated there  as  the  cotton  plant.  [Cotton; 
Linen.]  [T.  E.  P.] 

FLEA,  an  insect  twice  only  mentioned  in 
Scripture,  viz.  in  1  Sam.  xxiv.  14,  xxvi.  20.  Iu 
both  cases  David  in  speaking  to  Saul  applies  it  to 
himself  as  a  term  of  humility.  The  Heb.  word  is 
w'jniD,  which  the  LXX.  render  by  tyvWos,  and 
the  Vulg.  bv  puiex.  Fleas  are  abundant  in  the 
East,  and  afford  the  subject  of  many  proverbial 
expressions.  [W.  1 '.] 

FLESH.     [Food.] 

FLINT.  The  Heb.  quadriliteral  Wl&n  is  ren- 
dered flint  in  Dent.  viii.  15,  xxxii.  lo  ;  Ps.  cxiv.  8  ; 
and  Is.  1.  7.  In  Job  xxviii.  9  the  same  word  is 
rendered  rock  in  the  text,  aud  flint  in  the  margin. 
In  the  three  first  passages  the  reference  is  to  God's 
bringing  water  and  oil  out  of  the  naturally  barren 
rocks  of  the  Wilderness  for  the  sake  of  His  people. 
In  Isaiah  the  word  is  used  metaphorically  to  sig- 
nify the  firmness  of  the  prophet  in  resistance  to 
his  persecutors.  In  Ez.  iii.  9  the  English  word 
"  flint "  occurs  in  the  same  sense,  but  there  it 
represents  the  Heb.  Tzor.  So  also  in  Is.  v.  28  we 
have  like  flint,  in  reference  to  the  hoofs  of  horses. 
In  1  Mace.  x.  73  k6x^<*£  is  translated  flint,  and  in 
Wisd.  xi.  4  the  expression  4k  irerpas  a.Kpor6p.ov  is 
adopted  from  Deut.  viii.  15  (  LXX.).         [W.  D.] 

FLOOD.     [Noah.] 
FLOOR.     [Pavement.] 
FLOUR.     [Bread.] 

FLUTE  (NTPpnirO),  a  musical  instrument, 
mentioned  amongst  cithers  (Dan.  iii.  5,  7,  10,  15) 
as  used  at  the  worship  of  the  golden  image  which 
Nebuchadnezzar  had  set  up.  It  is  derived  from 
pIC,  to  hiss ;  Sept.  avpiy^,  a  pipe.  According  to 
the  author  of  Shilte-Haggihorim,  this  instrument 
was  sometimes  made  of  a  great  number  of  pipes — 
a  statement  which,  if  correct,  would  make  it^  name 
the  Chaldee  for  the  musical  instrument  called  in 
Hebrew  231V,  and  erroneously  rendered  in  the 
A.  V.  "Organ."  [D.   W.  M.] 

FLUX,  BLOODY  (dvffevrepla,  Acts  xxviii. 
8),  the  same  as  our  dysentery,  which  in  the  East  is, 
though  sometimes  sporadic,  generally  epidemic  and 
infectious,  and  then  assumes  its  worst  form.  !t  is 
always  attended  with  fever.  [Feveu.]  A  sharp 
gnawing  and  burning  sensation  seizes  the  bowels, 
which  give  off  in  purging  much  slimy  matter  ami 
purulent  discharge.  When  blood  flows  it  is  said  to 
be  less  dangerous  than  without  it  (Schmidt,  Bibl. 
Malic,  c.  xiv.  p.  503—507).  King  Jehoram's 
clise:u,e  was  probably  a  chronic  dysentery,  .iiid  the 
"bowels  felling  cut"  the  prolapsus  ant,  known 
.sometimes  to  ensue  (2  (  hr.xxi,  L5,  19).     |I1.  H.J 


FOOD 


627 


FLY.  1.  In  Ex.  viii.  20-32  we  have  a  de- 
scription of  the  plague  of  "  flies."  The  animals 
so  denominated  are  called  in  Heb.  2~\V ;  and  the 
same  term  occurs  in  Ps.  lxxviii.  45  and  cv.  31, 
where  this  visitation  is  alluded  to.  In  the  first 
of  these  passages  the  A.  V.  has  "swarms,"  in  the 
last  two  "  divers  sorts  of  flies."  The  LXX.  has 
in  each  Kvv6p.via,  the  "  dog-fly."  Perhaps  the 
better  rendering  of  the  Hebrew  would  be  beetles. 
[Beetle.] 

2.  The  word  2-13T,  rendered  fly  in  A.  V.  and 
fjLvia  bv  the  LXX.,  occurs  twice  in  the  O.  T.  In 
Is.  vii.18,  some  noxious  insect,  like  that  which  con- 
stituted the  plague  of  Pharaoh  and  the  Egyptians, 
is  meant;  but  the  etymology  of  the  word  affords 
no  clue  as  to  the  insect  specially  referred  to.  Jn 
Eccl.  x.  I  the  effect  of  any  decaying  animal  matter, 
however  small,  in  producing  corruption  iu  substances 
with  which  it  may  be  in  contact,  is  illustrated  by 
the  saying,  "  Dead  flies  cause  the  ointment  of  the 
apothecary  to  send  forth  a  stinking  savour."  (Comp. 
Wisd.  xvi.  9,  xix.  10.)  [W.  D-] 

FOOD.  The  diet  of  eastern  nations  has  been 
in  all  ages  light  and  simple.  As  compared  with 
our  own  habits,  the  chief  points  of  contrast  aie 
the  small  amount  of  animal  food  consumed,  the 
variety  of  articles  used  as  accompaniments  to 
bread,  the  substitution  of  milk  in  various  forms 
for  our  liquors,  aud  the  combination  of  what  we 
should  deem  heterogeneous  elements  in  the  same 
dish,  or  the  same  meal.  The  chief  point  of  agree- 
ment is  the  large  consumption  of  bread,  the  im- 
portance of  which  in  the  eyes  of  the  Hebrew  is 
testified  by  the  use  of  the  term  lechem  (originally 
food  of  any  kind)  specifically  for  bread,  as  well  as 
by  the  expression  "  staff  of  bread  "  (Lev.  xxvi.  26  ; 
Ps.  cv.  16;  Ez.  iv.  16,  xiv.  13).  Simpler  pre- 
parations of  corn  were,  however,  common  ;  some- 
times the  fresh  green  ears  were  eaten  in  a  natuial 
state,"  the  husks  being  rubbed  off  by  the  hand 
(Lev.  xxiii.  14;  Deut.  xxiii.  25;  2  K.  iv.  42; 
Matt.  xii.  1  ;  Luke  vi.  1)  ;  more  frequently, 
however,  the  grains,  after  being  carefully  picked, 
were  roasted  iu  a  pan  over  a  fire  (Lev.  ii.  14), 
and  eaten  as  "  paiched  corn,"  in  which  form 
it  was  an  ordinary  article  of  diet,  particularly 
among  laboureis,  or  others  who  had  not  the  means 
of  dressing  food  (Lev.  xxiii.  14;  Ruth  ii.  14; 
1  Sam.  xvii.  17,  xxv.  18;  2  Sam.  xvii.  28):  this 
practice  is  still  very  usual  in  the  East  (cf.  Lane,  i. 
251  ;  Robinson,  Researches,  ii.  350).  Sometimes 
th./  -rain  was  bruised  (like  the  Greek  polenta, 
l'liu.  xviii.  14),  in  which  state  it  was  termed 
either  CJH3  (epi/cra,  LXX.  ;  A.  V.  "  beaten " 
Lev.  ii.  14,  16),  or  nis^")  (vTiffdvcu,  Aquil. 
Symm. ;  A.  V.  "corn;"  2  Sam.  xvii.  19;  cf. 
I'rov.  xwii.  22),  and  then  dried  in  the  sun  ;  it  was 
eaten  either  mixed  with  oil  (Lev.  ii.  15),  or  made 
into  a  soft  cake  named  nDHJJ  (A.  V.  "dough;" 
Num.  xv.  20;  -Neb.  x.  37;  Ez.  xliv.  30).  The 
Hebrews  used  a  great  variety  of  articles  (John  xxi. 
.,)  in  give  a  relish  to  bread.  Sometimes  salt  was  so 
used  (.loii  \i.  6),  as  we  barn  from  the  passage  just 
quoted ;  somel  imes  the  bread  was  dipped  into  the  bout 
wine  (A.  V.  "  vinegar")  which  the  labourers  drank 
(Ruth  ii.  14)  ;  or,  where  meat  w.is  eaten,  into  the 


*  This  custom  is  still  practised  in  Palestine  (Ro- 
binson's R<  ii  •>  <  ht  <•  i-  -193). 


628 


FOOD 


gravy,  which  was  either  served  up  separately  for 
the  purpose,  as  by  Gideon  (Judy;,  vi.  19),  or  placed 
in  the  middle -of  the  meat  dish,  as  done  by  the 
Arabs  (Burckhardt,  Notes,  i.  63),  whose  practice  of 
dipping  bread  in  the  broth,  or  melted  fat  of  the 
animal,  strongly  illustrates  the  reference  to  the 
sop  in  John  xiii.  20  if.  The  modern  Egyptians 
season  their  bread  with  a  sauce b  composed  of  various 
stimulants,  such  as  salt,  mint,  sesame,  and  chick- 
peas (Lane,  i.  180).  The  Syrians,  on  the  other  hand, 
use  a  mixture  of  savory  and  salt  for  the  same 
purpose  (Russell,  i.  93).  Where  the  above  men- 
tioned accessories  were  wanting,  fruit,  vegetables, 
fish,  or  honey,  were  used.  In  short  it  may  be  said 
that  all  the  articles  of  food,  which  we  are  about  to 
mention,  were  mainly  viewed  as  subordinates  to  the 
staple  commodity  of  bread.  The  various  kinds 
of  bread  and  cakes  are  described  under  the  head  of 
Bread. 

Milk  and  its  preparations  hold  a  conspicuous 
place  in  Eastern  diet,  as  affording  substantial  nourish- 
ment ;  sometimes  it  was  produced  in  a  fresh  state 
(2TTI  ;  Gen.  xviii.  8),  but  more  generally  in  the 
form  of  the  modern  lebaa,  i.  e.  sour  milk  (i"INDn  ■ 
A.V.  "butter;"  Gen.  xviii.  8;  Judg.  v.  25;'  2 
Sam.  xvii.  29).  The  latter  is  universally  used  by 
the  Bedouins,  not  only  as  their  ordinary  beverage 
(Burckhardt,  Notes,  i.  240),  but  mixed  with  flour, 
meat,  and  even  salad  (Burckhardt,  i.  58,  63  ; 
Russell,  Aleppo,  i.  118).  It  is  constantly  offered 
to  travellers,  and  in  some  parts  of  Arabia  it  is 
deemed  scandalous  to  take  any  money  in  return 
for  it  (Burckhardt,  Arabia,  i.  120).  For  a 
certain  season  of  the  year,  leban  makes  up  a  great 
part  of  the  food  of  the  poor  in  Syria  (Russell, 
/.  c).  Butter  (Prov.  xxx.  33)  and  various  forms 
of  coagulated  milk,  of  the  consistency  of  the  modern 
kaiiaak  (Job  x.  10;  1  Sam.  xvii.  18;  2  Sam. 
xvii.  29)  were  also  used.  [Butter;  Cheese; 
Milk.] 

Fruit  was  another  source  of  subsistence :  figs 
stand  first  in  point  of  importance  ;  the  early  sorts 
described  as  the  "summer  fruit"  (Y^p  ;  Am.  viii. 
1,  2),  and  the  "first  ripe  fruit"  (ITT132  ;  Hos. 
ix.  10  ;  Mic.  vii.  1)  were  esteemed  a  great  luxury, 
and  were  eaten  as  fresh  fruit ;  but  they  were  gene- 
rally dried  and  pressed  into  cakes,  similar  to  the 
date-cakes  of  the  Arabians  (Burckhardt,  Arabia, 
i.  57),  in  which  form  they  were  termed  Dv^l 
(ira.Ad.6ai,  A.  V.  "  cakes  of  figs  ;"•  1  Sam.  xxv. 
18,  xxx.  12  ;  1  Chr.  xii.  40),  and  occasionally 
j"»p  simply  (2  Sam.  xvi.  1  ;  A.V.  "  summer 
♦  fruit").  Grapes  were  generally  eaten  in  a  dried 
state  as  raisins  (□''pSV  ;  Kgaturae  uvae  passae, 
Vulg.  ;  1  Sam.  xxv.  18,  xxx.  12  ;  2  Sam.  xvi.  1  ; 
1  Chr.  xii.  40),  but  sometimes,  as  before,  pressed 
into  cakes,  named  H^t^N  (2  Sam.  vi.  19  ;  1  Chr. 
xvi.  3  ;  Cant.  ii.  5  ;  Hos.  iii.  1),  understood  by  the, 
LXX.  as  a  sort  of  cake,  Xayavov  airb  r-qyavov,  and 
by  the  A.  V.  as  a  "flagon  of  wine."  FYuit-cake 
forms  a  part  of  the  daily  food  of  the  Arabians,  and 
is  particularly  adapted  to  the  wants  of  travellers  ; 
dissolved  in  water  it  affords  a  sweet  and  refreshing 
drink  (Niebuhr,  Arabia,  p.  57  ;  Russell,  Aleppo,  i. 
82)  ;  an  instance  of  its  stimulating  effect  is  re- 
corded in  1  Sam.  xxx.  12.  Apples  (probably 
citrons)   are   occasionally   noticed,    but    rather    in 


b  The  later  Jews  named  this  sauce  PIDlin  (Mishn. 
Pes.  2,  §s)  :  it  consisted  of  vineg-ar,   almonds,   and 


POOD 

reference  to  their  fragrance  (Cant.  ii.  5,  vii.  8)  and 
colour  (Prov.  xxv.  11),  than  as  an  article  of  food. 
Dates  are  not  noticed  in  Scripture,  uuless  we  accept 
the  rendering  of  y]p  in  the  LXX.  (2  Sam.  xvi. 
1)  as  =  (polvuces;  it  can  hardly  be  doubted,  how- 
ever, that,  where  the  palm-tree  flourished,  as  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Jericho,  its  fruit  was  consumed  ; 
in  Joel  i.  12  it  is  reckoned  among  other  trees 
valuable  for  their  fruit.  The  pomegranate  tree 
is  also  noticed  by  Joel ;  it  yields  a  luscious  fruit, 
from  which  a  species  of  wine  was  expressed  (Cant. 
.viii.  2 ;  Hag.  ii.  19).  Melons  were  grown  in 
Egypt  (Num.  xi.  5),  but  not  in  Palestine.  The 
mulberry  is  undoubtedly  mentioned  in  Luke  xvii. 
6  under  the  name  ffvud/xivos ;  the  Hebrew  D^SOU 
so  translated  (2  Sam.  v.  23  ;  1  Chr.  xiv.  14)  is 
rather  doubtful ;  the  Vulg.  takes  it  to  mean  pears. 
The  crvKOfj.op4a  ("sycomore,"  A.V  ;  Luke  xix.  4)  dif- 
fered from  the  tree  last  mentioned  ;  it  was  the  Egyp- 
tian fig,  which  abounded  in  Palestine  (1  K.  x.  27), 
and  was  much  valued  for  its  fruit  (1  Chr.  xxvii. 
28  ;  Am.  vii.  14).  [Apple  ;  Citron  ;  Figs  ; 
Mulberry-tree  ;  Palm-tree  ;  Pomegranate  ; 
Sycamine-tree  ;  Sycamore.] 

Of  vegetables  we  have  most  frequent  notice  of 
lentils  (Gen.  xxv.  34;  2  Sam.  xvii.  28,  xxiii.  11  ; 
Ez.  iv.  9),  which  are  still  largely  used  by  the  Be- 
douins in  travelling  (Burckhardt,  Arabia,  i.  65)  ; 
beans  (2  Sam.  xvii.  28  ;  Ez.  iv.  9),  which  still  form 
a  favourite  dish  in  Egypt  and  Arabia  for  breakfast, 
boiled  in  water  and  eaten  with  batter  and  pepper ; 
from  2  Sam.  xvii.  28  it  might  be  inferred  that  beans 
and  other  kinds  of  pulse  were  roasted,  as  barley 
was,  but  the  second  vp  in  that  verse  is  probably 
interpolated,  not  appearing  in  the  LXX.,  and  even, 
if  it  were  not  so,  the  reference  to  pulse  in  the  A.  V., 
as  of  cicer  in  the  Vulg.  is  wholly  unwarranted  ; 
cucumbers  (Num.  xi.  5  ;  Is.  i.  8  ;  Bar.  vi.  70  ; 
cf.  2  K.  iv.  39  where  wild  gourds,  cucumeres  asinini, 
were  picked  in  mistake  for  cucumbers)  ;  leeks, 
onions,  and  garlick,  which  were  and  still  are  of  a 
superior  quality  in  Egypt  (Num.  xi.  5;  cf.  Wilkin- 
son, Anc.  Egypt,  ii.  374;  Lane,  i.  251);  lettuce, 
of  which  the  wild  species,  lactuca  agrestis,  is  identi- 
fied with  the  Greek  irtKpis  by  Pliny  (xxi.  65),  and 
formed,  according  to  the  LXX.  and  the  Vulg.,  the 
"  bitter  herbs "  (D'HID)  eaten  with  the  paschal 
lamb  (Ex.  xii.  8;  Num.  ix.  11);  endive,  which  is 
still  well  known  in  the  East  (Russell,  i.  91)  may 
have  been  included  under  the  same  class.  In  addi- 
tion to  the  above  we  have  notice  of  certain  "  herbs  " 
(n'l"liX  ;  2  K.  iv.  39)  eaten  in  times  of  scarcity, 
which  were  mallows  according  to  the  Syriac  and 
Arabic  versions,  but,  according  to  the  Talmud,  a 
vegetable  resembling  the  brassica  eruca  of  Lin- 
naeus ;  and  again  of  sea-purslane  (ITl?D  ;  dXt/xa  ; 
"A.  V.  mallows"),  and  broom-root  (D^DD"! ; 
"  A.  V.  juniper  ;"  Job  xxx.  4)  as  eaten  by  the 
poor  in  time  of  famine,  unless  the  latter  were 
gathered  as  fuel.  An  insipid  plant,  probably  purs- 
lane, used  in  salad  appears  to  be  referred  to  in  Job 
vi.  6,  under  the  expression  D-IOpn  "VI  ("  white 
of  egg,"  A.  V.).  The  usual  method  of  eating 
vegetables  was  in  the  form  of  pottage  (T|3  ;  'ity-qp-a ; 
pulmentum ;  Gen.  xxv.  29  ;  2  K.  iv.  38  ;  Hag.  ii. 
12)  ;  a  meal  wholly  of  vegetables  was  deemed  very 

spice,  thickened  with  flour.  It  was  used  at  the 
celebration  of  the  Passover  (Pes.  10,  §:>). 


FOOD 

poor  fare  (Prov.  xv.  17  ;  Dan.  i.  12  ;  Rom.  xiv.  2). 
The  modern  Arabians  consume  but  tew  vegetables  ; 
radishes  and  leeks  are  most  in  use,  and  are  eaten 
raw  with  bread  (Burckhardt,  Arabia,  i.  56). 
[Beans  ;  Cucumber  ;  Garlic  ;  Gourd  ;  Leek  ; 
Lentil  ;  Onion.] 

The  spices  or  condiments  known  to  the  Hebrews 
were  numerous ;  cummin  (Is.  xxviii.  25  ;  Matt, 
xxiii.  23),  dill  (Malt,  xxiii.  23,  "  anise,"  A.  V.), 
coriander  (Ex.  xvi.  31  ;  Num.  xi.  7),  mint  (Matt. 
xxiii.  23),  rue  (Luke  xi.  42),  mustard  (Matt.  xiii. 
31,  xvii.  20),  and  salt  (Job  vi.  6),  which  is 
reckoned  among  "  the  principal  things  for  the  whole 
use  of  man's  life"  (Ecclus.  xxxix.  26).  Nuts 
(pistachios)  and  almonds  (Gen.  xliii.  11)  were  also 
used  as  whets  to  the  appetite.  [Almond-tree  ; 
Anise  ;  Coriander  ;  Cummin  ;  Mint  ;  Mus- 
tard ;  Nuts  ;  Spices.] 

In  addition  to  these  classes,  we  have  to  notice 
some  other  important  articles  of  food :  in  the  first 
place,  honey,  whether  the  natural  product  of  the 
bee  (1  Sam.  xiv.  25;  Matt.  iii.  4),  which  abounds 
in  most  parts  of  Arabia  (Burckhardt,  Arabia,  i. 
54),  or  the  other  natural  and  artificial  productions 
included  under  that  head,  especially  the  dibs  of  the 
Syrians  and  Arabians,  i.  c.  grape-juice  boiled  down 
to  the  state  of  the  Roman  defrutum,  which  is  still 
extensively  used  in  the  East  (Russell,  i.  82)  ;  the 
latter  is  supposed  to  be  referred  to  in  Gen.  xliii.  11 
and  Ez.  xxvii.  17.  The  importance  of  honey,  as  a 
substitute  for  sugar,  is  obvious  ;  it  was  both  used 
in  certain  kinds  of  cake  (though  prohibited  in  the 
case  of  meat  offerings,  Lev.  ii.  1 1),  as  in  the  pastry  of 
the  Arabs  (Burckhardt,  Arabia,  i.  54),  and  was  also 
eaten  in  its  natural  state  either  by  itself  (1  Sam. 
xiv.  27  ;  2  Sam.  xvii.  29  ;  1  K.  xiv.  3),  or  in  con- 
junction with  other  things,  even  with  fish  (Luke 
xxiv.  42).  "Butter  and  honey"  is  an  expression 
for  rich  diet  (Is.  vii.  15,  22);  such  a  mixture  is 
popular  among  the  Arabs  (Burckhardt,  Arabia, 
i.  54).  "  Milk  and  honey"  are  similarly  coupled 
together,  not  only  frequently  by  the  sacred  writers, 
as  expressive  of  the  richness  of  the  promised  land, 
but  also  by  the  Greek  poets  (cf.  Callim.  Hymn,  in 
Jov.  48  ;  Horn.  Od.  xx.  68).  Too  much  honey 
was  deemed  unwholesome  (Prov.  xxv.  27).  With 
regard  to  oil,  it  does  not  appear  to  have  been  used 
to  the  extent  we  might  have  anticipated ;  the 
modern  Arabs  only  employ  it  in  frying  fish 
(Burckhardt.  Arabia,  i.  54),  but  for  all  other  pur- 
poses butter  is  substituted:  among  the  Hebrews 
it  was  deemed  an  expensive  luxury  (Prov.  xxi.  17), 
to  be  reserved  for  festive  occasions  (1  Chr.  xii.  4u  ; 
it  was  chiefly  used  in  certain  kinds  of  cake  (Lev.  ii. 
5  it.  ;  1  K.  xvii.  12).  "  Oil  and  honey  "  are  men- 
tioned in  conjunction  with  bread  in  Ez.  xvi.  13, 
19,  The  Syrians,  especially  the  Jews,  eat  oil  and 
honey  (cftos)  mixed  together  (Russell,  i.  80).  Eggs 
are  not  often  noticed,  but  were  evidently  known  as 
articles  of  food  (Is.  x.  14,  lix.  5;  Luke  xi.  12), 
and  are  reckoned  by  Jerome  (/»  Epitaph.  Paul. 
i.  L76)  among  the  delicacies  of  the  table.  [Honey  ; 
Oil.] 

The  Orientals  have  been  at  all  times  sparing  in 
the  use  of  animal  food:  not  only  does  the  excessive 
heat  of  the  climate  render  it  both  unwholesome  to 
eat  much  meat  (Niebuhr,  Descript.  p.  46),  and  ex- 
pensive from  the  necessity  of  immediately  con- 
suming a  whole  animal,  but  beyond  this  the  ritual 
regulations  of  the  Mosaic  law  in  ancient,  as  of  the 
Koran  in  modern  times,  have  tended  to  the  same 
result.     It  has   been   inferred   from  Gen.  i\.  •"•,  4, 


FOOD 


620 


that  animal  food  was  not  permitted  before  the 
flood:  but  the  notices  of  the  flock  of  Abel  (Gen.  iv. 
2)  and  of  the  herds  of  Jabal  (Gen.  iv.  20),  as  well 
as  the  distinction  between  clean  and  unclean  animals 
(Gen.  vii.  2),  favour  the  opposite  opinion ;  and  the 
permission  in  Gen.  ix.  3  may  be  held  to  be  only  a 
more  explicit  declaration  of  a  condition  implied  in 
the  grant  of  universal  dominion  previously  given 
(Gen.  i.  28).  The  prohibition  then  expressed  against 
consuming  the  blood  of  any  animal  (Gen.  ix.  4) 
was  more  fully  developed  in  the  Levitical  law,  and 
enforced  by  the  penalty  of  death  (Lev.  iii.  17  vii. 
26,  xix.  26  ;  Deut.  xii.  16  ;  1  Sam.  xiv.  32  If.  ;  Ez. 
xliv.  7,  15),  on  the  ground,  as  stated  in  Lev.  xvii. 

11,  and  Deut.  xii.  23,  that  the  blood  contained  the 
principle  of  life,  and,  as  such,  was  to  be  offered  on 
the  altar;  probably  there  was  an  additional  reason 
in  the  heathen  practice  of  consuming  blood  in  their 
sacrifices  (Ps.  xvi.  4;  Ez.  xxxiii.  25).  The  pro- 
hibition applied  to  strangers  as  well  as  Israelites, 
and  to  all  kinds  of  beast  or  fowl  (Lev.  vii.  26,  xvii. 

12,  13).  So  strong  was  the  feeling  of  the  Jews  on 
this  point,  that  the  Gentile  converts  to  Christianity 
were  laid  under  similar  restrictions  (Acts  xv.  20, 
29,  xxi.  25).  As  a  necessary  deduction  from  the 
above  principle,  all  animals  which  had  died  a  na- 
tural death  (i"P2J,  Deut.  xiv.  21),  or  had  been 
torn  of  beasts  (!"IQ"ip,    Ex.   xxii.   31),  were  also 

prohibited  (Lev.  xvii.  15  ;  cf.  Ez.  iv.  14),  and  to  be 
thrown  to  the  dogs  (Ex.  xxii.  31):  this  prohibition 
did  not  extend  to  strangers  (Deut.  xiv.  21).  Any 
person  infringing  this  rule  was  held  unclean  until 
the  evening,  and  was  obliged  to  wash  his  clothes 
(Lev.  xvii.  15).  In  the  N.  T.  these  cases  are  de- 
scribed under  the  term  -kvlkt6v  (Acts  xv.  20),  ap- 
plying not  only  to  what  was  strangled  (as  in 
A.  V.),  but  to  any  animal  from  which  the  blood 
was  not  regularly  poured  forth.  Similar  prohibitions 
are  contained  in  the  Koran  (ii.  175,  v.  4,  xvi.  116), 
the  result  of  which  is  that  at  the  present  day  the 
Arabians  eat  no  meat  except  what  has  been  bought 
at  the  shambles.  Certain  portions  of  the  tat  of  sa- 
crifices were  also  forbidden  (Lev.  iii.  9,  10),  as 
being  set  apart  for  the  altar  (Lev.  iii.  16,  vii.  25 ; 
cf.  1  Sam.  ii.  16  If.  ;  2  Chr.  vii.  7):  it  should  be 
observed  that  the  term  in  Neh.  viii.  10,  translated 

fat,  is  not  2^n,  but  D'OOtTE^the  fatty  pieces  of 
meat,  delicacies.  In  addition  to  the  above,  Christians 
were  forbidden  to  eat  the  -flesh  of  animals,  portions 
of  which  had  been  offered  to  idols  {ii5aiK6QvTa), 
whether  at  private  feasts,  or  as  bought  in  the 
market  (Acts  xv.  29,  xxi.  25;  1  Cor.  viii.  1  11'.). 
All  beasts  and  birds  classed  as  unclean  |  Lev.  xi. 
1  if.;  Deut.  xiv.  4  If.)  were  also  prohibited  [Un- 
cleah  Beasts  and  Birds]:  and  in  addition  to 
these  general  precepts  there  was  a  special  pro- 
hibition i.;unst  "seething  a  kid  in  his  metier-; 
milk  "  (Ex.  xxiii.  19,  x.wiv.  26;    Deut.  xiv.  21), 

which  has  been  variously  understood,  by  Talinudical 
writ  rs  as  a  general  prohibition  against  tli.  |  .:ut  use 
of  meat  and  milk  (Mishna,  Cholin,  cap.  s,§l); 
by  Michaelis  |  J  A..-,  ttecht.  iv.  210)  as  prohibiting 
the   use  of  fat   or   milk,  as  compared    with   nil,   in 

cooking;  by  Luther  ami  Calvin  as  prohibiting  the 
slaughter  of  young  animals;  and  by  Bochart  and 
others  as  discountenancing  cruelty  in  any  way. 
These  interpretations,  however,  all  tail  in  establish- 
ing any  connexion  between  the  precept  and  the 
offering  of  the  first-fruits,  as  implied  in  the  three 
pa    ages  quoted.      More  probably  it  has  reference  to 


630 


FOOD 


certain  heathen  usages  at  their  harvest  festivals  [ 
(Maimonides,  More  Neboch.  3,  48  ;  Spencer,  de 
Legg.  Hebr.  Ritt.  535  ff.)  :  there  is  a  remarkable 
addition  in  the  Samaritan  version  and  in  some 
copies  of  the  LXX.  in  Deut.  xiv.  21,  which  sup- 
ports this  view  ;  ts  yap  7roie?  tovto,  dxrel  do~ira- 
Aa/ca  dvffet,  on  fiiacr/xd  icrn  tw  8ew  'IaKco/3  (ct. 
Knobel,  Comment,  in  Ex.  xxiii.  19).  The  Hebrews 
further  abstained  from  eating  the  sinew  of  the  hip 
(Plt^n  T3,  Gen.  xxxii.  32),  in  memory  of  the 
straggle  between  Jacob  and  the  angel  (comp.  ver. 
25).  The  LXX.,  the  Vulg.,  and  the" A.  V.  interpret 
the  aira.%  Aey6p.evov  word  nasheh  of  the  shrinking 
or  benumbing  of  the  muscle  (o  evdpKTjo'ev ;  qui 
emarcuit ;  "  which  shrank  ") :  Josephus  (Ant.  i.  20, 
§2)  more  correctly  explains  it,  to  vevpov  to  wXarii ; 
and  there  is  little  doubt  that  the  nerve  he  refers  to 
is  the  nervits  ischiadicus,  which  attains  its  greatest 
thickness  at  the  hip.  There  is  no  further  reference 
to  this  custom  in  the  Bible ;  but  the  Talmudists 
(Cholin,  7)  enforced  its  observance  by  penalties. 

Under  these  restrictions  the  Hebrews  were  per- 
mitted the  free  use  of  animal  food:  generally 
speaking  they  only  availed  themselves  of  it  in  the 
exercise  of  hospitality  (Gen.  xviii.  7),  or  at  festivals 
of  a  religious  (Ex.  xii.  8),  public  (1  K.  i.  9  ;  1  Chr. 
xii.  40),  or  private  character  (Gen.  xxvii.  4 ;  Luke 
xv.  23)  :  it  was  only  in  royal  households  that  there 
was  a  daily  consumption  of  meat  (1  K.  iv.  23 ; 
Neh.  v.  18).  The  use  of  meat  is  reserved  for  similar 
occasions  among  the  Bedouins  (Burckhardt's  Notes, 
i.  63).  The  animals  killed  for  meat  were — calves 
(Gen.  xviii.  7;  1  Sam.  xxviii.  24;  Am.  vi.  4), 
which  are  farther  described  by  the  term  fatling 
(N'HO  =  /uo'crxos    o-iTevr6s,    Luke   xv.    23,   and 

a-mo-rd,  Matt.  xxii.  4  ;  2  Sam.  vi.  13  ;  1  K.  i.  9  ff. ; 
A.  V.  "  tat  cattle  ")  ;  lambs  (2  Sam.  xii.  4  ;  Am. 
vi.  4)  ;  oxen,  not  above  three  years  of  age  (1  K.  i. 
9;  Prov.  xv.  17;  Is.  xxii.  13;  Matt.  xxii.  4), 
which  were  either  stall-fed  (O^iOi  ;  /x<Jcr%o(  e'/c- 
ktKToi),  or  taken  up  from  the  pastures  ('•J?"] ;  f}6es 
uo/xdSes  ;  1  K.  iv.  23)  ;  kids  (Gen.  xxvii.  9 ;  Judg. 
vi.  19;  1  Sam.  xvi.  20);  harts,  roebucks,  and 
fallow-deer  (1  K.  iv.  23),  which  are  also  brought 
into  close  connexion  with  ordinary  cattle  in  Deut. 
xiv.  5,  as  though  holding  an  intermediate  place 
between  tame  and  wild  animals ;  birds  of  various 
kinds  (Dn3^;  A.  V.  "  fowls;"  Neh.  v.  18  ;  the 
LXX.,  however,  gives  xtfiapos  as  though  the  read- 
ing were  D^TS^)  ;  quail  in  certain  parts  of  Arabia 
(Ex.  xvi.  13;Num.  xi.  32);  poultry  (Dn3"l2 ; 
1  K.  iv.  23  ;  understood  generally  by  the  LXX., 
bpviQwv  eKAeKTciv  ffirevrd ;  by  Kimchi  and  the 
A.  V.  as  fatted  fowl;  by  Gesenius,  Thesaur.  246, 
as  geese,  from  the  whiteness  of  their  plumage ;  by 
Thenius,  Comm.  in  I.  c,  as  guinea-fowls,  as  though 
the  word  represented  the  call  of  that  bird) ; 
partridges  (1  Sam.  xxvi.  20)  ;  fish,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  such  as  were  without  scales  and  fins 
(Lev.  xi.  9;  Deut.  xiv.  9),  both  salted,  as  was 
probably  the  case  with  the  sea-fish  brought  to 
Jerusalem  (Neh.  xiii.  16),  and  fresh  (Matt.  xiv.  19, 
xv.  36  ;  Luke  xxiv.  42) :  in  our  Saviour's  time  it 
appears  to  have  been  the  usual  food  about  the  Sea 
of  Galilee  (Matt.  vii.  10)  ;  the  term  b^/dpiov  is 
applied  to  it  by  St.  John  (vi.  9 ;  xxi.  9  ff.)  in  the 
restricted  sense  which  the  word  obtained  among 
the  later  Greeks,  as  =  fish.  Locusts,  of  which  cer- 
tain species  only  were  esteemed  clean  (Lev.  xi.  22), 
were  occasionally   eaten   (Matt.   iii.  4),    but   con- 


FOOTMAN 

sidered  as  poor  tare.  They  are  at  the  present  day 
largely  consumed  by  the  poor  both  in  Persia 
(Morier's  Second  Journey,  p.  44)  and  in  Arabia 
(Niebuhr,  Voyage,  i.  319);  they  are  salted  and 
dried,  and  roasted,  when  required,  on  a  frying-pan 
with  butter  (Burckhardt's  Notes,  ii.  92  ;  Niebuhr, 
I.  c). 

Meat  does  not  appear  ever  to  have  been  eaten  by 
itself;  various  accompaniments  are  noticed  in  Scrip- 
ture, as  bread,  milk,  and  sour  milk  (Gen.  xviii.  8)  ; 
bread  and  broth  (Judg.  vi.  19)  ;  and  with  fish 
either  bread  (Matt.  xiv.  19,  xv.  36;  John  xxi.  9) 
or  honeycomb  (Luke  xxiv.  42)  :  the  instance  in 
2  Sam.  vi.  19  cannot  be  relied  on,  as  the  term 
"iQtytf ,  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  a  good  piece  of  flesh, 
after  the  Vulg.,  assatura  bibulae  carnis,  means 
simply  a  portion  or  measure,  and  may  apply  to 
wine  as  well  as  meat.  For  the  modes  of  preparing 
meat,  see  Cooking  ;  and  for  the  times  and  manner 
of  eating,  Meals  :  see  also  Fish,  Fowl,  &c.  &c. 

To  pass  from  ordinary  to  occasional  sources  of  • 
subsistence :  prison  diet  consisted  of  bread  and 
water  administered  in  small  quantities  (1  K.  xxii. 
27;  Jer.  xxxvii.  21):  pulse  and  water  was  con- 
sidered but  little  better  (Dan.  i.  12):  in  time  of 
sorrow  or  fasting  it  was  usual  to  abstain  either 
altogether  from  food  (2  Sam.  xii.  17,  20),  or  from 
meat,  wine,  and  other  delicacies,  which  were  de- 
scribed as  nil-IOn  DPI?,  lit.  bread  of  desires  (Dan. 
x.  3).  In  time  of  extreme  famine  the  most  loath- 
some food  was  swallowed  ;  such  as  an  ass's  head 
(2  K.  vi.  25),  the  ass,  it  must  be  remembered, 
being  an  unclean  animal  (for  a  parallel  case  comp. 
Plutarch,  Artaxerx.  24),  and  dove's  dung  (see  the 
article  on  that  subject),  the  dung  of  cattle  (Joseph. 
B.  J.  v.  13,  §7),  and  even  possibly  their  own  dung 
(2  K.  xviii.  27).  The  consumption  of  human  flesh 
was  not  altogether  unknown  (2  Iv.  vi.  28  ;  cf.  Joseph. 
B.  J.  vi.  3,  §4),  the  passages  quoted  supplying 
instances  of  the  exact  fulfilment  of  the  prediction 
in  Deut.  xxviii.  56,  57:  compare  also  Lam.  ii.  20, 
iv.  10  ;  Ez.  v.  10. 

With  regard  to  the  beverages  used  by  the  He- 
brews, we  have  already  mentioned  milk,  and  the 
probable  use  of  barley-water,  and  of  a  mixture, 
resembling  the  modern  sherbet,  formed  of  fig-cake 
and  water.  The  Hebrews  probably  resembled  the 
Arabs  in  not  drinking  much  during  their  meals, 
but  concluding  them  with  a  long  draught  of  water. 
It  is  almost  needless  to  say  that  water  was  most 
generally  drunk.  In  addition  to  these  the  Hebrews 
were  acquainted  with  various  intoxicating  liquors, 
the  most  valued  of  which  was  the  juice  of  the 
grape,  while  others  were  described  under  the 
general  term  of  shechar  or  strong  drink  (Lev.  x.  9  ; 
Num.  vi.  3  ;  Judg.  xiii.  4,  7),  if  indeed  the  latter 
does  not  sometimes  include  the  former  (Num. 
xxviii.  7).  These  were  reserved  for  the  wealthy 
or  for  festive  occasions :  the  poor  consumed  a  sour 
wine  (A.  V.  "  vinegar  ;"  Ruth  ii.  14  ;  Matt,  xxvii. 
48),  calculated  to  quench  thirst,  but  not  agreeable 
to  the  taste  (Prov.  x.  26).  [Drink,  STRONG; 
Vinegar;  Water;  Wine.]  [W.  L.  B.] 

FOOTMAN,  a  word  employed  in  the  Auth. 
Version  in  two  senses.  1.  Generally,  to  distinguish 
those  of  the  people  or  of  the  fighting-men  who  went 
on  foot  from  those  who  were  on  horseback  or  in 
chariots.  The  Hebrew  word  for  this  is  r}f\,  ragli, 
from  regel,  a  foot.  The  LXX.  commonly  express  it 
by  TreCoi,  or  occasionally  Ta.yp.dTO.. 


FOREHEAD 

but,  2.  The  word  occurs  in  a  more  special  sense 
(in  1  Sam.  xxj(.  17  only),  and  as  the  translation 
of  a  different  tenn  from  the  above — ^-11,  rootz. 
This  passage  affords  the  first  mention  of  the  ex- 
istence of  a  body  of  swift  runners  in  attendance  on 
the  king,  though  such  a  thing  had  been  foretold  by 
Samuel  (1  Sam.  viii.  11).  This  body  appear  to 
have  been  afterwards  kept  up,  and  to  have  been 
distinct  from  the  body-guard — the  six  hundred  and 
the  thirty — who  were  originated  by  David.  See 
1  K.  xiv.  27,  28;  2  Chr.  xii.  10,  11 ;  2  K.  xi.  4,  6, 
11,  18,  19.  In  each  of  these  cases  the  word  is  the 
same  as  the  above,  and  is  rendered  "  guard :"  but 
the  translators  were  evidently  aware  of  its  significa- 
tion, for  they  have  put  the  word  "runners"  in  the 
margin  in  two  instances  (1  K.  xiv.  27;  2  K.  xi. 
13).  This  indeed  was  the  force  of  the  term  "  foot- 
man "  at  the  time  the  A.  V.  was  made,  as  is  plain  not 
only  from  the  references  just  quoted,  but  amongst 
others  fiom  the  title  of  a  well  known  tract  of  Bun- 
yan's — The  Heavenly  Footman,  or  a  Description  of 
the  Man  that  gets  to  Heaven,  on  1  Cor.  ix.  24  (St. 
Paul's  figure -of  the  race).  Swift  running  was  evi- 
dently a  valued  accomplishment  of  a  perfect  warrior — 
a  gibbor,  as  the  Hebrew  word  is — among  the  Israel- 
ites. There  are  constant  allusions  to  this  in  the 
Bible,  though  obscured  iu  the  A.  V.,  from  the 
translators  not  recognising  the  technical  sense  of 
the  word  gibbor.  Among  others  see  Ps.  xix.  5 ; 
Job  xvi.  14;  Joel  ii.  7,  where  "strong  man," 
"  giant,"  and  "  mighty  man,"  are  all  gibbor.  David 
was  famed  for  his  powers  of  running ;  they  are 
so  mentioned  as  to  seem  characteristic  of  him  (1 
Sam.  xvii.  22,  48,  51,  xx.  6),  and  he  makes  them 
;i  special  subject  of  thanksgiving  to  God  ('_'  Sam. 
xxii.  30;  Ps.  xviii.  29).  The  cases  of  Cushi  and 
Ahimaaz  (2  Sam.  xviii.)  will  occur  to  every  one. 
It  is  not  impossible  that  the  former — "  the  Ethi- 
opian," as  His  name  most  likely  is— had  some  pe- 
culiar mode  of  running.  [Cushi.]  Asahel  also 
was  "  swift  on  his  feet,"  and  the  Gadite  heroes 
who  came  across  to  David  in  his  difficulties  were 
"swift  as  the  roes  upon  the  mountains:"  but  in 
neither  of  these  last  cases  is  the  word  rootz  em- 
ployed. The  word  probably  derives  its  modern 
sense  from  the  custom  of  domestic  servants  run- 
ning by  the  side  of  the  carriage  of  their  master. 
[Goard.]  [G.] 

FOREHEAD  (TIVO,  from  I1VE,  rad.  inus. 
shine,  Gesen.  p.  815;  fiirwirov ;  from).  The 
practice  of  veiling  the  face  in  public  for  women  of 
the  higher  classes,  especially  married  women,  in  the 
East,  sufficiently  stigmatizes  with  reproach  the 
unveiled  face  of  women  of  bad  character  (Gen.  xxv. 
65;  Jer.  iii.  3;  Niebuhr,  Voy.  i.  182,  149,150; 
Shaw,  Travels,  p.  228,  240;  Hasselquist,  Travels, 
p.  58 ;  Buckingham,  Arab  Tribes,  p.  .112;  Lane, 
Mod.  Eg.  i.  72,  77,  225-248  ;  Burckhardt,  T 
i.  233).  An  especial  force  is  thus  given  to  the  term 
"hard  of  forehead"  as  descriptive  "f  audacity  in 
genera]  (Ez.  iii.  7,  8,  9  ;  comp.  Juv.  Sat.  xiv.  242 — 
"  Ejectum  attrita  de  fronte  ruborem  "). 

The  custom  among  many  Oriental  nations  both 
of  colouring  the  face  and  forehead,  ami  of  impressing 
on  the  body  marks  indicative  of  devotion  to  some 
special  deity  or  religious  sect  is  mentioned  elsewhere 
[Cuttings  in  Flesh]  (Burckhardt,  Notes  on 
Bed.  i.  51;  Niebuhr,  ire/,  ii.  57;  Wilkinson, 
Anc.  Eg.  ii.  342;  Lane,  Mod.  Eg.  i.  66).  It  is 
doubtless  alluded  t.>  in  1,'ev.  (xiii.  It;.  17.  xiv.  9, 
xvii.  5,  xx.  4),  and  in  the  opposite  direction   by 


FOREST 


631 


Ezekiel  (ix.  4,  5,  6).  and  in  Rev.  (vii.  3,  ix.  4, 
xiv.  1,  xxii.  4.)  The  mark  mentioned  by  Ezekiel 
with  approval  has  been  supposed  to  be  the  figure  of 
the  cross,  said  to  be  denoted  by  the  word  here  used, 
in,  in  the  ancient  Semitic  language  (Gesen.  p. 
1495  ;  Spencer,  deLeg.  Hebr.  ii.  20.  3.  409,  413). 

It  may  have  been  by  way  of  contradiction  to 
heathen  practice  that  the  High-priest  wore  on  the 
front  of  his  mitre  the  golden  plate  inscribed  "  Holi- 
ness to  the  Lord"  (Ex.  xxviii.  36,  xxxix.  30; 
Spencer,  J.,  ft).  . 

The  "  jewels  for  the  forehead,"  mentioned 
by  Ezekiel  (xvi.  12),  and  in  margin  of  A.  V. 
Gen.  xxiv.  22,  were  in  all  probability  nose-rings 
(Is.  iii.  21 ;  Lane,  Mod.  Eg.  iii.  225,  226  ; 
Harmer,  Obs.  iv.  311,  312 ;  Gesen.  p.  870 ; 
Winer,  s.  v.  Nasewing).  The  Persian  and  also 
Egyptian  women  wear  jewels  and  strings  of  coins 
across  their  foreheads  (Olearius,  Travels,  p.  317  ; 
Lane,  Mod.  Eg.  ii.  228).     [Nose-jewel.] 

For  the  use  of  frontlets  between  the  eyes,  see 
Frontlets,  and  for  the  symptoms  of  leprosy 
apparent  in  the  forehead,  Leprosy.     [H.  W.  P.] 

FOREST.  The  corresponding  Hebrew  terms  are 
"IJ?!,  EH"!,  and  DT12.  The  first  of  these  most 
truly  expresses  the  idea  of  a  forest,  the  etymological 
force  of  the  word  being  abundance,  and  its  use  being 
restricted  (with  the  exception  of  1  Sam.  xiv.  26, 
and  Cant.  v.  i.,  in  which  it  refers  to  honey)  to  an 
abundance  of  trees.  The  second  is  seldom  used,  and 
applies  to  woods  of  less  extent,  the  word  itself  in- 
volving the  idea  of  what  is  being  cut  down  (silva  a 
caedendo  dicta,  Gesen.  Thesaur.  p.  530):  it  is 
only  twice  (1  Sam.  xxiii.  15  ff.  ;  2  Chr.  xxvii.  4) 
applied  to  woods  properly  so  called;  its  sense,  how- 
ever, is  illustrated  in  the  other  passages  in  which  it 
occurs,  viz.,  Is.  xvii.  9  (A.  V.  "bough"),  where 
the  comparison  is  to  the  solitary  relic  of  an  ancient 
forest,  and  Ez.  xxxi.  3,  where  it  applies  to  trees  or 
foliage  sufficient  to  afford  shelter  (frondibus  ncmo- 
riisns.  Vulg. ;  A.  V.  "with  a  shadowing  shroud"). 
The  third,  panics  (a  word  of  foreign  origin,  mean- 
ing a  park  or  plantation,  whence  also  comes  the 
Greek  TrapctSeicros),  occurs  only  once  in  reference 
to  forest  trees  (Neh.  ii.  8),  and  appropriately  ex- 
presses the  care  with  which  the  forests  of  Palestine 
were  preserved  under  the  Persian  rule,  a  regular 
warden  being  appointed,  without  whose  sanction  no 
tree  could  be  felled.  Elsewhere  the  word  describes 
an  orchard  (Eccl.  ii.  5;   Cant.  iv.  13). 

Although  Palestine  has  never  been  in  historical 
times  a  woodland  country,  yet  there  can  be  no 
doubt  that  there  was  much  more  wood  formerly 
than  there  is  at  present.  It  is  not  improbable  thai 
the  highlands  were  once  covered  with  a  primaeval 
forest,  of  which  the  celebrated  oaks  and  terebinths 
scattered  here  and  there  were  the  relies.  The  woods 
anil  forests  mentioned  in  the  Bible  appear  to  have 
been  situated  where  they  are  usually  found  in  cul- 
tivated e itries,  in  the  valleys  and  defiles  that  lead 

down  from  the  high-  to  the  lowlands  and  in  the 
adjacent  plains.  They  were  therefore  of  no  great 
si/.e,  and  correspond  rather  with  the  idea  of  the 
Latin  SaltUS  than  with  our  forest. 

(1.)  The  wood  of  Ephraim  was  the  most  exten- 
sive.   It  clothed  tin'  slopes  of  the  hills  that  bordered 

the   plain   of  Jez I.   and    the   plain   itself   in  the 

neighbour] 1    of   Bethshan   (Josh.   xvii.   15  ff.), 

extending,  perhaps,  at  one  time  to  Tabor,  which  is 
translated  Spud's  by  Theodotion  (Hos.  v.  1),  and 
which  is  still  well  covered  with  forest  trees  (Stan- 


632  FORTIFICATIONS 

ley,  p.  350).     (2.)  The  wood  of  Bethel  (2  K.  ii. 

23,  24)  was  situated  in  the  ravine  which  descends 

to  the  plain  of  Jericho.     C  3.)  The  forest  of  Hareth 

(1  Sam.  xxii.  5)  was  somewhere  on  the  border  of  I  P-  f?>  a11  ™uall7>  ™»W>  or  « 

the  Philistine  plain,  in  the  southern  part  of  Judah.    fnd  fonsaquarum.    The  speed 

i      .  '.         .  .   .       .       t  i.j  i      tpniK  -will    rip    liiniii!    nvniiimi'd    i 

(4.)  The  wood  through  which  the  Israelites  passed 
in  their  pursuit  of  the  Philistines  (1  Sam.  x:.v.  25) 


x:.v 
was  probably  near  Aijalon  (comp.  v.  31),  in 
one  of  the  valleys  leading  down  to-  the  plain  of 
Philistia.  (5.)  The  "wood"  (Ps.  exxxii.  6)  im- 
plied in  the  name  of  Kirjath-jearim  (1  Sam.  vii.  2) 
must  have  been  similarly  situated,  as  also  (6.)  were 
the  "forests"  (Choresh)  in  which  Jotham  placed 
his  forts  (2  Chr.  xxvii.  4).  (7.)  The  plain  of 
Sharon  was  partly  covered  with  wood  (Strab.  xvii. 
p.  758),  whence  the  LXX.  gives  Spv/xSs  as  an  equi- 
valent (Is.  lxv.  10).  It  has  still  a  fair  amount  of 
wood  (Stanley,  p'  260.)  (8.)  The  wood  (Choresh) 
in  the  wilderness  of  Ziph,  in  which  David  concealed 
himself  (1  Sam.  xxiii.  15  ff.),  lay  S.E.  of  Hebron. 
The  greater  portion  of  Peraea  was,  and  still  is, 
covered  with  forests  of  oak  and  terebinth  (Is.  ii.  13  ; 
Ez.  xxvii.  6 ;  Zech.  xi.  2 ;  comp.  Buckingham's 
Palestine,  pp.  103  ff.,  240  ff. ;  Stanley,  p.  324). 
A  portion  of  this  near  Mahanaim  was  known  as  the 
"  wood  of  Ephraim  "  (2  Sam.  xviii.  6),  in  which  the 
battle  between  David  and  Absalom  took  place. 
Winer  (art.  Walder)  places  it  on  the  west  side  of 
the  Jordan,  but  a  comparison  of  2  Sam.  xvii.  2(3, 
xviii.  3,  23,  proves  the  reverse.  The  statement  in 
xviii.  23,  in  particular,  marks  its  position  as  on  the 
highlands,  at  some  little  distance  from  the  valley 
of  the  Jordan  (comp.  Joseph.  Ant.  vii.  10,  §1,  2). 
The  house  of  the  forest  of  Lebanon  (1  K.  vii.  2, 
x.  17,  21  ;  2  Chr.  ix.  16,  20)  was  so  called  pro- 
bably from  being  fitted  up  with  cedar.  It  has  also 
been  explained  as  referring  to  the  forest-like  rows  of 
cedar  pillars.  The  number  and  magnificence  of  the 
cedars  of  Lebanon  is  frequently  noticed  in  the 
poetical  portions  of  the  Bible.  The  forest  generally 
supplied  Hebrew  writers  with  an  image  of  pride 
and  exaltation  doomed  to  destruction  (2  K.  xix. 
23  ;  Is.  x.  18,  xxxii.  19,  xxxvii.  24 ;  Jer.  xxi.  14, 
xxii.  7,  xlvi.  23;  Zech.  xi.  2),  as  well  as  of  un- 
fruitfulness  as  contrasted  with  a  cultivated  field  or 
vineyard  (Is.  xxix.  17,  xxxii.  15;  Jer.  xxvi.  18; 
Hos.  ii.  12).  [W.  L.  B.] 

FORTIFICATIONS.  [Fenced  Cities.] 
FORTUNA'TUS  (*optoiWtos,  1  Cor.  xvi. 
17),  one  of  three  Corinthians,  the  others  being 
Stephanas  and  Achaicus,  who  were  at  Ephesus  when 
St.  Paul  wrote  his  first  Epistle.  Some  have  sup- 
posed that  they  were  ol  X\orjs,  alluded  to  1  Cor. 
i.  11;  but  the  language  of  irony,  in  which  the 
Apostle  must  in  that  case  be  interpreted  in  ch.  xvi. 
as  speaking  of  their  presence,  would  become  sar- 
casm too  cutting  for  so  tender  a  heart  as  St.  Paul's 
to  have  uttered  among  his  valedictions.  "  The 
household  of  Stephanas"  is  mentioned  in  ch.  i.  16 
as  having  been  baptized  by  himself:  perhaps  For- 
tunatus  and  Achaicus  may  have  been  members  of  that 
household.  There  is  a  Fortunatus  mentioned  at  the 
end  of  Clement's  first  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians, 
who  was  possibly  the  same  person.  [H.  A.] 

FOUNTAIN.  1.  ]]]!,  from  fj?,  to  flow ;  also 
signifies  an  "  eye,"  Gesen.  p.  1017.  2.  )*J?E>  (from 
1),  a  well-watered  place;  sometimes  in  A.  V. 
"  well,"  or  "  spring."  ?.  D^O  NV1D,  from  X^, 
to  go  forth,  Gesen.  p.  613;  a  gushing  forth  of 
waters.     4.   "l'lpO,  from  "l-1p,   to  dig,   Gesen.    p. 


FOUNTAIN 

1209.    5.  JM3D,  from  jn:,  to  bubble  forth,  Gesen. 
p.  845.     6.  hi,  or  H?3,  from  7^3,  to  roll,  Gesen. 

288,  all  usually,  irr]yi\,  or  ir-qy)]  vSaros  ;  fons, 
use  of  these  various 
terms  will  be  found  examined  in  the  Appendix  to 
Stanley's  Sinai  and  Palestine. 

Among  the  attractive  features  presented  by  the 
Land  of  Promise  to  the  nation  migrating  from 
Egypt  by  way  of  the  desert,  none  would  be  more 
striking  than  the  natural  gush  of  waters  from  the 
ground.  Instead  of  watering  his  field  or  garden,  as 
in  Egypt,  "  with  his  foot  "  (Shaw,  Travels,  p.  408), 
the  Hebrew  cultivator  was  taught  to  look  forward 
to  a  land  "  drinking  water  of  the  rain  of  heaven,  a 
land  of  brooks  of  water,  of  fountains  and  depths 
springing  from  valleys  and  hills"  (Deut.  viii.  7, 
xi.  11).  In  the  desert  of  Sinai,  "  the  few  living, 
perhaps  perennial  springs,"  by  the  fact  of  their 
rarity  assume  an  importance  hardly  to  be  under- 
stood in  moister  climates,  and  more  than  justify  a 
poetical  expression  of  national  rejoicing  over  the 
discovery  of  one  (Num.  xxi.  17).  But  the  springs 
of  Palestine,  though  short-lived,  are  remarkable  for 
their  abundance  and  beauty,  especially  those  which 
fall  into  the  Jordan  and  its  lakes  throughotit  its 
whole  course  (Stanley,  S.  $  P.  17,  122,  123, 
295,  373,  509  ;  Burckhardt,  Syria,  344).  The 
spring  or  fountain  of  living  water,  the  "  eye"  of 
the  landscape  (see  No.  1),  is  distinguished  in  all 
Oriental  languages  from  the  artificially  sunk  and 
enclosed  well  (Stanley,  509).  Its  importance  is 
implied  by  the  number  of  topographical  names 
compounded  with  En,  or  Ain  (Arab.):  En-gedi, 
Ain-jidij,  "  spring  of  the  gazelle,"  may  serve  as  a 
striking  instance  (1  Sam.  xxiii.  29  ;  Pielaud,  763; 
Robinson,  i.  504  ;   Stanley,  App.  §50). 


itwm* 


Fountain  at  Nasareth.    (Roberts.) 

The  volcanic  agency  which  has  operated  so  power- 
fully in  Palestine,  has  from  very  early  times  given 
tokens  of  its  working  in  the  warm  springs  which 
are  found  near  the  sea  of  Galilee  and  the  Dead  Sea. 
One  of  them,  En-eglaim,  the  "spring  of  calves," 
at  the  N.E.  end  of  the  latter,  is  probably  identical 
with  Callirrhoe,  mentioned  by  Josephus  as  a  place 
resorted  to  by  Herod  in  his  last  illness  (Joseph. 
B.  J.  i.  33,  §5  ;  Kitto,  Fhys.  Geogr.  of  Pal. 
120,  121  ;  Stanley,  S.  3f  P.  285).  His  son 
Philip  built  the  town,  which  he  named  Tiberias,  at 
the  sulphureous  hot-springs  at  the  S.  of  the  sea 
of  Galilee  (Joseph.  Ant.  xviii.  2,  §3';  Hasselquist, 


FOWL 

Travels,  App.  283 ;  Kitto,  114;  Burckhardt,  Syria, 
328,  330).  Other  hot-springs  are  found  at  seven 
miles  distance  from  Tiberias,  and  at  Omkeis  (Ga- 
dara)  (Relaud,  775  ;  Burckhardt,  276,  277  ;  Kitto, 
116,  118). 

Jerusalem,  though  mainly  dependent  for  its  sup- 
ply of  water  upon  its  rain-water  cisterns,  appears 
from  recent  inquiries  to  have  possessed  either  more 
than  one  perennial  spring,  or  one  issuing  by  more 
than  one  outlet.  To  this  agree  the  "  fons  pereunis 
aquae"  of  Tacitus  (Hist.  v.  12),  and  the  63aTcof 
dye'/c\enrToy  (riffraff  is  of  Aristeas  (  Joseph,  ii.  112, 
ed.  Havercamp.  ;  Robinson,  i.  343,  .'145 ;  Williams, 
Holy  City,  ii.  458,  468;  Raumer,  298  ;  Ez.  xlvii. 
1,  12;  Kitto,  Phys.  Geoyr.  412,  415).  [Cis- 
terns ;  Sii.oam.] 

In  the  towers  built  by  Herod,  Josephus  says 
there  were  cisterns  with  xa^KOVP'YVI^aT'^  through 
which  water  was  poured  forth :  these  may  have 
been  statues  or  figures  containing  spouts  tor  water 
after  Roman  models  (Plin.  Epist.  v.  6 ;  N.  H. 
xxxvi.  15,  121  ;  Joseph.  B.  ,/.  v.  4,  §4). 

No  Eastern  city  is  so  well  supplied  with  water 
as  Damascus  {Early  Trav.  294).  In  Oriental 
cities  generally  public  fountains  are  frequent  (Poole, 
Englishw.  in  Eg.  i.  180).  Traces  of  such  foun- 
tains at  Jerusalem  may  perhaps  be  found  in  the 
names  En-Rogel  (2  Sam.  xvii.  17),  the  "Dragon- 
well"  or  fountain,  and  the  "gate  of  the  fountain" 
(Neh.  ii.  13,  14).  The  water  which  supplied 
Solomon's  pools  near  Bethlehem  was  conveyed 
to  them  by  subterranean  channels.  In  these  may 
perhaps  be  found  the  "sealed  fountain"  of  Cant.  iv. 
12  (Hasselquist,  145  ;  Maundrell,  Ear.  Trav. 
457).  The  fountain  of  Nazareth  bears  a  traditional 
antiquity,  to  which  it  has  probably  good  derivative, 
if  not  actual  claim  (Roberts,  Views  in  Palestine, 
i.  21.29,  33;  Col.  Ch.  Chron.  No.  cxxx.  147; 
Fisher's  Views  in  Syria,  i.  31,  iii.  44).  [H.  W.P.j 


r"<. 


FRANKINCENSE 


633 


So-calle<l  "  Fountain 


(From  Roberts.) 


FOWL.  Several  distinct  Hebrew  and  Greek 
words  are  thus  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  of  the  Bible. 
Of  these  the  most  common  is  Ppy,  which  is  usually 
a  collective  term  for  all  kinds  of  birds,  frequently 
with  the  addition  of  DV3t*'!"I,  "  of  the  skies." 

t^J?  is  a  collective  term  for  birds  of  prey,  derived 
from  O'V,  "  to  attack  vehemently."  It  is  translated 
fowl  in  Gen.  xv.  11,  Job  xxviii.  7,  Is.  xviii.  6. 

"YIQ>*  (Chald.  -|QV),  from  root  "IBS,  "  to  hiss," 
is  also  a  collective  term  for  birds,  though  occa- 
sionally rendered  by  swallow  ami  .^jtarrow.  For 
the  collective  use  of  the  word  see  Deut.  iv.  17. 
Ps.  viii.  8,  Ez.  xvii.  23,  and  Dan.  iv.  12.  In  \>  h. 
v.  18,   the  woj'd   seems   to  have  the   special   sense 


which  "  fowl"  has  with  us,  as  it  is  enumerated  among 
the  viands  provided  for  Nehemiah's  table. 

In  1  K.  iv.  23,  among  the  daily  provisions  for 
Solomon's  table  "  fatted  fowl  "  are  included,  the 
Heb.  words  being  CD-ISN  D*"13*12.  Gesenius 
prefers  to  translate  this  "  iiitted  geese,"  referring 
the  word  to  the  root  VI3,  "to  be  pure,"  because 
of  the  pure  whiteuess  of  the  bird.  He  gives  reasons 
for  believing  thai  the  same  word  in  the  cognate 
languages  included  also  the  meaning  of  swan. 

In  the  N.  T.  the  word  translated  "  fowls"  is  most 
frequently  t«  irereivd,  which  comprehends  all  kinds 
of  birds  (including  ravens,  Luke  xii.  24)  ;  but  in 
Rev.  xix.  17-21,  where  the  context  shows  that  birds 
of  prey  are  meant,  the  Greek  is  ra  opvta.  The 
same  distinction  is  observed  in  the  Apocryphal 
writings:  comp.  Jud.xi.  7,  Ecclus.  xvii.  4,  xliii.  14. 
with  2  Mace.  xv.  33.  [W.  I).] 

FOX  (b]ftW,  shual;  aAami^).  The  root  of  ^MK> 
is  ?))&,  "to  break  through,  to  make  hollow;"  and 
hence  its  application  to  the  fox,  which  burrows. 
The  term  probably  in  its  use  by  the  Hebrews  in- 
cluded the  jackal  as  well  as  the  common  fox  ;  for 
some  of  the  passages  in  which  A.  V.  renders  it  "  fox  " 
suit  that  animal,  while  others  better  represent  the 
habits  of  the  jackal. 

The  fox  is  proverbially  fond  of  grapes,  and  a  very 
destructive  visitor  to  vineyards  (Cant.  ii.  15).  The 
proverbially  cunning  character  of  the  fox  is  alluded 
to  in  Ez.  xiii.  4,  and  Luke  xiii.  32,  where  the  pro- 
phets of  Israel  are  said  to  be  like  foxes  in  the  desert, 
and  where  our  Saviour  calls  Herod  "that  fox." 
His  habit  of  burrowing  among  ruins  is  referred  to  in 
Neh.  iv.  3  and  Lam.  v.  18  (see  also  Matt.  viii.  20). 
In  Judg.  xv.  4,  and  in  Ps.  lxiii.  10,  it  seems  probable 
that  the  jackal  lather  than  the  fox  is  spoken  of. 
The  Rabbinical  writers  make  frequent  mention  of 
the  fox  and  his  habits.  In  the  Talmud  it  is  said, 
"  The  fox  does  not  die  from  being  under  the  earth  ; 
he  is  used  to  it,  and  it  does  not  hurt  him."  And 
again,  "  He  has  gained  as  much  asa  fox  in  a  ploughed 
field,"  i.  e.  nothing.  Another  proverb  relating  to 
him  is  this  : 

"  If  the  fox  be  at  the  rudder, 
Speak  him  fairly,  '  My  dear  brother.' " 
Both  the  fox  and  the  jackal   are  common  in  Pa- 
le tine;   the  latter  name  being  probably  connected 
with  the  Heb.  shual;  Fr.  chacal;  Germ,  schakal; 
Sanscr.  qrikala,  crigala. 

A  curious  instance  of  a  not  unfrcquent  error  in 
the  LXX.  will  be  found  in  1  K.  xx.  10,  where 
sh'dlim,  foxes,  has  been  read  for  salim,  handfuls, 
and  rendered  accordingly.  [W.  l>.j 

FHANKINCENSE  (Pin1?,  from  J31?,  to  be 
white;  Ai'/Bafos,  Ex.  nx. 34, Sic., and  Matt.  ii.  11; 
\if3avccr6s,  1  Chr.  ix.  29  ;  Rev.  viii.  3,  N.  T.),  a 
vegetable  resin,  brittle,  glittering,  and  of  a  bitter 
taste,  used  fcr  the  purpose  of  sacrr/kral  fumigate 
i  Ex.  xzx.  84-36).  It  is  obtained  by  successive  in- 
cisions in  the  bark  of  a  free  called  the  arbor  thuris, 
the  first  of  which  yields  the  puresl  and  whitest  kind 
G13T  7,  Xifiavov  Zta(pavr\.  or  Ka6ap6v) ;  while  the 
produce  of  the  alter  incisions  is  spotted  with  yellow, 

and  as  it  becomes  old  loses  its  whiteness  altogether. 
The  Hebrews  imported  their  frankincense  from 
Arabia  ( Is.  Ix.  6  ;  Jer.  vi.  20  ),  and  more  particularly 
from  Saba  i  but  it  is  remarkable  that  at  present  the 
Arabian  Libanum,  or  Olibanum,  is  of  a  very  inferior 
kind,  and  that  the  finest  frankincense  imported  into 

2  T 


034 


FRANKINCENSE 


Turkey  comes  through  Arabia  from  the  islands  of  the 
Indian  Archipelago.  The  Arabian  plant  may  pos- 
sibly have  degenerate  1,  or  it  may  be  that  the  finest 
kind  was  always  procured  from  India,  as  it  certainly 
was  in  the  time  of  Dioscorides.  The  Arabs  call  the 
best  frankincense  cundur,  with  which  compare  the 
Sanscrit  cunduru,  an  odorous  gum  which  is  stated 
by  the  Hindu  medical  writers  to  be  the  produce  of  a 
tree  called  Sallaci  or  Salai.  This  tree  grows  on 
the  mountains  of  India,  and  is  described  by  Dr. 
Roxburgh,  who  calls  it  the  Boswellia  serrata  (Asiat. 
fie*,  ix.  p.  377,  8vo.  edit.). 

The  resin  itself  is  well  known  ;  but  it  is  still  un- 
certain by  what  tree  it  is  produced.  Ancient  as 
well  as  modern  authors  vary  in  their  descriptions 
to  such  an  extent,  that  it  is  difficult  to  arrive  at  a 
consistent,  still  more  difficult  to  gain  a  botanical, 
idea  of  the  plant.  It  is  described  by  Theophrastus 
as  attaining  the  height  of  about  5  ells,  having  many 
branches,  leaves  like  the  pear-tree,  and  bark  like 
the  laurel ;  but  at  the  same  time  he  mentions  an- 
other description,  according  to  which  it  resembles 
the  mastick-tree,  its  leaves  being  of  a  reddish 
colour  {Hist.  Plant,  ix.  4).  According  to  Dio- 
dorus  (v.  41)  it  is  a  small  tree,  resembling  the 
Egyptian  hawthorn,  with  gold-yellow  leaves  like 
those  of  the  woad.  The  difficulty  was  rather  in- 
creased than  otherwise  in  the  time  of  Pliny  by  the 
importation  of  some  shoots  of  the  tree  itself,  which 
seemed  to  belong  to  the  terebinfhus  (xii.  31). 
Garcia  de  Horto  represents  it  as  low,  with  a  leaf 
like  that  of  the  mastick:  he  distinguishes  two  kinds, 
the  finer,  growing  on  the  mountains,  the  other 
dark,  and  of  an  inferior  quality  growing  on  the 
plains.  Chardin  says  that  the  frankincense  tree 
on  the  mountains  of  Caramania  resembles  a  large 
pear-tree.  It  is  not  mentioned  by  Forskal,  and 
Niebuhr  could  learn  nothing  of  it  (Trav.  p.  356). 
A  more  definite  notion  of  the  plant  might  possibly 
be  obtained  from  the  Thuia  occidentalis,  the  Ame- 
rican arbor  vitae,  or  Frankincense  tree.  But  at  any 
rate  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  the  tree  which 
produces  the  Indian  frankincense,  and  which  in  all 
probability  supplied  Arabia  with  the  finer  kind 
supposed  to  be  indigenous  in  that  country,  is  the 
Boswellia  serrata  of  Roxburgh  (vid.  supr.)  ;  or 
Boiwellia  thurifera  of  Colebrooke.  Its  claims  have 
been  maintained  by  Colebrooke  against  the  Juni- 
perus  lycia  of  Linnaeus,  which  was  long  supposed 
to  be  the  true  frankincense  tree.  Colebrooke  shows, 
upon  the  testimony  of  French  botanists,  that  this 
tree,  which  grows  in  the  South  of  France,  does  not 
yield  the  gum  in  question.  It  is  still  extremely 
doubtful  what  tree  produces  the  Arab.  Olibanum  : 
Lamarck  proposes  the  Amyris  Gileadensis  ;  but,  as 
it  would  seem,  upon  inconclusive  evidence. 

The  Indian  Olibanum,  or  frankincense,  is  imported 
in  chests  and  casks  from  Bombay,  as  a  regular 
article  of  sale.  It  is  chiefly  used  in  the  rites  of 
the  Greek  and  Roman  churches  ;  and  its  only 
medical  application  at  present  is  as  a  perfume  in 
sick  rooms.  The  Olibauum,  or  frankincense  used 
by  the  Jews  in  the  temple  services,  is  not  to  be 
confounded  with  the  frankincense  of  commerce, 
which  is  a  spontaneous  exudation  of  the  Pinus 
abies,  or  Norway  spruce  fir,  and  resembles,  in  its 
nature  and  uses,  the  Burgundy  pitch  which  is  ob- 
tained from  the  same  tree. 

From  Cant.  it.  14,  it  has  been  inferred  that  the 
frankincense  tree  grew  in  Palestine,  and  especially 
on  Mount  Lebanon.  The  connexion  between  the 
names,  however,  goes  for  nothing  (Lebonah,  Leba- 


FRONTLETS 

non)  ;  the  word  may  be  used  for  aromatia  plants 
generally  (Ges.  Lex.)  ;  and  the  rhetorical  flourishes 
of  Florns  (Epit.  iii.  6,  "  thuris  silvas"),  and  Au- 
sonius  (Monosi/l.  p.  110)  are  of  little  avail  against 
the  fact  that  the  tree  is  not  at  present  found  in  Pa- 
lestine (Cels.  Hierobot.  i.  p.  231  ff. ;  Rosenm.  Al- 
terthumsk.  iv.  p.  153  ff.).  [T.  E.  B.] 

FROG.  The  mention  of  this  reptile  in  the  0.  T. 
is  confined  to  the  passage  in  Ex.  viii.  2-7,  &c,  in 
which  the  plague  of  frogs  is  described,  and  to  the 
two  allusions  to  that  event  in  Ps.  lxxviii.  45,  cv.  30. 
The  term  also  occurs  in  Wisd.  xix.  10  in  reference 
to  the  same  event.  The  Heb.  word  is  jniQ^* 
which  is  rendered  by  the  LXX.  fidrpaxos,  Vulg. 
rana.  In  the  N.  T.  the  word  occurs  once  only 
in  Rev.  xvi.  13,  "three  unclean  spirits  like 
frogs."  There  is  no  question  as  to  the  animal 
meant.  Many  species  of  frogs  are  found  in  Egypt, 
but  the  most  common  is  the  Rana  punctata,  the 
dotted  Egyptian  frog,  which  is  of  ash  colour  with 
green  spots,  the  feet  being  marked  with  transverse 
bands,  and  the  toes  separated  to  half  their  length. 
(See  Kalisch  on  Ex.  I.  c.)  Gesenius  derives  the 
Heb.  noun  from  "IQV,  "  to  leap,"  and  the  Arab. 

clij,   "marsh,"   i.e.  "leaping   in   the  marsh." 

Gesenius  queries  whether  we  may  not  trace  #a- 
rpaxos  to  the  Heb.  root — throwing  away  V,  and 
transposing  the  "1  and  1,  so  as   to  get  the  form 

ma.  [W.  D.] 

FRONTLETS,   or   PHYLACTERIES 

(rriSDia,  Ex.  xiii.  16  ;  Deut.  vi.  8,  xi.  18  ;  the 
only  three  passages  of  the  0.  T.  in  which  the  word 
occurs ;  LXX.  a<ra\€vrd ;  N.  T.  (pvAaKTypia, 
Matt,  xxiii.  5;  the  modern  Jews  called  them  Te- 

phillin,  j^Sfl,  a  word  not  found  in  the  Bible, 
Buxtorf,  Lex.  Tahn.  s.  v.).  These  "  frontlets"  or 
"  phylacteries"  were  strips  of  parchment,  on  which 
were  written  four  passages  of  Scripture  (Ex.  xiii. 
2-10,  11-17  ;  Deut.  vi.  4-9,  13-22)  in  an  ink  pie- 
pared  for  the  purpose.  They  were  then  rolled  up 
in  a  case  of  black  calfskin,  which  was  attached  to  a 
stiffer  piece  of  leather,  having  a  thong  one  finger 
broad,  and  one  and  a  half  cubits  long.  "  They  were 
placed  at  the  bend  of 
the  left  arm,  and  after 
the  thong  had  made  a 
little  knot  in  the  shape 
of  the  letter  \  it  was 
wound  about  the  arm 
in  a  spiral  line,  which 
ended  at  the  top  of  the 
middle  finger."  This 
was  called  "  the  Tephil- 
lah  on  the  arm,"  and 
the  leather  case  contained 
only  one  cell,  the  pas- 
sages being  written  on  a 
single  piece  of  parch- 
ment, with  thin  lines 
ruled  between  (Good- 
wyn,  Mos.  8f  Aar.  1. 
x.  2159).  Those  worn 
on  the  forehead  were 
written  on  four  strips  of 
parchment  (which  might 

not  be  of  any  hide  except  cow's  hide,  Nork,  Bramm. 
vml  Rabb.  p.  211;  comp.  Hesych.  s.  v.  ~S,Kvr'iKr] 
iiriKovpia),  and  put  into  four  little  cells  within  a 


Frontlets  ur  FliyhiutLTH-s. 


FRONTLETS 

square  case,  on  which  the  letter  C  was  written; 
the  three  points  of  the  u"  being  "  an  emblem  of 
the  heavenly  Fathers,  Jehovah  our  Lord  Je- 
hovah "  (Zohar.  fol.  54,  col.  2).  The  square  had 
two  thongs  (niy^"):,  on  which  Hebrew  letters 
were  inscribed ;  these  were  passed  round  the 
head,  and  after  making  a  knot  in  the  shape  of  T 
passed  over  the  breast.  This  phylactery  was  called 
"the  Tephillah  on  the  head,"  and  was  worn  in  the 
centre  of  the  forehead  (Leo  of  Modena,  Ceremonies 
of  the  Jetcs,  i.  11.  u.  4  ;  Calmet,  s.  v.  Phylactery  ; 
Otho,  Lex.  Rabbin,  p.  656). 

The  derivation  of  rilSOILD  is  uncertain.  Gesenins 
derives  it  by  contraction  from  TT1DL2SD  ( Thes. 
548).  The  Rabbinic  name  j^SFI  comes  from 
fPSFI,  "  a  prayer,"  because  they  were  worn  dining 
prayer,  and  were  supposed  to  typify  the  sincerity 
of  the  worshipper;  hence  they  were  bound  on  the 
left  wrist  |  Gem.  Eruvin.  95.  2  ;  otho,  /.  c. ;  Bu.xt. 
Lex.  TaJm.  s.  v.).  In  Matt,  xxiii.  5,  only,  they 
are  called  <pv\a.KTJipia,  either  because  they  tended 
to  promote  observance  of  the  law  (del  fivrj^v 
*X*LV  T°v  ®(ov,  Just.  Mart.  Dial.  c.  Tryph.  p. 
205,  for  which  reason  Luther  happily  renders  the 
word  by  Denkzettcl)  ;  or  from  the  use  of  them  as 
amulets  (Lat.  Praebia,  Gk.  TrepiavTa,  Grotius  ad 
Matt,  xxiii.  5).  $v\a.KTr]piov  is  the  ordinary  Greek 
word  for  an  amulet  (Plut.  ii.  378.  B,  where  rpvA. 
=the  Roman  Bulla),  and  is  used  apparently  with 
this  meaning  by  a  Greek  translator,  Ez.  xiii.  18 
for  mriD3,  cushions  (Kosenmiiller,  Schol.  ad  loc. 
i. ;  Schleusner,  Lex.  in  N.  T.).  That  phylac- 
teries were  used  as  amulets  is  certain,  and  was 
very  natural  (Targ.  ad  Cant.  viii.  3;  Barto- 
locc.  Bibl.  Rab.  i.  57G ;  Winer,  s.  vv.  Amur 
lete,  Phylakterien).  Jerome  (on  Matt,  xxiii. 
5)  says  they  were  thus  used  in  his  day  by  the 
Babylonians,  Persians,  and  Indians,  and  condemns 
certain  Christian  "  mulierculae "  for  similarly 
using  the  gospels  ("  parvula  evangelia,"  fiiflhia. 
fiiKpa,  Chrys. )  as  Trepid/j.p.aTa,  especially  the  Proem, 
to  St.  John  (comp.  Chrysost.  Horn,  in  Matt.  73). 
The  Koran  and  other  sacred  books  are  applied  to 
the  same  purpose  to  this  day  (Hottinger,  Hist. 
Orient,  i.  8,  p.  30 1,  de  numinis  Orient,  xvii.  sq. ; 
"The  most  esteemed  of  all  Hhegabs  is  a  Mooshaf, 
or  copy  of  the  Koran,"  Lane,  Mod,  Eg.  i.  338). 
Scaliger  even  supposes  that  phylacteries  were  de- 
signed to  supersede  those  amulets,  the  use  of  which 
had  been  already  learnt  by  the  Israelites  in  Egypt, 
[Amulets.]  There  was  a  spurious  book  called 
Phylact.  Angelorum,  where  Pope  i  felasius  evidently 
understood  the  word  to  mean  "  amulets,"  for  he  re- 
marks that  Phylacteria  ought  rather  to  he  ascribed 
to  devils.  In  this  sense  they  were  expressly  for- 
bidden by  Pope  Gregory  ."Si  quis  .  .  .  phylacteriis 
usiis  fuerit,  anathema  sit,"  Sixt.  Senensis,  Bibl. 
8anct.  p.  '.»'-!;  comp.  Can.  36.  Concil.  Laod.). 

The  LXX.  rendering  affaAevrd  |  Aquil.  arivaKTa) 
must  allude  to  their  being  tightly  bound  on  the 
forehead  and  wrist  during  prayer.  I 'el  it  [Var. 
Lectt.  ii.  .".  )  would   read   a(aAeuTa.     h.  e.  OJ 

alSola   fwl    airoTpoTTi]  ?    Schleusner,     Thes.  s.  o. 

adkA.),   but   he   is   amply    refuted    by  Spe r    </< 

Legg.  Hit.  iv.  2,  p.   1210)  and  Wiisius 

ii.    9,    §11).       Jerome'   calls   them    Pittaci 
Pietat.)  a   name   which    tolerably  expresses    their 
purpose  (  Force] lini,  Lex.  S.    ■ 

The  expression  "they  make  broad  their  phy- 
lacteries" {irKaTvvovffi  raipvA.  ai>Tu>v,  Matt,  xxiii. 
5)    refers   not    so    much    to   the    phylactery    itself, 


FRONTLETS 


635 


which  seems  to  have  been  of  a  prescribed  breadth, 
as  to  the  case  (H^Vp)  in  which  the  parchment 
was  kept,  which  the  Pharisees  (among  their  other 
pretentious  customs,  Mark  vii.  3,4;  Luke  v.  :-',:;. 
&c.)  made  as  conspicuous  as  they  could  (Reland, 
Anti'j.  ii.  9,  15).  Misled  probably  by  the  term 
■kKo.tuvovo-1,  and  by  the  mention  of  the  lYi?11)*,  or 
fringe  (Num.  xv.  38,  KAcia/xa  vaitivOivov  fael  ra 
KpaffireSa  rwvKTtpvyicav.  LXX.)  in  connexion  with 
them,  Epiphanius  says  that  they  were  irKdna  ar)- 
jxara  Tropcpvpas,  like  the  Roman  laticlave,  or  the 
stripes  on  a  Dalmatic  (ra  St  o-r]fji.aTa  rrjs  irop- 
(pvpas  (pvAanrripia  elcvdacriv  ol  T/zcpiySoj^eVoi  fj.e- 
rouo/j-d^eiy,  c.  Haer.  i.  33  ;  Sixt.  Sen.  /.  c).  He 
says  that  these  purple  stripes  were  worn  by  the 
Pharisees  with  fringes,  and  four  pomegranates,  that 
no  one  might  touch  them,  and  hence  he  derives 
their  name  (Reland,  Ant.  ii.  9,  15).  But  that 
this  is  an  error  is  clearly  shown  by  Scaliger  (Elench. 
Trihoer.  viii.  p.  66,  sq.).  It  is  said  that  the  Pha- 
risees wore  them  always,  wdiereas  the  common 
people  only  used  them  at  prayers,  because  they 
were  considered  to  be  even  holier  than  the  y'S,  or 
golden  plate,  on  the  priest's  tiara  (Ex.  xxviii.  36) 
since  that  had  the  sacred  name  once  engraved,  but 
in  each  of  the  Tephillin  the  tetragrammaton  re- 
curred twenty-three  times  (Carpzov.  App.  Critic. 
196).  Again  the  Pharisees  wore  the  Tephillah 
above  the  elbow,  but  the  Sadducees  on  the  palm 

of  the  hand  Mi Iwyn,  I.e.).     The  modern  Jews 

only  wear  them  at  morning  prayers,  and  some- 
times at  noon  (Leo  of  Modena,  /.  c). 

In  our  Lord's  time  they  were  worn  by  all  Jews, 
except  the  Karaites,  women,  and  slaves.  Boys, 
when  (at  the  age  of  thirteen  years  and  a  day)  they 
became  fl1^»V3  *J2  (sons  of  the  commandments), 
were  bound  to  wear  them  (Baba  Berac.  fol.  22.  1.  in 
Glossa),  and  therefore  they  may  have  been  used  even 
by  our  Lord,  as  he  merely  discountenanced  their 
abuse.  The  suggestion  was  made  by  Scaliger  (I.  c), 
and  led  to  a  somewhat  idle  controversy.  Lightfoot 
!  Bar.  Hebr,  ad  Matt,  xxiii.  5)  and  Otho  (Lex. 
Rab.  p.  656)  agree  with  Scaliger,  hut  Carpzov 
(I.  c.)  and  others  strongly  deny  it,  from  a  belief 
that  the  entire  use  of  phylacteries  arose  from  an 
error. 

The  Karaites  explained  Dent.  vi.  8,  Ex.  xiii.  9, 
&c.  as  a  figurative  command  to  remember  the  law 
(Reland,  Ant.  p.  132),  as  is  certainly  the  case  iu 
similar  passages  (Prov.  iii.  3,  vi.  ~1\.  vii.  3;  ('ant. 
viii.  ti.&c).  It  seems  clear  to  us  that  the  scope  of 
these  injunctions  favours  the  Karaite  interpretation, 
and  in  Ex.  xiii.  9  the  word  is  not  1112010,  hut 
}1~)3T  "a  memorial"  (Gerhardus  on  Deut.vi.8; 
Edzardus  on  Berachoth.  i.  209  ;  Heidanus,  de  Orig. 
Erroris,  viii.  1'..  6;  Schottgen,  Ear.  ffebr.  i.  199; 
Rosenmiiller,  at  loc.\  Hengstenberg,  /'. at.  i. 
458  .  Considering  too  the  nature  of  the  passages 
inscribed   on   the  phylactei  ies    I  by   no  I  bi 

mosl  important  in  the  Pentateuch — for  the  I 
are  mistaken  in  saying  that  the  Decaloguewas  used 
in  this  way,  Jer.  I.e.]  Chrysost.  /.  ,.  .•  Theophyl. 

.'./  .!/•///.    xxiii.    .'.   .  and  the   fact    that  WC    h 

trai  e  n  hat.  \  er  of  their  use  before  the  exile  I  dm  ing 

which   tine'  tie    Jews  probably    learnt  the   i 

of  wearing  them  from  the  Babylonians  ,  we  have 

no  doubt  that  the  object  of  the  pr pts  (Deut.  vi. 

8;  Ex.  xii.  9    was  to  impress  on  the  minds  of  the 

1 pie  the  necessity  of  remembering  the  Law.    But 

the  figurative  language  in  which  this  duty  was 
urged  upon  them  was  mistaken  for  a  literal  cora- 

-'  T  2 


636 


FRONTLETS 


mand.  An  additional  argument  against  the  literal 
interpretation  of  the  direction  is  the  dangerous  abuse 
to  which  it  was  •immediately  liable.  Indeed  such 
an  observance  would  defeat  the  supposed  intention 
of  it,  by  substituting  an  outward  ceremony  for  an 
inward  remembrance.  We  have  a  specimen  of  this 
in  the  curious  literalism  of  Kimchi's  Comment  on 
Ps.  i.  2.  Starting  the  objection  that  it  is  impossible 
to  meditate  in  God's  law  day  and  night,  because  of 
sleep,  domestic  cares,  &c,  he  answers  that  for  the  ful- 
filment of  the  text  it  is  sufficient  to  wear  Tephillin ! 

In  spite  of  these  considerations,  Justin  {Dial.  c. 
Tri/plt.  I.  c),  Chrysostom,  Euthymius,  Theophylact, 
and  many  moderns  (Baumgarten,  Comm.  i.  479  ; 
Winer,  s.  v.  Phylact.)  prefer  the  literal  meaning. 
It  rests  therefore  with  them  to  account  for  the  entire 
absence  of  all  allusion  to  phylacteries  in  the  0.  T. 
The  passages  in  Proverbs  (v.  supra)  contain  no  such 
reference,  and  in  Ez.  xxiv.  17  "INS  means  not  a 
Phylactery  (as  Jarchi  says),  but  a  turban. 
[Crowns.]  |   (Gesen.  Thes.  p.  1089.) 

The  Rabbis  have  many  rules  about  their  use. 
They  were  not  worn  on  Sabbaths  or  other  sacred 
days,  because  those  days  were  themselves  a  sign  or 
pledge  (mtf),  and  required  no  further  memorial 
(Zohar,  fol.  236  ;  Reland,  I.  c).  They  must  be  read 
standing  in  the  morning  (when  blue  can  be  dis- 
tinguished from  green),  but  in  the  evening  (at  sun- 
set) they  might  be  read  sitting.  In  times  of  perse- 
cution a  red  thread  was  worn  instead  (Mnnster,  de 
praeo.  affirm.  ;  comp.  Josh.  ii.  18).  Both  hands 
were  to  be  used,  if  possible,  in  writing  them.  The 
leather  must  have  no  hole  in  it.  A  single  blot  did 
not  signify  if  an  uneducated  boy  could  read  the  word. 
At  the  top  of  the  parchment  no  more  room  must  be 

left  than  would  suffice  for  the  letter  7,  but  at  the 
bottom  there  might  be  room  even  for  p  or  1.  A 
man,  when  wearing  the  Tephillin,  must  not  approach 
within  four  cubits  of  a  cemetery  (Sixt.  Senensis,  I.  a). 
He  who  has  a  taste  for  further  frivolities  (which 
yet  are  deeplv  interesting  as  illustrative  of  a  priestly 
superstition)  may  find  them  in  Lightfoot  (Hor. 
Heb.  ad  loc),  Schottgen,  Otho  {Lex.  Rob.  s.  v.), 
and  in  the  Mishna — especially  in  the  treatise  called 
Bosh  Hashanah. 

The  Rabbis  even  declared  that  Cod  wore  them, 
arguing  from  Is.  lxii.  8  ;  Deut.  xxxiii.  2  :  Is.  xlix. 
16.  Perhaps  this  was  a  pious  fraud  to  inculcate 
their  use  ;  or  it  may  have  had  some  mystic  mean- 
ing (Zohar,  pt.  ii.  fol.  2;  Carpzov.  he.). 

Josephus  gives  their  general  significance  (Ant.  iv. 
8,  §13.  us  Tr€pij8Ae7rT0t'  wavTaxodtv  rb  irepl 
auTovs  irpodvjxov  tov  0eoO).  They  were  supposed 
to  save  from  the  devil  (Targ.  ad  Cant.  viii.  3)  and 
from  sin  (Hottinger,  Jur.  Hebr.  Leg.  xx.  p.  29), 
and  they  were  used  for  oaths ;  but  the  Piabbis  dis- 
approved the  application  of  them  to  charm  wounds, 
or  lull  children  to  sleep  (Id.  Leg.  253  ;  Maimon. 
de  Idol.  ii.).  He  who  wore  them  was  supposed  to 
prolong  his  days  (Is.  xxxviii.  16),  but  he  who  did 
not,  was  doomed  to  perdition,  since  he  thereby  broke 
eight  affirmative  precepts  (Maimon.  Tephil.  iv.  26). 

On  the  analogous  practice  alluded  to  in  Rev.  xiii. 
16,  xiv.  1,  see  Forehead. 

Besides  the  authors  already  quoted  (Sixt.  Senensis, 
Reland,  Otho,  Lightfoot,  Schottgen,  Carpzov,  Hot- 
tinger, Goodwyn,  Rosenmiiller,  &c),  see  the  fol- 
lowing, to  whom  they  refer :  Maimonides,  Tephillin; 
Wagenseil  in  Soto,  cap.  ii.  397-418;  Surenhusius, 
Mishna  ad  Tract.  Beracoth,  pp.  8,  9;  Beck,  de 
Jvdaeorum  ligamentis  precativis,  and  de  usu  Phy- 


FULLER 

/art.  (1679);  Basnage,  Hist,  des  Juifs,  v.  xii.  12 
sq.;  Braunius,  de  Vest.  Sacerd.  p.  7  sq.;  Buxtorf, 
Synag.  J  ml.  p.  170  sq.;  Ugolini,  Thes.  torn,  xxi.; 
de  usu  phylact.  There  is  in  this  latter  work  much 
further  information,  but  we  have  inserted  all  that 
seemed  interesting.  [F.  W.  F.] 

FULLER  (D33,  from  D23,  tread,  Gesen.  p. 
657  ;  yva<pevs ;  fullo).  The  trade  of  the  fullers, 
so  far  as  it  is  mentioned  in  Scripture,  appears  to 
have  consisted  chiefly  in  cleansing  garments  ami 
whitening  them.  The  use  of  white  garments,  and 
also  the  feeling  respecting  their  use  for  festal  and 
religious  purposes,  may  be  gathered  from  the  fol- 
lowing passages : — Eccl.  ix.  8  ;  Dan.  vii.  9 ;  Is. 
Ixiv.  6;  Zech.  iii.  3,  5;  2  Sam.  vi.  14;  1  Chr. 
xv..  27;  Mark  ix.  3;  Rev.  iv.  4,  vi.  11,  vii.  9; 
Mishna,  Taanith,  iv.  8 ;  see  also  Stat.  Silv.  i.  2, 
237  ;  Ovid.  Fast,  i-  79;  Claudian,  de  Laud.  Stil. 
iii.  289.  This  branch  of  the  trade  was  perhaps  ex- 
ercised by  other  persons  than  those  who  carded  the 
wool  and  smoothed  the  cloth  when  woven  (Mishna, 
Bava  kama,  i.  x.  10).  In  applying  the  marks 
used  to  distinguish  cloths  sent  to  be  cleansed,  fullers 
were  desired  to  be  careful  to  avoid  the  mixtures 
forbidden  by  the  Law  (Lev.  xix.  19  ;  Deut.  xxii.  11 ; 
Mishna,  Massec.  Cilaim.  ix.  10). 

The  process  of  fulling  or  cleansing  cloth,  so  far 
as  it  may  be  gathered  from  the  practice  of  other 
nations,  consisted  in  treading  or  stamping  on  the 
garments  with  the  feet  or  with  bats  in  tubs'  of 
water,  in  which  some  alkaline  substance  answering 
the  purpose  of  soap  had  been  dissolved  (Gesen. 
Thes.  1261,  ?J~1 ;  Beckmann,  Hist,  of  Tnventions, 
ii.  94,  95,  Bohn).  The  substances  used  for  this 
purpose  which  are  mentioned  in  Scripture  are  "103, 
nitre,  v'npov,  nitrum  (Gesen.  p.  930  ;  Prov.  xxv. 
20;  Jer.  ii.  22),  and  TV  Til,  soap,  iroia,  herba 
fullonum,  herba  borith  (Gesen.  p.  246  ;  Mai.  iii.  2). 
Nitre  is  found  in  Egypt  and  in  Syria,  and  vegetable 
alkali  was  also  obtained  there  from  the  ashes  of 
certain  plants,  probably  Salsola  kali  (Gesen.  246 ; 
l'lin.  xxxi.  10,  46;  Hasselquist,  275;  Burck- 
hardt,  Syria,  214).  The  juice  also  of  some  sapo- 
naceous plant,  perhaps  Gypsaphila  struthium,  or 
Saponaria  officinalis,  was  sometimes  mixed  with 
the  water  for  the  like  purpose,  and  may  thus  be 
regarded  as  representing  the  soap  of  Scripture. 
Other  substances  also  are  mentioned  as  being  em- 
ployed in  cleansing,  which,  together  with  alkali, 
seem  to  identify  the  Jewish  with  the  Roman  pro- 
cess, •  as  urine  and  chalk,  creta  cimolia,  and  bean- 
water,  i.  e.  bean-meal  mixed  with  water  (Mishna, 
Shabb.  ix.  5;  Niddah,  ix.  6).  Urine,  both  of  men 
and  of  animals,  was  regularly  collected  at  Rome 
tor  cleansing  cloths  (Plin.  xxxviii.  6,  8 ;  Athen. 
xi.  p.  484;  Mart.  ix.  93;  Plautus,  Asin.  v.  2, 
57),  and  it  seems  not  improbable  that  its  use  in 
the  fullers'  trade  at  Jerusalem  may  have  suggested 
the  coarse  taunt  of  Rabshakeh,  during  his  interview 
with  the  deputies  of  Hezekiah  in  the  highway  of 
the  Fullers'  Field  (2  K.  xviii.  27),  but  Schoettgen 
thinks  it  doubtful  whether  the  Jews  made  use  of  it 
in  fulling  {Antiq.  full.  §9).  The  process  of  whiten- 
ing garments  was  performed  by  rubbing  into  them 
chalk  or  earth  of  some  kind.  Creta  Cimolia  (Cimo- 
lite)  was  probably  the  earth  most  frequently  used. 
The  whitest  sort  of  earth  for  this  purpose  is  a  white 
potter's  clay  or  marl,  with  which  the  poor  at  Rome 
rubbed  their  clothes  on  festival  days  to  make  them 
appear    brighter    (Plin.    xxxi.     10,     §118,     xxxv. 


FULLER'S  FIELD 

17).  Sulphur,  which  was  used  at  Rome  for  dis- 
charging positive  colour,  was  abundant  in  some 
parts  of  Palestine,  but  there  is  no  evidence  to  show 
that  it  was  used  in  the  fullers'  trade 


FURNACE 


637 


Egyptian  Fuller. 

The  trade  of  the  fullers,  as  causing  offensive 
smells,  and  also  as  requiring  space  for  drying 
clothes,  appears  to  have  been  carried  on  at  Jeru- 
salem outside  the  city,  and  from  them  a  field,  a 
monument,  and  also  a  spring  (En-rogel),  to  have 
derived  their  names  (Beckmann,  Hist,  of  Tnv.  ii. 
92, 106,  Bohn  ;  Did.  of  Antiq.  art.  Fullo  ;  Winer, 
s.  V.  Walker;  Wilkinson,  abridgm.  ii.  106,  Saal- 
schiitz,  i.  3,  14,  32,  ii.  14,  6  ;  Schoettgen,  Antiq. 
fulloniac).     [Handicraft.]  [H.  \V.  1'.] 

FULLERS  FIELD,   THE  (D313   iVYB>; 

aypos  tov  yvcHptws,  or  Kva<peu>? ;  agcr  fullonis), 
a  spot  near  Jerusalem  (2  K.  xviii.  17  ;  Is.  xxxvi. 
2,  vii.  3)  so  close  to  the  walls  that  a  person  speak- 
ing from  there  could  be  heard  on  them  (2  K.  xviii. 
17,  26).  It  is  only  incidentally  mentioned  in 
these  passages,  as  giving  its  name  to  a  "  highway  " 
(!"l?DO  =  an  embanked  road,  Gesen.  Thcs.  957  b), 
"  in  "  (3)  or  "  on  "  (?N,  A.  V.  "  in  "),  which  high- 
way was  the  "conduit  of  the  upper  pool."  The 
"end"  (!"l\*p)  of  the  conduit,  whatever  that  was, 
appears  to  have  been  close  to  the  road  (Is.  vii.  3). 
One  resort  of  the  fullers  of  Jerusalem  would  seem 
to  have  been  below  the  city  on  the  south-cast 
side.  [En-rogel.]  But  Rabshakeh  and  his  "  great 
host"  can  hardly  have  approached  in  that  direction. 
They  must  have  come  from  the  mirth — the  only 
accessible  side  tin-  any  body  "f  people — as  is  cer- 
tainly indicated  by  the  route  traced  in  Is.  x.  28-32 
[Giheah]  ;  and  tin-  Fuller's  Field  was  therefore, 
to  judge  from  this  circumstance,  on  the  table-land 
on  the  northern  side  of  the  city.  The  "pool  "  and 
the  "conduit"  would  be  sufficient  reasons  for  tic- 
presence  of  the  fullers.  But  on  the  other  hand, 
Rabshakeh  and  his  companions  may  have  left  the 
army  and  advanced  along  the  east  side  of  Mount 
Moriah  to  En-rogel,  to  a  convenient  place  under 
tin-  temple  walls  tor  speaking. 

In  considering  the  nature  of  this  spot,  it  should 
be  borne  in  mind  that  Sadeh,  "  Held."  is  a  term 
almost  invariably  confined  to  cultivated  arable- 
land,  as  opposed  to  unreclaimed  ground.  [Jeru- 
salem.] [G.] 

FUNERALS.    [Burial.] 
FURLONG.     [Measub 

FURNACE.  Various  kinds  of  furnaces  arc 
noticed  in  the  Bible.  (1.)  "I-ISF!  is  so  translated  in 
the  A.  V.  in  Gen.  w.  17;  Is.  rati.  9;  Neh.  iii. 
11,  xii.  38.    Generally  the  word  applies  to  tie 


I  baker's  oven,  which '  is   described   under  Bread, 

I  and  there  is  little  doubt  that  the  "  tower  of  the 

!  furnaces  "   in  Neh.  should  be  rendered  "  tower  of 

the  ovens."     In  Gen.  xv.  and  Is.  xxxi.  it  is  used  in 

a  more  general  sense.     (2.)  JD'23 

a  smelting  or  calcining  furnace  (Gen. 

xix.   28;  Ex.  ix.  8,   10,  xix.  18), 

especially  a  lime-kiln,   the   use  of 

which  was  evidently  well  known  to 

the  Hebrews  (Is.  xxxiii.  12 ;   Am. 

ii.  1).     (3.)  "1-13,  a  refining  furnace 

(Prov.  xvii.  3,  xxvii.  21;  Ez.  xxii. 

18  ff.),  metaphorically  applied  to  a 

state  of  trial  (Deut.  iv.  20;  1  K. 

viii.  51 ;  Is.  xlviii.  10 ;  Jer.  xi.  4). 

The  form  of  it  was  probably  similar 

to  the  one  used  in  Egypt,  which  is 

figured  below.    (4.)  J-lfltf,  a  large 

furnace  built  like  a  brick-kiln,  with 

an    opening  at  the  top   to  cast  in  the  materials 

(Dan.  iii.  22,  23),  and  a  door  at  the  ground  by 

which  the  metal  might  be  extracted  (v.  26).     The 

Iioman  fornax,  as  represented  in  Diet,  of  Ant.  p. 

546,  gives  an  idea  of  the   Persian  Attun.      The 

Persians    were   in  the  habit  of  using  the  furnace 


Furnace. — An  Egyptian  blowing  the  fire  for  melting  gold. 
(W.lkinson.) 


as  a  means  of  inflicting  capital  punishment  (Dan. 
I.  c. ;  Jer.  xxix.  22  ;  2  Mace.  vii.  5  ;  Hos.  vii.  7). 
A  parallel  case  is  mentioned  by  Chardin  (Voyage 
en  Perse,  iv.  276),  two  ovens  having  been  kept 
ready  heated  for  a  whole  month  to  throw  in  any 
corn-dealers  who  raised  the  price  of  corn.  (5.) 
The  potter's  furnace  (Ecclus.  xxvii.  5  ;  xxxviii.  30  I, 
which  resembles  a  chimney  in  shape,  and  was  about 
five  or  six  feet  high,  as  represented  below.    (6.)  The 


'Mil-  Eg)  utian  Potter 


(Wilkinson.) 


blacksmith's  furnace  I  Ecclus.  xxxviii.  28).  Tie" 

Ka.fj.ivos,  which  is  applied  to  the  two  latter,  also  de- 
scribes the  calcining  furnace  Xen.  Veotig.  iv.49). 
It  is  metaphorically  used  in  the  X. '1'.  in  this  sense 
(llev.  i.  15)  i\.  2  i.  and  in  Matt.  riii.  42,  with  an 
especial  reference  to  Dan.  iii.  6.  [W.  L.  B.] 


638  GAAL 

G. 

GA'AL  (7j?a,  Tad\;  Joseph.  Tud\r]s;  Gaal), 
son    of    Ebed,    aided    the    Shechemites    in    their 

rebellion  against  Abimelech  (Judg.  ix. ;  Joseph. 
Ant.  v.  7,  §§3,  4).  He  does  not  seem  to  have 
been  a  native  of  Shechem,  nor  specially  interested 
in  the  revolution,  but  rather  one  of  a  class  of 
condottieri,  who  at  such  a  period  of  anarchy  would 
be  willing  to  sell  their  services  to  the  highest 
bidder.  Josephus  calls  him  tIs  twv  apxovTwv, 
a  term  which  scarcely  designates  any  special  office, 
as  in  the  case  of  Zebul  (twv  ^ikiixitwi/  &px&v, 
Joseph.  /.  c.) :  more  probably  it  has  reference  to 
the  headship  of  his  family  (Judg.  ix.  26  ;  Joseph. 
I.  c),  and  the  command  of  a  body  of  men-at-arms, 
who  seem  to  have  been  permanently  attached  to 
his  service  (cruv  dirXiTais  /ecu  (rvyyevtffi,  Joseph.). 
His  appeal  to  ante-Israelitish  traditions  (Judg.  ix. 
28),  together  with  the  re-establishment  of  idolatry 
at  Shechem,  shows  that  the  movement  in  which  he 
took  part  was  a  reactionary  one,  and  proceeded  upon 
the  principle  of  a  combination  of  the  aborigines 
with  the  idolatrous  Israelites  against  the  iconoclastic 
family  of  Gideon  as  represented  by  Abimelech. 
The  ambitious  designs  of  Gaal,  who  seems  to  have 
aspired  to  the  supreme  command,  awakened  the 
jealousy  of  Zebul,  who  recalled  Abimelech,  and 
procured  the  expulsion  of  Gaal  from  the  city  upon 
a  charge  of  cowardice.  [T.  E.  B.] 

GA  ASH  (C'JJJI  =  earthquake  ;  Toar,  once  Ta- 
\ad5  ;  Gaas).  On  the  north  side  of  "  the  hill  of 
Gaadi"   (accurately  "  Mount  G."  'jT"1i"l),   in  the 

district  of"  Mount  Ephraim,"  was  Timnath-serach, 
or  Timnath-cheres,  the  city,  which  at  his  request 
was  given  by  the  nation  to  Joshua;  where  he  resided, 
ami  where  at  last  he  was  buried  (Josh.  xxiv.  30  ; 
Judg.  ii.  9;  comp.  Josh.  xix.  49,  50).  We  only 
hear  of  it  again  incidentally  as  the  native  place  of 
one  of  David's  guard,  "  Hiddai,  or  Hurai,  of  the 
brooks  (the  torrent -beds  or  wadys,  *7l"l3)  of 
Gaash" — the  "  torrents  of  the  earthquake"  (2  Sam. 
xxiii.  30  ;  1  Chr.  xi.  32).  By  Eusebius  and  Jerome 
the  name  is  mentioned  (Onom.  "  Gaas"),  but  evi- 
dently without  any  knowledge  of  the  place  ;  nor 
does  it  appear  to  have  been  recognized  by  any  more 
modern  traveller  in  Palestine.  [G.] 

GA'BA(JQS  ;  ra/3aa,  Tai/SaA,  Tafiawv ;  Gabee, 
Gaboa,  Geba).  The  same  name  as  Geba,  but  with 
the  vowel  sound  made  broader,  according  to  Hebrew 
custom,  because  of  its  occurrence  at  the  end  of  a 
clause  or  sentence.  It  is  found  in  the  A.  V.  in  Josh. 
xviii.  24;  Ezr.  ii.  26;  Neh.  vii.  30:  but  in  the 
Hebrew  also  in  2  Sam.  v.  25 ;  2  K.  xxiii.  8  ;  Neh. 
xi.  31.     [G  abbes.] 

GABAEL  (ra/SarjA,  LXX.  ;  Ta/xarjA,  Cod. 
Alex. ;  Vet.  Lat.  GabaJxl  [Tob.  i.  1]  ;  Vulg.  Ga- 
bclus.     1.  An  ancestor  of  Tobit  (Tob.  i.  1). 

2.  A  poor  Jew  (Tob.  i.  17,  Vulg.)  of"  Rages  in 
Media,"  to  whom  Tobias  lent  (sub  chirographo  dedit, 
Vulg.)  ten  talents  of  silver,  which  Gabael  after- 
wards faithfully  restored  to  Tobias  in  the  time  of 
Tobit's  distress  (Tob.  i.  14,  iv.  1,  20,  v.  6,  ix., 
x.  2).     [Gabeias.]  [B.  F.  W.] 

GABATHA  (Bagatka),  Esth.  xii.  1.     [Big- 

TIJAN.] 


GABRIEL 

GAB'BAI  (*3|;  TyPe ;  Gebbai),  apparently 
the  head  of  an  important  family  of  Benjamin  resi- 
dent at  Jerusalem  (Neh.  xi.  8). 

GAB'BATHA  (Ta^ada;  Gabbatha.)  The 
Hebrew  or  Chaldee  appellation  of  a  place  also  called 
"Pavement"  (AidScrrpwrov),  where  the  judgment- 
seat  or  bema  (j8f/,ua)  was  planted,  from  his  place  on 
which  Pilate  delivered  our  Lord  to  death  (John 
xix.  13).  The  name,  and  the  incident  which  leads 
to  the  mention  of  the  name,  occur  nowhere  but  in 
this  passage  of  St.  John.  The  place  was  outside 
the  praetorium  (A.  V.  judgment-hall),  for  Pilate 
brought  Jesus  forth  from  thence  to  it. 

It  is  suggested  by  Lightfoot  (Exerc.  on  St.  John, 
ad  foe.)  that  the  word  is  derived  from  23,  a  surface, 
in  which  case  Gabbatha  would  be  a  mere  translation 
of  KidoarpwTOv.  There  was  a  room  in  the  Temple 
in  which  the  Sanhedrin  sate,  and  which  was  called 
Gazith,  because  it  was  paved  with  smooth  and  square 
flags  (rVTil) ;  and  Lightfoot  conjectures  that  Pilate 
may  on  this  occasion  have  delivered  his  judgment 
in  that  room.  But  this  is  not  consistent  with  the 
practice  of  St.  John,  who,  in  other  instances,  gives 
the  Hebrew  name  as  that  properly  belonging  to  the 
place,  not  as  a  mere  translation  of  a  Greek  one. 
Besides,  Pilate  evidently  spoke  from  the  bema — the 
regular  seat  of  justice — and  this  in  an  important 
place  like  Jerusalem  would  be  in  a  fixed  spot.  Be- 
sides, the  Praetorium,  a  Roman  residence  with  the 
idolatrous  emblems,  could  not  have  been  within  the 
Temple.  The  word  is  more  probably  Chaldee, 
Nn33,  from  an  ancient  root  signifying  height  or 
roundness — the  root  of  the  Hebrew  word  Gibeah, 
which  is  the  common  term  in  the  O.  T.  for  a  bald 
rounded  hill,  or  elevation  of  moderate  height.  In 
this  case  Gabbatha  designated  the  elevated  Bema ; 
and  the '•  pavement"  was  possibly  some  mosaic  or 
tessellated  work,  either  forming  the  bema  itself,  or 
the  flooring  of  the  court  immediately  round  it — 
perhaps  some  such  work  as  that  which  we  are  told 
by  Suetonius  (Caesar,  46)  Julius  Caesar  was  ac- 
customed to  carry  with  him  on  his  expeditions,  in 
order  to  give  the  Bema  or  Tribunal  its  necessary 
conventional  elevation.  [^-3 

GAB'DES  (TaPffis,  both  MSS.  ;  Gabea), 
1  Esd.  v.  20.     [Gaba.] 

■  GA'BEIAS  (TaPplas,  LXX. ;  Taipei,  Cod.  F. A. ; 
i.  e.  n*123,  the  man  of  Jehovah),  according  to  the 
present  text  of  the  LXX.  the  brother  of  Gabael,  the 
creditor  of  Tobit  (Tob.  i.  14),  though  in  another 
place  (Tob.  iv.  20,  rtfi  rov  Tafipia ;  cf.  Pritzsche, 
ad  foe.)  he  is  described  as  his  father.  The  readings 
throughout  are  very  uncertain,  and  in  the  versions 
the  names  are  strangely  confused.  It  is  an  obvious 
correction  to  suppose  that  TapayKcp  rep  a8eA(p<p 
tb  TaPpla  should  be  read  in  i.  14,  as  is  in  fact 
suggested  by  Cod.  F.  A.,  TaP-faa}  .  .  .  t<£  aS.  t<j> 
Taipei.  The  misunderstanding  of  t<£  a8eA<pqi  (cf. 
Tob.  i.  10,  16,  &c.)  naturally  occasioned  the  •mis- 
sion of  the  article.  The  old  Latin  has,  Gabelo  fratri 
meo  filio  Gabahel ;  and  so  also  iv.  20.   [B.  P.  W.] 

GA'BRIEL  (?W*13|,  "  man  of  God  ;"  Ta- 
/3pirjA,  LXX.  and  N.  T.j.  The  word,  which  is  not 
in  itself  distinctive,  but  merely  a  description  of  the 
angelic  office,  is  used  as  a  proper  name  or  title,  in 
Dan.  viii.  16,  ix.  21,  and  in  Luke  i.  19,  26.  (It  is 
also  added  in  tie  Targums  as  a  gloss  on  some  other 


GAD 

ptssages  of  the  0.  T.)  In  the  ordinary  traditions, 
Jewish  and  Christian,  Gabriel  is  spoken  of  as  one 
of  the  archangels.  In  Scripture,  he  is  set  forth 
only  as  the  representative  of  the  angelic,  nature,  not 
in  its  dignity  or  power  of  contending  against  evil 
[Michael],  but  in  its  ministration  of  comfort  and 
sympathy  to  man.  Thus  his  mission  to  Daniel  is 
to  interpret  in  plain  words  the  vision  of  the  ram 
and  the  he-goat,  and  to  comfort  him  after  his  prayer 
with  the  prophecy  of  the  "  seventy  weeks."  And 
so  in  the  New  Testament  he  is  the  herald  of  good 
tidings,  declaring  as  he  does  the  coming  of  the  pre- 
dicted Messiah  and  of  his  forerunner.  His  pro- 
minent character,  therefore,  is  that  of  a  "  fellow- 
servant  "  of  the  saints  on  earth  ;  and  there  is  a  cor- 
responding simplicity,  and  absence  of  all  terror  and 
mystery,  in  his  communications  to  men.      [A.  B.] 

GAD  (Ii!  ;  Too* ;  Joseph.  TdSas;  Gad),  Jacob's 
seventh  son,  the  first-bom  of  Zilpah,  Leah's  maid, 
and  whole-brother  to  Asher(Gen.  xxx.  11-13;  xlvi. 
16,  18).  (")  The  passage  in  which  the  bestowal  of 
the  name  of  (lad  is  preserved — like  the  others,  an 
exclamation  on  his  birth — is  more  than  usually  ob- 
scure :  "  And  Leah  said, '  In  fortune  '  (fie gad,  ~1JQ), 
and  she  called  his  name  Gad"  (Gen.  xxx.  1 1  ).  Such 
is  supposed  to  be  the  meaning  of  the  old  text  of  the 
passage  (the  Cetib)  :  so  it  stood  at  the  time  of  the 
LXX.,  who  render  the  key-word  by  iv  rvxv  i  hi 
which  they  are  followed  by  Jerome  in  the  Vulgate, 
feliciter*  But  in  the  marginal  emendations  of  the 
Masorets  (the  Kcri)  the  word  is  given  "13  N3 
"  Gad  comes."  This  construction  is  adopted  by 
the  ancient  versions  of  Onkelos,  Aquila  (JiXQtv  rj 
(aicris),  and  Symmachus  (^\9(v  To5).  (//)  In  the 
blessing  of  Jacob,  however,  we  rind  the  name 
played  upon  in  a  different  manner:  "Gad"  is 
here  taken  as  meaning  a  piratical  band  or  troop  (the 
term  constantly  used  for  which  is  gedood,  TITH), 
and  the  allusion — the  turns  of  which  it  is  impossible 
adequately  to  convey  in  English — -would  seem  to  be 
to  the  irregular  life  of  predatory  warfare  which 
should  be  pursued  by  the  tribe  alter  their  settlement 
on  the  borders  of  the  Promised  Laud.  "  Gad,  a  plun- 
dering troop  (gedwl)  shall  plunder  him  (ye-yud- 
enu),  but  he  will  plunder  (j/a-gHd)  at  their  heels" 
(Gen.  xlix.  19).h  (c)  The  force  here  lent  to  the 
name  has  been  by  some  partially  transferred  to  the 
narrative  of  (ien.  xxx.,  c  </.  the  Samaritan  Version, 
the  Veneto-G reek,  and  our  own  A.  V . — "  a  troop  (of 
children)  cometh."  But  it  must  not  be  overlooked 
that  the  word  gedwl — by  which  it  is  here  sought 
to  interpret  the  gad  of  Gen.  xxx.  1  1 — possessed  its 
own  special  signification  <<\'  turbulence  ami  liercc- 
ness,  which  makes  it  hardly  applicable  to  children 
in  the  sense  of  a  number  or  crowd,  the  image 
suggested  by  the  A.  V.  Exactly  as  the  turns  of 
Jacob's  language  apply  to  the  characteristics  of  the 
tribe,  it  does  not  appear  thai  there  is  any  connexion 
between  his  allusions  and  those  in  the  exclamation 
of  Leah,  'fhe  key  to  the  latter  is  probably  lost. 
To  suppose  that  Leah  was  invoking  some  ancient 
divinity,  the  god  Fortune,  who  ed  to  be 

once  alluded   to — and   once  only — in  the  later  part 
of  the  book  of  Isaiah,  under  ''"'  l'''*'  "'   '' 
lxv.  11;  A.  V.  '"that   troop;"   Gesenius,    "dem 
Gliick"),  is  surely  a  poor  explanation. 


GAD 


039 


*  In  his  Quaest.  in  Qenesim,  .Jerome  lias  inforttiM. 
Josephus  (Ant.  i.  19,  §S)  gives  it  still  a  different 
turn — Tv\aloi=fort  u  i I  n  s . 

b  Jerome  [De  Benedict.  Jacobi)  interprets  this  of 


Of  the  childhood  and  life  of  the  individual  <;.w> 
nothing  is  preserved.  At  the  time  of  the  descent 
into  Egypt  seven  sons  are  ascribed  to  him,  remark- 
able from  the  fact  that  a  majority  of  their  names 
have  plural  terminations,  as  if  those  of  families 
rather  than  persons  (Gen.  xlvi.  16).  The  list, 
with  a  slight  variation,  is  again  given  on  the  occa- 
sion of  the  census  in  the  wilderness  of  Sinai  (Num. 
xxvi.  15-18).  [Arod;  EzbON  ;  Ozni.]  The 
position  of  Gad  during  the  march  to  the  Promised 
Land  was  on  the  south  side  of  the  Tabernacle 
(Num.  ii.  14).  The  leader  of  the  tribe  at  the  time 
of  the  start  from  Sinai  was  Eliasaph  son  of  Beuel 
or  Deuel  (ii.  14,  x.  20).  Gad  is  regularly  named 
in  the  various  enumerations  of  the  tribes  through 
the  wanderings — at  the  despatching  of  the  spies 
(xiii.  15) — the  numbering  in  the  plains  of  Moab 
(xxvi.  3,  15)  ;  but  the  only  inference  we  can  draw 
is  an  indication  of  a  commencing  alliance  with  the 
tribe  which  was  subsequently  to  be  his  next  neigh- 
bour. He  has  left  the  more  closely  related  tribe  of 
Asher,  to  take  up  his  position  next  to  Reuben. 
These  two  tribes  also  preserve  a  near  equality  in 
their  numbers,  not  suffering  from  the  fluctuations 
which  were  endured  by  the  others.  At  the  first 
census  Gad  had  45,650,  and  Reuben  46,500;  at 
the  last,  Gad  had  40,500,  and  Reuben  43,330. 
This  alliance  was  doubtless  induced  by  the  simi- 
larity of  their  pursuits.  Of  all  the  sons  of  Jacob 
these  two  tribes  alone  returned  to  the  land  which 
their  forefathers  had  left  five  hundred  years  before, 
with  their  occupations  unchanged.  "  The  trade  of 
thy  slaves  hath  been  about  cattle  from  our  youth 
even  till  now  " — "  we  are  shepherds,  both  we  and 
our  fathers  "  (Gen.  xlvi.  34,  xlvii.  4) — such  was  the 
account  which  the  Patriarchs  gave  of  themselves  to 
Pharaoh.  The  civilisation  and  the  persecutions  of 
Egypt  had  worked  a  change  in  the  habits  of  most  of 
the  tribes,  but  Reuben  and  (lad  remained  faithful  to 
the  pastoral  pursuits  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob; 
and  at  the  halt  on  the  east  of  Jordan  we  find  them 
coming  forward  to  Moses  with  the  representation 
that  they  "  have  cattle" — "a  great  multitude  of 
cattle,"  ami  the  land  where  they  now  are  is  a  "  place 
for  cattle."  What  should  they  do  in  the  close  pre- 
cincts of  the  country  west  of  Jordan  with  all  their 
flocks  and  herds?  Wherefore  let  this  land,  they 
pray,  be  given  them  for  a  possession,  and  let  them 
not  be  brought  over  Jordan  (Num.  xxxii.  1-5). 
They  did  not,  however,  attempt  to  evade  taking 
their  proper  share  of  the  difficulties  of  subduing 
the  [and  of  Canaan,  and  after  that  task  had  been 
effected,  and  the  apportionment  amongst  the  nine 
and  a  half  tribes  completed  "  at  the  doorway  of  the 
tabernacle  of  the  congregation  in  Shiloh,  Imbue 
Jehovah,"  they  were  dismissed  by  Joshua  "  to 
their  tents,"  to  their  '-wives,  their  little  ones,  and 
their  cattle,"  which  they  had  left  behind  them  in 
Gilead.  To  their  tents  they  went — to  the  dangers 
and  delights  of  the  free  Bedouin  lite  in  which  they 
had  elected  to  remain,  ami  in  which — a  few  partial 
glimpses  excepted — the  later  history  allows  them 
to  remain  hidden  from  view. 

The  country  allotted  to  I  lad  app  »rs,  i  p 
roughly,  to  have  lain  chiefly  about  the  centre  of 
the  land  east  of  Jordan.      'I  lie  south  of  that  district 
— from  the  Anion  (  Wady  Moj  df  way 


the   revenue   taken   by  the   warriors   of  the    tribe   on 

their  return  from  the  conquest  of  Western  Palestine, 

for  the  inclusions  of  the  desert   tribes  ilurinj.'  tin  n 
absence. 


040 


GAD 


down  the  Dead  Sea,  to  Heshbou,  nearly  due  east  of 
Jerusalem— was  occupied  by  Reuben,  and  at  or  about 
Heshbon  the  possessions  of  Gad  commenced.  They 
embraced  half  Gilead,  as  the  oldest  record  specially 
states  (Deut.  iii.  12),  or  half  the  land  of  the  children 
of  Amnion  (Josh.  xiii.  25),  probably  the  mountainous 
district  which  is  intersected  by  the  torrent  Jabbok 
— if  the  Wady  Zurka  be  the  Jabbok — including,  as 
its  most  northern  town,  the  ancient  sanctuary  of 
Mahanaim.  On  the  East  the  furthest  landmark 
given  is  "  Aroer,  that  faces  Kabbah,"  the  present 
Amman  (Josh.  xiii.  25).  West  was  the  Jordan 
(27).  The  territory  thus  consisted  of  two  compara- 
tively separate  and  independent  parts — (1.)  The 
high  land,  on  the  general  level  of  the  country  east 
of  Jordan  ;  and  (2.)  the  sunk  valley  of  the  Jordan 
itself — the  former  stopping  short  at  the  Jabbok ; 
the  latter  occupying  the  whole  of  the  great  valley 
on  the  east  side  of  the  river,  and  extending  up  to 
the  very  sea  of  Cinnereth,  or  Gennesaret,  itself. 

Of  the  structure  and  character  of  the  land  which 
thus  belonged  to  the  tribe — "  the  land  of  Gad 
and  Gilead" — we  have  only  vague  information. 
From  the  western  part  of  Palestine  its  aspect  is 
that  of  a  wall  of  purple  mountain,  with  a 
singularly  horizontal  outline  ;  here  and  there  the 
surface  is  seamed  by  the  ravines,  through  which 
the  torrents  find  their  way  to  the  Jordan,  but  this 
does  not  much  aftect  the  vertical  wall-like  look  of 
the  range.  But  on  a  nearer  approach  in  the  Jordan 
valley,  the  horizontal  outline  becomes  broken,  and 
when  the  summits  are  attained  a  new  scene  is  said 
to  burst  on  the  view.  "  A  wide  table-land  appears, 
tossed  about  in  wild  confusion  of  undulating  downs, 
clothed  with  rich  grass  throughout ;  in  the  southern 
parts  trees  are  thinly  scattered  here  and  there, 
aged  trees  covered  with  lichen,  as  if  the  relics  of  a 
primeval  forest  long  since  cleared  away  ;  the  north- 
ern parts  still  abound  in  magnificent  woods  of 
sycamore,  beech,  terebinth,  ilex,  and  enormous  fig- 
trees.  These  downs  are  broken  by  three  deep  de- 
files, through  which  the  three  rivers  of  the  Yarmuk, 
the  Jabbok,  and  the  Arnon  fall  into  the  valley  of 
the  Jordan  and  the  Dead  Sea.  On  the  east  they 
melt  away  into  the  vast  red  plain,  which  by  a 
gradual  descent  joins  the  level  of  the  plain  of  the 
Hainan,  and  of  the  Assyrian  desert"  (Stanley, 
S.  Sf  P.  320).  A  very  picturesque  country — not 
the  "  flat  open  downs  of  smooth  and  even  turf"  of 
the  country  round  Heshbon  (Irby,  142),  the  sheep- 
walks  of  Keuben  and  of  the  Moabites — but  "  most 
beautifully  varied  with  hanging  woods,  mostly  of 
the  vallonia  oak,  laurestinus,  cedar,  arbutus,  arbu- 
tus andrachne,  &c.  At  times  the  country  had  all 
the  appearance  of  a  noble  park"  (147),  "graceful 
hills,  rich  vales,  luxuriant  herbage  "  (Porter,  Handb. 
310).     [Gilead]. 

Such  was  the  territory  allotted  to  the  Gadites ; 
but  there  is  no  doubt  that  they  soon  extended  them- 
selves beyond  these  limits.  The  official  records  of 
the  reigu  of  Jotham  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  v.  11,  16) 
show  them  to  have  been  at  that  time  established 
over  the  whole  of  Gilead,  and  in  possession  of 
Bashan  as  far  as  Salcah — the  modern  Sulkhad,  a 
town  at  the  eastern  extremity  of  the  noble  plain  of 
the  Haurdn — and  very  far  both  to  the  north  and 
the  east  of  the  border  given  them  originally,  while  the 
Manassites  were  pushed  still  further  northwards  to 
Mount  Hermon  (1  Chr.  v.  23).  They  soon  became 
identified  with  Gilead — that  name  so  memorable  in 
the  earliest  history  of  the  nation  ;  and  in  many  of 
the  earlier  records  it  supersedes  the  name  of  Gad, 


GAD 

as  we  have  already  remarked  it  did  that  of  Bashan. 
In  the  song  of  Deborah  "  Gilead  "  is  said  to  have 
"abode  beyond  Jordan"  (Judg.  v.  17).  Jephthah 
appears  to  have  been  a  Gadite,  a  native  of  Mizpeh 
(Judg.  xi.  34  ;  comp.  31,  and  Josh.  xiii.  26),  and 
yet  he  is  always  designated  "  the  Gileadite  ; "  and 
so  also  with  Barzillai  of  Mahanaim  (2  Sam.  xvii. 
27  ;  Ezr.  ii.  61  ;  comp.  Josh.  xiii.  26). 

The  character  of  the  tribe  is  throughout  strongly 
marked — fierce  and  warlike — "  strong  men  of  might, 
men  of  war  for  the  battle,  that  could  handle  shield 
and  buckler,  their  faces  the  faces  of  lions,  and  like 
roes,  upon  the  mountains  for  swiftness."  Such  is 
the  graphic  description  given  of  those  eleven  he- 
roes of  Gad — "  the  least  of  them  more  than  equal 
to  a  hundred,  and  the  greatest  to  a  thousand" — 
who  joined  their  fortunes  to  David  at  the  time  of 
his  greatest  discredit  and  embarrassment  (1  Chr. 
xii.  8),  undeterred  by  the  natural  difficulties  of 
"  flood  and  field  "  which  stood  in  their  way.  Sur- 
rounded, as  they  were,  by  Ammonites,  Midianites, 
Hagarites,  "  Children  of  the  East,"  and  all  the 
other  countless  tribes,  animated  by  a  common  hos- 
tility to  the  strangers  whose  coming  had  dispos- 
sessed them  of  their  fairest  districts,  the  warlike 
propensities  of  the  tribe  must  have  had  many 
opportunities  of  exercise.  One  of  its  great  engage- 
ments is  related  in  1  Chr.  v.  19-22.  Here  their 
opponents  were  the  wandering  Ishmaelite  tribes  of 
Jetur,  Nephish,  and  Nodab  (comp.  Gen.  xxv.  15), 
nomad  people,  possessed  of  an  enormous  wealth  in 
camels,  sheep,  and  asses,  to  this  day  the  character- 
istic possessions  of  their  Bedouin  successors.  This 
immense  booty  came  into  the  hands  of  the  con- 
querors, who  seem  to  have  entered  with  it  on  the 
former  mode  of  life  of  their  victims:  probably 
pushed  their  way  further  into  the  eastern  wilder- 
ness in  the  "  steads  "  of  these  Hagarites.  Another 
of  these  encounters  is  contained  in  the  history  of 
Jephthah,  but  this  latter  story  develops  elements  of 
a  different  nature  and  a  higher  order  than  the  mere 
fierceness  necessary  to  repel  the  attacks  of  the  plun- 
derers of  the  desert.  In  the  behaviour  of  Jephthah 
throughout  that  affecting  history,  there  are  traces  of 
a  spirit  which  we  may  almost  call  cliivaleresque, 
the  high  tone  taken  with  the  Elders  of  Gilead,  the 
noble  but  fruitless  expostulation  with  the  king  of 
Ammon  before  the  attack,  the  hasty  vow,  the  over- 
whelming grief,  and  yet  the  persistent  devotiou  of 
purpose,  surely  in  all  these  there  are  marks  of  a 
great  nobility  of  character,  which  must  have  been 
more  or  less  characteristic  of  the  Gadites  in  genera]. 
If  to  this  we  add  the  loyalty,  the  generosity  and  the 
delicacy  of  Barzillai  (2  Sam.  xix.  32-39)  we  obtain 
a  very  high  idea  of  the  tribe  at  whose  head  were 
such  men  as  these.  Nor  must  we,  while  enu- 
merating the  worthies  of  Gad,  forget  that  in  all  pro- 
bability Elijah  the  Tishbite,  "  who  was  of  the  inha- 
bitants of  Gilead,''  was  one  of  them. 

But  while  exhibiting  these  high  personal  qualities 
Gad  appears  to  have  been  wanting  in  the  powers 
necessary  to  enable  him  to  take  any  active  or  lead- 
ing part  in  the  confederacy  of  the  nation.  The 
warriors,  who  rendered  such  assistance  to  David, 
might,  when  Ishbosheth  set  up  his  court  at  Maha- 
naim as  king  of  Israel,  have  done  much  towards 
affirming  his  rights.  Had  Abner  made  choice  of 
Shechem  or  Shiloh  instead  of  Mahanaim — the  quick, 
explosive  Ephraim  instead  of  the  unready  Gad — 
who  can  doubt  that  the  troubles  of  David's  reign 
would  have  been  immensely  increased,  perhaps  the 
establishment  of  the  northern  kingdom  ante-dated 


GAD 

by  nearly  a  century  ?  David's  presence  at  the  same 
city  during  his  Might  from  Absalom  produced  no 
effect  on  the  tribe,  and  they  are  not  mentioned  as 
having  taken  any  part  in  the  quarrels  between 
Ephraim  and  Judah. 

Cut  off  as  Gad  was  by  position  and  circumstances 
from  its  brethren  on  the  west  of  Jordan  it  still  re- 
tained some  connexion  with  them.  We  may  infer 
that  it  was  considered  as  belonging  to  the  northern 
kingdom — •"  Know  ye  not,"  says  Ahab  in  Samaria, 
"  know  ye  not  that  Ramoth  in  Gilead  is  ours,  and 
we  be  still,  and  take  it  not  out  of  the  hand  of  the 
king  of  Syria?"  (1  K.  xxii.  3).  The  territory  of 
Gad  was  the  battle-field  on  which  the  long  and 
fierce  struggles  of  Syria  and  Israel  were  fought 
out,  and,  as  an  agricultural  pastoral  country,  it 
must  have  suffered  severely  in  consequence  (2  K. 
xx.  33). 

Gad  was  carried  into  captivity  by  Tiglath  Pileser 
(1  Chr.  v.  26),  and  in  the  time  of  Jeremiah  the 
cities  of  the  tribe  seem  to  have  been  inhabited  by 
the  Ammonites.  "  Hath  Israel  no  sons  ?  hath  he  no 
heir?  why  doth  Malcham  (».  e.  -Moloch)  inherit 
Gad,  and  his  people  dwell  in  his  cities  ? "  ( Jer. 
xlix.  1).  [G.] 

GAD  (13  ,   Ta5;    Gad),  "  the  seer"  (HThn), 

or  "  the  king's  seer,"  i.  c.  David's — such  appears 
to  have  been  his  official  title  (1  Chr.  xxix.  29  ; 
2  Chr.  xxix.  25  ;  2  Sam.  xxiv.  11:1  Chr.  xxi.  9) — 
was  a  "prophet"  (X*33),  who  appears  to  have 
joined  David  when  in  "  the  hold,"  and  at  whose 
advice  he  quitted  it  for  the  forest  of  Hareth  (1  Sam. 
xxii.  5).  Whether  he  remained  with  David  during 
his  wanderings  is  not  to  be  ascertained:  we  do  not 
again  encounter  him  till  late  in  the  life  of  the  king, 
when  he  re-appears  in  connexion  with  the  punishment 
inflicted  for  the  numbering  of  the  people  (2  Sam. 
xxiv.  11-19;  1  Chr.  xxi.  9-19).  But  he  was  evi- 
dently attached  to  the  royal  establishment  at  Jeru- 
salem, for  he  wrote  a  book  of  the  Acts  of  David 
(1  Chr.  xxix.  29),  and  also  assisted  in  settling  the 
arrangements  for  the  musical  service  of  the  "  house 
of  God,"  by  which  his  name  was  handed  down  to 
tines  long  after  bis  own  i .2  Chr.  xxix.  25).  In  the 
abruptness  of  bis  introduction  Gad  has  been  com- 
pared with  Elijah  (Jerome,  Qu.  fle&r.  on  1  Sam. 
xxii.  5),  with  whom  lie  may  have  been  of  the  same 
tribe,  if  his  name  can  be  taken  as  denoting  his  pa- 
rentage, but  this  is  unsupported  by  any  evidence. 
Nor  is  there  any  apparent  ground  for  Ewald's  sug- 
gestion (Gesch.  iii.   L16)  that  he  was  of  the  ,-  i I 

of  Samuel.  If  this  could  be  made  out,  it  would 
afford  a  natural  reason  for  his  joining  David.  [DA- 
VID, p.  405.]  [G.] 

<  iADARA,  a  strong  city  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  13, 
§3),  situated  near  the  river  llieiomax  (l'lin.  //.  X. 
v.  16),  east  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  over  against 
Scythopolis  and  Tiberias    Euseb.  Onom.  s.  v.),  ami 

sixteen    Roman    miles    distant    t'lom    each    of    those 

places  (Itin.  Anton,  ed.  Wess.  pp.  196,  198;  Tab. 
/'."/.).  It  stood  on  the  top  of  a  hill,  at  the  foot 
of  which,  upon  the  banks  of  the  llieiomax,  three 
miles  distant,  were  warm  springs  and  baths  called 
Amatha  (Onom.  s.  v.  Aetham  el  Q  tdara  :  /tin. 
Ant.  Martyr.).  Josephns  calls  it  the  capital  of 
Peraea;  and  Polybius  says  it  was  one  of  tip  in  ■  • 
strongly  fortified  cities  in  the  country  (Joseph. 
/.'.  ./.  i'v.  7.  §:; ;  Polyb.  v.  71).  A  large  district 
was  attached  to  it,  called  by  Josephns  TaSap?TiS 
(B.J.ni.  10,  §10);  Strabo  also  informs  as  that 


GADARA 


641 


the  warm  healing  springs  were  4v  rfj  TaBapiSt, 
"  in  the  territory  of  Gadara  "  (  Geog.  xvi.).  Gadara 
itself  is  not  mentioned  in  the  Bible,  but  it  is  evi- 
dently identical  with  the  "  Country  of  the  Gada- 
renes,"  x®Pa  or  fep'Xa>P0S  T&v  TaSap-qywi'  (Mark 
v.  1 ;  Luke  viii.  26,  37). 

Of  the  site  of  Gadara,  thus  so  clearly  defined, 
there  cannot  be  a  doubt.  On  a  partially  isolated 
hill,  at  the  north-western  extremity  of  the  moun- 
tains of  Gilead,  about  sixteen  miles  from  Tiberias, 
lie  the  extensive  and  remarkable  ruins  of  Um  Keis. 
Three  miles  northward,  at  the  foot  of  the  bill,  is 
the  deep  bed  of  the  Sheriat  el-Mandhur,  the  ancient 
Hieromax  ;  and  here  are  still  the  warm  springs  of 
Amatha.  On  the  west  is  the  Jordan  valley ;  and 
on  the  south  is  Wady  el-'Arab,  running  parallel  to 
the  Mandhur.  Um  Keis  occupies  the  crest  of  the 
ridge  between  the  two  latter  wadys ;  and  as  this 
crest  declines  in  elevation  towards  the  east  as  well 
as  the  west,  the  situation  is  strong  and  commanding. 
The  whole  space  occupied  by  the  ruins  is  about  two 
miles  in  circumference  ;  and  there  are  traces  of 
fortifications  all  round,  though  now  almost  com- 
pletely prostrate. 

The  first  historical  notice  of  Gadara  is  its  capture, 
along  with  Pella  and  other  cities,  by  Antiochus  the 
Great,  in  the  year  B.C.  218  (Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  3, 
§:i).  About  twenty  years  afterwards  it  was  taken 
from  the  Syrians  by  Alex.  Jannaeus,  after  a  siege 
often  months  {Ant.  xiii.  13,  §3;  B.  J.  i.  4,  §2). 
The  Jews  retaiued  possession  of  it  for  some  time  ; 
but  the  place  having  been  destroyed  during  their 
civil  wars,  it  was  rebuilt  by  1'ompey  to  gratify  his 
freedman  Demetrius,  who  was  a  Gadarene  (B.  J.  i. 
7,  §7).  When  Gabinius,  the  proconsul  of  Syria, 
changed  the  government  of  Judaea,  by  dividing  the 
country  into  five  districts,  and  placing  each  under 
the  authority  of  a  council,  Gadara  was  made  the 
capital  of  one  of  these  districts  (B.  J.  i.  8,  §5). 
The  territory  of  Gadara,  with  the  adjoining  one  of 
Hippos,  was  subsequently  added  to  the  kingdom  of 
Herod  the  Great  (Ant.  xv.  7,  §3). 

Gadara,  however,  derives  its  greatest  interest 
from  having  been  the  scene  of  our  Lord's  miracle 
in  healing  the  Demoniacs  (Matt.  viii.  28-34;  Mark 
v.  1-21;  Luke  viii.  26-40).  "They  ware  no 
clothes,  neither  abode  in  any  house,  but  in  the 
tombs."  Christ  came  across  the  lake  from  Caper- 
naum, and  landed  at  the  south-eastern  corner, 
where  the  steep,  lofty  bank  of  the  eastern  plateau 
breaks  down  into  the  plain  of  the  Jordan.  The 
demoniacs  met  Him  a  short  distance  from  the 
shore  ;  on  the  side  of  the  adjoining  declivity  the 
"great  herd  of  swine"  were  feeding;  when  the 
demons  went  among  them  the  whole  held  rushed 
down  that  "  steep  place  "  into  the  lake  and  perished  ; 
the  keepers  ran  up  to  the  city  and  told  the  news, 
and  the  excited  population  came  down  in  haste, 
and  "  besought  JesOS  that    he  would    depart,  out   of 

their  coasts."    The   whole  circumstances  of  the 

narrative  are  thus  strikingly  illustrated  by  the  fea- 
tures of  the  country.  Another  thing  is  worthy  of 
notice,      'flie    most    interesting   remains   of  Gadara 

are  its  tombs,  which  dot  the  dills  tor  a  considerable 
distance  round  the  city.  They  are  excavated  in 
the  limestone  rod;,  and  consist  of  chambers  of 
Various  dimensions,  some  more  than  20  feet  square. 
with  recesses  in  the  sides  for  bodies.  The  doors 
are  slabs  of  stoni — a  few  being  ornamented  with 
panels:  some  of  them  still  remain  in  their  places. 
The  present  inhabitants  of  I'm  Keis  are  all  troglo- 
dytes, ••  dwelling  in  tombs,"'  like  'he  poor  maniacs  of 


642 


GADDI 


old;  and  occasionally  they  are  almost  as  dangerous 

to  the  unprotected  traveller.  In  the  Gospel  of 
Matt.  (viii.  28)  we  have  the  word  Yepyzcryvwv 
(instead  of  FaSaprivwu),  which  seems  to  be  the 
same  as  the  Hebrew  ^IHS  (LXX.  Ttpyeaouos)  in 
Gen.  xv.  21,  and  Deut.  vii.  1 — the  name  of  an  old 
Cauaanitish  tribe  [Girgasiiites],  which  Jerome 
(tn  Comm.  ad  Gen.  xv.)  locates  on  the  shore  of  the 
sea  of  Tiberias.  Origen  also  says  (Opp.  iv.  140) 
that  a  city  called  Gergesa  anciently  stood  on  the 
eastern  side  of  the  lake.  Even  were  this  true,  still 
the  other  Gospels  would  be  strictly  accurate. 
Gadara  was  a  large  city,  and  its  district  would 
include  Gergesa.  But  it  must  be  remembered  that 
the  most  ancient  MSS.  give  the  word  Tepaarjvwv, 
while  others  have  TaSap^vav — the  former  reading 
is  adopted  by  Griesbach  and  Lachmann;  while 
Scholz  prefers  the  latter  ;  and  either  one  or  other 
of  these  is  preferable  to  T^pyt(X7)vQv.    [Gerasa.] 

Gadara  was  captured  by  Vespasian  on  the  first 
outbreak  of  the  war  with  the  Jews ;  all  its  in- 
habitants massacred;  and  the  town  itself,  with  the 
surrounding  villages,  reduced  to  ashes  (Joseph. 
]!.  J.  iii.  7,  §1).  It  was  at  this  time  one  of  the 
most  important  cities  east  of  the  Jordan,  and  is  even 
called  the  Capital  of  Peraea.  At  a  later  period  it 
was  the  seatof  a  bishop  ;  but  it  fell  to  ruin  at,  or 
soon  after,  the  Mohammedan  conquest. 

The  ruins  of  Um  Keis  bear  testimony  to  the 
splendour  of  ancient  Gadara.  On  the  northern  side 
or'  the  hill  is  a  theatre,  and  not  tar  from  it  are  the 
remains  of  one  of  the  city  gates.  At  the  latter  a 
street  commences — the  via  recta  of  Gadara — which 
ran  through  the  city  in  a  straight  line,  having  a 
colonnade  on  each  side.  The  columns  are  all  pros- 
trate. On  the  west  side  of  the  hill  is  another 
larger  theatre  in  better  preservation.  The  principal 
part  of  the  city  lay  to  the  west  of  these  two  theatres, 
on  a  level  piece  of  ground.  Now  not  a  house,  not 
a  column,  not  a  wall  remains  standing  ;  yet  the  old 
pavement  of  the  main  street  is  nearly  perfect ;  and 
here  and  there  the  traces  of  the  chariot-wheels  are 
visible  on  the  stones,  reminding  one  of  the  thorough- 
fares of  Pompeii.  (Full  descriptions  of  Gadara  are 
given  in  Handbook  for  Syr.  ty  Pal.;  Burckhardt, 
Syria,  270  sq. ;  Porter,  in  Journal  of  Sac.  Lit. 
vol.  vi.  281  sq.)  [J.  L.  P.] 

GAD'DI  (na  ;  TaSSf ;  Gaddi),  son  of  Susi ; 
representative  of  the  tribe  of  Manasseh  among  the 
spies  sent  by  Moses  to  explore  Canaan  (Num. 
xiii.  11). 

GAD'DIEL^NHll;  rovSifa;   GeddieT),  son 

of  Sodi  ;  representative  of  the  tribe  of  Zebulun  on 
the  same  occasion  (Num.  xiii.  10). 

GA'DI  (H|  ;  TabS'i,  Alex.  TeSSei,  and  TaSSei ; 
Gadi),  father  of  Menahem,  who  seized  the  throne  of 
Israel  from  Shallum  (2  K.  xv.  14,  17). 

GA'HAM  (Dn|:  Tad/x,  Alex.  Tadfi),  son  of 
Nahor,  Abraham's  brother,  by  his  concubine  Reu- 
mah  (Gen.  xxii.  24).  No  light  has  yet  been  thrown 
on  this  tribe.  The  name  probably  signifies  sun- 
burnt, or  swarthy. 

GA'HAR  C\m  ;  Tadp  ;  Gaher).  The  Bene- 
Gachar  were  among  the  families  of  Nathinim  who 
returned  from  the  captivity  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr. 
ii.  47:  Neh.  vii.  49).  In  the  lists  of  1  Esd.  the 
name  is  given  as  GEDDUR.  TLEg  QF  i 

GAI'US.     [John.  Second  and  Third  Epis- 


GALATTA 

GAL'AAD  (TaKadS),  1  Mace.  v.  9,  55;  Jud. 
i.  8,  xv.  5  ;  and  the  country  of  Galaau  (r)  Ta- 
AaaSiTjj;  Galaaditis),  1  Mace. v.  17,20,25,27,36, 
45  ;  xiii.  22),  the  Greek  form  of  the  word  Gilead. 

GA'LAL  0?7il ;  TaAaaA;  Galal).     1.  A  Levite, 

one  of  the  sons  of  Asaph  (1  Chr.  ix.  15). 

2.  Another  Levite  of  the  family  of  Elkanah 
(1  Chr.  ix.  16). 

3.  A  third  Levite,  son  of  Jeduthun  (Neh.  xi.  1 7). 

GALA'TIA  (TaXaria).  It  is  sometimes  diffi- 
cult to  determine,  in  the  case  of  the  names  of  dis- 
tricts mentioned  in  the  N.  T.,  whether  they  are  to 
be  understood  in  a  general  and  popular  sense  as  re- 
ferring to  a  region  inhabited  by  a  race  or  tribe  of 
people,  or  whether  they  define  piecisely  some  tract 
of  country  marked  out  for  political  purposes. 
Galatia  is  a  district  of  this  kind  ;  and  it  will  be 
convenient  to  consider  it,  first  ethnologically,  and 
then  as  a  Roman  province. 

Galatia  is  literally  the  "Gallia"  of  the  East. 
Roman  writers  call  its  inhabitants  Galli,  just  as 
Greek  writers  call  the  inhabitants  of  ancient  France 
YdXarcu..  In  2  Tim.  iv.  10,  some  commentators 
suppose  Western  Gaul  to  be  meant,  and  several 
MSS.  have  TaWiav  instead  of  TaXariav.  In 
1  Mace.  viii.  2,  where  Judas  Maecabaeus  is  hearing 
the  story  of  the  prowess  of  the  Romans  in  con- 
quering the  Td\arat,  it  is  possible  to  interpret  the 
passage  either  of  the  Eastern  or  Western  Gauls ; 
tbi"  the  subjugation  of  Spain  by  the  Romans,  and 
their  defeat  of  Antiochus,  king  of  Asia,  are  men- 
tioned in  the  same  context.  Again,  rd\a.Tat  is  the 
same  word  with  KeArut ;  and  the  Galatians  were 
in  their  origin  a  stream  of  that  great  Keltic  torrent 
(apparently  Kymry,  and  not  Gael)  which  poured 
into  Greece  in  the  third  century  before  the  Christian 
era.  Some  of  these  invaders  moved  on  into  Thrace, 
and  appeared  on  the  shores  of  the  Hellespont  and 
Bosporus,  when  Nicomedes  I.,  king  of  Bithynia, 
being  then  engaged  in  a  civil  war,  invited  them 
across  to  help  him.  Once  established  in  Asia  Minor, 
they  became  a  terrible  scourge,  and  extended  their 
invasions  far  and  wide.  The  neighbouring  kings 
succeeded  in  repressing  them  within  the  general 
geographical  limits,  to  which  the  name  of  Galatia 
was  permanently  given.  Antiochus  I.,  king  of 
Syria,  took  his  title  of  Soter  in  consequence  of 
his  victory  over  them,  and  Attains  I.  of  Per- 
gamus  commemorated  his  own  success  by  taking 
the  title  of  king.  The  Galatians  still  found  vent 
for  their  restlessness  and  love  of  war  by  hiring 
themselves  out  as  mercenary  soldiers.  This  is 
doubtless  the  explanation  of  2  Mace.  viii.  20,  which 
refers  to  some  struggle  of  the  Seleueid  princes  in 
which  both  Jews  and  Galatians  were  engaged.  In 
Joseph.  B.  J.  i.  20,  §3,  we  rind  some  of  the  latter, 
who  had  been  in  Cleopatra's  body-guard,  acting  in 
the  same  character  for  Herod  the  Great.  Mean- 
while the  wars  had  been  taking  place,  which  brought 
all  the  countries  round  the  East  of  the  Mediter- 
ranean within  the  range  of  the  Roman  power.  The 
Galatians  fought  on  the  side  of  Antiochus  at  Mag- 
nesia. In  the  Mithridatic  war  they  fought  on  both 
sides.  At  the  end  of  the  Republic  Galatia  appears 
as  a  dependent  kingdom,  at  the  beginning  of  the 
Empire  as  a  province.  (See  Bitter,  Erdft  unde,  xviii. 
597-610.) 

The  Roman  province  of  Galatia  may  be  roughly 
described  as  the  central  region  of  the  peninsula  of 
Asia  Minor,  with  the  provinces  of  Asia   on  the 


GALATIA 

West,  Cappadocia  on  the  East,  Pamphyua 
and  ClLlGIA  on  the  South,  and  Bithynia  and 
l'OXTi.'S  on  the  North.  It  would  bo  difficult  to 
define  the  exact  limits.  In  fact  they  were  fre- 
quently changing.  For  information  on  this  subject, 
see  the  Diet,  of  Geog.  i.  9306.  At  one  time  there 
is  no  doubt  that  this  province  contained  Pisidia  and 
Lycaonia,  and  therefore  those  towns  of  Antioch, 
Iconium,  Lystra,  and  Derbe,  which  are  conspicuous 
in  the  narrative  of  St.  Paul's  travels.  But  the 
characteristic  part  of  Galatia  lay  northward  from 
those  districts.  On  the  table-land  between  the 
Sangarius  and  the  Halys,  the  Galatians  were  settled 
in  three  tribes,  the  Tectosages,  the  Tolistoboii,  and 
the  Trocmi,  the  first  of  which  is  identical  in  name 
with  a  tribe  familiar  to  us  in  the  history  of  Gaul, 
as  distributed  over  the  Ceveunes  near  Toulouse. 
The  three  capitals  were  respectively  Tavium,  Pes- 
siuus,  and  Ancyra.  The  last  of  these  (the  modern 
Angora)  was  the  centre  of  the  roads  of  the  district, 
and  may  lie  regarded  as  the  metropolis  of  the 
Galatians.  These  Eastern  Gauls  preserved  much 
of  their  ancient  character,  mid  something  of  their 
ancient  language.  At  least  Jerome  says  that  in 
his  day  the  same  language  might  be  heard  at 
Ancyra  as  at  Treves  :  and  lie  is  a  good  witness; 
for  he  himself  had  been  at  Treves.  The  prevailing 
speech,  however,  of  the  district  was  Greek.  Hence 
the  Galatians  were  called  Gallograeci.  ("Hi  jam 
degeneres  sunt ;  mixti,  et  Gallograeci  vere,  quod 
appellantur."  Manlius  in  Livy,  xxxviii.  17.)  The 
inscriptions  found  at  Ancyra  are  Greek)  and  St. 
Paul  wrote  his  Epistle  in  Greek. 

It  is  difficult  at  first  sight  to  determine  in  what 
sense  the  word  Galatia  is  used  by  the  writers  of 
the  N.  T.,  or  whether  always  in  the  same  sense, 
hi  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  the  journeys  of  St. 
Paul  through  the  district  are  mentioned  in  very 
general  terms.  We  are  simply  told  (Acts  xvi.  t>), 
that  on  his  second  missionary  circuit  he  went  with 
Silas  and  Timotheus  through  t))v  frpvyiau  ko.\ 
tV  TaAariK^u  x^Pav-  From  the  Epistle  indeed 
we  have  this  supplementary  information,  that  an 
attack  of  sickness  (5V  aadtveiav  rris  crapKos,  <  ial.  iv. 
IB)  detained  him  among  the  Galatians,  and  gave 
him  the  opportunity  of  preaching  the  Gospel  to 
them,  and  also  that  he  was  received  by  them  with 
extraordinary  fervour  (ib.  14,  15);  but  this  dues 
not  inform  us  of  the  route  which  he  took.  So  on 
the  third  circuit  he  is  described  i  Acts  xviii.  23)  as 
Siepxcjiieeos  Kafittfs  r)]v  raXaTiKTjv  x^Pav  Ka^ 
^pvytau.  We  know  from  the  first  Epistle  to  the 
Corinthians  that  on  this  journey  St.  Paul  was  occu- 
pied with  the  collection  for  the  poor  Christians  of 
Judaea,  and  that  he  gave  instructions  in  Galatia  on 
the  subject  ( ilicnrep  fiiera£a  rats  €/cKA.rj<n'ais  rijs 
I'aAaTias,  1  Cor.  xvi.  lj:  but  here  again  we  are 
in  doubt  as  to  the  places  which  he  had  visited. 
We  observe  that  the  "churches'"  of  Galatia  are 
mentioned  here  in  the  plural,  as  in  the  opening  of 
the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  themselves  (Gal.  i.  2). 
From  this  we  should  be  incline  I  to  infer  thai  he 
visited  several  parts  of  the  district,  instead  of  resid- 
ing a  lung  time  in  one  pLace,  so  as  to  form  a  great 
central  church-,  as  at  Ephesus  ami  Corinth.  This 
is  in  harmony  with  the  phrase  ?';  TaXartKr)  x^'Pa 
used  in  both  instances.  Since  Phrygia  is  men- 
tioned first  in  one  case,  and  second  ki  the  other, 
we  should  suppose  that  the  order  of  the  journey 
was  different  on  the  two  occasions.  Phrygia  also 
being  not  the  name  of  a  Roman  province,  but 
simply   an    ethnographical   term,    it    is    natural   to 


GALATIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE   tiL3 

conclude  that  Galatia  is  used  here  by  St.  Luke 
in  the  same  general  way.  In  confirmation  of  bis 
view  it  is  worth  while  to  notice  that  in  Acts  ii.  9, 
10,  where  the  enumeration  is  ethnographical  rather 
than  political,  Phrygia  is  mentioned,  and  not 
Galatia, —  while  the  exact  contrary  is  the  case  in 
1  Pet.  i.  1,  2,  where  each  geographical  term  is  the 
name  of  a  province. 

The  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  was  probably  writ- 
ten very  soon  after  St.  Paul's  second  visit  to  them. 
Its  abruptness  and  severity,  and  the  sadness  of  its 
tone,  are  caused  by  their  sudden  perversion  from 
the  doctrine  which  the  Apostle  had  taught  them, 
and  which  at  first  they  had  received  so  willingly. 
It  is  no  fancy,  if  we  see  in  this  fickleness  a  specimen 
of  that  "  esprit  inipe'tueux,  ouvert  a  toutes  les 
impressions,"  that  "  mobilite  extreme,"  which 
Thierry  marks  as  characteristic  of  the  Gaulish 
race  {Hist,  des  Gaulois,  Introd.  iv.  v.).  From 
Joseph.  Ant.  xvi.  6,  §2,  we  know  that  many  Jews 
were  settled  in  Galatia ;  but  Gal.  iv.  8  would  lead 
us  to  suppose  that  St.  Paul's  converts  were  mostly 
Gentiles. 

We  must  not  leave  unnoticed  the  view  advocated 
byBottger  {Schauplatz  der  Wirksamkeit  des  Apos- 
tels  Paulus,  pp.  28-30,  and  the  third  of  his 
Beitraije,  pp.  1-5),  viz.  that  the  Galatia  of  the 
Epistle  is  entirely  limited  to  the  district  between 
Derbe  and  Golossae,  i.  e.  the  extieme  southern  fron- 
tier of  the  Roman  province.  On  this  view  the 
visit  alluded  to  by  the  Apostle  took  place  on  his 
first  missionary  circuit ;  and  the  htrQiveia.  of  Gal. 
iv.  PI  is  identified  with  the  effects  of  the  stoning  at 
Lystra  (Acts  xiv.  19).  Geographically  this  is  not 
impossible,  though  it  seems  unlikely  that  regions 
called  Pisidia  and  Lycaonia  in  one  place  should  be 
called  Galatia  in  another.  Bottger's  geography, 
however,  is  connected  with  a  theory  concerning  the 
date  of  the  Epistle ;  and  for  the  determination  of 
this  point  we  must  refer  to  the  article  on  the 
Galatians,  The  Epistle  to  the.     [J.  S.  H.j 

GALATIANS,  THE  EPISTLE  TO  THE, 

was  written  by  the  Apostle  St.  Paul,  not  long  after 
his  journey  through  Galatia  and  Phrygia  (Acts 
xviii.  23),  and  probably  (see  below)  in  the  early 
portion  of  his  two  years  and  a  half  stay  at  Ephesus, 
which  terminated  with  the  Pentecost  of  a.d.  57 
or  58.  It  would  thus  succeed  in  order  of  com- 
position  the  Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians,  and 
would  form  the  first  of  the  second  group  of  epistles, 
the  remaining  portions  of  which  arc  Epistles  to  the 
Corinthians  and  to  the  Romans. 

This  characteristic  letter  was  addressed  to  the 
churches  of  the  Asiatic  province  of  Galatia  (i.  2), 
or  Gallograecia  (Strabo,  xii.  566; — a  province  that 
bore  in  its  name  its  well-founded  claim  to  a  Gallic 
or  Celtic  origin  (Pausanias,  i.  4-),  and  that  now, 
after  an  establishment,  first  by  predatory  conquest, 
and  subsequently  by  recognition  but  limitation  at 
the  hand.--  of  neighbouring  rulers  (Strabo,  I.e.; 
Pausanias,  iv.  .">),  could  date  an  occupancy,  though 
nut  an  independence,  extending  to  more  than  three 
hundred  year.-;  the  first  subjection  of  Galatia  to 
the  Etonians  having  taken  place  in  189  Ii.C.  Liv. 
xxxviii.  16,  sq.),  and  its  formal  reduction  (with 
territorial  additions)  to  a  regular  Roman  province 
in  26  \.t>.  The  epistle  appears  to  have  been  called 
forth  by  the  machinations  of  Judaizing  teachers, 
u  ho.  shortly  before  the  date  of  its  composition,  had 
endeavoured  to  seduce  the  churches  of  this  province 
into   a   recognition    of  circumcision   (v.  2,  11,  12, 


044    GALATIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 

vi.  12,  sq."),  and  had  openly  sought  to  depreciate 
the  apostolic  claims  of  St.  Paul  (comp.  i.  1,  11). 
The  scope  and  contents  of  the  epistle  are  thus — 

(1)  apologetic  (i.,  ii.)  and  polemical  (iii.,  iv.),  and 

(2)  hortatory  and  practical  (v.,  vi.),  the  positions 
and  demonstrations  of  the  former  portion  being 
used  with  great  power  and  persuasiveness  in  the 
exhortations  of  the  latter.  The  following  is  a  brief 
summary : — 

After  an  address  and  salutation,  in  which  his 
total  independence  of  human  mission  is  distinctly 
asserted  (i.  1),  and  a  brief  doxology  (i.  5),  the 
Apostle  expresses  his  astonishment  at  the  speedy 
lapse  of  his  converts,  and  reminds  them  how  he 
had  forewarned  them  that  even  if  an  angel  preached 
to  them  another  gospel  he  was  to  be  anathema 
(i.  6-10).  The  gospel  he  preached  was  not  of  men, 
as  his  former  course  of  life  (i.  11-14),  and  as  his 
actual  history  subsequent  to  his  conversion  (i.  15- 
24),  convincingly  proved.  When  he  went  up  to 
Jerusalem  it  was  not  to  be  instructed  by  the 
Apostles,  but  on  a  special  mission,  which  resulted 
in  his  being  formally  accredited  by  them  (ii.  1-10)  ; 
nay  more,  when  St.  Peter  dissembled  in  his  com- 
munion with  Gentiles,  he  rebuked  him,  and  de- 
monstrates the  danger  of  such  inconsistency  (ii.  11- 
21).  The  Apostle  then  turns  to  the  Galatians,  and 
urges  specially  the  doctrine  of  justification,  as 
evinced  by  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  (iii.  1-5),  the  case 
of  Abraham  (iii.  6-9),  the  fact  of  the  law  involving 
a  curse,  from  which  Christ  has  freed  us  (iii.  10-14), 
and  lastly  the  prior  validity  of  the  promise  (iii. 
15-18),  and  that  preparatory  character  of  the  law 
(iii.  19-24)  which  ceased  when  faith  in  Christ  and 
baptism  into  Him  were  fully  come  (iii.  25-29). 
All  this  the  Apostle  illustrates  by  a  comparison  of 
the  nonage  of  an  heir  with  that  of  bondage  under 
the  law :  they  were  now  sons  and  inheritors  (iv. 
1-7),  why  then  were  they  now  turning  back  to 
bondage  (iv.  8-11)  ?  They  once  treated  the  Apostle 
very  differently  (iv.  12-16);  now  they  pay  court 
to  others  and  awaken  feelings  of  serious  mistrust 
(iv.  17-20),  and  yet  with  all  their  approval  of  the 
law  show  that  they  do  not  understand  its  deeper 
and  more  allegorical  meanings  (iv.  21-30).  If  this 
be  so,  they  must  stand  fast  in  their  freedom,  and 
beware  that  they  make  not  void  their  union  with 
Chnst  (iv.  31— v.  6):  their  perverters  at  any  rate 
shall  be  punished  (v.  7-12).  The  real  fulfilment 
of  the  law  is  love  (v.  13-15) :  the  works  of  the 
Spirit  are  what  no  law  condemns,  the  works  of  the 
flesh  are  what  exclude  from  the  kingdom  of  God 
(v.  16-26).  The  Apostle  further  exhorts  the  spi- 
ritual to  be  forbearing  (vi.  1-5),  the  taught  to  be 
liberal  to  their  teachers,  and  to  remember  that  as 
they  sowed  so  would  they  reap  (vi.  6-10).  Then 
after  a  noticeable  recapitulation,  and  a  contrast  be- 
tween his  own  conduct  and  that  of  the  false  teachers 
(vi.  11-16),  and  an  affecting  entreaty  that  they 
would  trouble  him  no  more  (vi.  17),  the  Apostle 
t  concludes  with  his  usual  benediction  (vi.  18). 

With  regard  to  the  genuineness  and  authenticity 
of  this  epistle,  no  writer  of  any  credit  or  respect- 
ability has  expressed  any  doubts.  The  testimony 
of  the  early  church  is  most  decided  and  unanimous. 
Beside  express  references  to  the  epistle  (irenaeus, 
Hacr.  iii.  7,  2,  v.  21,  1  ;  Tertull.  de  Praescr.  ch. 
60,  al.},  we  have  one  or  two  direct  citations  found 
as  early  as  the  time  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers  (Polyc. 
ad  Phil.  ch.  3),  and  several  apparent  allusions  (see 
Davidson,  Introd.  ii.  318,  sq.).  The  attempt  of 
Bruno  Bauer  (Kritik  der  Paulin.  Bricfe,  Berlin, 


GALATIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 

1850)  to  demonstrate  that  this  epistle  is  a  com- 
pilation of  later  times,  out  of  those  to  the  Romans 
and  to  the  Corinthians,  has  been  treated  by  Meyer 
with  a  contempt  and  a  severity  (  Vorrede,  p.  vii. ; 
Einleit.  p.  8)  which,  it  does  not  seem  too  much  to 
say,  are  both  completely  deserved.  Such  efforts  are 
alike  melancholy  and  desperate,  but  are  useful  in 
exhibiting  the  real  issues  and  tendencies  of  all  his- 
torical criticism  that  has  the  hardihood  to  place  its 
own,  often  interested,  speculations  before  external 
testimony  and  recognised  facts. 

Two  historical  questions  require  a  brief  notice : — 

1 .  The  number  of  visits  made  by  St.  Paul  to  the 
churches  of  Galatia  previous  to  his  writing  the 
epistle.  These  seem  certainly  to  have  been  two. 
The  Apostle  founded  the  churches  of  Galatia  in  the 
visit  recorded  Acts  xvi.  6,,  during  his  second  mis- 
sionary journey,  about  A.D.  51,  and  revisited  them 
at  the  period  and  on  the  occasion  mentioned  Acts 
xviii.  23,  when  he  went  through  the  country  of 
Galatia  and  Phrygia,  firiarripifai'  iravras  tovs 
lxa6t]Tas.  On  this  occasion  it  would  seem  probable 
that  he  found  the  leaven  of  Judaism  beginning  to 
work  in  the  churches  of  Galatia,  and  that  he  then 
warned  them  against  it  in  language  of  the  most 
decided  character  (comp.  i.  9,  v.  3).  The  majority 
of  the  new  converts  consisted  of  Gentiles  (iv.  8). 
but,  as  we  may  infer  from  the  language  of  the 
epistle,  had  considerable  contact  with  Jews,  and 
some  familiarity  with  Jewish  modes  of  interpre- 
tation. It  was  then  all  the  more  necessary  to  warn 
them  emphatically  against  believing  in  the  necessity 
of  circumcision,  and  of  yielding  themselves  up  to 
the  bondage  of  a  law  which,  however  strenuously 
urged  upon  them  by  those  around  them,  had  now 
become  merged  in  that  dispensation  to  which  it 
was  only  prevenient  and  preparatory. 

2.  Closely  allied  with  the  preceding  question  is 
that  of  the  date,  and  place  from  which  the  epistle 
was  written.  If  the  preceding  view  be  correct, 
the  epistle  could  not  have  been  written  before  the 
second  visit,  as  it  contains  clear  allusions  to  warn- 
ings that  were  then  given  when  the  Apostle  was 
present  with  them.  It  must  then  date  from  some 
period  subsequent  to  the  journey  recorded  in  Acts 
xviii.  23.  How  long  subsequent  to  that  journey  is 
somewhat  debateable.  Conybeare  and  Howson,  and 
more  recently  Lightfoot  {journal  of  Sacred  and 
Class.  Philol.  for  Jan.  1857),  urge  the  probability 
of  its  having  been  written  at  about  the  same  time 
as  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  and  find  it  very  un- 
likely that  two  epistles  so  nearly  allied  in  subject 
and  line  of  argument  should  have  been  separated 
in  order  of  composition  by  the  two  epistles  to  the 
Corinthians.  They  would  therefore  assign  Corinth 
as  the  place  where  the  epistle  was  written,  and  the 
three  months  that  the  Apostle  stayed  there  (Acts 
xx.  2,  3),  apparently  the  winter  of  A.D.  57  or  58, 
as  the  exact  period.  It  is  not  to  be  denied  that 
there  is  a  considerable  plausibility  in  these  argu- 
ments ;  still  when  we  consider  not  only  the  note  of 
time  in  Gal.  i.  6,  ovrces  raxews,  but  also  the  ob- 
vious fervour  and  freshness  of  interest  that  seems  to 
breathe  through  the  whole  epistle,  it  does  seem 
almost  impossible  to  assign  a  later  period  than  the 
commencement  of  the  prolonged  stay  in  Ephesus. 
The  Apostle  would  in  that  city  have  been  easily 
able  to  receive  tidings  of  his  Galatian  converts  ;  the 
dangers  of  Judaism,  against  which  he  personally 
warned  them,  would  have  been  fresh  in  his 
thoughts ;  and  when  he  found  that  these  warnings 
were  proving  unavailing,  and  that  even  his  apostolic 


GALBANUM 

authority  was  becoming  undermined  by  a  fresh 
arrival  of  Judaizing  teachers, — it  is  then  that  he 
would  have  written,  as  it  were  on  the  spur  of  the 
moment,  in  those  terms  of  earnest  and  almost  im- 
passioned warning  that  so  noticeably  mark  this 
epistle.  We  do  not  therefore  see  sufficient  reason 
for  giving  up  the  anciently-received  opinion  that 
the  epistle  was  written  from  Ephesus,  perhaps  not 
very  long  after  the  Apostle's  arrival  at  that  city. 
The  subscription  iypdcp-q  curb  'Vw/j.7is  has  found, 
both  in  ancient  and  modern  times,  some  supporters, 
but  seems  in  every  way  improbable,  and  was  not 
unlikely  suggested  by  a  mistaken 'reference  of  the 
expressions  in  ch.  vi.  17  to  the  sufferings  of  im- 
prisonment. See  Meyer,  Einleit.  p.  7  ;  Davidson, 
Introduction,  ii.  292,  sq. ;  Alford,  Prolegomena, 
p.  459. 

The  editions  of  this  epistle  have  been  very  nu- 
merous. We  may  specify  those  of  Winer  (Lips. 
1829),Riickert(Leipz.l833),  Usteri  (Zurich,  1833), 
Schott  (Lips.  1834),  Olshausen  (Konigsb.  1840), 
Windischmann  (Mainz,  1843),  De  Wette  (Leipz. 
1845),  Meyer  (Gotting.  1851),  Turner  (New  York, 
1855),  and  in  our  own  country  those  of  Ellicott 
(Lond.  1854,  2nd  ed.  1859),  Bagge  (Lond.  1856), 
and  Alford  (Lond.  1857.)  [C.  J.  E.] 

GALBANUM  (PI33^n,  chelh'ndh),  one  of  the 

perfumes  employed  in  the  preparation  of  the  sacred 
incense  (Ex.  xxx.  34).  The  similarity  of  the  Hebrew 
name  to  the  Greek  -^aX^dvv  and  the  Latin  Galba- 
num has  led  to  the  supposition  that  the  substance 
indicated  is  the  same.  The  galbanum  of  commerce 
is  brought  chiefly  from  India  and  the  Levant.  It 
is  a  resinous  gum  of  a  brownish  yellow  colour,  and 
strong,  disagreeable  smell,  usually  met  with  in 
masses,  but  sometimes  found  in  yellowish  tear-like 
drops.  The  ancients  believed  that  when  burnt  the 
smoke  of  it  was  efficacious  in  driving  away  serpents 
and  gnats  ( 1*1  in .  rii.  56,  xix.  58,  xxiv.  13;  Virg. 
Georg.  iii.  415).  But,  though  galbanum  itself  is 
well  known,  the  plant  which  yields  it  has  not  been 
exactly  determined.  Dioscorides  (iii.  87)  describes 
it  as  the  juice  of  an  umbelliferous  plant  growing  in 
Syria,  and  called  by  some  nerdiinov  (cf.  i,  71). 
Kiihn,  in  his  commentary  on  Dioscorides  (ii.  p. 
532)  is  in  favour  of  the  Ferula  ferulago,  L., 
which  grows  in  North  Africa,  Crete,  and  Asia 
Minor.  According  to  Pliny  (xii.  56)  it  is  the 
resinous  gum  of  a  plant  called  stagonitis,  growing 
on  Mount  Amanus  in  Syria;  while  the  metopion  is 
the  product  of  a  tree  near  the  oracle  of  Amnion 
(xii.  49).  The  testimony  of  Theophrastus  (Hist. 
Plant,  ix.  7),  so  far  as  it  goes,  confirms  the  ac- 
counts of  Pliny  and  Dioscorides.  It  was  for  some 
time  supposed  to  be  the  product  of  the  Bvbon  gal- 
banum  of  Linnaeus,  a  native  of  the  Cape  of  Good 
Hope.  Don  found  in  the  galbanum  of  commerce 
the  fruit  of  an  umbelliferous  plant  of  the  tribe 
Silerinae,  which  lie  assumed  to  be  thai  from  which 
the  gum  was  produced,  and  tq  which  he  gave  the 
name  of  Galbanum  officinale.  But  his  conclusion 
was  called  in  question  by  Dr.  I.indley,  who  n 
from  Sir  John  Macneil  the  fruits  of  a  plant  grow- 
ing at  Durrood,  near  Nishapore,  in  Khorassan, 
which  he  named  Opoidia  Galbanifera,  of  the  tribe 
Smyrneae.  This  plant  has  been  adopted  by  tin- 
Dublin  College  in  their  Pharmacopeia,  as  that 
which  yields  the  galbanum  |  Pereira,  M<<t .  Med.  ii. 
pt.  2,  p.  188).  M.  Buhse,  in  bis  Persian  travels 
(quoted  in  Royle,  Mat.  Med.  pp.  471,472),  identi- 
fied the  plant  producing  galbanum  with  one  which 


GALILEE 


645 


he  found  on  the  Demawend  mountains.  It  was  called 
by  the  natives  Khassuch,  and  bore  a  very  close  re- 
semblance to  the  Ferula  erubescens,  but  belonged 
neither  to  the  genus  Galbanum  nor  to  Opoidea.  It 
is  believed  that  the  Persian  galbanum,  and  that 
brought  from  the  Levant,  are  the  produce  of  dif- 
ferent plants.  But  the  question  remains  undecided. 
If  the  galbanum  be  the  true  representative  of 
the  chelb'ndh  of  the  Hebrews,  it  may  at  first  sight 
appear  strange  that  a  substance  which,  when  burnt 
by  itself,  produces  a  repulsive  odour,  should  be 
employed  in  the  composition  of  the  sweet-smelling 
incense  for  the  service  of  the  tabernacle.  We  have 
the  authority  of  Pliny  that  it  was  used,  with  other 
resinous  ingredients,  in  making  perfumes  among  the 
ancients ;  and  the  same  author  tells  us  that  these 
resinous  substances  were  added  to  enable  the  per- 
fume to  retain  its  fragrance  longer.  "  Resina  ant 
gummi  adjiciuutur  ad  continendum  odorem  in  cor- 
pore"  (xiii.  2).  Galbanum  was  also  employed  in 
adulterating  the  opobalsamum,  or  gum  of  the  bal- 
sam plant  (Plin.  xii.  54).  [W.  A.  W.] 

GALEED  O&h  Le-  6al-ed="heap  of  wit- 
ness"). The  name  given  by  Jacob  to  the  heap 
which  he  and  Laban  made  on  Mount  Gilead,  in 
witness  of  the  covenant  then  entered  into  between 
them  (Gen.  xxxi.  47,  48  ;  comp.  23,  25).  [Gil- 
ead ;  Jegar-sahadutha.] 

GAL'GALA  (Ta\ya\a ;  Galgala),  the  ordi- 
nary equivalent  in  the  LXX.  for  Gilgal.  In  the 
A.  V.  it  is  named  only  in  1  Mace.  ix.  2,  as  desig- 
nating the  direction  of  the  road  taken  by  the  army 
of  Demetrius,  when  they  attacked  Masaloth  in  Ar- 
bela — "the  way  to  Galgala"  (bbbv  t?V  eis  Td\- 
ya\a).  The  army,  as  we  learn  from  the  statements 
of  Josephus  (Ant.  xii.  11,  §1),  was  on  its  way  from 
Antioch,  and  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  by 
Arbela  is  meant  the  place  of  that  name  in  Galilee 
now  surviving  as  Irbid.  [Arbela.]  Its  ultimate 
destination  was  Jerusalem  (1  Mace.  ix.  3),  and  Gal- 
gala may  therefore  be,  either  the  upper  Gilgal  near 
Bethel,  or  the  lower  one  near  Jericho,  as  the  route 
through  the  Ghor  or  that  through  the  centre  of 
the  country  was  chosen  (Ewald,  Gcsch.  iv.  370). 
Josephus  omits  the  name  in  his  version  of  the 
passage.  It  is  a  gratuitous  supposition  of  Ewald's 
that  the  Galilee  which  Josephus  introduces  is  a 
corruption  of  Galgala.  [G.] 

GAL'ILEE  (TaMXaia).  This  name,  which  in 
the  Roman  age  was  applied  to  a  large  province, 
seems  to  have  been  originally  confined  to  a  little 
"  circuit"  (the  Hebrew  word  ?v3,  Galil,  the  origin 
of  the  later  "  Galilee,"  like  "133,  signifies  a  "  circle, 
or  circuit ")  of  country  round  Kedesh-Naphtali,  in 
which  were  situated  the  twenty  towns  given  by 
Solomon  to  Hiram,  king  of  Tyre,  as  payment  for 
his  work  in  conveying  timber  from  Lebanon  to  Je- 
rusalem (Josh.  xx.  7;  1  K.  ix.  11;  LXX.  ToAi- 
\ala).  They  were  then,  or  subsequently,  occupied 
by  strangers,  and  for  thi>  reason  Isaiah  gives  to  the 
district  the  name  "Galilee  of  the  Gentiles"  (7v3 
□  'IHn,  Is.  ix.  1.  In  Matt.  iv.  15,  YaXiXaia  twv 
iBvwv  ;  in  1  Mace.  v.  1. ">,  Ta\i\aia  a\\o<pv\un> ) . 
It  is  probable  that  the  strangers  increased  in  Dumber, 
and  became  daring  the  captivity  the  great  body  of 
the  inhabitants  ;  extending  themselves  also  over  the 
surrounding  country,  they  gave  to  their  new  terri- 
tories the  old-name,  until  at  length  Galilee  became 
one  of  the  largest  provinces  of  Palestine.     In  the 


646 


GALILEE 


time  of  the  Maccabees  (Jalilee  contained  only  a  few 
Jews  living  in  the  midst  of  a  large  heathen  popula- 
tion (1  Mace.  v.  20-23)  ;  Strabo  states  that  in  his 
day  it  was  chiefly  inhabited  by  Syrians,  Phoenicians, 
and  Arabs  (xvi.  p.  760)  ;  and  Josephus  says  Greeks 
also  dwelt  in  its  cities  (  Vit.  12). 

In  the  time  of  our  Lord  all  Palestine  was  divided 
into  three  provinces,  Judaea,  Samaria,  and  Galilee 
(Acts  ix.  31  ;  Luke  xvii.  11  ;  Joseph.  B.J.  iii.  3). 
The  latter  included  the  whole  northern  section  of 
the  country,  including  the  ancient  territories  of 
Issachav,  Zebulim,  Asher,  and  Naphtali.  Josephus 
defines  its  boundaries,  and  gives  a  tolerably  full 
description  of  its  scenery,  products,  and  population. 
He  says  the  soil  is  rich  and  well  cultivated ;  fruit 
and  forest  trees  of  all  kinds  abound  ;  numerous 
large  cities  and  populous  villages,  amounting  in  all 
to  no  less  than  two  hundred  and  forty,  thickly  stud 
the  whole  face  of  the  country ;  the  inhabitants  are 
industrious  and  warlike,  being  trained  to  arms  from 
their  infancy  (B.  J.  iii.  3,  §3 ;  Vit.  45).  On  the 
west  it  was  bounded  by  the  territory  of  Ptolemais, 
which  probably  included  the  whole  plain  of  Akka 
to  the  foot  of  Cannel.  The  southern  border  ran 
along  the  base  of  Cannel  and  of  the  hills  of  Samaria 
to  Mount  Gilboa,  and  then  descended  the  valley  of 
Jezreel  by  Scythopolis  to  the  Jordan.  The  river 
Jordan,  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  and  the  upper  Jordan  to 
the  fountain  at  Dan,  formed  the  eastern  border ; 
and  the  northern  ran  from  Dan  westward  across 
the  mountain  ridge  till  it  touched  the  territory  of 
the  Phoenicians  (B.  J.  iii.  3,  §1,  ii.  18,  §9;  comp. 
Luke  viii.  26). 

Galilee  was  divided  into  two  sections,  "  Lower" 
and  "Upper;"  tj  Kara)  koL  r\  avoi  TaAiAaia. 
Cyril  says  (c.  Jul.  ii.)  Eiiri  yap  FaAiAaiai  Svo,  Siv 
7/  juia  Kara  tt)v  'lovfiaiav  r/ye  fj.iv  lr4pa  raTs 
fyniv'iKwv  ■k&Azitiv  '6/xop6i  re  Kal  yeiroiv.-  A 
single  glance  at  the  country  shows  that  the  division 
was  natural.  Lower  Galilee  included  the  great 
plain  of  Esdraelon  with  its  offshoots,  which  run 
down  to  the  Jordan  and  the  Lake  of  Tiberias  ;  and 
the  whole  of  the  hill-country  adjoining  it  on  the 
north  to  the  foot  of  the  mountain-range.  The 
words  of  Josephus  are  clear  and  important  (2?.  J. 
iii.  3,  §1)  :  Kal  ttjj  /xev  Karco  KaAovfj.4vi]s  FuAl- 
Aaias  enrb  Ti/3epia5os  /Uf'xP'  ZafiovAiw  i)S  iv 
to?s  irapaAiois  TlroAtfiats  ytiroov  rb  [itjkos  iKrei- 
verar  ■nXarvvtrai  Si  airb  rrjs  iv  rw  fj.eya.Aw 
7re5iou  Kei^eVrjs  KcijJ.r]S  ^  BaAwd  KaAurat  fJ-^Xpi 
B7)p(ra/3r)s.  "  The  village  of  Xaloth"  is  evidently 
the  Chesulloth  of  Josh.  xix.  12,  now  called  Iksdl, 
and  situated  at  the  base  of  Mount  Tabor,  on  the 
northern  border  of  the  Great  Plain  (Porter,  Hand- 
book, p.  359).  But  a  comparison  of  Josephus,  Ant. 
xx.  6,  §4,  with  B.  J.  iii.  2,  §4,  proves  that  Lower 
Galilee  extended  as  far  as  the  village  of  Ginea,  the 
modern  Jenin,  on  the  extreme  southern  side  of  the 
plain.  The  site  of  the  northern  border  town, 
Bersabe,  is  not  known  ;  but  we  learn  incidentally 
that  both  Arbela  and  Jotopata  were  in  Lower 
Galilee  (Joseph.  Vit.  37;  B.J.  ii.  20,  §6);  and 
as  the  former  was  situated  near  the  north-west 
angle  of  the  Lake  of  Tiberias,  and  the  latter  about 
eight  miles  north  of  Nazareth  (Porter,  Handbook, 
pp.  432,  377),  we  conclude  that  Lower  Galilee 
included  the  whole  region  extending  from  the  plain 
of  Akka,  on  the  west,  to  the  shores  of  the  lake  on 
the  east.  It  was  thus  one  of  the  richest  and  most 
beautiful  sections  of  Palestine.  The  Plain  of 
Esdraelon  presents  an  unbroken  surface  of  fertile 
soil — soil  so  good  that  .to  enjoy  it  the  tribe  of  Issa- 


GALILEE 

char  condescended  to  a  semi-nomadic  state,  and 
"  became  a  servant  to  tribute"  (Deut.  xxxiii.  18  ; 
Gen.  xlix.  14,  15).  With  the  exception  of  a  few 
rocky  summits  round  Nazareth  the  hills  are  all 
wooded,  and  sink  down  in  graceful  slopes  to  broad 
winding  vales  of  the  richest  green.  The  outlines 
are  varied,  the  colours  soft,  and  the  whole  land- 
scape is  characterised  by  that  picturesque  luxuriance 
which  one  sees  in  parts  of  Tuscany.  The  blessings 
promised  by  Jacob  and  Moses  to  Zebulun  and 
Asher  seem  to  be  here  inscribed  on  the  features  of 
the  country.  Zebulun,  nestling  amid  these  hills, 
"offers  sacrifices  of  righteousness"  of  the  abundant 
flocks  nourished  by  their  rich  pastures ;  he  rejoices 
"  in  his  goings  out "  along  the  fei tile  plain  of 
Esdraelon ;  "  he  sucks  of  the  abundance  of  the 
seas  " — his  possessions  skirting  the  bay  of  Haifa  at 
the  base  of  Carniel ;  and  "  he  sucks  of  treasures 
hid  in  the  sand,"  probably  in  allusion  to  the  glass, 
which  was  first  made  from  the  sands  of  the  river 
Belus  (Deut.  xxxiii.  18,  19;  Plin.  v.  19;  Tac. 
Hist.  v.).  Asher,  dwelling  amid  the  hills  on  the 
north-west  of  Zebulun,  on  the  borders  of  Phoenicia, 
"dips  his  feet  in  oil,"  the  produce  of  luxuriant 
olive  groves,  such  as  still  distinguish  this  region ; 
"  his  bread,"  the  produce  of  the  plain  of  Phoenicia, 
and  the  fertile  upland  valleys  "  is  fat ;  "  "  he  yields 
royal  dainties  " — oil  and  wine  from  his  olives  and 
vineyards,  and  milk  and  butter  from  his  pastures 
(Gen.  xlix.  20  ;  Deut.  xxxiii.  24,  25).  The  chief 
towns  of  Lower  Galilee  were  Tiberias,  Tarichaea,  at 
the  southern  end  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  and  Sepphoris 
(Joseph.  Vit.  9,  25,  29,  37).  The  latter  played 
an  important  part  in  the  last  great  Jewish  war 
(Joseph.  Vit.  45  ;  B.  J.  ii.  18,  §11).  .  It  is  now 
called  Sefurieh,  and  is  situated  about  three  miles 
north  of  Nazareth  (Porter,  Handbook,  p.  378). 
There  were  besides  two  strong  fortresses,  Jotapata, 
now  called  Jefdt,  and  Mount  Tabor  (Joseph.  IS.  J. 
iii.  7,  §3  sq.,  iv.  1,  §6).  The  towns  most  cele- 
brated in  N.  T.  history  are  Nazareth,  Cana,  and 
Tiberias  (Luke  i.  26;   John  ii.  1,  vi.  t). 

Upper  Galilee,  according  to  Josephus,  extended 
from  Bersabe  on  the  south,  to  the  village  of  Baca, 
on  the  borders  of  the  territory  of  Tyre,  and  from 
Melotti  on  the  .west,  to  Thella,  a  city  near  the 
Jordan  (B.  J.  iii.  3,  §1).  None  of  these  places 
are  now  known,  but  there  is  no  difficulty  in  ascer- 
taining the  position  and  approximate  extent  of  the 
province.  It  embraced  the  whole  mountain-range 
lying  between  the  upper  Jordan  and  Phoenicia. 
Its  southern  border  ran  along  the  foot  of  the  Sated 
range  from  the  north-west  angle  of  the  Sea  of 
(ialilee  to  the  plain  of  Akka.  To  this  region  the 
name  "Galilee  of  the  Gentiles"  is  given  in  the 
0.  and  N.  T.  (Is.  ix.  1  ;  Matt.  iv.  15).  So  Euse- 
bius  states  :  y  lx\v  TaAiAaia  iBvwv  etpe-rai  iv  bpiois 
Tupeoov  irapaKeifxevr],  evOa  eS&>Ke  'S.oAoixaiv  t<£ 
Xipa/x  k4  ir6Aeis  KAypov  NecpdaAei/J.  (Onom.  s.  v. 
TaAiAaia) .  The  town  of  Capernaum,  on  the  north 
shore  of  the  lake,  was  in  upper  Galilee  (Onom.  s.  v. 
Capharnaum),  and  this  fact  is  important,  as  show- 
ing how  far  the  province  extended  southward,  and 
as  proving  that  it,  as  well  as  Lower  Galilee,  touched 
the  lake."  The  mountain-range  of  Upper  Galilee 
is  a  southern  prolongation  of  Lebanon,  from  which 
it  is  separated  by  the  deep  ravine  of  the  Leoutes, 
[Lebanon].  The  summit  of  the  range  is  table- 
land ;  part  of  which  is  beautifully  wooded  with 
dwarf  oak,  intermixed  with  tangled  shrubberies  of 
hawthorn  and  arbutus.  The  whole  is  varied  by 
fertile  upland  plains,  green  forest  glades,  and  wild 


GALILEE,  SEA  OP 

picturesque  glens  breaking  down  to  the  east  and 
west.  The  population  are  still  numerous  and  indus- 
trious, consisting  chiefly  of  Metawileh,  a  sect  of 
Mohammedans.  Sated  is  the  principal  town,  and 
contains  about  4000  souls,  one-third  of  whom  are 
Jews.  It  is  one  of  the  four  holy  Jewish  cities  of 
Palestine,  and  has  for  three  centuries  or  more  been 
celebrated  for  the  sacreduess  of  its  tombs,  and  the 
learning  of  its  Rabbins.  Safed  seems  to  be  the 
centre  of  an  extensive  volcanic  district.  Shocks  of 
earthquake  are  felt  every  few  years.  One  occurred 
in  18.57,  which  killed  about  5000  persons  (Porter, 
Handbook,  p.  438).  On  the  table-land  of  Upper 
Galilee  lie  the  ruins  of  Kedesh-Naphtali  (Josh.  xx. 
7),  and  Giscala  (now  cl-Jisli),  a  city  fortified  by 
Josephus,  and  celebrated  as  the  last  place  in  Galilee 
that  held  out  against  the  Romans  (#.  /.  ii.  22, 
§6,iv.  1,  §1,  2,  §1-5). 

Galilee  was  the  scene  of  the  greater  part  of  our 
Lord's  private  life  aud  public  acts.  His  early  years 
were  spent  at  Nazareth ;  and  when  He  entered  on 
His  great  work  He  made  Capernaum  His  home 
(Matt.  iv.  13,  ix.  1).  It  is  a  remarkable  fact  that 
the  first  three  Gospels  are  chiefly  taken  up  with 
our  Lord's  ministrations  in  this  province ;  while 
the  Gospel  of  John  dwells  more  upon  those  in 
Judaea.  The  nature  of  our  Lord's  parables  and 
illustrations  was  greatly  influenced  by  the  peculiar 
features  and  products  of  the  country.  The  vine- 
yard, the  fig-tree,  the  shepherd,  and  the  desert  in 
the  parable  of  the  Good  Samaritan,  were  all  appro- 
priate in  Jsdaea ;  while  the  corn-fields  (Mark  iv. 
28),  the  fisheries  (Matt.  xiii.  47),  the  merchants 
(Matt.  xiii.  45),  and  the  flowers  (Matt.  vi.  28), 
are  no  less  appropriate  in  Galilee.  The  Apostles 
were  all  either  Galileans  by  birth  or  residence  (Acts 
i.  11);  and  as  such  they  were  despised,  as  their 
Master  had  been,  by  the  proud  Jews  (John  i.  40, 
vii.  52  ;  Acts  ii.  7).  It  appears  also  that  the  pro- 
nunciation of  those  Jews,  who  resided  in  Galilee, 
had  become  peculiar,  probably  from  their  contact 
with  their  Gentile  neighbours  ( Matt.  xxvi.  73 ; 
Mark  xiv.  70  ;  see  Lightfoot,  Opp.  ii.  77).  After 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  Galilee  became  the 
chief  seat  of  Jewish  schools  of  learning,  and  the 
residence  of  their  most  celebrated  Rabbins.  The 
National  Council  or  Sanhedrim  was  taken  for  a 
time  to  Jabneh  in  Philistia,  but  was  soon  removed 
to  Sepphoris,  and  afterwards  to  Tiberias  (Lightfoot, 
Opp.  ii.  p.  141).  The  Mishna  was  here  com- 
piled by  Rabbi  Judah  Hakkodesh  (cir.  A.D.  109- 
220)  ;  and  a  few  years  afterwards  the  Gemarawas 
a  Ided  (Buxtorf,  Tiberias,  p.  19).  Remains  of 
splendid  synagogues  still  exist  in  many  of  the  old 
towns  and  villages,  showing  that  from  the  second 
to  the  seventh  century  the  Jews  were  as  prosperous 
as  they  were  numerous  (Porter,  Handbook,  pp. 
427,  440).  [J.  L.  P.] 

GALILEE,  SEA  OF.     [Gijnxesaketii.] 

GALL.  The  Heb.  word  so  rendered  in  many 
passages  of  Scripture  is  C'N"I,  oi-,  as  it  is  written  in 
Deut.  xxxii.  32,  K-'il.  It  was  some  kind  of  bitter 
and  poisonous  herb,  hut  great  differences  exist  as  to 
the  particular  herb  which  it  indicates.  According 
to  Celsius  (Ilicrobot.  ii.  46  seq.)  it  was  hemlock 
(so  rendered  by  A.  V .  in  Ih>s.  x.  4);  Oedmann 
says  colocynth,  and  Michaelis  tares  ;  but  Gesenius, 
with  greater  probability,  "  the  poppy."  In  Jer.  viii. 
14,  ix.  15,  xxiii.  15,  L"N~I  VO.  succus  papaveru 
= opium. 


GALLIM 


647 


In  all  the  passages,  when  t^N"l  is  rendered  by 
gall  in  the  A.  V.,  the  LXX.  have  xoA^>  except  in 
Am.  vi.  12,  where  they  have  iriKpta.  The  Gk. 
X0A7)  signifies  a  bitter  juice,  one  of  the  humours  of 
the  body  in  man  and  beast,  and  is  so  used  in  the 
N.  T.,  literally  in  Matt,  xxvii.  34,  and  meta- 
phorically in  Acts  viii.  23.  In  Job  xvi.  13  the 
Heb.  riTip,  and  ib.  xx.  14,  25,  HTlp  is  rendered 
gall  in  the  A.  V.,  the  derivation  of  either  word 
being  from  *l"lO,  to  be  bitter.  In  Job  xvi.  13,  xx. 
25  the  gall  of  the  human  body  is  signified,  but  in 
xx.  14  the  gall  =  the  poison  of  asps  (comp.  Heb. 
xii.  15,  pi£a  7riK-pi'as).  [W.  I).] 

GALLERY,  an  architectural  term,  describing 
the  porticos  or  verandas,  which  are  not  uncommon 
in  Eastern  houses.  It  is  doubtful,  however,  whe- 
ther the  Hebrew  words,  so  translated,  have  any 
reference  to  such  an  object.  (1.)  In  Cant.  i.  17, 
the  word  rdchit  (ETp)  means  "  panelling,"  or 
"  fretted  work,''  and  is  so  understood  in  the  LXX. 
and  Vulg.  ((pdTvcofjLa,  laqueare).  The  sense  of  a 
"  gallery"  appears  to  be  derived  from  the  marginal 
reading  rahit  (L3TI"1,  Keri),  which  contains  the  idea 
of"  running,"  and  so  of  an  ambulatory,  as  a  place 
of  exercise :  such  a  sense  is,  however,  too  remote  to 
be  accepted.  (2.)  In  Cant.  vii.  6,  ralat  is  applied 
to  the  hair,  the  regularly  arranged,  flowing  locks 
being  compared  by  the  poet  to  the  channels  of  run- 
ning water  seen  in  the  pasture-grounds  of  Palestine. 
[Hair.]  (3.)  In  Ez.  xli.  15,  xiii.  3,  the  word 
attik  (p^PlK)  seems  to  mean  a  pillar,  used  for  the 
support  of  a  floor.  The  LXX.  and  Vulg.  give  in 
the  latter  passage  TrepicrrvAov,  and  portions,  but  a 
comparison  of  verses  5  and  6  shows  that  the  "  gal- 
leries "  and  "  pillars  "  were  identical  ;  the  reason 
of  the  upper  chambers  being  shorter  is  ascribed  to 
the  absence  of  supporting  pillars,  which  allowed 
an  extra  length  to  the  chambers  of  the  lower  story. 
The  space  thus  included  within  the  pillars  would 
assume  the  corner  of  an  open  gallery.  [\V.  L.  B.] 

GALLEY.     [Ship.] 

GAL'LIM  (D^a  =  "  heaps,"  or  possibly 
"springs;"  TaWeifj. ;  Gallini),  a  place  which  is 
twice  mentioned  in  the  Bible: — (1.)  As  the  native 
place  of  the  man  to  whom  Michal  David's  wife  was 
given — "  Phalti  the  son  of  Laish,  who  was  from 
Gallim  "  (D^-lft,  1  Sam.  xxv.  44).  The  LXX.  has 
'PcfjUjUa,  and  Josephus  Tt8\d ;  but  there  is  no  clue 
in  either  to  the  situation  of  the  place.  In  2  Sam. 
iii.  15,  1(3,  where  Michal  returns  to  David  at  He- 
bron, her  husband  is  represented  as  following  her  as 
fir  as  Bahurim,  i.  e.  on  the  road  between  the  Mount 
of  Olives  and  Jericho  (comp.  2  Sam.  xvi.  1 ).  But 
even  this  does  not  necessarily  point  to  the  direction 
of  Gallim,  because  Phalti  may  have  been  at  the  time 
with  Ishhosheth  at  Mahanaim,  the  road  from  which 
would  naturally  lead  past  Bahurim.  (2.)  The  name 
occurs  again  in  the  catalogue  of  places  terrified  at 
the  approach  of  Sennacherib  Is.  \.  30):  "  Lift  up 
thy  voice,  ( )  daughter  ( /.  e.  0  inhabitant)  of  Gallim  ! 
attend,  (>  Laish  !  poor  Auathoth  !"  The  other  towns 
in  this  passage — Aiath,  Michmash,  Ramah,  Gibeah 
of  Saul —  are  all,  like  Auathoth,  in  the  tiil f  Ben- 
jamin, a  short  distance  north  of  Jerusalem.  It 
should  not  he  overlooked  that  in  both  these  pass- 
ages the  names  Laish  and  Gallim  an'  mentioned   in 

coi \ioii.     Possibly  the  Ben-Laish  in  the  former 

implies  that  Phalti  was  a  native  of  Laish,  that  being 
dependent  on  '  lallim. 


648 


GALLIO 


Among  the  names  of  towns  added  by  the  LXX. 
to  those  of  Judah  in  Josh.  xv.  59,  Gal  em  (raAe'ju) 
occurs,  between  Karem  and  Thether.  In  Is.  xv.  8, 
the  Vulgate  has  Gallim  for  Eglainij  among  the 
towns  of  Moab. 

The  name  of  Gallim  has  not  been  met  with  in 
modern  times.  Schwarz  (131)  reports  a  Beit- 
Djallin  between  Ramleh  and  Joppa,  but  by  other 
explorers  the  name  is  given  as  Beit-Dejan.  Euse- 
bius,  from  hearsay  (Aeyerai),  places  it  near  Akkaron 
(Ekron).  [G.] 

GAL'LIO  (FaWluv ;  Junius  Annaeus  Gallio, 
Plin.  H.  N.  xxxi.  33),  the  Roman  proconsul  of 
Achaia  when  .St.  Paul  was  at  Corinth,  a.d.  53, 
under  the  Emperor  Claudius.  He  was  brother  to 
Lucius  Annaeus  Seneca,  the  philosopher,  and  was 
originally  named  Marcus  Annaeus  Novatus,  but 
got  the  above  name  from  his  adoption  into  the 
family  of  the  rhetorician  Lucius  Junius  Gallio.  (See 
Tacit.  Ann.  xv.  73,  xvi.  17  ;  Seneca,  Nat.  Quaest. 
4  praef. ;  Dion  Cass.  lx.  35  ;  Statins,  Silv.  ii.  7,  32.) 
Gallio  appears  to  have  resigned  the  government  of 
Achaia  on  account  of  the  climate  not  agreeing  with 
his  health,  Seneca,  Ep.  civ. :  quum  in  Achaia 
febrem  habere  coepisset,  protinus  navem  adscendit, 
clamitans  non  corporis  esse  sed  loci  morbum.  The 
character  of  him  which  his  brother  gives  is  in  ac- 
cordance with  that  which  we  might  infer  from  the 
narrative  in  the  Acts:  nemo  mortalium  mihi  tarn 
dulcis  est,  quam  hie  omnibus :  Gallionem  fratrem 
meum,  quern  nemo  non  parum  amat,  etiam  qui 
amare  plus  non  potest.  And  Statius  {I.  c.)  says, 
Hoc  plus  quam  Senecam  dedisse  mundo,  aut  dulcem 
generasse  Gallionem.  He  is  said  to  have  been  put 
to  death  by  Nero,  "  as  well  as  his  brother  Seneca,  but 
not  at  the  same  time  "  (Winer)  ;  but  there  is  appa- 
rently no  authority  for  this.  Tacitus  describes  him, 
Ann.  xv.  73,  as  fratris  morte  pavidum,  et  pro  sua 
incolumitate  supplicem  ;  and  Jerome  in  the  Chro- 
nicle of  Eusebius  says  that  he  committed  suicide 
in  the  year  65  A.D.  Of  Seneca's  works,  the  De  Ira 
is  dedicated  to  him  (JExegisti  a  me,  Novate,  &c), 
and  the  Vita  Beata  (  Vivere,  Gallio  f rater,  omnes 
beate  volunt).  [H.  A.] 

GALLOWS.    [Punishment.] 

GAM'AEL  (TajUaAiiJA,  Alex.  rajuarJA ;  Ame- 
nus),  1  Esd.  viii.  29.     [Daniel,  3.] 

GAMA'LIEL  (7fc$7P|  ;  rajtuA^A  ;  Gama- 
liel), son  of  Pedahzur;  prince  or  captain  (N^EW)  of 
the  tribe  of  Manasseh  at  the  census  at  Sinai  (Num. 
i.  10 ;  ii.  20  ;  vii.  54,  59),  and  at  starting  on  the 
march  through  the  wilderness  (x.  23). 

GAMALIEL  (YafiaXiyX ;  for  the  Hebrew  equi- 
valent see  the  preceding  article),  a  Pharisee  and  cele- 
brated doctor  of  the  law,  who  gave  prudent  worldly 
advice  in  the  Sanhedrim  respecting  the  treatment  of* 
the  followers  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth  (Acts  v.  34  ff.). 
We  learn  from  Acts  xxii.  3,  that  he  was  the  pre- 
ceptor of  St.  Paul.  He  is  generally  identified  with 
the  very  celebrated  Jewish  doctor  Gamaliel,  who 
is  known  by  the  title  of  "  the  glory  of  the  law," 
and  was  the  first  to  whom  the  title  "  Rabban," 
"  our  master,"  was  given.  The  time  agrees,  and 
there  is  every  reason  to  suppose  the  assumption  to 
be  correct.  This  Gamaliel  was  son  of"  Rabbi  Simeon , 
and  grandson  of  the  celebrated  Hillel ;  he  was  pre- 
sident of*  the  Sanhedrim  under  Tiberius,  Caligula,  and 
Claudius,  and  is  reported  to  have  died  eighteen  years 
before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.     Winer  says, 


GAMES 

"  after."  {nacli);  but  it  is  evidently  a  mistake,  for  he 
was  succeeded  in  the  presidency  by  his  son  Simeon, 
who  perished  in  the  siege  (see  Lightfoot,  Centuria 
i  horographica  Matthaeo  praemissa,  ch.  xv.).  If 
the  identity  be  assumed,  there  is  no  reason — and  we 
should  arrive  at  the  same  result  by  inference  from 
his  conduct  in  Acts  (I.  c.) — for  supposing  him  at  all 
inclined  towards  Christianity.  The  Jewish  ac- 
counts make  him  die  a  Pharisee.  And  when  we 
remember  that  in  Acts  v.  he  was  opposing  the  then 
prevalent  feature  of  Sadducaeism  in  a  matter  where 
the  Resurrection  was  called  in  question,  and  was  a 
wise  and  enlightened  man  opposing  furious  and 
unreasoning  zealots, — and  consider  also,  that  when 
the  anti-pharisaical  element  in  Christianity  was 
brought  out  in  the  acts  and  sayings  of*  Stephen,  his 
pupil  Saul  was  found  the  foremost  persecutor, — 
we  should  be  slow  to  suspect  him  of  forwarding  the 
Apostles  as  followers  of  Jesus. 

Ecclesiastical  tradition  makes  him  become  a 
Christian,  and  be  baptised  by  St.  Peter  and  St. 
Paul  (Phot.  Cod.  171,  p.  199),  together  with  his 
son  Gamaliel,  and  with  Nicodemus ;  and  the  Cle- 
mentine Recognitions  (i.  65)  state  that  he  was 
secretly  a  Christian  at  this  time.  Various  notices 
and  anecdotes  concerning  him  will  be  found  in 
Conybeare  and  Howson's  Life  of  St.  Paul,  edition 
2,  vol.  i.  pp.  69  ff.  [H.  A.] 

GAMES.  Of  the  three  classes  into  which  games 
may  be  arranged,  juvenile,  manly,  and  public,  the 
two  first  alone  belong  to  the  Hebrew  life,  the 
latter,  as  noticed  in  the  Bible,  being  either  foreign 
introductions  into  Palestine  or  the  customs  of  other 
countries.  With  regard  to  juvenile  games,  the 
notices  are  very  few.  It  must  not,  however,  be 
inferred  from  this  that  the  Hebrew  children  were 
without  the  amusements  adapted  to  their  age.  The 
toys  and  sports  of  childhood  claim  a  remote  anti- 
quity ;  and  if  the  children  of  the  ancient  Egyptians 
had  their  dolls  of"  ingenious  construction,  and  played 
at  ball  (Wilkinson,  Auc.  Egypt,  abridgm.  i.  197), 
and  if  the  children  of  the  Romans  amused  them- 
selves much  as  those  of  the  present  day, 

"  Aedificare  casas,  plostello  adjungere  mures, 
Ludere  par  impar,  equitai-e  in  arundine  longa"  — 
Hor.  2  Sat.  iii.  247. 

we  may  imagine  the  Hebrew  children  doing  the 
same,  as  they  played  in  the  streets  of  Jerusalem 
(Zech.  viii.  5).  The  only  recorded  sports,  how- 
ever, are  keeping  tame  birds  (Jobxli.5;  cf.  Catull.  2, 
1,  Passer,  deliciae  meae  puellae)  and  imitating  the 
proceedings  of  marriages  or  funerals  (Matt.  xi.  16). 
With  regard  to  manly  games,  they  were  not 
much  followed  up  by  the  Hebrews ;  the  natural 
earnestness  of  their  character  and  the  influence  of 
the  climate  alike  indisposed  them  to  active  exertion. 
The  chief  amusement  of  the  men  appears  to  have 
consisted  in  conversation  and  joking  (Jer.  xv.  17; 
Prov.  xxvi.  19).  A  military  exercise  seems  to  be 
noticed  in  2  Sam.  ii.  14,  but  the  term  under  which 
it  is  described  (pl"lt?)  is  of  too  general  an  applica- 
tion to  enable  us  to  form  an  idea  as  to  its  cha- 
racter: if*  intended  as  a  sport  it  must  have  re- 
sembled the  Djerid,  with  the  exception  of  the 
combatants  not  being  mounted ;  but  it  is  more 
consonant  to  the  sense  of  the  passage  t.p  reject  the 
notion  of  sport  and  give  sichak  the  sense  of  fencing 
or  fighting  (Thenius,  Comm.  in  foe).  In  Jerome's 
day  the  usual  sport  consisted  in  lifting  weights  as 
a    trial    of  strength,  as    also    practised    in    Egypt 


GAMES 

(Wilkinson,  i.  207).  Dice  arc  mentioned  by  the 
Talmudists  (Mishna,  Sanhedr.  3,  3;  Shabb.  23, 

2),  probably  introduced  from  Egypt  (Wilkinson,  ii. 
424);  and,  if  we  assume  thai  the  Hebrews  imi- 
tated, as  not  Improbably  they  did,  other  amuse- 
ments of  their  neighbours,  we  might  add  such 
games  as  od'd  and  even,  mora  (the  micare  digitis  of 
the  Romans),  draughts,  hoops,  catching  balls,  &c. 
(Wilkinson,  i.  188;.  If  it  be  objected  that  such 
trilling  amusements  were  inconsistent  with  the 
gravity  of  the  Hebrews,  it  may  be  remarked  that 
the  amusements  of  the  Arabians  at  the  present  day 
are  equally  trifling,  such  as  blind  man's  burl, 
hiding  the  ring,  &c.  (Wellsted's  Arabia,  i.  160). 

Public  games  were  altogether  foreign  to  the 
spirit  of  Hebrew  institutions :  the  great  religious 
festivals  supplied  the  pleasurable  excitement  and 
the  feelings  of  national  union  which  rendered  the 
games  of  Greece  so  popular,  and  at  the  same  time 
inspired  the  persuasion  that  such  gatherings  should 
be  exclusively  connected  with  religious  duties.  Ac- 
cordingly the  erection  of  a  gymnasium  by  Jason, 
in  which  the  discus  was  chiefly  practised,  was 
looked  upon  as  a  heathenish  proceeding  (1  Mace.  i. 
14  ;  2  Mace.  iv.  12-14),  and  the  subsequent  erection 
by  Herod  of  a  theatre  and  amphitheatre  at  Jeru- 
salem (Joseph.  Ant.  xv.  8,  §1),  as  well  as  at 
Caesaiea  (Ant.  xv.  9,  §6;  B.  J.  i.  21,  §8)  and  at 
Berytus  {Ant.  xix.  7,  §5),  in  each  of  which  a 
quinquennial  festival  iu  honour  of  Caesar  was 
celebrated  with  the  usual  contests  in  gymnastics. 
chariot-races,  music,  and  with  wild  beasts, —  was 
viewed  with  the  deepest  aversion  by  the  general 
body  of  the  Jews  {Ant.  xv.  8,  §1). 

The  entire  absence  of  verbal  or  histoiical  refer- 
ence to  this  subject  in  the  Gospels  shows  how  little 
it  entered  into  the  life  of  the  Jews :  some  of  the 
foreign  Jews,  indeed,  imbibed  a  taste  for  theatrical 
representations ;  Josephus  (  Vita,  3)  speaks  of  one 
AKturus,  an  actor  of  farces  {(iifioAoyos),  who  was 
iu  high  favour  with  Nero.  Among  the  Greeks 
the  rage  for  theatrical  exhibitions  was  such  that 
every  city  of  any  size  possessed  its  theatre  aud 
stadium.  At  Kphesus  an  annual  contest  (ayuif 
Kcd  yvfiuiicos  Kal  fxovffiic6s,  Thucyd.  iii.  104)  was 
held  in  hono'ur  of  Diana,  which  was  superintended 
by  officers  named  'Acrtdpxat  (Acts  xix.  .">1  ;  A.  Y . 
"chief  of  Asia").  [Asiarciiak.]  It  is  probable 
that  St.  Paul  was  present  when  these  games  were 
proceeding,  as  they  were  celebrated  in  the  month 
of  May  (comp.  Acts  xx.  16  ;  Conybeare  aud  How- 
sun's  St.  Paul,  ii.  81).  A  direct  reference  to  the 
exhibitions  that  took  place  en  such  occasions  is 
made  in  the  term  edvpLO/j.dxv<ra  (1  Cor.  xv.  32). 
The  0-npio/xdxoi  were  sometimes  professional  per- 
formers, but  more  usually  criminals  (Joseph.  Int. 
XV.  8,  §1)  who  were  exposed  to  lions  and  other 
wild  beasts  without  any  means  of  defence  (Cic. 
Pro  Scxt.  64;  TertulL  Apol.  '■').  Political  of- 
fenders were  so  treated,  and  Josephus  (B.J.  vii. 
3,  §1)  records  that  no  less  than  2500  Jews  were 
destroyed  in  the  theatre  at  Caesarea  by  this  and 
similar  methods.  The  expression  as  used  by  St. 
Paid  is  usually  taken  as  metaphorical,  both  on 
account  of  the  qualifying  words  tear'  avQponrov, 
the  absence  of  all  reference  to  the  occurrence  in 
the  Acts,  and  the  rights  of  citizenship  which  St. 
Paul  enjoyed:  none  of  these  arguments  can  be 
belli  to  be  absolutely  conclusive,  while  on  the  other 
hand  the  term  Q-npiofxax^v  is  applied  iu  its  literal 
s,ense  in  the  Apostolical  Epistles  (Ign.  ad  Eph.  1  ; 
ad  Trail.  Hi;  Mart.  Polyc.  3;  cf.  Euseb.  /■:.  //. 


GAMES 


649 


iv.  15),  and,  where  metaphorically  used  (Ign.  ad 
Pom.  5),  an  explanation  is  added  which  implies 
that  it  would  otherwise  have  been  taken  literally. 
Certainly  St.  Paid  was  exposed  to  some  extraor- 
dinary suffering  at  Ephesus,  which  he  describes  in 
language  borrowed  from,  if  not  descriptive  of,  a  real 
case  of  6r]pi.op.axLa;  for  he  speaks  of  himself  as  a 
criminal  condemned  to  death  {i-irtOavariovs,  1  Cor. 
iv.  9  ;  an6Kpifj.a  rov  Qava/rov  iffx^xajjav,  -  Cor. 
i.  9),  exhibited  previously  to  the  execution  of  the 
sentence  ( aTre5ei|tj/,  1  Cor.  I.  c),  reserved  to  the 
conclusion  of  the  games  (ecrxdrovs)  as  was  usual 
with  the  thcriomachi  (novissimos  elegit,  velut  bes- 
tiarios,  Tertull.  de  Pudic.  14),  and  thus  made  a 
spectacle  (Oearpov  iyeviidrgxeu).  Lightfoot  {Ex- 
ercit.  on  1  Cor.  xv.  32)  points  to  the  friendliness 
of  the  Asiarchs  at  a  subsequent  period  (Acts  xix. 
31)  as  probably  resulting  from  some  wonderful 
preservation  which  they  had  witnessed.  Nero 
selected  this  mode  of  executing  the  Christians  at 
Rome,  with  the  barbarous  aggravation  that  the 
victims  were  dressed  up  in  the  skins  of  beasts  (Tac. 
Ann.  xv.  44).  St.  Paul  may  possibly  allude  to 
his  escape  from  such  torture  in  2  Tim.  iv.  17). 
[Diet,  of  Ant.  art.  Bestiarii.] 

St.  Paul's  Epistles  abound  with  allusions  to  the 
Greek  contests,  borrowed  probably  from  the  Isth- 
mian games,  at  which  he  may  well  have  been 
present  during  his  first  visit  to  Corinth  (Conybeare 
and  Howson,  ii.  206).  These  contests  (6  aySiv — a 
word  of  general  import,  applied  by  St.  Paid,  not  to 
the  fight,  as  the  A.  V.  has  it,  but  to  the  race,  2 
Tim.  iv.  7;  1  Tim.  vi.  12)  were  divided  into  two 
classes,  the  pancratium,  consisting  of  boxing  and 
wrestling,  and  the  pentathlon,  consisting  of  leaping, 
running,  quoiting,  hurling  the  spear,  and  wrestling. 
The  competitors  (6  kycovi^^vos,  1  Cor.  ix.  25  : 
iav  aQAfj  tis,  2  Tim.  ii.  5)  required  a  long  aud 
severe  course  of  previous  training  (cf.  ffw/xartKy 
yvfj.va.ffia,  1  Tim.  iv.  8),  during  which  a  parti- 
cular diet  was  enforced  (wdvTa  iyKpaTevtrai, 
SovAayuyci,  1  Cor.  ix.  25,  27).  Iu  the  Olympic 
contests  these  preparatory  exercises  (irpoyv/j.t'da- 
fiara)  extended  over  a  period  of  ten  months, 
during  the  last  of  which  they  were  conducted 
under  the  supervision  of  appointed  officers.  The 
contests  took  place  in  the  presence  of  a  vast  multi- 
tude of  spectators  (irepLKeiixevov  vtcpos  fiapTvpoiv, 
Heb.  xii.  1),  the  competitors  being  the  spectacle 
[6ea.Tpov  =  8ta[xa,  1  Cor.  iv.  9;  BeaCS/xevoL.  Heb. 
\.  33).  The  games  were  opened  by  the  proclama- 
tion of  a  herald  (Kypv^as.  1  Cor.  ix.  'J7),  whose 
office  it  was  to  proclaim  the  name  and  country  of 
each  candidate,  and  especially  to  announce  the 
name  of  the  victor  before  tin'  assembled  multitude. 
Certain  conditions  and  rules  were  laid  down  for 
the  different  contests,  as,  that  no  bribe  be  offered 
to  a  competitor;  that  in  boxing  the  combatants 
should  not  lay  hold  of  one  another,  &c. ;  any 
infringement  cf  these  rules  {eav  ny  pu/xifius 
aOXyffri,  2  Tim.  ii.  .'>  involved  a  loss  (it'  the  prize, 
the  competitor  being  pronounced  disqualified  (a.86- 
Kifxos,  1  Cor.  i\.  27;  indignus  brabeo,  Ben  gel.). 
The  judge  was  selected  tin-  his  spotless  integrity 
(6  SiKaios  Kpnrjs,  2  Tim.  iv.  8):  his  office  was  1" 
decide  any  disputes  (/3paj8eWro>,  Col.  iii.  15;  A.V. 
"rule")  and  to  give  the  prize  (to  /3paj9eIW,  1  ('or. 
ix.  24;  Phil.  iii.  14), consisting  of  a  crown  (crre- 
(pavos,  2  Tim.  ii.  .r>,  iv.  8)  of  leaves  of  wild  olive  at 
the  Olympic  games,  and  of  pine  or,  at  one  period, 
ivy  at  the  Isthmian  games.  These  crowns,  though 
perishable  (<pdapr6v,  1  Cor.  ix.  25;  cf.   1   Pet.  v. 

1  9  U 


650 


GAMES 


4),  were  always  regarded  as  a  source '  of  unfailing 
exultation  (Phil.  iv.    1  ;    1  Thess.   ii.   19):  palm 


branches  were  also  placed  in  the  hands  of  the 
victors  (Rev.  vii.  9).  St.  Paul  alludes  to  two  only 
out  of  the  five  contests,  boxing  and  running,  most 
frequently  to  the  latter.  In  boxing  (wvyfj.^  ;  cf. 
irvKTevui,  1  Cor.  ix.  26),  the  hands  and  arms  were 
bound  with  the  cestus,  a  band  of  leather  studded 
with  nails,  which  very  much  increased  the  severity 
of  the  blow,  and  rendered  a  bruise  inevitable 
(inrunridfe,  1  Cor.  I.  c. ;  int&ina  =  ra  virb  rbvs 
tiiras  tuiv  Trhriywv  txurl->  Pollux,  Onom.  ii.  4,  52). 
The  skill  of  the  combatant  was  shown  in  avoiding 
the  blows  of  his  adversary  so  that  they  were 
expended  on  the  air  (ovk  &s  ae'pa  h~4pwv,  1  Cor. 
I.  c).  The  foot-race  (SpS/xos,  2  Tim.  iv.  7,  a 
word,  peculiar  to  St.  Paul ;  cf.  Acts  xiii.  25,  xx. 


24)  was  run  in  the  stadium  (iv  o-raSiw ;  A.  V. 
"  race  ;"  1  Cor.  ix.  24),  an  oblong  area,  open  at  one 
end' and  rounded  in  a  semicircular  form  at  the 
other,  along  the  sides  of  which  were  the  raised 
tiers  of  seats  on  which  the  spectators  sat.  The 
race  was  either  from  one  end  of  the  stadium  to 
the  other,  or,  in  the  b"iav\os,  back  again  to  the 
starting-post.  There  may  be  a  latent  reference 
to   the    SlavXos    in    the   expression    b.pxvy°v  Ktxl 


GAMMADIMS 

TfAeioiT^i/  (Heb.  xii.  2),  Jesus  being,  as  it  were, 
the  starting-point  and  the  goal,  the  locus  a  quo 
and  the  locus  ad  quern  of  the  Christian's  course. 
The  judge  was  stationed  by  the  goal  (o~ko-k6v  ; 
A.  V.  '"mark";  Phil.  iii.  14),  which  was  clearly 
visible  from  one  end  of  the  stadium  to  the  other, 
so  that  the  runner  could  make  straight  for  it 
(ovk  &s  aSr/Mis,  1  Cor.  ix.  26).  St.  Paul  brings 
vividly  before  our  minds  the  earnestness  of  the 
competitor,  having  cast  off  every  encumbrance 
(vyKov  aTrodefievoi  Tvavra),  especially  any  closelv- 
fitting  robe  (tinrepin-TtXTov,  Heb.  xii.  1  ;  cf.  Conv- 
beare  and  Howson,  ii.  54o),  holding  on  his  comse 
uninterruptedly  (Sh&kw,  Phil.  iii.  12),  his  eye 
fixed  on  the  distant  goal  (cKpopwurts,  airefiAeire, 
Heb.  xii.  2,  xi.  26;  curb  notat  longe,  Bengel), 
unmindful  of  the  space  already  past  (to  (jl\v  biritrui 
e-KihavQavoixtvos,  Phil.  I.  c),  and  stretching  for- 
ward with  bent  body  (toIs  Si  efx-rrpoadiv  iireK- 
TeifSufvos),  his  perseveiance  (oY  vvofj.ot'rjs,  Heb. 
xii.  1),  his  joy  at  the  completion  of  the  course 
fjueTo  XaP"s>  ^<:t:s  xx-  24),  his  exultation  as  he 
not  only  receives  {ZXajSov,  Phil.  iii.  12)  but  actually 
grasps  (KaraXafiai,  not  "  apprehend,"  as  A.  V. 
Phil.;  iinAafiov,  1  Tim.  vi.  12,  19)  the  crown 
which  had  been  set  apart  (airoKeirai,  2  Tim.  iv. 
8;  for  the  victor.  [W.  L.  B.] 

GAMMADIMS  (DH»J).  This  word  occurs 
only  in  Ez.  xxvii.  11 ,  where  it  is  said  of  Tyre  "  the 
Gammadims  were  in  thy  towers."  A  variety  of  ex- 
planations of  the  term  have  been  offered.  (1.)  One 
class  turns  upon  a  supposed  connexion  with  "TOil 
a  cubit,  as  though  =  cubit  high  men,  whence  the 
Vulg.  has  Pygmaei.  Michaelis  thinks  that  the 
apparent  height  alone  is  referred  to,  with  the 
intention  of  conveying  an  idea  of  the  great  height 
of  the  towers.  Spencer  (de  Leg.  Heb.  Bit.  ii. 
cap.  24)  explains  it  of  small  images  of  the  tutelar 
gods,  like  the  Lares  of  the  Romans.  (2.)  A  second 
class  treats  it  as  a  geographical  or  local  term  ; 
Grotius  holds  Gamad  to  he  a  Hebraized  form  of 
the  name  A  neon,  a  Phoenician  town;  the  Chaldee 
paraphrase  has  Cappadocians,  as  though  reading 
QHSJ1  ;  Fuller  (Miscell.  vi.  3)  identifies  them  as 
the  inhabitants  of  Gamala  (Plin.  v.  14);  and  again 
the  word  has  been  .broken  up  into  DHO  Oil  =also 
the  Medes.  (H.)  A  third  class  gives  a  more  general 
sense  to  the  word;  Gesenius  (Thesaur.  p.  292) 
connects  it  with  *10i,  a  bough,  whence  the  sense  of 
brave  warriors,  hostcs  arborum  instar  ciedentes. 
Hitzig  (comm.  in  loc.)  suggests  deserters  (ueber- 
laufer)  and  draws  attention  to  the  preposition  in 
as  favouring  this  sense:  he  inclines,  however,  to  the 
opinion  that  the  prophet  had  in  view  Cant.  iv.  4, 
and  that  the  word  D'l"yi33  in  that  passage  has  been 
successivelv  corrupted  into  D^OK*,  as  read  by  the 
LXX.  which  gives  r/wAaKes,  and  DHJSjl,  as  in  the 
present  text.     After  all.  the  rendering  in  the  LXX. 


Castle  of  a  maritime  people,  with  the  shields  hanging  upon  the 
(From  a  bas-relief  at  kuuyunjlk.    Layanl.) 


GAMUL 

furnishes  the  simplest  explanation:  the  Lutheran 
translation  has  followed  this,  giving  wachter.  The 
following  words  of  the  verse — "  they  hanged  their 
shields  upon  thy  walls  round  ahout" — are  illus- 
trated by  one  of  the  bas-reliefs  found  at  Kouyunjik 
(See  preceding  cut).  [W.  L.  B.] 

GA'MUL  p-1D3  ;  6  Va^ovX,  Alex.  TafiovnK  ; 
Gamut),  a  priest ;  the  leader  of  the  22nd  course  in 
the  service  of  the  sanctuary  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  17). 

GAR  (Taj;  Sasus).  "  Sons  of  Gar''  are  named 
among  the  "sons  of  the  servants  of  Solomon"  in 
1  Esd.  v.  34.  There  are  not  in  the  lists  of  Ezra 
and  Nehemiah  any  names  corresponding  to  the  two 
preceding  and  the  six  succeeding  this  name.  It 
does  not  appear  whence  the  form  of  the  name  in 
the  A.  V.  is  derived. 

GAEDEN  ({J,  H3il,  TIM  ;  kTittos).  Gardens 
in  the  East,  as  the  Hebrew  word  indicates,  are 
inclosures,  on  the  outskirts  of  towns,  planted  with 
various  trees  and  shrubs.  Erom  the  allusions  in 
the  Bible  we  learn  that  they  were  surrounded  by 
hedges  of  thorn  (Is.  v.  5),  or  walls  of  stone  (Prov. 
xxiv.  31).  For  further  protection  lodges  (Is.  i.  8  ; 
Lam.  ii.  6)  or  watchtowers  (Mark  xii.  l)were  built 
in  them,  in  which  sat  the  keeper  ("1VJ,  Job  xxvii. 
18)  to  drive  away  the  wild  beasts  and  robbers,  as 
is  the  case  to  this  day.  Layard  (Kin.  $  Bab. 
p.  365)  gives  the  following  description  of  a  scene 
which  he  witnessed : — "  The  broad  silver  river 
wound  through  the  plain,  the  great  ruin  cast  its 
dark  shadows  in  the  moonlight,  the  lights  of  '  the 
lodges  in  the  gardens  of  cucumbers '  flickered  at 
our  feet,  and  the  deep  silence  was  only  broken  by 
the  sharp  report  of  a  rifle  fired  by  the  watchful 
guards  to  frighten  away  the  wild  boars  that  lurked 
in  the  melon  beds."  The  scarecrow  also  was  an 
invention  not  unknown  {TrpofSa(TKC.viov,  Bar.  vi. 
70). 

The  gardens  of  the  Hebrews  weie  planted  with 
flowers  and  aromatic  shrubs  (Cant.  vi.  2,  iv.  16), 
besides  olives,  fig-trees,  nuts,  or  walnuts  (('ant.  vi. 
11),  pomegranates,  and  others  for  domestic  use 
(Ex.  xxiii.  11;  Jer.  xxix.  "> ;  Am..ix.  14).  The 
quince,  medlar,  citron,  almond,  and  service  trees 
are  among  those  enumerated  in  the  Mishna  as  cul- 
tivated in  Palestine  {Kilaim,  i.  §4).  Gardens  of 
herbs,  or  kitchen-gardens,  are  mentioned  in  Dent. 
xi.  10,  and  1  K.  xxi.  2.  Cucumbers  were  grown 
in  th. 'in  (Is.  i.  8;  Bar.  vi.  70),  and  probably  also 
melons,  leeks,  onions,  and  garlic,  which  are  spoken 
of(.\imi.xi.  .">)  as  the  productions  ..I' a  neighbouring 
country.  In  addition  to  these,  the  lettuce,  mustard- 
plan*  (Luke  xiii.  19),  coriander,  endive,  one  of  the 
Litter  herbs  eaten  with  the  paschal  lamb,  and  rue, 
are  particularised  in  the  precepts  of  the  .Mishna, 
though  it  is  not  certain  that  they  were  all.  Btrictly 
speaking,  cultivated  in  the  gardens  of  Palestine 
{Kilaim,  i.  §§2.  8),  It  is  well  known  that,  in  the 
tin f  the  Romans,  the  art  of  gardening  was  car- 
ried to  great  perfection  in  Syria.  Pliny  (xx.  16) 
says,  "Syria  in  hortis  operosissima  est;  iudeque 
proverbium  Graecis,  '  M ulta  Syrorum  olera; '"  and 
again  (xii.  54)  he  describes  the  balsam  plant  as 

growing  in  Judaea   al and  there  only  in  two 

royal  gardens.  Strabo  I '  w  i.  p.  763  .  alluding  to 
one  of  these  gardens  near  Jericho,  calls  it  o  toG 
fSaAtra/xov  TrapdSeuros.  The  rose-garden  iii  Jeru- 
salem, mentioned  in  the  Mishna  {Maaseroth,  ii. 
§5),  and  said  to  have  been  situated  westward  of  the 


GARDEN 


051 


temple  mount,  is  remarkable  as  having  been  one  of 
the  few  gardens  which,  from  the  time  of  the  pro- 
phets, existed  within  the  city  walls  (Lighttbnt, 
Hov.  Heb.  on  Matt.  xxvi.  36).  They  were  usually 
planted  without  the  gates,  according  to  the  gloss 
quoted  by  Lightfoot,  on  account  of  the  fetid  smell 
arising  from  the  weeds  thrown  out  from  them, 
or  from  the  manure  employed  in  their  cultivation. 

The  gate  Gennath,  mentioned  by  Josephus  (B.  J. 
v.  4,  §2),  is  supposed  to  have  derived  its  name 
from  the  rose-garden  already  mentioned,  or  from 
the  fact  of  its  leading  to  the  gardens  without  the 
city.  It  was  near  the  garden-ground  by  the  Gate 
of  the  Women  that  Titus  was  surprised  by  the 
Jews  while  reconnoitring  the  city.  The  trench  by 
which  it  was  surrounded  cut  oft'  his  retreat  (Jos. 
B.  J.  v.  2,  §2).  But  of  all  the  gardens  of  Pales- 
tine none  is  possessed  of  associations  more  sacred 
and  imperishable  than  the  garden  of  Gethsemane, 
beside  the  oil-presses  on  the  slopes  of  Olivet.  Eight 
aged  olive  trees  mark  the  site  which  tradition  has 
connected  with  that  memorable  garden-scene,  and 
their  gnarled  stems  and  almost  leafless  branches 
attest  an  antiquity  as  venerable  as  that  which  is 
claimed  for  them.     [Gethsejiane.] 

In  addition  to  the  ordinary  productions  of  the 
country,  we  are  tempted  to  infer  from  Is.  xvii.  10 
that  in  some  gardens  care  was  bestowed  on  the 
rearing  of  exotics.  To  this  conclusion  the  descrip- 
tion of  the  gardens  of  Solomon  in  the  Targum  on 
Eccl.  ii.  5,  6  seems  to  point:  "  I  made  me  well- 
watered  gardens  and  paradises,  and  sowed  there  all 
kinds  of  plants,  some  for  use  of  eating,  and  some  for 
use  of  drinking,  and  some  for  purposes  of  medicine  ; 
all  kinds  of  plants  of  spices.  I  planted  in  them 
trees  of  emptiness  (t.  e.  not  fruit-bearing),  and  all 
trees  of  spices  which  the  spectres  and  demons 
brought  me  from  India,  and  every  tree  which  pro- 
duces fruit;  and  its  border  was  from  the  wall  of 
the  citadel,  which  is  in  Jerusalem,  by  the  waters  of 
Siloah.  I  chose  reservoirs  of  water,  which  behold  ! 
are  for  watering  the  trees  and  the  plants,  and  I 
made  me  fish-ponds  of  water,  some  of  them  also  for 
the  plantation  which  rears  the  trees  to  water  it." 

In  a  climate  like  that  of  Palestine  the  neighbour- 
hood of  water  was  an  important  consideration  in 
selecting  the  site  of  a  garden.  The  nomenclature 
of  the  country  has  perpetuated  this  fact  in  the 
name  Engannim — "the  fountain  of  gardens"— the 
modern./,/,///  ,,f.  Cant.  iv.  1.".).  To  the  old  Hebrew 
poets  "  a  well-watered  garden,"  or  "  a  tree  planted 
by  the  waters,"  was  an  emblem  of  luxuriant  fertility 
and  material  prosperity  (Is.  lviii.  11;  Jer.  xvii". 
S,  xxxi.  12);  while  no  figure  more  graphically 
conveyed  the  idea  of  dreary  barrenness  or  misery 
than  "a  garden  that  hath' no  water"  (Is.  i.  30  . 
From  a  neighbouring  stream  orcistern  were  supplied 
the  channels  or  conduits,  by  which  the  gardens 
were  intersected,  and  the  water  was  thus  conveyed 
to  all  parts  !  1's.  i.  3;  Eccl.  ii.  6;  Ecclus.  xxiv. 
30).  It  is  matter  of  doubt  what  i-  the  exact  mean- 
ing oi  the  expression  "to  water  with  the  foot"  in 
Deut.  \i.  In.  Niebuhr  (Descr.  ■/■■  FArabie,  p. 
ci  ibes  a  wiieel  winch  is  i  mployed  for  irri- 
gating gardens  where  the  water  is  not  deep,  and 
which  is  \v,.rked  by  the  hands  and  feet  alter  the 
manner  of  a  treadmill,  the  men  ••  pulling  f)„,  upper 
put  towards  them  with  their  hands,  and  pushing 
with  their  )',.,.(  upon  the  lower  pail  "  |  Robi 
ii.  226).  This  mode  of  irrigation  mighl  b 
scribed  a-  "watering  with  the  foot."  But  the 
method  practised  by  the  agriculturists  in  Oman,  as 

2   [)  2 


652 


GARDEN 


narrated  by  Wellsted  (Trao.  i.  281),  answers  more 
nearly  to  this  description,  and  serves  to  illustrate 
Prov.  xxi.  1 :  "  After  ploughing,  they  form  the 
ground  with  a  spade  into  small  squares  with  ledges 
on  either  side,  along  which  the  water  is  conducted 
....  When  one  of  the  hollows  is  filled,  the  peasant 
stops  the  supply  by  turning  up  the  earth  with  his 
foot,  and  thus  opens  a  channel  into  another." 

The  orange,  lemon,  and  mulberry  groves  which 
lie  around  and  behind  Jaffa  supply,  perhaps,  the 
most  striking  peculiarities  of  oriental  gardens — gar- 
dens which  Maundrell  describes  as  being  "  a  con- 
fused miscellany  of  trees  jumbled  together,  with- 
out either  posts,  walks,  arbours,  or  anything  of 
art  or  design,  so  that  they  seem  like  thickets  rather 
than  gardens"  {Early  Tram,  in  Pal.  p.  416).  The 
Persian  wheels,  which  are  kept  ever  working,  day 
and  night,  by  mules,  to  supply  the  gardens  with 
water,  leave  upon  the  traveller's  ear  a  most  en- 
during impression  (Lynch,  Exp.  to  Jordan,  p. 
441 ;  Siddon's  Memoir,  187). 

The  law  against  the  propagation  of  mixed  species 
(Lev.  xix.  19;  Deut.  xxii.  9,  11)  gave  rise  to 
numerous  enactments  in  the  Mishna  to  ensure  its 
observance.  The  portions  of  the  field  or  garden,  in 
which  the  various  plants  were  sown,  were  separated 
by  light  fences  of  reed,  ten  palms  in  height,  the 
distance  between  the  reeds  being  not  more  than 
three  palms,  so  that  a  kid  could  not  enter  (Kilaim, 
iv.  §§3,  4). 

The  kings  and  nobles  had  their  country-houses 
surrounded  by  gardens  (1  K.  xxi.  1  ;  2  K.  ix.  27), 
and  these  were  used  on  festal  occasions  (Cant.  v.  1). 
So  intimately,  indeed,  were  gardens  associated  with 


GARDEN 

festivity  that  horticulture  and  conviviality  are,  in 
the  Talmud,  denoted  by  the  same  term  (cf.  Buxtorf, 
Lex.  Talm.  s.v.  JYlD'HN).  It  is  possible,  how- 
ever, that  this  may  be  a  merely  accidental  coinci- 
dence. The  garden  of  Ahasuerus  was  in  a  court  of 
the  palace  (Esth.  i.  5),  adjoining  the  banqueting- 
hall  (Esth.  vii.  7).  In  Babylon  the  gardens  and 
orchards  were  inclosed  by  the  city-walls  (Layard, 
Nin.  ii.  246).  Attached  to  the  house  of  Joachim 
was  a  garden  or  orchard  (Sus.  4) — "  a  garden  in- 
closed "  (Cant.  iv.  12) — provided  with  baths  and 
other  appliances  of  luxury  (Sus.  15;  cf.  2  Sam. 
xi.  2). 

In  large  gardens  the  orchard  ( D^TS,  TrapaSeiaos) 
was  probably,  as  in  Egypt,  the  inclosure  set  apart 
for  the  cultivation  of  date  and  sycamore  trees,  and 
fruit-trees  of  various  kinds  (Cant.  iv.  13  ;  Eccl.  ii. 
5).  Schroeder,  in  the  preface  to  his  Thesaurus 
Linguae  Armenicae,  asserts  that  the  word  "  pardes" 
is  of  Armenian  origin,  and  denotes  a  garden  near  a 
house,  planted  with  herbs,  trees,  and  flowers.  It 
is  applied  by  Diodorus  Siculus  (ii.  10)  .and  Berosus 
(quoted  by  Jos.  Ant.  x.  ii.  §1),  to  the  famous 
hanging  gardens  of  Babylon.  Xenophon  (Anab. 
i.  2  §7)  describes  the  "paradise"  at  Celaenae  in 
Phrygia,  where  Cyrus  had  a  palace,  as  a  large  pre- 
serve full  of  wild  beasts;  and  Aulus  Gellius  (ii. 
20)  gives  "  vivaria"  as  the  equivalent  of  irapaSeicroi 
(cf.  Philostratus,  Vit.  Apoll.  Tyan.  i.  38).  The 
officer  in  charge  of  such  a  domain  was  called  "  the 
keeper  of  the  paradise  "  (Neh.  ii.  8). 

The  ancient  Hebrews  made  use  of  gardens  as 
places  of  burial  (John  xix.  41).  Manasseh  and  his 
son    Anion   were   buried   in   the   garden  of  their 


mmmmmmtmiMmwi 


An  Egyptian  'jj-mlen,  with  the  vneynrd  and  other  enchi 


*  of  water,  a  temple  or  chapel,  and  a  small  house.     fRowtllttl.1 


•   GAREB 

palace,  the  garden  of  Uzza  (2  K.  xxi.  18,  26  ; 
iy  rots  avrov  irapaSeiffois,  Jos.  Ant.  x.  3,  §2). 
The  retirement  of  gardens  rendered  them  favourite 
places  for  devotion  (Matt.  xxvi.  36  ;  John  xviii.  1  ; 
cf.  Gen.  xxiv.  63).  In  the  degenerate  times  of  the 
monarchy  they  were  selected  as  the  scenes  of  idola- 
trous worship  (Is.  i.  29,  lxv.  3,  lxvi.  17),  and 
images  of  the  idols  were  probably  erected  in  them. 

Gardeners  are  alluded  to  in  Job  xxvii.  18  and 
John  xx.  15.  But  how  far  the  art  of  gardening 
was  carried  among  the  Hebrews  we  have  few  means 
of  ascertaining.  That  they  were  acquainted  with 
the  process  of  grafting  is  evident  from  Kom.xi.  17, 
24,  as  well  as  from  the  minute  prohibitions  of  the 
Mishna;"  and  the  method  of  propagating  plants  by 
layers  or  cuttings  was  not  unknown  (Is.  xvii.  10). 
Buxtorf  says  that  ^D^IX,  Srtsin  (Mishua,  Biccu- 
rim,  i.  §2)  were  gardeners  who  tended  and  looked 
after  gardens  on  consideration  of  receiving  some 
poition  of  the  fruit  (Lex.  Talm.  s.  v.)  But  that 
gardening  was  a  special  means  of  livelihood  is  clear 
from  a  proverb  which  contains  a  warning  against 
rash  speculations:  "  Who  hires  a  garden  eats  the 
birds;  who  hires  gardens,  him  the  birds  eat"  (Dukes, 
Rabbin.  Blumenlese,  p.  141). 

The  traditional  gardens  and  pools  of  Solomon, 
supposed  to  be  alluded  to  in  Eccl.  ii.  5,  6,  are  shown 
in  the  Wady  Urtds  (i.  e.  Hortus),  about  an  hour  and 
quarter  to  the  south  of  Bethlehem  (cf.  Jos.  Ant.  viii. 
7,  §3).  The  Arabs  perpetuate  the  tradition  in  the 
name  of  a  neighbouring  hill,  which  they  call  "  Je- 
bel-el-Fureidis,"  or  "Mountain  of  the  Paradise" 
(Stanley,  Sin-.  8[  Pal.  p.  166).  Maundrell  is  sceptical 
on  the  subject  of  the  gardens  (Early  Trav.  in  Pal. 
p.  457),  but  they  find  a  champion  in  Van  de  Velde, 
who  asserts  that  they  "  were  not  confined  to  the 
Waili  Urtds;  the  hill-slopes  to  the  left  and  right 
also,  with  their  heights  and  hollows,  must  have 
been  covered  with  trees  and  plants,  as  is  shown  by 
the  names  they  still  bear,  as  '  peach-hill,'  '  nut- 
vale,'  '  fig-vale,'"  &c.  (Syria  <$■  Pal.  ii.  27). 

The  "king's  garden,"  mentioned  in  2  K.  xxv.  4, 
Neh.  iii.  15,  Jer.  xxxiw  4,  lii.  7,  was  near  the  pool 
of  Siloam,  at  the  month  of  the  Tyropoeon,  north  of 
Bir  Ejrub,  and  was  formed  by  the  meeting  of  the 
valleys  of  Jehoshaphat  and  Ben  Hinnom  (Wilson, 
Lands  of  the  Bible,  i.  498).  Josephus  places  the 
scene  of  the  feast  of  Adonijah  at  Enrogel,  "  beside 
the  fountain  that  is  in  the  royal  paradise  "  (Ant. 
vii.  14  §4;  cf.  also  ix.  10.  §4).  [W.  A.  W.] 

GA'REB  (3}3  ;  rape/3),  one  of  the  heroes  of 
David's  army  '  2  Sam.  xxiii.  38).  He  is  described 
as  the  (A.  V.  "an")  Ithrite,  et  ipse  Jethrites, 
Vulg.  This  is  generally  explained  as  a  patronymic 
=  son  of  Jether.  It  may  be  observed,  however, 
that  Ira,  whf.  is  also  called  the  Ithrite  in  this 
passage,  is  called  the  Jairite  in  2  Sam.  xx.  26,  and 
that  tli''  readings  of  the  I, XX.  vary  in  the  former 
passage  'ledpaios,  'Edtpaws,  and,  'EOevcuos.  These 
variations  support  to  a  certain  extent  the  sense 
given  in  the  Syriac  version,  which  reads  in  2  Sam. 
xx.  26  ^IJVn,  i.  e.  an  inhabitant  of  Jathir  in  the 
mountainous  district  of  Judah.  [W.  L.  1'..] 

GA'REB,  THE  HILL  (2~)l  rVV33  ;  frovvoi 
Taprili;  collis  GareV),  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Jeru- 
salem, named  only  in  Jer.  xxxi.  w.i-.M.J 

*  It  was  forbidden  to  graft  trees  on  trees  of  a  dif- 
ferent kind,  or  t'>  graft  vegetables  on  trees  or  tires 
on  vegetables  (Kilaim,  i.  *j§7,  8). 


GATE 


65  i 


GARIZ'IM  (rapi(ii>,  Alex,  rapi&iv;  Garizin); 
2  Mace.  v.  23  ;   vi.  2.     [GEBIZIM.] 

GARLICK  (D-1£>;  ra  (tk6pM;  allid),  men- 
tioned in  Num.  xi.  5  as  one  of  the  Egyptian  plants, 
the  loss  of  which  was  regretted  by  the  mixed  multi- 
tude at  Taberah.  It  is  the  Allium  Sativum  of  Lin- 
naeus, which  abounds  in  Egypt  (see  Cels.  Hierobot. 
pt.  ii.  p.  52  seq.),  a  fact  evident  from  Herodotus 
(ii.  125),  when  he  states  that  the  allowance  to  the 
workmen  for  this  and  other  vegetables  was  in- 
scribed on  the  great  pyramid.  [W.  D.] 

GARMENT.     [Dress.] 

GAR'MITE,  THE  0»"l|f] ;  Tapfxi,  Alex. 
(Trap/xi ;  Garmi).  Keilah  the  Garmite,  i.  e.  the 
descendant  of  Gerem  (see  the  Targum  on  this  word), 
is  mentioned  in  the  obscure  genealogical  lists  of  the 
families  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  iv.  19).  Keilah  is  appa- 
rently the  place  of  that  name  ;  but  there  is  no  clue 
to  the  reason  of  the  soubriquet  here  given  it. 

GARRISON.  The  Hebrew  words  so  rendered 
in  the  A.  V.  are  derivatives  from  the  root  natzab  to 
"  place,  erect,"  which  may  be  applied  to  a  variety 
of  objects.  ,(1.)  Mattzab  and  mattzabah  (rQ-'SD 
3-¥)0)  undoubtedly  mean  a  "  garrison,"  or  f'ui ti- 
tled post  (l  Sam.  xiii.  23,  xiv.  1,  4,  12,  15;  2 
Sam.  xxiii.  14).  (2.)  Netzib  (^Si)  is  also  used 
for  a  "  garrison"  (in  1  Chr.  xi.  16),  but  elsewhere 
for  a  "  column  "  erected  in  an  enemy's  country  as  a 
token  of  conquest,  like  the  stelae  erected  by  Sesostris 
(Her.  ii.  102,  106):  the  LXX.  correctly  gives 
ava<TTt)fjLa  (1  Sam.  x.  5)  :  Jonathan  broke  in  pieces 
a  column  which  the  Philistines  had  erected  on  a 
hill  (1  Sam.  xiii.  3).  (3.)  The  same  word  else- 
where means  "  officers  "  placed  over  a  vanquished 
people  (2  Sam.  viii.  6,  14 ;  1  Chr.  xviii.  13; 
2  Chr.  xvii.  2) :  the  presence  of  a  "  garrison  "  in 
such  cases  is  implied  but  not  expressed  in  the  word 
(comp.  1  K.  iv.  7, 19).  (4.)  Mattzebah  (iUKC) 
means  a  "pillar:"  in  Ez.  xxvi.  11,  reference  is 
made  to  the  beautiful  pillars  of  the  Tyrian  temples, 
some  of  which  attracted  the  attention  of  Herodotus 
(ii.  44).  [W.  L.  B.J 

GASH'MU  0»K?!  ;  Gossem,  Neh.  vi.  6. 
Assumed  by  all  the  lexicons  to  be  a  variation  of 
the  name  of  Geshem  (see  vers.  1,  2).  The  words 
"  and  Gashmu  saith  "  are  omitted  in  both  MSS.  of 
the  LXX. 

GA'TAM  (Driyjl  ;  rodt&fi,  Towddfi,  Alex. 
ToOd/x ;  Gatham,  Gathan),  the  fourth  son  of  Eli- 
phaz  the  son  of  Esau  (Gen.  xxxvi.  11  ;  1  Chr.  i.  36), 
and  one  of  the  "dukes"  of  Eliphaz  (Gen.  xxxvi.  16). 
By  Knobel  (Genesis,  ad  loc.)  the  name  is  compared 

with  Jodam  ((,]l\^>),  a  tribe  inhabiting  a  part  oi 

the  mountains  of  Sherah  called  Hismah,  But  in 
this  case  the  Am  iii  the  original  name  would  have 
been  dropped,  which  is  very  rarely  the  case. 
Rodiger  (Gesen.  Thes.  iii.  80)  quotes  jj^ixji.  a^ 

the  name  of  an  Arab  tribe,  referring  to  Ibn  Dm  aid, 
1 854,  p.  300. 

GATE.  1.  "IJK£;,  from  "rytT,  to  divide,  Gesen. 
p.  1458;  irvXt) :  porta,  introittts.  2.  nnS.  from 
nriS.  to  open,  I  les.  p.  113S;  Oipa,  ttv\t;  ;  ostium, 
s  "doorway."  3.  f|D,  a  vestibule  or  gateway; 
cu'Xi'j,  (no.Qit.6s;  linen,  pastes.      4.  yin,  Chnld. 


054 


GATE 


only  in  Ezra  and  Daniel ;  ouAt),  dvpa  ;  ostium, 
fores.  5.  Dpi,  from  H?"7!,  to  hang  down  ;  Gesen. 
p.  339,  a  door ;  6vpa ;  vulva,  ostium,  fores,  the 
"  door  "  or  valve. 

The  gates  and  gateways  of  eastern  cities  anciently 
held,  and  still  hold,  an' important  part,  not  only  in 
the  defence  but  in  the  public  economy  of  the  place. 
They  are  thus  sometimes  taken  as  representing  the 
city  itself  (Gen.  xxii.  17,  xxiv.  60  ;  Deut.  xii.  12  ; 
Judg.  v.  8 ;  Ruth  iv.  10  ;  Ps.  lxxxvii.  2,  cxxii.  2). 
Among  the  special  purposes  for  which  they  were 
used  may  be  mentioned — 1.  As  places  of  public 
resort,  either  for  business,  or  where  people  sat  to 
converse  and  hear  news  (Gen.  xix.  1,  xxiii.  10, 
xxxiv.  20,  24;  1  Sam.  iv.  18;  2  .Sam.  xv.  2, 
xviii.  24;  Ps.  lxix.  12;  Neh.  viii.  1,  3,  16; 
Shaw,  p.  207).  2.  Places  for  public  deliberation, 
administration  of  justice,  or  of  audience  for  kings 
and  rulers,  or  ambassadors  (Deut.  xvi.  18,  xxi.  19, 
xxv.  7  ;  Josh.  xx.  4  ;  Judg.  ix.  35  ;  Paith  iv.  1  ; 
2  Sam.  xix.  8  ;  IK.  xxii.  10  ;  Job  xxix.  7  ;  Prov. 
xxii.  22,  xxiv.  7;  Jer.  xvii.  19,  xxxviii.  7;  Lam. 
v.  14;  Am.  v.  12  ;  Zech.  viii.  16  ;  Polyb.  xv.  31). 
Hence  came  the  usage  of  the  word  "  Porte "  in 
speaking  of  the  government  of  Constantinople 
(Early  Trav.  p.  349).  3.  Public  markets  (2  K. 
vii.  1;  eomp.  Aristoph.  Eg.  1243,  ed.  Bekk. ; 
Neh.  xiii.  16,  19).  [Cities.]  In  heathen  towns 
the  open  spaces  near  the  gates  appear  to  have  been 
sometimes  used  as  places  for  sacrifice  (Acts  xiv.  13  ; 
comp.  2  K.  xxiii.  8). 

Regarded  therefore  as  positions  of  great  import- 
ance the  gates  of  cities  were  carefully  guarded  and 
closed  at  nightfall  (Deut.  iii.  5 ;  Josh.  ii.  5,  7  ; 
Judg.  ix.  40,  44  ;  1  Sam.  xxiii.  7  ;  2  Sam.  xi.  23 ; 
Jer.  xxxix.  4  ;  Judith  i.  4).  They  contained  cham- 
bers over  the  gateway,  and  probably  also  chambers 
or  recesses  at  the  sides  for  the  various  puiposes  to 
which  they  were  applied  (2  Sam.  xviii.  24  ;  Lajard, 
Xin.  fy  Bab.  p.  57,  and  note). 


£J*t&A&\ 


Jrr? 


(  /  f  /   A  |  '     ! 


30 

a 


Q0 

a 


Assyrian  gates.     (Layard.) 

The  galewavs  of  Assyrian  cities  were  arched  or 
square-headed   entrances    in    the    wall,    sometimes 


GATE      • 

flanked  by  towers  (Layard,  Nineveh,  ii.  388,  395, 
Nin.  $  Bab.  231,  Mons.  of  Nin.  Pt.  2,  pi.  49  ;  see 
also  Assyrian  bas-reliefs  in  Brit.  Mus.  Nos.  49,  25, 
26).  In  later  Egyptian  times, the  gates  of  the  temples 
seem  to  have  been  intended  as  places  of  defence,  if 
not  the  principal  fortifications  (Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg. 
i.  409,  abridgm.).  The  doors  themselves  of  the  larger 
gates  mentioned  in  Scripture  were  two-leaved,  plated 
with  metal,  closed  with  locks   and  fastened  with 


An  Egyptian  folding-door. 

metal  bars  (Deut.  iii.  5 ;  Judg.  xvi.  3 ;  1  Sam. 
xxiii.  7  ;  1  K.  iv.  13;  2  Chr.  viii.  5;  Neh.  iii. 
3-15;  Ps.  cvii.  16;  Is.  xlv.  1,  2  ;  Jer.  xlix.  31). 
Gates  not  defended  by  iron  were  of  course  liable  to 
be  set  on  fire  by  an  enemy  (Judg.  ix.  52). 


Egyptian  doors. — Frg.  1.  The  upper  pm,  on  which  the  dooi  turned. 
Fig.  X.  Lower  pin.     ^W''kinsun.) 


Modem  Egyptian  door.    (Lane.) 


The  gateways  of  royal  palaces  and  even  of  pri- 
vate houses  were  often  richly  ornamented.  Sen- 
tences from  the  Law  were  inscribed  on  and  above 
the  gates,  as  in  Mohammedan  countries  sentences 
from"  the  Kuran  are  inscribed  over  doorways  and  on 
doors  (Deut.  vi.  9  ;  Is.  liv.  12  ;  Rev.  xxi.  21  ; 
Maundrell,  E.  T.  p.  488  ;  Lane,  Mod.  Eg.  i.  29  ; 
Rauwolrf,  Travels,  Pt.  iii.  c.  10;  Ray,  ii.  \>-  278). 
The  principal  gate  of  the  royal  palace  at  Ispahan 
was  in  Chardin's  time  held  sacred,  and  served  as  a 
sanctuary  for  criminals  (Chardin,  vii.  368,  and 
petitions   were   presented   to   the  sovereign   at    the 


GATE 

gate.  See  Ksth.  iv.  2,  and  Herod,  iii.  120,  140). 
The  gateways  of  Nimroud  and  Persepolis  were 
flanked  by  colossal  figures  of  animals. 


GATH 


(555 


fgiiiiiig^E^iig^  s 

m 
I 


Modern  Egyptian  door.     (Lnne., 

The  gates  of  Solomon's  Temple  were  very  massive 
and  costly,  being  overlaid  with  gold  and  carvings 
(  1  K.  vi.  34,  35;  2  K.  xviii.  16).  Those  of  the 
Holy  Place  were  of  olive-wood,  two-leaved,  and 
overlaid  with  gold  ;  those  of  the  temple  of  fir  (1  K. 
vi.  31,  32,  34;  Ez.  xli.  23,  24).  Of  the  gates  of 
the  outer  court  of  Herod's  temple,  9  were  covered 
with  gold  and  silver,  as  well  as  the  posts  and 
lintels,  but  the  outer  one,  the  Beautiful  Gate  (Acts 
iii.  2),  was  made  entirely  of  Corinthian  brass,  and 
was  considered  to  surpass  the  others  far  in  costli- 
ness (Joseph.  B.  J.  v.  5,  §3).  This  gate,  which 
was  so  heavy  as  to  require  20  men  to  close  it,  was 
unexpectedly  found  open  on  one  occasion  shortly 
before  the  close  of  the  siege  (Joseph.  B.  J .  vi.  5, 
§3;  c.  Ay.  ii.  9). 


~An  Xv\ 


and  below  (Maundrell,  Ear.  Trav.  447  ;  Shaw,  210  ; 
Burckhardt,  Syria,  58,  74  ;  Porter,  Jhimascus,  ii. 
22,  192  ;   Ray,  Coll.  of  Trav.  ii.  429). 


Ancient  Egyptian  door.     (Wilkinson.') 

The  figurative  gates  of  pearl  and  precious  stones 
(Is.  liv.  12;  Rev.  xxi.  21)  may  be  regarded  as 
having  their  types  in  the  massive  Btone  doors  which 
are  found  in  some  of  the  ancient  houses  in  Syria. 
These  are  of  single  slabs  Bevel's]  inches  thick,  some- 
times 10  feet  high,  and  turn  on  stone  pivots  above 


^—    1    1    ~- 

m\ 

-  ^  > 

nn 

vvu 

^rnTl 

■H 

••S:M-W,^»*V.')i 


'fi??T 


Ancient  Egyptian  door.     (Wilkinson.) 

Egyptian  doorways  were  often  richly  ornamented. 
The  parts  of  the  doorway  were  the  threshold 
(f]D,  Judg.  six.  27  ;  irp66vpov,  limen) ;  the  side- 
posts  (flT-ITO  ;  crra9/j.ol;  uterque  postis),  the  lintel 
(fjlpt'O;  <j>A.ia,  superliminare,  Ex.  xii.  7).  It 
was  on  the  lintel  and  side-posts  that  the  blood  of 
the  Passover  lamb  was  sprinkled  (Ex.  xii.  7,  22). 
A  trace  of  some  similar.practice  in  Assyrian  worship 
seems  to  have  been  discovered  at  Nineveh  (Layard, 
Nin.  ii.  256). 

The  camp  of  the  Israelites  in  the  desert  appears 
to  have  been  closed  by  gates  (Ex.  xxxii.  27). 

The  word  "door"  in  reference  to  a  tent,  ex- 
presses the  opening  made  by  dispensing  with  the 
cloths  in  front  of  the  tent,  which  is  then  supported 
only  by  the  hinder  and  middle  poles  (Gen.  xviii. 
2  ;  Burckhardt,  Notes  on  Bed.  i.  42). 

In  the  Temple,  Levites,  and  in  houses  of  wealthier 
classes,  and  in  palaces,  persons  were  especially  ap- 
pointed to  keep  the  door  (Jer.  xxxv.  4;  2  K.  xii. 
9,  xxv.  18;  1  Chr.  ix.  18,19  ;  Est.  ii.  21;  DnjTC?; 
Ovpicpoi,  nvXaipol ;  portarii,  janitores).  In  the 
A.  Y.  these  are  frequently  called  "porters,"  a 
word  which  has  now  acquired  a  different  meaning. 
The  chief  steward  of  the  household  in  the  palace  of 
the  Shah  of  Persia  was  called  chief  of  the  guardians 
of  the  gate  (C'hardin,  vii.  369).  [CURTAIN  ; 
House  ;  Temple.]  [H.  \V.  P.] 

GATH  (Till,  "a  wine-press;"  TeB ;  Joseph. 
riTTa  ;  Getli),  one  of  the  five  royal  cities  of  the 
Philistines  (Josh.  xiii.  3  ;  1  Sam.  vi.  17)  ;  and  the 
native  place  of  the  giant  Goliath  (1  Sam.  xvii.  4, 
23).  The  site  of  Hath  has  for  many  centuries  re- 
main. t\  unknown.  The  writer  of  this  article  made 
a  tour  through  lhih.-tia  in  i8;7,  one  special  cb)3St 
of  which  was  to  search  for  tin'  long  lost  city.    After 

a  careful  survey  of  the  country,  and  a  minute  exa- 
mination of  the  several  passages  of  Scripture  in 


656 


GATH 


which  the  name  is  mentioned,  he  came  to  the  con- 
clusion that  it  stood  upon  the  conspicuous  hill  now 
called  Tell-es-Sdfieh.  This  hill  stands  upon  the 
side  of  the  plain  of  Philistia,  at  the  foot  of  the 
mountains  of  Judah ;  10  miles  E.  of  Ashdod,  and 
about  the  same  distance  S.  by  E.  of  Ekron.  It  is 
irregular  in  form,  and  about  200  ft.  high.  On  the 
top  are  the  foundations  of  an  old  castle;  and  great 
numbers  of  hewn  stones  are  built  up  in  the  walls 
of  the  terraces  that  run  along  the  declivities.  On 
the  N.E.  is  a  projecting  shoulder,  whose  sides  ap- 
pear to  have  been  scarped.  Here,  too,  are  traces 
of  ancient  buildings ;  and  here  stands  the  modem 
village,  extending  along  the  whole  northern  face  of 
the  hill.  In  the  walls  of  the  houses  are  many 
old  stones,  and  at  its  western  extremity  two  co- 
lumns still  remain  on  their  pedestals.  Round  the 
sides  of  the  hill,  especially  on  the  S.,  are  large  cis- 
terns excavated  in  the  rock,  Gath  occupied  a  strong 
position  (2  Chr.  xi.  8)  on  the  border  of  Judah  and 
Philistia  (1  Sam.  xxi.  10;  1  Chr.  xviii.  1);  and 
from  its  strength  and  resources,  forming  the  key  of 
both  countries,  it  was  the  scene  of  frequent  struggles, 
and  was  often  captured  and  recaptured  (2  Chr. 
xi.  8,  xxvi.  6  ;  2  K.  xii.  17  ;  Am.  vi.  2).  It  was 
near  Shocoh  and  Adullam  (2  Chr.  xi.  8),  and  it 
appears  to  have  stood  on  the  way  leading  from  the 
former  to  Ekron ;  for  when  the  Philistines  tied  on 
the  death  of  Goliath,  they  went  "  by  the  way  of 
Shaaraim,  even  unto  Gath  and  unto  Ekron  "  (1  Sam. 
xvii.  1,  52).  All  these  notices  combine  in  pointing 
to  Tell-es-Sdfieh  as  the  site  of  Gath.  The  state- 
ments of  most  of  the  early  geographers  as  to  the 
position  of  Gath  are  not  only  confused,  but  contra- 
dictory, probably  owing  to  the  fact  that  there  was 
more  than  one  place  of  the  same  name.  But  there 
is  one  very  clear  description  by  Eusebius,  translated 
without  change  or  comment  by  Jerome.  It  is  as 
follows :  "  Gath,  from  which  the  Anakirn  and  Phi- 
listines were  not  exterminated,  is  a  village  seen  by 
such  as  go  from  Eleutheropolis  to  I>iospolis,  at 
about  the  fifth  milestone" — KcifxT]  irapi6vToiv  a-rro 
rr/s  'F.Aev9epoir6Aeas  irep\  AidtnroXiv  -wepl  7re',U7r- 
tov  ffriixeTov  ttjs  'EAeudepoirSAews  (  Onom.  s.  v. 
re89d).  The  road  from  Kleutheropolis.  now  Beit 
Jebrin,  to  Diospolis  or  Lydda,  must  have  passed 
near  Tell-es-Sdfieh,  which  would  be  distinctly  seen 
at  about  the  distance  indicated.  Eusebius  mentions 
another  Gath  (Onom.  s.  v.  Gcth),  a  large  village 
between  Antipatris  and  Jamnia,  which  he  consi- 
dered to  be  that  to  which  the  Ark  was  carried 
(1  Sam.  v.  8),  but  this  position,  on  the  western 
side  of  the  plain  of  Philistia,  does  not  agree  with  the 
descriptions  above  referred  to.  Jerome,  who,  as 
stated  above,  translates  Eusebius'  former  notice 
without  change  or  comment,  gives  a  perplexing 
statement  in  his  Comm.  on  Micah :  Geth  una  est  de 
5  urbibus  Palaestinae  vicina  Judaeae  confinio  et  de 
Eleutheropioli  euntibus  Gazam,  nunc  usque  vicus 
vel  maximus.  Yet  in  his  preface  to  Jonah,  he  says 
that  Geth  in  Opher,  the  native  place  of  the  prophet, 
is  to  be  distinguished:  Aliarnm  Geth  urbium  quae 
juxta  Eleutheropolim  sive  Diospolim  hodie  qnoque 
monstrantur.  On  the  whole  then  there  is  nothing 
in  these  notices  to  contradict  the  direct  statement 
of  Eusebius,  and  we  may,  therefore,  safely  conclude 
that  Tell-es-Sdfieh  is  its  site. 

The  ravages  of  war  to  which  Gath  was  exposed 
appear  to  have  destroyed  it  at  a  comparatively  early 
period,  as  it  is  not  mentioned  among  the  other  royal 
cities  by  the  later  prophets  (Zeph.  ii.  4 ;  Zech.  ix. 
5,  6).     It  is  familial"  to  the  Bible  student  as  the  ] 


GAZA 

scene  of  one  of  the  most  romantic  incidents  in  the 
life  of  king  David  (1  Sam.  xxi.  10-15),  when  to 
save   his  life  "  he  feigned  himself  mad ;  scrabbled 

on  the  doors  of  the  gate,  and  let  his  spittle  fall  down 
upon  his  beard."  A  'few  years  later  he  returned 
to  the  city,  was  well  received  by  the  Philistine 
king,  and  had  Ziklag  assigned  to  him  as  a  residence. 
He  then  secured  some  firm  friends  among  his  here- 
ditary foes,  who  were  true  to  him  when  his  own 
son  rebelled.  We  have  few  more  striking  examples 
of  devoted  attachment  than  that  of  Ittai  the  Gittite 
(2  Sam.  xv.  19-22;.  [J.  L.  P.] 

GATH-HETHER,orGITTAH-HETHEK 

("IDnn  nil,  "the  wine-press  of  the  well;"  and 
with  n  loc.  "IQn  flFlS,  Josh.  six.  13),  a  town  on 
the  border  of  the  territory  of  Zebulun,  not  far  from 
Japhia,  now  Tdfa  (Josh.  xix.  12,  13),  celebrated 
as  the  native  place  of  the  prophet  Jonah  (2  K.  xiv. 
25).  Jerome  says  (Prooem.  in  Jonam):  Geth, 
quae  est  in  Opher  hand  ijrandis  est  viculus,  in  se- 
cundo  Sepphoris  miliaria  quae  hodie  appellatur 
Diocaesarea  euntibus  Tiberiadem,  ubi  et  sepulchrum 
ejus  ostendittir.  Benjamin  of  Tudela  in  the  12th 
century  says  that  the  tomb  of  Jonah  was  still 
shown  on  a  hill  near  Sepphoris  (Early  Travels  in 
Pal.  p.  89).  About  2  miles  E.  of  Sefurieh  (Sep- 
phoris), on  the  top  of  a  rocky  hill  stands  the  little 
village  of  el-Meshhad,  in  which  the  tomb  of  Jonah 
yet  exists.  It  belongs  to  the  Muslems,  and  both 
they  and  the  Christians  of  Xazareth  agree  in  re- 
garding this  as  the  native  village  of  the  prophet. 
There  can  scarcely  be  a  doubt  that  el-Meshhad  is 
the  ancient  Gath-hepher.  [J.  L.  P.] 

GATH-EIM'MONfpSI  ri|).  1.  A  city  given 
out  of  the  tribe  of  Dan  to  the  Levites  (Josh.  xxi. 
24 ;  1  Chr.  vi.  69),  situated  on  the  plain  of  Phi- 
listia, apparently  not  far  from  Joppa  (Josh.  xix. 
45).  Eusebius  mentions  a  TerOa  lying  between 
Antipatris  and  Jamnia,  which  would  answer  well 
to  the  position  of  Gath-rimmon  (Onom.  s.  v.  Geth). 
But  in  another  place  he  says  Te6pcij.fj.wv  vvv  £<tti 
kw/j.7]  (jLtyi&Tr)  curb  arnjeiwv  i/3'  AioairSAeccs 
o.tti6vt<i>v  els  'EAevdepSiroAiv  (Onom.  s.  v.).  This, 
however,  would  seem  to  agree  better  with  the  po- 
sition of  Gath,  the  royal  city  of  Philistia,  than  of 
that  assigned  to  Gath-rimmon  in  the  passage  above 
cited.  The  site  of  Gath-rimmon  is  unknown  (Pe- 
land,  808)., 

2.  A  town  of  the  half  tribe  of  Manasseh  west 
of  the  Jordan,  assigned  to  the  Levites  (Josh.  xxi. 
25).  It  is  only  once  mentioned,  and  the  LXX. 
reading  is  BaiBadv.  In  the  parallel  passage  in 
1  Chr.  vi.  70,  this  town  is  called  Bileam.  The 
reading  Gath-rimmon  is,  therefore,  probably  an 
error  of  the  transcribers,  and  may  be  merely  a 
repetition  of  the  same  name  occurring  in  the  pre- 
vious verse.  [J.  L.  P.] 

GA'ZA  (my,  i.  c.  Azzah;  Tdfa;  still  called 
Ghuzzeh  or  'Azzah:  the  form  Gazara  is  found  in 
the  Apocrypha  and  Josephus,  and  Brocardus  men- 
tions it  as  used  in  his  day),  one  of  the  five  chief 
cities  of  the  Philistines.  It  is  remarkable  for  its 
continuous  existence  and  importance  from  the  very 
earliest  times.  Like  Damascus,  it  is  mentioned  both 
in  the  book  of  Genesis  and  in  the  Acts  of  (lie  Apostles : 
and  it  is  still  a  place  of  very  considerable 
than  Jerusalem. 

The  secret  of  this  unbroken  history  is  to  be  found 
in  the  situation  of  Gaza.     It  is  the  last  town  in  the 


GAZA 

S.W.  of  Palestine,  on  the  frontier  towards  Egypt. 
'E<rxaT7)  wkc'ito  ws  eir'  AIjvtttov  e/c  4>oii'(Ktjs 
16vti  tirl  rrj  o-pxV  rVs  epVM-ov  (Arrian,  Lxp.  Alex. 
ii.  26).  It  lay  on  the  road  which  must  always 
have  been  the  line  of  communication  between  the 
valley  of  the  Nile  and  the  whole  region  of  Syria. 
Even  now  its  bazaars  arc  better  than  those  of  Jeru- 
salem. "Those  travelling  towards  Egypt  naturally 
lay  in  here  a  stock  of  provisions  and  necessaries  for 
the  desert ;  while  those  coming  from  Egypt  arrive 
at  Gaza  exhausted,  and  must  of  course  supply 
themselves  anew"  (Robinson,  ii.  40). 

The  same  peculiarity  of  situation  has  made  Gaza 
important  in  the  military  sense,  its  name  means 
"  the  strong ;"  and  this  was  well  elucidated  in  its 
siege  by  Alexander  the  Great,  which,  notwithstand- 
ing all  his  resources  of  artillery,  lasted  live  months. 
As  Van  de  Velde  says  (p.  1ST),  it  was  the  key  of 
the  country.  What  had  happened  in  the  times  of 
the  Pharaohs  (Jer.  xlvii.  1)  and  Cambyses  (Pomp. 
Mel.  i.  11)  happened  again  in  the  struggles  between 
the  Ptolemies  and  Seleucidae  (Polyb.  v.  68,  xvi. 
40).  This  city  was  one  of  the  most  important 
military  positions  in  the  wars  of  the  Maccabees  (see 
1  Mace.  xi.  01,  62,  xiii.  43;  Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  5, 
§5,  and  13,  §3).  By  the  Romans  it  was  assigned 
to  the  kingdom  of  Herod  (xv.  7,  §3),  and  after  his 
death  to  the  province  of  Syria  (xvii.  11,  §4).  Nor 
does  the  history  of  Gaza  in  connexion  with  war  end 
here.  In  A.D.  634  it  was  taken  by  the  generals 
of  the  first  Khalif  Abu  Bekr,  though  he  did  not 
live  to  hear  of  the  victory.  Some  of  the  most 
important  campaigns  of  the  crusaders  took  place  in 
the  neighbourhood.  In  the  12th  century  we  find 
the  place  garrisoned  by  the  Knights  Templars.  It 
finally  fell  into  the  hands  of  Saiadin,  A.D.  1170, 
after  the  disastrous  battle  of  Hattin. 

The  Biblical  history  of  Gaza  may  be  traced 
through  the  following  stages : — In  Gen.  x.  19  it 
appears,  even  before  the  call  of  Abraham,  as  a 
"  border"  city  of  the  Canaanites.  With  this  we 
should  compare  the  descriptive  words  in  Deut. 
ii.  23,  where  the  name  is  spelt  "  Azzah  "  in  the 
English  Version.  In  the  conquest  of  Joshua  the 
territory  of  Gaza  is  mentioned  as  one  which  he  was 
nut  able  to  subdue  (Josh.  x.  41,  xi.  22,  xiii.  3). 
It  was  assigned  to  the  tribe  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv. 
47),  and  that  tribe  did  obtain  possession  of  it 
(Judg.  i.  18);  but  they  did  not  hold  it  long;  for 
soon  afterwards  we  find  it  in  the  hands  of  the  Phi- 
listines (Judg.  iii.  3,  xiii.  1,  xvi.  1,  21):  indeed  it 
seems  to  have  been  their  capital ;  and  notwith- 
standing tin-  gigantic  efforts  of  Samson,  who  died 
here,  Gaza  apparently  continued  through  the  times 
of  Samuel,  Saul,  and  David  to  be  a  Philistine  city 
1  1  Sam.  vi.  17,  xiv.  52,  xxxi.  1  ;  2  Sam.  xxi.  15). 
Solomon  became  master  of  "  Azzah  "  ( 1  K.  iv.  24  |, 
But  in  after  times  the  same  trouble  with  the  Philis- 
tines recurred  (2  Chr.  xxi.  16,  xxvi.  6,  xxviii.  1  T-s ) . 
In  these  passages,  indeed,  ( ;:iz:i  is  not  specified,  but 
there  is  little  doubt  that  it  is  implied.  In  2  K.  xviii. 
8,  we  are  distinctly  told  that  llezekiah  "  smote  the 
Philistines  even  unto  Gaza, and  the  borders  thereof, 
from  the  tower  of  the  watchmen  to  the  fenced 
city."  During  this  period  of  Jewish  history,  it 
seems  that  some  facts  concerning  the  connexion  of 
Gaza  with  the  invasion  of  Sennacherib  may  lie 
added  from  the  inscriptions  found  at.  Nineveh 
(Layard's  Nineveh  and  Babylon,  p.  144).  We 
ought  here  to  compare  certain  passages  in  tli  pro- 
phets where  the  name  of  the  Philistine  city  occurs: 
viz.  Am.  i.  6,  7  ;  Zeph.  ii.  4  ;  Zech.  ix.  ■">.     The 


GAZA 


657 


period  intermediate  between  the  <  )ld  and  New  Tes- 
taments has  been  touched  on  above. 

The  passage  where  Gaza  is  mentioned  in  the 
N.  T.  (Acts  viii.  26)  is  full  of  interest.  It  is  the 
account  of  the  baptism  of  the  Ethiopian  eunuch 
on  his  return  from  Jerusalem  to  Egypt.  The 
words  in  this  passage — "  Arise  and  go  towards 
the  south,  unto  the  way  that  goeth  down  from 
Jerusalem  to  Gaza,  which  is  desert"  (iropeuou  Kara 
fj.eo-ryj.fipiai',  eVl  rriv  65bi'  t))V  Karafiaivovaav 
anb  'IepoixraA.7/jU.  els  Ta^av  avrn)  iarlv  eprj/xos), 
have  given  rise  to  much  discussion.  It  is  doubted, 
in  the  first  place,  whether  they  are  to  be  attributed 
to  the  angel  or  to  the  narrator.  The  solution  of 
this  doubt  depends  partly  on  another  question,  viz. 
whether  oi/'toj  is  to  be  referred  to  the  road  or  the 
city.  If  to  the  latter,  the  remark  will  naturally 
be  understood  as  St.  Luke's ;  and  we  may  suppose 
that  he  wrote  the  passage  just  after  the  beginning 
of  the  Jewish  war  (a.D.  65),  when  Gaza  was 
actually  desolated  (Joseph.  B.  J.  ii.  18,  §1).  Others 
would  refer  us  to  a  passage  of  Strabo,  where  he 
says  that  the  town  w:as  ip-qfxos'  after  it  was  taken 
by  Alexander:  but  the  text  of  Strabo  in  this  place 
is  doubtful  ;  and  it  is  evident  (see  above)  that  the 
statement  cannot  be  literally  true.  Pomponius 
Mela  speaks  of  Gaza  as  "  ingens  urbs  et  munita 
admodum,"  and  it  is  prominently  noticed  in  Pliny. 
Some  suppose  (as  Jerome)  that  the  site  of  Gaza 
was  changed :  and  this  may  possibly  be  true  ;  for 
Strabo  says  that  it  was  only  seven  stadia  from  the 
sea,  whereas  it  is  now  considerably  more :  and  the 
encroachment  of  the  drifting  sands  near  the  coast 
may  have  been  a  motive  for  the  restorers  of  the 
city  to  move  it  further  eastwards.  The  probability, 
however,  is  that  the  words  avrr)  icnlv  %prifios 
refer  to  the  road,  and  are  used  by  the  angel  to 
inform  Philip,  who  was  then  in  Samaria,  on  what 
route  he  would  find  the  eunuch.  Besides  the  ordi- 
nary road  from  Jerusalem  by  Ramleh  to  Gaza,  there 
was  another,  more  favourable  for  carriages  (Acts 
viii.  28),  further  to  the  south,  through  Hebron, 
and  thence  through  a  district  comparatively  with- 
out towns  and  much  exposed  to  the  incursions  of 
people  from  the  desert.  The  matter  is  discussed 
by  Kaumer  in  one  of  his  Beitrwjc,  incorporated  in 
the  last  edition  of  his  Palastina,  also  by  Robinson 
in  the  Appendix  to  his  second  volume.  The  latter 
writer  suggests  a  very  probable  place  for  the 
baptism,  viz.  at  the  water  in  the  Wady-cl-Hasy, 
between  Eleutheropolis  and  Gaza,  not  far  from  the 
old  sites  of  Lachish  and  Eglon.  The  legendary 
scene  of  the  baptism  is  at  Beit-siir,  between  Jeru- 
salem and  Hebron  :  the  tradition  having  arisen 
apparently  from  the  opinion  that  Philip  himself 
was  travelling  southwards  from  Jerusalem.  But 
there  is  no  need  to  suppose  that  he  went  to  Jeru- 
salem at  all.  Lange  (Apost.  Z< Halt.  ii.  109)  gives 
a  spiritual  sense  to  the  word  cprifios. 

The  modern  Ghuzzeh  is  situated  partly  on  an 
oblong  hill  of  moderate  height,  ami  partly  on  the 
lower  ground.  The  climate  of  the  place  is  almost 
tropical,  but  it  has  deep  wells  of  excellent  water. 
There  are  a  few  palm-trees  in  the  town,  and  its 
fruit-orchards  are   very  productive.      Put  the   chief 

feature  of  the  neighbourhood  is  the  wide-spread 
olive-grove  to  the  x.  and  \.k.  Hence  arives  a 
considerable  manufacture  of  soap,  which  G A 
exports  iii  large  quantities.  It  has  also  an  active 
trade  in  corn.  For  a  full  account  of  nearly  all  that 
has  been  written  concerning  the  topographical  and 
historical  relations  of  Gaza,  see  Rittera  Erdkunde, 


658 


GAZARA 


xvi.  45-60.  Among  the  travellers  who  have  de- 
scribed the  place  we  may  mention  especially  Ro- 
binson (Biblical  Researches,  ii.  35-43)  and  Van 
de  Velde  (Syria  and  Palestine,  ii.  179-188),  from 
whom  we  have  already  quoted  ;  also  Thomson 
(  The  Land  and  the  Book,  ii.  331-343).  The  last 
writer  speaks  of  the  great  extent  of  corn-land 
near  Gaza,  and  of  the  sound  of  mill-stones  in 
the  city.  Both  these  circumstances  are  valuable 
illustrations  of  the  acts  and  sufferings  of  Samson, 
the  great  hero  of  Gaza.  [J.  S.  H.] 

GAZ'ARA  (r)  TaQapa,  and  ra  Tafapa;  Gaz- 
ara),  a  place  frequently  mentioned  in  the  wars  of 
the  Maccabees,  and  of  great  importance  in  the  ope- 
rations of  both  parties.  Its  first  introduction  is  as 
a  stronghold  (bxvpwfJ.a),  in  which  Timotheus  took 
refuge  after  his  defeat  by  Judas,  and  which  for  four 
days  resisted  the  efforts  of  the  infuriated  Jews 
(2  Mace.  x.  32-36).  One  of  the  first  steps  of 
Bacchides,  after  getting  possession  of  Judaea,  was  to 
fortify  Bethsura  and  Gazara  and  the  citadel  (&Kpa) 
at  Jerusalem  (1  Mace.  ix.  52) ;  and  the  same  names 
are  mentioned  when  Simon  in  his  turn  recovered 
the  country  (xiv.  7,  33,  34,  36;  xv.  28).  So  im- 
portant was  it,  that  Simon  made  it  the  residence  of 
his  son  John  as  general-in-chief  of  the  Jewish  army 
(xiii.  53,  xvi.  1). 

There  is  every  reason  to  believe  that  Gazara  was 
the  same  place  as  the  more  ancient  Gezer  or  Gazer. 
The  name  is  the  same  as  that  which  the  LXX.  use 
for  Gezer  in  the  0.  T. ;  and  more  than  this,  the 
indications  of  the  position  of  both  are  very  much  in 
accordance.  As  David  smote  the  Philistines  from 
Gibeon  to  Gezer,  so  Judas  defeats  Gorgias  at  Em- 
maus,  and  pursues  him  to  Gazera  (1  Mace.  iv.  15). 
Gazara  also  is  constantly  mentioned  in  connexion 
with  the  sea-coast — Joppaand  Jamnia  (xv.  28,  35  ; 
iv.  15),  and  with  the  Philistine  plain,  .Azotus,  Adasa, 
&c.  (iv.  15;  vii.  45;  xiv.  34).  [G.] 

GA'ZATHITES,  THE  (Tl-Tyn,  accur.  "the 
Azzathite;"  t<£  Ta(aiw  ;  Gazaeos),  Josh.  xiii.  3; 
the  inhabitants  of  Gaza.  Elsewhere  the  same 
name  is  rendered  Gazites  in  the  A.  V. 

GA'ZER  (in  ;  ra&p;  Gazer),  2  Sam.  v.  25  ; 
1  Chr.  xiv.  16.  The  same  place  as  Gezer;  the 
difference  arising  from  the  emphatic  Hebrew  accent ; 
which  has  been  here  retained  in  the  A.  V.,  though 
disregarded  in  several  other  places  where  the  same 
form  occurs.  [Gezer.]  From  the  uniform  prac- 
tice of  the  LXX.,  both  in  the  0.  T.  and  the  books 
of  Maccabees,  Ewald  infers  that  the  original  form 
of  the  name  was  Gazer  ;  but  the  punctuation  of  the 
Masorets  is  certainly  as  often  the  one  as  the  other. 
(Ewald,  Gesch.  ii.  427  note.)  [G.] 

GAZE'RA,  1.  (to  rdCvpa,  Alex,  rdo-npa; 
Joseph,  ra  rdfiapa ;  Gezeron,  Gazara),  1  Mace, 
iv.  15;  vii.  45.  The  place  elsewhere  given  as 
Gazara. 

2.  One  of  the  "  sen-ants  of  the  temple,"  whose 
sons  returned  with  Zorobabel  (1  Esd.  v.  31).  In 
Ezra  and  Nehem.  the  name  is  Gazzam. 

GA'ZEZ  (m ;  o  re(ove ;  Gezez),  a  name 
which  occurs  twice  in  1  Chr.  ii.  46  ;  (1)  as  son  of 
Caleb  by  Ephah  his  concubine;  and  (2)  as  son  of 
Haran,  the  son  of  the  same  woman  :  the  second  is 
possibly  only  a  repetition  of  the  first.  At  any 
rate  there  is  no  necessity  for  the  assumption  of 
Eloubigant.  that  the  second  Gazez  is  an  error  for 
Jahdai       In  some  MSS.  and  the  Peschito  the  name 


GEBA 

is  given  Gazen.     The  Vat.  LXX.  omits  the  second 
occurrence. 

GA'ZITES,  THE  (D  WH  ;  to?s  TaCai'ois ; 
Philisthiini),  inhabitants  of  Gaza  (Judg.  xvi.  2). 
Elsewhere'given  as  Gazamiites. 

GAZ'ZAM  (Qn  ;  Ta^/x,  Tv(dix ;  Gazam). 
The  Bene-Gazzam  were  among  the  families  of  the 
Nethinim  who  returned  from  the  captivity  with 
Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  48;  Neh.  vii.  51).  In  1  Esd. 
the  name  is  altered  to  Gazera. 

GE'BA  (J?33,  often  with  the  definite  article,  =j 
"the  hill;  TajSaa;  Gabae,  Gabee),  a  city  of 
Benjamin,  with  "  suburbs,"  allotted  to  the  priests 
(Josh.  xxi.  17;  1  Chr.  vi.  60).  It  is  named 
amongst  the  first  group  of  the  Benjamite  towns, 
apparently  those  lying  near  to  and  along  the  north 
boundary  (Josh,  xviii.  24).  Here  the  name  is 
given  as  Gaisa,  a  change  due  to  the  emphasis  re- 
quired in  Hebrew  before  a  pause ;  and  the  same 
change  occurs  in  Ezr.  ii.  26;  Neh.  vii.  30  and  xi. , 
31 ;  2  Sam.  v.  25  ;  2  K.  xxiii.  8  ;  the  last  three  of 
these  being  in  the  A.  V.  Geba.  In  one  place  Geba  is 
used  as  the  northern  landmark  of  the  kingdom  of 
Judah  and  Benjamin,  in  the  expression  "  from  G. 
to  Beersheba "  (2  K.  xxiii.  8)  ;  and  also  as  an 
eastern  limit  in  opposition  to  Gazer  (2  Sam.  v.  25). 
In  the  parallel  passage  to  this  last,  in  1  Chr.  xiv.  16 
the  name  is  changed  to  Gibeon.  During  the  wars 
of  the  earlier  part  of  the  reign  of  Saul,  Geba  was 
held  as  a  garrison  by  the  Philistines  (1  Sam.  xiii. 
3),  but  they  were  ejected  by  Jonathan,  a  feat 
which,  while  it  added  greatly  to  his  renown,  ex- 
asperated them  to  a  more  overwhelming  invasion. 
Later  in  the  same  campaign  we  find  it  referred 
to  to  define  the  position  of  the  two  rocks  which 
stood  in  the  ravine  below  the  garrison  of  Mich- 
mash,  in  terms  which  fix  Geba  on  the  south  and 
Michmash  on  the  north  of  the  ravine  (1  Sam.  xiv. 
5:  the  A.  V.  has  here  GibeahL  Exactly  in  ac- 
cordance with  this  is  the  position  of  the  modern 
village  of  Jeba,  which  stands  picturesquely  on  the 
top  of  its  steep  terraced  hill,  on  the  very  edge  of  the 
great  Wady  Suweinit,  looking  northwards  to  the 
opposite  village,  which  also  retains  its  old  name 
of  Mukhmas.  The  names,  and  the  agreement  of  the 
situation  with  the  requirements  of  the  story  of 
Jonathan,  make  the  identification  all  but  certain  ; 
but  it  is  still  further  confirmed  by  the  invaluable 
list  of  Benjamite  towns  visited  by  the  Assyrian 
army  on  their  road  through  the  country  south- 
ward to  Jerusalem,  which  we  have  in  Is.  x.  28- 
32 ;  where  the  minute  details — the  stoppage  of 
the  heavy  baggage  (A.  V.  "  carriages"),  which 
could  not  be  got  across  the  broken  ground  of  the 
wady  at  Michmash  ;  then  the  passage  of  the  ravine 
by  the  lighter  portion  of  the  army,  and  the  sub- 
sequent bivouac  ("  lodging,"  p?D  =  rest  for  the 
night)  at  Geba  on  the  opposite  side, — are  in  exact 
accordance  with  the  nature  of  the  spot.  Stand- 
ing as  it  does  on  the  south  bank  of  this  important 
wady — one  of  the  most  striking  natural  features 
of  this  part  of  the  country — the  mention  of  Geba 
as  the  northern  boundary  of  the  lower  kingdom  is 
very  significant.  Thus  commanding  the  pass  its 
fortification  by  Asa  (1  K.  xv.  22;  2  Chr.  xvi.  6) 
is  also  quite  intelligible.  It  continues  to  be  named 
with  Michmash  to  the  very  last  (Neh.  xi.  31  I. 

Geba  is  probably  intended  by  the  "Gibeah-in- 
the-held  "  of  Judg.  xx.  31,  to  which  its  position   is 


GEBAL 

very  applicable.  [Gibeah,  6.]  The  "  fields"  are 
mentioned  again  as  late  as  Neh.  xii.  '29. 

It  remains  to  notice  a  few  places  in  which,  from 
the  similarity  of  the  two  names,  or  possihly  from 
some  provincial  usage,a  "  Geba"  is  used  for  "  Gibeah." 
These  are:  —  (1.)  Judg.  xx.  10:  here  the  A.  V. 
probably  anxious  to  prevent  confusion,  has  "  Gibeah." 
(2.)  Judg.  xx.  33:  "the  meadows,"  or  more  pro- 
bably "  the  cave  of  Geba."  Geba  may  be  here 
intended,  but  Gibeah — as  in  the  A.  V. — seems  almost 
necessary.  Owing  to  the  word  occurring  here  at  a 
pause  the  vowels  are  lengthened,  and  in  the  Hebrew 
it.  stands  as  Gdba.  (3.)  1  Sam.  xiii.  16:  here  the 
meaning  is  evident,  and  the  A.  V.  has  again  altered 
the  name  accordingly.  Josephus  (Ant.  vi.  6,  2) 
has  Ta/3ad<v,  Gibeon,  iu  this  place;  for  which 
perhaps  compare  1  Chr.  viii.  29,  ix.  35. 

2.  The  Geba  (Taifiai;  Alex.  TaifSav)  named  in 
Jud.  iii.  10,  where  Holofernes  is  said  to  have 
made  his  encampment — "  between  Geba  and  Scy- 
thopolis  " — must  be  the  place  of  the  same  name, 
Jeba,  on  the  road  between  Samaria  and  Jenhi, 
about  three  miles  from  the  former  (Rob.  i.  440). 
The  Vulgate  has  a  remarkable  variation  here — venit 
ad  TJumaeos  in  terrain  Gabaa.  [G.] 

GE'BAL  C^^a,   G'bal,  from  %l,   Gabal,  to 

twist ;  thence  >135,  G'bul,  a  line  ;  thence  J^-, 
Geb  ii.  a  line  of  mountains  as  a  natural  boundary; 
Te^aA  ;  Gebal),  a  proper  name,  occurring  in  Ps. 
Ixxxiii.  7  (Vulg.  lxxxii.)  in  connexion  with  Edom 
and  Moab,  Amnion  and  Amalek,  the  Philistines  and 
the  inhabitants  of  Tyre.  The  mention  of  Assur,  or 
the  Assyrian,  in  the  next  verse,  is  with  reason  sup- 
posed to  refer  the  date  of  the  composition  to  the 
latter  days  of  the  Jewish  kingdom.  It  is  inscribed 
moreover  with  the  name  of  Asaph.  Now,  in  2  Chr. 
\\.  14,  it  is  one  of  the  sons  or  descendants  of  Asaph, 
Jahaziel,  who  is  inspired  to  encourage  Jehoshaphat 
and  his  people,  when  threatened  with  invasion  by 
tin'  Moabites,  Ammonites,  and  others  from  beyond 
the  sea,  and  from  Syria  (as  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  : 
it  is  unnecessary  here  to  go  into  the  obscurities  and 
varieties  of  the  Hebrew,  Syriac,  and  Arabic  versions). 
It  is  impossible  therefore  not  to  recognise  the  con- 
m  between  this  psalm  and  these  events;  and 
hence  the  contexts  both  of  the  psalm  and  of  the 
historical  records  will  justify  our  assuming  the 
Gebal  of  the  Psalms  to  be  one  and  the  same  city 
with  tlie  Gebal  of  Ezekiel  (xxvii.  9),  a  maritime 
town  of  Phoenicia,  and  nut  another,  as  some  have 
supposed,  in  the  district  round  about  I'etra,  which 
is  by  Josephus,  Kusebius,  and  St.  Jerome  called 
<  i<  balene.  Jehoshaphat  had,  in  the  beginning  of  his 
reign,  humbled  the  Philistines  and  Arabians  (2  Chr. 
xvii.  9-10),  and  still  more  recently  had  assisted 
Alinb  against  the  Syrians  (ibid.  eh.  xviii.).  Now, 
acciirding  to  the  poetic  language  of  the  Psalmist, 
there  were  symptoms  of  a  general  rising  against  him. 
On  the  south  the  Edomites,  [shmaelites,  ami  Ha- 
garenes;  on  the  south-east  Moab,  ami  north-east 
A  mm  on.  Along  the  whole  line  of  the  western  coast 
(and,  with  Jehoshaphat's  maritime  projects,  this 
would  naturally  disturb  him  must,  see  2  Chr.  xx. 
36)  the  Amalekites,  Philistines,  and  Phoenicians,  or 
inhabitants  of  Tyre,  to  their  frontier  town  Gebal; 
with  Assur,  i.  e.  the  Syrians,  or  Assyrians,  from 
the  more  distant  north.  It  may  he  observed  that 
the  Ashurites are  mentioned  in  connexion  with  Gebal 

■    \.s  \\  iih   us,    Barkshire  for   Berkshire,  Darby  for 
Derby,  &c. 


GEBIM 


6o\) 


no  less  in  (ver.  6)  the  prophecy  than  in  the  psalm. 
But,  again,  the  Gebal  of  Ezekiel  was  evidently  no 
mean  city.  From  the  fact  that  its  inhabitants  are 
written  "  Giblians"  in  the  Vulg.,  and  "  Biblians" 
in  the  LXX.,  we  may  infer  their  identity  with  the 
Giblites,  spoken  of  iu  connexion  with  Lebanon  by 
Joshua  (xiii.  5),  and  that  of  their  city  with  the 
"  Biblus  "  (or  Byblus)  of  profane  literature — so  ex- 
tensive that  it  gave  name  to  the  surrounding  district. 
(See  a  passage  from  Lucian,  quoted  by  Reland, 
Palest,  lib.  i.  c.  xiii.  p.  269.)  It  was  situated  on  the 
frontiers  of  Phoenicia,  somewhat  to  the  north  of  the 
mouth  of  the  small  river  Adonis,  so  celebrated  in 
mythology  (comp.  Ez.  viii.  13).  Meanwhile  the 
Giblites,  or  Biblians,  seem  to  have  been  pre-eminent 
in  the  arts  of  stone-carving  (2  K.  v.  18)  and  ship 
calking  (Ez.  xxvii.  9) ;  but,  according  to  Strabo, 
their  industry  suffered  greatly  from  the  robbers  in 
festmg  the  sides  of  Mount  Lebanon.  Pompey  not 
only  destroyed  the  strongholds  from  whence  these 
pests  issued,  but  freed  the  city  from  a  tyrant 
(Strab.  xvi.  2,  18).  Some  have  confounded  Gebal, 
or  Biblus,  with  the  Gabala  of  Strabo,  just  below 
Laodicea,  and  consequently  many  leagues  to  the 
north,  the  ruins  and  site  of  which,  still  called 
Jebilee,  are  so  graphically  described  by  Maundrell 
(Early  Travellers  in  P.  by  Wright,  p.  394).  By 
Moroni  (Dizion.  Eccles.)  they  are  accurately  dis- 
tinguished under  their  respective  names.  Finally, 
Biblus  became  a  Christian  see  in  the  patriarchate 
of  Autioch,  subject  to  the  metropolitan  see  of  Tyre 
(Keland's  Palest,  lib.  i.  p.  214,  et  seq.).  It  shared 
the  usual  vicissitudes  of  Christianity  in  these  parts; 
and  even  now  furnishes  episcopacy  with  a  title.  It 
is  called  Jebail  by  the  Arabs,  thus  reviving  the  old 
Biblical  name.     "  [E.  S.  Ff.] 

GE'BEB,  p3jl  ;  Ta&p,  Na/3e>  ;  Gaber),  a 
name  occurring  twice  in  the  list  of  Solomon's  com- 
missariat officers,  and  there  only.  1.  The  son  of 
Geber  (Ben-Geber)  resided  in  the  fortress  of  Ramoth- 
Gilead,  ami  had  charge  of  Havoth-Jair,  and  the 
district  of  Argob  (1  K.  iv.  13).  Josephus  (Ant. 
viii.  2,  §3)  gives  the  name  as  Tapapris.  2.  Geber 
the  son  of  Uri  had  a  district  south  of  the  former — ■ 
the  "  land  of  Gilead,"  the  country  originally  pos- 
sessed by  Sihon  and  Og,  probably  the  modern 
Belka,  the  great  pasture-ground  of  the  tribes 
east  of  Jordan  (1  K.  iv.  19).  The  conclusion 
of  this  verse  as  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  is  very 
unsatisfactory  —  "and  he  was  the  only  officer 
which  was  in  the  land" — when  two  others  are 
mentioned  in  13  and  14.  A  more  accurate  in- 
terpretation is,  "  and  one  officer  who  was  in  the 
land,"  that  is,  a  superior  (2*V3,  a  word  of  rare  oc- 
currence, but  used  again  For  Solomon's  "officers"  in 
2  ( !hr.  viii.  10)  over  the  three.  Josephus  has  iir\  8e 
tovtoov  efs  TrAhtv  &pxa"/  airoSfSftKTO,  the  itahiv 
referring  to  a  similar  statement  just  before  that  there 
was  also  one  general  superintendent  over  the  com- 
missaries of  the  whole  of  Upper  Palestine.        [<i.] 

GE'BIM  (D'aiin,  with  the  article,  =  probably 
"  the  ditches  ;"  the  word  is  used  in  that  sense  in 
2  K.  iii.  16,  ami  elsewhere;  Ti&Peip  ;  Gabiiri),  a 
village  north  of  Jerusalem,  in  the  neighbourhood  oj 
tin'  main  road,  and  apparently  between  Anathoth 
(the  modern  Anatd)  ami  the  ridge  on  which  Nob 

was    situated,    and    from    which    the    first    view    of 

the  city  is  obtained.     It  is  named   nowhere   bui 

in  the  enumeration    by    Naiah  of  the   towns  whose 

inhabitants  lied  at  Sennacherib's  approach  \x.  :;i). 


(360 


GEDALIAH 


Judging  by  those  places  the  situation  of  which 
is  known  to  us,  the  enumeration  is  so  ordei  ly 
that  it  is  impossible  to  entei  tain  the  conjecture  of 
either  Eusebius  (Onom.  Gebin),  who  places  it  at 
Geba,  five  miles  noith  of  Gophna ;  or  of  Schwarz 
(131),  who  would  have  it  identical  with  Gob  or  Gezer: 
the  former  being  at  least  10  miles  north,  and  the 
latter  20  miles  west,  of  its  probable  position. 
El-Isawiyeh  occupies  about  the  right  spot.      [G.] 

GEDALI'AH  {T\fr\\,  and  -in^HS,  i.e.  Ge- 
daliahu  ;  ToSoAlas  ;  Godolias).  1.  Gedaliah, 
the  son  of  Ahikam  (Jeremiah's  protector,  Jer.  xxvi. 
24),  and  grandson  of  Shaphan  the  secretary  of  king 
Josiah.  After  the  destruction  of  the  Temple,  B.C. 
588,  Nebuchadnezzar  departed  from  Judaea,  leaving 
Gedaliah  with  a  Chaldaean  guard  (Jer.  xl.  5)  at 
Mizpah,  a  strong  (1  K.  xv.  22)  town,  six  miles  N.  of 
Jerusalem,  to  govern,  as  a  tributary  (Joseph.  Ant.  x. 
9,  §1)  of  the  king  of  Babylon,  the  vine-dressers  and 
husbandmen  (Jer.  lii.  16)  who  were  exempted  from 
captivit-,-.  Jeremiah  joined  Gedaliah  ;  and  Mizpah 
became  the  resort  of  Jews  from  various  quarters 
(Jer.  xl.  6,  11),  many  of  whom,  as  might  be  ex- 
pected at  the  end  of  a  long  war,  were  in  a  demo- 
ralized state,  unrestrained  by  religion,  patriotism  or 
prudence.  The  gentle  and  popular  character  of 
Gedaliah  (Joseph.  Ant.  x.  9,  §1,  3),  his  hereditary 
piety  (Rosenmiiller  in  Jer.  xxvi.  24),  the  prosperity 
of  his  brief  rule  (Jer.  xl.  12),  the  reverence  which 
revived  and  was  fostered  under  him  for  the  ruined 
Temple  (xli.  5),  fear  of  the  Chaldaean  conquerors 
whose  officer  he  was,— all  proved  insufficient  to 
secure  Gedaliah  from  the  foreign  jealousy  of  Baalis 
king  of  Amnion,  and  the  domestic  ambition  of  Ish- 
mael,  a  member  of  the  royal  family  of  Judah 
(Joseph.  Ant.  x.  9,  §3).  This  man  came  to  Mizpah 
with  a  secret  purpose  to  destroy  Gedaliah.  Geda- 
liah, generously  refusing  to  believe  a  friendly  warn- 
ing which  he  received  of  the  intended  treachery, 
was  murdered,  with  his  Jewish  and  Chaldaean  fol- 
lowers, two  months  after  his  appointment.  After 
his  death,  which  is  still  commemorated  in  the 
Jewish  Calendar  (Prideanx,  Connexion,  anno  588, 
and  Zech.  vii.  19)  as  a  national  calamity,  the  Jews, 
in  their  native  land,  anticipating  the  resentment  of 
the  king  of  Babylon,  gave  way  to  despair.  Many, 
forcing  Jeremiah  to  accompany  them,  fled  to  Egypt 
under  Johanan.  2.  Gedaliahu  ;  a  Levite,  one 
of  the  six  sons  of  Jeduthun  who  played  the  harp  in 
the  service  of  Jehovah  (1  Chr.  xxv.  3,  9).  3.  Ge- 
daliah ;  a  priest  in  the  time  of  Ezra  (Ezr.  x.  18). 
[Joadanus.]  4.  Gedaliahu  ;  son  of  Pashur 
(Jer.  xxxviii.  1),  one  of  those  who  caused  Jeremiah 
to  be  imprisoned.  5.  Gedaliah  ;  grandfather  of 
Zephaniah  the  prophet  (Zeph.  i.  1).     [W.  T.  B.] 

GED'DUR  (TeSSoip ;  Geddu),  1  Esd.  v.  30. 
[Gahar.] 

GED'EON  (TeSt-civ  ;  Gedeon).  1.  The  son  of 
Raphaim  ;  one  of  the  ancestors  of  Judith  (Jud.  viii. 
1).     The  name  is  omitted  in  the  Vat.  LXX. 

2.  The  Greek  form  of  the  Hebrew  name  Gideon 
(Heb.  xi.  32) ;  retained  in  the  N.  T.  by  our  trans- 
lators, in  company  with  Elias,  Eliseus,  Osee,  Jesus, 
and  other  Grecised  Hebrew  names,  to  the  confusion 
of  the  ordinary  reader. 

GE'DER  (Tia  ;  TaSep  ;  Gadcr).  The  king  of 
Geder  was  one  of  the  31  kings  who  were  overcome 
by  Joshua  on  the  west  of  the  Jordan  (Josh.  xii.  13), 
and  mentioned  in  that  list  only.  Being  named  with 
Debir,  Hormah,  and  Arad,  Geder  was  evidently  in 


GEDOR 

the  extreme  south:  this  prevents  our  identifying 
it  with  Gedor  (Josh.  xv.  58),  which  lay  between 
Hebron  and  Bethlehem  ;  or  with  ha-Gederah  in  the 
low  country  (xv.  36).  It  is  possible,  however,  that, 
it  may  be  the  same  place  as  the  Gedor  named  in 
connexion  with  the  Simeouites  (1  Chr.  iv.  39).   [G.] 

GED'ERAH  (ilTJin,  with  the  article  =  the 
sheepcote  ;  TdSripa ;  Ge'dera),  a  town  of  Judah  in 
the  Shefelah  or  lowland  country  (Josh.  xv.  36), 
apparently,  from  the  near  mention  of  Azekah, 
Socoh,  &c,  in  its  eastern  part,  near  the  "  valley  of 
the  Terebinth."  [Elah.]  This  position  agrees 
passably  with  that  assigned  by  Eusebius  (Onomas- 
ticon)  to  "Gedour,"  which  he  says  was  in  his  time  a 
very  large  village  10  miles  from  Eleutheropolis,  on 
the  road  to  Diospolis  (Lydda)  ;  and  also  with  another 
which  he  gives  as  Gidora,  in  the  boundaries  of  Jeru- 
salem (Aelia),  near  the  Terebinth.  No  town  bear- 
ing this  name  has  however  been  yet  discovered  in 
this  hitherto  little  explored  district.  The  name  (if 
the  interpretation  given  be  correct),  and  the  occur- 
rence next  to  it  of  one  so  similar  as  Gederothaiji, 
seem  to  point  to  a  great  deal  of  sheep-breeding  in 
this  part.  [G.] 

GED'ERATHITE,  THE  QT)-pin  ;  6  Ta- 

SapaOdfi,  A\c\.Ta5ripco8i ;  Gadcrothites),  the  native 
of  a  place  called  Gederah,  but  not  of  that  in  the 
Shefelah  of  Judah,  forJosabad  theGederathite(l  Chr. 
xii.  4)  was  one  of  Saul's  own  tribe — his  "  brethren 
of  Benjamin"  (ver.  2).    No  other  is  named.    [G.] 

GEDE'RITE,  THE  (»Yian  ;  6  reSapfrys, 
Alex,  6  TeSup  ;  Gederitcs),  i.  e.  the  native  of  some 
place  named  Geder  or  Gederah.  Baal-hanan  the 
Gederite  had  charge  of  the  olive  and  sveomore 
groves  in  the  low  country  (Shefelah)  for  king  David 
(1  Chr.  xxvii.  28).  He  possibly  belonged  to  Ge- 
derah, a  place  in  this  district,  the  very  locality 
for  sycomores.  [G.] 

GED'EROTH(nn"l/l  =  "  sheep-cotes,"  but  in 
Chron.  with  the  article  ;  TaXripai,  but  in  Chron. 
TeSSdop,  Alex.  TaZr)pw6  ;  Gideroth,  Gaderoth),  a 
town  in  the  Shefelah  or  low  country  of  Judah  (Josh. 
xv.  41 ;  2  Chr.  xxviii.  18).  It  is  not  named  in  the 
same  group  with  Gederah  and  Gederothaim  in 
the  list  in  Joshua,  but  lay  apparently  a  little  more 
to  the  north  with  Makkedah.  The  notice  in  Chro- 
nicles shows,  however,  that  all  the  towns  of  these 
groups  were  comparatively  close  together.       [G.] 

GEDEROTHA'IM  (D?nTH  =  two  sheep- 
folds  ;  Gedorathaim),  a  town  in  the  low  country 
of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  36),  named  next  in  order  to 
Gederah.  The  LXX.  treat  the  word  as  referring  to 
the  name  preceding  it,  and  render  it  Kal  ai  iTrav\zis 
aiiTTJs.  [*-*]• 

GE'DOR  (nn| ;  Gedor).  1.  (TeSSc&v,  Alex. 
TeSdop),  a  town  in  the  mountainous  part  of  Judah, 
named  with  Halhul  and  Bethzur  (Josh.  xv.  58), 
and  therefore  a  few  miles  north  of  Hebron.  Eusebius 
(Onom.  "Gaedur")  places  it  at  ten  miles  south  of 
Diospolis,  the  modern  Ludd ;  but  this  does  not 
agree  with  the  requirements  of  the  passage.  On 
the  other  hand,  Robinson  (iii.  283)  has  discovered  a 
Jedur  half  way  between  Bethlehem  and  Hebron, 
about  two  miles  west  of  the  road,  which  very  pro- 
bably represents  the  ancient  site.  The  Gaedur  of 
Eusebius  is  more  likely 

2.  The  town — apparently  of  Benjamin— 1<>  which 
"  Jeroham  of  Gedor"  belonged,  whose  sons  Joelah 


GEHAZI 

ami  Zebadiah  were  among  tlie  mighty  men,  "  Saul's 
brethren  of  Benjamin,"  who  joined  David  in  his 
difficulties  at  Ziklag  (1  Chr.  xii.  7).  The  name  has 
the  definite  article  to  it  in  this  passage  (")1"tili"rjQ; 
oi  toO  YeSwp).  If  this  be  a  Benjamite  name,  it  is 
very  probably  connected  with 

3.  (Te5ovp)  A  man  among  the  ancestors  of 
Saul ;  son  of  Jehiel,  the  "  father  of  Gibeon"  (1  Chr. 
viii.  31  ;   ix.  37). 

4.  The  name  occurs  twice  in  the  genealogies  of 
Judah — 1  Chr.  iv.4,  and  18 — (in  both  shortened  to 
Till  ;  TeSdp).  In  the  former  passage  Penuel  is 
said  to  be  "  father  of  Gedor,"  while  in  the  latter. 
Jered,  sou  of  a  certain  Ezra  by  his  Jewish  wife  (A.V. 
"  Jehudijah  "),  has  the  same  title.  In  the  Targum, 
Jered,  Gedor  and  other  names  in  this  passage  are 
treated  as  being  titles  of  Moses,  conferred  on  him 
by  Jehudijah,  who  is  identified  with  the  daughter  of 
Pharaoh. 

5.  In  the  records  of  the  tribe  of  Simeon,  in  1  Chr. 
iv.  39,  certain  chiefs  of  the  tribe  are  said  to  have 
gone,  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  "  to  the  entrance  of 
Gedor,  unto  the  east  side  of  the  valley"  (N^H), 
in  search  of  pasture  grounds,  and  to  have  expelled 
thence  the  Hamites  who  dwelt  there  in  tents,  and 
the  Maonites  (A.  V.  "  habitations  ").  Simeon  lay 
in  the  extreme  south  of  Judah,  and  therefore  this 
Gedor  must  be  a  different  place  from  that  noticed 
above — No.  1.  If  what  is  told  in  ver.  42  was  a 
subsequent  incident  in  the  same  expedition,  then 
we  should  look  for  Gedor  between  the  south  of 
Judah  and  Mount  Seir, »'.  e.  Petra.  No  place  of 
the  name  has  yet  been  met  with  in  that  direction. 
The  LXX.  (both  BISS.)  read  Gerar  for  Gedor  (ea>s 
rod  e'AfleiV  Yepdpa)  ;  which  agrees  well  both  with 
the  situation  and  with  the  mention  of  the  "pas- 
ture," and  is  adopted  by  Ewald  (i.  322  note). 
The  "valley"  (Gat,  i.e.  rather  the  "ravine"), 
from  the  presence  of  the  article,  would  appeal-  to  be 
some  well-known  spot ;  but  in  our  present  limited 
knowledge  of  that  district,  no  conjecture  can  be 
made  as  to  its  locality.  It  may  be  noticed  that 
Nachal  { =  wady),  and  not  Gai,  is  the  word  else- 
where applied  to  Gerar.  [G.] 

GEHA'ZI  Cma  ;  Ti((i ;  Giezx),  the  servant  or 
boy  of  Elisha.  He  was  sent  as  the  prophet's  mes- 
senger on  two  occasions  to  the  good  Shunammite 
(2  K.  iv.);  obtained  fraudulently  in  Elisha's  name 
money  and  garments  from  Naaman,  was  miracu- 
lously smitten  with  incurable  leprosy,  and  was  dis- 
missed from  the  prophet's  service  (2  K.  v).  Later 
in  the  history  he  is  mentioned  as  being  engaged  in 
relating  to  King  Joram  all  the  great  things  which 
Elisha  had  done,  when  the  Shunammite  whose  son 
Elisha  had  restored  to  life  appeared  before  the  king, 
petitioning  for  her  house  and  land  of  which  she 
had  been  dispossessed  in  her  seven  years'  absence  in 
Philistia  (2  K.  viii.).  [\V.  T.  B.] 

GEHEN'NA  (rewa),  the  Greek  representa- 
tive of  D3  PT^,  Josh.  xv.  8,  Neb.,  xi.  30  (rendered 
by  LXX.  Yaiivva,  Josh,  xviii.  16  ;  more  fully, 
D3.T|n  *3,or  'n_,,:n  %  2K.  xxiii.10,  2Chr.xrviii. 
3,  xxxiii.  6,  Jer.  xix.  2),  the  "  valley  of  Ilinnom," 
or  "  of  the  son,"  or  "  children  of  II."  (A.  \'.j,  a  deep 
narrow  glen  to  the  S.  of  Jerusalem,  where,  after 
tin'  introduction  of  the  worship  of  the  fire-gods  by 
Ahaz,  the  idolatrous  Jews  offered  their  children  to 
Molech  (2  Chr.  xxviii.  3,  xxxiii.  o';  Jer.  vii.  31, 
xix.  2-6).     In  consequence  of  these  abominations 


GELILOTH 


661 


the  valley  was  polluted  by  Josiah  (2  K.  xxiii.  10)  ; 
subsequently  to  which  it  became  the  common  lay- 
stall of  the  city,  where  the  dead  bodies  of  criminals, 
and  the  carcases  of  animals,  and  every  other  kind  of 
filth  was  cast,  and,  according  to  late  and  some- 
what questionable  authorities,  the  combustible  por- 
tions consumed  with  fire.  Erom  the  depth  and 
narrowness  of  the  gorge,  and,  perhaps,  its  ever- 
burning tires,  as  well  as  from  its  being  the  receptacle 
of  all  sorts  of  putrifying  matter,  and  all  that  defiled 
the  holy  city,  it  became  in  later  times  the  image  of 
the  place  of  everlasting  punishment,  "  where  their 
worm  dieth  not,  and  the  fire  is  not  quenched ;" 
in  which  the  Talmudists  placed  the  mouth  of  hell : 
"  There  are  two  palm-trees  in  the  V.  of  H.,  between 
which  a  smoke  ariseth  ....  and  this  is  the  door  of 
Gehenna."  (Talmud,  quoted  by  Barclay,  City  of 
Great  King,  p.  90  ;  Lightfoot,  Centur.  Chorograph. 
Matt,  proem,  ii.  200.) 

In  this  sense  the  word  is  used  by  our  blessed  Lord, 
Matt.  v.  29,  30,  x.  28,  xxiii.  15,  33;  Mark  ix.  43, 
45 ;  Luke  xii.  5 ;  and  with  the  addition  rov  irvpos, 
Matt.  v.  22,  xviii.  9  ;  Mark  ix.  47  ;  and  by  St.  James, 
iii.  6.  [Hinnom,  Valley  of  ;  Tophet.]    [E.V.] 

GELIL'OTH  (Trh'hi  ;  TaMAcbd,  Alex.  A-yaA- 
XiAciB,  as  if  the  definite  article  had  been  originally 
prefixed  to  the  Hebrew  word  ;  ad  tumulos),  a  place 
named  among  the  marks  of  the  south  boundary  line 
of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  (Josh,  xviii.  17).  The 
boundary  went  from  Enshemesh  towards  Geliloth, 
which  was  "over  against"  (7133)  the  ascent  of 
Adummim.  In  the  description  of  the  north  boundary 
of  Judah,  which  was  identical  at  this  part  with  the 
south  of  Benjamin,  we  find  Gilgal  substituted  for 
Geliloth,  with  the  same  specification  as  "  over 
against"  (1133)  the  ascent  of  Adummim  (Josh.  xv. 
7).  The  name  Geliloth  never  occurs  again  in  this 
locality,  and  it  therefore  seems  probable  that  Gilgal 
is  the  right  reading.  Many  glimpses  of  the  Jordan 
valley  are  obtained  through  the  hills  in  the  latter 
part  of  the  descent  from  Olivet  to  Jericho,  along 
which  the  boundary  in  question  appears  to  have 
run  ;  and  it  is  very  possible  that,  from  the  ascent 
of  Adummim,  Gilgal  appeared  through  one  of  these 
gaps  in  the  distance,  "  over  against"  the  spectator, 
and  thus  furnished  a  point  by  which  to  indicate  the 
direction  of  the  line  at  that  part. 

But  though  Geliloth  does  not  again  appear  in  the 
A.  V.,  it  is  found  in  the  original  bearing  a  peculiar 
topographical  sense.  The  following  extract  from  the 
Appendix  to  Professor  Stanley's  S.  cjr  P.  (1st  Edit.) 
§13,  contains  all  that  can  be  said  on  the  point: — 
"  This  word  is  derived  from  a  root  Tvil,  '  to  roll ' 
(Gesen.  Thes.  287  6.).  Of  the  five  times  in  which 
it  occurs  in  Scripture,  two  are  in  the  general  sense 
of  boundary  or  border:  Josh.  xiii.  2,  '  All  the 
harden  of  the  Philistines'  (Spio);  Joel  iii.  4,  '  All 
the  coasts  of  Palestine '  ( TaAiAaia  aAAotpi'Aair)  ; 
and  three  specially  relate  to  the  course  of  the  Jordan  : 
Josh.  xxii.  10,  11,'  Tin'  borders  of  Jordan  '  (ToAaaS 
too  'lopfidvov};  Ez.  xlvii.  8,  'The  east  coun/n/' 
(els  tt)v  Ya\i\alav  \.  It  has  been  pointed  out  in 
ch.  vii.  p.  27S  note,  that  this  word  is  analogous  t<> 
tin'  Scotch  term  '  links.'  which  has  both  the  meanings 
of  Geliloth,  being  used  of  the  snake-like  windings  "1 
a  stream,  as  well  as  with  the  derived  meaning  ofa 
coast  or  shore.  Thu&Geliloth  is  distinguished  from 
Ciccar,  which  will  rather  mean  the  circle  oi 

tation   or  dwellings  gathered    round  the  bends  and 
I  reaches  of  the  river." 

J 


G62 


GKMALLI 


It  will  not  be  overlooked  that  the  place  Geliloth, 
noticed  above,  is  in  the  neighbourhood  of  the 
Jordan.  [G.] 

GEMAL'LI  c6»3  ;  TapaXi ;  .  GcmaM),  the 
father  of  Ammiel,  who  was  the  "  ruler  "  (Nasi)  of 
Dan,  chosen  to  represent  that  tribe  among  the  spies 
who  explored  the  land  of  Canaan  (Num.  xiii.  12). 

GEMARI'AH  (PinOS  ;  Tafiapias ;  Gama- 
rias).  1.  Son  of  Shaphan  the  scribe,  and  father  of 
Michaiah.  He  was  one  of  the  nobles  of  Judah,  and 
had  a  chamber  in  the  house  of  the  Lord,  from  which 
for  from  a  window  in  which,  Prideaux,  Michaelis) 
Baruch  read  Jeremiah's  alarming  prophecy  in  the 
ears  of  all  the  people,  B.C.  606  (Jer.  xxxvi.).  Gema- 
riah  with  the  other  princes  heard  the  Divine  message 
with  terror,  but  without  a  sign  of  repentance;  though 
Gemariah  joined  two  others  in  intreating  king  Je- 
hoiakim  to  forbear  destroying  the  roll  which  they 
had  taken  from  Baruch. 

2.  Son  of  Hilkiah,  being  sent  B.C.  597  by  king 
Zedekiah  on  an  embassy  to  Nebuchadnezzar  at  Ba- 
bylon, was  made  the  bearer  of  Jeremiah's  letter  to 
the  captive  Jews  (Jer.  xxix.V  [W.  T.  B.] 

GEMS.     [Stones,  Precious.] 

GENEALOGY  (TevsaKoyia),  literally  the  act 
or  art  of  the  yevea\6yos,  i.  e.  of  him  who  treats 
of  birth  and  family,  and  reckons  descents  and  ge- 
nerations. Hence  by  an  easy  transition  it  is  often 
(like  l(TTOf)ia)  used  of  the  document  itself  in  which 
such  series  of  generations  is  set  down.  In  Hebrew 
the  term  for  a  genealogy  or  pedigree  is  CT^H  "I2D, 
and  ni*piri  "1SD,  "  the  book  of  the  generations.;" 
and  because  the  oldest  histories  were  usually  drawn 
up  on  a  genealogical  basis,  the  expression  often  ex- 
tended to  the  whole  history,  as  is  the  case  with  the 
Gospel  of  St.  Matthew,  where  "  the  book  of  the 
generation  of  Jesus  Christ "  includes  the  whole 
history  contained  in  that  Gospel.  So  Gen.  ii.  4, 
"  These  are  the  generations  of  the  heavens  and  of 
the  earth,"  seems  to  be  the  title  of  the  history 
which  follows.  Gen.  v.  1,  vi.  9,  x.  1,  xi.  10,  27, 
xxv.  12,  19,  xxxvi.  1,  9,  xxxvii.  2,  are  other  ex- 
amples of  the  same  usage,  and  these  passages  seem 
to  mark  the  existence  of  separate  histories  from 
which  the  book  of  Genesis  was  compiled.  Nor  is 
this  genealogical  form  of  history  peculiar  to  the 
Hebrews,  or  the  Semitic  races.  The  earliest  Greek 
histories  were  also  genealogies.  Thus  the  histories 
of  Acnsilaus  of  Argos  and  of  Hecataeus  of  Miletus 
were  entitled  TeveaKoylai,  and  the  fragments  re- 
maining of  Xanthus,  Charon  of  Lampsacus,  and 
Hellanicus,  are  strongly  tinged  with  the  same 
genealogical  element,*  which  is  not  lost  even  in  the 
pages  of  Herodotus.  The  frequent  use  of  the  pa- 
tronymic in  Greek,  the  stories  of  particular  races, 
as  Heraclides,  Alcmaeonidae,  &c,  the  lists  of  priests, 
and  kings,  and  conquerors  at  the  Games,  preserved 
at  Elis,  Sparta,  Olympia,  and  elsewhere  ;  the  here- 
ditary monarchies  and  priesthoods,  as  of  the  Bran- 
chidae,  Eumolpidae,  &c,  in  so  many  cities  in 
Greece  and  Greek  Asia;  the  division,  as  old  as 
Homer,  into  tribes,  fratriae  and  yivt\,  and  the  ex- 
istence of  the  tribe,  the  gens  and  the  fiunilia  among 
the  Romans ;  the  Celtic  clans,  the  Saxon  families 
using  a  common  patronymic,  and  their  royal  genea- 
logies running  back  to  the  Teutonic  gods,  these  are 
among  the  many  instances  that  may  be  cited  to 


ocra  'EAAai'iKo;  'AkovctlXclw    ncpi    tG>v  ■yeyeaAoyuif 
8ia.Tr«liwi>riK:v-  (Joseph,  c.  Apinn.  i.  3). 


GENEALOGY 

prove  the  strong  family  and  genealogical  instinct  of 
the  ancient  world.  Coming  nearer  to  the  Israelites 
it  will  be  enough  to  allude  to  the  hereditary  prin- 
ciple, and  the  vast  genealogical  records  of  the  Egyp- 
tians, as  regards  their  kings  and  priests,  and  to 
the  passion  for  genealogies  among  the  Arabs,  men- 
tioned by  Layard  and  others,  in  order  to  show  that 
the  attention  paid  by  the  Jews  to  genealogies  is  in 
entire  accordance  with  the  manners  and  tendencies 
of  their  contemporaries.  In  their  case,  however,  it 
was  heightened  by  several  peculiar  circumstances. 
The  promise  of  the  land  of  Canaan  to  the  seed  of 
Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  successively,  and  the 
separation  of  the  Israelites  from  the  Gentile  world  ; 
the  expectation  of  Messiah  as  to  spring  from  the 
tribe  of  Judah  ;  the  exclusively  hereditary  priest- 
hood of  Aaron  with  its  dignity  and  emoluments ; 
the  long  succession  of  kings  in  the  line  of  David  ; 
and  the  whole  division  and  occupation  of  the  land 
upon  genealogical  principles  by  the  tribes,  families, 
and  houses  of  fathers,  gave  a  deeper  importance  to 
the  science  of  genealogy  among  the  Jews  than  per- 
haps any  other  nation.  We  have  already  noted 
the  evidence  of  the  existence  of  family  memoirs 
even  before  the  flood,  to  which  we  are  probably  in- 
debted for  the  genealogies  in  Gen.  i\\,  v. ;  and  Gen. 
x.,  xi.,  &c.  indicate  the  continuance  of  the  same 
system  in  the  times  between  the  flood  and  Abra- 
ham. But  with  Jacob,  the  founder  of  the  nation, 
the  system  of  reckoning  by  genealogies  (£*ITrin,  or 
in  the  language  of  Moses,  Num.  i.  18,  "l?"1!"!!"!)  was 
much  further  developed.  In  Gen.  xxxv.  22-26, 
we  have  a  formal  account  of  the  sons  of  Jacob,  the 
patriarchs  of  the  nation,  repeated  in  Ex.  i.  ]-5.  In 
Gen.  xlvi.  we  have  an  exact  genealogical  census  of 
the  house  of  Israel  at  the  time  of  Jacob's  going 
down  to  Egypt.  The  way  in  which  the  former 
part  of  this  census,  relating  to  Reuben  and  Simeon, 
is  quoted  in  Ex.  vi.,  where  the  census  of  trie  tribe 
of  Levi  is  all  that  was  wanted,  seems  to  show  that 
it  was  transcribed  from  an  existing  document. 
When  the  Israelites  were  in  the  wilderness  of  Sinai, 
in  the  second  month  of  the  second  year  of  the 
Exodus,  their  number  was  taken  by  Divine  com- 
mand, "  after  their  families,  by  the  house  of  their 
fathers,"  tribe  by  tribe,  and  the  number  of  each 
tribe  is  given  "  by  their  generations,  after  their 
families,  by  the  house  of  their  fathers, "according  to 
the  number  of  the  names,  by  their  polls,"  Num.  i., 
iii.  This  census  was  repeated  38  years  afterwards, 
and  the  names  of  the  families  added,  as  we  find  in 
Num.  xxvi.  According  to  these  genealogical  divi- 
sions they  pitched  their  tents,  and  marched,  and 
offered  their  gifts  and  offerings,  and  chose  the  spies. 
According  to.  the  same  they  cast  the  lots  by  which 
the  troubler  of  Israel,  Achan,  was  discovered,  as 
later  those  by  which  Saul  was  called  to  the  throne. 
Above  all,  according  to  these  divisions,  the  whole 
land  of  Canaan  was  parcelled  out  amongst  them. 
But  now  of  necessity  that  took  place  which  always 
has  taken  place  with  respect  to  such  genealogical 
arrangements,  viz.  that  by  marriage,  or  servitude, 
or  incorporation  as  friends  and  allies,  persons  not 
strictly  belonging  by  birth  to  such  or  such  a  family 
or  tribe,  were  yet  reckoned  in  the  census  as  belong- 
ing to  them,  when  they  had  acquired  property 
within  their  borders,  and  were  liable  to  the  various 
services  in  peace  or  war  which  wen'  performed 
under  the  heads  of  such  tribes  and  families.  No- 
body supposes  that  all  the  Cornelii,  or  all  the 
Campbells,  sprang   from  one  ancestor,  and  it  is  in 


GENEALOGY 


663 


GENEALOGY 

the  teeth  of  direct  evidence  from  Scripture,  as  well 
as  of  probability,  to  suppose  that  the  Jewish  tribes 
contained  absolutely  none  but  such  as  were  de- 
scended from  the  twelve  patriarchs.1  The  tribe  of 
Levi  was  probably  the  only  one  which  had  no  ad- 
mixture of  foreign  blood.  In  many  of  the  Scrip- 
ture genealogies,  as  e.g.  those  of  Caleb,  Joab, 
Segub,  and  the  sons  of  Rephaiah,  &c,  in  1  Chr.  iii. 
21,  it  is  quite  clear  that  birth  was  not  the  ground 
of  their  incorporation  into  their  respective  tribes. 
[Becher;  Caleb.]  However,  birth  was,  and 
continued  to  be  throughout  their  whole  national 
course,  the  foundation  of  all  the  Jewish  organiza- 
tion, and  the  reigns  of  the  more  active  and  able 
kings  and  rulers  were  marked  by  attention  to  ge- 
nealogical operations.  When  David  established  the 
temple  services  on  the  footing  which  continued  till 
the  time  of  Christ,  he  divided  the  priests  and  Le- 
vites  into  courses  and  companies,  each  under  the 
family  chief.  The  singers,  the  porters,  the'trum- 
peters,  the  players  on  instruments,  were  all  thus 
genealogically  distributed.  In  the  active  stirring 
reign  of  Rehoboam ,  we  have  the  work  of  Lido  con- 
cerning genealogies  (2  Chr.  rii.  15).  When  Heze- 
kiah  reopened  the  temple,  and  restored  the  temple 
services  which  had  fallen  into  disuse,  he  reckoned 
the  whole  nation  by  genealogies.  This  appears 
from  the  fact  of  many  of  the  genealogies  in  Chro- 
nicles terminating  in  Hezekiah's  reign  [Azariaii 
13],  from  the  expression  "So  all  Israel  were  reck- 
oned by  genealogies"  (1  Chr.  ix.  1),  immediately 
following  genealogies  which  do  so  terminate,  and 
from  the  narrative  in  2  Chr.  xxxi.  16-19  proving 
that,  as  regards  the  priests  and  Levites,  such  a  com- 
plete census  was  taken  by  Hezekiah.  It  is  indicated 
also  in  1  Chr.  iv.  41.  We  learn  too  incidentally 
from  Prov.  xxv.  that  Hezekiah  had  a  staff  of 
scribes,  who  would  be  equally  useful  in  transcribing 
genealogical  registers,  as  in  copying  out  Proverbs. 
So  also  in  the  reign  of  Jotham  king  of  Judah,  who 
among  other  great  works  built  the  higher  gate  of 
the  house  of  the  Lord  (2  K.  xv.  35),  and  was  an 
energetic  as  well  as  a  good  king,  we  find  a  genea- 
logical reckoning  of  the  Reubenites  (1  Chr.  v.  17), 
probably  in  connexion  with  Jotham's  wars  against 
the  Ammonites  (2  Chr.  xxvii.  5).  When  Zerub- 
babel  brought  back  the  captivity  from  Babylon, 
one  of  his  first  cares  seems  to  have  been  to  take  a 
census  of  those  that  returned,  and  to  settle  them 
according  to  their  genealogies.  The  evidence  of 
this  is  found  in  1  Chr.  ix.,  and  the  duplicate  pas- 
sage Neh.  xi.;  in  1  Chr.  iii.  19;  and  yet  more  dis- 
tinctly  in  Neh.  vii.  5,  and  xii.  In  like  manner 
Nehemiah,  as  an  essential  part  of  that  national  res- 
toration which  he  laboured  so  zealously  to  promote, 
gathered  "  together  the  nobles,  and  the  rulers  and 
the  ] pie,  that  they  might  be  reckoned  by  genea- 
logy," Neh.  vii.  5,  xii.  26.  The  abstract  of  this 
census  is  preserved  in  Ezra  ii.  and  Neh.  vii.,  and  a 
portion  of  it  in  1  Chr.  iii.  21-24.  That  this  Bystem 
was  continued  after  their  times,  as  far  at  least  as 
the  priests  and  Levites  were  concerned,  we  learn 
from  Neh.  xii.  22  ;  and  we  have  incidental  evidence 
of  the  continued  care  of  the  Jews  still  later  to  pre- 
serve their  genealogies  in  such  passages  of  the  apo- 
cryphal books  as  1  Mace.  ii.  1-5,  viii.  17,  xiv.  29, 
and  perhaps  Judith  viii.  1  ;  'fob.  i.  1,  &C,  Passing 
on  to  the  time  of  the  birth  of  Christ,  we  hue  a 

b  Jul.  Africanus,  in  his  Ep.  to  Aristides,  expressly    from   the   patriarchs.     The   registers   in   Ears    and 

mentions    that    the  ancient  genealogical    records    at     Nehemiah  include  the  Nethinim,  and  the  children  of 
Jerusalem  included  those  who  were  descended  from 
proselytes,  and  yeiwpai.  as  well  as  those  who  sprang 


striking  incidental  proof  of  the  continuance  of  the 
Jewish  genealogical  economy  in  the  fact  that  when 
Augustus  ordered  the  census  of  the  empire  to  be 
taken,  the  Jews  in  the  province  of  Syria  immedi- 
ately went  each  one  to  his  own  city,  i.  e.  ( as  is 
clear  from  Joseph  going  to  Bethlehem  the  city  of 
David),  to  the  city  to  which  his  tribe,  family,  and 
father's  house  belonged.  So  that  the  return,  if 
completed,  doubtless  exhibited  the  form  of  the  old 
censuses  taken  by  the  kings  of  Israel  and  Judah. 

Another  proof  is  the  existence  of  our  Lord's  ge- 
nealogy in  two  forms  as  given  by  St.  Matthew  and 
St.  Luke.  [Genealogy  of  Christ.]  The  men- 
tion of  Zacharias,  as  "  of  the  course  of  Abia,"  of 
Elizabeth,  as  "  of  the  daughters  of  Aaron,"  and  of 
Anna  the  daughter  of  Phanuel,  as  "  of  the  tribe  of 
Aser,"  are  further  indications  of  the  same  thing. 
And  this  conclusion  is  expressly  confirmed  bv  the 
testimony  of  Josephus  in  the  opening  of  his  Life. 
There,  after  deducing  his  own  descent,  "  not  only 
from  that  race  which  is  considered  the  noblest 
among  the  Jews,  that  of  the  priests,  but  from  the 
first  of  the  24  courses"  (the  course  of  Jehoiarib), 
and  on  the  mother's  side  from  the  Asmonean  sove- 
reigns, he  adds,  "  I  have  thus  traced  my  genealogy, 
as  I  have  found  it  recorded  in  the  public  tables  " 
(eV  reus  Srj/j.o(Tiais  SeATOis  avayeypa/A/xiurit');  and 
again,  contr.  Apion.  i.  §7,  he  states  that  the  priests 
were  obliged  to  verify  the  descent  of  their  intended 
wives  by  reference  to  the  archives  kept  at  Jeru- 
salem ;  adding  that  it  was  the  duty  of  the  priests 
after  every  war  (and  he  specifies  the  wars  of  An- 
tiochus  Epiph.,  Pompey,  and  Q.  Varus),  to  make 
new  genealogical  tables  from  the  old  ones,  and  to 
ascertain  what  women  among  the  priestly  families 
had  been  made  prisoners,  as  all  such  were  deemed 
improper  to  be  wives  of  priests.  As  a  proof  of  the 
care  of  the  Jews  in  such  matters  he  further  men- 
tions that  in  his  day  the  list  of  successive  high 
priests  preserved  in  the  public  records  extended 
through  a  period  of  2000  years.  From  all  this  it 
is  abundantly  manifest  that  the  Jewish  genealogical 
records  continued  to  be  kept  till  near  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem.  Hence  we  are  constrained  to  dis- 
believe the  story  told  by  Africanus  concerning  the 
destruction  of  all  the  Jewish  genealogies  by  Herod 
the  Great,  in  order  to  conceal  the  ignobleness  of  his 
own  origin.  His  statement  is,  that  up  to  that  time 
the  Hebrew  genealogies  had  been  preserved  entire, 
and  the  different  families  were  traced  up  either  to 
the  patriarchs,  or  the  first  proselytes,  or  the  yeido- 
pai  or  mixed  people.  But  that  on  Herod's  causing 
these  genealogies  to  be  burnt,  only  a  few  of  the 
more  illustrious  Jews  who  had  private  pedigrees  of 
their  own,  or  who  could  supply  the  lost  genealogies 
from  memory,  or  from  the  hooks  of  chronicles,  were 
able  to  retain  any  account  of  their  own  lineage — 
among  whom  he  says  were  the  Desposyni,  or  bre- 
thren of  our  Lord,  from  whom  was  said  to  be  de- 
rived the  scheme  (given  by  Africanus)  for  recon- 
ciling the  two  genealogies  of  Christ.  But  there  can 
be  little  doubt  that  the  registers  of  the  Jewish 
tribes  and  families  perished  at  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem,  and  not  before.  Some  partial  records 
may,  however,  have  survived  thai  event,  as  it  is 
probable,  and  indeed  seems  to  be  implied  in  Jo- 
sephus's  statement,  that  al  least  the  priestly  fami- 
lies of  the   dispersion  had    records   of  their  own 


Solomon's  servants 


664 


GENEALOGY 


genealogy.  We  learn  too  from  Benjamin  of  Tudela, 
that  in  his  day  the  princes  of  the  captivity  pro- 
fessed to  trace  their  descent  to  David,  and  he  also 
names  others,  e.g.  R.  Calonymos,  "a  descendant 
of  the  house  of  David,  as  proved  by  his  pedigree," 
vol.  i.  p.  32,  and  R.  Eleazar  Ben  Tsemach,  "  who 
possesses  a  pedigree  of  his  descent'  from  the  prophet 
Samuel,  and  knows  the  melodies  which  were  sung 
in  the  temple  during  its  existence,"  ib.  p.  100,  &c. 
He  also  mentions  descendants  of  the  tribes  of  Dan, 
Zabulon,  and  Naphthali,  among  the  mountains  of 
Khasvin,  whose  prince  was  of  the  tribe  of  Levi. 
The  patriarchs  of  Jerusalem,  so  called  from  the 
Hebrew  Di2K  K;N"I,  claimed  descent  from  Hillel, 
the  Babylonian,  of  whom  it  is  said  that  a  genealogy, 
fouud  at  Jerusalem,  declared  his  descent  from  David 
and  Abital.  Others,  however,  traced  his  descent 
from  Benjamin,  and  from  David  only  through  a 
daughter  of  Shephatiahc  (Wolf,  B.  II.  iv.  380). 
But  however  tradition  may  have  preserved  for  a 
while  true  genealogies,  or  imagination  and  pride 
have  coined  fictitious  ones,  after  the  destruction  of 
Jeiusalem,  it  may  be  safely  affirmed  that  the  Jewish 
genealogical  system  then  came  to  an  end.  Essen- 
tially connected  as  it  was  with  the  tenure  of  the 
land  on  the  one  hand,  and  with  the  peculiar  pri- 
vileges of  the  houses  of  David  and  Levi  on  the 
other,  it  naturally  failed  when  the  land  was  taken 
away  from  the  Jewish  race,  and  when  the  promise 
to  David  was  fulfilled,  and  the  priesthood  of  Aaron 
superseded  by  the  exaltation  of  Christ  to  the  right 
hand  of  God.  The  remains  of  the  genealogical 
spirit  among  the  later  Jews  (which  might  of  course 
be  much  more  fully  illustrated  from  Rabbinical 
literature)  has  only  been  glanced  at  to  show  how 
deeply  it  had  penetrated  into  the  Jewish  national 
mind.1'  It  remains  to  be  said  that  just  notions  of 
the  nature  of  the  Jewish  genealogical  records  are  of 
great  importance  with  a  view  to  the  right  interpre- 
tation of  Scripture.  Let  it  only  be  remembered 
that  these  records  have  respect  to  political  and  ter- 
ritorial divisions,  as  much  as  to  strictly  genealogical 
descent,  and  it  will  at  once  be  seen  how  erroneous 
a  conclusion  it  may  be,  that  all  who  are  called 
"sons"  of  such  or  such  a  patriarch,  or  chief 
father,  must  necessarily  be  his  very  children.  Just 
as  in  the  very  first  division  into  tribes  Manasseh 
and  Ephraim  were  numbered  with  their  uncles,  as 
if  they  had  been  sons  instead  of  grandsons  (Gen. 
xlviii.  5)  of  Jacob,  so  afterwards  the  names  of  per- 
sons belonging  to  different  generations  would  often 
stand  side  by  side  as  heads  of  families  or  houses, 
and  be  called  the  sons  of  their  common  ancestor. 
For  example,  Gen.  xlvi.  21  contains  grandsons  as 
well  as  sons  of  Benjamin  [Bklah],  and  Ex.  vi.  24 
probably  enumerates  the  son  and  grandson  of  Assir 
as  heads,  with  their  father,  of  the  families  of  the 
Korhites.  And  so  in  innumerable  instances.  If 
any  one  family  or  house  became  extinct,  some  other 


c  Some  further  information  on  these  modern  Jewish 
genealogies  is  given  in  a  note  to  p.  32  of  Asher's 
Benj.  of  Tudela,  vol.  ii.  p.  6. 

d  Thus  in  the  Targum  of  Esther  we  have  Haman's 
pedigree  traced  through  21  generations  to  the  "im- 
pious Esau  ;"  and  Mordecai's  through  42  generations 
to  Abraham.  The  writer  makes  33  generations  from 
Abraham  to  King  Saul ! 

e  The  Jews  say  that  only  4  courses  came  back  with 
Zeruhhabel,  and  that  they  were  subdivided  into  24, 
saving  the  rights  of  such  courses  as  should  return 
from  captivity.     See  Selden,  Opp.  v.  i.  t.  i.  p.  x. 

f  "The  term  'son  of  appears  to  have  been  used 


GENEALOGY 

would  succeed  to  its  place,  called  after  its  own  chief 
father.  Hence  of  course  a  census  of  any  tribe 
drawn  up  at  a  later  period,  would  exhibit  different 
divisions  from  one  drawn  up  at  an  earlier.  Com- 
pare, e.  g.,  the  list  of  courses  of  priests  in  Zerubba- 
bel's  time  (Neh.  xii.),  with  that  of  those  in  David's 
time  (1  Chr.  xxiv.).c  The  same  principle  must  be 
borne  in  mind  in  interpreting  any  particular  genea- 
logy. The  sequence  of  generations  may  represent 
the  succession  to  such  or  such  an  inheritance  or 
headship  of  tribe  or  family,  rather  than  the  rela- 
tionship of  father  and  son.f  Again,  where  a  pe- 
digree was  abbreviated,  it  would  naturally  specify 
such  generations  as  would  indicate  from  what  chief 
houses  the  person  descended.  In  cases  where  a 
name  was  common  the  father's  name  would  be 
added  for  distinction  only.  These  reasons  would 
be  well  understood  at  the  time,  though  it  may  be 
difficult  now  to  ascertain  them  positively.  Thus 
in  the  pedigree  of  Ezra  (Ezr.  vii.  1-5),  it  would 
seem  that  both  Seraiah  and  Azariah  were  heads  of 
houses  (Neh.  x.  2);  they  are  both  therefore  named. 
Hilkiah  is.  named  as  having  been  high-priest,  and 
his  identity  is  established  by  the  addition  "  the  son 
of  Shallum"  (1  Chr.  vi.  13);  the  next  named  is 
Zadok,  the  priest  in  David's  time,  who  was  chief  of 
the  16  courses  sprung  from  Eleazar,  and  then 
follows  a  complete  pedigree  from  this  Zadok  to 
Aaron.  But  then  as  regards  the  chi  onological  use 
of  the  Scripture  genealogies,  it  follows  from  the 
above  view  that  great  caution  is  necessary  in  using 
them  as  measures  of  time,  though  they  are  inva- 
luable for  this  purpose  whenever  we  can  be  sure 
that  they  are  complete.  What  seems  necessary  to 
make  them  trustworthy  measures  of  time  is,  either 
that  they  should  have  special  internal  marks  of 
being  complete,  such  as  where  the  mother  as  well 
as  the  father  is  named,  or  some  historical  circum- 
stance defines  the  several  relationships,  or,  that 
there  should  be  several  genealogies,  all  giving  the 
same  number  of  generations  within  the  same  ter- 
mini. When  these  conditions  are  found  it  is  diffi- 
cult to  overrate  the  value  of  genealogies  for  chro- 
nology. In  determining  however  the  relation  of 
generations  to  time,  some  allowance  must  be  made 
for  the  station  in  life  of  the  persons  in  question. 
From  the  early  marriages  of  the  princes,  the  average 
of  even  30  years  to  a  generation  will  probably  be 
found  too  long  for  the  kings.S 

Another  feature  in  the  Scripture  genealogies 
which  it  is  worth  while  to  notice  is  the  recurrence 
of  the  same  name,  or  modifications  of  the  same 
name,  such  as  Tobias,  Tobit,  Nathan,  Mattatha, 
and  even  of  names  of  the  same  signification,  in  the 
same  family.  This  is  an  indication  of  the  careful- 
ness with  which  the  Jews  kept  their  pedigrees  (as 
otherwise  they  could  not  have  known  the  names  of 
their  remote  ancestors);  it  also  gives  a  clue  by 
which  to  judge  of  obscure  or  doubtful  genealogies. 


throughout  the  East  in  those  days,  as  it  still  is,  to 
denote  connexion  generally,  either  by  descent  or 
succession"  (Layard's  Nin.  $  Sab.  p.  613).  The 
observation  is  to  explain  the  inscription  "  Jehu  the 
son  of  Omri." 

s  Mr.  J.  W.  Bosanquet,  in  a  paper  read  before  the 
Chronolog.  Instit.,  endeavours  to  show  that  a  gene- 
ration in  Scripture  language  =  40  years  ;  and  that 
St.  Matthew's  three  divisions  of  14  generations, 
consequently,  equal  each  560  years;  a  calculation 
which  suits  his  chronological  scheme  exactly,  by 
placing  the  captivity  in  the  year  B.C.  563. 


GENEALOGY  OP  JESUS  CHRIST 


CO  5 


The  Jewish  genealogies  have  two  forms,  one 
giving  the  generations  in  a  descending,  the  other 
in  an  ascending  scale.  Examples  of  the  descending 
form  may  be  seen  in  Ruth  iv.  18-22,  or  1  Chr.  iii. 
Of  the  ascending  1  Chr.  vi.  33-43  (A.  V.);  Ezr. 
vii.  1-5.  The  descending  form  is  expressed  by  the 
formula  A  begat  B,  and  B  begat  C,  &c.  ;  or,  the 
sons  of  A,  B  his  son,  C  his  son,  &c. ;  or,  the  sons 
of  A,  B,  c,  D  ;  and  the  sons  of  B,  C,  D,  e  ;  and  the 
sons  of  C,  e,  f,  G,  &c.  The  ascending  is  always 
expressed  in  the  same  way.  Of  the  two,  it  is 
obvious  that  the  descending  scale  is  the  one  in 
which  we  are  most  likely  to  rind  collateral  descents, 
inasmuch  as  it  implies  that  the  object  is  to  enu- 
merate the  heirs  of  the  person  at  the  head  of  the 
stem ;  and  if  direct  heirs  failed  at  any  point,  colla- 
teral ones  would  have  to  be  inserted.  In  all  cases 
too  where  the  original  document  was  preserved, 
when  the  direct  line  tailed,  the  heir  would  naturally 
place  his  own  name  next  to  his  immediate  prede- 
cessor, though  that  predecessor  was  not  his  father, 
but  only  his  kinsman.  Whereas  in  the  ascending 
scale  there  can  be  no  failure  in  the  nature  of  things. 
But  neither  form  is  in  itself  more  or  less  fit  than 
the  other  to  express  either  proper  or  imputed  filia- 
tion. 

Females  are  named  in  genealogies  when  there  is 
anything  remarkable  about  them,  or  when  any 
right  or  property  is  transmitted  through  them. 
See  Gen.  xi.  29,  xxii.  23,  xxv.  1-4,  xxxv.  22-26  ; 
Ex.  vi.  23  ;  Num.  xxvi.  33  ;  1  Chr.  ii.  4,  lit,  50, 
35,  &c. 

The  genealogical  lists  of  names  are  peculiarly 
liable  to  corruptions  of  the  text,  and  there  are  many 
such  in  the  books  of  Chronicles,  Ezra,  &c.  Jerome 
speaks  of  these  corruptions  having  risen  to  a  fearful 
height  in  the  LXX. :  "  Sylvam  nominum  quae 
scriptorum  vitio  confusa  sunt ."  "  Ita  in  Grcu  .  *  t 
Lat.  Codd.  h~tc  nominum  liber  vitiosus  est,  ut  non 
turn  Hebraea  quam  barbara  quaedam  et  Sarmatica 
nomina  conjecta  arbitrandum  sit."  "  Saepe  tria 
nomina,  subtractis  e  medio  syllabis,  in  unum  voi  \abu- 
lum  cogunt,  vel  .  .  unum  nomen  .  .  in  dico  vel  tria 
vocabula  dividunt"  (Praefat.  in  Parasfetjp.).  In  like 
manner  the  lists  of  high-priests  in  Josephus  are  so 
corrupt,  that  the  names  are  scarcely  recognizable. 
This  must  be  borne  in  mind  in  dealing  with  the 
genealogies. 

The  Bible  genealogies  give  an  unbroken  descent 
of  the  house  of  David  from  the  creation  to  the  time 
of  Christ,  The  registers  at  Jerusalem  must  hare 
supplied  the  same  to  the  priestly  and  many  other 
families.  They  also  inform  as  of  the  origin  of 
most  of  the  nations  of  the  earth,  and  cany  the  ge- 
nealogy of  the  Edomitish  sovereigns  down  to  about 
the  time  of  Saul.  Viewed  as  a  whole,  it  is  a  ge- 
nealogical collection  of  surpassing  interest  and  accu- 
racy. (Rawlinson's  Herodot.  vol,  i.  ch.  2  ;  Bur- 
lington's dencd.  Tab.  ;  Seidell's  Works,  passim  ; 
Benj.  of  Tudela's  Itin.,  byA.  Asher.)    [A.  C.  H.] 

GENEALOGY  of  JESUS  CHRIST.  The 
New  Testament  gives  us  the  genealogy  of  bul  one 
person,  that  of  our  Saviour.     The  priesthood  of 

Aaron  having  ceased,  the  possession  of  the  land  of 
Canaan  being  transferred  to  the  gentiles,  there  being 
under  the  N.  T.  dispensation  no  difference  between 
circumcision  and  uncircumcision,  Barbarian  and 
Scythian,  bond  and  free,  there  is  but  One  whose 
genealogy  it  concerns  us  as  Christians  to  be  ac- 
quainted with,  that  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 
Him  the  prophets  announced  as  the  seed  of  Abraham, 


and  the  son  of  David,  and  the  angel  declared  that  to 
Him  should  be  given  the  throne  of  His  father  David, 
that  He  might  reign  over  the  house  of  Jacob  for  ever. 
His  descent  from  David  and  Abraham  being  there- 
fore an  essential  pait  of  his  Messiahship,  it  was 
right  that  His  genealogy  should  be  given  as  a  por- 
tion of  Gospel  truth.  Considering,  further,  that 
to  the  Jews  first  He  was  manifested  and  preached, 
and  that  His  descent  from  David  and  Abraham  was 
a  matter  of  special  interest  to  them,  it  seems  likely 
that  the  proof  of  his  descent  would  be  one  especially 
adapted  to  convince  them ;  in  other  words  that  it 
would  be  drawn  from  documents  which  they  deemed 
authentic.  Such  were  the  genealogical  records 
preserved  at  Jerusalem.  [GENEALOGY.]  And  when 
to  the  above  considerations  we  add  the  fact  that  the 
lineage  of  Joseph  was  actually  made  out  from 
authentic  records  for  the  purpose  of  the  civil  census 
ordered  by  Augustus,  it  becomes  morally  certain 
that  the  genealogy  of  Jesus  Christ  was  extracted 
from  the  public  registers.  Another  consideration 
adds  yet  further  conviction.  It  has  often  excited 
surprise  that  the  genealogies  of  Christ  should  both 
give  the  descent  of  Joseph,  and  not  Mary.  But  if 
these  genealogies  were  those  contained  in  the  public 
registers,  it  could  not  be  othei  wise.  In  them  Jesus, 
the  son  of  Mary,  the  espoused  wife  of  Joseph, 
could  only  appear  as  Joseph's  son  (comp.  John  i. 
45).  In  transferring  them  to  the  pages  of  the 
Gospels,  the  evangelists  only  added  the  qualifying 
expression  "  as  was  supposed  "  (Luke  iii.  23,  and 
its  equivalent,  Matt.  i.  16). 

But  now  to  approach  the  difficulties  with  which 
the  genealogies  of  Christ  aie  thought  to  be  beset. 
These  difficulties  have  seemed  so  considerable  in  all 
ages  as  to  drive  commentators  to  very  strange 
shifts.  Some,  as  early  as  the  second  century, 
broached  the  notion,  which  Julius  Africanus 
vigorously  repudiates,  that  the  genealogies  are 
imaginary  lists  designed  only  to  set  forth  the  union 
of  royal  and  priestly  descent  in  Christ.  Others  on 
the  contrary,  to  silence  this  and  similar  solutions, 
brought  in  a  Deus  ex  machind,  in  the  shape  of  a 
tradition  derived  from  the  Desposyni,  in  which  by 
an  ingenious  application  of  the  law  of  Levirate  to 
two  uterine  brothers,  whose  mother  had  married 
first  into  the  house  of  Solomon,  and  afterwards  into  - 
the  house  of  Nathan,  some  of  the  discrepancies  were 
reconciled,  though  the  meeting  of  the  two  genealo- 
gies in  Zerubbabel  and  Salathiel  is  wholly  un- 
accounted for.  Later,  and  chiefly  among  Protestant 
divines,  the  theory  was  invented  of  one  genealogy 
being  Joseph's,  and  the  other  Mary's,  a  theory  in 
direct  contradiction  to  the  plain  letter  of  the  Scrip- 
ture narrative,  and  Leaving  untouched  as  many 
difficulties  as  it  solves.  The  fertile  invention  of 
Annius  of  Yiterbo  forged  a  book  in  Philo's  name. 
which  accounted  for  the  discrepancies  by  asserting 
that  all  Christ's  ancestors,  from  David  downwards, 
had  two  names.  The  circumstance,  however,  of 
one  line  running  11)1  to  Solomon,  and  the  oilier  to 
Nathan,  was  overlooked,  other  fanciful  sugges- 
tions have  l n  offered ;  while  infidels,  from  Por- 
phyry downwards,  have  seen  in  what  they  call  the 
contradiction  of  Matthew  and  Luke  a  proof  of  the 
spuriousness  of  the  Gospels;  and  critics  like  Pro- 
fessor  Norton,  a  proof  of  such  portions  of  Scripture 
being  interpolated,  others,  like  Alfbrd,  content 
themselves  with  saying  that  solution  is  impossible, 
without  further  knowledge  than  we  possess.  But 
it  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  after  all,  in  regard 
to  the  main  points,  there  is  no  difficulty  at  all,  if 


666 


GENEALOGY  OF  JESUS  CHRIST 


only  the  documents  in  question  are  dealt  with  rea- 
sonably, and  after  the  analogy  of  similar  Jewish 
documents  in  the  0.  T. — and  that  the  clues  to  a 
right  understanding  of  them  are  so  patent,  and  so 
strongly  marked,  that  it  is  surprising  that  so  much 
diversity  of  opinion  should  have  existed.  The  fol- 
lowing propositions  will  explain  the  true  construc- 
tion of  these  genealogies : — 

1.  They  are  both  the  genealogies  of  Joseph,  t.  e. 
of  Jesus  Christ,  as  the  reputed  and  legal  son  of 
Joseph  and  Mary.  One  has  only  to  read  them  to 
be  satisfied  of  this.  The  notices  of  Joseph  as  being 
of  the  house  of  David,  by  the  same  evangelists  who 
give  the  pedigree,  are  an  additional  confirmation 
(Matt,  i.  20;  Luke  i.  27,  ii.  4,  &c.%  and  if  these 
pedigrees  were  extracted  from  the  public  archives, 
they  must  have  been  Joseph's. 

2.  The  genealogy  of  St.  Matthew  is,  as  Grotius 
most  truly  and  unhesitatingly  asserted,  Joseph's 
genealogy  as  legal  successor  to  the  throne  of  David, 
i.  e.  it  exhibits  the  successive  heirs  of  the  kingdom 
ending  with  Christ,  as  Joseph's  reputed  son.  St. 
Luke's  is  Joseph's  private  genealogy,  exhibiting  his 
real  birth,  as  Davids  son,  and  thus  showing  why  he 
was  heir  to  Solomon's  crown.  This  is  capable  of 
being  almost  demonstrated.  If  St.  Matthew's 
genealogy  had  stood  alone,  and  we  had  no  further 
information  on  this  subject  than  it  affords,  we  might 
indeed  have  thought  that  it  was  a  genealogical  stem 
in  the  strictest  sense  of  the  word,  exhibiting  Joseph's 
forefathers  in  succession,  from  David  downwards. 
But  immediately  we  find  a  second  genealogy  of  Jo- 
seph— that  in  St.  Luke's  Gospel — such  is  no  longer 
a  reasonable  opinion.  Because  if  St,  Matthew's 
genealogy,  tracing  as  it  does  the  successive  genera- 
tions through  the  long  line  of  Jewish  kings,  had 
been  Joseph's  real  paternal  stem,  there  could  not 
possibly  have  been  room  for  a  second  genealogy. 
The  steps  of  ancestry  coinciding  with  the  steps  of 
succession,  one  pedigree  only  could  in  the  nature  of 
things  be  proper.  The  mere  existence  therefore  of 
a  second  pedigree,  tracing  Joseph's  ancestry  through 
private  persons,  by  the  side  of  one  tracing  it  through 
kings,  is  in  itself  a  proof  that  the  latter  is  not  the 
true  stem  of  birth.  When,  with  this  clue,  we 
examine  St.  Matthew's  list,  to  discover  whether  it 

>  contains  in  itself  any  evidence  as  to  when  the  lineal 
descent  was  broken,  we  fix  at  once  upon  Jechonias, 
who  could  not,  we  know,  be  literally  the  father  of 
Salathiel,  because  the  word  of  God  by  the  mouth 
of  Jeremiah  had  pronounced  him  childless,  and 
declared  that  none  of  his  seed  should  sit  upon  the 
throne  of  David,  or  rule  in  Judah  (Jer.  xxii.  30). 
The  same  thing  had  been  declared  concerning  his 
father  Jehoiakim  in  Jer.  xxxvi.  30.  Jechonias 
therefore  could  not  be  the  father  of  Salathiel,  nor 
could  Christ  spring  either  from  him  or  his  father. 
Here  then  we  have  the  most  striking  confirmation 
of  the  justice  of  the  •inference  drawn  from  finding  a 
second  genealogy,  viz.  that  St.  Matthew  gives  the 
succession,  not  the  strict  birth  ;  and  we  conclude 
that  the  names  after  the  childless  Jechonias  are 
those  of  his  next  heirs,  as  also  in  1  Chr.  iii.  17. 
One  more  look  at  the  two  genealogies  convinces  us 
that,  this  conclusion  is  just ;  for  we  find  that  the 
two  next  names  following  Jechonias,  Salathiel  and 
Zorobabel,  are  actually  taken  from  the  other  ge- 
nealogy, which  teaches  us  that  Salathiel's  real 
father  was  Neri,  of  the  house  of  Nathan.  It  be- 
comes therefore  perfectly  certain,  that  Salathiel  of 
the  house  of  Nathan  became  heir  to  David's  throne 
on  the.  failure  of  Solomon's  line  in  Jechonias,  and 


that  as  such  he  and  his  descendants  were  transferred 
as  "sons  of  Jeconiah"  to  the  royal  genealogical 
table,  according  to  the  principle  of  the  Jewish  law 
laid  down  Num.  xxvii.  8-11.  The  two  genealogies 
then  coincide  for  two,  or  rather  for  four  generations, 
as  will  be  shown  below.  There  then  occur  six 
names  in  St.  Matthew,  which  are  not  found  in 
St.  Luke;  and  then  once  more  the  two  genealogies 
coincide  in  the  name  of  Matthan  or  Matthat  (Matt. 
i.  15;  Luke  iii.  24),  to  whom  two  different  sons, 
Jacob  and  Heli,  are  assigned,  but  one  and  the  same 
grandson  and  heir  Joseph,  the  husband  of  Mary, 
and  the  reputed  father  of  Jesus,  who  is  called 
Christ,  The  simple  and  obvious  explanation  of 
this  is,  on  the  same  principle  as  before,  that  Jo- 
seph was  descended  from  Joseph,  a  younger  son 
of  Abiud  (the  Juda  of  Luke  iii.  26),  but  that  on 
the  failure  of  the  line  of  Abiud's  eldest  son  in 
Eleazar,  Joseph's  grandfather  Matthan  became  the 
heir  ;  that  Matthan  had  two  sons,  Jacob  and  Heli  ; 
that  Jacob  had  no  son,  and  consequently  that 
Joseph,  the  son  of  his  younger  brother  Heli,  became 
heir  to  his  uncle,  and  to  the  throne  of  David. 
Thus  the  simple  principle  that  one  evangelist  ex- 
hibits that  genealogy  which  contained  the  successive 
heirs  to  David's  and  Solomon's  throne,  while  the 
other  exhibits  the  paternal  stem  of  him  who  was 
the  heir,  explains  all  the  anomalies  of  the  two  pedi- 
grees, their  agreements  as  well  as  their  discre- 
pancies, and  the  circumstance  of  there  being  two  at. 
all.  It  must  be  added  that  not  only  does  this 
theory  explain  all  the  phenomena,  but  that  that 
portion  of  it  which  asserts  that  Luke  gives  Joseph's 
paternal  stem  receives  a  most  remarkable  confirma- 
tion from  the  names  which  compose  that  stem. 
For  if  we  begin  with  Nathan,  we  find  that  his  son, 
Mattatha,  and  four  others,  of  whom  the  last  was 
grandfather  to  Joseph,  had  names  which  are  merely 
modifications  of  Nathan  (Matthat  twice,  and  Matta- 
thias  twice) ;  or  if  we  begin  with  Joseph,  we  shall 
find  no  less  than  three  of  his  name  between  him 
and  Nathan  :  an  evidence,  of  the  most  convincing 
kind,  that  Joseph  was  lineally  descended  from 
Nathan  in  the  way  St.  Luke  represents  him  to  be 
(comp.  Zech.  xii.  12). 

?>.  Mary,  the  mother  of  Jesus,  was  in  all  pro- 
bability the  daughter  of  Jacob,  and  first  cousin  to 
Joseph  her  husband."  So  that  in  point  of  fact, 
though  not  of  form,  "both  the  genealogies  are  as 
much  hers  as  her  husband's. 

But  besides  these  main  difficulties,  as  they  have 
been  thought  to  be,  there  are  several  others  which 
cannot,  be  passed  over  in  any  account,  however  con- 
cise, of  the  genealogies  of  Christ,  The  most  startling 
is  the  total  discrepancy  between  them  both  and 
that  of  Zerubbabel  in  the  0.  T.  (1  Chr.  iii.  19-24-). 
In  this  last,  of  seven  sons  of  Zerubbabel  not  one 
bears  the  name,  or  anything  like  the  name,  of 
Rhesa  or  Abiud.  And  of  the  next  generation  not. 
one  bears  the  name,  or  anything  like  the  name,  of 
Eliakim  or  Joanna,  which  are  in  the  corresponding 
generation  in  Matthew  and  Luke.  Nor  can  any 
subsequent  generations  be  identified.  But  this  dif- 
ference will  be  entirely  got  rid  of,  ami  a  remarkable 
harmony  established  in  its  place,  if  we  suppose 
Rhesa,  who  is  named  in  St  Luke's  Gospel  as  Zerub- 
babel's  son,  to  have  slipped  into  the  text  from  the 


a  Hippolytus  of  Thebes,  in  the  loth  century, 
asserted  tha_  Mary  was  granddaughter  of  Matthan, 
hut  by  her  mother  (Patritius,  Dissert.  i\.  ftc,  D« 
Gen.  Jcs.  Christi). 


GENEALOGY  OF  JESUS  CHRIST 


(507 


margin.  Rhcsa  is  in  fact  not  a  name  at  all,  but  it 
is  tin'  Chaldee  title  of  the  princes  of  the  captivity, 
who  at  the  end  of  the  second,  and  through  the  third 
century  after  Christ,  rose  to  great  eminence  in  the 
East,  assumed  the  state  of  sovereigns,  and  were 
considered  to  be  of  the  house  of  David.  (See  pre- 
ceding article,  p.  (>72  <(.)  These  princes  then  were 
exactly  what  Zerubbabel  was  in  his  day.  It  is  very 
probable  therefore  that  this  title,  Nt^H,  Rhcsa, 
should  have  been  placed  against  the  name  of  Zerub- 
babel by  some  early  Christian  Jew,  and  thence 
crept  into  the  text.  If  this  be  so,  St.  Luke  will 
then  give  Joanna,  'looavvas,  as  the  son  of  Zerub- 
babel. But  'luauvas  is  the  very  same  name  as 
Hananiah,  rP33n,  the  son  of  Zerubbabel  according 
to  1  Chr.  iii.  l'n. '  [Hananiah.]  In  St.  Matthew 
this  generation  is  omitted.  In  the  next  generation 
we  identify  Matthew's  Ab-jud  (Abiud),  "J-irTQN, 
with  Luke's  Juda,  in  the  Hebrew  of  that  day 
1-in*  (Jud),  and  both  with  Hodaiah,  •llTVTin,  of 
1  Chr.  iii.  24  (a  name  which  is  actually  inter- 
changed with  Juda,  Hl-liV,  Ezr.  iii.  9;  Neh.  xi.  9, 

t       : 
compared  with  Ezr.  ii.  40  ;  1  Chr.  ix.  7),  by  the 

simple  process  of  supposing  the  Shemaiah,  n\yj3C, 
of  1  Chr.  iii.  22  to  be  the  same  person  as  the 
Shimei,  ,,J??0^',  ofver.  19:  thus  at  the  same  time 
cutting  off  all  those  redundant  generations  which 
bring  this  genealogy  in  1  Chr.  iii.  down  some  200 
years  later  than  any  other  in  the  book,  and  long 
after  the  close  of  the  canon. 

The  next  difficulty  is  the  difference  in  the  num- 
ber of  generations  between  the  two  genealogies. 
St.  Matthew's  division  into  three  fourteens  gives 
only  42,  while  St.  Luke,  from  Abraham  to  Christ 
inclusive,  reckons  56,  or,  which  is  more  to  the  point 
(since  the  generations  between  Abraham  and  David 
are  the  same  in  both  genealogies),  while  St.  Matthew 
reckons  28  from  David  to  Christ,  St.  Luke  reckons 
43,  or  42  without  Rhesa.  But  the  genealogy  itself 
supplies  the  explanation.  In  the  second  tessaro- 
decade,  including  the  kings,  we  know  that  three 
generations  are  omitted — Ahaziah,  Joash,  Amaziah 
— in  order  to  reduce  the  generations  from  17  to  14: 
the  difference  between  these  17  and  the  19  of  St. 
Luke  being  very  small.  So  in  like  manner  it  is 
obvious  that  the  generations  have  been  abridged  in 
the  same  way  in  the  third  division  to  keep  to  the 
number  14.  The  true  number  would  lie  one  much 
nearer  St.  Luke's  '_':;  (22  without  Rhesa),  implying 
the  omission  of  about  seven  generations  in  this  last 
division.  Dr.  Jlill  lias  shown  that  it  was  a  common 
practice  with  the  Jews  to  distribute  genealogies 
into  divisions,  each  containing  some  favourite  or 
mystical  number,  and  that,  in  order  to  do  this, 
generations  were  either  repeated  or  left  out.  Thus 
in  Philo  the  generations  from  Adam  to  Moses  are 
divided  into  two  decads  ami  one  hebdomad,  by  the 
repetition  of  Abraham.  Bui  in  a  Samaritan  poem 
the  very  same  series  is  divided  into  two  deeads 
only,  by  the  omission  of  six  of  the  leasl  important 
names  (  I  indication,  p.  1 1 ♦  ►  —  1  IS). 

Another  difficulty  is  the  apparent  deficiency  in 
the  number  of  the  last  tessarodecad,  which  seems 
to  contain  only  1  3  names,  Bui  the  explanation  of 
this  is,  that  either  in  the  process  of  translation,  or 
otherwise,  the   names   of  Jehoiakim  and  Jehoiachin 

b  Sec  .Tei.  xxii.  11. 

c  Those  of  Zadok,  ELeman,  Ahimoth,  Asaph,  Ethan, 
in  1  Chr,  vi.  ;   that  of  Abiathar,    made  up  from   dif- 


have  got  confused  and  expressed  by  the  one  name 
Jeehonias.  For  that  Jechonias,  in  ver.  11,  means 
Jehoiakim,  while  in  ver.  12  it  means  Jehoiachin,  is 
quite  certain,  as  Jerome  saw  long  ago.  Jehoiachin 
had  no  brothers,  but  Jehoiakim  had  three  brothers, 
of  whom  two  at  least  sat  upon  the  throne,  if  not 
three,b  and  were  therefore  named  in  the  genealogy. 
The  two  names  are  very  commonly  considered  as 
the  same,  both  by  Creek  and  Latin  writers,  e.  g. 
Clemens  Alex.,  Ambrose,  Africanus,  Epiphanius,  as 
well  as  the  author  of  1  Esdr.  (i.  37,  43),  and  others. 
Irenaeus  also  distinctly  asserts  that  Joseph's  gene- 
alogy, as  given  by  St.  Matthew,  expresses  both 
Joiakim  and  Jechonias.  It  seems  that  this  identity 
of  name  has  led  to  some  corruption  in  the  text  of 
very  early  date,  and  that  the  clause  'Iexoi,'tas  5e 
eyevvr]ae  rhv  'lexoviay  has  fallen  out  between 
avrov  and  iirl  rrjs  jiter.  Ba/3.,  in  ver.  11.  The 
Cod.  Vat.  B.  contains  the  clause  only  after  Ba/3u- 
Aicvos  in  ver.  12,  where  it  seems  less  proper  (see 
Alford's  G.  T.). 

The  last  difficulty  of  sufficient  importance  to  he 
mentioned  here  is  a  chronological  one.  In  both 
the  genealogies  there  are  but  three  names  between 
Salmon  and  David — Boaz,  Obed,  Jesse.  But,  ac- 
cording to  the  common  chronology,  from  the  en- 
trance into  Canaan  (when  Salmon  was  come  to  man's 
estate)  to  the  birth  of  David  was  405  years,  or 
from  that  to  500  years  and  upwards.  Now  for 
about  an  equal  period,  from  Solomon  to  Jehoiachin, 
St.  Luke's  genealogy  contains  20  names.  Obviously 
therefore  either  the  chronology  or  the  genealogy  is 
wrong.  But  it  cannot  be  the  genealogy  (which  is 
repeated  four  times  over  without  any  variation), 
because  it  is  supported  by  eight  other  genealogies,0 
which  all  contain  about  the  same  number  of  gene- 
rations  from  the  Patriarchs  to  David  as  David's 
own  line  does:  except  that,  as  was  to  be  expected 
from  Judah,  Boaz,  and  Jesse  being  all  advanced  in 
years  at  the  time  of  the  birth  of  their  sons,  David's 
line  is  one  of  the  shortest.  The  number  of  genera- 
tions in  the  genealogies  referred  to  is  14  in  tive, 
15  in  two,  and  11  in  one,  to  correspond  with  the 
11  in  David's  line.  There  are  other  genealogies 
where  the  series  is  not  complete,  but  not  one  which 
contains  more  generations.  It  is  the  province  there- 
fore of  Chronology  to  square  its  calculations  to  the 
genealogies.  It  must  suffice  here  to  assert  that  the 
shortening  the  interval  between  the  Exodus  and 
David  by  about  200  years,  which  brings  it  to  the 
length  indicated  by  the  genealogies,  does  in  the 
most  remarkable  manner  bring  Israelitish  history 
into  harmony  with  Egyptian,  with  the  traditional 
Jewish  date  of  the  Exodus,  with  the  fragment  of 
Edomitish  history  preserved  in  Gen,  xxxyi.  :'>l — 39, 
and  with  the  internal  evidence  of  the  israelitish 
history  itself.     The  following  pedigree  will  exhibit 

the     two 


tin?  successive   genet 

ations 

as 

given    by 

Evangelists: — 

.Vim 

1 

In 

1 

Lamed] 

St.  Luke. 

Beth 

1 
Baa 

1 
C.-iinun 

1 
.M.il. let 

1 
Jared 

Enoch 

1 

M  aim.  il:. 

1 
Noah 

1 
Stem 

1 

AiptMUOMl 

CttfMN 

1 
Si, In 

,„L 
I 

fcrent  notices  ol  his  ancestors  in  i  Sam. ;  thai  of  Saul, 
from  l  Chr.  riii.,  i\.,  and  l  Sam.  i\. :  ami  tint  of 
Zaliad  ill  1  Chr.  ii. 

2X2 


668    GENEALOGY  OF  JESUS  CHRIST 


According 
to  Matt, 
mid  Luke. 


Ptaalec  (Peleg) 

Ragau  (Reu) 

Saruch  (Serug) 

Nachor 

Thara  (Terah) 

I 

Abraham 

I 


Jarob 

Judah 


Pharez 
Ezrom 

Aram  (Ram) 
Amitmdab 
NaJs.cn 

Salmon=Rachab 
Booz^Ruth 

Obed 

I 
Jesse 

David=Bathsheba 


Roboa 
Abia 


Asa 

I 


Jomm  (Ahazmh, 


Achaz 
Ezekias 


Amun 

Josias 

Jechonias  (i.  e.  .!<■- 
hoiakim)  and  his 
brothers  ft.  e.  Je- 
hoahaz,  Zedekiah, 
and  Shallum) 

Jechonias  (i.  e.  Je- 
hoiachin),      child- 


Ma  ttatha 
Menan 

i 

Melea 

Eliakim 

I 

Jonan 

Joseph 

Juda 

Simeon 

I 

Levi 

I 

Matthat 

I 
Jorim 


Eli, 


Kl 


Jose 

I 
Er 

lodam 
I 
Cosam 


\ddi 


(Matt,  and  Luke") 


Melchi 

I 
Neri 


Salatbiel 

Zorobabel  (the  Prince  or  Rhesa) 

Joanna  (Hananiah,  in  1  Chr.  iii.  19, 
omitted  by  Matthew,  i.  13) 

Juda,  or  Ab-iud  (Hodaiah,  1  Chr.  iii.  4 


Eliakim 

I 

Azor 

Sadoc 

Achim 

I 
Eliud 

Eleazar 


(Mall,  and  t.ukrA 


I 

Maltathiii 

I 

Maath 

I 
Nagge 

Esli 

Naum 


Mnttathii 

I 
Joseph 

I 
Janna 

I 

Melchi 

I 

Levi 

I 


(Matt,  and  Luke.') 


Mary    =     Jacob's  heir  was  Joseph 

Jesus,  called  Christ. 

Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  the  whole  number  of 
generations  from  Adam  to  Christ,  both  inclusive, 
is  74,  without  the  second  Cainan  and  Rhesa.     In- 


GENERATION 

eluding  these  two,  and  adding  the  name  of  GOD, 
Augustine  reckoned  77,  and  thought  the  number 
typical  of  the  forgiveness  of  all  sins  in  baptism  by 
Him  who  was  thus  born  in  the  77th  generation, 
alluding  to  Matt,  xviii.  22  ;  with  many  other  won- 
derful speculations  on  the  hidden  meaning  of  the 
numbers  3,  4,  7,  10,  11,  and  their  additions  and 
multiplications  (Quaest.  Evang.  lib.  11).  Irenaeus, 
who  probably,  like  Africanus  and  Eusebius,  omitted 
Matthat  and  Levi,  reckoned  72  generations,  which 
he  connected  with  the  72  nations  into  which,  ac- 
cording to  Gen.  x.  (LXX.),  mankind  was  divided, 
and  so  other  fathers  likewise. 

For  an  account  of  the  different  explanations  that 
have  been  given,  both  by  ancient  and  modern  com- 
mentators, the  reader  may  refer  to  the  elaborate 
Dissertation  of  Patritius  in  his  2nd  vol.  Be  Evan- 
geliis ;  who,  however,  does  not  contribute  much  to 
elucidate  the  difficulties  of  the  case.  The  opinions 
advanced  in  the  foregoing  article  are  fully  discussed 
in  the  writer's  work  on  the  Genealogies  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ ;  and -much  valuable  matter  will 
be  found  in  Dr.  Mill's  Vindication  of  the  Geneal., 
and  in  Grotius'  note  on  Luke  iii.  23.  Other  trea- 
tises are,  Gomarus,  De  Geneal.  Christi;  Hottinger, 
Dissert,  duae  de  Geneal.  Christi;  G.  G.  Voss,  Be 
J.  Chr:  Geneal.;  Yardley,  On  the  Geneal.  of  J.  Chr., 
&c.  [A.  C.  H.] 

GENERATION.  1.  Abstract  .—time,  either 
definite,  or  indefinite.  The  primary  meaning  of 
the  Heb.  "TH  is  revolution  ;  hence  period  of  time  : 
comp.  wepioSos,  eviavr6s,  and  annus.  From  the 
general  idea  of  a  period  comes  the  more  special 
notion  of  an  age  or  generation  of  men,  the  or- 
dinary period  of  human  life.  In  this  point  of  view 
the  history  of  the  word  seems  to  be  directly  con- 
trasted with  that  of  the  Lat.  seculum ;  which, 
starting  with  the  idea  of  breed,  or  race,  acquired 
the  secondary  signification  of  a  definite  period  ot 
time  (Censorin.  de  Bie  Nat.  c.  17). 

In  the  long-lived  Patriarchal  age  a  generation 
seems  to  have  been  computed  at  100  years  (Gen. 
xv.  16;  comp.  13,  and  Ex.  xii.  40);  the  later 
reckoning,  however,  was  the  same  which  has  been 
adopted  by  other  civilised  nations,  viz.  from  thirty 
to  forty  years  (Job  xlii.  16).  For  generation  in 
the  sense  of  a  definite  period  of  time,  see  Gen.  xv. 
16  ;  Deut.  xxiii.  3,  4,  8,  &c. 

As  an  indefinite  period  of  time  : — for  time  past, 
see  Deut.  xxxii.  7  ;  Is.  lviii.  12 ;  for  time  future, 
see  Ps.  xlv.  17,  lxxii.  5,  &c. 

2.  Concrete: — the  men  of  an  age,  or -time.  So 
generation  =  contemporaries  (Gen.  vi.  9  ;  Is.  liii. 
8  ;  see  Lowth  ad  loc. ;  Ges.  Lex. ;  better  than 
"  aeterna  generatio,"  or  "  multitudo  creditura  ") ; 
posterity,  especially  in  legal  formulae  (Lev.  iii.  17, 
&c.)  ;  fathers,  or  ancestors  (Ps.  xlix.  19  ;  Rosenm. 
Schol.  ad  loc. ;  comp.  2  Chr.  xxxiv.  28).  Dropping 
the  idea  of  time,  generation  comes  to  mean  a  race, 
or  class  of  men ;  e.  g.  of  the  righteous  (Ps.  xiv. 
5,  &c) ;  of  the  wicked  (Deut.  xxxii.  5 ;  Jer.  vii. 
29,  where  "  generation  of  his  wrath  "  =  against 
which  God  is  angry). 

In  A.  V.  of  N.  Test,  three  words  are  rendered  by 
generation : — 

yei>((Tis,  ytvvi\ixara,  yfvea. 

yeveais,  properly  generatio ;  but  in  Matt.  i.  1 

&(p\os  7€^€<reo.s  =  nn^n  13D  =  a  genealogical 

scheme. 

yevviifiara  pi.  of   yivviJixu.,  Matt.   iii.    7,    &<•., 


GENESARETH 

A.  V.  generation  ;  more  properly  brood,  as  the 
result  of  generation  in  its  primary  sense. 

761/ea  in  most  of  its  uses  corresponds  with  the 
Heb.--|'n. 

For  the  abstract  and  indefinite,  see  Luke  i.  50, 
Eph.  iii.  21  (A.  V.  "  ages"),  future :  Actsxv.  21 
(A.  V.  "  of  old  time"),  Eph.  iii.  5  (A.  V.  "  ages"), 
past. 

For  concrete,  see  Matt.  xi.  16. 

For  generation  without  reference  to  time,  see 
Luke  xvi.  8,  "  in  their  generation,"  i.  c.  in  their 
disposition,  "  indoles,  ingenium,  et  ratio  hominum," 
Schleusn,  Matt.  i.  17,  "all  the  generations;"  either 
concrete  use,  sc.  "  familiae  sibi  invicem  succe- 
dentes  ; "  or  abstract  and  definite,  according  to  the 
view  which  may  be  taken  of  the  difficulties  con- 
nected with  the  genealogies  of  our  Lord.  [Genea- 
logy.] [T.  E.'B.] 

GENES'ARETH.  In  this  form  the  name 
appears  in  the  edition  of  the  A.  V.  of  1611,  in 
Mark  vi.  53,  and  Luke  v.  1,  following  the  spelling 
of  the  Vulgate.  In  Matt.  xiv.  34,  where  the  Vulg. 
has  Genesar,  the  A.  V.  originally  followed  the  Re- 
ceived Greek  Text — Genesaret.  The  oldest  MSS. 
have,  however,  Teuvrjaapfr  in  each  of  the  three 
places.     [GeNNESAHEX.J 

GEN'ESIS  (rVty&02;  reWts:  Genesis; 
called  also  by  the  later  Jews  m1^  "1BD),  the 
first  book  of  the  Law  or  Pentateuch. 

A.  The  book  of  Genesis  has  an  interest  and  an 
importance  to  which  no  other  document  of  antiquity 
can  pretend.  If  not  absolutely  the  oldest  book  in 
the  world,  it  is  the  oldest  which  lays  any  claim 
to  being  a  trustworthy  history.  There  may  be 
some  papyrus-rolls  in  our  Museums  which  were 
written  in  Egypt  about  the  same  time  that  the 
genealogies  of  the  Semitic  race  were  so  carefully 
collected  in  the  tents  of  the  Patriarchs.  But  these 
rolls  at  best  contain  barren  registers  of  little  service 
to  the  historian.  It  is  said  that  there  are  fragments 
of  Chinese  literature  which  in  their  present  form 
date  back  as  far  as  2200  years  B.C. ,  and  even  more." 
But  they  are  either  calendars  containing  astrono- 
mical calculations,  or  records  of  merely  local  and 
temporary  interest.  Genesis,  on  the  contrary,  is 
rich  in-  details  respecting  other  races  besides  the 
race  to  which  it  more  immediately  belongs.  And 
the  Jewish  pedigrees  there  so  studiously  preserved 
are  but  the  scaffolding  whereon  is  reared  a  temple 
of  universal  history. 

If  the  religious  books  of  other  nations  make 
any  pretensions  to  vie  with  it  in  antiquity,  in  all 
other  respects  they  are  immeasurably  interior.  The 
Mantras,  the  oldest  portions  of  the  Vedas,  are,  it 
would  seem,  as  old  as  the  fourteenth  century  B.C. b 
The  Zendavesta,  in  the  opinion  of  competent  scho- 
lars, is  of  very  much  more  modern  date.  Of  the 
Chinese  sacred  books,  the  oldest,  the  fib-king,  is 
undoubtedly  of  a  venerable  antiquity,  but  it  is  no1 
certain  that  it  was  a  religious  book  at  all ;  while 
the  writings  attributed  to  Confucius  are  certainly 
not  earlier  than  the  sixth  centur]   B.C.' 

But  Genesis  is  neither  like  the  Vedas,  a  colleci  ion 
of  hymns  more  or  less  sublime ;  nor  like  the  Zenda- 
vesta, a  philosophic  speculation  on  the  origin  of  all 
things;  nor  like  the  Vih-king,  an  unintelligible 
jumble  whose    expositors    could    twist    it   from    a 


GENESIS 


069 


*  Gfrorer,  Urgcschichte,  i.  s.  215. 
b  See  Colebroke,  Asiat.  lies.  vii.  283,  and  Professor 
Wilson's  preface  to  his  translation  of  the  Big-Veda, 


cosmological  essay  into  a  standard  treatise  on  ethic'al 
philosophy."1  It  is  a  history,  and  it  is  a  religious 
history.  The  earlier  portion  of  the  book,  so  far  as 
the  end  of  the  eleventh  chapter,  may  be  properly 
termed  a  history  of  the  world ;  the  latter  is  a 
history  of  the  fathers  of  the  Jewish  race.  But 
from  first  to  last  it  is  a  religious  histoiy :  it  begins 
with  the  creation  of  the  world  and  of  man  ;  it  tells 
of  the  early  happiness  of  a  Paradise  in  which  God 
spake  with  man ;  of  the  first  sin  and  its  conse- 
quences ;  of  the  promise  of  Redemption ;  of  the 
gigantic  growth  of  sin,  and  the  judgment  of  the 
Flood ;  of  a  new  earth,  and  a  new'  covenant  with 
man,  its  unchangeableness  typified  by  the  bow  in 
the  heavens  ;  of  the  dispersion  of  the  human  race 
over  the  world.  And  then  it  passes  to  the  story 
of  Redemption  ;  to  the  promise  given  to  Abraham, 
and  renewed  to  Isaac  and  to  Jacob,  and  to  all  that 
chain  of  circumstances  which  paved  the  way  for  the 
great  symbolic  act  of  Redemption,  when  with  a 
mighty  hand  and  a  stretched  out  arm  Jehovah 
brought  his  people  out  of  Egypt. 

It  is  very  important  to  bear  in  mind  this  reli- 
gious aspect  of  the  history  if  we  would  put  our- 
selves in  a  position  rightly  to  understand  it.  Of 
course  the  tacts  must  be  treated  like  any  other 
historical  facts,  sifted  in  the  same  way,  and  sub- 
jected to  the  same  laws  of  evidence.  But  if  we 
would  judge  of  the  work  as  a  whole  we  must  not 
forget  the  evident  aim  of  the  writer.  It  is  only  in 
this  way  we  can  understand,  for  instance,  why  the 
history  of  the  Fall  is  given  with  so  much  minute- 
ness of  detail,  whereas  of  whole  generations  of  men 
we  have  nothing  but  a  bare  catalogue.  And  only 
in  this  way  can  we  account  for  the  fact  that  by  tar 
the  greater  portion  of  the  book  is  occupied  not  with 
the  fortunes  of  nations,  but  with  the  biographies  ot 
the  three  patriarchs.  For  it  was  to  Abraham,  to 
Isaac,  and  to  Jacob,  that  God  revealed  himself.  It 
was  to  them  that  the  promise  was  given,  which  was 
to  be  the  hope  of  Israel  till  "the  fulness  of  the  time" 
should  come.  And  hence  to  these  wandering  sheikhs 
attaches  a  grandeur  and  an  interest  greater  than 
that  of  the  Babels  and  Nimrods  of  the  world.  The 
minutest  circumstances  of  their  lives  are  worthier 
to  be  chronicled  than  the  rise  and  fall  of  empires. 
And  this  not  merely  from  the  patriotic  feeling  of 
the  writer  as  a  Jew,  but  from  his  religious  feeling 
as  one  of  the,  chosen  race.  He  lived  in  the  land 
given  to  the  fathers  ;  he  looked  for  the  seed  pro- 
mised to  the  fathers,  in  whom  himself  and  all  the 
families  of  the  eaith  should  be  blessed. 

B.  Unity  and  Design. — That  a  distinct  plan 
and  method  characterise  the  work  is  now  generally 
admitted.  This  is  acknowledged  in  fact  quite  as 
much  by  those  who  contend  for,  as  by  those  who 
deny  the  existence  of  different  documents  in  the 
book.  Ewald  and  Tuch  are  no  less  decided  advo- 
cates of  the  unity  of  Genesis,  so  far  as  its  plan  is 
concerned,  than  Ranks  or  Hengstenberg.  Ewald 
indeed  ( in  bis  Composition  der  Genesis)  was  the 
first,  who  established  it  satisfactorily,  and  clearly 
pointed  out  the  principle  on  which  it  rests. 

What  then  is  the  plan  of  the  writer?  First,  we 
must  bear  in  mind  that  Genesis  is  alter  all  but  a 

po.  tion  of  a  larger  work.     The  five  I ks  of  the 

Pentateuch  form  a  consecutive  whole:  they  are  not 
merely  a  collection    of  ancient    fragments   loosely 


o  Gfrorer,  i.  270. 

<i  Ilardwick.  Christ  and  other  Masters,  iii.  i.  p.  1G. 


670 


GENESIS 


strung  together,  but,  as  we  shall  prove  elsewhere, 
a  well-digested  and  connected  composition.  [Pen- 
tateuch.] 

The  great  subject  of  this  history  is  the  establish- 
ment of  the  Theocracy.  Its  central  point  is  the 
giving  of  the  Law  on  Sinai,  and  the  solemn  covenant' 
there  ratified,  whereby  the  Jewish  nation  was  con- 
stituted "  a  kingdom  of  priests  and  a  holy  nation  to 
Jehovah."  With  reference  to  this  great  central 
fact  all  the  rest  of  the  narrative  is  grouped. 

Israel  is  the  people  of  God.  God  rules  in  the 
midst  of  them,  hairing  chosen  them  to  Himself. 
But  a  nation  must  have  laws,  therefore  He  gives 
them  a  law  ;  and,  in  virtue  of  their  peculiar  relation- 
ship to  God,  this  body  of  laws  is  both  religious  and 
political,  defining  their  duty  to  Cod  as  well  as  their 
duty  to  their  neighbour.  Further,  a  nation  must 
have  a  land,  and  the  promise  of  the  land  and  the 
preparation  for  its  possession  are  all  along  kept  in 
view. 

The  book  of  Genesis  then  (with  the  first  chapters 
of  Exodus)  describes  the  steps  which  led  to  the 
establishment  of  the  Theocracy.  In  reading  it  we 
must  remember  that  it  is  but  a  part  of  a  more  ex- 
tended work;  and  we  must  also  bear  in  mind  these 
two  prominent  ideas,  which  give  a  characteristic 
unity  to  the  whole  composition,  viz.,  the  people  of 
God,  and  the  promised  land. 

We  shall  then  observe  that  the  history  of  Abra- 
ham holds  the  same  relation  to  the  other  portions 
of  Genesis,  which  the  giving  of  the  law  does  to  the 
entire  Pentateuch.  Abraham  is  the  father  of  the 
Jewish  Nation  :  to  Abraham  the  Land  of  Canaan  is 
first  given  in  promise.  Isaac  and  Jacob,  though 
also  prominent  figures  in  the  narrative,  yet  do  but 
inherit  the  promise  as  Abraham's  children,  and 
Jacob  especially  is  the  chief  connecting  link  in  the 
chain  of  events  which  leads  finally  to  the  posses- 
sion of  the  land  of  Canaan.  In  like  manner  the 
former  section  of  the  book  is  written  with  the  same 
obvious  purpose.  It  is  a  part  of  the  writer's  plan  to 
tell  us  what  the  Divine  preparation  of  the  world 
was  in  order  to  show,  first,  the  significance  of  the 
call  of  Abraham,  and  next,  the  true  nature  of  the 
Jewish  theocracy.  He  does  not  (as  Tuch  asserts) 
work  backwards  from  Abraham,  till  he  comes  in 
spite  of  himself  to  the  beginning  of  all  things.  He 
does  not  ask,  Who  was  Abraham  ?  answei  ing,  of  the 
posterity  of  Shem ;  and  who  was  Shem  ?  a  son  of 
Noah  ;  and  who  was  Noah  ?  &c.  But  he  begins 
with  the  creation  of  the  world,  because  the  God 
who  created  the  world  and  the  God  who  revealed 
Himself  to  the  fathers  is  the  same  God.  Jehovah, 
who  commanded  His  people  to  keep  holy  the  seventh 
day,  was  the  same  God  who  in  six  days  created 
the  heavens  and  the  earth,  and  rested  on  the 
seventh  day  from  all  His  work.  The  God  who, 
when  man  had  fallen,  visited  him  in  mercy,  and 
gave  him  a  promise  of  redemption  and  victory,  is 
the  God  who  sent  Moses  to  deliver  His  people  out 
of  Egypt.  He  who  made  a  covenant  with  Noah, 
and  through  him  with  "  all  the  families  of  the 
earth,"  is  the  God  who  also  made  Himself  known  as 
the  God  of  Abraham,  of  Isaac,  and  of  Jacob.  In 
a  word,  creation  and  redemption  are  eternally  linked 
together.  This  is  the  idea  which  in  fact  gives  its 
shape  to  the  history,  although  its  distinct  enuncia- 
tion is  reserved  for  the  N.  T.  There  we  learn  that 
all  things  were  created  by  and  for  Christ,  and  that 
in  him  all  things  consist  (Col.  i.  1(1,  17)  ;  ami  that 
by  the  church  is  made  known  unto  principalities 
and  powers  the  manifold  wisdom  of  God.     It  would 


GENESIS 

be  impossible,  therefore,  for  a  book  which  tells  us 
of  the  beginning  of  the  church,  not  to  tell  us  also 
of  the  beginning  of  the  world. 

The  book  of  Genesis  has  thus  a  character  at"  once 
special  and  universal.  It  embraces  the  world  ;  it 
speaks  of  God  as  the  God  of  the  whole  human  race. 
But  as  the  introduction  to  Jewish  history,  it  makes 
the  universal  interest  subordinate  to  the  national. 
Its  design  is  to  show  how  God  revealed  Himself  to 
the  first  fathers  of  the  Jewish  race,  in  order  that 
He  might  make  to  Himself  a  nation  who  should  be 
His  witnesses  iu  the  midst  of  the  earth.  This  is 
the  inner  principle  of  unity  which  pervades  the 
book.  Its  external  framework  we  are  now  to 
examine.  Five  principal  persons  are  the  pillars,  so 
to  speak,  on  which  the  whole  superstructure  rests, 
Adam,  Noah,  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob. 

I.  Adam. — The  creation  of  the  world,  and  the 
earliest  history  of  mankind  (ch.  i.-iii.).  As  yet,  no 
divergence  of  the  different  families  of  man. 

II.  Noah. — The  history  of  Adam's  descendants 
to  the  death  of  Noah  (iv.-ix.). — Here  we  have  (1) 
the  line  of  Cain  branching  off  while  the  history 
follows  the  fortunes  of  Seth,  whose  descendants 
are  (2)  traced  in  genealogical  succession,  and  in  an 
unbroken  line  as  far  as  Noah,  and  (3)  the  history 
of  Noah  himself  (vi.-ix.),  continued  to  his  death. 

III.  Abraham. — Noah's  posterity  till  the  death 
of  Abraham  (x.-xxv.  18). — Here  we  have  (1)  the 
peopling  of  the  whole  earth  by  the  descendants  of 
Noah's  three  sons  (xi.  1-9).  The  history  of  two  of 
these  is  then  dropped,  and  (2)  the  line  of  Shem  only 
pursued  (xi.  10-32)  as  far  as  Terah  and  Abraham, 
where  the  genealogical  table  breaks  oft'.  (3) 
Abraham  is  now  the  prominent  figure  (xii.-xxv. 
18).  But  as  Terah  had  two  other  sons,  Nahor  and 
Haran  (xi.  27),  some  notices  respecting  their  fami- 
lies are  added.  Lot's  migration  with  Abraham  into 
the  land  of  Canaan  is  mentioned,  as  well  as  the 
fact  that  he  was  the  father  of  Moab  and  Amnion 
(xix.  37,  38),  nations  whose  later  history  was 
intimately  connected  with  that  of  the  posterity  of 
Abraham.  Nahor  remained  in  Mesopotamia,  but 
his  family  is  briefly  enumerated  (xxii.  20-24), 
chiefly  no  doubt  for  Rebekah's  sake,  who  was  after- 
wards the  wife  of  Isaac.  Of  Abraham's  own 
children,  there  branches  oft'  first  the  line  of  Ishmael 
(xxi.  9,  &c),  and  next  the  children  by  Keturah  ; 
and  the  genealogical  notices  of  these  two  branches 
of  his  posterity  are  apparently  brought  together 
(xxv.  1-6,  and  xxv.  12-18),  in  order  that,  being  here 
severally  dismissed  at  the  end  of  Abraham's  life,  _ 
the  main  stream  of  the  narrative  may  flow  in  the 
channel  of  Isaac's  fortunes. 

IV.  Isaac. — Isaac's  life  (xxv.  19-xxxv.  29),  a 
life  in  itself  retiring  and  uneventful.  But  in  his 
sons  the  final  separation  takes  place,  leaving  the 
field  clear  for  the  great  story  of  the  chosen  seed. 
Even  when  Nahor 's  family  comes  on  the  scene,  as 
it  does  in  ch.  xxix.,  we  hear  only  so  much  of  it  as 
is  necessary  to  throw  light  on  Jacob's  history. 

V.  Jacob.—  The  history  of  Jacob  and  Joseph 
(xxxvi.  1). — Here,  after  Isaac's  death,  we  have  (1) 
the  genealogy  of  Esau,  xxxvi.,  who  thru  drops  out 
of  the  narrative,  in  order  that  (2)  the  history  of 
the  Patriarchs  may  be  carried  on  without  inter- 
mission to  the  death  of  Joseph  (xxxvii-1). 

Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  a  specific  plan  is  pre- 
served throughout.  The  main  purpose  is  never 
forgotten.  God's  relation  to  Israel  holds  the  first 
place  in  the  writer's  mind.  It  is  this  which  it  is 
his  object  to  convey.     The  history  of  thai  chosen 


GENESIS 

seed  who  were  the  heirs  of  the  promise,  and  the 
guardians  of  the  Divine  oracles,  is  the  only  history 
which  interprets  man's  relation  to  GocL  By  its 
light  all  others  shine,  and  may  be  read  when  the 
time  shall  come.  .Meanwhile  as  the  different  fami- 
lies drop  oft'  here  and  there  from  the  principal 
stock,  their  course  is  briefly  indicated.  A  hint  is 
given  of  their  parentage  and  their  migrations;  and 
then  the  narrative  returns  to  its  regular  channel. 
Thus  the  whole  book  may  be  compared  to  one  of 
those  vast  American  rivers  which,  instead  of  being 
fed  by  tributaries,  send  oil'  here  and  there  certain 
lesser  streams  or  bayous,  as  they  are  termed,  the 
main  current  meanwhile  flowing  oil  with  its  great 
mass  of  water  to  the  sea. 

Beyond  all  doubt  then,  we  may  trace  in  the  book 
of  Genesis  in  its  present  form  a  systematic  plan. 
It  is  no  hasty  compilation,  no  mere  collection  of 
ancient  fragments  without  order  or  arrangement. 
It  coheres  by  an  internal  principle  of  unity.  Its 
whole  structure  presents  a  very  definite  and  clearly 
marked  outline.  But  does  it  follow  from  this  that 
the  book,  as  it  at  present  stands,  is  the  work  of  a 
single  author  ? 

0.  Integrity. — This  is  the  next  question  we  have 
to  consider.  Granting  that  this  unity  of  design, 
which  we  have  already  noticed,  leads  to  the  con- 
elusion  that  the  work  must  have  been  by  the  same 
hand,  are  there  any  reasons  for  supposing  that  the 
author  availed  himself  in  its  composition  of  earlier 
documents?  and  if  so,  are  we  still  able  by  critical 
investigation  to  ascertain  where  they  have  been 
introduced  into  the  body  of  the  work  ? 

1.  Now  it  is  almost  impossible  to  read  the  book 
of  Genesis  with  anything  like  a  critical  eye  without 
being  struck  with  the  great  peculiarities  of  style 
and  language  which  certain  portions  of  it  present. 
Thus,  for  instance,  chap.  ii.  JJ-iii.  -4  is  quite  diffe- 
rent both  from  chap.  i.  and  from  chap.  iv.  Again, 
chap.  xiv.  and  (according  to  Jahn)  chap,  xxiii.  are 
evidently  separate  documents  transplanted  in  their 
original  form  without  correction  or  modification  into 
the  existing  work.  In  fact  there  is  nothing  like 
uniformity  of  style  till  we  come  to  the  history  of 
Joseph. 

2.  We  are  led  to  the  same  conclusion  by  the 
inscriptions  which  are  prefixed  to  certain  sections, 
as  ii.  4,  v.  1,  vi.  9,  x.  1,  xi.  lit,  27,  and  seem  to 
indicate  so  many  older  documents. 

:'>.  Lastly,  tlie  distinct  use  of  the  Divine  names, 
Jehovah  in  some  sections,  and  Elohim  in  others,  is 
characteristic  of  two  different  writers;  and  other 
peculiarities  of  diction  it  has  been  observed  fall 
in  with  this  usage,  and  go  far  to  establish  the 
theory.  All  this  is  quite  in  harmony  with  what 
we  might  have  expected  <i  priori,  viz.,  that  if 
Moses  or  any  later  writer  were  the  author  of  the 
book  he  would  have  availed  himself  of  existing 
traditions  either  oral  or  written.  That  they  might 
have  been  written  is  now  established  beyond  all 
doubt,  the  art  of  writing  having  been  proved  to  be 
much  earlier  than  Moses.  That  they  Were  Written 
we  infer  from  the  bonk  itself. 

Astruc,  a  Belgian  physician,  was  the  fust  who 
broached  the  theory  thai  Genesis  was  based  on  a 
collection  of  older  documents.  [PENTATEUCH.] 
of  these  he  profess., I  to  point  out  as  man]  as 
twelve,  the  use  of  the  Divine  names,  however, 
having  in  the  first  instance  >iiLr'_'e-tod  the  distinc- 
tion.    Subsequently  Eichhorn  adopted  this  theory, 

so   far    as   to   admit    that    two  documents,   the   

Elohistic,  and  the  other  Jehovistic,  were  the  main 


GENESIS 


(371 


sources  of  the  book,  though  he  did  not  altogether 
exclude  others.  Since  his  time  the  theory  has  been 
maintained,  but  variously  modified,  by  one  class  of 
critics,  whilst  another  class  has  strenuously  opposed 
it.  De  Wette,  Knobel.  Tuch,  Delitzsch,  &c,  think 
that  two  original  documents  may  be  traced  through- 
out tin'  work,  the  Jehovist,  who  was  also  probably 
the  editor  of  the  book  in  its  present  form,  having 
designed  merely  to  complete  the  work  of  the 
Elohist.  Hengstenberg,  Keil,  Baumgarten,  and 
Havemick  contend  for  a  single  author.  The  great 
weight  of  probability  lies  on  the  side  of  those  who 
argue  for  the  existence  of  different  documents. 
The  evidence  already  alluded  to  is  strong  ;  and 
nothing  can  be  more  natural  than  that  an  honest 
historian  should  seek  to  make  his  work  more 
valuable  by  embodying  in  it  the  most  ancient 
records  of  his  race ;  the  higher  the  value,  which 
they  possessed  in  his  eyes,  the  more  anxious  would 
he  be  to  preserve  them  in  their  original  form. 
Those  particularly  in  the  earlier  portion  of  the 
work  were  perhaps  simply  transcribed.  In 
one  instance  we  have  what  looks  like  an  omission, 
ii.  4,  where  the  inscription  seems  to  promise  a 
larger  cosmogony.  Here  and  there  throughout  the 
book  we  meet  with  a  later  remark,  intended  to 
explain  or  supplement  the  earlier  monument. 
And  in  some  instances  there  seems  to  have  been  so 
complete  a  fusion  of  the  two  principal  documents, 
the  Elohistic  and  the  Jehovistic,  that  it  is  no  longer 
possible  accurately  to  distinguish  them.  The  later 
writer,  the  Jehovist,  instead  of  transcribing  the 
Elohistic  account  intact,  thought  tit  to  blend  and 
intersperse  with  it  his  own  remarks.  We  have  an 
instance  of  this,  aceordiug  to  Hupfeld  {Die  Quellen 
der.  Genesis),  in  chap,  vii.:  vers.  1-10  are  usually 
assigned  to  the  Jehovist;  but  whilst  he  admits 
this,  he  detects  a  large  admixture  of  Elohistic 
phraseology  and  colouring  in  the  narrative.  But 
this  sort  of  criticism  it  must  be  admitted  is 
very  doubtful.  Many  other  instances  might  be 
mentioned  where  there  is  the  same  difficulty  in 
assigning  their  own  to  the  several  authors.  Thus 
in  sections  generally  recognised  as  Jehovistic,  chaps. 
xii.,  xiii.,  six.,  here  and  there  a  sentence  or  a 
phrase  occurs,  which  seems  to  betray  a  different 
origin,  as  xii.  5,  xiii.  0,  xix.  29.  These  anomalies, 
however,  though  it  may  be  difficult  to  account  for 
them,  can  hardly  be  considered  of  sufficient  force 
entirely  to  overthrow  the  theory  of  independent 
documents  which  has  so  much,  on  othergrounds,  to 
recommend  it.  And  certainly  when  Keil,  Hengsten- 
berg and  others,  who  reject  this  theory,  attempt  to 
account  for  the  use  of  the  Divine  names,  on  the 
hypothesis  that  the  writer  designedly  employed  the 

one  or  the  other  name  according  to  the  subject  of 
which  he  was  treating,  their  explanations  are  often 
of  the  most  arbitrary  kind.  As  a  whole,  the  docu- 
mentary character  of  Genesis  is  so  remarkable  when 
we  compare  it  with  the  later  books  of  the  lVnta- 
teuch,  and  is  so  exactly  what  we  might  expect, 
Supposing  a  Mosaic  authorship  of  the  whole,  that, 
whilst   contending   against    the    theory    of  di 

documents  in  the  later  portion-;,  we  feel  convinced 
that  this  theory  is  the  only  tenable  one  in  Genesis. 
Of  the  two  principal  documents,  the  Elohistic  i> 
the  earlier.  So  tar  as  we  can  detach  its  integral 
portions,  they  still  present  the  appearance  of  some- 
thin.'  like  a  connected  work.  This  has  been  verj 
well  argued  by  Tuch  I  Di* 
li.-lxv.),  as  well  as  by  Hupfeld  (pit  QueUen  <<<<■ 
Genesis),  Knobel,  and  Delitzsch. 


072 


GENESIS 


Hupfeld,  however,  whose  analysis  is  very  care- 
ful, thinks  that  he  can  discover  traces  of  three 
original  records,  an  earlier  Elohist,  a  Jehovist,  and  a 
later  Elohist.  These  three  documents  were,  accord- 
ing to  him,  subsequently  united  and  arranged  by  a 
fourth  pei  son,  who  acted  as  editor  of  the  whole. 
His  argument  is  ingenious  and  worthy  of  con- 
sideration, though  it  is  at  times  too  elaborate  to  be 
convincing. 

The  following  table  of  the  use  of  the  Divine  Names 
in  Genesis  will  enable  the  reader  to  form  his  own 
judgment  as  to  the  relative  probability  of  the  hypo- 
theses above  mentioned.  Much  as  commentators 
ditl'er  concerning  some  portions  of  the  Book,  one 
pronouncing  passages  to  be  Elohistic,  which  another 
with  equal  confidence  assigns  to  the  Jehovist,  the 
fact  is  certain  that  whole  sections  are  characterized 
by  a  separate  use  of  the  Divine  names. 

(1.)  Sections  in  which  Elohim  is  found  exclu- 
sively, or  nearly  so:— Chap,  i.-ii.  3  (creation  of 
heaven  and  earth)  ;  v.  (generations  of  Adam,  except 
ver.  29,  where  Jehovah  occurs  ;  vi.  9-22  (genera- 
tions of  Noah)  ;  vii.  9-24  (the  entering  into  the 
ark),  but  Jehovah  in  ver.  16  ;  viii.  1-19  (end  of 
the  flood)  ;  ix.  1-17  (covenant  with  Noah)  ;  xvii. 
(covenant  of  circumcision),  where,  however,  Jehovah 
occurs  once  in  ver.  1 ,  as  compared  with  Elohim 
seven  times ;  xix.  29-38  (conclusion  of  Lot's  history)  ; 
xx.  (Abraham's  sojourn  at  Gerar),  where  again  we 
have  Jehovah  once  and  Elohim  four  times,  and 
Haelohim  twice;  xxi.  1-21  (Isaac's  birth  and  Ish- 
mael's  dismissal),  only  xxi.  1,  Jehovah  ;  xxi.  22-34 
(Abraham's  covenant  with  Abimelech),  where  Je- 
hovah is  found  once ;  xxv.  1-18  (sons  of  Keturnh, 
Abraham's  death  and  the  generations  of  Ishmael), 
Elohim  once ;  xxvii.  46-xxviii.  9  (Jacob  goes  to 
Haran,  Esau's  marriage),  Elohim  once,  and  El  Shad- 
dai  once  ;  xxxi.  (Jacob's  departure  from  Laban), 
where  Jehovah  twice  ;  xxxiii.-xxxvii.  (Jacob's  re- 
conciliation with  Esau,  Dinah  and  the  Shechemites, 
Jacob  at  Bethel,  Esau's  family,  Joseph  sold  into 
Egypt).  It  should  be  observed,  however,  that  in 
large  portions  of  this  section  the  Divine  name  does 
not  occur  at  all.  (See  below.)  xl.-l.  (history  of 
Joseph  in  Egypt)  :  here  we  have  Jehovah  once  only 
(xlix.  18).  [Ex.  i.-ii.  (Israel's  oppression  in  Egypt, 
and  birth  of  Moses  as  deliverer).] 

(2.)  Sections  in  which  Jehovah  occurs  exclusively, 
or  in  preference  to  Elohim  ;  iv.  (Cain  and  Abel,  and 
Cain's  posterity),  where  Jehovah  10  times  and 
Elohim  only  once  ;  vi.  1-8  (the  sons  of  God  and 
the  daughters  of  men,  &c.)  ;  vii.  1-9  (the  entering 
into  the  ark),  but  Elohim  once,  ver.  9  ;  viii.  20-22 
(Noah's  altar  and  Jehovah's  blessing)  ;  ix.  18-27 
(Noah  and  his  sons);  x.  (the  families  of  mankind 
as  descended  from  Noah)  ;  xi.  1-9  (the  confusion  of 
tongues)  ;  xii.  1-20  (Abram's  journey  first  from 
Haran  to  Canaan,  and  then  into  Egypt)  ;  xiii. 
(Abram's  separation  from  Lot)  ;  xv.  (Abram's  faith, 
sacrifice,  and  covenant)  ;  xvi.  (Hagar  and  Ishmael), 
where  ''JO  7X  once ;  xviii.-xix.  28  (visit  of  the 
three  angels  to  Abram,  Lot,  destruction  of  Sodom 
and  Gomorrah)  ;  xxiv.  (betrothal  of  Rebekah  and 
Isaac's  marriage)  ;  xxv.  19-xxvi.  35  (Isaac's  sons, 
his  visit  to  Abimelech,  Esau's  wives)  ;  xxvii.  1-40 
(Jacob  obtains  the  blessing),  but  in  ver.  28  Haelohim ; 
xxx.  25-43  (Jacob's  bargain  with  Laban),  where  how- 


e  This  is  capable  of  proof,  not  from  the  meaning: 
of  the  root  fc$~Q>  which  does  not  necessarily  mean 
creation  out  of  nothing-  (though  it  is  never  used  but 
of  a  Divine  act),  but  from  the  whole  structure  of  the 


GENESIS 

ever  Jehovah  only  once  ;  xxXviii.  (Judah's  incest)  ; 
xxxix.  (Jehovah  with  Joseph  in  Potiphar's  house 
and  in  the  prison)  ;  [Ex.  iv.  18-31  (Moses'  return 
to  Egypt);  v.  (Pharaoh's  treatment  of  the  mes- 
sengers of  Jehovah).] 

(3.)  The  section  Gen.  ii.  4-iii.  24  (the  account 
of  Paradise  and  the  Fall)  is  generally  regarded  as 
Jehovistic,  but  it  is  clearly  quite  distinct.  The 
Divine  name  as  there  found  is  not  Jehovah,  but 
Jehovah  Elohim  (in  which  form  it  only  occurs  once 
beside  in  the  Pentateuch,  Ex.  ix.  38),  and  it  occurs 
20  times  ;  the  name  Elohim  being  found  three 
times  in  the  same  section,  once  in  the  mouth  of  the 
woman,  and  twice  in  that  of  the  serpent. 

(4.)  In  Gen.  xiv.  the  prevailing  name  is  El-Elyon 
(A.  V.  "the  most  high  God"),  and  only  once,  in 
Abram's  mouth,  "  Jehovah  the  most  high  God," 
which  is  quite  intelligible. 

(5.)  Some  few  sections  are  found  in  which  the 
names  Jehovah  and  Elohim  seem  to  be  used  pro- 
miscuously. This  is  the  case  in  xxii.  1-19  (the 
offering  up  of  Isaac)  ;  xxviii.  10-22  (Jacob's  dream 
at  Bethel)  ;  xxix.  31-xxx.  24  (birth  and  naming 
of  the  eleven  sons  of  Jacob)  ;  and  xxxii.  (Jacob's 
wrestling  with  the  angel)  ;  [Ex.  iii.  1-iv.  17  (the 
call  of  Moses).] 

(6.)  It  is  worthy  of  notice  that  of  the  other 
Divine  names  Adonai  is  always  found  in  connexion 
with  Jehovah,  except  Gen.  xx.  4  ;  whereas  El, 
El-Shaddai,  &c,  occur  most  frequently  in  the 
Elohistic  sections. 

(7.)  In  the  following  sections  neither  of  the 
Divine  names  occur: — Gen.  xi.  10-32,  xxii.  20-24, 
xxiii.,  xxv.  27-34,  xxvii.  40-45,  xxix.  1-30,  xxxiv., 
xxxvi.,  xxxvii.,  xl.,  Ex.  ii.  1-22. 

D.  Authenticity. — Luther  used  to  say,  "  Nihil 
pulcrius  Genesi,  nihil  utilius."  But  hard  critics 
have  tried  all  they  can  to  mar  its  beauty  and  to  de- 
tract from  its  utility.  In  fact  the  bitterness  of  the 
attacks  on  a  document  so  venerable,  so  full  of  un- 
dying interest,  hallowed  by  the  love  of  many  gene- 
rations, makes  one  almost  suspect  that  a  secret 
malevolence  must  have  been  the  mainspring  of 
hostile  criticism.  Certain  it  is  that  no  book  has  met 
with  more  determined  and  unsparing  assailants.  To 
enumerate  and  to  reply  to  all  objections  would  be 
impossible.  We  will  only  refer  to  some  of  the  most 
important. 

(1.)  The  story  of  Creation,  as  given  in  the  first 
chapter,  has  been  set  aside  in  two  ways :  first  by 
placing  it  on  the  same  level  with  other  cosmogonies 
which  are  to  be  found  in  the  sacred  writings  of  all 
nations  ;  and  next,  by  asserting  that  its  statements 
are  directly  contradicted  by  the  discoveries  of  mo- 
dern science. 

Let  us  glance  at  these  two  objections. 

(«.)  Now  when  we  compare  the  Biblical  with  all 
other  known  cosmogonies,  we  are  immediately 
struck  with  the  great  moral  superiority  of  the 
former.  There  is  no  confusion  here  between  the 
Divine  Creator  and  His  work.  God  is  before  all 
things,  God  creates6  all  things;  this  is  the  sublime 
assertion  of  the  Hebrew  writer.  Wiereas  all  the 
cosmogonies  of  the  heathen  world  err  in  on.'  of  two 
directions.  Either  they  are  Dualistic,  that  is.  they 
regard  God  and   matter  as  two  eternal  co- 


sentence.  In  the  beginning— put  that  beginning 
when  you  will — God,  already  existent,  created.  But 
at  the  time  of  the  Divine  act,  nothing  but  God, 
according  to  the  sacred  writer,  existed. 


GENESIS 

principles ;  or  they  are  Pantheistic,  i.  e.  they  con- 
found God  and  matter,  making  the  material  universe 
a  kind  of  emanation  from  the  great  Spirit  which 
informs  the  mass.  Both  these  theories,  with  their 
various  modifications,  whether  in  the  more  subtle 
philosophemes  of  the  Indian  races,  or  in  the  rougher 
and  grosser  systems  of  the  Phoenicians  and  Babylo- 
nians, are  alike  exclusive  of  the  idea  of  creation. 
Without  attempting  to  discuss  in  anything  like 
detail  the  points  of  resemblance  and  difference 
between  the  Biblical  record  of  creation,  and  the  myths 
and  legends  of  other  nations,  it  may  suffice  to  men- 
tion certain  particulars  in  which  the  superiority  of 
the  Hebrew  account  can  hardly  be  called  in  ques- 
tion. First,  the  Hebrew  story  alone  clearly  acknow- 
ledges the  personality  and  unity  of  God.  Secondly, 
here  only  do  we  find  recognised  a  distinct  act  of 
creation,  by  creation  being  understood  the  calling 
into  existence  out  of  nothing  the  whole  material 
universe.  Thirdly,  there  is  here  only  a  clear  inti- 
mation of  that  great  law  of  progress  which  wTe  find 
everywhere  observed.  The  order  of  creation  as 
given  in  Genesis  is  the  gradual  progress  of  all 
things  from  the  lowest  and  least  perfect  to  the 
highest  and  most  completely  developed  forms. 
Fourthly,  there  is  the  fact  of  a  relation  between  the 
personal  Creator  and  the  work  of  His  fingers,  and 
that  relation  is  a  relation  of  Love :  for  God  looks 
upon  His  creation  at  every  stage  of  its  progress  and 
pronounces  it  very  good.  Fifthly,  there  is  through- 
out a  sublime  simplicity,  which  of  itself  is  charac- 
teristic of  a  history,  not  of  a  myth  or  of  a  philo- 
sophical speculation. 

(i.)  It  would  occupy  too  large  a  space  to  discuss  at 
any  length  the  objections  which  have  been  urged  from 
the  results  of  modern  discovery  against  the  literal 
truth  of  this  chapter.  One  or  two  remarks  of  a 
general  kind  must  suffice.  It  is  argued,  for  instance, 
that  light  could  not  have  existed  before  the  sun, 
or  at  any  rate  not  that  kind  of  light  which  would 
be  necessary  for  the  support  of  vegetable  life ; 
whereas  the  Mosaic  narrative  makes  light  created 
on  the  first  day,  trees  and  plants  on  the  third,  and 
the  sun  on  the  fourth.  To  this  we  may  reply, 
that  we  must  not  too  hastily  build  an  argument 
upon  our  ignorance.  We  do  not  know  that  the 
existing  laws  of  creation  were  in  operation  when 
the  creative  fiat  was  first  put  forth.  The  very 
act  of  Creation  must  have  been  the  introducing  of 
laws:  but  when  the  work  was  finished,  those  laws 
may  have  suffered  some  modification.  Men  are  not 
now  created  in  the  full  stature  of  manhood,  but 
are  bora  and  glow.  Similarly  the  lower  ranks  of 
being  might  have  been  influenced  by  certain  neces- 
sary conditions  during  the  first  stages  of  their  ex- 
istence, which  conditions  were  afterwards  removed 
without  any  disturbance  of  the  natural  functions. 
And  again  it  is  not  certain  that  the  language  of 
<ieue>is  can  "uly  mean  that  the  sun  was  i 


GENESIS 


673 


f  Hence  the  force  of  our  Lord's   argument,  very 
generally  misunderstood,  in  John  v.  17. 

f   One  nf  the  most  elaborate  of  these  is  by  the  late 

Hugh  Miller,  in  his  Testimony  of  the  Bocks.  No  man 
bad  a  better  right  to  be  beard,  both  as  a  profound 
geologist  and  as  a  sincere  christian.  And  it  is  impos- 
sible not  to  admire  the  eloquence  ami  ingenuity  with 
which  lie  attempts  to  reconcile  the  story  of  Genesis 
with  the  story  of  the  rocks,  lint  his  argument  is  far 
from  convincing.  And  be  only  attempts  to  reconcile 
three  of  the  Mosaic  days  with  the  three  great  periods 
of  geology.  Another  writer,  Mr.  M'Causland,  who 
lias  adopted  bis  view,  and  tried   to  extend   it   to  the 


on  the  fourth  day.  It  may  mean  that  then  only 
did  that  luminary  become  visible  to  our  planet. 

With  regard  to  the  six  days,  no  reasonable  doubt 
can  exist  that  they  ought  to  be  interpreted  as  six 
periods,  without  defining  what  the  length  of  those 
periods  is.  No  one  can  suppose  that  the  Divine 
rest  was  literally  a  rest  of  24  hours.  On  the  con- 
trary, the  Divine  Sabbath  still  continues.  There 
has  been  no  creation  since  the  creation  of  man. 
This  is  what  Genesis  teaches,  and  this  geology  con- 
firms. But  God,  after  six  periods  of  creative  activity, 
entered  into  that  Sabbath  in  which  His  work  has 
been  not  a  work  of  Creation  but  of  Redemption/ 

No  attempt,  however,  which  has  as  yet  been 
made  to  identify  these  six  periods  with  correspond- 
ing geological  epochs  can  be  pronounced  satisfac- 
tory.6 On  the  other  hand,  it  seems  rash  and  pre- 
mature to  assert  that  no  reconciliation  is  possible.'1 
What  we  ought  to  maintain  is,  that  no  reconcilia- 
tion is  necessary.  It  is  certain  that  the  author  of 
the  first  chapter  of  Genesis,  whether  Moses  or  some 
one  else,  knew  nothing  of  geology  or  astronomy. 
It  is  certain  that  he  made  use  of  phraseology  con- 
cerning physical  facts  in  accordance  with  the  limited 
range  of  information  which  he  possessed.  It  is 
also  certain  that  the  Bible  was  never  intended  to 
reveal  to  us  knowledge  of  which  our  own  faculties 
rightly  used  could  put  us  in  possession.  And  we 
have  no  business  therefore  to  expect  anything  but 
popular  language  in  the  description  of  physical 
phenomena.  Thus,  for  instance,  when  it  is  said 
that  by  means  of  the  firmament  God  divided  the 
waters  which  were  above  from  those  which  were  be- 
neath, we  admit  the  fact  without  admitting  the 
implied  explanation.  The  Hebrew  supposed  that 
there  existed  vast  reservoirs  above  him  correspond- 
ing to  the  "waters  under  the  earth."  We  know 
that  by  certain  natural  processes  the  rain  descends 
from  the  clouds.  But  the  fact  remains  the  same 
that  there  are  waters  above  as  well  as  below. 

Further  investigation  may  perhaps  throw  more 
light  on  these  interesting  questions.  Meanwhile  it 
may  be  safely  said  that  modern  discoveries  are  in 
no  way  opposed  to  the  great  outlines  of  the  Mosaic 
cosmogony.  That  the  world  was  created  in  six 
periods,  that  creation  was  by  a  law  of  gradual  ad- 
vance beginning  with  inorganic  matter,  and  then 
advancing  from  the  lowest  organisms  to  the  highest, 
that  since  the  appearance  of  man  upon  the  earth  no 
new  species  have  come  into  being  ;  these  are  state- 
ments not  only  not  disproved,  but  the  two  last  of 
them  at  least  amply  confirmed  by  geological  re- 
search.' 

(2.)  To  the  description  of  Paradise,  and  the  his- 
tory of  the  Kail  and  of  the  Deluge  very  similar  re- 
marks apply.  All  nations  have  their  own  version  of 
these  tacts,  coloured  by  local  circumstances  and  em- 
bellished  according  to  the  poetic  or  philosophic  spirit 
of  the  tribes  among  whom  the  tradition  lias  taken 


six  days,  does  not  seem  entitled  to  speak  with  authority 
on  the  geological  question. 

h  As  Professor  Powell  does  in  bis  Order  <if  Xnture. 

1  I  am  aware  it  may  be  said  that  the  trilobite 
which  is  discovered  in  the  lowest  fossiliferoua  rocks 
is  not  the  lowest  type  of  organic  being  :  but  lower 
forms  may  have  perished  without  leaving  traces 
behind  them.  And  if  not,  manifestly  in  such  a  nar- 
rative  as  that  of  Genesis  we  ought   not  to  expect 

minute  accuracy  :  in  the  main  it  is  ci  itandy  true 
that,  as  we  ailw.nce  from  the  lower  to  the  higher 
strata,  we  find  a  corresponding  advance  in  organic 
deposits. 


674 


GENESIS 


root.  But  if  there  be  any  one  original  source  of 
these  traditions,  any  root  from  which  they  di- 
verged, we  cannot  doubt  where  to  look  for  it.  The 
earliest  record  of  these  momentous  facts  is  that 
preserved  in  the  Bible.  We  cannot  doubt  this, 
because  the  simplicity  of  the  narrative  is  greater 
than  that  of  any  other  work  with  which  we  are 
acquainted.  And  this  simplicity  is  an  argument 
at  once  in  favour  of  the  greater  antiquity  and  also 
of  the  greater  truthfulness  of  the  story.  It  is 
hardly  possible  to  suppose  that  traditions  so  widely 
spread  over  the  surface  of  the  earth  as  are  the  tra- 
ditions of  the  Creation,  the  Fall,  and  the  Deluge, 
should  have  no  foundation  whatever  in  fact.  And 
it  is  quite  as  impossible  to  suppose  that  that  version 
of  these  tacts,  which  in  its  moral  and  religious 
aspect  is  the  purest,  is  not  also,  to  take  the  lowest 
ground,  the  most  likely  to  be  true. 

Opinions  have  differed  whether  we  ought  to  take 
the  story  of  the  Fall  in  Gen.  hi.,  to  be  a  literal 
statement  of  facts,  or  whether  with  many  expositors 
since  the  time  of  Philo,  we  should  regard  it  as  an 
allegory,  framed  in  childlike  words  as  befitted  the 
childhood  of  the  world,  but  conveying  to  us  a  deeper 
spiritual  truth.  But  in  the  latter  case  we  ought  not 
to  deny  that  spiritual  truth.  Neither  should  we  over- 
look the  very  important  bearing  which  this  narrative 
has  on  the  whole  of  the  subsequent  history  of  the 
world  and  of  Israel.  Delitzsch  well  says,  "  The  story 
of  the  Fall,  like  that  of  the  Creation,  has  wandered 
over  the  world.  Heathen  nations  have  transplanted 
and  mixed  it  up  with  their  geography,  their  history, 
their  mythology,  although  it  has  never  so  completely 
changed  form  and  colour,  and  spirit,  that  you  can- 
not recognise  it.  Here,  however,  in  the  Law,  it 
preserves  the  character  of  a  universal,  human,  world- 
wide fact :  and  the  groans  of  Creation,  the  Redemp- 
tion that  is  in  Christ  Jesus,  and  the  heart  of  every 
man,  conspire  in  their  testimony  to  the  most  literal 
truth  of  the  narrative." 

The  universality  of  the  Deluge,  it  may  be  proved, 
is  quite  at  variance  with  the  most  certain  facts  of 
geology.  But  then  we  are  not  bound  to  contend 
for  a  universal  deluge.  The  Biblical  writer  himself, 
it  is  true,  supposed  it  to  be  universal,  but  that  was 
only  because  it  covered  what  was  then  the  known 
world  :  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  it  did  extend  to 
all  that  part  of  the  world  which  was  then  inha- 
bited:  and  this  is  enough,  on  the  one  hand,  to  satisfy 
the  terms  of  the  narrative,,  and  on  the  other,  the 
geological  difficulty  as  well  as  other  difficulties  con- 
cerning the  ark,  and  the  number  of  animals,  dis- 
appear with  this  interpretation.    [See  Noah.] 

(3.)  When  we  come  down  to  a  later  period  in 
the  narrative,  where  we  have  the  opportunity  of 
testing  the  accuracy  of  the  historian,  we  find  it  in 
many  of  the  most  important  particulars  abundantly 
corroborated. 

Whatever  interpretation  we  may  be  disposed  to 
put  on  the  story  of  the  confusion  of  tongues,  and 
the  subsequent  dispersion  of  mankind,  there  is  no 
good  ground  for  setting  it  aside.  Indeed,  if  the 
reading  of  a  cylinder  recently  discovered  at  Birs 
Xiiuri'td*  may  be  trusted,  there  is  independent  evi- 
dence corroborative  of  the  Biblical  account.  But 
at  any  rate  the  other  versions  of  this  event  are  far 
less  probable  (see  these  in  Joseph.  Antiq.  i.  iv.  o  ; 
Euseb.   Praep.   Ev.   ix.    1-t).      The   later  myths 


GENESIS 

concerning  the  wars  of  the  Titans  with  the  gods 
are  apparently  based  upon  this  story,  or  rather 
upon  perversions  of  it.  But  it  is  quite  impossible 
to  suppose,  as  Kalisch  does  (Genesis,  p.  313),  that 
"  the  Hebrew  historian  converted  that  very  legend 
into  a  medium  for  solving  a  great  and  important 
problem."  There  is  not  the  smallest  appearance 
of  any  such  design.  The  legend  is  a  perversion  of 
the  history,  not  the  history  a  commeut  upon  the 
legend.  One  of  the  strongest  proofs  of  the  bond 
fide  historical  character  of  the  earlier  portion  of 
Genesis  is  to  be  found  in  the  valuable  ethnological 
catalogue  contained  in  chap.  x.  Knobel,  who  has 
devoted  a  volume  m  to  the  elucidation  of  this  docu- 
ment, has  succeeded  in  establishing  its  main  accu- 
racy beyond  doubt,  although,  in  accordance  with  his 
theory  as  to  the  age  of  the  Pentateuch,  he  assigns 
to  it  no  greater  antiquity  than  between  1200  and 
1000  B.C. 

(4.)  As  to  the  fact  implied  in  this  dispersion, 
that  all  languages  had  one  origin,  philological  re- 
search has  not  as  yet  been  carried  far  enough  to 
lead  to  any  very  certain  result.  Many  of  the 
greatest  philologists11  contend  for  real  affinities  be- 
tween the  Indo-European  and  the  .Semitic  tongues. 
On  the  other  hand,  languages  like  the  Coptic  (not 
to  mention  many  others)  seem  at  present  to  stand 
out  in  complete  isolation.  And  the  must  that  has 
been  effected  is  a  classification  of  languages  in  three 
great  families.  This  classification  however  is  in 
exact  accordance  with  the  threefold  division  of  the 
race  in  Shem,  Ham,  and  Japhet,  of  which  Genesis 
tells  us. 

(5.)  Another  fact  which  rests  on  the  authority 
of  the  earlier  chapters  of  Genesis,  the  derivation  of 
the  whole  human  race  from  a  single  pair,  has  been 
abundantly  confirmed  by  recent  investigations.  For 
the  full  proof  of  this  it  is  sufficient  to  refer  to 
Prichard's  Physical  History  of  Mankind,  in  which 
the  subject  is  discussed  with  great  care  and  ability. 

(6.)  It  is  quite  impossible,  as  has  already  been  said, 
to  notice  all  the  objections  made  by  hostile  critics  at 
every  step  as  we  advance.  But  it  may  be  well  to 
refer  to  one  more  instance  in  which  suspicion  has 
been  cast  upon  the  credibility  of  the  narrative. 
Three  stories  are  found  in  three  distinct  portions  of 
the  Book,  which  in  their  main  features  no  doubt 
present  a  striking  similarity  to  one  another.  See 
xii.  10-20,  xx.,  xxvi.  1-11.  These,  it  is  said,  besides 
containing  certain  improbabilities  of  statement,  are 
clearly  only  three  different  versions  of  the  same 
story. 

It  is  of  course  possible  that  these  are  only  different 
versions  of  the  same  story.  But  is  it  psychologi- 
cally so  very  improbable  that  the  same  incident 
should  happen  three  times  in  almost  the  same 
manner?  All  men  repeat  themselves,  and  even 
repeat  their  mistakes.  And  the  repetition  of  cir- 
cumstances over  which  a  man  has  no  control,  is 
sometimes  as  astonishing  as  the  repetition  of  actions 
which  he  can  control.  Was  not  the  state  of  so- 
ciety in  those  days  such  as  to  render  it  mi  way 
improbable  that  Pharaoh  on  one  occasion,  and  Abi- 
melech  on  another,  should  have  acted  in  the  same 
selfish  and  arbitrary  manner?  Abraham  too  might 
have  been  guilty  twice  of  the  same  sinful  cowardice  ; 
and  Isaac  might,  in  similar  circumstances,  have 
copied  his  father's  example,  calling  it  wisdom.     To 


k  As  given  by  M.  Oppert  in  a  Paper  read  before 
the  Royal  Society  of  Literature. 
'"   Die  Volkertafel  der  Genesis. 


n  As   Bopp,    Lcpsius,   Burnouf,   &c.       See   Kenan, 
llistuire  cles  Lanyues  Semitiques,  1.  v.  c.  2,  3. 


GENESIS 

say,  as  the  most  recent  expositor  of  this  Book  lias 
done,  that  the  object  of  the  Hebrew  writer  was  to 
represent  an  idea,  such  as  "  the  sanctity  of  matri- 
mony," that  "  in  his  hands,  the  facts  are  subordi- 
nated to  ideas,"  &C,  is  to  cut  up  by  the  very  roots 
the  historical  character  of  the  Book.  The  mythical 
theory  is  preferable  to  this  ;  for  that  leaves  a  sub- 
stratum of  fact,  however  it  may  have  been  embel- 
lished or  perhaps  disfigured  by  tradition.0 

There  is  a  further  difficulty  about  the  age  of 
Sarah,  who  at  the  time  of  the  first  occurrence  must 
have  been  65  years  old,  and  the  freshness  of  her 
beauty  therefore,  it  is  said,  long  since  faded.  In 
reply  it  has  been  argued  that  as  she  lived  to  the 
age  of  127,  she  was  only  then  in  middle  life  ;  that 
consecpiently  she  would  have  been  at  65  what  a 
woman  of  modern  Europe  would  be  at  35  or  40, 
an  age  at  which  personal  attractions  are  not  neces- 
sarily impaired. 

But  it  is  a  minute  criticism,  hardly  worth  an- 
swering, which  tries  to  cast  suspicion  on  the  veracity 
of  the  writer,  because  of  difficulties  such  as  these. 
The  positive  evidence  is  overwhelming  in  favour  of 
his  credibility.  The  patriarchal  tent  beneath  the 
shade  of  some  spreading  tree,  the  wealth  of  flocks 
and  herds,  the  free  and  generous  hospitality  to 
strangers,  the  strife  for  the  well,  the  purchase  of  the 
cave  of  Machpelah  for  a  burial-place, — we  feel  at 
once  that  these  are  no  inventions  of  a  later  writer 
in  more  civilized  times.  So  again,  what  can  be 
more  life-like,  more  touchingly  beautiful,  than  the 
picture  of  Hagar  and  Ishmael,  the  meeting  of  Abra- 
ham's servant  with  Rebekah,  or  of  Jacob  with 
Rachel  at  the  well  of  Haran  ?  There  is  a  fidelity 
in  the  minutest  incidents  which  convinces  us  that 
we  are  reading  history,  not  table.  Or  can  anything 
more  completely  transport  us  into  patriarchal  times 
than  the  battle  of  the  kings  and  the  interview  be- 
tween Abraham  and  Melchisedec?  The  very  open- 
ing of  the  story,  "In  the  days  of  Amraphel,"  &C, 
reads  like  the  work  of  some  old  chronicler  who 
lived  not  far  from  the  time  of  which  he  speaks. 
The  archaic  forms  of  names  of  places,  Bela  for 
/ear;  Chatzatzon  Tamar  for  Engedi;  Emek  Sha- 
ven for  the  King's  Yale ;  the  Vale  of  Siddim  as 
descriptive  of  the  spot  which  was  afterwards  the 
Dead  Sea;  the  expression  "  Abram  the  Hebrew;" 
are  remarkable  evidences  of  the  antiquity  of  the 
narrative.  So  also  are  the  names  of  the  different 
tribes  who  at  that  early  period  inhabited  Canaan; 
the  Rephaim,  for  instance,  of  whom  we  find  in  the 
time  of  Joshua  but  a  weak  remnant  left  (Jos.  xiii. 
12),  and  tin.'  Susim,  Kinini,  Choiim,  who  are  only 
mentioned  beside  in  the  Pentateuch  (Dent.  ii.  in, 
1  _'  .  Quite  in  keeping  with  the  rest  of  the  picture 
is  Abraham's  "aiming  his  trained  servants"  (xiv. 
14)' — a  phrase  which  occurs  no  where  else — and 
above  all  the  character  and  position  of  Melchisedec. 
"  Simple,  calm,  great,  conies  and  goes  the  priest- 
king  of  the  Divine  history."  The  representations 
of  the  Greek  poets,  says  Creuzer  (JSymb.  iv.  378), 
tall  very  tar  short  of  this.  And  as  Havernick 
justly  remarks,  such  a  person  could  be  no  theocratic 
invention;  for  the  union  of  the  kingly  and  priestly 
offices  in  the  same  person  was  no  part  of  the  theo- 
cracy. Lastly,  the  name  by  which  lit'  knows  God, 
"the  most  high  God,  Possessor  of  heaven  and 
earth,"  occurs  also  in  the  Phoenician  religions,  but 


0  If  the  view  of  Delitzsch  is  correct,  that  xii.  10-20 
i-  Jehovistic;  x.\.,  Elohistic  (with  a  Jehovistic  addi- 
tion, ver.  IS)  ;  xxvi.  1-18,  Jehovistic,  but  taken  from 


GENNESARET,  SEA  OF        G75 

not  amongst  the  Jews,  and  is  again  one  of  those  slight 
but  accurate  touches  which  at  once  distinguishes 
the  historian  from  the  fabulist. 

Passing  on  to  a  later  portion  of  the  Book  we  find 
the  writer  evincing  the  most  accurate  knowledge 
of  the  state  of  society  in  Egypt.  The  Egyptian 
jealousy  of  foreigners,  and  especially  their  hatred 
of  shepherds  ;  the  use  of  interpreters  in  the  court 
(who,  we  learn  from  other  sources,  formed  a  distinct 
caste) ;  the  existence  of  caste  ;  the  importance  of 
the  priesthood ;  the  means  by  which  the  land 
which  had  once  belonged  to  free  proprietors  passed 
into  the  hands  of  the  king ;  the  fact  that  even  at 
that  early  time  a  settled  trade  existed  between 
Egypt  and  other  countries,  are  all  confirmed  by  the 
monuments  or  by  later  writers.  So  again  Joseph's 
priestly  dress  of  fine  linen,  the  chain  of  gold  round 
his  neck,  the  chariot  on  which  he  rides,  the  body- 
guard of  the  king,  the  rites  of  burial  and  embalm- 
ing (though  spoken  of  only  incidentally)  are  spoken 
of  with  a  minute  accuracy,  which  can  leave  r;o 
doubt  on  the  mind  as  to  the  credibility  of  the 
historian. 

E.  Author  and  date  of  composition. — It  will  be 
seen,  from  what  has  been  said  above,  that  the  Book 
of  Genesis,  though  containing  different  documents, 
owes  its  existing  form  to  the  labour  of  a  single 
author,  who  has  digested  and  incorporated  the'  ma- 
terials he  found  ready  to  his  hand.  A  modern 
writer  on  histoiy,  in  the  same  way,  might  some- 
times transcribe  passages  from  ancient  chronicles, 
sometimes  place  different  accounts  together,  some- 
times again  give  briefly  the  substance  of  the  older 
document,  neglecting  its  form. 

But  it  is  a  distinct  inquiry  who  this  author  or 
editor  was.  This  question  cannot  properly  be  dis- 
cussed apart  from  the  general  question  of  the 
authorship  of  the  entire  Pentateuch.  We  shall 
therefore  reserve  this  subject  for  another  article. 
[Pentateuch.]  [J.  J.  S.  P.] 

GENNE'SAR,  THE  WATER  OF  (to  SSup 

revwqerap ;  Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  5,  7,  ra  uSara  ra 
Tivvnadpa  Key. ;  Aqua  Genesar),  1  Mace.  xi.  C7. 
[Gennbsaket.] 

GENNES'ARET,  SEA   OF  (\lfivn  Temri- 

aaper,  Luke  v.  1  ;  vowp  Ytvvncrdp,  1  Mace.  xi. 
67),  called  in  the  0.  T.  "the  Sea  of  Chinnereth," 
or  "  Cinneroth,"  Num.  xxxiv.  11;  Josh.  xii.  3), 
from  a  town  of  that  name  which  stood  on  or  near 
its  shore  (Josh.  xix.  35).  In  the  later  Hebrew 
we  always  find  the  Greek  form  "1M*|,  which 
may  possibly  be  a  corruption  of  J"n33  though 
some  derive  the  word  from  (iannah,  "a  garden," 
aud  Sharon,  the  name  of  a  plain  between  Tabor  and 
this  lake  (On<>m.  s.  v.  "Zapdiv  ;  Reland,  pp.  193, 
259).  Josephus  calls  it  Ytvvnao.pl.Tiv  Ki^xv-nv 
{Ant.  xviii.  '_',  §1);  and  this  seems  to  have  been 
its  common  name  at  the  commencement  of  our  era 
(Strab.  xvi.  p. 755;  Plin.  v.  16;  Ptol.  v.  15).  \t 
its  north  western  angle  was  a  beautiful  and  fertile 
plain  called  "Gennesaret"  (yriv  Yevvricrapir,  Matt. 
xiv.  :>4).  from  which  the  name  of  the  lake  was  taken 
|  Joseph.  /•'.  •/.  iii.  10,  §7  |.  The  lake  is  also  called 
in  the  N.  T.  &d\aaaa  Tf;s  ToAiAaios,  from  the 
province  of  Galilee  which  bordered  on  its  western 
side  (Matt.  iv.  18;  Mark  rii.  31  ;  John  vi.  1);   and 


written  documents,  this  may  to  some  minds  explain 
the  repetition  of  the  story. 


676        GENNESARET,  SEA  OF 

®d\acrcra  ttjs  TifitpicLSos,  from  the  celebrated  city 
(John  vi.  1).  Eusebius  Kills  it  Ai/xvT)  Ttfiepias 
(Onom.  s.  v.  "Zaptiiu;  see  also  Cyr.  in  Jes.  i.  5). 
It  is  a  curious  fact  that  all  the  numerous  names 
given  to  this  lake  were  taken  from  places  on  its 
western  side.     Its  modern  name  is  Bahr  Tubarvjeh 

In  Josh.  xi.  2  "  the  plains  south  of  Chinneroth  " 
are  mentioned.  It  is  the  sea  and  not  the  city  that 
is  here  referred  to  (comp.  Deut.  iii.  17;  Josh.  xii. 
3)  ;  and  "  the  plains"  are  those  along  the  banks  of 
the  Jordan.  Most  of  our  Lord's  public  life  was  spent 
in  the  environs  of  the  Sea  of  Gennesaret.  On  its 
shores  stood  Capernaum,  "  His  own  city  "  (Matt.  iv. 
13);  on  its  shore  he  called  His  first  disciples  from 
their  occupation  as  fishermen  (Luke  v.  1-1 1) ;  and 
near  its  shores  He  spake  many  of  His  parables,  and 
performed  many  of  His  miracles.  This  region  was 
then  the  most  densely  peopled  in  all  Palestine.  No 
less  than  nine  cities  stood  on  the  very  shores  of  the 
lake ;  while  numerous  large  villages  dotted  the 
plains  and  hill-sides  around  (Porter,  Handbook, 
p.  424). 

The  Sea  of  Gennesaret  is  of  an  oval  shape,  about 
thirteen  geographical  miles  long,  and  six  broad. 
Josephus  gives  the  length  at  140  stadia,  and  the 
breadth  forty  (B.  J.  iii.  10,  §7)  ;  and  Pliny  says  it 
measured  xvi.  M.  p.  by  vi.  (N.  H.  xiv.).  Both 
these  are  so  near  the  truth  that  they  could  scarcely 
have  been  mere  estimates.  The  river  Jordan  enters 
it  at  its  northern  end;  and  passes  out  at  its  southern 
end.  In  fact  the  bed  of  the  lake  is  just  a  lower 
section  of  the  great  Jordan  valley.  Its  most  re- 
markable feature  is  its  deep  depression,  being  no  less 
than  700  feet  below  the  level  of  the  ocean  (Robin- 
son, Pal.  i.  613).  Like  almost  all  lakes  of  volcanic 
origin  it  occupies  the  bottom  of  a  great  basin,  the 
sides  of  which  shelve  down  with  a  uniform  slope 
from  the  surrounding  plateaus.  On  the  east  the 
banks  are  nearly  2000  feet  high,  destitute  of  ver- 
dure and  of  foliage,  deeply  furrowed  by  ravines, 
but  quite  flat  along  the  summit ;  forming  in  fact 
the  supporting  wall  of  the  table-land  of  Bashan. 
On  the  north  there  is  a  gradual  descent  from  this 
table-land  to  the  valley  of  the  Jordan  ;  and  then  a 
gradual  rise  again  to  a  plateau  of  nearly  equal  eleva- 
tion skirting  the  mountains  of  Upper  Galilee.  The 
western  banks  are  less  regular,  yet  they  present  the 
same  general  features — plateaus  of  different  altitudes 
breaking  down  abruptly  to  the  shore.  The  scenery 
has  neither  grandeur  nor  beauty.  It  wants  features, 
and  it  wants  variety.  It  is  bleak  and  monotonous, 
especially  so  when  the  sky  is  cloudless,  and  the 
sun  high.  The  golden  tints  and  purple  shadows  of 
evening  help  it,  but  it  looks  best  during  a  thunder- 
storm, such  as  the  writer  has  often  witnessed  in 
early  spring.  The  cliffs  and  rocks  along  the  shores 
are  mostly  a  hard  porous  basalt,  and  the  whole 
basin  has  a  scathed  volcanic  look.  The  frequent 
earthquakes  prove  that  the  elements  of  destruction 
are  still  at  work  beneath  the  surface.  There  is  a 
copious  warm  fountain  near  the  site  of  Tiberias, 
and  it  is  said  that  at  the  time  of  the  great  earth- 
quake of  1837  both  the  quantity  and  temperature 
of  the  water  were  much  increased. 

The  great  depression  makes  the  climate  of  the 
shores  almost  tropical.  This  is  very  sensibly  felt 
by  the  traveller  in  going  down  from  the  plains  of 
Galilee.  In  summer  the  heat  is  intense,  and  even 
in  early  spring  the  air  has  something  of  an  Egyp- 
tian balminess.     Snow  very  rarely  falls,  and  though 


GENTILES 

it  often  whitens  the  neighbouring  mountains,  it 
never  lies  here.  The  vegetation  is  almost  of  a 
tropical  character.  The  thorny  lote-tree  grows 
among  the  basalt  rocks  ;  palms  flourish  luxuriantly, 
and  indigo  is  cultivated  in  the  fields  (comp.  Joseph. 
B.  J.  iii.  10,  §6). 

The  water  of  the  lake  is  sweet,  cool,  and  trans- 
parent ;  and  as  the  beach  is  everywhere  pebbly  it 
has  a  beautiful  sparkling  look.  This  fact  is  some- 
what strange  when  we  consider  that  it  is  exposed  to 
the  powerful  rays  of  the  sun,  that  many  warm  and 
brackish  springs  flow  into  it,  and  that  it  is  supplied 
by  the  Jordan  which  rushes  into  its  northern  end, 
a  turbid,  ruddy  torrent.  The  lake  abounds  in  fish 
now  as  in  ancient  times.  Some  are  of  the  same 
species  as  those  got  in  the  Nile,  such  as  the  Silurus, 
the  Muijil,  and  another  called  by  Hasselquist  Spams 
Galilaeus  {Beise,\rp.  181,  412  sq. ;  comp.  Joseph. 
B.  J.  iii.  10,  §7).  The  fishery,  like  the  soil  of 
the  surrounding  country,  is  sadly  neglected.  One 
little  crazy  boat  is  the  sole  representative  of  the 
fleets  that  covered  the  lake  in  N.  T.  times,  and 
even  with  it  there  is  no  deep-water  fishing.  Two 
modes  are  now  employed  to  catch  the  fish.  One  is 
a  hand-net,  with  which  a  man,  usually  naked 
(John  xxi.  7),  stalks  along  the  shore,  and  watching 
his  opportunity,  throws  it  round  the  game  with  a 
jerk.  The  other  mode  is  still  more  curious.  Bread- 
crumbs are  mixed  up  with  bi-ehlorid  of  mercury, 
and  sown  over  the  water ;  the  fish  swallow  the 
poison  and  die.  The  dead  bodies  float,  are  picked 
up,  and  taken  to  the  market  of  Tiberias !  (Porter, 
Handbook,  p.  432.) 

A  "mournful  and  solitary  silence"  now  reigns 
along  the  shores  of  the  sea  of  Gennesaret,  which 
were  in  former  ages  studded  with  great  cities,  and 
resounded  with  the  din  of  an  active  and  industrious 
people.  Seven  out  of  the  nine  cities  above  referred 
to  are  now  uninhabited  ruins  ;  one,  Magdala,  is  oc- 
cupied by  half-a-dozen  mud  hovels  ;  and  Tiberias 
alone  retains  a  wretched  remnant  of  its  former 
prosperity.  [J.  L.  P.] 

GENNE'TTS  {Ttvvaios,  Alex.  YevveSs  ;  Gen- 
naeus),  father  of  Apollonius,  who  was  one  of  several 
generals  ((rrparriyoi)  commanding  towns  in  Pales- 
tine, who  molested  the  Jews  while  Lysias  was  go- 
vernor for  Antiochus  Eupator  (2  Mace.  xii.  2). 
Luther  understands  the  word  as  an  adjective  (yev- 
vcuos  =  well-born),  and  has  "des  edlen  Apollonius." 

GENTILES.  I.  Old  Testament.— The  He- 
brew '13  in  sing.  =  a  people,  nation,  body  politic  ; 
in  which  sense  it  is  applied  to  the  Jewish  nation 
amongst  others.  In  the  pi.  it  acquires  an  ethno- 
graphic, and  also  an  invidious  meaning,  and  is  ren- 
dered in  A.  V.  by  Gentiles  and  Heathen. 

D*13,  the  nations,  the  surrounding  nations, 
foreigners  as  opposed  to  Israel  (Neh.  v.  8).  In 
Gen.  x.  5  it  occurs  in  its  most  indefinite  sense  =  the 
far-distant  inhabitants  of  the  Western  Isles,  without 
the  slightest  accessory  notion  of  heathenism,  or 
barbarism.  In  Lev.,  Deut.,  Ps.  the  term  is  applied 
to  the  various  heathen  nations  with  which  Israel 
came  into  contact;  its  meaning  grows  wider  in  pro- 
poi  tion  to  the  wider  circle  of  the  national  experience, 
and  more  or  Jess  invidious  according  to  the  success 
or  defeat  of  the  national  arms.  In  the  Prophets  it 
attains  at  once  its  most  comprehensive  and  its 
most  hostile  view  ;  hostile  in  presence  of  victorious 
rivals,  comprehensive  with  reference  to  the  triumphs 
of  a  spiritual  future. 

Notwithstanding  the  disagreeable  connotation  of 


GENUBATH 

the  term,  the  Jews  were  able  to  use  it,  even  in  the 
plural  in  a  purely  technical,  geographical  sense.  So 
Gen.  x.  5  (see  above) ;  Gen.  xiv.  1 ;  Josh.  xii. 
23  ;  Is.  ix.  1.  In  Josh.  xii.  23,  "  the  king  of  the 
nations  of  Gilgal,"  A.  V.  ;  better  with  Gesenius 
"  the  king  of  the  Gentiles  at  Gilgal,"  where  pro- 
bably, as  afterwards  in  Galilee,  foreigners,  Gentiles, 
were  settled  among  the  Jews. 

For  "  Galilee  of  the  Gentiles,"  comp.  Matt.  iv. 
15   with   Is.  ix.   1,  where  A.  V".  "Galilee   of  the 

nations."  In  Heb.  D^iilH  ?vJl,  the  "circle  of  the 
Gentiles;"  kut'  t£oxyv,  7viin,  ha-Galeel ;  whence 

the  name  Galilee  applied  to  a  district  which  was 
largely  peopled  by  the  Gentiles,  especially  the 
Phoenicians. 

The  Gentiles  in  Gen.  xiv.  1  may  either  be  the 
inhabitants  of  the  same  territory,  or,  as  suggested 
by  Gesenius,  "  nations  of  the  West"  generally. 

II.  New  Testament. — -1.  The  Greek  iQvos  in 
sing,  means  a  people  or  nation  (Matt.  xxiv.  7  ; 
Acts  ii.  5,  &c),  and  even  the  Jewish  people  (Luke 
vii.  5,  xxiii.  2,  &c.  ;  comp.  ''I-!,  supr.)  It  is  only 
in  the  pi.  that  it  is  used  for  the  Heb.  D^IH,  heathen, 
gentiles  (comp.  edvos,  heathen,  ethnic)  :  in  Matt. 
xxi.  43  eduei  alludes  to,  but  does  not  directly  stand 
for,  "  the  Gentiles."  As  equivalent  to  Gentiles  it 
is  found  in  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  but  not  always 
in  an  invidious  sense  {e.g.  Rom.  xi.  13;  Eph. 
iii.  1,  6). 

2.  aEWr)v,  John  vii.  35,  ri  Stacnropa.  rwv 
'E\\i}vicv,  "  the  Jews  dispersed  among  the  Gen- 
tiles," Rom.  iii.  9,  'lovSaiovs  Ktxl  "Ek\T]vas,  Jews 
and  Gentiles. 

The  A.  V.  is  not  consistent  in  its  treatment  of 
this  word  ;  sometimes  rendering  it  by  Greek  (Acts 
xiv.  1,  xvii.  4;  Rom.  i.  16,  x.  12),  sometimes  by 
Gentile  (Rom.  ii.  9,  10,  iii.  9  ;  1  Cor.  x.  32), 
inserting  Greek  in  the  margin.  The  places  where 
"EAA-Tje  is  equivalent  to  Greek  simply  (as  Acts  xvi. 
1,  3)  are  much  fewer  than  those  where  it  is  equiva- 
lent to  Gentile.  The  former  may  probably  be 
reduced  to  Acts  xvi.  1,  3  ;  Acts  xviii.  17  ;  Rom.  i. 
14.  The  latter  use  of  the  word  seems  to  have 
arisen  from  the  almost  universal  adoption  of  the 
Greek  language.  Even  in  2  Mace.  iv.  13  'EA\r]vi<T- 
fx6s  appears  as  synonymous  with  aAA.o^i/Aicr/xo's 
(comp.  vi.  9)  ;  and  in  Is.  ix.  12  the  LXX.  renders 

D*P)ti'pB  by"EAA.7jpas;  and  so  the  Greek  Fathers  de- 
fended the  Christian  faith  irpbs  "EWrjvas,  and  natf 

'E\\r)vwv.    [Greek;  Heathen.]     [T.  E.  B.] 

GENUBATH  (71333  ;  Tavrt^aQ;  Genubath), 
the  son  of  Hadad,  an  Edomite  of  the  royal  family, 
by  an  Egyptian  princess,  the  sister  of  Tahponcs, 
tlie  queen  of  the  Pharaoh  who  governed  Egypt  in 
the  latter  part  of  the  reign  of  David  (1  EL  xi.  20  ; 
comp.  16).  Genubath  was  born  in  the  palace  of 
Pharaoh,  and  weaned  by  the  queen  herself;  after 
which  he  became  a  member  of  the  royal  establish- 
ment, on  the  same  footing  as  one  of  the  sons  of 
Pharaoh.  The  fragment  of  Edomite  chronicle  in 
which  this  is  contained  is  very  remarkable,  and  may 
be  compared  with  that  in  Gen.  xxx\i.  Genubath 
is  not  again  mentioned  or  alluded  to. 

GE'ON  (Ttiwv  ;  Gehori),  i.e.  Gihon,  o fthe 

four  rivers  of  Eden;  introduced,  with  the  Jordan, 
and  probably  the  Nile,  into  a  figure  in  the  praise  of 


GERAR 


G77 


Greek  form  of  the  Hebrew  name,  the  same  which 
is  used  by  the  LXX.  in  Gen.  ii.  13. 

GE'RA  (fcOJl ;  Typa),  one  of  the  "sons,"  i.e.  de- 
scendants, of  Benjamin,  enumerated  in  Gen.  xlvi.  21, 
as  already  living  at  the  time  of  Jacob's  migration 
into  Egypt.     He  was  son  of  Bela  (1  Chr.  viii.  3). 
[Bela.]     The  text  of  this  last  passage   is  very 
corrupt ;  and  the  different  Geras  there  named  seem 
to  reduce  themselves  into  one, — the  same  as  the 
son  of  Bela.     Gera,  who  is  named  Judg.  iii.  15  as 
the  ancestor  of  Ehud,  and  in  2  Sam.  xvi.  5  as  the 
ancestor  of  Shiinei  who  cursed  David  [Becher], 
is   probably  also   the   same   person.     Gera  is  not 
mentioned   in    the   list   of  Benjamite    families   in 
Num.  xxvi.  38-40 ;  of  which  a  very  obvious  ex- 
planation is  that  at  that  time  he  was  not  the  head 
of  a  separate  family,  but  was  included  among  the 
Belaites ;   it  being  a  matter  of  necessity  that  some 
of  Bela's   sons   should  be  so   included,  otherwise 
there  could  be  no  family  of  Belaites  at  all.     Dr. 
Kalisch  has  some  long   and  rather  perplexed  ob- 
servations on  the  discrepancies  in  the  lists  in  Gen. 
xlvi.  and  Num.  xxvi.,  and  specially  as  regards  the 
sons  of  Benjamin.     But  the  truth  is  that  the  two 
lists  agree  very  well   as  far  as  Benjamin  is  con- 
cerned.    For  the    only   discrepance    that  remains, 
when  the  absence  of  Becher  and  Gera  from  the  list 
in  Num.  is  thus  explained,  is  that  for  the  two 
names  T\H  and  K>&0  (Ehi  and  Rosh)  in  Gen.,  we 
have  the  one  name  DTTIN  (Ahiram)  in  Num.     If 
this  last  were  written  DfcO,  as  it  might  be,  the 
two  texts  would  be  almost  identical,  especially  if 
written  in  the  Samaritan  character,  in  which  the 
shin  closely  resembles  the  mem.     That  Ahiram  is 
right  we  are  quite  sure,  from  the  family  of  the 
Ahiramites,  and  from  the  non-mention  elsewhere 
of  Rosh,   which    in   fact    is    not   a    proper    name. 
[ROSH.]    The  conclusion  therefore   seems  certain 
that  K'NIVriX  in  Gen.  is  a  mere  clerical  error,  and 
that  there  is  perfect  agreement  between  the  two 
lists.     This  view  is   strengthened  by  the  further 
fact  that  in   the  word  which  follows  Rosh,   viz. 
Muppim,  the  initial  in  is  an  error  for  sh.    It  should 
be  Shuppim,  as  in  Num.  xxvi.  39  ;  1  Chr.  vii.  12. 
The  final  in  of  Aliiram,  and  the  initial  sh  of  Shup- 
pim, have  thus  been  transposed.     To  the  remarks 
made  under  Becher  should  be  added  that  the  great 
destruction  of  the  Benjamites  recorded  in  Judg.  xx. 
may  account  for  the  introduction  of  so  many  new 
names  in  the  later  Benjamite  lists  of  1  Chr.  vii. 
and  viii.,  of  which  several  seem  to  be   women's 
names.  [A.  C.  H.] 

GERAH.  [Measures.] 
GE'RAR  (T>l  ;  Tepapa;  Joseph.  Ant.  i.  12, 
§1),  a  very  ancient  city  south  of  Gaza.  It  occurs 
chiefly  in  Genesis  (x.  19,  xx.  1 ,  xxvi.  1 ,  6)  ;  also  inci- 
dentally in  2  ( !hr.  xiv.  13,  14.  In  <  icnesis  the  people 
are  spoken  of  as  Philistines  ;  but  their  habits  appear, 
in  that  early  stage,  more  pastoral  than  they  subse- 
quently were.  Tel  they  are  even  then  warlike,  since 
Abimelech  w:is  "  a  captain  of  the  host,"  who  appears 
from  his  iixcil  title,  "  Phichol,"  Like  thai  of  the  king, 
"  Abimelech,"  to  be  a  permanent  officer  '  comp.  ( !en. 

xxi.  32,  xxvi.  26,  and  Ps.  xxxiv..  title).  The  local 
description,  xxi.  1,  "between  Kadesh  ami  Shur,"  is 
probably  meant  to  indicate  the  limits  within  which 
these  pastoral  Philistines,  whose  chief  seal  was  then 
Gerar,  ranged, although  it  would  by  no  means  follow 
that  their  territory  embraced  all  tin-  interval  between 
those  cities.  It  must  have  trenched  on  the  "  south  " 
wisdom,   Ecclus.   xxiv.   27.      This   is   merely   the  I  or  "south  country  "  of  later  Palestine.  From  a  com- 


678 


GERASA 


parison  of  xxi.  32  with  xxvi.  23,  20,n  Beersheba 
would  seem  to  be  just  on  the  verge  of  this  territory, 
and  perhaps  to  be  its  limit  towards  the  N.E.     For  its 

southern  boundary,  though  very  uncertain,  none  is 
more  probable  than  the  Wadys  El  Arish  ("  River  of 
Egypt ")  and  El  'Ain  ;  south  of  which  the  neigh* 
bouring  "  wilderness  of  Paran  "  (xx.  15,  xxi.  22, 
34)  may  bo  probably  reckoned  to  begin.  Isaac  was 
most  probably  born  in  Gerar.  The  great  crops 
which  he  subsequently  raised  attest  the  fertility  of 
the  soil,  which,  lying  in  the  maritime  plain,  still 
contains  some  of  the  best. ground  in  Palestine  (xxi. 
'_',  xxvi.  12).  It  is  possible  that  the  wells  mentioned 
by  Robinson  (i.  190)  may  represent  those  digged 
by  Abraham  and  reopened  by  Isaac  (xxvi.  18-22).b 
Williams  {Holy  City,  i.  46)  speaks  of  a  Joorf  cl 
Gerar  as  now  existing,  three  hours  S.S.E.  of  Gaza, 
and  this  may  probably  indicate  the  northern  limit 
of  the  territory,  if  not  the  site  of  the  town  ;  but  the 
range  of  that  territory  need  not  be  so  far  narrowed 
as  to  make  the  Wady  Ruhaibeh  an  impossible  site, 
as  Pobinson  thinks  it  (see  his  map  at  end  of  vol.  i. 
and  i.  197),  for  Rehoboth.  There  is  also  a  Wady 
cl  Jerur  laid  down  S.  of  the  wadys  above-named, 
and  running  into  one  of  them ;  but  this  is  too  far 
south  (Robinson,  i.  189,  note)  to  be  accepted  as  a 
possible  site.  The  valley  of  Gerar  may  be  almost 
any  important  wad}'  within  the  limits  indicated; 
but  if  the  above-mentioned  situation  for  the  wells 
be  not  rejected,  it  would  tend  to  designate  the 
Wady  el  Ain.  Robinson  (ii.  44)  appears  to  prefer 
the  W.  es  Scheria,  running  to  the  sea  south  of  Gaza. 
Eusebius  (dc  sit.  8[  noni.  loc.  Heb.  s.  v.)  makes 
Gerar  25  miles  S.  from  Eleutheropolis,  which  would 
be  about  the  latitude  of  Beersheba  ;  but  see  Je- 
rome, Lib.  quaest.  Heb.  Gen.  lxii.  3.  Bered  (xvi. 
14)  may  perhaps  have  lain  in  this  territory.  In  1 
Chr.  iv.  39,  the  LXX.  read  Gerar,  els  ri]v  Tepapa, 
for  Gedor;  a  substitution  which  is  not  without 
some  claims  to  support.  [Bered  ;  Beershev.a  ; 
Gedor.]  [H.  H.] 

GERASA    (Tepaaa,    Ptol.  ;     Tepacra-a,    Not. 

Eccl.es. ;  Arab.  Jerash,    i^s»).     This  name  does 

not  occur  in  the  0.  T.,  nor  in  the  Received  Text  of 
the  N.  T.  But  it  is-now  generally  admitted  that  in 
Matt.viii.28,  "Gerasenes"  supersedes  "Gadarenes." 
Gerasa  was  a  celebrated  city  on  the  eastern  borders 
of  Peraea  (Joseph.  B.  J.  iii.  3,  §3),  placed  by  some 
in  the  province  of  Coelesyria  and  region  of  Deea- 
polis  (Steph.  s.  v.),  by  others  in  Arabia  (Epiph.  adv. 
ffaer. :  Origen.  in  Jo/urn.).  These  various  state- 
ments do  not  arise  from  any  doubts  as  to  the  locality 
of  the  city,  but  from  the  ill-defined  boundaries  of  the 
provinces  mentioned.  In  the  Roman  age  no  city  of 
Palestine  was  better  known  than  Gerasa.  It  is 
situated  amid  the  mountains  of  Gilead,  20  miles  east 
of  the  Jordan,  and  25  north  of  Philadelphia,  the 
ancient  Pabbath-Ammon.  Several  MSS.  read  Te- 
p<x<rr\v5>v  instead  of  Ttpyecrrivaiv,  in  Matt.  viii.  28  ; 
but  the  city  of  Gerasa  lay  too  far  from  the  Sea  of 
Tiberias  to  admit  the  possibility  of  the  miracles 
having  been  wrought  in  its  vicinity.  If  the  reading 
repa<n)vu>v  be  the  true  one,  the  x<^Pa>  "district," 
must  then  have  been  very  large,  including  Gadara 
and  its  environs  ;  and  Matthew  thus  uses  a  broader 
appellation,  where  Mark  and  Luke  use  a  more  spe- 


1  The  well  where  Isaac  and  Abimelech  covenanted 
is  distinguished   by  the   LXX.   from  the   Beersheba 

where  Abraham  did  so,  the  former  being  called  <j>peap  I  hour  of  whom  they  wish  to  be  rid 
opKov,  the  latter  4>P^aP  bpKi.a-p.ov. 


GERGESENES 

cific  one.  This  is  not  improbable;  as  Jerome  (ad 
Obad.)  states  that  Gilead  was  in  his  day  called 
Gerasa;   and  Origen  affirms  that  Tepaa-r)vSiv  was 

the  ancient  reading  (Opp.  iv.  p.  140).  [<  Iahai:  \.] 
It  is  not  known  when  or  by  whom  Gerasa  was 
founded.  It  is  first  mentioned  by  Josephus  as 
having  been  captured  by  Alexander  Jannaeus  (circ. 
B.C.  85;  Joseph.  B.J.  i.  4,  §8).  It  was  one  of 
the  cities  the  Jews  burned  in  revenge  for  the  mas- 
sacre of  their  countrymen  at  Caesarea,  at  the  com- 
mencement of  their  last  war  with  the  Romans: 
and  it  had  scarcely  recovered  from  this  calamity 
when  the  Emperor  Vespasian  despatched  Annius, 
his  general,  to  capture  it.  Annius,  having  carried 
the  city  at  the  first  assault,  put  to  the  sword  one 
thousand  of  the  youth  who  had  not  effected  their 
escape,  enslaved  their  families,  and  plundered  their 
dwellings  (Joseph.  B.  J.  iv.  9,  §1).  It  appears  to 
have  been  nearly  a  century  subsequent  to  this 
period  that  Gerasa  attained  its  greatest  prosperity, 
and  was  adorned  with  those  monuments  which  give 
it  a  place  among  the  proudest  cities  of  Syria.  His- 
tory tells  us  nothing  of  this,  but  the  fragments  of 
inscriptions  found  among  its  ruined  palaces  and 
temples,  show  that  it  is  indebted  for  its  architec- 
tural splendour  to  the  age  and  genius  of  the  Anto- 
nines  (A.D.  138-80).  It  subsequently  became  the 
seat  of  a  bishopric.  There  is  no  evidence  that  the 
city  was  ever  occupied  by  the  Saracens.  Tlniv  are 
no  traces  of  their  architecture — no  mosks,  no  inscrip- 
tions, no  reconstruction  of  old  edifices,  such  as  are 
found  in  most  other  great  cities  in  Syria.  All  here 
is  Roman,  or  at  least  ante-Islamic  ;  every  structure 
remains  as  the  hand  of  the  destroyer,  or  the  earth- 
quake shock  left  it — ruinous  and  deserted. 

The  ruins  of  Gerasa  are  by  far  the  most  beau- 
tiful and  extensive  east  of  the  Jordan.  They  are 
situated  on  both  sides  of  a  shallow  valley  that  runs 
from  north  to  south  through  a  high  .undulating 
plain,  and  falls  into  the  Zurka  (the  ancient  Jabbok) 
at  the  distance  of  about  5  miles.  A  little  rivulet, 
thickly  fringed  with  oleander,  winds  through  the 
valley,  giving  life  and  beauty  to  the  deserted  city. 
The  first  view  of  the  ruins  is  very  striking  ;  and 
such  as  have  enjoyed  it  will  not  soon  forget  the 
impression  made  upon  the  mind.  The  long  colon- 
nade running  through  the  centre  of  the  city,  ter- 
minating at  one  end  in  the  graceful  circle  of  the 
forum  ;  the  groups  of  columns  clustered  here  and 
there  round  the  crumbling  walls  of  the  temples ; 
the  heavy  masses  of  masonry  that  distinguish  the 
positions  of  the  great  theatres ;  and  the  vast  field 
of  shapeless  ruins  rising  gradually  from  the  green 
banks  of  the  rivulet  to  the  battlemented  heights  on 
each  side — all  combine  in  forming  a  picture  such  as 
is  rarely  equalled.  The  form  of  the  city  is  an  irre- 
gular square,  each  side  measuring  nearly  a  mile. 
It  was  surrounded  by  a  strong  wall,  a  large  portion 
of  which,  with  its  flanking  towers  at  intervals,  is 
in  a  good  state  of  preservation.  Three  gateways 
are  still  nearly  perfect;  and  within  the  city  up- 
wards  of  two  hundred  and  thirty  columns  remain 
on  their  pedestals.  (Full  descriptions  of  Gerasa 
are  given  in  the  Handbook  for  Syr.  mid  Pal.; 
Burckhardt's  Travels  in  Syria  /Buckingham's  Arab 
Tribes;  Ritter's  Pal.  unci  Syr.).  "  [J.  I.  P.] 

GERGESE'NES,  Matt.  viii.  28.    [Gadara .] 


b  The  stopping-  wells  is  a  device  still  resorted  to  by 
the  Bedouins,  to  make  a  country  untenable  by  a  neigh- 


GERSGESITES 

GERGESI'TES,  THE  (of  repyetraloi ;  Vu/g. 
omifcs),  Jud.  v.  16.      [GlBGASHlTES.] 

GERIZ'IM  (always  D^p.rin,  har-Gerizzim, 

the  mountain  of  the  Gerizzites,  from  i-fl-l,  G'rizzi, 

dwellers  in  a  shorn  («'.  e.  desert)  land,  from  PH, 

garaz,  to  cut  off;  possibly  the  tribe  subdued  by 
David,  1  Sam.  xxvii.  8;  Tapi^i" ;  Gariziin),  a 
mountain  designated  by  Muses,  in  conjunction  with 
Mount  Ebal,  to  be  the  scene  of  a  great  solemnity 
upon  the  entrance  of  the  children  of  Israel  into  the 
promised  land.  High  places  had  a  peculiar  charm 
attached  to  them  in  these  days  of  external  observ- 
ance. The  law  was  delivered  from  Sinai :  the 
blessings  and  curses  affixed  to  the  performance  or 
neglect  of  it  were  directed  to  be  pronounced  upon 
Gerizim  and  Ebal.  Six  of  the  tribes — Simeon,  Levi 
(but  Joseph  being  represented  by  two  tribes,  Levi's 
actual  place  probably  was  as  assigned  below),  Jndah, 
[ssachar,  Joseph,  and  Benjamin  were  to  take  their 
stand  upon  the  former  to  bless  ;  and  six,  namely — 
Reuben,  Gad,  Aster,  Zebulnn,  Dan,  and  Naphtali — 
upon  the  latter  to  curse  (Deut.  xxvii.  12-13). 
Apparently,  the  Ark  halted  mid-way  between  the 
two  mountains,  encompassed  by  the  priests  and 
Levites,  thus  divided  by  it  into  two  bands,  with 
Joshua  for  their  coryphaeus.  He  read  the  blessings 
and  cursings  successively  (Josh.  viii.  33,34),  to  be 
re-echoed  by  the  Levites  on  either  side  of  him, 
and  responded  to  by  the  tribes  in  their  double 
array  with  a  loud  Amen  (Deut.  xxvii.  14).  Cu- 
riously enough,  only  the  formula  for  the  curses  is 
given  (ibid.  v.  14-26)  ;  and  it  was  upon  Ebal,  and 
nut  Gerizim,  where  the  altar  of  whole  unwrought 
stone  was  to  lie  built,  and  where  the  huge  plastered 
stones,  with  the  words  of  the  law  (Josh.  viii.  32  ; 
Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  8,  §44,  limits  them  to  the  bless- 
ings ami  curses  just  pronounced)  written  upon 
them  were  to  be  set  up  (Deut.  xxvii.  4-6)— -a. 
significant  omen  for  a  people  entering  joyously 
upon  their  new  inheritance,  and  yet  the  song  of 
Muses  abounds  with  forebodings  still  more  sinister 
and  plain-spoken  (Deut.  xxxii.  5,  G,  and  15-28). 

The  next  question  is,  Has  Moses  defined  the 
localities  of  Ebal  and  Gerizim?  Standing  on  the 
eastern  side  of  the  Jordan,  in  the  land  of  Moab 
(Deut.  i.  ")),  hi'  asks:  "Are  they  not  on  the  other 
side  Jordan,  by  the  way  where  the  sun  goeth 
down  (k  e.  at  some  distance  to  the  \\\),  in  the  land 
of  the  Canaanites,  which  dwell  in  the  champaign 
Over  against  I  rilgal  ( i.  <".  whose  territory — not  these 
mountains — commenced  over  against  Gilgal — see 
Patrick  on  Deut.  xi.  30),  beside  the  plains  of 
Moreh?"  .  .  .  These  closing  words  would  seem  to 
mark  their  site  with  unusual  precision  :  for  in  Gen. 
xii.  6  "  the  plain  1 1. XX.  •  oak  \i  of  Aforeb  "  is  ex- 
pressly connected  with  "the  place  of  Sichem  or 
Shechem"  (N.  'I'.  Sychem  or  Sychar,  which  last 
form  is  thought  to  convey  a  reproach.  Reland, 
Dissert.  <<,,  Qeri  fro,  in  Ugol.  Thesaur.  p.  deexxv., 
in  Joseph  us  the  form  is  Sicima),  and  accordingly 
Judg.  ix.  7,  Jotham  is  made  to  address  hi,  cele- 
brated parable  to  the  men  of  Shechem  from  "the 
,  top  of  Mount  Gerizim."  The  "hill  of  Moreh," 
mentioned  in  the  history  of  Gideon  Ins  father,  ma; 
have  been  a  mountain  overhanging  t lie  same  plain, 
but  certainly  could  not  ha\e  been  farther  south 
(comp.  c.  vi.  33,  and  vii.  1).  Was  it  therefore 
prejudice,  or  neglecf  of  the  true  import  of  these 
passages,  that  made  EuscKius  '  and  Kpiphanius, 
Doth  natives  of  Palestine,  concur  in  placing   Ebal 


GERIZIM 


079 


and  Gerizim  near  Jericho,  the  former  diamine  the 
Samaritans  with  grave  error  for  affirming  them  to 
be  near  Neapolis?  (Reland,  Dissert.,  as  above,  p. 
deexx.).  Of  one  thing  we  may  be  assured,  namely , 
that  their  Scriptural  site  must  have  been,  in  the 
fourth  century,  lost  to  all  but  the  Samaritans  ; 
otherwise  these  two  fathers  would  have  spoken 
very  differently.  It  is  true  that  they  consider  the 
Samaritan  hypothesis  irreconcil cable  with  Deut.  xi. 
30,  which  it  has  already  been  shown  not  to  be.  A 
more  formidable  objection  would  have  been  that 
Joshua  could  not  have  marched  from  Ai  to  Shechem, 
through  a  hostile  country,  to  perform  the  above 
solemnity,  and  retraced  his  steps  so  soon  afterwards 
to  Gilgal,  as  to  have  been  found  there  by  the 
Gibeonites  (Josh.  ix.  6  ;  comp.  viii.  30-35).  Yet 
the  distance  between  Ai  and  Shechem  is  not  so  long 
(under  two  days'  journey).  Neither  can  the  in- 
terval implied  in  the  context  of  the  former  passage 
have  been  so  short,  as  even  to  warrant  the  modern 
supposition  that  the  latter  passage  has  been  mis- ' 
placed.  The  remaining  objection,  namely,  "  the 
wide  interval  between  the  two  mountains  at 
Shechem  "  (Stanley,  S.  Sr  P.  238,  note),  is  still 
more  easily  disposed  of,  if  we  consider  the  blessings 
and  curses  to  have  been  pronounced  by  the  Levites, 
standing  in  the  midst  of  the  valley — thus  abridging 
the  distance  by  one-half — and  not  by  the  six  tribes 
on  either  hill,  who  only  responded.  How  indeed 
could  600,000  men  and  upwards,  besides  women 
and  children  (comp.  Num.  ii.  32  with  Judg.  xx.  2 
and  17),  have  been  accommodated  in  a  smaller 
space  ?  Besides  in  those  days  of  assemblies  "  sub 
dio,"  the  sense  of  hearing  must  have  been  neces- 
sarily more  acute,  just  as,  before  the  aids  of  writing 
and  printing,  memories  were  much  more  retentive. 
We  may  conclude  therefore  that  there  is  no  room 
for  doubting  the  Scriptural  position  of  Ebal  and 
Gerizim  to  have  been — where  they  are  now  placed 
— in  the  territory  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim  ;  the 
latter  of  them  overhanging  the  city  of  Shechem  or 
Sicima,  asjosephus,  following  the  Scriptural  narra- 
tive, asserts.  Even  Eusebius,  in  another  work  of 
his  (Praep.  Evang.  ix.  22),  quotes  some  lines  from 
Theodotus,  in  which  the  true  position  of  Ebal  and 
Gerizim  is  described  with  great  force  and  accuracy  : 
and  St.  Jerome,  while  following  Eusebius  in  the 
Onomasticon,  in  his  ordinary  correspondence  does 
not  hesitate  to  connect  Sichem  or  Neapolis,  the 
well  of  Jacob,  and  Mount  Gerizim  {Ep.  cviii.  c. 
13,  ed.  Migne).  Procopius  of  Gaza  does  nothing 
more  than  follow  Eusebius,  and  that  clumsily 
(Reland,  Palest,  lib.  ii.  c.  13,  p.  503);  but  his 
more  accurate  namesake  of  Caesarea  expressly 
asserts  that  Gerizim  rose  over  Neapolis  (  De  Aedif. 
v.  7) — that  Ebal  was  not  a  peak  of  Gerizim 
(v.  Quaresm.  Elucid.  '/'.  8.  lib.  \ii.  Per.  i.  c.  8), 
but  a  distinct  mountain  to  the  X.  of  it,  and  se- 
parated from  it  by  the  valley  in  which  Shechem 
Stood,  we  are  not  called  upon  here  to  prove;  nor 
again,  that  Ebal  was  entirely  barren,  which  it  can 
scarce  be  called  now  ;  while  Gerizim  was  the  same 
proverb  tor  verdure  and  gushing  rills   formerly, 

that  it  is  now,  at  least  where  it  descends  towards 
Nabl&s.    It  is  a  fir  more  important  question  whether 

Gerizim  was  the  mountai i  which  Abraham  was 

directed  to  oiler  his  son  Isaac  (Con.  xxii.  2,  and 
sq.).  First,  then,  let  it  lie  observed  that  it  is  not 
the  mountain,  but  the  district  which  is  there  called 
Moriah  (of  the  same  root  with  Moreh:  see  ('urn. 
a  l.apid.  on  Gen.  \ii.  6),  and  that  antecedently  to 
the  occurrence  which  took  place  "  upon  one  of  the 


680 


GERIZIM 


mountains"  in  its  vicinity— a  consideration  which 
of  itself  would  naturally  point  to  the  locality, 
already  known  to  Abraham,  as  the  plain  or  plains 
of  Moreh,  "  the  land  of  vision,"  "  the  high  land  ;" 
and  therefore  consistently  "  the  land  of  adoration," 
or  "  religious  worship,"  as  it  is  variously  explained. 
That  all  these  interpretations  are  incomparably 
more  applicable  to  the  natural  features  of  Gerizim 
and  its  neighbourhood,  than  to  the  hillock  (in  com- 
parison) upon  which  Solomon  built  his  temple, 
none  can  for  a  moment  doubt  who  have  seen  both. 
Jerusalem  unquestionably  stands  upon  high  ground  ; 
but  owing  to  the  hills  "  round  about"  it,  cannot  be 
seen  on  any  side  from  any  great  distance  ;  nor,  for 
the  same  reason,  could  it  ever  have  been  a  land  of 
vision,  or  extensive  views.  Even  from  Mount 
Olivet,  which  must  always  have  towered  over  the 
small  eminences  at  its  base  to  the  S.W.,  the  view 
cannot  be  named  in  the  same  breath  with  that  from 
Gerizim,  which  is  one  of  the  finest  in  Palestine, 
commanding,  as  it  does,  from  an  elevation  of  nearly 
2500  feet  (Arrowsmith,  Geograph.  Diet,  of  the 
H.  S.  p.  145),  "the  Mediterranean  sea  on  the  W., 
the  snowy  heights  of  Hermon  on  the  N.,  on  the  E. 
the  wall  of  the  trans-Jordanic  mountains,  broken 
by  the  deep  cleft  of  the  Jabbok  "  (Stanley,  S.  $  P. 
p.  235),  and  the  lovely  and  tortuous  expanse  ot 
plain  (the  Mukhna)  stretched  as  a  carpet  of  many 
colours  beneath  its  feet.  Neither  is  the  appearance, 
which  it  would  "  present  to  a  traveller  advancing  up 
the  Philistine  plain"  (ibid.  p.  252) — the  direction 
from  which  Abraham  came — to  be  overlooked.  It 
is  by  no  means  necessary,  as  Mr.  Porter  thinks 
{Handbook  of  8.  fy  P.  i.  339),  that  he  should 
have  started  from  Beer-sheba  (see  Gen.  xxi.  34 — 
"the  whole  land  being  before  him,"  c.  xx.  15). 
Then,  "  on  the  morning  of  the  third  day,  he  would 
arrive  in  the  plain  of  Sharon,  exactly  where  the 
massive  height  of  Gerizim  is  visible  afar  off"  ( ibid. 
p.  251),  and  from  thence,  with  the  mount  always 
in  view,  he  would  proceed  to  the  exact  "  place 
which  God  had  told  him  of"  in  all  solemnity — for 
again,  it  is  not  necessary  that  he  should  have  ar- 
rived on  the  actual  spot  during  the  third  day.  All 
that  is  said  in  the  narrative,  is  that,  from  the  time 
that  it  hove  in  sight,  he  and  Isaac  parted  from  the 
young  men,  and  went  on  together  alone.  The 
Samaritans  therefore,  through  whom  the  tradition 
of  the  true  site  of  Gerizim  has  been  preserved,  are 
probably  not  wrong  when  they  point  out  still — as 
they  have  done  from  time  immemorial — Gerizim  as 
the  hill  upon  which  Abraham's  "  faith  was  made 
perfect ;"  and  it  is  observable  that  no  such  spot  is 
attempted  to  be  shown  on  the  rival  hill  of  Jeru- 
salem, as  distinct  from  Calvary.  Different  reasons 
in  all  probability  caused  these  two  localities  to  be 
so  named :  the  first,  not  a  mountain,  but  a  laud, 
district,  or  plain  (for  it  is  not  intended  to  be  as- 
serted that  Gerizim  itself  ever  bore  the  name  of 
Moriah  ;  though  a  certain  spot  upon  it  was  ever 
afterwards  to  Abraham  personally  "  Jehovah- 
jireh  "),  called  Moreh,  or  Moriah,  from  the  noble 
vision  of  nature,  and  therefore  of  natural  religion, 
that  met  the  eye ;  the  second,  a  small  hill  deriving 
its  name  from  a  special  revelation  or  vision,  as  the 
express  words  of  Scripture  say,  which  took  place 
"  by  the  threshing  floor  of  Araunah  the  Jebusite" 
(2  Chr.  iii.  1;  comp.  2  Sam.  xxiv.  16).  If  it 
be  thought  strange  that  a  place  once  called  by 
the  "  Father  of  the  faithful  "  Jehovah-jireh,  should 
have  been  merged  by  Moses,  and  ever  afterwards, 
in  a  general  name  so  different  from  it  in  sense  and 


GERIZIM 

origin  as  Gerizim  ;  it  would  be  still  more  strange, 
that,  if  Mount  Moriah  of  the  book  of  Chronicles 
and  Jehovah-jireh  were  one  and  the  same  place,  no 
sort  of  allusion  should  have  been  made  by  the 
inspired  historian  to  the  prime  event  which  had 
caused  it  to  be  so  called.  True  it  is  that  Josephus, 
in  more  than  one  place,  asserts  that  where  Abraham 
offered,  there  the  temple  was  afterwards  built 
{Ant.  i.  13,  §2,  and  vii.  13,  §9).  Yet  the  same 
Josephus  makes  God  bid  Abraham  go  to  the  moun- 
tain— not  the  laud — of  Moriah  ;  having  omitted 
all  mention  of  the  plains  of  Moreh  in  his  account  of 
the  preceding  narrative.  Besides  in  more  than  one 
place  he  shows  that  he  bore  no  love  to  the  Sama- 
ritans (ibid.  xi.  8,  §6,  and  xii.  5,  §5).  St.  Jerome 
follows  Josephus  (Quaest.  in  Gen.  xxii.  5,'  ed. 
Migne),  but  with  his  uncertainty  about  the  site  of 
Gerizim  what  else  could  he  have  done?  Besides  it 
appears  from  the  Onomasticon  (s.  v.)  that  he  con- 
sidered the  hill  of  Moreh  (Judg.  vii.  1)  to  be  the 
same  with  Moriah.  And  who  that  is  aware  of  the 
extravagance  of  the  Rabbinical  traditions  respecting 
Mount  Moriah  can  attach  weight  to  any  one  of 
them?  (Cunaeus,  De  Eepubl.  Heb.  lib.  ii.  12). 
Finally,  the  Christian  tradition,  which  makes  the 
site  of  Abraham's  sacrifice  to  have  been  on  Calvary, 
will  derive  countenance  from  neither  Josephus  nor 
St.  Jerome,  unless  the  sites  of  the  Temple  and  of  the 
Crucifixion  are  admitted  to  have  been  the  same. 

Another  tradition  of  the  Samaritans  is  tar  less 
trustworthy ;  viz.,  that  Blount  Gerizim  was  the 
spot  where  Melchisedech  met  Abraham — though 
there  certainly  was  a  Salem  or  Shalem  in  that 
neighbourhood  (Gen.  xxxiii.  18:  Stanley,  S.  fy  P. 
p.  247,  and  seq.).  The  first  altar  erected  in  the  land 
of  Abraham,  and  the  first  appearance  of  Jehovah  to 
him  in  it,  was  in  the  plain  of  Moreh  near  Sichem 
(Gen.  xii.  6)  ;  but  the  mountain  overhanging  that 
city  (assuming  our  view  to  be  correct)  had  not  yet 
been  hallowed  to  him  for  the  rest  of  his  life  by  that 
decisive  trial  of  his  faith,  which  was  made  there 
subsequently.  He  can  hardly  therefore  be  supposed 
to  have  deviated  from  his  road  so  far,  which  lay 
through  the  plain  of  the  Jordan  ;  nor  again  is  it 
likely  that  he  would  have  found  the  king  of  Sodom 
so  far  away  from  his  own  territory  (Gen.  xiv.  17, 
and  seq.).  Lastly,  the  altar  which  Jacob  built 
was  not  on  Gerizim,  as  the  Samaritans'  contend, 
though  probably  about  its  base,  at  the  head  of  the 
plain  between  it  and  Ebal,  "  in  the  parcel  of  a 
field "  which  that  patriarch  purchased  from  the 
children  of  Haruor,  and  where  he  spread  his  tent 
(Gen.  xxxiii.  18-20).  Here  was  likewise  his  well 
(John  iv.  6) ;  and  the  tomb  of  his  son  Joseph 
(Josh.  xxiv.  32),  both  of  which  are  still  shown; 
the  former  surmounted  by  the  remains  of  a  vaulted 
chamber,  and  with  the  ruins  of  a  church  hard  by 
(Kobinson,  Bibl.  lies.  ii.  283)  the  latter,  with  "a 
fruitful  vine "  trailing  over  its  white-washed  in- 
closure,  and,  before  it,  two  dwarf  pillars,  hollowed 
out  at  the  top  to  receive  lamps,  which  are  lighted 
every  Friday  or  Mahometan  sabbath.  There  is, 
however,  another  Mahometan  monument  claiming 
to  be  the  said  tomb  (Stanley,  S.  $  P.  p.  241  noti  I . 
The  tradition  (Robinson,  ii.  283  note)  tint  the 
twelve  patriarchs  were  buried  there  likewise  |  it 
should  have  made  them  eleven  without  Joseph, 
or  thirteen,  including  his  two  sons),  probably  de- 
pends upon  Acts  vii.  16,  where,  unless  we  are  to 
suppose  confusion  in  the  narrative,  Autos  should 
be  read  for  'Afipaa/JL,  which  may  well  have  been 
suggested  to  the  copyist  from  its  recurrence  v.  17  ; 


GERIZIM 

while  avrhs,  from  having  already  occurred,  v.  15, 
might  have  been  thought  suspicious. 

We  now  enter  upon  the  second  phase  in  the  his- 
tory of  Gerizim.  According  to  Joseph  us,  a  mar- 
riage contracted  between  Manasseh,  brother  of 
Jaddus,  the  then  high-priest,  and  the  daughter  of 
Sanballat  the  Cuthaean  (comp.  2  K.  xvii.  24), 
having  created  a  great  stir  amongst  the  Jews  (who 
had  been  strictly  forbidden  to  contract  alien  mar- 
riages (Ezr.  ix.  2;  Neh.  xiii.  23) — Sanballat,  in 
order  to  reconcile  his  son-in-law  to  this  unpopular 
affinity, obtained  leave  from  Alexander  the  Great  to 
build  a  temple  upon  Mount  Gerizim,  and  to  in- 
augurate a  rival  priesthood  and  altar  there  to  those 
of  Jerusalem  (Ant.  xi.  8,  2-4,  and,  for  the  har- 
monising of  the  names  and  dates,  Prideaux,  Connect. 
i.  396,  and  seq.,  M'Oaul'sed.).  "  Samaria  thence- 
forth," says  Prideaux,  "  became  the  common  re- 
fuge and  asylum  of  the  refractory  Jews"  (ibid.  ; 
see  also  Joseph.  Ant.  xi.  8,  7),  and  for  a  time,  at 
least,  their  temple  seems  to  have  been  called  by  the 
name  of  a  Greek  deity  (Ant.  xii.  5,  5).  Hence 
one  of  the  first  acts  of  Hyrcanus,  when  the  death 
of  Antiochus  Sidetes  had  set  his  hands  free,  was  to 
seize  Shechem,  and  destroy  the  temple  upon  Geri- 
zim, after  it  had  stood  there  200  years  (Ant.  xiii. 
9,  1).  But  the  destruction  of  their  temple  by  no 
means  crushed  the  rancour  of  the  Samaritans.  The 
road  from  Galilee  to  Judaea  lay  then,  as  now, 
through  Samaria,  skirting  the  foot  of  Gerizim 
(St.  John  iv.  4).  Here  was  a  constant  occasion 
for  religious  controversy  and  for  outrage.  "  How 
is  it  that  Thou,  being  a  Jew,  askest  to  drink  of 
me,  which  am  a  woman  of  Samaria?"  said  the 
female  to  our  Lord  at  the  well  of  Jacob — where 
both  parties  would  always  be  sure  to  meet.  "  Our 
fathers  worshipped  in  this  mountain,  and  ye  say 
that  in  Jerusalem  is  the  place  where  men  ought 
to  worship?"  .  .  .  Subsequently  we  read  of  the 
depredations  committed  on  that  road  upon  a  party 
of  Galilaeans  (Ant.  xx.  0,  1).  The  liberal  attitude, 
first  of  the  Saviour,  and  then  of  his  disciples  (Acts 
viii.  14),  was  thrown  away  upon  all  those  who 
would  not  abandon  their  creed.  And  Gerizim  con- 
tinued to  be  the  focus  of  outbreaks  through  succes- 
sive centuries.  One,  under  Pilate,  while  it  led  to 
their  severe  chastisement,  procured  the  disgrace 
of  that  ill-starred  magistrate,  who  had  crucified 
"Jesus,  the  king  of  the  Jews,"  with  impunity 
(Ant.  xviii.  4,  1).  Another  hostile  gathering  on 
the  same  spot  caused  a  slaughter  of  10,600  of  them 
under  Vespasian.  It  is  remarkable  that,  in  this 
instance,  want  of  water  is  said  to  have  made  them 
easy  victims;  so  that  the  deliriously  cold  and  pure 
spring  on  the  summit  of  Gerizim  must  have  failed 
before  so  great  a  multitude  (Hell.  Jud.  iii.  7,  32). 
At  length  their  aggressions  were  directed  against 
the  Christians  inhabiting  Neapolis — now  powerful, 
and  under  a  bishop — in  the  reign  of  Zeno.  Tere- 
binthus  at  once  carried  the  news  of  this  outrage  to 
Byzantium:  the  Samaritans  were  forcibly  ejected 
from  Gerizim,  which  was  banded  over  to  the 
Christians,  and  adorned  with  a  church  in  honour  of 
the  Virgin;  to  some  extent  fortified,  and  even 
guarded.  This  not  proving  sufficient  to  repel  the 
foe,  Justinian  built  a  second  wall  round  the  church, 
which  his  historian  says  defied  all  attacks  (Procop. 
De  Aedif.  v.  7).  It  is  probably  the  ruins  of  these 
buildings  which  meet  the  eve  of  the  modern  tra- 
veller (Handb.  of  3.  §  P.  ii.  339).  Previously 
to  this  time,  the  Samaritans  had  been  a  numerous 
and  important  sect — sufficiently  so  indeed  to  be 


GERRHENIANS,  THE 


MSI 


carefully  distinguished  from  the  Jews  and  Caelieo- 
lists  in  the  Theodosian  code.  This  last  outrage  led 
to  their  comparative  disappearance  from  history. 
Travellers  of  the  12th,  14th,  and  17th  centuries 
take  notice  of  their  existence,  but  extreme  paucity 
{Early  Travellers,  by  Wright,  pp.  81,  181,  and 
432),  and  their  numbers  now,  as  in  those  days, 
is  said  to  be  below  200  (Robinson,  Bibl.  Bes.  ii. 
282,  2nd  ed.).  We  are  confined  by  our  subject 
to  Gerizim,  and  therefoie  can  only  touch  upon  the 
Samaritans,  or  their  city  Neapolis,  so  far  as  their 
history  connects  directly  with  that  ot  the  mountain. 
And  yet  we  may  observe  that  as  it  was  undoubtedly 
this  mountain  of  which  our  Lord  had  said,  "  Wo- 
man, believe  me,  the  hour  Cometh',  when  ye  shall 
neither  in  this  mountain,  nor  yet  at  Jerusalem 
(»".  e.  exclusively),  worship  the  Father  "  (John  iv. 
21) — so  likewise  it  is  a  singular  historical  fact, 
that  the  Samaritans  have  continued  on  this  self- 
same mountain  century  after  century,  with  the 
briefest  interruptions,  to  worship  according  to  their 
ancient  custom  ever  since  to  the  present  day. 
While  the  Jews — expelled  from  Jerusalem,  and 
therefore  no  longer  able  to  offer  up  bloody  sacrifices 
according  to  the  law  of  Moses — have  been  obliged 
to  adapt  their  ceremonial  to  the  circumstances  of 
their  destiny :  here  the  Paschal  Lamb  has  been 
ottered  up  in  all  ages  of  the  Christian  era  by  a 
small  but  united  nationality  (the  spot  is  accurately 
marked  out  by  Dr.  P.,  Bibl.  Bes.  ii.  277).  Their 
copy  of  the  law,  probably  the  work  of  Manasseh, 
and  known  to  the  Fathers  of  the  2nd  and  3rd 
centuries  (Prideaux,  Connect,  i.  600  ;  and  Robin- 
son, ii.  297-301),  was,  in  the  17th,  vindicated 
from  oblivion  by  Scaliger,  Usher,  Morinus,  and 
others ;  and  no  traveller  now  visits  Palestine  with- 
out making  a  sight  of  it  one  of  his  prime  objects. 
Gerizim  is  likewise  still  to  the  Samaritans  what, 
Jerusalem  is  to  the  Jews,  and  Mecca  to  the  Ma- 
hometans. Their  prostrations  are  directed  towards 
it,  wherever  they  are ;  its  holiest  spot  in  their 
estimation  being  the  traditional  site  of  the  tabernacle, 
near  that  on  which  they  believe  Abraham  to  have 
offered  his  son.  Both  these  spots  are  on  the  sum- 
mit ;  and  near  them  is  still  to  be  seen  a  mound  of 
ashes,  similar  to  the  larger  and  more  celebrated 
one  N.  of  Jerusalem  ;  collected,  it  is  said,  from  the 
sacrifices  of  each  successive  age  (Dr.  R.,  Bibl.  Bes. 
ii.  202  and  299,  evidently  did  not  see  this  on 
Gerizim).  Into  their  more  legendary  traditions 
respecting  Gerizim,  and  the  story  of  their  alleged 
worship  of  a  dove — due  to  the  Jews,  their  enemies 
(Belaud,  Diss.ap.  Vgolin.  Thcsaur.  vii.  p.  deexxix.- 
xxxiii.) — it  is  needless  to  enter.  [E.  S.  Ft'.] 

GERIZI'TES,  1  Sam.  xxvii.  8.     [Gekzitks.] 

GERRHE'NTANS,  THE  (fas  -rmv  Tepfavwv, 
Alex.  TiWTipCov  ;  ml  Oerrenos),  named  in  -  Mace. 
xiii.  24  only,  as  one  limit  of  lie  district  committed 
by  Antiochus  Eupator  to  the  government  of  Judas 
Maccabaeus,  the  other  limit  being  Ptolemaisf  Accho). 
To  judge  by  the  similar  expression  in  defining  the 
extent  of  Simon's  government  in  1  Mace.  xi.  59, 
the  specification  lias  reference  to  the  sea-coast  of 
Palestine,  and.  fipom  the  nature  of  the  case,  the 
Gerrhenians,  wherever  they  were,  must  have  been 

south  of  Ptolemais.     Grotius  seems  to  have  1 a 

the  first  to  suggest,  that  the  town  <  ierrhon  or  <  ien  ha 
was  intended,  which  lay  between  Pelusium  and 
Rhinocolura  (  Wady  Bui   it  has  been 

pointed  out  by  Ewald  (Gcschicldr.  iv.  365  noti  | 

that    tie-   c.ia-t'  as  far  north   as   the  latter  plai 

2  Y 


682 


GERSHOM 


at  that  time  in  possession  of  Egypt,  and  he  thereon 
conjectures  that  the  inhabitants  of  the  ancient  city 
of  GERAR,  S.E.  of  Gaza,  the  residence  ot  Abraham 
and  Isaac,  are  meant.  In  support  of  this  Grimm 
(Kurzcj.  Handb.  ad  loc.)  mentions  that  at  least  one 
MS.  reads  YepapT)vwv,  which  would  without  diffi- 
culty be  corrupted  to  repprjvuv. 

It  seems  to  have  been  overlooked  that  the  Syriac 
version  (early,  and  entitled  to  much  respect)  has 

Gozor  ('J^N.  )•      By  this  may  be  intended  either 

(a)  the  ancient  Gezer,  which  was  near  the  sea ; 
somewhere  about  Joppa  ;  or  (6)  Gaza,  which  appears 
sometimes  to  take  that  form  in  these  books..  In 
the  former  case  the  government  of  Judas  would 
contain  half,  in  the  latter  the  whole,  of  the  coast 
of  Palestine.  The  latter  is  most  probably  correct, 
as  otherwise  the  important  district  of  Idumaea, 
wi.th  the  great  fortress  of  Bethsura,  would  have 
been  left  unprovided  for.  [*-*•] 

GERSHOM  (in  the  earlier  books  DBh'3,  in 
Chron,  generally  DiBH3).  1.  (T-npffdfi ;  in  Judg. 
rrfpcrdv,  and  Alex.  r^pcw/U ;  Joseph.  Trjpcros  ; 
Gersom,  Gersan)  The  first-born  son  of  Moses  and 
Zipporah  (Ex.  ii.  22;  xviii.  3).  The  name  is  ex- 
plained in  these  passages  as  if  Dfc?  "13  (Ger  sham) 
=  "  a  stranger  there,"  in  allusion  to  Moses' being 
a  foreigner  inMidian — "  For  he  said,  I  have  been  a 
stranger  (Ger')  in  a  foreign  land."  This  significa- 
tion is  adopted  by  Josephus  (Ant.  ii.  13,  §1),  and 
also  by  the  LXX.  in  the  form  of  the  name  which 
they  give — ■Ti)p<rafx. ;  but  according  to  Gesenius 
( Thes.  306  b),  its  true  meaning,  taking  it  as  a 
Hebrew  word,  is  "expulsion,"  from  a  root  Clil, 
being  only  another  form  of  Gershon  (see  also 
Fiirst,  Handwb.).  The  circumcision  of  Gershom  is 
probably  related  in  Ex.  iv.  25.  He  does  not  appear 
again  in  the  history  in  his  own  person,  but  he  was 
the  founder  of  a  family  of  which  more  than  one  of 
the  members  are  mentioned  later*  (a.)  One  of  these 
was  a  remarkable  person — "  Jonathan  the  son  of 
Gershom,"  the  "young  man  the  Levite,"  whom 
we  first  encounter  on  his  way  from  Bethlehem- 
Judah  to  Micah's  house  at  Mount  Ephraim  (Judg. 
xvii.  7),  and  who  subsequently  became  the  first 
priest  to  the  irregular  worship  of  the  tribe  of  Dan 
(xviii.  30).  The  change  of  the  name  "  Moses"  in 
this  passage,  as  it  originally  stood  in  the  Hebrew 
text,  to  "  Manasseh,"  as  it  now  stands  both  in  the 
Text  and  the  A.  V.,is  explained  under  Manasseh. 
(h.)  But  at  least  one  of  the  other  branches  of  the 
family  preserved  its  allegiance  to  Jehovah,  for  when 
the  courses  of  the  Levites  were  settled  by  king 
David,  the  "  sons  of  Moses  the  man  of  God  "  re- 
ceived honourable  prominence,  and  Shebuel  chief 
of  the  sons  of  Gershom  was  appointed  ruler  (1*33 )  of 
the  treasures.     (1  Chr.  xxiii.  15-17  ;  xxvi.  24-28.) 

2.  The  form  under  which  the  name  Gershon 
— the  eldest  son  of  Levi — is  given  in  several  passages 
of  Chronicles,  viz.  1  Chr.  vi.  1  6,  17,  20,  43,  62,  71  ; 
xv.  7.  The  Hebrew  is  almost  alternately  DCJH3  and 
D1CJH3  ;  the  LXX.  adhere  to  their  ordinary  render- 

.    ing    of  Gershon  ;    Vat.   T&auv,    Alex.   F-qpawv  ; 
Vulg.  Gerson  and  Gersom. 

3.  (DtJHll I;  Tripauv,  A\cx.  Tripa-wfi;  Gersom), 
the  representative  of  the  priestly  family  of  Phinehas, 
among  those  who  accompanied  Ezra  from  Babylon 
(Ezr.  viii.  2).  In  Esdras  (he  name  is  Gerson.  [G.] 


GERSHONITES,  THE 
GERSHON  QtehS  ;  in  Gen.  Yi)pffwv,  in  other 
books  uniformly  Tedfft&v ;  and  so  also  Alex,  with 
three  exceptions;  Joseph.  Ant.  ii.  7,  4,  T-tipao^-qs), 
the  eldest  of  the  three  sons  of  Levi,  born  before  the 
descent  of  Jacob's  family  into  Egypt  (Gen.  xlvi.  1  1 . 
Ex.  vi.  16).  But  though  the  eldest  bom.  the  fa- 
milies of  Gershon  were  outstripped  in  fame  by  their 
younger  brethren  of  Kohath,  from  whom  sprang 
Moses  and  the  priestly  line  of  Aaron."  Gershon' s 
sons  were  Libni  and  Sunn  (Ex.  vi.  17;  Num. 
iii.  18,  21;  1  Chr.  vi.  17),  and  their  families 
were  duly  recognized  in  the  reign  of  David,  when 
the  permanent  arrangements  for  the  service  of  Je- 
hovah were  made  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  7-11).  At  this 
time  Gershon  was  represented  by  the  famous  Asaph 
"  the  seer,"  whose  genealogy  is  given  in  1  Chr.  vi. 
39-43,  and  also  in  part,  20,  21.  The  family  is  men- 
tioned once  again  as  taking  part  in  the  reforms  of 
king  Hezekiah  (2  Chr.  xxix.  12,  where  it  should  be 
observed  that  the  sons  of  Asaph  are  reckoned  as  dis- 
tinct from  the  Gershonites).  At  the  census  in  the 
wilderness  of  Sinai  the  whole  number  of  the  males 
of  the  Bene-Gershon  was  7500  (  Num.  iii.  22),  mid- 
way between  the  Kohathites  and  the  Merarites.  At 
the  same  date  the  efficient  men  were  2630  (iv.  40). 
On  the  occasion  of  the  second  census  the  numbers 
of  the  Levites  are  given  only  in  gross  (Num.  xxvi. 
62).  The  sons  of  Gershon  had  charge  of  the  fabrics 
of  the  Tabernacle — the  coverings,  curtains,  hangings, 
and  cords  (Num.  iii.  25,  26  ;  iv.  25,  26)  ;  for  the 
transport  of  these  they  had  two  covered  wagons  and 
four  oxen  (vii.  3,  7).  In  the  encampment  their  sta- 
tion was  behind  CHIIX)  the  Tabernacle,  on  the  west 
side  (Num.  iii.  23).  When  on  the  march  they  went 
with  the  Merarites  in  the  rear  of  the  first  body 
of  three  tribes — Judah,  Issachar,  Zebulun — with 
Reuben  behind  them.  In  the  apportionment  of  the 
Levitical  cities,  thirteen  fell  to  the  lot  of  the  Ger- 
shonites. These  were  in  the  northern  tribes — two 
in  Manasseh  beyond  Jordan  ;  four  in  Isaachar;  four 
in  Asher  ;  and  three  in  Naphtali.  All  of  these  are 
said  to  have  possessed  "  suburbs,"  and  two  were 
cities  of  refuge  (Josh.  xxi.  27-33;  1  Chr.  vi.  62, 
71-76).  It  is  not  easy  to  see  what  special  duties 
fell  to  the  lot  of  the  Gershonites  in  the  service  of 
the  Tabernacle  after  its  erection  at  Jerusalem,  or  in 
the  Temple.  The  sons  of  Jeduthun  "  prophesied 
with  a  harp,"  and  the  sons  of  Heman  "lifted  up 
the  horn,"  but  for  the  sons  of  Asaph  no  instrument 
is  mentioned  (1  Chr.  xxv.  1-5).  They  were  ap- 
pointed to  "  prophesy"  (that  is,  probably,  to  utter, 
or  sing,  inspired  words,  N33),  perhaps  after  the 
special  prompting  of  David  himself  (xxv.  2.)  Othei  s 
of  the  Gershonites,  sons  of  Laadan,  had  charge  of 
the  "  treasures  of  the  house  of  God,  and  over  the 
treasures  of  the  holy  things  "  (xxvi.  20-22),  among 
which  precious  stones  are  specially  named  (xxix.  8). 
In  Chronicles  the  name  is,  with  two  exceptions 
(1  Chr.  vi.  1,  xxiii.  6),  given  in  the  slightly  dif- 
ferent form  of  Gershom.  [Gershom,  2.]  See  also 
Gershonites.  [•'•] 

GERSHONITES,  THE  (»3Enjn,  i.  e.  the 
Gershunnite;  6  TeSacbi',  oTeSffoivi;  v'tot  TtSaoivl ; 
Alex.  Tr)p<Tc&v),  the  family  descended  from  GERSHON 
oi-Gershom,  the  son  of  Levi  (Num.  iii.  21.  23,  24  ; 
iv.  24,  27  ;  xxvi.  57  ;  Josh.  xxi.  33 ;  1  Chr.  xxiii. 
7;  2  Chr.  xxix.  12). 

a  See  an  instance  of  this  in  1  Chr.  vi.  2-15,  where 
the  line  of  Kohath  is  given,  to  the  exclusion  of  the 
other  two  families. 


GERSON 

-  "  The  Geushoxite,"  as  applied  to  indivi- 
duals, occurs  in  1  Chr.  x.xvi.  21  (Laadan),  xxix.  8 
(Jehiel).  [G.] 

GER'SON  {T-npauv  ;  Gersomus),  1  Esd.  viii. 
29.     [Geeshom,  .">.] 

GER'ZITES,  THE  (TUn,  or  Win— (Ges. 
T/ies.  301) — the  Girzite,  or  the  Gerizzite  ;  Vat. 
omits,  Alex,  rbv  Te(paiuv  •   Gerzi  and  Qezri,  but 

in  his  Quaest.  Hcbr.  Jerome  has  Gctri ;  Syr.  and 
Arab.  Godola),  a  tribe  who  with  the  Geshurites 
and  the  Amalekites  occupied  the  land  between  the 
south  of  Palestine"  and  Egypt  in  the  time  of  Saul 
(1  Sam.  xxvii.  8).  They  were  rich  in  Bedouin 
treasures — "  sheep,  oxen,  asses,  camels,  and  apparel" 
(ver.  9;  com  p.  xv.  3;  1  Chr.  vi.  21).  The 
name  is  not  found  in  the  text  of  the  A.  V.  hut 
only  in  the  margin.  This  arises  from  its  having 
been  corrected  by  the  Masorets  (Keri)  into  Giz- 
RITES,  which  form  our  translators  have  adopted 
in  the  text.  The  change  is  supported  by  the  Tar- 
gum,  and  by  the  Alex.  MS.  of  the  LXX.  as  above. 
There  is  not,  however,  any  apparent  reason  for  re- 
linquishing the  older  form  of  the  name,  the  interest 
of  which  lies  in  its  connexion  with  that  of  Mount 
Gerizim.  In  the  name  of  that  ancient  mountain 
we  have  the  only  remaining  trace  of  the  presence 
of  this  old  tribe  of  Bedouins  in  central  Palestine. 
They  appear  to  have  occupied  it  at  a  very  early 
period,  and  to  have  relinquished  it  in  compatiy  with 
the  Amalekites,  who  also  lett  their  name  attached 
to  a  mountain  in  the  same  locality  (Judg.  xii.  15), 
when  they  abandoned  that  rich  district  for  the  less 
fertile  but  freer  South.  Other  tribes,  as  the  Avvim 
and  the  Zemarites,  also  left  traces  of  their  presence 
in  the  names  of  towns  of  the  central  district  {see 
p.  1416,  188  note). 

The  connexion  between  the  Gerizites  and  Mount 
Gerizim  appeals  to  have  been  first  suggested  by 
Gesenius.  It  has  been  since  adopted  by  Stanley 
(S.4'P-  237  note).  Gesenius  interprets  the  name 
as  "  dwellers  in  the  dry,  barren  country."       [G.] 

GE'SEM,  THE  LAND  OF  (yv  r«re>  ;  terra 
Jesse  ,  the  Greek  form  of  the  Hebrew  name  Gosh  ex 

r.iu.i.  i.  9). 

GE'SHAM  (|B>*3,  i.e.  Gesban;  Zcoydp,  Alex. 
Tiripcrwfj. ;  Gcsan),  one  of  the  sons  of  JAHDAI,  in 
the  genealogy  of  Judah  and  family  of  Caleb  (1  Chr. 
ii.  47).  Nothing  further  concerning  him  has  been 
yet  traced.  The  name,  as  it  stands  in  our  present 
Bibles,  is  a  corruption  of  the  A.  V.  of  1G1 1,  which 
has,  accurately,  Geshan.  Burrington,  usually  very 
careful,  has  Geshur  (Table  xi.  1,  280),  but  without 
giving  any  authority. 

GE'SHEM,  and  GASH'MU  (D^3,  -113E?|  ; 

r-qtrdfj. ;   Gossem),  an  Arabian,  menti »  in  Neh. 

ii.  L9,  and  vi.  1,  '_',  6,  who,  with  "  Sanballat  the 
Hbronite,  and  Tobiah,  the  servant,  the  Ammonite," 
opposed  Nehemiah  in  tin-  repairing  of  Jerusalem. 
Geshem,  we  may  conclude,  was  an  inhabitant  of 
Arabia  Petraea,  or  of  the  Arabian  Desert,  and  pro- 
bably the  chief  of'  a  tribe  which,  like  most  of  the 
tribes  on  the  eastern  frontier  of  Palestine,  was,  in 

a  The  LXX.  has  rendered  the  passage  referred  to 

as  follows  : — Kal  ISov  r)  yi)  KaTuHcetTO  anb  anjicoiTioi" 
r\  aw'o  lWafxijiovp  (Alex.  IYAajuomip)  TeT€i\-03>uVu>i' 
«ai  eai;  y>)s  Aiyvirrov.  The  word  Gelamsmir  may  be 
a  corruption  of  the  Hebrew  meolam  .  .  Shnrdh 
(A.  V.   "of  old  .  .  to  Shur"),   or  it   may  contain   a 


G ETHER 


683 


the  time  of  the  captivity  and  the  subsequent  period, 
allied  with  the  Persians  or  with  any  peoples 
threatening  the  Jewish  nation.  Geshem,  like  San- 
ballat and  Tobiah,  seems  to  have  been  one  of  the 
"  governors  beyond  the  river,"  to  whom  Nehemiah 
came,  and  whose  mission  "  grieved  them  exceed- 
ingly, that  there  was  come  a  man  to  seek  the  wel- 
fare of  the  children  of  Israel"  (Neh.  ii.  10);  for 
the  wandering  inhabitants  of  the  frontier  doubtless 
availed  themselves  largely,  in  their  predatory  ex- 
cursions, of  the  distracted  state  of  Palestine,  and 
dreaded  the  re-establishment  of  the  kingdom ;  and 
the  Arabians,  Ammonites,  and  Ashdodites,  are  re- 
corded as  having  "  conspired  to  fight  against  Jeru- 
salem, and  to  hinder "  the  repairing.  The  en- 
deavours of  these  confederates  and  their  failure  are 
recorded  in  chapters  ii.,  iv'.,  ami  vi.  The  Arabic 
name  corresponding  to   Geshem    cannot    easily   be 

identified.    Jasim  (or  Gasim,  *./wL=>)  is  one  of  very 

'       3 

remote  antiquity  ;  and  Jashum  (    ^v^)  is  the  name 

of  an  historical  tribe  of  Arabia  Proper;  the  latter  may 
more  probably  be  compared  with  it.        [E.  S.  P.] 

GE'SHUR  (*rlK>|  and  VTW1,  "  a  bridge  ;" 

Arab.  .^^  ;  Jessur),  a  little  principality  in  the 

north-eastern  corner  of  Bashan,  adjoining  the  pro- 
vince of  Argob  (Deut.  iii.  14),  and  the  kingdom  of 
Aram  (Syria  in  the  A.  V. ;  2  Sam.  xv.  8  ;  comp. 
1  Chr.  ii.  23).  It  was  within  the  boundary  of  the 
allotted  territory  of  Manasseh,  but  its  inhabitants 
were  never  expelled  (Josh.  xiii.  13  ;  comp.  1  Chr. 
ii.  23).  King  David  married  "  the  daughter  of 
Talmai,  king  of  Geshur"  (2  Sam.  iii.  3)  ;  and  her 
son  Absalom  sought  refuge  among  his  maternal 
relatives  after  the  murder  of  his  brother.  The 
wild  acts  of  Absalom's  life  may  have  been  to  some 
extent  the  results  of  maternal  training  ;  they  were 
at  least  characteristic  of  the  stock  from  which  he 
sprung.  He  remained  in  "  Geshur  of  Aram  "  until 
he  was  taken  back  to  Jerusalem  by  Joab  (2  Sam. 
xiii.  37,  xv.  8).  It  is  highly  probable  that  Geshur 
was  a  section  of  the  wild  and  rugged  region,  now 
called  el-Zejah,  among  whose  rocky  fastnesses  the 
Geshurites  might  dwell  in  security  while  the  whole 
surrounding  plains  were  occupied  by  the  Israelites. 
On  the  north  the  Lejah  borders  on  the  territory  of 
Damascus,  the  ancient  Aram  ;  and  in  Scripture  the 
name  is  so  intimately  connected  with  Bashan  and 
Argob,  that  one  is  led  to  suppose;  it  formed  part  of 
them  (Deut.  iii.  13,  14  ;  1  Chr.  ii.  23  ;  Josh.  xiii. 
12,  13).     [Argoh].  [J.  I..  I'.] 

GESHU'RI  and  GESHURITES  (nWfo). 
(1.)  The  inhabitants  of  Geshur,  which  see  (Deut. 
iii.  14;  Josh.  xii.  5,  xiii.  11).  (2.)  An  ancient 
tribe  which  dwelt  in  the  desert  between  Arabia  and 
Philistia  (Josh. xiii.  2  ;  1  Sam. xxvii.  8)  j  they  arc 
mentioned  in  connexion  with  the  Gezrites  and 
Amalekites.     [Gezer,  p.  693 a.]  [J.  L.  P.] 

GE'THER  pn3  ;  Tarip  ;  Gather),  the  third, 
in  order,  of  the  sun,  of  Aram  (Gen.  x.  23).  No 
satisfactory  trace  of  the  people  sprung  from  this 

mention  of  the  name  Telcm  or  Tclaim,  a  place  in  the 
extreme  south  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  24),  which  bore 
a  prominent  part  in  a  Former  attack  on  the  Amalekites 
(1  Sam.  xv.  4),  In  the  latter  case  1'  has  been  read 
for  T,     (See  Lengerke  :   Hirst's  Jlmuhcb.,  Sec). 

2  V  2 


084 


GETHSEMANE 


stock  has  been  found.  The  theories  of  Bochart  and 
others,  which  rest  on  improbable  etymologies,  are 
without  support  ;  while  the  suggestions  of  Carians 

(Hieroii.),  Bactrians  (Joseph.  Ant.),  and  jiii^L^ 

(Saad.),  are  not  better  founded.  (See  Bochart, 
PJutleg,  ii.  10,  and  Winer,  s.  v.)  Kalisch  proposes 
Geshur  ;  but  he  does  not  adduce  any  argument  in 
its  favour,  except  the  similarity  of  sound,  and  the 
permutation  of  Aramaean  and  Hebrew  letters. 

The  Arabs  write  the  name  J)L£  (Ghathir)  ;  and, 

in  the  mythical  history  of  their  country,  it  is  said 
that  the  probably  aboriginal  tribes  of  Thamood, 
Tasur,  Jadces,  and  "Ad  (the  last,  in  the  second 
generation,  through  'Ood),  were  descended  from 
Ghathir  (Caussin,  Essai,  i.  8,  9,  23;  Abul-Fida, 
Hist.  Anteisl.  16).  These  traditious  are  in  the 
highest  degree  untrustworthy  ;  and,  as  we  have 
stated  in  Arabia,  the  tribes  referred  to  were, 
almost  demonstrably,  not  of  Semitic  origin.  See 
Arabia,  Aram,  and  Nabathaeans. 

GETHSEM'ANE  (nil,  gath,  a  "  wine-press," 
and  VOW,  shemen,  "  oil ;"  TeBcrr^fiavel,  or  more 
generally  reOcrrifxavrj),  a  small  "  farm,"  as  the 
French  would  say,  "  unbien  aux  champs"  (x'opioj', 
..-ager,  praedium  ;  or  as  the  Vulgate,  villa;  A.  V. 
:<  place;"  Matt.  xxvi.  36;  Mark  xiv.  32),  situated 
across  the  brook  Kedron  (John  xviii.  1),  probably 
at  the  foot  of  Mount  Olivet  (Luke  xxii.  39),  to  the 
N.  W.,  and  about  \  or  §  of  a  mile  English  from  the 
walls  of  Jerusalem.  There  was  a  "garden,"  or 
rather  orchard  (ftr/nos),  attached  to  it,  to  which 
the  olive,  fig,  and  pomegranate  doubtless  invited 
resort  by  their  "hospitable  shade."  And  we  know 
from  the  Evangelists  SS.  Luke  (xxii.  39)  and  John 
(xviii.  2)  that  our  Lord  ofttimes  resorted  thither 
with  his  disciples.  "  It  was  on  the  road  to  Be- 
thany," says  Mr.  Greswell  {Harm.  Diss,  xlii.), 
"  and  the  family  of  Lazarus  might  have  possessions 
there ; "  but,  if  so,  it  should  have  been  rather  on 
the  S.E.  side  of  the  mountain  where  Bethany  lies: 
part  of  which,  it  may  be  remarked,  being  the  pro- 
perty of  the  village  still,  as  it  may  well  have  been 
then,  is  even  now  called  Bethany  (el-Azariych)  by 
the  natives.  Hence  the  expressions  in  S.  Luke 
xxiv.  50,  and  Acts  i.  1 2,  are  quite  consistent. 
According  to  Josephus,  the  suburbs  of  Jerusalem 
abounded  with  gardens  and  pleasure-grounds  (ira- 
paSeiaots,  B.  J.  vi.  1,  §1  :  comp.  v.  3,  §2)  : 
now,  with  the  exception  of  those  belonging  to 
the  Greek  and  Latin  convents,  hardly  the  vestige 
of  a  garden  is  to  be  seen.  There  is  indeed  a  fa- 
vourite paddock  or  close,  half-a-mile  or  more  to  the 
north,  on  the  same  side  of  the  continuation  of  the 
valley  of  the  Kedron,  the  property  of  a  wealthy 
Turk,  where  the  Mahometan  ladies  pass  the  day 
with  their  families,  their  bright-flowing  costume 
forming  a  picturesque  contrast  to  the  stiff  sombre 
foliage  of  the  olive-grove  beneath  which  they  cluster. 
But  Gethsemane  has  not  come  down  to  us  as  a 
scene  of  mirth ;  its  inexhaustible  associations  are 
the  offspring  of  a  single  event — the  Agony  of  the 
Son  of  God  on  the  evening  preceding  His  Passion. 
Here  emphatically,  as  Isaiah  had  foretold,  and 
as  the  name  imports,  were  fulfilled  those  dark 
words,  "I  have  trodden  the  wine-press  alone" 
(lxiii.  3  ;  comp.  Rev.  xiv.  20,  "  the  wine- 
press .  .  .  without  the  city  ").  "  The  period 
of  the  year,"   proceeds  Mr.  Gresswell,   "  was    the 


GETHSEMANE 

Vernal  Equinox :  the  day  of  the  month  about  two 
days  before  the  full  of  the  moon — in  which  case  the 
moon  would  not  be  now  very  far  past  her  meridian  ; 
and  the  night  would  be  enlightened  until  a  late 
hour  towards  the  morning  " — the  day  of  the  week 
Thursday,  or  rather,  according  to  the  Jews,  Friday 
— for  the  sun  had  set.  The  time,  according  to 
Mr.  Gresswell,  would  be  the  last-watch  of  the 
night,  between  our  11  and  12  o'clock.  Any 
recapitulation  of  the  circumstances  of  that  in- 
effable event  would  be  unnecessary  ;  any  comments 
upon  it  unseasonable.  A  modern  garden,  in  which 
are  eight  venerable  olive-trees,  and  a  grotto  to  the 
north,  detached  from  it,  and  in  closer  connexion 
with  the  Church  of  the  Sepulchre  of  the  Virgin — 
in  fact  with  the  road  to  the  summit  of  the  moun- 
tain running  between  them,  as  it  did  also  in  the 
days  of  the  Crusaders  (Sanuti  Secret.  Fidel.  Cruc. 
lib.  iii..p.  xiv.  c.  9) — both  securely  enclosed,  and 
under  lock  and  key,  are  pointed  out  as  making  up 
the  true  Gethsemane.  These  may,  or  may  not,  be 
the  spots  which  Eusebius,  St.  Jerome  (Liber  de 
Situ  et  Nbminibus,  s.  v.),  and  Adamnanus  mention 
as  such  ;  but  from  the  4th  century  downwards  some 
such  localities  are  spoken  of  as  known,  frequented, 
and  even  built  upon.  Every  generation  dwells 
most  upon  what  accords  most  with  its  instincts 
and  predilections.  Accordingly  the  pilgrims  of  an- 
tiquity say  nothing  about  those  time-honoured  olive- 
trees,  whose  age  the  poetic  minds  of  a  Lamartine 
or  a  Stanley  shrink  from  criticising — they  were 
doubtless  not  so  imposing  in  the  6th  century  ;  still, 
had  they  been  noticed,  they  would  have  afforded 
undying  witness  to  the  locality — while,  on  the 
other  hand,  few  modern  travellers  woidd  inquire 
for,  and  adore,  with  Antoninus,  the  three  precise 
spots  where  our  Lord  is  said  to  have  fallen  upon 
His  face.  Against  the  contemporary  antiquity  of 
the  olive-trees,  it  has  been  urged  that  Titus  cut 
down  all  the  trees  round  about  Jerusalem  ;  and 
certainly  this  is  no  more  than  Josephus  states  in 
express  terms  (see  particularly  B.  J.  vi.  1,  §1, 
a  passage  which  must  have  escaped  Mr.  Williams, 
Holy  City,  vol.  ii.  p.  437,  ed.  2nd,  who  only  cites 
v.  3,  §2,  and  vi.  8,  §1).  Besides,  the  10th  legion, 
arriving  from  Jericho,  were  posted  about  the  Mount 
of  Olives  (v.  2,  §3;  and  comp.  vi.  2,  §8),  and,  in 
the  course  of  the  siege,  a  wall  was  carried  along  the 
valley  .of  the  Kedron  to  the  fountain  of  Siloam 
(v.  10,  §2).  The  probability  therefore  would  seem 
to  be,  thai  they  were  planted  by  Christian  hands 
to  mark  the  spot:  unless,  like  the  sacred  olive  of 
the  Acropolis  (Bahr  ad  Herod,  viii.  55),  they  may 
have  reproduced  themselves.  Maundrell  (Early 
Travellers  in  P.  by  Wright,  p.  471)  and  Quares- 
mius  (Elucid.  T.S.  lib.  iv.  per.  v.  ch.  7)  appear  to 
have  been  the  first  to  notice  them,  not  more  than 
three  centuries  ago ;  the  former  arguing  against, 
and  the  latter  in  favour  of,  their  reputed  antiquity, 
but  nobody  reading  their  accounts  would  imagine 
that  there  were  then  no  more  than  eight,  the  lo- 
cality of  Gethsemane  being  supposed  the  same. 
Parallel  claims,  to  be  sure,  are  not  wanting  in  the 
cedars  of  Lebanon,  which  are  still  visited  with  so 
much  enthusiasm:  in  the  terebinth,  or  oak  of 
Mamre,  which  was  standing  in  the  days  of  Con- 
stantine  the  Great,  and  even  worshipped  (Vales,  ad 
Euseb.  Yit.  Const,  iii.  53),  and  the  fig-tree  (ficus 
elastica)  near  Nerbudda  in  India,  which  native  his- 
torians assert  to  be  2500  years  old  (Patterson's 
Journal  of  a  Tour  in  Egypt,  <>■".,  p.  202,  note). 
Still  more   appositely  there  were   olive-trees  near 


GEUEL 

Linternum  250  years  old,  according  to  Pliny,  in 
his  time,  which  are  recorded  to  have  survived  to  the 
middle  of  the  tenth  century  (Nouveau  Diet,  d' Hist. 
Nat.  Paris,  L846,  vol.  xxix.  p.  61).  [E.  S.  Ff.] 
.  GEU'EL  (^N-1N3,  Sam.  htfti  ;  r<w5nj\  ; 
Guel),  son  of  Machi ;  ruler  of  the  tribe  of  Gad,  and 
its  representative  among  the  spies  sent  from  the 
wilderness  of  Paran  to  explore  the  Promised  Land 
(Num.  xiii.  15). 

GE'ZER  ("in',  in  pause  1T| ;  Tu&p,  re(ep, 
Ta^dpa  ;  Gazer),  an  ancient  city  of  Canaaan,  whose 
king,  Horam,  or  Elam,  coming  to  the  assistance  of 
Lachish,  was  killed  with  all  his  people  by  Joshua 
(Josh.  x.  33;  xii.  12).  The  town,  however,  is 
not  said  to  have  beeii  destroyed ;  it  formed  one  of 
the  landmarks  on  the  south  boundary  of  Ephraim,a 
between  the  lower  Beth-horon  and  the  Mediterranean 
(xvi.  3),  the  western  limit  of  the  tribe  (1  Chr.  vii. 
28).  It  was  allotted  with  its  suburbs  to  the  Ko- 
hathite  Levites  (Josh.  xxi.  21 ;  1  Chr.  vi.  67) ;  but 
the  original  inhabitants  were  not  dispossessed  (Judg. 
i.  29)  ;  and  even  down  to  the  reign  of  Solomon  the 
Canaanites,  or  (according  to  the  LXX.  addition  to 
Josh.  xvi.  10)  the  Canaanites  and  Perizzites,  were* 
still  dwelling  there,  and  paying  tribute  to  Israel 
(1  K.  ix.  16).  At  this  time  it  must  in  fact  have 
been  independent  of  Israelite  rule,  for  Pharaoh  had 
burnt  it  to  the  ground  and  killed  its  inhabitants, 
and  then  presented  the  site  to  his  daughter, 
Solomon's  queen.  But  it  was  immediately  rebuilt  by 
the  kings  and  though  not  heard  of  again  till  after  the 
captivity,  yet  it  played  a  somewhat  prominent  part 
in  the  later  struggles  of  the  nation.     [Gazera.] 

Ewald  (Gesch.  iii.  280;  comp.  ii.  427)  takes 
Gezer  and  Geshur  to  be  the  same,  and  sees  in  the 
destruction  of  the  former  by  Pharaoh,  and  the 
simultaneous  expedition  of  Solomon  to  Hamath- 
zobah  in  the  neighbourhood  of  the  latter,  indications 
of  a  revolt  of  the  Canaanites,  of  whom  the  <  ieshurites 
formed  the  most  powerful  remnant,  and  whose  at- 
tempt against  the  new  monarch  was  thus  frustrated. 
But  this  can  hardly  be  supported. 

In  one  place  Gob  is  given  as  identical  with  Gezer 
(1  Chr.  xx.  4,  comp.  2  Sam.  xxi.  18).     The  exact 

site  of  Gezer  has  not  1 n  discovered ;  but  its  general 

position  is  not  difficult  to  inter.  It  must  have  been 
between  the  lower  Beth-horon  and  the  sea  (Josh. 
xvi.  3;  1  K.  ix.  17);  therefore  on  the  great  mari- 
time plain  which  lies  beneath  the  hills  of  which 
Beitur  et-tahta  is  the  last  outpost,  and  forms  the 
regular  coast  road  of  communication  with  Egypt 
(I  K.  ix.  16).  It  is  therefore  appropriately  named  as 
tin-  last  point  to  which  David's  pursuit  of  the  Phi- 
listines extended  (2  Sam.  v.  25;  1  Chr.  .xiv.  lt;h) ; 
and  as  the  scene  of  at  least  one  sharp  encounter 
(1  Chr.  xx.  4),  this  plain  being  their  own  peculiar 
territory  (comp.  Jos.  Ant.  viii.  6,  §1,  Tafapd  'tt}v 
ttjs  WaXaicnivoov  x&pas  inrdpxov(Tai>)  ;  and  as 
commanding  tin-  communication  between  Egypt  and 
the  new  capital,  Jerusalem.,  it  was  an  important 
point  tin-  Solomon   to  fortify.     By  Eusebius  it   is 

a  If  Lachish  be  where  Van  de  Velde  and  Porter 
would  place  it,  at  I'm  Lafcu,  near  Gaza,  at  least  10 
miles  from  the  southern  boundary  of  F.phraiin,  there 
is  some  ground  for  suspecting  the  existence  of  two 
Gezers,  and  this  is  confirmed  by  the  order  in  which 
it  is  mentioned  in  the  list  of  Josh.  xii.  with  Hebron, 
Eglon,  and  Debir.  There  is  not,  however,  any  means 
of  determining  this. 

b  In  these  two  places  the  word,  being  at  the  end 
of  a  period,  has,  according  to  Hebrew  custom,  its  Iii  st 


GIANTS 


685 


mentioned  as  four  miles  north  of  Nicopolis  (Amicds) ; 
a  position  exactly  occupied  by  the  important  town 
Jimzu,  the  ancient  Gimzo,  and  corresponding  well 
with  the  requirements  of  Joshua.  But  this  hardly 
agrees  with  the  indications  of  the  1st  book  of  Macca- 
bees, which  speak  of  it  as  between  Emmaus  (Amuds) 
and  Azotus  and  Jamnia ;  and  again  as  on  the  con- 
fines of  Azotus.  In  the  neighbourhood  of  the  latter 
there  is  more  than  one  site  bearing  the  name  Fasur ; 
but  whether  this  Arabic  name  can  be  derived  from 
the  Hebrew  Gezer,  and  also  whether  so  important  a 
town  as  Gazara  was  in  the  time  of  the  Maccabees, 
can  be  represented  by  such  insignificant  villages  as 
these,  are  questions  to  be  determined  by  future  in- 
vestigation. If  it  can,  then  perhaps  the  strongest 
claims  for  identity  with  Gezer  are  put  forward  by  a 
village  called  Yasur,  4  or  5  miles  east  of  Joppa,  on 
the  road  to  Ramleh  and  Lydd. 

From  the  occasional  occurrence  of  the  form  Gazer, 
and  from  the  LXX.  version  being  almost  uniformly 
Gazera  or  Gazer,  Ewald  infers  that  this  was  really 
the  original  name.  [*-'•] 

GEZ'RITES,  THE  (V)T|n,  accur.  the  Gizrite  ; 

rbv  Te^pawv ;  Gezri).  The  word  which  the  Jewish 
critics  have  substituted  in  the  margin  of  the  Bible 
for  the  ancient  reading,  "  the  Gerizite  "  (1  Sam. 
xxvii.  8),  and  which  has  thus  become  incorporated 
in  the  text  of  the  A.  V.  If  it  mean  anything 
— at  least  that  we  know — it  must  signify  the 
dwellers  in  Gezer.  But  Gezer  was  not  less 
than  50  miles  distant  from  the  "  south  of  Judah, 
the  south  of  the  Jerahmeelites,  and  the  south  of  the 
Kenites,"  the  scene  of  David's  inroad ;  a  fact  which 
stands  greatly  in  the  way  of  our  receiving  the  change. 
[Gerzites,  the.]  [G.] 

GI'AH  (ITU  ;  Tai ;  vallis),  a  place  named  only 
in  2  Sam.  ii.  24,  to  designate  the  position  of  the 
hill  Ammah — "  which  faces  Giah  by  the  way  of  the 
wilderness  of  Gibeon."  No  trace  of  the  situation  of 
either  has  yet  been  found.  By  the  LXX.  the  name 
is  read  as  if  fcO-l,  i.  e.  a  ravine  or  glen  ;  a  view  also 
taken  in  tl.e  Vulgate. 

GIANTS.  The  frequent  allusion  to  giants  in 
Scripture,  and  the  numerous  theories  and  disputes 
which  have  arisen  in  consequence,  render  it  neces- 
sary to  give  a  brief  view  of  some  of  the  main  opi- 
nions and  curious  inferences  to  which  the  mention 
of  them  leads. 

1 .  They  are  first  spoken  of  in  Gen.  vi.  4,  under 
the  name  Nephilim  (Dv^SJ  ;  LXX.  yiyavres  ; 
Aquil.  (TrnriTTTOi'Tes  ;  Symm.  /3iaioi ;  Vulg.  </'</««- 
tes;  Onk.  N'^33  ;  Luther,  Tyranneri).  The  wonl 
is  dei iced  either  from  J"I?B,  or  &OQ  (  =  "  mar- 
vellous"), or,  as  is  generally  believed,  from  ?SJ 
either  in  the  sense  to  throw  down,  or  to  tall 
(  =  fallen   angels,   Jai'c  hi ,   ct'.    Is.   xiv.    12;    Luke   x. 

is  :  or  meaning  "fywes  imtentes"  (Gesen.),  or 
collapsi  (by  euphemism,  Boettcher,  de   Tnferis,  \> 


vowel  lengthened,  and  stands  in  the  text  as  Gazer, 
and  in  these  two  places  only  the  name  is  so  trans- 
ferred to  the  A.  V.  Put,  to  be  consistent,  the  same 
change    should    have    been     made    in     several    other 

passaged,  where  it  occurs  in  the  Hebrew  :  e.  gr. 
Judg.  i.   29;   Josh.   wi.  :s,   I0j    1  K.  ix.  15,  &c.     It 

would  seem  better  to  render  the  Hebrew  name  always 
bj  tin  sum  English  one,  when  the  difference  arises 
from  nothing  but  an  emphatic  accent. 


686 


GIANTS 


92)  ;  but  certainly  not  "  because  men  fell  from  terror 
of  them"  (as  R.  Kimehi).  That  the  word  means 
"giant"  is  clear  from  Num.  xiii.  32,  33,  and  is 

confirmed  by  N7Q3,  the  Chaldee  name  for  "  the 
aery  giant"  Orion  (Job  ix.  9,  xxxviii.  31  ;  Is.  xiii. 
10  ;  Targ.),  unless  this  name  arise  from  the 
obliquity  of  the  constellation  {Gen.  of  Earth, 
p.  35). 

But  we  now  come  to  the  remarkable  conjectures 
about  the  origin  of  these  Nephilim  in  Gen.  vi. 
1-4.  (An  immense  amount  has  been  written  on 
this  passage.  See  Kurz,  Die  Ehen  der  Sohne  Gottes, 
&c,  Berlin,  1857  ;  Ewald,  Jahrb.  1854,  p.  126  ; 
Govett's  Isaiah  Unfulfilled;  Faber's  Many  Man- 
sions, J.  of  Sac.  Lit.  Oct.  1858,  &c).  We  are  told 
that  "  there  were  Nephilim  in  the  earth,"  and  that 
"afterwards  (nal  per  iiteivo,  LXX.)  the  "sons 
of  God  "  mingling  with  the  beautiful  "  daughters 
of  men"  produced  a  race  of  violent  and  insolent 
Gibborim  (W~\2i  I.  This  latter  word  is  also  rendered 
by  the  LXX.  yiyavTts,  but  we  shall  see  hereafter 
that  the  meaning  is  more  general.  It  is  clear  hew- 
ever  that  no  statement  is  made  that  the  Nephilim 
themselves  sprang  from  this  unhallowed  union. 
Who  then  were  they?  Taking  the  usual  deri- 
vation (7QJ),  and  explaining  it  to  mean  "  fallen 
spirits,"  the  Nephilim  seem  to  be  identical  with  the 
"  sons  of  God ;"  but  the  verse  before  us  militates 
against  this  notion  as  much  as  against  that  which 
makes  the  Nephilim  the  same  as  the  Gibborim,  viz. : 
the  offspring  of  wicked  marriages.  This  latter  sup- 
position can  only  be  accepted  if  we  admit  either 

(1)  that  there  were  two  kinds  of  Nephilim, — those 
who  existed  before  the  unequal  intercourse,  and  those 
produced  by  it  (Heidegger,  Hist.  Patr.  xi.),  or 

(2)  by  following  the  Vulgate  rendering,  postquam 
cnim  ingressi  sunt,  &c.  But  the  common  ren- 
dering seems  to  be  correct,  nor  is  there  much  pro- 
bability in  Abeu  Ezra's  explanation,  that  p'^iriX 
("after  that")  means  ^UOil  IPIN  (i.e.  "after 
the  deluge"),  and  is  an  allusion  to  the  Auakims. 

The  genealogy  of  the  Nephilim  then,  or  at  any 
rate  of  the  earliest  Nephilim,  is  not  recorded  in 
Scripture,  and  the  name  itself  is  so  mysterious 
that  we  are  lost  in  conjecture  respecting  them. 

2.  The  sons  of  the  marriages  mentioned  in  Gen. 
vi.  1-4,  are  called  Gibborim  (D'OBJ,  from  ~\2i 
to  be  strong),  a  general  name  meaning  powerful 
(v^piaTal  Kal  TtavTOs  vTrepoirTcu  kclAov,  Joseph. 
Ant.  i.  3,  §1  ;  yrjs  iraifies  tov  vovv  e/c/3i/3aa-ay- 
Tes  rod  Aoyi^eaOai  k.t.A.,  Philo  de  Gigant.  p. 
270;  comp.  Is.  iii.  2,  xlix.  24;  Ez.  xxxii.  21). 
They  were  not  necessarily  giants  in  our  sense 
of  the  word  (Theodoret,  Quaest.  48).  Yet,  as 
was  natural,  these  powerful  chiefs  were  almost 
universally  represented  as  men  of  extraordinary 
stature.  The  LXX.  render  the  word  yiyavres, 
and  call  Nimrod  a  yiyas  Kvvnybs  (1  Ghr.  i.  10)  ; 
Augustine  calls  them  Staturosi  (de  Civ.  Dei, 
xv.  4)  ;  Chrysostom  Vipojes  evuyKels,  Theodoret 
TraixfAtytQeis  (comp.  Bar.  iii.  26,  tv/xeyedtis, 
iTriffTd/xevoi  irSAffiov). 

But  who  were  the  parents  of  these  giants  ;  who 
are  "the  sons  of  God"  (D^n'^NH  »J3)  ?  The  opi- 
nions are  various,  (1.)  Men  of  power  (viol  Swaa- 
Tivovroiv,  Symm.  Hieron.  Quaest.  Heb.  ad  loc.  ; 
^nnnn  »33,  Onk. ;  l-COD^C  »J3,  Samar. ;  so  too 
Selden,   Vorst,   &c),   (comp.    IV.   ii.   7,.  lxxxii.  6, 


GIANTS 

lxxxix.  27  ;  Mic.  v.  5,  &c).  The  expression  will 
then  exactly  resemble  Homer's  Aioytuels  jiacri- 
Arjes,  and  the  Chinese  Tiun-tseii,  "  son  of  heaven," 
as  a  title  of  the  Emperor  (Gesen.  s.  v.  J3).  But 
why  should  the  union  of  the  high-born  and  low- 
born produce  offspring  unusual  for  their  size  and 
strength?  (2.)  Men  with  great  gifts,  "in  the 
image  of  God"  (Ritter,  Schumann);  (3.)  Cainites 
arrogantly  assuming  the  title  (Paulus) ;  or  (4.)  the 
pious  Sethites  (comp.  Gen.  iv.  26  ;  Maimon.  Mor. 
Neboch.  i.  14 ;  Suid.  s.  vv.  2??0  and  /juatya/xias  ; 
Cedren.  Hist.  Comp.  p.  10  ;  Aug.  de  Civ.  Dei,  xv. 
23;  Chrysost.  Horn.  22,  in  Gen.;  Theod.  in  Gen. 
Quaest.  47  ;  Cyril,  c.  Jul.  ix.,  &c).  A  host  of 
modem  commentators  catch  at  this  explanation,  but 
Gen.  iv.  26  has  probably  uo  connexion  with  the 
subject.  Other  texts  quoted  in  favour  of  the  view 
are  Deut.  xiv.  1,  2  ;  Ps.  lxxiii.  15  ;  Prov.  xiv.  26  ; 
Hos.  i.  10;  Rom.  viii.  14,  &c.  Still  the  mere 
antithesis  in  the  verse,  as  well  as  other  considera- 
tions, tend  strongly  against  this  gloss,  which  indeed 
is  built  on  a  foregone  conclusion.  Compare  how- 
ever the  Indian  notion  of  the  two  races  of  men 
Suras  and  Asuras  (children  of  the  sun  and  of  the 
'moon,  Nork,  Bramm.  und  Ilabb.  p.  204,  sq.),  and 
the  Persian  belief  in  the  marriage  of  Djemshid 
with  the  sister  of  a  deo,  whence  sprang  black  and 
impious  men  (Kalisch,  Gen.  p.  175).  5.  Wor- 
shippers of  false  gods  (iraTSes  rwv  Qtaiv,  Aqu.) 
making  *J2  =  "  servants "  (comp.  Deut.  xiv.  1; 
Prov.  xiv.  26;  Ex.  xxxii.  1  ;  Deut.  iv.  28,  &c). 
This  view  is  ably  supported  in  Genesis  of  Earth 
and  Man,  pp.  39,  sq.  (6.)  Devils,  such  as  the 
Incubi  and  Succubi.  Such  was  the  belief  of  the 
Cabbalists  (Valesius,  de  S.  Philosoph.  cap.  8). 
That  these  beings  can  have  intercoms  with  women 
St.  Augustine  declares  it  would  be  folly  to  doubt, 
and  it  was  the  universal  belief  in  the  East.  Mo- 
hammed makes  one  of  the  ancestors'of  Balkis  Queen 
of  Sheba  a  demon,  and  Damir  says  he  had  heard  a 
Mohammedan  doctor  openly  boast  of  having  married 
in  succession  four  demon  wives  (Bochart,  Hieroz. 
i.  p.  747).  Indeed  the  belief  still  exists  (Lane's 
Mod.  Eg.  i.  ch.  x.  ad  in.).  (7.)  Closely  allied  to 
this  is  the  oldest  opinion,  that  they  were  angels 
(&yyf\oi  tov  ®eov,  LXX.,  for  such  was  the  old 
reading,  not  viol,  Aug.  de  Civ.  Dei,  xv.  23  ;  so  too 
Joseph.  Ant.  i.  3,  §1 ;  Phil,  de  Gig.  ii.  358  ;  Clem. 
Alex.  Strom,  iii.  7,  §69 ;  Sulp.  Sever.  Hist.  Script, 
in  Orthod.  1.  i.  &c. ;  comp.  Job  i.  6,  ii.  1 ;  Ps. 
xxix.  1,  Job  iv.  18).  The  rare  expression  "sons 
of  God"  certainly  means  angels  in  Job  xxxviii.  7, 
i.  6,  ii.  ] ,  and  that  such  is  the  meaning  in  Gen. 
vi.  4  also,  was  the  most  prevalent  opinion  both  in 
the  Jewish  and  early  Christian  Church. 

It  was  probably  this  very  ancient  view  which 
gavfe  rise  to  the  spurious  book  of  Enoch,  and  the 
notion  quoted  from  it  by  St.  Jude  (6),  and  alluded 
to  by  St.  Peter  (2  Pet.  ii.  4  ;  comp.  1  Cor.  xi.  10, 
Tert.  de  Virg.  ,Vel.  7).  According  to  this  book 
certain  angels,  sent  by  God  to  guard  the  earth 
("Eyp-hyopoi,  (pvAaices),  were  perverted  by  the 
beauty  of  women,  "  went  after  strange  Mesh," 
taught  sorcery,  finery  (lumina  lapillorum,  cirt  ulos 
ex  awe,  Tert.,  &c),  and  being  banished  from  hea- 
ven had  sons  3000  cubits  high,  thus  originating  a 
celestial  and  terrestrial  race  of  demons  —  "  1'nde 
modo  vagi  subvertunt  corpora  multa"  (Comnmdi.ini 
Instruct.  III.  Cultus  Daemon  u  in)  i.e.  they  are 
still  the  source  of  epilepsy,  &c.  Vai  ious  Dames  were 
o-iven  at  a  later  time  to  these  monsters.     Their  chief 


GIANTS 

was  Leuixas,  and  of  their  number  were  Machsael, 
Aza,  Schemchozai,  and  (the  wickedest  of  them)  a 
goat-like  demon  Azael  (comp.  Azazel,  Lev.  xvi.  8, 
and  for  the  very  curious  questions  connected  with 
this  name,  see  Bochart,  Hieroz.  i.  p.  652,  sq.  ; 
Kab.  Eliezer,  cap.  23,  Bereshith  Hab.  ad  Gen.  vi.  2  ; 
Sennert,  de  Giguntibi®,  iii. 

Against  this  notion  (which  Hiivernick  calls  "  the 
silliest  whim  of  the  Alexandrian  Gnostics  and  Cab- 
balistic Rabbis")  Heidegger  (Hint.  Pair.  I.  c.) 
quotes  Matt.  xxii.  30  ;  Luke  xxiv.  39,  and  similar 
testimonies.  Philastrius  (Adv.  Haeres.  cap.  108) 
characterises  it  as  a  heresy,  and  Ohrysostom  (Horn. 
22)  even  calls  it  to  0\a.(r<p7]/.i.a  tKtivo.  Yet  Jude  is 
explicit,  and  the  question  is  not  so  much  what  can 
be,  as  what  was  believed.  The  fathers  almost  unani- 
mously accepted  these  fables,  and  Tertullian  argues 
warmly  (partly  on  expedient  grounds!)  for  the 
genuineness  of  the  book  of  Enoch.  The  angels 
were  called  'Eyp-qyopoi,  a  word  used  by  Aquil. 
and  Symm.  to  render  the  Chaldee  "Vy  (Dan.  iv. 
13,  sq. ;  Vulg.  Vigil;  LXX.  dp ;  Lex  Cyrilli, 
&yyeKot  t)  uypvirvoi;  Fabric.  Cod.  Pseudepigr. 
V.  T.  p.  180)  and  therefore  used,  as  in  the  Zend- 
Avesta,  of  good  guardian  angels,  and  applied  espe- 
cially to  archangels  in  the  Syriac  liturgies  (cf. 
"IDEP,  Is.  xxi.  11),  but  more  often  of  evil  angels 
(Castelli,  Lex.  Syr.  p.  649 ;  Scalig.  ad  Eiiseb. 
Chron.  p.  403  ;  Gesen.  s.  v.  "VJJ).  The  story  of 
the  Egregori  is  given  at  length  in  Tert.  de  Cult. 
Fern.  i.  2,  ii.  10 ;  Commodianus,  Instruct,  iii.  ; 
Lactant.  fDiv.  Inst.  ii.  14;  Testmn.  Patriare.  c. 
v.,  &c.  Every  one  will  remember  the  allusions 
to  the  same  interpretation  in  Milton,  Par.  Reg. 
ii.  179— 

"  Before  the  Flood,  thou  with  thy  lusty  crew, 
False-titled  sons  of  God,  roaming  the  earth, 
Cast  wanton  eyes  on  the  (laughters  of  men, 
And  coupled  with  them,  and  begat  a  race." 

The  use  made  of  the  legend  in  some  modern  poems 
cannot  sufficiently  be  reprobated. 

We  need  hardly  say  how  closely  allied  this  is  to 
the  Greek  legends  which  connected  the  aypia  <pvAa 
yiyavruiv  with  the  gods  (Horn.  Od.  vii.  205; 
Pausan.  viii.  29),  ami  made  Sal/xoves  sons  of  the 
gods  (Plat.  Apolog.  -^/xideot ;  Cratyl.  §32).  Indeed 
the  whole  heathen  tradition  resembles  the  one  before 
us  (Cumberland's  Sanchoniatho,  p.  24;  Horn.  Od. 
\\.  306,  sq. ;  Hes.  Tkeog.  185,  0pp.  ct  D.  144; 
Plat.  Rep.  ii.  §17,  604,  E. ;  de  Legg.  iii.  §16, 
805  A. ;  Ov.  Metam.  i.  151 ;  Luc.  iv.  593  ;  Luciau, 
de  Ded  Syr.,  Sec. ;  cf.Grot.de  Ver.  i.  6);  and 
the  Greek  translators  of  the  Bible  make  the  resem- 
blance  still  more  close  by  introducing  such  words 
as  Oeofiaxoi,  yriytvels,  and  even  Tirai/es,  to  which 
last  Josephus  (I.e.)  expressly  compares  the  giants 
of  Genesis  (LXX.  Prov.  ii.  18;  Ks.  xlviii.  2; 
2  Sam.  v.  18;  Judith  xvi.  .">:.  The  fate  too  of 
these  demon-chiefs  is  identical  with  that  of  heathen 
story  (Job  xxvi.  5;  Sir.  xvi.  7  ;  Bar.  iii.  26-28  ; 
Wis'd.  xiv.  6;  3  Mace  ii.  4  ;  1  Pet.  iii.  19). 

These  legends  may  therefore  be  regarded  as  dis- 
tortions of  the  Biblical  narrative,  handed  down  by 
tradition,  and  embellished  by  the  fancy  and  imagina- 
tion of  eastern  nations.  The  belief  of  the  Jews  in 
later  times  is  remarkably  illustrated  by  the  story 
•  it'  Asmodeus  in  the  book  ol'Toliit.  It  is  deeply 
instructive  to  observe  how  wide  and  marked  a  con- 
trast there  is  between  the  incidental  allusion  of  the 
sacred    narrative    (Gen.    vi.    4-),    and    the    minute 


GIANTS 


687 


frivolities  or  prurient  follies  which  degrade  the 
heathen  mythology,  and  repeatedly  appear  in  the 
groundless  imaginings  of  the  Rabbinic  interpreters. 
If  there  were  fallen  angels  whose  lawless  desires 
gave  birth  to  a  monstrous  progeny,  both  they  and 
their  intolerable  offspring  were  destroyed  by  the 
deluge,  which  was  the  retribution  on  their  wicked- 
ness, and  they  have  no  existence  in  the  baptised 
and  renovated  eaith. 

Before  passing  to  the  other  giant-races  we  may 
observe  that  all  nations  have  had  a  dim  fancy  that 
the  aborigines  who  preceded  them,  and  the  earliest 
men  generally  were  of  immense  stature.  Berosus 
says  that  the  ten  antediluvian  kings  of  Chaldea 
were  giants,  and  we  find  in  all  monkish  historians 
a  similar  statement  about  the  earliest  possessors  of 
Britain  (comp.  Horn.  Od.  x.  119;  Aug.  de  Civ. 
Dei,  xv.  9;    Plin.  vii.  16;  Varr.  ap.  Aid.  Gell.  iii. 

10  ;  Jer.  on  Matt,  xxvii.).  The  great  size  decreased 
gradually  after  the  deluge  (2  Esdr.  v.  52-55).  That 
we  are  dwarfs  compared  to  our  ancestors  was  a 
common  belief  among  the  Latin  and  Greek  poets 
(II.  v.  302  seqq.  ;  Lucret.  ii.  1151 ;  Virg.  Aen.  xii. 
900  ;  Juv.  xv.  69),  although  it  is  now  a  matter  of 
absolute  certainty  from  the  remains  of  antiquity, 
reaching  back  to  the  very  earliest  times,  that  in  old 
days  men  were  no  taller  than  ourselves.  On  the 
origin  of  the  mistaken  supposition  there  are  curious 
passages  in  Natalis  Comes  (M gtholog .  vi.  21),  and 
Macrobius  (Saturn,  i.  20). 

The  next  race  of  giants  which  we  find  mentioned 
in  Scripture  is 

3.  The  REPHAIM,  a  name  which  frequently 
occurs,  and  in  some  remarkable  passages.  The 
earliest  mention  of  them  is  the  lecord  of  their 
defeat  by  Chedorlaomer  and  some  allied  kings  at 
Ashteroth  Karnaim  (Gen.  xiv.  5).  They  are  again 
mentioned  (Gen.  xv.  20),  their  dispersion  recorded 
(Deut.  ii.  10,  20),  and  Og  the  giant  king  of  Bashan 
said  to  be  "  the  only  remnant  of  them  "  (Deut.  iii. 

11  ;  Jos.  xii.  4,  xiii.  12,  xvii.  15)  Extirpated  how- 
ever from  the  east  of  Palestine,  they  long  found 
a  home  in  the  west,  and  in  connexion  with  the 
Philistines,  under  whose  protection  the  small  rem- 
nant of  them  may  have  lived,  they  still  employed 
their  arms  against  the  Hebrews  (2  Sam.  xxi.  18, 
sq.  ;  1  Chr.  xx.  4).  In  the  latter  passage  there 
seems  however  to  be  some  confusion  between  the 
Rephaim,  and  the  sons  of  a  particular  giant  of  Gath, 
named  Kapha.  Such  a  name  may  have  been  con- 
jectured as  that  of  a  founder  of  the  race,  like  the 
names  Ion,  Doras,  Teut,  &c.  (Boettcher,  de  Inferis, 
p.  96,  n. ;  Kapha  occurs  also  as  a  proper  name, 
1  Chr.  vii.  25,  viii.  2.  :;?).  It  is  probable  that 
they  had  possessed  districts  west  of  the  Jordan  in 
early  times  since  the  "  Valley  of  Rephaim  "  (Kot\di 
rwv  Tnavwv,  2  Sam.  v.  IS;  1  Chi',  xi.  1  .">  :  [s. 
xvii.  5;  k.  twv  yiydvraiv,  Joseph.  Ant.  vii.  4,  §1), 
a  rich  valley  S.W.  of  Jerusalem,  derived  its  name 
from  them. 

That    they    were    not    ( 'anaaiiites    is    clear    from 
there  being  no  allusion  to  them  in  Gen.  x.  15-19. 

They  were  probably  one  of  those  aboriginal  ] pie, 

to  whose  existence   the   traditions   of  many   natio]  s 

testify,  and  of  whose  genealogy  the  Bible  gives  ns 
no  information.     The  few   names  recorded  have] 

as  Ewald  remarks,  a  Semitic  aspect  (Geschich.  des 
Volkes  Isr.  i.  ;ill).  but  from  the  hatred  existing 
between  them  and  both  the  Canaanites  and  He- 
brews, s sdppose  t  lea  ii  to  be  Japhethites,  "  who 

comprised  especially  the  inhabitants  of  the  coasts 
and  islands"  (Kalisch  ",<  Gen.  y.  351). 


G88 


GIANTS 


□^NEH  is  rendered  by  the  Greek  versions  very  va- 
riously ('PcMpaelfj.,  yiyavTes,  yr\yevtis,  Q(6jxaxoi, 
Tiraves,  and  larpol,  Vulg.  Medici  ;  LXX.  Ps. 
lxxxvii.  10  ;  Is.  xxvi.  14,  where  it  is  confused  with 
D^NSI ;  cf.  Gen.  1.  2,  and  sometimes  vacpol,  TtQv-n- 
kotcs,  especially  in  the  later  versions).  In  A.  V.  the 
words  used  for  it  are  "  Rephaim,"  "  giants,"  and 
"  the  dead."  That  it  has  the  latter  meaning  in  many 
passages  is  certain  (Ps.  lxxxviii.  10  ;  Prov.  ii.  18,  ix. 
18,  xxi.  16;  Is.  xxvi.  19,  14).  The  question  arises, 
how  are  these  meanings  to  be  reconciled?  Gesenius 
gives  no  derivation  for  the  national  name,  and  de- 
rives ""I  =  mortui,  from  XQ"),  sanavit,  and  the 
proper  name  Rapha  from  an  Arabic  root  signifying 
"  tall,"  thus  seeming  to  sever  aW  connexion  between 
the  meanings  of  the  word,  which  is  surely  most  un- 
likely. Masius,  Simonis,  &c,  suppose  the  second 
meaning  to  come  from  the  fact  that  both  spectres 
and  giants  strike  terror  (accepting  the  derivation 
from  i"IEn,  remisit,  "  unstrung  with  fear,"  R.  Be- 
chai  on  Deut.  ii.) ;  Vitringa  and  Hiller  from  the 
notion  of  length  involved  in  stretching  out  a  corpse, 
or  from  the  fancy  that  spirits  appear  in  more  than 
human  size  (Hiller,  Syntagm.  Hermen.  p.  205;  Virg. 
Acn.  ii.  772,  &c).  J.  D.  Michaelis  (ad  Lowth  s. 
poos.  p.  466 )  endeavoured  to  prove  that  the  Rephaims, 
&c,  were  Troglodytes,  and  that  hence  they  came  to 
be  identified  with  the  dead.  Passing  over  other  con- 
jectures, Bottcher  sees  in  NET)  and  HEH  a  double 
root,  and  thinks  that  the  giants  were  called  D^ND") 
(lahguefacti)  by  an  euphemism ;  and  that  the 
dead  were  so  called  by  a  title  which  will  thus  ex- 
actly parallel  the  Greek  KajxSvrfs,  k6k/x7)kJt€s 
(comp.  Buttmaun,  Le.dl.  ii.  237,  sq.).  His  argu- 
ments are  too  elaborate  to  quote,  but  see  Bottcher, 
pp.  94-100.  An  attentive  consideration  seems  to 
leave  little  room  for  doubt  that  the  dead  were 
called  Kephaim  (as  Gesenius  also  hints)  from  some 
notion  of  Scheol  being  the  residence  of  the  fallen 
spirits  or  buried  giants.  The  passages  which  seem 
most  strongly  to  prove  this  are  Prov.  xxi.  16 
(where  obviously  something  more  than  mere  phy- 
sical death  is  meant,  since  that  is  the  common  lot 
of  all)  ;  Is.  xxvi.  14,  19,  which  are  difficult  to 
explain  without  some  such  supposition  ;  Is.  xiv.  9, 
where  the  word  ^l-IFiy  (oi  &p£a.VTes  rrjs  777s, 
LXX.)  if  taken  in  its  literal  meaning  of  goats, 
may  mean  evil  spirits  represented  in  that  form 
(cf.  Lev.  xvii.  7)  ;  and  especially  Job  xxvi.  5,  6. 
"Behold  the  gyantes  (A.  V.  'dead  things') 
grown  under  the  waters "  (Douay  version),  where 
there  seems  to  be  clear  allusion  to  some  subaqueous 
prison  of  rebellious  spirits  like  that  in  which  (ac- 
cording to  the  Hindoo  legend)  Wischnu  the  water- 
god  confines  a  race  of  giants  (cf.  irvXaoxos,  as  a 
title  of  Neptune,  Hes.  Theog.  732 ;  Nork,  Bram- 
inin.  mid  Rabb.  p.  319,  sq.)     [Og  ;  Goliath.] 

Branches  of  this  great  unknown  people  were 
called  Emim,  Anakim,  and  Zuzim. 

4.  Emim  (D^X,  LXX.  'Oix/xiv,  'IyUyuaTot), 
smitten  by  Chedorlaomer  at  Shaveh  Kiriathaim 
(Gen.  xiv.  5),  and  occupying  the  country  after- 
wards held  by  the  Moabites  (Deut.  ii.  10),  who 
gave  them  the  name  D^N,  "  terrors."  The  word 
rendered  "  tall  "  may  perhaps  be  merely  "  haughty  " 
(iVxtWres).     [Emim.] 

5.  Anakim  (D*j?3J?).  The  imbecile  terror  of 
the  spies  exaggerated   their  proportions  into  some- 


GIANTS 

thing  superhuman  (Num.  xiii.  28,  33),  and  their 
name  became  proverbial  (Deut.  ii.  10,  ix.  2). 
[Anakim.] 

6.  Zuzim  (D'TIT),  whose  principal  town  was 
Ham  (Gen.  xiv.  5),  and  who  lived  between  the 
Arnou  and  the  Jabbok,  being  a  northern  tribe  of 
Rephaim.  The  Ammonites,  who  defeated  them, 
called  them  D^TpT  (Deut.  ii.  20,  sq.  which  is 
however  probably  an  early  gloss). 

We  have  now  examined  the  main  names  applied 
to  giant-races  in  the  Bible,  but  except  in  the  case 
of  the  two  first  (Nephilim  and  Gibborim)  there  is 
no  necessity  to  suppose  that  there  was  anything 
very  remarkable  in  the  size  of  these  nations,  beyond 
the  general  fact  of  their  being  finely  proportioned. 
Nothing  can  be  built  on  the  exaggeration  of  the 
spies  (Num.  xiii.  33),  and  Og,  Goliath,  Ishbi-benob, 
&c.  (see  under  the  names  themselves),  are  obviously 
mentioned  as  exceptional  cases.  The  Jews  how- 
ever (misled  by  supposed  relics)  thought  otherwise 
(Joseph.  Ant.  v.  2,  §3). 

No  one  has  yet  proved  by  experience  the  possi- 
bility of  giant  races,  materially  exceeding  in  size 
the  average  height  of  man.  There  is  no  great  va- 
riation in  the  ordinary  standard.  The  most  stunted 
tribes  of  Esquimaux  are  at  least  four  feet  high,  and 
the  tallest  races  of  America  (e.g.  the  Guayaquilists 
and  people  of  Paraguay)  do  not  exceed  six  feet 
and  a  half.  It  was  long  thought  that  the  Patago- 
nians  were  men  of  enormous  stature,  and  the  as- 
sertions of  the  old  voyagers  on  the  point  were  po- 
sitive. '  For  instance  Pigafetta  ( Voyage  Bound  the 
World,  Pinkerton,  xi.  314)  mentions  an  individual 
Patagonian  so  tall,  that  they  "  hardly  reached  to 
his  waist."  Similar  exaggerations  are  found  in  the 
Voyages  of  Byron,  Wallis,  Carteret,  Cook,  and 
Forster ;  but  it  is  now  a  matter  of  certainty  from 
the  recent  visits  to  Patagonia  (by  Winter,  Capt. 
Snow,  &c),  that  there  is  nothing  at  all  extraor- 
dinary in  their  size. 

The  general  belief  (until  very  recent  times)  in 
the  existence  of  fabulously  enormous  men,  arose 
from  fancied  giant-graves  (see  De  la  Valle's  Travels 
in  Persia,  ii.  89),  and  above  all  from  the  discovery 
of  huge  bones,  which  were  taken  for  those  of  men, 
in  days  when  comparative  anatomy  was  unknown. 
Even  the  ancient  Jews  were  thus  misled  (Joseph. 
Ant.  v.  2,  §3).  Augustin  appeals  triumphantly 
to  this  argument,  and  mentions  a  molar  tooth 
which  he  had  seen  at  Utica  a  hundred  tamos  larger 
than  ordinary  teeth  (De  Civ.  Dei,  xv.  9).  No 
doubt  it  once  belonged  to  an  elephant.  Vives,  in 
his  commentary  on  the  place,  mentions  a  tooth  as 
big  as  a  fist  which  was  shown  at  St.  Christopher's. 
In  fact  this  source  of  delusion  has  only  very  re- 
cently been  dispelled  (Sennert  de  Gigant.  passim, 
Martin's  West.  Islands  in  Pinkerton,  ii.  691). 
Most  bones,  which  have  been  exhibited,  have  turned 
out  to  belong  to  whales  or  elephants,  as  was  the 
case  with  the  vertebra  of  a  supposed  giant,  exa- 
mined by  Sir  Hans  Sloane  in  Oxfordshire. 

On  the  other  hand,  isolated  instances  of  mon- 
strosity are  sufficiently  attested  to  prove  that  beings 
like  Goliath  and  his  kinsmen  may  have  existed.  <  !o- 
lumella  (R.  R.  iii.  8,  §2)  mentions  Navius  Pollio 
as  one,  and  Pliny  says  that  in  the  time  of  Claudius 
Caesar  there  was  an  Arab  named  Gabbaras,  nearly 
ten  feet  high,  and  that  even  he  was  not  so  tall  as 
Pusio  and  Secundilla  in  the  reign  of  Augustus, 
whose  bodies  were  preserved  (vii.  16).  Josephus 
tells  us  that,  among  other  hostages,  Artabaiius  sent 


GIBBAR 

to  Tiberius  a  certain  Eleazar,  a  Jew,  surnamed  "  the 
Giant,"  seven  cubits  in  height  (Ant.  xviii.  4,  §5). 
Nor  are  well-authenticated  instances  wanting  in 
modern  times.  O'Brien,  whose  skeleton  is  preserved 
in  the  Museum  of  the  Coll.  of  Surgeons,  must  have 
been  8  feet  high,  but  his  unnatural  height  made 
him  weakly.  On  the  other  hand  the  blacksmith 
Parsons,  in  Charles  II.'s  reign,  was  7  feet  2  inches 
high,  and  also  remarkable  for  his  strength  (Fuller's 
Worthies,  Staffordshire). 

For  information  on  the  various  subjects  touched 
upon  in  this  Article,  besides  minor  authorities 
quoted  in  it,  see  Grot,  de  Veritat.  i.  16 ;  Nork, 
Brammin.  unci  P.abb.  210  ad  f . ;  Ewald,  Gesch.  i. 
pp.  305-312  ;  Winer,  s.  v.  Riesen,  &c. ;  Gesen. 
s.  v.  D^NQI ;  Rosenmiiller,  Kalisch  et  Comment,  ad 
loca  cit.  ;  Rosenm.  Alterthumsk.  ii. ;  Boettcher, 
de  Inferis,  p.  95,  sq. ;  Heidegger,  Hist.  Pair.  xi. ; 
Havernick's  hdrod.  to  Pentat.  p.  345,  sq. ; 
Home's  Introd.  i.  148  ;  Faber's  Bampt.  Led.  iii. 
7 ;  Maitland's  Eruvin ;  Orig.  of  Pagan  Idol.  i. 
217,  in  Maitland's  False  Worship,  1-67;  Pritch- 
ard's  Nat.  Hist,  of  Man,  v.  489,  seq.  ;  Hamilton 
on  the  Pentat.  189-201  ;  Papers  on  the  Rephaim 
by  Miss  F.  Corbaux,  Journ.  of  Sacr.  Lit.  1851. 
There  are  also  monographs  by  Cassanion,  Sangutelli, 
and  Seunert ;  we  have  only  met  with  the  latter 
{Dissert.  Hist.  Phil,  de  Gigantibus,  Vittemb. 
1663)  ;  it  is  interesting  and  learned,  but  extraor- 
dinarily credulous.  [F.  W.  F.] 

GIB'BAR  (T2;l ;  Yafcp;  6?e66a?-),Bene-Gibbar, 
to  the  number  of  ninety- five,  returned  with  Zerub- 
babel  from  Babylon  (Ezr,  ii.  20).  In  the  parallel 
list  of  Neh.  vii.  the  name  is  given  as  Guseon. 

GTB'BETHON  (Jinaa  ;  Bty*6<bv,  T&Mv, 
Alex,  rafiadcliv,  Tafieddiu ;  Gabathon),  a  town  al- 
lotted to  the  tribe  of  Dan  (Josh.  xix.  44),  and  after- 
wards given  with  its  "  suburbs "  to  the  Koha- 
thite  Levites  (xxi.  23).  Being,  like  most  of 
the  towns  of  Dan,  either  in  or  close  to  the  Phi- 
listines' country,  it  was  no  doubt  soon  taken  pos- 
session of  by  them  ;  at  any  rate  they  held  it  in  the 
early  days  of  the  monarchy  of  Israel,  when  king 
Nadab  "and  all  Israel,"  and  after  him  Omri,  be- 
sieged it  (1  K.  xv.  27,  xvi.  17).  What  were  the 
special  advantages  of  situation  or  otherwise  which 
rendered  it  so  desirable  as  a  possession  for  Israel 
are  not  apparent.  In  the  Onomnsticon  (Gabathon) 
it  is  quoted  as  a  small  village  (iroAixvr))  called 
Gabe,  in  the  17th  mile  from  Caesarea.  This  would 
place  it  nearly  due  west  of  Samaria,  and  about  the 
same  distance  therefrom.  No  name  at  all  resembling 
it  has,  however,  been  discovered  in  that  direction. 

GIB'EA  (NjnS  ;  TcuPdx,  Alex.  Tai^aa  ;  Ga- 
baa).  Sheva,  "  the  father  of  Macbenah,"  and 
"  father  of  Gibea,"  is  mentioned  with  other  names 
unmistakeably  those  of  places  and  not  persons, 
among  the  descendants  of  Judah  (  1  Chr.  ii.  49, 
<oni]j.  42).  This  would  seem  to  point  oat  Gibea 
(which  in  some  Hebrew  MSS.  is  Gibeah;  see  Bur- 
rington,  i.  216)  as  the  city  GlBEAH  in  Judah. 
The  mention  of  Madmannah  (49,  comp.  Josh.  xv. 
31),  as  well  as  of  Ziph  (42  |  and  Maun  (45),  seems 
to  carry  us  to  a  locality  considerably  south  of 
Hebron.  [Gibeah,  1.]  On  the  other  hand  Mad- 
mannah recalls  Madmcuah,  a  town  named  in  eon- 


GIBEAH 


689 


nexion  with  Gibeah  of 'Benjamin  (Is.  x.  31),  and 
therefore  lying  somewhere  north  of  Jerusalem. 

GIB'EAH  (ny23,  derived  according  to  Gesenius 
(Thes.  259,  260)  from  a  root,  JQ2,  signifying  to  be 
round  or  humped;  comp.  the  Latin  gibbus,  Eng. 
gibbous;  the  Arabic  V,x^»>  jebel,  a  mountain,  and 
the  German  gipfel).  A  word  employed  in  the 
Bible  to  denote  a  "hill" — that  is  an  emi- 
nence of  less  considerable  height  and  extent  than 
a  "  mountain,"  the  term  for  which  is  "in,  har. 
For  the  distinction  between  the  two  terms,  see 
Ps.  cxlviii.  9  ;  Prov.  viii.  25  ;  Is.  ii.  2,  xl.  4,  &c. 
In  the  historical  books  gibeah  is  commonly  applied 
to  the  bald  rounded  hills  of  central  Palestine,  espe- 
cially in  the  neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem  (Stanley, 
App.  §25).  Like  most  words  of  this  kind  it  gave 
its  name  to  several  towns  and  places  in  Palestine — 
which  would  doubtless  be  generally  on  or  near  a  hill. 
They  are 

1.  Gibeah  (Tafiaa;  Gabaa),  a  city  in  the 
mountain-district  of  Judah,  named  with  Maon  and 
the  southern  Carmel  (Josh.  xv.  57  ;  and  comp.  1 
Chr.  ii.  49,  &c).  In  the  Onomasticon  a  village 
named  Gabatha  is  mentioned  as  containing  the 
monument  of  Hahakkuk  the  prophet,  and  lying 
twelve  miles  from  Eleutheropolis.  The  direction, 
however,  is  not  stated.  Possibly  it  was  identical 
with  Keila,  which  is  given  as  eastward  from 
Eleutheropolis  (Eusebius  says  seventeen,  Jerome 
eight  miles)  on  the  road  to  Hebron,  and  is  also  men- 
tioned as  containing  the  monument  of  Habakkuk. 
But  neither  of  these  can  be  the  place  intended  in 
Joshua,  since  that  would  appear  to  have  been  to 
the  S.E.  of  Hebron,  near  where  Carmel  and  Maon 
are  still  existing.  For  the  same  reason  this  Gibeah 
cannot  be  that  discovered  by  Robinson  as  Jeba'h  in 
the  Wadg  Musurr,  not  far  west  of  Bethlehem,  and 
ten  miles  north  of  Hebron  (Rob.  ii.  6,  16).  Its 
site  is  therefore  yet  to  seek. 

2.  Gibeatii  (njn.5  ;  rafiawd,  Alex.  Tafiadd ; 
Gabaath).  This  is  enumerated  among  the  last 
group  of  the  towns  of  Benjamin,  next  to  Jerusalem 
(Josh,  xviii.  28).  It  is  generally  taken  to  be  the 
place  which  afterwards  became  so  notorious  as 
"  Gibeah-of-Benjamin  "  or  "  of-Saul."  But  this,  as 
we  shall  presently  see,  was  five  or  six  miles  north  of 
Jerusalem,  close  to  Gibeon  and  Ramah,  with  which, 
in  that  case,  it  would  have  been  mentioned  in  ver. 
25.  The  name  being  in  the  "construct  state" — 
(iibeath  and  not  Gibeah — may  it  not  belong  to  the 
following  name  Kirjath  (».  e.  Kirjath-jearim,  as 
some  MSS.  actually  read),  and  denote  the  hill 
adjoining  that  town  (see  below,  No.  3)?  The 
obvious  objection  to  this  proposal  is  the  statement 
of  the  number  of  this  group  of  towns  as  fourteen, 
luit  this  is  not  a  serious  objection,  as  in  these  cata- 
logues discrepancies  not  uufrequently  occur  between 
the  numbers  of  the  towns,  and  that  stated  as  the 
sum  of  the  enumeration  (comp.  Josh.  xv.  32,  36, 
xix.  6,  &c).  In  this  very  list  there  is  reason  to 
believe  that  Zelah  and  ha-Eleph  are  not  separate 
names,  but  one.  The  lists  of  Joshua,  though  in 
the  main  coeval  with  the  division  of  the  country, 
must  have  been  often  added  to  and  altered  before 
the]  became  finally  fixed  as  we  now  possess  them,* 
and  the  sanctity  conferred  on  the  "  hill  of  Kirjath  " 


a  For  instance,  Beth  marcaboth,  "  house  of  cha- 
riots," and  Hazar  susah,  "Tillage  of  horses"  (Josh. 
xix.  5),  would  seem  to  date  from  the  time  of  Solo- 


mon, when  the  traffic  in  these  articles  began  with 
Egypt 


GOO 


GIBE  AH 


by  the  temporary  sojourn  of  the  Ark  there  in  the 
time  of  Saul,  would  have  secured  its  insertion  among 
the  lists  of  the  towns  of  the  tribe. 

3.  (njnari;  eV  tw  &ovv$;  in  Gabaa),  the 
place  '  in  which  the  Ark  remained  from  the  time 
of  its  return  by  the  Philistines  till  its  removal  by 
David  (2  Sam.  vi.  3,  4;  comp.  1  Sam.  vii.  1,  2). 
The  name  has  the  definite  article,  and  in  1  Sam. 
vii.  1  it  is  translated  "  the  hill."   (See  No.  2  above). 

4.  Gibeah-of-Benjamin.  This  town  does 
not  appear  in  the  lists  of  the  cities  of  Benjamin 
in  Josh,  xviii.  (1.)  We  first  encounter  it  in  the 
tragical  story  of  the  Levite  and  his  conc'ubine,  when 
it  brought  all  but  extermination  on  the  tribe  (Judg. 
xix.  xx.).  It  was  then  a  "  city"  ("VJJ)  with  the 
usual  open  street  (2in"l)  or  square  (Judg.  xix.  15, 
17,  20),  and  containing  700  "chosen  men"  (xx. 
15),  probably  the  same  whose  skill  as  slingers 
is  preserved  in  the  next  verse.  Thanks  to  the 
precision  of  the  narrative  we  can  gather  some 
general  knowledge  of  the  position  of  Gibeah.  The 
Levite  and  his  party  left  Bethlehem  in  the 
'•  afternoon  " — when  the  day  was  coming  near  the 
time  at  which  the  tents  would  be  pitched  for 
evening.  It  was  probably  between  two  and  three 
o'clock.  At  the  ordinary  speed  of  eastern  travellers 
they  would  come  "  over  against  debus "  in  two 
hours,  say  by  five  o'clock,  and  the  same  length 
of  time  would  take  them  an  equal  distance,  or  about 
four  miles,  to  the  north  of  the  city  on  the  Nablus 
road,  in  the  direction  of  Mount  Ephraim  (xx.  13, 
comp.  1).  Ramah  and  Gibeah  both  lay  in  sight  of 
the  road,  Gibeah  apparently  the  nearest ;  and  when 
the  sudden  sunset  of  that  climate,  unaccompanied  by 
more  than  a  very  brief  twilight,  made  further  pro- 
gress impossible,  they  "  turned  aside "  from  the 
beaten  track  to  the  town  where  one  of  the  party  was  to 
meet  a  dreadful  death  (Judg.  xix.  9-15).  Later  indi- 
cations of  the  story  seem  to  show  that  a  little  north 
of  the  town  the  main  track  divided  into  two — one,  the 
present  Nablus  road,  leading  up  to  Bethel,  the  "  house 
i if  ( lod,"  and  the  other  taking  to  Gibeah-in-the-neld 
(xx.  31),  possibly  the  present  Jeba.  Below  the 
city  probably — about  the  base  of  the  hill  which 
gave  its  name  to  the  town — was  the  "  cave  h  of 
Gibeah,"  in  which  the  liers  in  wait  concealed  them- 
selves until  the  signal  was  given0  (xx.  33). 

During  this  narrative  the  name  is  given  simply 
;is  '■  ( iibeah,"  with  a  few  exceptions  ;  at  its  introduc- 
tion it  is  called  "  Gibeah  which  belongeth  to  Benja- 
min "  (xix.  14,  and  so  in  xx.  4).  In  xx.  10  we  have 
the  expression  "  Gibeah  of  Benjamin,"  but  here  the 
Hebrew  is  not  Gibeah,  but  Geba — JD3.  The 
same  form  of  the  word  is  found  in  xx.  33,  where 
the  meadows,  or  cave,  "  of  Gibeah,"  should  be 
"  of  Geba." 

In  many  of  the  above  particulars  Gibeah  agrees 
very  closely  with  Tuleil-el-Ful,  a  conspicuous  emi- 
nence just  four  miles  north  of  Jerusalem   to  the 

b  my?D,  A.  V.  "  meadows  of  Gibeah,"  taking  the 
word  as  Maareh  an  open  field  (Stanley,  App.  §19)  ; 
the    LXX.    transfers    the    Hebrew     word     literally, 

Mapaayafid  ;   the  Syriac  has  LO^Q  =  cave.     The 

Hebrew  word  for  cave,  Mearah,  differs  from  that 
adopted  in  the  A.  V.  only  in  the  vowel- points  ;  and 
there  seems  a  certain  consistency  in  an  ambush  con- 
cealing- themselves  in  a  cave,  which  in  an  open  field 
would  be  impossible. 

c  Josephus,  Ant.  v.  2,  §11. 


GIBEAH 

right  of  the  road.  Two  miles  beyond  it  and  full 
in  view  is  Er-Ram,  in  all  probability  the  ancient 
Ramah,  and  between  the  two  the  main  road  divides, 
one  branch  going  ott'  to  the  right  to  the  village  of 
Jeba,  while  the  other  continues  its  course  upwards 
to  Beitin,  the  modern  representative  of  Bethel. 
(See  No.  5  below.) 

(2.)  We  next  meet  with  Gibeah  of  Benjamin  dur- 
ing the  Philistine  wars  of  Saul  and  Jonathan  (1  Sam. 
xiii.  xiv.).  It  now  bears  its  full  title.  The  posi- 
tion of  matters  seems  to  have  been  this : — The  Philis- 
tines were  in  possession  of  the  village  of  Geba,  the 
present  Jeba  on  the  south  side  of  the  Wady  Suweinit. 
In  their  front,  across  the  Wady,  which  is  here 
about  a  mile  wide,  and  divided  by  several  swells 
lower  than  the  side  eminences,  was  Saul  in  the 
town  of  Michmash,  the  modem  Mukhmas,  and  hold- 
ing also  "  Mount  Bethel,"  that  is,  the  heights  on 
the  north  of  the  great  Wady — Deir  Diwan,  Burka, 
Tell  el-Hajitr,  as  far  as  Beitin  itself.  South  of  the 
Philistine  camp,  and  about  three  miles  in  its  rear, 
was  Jonathan,  in  Gibeah-of- Benjamin,  with  a  thou- 
sand chosen  warriors  (xiii.  2).  The  first  step  was 
taken  by  Jonathan,  who  drove  out  the  Philistines 
from  Geba,  by  a  feat  of  arms,  which  at  once  pro- 
cured him  an  immense  reputation.  But  in  the  mean- 
time it  increased  the  dithculties  of  Israel,  for  the 
Philistines  (hearing  of  their  reverse)  gathered  in  pro- 
digious strength,  and  advancing  with  an  enormous 
armament,  pushed  Saul's  little  force  before  them 
out  of  Bethel  and  Michmash,  and  down  the  Eastern 
passes  to  Gilgal,  near  Jericho  in  the  Jordan  valley 
(xiii.  4,  7).  They  then  established  themselves  at 
Michmash,  formerly  the  head-quarters  of  Saul,  and 
from  thence  sent  out  their  bands  of  plunderers,  North, 
West,  and  East  (17, 18).  But  nothing  could  dislodge 
Jonathan  from  his  main  stronghold  in  the  South.  As 
far  as  we  can  disentangle  the  complexities  of  the  story, 
he  soon  relinquished  Geba,  and  consolidated  his  little 
force  in  Gibeah,  where  he  was  joined  by  his  father, 
with  Samuel  the  prophet,  and  Ahiah  the  priest,  who, 
perhaps  remembering  the  former  fate  of  the  Ark, 
had  brought  down  the  sacred  Ephodd  from  Shiloh. 
These  three  had  made  their  way  up  from  Gilgal, 
with  a  force  sorely  diminished  by  desertion  to  the 
Philistine  camp  (xiv.  21),  and  flight  (xiii.  7) — a 
mere  remnant  (/caTaAei^jUo)  of  the  people  following 
in  the  rear  of  the  little  band  (LXX.).  Then 
occurred  the  feat  of  the  hero  and  his  armour-bearer. 
In  the  stillness  and  darkness  of  the  night  they  de- 
scended the  hill  of  (iibeah,  crossed  the  intervening 
country  to  the  steep  terraced  slope  of  Jeba,  and 
threading  the  mazes  of  the  ravine  below  climbed 
the  opposite  hill,  and  discovered  themselves  to  the 
garrison  of  the  Philistines  just  as  the  day  was 
breaking.e 

No  one  had  been  aware  of  their  departure,  but  it 
was  not  long  unknown.  Saul's  watchmen  at  Tuleit 
el-Ful  were  straining  their  eyes  to  catch  a  glimpse 
in  the  early  morning  of  the  position  i>t   the  toe  ; 

d  1  Sam.  xiv.  3.  In  ver.  18  the  ark  is  said  to 
have  been  at  Gibeah  ;  but  this  is  in  direct  contra- 
diction to  the  statement  of  vii.  1,  compared  with 
2  Sam.  vi.  3,  4,  and  1  Chr.  xiii.  3  ;  and  also  to  those 
of  the  LXX.  and  Josephus  at  this  place.  The  Hebrew 
words  for  ark  and  ephod— JIIX  and  "IIDX— are  very 
similar,  and  may  have  been  mistaken  for  one  another 
(Ewald,  Gesch.  Hi.  t(>  note  ;  Stanley,  205). 

c  We  owe  this  touch  to  Josephus  :  vn-o|)cui<ov<njs 
i  »i5ij  t^5  17/ue'pas-  [Ant.  vi.  6,  §2). 


GIBEAH 

and  as  the  lirst  rays  of  the  rising  sun  on  their  ! 
right  broke  over  the  mountains  of  Giiead,  and  glit- 
tered on  the  rocky  summit  of  Miehmash,  their  prac- 
tised eyes  quickly  discovered  the  unusual  stir  in 
the  camp;  they  could  see  "  the  multitude  melting 
away,  and  beating  down  one  another."  Through 
the  clear  air,  too,  came,  even  to  that  distance,  the 
unmistakable  sounds  of  the  conflict.  The  muster- 
roll  was  hastily  called  to  discover  the  absentees. 
The  oracle  of  God  was  consulted,  but  so  rapidly  did 
the  tumult  increase  that  Saul's  impatience  would 
not  permit  the  rites  to  be  completed,  and  soon 
he  and  Ahiah  (xiv.  36)  were  rushing  down  from 
Gibeah  at  the  head  of  their  hungry  warriors, 
joined  at  every  step  by  some  of  the  wretched 
Hebrews  from  their  hiding  places  in  the  clefts  and 
holes  of  the  Benjamite  hills,  eager  for  revenge,  and 
for  the  recovery  of  the  "  sheep,  and  oxen,  and 
calves"  (xiv.  32),  equally  with  the  arms,  of  which 
they  had  been  lately  plundered.  So  quickly  did 
the  news  run  through  the  district  that — if  we 
may  accept  the  statements  of  the  LXX. — by  the 
time  Saul  reached  the  Philistine  camp  his  following 
amounted  to  10,000  men:  on  every  one  of  the 
heights  of  the  country  (/3afj.u>6)  the  people  rose 
against  the  hated  invaders,  and  before  the  day  was 
out  there  was  not  a  city  even  of  Mount  Ephraim  to 
which  the  struggle  had  not  spread.  [Jonathan.] 

(3.)  As  "  Gibeah  of  Benjamin  "  this  place  is  re- 
ferred to  in  2  Sam.xxiii.  29  (comp.  1  Chr.  xi.  31), 
and  as  "  Gibeah"  it  is  mentioned  by  Hosea  (v.  8, 
ix.  9,  x.  9),  but  it  does  not  again  appear  in  the 
history.  It  is,  however,  almost  without  doubt 
identical  with 

5-  Gibeah-of-Saul  (>1KG5>  nj?n3  ;  the  LXX. 
do  not  recognize  this  uame  except  in  2  Sam.  xxi.  6, 
where  they  have  Tafiawv  2aovA,  and  Is.  x.  30,  tvoKls 
~2.ai.ovX,  elsewhere  simply  Yofiaa  or  Tafiadd).  This  is 
not  mentioned  as  Saul's  city  till  after  his  anointing 
(1  Sam.  x.  26"),  when  he  is  said  to  have  gone 
"home"  (Hebr.  "to  his  house,"  as  in  xv.  34)  to 
Gibeah,  "  to  which,"  adds  Josephus  (Ant.  vi.  4,  §6), 
"  he  belonged."  In  the  subsequent  narrative  the 
town  bears  its  full  name  (xi.  4),  and  the  king  is 
living  there,  still  following  the  avocations  of  a 
simple  farmer,  when  his  relations  f  of  Jabesh-Gilead 
beseech  his  help  in  their  danger.  His  Ammonite 
expedition  .is  followed  by  the  first  Philistine  war, 
and  by  various  other  conflicts,  amongst  others  an 
expedition  against  Amalek  in  the  extreme  south  of 
Palestine.  Put  he  returns,  as  before,  "to  his  house" 
at  Gibeah-of-Saul  (1  Sam.  xv.  34).  Again  we 
encounter  it,  when  the  seven  sons  of  the  king  were 
hung  there  as  a  sacrifice  to  turn  away  the  anger  of 
Jehovah  (2  Sam.  xxi.  (!  b).  The  name  of  Saul  has 
n.it  been  found  in  connexion  with  any  place  of  mo- 
dern  Palestine,  but  it  existed  as  late  as  the  days  of 
Josephus,  and  an  allusion  of  his  has  fortunately 
given  thi'  clue  to  tin'  identification  of  the  town  with 
tin'  spot  which  now  bears  the  name  of  TtdeUt  l-liil. 
Josephus  {/:../.  v.  2,  §1  i,  describing  Titus's  march 
fromCaesarea  to  Jerusalem,  gives  his  unite  as  through 
Samaria  to  I  iophna,  thence  a  day's  march  to  a  valley 
"railed  by  the  Jews  the  Valley  of  Thorns,  near  a 
certain  village  called  Gabathsaoule,  distant  from 
Jerusalem  about  thirty  stadia,"  t.  c.  jnst  the  dist- 
ance  of   Tirfcil   el-Ful.      Here  he   was  joined    by   a 


GIBEAH 


691 


1  This  is  a  fair  inference  from  the  fact  that  the 
wives  of  -too  out  of  the  goo  Benjamites  who  escaped 
the  massacre  at  Gibeah  came  from  .lahesh  Giiead 
(Judg.  xxi.  12). 


part  of  his  army  from  Emmaus  (Nicopolis),  who 
would  naturally  come  up  the  road  by  Beth-horon 
and  Gibeon,  the  same  which  still  falls  into  the 
northern  road  close  to  Tided  el-Fid.  In  both 
these  respects  therefore  the  agreement  is  complete, 
and  Gibeah  of  Benjamin  must  be  taken  as  identical 
with  Gibeah  of  Saul.  The  discovery  is  due  to  Dr. 
Robinson  (i.  577-79),  though  it  was  partly  sug- 
gested by  a  writer  in  Stud,  und  Kritiken. 

This  identification  of  Gibeah,  as  also  that  of 
Geba  with  Jeba,  is  fully  supported  by  Is.  x. 
28-32,  where  we  have  a  specification  of  the  route  of 
Sennacherib  from  the  north  through  the  villages  of 
the  Benjamite  district  to  Jerusalem.  Commencing 
with  Ai,  to  the  east  of  the  present  Bcitin,  the 
route  proceeds  by  Mukhmas,  across  the  "  passages  " 
of  the  Wudy  Suweinit  to  Jeba  on  the  opposite  side  ; 
and  then  by  er-Ram,  and  Tuleil  el-Ful,  villages 
actually  on  the  present  road,  to  the  heights  north  of 
Jerusalem,  from  which  the  city  is  visible.  Gallim, 
Madmenah,  and  Gebim,  none  of  which  have  been 
yet  identified,  must  have  been,  like  Anathoth 
(Aa<ita),  villages  on  one  side  or  the  other  of  the 
direct  line  of  march.  The  only  break  in  the  chain 
is  Migron,  which  is  here  placed  between  Ai  and 
Miehmash,  while  in  1  Sam.  xiv.  2  it  appears  to 
have  been  five  or  six  miles  south,  at  Gibeah.  One 
explanation  that  presents,  itself  is,  that  in  that 
uneven  and  rocky  district  the  name  "Migron," 
"  precipice,"  would  very  probably,  like  "  Gibeah," 
be  borne  by  more  than  one  town. 

In  1  Sam.  xxii.  6,  xxiii.  19,  xxvi.  1,  "Gibeah" 
doubtless  stands  for  G.  of  Saul. 

6.  ClBEAH-IK-THE-FlELD  (mb'3   njDJI  ;    To- 

/8oa  iv  aypw  ;  Gabaa),  named  only  in  Judg.  xx.  31, 
as  the  place  to  which  one  of  the  "highways" 
(ni?pP)  led  from  Gibeah-of-Benjamin, — "of  which 
one  goeth  up  to  Bethel,  and  one  to  Gibeah-in-the- 
rield."  Sadeh,  the  woid  here  rendered  "field,"  is 
applied  specially  to  cultivated  ground,  "as  distin- 
guished from  town,  desert,  or  garden "  (Stanley, 
App.  §15).  Cultivation  was  so  general  throughout 
this  district,  that  the  term  affords  no  clue  to  the 
situation  of  the  place.  It  is,  however,  remarkable 
that  the  north  road  from  Jerusalem,  shortly  after 
passing  Tided  el-Ful,  separates  into  two  branches, 
one  running  on  to  Beithi  (Bethel),  and  the  other 
diverging  to  the  right  to  Jeba  (Geba).  The  attack 
on  Gibeah  came  from  the  north  (comp.  xx.  18,  19, 
and  26,  in  which  "the  house  of  God"  is  really 
Bethel),  and  therefore  the  divergence  of  the  roads 
was  north  of  the  town.  In  the  case  of  Gibeah-of- 
Benjamin  we  have  seen  that  the  two  forms  "  Geba" 
and  "  Gibeah"  appear  to  be  convertible,  the  former 
for  the  latter.  It'  the  identification  now  proposed 
I'm'  Giheah-in-the-licld  be  correct,  the  case  is  here 
reversed — and  "Gibeah  "  is  put  for  '•  Geba." 

The  "  meadows  of  Gaba  "  (JJ3 J  :  A .  Y .  <  iibeah ; 
Judg.  xx.  33;  have  no  connexion  with  the  "field," 
the  Hebrew  words  being  entirely  different.  As 
stated  above,  tin-  word  rendered  "  meadows  "  is  pro- 
bably accurately  "cave."    [Gaba.] 

7.  There  are  several  other  names  compounded  of 
Gibeah,  which  are  given  in  a  translated  form  in  the 
A.  V.,  probably  from  their  appearing  not  to  belong 
to  towns.     These  are: — 

k  The  word  in  this  verse  rendered  "hill  "  is  not 
gibeah  but  har,  i.  e.  "  mountain,"  a  singular  change, 

and  not  quite  intelligible. 


692 


GIBEATH 


(1.)  The  "  hill  of  the  foreskins  "  (Josh.  v.  3),  be- 
tween the  Jordan  and  Jericho  ;  it  derives  its  name 
from  the  circumcision  which  took  place  there,  and 
seems  afterwards  to  have  received  the  name  of 
Gilgal. 

(2.)  The  "  hill  of  Phinehas  "  in  Mount  Ephraim 
(Josh.  xxiv.  33).  This  may  be  the  Jibia  on  the 
left  of  the  Nablus  road,  half-way  between  Bethel 
and  Shiloh;  or  the  Jeba  north  of  Nablus  (Rob.  ii. 
265  note,  312).  Both  would  be  "  in  Mount 
Ephraim,"  but  there  is  nothing  in  the  text  to  fix 
the  position  of  the  place,  while  there  is  no  lack  of  the 
name  among  the  villages  of  Central  Palestine. 

(3.)  The  hill  of  Moreh  (Judg.  vii.  1). 

(4.)  The  hill  of  God— Gibeath-ha-Elohim  (1 
Sam.  x.  5)  ;  one  of  the  places  in  the  route  of  Saul, 
which  is  so  difficult  to  trace.  In  verses  10  and  13, 
it  is  apparently  called  "  the  hill,"  and  "  the  high 
place." 

(5.)  The  hill  of  Hachilah  (1  Sam.  xxiii.  19, 
xxvi.  1). 

(6.)  The  hill  of  Ammah  (2  Sam.  ii.  24). 

(7.)  The  hill  Gareb  (Jer.  xxxi.  39). 

GIB'EATH,  Josh,  xviii.  28.    [Gibeah,  2.] 

GIBEATHI'TE,  THE  OnS^n  ;  6  Tafia- 
Giros ;  Gabaathites),  i.  e.  the  native  of  Gibeah 
(1  Chr.  xii.  3) ;  in  this  case  Shemaah,  or  "  the 
Shemaah,"  father  of  two  Benjamites,  "  Saul's 
brethren,"  who  joined  David. 

GIB'EON  (fiyna,  t.  c.  "belonging  to  a  hill;" 
YajSadiv,  Joseph.  Fafiaus  ;  Gabaon),  one  of  the  four8 
cities  of  the  HiviTES,  the  inhabitants  of  which 
made  a  league  with  Joshua  (ix.  3-15),  and  thus 
escaped  the  fate  of  Jericho  and  Ai  (comp.  xi.  19). 
It  appears,  as  might  be  inferred  from  its  taking  the 
initiative  in  this  matter,  to  have  been  the  largest 
of  the  four — "  a  great  city,  like  one-  of  the  royal 
cities" — larger  than  Ai  (x.  2).  Its  men  too  were 
all  practised  warriors  (Gibborim,  DH33).  Gibeon 
lay  within  the  territory  of  Benjamin  (xviii.  25), 
and  with  its  "  suburbs  "  was  allotted  to  the  priests 
(xxi.  17),  of  whom  it  became  afterwards  a  prin- 
cipal station.  Occasional  notices  of  its  existence 
occur  in  the  historical  books,  which  are  examined 
more  at  length  below ;  and  after  the  captivity 
we  find  the  "  men  of  Gibeon "  returning  with 
Zerubbabel  (Neh.  vii.  25 :  in  the  list  of  Ezra 
the  name  is  altered  to  Gibbar),  and  assisting 
Nehemiah  in  the  repair  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem 
(iii.  7).  In  the  post-biblical  times  it  was  the  scene 
of  a  victory  by  the  Jews  over  the  Roman  troops 
under  Cestius  Gall  us,  which  offers  in  many  respects 
a  close  parallel  to  that  of  Joshua  over  the  Canaan- 
ites  (Jos.  B.J.  ii.  19,  §7  ;  Stanley,  S.  $  P.  212). 

The  situation  of  Gibeon  has  fortunately  been 
recovered  with  as  great  certainty  as  any  ancient 
site  in  Palestine.  The  traveller  who  pursues  the 
northern  camel-road  from  Jerusalem,  turning  off  to 
the  left  at  Tuleil  el-ful  (Gibeah)  on  that  branch 
of  it  which  leads  westward  to  Jaffa,  finds  himself, 
after  crossing  one  or  two  stony  and  barren  ridges, 
in  a  district  of  a  more  open  character.  The  hills 
are  rounder  and  more  isolated  than  those  through 
which  he  has  been  passing,  and  rise  in  well-defined 
mamelons  from  broad  undulating  valleys  of  to- 
lerable extent  and  fertile  soil.  This  is  the  central 
plateau  of  the  country,  the  "  land  of  Benjamin  ;"  and 

a  So  Josh.  ix.  17.  Josephus  [Ant.  v.  1,  §16)  omits 
Beeroth. 


GIBEON 

these  round  hills  are  the  Gibeahs,  Gebas,  Gibeons, 
and  Ramahs,  whose  names  occur  so  frequently  in 
the  records  of  this  district.  Retaining  its  ancient 
name  almost  intact,  El-Jib  stands  on  the  northern- 
most of  a  couple  of  these  mamelons,  just  at  the 
place  where  the  road  to  the  sea  parts  into  two 
branches,  the  one  by  the  lower  level  of  the  Wady 
Suleiman,  the  other  by  the  heights  of  the  Beth- 
horons,  to  Gimzo,  Lydda,  and  Joppa.  The  road 
passes  at  a  short  distance  to  the  north  of  the  base 
of  the  hill  of  El-Jib.  The  strata  of  the  hills  in 
this  district  lie  much  more  horizontally  than  those 
further  south.  With  the  hills  of  Gibeon  this  is 
peculiarly  the  case,  and  it  imparts  a  remarkable 
precision  to  their  appearance,  especially  wheii 
viewed  from  a  height  such  as  the  neighbouring 
eminence  of  Neby  Samwil.  The  natural  terraces 
are  carried  round  the  hill  like  contour  lines ;  they 
are  all  dotted  thick  with  olives  and  vines,  and  the 
ancient-looking  houses  are  scattered  over  the  flatfish 
summit  of  the  mound.  On  the  east  side  of  the 
hill  is  a  copious  spring  which  issues  in  a  cave  ex- 
cavated in  the  limestone  rock,  so  as  to  form  a  large 
reservoir.  In  the  trees  farther  down  are  the  remains 
of  a  pool  or  tank  of  considerable  size,  probably,  says 
Dr.  Robinson,  120  feet  by  100,  i.e.  of  rather  smaller 
dimensions  than  the  lower  pool  at  Hebron.  This 
is  doubtless  the  "  pool  of  Gibeon"  at  which  Abner 
and  Joab  met  together  with  the  troops  of  Ish- 
bosheth  and  David,  and  where  that  sharp  conflict 
took  place  which  ended  in  the  death  of  Asahel,  and 
led  at  a  later  period  to  the  treacherous  murder  of 
Abner  himself.  Here  or  at  the  spring  were  the 
"  great  waters  (or  the  many  waters,  D'Q")  D'O) 
of  Gibeon,"  b  at  which  Johanan  the  son  of  Kareah 
found  the  traitor  Ishmael  (Jer.  xli.  12).  Round 
this  water  also,  according  to  the  notice  of  Josephus 
(eiri  tlvi  Trrjyrj  rrjs  ir6\ews  ovk  &iru6fv,  Ant.  v. 
1,  §17),  the  five  kings  of  the  Amorites  were  en- 
camped when  Joshua  burst  upon  them  from  Gilgal. 
The  "  wilderness  of  Gibeon"  (2  Sam.  ii.  24) — the 
Midbar,  i.  e.  rather  the  waste  pasture-grounds — 
must  have  been  to  the  east,  beyond  the  circle  or 
suburb  of  cultivated  fields,  and  towards  the  neigh- 
bouring swells,  which  bear  the  names  of  Jedireh 
and  Bir  Neballah.  Such  is  the  situation  of  Gibeon, 
fulfilling  in  position  every  requirement  of  the  notices 
of  the  Bible,  Josephus,  Eusebius,  and  Jerome.  Its 
distance  from  Jerusalem  by  the  main  road  is  as 
nearly  as  possible  6J  miles  ;  but  there  is  a  more 
direct  road  reducing  it  to  5  miles. 

(1.)  The  name  of  Gibeon  is  most  familiar  to  us  in 
connexion  with  the  artifice  by  which  its  inhabitants 
obtained  their  safety  at  the  hands  of  Joshua,  and 
with  the  memorable  battle  which  ultimately  re- 
sulted therefrom.  This  transaction  is  elsewhere 
examined,  and  therefore  requires  no  further  reference 
here.     [Joshua  ;  Beth-horon.] 

(2.)  We  next  hear  of  it  at  the  encounter  between 
the  men  of  David  and  of  Ishbosheth  under  their 
respective  leaders  Joab  and  Abner  (2  Sam.  ii.  1 2-17). 
The  meeting  has  all  the  air  of  having  been  pre- 
meditated by  both  parties,  unless  we  suppose  that 
Joab  had  heard  of  the  intention  of  the  Benjamites 
to  revisit  from  the  distant  Mahanaim  their  Dative 
villages,  and  had  seized  the  opportunity  to  try  his 
strength  with  Abner.  The  details  of  this  disasl  reus 
encounter  are  elsewhere  given.  [Joab.]  The  place 
where  the  struggle  began  received  a  name  from  the 


b  Both  here  and  in  1  K.  iii.  4,  Josephus  substitutes 
Hebron  for  Gibeon  [Ant.  x.  9,  §5,  viii.  2,  §1). 


GIBEON 

circumstance,  aud  seems  to  have  been  long  afterwards 
known  as  the  "  field  of  the  strong  men."     [Hel- 

KATH-HAZZUEIM.] 

(3.)  We  again  meet  with  Gibeon  in  connexion  with 
Joab  ;  this  time  as  the  scene  of  the  cruel  and  re- 
volting death  of  Amasa  by  his  hand  (2  Sam.  xx.  5- 
10) .  Joab  was  in  pursuit  of  the  rebellious  Sheba  the 
son  of  Bichri,  and  his  being  so  far  out  of  the  direct 
north  road  as  Gibeon  may  be  accounted  for  by  sup- 
posing that  he  was  making  a  search  for  this  Ben- 
jamite  among  the  towns  of  his  tribe.  The  two  rivals 
met  at  "the  great  stone c  which  is  in  Gibeon" — 
some  old  landmark  now  no  longer  recognizable,  at 
least  not  recognized — aud  then  Joab  repeated  the 
treachery  by  which  he  had  murdered  Abner,  but 
with  circumstances  of  a  still  more  revolting  cha- 
racter.    [Joab;  Arms,  p.  110  a.] 

It  is  remarkable  that  the  retribution  for  this 
crowning  act  of  perfidy  should  have  overtaken  Joab 
close  to  the  very  spot  on  which  it  had  been  com- 
mitted. For  it  was  to  the  tabernacle  at  Gibeon 
(1  K.  ii.  28,  29  ;  comp.  1  Chr.  xvi.  39)  that  Joab 
fled  for  sanctuary  when  his  death  was  pronounced 
by  Solomon,  and  it  was  while  clinging  to  the  horns 
of  the  brazen  altar  there  that  he  received  his  death- 
blow from  Benaiah  the  son  of  Jehoiada  (1  K.  ii. 
28,  30,  34;  and  LXX.  29). 

(4.)  Familiar  as  these  events  in  connexion  with  the 
history  of  Gibeon  are  to  us,  its  reputation  in  Israel 
was  due  to  a  very  different  circumstance — the  fact 
that  the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation  and  the 
brazen  altar  of  burnt-offering  were  for  some  time 
located  on  the  "  high  place "  attached  to  or  near 
the  town.  We  are  not  informed  whether  this 
"  high  place"  had  any  fame  for  sanctity  before  the 
tabernacle  came  there ;  but  if  not,  it  would  have 
probably  been  erected  elsewhere.  We  only  hear  of 
it  in  connexion  with  the  tabernacle,  nor  is  there 
any  indication  of  its  situation  in  regard  to  the  town. 
Professor  Stanley  has  suggested  that  it  was  the  re- 
markable hill  of  Ncby-Samwil,  the  most  prominent 
ami  individual  eminence  in' that  part  of  the  country, 
and  to  which  the  special  appellation  of  "  the  great 
high-place"  (1  K.  iii.  4;  rffflli]  HDan)  would 
perfectly  apply.  And  certainly,  if  "  great "  is  to 
be  understood  as  referring  to  height  or  size,  there 
is  no  other  hill  which  can  so  justly  claim  the 
distinction  {Sinai  and  Pal.  21tj).  But  the  word 
has  not  always  that  meaning,  and  may  equally 
imply  eminence  in  other  respects,  e.  g.  superior 
sanctity  to  the  numerous  other  high  places — Bethel, 
Hamah,  Mizpeh,  Gibeah — which  surrounded  it  on 
every  side.  The  main  objection  to  this  identifica- 
tion is  the  distance  of  Neby  Samwil  from  Gibeon — 
more  than  a  mile — and  the  absence  of  any  closer 
connexion  therewith  than  with  any  other  of  the 
neighbouring  places.  The  most  natural  position 
for  the  high  place  of  Gibeon  is  the  twin  mount 
immediately  south  of  El-Jih — so  close  as  to  be  all 
but  a  part  of  the  town,  and  yet  quite  separate  and 
distinct.     The  testimony  of  Fpiphanius,  by  which 


GIBEON 


693 


Mr.  Stanley  supports  his  conjecture,  viz.,  that  the 
"  Mount  of  Gabaon  "  was  the  highest  round  Jerusalem 
{Adv.  Hacreses,  i.  394),  should  be  received  with 
caution,  standing  as  it  does  quite  alone,  and  belong- 
ing to  an  age  which,  though  early,  was  marked  by 
ignorance,  and  by  the  most  improbable  conclusions. 
To  this  high  place,  wherever  situated,  the 
"  tabernacle  of  the  congregation" — the  sacred  tent 
which  had  accompanied  the  children  of  Israel 
through  the  whole  of  their  wanderings — had  been 
transferred  from  its  last  station  at  Nob.d  The 
exact  date  of  the  transfer  is  left  in  uncertainty. 
It  was  either  before  or  at  the  time  when  David 
brought  up  the  ark  from  Kirjath-jearim,  to  the  new 
tent  which  he  had  pitched  for  it  on  Mount  Zion, 
that  the  original  tent  was  spread  for  the  last  time 
at  Gibeon.  The  expression  in  2  Chr.  i.  5,  "  the  brazen 
altar  he  put  before  the  tabernacle  of  Jehovah,"  at 
first  sight  appears  to  refer  to  David.  But  the  text  of 
the  passage  is  disputed,  and  the  authorities  are  di- 
vided between   Dt^  =  "  he  put,"  and  Dt^  =  "was 

T  T 

there."  Whether  king  David  transferred  the  taber- 
nacle to  Gibeon  or  not,  he  certainly  appointed  the 
staff  of  priests  to  offer  the  daily  sacrifices  there  on 
the  brazen  altar  of  Moses,  and  to  fulfil  the  other 
requirements  of  the  law  (1  Chr.  xvi.  40),  with  no 
less  a  person  at  their  head  than  Zadok  the  priest 
(39),  assisted  by  the  famous  musicians  Heman  and 
Jeduthun  (41). 

One  of  the  earliest  acts  of  Solomon's  reign — it 
must  have  been  while  the  remembrance  of  the 
execution  of  Joab  was  still  fresh — was  to  visit 
Gibeon.  The  ceremonial  was  truly  magnificent: 
he  went  up  with  all  the  congregation,  the  great 
officers  of  the  state — the  captains  of  hundreds 
and  thousands,  the  judges,  the  governors,  and 
the  chief  of  the  fathers  —  and  the  sacrifice  con- 
sisted of  a  thousand  burnt-offerings e  (1  K.  iii.  4). 
Ami  this  glimpse  of  Gibeon  in  all  the  splendour 
of  its  greatest  prosperity — the  smoke  of  the  thou- 
sand animals  rising  from  the  venerable  altar  on  the 
commanding  height  of  "  the  great  high  place  " — 
the  clang  of  "  trumpets  and  cymbals  and  musical 
instruments  of  God"  (1  Chr.  xvi.  42)  resounding 
through  the  valleys  far  and  near — is  virtually  the 
last  we  have  of  it.  In  a  few  years  the  temple  at 
Jerusalem  was  completed,  and  then  the  tabernacle 
was  once  more  taken  down  and  removed.  Again 
"all  the  men  of  Israel  assembled  themselves"  to 
king  Solomon,  with  the  "  elders  of  Israel,"  and  the 
priests  and  the  Levites  brought  up  both  the  taber- 
nacle and  the  ark,  and  "  all  the  holy  vessels  that. 
were  in  the  tabernacle"  (1  K.  viii.  3;  Joseph. 
Ant.  viii.  4,  §1),  and  placed  the  venerable  relics  in 
their  new  home,  there  to  remain  until  the  plunder 
of  the  city  by  Nebuchadnezzar.  The  introduction 
of  the  name  of  'Gibeon  in  1  Chr.  ix.  35,  which 
seems  so  abrupt,  is  probably  due  to  the  fact  that 
the  preceding  verses  of  the  chapter  contain,  as  they 
appear  to  do,  a  list  of  the  stall'  attached  to  the 
"Tabernacle   of   the    congregation"    which   was 


c  The  Hebrew  preposition  (DJ?)  utmost  implies  that 
they  were  on  or  touching  the  stone. 

d  The  various  stations  of  the  Tabernacle  and  the 
Ark,  from  their  entry  on  the  Promised  Land  to  their 
final  deposition  in  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem,  will  he 
examined  under  Tabernaci.i:.  Meantime,  with  re- 
ference to  the  above,  it  may  be.  said  that  though  not 
expressly  stated  to  have  been  at  Nob,  it  may  be  con- 
clusively inferred  from  the  mention  of  the  "  shew 
bread"  (1  Sam.  xxi.  6).     The  "ephod"  (9)  and  the 


expression    "before    Jehovah "    (fi)    prove    nothing 
cither  way.     .Tosephus  throws  no  light  on  it. 

e  It  would  be  very  satisfactory  to  believe,  with 
Thompson  [The  I.iind  and  the  Hook,  ii.  547),  that  the 
present  Wady  Suleiman,  i.  e.  "  Solomon's  valley," 
which  commences  on  the  west  side  of  Gibeon,  and 
leads  down  to  the  Plain  of  Sharon,  derived  its  name 
from  this  visit.  Hut  the  modern  names  of  places  in 
Palestine  often  spring  from  very  modern  persons  or 
circumstances;  and,  without  confirmation  or  inves- 
tigation, this  cannot  be  received. 


694 


GIBEONITES,  THE 


erected  there  ;  or  if  these  persons  should  prove  to 
be  the  attendants  on  the  "  new  tent "  which 
David  had  pitched  for  the  ark  on  its  arrival  in  the 
city  of  David,  the  transition  to  the  place  where  the 
old  tent  was  still  standing  is  both  natural  and 
easy.  [G.] 

GIBEONITES, THE  (DtfjD|n  ■  ol  Ta.pa.oo- 
vircu  ;  Gabaonitae),  the  people  of  Gibeon,  and 
perhaps  also  of  the  three  cities  associated  with 
Gibeon  (Josh.  ix.  17) — Hivites ;  and  who,  on  the 
discovery  of  the  stratagem  by  which  they  had  ob- 
tained the  protection  of  the  Israelites,  were  con- 
demned to  be  perpetual  bondmen,  hewers  of  wood 
and  drawers  of  water  for  the  congregation,  and  for 
the  house  of  God  and  altar  of  Jehovah  (Josh.  ix. 
23,  27).  Saul  appears  to  have  broken  this  covenant, 
and  in  a  fit  of  enthusiasm  or  patriotism  to  have 
killed  some  and  devised  a  general  massacre  of  the 
rest  (2  Sam.  xxi.  1,2,  5).  This  was  expiated  many 
years  after  by  giving  up  seven  men  of  Saul's  de- 
scendants to  the  Gibeonites,  who  hung  them  or 
crucified  them  "  before  Jehovah" — as  a  kind  of  sacri- 
fice— in  Gibeah,  Saul's  own  town  (4,  6,  9).  At  this 
time,  or  at  any  rate  at  the  time  of  the  composition 
of  the  narrative,  the  Gibeonites  were  so  identified 
with  Israel,  that  the  historian  is  obliged  to  insert  a 
note  explaining  their  origin  and  their  non-Israelite 
extraction  (xxi.  2).  The  actual  name  "  Gibeonites" 
appears  only  in  this  passage  of  2  Sam.  [Nethinim.] 

Individual  Gibeonites  named  are  (1)  Ismaiah, 
one  of  the  Benjamites  who  joined  David  in  his  diffi- 
culties (1  Chr.  xii.  4)  ;  (2)  Melatiah,  one  of  those 
who  assisted  Nehemiah  in  repairing  the  wall  of 
Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  7)  ;  (3)  Haxaniah,  the  son  of 
Azur,  a  false  prophet  from  Gibeon,  who  opposed  Jere- 
miah, and  shortly  afterwards  died  (Jer.  xxviii.  1', 
10,  13,  17).  [G.] 

GIB'LITES,  THE  QbliT},  i.  e.  singular,  «  the 
Giblite ;"  YaKib.6  ^vAiffriei/x,  Alex.  Va/HKl ;  con- 
finid).  The  "  land  of  the  Giblite"  is  mentioned  in 
connexion  with  Lebanon  in  the  enumeration  of  the 
portions  of  the  Promised  Land  remaining  to  be 
conquered  by  Joshua  (Josh.  xiii.  5).  The  ancient 
versions,  as  will  be  seen  above,  give  no  help,  but 
there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  the  allusion  is  to 
the  inhabitants  of  the  city  Gebal,  which  was  on 
the  sea-coast  at  the  foot  of  the  northern  slopes  of 
Lebanon.  The  one  name  is  a  regular  derivative 
from  the  other  (see  Gesenius,  Thcs.  258  &).  We 
have  here  a  confirmation  of  the  identity  of  the 
Aphek  mentioned  in  this  passage  with  Afka,  which 
was  overlooked  by  the  writer  when  examining  the 
latter  name  [Aphek,  2] ;  and  the  whole  passage 
is  instructive,  as  showing  how  very  far  the  limits 
of  the  country  designed  lor  the  Israelites  exceeded 
those  which  they  actually  occupied. 

The  Giblites  are  again  named  (though  not  in  the 
A.  V.)  in  1  K.  v.  18  (D^iPI  ;  Alex,  ol  Bij3\toi ; 
Biblii)  as  assisting  Solomon's  builders  and  Hiram's 
builders  to  prepare  the  trees  and  the  stones  for 
building  the  Temple.  That  they  were  clever  arti- 
ficers is  evident  from  this  passage  (and  comp.  Ez. 
xxvii.  9)  ;  but  why  our  translators  should  have  so 
far  improved  on  this  as  to  render  the  word  by 
"  stone-squarers "  is  not  obvious.  Possibly  they 
followed  the  Targum,  which  has  a  word  of  similar 
import  in  this  place.  [G.] 

GIDDAL'TI  (*flWa ;  ToSoWaBl,  Alex.  Te- 
8oA\a6i),  one  of  the  sons  of  H email,  the  king's  seer, 


GIDEON 

and  therefore  a  Kohathite  Levite  (1  Chr.  xxv.  4  ;■ 
comp.  vi.  33):  his  office  was  with  thirteen  of  bis 
brothers  to  sound  the  horn  in  the  service  of  the 
tabernacle  (5,  7).  He  had  also  charge  of  the  22nd 
division  or  course  (29). 

GLD'DEL  (7^3 ;  TeSS^A.;  Gaddel).  1.  Children 
of  Giddel  {Bene-Giddel)  were  among  the  Nethinim 
who  returned  from  the  captivity  with  Zerubbabel 
(Ezr.  ii.  47  ;  Neh.  vii.  49).  In  the  parallel  lists  of 
1  Esdras  the  name  is  corrupted  to  Cathua. 

2.  Bene-Giddel  were  also  among  the  "  servants 
of  Solomon"  who  returned  to  Judaea  in  the  same 
caravan  (Ezr.  ii.  56;  Neh.  vii.  58).  In  1  Esdras 
this  is  given  as  Isdael. 

GID'EON  (fljna,  from  JH3,  "  a  sucker," 
or  better  =  "  a  hewer,"  i.  e.  a  brave  warrior  ; 
comp.  Is.  x.  33  ;  TeSeuu ;  Gedeori),  a  Manassite, 
youngest  son  of  Joash  of  the  Abiezrites,  an  undistin- 
guished family,  who  lived  at  Ophrah,  a  town  pro- 
bably on  this  side  Jordan  (Judg.  vi.  15),  although  its 
exact  position  is  unknown.  He  was  the  fifth  recorded 
Judge  of  Israel,  and  for  many  reasons  the  greatest  of 
them  all.  When  we  first  hear  of  him  he  was  grown 
up  and  had  sons  (Judg.  vi.  11,  viii.  20),  and  from 
the  apostrophe  of  the  angel  (vi.  12)  we  may  con- 
clude that  he  had  already  distinguished  himself  in 
war  against  the  roving  bauds  of  nomadic  robbers 
who  had  oppressed  Israel  for  seven  years,  and 
whose  countless  multitudes  (compared  to  locusts 
from  their  terrible  devastations,  vi.  5)  annually 
destroyed  all  the  produce  of  Canaan,  except  such 
as  could  be  concealed  in  mountain-fastnesses  (vi.  2). 
It  was  probably  during  this  disastrous  period  that 
the  emigration  of  Elimelech  took  place  (Ruth  i. 
1,  2  ;  Jahn's  llcbr.  Comm.  §xxi.).  Some  have 
identified  the  angel  who  appeared  to  Gideon  (<pa.v- 
racrfxa  veaviencov  /xopcpfj,  Jos.  Ant.  v.  6)  with  the 
prophet  mentioned  in  vi.  8,  which  will  remind  the 
reader  of  the  legends  about  Malachi  in  Origen 
and  other  commentators.  Paulus  {Exeg.  Consen. 
ii.  190  sq.)  endeavours  to  give  the  narrative  a  sub- 
jective colouring,  but  rationalism  is  of  little  value 
in  accounts  like  this.  When  the  angel  appeared, 
Gideon  was  thrashing  wheat  with  a  flail  (e/co7n-e, 
LXX.)  in  the  wine-press,  to  conceal  it  from  the 
predatory  tyrants.  After  a  natural  hesitation  he 
accepted  the  commission  of  a  deliverer,  and  learnt 
the  true  character  of  his  visitant  from  a  miracu- 
lous sign  (vi.  12-23)  ;  and  being  reassured  from 
the  fear  which  first  seized  him  (Ex.  xx.  19  ;  Judg. 
xiii.  22),  built  the  altar  Jehovah-shalom,  which 
existed  when  the  book  of  Judges  was  written  (vi. 
24).  In  a  dream  the  same  night  he  was  ordered 
to  throw  down  the  altar  of  Baal  and  cut  down  the 
Asherah  (A.  V.  "grove")  upon  it  [Asiiekaii], 
with  the  wood  of  which  he  was  to  offer  in  sacrifice 
his  father's  "  second  bullock  of  seven  years  old,"  an 
expression  in  which  some  see  an  allusion  to  the  seven 
years  of  servitude  (vi.  26,  1).  Perhaps  that  parti- 
cular bullock  is  specified  because  it  had  been  reserved 
by  bis  father  to  sacrifice  to  Baal  (Rosenmuller,  schol. 
ad  foe),  for  Joash  seems  to  have  been  a  priest  of 
that  worship.  Bertheau  can  hardly  be  right  in 
supposing  that  Gideon  was  to  oiler  two  bullocks 
(liicht.  115).  At  any  rate  the  minute  touch  is 
valuable  as  an  indication  of  truth  in  the  story 
(see  Ewald,  Gesch.  ii.  498,  and  note).  Gideon,  as- 
sisted by  ten  faithful  servants,  obeyed  the  vision, 
and  next  morning  ran  the  risk  of  being  stoned  ;  but 
Joash  appeased  the  popular  indignation  by  using 


GIDEON 

the  common  argument  that  Baal  was  capable  of 
defending  his  own  majesty  (comp.  1  K.  xviii.  27). 
This  circumstance  gave  to  Gideon  the  surname  of 

bl)2y  ("  Let  Baal  plead,"  vi.  32  ;  LXX.  'Iepo- 
£aaA),  a  standing  instance  of  national  irony,  ex- 
pressive of  Baal's  impotence.  Winer  thinks  that 
this  irony  was  increased  by  the  fact  that  ;>y2"V 
was  a  surname  of  the  Phoenician  Hercules  (comp. 
Movers,  Phoniz.  i.  434).  We  have  similar  cases  of 
contempt  in  the  names  Sychar,  Baal-zebul,  &c. 
(Lightfoot,  Hor.  Hebr.  ad  Matt.  xii.  24).  In 
consequence  of  this  name  some  have  identified 
Gideon  with  a  certain  priest  'IfpojxfSaKos,  men- 
tioned in  Eusebius  (Pracp.  Evang.  i.  10)  as 
having  given  much  accurate  information  to  Saneho- 
niatho  the  Berytian  (Bochart,  Phaleg,  p.  776; 
Huetius,  Dcm.  Evang.  p.  84,  &c),  but  this  opinion 
cannot  be  maintained  (Ewald,  Gesch.  ii.  p.  494; 
Gesen.  s.  v.).  We  also  find  the  name  in  the  form 
Jerubbesheth  (2  Sam.  xi.  21  ;  comp.  Eshbaal,  1 
Ghr.  viii.  33  with  Ishbosheth  2  Sam.  ii.  sq.~). 
Ewald  (p.  495,  n.)  brings  forward  several  argu- 
ments against  the  supposed  origin  of  the  name. 

2.  After  this  begins  the  second  act  of  Gideon's 
life.  "  Clothed"  by  the  Spirit  of  God  (Judg.  vi.  34  ; 
comp.  1  Chr.  xii.  18;  Luke  xxiv.  49),  he  blew  a 
trumpet;  and,  joined  by  "  Zebulun,  Naphtali,  and 
even  the  reluctant  Asher "  (which  tribes  were 
chiefly  endangered  by  the  Midianites),  and  possibly 
also  by  some  of  the  original  inhabitants,  who  would 
suffer  from  these  predatory  "  sons  of  the  East"  no 
less  than  the  Israelites  themselves,  he  encamped  on 
tlie  slopes  of  Gilboa,  from  which  he  overlooked  the 
plains  of  Esdraelon  covered  by  the  tents  of  Midian 
(Stanley,  Sin.  fy  Pal.  p.  243).  Strengthened  by  a 
double  sign  from  God  (to  which  Ewald  gives  a 
.strange  figurative  meaning,  Gesch.  ii.  p.  500),  he 
reduced  his  army  of  32,000  by  the  usual  proclama- 
tion (Deut.  xx.  8;  comp.  1  Mace.  iii.  5G).  The 
expression  "  let  him  depart  from  Mount  Gilead" 
is  perplexing;  Dathe  would  render  it  "  to  Mount 
Gilead," — on  the  other  side  of  Jordan;    and  Cle- 

ricus  reads  y2T>2,  Gilboa  ;  but  Ewald  is  probably 

right  in  regarding  the  name  as  a  sort  of  war-cry 
ami  general  designation  of  the  Manassites.  (See 
too  Gesen.  Thcs.  p.  So4  ».)  By  a  second  test  at 
"the  spring  of  trembling"  (now  probably  Ain 
Jahlnod,  on  which  see  Stanley,  342),  he  again  re- 
duced the  number  of  his  followers  to  300  (Judo-. 
vii.  5,  sq.),  whom  Josephus  explains  to  have  been 
the  most  cowardly  in  the  army  {Ant.  v.  6,  §3). 
Finally,  being  encouraged  by  words  fortuitously 
overheard  (what  the  later  Jews  termed  the  Bath 
Kol)  (comp.  1  Sam.  xiv.  9,  10;  Lightfoot,  Hor. 
Hebr.  ad  Matt.  iii.  14),  in  the  relation  of  a  signifi- 
cant dream,  he  framed  his  plans,  which  were  ad- 
mirably adapted  to  strike  a  panic  terror  into  the 

huge  and   andiscipli I    nomad    host   (Judg.  viii. 

15-18).  We  know  from  history  that  large  and 
irregular  Oriental  armies  are  especially  liable  to 
sudden  outbursts  of  uncontrollable  terror,  and  when 
the  stillness  and  darkness  of  the  night  were  sud- 
denly disturbed  in  three  different  directions  by  the 
flash  of  torches  and  by  the  reverberating  echoes 


GIDEON 


095 


0  It  is  curious  to  find  "lamps  and  pitchers"  in 
use  for  a  similar  purpose  at  this  very  day  in  the 
streets  of  Cairo.  The  Zahit  or  Aglia  of  the  police 
carries  with  him  at  night,  "  a  torch  which  burns 
soon  after  it  is  lighted,  without  a  name,  excepting 
when  it  is  waved  through  the  air,  when  it  suddenly 


which  the  trumpets  and  the  shouting  woke  among 
the  hills,  we  cannot  be  astonished  at  the  complete 
rout  into  which  the  enemy  were  thrown.  It  must 
be  remembered  too  that  the  sound  of  300  trumpets 
would  make  them  suppose  that  a  corresponding 
number  of  companies  were  attacking  them.a  For 
specimens  of  similar  stratagems  see  Liv.  xxii.  Iii  ; 
Polyaen.  Strateg.  ii.  37  ;  Froutin,  ii.4;  Sail.  Jug. 
99;  Niebuhr,  Desc.  de  I' Arabic,  p.  304 ;  Jaurn. 
As.  1841,  ii.  p.  516  (quoted  by  Ewald,  Rosenmuller, 
and  Winer).  The  custom  of  dividing  an  army  into 
three  seems  to  have  been  common  (1  Sam.  xi.  11  ; 
Gen.  xiv.  15),  and  Gideon's  war-cry  is  not  unlike 
that  adopted  by  Cyrus  (Xen.  Cyr.  iii.  28).  He 
adds  his  own  name  to  the  war-cry,  as  suited  both 
to  inspire  confidence  in  his  followers  and  strike  terror 
in  the  enemy.  His  stratagem  was  eminently  suc- 
cessful, and  the  Midianites,  breaking  into  their  wild 
peculiar  cries,  fled  headlong  "  down  the  descent 
to  the  Jordan,"  to  the  "  house  of  the  Acacia  " 
(Beth-shitta)  and  the  "meadow  of  the  dance" 
(Abel-meholah),  but  were  intercepted  by  the 
Ephraimites  (to  whom  notice  had  been  sent,  vii. 
24)  at  the  fords  of  Beth-barah,  where,  after  a 
second  fight,  the  princes  Oreb  and  Zeeb  ("the 
haven"  and  "the  Wolf")  were  detected  and  slain, 
— the  former  at  a  rock,  and  the  latter  concealed  in 
a  wine-press,  to  which  their  names  were  afterwards 
given.  Meanwhile  the  "  higher  sheykhs  Zeba  and 
Zalmmma,  had  alieady  escaped,"  and  Gideon  (after 
pacifying — by  a  soft  answer,  which  became  pro- 
verbial— the  haughty  tribe  of  Ephraim,  viii.  1-3) 
pursued  them  into  eastern  Manasseh,  and,  bursting 
upon  them  in  their  fancied  security  among  the 
tents  of  their  Bedouin  countrymen  (see  Karkor), 
won  his  third  victory,  and  avenged  on  the  Midian- 
itish  emirs  the  massacre  of  his  kingly  brethren  whom 
they  had  slain  at  Tabor  (viii.  18,  sq.).  In  these 
three  battles  only  15,000  out  of  120,000  Midianites 
escaped  alive.  It  is  indeed  stated  in  Judg.  viii.  10, 
that  120,000  Midianites  had  already  fallen:  but 
here  as  elsewhere,  it  may  merely  be  intended  that 
such  was  the  original  number  of  the  routed  host. 
During  his  triumphal  return  Gideon  took  signal  and 
appropriate  vengeance  on  the  coward  and  apostate 
towns  of  Succoth  and  l'eniel.  The  memory  of  this 
splendid  deliverance  took  deep  root  in  the  national 
traditions  (I  Sam.  xii.  11  ;  Ps.  lxxxiii.  11  ;  Is.  ix. 
4,  x.  26  ;  Heb.  xi.  32). 

3.  After  this  there  was  a  peace  of  40  years,  and 
we  see  Gideon  in  peaceful  possession  of  his  well- 
earned  honours,  and  surrounded  by  the  dignity  of 
a  numerous  household  (viii.  29-31).  It  is  not 
improbable  that,  like  Saul,  he  hail  owed  a  part  of 
his  popularity  to  his  princely  appearance  (Judg. 
viii.  IS).  In  this  third  stage  of  his  life  occur  alike 
his  most  noble  and  his  most  questionable  acts,  viz. 

the  refusal  of  the  monarchy  on  tl emtio  grounds, 

and  tin.'  irregular  consecration  of  a  jewelled  ephod, 
formed  out  of  the  rich  spoils  of'  Midian,  which 
proved  to  the  Israelites  a  temptation  to  idolatry, 
although  it  was  doubtless  intended  for  use  in  the 
worship  of  Jehovah.  Gesenius  and  others  (Thcs. 
p.  135;  Bertheau,  p.  133  seq.)  follow  the  IVshito 

in  making  the  word  Ephod  here  mean  an  idol, 
chiefly    on  account   of  the    vast   amount  of  gold 


blazes  forth  :  it  therefore  answers  the  same  purpose 
as  our  dark  lantern.  The  burning  cud  is  sometime* 
concealed  in  a  small  pot  or  jar,  or  covered  with  some- 
thing else,  when  not  required  to  give  light"  (Lane's 
Mod.  Eg.  i.  ch.  iv.). 


696 


GIDEONI 


(1700  shekels)  and  other  rich  material  appropriated 
to  it.  But  it  is  simpler  to  understand  it  as  a  sig- 
nificant symbol  of  an  unauthorised  worship. 

Respecting  the  chronology  of  this  period  little 
certainty  can  be  obtained.  Making  full  allowance 
for  the  use  of  round  numbers,  and  even  admitting 
the  improbable  assertion  of  some  of  the  Rabbis 
that  the  period  of  oppression  is  counted  in  the 
years  of  rest  (v.  Rosenmiiller,  on  Judg.  iii.  11), 
insuperable  difficulties  remain.  If,  however,  as  has 
been  suggested  by  Lord  A.  Hervey,  several  of  the 
judgeships  really  synchronise  instead  of  being  suc- 
cessive, much  of  the  confusion  vanishes.  For 
instance,  he  supposes  (from  a  comparison  of  Judg. 
iii.,  viii.,and  xii.)  that  there  was  a  combined  move- 
ment under  three  great  chiefs,  Ehud,  Gideon,  and 
Jephthah,  by  which  the  Israelites  emancipated 
themselves  from  the'  dominion  of  the  Moabites, 
Ammonites,  and  Midianites  (who  for  some  years 
had  occupied  their  land),  and  enjoyed  a  long  term 
of  peace  through  all  their  coasts.  "  If,"  he  says, 
"  we  string  together  the  different  accounts  of  the 
different  parts  of  Israel  which  are  given  us  in  that 
miscellaneous  collection  of  ancient  records  called 
the  book  of  Judges,  and  treat  them  as  connected 
and  successive  history,  we  shall  fall  into  as  great  a 
chronographical  error  as  if  we  treated  in  the  same 
manner  the  histories  of  Mercia,  Kent,  Essex, 
Wessex,  and  Northumberland,  before  England  be- 
came one  kingdom"  (Genealog.  of  our  Lord,  p. 
238).  It  is  now  well  known  that  a  similar  source 
of  error  has  long  existed  in  the  chronology  of 
Egypt.  [F.  W^F.] 

GIDEONI  CJyi3,  or  once  »3ijH| ;  TaSeuvl ; 
Gedeonis).  Abidan,  son  of  Gideoni,  was  the  chief 
man  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  at  the  time  of  the 
census  in  the  wilderness  of  Sinai  (Num.  i.  11  ;  ii. 
22  ;  vii.  60,  65  ;  x.  24). 

GI'DOM  (Djna  ;  TeSav,  Alex.  TaXadS),  a 
place  named  only  in  Judg.  xx.  45,  as  the  limit  to 
which  the  pursuit  of  Benjamin  extended  after  the 
final  battle  of  Gibeah.  It  would  appear  to  have 
been  situated  between  Gibeah  (Tuleil  cl-Ful)  and 
the  cliff  Rimmon  (probably  Summon,  about  three 
miles  E.  of  Bethel)  ;  but  no  trace  of  the  name,  nor 
yet  of  that  of  Menucah,  if  indeed  that  was  a  place 
(Judg.  xx.  43  ;  A.  V. "  with  ease  " — but  see  margin), 
has  yet  been  met  with.  The  reading  of  the  Alex. 
LXX.  "  Gilead,"  can  hardly  be  taken  as  well  founded. 
In  the  Vulgate  the  word  does  not  seem  to  be  repre- 
sented. [G.] 

GIEE-EAGLE  (Dm,  nDITl  ;  vopQvpiw  ; 
porphyria),  one  of- the  uncleau  birds  mentioned  in 
Lev.  xi.  18,  and  Dent.  xiv.  17.  According  to 
Gesenius  a  small  species  of  vulture,  white  with 
black  wings,  a  feeder  on  carrion;  the  vultur 
pcrcnopterus  of  Linnaeus — Germ.  Aasgeyer  ;  so 
called  from  its  tenderness  to  its  young,  the  root 
being  Dm,  to  cherish,  to  love,  just  as  HT'pn 
(from  T'Dn,  kind)  is  the  name  of  the  stork,  on 
account  of  her  piety  towards  her  offspring. 

It  seems  more  likely  that  some  bird  of  the  order 
Grallatores  is  meant  by  Dm  in  the  above  two  pas- 
sages. In  both  it  is  classed  with  the  pelican,  the 
cormorant,  and  the  stork,  and  is  separated  from 
the  birds  of  prey,  the  eagle,  the  ossifrage,  &c.  The 
rendering  of  the  LXX.  confirms  this  suggestion. 
Porphyria,  nomen  avis  aquaticae  rostrum  pur- 
pureum  et  pedes  purpureas  habentis,  unde  nomen 


GIFT 

nacta  est.  The  7rop(pvpiwv  is  mentioned  in  Aristoph. 
Av.  707.  It  is  the  Fulica  porphyria  of  Linnaeus, 
in  English,  the  Sultana-hen.  [W.  I).] 

GIFT.  The  giving  and  receiving  of  presents 
has  in  all  ages  been  not  only  a  more  frequent,  but 
also  a  more  formal  and  significant  proceeding  in 
the  East  than  among  ourselves.  It  enters  largely 
into  the  ordinary  transactions  of  life  :  no  negotiation, 
alliance,  or  contract  of  any  kind  can  be  entered  into 
between  states  or  sovereigns  without  a  previous 
interchange  of  presents :  none  of  the  important 
events  of  private  life,  betrothal,  marriage,  coming 
of  age,  birth,  take  place  without  presents :  even  a 
visit,  if  of  a  formal  nature,  must  be  prefaced  by  a 
present.  We  cannot  adduce  a  more  remarkable 
proof  of  the  important  part,  which  presents  play  in 
the  social  life  of  the  East,  than  the  fact,  that  the 
Hebrew  language  possesses  no  less  than  fifteen 
different  expressions  for  the  one  idea.  Many  of 
these  expressions  have  specific  meanings :  for  in- 
stance, minchah  (!"irO?D)  applies  to  a  present  from 
an  inferior  to  a  superior,  as  from  subjects  to  a  king 
(Judg.  iii.  15 ;  1  K.  x.  25  ;  2  Chr.  xvii.  5)  :  maseth 
(riND'JD)  expresses  the  converse  idea  of  a  present 
from  a  superior  to  an  inferior,  as  from  a  king  to  his 
subjects  (Esth.  ii.  18) ;  hence  it  is  used  of  a  portion 
of  food  sent  by  the  master  of  the  house  to  his  in- 
ferior guests  (Gen.  xliii.  34  ;  2  Sam.  xi.  8):  nisseth 
(riNtJ'3)  has  very  much  the  same  sense  (2  Sam. 
xix.  42)  :  berdcah  (i"D"12),  literally  a  "  blessing," 
is  used  where  the  present  is  one  of  a  complimentary 
nature,  either  accompanied  with  good  wishes,  or 
given  as  a  token  of  affection  (Gen.  xxxiii.  11 ;  Judg. 
i.  15;  1  Sam.  xxv.  27,  xxx.  26;  2  K.  v.  15); 
and  again,  shochad  (*H"lb>)  is  a  gift  for  the  purpose 
of  escaping  punishment,  presented  either  to  a  judge 
(Ex.  xxiii.  8 ;  Deut.  x.  17),  or  to  a  conqueror 
(2  K.  xvi.  8).  Other  terms,  as  mattdn  (Jflft), 
were  used  more  generally.  The  extent  to  which 
the  custom  prevailed  admits  of  some  explanation 
from  the  peculiar  usages  of  the  East :  it  is  clear 
that  the  term  "gift"  is  frequently  used  where 
we  should  substitute  "  tribute,"  or  "  fee."  The 
tribute  of  subject  states  was  paid  not  in  a  fixed  sum 
of  money,  but  in  kind,  each  nation  presenting  its 
particular  product — a  custom  which  is  frequently 
illustrated  in  the  sculptures  of  Assyria  and  Egypt ; 
hence  the  numerous  instances  in  which  the  present 
was  no  voluntary  act,  but  an  exaction  (Judg.  iii. 
15-18  ;  2  Sam.  viii.  2,  6;  1  K.  iv.  21  ;  2  K.  xvii. 
3;  2  Chr.  xvii.  11,  xxvi.  8);  and  hence  the  ex- 
pression "  to  bring  presents "  /=  to  own  submission 
(Ps.  lxviii.  29,  lxxvi.  11;  Is.  xviii.  7).  Again, 
the  present  taken  to  a  prophet  was  viewed  very 
much  in  the  light  of  a  consulting  "  fee,"  and  con- 
veyed no  idea  of  bribery  (1  Sam.  ix.  7,  comp.  xii.  3  ; 
2  K.  v.  5,  viii.  9):  it  was  only  when  false  prophets 
and  corrupt  judges  arose  that  the  present  was  pro- 
stituted, and  became,  instead  of  a  minchah  (as  in  the 
instances  quoted),  a  shochad,  or  bribe  (Is.  i.  23,  v. 
23;  Ez.  xxii.  12  ;  Mic.  iii.  11).  But  even  allow- 
ing for  these  cases,  which  are  hardly  "  gifts  "  in 
our  sense  of  the  term,  there  is  still  a  largo  excess 
remaining  in  the  practice  of  the  East:  friends 
brought  presents  to  friends  on  any  joyful  occasion 
(Esth.  ix.  19,  22),  those  who  asked  for  information 
or  advice  to  those  who  gave  it  (2  K.  viii.  8),  the 
needy  to  the  wealthy  from  whom  any  assistance 
was    expected    (Gen.    xliii.    11  ;    2    K.    XV.    19, 


GIHON 

xvi.  8),  rulers  to  their  favourites  (Gen.  xlv.  22  ; 
2  Sam.  xi.  8),  especially  to  their  officers  (Esth.  ii. 
18  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  2,  §15),  or  to  the  people 
generally  on  festive  occasions  (2  Sam.  vi.  19):  on 
the  occasion  of  a  marriage,  the  bridegroom  not  only 
paid  the  parents  for  his  bride  (A.  V.  "  dowry  "), 
but  also  gave  the  bride  certain  presents  (Gen.  xxxiv. 
12  ;  comp.  Gen.  xxiv.  22),  while  the  father  of  the 
bride  gave  her  a  present  on  sending  her  away,  as  is 
expressed  in  the  term  shilluchim  (Wnf^)  (1  K. 
ix.  16)  :  and  again,  the  portions  of  the  sons  of  concu- 
bines were  paid  in  the  form  of  presents  (Gen.  xxv.  6). 
The  nature  of  the  presents  was  as  various  as 
were  the  occasions :  food  (1  Sam.  ix.  7,  xvi.  20,  xxv. 
18),  sheep,  and  cattle  (Gen.  xxxii.  13-15  ;  Judg.  xv. 
1),  gold  (2  Sam.  xviii.  11  ;  Job  xlii.  11  ;  Matt.  ii. 
11),  jewels  (Gen.  xxiv.  53),  furniture,  and  vessels 
for  eating  and  drinking  (2  Sam.  xvii.  28),  deli- 
cacies, such  as  spices,  honey,  &c.  (Gen.  xxiv.  53  ; 
1  K.  x.  25,  xiv.  3),  and  robes  (1  K.  x.  25  ;  2  K. 
v.  22),  particularly  in  the  case  of  persons  inducted 
into  high  office  (Esth.  vi.  8;  Dan.  v.  16;  comp. 
Herod,  iii.  20).  The  mode  of  presentation  was 
with  as  much  parade  as  possible  ;  the  presents  were 
conveyed  by  the  hands  of  servants  (Judg.  iii.  18), 
or  still  better  on  the  backs  of  beasts  of  burden 
(2  K.  viii.  9),  even  when  such  a  mode  of  conveyance 
was  unnecessary.  The  refusal  of  a  present  was  re- 
garded as  a  high  indignity,  and  this  constituted  the 
aggravated  insult  noticed  in  Matt.  xxii.  11,  the 
marriage  robe  having  been  offered  and  refused 
(Trench,  Parables).  No  less  an  insult  was  it,  not 
to  bring  a  present  when  the  position  of  the  parties 
demanded  it  (1  Sam.  x.  27).  [W.  L.  B.] 

GI'HON  (firVil  ;  Tewv,  Alex.  rVwv ;  Gehon). 
1.  The  second  river  of  Paradise  (Gen.  ii.  13).  The 
name  does  not  again  occur  in  the  Hebrew  text  of 
the  0.  T. ;  but  in  the  LXX.  it  is  used  in  Jer.  ii.  18, 
as  an  equivalent  for  the  word  Shichor  or  Sihor, 
>".  e.  the  Nile,  and  in  Ecclus.  xxiv.  27  (A.  V. 
"  Geon ").  All  that  can  be  said  upon  it  will  be 
found  under  Eden,  p.  485  b. 

2.  (pni!,  and  in  Chron.  flWi  ;  f}  Tiaiv,  Feious ; 
Gihon).  A  place  near  Jerusalem,  memorable  as  the 
scene  of  the  anointing  and  proclamation  of  Solomon 
as  king  (1  K.  i.  33,  38, 45).  From  the  terms  of  this 
passage,  it  is  evident  it  was  at  a  lower  level  than 
the  city — "bring  him  down  (DffiTVn)  upon  (?]}) 
Gihon" —  "they  are  come  up  (•"Py'1)  from 
thence."  With  this  agrees  a  later  mention  (2  Chr. 
xxxiii.  14),  where  it  is  called  "Gihon-in-the-\ -alley," 
the  word  rendered  valley  being  nachal  (7113).  In 
this  latter  place  Gihon  is  named  to  designate  the 
direction  of  the  waU  built  bv  Manasseh — "  outside 
the  city  of  David,  from  the  west  of  Gihon-in-the- 
valley  to  the  entrance  <>f  the  fish-gate."  It  is  not 
stated  in  any  of  the  above  passages  that  (iihon  was 
a  spring;  but  the  only  remaining  place  in  which 
it  is  mentioned  suggests  this  belief,  or  at  least  that 
it  ha«l  given  its  name  to  some  water — "He/.ekiah 
also  stopped  the  upper  source  or  issue  (S\'1D,  from 
NV,  to  rush  forth  ;  incorrectly  "watercourse"  in 
A.  V.)  of  the  waters  of  Gihon"  (2  Chr.  xxxii. 
30).  If  the  place  to  which  Solomon  was  brought 
down  on  the  king's  mule  was  Gihon-in-the-valley 
— and  from  the  terms  above  noticed  it  seems  pro- 
bable that  it  was — then  the  "  upper  source"  would 
be  some  distance  awav,  and  at  a  higher  level. 


GILBOA 


mi 


The  locality  of  Gihon  will  be  investigated  under 
Jerusalem  ;  but  in  the  meantime  the  following 
facts  may  be  noticed  in  regard  to  the  occurrences 
of  the  word. 

1 .  Its  low  level  ;  as  above  stated. 

2.  The  expression  "  Gihon-in-the-valley;  "  where 
it  will  be  observed  that  nachal  ("torrent"  or 
"  wady  ")  is  the  word  always  employed  for  the  val- 
ley of  the  Kedron,  east  of  Jerusalem — the  so-called 
Valley  of  Jehoshaphat ;  ge  ("  ravine  "  or  "  glen") 
being  as  constantly  employed  for  the  Valley  of 
Hinnom,  south  and  west  of  the  town.  In  this 
connexion  the  mention  of  Ophel  (2  Chr.  xxxiii.  14) 
with  Gihon  should  not  be  disregarded.  In  agree- 
ment with  this  is  the  fact  that 

3.  The  Targum  of  Jonathan,  and  the  Syriac  and 
Arabic  Versions,  have  Shiloha,  i.  e.  Siloam  (Arab. 
^4.m-Shiloha)  for  Gihon  in  1  K.  i.  In  Chronicles 
they  agree  with  the  Hebrew  text  in  having  Gihon. 
If  Siloam  be  Gihon,  then 

4.  From  the  west  of  Gihon  to  the  fish-gate — 
which  we  know  from  St.  Jerome  to  have  been  near 
the  present  "  Jaffa-gate," — would  answer  to  the 
course  of  a  wall  enclosing  "the  city  of  David" 
(2  Chr.  xxxiii.  14)  ;  and 

5.  The  omission  of  Gihon  from  the  very  detailed 
catalogue  of  Neh.  iv.  is  explained.  [*-*•] 

GILALAI'  {h?}  ;  TeKuK),  one  of  the  party 
of  priests'  sons  who  played  on  David's  instruments 
at  the  consecration  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem,  in  the 
company  at  whose  head  was  Ezra  (Neh.  xii.  36). 

GIL'BOA  (Vzhi,  "bubbling  fountain,"  from 
?i  and  JJ-12  ;  reA/3oue;  Gelboe),  a  mountain  range 
on  the  eastern  side  of  the  plain  of  Esdraelon,  rising 
over  the  city  of  Jezreel  (comp.  1  Sam.  xxviii.  4 
with  xxix.  1).  It  is  only  mentioned  in  Scripture 
in  connexion  with  one  event  in  Israelitish  history, 
the  defeat  and  death  of  Saul  and  Jonathan  by  the 
Philistines  (1  Sam.  xxxi.  1  ;  2  Sam.  i.  6,  xxi.  12  : 
1  Chr.  x.  1,  8).  The  latter  had  encamped  at 
Shunem,  on  the  northern  side  of  the  valley  of  Jez- 
reel ;  the  former  took  up  a  position  round  the  foun- 
tain of  Jezreel,  on  the  southern  side  of  the  valley, 
at  the  base  of  Gilboa.  The  result  is  well  known. 
Saul  and  Jonathan,  with  the  flower  of  their  army, 
fell  upon  the  mountain.  When  tin1  tidings  were 
carried  to  David,  he  broke  out  into  this  pathetic 
strain :  "  Ye  mountains  of  Gilboa,  let  there  be  no 
rain  upon  you,  neither  dew,  nor  field  of  offering  " 
(2  Sam.  i.  'Jl).  Of  the  identity  of  Gilboa  with  the 
ridge  which  stretches  eastward,  from  the  ruins  of 
Jezreel,  no  doubt  can  be  entertained.  At  the 
northern  base,  half-a-mile  from  the  ruins,  is  a  large 
fountain  called  in  Scripture  both  the  "  Well  of 
Harod"  (Judg.  vii.  I),  and  "The  fountain  of 
Jezreel"  (1  Sam.  xxix.  1),  and  it  was  probably 
from  it  the  name  Gilboa  was  derived,  Eusebiua 
places  Gilboa  at  the  distance  of  six  miles  from 
Scythopolis,  and  says  there  is  still  a  village  upon 
the  mountain  called  Gelbus  '  Onom.  s.  v.  Tefiove). 
The  village  is  now  called  JelbSu  (Robinson,  ii. 
8J6),  and  its  position  answers  to  the  description  of 
Eusebius;  it  is  situated  on  the  top  of  the  moun- 
tain.    The  range  of  Gilboa  extends  in  length  some 

ten    miles    from    \Y.    to    K.      The   sides    ale    bleak, 

white,  and  barren;  they  look,  in  (act,  as  if  the 
pathetic  exclamation  of  David  hail  proved  pro- 
phetic.     The   greatest    heighi    is   not    more  than 

:. .r  600  feet  above  the  plain.     Their  modern 

local  name  is  Jebcl  Fnhuih,  and  the  highest  point 

2  Z 


698 


GILEAD 


is  crowned  by  a  village  and   wely  called    Wczar 
(Porter,  Handbook,  p.  353).  [J.  L.  1'.] 

GIL'EAD  OJJ?3,  TaAaaS;  Galaad),  a  moun- 
tainous region  east  of  the  Jordan  ;  bounded  on  the 
north  by  Bashan,  on  the  east  by  the  Arabian  plateau, 
and  on  the  south  by  Moab  and  Amnion  (Gen.  xxxi. 
21 ;  Deut.iii.  12-17).  It  is  sometimes  railed  "Mount 
Gilead"  (Gen.  xxxi.  25,  1I??an  til),  sometimes 
"the  land  of  Gilead"  (Num.  xxxii.  1,  Ijfa  pK)  J 
and  sometimes  simply  "  Gilead  "  (Ps.  lx.  7  ;  Gen. 
xxxvii.  25)  ;  but  a  comparison  of  the  several  pas- 
sages shows  that  they  all  mean  the  same  thing. 
There  is  no  evidence,  in  fact,  that  any  particular 
mountain  was  meant  by  Mount  Gilead  more  than  by 
Mount  Lebanon  (Judg.  iii.  3)— they  both  compre- 
hend the  whole  range,  and  the  range  of  Gilead  em- 
braced the  whole  province.  The  name  Gilead,  as  is 
usual  in  Palestine,  describes  the  physical  aspect  of  the 
country.  It  signifies  "  a  hard  rocky  region  ;"  and 
it  may  be  regarded  as  standing  in  contrast  to  Ba- 
shan, the  other  great  trans- Jordanic  province,  which 
is,  as  the  name  implies,  a  "level,  fertile  tract." 

The  statements  in  Gen.  xxxi.  48,  are  not  opposed 
to  this  etymology.  The  old  name  of  the  district 
was  1J??il  (Gilead),  but  by  a  slight  change  in  the 
pronunciation,  the  radical  letters  being  retained, 
the  meaning  was  made  beautifully  applicable  to  the 
"  heap  of  stones  "  Jacob  and  Laban  had  built  up — 
"and  Laban  said,  this  heap  (?5)  is  a  witness  ("1J?) 
between  me  and  thee  this  day.  Therefore  was  the 
name  of  it  called  Gal-eed"  ("lj/?JI,  "the  heap  of 
witness ").  Those  acquainted  with  the  modern 
Arabs  and  their  literature  will  see  how  intensely 
such  a  play  upon  the  word  would  be  appreciated 
by  them.  It  does  not  appear  that  the  interview 
between  Jacob  and  his  father-in-law  took  place  on 
any  particular  mountain  peak.  Jacob,  having 
passed  the  Euphrates,  "  set  his  face  toward  Mount 
Gilead;"  he  struck  across  the  desert  by  the  great 
fountain  at  Palmyra;  then  traversed  the  eastern 
part  of  the  plain  of  Damascus,  and  the  plateau  of 
Bashan,  and  entered  Gilead  from  the  north-east. 
"  In  the  Mount  Gilead  Laban  overtook  him  " — ap- 
parently soon  after  he  entered  the  district;  for 
when  they  separated  again,  Jacob  went  on  his  way 
and  arrived  at  Mahanaim,  which  must  have  been 
considerably  north  of  the  river  Jabbok  (Gen.  xxxii. 
1,  2,  22). 

The  extent  of  Gilead  we  can  ascertain  with  to- 
lerable exactness  from  incidental  notices  in  the 
Holy  Scriptures.  The  Jordan  was  its  western 
border  (1  Sam.  xiii.  7  ;  2  K.  x.  33).  A  compa- 
rison of  a  number  of  passages  shows  that  the  river 
Hieromax,  the  modern  Sheriat  el-Mandhur,  sepa- 
rated it  from  Bashan  on  the  north.  "  Half  Gilead  " 
is  said  to  have  been  possessed  by  Sihon  king  of  the 
Amorites,  and  the  other  half  by  Og  king  ot  Bashan  ; 
and  the  river  Jabbok  was  the  division  between  the 
two  kingdoms  (Deut.  iii.  12  ;  Josh.  xii.  1-5).  The 
half  of  Gilead  possessed  by  Og  must,  therefore,  have 
been  north  of  the  Jabbok.  It  is  also  stated  that 
the  territory  of  the  tribe  of  Gad  extended  along  the 
Jordan  valley  to  the  Sea  of  Galilee  (Josh,  xiii,  27); 
and  yet  "  all  Bashan "  was  given  to  Manasseh 
(ver.  30).  We,  therefore,  conclude  that  the  deep 
glen  of  the  Hieromax,  which  runs  eastward,  on  the 
parallel  of  the  south  end  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  was 
the  dividing  line  between  Bashan  and  Gilead.  North 
of  that  glen  stretches  out  a  flat,  fertile   plateau, 


GILEAD 

such  as  the  name  Bashan  (|t^2,  like  the  Arabic 
^o^  T  T 

Xa5L»'  signifies  "soft  and  level  soil'')  would  sug- 
gest ;  while  on  the  south  we  have  the  rough  and 
rugged  yet  picturesque  hill  country,  for  which  Gilead 
is  the  fit  name.  (See  Porter  in  Journal  of  Sac.  Lit. 
vol.  vi.  pp.^284  sq.)  On  the  east  the  mountain 
range  melts  away  gradually  into  the  high  plateau 
of  Arabia.  The  boundary  of  Gilead  is  here  not  so 
clearly  defined,  but  it  may  be  regarded  as  running 
along  the  foot  of  the  range.  The  southern  boun- 
dary is  less  certain.  The  tribe  of  Reuben  occupied 
the  country  as  far  south  as  the  river  Anion,  which 
was  the  border  of  Moab  (Deut.  ii.  36,  iii.  12).  It 
seems,  however,  that  the  southern  section  of  their 
territory  was  not  included  in  Gilead.  In  Josh.  xiii. 
9-11  it  is  intimated  that  the  "plain  of  Medeba" 
("  the  Mishor  "  it  is  called),  north  of  the  Anion,  is 
not  in  Gilead;  and  when  speaking  of  the  cities  of 
refuge,  Moses  describes  Bezer,  which  was  given  out 
of  the  tribe  of  Reuben,  as  being  "  in  the  wilderness, 
in  the  plain  country  (i.e.  "  in  the  country  of  the 
Mishor,"  "ib^JSH  pN),  while  Ramoth  is  said  to 
be  in  Gilead  (Deut.  iv.  43).  This  southern  plateau 
was  also  called  "  the  land  of  Jazer  "  (Num.  xxxii. 
1 ;  2  Sam.  xxiv.  5  ;  compare  also  Josh.  xiii.  16-25). 
The  valley  of  Heshbon  may  therefore,  in  all  proba- 
bility, be  the  southern  boundary  of  Gilead.  Gilead 
thus  extended  from  the  parallel  of  the  south  end  of 
the  Sea  of  Galilee  to  that  of  the  north  end  of  the  Dead 
Sea — about  60  miles ;  and  its  average  breadth 
scarcely  exceeded  20. 

While  such  were  the  proper  limits  of  Gilead, 
the  name  is  used  in  a  wider  sense  in  two  or  three 
parts  of  Scripture.  Moses,  for  example,  is  said  to 
have  seen,  from  the  top  of  Pisgah,  "  all  the  land  of 
Gilead  unto  Dan  "  (Deut.  xxxiv.  1)  ;  and  in  Judg. 
xx.  1,  and  Josh.  xxii.  9,  the  name  seems  to  com- 
prehend the  whole  territory  of  the  Israelites  beyond 
the  Jordan.  A  little  attention  shows  that  this  is 
only  a  vague  way  of  speaking,  in  common  use 
everywhere.  We,  for  instance,  often  say  "  Eng- 
land" when  we  mean  "  England  and  Wales."  The 
section  of  Gilead  lying  between  the  Jabbok  and  the 
Hieromax  is  now  called  Jebel  Ajlun ;  while  that  to 
the  south  of  the  Jabbok  constitutes  the  modern 
province  of  Belka.  One  of  the  most  conspicuous 
peaks  in  the  mountain  range  still  retains  the  ancient 
name,  being  called  Jebel  Jil'ad,  "Mount  Gilead." 
It  is  about  7  miles  south  of  the  Jabbok,  and  com- 
mands a  magnificent  view  over  the  whole  Jordan 
valley,  and  the  mountains  of  Judah  and  Ephraim. 
It  is  probably  the  site  of  Ramath-Mizpeh  of  Josh, 
xiii.  26  ;  and  the  "  Mizpeh  of  Gilead,"  from  which 
Jephthah  "  passed  over  unto  the  children  of  Am- 
nion "  (Judg.  xi.  29).  The  spot  is  admirably 
adapted  for  a  gathering  place  in  time  of  invasion, 
or  aggressive  war.  The  neighbouring  village  of 
es-Salt  occupies  the  site  of  the  old  "  city  of  refuge" 
in  Gad,  Ramoth-Gilead.    [Ramotii-Giu;ai>.] 

We  have  already  alluded  to  a  special  descriptive 
term,  which  may  almost  be  regarded  as  a  proper 
name,  used  to  denote  the  great  plateau  which  bor- 
ders Gilead  on  the  south  and  east.  The  refuge-city 
Bezer  is  said  to  be  "  in  the  country  of  the  Mishor" 
(Deut.  iv.  43);  and  Jeremiah  (xlviii.  21)  says, 
"judgment  is  come  upon  the  country  of  the  Mi- 
shor" (see  also  Josh.  xiii.  9,  16,  17,  21,  xx.  8). 
Mishor  (-ite^O  and  "lB»b)  signifies  a  "  level 
plain,"  or  "table-land;"  and   no  word    could   be 


GILEAD 

more   applicable.     This   is   one  among  many  ex- 
amples of  the  minute  accuracy  of  Bible  topography. 

The  mountains  of  Gilead  have  a  real  elevation  of 
from  two  to  three  thousand  f#et ;  but  their  apparent 
elevation  on  the  western  side  is  much  greater,  owing 
to  the  depression  of  the  Jordan  valley,  which  aver- 
ages about  1000  feet.  Their  outline  is  singularly 
uniform,  resembling  a  massive  wall  running  along 
the  horizon.  From  the  distant  east  they  seem  very 
low,  for  on  that  side  they  meet  the  plateau  of  Ara- 
bia, 2000  ft.  or  more  in  height.  Though  the  range 
appears  bleak  from  the  distance,  yet  on  ascending  it 
we  find  the  scenery  rich,  picturesque,  and  in  places 
even  grand.  The  summit  is  broad,  almost  like 
table-land  "tossed  into  wild  confusion  of  undulating 
downs  "  (Stanley,  S.fyP.  320).  It  is  everywhere 
covered  with  luxuriant  herbage.  In  the  extreme 
north  and  south  there  are  no  trees  ;  but  as  we  ad- 
vance toward  the  centre  they  soon  begin  to  appear, 
at  first  singly,  then  in  groups,  and  at  length,  on  each 
side  of  the  Jabbok,  in  fine  forests  chiefly  of  prickly 
oak  and  terebinth.  The  rich  pasture  laud  of  Gilead 
presents  a  striking  contrast  to  the  nakedness  of  west- 
ern Palestine.  Except  among  the  hills  of  Galilee, 
and  along  the  heights  of  Carmel,  there  is  nothing  to 
be  compared  with  it  as  "  a  place  for  cattle  "  (Num. 
xxxii.  1).  Gilead  anciently  abounded  in  spices  and 
aromatic  gums  which  were  exported  to  Egypt  (Gen. 
xxxvii.  25  ;  Jer.  viii.  22,  xlvi.  11). 

The  first  notice  we  have  of  Gilead  is  in  connexion 
with  the  history  of  Jacob  (Gen.  xxxi.  21  sq.)  ;  but 
it  is  possibly  this  same  region  which  is  referred  to 
under  the  name  Ham,  and  was  inhabited  by  the 
giant  Zuzims.  The  kings  of  the  East  who  came 
to  punish  the  rebellious  "  cities  of  the  plain,"  first 
attacked  the  Rephaims  in  Ashteroth  Karnaim — i.  e. 
in  the  country  now  called  Hauran  ;  then  they  ad- 
vanced southwards  against  the  "  Zuzims  in  Ham  ;" 
and  next  against  the  Emims  in  Shaveh-Kiriathim, 
which  was  subsequently  possessed  by  the  Moabites 
(Gen.  xiv.  5  ;  Deut.  ii.  9-19).  [See  Emims  ;  Re- 
phaims.] We  hear  nothing  more  of  Gilead  till  the 
invasion  of  the  country  by  the  Israelites.  One-half 
of  it  was  then  in  the  hands  of  Sihon  king  of  the 
Amorites,  who  had  a  short  time  previously  driven 
out  the  Moabites.  Og,  king  of  Bashan,  had  the 
other  section  north  of  the  Jabbok.  The  Israelites 
defeated  the  former  at  Jahaz,  and  the  latter  at 
Edrei,  and  took  possession  of  Gilead  and  Bashan 
(Num.  xxi.  23  sq.).  The  rich  pasture  land  of 
Gilead,  with  its  shady  forests,  and  copious  streams, 
attracted  the  attention  of  Reuben  and  Gad,  who 
"  had  a  very  great  multitude  of  cattle,"  and  was 
allotted  to  them.  The  future  history  and  habits 
of  the  tribes  that  occupied  Gilead  were  greatly 
affected  by  the  character  of  the  country.  Rich  in 
flocks  and  herds,  and  now  the  lords  of  a  fitting 
region,  they  retained,  almost  unchanged,  the  nomad 
pastoral  habits  of  their  patriarchal  ancestors.  Like 
all  Bedawin  they  lived  in  a  constant  state  of  war- 
fare, just  as  Jacob  had  predicted  of  Gad — "  a  troop 
shall  plunder  him  ;  but  he  shall  plunder  at  the 
last"  (Gen.  xlix.  19).  The  &ons  of  Ishmael  were 
subdued  and  plundered  in  the  time  of  Saul  (1  Chr. 
v.  9  sq.)  ;  and  the  children  of  Amnion  in  the  days  of 
Jephthah  and  David  (Judg.  xi.  32  sq. ;  2  Sam.  x. 
12  sq.).  Their  wandering  tent  life,  and  their 
almost  inaccessible  country,  made  them  in  ancienl 
times  what  the  Bedawy  tribes  are  now — the  pro- 
tectors of  the  refugee  and  the  outlaw.  In  Gilead 
the  sons  of  Saul  found  a  home  while  they  vainly 
attempted    to   re-establish    the    authority    of  their 


GILGAL 


699 


house  (2  Sam.  ii.  8  sq.).  Here,  too,  David  found 
a  sanctuary  during  the  unnatural  rebellion  of  a  be- 
loved son  ;  and  the  surrounding  tribes,  with  a  cha- 
racteristic hospitality,  carried  presents  of  the  best 
they  possessed  to  the  fallen  monarch  (2  Sam.  xvii. 
22  sq.).  Elijah  the  Tishbite  was  a  Gileadite  (IK. 
xvii.  1) ;  and  in  his  simple  garb,  wild  aspect, 
abrupt  address,  wonderfully  active  habits,  and 
movements  so  rapid  as  to  evade  the  search  of  his 
watchful  and  bitter  foes,  we  see  all  the  character- 
istics of  the  genuine  Bedawy,  ennobled  by  a  high 
prophetic  mission.     [Gad.] 

Gilead  was  a  frontier  land,  exposed  to  the  first 
attacks  of  the  Syrian  and  Assyrian  invaders,  and 
to  the  unceasing  raids  of  the  desert  tribes — "  Be- 
cause Machir  the  first-born  of  Manasseh  was  a  man 
of  war,  therefore  he  had  Bashan  and  Gilead"  (Josh. 
xvii.  1).  Under  the  wild  and  wayward  Jephthah, 
Mizpeh  of  Gilead  became  the  gathering  place  of  the 
trans- Jordanic  tribes  (Judg.  xi.  29)  ;  and  in  subse- 
quent times  the  neighbouring  stronghold  of  Ra- 
moth-Gilead  appears  to  have  been  considered  the 
key  of  Palestine  on  the  east  (1  K.  xxii.  3,  4,  6  ; 
2  K.  viii.  28,  ix.  1). 

The  name  Galaad  (raAaaS)  occurs  several  times 
in  the  history  of  the  Maccabees  (1  Mace.  v.  9  sq.)  ; 
and  also  in  Josephus,  but  generally  with  the  Greek 
termination — TaXaaSTrts  or  TaXaS-qvri  (Ant.  xiii. 
14,  §2  ;  B.  J.  i.  4,  §3).  Under  the  Roman  domi- 
nion the  country  became  more  settled  and  civilized  ; 
and  the  great  cities  of  Gadara,  Pella,  and  Gerasa, 
with  Philadelphia  on  its  south-eastern  border, 
speedily  rose  to  opulence  and  splendour.  In  one  of 
these  (Pella)  the  Christians  of  Jerusalem  found  a 
sanctuary  when  the  armies  of  Titus  gathered  round 
the  devoted  city  (Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  5).  Under 
Mohammedan  rule  the  country  has  again  lapsed 
into  semi-barbarism.  Some  scattered  villages  amid 
the  fastnesses  of  Jebcl  Ajlun,  and  a  few  fierce  wan- 
dering tribes,  constitute  the  whole  population  of 
Gilead.  They  are  nominally  subject  to  the  Porte., 
but  their  allegiance  sits  lightly  upon  them. 

For  the  scenery,  products,  antiquities,  and  his- 
tory of  Gilead,  the  following  works  may  be  con- 
sulted. Burckhardt's  Trav.  in  Syr. ;  Bucking. 
Arab  Tribes  ;  Irby  and  Mangles,  Travels  ;  Poller's 
Handbook ;  and  Fire  Years  in  Damascus ;  Stanley's 
Sin.  and  Pal. ;  Bitter's  Pal.  and  Syr. 

2.  Possibly  the  name  of  a  mountain  west  of  the 
Jordan,  near  Jezreel  (Judg.  vii.  3).  We  are  inclined, 
however,  to  agree  with  the  suggestion  of  Clericus 
and  others,  that  the  true  reading  in  this  place 
should  be  y2^|,  Gilboa,  instead  of  l)}1?*.  Gideon 
was  encamped  at  the  "  spring  of  Harod,"  which  is 
at  the  base  of  Mount  Gilboa.  A  copyist  would 
easily  make  the  mistake,  and  ignorance  of  geography 
would  prevent  it  from  being  afterwards  detected. 
For  other  explanations,  see  Ewald,  Oesch.  ii.  50O; 
Schwarz,  104  note;  Gesen.  Thes.  804  note. 

3.  The  name  of  a  son  of  Machir,  grandson  of 
Manasseh  (Num.  xxvi.  29,  30). 

4.  The  father  of  Jephthah  (Judg.  xi.  1,  2).  It, 
is  difficult  to  understand  (comp.  ver.  7;  8 )  w  hether 
this  Gilead  wis  an  individual,  ci  a  personification 
of  the  community.  [J.  L.  P.] 

GIL'GATv  (always  with  the  article,  *?&}>], 
tmt  once;  roA/yaAa  (plural);  (iahjuhi).  By  this 
name  wen:  called  at  Least  two  places  in  ancienl 
Palestine. 

1.  The  site  of  the  first  camp  of  the  Israelites  on 
'J  7,  2 


700 


GILGAL 


the  west  of  the  Jordan,  the  place  at  which  they 
passed  the  first  night  after  crossing  the  river,  and 
where  the  twelve  stones  were  set  up  which  had 
been  taken  from  the  bed  of  the  stream  (Josh.  iv.  19, 
20,  coiup.  3)  ;  where  also  they  kept  their  first 
passover  in  the  land  of  Canaan  (v.  10).  It  was  in 
the  "end  of  the  east  of  Jericho"  ('*  I"HT?3  i"IVj?3  ; 
A.  V.  "  in  the  east  border  of  Jericho"),  apparently 
on  a  hillock  or  rising  ground  (v.  3,  comp.  9)  in  the 
Arboth- Jericho  (A.  V.  "  the  plains  "),  that  is,  the 
hot  depressed  district  of  the  Ghor  which  lay  between 
the  town  and  the  Jordan  (v.  10).  Here  the  Israelites 
who  had  been  born  on  the  march  through  the  wil- 
derness were  circumcised  ;  an  occurrence  from  which 
the  sacred  historian  derives  the  name :  "  '  This  day 
I  have  rolled  away  (galliothi)  the  reproach  of  Egypt 
from  off'  you.'  Therefore  the  name  of  the  place  is 
called  Gilgal  a  to  this  day."  By  .Tosephus  (Ant. 
v.  1,  §11)  it  is  said  to  signify  "freedom"  (e'Aeu- 
04piov).  The  camp  thus  established  at  Gilgal  re- 
mained there  during  the  early  part  of  the  con- 
quest (ix.  6,  x.  6,  7,  9,  15,  43) ;  and  we  may 
probably  infer  from  one  narrative  that  Joshua  retired 
thither  at  the  conclusion  of  his  labours  (xiv.  6, 
comp.  15). 

(2.)  We  again  encounter  Gilgal  in  the  time  of  Saul, 
when  it  seems  to  have  exchanged  its  military 
associations  for  those  of  sanctity.  True,  Saul,  when 
driven  from  the  highlands  by  the  Philistines,  collected 
his  feeble  force  at  the  site  of  the  old  camp  (1  Sam. 
xiii.  4,  7) ;  but  this  is  the  only  occurrence  at  all 
connecting  it  with  war.  It  was  now  one  of  the  "  holy 
cities"  (ol  TiyiafT/jLevoi) — if  we  accept  the  addition 
of  the  LXX. — to  which  Samuel  regularly  resorted, 
where  he  administered  justice  (1  Sam.  vii.  16), 
and  where  burnt-oft'erings  and  peace-offerings  were 
accustomed  to  be  offered  "  before  Jehovah"  (x.  8, 
xi.  15,  xiii.  8,  9-12,  xv.  21)  ;  and  on  one  occasion 
a  sacrifice  of  a  more  terrible  description  than  either 
(xv.  33).  The  air  of  the  narrative  all  through  leads 
to  the  conclusion  that  at  the  time  of  these  occur- 
rences it  was  the  chief  sanctuary  of  the  central  por- 
tion of  the  nation  (see  x.  8,  xi.  14,  xv.  12,  21). 
But  there  is  no  sign  of  its  being  a  town  ;  no  men- 
tion of  building,  or  of  its  being  allotted  to  the  priests 
or  Levites,  as  was  the  case  with  other  sacred  towns, 
Bethel,  Shechem,  &c. 

(3.)  We  again  have  a  glimpse  of  it,  some  sixty 
years  later,  in  the  history  of  David's  return  to  Jeru- 
salem (2  Sam.  xix.).  The  men  of  Judah  came  down 
to  Gilgal  to  meet  the  king  to  conduct  him  over 
Jordan,  as  if  it  was  close  to  the  river  (xix.  15), 
and  David  arrived  there  immediately  on  crossing 
the  stream  b  after  his  parting  with  Barzillai  the 
Gileadite. 

How  the  remarkable  sanctity  of  Gilgal  became 
appropriated  to  a  false  worship  we  are  not  told, 
but  certainly,  as  far  as  the  obscure  allusions  of 
Hosea  and  Amos  can  be  understood  (provided  that 
they  refer  to  this  Gilgal),  it  was  so  appropriated  by 
the  kingdom  of  Israel  in  the  middle  period  of  its 
existence  (Hos.  iv.  15,  ix.  15,  xii.  11;  Amos  iv. 
4,  v.  5). 

Beyond  the  general  statements  above  quoted, 
the  sacred  text  contains  no  indications  of  the  posi- 
tion of  Gilgal.     Neither  in  the  Apocrypha  nor  the 


a  This  derivation  of  the  name  cannot  apply  in  the 
case  of  the  other  Gilgals  mentioned  below.  May  it 
not  be  the  adaptation  to  Hebrew  of  a  name  previously 
existing  in  the  former  language  of  the  country  ? 

b  Such  is  the  real  force  of  the  Hebrew  text  (xix.  40). 


GILGAL 

N.  T.  is  It  mentioned.  Later  authorities  are  more 
precise,  but  unfortunately  discordant  among  them- 
selves. By  Josephus  (Ant.  v.  1,  §4)  the  encamp- 
ment is  given  as  fifty  ftadia,  rather  under  six  miles, 
from  the  river,  and  ten  from  Jericho.  In  the  time 
of  Jerome  the -site  of  the  camp,  and  the  twelve 
memorial  stones  were  still  distinguishable,  if  we 
are  to  take  literally  the  expression  of  the  Epit. 
Paulae  (§12).  The  distance  from  Jericho  was 
then  two  miles.  The  spot  was  left  uncultivated, 
but  regarded  with  great  veneration  by  the  residents ; 
locus  desertus  .  .  .  ab  illius  regionis  mortalibus 
miro  cultu  habitus  (Onom.  Galgala).  When  Arculf 
was  there  at  the  end  of  the  seventh  century  the 
place  was  shown  at  five  miles  from  Jericho.  A 
large  church  covered  the  site,  in  which  the  twelve 
stones  were  ranged.  The  church  and  stones  were 
seen  by  Willibald,  thirty  years  later,  but  he  gives 
the  distance  as  five  miles  from  the  Jordan,  which 
again  he  states  correctly"  as  seven  from  Jericho. 
The  stones  are  mentioned  also  by  Thietmar,0  A.D. 
1217,  and  lastly  by  Ludolf  de  Suchem  a  century 
later.  No  modern  traveller  has  succeeded  in  elicit- 
ing the  name,  or  in  discovering  a  probable  site. 
In  Van  de  Velde's  map  (1858)  a  spot  named 
Moharfer,  a  little  S.E.  of  er-Riha,  is  marked  as 
possible  ;  but  no  explanation  is  afforded  either  in 
his  Syria,  or  his  Memoir. 

But,  2.  this  was  certainly  a  distinct  place  from 
the  Gilgal  which  is  connected  with  the  last  scene  in 
the  life  of  Elijah,  and  with  one  of  Elisha's  miracles. 
The  chief  reason  for  believing  this  is  the  impos- 
sibility of  making  it  fit  into  the  notice  of  Eli- 
jah's translation.  He  and  Elisha  are  said  to  "  go 
down  "  (■AT)  from  Gilgal  to  Bethel  (2  K.  ii.  2),  in 
opposition  to  the  repeated  expressions  of  the  narra- 
tives in  Joshua  and  1  Samuel,  in  which  the  way 
from  Gilgal  to  the  neighbourhood  of  Bethel  is  always 
spoken  of  as  an  ascent,  the  fact  being  that  the  former 
is  nearly  1200  feet  below  the  latter.  Thus  there 
must  have  been  a  second  Gilgal  at  a  higher  level 
than  Bethel,  and  it  was  probably  that  at  which 
Elisha  worked  the  miracle  of  healiug  on  the  poi- 
sonous pottage  (2  K.  iv.  38).  Perhaps  the  expression 
of  2  K.  ii.  1,  coupled  with  the  "  came  again  "  of 
iv.  38,  may  indicate  that  Elisha  resided  there. 
The  mention  of  Baal-shalisha  (iv.  42)  gives  a  clue 
to  its  situation,  when  taken  with  the  notice  of 
Eusebius  (Onom.  Bethsarisa)  that  that  place  was 
fifteen  miles  from  Diospolis  (Lydda)  towards  the 
north.  In  that  very  position  stand  now  the  ruins 
bearing  the  name  of  Jiljilieh,  i.  e.  Gilgal.  (See 
Van  de  Velde's  map,  and  Rob.  iii.  139.) 

3.    The   "  KING  OF   THE  NATIONS  OF  GiLGAL," 

or  rather  perhaps  the  "  king  of  Goim-at-Gilgal  " 
(7JP3?  D^HT^O),  is  mentioned  in  the  catalogue  of 

the  chiefs  overthrown  by  Joshua  (Josh.  xii.  23). 
The  name  occurs  next  to  Dor  (22)  in  an  enumera- 
tion apparently  proceeding  southwards,  and  there- 
fore the  position  of  the  Jiljilieh  just  named  is  not 
wholly  inappropriate,  though  it  must  be  con- 
fessed its  distance  from  Dor — more  than  twenty- 
five  miles — is  considerable :  still  it  is  nearer  than 
any  other  place  of  the  name  yet  known.  Eusebius 
and  Jerome  (Onom.  Gelgel)  speak  of  a  "  Galgulis" 


c  According  to  this  Pilgrim,  it  was  to  these  that 
John  the  Baptist  pointed  when  he  said  that  God  was 
"  able  of  these  stones  to  raise  up  children  unto 
Abraham"  (Thietmar,  Peregr.  31). 


GILOH 

six  miles  N.  of  Antipatris.  This  is  slightly  more 
suitable,  but  has  not  been  identified.  What  these 
Goim  were  has  been  discussed  under  Heathen. 
By  that  word  (Judg.  iv.  2)  or  "  nations"  (Gen. 
xiv.  1)  the  name  is  usually  rendered  in  the  A.  V. 
as  in  the  well-known  phrase,  "  Galilee  of  the 
nations"  (Is.  ix.  1  ;  comp.  Matt.  iv.  15).  Pos- 
sibly they  were  a  tribe  of  the  early  inhabitants  of 
the  country,  who,  like  the  Gerizites,  the  Avim, 
the  Zemarites,  and  others,  have  left  only  this  faint 
casual  trace  of  their  existence  there. 

A  place  of  the  same  name  has  also  been  discovered 
nearer  the  centre  of  the  country,  to  the  left  of  the 
main  north  road,  four  miles  from  Shiloh  (Seilun), 
and  rather  more  than  the  same  distance  from  Bethel 
{Beitin).  This  suits  the  requirements  of  the  story 
of  Elijah  and  Elisha  even  better  than  the  former, 
being  more  in  the  neighbourhood  of  the  established 
holy  places  of  the  country,  and,  as  more  central, 
and  therefore  less  liable  to  attack  from  the  wan- 
derers in  the  maritime  plain,  more  suited  for  the 
residence  of  the  sons  of  the  prophets.  In  position 
it  appears  to  be  not  less  than  500  or  600  feet  above 
Bethel  (Van  de  Velde,  Memoir,  179).  It  may 
be  the  Beth-Gilgal  of  Neh.  xii.  29 ;  while  the 
Jiljilieh  north  of  Lydd  may  be  that  of  Josh.  xii.  23. 
Another  Gilgal,  under  the  slightly  different  form  of 
Kilkilieh,  lies  about  two  miles  E.  of  Kef r  Saba. 

4.  A  Gilgal  is  spoken  of  in  Josh.  xv.  7,  in  de- 
scribing the  north  border  of  Judah.  In  the  parallel 
list  (Josh,  xviii.  17)  it  is  given  as  Geliloth,  and 
under  that  word  an  attempt  is  made  to  show  that 
Gilgal,  i.e.  the  Gilgal  near  Jericho,  is  probably 
correct.  [G.] 

GI'LOH  (!"I73  ;  TtiXco/j.,  Alex.  Ti\\wv ;  in  Sam. 
ToiAa),  a  town  in  the  mountainous  part  of  Judah, 
named  in  the  first  group,  with  Debir  and  Eshtemoh 
(Josh.  xv.  51).  Its  only  interest  to  us  lies  in  the 
fact  of  its  having  been  the  native  place  of  the  famous 
Ahithophel  (2  Sam.  xv.  12),  where  he  was  residing 
when  Absalom  sent  for  him  to  Hebron,  and  whither 
he  returned  to  destroy  himself  after  his  counsel  had 
been  set  aside  for  that  of  Hushai  (xvii.  23).  The 
site  has  not  yet  been  met  with. 

GI'LONITE,  THE  O^an  and  <h$7\ ;  0e- 
kwv'i,  VeAwviTos,  Alex.  FtAaivcuos,  i.  e.  the  native 
ofGiloh  (as  Shilonite,  from  Shiloh):  applied  only 
to  Ahithophel  the  famous  counsellor  (2  Sam.  xv.  12  ; 
xxiii.  34). 

GIM'ZO  0T»a  ;  v  Ta^d,  Alex.  ra^uaiCaf), 
a  town  which  with  its  dependent  villages  (Hebr. 
"  daughters")  was  taken  possession  of  by  the  Phi- 
listines iu  the  reign  of  Ahaz  (2  Chr.  xxviii.  18). 
The  name — which  occurs  nowhere  but  here — is 
mentioned  with  Timnath,  Socho,  and  other  towns 
in  the  north-west  part  of  Judah,  or  in  Dan.  It 
still  remains  attached  to  a  Luge  village  between 
two  and  three  miles  S.W.  of  I.ydda,  south  of  the 
road  between  Jerusalem  and  Jaffa,  just  where  the 
hills  of  the  highland  finally  break  down  into  the 
maritime  plain,  Jimzu  is  a  tolerably  large  village, 
on  an  eminence,  well  surrounded  with  trees,  and 
standing  just  beyond  the  point  where  the  two  main 
roads  from  Jerusalem  (that  by  the  Bethhorons,  and 
that  by  Wad;/  Suleiman  ),  which  parted  at  Cibeon, 
again  join  and  run  on  as  one  t"  Jaffa.  It  is  remark- 
able for  nothing  but  some  extensive  corn  magazines 
underground,  unless  it  be  also  for  the  silence  main- 
tained regarding  it  by  all  travellers  up  to  Dr.  Ro- 
binson (ii.  249).  [G.] 


GIRDLE 


701 


GIN,  a  trap  for  birds  or  beasts :  it  consisted  of 
a  net  (PIS),  and  a  stick  to  act  as  a  springe  (K'pift) ; 
the  latter  word  is  translated  "gin"  in  the  A.  V. 
Am.  iii.  5,  and  the  former  in  Is.  viii.  14,  the  term 
"  snare  "  being  in  each  case  used  for  the  other  part 
of  the  trap.  In  Job  xl.  24  (marginal  translation) 
the  second  of  these  terms  is  applied  to  the  ring  run 
through  the  nostrils  of  an  animal.        [W.  L.  B.] 

GI'NATH  (D^a  ;  TuvaO ;  Gineth),  father  of 
Tibni,  who  after  the  death  of  Zimri  disputed  the 
throne  of  Israel  with  Omri  (1  K.  xvi.  21,  22). 

GIN'NETHO  OinSil,  i.  e.  Ginnethoi ;  Alex. 
YevvT)6ovi ;  Genthon),  one  of  the  "  chief"  (*K>fcO 
=  heads)  of  the  priests  and  Levites  who  returned 
to  Judaea  with  Zerubbabel  (Neh.  xii.  4).  He  is 
doubtless  the  same  person  as 

GIN'NETHON  (fln||  ;  Ya.vva.Mv,  TavaOde  ; 
Genthoii),  a  priest  who  sealed  the  covenant,  with 
Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  6).  He  was  head  of  a  family, 
and  one  of  his  descendants  is  mentioned  in  the  list 
of  priests  and  Levites  at  a  later  period  (xii.  16).  He 
is  probably  the  same  person  as  the  preceding. 

GIRDLE,  an  essential  article  of  dress  in  the 
East,  and  worn  both  by  men  and  women.  The 
corresponding  Hebrew  words  are  :  1.  "II  Jn  or 
mian,  which  is  the  general  term  for  a  gii-dle  of 
any  kind,  whether  worn  by  soldiers,  as  1  Sam. 
xviii.  4,  2  Sam.  xx.  8,  1  K.  ii.  5,  2  K.  iii.  21 ;  or 
by  women,  Is.  iii.  24.  2.  "11TN,  especially  used  of 
the  girdles  worn  by  men  ;  whether  by  prophetr, 
2  K.  i.  8,  Jer.  xiii.  1  ;  soldiers,  Is.  v.  27,  Ez. 
xxiii.  15;  or  kings  in  their  military  capacity,  Job 
xii.  18.  3.  ntO  or  W'XO,  used  of  the  girdle  worn 
by  men  alone,  Job  xii.  21,  Ps.  cix.  19,  Is.  xxiii. 
10.  4.  1333X,  the  girdle  worn  by  the  priests  and 
state  officers.  In  addition  to  these,  7^T)S,  Is.  iii. 
24,  is  a  costly  girdle  worn  by  women.  The  Vul- 
gate renders  it  fascia  pectoral  is.  It  would  thus 
seem  to  correspond  with  the  Latin  strophium,  a 
belt  worn  by  women  about  the  breast.  In  the 
LXX.  however,  it  is  translated  xlT^°u  M6cr07r<fy)" 
(pvpos,  "  a  tunic  shot  with  purple,"  and  Gesenius  has 
"buntes Feyerkleid' '  (comp.  Schroeder,  de  Vest.  Mid. 
137,  8;  404).  The  Dn-ltTp  mentioned  in  Is.  iii. 
20,  Jer.  ii.  32,  were  probably  girdles,  although 
both  Kimchi  and  Jarchi  consider  them  as  fillets  for 
the  hair.  In  the  latter  passage  the  Vulgate  has 
again  fascia  pectoralis,  and  the  LXX.  <TT7j0o5e(T/uis, 
an  appropriate  bridal  ornament. 

The  common  girdle  was  made  of  leather  (2  K. 
i.  8  ;  Matt.  iii.  4),  like  that  worn  by  the  Bedouins 
of  the  present  day,  whom  Curzon  describes  as 
"  armed  with  a  long  crooked  knife,  and  a  pistol  or 
two  stuck  in  a  red  leathern  girdle"  (Monast.  of 
the  Levant,  p.  7).  In  the  time  of  Chardin  the 
nobles  of  Mjngrelia  wore  girdles  of  leather,  four 
fingers  broad,  and  embossed  with  silver.  A  finer 
girdle  was  made  of  linen  (Jer.  xiii.  1  ;  Ez.  xvi. 
L0),  embroidered  with  silk,  and  sometimes  with 
gold  and  silver  thread  (Dan.  x.  5j  Rev.  i.  13,  xv. 
6),  and  frequently  studded  with  gold  and  precious 
stones  or  pearls  (Le  Brayn,  Voy.  iv.  17":  comp. 
Virg.  Aen.  ix.  359).  Morier  (Second  Journey,  p. 
[escribing  the  dress  of  the  Armenian  women. 
Bays,  '"  they  wear  a  silver  girdle  which  rests  00 
the  hips,    and    is    generally    curiously    wrought." 


■02 


GIRDLE 


The  manufacture  of  these  girdles  formed  part  of 
the  employment  of  women  (Prow  xxxi.  24-). 

The  girdle  was  fastened  by  a  clasp  of  gold  or 
silver,  or  tied  in  a  knot  so  that  the  ends  hung 
down  in  front,  as  in  the  figures  on  the  ruins  of 
Persepolis.  It  was  worn  by  men  about  the  loins, 
hence  the  expressions  D^O'?  "f$»  *s-  x'-  ^ ' 
D*X?n  11TN,  Is.  v.  27.  The  girdle  of  women  was 
generally  looser  than  that  of  the  men,  and  was 
worn  about  the  hips,  except  when  they  were  ac- 
tively engaged  (Prov.  xxxi.  17).  Curzon  (p.  58), 
describing  the  dress  of  the  Egyptian  women,  says, 
"  not  round  the  waist,  but  round  the  hips  a  large 
and  heavy  Cashmere  shawl  is  worn  over  the  yelek, 
and  the  whole  gracefulness  of  an  Egyptian  dress 
consists  in  the  way  in  which  this  is  put  on." 
The  military  girdle  was  worn  about  the  waist ; 
the  sword  or  dagger  was  suspended  from  it  ( Judg. 
iii.  16;  2  Sam.  xx.  8;  Ps.  xlv.  3).  In  the 
Nineveh  sculptures  the  soldiers  are  represented 
with  broad  girdles,  to  which  the  sword  is  attached, 
and  through  which  two  or  even  three  daggers  in  a 
sheath  are  passed.  Q.  Curtius  (iii.  3)  says  of 
Darius,  "zona  aurea  muliebriter  cinctus  acinacem 
suspenderat,  cui  ex  gemma  erat  vagina."  Hence 
girding  up  the  loins  denotes  preparation  for  battle 
or  for  active  exertion.  In  times  of  mourning, 
girdles  of  sackcloth  were  worn  as  marks  of  humilia- 
tion and  sorrow  (Is.  iii.  24,  xxii.  12). 

In  consequence  of  the  costly  materials  of  which 
girdles  were  made,  they  were  frequently  given  as 
presents  (1  Sam.  xviii.  4  ;  2  Sam.  xviii.  11),  as  is 
still  the  custom  in  Persia  (cf.  Morier,  p.  93). 
Villages  were  given  to  the  queens  of  Persia  to 
supply  them  with  girdles  (Xen.  Anab.  i.  4,  §9  ; 
Plat.  Ale.  i.  p.  123). 

They  were  used  as  pockets,  as  among  the  Arabs 
still  (Niebuhr,  Descr.  p.  56),  and  as  purses,  one 
end  of  the  girdle  being  folded  back  for  the  purpose 
(Matt.  x.  9  ;  Mark  vi.  8).  Hence,  "  zonam  per- 
dere,"  "  to  lose  one's  purse  "  (Hor.  Epist.  ii.  2,  40 ; 
comp.  Juv.  xiv.  297).  Inkhorns  were  also  earned 
in  the  girdle  (Ez.  ix.  2). 

The  ID32N,  or  girdle  worn  by  the  priests  about 
the  close-titting  tunic  (Ex.  xxviii.  39,  xxxix.  29), 
is  described  by  Josephus  [Ant.  iii.  7,  §2)  as  made 
of  linen  so  fine  of  texture  as  to  look  like  the  slough 
of  a  snake,  and  embroidered  with  flowers  of  scarlet, 
purple,  blue,  and  fine  linen.  It  was  about  four 
fingers'  broad,  and  was  wrapped  several  times 
round  the  priest's  body,  the  ends  hanging  down  to 
the  feet.  When  engaged  in  sacrifice,  the  priest 
threw  the  ends  over  his  left  shoulder.  According 
to  Maimonides  (de  Vas.  Sanct.  c.  8),  the  girdle 
worn  both  by  the  high-priest  and  the  common 
priests  was  of  white  linen  embroidered  with  wool  ; 
but  that  worn  by  the  high-priest  on  the  day  of 
Atonement  was  entirely  of  white  linen.  The  length 
of  it  was  thirty-two  cubits,  and  the  breadth  about 
three  fingers.  It  was  worn  just  below  the  arm- 
pits to  avoid  perspiration  (comp.  Ez.  xliv.  18). 
Jerome  (Ep.  ad  Fabiolam,  de  Vest.  Sac.)  follows 
Josephus.  With  regard  to  the  manner  in  which 
the  girdle  was  embroidered,  the  "  needlework  " 
(Dpi  HCyD,  Ex.  xxviii.  39)  is  distinguished  in  the 
Mishua  from  the  "  cunning-work  "  (3CT1  i"lt^l?D 
Ex.  xxvi.  31)  as  being  worked  by  the  needle  with 
figures  on  one  side  only,  whereas  the  latter  was 
woven  work  with  figures  on  both  sides  (Cod. 
Ioma.  c.  8).     So  also  Maimonides  (de  Vas.  Sanct. 


GITTAIM 

viii.  15).  But  Jarchi  on  Ex.  xxvi.  31,  36  explains 
the  difference  as  consisting  in  this,  that  in  the 
former  case  the  figures  on  the  two  sides  are  the 
same,  whereas  in  the  latter  they  are  different. 
[Embroiderer.] 

In  all  passages,  except  Is.  sxii.  21,  L2J3N  is 
used  of  the  girdle  of  the  priests  only,  but  in  that 
instance  it  appears  to  have  been  worn  by  Shebua, 
the  treasurer,  as  part  of  the  insignia  of  his  office  ; 
unless  it  be  supposed  that  he  was  of  priestly  rank, 
and  wore  it  in  his  priestly  capacity.  He  is  called 
"  high-priest  "  in  the  Chronicon  Paschale,  p.  1 15  a, 
and  in  the  Jewish  tradition  quoted  by  Jarchi  in  he. 

The  "  curious  girdle  "  (2BT1,  Ex.  xxviii.  8)  was 
made  of  the  same  materials  and  colours  as  the 
ephod,  that  is  of  "  gold,  blue,  and  purple,  and  scarlet, 
and  fine  twined  linen."  Josephus  describes  it  as 
sewn  to  the  breastplate.  After  passing  once  round 
it  was  tied  in  front  upon  the  seam,  the  ends  hang- 
ing down  [Ant.  iii.  7,  §5).  According  to  Maimon- 
ides it  was  of  woven  work. 

"  Girdle "  is  used  "figuratively  in  Ps.  cix.  5  ; 
Is.  xi.  5  ;  cf.  1  Sam.  ii.  4;  Ps.  xxx.  11,  lxv.  12  ; 
Eph.  vi.  14.  [W.  A.  W.] 

GIR'GASHITES,  THE  0^15  H,  i.  e.,  ac- 
cording to  the  Hebrew  usage,  singular — "  the  Gir- 
gashite  ;  "  in  which  form,  however,  it  occurs  in  the 
A.  V.  but  twice,  1  Chr.  i.  14,  and  Gen.  x.  16,  in 
the  latter  the  Girgasite  ;  elsewhere  uniformly 
plural,  as  above  :  6  Fepyecrouos,  and  so  also  Jo- 
sephus ;  Gergesaeus),  one  of  the  nations  who  were 
in  possession  of  Canaan  before  the  entrance  thither 
of  the  children  of  Israel.  The  name  occurs  in  the 
following  passages: — Gen.  x.  16,  xv.  21  ;  Deut.  vii. 
1  (and  xx.  17  in  Samarit.  and  LXX.)  ;  Josh.  iii.  10, 
xxiv.  11 ;  1  Chr.  i.  14;  Neh.  ix.  8.  In  ihe  first  of 
these  "  the  Girgasite  "  is  given  as  the  fifth  son  of 
Canaan  ;  in  the  other  places  the  tribe  is  merely 
mentioned,  and  that  but  occasionally,  in  the  for- 
mula expressing  the  doomed  country  ;  and  it  may 
truly  be  said  in  the  words  of  Josephus  [Ant.  i.  6, 
§2)  that  we  possess  the  name  and  nothing  more ; 
not  even  the  more  definite  notices  of  position,  or  the 
slight  glimpses  of  character,  general  or  individual, 
with  which  we  are  favoured  in  the  case  of  the 
Amorites,  Jebusites,  and  some  others  of  these  ancient 
nations.  The  expression  in  Josh.  xxiv.  11  would 
seem  to  indicate  that  the  district  of  the  Girgashites 
was  on  the  west  of  Jordan  ;  nor  is  this  invalidated 
by  the  mention  of  "  Gergesenes"  in  Matt.  viii.  28 
(Tepytcrnvoiv  in  Rec.  Text,  and  in  a  few  MSS.  men- 
tioned by  Epiphanius  and  Origeu  Fepyeffaiaiv),  as 
on  the  east  side  of  the  sea  of  Galilee,  since  that 
name  is  now  generally  recognized  as  Tepaa-qv&v — 
"  Gerasenes  " — and  therefore  as  having  no  connexion 
with  the  Girgashites.  [G.] 

GIR'GASITE,  THE  (Gen.  x.  16).  See  the 
foregoing. 

GIS'PA  (NSbi  ;  Alex.  re<r<pd;  Gaspha),  one 
of  the  overseers  of  the  Nethinim,  in  "the  Ophel" 
after  the  return  from  captivity  (Neh.  xi.  21).  By 
the  LXX.  the  name  appears  to  have  been  taken  as  a 
place. 

GIT'TAH-HE'PHER,  Josh.  xix.  1 3.  [Gatii- 
Hepher.J 

GIT'TAIM  (DJFjJ,  i.  e.  two  wine-presses ; 
TeOai/u.  Alex,  reddet/x ;  Gcthaim),  a  place  inci- 
dentally   mentioned  in   2  Sam.   iv.   '.'>,    where   the 


GITTITES 

meaning  appears  to  be  that  the  inhabitants  of 
Beeroth,  which  was  allotted  to  Benjamin,  had  been 
compelled  to  fly  from  that  place,  and  had  taken  refuge 
at  Gittaim.  Beeroth  was  one  of  the  towns  of  the 
Gibeonites  (Josh.  be.  17)  ;  and  the  cause  of  the 
flight  of  its  people  may  have  been  (though  this  is 
but  conjecture)  Saul's  persecution  of  the  Gibeonites 
alluded  to  in  2  Sam.  xxi.  '_'.  Gittaim  is  again  men- 
tioned in  the  list  of  places  inhabited  by  the  Ben- 
jamites  after  their  return  from  the  captivity,  with 
Ramah,  Neballat,  Lod,  and  other  known  towns 
of  Benjamin  to  the  N.W.  of  Jerusalem.  The  two 
may  be  the  same ;  though,  if  the  persecution  of  the 
Berothites  proceeded  from  Benjamin,  as  we  must 
infer  it  did,  they  would  hardly  choose  as  a  refuge  a 
place  within  the  limits  of  that  tribe.  Gittaim  is 
the  dual  form  of  the  word  Gath,  which  suggests 
the  Philistine  plain  as  its  locality.  But  there  .is  no 
evidence  for  or  against  this. 

Gittaim  occurs  in  the  LXX.  version  of  1  Sam. 
xiv.  33 — "  out  of  Getthaim  roll  me  a  great  stone." 
But  this  is  not  supported  by  any  other  of  the 
ancient  versions,  which  unanimously  adhere  to  the 
Hebr.  test,  and  probably  proceeds  from  a  mistake 
or  corruption  of  the  Hebrew  word  DmjB  ;  A.  V. 
"  ye  have  transgressed."  It  further  occurs  in  the 
LXX.  in  Gen.  xxxvi.  35,  and  1  Chr.  i.  46,  as  the 
representative  of  Avith,  a  change  not  so  intel- 
ligible as  the  other,  and  equally  unsupported  by 
the  other  old  versions.  [G.] 

GIT'TITES  (Wfil,  patron,  from  T\S),  the 
600  men  who  followed  David  from  Gath,  under 
Ittai  the  Gittite  Pnjn,  2  Sam.  xv.  18,  19),  and 
who  probably  acted  as  a  kind  of  body-guard.  Obed- 
edom  the  Levite,  in  whose  house  the  Ark  was  for  a 
time  placed  (2  Sam.  vi.  10),  and  who  afterwards 
served  in  Jerusalem  (1  Chr.  xvi.  38),  is  called  "  the 
Gittite  "  CDUn).  We  can  scarcely  think,  however, 
that  he  was  so  named  from  the:  royal  city  of  the 
Philistines.  May  he  not  have  been  from  the  town 
of  Gittaim  in  Benjamin?  (2  Sam.  iv.  3;  Neh. 
xi.  33),  or  from  Gath-rimmon,  a  town  of  Dan, 
allotted  to  the  Kohathite  Levites  (Josh.  xxi.  24), 
of  whom  Obed-edom  seems  to  have  been  one  (1 
Chr.  xxvi.  4)?  [J.  L.  P.] 

GIT'TITH  (rPPja),  a  musical  instrument,  by 
some  supposed  to  have  been  used  by  the  people  of 
Gath,  aim  thence  to  have  been  introduced  by  David 
into  Palestine;  and  by  others  (who  identify  FlTlil 
with  nH,  a  wine-press,  or  trough,  in  which  the 
grapes  were  trodden  with  the  feet)  to  have  been 
employed  at  the  festivities  of  the  vintage.  The 
Chaldee  paraphrase  of  JVfljin  ?]},  occasionally  found 
in  the  heading  of  Psalms,  is,  "On  the  instrument 
N"llV3  (Cinora),  which  was  brought  from  Gath." 
Rashi,  whilst  he  admits  Gittith  to  be  a  musical  in- 
strument, in  the  manufacture  of  which  the  artisans 
of  Gath  excelled,  quotes  a  Taluiudic  authority 
which  would  assign  to  the  word  a  different  meaning. 
"Our  sages,"  says  he,  "have  remarked  '  On  the 
nations  who  are  in  future  to  be  trodden  down  like 
a  wine-press.'  "  (Comp.  Is.  Ixiii.  3.)  Bui  neither 
of  the  Psalms,  viii.,  lxxxi.,  or  lxxxiv.,  which  have 
Gittith  for  a  heading,  contains  any  thing  that  may 
be  connected  with  such  an  idea.  The  interpretation 
el' the  LXX.  viTip  twv  \nvwv  "for  the  wine-presses," 
is  condemned  by  Aben-Ezra  and  other  eminent 
Jewish  scholars.      Fiirst   {Concordance')  describes 


GLASS 


703 


Gittith  as  a  hollow  instrument,  from  DOJ,  to  deepen 
(synonymous  with  PVil).  [D.  W.  M.] 

GI'ZONITE,  THE  (WT|)1 ;  o  Tifaviros, 
Alex.  6  Faivyi ;  Gezonites).  "  The  sons  of  Hashem 
the  Gizonite"  are  named  amongst  the  warriors  of 
David's  guard  (1  Chr.  xi.  34).  In  the  parallel  list 
of  2  Sam.  xxiii.  the  word  is  entirely  omitted  ;  and 
the  conclusion  of  Kennicott,  who  examines  the 
passage  at  length,  is  that  the  name  should  be 
Gouni,  a  proper  name,  and  not  an  appellative 
(Dissert.  199-203). 

GLASS  (JVD-'DT ;  vaAos  ;  vitrum).  The  word 
occurs  only  in  Job  xxviii.  17,  where  in  A.  V.  it  is 
rendered  "  crystal."  It  comes  from  "JpT  (to  be 
pure),  and  according  to  the  best  authorities  means 
a  kind  of  glass  which  in  ancient  days  was  held  in 
high  esteem  (J.  D.  Michaelis,  Hist.  Vitri  apud 
Hebr.;  and  Hamberger,  Hist.  Vitri  ex  antiqnitate 
eruta,  quoted  by  Gesen.  s.  v.).  Symmachus  ren- 
ders it  KpvffTaWos,  but  that  is  rather  intended  by 
K»3J  (Job  xxviii.  18,  A.  V.  "  pearls,"  LXX.  ydQis, 
a  word  which  also  means  "  ice;"  cf.  Plin.  H.  N. 
xxxvii.  2),  and  nip  (Ez.  i.  22).  It  seems  then 
that  Job  xxviii.  17  contains  the  only  allusion  to 
glass  found  in  the  O.  T.,  and  even  this  reference  is 
disputed.  Besides  Symmachus,  others  also  render 
it  Siavyrj  KpiurraAAov  (Schleusner,  Thesaur.  s.  v. 
vaAos),  anil  it  is  argued  that  the  word  vaAos  fre- 
quently means  crystal.  Thus  the  Schol.  on  Aristoph. 
Nub.  764,  defines  vaAos  (when  it  occurs  "in  old 
writers)  as  Siacpavrjs  Aidos  iotKws  iiaAai,  and  He- 
sychius  gives  as  its  equivalent  Aidos  rifxios.  In 
Herodotus  (iii.  24)  it  is  clear  that  veAos  must 
mean  crystal,  for  he  says,  i)  8e  a<pL  ttoAAt)  ko.1 
c&epyos  opvffffeTai,  and  Achilles  Tatius  speaks  of 
crystal  as  vaAos  bpwpvyixtvr)  (ii.  3;  Baehr.  On 
Herod,  ii.  44;  Heereu,  Idem,  ii.  1,  335).  Others 
consider  HO-IDT  to  be  amber,  or  electrum,  or 
alabaster  (Bochart,  Hieroz,  ii.  vi.  872). 

In  spite  of  this  absence  of  specific  allusion  to 
glass  in  the  sacred  writings,  the  Hebrews  must 
have  been  aware  of  the  invention.  There  has  been 
a  violent  modern  prejudice  against  the  belief  that 
glass  was  early  known  to,  or  extensively  used  by, 
the  ancients,  but  both  tacts  are  now  certain.  From 
paintings  representing  the  process  of  glassblowing 
which  have  been  discovered  in  paintings  at  Beni- 
Hassan,  and  in  tombs  at  other  places,  we  know  that 
the  invention  is  at  least  as  remote  as  the  age  of  ( >sir- 
tasen  the  first  (perhaps  a  contemporary  of  Joseph), 
3500  years  ago.  A  bead  as  old  as  1500  B.C.  was 
found  by  Captain  Hervey  at  Thebes,  "  the  specific 
gravity  of  which,  'J.')0  30',  is  precisely  the  same  as 
that  of  the  crown  glass  now  made  in  England." 
Fragments  too  of  wine-vases  as  old  as  the  Exodus 

have  I n  discovered  inJSgypt.    Glass  beads  known 

to  be  ancient  have  been  found  in  Africa,  and  al  o 

(it  is  siid)  in  Cornwall  and  Ireland,  which  are  in 
all  probability  the  relics  of  an  old  Phoenician  trade 
(Wilkinson,  in  Rawlimon's  Herod,  ii.  50,  i.  475 : 
-l»c  Egypt,  iii.  88-1  12).  The  arl  was  also  known 
to  the  ancienl  Assyrians  (Layard,  Nmevt  '•.  ii.  42), 

and  a  glass  bottle  was  found    in  the  N.W.  palace,  of 

Nimroud,  which  has  on  it  the  aame  of  Sargon,  and 
is  therefore  probably  older  than  b.c.  7h-j  (id.  Nin. 
and  Bab.  p.  197,503).  This  is  the  earliest  known 
specimen  of  transparent  glass. 

The  disbelief  in  the  antiquity  of  glass  (in  spite 
of  the  distinct  statements  of  early  writers)  is  diffi- 


704 


GLASS 


GLEDE 


cult  to  account  for,  because   the   invention  must !  This  is  probably  the  explanation  of  the  incredibly 


almost  naturally  arise  in  making  bricks  or  pottery, 
during  which  processes  there  must  be  at  least  a 
superficial  vitrification.  There  is  little  doubt  that 
the  honour  of  the  discovery  belongs  to  the  Egyptians. 
Pliny  gives  no  date  for  his  celebrated  story  of  the 
discovery  of  glass  from  the  solitary  accident  of  some 
Phoenician  sailors  using  blocks  of  natron  to  support 
their  saucepans  when  they  were  unable  to  find 
stones  for  the  purpose  (//.  iV.  xxxvi.  65).     But  this 


large  gems  which  we  find  mentioned  in  ancient 
authors  ;  e.  g.  Larcher  considers  that  the  emerald 
column  alluded  to  by  Herodotus  (ii.  44)  was  "  du 
verre  colore',  dont  l'inte'rieur  etait  eclaire  par  des 
lampes."  Strabo  was  told  by  an  Alexandrian  glass- 
maker  that  this  success  was  partly  due  to  a  rare 
and  valuable  earth  found  in  Egypt  (Beekman,  His- 
tory of  Inventions,  "Coloured  Glass,"  i.  195,  sq., 
Eng.  Transl.,  also  iii.  208,  sq.,  iv.  54).     Yet  the 


account  is    less    likely   than  the   supposition  that  -  perfectly  clear  and  transparent  glass  was  considered 
vitreous  matter  first  attracted  observation  from  the    the  most  valuable  (Plin.  xxxvi.  26). 


custom  of  lighting  fires  on  the  sand,  "  in  a  country 
producing  natron  or  subcarbonate  of  soda"  (Raw- 
linson's  Herod,  ii.  82).  It  has  been  pointed  out 
that  Pliny's  story  may  have  originated  in  the  fact 


Some  suppose  that  the  proper  name  DVD  niS"l£>D 

("  burnings  by  the  waters  ")  contains   an  allusion 
Sidonian   glass-factories   (Meier  on  Jos.  xi.  8, 


that  the 'sand  of  the  Syrian  river  Belus,  at  the  j  xiii.  6),  but  it  is  much  more  probable  that  it  was 
mouth  of  which  the  incident  is  supposed  to  have  j  so  called  from  the  burning  of  Jabin  s  chariots  at 
occurred,  "  was  esteemed  peculiarly  suitable  for  |  tha^P]ace  ^mdJ":  He!'r!y'  0n  the  Genealo9ies> 
glass-making,  and  exported  in  great  quantities  to 


the  workshops  of  Sidon  and  Alexandria,  long  the 
most  famous  in  the  ancient  world  "  (Diet,  of  Ant. 


Art.  Vitrum,  where  everything  requisite  to  the 
illustration  of  the  classical  allusions  to  glass  may  be 
found).  Some  find  a  remarkable  reference  to  this 
little  river  (respecting  which  see  Plin.  H.  N.  v.  17, 
xxxvi.  65 ;  Joseph.  B.  J.  ii.  10,  §2  ;  Tac.  Hist. 
v.  7)  in  the  blessing  to  the  tribe  of  Zebulun,  "  they 
shall  suck  of  the  abundance  of  the  seas,  and  of  trea- 
sures hid  in  the  sand"  (Deut.  xxxiii.  19).  Both 
the  name  Belus  (Reland,  quoted  in  Diet,  of  Geogr. 

s.  v.)  and  the  Hebrew  word  ?in,  "sand"  (Calmet, 
s.  ».),  have  been  suggested  as  derivations  for  the 
Greek  va\os,  which  is  however,  in  all  probability, 
from  an  Egyptian  root. 

Glass  was  not  only  known  to  the  ancients,  but 
used  by  them  (as  Winckelmann  thinks)  far  more 
extensively  than  in  modern  times, 
us  that  it  was  employed  in  wainscoting  (vitreae 
camerae,  H  N.  xxxvi.  64;  Stat.  Sylv.  i.  v.  42). 
The  Egyptians  knew  the  art  of  cutting,  grinding, 
and  engraving  it,  and  they  could  even  inlay  it  with 
gold  or  enamel,  and  "  permeate  opaque  glass  with 
designs  of  various  colours."  Besides  this  they  could 
colour  it  with  such  brilliancy  as  to  be  able  to 
imitate  precious  stones  in  a  manner  which  often 
defied  detection  (Plin.  H.  N.  xxxvii.  26,  33,  75). 


p.  228),  or  from  hot  springs. 

In  the  N.  T.  glass  is  alluded  to  as  an  emblem  of 

brightness  (Rev.  iv.  6,  xv.  2,  xxi.  18).  The  three 
other  places  where  the 
word  occurs  in  the 
A.  V.  (1  Cor.  xiii. 
12;  2  Cor.  iii.  18  ; 
Jam.  i.  23),  as  also 
the  word  "  glasses " 
(Is.  iii.  23),  are  consi- 
dered under  MiRBQRS. 
For,  strange  to  say, 
although  the  aucieuts 
were  aware  of  the  re- 
flective power  of  glass, 
and  although  the  Sido- 
nians  used  it  for  mir- 
rors (Plin.  H.  N.  xxxvi. 
66),  yet  for  some  un- 
explained reason  mir- 
rors of  glass  must  have 
proved  unsuccessful, 
since  even  under  the 
empire  they  were  uni- 
versally made  of  me- 
tal, which  is  at  once 
less  perfect,  more  ex- 
pensive, and  more  difficult  to  preserve  {Diet,  of 
Ant.  Art.  Speculum).  [F.  W.  F.] 

GLEANING  [T^V  as  applied  to  produce 
generally,  tDp?  rather  to  com).  The  remarks  under 
Corner  on  the  definite  character  of  the  rights  of 
the  poor,  or  rather  of  poor  relations  and  dependants, 
to  a  share  of  the  crop,  are  especially  exemplified  in 
the  instance  of  Ruth  gleaning  in  the  field  of  Boaz. 
Poor  young  women,  recognised  as  being  "  his 
maidens,"  were  gleaning  his  field,  and  on  her  claim 
upon  him  by  near  affinity  being  made  known,  she 
was  bidden  to  join  them  and  not  go  to  any  other 
field  ;  but  for  this,  the  reapers  it  seems  would 
have  driven  her  away  (Ruth  ii.  6,  8,  9).  The 
-liny  even  tells  leaning  of  fruit  trees,  as  well  as  of  cornfields 
was  reserved  for  the  poor.  Hence  the  proverb  of 
Gideon,  Judg.  viii.  2.  Maimonides  indeed  lays 
down  the  principle  (Constitutiones  de  don  is  pau- 
perum,  cap.  ii.  1),  that  whatever  crop  or  growth  ir, 
fit  for  food,  is  kept,  and  gathered  all  at  once,  and 
carried  into  store,  is  liable  to  that  law.  See  for 
farther  remarks,  Maimon.  Constitutiones  de  donis 
pauperum,  cap.  iv.  [H.  H.] 

GLEDE,  the  old  name  for  the  common  kite  {tnil- 


Egyptiao  Glass  Blowers.     (Wilkinson.) 


GNAT 

vus  ater~),  occurs  only  in  Deut.  xiv.  13  (JIN"))  among 
the  unclean  birds  of  prey,  and  if  !"INT  be  the 
correct  reading,  we  must  suppose  the  name  to  have 
been  taken  from  the  bird's  acuteness  of  vision  ; 
but  as  in  the  parallel  passage  in  Lev.  si.  14,  we 
find  HN"'!,  valtur,  it  is  probable  that  we  should 
read  HN"1!  in  Deut.  also.  The  LXX.  have  7^  in 
both  place's.  [W.  D.] 

GNAT  (/c&jj'anf/),-  mentioned  only  in  the  pro- 
verbial expression  used  by  our  Saviour  in  Matt, 
xxiii.  24,  "  Ye  blind  guides,  which  strain  at  a  gnat 
and  swallow  a  camel."  "  Strain  at"  in  the  A.  V., 
seems  to  be  a  typographical  error,  since  the  transla- 
tions before  the  A.  V.  had  "  strain  out"  the  Greek 
word  SivKtfa  signifying  to  strain  through  (a  sieve, 
&c),  to  filter  (see  Trench,  On  the  Auth.  Vers.  1st 
Ed.  131).  The  Greek  Kwvwty  is  the  generic  word  for 
gnat.  [W.  D.] 

GOAD.  The  equivalent  terms  in  the  Hebrew 
are  (1)  Itbn  (Judg.  iii.  31)  and  (2)  JiTr 
(1  Sam.  xiii.  '21;  Eccl.  xii.  11).  The  explanation 
given  by  Jahn  (Archaeol.  i.  4,  §59)  is  that  the 
former  represents  the  pole,  and  the  latter  the  iron 
spike  with  which  it  was  shod  for  the  purpose  of 
goading.  With  regard  to  the  latter,  however,  it 
may  refer  to  anything  pointed,  and  the  tenor  of 
Eccl.  xii.  requires  rather  the  sense  of  a  peg  or  nail, 
anything  in  short  which  can  be  fastened ;  while  in 
1  Sam.  xiii.  the  point  of  the  ploughshare  is  more 
probably  intended.  The  former  does  probably  refer 
to  the  goad,  the  long  handle  of  which  might  be 
used  as  a  formidable  weapon  (comp.  Horn.  II.  vi. 
135),  though  even  this  was  otherwise  understood 
by  the  LXX.  as  a  ploughshare  (eV  t<£  aporpSiroSi): 
it  should  also  be  noted  that  the  etymological  force 
of  the  word  is  that  of  guiding  (from  "IO7,  to  teach) 
rather  than  goading  (Saalschutz,  Archaeol.  i.  105). 
There  are  undoubted  references  to  the  use  of  the 
goad  in  driving  oxen  in  Ecclus.  xxxviii.  25,  and 
Acts  xxvi.  14.  The  instrument,  as  still  used  in  the 
countries  of  southern  Europe  and  western  Asia, 
consists  of  a  rod  about  eight  feet  long,  brought  to 
a  sharp  point  and  sometimes  eased  with  iron  at  the 
head  (Harmer's  Observations,  iii.  348).  The  ex- 
pression "  to  kick  against  the  goads"  (Acts  ix.  5; 
A.  V.  "  the  pricks  "),  was  proverbially  used  by  the 
Greeks  for  unavailing  resistance  to  superior  power 
(comp.  Aesch.  Again.  1633,  Prom.  323;  Eurip. 
Bacch.  791).  [\V.  L.  B.] 

GOAT.  1.  Of  the  Hebrew  words  which  are 
translated  goat  and  she-goat  in   A.  V.  the   most 

commqn  is  fy  =  Syr.  I  £-.2*..  Arab.  ■ Ag.,  Phoen.  &£a. 
The  Indo-Germanic  languages  have  a  similar  word 
in  Sausc.  ag'a  —  goat,  ag'/i  =  she-goat,  Germ,  geis  or 
gems,  Greek  <rf{,  aly6s.  The  derivation  from  HI?, 
to  be  strong,  points  to  he-goat  as  the  original  mean- 
ing, but  it  is  also  specially  used  for  she-goat,  as  in 
Gen.  xv.  9,  xxxi.  38,  xxxii.  14;  Num.  xv.  27.  In 
Jud.  vi.  19  Dvty  ,"13  is  gendered  kid,  and  in  Deut. 
xiv.  4  C-ty  rib*  is  rendered  the  goat,  bat  properly 
signifies  flock  of  goats.  DVTJ?  is  used  elliptically  for 
goats'  hair  in  Ex.  xxvi.  7,  xxxvi.  14.  &C.,  Num. 
xxxi.  20,  and  in  1  Sam.  xix.  13. 

2.  DvJJ*  are  wild  or  mountain  goats,  and  arc 
rendered  ivi'ld  goats  in  the  three  passages  of  Scrip- 
ture in  which  the  word  occurs,  viz.  1  Sam.  xxiv.  2. 


GOATH  705 

Job  xxxix.  1,  and  Ps.  civ.  18.  The  word  is  from  a 
root  ?JT,  to  ascend  or  climb,  and  is  the  Heb.  name  of 
the  ibex,  which  abounds  in  the  mountainous  parts 
of  the  ancient  territory  of  Moab.  In  Job  xxxix.  1, 
the  LXX.  have  TpayeXacpM  irirpas. 

3.  )pbt  is  rendered  the  wild  goat  in  Deut.  xiv.  5, 
and  occurs  only  in  this  passage.  It  is  a  contracted 
form  of  iTlpJK,  according  to  Lee,  who  renders  it 
gazelle,  but  it  is  more  properly  the  tragelaphus  or 
goat-deer  (Shaw,  Suppl.  p.  76). 

4.  TlRy,  a  he-goat,  as  Gesenius  thinks,  of  four 
months  old — strong  and  vigorous.  It  occurs  only 
in  the  plural,  and  is  rendered  by  A.  V.  indifferently 
goats  and  he-goats  (see  Ps.  1.  9  and  13).  In  Jer. 
1.  8  it  signifies  he-goats,  leaders  of  the  flock,  and 
hence  its  metaphorical  use  in  Is.  xiv.  9  for  chief 
ones  of  the  earth,  and  in  Zech.  x.  3,  where  goats 
=  principal  men,  chiefs.  It  is  derived  from  the 
root  "inj?,  to  set,  to  place,  to  prepare. 

5.  "VQ¥  occurs  in  2  Chr.  xxix.  21,  and  in  Dan. 
viii.  5;  8 — it  is  followed  by  C-Tyn,  and  signifies 
a  he-goat  of  the  goats.  Gesenius  derives  it  from 
~)Q¥,  to  leap.  It  is  a  word  found  only  in  the  later 
books  of  the  0.  T.  In  Ezr.  vi.  17  we  find  the 
Chald.  form  of  the  word  *VQ¥. 

6.  T'JJK'  is  translated  goat,  and  signifies  properly 
a  he-goat,  being  derived  from  "iyt^,  to  stand  on 
end,  to  bristle.  It  occurs  frequently  in  Leviticus 
and  Numbers  (DKtSnn  "VJn5P),  and  is  the  goat  of 
the  sin-offering,  Lev.  ix.  3,  15,  x.  16.  The  word 
is  used  as  an  adjective  with  "VSY  in  Dan.  viii.  21, 
"  — and  the  goat,  the  rough  one,  is  the  king  of 
Javan." 

7.  K^fl  is  from  a  root  t^fl,  to  strike.  It  is 
rendered  he-goat  in  Gen.  xxx.  35,  xxxii.  15,  Prov. 
xxx.  31,  and  2  Chr.  xvii.  11.  It  does  not  occur 
elsewhere. 

8.  ^TNTV,  scape-goat  in  Lev.  xvi.  8,  10,  26. 
On  this  word  see  Atonement,  Day  of,  p.  138. 

In  the  N.  T.  the  words  rendered  goats  in  Matt. 
xxv.  32,  33,  are  epicpos  and  epi<piov  =  a  young  goat, 
or  kid;  and  in  Heb.  ix.  12,  13,  19,  and  x.  4, 
rpdyos  =  he-goat.  Goat-skins,  in  Heb.  xi.  37,  are 
in  the  Greek,  iu  alyeiots  8ep/j.a<rip;  and  in  Jud.  ii. 
17  aiyas  is  rendered  goats.  [W.  D.] 

GOAT,  SCAPE.  [Atonement,  Day  of.] 
GOATH  (Jiyi  ;  the  LXX.  seem  to  have  had  a 
different  text,  and  read  e£  (kA(kto>i/  \i6aiv  ; 
Goatha),  a  place  apparently  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  Jerusalem,  and  named,  in  connexion  with  the 
hill  Gareb,  only  in  Jer.  xxxi.  39.  The  name 
(which  is  accurately  GOAH,  as  above,  the  th 
being  added  to  connect  the  Hebrew  particle  of 
motion,— Goathah)  is  derived  by  Gesenius  from 
nyH,  "to  low,"  as  a  cow.  In  accordance  with 
this  is  the  rendering  of  the  Targnm,  which  has 

for  Goah,  N*P:y  nsna  =  the   heifer's  pool.     The 
0         o 

Syriac,  on  the  other  hand,  has  JAOO^.^,  leromto, 
"  to  the  eminence,"  perhaps  reading  HN3  (Kiirst, 
ffandwb.  2696.).  Owing  to  the  presence  of  the 
letter  Ain  in  (loath,  the  resemblance  between  it  and 

Golgotha  does  not  exist  in   the  original  to  the  same 

degree  a-  m  English.    [Golgotha.]  [<;.] 


706 


GOB 


GOB  (33,  mid  2)S,  perhaps  =  a  "pit"  or 
"ditch;"  r4e,  'Pofi,  Alex.  rJ/3 ;  Gob),  a  place  men- 
tioned only  in  2  Sam.  xxi.  18,  19,  as  the  scene  of 
two  encounters  between  David's  warriors  and  the 
Philistines.  In  the  parallel  account — of  the  first  of 
these  only — in  1  Chr.  xx.  4,  the  name  is  given  as 
Ge'zer,  and  this,  as  well  as  the  omission  of  any 
locality  for  the  second  event,  is  supported  by  Jo- 
sephus  (Ant.  vii.  12,  §2).  On  the  other  hand  the 
LXX.  and  Syriac  have  Gath  in  the  first  case,  a 
name  which  in  Hebrew  much  resembles  Gob;  and 
this  appears  to  be  borne  out  by  the  account  of  a 
third  and  subsequent  fight,  which  all  agree  happened 
at  Gath  (2  Sam.  xxi.  20  ;  1  Chr.  xx.  6),  and  which, 
from  the  terms  of  the  narrative,  seems  to  have  oc- 
curred at  the  same  place  as  the  others.  The  sug- 
gestion of  Nob — which  Davidson  (Hebr.  Text) 
reports  as  in  many  MSS.  and  which  is  also  found 
in  copies  of  the  LXX. — is  not  admissible  on  account 
of  the  situation  of  that  place.  [£■•] 

GOBLET  (J3K;  Kparrip;  crater;  joined  with 
")HD  to  express  roundness,  Cant.  vii.  2  ;  Gesen. 
Thes.  22,  39  ;  in  plur.  Ex.  xxiv.  6  ;  A.  V.  "  basons," 
Is.  xxii.  24  ;  LXX.  literally  ayavwd  ;  craterae  ; 
A.  V.  "  cups"),  a  circular  vessel  for  wine  or  other 
liquid.    [Basin.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

GOG.  1.  (313;  Tovy ;  Gog.)  A  Reubenite 
(1  Chr.  v.  4)  ;  according  to  the  Hebrew  text  son 
of  Shemaiah.  The  LXX.  however  have  a  different 
text  throughout  the  passage.  2.  [MAGOG.]  3. 
In  the  Samarit.  Codex  and  LXX.  of  Num.  xxiv.  7, 
Gog  is  substituted  for  Agag. 

GO'LAN  (|Vl3  ;   Tav\wv),  a  city  of  Bashan 

(jt?22  jSi3,  Deut.  iv.  43)  allotted  out  of  the  half 

tribe  of  Manasseh  to  the  Levites  (Josh.  xxi.  27), 
and  one  of  the  three  cities  of  refuge  east  of  the 
Jordan  (xx.  8).  We  find  no  farther  notice  of  it  in 
Scripture ;  and  though  Eusebius  and  Jerome  say  it 
was  still  an  important  place  in  their  time  (Onum. 
s.  v. ;  Reland,  p.  815),  its  very  site  is  now  unknown. 
Some  have  supposed  that  the  village  of  Nawa,  on 
the  eastern  bonier  of  Jaulan,  around  which  are  ex- 
tensive ruins  (see  Handbook  for  Syr.  and  Pal.), 
is  identical  with  the  ancient  Golan ;  but  for  this 
there  is  not  a  shadow  of  evidence ;  and  Nawa  be- 
sides is  much  too  far  to  the  eastward. 

The  city  of  Golan  is  several  times  referred  to 
by  Josephus  (YavXavr),  B.  J.  i.  4,  §4,  and  8); 
he,  however,  more  frequently  speaks  of  the  pro- 
vince which  took  its  name  from  it,  Gaulanitis 
{TavXavlris).  When  the  kingdom  of  Israel  was 
overthrown  by  the  Assyrians,  and  the  dominion 
of  the  Jews  in  Bashan  ceased,  it  appears  that  the 
aboriginal  tribes,  before  kept  in  subjection,  but 
never  annihilated,  rose  again  to  some  power,  and 
rent  the  country  into  provinces.  Two  of  these  pro- 
vinces at  least  were  of  ancient  origin  [Tracho- 
NITIS  and  Hauran],  and  had  been  distinct  prin- 
cipalities previous  to  the  time  when  Og  or  his 
predecessors  united  them  under  one  sceptre.  Before 
the  Babylonish  captivity  Bashan  appears  in  Jewish 
history  as  one  kingdom  ;  but  subsequent  to  that 
period  it  is  spoken  of  as  divided  into  four  pro- 
vinces— Gaulanitis,  Trachouitis,  Auranitis,  and  Ba- 
tanea  (Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  5,  §3,  and  7,  §4,  i.  6, 
§4,  xvi.  9,  §1  ;  B.  J.  i.  20,  §4,  iii.  3,  §1,  iv.  1, 
§1).  It  seems  that  when  the  city  of  Golan  rose  to 
power  it  became  the  head  of  a  large  province,  the 
extent  of  which  is  pretty  accurately  given  by  Jo- 


GOLAN 

sephus,  especially  when  his  statements  are  compared 
with  the  modern  divisions  of  Bashan.  It  lay  east 
of  Galilee,  and  north  of  Gadaritis  (Gadara,  Joseph. 
B.  J.  iii.  3,  §1).  Gamala,  an  important  town  on 
the  eastern  bank  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  now  called 
El-jausn  (see  Handbook  for  Syr.  and  Pal.),  and 
the  province  attached  to  it,  were  included  in  Gau- 
lanitis (B.  J.  iv.  1,  §1).  But  the  boundary  of  the 
provinces  of  Gadara  and  Gamala  must  evidently 
have  been  the  river  Hieromax,  .which  may  therefore 
be  regarded  as  the  south  border  of  Gaulanitis.  The 
Jordan  from  the  Sea  of  Galilee  to  its  fountains  at 
Dan  and  Caesarea-Philippi,  formed  the  western 
boundary  (B.  J.  iii.  3,  §5).  It  is  important  to 
observe  that  the  boundaries  ot  the  modern  province 

of  Jaulan  (  NL  -^  is  the  Arabic  form  of  the  He- 
brew  p13,  from  which  is  derived  the  Greek  Tav- 

\ap7ris)  correspond  so  far  with  those  of  Gaula- 
nitis; we  may,  therefore,  safely  assume  that  their 
northern  and  eastern  boundaries  are  also  identical. 
Jaulan  is  bounded  on  the  north  by  Jedur  (the 
ancient  Ituraca),  and  on  the  east  by  Hainan 
[Hauran].  The  principal  cities  of  Gaulanitis 
were  Golan,  Hippos,  Gamala,  Julias  or  Bethsaida 
(Mark  viii.  22),  Seleucia,  and  Sogane  (Joseph.  B.  J. 
iii.  3,  §1,  and  5,  iv.  1,  §1).  ^The  site  of  Beth- 
saida is  at  a  small  tell  on  the  left  bank  of  the 
Jordan  [Bethsaida]  ;  the  ruins  of  Kul'at  cl-Husn 
mark  the  place  of  Gamala;  but  nothing  definite  is 
known  of  the  others. 

The  greater  part  of  Gaulanitis  is  a  flat  and  fertile 
table-land,  well  watered,  and  clothed  with  luxu- 
riant grass.  It  is  probably  to  this  region  the  name 
Mishor  (1E«p)  is  given  in  1  K.  xx.  23,  25—"  the 
plain"  in  which  the  Syrians  were  overthrown  by  the 
Israelites,  near  Aphek,  which  perhaps  stood  upon  the 
site  of  the  modern  Fill  (Stanley,  App.  §6;  Handb. 
for  Syr.  and  Pal.  425).  The  western  side  of  Gau- 
lanitis, along  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  is  steep,  rugged, 
and  bare.  It  is  upwards  of  2500  ft.  in  height, 
and  when  seen  from  the  city  of  Tiberias  resembles 
a  mountain  range,  though  in  reality  it  is  only  the 
supporting  wall  of  the  plateau.  It  was  this  re- 
markable feature  which  led  the  ancient  geographers 
to  suppose  that  the  mountain  range  ofGilead  was 
joined  to  Lebanon  (Reland,  p.  342).  Farther  north, 
along  the  bank  of  the  upper  Jordan,  the  plateau 
breaks  down  in  a  series  of  terraces,  which  though 
somewhat  rocky,  are  covered  with  rich  soil,  and 
clothed  in  spring  with  the  most  luxuriant  herbage, 
spangled  with  multitudes  of  bright  and  beautiful 
flowers.  A  range  of  low,  round-topped,  picturesque 
hills,  extends  southwards  for  nearly  20  miles  from 
the  base  of  Hermon  along  the  western  edge  of  the 
plateau.  These  are  in  places  covered  with  noblefoiests 
of  prickly  oak  and  terebinth.  Gaulanitis  was  once 
densely  populated,  but  it  is  now  almost  completely 
deserted.  The  writer  has  a  list  of  the  towns 
and  villages  which  it  once  contained;  and  in  it  are 
the  names  of  127  places,  all  of  which,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  about  eleven,  are  now  uninhabited.  Only 
a  tew  patches  of  its  soil,  are  cultivated;  and  the 
very  best  of  its  pasture  is  lost— the  tender  grass  of 
early  spring.  The  flocks  of  the  Turkmans  and 
el-Fmlhl  Arabs— the  only  tribes  that  remain  per- 
manently in  this  region — are  not  able  to  consume 
it ;  and  "the  ' Anazeh,  those  "  children  of  the  East  " 
who  spread  over  the  land  like  locusts,  and  "  whose 
camels  are  without  number"  (Judg.  vii.  12),  only 
arrive  about  the  beginning  of  May.     At  that  season 


GOLD 

the  whole  country  is  covered  with  them — their 
black  tents  pitched  in  circles  near  the  fountains ; 
their  cattle  thickly  dotting  the  vast  plain  ;  and  their 
fierce  cavaliers  roaming  tar  and  wide,  "their  hand 
against  every  man,  and  every  man's  hand  against 
them." 

For  fuller  accounts  of  the  scenery,  antiquities, 
and  history  of  Gaulanitis,  see  Porter's  Handbook  for 
Syr.  and  Pal.  295,  424-,  461,  531  ;  Five  Years  in 
Damascus,  ii.  250  ;  Journal  of  Sac.  Lit.  vi.  282  ; 
Burckhardt's  Trav.  in  Syr.  277.  [J.  L.  P.] 

GOLD,  the  most  valuable  of  metals,  from  its 
colour,  lustre,  weight,  ductility,  and  other  useful 
properties  (Plin.  H.  N.  xxxiii.  19).  Hence  it  is 
used  as  an  emblem  of  purity  (Job  xxiii.  10)  and 
nobility  (Lam.  iv.  1).  There  are  six  Hebrew  words 
used  to  denote  it,  and  four  of  them  occur  in  Job 
xxviii.  15,  16,  17.     These  are : — 

1.  2HT,  the  common  name,  connected  with  3HV 

(to  be  yellow),  as  geld,  from  gel,  yellow.  Various 
epithets  are  applied  to  it :  as,  "  fine  "  (2  Chr.  iii.  5), 
"refined"  (1  Chr.  xxviii.  18),  "pure"  (Ex.  xxv.ll). 
In  opposition  to  these,  "  beaten  gold  (tD-int?  'T)   is 

probably  mixed  gold  ;  LXX.  i\ar6s  ;  used  of  Solo- 
mon's shields  (1  K.  x.  16). 

2.  1-liD  (KftfxeMov),  treasured,  i.  e.  fine  gold 
(1  K.  vi.  20,  vii.  49,  &c).  Many  names  of  pre- 
cious substances  in  Hebrew  come  from  roots  signi- 
fying concealment,  as  pDDO  (Gen.  xliii.  23,  A.  V. 
"  treasure  "). 

3.  TS,  pure  or  native  gold  (Job  xxviii.  17  ;  Cant. 
v.  15 ;  probably  from  TTS,  to  separate).  Rosen- 
miiller  (Alterthumsk.  iv.  p.  49)  makes  it  come  from 
a  Syriac  root  meaning  solid  or  massy;  but  "HiltO 
(2  Chr.  ix.  17)  corresponds  to  TS1B  (1  K.  x.  18). 
The  LXX.  render  it  by  \i6os  rifxios,  xPvffi0V 
Ixirvpov  (Is.  xiii.  12  ;  Theodot.  &ire<p6ov  ;  comp. 
Thuc.  ii.  13  ;  Plin.  xxxiii.  19,  obrussa).  In  Ps. 
cxix.  127,  the  LXX.  render  it  roTra^iov  (A.  V. 
"fine  gold");  but  Schleusner  happily  conjectures 
to  ird^wv,  the  Hebrew  word  being  adopted  to 
avoid  the  repetition  of  xpvaos  (Thes.  s.  v.  T^iro^; 
Hesych.  s.  v.  Trd£tov). 

4.  1V3,  gold  earth,  or  a  mass  of  raw  ore  (Job 
xxii.  24,  dirvpov,  A.  V.  "  gold  as  dust"). 

The  poetical  names  for  gold  are: — 

1.  DD3  (also  implying  .something  concealed)  ; 
LXX.  yjivaiov  ;  and  in  Is.  xiii.  12,  \ldos  7roA.u- 
TeAryy.  In  .lob  xxxvii.  22,  it  is  rendered  in  A.  V. 
"fair  weather;"  LXX.  vt<pr)  xpvcra.vyovvTa.. 
(Comp.  Zech.  iv.  12.; 

2.  f-1"in,  =  "dug  out"  (Prov.  viii.  10),  a 
general  name,  which  has  become  special,  Ps.  lxviii. 
13,  where  it  cannot  mean  gems,  as  some  suppose 
(Bochart,  llieroz.  torn.  ii.  p.  9).  Michaelis  con- 
nects the  word  charntz  with  the  Creek  xpoffos. 

Gold  was  known  from  the  very  earliest  times 
(Cen.  ii.  1 1).  Pliny  attributes  the  discovery  of  it 
(at  Mount  Pangaeus),  and  the  art  of  working  it, 
to  Cadmus  (II.  X.  vii.  57)  ;  and  his  statement  is 
adopted  by  Clemens  Alexandrinus(<S'6-om.  i.  :it;;;,  nl. 
Pott.).  It  was  at  first  chiefly  used  for  ornaments, 
&c.  (Gen.  xxiv.  22) ;  and  although  Abraham  is  said 
to  have  been  "  very  rich  in  cattle,  in  silver,  and  in 
gold"  (<  }eh.  xiii.  2),  yet  no  mention  of  it,  as  used  in 
purchases,  is  made  till  after  his  return  from  Egypt. 
Coined  money  was  not  known  to  the  ancients  (e.  g. 


GOLGOTHA 


"07 


Horn.  //.  vii.  473)  till  a  comparatively  late  period  ; 
and  on  the  Egyptian  tombs  gold  is  represented  as 
being  weighed  in  rings  for  commercial  purposes. 
(Comp.  Gen.  xliii.  21.)  No  coins  are  found  in  the 
ruins  of  Egypt  or  Assyria  (Layard's  Nin.  ii.  418.) 
"  Even  so  late  as  the  time  of  David  gold  was  not 
used  as  a  standard  of  value,  but  was  considered 
merely  as  a  very  precious  article  of  commerce,  and 
was  weighed  like  other  articles"  (Jahn,  Arch.  Bibl. 
§115,  1  Chr.  xxi.  25). 

Gold  was  extremely  abundant  in  ancient  times 
(1  Chr.  xxii.  14;  2  Chr.  i.  15,  ix.  9  ;  Nah.  ii.  9  ; 
Dan.  iii.  1);  but  this  did  not  depreciate  its  value, 
because  of  the  enormous  quantities  consumed  by  the 
wealthy  in  furniture,  &c.  (1  K.  vi.  22,  x.  passim  ; 
Cant.  iii.  9,  10 ;  Esth.  i.  6 ;  Jer.  x.  9  ;  comp.  Horn. 
Od.  xix.  55  ;  Herod,  ix.  82).  Probably  too  the  art 
of  gilding  was  known  extensively,  being  applied 
even  to  the  battlements  of  a  city  (Herod,  i.  98  ;  and 
other  authorities  quoted  by  Layard,  ii.  264). 

The  chief  countries  mentioned  as  producing  gold 
are  Arabia,  Sheba,  and  Ophir  (1  K.  ix.  28,  x.  1  ; 
Job  xxviii.  16:  in  Job  xxii.  24,  the  word  Ophir 
is  used  for  gold).  Gold  is  not  found  in  Arabia  now 
(Niebuhr's  Travels,  p.  141),  but  it  used  to  be 
(Artemidor.  ap.  Strab.  xvi.  3,  18,  where  he  speaks 
of  an  Arabian  river  xf/rjyfjia  xpva°v  Karacpepwv). 
Diodorus  also  says  that  it  was  found  there  native 
(airvpov)  in  good-sized  nuggets  (fioohdpia).  Some 
suppose  that  Ophir  was  an  Arabian  port  to  which 
gold  was  brought  (comp.  2  Chr.  ii.  7,  ix.  10). 
Other  gold-bearing  countries  were  Uphaz  (Jer.  x.  9  ; 
Dan.  x.  5)  and  Parvaim  (2  Chr.  iii.  6). 

Metallurgic  processes  are  mentioned  in  Ps.  lxvi. 
10,  Prov.  xvii.  3,  xxvii.  21 ;  and  in  Is.  xlvi.  6,  the 
trade  of  goldsmith  (cf.  Judg.  xvii.  4,  Fp'V)  is 
alluded  to  in  connexion  with  the  overlaying  of  idols 
with  gold-leaf  (Rosenmiiller's  Minerals  of  Script. 
pp.  46-51).     [Handicraft.]  [F.  W.  F.] 

GOL'GOTHA  (ToXyoBa  ;  Golgotha),  the  He- 
brew name  of  the  spot  at  which  our  Lord  was 
crucified  (Matt,  xxvii.  33  ;  Mark  xv.  22;  John  xix. 
17).  By  these  three  Evangelists  it  is  interpreted 
to  mean  the  "  place  of  a  skull."  St.  Luke,  in  ac- 
cordance with  his  practice  in  other  cases  (compare 
Gabbatha,  Gethsemane,  &c),  omits  the  Hebrew  term 
and  gives  only  its  Greek  equivalent,  Kpaviov.  The 
word  Calvary,  which  in  Luke  xxiii.  33  is  retained 
in  the  A.  V.  from  the  Vulgate,  as  the  rendering  of 
Kpaviov,  obscures  the  statement  of  St.  Luke,  whose 
words  are  really  as  follows — "  the  place  which  is 
called  'a  skull'" — not,  as  in  the  other  Gospels, 
Kpaviov,  "  of  a  skull ;"  thus  employing  the  Greek 
term  exactly  as  they  do  the  Hebrew  one.  This 
Hebrew,  or  rather  Chaldee,    term,    was  doubtless 

Nn?J?il.  Oulgalta,  in  pure  Hebrew  JYpiP;],  applied 
to  the  skull  on  account  of  its  round  globular  form, 
that  being  the  idea  at  the  root  of  the  word. 

Two  explanations  of  the  name  are  given  :  (1)  that 
it  was  a  spot  where  executions  ordinarily  took  place, 
and  therefore  abounded  in  skulls;  but  according  to 
the   Jewish    law   those  must  have  been  buried,  and 

therefore  were  no  more  likely  to  confer  a  nan 

the  spot  than  any  other  part  of  the  skeleton.  In  this 
case  too  the  Greek  should  be  toVos  Kpaviuv,  "  of 
skulls,"  instead  of  Kpaviov,  "  of  a  skull,"  still  less 
"a  skull"  as  in  the  Hebrew,  and  in  the  Greefi  of 
St.  Luke.  Or  (2)  it  may  come  from  the  look  in- 
form of  the  spot  itself,  bald,  round,  and  skull-like, 
and  therefore  a  mound  or  hillock,  in  accordance  with 


708 


GOLIATH 


the  common  phrase — for  which  there  is  no  direct 
authority — "  Mount  Calvary."  Whichever  of  these 
is  the  correct  explanation — and  there  is  apparently  no 
means  of  deciding  with  certainty — Golgotha  seems 
to  have  been  a  known  spot.  This  is  to  be  gathered 
from  the  way  in  which  it  is  mentioned  in  the  Gospels, 
each  except  St.  Matthew a  having  the  definite  article 
— "  the  place  Golgotha" — "  the  place  which  is 
called  a  skull" — "  the  place  (A.  V.  omits  the  article) 
called  of,  or  after,  a  skull."  It  was  "  outside  the 
gate,"  e£to  ttjj  7tuAtjs  (Heb.  xiii.  12),  but  close  to 
the  city,  iyyvs  ttjs  iroXeais  (John  xix.  20)  ;  appa- 
rently near  a  thoroughfare  on  which  there  were 
passers-by.  This  road  or  path  led  out  of  the 
"  country  "b  (ayp6s).  It  was  probably  the  ordinary 
spot  for  executions.  Why  should  it  have  been  other- 
wise ?  To  those  at  least  who  carried  the  sentence 
into  effect,  Christ  was  but  an  ordinary  criminal  ; 
and  there  is  not  a  wTord  to  indicate  that  the  soldiers 
in  "  leading  Him  away"  went  to  any  other  than 
the  usual  place  for  what  must  have  been  a  com- 
mon operation.  However,  in  the  place  (iu  rw 
roir(fi)  itself — at  the  very  spot — was  a  garden  or 
orchard  (nrjiros). 

These  are  all  the  indications  of  the  nature  and 
situation  of  Golgotha  which  present  themselves  in 
the  N.  T.  Its  locality  in  regard  to  Jerusalem  is 
fully  examined  in  the  description  of  the  city. 
[Jerusalem.] 

A  tradition  at  one  time  prevailed  that  Adam  was 
buried  on  Golgotha,  that  from  his  skull  it  derived 
its  name,  and  that  at  the  Crucifixion  the  drops  of 
Christ's  blood  fell  on  the  skull  and  raised  Adam  to 
life,  whereby  the  ancient  prophecy  quoted  by  St. 
Paul  in  Eph.  v.  14  received  its  fulfilment—"  Awake 
thou  Adam  that  sleepest," — so  the  old  versions 
appear  to  have  run—"  and  arise  from  the  dead, 
for  Christ  shalt  touch  thee "  (e7rnj/au<ret  for  iiri- 
(jxzvffei).  See  Jerome,  Comm.  on  Matth.  xxvii. 
33,  and  the  quotation  in  Reland,  Pal.  860 ;  also 
Saewulf,  in  Early  Travellers,  p.  39.  The  skull 
commonly  introduced  in  early  pictures  of  the  Cru- 
cifixion refers  to  this. 

A  connexion  has  been  supposed  to  exist  between 
Goath  and  Golgotha,  but  at  the  best  this  is  mere 
conjecture,  and  there  is  not  in  the  original  the 
same   similarity   between    the    two   names  —  nj?J 

and  Kn?J?3  —  which  exists  in  their  English  or 
Latin  garb,  and  which  probably  occasioned  the 
suggestion.  [G.] 

GOLI'ATH  {T\hl  ;  ToKidd;  Goliah),  a  famous 
giant  of  Gath,  who  "  morning  and  evening  for  forty 
days  "  defied  the  armies  of  Israel  (1  Sam.  xvii.).  He 
was  possibly  descended  from  the  old  Rephaim,  of 
whom  a  scattered  remnant  took  refuge  with  the  Philis- 
tines after  their  dispersion  by  the  Ammonites  (Deut. 
ii.  20,  21  ;  2  Sam.  xxi.  22).  Some  trace  of  this  con- 
dition may  be  preserved  in  the  giant's  name,  if  it  be 
connected  with  n?li!,an  exile.  Simonis,  however,  de- 
rives it  from  an  Arabic  word  meaning  "  stout  " 
(Gesen.  Thes.  s.  v.).  His  height  was  "  six  cubits  and 
a  span,"  which,  taking  the  cubit  at  21  inches,  would 
make  him  10g  feet  high.  But  the  LXX.  and  Jo- 
seplius  read  "  four  cubits  and  a  span"  (1  Sam. 
xvii.  4  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  vi.  9,  §1).  This  will  make 
him  about  the  same  size  as  the  royal  champion 
slain  by  Antimenidas,  brother  of  Alcaeus  (curoAei- 
ttovto.  fxiav  jx6vov  vax^wv  airb  Trefiiraiv,  ap.  Strab. 


St.  Matthew  too  has  the  article  in  Codex  B. 
But  the  Vulgate  has  fir  villa. 


GOMER 

xiii.  p.  617,  with  Miiller's  emendation1).  Even  on 
this  computation  Goliath  would  be,  as  Josephus 
calls  him,  avjjp  iza^ixiyiQiaraTo^ — a  truly  enor- 
mous man. 

The  circumstances  of  the  combat  are  in  all 
respects  Homeric ;  free  from  any  of  the  puerile 
legends  which  Oriental  imagination  subsequently 
introduced  into  it, — as  for  instance  that  the  stones 
used  by  David  called  out  to  him  from  the  brook, 
"  By  our  means  you  shall  slay  the  giant,"  &c. 
(Hottinger,  Hist.  Orient,  i.  3,  p.  Ill,  sq.  ;  D'Her- 
belot,  s.  v.  Gialut).  The  fancies  of  the  Rabbis 
are  yet  more  extraordinary.  After  the  victory 
David  cut  oft*  Goliath's  head  (1  Sam.  xvii.  51 ; 
comp.  Herod,  iv.  6  ;  Xenoph.  Anab.  v.  4,  §17  ; 
Niebuhr  mentions  a  similar  custom  among  the 
Arabs,  Descr.  Winer,  s.  v.),  which  he  brought 
to  Jerusalem  (probably  after  his  accession  to  the 
throne,  Ewald,  Gesch.  iii.  94),  while  he  hung  the 
armour  in  his  tent. 

The  scene  of"  this  famous  combat  was  the  Valley 
of  the  Terebinth,  between  Shochoh  and  Azekah,  pro- 
babl y  among  the  western  passes  of  Benjami n ,  a  1  tho ugh 
a  confused  modern  tradition  has  given  the  name  of 
Ain  Jahlood  (spring  of  Goliath)  to  the  spring  of 
Harod,  or  "trembling"  (Stanley,  342  ;  Judg.  vii. 

1).       [El.AH,  VALLEY  OF.] 

In  2  Sam.  xxi.  19,  we  find  that  another  Goliath 
of  Gath,  of  whom  it  is  also  said  that  "  the  staff  of 
his  spear  was  like  a  weaver's  beam,"  was  slain  by 
Elhanan,  also  a  Bethlehemite.  St.  Jerome  (Quaest. 
Heir,  ad  loc.)  makes  the  unlikely  conjecture  that 
Elhanan  was  anothername  ofDavid.  The  A.  V.  here 
interpolates  the  words  "  the  brother  of,"  from  1  Chr. 
xx.  5,  where  this  giant  is  called  "  Lahmi."  This 
will  be  found  fully  examined  under  Elhanan. 

In  the  title  of  the  Psalm  added  to  the  Psalter  in 
the  LXX.  we  find  t$  Aavid  wpbs  rbv  ToAiaS ; 
and  although  the  allusions  are  vague,  it  is  perhaps 
possible  that  this  Psalm  may  have  been  written 
after  the  victory.  This  Psalm  is  given  at  length 
under  David,  p.  403  b.  It  is  strange  that  we  find 
no  more  definite  allusions  to  this  combat  in  Hebrew 
poetry ;  but  it  is  the  opinion  of  some  that  the  song 
now  attributed  to  Hannah  (1  Sam.  ii.  1-10)  was 
originally  written  really  in  commemoration  of 
David's  triumph  on  this  occasion  (Thenius,  die 
Biicher  Sam.  p.  8 ;  comp.  Bertholdt,  Einl.  iii. 
915;  Ewald,  Poet.  Biicher  des  A.  B.  i.  111). 

By  the  Mohammedans  Saul  and  Goliath  are  called 
Taluth  and  Galuth  (Jalut  in  Koran);  perhaps  for 
the  sake  of  the  homoioteleuton,  of  which  they  are 
so  fond  (Hottinger,  Hist.  Orient,  i.  3,  p.  28). 
Abulfeda  mentions  a  Canaanite  king  of  the  name 
Jalut  (Hist.  Anteislam.  176,  in  Winer  s.  v.); 
and,  according  to  Ahmed  al  Fassi,  Gialout  was  a 
dynastic  name  of  the  old  giant-chiefs  (D'Herbelot, 
s.  v.  Falasthin).     [Giants.]  [F.  W.  F.] 

GO'MER  (i?3i  ;  Ta/xep ;  Gomer).  1.  The  eldest 
son  of"  Japheth,and  the  father  of  Ashkenaz,  Riphath, 
and  Togarmah  (Gen.  x.  2,  3).  His  name. is  subse- 
quently noticed  but  once  (Ez.  xxxviii.  6)  as  an  ally 
or  subject  of  the  Scythian  king  Gog.  He  is  generally 
recognised  as  the  progenitor  of  the  early  Cimmerians, 
of  the  later  Cimbri  and  the  other  branches  of  the 
Celtic  family,  and  of  the  modern  Gael  and  Cymiy, 
the  latter  preserving  with  very  slight  deviation  the 
original  name.  The  Cimmerians,  when  first  known 
to  us,  occupied  the  Tauric  Chersonese,  where  they 
left  traces  of  their  presence  in  the  ancient  nanus, 
Cimmerian  Bosporus,  Cimmerian  Isthmus,  Mount 


GOMORRAH 


GOMORRAH 


709 


Cimmerium,  the  district  Cimmeria,  and  particularly  I  to  the  children  of  Israel  (Deut.  xxix.  23);    as  a. 


the  Cimmerian  walls  (Her.  iv.  12,45,  100  ;   Aesch 
Prom.  Vinct.  729),  and  in  the  modern  name  Crimea. 
They  forsook  this  abode  under  the  pressure  of  the 
Scythian  tribes,  and  during  the  early  part  of  the 
7th    century  B.C.    they  poured    over    the  western 
part  of  Asia  Minor,  committing  immense  devasta- 
tion, and  defying  for  more  than  half  a  century  the 
power  of  the  Lydian  kings.     They    were    finally 
expelled  by  Alyattes,  with  the  exception  of  a  few, 
who   settled   at  Sinope   and  Antandrus.     It   was 
about  the  same  period  that  Ezekiel  noticed  them,  as 
acting  in   conjunction  with   Armenia   (Togarmah) 
and    Magog    (Scythia).      The   connexion   between 
Corner  and  Armenia  is  supported  by  the  tradition, 
preserved  by  Moses  of  Chorene  (i.  11),  that  Gamir 
was  the  ancestor  of  the  Haichian  kings  of  the  latter 
country.     After  the  expulsion  of  the  Cimmerians 
from    Asia   Minor   their    name   disappears    in    its 
original  form  ;   but  there  can   be  little   reasonable 
doubt  that  both  the  name  and  the  people  are  to  be 
recognised  in  the  Cimbri,  whose  abodes  were  fixed 
during  the  Roman  Empire  in  the  north  and  west  of 
Europe,   particularly   in   the    Cimbric   Chersonese 
(Denmark),  on    the   coast  between  the  Elbe  and 
Rhine,  and  in  Belgium,  whence  they  had  crossed 
to  Britain,  and  occupied  at  one  period  the  whole  of 
the  British  isles,  but  were  ultimately  driven  back 
to  the  western  and  northern  districts,  which  their 
descendants  still  occupy  in  two  great  divisions,  the 
Gael  in  Ireland  and  Scotland,  the  Cymry  in  Wales. 
The  latter  name  preserves  a  greater  similarity  to 
the    original   Gomer   than   either  of  the   classical 
forms,  the  consonants  being  identical.     The  link  to 
connect  Cymry  with  Cimbri  is  furnished  by  the 
forms    Cambria    and    Cumbe?--\and.       The    whole 
Celtic  race  may  therefore  be  regarded  as  descended 
from    Gomer,  and   thus   the  opinion  of  Josephus 
(Ant.  i.   6,  §1),   that  the  Galatiaus  were  sprung 
from  him,  may  be  reconciled  with  the  view  pro- 
pounded.      Various   other   conjectures   have    been 
hazarded  on  the  subject:  Bochart  (Phaleg,  iii.  81) 
identities  the  name  on  etymological  grounds  witli 
Phrygia;    Wahl  (Asien,  i.  274)    proposes  Cappa- 
docia ;  and  Kalisch  (Comm.  in  Gen.)  seeks  to  iden- 
tify it  with  the  Chomari,  a  nation   in   Bactriana, 
noticed  by  Ptolemy  (vi.  11,  §6). 

2.  The  daughter  of  Diblaim,  and  concubine  of 
Hosea  (i.  3).  The  name  is  significant  of  a  maiden, 
ripe  for  marriage,  and  connects  well  with  the  name 
Diblaim,  which  is  also  derived  from  the  subject  of 
fruit.  [W.  L.  B.] 

GOMOR'RAH  (TTpV,   Gh'morah,    probably 

"  submersion,"   from  "V2]},  an    unused    root ;    in 

Arabic    wji,  ghamara,  is  to  "  overwhelm   with 

water;"  Tofx6pl>a;  Gomorrhd),  one  of  the  five 
"cities  of  the  plain,"  or  "vale  of  Siddim,"  that 
under  their  respective  kings  joined  battle  there 
with  Chedorlaomer  (Gen.  xiv.  2-8)  and  his  allies, 
by  whom  they  were  discomfited  till  Abram  came  to 
the  rescue.  Four  out  of  the  five  were  afterwards 
destroyed  by  the  Lord  with  fire  from  heaven  ('Jen. 
xix.  23-29).  One  of  them  only,  Zoar  or  Bela, 
which  was  its  original  name,  was  spared  at  the 
request  of  Lot,  in  order  that  he  might  take  refuge 
there.  Of  these  Gomorrah  seems  to  have  been  only 
second  to  Sodom  in  importance,  as  well  in  the 
wickedness  that  led  to  their  overthrow.  What 
that  atrocity  was  maybe  gathered  from  Gen.  \ix- 
4-8.     Their  miserable  fate  is  held  up  as  a  warning 


precedent  for  the  destruction  of  Babylon  (Is.  xiii. 
19,  and  Jer.  1.  40),  of  Edom  (Jer.  xlix.  18),  of 
Moab  (Zeph.  ii.  9),  and  even  of  Israel  (Amos  iv. 
11).  By  St.  Peter  in  the  N.  T.,  and  by  St.  Jude 
(2  Pet.  ii.  6;  Jude,  vers.  4-7),  it  is  made  "an 
ensample  unto  those  that  after  should  live  un- 
godly," or  "  deny  Christ."  Similarly  their  wicked- 
ness rings  as  a  proverb  throughout  the  prophecies 
(v.  Deut.  xxxii.  32  ;  Is.  i.  9,  10  ;  Jer.  xxiii.  14). 
Jerusalem  herself  is  there  unequivocally  called 
Sodom,  and  her  people  Gomorrah,  for  their  enor- 
mities ;  just  in  the  same  way  that  the  corruptions 
of  the  Church  of  Rome  have  caused  her  to  be  called 
Babylon.  On  the  other  hand,  according  to  the  N.  T., 
there  is  a  sin  which  exceeds  even  that  of  Sodom 
and  Gomorrah,  that,  namely,  of  which  Tyre  and 
Sidon,  Capernaum,  Chorazin,  and  Bethsaida  were 
guilty,  when  they  "  repented  not,"  in  spite  of 
"  the  mighty  works "  which  they  had  witnessed 
(St.  Matt.  x.  15) ;  and  St.  Mark  has  ranged  under 
the  same  category  all  those  who  would  not  receive 
the  preaching  of  the  Apostles  (vi.  11). 

To  turn  to  their  geographical  position,  one  pas- 
sage of  Scripture  seems  expressly  to  assert  that  the 
vale   of  Siddim  had  become  the  "  salt,"  or  dead, 
"sea"    (Gen.    xiv.    3),   called  elsewhere   too   the 
"sea  of  the  plain"  (Josh.  xii.  3)  ;  the  expression, 
however,  occurs  antecedently  to  their  overthrow. 
Josephus  (Ant.  i.  9)  says  that  the  lake  Asphaltites, 
or  Dead  Sea,  was  formed  out  of  what  used  to  be  the 
valley  where  Sodom  stood  ;  but  elsewhere  he  de- 
clares that   the  territory  of  Sodom  was  not  sub- 
merged in  the  lake  (De  Bell.  Jud.  iv.  8,  4),  but 
still  existed  parched  and  burnt  up,  as  is  the  appear- 
ance of  that  region  still ;   and  certainly  nothing  in 
Scripture  would  lead   to  the  idea  that  they  were 
destroyed  by  submersion — though  they  may  have 
been    submerged   afterwards  when   destroyed — for 
their  destruction  is  expressly  attributed  to  the  brim- 
stone and  fire  rained  upon  them  from  heaven  (Gen. 
xix.  24  ;  see  also  Deut.  xxix.  22,  and  Zeph.  ii.  9 ; 
also  St.  Peter  and  St.  Jude  before  cited).     And  St. 
Jerome  in  the  Onomasticon  says  of  Sodom  "  civitas 
impiorum  divino  igne  consumpta  juxta  mare  mor- 
tuum,"  and  so  of  the  rest  (ibid.  s.v.').     The  whole 
subject  is   ably  handled  by   Cellarius  (ap.    Ugol. 
Thesaur.  vii.  p.  dccxxxix-lxxviii.),  though  it  is  not 
always   necessary  to   agree   with    his    conclusions. 
Among  modern  travellers,  Dr.  Kobinson  shows  that 
the   Jordan  could  not  have  ever   flowed  into  the 
gulf  of  'Ahabah  ;  on  the  contrary  that  the  rivers  of 
the   desert   themselves    flow  northwards    into   the 
Dead  Sea.    [Arabah.]    And  this,  added  to  the  con- 
figuration and  deep  depression  of  the  valley,  serves 
in  his  opinion  to  prove  that  there  must  have  been 
always  a  lake  there,  into  which  the  Jordan  flowed  ; 
though  he  admits  it  to  have  been  of  far  less  extent 
than  it  now  is,  and   even   the  whole  southern   part 
of  it  to  have  been  added  subsequently  to  the  over- 
throw of  the  four  cities,  winch  stood,  according  to 
him,  at  the  original  south  end  <>f  it,  Zoar  probably 
being  situated  in  the  mouth  of  Wady  Kerah,  as  it 
opens  upon  the  isthmus  of  the  peninsula.     In  the 
same  plain,  he  remarks,  were  slime-pits,  or  wells  of 
bitumen  (Gen.  xiv.  10 j  "salt-pits"  also,  Zeph.  ii. 
9) ;  while  the  enlargement  of  the  lake  lie  considers  to 
have  been  caused  by  some  convulsion  or  catastrophe 
of  nature  connected  with  the  miraculous  destruction 
of  the  cities — volcanic  agency,  that  of  earthquakes, 
and  the  like  {Bill.  Res.  ii.    187-192,    2nd  ed.). 
He  might   have  adduced  the  great  earthquake  at 


710 


GOMORRHA 


Lisbon  as  a  case  in  point.  The  great  difference  of 
level  between  the  bottoms  of  the  northern  and 
southern  ends  of  the  lake,  the  former  1300,  the 
latter  only  13  feet  below  the  surface,  singularly 
confirms  the  above  view  (Stanley,  S.  fy  P.  p-  287, 
2nd  ed.).  Pilgrims  of  Palestine  formerly  saw,  or 
fancied  that  they  saw,  ruins  of  towns  at  the  bot- 
tom of  the  sea,  not  far  from  the  shore  (see  Maun- 
drell,  Early  Travellers,  p.  454).  M.  de  Saulcy 
was  the  first  to  point  out  ruins  along  the  shores 
(the  Iledjoin-el-Mezorrhel ;  and  more  particularly 
apropos  to  our  present  subject  Goumran  on  the 
N.  W.).  Both  perhaps  are  right.  Gomorrah  (as 
its  very  name  implies)  may  have  been  more  or  less 
submerged  with  the  other  three,  subsequently  to 
their  destruction  by  fire ;  while  the  ruins  of  Zoar, 
inasmuch  as  it  did  not  share  their  fate,  would  be 
found,  if  found  at  all,  upon  the  shore.  (See  generally 
Mr.  Isaacs'  Dead  Sea.)  [E.  S.  Ff.] 

GOMO'RRHA,  the  manner  in  which  the  name 
Gomorrah  is  written  in  the  A.  V.  of  the  Apo- 
cryphal books  and  the  N.  Testament,  following  the 
Greek  form  of  the  word,  TopS^a  (2  Esd.  ii.  8  ; 
Matt.  x.  15;  Mark  vi.  11;  Rom.  ix.  29;  Jude  7; 
2  Pet.  ii.  6). 

GOPHER  WOOD.  Only  once  in  Gen.  vi.  14. 
The  Heb.  "12J  '•VV,  trees  of  Gopher,  does  not  occur 
in  the  cognate  dialects.  The  A.  V.  has  made  no 
attempt  at  translation:  the  LXX.  (|uA.a  rerpd- 
ywva)  and  Vulgate  {ligna  laevigata),  elicited  by 
metathesis  of  "1  and  f)  ("I&3  =  CpJ),  the  former 
having  reference  to  square  blocks,  cut  by  the  axe, 
the  latter  to  planks  smoothed  by  the  plane,  have 
not  found  much  favour  with  modern  commentators. 

The  conjectures  of  cedar  (Eben  Ezra,  Onk. 
Jonath.  and  Rabbins  generally),  irood  moat  proper 
to  float  (Kimchi),  the  Greek  K(Spe\dr7]  (Jun. ; 
Tranell. ;  Buxt.),  pine  (Aveuar. ;  Munst.),  tur- 
pentine (Castalio),  are  little  better  than  gratuitous. 
The  rendering  cedar  has  been  defended  by  Pelletier, 
who  refers  to  the  great  abundance  of  this  tree 
in  Asia,  and  the  durability  of  its  timber. 

The  Mohammedan  equivalent  is  sag,  by  which 
Herbelot  understands  the  Indian  plane-tree.  Two 
principal  conjectures,  however,  have  been  pro- 
posed:— 1.  By  Is.  Vossius  {Diss,  de  LXX.  Interp. 
c.  12)  that  IQJI  =  "1Q3,  resin ;  whence  '3  »VS?, 
meaning  any  trees  of  the  resinous  kind,  such  as 
pine,  fir,  &c.  2.  By  Fuller  {Miscall.  Sac.  iv.  5), 
Bochart  {Phnleg,  i.  4),  Celsius  {Hierobot.  pt.  L 
p.  328),  Hass.  {Entdeckungen,  pt.  ii.  p.  78),  that 
Gopher  is  cypress,  in  favour  of  which  opinion 
(adopted  by  Ges.  Lex.)  they  adduce  the  similarity 
in  sound  of  gopher  and  cypress  (icvirap  =  yo<pep)  ; 
the  suitability  of  the  cypress  for  ship-building ; 
and  the  fact  that  this  tree  abounded  in  Babylonia, 
and  more  particularly  in  Adiabene,  where  it  sup- 
plied Alexander  with  timber  for  a  whole  fleet 
(Arrian.  vii.  p.  161,  ed.  Steph.). 

A  tradition  is  mentioned  in  Eutychius  {Annals, 
p.  34)  to  the  effect  that  the  Ark  was  made  of  the 
wood  Sadj,  by  which  is  probably  meant  not  the 
ebony,  but  the  Juniperus  Sabina,  a  species  of  cypress 
(Bochart  and  Cels. ;  Rosenm.  Schol.  ad  Gen.  vi.  14, 
and  Alterthnmsk.  vol.  iv.  pt.  1).  [T.  E.  B.] 

GOR'GIAS  (Topylas),  a  general  in  the  ser- 
vice of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  (1  Mace.  iii.  38,  av^ip 
Suvarbs  roiv  (f>l\a>u  tou  jSatnAe'os ;  cf.  2  Mace, 
viii.  'J),  who  was  appointed  by  his  regent  Lysias  to  a 
command  in  the  expedition  against  Judaea  B.C.  166, 


GOSHEN 

in  which  lie  was  defeated  by  Judas  Maccabaeus  with 
great  loss  (1  Mace.  iv.  1  ff.).  At  a  later  time  (B.C. 
164)  he  held  a  garrison  in  Jamnia,  and  defeated  the 
forces  of  Joseph  and  Azarias,  who  attacked  him  con- 
trary to  the  orders  of  Judas  (1  Mace.  v.  56  ff.  ; 
Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  8,  §6  ;  2  Mace.  xii.  32).  The 
account  of  Gorgias  in  2  Mace,  is  very  obscure.  He 
is  represented  there  as  acting  in  a  military  capacity 
(2  Mace.  x.  14,  crpar-nybs  twv  tSttwv  (?),  hardly 
of  Coele-Syria,  as  Grimm  {I.  c.)  takes  it),  apparently 
in  concert  with  the  Idumaeans  ;  and  afterwards  he 
is  described,  according  to  the  present  text,  as 
"governor  of  Idumea"  (2  Mace.  xii.  32),  though 
it  is  possible  (Grotius,  Grimm,  I.  c.)  that  the  read- 
ing is  an  error  for  "governor  of  Jamnia"  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xii.  8,  §6,  6  rrjs  'la/xveias  arTparriyos).  The 
hostility  of  the  Jews  towards  him  is  described  in 
strong  terms  (2  Mace.  xii.  35,  rbv  Kardparov, 
A.  V.  "  that  cursed  man  ")  ;  and  while  his  success 
is  only  noticed  in  passing,  his  defeat  and  flight  are 
given  in  detail,  though  confusedly  (2  Mace.  xii. 
34-38  ;  cf.  Joseph.  I.  c). 

The  name  itself  was  borne  by  one  of  Alexander's 
generals,  and  occurs  at  later  times  among  the  eastern 
Greeks.  [B.  F.  W.] 

GORTY'NA  (T6pTvvai;  in  classical  writers, 
rSprvva  or  Toprvv),  a  city  of  Crete,  and  in  ancient 
times  its  most  important  city,  next  to  Cnossus. 
The  only  direct  Biblical  interest  of  Gortyna  is  in 
the  fact  that  it  appears  from  I  Mace.  xv.  23  to 
have  contained  Jewish  residents.  [Crete.]  The 
circumstance  alluded  to  in  this  passage  took  place 
in  the  reign  of  Ptolemy  Physcon ;  and  it  is  possible 
that  the  Jews  had  increased  in  Crete  during  the 
reign  of  his  predecessor  Ptolemy  Philometor,  who 
received  many  of  them  into  Egypt,  and  who  also 
rebuilt  some  parts  of  Gortyna  (Strab.  x.  p.  478). 
This  city  was  nearly  half-way  between  the  Eastern 
and  Western  extremities  of  the  island  ;  and  it  is 
worth  while  to  notice  that  it  was  near  Fair  Havens ; 
so  that  St.  Paul  may  possibly  have  preached  the 
Gospel  there,  when  on  his  voyage  to  Rome  (Acts 
xxvii.  8,  9).  Gortyna  seems  to  have  been  the 
capital  of  the  island  under  the  Romans.  For  the 
remains  on  the  old  site  and  in  the  neighbourhood, 
see  the  Museum  of  Classical  Antiquities,  ii.  277- 
286.  [J.  S.  H.l 

GO'SHEN  {\m  ;  iW^u,  Teaiv ;  Gessen),  a 
word  of  uncertain  etymology,  the  name  of  a  part 
of  Egypt  where  the  Israelites  dwelt  for  the  whole 
period  of  their  sojourn  in  that  country.  It  is 
usually  called  the  "  land  of  Goshen,"  f£'il  |HN, 
but  also  Goshen  simply.  It  appears  to  have  borne 
another  name,  "the  land  of  Rameses,"  DDDjn  jHK 
(Gen.  xlvii.  11),  unless  this  be  the  name  of  a  district 
of  Goshen.  The  first  mention  of  Goshen  is  in 
Joseph's  message  to  his  father: — "  Thou  shalt  dwell 
in  the  land  of  Goshen,  and  thou  shalt  be  near  unto 
me"  (Gen.  xlv.  10).  This  shows  that  the  terri- 
tory was  near  the  usual  roval  residence  or  the  resi- 
dence of  Joseph's  Pharaoh.  The  dynasty  to  which  we 
assign  this  king,  the  fifteenth  [Egypt;  Joseph], 
appears  to  have  resided  part  of  the  year  at  Memphis, 
and  part  of  the  year,  at  harvest-time,  at  A  vans  on  the 
Bubastite  or  Pelusiac  branch  of  the  Nile:  this, 
Manetho  tells  us,  was  the  custom  of  the  first  king 
(Joseph,  c.  Ap.  i.  14).  In  the  account  of  the  arrival 
of  Jacob  it  is  said  of  the  patriarch  : — "  He  sent  Judah 
before  him  unto  Joseph,  to  direct  his  face  unto 
Goshen  ;  and  they  came  into  the  land  of  Goshen. 


GOSHEN 

And  Joseph  made  ready  his  chariot,  and  went  up 
to  meet  Israel  his  father,  to  Goshen"  (Gen.  xlvi. 
28,  '29).  This  land  was  therefore  between  Joseph's 
residence  at  the  time  and  the  frontier  of  Palestine, 
and  apparently  the  extreme  province  towards  that 
frontier.  The  advice  that  Joseph  gave  his  brethren 
as  to  their  conduct  to  Pharaoh  farther  characterizes 
the  territory: — "  When  Pharaoh  shall  call  you,  and 
shall  say,  What  [is]  your  occupation  ?  Then  ye 
shall  say,  Thy  servants  have  been  herdsmen  of 
cattle  (IIJpO  *KOK)  from  our  youth  even  until 
now,  both  we  [and]  also  our  fathers  :  that  ye  may 
dwell  in  the  land  of  Goshen  ;  for  every  shepherd 
()NV  nj?"l)  [is]  an  abomination  unto  the  Egyp- 
tians "  (xlvi.  33,  34).  It  is  remarkable  that  in 
Coptic  CLIUUC  sign>ties  both  "a  shepherd"  and 
"  disgrace "  and  the  like  (Rosellini,  Monumenti 
Storici,  i.  177).  This  passage  shows  that  Goshen 
was  scarcely  regarded  as  a  part  of  Egypt  Proper, 
and  was  not  peopled  by  Egyptians — characteristics 
that  would  positively  indicate  a  frontier-province. 
But  it  is  not  to  be  inferred  that  Goshen  had 
no  Egyptian  inhabitants  at  this  period :  at  the  time 
of  the  ten  plagues  such  are  distinctly  mentioned. 
That  there  was,  moreover,  a  foreign  population  be- 
sides the  Israelites  seems  evident  from  the  account 
of  the  calamity  of  Ephraim's  house  [Beriah], 
and  the  mention  of  the  2~1  2~\])  who  went  out  at 
the  Exodus  (Ex.  xii.  38),  notices  referring  to  the 
earlier  and  the  later  period  of  the  sojourn.  The 
name  Goshen  itself  appears  to  be  Hebrew,  or  Semitic 
— although  we  do  not  venture  with  Jerome  to 
derive  it  from  DE^Jl — for  it  also  occurs  as  the  name 
of  a  district  and  of  a  town  in  the  south  of  Palestine 
(infra,  2),  where  we  could  scarcely  expect  an  ap- 
pellation of  Egyptian  origin  unless  given  after  the 
Exodus,  which  in  this  case  does  not  seem  likely. 
It  is  also  noticeable  that  some  of  the  names  of 
places  in  Goshen  or  its  neighbourhood,  as  certainly 
Migdol  and  Baal-zephon,  are  Semitic  [Baal- 
zephon],  the  only  positive  exceptions  being  the 
cities  Pithom  and  Rameses,  built  during  the  op- 
pression. The  next  mention  of  Goshen  confirms 
the  previous  inference  that  its  position  was  between 
Canaan  and  the  Delta  (Gen.  xlvii.  1).  The  nature 
of  the  country  is  indicated  more  clearly  than  in 
the  passage  last  quoted  in  the  answer  of  Pharaoh 
to  the  request  of  Joseph's  brethren,  and  in  the  ac- 
count of  their  settling: — "  And  Pharaoh  spake  unto 
Joseph,  saying,  Thy  father  and  thy  brethren  are 
come  unto  thee:  the  land  of  Egypt  [is]  before 
thee ;  in  the  best  of  the  land  make  thy  father  and 
brethren  to  dwell :  in  the  land  of  Goshen  let  them 
dwell :  and  if  thou  knowest  [any]  men  of  activity 
among  them,  then  make  them  rulers  over  my 
cattle.  .  .  .  And  Joseph  placed  his  father  and  his 
brethren,  and  gave  them  a  possession  in  the  land  of 
Egypt,  in  the  best  of  the  land,  in  the  land  of  Ra- 
meses, as  Pharaoh  had  commanded"  (Gen.  xlvii.  5, 
6, 11).  Goshen  was  thus  a  pastoral  country  where 
some  of  Pharaoh's  cattle  were  kept.  The  expression 
"in  the  best  of  the  land,"  ^NH  nt^EQ  {4»  t?? 
fieAriffTT}  yfj,  in  Optimo  foco),  must,  we  think,  lie 
relative,  the  best  of  the  land  for  a  pastoral  people 
(although    we    do    not    accept    Michaelis'    reading 

5       3  O- 

"pastures"  by  comparison  with  i^J&^q,  Suppl. 

p.  1072 ;  see  Ges.  7%e*  s.  v.  St^O),  for  in  the 
matter  of  fertility  the  richest  parts  of  Egypt  are 


GOSHEN 


'11 


those  nearest  to  the  Nile,  a  position  which,  as 
will  be  seen,  we  cannot  assign  to  Goshen.  The 
sutjjeiency  of  this  tract  for  the  Israelites,  their 
prosperity  there,  and  their  virtual  separation,  as  is 
evident  from  the  account  of  the  plagues,  from  the 
great  body  of  the  Egyptians,  must  also  be  borne  in 
mind.  The  clearest  indications  of  the  exact  position 
of  Goshen  are  those  afforded  by  the  narrative  of  the 
Exodus.  The  Israelites  set  out  from  the  town  of 
Rameses  in  the  land  of  Goshen,  made  two  days' 
journey  to  "  the  edge  of  the  wilderness,"  and  in  one 
day  more  reached  the  Red  Sea.  At  the  starting- 
point  two  routes  lay  before  them,  "  the  way  of  the 
land  of  the  Philistines  .  .  .  that  [was]  near,"  and 
"  the  way  of  the  wilderness  of  the  Red  Sea"  (Ex. 
xiii.  17,  18).  From  these  indications  we  infer  that 
the  land  of  Goshen  must  have  in  part  been  near  the 
eastern  side  of  the  ancient  Delta,  Rameses  lying 
within  the  valley  now  called  the  Wddi-t-Tumei/ldt, 
about  thirty  miles  in  a  direct  course  from  the  an- 
cient western  shore  of  the  Arabian  Gulf  [Exodus, 
the]. 

The  results  of  the  foregoing  examination  of 
Biblical  evidence  are  that  the  land  of  Goshen  lay 
between  the  eastern  part  of  the  ancient  Delta  and 
the  western  border  of  Palestine,  that  it  was  scarcely 
a  part  of  Egypt  Proper,  was  inhabited  by  other 
foreigners  besides  the  Israelites,  and  was  in  its 
geographical  names  rather  Semitic  than  Egyptian ; 
that  it  was  a  pasture-land,  especially  suited  to  a 
shepherd-people,  and  sufficient  for  the  Israelites, 
who  there  prospered,  and  were  separate  from  the 
main  body  of  the  Egyptians  ;  and  lastly,  that  one 
of  its  towns  lay  near  the  western  extremity  of  the 
Wddi-t-Tumeyldt.  These  indications,  except  only 
that  of  sufficiency,  to  be  afterwards  considered, 
seem  to  us  decisively  to  indicate  the  Wddi-t-Tumey- 
lat,  the  valley  along  which  anciently  flowed  the 
canal  of  the  Red  Sea.  Other  identifications  seem 
to  us  to  be  utterly  untenable.  If  with  Lepsius  we 
place  Goshen  below  Heliopolis,  near  Bubastis  and 
Bilbeys,  the  distance  from  the  Red  Sea  of  three 
days'  journey  of  the  Israelites,  and  the  separate 
character  of  the  country,  are  violently  set  aside. 
If  we  consider  it  the  same  as  the  Bucolia,  we  have 
either  the  same  difficulty  as  to  the  distance,  or  we 
must  imagine  a  route  almost  wholly  through  the 
wilderness,  instead  of  only  for  the  last  third  or  less 
of  its  distance. 

Having  thus  concluded  that  the  land  of  Goshen 
appears  to  have  corresponded  to  the  Wddi-t-  Tttniey- 
Idt,  we  have  to  consider  whether  the  extent  of  this 
tract  would  be  sufficient  for  the  sustenance  of  the 
Israelites.  The  superficial  extent  of  the  Wddi-t- 
Tumeylat,  if  we  include  the  whole  cultivable  part  of 
the  natural  valley,  which  may  somewhat  exceed  that 
of  the  tract  bearing  this  appellation,  is  probably  under 
60  square  geographical  miles.  If  we  suppose  the 
entire  Israelite  population  at  the  time  of  the  Exodus 
to  have  been  1,800,000,  and  the  whole  population, 
including  Egyptians  and  foreigners  other  than  the 
Israelites,  about  2,000,000,  this  would  give  no  less 
than  between  30,000  and  40,000  inhabitants  to  the 
square  mile,  which  would  be  half  as  dense  as  the  ordi- 
nary population  of  an  eastern  city.  It  must  be  re- 
membered, however,  that  we  need  not  suppose  the 
Israelites  to  have  been  limited  to  the  valley  for  pas- 
ture, but  like  the  Arabs  to  have  led  their  flocks  into 
fertile  tracts  of  the  deserts  around,  and  that  we  have 
taken  for  our  estimate  an  extreme  sum,  that  of  the 
people  at  the  Exodus.  For  the  greater  part  of  the 
sojourn  their  numbers  must  have  been  far  lower, 


712 


GOSHEN 


and  before  the  Exodus  they  seem  to  have  been  partly 
spread  about  the  territory  of  the  oppressor,  although 
collected  at  Rameses  at  the  time  of  their  departure. 
One  very  large  place,  like  the  Shepherd-stronghold 
of  Avaris,  which  Mauetho  relates  to  have  had  at  the 
first  a  garrison  of  240,000  men,  would  also  greatly 
diminish  the  disproportion  of  population  to  super- 
ficies. The  very  small  superficial  extent  of  Egypt 
in  relation  to  the  population  necessary  to  the  con- 
struction of  the  vast  monuments,  and  the  main- 
tenance of  the  great  armies  of  the  Pharaohs,  requires 
a  different-  proportion  to  that  of  other  countries — a 
condition  fully  explained  by  the  extraordinary  fer- 
tility of  the  soil.  Even  now,  when  the  population 
is  almost  at  the  lowest  point  it  has  reached  in 
history,  when  villages  have  replaced  towns,  and 
hamlets  villages,  it  is  still  denser  than  that  of  our 
rich  and  thickly-populated  Yorkshire.  We  do  not 
think  therefore  that  the  small  superficies  presents 
any  serious  difficulty. 

Thus  far  we  have  reasoned  alone  on  the  evidence 
of  the  Hebrew  text.  The  LXX.  version,  however, 
presents  some  curious  evidence  which  must  not  be 
passed  by  unnoticed.  The  testimony  of  this  ver- 
sion in  any  Egyptian  matter  is  not  to  be  disre- 
garded, although  in  this  particular  case  too  much 
stress  should  not  be  laid  on  it,  since  the  tradition 
of  Goshen  and  its  inhabitants  must  have  become 
very  faint  among  the  Egyptians  at  the  time  when 
the  Pentateuch  was  translated,  and  we  have  no 
warrant  for  attributing  to  the  translator  or  trans- 
lators any  more  than  a  general  and  popular  know- 
ledge of  Egyptian  matters.  In  Gen.  xlv.  10,  for 
]&}  the  LXX.  has  Tea-e/x  'Apafrias.  The  ex- 
planatory word  may  be  understood  either  as 
meaning  that  Goshen  lay  in  the  region  of  Lower 
Egypt  to  the  east  of  the  Delta,  or  else  as  indica- 
ting that  the  Arabian  Nome  was  partly  or  wholly 
the  same.  In  the  latter  case  it  must  be  remem- 
bered that  the  Nomes  very  anciently  were  far  more 
extensive  than  under  the  Ptolemies.  On  either 
supposition  the  passage  is  favourable  to  our  identi- 
fication. In  Gen.  xlvi.  28,  instead  of  JtTJI  n\'"IX, 
the  LXX.  has  ko.8'  'tipucov  ir6\iv,  eV  yfj  'Pa/j-ea-aij 
(or  els  yr\v  "Pafxeacrri),  seemingly  identifying  Ra- 
meses with  Heroopolis.  It  is  scarcely  possible  to 
fix  the  site  of  the  latter  town,  but  there  is  no 
doubt  that  it  lay  in  the  valley  not  far  from  the 
ancient  head  of  the  Arabian  Gulf.  Its  position  is 
too  near  the  gulf  for  the  Rameses  of  Scripture,  and 
it  was  probably  chosen  merely  because  at  the  time 
when  the  translation  was  made  it  was  the  chief  place 
of  the  territory  where  the  Israelites  had  been.  It 
must  be  noted,  however,  that  in  Ex.  i.  11,  the  LXX., 
followed  by  the  Coptic,  reads,  instead  of  "  Pithom 
and  Raamses,"  tt)v  re  riej0a>,  koX  'Pa/j.e(T(rri,  iced 
Hr,  7]  iffTiv  'HAwviroAts.  Eusebius  identifies 
Rameses  with  Avaris,  the  Shepherd-stronghold  on 
the  Pelusiac  branch  of  the  Nile  (ap.  Cramer, 
Anecd.  Paris,  ii.  p.  174).  The  evidence  of  the 
LXX.  version  therefore  lends  a  general  support  to 
the  theory  we  have  advocated.  [See  Exodus, 
the.]  [R.  s.  P.] 

2.  (]Vi  ;  roa6fi;  Gessen,  Gozen)  the  "land" 
or  the  "country  (both  |nN)  of  Goshen,"  is  twice 
named  as  a  district  in  Southern  Palestine  (Josh.  x. 
41,  xi.  16).  From  the  first  of  these  it  would  seem 
to  have  lain  between  Gaza  and  Gibeon,  and  there- 
fore to  be  some  part  of  the  maritime  plain  of 
J  udah  ;  but  in  the  latter  passage,  that  plain — the 


GOSPELS 

Shefelah,  is  expressly  specified  in  addition  to  Goshen 
(here  with  the  article).  In  this  place  too  the  situa- 
tion of  Goshen — if  the  order  of  the  statement  be 
any  indication — would  seem  to  be  between  the 
"south"  and  the  Shefelah  (A.  V.  "valley").  If 
Goshen  was  any  portion  of  this  rich  plain,  is  it  not 
possible  that  its  fertility  may  ha,ve  suggested  the 
name  to  the  Israelites  ?  but  this  is  not  more  than 
mere  conjecture.  On  the  other  hand  the  name 
may  be  far  older,  and  may  retain  a  trace  of  early 
intercourse  between  Egypt  and  the  south  of  the 
promised  land.  For  such  intercourse  comp.  1  Chr. 
vii.  21. 

3.  A  town  of  the  same  name  is  once  mentioned 
in  company  with  Debir,  Socoh,  and  others,  as  in 
the  mountains  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  51).  There  is 
nothing  to  connect  this  place  with  the  district  last 
spoken  of.     It  has  not  yet  been  identified.      [G.] 

GOSPELS.  The  name  Gospel  (from  god  and 
spell,  Ang.  Sax.  good  message  or  news,  which  is  a 
translation  of  the  Greek  evayyeAiov)  is  applied  to 
the  four  inspired  histories  of  the  life  and  teaching 
of  Christ  contained  in  the  New  Testament,  of  which 
separate  accounts  will  be  given  in  their  place. 
[Matthew  ;  Mark  ;  Luke  ;  John.]  It  may 
be  fairly  said  that  the  genuineness  of  these  four 
narratives  rests  upon  better  evidence  than  that  of 
any  other  ancient  writings.  They  were  all  com- 
posed during  the  latter  half  of  the  first  century: 
those  of  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark  some  years 
before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  ;  that  of  St.  Luke 
probably  about  A.D.  64  ;  and  that  of  St.  John 
towards  the  close  of  the  century.  Before  the  end  of 
the  second  century,  there  is  abundant  evidence  that 
the  four  Gospels,  as  one  collection,  were  generally 
used  and  accepted.  Irenaeus,  who  suffered  martyr- 
dom about  A.D.  202,  the  disciple  of  Polycarp  and 
Papias,  who,  from  having  been  in  Asia,  in  Gaul, 
and  in  Rome,  had  ample  means  of  knowing  the 
belief  of  various  churches,  says  that  the  authority 
of  the  four  Gospels  was  so  far  confirmed  that  even 
the  heretics  of  his  time  could  not  reject  them,  but 
were  obliged  to  attempt  to  prove  their  tenets  out 
of  one  or  other  of  them  (Coutr.  Haer.  iii.  11,  §7). 
Tertullian,  in  a  work  written  about  A.D.  208, 
mentions  the  four  Gospels,  two  of  them  as  the 
work  of  Apostles,  and  two  as  that  of  the  disciples 
of  Apostles  (apostolici)  ;  and  rests  their  authority 
on  their  apostolic  origin  (Adv.  Marcion.  iv.  ch.  ii.). 
Origen,  who  was  bom  about  A.D.  185,  and  died 
A.D.  253,  describes  the  Gospels  in  a  characteristic 
strain  of  metaphor  as  "  the  [four]  elements  of  the 
Church's  faith,  of  which  the  whole  world,  reconciled 
to  God  in  Christ,  is  composed"  (In  Johan.).  Else- 
where, in  commenting  on  the  opening  words  of  St. 
Luke,  he  draws  a  line  between  the  inspired  Gospels 
and  such  productions  as  "  the  Gospel  according  to 
the  Egyptians,"  "  the  Gospel  of  the  Twelve,"  and 
the  like  (Homil.  in  Luc.  iii.  p.  932,  sq.).  Although 
Theophilus,  who  became  sixth  (seventh?)  bishop 
of  Antioch  about  A.D.  168,  speaks  only  of  "  the 
Evangelists,"  without  adding  their  names  (Ad  Au- 
tol.  iii.  pp.  124,  125),  we  might  fairly  conclude 
with  Gieseler  that  he  refers  to  the  collection  of  four, 
already  known  in  his  time.  But  from  Jerome  we 
know  that  Theophilus  arranged  the  records  of  the 
four  Evangelists  into  one  work  (Epist.  ad  Algas. 
iv.  p.  197).  Tatian,  who  died  about  A.D.  170  (?), 
compiled  a  Diatessaron,  or  Harmony  of  the  Gospels. 
The  Muratorian  fragment  (Muratori,  Antiq.  It.  iii. 
p.  854  ;  Routh,  Reliq.  S.*ro\.  iv.),  which,  even  if 
it  be  not  by  Caius  and  of  the  second  century,  is  at 


GOSPELS 

least  a  very  old  monument  of  the  Roman  Church, 
describes  the  Gospels  of  Luke  and  John  ;  but  time 
and  carelessness  seem  to  have  destroyed  the  sentences 
relating  to  Matthew  and  Mark.  Another  source  of 
evidence  is  open  to  us,  in  the  citations  from  the 
Gospels  found  in  the  earliest  writers.  Barnabas, 
Clemens  Romanus,  and  l'olycarp,  quote  passages 
from  them,  but  not  with  verbal  exactness.  The 
testimony  of  Justin  Martyr  (born  about  A.D.  99, 
martyred  A.D.  165)  is  much  fuller;  many  of  his 
quotations  are  found  verbatim  in  the  Gospels  of 
St.  Matthew,  St.  Luke,  and  St.  John,  and  possibly 
of  St.  Mark  also,  whose  words  it  is  more  difficult 
to  separate.  The  quotations  from  St.  Matthew  are 
the  most  numerous.  In  historical  references,  the 
mode  of  quotation  is  more  free,  and  the  narrative 
occasionally  unites  those  of  Matthew  and  Luke  :  in 
a  very  few  cases  he  alludes  to  matters  not  men- 
tioned in  the  canonical  Gospels.  Besides  these, 
St.  Matthew  appears  to  be  quoted  by  the  author  of 
the  Epistle  to  Diognetus,  by  Hegesippus,  Irenaeus, 
Tatian,  Athenagoras,  and  Theophilus.  Eusebius 
records  that  Pantaenus  found  in  India  (  ?  the  south 
of  Arabia?)  Christians  who  used  the  Gospel  of  St. 
Matthew.  All  this  shows  that  long  before  the  end 
of  the  second  century  the  Gospel  of  St.  Matthew 
was  in  general  use.  From  the  fact  that  St.  Mark's 
Gospel  has  kw  places  peculiar  to  it,  it  is  more 
difficult  to  identify  .citations  not  expressly  assigned 
to  him  ;  but  Justin  Martyr  and  Athenagoras  appear 
to  quote  his  Gospel,  and  Irenaeus  does  so  by  name. 
St.  Luke  is  quoted  by  Justin,  Irenaeus,  Tatian, 
Athenagoras,  and  Theophilus  ;  and  St.  John  by  all 
of  these,  with  the  addition  of  Ignatius,  the  Epistle 
to  Diognetus,  and  Polycrates.  From  these  we  may 
conclude  that  before  the  end  of  the  second  century  the 
Gospel  collection  was  well  known  and  in  general  use. 
There  is  yet  another  line  of  evidence.  The  here- 
tical sects,  as  well  as  the  Fathers  of  the  Church, 
knew  the  Gospels  ;  and  as  there  was  the  greatest 
hostilitv  between  them,  if  the  Gospels  had  become 
known  in  the  Church  after  the  dissension  arose,  the 
heretics  would  never  have  accepted  them  as  genuine 
from  such  a  quarter.  But  the  Gnostics  and  Mar- 
cionites  arose  early  in  the  second  century ;  and 
therefore  it  is  probable  that  the  (iospels  were  then 
accepted,  and  thus  they  are  traced  back  almost  to 
the  times  of  the  Apostles  (Olshausen).  Upon  a 
review  of  all  the  witnesses,  from  the  Apostolic 
Fathers  down  to  the  Canon  of  the  Laodicean  Council 
in  364,  and  that  of  the  third  Council  of  Carthage 
in  397,  in  both  of  which  the  four  Gospels  are  num- 
bered in  the  Canon  of  Scripture,  there  can  hardly 
be  room  for  any  candid  person  to  doubt  that  from 
the  first  the  four  <  iospels  were  recognized  as  genuine 
and  as.  inspired;  that  a  sharp  line  of  distinction  was 
drawn  between  them  and  the  so-called  apocryphal 
Gospels,  of  which  the  number  was  very  great  :  that, 
from  the  citations  of  passages,  the  Gospels  bearing 
these  four  names  were  the  same  as  those  which  we 
possess  in  our  Bibles  under  the  same  names;  that 
unbelievers,  like  ( 'elsus,  did  net  deny  the  genuineness 
of  the  (iospels,  even  when  rejecting  their  contents; 
and,  lastly,  that  heretics  thought  it  necessary  to 
plead  seme  kind  of  sanction  out  of  the  Gospels  for 
their  doctrines:  nor  could  they  venture  on  the  easier 
path  of  an  entire  rejection,  because  the  Gospels  were 
everywhere  known  to  be  genuine.  As  a  matter  of 
literary  history,  nothing  can  !»•  better  established 
than  the  genuineness  of  the  (Iospels  ;  and  if  in  these 
latest  times  they  have  been  assailed,  it  is  plain  that 
theological  doubts  have  been  concerned  in  the  attack. 


GOSPELS 


713 


The  authority  of  the  books  has  been  denied  from 
a  wish  to  set  aside  their  contents.  Out  of  a  mass 
of  authorities  the  following  may  be  selected : — 
Norton,  On  the  Genuineness  of  the  Gospels,  2  vols. 
London,  184-7,  2nd  ed. ;  Kirchhofer,  Quellensamm* 
lung  zur  Geschichte  des  N.  T.  Canons,  Zurich, 
1844;  DeWette,  Lehrbuch  der  hist.-krit.  Einleit- 
ung,  &c,  7th  ed.,  Berlin,  1852;  Hug's  Einleitung, 
&c,  Fosdick's  [American]  translation,  with  Stuart's 
Notes  ;  Olshausen,  Biblischer  C'ommentar,  Intro- 
duction, and  his  Echtheit  der  4  Canon.  Evangelien, 
1823  ;  Jer.  Jones,  Method  of  settling  the  Canonical 
Authority  of  the  N.  T.,  Oxford,  1798,  2  vols.  ; 
F.  C.  Baur,  Krit.  Unlcrsuchungen  iiber  die  Kanon. 
Evangelien,  Tubingen,  1847  ;  Reuss,  Geschichte 
des  N.  T. ;  Dean  Alford's  Greek  Testament,  Pro- 
legomena, vol.  i. ;  Lev.  B.  F.  Westcott's  History 
of  N.  T.  Canon,  London,  1859  ;  Gieseler,  Historisch- 
kritischer  Versuch  uber  die  Enstehung,  $c,  der 
schriftlichen  Evangelien,  Leipzig,  1818. 

On  comparing  these  four  books  one  with  another, 
a  peculiar  difficulty  claims  attention,  which  has  had 
much  to  do  with  the  controversy  as  to  their  genuine- 
ness. In  the  fourth  Gospel  the  narrative  coincides 
with  that  of  the  other  three  in  a  few  passages  only. 
Putting  aside  the  account  of  the  Passion,  there  are 
only  three  facts  which  John  relates  in  common  with 
the  other  Evangelists.  Two  of  these  are,  the  feed- 
ing of  the  five  thousand,  and  the  storm  on  the  Sea 
of  Galilee  (ch.  vi.),  which  appear  to  be  introduced 
in  connexion  with  the  discourse  that  arose  out  of  the 
miracle,  related  by  John  alone.  The  third  is  the 
anointing  of  His  feet  by  Mary  ;  and  it  is  worthy  of 
notice  that  the  narrative  of  John  recalls  something 
of  each  of  the  other  three :  the  actions  of  the  woman 
are  drawn  from  Luke,  the  ointment  and  its  value 
are  described  in  Mark,  and  the  admonition  to  Judas 
appears  in  Matthew  ;  and  John  combines  in  his 
narrative  all  these  particulars.  Whilst  the  three 
present  the  life  of  Jesus  in  Galilee,  John  follows 
him  into  Judaea ;  nor  should  we  know,  but  for  him, 
that  our  Lord  had  journeyed  to  Jerusalem  at  the 
prescribed  feasts.  Only  one  discourse  of  our  Lord 
that  was  delivered  in  Galilee,  that  in  the  6th  chapter, 
is  recorded  by  John.  The  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved 
had  it  put  into  his  mind  to  write  a  Gospel  which 
should  more  expressly  than  the  others  set  forth  Jesus 
as  the  Incarnate  Word  of  God  :  if  he  also  had  in  view 
the  beginnings  of  the  errors  of  Cerinthus  and  others 
before  him  at  the  time,  as  Irenaeus  and  Jerome 
assert,  the  polemical  purpose  is  quite  subordinate 
to  the  dogmatic.  He  does  not  war  against  a  tem- 
porary error,  but  preaches  for  all  time  that  Jesus 
is  the  <  'hrist  tin'  Son  of  (lod,  in  order  that  believing 
we  may  have  life  through  His  name.  Now  many 
of  the  facts  omitted  by  St.  John  and  recorded  by 
the  rest  are  such  as  would  have  contributed  most 
directly  to  this  great  design;  why  then  are  they 
omitted?  The  received  explanation  is  the  Only 
satisfactory  one,  namely,  that  John,  writing  last,  at 
the  dose  of  the  first  century,  had  seen  the  other 
<  Iospels,  anil  purposely  abstained  from  writing  anew 
what  they  had  sufficiently  recorded.     [John.] 

In  the  other  three  ( Iospels  there  is  a  great  amount 
of  agreement,  [f  we  suppose  the  history  that  they 
contain  to  be  divided  into  sections,  in  -42  of  these 
all  the  three  narratives  coincide,  12  more  are  given 
by  Matthew  and  Mark  only,  5  by  Mark  and  Luke 
only,  and  14  by  Matthew  and  Luke.  To  these  must 
be  added  5  peculiar  to  Matthew,  2  to  Mark,  and  9 
to  Luke;  and  the  enumeration  is  complete.  But 
this  applies  only  to  general  coincidence  as  to  the  facts 

3   A 


714 


GOSPELS 


narrated:  the  amount  of  verbal  coincidence,  that  is, 
the  passages  either  verbally  the  same,  or  coinciding 
in  the  use  of  many  of  the  same  words,  is  much 
smaller.  "  By  far  the  larger  portion,"  says  Professor 
■Andrews  Norton  [Genuineness,  i.  p.  240,  '2nd  ed.), 
"  of  this  verbal  agreement  is  found  in  the  recital  of 
the  words  of  others,  and  particularly  of  the  words 
of  Jesus.  Thus,  in  Matthew's  Gospel,  the  passages 
verbally  coincident  with  one  or  both  of  the  other 
two  Gospels  amount  to  less  than  a  sixth  part  of  its 
contents  ;  and  of  these  about  seven-eighths  occur  in 
the  recital  of  the  words  of  others,  and  only  about 
one-eighth  in  what,  by  way  of  distinction,  I  may 
call  mere  narrative,  in  which  the  Evangelist,  speak- 
ing in  his  own  person,  was  unrestrained  in  the 
choice  of  his  expressions.  In  Mark,  the  proportion 
of  coincident  passages  to  the  whole  contents  of  the 
Gospel  is  about  one-sixth,  of  which  not  one-fifth 
occurs  in  the  narrative.  Luke  has  still  less  agree- 
ment of  expression  with  the  other  Evangelists.  The 
passages  in  which  it  is  found  amount  only  to  about 
a  tenth  part  of  his  Gospel  ;  and  but  an  inconsider- 
able portion  of  it  appears  in  the  narrative — less 
than  a  twentieth  part.  These  proportions  should  be 
further  compared  with  those  which  the  narrative 
part  of  each  Gospel  bears  to  that  in  which  the  words 
of  others  are  professedly  repeated.  Matthew's  nar- 
rative occupies  about  one-fourth  of  his  Gospel, 
Mark's  about  one-half,  and  Luke's  about  one-third. 
It  may  easily  be  computed,  therefore,  that  the 
proportion  of  verbal  coincidence  found  in  the  nar- 
rative part  of  each  Gospel,  compared  with  what 
exists  in  the  other  part,  is  about  in  the  follow- 
ing ratios:  in  Matthew  as  one  to  somewhat  more 
than  two,  in  Mark  as  one  to  four,  and  in  Luke  as 
one  to  ten."  » 

Without  going  minutely  into  the  examination  of 
examples,  which  would  be  desirable  if  space  per- 
mitted, the  leading  facts  connected  with  the  subject 
may  be  thus  summed  up  : — The  verbal  and  material 
agreement  of  the  three  first  Evangelists  is  such  as 
does  not.  occur  in  any  other  authors  who  have  written 
independently  of  one  another.  The  verbal  agreement 
is  greater  where  the  spoken  words  of  others  are  cited 
than  where  facts  are  recorded  ;  and  greatest  in  quo- 
tations of  the  words  of  our  Lord.  But  in  some 
leading  events,  as  in  the  call  of  the  four  first  disciples, 
that  of  Matthew,  and  the  Transfiguration,  the  agree- 
ment even  in  expression  is  remarkable :  there  are 
also  narratives  where  there  is  no  verbal  harmony  in 
the  outset,  but  only  in  the  crisis  or  emphatic  part 
of  the  story  (Matt.  viii.  3  =  Mark  i.  4-1  =  Luke  v.  13, 
and  Matt.  xiv.  19,  20  =  Mark  vi.  41-43  =  Luke  ix. 
16,  17).  The  narratives  of  our  Lord's  early  life, 
as  given  by  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke,  have  little 
in  common  ;  while  St.  Mark  does  not  include  that 
part  of  the  history  in  his  plan.  The  agreement  in 
the  narrative  portions  of  the  Gospels  begins  with 
the  Baptism  of  John,  and  reaches  its  highest  point 
in  the  account  of  the  Passion  of  our  Lord  and  the 
facts  that  preceded  it ;  so  that  a  direct  ratio  might 
almost  be  said  to  exist  between  the  amount  of  agree- 
ment and  the  nearness  of  the  facts  related  to  the 
Passion.  After  this  event,  in  the  account  of  His 
burial  and  resurrection,  the  coincidences  are  few. 
The  language  of  all  three  is  Greek,  with  Hebrew 
idioms :  the  Hebraisms  are  most  abundant  in  St. 
Mark,  and  fewest  in  St.  Luke.  In  quotations 
from  the  Old  Testament,  the  Evangelists,  or  two 
of  them,  sometimes  exhibit  a  verbal  agreement, 
although  they  differ  from  the  Hebrew  and  from 
the  Septuagint  version  (Matt.  iii.  3  =  Mark  i.   3 


GOSPELS 

=  Luke  iii.  4.  Matt.  iv.  10  =  Luke  iv.  8. 
Matt.  xi.  10  =  Mark  i.  2  =  Luke  vii.  27,  &c). 
Except  as  to  24  verses,  the  Gospel  of  Mark  contains 
no  principal  tacts  which  are  not  found  in  Matthew 
and  Luke  ;  but  he  often  supplies  details  omitted  by 
them,  and  these  are  often  such  as  would  belong  to 
the  graphic  account  of  an  eye-witness.  There  are 
no  cases  in  which  Matthew  and  Luke  exactly  har- 
monize, where  Mark  does  not  also  coincide  with 
them.  In  several  places  the  words  of  Mark  have 
something  in  common  with  each  of  the  other  nar- 
ratives, so  as  to  form  a  connecting  link  between 
them,  where  their  words  slightly  differ.  The 
examples  of  verbal  agreement  between  Mark  and 
Luke  are  not  so  long  or  so  numerous  as  those 
between  Matthew  and  Luke,  and  Matthew  and  Mark  ; 
but  as  to  the  arrangement  of  events  Mark  and  Luke 
frequently  coincide,  where  Matthew  differs  from 
them.  These  are  the  leading  particulars  ;  but  they 
are  veiy  far  from  giving  a  complete  notion  of  a 
phenomenon  that  is  well  worthy  of  that  attention 
and  reverent  study  of  the  sacred  text  by  which 
alone  it  can  be  fully  and  fairly  apprehended. 

These  facts  exhibit  the  three  Gospels  as  three  dis- 
tinct records  of  the  life  and  works  of  the  Redeemer, 
but  with  a  greater  amount  of  agreement  than  three 
wholly  independent  accounts  could  be  expected  to 
exhibit.  The  agreement  would  be  no  difficulty, 
without  the  dilierences  ;  it  would  only  mark  the 
one  divine  source  from  which  they  are  all  derived — 
the  Holy  Spirit,  who  spake  by  the  prophets.  The 
difference  of  form  and  style,  without  the  agreement, 
would  offer  no  difficulty,  since  there  may  be  a  sub- 
stantial harmony  between  accounts  that  differ 
greatly  in  mode  of  expression,  and  the  very  differ- 
ence might  be  a  guarantee  of  independence.  The 
harmony  and  the  variety,  the  agreement  and  the 
differences,  form  together  the  problem  with  which 
Biblical  critics  have  occupied  themselves  for  a  cen- 
tury and  a  half. 

The  attempts  at  a  solution  are  so  many,  that 
they  can  be  more  easily  classified  than  enumerated. 
The  first  and  most  obvious  suggestion  would  be, 
that  the  narrators  made  use  of  each  other's  work. 
Accordingly  Grotius,  Mill,  Wetstein,  Griesbach, 
and  many  others,  have  endeavoured  to  ascertain 
which  Gospel  is  to  be  regarded  as  the  first ;  which 
is  copied  from  the  first ;  and  which  is  the  last,  and 
copied  from  the  other  two.  It  is  remarkable  that 
each  of  the  six  possible  combinations  have  found 
advocates;  and  this  of  itself  proves  the  uncertainty 
of  the  theory  (Bp.  Marsh's  Michaelis,  iii.  p.  172  ;  De 
Wette,  Hanabuch,  §22  et  sqq.).  When  we  are 
told  by  men  of  research  that  the  Gospel  of  St. 
Mark  is  plainly  founded  upon  the  other  two,  as 
Griesbach,  Biisching,  and  others  assure  us;  and 
again,  that  the  Gospel  of  St.  Mark  is  certainly  the 
primitive  Gospel,  on  which  the  other  two  are 
founded,  as  by  Wilke,  Bruno  Bauer,  and  others, 
both  sides  relying  mainly  on  facts  that  lie  within 
the  compass  of  the  text,  we  are  not  disposed  to 
expect  much  fruit  from  the  discussion.  But  the 
theory  in  its  crude  form  is  in  itself  most  impro- 
bable ;  and  the  wonder  is  that  so  much  time  and 
learning  have  been  devoted  to  it.  It  assumes  that 
an  Evangelist  has  taken  up  the  work  of  his  prede- 
cessor, and  without  substantial  alteration  has  made 
a  few  changes  in  form,  a  few  additions  and  retrench- 
ments, and  has  then  allowed  the  whole  to  go  forth 
under  his  name.  Whatever  order  of  the  three  is 
adopted  to  favour  the  hypothesis,  the  omission  by 
the  second  or  third,  of  matter  inserted  by  the  first, 


GOSPELS 

offers  a  great  difficulty ;  since  it  would  indicate  a 
tacit  opinion  that  these  passages  are  either  less 
useful  or  of  less  authority  than  the  rest.  The 
nature  of  the  alterations  is  not  such  as'  we  should 
expect  to  find  in  an  age  little  given  to  literary 
composition,  and  in  writings  so  simple  and  un- 
learned as  these  are  admitted  to  be.  The  replace- 
ment of  a  word  by  a  synonym,  neither  more  nor 
less  apt,  the  omission  of  a  saying  in  one  place  and 
insertion  of  it  in  another,  the  occasional  transposi- 
tion of  events ;  these  are  not  in  conformity  with 
the  habits  of  a  time  in  which  composition  was 
little  studied,  and  only  practised  as  a  necessity. 
Besides,  such  deviations,  which  in  writers  wholly 
independent  of  each  other  are  only  the  guarantee  of 
their  independence,  cannot  appear  in  those  who  copy 
from  each  other,  without  showing  a  certain  wilful- 
ness— an  intention  to  contradict  and  alter — that 
seems  quite  irreconcilcable  with  any  view  of  inspi- 
ration. These  general  objections  will  be  found  to 
take  a  still  more  cogent  shape  against  any  parti- 
cular form  of  this  hypothesis:  whether  it  is 
attempted  to  show  that  the  Gospel  of  St.  Mark,  as 
the  shortest,  is  also  the  earliest  and  primitive  Gospel, 
or  that  this  very  Gospel  bears  evident  signs  of 
being  the  latest,  a  compilation  from  the  other  two  ; 
or  that  the  order  in  the  canon  of  Scripture  is  also 
the  chronological  order — and  all  these  views  have 
found  defenders  at  no  distant  date — the  theory  that 
each  Evangelist  only  copied  from  his  predecessor 
otters  the  same  general  features,  a  plausible  argu- 
ment from  a  few  facts,  which  is  met  by  insuperable 
difficulties  as  soon  as  the  remaining  facts  are  taken 
in  (Gieseler,  pp.  35,  36  ;  Bp.  Marsh's  Michaelis, 
iii.,  Part  ii.,  pp.  171  sqq.). 

The  supposition  of  a  common  original  from 
which  the  three  Gospels  were  drawn,  each  with 
more  or  less  modification,  would  naturally  occur 
to  those  who  rejected  the  notion  that  the  Evan- 
gelists had  copied  from  each  other.  A  passage  of 
Epiphanius  has  been  often  quoted  in  support  of 
this  {Haeres.  51,  6),  but  the  e£  avriis  rrjSTnqyrjs 
no  doubt  refers  to  the  inspiring  Spirit  from  which 
all  three  drew  their  authority,  and  not  to  any 
earthly  copy,  written  or  oral,  of  His  divine  message. 
The  best  notion  of  that  class  of  speculations  which 
would  establish  a  written  document  as  the  common 
original  of  the  three  Gospels,  will  be  gained  per- 
haps from  Bishop  Marsh's  (Michaelis,  vol.  iii., 
Part  ii.)  account  of  Eiehhorn's  hypothesis,  and  of 
his  own  additions  to  it.  It  appeared  to  Eichhom 
that  the  portions  which  are  common  to  all  the  three 
Gospels  were  contained  in  a  certain  common  docu- 
ment, from  which  they  all  drew.  Niemeyer  had 
already  assumed  that  copies  of  such  a  document 
had  got  into  circulation,  and  had  been  altered  anil 
annotated  by  different  hands.  Now  Eichhorn 
tries  to  show,  from  an  exact  comparison  of  passages, 
that  "  the  sections,  whether  great  or  small,  which 
are  common  to  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark  but  not 
to  St.  I. uke,  and  at  (lie  same  time  occupy  places 
in  the  Gospels  of  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark  which 
correspond  to  each  other,  were  additions  made  in 
the  copies  used  by  St.  .Matthew  and  St.  Mark,  but 
not  in  the  copy  used  by  St.  I, uke;  and,  in  like 
manner,  that  the  sections  found  in  the  corresponding 
places  of  the  Gospels  of  St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke, 
but  not  contained  in  the  Gospel  of  St.  Matthew, 
Were  additions  made  in  the  copies  used  by  St.  Mark 
and  St.  Luke"  (p.  192).  Thus  Eichhorn  considers 
himself  entitled  to  assume  that  he  can  reconstruct 
the  original  document,   and   also  that   there  must 


GOSPELS 


715 


have  been  four  other  documents  to  account  for  the 
phenomena  of  the  text.     Thus  he  makes — 

1.  The  original  document. 

2.  An  altered  copy  which  St.  Matthew  used. 

3.  An  altered  copy  which  St.  Luke  used. 

4.  A  third  copy,  made  from  the  two  preceding, 
used  by  St.  Mark. 

5.  A  fourth  altered  copy,  used  by  St.  Matthew 
and  St.  Luke  in  common. 

As  there  is  no  external  evidence  worth  consider- 
ing that  this  original  or  any  of  its  numerous  copies 
ever  existed,  the  value  of  this  elaborate  hypothesis 
must  depend  upon  its  furnishing  the  only  explana- 
tion, and  that  a  sufficient  one,  of  the  tacts  of  ths 
text.  Bishop  Marsh,  however,  finds  it  necessary, 
in  order  to  complete  the  account  of  the  text,  to 
raise  the  number  of  documents  to  eight,  still  with- 
out producing  any  external  evidence  for  the  exist- 
ence of  any  of  them  ;  and  this,  on  one  side,  deprives 
Eichhorn 's  theory  of  the  merit  of  completeness, 
and,  on  the  other,  presents  a  much  broader  surface 
to  the  obvious  objections.  He  assumes  the  exist- 
ence of— 

1.  A  Hebrew  original. 

2.  A  Greek  translation. 

3.  A  transcript  of  No.  1,  with  alterations  and 
additions. 

4.  Another,  with  another  set  of  alterations  and 
additions. 

5.  Another,  combining  both  the  preceding,  used 
by  St.  Mark,  who  also  used  No.  2. 

6.  Another,  with  the  alterations  and  additions  of 
No.  3,  and  with  further  additions,  used  by  St. 
Matthew. 

7.  Another,  with  those  of  No.  4  and  further  ad- 
ditions, used  by  St.  Luke,  who  also  used  No  2. 

8.  A  wholly  distinct  Hebrew  document,  in  which 
our  Lord's  precepts,  parables,"  and  discourses  were 
recorded,  but  not  in  chronological  order;  used  both 
by  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke. 

To  this  it  is  added,  that  "as  the  Gospels  of  St. 
Mark  and  St.  Luke  contain  Greek  translations  of 
Hebrew  materials,  which  were  incorporated  into 
St.  Matthew's  Hebrew  Gospel,  the  person  who 
translated  St.  Matthew's  Hebrew  Gospel  into 
Greek  frequently  derived  assistance  from  the  Gospel 
of  St.  Mark,  where  he  had  matter  in  connexion 
with  St.  Matthew  :  and  in  those  places,  but  in 
those  places  only,  where  St.  Mark  had  no  matter  in 
connexion  with  St.  Matthew,  he  hail  frequently  re- 
course to  St.  Luke's  (Iospel"  (p.  361).  One  is 
hardly  surprised  after  this  to  learn  that  Eichhorn 
soon  after  put  forth  a  revised  hypothesis  (Einleitung 
in  <lxs  X.  T.,  1804),  in  which  a  supposed  deck 
translation  of  a  supposed  Aramaic  original  took  a 
conspicuous  part;  nor  that  Hug  was  able  to  point 
out  that  even  the  most  libel's]  assumption  ofwritten 
documents  had  not  provided  for  one  case,  that  of 
the  \ ci hi]  agreement  of  St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke,  to 
the  exclusion  of  St.  Matthew  ;  and  which,  though 
if  is  ot'  rare  occurrence,  would  require,  on  Eichhoru's 
theory,  an  additional  Greek  version. 

It  will  be  allowed  that  this  elaborate  hypothesis, 
whether  in  the  form  given  it  by  Marsh  or  by  Eich- 
hom,   possesses    almost    everv    fault     that    can    be 

charged  against  an  argument  of  that  kind.     For 

every  new  class  of  facts  a  new   document   must    be 

assumed  to  nave  existed ;  and  Hug's  objection  does 
not  really  weaken  the  theory,  since  t  h.>  new  class 
of  coincidences  he  mentions  only  requires  a  new 
version  of  the  "original  Gospel,"  which  can  be 
supplied  on  demand.     A  theory  so  prolific  in  as. 

3  A  2 


716 


GOSPELS 


sumptions  may  still  stand,  if  it  can  be  proved  that 
no  other  solution  is  possible  ;  but  since  this  cannot 
be  shown,  even  as  against  the  modified  theory  of 
Gratz  (Newer  Versuch,  &c,   1812),  then  we  are 
reminded  of  the  schoolman's  caution,  entia  non  sunt 
multiplicanda praeter  necessitate  m.    To  assume  for 
every  new  class  of  facts  the  existence  of  another 
complete  edition  and  recension  of  the  original  work 
is  quite  gratuitous  ;  the  documents  might  have  been 
as  easily   supposed   to   be  fragmentary  memorials, 
wrought  in  by  the  Evangelists  into  the  web  of  the 
original   Gospel ;   or  the  coincidences  might  be,  as 
Gratz  supposes,  cases  where  one  Gospel  has  been  in- 
terpolated by  portions  of  another.  Then  the  "  original 
Gospel "  is  supposed  to  have  been  of  such  authority 
as  to  be  circulated  everywhere :  yet  so  defective,  as 
to  require  annotation  from  any  hand,  so  little  reve- 
renced, that  no  hand  spared  it.     If  all  the  Evan- 
gelists agreed  to  draw  from  such  a  work,  it  must 
have  been  widely  if  not  universally  accepted  in  the 
Church  ;  and  yet  there  is  no  record  of  its  existence. 
The  force  of  this  dilemma  has  been  felt  by  the  sup- 
porters of  the   theory :   if  the  work  was  of  high 
authority,  it  would  have  been  preserved,  or  at  least 
mentioned  ;  if  of  lower  authority,  it  could  not  have 
become  the  basis  of  three  canonical  Gospels :  and 
various  attempts  have  been  made  to  escape  from  it. 
Bertholdt  tries  to  rind  traces  of  its  existence  in  the 
titles    of  works  other  than  our  present  Gospels, 
which  were  current  in  the  earliest  ages  ;  but  Gieseler 
has  so  diminished  the  force  of  his  arguments,,  that 
only  one  of  them  need  here  be  mentioned.  Bertholdt 
ingeniously  argues  that  a  Gospel  used  by  St.  Paul, 
and  transmitted  to  the  Christians  in  Poutus,  was 
the  basis  of  Marcion's  Gospel;  and  assumes  that  it 
was  also  the   "  original   Gospel :"   so  that  in   the 
Gospel   of  Marcion  there  would   be   a  transcript, 
though  corrupted,  of  this  primitive  document.  But 
there  is  no   proof  at  all  that   St.  Paul   used   any 
written  Gospel ;   and  as  to  that  of  Marcion,  if  the 
work  of  Halm  had  not  settled  the  question,  the  re- 
searches of  such  writers  as  Volkmau,  Zeller,  Ritschl, 
and  Hilgenfeld,   are  held  to  have  proved  that  the 
old  opinion  of  Tertullian  and  Epiphanius  is  also  the 
true  one,  and  that  the  so-called  Gospel  of  Marcion 
was  not  an  independent  work,  but  an  abridged  ver- 
sion of  St.  Luke's  Gospel,  altered  by  the  heretic  to 
suit   his   peculiar  tenets.    (See    Bertholdt,  iii.,  pp. 
1208-1223  ;  Gieseler,  p.  57  ;  Weisse,  Evangelien- 
frage,  p.   73.)     We  must  conclude  then  that  the 
work  has  perished  without  record.     Not  only  has 
this  fate  befallen  the  Aramaic  or  Hebrew  original, 
but  the  translation  and   the  five  or  six  recensions. 
But  it  may  well  be  asked  whether  the  state  of 
letters  in   Palestine  at  this  time   was  such  as  to 
make  this  constant  editing,  translating,  annotating, 
and  enriching  of  a  history  a  natural  and  probable 
process.     With  the  independence  of  the  Jews  their 
literature  had  declined  ;  from  the  time  of  Ezra  and 
Nehemiah,   if  a  writer  here  and  there  arose,  his 
works  became  known,  if  at  all,  in  Greek  translations 
through  the  Alexandrine  Jews.     That  the  period 
of  which  we  are  speaking  was  for  the  Jews  one  of 
very  little  literary  activity,  is  generally  admitted  ; 
and  if  this  applies  to  all  classes  of  the  people,  it 
would  be  true  of  the  humble  and  uneducated  class 
from  which  the  first  converts  came  (Acts  iv.  13 ; 
James  ii.  5).     Even  the  second  law  (Sivrfpcixreis), 
which  grew  up  after  the  captivity,  and   in  which 
the  knowledge  of  the  learned  class  consisted,  was 
handed  down  by  oral  tradition,  without  being  re- 
duced to  writing.     The  theory  of  Eichhorn  is  only 


GOSPELS 

probable  amidst  a  people  given  to  literary  habits, 
and  in  a  class  of  that  people  where  education  was 
good  and  literary  activity  likely  to  prevail :  the 
conditions  here  are  the  very  reverse  (see  Gieseler's 
able  argument,  p.  59  sqq.).  These  are  only  a  few 
of  the  objections  which  may  be  raised,  on  critical 
and  historical  grounds,  against  the  theory  of  Eich- 
horn and  Marsh. 

But  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  this  question 
reaches  beyond  history  and  criticism,  and  has  a 
deep  theological  interest.  We  are  orlered  here  an 
original  Gospel  composed  by  some  unknown  person  ; 
probably  not  an  apostle,  as  Eichhorn  admits,  in  his 
endeavour  to  account  for  the  loss  of  the  book. 
This  was  translated  by  one  equally  unknown  ;  and 
the  various  persons  into  whose  hands  the  two  docu- 
ments came,  all  equally  unknown,  exercised  freely 
the  power  of  altering  and  extending  the  materials 
thus  provided.  Out  of  such  unattested  materials 
the  three  Evangelists  composed  their  Gospels.  So 
far  as  they  allowed  their  materials  to  bind  and 
guide  them,  so  far  their  worth  as  independent 
witnesses  is  lessened.  But,  according  to  Eichhorn, 
they  all  felt  bound  to  admit  the  whole  of  the 
original  document,  so  that  it  is  possible  to  recover 
it  from  them  by  a  simple  process.  As  to  all  the 
passages,  then,  in  which  this  document  is  em- 
ployed, it  is  not  the  Evangelist  but  an  anonymous 
predecessor  to  whom  we  are  listening — not  Matthew 
the  Apostle,  and  Mark  the  companion  of  Apostles, 
and  Luke  the  beloved  of  the  Apostle  Paul,'  arc 
affording  us  the  strength  of  their  testimony,  but 
one  witness  whose  name  no  one  has  thought  fit  to 
record.  If,  indeed,  all  three  Evangelists  confined 
themselves  to  this  document,  this  of  itself  would 
be  a  guarantee  of  its  fidelity  and  of  the  respect  in 
which  it  was  held  ;  but  no  one  seems  to  have 
taken  it  in  hand  that  did  not  think  himself  entitled 
to  amend  it.  Surely  serious  people  would  have  a 
right  to  ask,  if  the  critical  objections  were  less 
decisive,  with  what  view  of  inspiration  such  a 
hypothesis  could  be  reconciled.  The  internal  evi- 
dence of  the  truth  of  the  Gospel,  in  the  harmonious 
and  self-consistent  representation  of  the  Person  of 
Jesus,  and  in  the  promises  and  precepts  which 
meet  the  innermost  needs  of  a  heart  stricken  with 
the  consciousness  of  sin,  would  still  remain  to  us. 
But  the  wholesome  confidence  with  which  we  now 
rely  on  the  Gospels  as  pure,  true,  and  genuine 
histories  of  the  life  of  Jesus,  composed  by  four 
independent  witnesses  inspired  for  that  work,  would 
be  taken  away.  Even  the  testimony  of  the  writers 
of  the  second  century  to  the  universal  acceptance 
of  these  books  would  be  invalidated,  from  their 
silence  and  ignorance  about  the  strange  circum- 
stances which  are  supposed  to  have  affected  their 
composition. 

Bibliography. — The  English  student  will  find 
in  Bp.  Marsh's  Translation  of  Michaelis'  Introd. 
to  N.  T.  iii.  2,  1803,  an  account  of  Eichhorn 's 
earlier  theory  and  of  his  own.  Veysie's  Examina- 
tion of  Mr.  Marsh's  Hi/pothcsis,  1808,  has  sug- 
gested many  of  the  objections.  In  Bp.  ThirlwaU's 
Translation  of  Schleiermacher  on  St.  Luke,  1825, 
Introduction,  is  an  account  of  the  whole  question. 
Other  principal  works  are,  an  essay  of  Eichhorn,  in 
the  5th  vol.  Allgemeine  Bibliothck  der  Biblischen 
Literatur,  1794;  the  Essay  of  P.p.  Marsh,  just 
quoted;  Eichhorn,  Einleituiuj  in  das  N.  T.  1804  ; 
Gratz,  Neuer  Versuch  die  Enstehung  der  drey 
ersten  Evang.  zu  erklaren,  1812;  Bertholdt,  Histor. 
kritische  Einleiturcg  in   sammtliche    kanon.   und 


GOSPELS 

apok.  Schriften  des  A.  and  N.  T.,  1812-1819; 
and  the  work  of  Gieseler,  quoted  above.  See  also 
I>e  Wette,  Lehrbuch,  and  Westcott,  Introduction, 
already  quoted  ;  also  Weisse,  Evangelieufrage, 
1856. 

There  is  another  supposition  to  account  for  these 
facts,  of  which  perhaps  Gieseler  has  been  the  most 
acute  expositor.  It  is  probable  that  none  of  the 
Gospels  was  written  until  many  years  after  the 
day  of  Pentecost,  on  which  the  Holy  Spirit  de- 
scended on  the  assembled  disciples.  From  that 
day  commenced  at  Jerusalem  the  work  of  preaching 
the  Gospel  and  converting  the  world.  So  sedulous 
were  the  apostles  in  this  work  that  they  divested 
themselves  of  the  labour  of  ministering  to  the  poor, 
in  order  that  they  might  give  themselves  "  con- 
tinually to  prayer  and  to  the  ministry  of  the 
word "  (Acts  vi.).  Prayer  and  preaching  were 
the  business  of  their  lives.  Now  their  preaching 
must  have  been,  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  in 
great  part  historical ;  it  must  have  been  based 
upon  an  account  of  the  life  and  acts  of  Jesus  of 
Nazareth.  They  had  been  the  eye-witnesses  of  a 
wondrous  life,  of  acts  and  sufferings  that  had  an 
influence  over  all  the  world  :  many  of  their  hearers 
had  never  heard  of  Jesus,  many  others  had  re- 
ceived false  accounts  of  one  whom  it  suited  the 
Jewish  rulers  to  stigmatize  as  an  impostor.  The 
ministry  of  our  Lord  went  on  principally  in  Ga- 
lilee;  the  first  preaching  was  addressed  to  people 
in  Judaea.  There  was  no  written  record  to  which 
the  hearers  might  be  referred  for  historical  details, 
and  therefore  the  preachers  must  furnish  not  only 
inferences  from  the  life  of  our  Lord,  but  the  facts 
of  the  life  itself.  The  preaching,  then,  must  have 
been  of  such  a  kind  as  to  be  to  the  hearers  what 
the  reading  of  lessons  from  the  Gospels  is  to  us. 
So  far  as  the  records  of  apostolic  preaching  in  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles  go,  they  confirm  this  view. 
Peter  at  Caesarea,  and  Paul  at  Antioch,  preach 
alike  the  facts  of  the  Redeemer's  life  and  death. 
There  is  no  improbability  in  supposing  that  in  the 
course  of  twenty  or  thirty  years'  assiduous  teaching, 
without  a  written  Gospel,  the  matterof  the  apostolic 
preaching  should  have  taken  a  settled  form.  Not 
only  might  the  Apostles  think  it  well  that  their 
own  accounts  should  agree,  as  in  substance  so  in 
form  ;  but  the  teachers  whom  they  sent  forth,  or 
left  behind  in  the  churches  they  visited,  would 
have  to  be  prepared  for  their  mission;  and,  so  long 
as  there  was  no  written  Gospel  to  put  into  their 
hands,  it  might  be  desirable  that  the  oral  instruc- 
tion should  be  as  tiir  as  possible  one  and  the  same 
to  all.  It  is  by  no  means  certain  that  the  interval 
between  the  mission  of  the  Comforter  and  His 
work  of  directing  the  writing  of  the  first  Gospel 
was  so  long  as  is  here  supposed:  the  date  of  the 
Hebrew  St.  Matthew  may  be  earlier.  [Mat- 
thew.] But  the  argument  remains  the  same:  the 
preaching  of  the  Apostles  would  probably  begin  to 
take  one  settled  form,  it'  at  all,  during  the  firsl 
wars  of  their  ministry.  If  it  were  allowed  us  to 
ask  why  God  in   His   providence  saw  lit  to  defer 

*  The  opening  words  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel,  "  Foras- 
much as  many  have  taken  in  hand  to  set  forth  in  order 
a  declaration  of  those  things  which  are  most  surely 
believed  among  us,  even  as  they  delivered  them  unto 
us,  which  from  the  beginning  were  eye-witnesses  and 
ministers  of  the  word,"  appear  to  mean  thai  many 
persons  who  heard  the  preaching  of  the  Apostles  wrote 
down  what  they  heard,  in  order  to  preserve  it  in  a 
permanent  form.     The  word  "many"  cannot  refer 


GOSPELS 


17 


the  gift  of  a  written  Gospel  to  His  people,  the 
answer  would  be,  that  for  the  first  few  years  the 
powerful  working  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  living 
members  of  the  Church  supplied  the  place  of  those 
records,  which,  as  soon  as  the  brightness  of  His 
presence  began  to  be  at  all  withdrawn,  became 
indispensable  in  order  to  prevent  the  corruption  of 
the  Gospel  history  by  false  teachers.  He  was 
promised  as  one  who  should  "teach  them  all  things, 
and  bring  all  things  to  their  remembrance,  what- 
soever "  the  Lord  had  "  said  unto  them "  (John 
xiv.  26).  And  more  than  once  His  aid  is  spoken 
of  as  needful ,  even  for  the  proclamation  of  the  facts 
that  relate  to  Christ  (Acts  i.  8 ;  1  Pet.  i.  12); 
and  He  is  described  as  a  witness  ivith  the  Apostles, 
rather  than  through  them,  of  the  things  which 
they  hail  seen  during  the  course  of  a  ministry 
which  they  had  shared  (John  xv.  26,  27  ;  Acts  v. 
32.  Compare  Acts  xv.  28).  The  personal  au- 
thority of  the  Apostles  as  eye-witnesses  of  what 
they  preached  is  not  set  aside  by  this  divine  aid : 
again  and  again  they  describe  themselves  as  "  wit- 
nesses" to  facts  (Acts  ii.  32,  iii.  15,  x.  39,  &c.)  ; 
and  when  a  vacancy  occurs  in  their  number  through 
the  fall  of  Judas,  it  is  almost  assumed  as  a  thing 
of  course  that  his  successor  shall  be  chosen  from 
those  "  which  had  companied  with  them  all  the 
time  that  the  Lord  Jesus  went  in  and  out  among 
them"  (Acts  i.  21).  The  teachings  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  consisted,  not  in  whispering  to  them  facts 
which  they  had  not  witnessed,  but  rather  in  re- 
viving the  fading  remembrance,  and  throwing  out 
into  their  true  importance  events  and  sayings  that 
had  been  esteemed  too  lightly  at  the  time  they 
took  place.  But  the  Apostles  could  not  have 
spoken  of  the  Spirit  as  they  did  (Acts  v.  32,  xv. 
28)  unless  He  were  known  to  be  working  in  and 
with  them  and  directing  them,  and  manifesting 
that  this  was  the  case  by  unmistakeable  signs. 
Here  is  the  answer,  both  to  the  question  why  was 
it  not  the  first  care  of  the  Apostles  to  prepare  a 
written  Gospel,  and  also  to  the  scruples  of  those 
who  fear  that  the  supposition  of  an  oral  Gospel 
would  give  a  precedent  for  those  views  of  tradition 
which  have  been  the  bane  of  the  Christian  Church 
as  they  were  of  the  Jewish.  The  guidance  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  supplied  for  a  time  such  aid  as  made 
a  written  Gospel  unnecessary;  but  the  Apostles 
saw  the  dangers  and  errors  which  a  traditional 
Gospel  would  be  exposed  to  in  the  course  of  time; 
and,  whilst  they  were  still  preaching  the  oral 
Gospel  in  the  strength  of  the  Holy  <ihost,  they 
were  admonished  by  the  same  divine  Person  to 
prepare  those  written  records  which  were  here- 
after to  be  the  daily  spiritual  food  of  all  the 
Church  of  Christ."  Nor  is  there  anything  un- 
natural in  the  supposition  that  the  Apostles  inten- 
tionally   uttered   their   witness   in    the    same   order, 

and  even,  for  the  most  part,  in  the  same  form  of 
words.  They  would  thus  approach  most  nearly 
to   the   condition   in   which   the   Church  was   to   be 

when    written    I ks    wen/    to    In'    tin'     means    of 

edification.     They  quote  the  Bcriptures  of  the  Old 

to  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark  only  ;  and  if  the  passage 
Implies  an  intention  to  supersede  the  writings  alluded 

to,  then  these  two  Evangelists  cannot  lie  included  under 
them.  Partial  and  incomplete  reports  of  the  preaching 
of  the  Apostles,  written  with  a  good  aim,  but  without 
authority,  are  intended  ;  and,  if  we  may  argue  from 
st.  i.uke's  sphere  of  observation,  they  were  probably 
composed  by  (ireek  converts. 


718 


GOSPELS 


Testament  frequently  in  their  discourses  ;  and  as  \ 
their  Jewish  education  had  accustomed  them  to  the 
use  of  the  words  of  the  Bible  as  well  as  the  matter, 
they  would  do  no  violence  to  their  prejudices  in 
assimilating  the  new  records  to  the  old,  and  in 
reducing  them  to  a  "  form  of  sound  words."  They 
were  all  Jews  of  Palestine,  of  humble  origin,  all 
alike  chosen,  we  may  suppose,  for  the  loving  zeal  , 
with  which  they  would  observe  the  works  of  their  j 
Master  and  afterwards  propagate  his  name ;  so  that 
the  tendency  to  variance,  arising  from  peculiarities 
of  education,  taste,  and  character,  would  be  re- 
duced to  its  lowest  in  such  a  body.  The  language 
of  their  first  preaching  was  the  Syro-Chaldaic, 
which  was  a  poor  and  scanty  language  ;  and 
though  Greek  was  now  widely  spread,  and  was 
the  language  even  of  several  places  in  Palestine 
(Josephus,  Ant.  xvii.  11,  4$  Bell.  Jud.  iii.  9,  1), 
though  it  prevailed  in  Antioch,  whence  the  first 
missions  to  Greeks  and  Hellenists,  or  Jews  who 
spoke  Greek,  proceeded  (Acts  xi.  20,  xiii.  1-3), 
the  Greek  tongue,  as  used  by  Jews,  partook  of 
the  poverty  of  the  speech  which  it  replaced ; 
as,  indeed,  it  is  impossible  to  borrow  a  whole 
language  without  borrowing  the  habits  of  thought 
upon  which  it  has  built  itself.  Whilst  modern 
taste  aims  at  a  variety  of  expression,  and  abhors 
a  repetition  of  the  same  phrases  as  monotonous, 
the  simplicity  of  the  men,  and  their  language, 
and  their  education,  and  the  state  of  literature, 
would  all  lead  us  to  expect  that  the  Apostles 
would  have  no  such  feeling.  As  to  this,  we  have 
ruore  than  mere  conjecture  to  rely  on.  Occasional 
repetitions  occur  in  the  Gospels  (Luke  vii.  19,  20  ; 
xix.  31,  34),  such  as  a  writer  in  a  more  copious 
and  cultivated  language  would  perhaps  have  sought 
to  avoid.  In  the  Acts,  the  conversion  of  St.  Paul 
is  three  times  related  (Acts  ix.,  xxii.,  xxvi.),  once 
by  the  writer  and  twice  by  St.  Paul  himself;  and 
the  two  first  harmonize  exactly,  except  as  to  a 
few  expressions  and  as  to  one  more  important 
circumstance  (ix.  7  =  xxii.  9) — which,  however, 
admits  of  an  explanation — whilst  the  third  deviates 
somewhat  more  in  expression,  and  has  one  passage 
peculiar  to  itself.  The  vision  of  Cornelius  is  also 
three  times  related  (Acts  x.  3-6,  30-32,  xi.  13, 
14),  where  the  words  of  the  angel  in  the  two  first 
are  almost  precisely  alike,  and  the  rest  very  similar, 
whilst  the  other  is  an  abridged  account  of  the  same 
facts.  The  vision  of  Peter  is  twice  related  (Acts 
x.  10-16,  xi.  5-10),  and,  except  in  one  or  two 
expressions,  the  agreement  is  verbally  exact.  These 
places  from  the  Acts  which,  both  as  to  their 
resemblance  and  their  difference,  may  be  compared 
to  the  narratives  of  the  Evangelists,  show  the  same 
tendency  to  a  common  form  of  narrative  which, 
according  to  the  present  view,  may  have  influenced 
the  preaching  of  the  Apostles.  It  is  supposed, 
then,  that  the  preaching  of  the  Apostles,  and  the 
teaching  whereby  they  prepared  others  to  preach, 
as  they  did,  would  tend  to  assume  a  common  form, 
more  or  less  fixed ;  and  that  the  portions  of  the 
three  Gospels  which  harmonize  most  exactly  owe 
their  agreement  not  to  the  fact  that  they  were 
copied  from  each  other,  although  it  is  impossible 
to  say  that  the  later  writer  made  no  use  of  the 
earlier  one,  nor  to  the  existence  of  any  original 
document  now  lost  to  us,  but  to  the  fact  that  the 
apostolic  preaching  had  already  clothed  itself  in  a 
settled  or  usual  form  of  words,  to  which  the 
writers  inclined  to  conform  without  feeling  bound 
to-  do  so ;   and  the  differences  which  occur,  often 


GOSPELS 

in  the  closest  proximity  to  the  harmonies,  arise 
from  the  feeling  of  independence  with  which  each 
wrote  what  he  had  seen  and  heard,  or,  in  the  case 
of  Mark  and  Luke,  what  apostolic  witnesses  had 
told  him.  The  harmonies,  as  we  have  seen,  begin 
with  the  baptism  of  John ;  that  is,  with  the  con- 
secration of  the  Lord  to  His  Messianic  office ;  and 
with  this  event  probably  the  ordinary  preaching  of 
the  Apostles  would  begin,  for  its  purport  was  that 
Jesus  is  the  Messiah,  and  that  as  Messiah  He  suf- 
fered, died,  and  rose  again.  They  are  very  fre- 
quent as  we  approach  the  period  of  the  Passion, 
because  the  sufferings  of  the  Lord  would  be  much 
in  the  mouth  of  every  one  who  preached  the 
Gospel,  and  all  would  become  familiar  with  the 
words  in  which  the  Apostles  described  it.  But  as 
regards  the  Resurrection,  which  differed  from  the 
Passion  in  that  it  was  a  fact  which  the  enemies  of 
Christianity  felt  bound  to  dispute  (Matt,  xxviii. 
15),  it  is  possible  that  the  divergence  arose  from 
the  intention  of  each  Evangelist  to  contribute  some- 
thing towards  the  weight  of  evidence  for  this 
central  truth.  Accordingly,  all  the  four,  even 
St.  Mark  (xvi.  14),  who  oftener  throws  a  new 
light  upon  old  ground  than  opens  out  new,  men- 
tion distinct  acts  and  appearances  of  the  Lord  to 
establish  that  He  was  risen  indeed.  The  verbal 
agreement  is  greater  where  the  words  of  others  are 
recorded,  and  greatest  of  all  where  they  are  those 
of  Jesus,  because  here  the  apostolic  preaching 
would  be  especially  exact ;  and  wnere  the  his- 
torical fact  is  the  utterance  of  certain  words,  the 
duty  of  the  historian  is  narrowed  to  a  bare  record 
of  them.  (See  the  works  of  Gieseler,  Norton, 
Westcott,  Weisse,  and  others  already  quoted.) 

That  this  opinion  would  explain  many  of  the 
facts  connected  with  the  text  is  certain.  Whether, 
besides  conforming  to  the  words  and  arrangement 
of  the  apostolic  preaching,  the  Evangelists  did  iii 
any  cases  make  use  of  each  other's  work  or  not,  it 
would  require  a  more  careful  investigation  of  de- 
tails to  discuss  than  space  permits.  Every  reader 
would  probably  find  on  examination  some  places 
which  could  best  be  explained  on  this  supposition. 
Nor  does  this  involve  a  sacrifice  of  the  independ- 
ence of  the  narrator.  If  each  of  the  three  drew 
the  substance  of  his  narrative  from  the  one  com- 
mon strain  of  preaching  that  everywhere  prevailed, 
to  have  departed  entirely  in  a  written  account 
from  the  common  form  of  words  to  which  Chris- 
tian ears  were  beginning  to  be  familiar,  would  not 
have  been  independence  but  wilfulness.  To  follow 
here  and  there  the  words  and  arrangement  of 
another  written  gospel  already  current  would  not 
compromise  the  writer's  independent  position.  If 
tlie  principal  part  of  the  narrative  was  the  voice  of 
the  whole  Church,  a  few  portions  might  be  con- 
formed to  another  writer  without  altering  the  cha- 
racter of  the  testimony.  In  the  separate  articles  on 
the  Gospels  it  will  be  shown  that,  however  close 
may  be  the  agreement  of  the  Evangelists,  the  inde- 
pendent position  of  each  appears  from  the  contents 
of  his  book,  and  has  been  recognised  by  writers  of 
all  ages.  It  will  appear  that  St.  Matthew  describes 
the  kingdom  of  Messiah,  as  founded  in  the  Old 
Testament  and  fulfilled  in  Jesus  of  Nazareth  ;  that 
St.  Mark,  with  so  little  of  narrative  peculiar  to 
himself,  brings  out  by  many  minute  circumstances 
a  more  vivid  delineation  of  our  Lord's  completely 
human  life ;  that  St.  Luke  puts  forward  the  work 
of  Redemption  as  a  universal  benefit,  and  shows 
Jesus  not  only  as  the  Messiah  of  the  chosen  people 


GOSPELS 

but  as  the  Saviour  of  the  world  ;  that  St.  John, 
writing  last  of  all,  passed  over  most  of  what  his 
predecessors  had  related,  in  order  to  set  forth  more 
fully  all  that  he  had  heard  from  the  Master  who 
loved  him,  of  His  relation  to  the  Father,  and  of 
the  relation  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  both.  The  inde- 
pendence of  the  writers  is  thus  established  ;  and  if 
they  seem  to  have  here  and  there  used  each  other's 
account,  which  it  is  perhaps  impossible  to  prove 
or  disprove,  such  cases  will  not  compromise  that 
claim  which  alone  gives  value  to  a  plurality  of 
witnesses. 

How  does  this  last  theory  bear  upon  our  belief 
in  the  inspiration  of  the  Gospels?  This  momentous 
question  admits  of  a  satisfactory  reply.  Our  blessed 
Lord,  on  rive  different  occasions,  promised  to  the 
Apostles  the  divine  guidance,  to  teach  and  enlighten 
them  in  their  dangers  (Matt.  x.  19  ;  Luke  xii.  11, 
12  ;  Mark  xiii.  11  ;  and  John  xiv.,  xv.,  xvi.).  He 
bade  them  hike  no  thought  about  defending  them- 
selves before  judges ;  he  promised  them  the  Spirit 
of  Truth  to  guide  them  into  all  truth,  to  teach 
them  all  things,  and  bring  all  things  to  their  re- 
membrance.  That  this  promise  was  fully  realised 
to  them  the  history  of  the  Acts  sufficiently  shows. 
But  if  the  divine  assistance  was  given  them  in  their 
discourses  and  preaching  it  would  be  rendered 
equally  when  they  were  about  to  put  down  in 
writing  the  same  gospel  which  they  preached  ;  and, 
as  this  would  be  their  greatest  time  of  need,  the 
aid  would  be  granted  then  most  surely.  So  that, 
as  to  St.  Matthew  and  St.  John,  we  may  say  that 
their  Gospels  are  inspired  because  the  writers  of 
them  were  inspired,  according  to  their  Master's 
promise  ;  for  it  is  impossible  to  suppose  that  He 
who  put  words  into  their  mouths  when  they  stood 
before  a  human  tribunal,  with  no  greater  fear  than 
that  of  death  before  them,  would  withhold  His 
light  and  truth  when  the  want  of  them  would  mis- 
lead the  whole  Church  of  Christ  and  turn  the  light 
that  was  in  it  into  darkness.  The  case  of  the  other 
two  Evangelists  is  somewhat  different.  It  has 
always  been  held  that  they  were  under  the  guid- 
ance of  ApOstles  in  what  they  wrote — St.  Mark 
under  that  of  St.  Peter,  and  St.  Luke  umb/r  that  of 
St.  Paul.  We  are  not  expressly  told  indeed  that 
these  Evangelists  themselves  were  persons  to  whom 
Christ's  promises  of  supernatural  guidance  had  been 
extended,  but  it  certainly  was  not  confined  to  the 
twelve  to  whom  it  was  originally  made,  as  the  case 
<>f  St.  Paul  himself  proves,  who  was  admitted  to  all 
the  privileges  of  an  apostle,  though,  as  it  were, 
"horn  out  of  due  time;"  and  as  St.  Mark  and 
St.  Luke  were  the  companions  of  apostles — shared 
their  dangers,  confronted  hostile  tribunals,  had  to 
te.uli  and  preach — there  is  reason  to  think  that 
they  equally  enjoyed  what  they  equally  need.,!. 
In  Acts  xv.  28,  the  Holy  Ghosi  i?-  spoken  "fa,  the 
common  guide  and  iighl  of  all  the  brethren,  not 
of  apostles  only;  nay,  to  speak  it  reverently,  as  one 
of  themselves.  So  that  (lie  Gospels  of  St.  Mark 
and  St.  Luke  appear  to  have  been  admitted  into 
the  canon  of  Scripture  as  written  by  inspired  men 
in  free  and  close  communication  with  inspired 
apostles.  But  supposing  that  the  portion  of  the 
three  first  Gospels  which  is  common  to  all  has  been 
derived  from  the  preaching  ofthe  apostles  in  general, 
then  it  is  drawn  directly  from  a  source  which  we 

know  from  our  Lord  Himself  to  have  1 u  inspired. 

It  comesto  us  from  those  apostles  into  whose  mouths 
Christ  promised  to  put  the  words  of  Mis  Holy  Spirit. 
It  is  not  from  aii  anonymous  writing,  as  Eichhorn 


GOSPELS 


719 


thinks — it  is  not  that  the  three  witnesses  are  really 
one,    as    Storr   and   others  have  suggested   in    the 
theory  of  copying — but  that  the  daily  preaching  of 
all  apostles  and  teachers  has  found  three  independent 
transcribers  in  the   three    Evangelists.     Now    the 
inspiration  of  an  historical  writing  will  consist  in 
its  truth,  and  in  its  selection  of  events.     Every- 
thing narrated  must  be  substantially  and  exactly 
true,  and  the  comparison  of  the  Gospels  one  with 
another  oilers  us  nothing  that  does  not  answer  to 
this  test.     There  are  differences  of  arrangement  of 
events ;  here  some  details  of  a  narrative  or  a  dis- 
course are  supplied  which  are  wanting  there  ;  and 
if  the  writer  had  professed  to  follow  a  strict  chrono- 
logical order,  or  had  pretended  that  his  record  was 
not  only  true  but  complete,  then  one  inversion  of 
order,  or  one  omission  of  a  syllable,  would  convict 
him  of  inaccuracy.     But  if  it  is  plain— if  it  is  all 
but    avowed—  that   minute    chronological  data  are 
not  part  of  the  writer's  purpose — if  it  is  also  plain 
that  nothing  but  a  selection  of  the  facts  is  intended, 
or,  indeed,  possible  (John  xxi.  25) — then  the  proper 
test  to  apply  is,  whether  each  gives  us  a  picture  of 
the  life  and  ministry  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth  that  is 
self-consistent  and  consistent  with  the  others,  such 
as  would  be  suitable  to  the  use  of  those  who  were 
to  believe  on  His  Name — for  this  is  their  evident 
intention.     About  the  answer  there  should  be  no 
doubt.     We   have   seen   that  each  Gospel   has   its 
own  features,  and  that  the  divine  element  has  con- 
trolled the  human  but  not  destroyed  it.     But  the 
picture  which  they  conspire  to  draw  is  one  full  of 
harmony.     The   Saviour    they    all   describe  is  the 
same   loving,  tender  guide  of  His  disciples,  sym- 
pathising with  them  in  the  sorrows  and  temptations 
of  earthly  life,  yet  ever  ready  to  enlighten  that  life 
by  rays  of  truth  out  of  the  infinite  world  where 
the  Father  sits  upon  His  throne.  •    It  has  been  said 
that  St.  Matthew  portrays  rather  the  human  side, 
and  St.  John  the  divine  ;  but  this  holds  good  only 
in  a  limited  sense.     It  is  in  St.  John  that  we  read 
that  "  Jesus  wept ;"  and  there  is  nothing,  even  in 
the  last  discourse  of  Jesus,  as  reported  by  St.  John, 
that  opens  a  deeper  view  of  His  divine  nature  than 
the  words  in  St.  Matthew  (xi.  25-30)  beginning, 
"  I  thank  thee,  0  Father,  Lord  of  heaven  and  earth, 
because  thou  hast  hid  these  things  from  the  wise 
and  prudent  and  hast  revealed  them  unto  babes." 
All  reveal  the  same  divine  and  human  Teacher  ;  four 
copies  of  the  same  portrait,  perhaps  with  a  differ- 
ence of  expression,  yet   still   the  same,  are  drawn 
here,  and  it  is  a  portrait   the  like  of  which  no  one 
had  ever  delineated  before,  or,  indeed,  could  have 
done,   Except   from    having   looked  on    it   with   ob- 
servant eyes,  and  from  having  had  the  mind  opened 
by  the  Holy  Spirit  to  comprehend  features  of  such 
unspeakable  radiance.     Not  only  does  this  highest 
"harmony  ot  the  Gospels"  manifest  itself  to  every 
pious  reader  ofthe  Bible,  but  the  lower  harmony — 
the  agreement  of  tact   and   won!  in  all  that  relates 
to  the  ministry  ofthe  Lord,  in  all   that  would  con- 
tribute to  a   trui'  view  of  His  spotless  character — 
exists  also,  and  cannot  he  denied.      For  example,  all 
tell    us    alike    that    Jesus   was   transfigured    on    the 
mount  ;    that  the  $kekin  <h  of  divine  glory  shone 
upon  His  face ;    that  Moses  the  lawgiver  and  Elijah 
the  prophet  talked  with    Him;   and   that   the  Voice 
from  heaven  bare  witness  to  Him.    Is  it  any  impu- 
tation   upon    the   truth    of   the  historic.-    that    St. 
.Matthew  alone  tells  us  that  the  witnesses  fell  pros- 
tiate  to  the  earth,  and  tiiat  Jesus  laised  them?  or, 
that  St.  John  alone  tells  us  that  for  a  part  of  the 


720 


GOSPELS 


time  they  were  heavy  with  sleep?  Again,  one 
Evangelist,  in  describing  our  Lord's  temptation, 
follows  the  order  of  the  occurrences,  another  ar- 
ranges according  to  the  degrees  of  temptation,  and 
the  third,  passing  over  all  particulars,  merely  men- 
tions that  our  Lord  was  tempted.  Is  there  any- 
thing here  to  shake  our  faith  in  the  writers  as  cre- 
dible historians?  Do  we  treat  other  histories  in 
this  exacting  spirit  ?  Is  not  the  very  independence 
of  treatment  the  pledge  to  us  that  we  have  really 
three  witnesses  to  the  fact  that  Jesus  was  tempted 
like  as  we  are  ?  for  if  the  Evangelists  were  copyists 
nothing  would  have  been  more  easy  than  to  remove 
such  an  obvious  difference  as  this.  The  histories 
are  true  according  to  any  test  that  should  be  ap- 
plied to  a  history  ;  and  the  events  that  they  select 
— though  we  could  not  presume  to  say  that  they 
were  more  important  than  what  are  omitted,  except 
from  the  fact  of  the  omission — are  at  least  such  as 
to  have  given  the  whole  Christian  Church  a  clear 
conception  of  the  Redeemer's  life,  so  that  none  has 
ever  complained  of  insufficient  means  of  knowing 
Him. 

There  is  a  perverted  form  of  the  theory  we  are 
considering  which  pretends  that  the  facts  of  the 
Redeemer's  life  remained  in  the  state  of  an  oral 
tradition  till  the  latter  part  of  the  second  century, 
and  that  the  four  Gospels  were  not  written  till 
that  time.  The  difference  is  not  of  degree  but  of 
kind  between  the  opinion  that  the  Gospels  were 
written  during  the  lifetime  of  the  Apostles,  who 
were  eye-witnesses,  and  the  notion  that  for  nearly 
a  century  after  the  oldest  of  them  had  passed  to  his 
rest  the  events  were  only  preserved  in  the  change- 
able and  insecure  form  of  an  oral  account.  But 
for  the  latter  opinion  there  is  not  one  spark  of  his- 
torical evidence.  Heretics  of  the  second  century 
who  would  gladly  have  rejected  and  exposed  a  new 
gospel  that  made  against  them  never  hint  that  the 
Gospels  are  spurious ;  and  orthodox  writers  ascribe 
without  contradiction  the  authorship  of  the  books 
to  those  whose  names  they  bear.  The  theory  was 
invented  to  accord  with  the  assumption  that  miracles 


GOSPELS 

are  impossible,  but  upon  no  evidence  whatever ; 
and  the  argument  when  exposed  runs  in  this  vicious 
circle  : — "  There  are  no  miracles,  therefore  the 
accounts  of  them  must  have  grown  up  in  the  course 
of  a  century  from  popular  exaggeration,  and  as  the 
accounts  are  not  contemporaneous  it  is  not  proved 
that  there  are  miracles  !  "  That  the  Jewish  mind 
in  its  lowest  decay  should  have  invented  the  cha- 
racter of  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  and  the  sublime  system 
of  morality  contained  in  His  teaching — that  four 
writers  should  have  fixed  the  popular  impression  in 
four  plain,  simple,  unadorned  narratives,  without 
any  outbursts  of  national  prejudice,  or  any  attempt 
to  give  a  political  tone  to  the  events  they  wrote  of 
— would  be  in  itself  a  miracle  harder  to  believe 
than  that  Lazarus  came  out  at  the  Lord's  call  from 
his  four-days'  tomb. 

It  will  be  an  appropriate  conclusion  to  this  im- 
perfect sketch  to  give  a  conspectus  of  the  harmony 
of  the  Gospels,  by  which  the  several  theories  may 
be  examined  in  their  bearing  on  the  gospel  accounts 
in  detail.  Let  it  be  remembered,  however,  that  a 
complete  harmony,  including  the  chronological  ar- 
rangement and  the  exact  succession  of  all  events,  was 
not  intended  by  the  sacred  writers  to  be  constructed  ; 
indeed  the  data  for  it  are  pointedly  withheld.  Here 
most  of  the  places  where  there  is  some  special  dif- 
ficulty, and  where  there  has  been  a  question  whether 
the  events  are  parallel  or  distinct,  are  marked  by 
figures  in  different  type.  The  sections  might  in 
many  cases  have  been  subdivided  but  for  the  limits 
of  space,  but  the  reader  can  supply  this  defect  for 
himself  as  cases  arise.  (The  principal  works  employed 
in  constructing  it  are,  Griesbach,  Synopsis  Evan- 
geliorum,  1776;  De  Wette  and  Liicke,  Syn.  Evang., 
1842  ;  Rodiger,  Syn.  Evang.,  1829  ;  Clausen, 
Quatuor  Evang.  Tabulae  Synopticae,  1829  ;  Gres- 
well's  Harmony  and  Dissertations,  a  most  im- 
portant work  ;  the  Rev.  I.  Williams  On  the  Gos- 
pels;  Theile's  Greek  Testament;  and  Tischen- 
dorf's  Syn.  Evany.,  1854;  besides  the  well-known 
works  of  Lightfoot,  Macknight,  Newcome,  and 
Robinson.)  [W.  T.] 


TABLE  OF  THE  HARMONY  OF  THE  FOUR  GOSPELS. 

N.B. — In  the  following  Table,  where  all  the  references  under  a  given  section  are  printed  in  thick  type, 
as  under  "  Two  Genealogies,"  it  is  to  be  understood  that  some  special  difficulty  besets  the  harmony. 
Where  one  or  more  references  under  a  given  section  are  in  thin,  and  one  or  more  in  thick  type,  it  is  to 
be  understood  that  the  former  are  given  as  in  their  proper  place,  and  that  it  is  more  or  less  doubtful 
whether  the  latter  are  to  be  considered  as  parallel  narratives  or  not. 


'St.  Matthew. 

St.  Mark. 

St.  Luke. 

St.  John. 

"The  Word" 

Annunciation  of  the  Baptist's  birth 
Annunciation  of  the  birth  of  Jesus 

Birth  of  Jesus  Christ       

Flight  to  Egypt      

i.  18-25 

i.  1-17 

ii.  1-12* 
ii.  13-23 

iii.  1-12 
iii.  13-17 
iv.  1-11 

i.  1-8 
i.  9-11 
i.  12,  13 

i.  1-4 

i.  5-25 
i.  26-38 
i.  39-56 
i.  57-80 
ii.  1-7 
iii.  23-38 
ii.  8-20 
ii.  21 
ii.  22-38 

ii.  39 
ii.  40-52 
iii.  1-18 
iii.  21,  22 
iv.  1-13 

i.  1-14 

i.  15-31 
i.  32-34 

GOSPELS 

TABLE  OF  THE  HARMONY  OF  THE  FOUR  GOSPELS— continued. 


721 


Andrew  and  another  see  Jesus 

Simon,  now  Cephas         

Philip  and  Nathanael       

The  water  made  wine 

Passover  (1st)  and  cleansing  the  Temple 

Nicodemus       

Christ  and  John  baptizing       

The  woman  of  Samaria 

John  the  Baptist  in  prison       

Return  to  Galilee 

The  synagogue  at  Nazareth 

The  nobleman's  son  

Capernaum.     Four  Apostles  called 

Demoniac  healed  there 

Simon's  wife's  mother  healed 

Circuit  round  Galilee      

Healing  a  leper        

Christ  stills  the  storm 

Demoniacs  in  land  of  Gadarenes 
Jairus's  daughter.     Woman  healed 

Blind  men,  and  demoniac        

Healing  the  paralytic       

Matthew  the  publican 

"  Thy  disciples  fast  not "         

Journey  to  Jerusalem  to  2nd  Passover  . . 
Pool  of  Bethesda.     Power  of  Christ 
Plucking  ears  of  corn  on  Sabbath 
The  withered  hand.     Miracles 

The  Twelve  Apostles       

The  Sermon  on  the  Mount      

The  centurion's  servant 

The  widow's  son  at  Nain         

Messengers  from  John 

Woe  to  the  cities  of  Galilee 

Call  to  the  meek  and  surlering 

Anointing  the  feet  of  Jesus 

Second  circuit  round  Galilee 

Parable  of  the  Sower       

,,       Candle  under  a  Bushel 

,,      the  Sower 

„       the  Wheat  and  Tares 

,,       Grain  of  Mustard-seed 

„       Leaven        

On  teaching  by  parables 

Wheat  and  tares  explained       

The  treasure,  the  pearl,  the  net 

His  mother  and  His  brethren 

Reception  at  Nazareth 

Third  circuit  round  Galilee 

Sending  forth  of  the  Twelve 

Herod's  opinion  of  Jesus 

Death  of  John  tin' Baptist       

Approach  of  Passover  (3rd) 

Feeding  of  the  five  thousand 

Walking  on  the  sea 

Miracles  in  Gennesaret 

The  bread  of  life      

The  washen  hands 

The  Syrophoenician  woman 

Miracles  of  healing 

Feeding  of  the  four  thousand 

The  sign  from  heaven      

The  leaven  of  the  Pharisees 

Blind  man  healed 

Peter's  profession  of  faith        

The  Passion  foretold        

The  Transfiguration         

Elijah       


St.  Matthew. 


iv.  12;  xiv.3 
iv.  12 


iv.  13-22 

viii.  14-17 
iv.  23-25 
viii.  1-4 
viii.  18-27 
viii.  28-34 
ix.  18-26 
ix.  27-34 
ix.  1-8 
ix.  9-13 
ix.  14-17 


St.  Mark. 


i.  14;  vi.  17 
i.  14,  15 


i.  1G-20 
i.  21-28 
i.  29-34 
i.  35-39 
i.  40-45 
iv.  35-41 
v.  1-20 
v.  21-43 

ii.  1-12 
ii.  13-17 
ii.  18-22 


xii.  1-8  ii.  23-28 

xii.  9-21  iii.  1-12 

x.  2-4  iii.  13-19 

v.  1-vii.  29 

viii.  5-13 


xi.  2-19 
xi.  20-24 
xi.  25-30 


1-23 


xiii.  24-30 
xiii.  31,  32 
xiii.  33 
xiii.  34,  35 
xiii.  36-43 
xiii.  44-52 
xii.  46-50 
xiii.  53-58 
ix.  35-38  ;xi.l 
x. 

xiv.  1,  2 
xiv.  3-12 


xiv.  13-21 
xiv.  22-:;:? 
xiv.  ;;4-:;i; 


xv.  1-'Jii 
xv.  21-28 
xv.  29-31 
xv.  32-39 
xvi.  1-4 
xvi.  5-12 


xvi.  13-19 
xvi.  20-28 
xvii.  1-9 
xvii.  10-13 


iv.  1-20 
iv.  21-25 
iv.  26-29 

iv.  30-32 

iv.  33,  34 


iii.  31-35 

vi.  1-6 
vi.  6 
vi.  7-13 
vi.  14-16 
vi.  17-29 

vi.  30-44 
vi.  45-52 
vi.  53-56 

vii.  1-2.5 
vii.  24-:  10 
vii.  31-37 
viii.  1-9 
viii 
viii 
viii 
viii 


St.  Luke. 


10-13 
14-21 
22-26 
27-29 
viii.30-ix.  1 
ix.  2-10 
ix.  11-1.5 


iii.  19-20 
iv.  14,  15 
iv.  16-30 

v.  1-11 

iv.  31-37 
iv.  38-41 
iv.  42-44 
v.  12-16 
viii.  22-25 
viii.  26-39 
viii.  40-56 

v.  17-26 
v.  27-32 
v.  33-39 


vi.  1-5 
vi.  6-11 
vi.  12-16 
vi.  17-49 
vii.  1-10 
vii.  11-17 
vii.  18-35 


vii.  36-50 
viii.  1-3 
viii.  4-15 
viii.  16-18 


xiii.  18,  19 
xiii.  20,  21 


viii.  19-21 


ix.  1-6 

ix.  7-9 


ix.  10-17 


ix.  18-20 

ix.  21-27 
ix.  28-36 


St.  John. 


i.  35-40 
i.  41,  42 
i.  43-51 
ii.  1-11 
ii.  12-22 
ii.  23-iii.21 
iii.  22-36 
iv.  1-42 
iii.  24 
iv.  43-45 

iv.  46-54 


v.  I 
v.  2-47 


iv.  46-54 


vi.  4 
vi.  1-15 
vi.  16-21 

vi.  22-i;;. 


vi.  66-71 


722 


GOSPELS 

TABLE  OF  THE  HARMONY  OF  THE  FOUR  GOSPELS—  continued. 


The  lunatic  healed 

The  Passion  again  foretold 
Fish  caught  for  the  tribute 

The  little  child        

One  casting  out  devils 

Offences 

The  lost  sheep  

Forgiveness  of  injuries 

Binding  and  loosing         

Forgiveness.     Parable 

"  Salted  with  fire"  

Journey  to  Jerusalem 

Fire  from  heaven 

Answers  to  disciples        

The  Seventy  disciples      

Discussions  at  Feast  of  Tabernacles 
Woman  taken  in  adultery 
Dispute  with  the  Pharisees 

The  man  born  blind         

The  good  Shepherd 

The  return  of  the  Seventy 

The  good  Samaritan         

Mary  and  Martha 

The  Lord's  Prayer 

Prayer  effectual       

"  Through  Beelzebub  " 

The  unclean  spirit  returning   . . 
The  sign  of  Jonah 

The  light  of  the  body 


The  Pharisees 

What  to  fear 

"  Master,  speak  to  my  brother  "     . . 

Covetousness 

Watchfulness 

Galileans  that  perished 

Woman  healed  on  Sabbath      

The  grain  of  mustard-seed       

The  leaven       

Towards  Jerusalem  

"  Are  there  few  that  be  saved  ?" 

Warning  against  Herod 

"  0  Jerusalem,  Jerusalem" 

Dropsy  healed  on  Sabbath-day 

Choosing  the  chief  rooms         

Parable  of  the  Great  Supper 

Following  Christ  with  the  Cross 

Parables  of  Lost  Sheep,  Piece  cf  Money, 
Prodigal  Son,  Unjust  Steward,  Rich  Man 
and  Lazarus         ] 

Offences 

Faith  and  merit       

The  ten  lepers  

How  the  kingdom  cometh        

Parable  of  the  Unjust  Judge 

„       the  Pharisee  and  Publican 

Divorce    

Infants  brought  to  Jesus  

The  rich  man  inquiring 

Promises  to  the  disciples  

Labourers  in  the  vinevard       

Death  of  Christ  foretold 

Request  of  James  and  John 

Blind  men  at  Jericho  . .  

Zacchaeus        

Parable  of  the  Ten  Talents      

Feast  of  Dedication 

Beyond  Jordan         


St.  Matthew. 


xvii.  14-21 
xvii.  22,  23 
xvii.  24-27 
xviii.  1-5 


xviii.  6-9 
xviii.  10-14 
xviii.  15-17 
xviii.  18-20 
xviii.  21-35 


viii.  19- 


vi.  9-13 
vii.  7-11 
xii.  22-37 
xii.  43-45 
xii.  38-42 
|v.l5;  vi.22, 
(     23 
xxiii. 
x.  26-33 

vi.  25-33 


xiii.  31,  32 
xiii.  33 


xxiii.  37-39 


xxii.  1-14 
x.  37,  38 


xviii.  6-15 
xvii.  20 


six.  1-12 
xix.  13-15 
xix.  16-26 
xix.  27-30 
xx.  1-16 
xx.  17-19 
xx.  20-28 
xx.  29-34 


xxv.  14-30 


St.  Mark. 


ix.  14-29 
ix.  30-32 


37 
8-41 
2  48 


ix.  49,  50 


20-30 


30-32 


x.  1-12 
x.  13-16 
x.  17-27 
x.  28-31 

x.  32-34 
x.  35-45 
x.  46-52 


St.  Luke. 


ix.  37-42 
ix.  43-45 

ix.  46-48 
ix.  49,  50 
xvii.  2 
xv.  4-7 


ix.  51 
ix.  52-56 
ix.  57-62 
x.  1-16 


x.  17-24 
x.  25-37 
x.  38-42 
xi.  1-4 
xi.  5-13 
xi.  14-23 
xi.  24-28 
xi.  29-32 

xi.  33-36 

xi.  37-54 
xii.  1-12 
xii.  13-15 
xii.  16-31 
xii.  32-59 
xiii.  1-9 
xiii.  10-17 
xiii.  18,  19 
xiii.  20,  21 
xiii.  22 
xiii.  23-30 
xiii.  31-33 
xiii.  34,  35 
xiv.  1-6 
xiv.  7-14 
xiv.  15-24 
xiv.  25-35 

xv.,  xvi. 

xvii.  1-4 
xvii.  5-10 
xvii.  11-19 

xvii.  20-37 
xviii.  1-8 
xviii.  9-14 

xviii.  15-17 
xviii.  18-27 
xviii.  28-30 

xviii.  31-34 

xviii.  35  43 
xix.  1-10 
xix.  11-28 


vii.  1-10 


vii.  11-53 
viii.  1-11 
viii.  12-59 
ix.  1-41 
x.  1-21 


x.  22-39 
\.  40-42 


GOSPELS 
TABLE  OF  THE  HARMONY  OF  THE  FOUR  GOSPELS— continued. 


723 


Raising  of  Lazarus 

Meeting  of  the  Sanhedrim 

Christ  in  Ephraim 

The  anointing  by  Mary  .. 
Christ  enters  Jerusalem 
Cleansing  of  the  Temple  (2nd) 

The  barren  fig-tree 


Pray,  and  forgive 

"  By  what  authority,"  &c 

Parable  of  the  Two  Sons 

,,       the  Wicked  Husbandman    . . 

„       the  Wedding  Garment 

The  tribute-money 

The  state  of  the  risen      

The  great  Commandment        

David's  Son  and  David's  Lord 

Against  the  Pharisees      

The  widow's  mite 

Christ's  second  coming 

Parable  of  the  Ten  Virgins 

„       the  Talents  

The  Last  Judgment         

Greeks  visit  Jesus.     Voice  from  heaven  .. 

Reflections  of  John 

Last  Passover  (4th).     Jews  conspire 

Judas  Iscariot 

Paschal  Supper        

Contention  of  the  Apostles      

Peter's  fall  foretold         

Last  discourse.    The  departure ;  the  Com- 1 

forter I 

The  vine  and  the  branches.  Abiding  in  love 
Work  of  the  Comforter  in  disciples 

The  prayer  of  Christ        

Gethsemane 

The  betrayal 


Before  Annas  (Caiaphas).     Peter's  denial 

Before  the  Sanhedrim      

Before  Pilate 

The  Traitor's  death  

Before  Herod 


Accusation  and  Condemnation 

Treatment  by  the  soldiers 

The  Crucifixion        

The  mother  of  Jesus 
Mockings  and  railings 

The  malefactor        

The  death        

Darkness  and  other  portents    . 

The  bystanders        

The  side  pierced        

The  burial        

The  guard  of  the  sepulchre 

The  Resurrection 

Disciples  going  to  Emmaus     . 
Appearances  in  Jerusalem 
At  the  Sea  of  Tiberias     . . 
On  the  Mount  in  Galilee 

Unrecorded  Works 

Ascension         


St.  Matthew. 


xxvi.  6-13 
xxi.  1-11 
xxi.  12-16 


xxi.  17-22 

vi.  14,  15 

xxi.  23-27 
xxi.  28-32 
xxi.  33-46 
xxii.  1-14 
xxii.  15-22 
xxii.  23-33 
xxii.  34-40 
xxii.  41-46 
xxiii.  1-39 


xxiv.  1-51 
xxv.  1-13 
xxv.  14-30 
xxv.  31-46 


xxvi.  1-5 
xxvi.  14-16 
xxvi.  17-29 

xxvi.  30-35 


St.  Mark. 


xiv.  3-9 
xi.  1-10 
xi.  15-18 
11-14, 
19-23 
xi.  24-26 
xi.  27-33 


(xi.      11-14,\ 
\     19-23       J 


xxvi.  36-46 
xxvi.  47-56 
|  xxvi.  57,  58, 
I  69-75 
xxvi.  59-68 
|  xxvii.  1,  2, 
|  11-14 
xxvii.  3-10 


xii.  1-12 

xii.  13-17 
xii.  18-27 
xii.  28-34 
xii.  35-37 
xii.  38-40 
xii.  41-44 
xiii.  1-37 


xiv.  1,  2 
xiv.  10,  11 
xiv.  12-25 

xiv.  26-31 


xiv.  32-42 

xiv.  43-52 

)  /xiv.  53,  54, \ 

M     66-72        / 

xiv.  55-65 

xv.  1-5 


xxvii.  15-26 

27-31 
32-38 


XXV] 

xxvi 


xxvii.  39-44 


XXV] 

xxvi 


xx  vi 
xxvi 
xxvi 
xxvi 


50 
45-53 

54-56 

57-61 
62-66  i 
.  11-15J 
.  1-10 


xxviii.  16-20 


xv.  6-15 

xv.  16-20 

xv.  21-28 

xv.  29-32 

xv.  37 
xv.  33-38 
xv.  39-41 

xv.  42-47 


xvi.  1-11 
xvi.  12,  13 
xvi.  14-18 


xvi.  19,  20 


St.  Luke. 


vii.  36-50 
xix.  29-44 
xix.  45-48 


xx.  1-8 

xx.  9-19 
xiv.  16-24 
xx.  20-26 
xx.  27-40 

xx.  41-44 
xx.  45-47 
xxi.  1-4 
xxi.  5-38 

xix.  11-28 


xxii.  1,  2 
xxii.  3-6 
xxii.  7-23 
xxii.  24-30 
xxii.  31-39 


xxii.  40-46 
xxii.  47-53 

xxii.  54-62 

xxii.  63-71 

xxiii.  1-3 


xx  m. 

xxiii. 

xxiii 

xxiii. 

xxiii. 
xxiii. 
xxiii. 
xxiii. 
xxiii. 


4-11 

13-25 

36,  37 

26-34 

35-39 

4o-43 
46 

44,  45 
47-49 


xxiii.  50-56 


xxiv.  1-12 
xxiv.  13-35 

xxiv.  1 16-49 


xxiv.  50-53 


St.  John. 


xi.  1-44 
xi.  45-53 
xi.  54-57 
xii.  1-11 
xii.  12-19 
ii.  13-22 


xii.  20-36 
xii.  36-50 


xiii.  1-35 

xiii.  36-38 

xiv.  1-31 

xv.  1-27 
xvi.  1-33 
xvii.  1-26 
xviii.  1 
xviii.  2-11 

xviii.  12-27 


'xviii.  29-40, 

xix.  1-16 
xix.  2,  3 
xix.  17-24 
xix.  25-27 


xix.  28-30 


xix.  31-37 
xix.  38-42 


xx.  1-18 

xx.  19-29 
xxi.  1-23 

[xx.  30,  31; 
[    xxi.  24,  25 


[W.T.] 


724 


GOTHOLIAS 


GOTHO'LIAS.  Josias,  son  of  Gotholias  (IV 
6o\iov  ;  Gotholiae),  was  one  of  the  sons  of  Elam 
who  returned  from  Babylon  with  Esdras  (1  Esd. 
viii.  33).  The  name  is  the  same  as  Athaliah, 
with  the  common  substitution  of  the  Greek  G  for 
the  Hebrew  guttural  Ain  (comp.  Gomorrah,  Gaza, 
&c).  This  passage  compared  with  2  K.  xi.  1,  &c. 
shows  that  Athaliah  was  both  a  male  and  female 
name. 

GOTHO'NIEL  (ToOovifa,  i.  e.  Othniel ;  Go- 
thoniel),  father  of  Chabris,  who  was  one  of  the 
governors  [&pxovres)  of  the  city  of  Bethulia  (Jud. 
vi.  15). 

GOURD.  I.  jl^p,  only  in  Jon.  iv.  6-10  ;  ko- 
XokwQt)  ;  hedera.  A  difference  of  opinion  has  long 
existed  as  to  the  plant  which  is  intended  by  this 
word.  The  argument  is  as  old  as  Jerome,  whose 
rendering  hedera  was  impugned  by  Augustine  as  a 
heresy  !  In  reality  Jerome's  rendering  was  not 
intended  to  be  critical,  but  rather  as  a  kind  of  pis 
idler  necessitated  by  the  want  of  a  proper  Latin 
word  to  express  the  original.  Besides  he  was  un- 
willing to  leave  it  in  merely  Latinised  Hebrew 
(kikayon),  which  might  jhave  occasioned  misappre- 
hensions. Augustine,  following  the  LXX.  and  Syr. 
Versions,  was  in  favour  of  the  rendering  gourd, 
which  was  adopted  by  Luther,  the  A.  V.  &c. 
In  Jerome's  description  of  the  plaut  called  in 
Syr.  karo,  and  Punic  el-keroa,  Celsius  recognises 
the  Ricinus,  Palma  Christi,  or  Castor-oil  plant 
( Hierobot.  ii.  273  ff. ;  Bochart,  Hieroz.  ii.  293, 
623).  The  Ricinus  was  seen  by  Niebuhr  (De- 
script,  of  Arab.  p.  148)  at  Basra,  where  it  was 
distinguished  by  the  name  el-keroa  ;  by  Rauwolf 
(Trav.  p.  52)  it  was  noticed  in  great  abundance 
near  Tripoli,  where  the  Arabs  called  it  el-kerua  ; 
while  both  Hasselquist  and  Robinson  observed  very 
large  specimens  of  it  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
Jericho  ("  Ricinus  in  altitudinem  arboris  insignis," 
Hasselq.  p.  555  ;  see  also  Robins,  i.  553). 

Niebuhr  observes  that  the  Jews  and  Christians 
at  Mosul  (Nineveh)  maintained  that  the  tree  which 
sheltered  Jonah  was  not  "  el-keroa,"  but  "  el- 
kerra,"  a  sort  of  gourd.  This  revival  of  the 
August,  rendering  has  been  defended  by  J.  E. 
Faber  {Notes  on  Harmer's  Observations,  &c.  i. 
145).  And  it  must  be  confessed  that  the  evi- 
dently miraculous  character  of  the  narrative  in  Jon. 
deprives  the  Palma  Christi  of  any  special  claim  to 
identification  on  the  ground  of  its  rapid  growth  and 
decay,  as  described  by  Niebuhr.  Much  more  im- 
portant, however,  is  it  to  observe  the  tree-like 
character  of  this  plaut,  rendering  it  more  suitable 
for  the  purpose  which  it  is  stated  to  have  fulfilled  ; 
also  the  authority  of  the  Palestine  Jews  who  were 
contemporaries  of  Jerome,  as  compared  with  that 
of  the  Mosul  Jews  conversed  with  by  Niebuhr. 
But  most  decisive  of  all  seems  the  derivation  of  the 
Hebrew  word  from  the  Egyptian  MM  (Herodot. 
ii.  94  ;  comp.  Biihr  ad  loc. ;  and  Jablonsky,  Opnsc. 
pt.  i.  p.  110)  established  by  Celsius,  with  whose 
arguments  Michaelis  declares  himself  entirely  satis- 
fied (J.  D.  Mich.  Supplem.)  ;  and  confirmed  by  the 
Talmudical  p^jp  Jftt2\  kik-oil,  prepared  from  the 
seeds  of  the  Ricinus  (Bu.xt.  Lex.  Chald.  Talmud. 
p.  2029),  and  Dioscorides.  iv.  164,  where  Kp6Ticv 
(  =  Palma  Christi)  is  described  under  the  name  of 
k'iki,  and  the  oil  made  from  its  seeds  is  called 
kIklvov  e\aiov. 

II.   niypQ,  and  D^pS.     1-  Iii  2  K.  iv.  39  ;  a 


GOVERNOR 

fruit  used  as  food,  disagreeable  to  the  taste,  and 
supposed  to  be  poisonous.  2.  In  1  K.  vi.  18,  vii.  24, 
as  an  architectural  ornament,  where  A.  V.  "  knops." 
In  Hebrew  the  plant  is  described  as  mb'  ]Sil  • 
afx-KeKov  iv  r$  aypai  ;  vitem  silvestrem  ;  whence 
in  A.  V.  "  wild  vine."  The  fruit  is  called  in  Heb. 
as  above  ;  ToXinrrj  aypia,  LXX.  =  aypla  ko\o- 
kvv8t),  Suid.  ;  colvcgnthides  agri ;  "  wild  gourds," 
A.  V. 

The  inconsistency  of  all  these  renderings  is  mani- 
fest ;  but  the  fact  is  that  the  Hebrew  name  of  the 
plant  may  denote  any  shrub  which  grows  in  ten- 
drils, such  as  the  colocyuth,  or  the  cucumber. 
Rosenmiiller  and  Gesenius  pronounce  in  favour  of 
the  wild  cucumber,  cucumis  agrestis,  or  asininus 
(Cels.  Hierobot.  i.  393  ff.).  This  opinion  is  con- 
fumed  by  the  derivation  from  J?p2,  to  burst.  The 
wild  cucumber  bursts  at  the  touch  of  the  finger, 
and  scatters  its  seeds,  which  the  colocyuth  does  not 
(Rosenm.  Alterthumsk.  iv.  pt.  1,  &c).  [T.  E.  B.] 

GOVERNOR.  In  the  Auth.  Ver.  this  one 
English  word  is  the  representative  of  no  less  than 
ten  Hebrew  and  four  Greek  words.  To  discriminate 
between  them  is  the  object  of  the  following  article. 

1.  f)1?N,  alluph,  the  chief  of  a  tribe  or  family, 
e£>N,  eleph  (Judg  vi.  15;  Is.  lx.  22  ;  Mic.  v.  1), 
and  equivalent  to  the  "  prince  of  a  thousand  "  of  Ex. 
xviii.  21,  or  the  "  head  of  a  thousand"  of  Num.  i.  16. 
It  is  the  term  applied  to  the  "  dukes  "  of  Edom  (Gen. 
xxxiv.  The  LXX.  have  retained  the  etymological 
significance  of  the  word  in  rendering  it  by  XL\idpxos 

in  Zech.  ix.  7,  xii.  5,  6  (comp.  K"bc',  from  KW). 

The  usage  in  other  passages  seems  to  imply  a  more 
intimate  relationship  than  that  which  would  exist 
between  a  chieftain  and  his  fellow-clansmen,  ana 
to  express  the  closest  friendship.  Alluph  is  then 
"  a  guide,  director,  counsellor"  (Ps.  Iv.  13;  Prov. 
ii.  17  ;  Jer.  iii.  4),  the  object  of  confidence  or  trust 
(Mic.  v.  1). 

2.  ppin,  chokek  (Judg.  v.  9),  and  3.  ppinJD, 
m'chohek  (Judg.  v.  14),  denote  a  ruler  in  his  ca- 
pacity of  lawgiver  and  dispenser  of  justice  (Gen. 
xlix.  10;  Prov.  viii.  15;  comp.  Judg,  v.  14,  with 
Is.  x.  1). 

4.  7^0,  moshel,  a  ruler  considered  especially  as 
having  power  over  the  property  and  persons  of  his 
subjects  ;  whether  his  authority  were  absolute,  as 
in  Josh.  xii.  2  of  Sihon,  and  in  Ps.  cv.  20  of  Pharaoh  ; 
or  delegated,  as  in  the  case  of  Abraham's  steward 
(Gen.  xxiv.  2),  and  Joseph  as  second  to  Pharaoh 
(Gen.  xlv.  8,  26  ;  Ps.  cv.  21).  The  "  governors  of 
the  people  "  in  2  Chr.  xxiii.  20,  appear  to  have  been 
the  king's  body-guard  (cf.  2  K.  xi.  19). 

5.  T33,  nagid,  is  connected  etymologically  with 
*13J  and  "133,  and  denotes  a  prominent  personage, 
whatever  his  capacity.  It  is  applied  to  a  king  as 
the  military  and  civil  chief  of  his  people  (2  Sam. 
v.  2,  vi.  21 ;  1  Chr.  xxix.  22),  to  the  general  of  an 
army  (2  Chr.  xxxii.  21),  and  to  the  head  of  a  tribe 
(2  Chr.  xix.  11).  The  heir-apparent  to  the  crown 
was  thus  designated  (2  Chr.  xi.  22),  as  holding  a 
prominent  position  among  the  king's  sons.  The 
term  is  also  used  of  persons  who  fulfilled  certain 
offices  in  the  temple,  and  is  applied  equally  to  the 
high-priest  (2  Chr.  xxxi.  10,  13),  as  to  inferior 
•priests  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  8)  to  whose  charge  were  com- 
mitted the  treasures  and  the  dedicated  tilings  (1  Chr. 


GOVEENOR 

xxvi.  24),  and  to  Levites  appointed  for  special  ser- 
vice (2  Chr.  xxxi.  12).  It  denotes  an  officer  of  high 
rank  in  the  palace,  the  lord  high  chamberlain  (2  Chr. 
xxviii.  7),  who  is  also  described  as  "over  the  house- 
hold "  (1  K.  iv.  6),  or  "over  the  house"  (1  K. 
xviii.  3).  Such  was  the  office  held  by  Shebna,  the 
scribe,  or  secretary  of  state  (Is.  xxii.  15),  and  in 
which  he  was  succeeded  by  Eliakim  (2  K.  xviii.  18). 
It  is  perhaps  the  equivalent  of  o!kou6/j.os,  Rom.  xvi. 
23,  and  of  Upo(TTa.TT)s,  1  Esd.  vii.  2  (cf.  1  Esd.  i.  8). 

0.  N^ti'J,  nasi.  The  prevailing  idea  in  this  word 
is  that  of  deration.  It  is  applied  to  the  chief  of  the 
tribe  (Gen.  xvii.  20  ;  Num.  ii.  3,  &c),  to  the  heads 
of  sections  of  a  tribe  (Num.  iii.  32,  vii.  2),  and  to 
a  powerful  sheykh  (Gen.  xxiii.  6).  It  appears  to 
be  synonymous  with  alluph  in  2  Chr.  i.  2,  D^NCJ 
'=nhN  *B>K"I  (cf.  2  Chr.  v.  2).  In  general' it 
denotes  a  man  of  elevated  rank.  In  later  times  the 
title  was  given  to  the  president  of  the  great  san- 
hedrim (.Seidell,  De  Synedriis,  ii.  6,  §1). 

7.  nriS,  pecfidh,  is  probably  a  word  of  Assyrian 
origin.  It  is  applied  in  1  K.  x.  15  to  the  petty 
chieftains  who  were  tributary  to  Solomon  (2  Chr. 
ix.  14) ;  to  the  military  commander  of  the  Syrians 
(1  K.  xx.  24),  the  Assyrians  (2  K.  xviii.  24,  xxiii. 
6),  the  Chaldeans  (Jer.  Ii.  23),  and  the  Medes  (.ler. 
Ii.  38).  Under  the  Persian  viceroys,  during  the  Ba- 
bylonian captivity,  the  land  of  the  Hebrews  appears 
to  have  been  portioned  out  among  "  governors " 
(DtriQ,  pachoth)  inferior  in  rank  to  the  satraps 
(Ezr.  viii.  36)',  like  the  other  provinces  which  were 
under  the  dominion  of  the  Persian  king  (Neh.  ii. 
7,  9).  It  is  impossible  to  determine  the  precise 
limits  of  their  authority,  or  the  functions  which 
they  had  to  perform.  They  formed  a  part  of  the 
Babylonian  system  of  government,  and  are  expressly 
distinguished  from  the  D"0JD,  s'gdnim  (Jew  li.  23, 
28),  to  whom,  as  well  as  to  the  satraps,  they  seem 
to  have  been  inferior  (Dan.  iii.  2,  3,  27);  as  also 
from  the  DHE?,  sarim  (Esth.  iii.  12,  viii.  9),  who, 
on  the  other  hand,  had  a  subordinate  jurisdiction. 
Sheshbazzar,  the  "prince"  (N*B'3,  Ezr.  i.  8)  of 
Judah,  was  appointed  by  Cyrus  "governor"  of  Je- 
rusalem (Ezr.  v.  14),  or  "governor  of  the  Jews," 
as  he  is  elsewhere  designated  (Ezr.  vi.  7),  an  office 
to  which  Nehemiah  afterwards  succeeded  (Neh.  v. 
14)  under  the  title  of  Tirshatha  (Ezr.  ii.  63;  Neh. 
viii.  U).  Zerubbabel,  the  representative  of  the  royal 
family  of  Judah,  is  also  called  the  "governor"  of 
Judah  (Hag.  i.  1),  but  whether  in  consequence  of 
bis  position  in  the  tribe  or  from  his  official  rank  is 
not  quite  clear.  Tatnai,  the  "governor"  beyond 
the  river,  is  spoken  of  by  Josephus  (Ant.  xi.  4,  §4), 
under  the  name  of  Sisines,  as  e-n-apxos  of  Syria  and 
Phoenicia  (cf.  1  Esd.  vi.  .">);  the  same  term  being 
employed  to  denote  the  Roman  proconsul  or  pro- 
praetor as  well  as  the  procurator  'Jos.  Ant.  xx.  8, 
§1).  It  appears  from  Ezr.  vi.  8  that  these  governors 
were  entrusted  with  the  collection  of  the  king's  taxes  ; 
and  from  Neh.  v.  IS,  xii.  26,  that  they  were  sup- 
ported by  a  contribution  levied  upon  the  people, 
which  was  technically  termed  "  the  bread  of  the 
governor"  (comp.  Ezr.  iv.  14).  They  were  pro- 
bably assisted  in  discharging  their  official  duties  by 
a  council  (Ezr.  iv.  7,  vi.  tl).  In  the  Peshito  version 
of  Neh.  iii.  11,  Pahath  Moab  is  not  taken  as  a  proper 
name,  but  is  rendered  "  chief  of  Moab;"  and  a  similar 
translation  is  given  in  other  passages  where  the  words 
occur,  as  in  Ezr.  ii.  6,   Neh.  vii.  11,  x.  14.     The 


GOVERNOR 


725 


"governor"  beyond  the  river  had  a  judgment-seat 
at  Jerusalem,  from  which  probably  he  administered 
justice  when  making  a  progress  through  his  province 
(Neh.  iii.  7). 

8.  T'JPS,  pdkid,  denotes  simply  a  person  ap- 
pointed to  any  office.  It  is  used  _  of  the  officers 
proposed  to  be  appointed  by  Joseph  (Gen.  xli.  34) ; 
of  Zebul,  Abimelech's  lieutenant  (Judg.  ix.  28); 
of  an  officer  of  the  High-priest  (2  Chr.  xxiv.  11), 
inferior  to  the  ndgid  (2  Chr.  xxxi.  12,  13),  or  pdkid 
ndgid  (Jer.  xx.  1 ) ;  and  of  a  priest  or  Levite  of  high 
rank  (Neh.  xi.  14,  22).  The  same  term  is  applied 
to  the  eunuch  who  was  over  the  men  of  war  (2  K. 
xxv.  19  ;  Jer.  Iii.  25),  and  to  an  officer  appointed 
for  especial  service  (Esth.  ii.  3).  In  the  passage 
of  Jer.  xx.  above  quoted  it  probably  denotes  the 
captain  of  the  temple- guard  mentioned  in  Acts  iv.  1, 
v.  2,  and  by  Josephus  (B.  J.  vi.  5,  §3). 

9.  tD,?£^,  shallit,  a  man  of  authority.  Applied 
to  Joseph  as  Pharaoh's  prime  minister  (Gen.  xlii. 
6);  to  Arioch,  the  captain  of  the  guard,  to  the 
king  of  Babylon  (Dan.  ii.  15),  and  to  Daniel  as 
third  in  rank  under  Belshazzar  (Dan.  v.  29). 

10.  "Vtf,  sar,  a  chief,  in  any  capacity.-  The  term 
is  used  equally  of  the  general  of  an  army  (Gen.  xxi. 
22),  or  the  commander  of  a  division  (1  K.  xvi.  9, 
xi.  24),  as  of  the  governor  of  Pharaoh's  prison 
(Gen.  xxxix.  21),  and  the  chief  of  his  butlers  and 
bakers  (Gen.  xl.  2),  or  herdsmen  (Gen.  xlvii.  6); 
The  chief  officer  of  a  city,  in  his  civic  capacity, 
was  thus  designated  (1  K.  xxii.  26  ;  2  K.  xxiii.  8). 
The  same  dignitary  is  elsewhere  described  as 
"  over  the  city"  (Neh.  xi.  9).  In  Judg.  ix.  30  tai- 
ls synonymous  with  pdkid  in  ver.  28,  and  with  both 
pdhid  and  ndgid  in  1  Chr.  xxiv.  5.  ni^ftn  '•"lb* 
sdre  hamm'dinoth,  "  the  princes  of  provinces" 
(1  K.  xx.  14),  appear  to  have  held  a  somewhat 
similar  position  to  the  "  governors"  under  the 
Persian  kings. 

11.  idvdpxris,  2  Cor.  xi.  32 — an  officer  of 
rank  under  Aretas,  the  Arabian  king  of  Damascus. 
It  is  not  easy  to  determine  the  capacity  in  which 
he  acted.  The  term  is  applied  in  1  Mace.  xiv.  47, 
xv.  1  to  Simon  the  High-priest,  who  was  made 
general  and  etlinarch  of  the  Jews,  as  a  vassal  of 
Demetrius.  From  this  the  office  would  appear  to 
be  distinct  from  a  military  command.  The  jurisdic- 
tion of  Archelaus,  called  by  Josephus  (B.  J.  ii. 
6,  §3)  an  ethnarchy,  extended  over  Idumaea,  Sa- 
maria, and  all  Judaea,  the  half  of  his  father's  king- 
dom, which  he  held  as  the  Emperor's  vassal. 
But,  on  the  other  hand,  Strabo  (xvii.  13),  in 
enumerating  the  officers  who  formed  part  of  the 
machinery  of  the  Roman  government  in  Egypt, 
mentions  ethnarchs  apparently  as  inferior  both  to 
the  military  commanders  and  to  the  oomarchs,  or 
governors  of  districts.  Again,  the  prefect  <>i'  the 
colony  of  Jews  in  Alexandria  (called  by  Philo 
■yfvapxv^i  H1'-  in  F/acc.  §lu)  is  designated  by  this 
title  in  the  edict  of  Claudius  given  by  Josephus 
(Ant.  xix.  .">,  §2).  According  to  Strabo  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xiv.  7,  §2)  he  exercised  the  prerogatives  of  an 
ordinary  independent  ruler,  it  has  therefore  been 
conjectured  that  the  ethnarch  of  Damascus  was 
merely  the  governor  of  the  resident  .bus,  and  this 
conjecture  receives  some  support  from  the  parallel 
narrative  in  Acts  ix.  24,  where  the  Jews  alone  are 
said  to  have  taken  part  in  the  conspiracy  against 
the  Apostle.  But  it  does  not  seem  probable  that 
an    officer   of  such   limited  jurisdiction  would  be 


726 


GOZAN 


styled  "theethnarch  of  Aretas  the  king;"  and  as 
the  term  is  clearly  capable  of  a  wide  range  of  mean- 
ing, it  was  most  likely  intended  to  denote  one  who 
held  the  city  and  district  of  Damascus  as  the  king's 
vassal  or  representative. 

12.  riyf/j-cav,  the  procurator  of  Judaea  under 
the  Romans  (Matt,  xxvii.  2,  &c).  The  verb  is 
employed  (Luke  ii.  2)  to  denote  the  nature  of  the 
jurisdiction  of  Quirinus  over  the  imperial  province 
of  Syria. 

13.  o1kovo/j.os  (Gal.  iv.  2),  a  steward;  appa- 
rently entrusted  with  the  management  of  a  minor's 
property. 

14.  apxirp'iK\ivos,  John  ii.  9,  "  the  governor  of 
the  feast."  It  has  been  conjectured,  but  without  much 
show  of  probability,  that  this  officer  corresponded 
to  the  a-v/jLTroiriapxos  of  the  Greeks,  whose  duties 
arc  described  by  Plutarch  (Sympos.  Quaest.  4),  and 
to  the  arbiter  bibendi  of  the  Romans.  Lightfoot 
supposes  him  to  have  been  a  kind  of  chaplain,  who 
pronounced  the  blessings  upon  the  wine  that  was 
drunk  during  the  seven  days  of  the  marriage  feast. 
Again,  some  have  taken  him  to  be  equivalent  to 
the  TpaTre(oTroios,  who  is  defined  by  Pollux  {Onom. 
vi.  1)  as  one  who  had  the  charge  of  all  the  servants 
at  a  feast,  the  carvers,  cup-bearers,  cooks,  &c. 
But  there  is  nothing  in  the  narrative  of  the  mar- 
riage feast  at  Cana  which  would  lead  to  the  supposi- 
tion that  the  apxiTp'iKAivos  held  the  rank  of  a 
servant.  He  appears  rather  to  have  been  on  inti- 
mate terms  with  the  bridegroom,  and  to  have  pre- 
sided at  the  banquet  in  his  stead.  The  duties  of 
the  master  of  a  feast  are  given  at  full  length  in 
Ecclus.  xxxv.  (xxxii.). 

In  the  Apocryphal  books,  in  addition  to  the 
common  words,  &px&v,  Seo"7roT7j9,  crrpaT7]yos, 
which  are  rendered  "  governor,"  we  find  eVicTarTjs 
(1  Esdr.  i.  8  ;  Jud.  ii.  14),  which  closely  cor- 
responds to  *VpS  ;  eirapxos  used  of  Zerubbabel  and 
Tatnai  (1  Esdr.  vi.  3,  29,  vii.  1),  and  ■Kpoffrdr^s, 
applied  to  Sheshbazzar  (1  Esdr.  ii.  12),  both  of 
which  represent  11113  ;  UpocrraTOS  ( 1  Esdr.  vii.  2) 
and  irpo<TTa.TT\s  tov  lepov  (2  Mace.  iii.  4),  "the 
governor  of  the  temple"  =  "P33  (cf.  2  Chr.  xxxv. 
8) ;  and  crarpd-K-ns  ( 1  Esdr.  iii.  2,  2 1 ),  "  a  satrap,"  not 
always  used  in  its  strict  sense,  but  as  the  equivalent 
of  arpar-nyos  (Jud.  v.  2,  vii.  8).       [W.  A.  W.] 

GO'ZAN  (|T13  ;  Tcȣd.v;  Gozan)  seems  in  the 
A.  V.  of  1  Chr.  v.  26  to  be  the  name  of  a  river; 
but  in  Kings  (2  K.  xvii.  6,  and  xviii.  11)  it  is  evi- 
dently applied  not  to  a  river  but  a  country.  Where 
Kings  and  Chronicles  differ,  the  authority  of  the 
latter  is  weak ;  and  the  name  Gozan  will  therefore 
be  taken  in  the  present  article  for  the  name  of  a 
tract  of  country. 

Gozan  was  the  tract  to  which  the  Israelites  were 
carried  away  captive  by  Pul,  Tiglath-Pileser,  and 
Shalmaneser,  or  possibly  Saigon.  It  has  been  va- 
riously placed ;  but  it  is  probably  identical  with  the 
Gauzanitis  of  Ptolemy  (Geograph.  v.  18),  and  may 
be  regarded  as  represented  by  the  Mygdonia  of  other 
writers  (Strab.,  Polyb.,&c).  It  was  the  tract  wa- 
tered by  the  Habor  {'A/36ppas,  or  Xafidbpas),  the 
modern  Khabour,  the  great  Mesopotamia!!  affluent  of 
the  Euphrates.  Mr.  Layard  describes  this  region  as 
one  of  remarkable  fertility  {Nineveh  and  Babylon, 
pp.  269-313).  According  to  the  LXX.  Halah  and 
Habor  were  both  rivers  of  Gozan  (2  K.  xvii.  6); 
but  this  is  a  mistranslation  of  the  Hebrew  text,  and 
it  is  corrected  in  the  following  chapter,  where  we 


GKASS     . 

have  the  term  "  river  "  used  in  the  singular  of  the 
Habor  only.  Halah  seems  to  have  been  a  region 
adjoining  Gozan.  [Halah.]  With  respect  to  the 
term  Mygdonia,  which  became  the  recognized  name 
of  the  region  in  classic  times,  and  which  Strabo 
(xvi.  1,  §27)  and  Plutarch  (Lucull.  c.  32)  absurdly 
connect  with  the  Macedonian  Mygdones,  it  may  be 
observed  that  it  is  merely  Gozan,  with  the  parti- 
cipial or  adjectival  "O  prefixed.  The  Greek  writers 
always  represent  the  Semitic  z  by  their  own  (/. 
Thus  Gaza  became  Carfytis,  Ach^ib  became  Ecc/ippa, 
the  river  Zab  became  theZ>iaba,  and  M'gozan  became 
Mygcfon. 

The  conjunction  of  Gozan  with  Haran  or  Harran 
in  Isaiah  (xxxvii.  12)  is  in  entire  agreement  with 
the  position  here  assigned  to  the  former.  As  Gozan 
was  the  district  on  the  Khabour,  so  Haran  was  that 
upon  the  Bilik,  the  next  affluent  of  the  Euphrates. 
[See  Charran.]  The  Assyrian  kings,  having  con- 
quered the  one,  would  naturally  go  on  to  the 
other.  [G.  R.] 

GKA'BA  ("Aypafid,  Atex.'AyyafSa;  Armacha), 
1  Esd.  v.  29.  [HAGABA.]  As  is  the  case  with 
many  names  in  the  A.  V.  of  the  Apocryphal  books, 
it  is  not  obvious  whence  our  translators  got  the 
form  they  have  here  employed — without  the  initial 
A,  which  even  the  corrupt  YTulgate  retains. 

GKAPE.     [Vine.] 

GEASS.  1.  This  is  the  ordinary  rendering  of  i he 
Heb.  word  "Wl"l,  which  signifies  properly  an  en- 
closed spot,  from  the  root  "IVn,  to  enclose  ;  but  this 
root  also  has  the  second  meaning  to  flourish,  and 
hence  the  noun  frequently  signifies  "  fodder,"  "  food 
of  cattle."  In  this  sense  it  occurs  in  1  K.  xviii.  5  ; 
Job  xl.  5;  Ps.  civ.  14;  Is.  xv.  6,  &c.  As  the 
herbage  rapidly  fades  under  the  parching  heat  of  the 
sun  of  Palestine,  it  has  afforded  to  the  sacred  writers 
an  image  of  the  fleeting  nature  of  human  fortunes 
(Job  viii.  12  ;  Ps.  xxxvii.  2),  and  also  of  the  brevity 
of  human  life  (Is.  xl.  6,  7  ;  Ps.  xc.  5).  The  LXX. 
render  *VVI1  by  PoTavr)  and  ir6a,  but  most  fre- 
quently by  x^PT0Si  a  word  which  in  Greek  has 
passed  through  the  very  same  modifications  of 
meaning  as  its  Hebrew  representative:  x^PT0S  = 
grarnen,  "  fodder,"  is  properly  a  court  or  inclosed 
space  for  cattle  to  feed  in  (Horn.  II.  xi.  774),  and 
then  any  feeding-place  whether  inclosed  or  not 
(Eur.  Iph.  T.  134,  x^PT01  evSevSpoi).  Gesenius 
questions  whether  "VXII,  x(fy,T0S>  ant^  the  Sansc. 
harit  =  green  may  not  be  traceable  to  the  same  root, 

2.  In  Jer.  1.  11,  A.  V.  renders  NEH  ^V"2  as 
the  heifer  at  grass,  and  the  LXX.  ais  /8oi'5ia  iv 
/3oTavr].  It  should  be  "  as  the  heifer  treadingout 
com  "  (comp.  Hos.  x.  11).  Kt^l  comes  from  K'-H, 
contcrere,  triturare,  and  has  been  confounded  with 
NEH,  grarnen,  from  root  NESH,  to  germinate.  This 
is  the  word  rendered  grass  in  Gen.  i.  11,  12,  where 
it  is  distinguished  from  2^'V,  the  latter  signifying 
herbs  suitable  for  human  rood,  while  the  former  is  ' 
herbage  for  cattle.  Gesenius  says  it  is  used  chiefly 
concerning  grass,  which  has  no  seed  (at  least  none 
obvious  to  general  observers),  and  the  smaller  weeds 
which  spring  up  spontaneously  from  the  soil.  The 
LXX.  render  it  by  x^y,  as  wel1  as  b7  xfy-ros, 
poravr],  and  ir6a. 

3.  In  Num.  xxii.  4,  where  mention  is  made  of 
the  ox  licking  up  the  grass  of  the  field,  the  Heb. 


GRASSHOPPER     , 

word  is  pT",  which  elsewhere  is  rendered  green, 
when  followed  by  Kt^T  or  2&V,  as  in  Gen.  i.  30, 
and  Ps.  xxxvii.  2.  lit  answers  to  the  German  das 
Grune,  and  comes  from  the  root  p"!"1,  to  flourish 
like  grass. 

4.  2&V  is  used  in  Deut.,  in  the  Psalms,  and  in 
the  Prophets,  and  as  distinguished  from  NC"7!, 
signifies  herbs  for  human  food  (Gen.  i.  30 ;.  Ps. 
civ.  14),  but  also  fodder  for  cattle  (Deut.  xi.  15; 
Jer.  xiv.  6).  It  is  the  grass  of  the  field  (Hen.  ii. 
5;  Ex.  ix.  22)  and  of  the  mountain  (Is.  xlii.  15; 
Prov.  xxvii.  25). 

In  the  N.  T.  wherever  the  word  grass  occurs  it 
is  the  representative  of  the  Greek  x6pros.  [W.  D.] 

GRASSHOPPER.    [Locust.] 

GRAVE.     [Burial.] 

GREAVES  (nnVD).  This  word  occurs  in  the 
A.  V.  only  in  1  Sam.  xvii.  6,  in  the  description  of 
tin?  equipment  of  Goliath — "  he  had  greaves  of  brass 
upon  his  legs."  Its  ordinary  meaning  is  a  piece 
of  defensive  armour  which  reached  from  the  foot  to 
the  knee,  and  thus  protected  the  shin  of  the  wearer. 
This  was  the  case  with  the  Kvrjfxis  of  the  Greeks, 
which  derived  its  name  from  its  covering  the  Kvr\[i-r\, 
i.  e.  the  part  of  the  leg  above-named.  But  the 
Mitzchah  of  the  above  passage  can  hardly  have  been 
armour  of  this  nature.  Whatever  the  armour  was, 
it  was  not  worn  on  the  legs,  but  on  the  feet  ( vJ")) 
of  Goliath.  It  appears  to  be  derived  from  a  root 
signifying  brightness,  as  of  a  star  (see  Gesenius 
and  Fiirst).  The  word  is  not  in  either  the  dual  or 
plural  number,  but  is  singular.  It  would  therefore 
appear  to  have  been  more  a  kind  of  shoe  or  boot  than 
a  "  greave;"  though  in  our  ignorance  of  the  details 
of  the  arms  of  the  Hebrews  and  the  Philistines  we 
cannot  conjecture  more  closely  as  to  its  nature.  At 
the  same  time  it  must  be  allowed  that  all  the  old 
versions,  including  Josephus,  give  it  the  meaning 
of  a  piece  of  armour  fur  the  leg — some  even  for  the 

thigh.  [<;.] 

GREECE,  GREEKS,    GRECIANS.     The 

histories  of  Greece  and  Palestine  are  as  little  con- 
nected as  those  of  any  other  two  nations  exercising 
the  Millie  influence  on  the  destinies  of  mankind  could 
well  be. 

The  Homeric  Epos  in  its  widest  range  does  not 
include  the  Hebrews,  while  on  the  other  hand  the 
Mosaic  idea  of  tin'  Western  world  seems  to  have 
been  sufficiently  indefinite.  It  is  possible  that  Hoses 
may  have  derived  some  geographical  outlines  from 
the  Egyptians;  but  he  does  not  use  them  in  Gen. 
x.  2-5,  where  he  mentions  the  descendants  of  Javan 
as  peopling  the  isles  of  the  Gentiles,  This  is  merely 
the  vaguest  possible  indication  of  a  geographical 
locality  ;  and  yet  it  is  not  improbable  that  his 
Egyptian  teachers  wire  almost  equally  in  the  dark 
as  to  the  position  of  a  country  which  had  not  at 
that  time  arrived  at  a  unity  sufficiently  imposing  to 
arrest  the  attention  of  its  neighbours.  The  amount 
and  precision  of  the  information  possessed  by  Moses 
must  lie  measured  by  the  nature  of  the  relation 
which  we  can  conceive  as  existing  in  his  time 
between  Greece  and  Egypt.  Now  it  appears  from 
Herodotus  that  prior  to  the  Trojan  war  the  current 
of  tradition,  sacred  and  mythological,  set  from 
Egypt  towards  ( Ireece  ;  and  the  first  quasi-historical 
event  which  awakened  the  curiosity,  and  stimulated 
the  imagination  of  the  Egyptian   priests,  was   the 


GREECE 


727 


story  of  Paris  and  Helen  (Herod,  ii.  43,  51,  52, 
and  112).  At  the  time  of  the  Exodus,  therefore, 
it  is  not  likely  that  Greece  had  entered  into  any 
definite  relation  whatever  with  Egypt.  Withdrawn 
from  the  sea-coast,  and  only  gradually  fighting 
their  way  to  it  during  the  period  of  the  Judges, 
the  Hebrews  can  have  had  no  opportunity  of  form- 
ing connexions  with  the  Greeks.  From  the  time 
of  Moses  to  that  of  Joel,  we  have  no  notice  of  the 
Greeks  in  the  Hebrew  writings,  except  that  which 
was  contained  in  the  word  Javan  (Gen.  x.  2) ;  and 
it  does  not  seem  probable  that  during  this  period 
the  word  had  any  peculiar  significance  for  a  Jew, 
except  in  so  far  as  it  was  associated  with  the  idea 
of  islanders.  When,  indeed,  they  came  into  contact 
with  the  Ionians  of  Asia  Minor,  and  recognized  them 
as  the  long-lost  islanders  of  the  western  migration, 
it  was  natural  that  they  should  mark  the  similarity 
of  sound  between  JV  =  J1*  and  Iones,  and  the  appli- 
cation of  that  name  to  the  Asiatic  Greeks  would 
tend  to  satisfy  in  some  measure  a  longing  to  realize 
the  Mosaic  ethnography.  Accordingly  the  0.  T. 
word  which  is  Grecia,  in  A.  V.  Greece,  Greeks,  &c, 
is  in  Hebrew  J'P,  Javan  (Joel  iii.  6  ;  Dan.  yiii.  21) : 
the  Hebrew,  however,  is  sometimes  retained  (Is. 
lxvi.  19;  Ez.  xxvii.  13).  In  Gen.  x.  2,  the  LXX. 
have,  teal  'Icovav  teal  'EXicra,  with  which  Rosen - 
miiller  compares  Herod,  i.  56-58,  and  professes  to 
discover  the  two  elements  of  the  Greek  race.  From 
'Iwvav  he  gets  the  Ionian  or  Pelasgian,  from  'EAicra 
(for  which  he  supposes  the  Heb  original  Dt^vN) 
the  Hellenic  element.  This  is  excessively  fanciful, 
and  the  degree  of  accuracy  which  it  implies  upoti 
an  ethnological  question  cannot  possibly  be  attri- 
buted to  Moses,  and  is  by  no  means  necessarily  in- 
volved in  the  fact  of  his  divine  inspiration. 

The  Greeks  and  Hebrews  met  for  the  first  time 
in  the  slave-market.  The  medium  of  communi- 
cation seems  to  have  been  the  Tyrian  slave-mer- 
chant. About  15. c.  800  Joel  speaks  of  the  Tyrians 
as  selling  the  children  of  Judah  to  the  Grecians 
(Joel  iii.  t>) ;  and  in  Ez.  xxvii.  13  the  Greeks  arc 
mentioned  as  bartering  their  brazen  vessels  for 
slaves.  On  the  other  hand,  Bochart  says  that  the 
Greek  slaves  were  highly  valued  throughout  the 
East  (Geogr.  Sac.  pt.  i.  lib.  iii .  c.  3,  p.  175)  ;  and  it 
is  probable  that,  the  Tyrians  took  advantage  of  the 
calamities  which  befell  either  nation  to  sell  them 
as  slaves  to  the  other.  Abundant  opportunities 
would  be  afforded  by  the  attacks  of  the  Lydian 
monarchy  on  the  one  people,  and  the  Syrian  on  the 
other ;  and  it  is  certain  that  Tyre  would  let  slip  no 
occasion  of  replenishing  her  slave-market. 

Prophetical  notice  of  (ireece  occurs  in  Dan.  viii. 
21,  &C,  where  the  history  of  Alexander  and  his 
successors  is  rapidly  sketched.  Zechariah  (ix.  13) 
foretells  the  triumphs  of  the  Maccabees  against  the 
Graeco-Syrian  empire,  while  Isaiah  looks  tin  ward 
to  the  conversion  of  the  Greeks,  amongst  other 
Gentiles,   through   the   instrumentality  of  Jewish 

missionaries  (lxvi.  19).      For  the  connexion  between 

the  Jews   and    the   quasi-Greek   kingdoms   which 

sprang  out    of   the   divided    empire    of    Alexander, 

ice  should  be  made  to  other  articles. 

The  present f  Alexander  himself  at  Jerusalem, 

and     his     respectful     demeanour,    are    described     by 

.losephus  [Ant.  xi.  8,  §3);  and  some  Jews  are  even 

said   to   have   joined    him    in   his   expedition   against, 

Persia  (Hecat.  ap.  Joseph,  c.  Apion,  ii.  4),  as  the 

Samaritans  had  already  done  in  the  siege  of  Tyre 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xi.  S,  §§4-6).     In  1  Mace.  rii.  5-23 


728 


GREECE 


(about  B.C.  180),  ami  Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  4,  §10,  we 
have  an  account  of  an  embassy  and  letter  sent  by 
the  Lacedaemonians  to  the  Jews.  [Areus  ;  Onias.] 
The  most  remarkable  feature  in  the  transaction  is 
the  claim  which  the  Lacedaemonians  prefer  to  kin- 
dred with  the  Jews,  and  which  Areus  professes  to 
establish  by  reference  to  a  book.  It  is  by  no  means 
unlikely  that  two  declining  nations,  the  one  crouch- 
ing beneath  a  Roman,  the  other  beneath  a  Graeco- 
Syrian  invader,  should  draw  together  in  face  ot  the 
common  calamity.  This  may  have  been  the  case, 
or  we  may  with  Jahn  (Heb.  Comm.  ix.  91,  note) 
regard  the  affair  as  a  piece  of  pompous  trifling  or 
idle  curiosity,  at  a  period  when  "  all  nations  were 
curious  to  ascertain  their  origin,  and  their  relation- 
ship to  other  nations." 

The  notices  of  the  Jewish  people  which  occur  in 
Greek  writers  have  been  collected  by  Josephus  (c. 
Apion.  i.  22).  The  chief  are  Pythagoras,  Hero- 
dotus, Choerilus,  Aristotle,  Theophrastus,  and  He- 
cataeus.  The  main  drift  of  the  argument  of  Josephus 
is  to  show  that  the  Greek  authors  derived  their  ma- 
terials from  Jewish  sources,  or  with  more  or  less 
distinctness  referred  to  Jewish  history.  For  Py- 
thagoras, he  cites  Hermippus'  life;  for  Aristotle, 
Clearchus:  but  it  should  be  remembered  that  the 
Neo-Platonism  of  these  authorities  makes  them 
comparatively  worthless ;  that  Hermippus  in  par- 
ticular belongs  to  that  Alexandrian  school  which 
made  it  its  business  to  fuse  the  Hebrew  traditions 
with  the  philosophy  of  Greece,  and  propitiated  the 
genius  of  Orientalism  by  denying  the  merit  of  ori- 
ginality to  the  great  and  independent  thinkers  of 
the  West.  This  style  of  thought  was  farther  de- 
veloped by  Iamblichus;  and  a  very  good  specimen 
of  it  may  be  seen  in  Le  Clerc's  notes  on  Grotius, 
de  Verit.  It  has  been  ably  and  vehemently  assailed 
by  Ritter,  Hist.  Phil.  b.  i.  c.  3. 

Herodotus  mentions  the  Syrians  of  Palestine  as 
confessing  that  they  derived  the  rite  of  circumcision 
from  the  Egyptians  (ii.  104).  Bahr,  however,  does 
not  think  it  likely  that  Herodotus  visited  the  in- 
terior of  Palestine,  though  he  was  acquainted  with 
the  sea-coast.  (On  the  other  hand  see  Dahlmann, 
pp.  55,  56,  Engl,  transl.)  It  is  almost  impossible 
to  suppose  that  Herodotus  could  have  visited  Jeru- 
salem without  giving  us  some  more  detailed  account 
of  it  than  the  merely  incidental  notices  in  ii.  159 
and  iii.  5,  not  to  mention  that  the  site  of  KclSvtls 
is  still  a  disputed  question. 

The  victory  of  Pharaoh-Necho  over  Josiah  at 
Megiddo  is  recorded  by  Herodotus  (comp.  Herod, 
ii.  159  with  2  K.  xxiii.  29  ff.,  2  Chr.  xxxv.  20  ff.). 
It  is  singular  that  Josephus  should  have  omitted 


GROVE 

these  references,  and  cited  Herodotus  only  as  men- 
tioning the  rite  of  circumcision. 

The  work  of  Theophrastus  cited  is  not  extanf ;  he 
enumerates  amongst  other  oaths  that  of  C'orban. 

Choerilus  is  supposed  by  Josephus  to  describe  the 
Jews  in  a  by  no  means  flattering  portrait  of  a 
people  who  accompanied  Xerxes  in  his  expedition 
against  Greece.  The  chief  points  of  identification 
are,  their  speaking  the  Phoenician  language,  and 
dwelling  in  the  Solymean  mountains,  near  a  broad 
lake,  which  according  to  Josephus  was  the  Dead  Sea. 
The  Hecataeus  of  Josephus  is  Hecataeus  of  Ab- 
dera,  a  contemporary  of  Alexander  the  Great,  and 
Ptolemy  son  of  Lagus.  The  authenticity  of  the 
History  of  the  Jews  attributed  to  him  by  Josephus 
has  been  called  in  question  by  Origen  and  others. 

After  the  complete  subjugation  of  the  Greeks  by 
the  Romans,  and  the  absorption  into  the  Roman 
empire  of  the  kingdoms  which  were  formed  out  of 
the  dominions  of  Alexander,  the  political  connexion 
between  the  Greeks  and  Jews  as  two  independent 
nations  no  longer  existed. 

The  name  of  the  country,  Greece,  occurs  once  in 
N.  T.,  Acts  xx.  2,  "EAAas  =  Greece,  i.e.  Greece 
Proper,  as  opposed  to  Macedonia.  In  the  A.  V.  of 
0.  T.  the  word  Greek  is  not  found ;  either  Javan 
is  retained,  or,  as  in  Joel  iii.  6,  the  word  is  rendered 
by  Grecian.  In  Maccabees  Greeks  and  Grecians 
seem  to  be  used  indifferently  (comp.  1  Mace.  i.  10, 
vi.  2  ;  also  2  Mace.  iv.  10,"  Greekish).'  In  N.  T., 
on  the  other  hand,  a  distinction  is  observed,  "EAAtjj/ 
being  rendered  Greek,  and  "E.\\r\vi<TT-i\s  Grecian. 
The  difference  of  the  English  terminations,  however, 
is  not  sufficient  to  convey  the  difference  of  meanings. 
"EAAtji/  in  N.  T.  is  either  a  Greek  by  race,  as  in 
Acts  xvi.  1-3,  xviii.  17,  Rom.  i.  14;  or  more  fre- 
quently a  Gentile,  as  opposed  to  a  Jew  (Rom.  ii. 
9,  10,  &c.)  ;  so  fern.  "E.\Ki)vis,  Mark  vii.  26,  Acts 
xvii.  12.  'EAAtjj/io-tV  (properly  "  one  who  speaks 
Greek ")  is  a  foreign  Jew ;  opposed,  therefore,  not 
to  'lovheuos,  but  to  "Efipcuos,  a  home-Jew,  one 
who  dwelt  in  Palestine.  So  Schleusner,  &c. :  accord- 
ing to  Salmasius,  however,  the  Hellenists  were  Greek 
proselytes,  who  had  become  Christians  ;  so  Wolf, 
Parkhurst,  &c,  arguing  from  Acts  xi.  20,  where 
'EAArj^iffTai  are  contrasted  with  'lovSaioi  in  19. 
The  question  resolves  itself  partly  into  a  textual 
one,  Griesbach  having  adopted  the  reading  "EAArj- 
vas,  and  so  also  Lachmann.  [T.  E.  B.] 

GRINDING.     [Mill.] 

GROVE.  A  word  used  in  the  A.  V.,  with  two 
exceptions,  to  translate  the  mysterious  Hebrew  term 
Asherah  (iTX'K).  This  term  is  examined  under  its 
own  head  (p. 
120),  where  it 
is  observed  that 
almost  all  mo- 
dern interpret- 
ers agree  that 
an  idol  or  image 
of  some  kind 
must  be  in- 
tended, and  not 
a  grove,  as  our 
translators  ren- 
der, following 
the  version  of  the 


hM  LXX.     (fiAo-os) 
JLl'and  of  the  Vul- 


Siicred  symbolic  Tree  of  tbe  Assyrians.    Fr. 

(FiTgusson's  Nmeieh  and  Perse/ioUs,  p.  20b.) 


srate 
This 


(Incus). 
is  evident 


GROVE 

from  many  passages,  and  especially  from  2  K.  xxiii.  6, 
where  we  find  that  Josiah  "  brought  out  the  Ashe- 
rah "  (translated  by  our  version  "the  grove") 
"  from  the  house  of  the  Lord  "  (comp.  also  Judg. 
iii.  7  ;  IK.  xiv.  23,  xviii.  19).  In  many  passages 
the  "  groves"  are  grouped  with  molten  and  graven 
images  in  a  manner  that  leaves  no  doubt  that  some 
idol  was  intended  (2  Chron.  xxxiii.  19,  xxxiv.  3,  4 ; 
Is.  xvii.  8).  There  has  been  much  dispute  as  to 
what  the  Asherah  was  ;  but  in  addition  to  the  views 
set  forth  under  Asherah,  we  must  not  omit  to 
notice  a  probable  connexion  between  this  symbol  or 
image — whatever  it  was — and  the  sacred  symbolic 
tree,  the  representation  of  which  occurs  so  fre- 
quently on  Assyrian  sculptures,  and  is  shown  in 
the  preceding  woodcut.  The  connexion  is  inge- 
niously maintained  by  Mr.  Fergusson  in  his  Nineveh 
and  Persepolis  restored  (pp.  299-304),  to  which 
the  reader  is  referred. 

2.  The  two  exceptions  noticed  above  are  Gen.  xxi. 
3:3  and  1  Sam.  xxii.  6  (margin),  where  "  grove"  is 
employed  to  render  the  word  ?tTN,  Eshel,  which 
in  the  text  of  the  latter  passage,  and  in  1  Sam. 
xxxi.  13,  is  translated  "  tree."  Professor  Stanley 
(£.  4"  P-  §77  j  also  P-  21,  note)  would  have  Eshel 
to  be  a  tamarisk  ;  but  this  is  controverted  by  Bonar 
{Land  of  Prom.),  on  the  ground  of  the  thin  and 
shadeless  nature  of  that  tree.  It  is  now  however  ge- 
nerally recognised  (amongst  others,  see  Gesen.  T/ies. 
506  ;  Stanley,  S.  8f  P.  §76,  3;  p.  142  note,  220  note, 
and  passim),  that  the  word  Eton,  ji?N,  which  is 
uniformly  rendered  by  the  A.  V.  "  plain,"  signifies  a 
grove  or  plantation.  Such  were  the  Elon  of  Mature 
(Gen.  xiii.  18,  xiv.  13,  xviii.  1);  of  Moreh  (Gen. 
xii.  6 ;  Deut.  xi.  30)  ;  of  Zaanaim  (Judg.  iv.  11), 
or  Zaanannim  (Josh.  xix.  33)  ;  of  the  pillar  (Judg. 
ix.  6)  ;  of  Meouenim  (Judg.  ix.  37)  ;  and  of  Tabor 
(1  Sam.  x.  3).  In  all  these  cases  the  LXX.  have 
dpvs  or  fiaAavos  ;  the  Vulgate — which  the  A.  V. 
probably  followed —  Vallis  or  Convallis,  in  the  last 
three  however  Quercus. 

In  the  religions  of  the  ancient  heathen  world  groves 
play  a  prominent  part.  In  old  times  altars  only 
were  erected  to  the  gods.  It  was  thought  wrong  to 
shut  up  the  gods  within  walls,  and  hence,  as  Pliny 
expressly  tells  us,  trees  were  the  first  temples  (Tac. 
//.  N.  xii.  2  ;  Germ.  9  ;  Lucian,  dc  Sucrific.  10  ; 
see  Carpzov,  App.  ( 'n't.  p.  332),  and  from  the  earliest 
times  groves  are  mentioned  in  connexion  with  reli- 
gious worship  (Gen.  xii.  6,  7,  xiii.  18  ;  Deut.  xi.  30  ; 
A.  V.  "  plain  ;"  see  above).  Their  high  antiquity, 
refreshing  shade,  solemn  silence,  and  awe-inspiring 
solitude,  as  well  as  the  striking  illustration  they 
afford  of  natural  life,  marked  them  out  as  the  fit 
localities,  or  even  the  actual  objects  of  worship 
("  Lucos  et  in  iis  silentia  ipsa  adoianius,"  Plin.  xii. 
1  ;  "Secretum  luei  . .  .  et  admiratio  umbrae  fidem 
tibi  numinis  fecit,"  Sen.  Ep.  xii.;  "Quo  posses 
viso  dicere  Numen  habet,"  Ov.  Fast.  iii.  295; 
"Saeia  neiiius  accubet  umbia,"  Virg.  Georg.  iii. 
334;  Ov.  Met.  viii.  743;  Ez.  vi.  13;  Is.  lvii.  :. ; 
Hos.  iv.  13).  This  last  passage  hints  at  another 
and  darker  reason  why  groves  were  opportune  Pol 
the  degraded  services  of  idolatry;  their  shadow  hid 
the  atrocities  and  obscenities  of  heathen  worship. 
The  groves  wen.  generally  found  connected  with 
temples,  and  often  had  the  right  of  affording  an 
asylum  (Tac.  Germ.  9,  40;  Herod,  ii.  138;  Virg. 
Aen.  i.  441,  ii.  512;  Sil.  Ital.  i.  81).  Seme 
have  supposed  that  even  the  Jewish  Temple  had  a 
refxevos  planted  with   palm  and   cedar   <  Ps.  xcii. 


GROVE 


729 


12,  13)  and  olive' (Ps.  Iii.  8)  as  the  mosk  which 
stands  on  its  site  now  has.  This  is  more  than 
doubtful ;  but  we  know  that  a  eelebiated  oak  stood 
by  the  sanctuary  at  Shechem  (Josh.  xxiv.  26 ; 
Judg.  ix.  6  ;  Stanley,  Sin.  and  Pcd.  142).  We  find 
repeated  mention  of  groves  consecrated  with  deep 
superstition  to  particular  gods  (Liv.vii.  25,  xxiv.  3, 
xxxv.  51 ;  Tac.  Ann.  ii.  12,  51,  &c,  iv.  73,  &c). 
For  this  reason  they  were  stringently  foi bidden  to 
the  Jews  (Ex.  xxxiv.  13  ;  Jer.  xvii.  2  ;  Ez.  xx.  28), 
and  Maimonides  even  says  that  it  is  forbidden  to 
sit  under  the  shade  of  any  green  tiee  wlieie  an  idol- 
statue  was  (Fabiic.  Bibl.  Antiq.  p.  290).  Yet  we 
find  abundant  indications  that  the  Hebrews  felt  the 
influence  of  groves  on  the  mind  ("  the  spirit  in  the 
woods,"  Wordsworth),  and  therefore  selected  them 
for  solemn  purposes,  such  as  great  national  meetings 
(Judg.  ix.  6,  37)  and  the  burial  of  the  dead  (Gen. 
xxxv.  8  ;  1  Sam.  xxxi.  14).  Those  connected  with 
patriarchal  history  were  peculiarly  liable  to  super- 
stitious reverence  (Am.  v.  5,  viii.  13),  and  we  find 
that  the  groves  of  Mamre  were  long  a  place  of 
worship  (Sozomen.  H.  E.  ii.  4 ;  Euseb.  Vet.  Con- 
stant. 81;  Eeland,  Palaest.  p.  714).  There  are  in 
Scripture  many  memorable  trees;  e.g.  Allon-bachuth 
(Gen.  xxxv.  8),  the  tamarisk  (but  see  above)  in 
Gibeah  (1  Sam.  xxii.  6),  the  terebinth  in  Shechem 
(Jos.  xxiv.  26,  under  which  the  law  was  set  up),  the 
palm-tree  of  Deborah  (Judg.  iv.  5),  the  terebinth  of 
enchantments  (Judg.  ix.  37),  the  terebinth  of  wan- 
derers (Judg.  iv.  11),  and  otheis  (1  Sam.  xiv.  2,  x. 
3, sometimes  "plain"  inA.V., Vnlg.  "convallis"). 
This  observation  of  particular  trees  was  among 
the  heathen  extended  to  a  regular  worship  of  them. 
"  Tree-worship  may  be  traced  from  the  interior  of 
Africa,  not  only  into  Egypt  and  Arabia,  but  also 
onward  uninterruptedly  into  Palestine  and  Syria, 
Assyria,  Persia,  India,  Thibet,  Siam,  the  Philippine 
Islands,  China,  Japan,  and  Siberia;  also  westwaid 
into  Asia  Minor,  Greece,  Italy,  and  other  countries ; 
and  in  most  of  the  countries  here  named  it  obtains 
in  the  present  day,  combined  as  it  has  been  in  other 
paits  with  various  forms  of  idolatiy  "  (Gt  n.  of  Earth 
and  Man,  p.  139).  "The  worship  of  trees  even 
goes  back  among  the  Iraunians  to  the  rules  of 
Horn,  called  in  the  Zend-Avesta  the  promulgator 
of  the  old  law.  We  know  fiom  Herodotus  the 
delight  which  Xerxes 'took  in  the  great  plane-tree 
in  Lydia,  on  which  he  bestowed  golden  ornaments, 
and  appointed  for  it  a  sentinel  in  the  person  of  one 
of  the  "  immortal  ten  thousand."  The  early  vene- 
ration of  trees  was  associated,  by  the  moist  and 
refreshing  canopy  of  foliage,  with  that  of  sacred 
fountains.  In  similar  connexion  with  the  early 
worship  of  nature  were  among  the  Hellenic  nations 
the  fame  of  the  great  palm-tree  of  Delos,  and  of  an 
aged  platanus  in  Arcadia.  The  Buddhists  of  <  'e\  Ion 
venerate  the  colossal  Indian  fig-tree  of  Anurah- 
depura.  ...  As  single  trees  thus  became  objects  of 
veneration  from  the  beauty  of  their  form,  so  did 
also  groups  of  tiees,  under  the  name  of '  groves  of 
gods.'  Pausanias  (i.  21,  §9)  is  full  of  the  praise 
of  a  grove  belonging  to  the  temple  of  Apollo  at 
I  irynioo  in  Aeolis;  and  the  grove  of  Col ■  is  cele- 
brated in  the  renowned  chorus  of  Sophocles  "  (Hum- 
boldt. Cosmos,  ii.  96,  Eng.  ed.).  The  eustom  ©f 
adorning  trees  "  with  jewels  and  mantles  "  was  very 
ancienl  and  universal  (Herod.  vii.M  ;  Aelian,  1".  //. 
ii.14;  Theocr.  Td.  xviri. ;  Ov.  Met.  viii. 723,  7i:>; 
Arnob.                                 and  even  still  exists  in 

the  Fast. 

The  oracular  trees  of  antiquity  are  well  known 

3  B 


730 


GUARD 


(77.  xvi.  233 ;  Od.  v.  237  ;  Soph.  Track.  754 ;  Virg. 
Georg.  ii.  1G  ;  Sil.  Ital.  iii.  1 1 ).  Each  god  had  some 
sacred  tree  (Virg.  Eel.  vii.  61  sqq.).  The  Etru- 
rians are  said  to  have  worshipped  a  palm,  and  the 
Celts  an  oak  (Max.  Tyr.  Dissert.  38,  in  Godwyn's 
Mos.  and  Aar.  ii.  4).  On  the  Druidic  veneration 
of  oak-groves,  see  Pliny,  //.  AT.  xvi.  44  ;  Tae.  Ann. 
xiv.  30.  Iu  the  same  way,  according  to  the  mission- 
ary Oldendorp,  the  negros  "  have  sacred  groves,  the 
abodes  of  a  deity,  which  no  negro  ventures  to  enter 
except  the  priests  "  (Prichard,  Nat.  Hist,  of  Man, 
525-539,  3rd  ed. ;  Park's  Travels,  p.  65).  So  too 
the  ancient  Egyptians  ( Kawlinson's  Herod,  ii.  298). 
Long  after  the  introduction  of  Christianity  it  was 
found  necessary  to  forbid  all  abuse  of  trees  and  groves 
to  the  purposes  of  superstition  (Harduin,  Act.  Concil. 
i.  988 ;  see  Orelli,  ad  Tie.  Germ.  9).     [F.  W.  F.] 

GUARD.  The  Hebrew  terms  commonly  used 
had  reference  to  the  special  duties  which  the  body- 
guard of  a  monarch  had  to  perform. 

( 1 .)  Tabhach  (11312)  originally  signified  a  "  cook," 
and  as  butchering  tell  to  the  lot  of  the  cook  in  Eastern 
countries,  it  gained  the  secondary  sense  of  "  execu- 
tioner," and  is  applied  to  the  body-guard  of  the  kings 
of  Egypt  (Gen.xxxvii.  36),  and  Babylon  ( 2  K.  xxv.  8 ; 
Jer.  xxxix.  9,  xl.  1  ;  Dan.  ii.  14).    [EXECUTIONER.] 

(2.)  Ratz  (P"l)  properly  means  a  "runner,"  and 
is  the  ordinary  term  employed  for  the  attendants  of 
the  Jewish  kings,  whose  office  it  was  to  run  before 
the  chariot  (2  Sam.  xv.  1  ;  1  K.  i.  5),  like  the 
enrsores  of  the  Roman  Emperors  (Senec.  Ep.  87, 
126).  That  the  Jewish  "runners"  superadded 
the  ordinary  duties  of  a  military  guard  appears  from 
several  passages  (1  Sam.  xxii.  17  ;  2  K.  x.  25,  xi. 
6  ;  2  Chr.  xii.  10).  It  was  their  office  also  to  carry 
despatches  (2  Chr.  xxx.  6).  They  had  a  guard-room 
set  apart  for  their  use  in  the  king's  palace,  in 
which  their  arms  were  kept  ready  for  use  (I  K. 
xiv.  28  ;  2  Chr.  xii.  11).    [Footman.] 

(3.)  The  terms  mishmereth  (mOC^D)  and  mish- 
mar  (IJDK'D)  express  properly  the  act  of  watching, 
but  are  occasionally  transferred  to  the  persons  who 
kept  watch  (Neh.  iv.  9. 22,  vii.  3,  xii.  9  ;  Job  vii.  12). 
The  A.  V.  is  probably  correct  in  substituting  misk- 
marto  ('iPnJX'Jp)  for  the  present  reading  in  2  Sam. 
xxiii.  23,  Benaiah  being  appointed  "  captain  of  the 
guard,"  as  Josephus  (Ant.  vii.  14,  §4)  relates,  and 
not  privy  councillor:  the  same  error  has  crept  into 
the  text  in  1  Sam.  xxii.  14,  where  the  words  "  which 
goeth  at  thy  bidding"  may  originally  have  been 
••  captain  of  the  body-guard."  For  the  duties  of  the 
captain  of  the  guard,  see  Captain.        [W.  L.  B.] 

GUD'GODAH  (with  the  art.  n*Uhjin;   TaS- 
ydS;   Gadgad),  Deut.  x.  7.     [Hob  Hagidgad.] 
GUEST.     [Hospitality.] 

GUL'LOTH  {7\hl,  plural  of  H>>3),  a  Hebrew 
term  of  unfrequent  occurrence  in  the  Bible,  and 
used  only  in  two  passages — and  those  identical  re- 
lations of  the  same  occurrence — to  denote  a  natural 
object,  viz.  the  springs  added  by  the  great  Caleb  to 
the  south  land  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Debir,  which 
formed  the  dowry  of  his  daughter  Achsah  (Josh.  xv. 
19;  Judg.  i.  15).  The  springs  were  "upper"  and 
"lower" — possibly  one  at  the  fop  and  the  other 
the  bottom  of  a  ravine  or  glen  ;  and  they  may  have 
derived  their  unusual  Dame  from  their  appearance 
being  different  to  that  of  the  ordinary  springs  of  tin' 


GUR  BAAL 

country.  The  root  (??H)  has  the  force  of  rolling 
oi'  tumbling  over,  and  perhaps  this  may  imply  that 
they  welled  up  in  that  round  or  mushroom  form 
which  is  not  uncommon  here,  though  apparently 
most  rare  in  Palestine.  The  rendering  of  the  Vat. 
LXX.  is  singular.  In  Josh,  it  has  ttjv  BorOavis, 
and  t)]v  Touai6\dv,  the  latter  doubtless  a  mere  cor- 
ruption of  the  Hebrew.  The  Alex.  IIS.,  as  usual, 
is  faithful  to  the  Hebrew  text.  In  Judges  both 
have  \vTpw(Tis.  An  attempt  has  been  lately  made 
by  Dr.  liosen  to  identify  these  springs  with  the 
Ain  Nuxtkur  near  Hebron  (see  Zeitschrift  der  J>. 
M.  G.  1857)  ;  but  the  identification  can  hardly 
be  received  without  fuller  confirmation  (Stanley, 
8.  §  P.  App.  §54).     [Debir.]  [G.] 

GU'NI  CO-l 3  ;  Twyl,  6  Yavvi,  Alex.  Twvvi ; 
Gum).  1.  A  son  of  Naphtali  (Gen.  xlvi.  24  ; 
1  Chr.  vii.  13),  the  founder  of  the  family  of  the 
Gunites  (Num.  xxvi.  48).  Like  several  others  of 
the  early  Israelite  names,  Guni  is  a  patronymic — 
"  Gunite  ;"  as  if  already  a  family  at  the  time  of 
its  first  mention  (comp.  Arodi,  Hushim,  &c). 

2.  A  descendant  of  Gad  ;  father  of  Abdiel  a  chief 
man  in  his  tribe  (1  Chr.  v.  15). 

GU'NITES,THEO>l-in;  dTaw[;  Gunitae), 
the  "family"  which  sprang  from  Guni,  son  of 
Naphtali  (Num.  xxvi.  48).  There  is  not  in  the 
Hebrew  any  difference  between  the  two  names, 
of  the  individual  and  the  family. 

GUR,  THE   GOING  UP  TO  (lirn^O 

=  the  ascent  or  steep  of  Gur,  or  the  lion's  whelp, 
Ges.  Thcs.  275 ;  iv  t<$  avafiaivetv  Toil  ;  ascensits 
Garer),  an  ascent  or  rising  ground,  at  which 
Ahaziah  received  his  death-blow  while  flying  from 
Jehu  after  the  slaughter  of  Joram  (2  K.  ix.  27). 
It  is  described  as  at  (3)  Ibleam,  and  on  the  way 
between  Jezreel  and  Beth-hag-gan  (A.  V.  "  the 
garden-house").  As  the  latter  is  identified  with 
tolerable  probability  with  the  present  Jcnin,  we 
may  conclude  that  the  ascent  of  Gur  was  some 
place  more  than  usually  steep  on  the  difficult  road 
which  leads  from  the  plain  of  Esdraelon  to  Jeuiu. 
By  Josephus  it  is  mentioned  (Ant.  ix.  6,  §4) 
merely  as  "  a  certain  ascent  "  (%v  tivi  irpoafiaaei). 
Neither  it  nor  Ibleam  have  been  yet  recovered. 

For  the  details  of  the  occurrence  see  Jehu.  For 
other  ascents  see  Adummim,  Acrabbim,  Ziz.  [G.] 

GUR  BA'AL  ('pys-l-l-l ;  Tlerpa  ;  Gurbaal), 
a  place  or  district  in  which  dwelt  Arabians,  as 
recorded  in  2  Chr.  xxvi.  7.  It  appears  from  the 
context  to  have  been  in  the  country  lying  between 
Palestine  and  the  Arabian  peninsula;  but.  this, 
although  probable,  and  although  the  LXX.  reading  is 
in  favour  of  the  conjecture,  cannot  be  proved,  no  site 
having  been  assigned  to  it.  The  Arab  geographers 
mention  a  place  called  Baal,  on  the  Syrian   road, 

north  of  El-Medeeneh  (Mardsid,  s.  v.  \xj)-  The 
Targum,  as  Winer  (s.  v.)  remarks,  reads  ""JO")}? 
"VIJ3  i^jTH — "  Arabs  living  in  Gerar  " — suggest- 
ing TI3  instead  of  "Mil  ;  but  there  is  no  further 
evidence  to  strengthen  this  supposition.  [See  also 
Gerar.]  The  ingenious  conjectures  of  Bochart 
(Thalcg,  ii.  22)  respecting  the  Mehunim,  wdio  are 
mentioned  together  with  the  "  Arabians  that  dwelt 
ill  Gur  Baal,"  may  be  considered  in  reference  to 
the  Mehunim,  although  they  are  far  fetched. 
[Mehunim.]  [E.  S.  P.] 


HAAHASHTAEI 


H. 

HAAHASHTAEI  rWnNn,  with  thc  ar" 
tide,  =  the  Ahashtarite;  rdv  'Aacrdrip,  Alex.  'Atr- 
6-qpd ;  Ahasthari),  a  man,  or  a  family,  immediately 
descended  from  Asbur,  "father  of  Tekoa"  by  his 
second  wife  Naarah  (1  Chr.  iv.  6).  The  name  does 
not  appear  again,  nor  is  there  any  trace  of  a  place 
of  similar  name. 

HABAIAH  (irnn,  in  Neh.  iTOn  ;  Ao/Seio, 
'EjS/a,  Alex.  'Ofiaia  ;  Hbbia,  Habia).  Bene-Cha- 
baijah  were  among  the  sons  of  the  priests  *who 
returned  from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel,  but  whose 
genealogy  being  imperfect,  were  not  allowed  to  serve 
(Ezr.  ii.  61  ;  Neh.  vii.  63).  It  is  not  clear  from 
the  passage  whether  they  were  among  the  de- 
scendants of  Barzilloi  the  Gileadite.  In  the  lists 
of  1  Esdras  the  name  is  given  as  Oisdia. 

HAB'AKKUK  (p-lpin),;  Jerome,  Prol.  in 
Hub.  renders  it  by  the  Greek  irepiArjipis  ;  'Afipa- 
kov/j.  ;  Habacuc).  Other  Greek  forms  of  the  name 
are  'AfiPaKov/x,  which  Suidas  erroneously  renders 
Trariip  iytpaeoes,  ' AflaKovft.  (Georg.  Cedrenus), 
'A/uLfiaKOVK,  and  'AQfiaKovK  (Dorotheus,  Ddctr. 
2).  The  Latin  forms  are  Ambacum,  Ambacuc, 
and  Abacuc. 

1.  Of  the  facts  of  the  prophet's  life  we  have  no 
certain  information,  and  with  regard  to  the  period 
of  his  prophecy  there  is  great  division  of  opinion. 
The  Rabbinical  tradition  that  Habakkuk  was  the 
son  of  the  Shunammite  woman  whom  Elisha  re- 
stored to  life  is  repeated  by  Abarbanel  in  his  com- 
mentary, and  has  no  other  foundation  than  a 
fanciful  etymology  of  the  prophet's  name,  based  on 
the  expression  in  2  K.  iv.  16.  Equally  unfounded 
is  the  tradition  that  he  was  the  sentinel  set  by 
Isaiah  to  watch  for  the  destruction  of  Babylon 
(comp.  Is.  xxi.  16  with  Hab.  ii.  1).  In  the  title 
of  the  history  of  Bel  and  the  Dragon,  as  found  in 
the  LXX.  version  in  Origen's  Tetrapla,  the  author 
is  called  ■'  Habakkuk,  the  son  of  Joshua,  of  the 
tribe  of  Levi."  Some  have  supposed  this  apocry- 
phal writer  to  be  identical  with  the  prophet  (Je- 
rome, prooem.  in  Dun.').  The  psalm  in  ch.  3  and 
its  title  are  thought  to  favour  the  opinion  that 
Habakkuk  was  a  Levite  (Delitzsch,  Habakuk,  p. 
iii.).  Pseado-Epiphanius  (vol.  ii.  p.  240,  de  Vitis 
Prophetarurri)  and  Dorotheus  {Chron.  Pasch. 
p.  150)  say  thai  he  was  of  @rj6(oKiip  or  p-nOirovxap 
{Bethaoat,  Isid.  Hispal.  c.  47),  of  the  tribe  of 
Simeon.  This  may  have  been  the  same  as  Bethza- 
charias,  where  Judas  Maccabaeus  was  defeated  by 
Antiochus  Eupator  (1  Mace.  \;i.  32,  33).  The 
same1  authors  relate  that  when  Jerusalem  was 
sacked  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  Habakkuk  fled  to 
Ostracine,  and  remained  there  till  after  the  Chal- 
daeans  had  Left  the  city,  when  he  returned  to  his 
own  country  and  died  at  his  farm  two  years  before 
the  return  from  Babylon,  B.C.  538.  It  was  during 
bis  residence  in  Judaea  that  he  is  said  to  have  car- 
ried food  to  Daniel  in  the  den  of  lions  at  Babylon. 
This  Legend  is  given  in  the  history  of  Bel  and  the 
Dragon,  and  is  repeated  by  Eusebius,  BarHebraeus, 
and  Eutychius.  It  is  quoted  from  Joseph  ben 
Gorion    (/■'.•/.   xi.   •">)    by   Abarbanel  (Comm.  en 

Hub.),    and   seriously    refuted    by    him    on   elm - 

logical  grounds.  The  scene  of  the  event  was  shown 
to  mediaeval  travellers  on  the  road  Bom  Jerusalem 


HABAKKUK 


731 


to  Bethlehem  (Early  Travels' in  Palestine,  p.  29). 
Habakkuk  is  said  to  have  been  buried  at  Keilah  in 
the  tribe  of  Judah,  eight  miles  E.  of  Eleutheropolis 
(Eusebius,  Onumasticon).  Rabbinical  tradition 
places  his  tomb  at  Chukkok,  of  the  tribe  of  Naph- 
thali,  now  called  Jakuk.  In  the  days  of  Zebenus, 
bishop  of  Eleutheropolis,  according  to  Nicephorus 
(H.  E.  xii.  48)  and  Sozomen  (H.  E.  vii.  28),  the 
remains  of  the  prophets  Habakkuk  and  Micah  were 
discovered  at  Keilah. 

2.  The  Rabbinical  traditions  agree  in  placing 
Habakkuk  with  Joel  and  Nahum  in  the  reign  of 
Manasseh  (cf.  Seder  Olam  Kabba  and  Zida,  and 
Tsemach  David).  This  date  is  adopted  by  Rimchi 
and  Abarbanel  among  the  Rabbis,  and  by  Witsius, 
Kalinsky,  and  Jahu  among  modern  writers.  The 
general  corruption  and  lawlessness  which  prevailed 
in  the  reign  of  Manasseh  are  supposed  to  be  referred 
to  in  Hab.  i.  2-4.  Both  Kalinsky  and  Jahn  con- 
jecture that  Habakkuk  may  have  been  one  of  the 
prophets  mentioned  in  2  K.  xxi.  10.  Syncellus 
(Chronographia,  pp.  214,  230,  240)  makes  him 
contemporary  with  Ezekiel,  and  extends  the  period 
of  his  prophecy  from  the  time  of  Manasseh  to  that 
of  Daniel  and  Joshua  the  son  of  Josedech.  The 
Chronicon  Paschale  places  him  later,  first  men- 
tioning him  in  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  JosTah 
(Olymp.  32),  as  contemporary  with  Zephaniah  and 
Nahum ;  and  again  in  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of 
Cyrus  (Olymp.  42),  as  contemporary  with  Daniel 
and  Ezekiel  in  Persia,  with  Haggai  and  Zechariah 
in  Judaea,  and  with  Baruch  in  Egypt.  Davidson 
(Home's  Intr.  ii.  968),  following  Keil,  decides  in 
favour  of  the  early  pait  of  the  reign  of  Josiah. 
Calmet,  Jaeger,  Ewald,  De  Wette,  Rosenmiiller, 
Knobel,  Maurer,  Hitzig,  and  Meier  agree  in  assign- 
ing the  commencement  of  Habakkuk* s  prophecy  to 
the  reign  of  Jehoiakim,  though  the}'  are  divided  as 
to  the  exact  period  to  which  it  is  to  be  referred. 
Knobel  (Der  Prophetism.  d.  Hebr.)  and  Meier 
(Gesch.  d.  poet.  nat.  Liter,  d.  Hebr.)  are  in  favour 
of  the  commencement  of  the  Chaldean  era,  after 
the  battle  of  Carchemish  (n.C.  606),  when  Judaea 
was  first  threatened  by  the  victors.  But  the  ques- 
tion of  the  date  of  Habakkuk's  prophecy  has  been 
discussed  in  the  most  exhaustive  manner  by 
Delitzsch  (Der  Prophet  Habakuk,  Einl.  §3),  and 
though  his  arguments  are  rather  ingenious  than 
convincing,  they  are  well  deserving  of  consideration 
as  based  upon  internal  evidence.  The  conclusion 
at  which  he  arrives  is  that  Habakkuk  delivered  his 
prophecy  about  the  12th  or  13th  year  of  Josiah 
(B.C.  630  or  629),  for  reasons  of  which  the  follow- 
ing is  a  summary.  In  Hab.  i.  5  the  expression 
"  in  your  days"  shows  that  the  fulfilment  of  the 
prophecy  would  take  place  in  the  lifetime  of  those 
to  whom  it  was  addiessed.  The  same  phrase  in 
Jer.  xvi.  9  embraces  a  period  of  at  most  twenty 
years,  while  in  Ez.  xii.  25  it  denotes  about  six 
years,  and  therefore,  reckoning  backwards  from  the 

Chaldean  invasion,  the  date  above  assigned  would 
involve  no  violation  of  probability,  though  the 
argument  does  not  amount  to  a  proof.  From  the 
similarity  of  Hab.  ii.  10  and  Zeph.  i.  7,  Delitzsch 
infers  that  the  latter  is  an  imitation,  the  former 
being  the  original.  He  supports  this  conclusion 
by  many  collateral  arguments.  Now  Zephaniah, 
according  to  the  superscription  of  his  prophecy, 

lived  in  the    time   of  Josiah,   and  from    iii.    .";    mils* 

have  prophesied  after  the  worship  of  Jehovah  was 
restored,  that  is.  after  the  twelfth  year  of  that 
king's  reign.     It   i--  probable  that  he  wrote  about 

:;  B  2 


732 


HABAKKUK 


B.C.  624.  Between 'this  period  therefore  and  the 
12th  year  of  Josiah  (B.C.  630)  Delitzsch  places 
Habakkuk.  But  Jeremiah  began  to  prophesy  in 
the  1 3th  year  of  Josiah,  and  many  passages  are 
borrowed  by  him  from  Habakkuk  (cf.  Hab.  ii.  13 
with  Jer.  Ii.  58,  &c).  The  latter  therefore  must 
have  written  about  630  or  629  B.C.  This  view 
receives  some  confirmation  from  the  position  of 
his  prophecy  in  the  0.  T.  Canon. 

3.  Instead  of  looking  upon  the  prophecy  as  an 
organic  whole,  Rosenmiiller  divided  it  into  three 
parts  corresponding  to  the  chapters,  and  assigned 
the  first  chapter  to  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim,  the 
second  to  that  of  Jehoiachin,  and  the  third  to  that 
of  Zedekiah,  when  Jerusalem  was  besieged  for  the 
third  time  by  Nebuchadnezzar.  Kalinsky  (  Vatic. 
Ckahac.  ei  Nah.)  makes  four  divisions,  and  refers 
the  prophecy  not  to  Nebuchadnezzar,  but  to  Esar- 
haddon.  But  in  such  an  arbitrary  arrangement 
the  true  character  of  the  composition  as  a  perfectly 
developed  poem  is  entirely  lost  sight  of.  The  pro- 
phet commences  by  announcing  his  office  and  im- 
portant mission  (i.  -1).  He  bewails  the  corruption 
and  social  disorganisation  by  which  he  is  sur- 
rounded, and  cries  to  Jehovah  for  help  (i.  2-4). 
Next  follows  the  reply  of  the  Deity,  threatening 
swift  vengeance  (i.  5-11).  The  prophet,  trans- 
ferring himself  to  the  near  future  foreshadowed  in 
the  divine  threatenings,  sees  the  rapacity  and  boast- 
ful impiety  of  the  Chaldean  hosts,  but,  confident 
that  Col  has  only  employed  them  as  the  instru- 
ments of  correction,  assumes  (ii.  1 )  an  attitude  of 
hopeful  expectancy,  and  waits  to  see  the  issue. 
He  receives  the  divine  command  to  write  in  an 
enduring  form  the  vision  of  God's  retributive  jus- 
tice, as  revealed  to  his  prophetic  eye  (ii.  2,  3).  The 
doom  of  the  Chaldeans  is  first  foretold  in  general 
terms  (ii.  4-6),  and  the  announcement  is  followed 
by- a  series  of  denunciations  pronounced  upon  them 
by  the  nations  who  had  suffered  from  their  oppres- 
sion (ii.  6-20).  The  strophical  arrangement  of  these 
"  woes"  is  a  remarkable  feature  of  the  prophecy. 
They  are  distributed  in  strophes  of  three  verses 
each,  characterised  by  a  certain  regularity  of  struc- 
ture.    The  first  four  commence  with  a  "  Woe ! " 

and  close  with  a  verse  beginning  with  *3   (for). 

The  first  verse  of  each  of  these  contains  the  cha- 
racter of  the  sin,  the  second  the  development  of 
the  woe,  while  the  third  is  confirmatory  of  the 
wqe  denounced.  The  fifth  strophe  differs  from  the 
others  in  form  in  having  a  verse  introductory  to 
the  woe.  The  prominent  vices  of  the  Chaldeans' 
character,  as  delineated  in  i.  5-11,  are  made  the 
subjects  of  separate  denunciations  :  their  insatiable 
ambition  (ii.  6-8),  their  covetousness  (ii.  9-11), 
cruelty  (ii.  12-14),  drunkenness  (ii.  15-17),  and 
idolatry  (ii.  18-20).  The  whole  concludes  with 
the  magnificent  Psalm  in  chap,  iii.,  "  Habakkuk's 
Pindaric  ode"  (Ewald),  a  composition  unrivalled 
for  boldness  of  conception,  sublimity  of  thought, 
and  majesty  of  diction.  This  constitutes,  in  De- 
litzsch's  opinion,  "  the  second  grand  division  of 
the  entire  prophecy,  as  the  subjective  reflex  of 
the  two  subdivisions  of  the  first,  and  the  lyrical 
recapitulation  of  the  whole."  It  is  the  echo  of  the 
feelings  aroused  in  the  prophet's  mind  by  the  divine 
answers  to  his  appeals ;  fear  in  anticipation  of  the 
thieatened  judgments,  and  thankfulness  and  joy  at 
the  promised  retribution.  But,  though  intimately 
connected  with  the  former  part  of  the  prophecy,  it 
is  in  itself  a  perfect  whole,  as  is  sufficiently  evident 


HABOR 

from  its  lyrical  character,  and  the  musical  arrange- 
ment by  which  it  was  adapted  for  use  in  the  temple 
service. 

In  other  parts  of  the  A.  V.  the  name  is  given  as 
Habbacuc,  and  Abacuc.  [W.  A.  W.] 

HABAZINI'AH  0TJ-??!3  ;  Xa($a<riv,  Alex. 
Xapo/SeeV  ;  Habsania),  apparently  the  head  of  one 
of  the  families  of  the  Rechabites  :  his  descend- 
ant Jaazaniah  was  the  chief  man  among  them  in  the 
time  of  Jeremiah  (Jer.  xxxv.  3). 

HAB'BACUC  ('  Afi$aKovfi ;  Hahacuc), the  form 
in  which  the  name  of  the  prophet  Habakkuk  is 
given  in  the  Apocrypha  (Bel,  33-39). 
% 

HABERGEON,  a  coat  of  mail  covering  the 

neck  and  breast.  The  Hebrew  terms  are  fcOnn 
iTHt,',  and  JVTB'.     The  first,  tachara,  occurs  only 

in  Ex.  xxviii.  32,  xxxix.  23,  and  is  noticed  inci- 
dentally to  illustrate  the  mode  of  making  the  aper- 
ture for  the  head  in  the  sacerdotal  meil.  It  was 
probably  similar  to  the  linen  corslet  Cktvodupy))^), 
worn  by  the  Egyptians  (Her.  ii.  182,  iii.  47), 
and  the  Greeks  (II.  ii.  529,  830).  The  second, 
shiryah,  occurs  only  in  Job  xli.  26,  and  is  regarded  as 
another  form  of  shiryan  (fHt^),  a  "breastplate" 
(Is.  lix.  17) ;  this  sense  has  been  questioned,  as  the 
context  requires  offensive  rather  than  defensive 
armour  ;  but  the  objection  may  be  met  by  the  sup- 
position of  an  extended  sense  being  given  to  the 
verb,  according  to  the  grammatical  usage  known  as 
zeugma.  The  third,  shiryon,  occurs  as  an  article 
of  defensive  armour  in  1  Sam.  xvii.  5  ;  2  Chr.  x.xvi. 
14,  and  Neh.  iv.  10.  [W.  L.  B.] 

HA'BOR  ("ibn  ;  'AQdp,  Xafap ;  Habor),  the 

"river  of  Gozan"  (2  K.  xvii.  6,  and  xviii.  11) 
has  been  already  distinguished  from  the  Chebar  or 
Chobar  of  Ezekiel.  [Chebar.]  It  is  identified 
beyond  all  reasonable  doubt  with  the  famous 
affluent  of  the  Euphrates,  which  is  called  Aborrhas 
('A/3<fy3pas)  by  Strabo  (xvi.  1,  §27)  and  Procopius 
(Bell.  Pers.  ii.  5) ;  Aburas  (' Afiovpas)  by  Isidore  of 
Charax  (p.  4),  Abora  ('Aficipa)  by  Zosimus  (iii. 
12),  and  Chaboras  {Xaficepas) ,  by  Pliny  and 
Ptolemy*(v.  18).  The  stream  in  question  still 
bears  the  name  of  the  Khabonr.  It  flows  from 
several  sources  in  the  mountain-chain,  which  in 
about  the  37th  parallel  closes  in  the  valley  of  the 
Tigris  upon  the  south— the  Mons  Masius  of  Strabo 
and  Ptolemy,  at  present  the  Kharej  Dagh.  The 
chief  source  is  said  to  be  "  a  little  to  the  west  of 
MarJln"  (Layard,  Nin.  and  Bab.  p.  309,  note); 
but  the  upper  course  of  the  river  is  still  very  imper- 
fectly known.  The  main  stream  was  seen  by  Mr. 
Layard  flowing  from  the  north-west  as  he  stood  on 
the  conical  hill  of  Koukab  (about  lat.  36°  20', 
long.  41°) ;  and  here  it  was  joined  by  an  important 
tributary,  the  Jemjer,  which  flowed  down  to  it 
from  Xisibis.  Both  streams  were  here  fordable, 
but  the  river  formed  by  their  union  had  to  be 
crossed  by  a  raft.  It  flowed  in  a  to]  tuous  course 
through  rich  meads  covered  with  flowers,  having  a 
general  direction  about  S.S.W.  to  its  junction  with 
the  Euphrates  at  Karkesia,  the  ancient  Circesium. 
The  country  on  both  sides  of  the  river  was  covered 
with  mounds,  the  remains  of  cities  belonging  to  the 
Assyrian  period. 

The  Khabonr  occurs  under  that  name  in  an 
Assyrian  inscription  of  the  ninth  century  before  our 
era.  [G.  P.] 


HACHALIAH 
HACHALI'AH  (iT^n  ;  XeXicta,  and  'Ax«- 

\ia  ;  Hechlia,  Hahelia,  Achclai),  the  father  of  Ne- 
hemiah  (Neh.  i.  1  ;  x.  1). 

HACH'ILAH,  THE  HILL  (H^Dnn  njfM  ; 

6  fiouvbs  rod  (and  8)  'ExeAa ;  collis,  and  Gabaa, 
Hachila),  a  Mil  apparently  situated  in  a  wood*  in 
the  wilderness  or  waste  land  ("OTD)  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  Ziph ;  in  the  fastnesses,  or  passes,  of 
which  David  and  his  six  hundred  followers  were 
lurking  when  the  Ziphites  informed  Saul  of  his 
whereabouts  (1  Sam.  xxiii.  19  ;  eohip.  14,  15,  18). 
The  special  topographical  note  is  added,  that  it  was 
"  on  the  right  (xxiii.  19,  A.  V.  "  south")  of  the 
Jeshimon,"  or,  according  to  what  may  be  a  second 
account  of  the  same  transaction  (xxvi.  1-3),  "  facing 
the  Jeshimon"  ("OS  ?J?,  A.  V.  "before"),  that  is, 
the  waste  barren  district.  As  Saul  approached, 
David  drew  down  from  the  hill  into  the  lower  ground 
(xxvi.  3),  still  probably  remaining  concealed  by  the 
wood  which  then  covered  the  country.  Saul  ad- 
vanced to  the  hill,  and  bivouacked  there  by  the  side 
of  the  road  (TVI,  A.  V.  "  way"),  which  appears 
to  have  run  over  the  hill  or  close  below  it.  It  was 
during  this  nocturnal  halt  that  the  romantic  adven- 
ture of  the  spear  and  cruse  of  water  took  place. 
In  xxiii.  14,  and  xxvi.  13,  this  hill  would  seem 
(though  this  is  not  quite  clear)  to  be  dignified  by 
the  title  of  "  the  mountain"  ("inn  ;  in  the  latter, 
the  A.  V.  has  "  hill,"  and  in  both  the  article  is 
missed) :  but,  on  the  other  hand,  the  same  emi- 
nence appears  to  be  again  designated  as  "  the 
clitf  "  (xxiii.  25,  y^DH  ;  A.  V.  "  a  rock  ")  fromb 
which  David  descended  into  the  midbar  of  Maon. 
Places  bearing  the  names  of  Ziph  and  Maon  are 
still  found  in  the  south  of  Judah — iu  all  proba- 
bility the  identical  sites  of  those  ancient  towns. 
They  are  sufficiently  close  to  each  other  for  the 
district  between  them  to  bear  indiscriminately  the 
name  of  both.  But  the  wood  has  vanished,  and  no 
trace  of  the  name  Hachilah  has  yet  been  discovered, 
nor  has  the  ground  been  examined  with  the  view  to 
see  if  the  minute  indications  of  the  story  can  be  re- 
cognized. By  Eusebius  and  Jerome  (  Onomasticon), 
Echela  is  named  as  a  village  then  standing;  but  the 
situation — seven  miles  from  Eleutheropolis,  i.  e.  on 
the  X.W.  of  Hebron — would  be  too  far  from  Ziph 
and  Maon;  and  as  h'oland  has  pointed  out,  they 
probably  confounded  it  with  Keilah  (comp.  Onom. 
"Ceeilah;"  and  Reland,  745).  [G.] 

HACHMONI,  SON  OF,  and  THE  HACH'- 
MONITE  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  32,  ri.  11),  both  render- 
ings— the  former  the  correct  one — of  the  same 
Hebrew   words  CilCSn'JS  =  son   of  a  Hacmon- 

ite  ;  vi6s  '  Axa/J-dv ,  'Axom1')  Alex.  '  Axa-ixavi  ; 
Achamoni).  Two  of  the  Bene-Hacmoni  are  named 
in  these  passages,  JEH1EL  in  the  former,  and 
JASIIOBEAM  in  the  latter.  Hachmon  or  Hachmoni 
was  no  doubt  the  founder  of  a  family  to  which 
these  men  belonged:  the  actual  tat  her  of  Jashobeam 
was  Zabdiel  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  2),  and  he  is  also  said 
to  have  belonged  to  the  Korhites  (1  Chr.  \ii.  6), 
possibly  the  Levites  descended  from  Korah.  Bui  tin' 
name  Hachmon  nowhere  appears  in  the  genealogies 


a  For  the   "  wood  "   the   LXX.   have  ev  to  k<ui'/j, 
reading  CHn  for  fin.     And  so  too  Josephus. 

b  The  Hebrew  exactly  answers  to  our  expression  j  tutisritnum  locum,  in  his  Q/uaest,  Hi  It.  ad  loc 
"  descended  the  clitf"  :   the  "  into  "  in  the  text  of  the 


HADAD  733 

of  the  Levites.  In  2  Sam.  xxiii.  8  the  name  is 
altered  to  the  Tachcemonite.  [Tachjionitk.]  See 
Kennicott,  Diss.  72,  82,  who  calls  attention  to  the 
fact  that  names  given  in  Chronicles  with  Hen  are 
in  Samuel  given  without  the  Ben,  but  with  the 
definite  article.  [<;.] 

HA'DAD  (Tin ;  'A5a5,  'ApdS,   'ASdp,  Xo5- 

Sdv  •  Hadad).  This  name  occurs  frequently  in  the 
history  of  the  Syrian  and  Edomite  dynasties.  It 
was  originally  the  indigenous  appellation  of  the 
Sun  among  the  Syrians  (Macrob.  Satumal.  i.  23  ; 
Plin.  xxxvii.  11),  and  was  thence  transferred  to  the 
king,  as  the  highest  of  earthly  authorities,  in  the 
forms  Hadad,  Ben-hadad  ("  worshipper  of  Hadad  " ), 
and  Hadad-ezer  ("assisted  by  Hadad,"  Gesen.  The- 
saur.  p.  218).  The  title  appears  to  have  been  an 
official  one,  like  Pharaoh  ;  and  perhaps  it  is  so  used 
by  Nicolaus  JJamascenus,  as  quoted  by  Josephus 
{Ant.  vii.  5,  §2),  in  reference  to  the  Syrian  king 
wko  aided  Hadadezer  (2  Sam.  viii.  5).  Josephus 
appears  to  have  used  the  name  in  the  same  sense, 
where  he  substitutes  it  for  Benhadad  {Ant.  ix.  8, 
§7,  compared  with  2  K.  xiii.  24).  The  name  ap- 
pears occasionally  in  the  altered  form  Hadar  (Gen. 
xxy.  15,  xxxvi.  39,  compared  with  1  Chr.  i.  30,  50). 

1.  The  first  of  the  name  was  a  son  of  Ishmael 
(Gen.  xxv.  15;  1  Chr.  i.  30).  His  descendants 
probably  occupied  the  western  coast  of  the  Peisian 
Gulf,  wheie  the  names  Attaei  (l'tol.  vi.  7,  §15), 
Attene,  and  Chateni  (Plin.  vi.  32)  bear  affinity  to 
the  original  name. 

2.  (*l*Tn).  The  second  was  a  king  of  Edom, 
who  gained  an  important  victory  over  the  Midian- 
ites  on  the  field  of  Moab  (Gen.  xxxvi.  35;  1  Chr. 
i.  46)  :  the  position  of  his  territory  is  marked  by 
his  capital,  Avith.     [AviTH.] 

3.  (Tin).  The  third  was  also  a  king  of  Edom, 
with  Pan  for  his  capital  (1  Chr.  i.  50).  [Pau.] 
He  was  the  last  of  the  kings :  the  change  to  the 
dukedom  is  pointedly  connected  with  his  death  in 
1  Chr.  i.  51.     [Hadar.] 

4.  (Tin).  The  last  of  the  name  was  a  member 
of  the  royal  house  of  Edom  (1  K.  xi.  14  tf.),  probably 
the  grandson  of  the  one  last  noticed  (In  ver.  1  7  it  is 
given  in  the  mutilated  form  of  my).  In  his  child- 
hood he  escaped  the  massacre  under  Joab,  in  which 
his  father  appears  to  have  perished,  and  fled  with 
a  band  of  followers  into  Egypt.  Some  difficulty 
arises  in  the  account  of  his  flight,  from  the  words, 
"they  arose  out  of  Midian"  (ver.  18):  Thenius 
(  ( '"mi/},  in  loc")  surmises  that  the  reading  has  been 
corrupted  from  pJJD  to  ^TO,  and  that  the  place 

intended    is  Maim,    i.  e.  the    rrsn/iurr    tor    the    time 

being  of  the  royal  family.  Other  explanations  are 
that  Midian  was  the  territory  of  some  of  the 
Mi  h  initish  tribes  in  tin1  peninsula  of  Sinai,  or  that 
it  is  the  name  of  a  town,  the  MoSiava  of  l'tol.  vi. 
7,  §2:  some  of  the  MSS.  of  the  I. XX.  supply  the 
words  tt)s  tt6k«i)s  before  MaSia/x.  Pharaoh,  the 
predecessor  of  Solomon's  father-in-law,  treated  him 
kindly,  and  gave  him  his  sister-in-law  in  marriage. 

After  [>avid*s  death   Hadad    resolved  to  attempt  the 

recovery  of  his  dominion:  Pharaoh  in  .vain  dis- 
couraged  him,  and    upon   this   he  left   Egypt   and 

A.  V.  is  derived  from  the  LXX.  'is  and  the  Vulgate 
ail.     see  Jerome's  explanation,  (ill  petram,  id  est,  nd 


734 


HAUADEZEK 


returned  to  his  own  country  (see  the  addition  to 
ver.  22  in  the  LXX. ;  the  omission  of  the  clause  in 
the  Hebrew  probably  arose  from  an  error  of  the 
transcriber).  It  does  not  appear  from  the  text  as 
it  now  stands,  how  Hadad  became  subsequently  to 
this  an  "  adversary  unto  Solomon"  (ver.  14),  still 
less  how  he  gained  the  sovereignty  over  Syria  (ver. 
25).  The  LXX.,  however,  refers  the  whole  of  ver. 
25  to  him,  and  substitutes  for  Q~IS  (Syria),  'E5u>,u 
(Edom).  This  reduces  the  whole  to  a  consistent 
and  intelligible  narrative.  Hadad,  according  to  this 
account,  succeeded  in  his  attempt,  and  carried  oil  a 
border  warfare  on  the  Israelites  from  his  own  terri- 
tory. Josephus  (Ant.  viii.  7,  §6)  retains  the  read- 
ing Syria,  and  represents  Hadad  as  having  failed  in 
his  attempt  on  Idumaea,  and  then  having  joined 
Rezon,  from  whom  he  received  a  portion  of  Syria. 
If  the  present  text  is  correct,  the  concluding  words 
of  ver.  25  must  be  referred  to  Rezon,  and  be  con- 
sidered as  a  repetition  in  an  amplified  form  of  the 
concluding  words  of  the  previous  verse.  [VV.  L.  B.'] 

HADADE'ZER,'lTJTnn,  6  'A8paa£dp,  in 
both  MSS.  (2  Sam.  viii.  3-12;  1  K.  xi.  23).  [HA- 
DAREZER.] 

HA'DAD-RIM'MON  (fim  Tin  ;  Koir^bs 
poSivos ;  Adadremmon)  is,  according  to  the  ordinary 
interpretation  of  Zech.  xii.  11,  a  place  in  the  valley 
of  Megiddo,  named  after  two  Syrian  idols,  where  a 
national  lamentation  was  held  for  the  death  of  kin 
Josiah  in  the  last  of  the  four  great  battles  (see 
Stanley,  S.  &  P.  ix.)  which  have  made  the  plain 
of  Esdraelon  famous  in  Hebrew  history  (see  2  K. 
xxiii.  29  ;  2  Chr.  xxxv.  23  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  x.  5,  §1). 
The  LXX.  translate  the  word  "pomegranate;"  and 
the  Greek  commentators,  using  that  version,  see 
here  no  reference  to  Josiah.  Jonathan,  the  Chaldee 
interpreter,  followed  by  Jarchi,  understands  it  to 
be  the  name  of  the  son  of  king  Tabrimon  who  was 
opposed  to  Ahab  at  Ramoth-gilead.  But  it  has 
been  taken  for  the  place  at  which  Josiah  died  by 
most  interpreters  since  Jerome,  who  states  ( Comm. 
in  Zach.)  that  it  was  the  name  of  a  city  which  was 
called  in  his  time  Maximianopolis,  and  was  not  far 
from  Jezreel.  Van  de  Velde  (i.  355)  thinks  that 
he  has  identified  the  very  site,  and  that  the  more 
ancient  name  still  lingers  on  the  spot.  There  is  a 
treatise  by  Wichmanshausen,  De  planctu  Hadadr. 
in  the  Nov.  Thes.  Theol.-phil.  i.  101.    [W.  T.  B.] 

HADAR  (Tin  ;  XoSSdu ;  Hadar),  a  son  of 
Ishmael  (Gen.  xxv.  15)  ;  written  in  1  Chr.  i.  30 
Hadad  (1111,  Xovddv,  Hadad)  ;  but  Gesenius  sup- 
poses the  former  to  be  the  true  reading  of  the  name. 
It  has  not  been  identified,  in  a  satisfactory  way,  with 
the  appellation  of  any  tribe  or  place  in  Arabia,  or  on 
the  Syrian  frontier ;  but  names  identical  with,  or  very 
closely  resembling  it,  are  not  uncommon  in  those 
parts,  and  may  contain  traces  of  the  Ishmaelite  tribe 
sprung  from  Hadar.  The  mountain  Hadad, belonging 
to  Teyma  [Tema]  on  the  borders  of  the  Syrian  desert, 
north  of  El-Mcdccneh,,  is  perhaps  the  most  likely  to 
be  correctly  identified  with  the  ancient  dwellings  of 
this  tribe  ;  it  stands  among  a  group  of  names  of  the 
sons  of  Ishmael,  containing  Duniah  (Doomah),  Ke- 
dar  (Keyd&r),  and  Tema  (Teymd).       [E.  S.  P.] 

2.  (Tin,  with  a  different  aspirate  to  the  preced- 
ing ;  'ApdS  ulbs  BapdS,  Alex.  ' ApdO  ;  Adar).  One 
of  the  kings  of  Edom,  successor  of  Baal-hanan  ben- 
Acbor  (Gen:  xxxvi.  39),  and,  if  we  may  so  understand 
Ihe  statement  of  ver.  31,  about  contemporary  with 


HADASHAH 

Saul.  The  name  of  his  city,  and  the  name  and  ge- 
nealogy of  his  wife,  are  given.  In  the  parallel  list  in 
1  Chr.  i.  he  appears  as  Hadad.  We  know  from  an- 
other source  (1  K.  xi.  14,  &c.)  that  Hadad  was  one 
of  the  names  of  the  royal  family  of  Edom.  Indeed 
it  occurs  in  this  very  list  (Gen.  xxxvi.  35).  But 
perhaps  this  fact  is  in  favour  of  the  form  Hadar  being 
correct  in  the  present  case :  its  isolation  is  probably 
a  proof  that  it  is  a  different  name  from  the  others, 
however  similar. 

HADAREZER  (">]jmn  ;  'ASpaaCdp,  Alex. 
'Afipa(dp ;  Adarczer),  son  of  Rehob  (2  Sam.  viii. 
3) ;  the  king  of  the  Aramite  state  of  Zobah,  who, 
while  on  his  way  to  "  establish  his  dominion  "  at 
the  Euphrates,  was  overtaken  by  David,  defeated 
with  great  loss  both  of  chariots,  horses,  and  men 
(1  Chr.  xviii.  3,  4),  and  driven  with  the  remnant  of 
his  force  to  the  other  side  of  the  liver  (xix.  16).  The 
golden  weapons  captured  on  this  occasion  (uPC,  A.V. 
"  shields  of  gold  "),  a  thousand  in  number,  were 
taken  by  David  to  Jerusalem  (xviii.  7),  and  dedi- 
cated to  Jehovah.  The  foreign  aims  were  preserved 
in  the  Temple,  and  were  long  known  as  king  David's 
(1  Chr.  xxiii.  9;   Cant.  iv.  4).     [Arms;  Shelet.~] 

Not  daunted  by  this  defeat,  Hadarezer  seized  an 
early  opportunity  of  attempting  to  revenge  himself; 
and  after  the  first  repulse  of  the  Ammonites  ami 
their  Syrian  allies  by  Joab,  he  sent  his  army  to  the 
assistance  of  his  kindred  the  people  of  Maachah, 
Rehob,  and  Ishtob  (1  Chr.  xix.  16  ;  2  Sam.  x.  15, 
comp.  8).  The  army  was  a  large  one,  as  is  evident 
from  the  numbers  of  the  slain ;  and  it  was  espe- 
cially strong  in  horse-soldiers  (xix.  18).  Under  the 
command  of  Shophach,  or  Shobach,  the  captain  of 
the  host  (iOtfn  lb)  they  crossed  the  Euphrates, 
joined  the  other  Syrians,  and  encamped  at  a  place 
called  Helam.  The  moment  was  a  critical  one,  and 
David  himself  came  from  Jerusalem  to  take  the 
command  of  the  Israelite  army.  As  on  the  former 
occasion,  the  rout  was  complete:  seven  hundred 
chariots  were  captured,  seven  thousand  charioteers 
and  forty  thousand  horse-soldiers  killed,  the  petty 
sovereigns  who  had  before  been  subject  to  Hadarezer 
submitted  themselves  to  David,  and  the  great  Syrian 
confederacy  was,  for  the  time,  at  an  end. 

But  one  of  Hadarezer's  more  immediate  retainers, 
Rezon  ben-Eliadah,  made  his  escape  from  the  army, 
and  gathering  round  him  some  fugitives  like  himself, 
formed  them  into  one  of  those  marauding  ravaging 
"  bands"  (l-HS)  which  found  a  congenial  refuge  in 
the  thinly  peopled  districts  between  the  Jordan  and  the 
Euphrates  (2  K.  v.  2  ;  1  Chr.  v.  18-22).  Making 
their  way  to  Damascus,  they  possessed  themselves  of 
the  city.  Rezon  became  king,  and  at  once  began  to 
avenge  the  loss  of  his  countrymen  by  the  course  of 
"  mischief"  to  Israel  which  he  pursued  down  to  the 
end  of  Solomon's  reign,  and  which  is  summed  up  in 
the  emphatic  words  "he  was  an  adversary  |  a  '  Satan  ') 
to  Israel"  . .  .  "he  abhorred  Israel"  (1  K.xi.  23-25). 

In  the  narrative  of  David's  Syrian  campaign  in 
2  Sam.  viii.  3-12»this  name  is  given  as  Iladad-ezer, 
and  also  in  1  K.  xi.  23.  But  in  2  Sam.  x.,  and  in 
all  its  other  occurrences  in  the  Hebrew  text  as  well 
as  in  the  LXX.  (both  MSS.),  and  in  Josephus,  the 
form  Hadarezer  is  maintained.  [G.] 

HADA'SHAH  (Htrin  ;  'ASarrdv,  Alex.  'A5a- 
ad ;  Hadassa),  one  of  the  towns  of  Judah,  in  the 
Shefelah  or  maritime  low-country,  named  between 
Zenan  ami  Migdal-gad,  in  the  second  group  (Josh.  . 


HADASSAH 

xv.  37  only).  By  Eusebius  it  is  spoken  of  as  lying 
Dear  " Taphna,"  i.e.  Gophtia.  Bat if  by  this  Eusebms 
intends  the  well-known  Gophna,  there  must  be  some 

error,  as  Gophna  was  several  miles  north  of  Jerusalem, 
near  the  direct  north  road  to  Nubias.  No  satisfactory 
reason  presents  itself  why  Hadashah  should  not  be 
the  Adasa  of  the  Maccabaean  history.  Hitherto  it 
has  eluded  discovery  in  modern  times.  [G.] 

HADAS'SAH  (ilDin  ;  LXX.  omits;  Edissa), 
a  name,  probably  the  earlier  name,  of  Esther  (Esth. 
ii.  7).  Gesenius  (Thcs.  366)  suggests  that  it  is 
identical  with  "Arocrcra,  the  name  of  the  daughter 
of  Cyrus. 

HADAT'TAH  (itrnn  ;  LXX.  omits  ;  nova). 
According  to  the  A.  V.  one  of  the  towns  of  Judah 
in  the  extreme  south — "  Hazor,  Hadattah,  and  Ke- 
rioth,  and  Hezron,"  &c.  (Josh.  xv.  25)  ;  but  the 
Masoret  accents  of  the  Hebrew  connect  the  word 
with  that  preceding  it,  as  if  it  were  Hazor-chadattah, 
i.  c.  New  Hazor,  in  distinction  from  the  place  of  the 
same  name  in  ver.  2:5.  This  reading  is  expressly 
sanctioned  by  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  who  speak 
(Onom.  "Asor")  of  "New  Hazor"  as  lying  in 
their  day  to  the  east  of  and  near  Ascalon.  (See 
also  Reland,  70S.)  But  Ascalon,  as  Robinson  has 
pointed  out  (ii.  34,  note),  is  in  the  Shefelah,  and 
not  in  the  South,  and  would,  if  named  in  Joshua 
at  all,  be  included  in  the  second  division  of  the  list, 
beginning  at  ver.  3a,  instead  of  where  it  is,  not 
far  from  Kedesh.  [G-] 

HA'DID  ("VTn,  I.  e.  "  sharp,"  possibly  from 
its  situation  on  some  craggy  eminence,  Gesen.  Thes. 
44l>  ;  'A5i8  ;  Hadid),  a  place  named,  with  Lod 
(I.vdda)  and  Ono,  only  in  the  later  books  of  the 
history  (  Ezr.  ii.  33;  Neb.,  vii.  37,  xi.  34),  but  yet 
so  as  to  imply  its  earlier  existence,  in  the  time 
of  Eusebius  (Onom.  "  Adithaim")  a  town  called 
Aditha,  or  Adatha,  existed  to  the  east  of  Diospolis 
(Lydda).  This  was  probably  Hadid.  The  Adida 
of  the  Maccabaean  history  cannot  be  the  same  place, 
as  it  is  distinctly  specified  as  in  the  maritime  or 
Philistine  plain  further  south — "  Adida  in  Sephela  " 
(  1  Mace.  xii.  38 ) — with  which  agrees  the  description 
of  Josephus  (Ant.  xiii.  6,  §5).  About  three  miles 
east  of  Lydd  stands  a  village  called  rl-IIaditlu'h, 
marked  in  Van  de  Velde's  map.  This  is  described 
by  the  old  Jewish  traveller  ha-1'archi  as  being  "  on 
the  summit  of  a  round  hill,"  and  identified  by  him, 
no  doubt  correctly,  with  Hadid.  See  Zunz,  in  Asher's 
Ben,},  of  Tudela,  ii.  439.  [G.] 

HAD'LAI  C^Hn;  'EAoof,  Alex.'ASSf;  Aduli), 
a  man  of  Ephraim  ;  hither  of  Amasa,  who  was  one 
of  the  chiefs  of  the  tribe  in  the  reign  of  Pekah 
(2  Chr.  xxviii.  12). 

HADO'EAM  fDnnn;  'OSoppd;  AJuram), 
thr  i "i 1 1 1 .  son  of  Joktan  (Gen.  x.  27;  1  Chr.  i.  21). 
His  settlements,  unlike  those  of  many  of  Joktan's 
sons,  have  not  been  identified.  Bocbart  supposed 
that  the  Adramitae  repiesented  his  descendants  ;  but 
afterwards  believed,  as  later  critics  have  also,  that 
this  people  was  the  same  as  the  Chatramotitae,  or 
people  of  Hadramawt  (  Phaleg,  ii.  c.  17).  |  II axak- 
maykth.]  Fresnel  cites  an  Arab  author  who  iden- 
tities Hadoram  with  Jurhum  (4""'  Lettre,  Journ. 

As.:lr/'i        in    soil,   M     220);     but    till:     IS    III. .Ill- 

improbable  ;  nor  is  the  suggestion  of  Hadhoord,  by 
Csussin  {Essai,  i.  ;>").  more  likely:  the  latter  being 

oi f  the  aboriginal  tribes  of  Arabia,  such  as  'A'd, 

Thamood,  &c.    [Arabia.]  [E,  S.  P.] 


HAGABA 


735 


2.  (D"l"nn  ;  'ASovpdfj.,  Alex.  Aovpd/j.  ;  Ado- 
rani),  son  of  Tou  or  Toi  king  of  Hamath  ;  his 
father's  ambassador  to  congratulate  David  on  his 
victory  over  Hadarezer  king  of  Zobah  (1  Chr.  xviii. 
10),  and  the  bearer  of  valuable  presents  in  the  form 
of  articles  of  antique  manufacture  (Joseph.),  in  gold, 
silver,  and  brass.  In  the  parallel  narrative  of  2  Sam. 
viii.  the  name  is  given  as  Joram  ;  hut  this  being  a 
contraction  of  Jehoram,  which  contains  the  name  of 
Jehovah,  is  peculiarly  an  Israelite  appellation,  and 
we  may  therefore  conclude  that  Hadoram  is  the 
genuine  form  of  the  name.  By  Josephus  {Ant.  vii. 
5,  4)  it  is  given  as  'ASdpafios. 

3.  (DTin  ;  '6  'ASaivipd/j.,  Alex.  'ASupd/x  ; 
Adurani).  The  form  assumed  in  Chronicles  by 
the  name  of  the  intendant  of  taxes  under  David, 
Solomon,  and  Rehoboam,  who  lost  bis  life  in  the 
revolt  at  Shechem  after  the  coronation  of  the  last- 
named  prince  (2  Chr.  x.  18).  He  was  sent  by 
Hehoboam  to  appease  the  tumult,  possibly  as  being 
one  of  the  old  and  moderate  party  ;  but  the  choice 
of  the  chief  officer  of  the  taxes  was  not  a  happy  one. 
His  interference  was  ineffectual,  and  he  himself  fell 
a  victim  :  "  all  Israel  stoned  him  with  stones  that, 
he  died."  In  Kings  the  name  is  given  in  the  longer 
form  of  Adoniram,  but  in  Samuel  (2  Sam.  xx.  24) 
as  Adoram.  By  Josephus,  iu  both  the  first  and 
last  case,  he  is  called  'ASwpa/j.os. 

HA'DEACH  (TfHn  ;  2e5pdX  \  Hadrach),  a 
country  of  Syria,  mentioned  once  only,  by  the  pro- 
phet Zechariah,  in  the  following  words: — "The 
burden  of  the  word  of  Jehovah  in  the  land  of 
Hadrach,  and  Damascus  [shall  be]  the  rest  thereof : 
when  the  eyes  of  man,  as  of  all  the  tribes  ot  Israel, 
shall  be  toward  Jehovah.  And  Hamath  also  shall 
border  thereby;  Tyrus  and  Zidon,  though  it  be 
very  wise  "  (ix.  1 ,  2).  The  position  of  the  district, 
with  its  borders,  is  here  generally  stated,  although 
it  does  not  appear,  as  is  commonly  assumed,  that  it 
was  on  the  east  of  Damascus  ;  But  the  name  itself 
seems  to  have  wholly  disappeared;  and  the  inge- 
nuity of  critics  has  been  exercised  on  it  without 
attaining  any  trustworthy  results.  It  still  remains 
unknown.  It  is  true  that  1L  Jose  of  Damascus 
identifies  it  with  the  site  of  an  important  city,  cast 
of  Damascus;   and  Joseph  Abassi   makes  mention 

of  a  place   called  Hadrak  (,s}  Jy^)  ;    but,   with 

Gesenius,  we  may  well  distrust  these  writers. 
The  vague  statement  of  Cyril  Alex,  seems  to  lie 
founded  on  no  particular  facts  beyond  those  con- 
tained in  the  prophecy  of  Zechariah.  Besides  these 
identifications  we  can  point  to  none  that  possesses 
the  smallest  claim  to  acceptance.  Those  ot'  Movers 
(Phonic.), Rleek,  and  others  are  purely  hypothetical, 
and  the  same  must  be  said  of  the  theory  ot'  Alphens, 
in  his  monograph  De  terra  Hadrach  <i  Damasco 
(Traj.  Rh.  172.;,  referred  to  by  Winer.  . v.  r.).  A 
solution  of  the  difficulties  surrounding  the  name 
may  perhaps  be  found  by  supposing  that  it  is 
derived  fiom  II \\>\\i.  [E.  S.  I'.] 

IIA'GA15(33P1;  'AydP;  Hagab).  Bene-Hagab 
were  among  the  Nethiiiiin  who  returned  from  Ba- 
bylon with  Zerubbabel  (Ezt.  ii.46).    In  the  parallel 

list  in  Neheiiu'ah,  this  and  the  name  preceding  it  are 
omitted.     In  the  Apocryphal  Bsdras  it  is  given  as 

AliAI'.A. 

EAGA'BA  (JHt2ini'Ayafid',Ifagaba).    Bene- 

ueie  among   the  NYthiniin  who  came  lack 


736 


HAGABAH 


from  captivity  with  Zerubbabel  (Nell.  vii.  48).   The 
name  is  slightly  different  in  form  from 

HAGA'BAH(nn:n;  'AyaPd;Hagaba),  under 

which  it  is  found  in  the  parallel  list  of  Ezr.  ii.  4b. 
In  Esdras  it  is  given  as  Graba. 

HAGAR  (13  H  ;  "Ayap;  Ajar),  an  Egyptian 
woman,  the  handmaid,  or  slave,  of  Sarah  (Gen.  xvi. 
1),  whom  the  latter  gave  as  a  concubine  to  Abra- 
ham, after  he  had  dwelt  ten  years  in  the  land  of 
Canaan  and  had  no  children  by  Sarah  (xvi.  2  and  3). 
That  she  was  a  bondwoman  is  stated  both  in  the 
0.  T.  and  in  the  N.  T.  (in  the  latter  as  part  of  her 
typical  character)  ;  and  the  condition  of  a  slave  was 
one  essential  of  her  position  as  a  legal  concubine.  It 
is  recorded  that  "  when  she  saw  that  she  had  con- 
ceived, her  mistress  was  despised  in  her  eyes"  (4), 
and  Sarah,  with  the  anger,  we  may  suppose,  of 
a  free  woman,  rather  than  of  a  wife,  reproached 
Abraham  for  the  results  of  her  own  act :  "  My 
wrong  be  upon  thee :  I  have  given  my  maid  into 
thy  bosom  ;  and  when  she  saw  that  she  had  con- 
ceived, I  was  despised  in  her  eyes  :  Jehovah  judge 
between  me  and  thee."  Abraham's  answer  seems 
to  have  been  forced  from  him  by  his  love  for  the 
wife  of  many  years,  who  besides  was  his  half-sister; 
and  with  the  apparent  want  of  purpose  that  he 
before  displayed  in  Egypt,  and  afterwards  at  the 
court  of  Abimelech8  (in  contrast  to  his  firm  cou- 
rage anil  constancy  when  directed  by  God),  he  said, 
"Behold,  thy  maid  is  in  thy  hand;  do  to  her  as  it 
pleaseth  thee."  This  permission  was  necessary  in 
an  Eastern  household,  but  it  is  worthy  of  remark 
that  it  is  now  very  rarely  given;  nor  can  we 
think,  from  the  unchangeableness  of  Eastern  cus- 
toms, and  the  strongly-marked  national  character 
of  those  peoples,  that  it  was  usual  anciently 
to  allow  a  wife  to  deal  hardly  with  a  slave  in 
Hagar' s  position.  Yet  the  truth  and  individuality 
of  the  vivid  narrative  is  enforced  by  this  apparent 
departure  from  usage:  "  And  when  Sarai  dealt 
hardly  with  her,  she  fled  from  her  face,"  turning 
her  steps  towards  her  native  land  through  the  great 
wilderness  traversed  by  the  Egyptian,  road.  By 
the  fountain  in  the  wny  to  Sbur,  the  angel  of  the 
Lord  found  her,  charged  her  to  return  and  submit 
herself  under  the  hands  of  her  mistress,  and  de- 
livered the  remarkable  prophecy  respecting  her 
unborn  child,  recorded  in  ver.  10-12.  [Ishmael.] 
"  And  she  called  the  name  of  the  Lord  that  spake 
unto  her,  Thou  God  art  a  God  of  vision  ;  for  she  said, 
Have  I  then  seen  [i.  e.  lived]  after  vision  [of  God]  ? 
Wherefore  the  well  was  called  Beer-lahai -koi  " 
(13, 14).  On  her  return,  Hagar  gave  birth  to  Ish- 
mael, and  Abraham  was  then  eighty-six  years  old. 

Mention  is  not  again  made  of  Hagar  in  the  history 
of  Abraham  until  the  feast  at  the  weaning  of  Isaac, 
when  "  Sarah  saw  the  son  of  Hagar  the  Egyptian, 
which  she  had  born  unto  Abraham,  mocking"  ;  and 
in  exact  sequence  with  the  first  flight  of  Hagar,  we 
now  read  of  her  expulsion.  "  Wherefore  she  said 
unto  Abraham,  Cast  out  this  bondwoman  and  her 
son ;  for  the  son  of  this  bondwoman  shall  not  be 
heir  with  my  son,  [even]  with  Isaac"  (xxi.  9, 10). 
Abraham,  in  his  grief,  and  unwillingness  thus  to 
act,  was  comforted  by  God,  with  the  assurance  that 
in  Isaac  should  his  seed  be  called,  and  that  a  nation 
shoal  I  also  be  raised  of  the  bondwoman's  son.     In 


HAGARENES 

his  trustful  obedience,  we  read,  in  the  pathetic  nar- 
rative, "  Abraham  rose  up  early  in  the  morning, 
and  took  bread,  and  a  bottle  of  water,  and  gave 
[it]  unto  Hagar,  putting  [it]  on  her  shoulder,  and 
the  child,  and  sent  her  away,  and  she  departed  and 
wandered  in  the  wilderness  of  Beersheba.  And  the 
water  was  spent  in  the  bottle,  and  she  cast  the 
child  under  one  of  the  shrubs.  And  she  went,  and 
sat  her  down  over  against  [him]  a  good  way  off,  as 
it  were  a  bow  shot ;  for  she  said,  Let  me  not  see 
the  death  of  the  child.  And  she  sat  over  against 
[him],  and  lift  up  her  voice  and  wept.  And  God 
hoard  the  voice  of  the  lad,  and  the  angel  of  God 
called  to  Hagar  out  of  heaven,  and  said  unto  her, 
What  aileth  thee,  Hagar?  fear  not,  for  God  hath 
heard  the  voice  of  the  lad  where  he  [is].  Arise, 
lift  up  the  lad,  and  hold  him  in  thine  hand,  for 
I  will  make  him  a  great  nation.  And  God  opened 
her  eyes,  and  she  saw  a  well  of  water,  and  she 
went  and  filled  the  bottle  with  water,  and  gave  the 
lad  to  drink"  (xxi.  14-19).  The  verisimilitude, 
oriental  exactness,  and  simple  beauty  of  this  story- 
are  internal  evidences  attesting  its  truth  apart 
from  all  other  evidence;  and  even  Winer  says 
(in  alluding  to  the  subterfuge  of  scepticism  that 
Hagar  =  "  flight"  would  lead  to  the  assumption  of 
its  being  a  myth),  "  Das  Ereigniss  ist  so  einfach  und 
den  orientalischen  Sitten  so  angemessen,  dass  wir 
hiergewiss  eine  rein  historische  Sage  vor  uns  haben" 
(JlealwSrt.  s.  v.  "Hagar"). 

The  name  of  Hagar  occurs  elsewhere  only  when 
she  takes  a  wife  to  Ishmael  (xxi.  21) ;  and  in  the 
genealogy  (xxv.  12)  St.  Paul  refers  to  her  as  the 
type  of  the  old  covenant,  likening  her  to  Mount 
Sinai,  the  Mount  of  the  Law  (Gal.  iv.  22  seqq.). 

In  Mohammadan  tradition  Hagar  (ws.jjfc,  H;'jir, 

or  Hagir)  is  represented  as  the  wife  of  Abraham , 
as  might  be  expected  when  we  remember  that 
Ishmael  is  the  head  of  the  Arab  nation,  and  the 
reputed  ancestor  of  Mohammad.  In  the  same 
manner  she  is  said  to  have  dwelt  and  been  buried 
at  Mekkeh,  and  the  well  Zemzem  in  the  sacred  en- 
closure of  the  temple  of  Mekkeh  is  pointed  out  by 
the  Muslims  as  the  well  which  was  miraculously 
formed  for  Ishmael  in  the  wilderness..      [E.  S.  P.] 

HAGARENES,  HAGARITES  (Dn^- 
D^N'HJn  ;  '  Ayap-nvoi,  'Ayapcuoi  ;  Agareni,  Aga- 
rei),  a  people  dwelling  to  the  east  of  Palestine,  with 
whom  the  tribe  of  Reuben  made  war  in  the  time  of 
Saul,  and  "  who  fell  by  their  hand,  and  they  dwelt 
in  their  tents  throughout  all  the  east  [land]  of 
Gilead"  (1  Chr.  v.  10) ;  and  again,  in  ver.  18-20,  the 
sons  of  Reuben,  and  the  Gadites,  and  half  the  tribe 
of  Manasseh  "  made  war  with  the  Hagarites,  with 
Jetur,  and  Nephish,  and  Nodab,  and  they  were 
helped  against  them,  and  the  Hagarites  were  de- 
livered into  their  hand,  and  all  that  were  with 
them."  The  spoil  here  recorded  to  have  been 
taken  shows  the  wealth  and  importance  of  these 
tribes  ;  and  the  conquest,  at  least  of  the  territory 
occupied  by  them,  was  complete,  for  the  Israelites 
"  dwelt  in  their  steads  until  the  captivity  "  (v.  22). 
The  same  people,  as  confederate  against  Israel,  are 
mentioned  in  Ps.  Ixxxiii. — "  The  tabernacles  of  Edom 
and  the  Ishmaelites  ;  of  Moab  and  the  Hagarenes ; 


a  It  seems  to  be  unnecessary  to  assume  (as  Kalisch  event  is  not  required,  nor  does  the  narrative  appear 
does,  Comment,  on  Genesis)  that  we  have  here  another  |  to  warrant  it,  unless  Abraham  regarded  Hagar's  son 
proof  of  Abraham's  faith.     This  explanation  of  the  I  as  the  heir  of  the  promise  :  comp.  Geii.  xvii.  18. 


HAGERITE,  THE 

Gebal,  Amnion,  and  Amalek  ;  the  Philistines  with 

the  inhabitants  of  Tyre  ;  Assur  also  is  joined  with 
them  ;  they  have  holpen  the  children  of  Lot "  (ver.  j 
6-8). 

Who  these  people  were  is  a  question  that  cannot 
readily  be  decided,  though  it  is  generally  believed 
that  they  were  named  after  Hagar.  Their  geogra- 
phical position,  as  inferred  from  the  above  passages,  j 
was  in  the  "  east  country,"  where  dwelt  the  de- 
scendants of  Ishmael ;  the  occurrence  of  the  names 
of  two  of  his  sons,  Jetur  and  Nephish  (1  Chr.  v. 
19),  as  before  quoted,  with  that  of  Nodab,  whom 
Cesenius  supposes  to  be  another  son  (though  he  is 
not  found  in  the  genealogical  lists,  and  must  remain 
doubtful  [NopaB]),  seems  to  indicate  that  these 
Hagarenes  were  named  after  Hagar ;  but  in  the 
passage  in  Ps.  lxxxiii.,  the  lshmaelites  are  apparently 
distinguished  from  the  Hagarenes  (cf.  Bar.  ii.  23). 
May  they  have  been  thus  called  after  a  town  or 
district  named  after  Hagar,  and  not  only  because 
they  were  her  descendants  ?  It  is  needless  to  follow 
the  suggestion  of  some  writers,  that  Hagar  may 
have  been  the  mother  of  other  children  after  her 
separation  from  Abraham  (as  the  Bible  and  tradition 
are  silent  on  the  question),  and  it  is  in  itself  highly 
improbable. 

It  is  also  uncertain  whether  the  important  town 
and  district  of  Hejer  (the  inhabitants  of  which 
were  probably  the  same  as  the  Agraei  of  Strabo, 
xvi.  707,  Dionys.  Perieg.  956,  Plin.  vi.  32,  and 
Pt.  v.  19,  2)  represent  the  ancient  name  and  a 
dwelling  of  the  Hagarenes  ;  but  it  is  reasonable  to 

3     -     - 

suppose  that  they  do.     Hejer,  or  Hejerd  (r~*c\&>i 

indeclinable,  according  to  Ydkoot,  Muahtarak,  s.  v. ; 

s  -  - 
but  also,  according  to  Kdmoos,  .<\A,  as  Ges.  and 

Winer  write  it),  is  the  capital  town,  and  also  a  sub- 
division, of  the  province  of  north-eastern  Arabia 
called  El-Bahreyn,  or,  as  some  writers  say,  the 
name  of  the  province  itself  (Mushtarak  and  Ma- 
rdsid,  s.  «.),  on  the  borders  of  the  Persian  Gulf. 
It  is  a  low  and  fertile  country,  frequented  for  its 
abundant  water  and  pasturage  by  the  wandering 
tribes  of  the  neighbouring  deserts  and  of  the  high 
land  of  Nejd.  For  the  Agraei,  see  the  Dictionary  of 
Geography.  There  is  another  Hejer,  a  place  near 
El-Medeeneh. 

5  -,. 

The  district  of  Hajar  (y^),  on  the  borders  of 

Desert  Arabia,  north  of  El-Medeeneh,  has  been 
thought  to  possess  a  trace,  in  its  name,  of  the 
Hagarenes,  It  is.  al  least,  less  Likely  than  Hejer 
to  do  so,  both  from  situation  and  etymology.  The 
tract,  however,  is  curious  from  the  caves  tii.it  it  i^ 
reported  to  contain,  in  which,  say  the  A>abs,  dwelt 
the  old  tribe  of  Thamood. 

Two  Hagaritea  arc  mentioned  intheO.T.:  see 
MlBHAB  and  JAZIZ.  [E.  S.  P.] 

HAG'ERITE,  THE  C~))r\7}  ;  &  'Ayapirris; 
Agareus,  or  Agarenus).  Jaziz  the  Hagerite,  i.  e. 
the  descendant  of  Hagar,  had  the  charge  of  David's 
sheep  (jiX¥,  A.  V.  "flocks;"  1  Chr.  xxvii.  31). 
The  word  appears  in  the  other  forms  of  Hag  aim  lis 
ami  Hagarenes. 

HAG'GAI  (*|I1  ;  'kyyaios  ;  Aggaeus),  the 
tenth  in  order  of  the  minor  prophets,  and  first  of 
those  who  prophesied  after  the  Captivity.  With 
regard  to  his  tribe  and  parentage  both  history  and 


HAGGAI 


73' 


tradition  are  alike  silent.     Some,  indeed,  taking  in 

its  literal  sense  the  expression  HIPP  T]X?>D   (maluc 

y'hovdJi)  in  i.  13,  have  imagined  that  he  was  an 
angel  in  human  shape  (Jerome,  Coinm.  in  foe). 
In  the  absence  of  any  direct  evidence  on  the  point, 
it  is  more  than  probable  that  he  was  one  of  the 
exiles  who  returned  with  Zerubbabel  and  Joshua  ; 
and  Ewald  {die  Proph.  d.  Alt.  II.)  is  even  tempted 
to  infer  from  ii.  3  that  he  may  have  been  one  of 
the  few  survivors  who  had  seen  the  first  temple  in 
its  splendour.  The  rebuilding  of  the  temple,  which 
was  commenced  in  the  reign  of  Cyrus  (B.C.  535), 
was  suspended  during  the  reigns  of  his  successors, 
Cambyses  and  Pseudo-Smerdis,  in  consequence  of 
the  determined  hostility  of  the  Samaritans.  On 
the  accession  of  Darius  Hystaspis  (B.C.  521),  the 
prophets  Haggai  and  Zechariah  urged  the  renewal 
of  the  undertaking,  and  obtained  the  permission 
and  assistance  of  the  king  (Ezr.  v.  1,  vi.  14;  Jos. 
Ant.  xi.  4).  Animated  by  the  high  courage 
(rnagni  spiritics,  Jerome)  of  these  devoted  men,  the 
people  prosecuted  the  work  with  vigour,  and  the 
temple  was  completed  and  dedicated  in  the  sixth 
year  of  Darius  (B.C.  516).  According  to  tradition, 
Haggai  was  born  in  Babylon,  was  a  young  man 
when  he  came  to  Jerusalem,  and  was  buried  with 
honour  near  the  sepulchres  of  the  priests  (Isidor. 
Hispal.  c.  49  ;  Pseudo-Dorotheus,  in  Chron.  Pasch. 
151  d).  It  has  hence  been  conjectured  that  he  was 
of  priestly  rank.  Haggai,  Zechariah,  and  Malachi, 
according  to  the  Jewish  writers,  were  the  men 
who  were  with  Daniel  when  he  saw  the  vision 
related  in  Dan.  x.  7 ;  and  were  after  the  captivity 
members  of  the  Great  Synagogue,  which  consisted 
of  120  elders  (Cozri,  iii.  65).  The  Seder  Olam 
Zuta  places  their  death  in  the  52nd  year  of  the 
Medes  and  Persians ;  while  the  extravagance  of 
another  tradition  makes  Haggai  survive  till  the 
entry  of  Alexander  the  Great  into  Jerusalem,  and 
even  till  the  time  of  our  Saviour  (Carpzov,  Tntrod.). 
j  In  the  Homan  Martyrology  Hosea  and  Haggai  are 
joined  in  the  catalogue  of  saints  {Acta  Sanctor. 
4  Julii).  The  question  of  Haggai's  probable  con- 
nexion with  the  authorship  of  the  book  of  Ezra  will 
be  found  fully  discussed  in  the  article  under  that 
head,  p.  607. 

The  names  of  Haggai  and  Zechariah  are  asso- 
ciated in  the  LXX.  in  the  titles  of  Ps.  137,  145- 
148;  in  the  Vulgate  in  those  of  Ps.  Ill,  14.".; 
and  in  the  Peshito  Syriac  in  those  of  Ps.  125,  126, 
145,  146,  147,  148.  It  may  be  that  tradition 
assigned  to  these  prophets  the  arrangement  of  the 
above-mentioned  psalms  for  use  in  the  temple  ser- 
vice, just  as  Ps.  lxiv.  is  in  the  Vulgate  attributed 
to  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel,  and  the  name  of  the  former 
is  inscribed  at  the  head  of  Ps.  exxxvi.  in  the  l.XX. 
According  to  Pseudo-Epiphanius  (</<'  Vitis  Proph.  . 
Haggai  was  the  first  Who  chanted  the  Hallelujah  in 
the  second  temple:  "  wherefore,"  he  adds,  "  we  say 
'  Hallelujah*  which  is  the  hymn  of  Haggai  ami  Ze- 
chariah.'" Haggai  is  mentioned  in  the  Apocrypha 
as  AGGETJ8,  in  1  Esdr.  vi.  I,  to.  3;  2  Esdr.  i. 
40;  and  is  alluded  to  in  Ecclus.  xlix.  11  (cf.  Hag. 
ii.  23),  and  Heb.  \ii.  26  (Hag.  ii.  6). 

The  style  of  his  writing  is  generally  tame  and 
prosaic,  though  at  times  it  rises  to  the  dignity  of 
severe  invective,  when  the  prophet  rebukes  his 
countrymen  for  their  sellish  indolence  and  neglect 
of  God's  house.  But  the  brevity  of  the  prophecies 
is  so  great,  and  the  poverty  of  expression  which 
characterises  them  so  striking,  as  to  give  rise  to  a 


738 


HAGGERI 


conjecture,  not  without  reason,  that  in  their  pre- 
sent form  they  are  but  the  outline  or  summary 
of  the  original  discourses.  They  were  delivered  in 
the  second  year  of  Darius  Hystaspis  (B.C.  520),  at 
intervals  from  the  1st  day  of  the  (3th  month  to  the 
24th  day  of  the  9th  month  in  the  same  year. 

In  his  first  message  to  the  people  the  prophet 
denounced  the  listlessness  of  the  Jews,  who  dwelt 
in  their  "  panelled  houses,"  while  the  temple  of 
the  Lord  was  roofless  and  desolate.  The  displeasure 
of  God  was  manifest  in  the  failure  of  all  their 
efforts  for  their  own  gratification.  The  heavens 
were  "  stayed  from  dew,"  and  the  earth  was 
"  stayed  from  her  fruit."  They  had  neglected  that 
which  should  have  been  their  first  care,  and  reaped 
the  due  wages  of  their  selfishness  (i.  4-11).  The 
words  of  the  prophet  sank  deep  into  the  hearts  of 
the  people  and  their  leaders.  They  acknowledged 
the  voice  of  God  speaking  by  His  servant,  and 
obeyed  the  command.  Their  obedience  was  re- 
warded with  the  assurance  of  God's  presence  (i.  13), 
and  twenty-four  days  after  the  building  was  re- 
sumed. A  month  had  scarcely  elapsed  when  the 
work  seems  to  have  slackened,  and  the  enthusiasm 
of  the  people  abated.  The  prophet,  ever  ready  to 
rekindle  their  zeal,  encouraged  the  flagging  spirits 
of  the  chiefs  with  the  renewed  assurance  of  God's 
presence,  and  the  fresh  promise  that,  stately  and 
magnificent  as  was  the  temple  of  their  wisest  king, 
the  glory  of  the  latter  house  should  be  greater  than 
the  glory  of  the  former  (ii.  3-9).  Yet  the  people 
were  still  inactive,  and  two  months  afterwards  we 
find  him  again  censuring  their  sluggishness,  which 
rendered  worthless  all  their  ceremonial  observances. 
But  the  rebuke  was  accompanied  by  a  repetition 
of  the  promise  (ii.  10-19).  On  the  same  day,  the 
four-and-twentieth  of  the  ninth  month,  the  prophet 
delivered  his  last  prophecy,  addressed  to  Zerub- 
babel,  prince  of  Judah,  the  representative  of  the 
royal  family  of  David,  and  as  such  the  lineal 
ancestor  of  the  Messiah.  This  closing  prediction 
foreshadows  the  establishment  of  the  Messianic 
kingdom  upon  the  overthrow  of  the  thrones  of  the 
nations  (ii.  20-23).  [W.  A.  W.] 

HAG'GERI  (njri  i.  c.  Hagri,  a  Hagarite  ; 
'Ayap'i,  Alex.  'Arapai;  Agarai).  "  Mibhar  son 
of  Haggeri,"  was  one  of  the  mighty  men  of  David's 
guard,  according  to  the  catalogue  of  1  Chr.  xi.  38. 
The  parallel  passage — 2  Sam.  xxiii.  36 — has  "  Bani 
the  Gadite "  CTHH).  This  Kennicott  decides  to 
have  been  the  original,  from  which  Haggeri  has 
been  corrupted  (Dissert.  214).  The  Targum  has 
Bar  Gedd  (6H|  "12). 

HAG'GI  Cin  ;  'Ayyls,  Alex.  'A77€?s;  Eaggi, 
Aggi),  second  son  of  Gad  (Gen.  xlvi.  16;  Num. 
xxvi.  15),  founder  of  the  Haggites  CJHirt).  It  will 
be  observed  that  the  name,  though  given  as  that  of 
an  individual,  is  really  a  patronymic,  precisely  the 
same  as  of  the  family. 

HAGGI'AH  (rt»|n  ;  'Ayyia  ;  Haggid),  a  Le- 
vite,  one  of  the  descendants  of  Merari  (1  Chr.  vi.  30). 

HAG'GITES,  THE  (^nn  ;  6  Ayyi ;  Agitae), 
the  family  sprung  from  Haggi,  second  son  of  Gad 
(Num.  xxvi.  15). 

HAG  GITH  (TV3n,  "  a  dancer  ;"  'AyyiB  ; 
Alex.  QevyeB,  'Ayi0,  'Ayyeid  ;  Joseph.  ^AyyiQ-q  ; 
Aggith,  Jlni/i/it/i),  one  of  David's  wives,  of  whom 
nothing  is  told  us  except  that  she  was  the  mother 


HAIR 

of  Adonijah,  who  is  commonly  designated  as  "  the 
sun  of  Haggith"  (2  Sam.  iii.  4  ;  1  K.i.  .">,  1 1 ,  ii.  1:;  ; 
1  Chr.  iii.  2).    He  was,  like  Absalom,  renowned  for 

his  handsome  presence.  In  the  first  and  last  of  the 
above  passages  Haggith  is  fourth  in  order  of  mention 
among  the  wives,  Adonijah  being  also  fourth  among 
the  sons.  His  birth  happened  at  Hebron  (2  Sam. 
iii.  2,  5)  shortly  after  that  of  Absalom  ( 1  K.  i.  6; 
where  it  will  be  observed  that  the  words  "  his 
mother"  are  inserted  by  the  translators).        [G.] 

HA'GIA  ('A7ia;  Aggia),  1  Esd.  v.  34.  [Hat- 
til.] 

HA'I  CJ?n  ;  'A77ai' ;  Eat).  The  form  in  which 
the  well-known  place  Ai  appears  in  the  A.  V.  on  its 
first  introduction  (Gen.  xii.  8,  xiii.  3).  It  arises 
from  the  translators  having  in  these  places,  and  these 
only,  recognized  the  definite  article  with  which  Ai 
is  invariably  and  emphatically  accompanied  in  the 
Hebrew.  In  the  Samaritan  Version  of  the  above 
two  passages,  the  name  is  given  in  the  first  Ainah, 
and  in  the  second  Cephrah,  as  if  CEPHTRAH.     [G.] 

HAIR.  The  Hebrews  were  fully  alive  to  the 
importance  of  the  hair  as  an  element  of  personal 
beauty,  whether  as  seen  in  the  "curled  locks, 
black  as  a  raven,"  of  youth  (Cant.  v.  11),  or  in  the 
"  crown  of  glory  "  that  encircled  the  head  of  old 
age  (Prov.  xvi.  31).  The  customs  of  ancient  na- 
tions in  regard  to  the  hair  varied  considerably  :  the 
Egyptians  allowed  the  women  to  wear  it  long,  but 
kept  the  heads  of  men  closely  shaved  from  early 
childhood  (Her.  ii.  36,  iii.  12  ;  Wilkinson's  Ancient 
Egyptians,  ii.  327,  328).  The  Greeks  admired 
long  hair,  whether  in  men  or  women,  as  is  evi- 
denced in  the  expression  KaprjKOfxowvrts  'Axaiol, 
and  in  the  representations  of  their  divinities,  espe- 
cially Bacchus  and  Apollo,  whose  long  locks  were 
a  symbol  of  perpetual  youth.  The  Assyrians 
also  wore  it  long  (Her.  i.  195),  the  flowing  curls 
being  gathered  together  in  a  heavy  cluster  on  the 
back,  as  represented  in  the  sculptures  of  Nineveh. 
The  Hebrews  on  the  other  hand,  while  they  encou- 
raged the  growth  of  hair,  observed  the  natural  dis- 
tinction between  the  sexes  by  allowing  the  women 
to  wear  it  long  (Luke  vii.  38  ;  John  xi.  2  ;  1  Cor. 
xi.  6  ff.),  while  the  men  restrained  theirs  by  fre- 
quent clippings  to  a  moderate  length.  This  differ- 
ence between  the  Hebrews  and  the  surrounding 
nations,  especially  the  Egyptians,  arose  no  doubt 
partly  from  natural,  taste,  but  partly  also  from 
legal  enactments:  clipping  the  hair  in  a  certain 
manner  and  offering  the  locks,  was  in  early  times 
connected  with  religious  worship:  many  of  the 
Arabians  practised  a  peculiar  tonsure  in  honour  of 
their  God  Orotal  (Her.  iii.  8,  Kftpovrat  Trepirp6- 
Xa\a,  Trepi^vpovi'Tes  robs  upordcpovs),  and  hence 
the  Hebrews  were  forbidden  to  "  round  the  corners 
(i"IN2,  lit.  the  extremity)  of  their  heads"  (Lev. 
xix.  27),  meaning  the  locks  along  the  forehead  and 
temples,  and  behind  the  ears.  This  tonsure  is  de- 
scribed in  the  LXX.  by  a  peculiar  expression  <n<ro?) 
(  =  the  classical  aKcupiov),  probably  derived  from 
the  Hebrew  IV^V  (conlP-  Bochart,  Can.  i.  fi,  p. 
379).  That  the  practice  of  the  Arabians  was  well 
known  to  the  Hebrews,  appears  from  the  expression 
HN2  *X-1Sp,  rounded  as  to  the  locks,  by  which 
they  are  described  (Jer.  ix.  26,  xxv.  23,  xlix.  32; 
see  marginal  translation  of  the  A.  V.).  The  pro- 
hibition against  cutting  off  the  hair  on  the  death  of 
a  relative  (Dcut.  xiv.  1)  was  probably  grounded  on 


HAIR 

a  similar  reason.  In  addition  to  these  regulations, 
the  Hebrews  dreaded  baldness,  as  it  was  frequently 
the  result  of  leprosy  (.Lev.  xiii.  4o  11'.),  and  hence 
formed  one  of  the  disqualifications  for  the  priesthood 
(Lev.  xxi.  20,  LXX.).  [BALDNESS.]  The  rule  im- 
posed upon  the  priests,  and  probably  followed  by  the 
rest  of  the  community,  was  that  the  hair  should  be 

polled  (DD3,  Ez.  xliv.  20),  neither  being  shaved, 
nor  allowed  to  grow  too  long  (Lev.  xxi.  5;  Ez. 
I.  c).  What  was  the  precise  length  usually  worn, 
we  have  no  means  of  ascertaining ;  but  from  various 
expressions,  such  as  CN~1  JHS,  lit.  to  let  loose  the 
head  or  the  hair  ( =  solvere  crines,  Virg.  Aen.  iii. 
65,  xi.  35 ;  demissos  bigentis  more  capillos,  Ov. 
Ep.  x.  137)  by  unbinding  the  head  band  and  let- 
ting it  go  dishevelled  (Lev.  x.  6,  A.  V.  "  uncover 
your  heads"),  which  was  done  in  mourning  (cf. 
Ez.  xxiv.  17) ;  and  again  \l'H  !"pjl,  to  uncover 
the  ear,  previous  to  making  any  communication 
of    importance    (1     Sam.    xx.    2,     12,    xxii.     8, 

'  A.  V.,  margin),  as  though  the  hair  fell  over  the 
ear,  we  may  conclude  that  men  wore  their  hair 
somewhat  longer  than  is  usual  with  us.  The  word 
JH3,  used  as  =  hair  (Num.  vi.  5;  Ez.  xliv.  20), 
is  especially  indicative  of  its  free  growth  (cf. 
Knobel,  Comfn.  in  Lev.  xxi.  10).  Long  hair  was 
admired  in  the  case  of  young  men;  it  is  especially 
noticed  in  the  description  of  Absalom's  person 
(2  Sam.  xiv.  2(3),  the  inconceivable  weight  of  whose 
hair,  as  given  in  the  text  (200  shekels),  has  led  to 
a  variety  of  explanations  (comp.  Harmer's  Obser- 
vations, iv.  321),  the  more  probable  being  that 
the  numeral  3  (20)  has  been  turned  into  ")  (200): 
Josephus  (Ant.  vii.  8,  §5)  adds,  that  it  was  cut 
every  eighth  day.  The  hair  was  also  worn  long  by 
the  body  guard  of  Solomon  according  to  the  same 
authority  (Ant.  viii.  7,  §3,  fj.r)Ki<TTas  KaQtifxtvoi 
Xairas).  The  care  requisite  to  keep  the  hair  in 
order  in  such  eases  must  have  been  very  great,  and 
hence  the  practice  of  wearing  long  hair  was  un- 
usual, and  only  resorted  to  as  an  act  of  religious 
observance,  in  which  case  it  was  a  "  sign  of  humil- 
iation ami  self-denial,  and  of  a  certain  religious 
slovenliness  "  (Lightfoot,  Exercit,  on  1  Cor.  xi.  14), 
and  was  practised  by  the  Nazarites  (Num.  vi.  5; 
Judg.  xiii.  5,  xvi.  17;  1  Sam.  i.  11),  and  occa- 
sionally by  others  in  token  of  special  mercies  (Acts 
xviii.  18);  it  was  not  unusual  among  the  Egyptians 
when  on  a  journey  (Diod.  i.  18;.  [Nazarite.] 
In  times  of  affliction  the  hair  was  altogether  cut  oft' 
(Is.  iii.  17,  24,  xv.  2,  xxii.  12  ;  Jer.  vii.  20,  xlviii. 
.".7;  Am.  viii.  10;  Joseph.  /,'.  J.  ii.  15,  §1), 
the  practice  of  the  Hebrews  being  in  this  respect 
the  reverse  of  that  of  the  Egyptians,  who  let 
their  hair  grow  long  in  time  of  mourning  (Herod, 
ii.  36),  shaving  their  heads  when  the  term  was 
over  ((Jen.  xli.  14);  but  resembling  that  of  the 
Greeks,  as  frequently  noticed  by  classical  writers 
(e.g.  Soph.  .1./'.  1174;  Eurip.  Eleetr.  14::,  241). 
Tearing  the  hair  (Ezr.  i.\.  '■'>)  and  letting  it  go 
dishevelled,  as  already  noticed,  were  similar  tokens 

of  grief.  [Mourning.]  The  practice  of  the  mo- 
dem Arabs  in  regard  to  the  Length  of  their  hair 
varies;  generally  the  men  allow  it  to  grow  its  na- 
tural length,  the  tresses  hanging  down  to  the  breast 
and  sometimes  to  the  waist,  affording  substantial 
protection  to  the  head  and  neck  against  the  violence 
of  the  sun's  rays  (Burckhardt.a  Notes,  i.  19  ;  Well- 
sted's  Travels,  i.  33,  53,  73).  The  modern  Egyp- 
tians retain  the  practices  of  their  ancestors,  .-having 


HAIR 


739 


the  heads  of  the  men,  but  suffering  the  women's 
hair  to  grow  long  (Lane's  Mod.  Egypt,  i.  52,  71). 
Wigs  were  commonly  used  by  the  latter  people 
(Wilkinson,  ii.  324),  but  not  by  the  Hebiews:  Jo- 
sephus (Vit.  §11)  notices  an  instance  of  false  hair 
(irepider^  /cd/xTj)  being  used  for  the  purpose  of  dis- 
guise. Whether  the  ample  ringlets  of  the  Assyrian 
monarchs,  as  represented  in  the  sculptures  of  Ni- 
neveh, were  real  or  artificial,  is  doubtful  (Layard's 
Nineveh,  ii.  328).  Among  the  Medes  the  wig  was 
worn  by  the  upper  classes  (Xen.  Cijrop.  i.  3,  §2). 


Egyptian  Wigs.    (Wilk 


The  usual  and  favourite  colour  of  the  hair  was 
black  (Cant.  v.  11),  as  is  indicated  in  the  compa- 
risons to  a  "flock  of  goats"  and  the  "tents  of 
Kedar"  (Cant.  iv.  1,  i.  5):  a  similar  hue  is  pro- 
bably intended  by  the  purple  of  Cant.  vii.  5,  the 
term  being  broadly  used  (as  the  Greek  Troptyvptus 
in  a  similar  application .=  fxeAas,  Anacr.  28).  A 
fictitious  hue  was  occasionally  obtained  by  sprink- 
ling gold-dust  on  the  hair  (Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  7, 
§3).  It  does  not  appear  that  dyes  were  ordi- 
narily used;  the  "Carmel"  of  Cant.  vii.  5  has 
been  understood  as  =  ^JDIS  (A.  V.  "  crimson," 
margin)  without  good  reason,  though  the  simi- 
larity of  the  words  may  have  suggested  the  subse- 
quent reference  to  purple.  Herod  is  said  to  have 
dyed  his  gray  hair  for  the  purpose  of  concealing  his 
age  (Ant.  xvi.  8,  §1),  but  the  practice  may  have 
been  borrowed  from  the  Greeks  or  Romans,  among 
whom  it  was  common  (Aristoph.  Eccles.  73i>  ; 
Martial,  Ep.  iii.  43  ;  Propert.  ii.  18,  24,  26):  from 
Matt.  v.  36,  we  may  infer  that  it  was  not  usual 
among  the  Hebrews.  The  approach  of  age  was 
marked  by  a.  sprinkling  (pit,  Hos.  vii.  0;  comp.  a 
similar  use  of  spargere,  Propert.  iii.  4,  24)  of  gray 
hairs,  which  soon  overspread  the  whole  head  (Gen. 
xiii.  38,  xliv.  29  ;  1  K.  ii.  6,  9;  I'rov.  xvi.  31,  xx. 
29).  The  reference  to  the  almond  in  Eccl.  xii.  5, 
has  been  explained  of  the  white  blossoms  of  that 
tree,  as  emblematic  of  old  age:  it  may  be  observed 
however  that  the  colour  of  the  flower  is  pink  rather 
than  white,  and  that  the  verb  in  that  passage  ac- 
cording to  high  authorities  (Gesen.  and  Ilit/.ig) 
does  not  bear  the  sense  of  blossoming  at  all.  Pure 
white  hair  was  deemed  characteristic  of  the  Divine 
Majesty  (Dan.  vii.  9  ;  Rev.  i.  14). 

The  chief  beauty  of  the  hair  consisted  in  curls, 
whether  of  a  natural  or  artificial  character.  The 
Hebrew  terms  are  highly  expressive:  to  omit  the 
word  i"l>3¥, — rendered  "locks"  in  Cant.  iv.  1,  3, 
vi.  7,  and  Is.  xlvii.  2,  but  more  probably  meaning 
a  veil, — we  have  CTJaTTl  (Cant,  v.  11),  properly 
pendulous  flexible  boughs  (according  to  the  LXX., 
ihirtu,  the  shoots  of  the  palm-tree)  which  supplied 
an  image  of  tl  ndula ;  HV^'    (Ez.   viii. 

3),  a  similar  image  borrowed  from  the  curve  of  a 
blossom;  p2V  (Cant*  iv.  9),  a  loek  falling  over  the 
shoulders  like  a  chain  of  ear-pendant  (in  una  crine 
colli  tut.    Yul:..    which   is   better   than   the  A.V.. 


740  HAIR 

"  with  one  chain  of  thy  neck  ") ;  D^OH")  (Cant.  vii. 
5,  A.  V.  "galleries,"),  properly  the  channels  by 
which  water  was  brought  to  the  docks,  which  sup- 
plied au  image  either  of  the  coma  flncns,  or  of  the 
regularity  in  which  the  locks  were  arranged  ;  nP^l 
(Cant.  vii.  5),  again  an  expression  for  coma  pen- 
dula,  borrowed  from  the  threads  hanging  down 
from  an  unfinished  woof;  and  lastly  HCpD  HC'VC 
(Is.  iii.  24,  A.  V.  "  well  set  hair,"),  properly 
plaited  work,  i.e.  gracefully  curved  locks.  With 
regard  to  the  mode  of  dressing  the  hair,  we  have 
no  very  precise  information  ;  the  terms  used  are 
of  a  general  character,  as  of  Jezebel  (2  K.  ix. 
30),  2D'f),  i.e.  she  adorned  her  head;  of  Judith 
(x.  3),  Sie'ra^e,  i.  e.  arranged  (the  A.  V.  has 
"  braided,"  and  the  Vulg.  discriminavit,  here  used 
in  a  technical  sense  in  the  reference  to  the  discri- 
minate or  hair-pin)  ;  of  Herod  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiv.  9, 
§4),  KeKofffxruxtfos  rfj  ffvvdiaa  ttjs  k^tjv,  and 
of  those  who  adopted  feminine  fashions  (B.  J.  iv. 
9,  §10),  K6jxas  (TvvdeTt^ofXfi'ot.  The  terms  used 
in  the  N.  T.  (irXzy jxaaiv,  1  Tim.  ii.  9  ;  ([attAoktjs 
rptxcov,  1  Pet.  iii.  3)  are  also  of  a  general  cha- 
racter ;  Schleusner  {Lex.  s.  v.)  understands  them  of 
curling  rather  than  plaiting.  The  arrangement  of 
Samson's  hair  into  seven  locks,  or  more  properly 
braids  (n'lQTTID,  from  SpPI,  to  interchange ;  trei- 
pal,  LXX.  ;  Judg.  xvi.  13,  19),  involves  the  prac- 
tice of  plaiting,  which  was  also  familiar  to  the 
Egyptians  (Wilkinson,  ii.  335)  and  Greeks  (Horn. 
//.  xiv.  176).  The  locks  were  probably  kept  in 
their  place  by  a  fillet  as  in  Egypt  ^Wilkinson,  I.  c). 


Egyptian  Wigs.     (Wilkinson.) 

Ornaments  were  worked  into  the  hair,  as  prac- 
tised by  the  modern  Egyptians,  who  "  add  to  each 


HAKKOZ 

of  gold"  (Lane,  i.  71):  the  LXX.  understands  the 
term  D^D'a^  (Is.  iii.  18,  A.  V.  "  cauls"),  as  ap- 
plying to  such  ornaments  (e^irA^/aa) ;  Schroeder 
(de  Vest.  Mid.  Heb.  cap.  2)  approves  of  this,  and 
conjectures  that  they  were  sun-shaped,  i.  e.  cir- 
cular, as  distinct  from  the  "  round  tires  like  the 
moon,"  i.  e.  the  crescent-shaped  ornaments  used  for 
necklaces.  The  Arabian  women  attach  small  bells 
to  the  tresses  of  their  hair  (Niebuhr,  Voyage,  i. 
133).  Other  terms,  sometimes  understood  as  ap- 
plying to  the  hair,  are  of  doubtful  signification,  e.  g. 
C'tD^in  (Is.  iii.  22  ;  acus  ;  "  crisping-pins  "),  more 
probably  .pwses, as  in  2  K.  v.  23  ;  D,"]£'j?  (Is.  iii.  20, 
"  head-bands  "),  bridal  girdles,  according  to  Schroe- 
der  and  other  authorities ;  DHNS  (Is.  iii.  20,  dis- 
criminalia,  Vulg.,  i.  e.  pins  used  for  keeping  the 
hair  parted ;  cf.  Jerome  in  Eufin.  iii.  cap.  ult.), 
more  probably  turbans.  Combs  and  hair-pins  are 
mentioned  in  the  Talmud  ;  the  Egyptian  combs 
were  made  of  wood  and  double,  one  side  having 
large,  and  the  other  small  teeth  (Wilkinson,  ii. 
343) ;  from  the  ornamental  devices  worked  on  them 
we  may  infer  that  they  were  worn  in  the  hair. 
With  regard  to  other  ornaments  worn  about  the 
head,  see  Head-dress.  The  Hebrews,  like  other 
nations  of  antiquity,  anointed  the  hair  profusely 
with  ointments,  which  were  generally  compounded 
of  various  aromatic  ingredients  (Ruth  iii.  3  ;  2  Sam. 
xiv.  2;  Ps.  xxiii.  5,  xiv.  7,  xcii.  10  ;  Eccl.  ix.  8  ; 
Is.  iii.  24) ;  more  especially  on  occasion  of  festi- 
vities or  hospitality  (Matt.  vi.  17,  xxvi.  7;  Luke 
vii.  4G  ;  cf.  Joseph.  Ant.  xix.  4,  §1,  ^pitra/uei/os 
fxvpois  rrju  K€(pah^u,  ws  curb  crvvovaias).  It  is 
perhaps  in  reference  to  the  glossy  appearance  so 
imparted  to  it  that  the  hair  is  described  as  purple 
(Cant.  vii.  5). 

It  appears  to  have  been  the  custom  of  the  Jews 
in  our  Saviour's  time  to  swear  by  the  hair  (Matt. 
v.  36),  much  as  the  Egyptian  women  still  swear 
by  the  side-lock,  and  the  men  by  their  beards 
(Lane,  i.  52,  71,  notes). 

Hair  was  employed  by  the  Hebrews  as  an  image 
of  what  was  least  valuable  in  man's  person  (1  Sam. 
xiv.  45 :  2  Sam.  xiv.  11  ;  1  K.  i.  52  ;  Matt.  x.  30 ; 
Luke  xii.  7,  xxi.  18;  Acts  xxvii.  34);  as  well  as 
of  what  was  innumerable  (Ps.  xl.  12,  lxix.  4);  or 
particularly  fine  (Judg.  xx.  16).  In  Is.  vii.  20,  it 
represents  the  various  productions  of  the  field,  trees, 
crops,  &c.  ;  like  opos  KeKo/xriinevov  v\ri  of  Callim. 
Dian.  41,  or  the  humus  comnns  of  Stat.  Theb.  v. 
502.  Hair  "  as  the  hair  of  women  "  (Rev.  ix.  8), 
means  long  and  undressed  hair,  which  in  later  times 
was  regarded  as  an  image  of  barbaric  rudeness 
(Hengstenberg,  Comm.  in  foe).  [W.  L.  B.] 

HAK'KATAN  (jnpn  ;  'AKKardv;  Eccetan). 
Johanan,  son  of  Hakkatan,  was  the  chief  of  the 
Bene-Azgad  who  returned  from  Babylon  with  Ezra 
(Ezr.  viii.  12).  The  name  is  probably  Katan,  with 
the  definite  article  prefixed.  In  the  Apocryphal 
Esdras  it  is  ACATAN. 

HAK'KOZ  ()'ipn  ;  6  Kdis,  Alex.  'Akkc&s  ; 
Accos),  a  priest,  the  chief  of  the  seventh  course  in 
the  service  of  the  sanctuary,  as  appointed  by  David 
(1  Chr.  xxiv.  10).  In  Ezr.  ii.  til  the  name  occurs 
again  as  that  of  a  family  of  priests  ;  though  here  the 
prefix  is  taken  by  our  translators — and  no  doubt 
correctly — as  the  definite  article,  and  the  name 
appeal's  as  Koz.     The  same  thing  also  occurs  in 


braid  three  black  silk-cords  with  little  ornaments    Neh.  iii.  4,  21.     In  Esdras  Accoz 


HAKUPHA 
HAKUTHA  (Kfi-lpn :  'Afcou</>a,  'Ax«f>ci ; 
Hacupha).  Bene-Chakupha  were  among  the  fami- 
lies of  Nethiium  who  returned  from  Babylon  with 
Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  51  ;  Neh.  vii.  53).  In  Esdras 
(v.  31)  the  name  is  given  as  AciPHA. 

HA'LAH  (Pl^n ;  'AActe,  XaAax ;  Hala)  is 
probably  a  different  place  from  the  Calah  of  Gen. 
x.  11.  [See  Calah.]  It  may  with  some  con- 
fidence be  identified  with  the  L'halcitis  (XaA/cms) 
of  Ptolemy  (v.  18),  which  he  places  between 
Anthemusia  (of.  Strab.  xvi.  1,  §27)  and  Gauzanitis. 
The  name  is  thought  to  remain  in  the  modern  Gla, 
a  large  mound  on  the  upper  Khabour,  above  its 
junction  with  the  Jerujer  (Layard,  Nin.  and  Bab. 
p.  312,  note).  [G.  R.] 

,  IIA'LAK,  THE  MOUNT  (with  the  article, 
pPPin  "inn  =  "the  smooth  mountain;"  6pos  rov 
XeAxa,  Alex.  'AAa/c,  or  'A\6k  ;  pars  montis),  a 
mountain  twice,  and  twice  only,  named  as  the 
southern  limit  of  Joshua's  conquests — ■"  the  Mount 
Halak  which  goeth  up  to  Seir"  (Josh.  xi.  17,  xii. 
7),  but  which  has  not  yet  been  identified — has  not 
apparently  been  sought  for — by  travellers.  Keil 
suggests  the  line  of  chalk  clirls  which  cross  the 
valley  of  the  Ghor  at  about  6  miles  south  of  the 
Dead  Sea,  and  form  at  once  the  southern  limit  of 
the  Ghor  and  the  northern  limit  of  the  Arahah. 
[Arabah,  896.]  And  this  suggestion  would  be 
plausible  enough,  if  there  were  any  example  of  the 
word  kar,  u  mountain,"  being  applied  to  such  a 
vertical  cliff  as  this,  which  rather  answers  to  what 
we  suppose  was  intended  by  the  term  Sela.  The 
word  which  is  at  the  root  of  the  name  (supposing  it 
to  be  Hebrew),  and  which  has  the  force  of  smooth- 
ness or  baldness,  has  ramified  into  other  terms,  as 
Helkah,  an  even  plot  of  ground,  like  those  of  Jacob 
(Gen.  xxxiii.  19)  or  Naboth  (2  K.  ix.  25),  or  that 
which  gave  its  name  to  Helkath  hat-tzurim,  the 
"field  of  the  strong"  (Stanley,  App.  §20).    [G.] 

HAL'HUL  (P-in'pn  ;  AiAoua,  Alex.  'A\o6\  ;' 
Halhul),  a  town  of  Judah  in  the  mountain  district, 
one  of  the  group  containing  Bethzur  and  Gedor(  Josh, 
xv.  58  ).  Jerome,  in  the  Onomasiicon  (under  Elul), 
reports  the  existence  of  a  hamlet  (villula)  named 
"  Alula,"  near  Hebron.8  The  name  still  remains 
unaltered,  attached  to  a  conspicuous  hill  a  mile  to 
the  left  of  the  road  from  Jerusalem  to  Hebron, 
between  3  and  4  miles  from  the  latter.  Opposite 
it,  on  the  other  side  of  the  road,  is  Beit-stir,  the 
modern  representative  of  Bethzur,  and  a  little 'fur- 
ther to  the  north  is  Jrililr,  the  ancient  Gedor.  The 
.site  is  marked  by  the  ruins  of  walls  and  foundations, 
amongst  which  stands  a  dilapidated  mosk  bearing 

the  inline  el'  Neby    )'itnns  —  the  prophet  Jonah  (Hull. 

i.  216).  In  a  Jewish  tradition  quoted  by  Hottinger 
[Cippi  Hebraici,  p.  38)  it  is  said  to  be  the  burial- 
place  of  Gad,  David's  seer.  See  also  the  citations 
of  Zunz   in    Asher's    Benj.   of  Tudela   (ii.   437, 

note,.  [G.] 

HA'LI  Chn;  'AAec/>,  Alex.  'OoAei  ;  Ckali),  a 
town  on  tin'  boundary  of  Asher,  named  between 
Helkath  and  Beten  (Josh.  xix.  25).  Nothing  is 
known  of  its  situation.     Schwarz  (191)  compares 

the  name  with  <  'helinmi,  tin-  equivalent  in  the  latin, 

of  Cyamon  in  the  Greek  of  Jud.  vii.  3.         [<;.] 

a  It  is  not  unworthy  of  notice  that,  though  so  far 
from  Jerusalem,  Jerome  speaks  of  it  as  "  in  the  dis- 
trict of  Aelia." 


HAM 


F41 


HALICAR'NASSUS  ('AAiKcfpz/arnros)  in 
Cakia,  a  city  of.great  renown,  as  being  the  birth- 
place of  Herodotus  and  of  the  later  historian  I>iony- 
sius,  and  as  embellished  by  the  Mausoleum  erected 
by  Artemisia,  but  of  no  Biblical  interest  except  as  the 
residence  of  a  Jewish  population  in  the  periods 
between  the  Old  and  New  Testament  histories.  In 
1  Mace.  xv.  23,  this  city  is  specified  as  containing 
such  a  population.  The  decree  in  Joseph.  Ant. 
xiv.  10,  §23,  where  the  Romans  direct  that  the 
Jews  of  Halicarnassus  shall  be  allowed  ras  irpoff- 
euxas  TroieicrQai  irpbs  rrj  QaKacrcrri  Kara  to 
■Kti.Tpi.ov  e8os,  is  interesting  when  compared  with 
Acts  xvi.  13.  This  city  was  celebrated  for  its 
haibour  and  for  the  strength  of  its  fortifications ; 
but  it  never  recovered  the  damage  which  it  suffered 
after  Alexander's  siege.  A  plan  of  the  site  is  given 
in  Ross,  Rciscn  auf  den  Griech.  Inseln.  (See  vol. 
iv.  p.  30.)  The  sculptures  of  the  Mausoleum  are 
the  subject  of  a  paper  by  Mr.  Newton  in  the  Clas- 
sical Museum,  and  many  of  them  are  now  in  the 
British  Museum.  The  modern  name  of  the  place 
is  Budrum.  [J.  S.  H.] 

HALL  (ai/Xri  ;  atrium),  used  of  the  court  of 
the  high-priest's  house  (Luke  xxii.  55).  AuAt;  is 
in  A.  V.  Matt.  xxvi.  69,  Mark  xiv.  66,  John  xviii. 
15,  "palace;"  Vulg.  atrium;  irpoavKiov,  Mark  xiv. 
68,  "  porch  ;"  Vulg.  ante  atrium.  In  Matt,  xxvii. 
27,  and  Mark  xv.  16,  auArj  is  syn.  with  irpatrdipiov, 
which  in  John  xviii.  28  is  in  A.  V.  "judgment- 
hall."  AiiAt;  is  the  equivalent  for  n^n,  an  en- 
closed or  fortified  space  (Ges.  512),  in  many  places 
in  0.  T.  where  Vulg.  and  A.  V.  have  respectively 
villa  or  viculus,  "  village,"  or  atrium,  "  court," 
chiefly  of  the  tabernacle  or  temple.  The  hall  or 
court  of  a  house  or  palace  would  probably  be  an 
enclosed  but  uncovered  space,  impluvium,  on  a  lower 
level  than  the  apartments  of  the  lowest  floor  which 
looked  into  it.  The  irpoavAiou  was  the  vestibule 
leading  to  it,  called  also  Matt.  xxvi.  71,  tzvXwv. 
[House.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

HALLO'HESH  (KTri->n ;  'AAonjs,  Alex.'ASoS; 
Alohes),  one  of  the  "chief  of  the  people"  who 
sealed  the  covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  24). 
The  name  is  Lochesh,  with  the  definite  article  pre- 
fixed. That  it  is  the  name  of  a  family,  and  not 
of  an  individual,  appears  probable  from  another 
passage  in  which  it  is  given  in  the  A.  V.  as 

HALO'HESH  (t>TVV?n  ;  'AAA^s  ;  Alohes). 
Shallum,  son  of  Hal-lochesh,  was  "  ruler  of  tin- 
half  part  of  Jerusalem  "  at  the  time  of  the  repair 
of  the  wall  by  Nehemiah  (Neh.  iii.  12).  According 
to  the  Hebrew  spelling,  the  name  is   identical  with 

Hallohesh. 

HAM  (Dri ;  Xd/.i ;  Cham).  1.  The  name  of  one 
of  the  three  suns  of  Noah,  apparently  the  second 
in  age.  It  is  probably  derived  from  Dftn,  "  to 
lie  warm,"  and  signifies  "  warm"  or  "  hot.      This 

meaning   seems    to    lie   confirmed   by   that   of  the 

Egyptian  word   Ki:M      Egypt),   which  we  believe  to 

be  the  Egyptian  equivalent  of  Ham,  and  which,  as 
an  adjective,  signifies  "  black,"  probably  implying 

warmth  as  well  as  blackness.  [EGYPT.]  If  tin- 
Hebrew  and   Egyptian   words   be   the  same,    Ham 

must  mean   the  swarthy  or  siiii-lnnut ,  like  AiOiuty, 

which  has  been  derived  tV<. iii  the  Coptic  name 
of  Ethiopia,  eOCUCLJ,  but  which  we  should  be 
inclined  to  trace  to  0OCU>  "a  boundary,"   uule.-s 


742 


HAM 


the  Sahidic  GOCOCU  m:iv  be  derived  from  Keesh 

(Cush).  It  is  observable  that  the  names  of  Noah 
and  his  sons  appear  to  have  had  prophetic .  signi- 
fications. This  is  stated  in  the  case  of  Noah  (Gen. 
v.  29),  and  implied  in  that  of  Japheth  (is.  27), 
and  it  can  scarcely  be  doubted  that  the  same  must 
be  concluded  as  to  Shem.  Ham  may  therefore  have 
been  so  named  as  progenitor  of  the  sunburnt  Egyp- 
tians and  Cushites. 

Of  the  history  of  Ham  nothing  is  related  except 
his  irreverence  to  his  father,  and  the  curse  which 
that  patriarch  pronounced — the  fulfilment  of  which 
is  evident  in  the  history  of  the  Hamites. 

The  sons  of  Ham  are  stated  to  have  been  "  Cush 
and  Mizraim  and  Phut  and  Canaan"  (Gen.  x.  6; 
comp.  1  Chr.  i.  8).  It  is  remarkable  that  a  dual 
form  (Mizraim)  should  occur  in  the  first  generation, 
indicating  a  country,  and  not  a  person  or  a  tribe, 
and  we  are  therefore  inclined  to  suppose  that  the 
gentile  noun  in  the  plural  D'HVp,  differing  alone  in 
the  pointing  from  D'HVO,  originally  stood  here, 
which  would  be  quite  consistent  with  the  plural 
forms  of  the  names  of  the  Mizraite  tribes  which 
follow,  and  analogous  to  the  singular  forms  of  the 
names  of  the  Canaanite  tribes,  except  the  Sidonians, 
who  are  mentioned  not  as  a  nation,  but  under  the 
name  of  their  forefather  Sidon. 

The  name  of  Ham  alone,  of  the  three  sons  of 
Noah,  if  our  identification  be  correct,  is  known  to 
have  been  given  to  a  country.  Egypt  is  recognised 
as  the  "  land  of  Ham  "  in  the  Bible  (Pp.  lxxviii.  51, 
cv.  23,  cvi.  22),  and  this,  though  it  does  not  prove 
the  identity  of  the  Egyptian  name  with  that  of  the 
patriarch,  certainly  favours  it,  and  establishes  the 
historical  fact  that  Egypt,  settled  by  the  descendants 
of  Ham,  was  peculiarly  his  territory.  The  name 
Mizraim  we  believe  to  confirm  this.  The  restriction 
of  Ham  to  Egypt,  unlike  the  case,  if  we  may  reason 
inferentially,  of  his  brethren,  may  be  accounted  for 
by  the  very  early  civilization  of  this  part  of  the 
Hamite  territory,  while  much  of  the  rest  was  com- 
paratively barbarous.  Egypt  may  also  have  been 
the  first  settlement  of  the  Hamites  whence  colonies 
went  forth,  as  we  know  to  have  been  the  case  with 
the  Philistines.     [Caphtor.] 

The  settlements  of  the  descendants  of  Cush  have 
occasioned  the  greatest  difficulty  to  critics.  The 
main  question  upon  which  everything  turns  is 
whether  there  was  an  eastern  and  a  western  Cush, 
like  the  eastern  and  western  Ethiopians  of  the 
Greeks.  This  has  been  usually  decided  on  the 
Biblical  evidence  as  to  the  land  of  Cush  and  the 
Cushites,  without  reference  to  that  as  to  the  several 
names  designating  in  Gen.  x.  his  progeny,  or,  except 
in  Nimrod's  case,  the  territories  held  by  it,  or  both. 
By  a  more  inductive  method  we  have  been  led  to 
the  conclusion  that  settlements  of  Cush  extended 
from  Babylonia  along  the  shores  of  the  Indian  Ocean 
to  Ethiopia  above  Egypt,  and  to  the  supposition  that 
there  was  an  eastern  as  well  as  a  western  Cush  : 
historically  the  latter  inference  must  be  correct; 
geographically  it  may  be  less  certain  ot  the  post- 
diluvian world.  The  ancient  Egyptians  applied  the 
name  Keesh  or  Kesh,  which  is  obviously  the  same 
as  Cush,  to  Ethiopia  above  Egypt.  The  sons  of 
Cush  are  stated  to  have  been  Seba,  Havilah,  Sabtah, 
Raamah,  and  Sabtechah:  it  is  added  that  the  sons 


*  It  has  been  supposed  that  some  or  all  of  the 
notices  of  events  in  Manetho's  lists  were  inserted  by 
copyists.     This  cannot  \vc  think  have  been  the  case 


HAM 

of  Raamah  were  Sheba  and  Dedan,  and  that  "  Cush 
begat  Nimrod."  Certain  of  these  names  recur  in 
the  lists  of  the  descendants  of  Joktan  and  of  Abra- 
ham by  Keturah,  a  circumstance  which  must  be 
explained,  in  most  cases,  as  historical  evidence  tends 
to  show,  by  the  settlement  of  Cushites,  Joktanites, 
and  Abrahamites  in  the  same  regions.  [Arabia.] 
Seba  is  generally  identified  with  Meroe,  and  there 
seems  to  be  little  doubt  that  at  the  time  of  Solomon 
the  chief  kingdom  of  Ethiopia  above  Egypt  was  that 
of  Seba.  [Seba.]  The  postdiluvian  Havilah  seems 
to  be  restricted  to  Arabia.  [Havilah.]  Sabtah 
and  Sabtechah  are  probably  Arabian  names :  this  is 
certainly  the  case  with  Raamah,  Sheba,  and  Bedan, 
which  are  recognised  on  the  Persian  Gulf.  [Sab- 
tah ;  Sabtechah  ;  Raamah  ;  Sheba  ;  Dedan.] 
Nimrod  is  a  descendant  of  Cush,  but  it  is  not 
certain  that  he  is  a  son,  and  his  is  the  only  name 
which  is  positively  personal  and  not  territorial  in 
the  list  of  the  descendants  of  Cush.,  The  account 
of  his  first  kingdom  in  Babylonia,  and  of  the  ex- 
tension of  his  rule  into  Assyria,  and  the  founda- 
tion of  Nineveh — for  this  we  take  to  be  the  mean- 
ing of  Gen.  x.  11,  12 — indicates  a  spread  of  Hamite 
colonists  along  the  Euphrates  and  Tigris  north- 
wards.    [Cush.] 

If,  as  we  suppose,  Mizraim  in  the  lists  of  Gen.  x. 
and  1  Chr.  i.  stand  for  Mizrim,  we  should  take  the 
singular  Mazor  to  be  the  name  of  the  progenitor  of 
the  Egyptian  tribes.  It  is  remarkable  that  Mazor 
appears  to  be  identical  in  signification  with  Ham, 
so  that  it  may  be  but  another  name  of  the  patri- 
arch. [Egypt.]  In  this  case  the  mention  of  Miz- 
raim (or  Mizrim)  would  be  geographical,  and  not 
indicative  of  a  Mazor,  son  of  Ham. 

The  Mizraites,  like  the  descendants  of  Ham, 
occupy  a  territory  wider  than  that  bearing  the 
name  of  Mizraim.  We  may,  however,  suppose  that 
Mizraim  included  all  the  first  settlements,  and  that 
in  remote  times  other  tribes  besides  the  Philistines 
migrated,  or  extended  their  territories.  This  we 
may  infer  to  have  been  the  case  with  the  Lehabim 
(Lubim)  or  Libyans,  for  Manetho  speaks  of  them 
as  in  the  remotest  period  of  Egyptian  history  sub- 
ject to  the  Pharaohs.  He  tells  us  that  under  the 
first  king  of  the  Third  Dynasty,  of  Memphites, 
Necherophes,  or  Necherochis,  "  the  Libyans  revolted 
from  the  Egyptians,  but,  on  account  of  a  wonderful 
increase  of  the  moon,  submitted  through  fear"" 
(Cory's  Anc.  Frag.  2nd  ed.  p.  100,  101).  It  is 
unlikely  that  at  this  very  early  time  the  Memphite 
kingdom  ruled  far,  if  at  all,  beyond  the  western 
boundary  of  Egypt. 

The  Ludim  appear  to  have  been  beyond  Egypt 
to  the  west,  so  probably  the  Anamim,  and  certainly 
the  Lehabim.  [Ludim  ;  Anamim  ;  Lehabim.] 
The  Naphtuhim  seem  to  have  been  just  beyond  the 
western  border.  [Naphtuhim.]  The  Pathrusim 
and  Caphtorim  were  in  Egypt,  and  probably  the 
Caslubim  also.  [Pathros  ;  Caphtor;  Cas- 
luiiim.]  The  Philistim  are  the  only  Mizraite  tribe 
that  we  know  to  have  passed  into  Asia :  their  first 
establishment  was  in  Egypt,  for  they  came  out  of 
Caphtor.     [Caphtor.] 

Phut  has  been  always  placed  in  Africa.  In  the 
Bible,  Phut  occurs  as  an  ally  or  supporter  of  Egyp- 
tian Thebes,  mentioned  with  Cush  and  Lubim  (Nab. 
iii.  9),  with  Cush  and  Ludim  (the  Mizraite  Ludim?), 


with  most  of  those  notices  that  occur   in    the  older 
dynasties. 


HAM 

as  supplying;  part  of  the  army  of  Pharaoh-Necho 
(Jer.  xlvi.  9),  as  involved  in  the  calamities  of  Egypt 

together  with  Cush,  Lud,  and  Chub  [Oh0b]  (Ez. 
xxx.  .">),  as  furnishing-,  with  Persia,  Lud,  and  other 
lands  or  tribes,  mercenaries  for  the  service  of  Tyre 
(xxvii.  10),  and  with  Persia  ami  Cush  as  supplying 
part  of  the  army  of  Gog  (xxxviii.  .">).  There  can 
therefore  be  little  doubt  that  Phut  is  to  be  placed 
in  Africa,  where  we  rind,  in  the  Egyptian  inscrip- 
tions, a  great  nomadic  people  corresponding  to  it. 
[Phut.] 

Respecting  the  geographical  position  of  the 
Canaanites  there  is  no  dispute,  although  all  the 
names  are  not  identified.  The  Hamathites  alone 
of  those  identified  were  settled  in  early  times  wholly 
beyond  the  land  of  Canaan.  Perhaps  there  was  a 
primeval  extension  of  the  Caua'anite  tribes  after 
their  first  establishment  in  the  land  called  after 
their  ancestor,  for  before  the  specification  of  its 
limits  as  those  of  their  settlements  it  is  stated 
"afterward  were  the  families  of  the  Canaanites 
spread  abroad"  (Gen.  x.  IS,  19).  One  of  their 
most  important  extensions  was  to  the  north-east, 
where  was  a  great  branch  of  the  Ilittite  nation  in 
tlie  valley  of  the  Orontes,  constantly  mentioned  in 
the  wars  of  the  Pharaohs  [Egypt],  and  in  those  of 
the  kings  of  Assyria.  Two  passages  which  have 
occasioned  much  controversy  may  be  here  noticed. 
In  the  account  of  Abraham's  entrance  into  Pales- 
tine it  is  said,  "  And  the  Canaanite  [was]  then  in 
the  laud"  (xii.  6);  and  as  to  a  somewhat  later 
time,  that  of  the  separation  of  Abraham  and  Lot, 
we  read  that  "  the  Canaanite  and  the  Perizzite 
dwelled  then  in  the  land"  (xiii.7).  These  passages 
have  been  supposed  either  to  be  late  glosses,  or  to 
indicate  that  the  Pentateuch  was  written  at  a  late 
period.  A  comparison  of  all  the  passages  refer- 
ring to  the  primitive  history  of  Palestine  and  Idu- 
maea  shows  that  there  was  an  earlier  population 
expelled  by  the  Hamite  and  Abrahamite  settlers. 
This  population  was  important  in  the  time  of  the 
war  of  Chedoi  laomer ;  but  at  the  Exodus,  more  than 
four  hundred  years  afterwards,  there  was  but  a 
remnant  of  it.  It  is  most  natural  therefore  to 
infer  that  the  two  passages  under  consideration 
mean  that  the  <  'anaanite  settlers  were  already  in  the 
land,  not  that  they  were  still  there. 

Philologers  are  not  agreed  as  to  a  Hamitic  class 
of  languages.  Recently  Pmnsen  has  applied  the 
term  "  Hamitism,"  or  as  he  writes  it  ( 'hamitism,  to 
the  Egyptian  language,  or  rather  family.  He  places 
it  at  the  head  of  the  "Semitic  stock,"  to  which  he 
considers  it  as  but  partially  belonging,  and  thus 
describes  it  :  —  '•  ('hamitism.  or  ante-historical  Se- 
mitism:  the  ('hamitic  deposit  in  Egypt;  its  daugh- 
ter, the  I  temotic  Egyptian  ;  and  its  end  the  <  loptic  " 
{Outlines,  vol.  i.  p.  183).  Sir  H.  Rawlinson  has 
applied  the  term  Cushite  to  the  primitive  language 
oi  Babylonia,  and  the  same  term  has  been  used 
for  the  ancient  language  of  the  southern  coast  of 
Arabia.  This  terminology  depends,  in  every  in- 
stance, upon  the  race  of  the  nation  speaking  the 
language,  and  not  upon  any  theory  of  a  Hamitic 
.lass.  There  is  evidence  which,  at  the  firsl  view, 
would  incline  us  to  consider  that  the  term  Semitic. 
as  applied  to  the  Syro-Arabic  class,  should  !»• 
changed  to  Hamitic;  but  on  a  more  careful  exami- 
nation it  becomes  evident  that  any  absolute  classi- 
fication of  languages  into  groups  corresponding  lo 
the  three  great  Noachian  families  is  not  tenable. 
The  Biblical  evidence  seems,  at  first  sight,  in 
favour  of  Hebrew  being  classed  as  a  Hamitic  rather 


HAM 


74o 


than  a  Semitic  form  of  speech.  It  is  called  in  the 
Bible  "the  language  of  Canaan,"  JJJD3  JlSb'  (Is. 
xix.  18),  although  those  speaking  it  are  elsewhere 
said  to  speak  JV"1-1i"P,  Judaice  (2  K.  xviii.  26,  28  ; 
Is.  xxxvi.  11, 13  ;  Neh.  xiii.  24).  P>ut  the  one  term, 
as  Gesenius  remarks  (Gram.  Introd.),  indicates  the 
country  where  the  language  was  spoken,  the  other  as 
evidently  indicates  a  people  by  whom  it  was  spoken  : 
thus  the  question  of  its  being  a  Hamitic  or  Semitic 
language  is  not  touched  ;  for  the  circumstance  that 
it  was  the  language  of  Canaan  is  agreeable  with  its 
being  either  indigenous  (and  therefore  either  Ca- 
naanite or  Rephaite),  or  adopted  (and  therefore 
perhaps  Semitic).  The  names  of  Canaanite  person's 
and  places,  as  Gesenius  has  observed  (l.  c),  conclu- 
sively show  that  the  Canaanites  spoke  what  we'  call 
Hebrew.  Elsewhere  we  might  find  evidence  of  the 
use  of  a  so-called  Semitic  language  by  nations  either 
partly  or  wholly  of  Hamite  origin.  This  evidence 
would  favour  the  theory  that  Hebrew  was  Hamitic  ; 
but  on  the  other  hand  we  should  be  unable  to  dis- 
sociate Semitic  languages  from  Semitic  peoples.  The 
Egyptian  language  would  also  offer  great  difficulties, 
unless  it  were  held  to  be  but  partly  of  Hamitic. 
origin,  since  it  is  mainly  of  an  entirely  different 
class  to  the  Semitic.  It  is  mainly  Nigritian,  but  it 
also  contains  Semitic  elements.  We  are  of  opinion 
that  the  groundwork  is  Nigritian,  and  that  the 
Semitic  part  is  a  layer  added  to  a  complete  Ni- 
gritian language.  The  two  elements  are  mixed, 
but  not  fused.  This  opinion  those  Semitic  scholars 
who  have  studied  the  subject  share  with  us.  Some 
Iranian  scholars  hold  that  the  two  elements  are 
mixed,  and  that  the  ancient  Egyptian  represents  the 
transition  from  Turanian  to  Semitic.  The  only 
solution  of  the  difficulty  seems  to  be,  that  what  we 
call  Semitic  is  early  Noachian. 

An  inquiry  into  the  history  of  the  Hamite 
nations  presents  considerable  difficulties,  since  it 
cannot  be  determined  in  the  cases  of  the  most 
important  of  those  commonly  held  to  be  Hamite 
that  they  were  purely  of  that  stock.  It  is  certain 
that  the  three  most  illustrious  Hamite  nations — the 
Cushites,  the  Phoenicians,  and  the  Egyptians — were 
greatly  mixed  with  foreign  peoples.  In  Babylonia 
the  Hamite  element  seems  to  have  been  absorbed  by 
the  Shemite,  but  not  in  the  earliest  times.  There 
are  some  common  characteristics,  however,  which 
appear  to  connect  the  different  branches  of  the 
Hamite  family,  and  to  distinguish  them  from  the 
children  of  Japheth  and  Shem.  Their  architecture 
has  a  solid  grandeur  that  we  look  for  in  vain 
elsewhere.  Egypt,  Babylonia,  and  Southern  Arabia 
alike  atlord  proofs  of  this,  and  the  few  remaining 
monuments  of  the  Phoenicians  are  of  the  same 
class.  What  is  very  important  as  indicating  the 
purely  Hamite  character  of  the  monuments  to 
which  we  refer  is  tnat  the  earliest  in  Egypt  are  the 
most  characteristic,  while  the  earlier  in  Babylonia 
do  not  yield  in  this  respect  to  the  later.  The 
national  mind  seems  in  all  these  cases  to  have  been 
these  material  forms.  The  early  history  of  each 
of  the  chief  Hamite  nations  shows  greal  power  of 

organising  an  extensive  kingdom,  of  acquiring  ma- 
terial greatness,  and  checking  the  inroads  of  neigh- 
bouring nomadic  peoples.  The  Philistines  afford  a 
remarkable  instance  of  these  qualities.  In  everj  case, 
however,  the  more  energetic  sons  of  Shem  or  Japheth 
have  at  last  fallen  upon  the  rich  Hamite  territories 
and  despoiled  them.  Egypt,  favoured  by  a  position 
fenced  round  with  nearly  impassable  barriers — on 


744 


HAMAN 


the  north  an  almost  havenless  coast,  on  the  east  and 
west  sterile  deserts,  held  its  freedom  far  longer 
than  the  rest ;  yet  even  in  the  days  of  Solomon  the 
throne  was  rilled  by  foreigners,  who,  if  Hamites, 
were  Shemite  enough  in  their  belief  to  revolutionize 
the  religion  of  the  country.  In  Babylonia  the 
Medes  had  already  captured  Nimrod's  city  more 
than  2000  years  before  the  Christian  era.  The 
Hamites  of  Southern  Arabia  were  so  early  over- 
thrown by  the  Joktanites  that  the  scanty  remains 
of  their  history  are  aloue  known  to  us  through  tra- 
dition. Yet  the  story  of  the  magnificence  of  the 
ancient  kings  of  Yemen  is  so  perfectly  in  accord- 
ance with  all  we  know  of  the  Hamites  that  it 
is  almost  enough  of  itself  to  prove  what  other 
evidence  has  so  well  established.  The  history  of 
the  Canaanites  is  similar ;  and  if  that  of  the 
Phoenicians  be  an  exception,  it  must  be  recol- 
lected that  they  became  a  merchant  class,  as  Eze- 
kiel's  famous  description  of  Tyre  shows  (chap. 
xxvii).  In  speaking  of  Hamite  characteristics  we 
do  not  intend  it  to  be  inferred  that  they  were 
necessarily  altogether  of  Hamite  origin,  and  not 
at  least  partly  borrowed.  [R.  S.  P.] 

2.  (Di"l,  Gen.  xiv.  5;  Sam.  Dfl,  Cham).  Ac- 
cording to  the  Masoretic  text,  Chedorlaomer  and 
his  allies  smote  the  Zuzim  in  a  place  called 
Ham.  If,  as  seems  likely,  the  Zuzim  be  the 
same  as  the  Zamzummim,  Ham  must  be  placed 
in  what  was  afterwards  the  Ammonite  territory. 
Hence  it  has  been  conjectured  by  Tuch,  that  Ham 
is  but  another  form  of  the  name  of  the  chief 
stronghold  of  the  children  of  Ammon,  Kabbah, 
now  Am-mau.  The  LXX.  and  Vulg.,  however, 
throw  some  doubt  upon  the  Masoretic  reading  : 
the  former  has,  as  the  rendering  of  DTVTIVriNl 
DH3,  Kai  tdvr)  Icrx^pa.  a/u-a  avrols  ;  and  the  latter, 
et  Zuzim  cum  cis,  which  shows  that  they  read 
DD3 :  but  the  Mas.  rendering  seems  the  more 
likely,  as  each  clause  mentions  a  nation,  and  its 
capital  or  stronghold  ;  although  it  must  be  allowed 
that  if  the  Zuzim  bad  gone  to  the  assistance  of  the 
Rephaim,  a  deviation  would  have  been  necessary. 
The  Samaritan  Version  has  ilfc'v,  Lishah,  perhaps 
intending  the  LASHA  of  Gen.  x.  19,  which  by  some 
is  identified  with  Callirhoe  on  the  N.E.  quarter  of 
the  Dead  Sea.  The  Targums  of  Onkelos  and  Pseu- 
dojon.  have  NFIOH,  Hernia.  Schwarz  (217)  sug- 
gests Humciiii'ith  (in  Van  de  Velde's  map  Humeitat), 
one  mile  above  Rabba,  the  ancient  Ar-Moab,  on  the 
Roman  road. 

3.  In  the  account  of  a  migration  of  the  Simeonites 
to  the  valley  of  Gedor,  and  their  destroying  the 
pastoral  inhabitants,  the  latter,  or  possibly  their 
predecessors,  are  said  to  have  been  "  of  Ham  " 
(Dn"}D  ;  4k  twv  vloov  Xdfi ;  de  stirpe  Cham,  1  Chr. 
iv.  40).  This  may  indicate  that  a  Hamite  tribe 
was  settled  here,  or,  more  precisely,  that  there  was 
an  Egyptian  settlement.  The  connexion  of  Egypt 
with  this  part  of  Palestine  will  be  noticed  under 
Zerah.  Ham  may,  however,  here  be  in  no  way 
connected  with  the  patriarch  or  with  Egypt. 

HA'MAN  (|Di"l;  'Afidv;  Amari),  the  chief 
minister  or  vizier  of  king  Ahasuerus  (Esth.  iii.  1). 
After  the  failure  of  his  attempt  to  cut  oft'  all  the 
Jews  in  the  Persian  empire,  he  was  hanged  on  the 
gallows  which  he  had  erected  for  Mordecai.  Most 
probably  he  is  the  same  Aman  who  is  mentioned  as 
the  oppressor  of  Achiacharus  (Tob.  xiv.  10).     The 


HAMATH 

Targum  and  Josephus  (Ant.  xi.  6,  §5)  interpret 
the  description  of  him — the  Agagite — as  signifying 
that  he  was  of  Amalekitish  descent :  but  he  is 
called  a  Macedonian  by  the  LXX.  in  Esth.  ix.  24 
(cf.  iii.  1),  and  a  Persian  by  Snlpicius  Severus. 
Prideaux  (Connexion,  anno  453)  computes  the  sum 
which  he  offered  to  pay  into  the  royal  treasury  at 
more  than  £2,000,000  sterling.  Modern  Jews  are 
said  to  be  in  the  habit  of  designating  any  Christian 
enemy  by  his  name  (Eisenmenger,  Ent.  Jud.  i. 
721).  [\V.  T.  B.] 

HA 'MATH  (riDn  ;    'EfidO,   'H^uafl,   Al/j.d6  ; 

Emath)  appears  to  have  been  the  principal  city  of 
Upper  Syria  from  the  time  of  the  Exodus  to  that  of 
the  prophet  Amos.  It  was  situated  in  the  valley 
of  the  Orontes,  about  half  way  between  its  source 
near  Baalbek,  and  the  bend  which  it  makes  at 
Jisr-hadid.  It  thus  naturally  commanded  the 
whole  of  the  Orontes  valley,  from  the  low  screen  of 
hills  which  forms  the  watershed  between  the 
Orontes  and  the  Litany — the  "  entrance  of  Ha- 
math,"  as  it  is  called  in  Scripture  (Num.  xxxiv.  8  ; 
Josh.  xiii.  5,  &c.) — to  the  defile  of  Daphne  below 
Antioch ;  and  this  tract  appears  to  have  formed 
the  kingdom  of  Hamath,  during  the  time  of  its 
independence. 

The  Hamathites  were  a  Hamitic  race,  and  are 
included  among  the  descendants  of  Canaan  (den. 
x.  18).  There  is  no  reason  to  suppose  with  Mr. 
Kenrick  (Phoenicia,  p.  60),  that  they  were  ever  in 
any  sense  Phoenicians.  We  must  regaid  them  as 
closely  akin  to  the  Hittites  on  whom  they  bor- 
dered, and  with  whom  they  were  generally  in 
alliance.  Nothing  appears  of  the  power  of  Hamath, 
beyond  the  geographical  notices  which  show  it  to 
be  a  well  known  place  (Num.  xiii.  21,  xxxiv.  8; 
Jos.  xiii.  5  ;  "Judg.  xviii.  28,  &c),  until  the  time 
of  David,  when  we  hear  that  Tot,  king  of  Hamath, 
hail  "had  wars "  with  Hadadezer,  king  of  Zobah, 
and  on  the  defeat  of  the  latter  by  David  sent  his 
son  to  congratulate  the  Jewish  monarch  (2  Sam. 
viii.  10),  and  (apparently)  to  put  Hamath  under 
his  protection.  Hamath  seems  clearly  to  have 
beeu  included  in  the  dominions  of  Solomon  (1  K. 
iv.  21-4);  and  its  king  was  no  doubt  one  of  those 
many  princes  over  whom  that  monarch  ruled, 
who  "  brought  presents  and  served  Solomon  all 
the  days  of  his  life."  The  "  store-cities,"  which 
Solomon  "  built  in  Hamath"  (2  Chr.  viii.  4),  weie 
perhaps  staples  for  trade,  the  importance  of  the 
Orontes  valley  as  a  line  of  traffic  being  always 
great.  On  the  death  of  Solomon  and  the  separation 
of  the  two  kingdoms,  Hamath  seems  to  have  re- 
gained its  independence.  In  the  Assyrian  inscrip- 
tions of  the  time  of  Ahab  (n.c.  900)  it  appears  as 
a  separate  power,  in  alliance  with  the  Syrians  of 
Damascus,  the  Hittites,  and  the  Phoenicians. 
About  three-quarters  of  a  century  later  Jeroboam 
the  second  "  recovered  Hamath "  (2  K.  xiv.  28) ; 
he  seems  to  have  dismantled  the  place,  whence  the 
prophet  Amos,  who  wrote  in  his  reign  (Am.  i.  1), 
couples  "Hamath  the  great"  with  Gath,  as  an 
instance  of  desolation  (ib.  vi.  2).  Soon  afterwards 
the  Assyrians  took  it  (2  K.  xviii.  34,xix.  13,  &c), 
and  from  this  time  it  ceased  to  be  a  place  of  much 
importance.  Antiochus  Epiphanes  appears  to  have 
changed  its  name  to  Epiphaneia.  an  appellation 
under  which  it  was  known  to  the  Greeks  and  Ro- 
mans from  his  time  to  that  of  St.  Jerome  <  'omrnent. 
in  Ezek.  xlvii.  16),  and  possibly  later.  The 
natives,   however,  called  it  Hamath,  even   in  St. 


HAMATH-ZOBAH 

Jerome's  time;  and  its  present  name,  ITaniah,  is 
but  very  slightly  altered  from  the  ancient  form. 

Burckhardt  visited  Hamah  in  1812.  He  de- 
scribes it  as  situated  on  both  sides  of  the  Orontes, 
partly  on  the  declivity  of  a  hill,  partly  in  the  plain, 
and  as  divided  into  four  quarters — Hadher,  El 
Djisr,  El  Aleyat,  and  El  Mediae,  the  last  being 
the  quarter  of  the  Christians.  The  population, 
according  to  him,  was  at  that  time  30,000.  Tire 
town  possessed  few  antiquities,  and  was  chiefly 
remarkable  for  its  huge  water-wheels,  whereby  the 
gardens  and  the  houses  in  the  upper  town  were 
supplied  from  the  Orontes.  The  neighbouring 
territory  he  calls  "  the  granary  of  Northern  Syria" 
{Travels  in  Syria,  pp.  146-7.  See  also  Pococke, 
Travels  in  the  East,  vol.  i. ;  Irby  and  Mangles, 
Travels,  p.  '24-4 ;  and  Stanley,  Sinai  §  Palestine, 
pp.  406,  7).  [G.  R.] 

HA'MATH-ZO'BAH  ( m'wnon ;  Bater«0a ; 

Emath-Svba)  is  said  to  have  been  attacked  and 
conquered  by  Solomon  (2  Chr.  viii.  3).  It  has 
been  conjectured  to  be  the  same  as  Hamath,  here 
regarded  as  included  in  Aram-Zobah — a  geographical 
expression  which  has  usually  a  narrower  meaning. 
But  the  name  Hamath-Zobah  would  seem  rather 
suited  to  another  Hamath  which  was  distinguished 
from  the  "  Great  Hamath,"  by  the  suffix  "  Zobah." 
Compare  Rxmoth- Gilead,  which  is  thus  distin- 
guished from  Ramah  in  Benjamin.  [G.  E.] 

HAM'ATHITE,  THE  (TlDnn  ;  6  'A^adi), 
Amathaeus,  Hamathaeus),  one  of  the  families  de- 
scended from  Canaan,  named  last  in  the  list  (Gen. 
x.  IS;  1  Chr.  i.  K!).  The  place  of  their  settle- 
ment was  doubtless  Hamath. 

HAM'MATH  (111311  ;  'n,xa0a8a;ce0— the  last 
two  syllables  a  corruption  of  the  name  following — 
Alex.  'A/xdd  ;  Emath),  one  of  the  fortified  cities  in 
the  territory  allotted  to  Xaphtali  (Josh.  xix.  35). 
It  is  not  possible  from  this  list  to  determine  its 
position,  but  the  notices  of  the  Talmudists,  collected 
by  Lightfoot  in  his  Chorographical  Century,  and 
Chor.  Decad,  leave  no  doubt  that  it  was  near 
Tiberias,  one  mile  distant — in  fact  that  it  had  its 
name,  Chammath,  "hot  baths,"  because  it  contained 
those  of  Tiberias.  In  accordance  with  this  are 
the  slight  notices  of  Josephus,  who  mentions  it 
under  the  name  of  Emmaus  as  a  "  village  not  far 
(Kuifxi]  ....  ovk  &-KuiQev)  from  Tiberias"  {Ant. 
xviii.  2,  §3),  and  as  where  Vespasian  had  encamped 
" before (irp6) Tiberias"  B.J.iv.  I, §3).  Remains 
of  the  wall  of  this  encampment  were  recognized  by 
Irby  and  Mangles  (896).  In  both  cases  Josephus 
names  the  hot  springs  or  baths,  adding  in  the  latter, 
that  such  is  the  interpretation  of  the  name'A/i^aoCj, 
and  that  thf  waters  are  medicinal.  The  Bamm&m, 
at  present  three  in  number,  still  send  up  their  hot 
and  sulphureous  waters,  at  a  spot  rather  more  than 
a  mile  south  of  the  modem  town,  at  the  extremity 
of  the  ruins  of  the  ancient  city  (Rob.  ii.  383,  t  ; 
Vande  Veld-,  ii.  399). 

It  is  difficult,  however,  to  reconcile  with  this 
position  other  observations  of  the  Talmudists,  quoted 

on  the  same  place,  by  Lightfoot,  to  tl 8eci  thai 

Chammath  was  called  also  the  "  wells  of  Gadara," 

from  its  proximity  to  that  place,  and  also  that  half 
the  town  was  mi  the  east  side  of  the  Jordan  and 
half  on  the  west,  with  a  bridge  between  them — 
the  fact  being  that  the  ancient  Tiberias  was  at  least 
4  miles,  and  the  Hammani  '_'!.  from  the  present 
embouchure  of  the  Jordan.      The  same  difficulty 


HAMMON 


745 


besets  the  account  of  Parchi  (in  Zunz's  Appendix  to 
Benjamin  of  Tudela,  ii.  403).  He  places  the  wells 
entirely  on  the  east  of  Jordan. 

In  the  list  of  Levitical  cities  given  out  of  Naph- 
tali  (Josh.  xxi.  32)  the  name  of  this  place  seems  to 
be  given  as  HAMMOTir-DOR,  and  in  1  Chr.  vi.  7ii 
it  is  further  altered  to  HAMMON.  [G.] 

HAMMEDA'THA  (KlllSil  ;  'A^aSddos  ; 
Amadathus),  father  of  the  infamous  Hainan,  and 
commonly  designated  as  "the  Agagite"  (Esth.  iii. 
1,  10,  viii.  5,  ix.  24),  though  also  without  that  title 
(ix.  10).  By  Gesenius  {Lex.  1855,  p.  539)  the 
name  is  taken  to  be  Medatha,  preceded  by  the 
definite  article.  For  other  explanations,  see  Fiirst, 
Hchcbuch.,  and  Simonis,  Onomasticon,  586.  The 
latter  derives  it  from  a  Persian  word  meaning 
"  double."       For   the    termination    compare    Ari- 

DATHA. 

HAMME'LECH  {t\blpn  ;  rov  jSatnAe'a^  ; 
Amelech),  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  as  a  proper  name 
(Jer.  xxxvi.  26,  xxxviii.  6)  ;  but  there  is  no  appa- 
rent reason  for  supposing  it  to  be  anything  but 
the  ordinary  Hebrew  word  for  "  the  king,"  i.  e.  in 
the  first  case  Jehoiakim,  and  in  the  latter  Zedekiah. 
If  this  is  so,  it  enables  us  to  connect  with  the  roval 
family  of  Judah  two  persons,  Jerachmeel  and  Mal- 
ciah,  who  do  not  appear  in  the  A.  V.  as  members 
thereof.  [G.] 

HAMMER.  The  Hebrew  language  has  several 
names  for  this  indispensable  tool.  (1.)  Pattish 
(E^Q,  connected  etymological  ly  with  Trardaaai, 
to  strike),  which  was  used  by  the  gold-beater  (Is. 
xli.  7,  A.  V.  "carpenter")  to  overlay  with  silver 
and  "smooth"  the  surface  of  the  image ;  as  well 
as  by  the  quarry-man  (Jer.  xxiii.  29).  (2.)  Mah- 
kdb&h  (!12J9D),  properly  a  tool  for  holloicing,  hence 
a  stonecutter's  mallet  (1  K.  vi.  7),  and  generally 
any  workman's  hammer  (Judg.  iv.  21  ;  Is.  xliv. 
12;  Jer.  x.  4).  (3.)  Halmuth  (JVlO^n),  used 
only  in  Judg.  v.  26,  and  then  with  the  addition  of 
the  word  "workmen's"  by  way  of  explanation. 
(4.)  A  kind  of  hammer,  named  mappetz  (VSJD), 
Jer.  Ii.  20  (A.  V.  "battle-axe"),  or  mephitz 
(}"QE>),  Prov.  xxv.  18  (A.  V.  "maul"),  was 
used  as  a  weapon  of  war.  "Hammer"  is  used 
figuratively  for  any  overwhelming  power,  whether 
worldly  (Jer.  1.  23),  or  spiritual  (Jer.  xxiii.  20). 

[W.  L.  B.] 

HAMMOLE'KETH  (n3?bn,  with  the  article, 
=  "  the  Queen;"  i)  MaAex*9 i  Regina),  a  woman 
introduced  in  the  genealogies  of  Manasseh  as  daughter 
of  Machir  and  sister  of  Gilead  (  1  ('In-,  vii.  17,  18), 
and  as  having  among  her  children  Abi-ezer,  from 
whose  family  sprang  the  great  judge  Gideon.  The 
Targum  translates  the  name  by  HDT'O  1  =  who 
reigned.  The  Jewish  tradition,  as  preserved  by 
Kiinehi  in  his  commentary  on  the  passage,  is  that 
•'  she  u>ed  to  reign  over  a  portion  of  the  land  which 
belonged  to  Gilead,"  and  that  for  that  reason  her 
lineage  has  l □  presen  ed. 

EAITMON  (]ittn;  XafiuO,  Alex.  Xa/xwv; 
Woman,  Amman).     1.  A  city  in  Asher  (Josh.  xix. 

28  ,  apparently  not  far  from  Xidon-rahbah,  or 
" Great  Zidon."  Dr.  Schultz  suggested  its  Identi- 
fication with  the  modern  village  of  Hamul,  Heal- 
th.' .oast,  about    10   miles  below   Tvre   (Hob.  iii. 

3  C 


746 


HAMMOTH-DOR 


66),  but  this  is  doubtful  both  in  etymology  and 
position. 

2.  A  city  allotted  out  of  the  tribe  of  Naphtali  to 
the  Levites  (1  Chr.  vi.  76),  and  answering  to  the 
somewhat  similar  names  Hammatii  and  Hammoth- 
DOR  in  Joshua.  [G.] 

HAM'MOTH-DOR  (IN"1!  nbn  ;  NWa», 
Alex.  'E/xadScap  ;  Ammoth  Dor),  a  city  of  Naphtali, 
allotted  with  its  suburbs  to  the  Gershonite  Levites, 
and  for  a  city  of  refuge  (Josh.  sxi.  32).  Unless 
there  were  two  places  of  the  same  or  very  similar 
name  in  Naphtali,  this  is  identical  with  HAMMATH. 
Why  the  suffix  Dor  is  added  it  is  hard  to  tell, 
unless  the  word  refers  in  some  way  to  the  situation 
of  the  place  on  the  coast,  in  which  fact  only  had  it 
(as  far  as  we  know)  any  resemblance  to  Dor,  on 
the  shore  of  the  Mediterranean.  In  1  Chr.  vi.  76 
the  name  is  contracted  to  Hammon.  [G.] 

HAMO'NAHtnriEn  ;  TloAvavSpiov ;  Amona), 
the  name  of  a  city  mentioned  in  a  highly  obscure 
passage  of  Ezekiel  (xxxix.  16);  apparently  that  of 
the  place  in  or  near  which  the  multitudes  of  Gog 
should  be  buried  after  their  great  slaughter  by 
God,  and  which  is  to  derive  its  name — "multi- 
tude"— from  that  circumstance.  [G.] 

HA'MON-GOG,  THE  VALLEY  of  (K*| 

313  '1DH  =  the  "  ravine  of  Gog's  multitude  ;" 
Tal  t6  iroAvdvSpiov  tov  Tcvy;  vallis  multitudinis 
Gog),  the  name  to  be  bestowed  on  a  ravine  or  glen, 
previously  known  as  "  the  ravine  of  the  passengers 
on  the  east  of  the  sea,"  after  the  burial  there  of 
"  Gog  and  all  his  multitude"  (Ez.  xxxix.  11,  15). 
HA'MOR  ("ton,  i.  e.  in  Heb.  a  large  he-ass, 
the  figure  employed  by  Jacob  for  Issachar  ;  '"Zfijxdp  ; 
Ilemor),  a  Hivite  (or  according  to  the  Alex.  LXX. 
a  Horite),  who  at  the  time  of  the  entrance  of  Jacob 
on  Palestine  was  prince  (Nasi)  of  the  land  and  city 
of  Shechem,  and  father  of  the  impetuous  young 
man  of  the  latter  name  whose  ill  treatment  of  Dinah 
brought  destruction  on  himself,  his  father,  and  the 
whole  of  their  city  (Gen.  xxxiii.  19,  xxxiv.  2,  4,  6, 
8,  13,  18,  20,  24,  26).  Hamor  would  seem  to 
have  been  a  person  of  great  influence,  because, 
though  alive  at  the  time,  the  men  of  his  tribe  are 
called  after  him  Bene-Hamor,  and  he  himself,  in 
records  narrating  events  long  subsequent  to  this,  is 
styled  Hamor- Abi-Shcccm  (Josh.  xxiv.  32  ;a  Judg. 
ix.  28  ;  Acts  vii.  16).  In  the  second  of  these 
passages  his  name  is  used  as  a  signal  of  revolt, 
when  the  remnant  of  the  ancient  Hivites  attempted 
to  rise  against  Abimekch  son  of  Gideon.  [She- 
CHEM.]  For  the  title  Abi-Shecem,  "  father  of 
Shechem,"  compare  "  father  of  Bethlehem,"  "  father 
of  Tekoah,"  and  others  in  the  early  lists  of  1  Chr. 
li.  iv.  In  Acts  vii.  16  the  name  is  given  in 
the  Greek  form  of  EMMOR,  and  Abraham  is  said 
to  have  bought  his  sepulchre  from  the  "  sons  of 
Emmor." 

HA'MUEL  (?M19n,  i.e.  Hammuel;  'A/xoutjA; 
Amttel),  a  man  of  Simeon;  son  of  Mishma,  of  the 
family  of  Shaul  (1  Chr.  iv.  26),  from  whom,  if  we 
follow  the  records  of  this  passage,  it  would  seem 
the  whole  tribe  of  Simeon  located  in  Palestine  were 
derived.  In  many  Hebrew  MSS.  the  name  is  given 
as  Chamnrdel. 

a  The  LXX.  have  here  read  the  word  without  its 
initial  guttural,  and  rendered  it  wapa  Tair  'A/uoppaiW, 
"  from  the  Amorites." 


HANAN 

HA'MUL  (|?-1»n  ;  Sam.  b$)12n  ;  'UnovyA, 
'la/xow  ;  Amid),  the  younger  son  of  Pharez,  Judah's 
son  by  Tamar  (Gen.  xlvi.  12 ;  1  Chr.  ii.  5). 
Ilamul  was  head  of  the  family  of  the  Hamulites 
(Num.  xxvi.  21),  but  none  of  the  genealogy  of  his 
descendants  is  preserved  in  the  lists  of  1  Chronicles, 
though  those  of  the  descendants  of  Zerah  are  fully 
given. 

.  HAMULI'TES,  THE  (^»nn  ;  'lafiowi, 
Alex.  'lajxovmKi ;  Amulitae),  the  family  (HnSt^ft) 
of  the  preceding  (Num.  xxvi.  21). 

HAMU'TAL  (tal»n,  =  perhaps,  "  kin  to  the 
dew  ;"  'AiuraA,  in  Jer.  'AfiendaA  ;  Amital), 
daughter  of  Jeremiah  of  Libnah  ;  one  of  the  wives 
of  king  Josiah,  and  mother  of  the  unfortunate 
princes  Jehoahaz  (2  K.  xxiii.  31),  and  Mattaniah  or 
Zedekiah  (2  K.  xxiv.  18  ;  Jer.  lii.  1).  In  the  two 
last  passages  the  name  is  given  in  the  original  text 
as  ?t3*Dn,  Chamital,  a  reading  which  the  LXX. 
follow  throughout. 

HANAMEEL   (^NOJn  ;    'Ava^A  ;    11a- 

namecl),  son  of  Shallum,  and  cousin  of  Jeremiah. 
When  Judaea  was  occupied  by  the  Chaldaeans,  Je- 
rusalem beleaguered,  and  Jeremiah  in  prison,  the 
prophet  bought  a  field  of  Hanameel  in  token  of  his 
assurance  that  a  time  was  to  come  when  land 
should  be  once  more  a  secure  possession  (Jer.  xxxii. 
7,  8,  9,  12  ;  and  comp.  44).  The  suburban  fields 
belonging  to  the  tribe  of  Levi  could  not  be  sold 
(Lev.  xxv.  34) ;  but  possibly  Hanameel  may  have 
inherited  property  from  his  mother.  Compare  the 
case  of  Barnabas,  who  also  was  a  Levite  ;  and  the 
note  of  Grotius  on  Acts  iv.  37.  Henderson  (on  Jer. 
xxxii.  7)  supposes  that  a  portion  of  the  Levitical 
estates  might  be  sold  within  the  tribe.       [W.  T.  B.] 

HA'NAN  (]:n  ;  "Avdv ;  Ilanan).  1.  One  of 
the  chief  people  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  (1  Chr. 
viii.  23). 

2.  The  last  of  the  six  sons  of  Azel,  a  descendant 
of  Saul  (1  Chr.  viii.  38,  ix.  44). 

3.  "  Son  of  Maaehah,"  i.  e.  possibly  a  Syrian  of 
Aram-Maacah,  one  of  the  heroes  of  David's  guard, 
according  to  the  extended  list  of  1  Chr.  xi.  43. 

4.  Bene-Chauan  were  among  the  Nethinim  who 
returned  from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii. 
46  ;  Neh.  vii.  49).  In  the  parallel  list,  1  Esdr.  v. 
30,  the  name  is  given  as  Anan. 

5.  (LXX.  omits.)  One  of  the  Levites  who  as- 
sisted Ezra  in  his  public  exposition  of  the  law 
(  Neh.  viii.  7).  The  same  person  is  probably  men- 
tioned in  x.  10,  as  sealing  the  covenant,  since  several 
of  the  same  names  occur  in  both  passages. 

6.  One  of  the  "  heads  "  of  the  "  people,"  that  is 
of  the  laymen,  who  also  sealed  the  covenant  (x.  22). 

7.  (AiVai/.)  Another  of  the  chief  laymen  on  the 
same  occasion  (x.  26). 

8.  Son  of  Zaccur,  son  of  Mattaniah,  whom  Ne- 
hemiah  made  one  of  the  storekeepers  of  the  pro- 
visions collected  as  tithes  (Neh.  xiii.  13).  He  was 
probably  a  layman,  in  which  case  the  four  store- 
keepers represented  the  four  chief  classes  of  the 
people — priests,  scribes,  levites,  and  laymen. 

9.  Son  of  Igdaliahu  "the  man  of  Cud"  (Jer. 
xxxv.  4).  The  sons  of  Hanan  had  a  chamber  in 
the  Temple.  The  Vat.  LXX.  gives  the  name  twice 
— '\tavav  uiov  'Avaviov. 


HANANEEL,  THE  TOWER  OF 
HANANEEL,  THE  TOWER  OF  fc»20 

?{03n  ;  irvpyos  'Ava/xe^A. ;  turris  Ifananeel),  a 
tower  which  formed  part  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem 
(Neh.  iii.  1,  xii.  39).  From  these  two  passages, 
particularly  from  the  former,  it  might  almost  be 
inferred  that  Hananeel  was  but  another  name  for 
the  Tower  of  Meah  (HX?3n  =  "  the  hundred")  :  at 
any  rate  they  were  close  together,  and  stood  between 
the  sheep-gate  and  the  fish-gate.  This  tower  is 
further  mentioned  in  Jer.  xxxi.  38,  where  the 
reference  appears  to  be  to  an  extensive  breach  in 
the  wall,  reaching  from  that  spot  to  the  "  gate  of 
the  corner"  (comp.  Neh.  iii.  '24,  32),  and  which 
the  prophet  is  announcing  shall  be  "  rebuilt  to 
Jehovah  "  and  "  not  be  thrown  down  any  more  for 
ever."  The  remaining  passage  in  which  it  is  named 
(Zech.  xiv.  10)  also  connects  this  tower  with  the 
"corner  gate,"  which  lay  on  the  other  side  of  the 
sheep-gate.  This  verse  is  rendered  by  Ewald  with 
a  different  punctuation  to  the  A.  V. — '*  from  the 
gate  of  Benjamin,  on  to  the  place  of  the  first  (or  early) 
gate,  on  to  the  corner-gate  and  Tower  Hananeel,  on 
to  the  king's  wine-presses."     [Jerusalem.] 

HANA'NI  P::n  ;  'Avavl ;  Hanaro).     1.  One 

of  the  sons  of  Heman,  David's  Seerj  who  were 
separated  for  song  in  the  house  of  the  Lord,  and 
head  of  the  18th  course  of  the  service  (1  Chr.  xxv. 
4,  25). 

2.  A  Seer  who  rebuked  (rs.C.  941)  Asa,  king  of 
Judah,  for  his  want  of  faith  in  (Jod,  which  he  had 
showed  by  buying  off  the  hostility  of  Benhadad  I. 
king  of  Syria  (2  Chr.  xvi.  7).  For  this  he  was  im- 
prisoned by  Asa  (10).  He  (or  another  Hanani) 
was  the  father  of  Jehu  the  Seer,  who  testified  against 
Baasha  (1  K.  xvi.  1,7),  and  Jehoshaphat  (2  Chr. 
xix.  2,  xx.  34). 

3.  One  of  the  priests  who  in  the  time  of  Ezra 
were  connected  with  strange  wives  (Ezr.  x.  20). 
In  Esdras  the  name  is  Ananias. 

4.  A  brother  of  Nehemiah,  who  returned  B.C. 
441)  from  Jerusalem  to  Susa  (Neh.  i.  2);  and  was 
afterwards  made  governor  of  Jerusalem  under  Ne- 
hemiah (vii.  2). 

5.  A  priest  mentioned  in  Neh.  xii.  36. 

[W.  T.  B.] 

HANANI  AH  (PW3n  and  ttPUII;  'Avavia; 
An-,:,:. is  and  Hananias.  In  N.  Test.  'Avavias  ; 
Ananias). 

1.  One  of  the  14  sons  of  Heman  the  singer,  and 
chief  of  the  sixteenth  out  of  the  24  courses  or 
wards  into  which  the  288  musicians  of  the  Levites 
were  divided  by  king  David.  The  sons  of  Heman 
were  especially  employed  to  blow  the  horns  (1  Chr. 
xxv.  4,  5,  23). 

2.  One  of  the  chief  captains  of  the  army  of  king 
Dinah  (2  Chr.  xxvi.  11). 

3.  Father  of  Zedekiah,  one  of  the  princes  in  the 
reign  of  JehoiaMm  king  of  Judah  (Jer.  xxxvi.  12). 

4.  Son  of  Azur,  a  Benjamite  of  Gibeon  and  a 
false  prophet  in  the  reign  of  Zedekiah  king  of 
Judah.  In  the  4th  year  of  his  reign,  B.C.  595, 
Hananiah  withstood  Jeremiah  the  prophet,  and 
publicly  prophesied  in  the  temple  that  within  two 

years  J« iah  and  all  his  fellow-captives,  with  the 

vessels  of  the  Lord's  iinu.se  which  Nebuchadnezzar 
had  taken  away  to  Babylon,  should  be  brought 
back  to  Jerusalem  (Jer.  xxviii.):  an  indication 
that  treacherous  negotiations  were  already  secretly 


HANANIAH 


747 


opened  with  Pharaoh-Hophra  (who  had  just  suc- 
ceeded Psammis  on  the  Egyptian  throne"),  and 
that  strong  hopes  were  entertained  of  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  Babylonian  power  by  him.  The  pre- 
ceding chapter  (xxvii.  3)  shows  further  that  a 
league  was  already  in  progress  between  Judah  and 
the  neighbouring  nations  of  Edom,  Amnion,  Moab, 
Tyre  and  Zidon,  for  the  purpose  of  organizing 
resistance  to  Nebuchadnezzar,  in  combination  no 
doubt  with  the  projected  movements  of  Pharaoh- 
Hophra.  Hananiah  corroborated  his  prophecy  by 
taking  from  off  the  neck  of  Jeremiah  the  yoke 
which  he  wore  by  Divine  command  (Jer.  xxvii., 
in  token  of  the  subjection  of  Judaea  and  the  neigh- 
bouring countries  to  the  Babylonian  empire),  and 
breaking  it,  adding,  "  Thus  saith  Jehovah,  Even  so 
will  I  break  the  yoke  of  Nebuchadnezzar  king  of 
Babylon  from  the  neck  of  all  nations  within  the 
space  of  two  full  years."  But  Jeremiah  was  bid 
to  go  and  tell  Hananiah  that  for  the  wooden  yokes 
which  he  had  broken  he  should  make  yokes  of  iron, 
so  firm  was  the  dominion  of  Babylon  destined  to 
be  for  seventy  years.  The  prophet  Jeremiah  added 
this  rebuke  and  prediction  of  Hananiah's  death,  the 
fulfilment  of  which  closes  the  history  of  this  false 
prophet.  "  Hear  now,  Hananiah  ;  Jehovah  hath 
not  sent  thee ;  but  thou  makest  this  people  to  trust 
in  a  lie.  Therefore  thus  saith  Jehovah,  Behold  I 
will  cast  thee  from  off  the  face  of  the  earth :  this 
year  thou  shalt  die,  because  thou  hast  taught 
rebellion  against  Jehovah.  So  Hananiah  the  pro- 
phet died  the  same  year,  in  the  seventh  month  " 
(Jer.  xxviii.).  The  above  history  of  Hananiah  is 
of  great  interest,  as  throwing  much  light  upon  the 
Jewish  politics  of  that  eventful  time,  divided  as 
parties  were  into  the  partizans  of  Babylon  on  one 
hand,  and  Egypt  on  the  other.  It  also  exhibits 
the  machinery  of  false  prophecies,  by  which  the 
irreligious  party  sought  to  promote  their  own 
policy,  in  a  very  distinct  form.  At  the  same  time 
too  that  it  explains  in  general  the  sort  of  political 
calculation  on  which  such  false  prophecies  were 
hazarded,  it  supplies  an  important  clue  in  par- 
ticular by  which  to  judge  of  the  date  of  Pharaoh- 
Hophra's  (or  Apries')  accession  to  the  Egyptian 
throne,  and  the  commencement  of  his  ineffectual 
effort  to  restore  the  power  of  Egypt  (which  had 
been  prostrate  since  Necho's  overthrow,  Jer.  xlvi. 
2)  upon  the  ruins  of  the  Babylonian  empire.  The 
leaning  to  Egypt,  indicated  by  Hananiah's  prophecy 
as  having  begun  in  the  fourth  of  Zedekiah,  had  in 
the  sixth  of  his  reign  issued  in  open  defection  from 
Nebuchadnezzar,  and  in  the  guilt  of  perjury,  which 
cost  Zedekiah  his  crown  and  his  lite,  as  we  learn 
from  V./..  xvii.  12-20;  the  date  being  fixed  by  a 
comparison  of  Ez.  viii.  1  with  xx.  1.  The  tempo- 
rary success  of  tin'  intrigue  which  is  described  in 
Jer.  XXXvii.  was   speedily  followed  by  the   return  of 

the  Chaldaeans  and  the  destruction  of  tin-  city,  ac- 

'ding  to  the  prediction  of  Jeremiah.    This  history 

of  Hananiah  also  illustrates  the  manner  in  which 
tie'  false  prophets  hindered  tin-  mission,  and  ob- 
structed the  beneficent  effects  of  the  ministry,  of  the 
true  prophets,  and  affords  a  remarkable  example  of 

the  way  in  which   tiny    prophesied    smooth    things, 

and  said  peace  when  there  was  no  peace  (comp. 
1  K.  xxii.  11,  24,  25). 
5.  Grandfather  "f  Irijah,  the  captain  of  the  ward 


*  Pharaoh-Hophra   succeeded  Psammis,  b.c.  595. 
The  dates  of  the  Egyptian  reigns  from  Psammetichus 

are  fixed  bv  that  of  the  conquest  of  Egypt  by  <  'anilivses. 

3  C  2 


748 


HANANIAH 


at  the  gate  of  Benjamin  who  arrested  Jeremiah  on 
a  charge  of  deserting  to  the  Chaldaeans  (Jer.  xx.wii. 
13). 

6.  Head  of  a  Benjamite  house  (1  Chr.  viii.  24). 

7.  The  Hebrew  name  of  Shadrach.  [Shadrach.] 
He  was  of  the  house  of  David,  according  to  Jewish 
tradition  (Dan.  i.  3,  6,  7,  11 ,  19  ;  ii.  17).  [Ana- 
nias.] 

8.  Son  of  Zerubbabel,  1  Chr.  iii.  19,  from  whom 
Christ  derived  his  descent.  He  is  the  same  person 
who  is  by  St'.  Luke  called  'looavvas,  Joanna,  and 
who,  when  Rhesa  is  discarded,  appears  there  also 
as  Zerubbabel's  son.  [Genealogy  op  Christ.] 
The  identity  of  the  two  names  Hananiah  and  Joanna 
is  apparent  immediately  we  compare  them  in  Hebrew. 
iTOjn  (Hananiah)  is  compounded  of  J3I1  and  the 
Divine  name,  which  always  takes  the  form  !"l\  or 
•in1,  at  the  end  of  compounded  names  (as  in  Jerem- 
iah, Shephet-iah,  Nehem-iah,  Azar-iah,  &c).  It 
means  gratiose  dedit  Dominus.  Joanna  (|3nV)  is 
compounded  of  the  Divine  name,  which  at  the  begin- 
ning of  compound  names  takes  the  form  V,  or  lfP 
(as  in  Jeho-shua,  Jeho-shaphat,  Jo-zadak,  &c),  and 
the  same  woid,  pn,  and  means  Dominus  gratiose 
dedit.  Examples  of  a  similar  transposition  of  the 
elements  of  a  compound  name  in  speaking  of  the 
same  individual,  are  IV313?,  Jecon-iah,  and  pDMIT, 
Jeho-jachin,  of  the  same  king  of  Judah  ;  Ahaz-iah 
and  Jeho-ahaz  of  the  same  son  of  Jehoram  ;  Eli-am, 
and  Ammi-el,  of  the  father  of  Bathsheba  ;  and  El- 
asah  for  Asah-el,  and  Ishma-el,  for  Eli-shama,  in 
some  MSS.  of  Ezr.  x.  15  and  2  K.  xxv.  25.  This 
identification  is  of  great  importance,  as  bringing  St. 
Luke's  genealogy  into  harmony  with  the  Old  Testa- 
ment.    Nothing  more  is  known  of  Hananiah. 

9.  The  two  names  Hananiah  and  Jehohanan  stand 
side  by  side  Ezr.  x.  28,  as  sons  of  Bebai,  who  returned 
with  Ezra  from  Babylon. 

10.  A  priest,  one  of  the  "  apothecaries"  or  makers 
of  the  sacred  ointments  and  incense  (Ex.  xxx.  22-38, 
1  Chr.  ix.  30),  who  built  a  portion  of  the  wall  of 
Jerusalem  in  the  days  of  Nehemiah  (Neh.  iii.  8). 
He  may  be  the  same  as  is  mentioned  in  ver.  30  as 
having  repaired  another  portion.  If  so,  he  was  son 
of  Shelemiah ;  perhaps  the  same  as  is  mentioned 
xii.  41. 

11.  Head  of  the  priestly  course  of  Jeremiah  in 
the  days  of  Joiakim  the  high-priest,  Neh.  xii.  12. 

12.  Ruler  of  the  palace  (iTV3n  X*')  at  Jeru- 
salem under  Nehemiah.  He  is  described  as  "  a  faith- 
ful man,  and  one  who  feared  God  above  many." 
His  office  seems  to  have,  been  one  of  authority  and 
trust,  and  perhaps  the  same  as  that  of  Eliakim,  who 
was  "over  the  house"  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah. 
[ELIAKIM.]  The  arrangements  for  guarding  the 
gates  of  Jerusalem  were  entrusted  to  him  with 
Hanani,  the  Tirshatha's  brother.  Prideaux  thinks 
that  the  appointment  of  Hanani  and  Hananiah  indi- 
cates that  at  this  time  Nehemiah  returned  to  Persia, 
but  without  sufficient  ground.  Nehemiah  seems  to 
hare  been  continuously  at  Jerusalem  for  some  time 
after  the  completion  of  the  wall  (vii.  5,  G5,  viii.  9, 
x.  1).  If,  too,  the  term  ITVSH  means,  as  Gesenius 
supposes,  and  as  the  use  of  it  in  Neh.  ii.  8  makes 
not  improbable,  not  the  palace,  but  the  fortress  of 
the  Temple,  called  by  Josephus  fiapis — there  is  still 
less  reason  to  imagine  Nehemiah' s  absence.  In  this 
case  Hananiah  would  be  a  priest,  perhaps  of  the 


HANDICRAFT 

same  family  as  the  preceding.  The  rendering  more- 
over of  Neh.  vii.  2,  3  should  probably  be,  "And  I 
enjoined  (or  gave  orders  to)  Hanani  .  .  and  Hananiah 
the  captains  of  the  fortress  ....  concerning  Jeru- 
salem, and  said,  Let  not  the  gates,"  &c.  There  is 
no  authority  for  rendering  ?y  by  "over"  —  "  He 
gave  such  an  one  charge  over  Jerusalem."  The 
passages  quoted  by  Gesenius  are  not  one  of  them  to 
the  point. 

13.  An  Israelite,  Neh.  x.  23  (hebr.  24).  [Ana- 
nias.] 

14.  Other  Hananiahs  will  be  found  under  Ana- 
nias, the  Greek  form  of  the  name.        [A.  C.  H.] 

HANDICRAFT  (t€X"V,  epyaala  ;  ars,  arti- 
ficium',  Acts  xviii.  3,  xix.  25;  Rev.  rviii.  22). 
Although  the  extent  cannot  be  ascertained  to  which 
those  arts  were  carried  on  whose  invention  is  as- 
cribed to  Tubal-Cain,  it  is  probable  that  this  was 
proportionate  to  the  nomadic  or  settled  habits  of 
the  antediluvian  races.  Among  nomad  races,  as 
the  Bedouin  Arabs,  or  the  tribes  of  Northern  and 
Central  Asia  and  of  America,  the  wants  of  life,  as 
well  as  the  arts  which  supply  them,  are  few  ;  and 
it  is  only  among  the  city-dwellers  that  both  of 
them  are  multiplied  and  make  progress.  This  sub- 
ject cannot,  of  course,  be  followed  out  here :  in  the 
present  article  brief  notices  can  only  be  given  of  such 
handicraft  trades  as  are  mentioned  in  Scripture. 

1.  The  preparation  of  iron  for  use  either  in 
war,  in  agriculture,  or  for  domestic  purposes,  was 
doubtless  one  of  the  earliest  applications  of  labour  ; 
and,  together  with  iron,  working  in  brass,  or  rather 
copper  alloyed  with  tin,  bronze  (DCriJ,  Gesen.  p. 
875),  is  mentioned  in  the  same  passage  as  prac- 
tised in  ante-diluvian  times  (Gen.  iv.  22).  The  use 
of  this  last  is  usually  considered  as  an  art  of  higher 
antiquity  even  than  that  of  iron  (Hesiod,  Works 
$  Days,  150;  Wilkinson,  Aac.  Eg.  ii.  p.  152, 
abridg.),  and  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  metal, 
whether  iron  or  bronze,  must  have  been  largely 
used,  either  in  material  or  in  tools,  for  the  con- 
struction of  the  Ark  (Gen.  vi.  14,  16).  Whether 
the  weapons  for  war  or  chase  used  by  the  early 
warriors  of  Syria  and  Assyria,  or  the  arrow-heads 
of  the  archer  Ishmael  were  of  bronze  or  iron  cannot 
be  ascertained  ;  but  we  know  that  iron  was  used 
for  warlike  purposes  by  the  Assyrians  (Layard, 
Nin.  <$•  Bah.  p.  194),  and  on  the  other  hand  that 
stone-tipped  arrows,  as  was  the  case  also  in  Mexico, 
were  used  in  the  earlier  times  by  the  Egyptians  as 
well  as  the  Persians  and  Greeks,  and  that  stone  or 
flint  knives  continued  to  be  used  by  them,  and  by 
the  inhabitants  of  the  desert,  and  also  by  the  Jews, 
for  religious  purposes  after  the  introduction  of  iron 
into  general  use  (Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  i.  353,  354, 
ii.  163;  Prescott,  Mexico,  i.  118;  Ex.  iv.  25; 
Josh.  v.  2;  1st  Egypt,  room,  Brit.  Mus.  case  36, 
37).  In  the  construction  of  the  Tabernacle,  cop- 
per, but  no  iron,  appears  to  have  been  used,  though 
the  use  of  iron  was  at  the  same  period  well  known 
to  the  Jews,  both  from  their  own  use  of  it  and 
from  their  Egyptian  education,  whilst  the  Canaan- 
ite  inhabitants  of  Palestine  and  Syria  were  in  full 
possession  of  its  use  both  for  warlike  and  domestic 
purposes  (Ex.  xx.  25,  xxv.  3,  xxvii.  H»  ;  Num. 
xxxv.  16;  Deut.  iii.  11,  iv.  20,  viii.  '.'  ;  Josh.  viii. 
31,xvii.  16,  18).  After  the  establishment  of  the 
Jews  in  Canaan,  the  occupation  of  a  smith  (L"~in) 
became  recognised  as  a  distinct  employment  (1 
Sam.   xiii.    19).     The  designer  of  a  higher  order 


HANDICRAFT 

appears  to  have  heen  called  specially  2CTI  (Gesen. 
p.  531;  Ex.  xxxv.  30,  35;  2  Chr.  xxvi.  1">; 
Saalschiitz,  Arch.  Heir.  c.  14  §16).     The  smith's 

woik  and  its  results  are  often  mentioned  in  Scrip- 
ture ("J  Sam.  xii.  31  ;  IK. 
vi.  7;  2  Chr.  xxvi.  14 ;  Is. 
xliv.  12,  liv.  16).  Among 
the  captives  taken  to  Ba- 
bylon by  Nebuchadnezzar 
were  1000  "  craftsmen  " 
and  smiths,  who  were  pro- 
bably of  the  superior  kind 
(2K.xriv.  1(1;  Jer.xxix.2). 
The  worker  in  gold  and 
silver    (EpIV;    apyvpoxd- 

iros  ;  xct"/el'T')?>  ''''</'"/''- 
rius,  aurifex)  must  have 
found  employment  both 
among  the  Hebrews  and 
the  neighbouring  nations 
in  very  early  times,  as  ap- 
pears from  the  ornaments 
sent  by  Abraham  to  Ke- 
bekah  (Gen.  xxiv.  22,  53, 
xxxv.  4,  xxxviii.  18  ;  Dent, 
vii.  25).  But,  whatever 
skill  the  Hebrew--  possessed, 
it  is  quite  clear  that  they 
must  have  learned  much 
from  Egypt  and  its  "  iron- 
furnaces,"  both  in  metal- 
work  and  in  the  arts  of 
setting  and  polishing  pre- 
cious stones;  arts  which 
were  turned  to  account  both 
in  the  construction  oi  the 
Tabernacle  and  the  making 
of  the  priests'  ornaments, 
and  also  in  the  casting  ot 
the  golden  calf  as  well  as 
its  destruction  by  Moses, 
probably,  as  suggested  by 
<  Soguet,  by  a  method  which 
he  had  learnt  in  Egypt 
(Gen.  xli.  42;  Ex.  iii.  22, 
xii.  35,  xxxi.  4,  5,  xxxii.  2, 
4.  20,  24,  xxxvii.  17.  24, 
xxxviii.  4,  8,  24,  '_'">,  xxxix. 
6,39;  Neh.iii.8;  Is.  xliv. 
I '_'  l.  Various  processes  of 
t  he  goldsmiths'  work  (  No. 
1)  are  illustrated  by  Egyp- 
tian monuments  (Wilkin- 
son, Anc.  Eg.  ii.  136,  L52, 
L62). 

After  the  conquest  fre- 
quent notices  are  found  both 
of  moulded  and  wrought 
metal,  including  soldering, 
which  last  had  long  been 
known  in  Egypt  :  but  the 
Phoenicians  appear  to  have 
possessed  greater  skill  than 
the   Jews   in    these  ai  ts,  at 

least    in    Solomon's    time 

(Judg.    viii.   '_'4,  11,  xvii. 

4;   1  K.  vii.  13,  45,  46; 

Is.  xli.  7;  Wisd.  xv.  4:  Ecclus.  xxxviii.  2£ 

vi.  50,  55,  57;   Wilkinson,  ii.  p.  L62).     [Zare- 

phath.]     Even  in  the  desert,  mention  is  mad.-  of 

beating  gold  into  plates,  cutting  it  into  wire,  and 


HANDICRAFT 


'49 


also  of  setting  precious  stones  in  gold  (Ex.  xxxix. 
3,  6,  &c. ;  Beckmann,  Hist,  of  Inv.  ii.  -114; 
Gesen.  p.  1229). 

Among  the  tools  of  the  smith  are  mentioned — 


.S  S 


D*np?D,  Aa/31?,  forceps,  Gesen.  p.  761; 
Is.  vi.  6), hammer  iu"l2S,  <r<pvpa.  malleus,  Gesen. 
p.    1101),  anvil   (DyS,  Gesen.  p.   1118),  bellows 


750 


HANDICRAFT 


((ISO,  <pv(rr)T7ip,  sufflatorium,  Gesen.  p.  896;  Is. 
xli.  7;  Jer.  vi.  29;  Ecclus.  xxxviii.  28;  Wilkin- 
son, ii.  316). 


Egyptian  Blowpipe,  and  small  fireplace  with  cheeks  to  confine  and 
reflect  the  heat.    (^Wilkinson.) 

In  N.T.  Alexander  "the  coppersmith"  (6  xaA" 
Kevs)  of  Ephesus  is  mentioned,  where  also  was 
carried  on  that  trade  in  "silver  shrines"  (vaol 
apyvpol),  which  was  represented  by  Demetrius  the 
silversmith  (apyvpoK6tros)  as  being  in  danger  from 
the  spread  of  Christianity  (Acts  xix.  24,  28  ;  2 
Tim.  iv.  14). 

2.  The  work  of  the  carpenter  (D^'V  BHn, 
TtKToiv,  artifex  lignarius)  is  often  mentioned  in 
Scripture  (e.  g.  Gen.  vi.  14 ;  Ex.  xxxvii. ;  Is. 
xliv.  13).     In  the  palace  built  by  David  for  him- 


Tools  of  an  Egyptian  Carpenter.     (Wi 

kinson 

) 

1,  2,  3,  4.  Chisels  and  drills.                                   Fig.  9. 

5.  Part  of  drill.                                                               10 

6.  Nut  of  wood  belonging  to  drill                                11 

7.  8.  Saws.                                                                       12 

Hom< 

Malic 
l!H*ke 
Baske 

foil. 
. 
tofnails. 

which  held  tl 

HANDICRAFT 

self  the  workmen  employed  were  chiefly  Phoeni- 
cians sent  by  Hiram  (2  Sam.  v.  11;  1  Chr.  xiv. 
1),  as  most  probably  were  those,  or  at  least  the 
principal  of  those  who  were  employed  by  Solomon 
in  his  works  (1  K.  v.  6).  But  in  the  repairs  of 
the  Temple,  executed  under  Joash  king  of  Judah, 
and  also  in  the  rebuilding  under  Zerubbabel,  uo 
mention  is  made  of  foreign  workmen,  though  in 
the  latter  case  the  timber  is  expressly  said  to  have 
been  brought  by  sea  to  Joppa  by  Zidonians  (2  K. 
xii.  11;  2  Chr.'xxiv.  12;  Ezra  i'ii.  7).  That  the 
Jewish  carpenters  must  have  been  able  to  carve 
with  some  skill  is  evident  from  Is.  xli.  7,  xliv.  13, 
in  which  last  passage  some  of  the  implements  used 
in  the  trade  are  mentioned: — the  rule  (1TC,  yu«- 
rpov,  norma,  possibly  a  chalk  pencil,  Gesen.  p. 
1337),  measuring-line  (}p,  Gesen.  p.  1201),  compass 
(njintt,  irapaypcMpls,  circinus,  Gesen.  p.  450), 
plane,  or  smoothing  instrument  (!"IJM¥pD,  /coAAa, 
runcina,  Gesen.  pp.  1228,  1338),  axe  (JT"I3,  Gesen. 
p.  302,  or  DMlp.  Gesen.  p.  1236,  a.£ivq,  sccuris). 
The  process  of  the  work,  and  the  tools  used  by 
Egyptian  carpenters,  and  also  coopers  and  wheel- 
wrights, are  displayed  in  Egyptian  monuments  and 
relics;  the  former,  including  dovetailing,  veneer- 
ing, drilling,  glueing,  varnishing,  and  inlaying, 
may  be  seen  in  Wilkinson,  Arte.  Eg.  ii.  111-119. 
Of  the  latter  many  specimens,  including  saws, 
hatchets,  knives,  awls,  nails,  a 
hone,  and  a  drill,  also  turned 
objects  in  bone,  exist  in  the 
British  Museum,  1st  Egyp. 
Room,  case  42-43,  Nos.  6046- 
6188.  See  also  Wilkinson,  ii. 
p.  113,  fig.  395. 

In  N.T.  the  occupation  of  a 
carpenter  (t4ktoov)  is  mentioned 
in  connexion  with  Joseph  the 
husband  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  and 
ascribed  to  our  Lord  himself  by 
way  of  reproach  (Mark  vi.  3  ; 
Matt.  xiii.  55  ;  and  Just.  Mart. 
dial.  Tryph.  c.  88). 

3.  The  masons  (D^Tljl,  wall- 
builders,  Gesen.  p.  269)  employed 
by  David  and  Solomon,  at  least 
the  chief  of  them,  were  Phoeni- 
cians, as  is  implied  also  in  the 
word  Dv23,  men  of  Gebal,  Je- 
bail,  Byblus  (Gesen.  p.  258  ;  1 
K.  v.  18;  Ez.  xxvr.  9;  Burck- 
hardt,  Syria,  p.  179).  Among 
their  implements  are  mentioned 
the  saw  (!T"ljp,  irpiuv),  the 
plumb-line  ("ipK,  Gesen.  p.  125), 
the  measuring-reed  (Hip,  Ka- 
Aa/xos,  calamus,  Gesen.  p.  1221). 
Some  of  these,  and  also  the  chisel 
and  mallet,  are  represented  on 
Egyptian  monuments  (Wilkin- 
son", Anc.  Eg.  ii.  313,  314),  or 
preserved  in  the  Brit.  Mus.  (1st 
Egyp.  Room,  No.  6114,  6038). 
The  large  stones  used  in  Solo- 
mon's Temple  an'  said  by  Jose- 
phus  to  have  been  fitted  together 
exactly  without  either  mortar  or 
cramps,  but  the  foundation  stones 


HANDICRAFT 

to  have  been  fastened  with  lead  (Joseph,  Ant.  viii. 
3,  §"2,  xv.  11,  §3).  For  ordinary  building,  mor- 
tar, "PC?  (Gesen.  p.  1328)  was  used;  sometimes, 
perhaps,  bitumen,  as  was  the  case  at  Babylon  (Gen. 
xi.  3).  The  lime,  clay,  and  straw  of  which  mortar 
is  generally  composed  in  the  East,  requires  to  be  very 
carefully  mixed  and  united  so  as  to  resist  wet  (Lane, 
Mod.  Eg.  i.  27;  Shaw,  Trao.  p.  206).  The  wall 
"  daubed  with  untempered  mortar"  of  Ezekiel  (xiii. 


HANDICRAFT 


7. 51 


10)  was  perhaps  a  sort  of  cob- wall  of  mud  or  clay 
without  lime  (730,  Gesen.  p.  1516;,  which  would 
give  way  under  heavy  rain.  The  use  of  white- 
wash ou  tombs  is  remarked  by  our  Lord  (Matt, 
xxiii.  27.  See  also  Mishu.  Maaser  Sherd,  v.  1). 
Houses  infected  with  leprosy  were  required  by  the 
Law  to  be  re-plastered  (Lev.  xiv.  40-45). 

4.  Akin  to  the  craft  of  the  carpenter  is  that  of 
ship  and  boat-building,  which  must  have  been  exer- 


752  HANDICRAFT 

cised  to  some  extent  for  the  fishing-vessels  on  the 
lake  of  Gennesaret  (Matt.  viii.  23,  ix.  1 ;  John 
xxi.  3,  8).  Solomon  built,  at  Ezion-Geber,  ships 
for  his  foreign  trade,  which  were  manned  by  Phoe- 
nician crews,  an  experiment  which  Jehoshaphat  en- 
deavoured in  vain  to  renew  (1  K.  ix.  26,  27,  xxii. 
48 ;  2  Chr.  xx.  36,  37). 


Carpenters.     (Wilkinson.) 

i  the  seat  of  a  chair,  s.    /  t,  li'gs  of  chair,    u 

planing  or  polishing  the  leg  of  a  c 


Part  1. 


(Wilkinson.) 
Part  1.  levelling,  and  Part  i  squaring  e 

5.  The  perfumes  used  in  the  religious  services, 
and  in  later  times  in  the  funeral  rites  of  monarchs, 
imply  knowledge  and  practice  in  the  art  of  the 
"  apothecaries  "  (DTljjn,  /xvpetyol,  pigmentarii), 
who  appear  to  have  formed  a  guild  or  association 
(Ex.  xxx.  25,  35;  Neh.  iii.  8;  2  Chr.  xvi.  14; 
Eccles.  vii.  1,  x.  1  ;  Ecclus.  xxxviii.  8). 

6.  The  arts  of  spinning  and  weaving  both  wool 
and  linen  were  carried  on  in  early  times,  as  they 
are  still  usually  among  the  Bedouins,  by  women. 
The  women  spun  and  wove  goat's  hair  and  flax  for 
the  Tabernacle,  as  in  later  times  their  skill  was 
employed  in  like  manner  for  idolatrous  purposes. 


HANDICRAFT 

One  of  the  excellences  attributed  to  the  good  house- 
wife is  her  skill  and  industry  in  these  aits  (Ex. 
xxxv.  25,  26;  Lev.  xix.  19';  Dent.  xxii.  11  ;  2 
K.  xxiii.  7;  Ez.  xvi.  16;  Prov.  xxxi.  13,  24; 
Burckhardt,  Notes  on  Bed.  i.  65;  comp.  Horn.  II. 
i.  123.;  Od.  i.  356,  ii.  104).  The  loom,  with  its 
beam  ("1130,  /j.effdi>Tiov,  liciatorium,  1  Sain.  xvii. 
7;  Gesen.  p.  883),  pin, 
("11V,  Ttaacrahos,  vin- 
ous, Judg.  xvi.  14  ;  Ge- 
sen. p.  643 ),  and  shuttle 
(inX5  Spo/u-evs,  Job 
vii.  6  ;  Gesen.  p.  146) 
was,  perhaps,  intro- 
duced later,  but  as  early 
as  David's  time  (1  Sam. 
xvii.  7),  and  worked  by 
men,  as  was  the  case  in 
Egypt,  cout;arv  to  the 
practice  of  other  na- 
tions. This  trade  also 
appears  to  have  been 
practised  hereditarily  (1 
Chr.  iv.  21  ;  Herod,  ii. 
35 ;  Soph.  Oed.  Col. 
339). 

Together  with  weav- 
ing we  read  also  of 
embroidery,  in  which 
gold  and  silver  threads 
were  interwoven  with 
the  body  of  the  stuff, 
sometimes  in  figure  pat- 
terns, or  with  precious 
stones  set  in  the  needle- 
work (Ex.  xxvi.  1, 
xxviii.  4,  xxxix.  6-13). 
7.  Besides  these  arts, 
those  of  dyeing  and  of 
dressing  cloth  were  prac- 
tised in  Palestine,  and 
those  also  of  tanning  and 
diessing  leather  (Josh. 
ii.  15-18;  2  K.  i.  8; 
Matt.  iii.  4 ;  Acts  ix. 
43 ;  Mishn.  Megill.  iii. 
2).  Shoemakers,  barbers, 
and  tailors  are  mention- 
ed in  the  Mishua  (Pe- 
sach.  iv.  6)  :  the  barber 
(2?3,  Kovpevs,  Gesen. 
p.  283),  or  his  occupa- 
tion, by  Ezekiel  (v.  1  ; 
Lev.  xiv.  8 ;  Num.  vi. 
5  ;  Josephus,  Ant.  xvi. 
itone-  11,§5;  J?./.i.27,§5; 

Mishn.  Shabb.  i.  2), 
and  the  tailor  (i.  3),  plasterers,  glaziers,  and  glass 
vessels,  painters,  and  goldworkers  are  mentioned 
in  Mishn.  (Chel.  viii.  9,  xxix.  3,  4,  xxx.  1). 

Tent-makers  (ffKrivoiroioi)  are  noticed  in  the 
Acts  (xviii.  3),  and  frequent  allusion  is  made  to 
the  trade  of  the  potters. 

8.  Bakers  (D^DK,  Gesen.  p.  136)  arc  noticed  in 
Scripture  as  carrying  on  their  trade  (Jer.  .wxvii. 
21;  Hos.  vii.  4;  Mishn.  Chel.  xv.  2);  ami  the 
well-known  valley  Tyropoeon  probably  derived  its 
name  from  the  occupation  of  the  cheese-makers,  its 
inhabitants  (Joseph.  B.  J.  v.  4,  1 ).  Butchers, 
not  Jewish,  are  spoken  of  1  Cor.  x.  25. 


HANDKERCHIEF 

Trade  in  all  its  branches  was  much  developed 
after  the  Captivity  ;  and  tor  a  father  to  teach  his 
son  a  trade  was  reckoned  not  only  honourable  but 
indispensable  (Mishn.  Pirke  Ab.  ii.  2  ; 
Kiddush.  iv.  14).  Some  trades,  how- 
ever, were  regarded  as  less  honourable 
(Jahn,  Bibl.Arch.  §84). 

Some,  if  not  all  trades,  had  special 
localities,  as  was  the  case  formerly  in 
European,  and  is  now  in  Eastern  cities 
(Jer.  xxxvii.  21  ;  1  Cor.  x.  25;  Jo- 
seph. B.  J.  v.  4,  §1,  and  8,  §1  ; 
Mishn.  Becor.  v.  1  ;  Russell,  Aleppo, 
i.  20;  Chardin,  Voyages,  vii.  274, 394 ; 
Lane,  Mod.  Eg.  ii.  145). 

One  feature,  distinguishing  Jewish 
from  other  workmen,  deserves  peculiar 
notice,  viz.  that  they  were  not  slaves, 
nor  were  their  trades  necessarily  heie- 
ditary,  as  was  and  is  so  often  the  case 
among  other,  especially  heathen  nations 
(Jahn.  Bib/.  Antiq.  c.  v.  §81-84; 
Saalschiitz,  Hcbr.  Arch,  c.  14  • 
Winer,  s.  v.  Handwerke).  [Musical 
Instruments  ;  Pottery  ;  Glass  ; 
Leather.]  [H.  W.  P.]         * '« » «*™fcie, 

HANDKERCHIEF,  NAPKIN,  APRON. 

The  two  former  of  these  terms,  as  used  in  the  A.  V. 
—  ffovSdfitou,  the  latter  =  ffifxtKivdiov :  they  are 
classed  together,  inasmuch  as  they  refer  to  objects 
of  a  very  similar  character.  Both  words  are  of 
Latin  origin  :  ffovSaptov  — sudarium  from  sudo,  "to 
sweat ;"  the  Lutheran  translation  preserves  the  re- 
ference to  its  etymology  in  its  rendering,  schweiss- 
tuch  ;  <ti[xikiv9iov  —  semicinctium,  i.  e.  "  a  half 
girdle."  Neither  is  much  used  by  classical  writers  ; 
the  sudarium  is  referred  to  as  used  for  wiping  the 
face  (candido  frontem  sudario  tergeret,  Quintil. 
vi.  3),  or  hands  (sudario  mamas  tcrgens,  quod  in 
collo  habebat,  Petron.  in  fragrn.  Trugur.  cap.  67)  ; 
and  also  as  worn  over  the  face  for  the  purpose  of 
concealment  (Sueton.  in  Neron.  cap.  48) ;  the  word 
was  introduced  by  the  Romans  into  Palestine, 
where  it  was  adopted  by  the  Jews,  in  the  form 
NTTD  as  =  nnsnp,  "in  Ruth  iii.  15.  The 
sudarium  is  noticed  in  the  N.  T.  as  a  wrapper  to 
fold  up  money  (Luke  xix.  20) — as  a  cloth  bound 
about  the  head  of  a  corpse  (John  xi.  44,  xx.  7), 
being  probably  brought  from  the  crown  of  the  head 
under  the  chin — and  lastly  as  an  article  of  dress 
that  could  be  easily  removed  (Acts  xix.  12),  pro- 
bably a  handkerchief  worn  on  the  head  like  the 
keffieh  of  the  Bedouins.  The  semicinctium  is  noticed 
by  Martial  .\iv.  epigr.  153,  and  by  Petron.  in 
Satyr,  cap.  94.  The  distinction  between  the 
einctus  and  the  semicinctium  consisted  in  its  width 
(Isidor.  "rig.  xLx.  33):  with  regard  to  the  cha- 
racter of  the  (TifxiKlvdiov,  the  only  inference  from 
the  passage  in  which  it  occurs  (Acts  xix.  12)  is 
that  it  was  easily  removed  from  the  person,  and 
probably  was  worn  next  to  the  skin.  According  to 
Suidas  the  distinction  between  the  sudarium  and 
the  semicinctium  was  rerj  small,  for  he  explains 
the  latter  by  the  former,  atfiiKivOiov  <$>o.ki6\lov  ^ 
(TovSdpiov,  the  <paKt6\iov  being  a  species  "i  head- 
dress: Hesychius  likewise  explains  at/xiKivdiov  by 
<P<xki6\iov.  According  to  the  scholiast,  (in  Cod. 
Steph.*),  as  quoted  by  Schleusuer  (Lex.  s.  v. 
trovSipiov),  the  distinction  between  the  two  terms 
is  that  the  sudarium  was  Worn  on  the  head,  and 
the  semicinctium   used   as   a    handkerchief.      The 


HANES 


753 


difference  was  probably  not  in  the  shape,  but  in  the 
use  of  the  article  ;  we  may  conceive  them  to  have 
been  bands  of  linen  of  greater  or  less  size,  which 


An  Egyptian  loom.     (Wilkinson.) 
not  thrown,  but  put  in  with  the  hand.     It  hud  a  hoolt  at  eacli  end. 

might  be  adapted  to  many  purposes,  like  the  article 
now  called  lungi  among  the  Arabs,  which  is  applied 
sometimes  as  a  girdle,  'at  other  times  as  a  turban 
(Wellsted,  Travels,  i.  321).  [W.  L.  B.] 

HANES  (D!J_n  ;  Bancs),  a  place  in  Egypt 
only  mentioned  in  Is.  xxx.  4  :  "  For  his  princes 
were  at  Zoan,  and  his  messengers  came  to  Hanes." 
The  LXX.  has  "On  elfflv  iv  Tavei  apxvyol  ayye- 
\oi  irovvpoi,  evidently  following  an  entirely  different 
reading.  Hanes  has  been  supposed  by  Vitringa, 
Michaelis,  Rosenmiiller,  and  Cesenius,  to  be  the 
same  as  Heracleopolis  Magna  in  the  Heptanomis, 

Copt,  e&rtec,  £,rtec,  £,ttHc    This 

identification  depends  wholly  upon  the  similarity 
of  the  two  names :  a  consideration  of  the  sense  of 
the  passage  in  which  Hanes  occurs  shows  its  great 
improbability.  The  prophecy  is  a  reproof  of  the 
Jews  for  trusting  in  Egypt ;  ami  according  to  the 
Masoretic  text,  mention  is  made  of  an  embassy, 
perhaps  from  Hoshea,  or  else  from  Ahaz,  or  possibly 
Hezekiah,  to  a  Pharaoh.  As  the  king  whose  assist- 
ance is  asked  is  called  Pharaoh,  he  is  probably  not 
an  Ethiopian  of  the  xxvth  dynasty,  for  the  kings  of 
that  line  are  mentioned  by  name — So,  Tirhakah — 
but  a  sovereign  of  the  xxiiird  dynasty,  which, 
according  to  Manetho,  was  of  Tanite  kings.  It  is 
supposed  that  the  last  king  of  the  latter  dynasty, 
Manetho's  Zet,  is  the  Sethos  of  Herodotus,  the  king- 
in  whose  time  Sennacherib's  army  perished,  and 
who  appears  to  have  been  mentioned  under  the  title 
of  Pharaoh  by  Rabshakeh  (Is.  .xx.xvi.  6;  2  K.  xviii. 
21),  though  it  is  just  possible  that  Tirhakah  may 

have  been  intended.  It  the  reference  In-  to  an  em- 
bassy to  Zet,  Zoan  was  probably  his  capital,  and  in 
any  case  then  the  most  important  city  of  the  eastern 
part  of  Lower  Egypt.  Hanes  was  most  probably  in 
its  neighbourhood  :  and  we  are  disposed  to  think  that 
tin'  Chald.  Paraphr.  is  right  in  identifying  it  with 
DnJSnn,  or  Dn^Enri,  once  written,  if  the 
Kethibh  be  correct,  in  the  form  D32nn,  Daphnae, 
a  fortified  town  on  the  eastern  frontier.  ['I'.MI- 
I'ANIIl.s.]      GeseniUS  remarks,  as  a  kind  of  apology 

for  the  identification  of  llan«s  with  Heracleopolis 


754 


HANGING 


Magna,  that  the  latter  was  formerly  a  royal  city.  It 
is  true  that  in  Manetho's  list  the  ixth  and  .xth  dy- 
nasties are  said  to  have  been  of  Heracleopolite  kings  ; 
but  it  has  been  lately  suggested,  on  strong  grounds, 
by  Sir  Gardner  Wilkinson,  that  this  is  a  mistake 
in  the  case  of  the  ixth  dynasty  for  Hermonthites 
(Herod,  ed.  Rawlinson,  vol.  ii.  p.  348).  If  this 
supposition  be  correct  as  to  the  ixth  dynasty,  it 
must  also  be  so  as  to  the  xth  ;  but  the  circumstance 
whether  Heracleopolis  was  a  royal  city  or  not,  a 
thousand  years  before  Isaiah's  time,  is  obviously  of 
no  consequence  here.  [R.  S.  P.] 

HANGING;  HANGINGS.  These  terms 
represent  both  different  words  in  the  original,  and 
different  articles  in  the  furniture  of  the  Temple. 
(1.)  The  "hanging"  (J]D?0  ;  e-nicnraffTpov  ;  tento- 
rium) was  a  curtain  or  "covering"  (as  the  word 
radically  means)  to  close  an  entrance;  one  was 
placed  before  the  door  of  the  Tabernacle  (Ex.  xxvi. 
36,  37,  xxxix.  38) ;  it  was  made  of  variegated  stuff 
wrought  with  needlework,  and  was  hung  on  five 
pillars  of  acacia  wood:  another  was  placed  before 
the  entrance  of  the  couit  (Ex.  xxvii.  16,  xxxviii. 
18  ;  Num.  iv.  26)  ;  the  term  is  also  applied  to  the 
vail  that  concealed  the  Holy  of  Holies,  in  the  full 
expression  "  vail  of  the  covering  "  (Ex.  xxxv.  12, 
xxxix.  34,  si.  21 ;  Num.  iv.  5).  [CURTAINS,  2.] 
(2.)  The  "hangings"  D^/p;  iarria;  tentoria) 
were  used  for  covering  the  walls  of  the  court  of  the 
Tabernacle,  just  as  tapestry  was  in  modern  times  (Ex. 
xxvii.  9,  xxxv.  17,  xxxviii.  9  ;  Num.  iii.  26,  iv.  26). 
The  rendering  in  the  LXX.  implies  that  they  were 
made  of  the  same  substance  as  the  sails  of  a  ship, 
i.  e.  (as  explained  by  Rashi)  '•  meshy,  not  woven:" 
this  opinion  is,  however,  incorrect,  as  the  material 
of  which  they  were  constructed  was  "tine  twined 
linen."  The  hangings  were  carried  only  five  cubits 
high,  or  half  the  height  of  the  walls  of  the  court 
(Ex.  xxvii.  18;  comp.  xxvi.  16).    [Tabernacle.] 

In  2  K.  xxiii.  7,  the  term  bottlm,  QT\2,  strictly 
"houses,"  A.  V.  "hangings,"  is  probably  intended  to 
describe  tents  used  as  portable  sanctuai  ies.  [W.  L.  B.] 

HAN'IEL  £>N*3n,  i.  e.  Channiel  ;    'AwjA. ; 

Hanicl),  one  of  the  sons  of  Ulla,  a  chief  prince, 
and  a  choice  hero  in  the  tribe  of  Asher  (1  Chr. 
vii.  39). 

HANNAH  (11311,  grace,  or  prayer;  "Avva; 
Anna),  one  of  the  wives  of  Elkanah,  and  mother  of 
Samuel  (1  Sam.  i.  ii.)  ;  a  prophetess  of  considerable 
repute,  though  her  claim  to  that  title  is  based  upon 
one  production  only,  viz.,  the  hymn  of  thanksgiving 
for  the  birth  of  her  son.  This  hymn  is  in  the 
highest  order  of  prophetic  poetry ;  its  resemblance 
to  that  of  the  Virgin  Mary  (comp.  1  Sam.  ii.  1-10 
with  Luke  i.  46-55;  see  also  Ps.  cxiii.)  has  been 
noticed  by  the  commentators;  and  it  is  specially 
remarkable  as  containing  the  first  designation  of 
the  Messiah  under  that  name.  In  the  Targum  it  has 
been  subjected  to  a  process  of  magniloquent  dilution, 
for  which  it  would  be  difficult  to  find  a  parallel 
even  in  the  pompous  vagaries  of  that  paraphrase 
(Erchhorn,  EM.  u.  p.  68).   [Samuel.]    [T.  E.B.] 

HAN'NATHON  (jh|n  ;  'A/jl<Z0,  Alex.  'Ev- 
vadw8  ;  Hanathon),  one  of  the  cities  of  Zebulun,  a 
point  apparently  on  the  northern  boundary  (Josh, 
xix.  14).     It  has  not  yet  heen  identified.  [G.] 

HAN'NIEL  (^X^n  ;  'Avtr)\ ;  Hanniel),  son 
of  Ephod  ;  as  prince  (Nasi)  of  Manasseh,  he  assisted 


HARAN 

in  the  division  of  the  Promised  Land  (Num.  xxxiv. 
23).     The  name  is  the  same  as  Haniel. 

HA'NOCH  Opn  ;  'EvwX  ;  Henoch).  1.  The 
third  in  order  of  the  children  of  Midian,  aud  there- 
fore descended  from  Abraham  by  Keturah  (Gen. 
xxv.  4).  In  the  parallel  list  of  1  Chr.  i.  33,  the 
name  is  given  in  the  A.  V.  as  Henoch. 

2.  0]13n  ;  'Ej/c6x  ;  Henoc h),  eldest  son  of  Reu- 
ben (Gen.  xlvi.  9  ;  Ex.  vi.  14 ;  Num.  xxvi.  5  ; 
1  Chr.  v.  3),  and  founder  of  the  family  of 

HA'NOCHITES,  THE  COJnn ;  twos  toC 
'Evwx  ;  familia  Ilenochitarum),  Num.  xxvi.  5. 

HA'NUN  (J-lJn;  'Avvciv;  Hmon).  1.  Son 
of  Nahash  (2  Sam/x.  1,  2;  1  Chr.  xix.  1,  2),  king 
of  Amnion  about  B.C.  1037,  who  dishonoured  the 
ambassadors  of  David  (2  Sam.  x.  4),  and  involved 
the  Ammonites  in  a  disastrous  war  (2  Sam.  xii. 
31  ;  1  Chr.  xix.  6).  [W.  T.  B.] 

2.  A  man  who,  with  the  people  of  Zanoah,  re- 
paired the  ravine-gate  in  the  wall  of  Jerusalem 
(Neh.  iii.  13). 

3.  A  man  specified  as  "  the  6th  son  of  Zalaph," 
who  also  assisted  in  the  repair  of  the  wall,  appa- 
rently on  the  east  side  (Neh.  iii.  30). 

HAPHRA'IM  (DnSn,  i.  e.  Chapharaim  ;  'Aylv, 
Alex.  'A(pepaei/x  ;  Hapharairri),  a  city  of  Issachar, 
mentioned  next  to  Shunem  (Josh.  xix.  19).  The 
name  possibly  signifies  "  two  pits."  In  the  Ono- 
masticon  ("  Aphraim")  it  is  spoken  as  still  known 
under  the  name  of  Affarea  (Eus.  'Acppaifx),  and  as 
standing  six  miles  north  of  Legio.  About  that  dis- 
tance north-east  of  Lejjun,  and  two  miles  west  of 
Solam  (the  ancient  Shunem),  stands  the  village  of 

cl-'Afuleh  it&J)u&\),  which  may  be  the  repre- 
sentative of  Chapharaim,  the  guttural  Ain  having 
taken  the  place  of  the  Hebrew  Cheth.  [^-] 

HA'RA  (N"lH  ;  Ara),  which  appears  only  in 
1  Chr.  v.  26,  and  even  there  is  omitted  by  the  LXX., 
is  either  a  place  utterly  unknown,  or  it  must  be 
regarded  as  identical  with  Haran  or  Charian  (pn), 
the  Mesopotamian  city  to  which  Abraham  came 
from  Ur.  The  names  in  Chronicles  often  vary  from 
those  elsewhere  used  in  Scripture,  being  later  forms  ; 
and  Hara  would  nearly  correspond  to  Carrhae, 
which  we  know  from  Strabo  and  Ptolemy  to  have 
been  the  appellation  by  which  Haran  was  known  to  the 
Greeks.  We  may  assume  then  the  author  of  Chro- 
nicles to  mean,  that  a  portion  of  the  Israelites  carried 
off  by  Pul  and  Tiglath-Pileser  were  settled  in  Har- 
ran  on  the  Belik,  while  the  greater  number  were 
conveyed  to  the  Chabour.  (Compare  1  Chr.  v.  26 
with  2  K.  xvii.  6,  xviii.  11,  and  xix.  12;  and  see 
articles  on  Charran  and  Habor.)  [G.  R.] 

HAE'ADAH  (nn"jnn,withthearticle;  Xapa- 
Sdd  ;  Arada),  a  desert  station  of  the  Israelites,  Num. 
xxxiii.  24,  25 ;  its  position  is  uncertain.      [H.  H.] 

HA'RAN.  1.  (pH;  'Appdv ;  Jos.  "Apdv-qs; 
Aran).  The  third  son  of  Terah,and  therefore  youngest 
brother  of  Abram  (Gen.  xi.  26).  Three  children 
are  ascribed  to  him— Lot  (27,  31),  and  two  daugh- 
ters, viz.  Milcah,  who  married  her  tmele  Xnhor  (29), 
and  Iscah  (29),  of  whom  we  merely  possess  her 
name,  though  by  some  (e.  g.  Josephus)  she  is  held 
to  be  identical  with  Sarah.  Haran  was  born  in  Ur 
of  the  Chaldees,  and  he  died  there  while  his  father 


HAEAN 

was  still  living  ('28).  His  sepulchre  was  still  shown 
there  whenJosephus  wrote  his  history  [Ant.  i.  6, §5). 
The  ancient  Jewish  tradition  is  that  Haran  was 
burnt  in  the  furnace  of  Nimrod  for  his  wavering 
conduct  during  the  fiery  trial  of  Abraham.  (See 
the  Targum  Ps.  Jonathan  ;  Jerome's  Quaest.  in 
Genesim,  and  the  notes  thereto  in  the  edit,  of 
Migne.)  This  tradition  seems  to  have  originated 
in  a  translation  of  the  word  Ur,  which  in  Hebrew 
signifies  "  fire."  It  will  be  observed  that  although 
this  name  and  that  of  the  country  appear  the  same 
in  the  A.  V.,  there  is  in  the  original  a  certain  dif- 
ference between  them  ;  the  latter  commencing  with 
the  harsh  guttural  Cheth. 

2.  (Aav,  Alex.  'Apdv ;  Aran).  A  Gershonite 
Levite  in  the  time  of  David,  one  of  the  family  of 
Shimei  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  9).  [G.] 

HA'RAN  (pn  ;  i.  e.  Charan  ;  'Apdfx,  Alex. 
'  Appdv ;  Haran),  a  son  of  the  great  Caleb  by  his 
concubine  Ephah  (1  Chr.  ii.  46).  He  himself  had 
a  son  named  Gazez. 

HA'RAN  (pn  ;   Xappdv ;  Strab.,  Ptol.  Kdp- 

pai  ;  Haran),  is  the  name  of  the  place  whither 
Abraham  migrated  with  his  family  from  Ur  of 
the  Chaldees,  and  where  the  descendants  of  his 
brother  Nahor  established  themselves.  Haran  is 
therefore  called  "  the  city  of  Nahor"  (comp. 
Gen.  .xxiv.  In,  with  xxvii.  4.1).  It  is  said  to  be 
in  Mesopotamia  (Gen.  xxiv.  10),  or  more  defi- 
nitely, in  Padan-Aram  (xxv.  20),  which  is  the 
"  cultivated  district  at  the  foot  of  the  hills"  (Stan- 
ley's S.  4'  P-)  129  note),  a  name  well  applying  to 
the  beautiful  stretch  of  country  which  lies  below 
Mount  Masius  between  the  Khabour  and  the  Eu- 
phrates. [PADAN-ARAM.]  Here,  about  midway 
in  this  district,  is  a  town  still  called  Harrdn, 
which  really  seems  never  to  have  changed  its  ap- 
pellation, and  beyond  any  reasonable  doubt  is  the 
Haran  or  Charran  of  Scripture  (Bochart's  Phaleg, 
i.  14  ;  Ewald's  Geschichte,  i.  384).  It  is  re- 
markable that  the  people  of  Harrdn  retained  to  a 
late  time  the  Chaldaean  language  and  the  worship 
of  Chaldaean  deities  (Asseman.  Bihl.  Ur.  i.  327  ; 
Chwolsohn's  Ssabier  unci  dor  Ssabismus,  ii.  39). 
Harrdn  lies  upon  the  Belilk  (ancient  Bilichus),  a 
small  affluent  of  the  Euphrates,  which  falls  into  it 
nearly  in  long.  39°.  It  was  famous  among  the 
Romans  for  being  near  the  scene  of  the  defeat  of 
( Jrassus  (Plin.  H.  N.  v.  24).  About  the  time  of  the 
Christian  era  it  appears  to  have  been  included  in  the 
kingdom  of  Edessa  (Mos.  Chor.  ii.  32),  which  was 
ruled  by  Agbarus.  Afterwards  it  passed  with  that 
kingdom  under  the  dominion  of  the  Romans,  and 
appears  as  a  Roman  city  in  the  wars  of  Caracalla 
(Mos.  Chor.  ii.  72)  and  Julian  (Jo.  Malal.  p. 
ii-"1 ).  It  is  now  a  small  village  inhabited  by  a  few 
families  of  Arabs. 

In  the  A.  V.  of  the  New  Test,  the  name  follows 
the  Greek  form,  and  is  given  as  CHARRAH  (Acts 
vii.  2,4).  [<;.  R.] 

HARARITE,  THE  (,-Tinn,  peihaps  =  "  the 
mountaineer,"  Ges.  Thes.  392;  de  Aran',  or  Orori, 
Ararites):  the  designation  of  three  men  connected 

with  David's  guard. 

1.  (6  'Apovx<ri»s)  "Agee,  a  Hararite" 
is  no  article  here  in  the  Hebrew),  father  of  Shain- 
mah,  the  third  of  the  three  chiefe  of  the  heroes 


HARETH 


755 


(2  Sam.  xxiii.  11.     In  the  parallel  passage,  1  Chr. 
xi.,  the  name  of  this  warrior  is  entirely  omitted). 

2.  ('Apa>8iTT/s)  "  SHAMMAH  the  Hararite"  is 
named  as  one  of  the  thirty  in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  33.  In 
1  Chr.  xi.  34  the  name  is  altered  to  Shage.  Kenni- 
cott's  conclusion,  from  a  minute  investigation,  is 
that  the  passage  should  stand  in  both,  "Jonathan 
son  of  Shammah  the  Hararite" — Shammah  being 
identical  with  Shimei,  David's  brother. 

3.  (SapooupiTTjs,  5  'Apapi)  "  SlIARAR  (2  Sam. 
xxiii.  33)  or  Sacar  (1  Chr.  xi.  35)  the  Hararite" 
was  the  father  of  Ahiam,  another  member  of  the 
guard.  Kennicott  inclines  to  take  Sacar  as  the 
correct  name. 

HARBO  NA  (Wirin  ;  ®dppa,  Alex.  'Oape- 
fiwd ;  Harbuna),  the  third  of  the  seven  chamber- 
lains, or  eunuchs,  who  served  king  Ahasuerus 
(Esth.  i.  10),  and  who  suggested  Hainan's  being 
hung  on  his  own  gallows  (vii.  9).  In  the  latter 
passage  the  name  is 

HARBO'NAH  (ilftrin  ;  Bovyaddv  ;  Har- 
bona). 

HARE  (j"G:nN  ;  b~a<rvirovs  ;  lepus).  The  hare 
is  reckoned  among  the  unclean  animals  (Lev.  xi. 
6  ;  Dent.  xiv.  7),  on  the  ground  that  it  chews  the 
cud.  But  ruminating  animals  have  tour  stomachs, 
molar  teeth,  and  a  peculiarly  formed  jaw-bone 
adapted  for  the  circular  movement  of  chewing  the 
cud.  The  hare  possesses  none  of  these  characteristics  ; 
and  on  the  other  hand  it  has  incisor  teeth  in  its 
upper  jaw,  which  the  ruminant  class  has  not. 
The  mistake  arose  from  a  peculiar  movement  of  the 
mouth  in  the  hare,  not  unlike  that  of  an  animal 
chewing  the  cud.  Hares  abound  in  Syria,  Arabia, 
and  Egypt :  a  difference  of  opinion  has  in  all  ages 
existed  "as  to  the  value  of  the  hare  as  an  article  of 
food :  the  Greeks  and  Romans  ate  it,  in  spite  of  an 
opinion  that  prevailed  that  it  was  not  very  whole- 
some ;  so  also  do  the  modern  Arabs  (Russell, 
Aleppo,  ii.  20).  The  Turks  and  Armenians,  on 
the  other  hand,  and  particularly  the  Parsees,  abomi- 
nate it.  The  term  amebeth  probably  includes  the 
rabbit  as  well  as  the  hare.  [W.  L.  B.] 

HAREM.     [House.] 

HA'REPH^enri:  yApifx,  Alex.'Apet;  Hariph), 
a  name  occurring  in  the  genealogies  of  Judah,  as  a 
son  of  Caleb,  and  as  '•  father  ofBeth-gader"  ( 1  I  !hr. 
ii.  51,  only).  In  the  lists  of  Ezr.  ii.  and  Neb.  vii. 
the  similar  name  Hariph  is  found  ;  but  nothing 
appears  to  establish  a  connexion  between  the  two. 

HA'RETH,  THE  FOREST  OF  (rnn  TgJ ; 
ec  irdAei"  in  both  MSS.— reading  TJJ  for  "1JT— 
SapiK,  Alex.  'AptdO ;  in  saltum  Haret),  in  which 
David  took  refuge,  after,  at  the  instigation  of  the 
prophet  Cad,  he  had  quitted  the  "  hold  "  or  fast- 
ness of  the  cave  of  Adullam — if  indeed  it  was 
Adullam  and  not  Mizpeh  of  Woab,  which  is  not 
cpiite  clear  (1  Sam.  xxii.  5).  Nothing  appears  in 
the  narrative  by  which  the  position  of  this  forest, 
which  has  long  since  disappeared,  can  be  ascertained, 
except  the  very  general  remark  that  it  was  in  the 
•■  land  of  Judah,"  i.  e.  according  to  Josephus,  the 
inheiitance  proper  of  that  tribe,  tV  xAvpouxiau 
TTjs  <f>uA.f)y,  as  opposed  to  the  "  desert,"  rijy 
ipriniav,  in  which  lie  had  before  been  lurking  l  Ant. 
vi.  12,  §4).     We  might  take  it  to  be  the  "  w 1  " 

The  same  reading  is  found  in  Josephus  1 .1"'.  vi.    alone  in  which  the  reading  of  Josephus  departs  from 
12,  4).     This  is  one  of  three  instances  in  this  chapter     the  Hebrew  text,  and  agrees  With  the  I.\X. 


756 


HARHAIAH 


iu  the  "  wilderness  of  Ziph  "  in  which  he  was 
subsequently  hidden  (xxiii.  1  .">,  19),  but  that  the 
Hebrew  term  is  different  (choresh  instead  of  year). 
In  the  Onomasticon,  "  Arith"  is  said  to  have  then 
existed  west  of  Jerusalem. 

HAEHAIAH  (iTrpn  ;  'ApaXaios  ;  Araia). 
Uzziel  son  of  Charhaiah,  of  the  goldsmiths,  assisted 
in  the  l  epair  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  under  Nehe- 
miah  (Neh.  iii.  8). 

HAlfHAS  (DITin  ;  'Apds;  Arms),  an  ancestor 
of  Shallum  the  husband  of  Huldah,  the  prophetess 
iu  the  time  of  Josiah  (2  K.  xxii.  14).  In  the 
parallel  passage  in  Chronicles  the  name  is  given  as 
Hasraii. 

■  HAR'HUR  p-irnn ;  'Apoip ;  Harhur).    Bene- 

Charchur  were  among  the  Nethinim  who  returned 
from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  51;  Neh. 
vii.  53).  In  the  Apocryphal  Esdras  the  name  has 
become  Assur,  Pharacim. 

HA'RIM  (Q"in).  1.  (Xaplp,  Alex.  Xap-fin  ; 
Harira),  a  priest  who  had  charge  of  the  third  divi- 
sion in  the  house  of  God  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  8). 

2.  ('Upe/j.;  Alex,' Hpdfji)  Bene-Harim,  probably 
descendants  of  the  above,  to  the  number  of  1017, 
came  up  from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii. 
39;  Neh.  vii.  42).  [Carme.]  The  name,  probably 
as  representing  the  family,  is  mentioned  amongst 
those  who  sealed  the  covenant  with  Nehemiah 
(Neh.  x.  5);  and  amongst  the  priests  who  had  to 
put  away  their  foreign  wives  were  rive  of  the  sons  of 
Harim  (Ezr.  x.  21).  In  the  parallel  to  this  latter 
passage  in  Esdras  the  name  is  given  Annas. 

3.  ('Ape'.)  It  further  occurs  in  a  list  of  the  fami- 
lies of  priests  "  who  went  up  with  Zerubbabel  and 
Jesh.ua,"  and  of  those  who  were  their  descendants 
in  the  next  generation — in  the  days  of  Joiakim  the 
son  of  Jeshua  (Neh.  xii.  15).  In  the  former  list 
(xii.  4)  the  name  is  changed  to  Rehum  (Din  to 
Dni)  by  a  not  unfrequent  transposition  of  letters. 
[Rehum.] 

4.  Another  family  of  Bene-Harim,  three  hun- 
dred and  twenty  in  number,  came  from  the  cap- 
tivity in  the  same  caravan  (Ezr.  ii.  32  ;  Neh.  vii. 
35).  These  were  laymen,  and  seem  to  have  taken 
their  name  from  a  place,  at  least  the  contiguous 
names  in  the  list  are  certainly  those  of  places. 
These  also  appear  among  those  who  had  married 
foreign  wives  (Ezr.  x.  31),  as  well  as  those  who 
sealed  the  covenant  (Neh.  x.  27).  [Eanes.] 

HA'RIPH(?|in;  'Ap.'^Alex.'ApeiV;  Hareph), 
a  hundred  and  twelve  of  the  Bene-Chariph  returned 
from  the  captivity  with  Zerubbabel  (Neh.  vii.  24). 
The  name  occurs  again  among  the  "  heads  of  the 
people"  who  sealed  the  covenant  (x.  19).  In  the 
lists  of  Ezra  and  Esdras,  Hariph  appears  as  Jorah 
and  Azephuritii  respectively.  An  almost  iden- 
tical name,  Hareph,  appears  in  the  lists  of  Judah 
as  the  father  pf  Bethgader  [comp.  Haruphite]. 

HARLOT  (nj'lT,  often  with  nftt,  'T133, 
n^'lp).     That  this  condition  of  persons  existed  in 


a  Deyling,  Obscrv.  Saci:  ii.  470,  N^pUS.  i.  e. 
nai'SoKevTpia. 

b  Philo  (lib.  de  spec,  ler/ib.  6,  7)  contends  that 
whoredom  was  punished  under  the  Mosaic  law  with 
stoning  ;  but  this  is  by  Selden  (de  XJx.  Heb.  iii.  18) 
shown  to  be  unfounded. 

c  So  at  Corinth  were  1000  iepoSov\oi  dedicated  to 


HARLOT 

the  earliest  states  of  society  is  clear  from  Gen. 
xxxviii.  15.  So  Rahab  (Josh.  ii.  1),  who  is  said  by 
the  Chaldee  paraph,  (ad  foe),  to  have  been  an  in- 
keeper,"  but  if  there  were  such  persons,  considering 
what  we  know  of  Canaanitish  morals  (Lev.  xviii. 
27),  we  may  conclude  that  they  would,  if  women, 
have  been  of  th's  class.  The  law  forbids  (xix.  29) 
the  father's  compelling  his  daughter  to  sin,  but  does 
not  mention  it  as  a  voluntary  mode  of  life  on  her 
part  without  his  complicity.  It  could  indeed  hardly 
be  so.  The  isolated  act  which  is  the  subject  of 
Deut.  xxii.  28,  .29,  is  not  to  the  purpose.  Male 
relatives b  were  probably  allowed  a  practically  un- 
limited discretion  in  punishing  family  dishonour 
incurred  by  their  women's  unchastity  (Gen.  xxxviii. 
24).  The  provision  of  Lev.  xxi.  9,  regarding  the 
priest's  daughter,  may  have  arisen  from  the  fact  of 
his  home  being  less  guarded  owing  to  his  absence 
when  ministering,  as  well  as  from  the  scandal  to 
sanctity  so  involved.  Perhaps  such  abominations 
might,  if  not  thus  severely  marked,  lead  the  way 
to  the  excesses  of  Gentile  ritualistic  fornication,  to 
which  indeed,  when  so  near  the  sanctuary,  they 
might  be  viewed  as  approximating  (Michaelis,  Laws 
of  Moses,  art.  268).  Yet  it  seems  to  be  assumed 
that  the  harlot  class  would  exist,  and  the  prohibi- 
tion of  Deut.  xxiii.  18,  forbidding  offerings  from 
the  wages  of  such  sin,  is  perhaps  due  to  the  conta- 
gion of  heathen  example,  in  whose  worship  prac- 
tices abounded  which  the  Israelites  were  taught  to 
abhor.  The  term  1CHJ?  (meaning  properly  "con- 
secrated") points  to  one  description  of  persons, 
and  that  n*133  ("  strange  woman")  to  another,  of 
whom  this  class  mostly  consisted.  The  first  term 
refers  to  the  impure  worship  of  the  Syrian c  Astarte 
(Num.  xxv.  1  ;  comp.  Herod,  i.  199  ;  Justin,  xviii. 
5  ;  Strabo  viii.  378,  xii.  559  ;  Val.  Max.  ii.  6,  15; 
August,  de  Civ.  Dei,  iv.  4),  whose  votaiies,  as 
idolatry  progressed,  would  be  recruited  from  the 
daughters  of  Israel;  hence  the  common  mention  of 
both  these  sins  in  the  Prophets,  the  one  indeed  being  a 
metaphor  of  the  other  (Is.  i.  21,  lvii.  8  ;  Jer.  ii.  20  ; 
comp.  Ex.  xxxiv.  15,  16  ;  Jer.  iii.  1,  2,  6  ;  Ez.  xvi. 
xxiii.;  Hos.  i.  2,  ii.  4,  5,  iv.  11,  13,  14,  15,  v.  3). 
The  latter  class  would  grow  up  with  the  growth  of 
great  cities  and  of  foreign  intercourse,  and  hardly 
could  enter  into  the  view  of  the  Mosaic  institutes. 
As  regards  the  fashions  involved  in  the  practice, 
similar  outward  marks  seem  to  have  attended  its 
earliest  forms  to  those  which  we  trace  in  the  clas- 
sical writers,  e.  g.  a  distinctive  dress  and  a  seat  by 
the  way  side  (fieri,  xxxviii.  14;  comp.  Ez.  xvi.  16, 
25  ;  Bar.  vi.  43  ;d  Petron.  Arb.  Sat.  xvi. ;  Juv. 
vi.  118  foil.  ;  Dougtaei,  Analect.  Sacr.  Exc.  xxiv.). 
Public  singing  in  the  streets  occurs  also  (Is.  xxiii. 
1 6  ;  Ecclus.  ix.  4).  Those  who  thus  published  their 
infamy  were  of  the  worst  repute,  others  had 
houses  of  resoit,  and  both  classes  seem  to  have 
been  known  among  the  Jews  (Prov.  vii.  8-12, 
xxiii.  28;  Ecclus.  ix.  7,  8)  ;  the  two  women,  1  K. 
iii.  16,  lived  as  Greek  hetaerae  sometimes  did  in 
a  house  together  (Diet.  Gr.  and  Bom.  Ant.  s.  v. 
HETAERA).  The  baneful  fascination  ascribed  to 
them  in  Prov.  vii.  21-23,  may  be  compared  with 


Aphrodite  and  the  gross  sins  of  her  worship,   and 
similarly  at  Comana,  in  Armenia  (Strabo,  11.  c). 

d  Autcu  al  -yvraixes  £k  rqs  bSoii  tous  7rapi'oi'Tas 
iiwapwdfrvo-i  (Theophr.  Char.  xxxi.).  So  Catullus 
(Carm.  xxxvii.  16)  speaks  conversely  of  semitarios 
mocchos. 


HARNEPHER 

what  Chardin  says  of  similar  effects  among  the 
young  nobility  of  Persia  (  Voyages  en  Perse,  i.  163, 
ed.  171 1),  as  also  may  Luke  xv.  30,  for  the  sums 
lavished  ou  them  (ib.  162).  In  earlier  times  the 
price  of  a  kid  is  mentioned  ( Gen.  xxxviii.),  and  great 
wealth  doubtless  sometimes  accrued  to  them  (Ez. 
xvi.  33,  39,  xxiii.  26).  But  Lust,  as  distinct  from 
gain,  appears  as  the  inducement,  in  Prov.  vii.  14, 
15  (see  Dougtaei  Anal.  Sacr.  ad  foe),  where  the 
victim  is  further  allured  by  a  promised  sacrificial 
banquet  (cocap.  Ter.  Eun.  iii.  •"> ).  The  "  harlots"  are 
classed  with  "  publicans,"  as  those  who  lay  under 
the  ban  of  society  in  the  X.  T.  (Matt.  xxi.  32). 
No  doubt  they  multiplied  with  the  increase  of  poly- 
gamy, and  consequently  lowered  the  estimate  of  mar- 
riage'. The  corrupt  practices  imported  by  Gentile 
converts  into  the  Church  occasion  most  of  the  other 
passages  in  which  allusions  to  the  subject  there 
occur,  1  Cor.  v.  1,  9,  11  :  2  Cor.  xii.  21 ;  1  Thess. 
iv.  3  ;  1  Tim.  i.  10.  The  decree,  Acts  xv.  29,  has 
occasioned  doubts  as  to  the  meaning  of  iropveia 
there,  chiefly  from  its  context,  which  may  be  seen 
discussed  at  length  in  Deyling's  Observ.  Sacr.  ii. 
47ii,  foil.;  Schoettgen,  Hbr.  Hebr.  i.  468  ;  Spencer 
and  Hammond,  ad  loc.  The  simplest  sense  however 
seems  the  most  probable.  The  children  of  such 
persons  were  held  in  contempt,  and  could  not 
exercise  privileges  nor  inherit  (John  viii.  41  ;  Deut. 
xxiii.  2;  Judg.  xi.  1,  2).  On  the  general  subject 
Michaelis'  Laws  of  Moses,  bk.  v.  Art.  268;  Sei- 
dell, de  Ux..Hab.  i.  16,  iii.  12,  and  de  Jur. 
Natur.  v.  4,  together  with  Schoettgen,  and  the  au- 
thorities there  quoted,  may  be  consulted.    [H.  H.] 

The  words  -"IVni  lTUfni,  A.  V.  "  and  they 
washed  his  armour"  (1  K.  xxii.  38)  should  be 
"  and  the  harlots  washed,"  which  is  not  only  the 
natural  rendering,  but  in  accordance  with  the  LXX. 
and  Josepbus. 

HARXEPHER  OQrin  ;  ' 'Apucupdp  ;  Har- 
napker),  one  of  the  sous  of  Zophah,  of  the  tribe  of 
Asher  (1  Chr.  vii.  36). 

HAROD..  THE  WELL  OF  (ace.  "the  spring 
of  Charod,"  Tin  j^J?  ;  717777;  'Apa5,  Alex,  rijv  yi)v 
Faep;  fons  qui  vocatwr  Harod),  a  spring  by  (pV) 
which  Gideon  and  ] lis.  great  army  encamped  on 
the  morning  of  the  day  which  ended  in  the  rout 
of  the  Midianites  (Judg.  vii.  1),  and  where  the 
trial  of  the  people  by  their  mode  of  drinking 
apparently  took  place.  The  word,  slightly  altered, 
recurs  in  the  proclamation  to  the  host  — "  Who- 
soever is  fearful  and  trembling  (Tin,  clutred)  let 
him  return"  (ver.  3):  but  it  is  impossible  to 
decide  whether  the  name  Charod  was,  as  Prof. 
Stanley  proposes,  bestowed  on  accouni  of  the  trem- 
bling, or  whether  the  mention  of  the  trembling  was 
suggested  by  the  previously  existing  name  of  the 
fountain:  either  would  suit  the  paronomastic  vein 
in  which  these  ancient  records  so  delight.  The 
word  chared  (A.  V.  "was  afraid")  recurs  in  the 
description  of  another  event  which  took  place  in  this 

aeighbourh 1,  possibly  at  this  very  spot — Saul's 

last  encounter  with  the  Philistines — when  be  "  was 
afraid,  and  his  heart  trembled  greatly,"  at  the  sight 
of   their    fierce    hosts   (1    Sam.  xwiii.  5).      Tie'   4«1 

Jalud,  with  which   Prof.  Stanley  would   identify 

Ilarod  (J3.  S[  I'.',  is  very  suitable  to  the  cir- 
cumstances, :is  being   at    present   the   largest    spring 

in   the   neighbourhood,   and   as    forming   a    ] 1    of 

considerable  size,  at  which  great  numbers  might 
drink    (Rob.    ii.    323).      But    if   at    that    time    go 


HAROSHETII 


757 


copious,  would  it  not  have  been  seized  by  the 
Midianites  before  Gideon's  arrival?  However,  it' 
the  Ain  Jalud  be  not  this  spring,  we  are  very 
much  in  the  dark,  since  the  "  hill  of  Moreb,"  the 
only  landmark  afforded  us  (vii.  1),  has  not  been 
recognised.  The  only  hill  of  Moreh  of  which  we 
have  any  certain  knowledge  was  by  Shechem,  -'< 
miles  to  the  south.  If  Ain  Jalud  be  Harod,  then 
Jebel  Duhi/  must  be  Moreh. 

It  is  quite  possible  that  the  name  Jalud  is  a 
corruption  of  Harod.  In  that  case  it  is  a  good 
example  of  the  manner  in  which  local  names  acqujre 
a  new  meaning  in  passing  from  one  language  to 
another.  Harod  itself  probably  underwent  a  similar 
process  after  the  arrival  of  the  Hebrews  in  Canaan, 
and  the  paronomastic  turn  given  to  Gideon's  speech, 
as  above,  may  be  an  indication  of  the  change.    [G.] 

HARODITE,  THE  (Winn  ;  b  'Pov5a?os, 
Alex.  'ApouScuos  ;  de  Harodi),  the  designation  of 
two  of  the  thirty-seven  warriors  of  David's  guard, 
SHAMMAH  and  Elika  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  25),  doubt- 
less derived  from  a  place  named  Harod,  either  that 
just  spoken  of  or  some  other.  In  the  parallel  pas- 
sage of  Chronicles  by  a  change  of  letter  the  name 
appears  as  HaroRITE. 

HARO'EH(n$On,  i.e.  ha-Roeh  =  "  the  seer ;" 
'Apaa),  a  name  occurring  in  the  genealogical  lists 
of  Judah  as  one  of  the  sons  of  "  Shobal,  father  of 
Kirjath-jearim  "  ( 1  Chr.  ii.  52).  The  Vulg.  translates 
this  and  the  following  words,  qui  videbat  <liiiii>liiiii> 
requietionum.  A  somewhat  similar  name — Ukaiaii 
— is  given  in  iv.  2  as  the  son  of  Shobal,  but  there 
is  nothing  to  establish  the  identity  of  the  two. 

HARORITE,  THE  (niinn  ;  o  'Apo.pi', 
Alex.  0a5i ;  Arorites),  the  title  given  to  Sham- 
moth,  one  of  the  warriors  of  David's  guard  (1  Chr. 
xi.  27).  We  have  here  an  example  of  the  minute 
discrepancies  which  exist  between  these  two  parallel 
lists.  In  this  case  it  appears  to  have  arisen  from  an 
exchange  of  1,  D,  for  "I,  R,  and  that  at  a  very 
early  date,  since  the  LXX.  is  in  agreement  with 
the  present  Hebrew  text.  But  there  are  other 
differences,  for  which  see  SHAMMAH. 

HARO'SHETII  I TlChn,  Charosheth,' Kpiff&B; 

JIaroseth),  or  rather  "  Harosheth  of  the  Gentiles," 
as  it  was  called  (probably  for  the  same  reason  that 
Galilee  was  afterwards),  from  tin'  mixed  races  that 
inhabited  it,  a  city  in  the  north  of  the  land  of  Canaan, 
supposed  to  have  stood  on  the  west  coast  of  the  lake 
Merom  [el-HuleK),  from  which  the  Jordan  issues 
forth  in  one  unbroken  stream,  and  in  the  portion  of 
the  tribe  ofNaphtali.  It  was  the  residence  of  Sisera, 
captain  of  Jabin,  king  of  Canaan  (Judg.  iv.  '_'  , 
whose  capital,  Hazor,  one  of  the  fenced  cities  assigned 
to  the  children  ofNaphtali  (Josh.  six.  36),  lay  to 
the  north-west  of  it  ;  and  it  was  the  point  to  which 
the  victorious  Israelites  under  Barak  pursued  the 
discomfited  host  and  chariots  of  the  second  potentate 
of  that  name  (Judg.  iv.  16).  Probably  from  in- 
terman  ia'_re    with    the    conquered    ( 'anaanites,    the 

name  of  Si-era  became  afterwards  a  family  name 
i ■  l-'./.r.  ii.  53).  Neither  is  it  irrelevant  to  allude 
to  this  coincidence  in  connexion  with  the  moral 
effects  ot'  this  decisive  victory;  for  Efazor,  once 
"the  head  of  all  those  kingdoms"  (Josh.  xi.  6,  10), 

had    1 n    taken    and    burnt    by   Joshua  ;    its    king, 

Jabin  I.,  put  to  the  sword;  and  the  wholi 

a  of  the  Canaanites  of  the  north  broken  and 
slaughtered  in  the'  celebrated  battle'  ot'  the  waters  of 


758 


HARP 


Merom  (Josh.  xi.  5-14) — the  first  time  that  "  cha- 
riots and  horses  "  appear  in  array  against  the  in- 
vading host,  and  are  so  summarily  disposed  of, 
according  to  Divine  command,  under  Joshua ;  but 
which  subsequently  the  children  of  Joseph  feared  to 
face  in  the  valley  of  Jezreel  (Josh.  xvii.  16-18)  ; 
and  which  Judah  actually  failed  before  in  the  Phi- 
listine plain  (Judg.  i.  19).  Herein  was  the  great 
difficulty  of  subduing  plains,  similar  to  that  of  the 
Jordan,  beside  which  Harosheth  stood.  It  was  not 
till  the  Israelites  had  asked  for  and  obtained  a  king, 
that  they  began  "  to  multiply  chariots  and  horses  " 
to  themselves,  contrary  to  the  express  words  of  the 
law  (Deut.  xvii.  16),  as  it  were  to  fight  the  enemy 
with  his  own  weapons.  (The  first  instance  occurs 
2  Sam.  viii.  4,  conrp.  1  Chr.  xviii.  4  ;  next  in  the 
histories  of  Absalom,  2  Sam.  xv.  1,  and  of  Adonijah, 
1  K.  i.  5 ;  while  the  climax  was  reached  under  So- 
lomon, 1  K.  iv.  26.)  And  then  it  was  that  their 
decadence  set  in !  They  were  strong  in  faith,  when 
they  hamstrung  the  horses,  and  burned  the  chariots 
with  fire,  of  the  kings  of  Hazor,  of  Madon,  of  Shim- 
ron,  and  of  Achshaph  (Josh.  xi.  1).  And  yet  so 
rapidly  did  they  decline  when  their  illustrious  leader 
was  no  more,  that  the  city  of  Hazor  had  risen  from 
its  ruins ;  and  in  contrast  to  the  kings  of  Meso- 
potamia and  of  Moab  (Judg.  hi.),  who  were  both 
of  them  foreign  potentates,  another  Jabin,  the  ter- 
ritory of  whose  ancestors  had  been  assigned  to  the 
tribe  of  Xaphtali,  claimed  the  distinction  of  being 
the  first  to  revolt  against  and  shake  off  the  dominion 
of  Israel  in  his  newly  acquired  inheritance.  But  the 
victory  won  by  Deborah  and  Barak  was  well  worthy 
of  the  song  of  triumph  which  it  inspired  (Judg.  v.), 
and  of  the  proverbial  celebrity  which  ever  after- 
wards attached  to  it  (Ps.  lxxxiii.  9-10).  The  whole 
territory  was  gradually  won  back,  to  be  held  per- 
manently, as  it  would  seem  (Judg.  iv.  24)  ;  at  all 
events  we  hear  nothing  more  of  Hazor,  Harosheth, 
or  the  Canaanites  of  the  north,  in  the  succeeding  wars. 
The  site  of  Harosheth  does  not  appear  to  have  been 
identified  by  any  modern  traveller.  [E.  S.  Ff.] 

HAEP  ("1133  ;  Kinnor),  in  Greek  Kivvvpa,  or 
Kivvpa,  from  the  Hebrew  word,  the  sound  of  which 
corresponds  with  the  thing  signified,  like  the  German 
Kharren,"to  produce  a  shrill  tone"  (Liddell  aud 
Scott).  Gesenius  inclines  to  the  opinion  that  "1133  is 
derived  from  "133,  "  an  unused  onomatopoetic  root 
which  means  to  give  forth  a  tremulous  and  stridu- 
lous  sound,  like  that  of  a  string  when  touched  ". 
The  kinnor  was  the  national  instrument  of  the 
Hebrews,  and  was  well  known  throughout  Asia. 
There  can  be  little  doubt  that  it  was  the  earliest 
instrument  with  which  man  was  acquainted,  as 
the  writer  of  the  Pentateuch  assigns  its  invention, 
together  with  that  of  the  3311?,  Uyab,  incorrectly 
translated  "organ"  in  the  A.  V.,  to  the  antediluvian 
period  (Gen.  iv.  21).  Dr.  Kalisch  {Hist,  and  Crit. 
Com.  on  the  Old  Test.)  considers  Kinnor  to  stand  for 
the  whole  class  of  stringed  instruments  (NeginotK), 
as  Ugab,  says  he,  "  is  the  type  of  all  wind  instru- 
ments." Writers  who  connect  the  Kivvpa  with 
Kivvp6s  (wailing).  Kivvpofiai  (I  lament),  conjec- 
ture that  this  instrument  was  only  employed  by 
the  Greeks  on  occasions  of  sorrow  and  distress.  If 
this  were  the  case  with  the  Greeks  it  was  far  dif- 
ferent with  the  Hebrews,  amongst  whom  the  kinnor 
served  as  an  accompaniment  to  songs  of  cheerful- 
ness and  miith  a»  well  as  of  praise  and  thanks- 
giving   to    the    Supreme    Being    (Gen.    xxxi.   'J 7  ; 


HARROW 

1  Sam.  xvi.  23;  2  Chr.  xx.  28;  Ps.  xxxiii.  2), 
and  was  very  rarely  used,  if  ever,  in  times  of  pri- 
vate or  national  affliction.  The  Jewish  bard  finds 
no  employment  for  the  kinnor  during  the  Baby- 
lonian captivity,  but  describes  it  as  put  aside  or 
suspended  on  the  willows  (Ps.  exxxvii.  2)  ;  and  in 
like  ■  manner  Job's  harp  "  is  changed  into  mourn- 
ing" (xxx.  31)  whilst  the  hand  of  grief  pressed 
heavily  upon  him.  The  passage  "  my  bowels  shall 
sound  like  a  harp  for  Moab  "  (Is.  xvi.  11)  has  im- 
pressed some  biblical  critics  with  the  idea  that  the 
kinnor  had  a  lugubrious  sound  ;  but  this  is  an 
error,  since  IDiT  "11333  refers  to  the  vibration  of 
the  chords  and  not  to  the  sound  of  the  instrument 
(Gesen.  and  Hitzig,  in  Comment.). 

Touching  the  shape  of  the  kinnor  a  great  dif- 
ference of  opinion  prevails.  The  author  of  Shilte 
Haggibborim  describes  it  as  resembling  the  modern 
harp ;  Pfeifter  gives  it  the  form  of  a  guitar  ;  and 
St.  Jerome  declares  it  to  have  resembled  in  shape 
the  Greek  letter  delta  ;  and  this  last  view  is  sup- 
ported by  Hieronymus,  quoted  by  Joel  Brill  in  the 
preface  to  Mendelssohn's  Psalms.  Josephus  records 
{Antiq.  vii.  12,  §3)  that  the  kinnor  had  ten  strings, 
and  that  it  was  played  on  with  the  plectrum  ;  others 
assign  to  it  twenty-four,  and  in  the  Shilte  Haggib- 
borim it  is  said  to  have  had  forty-seven.  Josephus's 
statement,  however,  ought  not  to  be  received  as  con- 
clusive, as  it  is  in  open  contradiction  to  what  is  set 
forth  in  the  1st  book  of  Samuel  (xvi.  23,  xviii.  10), 
that  David  played  on  the  kinnor  with  h\sha?id.  As 
it  is  reasonable  to  suppose  that  there  was  a  smaller 
and  a  larger  kinnor,  inasmuch  as  it  was  sometimes 
played  by  the  Israelites  whilst  walking  (1  Sam.  x. 
5),  the  opinion  of  Munk — -'on  jouait  peut-etre  des 
deux  manieres,  suivant  les  dimensions  de  l'instru- 
meut" — is  well  entitled  to  consideration.  The 
Talmud  (Mass.  Be'rachoth)  has  preserved  a  curious 
tradition  to  the  effect  that  over  the  bed  of 
David,  facing  the  north,  a  kinnor  was  suspended, 
and  that  when  at  midnight  the  north  wind 
touched  the  chords  they  vibrated,  and  produced 
musical  sounds. 

The  n^Eirn  by  1133—"  harp  on  the  She- 
minith  "  (1  Chr.  xv.  21) — was  so  called  from  its 
eight  strings.  Many  learned  writers,  including  the 
author  of  Shilte  Haggibborim,  identify  the  word 
"  Sheminith  "  with  the  octave;  but  it  would  in- 
deed be  rash  to  conclude  that  the  ancient  Hebrews 
understood  the  octave  in  the  sense  in  which  it  is 
employed  in  modern  times.  [Sheminith.]  The 
skill  of  the  Jews  on  the  kinnor  appears  to  have 
reached  its  highest  point  of  perfection  in  the  age 
of  David,  the  effect  of  whose  performances,  as  well 
as  of  those  by  the  members  of  the  "  Schools  of  the 
Prophets,"  are  described  as  truly  marvellous  (com  p. 
1  Sam.  x.  5  ;   xvi.  23,  and  xix.  20).     [D.  W.  M.j 

HARROW.  The  word  so  rendered  2  Sam. 
xii.  31 ,  1  Chr.  xx.  3  (p"in),  is  probably  a  thresh- 
ing-machine, the  verb  rendered  "  to  harrow  " 
("lib'),  Is.  xxviii.  24  ;  Job  xxxix.  10;  Hos.  x.  11, 
expresses  apparently  the  breaking  of  the  clods, 
and  is  so  far  analogous  to  our  harrowing,  but 
whether  done  by  any  such  machine  as  we  call 
"a  harrow,"  is  very  doubtful.  In  modern  Pales- 
tine, oxen  are  sometimes  turned  in  to  trample  the 
clods,  and  in  some  parts  of  Asia  a  bush  of  thorns  is 
dragged  over  the  surface,  but  all  these  processes,  if 
used,  occur  (not  after,  but)  before  the  seed  i>  i  om- 
mitted  to  the  soil.  [See  Agriculture.]   [H.  H.] 


HARSHA 
HAE'SHA  (NCnn  ,  'Ap<rd;  ffarsa).  Bene- 
Charsha  were  among  the  families  of  Nethinim  who 
came  back  from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii. 
52  ;  Xeh.  vii.  54).  In  the  parallel  list  in  Esdras 
the  name  is  Charea. 

HART  (P'X  ;  eAcxpos  ;  cervus).  The  hart  is 
reckoned  among  the  clean  animals  (Dent.  xii.  15, 
xiv.  5,  rv.  22),  and  seems,  from  the  passages  quoted 
as  well  as  from  1  K.iv.  2:5,  to  have  been  commonly 
killed  for  food.  Its  activity  furnishes  an  apt  com- 
parison in  Is.  xxxv.  6,  though  in  this  respect  the 
hind  was  more  commonly  selected  by  the  sacred 
writers.  In  Ps.  xlii.  1  the  feminine  termination  of 
the  verb  renders  an  emendation  necessary  :  we  must 
therefore  substitute  the  hind  ;  and  again  in  Lam. 
i.  6  the  true  reading  is  Qv*N,  "  ranis"  (as  given  in 
the  LXX.  and  Vulg.).  The  proper  name  Ajalon  is 
derived  from  ayyal,  and  implies  that  harts  were 
numerous  in  the  neighbourhood.  [\V.  L.  B.] 

HA'RUM  (D"lil ;  'laplv,  Alex,  'lapei/j. ;  Anon). 
A  name  occurring  in  one  of  the  most  obscure  por- 
tions of  the  genealogies  of  Judah,  in  which  Coz  is 
said  to  have  begotten  "  the  families  of  Aharhel  son 
of  Harum"  (1  Chr.  iv.  8). 

HARU'MAPH  (flO-lin;  'Epoofid<p;  Haro- 
iii  i /'Ii),  father  or  ancestor  of  Jedaiah,  who  assisted 
in  the  repair  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  10). 

HARUTHITE,  THE  ("Qlinn  ;  6  Xapai- 
<pir)A,  Alex.  'Apov<pi):  the  designation  of  Shepha- 
tialnt,  one  of  tlie  Korhites  who  repaired  to  David 
at  Ziklag  when  he  was  in  distress  (1  Chr.  xii.  5). 
The  Masorets  read  the  word  Hariphite,  and  point 
it  accordingly,  l|2'l"in. 

HA'RUZ  (f-l-in ;'  'Apods  ;  Harm),  a  man  of 
Jothah,  father  of  Meshullemeth,  queen  of  Manasseh, 
and  mother  of  AMON  king  of  Judah  (2  K.  xxi.  19). 

HARVEST.  [Agriculture.] 
'  HASADI'AH  (rvnpri;  'AffaSia;  Hasadia), 
one  of  a  group  of  five  persons  among  the  descend- 
ants of  the  royal  line  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  iii.  20), 
apparently  sons  of  Zerubbabel,  the  leader  of  the 
return  from  Babylon.  It  has  been  conjectured  that 
this  latter  half  of  the  family  was  born  after  the 
restoration,  since  some  of  the  names,  ami  amongst 
them  this  one — "beloved  of  Jehovah  " — appear  to 
embody  tin'  hopeful  feeling  of  that  time. 

HASENU'AH   (nsODH,    i.e.   has-Sennah ; 

' Aatuov,  Alex. ' Acravova  ;  Asana),  a  Benjamite,  of 
one  of  tie-  chief  families  in  the  tribe  ( 1  ( 'hr.  ix.  7). 
The  name  is  really  Senuah,  with  the  definite  article 
prefixed. 

HASHABIAH  (rP2L';n,  and  with  final  A, 
■liTO^'H  ;  'Avafiias,  'A<re/3i'a;  Hasdbias,  Basebia), 
■a  name  signifying  "  regarded  of  Jehovah,"  much  in 
request  among  the  Levites,  especially  at  the  date 
of  the  return  from  Babylon. 

1.  A  Merarite  Levite,  son  of  Amaziah,  in  the  line 
of  Ethan  the  singer  I  I  Chr.  vi.  45;  heh.  30). 

2.  Another  Merarite  Levite  '1  chr.  ix.  14). 

3.  Chashabiahu:  another  Levite,  the  fourth 
of  the  six  sons  of  Jeduthun  (the  sixth  is  omitted 
here,  but  is  supplied  in  ver.  17).  who  played  the 
harp  in  the    service  of  the  house  of  God   under 

a  This  is  one  of  the  instances  in  which  the  word 
eber  (beyond)  is  used  for  the  west  side  of  Jordan.    To 


HASHABNIAH 


759 


David's  order  (1  Chr.  xxv.  3),  and  had  charge  of 
the  twelfth  course  (19). 

4.  Chashabiahu:  one  of  the  Hehronites, ».  e. 
descendants  of  Hebron  the  son  of  Kohath,  one  of 
the  chief  families  of  the  Levites  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  30). 
He  and  the  1700  men  of  his  kindred  had  super- 
intendence for  lung  David  over  business  both  sacred 
and  secular  on  the  west a  of  Jordan.  Possibly  this 
is  the  same  person  as 

5.  The  son  of  Kemuel,  who  was  "prince"  p£')  of 
the  tribe  of  Levi  in  the  time  of  David  (1  Chr. 
xxvii.  17). 

6.  Chashabiahu  :  another  Levite,  one  of  the 
"chiefs"  ('IB')  of  his  tribe,  who  officiated  for 
King  Josiah  at  his  great  passover-feast  (2  Chr. 
xxxv.  9).  In  the  parallel  account  of  1  Esdras  the 
name  appears  as  ASSABIAS. 

7.  A  Merarite  Levite  who  accompanied  Ezra 
from  Babylon  (Ezr.  viii.  19).  In  1  Esdras  the  name 
is  Asebia.  • 

8.  One  of  the  chiefs  of  the  priests  (and  therefore 
of  the  family  of  Kohath)  who  formed  part  of  the 
same  caravan  (Ezr.  viii.  24).  In  1  Esdras  the  name 
is  Assanias. 

9.  "Ruler"  OtJ>)  of  half  the  circuit  or  environs 
("avS)  of  Keilah;  he  repaired  a  portion  of  the  wall 
of  Jerusalem  under  Nehemiah  (Neh.  iii.  17). 

10.  One  of  the  Levites  who  sealed  the  covenant 
of  reformation  after  the  return  from  the  captivity 
(Neh.  x.  11).  Probably  this  is  the  person  named 
as  one  of  the  "  chiefs "  (*5J*N"1)  of  the  Levites  in 
the  times  immediately  subsequent  to  the  return  from 
Babylon  (xii.  24;   comp.  26). 

11.  Another  Levite,  son  of  Bunni  (Neh.  xi.  15). 
Notwithstanding  the  remarkable  correspondence  be- 
tween the  lists  in  this  chapter  and  those  in  1  Chr. 
ix. — and  in  none  more  than  in  this  verse  compared 
with  1  Chr.  ix.  14 — it  does  not  appear  that  they 
can  be  identical,  inasmuch  as  this  relates  to  the 
times  after  the  captivity,  while  that  in  Chronicles 
refers  to  the  original  establishment  of  the  ark  at 
Jerusalem  by  David,  and  of  the  tabernacle  (comp. 
19,  21.  ami  the  mention  of  Gibeon,  where  the 
tabernacle  was  at  this  time,  in  ver.  35).  But  see 
Nehemiah. 

12.  Another  Levite  in  the  same  list  of  attendants 
on  the  Temple;  son  of  Mattaniab  (Xeh.  xi.  22). 

13.  A  priest  of  the  family  of  Hilkiah  in  the 
days  of  Joiakim  son  of  Jeshua,  that  is  in  the  gene- 
ration after  the  return  from  the  captivity  (  Neh.  xii. 
21  ;    com]..   1,  10,  26  I. 

HASHAB'NAH  (rmt|:n  ;  'Kffffa&avi  ;  fife 
sebna ),  one  of  the  chief  ( "  heads ")  of  the  "  people  " 
(».  e.  the  laymen)  who  sealed  the  covenant  at  the 

same  time  with  Xehemiah  (Xeh.  x.  25). 

IIASIIAPATAII  rVjni-'TI  ;  'Atra/Saix'a,  Alex. 
' AafSavia  :  Basebonia,  8a  ■  '<•><"  .  1.  father  of 
llattush.  who  repaired  pari  of  the  wall  of  Jeru- 
salem (  Xeh.  iii.  10). 

2.  A  Levite  who  was  among  those  who  officiated 

at  the   great    fhsl    under   Ezra   and    Xehemiah   when 

the  covenant  was  sealed  (Xeh.  be.  5).     This  and 

several  other  names  are  omitted  in  both  MSS.  of 

the   LXX. 


remove  the  anomaly,  our  translators  have  rendered  it 

"  on  this  side.'' 


7G0 


HASHBADANA 


HASHBADA'NA  (rm2irn ;  'AtraPafifaL  ; 
Hasbadana),  one  of  the  men  (probably  Levites) 
who  stood  on  Ezra's  left  hand  while  he  read  the 
law  to  the  people  in  Jerusalem  (Neh.  viii.  4). 

HA'SHEM  (D^n  ;  'Atra/i ;  Asom).  The  sons 
of  Hashem  the  Gizonite  are  named  amongst  the 
members  of  David's  guard  in  the  catalogue  of 
1  Chr.  (xi.  34.)  In  the  parallel  list  of  2  Sam. 
xxiii.  we  find  "  of  the  suns  of  Jashen,  Jonathan." 
After  a  lengthened  examination,  Kennicott  decides 
that  the  text  of  both  passages  originally  stood  "  of  the 
sons  of  Hashem,  Guni"  [Dissertation,  198-203). 

HASHMAN'NIM  (D»3»B>n  ;  npta^Ls  ;  le- 
gati).  This  word  occurs  only  in  the  Hebrew  of 
Ps.  lxviii.  31  :  "  Hashmannim  (A.  V.  "princes") 
shall  come  out  of  Egypt,  Cush  shall  make  her  hands 
to  hasten  to  God."  In  order  to  render  this  word 
"  princes,"  or  the  like,  modern  Hebraists  have  had 
recourse  to  extremely  improbable  derivations  from 
the  Arabic.  The  old  derivation  from  the  civil 
name  of  Hermopolis  Magna  in  the  Heptanomis,  pre- 


served in  the  modern  Arabic      o^^,}, 


the  two 

Ashmoons,"  seems  to  us  more  reasonable.  The 
ancient  Egyptian  name  is  Ha-shmen,  or  Ha-shmoon, 
the  abode  of  eight ;  the  sound  of  the  signs  for  eight, 
however,  we  take  alone  from  the  Coptic,  and  Brugsch 
reads  them  Sesennu  (Geog.  Inschr.  i.  pp.  219, 
220.),  but  not,  as  we  think,  on  conclusive  grounds. 

The  Coptic  form  is  CLIJULO'yn  .&_,  "the  two 
Shmoons,"  like  the  Arabic.  If  we  suppose  that 
Hashmannim  is  a  proper  name  and  signifies  Hermo- 
polites,  the  mention  might  be  explained  by  the 
circumstance  that  Hermopolis  Magna  was  the  great 
city  of  the  Egyptian  Hermes,  Thoth,  the  god  of 
wisdom  ;  and  the  meaning  might  therefore  be  that 
even  the  wisest  Egyptians  should  come  to  the  temple, 
as  well  as  the  distant  Cushites.  [R.  S.  P.] 

HASHMO'NAH  (rmXTl:  SeA^com;  Alex. 
'Acre \/j.cova :  Hesmona),  a  station  of  the  Israelites, 
mentioned  Num.  xxxiii.  29,  as  next  before  Moseroth, 
which,  from  xx.  28  and  Deut.  x.  6,  was  near  Mt. 
Hor  ;  this  tends  to  indicate  the  locality  of  Hash- 
monah.  [H.  H.] 

HA'SHUB  (n-ltrn,  i.e.  Chasshub;  'Acrou/3; 
Asnb).  The  reduplication  of  the  Sh  has  been  over- 
looked in  the  A.  V.,  and  the  name  is  identical  with 
that  elsewhere  correctly  given  as  Hasshub. 

1.  A  son  of  Pahath-Moab  who  assisted  in  the 
repair  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  1 1 ). 

2.  Another  man  who  assisted  in  the  same  work, 
but  at  another  part  of  the  wall  (Neh.  iii.  23). 

3.  The  name  is  mentioned  again  among  the 
heads  of  the  "  people  "  (that  is  the  laymen)  who 
sealed  the  covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  23). 
It  may  belong  to  either  of  the  foregoing. 

4.  "A  Merarite  Levite  (Neh.  xi.  15).  In  1  Chr. 
ix.  14,  he  appears  again  as  Hasshub. 

HASHU'BAH  (nriKTj ;  'Ao-oujSe,  Alex.  'Ak- 
fid;  ffasaba),  the  first  of  a  group  of  five  men, 
apparently  the  latter  half  of  the  family  of  Zerub- 
babel  ( 1  Chr.  iii.  20).  For  a  suggestion  concerning 
these  persons,  see  Hasadiah. 

HA'SHUM  (DKTI;  'Acroi/j.,  'Hardfx;  Ascm). 

1.  Bene-Chashum,  two  bundled  and  twenty-three 
in  number,  came  back  from  Babylon  with  Zerub- 
babel  (Ezr.  ii.  19  ;   Neh.  vii.  22).     Seven    men  of 


HATTUSH 

them  had  married  foreign  wives  from  whom  they 
had  to  separate  (Ezr.  x.  33).  The  chief  man  of  the 
family  was  among  those  who  sealed  the  covenant 
with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  18). 

2.  ('Ao-co/U  ;  Asuiti.')  The  name  occurs  amongst 
the  priests  or  Levites  who  stood  on  Ezra's  left  hand 
while  he  read  the  law  to  the  congregation  (Neh.  viii. 
4).     In  1  Esdr.  ix.  44  the  name  is  given  corruptly 

as  LOTHASUBUS. 

HASHU'PHA  (NE)b»n  ;  'A<r<pd),  one  of  the 
families  of  Nethinim  who  returned  from  captivity 
in  the  first  caravan  (Neh.  vii.  4(3).  The  name  is 
accurately  Hasupiia,  as  in  Ezr.  ii.  43.    [Asipiia.] 

HAS'RAH  (mpn  ;  'Apds,  Alex.  'E<r<rep-h  ; 
Hasra),  the  form  in  which  the  name  Harhas  is 
given  in  2  Chr.  xxxiv.  22  (comp.  2  K.  xxii.  14). 

HASSENA'AH  (HWEin  ;  'Acravd;  Asnaa). 
The  Bene-has-senaah  rebuilt  the  fish-gate  in  the 
repair  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  3).  The 
name  is  doubtless  that  of  the  place  mentioned  in 
Ezr.  ii.  35,  and  Neh.  vii.  38 — Senaah,  with  the 
addition  of  the  definite  article.  Perhaps  it  has 
some  connexion  with  the  rock  or  cliff  Seneh  (1  Sam. 
xiv.  4). 

HASSH'UB  (n-1B>n  ;  'Ao^/3  ;  Assub),  a  Me- 
rarite Levite  (1  Chr.  ix.  14).  He  appears  to  be 
mentioned  again  in  Neh.  xi.  15,  in  what  may  be  a 
repetition  of  the  same  genealogy ;  but  here  the 
A.  V.  have  given  the  name  as  Hasiiub. 

HASU'PHA  (KS-lb'n  ;  'Arovcpd  ;  Hasupha). 
Bene-Chastlpha  were  among  the  Nethinim  who  re- 
turned from  Babylou  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  43). 
In  Nehemiah  the  name  is  inaccurately  given  in  the 
A.  V.  Hashupha  ;  in  Esdras  it  is  Asipiia. 

HA'TACH  i^nn  ;  ,Axpa9a?os,  Alex.  'Axpct- 
0e6s  ;  Athach).  one  of  the  eunuchs  (A.  V.  "  cham- 
berlains"') in  the  court  of  Ahasuerus,  in  immediate 
attendance  on  Esther  (Esth.  iv.  5,  6,  9,  10).  The 
LXX.  alters  ver.  5  to  rbv  tvvovxov  avryjs. 

HATHxYTH  (nnn  ;  'A6d6  ;  ffathat),  a  man 
in  the  genealogy  of  Judah ;  one  of  the  sons  of  Oth- 
niel  the  Kenazite,  the  well-known  judge  of  Israel 
(1  Chr.  iv.  13). 

HAT'IPHA  (KS^ri;  'Arovcpd,  'Arupd;  Ha- 
tipha).  Bene-Chatiplia  were  among  the  Nethinim 
who  returned  from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr. 
ii.  54;   Neh.  vii.  56).     [Atipiia.] 

HAT'ITA  (Nt^pn  ;  'Arird  ;  Ilatita).  Bene- 
Chatita  were  among  the  "porters"  or  "children 
of  the  porters"  (D'HytiTl,  t.  e,  the  gate-keepers), 
a  division  of  the  Levites  who  returned  from  the 
captivity  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  42  ;  Neb.  vii. 
45).     In  Esdras  the  name  is  abbreviated  to  Teta. 

HAT  TIL  (^pn  ;  'A-n'A,  'EtttjA.,  Alex.  'At- 
ti'A  ;  HatU).  Bene-Chattil  were  among  the 
"  children  of  Solomon's  slaves"  who  came  batk 
from  captivity  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  57;  Neh. 
vii.  .V.I).     [Hagia.] 

HAT'TUSH  (B>-1t3n  ;  Xarro.'-y,  'Attovs  ; 
Hattus).  1.  A  descendant  of  the  kings  of  Judah, 
apparently  one  of  the  "  sons  of  Shechaniah  "  ( 1  ( !hr. 
iii.  22),  in  the  fourth  or  fifth  generation  from  Ze- 
rubbabel. A  person  of  the  same  nam.',  expressly 
specified  as  one  of  the  "  sons  of  David  of  the  sons 
of  Shechaniah,"  accompanied  Ezra  on  his  journey 


HAURAft 

from  Babylon  to  Jerusalem  (Ezr.  viii.  2),  whither 
Zerubbabel  himself  had  also  come  only  seventy 
or  eighty  years  before  (Ezr.  ii.  1,2).  Indeed  in 
another  statement  Ilattush  is  said  to  have  actually 
returned  with  Zerubbabel  (Neh.  xii.  2).  At  any 
rate  he  took  part  in  the  sealing  of  the  covenant 
with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  4).  To  obviate  the  dis- 
crepancy between  these  last-mentioned  statements 
and  the  interval  between  Hat  tush  and  Zerubbabel 
in  1  Chr.  iii.,  Lord  A.  Hervey  proposes  to  read  the 
genealogy  in  that  chapter  as  if  lie  were  the  nephew 
of  Zerubbabel,  Shemaiah  in  ver.  22  being  taken  as 
identical  with  Shimei  in  ver.  19.  For  these  pro- 
posals the  reader  is  referied  to  Lord  H.'s  Genealogies, 
103,  307,  322,  &c.     [Lettus;  Sheciianiah.] 

2.  ('Arrovd)  Son  of  Hashabuiah  ;  one  of  those 
who  assisted  Nehemiah  in  the  repair  of  the  wall  of 
Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  10). 

HAURAN  (pin  ;  Avpav7rts  ;  Auran ;  Arab. 
o  -  t:  " 

J  .ys>),  a  province  of  Palestine  twice  mentioned 

by  Ezekiel  in  denning  the  north-eastern  border 
of  the  Promised  Land  (xlvii.  16,  18).  Had  we 
no  other  data  for  determining  its  situation  we 
should  conclude  from  his  words  that  it  lay  north  of 
Damascus.  There  can  be  little  doubt,  however, 
that  it  is  identical  with  the  well-known  Greek  pro- 
vince of  Auranitis,  and  the  modern  Hauran.  The 
name  is  probably  derived  from  the  word  "lin,  Hnr, 
"  a  hole  or  cave  ;"  the  region  still  abounds  in  caves 
which  the  old  inhabitants  excavated  partly  to  serve 
as  cisterns  for  the  collection  of  water,  and  partly 
for  granaries  in  which  to  secure  their  grain  from 
plunderers.  Josephus  frequently  mentions  Aura- 
nitis in  connexion  with  Trachonitis,  Batanaea,  and 
Gaulanitis,  which  with  it  constituted  the  ancient 
kingdom  of  Bashan  (B.  J.  i.  20,  §4  ;  ii.  17,  §4). 
It  formed  part  of  that  TpaxoivlriBos  X"Pa  referred 
to  by  Luke  (iii.  1)  as  subject  to  Philip  the  tetrarch 
(comp.  Joseph.  Ant.  xvii.  11,  §4).  It  is  bounded 
on  the  west  by  Gaulanitis,  on  the  north  by  the 
wild  and  rocky  district  of  Trachonitis,  on  the  east 
by  the  mountainous  region  of  Batanaea,  and  on  the 
south  by  the  great  plain  of  Moab  (Jer.  xlviii.  21). 
The  surface  is  perfectly  flat  and  the  soil  is  among 
the  richest  in  Syria.  Not  a  stone  is  to  be  seen  save 
on  the  few  low  volcanic  tells  that  rise  up  here  and 
there,  like  islands  in  a  sea.  It  contains  upwards  of 
a  hundred  towns  and  villages,  most  of  them  now 
deserted,  though  not  ruined.  The  buildings  in 
many  of  these  are  remarkable,  the  walls  are  of 
great  thickness,  and  the  roofs  and  doors  are  of  stone, 
evidently  of  remote  antiquity  (see  Porter's  Five 
Years  iii  Damascus,  vol.  ii.).  Some  Arab  geogra- 
phers have  described  the  Hauran  as  much  more  ex- 
tensive than  here  stated  (Hohaed.  \  it. Sal.  ed.Schult. 
p.  70;  Abulfed.  Tab.  Syr.s.v.);  and  at  the  pre- 
sent day  the  name  is  applied  by  those  at  a  distance 
to  the  whole  country  east  of  Jauldn;  bul  the  inha- 
bitants themselves  define  it  as  above.     [J.  L.  P.] 

HAVI'LAH  (n^in;  EtuAa,  EueiAa  :  He- 
vila).  1.  A  son  of  Cush  (Gen.  x.  7);  and  2. 
a  son  of  Joktan  (x.  20).  Various  theories  have  been 
advanced  respecting  these  obscure  peoples.  It  appears 
to  be  most  probable  that  both  stocks  settled  in  the 
same  country,  and  there  intermarried  ;  thus  receiving 
one  name,  and  forming  one  race,  with  a  common 
descent.  It  is  immaterial  to  the  argument  to  decide 
whether  in  such  instances  the  settlements  were  con- 
temporaneous, or  whether  new  immigrants  took  the 


HAVILAH 


761 


name  of  the  older  settlers.  In  the  case  of  Havilah, 
it  seems  that  the  Cushite  people  of  this  name  formed 
the  westernmost  colony  ot  Cush  along  the  south  of 
Arabia,  and  that  the  Joktanites  were  an  earlier  colo- 
nization.    It  is  commonly  thought  that  the  district 

-.  (j  - 
of  Khawlan  (     *SL^l\  in  the  Yemen,  preserves 

the  trace  of  this  ancient  people  ;  and  the  similarity 

of  name  ( -^  being  interchangeable  with  n,  and  the 

termination  being  redundant),  and  the  group  of 
Joktanite  names  in  the  Yemen,  render  the  identifi- 
cation probable.  Niebuhr  states  that  there  are 
two  Khawlans  (Peser.  270,  280),  and  it  has  hence 
been  argued  by  some  that  we  have  thus  the  Cushite 
and  the  Joktanite  Havilah.  The  second  Khawlan, 
however,  is  a  town,  and  not  a  large  and  well- 
known  district  like  the  first,  or  more  northern  one  : 
and  the  hypothesis  based  on  Niebuhr's  assertion  is 
unnecessary,  if  the  theory  of  a  double  settlement 
be  adopted.      There  is  also  another  town  in   the 

Yemen  called  Hauidn  (/.w^-^*)- 

The  district  of  Khawlan  lies  between  the  city  of 
San' a  and  the  Hijaz,  i.  e.  in  the  north -western  por- 
tion of  the  Yemen.  It  took  its  name,  according  to 
the  Arabs,  from  Khawlan,  a  descendant  of  Kahtan 
[Joktan]  (Mardsid,  s.  v.),  or,  as  some  say,  of 
Kahlan,  brother  of  Himyer  (Caussin,  Essai,  i.  113, 
and  tab.  ii.).  This  genealogy  says  little  more  than 
that  the  name  was  Joktanite  ;  and  the  difference 
between  Kahtan  and  Kahlan  may  be  neglected, 
both  being  descendants  of  the  first  Joktanite  settler, 
and  the  whole  of  these  early  traditions  pointing  to 
a  Joktanite  settlement,  without  perhaps  a  distinct 
preservation  of  Joktau's  name,  and  certainly  none 
of  a  correct  genealogy  from  him  downwards. 

Khawlan  is  a  fertile  territory,  embracing  a 
large  part  of  myrrhiferous  Arabia ;  mountainous ; 
with  plenty  of  water;  and  supporting  a  large  popu- 
lation. It  is  a  tract  of  Arabia  better  known  to 
both  ancients  and  moderns  than  the  rest  of  the 
Yemen,  and  the  eastern  and  central  provinces.  It 
adjoins  Nejran  (the  district  and  town  of  that  name), 
mentioned  in  the  account  of  the  expedition  of  Aelius 
Gallus,  and  the  scene  of  great  persecutions  of  the 
Christians  by  Dhu-Nuwas,  the  last  of  the  Tubbaas 
before  the  Abyssinian  conquest  of  Arabia,  in  the 
year  523  of  our  era  (cf.  Caussin,  Essai,  i.  121, 
seqq.}.  For  the  Chaulanitae,  see  the  Dictionary  of 
Geography. 

An  argument  against  the  identity  of  Khawlan 
and  Havilah  has  been  found  in  the  mentions  of  :i 
Havilah  on  the  border  of  the  Ishmaelites,  "  as  thou 
goesl  to  Assyria"  (Gen.  xxv.  18),  and  also  on  thai 
of  the  Amah-kites  (1  Sam.  xv.  7).  It  is  not  how- 
ever necessary  that  these  passages  should  refer  to  l 
or  2  :  the  place  named  may  lie  a  town  or  country 
called  after  them  ;  or  it  may  have  some  reference  to 
the  Havilah  named  in  the  description  of  the  rivers 
of  the  garden  of  Eden  ;  and  the  LXX.  render  it,  fol- 
lowing apparent!]  'I"'  Las4  suppositi Eiu'Aar  in 

both  instances,  according  to  their  spelling  of  the 
Havilah  of  Gen.  ii.  11. 

Those  who  separate  the  Cushite  and  Joktanite 
Havilah  either  place  them  in  Niebuhr's  two  Khaw- 
lans (as  already  stated),  or  they  place  2  on  the  north 
of  the  peninsula,  following  the  supposed  argument 
derived  from  Gen.  nrv.  18,  and  1  8am.  xv.  7.  and 
finding  the  name   in   that  of  the  XavXoTcuoi  |  Era- 

3  D 


702 


HAVILAH 


tosth.  ap.  Strabo,  xvi.  767),  between  the  Nabataci 

and  the  Agraei,  and  in  that  of  the  town  of  XXj^, 

on  the  Persian  Gulf  (Niebuhr,  Descr.  342).  A 
Joktanite  settlement  so  far  north  is  however  very 
improbable.  They  discover  1  in  the  Avalitae  on 
the  African  coast  (Ptol.  iv.  7  ;  Arrian,  Peripl.  263, 
ed.  Miiller),  the  modern  name  of  the  shore  of  the 
.sinus  Avalatis  being,  says  Gesenius,  Zeylah  =  Zu- 
weylah  =  Havilah,  and  Saadiah  having  three  times 
in  Gen.  written  Zeylah  for  Havilah.  But  Gesenius 
seems  to  have  overlooked  the  true  orthography  of 
the   name  of  the  modern   country,  which   is   not 

XXj  ",'  hut  «X_,  • ,  with  a  final  letter  very  rarely 
added  to  the  Hebrew.  [E.  S.  P.] 

HAVI'LAH  (Gen.  ii.  1 1).  [Eden,  p.  484.] 
HA'VOTH-JAIK  (1W  Jl-in,  ».  e.  Chavvoth 
Jair  ;  eiravAeis  and  Kc!>/j.ai  'la'ip,  Qavc&d  ;  vicus, 
Avoth  Jair,  viculus  Jair),  certain  villages  on  the 
east  of  Jordan,  in  Gilead  or  Bash'an.  The  word 
Chavvah,  which  occurs  in  the  Bible  in  this  con- 
nexion only,  is  perhaps  best  explained  by  the  similar 
term  in  modern  Arabic,  which  denotes  a  small  col- 
lection of  huts  or  hovels  in  a  country  place  (see 
the  citations  in  Gesenius,  Thes.  451  ;  and  Stanley, 
S.  $  P.  App.  §84). 

(1.)  The  earliest  notice  of  the  Havoth-jair  is  in 
Num.  xxxii.  41,  in  the  account  of  the  settlement 
of  the  Transjordanic  country,  where  Jair,  son  of 
Manasseh,  is  stated  to  have  taken  some  villages 
(A.  V.  "the  small  towns;"  but  there  is  no  article 
in  the  Hebrew)  of  Gilead — which  was  allotted  to 
his  tribe — and  to  have  named  them  after  himself, 
Havvoth-jair.  (2.)  In  Deut.  iii.  14  it  is  said 
that  Jair  "  took  all  the  tract  of  Argob,  unto  the 
boundary  of  the  Geshurite  and  the  Maacathite,  and 
called  them  after  his  own  name,  Bashan-havoth- 
jair."  Here  the  villages  are  referred  to,  but  there 
must  be  a  hiatus  after  the  word  "  Maacathite,"  in 
which  they  weie  mentioned,  or  else  there  is  nothing 
to  justify  the  plural  "  them."  (3.)  In  the  records 
of  Manasseh  in  Josh.  xiii.  30,  and  1  Chr.  ii.  23 
(A.  V.,  in  both  "towns  of  Jair"),  the  Havvoth- 
jair  are  reckoned  with  other  districts  as  making  up 
sixty  "cities"  (D'HJ?).  In  1  K.  iv.  13  they  are 
named  as  part  of  the  commissariat  district  of  Ben- 
geber,  next  in  order  to  the  "  sixty  great  cities"  of 
Argob.  There  is  apparently  some  confusion  in 
these  different  statements  as  to  what  the  sixty  cities 
really  consisted  of,  and  if  the  interpretation  of 
Chavvah  given  above  be  correct,  the  application  of 
the  word  "  city"  to  such  transient  erections  is  re- 
markable and  puzzling.  Perhaps  the  remoteness 
and  inaccessibility  of  the  Transjordanic  district  in 
which  they  lay  may  explain  the  one,  and  our  igno- 
rance of  the  real  force  of  the  Hebrew  word  Ir, 
rendered  "city,"  the  other.  Or  perhaps,  though 
retaining  their  ancient  name,  they  had  changed  their 
original  condition,  and  had  become  more  important, 
as  has  been  the  case  in  our  own  country  with  more 
than  one  place  still  designated  as  a  "hamlet,"  though 
long  since  a  populous  town.  (4.)  No  less  doubtful 
is  the  number  of  the  Havoth-jair.  In  1  Chr.  ii.  22 
they  are  specified  as  twenty-three,  but  in  Judg.  x. 
4,  as  thirty.  In  the  latter  passage,  however,"  the 
allusion  is  to  a  second  Jair,  by  whose  thirty  sons 
they  were  governed,  and  for  whom  the  original  num- 
ber may  have  been  increased.  The  word  D,-VJ? 
"  cities,"  is  perhaps  employed  here  for  the  sake  of 


"hazael 

the  play  which  it  affords  with  C'T'J?,  "  ass-colts." 
[Jair;  Bashan-havoth-jair.].  [G.] 

HAWK  C|'3  :  <e>a| ;  accipiter).  The  Hebrew 
nctz  is  expressive  of  strong  and  rapid  flight,  and  is 
therefore  highly  appropriate  to  the  hawk:  the  simi- 
larity of  the  Latin  name  nisus  is  worthy  of  notice. 
The  hawk  is  noticed  as  an  unclean  bird  (Lev.  xi.  16  ; 
Deut.  xiv.  1 5),  and  as  "  stretching  her  wings  toward 
the  south"  (Job  xxxix.  26) — an  expression  which 
has  been  variously  understood  as  referring  either  to 
the  migratory  habits  of  the  bird,  one  species  alone 
being  an  exception  to  the  general  rule  in  this  respect 
(Plin.  x.  9);  or  to  its  moulting  and  seeking  the 
warmth  of  the  sun's  rays  in  consequence  (Bochart, 
Hieroz.  iii.  9)  ;  or  lastly  to  the  opinion  prevalent 
in  ancient  times  that  it  was  the  only  bird  whose 
keen  eye  could  bear  the  direct  rays  of  the  sun 
(Aelian,  //.  A.  x.  14).  The  hawk,  though  not 
migratory  in  our  country,  is  so  in  the  south  of 
Europe,  and  in  parts  of  Asia.  It  was  common  in 
Syria  and  the  surrounding  countries.  In  Egypt 
one  species  was  regarded  as  sacred,  and  frequently 
appears  on  the  ancient  monuments.       [W.  L.  B.] 

HA'ZAEL  ("?Nm  ,  'K(ai]\  ;  JTaiael)  was  a 
king  of  Damascus,  who  reigned  from  about  Bic. 
886  to  B.C.  840.  He  appears  to  have  been  pre- 
viously a  person  in  a  high  position  at  the  court  of 
Benhadad,  and  was  sent  by  his  master  to  Elisha, 
when  that  prophet  visited  Damascus,  to  inquire  if 
he  would  recover  from  the  malady  under  which  he 
was  suffering.  Elisha's  answer  that  Benhadad  might 
recover,  but  would  die,  and  his  announcement  to 
Hazael  that  he  would  one  day  be  king  of  Syria, 
which  seems  to  have  been  the  fulfilment  of  the  com- 
mission given  to  Elijah  (1  K.  xix.  15)  to  appoint 
Hazael  king — led  to  the  murder  of  Benhadad  by 
his  ambitious  servant,  who  foithwith  mounted  the 
throne  (2  K.  viii.  7-15).  He  was  soon  engaged  in 
hostilities  with  Ahaziah  king  of  Judah,  and  Jeho- 
ram  king  of  Israel,  for  the  possession  of  the  city  of 
Eamoth-Gilead  (ibid.  viii.  28).  The  Assyrian 
inscriptions  show  that  about  this  time  a  bloody  ami 
destructive  war  was  being  waged  between  the 
Assyrians  on  the  one  side,  and  the  Syrians,  Hittites, 
Hamathites,  and  Phoenicians  on  the  other.  [See 
Damascus.]  Benhadad  had  recently  suffered 
several  severe  defeats  at  the  hands  of  the  Assyrian 
king;  and  upon  the  accession  of  Hazael  the  war 
was  speedily  renewed.  Hazael  took  up  a  position 
in  the  fastnesses  of  the  Anti-Libanus,  but  was  there 
attacked  by  the  Assyrians,  who  defeated  him  with 
great  loss,  killing  16,000  of  his  warriors,  and 
capturing  more  than  1 1 00  chariots.  Three  years 
later  the  Assyrians  once  more  entered  Syria  in 
force ;  but  on  this  occasion  Hazael  submitted  and 
helped  to  furnish  the  invaders  with  supplies.  After 
this,  internal  troubles  appear  to  have  occupied  the 
attention  of  the  Assyrians,  who  made  no  more 
expeditions  into  these  parts  for  about  a  century. 
The  Syrians  rapidly  recovered  their  losses  ;  and  to- 
wards the  close  of'  the  reign  of  Jehu.  Hazael  led 
them  against  the  Israelites  (about  B.C.  860),  whom 
he  "  smote  in  all  their  coasts"  ('-'  K.  x.  32),  thus 
accomplishing  the  prophecy  of  Elisha  (ibid.  viii. 
12).  His  main  attack  fell  upon  the  eastern  pro- 
vinces, where  he  ravaged  "  all  the  land  of  Gilead, 
theGadites,  and  the  Heubenites,  and  the  Manassites, 
from  Aroer,  which  is  by  the  river  Anion,  even 
Gilead  and  Bashan"  (ibid.  x.  33).  After  this  he 
seems    to  have   held   the  kingdom  of  Israel    in    a 


u 


'jyAj*02» 


HAZAIAH 

species  of  subjection  (ibid.  xiii.  ;i-7,  and  '22)  ;  and 
towards  the  close  of  his  life  he  even  threatened  the 
kingdom  of  Judah.  Having  taken  Gath  (ibid.  xii. 
17  ;  comp.  Am.  vi.  2),  he  proceeded  to  attack 
Jerusalem,  defeated  the  Jews  in  an  engagement 
(2  Chr.  xxiv.  24),  and  was  about  to  assault  the 
city,  when  Joash  induced  him  to  retire  by  present- 
ing him  with  "  all  the  gold  that  was  found  in  the 
treasures  of  the  house  of  the  Lord,  and  in  the 
king's  house"  (2  K.  xii.  18).  Hazael  appears  to 
have  died  about  the  year  B.C.  840  (ibid.  xiii.  24), 
having  reigned  4G  years.  He  left  his  crown  to  his 
son  Benhadad  (ibid.).  [G.  R.] 

HAZAI'AH  (finn  ;  'O0ct ;  Hazia),  a  man  of 
Judah  of  the  family  of  the  Shilonites  (A.  V.  "  Shi- 
loni"),  or  descendants  of  Shelah  (Neh.  xi.  5). 

HA'ZAR-ADDAR,  &c.     [Hazer.] 

HAZAEMA'VETH   (ni»"lXn  ;     %aP^e  ; 

Asarmoth  ;  "  the  court  of  death,"  Ges.),  the  third, 

in  order,  of  the  sons  of  Joktan  (Gen.  x.  26).     The 

name  is  preserved,  almost  literally,  in  the  Arabic 

o  —  o  .- 
ffadramawt     (■"«»  ^t^O     and     Hadrumaiot 

),  and  the  appellation  of  a  province 

and  an  ancient  people  of  Southern  Arabia.  This  iden- 
tification of  the  settlement  of  Hazarmaveth  is  accepted 
by  Biblical  scholars  as  not  admitting  of  dispute.  It 
rests  not  only  on  the  occurrence  of  the  name,  but  is 
supported  by  the  proved  fact  that  Joktan  settled  in 
the  Yemen,  along  the  south  coast  of  Arabia,  by  the 
physical  characteristics  of  the  inhabitants  of  this  re- 
gion, and  by  the  identification  of  the  names  of  several 
others  of  the  sons  of  Joktan.  The  province  of  Hadra- 
mawt  is  situate  east  of  the  modern  Yemen  (anciently, 
as  shown  in  Arabia,  the  limits  of  the  latter  pro- 
vince embraced  almost  the  whole  of  the  south  of  the 
peninsula),  extending  to  the  districts  of  Sbihr  and 
Mahreh.  Its  capital  is  Shibam,  a  very  ancient  city, 
of  which  the  native  writers  give  curious  accounts, 
and  its  chief  ports  are  Mirbdt,  Zafari  [SEPHAR], 
and  Kisheem,  from  whence  a  great  trade  was  carried 
on,  in  ancient  times,  with  India  and  Africa.  Ha- 
dramawt  itself  is  generally  cultivated,  in  contrast 
to  tin'  contiguous  sandy  deserts  (called  El-Ahkaf, 
where  lived  the  gigantic  race  of  'A'd),  is  partly 
mountainous,  with  watered  valleys,  and  is  still 
celebrated  for  its  frankincense  (El-Idreesee,  ed. 
Jomard,  i.  p.  54;  Niebuhr,  Descr.  24.")),  exporting 
also  gum-arabic,  myrrh,  dragon's  blood,  and  aloes, 
the  latter,  however,  being  chiefly  from  Socotra, 
which  is  under  the  rule  of  the  sheykh  of  Kesheem 
(Nieliulir,  /.  c.  et  seq.).  The  early  kings  of  Ha- 
dramawt  were  Joktanites,  distinct  from  the  de- 
scendants of  Yaarub,  the  progenitor  of  the  Joktanite 
Arabs  generally  ;  and  it  is  hence  to  be  inferred  that 
they  were  separately  descended  from  Hazarmaveth. 
They  maintained  their  independence  against  the 
powerful  kings  of  Himyer,  until  the  latter  were 
subdued  at  the  Abyssinian  invasion  (Ibn-Khaldoon, 
ap.  Caussin,  Essai,  i.  135,  seqq.).     The  Greeks  and 

Romans  call  the  i pie  of  Hadramawt,  variously. 

Chatramotitae,  Chatrammitae,  &c. ;  and  there  is 
little  doubt  that  they  were  the  same  as  the  Adra- 
mitae,  &C  (the  latter  not  applying  to  the  descendants 

of  Hadoram,  as  some  have  suggested);  while  the 
native  appellation  of  an  inhabitant,  Hadramee,  cones 


HAZER 


763 


very  near  Adramitae  in  sound.  The  modern  people, 
although  mixed  with  other  races,  are  strongly  charac- 
terized by  fierce,  fanatical,  and  restless  dispositions. 
They  are  enterprising  merchants,  well  known  for 
their  trading  and  tiavelling  propensities.   [E.  S.  P.] 

HAZEL  (T-11?).  The  Hebrew  term  luz  occurs 
only  in  Gen.  xxx.  37,  where  it  is  coupled  with  the 
"  poplar"  and  "chestnut,"  as  one  of  the  trees  from 
which  Jacob  cut  the  rods,  which  he  afterwards 
peeled.  Authorities  are  divided  between  the  hazel 
and  the  almond-tree,  as  representing  the  luz  ;  in 
favour  of  the  former  we  have  Kimchi,  Hashi,  Luther, 
and  others  ;  while  the  Vulgate,  Saadias,  and  Gese- 
nius  adopt  the  latter  view.  The  rendering  in  the 
LXX.,  Kapvov,  is  equally  applicable  to  either.  We 
think  the  latter  most  probably  correct,  both  because 
the  Arabic  word  luz  is  undoubtedly  the  "  almond- 
tree,"  and  because  there  is  another  word  in  the 
Hebrew  language,  e<juz  (TUX),  which  is  applicable 
to  the  hazel.  The  strongest  argument  on  the  other 
side  arises  from  the  circumstance  of  another  word, 
sh&hid  (Tpt?),  having  reference  to  the  almond  ;  it 
is  supposed,  however,  that  the  latter  applies  to  the 
fruit  exclusively,  and  the  word  under  discussion  to 
the  tree :  Kosenmiiller  identifies  the  shaked  with  the 
cultivated,  and  luz  with  the  wild  almond-tree.  For 
a  description  of  the  almond-tree,  see  the  article  on  that 
subject.  The  Hebrew  term  appears  as  a  pre  per  name 
in  Luz,  the  old  appellation  of  Bethel.      [W.  L.  B.] 

HAZELELPO'NI  (tflB^Stn ;  'EcnjAeftSefo, 

Alex.  'EayWeXcpdv ;  Asalelphuni) ,  the  sister  of 
the  sons  of  Etam  in  the  genealogies  of  Judah  ( 1  Chr. 
iv.  3).  The  name  has  the  definite  article  prefixed, 
and  is  accurately  "  the  Tzelelpouite,"  as  of  a  family 
rather  than  an  individual. 

HA'ZER  0>|n,  t.  e.  Chatzer,  fiom  *isn,  to 
surround  or  enclose),  a  word  which  is  of  not  unfre- 
quent  occurrence  in  the  Bible  in  the  sense  of  a 
"court"  or  quadrangle  to  a  palace3  or  other  build- 
ing, but  which  topographically  seems  generally  em- 
ployed for  the  "  villages  "  of  people  in  a  roving 
and  unsettled  life,  the  semi-permanent  collections  of 
dwellings  which  are  described  by  travellers  among 
the  modern  Arabs  to  consist  of  rough  stone  walls 
covered  with  the  tent  cloths,  and  thus  holding  a 
middle  position  between  the  tent  of  the  wanderer 
—  so  transitory  as  to  furnish  an  image  of  the  sudden 
termination  of  life  (Is.  xxxviii.  12)— and  the  settled, 
permanent,  town. 

As  a  proper  name  it  appears  in  the  A.  V. — 

1.  In  the  plural,  HaZERTM,  and  HAZEROTH, 
for  which  see  below. 

2.  In  the  slightly  different  form  of  Bazor. 

3.  In  composition  with  other  words,  giving  a 
special  designation  to  the  particular  "village"  in- 
tended. When  thus  in  union  with  another  word 
the  name  is  Ila/.ar  i  ( 'hatzar).  The  following  are  the 
places  so  named,  and  it  should  not  lie  overlooked  that 

tiny  are  all  in  the  wilderness  itself,  or  else  quite  on 
the  confines  of  civilised  country  : — 

1.  ElAZAR-ADDAB  (~nN"l^ri:  tnavKis  WpdS, 
2apa5o,  Alex. 'ASSapd  ;   Villa  nomine    i  Id 

dor),  a  place  named  as  one  of  the  landmarks  on  the 
southern  boundary  of  the  land  promised  to  Israel, 
between  ECadesh-barnea  and  Azmon  'Num.  xxxiv. 
4).     In  the  specification  of  the  south  bound 


*  In  2  K.  \x.  4,  the  Masorets   ( AVW)   have  substi-    original  text.     The  same  change  should   probably  lie 
tuted  "IVH   (A.  V.   "court")   for  the    TJ?n   of  the    made  in  Jer.  xii.  7.      [See  1-umm.i.,  C] 

;;  D 


764 


HAZER 


the  country  actually  possessed  (Josh.  xv.  3),  the 
name  appears  in  the  shorter  form  of  Addar  (A.  V. 

Adar),  and  an  additional  place  is  named  on  each 
side  of  it.  The  site  of  Hazar-addar  does  not  appear 
to  have  been  encountered  in  mo  lern  times. 

The  LXX.  reading  might  lead  to  the  belief  that 
Hazar-addar  was  identical  with  AltAD,  a  Canaanite 
city  which  lay  in  this  direction,  but  the  presence  of 
the  Am  in  the  latter  name  forbids  such  an  inference. 

2.  Hazar-enan  (\yy  IVn  =  "  village  of 
springs;"  'Apa^vah,  Alex.  'A<repvaCv,  avM)  rov 
Alvdv ;  Villa  Enan,  Atrium  Enon),  the  place  at 
which  the  northern  boundary  of  the  land  promised 
to  the  children  of  Israel  was  to  terminate  (Num. 
xxxiv.  9),  and  the  eastern  boundary  commence 
(10).  It  is  again  mentioned  in  EzekiePs  pro- 
phecy (xlvii.  17,  xlviii.  1)  of  what  the  ultimate 
extent  of  the  land  will  be.  These  boundaries  are 
traced  by  Mr.  Porter,  who  would  identify  Hazar- 
enan  with  Kuryetein  =  "  the  two  cities,"  a  vil- 
lage more  than  sixty  miles  E.  N.  E.  of  Damascus, 
the  chief  ground  for  the  identification  apparently 
being  the  presence  at  Kuryetein  of  "  large  foun- 
tains," the  only  ones  in  that  "  vast  region,"  a  cir- 
cumstance with  which  the  name  of  Hazar-enan  well 
agrees  (Porter,  Damascus,  i.  252,  ii.  358).  The 
great  distance  from  Damascus  and  the  body  of 
Palestine  is  the  main  impediment  to  the  reception 
of  this  identification. 

3.  Hazar-gaddah  (fffij  "l\*n ;  Alex.  'Ao-€p- 
7a55a ;  Aser-Gadda),  one  of  the  towns  in  the 
southern  district  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  27),  named 
between  Moladah  and  Heshmon.  No  trace  of  the 
situation  of  this  place  appears  in  the  Onomasticon, 
or  in  any  of  the  modern  travellers.  In  Van  de 
Velde's  map  a  site  named  Jurrah  is  marked  as  close 
to  Molada  {El-MWi),  but  it  is  perhaps  too  much 
to  assume  that  Gaddah  has  taken  this  form  by  the 
change  so  frequent  in  the  East  of  D  to  R. 

4.  Hazar-hat-ticon  (f'D'Tin  "lVPl ;  Au\r; 
rov  ~S,avvav ;  Domus  Tichori),  a  place  named  in 
EzekiePs  prophecy  of  the  ultimate  boundaries  of 
the  land  (Ez.  xlvii.  16), and  specified  as  being  on  the 
boundary  (7-13JI  ?N)  of  Hauran.  It  is  not  yet 
known. 

5.  Hazar-SHUAL  ( py-lty  "l^n  =  "  fox-village ;" 
XoAacrecoAa,  'Apaw\d,  'EcreptrouaA,  Alex.  '  Affap- 
ffov\d  ;  Hasersual,  Hasarsnhal),  a  town  in  the 
southern  district  of  Judah,  lying  between  Hazar- 
gaddah  and  Beersheba  (Josh.  xv.  28,  xix.  3  ; 
i  Chr.  iv.  28).  It  is  mentioned  in  the  same  con- 
nexion after  the  return  from  the  captivity  (Neh. 
xi.  27).  The  site  has  not  yet  been  conclusively 
recovered;  but  in  Van  de  Velde's  map  (1858)  a 
site,  Saweh,  is  marked  at  about  the  right  spot, 
and  which  may  be  a  corruption  of  the  original 
name.  This  district  has  been  only  very  slightly 
explored ;  when  it  is  so  we  may  look  for  most 
interesting  information. 

6.  Hazar-susaii  (nD-ID  ")Vn  =  "horse-vil- 
lage ;"  Sapaovcriv,  Alex.  'Acrep<rot>o'i/u'),  one  of  the 
"  cities  "  allotted  to  Simeon  in  the  extreme  south  of 
the  territory  of  Judah  (Josh.  xix.  5).  Neither  it 
nor  its  companion  Beth-marcaboth,  the  "  house 
of  chariots,"  are  named  in  the  list  of  the  towns 
of  Judah  in  chap,  xv.,  but  they  are  included  in 
those  of  Simeon  in  1  Chr.  iv.  31,  with  the  express 


HAZEZON-TAMAR 

statement  that  they  existed  before  and  up  to  the 
time  of  David.  This  appears  to  invalidate  Pro- 
fessor  Stanley's  suggestion  (S.ty  P.  160)  that  they 
were  the  depots  for  the  trade  with  Egypt  in  cha- 
riots and  hoi  si's,  which  commenced  in  the  reign  of 
Solomon.  Still,  it  is  difficult  to  know  to  what  else 
to  ascribe  the  names  of  places  situated,  as  these 
were,  in  the  Bedouin  country,  where  a  chaiiot 
must  have  been  unknown,  and  where  even  horses 
seem  carefully  excluded  from  the  possessions  of  the 
inhabitants — "  camels,  sheep,  oxen,  and  asses  " 
( 1  Sam.  xxvii.  9).  In  truth  the  difficulty  arises  only 
on  the  assumption  that  the  names  are  Hebrew,  ami 
that  they  are  to  be  interpreted  accordingly.  It 
would  cease  if  we  could  believe  them  to  be  in  the 
former  language  of  the  country,  adopted  by  the 
Hebrews,  and  so  altered  as  to  bear  a  meaning  in 
Hebrew.  This  is  exactly  the  process  which  the 
Hebrew  names  have  in  their  turn  undergone  from 
the  Arabs,  and  is  in  fact  one  which  is  well  known 
to  have  occurred  in  all  languages,  though  not  yet 
recognized  in  the  particular  case  of  the  early  local 
names  of  Palestine. 

7.  Hazar-susim  (C'D-ID  "IVn,  "  the  village 
of  horses;"  'H/xiaovo-tcaffiy,  as  if  'VPI;  Hasarsu- 
sini),  the  form  under  which  the  preceding  name 
appears  in  the  list  of  the  towns  of  Simeon  in  1  Chr. 
iv.  31.  [G.] 

HAZE'RIM.  The  Avims,  or  more  accurately 
the  Avvim,  a  tribe  commemorated  in  a  fragment  of 
very  ancient  history,  as  the  early  inhabitants  of  the 
south-western  portion  of  Palestine,  are  therein  said 
to  have  lived  "in  the  villages  (A.  V.  "  Hazerim," 
D'HVnS),  as  far  as  Gaza"  (Deut.  ii.  23),  before 
their  expulsion  by  the  Caphtorim.  The  word  is  the 
plural  of  Hazer,  noticed  above,  and,  as  far  as  we 
can  now  appreciate  the  significance  of  the  term,  it 
implies  that  the  Avvim  were  a  wandering  tribe  who 
had  retained  in  their  new  locality  the  transitory  form 
of  encampment  of  their  original  desert-life.       [G.] 

HAZE'ROTH(nV-|>Tj;  'Acrypcid:  Num.  xi. 
35,  xii.  16,  xxxiii.  17,  Deut.  i.  1),  a  station  of  the 
Israelites  in  the  desert,  mentioned  next  to  Kibroth- 
Hattaavah,  and  perhaps  recognisable  in  the  Arabic 

]  tfi-*^,    Hudhera    (Robinson,    i.    151  ;     Stanley, 

S.  Sf  P.  81,  82),  which  lies  about  eighteen  hours' 
distance  from  Sinai  on  the  road  to  the  Akabah.  The 
word  appears  to  mean  the  sort  of  unenclosed  vil- 
lages in  which  the  Bedouins  are  found  to  congre- 
gate.    [Hazer.]  [H.  H.] 

HA'ZEZON-TA'MAR,    and    HA'ZAZON- 

TATHARpOn  |VVn,a  butmChron.T)  |te?tfl; 
'Ao-ao-ovda/jidp,  or  ' Aeraffav  ®a/j.dp ;  Asasan  Thu- 
mar),  the  name  under  which,  at  a  very  early  period 
of  the  history  of  Palestine,  and  in  a  document  believed 
by  many  to  be  the  oldest  of  all  these  early  records, 
we  first  hear  of  the  place  which  afterwards  became 
En-GEDI.  The  Amorites  were  dwelling  at  Hazazon- 
Tamar  when  the  four  kings  made  their  incursion, 
and  fought  their  successful  battle  with  the  five 
(Gen.  xiv.  7).  The  name  occurs  only  once  again — 
in  the  records  of  the  reign  of  Hezekiah  (2  Chr. 
xx.  2) — when  he  is  warned  of  the  approach  of  the 
horde  of  Ammonites,  Moabites,  Mehunim,  and  men 
of  Mount  Seir,  whom  he  afterwards  so  completely 


a  The  translators  of  the  A.  V.  have  curiously  re-    where  the  Hebrew  is  Hazazon,  they  have  Hazezon, 
versed  the  two  variations  of  the  name.     In  Genesis,    and  the  opposite  in  Chronicles. 


HAZIEL 

destroyed,  and  who  were  no  doubt  pursuing  thus 
far  exactly  the  same  route  as  the  Assyrians  had 
done  a  thousand  years  before  them.  Here  the  ex- 
planation, "  which  is  En-gedi,"  is  added.  The 
existence  of  the  earlier  appellation,  after  En-gedi  had 
been  so  long;  in  use,  is  a  remarkable  instance  of  the 
tenacity  of  these  old  Oriental  names,  of  which  more 
modern  instances  are  frequent.  See  ACCHO,  Beth- 
SAIDA,  &o. 

Hazazon-tatnar  is  interpreted  in  Hebrew  to  mean 
the  "pruning  or  telling  of  the  palm"  (Gesen. 
Thes.  p.  512).  Jerome  (Quaest.  in  Gen.)  renders 
it  urbs  palmarum.  This  interpretation  of  the  name 
is  borne  out  by  the  ancient  reputation  of  the  palms 
of  En-gedi  (Ecclus.  xxiv.  14,  and  the  citations  from 
Pliny,  given  under  that  name).  The  Samaritan  Ver- 
sion has  H3  J17Q  =  the  Valley  of  Cadi,  possibly  a 
corruption  of  En-gedi.    TheTargums  have  En-gedi. 

Perhaps  this  was  the  "city  of  palm-trees"  (//■ 
hat-temarirri)  out  of  which  the  Kenites,  the  tribe 
of  Moses'  father-in-law,  went  up  into  the  wilder- 
ness of  Judah,  after  the  conquest  of  the  country 
(Judg.  i.  16).  If  this  were  so,  the  allusion  of 
Balaam  to  the  Kenite  (Num.  xxiv.  21)  is  at  once 
explained.  Standing  as  he  was  on  one  of  the  lofty 
points  of  the  highlands  opposite  Jericho,  the  western 
shore  of  the  Dead  Sea  as  far  as  Engedi  would  be 
before  him,  and  the  cliff,  in  the  clefts  of  which  the 
Kenites  had  fixed  their  secure  "nest,"  would  he 
a  prominent  object  in  the  view.  This  has  been 
already  alluded  to  by  Professor  Stanley  (JS.  c|-  P. 
225,  n.  4.).  [G.] 

HA'ZIEL  C^Xnn  ;  'Ienj*,  Alex.  'Af^A  ;  Ho- 
stel'), a  Levite  in  the  time  of  king  David,  of  the 
family  of  Shimei  or  Shimi,  the  younger  branch  of 
the  (iershonites  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  9). 

HA'ZO  (ITn  ;  'A(av ;  Azau),  a  son  of  Nahor, 
by  Milcah  his  wife  (Gen.  xxii.  22):  perhaps,  says 
Gesenius,  for  niTPI,  "  a  vision."  The  name  is 
unknown,  and  the  settlements  of  the  descendants 
of  Hazo  cannot  In'  ascertained.  The  only  clue  is  to 
be  found  in  the  identification  of  Chesed,  and  the 
other  sons  of  Nahor;  and  hence  he  must,  in  all 
likelihood,  be  placed  in  Ur  of  the  Chaldees,  or 
tiie  adjacent  countries.  Bunsen  (Bibelwerk,  i.  pt. 
2,  49)  suggests  Chazene  by  the  Euphrates,  in  Meso- 
potamia, or  the  Chazene  in  Assyria  (Strabo,  xvi. 
p.  7:;<3).  [E.  S.  P.] 

IIA'ZOR  ("llVn  ;  'Ao-ttip ;  Asor).  1.  A  fortified 
city,  which  on  the  occupation  of  the  country  was 
allotted  to  Naphtali  (Josh.  xix.  36  ).  Its  position 
was  apparently  between  Ramah  and  Kedesh  (ibid. 
xii.  Ill;,  on  the  high  ground  overlooking  the  Lake 
ot'.Merom  [vir4pK(irai  ttjj  ^e/xexoovlrtSos  At/x^Tjs, 
Joseph.  Ant.v.  5,  §1).  There  is  no  reason  for  sup- 
posing it  a  different  place  from  that  of  whii  h 
Jabin  was  king  (Josh.  xi.  1),  both  when  Joshua 
gained  his  signal  victory  over  the  northern  confe- 
deration, and  when  Deborah  and  Barak  routed  his 
general  Sisera  (Judg.  iv.  2,  17;  1  Sam.  xii.  :•'. 
It  was  the  principal  city  of  the  whole  of  the  North 
1'alestine,  '•  the  head  of  all  those  kingdoms"  (Josh, 
xi.  10,  and  see  Onomasticon,  Asor).  I. ike  the 
other  strong  places  of  that  part,  it  stood  on  aii  emi- 
nence (?fl,  Josh.  xi.  Pi,  A.  Y.  "strength"),  but 
the   district    around    must  have  been  on  the  whole 

flat,  and  suitable  for  the  manoeui  res  of  the  "  very 
many"  chariots  and  horses  which  formed  part  of 
the  forces  of  the  king  of  Eiazor  and  his  confederates 


HAZOR 


765 


(Josh.  xi.  4,  6,  9 ;  Judg.  iv.  3).  Hazor  was  the 
only  one  of  those  northern  cities  which  was  burnt 
by  Joshua,  doubtless  it  was  too  strong  and  import- 
ant to  leave  standing  in  his  rear.  Whether  it  was 
rebuilt  by  the  men  of  Naphtali,  or  by  the  second 
Jabin  (Judg.  iv.),  we  are  not  told,  but  Solomon  did 
not  overlook  so  important  a  post,  and  the  fortifica- 
tion of  Hazor,  Megiddo,  and  Gezer,  the  points  of 
defence  for  the  entrance  from  Syria  and  Assyria, 
the  plain  of  Esdraelon,  and  the  great  maritime 
lowland  respectively,  was  one  of  the  chief  pretexts 
for  his  levy  of  taxes  (1  K.  ix.  15).  Later  still  it 
is  mentioned  in  the  list  of  the  towns  and  districts 
whose  inhabitants  were  carried  off  to  Assyria  by 
Tiglath-Pileser  (2  K.  xv.  29  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  ix.  11, 
§1).  We  encounter  it  once  more  in  1  Mace.  xi.  07, 
where  Jonathan,  after  encamping  for  the  night  at 
the  "  water  of  Gennesar,"  advances  to  the  "  plain  of 
Asor"  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  5,  §7  ;  the  Greek  text  of 
the  Maccabees  has  prefixed  an  n  from  the  preceding 
word  weSiov ;  A.  V.  Nasor)  to  meet  Demetrius, 
who  was  in  possession  of  Kadesh  (xi.  63,  Joseph, 
as  above).      [NASOR.] 

Several  places  bearing  names  probably  derived 
from  ancient  Hazors,  have  been  discovered  in  this 
district.  A  list  will  be  found  in  Rob.  iii.  366  note 
( and  compare  also  Van  de  Velde,  Syria  §  P.  ii.  178  ; 
Porter,  Damascus,  i.  3u4).  But  none  of  these  an- 
swer to  the  requirements  of  this  Hazor.  The  nearest 
is  the  site  suggested  by  Dr.  Kobinsou,  viz.  Tell 
Khuraibeh,  "  the  ruins,"  which,  though  without 
any  direct  evidence  of  name  or  tradition  in  its 
favour,  is  so  suitable,  in  its  situation  on  a  rocky 
eminence,  and  in  its  proximity  both  to  Kedesh  and 
the  Pake  Huleh,  that  we  may  accept  it  until  a 
better  is  discovered  (Rob.  iii.  364,  5). 

2.  i^Aaopuapvaiv,  including  the  following  name  ; 
Alex,  omits:  Asor)  one  of  the  "cities"  of  Judah 
in  the  extreme  south,  named  next  in  order  to  Ke- 
desh (Josh.  xv.  23).  It  is  mentioned  nowhere 
else,  nor  has  it  yet  been  identified  (see  Rob.  ii.  34 
note).  The  Vatican  PXX.  unites  Hazor  with  the 
name  following  it,  Ithnan;  which  causes  Reland  to 
maintain  that  they  form  but  one  (Pal.  144,  708): 
but  the  LXX.  text  of  this  list  is  so  corrupt,  that  it 
seems  impossible  to  argue  from  it.  In  the  Alex. 
MSS.  Hazor  is  entirely  omitted,  while  Ithnan  again 
is  joined  to  Ziph. 

3.  (LXX.  omits  ;  Asor  nova.)  Hazor-Hadat- 
tah,  =  "  new  Hazor,"  possibly  contra-distinguished 
from  that  just  mentioned  ;  another  of  the  southern 
towns  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  25).  The  words  are 
improperly  separated  in  the  A.  Y. 

4.  ('Acrepwv  ui/'ttj  'Aawp,  Alex.  'Affupaixd/x  : 
Aesron,  /i</<<'  .  .*/  Asor.)  "  Hezron  which  i*  Hazor" 

(Josh.  xv.  25)  ;  but  whether  it  be  intended  that  it 
is  the  same  Hazor  as  either  of  those  named  before, 
or  that  the  name  was  originally  Hazor,  and  had 
been  changed  to  Hezron,  we  cannot  now  decide. 

5.  (Alex.  'A(Tup.  Vat.  omits:  Asor.)  A  place  in 
which  the  Benjamites  resided  alter  their  return 
from  the  captivity  (Neb.  \i.  33).  From  the  places 
mentioned  with  it,  as  Anathoth,  Nob,  Ramah,  &c, 
it  would  serm  to  have  lain  north  of  Jerusalem,  and 

reat .distance  therefrom.  But  it  has  not  yet 
been  discovered.  The  above  conditions  are  not 
against  its  being  the  same  place  with  Baal-hazor, 
though  there  is  no  positive  evidence  beyond  the 
name  in  favour  ofsuch  .in  identification. 

The  word  appears  in  combination— with  Baal  in 
Baal-hazor,  with  Aio  in  En-hazor.         [G.] 


'66 


HEAD-DRESS 


HEAD-DRESS.  The  Hebrews  do  not  appear 
to  have  regarded  a  covering  for  the  head  as  an 
essential  article  of  dress.  The  earliest  notice  we 
have  of  such  a  tiling  is  in  connexion  with  the 
sacerdotal  vestments,  and  in  this  case  it  is  de- 
scribed as  an  ornamental  appendage  "  for  glory  and 
for  beauty  "  (Ex.  xxviii.  40).  The  absence  of  any 
allusion  to  a  head-dress  in  passages  where  we  should 
expect  to  meet  with  it,  as  in  the  trial  of  jealousy 
(Num.  v.  18),  and  the  regulations  regarding  the 
leper  (Lev.  xiii.  45),  in  both  of  which  the  "  un- 
covering of  the  head"  refers  undoubtedly  to  the 
hair,  leads  to  the  inference  that  it  was  not  or- 
dinarily worn  in  the  Mosaic  age ;  and  this  is 
confirmed  by  the  practice,  frequently  alluded  to,  of 
covering  the  head  with  the'  mantle.  Even  in  after 
times  it  seems  to  have  been  reserved  especially  for 
purposes  of  ornament:  thus  the  Tzaniph  (E]"0V)  is 
noticed  as  being  worn  by  nobles  (Job  xxix.  14), 
ladies  (Is.  iii.  23),  and  kings  (Is.  lxii.  3),  while  the 
Peer  ("INS)  was  an  article  of  holiday  dress  (Is. 
lxi.  3,  A.  V.  "beauty  ;"  Ez.  xxiv.  17,  23),  and  was 
worn  at  weddings  (Is.  lxi.  10):  the  use  of  the 
/jLiTpa  was  restricted  to  similar  occasions  (Jud.  xvi. 
8  ;  Bar.  v.  2).  The  former  of  these  terms  undoubt- 
edly describes  a  kind  of  turban :  its  primary  sense 
(?p¥  ;  "  to  roll  around")  expresses  the  folds  of  linen 
■wound  round  the  head,  and  its  form  probably 
resembled  that  of  the  High-priest's  Mitznepheth 
(a  word  derived  from  the  same  root,  and  identical 
in  meaning,  for  in  Zech.  iii.  5  Tzaniph  —  Mitzne- 
pheth), as  described  by  Josephus  (Ant.  iii.  7,  §3). 
The  renderings  of  the  term  in  the  A.  V.,  "hood" 
(Is.  iii.  23),  "diadem"  (Job  xxix.  14;  Is.  lxii. 
'■'>),  "  mitre"  (Zech.  iii.  5)  do  not  convoy  the  right 
idea  of  its  meaning.  The  other  term,  Peer,  primarily 
means  an  ornament,  and  is  so  rendered  in  the  A.  V. 
(Is.  lxi.  10;  see  also  ver.  3,  "beauty"),  and  is 
specifically  applied  to  the  head-dress  from  its  orna- 
mental character.  It  is  uncertain  what  the  term 
properly  describes :  the  modern  turban  consists  of 
two  parts,  the  Kaook,  a  stiff,  round  cap  oeca- 
sionally  rising  to  a  considerable  height,  and  the 
Shash,  a  long  piece  of  muslin  wound  about  it 
i  Russell,  Aleppo,  i.  104) :  Josephus'  account  of  the 
High-priest's  head-dress  implies  a  similar  construc- 
tion ;  for  he  says  that  it  was  made  of  thick  bands  of 


HEAD-DRESS 

linen  doubled  round  many  times,  and  sewn  together ; 
the  whole  covered  by  a  piece  of  fine  linen  to  conceal 
the  seams.  Saalschiitz  (Archaeol.  i.  27  7iote~)  sug- 
gests that  the  Tzaniph  and  the  Peer  represent  the 
Shash  and  the  Kaook,  the  latter  rising  high  above 
the  other,  and  so  the  most  prominent  and  striking 
feature.  In  favour  of  this  explanation  it  may  be 
remarked  that  the  Peer  is  more  particularly  con- 
nected with  the  Migbaah,  the  high  cap  of  the 
ordinary  priests,  in  Ex.  xxxix.  28,  while  the 
Tzaniph,  as  we  have  seen,  resembled  the  High- 
priest's  mitre,  in  which  the  cap  was  concealed  by 
the  linen  folds.  The  objection,  however,  to  this 
explanation  is  that  the  etymological  force  of  Peer  is 
not  brought  out :  may  not  that  term  have  applied 
tp  the  jewels  and  other  ornaments  with  which  the 
turban  is  frequently  decorated  (Russell,  i.  106), 
some  of  which  are  represented  in  the  accompanying 
illustration  borrowed  from  Lane's  Mod.  Egypt. 
Appen.  A.     The  term  used  for  putting  on  either 


Mg&0°  v-*  w  y-:  »*>if 


Moilcrn  Egyptian  Head-dn 


(Lane.) 


Modern  Syrian  an«l  Egyptian  Head  ilrcssi  i 


the  Tzaniph  or  the  Peer  is  KOH,  "to bind  round" 
(Ex.  xxix.  9;  Lev.  viii.  13):  hence  the  words  in 
Ez.  xvi.  10,  "  I  girded  thee  about  with  fine  linen," 
are  to  be  understood  of  the  turban  ;  and  by  the  use 
of  the  same  term  Jonah  (ii.  5)  represents  the  weeds 
wrapped  as  a  turban  round  his  head.  The  turban  as 
now  worn  in  the  East  varies  very  much  in  shape ; 
the  most  prevalent  forms  are  shown  in  Russell's 
Aleppo,  i.  102. 

If  the  Tzaniph  and  the  Peer  were  reserved 
for  holiday  attire,  it  remains  for  us  to  inquire 
whether  any  and  what  covering  was  ordinarily 
worn  over  the  head.  It  appears  that  frequently 
the  robes  supplied  the  plaee  of  m  head-dress,  being 
so  ample  that  they  might  be  thrown  over  the  head 
at  pleasure  :  the  Rddid  and  the  Tsdiph  at  all  events 
were  so  used  [Dress],  and  the  veil  served  a 
similar  purpose.  [Veil.]  The  ordinary  head- 
dress of  the  Bedouin  consists  of  the  kiffi/eh,  a  square 
handkerchief,  generally  of  red  and  yellow  cotton, 
or  cotton  and  silk,  folded  so  that  three  of  the 
corners  hang  down  over  the  back  and  shoulders, 
leaving  the  face  exposed,  and  bound  round  the  head 
by  a  cord  (Burckhardt,  Notes,  i.  48).  It  is  not 
improbable  that  a  similar  covering  was  used  by  the 
Hebrews  on   certain  occasions :   the  "  kerchief"  in 


HEAETH 

Ez.  xiii.  18  has  been  so  understood  by  some  writers 
(Harmer,  Observations,  ii.  393),  though  the  word 
more  probably  refers  to  a  species  of  veil  ;  and  the 
(ri/.UKivQioi'  (Aets  xix.  12,  A.  V.  "apron"),  as 
explained  bySuidas(Tb  ttjs  Ke<pa\TJs  (pSfnQfxa)  was 
applicable  to  the  purposes  of  a  head-dress.  [Hand- 
kerchief.] Neither  of  these  cases,  however,  sup- 
plies positive  evidence  on  the  point,  and  the  general 
absence  of  allusions  leads  to  the  inference  that  the 
head  was  usually  uncovered,  as  is  still  the  case  in 
many  parts  of  Arabia  (Wellsted,  Travels,  i.  73) 
The  introduction  of  the  Greek  hat  {ttItclgos)  by 
Jason,  as  an  article  of  dress  adapted  to  the  gymna- 
sium,~wa.s  regarded  as  a  national  dishonour  (2  Maec. 
iv.  1:2):  in  shape  ami  material  the  Petosus  very 
much  resembled  the  common  felt  hats  of  this  country 
{Diet,  of  Ant.  art.  Pjleus). 


HEATHEN 


767 


Bedouin  Head-dress  :  the  Krfliyeh. 

The  Assyrian  head-drc.-s  is  described  in  Ez.  xxiii. 
15  under  the  terms  D^-I^Qp  TinD,  "exceeding 
in  dyed  attire  ;"  it  is  doubtful,  however,  whether 
t<  bulim  describes  the  coloured  material  of  the  head- 
dress (tiarae  a  coloribus  quibus  tinctae  sinl  | ;  an- 
other sense  has  been  assigned  to  it  more  appropriate 
to  the  description  of  a  turban  {fasciis  obvolvit,  (li'sm. 
Thesaw,  p.  542).  The  term  Engl,  s'ruoke  expresses 
tin1  flowing  character  of  tin.'  Eastern  head-dress,  as 
it  falls  down  over  the  back  (Layard,  Nineveh,  ii. 
:\os).  'fhe  word  rendered  "  hats"  in  Dan.  iii.  121 
(xbzi-13)  properly  applies  to  a  cloak.     [W.  L.  B.] 

HEAETH.  1.  PIN;  iax^  ;  "',<«''(  (Ges- 
69),  a  pot  or  brazier  for  containing  fire.  2.  TpID///. 
and  mp!D/.  KaiHTTpa,  Kavais ;  incendium  (Ges. 
620),  T':'..  "1*3,  or  11»3JZech.  .\ii.  6);  Sa\bs  ; 
caminus;  in  dual,  DH^S  (Lev.  xi.  35);  xVTp6- 
iroSes  ;  chytrqpodes  ;  A.  V.  "ranges  for  pots" 
(Ges.  672  i. 

One  way  of  baking  much  practised  in  the  Bast  is 
to  place  the  dough  on  an  iron  plate,  either  laid  on, 
or  supported  on  legs  above  the  vessel  sunk  in  the 
ground,  which   forms   the   oven.      This   plate   or 

"hearth"   is  in  Arabic       ~»Lk>.  tajen;  a    word 

vrhich  has  probably  passed  into  Greek  in  T-nyavov. 
The  cakes  baked  "on  the  hearth"  (Gen.  xviii.  6, 
iyKpv<t>ias,SJibcinericiospanes  |  were  probably  baked 
in  tin'  existing  Bedouin  manner,  on  hot  stones  cox  ered 
with  ashes,  'flu-  "hearth"  of  king  Jehoiakim's 
winter  palace,  Jer.  xxxvi.23,was  possibly  a  pan  or 
brazier  of  charcoal.  Burckhardt,  Noteson  Bed. 
i.  58  :  P.  dellaValle,  1  iaggi,  i.  437;  Harmer,  Obs. 


i.  p.  477,  and  note;  RauwoltT,  Travels,  ap.  Kay,  ii. 
163;  Shaw,  Travels,  p.  231;  Niebuhr,  Descr.  de 
l' Arabic,  p.  45  ;  Schleusner,  Lex.  Yet.  Test,  r-ljya- 
yoj/;  Gesen.s.w.  nai?,  p.t)97.)   [Fire.]  [H.W.P.] 

HEATHEN.  The  Hebrew  words  <r)j,  DM3 
goi,  goyim,  together  with  their  Greek  equivalents 
tdvos,  601/7},  have  been  somewhat  arbitrarily  ren- 
dered "nations,"  "gentiles,"  and  "heathen"  in  the 
A.  V.  It  will  be  interesting  to  trace  the  manner 
in  which  a  term,  primarily  and  essentially  general 
in  its  signification,  acquired  that  more  restricted 
sense  which  was  afterwards  attached  to  it.  Its 
development  is  parallel  with  that  of  the  Hebrew 
people,  and  its  meaning  at  any  period  may  be  taken 
as  significant  of  their  relative  position  with  regard 
to  the  surrounding  nations. 

1.  While  as  yet  the  Jewish  nation  had  no  poli- 
tical existence,  goyim  denoted  generally  the  nations 
of  the  world,  especially  including  the  immediate 
descendants  of  Abraham  (Gen.  xviii.  1 8  ;  comp.  Gal. 
iii.  16).  The  latter,  as  they  grew  in  numbers  and 
importance,  were  distinguished  in  a  most  marked 
manner  from  the  nations  by  whom  they  were  sur- 
rounded, and  were  provided  with  a  code  of  laws 
and  a  religious  ritual,  which  made  the  distinction 
still  more  peculiar.  They  were  essentially  a  sepa- 
rate people  (Lev.  xx.  123) ;  separate  in  habits, 
morals,  and  religion,  and  bound  to  maintain  their 
separate  character  by  denunciations  of  the  most 
terrible  judgments  (Lev.xxvi.  14-38;  Deut.xxviii.). 
On  their  march  through  the  desert  they  encountered 
the  most  obstinate  resistance  from  Amalek,  "  chief 
of  the  goyim  "  (Num.  xxiv.  20),  in  whose  sight  the 
deliverance  from  Egypt  was  achieved  (Lev.  xxvi. 
45).  During  the  conquest  of  Canaan  and  the  sub- 
sequent wars  of  extermination,  which  the  Israelites 
for  several  generations  carried  on  against  their 
enemies,  the  seven  nations  of  the  Canaanites, 
Amorites,  Hittites,  Hivites,  Jebusites,  Perizzites, 
and  Girgashites  (Ex.  xxxiv.  24),  together  with  the 
remnants  of  them  who  were  left  to  prove  Israel 
(Josh,  xxiii.  13  ;  Judg.  iii.  1  ;  l's.  lxxviii.  55), 
and  teach  them  war  (Judg.  iii.  2),  received  the 
especial  appellation  of  goyim.  With  these  the 
Israelites  were  forbidden  to  associate  (Josh,  xxiii. 
7);  intermarriages  were  prohibited  (Josh,  xxiii. 
12;  1  K.  xi.  2);  and  as  a  warning  against  dis- 
obedience the  fate  of  the  nations  of  Canaan  was  kept 
constantly  before  their  eyes  (Lev.  xviii.  24,  25  ; 
Deut.  xviii.  12).  They  are  ever  associated  with 
the  worship  of  false  gods,  and  the  foul  practices  of 
idolaters  (Lev.  xviii.  xx.),  and  these  constituted 
their  chief  distinctions,  as  goyim,  from  tin'  wor- 
shippers of  the  one  God,  the  ] pie  of  Jehovah 

(Num.  xv.  41  ;  Deut.  xxviii.  10).  This  distinc- 
tion was  maintained  in  its  full  force  during  the 
early  times  of  the  monarchy  (2  Sam.  vh.  23  J 
1  K.  xi.  4-8,  xiv.  24  ;  l's.  cvi.  35).  It  was  from 
among  the  goyim,  the  degraded  tribes  who  sub- 
mittal to  their  arms,  that  the  Israelites  were  per- 
mitted to  purchase  their  bond  servants  (Lev.  xxv. 
44,  45),  and  this  special  enactment  seems  to  have 
had  the  effect  of  giving  to  a  national  tradition  the 
force  and  sanction  of  a  law  (comp.  Gen.  xxxi.  15). 
In  later  times  this  regulation  was  strictly  adhered 
to.  To  the  words  of  Keel.  ii.  7  "  1  bought  men- 
servants  and  maid-servants,"  the  Targum  adds, 
"  of  the  children  of  I  lam,  and  the  rest  of  the  foreign 
nations." 

And  not  only  were  the  Israelites  forbidden  to 
intermarry  with  these  goyim,  but  the  latter  were 


768 


HEATHEN 


virtually  excluded  from  the  possibility  of  becoming 
naturalised.  Au  Ammonite  or  Moabite  was  shut 
out  from  the  congregation  of  Jehovah  even  to  the 
tenth  generation  (Deut.  xxiii.  3),  while  an  Edomite 
or  Egyptian  was  admitted  in  the  third  (vers.  7, 
8).  The  necessity  of  maintaining  a  separation  so 
broadly  marked  is  ever  more  and  more  manifest  as 
we  follow  the  Israelites  through  their  history,  and 
observe  their  constantly  recurring  tendency  to 
idolatry.  Offence  and  punishment  followed  each 
other  with  all  the  regularity  of  cause  and  effect 
(Judg.  ii.  12,  iii.  6-8,  &c). 

2.  But,  even  in  early  Jewish  times,  the  term 
goyim  received  by  anticipation  a  significance  of  wider 
range  than  the  national  experience  (Lev.  xxvi.  33, 
38  ;  Deut.  xxx.  1),  and  as  the  latter  was  gradually 
developed  during  the  prosperous  times  of  the 
monarchy,  the  goyim  were  the  surrounding  nations 
generally,  with  whom  the  Israelites  were  brought 
into  contact  by  the  extension  of  their  commerce, 
and  whose  idolatrous  practices  they  readily  adopted 
(Ez.  xxiii.  30;  Am.  v.  26).  Later  still,  it  is 
applied  to  the  Babylonians  who  took  Jerusalem 
(Neh.  v.  8  ;  Ps.  lxxix.  1,  6,  10),  to  the  destroyers 
of  Moab  (Is.  xvi.  8),  and  to  the  several  nations 
among  whom  the  Jews  were  scattered  during  the 
captivity  (Ps.  cvi.  47 ;  Jer.  xlvi.  28 ;  Lam,  i.  3, 
&c),  the  practice  of  idolatry  still  being  their  cha- 
racteristic distinction  (Is.  xxxvi.  18;  Jer.  x.  2,  3, 
xiv.  22).  This  signification  it  retained  after  the 
return  from  Babylon,  though  it  was  used  in  a  more 
limited  sense  as  denoting  the  mixed  race  of  colonists 
who  settled  in  Palestine  during  the  captivity  (Neh. 
v.  17),  and  who  are  described  as  fearing  Jehovah, 
while  serving  their  own  gods  (2  K.  xvii.  29-33  ; 
Ezr.  vi.  21). 

Tracing  the  synonymous  term  %Qvt]  through  the 
Apocryphal  writings,  we  find  that  it  is  applied  to 
the  nations  around  Palestine  (1  Mace.  i.  11),  in- 
cluding the  Syrians  and  Philistines  of  the  army  of 
Gorgias  (1  Mace.  iii.  41,  iv.  7,  11,  14),  as  well  as 
the  people  of  Ptolemais,  Tyre  and  Sidon  (1  Mace. 
v.  9,  10,  15).  They  were  image-worshippers  (1 
Mace.  iii.  48;  Wisd.  xv.  15),  whose  customs  and 
fashions  the  Jews  seem  still  to  have  had  an  un- 
conquerable propensity  to  imitate,  but  on  whom 
they  were  bound  by  national  tradition  to  take 
vengeance  (1  Mace.  ii.  68  ;  1  Esdr.  viii.  85).  Fol- 
lowing the  customs  of  the  goyim  at  this  period 
denoted  the  neglect  or  concealment  of  circumcision 
(1  Mace.  i.  15),  disregard  of  sacrifices,  profanation 
of  the  sabbath,  eating  of  swine's  flesh  and  meat 
offered  to  idols  (2  Mace.  vi.  6-9,  18,  xv.  1,  2),  and 
adoption  of  the  Greek  national  games  (2  Mace.  iv. 
12,  14).  In  all  points  Judaism  and  heathenism  are 
strongly  contrasted.  The  "  barbarous  multitude  " 
in  2  Mace.  ii.  21  are  opposed  to  those  who  played 
the  man  for  Judaism,  and  the  distinction  now 
becomes  an  ecclesiastical  one  (comp.  Matt,  xviii.  17  ). 
Iu  2  Esdr.  iii.  33,  34,  the  "  gentes  "  are  defined  as 
those  "  qui  habitant  in  seculo  "  (comp.  Matt.  vi.  32 ; 
Luke  xii.  30). 

As  the  Greek  influence  became  more  extensively 
felt  in  Asia  Minor,  and  the  Greek  language  was 
generally  used,  Hellenism  and  heathenism  became 
convertible  terms,  and  a  Greek  was  synonymous 
with  a  foreigner  of  any  nation.  This  is  singularly 
evident  in  the  Syriac  of  2  Mace.  v.  9,  10,  13 ;  cf. 
John  vii.  35;    1  Cor.  x.  32;  2  Mace.  xi.  2. 

In  the  N.  T.  again  we  find  various  shades  of 
meaning  attached  to  tOvt).  In  its  narrowest  sense 
it  is  opposed  to  "  those  of  the  circumcision  "  (Acts 


HEAVEN 

x.  45  ;  cf.  Esth.  xiv.  15,  where  a\\oTpio?  =  airepi- 
Tfx-i)Tos),  and  is  contrasted  with  Israel,  the  people 
of  Jehovah  (Luke  ii.  32),  thus  representing  the 
Hebrew  D^lil  at  one  stage  of  its  history.  But,  like 
goyim,  it  also  denotes  the  people  of  the  earth  gener- 
ally (Acts  xvii.  26;  Gal.  iii.  14).  In  Matt.  vi.  7 
£6vlk6s  is  applied  to  an  idolater. 

But,  in  addition  to  its  significance  as  an  ethno- 
graphical term,  goyim  had  a  moral  sense  which 
must  not  be  overlooked."  In  Ps.  ix.  5,  15,  17  (comp. 
Ez.  vii.  21)  the   word  stands  in  parallelism  with 

yt2H,  rdshd,  the  wicked,   as  distinguished  by  his 

T  T 
moral  obliquity  (see  Hupfeld  on  Ps.  i.  1) ;  and  in 

ver.  17  the  people  thus  designated  are  described  as 
"  forgetters  of  God,"  that  know  not  Jehovah  (Jer. 
x.  25).  Again  in  Ps.  lix.  5  it  is  to  some  extent 
commensurate  in  meaning  with  JIN  s1}2,  bog'de 
dven,  "  iniquitous  transgressors  ;"  and  in  these  pas- 
sages, as  well  as  in  Ps.  x.  15,  it  has  a  deeper  sig- 
nificance than  that  of  a  merely  national  distinction, 
although  the  latter  idea  is  never  entirely  lost 
sight  of. 

In  later  Jewish  literature  a  technical  definition 
of  the  word  is  laid  down  which  is  certainly  not 
of  universal  application.  Elias  Levita  (quoted  by 
Eisenmenger,  Entdecktes  Judenthum,  i.  665)  ex- 
plains the  sing,  gdi  as  denoting  one  who  is  not  of 
Israelitish  birth.  This  can  only  have  reference  to 
its  after  signification ;  in  the  0.  T.  the  singular  is 
never  used  of  an  individual,  but  is  a  collective 
term,  applied  equally  to  the  Israelites  (Josh.  iii. 
17)  as  to  the  nations  of  Canaan  (Lev.  xx.  23),  and 
denotes  simply  a  body  politic.  Another  distinction, 
equally  unsupported,  is  made  between  W)i,  goyim, 
and  D^JSN,  murium,  the  former  being  defined  as 
the  nations  who  had  served  Israel,  while  the  latter 
were  those  who  had  not  (Jalkut  Chctdash,  fol.  20, 
no.  20  ;  Eisenmenger,  i.  667).  Abarbanel  on  Joel 
iii.  2  applies  the  former  to  both  Christians  and 
Turks,  or  Ishmaelites,  while  in  Sepher  Juchasin 
(fol.  148,  coi.  2)  the  Christians  alone  are  distin- 
guished by  this  appellation.  Eisenmenger  gives 
some  curious  examples  of  the  disabilities  under 
which  a  goi  laboured.  One  who  kept  sabbaths  was 
judged  deserving  of  death  (ii.  206),  and  the  suidy 
of  the  law  was  prohibited  to  him  under  the  same 
penalty ;  but  on  the  latter  point  the  doctors  are  at 
issue  (ii.  209).  [W.  A.  W.] 

HEAVEN.  There  are  four  Hebrew  words  thus 
rendered  in  the  O.  T.,  which  we  may  briefly  notice. 
1.  JTp"l  (<TTept(afx.a;  firmamentum  ;  Luth.  Teste), 
a  solid  expanse;  from  ]}pi,  "to  beat  out;"  a  word 
used  primarily  of  the  hammering  out  of  metal  (Ex. 
xxxix.  3,  Num.  xvi.  38).  The  fuller  expression  is 
D^il  Vl\>"}  (Gen.  i.  14,  sq.).  That  Moses 
understood  it  to  mean  a  solid  expanse  is  clear  from 
his  representing  it  as  the  barrier  between  the  upper 
and  lower  waters  (Gen.  i.  6  sq.),  i.  e.  as  separating 
the  reservoir  of  the  celestial  ocean  (Ps.  civ.  3,  xxix. 
3)  from  the  waters  of  the  earth,  or  those  on 
which  the  earth  was  supposed  to  float  (Ps.  exxxvi. 
6).  Through  its  open  lattices  (ni3~lX.  Gen.  vii. 
11 ;  2  K.vii.2, 19  ;  comp.  k6<tkivov,  Aristoph.  ]$vb. 
373)  or  doors  (D?r6?,  Ps.  lxxviii.  23)  the  dew 
and  snow  ami  hail  are  poured  upon  the  earth  (Job 
xxxviii.  22,  37,  where  we  have  the  curious  expres- 
sion "bottles  of  heaven,"   "litres  coeli").     This 


HEAVEN 

firm  vault,  which  Job  describes  as  being  "  strong 
as  a  molten  looking-glass  "  (xxxvii.  18),  is  trans- 
parent, like  pellucid  sapphire,  and  splendid  as 
crystal  (Dan.  xii.  3;  Ex.  xxiv.  10;  Ez.  i.  22; 
Rev.  iv.  6),  over  which  rests  the  throne  of  God 
(Is.  lxvi.  1 ;  Ez.  i.  26),  and  which  is  opened  for 
the  descent  of  angels,  or  for  prophetic  visions  (Gen. 
xxviii.  17  ;  Ez.  i.  1  ;  Acts  vii.  56,  x.  11).  In  it, 
like  gems  or  golden  lamps,  the  stars  are  fixed  to 
give  light  to  the  earth,  and  regulate  the  seasons 
(Gen.  i.  14-19)  ;  and  the  whole  magnificent,  im- 
measurable structure  (.tor.  xxxi.  37)  is  supported 
by  the  mountains  as  its  pillars,  or  strong  founda- 
tions (l's.  xviii.  7;  2  Sam.  xxii.  8;  Job  xxiv. 
11).  Similarly  the  Greeks  believed  in  an  ovpavbs 
Tro\vxa\Kos  (Horn.  II.  y.  504),  or  ffiSriptos  (Horn. 
Od.  xv.  328),  or  aSaparrros  (Orph.  Hymm.  ad 
Caelum),  which  the  philosophers  called  crrepipviov, 
or  /cpu<rTaAAoei5es  (Emped.  up.  Pint,  de  Phil. 
plac.  ii.  11  ;  Artemid.  up.  Sen.  Nat.  Quaest.  vii. 
13;  quoted  by  Gesenius,  s.  v.~).  It  is  clear  that 
very  many  of  the  above  notions  were  mere  meta- 
phors resulting  from  the  simple  primitive  concep- 
tion, and  that  later  writers  among  the  Hebrews 
had  arrived  at  more  scientific  views,  although  of 
course  they  retained  much  of  the  old  phraseology, 
and  are  fluctuating  and  undecided  in  their  terms. 
Elsewhere,  for  instance,  the  heavens  are  likened  to 
a  curtain  (Ps.  civ.  2  ;  Is.  xl.  22).  In  A.  V.  "  hea- 
ven" and  "heavens"  are  used  to  render  not  only 
J^ip-1,  but  also  D?fX;,  Di"lE>,  and  ti^Tp,  for  which 
reason  we  have  thrown  together  under  the  former 
word  the  chief  features  ascribed  by  the  Jewish 
writers  to  this  portion  of  the  universe. 

2.  DW  is  derived  from  H?X',  "to  be  high." 
This  is  the  word  used  in  the  expression  "the  hea- 
ven and  the  earth,"  or  "  the  upper  and  lower  re- 
gions" (Gen.  i.  1),  which  was  a  periphrasis  to  sup- 
ply the  want  of  a  single  word  for  the  Cosmos  (Deut. 
xxxii.  1;  Is.  i.  2;  Ps.  cxlviii.  13).  "Heaven  of 
heavens  "  is  their  expression  of  infinity  (Neh.  ix.  6  ; 
Ecclus.  xvi.  18). 

3.  Dn?0,  used  for  heaven  in  Ps.  xviii.  16  ;  Jer. 
xxv.  .Ii);  Is.  xxiv.  18.  Properly  speaking  it  means 
a  mountain,  as  in  Ps.  cii.  19,  Ez.  xvii.  23.  It 
must  not,  however,  be  supposed  for  a  moment  that 
the  Hebrews  had  any  notion  of  a  "Mountain  of 
Meeting,"  like  Albordsh,  the  northern  hill  of  Baby- 
lonish mythology  (Is.  xiv.  13),  or  the  Greek 
Olympus,  or  the  Hindoo  Mem,  the  Chinese  Kuen- 
lun,  or  tin'  Arabian  Caf  (see  Kalisch,  Gen.  p.  24, 
and  tin'  authorities  there  quoted),  shire  such  a 
fancy  is  incompatible  with  the  pure  monotheism  of 
the  old  Testament. 

4.  D^pnL",  "expanses,''  with  reference  to  the 
extent  of  heaven,  as  the  lasl  two  words  were  de- 
rived from  its  height ;  hence  this  word  is  often 
used  together  with  D^Ou",  as  in  Deut.  xxxiii.  26; 
.loli  xxw.  5.  Iii  tin'  A.  V.  it  is  sometimes  ren- 
dered clouds,  for  which  the  fuller  term  is  "Qy 
Erpnp'  (Ps.  xviii.  12).  The  word  pntJ>  means 
first  "  to  pound,"  ami  then  "  to  wear  out."  So  that, 
iceording  to  some,  "clouds"  (from  the  notion  of 

dust)  is  the  origin  (/meaning  of  the  word.  Gesenius, 
however,  rejects  this  opinion  |  Thesaar.  >.  v.). 

In    the    X.    T.    we    frequently    have  the   word 
ovpavoi,  which  some  consider  to  lir  a  Hebraism,  or 
a  plural  of  excellence  (Schleusner,  Lex.  A'<< 
s.  v.).      St.  Paul's  expression   ecus  rp'iTov  ovpavov 


HEBER 


769 


(2  Cor.  xii.  2)  has  led  to  much  conjecture.  Grotius 
said  that  the  Jews  divided  the  heaven  into  three 
parts,  viz.  1.  Nubiferum,  the  air  or  atmosphere, 
where  clouds  gather;  2.  Astriferum,  the  firma- 
ment, in  which  the  sun,  moon,  and  stars  are  fixed  ; 
3.  Empyreum,  or  Angeliferum,  the  upper  heaven, 

the  abode  of  God  and  his  angels,  i.e.  1.  ?2t^  u?)]3 
(or  JJ'pl)  ;  2.  pDJTTI  ch)]}  (or  D'JX') ;  and 
3.  ]vbyn  D'PIJ?  (or  "heaven  of  heavens,"  iftW 
D^Dty).  This  curiously  explicit  statement  is  en- 
tirely unsupported  by  Rabbinic  authority,  but  it  is 
hardly  fair  of  Meyer  to  call  it  a  fiction,  for  it  may 
be  supposed  to  rest  on  some  vague  Biblical  evidence 
(cf.  Dan.  iv.  12,  "the  fowls  of  the  heaven;"  Gen. 
xxii.  17,  "  the  stars  of  the  heaven ;  "  Ps.  ii.  4,  "  he 
that  sitteth  in  the  heavens,"  &c).  The  Rabbis 
spoke  of  two  heavens  (cf.  Deut.  x.  14,  "  the  hea- 
ven and  the  heaven  of  heavens"),  or  seven  (tirra 
ovpavovs  ovs  TLves  apiOpovai  Kar'  eiravdfiacriv, 
Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  iv.  7,  636).  "  Pesch  Lakisch 
dixit  septem  esse  coelos,  quorum  nomina  sunt, 
1.  velum;  2.  expansum ;  3.  nubes ;  4.  habita- 
culum  ;  5.  habitatio ;  6.  sedes  fixa;  7.  Araboth," 
or  sometimes  "  the ,  treasury."  At  the  sin  of 
Adam,  God  ascended  into  the  first ;  at  the  sin  of 
Cain  into  the  second  ;  during  the  generation  of 
Enoch  into  the  third,  &c.  ;  afterwards  God  de- 
scended downwards  into  the  sixth  at  the  time  of 
Abraham,  into  the  fifth  during  the  life  of  Isaac, 
and  so  on  down  to  the  time  of  Moses,  when  He  re- 
descended  into  the  first  (see  many  passages  quoted 
by  Wetstein,  ad  2  Cor.  xii.  2).  Of  all  these  defini- 
tions and  deductions  we  may  remark  simply  with 
Origen,  eTrra  8e  ovpavovs  ?)  6'Aais  Trepitcpiaptvov 
apiQfj.6v  avruiv  al  <p€p6pevai  4v  reus  'E/fwATjcriais 
ovk  aTrayytWovai  ypa<pai  (c.  Cels.  vi.  289). 

If  nothing  has  here  been  said  on  the  secondary 
senses  attached  to  the  word  "  heaven,"  the  omission 
is  intentional.  The  object  of  this  Dictionary  is  not 
practical,  but  exegetical;  not  theological,  but  cri- 
tical and  explanatory.  A  treatise  on  the  nature 
and  conditions  of  future  beatitude  would  here  be 
wholly  out  of  place.  We  may  however  remark  that 
as  heaven  was  used  metaphorically  to  signify  the 
abode  of  Jehovah,  it  is  constantly  employed  in  the 
N.  T.  to  signify  the  abode  of  the  spirits  of  the  just. 
(See  for  example  Matt.  v.  12,  vi.  20  ;  Luke  x.  20, 
xii.  33 ;  2  Cor.  v.  1  ;  Col.  i.  5.)  [E.  W.  F.] 

HEBER.  The  Heb.  "QJJ  and  inn  are  more 
forcibly  distinguished  than  the  English  Eber  and 
Heber.  In  its  use,  however,  ot  this  merely  aspirate 
distinction  the  A.  V.  of  the  0.  T.  is  consistent  : 
Eber  always  =  ~\2V,  and  Heber  "Qn.  In  Luke 
iii.  35,  Heber  =  Eber,  'EjSe'p ;  the  distinction  so 
carefully  observed  in  the  O.  T.  having  been  neg- 
lected by  the  translators  of  the  X.  T. 

The  LXX.  has  a  similar  distinction,  though  not 
consistently  carried  out.  It  expresses  ~Qy  by 
"E0ep  (Gen.  \.  21  ),  "E&ep  (1  Chr.  i.  25),  'E/fycu- 
ows  (Num.  xxiv.  24);  while  "inn  is  variously 
given  as  Xo[i6p,  Xa/3e'p,  'Af3dp,  or  'A$ep.  In 
these  words,  however,  we  can  clearly  perceive  two 
distinct  groups  of  equivalents,  suggested  by  the 
effort  to  express  two  radically  different  forms.  The 
transition  from  Xo/3Jp  through  XajSe'p  to  'A/3e'p  is 
i  Iv  obi  ions. 

The  Vulg.  expresses  both  indifferently  by  Heber, 
except  in  Judg.  iv.  1 1  ti'.,  where  Haber  is  probably 


■70 


HEBKEAV 


suggested  by  the   LXX.  Xafitp;  and  Num.  xxiv. 
'-'4,  Hebraeos,  evidently  alter  the  LXX.  'Efipaiovs. 
Excluding  Luke  iii.  35,  where  Heber  =  Eber,  we 
have  in  the  0.  T.  six  of  the  name. 

1.  Grandson  of  the  Patriarch  Asher  (Gen.  xlvi. 
17  ;  1  Chr.  vii.  31  ;  Num.  xxvi.  45). 

2.  Of  the  tribe  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  iv.  18). 

3.  A  Gadite  (1  Chr.  v.  13). 

4.  A  Benjamite  (1  Chr.  viii.  17). 

5.  Another  Benjamite  (1  Chr.  viii.  22). 

6.  Heber,  the  Keuite,  the  husband  of  Jael  (Judg. 
iv.  11-17,  v.  24).  It  is  a  question  how  he  could 
be  a  Kenite,  and  yet  trace  his  descent  from  Hobab, 
or  Jethro,  who  was  priest  of  Midian.  The  so- 
lution is  probably  to  be  sought  in  the  nomadic 
habits  of  the  tribe,  as  shown  in  the  case  of  Heber 
himself,  of  the  family  to  which  he  belonged  (Judg. 
i.  16),  and  of  the  Kenites  generally  (in  1  Sam.  xv. 
6,  they  appear  among  the  Amalekites).  It  should 
be  observed  that  Jethro  is  never  called  a  Mi- 
dianite,  but  expressly  a  Kenite  (Judg.  i.  10);  that 
the  expression  "  priest  of  Midian,"  may  merely 
serve  to  indicate  the  country  in  which  Jethro  re- 
sided;  lastly,  that  there  would  seem  to  have  been 
two  successive  migrations  of  the  Kenites  into  Pales- 
tine, one  under  the  sanction  of  the  tribe  of  Judah 
at  the  time  of  the  original  occupation,  ami  attri- 
buted to  Jethro's  descendants  generally  (Judg.  i. 
16)  ;  the  other  a  special,  nomadic  expedition  of 
Heber's  family,  which  led  them  to  Kedesh  in 
Naphtali,  at  that  time  the  debatable  ground  be- 
tween the  northern  tribes-  and  Jabin,  King  of 
Canaan.  We  are  not  to  infer  that  this  was  the 
final  settlement  of  Heber:  a  tent  seems  to  have 
been  his  sole  habitation  when  his  wife  smote  Sisera 
(Judg.  iv.  21). 

7.  ("E;8ep;  Ilcber.)  The  form  in  which  the 
name  of  the  patriarch  Eber  is  given  in  the  genea- 
logy, Luke  iii.  35.;  [T.  E.B.] 

HE'BREW,  HE'BREWS.  This  word  first 
occurs  as  applied  to  Abraham  (Gen.  xiv.  13):  it 
was  afterwards  given  as  a  name  to  his  descendants. 

Four  derivations  have  been  proposed : — 

I.  Patronymic  from  Abram. 

II.  Appellative  from  12V- 

III.  Appellative  from  ~IHy. 

IV.  Patronymic  from  Eber. 

I.  From  Abram,  Abraei,  and  by  euphony  He- 
braei  (August.,  Ambrose).  Displaying,  as  it  does, 
the  utmost  ignorance  of  the  language,  this  deriva- 
tion was  never  extensively  adopted,  and  was  even 
retracted  by  Augustine  (Retract,  16).  The  eu- 
phony  alleged  by  Ambrose  is  quite  imperceptible, 
and  there  is  no  parallel  in  the  Lat.  meridie  =  me- 
didie. 

II.  ''"py,  from  12V  =  "crossed  over,"  applied 
by  the  Canaanites  to  Abraham  upon  his  crossing  the 
Euphrates  (Gen.  xiv.  13,  where  LXX.  ir€paT7js  = 
transitor).  This  derivation  is  open  to  the  strong 
objection  that  Hebrew  nouns  ending  in  *  are  either 
Patronymics,  or  gentilic  nouns  (Buxtorf,  Leusden). 
This  is  a  technical  objection  which,  though  fatal  to 
the  irepdrris,  or  appellative  derivation  as  traced 
back  to  the  verb,  does  not  apply  to  the  same  as  re- 
ferred to  the  noun  "QJ7.  The  analogy  of  Galli, 
Angli,  Hispani  derived  from  Gallia,  Anglia,  His- 
pania  (Leusd.)  is  a  complete  blunder  in  ethno- 
graphy ;  and  at  any  rate  it  would  confirm  rather 
than  destrov  the  derivation  from  the  noun. 

III.  This  latter  comes  next  in  review,  and  is  es- 


HEBKEW 

sentially  tin-  same  with  II.;  since  both  rest  upon 
the  hypothesis  that  Abraham  and  his  posterity 
weie  called  Hebrews  in  order  to  express  a  distinc- 
tion between  the  races  E.  and  VV.  of  the  Euphrates. 
The  question  of  fact  is  not  essential  whether  Abra- 
ham was  the  first  person  to  whom  the  word  was 
applied,  his  posterity  as  such  inheriting  the  name; 
or  whether  his  posterity  equally  with  himself  were 
by  the  Canaanites  regarded  as  men  from  "  the  other 
side"  of  the  river.  The  leal  question  at  issue  is 
whether  the  Hebrews  were  so  called  from  a  pro- 
genitor Eber  (which  is  the  fourth,  and  last  deriva- 
tion), or  from  a  country  which  had  been  the  cradle 
of  their  race,  and  from  which  they  had  emigrated 
westward  into  Palestine;  in  short,  whether  the 
word  Hebrew  is  a  Patronymic,  or  a  Gentile  noun. 

IV.  The  latter  opinion  in  one  or  other  of  its  phases 
indicated  above  is  that  suggested  by  the  LXX.,  and 
maintained  by  Jerome,  Theodor.,  Origen,  Chrysost., 
Arias  Montanus,  R.  Bechai,  Paul  Burg.,  Muuster, 
Grotius,  Scaliger,  Selden,  Rosenm.,  Gesen.,  Eich- 
horn ;  the  former  is  supported  by  Joseph.,  Suidas, 
Bochart,  Vatablus,  Drusius,  Vossius,  Buxtorf,  Het- 
tinger, Leusden,  Whiston,  Bauer.  As  regards  the 
derivation  from  12V,  the  noun  (or  according  to 
others  the  prep.),  Leusden  himself,  the  great  sup- 
porter of  the  Buxtorfian  theory,  indicates  the 
obvious  analogy  of  Transmarini,  Transylvani,  Trans- 
alpini,  words  which  from  the  description  of  a  fixed 
and  local  relation  attained  in  process  of  time  to  the 
independence,  and  mobility  of  a  Gentile  name.  So 
natural  indeed  is  it  to  suppose  that  Eber  (trans, 
on  the  other  side)  was  the  term  used  by  a  Canaanite 
to  denote  the  country  E.  of  the  Euphrates,  and 
Hebrew  the  name  which  he  applied  to  the  inha- 
bitants of  that  country,  that  Leusden  is  driven  to 
stake  the  entire  issue  as  between  derivations  III.  and 
IV.  upon  a  challenge  to  produce  any  passage  of  the 
0.  T.  in  which  "Dy  =  "iri3n  12)).  If  we  accept 
Rosenm.  Schol.  on  Num.  xxiv.  24,  according  to 
which  Eber  by  parallelism  with  Asshur=Trans- 
euphratian,  this  challenge  is  met.  But  if  not,  the 
facility  of  the  abbreviation  is  sufficient  to  create  a 
presumption  in  its  favour;  while  the  derivation 
with  which  it  is  associated  harmonizes  more  per- 
fectly than  any  other  with  the  later  usage  of  the 
word  Hebrew,  and  is  confirmed  by  negative  argu- 
ments of  the  strongest  kind.  In  fact  it  seems 
almost  impossible  for  the  defenders  of  the  Patro- 
nymic, Eber  theory,,  to  get  over  the  difficulty 
aiisiug  from  the  circumstance  that  no  special  pro- 
minence is  in  the  genealogy  assigned  to  Eber  such 
as  might  entitle  him  to  the  position  of  head,  or 
founder  of  the  race.  From  the  genealogical  scheme 
in  Gen.  xi.  10-26,  it  does  not  appear  that  the  Jews 
thought  of  Eber  as  a  source  primary,  or  even  se- 
condary of  the  national  descent.  The  genealogy 
neither  starts  from  him,  nor  in  its  uniform  sequence 
does  it  rest  upon  him  with  any  emphasis.  There 
is  nothing  to  distinguish  Eber  above  Arphaxad, 
Peleg,  or  Serug.  Like  them  he  is  but  a  link  in 
the  chain  by  which  Shem  is  connected  with  Abra- 
ham. Indeed  the  tendency  of  the  Israelitish  retro- 
spect is  to  stop  at  Jacob.  It  is  with  Jacob  that 
their  history  as  a  nation  begins:  beyond  Jacob  they 
held  their  ancestry  in  common  with  the  Edomites  ; 
beyond  Isaac  they  were  in  danger  of  being  confounded 
with  the  Ishmnelites.  The  predominant  figure  of  the 
emphatically  Hebrew  Abraham  might  tempi  them 
beyond  those  points  of  affinity  with  other  races,  so 
distasteful,  so  anti-national ;  but  it  is  almost  incon- 


HEBREW 

ceivable  that  they  would  voluntarily  originate,  and 
perpetuate  an  appellation  of  themselves  which 
landed  them  on  ft  platform  of  ancestry  where  they 
met  the  whole  population  of  Arabia  (Gen.  x. 
25,  30). 

As  might  have  been  expected,  an  attempt  has 
been  made  to  show  that  the  position  which  Eber 
occupies  in  the  genealogy  is  one  of  no  ordinary 
kind,  and  that  the  Hebrews  stood  in  a  relation  to 
hiin  which  was  held  by  none  other  of  his  descend- 
ants, and  might  therefore  be  called  par  excellence 
"  tlic  children  .of  Eber." 

There  is,  however,  only  one  passage  in  which  it 
is  possible  to  imagine  any  peculiar  resting-point  as 
connected  with  the  name  of  Eber.  In  Gen.  x.  21 
Shem  is  called  "  the  father  of  all  the  children  of 
Eber."  But  the  passage  is  apparently  not  so  much 
genealogical  as  ethnographical ;  and  in  this  view  it 
seems  evident  that  the  words  are  intended  to  contrast 
Shem  with  Ham  and  Japheth,  and  especially  with 
the  former.  Now  Babel  is  plainly  fixed  as  the 
extreme  E.  limit  of  the  posterity  of  Ham  (ver.  10), 
from  whose  land  Nimrod  went  out  into  Assyria 
(ver.  11,  margin  of  A.  V.):  in  the  next  place, 
Egypt  (ver.  13)  is  mentioned  as  the  W.  limit  of 
the  same  great  race  ;  and  these  two  extremes  having 
been  ascertained,  the  historian  proceeds  (ver.  15-19) 
to  fill  up  his  ethnographic  sketch  with  the  inter- 
mediate tribes  of  the  Canaauites.  In  short  in  ver. 
6-20  we  have  indications  of  three  geographical 
points  which  distinguish  the  posterity  of  Ham,  viz. 
Egypt,  Palestine,  and  Babylon.  At  the  last-men- 
tioned city,  at  the  river  Euphrates,  their  proper 
occupancy,  unaffected  by  the  exceptional  movement 
of  Asshur,  terminated,  and  at  the  same  point  that 
of  the  descendants  of  Shem  began.  Accordingly 
the  sharpest  contrast  that  could  be  devised  is  ob- 
tained by  generally  classing  these  latter  nations  as 
those  beyond  the  river  Euphrates;  and  the  words 
•'  father  of  all  tin'  children  of  Eber,"  i.e.  father  of 

the  nations  to  tl ast  of  the    Euphrates,    tind   an 

intelligible  place  in  the  context. 

But  a  more  tangible  ground  for  the  specialty 
implied  in  the  derivation  of  Hebrew  from  Eber  is 
sought  in  the  supposititious  fact  that  Eber  was  the 
only  descendant  of  Noah  who  preserved  the  one 
primeval  language;  ami  it  is  maintained  that  this 
language  transmitted  by  Eber  to  the  Hebrews,  and 
to  them  alone  of  all  his  descendants,  constitutes  a  pe- 
culiar and  special  relation  (Theodor.,  Voss.,  Leusd.). 

It  is  obvious  to  remark  that  this  theory  rests 
upon  three  entirely  gratuitous  assumptions:  first, 
that  the  primeval  language  has  been  preserved; 
next,  that  Eber  alone  preserved  it;  lastly,  that 
having  so  preserved  it,  lie  communicated  it  to  his 
son  Peleg,  but  not  to  his  son  Joktan. 

The  first  assumption  is  utterly  at  variance  with 
the  most  certain  results  of  ethnology,  the  two 
others  are  grossly  improbable.  The  Hebrew  of  the 
0.  T.  was   not  the   language  of  Abraham  when  he 

first  entered  Palestine:  whether  he  inherited  his 
language  from  fiber  or  not,  decidedly  the  language 
which  he  did  speak  must  have  been  Chaldee  (comp. 
Gen.  xxxi.  47),  and  not  Hebrew  (Eichhorn).  This 
supposed  primeval  language  was  in  fact  the  lan- 
guage of  the  Canaanites,  assumed  by  Abraham  as 
more    or  less  akin    to  that   in  which  he  had   been 

»  The  Rev.  J.  Jones,  in  his  Method  of  settling  the 
Canonical  Authority  of  the  .V.  /'.,  indicates  the  way 
in  which  an  inquiry  into  this  subject  ahould  lie  con- 
ducted ;  and  Dr.  N.  Lardner'e  Credibility  of  the  Gospel 
History  is  a  storehouse  <><  ancient  authorities.     But 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE     771 

brought  up,  ami  could  not  possibly  have  been 
transmitted  to  him  by  Eber. 

The  appellative  (Treparrjs)  derivation  is  strongly 
confirmed  by  the  historical  use  of  the  word  Hebrew. 
A  patronymic  would  naturally  be  in  use  only 
among  the  people  themselves,  while  the  appellative 
which  had  been  originally  applied'  to  them  as 
strangers  in  a  strange  land  would  probably  con- 
tinue to  designate  them  in  their  relations  to  neigh- 
bouring tribes,  and  would  be  their  current  name 
among  foreign  nations.  This  is  precisely  the  case 
with  the  terms  Israelite  and  Hebrew  respectively. 
The  former  was  used  by  the  Jews  of  themselves 
among  themselves,  the  latter  was  the  name  by 
which  they  were  known  to  foreigners.  It  is  used 
either  when  foreigners  are  introduced  as  speaking 
(Gen.  xxxix.  14,  17,  xli.  12;  Ex.  i  16,  ii.  (5;  1 
Sam.  iv.  6,  9,  xiii.  19,  xiv.  11,  xxix.  3),  or  where 
they  are  opposed  to  foreign  nations  (Gen.  xliii.  32  ; 
Ex.  i.  15,  ii.  11  ;  Deut.  xv.  12 ;  1  Sam.  xiii.  3,  7). 
So  in  Greek  and  Homan  writers  we  find  the  name 
Hebrews,  or,  in  later  times,  Jews  (Pausau.  v.  5,  §2, 
vi.  24,  §6  ;  Plut.  Sijmpos.  iv.  (3,1;  Tac.  Hist.  v. 
1 ;  Joseph,  passim).  In  N.  T.  we  find  the  same 
contrast  between  Hebrews  and  foreigners  (Acts  vi. 
1;  Phil.  iii.  5):  the  Hebrew  language  is  distin- 
guished from  all  others  (Luke  xxiii.  38  ;  John  v.  2, 
xix.  13;  Acts  xxi.  40,  xxvi.  14:  Rev.  ix.  11); 
while  in  2  Cor.  xi.  22  the  word  is  used  as  only 
second  to  Israelite  in  the  expression  of  national 
peculiarity. 

Gesenius  has  successfully  controverted  the  opinion 
that  the  term  Israelite  was  a  sacred  name,  and 
Hebrew  the  common  appellation. 

Briefly,  we  suppose  that  Hebrew  was  originally  a 
Cis-Euphratian  word  applied  to  Trans-Euphratian 
immigrants:  it  was  accepted  by  these  immigrants  in 
their  external  relations  ;  and  after  the  general  substi- 
tution of  the  word  Jew,  it  still  found  a  place  in  that 
marked  and  special  feature  of  national  contradistinc- 
tion, the  language  (Joseph.  Ant.  i.  6,  §4;  Suidas, 
s.  v.  'Efipcuoi ;  Euseb.  de  Praep.  Evang.  ii.  4  ;  Am- 
brose, Comment,  in  Phil.  iii.  5;  August.  Quaest. 
in  Gen.  24;  Consens.  Evang.  14;  comp.  Retract. 
16 ;  Grot.  Annot.  ad  Gen.  xiv.  13  ;  Voss.  Etym.  s.  v. 
supra;  Bochart,  Phaleg,  ii.  14;  Buxt.  Diss,  de  ling. 
Ilcb.  Gonsero.  31  ;  Hettinger,  Thcs.  i.  1,  2;  Leus- 
den,  Phil.  Heb.  Diss.  21,1;  Bauer,  Entwurf,  &c, 
§xi.;  Rosenm.  Schol.  ad  Gen.  x.  21,  xiv.  13,  and 
Num.  xxiv.  24  ;  Eichhorn,  Einleit.  i.  p.  60;  Gesen. 
Lex.,  and  Gesch.  d.  Heb.  Spr.  1 1 ,  12).  [T.  E.  B.] 

HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE.  The 
principal  questions  which  have  been  raised,  and  the 
opinions  which  are  current  respecting  the  Epistle 
may  be  considered  under  the  following  heads: 

I.  Its  canonical  authority. 

IF.   Fts  author. 

III.  To  whom  was  it  addressed? 

IV.  Where  and  wjien  was  it  written? 

V.  In  wdiat  language  was  it  written  ? 

VI.  Condition  of  the  Hebrews,  and  scope  of  the 
Epistle. 

VII.  Literature  connected  with  it. 

I.  The  most  important  question  that  can  be  en- 
tertained in  connexion  with  this  Epistle  touches  its 

e.n ieal  *  authority. 

both  these  great  works  are  nearly  superseded  tor  ordi- 
nary purposes  by  the  Invaluable  compendium  of  the 
Hbv.  ]'..  !'.  Westcott,  tin  the  Canon  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, to  which  the  first  part  of  this  article  is  greatly 
indebted. 


772  HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 

The  universal  Church,  by  allowing  it  a  place 
among  the  Holy  Scriptures,  acknowledges  that  there 
is  nothing  in  its  contents  inconsistent  with  the  rest 
of  the  Bible.  But  the  peculiar  position  which  is 
assigned  to  it  among  the  Epistles  shows  a  trace  of 
doubts  as  to  its  authorship  or  canonical  authority, 
two  points  which  were  blended  together  in  pri- 
mitive times.  Has  it  then  a  just  claim  to  be  re- 
ceived by  us  as  a  portion  of  that  Bible  which  con- 
tains the  rule  of  our  faith  and  the  rule  of  our 
practice,  laid  down  by  Christ  and  His  apostles? 
Was  it  regarded  as  such  by  the  Primitive  Church, 
to  whose  clearly-expressed  judgment  in  this  matter 
all  later  generations  of  Christians  agree  to  defer  ? 

Of  course,  if  we  possessed  a  declaration  by  an 
inspired  apostle  that  this  Epistle  is  canonical,  all 
discussion  would  be  superfluous.  But  the  inter- 
pretation (by  F.  Spanheim  and  later  writers)  of 
2  Pet.  iii.  15  as  a  distinct  reference  to  St.  Paul's 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  seems  scarcely  tenable.  For, 
if  the  "  you "  whom  St.  Peter  addresses  be  all 
Christians  (see  2  Pet.  i.  1),  the  reference  must  not 
be  limited  to  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews ;  or  if  it 
include  only  (see  2  Pet.  iii.  1)  the  Jews  named  in 
1  Pet.  i.  1,  there  may  be  special  reference  to  the 
Galatians  (vi.  7-9)  and  Ephesians  (ii.  3-5),  but  not 
to  the  Hebrews. 

Was  it  then  received  and  transmitted  as  canonical 
by  the  immediate  successors  of  the  apostles  ?  The 
most  important  witness  among  these,  Clement 
(a.d.  70  or  95)  refers  to  this  Epistle  in  the  same 
way  as,  and  more  frequently  than,  to  any  other 
canonical  book.  It  seems  to  have  been  "  wholly 
transfused,"  says  Mr.  Westcott  [On  the  Canon,  p. 
32)  into  Clement's  mind.  Little  stress  can  be  laid 
upon  the  few  possible  allusions  to  it  in  Barnabas, 
Hernias,  Polycarp,  and  Ignatius.  But  among  the 
extant  authorities  of  orthodox  Christianity  during 
the  first  century  after  the  Epistle  was  written, 
there  is  not  one  dissentient  voice,  whilst  it  is  re- 
ceived as  canonical  by  Clement  writing  from  Rome; 
by  Justin  Martyr,b  familiar  with  the  traditions  of 
Italy  and  Asia ;  by  his  contemporaries,  Pinytus  (?) 
the  Cretan  bishop,  and  the  predecessors  of  Clemeut 
and  Origen  at  Alexandria  ;  and  by  the  compilers  of 
the  Peshito  version  of  the  New  Testament.  Among 
the  writers  of  this  period  who  make  no  reference  to 
it,  there  is  not  one  whose  subject  necessarily  leads 
us  to  expect  him  to  refer  to  it.  Two  heretical 
teachers,  Basilides  at  Alexandria  and  Marcion  at 
Rome,  are  recorded  as  distinctly  rejecting  the  Epistle. 

But  at  the  close  of  that  period,  in  the  North 
African  church,  where  first  the  Gospel  found  utter- 
ance in  the  Latiu  tongue,  orthodox  Christianity 
first  doubted  the  canonical  authority  of  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews.  The  Gospel,  spreading  from  Je- 
rusalem along  the  northern  and  southern  shores  of 
the  Mediterranean,  does  not  appear  to  have  borne 
fruit  in  North  Africa  until  after  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  had  curtailed  intercourse  with  Palestine. 
And  it  came  thither  not  on  the  lips  of  an  inspired 
apostle,  but  shorn  of  much  of  that  oral  tradition  in 
which,  with  many  other  facts,  was  embodied  the 
ground  of  the  Eastern  belief  in  the  canonical  autho- 
rity and  authorship  of  this  anonymous  Epistle.  To 
the  old  Latin  version  of  the  Scriptures,  which  was 


b  Lardner's  remark,  that  it  was  not  the  method  of 
Justin  to  use  allusions  so  often  as  other  authors  have 
done,  may  supply  us  with  something  like  a  middle  point 
between  the  conflicting  declarations  of  two  living 
writers,   both   entitled  to  be   heard   with    attention. 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 

completed  probably  about  a.d.  170,  this  Epistle 
seems  to  have  been  added  as  a  composition  of  Bar- 
nabas, and  as  destitute  of  canonical  authority.  The 
opinion  or  tradition  thus  embodied  in  that  age  and 
country  cannot  be  traced  farther  back.  About  that 
time  the  Roman  Church  also  began  to  speak  Latiu  ; 
and  even  its  latest  Greek  writers  gave  up,  we  know 
not  why,  the  full  faith  of  the  Eastern  Church  in 
the  canonical  authority  of  this  Epistle. 

During  the  next  two  centuries  the  extant  fathers 
of  the  Roman  and  North  African  churches  regard 
the  Epistle  as  a  book  of  no  canonical  authority. 
Tertullian,  if  he  quotes  it,  disclaims  its  authority 
and  speaks  of  it  as  a  good  kind  of  apocryphal  book 
written  by  Barnabas.  Cyprian  leaves  it  out  of  the 
number  of  St.  Paul's  Epistles,  and,  even  in  his 
books  of  Scripture  Testimonies  against  the  Jews, 
never  makes  the  slightest  reference  to  it.  Irenaeus, 
who  came  in  his  youth  to  Gaul,  defending  in  his 
great  work  the  Divinity  of  Christ,  never  quotes, 
scarcely  refers  to  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  The 
Muratorian  Fragment  on  the  Canon  leaves  it  out 
of  the  list  of  St.  Paul's  Epistles.  So  did  Cains 
and  Hippolytus,  who  wrote  at  Rome  in  Greek  ;  and 
so  did  Victorinus  of  Pannonia.  But  in  the  fourth 
century  its  authority  began  to  revive  ;  it  was  re- 
ceived by  Hilary  of  Poitiers,  Lucifer  and  Faustinus 
of  Cagliari,  Fabius  and  Victorinus  of  Rome,  Am- 
brose of  Milan,  and  Philaster  (?)  and  Gaudentius  of 
Brescia.  At  the  end  of  the  fourth  century,  Jerome, 
the  most  learned  and  critical  of  the  Latiu  Fathers, 
reviewed  the  conflicting  opinions  as  to  the  autho- 
rity of  this  Epistle.  He  considered  that  the  pre- 
vailing, though  not  universal  view  of  the  Latin 
churches  was  of  less  weight  than  the  view  not  only 
of  ancient  writers,  but  also  of  all  the  Greek  and  all 
the  Eastern  churches,  where  the  Epistle  was  re- 
ceived as  canonical  and  read  daily ;  and  he  pro- 
nounced a  decided  opinion  in  favour  of  its  authority. 
The  great  contemporary  light  of  North  Africa,  St. 
Augustine,  held  a  similar  opinion.  And  after  the 
declaration  of  these  two  eminent  men,  the  Latin 
churches  united  with  the  East  in  receiving  the 
Epistle.  The  3rd  Council  of  Carthage,  a.d.  1597, 
and  a  Decretal  of  Pope  Innocent,  A.D.  416,  gave  a 
final  confirmation  to  their  decision. 

Such  was  the  course  and  the  end  of  the  only 
considerable  opposition  which  has  been  made  to  the 
canonical  authority  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews. 
Its  origin  has  not  been  ascertained.  Some  critics 
have  conjectured  that  the  Montanist  or  the  Novatian 
controversy  instigated,  and  that  the  Ariaii  contro- 
versy dissipated  so  much  opposition  as  proceeded 
from  orthodox  Christians.  The  references  to  St. 
Paul  in  the  Clementine  Homilies  have  led  other 
critics  to  the  startling  theory  that  orthodox  Chris- 
tians at  Rome,  in  the  middle  of  the  second  century, 
commonly  regarded  and  described  St.  Paul  as  an 
enemy  of  the  Faith; — a  theory  which,  if  it  were 
established,  would  be  a  much  stranger  fact  than  the 
rejection  of  the  least  accredited  of  the  epistles 
which  bear  the  Apostle's  name.  But  perhaps  it  is 
more  probable  that  that  jealous  care,  with  which 
the  Church  everywhere,  in  the  second  century,  had 
learned  to  scrutinize  all  books  claiming  canonical 
authority,  misled,  in  this  instance,  the  churches  of 


The  index  of  Otto's  edition  of  Justin  contains  more 
than  50  references  by  Justin  to  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul ; 
while  Prof.  Jowett  [On  the  Thessalonians,  <$<•'.,  1st  Ed. 
i.  345)  puts  forth  in  England  the  statement  that  Justin 
was  unacquainted  with  St.  Paul  and  his  writings. 


HEBREWS  EPISTLE  TO  THE 

North  Africa  and  Rome.  For  to  thorn  this  Epistle 
was  an  anonymous  writing,  unlike  an  epistle  in  its 
opening,  unlike  a  treatise  in  its  end,  differing  in  its 
style  from  every  apostolic  epistle,  abounding  in 
arguments  and  appealing  to  sentiments  which  were 
always  foreign  to  the  Gentile,  and  growing  less 
familiar  to  the  Jewish  mind.  So  they  went  a  step 
beyond  the  church  of  Alexandria,  which,  while 
doubting  the  authorship  of  this  Epistle,  always 
acknowledged  its  authority.  The  church  of  Jeru- 
salem, as  the  original  receiver  ofthe  Epistle,  was  the 
depository  of  that  oral  testimony  on  which  both  its 
authorship  ami  canonical  authority  rested,  and  was 
the  fountain-head  of  information  which  satisfied 
the  Eastern  and  Greek  churches.  But  the  church 
of  Jerusalem  was  early  hidden  in  exile  and  ob- 
scurity. And  Palestine,  after  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem,  became  unknown  ground  to  that  class 
of  "  dwellers  in  Libya  about  Cyrene,  and  strangers 
of  Rome,"  who  once  maintained  close  religious  in- 
tercourse with  it.  All  these  considerations  may 
help  to  account  for  the  fact  that  the  Latin  churches 
hesitated  to  receive  an  epistle,  the  credentials  of 
which,  from  peculiar  circumstances,  were  originally 
imperfect,  and  had  become  inaccessible  to  them 
when  their  version  of  Scripture  was  in  process  of 
formation,  until  religious  intercourse  between  East 
and  West  again  grew  frequent  and  intimate  in  the 
fourth  century. 

But  such  doubts  were  confined  to  the  Latin 
churches  from  the  middle  of  the  second  to  the  close 
'ofthe  fourth  century.  All  the  rest  of  orthodox 
Christendom  from  the  beginning  was  agreed  upon 
the  canonical  authority  of  this  Epistle.  No  Greek 
or  Syriac  writer  ever  expressed  a  *doubt.  It  was 
acknowledged  in  various  public  documents;  received 
by  the  trainers  of  the  Apostolical  Constitutions 
(about  a.d.  250,  Beveridge);  quoted  in  the  epistle 
of  the  Synod  of  Antioch,  A.D.  269  ;  appealed  to  by 
the  debaters  in  the  first  Council  of  Nice  ;  included 
in  that  catalogue  of  canonical  books  which  was 
added  (perhaps  afterwards)  to  the  canons  of  the 
Council  of  Laodicea,  A.D.  365;  and  sanctioned  by 
the  Quinisextine  Council  at  Constantinople,  A.D. 
692. 

Cardinal  Cajetan,  the  opponent  of  Luther,  was 
the  first  to  disturb  the  tradition  of  a  thousand 
years,  and  to  deny  the  authority  of  this  Epistle. 
Erasmus,  Calvin  and  Beza  questioned  only  "its  au- 
thorship. Tin-  bolder  spirit  of  Luther,  unable  to 
perceive  its  agreement  with  St.  Paul's  doctrine, 
pronounced  it  to  be  the  work  of  some  disciple  of  the 
Apostle  who  had  built  not  only  gold,  silver,  and 
precious  stones,  but  also  wood,  hay,  and  stubble 
upon  his  master's  foundation.  Ami  whereas  the 
Greek  church  in  the  fourth  century  gave  it  some- 
times the  tenth0  place,  or  at  other  times,  as  it  now 
does,    and    as    the    Syrian,     Roman,     and     English 

churches  do,  the  fourteenth  place  among  the  Epistles 
of  St.  Paul,  Luther,  when  he  printed  his  version  of 

the    Bible,    separated    this    1 k    from    St.    Paul's 

Epistles,  and  placed  it  with  the  Epistles  of  St. 
James  and  St.  Judo,  next  before  the  Revelation; 
indicating  by  this  change  of  order  his  opinion  that 

the  four  relegated  books  are  of  Ies8  importance  and 
less  authority d  than  the  rest  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment.    His  opinion  found  some  promoters;  but  it 


c  The  Vatican  Codex    (B)  A.n.   350  bears  traces  of 
an  earlier  assignment  ofthe  fifth  place  to  the  Ep.  to 

lie-  Hebrews. 

'»   Sic  lilcck,  i.  pp.  247  and  44". 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE  773 

has  not  been  adopted  in  any  confession  ofthe  Lu- 
theran church. 

The  canonical  authority  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  is  then  secure,  so  far  as  it  can  be  esta- 
blished by  the  tradition  of  Christian  churches.  The 
doubts  which  affected  it  were  admitted  in  remote 
places,  or  in  the  failure  of  knowledge,  or  under  the 
pressure  of  times  of  intellectual  excitement;  and 
they  have  disappeared  before  full  information  and 
calm  judgment. 

II.  Who  was  the  author  of  the  Epistle? — This 
question  is  of  less  practical  importance  than  the 
last ;  for  many  books  are  received  as  canonical, 
whilst  little  or  nothing  is  known  of  their  writers. 
In  this  Epistle  the  superscription,  the  ordinary 
source  of  information,  is  wanting.  Its  omission  has 
been  accounted  for,  since  the  days  of  Clement  of 
Alexandria  (apud  Euseb.  E.  H.  vi.  14)  and  Chry- 
sostom,  by  supposing  that  St.  Paul  withheld  his 
name,  lest  the  sight  of  it  should  repel  any  Jewish 
Christians  who  might  still  regard  him  rather  as  an 
enemy  of  the  law  (Acts  xxi.  21)  than  as  a  bene- 
factor to  their  nation  (Acts  xxiv.  17).  And  Pau- 
taenus,  or  some  other  predecessor  of  Clement,  adds 
that  St.  Paul  would  not  write  to  the  Jews  as  an 
apostle  because  he  regarded  the  Lord  Himself  as  their 
apostle  (see  the  remarkable  expression,  Heb.  iii.  1, 
twice  quoted  by  Justin  Martyr,  Apol.  i.  12,  63).    ' 

It  was  the  custom  of  the  earliest  fathers  to  quote 
passages  of  Scripture  without  naming  the  writer 
or  the  book  which  supplied  them.  But  there  is  no 
reason  to  doubt  that  at  first,  everywhere,  except  in 
North  Africa,  St.  Paul  was  regarded  as  the  author. 
"  Among  the  Greek  fathers,"  says  Olshausen 
(Opuscula,  p.  95),  "  no  one  is  named  either  in 
Egypt,  or  iu  Syria,  Palestine,  Asia,  or  Greece,  who 
is  opposed  to  the  opinion  that  this  Epistle  proceeds 
from  St.  Paul."  The  Alexandrian  fathers,  whether 
guided  by  tradition  or  by  critical  discernment,  are 
the  earliest  to  note  the  discrepancy  of  style  between 
this  Epistle  and  the  other  thirteen.  And  they  re- 
ceived it  in  the  same  sense  that  the  speech  in  Acts 
xxii.  1-21  is  received  as  St.  Paul's.  Clement 
ascribed  to  St.  Luke  the  translation  of  the  Epistle 
into  Greek  from  a  Hebrew  original  of  St.  Paul. 
Origen,  embracing  the  opinion  of  those  who,  he 
says,  preceded  him,  believed  that  the  thoughts  were 
St.  Paul's,  the  language  and  composition  St.  Luke's 
or  Clement's  of  Rome.  Tertullian,  knowing  no- 
thing of  any  connexion  of  St.  Paul  with  the  Epistle, 
names  Barnabas  as  the  reputed  author  according  to 
the   North   African   tradition,   which  in  the  time  of 

Augustine  had  taken  the  less  definite  sha] f  a 

denial  by  some  that  the  Epistle  was  St.  Paul's,  and 
in  the  time  of  Isidore  of  Seville  appears  as  a  Latin 
opinion  (founded  on  the  dissonance  of  style)  that  it. 
was  written  by  Barnabas  or  Clement.  At  Rome 
Clement  was  silent  as  to  the  author  of  this  as  of 

the  other  epistles  which  lie  iplotes;   and  the  writ. as 
who  follow   him,  down  to  the  mi, Idle  of  the  fourth 
century, only  touch  on  the  point  to  denj   that  the 
Epistle  is  St.  Paul's. 
The  view  of  the  Alexandrian  fathers,  a  middle 

point  between  the  Eastern  and  Western  traditions, 
won  its  way  in  the  Church.  It  was  adopted  as  tie- 
most  probable  opinion  b]  Eusebius;*  and  its  gradual 
reo  ption  may  have  led  to  tin'  silent  transfer,  which 


c  Professor  Blunt,  <>n  the  HigM  Use  of  the  Early 

Fathers,  pp.  189-444,    gives   a   complete  view  of   the 
evidence  of  Clement,  Origen,  and  Eusebius  as  to  the 

author-hip  of  the  Epistle. 


774  HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 

was  made  about  his  time,  of  this  Epistle  from  the 
tenth  place  in  the  Greek  Canon  to  the  fourteenth,  at 
the  end  of  St.  Paul's  Epistles,  and  before  those  of 
other  Apostles.  This  place  it  held  everywhere  till 
the  time  of  Luther  ;  as  if  to  indicate  the  deliberate 
and  final  acquiescence  of  the  universal  church  in 
the  opinion  that  it  is  one  of  the  works  of  St.  Paul, 
but  not  in  the  same  full  sense f  as  the  other  ten 
Epistles,  addressed  to  particular  churches,  are  his. 

In  the  last  three  centuries  every  word  and  phrase 
in  the  Epistle  has  been  scrutinised  with  the  most 
exact  care  for  historical  and  grammatical  evidence 
as  to  the  authorship.  The  conclusions  of  individual 
inquirers  are  very  diverse  ;  but  the  result  lias  not 
been  any  considerable  disturbance  of  the  ancient 
tradition.s  No  new  kind  of  difficulty  has  been 
discovered :  no  hypothesis  open  to  fewer  objections 
than  the  tradition  has  been  devised.  The  laborious 
work  of  the  Rev.  C.  Forster  {The  Apostolical  Au- 
thority of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews),  which  is  a 
storehouse  of  grammatical  evidence,  advocates  the 
opinion  that  St.  Paul  was  the  author  of  the  lan- 
guage, as  well  as  the  thoughts  of  the  Epistle. 
Professor  Stuart,  in  the  Introduction  to  his  Com- 
mentary on  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  discusses 
the  internal  evidence  at  great  length,  and  agrees  in 
opinion  with  Mr.  Forster.  Dr.  C.  Wordsworth, 
"  On  the  Canon  of  the  Scriptures,  Lect.  is.,  leans  to 
the  same  conclusion.  Dr.  S.  Davidson,  in  his  Intro- 
duction to  the  New  Testament,  gives  a  very  careful 
and  minute  summary  of  the  arguments  of  all  the 
principal  modern  critics  who  reason  upon  the  internal 
evidence,  and  concludes,  in  substantial  agreement 
with  the  Alexandrian  tradition,  that  St.  Paul  was 
the  author  of  the  Epistle,  and  that,  as  regards  its 
phraseology  and  style,  St.  Luke  co-operated  with 
him  in  making  it  what  it  now  appears.  The  ten- 
dency of  opinion  in  Germany  has  been  to  ascribe 
the  Epistle  to  some  other  author  than  St.  Paul. 
Luther's  conjecture,  that  Apollos  was  the  author, 
has  been  widely  adopted  by  Le  Clerc,  Bleek,  De 
Wette,  Tholuck,  Bunsen,  and  others. h  Barnabas 
has  been  named  by  Wieseler,  Thiersch,  and  others.1 
Luke  by  Grotius.  Silas  by  others.  Neander  attri- 
butes it  to  some  apostolic  man  of  the  Pauline  school, 
whose  training  and  method  of  stating  doctrinal 
truth  differed  from  St.  Paul's.  The  distinguished 
name  of  H.  Ewald  has  been  given  recently  to  the 
hypothesis  (paitly  anticipated  by  Wetstein),  that  it 
was  written  neither  by  St.  Paul,  nor  to  the  Hebrews, 
but  by  some  Jewish  teacher  residing  at  Jerusalem 
to  a  church  in  some  important  Italian  town,  which 
is  supposed  to  have  sent  a  deputation  to  Palestine. 
Most  of  these  guesses  are  quite  destitute  of  historical 
evidence,  and  require  the  support  of  imaginary  facts 
to  place  them  on  a  seeming  equality  with  the  tra- 


f  In  this  sense  may  be  fairly  understood  the  indi- 
rect declaration  that  this  Epistle  is  St.  Paul's,  which 
the  Church  of  England  puts  into  the  mouth  of  her 
ministers  in  the  Offices  for  the  Visitation  of  the  Sick 
and  the  Solemnization  of  Matrimony. 

s  Bishop  Pearson  {I)e  successione  priorum  Romae 
episcoporum,  ch.  viii.  §8)  says  that  the  way  in  which 
Timothy  is  mentioned  (xiii.  23)  seems  to  him  a  suffi- 
cient proof  that  St.  Paul  was  the  author  of  this  Epistle. 
For  another  view  of  this  passage  see  Bleek,  i.  273. 

h  Among  these  must  now  be  placed  Dean  Alford, 
who  in  the  fourth  vol.  of  his  Greek  Testament  (pub- 
lished since  the  above  article  was  in  type),  discusses 
the  question  with  great  care  and  candour,  and  con- 
cludes that  the  Epistle  was  written  by  Apollos  to  the 
Romans,  about  a.d.  69,  from  Ephesus. 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 

ditionary  account.  They  cannot  be  said  to  vise  out 
of  the  region  of  possibility  into  that  of  probability  ; 
but  they  are  such  as  any  man  of  leisure  and  learn- 
ing might  multiply  till  they  include  every  name  in 
the  limited  list  that  we  possess  of  St.  Paul's  con- 
temporaries. 

The  tradition  of  the  Alexandrian  fathers  is  not 
without  some  difficulties.  It  is  truly  said  that 
the  style  of  reasoning  is  different  from  that  which 
St.  Paul  uses  in  his  acknowledged  epistles.  But  it 
may  be  replied, — Is  the  adoption  of  a  different  style 
of  reasoning  inconsistent  with  the  versatility  of  that 
mind  which  could  express  itself  in  writings  so 
diverse  as  the  Pastoral  Epistles  and  the  preceding- 
nine  ?  or  in  speeches  so  diverse  as  those  which  are 
severally  addressed  to  pagans  at  Athens  and  Ly- 
caonia,  to  Jews  at  Pisidian  Antioch,  to  Christian 
elders  at  Miletus?  Is  not  such  diversity  just  what 
might  be  expected  from  the  man  who  in  Syrian 
Antioch  resisted  circumcision  and  St.  Peter,  but  in 
Jerusalem  kept  the  Nazarite  vow,  and  made  con- 
cessions to  Hebrew  Christians  ;  who  professed  to 
become  "all  things  to  all  men"  (1  Cor.  ix.  22)  ; 
whose  education  qualified  him  to  express  his  thoughts 
in  the  idiom  of  either  Syria  or  Greece,  and  to  vin- 
dicate to  Christianity  whatever  of  eternal  truth  was 
known  in  the  world,  whether  it  had  become  current 
in  Alexandrian  philosophy,  or  in  Rabbinical  tia- 
dition  ? 

If  it  be  asked  to  what  extent,  and  by  whom  was 
St.  Paul  assisted  in  the  composition  of  this  Epistle, 
the  reply  must  be  in  the  words  of  Origen,  "  Who 
wrote  [i.  c.  as  in  Rom.  xvi.  22,  wrote  from  the 
author's  dictation11]  this  Epistle,  only  God  knows." 
The  style  is  not  quite  like  that  of  Clement  of  Rome. 
Both  style  and  sentiment  are  quite  unlike  those  of 
the  author  of  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas.  Of  the  three 
apostolic  men  named  by  African  fathers,  St.  Luke 
is  the  most  likely  to  have  shared  in  the  composition 
of  this  Epistle.  The  similarity  in  phraseology 
which  exists  between  the  acknowledged  writings  of 
St.  Luke  and  this  Epistle  ;  his  constant  companion- 
ship with  St.  Paul,  and  his  habit  of  listening  to 
and  recording  the  Apostle's  arguments,  form  a 
strong  presumption  in  his  favour. 

But  if  St.  Luke  were  joint-author  with  St.  Paul, 
what  share  in  the  composition  is  to  be.  assigned  to 
him  ?  This  question  has  been  asked  by  those  who 
regard  joint-authorship  as  an  impossibility,  and 
ascribe  the  Epistle  to  some  other  writer  than  St. 
Paul.  Perhaps  it  is  not  easy,  certainly  it  is  not 
necessary,  to  rind  an  answer  which  would  satisfy  or 
silence  persons  who  pursue  an  historical  inquiry  into 
the  region  of  conjecture.  Who  shall  define  the 
exact  responsibility  of  Timothy  or  Silvanus,  or 
Sosthenes  in  those  seven  Epistles  which  St.  Paul 


1  Among  these  are  some,  who,  unlike  Origen,  deny 
that  Barnabas  is  the  author  of  the  Epistle  which 
bears  his  name.  If  it  be  granted  that  we  have  no 
specimen  of  his  style,  the  hypothesis  which  connects 
him  with  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  becomes  less 
improbable..  Many  circumstances  show  that  he  pos- 
sessed some  qualifications  for  writing  such  an  Epistle  ; 
such  as  his  Levitical  descent,  his  priestly  education, 
his  reputation  at  Jerusalem,  his  acquaintance  with 
Gentile  churches,  his  company  with  St.  Taul,  the  tra- 
dition of  Tertullian,  &C. 

k  Liinemann,  followed  by  Dean  Alford,  argues  that 
Origen  must  have  meant  here,  as  he  confessedly  docs 
a  few  lines  farther  on,  to  indicate  an  author  not  a 
scribe  by  6  ypdij/as  ;  but  he  acknowledges  that  Olshau- 
sen,  Stcnglein,  and  Delitzsch,  do  not  allow  the  necessity. 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 

inscribes  with  some  of  their  names  conjointly  with 
his  own  ?  To  what  extent  does  St.  Mark's  lan- 
guage clothe  the  inspired  recollections  of  St.  Peter, 
which,  according  to  ancient  tradition,  are  recorded 
in  the  second  Gospel?  Or,  to  take  the  acknow- 
ledged writings  of  St.  Luke  himself, — what  is  the 
share  of  the  "eye-witnesses  and  ministers  of  the 
word"  (Luke  i.  2),  or  what  is  the  share  of  St.  Paul 
himself  in  that  Gospel,  which  some  persons,  not 
without  countenance  from  tradition,  conjecture  that 
St.  Luke  wrote  under  his  master's  eye,  in  the 
prison  at  Caesarea  ;  or  who  shall  assign  to  the  fol- 
lower and  the  master  their  portions  respectively 
in  those  seven  characteristic  speeches  at  Antioch, 
Lystra,  Athens,  Miletus,  Jerusalem,  and  Caesarea? 
If  St.  Luke  wrote  down  St.  Paul's  Gospel,  and 
condensed  his  missionary  speeches,  may  he  not  have 
taken  afterwards  a  more  important  share  in  the 
composition  of  this  Epistle  ? 

HI.  To  whom  was  the  Epistle  sent  ? — This  ques- 
tion was  agitated  as  early  as  the  time  of  Chry- 
sostom,  who  replies,- — to  the  Jews  in  Jerusalem 
and  Palestine.  The  ancient  tradition  preserved 
by  Clement  of  Alexandria,  that  it  was  origi- 
nally written  in  Hebrew  by  St.  Paul,  points  to 
the  same  quarter.  The  unfaltering  tenacity  with 
which  the  Eastern  Church  from  the  beginning 
maintained  the  authority  of  this  Epistle  leads  to 
the  inference  that  it  was  pent  thither  with  sufficient 
credentials  in  the  first  instance.  Like  the  first 
Epistle  of  St.  John  it  has  no  inscription  embodied 
in  its  text,  and  yet  it  differs  from  a  treatise  by  con- 
taining several  direct  personal  appeals,  and  from  a 
homily,  by  closing  with  messages  and  salutations. 
Its  present  title,  which,  though  ancient,  cannot  be 
proved  to  have  been  inscribed  by  the  writer  of  the 
Epistle,  might  have  been  given  to  it,  in  accordance 
with  the  use  of  the  term  Hebrews  in  the  N.  T.,  if 
it  had  been  addressed  either  to  Jews  who  lived 
at  Jerusalem,  and  spoke  Aramaic  (Acts  vi.  1),  or 
to  the  descendants  of  Abraham  generally  (2  Cor.  xi. 
22;    Phil.  iii.  5). 

But  the  argument  of  the  Epistle  is  such  as  could 
be  used  with  must,  effect  to  a  church  consisting 
exclusively  of  Jews  by  birth,  personally  familiar 
with,1  and  attached  to  the  Temple-service.  And 
such  a  community  (as  Bleek,  Hebrder,  i.  31,  argues) 
could  be  found  only  in  Jerusalem  and  its  neighbour- 
hood. And  if  the  church  at  Jerusalem  retained 
its  former  distinction  of  including  a  great  company 
of  priests  I  Acts  vi.  7  i — a  class  professionally  fami- 
liar with  the  songs  of  the  Temple,  accustomed 
to  discuss  the  interpretation  of  Scripture,  and  ac- 
quainted with  the  prevailing  Alexandrian  philo- 
sophy,— such  a  church  would  be  peculiarly  lit  to 
appreciate  this  Epistle.  For  it  takes  from  the 
Booh  of  Psalms  the  remarkable  proportion  of  six- 
tee it  of  thirty-two  quotations  from  the  0.  T., 

which  it  itains.     It  relies  so  much  on  deductions 

from  Scripture  that  this  circumstance  has  been 
pointed  out  as  inconsistent  With  the  tone  of  inde- 
pendent apostolic  authority,  which  characterises 
the  undoubted  Epistles  of  St.  Paul.     And  so  fire- 

1  For  an  explanation  of  the  alleged  ignorance  of 
the  author  of  Ileb.  ix.  as  to  the  furniture  of  the 
Temple,  see  Ebrard's  Commentary  on  the  pa 
Professor  Stuart's  Excursus,  xvi.  and  xvii. 

m  The  influence  of  the  Alexandrian  school  did  not 
begin  with  Philo,  and  was  not  confined  to  Alexandria. 
[Alexandria.]  The  means  and  the  evidence  of  its 
progress  may  be  traced  in  the  writings  of  the  son  of 
Sirach  (Maurice's  Moral  and  Metaphysical  Philosophy, 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE  775 

quent    is  the   use  of  Alexandrian   philosophy   and 

exegesis  that  it  has  suggested  to  some  critics 
Apollos  as  the  writer,  to  others  the  Alexandrian 
church  as  the  primary  recipient  of  the  Epistle.™ 
If  certain  members  of  the  church  at  Jerusalem  pos- 
sessed goods  (Heb.  x.  34),  and  the  means  of  minis- 
tering to  distress  (vi.  10),  this  fact  is  not  irre- 
concileable,  as  has  been  supposed,  with  the  deep 
poverty  of  other  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  (Rom. 
xv.  26,  &c.)  ;  but  it  agrees  exactly  with  the  condi- 
tion of  that  church  thirty  years  previously  (Acts 
ii.  45,  and  iv.  34),  and  with  the  historical  estimate 
of  the  material  prosperity  of  the  Jews  at  this  time 
(Merivale,  History  of  the  Romans  under  the  Em- 
pire, vi.  531,  ch.  lix.).  If  St.  Paul  quotes  to 
Hebrews  the  LXX.  without  correcting  it  where 
it  differs  from  the  Hebrew,  this  agrees  with  his 
practice  in  other  Epistles,  and  with  the  fact  that, 
as  elsewhere  so  in  Jerusalem,  Hebrew  was  a 
dead  language,  acquired  only  with  much  pains  by 
the  learned.  The  Scriptures  were  popularly  known 
in  Aramaic  or  Greek :  quotations  were  made  from 
memory,  and  verified  by  memory.  Probably  Prof. 
Jowett  is  corr«t  in  his  inference  (1st  Edit.  i.  361), 
that  St.  Paul  did  not  familarly  know  the  Hebrew 
original,  while  he  possessed  a  minute  knowledge  of 
the  LXX. 

Ebrard  limits  the  primary  circle  of  readers  even 
to  a  section  of  the  church  at  Jerusalem.  Consider- 
ing such  passages  as  v.  12,  vi.  10,  x.  32,  as  pro- 
bably inapplicable  to  the  whole  of  that  church,  he 
conjectures  that  St.  Paul  wrote  to  some  neophytes 
whose  conversion,  though  not  mentioned  in  the 
Acts,  may  have  been  partly  due  to  the  Apostle's 
influence  in  the  time  of  his  last  recorded  sojourn  in 
Jerusalem  (Acts  xxi.  22). 

Some  critics  have  maintained  that  this  Epistle 
was  addressed  directly  to  Jewish  believers  every- 
where: others  have  restricted  it  to  those  who  dwelt 
in  Asia  and  Greece.  Almost  every  city  in  which 
St.  Paul  laboured  has  been  selected  by  some  critic 
as  the  place  to  which  it  was  originally  sent.  Not 
only  Rome  and  Caesarea,  where  St.  Paul  was  long 
imprisoned,  but,  amid  the  profound  silence  of  its 
early  Fathers,  Alexandria  also,  which  he  never  saw, 
have  each  found  their  advocates.  And  one  con- 
jecture connects  this  Epistle  specially  with  the 
Gentile  Christians  of  Ephesus.  These  guesses 
agree  in  being  entirely  unsupported  by  historical 
evidence;  and  each  of  them  has  some  special  plausi- 
bility combined  with  difficulties  peculiar  to  itself. 

IV.  Where  and  when  was  it  written  ? — Eastern 
traditions  of  the  fourth  century,  in  connexion 
with  the  opinion  that  St.  Paul  is  the  writer, 
name  Italy  ami  Rome,  or  Athens,  as  the  place  from 
whence  the  Epistle  was  written.  Either  place 
would  agree  with,  perhaps  was  suggested  by,  the 
mention   of   Timothy    in   the   last   chapter.      An 

inference  in  favour  of  Lome  may  be  drawn  from 
the  Apostle's  long  captivity  there  iii  company  with 
Timothy  and  Luke.  Caesarea  is  open  to  a  similar 
ce;  and  it  has  been  conjecturally named  as 
the   place   of  the   composition    of  the    Epp.   to   the 


i.  i-8,  p.  234),  the  author  of  the  Boob  of  Wisdom 
(Ewald,  Oesehichte,  iv.  548),  Aristobulus,  Ezekiel, 
Philo,  ami  Theodotus  [Ewald,  iv.  297);  in  the 
phraseology  of  st.  John  (Prof.  Jowett,  On  the  Thessa- 
lonians,  Sec.  1st  Edit.  i.  108),  and  the  arguments  of 
st.  Paul  (ibid.  p.  301)  ;  in  the  establishment  of  an 

Alexandrian  BynagOgue  at  Jerusalem  (Acts  vi.  !)),  and 
the  existence  of  schools  of   scriptural   interpretation 

there  (Ewald,  Oesehichte,  v.  t;3,  and  vi.  231). 


776  HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 

Colossians,  Ephesians,  and  Philippians:  but  it  is 
not  supported  by  any  tradition.  From  the  expres- 
sion "they  of  (air6)  Italy,"  xiii.  24,  it  has  been 
interred  that  the  writer  could  not  have  been  in 
Italy;  but  Winer  (Grammatik,  §66.  6),  denies 
that  the  preposition  necessarily  lias  that  force. 

The  Epistle  was  evidently  written  before  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  in  a.d.  70.  The  whole 
argument,  and  specially  the  passages  viii.  4  and  sq., 
ix.  6  and  sq.  (where  the  present  tenses  of  the  Greek 
are  unaccountably  changed  into  past  in  the  English 
version),  and  xiii.  10  and  sq.  imply  that  the  Temple 
was  standing,  and  that  its  usual  course  of  Divine 
service  was  carried  on  without  interruption.  A 
Christian  reader,  keenly  watching  in  the  doomed n 
city  for  the  fulfilment  of  his  Lord's  prediction, 
would  at  once  understand  the  ominous  references 
to  "  that  which  beareth  thorns  and  briers,  and  is 
rejected,  and  is  nigh  unto  cursing,  whose  end  is  to 
be  burned ;  "  "  that  which  decayeth  and  waxeth 
old,  and  is  ready  to  vanish  away  ;  "  and  the  coming 
of  the  expected  "  Day,"  and  the  removing  of  those 
things  that  are  shaken,  vi.  8,  viii.  13,  x.  25,  37, 
xii.  27.  But  these  forebodings  seem  fcss  distinct  and 
circumstantial  than  they  might  have  been  if  uttered 
immediately  before  the  catastrophe.  The  refer- 
ences to  former  teachers  xiii.  7,  and  earlier  instruc- 
tion v.  12,  and  x.  32,  might  suit  any  time  after 
the  first  years  of  the  church  ;  but  it  would  be  in- 
teresting to  connect  the  first  reference  with  the 
martyrdom0  of  St.  James  at  the  Passover  A.D.  62. 
Modern  criticism  has  not  destroyed,  though  it  has 
weakened,  the  connexion  of  this  Epistle  with  St. 
Paul's  Roman  captivity  (a.d.  61-63)  by  substi- 
tuting the  reading  ro?s  Secrfj-lois,  "  the  prisoners  " 
for  to?s  Sea/j.o'is  fxov  (A.  V.  "  me  in  my  bonds)," 
x.  34 ;  by  proposing  to  interpret  aTroAeXv/xevov 
xiii.  23  as  "sent  away,"  rather  than  "set  at 
liberty  ;  "  and  by  urging  that  the  condition  of  the 
writer,  as  portrayed  in  xiii.  18,  19,  23,  is  not 
necessarily  that  of  a  prisoner,  and  that  there  may 
possibly  be  no  allusion  to  it  in  xiii.  3.  On  the 
whole,  the  date  which  best  agrees  with  the  tra- 
ditionary account  of  the  authorship  and  destination 
of  the  Epistle  is  A.D.  63,  about  the  end  of  St.  Paul's 
imprisonment  at  Home,  or  a  year  after  Albinus  suc- 
ceeded Festus  as  Procurator. 

V.  In  what  language  was  it  written  1 — Like 
St.  Matthew's  Gospel,  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 
has  afforded  ground  for  much  unimportant  contro- 
versy respecting  the  language  in  which  it  was 
originally  written.  The  earliest  statement  is  that 
of  Clement  of  Alexandria  (preserved  in  Euseb. 
H.  E.  vi.  14);  to  the  effect  that  it  was  written  by 
St.  Paul  in  Hebrew,  and  translated  by  St.  Luke 
into  Greek  ;  and  hence,  as  Clement  observes,  arises 
the  identity  of  the  style  of  the  Epistle  and  that  of 
the  Acts.  This  statement  is  repeated,  after  a  long 
interval,  by  Eusebius,  Theodoret,  Jerome,  and 
several  later  fathers :  but  it  is  not  noticed  by.  the 
majority.  Nothing  is  said  to  had  us  to  regard 
it  as  a  tradition,  rather  than  a  conjecture  suggested 
by  the  style  of  the  Epistle.  No  person  is  said  to 
have  used  or  seen  a  Hebrew  original.  The  Aramaic 
copy,  included  in  the  Peshito,  has  never  been  re- 
garded otherwise  than  as  a  translation.  Among 
the  few  modern  supporters  of  an  Aramaic  original 
the  most  distinguished  are  Joseph  Hallet,  an  English 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 

writer  in  1727  (whose  able  essay  is  most  easily 
accessible  in  a  Latin  translation  in  Wolf's  Curae 
Philologicae,  iv.  806-837),  and  J.  D.  Michaelis, 
Erkldr.  des  Brief es  an  die  Hebraer.  Bleek  (i.  6-23 ) , 
argues  in  support  of  a  Greek  original,  on  the  grounds 
of  (1.)  the  purity  and  easy  flow  of  the  Greek  ;  (2.) 
the  use  of  Greek  words  which  could  not  be  ade- 
quately expressed  in  Hebrew  without  long  peri- 
phrase  ;  (3.)  the  use  of  paronomasia — under  which 
head  he  disallows  the  inference  against  an  Aramaic 
original  which  has  been  drawn  from  the  double 
sense  given  to  Siafiifjicrj,  ix.  15  ;  and  (4.)  the  use  of 
the  Septuagint  in  quotations  and  references  which 
do  not  correspond  with  the  Hebrew  text. 

VI.   Condition   of    the  Hebrews,    and  scope   of 
the  Epistle. — The    numerous    Christian    churches 
scattered  throughout  Judaea  (Acts  ix.  31  ;  Gal.  i. 
22)  were  continually  exposed  to  persecution  from  the 
Jews  (1  Thess.  ii.  14),  which  would  become  more 
searching  and  extensive  as  churches  multiplied,  and 
as  the  growing  turbulence  of  the  nation  ripened  into 
the  insurrection   of  A.D.    66.     Personal  violence, 
spoliation  of  property,  exclusion  from  the  synagogue, 
and   domestic  strife  were  the    universal  forms  of 
persecution.     But  in  Jerusalem  there  was  one  ad- 
ditional weapon  in  the  hands  of  the  predominant 
oppressors    of  the   Christians.     Their   magnificent 
national  Temple,  hallowed  to  every  Jew  by  ancient 
historical  and  by  gentler  personal  recollections^  with 
its  irresistible  attractions,  its  soothing  strains,  and 
mysterious  ceremonies,  might  be  shut  against  the 
Hebrew   Christian.     And  even  if,   amid  the  fierce 
factions  and  frequent  oscillations    of  authority  in 
Jerusalem,  this  affliction  were  not  often  laid  upon 
him,  yet  there  was  a  secret  burden   which  every 
Hebrew  Christian  bore  within  him — the  knowledge 
that  the  end  of  all  the  beauty  and  awfulness  of  Zion 
was  rapidly  approaching.     Paralysed,  perhaps,  by 
this  consciousness,  and  enfeebled  by  their  attachment 
to  a  lower  fornvof  Christianity,  they  became  station- 
ary in  knowledge,  weak  in  faith,  void  of  energy,  and 
even  in  danger  of  apostasy  from  Christ.     For,  as 
afflictions  multiplied  round  them,  and  made  them 
feel  more  keenly  their  dependence  on  God,  and  their 
need  of  near  and  frequent  and  associated  approach 
to  Him,  they  seemed,  in  consequence  of  their  Chris- 
tianity, to  be  receding  from  the  God  of  their  fathers, 
and  losing  that  means  of  communion  with    Him 
which  rtiey  used  to  enjoy.     Angels,  Moses,  and  the 
High-priest — their  intercessors    in  heaven,  in    the 
grave,  and  on  earth — became  of  less  importance  in 
the  creed    of  the   Jewish   Christian ;    their    glory 
waned  as  he  grew  in  Christian  experience.     Already 
he  felt  that  the  Lord's  day  was  superseding  the 
Sabbath,  the  New  Covenant  the  Old.     What  could 
take  the  place  of  the  Temple,  and  that  which  was 
behind  the   veil,  and  the   Levitical  sacrifices,  and 
the  Holy  City,  when  they  should  cease  to  exist  ? 
What  compensation  could  Christianity  offer  him  for 
the  loss  which  was  pressing1'  the  Hebrew  Christian 
more  and  more  ? 

James,  the  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  had  just  left  his 
place  vacant  by  a  martyr's  death.  Neither  to 
Cephas  at  Babylon,  nor  to  John  at  Ephesus,  the 
third  pillar  of  the  Apostolic  Church,  was  it  given  to 
understand  all  the  greatness  of  his  want,  and  to 
speak  to  him  the  word  in  season.  But  there  came 
to  him  from  Rome  the  voice  of  one  who  had  been 


11  See  Josephus,  B.  J.  vi.  5,  §3. 
0  See  Josephus,  Ant.  xx.  9,  §i  ;  Euseb.  E.  H.  ii.  23  ; 
and  Eecogn.  Clement,  i.  70,  ap.  Cotcler.  i.  509. 


p  See  the  ingenious,  but  perhaps  overstrained,  in- 
terpretation of  Heb.  xi.  in  Thiersch's  Commentatio 
Bisfdrica  </e  Epistola  ad  Eebraeos. 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 

the  foremost,  in  sounding  the  depth  and  breadth  of 
that  love  of  Christ  which  was  all  but  incom- 
prehensible to  the  Jew,  one  who  feeling  more  than 
any  other  Apostle  the  weight  of  the  care  of  all 
the  churches,  yet  clung  to  his  own  people  with  a 
love  ever  ready  to  break  out  in  impassioned  words, 
and  unsought  and  ill-requited  deeds  of  kindness. 
He  whom  Jerusalem  had  sent  away  in  chains  to 
Rome  again  lifted  up  his  voice  in  the  hallowed 
city  among  his  countrymen ;  but  with  words  and 
arguments  suited  to  their  capacity,  with  a  strange, 
borrowed  accent,  and  a  tone  in  which  reigned  no 
apostolic  authority,  and  a  face  veiled  in  very  hive 
from  wayward  children  who  might  refuse  to  hear 
divine  and  saving  truth,  when  it  fell  from  the  lips 
of  Paul. 

He  meets  the  Hebrew  Christians  on  their  own 
ground.  His  answer  is — "  Your  new  faith  gives 
you  Christ,  and,  in  Christ,  all  you  seek,  all  your 
fathers  sought.  In  Christ  the  Son  of  God  you  have 
an  all-sufficient  Mediator,  nearer  than  Angels  to  the 
Father,  eminent  above  Moses  as  a  benefactor,  more 
sympathising  and  more  prevailing  than  the  High- 
priest  as  an  intercessor  :  His  sabbath  awaits  you  in 
heaven  ;  to  His  covenant  the  old  was  intended  to  be 
subservient ;  His  atonement  is  the  eternal  reality  s  of 
which  sacrifices  are  but  the  passing  shadow ;  His 
city  heavenly,  not  made  with  hands.  Having  Him, 
believe  in  Him  with  all  your  heart, — with  a  faith 
in  the  unseen  future,  strong  as  that  of  the  saints  of 
old,  patient  under  present,  and  prepared  for  coming 
woe,  full  of  energy,  and  hope,  and  holiness,  and 
love." 

Such  was  the  teaching  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews.  We  do  not  possess  the  means  of  tracing 
out  step  by  step  its  effect  upon  them  ;  but  we 
know  that  the  result  at  which  it  aimed  was  achieved. 
The  church  at  Jerusalem  did  not  apostatise.  It 
migrated  to  Pella  (Eusebius,  H.  E.  iii.  5)  ;  and 
then',  no  longer  dwindled  under  the  cold  shadow  of 
overhanging  Judaism,  it  followed  the  Hebrew  Chris- 
tians of  the  Dispersion  in  gradually  entering  on  the 
possession  of  the  full  liberty  which  the  law  of  Christ 
allows  to  all. 

And  this  great  Epistle  remains  to  aftertimes,  a 
keystone  binding  together  that  succession  of  inspired 
men  which  spans  over  the  ages  between  Moses  and 
St.  John,  It  teaches  the  Christian  student  the  sub- 
stantial identity  of  the  revelation  of  God,  whether 
given  through  the  Prophets,  or  through  the  Son ; 
tin-  it  shows  that  God's  purposes  are  unchangeable, 
however  diversely  in  different  ages  they  have  been 
"  reflected  in  broken  and  litful  rays,  glancing  back 
from  the  troubled  waters  of  the  human  soul."  It 
is  a  source  of  inexhaustible  comfort  to  every  Chris- 
tian sufferer  in  inward  perplexity,  or  amid  "re- 
proaches and  afflictions."  It  is  a  pattern  to  every 
Christian  teacher  of  the  method  in  which  larger 
views  should  be  imparted,  gently,  reverently,  and 
seasonably,  to  feeble  spirits  prone  to  cling  to  an- 
cient forms,  and  to  rest  in  accustomed  feelings. 

VII.  Literature  connected  with  the  Epistle. — 
In  addition  to  the  books  already  referred  to,  four 
commentaries  may  be  selected  as  the  best  repre- 
sentatives of  distinct  lines  of  thought  ; — those  oi 
Chrysostom, Calvin,  Estius,and  Bleek.    Luhemann 

a  See  Bishop  Butler's  Analogy,  ii.  •">,  §G. 

b  The  expression  here  is  literally  "  were  superin- 
tendents of  Israel  beyond  ("0170)  Jordan  for  the 
west  (rQiyD)  in  all  the  business,"  &o.  "  Beyond 
.Ionian  "  generally  means  "  on  the  east,"  but  here,  in- 


HEBRON 


777 


(1855),  and  Delitzsch  (1858)  have  recently  added 
valuable  Commentaries  to  those  already  in  existence. 

The  Commentaries  accessible  to  the  English  reader 
are  those  of  Professor  Stuart  (of  Andover,  U.  S.), 
and  of  Ebrard,  translated  by  the  Rev.  J.  Fulton.  Dr. 
Owen's  Exercitations  on  the  Hebrews  are  not  chiefly 
valuable  as  an  attempt  at  exegesis.  The  Para- 
phrase and  Notes  of  Pierce  are  praised  by  Dr.  Dodd- 
ridge. Among  the  well-known  collections  of  English 
notes  on  the  Greek  text,  or  English  version  of  the 
N.  T.  those  of  Hammond,  Fell,  Whitby,  Mac- 
knight,  Wordsworth,  and  Alford  may  be  particu- 
larly mentioned.  In  Prof.  Stanley's  Sermons  and 
Essays  on  the  Apostolical  A<je  there  is  a  thoughtful 
and  eloquent  sermon  on  this  Epistle;  and  it  is  the 
subject  of  three  Warburtonian  Lectures,  by  the  Rev. 
F.  D.  Maurice. 

A  tolerably  complete  list  of  Commentaries  on  this 
Epistle  may  be  found  in  Bleek,  vol.  ii.  pp.  10-16, 
and  a  comprehensive  but  shorter  list  at  the  end  of 
Ebrard' s  Commentary .  [W.  T.  B.] 

HE'BRON  (|'nnn ;  XejSpwv ;  Hebron).    1.  The 

third  son  of  Kohath,  who  was  the  second  son  of 
Levi;  the  younger  brother  of  Amram,  father  of 
Moses  and  Aaron  (Ex.  vi.  18;  Num.  iii.  19;  1  Chr. 
vi.  2,  18,  x^iii.  12).  The  immediate  children  of 
Hebron  are  not  mentioned  by  name  (comp.  Ex.  vi. 
21,  22), but  he  was  the  founder  of  a  "  family" 
(MishpachdK)  of  Hebronites  (Num.  iii.  27,  xxvi. 
58;  1  Chr.  xxvi.  23,  30,  31)  or  Bene-Hebron 
(1  Chr.  xv.  9,  xxiii.  19),  who  are  often  mentioned 
in  the  enumerations  of  the  Levites  in  the  passages 
above  cited.  Jeriah  was  the  head  of  the  family 
in  the  time  of  David  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  19,  xxvi.  31, 
xxiv.  23  :  in  the  last  of  these  passages  the  name 
of  Hebron  does  not  now  exist  in  the  Hebrew,  but 
has  been  supplied  in  the  A.  V.  from  the  other 
lists).  In  the  last  year  of  David's  reign  we  find  them 
settled  at  Jazer  in  Gilead  (a  place  not  elsewhere 
named  as  a  Levitical  city),"  mighty  men  of  .valour  " 

(T^n  *J2),  2700  in  number,  who  were  superintend- 

auts  for  the  king  over  the  two  and  a  half  tribes  in 
regard  to  all  matters  sacred  and  secular  (A  Chr. 
xxvi."  31,  32).  At  the  same  time  1700  of  the 
family  under  Hashabiah  held  the  same  office  on  the 
westb  of  Jordan  (30). 

2.  This  name  appears  in  the  genealogical  lists 
of  the  tribe  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  ii.  42,  43),  where 
Mareshah  is  said  to  have  been  the  "  father  of 
Hebron,"  who  again  had  four  sons,  one  of  whom  N 
was  Tappuach.  The. three  names  just  mentioned 
are  those  of  places,  as  are  also  many  others  in  the 
subsequent  branches  of  this  genealogy— Ziph,  Maon, 
Bethzur,  &c.  But  it  is  impossible  at  present  to 
say  whether  these  names  are  intended  to  be  those 
of  the  places  themselves  or  of  persons  who  founded 

them.  [G.] 

HE'BRON  (frqn  ;  XfPpvfi  and  Xtfrpwv ; 
Arab.  VjkiLi  =  "'I"'  fnend"),  a  city  of  Judah 
(Josh,  xv.  "'4  (J  situated  aiming  the  mountains  (Josh, 
xx.  7),  20  Roman  miles  south  of  Jerusalem)  and  the 
same  distance  north  ofBeersheba  i  Onom.s.t  .'Apxh). 

duced  probably  by  the  word  following,  "  westward," 
our  translators  have  rendered  it  "  on  this  Bide  "  (OOmp. 
Deut.  i.  1,  5,  Josh.  ix.  1,  (cc).  May  not  the  mean- 
ing be  that  Hashabiah  and  his  brethren  were  fettled 
on  the  western  side  of  the  Tnmsjordanic  country! 

3  E 


778  HEBRON 

Hebron  is  one  of  the  most,  ancient  cities  in  the 
world  still  existing;  and  in  this  respect  it,  is  the 
rival  of  Damascus.  It  was  built,  says  a  sacred 
writer,  "  seven  years  before  Zoan  in  Egypt"  (  Num. 
xiii.  22).  But  when  was  Zoan  built?  It  is  well 
we  can  prove  the  high  antiquity  of  Hebron  inde- 
pendently of  Egypt's  mystic  annals.  It  was  a  well- 
known  town  when  Abraham  entered  Canaan  3780 
years  ago  (Gen.  xiii.  18).  Its  original  name  was 
Kirjath-Arba  (yanssmnf?  ;  LXX.,  Kipiad-apjioK- 

<re<pep,  Judg.  i.  10),  "  the  city  of  Arba  ;"  so  called 
from  Arba,  the  father  of  Anak,  and  progenitor  of 
the  giant  Anakim  (Josh.  xxi.  11,  xv.  13,  14).  It 
was  sometimes  called  Mamre,  doubtless  from  Abra- 
ham's friend  and  ally,  Mamre  the  Amorite  (Gen. 
xxiii.  l'.i,  xxxv.  27);  but  the  "oak  of  Mamre," 
where  the  Patriarch  so  often  pitched  his  tent,  appears 
to  have  been  not  in,  but  near  Hebron.  [Mamre.] 
The  chief  interest  of  this  city  arises  from  its 
having  been  the  scene  of  some  of  the  most  remark- 
able events  in  the  lives  of  the  patriarchs.  Sarah 
died  at  Hebron;  and  Abraham  then  bought  from 
Ephron  the  Hittite  the  field  and  .cave  of  Machpelah, 
to  serve  as  a  family  tomb  (Gen.  xxiii.  2-20).  The 
cave  is  still  there;  and  the  massive  walls  of  the 
Earam  or  mosque,  within  which  it  lies,  form  the 
most,  remarkable  object  in  the  whole  city.  [Machpe- 
lah.] Abraham  is  called  by  Mohammedans  el- 
Khvlil,  "  the  Eriend,"  i.e.  of  God,  and  this  is  the 
modern  name  of  Hebron.  When  the  Israelites  en- 
tered Palestine  Hebron -was  taken  by  Joshua  from 
the  descendants  of  Anak,  and  given  to  Caleb  (Josh. 
x.  36,  xiv.  6-15,  xv.  13,  14).  It  was  assigned  to 
the  Levites,  and  made  "a  city  of  refuge"  (Josh, 
xxi.  1  1-13).  Here  David  first  established  the  seat 
of  his  government,  and  dwelt  during  the  seven 
years  and  a  half  he  reigned  over  Judah  (2  8am. 
v.  5).  Hebron  was  rebuilt  after  the  captivity;  but 
it  soon  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  Edomites,  from 
whom  it  was  rescued  by  Judas  Maccabaeus  (Neh. 
xi.  25  ;  1  Mace.  v.  65  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  8,  §ii ).  A 
short  time  before  the  capture  of  Jerusalem  Hebron 
was  burned  by  an  officer  of  Vespasian  (Joseph. 
B.  ./.  iv.  9,  §9).  About  the  beginning  of  the  12th 
century  it  was  captured  by  the  Crusaders.  It  sub- 
sequently lay  for  a  time  in  ruins  (Albert  Aq.  vii. 
15  ;  Saewulf  in  Early  Travels  in  Pal.  p.  45)  ;  but 
in  A.D.  1167  it  was  made  the  seat  of  a  Latin 
bishopric  (Will.  Tyr.  xx.  3).  In  1187  it  reverted 
to  the  Muslems,  and  has  ever  since  remained  in 
their  hands. 

Hebron  now  contains  about  5000  inhabitants, 
of  whom  some  50  families  are  Jews.  It  is  pic-  i 
turesquely  situated  in  a  narrow  valley,  surrounded  ! 
by  rocky  hills.  This,  in  all  probability,  is  that 
"  valley  of  Eschol,"  whence  the  Jewish  spies  got 
the  great  bunch  of  grapes  (Num.  xiii.  23).  Its 
sides  are  still  clothed  with  luxuriant  vineyards,  and 
its  grapes  are  considered  the  finest  in  Southern  Pa- 
lestine. Groves  of  gray  olives,  and  some  other  fruit 
trees,  give  variety  to  the  scene.  The  valley  runs 
from  north  to  south  ;  and  the  main  quarter  "of  the 
town,  surmounted  by  the  lofty  walls  of  the  vene- 
rable Hiram,  lies  partly  on  the  eastern  slope  (Gen. 
xxxvii.  14  :  comp.  xxiii.  19).  The  houses  are  all 
of  stone,  solidly  built,  fiat-roofed,  each  having  one 
or  two  small  cupolas.  The  town  has  no  walls,  but 
the  main  streets  opening  on  the  principal  roads 
have  gates.  In  the  bottom  of  the  valley  south  of 
the  town  is  a  large  tank,  130  ft.  square,  by  50 
deep;   the  sides  are  solidly  built  with  hewn  stones. 


HEDGE 

At  the  northern  end  of  the  principal  quarter  is  an- 
other, measuring  8.")  ft.  long,  by  55  broad.  Both 
are  of  high  antiquity;  and  one  of  them,  probably 
the  former,  is  that  over  which  David  hanged  the 
murderers  of  Ishbosheth  (2  Sam.  iv.  12).  About 
a  mile  from  the  town,  up  the  valley,  is  one  of  the 
largest  oak-trees  in  Palestine.  It  stands  quite  alone 
in  the  midst  of  the  vineyards.  It  is  23  ft.  in  girth, 
and  its  branches  cover  a  space  90  ft.  in  diameter. 
This,  say  some,  is  the  very  tree  beneath  which 
Abraham  pitched  his  tent ;  but,  however  this  may 
be,  it  still  bears  the  name  of  the  patriarch.  ( 1  'i  irter's 
Handbook,  67  sq.  ;  Hob.  ii.  73  sq.)       [J.  L.  P.] 

2.  (|"ny,  and  |'nny  ;  'EAySou/,  Alex.  'AXpdi>; 
Achran,  later  editions  Abran).  One  of  the  towns  in 
the  territory  of  Asher  (Josh.  xix.  28),  on  the 
boundary  of  the  tribe.  It  is  named  next  to  Rehob, 
and  is  apparently  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Zidon. 
By  Eusebius  and  Jerome  it  is  merely  mentioned 
(Onomast.  Achran),  and  no  one  in  modern  times 
has  discovered  its  site.  It  will  be  observed  that 
the  name  in  the  original  is  quite  different  from  that 
of  Hebron,  the  well-known  city  of  Judah  (No.  1), 
although  in  the  A.  V.  they  are  the  same,  our 
translators  having  represented  the  ain  by  H,  instead 
of  by  G,  or  by  the  vowel  only,  as  is  their  usual 
custom.  But,  in  addition,  it  is  not  certain  whether 
the  name  should  not  rather  be  Ebdon  or  Abdon 
(}l*J3JJ),  since  that  form  is  found  in  many  MSS. 
(Davidson,  Hcbr.  Text;  Gesen.  Thes.  980),  and 
since  an  Abdon  is  named  amongst  the  Levitical 
cities  of  Asher  in  other  lists,  which  otherwise  would 
be  unmentioned  here.  On  the  other  hand,  the  old 
versions  (excepting  only  the  Vat.  LXX.,  which  is 
obviously  corrupt)  unanimously  retain  the  P. 
[Abdon.]  [G.] 

hedge  cm,  VTji,  nnni;  n>"»D»,  rn-)b*p; 

<ppay/j.6s).  The  first  three  words  thus  rendered 
in  the  A.  V.,  as  well  as  their  (ireek  equivalent, 
denote  simply  that  which  surrounds  or  encloses, 
whether  it  be  a  stone  wall  ("nil,  geder,  Prov.  xxiv. 
31 ;  Ez.  xiii.  10),  or  a  fence  of  other  materials. 
"Hil.  gader,  and  mi3,  g'derah,  are  used  of  the 
hedge  of  a  vineyard  (Num.  xxii.  24;  Ps.  lxxxix. 
40;  1  Chr.  iv.  23),  and  the  latter  .is  employed  to 
describe  the  wide  walls  of  stone,  or  fences  of  thorn, 
which  served  as  a  shelter  for  sheep  in  winter  and 
summer  (Num.  xxxii.  16).  The  stone  walls  which 
surround  the  sheepfolds  of  modern  Palestine  are  fre- 
quently crowned  with  sharp  thorns  (Thomson, 
Land  and  the  BooJ:,  i.  299),  a  custom  at  least  as 
ancient  as  the  time  of  Homer  ((A/,  xiv.  10),  when 
a  kind  of  prickly  pear  {ax^pSos)  was  used  for  that 
purpose,  as  well  as  for  the  i'ences  of  corn-fields  at  a 
later  period  (Arist.  Eccl.  355).  In  order  to  pro- 
tect the  vineyards  from  the  ravages  of  wild  beasts 
( Ps.  lxxx.  12)  it  was  customary  to  surround  them 
with  a  wall  of  loose  stones  or  mud  (Matt.  xxi.  .">:'.  ; 
Mark  xii.  1),  which  was  a  favourite  haunt  of  serpents 
(Eccl.  x.  8),  and  a  retreat  for  locusts  from  the  cold 
(Nah.  iii.  17).  Such  walls  are  described  by  Maun- 
diell  as  surrounding  the  gardens  of  Damascus. 
"  They  are  built  of  great  pieces  of  earth,  made  in 
the  fashion  of  brick  and  hardened  in  the  sun.  In 
their  dimensions  they  are  each  two  yards  long  and 
somewhat  more  than  one  broad,  and  half  a  yard 
thick.  Two  rows  of  these,  placed  one  upon  an- 
other, make  a  cheap,  expeditions,  and,  in  this  dry 
country,  a   durable   wall"    (Early    Trav.    in    1'al. 


HEGAI 

p.  487).  A  wall  or  fence  of  this  kind  is  clearly 
distinguished  in  Is.  v.  5  from  the  tangled  hedge, 
T&SffD,  m'sucdh  (HMDO,  Mic.  vii.  4),  which 
was  planted  as  an  additional  safeguard  to  the  vine- 
yard (cf.  Ecclus.  xxviii.  24),  and  was  composed  of 
the  thorny  shrubs  with  which  Palestine  abounds. 
The  prickly  pear,  a  species  of  cactus,  so  frequently 
employed  for  this  purpose  in  the  East  at  present,  is. 
believed  to  be  of  comparatively  modern  introduction. 
The  aptness  of  the  comparison  of  a  tangled  hedge 
of  thorn  to  the  difficulties  which  a  slothful  man 
conjures  up  as  an  excuse  for  his  inactivity,  will  be 
at  once  recognised  (Prov.  xv.  19  ;  cf.  Hos.  ii.  6). 
The  narrow  paths  between  the  hedges  of  the  vine- 
yards and  gardens,  "  with  a  fence  on  this  side  and  a 
fence  on  that  side"  (Num.  xxii.  24),  are  distin- 
guished from  the  "  highways,"  or  more  frequented 
tracks,  in  Luke  xiv.  23.  [\V.  A.  W.] 

HEGA'I^Jn  ;  Tat;  Egeus),  one  of  the  eunuchs 

(A.  V.  "  chamberlains  ")  of  the  court  of  Ahasuerus, 
who  had  "special  charge  of  the  women  of  the  hareem 
(Esth.  ii.  8,  1.")).  According  to  the  Hebrew  text 
he  was  a  distinct  person  from  the  "  keeper  of  the 
concubines" — Shaashgaz  (14),  but  the  LXX.  have 
the  same  name  iu  14  as  in  8,  while  in  15  they 
omit  it  altogether.  In  verse  3  the  name  is  given 
under  the  different  form  of 

HE'GE  (fcOH  ;  Egeus,  probably  a  Persian  name. 
Aja  signifies  eunuch  in  Sanscrit,  in  accordance  with 
which  the  LXX.  have  rtp  ebvovxv-  Hegias,  'Hy'tas, 
is  mentioned  by  Ctesias  as  one  of  the  people  about 
Xerxes,  Gesenius,  Thes.  Addenda,  83  b). 

HEIFEB  (rf^y,  rnS  ;  UjxaMs;  vacca).  The 
Hebrew  language  has  no  expression  that  exactly 
corresponds  to  our  heifer;  for  both  eglah  and  parah 
are  applied  to  cows  that  have  calved  (I  Sam.  vi.  7- 
12  ;  Job  xxi.  10  ;  Is.  vii.  21)  :  indeed  eijlah  means 
a  young  animal  of  any  species,  the  full  expression 
being  eglah  bdkar,  "  heifer  of  kine"  (Deut.  xxi.  ;! ; 
1  Sam.  xvi.  2  ;  Is.  vii.  21).  The  heifer  or  young 
cow  was  not  commonly  used  for  ploughing,  but  only 
for  treading  out  the  corn  ( Hos.  x.  11;  but  see  Judg. 
xiv.  18),  when  it  ran  about  without  any  headstall 
(Deut:  xxv.  4)  ;  hence  the  expression  an  "  unbroken 
heifer"  (Hos.  iv.  16;  A.  V.  "backsliding"),  to 
which  Israel  is  compared.  A  similar  sense  has  been 
attached  to  the  expression  "  calf  of  three  years  old," 
i.  e.  unsubdued,  in  Is.  xv.  5,  Jer.  xlviii.  34  ;  but  it 
is  much  more  probably  to  be  taken  as  a  proper 
name,  Eglath  Shelishiyah,  such  names  being  not 
uncommon.  The  sense  of  "  dissolute"  is  conveyed 
undoubtedly  in  Am.  iv.  1.  The  comparison  of 
Egypt  ti>  a  "  fair  heifer "  (Jer.  xlvi.  20)  may  be 
an  allusion  to  the  well  known  form  under  which 
Apis  was  worshipped  (to  which  we  may  also  refer 

the  words   in  vit.   15,  as  undersi I  in   tin-  LXX., 

"Why  is  tli''  bullock  ( fx6<rxos  iic\€KT6s)  Bwepl 
away?")  the  "destruction"  threatened  being , the 
bite  of  the  gad-fly,  to  which  the  word  ken  I  would 
fitly  apply.   "  To  plough  with  another  man's  heifer  " 

(Judg.  xiv.  IS)  implies  that  an  advantage  has  1 u 

gained  by  unfair  means.  The  proper  names  Eglah, 
En-eglaim,  and  Parah,  arc  derived  from  the  He- 
brew terms  at  the  head  of  this  article.   [\V.  I..  1'>.J 

HEIR.  The  Hebrew  institutions  relative  to 
inheritance  were  of  a  very  simple  character.  I  oder 
the  Patriarchal  system   the  property   was  divided 

among  the  sons  of  the  legitimate  wives  (Gen.  xxi. 


HEIR 


779 


10,  xxiv.  36,  xxv.  5),  a  larger  portion  being  as- 
signed to  one,  generally  the  eldest,  on  whom  de- 
volved the  duty  of  maintaining  the  females  of  the 
family.  [Birthright.]  The  sons  of  concubines 
were  portioned  off  with  presents  (Gen.  xxv.  6): 
occasionally  they  were  placed  on  a  par  with  the 
legitimate  sons  (Gen.  xlix.  1  if.),  but  this  may 
have  been  restricted  to  cases  where  the  children 
had  beeu  adopted  by  the  legitimate  wife  (Gen.  xxx. 
3).  At  a  later  period  the  exclusion  of  the  sons  of 
concubines  was  rigidly  enforced  (Judg.  xi.  1  if.). 
Daughters  had  no  share  in  the  patrimony  (Gen. 
xxxi.  14),  but  received  a  marriage  portion,  consist- 
ing of  a.  maid-servant  (Gen.  xxix.  24,  29),  or  some 
other  property.  As  a  matter  of  special  favour  they 
sometimes  took  part  with  the  sons  (Job  xlii.  1.")). 
The  Mosaic  law  regulated  the  succession  to  real 
property  thus:  it  was  to  be  divided  among  the 
sons,  the  eldest  receiving  a  double  portion  (Deut. 
xxi.  17),  the  others  equal  shares  :  if  there  were  no 
sons,  it  went  to  the  daughters  (Num.  xxvii.  8),  on 
the  condition  that  they  did  not  marry  out  of  their 
own  tribe  (Num.  xxxvi.  6  ff. ;  Tob.  vi.  12,  vii.  1 .'!  I, 
otherwise  the  patrimony  was  forfeited  (Joseph. 
Ant.  iv.  7,  §5).  If  there  were  no  daughters,  it 
went  to  the  brother  of  the  deceased  ;  if  no  brother, 
to  the  paternal  uncle;  and,  failing  these,  to  the 
next  of  kin  (Num.  xxvii.  9-11).  In  the  case  of  a 
widow  being  left  without  children,  the  nearest  of 
kin  on  her  husband's  side  had  the  right  of  marrying 
her,  and  in  the  event  of  his  refusal  the  next  of  kin 
(Ruth  iii.  12,  13):  with  him  rested  the  obligation 
of  redeeming  the  property  of  the  widow  (Ruth  iv. 
1  if'.),  if  it  had  been  either  sold  or  mortgaged  :  this 

obligation  was  termed  n?N5H  DD^'ft  ("  the  right 

of  inheritance"),  and  was  exercised  in  other  cases 

besides  that  of  marriage  (Jer.  xxxii.  7  if.).      If  n ! 

stepped  forward  to  marry  the  widow,  the  inheritance 
remained  with  her  until  her  death,  and  then  re- 
verted to  the*  next  of  kin.     The  object   of  th 

regulations  evidently  was  to  prevent  the  alienation 
of  the  land,  and  to  retain  it  in  the  same  family  : 
the  Mosaic  law  enforced,  in  short,  a  strict  entail. 
Even  the  assignment  of  the  double  portion,  which 
under  the  patriarchal  regime  had  been  at  the  dis- 
posal of  the  father  (Gen.  xlviii.  22),  was  by  the 
Mosaic  law  limited  to  the  eldest  son  (Deut.  xxi. 
15-17).  The  case  of  Achsah,  to  whom  Caleb  pre- 
sented a  field  (Josh.  xv.  18,  19  ;  Judg.  i.  15),  is  an 
exception:  but  perhaps  even  in  that  instance  the 
land  reverted  to  Caleb's  descendants  either  at  the 
death  of  Achsah  or  iu  the  year  of  Jubilee.  The 
land  being  thus  so  strictly  tied  up,  the  notion  of 
heirship,  as  we  understand  it,  was  hardly  known  to 
the  Jews  :  succession  was  a  matter  of  right,  ami 
not  of  favour — a  state  of  things  which  is  embodied 
in  the  Hebrew  language  itself,  for  the  word  l"T 
(A.  V.  "to  inherit")  implies  possession,  and  very 
often  forcible  possession  (Deut.  ii.  12  :  Judg.  i.  2!». 
xi.  24),  and   a   similar  idea   lies  at  the   root    of  the 

words  n-tnX  and  i"6rp_,  generally  translated  "  in- 
heritance."     Testamentary    dispositions    v. 

superfluous:  the  nearest  approach  to  the 
idea  is  the  blessing,  which  in  early  time-  COI 
temporal  as  well  as  spiritual  benefits  (Gen.  xxvii. 
I '.i.  37;  Josh.  xv.  19).  'I'he  reference-  to  wills  ill 
St.  Paul's  writings  are  borrowed  from  tie 
"it; ceand  Rome  (Heb.  ix.  17),  whence  the  cus- 
tom was  introduced  into  Judaea:  several  wills  are 

:'.  E  2 


780 


HELAH 


noticed  by  Josephus  in  connexion  with  the  Herods 
(Ant.  xiii.  16,  §1,  xvii.  B,  §2  ;  B.  J.  ii.  2,  §3). 

With  regard  to  personal  property,  it  may  be  pre- 
sumed that  the  owner  had  some  authority  over  it, 
at  all  events  during  his  life-time.  The  admission 
of  a  slave  to  a  portion  of  the  inheritance  with  the 
sons  (Prov.  xvii.  2)  probably  applies  only  to  the 
personalty.  A  presentation  of  half  the  personalty 
formed  the  marriage  portion  of  Tobit's  wife  (Tob. 
viii.  21).  A  distribution  of  goods  during  the  father's 
life-time  is  implied  in  Luke  xv.  11-13:  a  distinction 
may  be  noted  between  ovaia,  a  general  term  ap- 
plicable to  personalty,  and  K\r]povofj.ia,  the  landed 
property,  which  could  only  be  divided  after  the 
father's  death  (Luke  xii.  13). 

There  is  a  striking  resemblance  between  the  He- 
brew and  Athenian  customs  of  heirship,  particularly 
as  regards  heiresses  (eVi/cATjpoi),  who  were,  in  both 
nations,  bound  to  marry  their  nearest  relation :  the 
property  did  not  vest  in  the  husband  even  for  his 
life-time,  but  devolved  upon  the  son  of  the  heiress  as 
soon  as  he  was  of  age,  who  also  bore  the  name,  not 
of  his  father,  but  of  his  maternal  grandfather.  The 
object  in  both  countries  was  the  same,  viz.  to  pre- 
serve the  name  and  property  of  every  family  (Diet. 
of  Ant.  art.  'Eir'tKXripos).  [W.  L.  B.] 

HE'LAH  (HK^n  ;  'AcoSd,  Alex.  'A\a<L ;  Halaa), 

one  of  the  two  wives  of  Ashur,  father  of  Tekoa 
(1  Chr.  iv.  5).  Her  three  children  are  enumerated 
in  ver.  7.  In  the  LXX.  the  passage  is  very  much 
confused,  the  sons  being  ascribed  to  different  wives 
from  what  they  are  in  the  Hebrew  text. 

HE'LAM  (07*11;   Al\dfi ;    Helam),   a  place 

east  of  the  Jordan,  but  west  of  the  Euphrates 
("  the  river"),  at  which  the  Syrians  were  collected 
by  Hadarezer,  and  at  which  David  met  and  defeated 
them  (2  Sam.  x.  16,  17).     In  the  latter  verse  the 

name  appears  as  Chelamah  (!"I)Drc?rU,  but  the  final 

syllable  is  probably  only  the  particle  of  motion. 
This  longer  form,  XaAa/xdic,  the  present  text"  of 
the  LXX.  inserts  in  ver.  16  as  if  the  name  of  the 
river ;  while  in  the  two  other  places  it  has  AlAd/m, 
corresponding  to  the  Hebrew  text.  By  Josephus 
(A?it.  vii.  6,  §3)  the  name  is  given  as  XaXa/xd,  and 
as  being  that  of  the  king  of  the  Syrians  beyond 
Euphrates — irpbs  Xa\afj.av  rbv  twv  irepav  'Eixppd- 
tov  ~Zvpt>)v  /3ctrnAea. 

In  the  Vulgate  no  name  is  inserted  after  fluvium  ; 
but  in  ver.  16,  for  "  came  to  Helam,"  we  find 
adduxit  exercitum  eorum,  reading  D?*n,  "  their 

army."  This  too  is  the  rendering  of  the  old 
translator  Aquila — iv  Suvdfj.€i  clvtwv — of  whose 
version  ver.  16  has  survived.  In  17  the  Vulgate 
agrees  with  the  A.  V. 

Many  conjectures  have  been  made  as  to  the 
locality  of  Helam;  but  to  none  of  them  does  any 
certainty  attach.  The  most  feasible  perhaps  is  that 
it  is  identical  with  Alamatha,  a  town  named  by 
Ptolemy,  and  located  by  him  on  the  west  of  the 
Euphrates  near  Nicephorium.  [G.] 

HEL'BAH  (i"l2^n;   XefiU;  Helba),  a  town 

of  Asher,  probably  on  the  plain  of  Phoenicia,  not 
far  from  Sidon  (Judg.  i.  31).  [J.  L.  P.] 


a  This  is  probably  a  late  addition,  since  in  the 
T.XX.  text  as  it  stood  in  Oripren's  Hexapla,  XaAajuaic 
was  omitted  after  iroTafioO  (see  Bardht,  ad  lac). 


HELED 

HEL'BON  (jia^rt;  XcAfav),  a  place  only 
mentioned  once  in  Scripture.  Ezekiel,  in  describing 
the  wealth  and  commerce  of  Tyre,  says,  "  Damascus 
was  thy  merchant  in  the  wine  of  Helbon."  The 
Vulgate  translates  these  words  in  vino  pini/ui ;  and 
some  other  ancient  versions  also  make  the  word 
descriptive  of  the  quality  of  the  wine.  There  can 
be  no  doubt,  however,  that  Helbon  is  a  proper  name. 
Strabo  speaks  of  the  wine  of  Chalybon  (oivov  (k 
'S.vpias  rbv  XaAvfiwviov)  from  Syria  as  among  the 
luxuries  in  which  the  kings  of  Persia  indulged 
(xv.  735)  ;  and  Atheuaeus  assigns  it  to  Damascus 
(i.  22).  Geographers  have  hitherto  represented 
Helbon  as  identical  with  the  city  of  Aleppo,  called 

Haleb  (t_*Xs»)  by  the  Arabs  ;  but  there  are  strong 
reasons  against  this.  The  whole  force  and  beauty 
of  the  description  in  Ezekiel  consists  in  this,  that 
in  the  great  market  of  Tyre  every  kingdom  and 
city  found  ample  demand  for  its  owu  staple  pro- 
ducts. Why,  therefore,  should  the  Damascenes 
supply  wine  of  Aleppo,  conveying  it  a  long  and 
difficult  journey  overland?  If  strange  merchants 
had  engaged  in  this  trade,  we  should  naturally  ex- 
pect them  to  be  some  maritime  people  who  could 
cany  it  cheaply  along  the  coast  from  the  port  of 
Aleppo. 

A  few  years  ago  the  writer  directed  attention  to  a 
village  and  district  within  a  few  miles  of  Damascus, 
still  bearing  the  ancient  name  Helbon  (the  Arabic 

JO- 

.  kjJl^>  corresponds  exactly  to  the  Hebrew 
|i2?n),    and   still   celebrated     as   producing    the 

finest  grapes  in  the  country.  (See  Journal  of  Sac. 
Lit.  July  1853,  p.  260  ;  Five  Tears  in  Damascus, 
ii.  330  sq.).  There  cannot  be  a  doubt  that  this 
village,  and  not  Aleppo,  is  the  Helbon  of  Ezekiel 
and  Strabo.  The  village  is  situated  in  a  wild  glen, 
high  up  in  Antilebanon.  The  remains  of  some 
large  and  beautiful  structures  are  strewn  around  it. 
The  bottom  and  sides  of  the  glen  are  covered  with 
terraced  vineyards ;  and  the  whole  surrounding 
country  is  rich  in  vines  and  fig-trees  (Handbk.  for 
Syr.  and  Pal.  pp.  495-6).  [J.  L.  P.] 

HELCHI'AH  (XeXKtas  ;  Helcias),  1  Esd. 
viii.  1.      [Hilkiaii.] 

HELCHI'AS  (Helcias),  the  same  person  as 
the  preceding,  2  Esd.  i.  1.     [Hilkiaii.] 

HEL'DAI  (n'pn  ;    XoASi'a,    Alex.    XoASaf ; 

Holdai).  1.  The  twelfth  captain  of  the  monthly 
courses  for  the  temple  service  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  15). 
He  is  specified  as  "the  Netophathite,"  and  as  a 
descendant  of  Othniel. 

2.  An  Israelite  who  seems  to  have  returned 
from  the  Captivity  ;  for  whom,  with  others, 
Zechariah  was  commanded  to  make  certain  crowns 
as  memorials  (Zech.  vi.  10).  In  ver.  14  the  name 
appears  to  be  changed  to  Helem.  The  LXX. 
translate  irapa  tSiv  apx^vToov. 

HE'LEB  (ibn  ;  Vat.  omits,  Alex.  'AAo>  ; 
Heled),  son  of  Baanah,  the  Netophathite,  one  of  the 
heroes  of  king  David's  guard  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  211). 
In  the  parallel  list  the  name  is  given  as 

HE'LED  nbn;  X9a68,  Alex.  'EAaS  ;  Heled), 
1  Chr.  xi.  30. 


HELEK 

HE'LEK(pSn;  Xe\4y,  Alex.  XeAeVc;  Helcc), 
one  of  the  descendants  of  Manasseh  ;  the  second  son 
of  Gilead  (Num.  xxvi.  30),  and  founder  of  the  family 
of  the  Helekitf.s.  The  Bene-Chelek  are  men- 
tioned in  Josh.  xvii.  2  as  of  much  importance  in 
their  tribe.  The  name  has  not  however  survived, 
at  least  it  has  not  yet  been  met  with. 

HE'LEKITES,  THE  (^nn,  i.  e.  "  the 
Chelkite ;"  5  XeXeyi,  Alex.  XeAe/a  ;  familia  Jle- 
lecitaruni),  the  family  descended  from  the  foregoing 
(Num.  xxvi.  30). 

HE'LEM  (D^H  ;  'E\dfx. ;  Ilekm).  1.  A  man 
named  among  the  descendants  of  Asher,  in  a  passage 
evidently  much  disordered  (1  Chr.  vii.  35).  If  it 
be  intended  that  he  was  the  brother  of  Shamer, 
then  he  may  be  identical  with  Hotham,  in  ver.  32, 
the  name  having  been  altered  in  copying  ;  but  this 
is  mere  conjecture.  Burrington  (i.  265)  quotes 
two  Hebrew  MSS.,  in  which  the  name  is  written 
DTTI,  Cheles. 

2.  A  man  mentioned  only  in  Zech.  vi.  14. 
Apparently  the  same  who  is  given  as  Heldai  in 
ver.  10  (Ewald,  1'ropheten,  536  note). 

HE'LEPH  (Pf?n ;  MooAa/u,  Alex.  MeAe>—  both 
include  the  preposition  prefixed  ;  Heleph),  the  place 
from  which  the  boundary  of  the  tribe  of  Naphtali 
started  (Josh.  xix.  33),  but  where  situated,  or  on 
which  quarter,  cannot  be  ascertained  from  the  text. 
Van  de  Velde  (Memoir,  320)  proposes  to  identify  it 
with  Beitlif,  an  ancient  site  nearly  due  east  of  the 
Mas  Abyad,  and  west  of  Kades,  on  the  edge  of  a  very 
marked  ravine,  which  probably  formed  part  of  the 
boundary  between  Naphtali  and  Asher  (Van  de  Velde, 
Syria,  i.  '-:;:! ;  and  see  his  map,  1858).  [G.] 

HE'LEZ  (p?n  ;  2eAAijs— the  initial  2  is  pro- 
bably from  the  end  of  the  preceding  word — Alex. 
'EAArjs,  XeAArjs  ;  Beles,  /Idles).  1.  One  of  "  the 
thirty  "  of  David's  guard  (2  Sain,  xxiii.  26  ;  1  Chr. 
xi.  27  :  in  the  latter,  |\TI),  an  Ephraimite,  and 
captain  of  the  seventh  monthly  course  (1  Chr.  xxvii. 
10).  In  both  tlie.se  passages  of  Chronicles  he  is 
called  "  the  Pelonite,"  of  which  Kennicott  decides 
that  "the  I'altite "  of  Samuel  is  a  corruption 
(Dissertation,  &c,  183-4).     [Paltite.] 

2.  A  man  of  Judah,  son  of  Azariah  (1  Chr.  ii. 
39);  a  descendant  of  Jerahmeel,  of  the  great  family 
of  Hezron. 

HE'LI  ('HAt,  'HAef ;  /Mi),  the  fatha- of  Joseph, 
the  husband  of  the  Virgin  Mary  (Luke  iii.  23)  ; 
maintained  by  Lord  A.  Hervey,  the  latest  investi- 
gator of  the  genealogy  of  Christ,  to  have  been  the 
real  brother  of  Jacob  the  father  of  the  Virgin  her- 
self. (Hervey,  Genealogies,  130,138.)  The  name, 
as  we  possess  it,  is  tin'  same  as  that  employed  by 
the  LXN.  in  the  0.  T.  to  render  the  Hebrew  "hv,  Eu 
the  high-priest. 

2.  The  third  of  three  names  inserted  between 
A.CHITOB  and  Amakias  in  the  genealogy  of  Ezra, 
in  2  Esd.  i.  2  (compare  Ezr.  vii.  2,  3). 

HELI'AS,  2  E>d.  vii.  39.     [Elijah.] 

HELIODORUS  ('HMoSwpos),  the  treasurer 
(o  iirl  rwv  TrpayfjidTwv)  of  Seleucus  Philopator, 
who  was  commissioned  by  the  king,  ;it  the  instiga- 
tion of  Apollonius  [Arui.i.HMrsj  to  carry  away 
tin'  private  treasures  deposited  in  the  Temple  at 

Jerusalem.      According  to  the  narrative  in  2  MaCC. 
iii.  9  If.,   he  was  stayed    from   the  execution  of  his 


HELL 


781 


design  by  a  "  great  apparition  "  (i-n-icpdueia),  in  con- 
sequence of  which  he  fell  down  "  compassed  with 
great  darkness,"  and  speechless.  He  was  after- 
wards restored  at  the  intercession  of  the  High- 
priest  Onias,  and  bore  witness  to  the  king  of  the 
inviolable  majesty  of  the  Temple  (2  Mace.  iii.). 
The  full  details  of  the  narrative  are  not  supported 
by  any  other  evidence.  Josephus,  who  was  unac- 
quainted with  2  Mace,  takes  no  notice  of  it ;  and 
the  author  of  the  so-called  iv.  Mace,  attributes  the 
attempt  to  plunder  the  Temple  to  Apollonius,  ajid 
differs  in  his  account  of  the  miraculous  interposition, 
though  he  distinctly  recognises  it  (de  Mace,  4 
ovpavSdev  <=<pnriroi  irpov<pd.vr]aav  dyyeAot  .... 
KaraTrecrwu  5e  rtfiiQavris  6  'AiroWuivios  ....). 
Heliodorus  afterwards  murdered  Seleucus,  and  made 
an  unsuccessful  attempt  to  seize  the  Syrian  crown 
b.c.  175  (App.  Syr.  45).  Cf.  Werrisdorf,  De 
fide  Libr.  Mace.  §liv.  Kaffaelle's  grand  picture 
of  "  Heliodorus  "  will  be  known  to  most  by  copies 
and  engravings,  if  not  by  the  original.    [B.  F.  W.] 

HEL'KAI  (>\hn  ;  'EAko/-;  Held),  a  priest  of 
the  family  of  Meraioth  (or  Meremoth,  see  ver.  3), 
who  was  livtng  in  the  days  of  Joiakim  the  high- 
priest,  i.  e.  in  the  generation  following  the  return 
from  Babylon  under  Jeshua  and  Zerubbabel  (Neh. 
xii.  15;  comp.  10,  12). 

HEL'KATH  (n^n  ;  'E|eAe;ce0,  Alex.  XeA- 
Ka6  ■  Alcath,  and  Elcath),  the  town  named  as  the 
starting-point  for  the  boundary  of  the  tribe  of  Asher 
(Josh.  xix.  25),  and  allotted  with  its  "  suburbs"  to 
the  Gershonite  Levites  (xxi.  31).  The  enumeiation 
of  the  boundary  seems  to  proceed  from  south  to 
north ;  but  nothing  absolutely  certain  can  lie  said 
thereon,  nor  has  any  traveller  recovered  the  site 
of  Helkath.  Eusebius  and  Jerome  report  the  name 
much  corrupted  (Onoin.  Ethae),  but  evidently 
knew  nothing  of  the  place.  Schwarz  (191)  suggests 
the  village  Yerka,  which  lies  about  8  miles  east  of 
Akka  (see  Van  de  Velde's  map)  ;  but  this  requires 
further  examination. 

In  the  list  of  Levitical  cities  in  1  Chr.  vi. 
HlTKOK  is  substituted  for  Helkath.  [<i.] 

HEL'KATH  HAZ'ZURIM  (Dn>'H  n^n  ; 
/xepls  twv  eTTL^ovAwp  —  perhaps  reading  D^T^*  • 
Aquila,  KAripos  tSiv  trrfpfotv;  Ager  robustorum), 
a  smooth  piece  of  ground,  apparently  close  to  the 
pool  of  Gibeon,  where  the  combat  took  place  be- 
tween the  two  parties  of  Joab's  men  and  Aimer's 
men,  which  ended  in  the  death  of  the  whole  of  the 
combatants,  ami  brought  on  a  general  battle  (2  Sam. 

ii.  16).  [Gibeon  ;  Joab.]  Various  interpreta- 
tions are  given  of  the  name.  In  addition  to  those' 
given  above,  Gesenius  (  Thes.  485  a)  renders  it  "the 

tield  of  swords."  The  margin  of  the  \.  V.  has 
"the  tield  of  strong  men,"  agreeing  with  Aquila 
and  the  Vulgate.  Ewald  (Gesch.  iii.  1)7  "das 
Eeld  der  Tiickisehcn."  [G.] 

HELKIAS  (XcAxfas ;  Vulg.  omits).  A  fourth 
variation  of  the  name  of  Hilkiah  the  high-priest, 

1   Esd.   i.  8.       [IllLKlAII.J 

HCELLi.  This  is  the  word  generally  and  unfor- 
tunately used  by  our  translators  to  render  the  He- 
brew Sheol  (VlNL",  or  7XL"  ;  "Ai5?)s,  and  once 
Odvaros.  2  Sam.  xxii.  <: :  Tnferi  or  Tnferna,  or 
sometimes    Mors).     We  say  unfortunately,  because 

— although,  as   St.    Augustin  truly   asserts,  Sheol, 

with  its  equivalents   Tnferi  and  Hades,  are  never 


782 


HELL 


used  in  a  good  sense  {Be  Gen.  ad  Lit.  xii.  33), 
yet — the  English  word  Hell  is  mixed  up  with 
numberless  associations  entirely  foreign  to  the  minds 
of  the  ancient  Hebrews.  It  would  perhaps  have  been 
better  to  retain  the  Hebrew  word  Sheol,  or  else  render 
it  always  by  "the  grave"  or  "the  pit."  Ewald 
accepts  Luther's  word  Holle ;  even  Unterwelt,  which 
is  suggested  by  De  Wette,  involves  conceptions  too 
human  for  the  purpose. 

Passing  over  the  derivations  suggested  by  older 
writers,  it  is  now  generally  agreed  that  the  word 
comes  from  the  root  ?yB>,  "  to  make  hollow " 
(comp.  Germ.  Holle,  "  hell,"  with  Hohle,  "  a 
hollow"), and  therefore  means  the  vast  hollow  sub- 
terranean resting-place  which  is  the  common  recep- 
tacle of  the  dead  (Gesen.  Thes.  1348  ;  Bbttcher,  de 
Inferis,  c.  iv.  p.  137  sq. ;  Ewald,  ad  Ps.  p.  42).  It 
is  deep  (Job  xi.  8)  and  dark  (Job  xi.  21,  22),  in  the 
centre  of  the  earth  (Num.  xvi.  30  ;  Deut.  xxxii.  22), 
having  within  it  depths  on  depths  (Prov.  ix.  18), 
and  fastened  with  gates  (Is.  xxxviii.  10)  and  bars 
(Job  xvii.  16).  Some  have  fancied  (as  Jahn,  Arch. 
Bibl.  §203,  Eng.  ed.)  that  the  Jews,  like  the  Greeks, 
believed  in  infernal  rivers :  thus  Clemens  Alex, 
defines  Gehenna  as  "  a  river  of  fire"  (Fragm.  38), 
and  expressly  compares  it  to  the  fiery  rivers  of 
Tartarus  {Strom,  v.  14,  92) ;  and  Tertullian  says 
that  it  was  supposed  to  resemble  Pyriphlegethon 
(Apolog.  cap.  xlvii.).  The  notion,  however,  is  not 
found  in  Scripture,  for  Ps.  xviii.  4  is  a  mere  me- 
taphor. In  this  cavernous  realm  are  the  souls  of 
dead  men,  the  Kephaim  and  ill-spirits  (Ps.  lxxXvi. 
13,  lxxxix.  48  ;  Prov.  xxiii.  14  ;  Ez.  xxxi.  17,  xxxii. 
21).  It  is  all-devouring  (Prov.  i.  12,  xxx.  16),  in- 
satiable (Is.  v.  14),  and  remorseless  (Cant.  viii.  6). 
The  shadows,  not  of  men  only,  but  even  of  trees 
and  kingdoms,  are  placed  in  Sheol  (Is.  xiv.  9-20 ; 
Ez.  xxxi.  14-18,  xxxii. passim). 

It  is  clear  that  in  many  passages  of  the  0.  T. 
Sheol  can  only  mean  "  the  grave,"  and  is  so  ren- 
dered in  the  A.  V.  (see,  for  example,  Gen.  xxxvii. 
35,  xlii.  38  ;  1  Sam.  ii.  6 ;  Job  xiv.  13).  In 
other  passages,  however,  it  seems  to  involve  a 
notion  of  punishment,  and  is  therefore  rendered  in 
the  A.  V.  by  the  word  "  Hell."  But  in  many 
cases  this  translation  misleads  the  reader.  It  is 
obvious,  for  instance,  that  Job  xi.  8;  Ps.  cxxxix. 
8  ;  Am.  ix.  2  (where  "  hell "  is  used  as  the  anti- 
thesis of  "  heaven"),  merely  illustrate  the  Jewish 
notions  of  the  locality  of  Sheol  in  the  bowels  of  the 
earth.  Even  Ps.  ix.  17,  Prov.  xv.  24,  v.  5,  ix.  18, 
seem  to  refer  rather  to  the  danger  of  terrible  and 
precipitate  death  than  to  a  place  of  infernal  anguish. 
An  attentive  examination  of  all  the  passages  in 
which  the  word  occurs  will  show  that  the  Hebrew 
notions  respecting  Sheol  were  of  a  vague  description. 
The  rewards  and  punishments  of  the  Mosaic  law 
were  temporal,  and  it  was  only  gradually  and 
slowly  that  God  revealed  to  his  chosen  people  a 
knowledge  of  future  rewards  and  punishments. 
Generally  speaking,  the  Hebrews  regarded  the  grave 
as  the  final  end  of  all  sentient  and  intelligent  exist- 
ence, "the  land  where  all  things  are  forgotten" 
(1's.  lxxxviii.  10-12  ;  Is.  xxxviii.  9-20;  Ps.  vi.  5; 
Eccl.  ix.  10;  Ecclus.  xvii.  27,  28).  Even  the 
righteous  Hezekiah  trembled  lest,  "  when  his  eyes 
closed  upon  the  cherubim  and  the  mercy-seat,"  he 
should  no  longer  "see  the  Lord,  even  the  Lord  in 
the  land  of  the  living." 

In  the  X.  T  the  word  Hades  (like  Sheol)  pome- 
times  means  merely   "the  grave"  (Rev.  xx.  13; 


HELL 

Acts  ii.  31  ;  1  Cor.  xv.  55),  or  in  general  "  the 
unseen  world."  It  is  in  this  sense  that  the  creeds 
say  of  our  Lord  Karr\\6sv  ip  a5r?  or  els  &8ov,  de- 
scendit  ad  inferos,  or  inferna,  meaning  "  the  state 
of  the  dead  in  general,  without  any  restriction  of 
happiness  or  misery"  (Beveridge  on  Art.  iii.),  a 
doctrine  certainly,  though  only  virtually,  expressed 
in  Scripture  (Eph.  iv.  9  ;  Acts  ii.  25-31).  Simi- 
larly Josephus  uses  Hades  as  the  name  of  the  place 
whence  the  soul  of  Samuel  was  evoked  (Ant.  vi. 
14,  §2).  Elsewhere  in  the  N.  T.  Hades  is  used  of  a 
place  of  torment  (Luke  xvi.  23  ;  2  Pet.  ii.  4;  Matt, 
xi.  23,  &c).  Consequently  it  has  been  the  pre- 
valent, almost  the  universal,  notion  that  Hades  is 
an  intermediate  state  between  death  and  resurrec- 
tion, divided  into  two  parts,  one  the  abode  of  the 
blessed  and  the  other  of  the  lost.  This  was  the 
belief  of  the  Jews  after  the  exile,  who  gave  to  the 
places  the  names  of  Paradise  and  Gehenna  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xviii.  1,  §3  ;  cf.  Otho,  Lex.  Rabb.  s.  vv.),  of  the 
Fathers  generally  (Tert.  de  Anima,  c.  Iv. ;  Jerome  in 
Eccl.  iii. ;  Just.  Mart.  Dial.  c.  Tryph.  §105,  &c. ; 
see  Pearson  on  Creed.  Art.  v.),  and  of  many  moderns 
(Trench  on  the  Parables,  p.  467 ;  Alford  on  Luke 
xvi.  23).  In  holding  this  view,  main  reliance  is 
placed  on  the  parable  of  Dives  and  Lazarus  ;  but  it 
is  impossible  to  ground  the  proof  of  an  important 
theological  doctrine  on  a  passage  which  confessedly 
abounds  in  Jewish  metaphors.  "  Theologia  parabo- 
lica  non  est  demonstrativa  "  is  a  rule  too  valuable 
to  be  forgotten  ;  and  if  we  are  to  turn  rhetoric  into 
logic,  and  build  a  dogma  on  every  metaphor,  our 
belief  will  be  of  a  vague  and  contradictory  cha- 
racter. "  Abraham's  bosom,"  says  Dean  Trench, 
"  is  not  heaven,  though  it  will  issue  in  heaven, 
so  neither  is  Hades  hell  though  to  issue  in  it, 
when  death  and  Hades  shall  be  cast  into  the 
lake  of  fire  which  is  the  proper  hell.  It  is  the 
place  of  painful  restraint  (<pv\a.K7),  1  Pet.  iii.  19; 
afivffffos,  Luke  viii.  31),  where  the  souls  of  the 
wicked  are  reserved  to  the  judgment  of  the  great 
day."  But  respecting  the  condition  of  the  dead 
whether  before  or  after  the  resurrection  we  know 
very  little  indeed ;  nor  shall  we  know  anything 
certain  until  the  awful  curtains  of  mortality  are 
drawn  aside.  Dogmatism  on  this  topic  appears  to 
be  peculiarly  misplaced.     [See  Paradise.] 

The  word  most  frequently  used  in  the  N.  T.  for 
the  place  of  future  punishment  is  Gehenna  (yeevva), 
or  Gehenna  of  fire  (jj  y.  tov  irvpos),  and  this  word 
we  must  notice  only  so  far  as  our  purpose  requires  ; 
for  further  information  see  Gehenna  and  Hin- 
NOM.  The  valley  of  Hinnom,  for  which  Gehenna 
is  the  Greek  representative,  once  pleasant  with  the 
waters  of  Siloa  ("  irrigua  et  nemorosa,  plenaque 
deliciis,"  Hieron.  ad.Ter.  vii.  19,  31 ;  Matt.  v.  22), 
and  which  afterwards  regained  its  old  appearance 
("  hodieque  hortorum  praebens  delicias,"  id.),  was 
with  its  horrible  associations  of  Moloch-worship 
(Jer.  vii.  31,  xix.  2-6;  2  K.  xxiii.  10),  so  abhor- 
rent to  Jewish  feeling  that  they  adopted  the  word 
as  a  symbol  of  disgust  and  torment.  The  feeling 
was  kept  up  by  the  pollution  which  the  valley 
underwent  at  the  hands  of  Josiah,  after  which  it 
was  made  the  common  sink  of  all  the  filth  and 
corruption  in  the  city,  ghastly  fires  being  kept 
burning  (ace.  to  R.  Kimchi)  to  preserve  it  from 
absolute  putrefaction  (see  authorities  quoted  in 
Otho  Lex.  $abb.  s.  v.  binnom,  &c.).  The  lire 
and  the  worm  were  fit  emblems  of  anguish,  and  as 
such  had  seized  hold  of  the  Jewish  imagination  (Is. 
lxvi.    24;   Jud.   xvi.    17;    Ecclus.    vii.    17    :    hence 


HELLENIST 

the  application  of  the  word  Gehenna  and  its  acces- 
sories in  JMatt .  v.  22,  29,  30  :  Luke  xii.  <j. 

A  part  i  if  the  valley  of  Hinnom  was  named  Tophet 
(2  K.  xxiii.  10;  for  its  history  and  derivation  see 
T<  irn  i;t),  a  word  used  for  what  is  defiled  and  abom- 
inable (Jer.  vii.  31,32,  six.  6-13).  It  was  applied 
by  the  Rabbis  to  a  place  of  future  torment  (Targ, 
on  Is.  xxx.  33;  Talm.  Erubin.  f.  19,  1;  Bott- 
cher,  pp.  80,  85),  but  does  nut  occur  in  the  N.  T. 
luthevr.id  picture  of  Jsai  ill  (xxx.  :  ),  whidi  is 
full  of  tine  irony  against  the  enemy,  the  name  is 
applied  to  purposes  of  threatening  (with  a  probable 
allusion  to  the  recent  acts  of  Hezekiah,  see  Rosen- 
muller  '«/  loo.').  Besides  the  authorities  quoted,  see 
Bochart  (Phaleg,  p.  528),  Ewald  (Proph.  ii.  55), 
Seldeu  (de  Dis  Syris,  p.  172  sqq.),  Wilson  {Lands 
of  the  Bible,  i.  499),  &c. 

The  subject  of  the  punishment  of  the  wicked  and 
of  Hell  as  a  place  of  torment  belongs  to  a  Theolo- 
gical rather  than  a  Biblical  Dictionary.  [F.W.F.] 

HELLENIST  ('EAAtjcictt^s  ;  Graecus;  cf. 
'EW-qvta/xos,  '1  Mace,  iv.  13).  In  one  of  the 
earliest  notices  of  the  first  Christian  Church  at 
Jerusalem  (Acts  vi.  1),  two  distinct  parties  are 
recogni  el  among  its  members,  "Hebrews"  and 
••Hellenists"  (Grecians),  who  appear  to  stand  to- 
wards one  another  in  some  degree  in  a  relation  of 
jealous  rivalry.  So  again  when  Si.  Paul  first  visited 
Jerusalem  alter  his  conversion,  he  " spake  and  dis- 
puted with  the  Hellenists"  (Acts  ix.  29),  as  if 
expecting  to  find  more  sympathy  among  them  than 
with  the  rulers  of  the  Jews.  The  term  Hellenist 
occurs  once  again  in  the  N.  T.  according  to  the 
common  text,  in  the  account  of  the  foundation  of 
tie-  Church  at  Antioch  (Acts  xi.  20),  tint  there 
the  context,  as  well  as  tin1  form  of  the  Sentence 
(K'i\  irfjbs  robs  'E.,  though  the  Kal  is  doubtful), 
seems  to  require  the  other  reading  "Greeks" 
("EAArjyes),  which  is  supported  by  great  external 
e\  idence,as  the  true  antithesis  to  ".lews"  i^'louSaiois, 
not  'Efipaiois,  v.  19). 

The  name,  according  to  its  derivation,  whether 
the  original  verb  ('EWriuiCw)  be  taken,  according 
to  the  common  analogy  of  similar  foims  (fxriS'tfa, 
a.TTtKi{<i),&tAiiTiTi{OL>  <.  ill  the  general  sense  of  adopt- 
ing the  spirit  and  character  of  Greeks,  or,  in  the 
n limited   sense  of  using  the  Greek  language 

|  \en.  Anab.  vii.  3,  §25  ),  marks  a  class  distinguished 
le.  peculiar  habits,  and  not  by  descent.  Thus  the 
Hellenist  -  as  a  bo.lv  included  not  only  the  proselytes 
of  Civek  (or  foreign)  parentage  {ol  <re/3o7ieecn 
"EAAtjj/cs,  Acts  xvii.  4  i?);  ol  ae^o/xepoL  irpoa- 
7)At/Toi,  Acts  xiii.  43  ;  ol  ae[i6fxevoi,  Acts  xvii. 
11  .  hi  t  also  those  Jews  who,  by  settling  in  foreign 
countries,  had  adopted  the  prevalent  form  of  the 
current  Greek  civilisation,  and  with  it  the  use  of 
the  common  Greek  dialect,  to  the  exclusion  of  the 
Aramaic,  which  was  the  national  representative  of 
the  ancient  Hebrew.     Hellenism  was  thus  a  type  of 

life,    and    not    an    indication    of   01  igin.      II    ' 
might  be  Creeks,  but   when  the  latter  term  is  used 
("EAATjyey,  John  xii.  20),  the  point  of  race  and  not 
of  creed  is  that  which  is  foremost  in  the  mind  of  tie- 
writer. 

The  genera]  iuilnei.ee  of  the  I  i  sts  in 

the  Blast,  the  rise  and  spread  of  the  Jewish  Dis- 
persion, and  the  essential  antagonism  of  Jew  and 
Greek,  have  been  noticed  in  other  articles  jAu  x- 
am.ii:  iiii.Ci;;  \  i  :  An  \  \\hl:i  \  :  DlSPEBSIOU  : 
Asrua  in  s  i\ .  Epiphanes],  and  it  n  mains  only 
to  characterise  brief!}  the  elements  which  the  Hel- 
lenists contributed  to  the  lac  uage  oi  the  V  T..  and 


HELLENIST 


783 


the  immediate  effects  which  they  produced  upon  the 
Apostolic  teaching: — 

1.  The  flexibility  of  the  Creek  language  gained 
for  it  in  ancient  time  a  general  currency  similar  to 
that  which  French  enjoys  in  modern  Europe  ;  but 
with  this  important  difference,  that  Greek  was  not 
only  the  language  of  educated  men,  but  also  the 
language  of  the  masses  in  the  great  centres  of  com- 
merce. The  colonies  of  Alexander  and  his  suc- 
cessors originally  established  what  has  been  called 
the  Macedonian  dialect  throughout  the  East;  but 
even  in  this  the  prevailing  power  of  Attic  literature 
made  itself  distinctly  felt.  Peculiar  words  ami 
fin ms  adopted  at  Alexandria  were  undoubtedly  of 
Macedonian  origin,  but  the  later  Attic  may  be 
justly  regarded  as  the  real  basis  of  Oriental  Greek. 
This  first  type  was,  however,  soon  modified,  at 
least  in  common  use,  by  contact  with  other  lan- 
guages. The  vocabulary  was  enriched  by  the  addi- 
tion of  foreign  words,  and  the  syntax  was  modified 
by  new  constructions.  In  this  way  a  variet  v  of  local 
dialects  must  have  arisen,  the  specific  characters  of 
which  were  determined  in  the  first  instance  by  the 
conditions  under  which  they  were  formed,  and  which 
afterwards  passed  away  with  the  circumstances 
which  had  produced  them.  But  one  of  these  dialects 
has  been  preserved  after  the  ruin  of  the'  people 
among  whom  it  arose,  by  being  consecrated  to  the 
noblest  service  which  language  has  yet  fulfilled. 
In  other  cases  the  dialects  perished  together  with 
the  communities  who  used  them  in  the  common 
intercourse  of  life,  but  in  that  of  the  Jews  the 
Alexandrine  version  of  the  0.  T.,  acting  in  this 
respect  like  the  great  vernacular  versions  of  England 
and  Germany,  gave  a  definiteness  and  fixity  to  the 
popular  language  which  could  not  have  been  gained 
without  the  existence  of  some  recognised  standard, 
'flic  style  of  the  LXX.  itself  is,  indeed,  different  in 
different  parts  but  the  same  general  character  runs 
through  the  whole,  and  the  variations  which  it  pre- 
sents are  not  greater  than  those  which  exist  in  the 
different  books  of  the  X.  T. 

'flic  functions  which  this  Jewish-Greek  had  to 
discharge  were  of  the  widest  application,  and  the 
language  itself' combined  the  most  opposite  features. 
It  was  essentially  a  fusion  of  Eastern  and  Western 
thought.  For  disregarding  peculiarities  of' inflexion 
ami  novel  words,  tin'  characteristic  of  the  Hellenistic 
Ji  il; :  t  i  ■.;  tne  coinlan  itnai  of  a  Hebrew  spirit  with  a 
Greek  body,  of  a  Hebrew  form  with  Greek  words. 
Tie'  conception  belongs  to  one  race,  and  the  expn 
sion  to  another.  Nor  is  it  too  much  to  say  that 
this-  combination  was  one  of  the  most  important, 
preparations  for  the  reception  of  <  Christianity,  and  one 
of  the  most  important  aids  for  (he  adequate  expres 
si fits  teaching.     On  the  one  hand,  by  the 

of  the  Hellenistic  Creek,  the  deep,  theocratic    a-peet 

of  the  world  and  lite,  which  distinguishes  Jewish 
thought,  was  placed  before  men  at  large;  ami  on  the 
other,  tie-  subtle  truths,  which  philosophy  bad 
gained  from  the  analysis  of  mind  and  action,  and 
ned  in  words,  were  transferred  to  the  service 
of  revelation.  In  the  fulness  of  time,  when  the 
great  ne  \      agewas  prepared  to  con- 

vej    it;  and  thus   the   very   dialect  of  the  N.  T. 
forms  a  great  lesson-in  the  ti  hyof  history, 

and  becomes  in  itself  a  monument  of  the  providenti  J 
government  of  mankind. 

This  vi.w  of  the  Hellenistic  dialect  will  at  once 
remove  one  of  the  commonest  misconceptions  relat- 

i.       Koi     if     wdl    follow    that    its    deviations 

from  the  ordinary  law-  of  classic  Greek  are  them- 


784 


HELLENIST 


selves  bound  by  some  common  law,  and  that  irre- 
gularities of  construction  and  altered  usages  of  words 
are  to  be  traced  to  their  first  source,  and  inter- 
preted strictly  according  to  the  original  conception 
out  of  which  they  sprang.  A  popular,  and  even  a 
corrupt,  dialect  is  not  less  precise,  or,  in  other  words, 
is  not  less  human  than  a  polished  one,  though  its 
interpretation  may  often  be  more  difficult  from  the 
want  of  materials  for  analysis.  But  in  the  case  of 
the  N.  T.,  the  books  themselves  furnish  an  ample 
store  for  the  critic,  and  the  Septuagint,  when  com- 
pared with  the  Hebrew  text,  provides  him  with  the 
history  of  the  language  which  he  has  to  study. 

2.  The  adoption  of  a  strange  language  was  essen- 
tially characteristic  of  the  true  nature  of  Hellenism. 
The  purely  outward  elements  of  the  national  life 
were  laid  aside  with  a  facility  of  which  history  offers 
few  examples,  while  the  inner  character  of  the 
people  remained  unchanged.  In  every  respect  the 
thought,  so  to  speak,  was  clothed  in  a  new  dress. 
Hellenism  was,  as  it  were,  a  fresh  incorporation  of 
Judaism  according  to  altered  laws  of  life  and  wor- 
ship. But  as  the  Hebrew  spirit  made  itself  dis- 
tinctly visible  in  the  new  dialect,  so  it  remained 
undestroyed  by  the  new  conditions  which  regulated 
its  action.  While  the  Hellenistic  Jews  followed 
their  natural  instinct  for  trade,  which  was  originally 
curbed  by  the  Mosaic  Law,  and  gained  a  deeper 
insight  into  foreign  character,  and  with  this  a  truer 
sympathy,  or  at  least  a  wider  tolerance  towards 
foreign  opinions,  they  found  means  at  the  same 
time  to  extend  the  knowledge  of  the  principles  of 
their  divine  faith,  and  to  gain  respect  and  attention 
even  from  those  who  did  not  openly  embrace  their 
religion.  Hellenism  accomplished  for  the  outer 
world  what  the  Return  [Cyrus]  accomplished  for 
the  Palestinian  Jews :  it  was  the  necessary  step  be- 
tween a  religion  of  form  and  a  religion  of  spirit: 
it  witnessed  against  Judaism  as  final  and  universal, 
and  it  witnessed  for  it,  as  the  foundation  of  a 
spiritual  religion  which  should  be  bound  by  no  local 
restrictions.  Under  the  influence  of  this  wider  in- 
struction a  Greek  body  grew  up  around  the  Syna- 
gogue, not  admitted  into  the  Jewish  Church,  and 
yet  holding  a  recognised  position  with  regard  to  it, 
which  was  able  to  apprehend  the  Apostolic  teaching, 
and  ready  to  receive  it.  The  Hellenists  themselves 
were  at  once  missionaries  to  the  heathen,  and  pro- 
phets to  their  own  countrymen.  Their  lives  were 
an  abiding  protest  against  polytheism  and  pantheism, 
and  they  retained  with  unshaken  zeal  the  sum  of 
their  ancient  creed,  when  the  preacher  had  popularly 
occupied  the  place  of  the  priest,  and  a  service  of 
prayer  and  praise  and  exhortation  had  succeeded  in 
daily  life  to  the  elaborate  ritual  of  the  Temple. 
Yet  this  new  development  of  Judaism  was  obtained 
without  the  sacrifice  of  national  ties.  The  con- 
nexion of  the  Hellenists  with  the  Temple  was  not 
broken,  except  in  the  case  of  some  of  the.  Egyptian 
Jews.  [The  Dispersion.]  Unity  coexisted  with 
dispersion  ;  and  the  organisation  of  a  Catholic  church 
was  foreshadowed,  not  only  in  the  widening  breadth 
of  doctrine,  but  even  externally  in  the  scattered 
communities  which  looked  to  Jerusalem  as  their 
common  centre. 

In  another  aspect  Hellenism  served  as  the  pre- 
paration for  a  Catholic  creed.  As  it  furnished  the 
language  of  Christianity,  it  supplied  also  that 
literary  instinct  which  counteracted  the  traditional 
reserve  of  the  Palestinian  Jews.  The  writings  of 
the  N.  T.,  and  all  the  writings  of  the  Apostolic 
age,  with  the  exception  of  the  original  Gospel  of 


HEM  OF  GARMENT 

St.  Matthew,  were,  as  far  as  we  know,  Greek  ;  and 
Greek  seems  to  have  remained  the  sole  vehicle  ot 
Christian  literature,  and  the  principal  medium  of 
Christian  worship,  till  the  Church  of  North  Africa 
rose  into  importance  in  the  time  of  Tertullian. 
The  Canon  of  the  Christian  Scriptures,  the  early 
Creeds,  and  the  Liturgies,  are  the  memorials  of  this 
Hellenistic  predominance  in  the  Church,  and  the 
types  of  its  working  ;  and  if  in  later  times  the  ( J  reek 
spirit  descended  to  the  investigation  of  painful  sub- 
tleties, it  may  be  questioned  whether  the  fulness 
of  Christian  truth  could  have  been  developed  with- 
out the  power  of  Greek  thought  tempered  by  He- 
brew discipline. 

The  general  relations  of  Hellenism  to  Judaism 
arc  well  treated  in  the  histories  of  Ewald  and  Jost ; 
but  the  Hellenistic  language  is  as  yet,  critically 
speaking,  almost  unexplored.  Winer's  Grammar 
(Gramm.  d.  N.  T.  Sprachidioms,  6te  Aufl.  1855) 
has  done  great  service  in  establishing  the  idea  of 
law  in  N.  T.  language,  which  was  obliterated  by 
earlier  interpreters,  but  even  Winer  does  not  in- 
vestigate the  origin  of  the  peculiarities  of  the 
Hellenistic  dialect.  The  idioms  of  the  N.  T.  cannot 
be  discussed  apart  from  those  of  the  LXX.  ;  and  no 
explanation' can  be  considered  perfect  which  does 
not  take  into  account  the  origin  of  the  corresponding 
Hebrew  idioms.  For  this  work  even  the  materials 
are  as  yet  deficient.  The  text  of  the  LXX.  is  still 
in  a  most  unsatisfactory  condition;  and  while 
Bruder's  concordance  leaves  nothing  to  be  desired 
for  the  vocabulary  of  the  N.  T.,  Trommius'  con- 
cordance to  the  LXX.,  however  useful,  is  cpiite 
untrustworthy  for  critical  purposes.      [B.  F.  W.] 

HELMET.     [Arms,  p.  112  «.] 

HE'LON  (jfyl;  Xai\dv ;  Helon),  father  of 
Eliab,  who  was  the  chief  man  of  the  tribe  of  Ze- 
bulun,  when  the  census  was  taken  in  the  wilder- 
ness of  Sinai  (Num.  i.  9,  ii.  7,  vii.  24,  29,  x.  16). 

HEM  OF  GARMENT  (TWX  5   ^pdo-ireSov ; 

fimbria').  The  importance  which  the  later  Jews, 
especially  the  Pharisees  (Matt,  xxiii.  5),  attached 
to  the  hem  or  fringe  of  their  garments  was  founded 
upon  the  regulation  in  Num.  xv.  38,  39,  which 
attached  a  symbolical  meaning  to  it.  We  must 
not,  however,  conclude  that  the  fringe  owed  its 
origin  to  that  passage :  it  was  in  the  first  instance 
the  ordinary  mode  of  finishing  the  robe,  the  ends 
of  the  threads  composing  the  woof  being  left  in 
order  to  prevent  the  cloth  from  unravelling,  just  as 
in  the  Egyptian  calasiris  (Her.  ii.  81  ;  Wilkinson's 
Ancient  Egyptians,  ii.  90),  and  in  the  Assyrian 
robes  as  represented  in  the  bas-reliefs  of  Nineveh: 
the  blue  riband  being  added  to  strengthen  the 
border.  The  Hebrew  word  tzizith  is  expressive  of 
this  fretted  edge:  the  Greek  Kpao-rreSa  (the  ety- 
mology of  which  is  uncertain,  being  variously  traced 
to  Kpooffos,  &Kpos  7re'8oj/,  and  KprjTris)  applies  to 
the  edge  of  a  river  or  mountain  (Xen.  Hist.  Gr. 
iii.  2,  §16,  iv.  6,  §8),  and  is  explained  by  Hesychius 
as  to:  iv  t<2  &Kpcjj  rod  l/xarlov  KtKKdiff^va 
pdfj./J.ara  kol  ro  aicpov  abrov.  The  beged  or  outer 
robe  was  a  simple  quadrangular  piece  of  cloth,  and 
generally  so  worn  that  two  of  the  corners  hung 
down  in  front:  these  corners  were  ornamented  with 
a  "  riband  of  blue,"  or  rather  dark  violet,  tin-  riband 
itself  being,  as  we  may  conclude  from  the  word 
used,  7T13,  as  narrow  as  a  thread  or  piece  of 
string.      The  Jews  attached  great   sanctity  to  this 


HEM  AM 

fringe  (Matt.  ix.  20,  xiv.  36  ;  Luke  viii.  44),  and 
the  Pharisees  made  it  more  prominent  than  it  was 
originally  designed  to  be,  enlarging  both  the  fringe 
and  the  riband  to  an  undue  width  (Matt,  xxiii.  5). 
Directions  were  given  as  to  the  number  of  threads 
of  which  it  ought  to  be  composed,  and  other  par- 
ticulars, to  each  of  which  a  symbolical  meaning 
was  attached  (Carpzov,  Apparat.  p.  198).  It  was 
appended  in  later  times  to  the  talith  more  especially, 
as  being  the  robe  usually  worn  at  devotions  :  whence 
the  proverbial  saying  quoted  by  Lightfoot  (Exercit. 
on  Matt.  v.  40),  "  He  that  takes  care  of  his  fringes 
deserves  a  good  coat."  [W.  L.  B.] 

HE'MAM  (DECI!  ;  Alfidv  ;  Heman).  Hori 
(».  e.  Horite)  and  Hemam  were  sons  (A.  V. 
"  children,"  but  the  word  is  Bene)  of  Lotan,  the 
eldest  son  of  Seir  (Gen.  xxxvi.  22).  In  the  list  in 
1  Chr.  i.  the  name  appears  as  HOMAM,  which  is 
probably  the  correct  form. 

HE'MAN  (|D»H  ;  Al^hv  and  'Afiav).  1.  Son 
of  Zerah,  1  Chr.  ii.  6  ;  1  K.  iv.  31.  See  following- 
article. 

2.  Son  of  Joel,  and  grandson  of  Samuel  the 
prophet,  a  Kohathite.  He  is  called  "the  singer" 
(VliC'JDrh,  rather,   the  musician,  1   Chr.  vi.  3:3, 

and  was  the  first  pf  the  three  chief  Levites  to 
whom  was  committed  the  vocal  and  instrumental 
music  of  the  temple-service  in  the  reign  of  David, 
as  we  read  1  Chr.  xv.  16-22,  Asaph  and  Ethan, 
or  rather,  according  to  xxv.  1,  3,  Jeduthun,a  being 
his  colleagues.  [Jeduthun.]  The  genealogy  of 
Heman  is  given  in  1  Chr.  vi.  33-38  (A.  V.),  but 
the  generations  between  Assir,  the  son  of  Korah, 
and  Samuel  are  somewhat  confused,  owing  to  two 
collateral  lines  having  got  mixed.  A  rectification 
of  this  genealogy  will  be  found  at  p.  214  of  the 
Genealogies  of  our  Lord,  where  it  is  shown  that 
Heman  is  14th  in  descent  from  Levi.  A  further 
account  of  Heman  is  giver.  1  Chr.  xxv.,  where  he  is 
called  (ver.  5)  "  the  king's  seer  in  the  matters  of 
God,"  the  word  nth,  "  seer,"  which  in  2  Chr.  xxxv. 
15  ii  applied  to  Jeduthun,  and  in  xxix.  30  to  Asaph, 
being  probably  used  in  the  same  sense  as  is  N33 
"  prophesied/'  of  Asaph  and  Jeduthun  in  xxv.  1-3. 
We  there  learn  that  Heman  had  fourteen  sons, 
and  three  daughters  [Hanani.ui  I.],  of  which  the 
sons  all  assisted  in  tin:  music  under  their  father, 
and  each  of  whom  was  head  of  one  of  the  twenty- 
four  wards  of  Levites,  who  "  were  instructed  in  the 
songs  of  the  Lord,"  >>r  rather,  in  sacred  music. 
Whether  or  no  this  Heman  is  the  person  to  whom 
the  88th  Psalm  is  ascribed  is  doubtful.  The  chief 
reason  fur  supposing  him  to  be  the  same  is,  that  as 
other  Psalms  are  ascribed  to  Asapb  and  Jeduthun, 
so  it  is  likely  that  this  one  should  be  to  Heman  the 

singer.      Hut  on  the  other   band    lie   is   there   called 

'•tiie  Ezrahite;"  and  the  89th  Psalm  is  ascribed 
to  "  Ethan  tin-  Ezrahite."11  But  since  Heman  and 
Ethan  are  described  in  I  Chr.  ii.  •  '.,  as  ••sons  of 
Zerah,"  it  is  in  the  highest  degree  probable  that 
Ezrahite  means  "  of  the  family  of  Zerah,"  and  con- 
sequently that  Heman  "l'  the  88th  Psalm  is  differenl 
from  Heman  the  singer,  the  Kohathite.  In  1  K. 
iv.  :;t  again  (hebr.  v.  11;,  we  have  mention,  as 
of  the  wi>est  of  mankind,  of  Ethan  the  Ezrahite, 


HEMDAN 


785 


11   |i"VN  and  pniT  arc  probably  only  clerical  va- 
riations.     See  also  2  Chr.  wix-   13,  14. 

b  St.  Augustine's  copy  read,  with  the  LXX.,  Israelite, 


Heman,  Chalcol  and  Darda,  the  sons  of  Mahol,  a  list 
corresponding  with  the  names  of  the  sons  of  Zerah, 
in  1  Chr.  ii.  t3.  The  inference  from  which  is  that 
there  was  a  Heman,  different  from  Heman  the  singer, 
of  the  family  of  Zerah  the  son  of  Judah,  and  that 
he  is  distinguished  from  Heman  the  singer,  the 
Levite,  by  being  called  the  Ezrahite.  As  regards 
the  age  when  Heman  the  Ezrahite  lived,  the  only 
tiring  that  can  be  asserted  is  that  he  lived  before 
Solomon,  who  was  said  to  be  "  wiser  than  Heman," 
and  after  Zerah  the  son  of  Judah.  His  being  called 
"son  of  Zerah"  in  1  Chr.  ii.  6,  indicates  nothing 
as  to  the  precise  age  when  he  and  his  brother  lived. 
They  are  probably  mentioned  in  this  abridged 
genealogy,  only  as  having  been  illustrious  persons 
of  their  family.  Nor  is  anything  known  of  Mahol 
their  father.  It  is  of  course  uncertain  whether  the 
tradition  which  ascribed  the  88th  Psalm  to  Heman's 
authorship  is  trustworthy.  Nor  is  there  anything 
in  the  Psalm  itself  which  clearly  marks  the  time  of 
its  composition.  The  89th  Psalm,  ascribed  to 
Ethan,  seems  to  be  subsequent  to  the  overthrow  of 
the  kingdom  of  Judah,  unless  possibly  the  cala- 
mities described  in  the  latter  part  of  the  Psalm  may 
be  understood  of  David's  flight  at  Absalom's  rebel- 
lion, in  which  case  ver.  41  would  allude  to  Shimei 
the  son  of  Gera. 

If  Heman  the  Kohathite,  or  his  father,  had  mar- 
ried an  heiress  of  the  house  of  Zerah,  as  the  sons  of 
Hakkoz  did  of  the  house  of  Barzillai,  and  was  so 
reckoned  in  the  genealogy  of  Zerah,  then  all  the 
notices  of  Heman  might  point  to  the  same  person, 
and  the  musical  skill  of  David's  chief  musician,  and 
the  wisdom  of  David's  seer,  and  the  genius  of  the 
author  of  the  88th  Psalm,  concurring  in  the  same 
individual,  would  make  him  fit  to  be  joined  with 
those  other  worthies  whose  wisdom  was  only  ex- 
ceeded by  that  of  Solomon.  But  it  is  impossible  to 
assert  that  this  was  the  case. 

Rosenm.  Proleg.  in  J's<i/m.  p.  xvii. ;  J.  Ols- 
hausen,  on  Psalms ;  Einleit.  p.  22  ;  Kwzgef. 
Exeg.Handb.  [A.  C.  H.] 

HE'MATH  (nnn  ;  A(,ua0,  Alex.  'E/ide  ; 
Emath).  Another  form — not  warranted  by  the 
Hebrew — of  the  well-known  name  Hamatii  (Am. 
vi.  14). 

HE'MATH  (n»n,    i.e.    Ham  math  ;    Al/xde  ; 

Vulg.  translates  <le  colore),  a  person,  or  a  place, 
named  in  the  genealogical  lists  of  Judah,  as  the 
origin  of  the  Kenites,  and  the  "father''  of  the 
house  of  RECHAB  (1  Chr.  ii.  55). 

HKM'DAN  (ppn  ;  'A/aaM;  Amdam,  or  Ham- 
dam,  SOllle  copies  //  i  mi  I' in  ),  tile  eldest  son  of  Disholl, 
sin  of  Anah  the  Horite  (den.  xxxvi.  26).  In  the 
parallel  list  of  1  Chr.  (i.  41  |  the  name  is  changed  to 
Hamran  (pDIT),  which  in  the  A.  Y.  is  given  as 
Ambam,  probably  following  the  Vulgate  ffamram, 

in  the  earliest  MSS.   .!//<< 

'l'be  name  llenidan  is  by  Knobel  (Genesis,  256) 
compared  with  those  of  Humeidy  and  Hamady, 
two  of  the  five  families  of  the  tribe  <>f  Otnran  or 
.  Imran,  \\  ho  are  located  to  the  E.  and  S.E.  of  Akaba. 
Also  with  the  Bene-Hamyde,  who  are  found  a  short 
distance  s.  of  Kerek  (S.E,  corner  of  the  Dead  Sea); 
and  from  thence  to  <  l-Busaireh,  probably  theancienl 

for  EorahiU,  in  the  titles  to  the  B8th  and  S'.ltli  I'saln.s. 

His  explanation  of  the  title  of  Ps.  lxxxviii.  is  a  curious 
specimen  of  spiritualizing  interpretation. 


78(3 


HEMLOCK 


Bozrah,  on  the  road  to  Petra.     (See  Burckhardt, 
Syria,  &c,  695,  407.) 

HEMLOCK  (SPfth).  The  Hebrew  rosh  is  ren- 
dered "  hemlock"  in  two  passages  (Hos.  x.  4  ;  Am. 
vi.  12),  but  elsewhere  "gall."  It  is  impossible  to 
decide  what,  or  indeed  whether  any  particular 
plant  is  meant.  From  a  comparison  of  the  passages 
in  which  it  is  noticed  we  may  infer  that  it  grew 
rankly  in  the  corn-fields  (Hos.  x.  4),  and  bore  a 
berry  or  fruit  (Deut.  xxxii.  32  ;  Am.  vi.  12),  from 
which  a  juice  might  be  expressed  (Jer.  viii.  14)  of 
a  very  bitter  flavour  (Deut.  xxix.  18;  Jer.  ix.  15, 
Kxiii.  15 ;  Lam.  iii.  19),  but  not  necessarily 
poisonous,  as  Winer  (s.  v.  Gift)  assumes.  In  the 
LXX.  it  is  rendered  by  a  general  term,  xoA^, 
expressive  of  bitterness,  with  the  exception  of  the 
passage  in  Hosea,  where  'aypwGTis,  "  couch  grass," 
occurs.  Various  conjectures  have  been  made  as  to 
the  plant:  Gesenius  {Thes.  p.  1251)  suggests,  on 
etymological  grounds,  "  poppy-Ae«c?s,"  or  the  seed- 
vessels  of  the  papaver  somniferum,  from  which  an 
intoxicating  liquor  may  be  extracted:  the  objection 
to  this,  however,  is  that  it  is  not  bitter.  The  colo- 
cynth  (cucumis  colocynthi)  has  been  proposed  ;  this 
is  notoriously  bitter,  but  is  not  found  growing  wild 
in  corn-fields.  Michaelis  (jSuppl.  2220)  is  in  Favour 
of  the  darnel  (lolium  temulentum,  the  £i£dviov  of 
Matt.  xiii.  25),  which  grows  amidst  wheat,  and 
has  a  prejudicial  effect  if  not  separated  from  it 
in  bread  (Robinson,  Researches,  iii.  55):  the 
objection,  in  this  case,  is  that  it  produces  no  fruit 
or  berry.  Celsius  (Hierob.  ii.  46)  is  in  favour  of  the 
"  hemlock,"  and  quotes  the  opinion  of  a  most  learned 
Rabbi,  Ben  Melech,  to  that  effect.  It  seems  more 
probable  that  the  name  may  have  been  applied  to 
several  plants  having  an  acrid  juice.     [W.  L.  B.] 

HEN  (|n  ;  Hem).  According  to  the  rendering 
of  the  passage  (Zech.  vi.  14)  adopted  in  the  A.  V. 
Hen  (or  accurately  Chen)  is  the  name  of  a  son  of 
Zephaniah,  and  apparently  the  same  who  is  called 
Josiah  in  ver.  10.  But  by  the  LXX.  (xdpis), 
Ewald  (Gunst),  and  other  interpreters,  the  words 
are  taken  to  mean  "  for  the  favour  of  the  sou  of 
Zephaniah." 

HEN.  The  hen  is  nowhere  noticed  in  the  Bible 
except  in  the  passages  (Matt,  xxiii.  37  ;  Luke  xiii. 
34),  where  our  Saviour  touchingly  compares  His 
anxiety  to  save  Jerusalem  to  the  tender  care  of  a 
hen  "  gathering  her  chickens  under  her  wings." 
The  word  employed  is  upvis,  which  is  used  in  the 
same  specific  sense  in  classical  Greek  (Aristoph. 
Av.  102,  Vesp.  811).  That  a  bird,  so  intimately 
connected  with  the  household,  and  so  common  in 
Palestine,  as  we  know  from  Rabbinical  sources, 
should  receive  such  slight  notice,  is  certainly 
singular  ;  it  is  almost  equally  singular  that  it  is 
nowhere  represented  in  the  paintings  of  ancient 
Egypt  (Wilkinson,  i.  234).  [W.  L.  B.l 

HE'NA  (J?jn  ;  'Ava ;  Ana)  seems  to  have  been 
one  of  the  chief  cities  of  a  monarchical  state  which 
the  Assyrian  kings  had  reduced  shortly  before  the 
time  of  Sennacherib  (2  K.  xix.  13:  Is.  xxxvii.  13). 
Its  connexion  with  Sepharvaim,  or  Sippara,  would 
lead  us  to  place  it  in  Babylonia,  or  at  any  rate  on 
the  Euphrates.  Here,  at  no  great  distance  from 
Sippara  (now  Mosaib),  is  an  ancient  town  called 
Ana  or  Anah,  which  seems  to  have  been  in  former 
times  a  place  of  considerable  importance.  It  is  men- 
tioned by  Abulfeda,  by  William  of  Tvre,  and  others 


HEPHERITES,  THE 

i  see  Asseman.  Bibl.  (Jr.  vol.  iii.  pt.  ii.  p.  5G0,  and 
p.  717).  The  conjecture  by  some  (see  Winer's 
Realworterbuch,  s.  v.)  that  this  may  be  Hena,  is 
probable,  and  deserves  acceptance.  A  further  con- 
jecture identifies  Ana  with  a  town  called  Anat 
(71  is  merely  the  feminine  termination),  which  is 
mentioned  in  the  Assyrian  inscriptions  as  situated 
on  an  island  in  the  Euphrates  (Fox  Talbot's  Assy- 
rian Texts,  21  ;  Layard's  Nineveh  and  Babylon, 
355)  at  some  distance  below  its  junction  with  the 
Chabour ;  and  which  appears  as  Anatho  {'kvadu ) 
in  Isidore  of  Charax  {Mans.  Parth.  p.  4).  The 
modern  Anat  is  on  the  right  bank  of  the  stream, 
while  the  name  also  attaches  to  some  ruins  a  little 
lower  down  upon  the  left  bank;  but  between  them 
is  "a  string  of  islands"  (Chesney's  Euphrates 
Expedition,  i.  53),  on  one  or  more  of  which  the 
ancient  city  may  have  been  situated.  [( i.  R.l 

HEN'AUAD  (Tljn  ;  'Hva^dS.;  Henadad, 
Enadad),  the  head  of  a  family  of  Levites  who 
took  a  prominent  part  in  the  rebuilding  of  the 
Temple  under  Jeshua  (Ezr.  iii.  9).  Bavai  and 
Binnui  (Neh.  iii.  18,  24),  who  assisted  in  the  repair 
of  the  wall  of  the  city,  probably  belonged  to  the 
same  family.  The  latter  also  represented  his  family 
at  the  signing  of  the  covenant  (Neh.  x.  9). 

HE'NOCH  (Ipjn  ;  'E^x  i  Henoch).  1.  The 
form  iu  which  the  well-known  name  Enoch  is  given 
in  the  A.  V.  of  1  Chr.  i.  3.  The  Hebrew  word  is 
the  same  both  here  and  in  Genesis,  viz.  Chanoc. 
Perhaps  in  the  present  case  our  translators  followed 
the  Vulgate.  2.  So  they  appear  also  to  .have  done 
in  1  Chr.  i.  33  with  a  name  which  in  Gen.  xxv.  4 
is  more  accurately  given  as  Haxoch. 

HE'PHER  pan  ;  'Oct^'p  ;  Hepher).  1.  A  de- 
scendant of  Manasseh.  The  youngest  of  the  sons 
of  Gilead  (Num.  xxvi.  32),  and  head  of  the  family 
of  the  Hepherites.  Hepher  was  father  of  Ze- 
LOPHEHAD  (xxvi.  33  ;  xxvii.  1),  whose  daughters 
first  raised  the  question  of  the  right  of  a  woman 
having  no  brother,  to  hold  the  propeity  of  her 
father. 

2.  ('H</><xA  ;  Hepher)  The  second  son  of  Naaiah, 
one  of  the  two  wives  of  Ashur,  the  "  father  of 
Tekoa"  (1  Chr.  iv.  6),  in  the  genealogy  of  Judah. 

3.  The  Mecherathite,  one  of  the  heroes  of  David's 
guard,  according  to  the  list  of  1  Chr.  xi.  36.  In 
the  catalogue  of  2  Samuel  this  name  does  not  exist 
(see  xxiii.  34)  :  and  the  conclusion  of  Kennicott,  after 
a  full  investigation  of  the  passages,  is  that  the  names 
in  Samuel  are  the  originals,  and  that  Hepher  is  a 
mere  corruption  of  them. 

HEPHER  pan  ;  '0(i>e>  ;  Opher),  a  place  in 
ancient  Canaan,  which,  though  not  mentioned  in 
the  history  of  the  conquest,  occurs  in  the  list  of 
conquered  kings  (Josh.  xii.  17).  It  was  on  the 
west  of  Jordan  (comp.  7).  So  was  also  the  "  land  of 
Hepher"  (Tl  }'1N,  terra  Eijlicr),  which  is  named 
with  Socoh  as  one  of  Solbmon's  commissaiial  dis- 
tricts (1  K.  iv.  10).  To  judge  from  this  cai  dogue 
it  lay  towards  the  south  of  central  Palestine,  at 
any  rate  below  Dor:  so  that  there  cannot  lie  any 
connexion  between  it  and  Gath-HEPHEB,  which 
was  in  Zebulun  near  Sepphoris.  [<>.] 

HEPHERITES,  THE  (nann.  fie 

Hepberite;"    6  'Cxpcpi ;  familia   Heph 
the    family  of   Ilepher    the   son    of  Gilead    (Num. 
xxvi.  32). 


HEPHZI-BAH 

HEPH  ZI-BAH  (rU-^an  ;  Ofo-wia  ip6v ; 
voluntas  mea  in  ea).  1.  A  name  signifying  "  My 
delight  in  her,"  which  is  to  be  borne  by  the 
restored  Jerusalem  (Is.  lxii.  4),  The  succeeding 
sentence  contains  a  play  on  the  word — "  for 
Jehovah  delighteth  (}'Qn,  chaphetz)  in  thee." 

2.  ('AipLfid,  Alex.  'O^ifSd;  Joseph.  'Ax'/3a ; 
Haphsiba) .  It  was  actually  the  name  of  the  queen 
of  King  Hezekiah,  and  the  mother  of  Manasseh 
(•_'  K.  xxi.  1).  In  the  parallel  account  (2  Chr. 
xxxiii.  1)  her  name  is  omitted.  No  clue  is  given 
us  to  the  character  of  this  queen.  But  if  she  was 
an  adherent  of  Jehovah —and  this  the  wife  of  He- 
zekiah could  not  fail  to  be — it  is  not  impossible 
that  the  words  of  Is.  lxii.  4  may  contain  a  compli- 
mentary allusion  to  her. 

HEEALD  (NT'rO).  The  only  notice  of  this 
officer  in  the  0.  T.  occurs  in  Dan.  iii.  4  ;  the  term 
there  used  is  connected  etymologically  with  the 
Greek  Kripvacrw  and  Kpafa,  and  with  our  "  cry." 
There  is  an  evident  allusion  to  the  office  of  the 
herald  in  the  expressions  KTjpvcraw,  K-f]pv£,  and 
Kiipvy/uLa,  which  are  frequent  in  the  N.  T.,  and 
which  are  but  inadequately  rendered  by  "preach," 
&C.  The  term  "  herald  "  might  be  substituted  in 
1  Tim.  ii.  7  ;  2  Tim.  i.  1 1 ;  2  Pet.  ii.  5.  [W.  L.  B.] 

HER'CULES  ('Hpa/cATJs),  the  name  com- 
monly applied  by  the  Western  nations  to  the  tute- 
lary deity  of  Tyre,  whose  national  title  was  Melkart" 
(Dip  773,  t.  e.  mp  "pO,  the  king  of  the  city 
~  iro\tovxos,  MeAiKapos,  Phil.  Bybl.  ap.  Euseb. 
Praep.  Ev.  i.  10).  The  identification  was  based 
upon  a  similarity  of  the  legends  and  attributes 
referred  to  the  two  deities,  but  Herodotus  (ii.  44) 
recognised  their  distinctness,  and  dwells  on  the 
extreme  antiquity  of  the  Tyrian  rite  (Herod.  1.  c. ; 
cf.  Strabo,  xvi.  757  ;  Ait.  Alex.  ii.  16  ;  Joseph. 
Ant.  viii.  5,  §3  ;  c.  Apion.  i.  18).  The  worship 
of  Melkart  was  spread  throughout  the  Tyrian  colo- 
nies, and  was  especially  established  at  Carthage 
(cf.  Hamilcar),  where  it  was  celebrated  even  with 
human  sacrifices  (Plin.  H.  N.  xxxvi.  4  (5)  ;  cf. 
Jer.  xix.  5).  Mention  is  made  of  public  embassies 
sent  from  the  colonies  to  the  mother  state  to 
honour  the  national  God  (Ait.  Alex.  ii.  24 ; 
C>.  Curt.  iv.  2;  Polyb.  xxxi.  20),  and  this  fact 
places  in  a  clearer  light  the  olfence  of  Jason  in 
sending  envoys  (Oeaipovs)  to  his  festival  (2  Mace. 
iv.  19  ff.). 

There  can  be  little  doubt  but  that  Melkart  is  the 
proper  name  of  the  Baal — the  Prince  (?y2i"l) — 
mentioned  in  the  later  history  of  the  0.  T.     The 

win-ship  of  "  Baal"  was  introduced  fr Tyre  (1  K. 

xvi.  31 ;  cf.  2  K.  xii.  IS)  after  the  earlier  Canaanitish 
idolatry  had  been  put  down  ( 1  Sam.  vii.  4  ;  cf.  1  K. 
xi.  5-8),  and  Melkart  (Hercules)  and  Astarte appear 
in  the  same  close  relation  (Joseph.  AntA.c.)  as  Baal 


a  This  identification  is  distinctly  made  in  a  Maltese 
inscription  quoted  by  Gesenios  (Ersch  und  Gruber's 
Encyklop.  b.  v.  ;;( /,  and  Thesaurus,  s.  v.  7JJ3),  where 
"1^*  7^3   T\~\p^t2  answers  to  'HpcucAec  apxyytiTr). 

'■  These  were  common,  and  are  frequently  alluded 
to.  The  expression  "IpSTHDV,  -  Sam.  xvii.  29, 
means  cheese  of  cows'  milk ;  that  ilNCn,  Arab. 
i»^v  Gen.  xviii.  s,  1~.  vii.  15,  2  Sam.  wii.  2i), 
.'ob  xx.  17,  Judg.  v.  25,  l'rov.  x.\\.  ;>;!,  i--  properly 


HERD  787 

and  Astarte.    The  objections  which  are  urged  against 

the  identification  appear  to  have  little  weight ;  but 
the  supposed  connexions  between  Melkart  and  other 
gods  (Moloch, &c.)  which  haVe  been  suggested  Paul  v. 
Real-Encycl.  s.  v.  MelcartK)  appear  less  likely  (cf. 
Gesenius,  I.  c. ;  Movers,  Phoenizier,  i.  176  ft'.,  385  ft". 
[Baal.] 

The  direct  derivation  of  the  word  Hercules  froc* 
Phoenician  roots  either  as  ?D"in,  circuitor,  the 
traveller,  in  reference  to  the  course  of  the  sun,  with 
whom  he  was  identified,  or  to  the  journeys  of  the 
hero,  or  again  as  ?3~IN  ('ApxaAevs,  Etym.  M.)  the 
strong  conquers,  has  little  probability.  [B.  F.  W.] 

HERD,  HERDSMAN.  The  herd  was  greatly 
regarded  both  in  the  patriarchal  and  Mosaic  period. 
Its  multiplying  was  considered  as  a  blessing,  and 
its  decrease  as  a  curse  (Gen.  xiii.  2;  Deut.  vii.  14, 
xxviii.  4;  Ps.  cvii.  38,  cxliv.  14;  Jer.  Ii.  23). 
The  ox  was  the  most  precious  stock  next  to  horse 
and  mule,  and  (since  those  were  rare)  the  tiling 
of  greatest  value  which  was  commonly  possessed 
(IK.  xviii.  5).  Hence  we  see  the  force  of  Saul's 
threat  (1  Sam.  xi.  7).  The  herd  yielded  the  most 
esteemed  sacrifice  (Num.  vii.  3  ;  Ps.  lxix.  31  ;  Is. 
lxvi.  3) ;  also  flesh-meat  and  milk,  chiefly  con- 
verted, probably,  into  butter  and  cheese  (Deut. 
xxxii.  14;  2  Sam.  xvii.  29),  which  such  milk  yields 
more  copiously  than  that  of  small  cattle b  (Arist. 
Hist.  An  ini.  iii.  20).  The  full-grown  ox  is  hardly 
ever  slaughtered  in  Syria;  but,  both  for  sacrificial 
and  convivial  purposes,  the  young  animal  was  pre- 
ferred (Ex.  xxix.  1) — perhaps  three  years  might  be 
the  age  up  to  which  it  was  so  regarded  (Gen.  xv. 
9) — and  is  spokeu  of  as  a  special  dainty  (Gen. 
xviii.  8;  Am.  vi.  4;  Luke  xv.  23).  The  case  of 
Gideon's  sacrifice  was  one  of  exigency  (Judg.  vi. 
25)  and  exceptional.  So  that  of  the  people  (1  Sam. 
xiv.  32)  was  an  act  of  wanton  excess.  The  agri- 
cultural and  general  usefulness  of  the  ox,  in  plough- 
ing, threshing  [Agriculture],  and  as  a  beast  of 
burden  (1  Chr.  xii.  40;  Is.  xlvi.  1),  made  such  a 
slaughtering  seem  wasteful ;  nor,  owing  to  diffi- 
culties of  grazing,  fattening,  &c,  is  beef  the  product 
of  an  eastern  climate.  The  animal  was  broken  to 
service  probably  in  his  third  year  (Is.  xv.  5  ;  Jer. 
xlviii.  :;4;  comp.  Plin.  W.  II.  viii.  70,  ed.  Par.). 
In  the  moist  season,  when  grass  abounded  in  the 
waste  lands,  especially  in  the  "  south  "  region, 
herds  grazed  there;  e.g.  in  Carmel  on  the  W.  side 
of  the  Dead  Sea  (1  Sam.  xxv.  2;  2  Chr.  xxvi.  In  . 
Dothan  also,  Misnor,  and  Sharon  (On.  xxxvii.  17; 
comp.  Robinson,  iii.  122  ;  Stanley,  8.  i)-  P.  '-'47, 
260,  4S4,  5;  1  Chr.  xxvii.  'Jit;  Is.  lxv.  10)  were 
favourite  pastures.  For  such  purposes  Qzziah  built 
towers  in  the  wilderness  (2  chr.  xxvi.  10).  Not 
only  grass,"  but  foliage,  is  acceptable  to  the  ox,  and 
the  hills  and  woods  of  Bashan  and  Gilead  afforded 
both  abundantly  ;  mi  such  upland  ( Ps.  1.  In,  lxv.  12) 


rendered  "butter"  (which  Gesenius,  .v.  v.,  is  mistaken 
in  declaring  to  be  "hardly  known  to  the  Orientals, 
except  as  a  medicine").    The  word  (1323,  -lob  x.  Id, 

is  the  same  as  the  Arab.  ^jAjs*,  applied  by  the 
Bedouins  to  their  goats'  milk  chi 

c  In  Num.  xxii.  4,  tbc  word  p"l\  in  A.V.  "grass," 
really  includes  all  vegetation.  Comp.  Ex.  x.  15,  Is. 
xxvii.  20,  Cato  '/-■  /.'.  R.  c.  80,  Varro  •'<  n.  /;.  i.  15, 
and  ii.  5.  TXII,  •lob  iii.  42,  si,  15,  seems  used  in  a 
signification  equally  wide. 


783 


HERD 


HERESH 


Egyptian  farm-yard.     (Wilkinson.) 


pastures  cattle  might  graze,  as  also,  of  course,  by 
river  sides,  when  driven  by  the  heat  from  the  regions 
of  the  "  wilderness."  Especially  was  the  eastern 
table-land  (Ez.  xxxix.  18  ;  Num.  xxxii.  4)  "  a  place 
for  cattle,"  and  the  pastoral  tribes  of  Reuben,  Gad, 
and  half  Manasseh,  who  settled  there,  retained 
something  of  the  nomadic  character  and  handed 
down  some  image  of  the  patriarchal  life  (Stanley, 
S.  fy  P.  324-5).  Herdsmen,  &c,  in  Egypt  were 
a  low,  perhaps  the  lowest,  caste  ;  hence  as  Jo- 
seph's kindred,  through  his  position,  were  brought 
into  contact  with  the  highest  castes,  they  are  de- 
scribed as  "an  abomination;"  but  of  the  abundance 
of  cattle  in  Egypt,  and  of  the  care  there  bestowed 
on  them,  there  is  no  doubt  (Gen.  xlvii.  6,  17  ;  Ex. 
ix.  4,  '20).  Brands  were  used  to  distinguish  the 
owner's  herds  (Wilkinson,  iii.  8,  195  ;  iv.  125-131). 


So  the  plague  of  hail  was  sent  to  smite  especially  the 
cattle  (Ps.  lxxviii.  48),  the  firstborn  of  which  also 
were  smitten  (Ex.  xii.  29).  The  Israelites  departing 
stipulated  for  (Ex.  x.  26)  and  took  "  much  cattle  " 
with  them  (xii.  38).  [Wilderness  of  Wander- 
ing.] Cattle  formed  thus  one  of  the  traditions  of 
the  Israelitish  nation  in  its  greatest  period,  and  be- 
came almost  a  part  of  that  greatness.  They  are  the 
subject  of  providential  care  and  legislative  ordinance 
(Ex.  xx.  10,  xxi.  28,d  xxxiv.  19  ;  Lev.  xix.  19,  xxv. 
7  ;  Deut.  xi.  15,  xxii.  1,  4,  10,  xxv.  4;  Ps.  civ.  14; 
Is.  xxx.  23;  Jon.  iv.  11),  and  even  the  Levites, 
though  not  holding  land,  were  allowed  cattle  (Num. 
xxxv.  2,  3).  When  pasture  failed,  a  mixture  of 
various  grains  (called,  Job  vi.  5,  7v3,  rendered 
"fodder"  in  the  A.  V.,  and,  Is.  xxx. '24,  "pro- 
vender ;"  e  comp.  the  Roman  farrago  and  ocymum, 
Plin.  xviii.  10  and  42)  was  used,  as  also  pfl, 
"chopped  straw"  (Gen.  xxiv.  25;  Is.  xi.  7,  lxv. 
25),  which  was  torn  in  pieces  by  the  threshing- 
machine  and  used  probably   for  feeding  in  stalls. 

d  Rabbis  differ  on  the  question  whether  the  owner 
of  the  animal  was  under  this  enactment  liable  or 
not  liable.  See  de  R.  M.  Veterum  Hebraeorum,  c.  ii. ; 
Ugolini,  xxix. 


These  last  formed  an  important  adjunct  to  cattle- 
keeping,  being  indispensable  for  shelter  at  certain 
seasons  (Exod.  ix.  6,  19).  The  herd,  after  its  har- 
vest-duty was  done,  which  probably  caused  it  to  be 
in  high  condition,  was  specially  worth  caring  for;  at 
the  same  time  most  open  pastures  would  have  failed 
because  of  the  heat.  It  was  then  probably  stalled, 
and  -would  continue  so  until  vegetation  returned. 
Hence  the  failure  of  "  the  herd"  from  "  the  stalls" 
is  mentioned  as  a  feature  of  scarcity  (Hab.  iii.  17). 
"  Calves  of  the  stall  "  (Mai.  iv.  2  ;  Prov.  xv.  17) 
are  the  objects  of  watchful  care.  The  Reubenites, 
&c,  bestowed  their  cattle  "in  cities"  when  they 
passed  the  Jordan  to  share  the  toils  of  conquest 
(Deut.  iii.  19),  i.  e.  probably  in  some  pastures 
closely  adjoining,  like  the  "suburbs"  appointed  for 
the  cattle  of  the  Levites  (Num.  xxxv.  2,3;  Josh, 
xxi.  2).  Cattle  were  ordinarily  allowed 
as  a  prey  in  war  to  the  captor  (Deut. 
xx.  14;  Josh.  viii.  2),  and  the  case  of 
Amalek  is  exceptional,  probably  to 
mark  the  extreme  curse  to  which  that 
people  was  devoted  (Ex.  xvii.  14  ; 
1  Sam.  xv.  3).  The  occupation  of 
herdsman  was  honourable  in  early 
times  (Gen.  xlvii.  6  ;  1  Sam.  xi.  5 ; 
1  Chr.  xx'vii.  29,  xxviii.  1).  Saul 
himself  resumed  it  in  the  interval  of 
his  cares  as  king ;  also  Doeg  was  cer- 
tainly high  in  his  confidence  (1  Sam. 
xxi.  7).  Pharaoh  made  some  of  Jo- 
inson).  seph's  brethren  "  rulers  over  his  cattle." 

David's  herd-masters  were  among  his 
chief  officers  of  state.  In  Solomon's  time  the  relative 
importance  of  the  pursuit  declined  as  commerce  grew, 
but  it  was  still  extensive  (Eccl.  ii.  7  ;  1  K.  iv.  23). 
It  must  have  greatly  suffered  from  the  inroads  of  the 
enemies  to  which  the  country  under  the  later  kings 
of  Judah  and  Israel  was  exposed.  Uzziah,  however 
(2  Chr.  xxvi.  10),  and  Hezekiah  (xxxii.  28,  29), 
resuming  command  of  the  open  country,  revived  it. 
Josiah  also  seems  to  have  been  rich  in  herds  (xxxv. 
7-9).  The  prophet  Amos  at  first  followed  this 
occupation  (Am.  i.  1,  vii.  14).     A  goad  was  used 

(Judg.   iii.  31;  1  Sam.  xiii.  21,  TD^D,  Jll.^), 

being,  as  mostly,  a  staff  armed  with  a  spike.  For 
the  word  Herd  as  applied  to  swine,  see  Swine  ; 
and  on  the  general  subject,  Ugolini,  xxix.,  (/<'  Ii.  B. 
vett.  Hebr. .  c.  ii.,  which  will  be  found  nearly  ex- 
haustive of  it.  [H.  H.] 

HE'RES  (Is.  xix.  18;  A.  V.  "destruction"  or 
"  the  sun  ").     See  Ir-ha-heres. 

HE'RESH    (C3hn  =  artificer  ;    'A^y,     Ales. 


e  The  word  seems  to  be  derived  from  772,  to  mix. 
The  passage  in  Isaiah  probably  means  that  in  the 
abundant  yield  of  the  crops  the  cattle  should  eat  of 

the  best,  such  as  was  usually  consumed  by  man. 


HERMAS 

'Apes ;  Carpentaria?;),  a  Levite ;  one  of  the  staff 
attached  to  the  tabernacle  (1  Chr.  ix.  15). 

HER'MAS  {'Ep/xas,  from  'Ep/wjs,  the  "  Greek 
god  of  gain,"  or  Mercury),  the  name  of  a  person 
to  whom  St.  Paul  sends  greeting  in  his  Epistle  to 
the  Romans  (xvi.  14),  and  consequently  then  resi- 
dent in  Rome,  and  a  Christian  :  and  yet  the  origin  of 
the  name,  like  that  of  the  other  four  mentioned  in 
the  same  verse,  is  Greek.  However,  in  those  days, 
even  a  Jew,  like  St.  Raul  himself,  might  acquire 
Roman  citizenship.  Irenaeus,  TVrtullian,  and  Origen, 
agree  in  attributing  to  him  the  work  called  the 
Shepherd:  which,  from  the  name  of  Clement  oc- 
curring in  it,  is  supposed  to  have  been  written  in 
the  pontificate  of  Clement  I.  ;  while  others  affirm 
it  to  have  been  the  work  of  a  namesake  in  the  fol- 
lowing age,  and  brother  to  Pius  I. ;  others  again 
have  argued  against  its  genuineness.  (Cave,  Hist. 
Lit.  s.  V. ;  Bull,  Defens.  Fid.  Nic.  i.  2,  3-6; 
Dindorf,  Praef.  ad  Hermae  Pad.)  From  internal 
evidence,  its  author,  whoever  he  was,  appears  to 
have  been  a  married  man  and  father  of  a  family  : 
a  deep  mystic,  but  without  ecclesiastical  rank. 
Further,  the  work  in  question"  is  supposed  to  Lave 
been  originally  written  in  Greek — in  which  language 
it  is  frequently  cited  by  the  Greek  Fathers — though 
it  now  only  exists  entire  in  a  Latin  version.  It  was 
never  received  into  the  canon ;  but  yet  was  generally 
cited  with  respect  only  second  to  that  which  was 
paid  to  the  authoritative  books  of  the  N.  T.,  and 
was  held  to  be  in  some  sense  inspired  (Caillau's 
Patres,  torn.  i.  p.  17).  It  may.  be  styled  the 
Pilgrim's  Progress  of  ante-Nicene  times;  and  is 
divided  into  three  parts;  the  first  containing  four 
visions,  the  second  twelve  moral  and  spiritual  pre- 
cepts, and  the  third  ten  similitudes,  each  intended 
to  shadow  forth  some  verity  (Caillau,  ibid.).  Every 
man,  according  tc  this  writer,  is  attended  by  a  good 
and  bad  angel,  who  are  continually  endeavouring  to 
affect  his  course  through  life ;  a  doctrine  which 
forcibly  recalls  the  fable  of  Prodicus  respecting  the 
choice  of  Hercules  (Xenoph.  Mem.  ii.  1). 

The  Hennas  of  the  Kpistle  to  the  Romans  is  cele- 
brated as  a  saint  in  the  Roman  calendar  on  May  9 
( Butler's  Lines  of  the  Saints,  May  9).    [E.  S.  FT.] 

HER'MES  ('Efluyjs),  the  name  of  a  man  men- 
tinned  in  the  same  Kpistle  with  the  preceding  (Horn. 
xvi.  14).  "According  to  the  Greeks,"  says  Calmet 
I  Did.  s.  v.),  "  he  was  one  of  the  Seventy  disciples, 
and  afterwards  Bishop  of  Dalmatia."  His  festival 
occurs  in  their  calendar  upon  April  8  (Neale, 
Eastern  C/i>m-/t,  ii.  774).  [E.  S.  F.] 

HERMOG'ENES  ('Epfj.oy4i>7is),  a  person  men- 
tinned  by  St.  Raul  in  the  latest  of  all  his  Epistles 
(2  Tim.  i.  1">:  see  Alford's  Proleg.  c.  vii.  §•">■">)• 
when  "all  in  Asia"  [i.e.  those  whom  he  had 
left  there)  '-had  turned  away  from  him,"  and 
among  their  number  "  Phygellus and  Hermo 
It  does  not  appear  whether  they  had  merely  for- 
saken his  cause,  now  that  he  was  in  bund-,  through 
fear,  like  those  of  whom  St.  Cyprian  treats  in  Ins 
celebrated  work  I 'V  /.'i/isis  ;  or  whether,  like 
Hymenaeus  and  Philetus  (ibid.  ch.  ii.  18),  they 
had  embraced  false  doctrine.  It  is  just  possible 
thai  there  maybe  a  contrast  intended  between  these 
two  sets  of  deserters.  According  to  the  legendary 
history,  bearing  the  name  of  Abdias  •  Fabricii  Cod. 
[pocryph.  X.  T.  p.  517)  Hermogenes  had  been  a 
magician,  and  was,  with  Philetus,  converted  by 
St.  James  the  Great,  who  destroyed  the  charm  of 
his  spells.     Neither  the  Hermogenes,  who  suffered 


HERMON 


789 


in  the  reign  of  Pomitian  (Hoffman,  Lex.  Univ. 
s.  v.;  Alford  on  2  Tim.  i.  15),  nor  the  Hermo- 
genes, against  whom  Tertullian  wrote — still  less 
the  martyrs  of  the  Greek  calendar  (Neale,  Eastern 
Church,  ii.  p.  770,  January  24,  and  p.  781,  Sep- 
tember 1) — are  to  be  confounded  with  the  person 
now  under  notice,  of  whom  nothing  more  is 
known.  [E.  S.  Ff.] 

HER'MON  ($D*in  ;  Aip/xuv),  a  mountain  on 
the  north-eastern  border  of  Palestine  (Deut.  iii.  8  ; 
Josh.  xii.  1),  over  against  Lebanon  (Josh.  xi.  17), 
adjoining  the  plateau  of  Bashan  (1  Chr.  v.  23). 
Its  situation  being  thus  clearly  defined  in  Scripture, 
there  can  be  no  doubt  as  to  its  identity.  It  stands 
at  the  southern  end,  and  is  the  culminating  point 
of  the  anti-Libanus  range ;  it  towers  high  above  the 
ancient  border-city  of  Dan  and  the  fountains  of  the 
Jordan,  and  is  the  most  conspicuous  and  beautiful 
mountain  in  Palestine  or  Syria.  The  name  Hermon 
was  doubtless  suggested  by- its  appearance — "  a  lofty 
prominent  peak,"  visible  from  afar  (}lft~in  has  the 

same  meaning  as  the  Arabic  -  -^) ;  just  as  Leba- 
non was  suggested  by  the  white  character  of  its 
limestone  strata.  Other  names  were  also  given  to 
Hermon,  each  in  like  manner  descriptive  of  some 
striking  feature.  The  Sidonians  called  it  Sirion 
(Jin^,  from  mK>,  "  to  glitter"),  and  the  Amorites 
Shenir  (TOb,  trom  "W>  "  to  clatter"),  both  sig- 
nifying "  breastplate,"  and  suggested  by  its  rounded 
glittering  top,  when  the  sun's  rays  were  reflected 
by  the  snow  that  covers  it  (Deut.  iii.  9  ;  Cant, 
iv.  8  ;  Ez.  xxvii.  5).  It  was  also  named  Sion, 
"  the  elevated"  (ji?^),  towering  over  all  its  com- 
peers (Deut.  iv.  48).  So  now,  at  the  present 
day,  it  is  called  Jcbcl  esh-Sheikh  (^\jj^\\  Jj»o»), 
"  the  chief  mountain "' — a  name  it  well  deserves  ; 
and  Jebcl  eth-Thelj   (^vXaJ\     Vxs»)>    "  snowy 

mountain,"  which  every  man  wdio  sees  it  will  say  is 
peculiarly  appropriate.  When  the  whole  country 
is  parched  with  the  summer-sun,  white  lines  of 
snow  streak  the  head  of  Hermon.  This  mountain 
was  the  great  landmark  of  the  Israelites.  It  was 
associated  with  their  northern  border  almost  as 
intimately  as  the  sea  was  with  the  western  (see  D* 
in  Ex.  xxvii.  12,  A.  V.  "west ;"  Josh.  viii.  9).  They 
conquered  all  the  land  cast  of  the  Jordan,  "from  the 
river  Anion  unto  Mount  Hermon  "  (Deut.  iii.  8,  iv 
48;  Josh.  xi.  17).  Baal-gad,  the  border-city  before 
Dan  became  historic,  is  described  as  "  under  Mount. 
Hermon"  (Josh.  xiii.  .">,  xi.  17);  and  when  the 
half-tribe  of  Wanasseli  conquered  their  whole  allotted 
territory,  they  are  said  to  have  "increased  from 
Bashan  unto  Baal-hermorj  ami  Senir,  and  unto 
Mount  Hermon"  (1  Chr.  v.  23).  In  one  passage 
Hermon  would  almost  seem  to  be  used  to  signify 

"  north,"  as  the  word  "  sea"  (D"1)  is  for  "west" — 
"the  north  and  the  south  Thou  hast  created  them; 
Tabor  and  Hermon  shall  rejoice  in  thy  name"  (Ps. 
Ixxxix.  12).  The  reason  of  this  is  obvious.  From 
whatever  part  of  Palestine  the  Israelite  turned  his 

•  \ thward.    Hermon    was    there,    terminating 

the  new.     From  the  plain  along  the  coast,  from 

the  mountains  of  Samaria,  from  the  Jordan  valley, 
from  the  heights  of  Moab  and  Gilead,  from  the 
plateau   of   Radian,   that    pale-blue,   Bnow-capped 


790 


HERMON 


cone  forms  the  one  feature  on  the  northern  horizon. 
The  "  dew  of  Hernion  "  is  once  referred  to  in  a 
passage  whieh  has  long  been  considered  a  geo- 
graphical puzzle — "  As  the  dew  of  Hermon,  the 
dew  that  descended  on  the  mountains  of  Zion " 
(Ps.  cxxxiii.  3).  Zion  (f'VV)  is  probably  used  here 
for  Sion  (|*N*t}>),  one  of  the  old  names  of  Hermon 
(Deut.  iv.  48).  The  snow  on  the  summit  of  this 
mountain  condenses  the  vapours  that  float  during 
the  summer  in  the  higher  regions  of  the  atmosphere, 
causing  light  clouds  to  hover  around  it,  and  abun- 
dant dew  to  descend  on  it,  while  the  whole  country 
elsewhere  is  parched,  and  the  whole  heaven  else- 
where cloudless. 

Hernion  has  three  summits,  situated  like  the 
angles  of  a  triangle,  and  about  a  quarter  of  a  mile 
from  each  other.  They  do  not  differ  much  in  ele- 
vation. This  may  account  for  the  expression  in 
Ps.  xlii.  7  (6),  "  I  will  remember  thee  from  the 
land  of  the  Jordan  and  the  Hermons  (D'OID-!/]) — 
perhaps  also  for  the  three  appellations  in  1  Chr.  v. 
23.  On  one  of  the  summits  are  curious  and  in- 
teresting ruins.  Round  a  rock  which  forms  the 
crest  of  the  peak  are  the  foundations  of  a  rude 
circular  wall,  composed  of  massive  stones ;  and 
within  the  circle  is  a  large  heap  of  hewn  stones, 
surrounding  the  remains  of  a  small  and  very  ancient 
temple.  This  is  evidently  one  of  those  "  high 
places  "  which  the  old  inhabitants  of  Palestine,  and 
the  Jews  frequently  in  imitation  of  them,  set  up 
"  upon  every  high  mountain  and  upon  every  hill  " 
(Deut.  xii.  2  ;  2  K.  xvii.  10, 11).  In  two  passages 
of  Scripture  this  mountain  is  called  Baal-hermon 
(pO"in  h)}2,  Judg.  iii.  3  ;  1  Chr.  v.  23)  ;  and  the 
only  reason  that  can  be  assigned  for  it  is  that  Baal 
was  there  worshipped.  Jerome  says  of  it,  "  dici- 
turque  in  vertice  ejus  insigne  templum,  quod  ab 
ethnicis  cultui  habetur  e  regione  Paneadis  et  Li- 
bani" — reference  must  here  be  made  to  the  building 
whose  ruins  are  still  seen  (Onom.  s.  v.  Hermon). 
It  is  remarkable  that  Hermon  was  anciently  en- 
compassed by  a  circle  of  temples,  all  facing  the 
summit.  Can  it  be  that  this  mountain  was  the 
great  sanctuary  of  Baal,  and  that  it  was  to  the 
old  Syrians  what  Jerusalem  was  to  the  Jews,  and 
what  Mekkah  is  to  the  Muslems?  (See  Handb.  for 
Syr.  and  Pal.  454,  457  ;  Reland,  Pal.  323  sq.) 

The  height  of  Hermon  has  never  been  measured, 
though  it  has  been  often  estimated.  It  is  unques- 
tionably the  second  mountain  in  Syria,  ranking- 
next  to  the  summit  of  Lebanon  near  the  Cedars, 
and  only  a  few  hundred  feet  lower  than  it.  It 
may  safely  be  estimated  at  10,000  feet.  It  rises 
up  an  obtuse  truncated  cone,  from  2000  to  3000 
feet  above  the  ridges  that  radiate  from  it — thus 
having  a  more  commanding  aspect  than  any  other 
mountain  in  Syria.  The  cone  is  entirely  naked. 
A  coating  of  disintegrated  limestone  covers  the  sur- 
face, rendering  it  smooth  and  bleak.  The  snow 
never  disappears  from  its  summit.  In  spring  and 
early  summer  the  top  is  entirely  covered.  As 
summer  advances  the  snow  gradually  melts  from 


■  The  Jewish  partisans  of  Herod  (Nicolas  Damas- 
ccnus,  ap.  Jos.  Ant.  xiv.  1,  3)  sought  to  raise  him  to 
the  dignity  of  a  descent  from  one  of  the  noble  families 
which  returned  from  Babylon  ;  and,  on  the  other  hand, 
early  Christian  writers  represented  his  origin  as  utterly 
mean  and  servile.  Africanus  has  preserved  a  tradi- 
tion (Routh,  Hell.  Sarr.  ii.  p.  235),  on  the  authority  of 
"  the  natural  kinsmen  of  the  Saviour,"  whieh  makes 
Antipater,  the  father  of  Herod,  the  son  of  one  Herod, 


HEROD 

the  tops  of  the  ridges,  but  remains  in  long  glitter- 
ing streaks  in  the  ravines  that  radiate  from  the 
centre,  looking  in  the  distance  like  the  white  locks 
that  scantily  cover  the  head  of  old  age.  (See  Fire 
Tears  in  Damascus,  vol.  i.) 

A  tradition,  originating  apparently  about  the 
time  of  Jerome  (Reland,  p.  326),  gave  the  name 
Hermon  to  the  range  of  Jebel  ed-Duhy  near  Tabor, 
the  better  to  explain  Ps.  lxxxix.  12.  The  name 
still  continues  in  the  monasteries  of  Palestine,  and 
has  thus  crept  into  books  of  travel.         [J.  L.  P.] 

HER'OD  ('Hpa>8r)s,  i.  e.  Herodes).  The  He- 
rodian Family.  The  history  of  the  Herodian 
family  presents  one  side  of  the  last  development  of 
the  Jewish  nation.  The  evils  which  had  existed  in 
the  hierarchy  which  grew  up  after  the  Return,  found 
an  unexpected  embodiment  in  the  tyranny  of  a  fo- 
reign usurper.  Religion  was  adopted  as  a  policy ; 
and  the  hellenizing  designs  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes 
were  carried  out,  at  least  in  their  spirit,  by  men 
who  professed  to  observe  the  Law.  Side  by  side 
with  the  spiritual  "  kingdom  of  God,"  proclaimed 
by  John  the  Baptist,  and  founded  by  the  Lord,  a 
kingdom  of  the  world  was  established,  which  in  its 
external  splendour  recalled  the  traditional  magnifi- 
cence of  Solomon.  The  simultaneous  realization  of 
the  two  principles,  national  and  spiritual,  which  had 
long  variously  influenced  the  Jews,  in  the  establish- 
ment of  a  dynasty  and  a  church,  is  a  fact  pregnant 
with  instruction.  In  the  fulness  of  time  a  descend- 
ant of  Esau  established  a  false  counterpart  of  the 
promised  glories  of  Messiah. 

Various  accounts  are  given  of  the  ancestry  of  the 
Herods  ;  but  neglecting  the  exaggerated  statements 
of  friends  and  enemies,*  it  seems  certain  that  they 
were  of  Idumaean  descent  (Jos.  Ant.  xiv.  1,  3),  a 
tact  which  is  indicated  by  the  forms  of  some  of  the 
names  which  were  retained  in  the  family  (Ewald, 
Geschichte,  iv.  477  notq).  But  though  aliens  by  race, 
the  Herods  were  Jews  in  faith.  The  Idumaeans 
had  been  conquered  and  brought  over  to  Judaism 
by  John  Hyrcanus  (B.C.  130,  Jos.  Ant.  xiii.  9  §1) ; 
and  from  the  time  of  their  conversion  they  remained 
constant  to  their  new  religion,  looking  upon  Jeru- 
salem as  their  mother  city  and  claiming  for  them- 
selves the  name  of  Jews  (Joseph.  Ant.  xx.  7,  §7  ; 
B.  J.  i.  10,  §4,  iv.  4,' §4). 

The  general  policy  of  the  whole  Herodian  family, 
though  modified  by  the  personal  characteristics  of 
the  successive  rulers,  was  the  same.  It  centred 
in  the  endeavour  to  found  a  great  and  independent 
kingdom,  in  whieh  the  power  of  Judaism  should 
subserve  to  the  consolidation  of  a  state.  The  pro- 
tection of  Rome  was  in  the  first  instance  a  neces- 
sity, but  the  designs  of  Herod  I.  and  Agrippa  I. 
point  to  an  independent  Eastern  empire  as  their 
end,  and  not  to  a  mere  subject  monarchy.  Such  a 
consummation  of  the  Jewish  hopes  seems  to  have 
found  some  measure  of  acceptance  at  first  [He- 
rodians]  ;  and  by  a  natural  reaction  the  temporal 
dominion  of  the  Herods  opened  the  way  to  the  de- 
struction of  the  Jewish  nationality.  The  religion 
which  was  degraded  into  the  instrument  of  unscru- 


a  slave  attached  to  the  service  of  a  temple  of  Apollo  at 
Ascalon,  who  was  taken  prisoner  by  Idumaean  robbers, 
and  kept  by  them  as  his  father  could  not  pay  his 
ransom.  The  locality  (cf.  Philo,  Leg.  ml  Caium,  §30) 
no  less  than  the  office  was  calculated  to  fix  a  heavy 
reproach  upon  the  name  (cf.  Routh,  ml  loc).  This 
story  is  repeated  with  great  inaccuracy  by  Epiphanius 
[Haer.  xx.). 


HEROD 

pulous  ambition  lost  its  power  to  quicken  a  united 
people.  The  high-priests  were  appointed  and  de- 
posed by  Herod  I.  and  his  successors  with  such  a 
reckless  disregard  for  the  character  of  their  office 
(Jost,  Gesch.  d.  Judenthums,  pp.  322,  325,  421), 
that  the  office  itself  was  deprived  of  its  sacred  dig- 
nity (comp.  Acts  xxiii.  2  If. ;  .lost,  430,  &c).  The 
nation  was  divided,  and  amidst  the  conflict  of  sects 
a  universal  faith  arose,  which  more  than  fulfilled 
the  nobler  hopes  that  found  no  satisfaction  in  the 
treacherous  grandeur  of  a  court. 

The  family  relations  of  the  Herods  are  singularly 
complicated  from  the  frequent  recurrence  of  the 
same  names,  ami  the  several  accounts  of  Josephus 
are  not  consistent  in  every  detail.  The  following 
table,  however,  seems  to  oli'er  a  satisfactory  sum- 
mary of  his  statements.  The  members  of  the  He- 
rodian  family  who  are  mentioned  in  the  N.  T.  are 
distinguished  by  capitals. 

Josephus  is  the  one  great  authority  for  the  his- 
toid of  the  Herodian  family.  The  scanty  notices 
which  occur  in  Hebrew  and  classic  writers  throw 
very  little  additional  light  upon  the  events  which 
he  narrates.  Of  modern  writers  Ewald  has  treated 
the  whole  subject  with  the  widest  anil  clearest  view. 
.lost  in  his  several  works  has  added  to  the  records 
of  Josephus  gleanings  from  later  Jewish  writers. 
Where  the  original  sources  are  so  accessible,  mono- 
graphs are  of  little  use.  The  following  are  cpuoted 
by  Winer: — Noldii  Hist.  Idwmaea  ....  Vr<m<<i. 
16f!0;  E.  Spanhemii  Stemma  ....  Ilerodis  M., 
which  are  reprinted  in  Havercamp's  Josephus  (ii. 
331  ff. ;  402  ff.). 

I.  Herod  the  Great  ('HpciSrjs)  was  the  second 
son  of  Antipater,  who  was  appointed  procurator 
of  Judaea  by  Julius  Caesar,  B.C.  47,  and  Cypros, 
an  Arabian  of  noble  descent  (Jos.  Ant.  xiv.  7, 
§3).  At  the  time  of  his  father's  elevation,  though 
only  fifteen  years  old,  he  received  the  govern- 
ment of  Galilee  (Jos.  Ant.  xiv.  9,  §2),  and  shortly 
afterwards  that  of  Code-Syria.  When  Antony 
came  to  Syria,  B.C.  41,  he  appointed  Herod  and 
his  elder  brother  Phasael  tetrarohs  of  Judaea  (Jos. 
Ant.  xiv.  l:j,  §1).  Herod  was  forced  to  abandon 
Judaea  next  year  by  an  invasion  of  the  l'arthians, 
who  supported  the  claims  of  Antigonus,  the  repre- 
sentative of  the  Asmonaean  dynasty,  and  fled  to 
Home  (B.C.  40).  At  Rome  he  was  well  received 
by   Antony  and  Octavian,  and  was  appointed  by 

the  senate  king  of  Judaea  to  the  exclusion  "f  the 
Hasmonaean  line  (Jos.  Ant.  xiv.  14.  §4  ;  App.  Bell. 
In  thi  course  of  a  few  years,  by  the  help 
of  the  Romans,  he  took  Jerusalem  (B.C.  37),  and 
completely  established  his  authority  throughout  Ids 
dominions.  An  expedition  which  he  was  forced  to 
make  against  Arabia  saved  him  from  taking  an 
active  part  in  the  civil  war.  though  he  was  devoted 
to  tin'  cause  of  Antony.  After  the  battle  of  Actium 
he  \  isited  <  Ictavian  at   llhodcs,  and  his  noble  bearing 

won  tor  him  the  favour  of  tin-  conqueror,  who  con- 
firmed him  in  the  possession  of  the  kingdom,  B.C. 
31,  and  in  the  next  year  increased  it  1>\  the  addition 
of  several  important  cities  (Jos.  Ant.  xv.  In,  $i  ff. :, 

and  afterwards  gave  him   the  provin fTracho- 

nitis  and  the  districi  ef  Panes  -  Jos.  .1;,/.  I.  ft). 
The  remainder  of  the  reign  of  Herod  was  undis- 
turbed by  external  troubles,  but  his  domestic  Life 
was  embittered  by  an  almost   uninterrupted  iseries 


HEROD 


791 


h  The  language  of  St.  Matthew  offers  an  instructive 

contrast    to    that   of  .lustin   M.  [Dial.  0.   Tryph.  7s     : 
6  'llpuiovj?  .  .  .  .  iraVTas   iiAiii   ious  iroiSas  rvvt 


of  injuries  and  cruel  acts  of  vengeance.  Hyrcanus, 
the  grandfather  of  his  wife  Mariamne,  was  put  to 
death  shortly  before  his  visit  to  Augustus.  Ma- 
riamne herself,  to  whom  he  was  passionately  de- 
voted, was  next  sacrificed  to  his  jealousy.  One 
execution  followed  another,  till  at  last  in  B.C.  6, 
he  was  persuaded  to  put  to  death  the  two  sons  of 
Mariamne,  Alexander  and  Aristobulus,  in  whom 
the  chief  hope  of  the  people  lay.  Two  years  after- 
wards he  condemned  to  death  Antipater,  his  eldest 
son,  who  had  been  their  most  active  accuser,  and 
the  order  for  his  execution  was  among  the  last  acts 
of  Herod's  life,  for  he  died  himself  five  days  after 
the  death  of  his  son,  B.C.  4,  in  the  same  year  which 
marks  the  true  date  of  the  Nativity.  [JESUS 
Christ]. 

These  terrible  acts  of  bloodshed  which  Herod  per- 
petrated in  his  own  family  were  accompanied  by 
others  among  his  subjects  equally  terrible,  from  the 
numbers  who  fell  victims  to  them.  The  infirmities 
of  his  later  years  exasperated  him  to  yet  greater 
cruelty  ;  and,  according  to  the  well-known  story, 
he  ordered  the  nobles  whom  he  had  called  to  him 
in  his  last  moments  to  be  executed  immediately 
after  his  decease,  that  so  at  least  his  death  might 
be  attended  by  universal  mourning  (Jos.  Ant. 
xvii.  7,  51.  It  was  at  the  time  of  this  fatal  illness 
that  he  must  have  caused  the  slaughter  of  the 
infants  at  Bethlehem  (Matt.  ii.  16-18),  and  from 
the  comparative  insignificance  of  the  murder  of  a 
few  young  children  in  an  unimportant  village  when 
contrasted  with  the  deeds  which  he  carried  out  or 
designed,  it  is  not  surprising  that  Josephus  has 
passed  it  over  in  silence.  The  number  of  children 
in  Bethlehem  and  "all  the  borders  thereof"  (eV 
■Kcicriv  rols  opiois)  may  be  estimated  at  about  ten 
or  twelve;1"  and  the  language  of  the  Evangelist 
leaves  incomplete  uncertainty  the  method  in  which 
the  deed  was  effected  (owroffTe/Aas  avelXtv).  The 
scene  of  open  mid  undisguised  violence  which  has 
been  consecrated  by  Christian  art  is  wholly  at  va- 
riance with  wdiat  may  be  supposed  to  have  been  the 
historic  reality.  At  a  later  time  the  minder  of  the 
children  seems  to  have  been  connected  with  the  death 
of  Antipater.  Thus,  according  to  the  anecdote  pre- 
served by  Macrobius  (c".  A.D.  410),  Augustus,  cum 
."„//n.s,  />  inter  pnvms  qims  in  Syria  Herodes,  Rex 
Judaeorum,\iitra  bimatum  (Matt.  ii.  16;  lb.  Vnlg. 
a  bimatu  et  infra)  jussit  interfici,  filium  quogue 
ejus  occisum,  ait :  Melius  est  Herodis  porcum  esse 
quam  filium  (Macrob.  Sat.  ii.  4).  Buf  Josephus 
has  preserved  two  very  remarkable  references  to  a 
massacre  which  Herod  caused  to  be  made  shortly 
before  his  death,  which  may  throw  an  additional 
light  upon  the  history.  In  this  it  is  said  that  Herod 
did  not  spare  "those  who  seemed  most  dear  to 
him"  (Ant.  xvi.  1  1,  §7  .  but  "  slew  all  those  of  his 
own  family  who  sided  with  the  Pharisees  A  <J>a/>i- 
0-cuos)"  in  refusing  to  take  the  oath  of  allegiance 
to  the  Roman  emperor,  while  they  looked  forward 
to  a  change  in  the  royal  tin,-  (Jos.  Ant .  xvii.  2,  §6  ; 
cf.  I.ardner,  Credibility,  &c,  i.  pp.  278  ff.,  332  f.. 
:;i!i  ['.).  How  tin-  this  event  may  have  been 
directly  connected  with  the  murder  at  Bethlehem 
it  is  impossible  to  say,  from  the  obscurity  of  the 
details,  but  its  occasion  an. I  character  throw  a  great 
light  upon  St.  Matthew's  narrative. 

In  dealing  with    the    religious    feelings    or    prejll- 


ti<   lir]8\iin   eKe\ev&(i>   avaipffrrii'ai.      Cf.  Orig.    • 

i.  p.  17,  cii.  Bpenc.  6  £f  'Hpto^i)?  artlAt  -niTii  to.  cV 

B7)0Aet/i  na\  rots  opiot;  <uitJ)<;   irai&ui  .  .  . 


792 


HEROD 


-8g. 


Eb 

■' 

^i 

It 

M 

r.%  — «  §.' — 


B's„sa§, 


II  If 


S§£  J: 

*  *•  ■*-  ■« 

i|  i.  r 


-si- 


.5-  o  5  X  § 


HEROD 

dices  of  the  Jews,  Herod  shewed  as  great  contempt 
for  public  opinion  as  in  the  execution  of  his  per- 
sonal vengeance.  He  signalised  his  elevation  to  the 
throne  by  offerings  to  the  Capitoline  Jupiter  (Jost, 
Gesch.  d.  Judenthums,  p.  318),  and  surrounded 
his  person  by  foreign  mercenaries,  some  of  whom 
had  been  formerly  in  the  service  of  Cleopatra  (Jos. 
Ant.  xv.  7,  §3  ;  xvii.  1,  §1  ;  8,  §3).  His  coins  and 
those  of  his  successors  bore  only  Greek  legends ; 
and  he  introduced  heathen  games  within  the  walls 
of  Jerusalem  (Jos.  Ant.  xv.  8,  §1).  He  displayed 
ostentatiously  his  favour  towards  foreigners  (Jos. 
Ant.  xvi.  5,  §3),  and  oppressed  the  old  Jewish  aris- 
tocracy (Jos.  Ant.  xv.  1 ,  §  1 ).  The  later  Jewish  tra- 
ditions describe  him  as  successively  the  servant  of  the 
Hasmonaeans  and  the  Romans,  and  relate  that  one 
Rabbin  only  survived  the  persecution  which  he 
directed  against  them,  purchasing  his  life  by  the 
loss  of  sight  (Jost,  319  &c). 

While  Herod  alienated  in  this  manner  the  affec- 
tions of  the  Jews  by  his  cruelty  and  disregard  for 
the  Law,  he  adorned  Jerusalem  with  many  splendid 
monuments  of  his  taste  ami  magnificence.  The 
Temple,  which  he  rebuilt  with  scrupulous  care,  so 
that  it  might  seem  to  be  a  restoration  of  the  old 
one  rather  than  a  new  building  (Jos.  Ant.  xv.  §11), 
was  the  greatest  of  these  works.  The  restoration 
was  begun  B.C.  20,  and  the  Temple  itself  was  com- 
pleted in  a  year  and  a  half  (Jos.  Ant.  xv.  11,  §6). 
The  surrounding  buildings  occupied  eight  years 
more  (Jos.  Ant.  xv.  11,  §5).  But  fresh  additions 
were  constantly  made  in  succeeding  years,  so  that 
at  the  time  of  the  Lord's  visit  to  Jerusalem  at  the 
beginning  of  His  ministry,  it  was  said  that  the 
Temple  was  "built  (cpKoSoixyidr})  in  forty  and  six 
years"  (John  ii.  20),  a  phrase  which  expresses  the 
whole  period  from  the  commencement  of  Herod's 
work  to  the  completion  of  the  latest  addition  then 
made,  for  the  final  completion  of  the  whole  build- 
ing is  placed  by  Josephus  (Ant.  xx.  8,  ^7,  ^877  Se 
t6ts  Kai  rb  Upbv  eT€r4\^aro)  in  the  time  of 
Herod  Agrippa  11.  (c.  A.n.  50). 

Yet  even  this  splendid  work  was  not  likely  to 
mislead  the  Jews  as  to  the  real  spirit  of  the  king. 
While  he  rebuilt  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem,  he  re- 
built also  the  Temple  at  Samaria  (Jos.  Ant.  xv. 
8,  §5),  and  made  provision  in  his  new  city  Caesarea 
for  the  celebration  of  heathen  worship  (Jos.  Ant. 
xv.  9,  §5) ;  and  it  has  been  supposed  (Just,  Gesch. 
ii.  Judenth.  :',2.'i)  that  the  rebuilding  of  the  Temple 
furnished  him  with  the  opportunity  of  destroying 
the  authentic  collection  of  genealogies  which  was 
of  the  highest  importance  to  the  priest  1\  families. 
Herod,  as  appears  from  bis  public  designs,  affected 
the  dignity  of  a  second  S. .loin, m,  but  be  joined  the 
License  of  that  monarch  to  his  magnificence;  and 
it  was  said  that  the  monument  which  lie  raised  over 
the  royal  tombs  was  due  to  the  fear  which  seized 
him  after  a  sacrilegious  attempt  to  rob  them  of 
secret  treasures  (Jos.  Ant.  xvi.  7,  §1). 

it  is,  perhaps,  difficult  to  see  in  the  character  of 
Herod  any  of  the  true  elements  of  greatness.  Some 
have  even  supposed  that  the  title  the  great — is  a 
mistranslation  for  Viae  elder  1  K2"1,  Jost, p.  319  note; 
6  /xeyas,  Ewald,  Gesch.  iv.  47:;,  &c.)j  and  yet 
on  the  other  hand  he  seems  to  have  possessed  the 
good  qualities  of  our  own  Henry  VIII.  with  "his 
vices.  He  maintained  peace  at  home  dining  a  long 
reign  by  the  vigour  and  timely  generosity  of  his 
administration.  Abroad  he  conciliated  the  goodwill 
of  the  Romans  under  circumstances  of  unusual  dif- 
ficulty.    His  ostentatious  display  and  even  his  arhi- 


HEROD 


793 


trary  tyranny  was  calculated  to  inspire  Orientals 
with  awe.  Bold  and  yet  prudent,  oppressive  and 
yet  prpfuse,  he  had  many  of  the  characteristics 
which  make  a  popular  hero ;  and  the  title  which 
may  have  been  first  given  in  admiration  of  success- 
ful despotism  now  serves  to  bring  out  in  clearer 
contrast  the  terrible  price  at  which  the  success  was 
purchased. 


Copper  Coin  of  Herod  the  Great. 

Obv.   HP«»AOY.    Bunch  of  grapes.    Rot.    E0NAPXO. 
Macedonian  helmet :  in  the  field  caduceut. 


II.  Herod  Antipas  ('AvTiiraTpos,  'Auriiras) 
was  the  son  of  Herod  the  Great  by  Malthace,  a 
Samaritan  (Jos.  Ant.  xvii.  1,  §3).  His  father  had 
originally  destined  him  as  his  successor  in  the  king- 
dom (cf.  Matt.  ii.  22;  AECHELATJS),  but  by  the 
last  change  of  his  will  appointed  him  "  tetrarch  of 
Galilee  and  Peraea"  (Jos.  Ant.  xvii.  8,  §1,  'Hp.  6 
TfTpapxys,  Matt.  xiv.  1 ;  Luke  iii.  19,  ix.  7  ;  Acts 
xiii.  1.  Cf.  Luke  iii.  1,  reTpapxovi/Tos  rr/s  FaAi- 
Aaias  'Up-),  which  brought  him  a  yearly  revenue  of 
200  talents  (Jos.  Ant.  xvii.  13,  §4;  cf.  Luke  viii. 
3,  Xov(a  eir  it  p6ir  ov  'Up.).  He  first  married 
a  daughter  of  Aretas,  "  king  of  Arabia  Petraea," 
but  after  some  time  (Jos.  Ant.  xviii.  5,  §1)  he 
made  overtures  of  marriage  to  Herodias,  the  wife 
of  his  half-brother  Herod-Philip,  which  she  received 
favourably.  Aretas,  indignant  at  the  insult  offered 
to  his  daughter,  found  a  pretext  for  invading  the 
territory  of  Herod,  and  defeated  him  with  great 
loss  (Jos.  '.  c).  This  defeat,  according  to  the 
famous  passage  in  Josephus  {Ant.  xviii.  5,  §2),  was 
attributed  by  many  to  the  murder  of  John  the 
Baptist,  which  had  been  committed  by  Antipas 
shortly  before,  under  the  influence  of  Herodias 
(Matt.  xiv.  4  ft'.  ;  Mark  vi.  17  ft! ;  Luke  iii.  19). 
At  a  later  time  the  ambition  of  Herodias  proved 
the  cause  of  her  husband's  ruin.  She  urged  him 
to  go  to  Rome  to  gain  the  title  of  king  (of.  Mark 
vi.  14,  6  fiao-  i\ev  s  'Hp.  by  courtesy),  which 
had  been  granted  to  his  nephew  Agrippa;  but  he 
was  opposed  at  the  court  of  Caligula  by  the  emis- 
saries of  Agrippa  [HEROD  AGRIPPA],  and  con- 
demned to  perpetual  banishment  at  Lugdunum, 
\.n.  :',:•  (Jos.  Ant.  xviii.  7,  §2),  whence  he  ap- 
pears to  have  retired  afterwards  to  Spain  (  B.  ./. 
ii.  9,  §i>  ;  l"it  see  note  on  p.  796).  Herodias 
voluntarily  shared  his  punishment,  and  he  died  in 
exile.      [HEBODIAS.J 

Pilate  took  occasion  from  our  Lord's  residence  in 
Galilee  to  send  Him  for  examination  '  I. uke  xxiii. 
6  ft. )  to  Herod  Antipas,  who  came  up  t,>  Jerusalem 

to  celebrate    tile    I'llssoVfl'    III'.  .Ins.    An  I .   xviii.   Ii,  §3  ;, 

and  thus  heal  the  feud  which  had  existed  between 
ile  tetrarch  and  himself  (Luke  .xxiii.  12  ;  cf.  Luke 
xiii.  1,  Trepl  tu>v  raAiXaiwv,  wv  rb  aljua  Tllharos 
(fxi^ev  ,it€Tci  twu  8v<noi>v  uvtwi/).  The  share  which 
Antipas  thus  took  in  the  Passion  is  specially  noticed 
in  the  Acts  (iv.  27  1  in  connexion  with  Ps.  ii.  1.  .. 
Ills  character,  as  it  appears  in  the  Gospels,  answers 

to  the  genera]  tenor  of'  his  lite.  He  was  unscru- 
pulous (Luke  iii.  19,  nepl  irdvTuv  6)v  eitoi-qcrev 
irovt)pwv).  tyrannical   (Luke   xiii.  31  ).  and   weak 

3  F 


794 


HEROD 


(Matt.  xiv.  9).  Yet  his  cruelty  was  marked  by 
cunning  (Luke  xiii.  32,  rfj  ctAoiire/a  tavrri),  and 
followed  by  remorse  (Mark  vi.  14).  In  contrast 
with  Pilate  he  presents  the  type  of  an  Eastern 
despot,  capricious,  sensual,  and  superstitious.  This 
last  element  of  superstition  is  both  natural  and 
clearly  marked.  For  a  time  "  he  heard  John 
gladly"  (Mark  vi.  20),  and  was  anxious  to  see 
Jesus  (Luke  ix.  9,  xxiii.  8)  in  the  expectation,  as  it 
is  said,  of  witnessing  some  miracle  wrought  by 
Him  (Luke  xiii.  31,  xxiii.  8). 

The  city  of  Tiberias,  which  Antipas  founded 
and  named  in  honour  of  the  emperor,  was  the  most 
conspicuous  monument  of  his  long  reign  ;  but, 
like  the  rest  of  the  Herodian  family,  he  shewed 
his  passion  for  building  cities  in  several  places,  re- 
storing Sepphoris,  near  Tabor,  which  had  been  de- 
stroyed in  the  wars  after  the  death  of  Herod  the 
Great  (Jos.  Ant.  xvii.  12,  §9;  xviii.  2,  §1)  and 
Berharamphtha  (Beth-haram)  in  Peraea,  which  he 
named  Julias,  "from  the  wife  of  the  emperor" 
(Jos.  Ant.  xviii.  2,  1  ;  Hieron.  Euseb.  Chron. 
A.D.  29.  Livias). 

III,  Archelaus  CApxeXao1,)  was,  like  Herod 
Antipas,  the  son  of  Herod  the  Great  and  Malthace. 
He  was  brought  up  with  his  brother  at  Rome 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xvii.  1,  §3),  and  in  consequence  of  the 
accusations  of  his  eldest  brother  Antipater,  the  son 
of  Doris,  he  was  excluded  by  his  father's  will  from 
any  share  in  his  dominions.  Afterwards,  however, 
by  a  second  change,  the  "  kingdom  "  was  left  to 
him,  which  had  been  designed  for  his  brother  An- 
tipas (Joseph.  Ant.  xvii.  8,  §1),  and  it  was  this 
unexpected  arrangement  which  led  to  the  retreat  of 
Joseph  to  Galilee  (Matt.  ii.  22).  Archelaus  did 
not  euter  on  his  power  without  strong  opposition 
and  bloodshed  (Joseph.  Ant.  xvii.  9)  ;  but  Au- 
gustus confirmed  the  will  of  Herod  in  its  essential 
provisions,  and  gave  Archelaus  the  government  of 
"  Idumaea,  Judaea,  and  Samaria,  with  the  cities  of 
Caesarea,  Sebaste,  Joppa,  and  Jerusalem"  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xvii.  13,  5),  which  produced  a  revenue  of 
400  (Joseph.  B.  J.  ii.  6,  §3)  or  600  talents  {Ant. 
xvii.  13,  5).  For  the  time  he  received  the  title  of 
Ethnarch,  with  the  promise  of  that  of  king,  if  he 
proved  worthy  of  it  (Joseph.  I.  c).  His  conduct 
justified  the  fears  which  his  character  inspired. 
After  violating  the  Mosaic  law  by  the  marriage  with 
Glaphyra,  his  brother  s  widow  (Joseph.  Ant.  xvii. 
13,  §1),  he  roused  his  subjects  by  his  tyranny  and 
cruelty  to  appeal  to  Rome  for  redress.  Augustus 
at  once  summoned  him  to  his  presence,  and  after 
his  cause  was  heard  he  was  banished  to  Vienne  in 
Gaul  (a.d.  7),  where  probably  he  died  (Joseph. 
/.  c. ;  cf.  Strab.  xvi.  p.  765;  Dio  Cass.  lv.  27); 
though  in  the  time  of  Jerome  his  tomb  was  shown 
near  Bethlehem  (Onomasticon). 

IV.  Herod  Philip  I.  (QiAnnros,  Mark  vi.  17) 
was  the  son  of  Herod  the  Great,  and  Mariamne  the 
daughter  of  a  high-priest  Simon  (Joseph.  Ant. 
xviii.  6.  4),  and  must  be  carefully  distinguished 
from  the  tetiarch  Philip.  [Herod  Philip  II.] 
He  married  Herodias,  the  sister  of  Agrippa  I.,  by 
whom  he  had  a  daughter  Salome.  Herodias,  how- 
ever, left  him,  and  made  an  infamous  marriage  with 
his  half-brother  Herod  Antipas  (Matt.  xiv.  3 ; 
Mark  vi.   17  ;    Luke  iii.  19).     He  is  called  only 


c  Jos.  Ant. xvii.  8,  §1,  Joseplms  calls  Philip 'Apx^Aaov 
a&e\<f>b<;  yvqcrios  ;  but  elsewhere  he  states  their  distinct 
descent. 


HEROD 

Herod  by  Joseplms,  but  the  repetition  of  the  name 
Philip  is  fully  justified  by  the  frequent  recurrence 
of  names  in  the  Herodian  family  (e.  g.  Antipater). 
The  two  Philips  were  confounded  by  Jerome  (ad 
Matt.  I.  c.) ;  and  the  confusion  was  the  more  easy, 
because  the  son  of  Mariamne  was  excluded  from  all 
share  in  his  father's  possessions  (t7Js  5ia9riK7]s 
^riAetipev )  in  consequence  of  his  mother's  treachery 
(Joseph.  B.  J.  i.  30,  §7),  and  lived  afterwards  in  a 
private  station. 

V.  Herod  Philip  II.  (QlAnriros)  was  the  son 
of  Herod  the  Great  and  Cleopatra  ('lepo<roAvfuTis). 
Like  his  half-brothers c'  Antipas  and  Archelaus, 
he  was  brought  up  at  home  (Joseph.  Ant.  xvii.  1, 
3),  and  on  the  death  of  his  father  advocated  the 
claims  of  Archelaus  before  Augustus  (Joseph.  B.  J. 
ii.  6,  §1).  He  received  as  his  own  government 
"  Batauaea,  Trachonitis,  Auranitis  (Gaulonitis), 
and  some  parts  about  Jamnia  "  (Joseph.  B.  J.  ii. 
6,  §3),  with  the  title  of  tetrarch  (Luke  iii.  1, 
$>iA'nnrov  ....  TfTpapxovvTOs  tt)j  'iTOvpaias  Kal 
TpaxoiviriBos  xaSpas).  His  rule  was  distinguished 
by  justice  and  moderation  (Joseph.  Ant.  xvii.  §2, 
4),  and  he  appears  to  have  devoted  himself  entirelv 
to  the  duties  of  his  office  without  sharing. in  the 
intrigues  which  disgraced  his  family  (Joseph.  Ant. 
xviii.  5,  6).  He  built  a  new  city  on  the  site  of 
Paneas,  near  the  sources  of  the  Jordan,  which  he 
called  Caesarea  (Kaitrape'ia  t]  ^lAittttou,  Matt.  xvi. 
13  ;  Mark  viii.  27),  and  raised  Bethsaida  (in  lower 
Gaulonitis)  to  the  rank  of  a  city  under  the  title  of 
Julias  (Joseph.  Ant.  ii.  9,  §1  ;  xviii.  2,  §1),  and 
died  there  A.D.  34  (xviii.  5,  §6).  He  married  Salome, 
the  daughter  of  Philip  ( 1 .)  and  Herodias  ( Ant.  xviii. 
6,  §4),  but  as  he  left  no  children  at  his  death  his 
dominions  were  added  to  the  Roman  province  of  Syria 
(xviii.  5,  §6). 

VI.  Herod  Agrippa  I.  ('HpaJSjjs,  Acts;  'Aypnr- 
iras,  Joseph.)  was  the  son  of  Aristobulus  and  Bere- 
nice, and  grandson  of  Herod  the  Great.  He  was 
brought  up  at  Rome  with  Claudius  and  Drusus,  and 
after  a  life  of  various  vicissitudes  (Joseph.  Ant. 
xviii.  7),  was  thrown  into  prison  by  Tiberius  for 
an  unguarded  speech,  where  he  remained  till  the 
accession  of  Caius  (Caligula)  A.D.  37.  The  new 
Emperor  gave  him  the  governments  formerly  held 
by  the  tetrarchs  Philip  and  Lysanias,  and  bestowed 
on  him  the  ensigns  of  royalty  and  other  mai  ks  of 
favour  (Acts  xii.  1,'Hp.  6  flcuriAevs).  The  jealousy 
of  Herod  Antipas  and  his  wife  Herodias  was  ex- 
cited by  these  distinctions,  and  they  sailed  to  Rome 
in  the  hope  of  supplanting  Agrippa  in  the  Em- 
peror's favour.  Agrippa  was  aware  of  their  design, 
and  anticipated  it  by  a  counter-charge  against 
Antipas  of  treasonous  correspondence  with  the 
Parthians.  Antipas  failed  to  answer  the  accusa- 
tion, and  was  banished  to  Gaul  (A.D.  39),  and  his 
dominions  were  added  to  those  already  held  by 
Agrippa  (Joseph.  Ant.  xviii.  7,  §2).  Afterwards 
Agrippa  rendered  important  services  to  Claudius 
(Joseph.  B.  J.  ii.  11,  §2,  3),  and  received  from  him 
in  return  (A.D.  41)  the  government  of  Judaea  and 
Samaria;  so  that  his  entire  dominions  equalled  in 
extent  the  kingdom  of  Herod  the  Great.  Unlike 
his  predecessors,  Agrippa  was  a  strict  observer  of 
the  Law  (Joseph.  Ant.  xix.  7,  §3  |,  and  In-  sought 
with  success  the  favour  of  the  Jews.d     It  is  pro- 


d  Jost  (Gesch.  d.  Judcnthums,  420)  quotes  a  leg-end 
that  Agrippa  burst  into  tears  on  reading  in  a  public 
service  Dent.  xvii.  15  ;  whereupon  the  people  cried  out, 


HEKOD 

bable  that  it  was  with  this  view"  he  put  to  death 
James  the  son  of  Zebedee,  and  further  imprisoned 
Peter  (Acts  xii.  1  ft".).  But  his  sudden  death,  which 
followed  immediately  afterwards,  interrupted  his 
ambitious  projects. 

In  the  fourth  year  of  his  reign  over  the  whole 
of  Judaea  (a.d.  44)  Agrippa  attended  some  games 
at  Caesarea,  held  in  honour  of  the  Emperor.  When 
he  appeared  in  the  theatre  (Joseph.  Ant.  six.  8,  §2, 
Sevrepa  twv  Bewpiwv  7]fj.tpq;  Acts  xii.  21,  tokt»7 
rifxtpa)  in  "  a  robe  of  silver  stuff  (e|  apyvpov 
■K£-K0ir)iA€V7}v  iracrav,  Joseph.;  iaBrJTa  f$a.<ri\iKT)v , 
Acts  xii.  21)  which  shone  in  the  morning  light., 
his  flatterers  saluted  him  as  a  god ;  and  suddenly 
he  was  seized  with  terrible  pains,  and  being  car- 
ried from  the  theatre  to  the  palace  died  aftei 
five  days  agony  (icp'  7]/j.epas  irevre  rcy  rf;s  yaa- 
Tpbs  a.Kyi]^ari  8i£pyacr9eh  rbv  fiiov  KareffTpe- 
\p(v,  Joseph.  Ant.  xix.  8  ;  yev6ju.evos  <tkw\7jk6- 
[SpfjiTos  e|e\J/u|ej/,  Acts  xii.  23;  cf.  2  Mace.  ix. 
5-9). 

By  a  singular  and  instructive  confusion  Euse- 
bius  (H.  E.  ii.  10 ;  cf.  Heinichen,  Exc.  2,  ad  loc.) 
converts  the  owl,  which,  according  to  Josephus,  ap- 
peared  to  Herod  as  a  messenger  of  evil  (£77  e  A  o  s 
KaKu>v)  into  "the  angel"  of  the  Acts,  who  was  the 
unseen  minister  of  the  Divine  Will  (Acts  xii.  23, 
eirdra^ep  avrbv  ayyeAos  Kvpiov ;  cf.  2  K.  xix. 
35,  LXX.). 

Various  conjectures  have  been  made  as  to  the 
occasion  of  the  festival  at  which  the  event  took 
place.  Josephus  (I.  c.)  says  that  it  was  "  iu  behalf 
of  the  Emperor's  safety,"  and  it  lias  been  supposed 
that  it  might  be  in  connexion  with  his  return  from 
Britain ;  but  this  is  at  least  very  uncertain  (cf. 
Wieseler,  Ckron.  d.  Apost.  Zeit.  131  ff. )..  Jose- 
phus mentions  also  the  concourse  "  of  the  chief  men 
throughout  the  province  "  who  were  present  on  the 
occasion  ;  and  though  he  does  not  notice  the  em- 
bassy of  the  Tvrians  and  Agrippa' s  speech,  yet  his 
narrative  is  perfectly  consistent  with  both  facts. 

VII.  HEROD  Agrippa  II.  CAyp'nriras,  X.  T. 
Joseph.)  was  the  son  of  Herod  Agrippa  I.  and  Cypros, 
a  grand-niece  of  Herod  the  Great.  At  the  time  of 
the  death  of  his  father  a.d.  44  he  was  at  Home, 
and  his  youth  (he  was  17  years  old)  prevented 
Claudius  from  carrying  out  his  first  intention  of 
appointing  him  his  father's  successor  (Joseph.  Ant. 
xix.  9,  §1-2).  Not  long  afterwards,  however,  the 
Emperor  gave  him  (c.  A.D.  50)  the  kingdom  of 
Chalcis,  which  had  belonged  to  his  uncle  (who  died 
A.D.  48;  Joseph.  Ant.  xx.  4,  §2 ;  B.J.  ii.  12, 
1);  and  then  transferred  him  (A.D.  52)  to  the 
tetrarchies  formerly  held  by  Philip  and  Lysanias 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xx.  6,  §1 ;  B.J.  ii.  12,  §8),  with  the 
title  of  king  (Acts  xxv.  13,  'AypiTnras  6  fiaffiXevs, 
xxvi.  2,  7,  &e.). 

Nero  afterwards  increased  the  dominions  of 
Agrippa  by  the  addition  of  several  cities  (  Ant. 
xx.  6,  §4)  ;  and  he  displayed  the  lavish  magni- 
ficence which  marked  his  family  by  costly  buildings 

"  Be  not  distressed,  Agrippa,  thou  art  our  brother," 
in  virtue,  that  is,  of  his  half-descent  from  the  llas- 
monaeans. 

e  Jost  (p.  421,  &c.),  who  objects  that  these  acta 
are  inconsistent  witli  the  known  humanity  of  Agrippa, 
entirely  neglects  the  reason  suggested  by  St.  Luke 
(Acts  xii.  3). 

a  Origen  (Comm.  in  Mutt.  torn.  xvii.  §20)  regards 
this  combination  of  the  Herodians  and  Pharisees  as  a 
combination  of  antagonistic  parties,  the  one  favour- 
able  to   the  Roman  government  (eixos  yap  Bri  iv  tw 


HERODIANS 


795 


at  Jerusalem  and  Berytus,  in  both  cases  doino- 
violence  to  the  feelings  of  the  Jews  (Ant.  xx.  7 
§11  ;  8,  §4).  The  relation  in  which  he  stood  to 
his  sister  Berenice  (Acts  xxv.  13)  was  the  cause 
of  grave  suspicion  (Joseph.  Ant.  xx.  6,  §3),  which 
was  noticed  by  Juvenal  (Sat.  vi.  155  ff.).  In  the 
last  Roman  war  Agrippa  took  part  with  the  Ro- 
mans, and  after  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  retired  with 
Berenice  to  Rome,  where  he  died  in  the  third  year 
of  Trajan  (a.d.  100),  being  the  last  prince  of  the 
house  of  Herod  (l'hot.  Cod.  33). 


Copper  Coin  of  Herod  Agrippa  II.  with  Titus. 
Obv.  AYTOKPTITOC  KAICAPC6BA.     Head  laureate  to  the 
right.     Rev.   ETO    KS   BA    ArPHIilA  (year  26.)      Victory 
advancing  to  the  right :  in  the  field  a  star. 

The  appearance  of  St.  Paul  before  Agrippa  (a.d. 
60)  offers  several  characteristic  traits.  Agrippa 
seems  to  have  been  intimate  with  Festus  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xx.  7,  §11)  ;  and  it  was  natural  that  the  Ko- 
man  governor  should  avail  himself  of  his  judgment 
on  a  question  of  what  seemed  to  be  Jewish  law 
(Acts  xxv.  18  ft'.,  26  ;  cf.  Joseph.  Ant.  xx.  8,  §7). 
The  "  pomp  "  (jroWr)  (pavracria.)  with  which  the 
king  came  into  the  audience  chamber  (Acts  xxv. 
23)  was  accordant  with  his  general  bearing  ;  and 
the  cold  irony  with  which  he  met  the  impassioned 
words  of  the  Apostle  (Acts  xxvi.  27,  28)  suits  the 
temper  of  one  who  was  contented  to  take  part  in 
the  destruction  of  his  nation. 

VIII.  Berenice.     [Berenice.] 

IX.  Drusilla.     [Drusilla.]   [B.  F.  W.] 

HERODIANS  ('HpuStavoi).  In  the  account 
which  is  given  by  St.  Matthew  (xxii.  15  ff. )  and  St. 
Mark  (xii.  13  ff.)  of  the  last  efforts  made  by  different 
sections  of  the  Jews  to  obtain  from  our  Lord  Him- 
self the  materials  for  His  accusation,  a  party  under 
the  name  of  Herodians  is  represented  as  acting  in 
concert  with  the  Pharisees11  (Matt.  xxii.  16  ;  Mark 
xii.  13).  St.  Mark  mentions  the  combination  of 
the  two  parties  lor  a  similar  object  at  an  earlier 
period  (Mark  Hi.  6),  and  in  another  place  (viii.  15  ; 
cf.  Luke  xii.  1)  he  preserves  a  saying  of  our  Lord, 
in  which  "  the  leaven  of  Herod"  is  placed  in  close 
connexion  with  "  the  leaven  ofthe  Pharisees)."  In 
the  Gospel  of  St.  Luke,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
Herodians  are  ooi  broughl  forward  at  all  byname. 

These  verv  scant  v  notices  ofthe  Evangelists  as  to 
the  position  of  the  Herodians  are  ooi  compensated 
by  other  t .'--t  i in< mi.'-s ;  ye)  it  is  not  difficult  to  fix 


Aau>  tot€  oi  p.iv  Sioamcoi'Tts  TtKiiv  Tor  <f>6pov  Kou'o-api 
ticaAoOfTO  'HpwSiaroi  virb  Tail'  ju>)  8e\6vTiov  tovto  yi- 
i'€0-eoi  .  .  .  ),  and  the  other  opposed  to  it ;  but  this 
view,  which  is  only  conjectural  (cikos),  docs  not  offer 
a  complete  solution  of  the  various  relations  of  the 
Herodians  to  the  other  parties  of  the  times.  Jerome, 
following  Origen.  limits  the  meaning  of  the  term  yet 
more:  "  Oum  KerodianU,  id  at,  militibus  Herodis, 
s,-n   ijimx   ilhtdciitcs  I'lituisari,  i/uia    Hnmnnis    ttibuta 

solvebant,  Kerodianos  vocabemt  ft  »"»  dieino  ctdtui 

deditos"  (Ilieron.  Coptm.  in  Itatt.  xxii.  151. 

3    K   2 


■96 


HEEODIAS 


their  characteristics  by  a  reference  to  the  condition 
of  Jewish  feeling  in  the  Apostolic  age.  There 
were  probably  many  who  saw  in  the  power  of  the 
Herodian  family  the  pledge  of  the  preservation  of 
their  national  existence  in  the  face  of  Roman  am- 
bition. In  proportion  as  they  regarded  the  inde- 
pendent nationality  of  the  Jewish  people  as  the  first 
condition  of  the  fulfilment  of  its  future  destiny, 
they  would  be  willing  to  acquiesce  in  the  dominion 
of  men  who  were  themselves  of  foreign  descent 
[Herod],  and  not  rigid  in  the  observance  of  the 
Mosaic  ritual.  Two  distinct  classes  might  thus 
unite  in  supporting  what  was  a  domestic  tyranny 
as  contrasted  with  absolute  dependence  on  Rome, 
those  who  saw  in  the  Herods  a  protection  against 
direct  heathen  rule,  which  was  the  one  object  of 
their  fear  (cf.  Juchas,  f.  19,  ap.  Lightfoot,  Harm. 
Ev.  p.  470,  Ed.  Leusd.  Herodes  etiam  senem 
Hillel  magno  in  honore  habuit ;  namque  hi  homines 
regem  ilium  esse  non  aegre  ferebant),  and  those 
who  were  inclined  to  look  with  satisfaction  upon 
such  a  compromise  between  the  ancient  faith  and 
heathen  civilisation,  as  Herod  the  Great  and  his 
successors  had  endeavoured  to  realise,  as  the  true 
and  highest  consummation  of  Jewish  hopes.b  On 
the  one  side  the  Herodians — partisans  of  Herod  in 
the  widest  sense  of  the  term — were  thus  brought  into 
union  with  the  Pharisees,  on  the  other,  with  the 
Sadducees.  Yet  there  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that 
they  endeavoured  to  form  any  very  systematic 
harmony  of  the  conflicting  doctrines  of  the  two 
sects,  but  rather  the  conflicting  doctrines  themselves 
were  thrown  into  the  background  by  what  ap- 
peared to  be  a  paramount  political  necessity.  Such 
coalitions  have  been  frequent  in  every  age ;  and 
the  rarity  of  the  allusions  to  the  Herodians,  as  a 
marked  body,  seems  to  show  that  this,  like  similar 
coalitions,  had  no  enduring  influence  as  the  founda- 
tion of  party.  The  feelings  which  led  to  the  coali- 
tion remained,  but  they  were  incapable  of  animating 
the  common  action  of  a  united  bodv  for  anv  length 
of  time.     '  [B.  F.  VV.] 

HEKO'DIAS  ('HpwSias,  a  female  patronymic 
from  'HpwSrjs ;  on  patronymics  and  gentilic  names  in 
tas,  see  Matthiae,  Gk.  Gr.  §101  and  103),  the  name 
of  a  woman  of  notoriety  in  the  N.  T.,  daughter  of 
Aristobulus,  one  of  the  sons  of  Mariamne  and  Herod 
the  Great,  and  consequently  sister  of  Agrippa  I. 

She  first  married  Herod,  surnamed  Philip,  .-in- 
other  of  the  sons  of  Mariamne  and  the  first  Herod 
(Joseph.  Ant.xvm.  5,  §4  ;  .comp.  B.  J.  i.  29,  §4), 
and  therefore  her  full  uncle;  then  she  eloped  from 
him,  during  his  lifetime  (Ant.  ibid.),  to  marry 
Herod  Antipas,  her  step-uncle,  who  had  been  long 
married  to,  and  was  still  living  with,  the  daughter 
of  Aeneas  or  Aretas — his  assumed  name — king  of 
Arabia  (ibid.  xvii.  9,  §4).  Thus  she  left  her  hus- 
band, who  was  still  alive,  to  connect  herself  with  a 
man,  whose  wife  was  still  alive.  Her  paramour  was 
indeed  less  of  a  blood  relation  than  her  original  hus- 


b  In  this  way  the  Herodians  were  said  to  regard 
Herod  (Antipas)  as  "  the  Messiah  :"  'HpuSiavol  raf 
eKelvovs  tovs  \povovs  y^uav  ot  tov  'llpuiSrjv  XpKrTbv  tirat 
Ae'yoi'-rcs  to;  ioroperrai  (Viet.  Ant.  ap.  Cram.  Cat.  in 
Marc.  p.  400).  Philastrius  (Haer.  xxviii.)  applies  the 
same  belief  to  Herod  Agrippa;  Epiphanius  (JJaer.xix.) 
to  Herod  the  Great.  Jerome  in  one  place  (ad  Mutt.  xxii. 
15)  calls  the  idea  "  a  ridiculous  notion  of  some  Latin 
writers,  which  rests  on  no  authority  (quad  nusquam  le- 
gimus]  ;"  and  again  (Dial.  c.  Lucifer,  xxiii.)  mentions 
it  in  a  general  summary  of  heretical  notions  without 
hesitation.  The  belief  was,  in  faot,one  of  general  senti- 


HERODIAS 

band  ;  but  being  likewise  the  half-brother  of  that 
husband,  he  was  already  connected  with  her  by 
affinity — so  close,  that  there  was  only  one  case  con- 
templated in  the  law  of  Moses,  where  it  could  be  set 
aside,  namely,  when  the  married  brother  had  died 
childless  (Lev.  xviii.  16,  and  xx.  21,  and  for  the  ex- 
ception Deut.  xxv.  5  and  seq.).  Now  Herodias  had 
already  had  one  child—Salome — by  Philip  (Ant. 
xviii.  5,  §4),  and,  as  he  was  still  alive,  might  have 
had  more.  Well  therefore  may  she  be  charged  by 
Josephus  with  the  intention  of  confounding  her  coun- 
try's institutions  (ibid,  xviii.  5,  §4)  ;  and  well  may 
St.  John  the  Baptist  have  remonstrated  against  the 
enormity  of  such  a  connexion  with  the  tetrarch, 
whose  conscience  would  certainly  seem  to  have  been 
a  less  hardened  one  (Matt.  xiv.  9  says  he  "was 
sorry  ;"  Mark  vi.  20  that  he  "  feared  "  St.  John  ; 
and  "  heard  him  gladly"). 

The  consequences  both  of  the  crime,  and  of 
the  reproof  which  it  incurred,  are  well  known. 
Aretas  made  war  upon  Herod  for  the  injury  done 
to  his  daughter,  and  routed  him  with  the  loss  of 
his  whole  army  (Ant.  xviii.  5,  §1).  The  head  of 
St.  John  the  Baptist  was  granted  to  the  request 
of  Herodias  (Matt.  xiv.  8-11;  Mark  vi.  24-28). 
According  to  Josephus  the  execution  took  place  in 
a  fortress  called  Machaerus,  on  the  frontier  between 
the  dominions  of  Aretas  and  Herod,  according  to 
Pliny  (v.  15),  looking  down  upon  the  Dead  Sea  from 
the  south  (comp.  Robinson,  i.  570  note).  And  it 
was  to  the  iniquity  of  this  act,  rather  than  to  the 
immorality  of  that  illicit  connexion,  that,  the  his- 
torian says,  some  of  the  Jews  attributed  the  defeat 
of  Herod.  In  the  closing  scene  of  her  career  indeed 
Herodias  exhibited  considerable  magnanimity;  as 
she  preferred  going  with  Antipas  to  Lugdunum,8 
and  there  sharing  his  exile  and  reverses,  till  death 
ended  them,  to  the  remaining  with  her  brother 
Agrippa  I.,  and  partaking  of  his  elevation  (Ant. 
xviii.  7,  §2). 

There  are  few  episodes  in  the  whole  range  of  the 
N.  T.  more  suggestive  to  the  commentator  than 
this  one  scene  in  the  life  of  Herodias. 

1 .  It  exhibits  one  of  the  most  remarkable  of  the 
undesigned  coincidences  between  the  N.  T.  and 
Josephus  ;  that  there  are  some  discrepancies  in  the 
two  accounts,  only  enhances  their  value.  More 
than  this,  it  has  led  the  historian  info  a  brief  digres- 
sion upon  the  life,  death,  and  character  of  the 
Baptist,  which  speaks  volumes  in  favour  of  the 
genuineness  of  that  still  more  celebrated  passage,  in 
which  he  speaks  of"  Jesus,"  that  "wise  man,  if 
man  he  may  be  called  "  (Ant.  xviii.  3,  §3;  comp. 
xx.  9,  §1,  unhesitatingly  quoted  as  genuine  by  Euseb. 
H.  E.  i.  11). 

2.  It  has  been  warmly  debated  whether  it  was 
the  adultery,  or  the  incestuous  connexion,  that 
drew  down  the  reproof  of  the  Baptist.  It  has  been 
already  shown  that,  either  way,  the  offence  merited 
condemnation  upon  more  grounds  than  one. 


ment,  and  not  of  distinct  and  pronounced  confession. 
a  This  town  is  probably  Lugdunum  Convenarum, 
a  town  of  Gaul,  situated  on  the  right  bank  of  the 
Garonne,  at  the  foot  of  the  Pyrenees,  now  St.  Ber- 
trand  de  Comminges  (Murray,  Hundb.  of  Frame,  p. 
314) ;  Eusebius,  II.  E.  i.  11,  says  Vienne.  confounding 
Antipas  with  Archelaus.  Burton  on  .Matt.  xiv.  3, 
Alford,  and  moderns  in  general,  Lyons.  In  Josephus 
(B.  J.  ii.  9,  §6),  Antipas  is  said  to  have  died  in  Spain — 
apparently,  from  the  context,  the  land  of  his  exile. 
A  town  on  tho  frontiers,  therefore,  like  the  above, 
would  satisfy  both  passages. 


HERODION 

3.  The.  birthday  feast  is  another  undesigned 
coincidence  between  Scripture  and  profane  history. 
The  Jews  abhorred  keeping  birthdays  as  a  pagan 
custom  (Bland  on  Matt.  xiv.  6).  On  the  other 
hand,  it  was  usual  with  the  Egyptians  ( Gen.  xl. 
20;  comp.  Joseph.  Ant.  .\ii.  4,  §7),  with  the 
Persians  (Herod,  i.  133),  with  the  Greeks,  even  in 
the  case  of  the  dead,  whence  the  Christian  custom 
of  keeping  anniversaries  of  the  martyrs  (Bahr,  ad 
Herod,  iv.  26),  and  with  the  Romans  (Fers.  Sat. 
ii.  1-3).  Now  the  Herods  may  be  said  to  have 
gone  beyond  Home  in  the  observance  of  all  that  was 
Roman.  Herod  the  Great  kept  the  day  of  his 
accession;  Antipas — as  we  read  here — and  Agrippa 
I.,  as  Josephus  tells  us  {Ant.  six.  7,  §1),  their 
birthday,  with  such  magnificence,  that  the  "  biith- 
days  of  Herod"  (Herodis  dies)  had  passed  into  a 
proverb  when  Persius  wrote  (Sat.  v.  180). 

4.  And  yet  dancing,  on  these  festive  occasions, 
was  common  to  both  Jew  and  Gentile ;  and  was 
practised  in  the  same  way — Youths  and  virgins, 
singly,  or  separated  into  two  bands,  but  never  inter- 
mingled, danced  to  do  honour  to  their  deity,  their 
hero,  or  to  the  day  of  their  solemnity.  Miriam 
C  Ex.  xv.  20),  the  daughter  of  Jephthah  (Judges  xi. 
34)  and  David  (2  .Sam.  vi.  14)  are  familiar  in- 
stances in  Holy  Writ :  the  "  Carmen  Saeculare  "  of 
Horace,  to  quote  no  more,  points  to  the  same  cus- 
tom amongst  Greeks  and  Romans.  It  is  plainly 
owing  to  the  elevation  ot  woman  in  the  social  scale, 
that  dancing  in  pairs  (still  unknown  to  the  East) 
has  come  into  fashion. 

5.  The  rash  oath  of  Herod,  like  that  of  Jeph- 
thah in  the  0.  T.,  has  afforded  ample  discussion  to 
casuists.  It  is  now  ruled  that  all  such  oaths,  where 
there  is  no  reservation,  expressed  or  implied,  in 
favour  of  the  laws  of  God  or  man,  are  illicit  and 
without  force.  And  so  Solomon  had  long  since 
decided  (1  K.  ii.  2<)-24;  sec  Sanderson,  DeJuram. 
Oblig.  Praelect.  iii.  16  i.  [E.  S.  Ff.] 

HEEO'DIOX  ('Hpa>5iW  ;  11, rodion),  a  rela- 
tive of  St.  Paul  (rbv  avyytvrj  fiov  ;  cognatus),  to 
whom  he  semis  his  salutation  amongst  the  Chris- 
tians of  the  Roman  Church  (Rom.xvi.  11).  Nothing 
appears  to  be  certainly  known  of  him.  By  Hippo- 
lytus,  however,  he  is  said  to  have  been  bishop  of 
Tarsus;  and  by  Pseudodorothoea,  of  Patrae  (Winer, 
Slib  ''or.). 

HERON  (HWN).  The  Hebrew  amphah  ap- 
pear* as  the  name  of  an  unclean  bird  in  Lev.  xi.  19, 
Deut.  xiv.  IS.  From  the  addition  of  the  words 
'•  after  her  kind,"  we  may  infer  tliat  it  was  a  generic 
name  for  a  well  known  class  of  birds,  and  hence  it 
is  the  more  remarkable  that  the  name  does  not 
occur  elsewhere  in  the  Bible.  It  is  quite  uncertain 
what  bird  is  intended:  the  only  point  on  which 
any  two  commentators  seem  to  agree  is  that  it  is 

not    the   //,,-,,/,,    tor    many   supp  eding 

word  translated  in  the  A.  V.  ••  stork"  to  apply  in 
reality  to  the  heron.  The  I. XX.  translates  it 
it  xaP<*$Pt0S-i  which  may  lie  regarded  as  applicable 

to  all  birds  frequenting  swampy  gr I  (iv  xaP<*- 

Spais),  but  more  particularly  to  the  plover.  This 
explanation  loses  what  little  weight  it  might  other- 
wise have  had,  from  tic  probability  thai  it  ori- 
ginated in  a-false  reading,  viz.,  agaphah,  which  the 
translators  connected  with  agaph,  "a  bank."  The 
Talmudists  evidently  were  at  a  loss?  for  they  de- 
scribe it  indefinitely  as  a  "  high  flying  bud  ot'  prey  " 
The  only  ground  on  which  an 
opinion  can  he  formed,  is  theetymology  of  the  word; 


HETH 


797 


it  is  connected  by  Gesenius  (Thes.  p.  127)  with  the 
root  anaph,  "  to  snort  in  anger,"  and  is  therefore 
applicable  to  some  irritable  bird,  perhaps  the  goose. 
The  parrot,  swallow,  and  a  kind  of  eagle  have  been 
suggested  without  any  real  reason.       [W.  L.  B.] 

HE'SEU  Opn  ;  'Eo-S/,  Alex.  "EaS  ;  Benesed), 
the  son  of  Hesed,  or  Ben-Chesed,  was  commissary 
tin'  Solomon  in  the  district  of  "  the  Arubboth,  Socoh, 
and  all  the  land  of  Hepher"  (1  K.  iv.  10). 

HESH'BON  (fl3t>;n  ;  'Zaefav  ;  Hesebon), 
the  capital  city  of  Sihon  king  of  the  Amorites 
(Num.  xxi.  26).  It  stood  on  the  western  border 
of  the  high  plain  (Mishor,  Josh.  xiii.  17),  and  on 
the  boundary-line  between  the  tribes  of  Reuben  and 
Gad.  The  ruins  of  Hesban,  20  miles  east  of  the 
J  oi  dan,  on  the  parallel  of  the  northern  end  of  the 
Dead  Sea,  mark  the  site,  as  they  bear  the  name,  of 
the  ancient  Heshbon.  The  city  is  chiefly  celebrated 
from  its  connexion  with  Sihon,  who  was  the  first  to 
give  battle  to  the  invading  Israelites.  He  marched 
against  them  to  Jahaz,  which  must  have  been 
situated  a  short  distance  south  of  Heshbon,  and  was 
theie  completely  overthrown  (Deut.  ii.  32  sq.). 
Heshbon  was  rebuilt  by  the  tribe  of  Iteuben  (Num. 
xxxii.  37),  but  was  assigned  to  the  Levites  in  con- 
nexion with  the  tribe  of  Gad  (Josh.  xxi.  39).  After 
the  captivity  it  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  Moabites, 
to  whom  it  had  originally  belonged  (Num.  xxi.  26), 
and  hence  it  is  mentioned  in  the  prophetic  denunci- 
ations against  Moab  (Is.  xv.  4  ;  Jer.  xlviii.  2,  34, 
4."i).  In  the  fourth  century  it  was  still  a  place  of 
some  note  (Onom.  s.  v.  Esebori),  but  it  has  now 
been  for  many  centuries  wholly  desolate. 

The  ruins  of  Heshbon  stand  on  a  low  hill  rising 
out  of  the  great  undulating  plateau.  They  aie 
more  than  a  mile  in  circuit;  but  not  a  building 
remains  entire.  Towards  the  western  part  is  a 
singular  structure,  whose  crumbling  ruins  exhibit 
the  workmanship  of  successive  ages — the  massive 
stones  of  the  Jewish  period,  the  sculptured  cornice 
of  the  Roman  era,  and  the  light  Saracenic  arch,  all 
grouped  together.  There  are  many  cisterns  among 
the  ruins ;  and  towards  the  south,  a  few  yards 
from  the  base  of  the  hill,  is  a  large  ancient  reservoir, 
which  calls  to  mind  the  passage  in  Cant.  vii.  4 
"  Thine  eyes  are  like  the  fishpools  of  Heshbon  by 
the  gate  of  Bath-rabbini."  (See  Burckhardt,  Trav. 
in  Syr.  p.  365;  Jrhy  and  Mangles,  p.  472.) 
[Bath-rabmm.]  [J.  L.  P.] 

HESH'MON  (flDtrn  ;  LXX.  omits,  both  MSS. ; 
Hassemon  ,,  a  place  named,  with  others,  as  lying 
between  Moladah  and  Beersheba  (Josh.  xv.  27 
and  therefore  in  the  extreme  south  of  Judah. 
Nothing  further  is  known  of  it  ;  but  may  it  not 
lie  another  form  of  the  name  AZMON,  given  in 
Num.  \x\iv.  4  as  one  of  the  landmarks  of  the 
southern  boundary  of  Judah  ?  [G.] 

HETB  nn,  I.  0.  Cheth;  XeV  ;  11,  th),  the 
forefather  of  the  nation  of  nn  Mi  i  1 1 1  is.  In  the 
genealogical  tables  of  Gen.  x.  and  l  Chr.  i..  Heth  is 
tat  i  as  ;i  -on  of  Canaan,  younger  than  Zidon  the 
firstborn,  but  preceding  the  Jebusite,  the  Amorite, 

and  the  other  Canaanite  families.      Heth  and  Zidon 

alone  are  named  as  persons ;  all  the  rest  figure  as 

1  .n.  \.  15;   I  Chr.  i.  13;  I. XX.  rbv  X«t- 

ralov  :   and  so  .1 phus,  Ant.  i.  6,  $2  . 

The  Hittites  were  therefore  a  ETamite  race,  neither 
of  the  ■•  country  "  nor  the  "  kindred  "  of  Abraham 
and  Isaac  (Gen.  xxiv.  3,  4 ;  uriii.  1,2V      In  the 


■U8 


HETHLON 


earliest  historical  mention  of  the  nation — the  beau- 
tiful narrative  of  Abraham's  purchase  of  the  cave 
of  Machpelah — they  are  styled,  not  Hittites,  but 
Bene-Cheth  (A.  V.  "  sons,  and  children  of  Heth," 
Gen.  xxiii.  3,  5,  7,  10,  16,  18,  20  ;  xxv.  10  ; 
xlix.  32).  Ouce  we  hear  of  "  daughters  of  Heth  " 
(xxvii.  46),  the  "  daughters  of  the  land ;"  at  that 
early  period  still  called,  after  their  less  immediate 
progenitor,  "daughters  of  Canaan"  (xxviii.  1,  8, 
compared  with  xxvii.  46,  and  xxvi.  34,  35). 

In  the  Egyptian  monuments  the  name  Chat  is 
said  to  stand  for  Palestine  (Bunsen,  Aegypten,  quoted 
by  Ewald,  Gesch.  i.  317  note).  [G.] 

HETHLON  (f?T\n  1\yt,  "  the  way  of  Heth- 
lon"),  the  name  of  a  place  on  the  northern  border 
of  the  "  promised  land."  It  is  mentioned  only 
twice  in  Scripture  (Ez.  xlvii.  15,  xlviii.  1).  In  all 
probability  the  "  way  of  Hethlon  "  is  the  pass  at 
the  northern  end  of  Lebanon,  from  the  sea-coast  of 
the  Mediterranean  to  the  great  plain  of  Hamath, 
and  is  thus  identical  with  "  the  entrance  of  Hamath  " 
in  Num.  xxxiv.  8,  &c.  (See  Five  Years  in  Dam  ts- 
ous,  ii.  356.)  [J.  L.  P.] 

HE'ZEKI  ^jptn,  i.  e.  Hizki,  a  short  form  of 
Hizkiah,  "  strength  of  Jehovah  "  =  Hezekiah  ; 
'A^a/ci  ;  Hezeci),  a  man  in  the  genealogies  of  Ben- 
jamin, one  of  the  Bene-Elpaal,  a  descendant  of 
Shaaraim  (1  Chr.  viii.  17). 

HEZEKI'AH  (n»pTn,  generally  -liTpTn,  Hiz- 
kiyahu,  and  also  with  initial  * — -irPpTIT  ;  LXX. 
and  Joseph.  'E£e/a'as  ;  Ezechias ;  =  "  strength  of  Je- 
hovah," comp.  Germ.  "  Gotthard,"  Gesen.),  twelfth 
king  of  Judah,  son  of  the  apostate  Ahaz  and  Abi  (or 
Abijah),  ascended  the  throne  at  the  age  of  25,  B.C. 
726.  Since,  however,  Ahaz  died  at  the  age  of  36, 
some  prefer  to  make  Hezekiah  only  20  years  old  at 
his  accession  (reading  3  for  TO),  as  otherwise  he 
must  have  been  born  when  Ahaz  was  a  boy  of  11 
years  old.  This  indeed  is  not  impossible  (Hieron.  Ep. 
ad  Yitalem.  132,  quoted  by  Bochart,  Geogr.  Sacr. 
p.  920;  see  Keil  on  2  K.  xviii.  1  ;  Knobel,  Jes.  22, 
&c.)  ;  but,  if  any  change  be  desirable,  it  is  better 
to  suppose  that  Ahaz  was  25  and  not  20  years 
old  at  his  accession  (LXX.  Syr.  Arab.  2  Chr. 
xxviii.  1),  reading  !"I3  for  D  in  2  K.  xvi.  2. 

Hezekiah  was  one  of  the  three  most  perfect  kings 
of  Judah  (2  K.  xviii.  5  ;  Ecclus.  xlix.  4).  His 
first  act  was  to  purge,  and  repair,  and  reopen  with 
splendid  sacrifices  and  perfect  ceremonial,  the  Temple 
which  had  been  despoiled  and  neglected  during 
the  careless  and  idolatrous  reign  of  his  father.  This 
consecration  was  accompanied  by  a  revival  of  the 
theocratic  spirit,  so  strict  as  not  even  to  spare  "  the 
high  places,"  which,  although  tolerated  by  many 
well-intentioned  kings,  had  naturally  been  profaned 
by  the  worship  of  images  and  Asherahs  (2  K.  xviii. 
4).  On  the  extreme  importance  and  probable  con- 
sequences of  this  measure,  see  High  Places.  A 
still  more  decisive  act  was  the  destruction  of  a 
brazen  serpent,  said  to  have  been  the  one  used  by 
Moses  in  the  miraculous  healing  of  the  Israelites 
(Num.  xxi.  9),  which  had  been  removed  to  Je- 
rusalem, and  had  become,  "  down  to  those  days," 
an  object  of  adoration,  partly  in  consequence  of 
its  venerable  character  as  a  relic,  and  partly  per- 
haps from  some  dim  tendencies  to  the  ophiolatry 


tie   bronze  qui  scion  une  croyance 
:elui  que   leva   Moi'se,   et    qui  doit 


a  "  Un  serpent  ... 
populairc   serait   celui   que   leva   Moi'se,   et    qui 


HEZEKIAH 

common  in  ancient  times  (Ewald,  Gesch.  iii.  622). 
To  break  up  a  figure  so  curious  and  so  highly 
honoured  showed  a  strong  mind,  as  well  as  a  clear- 
sighted zeal,  and  Hezekiah  briefly  justified  his 
procedure  by  calling  the  image  Jflfc^nj,  "  a  brazen 
thing,"  possibly  with  a  contemptuous  play  on  the 
word  fnj,  "a  serpent."  How  necessary  this  was 
in  such  times  may  be  inferred  from  the  fact  that 
"  the  brazen  serpent"  is,  or  was,  reverenced  in  the 
Church  of  St.  Ambrose  at  Milan  (Prideaux,  Connect. 
i.  19,  Oxf.  ed.).H  When  the  kingdom  of  Israel  had 
fallen,  Hezekiah  extended  his  pious  endeavours  to 
Ephraim  and  Manasseh,  and  by  inviting  the  scat- 
tered inhabitants  to  a  peculiar  Passover  kindled  their 
indignation  also  against  the  idolatrous  practices  which 
still  continued  among  them.  This  Passover  was, 
from  the  necessities  of  the  case,  celebrated  at  an 
unusual,  though  not  illegal  (Num.  ix.  10,11)  time, 
and  by  an  excess  of  Levitical  zeal,  it  was  continued 
tor  the  unprecedented  period  of  fourteen  days.  For 
these  latter  facts  the  Chronicler  (2  Chr.  xxix.,  xxx., 
xxxi.)  is  our  sole  authority,  and  he  characteristically 
narrates  them  at  great  length.  It  would  appear 
at  first  sight  that  this  Passover  was  celebrated  im- 
mediately after  the  purification  of  the  Temple  (see 
Prideaux,  I.  c),  but  careful  consideration  makes 
it  almost  certain  that  it  could  not  have  taken  place 
before  the  sixth  year  of  Hezekiah's  reign,  when  the 
fall  of  Samaria  had  stricken  remorseful  terror  into 
the  heart  of  Israel  (2  Chr.  xxxi.  1,  xxx.  6,  9,  and 
Keil  on  2  K.  xviii.  3). 

By  a  rare  and  happy  providence  the  most  pious 
of  kings  was  confiimed  in  his  faithfulness,  and 
seconded  in  his  endeavours  by  the  powerful  assist- 
ance of  the  noblest  and  most  eloquent  of  prophets. 
The  influence  of  Isaiah  was,  however,  not  gained 
without  a  struggle  with  the  "scornful"  remnant 
of  the  former  royal  counsellors  (Is.  xxviii.  14),  who 
in  all  probability  recommended  to  the  king  such 
alliances  and  compromises  as  would  be  in  unison 
rather  with  the  dictates  of  political  expediency,  than 
with  that  sole  unhesitating  trust  in  the  arm  of 
Jehovah,  which  the  prophets  inculcated.  The  lead- 
ing man  of  this  cabinet  was  Shebna,  who,  from  the 
omission  of  his  father's  name,  and  the  expression  in 
Is.  xxii.  16  (see  Blunt,  Undcs.  Coincidences'),  was 
probably  a  foreigner,  perhaps  a  Syrian  (Hitzig). 
At  the  instance  of  Isaiah,  he  seems  to  have  been 
subsequently  degraded  from  the  high  post  of  prefect 
of  the  palace  (which  office  was  given  to  Eliakim, 
Is.  xxii.  21),  to  the  inferior,  though  still  honourable, 
station  of  state-secretary  ("1QD,  2  K.  xviii.  18) ;  the 
further  punishment  of  exile  with  which  Isaiah  had 
threatened  him  (xxii.  18)  being  possibly  forgiven  on 
his  amendment,  of  which  we  have  some  traces  in 
Is.  xxxvii.  2  sqq.  (Ewald,  Gesch.  iii.  617). 

At  the  head  of  a  repentant  and  united  people, 
Hezekiah  ventured  to  assume  the  aggressive  against 
the  Philistines,  and  in  a  series  of  victories  not  only 
lewnn  the  cities  which  his  father  had  lost  (2  Chr. 
xxviii.  18),  but  even  dispossessed  them  of  their  own 
cities  except  Gaza  (2  K.  xviii.  8)  and  Gath  (Joseph. 
Ant.  ix.  13.  §3).  It  was  perhaps  to  the  purposes 
of  this  war  that  he  applied  the  money  which  would 
otherwise  have  been  used  to  pay  the  tribute  exacted 
by  Shalmanezer,  according  to  the  agreement  of 
Ahaz  with  his  predecessor,  Tiglath  Pileser.  When, 
after  the  capture  of  Samaria,  the  king  of  Assyria 


siffler   a  In    fin   Aw    monde."     (Itin.    de  Vltalie,  p. 
117.) 


HEZEKIAH 

applied  for  this  impost,  Hezekiah  refused  it,  and  in 
open  rebellion  omitted  to  send  even  the  usual  pre- 
sents (2  K.  xviii.  7),  a  line  of  conduct  to  which  he 
was  doubtless  encouraged  by  the  splendid  exhorta- 
tion of  his  prophetic  guide. 

Instant  war  was  averted  by  the  hei  oic  and  long- 
continued  resistance  of  the  Tyrians  under  their  king 
Eluloeus  (Joseph.  Ant.  ix.  14),  against  a  siege, 
which  was  abandoned  only  in  the  fifth  year  (Grote, 
Greece,  iii.  359  ;  4th  Ed.),  when  it  was  found  to  be 
impracticable.  This  must  have  been  a  critical  and 
intensely  anxious  period  for  Jerusalem,  and  Heze- 
kiah used  every  available  means  to  strengthen  his 
position,  and  render  his  capital  impregnable  (2  K.  xx. 
20;  2Chr.  xxxii.3-5,30  ;  Is.  xxii.  8-11,  xxxiii.  IS; 
and  to  these  events  Ewald  also  refers  Ps.  xlviii.  13). 
But  while  all  Judea  trembled  with  anticipation  of 
Assyrian  invasion,  and  while  Shebna  and  others  were 
relying  "  in  the  shadow  of  Egypt,"  Isaiah's  brave 
heart  did  not  fail,  and  he  even  denounced  the  wrath 
of  God  against  the  proud  and  sinful  merchant-city 
(Is.  xxiii.),  which  now  seemed  to  be  the  main  bul- 
wark of  Judea  against  immediate  attack. 

It  was  probably  during  the  siege  of  Samaria  that 
Shalmanezer  died,  and  was  succeeded  by  Saigon, 
who,  jealous  of  Egyptian  influence  in  Judea,  sent  an 
army  under  a  Tartan  or  general  (Is.  xx.  1),  which 
penetrated  Egypt  (Nah.  iii.  8-10)  and  destroyed 
No-Amon  ;  although  it  is  clear  from  Hezekiah's 
rebellion  (2  K.  xviii.  7)  that  it  can  have  produced 
but  little  permanent  impression.  Sargon,  in  the 
tenth  year  of  his  reign  (which  is  the  fourteenth 
year  of  the  reign  of  Hezekiah),  made  an  expedition 
to  Palestine;  but  his  annals  make  no  mention  of  any 
conquests  from  Hezekiah  on  this  occasion,  and  he 
seems  to  have  occupied  himself  in  the  siege  of 
Ashdod  (Is.  xx.  1),  and  in  the  inspection  of  mines 
(Kosenmuller,  Bibl.  Geoi/r.  ix.).  This  must  there- 
fore be  the  expedition  alluded  to  in  2  K.  xviii.  13; 
Is.  xxxvi.  1  ;  an  expedition  which  is  merely  alluded 
to,  as  it  led  to  no  result.  But  if  the  .Scripture  nar- 
rative is  to  be  reconciled  with  the  records  of  Assyrian 
history  it  seems  necessary  to  make  a  transposition 
in  the  text  of  Isaiah  (and  therefore  of  the  book  of 
Kings).  That  some  such  expedient  must  be  re- 
sorted to,  if  the  Assyrian  history  is  trustworthy, 
is  maintained  by  Dr.  Hincks  in  a  paper  On  the  recti- 
fication of  Chronology,  which  the  ncidij-discovered 
Apis-steles  render  necessary.  "  The  text,"  he  savs, 
"  as  it  originally  stood  was  probably  to  this  effect : 
2  K.  xviii.  13.  Now  in  the  fourteenth  year  of 
king  Hezekiah  the  king  of  Assyria  came  vp  [allud- 
ing to  the  attack  mentioned  in  Saigon's  Annals']  ; 
xx.  1-19.  In  those  days  was  king  Hezekiah  sick 
Unto  death,  &C,  xviii.  13.  And  Sennacherib,  king 
of  Assyria,  came  up  against  all  the  fenced  cities 
of  Judah,  ami  took  them,  &c,  xviii.  13,  xix.  'M  " 
(Dr.  Hincks,  in  Journ.  of  Sacr.  Lit.  Oct.  1858). 
Perhaps  some  later  transcriber,  unaware  of  the 
earlier  and  unimportant  invasion,  confused  the 
allusion  to  Sargon  in  2  K.  xviii.  13  with  the 
detailed  story  of  Sennacherib's  attack  (2  K.  xviii. 
14  to  xix.  -I"!,  and,  considering  that  the  account 
of  Hezekiah's  illness  broke  the  continuity  of  the 
narrative,  removed  it  to  the  end. 

According  to  this  scheme,  Hezekiah's  dangerous 
illness  (2  K.  xx.  ;  Is.  xxxviii.  ;  2  Chr.  xxxii.  24) 
nearly  synchronised  with  Sargon's  futile  invasion. 

in  the  fourteenth  year  of  Hezekiah's  reig leven 

years  before  Sennacherib's  invasion.  That  it  must 
have  preceded  the  attack  of  Sennacherib  i*  nearly 
olivioiis  from  the  promise  in  2  K.  xx.  b',  a-  well  as 


HEZEKIAH 


799 


from  modern  discoveries  (Layard,  Nin.  fy  Bab.  i. 
145) ;  and  such  is  the  view  adopted  by  the  Kabbis 
(Seder  Olam,  cap.  xxiii.),  Ussher,  and  by  most  com- 
mentators, except  Vitringa  and  Gesenius  (Keil,  ad 
loc;  Prideaux,  i.  22).  There  seems  to  be  no 
ground  whatever  for  the  vague  conjecture  so  con- 
fidently advanced  (Winer,  s.  v.  Hiskias ;  Jahn, 
Hebr.  Common.  §xli.)  that  the  king's  illness  was 
the  same  plague  which  had  destroyed  the  Assyrian 

army.     The  word  \>rW  is  not  elsewhere  applied  to 

the  plague,  but  to  carbuncles  and  inflammatory 
ulcers  (Ex.  ix.  9;  Job  ii.  1,  &c).  Hezekiah, 
whose  kingdom  was  in  a  dangerous  crisis,  who  had 
at  that  time  no  heir  (for  Manasseh  was  not  bom  till 
long  aftenvaids,  2  K.  xxi.  1),  and  who  regarded 
death  as  the  end  of  existence  (Is.  xxxviii.),  "  turned 
his  face  to  the  wall  and  wept  sore  "  at  the  threatened 
approach  of  dissolution.  God  had  compassion  on 
his  anguish,  and  heard  his  prayer.  Isaiah  had 
hardly  left  the  palace  when  he  was  ordered  to  pro- 
mise the  king  immediate  recovery,  and  a  fresh  lease 
of  life,  ratifying  the  promise  by  a  sign,  and  curing 
the  boil  by  a  plaster  of  figs,  which  were  often  used 
medicinally  in  similar  cases  (Gesen.  Thes.  i.  311; 
Celsius,  Hierobot.  ii.  377  ;  Bartholinus,  Dc  Morbis 
Biblicis,  x.  47).  What  was  the  exact  nature  of  the 
disease  we  cannot  say  ;  according  to  Meade  it  was 
fever  terminating  in  abscess..  For  some  account  of 
the  retrogression  of  the  shadow  on  the  sundial  of 
Ahaz,  see  Dial.  On  this  remarkable  passage  we 
must  be  content  to  refer  the  reader  to  Carpzov, 
App.  Grit.  p.  351  ff. ;  Winer,  s.  v.  Iliskias  and 
Uhren  ;  Hawlinson,  Herod,  ii.  332  sqq. ;  the  elabo- 
rate notes  of  Keil  on  2  K.  xx. ;  Rosenmiiller  and 
Gesenius  on  Is.  xxxviii.,  and  especially  Ewald, 
Gesch.  iii.  638. 

Various  ambassadors  came  with  letters  and  gifts 
to  congratulate  Hezekiah  on  his  recovery  (2  Chr. 
xxxii.  23),  and  among  them  an  embassy  from  Heio- 
dach-Baladan  (or  Berodach,  2  K.  xx.  12  ;  o  BaAaSas, 
Joseph.  I.  c),  the  viceroy  of  Babylon,  the  Mardo- 
kempados  of  Ptolemy's  canon.  The  ostensible  ob- 
ject of  this  mission  was  to  compliment  Hezekiah  on 
his  convalescence  (2  K.  xx.  12;  Is.  xxxix.  1),  and 
"  to  inquire  of  the  wonder  that  was  done  in  the 
land  "  (2  Chr.  xxxii.  31),  a  rumour  of  which  could 
not  fail  to  interest  a  people  devoted  to  astrology. 
But  its  real  purpose  was  to  discover  how  far  an 
alliance  between  the  two  powers  was  possible  or 
desirable,  for  Mardokempados,  no  less  than  Hezekiah, 
was  in  apprehension  of  the  Assyrians.  In  fact 
Sargon  expelled  him  from  the  throne  of  Babylon  in 
the  following  year  (the  16th  of  Hezekiah),  although 
after  a  time  he  seems  to  have  returned  and  re- 
established himself  for  six  months,  at  the  end  of 
which  he  was  murdered  by  Belibos  (Dr.  Hincks, 
I.e.;  Rosenmiiller,  Bibl.  Geogr.  ch.  viii. ;  Layard, 
Nin.  §  Bab.  i.  141).  Community  of  interest 
made  Hezekiah  receive  the  overtures  of  Babylon 
with  unconcealed  gratification ;  and,  perhaps,  to 
enhance  the  opinion  of  his  own  importance  as  an 
ally,  he  displayed  to  the  messengers  the  princely 
treasures  which  he  and  his  predecessors  had  accu- 
mulated. The  mention  of  such  rich  stores  is  an 
additional  argument  for  supposing  these  events  to 
have  happened  before  Sennacherib's  invasion  (see  2 
K.  xviii.  L4-16),  although  they  are  related  after 
them  in  the  Script ure  historians.  If  ostentation 
were  his  motive  it  received  a  terrible  rebuke,  and  he 
was  informed  by  Isaiah  that  from  the  then  tottering 
and  subordinate  province  of  Babylon,  and  not  from 


800 


HEZEKIAH 


the  mighty  Assyria,  would  come  the  ruin  and  cap- 
tivity of  Judah  (Is.  xxxix.  5).  This  prophecy  and 
the  one  of  Micah  (Mic.  iv.  10)  are  the  earliest 
definition  of  the  locality  of  that  hostile  power, 
where  the  clouds  of  exile  so  long  threatened  (Lev. 
xxvi.  33;  Dent.  iv.  27,  xxx.  3)  were  beginning  to 
gather.  It  is  an  impressive  and  fearful  circum- 
stance that  the  moment  of  exultation  was  chosen  as 
the  opportunity  for  warning,  and  that  the  pro- 
phecies of  the  Assyrian  deliverance  are  set  side  by 
side  with  those  of  the  Babylonish  captivity  (David- 
son On  Prophecy,  p.  '256).  The  weak  friend  was 
to  accomplish  that  which  was  impossible  to  the 
powerful  foe.  But,  although  pride  was  the  sin 
thus  vehemently  checked  by  the  prophet,  Isaiah 
was  certainly  not  blind  to  the  political  motives 
(Joseph.  Ant.  x.  2,  §2),  which  made  Hezekiah  so 
complaisant  to  the  Babylonian  ambassadors.  Into 
those  motives  he  had  inquired  in  vain,  for  the  king 
met  that  portion  of  his  question  ("What  said  these 
men?")  by  emphatic  silence.  Hezekiah's  meek 
answer  to  the  stern  denunciation  of  future  woe  has 
been  most  unjustly  censured  as  "  a  false  resignation 
which  combines  selfishness  with  silliness"  (New- 
man, Hebr.  Mon.  p.  274).  On  the  contrary  it 
merely  implies  a  conviction  that  God's  decree  could 
not  be  otherwise  than  just  and  right,  and  a  natural 
thankfulness  for  even  a  temporary  suspension  of  its 
inevitable  fulfilment. 

Sargon  was  succeeded  (b.C.  702)  by  his  son 
Sennacherib,  whose  two  invasions  occupy  the  greater 
part  of  the  Scripture  records  concerning  the  reign  of 
Hezekiah.  The  first  of  these  took  place  in  the  third 
year  of  Sennacherib  (B.C.  702),  and  occupies  only 
three  verses  (2  K.  xviii.  13-16),  though  the  route 
of  the  advancing  Assyrians  may  be  traced  in  Is.  x. 
5,  xi.  The  rumour  of  the  invasion  redoubled  Heze- 
kiah's exertions,  and  he  prepared  for  a  siege  by  pro- 
viding offensive  and  defensive  armour,  stopping  up 
the  wells,  and  diverting  the  watercourses,  conduct- 
ing the  water  of  Gihon  into  the  city  by  a  sub- 
terranean canal  (Ecclus.  xlviii.  17.  For  a  similar 
precaution  taken  by  the  Mohammedans,  see  Will. 
Tyr.  viii.  7,  Keil).  But  the  main  hope  of  the  poli- 
tical faction  was  the  alliance  with  Egypt,  and  they 
seem  to  have  sought  it  by  presents  and  private 
entreaties  (Is.  xxx.  6),  especially  with  a  view  to 
obtaining  chariots  ami  cavalry  (Is.  xxxi.  1-3),  which 
was  the  weakest  arm  of  the  Jewish  service,  as  we 
see  from  the  derision  which  it  excited  (2  K.  xviii. 
23).  Such  overtures  kindled  Isaiah's  indignation, 
ami  Shebna  may  have  lost  his  high  office  by  re- 
commending them.  The  prophet  clearly  saw  that 
Egypt  was  too  weak  and  faithless  to  be  serviceable, 
and  the  applications  to  Pharaoh  (who  is  compared 
by  Rabshakeh  to  one  of  the  weak  reeds  of  his  own 
river),  implied  a  want  of  trust  in  the  help  ol  God. 
But  Isaiah  did  not  disapprove  of  the  spontaneously 
proffered  assistance  of  the  tall  and  warlike  Ethio- 
pians (Is.  xviii.  2,  7,  ace.  to  Ewald's  transl.) ;  be- 
cause he  may  have  regarded  it  as  a  providential  aid. 

The  account  given  of  this  first  invasion  in  the 
Annals  of  Sennacherib  is  that  he  attacked  Hezekiah, 
because  the  Ekronites  had  sent  their  king  Padiya  (or 
"  Haddiya  "  ace.  to  Col.  Rawlinson)  as  a  prisoner  to 
Jerusalem  (cf.  2  K.  xviii.  8)  ;  that  he  took  forty-six 
cities  ("all  the  fenced  cities"  in  2  K.  xviii.  13  is 
apparentnly  a  general  expression,  cf.  xix.  8)  and 
200,000  prisoners;  that  he  besieged  Jerusalem 
with  mounds  (cf.  2  K.  xix.  32) ;  and  although 
Hezekiah  promised  to  pay  800  talents  of  silver 
(of  which   perhaps  300  only  were  over  paid)  and 


HEZEKIAH 

30  of  gold  (2  K.  xviii.  14;  but  see  Layard,  "Nin.  if* 
Bab.  4,  p.  148),  yet  not  content  with  this  he 
mulcted  him  of  a  part  of  his  dominions,  and  gave 
them  to  the  kings  of  Ekron,  Ashdod,  and  Gaza 
(  Rawlinson,  Herod,  i.  475  sq.).  So  important  was 
this  expedition  that  Demetrius,  the  Jewish  historian, 
even  attributes  to  Sennacherib  the  Great  Captivity 
(Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  p.  146,  ed.  Sylb.).  In  almost 
every  particular  this  account  agrees  with  the 
notice  in  Scripture,  and  we  may  see  a  reason  for  so 
great  a  sacrifice  on  the  part  of  Hezekiah  in  the 
glimpse  which  Isaiah  gives  us  of  his  capital  city 
driven  by  desperation  into  licentious  and  impious 
mirth  (xxii.  12-14).  This  campaign  must  at  least 
have  had  the  one  good  result  of  proving  the  worth- 
lessness  of  the  Egyptian  alliance ;  for  at  a  place 
called  Altagii  (the  Eltekon  of  Josh.  xv.  59  ?)  Senna- 
cherib inflicted  an  overwhelming  defeat  on  the  com- 
bined forces  of  Egypt  and  Ethiopia,  which  had  come 
to  the  assistance  of  Ekron.  But  Isaiah  regarded 
the  purchased  treaty  as  a  cowardly  defection,  and 
the  sight  of  his  fellow-citizens  gazing  peacefully 
from  the  house-tops  ou  the  bright  array  of  the  car- 
borne  and  quivered  Assyrians,  filled  him  with 
indignation  and  despair  (Is.  xxii.  1-7,  if  the  latest 
explanations  of  this  chapter  be  correct). 

Hezekiah's  bribe  (or  fine)  brought  a  temporary 
release,  for  the  Assyrians  marched  into  Egypt, 
where,  if  Herodotus  (ii.  141)  and  Josephus  {Ant. 
x.  1-3)  are  to  be  trusted,  they  advanced  without  re- 
sistance to  Pelusium,  owing  to  the  hatred  of  the  war- 
rior-caste against  Sethos  the  king-priest  of  Pthah, 
who  had,  in  his  priestly  predilections,  interfered 
with  their  prerogatives.  In  spite  of  this  advantage, 
Sennacherib  was  forced  to  raise  the  siege  of  Pelu- 
sium, by  the  advance  of  Tirhakah  or  Tarakos,  the 
ally  of  Sethos  and  Hezekiah,  who  afterwards  united 
the  crowns  of  Egypt  and  Ethiopia.  This  mag- 
nificent Ethiopian  hero,  who  had  extended  his  con- 
quests to  the  pillars  of  Hercules  (Strab.  xv.  472), 
was  indeed  a  formidable  antagonist.  His  deeds  are 
recorded  in  a  temple  at  Medineet  Haboo,  but  the 
jealousy  of  the  Memphites  (Wilkinson,  Anc.  Egypt. 
i.  141)  concealed  his  assistance,  and  attributed  the 
deliverance  of  Sethos  to  the  miraculous  interposition 
of  an  army  of  mice  (Herod,  ii.  141).  This  story 
may  have  had  its  source,  however,  not  in  jealousy, 
but  in  the  use  of  a  mouse  as  the  emblem  of  destruc- 
tion (Horapoll.  Hicrogl.  i.  50  ;  Pawlinson,  Herod. 
ad  loc),  and  of  some  sort  of  disease  or  plague 
(?  1  Sam.  vi.  18;  Jahn,  Arch.  Bibl.  §185).  the 
legend  doubtless  gained  ground  from  the  extraordi- 
nary circumstances  which  afterwards  ruined  the 
army  of  Sennacherib.  We  say  afterwards,  because, 
however  much  the  details  of  the  two  occurrences 
may  have  been  confused,  we  cannot  agree  with  the 
majority  of  writers  (Prideaux,  Bochart,  Michaelis, 
Jahn,  Keil,  Newman,  &c.)  in  identifying  the  flight 
of  Sennacherib  from  Pelusium  with  the  event  de- 
scribed in  2  K.  xix.  We  prefer  to  follow  Josephus 
in  making  them  allude  to  distinct  events. 

Returning  from  his  futile  expedition  i&irpaKTOs 
avex&  >V<re,  Joseph.  Ant.  x.  1,  §4)  Sennacherib 
"dealt  treacherously"  with  Hezekiah  (Is.  xxxiii. 
T)  by  ittacking  the  stronghold  of  Lachish,  This 
was  the  commencement  of  that  second  invasion, 
respecting  which  we  have  such  full  details  in  •_'  K". 
xviii.  17  sq. ;  2  Chr.  xxxii.  9  sq. ;  Is.  xxxvi.  That 
there  were  two  invasions  (contrary  to  the  opinion 
of  Layard,  Bosanquet,  Vance  Smith,  &c.)  is  clearly 
proved  by  the  details  of  the  first  given  in  the 
Assyrian  annals  (see  JRawlinson,  Herod,  i.  p.  177  . 


HEZEKIAH 

Although  the  annals  of  .Sennacherib  on  the  great 
cylinder  in  the  Brit.  Museum,  reach  to  the  end  of 
his  eighth  year,  and  this  second  invasion  belongs  to 
his  fifth  year  (B.C.  698,  the  twenty-eighth  year  of 
Hezekiah),  yet  no  allusion  to  it  has  been  found. 
So  shameful  a  disaster  was  naturally  concealed  by 
national  vanity.  From  Lachish  he  sent  against 
Jerusalem  an  army  under  two  officers  and  his  cup- 
bearer the  orator  Rabshakeh,  with  a  blasphemous 
and  insulting  summons  to  surrender,  deriding  Heze- 
kiah's  hopes  of  Egyptian  succour,  and  apparently 
endeavouring  to  inspire  the  people  with  distrust  of 
his  religious  innovations  (2  K.  xviii.  22,  25,  30). 
The  reiteration  and  peculiarity  of  the  latter  argu- 
ment, together  with  Rabshakeh's  fluent  mastery  of 
Hebrew  (which  he  used  to  tempt  the  people  from 
their  allegiance  by  a  glowing  promise,  v.  81,  32), 
give  countenance  to  the  supposition  that  he  was  an 
apostate  Jew.  Hezekiah's  ministers  were  thrown 
into  anguish  and  dismay  ;  but  the  undaunted  Isaiah 
hurled  back  threatening  for  threatening  with  un- 
rivalled eloquence  and  force.  He  even  prophesied 
that  the  tires  of  Tophet  were  already  burning  in  ex- 
pectancy of  the  Assyrian  corpses  which  were  destined 
to  feed  their  flame.  Meanwhile  Sennacherib,  hav- 
ing taken  Lachish  (an  event  possibly  depicted  on 
a  series  of  slabs  at  Mosul,  Layard,  iV.  §  B. 
148-152),  was  besieging  Libnah,  when,  alarmed 
by  a  "  rumour"  of  Tirkakah's  advance  (to  avenge 
the  defeat  at  Altagu?),  he  was  forced  to  relinquish 
once  more  his  immediate  designs,  and  content  him- 
self with  a  detiant  letter  to  Hezekiah.  Whether  on 
the  occasion  he  encountered  and  defeated  the  Ethio- 
pians (as  Prideaux  precariously  infers  from  Is.  xx. 
'  onnect.  i.  p.  26),  or  not,  we  cannot  tell.  The 
next  event  of  the  campaign,  about  which  we  are  in- 
formed, is  that  the  Jewish  king  with  simple  piety 
prayed  to  Cod  with  Sennacherib's  letter  outspread 
before  him  (cf.  1  Mace.  iii.  48),  and  received  a  pro- 
phecy of  immediate  deliverance.  Accordingly  "that 
night  the  Angel  o'f  the  Lord  went  out  and  smote  in 
the  camp  of  the  Assyrians  185,000  men." 

There  is  no  doubt  that  some  secondary  cause  was 
employed  in  the  accomplishment  of  this  event. 
We  are  certainly  ':uot  to  suppose,"  as  Dr.  Johnson 
observed,  "  that  the  angel  went  about  with  a  sword 
in  his  hand  stabbing  them  one  by  one,  but  that 
some  powerful  natural  audit  was  employed."  The 
Babylonish  Talmud  and  some  of  the  Targums  attri- 
bute it  to  storms  of  lightning  (  Vitringa,  Vogel,  &c.)  ; 
Prideaux,  Heine  (de  causa  Strag.  Assyr.),  and 
Eaber  to  the  Simoon;  R.  Jose,  Ussher,  Preiss  (de 
■  uitsd  clad.  Assyr.),  &c.  &c,  to  a  nocturnal  attack 
by  Tirhakah  ;  Paulus  to  a  poisoning  of  the  waters; 
and  finally  Josephus,  followed  by  an  immense  ma- 
jority of  ancient  and  modern  commentators,  includ- 
ing even  Keil,  to  the  Pestilence.  This  would  be  a 
cause  not  only  adequate  (Justin,  xix.  11;  Diodor. 
\ix.  p.  434:  see  the  other  instances  quoted  by  Ro- 
senmuller,  Winer,  Keil,  Jahn,  &c),  but  most  pro- 
bable in  itself  from  the  crowded  and  terrified  state 

of  the  camp.     There  i>  therefore  no  n Bsity  to 

adopt  the  ingenious  conjectures  by  which  Doderlein, 
Koppe,  and  Wessler  endeavour  to  get  rid  of  the 
large  number  185, ■ 

After  this  reverse  Sennacherib  fled  precipitately 
to  Nineveh,  where  he  revenged  himself  on  a^  many 

Jews  as  were  in  his  power  (Tob.  i.  18),  and  after 
many  years  (not  titty-live  days,  as  Tobit  says, 
i.  21),  was  murdered  by  two  of  his  son.-,  as  he 
drank  himself  drunk  in  the  house  of  Nisroch 
Vssarac?)  his  god.     Hi   certainly  lived  till    B.C. 


HEZIR 


801 


680,  for  his  22nd  year  is  mentioned  on  a  clay 
tablet  (Kawlinson,  /.  c.)  ;  he  must  therefore  have 
survived  Hezekiah  by  some  seventeen  years.  It  is 
probable  that  several  of  the  Psalms  (e.  <j.  xlvi.- 
xlviii.  Ixxvi.)  allude  to  his  discomfiture. 

Hezekiah  only  lived  to  enjoy  for  about  one  year 
more  his  well-earned  peace  and  glory.  He  slept 
with  his  fathers  after  a  reign  of  twenty-nine  years, 
in  the  56th  year  of  his  age  (B.C.  697),  and  was 
buried  with  great  honour  and  universal  ^mourning 
"in  the  chiefest  of  the  sepulchres  (or  "the  road 
leading  up  to  the  sepulchres,"  ip  hvafiaaei  ratyeev, 
LXX.,  because,  as  Thenius  conjectures,  the  actual 
sepulchres  were  full)  of  the  sons  of  David "  (2 
Chr.  xxxii.  33).  He  had  found  time  for  many 
works  of  peace  in  the  noble  and  almost  blameless 
course  of  his  troubled  life,  and  to  his  pious  labours 
we  are  indebted  for  at  least  one  portion  of  the  pre- 
sent canon  (Prov.  xxv.  1  ;  Ecclus.  xlviii.  17  sq.). 
He  can  have  no  finer  panegyric  than  the  words  of 
the  son  of  Sirach,  "even  the  kings  of  Judah  failed, 
for  they  forsook  the  law  of  the  Most  High ;  all 
except  David,  and  Ezekias,  and  Judas  failed." 

Besides  the  many  authors  and  commentators  who 
have  written  on  this  period  of  Jewish  history  (on 
which  much  light  has  been  recently  thrown  by 
Mr.  Layard,  Sir  G.  Wilkinson,  Sir  H.  Kawlinson, 
Dr.  Hincks,  and  other  scholars  who  have  studied 
the  Nineveh  remains),  see  for  continuous  lives  of 
Hezekiah,  Josephus  (Ant.  ix.  13 — x.  2),  Prideaux 
(Connect,  i.  16-30),  Jahn  (Hebr.  Com.  §xli.), 
Winer  (s.  v.  Hiskias~),  and  Ewald  (Gesch.  iii.  614- 
644,  2nd  ed.). 

2.  Son  of  Neariah,  one  of  the  descendants  of 
the  royal  family  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  iii.  23). 

3.  The  same  name,  though  rendered  in  the 
A.  V.  Hizkiah,  is  found  in  Zeph.  i.  1. 

4.  Ater-of-Hezekiah.  [Ater.]    [F.  W.  F.] 

HEZI'ON  (jinn:  'A^lV;  Alex.  'Afofr:   He- 

zioti),  a  king  of  Aram  (Syria),  father  of  Tabrimon, 
and  grandfather  of  Bennadad  I.  He  and  his  father 
are  mentioned  only  in  1  K.  xv.  18,  and  their  names 
are  omitted  by  Josephus.  In  the  absence  of  all  infor- 
mation, the  natural  suggestion  is  that  he  is  iden- 
tical with  ItEZON,  the  contemporary  of  Solomon, 
in  1  K.  xi.  23;  the  two  names  being  very  similar 
in  Hebrew,  and  still  more  so  in  other  versions 
(compare  Arab,  and  Peshito  on  the  latter  passage; ; 
and  indeed  this  conclusion  has  been  adopted  by  some 
translators  and  commentators  (Junius,  Kohler, 
Dathe,  Ewald).  Against  it  are,  (a.)  that  the 
number  of  generations  of  the  Syrian  kings  would 
then  be  one  less  than  those  of  the  coiiteinporarv 
kings  of  Judah.  But  then  the  reign  of  Abijam  was 
only  three  years,  ami  in  fact  Jeroboam  outlived 
both  Iiehoboam  and  his  son.  (/».)  The  statement 
ofNicolausof  Damascus  (Joseph.  Ant.  \ii.  ■">.  §2), 
tli, it  from  the  time  of  David  for  ten  generations  the 
kings  of  Syria  were  one  dynasty,  each  king  taking 
tiie  ii. line  of  lladad,  "  a>  did  the  Ptolemies  in 
Egypt."  Bui  this  would  exclude,  not  only  Elezion 
and  Tabrimon,  but  Rezon,  unless  we  may  interpret 
the  last  sentence  to  mean  thai  the  official  title  of 
lladad  was  heM  in  addition    to  the  ordinary   name 

of  the  king.    [Rezon ;  ["abrimon.]  [<;.] 

BE'ZIE    TTn;    XyCiv,   Alex.  'I«J>i>,  'H0P; 
/.' >.ir,  Azir ,.      1.  A  piiesl   in  the  time  of  David, 
leader  of  the  17th  monthly  i  ourse  in  the 
|  1  Chr.  xxiv.  15). 

2.  <  'lie  of  the  beade  ol  th<  people    laj  men    who 


802 


HEZRAI 


sealed  the  solemn  covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neb.. 
x.  20). 

HEZ'RAI  O^Vt?'  accovding  to  the  Kcri  of  the 
Masorets,  but  the  original  reading  of  the  text,  ( 'etib, 
has  livn  =  Hezro  ;  'Aaapat;  Esrai),  a  native  of 
Caxmel,  perhaps  of  the  southern  one,  and  in  that 
case  possibly  once  a  slave  or  adherent  of  Nabal  ; 
one  of  the  30  heroes  of  David's  guard  (2  Sam.  xxiii. 
35).     In  the  parallel  list  the  name  appears  as 

HEZ'RO  tfltfn !  'Herepe,  Alex.  'Aaapai;  Asro), 
in  1  Chr.  xi.  37.  Kennicott  however  {Dissertation, 
207,  8)  decides,  on  the  almost  unanimous  authority 
of  the  ancient  version,  that  Hetzrai  is  the  original 
form  of  the  name. 

HEZ'RON  (flVO;  'Aoy^;  Hesrori),    1.  A 

sou  of  Reuben  (Gen.  xlvi.  9  ;  Ex.  vi.  14),  who 
founded  the  family  of  the  Hezronites  (Num.  xxvi.  6). 
2.  A  son  of  Pharez,  and  one  of  the  direct  an- 
cestors of  David  (Gen.  xlvi.  12;  Ruth  iv.  18);  in 
LXX.  'Ecrpwi/  (once  var.  lect.  Grab.  'Aapcci'),  and 
'Earpdfi,  which  is  followed  in  Matt.  i.  3.  [T.  E.  B.] 

HID'DAI  (HH  ;  Alex.  'AdOai ;  Yat,  omits  ; 
Hedclai),  one  of  the  thirty-seven  heroes  of  David's 
guard  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  30),  described  as  "  of  the  tor- 
rents of  Gaash."  In  the  parallel  list  of  1  Chr.  (xi.  32) 
the  name  is  given  as  Hurai.  Kennicott  (Dissert. 
194)  decides  in  favour  of  "  Hurai  "  on  grounds  for 
which  the  reader  must  be  referred  to  his  work. 

HID'DEKEL  (^n  ;  Tiypts,  Tlypts-ESSe- 
Ke\  ;  Tygris,  Tigris),  one  of  the  rivers  of  Eden,  the 
river  which  "  goeth  eastward  to  Assyria"  (Gen.  ii. 
14),  and  which  Daniel  calls  "  the  Great  river"  (Dan. 
x.  4),  seems  to  have  been  rightly  identified  by  the 
LXX.  with  the  Tigris.  It  is  difficult  to  account  for 
the  initial  PI,  unless  it  be  for  *!"!,  "  lively,"  which 
is  used  of  running  water  in  Gen.  xxvi.  19.  Dckel 
(Pp^l)  is  clearly  an  equivalent  of  Digla  or  Diglath, 
a  name  borne  by  the  Tigris  in  all  ages.  The  form 
Diglath  occurs  in  the  Targums  of  Onkelos  and  Jo- 
nathan, in  Josephus  (Ant.  Jud.  i.  1),  in  the  Arme- 
nian Eusebius  (Chron.  Can.  Pars  i.  c.  2),  in  Zo- 
naras  ( Ann.  i.  2),  and  in  the  Armenian  version  of 
the  Scriptures.  It  is  hardened  to  Diglit  (Diglito) 
by  Pliny  (//.  AT.  vi.  27).  The  name  now  in  use 
among  the  inhabitants  of  Mesopotamia  is  Dijleh. 

It  has  generally  been  supposed  that  Digla  is  a 
mere  Semitic  corruption  of  Tigra,  and  that  this 
latter  is  the  true  name  of  the  stream.  Strabq  (xi. 
14,  §8),  Pliny  (loc.  cit.)  and  other  writers  tell  ns 
that  the  river  received  its  designation  from  its  ra- 
pidity, the  word  Tigris  (Tigra)  meaning  in  the 
Medo-Persic  language  "an  arrow."  This  seems 
probable  enough  ;  but  it  must  be  observed  that  the 
two  forms  are  found  side  by  side  in  the  Babylonian 
transcript  of  the  Behistun  inscription,  and  that  the 
ordinary  name  of  the  stream  in  the  inscriptions  of 
Assyria  is  Tiggar.  Moreover,  if  we  allow  the 
Dekel  of  Hiddekel,  to  mean  the  Tigris,  it  would 
seem  probable  that  this  was  the  more  ancient  of 
the  two  appellations.  Perhaps  therefore  it  is  best 
to  suppose  that  there  was  in  early  Babylonian  a 
root  dik  equivalent  in  meaning,  and  no  doubt  con- 
nected in  origin,  with  the  Arian  tig  or  tij,  and 
that  from  these  two  roots  were  formed  independ- 
ently the  two  names,  Dekel,  Dihla,  or  Digla,  and  Tig- 
gar,  Tigra,  or  Tigris.  The  stream  was  known  by 
either  name  indifferently ;  but  on  the  whole  the 
Arian  appellation  predominated  in  ancient  times,  and 


HIERONYMUS 

was  that  most  commonly  used  even  by  Semitic  races. 
The  Arabians,  however,  when  they  conquered  Me- 
sopotamia, revived  the  true  Semitic  title,  and  this 
(Dijleh)  continues  to  be  the  name  by  which  the 
river  is  known  to  the  natives  down  to  the  present 
day.  The  course  of  the  river  is  described  under 
Tigris.  [G.  R.] 

HI'EL  Own,  perhaps  for  ^NTP  ;  'AX«?A  ; 
Hiel),  a  native  of  Bethel,  who  rebuilt  Jericho  in 
the  reign  of  Ahab  (1  K.  xvi.  34)  ;  and  in  whom 
was  fulfilled  the  curse  pronounced  by  Joshua  (Josh. 
v.  i.  26).  Strabo  speaks  of  this  cursing  of  a  de- 
stroyed city  as  an  ancient  custom,  and  instances 
the  curses  imprecated  by  Agamemnon,  and  Croesus 
(Grot.  Annot.  ad  Josh.  vi.  26);  Masius  compares 
the  cursing  of  Carthage  by  the  Romans  (Pol.  Syn.). 
The  term  Bethelite  (vXil  IT'S)  here  only  is  ren- 
dered family  of  cursing  (Pet.  Mart.),  and  also 
house  or  place  of  cursing  (Ar.,  Syr.,  and  Chald. 
verss.),  qu.  n?H  71*3  •  but  there  seems  no  reason 
for  questioning  the  accuracy  of  the  LXX.  6  BaiOri- 
X'ittjs,  which  is  approved  by  most  commentators, 
and  sanctioned  by  Gesen.  (Lex.  s.  v.).  The  re- 
building of  Jericho  was  an  intrusion  upon  the  king- 
dom of  Jehoshaphat,  unless  with  Pet.  Mart,  we 
suppose  that  Jericho  had  already  been  detached  from 
it  by  the  kings  of  Israel.  [T.  E.  B.] 

HIERAPOLIS  ('Upa.TroAis).  This  place  is 
mentioned  only  once  in  Scripture,  and  that  inci- 
dentally, viz.  in  Col.  iv.  13,  where  its  church  is 
associated  with  those  of  Colossae  and  Laodicea. 
Such  association  is  just  what  we  should  expect ; 
for  the  three  towns  were  all  in  the  basin  of  the 
Maeander,  and  within  a  few  miles  of  one  another. 
It  is  probable  that  Hierapolis  was  one  of  the  "  in- 
lustres  Asiae  urbes  "  (Tac.  Ann.  xiv.  27 )  which,  with 
Laodicea,  were  simultaneously  desolated  by  an  earth- 
quake about  the  time  when  Christianity  was  esta- 
blished in  this  district.  There  is  little  doubt  that 
the  church  of  Hieiapolis  was  founded  at  the  same 
time  with  that  of  Colossae,  and  that  its  character- 
istics in  the  Apostolic  period  were  the  same.  Its 
modern  name  is  Pambouk-Kalessi.  The  most  re- 
markable feature  of  the  neighbourhood  consists  of 
the  hot  calcareous  springs,  which  have  deposited 
the  vast  and  singular  incrustations  noticed  by  tra- 
vellers. See,  for  instance,  Chandler,  Trav.  in  Asia 
Minor  (1817),  i.  pp.  264-272;  Hamilton,  lies,  in 
A.  M.  (1842),  i.  pp.  p07-522.  The  situation  of 
Hierapolis  is  extiemely  beautiful ;  and  its  ruins  are 
considerable,  the  theatre  and  gymnasium  being  the 
most  conspicuous.  [J.  S.  H.] 

HIER'EEL  ('Iepe^A;  Jeclcch),  1  Esd.  ix.  21. 
[Jehiel.] 

HIER'EMOTH  ('Up^wd  ;  Erimoth,  Jeri- 
matk).  1.  1  Esd.  ix.  27.  [Jeremoth.]  2.  1  Esd. 
ix.  30.     [Ramoth.] 

HIERIE'LUS  ('uCpivAos,  i.  e.  Iezrielos  ;  Jez- 
relus),  1  Esd.  ix.  27.  This  answers  to  JBHIEL  in 
the  list  of  Ezr.  x.  ;  but  whence  our  translators 
obtained  their  form  of  the  name  does  not  appear. 

HIER'MAS  ('Up/ids;  Eemias),  1  Esd.  ix.  26. 
[Rami  ail] 

HIERON'YMUS  ('Upa>wp.os  ;  R 
a  Syrian  general  in  the  time  of  Antiochus  V. 
Eupator  (2  Mace.  xii.  2).  The  name  was  made 
distinguished  among  the  Asiatic  Greeks  b]  Hie  o- 
uymus  of  Cardia,  the  historian  of  Alexander's  suc- 
cessors. [B-  1;-  W.] 


HIGGAION 

HIGGAION  (}Vin:  tfSij),  a  word  which 
occurs  three  times  in  the  book  of  Psalms  (ix.  17, 
xix.  15,  xcii.  4).  Mendelssohn  translates  it  medi- 
tation, thought,  idea.  Knapp  (Die  Psalmcn)  iden- 
tities it  in  Ps.  ix.  17,  with  the  Arabic  ^n  and 
fcOn,  "  to  mock,"  and  hence  his  rendering  "  What 
a  shout  of  laughter !"  (because  the  wicked  are  en- 
trapped in  their  own  snares) ;  but  in  Ps.  xcii.  4, 
he  translates  it  by  "  lieder  "  (songs).  K.  David 
Kimchi  Likewise  assigns  two  separate  meanings  to 
the  word ;  on  Ps.  ix.  17  he  says,  "  This  aid  is  for 
us  (a  subject  of)  meditation  and  thankfulness," 
whilst  in  his  commentary  on  the  passage,  Ps.  cxii. 
4,  he  gives  to  the  same  word  the  signification  of 
melody,  "  this  is  the  melody  of  the  hymn  when  it 
is  recited  (played)  on  the  harp."  ."  We  will  me- 
ditate on  this  tor  ever"  (Rashi  Comm.  on  Ps.  ix. 
17).  In  Ps.  ix.  17,  Aben  Ezra's  Comment,  on 
"  Higgaion  Selah "  is,  "  this  will  I  record  in 
truth:"  on  Ps.  xcii.  4  he  says,  "  Higgaion  means 
the  melody  of  the  hymn,  or  it  is  the  name  of  a 
musical  instrument."  According  to  Fiirst,  JVJn 
is  derived  from  HUH,  "  to  whisper:"  (a.)  it  refers 
to  the  vibration  of  the  harp,  or  to  the  opening  of  an 
interlude,  an  opinion  supported  by  the  LXX.,  Sym- 
machus,  and  Aquilas:  (6.)  it  refers  to  silent  medita- 
tion: this  is  agreeable  to  the  use  of  the  word 
in'  the  Talmud  and  in  the  Rabbinical  writings ; 
hence  JVJH  for  logic  (Concord.  I/cbr.  atque 
Chald.). 

It  should  seem,  then,  that  Higgaion  has  two  mean- 
ings, one  of  a  general  character  implying  thought, 

reflection,  from  T\IT\  (comp.  "Q?  jVJiTI,  Ps.  ix. 
17,  and  DVTI  !?3  *6j>  D3V2iT1,  Lam.  iii.  62),  and 
another  in  Ps.  ix.  17,  and  Ps.  xcii.  4,  of  a  technical 
nature,  bearing  on  the  import  of  musical  sounds  or 
signs  well-known  in  the  age  of  David,  but  the  pre- 
cise meaning  of  which  cannot  at  this  distance  of 
time  be  determined.  [D.  W.  M.] 

HIGH  PLACES  (71103 ;  in  the  historical 
books,  to  uij/TjAa,  ra  \i^7) ;  in  the  Prophets,  j3w/xoi ; 
in  the  Pentateuch,  crrrjXat,  Lev.  xxvi.  30,  &e. ; 
and  once  (15u>Aa,  Kz.  xvi.  16;  Excelsa,  fana). 
From  the  earliest  times  it  was  the  custom  among 
all  nations  to  erect  altars  and  places  of  worship 
on  lofty  and  conspicuous  spots.  We  find  that  the 
Trojans  sacrificed  to  Zeus  on  .Mount  Ida  (  //.  x. 
171 ),  and  we  are  repeatedly  told  that  such  was  the 
custom  of  the  Persians,  Greeks,  Germans,  &e.,  be- 
cause they  fancied  that  the  hill-tops  were  nearer 
heaven,  and  therefore  the  most  favourable  places 
for  prayer  and  incense  |  Herod,  i.  131  ;  Xen.  '  'yrop. 
viii.  7;  Mem.  iii.  8,  §10;  Strati.  xv.  732 ;  Luc. 
de  Sacrif.  i.  4;  Creuzer,  Syrnb.  i.  159;  Winer, 
s.  o.  BerggStter).  To  this  general  custom  we 
find  constant  allusion  in  the  Bible  (Is.  lxv.  7; 
Jer.  iii.  6;  Ez.  vi.  13,  xviii.  6;  llos.  iv.  13), 
and  it  is  especially  attributed  to  the  Moabites  (Is. 
xv.  2,  xvi.  12;  Jer.  xlviii.  35).  Even  Abraham 
built  an  altar  to  the  Lord  <>n  a  mountain  near  Be- 
thel (xii.  7,  8;  cf.  \xii.  2-4,  XXX).  54)  which  shows 
that  the  practice  was  then  as  innocent  as  it  was 
natural  ;  and  although  it  afterwards  became  mingled 
with  idolatrous  observances  |  Num.  xxiii.  3),  it  was 
in  itself  far  less  likely  to  be  abused  than  the  con- 
secration of  groves   (llos.  iv.  13).      Tl xternal 

religion  of  the  patriarchs  was  in  some  outward 
observances  different  from  that  subsequently  esta- 
blished by  the  Mosaic  law,  and  therefore  they 
should  not  be  condemned  for  actions  which  after- 


HIGH  PLACES 


803 


wards  became  sinful  only  because  they  were  for- 
bidden (Heidegger,  Hist.  Pair.  If.  iii.  §53). 

It  is,  however,  quite  obvious  that  if  every  grove 
and  eminence  had  been  suffered  to  become  a  place 
for  legitimate  worship,  especially  in  a  country 
where  they  had  already  been  defiled  with  the  sins 
of  polytheism,  the  utmost  danger  would  have  re- 
sulted to  the  pure  worship  of  the  one  true  God 
(Hiivernick,  Einl.  i.  p.  59-!).  It  would  infallibly 
have  led  to  the  adoption  of  nature-goddesses,  and 
"  gods  of  the  hills"  (1  K.  xx.  23).  "  It  was  there- 
fore implicitly  forbidden  by  the  law  of  Moses  (Deut. 
xii.  11-14),  which  also  gave  the  strictest  injunction 
to  destroy  these  monuments  of  Canaanitish  idolatry 
(Lev.  xxvi.  30  ;  Num.  xxxiii.  52  ;  Deut.  xxxiii.  29  ; 
ubi  LXX.  rpax^ov),  without  stating  any  general 
reason  for  this  command,  beyond  the  fact  that  they 
hud  been  connected  with  such  associations.  It 
seems,  however,  to  be  assumed  that  every  Israelite 
would  perfectly  understand  why  groves  and  high 
places  were  prohibited,  and  therefore  they  are  only 
condemned  by  virtue  of  the  injunction  to  use  but 
one  altar  for  the  purposes  of  sacrifice '  (Lev.  xvii.  3, 
4;  Deut.  xii.  passim,  xvi.  21 ;  John  iv.  20). 

The  command  was  a  prospective  one,  and  was 
not  to  come  into  force  until  such  time  as  the  tribes 
were  settled  in  the  promised  land,  and  "  had  rest 
from  all  their  enemies  round  about."  Thus  we 
find  that  both  Gideon  and  Manoali  built  altars  on 
high  places  by  Divine  command  (Judg.  vi.  25,  26, 
xiii.  16-23),  and  it  is  quite  clear  from  the  tone  of 
the  book  of  Judges  that  the  law  on  the  subject  was 
either  totally  forgotten  or  practically  obsolete.  Nor 
could  the  unsettled  state  of  the  country  have  been 
pleaded  as  an  excuse,  since  it  seems  to  have  been 
most  fully  understood,  even  during  the  life  of 
Joshua,  that  burnt-orlerings  could  be  legally  offered 
on  one  altar  only  (Josh.  xxii.  29).  It  is  moie  sur- 
prising to  find  this  law  absolutely  ignored  at  a 
much  later  period,  when  there  was  no  intelligible 
reason  for  its  violation — as  by  Samuel  at  Mizpeh 
(  1  Sain.  vii.  10)  and  at  Bethlehem  (xvi.  5);  by 
Saul  at  Oilgal  (xiii.  9)  and  at  Ajalon  (?  xiv.  35)  ;  by 
David  (1  Ghr.  xxi.  26)  ;  by  Elijah  on  Mount  Carmel 
( 1  K  xviii.  30  )  ;  and  by  other  prophets  ( 1  Sam.  x.  5). 
To  suppose  that  in  all  these  cases  the  rule  was 
superseded  by  a  divine  intimation  appears  to  us  an 
unwarrantable  expedient,  the  more  so  as  the  actors 
in  the  transactions  do  not  appear  to  be  aware  of 
anything  extraordinary  in  their  conduct.  The 
Rabbis  have  invented  elaborate  methods  to  account 
for  the  anomaly:  thus  they  say  that  high  places 
were  allowed  until  the  building  of  the  Tabernacle; 
that  they  were  then  illegal  until  the  arrival  at 
Gilgal,  and  then  during  the  period  while  the 
Tabernacle  was  at  Shiloh ;  that  they  were  once 
more  permitted  whilst  it  was  at  Nob  and  Gideon 
(cf.  2  ('In.  i.  3),  until  the  building  of  the  Temple 
at  Jerusalem  rendered  them  finally  unlawful  (I;. 
Sol.  .larchi.  Abarbanel,  &c.,  quoted  in  CaipZOV, 
App.  < '/'//.  p.  333  s(|. ;  Reland,  .!/«/.  Hebr.  i.  8  sq.  I. 
Others  content  themselves  with  saying  that  until 
Solomon's  time  all  Palestine  was  considered  holy 
ground,  or  that  there  existed  a  recognised  exemption 
in  favour  of  high  places  tor  private  and  spontaneous, 
though  not    tor  the  stated  and  public  sacrilice^. 

Such  explanations  are  sufficiently  unsatisfactory; 
but  it  is  at  any  rate  certain  that,  whether  firom 
the  obvious  temptations  to  the  disobedience,  oi 
from  the  example  oi  other  nations,  or  from  ignorance 
of  any  definite  law  against  it,  the  worship  in  high 
i  and  all  but  uni\ ei sal  through- 


804 


HIGH  PLACES 


out  Judea,  not  only  during  (1  K.  iii.  2-4),  but 
even  after  the  time  of  Solomon.  The  convenience 
of  them  was  obvious,  because,  as  local  centres  of 
religious  worship,  they  obviated  the  unpleasant  and 
dangerous  necessity  of  visiting  Jerusalem  for  the 
celebration  of  the  yearly  feasts  (2  K.  xxiii.  9). 
The  tendency  was  engrained  in  the  national  mind ; 
and  although  it  was  severely  reprehended' by  the 
later  historians,  we  have  no  proof  that  it  was 
known  to  be  sinful  during  the  earlier  periods  of  the 
monarchy,  except  of  course  where  it  was  directly 
connected  with  idolatrous  abominations  (1  K.  xi.  7  ; 
2  K.  xxiii.  13).  In  fact  the  high  places  seein  to 
have  supplied  the  need  of  synagogues  (Ps.  lxxiv.  8), 
and  to  have  obviated  the  extreme  self-denial  in- 
volved in  having  but  one  legalised  locality  for  the 
highest  forms  of  worship.  Thus  we  rind  that 
Kehoboam  established  a  definite  worship  at  the  high 
places,  with  its  own  peculiar  and  separated  priest- 
hood (2  Chr.  xi.  15;  2  K.  xxiii.  9),  the  members 
of  which  were  still  considered  to  be  piiests  of  Jeho- 
vah (although  in  2  K.  xxiii.  5  they  are  called  by 
the  opprobrious  term  DV"}D3).  It  was  therefore 
no  wonder  that  Jeroboam  found  it  so  easy  to  seduce 
the  people  into  his  symbolic  worship  at  the  high 
places  of  Dan  and  Bethel,  at  each  of  which  he  built 
a  chapel  for  his  golden  calves.  Such  chapels  were 
of  course  frequently  added  to  the  mere  altars  on  the 
hills,  as  appears  from  the  expressions  in  1  K.  xi.  7  ; 
2  K.  xvii.  9,  &c.  Indeed  the  word  ni£3  became 
so  common  that  it  was  used  for  any  idolatrous 
shrine  even  in  a  valley  (Jer.  vii.  31),  or  in  the 
streets  of  cities  (2  K.  xvii.  9  ;'  Ez.  xvi.  31).  These 
chapels  were  probably  not  structures  of  stone,  but 
mere  tabernacles  hung  with  coloured  tapestry  (Ez. 
xvi.  1(3;  i/x^oAia-fia,  Aqu.  Theod.  ;  Jer.  ad  loc. ; 
e'ISwXov  pcnr-roV,  LXX.),  iike  the  (TK-qv^  Upa.  of  the 
Carthaginians  (I)iod.  Sic.  xx.  05  ;  Creuzer,  Symbol. 
v.  176,  quoted  by  Gesen.  Thes.  i.  188),  and  like 
those  mentioned  in  2  K.  xxiii.  7  ;  Am.  v.  26. 

Many  of  the  pious  kings  of  Judah  were  either 
too  weak  or  too  ill-informed  to  repress  the  worship 
of  Jehovah  at  these  local  sanctuaries,  while  they  of 
course  endeavoured  to  prevent  it  from  being  con- 
taminated with  polytheism.  It  is  therefore  ap- 
pended as  a  matter  of  blame  or  a  (perhaps  venial) 
drawback  to  the  character  of  some  of  the  most 
pious  princes,  that  they  tolerated  this  disobedience 
to  the  provision  of  Deuteronomy  and  Leviticus. 
On  the  other  hand  it  is  mentioned  as  an  aggrava- 
tion of  the  sinfulness  of  other  kings  that  they  built 
or  raised  high  places  (2  Chr.  xxi.  11,  xxviii.  25), 
which  are  generally  said  to  have  been  dedicated  to 
idolatrous  purposes.  It  is  almost  inconceivable  that 
so  direct  a  violation  of  the  theocratic  principle  as 
the  permitted  existence  of  false  worship  should  have 
been  tolerated  by  kings  of  even  ordinary  piety, 
much  less  by  the  highest  sacerdotal  authorities 
(2  K.  xii.  3).  When  therefore  we  find  the  recurring 
phrase,  "  only  the  high  places  were  not  taken  away  ; 
as  yet  the  people  did  sacrifice  and  burn  incense  on 
the  high  places"  (2  K.  xiv.  4,  xv.  5,  35;  2  Chr. 
xv.  17,  &c),  we  are  forced  to  limit  it  (as  above)  to 
places  dedicated  to  Jehovah  only.  The  subject,  how- 
ever, is  made  more  difficult  by  a  double  discrepancy, 
for  the  assertion  that  Asa  "took  away  the  high 
places  "  (2  Chr.  xiv.  3)  is  opposite  to  what  is  stated 
in  the  first  book  of  Kings  (xv.  14),  and  a  similar 
discrepancy  is  found  in  the  case  of  Jehoshaphat 
1 2  ( 'hr.  xvii.  6,  xx.  33).  Moreover  in  both  instances 
the  chronicler  is  apparently  at  issue  with  himself 


HIGH-PRIEST 

(xiv.  3,  xv.  17,  xvii.  6,  xx.  33).  It  is  iucredible 
that  this  should  have  been  the  result  of  carelessness 
or  oversight,  and  we  must  therefore  suppose,  either 
that  the  earlier  notices  expressed  the  will  and  endea- 
vour of  these  monarchs  to  remove  the  high  places, 
and  that  the  later  ones  recorded  their  failure  in  the 
attempt  (Ewald,  Gesch.  iii.  468;  Keil,  Apolog, 
Versuch.  p.  29u  ;  Winer,  s.w.  Assa,  Josaphaf); 
or  that  the  statements  refer  respectively  to  Bamoth, 
dedicated  to  Jehovah  and  to  idols  (Michaelis,  Schulz, 
Bertheau  on  2  Chr.  xvii.  6,  &c).  "  Those  devoted 
to  false  gods  were  removed,  those  misdevoted  to  the 
true  God  were  suffered  to  remain.  The  kings  op- 
posed impiety,  but  winked  at  error"  (Bishop  Hall). 
At  last  Hezekiah  set  himself  in  good  earnest  to 
the  suppression  of  this  prevalent  corruption  (2  K. 
xviii.  4,  22),  both  in  Judah  and  Israel  (2  Chr. 
xxxi.  I-),  although,  so  rapid  was  the  growth  of 
the  evil,  that  even  his  sweeping  reformation  re- 
quired to  be  finally  consummated  by  Josiah  (2  K. 
xxiii.),  and  that  too  in  Jerusalem  and  its  immediate 
neighbourhood  (2  Chr.  xxxiv.  3).  The  measure 
must  have  caused  a  very  violent  shock  to  the  reli- 
gious prejudices  of  a  large  number  of  people,  and 
we  have  a  curious  and  almost  unnoticed  trace  of 
this  resentment  in  the  fact  that  Habshakeh  appeals 
to  the  discontented  faction,  and  represents  Hezekiah 
as  a  dangerous  innovator  who  had  provoked  God's 
anger  by  his  arbitrary  impiety  (2  K.  xviii.  22  ; 
2  Chr.  xxxii.  12).  After  the  time  of  Josiah  we 
rind  no  further  mention  of  these  Jehovistic  high 
places.  [F.  \V.  F.] 

HIGH-PRIEST  (|nbn,  with  the  definite  ar- 
ticle, i.  c.  "the  Priest;"  and  in  the  books  sub- 
sequent to  the  Pentateuch  with  the  frequent  addi- 
tion ?'lHn  and  CfcOil).  Lev.  xxi.  10  seems  to 
exhibit  the  epithet  ?1J  (as  tirlaKOTcos  and  SiaKovos 
in  the  N.  T.)  in  a  transition  state,  not  yet  wholly 
technical  ;  and  the  same  may  be  said  of  Num. 
xxxv.  25,  where  the  explanation  at  the  end  of  the 
verse,  "  which  was  anointed  with  the  holy  oil," 
seems  to  show  that  the  epithet  TH3  was  not  yet 
quite  established  as  distinctive  of  the  chief  priest 
(cf.  ver.  28).  In  all  other  passages  of  the  Penta- 
teuch it  is  simply  "the  priest,"  Ex.  xxix.  30,  44;- 
Lev.  xvi.  32  :  or  yet  more  frequently  "  Aaron,"  or 
"  Aaron  the  priest,"  as  Num.  iii.  6,  iv.  33  ;  Lev. 
i.  7,  &c.  So  too  "  Eleazar  the  priest,"  Num.  xxvii. 
22,  xxxi.  26,  29,  31,  &c.  In  the  LXX.  6  apx^pevs, 
or  lepevs,  where  the  Heb.  has  only  |i"D.  Vulg.  Sa- 
cerdos  maynus,  ot  primus  pontif ex,  princeps  sacer- 
dotum. 

In  treating  of  the  office  of  high-priest  among 
the  Israelites  it  will  be  convenient  to  consider  it — 
I.  Legally.    II.  Theologically.     HI.  Historically. 

I.  The  legal  view  of  the  high-priest's  office  com- 
prises all  that  the  law  of  Moses  ordained  respecting  it. 
The  first  distinct  separation  of  Aaron  to  the  office 
of  the  priesthood,  which  previously  belonged  to  the 
firstborn,  was  that  recorded  Ex.  xxviii.  A  partial 
anticipation  of  this  call  occurred  at  the  gathering 
of  the  manna  (ch.  xvi.),  when  Moses  bid  Aaron 
take  a  pot  of  manna,  and  lay  it  up  before  the  Lord  : 
which  implied  that  the  ark  "of  the  Testimony  would 
thereafter  be  under  Aaron's  charge,  though  it  was 
not  at  that  time  in  existence.  The  taking  up  of 
Xadab  and  Abihu  with  their  father  Aaron  to  the 
Mount,  where  they  beheld  the  glory  of  the  God  of 
Israel,  seems  also  'to  have  been  intended  as  a  pre- 
paratory  intimation   of  Aaron's   hereditary    p 


HIGH-PRIEST 

hood.  See  also  xxvii.  21.  But  it  was  not  till  the 
completion  of  the  directions  for  making  the  taber- 
nacle and  its  furniture  that  the  distinct  order  was 
given  to  Moses,  "Take  thou  unto  thee  Aaron  thy 
brother,  and  his  sons  with  him,  from  among  the 
children  of  Israel,  that  he  may  minister  unto  me 
in  the  priest's  office,  even  Aaron,  Nadaband  Abihu, 
Eleazar  and  Ithamar,  Aaron's  sons"  (Ex.  xxviii. 
1).  And  after  the  order  for  the  priestly  garments 
to  be  made  "  for  Aaron  and  his  sous,"  it  is  added, 
"  and  the  priest's  office  shall  be  theirs  for  a  per- 
petual statute  ;  and  thou  shalt  consecrate  Aaron 
and  his  suns,"  and  "  I  will  sanctify  both  Aaron  and 
his  sons  to  minister  to  me  in  the  priest's  office," 
xxix.  9,  44. 

We  find  from  the  very  first  the  following  cha- 
racterise attributes  of  Aaron  and  the  high-priests 
his  successors,  as  distinguished  from  the  other  priests. 

(1.)  Aaron  alone  wis  anointed.  ''He  poured 
of  the  anointing  oil  upon  Aaron's  head,  and 
anointed  him  to  sanctify  him"  (Lev.  viii.  12): 
u  hence  one  of  the  distinctive  epithets  of  the  high- 
priest  was  ITK'Sn  |n'3n,  "the  anointed  priest" 
i  Lev.  iv.  3,  5,  lb',  xxi.  10;  see  Num.  xx.xv.  25). 
This  appears  also  from  Ex.  xxix.  29,  30,  where  it 
is  ordered  that  the  one  of  the  sons  of  Aaron  who 
succeeds  him  in  the  priest's  office  shall  wear  the 
holy  garments  that  were  Aaron's  for  seven  days,  to 
be  anointed  therein,  and  to  be  consecrated  in  them. 
Hence  Eusebius  (Jfist.  Eccles.  i.  6  ;  Dem.  Evang. 
viii.)  understands  the  Anointed  (A. V.  "Messiah," 
or,  as  the  LXX.  read,  xpio~fia)  in  Dan.  ix.  '26,  the 
anointing  of  the  Jewish  high-priests :  "  It  means  no- 
thing else  than  the  succession  of  high-priests,  whom 
the  Scripture  commonly  calls  ^pia-rovs,  anointed  ;" 
and  so  too  Tertullian  and  Theodoret  (Rosenm. 
ad  I.  c).  The  anointing  of  the  sons  of  Aaron, 
i.  e.,  the  common  priests,  seems  to  have  been  con- 
fined to  sprinkling  their  garments  with  the  anoint- 
ing oil  (Ex.  xxix.  21,  xxviii.  41,  &C.),  though  ac- 
cording to  Kalisch  on  Ex.  xxix.  8,  and  Lightfoot, 
following  the  Rabbinical  interpretation,  the  differ- 
ence consists  in  the  abundant  pouring  of  oil  (pV)  on 
the  head  of  the  high-priest,  from  whence  it  was 
drawn  with  the  linger  into  two  streams,  in  the 
shape  of  a  Greek  X,  while  the  priests  were  merely 
marked  with  the  linger  dipped  in  oil  on  the  fore- 
head (ftHftS  ■  But  this  is  probably  a  late  invention 
of  the  Rabbins.  The  anointing  of  the  high-priesi 
is  alluded  1o  iu  l's.  cxwiii.  '_' :  "  It  is  like  the  pre- 
vious ointment  upon  the  head,  that  ran  down  upon 
tiie  beard,  even  Aaron's  beard,  that  went  down  to 
tlii>  skiits  of  his  garments."  The  composition  of 
this  anointing  oil,  consisting  of  myrrh,  cinnamon, 
calamus,  cassia,  and  oil  olive,  is  prescribed  Ex.  xxx. 
22-25,  and  its  use  tin-  any  other  purpose,  hut  that 
of  anointing  the  priests,  the  tabernacle,  and  the 
vessels,  was  strictly  prohibited  on  pain  of  being 
"cutoff  from  his  people."  The  manufacture  of  it 
was  entrusted  to  certain  priests,  called  apothecaries 
l  Neli.  iii.  a  |.  Bui  this  oil  is  said  to  h,! 
wanting  under  the  second  Temple  (Prideaux,  i. 
151;   Selden,  cap.  ix.). 

■  In  Lev.  viii.  7-12  there  is  a  count  of 

the  putting  on  of  these  garments  by  Aaron,  and  the 
whole  ceremony  of  his  consecration  and  that  of  his 
sons.  Tt  there  appears  distinctly  that,  besides  the 
girdle  common  to  all  the  priests,  the  high-priest  also 
wore  the  curious  girdle  of  the  ephod. 

b  Josephus,  however    whom  liiihr  follows,  calls  the 


HIGH-PRIEST 


805 


(2.)  The  high-priest  had  a  peculiar  dress,  which , 
as  we  have  seen,  passed  to  his  successor  at  his  death. 
This  dress  consisted  of  eight  parts,  as  the  Rabbins 
constantly  note,  the  breastplate,  the  ephod  with  its 
curious  girdle,  the  robe  of  the  ephod,  the  mitre,  the 
broidered  end  or  diaper  tunic,  and  the  girdle,  the 
materials  being  gold,  blue,  red,  crimson,  and  tine 
(white)  linen  (Ex.  xxviii.).  To  the  above  are  added, 
in  ver.  42,  the  breeches  or  drawers  (Lev.  xvi.  4)  of 
linen  ;  and  to  make  up  the  number  8,  some  reckon 
the  high-priest's  mitre,  or  the  plate  (f¥)  sepa- 
rately from  the  bonnet ;  while  others  reckon  the 
curious  girdle  of  the  ephod  separately  from  the 
ephod." 

Of  these  8  articles  of  attire,  4,  viz.,  the  coat  or 
tunic,  the  girdle,  the  breeches,  and  the  bonnet  or 
turban,  HJ/aJO,  instead  of  the  mitre,  DQ3y*?'b 
belonged  to  the  common  priests. 

It  is  well  known  how,  in  the  Assyrian  sculp 
tures,  the  king  is  in  like  manner  distinguished  by 
the  shape  of  his  head-dress  ;  and  how  in  Persia 
none  but  the  king  wore  the  cidaris  or  erect  tiara.c 
Taking  the  articles  of  the  high-priest's  dress  in  the 
order  in  which  they  are  enumerated  above,  we  have 
(rt)  the  breastplate,  or,  as  it  is  further  named,  ver. 

15,29,  30, thebreastplate  of  judgment,  EDC'D  }K*n, 
Xoytiov  rSiv  KpicreoJV  (or  rrjs  Kpiffeais)  in  the 
LXX.,  and  only  in  ver.  4,  ■Ktpio-rrfii.ov.  It  was, 
like  the  inner  curtains  of  the  tabernacle,  the  vail, 

and  the  ephod,  of  "cunning  work,"  3£T!  nt'^D 
"  opus  plumarium,"  and  "  arte  plumaria,"  Vulg. 
[See  Emijroidkuer.]  The  breastplate  was  origin- 
ally 2  spans  long,  and  1  span  broad,  but  when 
doubled  it  was  square,  the  shape  in  which  it  was 
worn.  It  was  fastened  at  the  top  by  rings  and 
chains  of  wreathen  gold  to  the  two  onyx  stones 
on  the  shoulders,  and  beneath  with  two  other 
rings  and  a  lace  of  blue  to  two  corresponding 
rings  in  the  ephod,  to  keep  it  fixed  in  its  place, 
above  the  curious  girdle.  But  the  most  remark- 
able and  most  important  part  of  this  breast- 
plate, were  the  12  precious  stones,  set  in  4  rows, 
3  in  a  row,  thus  corresponding  to  the  12  tribes, 
and  divided  in  the  same  manner  as  their  camps 
were;  each  stone  having  the  name  of  one  of  the 
children  of  Israel  engraved  upon  it.  Whether  the 
order  followed  the  ages  of  the  sons  of  Israel,  or,  as 
seems  most  probable,  the  order  of  the  encampment, 
may  be  doubted;  but  unless  any  appropriate  distinct 
symbolism  of  the  different  tribes  be  found  in  the 
names  of  the  precious  stones,  the  question  can 
scarcely  be  decided.  According  to  the  LXX.  and 
Josephus,  and  in  accordance  with  the  language  of 
Scripture,  it  was  these  stones  which  constituted  the 
Urim  and  Tliummim,  nor  does  the  notion  advo- 
cated by  Gesenius  after  Spencer  and  others,  that 
these  names  designated  two  little  images  placed 
between  the  folds  of  the  breastplate,  seem  to  resl 
on  any  sufficient  ground,  in  spite  of  the  Egyptian 
analogj  ''  brought  to  bear  upon  it.  Josephus's  opi- 
nion, on  the  other  hand,  improved  upon  b\  the 
Rabbins,  as  to  the  manner  in  which  the  stones  gave 

bonnets  of  the  priests  by  the  name  of  nS3VO.  See 
below.  ' v  : 

■  Bahr  compares  also  the  apices  of  the  flamen  Hialis. 

11  l-'or  an  account  of  the  image  of  Thmei  worn  by 
the  Egyptian  jndge  and  priest,  sec  Kalisch's  note  on 
Ex.  \wiii.  ;  Bengstenberg'ri  Egypt  and  the  Books  of 
Moses  ;  Wilkinson's  Egyptians,  ii.  27,  &c. 


806 


HIGH-PRIEST 


out  the  oracular  answer,  by  preternatural  illumi- 
nation, appears  equally  destitute  of  probability.  It 
seems  to  be  far  simplest  and  most  in  agreement 
with  the  different  accounts  of  enquiries  made  by 
Urim  and  Thummim  (1  Sam.  xiv.  3,  18,  19,  xxiii. 
2,  4,  9,  11,  12,  xxviii.  ti ;  Judg.  xx.  28  ;  2  Sam. 
v.  23,  &c.)  to  suppose  that  the  answer  was  given 
simply  by  the  Word  of  the  Lord  to  the  high-priest 
(comp.  John  xi.  51),  when  he  had  enquired  of  the 
Lord  clothed  with  the  ephod  and  breastplate.  Such  a 
view  agrees  with  the  true  notion  of  the  breastplate, 
of  which  it  was  not  the  leading  characteristic  to  be 
oracular  (as  the  term  Aoyelov  supposes,  and  as  is 
by  many  thought  to  be  intimated  by  the  descriptive 
addition  "  of  judgment,"  i.e.,  as  they  understand  it, 
"decision"),  but  only  an  incidental  privilege  con- 
nected with  its  fundamental  meaning.  What  that 
meaning  was  we  learn  from  Ex.  xxviii.  30,  where 
we  read  "  Aaron  shall  bear  the  judgment  of  the 
children  of  Israel  upon  his  heart  before  the  Lord 
continually."  Now  LJSlt^D  is  the  judicial  sentence 
by  which  any  one  is  either  justified  or  condemned. 
In  prophetic  vision,  as  in  actual  Oriental  life,  the 
sentence  of  justification  was  often  expressed  by  the 
nature  of  the  robe  worn.  "  He  hath  clothed  me 
with  the  garments  of  salvation,  He  hath  covered 
me  with  the  robe  of  righteousness,  as  a  bridegroom 
decketh  himself  with  ornaments,  and  as  a  bride 
adorneth  herself  with  her  jewels"  (Is.  lxi.  10), 
is  a  good  illustration  of  this  ;  cf.  lxii.  3.  In  like 
manner,  in  Rev.  iii.  5,  vii.  9,  six.  14,  &c,  the  white 
linen  robe  expresses  the  righteousness  or  justifica- 
tion of  saints.  Something  of  the  same  notion  may 
be  seen  in  Esth.  vi.  8,  9,  and  on  the  contrary 
ver.  12. 

The  addition  of  precious  stones  and  costly  orna- 
ments expresses  glory  beyond  simple  justification. 
Thus  in  Is.  lxii.  3,  "  Thou  shalt  be  a  crown  of 
glory  in  the  hand  of  the  Lord,  and  a  royal  diadem 
in  the  hand  of  thy  God."  Exactly  the  same  sym- 
bolism of  glory  is  assigned  to  the  precious  stones  in 
the  description  of  the  New  Jerusalem  (Rev.  xxi. 
11,  12-21),  a  passage  which  ties  together  with  sin- 
gular force  the  arrangement  of  the  tribes  in  their 
camps,  and  that  of  the  precious  stones  in  the  breast- 
plate. But,  nioreover,  the  high-priest  beino-  a  re- 
presentative personage,  the  fortunes  of  the  whole 
people  would  most  properly  be  indicated  in  his 
person.  A  striking  instance  of  this,  in  connexion 
too  with  symbolical  dress,  is  to  be  found  in  Zech. 
iii.  "  Now  Joshua  (the  high-priest,  ver.  1)  was 
clothed  with  filthy  garments  and  stood  before  the 
angel.  And  he  answered  and  spake  unto  those  that 
stood  before  him,  saying,  Take  away  the  filthy 
garments  from  him.  And  unto  him  he  said,  Be- 
hold, I  have  caused  thine  iniquity  to  pass  from 
thee,  and  1  will  clothe  thee  with  change  of  raiment. 
And  I  said,  Let  them  set  a  fair  mitre  (PJ^S)  upon 
his  head.  So  they  set  a  fair  mitre  upon  his  head, 
and  clothed  him  with  garments."  Here  the  priest's 
garments,  D>>1J3,  and  the  mitre,  expressly  typify 
the  restored  righteousness  of  the  nation.  Hence  it 
seems  to  be  sufficiently  obvious  that  the  breastplate 
of  righteousness  or  judgment,  resplendent  with  the 
same  precious  stones  which  symbolize  the  glory  of 
the  New  Jerusalem,  and  on  which  were  engraved  the 
names  of  the  12  tribes,  worn  by  the  high-priest,  who 
was  then  said  to  bear  the  judgment  of  the  children 
of  Israel  upon  his  heart,  was  intended  to  express  by 
symbols  the  acceptance  of  Israel  grounded  upon  the 
sacrificial  functions  of  the  high-priest.    The  sense  of 


HIGH-PRIEST 

the  symbol  is  thus  nearly  identical  with  such  passages 
as  Num.  xxiii.  21,  and  the  meaning  of  the  Urim 
and  Thummim  is  explained  by  such  expressions  as 
Tp'lN  NH-O  n"l«  ''Dip,  "Arise,  shine;  for  thy 
light  is  come  "  (Is.  lx.  1 ).  Thummim  expresses  alike 
complete  prosperity  and  complete  innocence,  and  so 
falls  in  exactly  with  the  double  notion  of  light  (Is. 
lx.  1,  and  lxii.  1,2).  The  privilege  of  receiving  an 
answer  from  God  bears  the  same  relation  to  the 
general  state  of  Israel  symbolized  by  the  priest's 
dress,  that  the  promise  in  Is.  liv.  13,  "  All  thy 
children  shall  be  taught  of  the  Lord,"  does  to  the 
preceding  description,  "  I  will  lay  thy  stones  with 
fair  colours,  and  lay  thy  foundations  with  sap- 
phires, and  I  will  make  thy  windows  of  agates,  and 
thy  gates  of  carbuncles,  and  all  thy  borders  of 
pleasant  stones,"  ver.  11,  12;  comp.  also  ver.  14 
and  17  (Heb.).  It  is  obvious  to  add  how  entirely 
this  view  accords  with  the  blessing  of  Levi  in  Deut. 
xxxiii.  8,  where  Levi  is  called  God's  holy  one,  and 
God's  Thummim  and  Urim  are  said  to  be  given  to 
him,  because  he  came  out  of  the  trial  so  clear  in 
his  integrity.     (See  also  Bar.  v.  2.) 

(6.)  The  Ephod  (*l'SN).  This  consisted  of  two 
parts,  of  which  one  covered  the  back,  ami  the  other 
the  front,  i.  e.,  the  breast  and  upper  part  of  the 
body,  like  the  eVajyUi's  of  the  Greeks  (see  Diet,  of 
Antiquities,  art.  Tunica,  p.  1172).  These  were 
clasped  together  on  the  shoulder  with  two  large 
onyx  stones,  each  having  engraved  on  it  6  of 
the  names  of  the  tribes  of  Israel.  It  was  further 
united  by  a  "curious  girdle"  of  gold,  blue,  purple, 
scarlet,  and  fine  twined  linen  round  the  waist. 
Upon  it  was  placed  the  breastplate  of  judgment, 
which  in  fact  was  a  part  of  the  ephod,  and  included 
in  the  term  in  such  passages  as  1  Sam.  ii.  28,  xiv. 
3,  xxiii.  9,  and  was  fastened  to  it  just  above  the 
curious  girdle  of  the  ephod.  Linen  ephods  were 
also  worn  by  other  priests  (1  Sam.  xxii.  18),  by 
Samuel,  who  was  only  a  Levite  (1  Sam.  ii.  18.i, 
and  by  David  when  bringing  up  the  ark  (2  Sam. 
vi.  14).  The  expression  for  wearing  an  ephod  is 
"girded  with  a  linen  ephod."  The  ephod  was  also 
frequently  used  in  the  idolatrous  worship  of  the 
Israelites.  See  Judg.  viii.  27,  xvii.  5,  &c.  [Ephod  ; 
Girdle.] 

(c.)  The  Robe  of  the  ephod  6*JflD).  This  was 
of  inferior  material  to  the  ephod  itself,  being  all  of 
blue  (ver.  31),  which  implied  its  being  only  of 
"  woven  work  "  (3"lV{  n^'J?D,  xxxix.  22).  It  was 
worn  immediately  under  the  ephod,  and  was  longer 
than  it,  though  not  so  long  as  the  broidered  coat  or 
tunic  (]'3y'F)  n3h3),  according  to  some  state- 
ments (Biihr,  Winer,  Kalisch,  &c).  The  Greek 
rendering,  however,  of  ^yO,  iroSrjpris,  and  Jo- 
sephus's  description  of  it  (i>.  J.  v.  5,  §7)  seem  to 
outweigh  the  reasons  given  by  Bahr  tor  thinking 
the  robe  only  came  down  to  the  knees,  and  to  make 
it  improbable  that  the  tunic  should  have  been  seen 
below  the  robe.  It  seems  likely  therefore  that  the 
sleeves  of  the  tunic,  of  white  diaper  linen,  were  the 
only  parts  of  it  which  were  visible,  m  the  case  of 
the" high-priest,  when  he  wore  the  blue  robe  over  it. 
For  the  blue  robe  had  no  sleeves,  but  only  slits  in 
the  sides  for  the  arms  to  come  through.  It  had  a 
hole  for  the  head  to  pass  through,  with  a  border 
round  it  of  woven  work,  to  prevent  its  being  rent. 
The  skirt  of  this  robe  had  a  remarkable  trimming 
of  pomegranates  in  blue,  red,  and  crimson,  with  a 


HIGH-PRIEST 

bell  of  gold  between  each  pomegranate  alternately. 
The  bells  were  to  give  a  sound  when  the  high- 
priest  went  in  and  came  out  of  the  Holy  Place. 
Josephus  in  the  Antiquities  gives  no  explanation  of 
the  use  of  the  bells,  but  merely  speaks  of  the  studied 
beauty  of  their  appearance.  In  his  Jewish  Wai\ 
however,  he  tells  us  that  the  bells  signified  thunder, 
and  the  pomegranates  lightning.  For  l'hilo's  very 
curious  observations  see  Lightfoot's  Works,  ix.  p.  25. 

Neither  does  the  son  of  Sirach  very  distinctly  ex- 
plain it  (Ecclus.  xlv.),  who  in  his  description  of  the 
high-priest's  attire  seems  chiefly  impressed  with 
its  beauty  and  magnificence,  and  says  of  this  trim- 
ming, "  He  compassed  him  with  pomegranates  and 
with  many  golden  bells  round  about,  that  as  he 
went  there  might  be  a  sound,  and  a  noise  made 
that  might  be  heard  in  the  temple,  for  a  memorial 
to  the  children  of  his  people."  Perhaps,  however, 
lie  means  to  intimate  that  the  use  of  the  bells  was 
to  give  notice  to  the  people  outside,  when  the  high- 
priest  went  in  ami  came  out  of  the  sanctuary,  as 
Whiston,  Yatablus,  and  many  others  have  supposed. 

(d.)  The  fourth  article  peculiar  to  the  high-priest 
is  the  mitre  or  upper  turban,  with  its  gold  plate, 
engraved  with  HOLINESS  TO  THE  Loud,  fastened  to 
it  by  a  ribbon  of  blue.  Josephus  applies  the  term 
riSJVO  (fia(Tvaeij.(p8ris)  to  the  turbans  of  the 
common  priests  as  well,  but  says  that  in  addition 
to  this,  and  sewn  on  to  the  top  of  it,  the  high-priest 
had  another  turban  of  blue;  that  beside  this  he 
had  outside  the  turban  a  triple  crown  of  gold,  con- 
sisting, that  is,  of  3  rims  one  above  the  other,  and 
terminating  at  tup  in  a  kind  of  conical  calyx,  like 
the  inverted  calyx  of  the  herb  hyoscyamus.  Jo- 
sephus doubtless  gives  a  true  account  of  the 
high-priest's  turban  as  worn  in  his  day.  It  may 
be  fairly  conjectured  that  the  crown  was  appended 
'when  the  Asmoneans  united  t he  temporal  monarchy 
with  the  priesthood,  and  that  this  was  continued, 
though  in  a  modified  shape, e  after  the  sovereignty 
was  taken  from  them.  Josephus  also  describes  the 
ir4ra\ov,  the  lamina  or  gold  plate,  which  he  says 
covered  the  forehead  of  the  high-priest.  In  Ant.  vii. 
3,  §8,  he  says  that  the  identical  gold  plate  made 
in  the  days  of'  Muses  existed  in  his  time  ;  and  Whis- 
ton adds  in  a  note  that  it  w'as  still  preserved  in  the 
time  of  Origen,  and  that  the  inscription  on  it  was 
engraved  in  Samaritan  characters  {Ant.  iii.  3,  §6). 
It  is  certain  that  R.  Eliezer,  who  flourished  in 
Hadrian's  reign,  saw  it  at  Home.  It  was  doubt- 
less placed,  with  other  spoils  of  the  Temple,  in  the 
Temple  of  Peace,  which  was  burnt  down  in  the 
reign  <it'  Commodus.  These  spoils,  however,  are 
expressly  mentioned  as  part  of  Alaric's  plunder 
when  he  took  Pome.  They  were  carried  by  Gen- 
seric  into  Africa,  and  brought  by  Belisarius  to  By- 
zantium, where  they  adorned  his  triumph.  On  tie- 
warning  of  a  Jew  the  emperor  ordered  them  back 
to  Jerusalem,  but  what  became  of  them  is  not 
known  (  Reland,  de  Spoliis  Tem\ 

(e.)  The  broidered  coat,  ]'3l"fi  J"l3h3,  was  a 
tunic  or  long  shirt  of  linen  witli  a  tessellated  or 
diaper    pattern,  like    the   setting   of  a   stone.      The 

girdle,  033X,  also  of  Linen,  was  wound  round  the 
body  several  times  from  the  breast  downwards,  and 
the  ends  hung  down  to  the  ancles.  The  breeches  or 
drawers,  D*D330,  of  linen,  covered  tin-  loins  and 


HIGH-PRIEST 


80^ 


'  Josephus  (A.  J.  xx.  lo)  says  that  Pompey  would 
not  allow  Hyrcanus  to  wear  the  diadem,  when  lie 
restored  him  to  the  high  priesthood. 


thighs  ;  and  the  bonnet  or  Hy3J?0  was  a  turban 
of  linen,  partially  covering  the  head,  but  not  in  the 
form  of  a  cone  like  that  of  the  high-priest  when 
the  mitre  was  added  to  it.  These  four  last  were 
common  to  all  priests.  Josephus  speaks  of  the 
robes  (evSvfiara)  of  the  chief  priests,  and  the 
tunics  and  girdles  of  the  priests,  as  forming  part  of 
the  spoil  of  the  Temple,  (  B.  J.  vi.  8.  §3).  Aaron, 
and  at  his  death  Eleazar  (Num.  xx.  26,  28),  and 
their  successors  in  the  high-priesthood,  were  so- 
lemnly inaugurated  into  their  office  by  being  clad  in 
these  eight  articles  of  dress  on  seven  successive  days. 
From  the  time  of  the  second  Temple,  when  the 
sacred  oil  (said  to  have  been  hid  by  Josiah,  and 
lost)  was  wanting,  this  putting  on  of  the  garments 
was  deemed  the  official  investiture  of  the  office. 
Hence  the  robes,  which  had  used  to  be  kept  in  one 
of  the  chambers  of  the  Temple,  and  were  by  Hyr- 
canus deposited  in  the  Baris,  which  he  built  on  pur- 
pose, were  kept  by  Herod  in  the  same  tower,  which 
he  called  Antonia,  so  that  they  might  be  at  his  abso- 
lute disposal.  The  Romans  did  the  same  till  the 
government  of  Vitellius  in  the  reign  of  Tiberius, 
when  the  custody  of  the  robes  was  restored  to  the 
Jews  {Ant.  xv.  11,  §4  ;  xviii.  4,  §3). 

(3.)  Aaron  had  peculiar  functions.  To  him  alone 
it  appertained,  and  he  alone  was  permitted,  to  enter 
the  Holy  of  Holies,  which  he  did  once  a  year,  on  the 
great  day  of  atonement,  when  he  sprinkled  the  blood 
of  the  sin-offering  on  the  mercy-seat,  and  burnt  in- 
cense within  the  vail  (Lev.  xvi.).  He  is  said  by  the 
Talmudists,with  whom  agree  Lightfoot,Selden,  Gro- 
tius,  Winer,  Bahr,  and  many  others,  not  to  have 
worn  his  full  pontifical  robes  on  this  occasion,  but  to 
have  been  clad  entirely  in  white  linen  (Lev.  xvi.  4, 
32).  It  is  singular,  however,  that  on  the  other 
hand  Josephus  says  that  the  great  fast  day  was  the 
chief,  if  not  the  only  day  in  the  year,  when  the 
high-priest  wore  all  his  robes  (Z?.  /.  v.  5,  §7), 
and  in  spite  of  the  alleged  impropriety  of  his 
wearing  his  splendid  apparel  on  a  day  of  humilia- 
tion, it  seems  far  more  probable  that  on  the  one 
occasion  when  he  performed  functions  peculiar  to 
the  high-priest,  he  should  have  worn  his  full  dress. 
Josephus  too  could  not  have  been  mistaken  as  to 
the  tact,  which  he  repeats  (cont.  Ap.  lib.  ii.  §7), 
where  he  says  the  high-priests  alone  might  enter 
into  the  Holy  of  Holies,  "  propria-  stola  circuma- 
micti."  For  although  Seidell,'  who  strenuously  su]>- 
ports  the  Rabbinical  statement  that  the  high-priest 
only  wore  the  4  linen  garments  when  he  entered 
the  Holy  of  Holies,  endeavours  to  make  Josephus 
say  the  same  thing,  it  is  impossible  to  twist 
his  words  into  this  meaning.  It  is  true  on  the 
other  hand,  that  Lev.  xvi.  distinctly  prescribes  that 
Aaron  should  wear  the  4  priestly  garments  of 
linen  when  he  entered  into  the  Holy  of  Holies,  and 
put  them  off  immediately  he  came  out.  and  leave 

them  in  the  Temple  ;   i no  being  present  in  the 

Temple  while  Aaron  made  the  atonement  (ver.  17). 
blither  therefore  in  the  time  of  Josephus  this  law 
was  not  kept  in  practice,  or  else  we  must  reconcile 
the  apparent  contradiction  by  supposing  that  in 
consequence  of  the  great  jealousy  with  which  the 
high-priest's  robes  were  kept  by  tin'  civil  power  at 
this  time,  the  custom  had  arisen  for  him  to  wear 
them,  not  even  always  on  the  :;  great  festivals 
(Ant.  xviii.  4,  §3),  but  only  on  the  great  day  of 

f  Selden  himself  remarks  (cap.  vii.  in  Jin.)  that 
Josephus  and  others  always  describe  the  pontifical 

robes  by  the  name  of  ttj?  o-toAtjs  ap)(iepaTiir>js. 


808 


HIGH-PRIEST 


expiation.  Clad  in  this  gorgeous  attire  he  would 
enter  the  Temple  in  presence  of  all  the  people,  and 
after  having  performed  in  secret,  as  the  law  requires, 
the  rites  of  expiation  in  the  linen  dress,  he  would 
resume  his  pontifical  rohes  and  so  appear  again  in 
public.  Thus  his  wearing  the  robes  would  easily 
come  to  be  identified  chiefly  with  the  day  of  atone- 
ment ;  and  this  is  perhaps  the  most  probable  explana- 
tion. In  other  respects  the  high-priest  performed 
the  functions  of  a  priest,  but  only  on  new  moons  and 
other  great  feasts,  and  on  such  solemn  occasions  as 
the  dedication  of  the  Temple  under  Solomon,  under 
Zerubbabel,  &c.     [Atonement,  day  of.] 

(4.)  The  high-priest  had  a  peculiar  place  in  the 
law  of  the  manslayer,  and  his  taking  sanctuary  in 
the  cities  of  refuge.  The  manslayer  might  not 
leave  the  city  of  refuge  during  the  lifetime  of  the 
existing  high-priest  who  was  anointed  with  the 
holy  oil  (Num.  xxxv.  25,  28).  It  was  also  for- 
bidden to  the  high-priest  to  follow  a  funeral,  or 
rend  his  clothes  for  the  dead,  according  to  the  pre- 
cedent in  Lev.  x.  6. 

The  other  i-espects  in  which  the  high-priest  ex- 
ercised superior  functions  to  the  other  priests  arose 
rather  from  his  position  and  opportunities,  than  were 
distinctly  attached  to  his  office,  and  they  conse- 
quently varied  with  the  personal  character  and  abili- 
ties of  the  high-priest.  Such  were  reforms  in  religion, 
restorations  of  the  Temple  and  its  service,  the  pre- 
servation of  the  Temple  from  intrusion  or  profana- 
tion, taking  the  lead  in  ecclesiastical  or  civil  affairs, 
judging  the  people,  presiding  in  the  Sanhedrim 
(which,  however,  he  is  said  by  Lightfoot  rarely  to 
have  done),  and  other  similar  transactions,  in  which 
we  find  the  high-priest  sometimes  prominent,  some- 
times not  even  mentioned.  (See  the  historical  part  of 
this  article.)  Even  that  portion  of  power  which  most 
naturally  and  usually  fell  to  his  share,  the  rule  of 
the  Temple,  ami  the  government  of  the  priests  and 
Levites  who  ministered  there,  did  not  invariably 
fall  to  the  share  of  the  high-priest.  For  the  title 
"  Ruler  of  the  House  of  God,"  DTtxiTrpa  TJ3 
which  usually  denotes  the  high-priest,  is  sometimes 
given  to  those  who  were  not  high-priests,  as  e.  g. 
to  Pashur  the  son  of  Immer  in  Jer.  xx.  1  ;  comp. 
1  Chr.  xii.  27.  The  Rabbins  speak  very  fre- 
quently of  one  second  in  dignity  to  the  high-priest, 
whom  they  call  the  Sagan,  and  who  often  acted  in 
the  high-priest's  room.fc'  He  is  the  same  who  in  the 
0.  T.  is  called  "the  second  priest"  (2  K.  xxiii.  4, 
xxv.  18).  They  say  that  Moses  was  sagan  to  Aaron. 
Thus  too  it  is  explained  of  Annas  and  Caiaphas 
(Luke  iii.  2),  that  Annas  was  sagan.  Ananias  is 
also  thought  by  some  to  have  been  sagan,  actino- 
for  the  high-priest  (Acts  xxiii.  2).  In  like  manner 
they  say  Zadok  and  Abiathar  were  high-priest  and 
sagan  in  the  time  of  David.  The  sagan  is  also  very 
frequently  called  Memunneh,  or  Prefect  of  the  Temple, 
and  upon  him  chiefly  lay  the  care  and  charge  of 
the  Temple  services  (Lightfoot,  passim).  If  the 
high-priest  was  incapacitated  from  officiating  by 
any  accidental  uncleanness,  the  sagan  or  vice-high- 
priest  took  his  place.  Thus,  e.  g.,  the  Jerusalem 
Talmud  tells  a  story  of  Simon  son  of  Kamith,  that 
"on  the  eve  of  the  day  of  expiation,  he  went  out 
to  speak  with  the  king,  and  some  spittle  fell  upon 
his  garments  and  defiled  him  :  therefore  Judah  his 
brother  went  in  on  the  day  of  expiation,  and  served 


e  There  is  a  controversy  as  to  whether  the  deputy 
high-priest  was  the  same  as  the  Sagan.  Lightfoot 
thinks  not. 


HIGH-PRIEST 

in  his  stead ;  and  so  their  mother  Kamith  saw  two 
of  her  sons  high-priests  in  one  day.  She  had  seven 
sons,  and  they  all  served  in  the  high-priesthood  " 
(Lightfoot,  ix.  35).  It  does  not  appear  by  whose 
authority  the  high-priests  were  appointed  to  their 
office  before  there  ware  kings  of  Israel.  But  as  we 
find  it  invariably  done  by  the  civil  power  in  later 
times,  it  is  probable  that,  in  the  times  preceding  the 
monarchy,  it  was  by  the  elders,  or  Sanhedrim.  The 
installation  and  anointing  of  the  high-priest  or 
clothing  him  with  the  eight  garments,  which  was 
the  formal  investiture,  is  ascribed  by  Maimonides  to 
the  Sanhedrim  at  all  times  (Lightfoot,  ix.  22). 

It  should  be  added,  that  the  usual  age  for  enter- 
ing upon  the  functions  of  the  priesthood,  according 
to  2  Chr.  xxxi.  17,  is  considered  to  have  been  20 
years,  though  a  priest  or  high-priest  was  not  actually 
incapacitated  if  he  had  attained  to  puberty,  as  ap- 
pears by  the  example  of  Aristobulus,  who  was  high- 
priest  at  17.  Onias,  the  son  of  Simon  the  Just, 
could  not  be  high-priest,  because  he  was  but  a  child 
at  his  father's  death.  Again,  according  to  Lev.  xxi., 
no  one  that  had  a  blemish  could  officiate  at  the 
altar.  Moses  enumerates  11  blemishes,  which  the 
Talmud  expands  into  142.  Josephus  relates  how 
Antigonus  mutilated  Hyrcanus's  ears,  to  incapa- 
citate him  for  being  restored  to  the  high-priest- 
hood. Illegitimate  birth  was  also  a  bar  to  the 
high-priesthood,  and  the  subtlety  of  Jewish  dis- 
tinctions extended  this  illegitimacy  to  being  born  of 
a  mother  who  had  been  taken  captive  by  heathen 
conquerors  (Joseph,  c.  Apion.  i.  §7).  Thus  Eleazar 
said  to  John  Hyrcanus  (though,  Josephus  says, 
falsely)  that  if  he  was  a  just  man,  he  ought  to 
resign  the  pontificate,  because  his  mother  had  been 
a  captive,  and  he  was  therefore  incapacitated.  Lev. 
xxi.  13,  14,  was  taken  as  the  ground  of  this  and 
similar  disqualifications.  For  a  full  account  of  this 
branch  of  the  subject  the  reader  is  referred  to  Sel- 
den's  learned  treatises  De  Successionibus,  fyc,  and 
De  Success,  in  Pontif.  Ehraeor. ;  and  to  Prideaux, 
ii.  306.  It  was  the  universal  opinion  of  the  Jews 
that  the  deposition  of  a  high-priest,  which  became 
so  common,  was  unlawful.  Josephus  {Ant.  xv.  3) 
says  that  Antiochus  Epiphanes  was  the  fiist  who 
did  so,  when  he  deposed  Jesus  or  Jason;  Aristo- 
bulus, who  deposed  his  brother  Hyrcanus,  the  se- 
cond ;  and  Herod,  who  took  away  the  high-priest- 
hood from  Ananelus  to  give  it  to  Aristobulus  the 
Third.  See  the  story  of  Jonathan  son  of  A  nanus, 
Ant.  xix.  6,  §4. 

II.  Theologically.  The  theological  view  of  the 
high-priesthood  does  not  fall  within  the  scope  of 
this  Dictionary.  It  must  suffice  therefore  to  indi- 
cate that  such  a  view  would  embrace  the  considera- 
tion of  the  office,  dress,  functions,  and  ministrations 
of  the  high-priest,  considered  as  typical  of  the 
priesthood  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  as  setting 
foith  under  shadows  the  truths  which  are  openly 
taught  under  the  Gospel.  This  has  been  done  to  a 
great  extent  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  and  is 
occasionally  done  in  other  parts  of  Scripture,  as, 
e.  g.,  Rev.  i.  13,  where  the  iroHpys,  and  the  girdle 
about  the  paps,  are  distinctly  the  robe,  and  the 
curious  girdle  of  the  ephod,  characteristic  of  the 
high-priest.  It  would  also  embrace  all  the  moral 
and  spiritual  teaching  supposed  to  he  intended  In- 
such  symbols.  Phdo  (de  vita  Mosis),  Origen 
(Homil.  in  Zevit.),  Eusebius  {Demonst.  Evang. 
lib.  iii.);  Epiphanius  {cont.  Melchized.  iv.  &c), 
Gregory  Nazianzen  (Orat.  i.,  Eliae  Cretens.,  and 
Comment,  p.  195,  Augustine  (Quaest.  in  Exod.) 


HIGH-PRIEST 

may  be  cited  among  many  others  of  the  ancients 
who  have  more  or  less  thus  treated  the  subject.  Of 
moderns,  Bahr  (Symbolik  des  Mosaischen  Cultus), 
Fairbairn  (  Typology  of  Script.'),  Kalisch  (Com- 
ment, on  Exod.)  have  entered  fully  into  this  sub- 
ject, both  from  the  Jewish  and  Christian  point  of 
view . 

III.  To  pass  to  the  historical  view  of  the  subject. 
The  history  of  the  high-priests  embraces  a  period 
of  about  1370  years,  according  to  the  opinion  of 
the  present  writer,  and  a  succession  of  about  80 
high-priests,  beginning  with  Aaron,  and  ending 
with  Phannias.  "The  number  of  all  the  high- 
priests  (says  Josephus,  Ant.  xx.  10)  from  Aaron 
.  .  .  until  Phanas  .  .  .  was  83,"  where  he  gives 
a  comprehensive  account  of  them.  They  naturally 
arrange  themselves  into  three  groups — (a.)  those 
before  David;  (6.)  those  from  David  to  the  capti- 
vity :  (<\)  those  from  the  return  from  the  Baby- 
lonish captivity  till  the  cessation  of  the  office  at 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  The  two  former 
have  come  down  to  us  in  the  canonical  books  of 
Scripture,  and  so  have  a  few  of  the  earliest  and 
the  latest  of  the  latter;  but  for  by  far  the  larger 
portion  of  the  latter  group  we  have  only  the  au- 
thority  of  Josephus,  the  Talmud,  and  some  other 
profane  writers. 

(a.)  The  high-priests  of  the  first  group  who  are 
distinctly  made  known  to  us  as  such  are — 1.  Aaron  ; 
2.  Kleazar;  3.  Phinehas;  4.  Eli;  5.  A'nitub 
(1  Chr.  ix.  11  ;  Neb.,  xi.  11  ;  1  Sam.  xiv.  3);  6. 
Ahiah  ;  7.  Ahimelech.  Phinehas  the  son  of  Eli, 
and  father  of  Ahitub,  died  before  bis  father,  and  so 
was  not  high-priest.  Of  the  above  the  three  first 
succeeded  in  regular  order,  Xadab  and  Abihu, 
Aaron's  eldest  sons,  having  died  in  the  wilderness 
(Lev.  x.).  P>ut  Eli,  the  4th,  was  of  the  line  df 
ithamar.  What  was  the  exact  interval  between 
the  death  of  Phinehas  and  the  accession  of  Eli, 
what  led  to  the  transference  of  the  chief  priesthood 
from  the  line  of  Eleazar  to  that  of  [thamar,  and 
whether  any,  or  which,  of  the  descendants  of  Elea- 
zar between  Phinehas  and  Zailok  (seven  in  number, 
viz..  Abishua,  Bukki,  Uzzi.  Zerahiah,  Meraioth, 
Amariah.  Ahitub),  were  high-priests,  we  have  no 
means  of  determining  from  Scripture.  Judg.  xx. 
28,  leaves  Phinehas,  the  son  of  Eleazar,  priest  at 
Shiloh,  and  1  Sam.  i.  .'i,  9,  finds  Eli  high-priest 
there,  with  two  grown-up  sons  priests  under  him. 
The  only  clue  is  to  be  found  in  the  genealogies,  by 
which  it  appears  that  Phinehas  was  6th  in  succes- 
sion from  Levi,  while  Eli,  supposing  him  to  be  the 
same  generation  as  Samuel's  grandfather,  would  be 

LOth.  If  however  Phinehas  lived,  as  is  probable, 
to  a  great  old  age,  and  Eli,  as  his  age  admits,  be 
placed  about  half  a  generation  backwarder,  a  very 

small  interval  will  remain.      Josephus  asserts  I  Ant. 

■  viii.   1,  §3)   that  the  father  of  Bukki — whom  he 

calls  Joseph,  and  {Ant.  v.  11.  §5)   Abiezer,  i.e., 

Abishua — was    the     last     high-priest    of    Philiehas's 

line,  before  Zadok.  This  is  probably  a  true  tradi- 
tion, though  Josephus,  with  characteristic  levity, 
does  not  adhere  to  it  in  the  above  passage  of  his 
5th  book,  where  he  makes  Bukki  and  Dzzi  to  have 
been  both  high-priests,  ami  Eli  to  have  succeeded 
Uzzi;  or  in  bk.  ,\.\.  10,  where  be  reckons  the  high- 
priests  before  Zadok  and  Solomon  to  bare  been  13 
(a  reckoning  which  includes  apparently  all  Klea- 
zar's  descendants  down  to  Ahitub),  and  adds  Eli 
and  his  son  Phinehas,  and  Abiathar,  whom  he  calls 
Eli's  grandson.  If  Abishua  died,  leaving  a  son  or 
grandson  under  age,  Eli,  as  head  of  the  line  of  Itha- 


HIGH-PRIEST 


80A 


mar,  might  have  become  high-priest  as  a  matter  of 
course,  or  he  might  have  been  appointed  by  the 
elders.  His  having  judged  Israel  40  years  (1  Sam. 
iv.  18)  marks  him  as  a  man  of  ability.  If  Ahiah 
and  Ahimelech  are  not  variations  of  the  name  of 
the  same  person,  they  must  have  been  brothers, 
since  both  were  sons  of  Ahitub.  The  high-priests 
then  before  David's  reign  may  be  set  down  as  eight 
in  number,  of  whom  seven  are  said  in  Scripture  to 
have  been  high-priests,  and  one  by  Josephus  alone. 
The  bearing  of  this  on  the  chronology  of  the  times 
from  the  Exodus  to  David,  tallying  as  it  does  with 
the  number  of  the  ancestors  of  David,  is  too  im- 
portant to  be  passed-  over  in  silence.  It  must  also 
be  noted  that  the  tabernacle  of  God,  during  the  high- 
priesthood  of  Aaron's  successors  of  this  first  group, 
was  pitched  at  Shiloh  in  the  tribe  of  Ephraim,  a 
fact  which  marks  the  strong  influence  which  the 
temporal  power  already  had  in  ecclesiastical  affairs, 
since  Ephraim  was  Joshua's  tribe,  as  Judah  was 
David's  (Josh.  xxiv.  30,  33  ;  Judg.  xx.  27,  28,  xxi. 
21  ;  1  Sam.  i.  3,  9,  24,  iv.  3,  4,"  xiv.  3,  &c. ;  Ps. 
lxxviii.  60).  This  strong  influence  and  interfer- 
ence of  the  secular  power  is  manifest  throughout, 
the  subsequent  history.  This  first  period  was  also 
marked  by  the  calamity  which  befell  the  high- 
priests  as  the  guardians  of  the  ark,  in  its  capture 
by  the  Philistines.  This  probably  suspended  all 
inquiries  by  Urim  and  Thummim,  which  were 
made  before  the  ark  (1  Chr.  xiii.  3  ;  comp.  Judg.  xx. 
27  ;  1  Sam.  vii.  2,  xiv.  18),  and  must  have  greatly 
diminished  the  influence  of  the  high-priests,  on 
whom  the  largest  share  of  the  humiliation  expressed 
in  the  name  Ichabod,  would  naturally  fall.  The 
rise  of  Samuel  as  a  prophet  at  this  very  time,  and 
his  paramount  influence  and  importance  in  the 
State,  to  the  entire  eclipsing  of  Ahiah  the  priest, 
coincides  remarkably  with  the  absence  of  the  ark, 
and  the  means  of  inquiring  by  Urim  and  Thum- 
mim. 

(b.~)  Passing  to  the  second  group,  we  begin  with  the 
unexplained  circumstance  of  there  being  two  priests 
in  the  reign  of  David,  apparently  of  nearly  equal 
authority,  viz.,  Zadok  and  Abiathar)  1  Chr.  xv.  11  ; 
2  Sam.  viii.  17).  Indeed  it  is  only  from  the  de- 
position of  Abiathar,  and  the  placing  of  Zadok  in 
iiis  loom,  by  Solomon  (1  K.  ii.  35),  that  we  learn 
certainly  that  Abiathar  was  the  high-priest,  and 
Zadok  the  second.  Zadok  was  son  of  Ahitub,  of 
the  line  of  Eleazar  (1  Chr.  vi.  8),  and  the  first 
mention  of  him  is  in  1  Chr.  xii.  28,  as  '"a  young 
man,  mighty  in  valour,"  who  joined  David  in 
Hebron  after  Saul's  death,  with  22  captains  of  his 
father's  house.  It  is  therefore  not  unlikely  that 
after  the  death  of  Ahimelech  and  tin'  secession  of 
Abiathar  to  David,  Saul  may  have  made  Zadok 
priest,   as   far   as   it    was   possible   for   him    to  do  so 

in  tie  absence  of  the  ark  and  the  high-priest's  robes, 
and  that  David  may  have  avoided  the  difficulty  of 
deciding  between  the  claims  of  his  faithful  friend 

Abiathar,  and  his  new  and  important  ally  Zadok 
(  who  perhaps  was  the  mean-  of  attaching  t..  I  (an  id's 
,-aus,.  tie.  4600  l.evites  ami  the  3700  priests  who 
came  under  Jehoiada  their  captain,  ver.  26,  27), 

by  appointing  them  to  a  joint  priesth 1 :  the  first 

place,  with  the  Ephod,  add  Urim  ami  Thummim, 
remaining  with  Abiathar,  who  was  in  actual  pos- 
session of  them.      Certain  it  is  that   from   this   tune 

Zadok  and  Abiathar  ai e  constantly  named  together, 
and  singularly  Zadok  always  first,  both  in  the  book 

of  Samuel  and  that  of  Kiie.s.  U  e  Can,  however. 
trace  very  clearly  up  to  B  en  tain  point  the  division 

3  G 


810 


HIGH-PRIEST 


of  the  priestly  offices  and  dignities  between  them, 
coinciding  as  it  did  with  the  divided  state  of  the 
Levitical  worship  in  David's  time.  For  we  learn 
from  1  Chr.  xvi.  1-7,  37  compared  with  39,  40, 
and  yet  more  distinctly  from  2  Chr.  i.  3,  4,  5,  that 
the  tabernacle  and  the  brazen  altar  made  by  Moses 
and  Bezaleel  in  the  wilderness,  were  at  this  time  at 
Gibeon,  while  the  ark  was  at  Jerusalem,  in  the  se- 
parate tent  made  for  it  by  David.  [GlBEON,  p.  693.] 
Now  Zadok  the  priest  and  his  brethren  the  priests 
wen/  left  "  before  the  tabernacle  at  Gibeon"  to  offer 
burnt-offerings  unto  the  Lord  morning  and  evening, 
and  to  do  according  to  all  that  is  written  in  the 
law  of  the  Lord  (l^Chr.  xvi.  39,  40).  It  is  there- 
fore obvious  to  conclude  that  Abiathar  had  special 
charge  of  the  ark  and  the  services  connected  with 
it,  which  agrees  exactly  with  the  possession  of  the 
ephod  by  Abiathar,  and  his  previous  position  with 
David  before  he  became  king  of  Israel,  as  well  as 
with  what  we  are  told  1  Chr.  xxvii.  34,  that 
Jehoiada  and  Abiathar  were  the  king's  counsellors 
next  to  Ahithophel.  Residence  at  Jerusalem  with 
the  ark,  and  the  privilege  of  inquiring  of  the  Lord 
before  the  ark,  both  well  suit  his  office  of  coun- 
sellor. Abiathar,  however,  forfeited  his  place  by 
taking  part  with  Adouijah  against  Solomon,  and 
Zadok  was  made  high-priest  in  his  place.  The 
pontificate  was  thus  again  consolidated  and  trans- 
ferred permanently  from  the  line  of  Ithamar  to 
that  of  Eleazar.  This  is  the  only  instance  recorded 
of  the  deposition  of  a  high-priest  (which  became 
common  in  later  times,  especially  under  Herod  and 
the  Romans)  during  this  second  period.  It  was 
the  fulfilment  of  the  prophetic  denunciations  of  the 
sin  of  Eli's  sous  (1  Sam.  ii.,  iii.). 

The  first  considerable  difficulty  that  meets  us  in 
the  historical  survey  of  the  high-priests  of  the 
second  group  is  to  ascertain  who  was  high-priest 
at  the  dedication  of  Solomon's  Temple — Josephus 
(Ant.  x.  8,  §6)  asserts  that  Zadok  was,  and  the 
Seder  Olam  makes  him  the  high-priest  in  the 
reign  of  Solomon.  But  first  it  is  very  impro- 
bable that  Zadok,  who  must  have  been  very  old 
at  Solomon's  accession  (being  David's  contempo- 
rary), should  have  lived  to  the  11th  year  of  his 
reign;  and  next,  1  K.  iv.  2  distinctly  asserts  that 
Azariah  the  son  of  Zadok  was  priest  under  Solomon, 
and  1  Chr.  vi.  10  tells  us  of  Azariah, h  "  he  it  is 
that  executed  the  priest's  office  in  the  temple  that 
Solomon  built  in  Jerusalem,"  obviously  meaning  at 
its  first  completion.  We  can  hardly  therefore  be 
wrong  in  saying  that  Azariah  the  son  of  Ahimaaz 
was  the  first  high-priest  of  Solomon's  temple.  The 
non-mention  of  him  in  the  account  of  the  dedication 
of  the  temple,  even  where  one  would  most  have 
expected  it  (as  1  K.  viii.  3,  6, 10,  11,  62  ;  2  Chr.  v. 
7,  11,  &c),  and  the  prominence  given  to  Solomon — 
the  civil  power — are  certainly  remarkable.  Compare 
also  2  Chr.  viii.  14,  15.  The  probable  inference  is 
that  Azariah  had  no  great  personal  qualities  or 
energy.  In  constructing  the  list  of  the  succession 
of  priests  of  this  group,  our  method  must  be  to 
compare  the  genealogical  list  in  1  Chr.  vi.  8-15 
(A.  V.)  with  the  notices  of  high-priests  in  the 
sacred  history,  and  with  the  list  given  by  Josephus, 
who,  it  must  be  remembered,  had  access  to  the 
lists  preserved  in  the  archives  at  Jerusalem  :  testing 
the  whole  by  the  application  of  the  ordinary  rules 
of  genealogical  succession.      Now    as    regards  the 


h  It   appears   from  1  Chr.   vi.  9   that  Azariah  was 
grandson  to  Zadok,  being  the  son  of  Aidaiaaz.     The 


HIGH-PRIEST 

genealogy,  it  is  seen  at  once  that  there  is  some- 
thing defective;  for  whereas  from  David  to  Jeconiah 
there  are  20  kings,  from  Zadok  to  Jehozadak  there 
are  but  13  priests.  Moreover  the  passage  in  ques- 
tion is  not  a  list  of  high-priests,  but  the  pedigree 
of  Jehozadak.  Then  again,  while  the  pedigree  in 
its  six  first  generations  from  Zadok,  inclusive,  ex- 
actly suits  the  history — for  it  makes  Amariah  the 
sixth  priest,  while  the  history  (2  Chr.  xix.  11)  tells 
us  he  lived  in  Jehoshaphat's  reign,  who  was  the 
sixth  king  from  David,  inclusive ;  and  while  the 
same  pedigree  in  its  five  last  generations  also  suits 
the  history — inasmuch  as  it  places  Hilkiah  the  son 
of  Shallum  fourth  from  the  end,  and  the  history 
tells  us  he  lived  in  the  reign  of  Josiah,  the  fourth 
king  from  the  end — yet  is  there  a  great  gap  in  the 
middle.  For  betweeu  Amariah,  the  high-priest  in 
Jehoshaphat's  reign,  and  Shallum  the  father  of  Hil- 
kiah, the  high-priest  in  Josiah's  reign — an  interval 
of  about  240  years — there  are  but  two  names, 
Ahitub  and  Zadok,  and  those  liable  to  the  utmost 
suspicion  from  their  reproducing  the  same  sequence 
which  occurs  in  the  earlier  part  of  the  same  gene- 
alogy— Amariah,  Ahitub,  Zadok.  Besides  which 
they  are  not  mentioned  by  Josephus.  This  part 
therefore  of  the  pedigree  is  useless  for  our  purpose. 
But  the  historical  books  supply  us  with  four  or  five 
names  for  this  interval,  viz.  Jehoiada  in  the  reigns 
of  Athaliah  and  Joash,  and  probably  still  earlier; 
Zechariah  his  son  ;  Azariah  in  the  reign  of  Uzziah  ; 
Urijah  in  the  reign  of  Ahaz ;  and  Azariah  in  the 
reign  of  Hezekiah.  If,  however,  in  the  genealogy 
ofl  Chr.  vi.  Azariah  and  Hilkiah  have  been  acci- 
dentally transposed,  as  is  not  unlikely,  then  the 
Azariah  who  was  high-priest  in  Hezekiah 's  reign 
will  be  the  Azariah  ofl  Chr.  vi.  13,  14.  Putting 
the  additional  historical  names  at  four,  and  deduct- 
ing the  two  suspicious  names  from  the  genealogy, 
we  have  15  high-priests  indicated  in  Scripture  as 
contemporary  with  the  20  kings,  with  room,  how- 
ever, for  one  or  two  more  in  the  history.  Turning 
to  Josephus,  we  find  his  list  of  17  high-priests 
(whom  he  reckons  as  18  (Ant.  xx.  10),  as  do  also 
the  Rabbins)  in  places  exceedingly  corrupt,  a  cor- 
ruption sometimes  caused  by  the  end  of  one  name 
sticking  on  to  the  beginning  of  the  following  (as  in 
Axioramus),  sometimes  apparently  by  substituting 
the  name  of  the  contemporary  king  or  prophet  for 
that  of  the  high-priest,  as  Joel  and  Jotham.  Per- 
haps, however,  Sudeas,  who  corresponds  to  Zedekiah 
in  the  reign  of  Amaziah  in  the  Seder  Olam,  ami 
Odeas,  who  corresponds  to  Hoshaiah  in  the  reign  of 
Manasseh,  according  to  the  same  Jewish  chronicle, 
may  really  represent  high-priests  whose  names  have 
not  been  preserved  in  Scripture.  This  would  bring 
up  the  number  to  17,  or,  if  we  retain  Azariah  as 
the  father  of  Seraiah,  to  18,  which  agrees  with 
the  20  kings. 

Reviewing  the  high-priests  of  this  second  group, 
the  following  are  some  of  the  most  remarkable  inci- 
dents:— (1)  The  transfer  of  the  seat  of  worship  from 
Shiloh  in  the  tribe  of  Ephraim  to  Jerusalem  in  the 
tribe  of  Judah,  effected  by  David,  and  consolidated 
by  the  building  of  the  magnificent  temple  of  So- 
lomon. (2)  The  organization  of  the  temple  service 
under  the  high-priests,  and  the  division  of  the  \>\  iests 
and  Levites  into  courses,  who  resided  at  the  temple 
during  their  term  of  service— all  which  necessarily 
put  great  power  into  the  hands  of  an  able  high-priest. 


notice  in  ver.  10  seems  to  belong  to  him,  and  not  to 
the  son  of  Johanan. 


HIGH-PRIEST 

(:■>)  The  revolt  <>f  the  ten  tribes  from  the  dynasty 
of  David  and  from  the  worship  at  Jerusalem,  and 
tlie  setting  up  of  a  schismatical  priesthood  at  Dan 

and  Beersheba  (1  K.  xii.  31  ;  2  Chr.  xiii.  9,  &c). 
( 4)  The  overthrow  of  the  usurpation  of  Athaliah,  the 
daughter  of  Ahab,  by  Jehoiada  the  high-priest,  whose 
near  relationship  to  king  Joash,  added  to  his  zeal 
against  the  idolatries  of  the  house  of  Ahab,  stimulated 
him  to  head  the  revolution  with  the  force  of  priests 
and  Levites  at  his  command.  (5)  The  boldness 
and  success  with  which  the  high-priest  Azariah 
withstood  the  encroachments  of  the  king  Uzziah 
upon  the  office  and  functions  of  the  priesthood. 
(6)  The  repair  of  the  temple  by  Jehoiada,  in  the 
reign  of  Joash,  the  restoration  of  the  temple  services 
by  Azariah  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  and  the  dis- 
co very  of  the  book  of  the  law,  and  the  religious 
reformation  by  Hilkiah  in  the  reign  of  Josiah. 
[HlLKiAH.]  (7)  In  all  these  great  religious 
movements,  however,  excepting  the  one  headed  by 
Jehoiada,  it  is  remarkable  how  the  civil  power 
took  the  lead.  It  was  David  who  arranged  all  the 
temple  service,  Solomon  who  directed  the  building 
and  dedication  of  the  temple,  the  high-priest  being 
not  so  much  as  named;  Jehoshaphat  who  sent  the 
priests  about  to  teach  the  people,  and  assigned  to 
the  high-priest  Amariah  his  share  in  the  work ; 
Hezekiah  who  headed  the  reformation,  and  urged 
on  Azariah  and  the  priests  aud  Levites  ;  Josiah 
who  encouraged  the  priests  in  the  service  of  the 
house  of  the  Lord.  On  the  other  hand  we  read  of 
no  opposition  to  the  idolatries  of  Manasseh  by  the 
high-priest,  and  we  know  how  shamefully  sub- 
servient Urijah  the  high-priest  was  to  king  Ahaz, 
actually  building  an  altar  according  to  the  pat- 
tern of  one  at  Damascus,  to  displace  the  brazen 
altar,  and  joining  the  king  in  his  profane  worship 
before  it  (2  K.  xvi.  10-16).  The  preponderance  of 
the  civil  over  the  ecclesiastical  power,  as  an  historical 
fact,  in  the  kingdom  of  Judah,  although  kept  within 
bounds  by  the  hereditary  succession  of  the  high- 
priests,  seems  to  be  proved  from  these  circumstances. 

The  priests  of  this  series  ended  with  Seraiah,  who 
was  taken  prisoner  by  Xebuzar-adan,  and  slain  at 
Riblah  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  together  with  Zepha- 
niah  the  second  priest  or  sagan,  after  the  burning 
of  tin-  temple  and  the  plunder  of  all  the  sacred 
(2  h.  xxv.  18).  His  son  Jehozadak  or  Jo- 
sedech  was  at  tin'  same  time  carried  away  captive 
(!  Chr.  vi.  15). 

'flu'  time  occupied  by  these  'say)  eighteen  high- 
priests  who  ministered  at  Jerusalem,  was  about 
4.">4  years,  which  gives  an  average  of  something 
more  than  twenty-live  years  to  each  high-priest. 
It  is  remarkable  tli.it  no!  a  single  instance  is  re- 
corded after  the  time  of  David  of  an  inquiry  by 
Trim  and  Thummim  as  a  means  of  inquiring  ol 
the  Lord.  The  ministry  of  the  prophets  seems  to 
have  superseded  that  of  the  high-priests  (see  e.  </. 
2  Chr.  xv.,  xviii.  xx.  11,  15;  2  K.  xix.  1,  2,  xxii. 
12-14;  Jer.  xxi.  I,  '-').  Some  think  that  Trim 
and  Thummim  ceased  with  the  theocracy;  "tie. 
with  the  division  of  Israel  into  two  kingdoms. 
Nehemiah  seems  to  have  expected  the  restoration  of 
it  (Neh.  vii.  «!.">),  and  so  perhaps  did  Judas  Mac- 
cabaeus,  1  Mace.  iv.  46;  comp.  xiv.  41,  while 
Josephus  affirms  that  if  had  been  exercised  for  the 
last  time  200  years  before  he  wrote,  viz..  by  John 
Hyrcanus  (Whiston,  n  ie  on  An!-  iii.  8,  ami  Prid. 
/.  i.  150,  CM  |.     It  seems  therefore  scarcely 

true  to   reckon  [Jrim    and  Thummim  as   oi !'  the 

marks  of  God's  presence   with   Solomon's  temple. 


HIGH-PRIEST 


811 


which  was  wanting  to  the  second  temple  (Prid. 
i.  138,  L44,sqq.).  This  early  cessation  of  answers 
by  Urim  and  Thummim,  though  the  high-priest's 
office  and  the  wearing  of  the  breast-plate  con- 
tinued in  force  during  so  many  centuries,  seems  to 
confirm  the  notion  that  such  answers  were  not  the 
fundamental,  but  only  the  accessory  uses  of  the 
breastplate  of  judgment. 

(c.)  An  interval  of  about  fifty-two  years  elapsed 
between  the  high-priests  of  the  second  and  third 
group,  during  which  there  was  neither  temple,  nor 
altar,  nor  ark,  nor  priest.  Jehozadak,  or  Josedech, 
as  it  is  written  in  Haggai  (i.  1,  14,  &c),  who  should 
have  succeeded  Seraiah,  lived  and  died  a  captive  at 
Babylon.  The  pontifical  office  revived  in  his  son 
Jeshua,  of  whom  such  frequent  mention  is  made  in 
Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  Haggai,  ami  Zechariah,  1  Esdr. 
and  Ecclus. ;  and  he  therefore  stmxls  at  the  head  of 
this  third  and  last  series,  honourably  distinguished 
for  his  zealous  co-operation  with  Zerubbabel  in  re- 
building the  temple,  and  restoring  the  dilapidated 
commonwealth  of  Israel.  His  successors,  as  far  as 
theO.  T.  guides  us,  were  Joiakim,  Eliashib,  Joiada, 
Johanan  (or  Jonathan),  and  Jaddua.  Of  these  we 
find  Eliashib  hindering  rather  than  seconding  the 
zeal  of  the  devout  Tirshatha  Nehemiah  for  the 
observance  of  God's  law  in  Israel  (Neh.  xiii.  4,  7) ; 
and  Johanan,  Josephus  tells  us,  murdered  his  own 
brother  Jesus  or  Joshua  in  the  temple,  which  led 
to  its  further  profanation  by  Bagoses,  the  general  of 
Artaxerxes  Mnemon's  army  (Ant.  si.  7).  Jaddua 
was  high-priest  in  the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great. 
Concerning  him  Josephus  relates  the  story  that  he 
went  out  to  meet  Alexander  at  Sapha  (probably  the 
ancient  Mizpeh)  at  the  head  of  a  procession  of 
priests  ;  and  that  when  Alexander  saw  the  multitude 
clothed  in  white,  and  the  priests  in  their  linen  gar- 
ments, and  the  high-priest  in  blue  and  gold,  with 
the  mitre  on  his  head,  and  the  gold  plate,  on  which 
was  the  name  of  God,  he  stepped  forward  alone  and 
adored  the  Name,  and  hastened  to  embrace  the  high- 
priest  {Ant.  xi.  8,  §5).  Josephus  adds  among  other 
things  that  the  king  entered  Jerusalem  with  the 
high-priest,  and  went  up  to  the  temple  to  worship 
and  offer  sacrifice ;  that  he  was  shown  the  pro- 
phecies of  Daniel  concerning  himself,  and  at  the 
high-priest's  intercession  granted  the  Jews  liberty 
to  live  according  to  their  own  laws,  and  freedom  from 
tribute  on  the  Sabbatical  years.  The  story,  how- 
ever, has  not  obtained  credit.  It  was  the  brother  of 
this  Jaddua,  Manasseh,  who,  according  to  the  same 
authority,  was  at  the  request  of  Sahballat  made  the 
first  high-priest  of  the  Samaritan  temple  by  Alex- 
ander the  <  Jreat. 

Jaddua  was  SUO led   by  Onias  I.,  his  son,   and 

he  again  by  Simon  the  Just,  the  last  of  the  mi  n  OJ 
the  great  synagogue,  as  the  Jews  speak,  and  to 
whom  is  usually  ascribed  the  completion  of  the 
Canon  of  the  O.  T.  (Prideaux,  Conn.  i.  545).  Of 
him  Jesus,  the  son  of  Sirach,  speaks  in  tei  tns  of  mosl 
glowing  eulogy  in  Ecclus.  I.,  and  ascribing  to  him 
the  repair  and  fortification  of  the  temple,  with  other 
works.  The  passage  (1-21 )  contains  an  interesting 
account  of  the  ministrations  of  the  high-priest. 
I  pon  Simon's  death,  bis  son  Onias  being  under 
age,  Eleazar,  Simon's  brother,  succeeded  him,     The 

high-priest! d  of  Eleazar  is  memorable  as  being 

that  under  which  the  LXX.  version  of  the  Scriptures 
was  made  at   Alexandria  for  Ptolemy  Philadelphus, 
according  to  the  accounl  of  Josephus  taken  from 
Aristeas    |  An!,    vi.    '_' ..     This  tram  I 
Hebrew  Sdriptures  into  Gt  Ie  as  it  was 

:;  G  2 


812 


HIGH-PEIEST 


with  reference  to  the  wider  interests  of  religion, 
and  marked  as  was  the  Providence  which  gave  it 
to  the  world  at  this  time  as  a  preparation  for  the 
approaching  advent  of  Christ,  yet  viewed  in  its  re- 
lation to  Judaism  and  the  high-priesthood,  was  a 
sign,  and  perhaps  a  helping  cause  of  their  decay. 
It  marked  a  growing  tendency  to  Hellenise,  utterly 
inconsistent  with  the  spirit  of  the  Mosaic  economy. 
Accordingly  in  the  high-priesthood  of  Eleazar's 
rival  nephews,  Jesus  and  Onias,  we  find  their  very 
names  changed  into  the  Greek  ones  of  Jason  and 
Menelaus,  and  with  the  introduction  of  this  new 
feature  of  rival  high-priests  we  find  one  of  them,  Me- 
nelaus, strengthening  himself  and  seeking  support 
from  the  Syro-Greek  kings  against  the  Jewish  party, 
by  offering  to  forsake  their  national  laws  and  customs, 
and  to  adopt  those  of  the  Greeks.  The  building  of 
a  gymnasium  at  Jerusalem  for  the  use  of  these 
apostate  Jews,  and  their  endeavour  to  conceal  their 
circumcision  when  stripped  for  the  games  (1  Mace, 
i.  14,  15  ;  2  Macc.iv.  12-15  ;  Jos.  Ant.  xii.  5,  §1); 
show  the  length  to  which  this  spirit  was  carried. 
The  acceptance  of  the  spurious  priesthood  of  the 
temple  of  Onion  from  Ptolemy  Philometor  by  Onias 
(the  son  of  Onias  the  high-priest),  who  would  have 
been  the  legitimate  high-priest  on  the  death  of 
Menelaus,  his  uncle,  is  another  striking  indication  of 
the  same  degeneracy.  By  this  flight  of  Onias  into 
Egypt  the  succession  of  high-priests  in  the  family 
of  Jozadak  ceased ;  for  although  the  Syro-Greek 
kings  had  introduced  much  uncertainty  into  the 
succession,  by  deposing  at  their  will  obnoxious  per- 
sons, and  appointing  whom  they  pleased,  yet  the 
dignity  had  never  gone  out  of  the  one  family. 
Alcimus,  whose  Hebrew  name  was  Jakim  (1  Ohr. 
xxiv.  12),  or  perhaps  Jachin  (1  Chr.  ix.  10,  xxiv. 
17),  or,  according  to  Ruffinus  (ap.  Selden),  Joachim, 
and  who  was  made  high-priest  by  Antiochus 
Eupator  on  Menelaus  being  put  to  death  by  him, 
was  the  first  who  was  of  a  different  family.  One, 
says  Josephus,  that  "  was  indeed  of  the  stock  of 
Aaron,  but  not  of  this  family"  of  Jozadak. 

What,  however,  for  a  time  saved  the  Jewish 
institutions,  infused  a  new  life  and  consistency 
into  the  priesthood  and  the  national  religion,  and 
enabled  them  to  fulfil  their  destined  course  till 
the  advent  of  Christ,  was  the  cruel  and  impolitic 
persecution  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  This  tho- 
roughly aroused  the  piety  and  national  spirit  of  the 
Jews,  and  drew  together  in  defence  of  their  temple 
and  country  all  who  feared  God  and  were  attached 
to  their  national  institutions.  The  result  was  that 
after  the  high-priesthood  had  been  brought  to  the 
lowest  degradation  by  the  apostacy  and  crimes  of 
the  last  Onias  or  Menelaus,  and  after  a  vacancy  of 
seven  years  had  followed  the  brief  pontificate  of 
Alcimus,  his  no  less  infamous  successor,  a  new  and 
glorious  succession  of  high-priests  arose  in  the 
Asmonean  family,  who  united  the  dignity  of  civil 
rulers,  and  for  a  time  of  independent  sovereigns,  to 
that  of  the  high-priesthood.  Josephus,  who  is 
followed  by  Lightfoot,  Selden,  and  others,  calls 
Judas  Maccabaeus  "high-priest  of  the  nation  of 
Judah  "  (Ant.  xii.  10,  §6),  but,  according  to  the 
far  better  authority  of  1  Mace.  x.  'Jo,  it  was  not  till 
after  the  death  of  Judas  Maccabaeus  that  Alcimus 
himself  died,  and  that  Alexander,  king  of  Syria, 
made  Jonathan,  the  brother  of  Judas,  high-priest. 


'  Josephus  tells  us  of  one  Ananus  and  his  five  sons 
who  all  filled  the  office  of  high-priest  in  turn.  One 
of  these,  Ananus  the  younger,  was  deposed  by  king 


HIGH-PRIEST 

Josephus  himself  too  calls  Jonathan  "  the  first  of 
the    sons   of  Asamoneus,    who   was   high-priest " 
( Vita,  §1).     It  is  possible,  however,  that  Judas 
may  have  been  elected  by  the  people  to  the  office  of 
high-priest,  though    never  confirmed  in  it  by  the 
Syrian  kings.     The  Asmonean  family  were  priests 
of  the  course  of  Joiarib,  the  first  of  the  twenty- 
four  courses  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  7),  and  whose  return 
from  captivity  is  recorded  1  Chr.  ix.   10,  Neh.  xi. 
10.     They  were  probably  of  the  house  of  Eleazar, 
though  this  cannot  be  affirmed  with  certainty  ;  and 
Josephus  tells  us  that  he  himself  was  related  to 
them,  one  of  his  ancestors  having  married  a  daughter 
of  Jonathan,  the   first  high-priest  of  the    house. 
This  Asmonean  dynasty  lasted  from  B.C.  153,  till 
the  family  was  damaged  by  intestine  divisions,  and 
then  destroyed  by  Herod  the  Great.     Aristobulus, 
the  last  high-priest  of  his  line,  brother  of  Mariamne, 
was  murdered  by  order  of  Herod,  his  brother-in-law, 
B.C.  35.     The  independence  of  Judaea,  under  the. 
priest-kings   of  this    race,  had  lasted  till  Pompey 
took  Jerusalem,  and  sent  king  Aristobulus  II.  (who 
had  also  taken  the  high-priesthood  from  his  brother 
Hyreauus)  a  prisoner  to  Rome.     Pompey  restored 
Hvrcanus  to  the  high-priesthood,  but  forbad  him 
to    wear   the    diadem.       Everything    Jewish    was 
now,  however,  hastening  to  decay.     Herod  made 
men  of  low  birth  high-priests,  deposed  them  at 
his  will,  and  named  others  in  their  room.     In  this 
he  was  followed  by  Archelaus,  and  by  the  Romans 
when   they  took  the  government  of  Judaea  into 
their  own  hands  ;  so  that  there  were  no  fewer  than 
twenty-eight  high-priests  from  the  reign  of  Herod 
to  the  destruction  of  the  Temple  by  Titus,  a  period 
of  107  years.'     The  N.  T.  introduces  us  to  some  ot 
these   later,    and   oft-changing   high- priests,    viz., 
Annas  and  Caiaphas — the    former,  high-priest   at 
the   commencement   of  John    Baptist's    ministry. 
with  Caiaphas   as  second  priest ;    and    the   latter 
high-priest  himself  at  our  Lord's  crucifixion — and 
Ananias,  thought  to  be  the  same  as  Ananus  who 
was  murdered  bv  the  Zealots  just  before  the  siege 
of  Jerusalem,  before  whom  St.  Paul  was  tried,  as  we 
read  Acts  xxiii.,  and  of  whom  he  said  "God  shall 
smite  thee,  thou  whited  wall."    Theophilus,  the  son 
of  Ananus,  was  the   high-priest  from  whom  Saul 
received    letters    to    the   synagogue,  at    Damascus 
(Acts  ix.  1,  14,  Kuinoel).     Both  he  and  Ananias 
seem  certainly  to  have  presided  in  the  Sanhedrim, 
and  that   officially,  nor  is  Lightfoot's  explanation 
(viii.  450,  and  484)  of  the  mention  of  the  high- 
priest,  though  Gamaliel  and  his  son  Simeon  were 
respectively  presidents  of  the  Sanhedrim,  at  all  pro- 
bable or  satisfactory  (see  Acts  v.  17,  &c).     The 
last  high-priest  was  appointed  by  lot  by  the  Zealots 
from  the  course  of  priests  called  by  Josephus  Eni- 
achim  (probably  a  corrupt  reading  for  Jachim).    He 
is  thus  described  by  the  Jewish  historian.     "His 
name  was  Phannias :  he  was  the  son  of  Samuel  of  the 
village  of  Aphtha,  a  man  not  only  not  of  the  number 
of  the  chief  priests,  but  who,  such  a  mere  rustic  was 
he,  scarcely  knew  what  the  high-priesthood  meant. 
Yet  did  they  drag  him  reluctant  from  the  country, 
and  setting  "him  forth  in  a  borrowed  character  as  on 
the  stage,"  they  put  the  sacred  vestments  on  him, 
and  instructed  him   how  to  act   on   the  occasion. 
This  shocking  impiety,  which  to  them  was  a  sub- 
ject of  merriment  and  sport,  drew  bears  from  the 

Agrippa  for  the  part  he  took  in  causing  "James  the 
brother  of  Jesus  who  was  called  Christ"  to  lie  -toned 
[Ant.  xx.  9,  §1). 


HIGH  PRIEST 

other  priests,  who  beheld  from  a  distance  their  law 
turned  into  ridicule,  and  groaned  over  the  subver- 
sion of  the  sacred  honours"  (/>.  ./.  iv.  3,  §8). 
Thus  ignominiously  ended  the  series  of  high-priests 
which  had  stretched  in  a  scarcely  broken  line, 
through  nearly  fourteen,  or,  according  to  the  com- 
mon chronology,  sixteen  centuries.  The  Egyptian, 
Assyrian,  Babylonian,  Persian,  Grecian,  and  Roman 
empires,  which  the  Jewish  high-priests  had  seen  in 
turn  over-shadowing  the  world,  had  each,  except 
the  last,  one  by  one  withered  away  and  died — and 
now  the  last  successor  of  Aaron  was  stripped  of  his 
sacerdotal  robes,  and  the  temple  which  he  served 
laid  level  with  the  ground  to  rise  no  more.  But 
this  did  not  happen,  till  the  true  High-priest  and 
King  of  Israel,  the  Minister  of  the  sanctuary  and 
of  the  true  Tabernacle  which  the  Lord  pitched,  and 
not  man,  had  offered  His  one  sacrifice,  once  tor  all, 
anil  had  taken  His  place  at  the  right  hand  of  the 
.Majesty  in  the  heavens,  bearing  on  His  breast  the 
judgment  of  His  redeemed  people,  and  continuing 
a  Priest  for  ever,  in  the  .Sanctuary  which  shall 
never  be  taken  down  ! 

The  subjoined  table  shows  the  succession  of  high- 
priests,  as  far  as  it  can  be  ascertained,  and  of  the 
contemporary  civil  rulers. 

CIVIL  RULER.  lIIC.lI-rim.ST. 

Moses       Aaron. 

Joshua Eleazar. 

Othniel Phinehas. 

Abishua Abishua. 

Eli Eli. 

Samuel Ahitub. 

Saul Ahijah. 

David       Zadok  and  Abiathar. 

Solomon \z.iriah. 

Abijah Johanan. 

Asa Azariah. 

Jehoshapbat Amariah. 

Jeboram Jehoiada. 

Abaziah ,, 

Jeboasb Eo.  and  Zechariab. 

Amaziah 1 

Uzziah Azariah. 

Jotbam ? 

Abaz         Urijah. 

Hezekiab         Azariah. 

Manasseh        shallum. 

Anion       ,, 

Josiah      Ililkiah. 

Jehoiakim        \zariali  1 

Zedekiah Seraiab. 

Evil-Merodach        rebozadak. 

Zerubbabel     (Cyrus     and  Jesbua, 

Darius  . 

Mnrdecai  !  (Xerxes)       . .    Joiakim. 
Ezra  and  Neheiniah  (Arta-    Eliashib. 

xerxes). 
Darius  Notluis         loiada. 

Artaxerxes  Mnemon      . .  Johanan. 

Alexander  the  Great      ..  Jaddua, 

Onias  I.  (Ptolemy  Soter,  Oniaa  l. 

Antigonus). 

Ptolemy  Soter        . .     . .  Simon  the  Just. 

Ptolemy  Philadelphia    ..  Eleazar. 

,,       Manasseb. 

Ptolemy  Euergetes..     ..  Onias  JX 

Ptolemy  Philopator        ..  Simon  II. 

Ptolemy    Epiphanes    and  Oniaa  III. 

Antiochus. 

Antiochus  Epiphanes      ..  (Joshua,  or)  .1 i. 

„       Onias,  or  Mrnelaus. 

Demetrius        lacimus,  or  Alcimus. 

Alexander  lialas      ..      ..  Jonathan,  brother  ol'.luda- 
Maccabeus  (Asmonean). 


HILKIAH  813 

CIVIL  RULER.  HIGH-PRIEST. 

Simon  (Asmonean) .  •      ..  Simon  (Asmonean). 

John  Hyreanus  (Asm.)   ..  John  Hyrcanus  (Do.). 

King  Aristobulus    (Asm.)  Aristobulus  (Do.). 

Kins;  Alexander  Jannaeus  Alexander      Jannaeus 

(Asmonean).  (Do.). 

Queen  Alexandra   (Asm.)  Hyrcanus  IE    (Do.). 

King  Aristobulus  IE  (As-  Aristobulus  II.  (Do.). 

monean). 

Pompey    the    Great    and  Hyrcanus  IE   (Do.). 
Hyreanus,     or    rather, 
towards  the  end  of  his 
pontificate,    Antipater. 

Pacorus  the  Parthian     ..  Antigonus   (Do.). 

Herod  K.  of  Judaea.      ..  Ananelus. 

,,  Aristobulus    (last   of  As- 

moneans)  murdered  by 
Herod. 

,,  Ananelus  restored. 

Herod  the  Great     . .      .  .  Jesus,  son  of  Faneus. 

,,  Simon,    son    of    Boethus, 

father-in-law  to  Herod. 

„  Matthias,     son    of    Theo- 

philus. 

,,  Jozarus,  son  of  Simon. 

Archelaus,  K.  of  Judaea . .  Eleazar. 

„  Jesus  son  of  Sie. 

,,  Jozarus  (second  time). 

Cyrenius,  governor  of  Sy-  Ananus. 

ria,  second  time. 

Valerius    Gratus,    procu-  Ishmael,  son  of  Phabi. 
rator  of  Judea. 

,,  Eleazar,  son  of  Ananus. 

,,  Simon,  son  of  Kamith. 

,,  Caiaphas,   called  also  Jo- 

seph. 

Vitcllius,  governor  of  Syria  Jonathan,  son  of  Ananus. 

,,  Theophilus,  brother  of  Jo- 

nathan. 

Herod  Agrippa        . .      . .  Simon  Cantheras. 

,,  Matthias,   brother  of  Jo- 

nathan, son  of  Ananus. 

,,  .....      ..  Elioneus,  son  of  Cantheras. 

Herod,  king  of  Clialcis  .  .  Joseph,  son  of  Camei. 

,, Ananias,  son  of  Nebedeus. 

„  .  ,      . .      . .  Jonathan. 

„  Ismael,  son  of  Fabi. 

,,  Joseph,  son  of  Simon. 

,,  Ananus,  son  of  Ananus,  or 

Ananias. 

Appointed  by  the  people . .  Jesus  son  of  Gamaliel. 

Do.  (Winston  on  B.  J.  iv.  Matthias,    son    of    Theo- 

3,  §7).  philus. 

Chosen  by  lot l'hannias  son  of  Samuel. 

The  latter  part  of  the  above  list  is  taken  partly 
from  Lightfoot,  vol.  ix.  cb.  iv. — also  in  part  from 
Josephus  directly,  and  in  part  from  Whiston's  note 
on  Ant.  xv.  8,  §5.  [A.  C.  11.] 

III'LEN  i]^n  ;    v   ZtXvd,    Alex.    NtjAuj/ ;  " 

.  the  name  of  a  cityof  Judah  allotted  with 

its  ".suburbs"  to  the  priests     1   Ciir.  vi.  58    :    and 

which  in  the  corresponding  li.-t-  of  Joshua  is  called 

IloI.ILN.  [G.] 

HILKFAII  (■lnjj&n  and  iTP>n.  -  the  Lord 
is  my  portion;"  XcAxfas:  //■  Jcias).  'l.  HiLKl  \m  . 
fatliei-  of  Eliakim  (•_'  K.  xviii.  37;  Is.  \.\ii.  20, 
xxxvi.  22  i.     [Eli  \mm.  | 

2.  High-priesl  in  the  reign  of  Josiah  (2  K.  rrii. 
4sqq. ;  2  Chr.  xxxiv.  9sqq.;  1  Esdr.  i.  8).  Ve- 
to the  geni  dogj  in  l  I  !hr.  vi.  13  a.  \  .  | 
he  was  son  "f  Shallum,  and  from  Ezr.  vii.  I,  ap- 
parently the  ancestor  of  Ezra  the  scribe.    His  high- 

1  In  the  EXX.  this  name  appears  in  vcr.  59,  having 
changed  places  with  Jattir. 


814 


HILKIAH 


priesthood  was  rendered  particularly  illustrious  by 
the  great   reformation    effected    under    it   by  king 
Josiah,  by  the  solemn  Passover  kept  at  Jerusalem 
in  the  18th  year  of  that  king's  reign,  and  above  all 
by  the  discovery  which  he  made  of  the  book  of  the 
law  of  Moses  in  the  temple.     With  regard  to  the 
latter,  Kennicott  (//.  b.  Text.  ii.  299)  is  of  opinion 
that   it  was    the  original  autograph  copy   of  the 
Pentateuch  written  by  Moses  which  Hilkiah  found. 
He  argues  from  the  peculiar  form  of  expression  in 
2  Chr.  xxxiv.  14,   HLTJ  T3   mil?   rrtfl   1BD, 
"  the  book  of  the  law  of  Jehovah  by  the  hand  of 
Moses  ;"  whereas  in  the  fourteen  other  places  in  the 
0.  T.  where  the  law  of  Moses  or  the  book  of  Moses 
are  mentioned,  it  is  either  "  the  book  of  Moses,"  or 
"  the  law  of  Moses,"  or  "  the  book  of  the  law  of 
Moses."     But  the  argument  is  far  from  conclusive, 
because  the  phrase  in  question  may  quite  as  pro- 
perly signify  "  the   book  of  the  law   of  the  Lord 
given  through  Moses."      Compare   the    expression 
iv  xeipl   /ueiriTou  (Gal.   iii.  19),  and   HD'O  "P3 
(Ex.  ix.  35,  xxxv.  29  ;  Neh.  x.  29  ;  2  Chr.  xxxv. 
6;  Jer.  1.  1).     Though,  however,  the  copy  cannot 
be  proved  to  have  been  Moses'  autograph  from  the 
words  in  question,  it  seems  probable  that  it  was, 
from  the  place   where  it  was   found,   viz.   in  the 
temple;  and,  from   its  not  having  been  discovered 
before,  but  being  only  brought  to  light  on  the  oc- 
casion of  the  repairs   wrhich  were  necessary,  and 
from  the  discoveier  being  the  high-priest  himself,  it 
seems  natural  to  conclude  that  the  particular  part 
of  the  temple  where  it   was    found   was  one  not 
usually  frequented,  or  ever  by  any  but  the  high- 
priest.     Such  a  place  exactly  was  the  one  where  we 
know  the  original  copy  of  the  law  was  deposited  by 
command  of  Moses,  viz.  by  the  side  of  the  ark  of 
the  covenant  within  the  vail,  as  we  learn  from  Deut. 
xxxi.  9,  26.     A  difficult  and  interesting  question 
arises,  What  was  the  book  found  by  Hilkiah?    Was 
it  the  whole  Pentateuch,  as  Le  Clerc,  Keil,  Ewald, 
&c,  suppose,  or  the  three  middle  books,  as  Bertheau, 
or  the  book  of  Deuteronomy  alone,  as  De  Wette, 
Gesenius,    Rosenmuller,   &c.  ?     Our  means  of  an- 
swering this  question  seem  to  be  limited,  (1)  to  an 
examination  of  the  terms  in  which  the  depositing 
the  book  of  the   law  by  the   ark  was   originally 
enjoined;   (2)  to  an  examination  of  the  contents  of 
the  book  discovered   by   Hilkiah,    as    far  as   they 
transpire ;    (3)  to  any  indications   which  may  be 
gathered  from  the  contemporary  writings  of  Jere- 
miah, or  from  any  other  portions  of  Scripture.     As 
regards  the  first,  a  comparison  of  Deut.  i.  5  with 
xxxi.  9  ;  the  consideration  how  exactly  suited  Deu- 
teronomy is  for  the  purpose  of  a  public  recital,  as 
commanded  Deut.  xxxi.  10-13,  whereas  the  recital 
of  the  whole   Pentateuch  is  scarcely  conceivable ; 
and  perhaps  even  the  smaller  bulk  of  a  copy  of 
Deuteronomy  compared  with  that  of  the  whole  law, 
considered  with  reference  to  its  place  by  the  ark, 
point  strongly  to  the  conclusion  that  "  the  book  of 
the  law"  ordered  to  be  put  "  in  the  side  of  the 
ark  of  the  covenant,"  was  the  book  of  Deuteionomy 
alone,  whether  or  no  exactly  in  its  present  form  is 
a   further  question.     As    regards   the   second,  the 
28th  and   29th  chapters  of  Deut.  seem  to  be  those 
especially  referred  to  in  2  K.  xxii.  13,  16,  17,  and 
2  K.  xxiii.   2,  3  seem  to  point  directly  to  Deut. 
xxix.  1,  iu  the  mention  of  the  covenant,  and  ver.  3 
of  the  former  to  Deut.  xxx.  2,  in  the  expression 
with  all  their  heart  and  all  their  soul.     The  words 
in   2   Chr.  xxxv.  ."..  "  The  Levites  that  taught  all 


HILKIAH 

Israel,"  »eem  also  to  refer  to  Deut.  xxxiii.  10.  All 
the  actions  of  Josiah  which  followed  the  reading  of 
the  book  found,  the  destruction  of  all  idolatrous 
symbols,  the  putting  away  of  wizards  and  workers 
with  familiar  spirits,  and  the  keeping  of  the  Pass- 
over, were  such  as  would  follow  from  hearing  the 
16th,  18th,  and  other  chapters  of  Deuteronomy, 
while  there  is  not  one  that  points  to  any  precept 
contained  in  the  other  books,  and  not  in  Deutei- 
onomy.  If  there  is  any  exception  to  this  statement 
it  is  to  be  found  in  the  description  of  the  Passover 
in  ch.  xxxv.  The  phiases  "  on  the  fourteenth  day 
of  the  first  mouth,"  irr  ver.  1  ;  "  Sanctify  your- 
selves, and  prepare  your  brethren,  that  they  may 
do  according  to  the  word  of  the  Lord  by  the  hand 
of  Moses,"  ver.  6  ;  "  The  priests  sprinkled  the 
blood,"  ver.  1 1  ;  and  perhaps  the  allusion  in  ver. 
12,  may  be  thought  to  point  to  Lev.  xxiii.  5,  or 
Num.  ix.  3;  to  Lev.  xxii.  and  Num.  viii.  '_'h--_''_>  ; 
to  Lev.  i.  5  ;  iii.  2,  &c. ;  and  to  Lev.  hi.  3-5,  &c. 
respectively.  But  the  allusions  ;ue  not  marked, 
and  it  must  be  lemembered  that  the  Levitical  in- 
stitutions existed  in  practice,  and  that  the  other 
books  of  Moses  were  certainly  extant,  though  they 
were  not  kept  by  the  side  of  the  ark.  As  legaids 
the  third,  it  is  well  known  how  full  the  writings 
of  Jeiemiah  are  of  diiect  references  and  of  points 
of  resemblance  to  the  book  of  Deuteronomy.  Now 
this  is  at  once  accounted  for  on  the  supposition  of 
the  law  thus  found  by  Hilkiah  being  that  book, 
which  would  thus  naturally  be  au  object  of  special 
curiosity  and  study  to  the  prophet,  and  as  naturally 
influence  his  own  writings.  Moreover,  in  an  un- 
dated prophecy  of  Jeiemiah's  (ch.  xi.a),  which 
seems  to  have  been  occasioned  by  the  finding  of 
this  covenant — for  he  introduces  the  mention  of 
"  the  words  of  this  covenant"  quite  abruptly — he 
quotes  word  for  word  from  Deut.  xxvii.  26,  answer- 
ing Amen  himself,  as  the  people  are  there  directed 
to  do,  with  reference  to  the  curse  for  disobedience 
(see  ver.  3,  5)  ;  a  very  strong  confirmation  of  the 
preceding  arguments  which  tend  to  prove  that 
Deuteronomy  was  the  book  found  by  Hilkiah. 
But  again:  in  Josh.  viii.  we  have  the  account  of 
the  first  execution  by  Joshua  and  the  Israelites 
of  that  which  Moses  had  commanded  relative  to 
writing  the  law  upon  stones  to  be  set  upon  Mount 
Ebal ;  and  it  is  added  in  ver.  34,  "  and  afterwards 
he  read  all  the  words  of  the  law,  the  blessings  and 
cursings,  according  to  all  that  is  written  in  the 
book  of  the  law."  In  ver.  32  he  had  said  "  he 
wrote  there  upon  the  stones  a  copy  of  the  law  of 
Moses."  Now  not  only  is  it  impossible  to  imagine 
that  the  whole  Pentateuch  was  transcribed  on  these 
stoues,  but  all  the  references  which  transpire  are 
to  the  book  of  Deuteronomy.  The  altar  of  whole 
stones  untouched  by  iron  tool,  the  peace-offerings, 
the  blessings  and  the  cursings,  as  well  as  the  act 
itself  of  writing  the  law  on  stones  and  setting  them 
on  Mount  Ebal,  and  placing  half  the  tiibes  on 
Mount  Ebal,  and  the  other  half  on  Mount  Gerizim, 
all  belong  to  Deuteronomy.  And  therefore  when  it 
is  added  in  ver.  35,  "  There  was  not  a  word  of  all 
that  Moses  commanded  which  Joshua  Had  not 
before  all  the  congregation  of  Israel,"  we  seem  con- 
strained to  accept  the  words  with  the  limitation  to 
the  book  of  Deuteronomy,  as  that  which  alone  was 
ordered  by  Moses  to  be  thus  publicly  read.       \nd 


a  Hitzisr,  on  Jer.  xi.,  also  supposes  the  expres- 
sions in  this  chapter  to  have  been  occasioned  by  the 
finding  of  the  book  of  the  law. 


HILKIAH 

this  increases  the  probability  that  here  too  the  ex- 
pression is  limited  to  the  same  book. 

The  only  discordant  evidence  is  that  of  the  book 
of  Nehemiah.  In  tin1  8th  chapter  of  that  hunk,  ami 
ix.  :s,  we  have  the  public  reading  by  Ezra  of  "  the 
book  of  the  law  of  Moses"  to  the  whole  congre- 
gation at  the  feast  of  Tabernacles,  in  evident  obe- 
dience to  Deut.  xxxi.  10-13.  But  it  is  quite  cer- 
tain, from  Neb.,  viii.  14-17,  that  on  the  second  day 
they  read  out  of  Leviticus,  because  the  directions 
about  dwelling  in  booths  are  found  there  only,  in 
eh.  xxiii.  Moreover  in  the  prayer  of  the  Levites 
which  follows  Neh.  ix.  5,  and  which  is  appa- 
rently based  upon  the  previous  reading  of  the  law 
reference  is  freely  made  to  all  the  books  of  Moses, 
ami  indeed  to  the  later  books  also.  It  is,  however, 
perhaps  not  an  improbable  inference  that,  Ezra 
having  lately  completed  his  edition  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  more  was  read  on  this  occasion  than  was 
strictly  enjoined  by  Deut.  xxxi.,  and  that  therefore 
this  transaction  does  not  leally  weaken  the  fore- 
going evidence. 

But  no  little  surprise  has  been  expressed  by 
critics  at  the  previous  non-acquaintance  with  this 
book  on  the  part  of  Hilkiah,  Josiah,  and  the  people 
generally,  which  their  manner  of  receiving  it  plainly 
evidences;  and  some  have  argued  from  hence  that 
"  the  law  of  Moses  "  is  not  of  older  date  than  the 
reign  of  Josiah :  in  fact  that  Josiah  and  Hilkiah 
invented  it,  and  pretended  to  have  found  a  copy  in 
the  temple  in  order  to  give  sanction  to  the  reform- 
ation which  they  had  in  hand.  The  following  re- 
marks are  intended  to  point  out  the  true  inferences 
to  be  drawn  from  the  narrative  of  this  remarkable 
discovery  in  the  books  of  Kings  and  Chronicles, 
'fhe  direction  in  Deut.  xxxi.  10-13  for  the  public 
reading  of  the  law  at  the  least  of  Tabernacles  on 
each  seventh  year,  or  year  of  release,  to  the  whole 
congregation,  as  the  means  of  perpetuating  the  know- 
ledge of  tin'  law,  sufficiently  shows  that  at  that 
time  a  multiplication  of  copies  and  a  multitude  of 
readers  was  not  contemplated.  The  same  thing 
seems  to  be  implied  also  in  the  direction  given  in 
Deut.  xvii.  18,  19,  concerning  the  copy  of  the  law 
to  be  made,  for  the  special  use  of  the  king,  distinct 
from  that  in  the  keeping  of  the  priests  and  l.evites. 
And  this  paucity  of  copies  and  of  readers  is  just 
what  one  would  have  expected  in  an  age  when  the 
art  of  reading  and  writing  was  confined  to  the  pro- 
il  scribes,  ami  the  very  few  others  who,  like 
Muses  had  learnt  the  art  in  Egypt  (Acts  vii.  22  . 
The  troublous  time-,  of  the  Judges  were  obviously 
more  likely  to  obliterate  than  to  promote  the  study 
of  letter^.  And  whatei  er  occa  sional  revival  of  sacred 
learning  may  have  taken  place  under  sneh  kings  as 
David,  Solomon,  Jehoshaphat,  Uzziah,  Jotham,  and 
Ilezekiah,  vet  on  the  other  hand  Mich  reigns  as  that 
of  Athaliah,  the  last  years  of  leash,  that  ofAhaz, 
and  above  all  the  long  reign  of  Manasseh,  with 
their  idolatries  ami  national  calamities,  must  have 
been  most,  unfavourable  to  the  study  of  ••  the 
sacred    letters."       <  * 1 1    the    whole,    in    the    days    of 

Josiah  irreligion  and  ignorance  had  overflowed  ail 
the. dykes  erected  to  stay  their  p  i  jress.  In  spite 
of  such  occasional  acts  as  the  public  reading  of  the 

law  to  the  people,  enjoi 1  by  Jehoshaphat  (2  Chr, 

xvii.  9),  and  such  insulated  evidences  of  the  kind's 
reading  the  law,  as  commanded  by  Moses,  as  the 
action  recorded  of  ^nftziab  affords  ('-'  K.  \r 
where  by  the  way  the  reference   is   still  to  the  1 k 

of  Deuteronomy — ami  the  \,t  more  marked  ac- 
quaintance with  the   law   attributed   to   Hezekiah 


HILLS 


815 


(2  K.  xviii.  5,  0)  [Genealogy],  everything  in 
Josiah's  reign  indicates  a  very  low  state  of  know- 
ledge. There  were  indeed  still  professional  scribes 
among  the  Levites  (2  Chr.  xxxiv.  13),  and  Shaphan 
was  the  king's  scribe.  But  judging  from  the  nar- 
rative, 2  K.  xxii.  8,  10 ;  2  Chr.  xxxiv.,  it  seems 
probable  that  neither  Hilkiah  nor  Josiah  could  read. 
The  same  may  perhaps  be  said  of  Jeremiah,  who 
was  always  attended  by  Baruch  the  scribe,  who 
wrote  down  the  words  of  Jeremiah  from  his  mouth 
(Jer.  xxxvi.  2,  4,  6,  8,  18,  28,  32,  xlv.,  &c). 
How  then  can  we  wonder  that  under  such  circum- 
stances the  knowledge  of  the  law  had  fallen  into 
desuetude?  or  tail  to  see  in  the  incident  of  the 
startling  discovery  of  the  copy  of  it  by  Hilkiah 
one  of  those  many  instances  of  simple  truthfulness 
which  impress  on  the  Scripture  narrative  such  an 
unmistakeable  stamp  of  authenticity,  when  it  is 
read  in  the  same  guileless  spirit  in  which  it  is 
written?  In  fact,  the  ignorance  of  the  law  of  Moses 
which  this  history  reveals  is  in  most  striking  har- 
mony with  the  prevalent  idolatry  disclosed  by  the 
previous  history  of  Judaea,  especially  since  its  con- 
nexion with  the  house  of  Ahab,  as  well  as  with  the 
low  state  of  education  which  is  apparent  from  so 
many  incidental  notices. 

The  story  of  Hilkiah's  discovery  throws  no  light 
whatever  upon  the  mode  in  which  other  portions 
of  the  .Scriptures  were  preserved,  and  therefore  this 
is  not  the  place  to  consider  it.  But  Thenius 
truly  observes  that  the  expression  in  2  K.  xxii.  8 
clearly  implies  that  the  existence  of  the  law  of 
Moses  was  a  thing  well  known  to  the  Jews.  It  is 
interesting  to  notice  the  concurrence  of  the  king 
with  the  high-priest  in  the  restoiation  of  the  temple, 
as  well  as  the  analogy  of  the  circumstances  with  wdiat 
took  place  in  the  reign  of  Joash,  when  Jehoiada  was 
high-priest, as  related  2  Chr.  xxiv.  (Bertheau,  ad  loc. ; 
Prideaux,  Connect,  i.  43,  315;  Lewis,  Orig.  Heb. 
B.  viii.  eh.  8,  &c).     [Ciielcias.]        [A.  C.  II.] 

3.  Hilkiah  (LXX.  omits;  Helcias), a Merarite 
Levite,  son  of  Amzi,  one  of  the  ancestors  of  ETHAN 
(1  Chr.  vi.  45  ;  hebr.  30). 

4.  Hilkiahu  ;  another  Merarite  Levite,  second 
son  of  Hosah;  among  the  doorkeepers  of  the  taber- 
nacle in  the  time  of  king  David  (1  Chr.  x.wi.  II). 

5.  Hilktah  ;  one  of  those  who  stood  on  the 
right  hand  of  Ezra  when  he  read  the  law  to  the 
people.  Doubtless  a  Levite,  and  probably  a  priest 
(  Neh.  viii.  4).  He  may  be  identical  with  the  Hil- 
kiah who  came  up  in  the  expedition  with  Jeshua 
and  Zerubbabel  (xii.  7),  and  whose  descendant 
Ilashabiah   is  commemorated  as  living  in  th 

of  Joiakim  (xii.  21). 

6.  Hilkiahu  ;  a  priest,  of  Anathoth,  father  of 

the  prophet  JEREMIAH  (Jer.  i.  1). 

7.  Hilkiah,  father  of  Gemariah,  who  was  one 
of  Zedekiah's  envoys  to  Babylon  (Jer.  \\ix.  .'!). 

HIL'LEL  {hhn  ;  'EAAtjA,  Alex.  2«AA^:  Jo- 
seph. "eaatjAos  ;  Tlh-h,  a  native  of  Pirathon  in 
Mount   Ephraim,    lather  of  Abdon,   one   of  the 

judges  of  Israel  (Jlldg.  xii.    13,    I 

HILLS.  The  structure  and  characteristics  of 
the  lulls  of  Palestine  will  be  most  conveniently 
noticed  in  the  general  description  of  the  features  of 
the  country.  [Palestine.]  Bui  it  maj  no!  be 
unprofitable  to  call  attention  here  to  the  i 
Hebrew  terms  for  which  the  word  "hill"  has  been 
employed  in  the  \uth.  Version. 

I.  Gibeah,  P1JD3,  from   a   root  akin  to  22). 


816 


HIX 


which  seems  to  have  the  force  of  curvature  or  hump- 
ishness.  A  word  involving  this  idea  is  peculiarly 
applicable  to  the  rounded  hills  of  Palestine,  and 
from  it  are  derived,  as  has  been  pointed  out  under 
Gibeah.  the  names  of  several  places  situated  on 
hills.  Our  translators  have  been  consistent  in  ren- 
dering gibeah  bv  "  hill  ;"  in  four  passages  onlv 
qualifying  it  as  "  little  hill,"  doubtless  tor  the  more 
complete  antithesis  to  "mountain"  (Ps.  1st.  12, 
lxxii.  3,  exiv.  - 

2.  But  they  have  also  employed  the  same  Eng- 
lish word  for  the  very  different  term  har,  ~l!"l, 
which  has  a  much  more  extended  sense  thangibeoh, 
meaning  a  whole  district  rather  than  an  individual 
eminence,  and  to  which  our  word  "mountain" 
answers  with  tolerable  accuracy.  This  exchange 
is  always  undesirable,  but  it  sometimes  occurs  so  as 
to  confuse  the  meaning  of  a  passage  where  it  is  de- 
sirable that  the  topography  should  be  unmistake- 
able.  For  instance,  in  Ex.  xxiv.  4,  the  "  hill "  is 
the  same  which  is  elsewhere  in  the  same  chapter 
( 1-',  13.  IS,  &e.  and  book,  consistentlv  and  accu- 
rately rendered  "  mount ''  and  "  mountain."  In 
Num.  xiv.  44,  4.5,  the  "hill"  is  the  "mountain" 
of  ver.  40,  as  also  in  Deut.  i.  41,  43,  compared 
with  24,  44.  In  Josh.  xv.  9,  the  allusion  is  to 
the  Mount  of  Olives,  correctly  called  "  mountain  " 
in  the  preceding  verse  :  and  so  also  in  2  Sam.  xvi. 
13.  The  country  of  the  "hills,"  in  Deut.  i.  7  ; 
Josh.  ix.  1,  x.  40,  xi.  16,  is  the  elevated  district 
of  Judah,  Benjamin  and  Ephraim,  which  is  correctlv 
called  "  the  mountain  "  in  the  earliest  descriptions 
of  Palestine  (Xum.  xiii.  29),  and  in  ma: 
sequent  passages.  The  "holy  hill"  |  Ps.  iii.  4  . 
the  "  hill  of  Jehovah "  xxiv.  3  .  the  "  hill  of 
God"  (lxviii.  15),  are  nothing  else  than  "Mount 
Zion."  In  2  K.  i.  9  and  iv.  27,  the  use  of  the 
word  "  hill "  obscures  the  allusion  to  Carrnel, 
which  in  other  passages  of  the  life  of  the  prophet 
1  K.  xviii.  19  :  2  K.  iv.  2b)  has  the  term 
"  mount  "  correctly  attached  to  it.  Other  places  in 
the  historical  books  in  which  the  same  substitution 
weakens  the  force  of  the  narrative,  are  as  follows : 
Gen.  vii.  19  ;  Deut.  viii.  7  :  Josh.  xiii.  6.  xviii. 
13,  14  .  _     .  ■;.  3  ;   1  Sam.  xxiii.  14:  xxv.  20  : 

xxvi.  13;  2  Sam.  xiii.  34:   1  K.  xx.  ^o,  28,  xxii. 
17.  .v  . 

■a  one  occasion  the  word  JTa'aleh,  ii?!'".  :- 
rendered  "  hill,"  viz.  1  Sam.  ix.  11,  where  it  would 
be  better  to  employ  "  ascent"  or  some  similar  term. 
4.  In  the  N.  T.  the  word  "hill"  is  employed 
to  render  the  Greek  word  fiovvos ;  but  on  one  occa- 
sion it  is  used  for  opos,  elsewhere  "  mountain,"  so 

•  "  -'Scure  the  connexion  between  the  two  parts 
of  the  same  narrative.  The  "hill"  from  which 
Jesus  was  coming  down  in  Luke  ix.  37,  is  the  same 

-  '  :  he  mountain "  into  which  He  had  trone  for 
His  transfiguration  the  day  before  (eomp.  v 
In  Matt.  v.  14,  and  Luke  iv.  29,  opos  is  also  ren- 
dered "  hill,"  but  not  with  the  inconvenience 
just  noticed.  In  Luke  i.  39,  the  "  hill  country  " 
(J)bpeivT)j  is  the  same  "  mountain  of  Judah  "  to 
which  frequent  reference  is  made  in  the  0.  T.    [G.] 

HIX.     [Measures.] 

HIXD  rP*K  :  %\a<pos  :  cerrms  .  the  female  of 
the  common  stag  or  a  -.     It    is    fre- 

quently noticed  in  the  poetical  parts  of  Scripture 
as  emblematic  of  activity  Mien.  xlix.  21  :  2  Sam. 
xxii.  34:  Ps.  xviii.  33:  Hab.  iii.  19),  gentleness 
Ptoy.  v.  19),  feminine  modesty  (Cant.  ii.  7.  iii. 


HIXXOM,  VALLEY  <  >F 

.:.e>t  longing  v  Ps.  xiii.  1  .  and  maternal 
affection  (Jer.  xiv.  5  .  Its  shyness  and  remoteness 
from  the  haunts  of  men  are  also  noticed  'Job  xxxix. 
1  .  and  its  timidity,  causing  it  to  cast  its  vouns  at 
the  sound  of  thunder  (Ps.  xxix.  9).  'The  con- 
clusion which  some  have  drawn  from  the  passage 
last  quoted  that  the  hind  produces  her  vouns  with 
great  difficulty,  is  not  in  reality  deducible  from  the 
words,  and  is  expressly  contradicted  by  Job  xxxix.  3. 
The  LXX.  reads  ir^K  in  Gen.  xlix.  21,  rendering 

it  <TTe\exos  aveifievov,  "  a  luxuriant  terebinth:" 
Lowth  has  proposed  a  similar  change  in  Ps.  xxix., 
but  in  neither  case  can  the  emendation  be  accepted : 
Naphtali  verified  the  comparison  of  himself  to  a 
"  graceful  or  tall  hind "  by  the  events  recorded  in 
Judg.  iv.  6-9,  v.  IS.  The  inscription  of  Ps.  xxii., 
"  the  hind  of  the  morning,"  probably  refers  to  a  tune 
of  that  name.  [Aijeleth-Shahap..]  [W.  L.  B.] 
HIXGE.  1.  *I*X,  o-Tp6<piy£,  cardo,  with  the 
notion  of  turning  (Ges.  p.  11  65  .  2.  712.  dvpufia, 
.  with  the  notion  of  insertion  (Ges.  p.  1096  . 
Both  ancient  Egyptian  and  modem  Oriental  doors 
were  and  are  hung  by  means  of  pivots  turning  in 
sockets  both  on  the  upper  and  lower  sides.  In 
Syria,  and  especially  the  Hainan,  there  are  manv 
ancient  doors  consisting  of  stone  slabs  with  pivots 
carved  out  of  the  same  piece,  inserted  in  sockets 
above  and  below,  and  fixed  during  the  building  of 
the  house.  The  allusion  in  Prov.  xxvi.  14  is  thus 
clearly  explained.  The  hinges  mentioned  in  1  K. 
probably  of  the  Egyptian  kind,  at- 
tached to  the  upper  and  lower  sides  of  the  door 
'Buckingham.  -.  p.  177:   Port-.. 

.  ii.  22.   192  :   Maundrell,  Early   T 
pp.  447,  44S   (Bohn    :    Shaw.   Trareh,  p.   2k>  : 
Lord  Lindsav,  Lett  _    .  :  Wilkinso:.. 

Eg.  abridgm*.  i.  15).  [H.  W.  P.] 

HIXXOM.  VALLEY  OF,  otherwise  called 
"  the  valley  of  the  son  "  or  '*  children  of  Hinnom" 
(EJirr\3,or  "n"I2"'a,  or  ""'12"*  J.  variously  ren- 
dered by  LXX.  <pdpay£  'Evvofx.,  or  vlov  'Ewofi,  or 
Ycuevva.  Jos.  xviii.  16;  iv  yij  Bevevvofi,  2  Chr. 
xxviii.  3.  xxxiii.  G  :  to  Tro\vdvSpwv  viuv  tccv  t4k- 
vtev-  olvtwv,  Jer.  xix.  2,6  ,  a  deep  and  narrow  ravine, 
with  steep,  rocky  sides  to  the  S.  and  W.  of  Jeru- 
salem, separating  Mount  Zion  to  the  X.  from  the 
"  Hill  of  Evil  Counsel,"  and  the  sloping  rocky 
plateau  of  the  "  plain  of  Rephaim  "  to  the  S. ,  taking 
its  name,  according  to  Professor  Stanley,  from 
•  ■  some  ancient  hero,  the  son  of  Hinnom  "  having 
encamped  in  it  (Stanley.  S'.  $  P-  P-  172).  The 
earliest  mention  of  the  Valley  of  Hinnom  in  the 
sacred  writings  is  Josh.  xv.  S,  xviii.  l»j,  where 
the  boundary-line  between  the  tribes  of  Judah  and 
Benjamin  is  described  with  minute  topographical 
accuracy,  as  passing  along  the  bed  of  the  ravine. 
On  the  southern  brow,  overlooking  the  valley  at  its 
eastern  extremity,  Solomon  erected  high  places  for 
Molech  (1  K .  xi.  7  ,  whose  horrid  iite=  were  revived 
from  time  to  time  in  the  same  vicinity  by  the 
liter  idolatrous  kintrs.  Abaz  and  Manasseh  made 
their  children  "  pass  through  the  hie "  in  this 
valley  2  K.  xvi.  3  :  2  Chi-,  xxviii.  3,  xxx 
and  the  fiendish  custom  of  infant  » 
fire-gods  seems  to  have  been  kept  up  in  T>  i 

-      .  extremitv  for  a  considerable 
vii.  31  :  2  K.  xxiii.  10).     [T<MPBKT.] 
end  to  these  abominations  the  place  v 
Iv  .L.siah.  who  rendered  it  ceremoniaD; 
spreading  over  it  human  bones,  and  other  corrup- 


HINXOM,  VALLEY  OF 

tious  (2  K.  xxiii.  10,  13,  14;  2  Chr.  xxxiv.  4,  5), 
from  which  time  it  appeals  to  have  become  the 
common  cesspool  of  the  city,  into  which  its  sewage 
was  conducted,  to  be  carried  off  by  the  waters  of 
the  Kidron,  as  well  as  a  laystall,  where  all  its  solid 
filth  was  collected.  Most  commentators  follow 
Boxtorf,  Lightfoot,  and  others,  in  asserting  that 
perpetual  rires  were  here  kept  up  for  the  consump- 
tion of  bodies  of  criminals,  carcases  of  animals,  and 
whatever  else  was  combustible;  but  the  Kabbinical 
authorities  usually  brought  forward  in  support  of 
this  idea  appear  insufficient,  and  Robinson  declares 
(i.  _'74i  that  "there  is  no  evidence  of  any  othei 
fires  than  those  of  Molech  having  been  kept  up  in 
this  valley,"  referring  to  Rosenmuller,  Biblisch. 
Geogr.  II.  i.  156,  L64.  For  the  more  ordinary  view, 
see  Hengstenberg,  Christol.  ii.  454,  iv.  41 ;  Keil 
on  Kings  ii.  147,  Clark's  edit.;  and  cf.  Is.  xxx. 
33,  lxvi.  24. 

From  its  ceremonial  defilement,  and  from  the 
detested  and  abominable  tire  of  Molech,  if  not  from 
the  supposed  everburning  funeral  piles,  the  later 
Jews  applied  the  name  of  this  valley  Ge  Hintiom, 
Gehenna,  to  denote  the  place  of  eternal  torment, 
and  some  of  the  Rabbins  here  fixed  the  "door  of 
hell  ;"  a  sense  in  which  it  is  used  by  our  Lord. 
[Gehenma.]  It  is  called  Jer.  ii.  23,  "  the 
valley,"  kcut'  e'£ox7)»/.  and  perhaps  "  the  valley  of 
dead  bodies,"  xxxi.  40,  and  "the  valley  of  vision," 
Is.  xxii.  1,  :.  (Stanley,  S.  $  I'.  172,  482).  The 
name  by  which  it  is  now  known  is  (iu  ignorance 
of  the  meaning  of  the  initial  syllable;  Wddy  -le- 
nt, or  Wddy  er  Stibeb  (Williams,// 
i.  .">•!,  Suppl.),  though  in  .Mohammedan  traditions 
the  name  Gehenna  is  applied  to  the  Valley  of 
Kedron    Ibn  Batutah,  12,  4;  Stanley,  ut  s»p.). 

The  valley  commences  iu  a  broad  sloping  basin 
to  tin-  W.  of  the  city,  S.  of  the  Jaffa  road  (extend- 
ing nearly  to  tin-  brow  of  the  great  Wady,  on  the 
W.  ,  in  the  centre  of  which,  700  yards  from  the 
Jaffa  gate,  is  the  large  reservoir,  supposed  to  Vie 
the  ■•  upper  pool,"  or  "  Gihon"  [Gihon]  (Is.  vii. 
;>,  xxrvi.  2;  2  Chr.  xxxii.  30),  now  known  as 
Birket-el-Mamilla.  After  running  about  three 
quarters  of  a  mile  E,  by  S.  the  valley  takes  a  sud- 
den bend  to  the  S.  opposite  the  Jaffa  gate,  but  in 
less  than  another  three  quarters  of  a  mile  it  en- 
ters a  rocky  hill-side  which  forces  it  a 
an  eastern  direction,  sweeping  round  the  precipitous 
S.W.  corner  of  Mount  Zion almost  at  a  right  angle. 
In    this   part   of  it-  valley  is   from    .""»< i 

to  Iimi  yards  broad,  the  bottom  everywhere  covered 
with  small  stones,  and  cultivated.  At  290  yards 
from  the  Jaffa  .ate  it  is  crossed  by  an  aqueduct  on 
nine  very  low  arches,  conveying  water  from  the 

••  J Is  of  Solomon  "  to  the  Temple  Mount,  a  short 

distance  below  which  is  the  "lower  pool  "  i  Is.  xxii. 
'.i  ,  Birket-es-Sultan.     From  this  point  the  ravine 
narrows    and    deepen-,    and     descends    with 
rapidity  between  broken  cliffs,  . 

terraces,  honeycomhed  with  innumerable  sepulchral 
recesses,  forming  the  northern  lace  of  the  ••  Hill  of 
Evil  Counsel,"  to  the  S.,  and  the  steep  shelving, 
but  not  precipitous  southern  >l"p.->  of  Mount  Zion, 
which  rise  to  about  the  height  of  150  feet,  to  the 
X.     The  bed  of  the  valley  is  planted  with  olives 

and  other  fruit  tree-,  and  when  practicable  is  culti- 
vated. About  400  yards  from  the  S.  \V.  angle  of 
Mount  Zion  intracts  still  more,  becomes 

quite  narrow  and  stony,  and  descends  with  much 
greater  rapidity  towards  the  ••  valley  of  Jehobha- 
phat."  oi f  tie1  brook  Kidion."  before  joining 


HIPPOPOTAMUS 


817 


which  it  opens  out  again,  forming  an  oblong  plot, 
the  site  of  Tophet,  devoted  to  gardens  irrigate  I  by 
the  waters  of  Siloam.  Towards  the  eastern  ex- 
tremity of  the  valley  is  the  traditional  site  of  "  Acel- 
dama," authenticated  by  a  bed  of  white  clay  still 
worked  by  potters  (Williams,  Holy  City,  ii.  -495), 
opposite  to  which,  where  the  cliff  is  thirty  or  forty 
feet  high,  the  tree  on  which  Judas  hanged  himself 
was  placed  during  the  Frankish  kingdom  (Barclay, 
City  of  Grt  at  King,  p.  208).  Not  far  from  Acel- 
dama is  a  conspicuously  situated  tomb  with  a  Doric 
pediment,  sometimes  known  as  the  "  whited  sepul- 
chre," near  which  a  large  sepulchral  recess  with  a 
Doric  portal  hewn  in  the  native  rock  is  known  as 
the  "  Latibulum  apostolorum,"  where  the  Twelve 
are  said  to  have  concealed  themselves  during  the 
time  between  the  Crucifixion  and  the  Resurrection. 
The  tombs  continue  quite  down  to  the  corner  of 
the  mountain,  where  it  bends  off  to  the  S.  along  the 
valley  of  Jehoshaphat.  None  of  the  sepulchral 
recesses  in  the  vicinity  of  Jerusalem  are  so  well 
preserved  ;  most  of  them  are  verv  old — small  gloomy 
caves,  with  narrow,  rock-hewn  doorwavs. 

Robinson  places  "  the  valley  gate,"  Neh.  ii.  13, 
15 ;  2  Chr.  xxvi.  9,  at  the  N.W.  comer  of  Mount 
Zion  in  the  upper  part  of  this  valley  (Robinson,  i. 
220,  239,  274,  32U,  353;  Williams,  Holy  City,  i. 
Suppl.  56,  ii.  495 ;  Barclay,  City  of  Great  King, 
205,  208).     [But  see  JERUSALEM.]         [E.  V.j 

HIPPOPOTAMUS.  There  is  hardly  a  doubt 
that  the  Hebrew  behemoth  (niDrO)  describes  the 
hippopotamus :  the  word  itself  bears  the  strongest 
resemblance  to  the  Coptic  name  peheniout,  "  the 
water-ox,"  and  at  the  same  time  expresses  in  its 
Hebrew  form,  as  the  plural  of  110113,  the  idea  of 
a  very  large  beast.  Though  now  no  longer  found 
in  the  lower  Nile,  it  was  formerly  common  there 
(Wilkinson,  i.  239).  The  association  of  it  with  the 
crocodile  in  the  passage  in  which  it  is  described 
(Jobxl.  15  ff.),  and  most  of  the  particulars  in  that 
I  i,  are  more  appropriate  to  the  hippopotamus 
than  to  any  other  animal.  Behemoth  "eateth 
grass  as  an  ox"  (Jobxl.  15) — a  circumstance  which 
is  noticed  as  peculiar  in  an  animal  of  aquatic  habits  ; 
this  is  strictly  true  of  the  hippopotamus,  which  leaves 
the  water  by  night,  and  feeds  on  vegetables  and 
green  crops.  Its  strength  is  enormous,  w.  16,  18, 
and  the  notice  of  the  power  of  the  muscles  of  the 
belly.  ■•  bis  force  is  in  the  navel  of  his  belly,"  appears 
to  be  strictly  correct.  The  tail,  however,  is  short, 
and  it  must  be  conceded  that  the  first  part  of  ver. 
17.  '•  he  moveth  his  tail  like  a  cedar,"  seems  not 
altogether  applicable.  His  mole  of  attack  is  with 
his  mouth,  which  is  armed  with  a  Formidable  array 
of  teeth,  projecting  incisors,  and  enormous  curved 
canines;  thus  "his  creator  offers  him  a  sword," 
for  so  the  words  in  ver.  19  may  be  rendered.  Rut 
■  of  bis  sword  is  mainly  for  pacific  purposes, 
"the  beasts  of  the  field  playing"  about  him  as  he 

I  he  hipj  opotamus  being  a  remarkably  inoffen- 
sive animal.      His  retreat    is   among  the  |< 
[tzeelim  •  A.  V.  ••  shady  trees  "  i,  which  abounded 
about    the    Nile,  and   amid    the  reeds  of  the   river. 
Thoroughly  at  home  in  the  water,  "it'  the  river 

riseth,  be  doth  not  take   to  flight  :   and  he  c.i  • 

it'  a  Jordan   (here  an  appellative  tor  a  "  stream") 

press  on  his  mouth."    Ordinarj  •  ipture 

d  against   the  great   strength  of  this 
animal.      "  Will  any   take  him   before   his  • 

pi-nly.    and   without   cunning),    "  will    any 
I ■  his  nose  with  a  gin?",  at  was  usual  with 


818 


HTRAH 


fish.  The  method  of  killing  it  in  Egypt  was  with 
a  spear,  the  animal  being  in  the  first  instance 
secured  by  a  lasso,  and  repeatedly  struck  until  it 
Ik  came  exhausted  (Wilkinson,  i.  240);  the  very 
same  method  is  pursued  by  the  natives  of  South 
Africa  at  the  present  day  (Livingstone,  p.  73; 
instances  of  its  great  strength  are  noticed  bv  the 
same  writer,  pp.  231,  232,  497).         [W.  L.'B.] 

HI'EAH  (!TVn  ;  Elpds  ;  Hiram),  an  Adul- 
lamite,  the  friend  (JH)  of  Judah  (Gen.  xxxviii.  1. 
12;  and  see  20).  For  "friend"  the  LXX.  and 
Vulg.  have  "  shepherd,"  probably  reading  -inj/l. 

HI'RAM,  or  HU'KAM  (DTn,  or  Dl-lfl :  on 
the  different  forms  of  the  name  see  Huram). 
1.  The  king  of  Tyre  who  sent  workmen  and  ma- 
terials to  Jerusalem,  first  (2  Sam.  v.  11,  1  Chr. 
xiv.  1)  to  build  a  palace  for  David  whom  he  ever 
loved  (1  K.  v.  1),  and  again  (1  K.  v.  10,  vii.  13, 
2  Chr.  ii.  14,  16)  to  build  the  Temple  for  Solomon, 
with  whom  he  had  a  treaty  of  peace  and  commerce 
(1  K.  v.  11,  12).  The  contempt  with  which  he 
received  Solomon's  present  of  Cabul  (1  K.  ix.  12) 
does  not  appear  to  have  caused  any  breach  between 
the  two  kings.  He  admitted  Solomon's  ships, 
issuing  from  Joppa,  to  a  share  in  the  profitable 
trade  of  the  Mediterranean  (1  K.  x.  22);  and 
Jewish  sailors,  under  the  guidance  of  Tyrians,  were 
taught  to  bring  the  gold  of  India  (1  K.  ix.  26)  to 
Solomon's  two  harbours  on  the  lied  Sea  (see  Ewald, 
Gesch.  Isr.  iii.  343-347). 

Eupolemon  (ap.  Euseb.  Praep.  Evang.  ix.  30) 
states  that  David,  after  a  war  with  Hiram,  reduced 
him  to  the  condition  of  a  tributary  prince.  Dins 
the  Phoenician  historian,  and  Meuander  of  Ephesus 
(ap.  Joseph,  c.  Ap.  i.  17,  18)  assign  to  Hiram  a 
prosperous  reign  of  34  years ;  and  relate  that  his 
father  was  Abibal,  liis  son  and  successor  Baleazar  ; 
that  he  rebuilt  various  idol-temples,  and  dedicated 
some  splendid  offerings ;  that  he  was  successful  in 
war ;  that  he  enlarged  and  fortified  his  city  ;  that 
he  and  Solomon  had  a  contest  with  riddles  or  dark 
sayings  (compare  Samson  and  his  friends,  Judg.  xiv. 
12),  in  which  Solomon,  after  winning  a  large  sum 
of  money  from  the  king  of  Tyre,  was  eventually 
outwitted  by  Abdemon,  one  of  his  subjects.  The 
intercourse  of  these  great  and  kindred-minded 
kings  was  much  celebrated  by  local  historians. 
Josephus  (Ant.  viii.  2,  §8)  states  that  the  cor- 
respondence between  them  with  respect  to  the 
building  of  the  Temple  was  preserved  among  the 
Tyrian  archives  in  his  days.  With  the  letters  in 
1  K.  v.  and  2  Chr.  ii.  may  be  compared  not  only 
his  copies  of  the  letters,  but  also  the  still  less 
authentic  letters  between  Solomon  and  Hiram,  and 
between  Solomon  and  Vaphres  (A pries?),  which  are 
preserved  by  Eupolemon  (ap.  Euseb.  Praep.  Evang. 
ix.  30),  and  mentioned  by  Alexander  Polyhistor 
(ap.  Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  i.  21,  p.  332).  Some 
Phoenician  historians  (ap.  Tatian.  cont.  Graec.  §37) 
relate  that  Hiram,  besides  supplying  timber  for  the 
Temple,  gave  his  daughter  in  mariiage  to  Solomon. 
Jewish  writers  in  less  ancient  times  cannot  over- 
look Hiram's  uncircumcision  in  his  services  towards 
the  building  of  the  Temple.  Their  legends  relate 
(ap.  Eisenm.  Ent.  Jud.  i.  8'uS)  that  because  he 
was  a  God-fearing  man  and  built  the  Temple  he 
was  received  alive  into  Paradise ;  but  that,  after 
he  had  been  there  a  thousand  years,  he  sinned  by 
pride,  and  was  thrust  down  into  hell. 

2.  Hiram  was  the  name  of  a  man  of  mixed  race 


HITTITES,  THE 

(1  K.  vii.  13,  40),  the  principal  architect  and  en- 
gineer sent  by  king  Hiram  to  Solomon ;  also  called 
Huram  in  the  Chronicles.  On  the  title  of  3N  = 
"  master,"  or  "father,"  given  to  him  in  2  Chr.  ii. 
13,  iv.  16,  see  Huram,  No.  3.  [W.  T.  P.] 

HIRCA'NUS  ('TpKav6s  ;  Bircanus),  "  a  son 
of  Tobias,"  who  hail  a  large  treasure  place  1  for 
security  in  the  treasury  of  the  temple  at  the  time  of 
the  visit  of  Heliodorus  (c.  187  B.C.;  2  Mace.  iii. 
11).  Josephus  also  mentions  "  children  of  Tobias  " 
(Ant.  xii.  5,  §1,  iraiSes  Ta>/3iou),  who,  however, 
belonged  to  the  faction  of  Menelaus,  and  notices 
especially  a  son  of  one  of  them  (Joseph)  who  was 
named  Hyrcanus  (Ant.  xii.  4,  §2  ft'.).  But  there 
is  no  sufficient  reason  for  identifying  the  Hyrcanus 
of  2  Mace,  with  this  grandson  of  Tobias  either 
by  supposing  that  the  ellipse  (rov  Ta>/3i'ou)  is  to 
be  so  rilled  up  (Grotius,  Calmet),  or  that  the 
sons  of  Joseph  were  popularly  named  after  their 
grandfather  (Ewald,  Gesch.  iv.  309),  which  could 
scarcely  have  been  the  case  in  consequence  of  the 
great  eminence  of  their  father. 

The  name  appears  to  be  simply  a  local  appella- 
tive, and  became  illustrious  afterwards  in  the 
Maccabean  dynasty,  though  the  circumstances  which 
led  to  its  adoption  are  unknown  (yet  comp.  Joseph. 
Ant.  xiii.  8,  §4).     [Maccabees.]       [B.  F.  W.j 

HITTITES,  THE,  the  nation  descended 
from  Cheth  (A.  V.  "  Heth "),  the  second  son  of 
Canaan.  (1.)  With  five  exceptions,  noticed  below, 
the  word  is  THIH  =  '•  the  Chittite  ;"  in  the  singular 
number,  according  to  the  common  Hebrew  idiom. 
It  is  occasionally  rendered  in  the  A.  Y.  in  the 
singular  number,  "the  Hittite"  (Ex.  xxiii.  28, 
xxxiii.  2,  xxxiv.  11  ;  Josh.  ix.  1,  xi.  3),  but  else- 
where plural  (Gen.  xv.  20;  Ex.  iii.  8,  17,  xiii.  5, 
xxiii.  23;  Num.  xiii.  29;  Deut.  vii.  1,  xx.  17, 
Josh.  iii.  10,  xii.  8,  xxiv.  11  ;  Judg.  iii.  5  ;  1  K. 
ix.  20;    2  Chr.  viii.  7  ;    Ezr.  ix.   1  ;    Neh.  ix.  8  ; 

1  Esd.'  viii.  69,  XerTaioi).  (2.)  The  plural  form 
of  the  word  is  D^Finn  =  the  Chittim,  or  Hittites 
(Josh.  i.  4  ;  Judg.  i.  26  ;   1  K.  x.  29  ;   2  K.  vii.  6  ; 

2  Chr.  i.  17).  (3.)  "A  Hittite  [woman]"  is 
TVnn  (Ez.  xvi.  3,  45).  In  1  K.  xi.  1,  the  same 
word  is  rendered  "  Hittites." 

1.  Our  first  introduction  to  the  Hittites  is  in  the 
time  of  Abraham,  when  he  bought  from  the  Bene- 
Cheth,  "Children  of  Heth  " — such  was  then  their 
title — the  field  and  the  cave  of  Machpelah,  belonging 
to  Ephron  the  Hittite.  They  were  then  settled  at 
the  town  which  was  afterwards,  under  its  new 
name  of  Hebron,  to  become  one  of  the  most  famous 
cities  of  Palestine,  then  bearing  the  name  of  Kirjath- 
arba,  and  perhaps  also  of  Mamie  (Gen.  xxiii.  19, 
xxv.  9).  The  propensities  of  the  tribe  appear  at 
that  time  to  have  been  rather  commercial3  than  mi- 
litary. The  "  money  current  with  the  merchant," 
and  the  process  of  weighing  it,  were  familiar  to 
them  ;  the  peaceful  assembly  "in  the  gate  oi'  the 
city"  was  their  manner  of  receiving  the  stranger 
who  was  desirous  of  having  a  "  possession 
"  secured"  to  him  among  them.  The  dignitj  and 
courtesy  of  their  demeanour  also  come  out  sfaouel] 
in  this  narrative.  As  Ewald  well  says,  Abraham 
chose  his  allies  in  warfare  from  the  Amorites,  I  ul 
he  goes  to  the  Hittites  for  his  grave.    But  thi 


*  "Canaanite"  has   in    many  places   the   l 
"  merchant"  or  "trafficker."     See  amonfe  Others  the 
examples  in  246  b. 


HITTITES,  THE 

was  evidently  as  yet  but  small,  not  important 
enough  to  be  noticed  beside  "  theCanaanite  and  the 

Perizzite  "  who  shared  the  bulk  of  the  land  between 
them  (Gen.  xii.  b,  xiii.  7).  In  the  southern  part 
of  the  country  they  remained  for  a  considerable 
period  after  this,  possibly  extending  as  far  as  Gerar 
and  Beersheba,  a  good  deal  below  Hebron  (xxvi.  17, 
xxviii.  10).  From  their  families  Esau  manied  his 
two  first  wives  ;  and  her  fear  lest  Jacob  should  take 
the  same  course  is  the  motive  given  by  Kebekah  for 
sending  Jacob  away  to  IJarfui.  It  was  the  same 
feeling  that  had  urged  Abram  to  send  to  Mesopo- 
tamia for  a  wife  for  Isaac.  The  descendant  of  Shem 
couid  not  wed  with  Hamites— "  with  the  daughters 
of  the  Canaanites  among  whom  1  dwell  .  .  .  wherein 
1  am  a  stranger,"  but  ''go  to  my  country  and  thy 
kindred  "  is  his  father's  command,  "  to  the  house 
of  thy  mother's  father,  and  take  thee  a  wife  from 
thence"  (Gen.  xxviii.  2,  xxiv.  4). 

2.  Throughout  the  book  of  Exodus  the  name  of 
the  Hittites  occurs  only  in  the  usual  formula  for 
the  occupants  of  the  Promised  Land.  Changes  occur 
in  the  mode  of  stating  this  foimula  [Canaan, 
p.  248  6],  but  the  Hittites  are  never  omitted  (see 
Ex.  xxiii.  28).  In  the  report  of  the  spies,  however, 
we  have  again  a  real  historical  notice  of  them  :  "  the 
Hittite,  the  Jebusite,  and  the  Amorite  dwell  in  the 
mountain"  (Num.  xiii.  29).  Whatever  temporary 
circumstances  may  have  attracted  them  so  far  to 
tin'  south  as  Beersheba,  a  people  having  the  quiet 
commercial  tastes  of  Ephron  the  Hittite  and  his 
companions  can  have  had  no  call  for  the  roving, 
skirmishing  life  of  the  country  bordering  on  the 
desert;  and  thus,  during  the  sojourn  of  Israel  in 
Egypt,  they  had  withdrawn  themselves  from  those 
districts,  retiring  before  Amalek  (Num.  xiii.  29)  to 
the  more  secure  mountain  country  in  the  centre  of 
t In-  land.  Perhaps  the  words  of  Ezekicl  (  xvi.  3,  45) 
may  imply  that  they  helped  to  found  the  city  of 
Jehus. 

From  this  time,  however,  their  quiet  habits 
vanish,  and  they  take  their  part  against  the  invader, 
in  equal  alliance  with  the  other  Canaanite  tribes 
(Josh.  ix.  1,  xi.  :!,  &c). 

3.  Henceforward  the  notices  of  the  Hittites  arc 
very  few  and  faint.  We  meet  with  two  individuals, 
both  attached  to  the  person  of  David.  (1.)  "Ahi- 
melech the  Hittite,"  who  was  with  him  in  the  hill 
of  1  In.  hilah,  and  with  Abishai  accompanied  him  by 
night  to  the  tenl  of  Saul  |  I  Sam.  xxvi.  6).  He  is 
nowhere  else  mentioned,  and  was  possibly  killed  in 
inn1  of  David's  expeditions,  before  the  list  in  2  Sam. 
xxiii.  was  drawn  up.  (2.)  "  Uriah  the  Hittite,"  one 
of  "the  thirty"  of  Davids  body-guard  (2  Sam.  xxiii. 
39;  1  Chr.  xi.  41;,  the  deep  tragedy  of  whose 
wrongs  forms  the  one  blot  in  the  life  of  his  master. 
In  both  these  persons,  though  warriors  by  profes- 
sion, we  can  perhaps  detect  traces  of  those  qualities 
which  we  have  noticed  as  characteristic  of  the  tribe. 

In  the  case  of  the  first,  it  was  Abishai,  the  practical, 

unscrupulous  ••son  of  Zeruiah,"  who  pressed  David 

to  allow  him  to  kill  the  sleeping  king :  Ahimelech 
is  clear  from  that  stain.  In  the  case  of  Uriah,  the 
absence  from  suspicion  and  the  generous  self-denial 

which  he  displayed  are  too  well  known  t d  mole 

than  a  reference  I  2  Sam.  xi.  11,  12  . 

4.  'I'he  Egyptian  annals  tell  us  of  a  very  power- 
ful   confederacy    of    Hittites    in    the    valley    of   the 

Orontes,  with  whom  Sether  1.,  or  Sethos,  waged 
war  about  B.C.  bib1,  and  whose  capital,  Ketesh, 
situate  near  Emesa,  lie  conquered.   I  Ki.Y  I'  I  .p.  ">1  1 . 1 

5.  lu  the  .\ss\iian  inscriptions,  as  latel)   deci- 


HIVITES,  THE 


819 


phered,  there  are  frequent  references  to  a  nation  of 
Khatti,  who  "formed  a  great  confederacy  ruled 
by  a  number  of  petty  chiefs,"  whose  territory  also 
lay  in  the  valley  of  the  Orontes,  and  who  were 
sometimes  assisted  by  the  people  of  the  sea-coast, 
piobably  the  Phoenicians  (Rawlinson's  Herodotus, 
i.  4(33).  "  Twelve  kings  of  the  Southern  Khatti 
are  mentioned  in  several  places."  If  the  identi- 
fication of  these  people  with  the  Hittites  should 
prove  to  be  correct,  it  agrees  with  the  name  Chat, 
as  noticed  under  Heth,  and  affords  a  clue  to  the 
meaning  of  some  passages  which  are  otherwise 
puzzling.  These  are  (a)  Josh.  i.  4,  where  the  ex- 
pression "  all  the  land  of  the  Hittites  "  appears  to 
mean  all  the  land  of  Canaan,  or  at  least  the  northern 
part  thereof.  (6)  Judg.  i.  26.  Here  nearly  the  same 
expression  recurs.  [I,uz.]  (c)  1  K.  x.  29  ;  2  Chr. 
i.  17  :  "  All  the  kings  of  the  Hittites  and  kings  of 
Aram"  (piobably  identical  with  the  "  kings  on  this 
side  Euphrates,"  1  K.  iv.  24)  are  mentioned  as  pur- 
chasing chariots  and  horses  from  Egypt,  for  the 
possession  of  which  they  were  so  notorious,  that  ((/) 
it  would  seem  to  have  become  at  a  later  date  almost 
proverbial  in  allusion  to  an  alarm  of  an  attack  by 
chariots  (2  K.  vii.  6). 

6.  Nothing  is  said  of  the  religion  or  worship  of 
the  Hittites.  Even  in  the  enumeration  of  Solomon's 
idolatrous  worship  of  the  gods  of  his  wives — among 
whom  were  rjittite  women  (1  K.  xi.  1) — no  Hittite 
deity  is  alluded  to.  (See  1  K.  xi.  5,  7  ;  2  K.  xxiii.  13.) 

7.  The  names  of  the  individual  Hittites  men- 
tioned in  the  Bible  are  as  follow.  They  are  all 
susceptible  of  interpretation  as  Hebrew  words,  which 
would  lead  to  the  belief  either  that  the  Hittites 
spoke  a  dialect  of  the  Aramaic  or  Hebrew  language, 
or  that  the  words  were  Hebraized  in  their  trans- 
ference to  the  Bible  records. 

Adah  (woman),  Gen.  xxxvi.  2. 

Ahimelech,  1  Sam.  xxvi.  ti. 

BASHEMATH,  accur.  Bas'uath  (woman);  pos- 
sibly a  second  name  of  Adah,  Gen.  xxvi.  .".4. 

Beeri  (father  of  Judith,  below),  Gen.  xxvi.  34. 

Elon  (father  of  Basmath),  Gen.  xxvi.  34. 

Ephhon,  Gen.  xxiii.  10,  13,  14,  &c. 

Judith  (woman),  Gen.  xxvi.  34.  < 

Uriah,  2  Sam.  xi.  3,,  &c.,  xxiii.  39,  &e. 

Zohar  (father  of  Ephron),  Gen.  xxiii.  8. 

In  addition  to  the  above,  SlBBECHAl,  who  in  the 
Hebrew  text  is  always  denominated  a  Hushathite,  is 
by  Josephus  {Ant.  vii.  12,  §2)  styled  a  Hittite.  [G.] 

HI'VITES,  THE  (Mnn,  i.e.  the  Chiwite ; 

6  Eucuoj  :  Hi  r  leus).  The  name  is,  in  the  original, 
uniformly  found  in  the  singular  number.  It  never 
has,  like  that  of  the  Hittites,  a  plural,  nor  does  it 
appear  in  any  other  form.  Perhaps  we  may  assume 
from  this  that  it  originated  in  some  peculiarity  of 
locality  or  circumstance,  as  in  the  case  of'  the  Amo- 
rites — "mountaineers;"  and  not  in  a  progenitor, 
BS  did  that  of  the  Ammonites,  who  are  also  styled 
Bene-Ammon-  -children  of  Amnion — or  the  Hittib  s, 
Bene-Cheth-  children  of  Heth.  'I'he  name  is  ex- 
plained by  Ewald  (Oesck.  i.  318   as  BinnenJ 

that    is,    ••  .Miillamleis  ;"'    by  (le-euius  (  Thes.  451) 

a-  pagani,  •'villagers."     In  the  following  passages 

the   name   is   given    in   the  A.   V.  in  the  singular — ■ 

the  Hivite :— Gen.  x.  17:  Ex.  mil.  28,  xxxiii. 

2,  xxxiv.  II  :  Josh.  ix.  1,  xi.  3;  1  Chr.  i.  15; 
also  Gen.  xxxiv.  2.  xxxvi.  2.  In  all  the  rest  it 
is  plural. 

I.  In  the  genealogical  tables  of  Genesis,  "the 
Hivite"  is  named  as  one  of  the  descendants — the 


820 


HIVJTES,  THE 


sixth  in  order — of  Canaan,  the  son  of  Ham  (Gen. 
x.  17  ;  1  Chr.  i.  15).  In  the  first  enumeration  of 
the  nations  who,  at  the  time  of  the  call  of  Abra- 
ham, occupied  the  promised  land  (Gen.  xv.  19-21), 
the  Hivites  are  omitted  from  the  Hebrew  text 
(though  in  the  Samaritan  and  LXX.  their  name  is 
inserted).  This  has  led  to  the  conjecture,  amongst 
others,  that  they  are  identical  with  the  Kadjion- 
ITES,  whose  name  is  found  there  and  there  only 
(Keland,  Pal  140;  Bochart,  Phal.  iv.  36 ;  Can. 
i.  19).  But  are  not  the  Kadmonites  rather,  as 
their  name  implies,  the  representatives  of  the  Bene- 
kedem,  or  "  children  of  the  East "  ?  The  name 
constantly  occurs  in  the  formula  by  which  the 
country  is  designated  in  the  earlier  books  (Ex.  iii. 
8,  17,  xiii.  5,  xxiii.  23,  28,  xxxiii.  2,  xxxiv.  11; 
Deut.  vii.  1,  xx.  17;  Josh.  iii.  10,  ix.  1,  xii.  8, 
xxiv.  11),  and  also  in  the  later  ones  (1  K.  ix. 
20  ;  2  Chi-,  viii.  7  ;  but  comp.  Ezr.  ix.  1,  and 
Neh.  ix.  8).  It  is,  however,  absent  in  the  report 
of  the  spies  (Num.  xiii.  29),  a  document  which 
fixes  the  localities  occupied  by  the  Canaanite  nations 
at  that  time.  Perhaps  this  is  owing  to  the  then 
insignificance  of  the  Hivites,  or  perhaps  to  the  fact 
that  they  were  indifferent  to  the  special  locality 
of  their  settlements. 

2.  We  first  encounter  the  actual  people  of  the 
Hivites  at  the  time  of  Jacob's  return  to  Canaan. 
Shechem  was  then  (according  to  the  current  He- 
brew text)  in  their  possession,  Hamor  the  Hivite 
being  the  "  prince  (fcOb'J)  of  the  land"  (Gen. 
xxxiv.  2).  They  were  at  this  time,  to  judge  of 
them  by  their  rulers,  a  warm  and  impetuous 
people,  credulous,  and  easily  deceived  by  the  crafty 
and  cruel  sons  of  Jacob.  The  narrative  further 
exhibits  them  as  peaceful  and  commercial,  given  to 
"  trade"  (10,  21),  and  to  the  acquiring  of  "pos- 
sessions "  of  cattle  and  other  "  wealth "  (10,  23, 
28,  29).  Like  the  Hittites  they  held  their  assem- 
blies or  conferences  in  the  gate  of  their  city  (20). 
We  may  also  see  a  testimony  to  their  peaceful 
habits  in  the  absence  of  any  attempt  at  revenge  on 
Jacob  for  the  massacre  of  the  Shechemites.  Perhaps 
a  similar  indication  is  furnished  by  the  name  of  the 
.  god  of  the  Shechemites  some  generations  after  this 
■ — Baal-berith — Baal  of  the  league,  or  the  alliance 
(Juds;.  viii.  33,  ix.  4,  46);  by  the  way  in  which 
the  Shechcniites  were  beaten  by  Abimelech  (40) ; 
and  by  the  unmilitary  character,  both  of  the  weapon 
which  caused  Abimelech's  death  and  of  the  person 
who  discharged  it  (ix.  53). 

The  Alex.  MS.,  and  several  other  MSS.  of  the 
LXX.,  in  the  above  narrative  (Gen.  xxxiv.  2)  sub- 
stitute "  Horite  "  for  "  Hivite."  The  change  is 
remarkable  from  the  usually  close  adherence  of  the 
Alex.  Codex  to  the  Hebrew  text,  but  it  is  not  cor- 
roborated by  any  other  of  the  ancient  versions,  nor 
is  it  recommended  by  other  considerations.  No 
instances  occur  of  Horites  in  this  part  of  Palestine, 
while  we  know,  from  a  later  narrative,  that  there 
was  an  important  colony  of  Hivites  on  the  highland 
of  Benjamin  at  Gibeon,  &c,  no  very  great  distance 
from  Shechem.  On  the  other  hand,  in  Gen.  xxxvi.  2, 
where  Aholibama,  one  of  Esau's  wives,  is  said  to 
have  been  the  daughter  of  the  daughter  of  Zibeon 
the  Hivite,  all  considerations  are  in  favour  of  read- 
ing "  Horite  "  for  "  Hivite."  In  this  case  we  for- 
tunately possess  a  detailed  genealogy  of  the  family, 
by  comparison  of  which  little  doubt  is  left  of  the 
propriety  of  the  change  (comp.  verses  20,  24,  25, 
30,  with  2),  although  no  ancient  version  has  sug- 
gested it  here. 


HOBAB 

3.  We  next  meet  with  the  Hivites  during  the 
conquest  of  Canaan  (Josh.  ix.  7,  xi.  19).  Their 
character  is  now  in  some  respects  materially  altered. 
They  are  still  evidently  averse  to  fighting,  but  they 
have  acquired  —  possibly  by  long  experience  in 
traffic — an  amount  of  craft  which  they  did  not 
before  possess,  and  which  enables  them  to  turn  the 
tables  on  the  Israelites  in  a  highly  successful  man- 
ner (Josh.  ix.  3-27).  The  colony  of  Hivites,h  who 
made  Joshua  and  the  heads  of  the  tribes  their 
dupes  on  this  occasion,  had  four  cities — Gibeon, 
Chephirah,  Beeroth,  and  Kirjath-jearim— situated, 
if  our  present  knowledge  is  accurate,  at  considerable 
distances  asunder.  It  is  not  certain  whether  the 
three  last  were  destroyed  by  Joshua  or  not  (xi.  19) ; 
Gibeon  certainly  was  spared.  In  ver.  11  the 
Gibeonites  speak  of  the  "  elders "  of  their  city, 
a  word  which  does  not  necessarily  point  to  any 
special  form  of  government,  as  is  assumed  by  Winer 
(Heviter),  who  uses  the  ambiguous  expression  that 
they  "  lived  under  a  republican  constitution  "  (in 
repuhlicamscher  Verfassung)  !  See  also  Ewald 
(Gesch.  i.  318,  9). 

4.  The  main  body  of  the  Hivites,  however,  were 
at  this  time  living  on  the  nonhern  confines  of 
western  Palestine — "  under  Hermon,  in  the  land  of 
Mizpeh"  (Josh.  xi.  3) — "in  Mount  Lebanon,  from 
Mount  Baal-Hermon  to  the  entering  in  of  Ha- 
math"(Judg.  iii.  3).  Somewhere  in  this  neigh- 
bourhood they  were  settled  when  Joab  and  the 
captains  of  the  host,  in  their  tour  of  numbering, 
came  to  "  all  the  cities  of  the  Hivites  "  near  Tyre 
(2  Sam.  xxiv.  7).  In  the  Jerusalem  Targum  on 
Gen.  x.  17,  they  are  called  Tripolitans  (WiSnB), 
a  name  which  points  to  the  same  general  northern 
locality. 

5.  In  speaking  of  the  Avim,  or  Awites,  a  sug- 
gestion has  been  made  by  the  writer  that  they  may 
have  been  identical  with  the  Hivites.  This  is  appa- 
rently corroborated  by  the  fact  that,  according  to 
the  notice  in  Deut.  ii.  the  Avites  seem  to  have  been 
dispersed  before  the  Hivites  appear  on  the  scene  of 
the  sacred  history.  [G.] 

HIZKI'AH  (n'ipm;  'ECe/ci'os  ;  Ezcchia),  an 
ancestor  of  Zephaniah  the  prophet  (Zeph.  i.  1). 

HIZKI'JAH  (n»j?Tn  ;  'E^e/a'a  ;  Ezechia), 
according  to  the  punctuation  of  the  A.  V.  a  man 
who  sealed  the  covenant  of  reformation  with  Ezra 
and  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  17).  But  there  is  no  doubt 
that  the  name  should  be  taken  with  that  preceding 
it,  as  "  Ater-Hizkijah,"  a  name  given  in  the  lists  of 
those  who  returned  from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel. 
It  appears  also  extremely  likely  that  the  two  names 
following  these  in  x.  17,  18  (Azzur,  Hodijah)  are 
only  corrupt  repetitions  of  them. 

This  and  the  preceding  name  are  identical,  and  are 
the  same  with  that  given  in  the  A.  V.  as  Hezekiah. 

HO'BAB  (nnh  ;  6  'Ofidp,  Alex,  'tlfldp,  in 
Judg.  'la>/8d/8  ;  Hobab).  This  name  is  found  in 
two  places  only  (Num.  x.  29  ;  Judg.  iv.  1 1 ),  and  it 
seems  doubtful  whether  it  denotes  the  father-in-law 
of  Moses,  or  his  son.  (1.)  In  favour  of  the  latter 
are  (a.)  the  express  statement  that  Hobab  was  "  the 
son  of  Raguel"  (Num.  x.  29);  Paguel  or  Bene! 
the  Hebrew  word  in  both  cases  is  the  same- 
identified  with  Jethro,  not  only  in  Ex.  ii.  18  (comp. 


b  Here  again  the  LXX.  (both  MSS.)  have  Horites 
for  Hivites  ;  but  we  cannot  accept  the  change  without 
further  consideration. 


HO  BAH 

iii.  1,  &c),  but  also  by  Josephus,  who  constantly 
gives  him  that  name,  (b.)  The  fact  that  Jethro 
had  some  time  previously  left  the  Israelite  camp  to 
return  to  his  own  country  (Ex.  xviii.  27).  The 
words  "the  father-in-law  oi'  Moses"  in  Num.  x. 
'29,  though  in  most  of  the  ancient  versions  con- 
nected with  Hobab,  will  in  the  original  read  either 
wav,  so  that  no  argument  can  be  founded  on  them. 
(■_'.)  In  favour  of  Hobab's  identity  with  Jethro  are 
(a.)  the  words  of  Judg.  iv.  1 1  ;  but  it  should  be 
remembered  that  this  is  (ostensibly)  of  later  date 
than  the  other,  and  altogether  a  more  casual  state- 
ment. (6.)  Josephus  in  speaking  of  Raguel  re- 
marks once  (Ant.  ii.  12,  §1)  that  he  "  had  I  other 
(»'.  c.  Jethro)  for  a  surname"  (toCto  yhp  ?iv  e?Ti- 
K\7)fx.a  t<£  'PayouTiA).  From  the  absence  of  the 
article  here,  it  is  inferred  by  Whiston  and  others 
that  Josephus  intends  that  he  had  more  than  one 
surname,  but  this  seems  hardly  safe. 

The  Mahometan  traditions  are  certainly  in  favour 
of  the  identity  of  Hobab  with  Jethro.  He  is  known 
in  the  Koran  and  elsewhere,  and  in  the  East  at  the 

present  day,  by  the  name  of  Sho'eib   (i_*xXvi), 

doubtless  a  corruption  of  Hobab.  Accordiug  to 
those  traditions  he  was  the  prophet  of  God  to  the 
idolaters  of  Medyen  (Midian),  who  not  believing 
his  message  were  destroyed  (Lane's  Koran,  179- 
181);  he  was  blind  (ib.  180 note);  the  rod  of 
Moms  was  his  gift,  it  had  once  been  the  rod  of 
Adam,  and  was  of  the  myrtle  of  Paradise,  &c.  (Ib. 
190;  Weil's  Bibl.  Legends,  107-109).  The  name 
of  Sho'eib  still  remains  attached  to  one  of  the  Wadys 
on  the  East  side  of  the  Jordan,  opposite  Jericho, 
through  which,  according  to  the  tradition  of  the 
locality  (Seetzen,  Reisen,  1854,  ii.  319,  37(3),  the 
children  of  Israel  descended  to  the  Jordan.  [BETH- 
NlMBAH.l  According  to  this  tradition,  therefore, 
he  accompanied  the  people  as  far  as  the  Promised 
Land,  though  whatever  weight  that  may  possess  is, 
when  the  statement  of  Ex.  xviii.  27  is  taken  into 
account,  against  his  identity  with  Jethro.  Other 
places  bearing  his  name  and  those  of  his  two 
daughters  are  shown  at  Sinai  and  on  the  Gulf  of 
Akaba  (Stanley,  S.  #  P.  33). 

But  whether  Hobab  was  the  father-in-law  of  Moses 
or  not,  the  notice  of  him  in  Num.  x.  29-32,  though 
brief,  is  full  of  point  and  interest.  While  Jethro 
is  preserved  to  us  as  the  wise  and  practised  admi- 
nistrator, Hobab  appears  as  the  experienced  Bedouin 
sheikh,  to  whom  Moses  looked  for  tin-  material 
safety  of  his  cumbrous  caravan  in  the  new  and  diffi- 
cult ground  before  them.  Tin'  tracks  and  passes 
of  that  "  waste  howling  wilderness"  were  all  fami- 
liar to  him,  ami  his  practised  sight  would  he  to 
them  "instead  of  eyes"  in  discerning  the  distant 
clumps  of  verdure  which  betokened  the  wells  or 
springs  for  the  daily  encampment,  ami  in  giving 
timely  warning  of  the  approach  of  Amalekites  or 
other  spoilers  of  the  desert.     [Jethbq.]        [G.] 

HOBAH  (rnin  ;  Xo/3d;  Eoba),  the  place  to 
which  Abraham  pursued  the  kings  who  had  pillaged 
Sodom  (Gen.  xiv.  15).   It  was  situated  "to  the  north 

ofDamascus"  (pfe>BT?  7ND&D  .  Josephusmen- 
tions  a  tradition  concerning  Abraham  which  he  takes 
from  Nicolaus  of  Damascus: — "  Abraham  reigned 
at  Damascus,  being  a  foreigner  .  .  .  and  his  name  is 
still  famous  in  the  country;  and  there  is  shown  a 
tillage  called  from  him  77.-'  Habitation  of  Abra- 
ham' (Ant.  i.  7.  §2).    It  is  remarkable  that  in  the 


HODI.TAH 


821 


village  of  Burzeh,  three  miles  north  of  Damascus, 
there  is  a  wely  held  in  high  veneration  by  the  Mo- 
hammedans, and  called  after  the  name  of  the  patri- 
arch, Masjad  Ibrahim,  "the  prayer-place  of  Abra- 
ham." The  tradition  attached  to  it  is  that  here 
Abraham  offered  thanks  to  God  after  the  total  dis- 
comfiture of  the  eastern  kings.  Behind  the  wely  is 
a  cleft  in  the  rock,  in  which  another  tradition  repre- 
sents the  patriarch  as  tailing  refuge  on  one  occasion 
from  the  giant  Nimrod.  It  is  remarkable  that  the 
word  Hobah  signifies  "  a  hiding-place." 

The  Jews  of  Damascus  affirm  that  the  village  of 
Jobar,  not  far  from  Burzeh,  is  the  Hobah  of  Scrip- 
ture. They  have  a  synagogue  there  dedicated  to 
Elijah,  to  "which  they"  make  frequent  pilgrimages 
(see  p.  540  b,  note ;  also  Handb.  for  Syr.  and  Pal. 
pp.  491,  492).  [J.  L.  P.] 

HOD  (Tin  ;  'Ho,  Alex/n8  ;  Hod),  one  of  the 
sons  of  Zophah,  among  the  descendants  of  Asher 
(1  Chr.  vii.  37). 

HODAIAH  (Chetib,  -inVTin,  altered  in  the 
Keri  to  -liTITin,  i.  c.  Hopaviahu  ;  'OSoAi'a, 
Alex.  'nSovia;  Oduia),  son  of  Elioenai,  one  of  the 
last  members  of  the  royal  line  of  J  udah  ;  mentioned 
1  Chr.  iii.  24. 

HOD  AVI'  AH  (HTTin  ;  'tiSovLa  ;  Odoia, 
Oduia,  Odavia).  1.  A  man  of  Manasseh,  one  of 
the  heads  of  the  half-tribe  on  the  east  of  Jordan 
(1  Chr.  v.  24). 

2.  A  man  of  Benjamin,  son  of  Has-senuah 
(1  Chr.  ix.  7). 

3.  A  Levite,  who  seems  to  have  given  his  name 
to  an  important  family  in  the  tribe — the  Bene  Ho- 
dayiah  (Ezr.  ii.  40)".  In  Nehemiah  the  name 
appears  as  Hopevah.  Lord  A.  Hervey  has  called 
attention  to  the  fact  that  this  name  is  closely  con- 
nected with  Judah  (  Gene  tlogies,  119).  This  being 
the  case,  we  probably  find  this  Hodaviah  mentioned 
again  in  iii.  9. 

HO'DESH  (DHh  ;  A8d  ;  Ifodes),  a  woman 
named  in  the  genealogies  of  Benjamin  (1  Chr.  viii. 
9)  as  the  wife"  of  a  certain  Shaharaim,  and  mother 
of  seven  children.  Shaharaim  had  two  wives  besides 
Hodesh,  or  possibly  Hodesh  was  a  second  name  of 
one  of  those  women  (ver.  8).  The  LXX.  by  read- 
ing Baara,  BctaSd,  and  Hodesh,  'A5d,  seem  to  wish 
to  establish  such  a  connexion. 

HODE'VAH  (nn'm,  keri  iTHIil;  OvSovla, 
Alex.  OvSovlS  ;  Oduia),  Bene-Hodevah,  a  Levite 
family,  returned  from  captivity  with  Zerubbabe! 
(X.di'.  vii.  43).     In  the  parallel  lists  it   is  given  as 

Hodaviah  (No.  3)  ami  Sudias. 

HODIAII  (ilHta  :  ?/  '\5ovia,  Alex,  'lovtiaia  ; 
Odaia),  one  of  the  two  wives  of  Ezra,  a  man  of 
Judah,  and  mother  to  the  founders  of  Keila'u  and 
Eshtemoa  (1  Chr.  iv.  19).  She  is  doubtless  the 
same  person  as  Jehudijah  in  verse  is.  that  is  '•  the 
Jewess"),  in  tart,  except  the  article,  which  bs  dis- 
regarded in  the  A.  Y..  tlio  two  names  are  identical 
[comp.  HODAVl  \n.  No.  ■".].  Hodiah  is  exactly  the 
same  name  as  Hodijah,  under  which  form  it  is 
given  more  than  once  in  the  A.  \  . 

HODI'JAH  (IVTin  ;  'ClSovia,  'aSoi/x;  Odia, 
.  This  is  in  the  original  precisely  the  same 
name  as  the  preceding,  though  spell  differently  in 
tin-  A.  V.     It  occurs 

1.    A  Levite  in  the  time  of  Kzra  and    Nehemiah 


822 


HOGLAH 


(Neh.  viii.  7;  and  probably  also  ix.  5;  x.  10). 
The  name  with  others  is  omitted  in  the  two  first 
of  these  passages  in  the  LXX. 

2.  Another  Levite  at  the  same  time  (Neh. 
x.  13). 

3.  A  layman  ;  one  of  the  "  heads  "  of  the  people 
at  the  same  time  (Neh.  x.  18). 

HOG'LAH  (rbm  ;  'Ey\d,  Alex.  Aly\d, 
AiyAdfx  ;  Hegla),  the  third  of  the  five  daughters 
of  Zelophehad,  in  whose  favour  the  law  of  inherit- 
ance was  altered  so  that  a  daughter  could  inherit 
her  father's  estate  when  he  left  no  sons  (Num. 
xxvi.  33,  xxvii.  1,  xxxvi.  11,  Josh.  xvii.  3). 

The  name  also  occurs  in  Beth-hoglah,  which 
see. 

HO'HAM  (DHin  ;  'EAa^i,  Alex.  Aixdjx ; R 
Oham),  king  of  Hebron  at  the  time  of  the  conquest 
of  Canaan  (Josh.  x.  3)  ;  one  of  the  five  kings  who 
were  pursued  by  Joshua  down  the  pass  of  Beth- 
horon,  and  who  were  at  last  captured  in  the  cave 
at  Makkedah  and  there  put  to  death.  As  king  of 
Hebron  he  is  frequently  referred  to  in  Josh,  x.,  but 
his  name  occurs  in  the  above  passage  only. 

HOLOFER'NES,  or,  more  correctly,  Ouo- 
FERNES  ('OXocpepvys),  was,  according  to  the  book 
of  Judith,  a  general  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  king  of 
the  Assyrians  (Jud.  ii.  4),  who  was  slain  by  the 
Jewish  heroine  Judith  during  the  siege  of  Bethulia. 
[Judith.]  The  name  occurs  twice  in  Cappadocian 
history,  as  borne  by  the  brother  of  Ariarathes  I. 
(c.  B.C.  350),  and  afterwards  by  a  pretender  to  the 
Cappadocian  throne,  who  was  at  first  supported  anil 
afterwards  imprisoned  by  Demetrius  Soter  (c.  B.C. 
158).  The  termination  CTissaphemes,  &c.)  points 
to  a  Persian  origin,  but  the  meaning  of  the  word  is 
uncertain.  [B.  F.  W.] 

HO'LON  (]bn  ;  Xa\oi>  koI  Xavvd,  Alex.  Xj- 
Aovwv  ;  7]  FeWa,  Alex.  'Cl\d!>v  ;  Olon,  Holon). 
1.  A  town  in  the  mountains  of  Judah  ;  one  of  the 
first  group,  of  which  Debir  was  apparently  the  most 
considerable.  It  is  named  between  Goshen  and 
Giloh  (Josh.  xv.  51),  and  was  allotted  with  its 
"suburbs"  to  the  priests  (xxi.  15).  In  the  list  of 
priest's  cities  of  1  Chr.  vi.  the  name  appears  as 
Hilen.  In  the  Onomasticon  ("Helon"  and 
"Olon")  it  is  mentioned,  but  not  so  as  to  imply 
its  then  existence.  Nor  has  the  name  been  since 
recognised  by  travellers. 

2.  (fbh;  XeAcui/;  Helon),  a  city  of  Moab 
(Jer.  xlviii.  21,  only).  It  was  one  of  the  towns  of 
the  Mishor,  the  level  downs  (A.  V.  "  plain 
country  ")  east  of  Jordan,  and  is  named  with  Ja- 
hazah,  Dibon,  and  other  known  places;  but  no 
identification  of  it  has  yet  taken  place,  nor  does  it 
appear  in  the  parallel  lists  of  Num.  xxxii.  and 
Josh.  xiii.  [G.] 

HO'MAM  (Dftin  ;  Alfidv;  Homan),  the  form 
under  which  in  1  Chr.  i.  39,  an  Edomite  name 
appears,  which  in  Gen.  xxxvi.  is  given  Hemam. 
Homam  is  assumed  by  Gesenius  to  be  the  original 
form  (Thes.  385  a).  By  Knobel  (Genesis,  25+). 
the    name   is    compared    with   that   of   Homaima 

(&j.a^=»),  a  town  now  ruined,  though  once  im- 
portant, halfway  between  Petra  and  Ailath,  on  the 
ancient  road   at   the  back   of   the  mountain.      See 


HONEY 

Eaborde,  Journey,  207 ,  Ameime ;   also  the  Arabic 
authorities  mentioned  by  Knobel.  [<i.] 


a  In  each  MS.  the  same  equivalent  as  the  above 
has  been  given  for  Horam. 


HOMER.     [Measures.] 

HONEY.      We  have   already  noticed  [Foon] 
the  extensive  use  of  honey  as  an  article  of  ordinary 
food  among  the  Hebrews :  we  shall  therefore  in  the 
present  article  restrict  ourselves  to  a  description  of 
the  different  articles  which  passed  under  the  Hebrew- 
name  oi'd'hash  (t^Q^I).     In  the  first  place  it  applies 
to  the  product  of  the  bee,  to  which  we  exclusively 
apply  the  name  of  honey.      All  travellers  agree  in 
describing  Palestine  as  a  land  "  flowing  with  honey  " 
(Ex.  iii.  8),  bees  being  abundant  even  in  the  remote 
parts  of  the  wilderness,  where  they  deposit  their 
honey  in  the  crevices  of  the  rocks  or  in  hollow  trees. 
In  some  parts  of  northern  Arabia  the  hills  are  so 
well  stocked  with  bees,  that  no  sooner  are  hives 
placed  than  they  are  occupied  (Wellsted's  Travels, 
ii.  123).     The  Hebrews  had  special  expressions  to 
describe  the  exuding  of  the  honey  from  the  comb, 
such  as  nopheth  (J"ISi))  "dropping"  (Cant.  iv.  11  ; 
Prov.  v.  3,  xxiv.  13),  tzuph  (5j-1¥)  "  overflowing" 
(Ps.  xix.  10;   Prov.  xvi.  24),  and  yaar  (IV)  01' 
yaarah  (mj?*)  (1  Sam.  xiv.  27  ;  Cant.  v.  lj— ex- 
pressions which  answer  to  the  mel  acetum  of  Pliny 
(xi.  15):  the  second  of  these  terms  approaches  nearest 
to  the  sense  of  "  honey  comb,"  inasmuch  as  it  is  con- 
nected with  nopeth  in  Ps.  xix.  10,  "  the  droppings  of 
the  comb."    (2.)  In  the  second  place,  the  term  debesh 
applies  to  a  decoction  of  the  juice  of  the  grape, 
which  is  still   called    dibs,  and    which    forms   an 
article  of  commerce  in  the  East ;  it  was  this,  and 
not  ordinary  bee-honey,  which  Jacob  sent  to  Joseph 
(Gen.  xliii.  11),  and  which  the  Tynans  purchased 
from  Palestine  (Ez.  xxvii.  17).     The  mode  of  pre- 
paring it  is  described  by  Pliny  (xiv.  11):  the  must 
was  either  boiled  down  to  a  half  (in  which  case  it 
was  called  defrutum),  or  to  a  third  (when  it  was 
called  siracum,   or  sapa,  the  tripaios   olvos,    and 
e\pVfJ-a  of  the  Greeks)  :  it  was  mixed  either  with 
wine  or  milk  (Virg.  Georg.  i.  296 ;  Ov.  Fast.  iv. 
780)  :    it  is  still  a  favourite  article  of  nutriment 
among   the   Syrians,    and   has  the   appearance  of 
coarse  honey  (Russell,  Aleppo,  i.  82).     (3.)A  third 
kind  has  been  described  by  some  writers  as  "  vege- 
table "  honey,  by  which  is  meant  the  exudations  of 
certain    trees   and    shrubs,  such  as  the    Tamarix 
mannifera,  found  in  the  peninsula  of  Sinai,  or  the 
stunted   oaks  of  Luristan  and  Mesopotamia.     The 
honey,  which  Jonathan  ate  in  the  wood  (1  Sam. 
xiv.  25),  and  the  "  wild  honey,"  which  supported 
St.  John  (Matt.  iii.  4),  have  been  referred  to  this 
species.     We  do  not  agree  to  this  view :  the  honey 
in  the  wood  was  in  such  abundance  that  Jonathan 
took  it  up  on  the  end  of  a  stick;  but  the  vegetable 
honey  is  found  only  in  small  globules,  which  must 
be  carefully  collected  and  strained  before  being  used 
(Wellsted,  ii.  50).     The  use  of  the  term  yaar  in 
that  passage  is  decisive  against  this  kind  of  honey. 
The  /a4\i  &ypiov  of  Matthew  need  not  mean  any- 
thing else  than  the  honey  of  the  wild  bees,  which 
we  have  already  stated  to  be  common  in  Palestine, 
and  which   Jo'sephus   (£.  J.  iv.   8,  §3)    s] 
among  the    natural    productions   of  the    plain    of 
Jericho:    the    expression    is   certainly   applii 
Diodorus  Siculus  (xix.  94)  to  honey  exuded   from 
trees;  but  it  may  also  be  applied  like  the  Latin 
mel  silvestre  (Plin.  xi.  16)  to  a  particular  kind  of 
bee-honey.     (4.)  A  fourth  kind  i<  described  by  Jo- 


HOOK 

sephus  (/.   c,),   ns   being  manufactured   from   the 
juice  of  the  date. 

The  prohibition  against  the  use  of  honey  in  meat 
offerings  (Lev.  ii.  11)  appears  to  have  been  grounded 
on  the  fermentation  produced  by  it,  honey  soon 
turning  sour,  and  even  forming  vinegar  (Plin.  xxi. 
48).  This  fact  is  embodied  in  the  Talmudical 
word  hidliish  =  "  to  ferment,"  derived  from  d'bash. 
Other  explanations  have  been  offered,  as  that  bees 
were  unclean  (Phil.  ii.  255),  or  that  the  honey  was  the 
artificial  dibs  (Bahr,  Symbol,  ii.  323).    [W.  L.  B.] 

HOOK,  HOOKS.  Various  kinds  of  hooks  are 
noticed  in  the  Bible,  of  which  the  following  are  the 
most  important. 

1.  Fishing-hooks  (n3^,  "T'D,  Am.  iv.  2;  nSn, 
Job  xli.  2  ;  Is.  xix.  8  ;  Hab.  i.  15).  The  two  first 
of  these  Hebrew  terms  mean  primarily  thorns,  and 
secondarily  fishing-hooks,  from  the  similarity  in 
shape,  or  perhaps  from  thorns  having  been  origin- 
ally used  for  the  purpose ;  in  both  eases  the  LXX. 
and  Vulg.  are  mistaken  in  their  renderings,  giving 
oVAois  and  cordis  for  the  first,  Xifi-nTas  and  ollis 
for  the  second:  the  third  term  refers  to  the  con- 
traction of  the  mouth  by  the  hook. 

2.  mn  (A.  V.  "thorn,"),  properly  a  ring  (-tyix- 
Xiov ,  circulus)  placed  through  the  mouth  of  a  large 
fish  and  attached  by  a  cord  ()D2S<)  to  a  stake  tor 
the  purpose  of  keeping  it  alive  in  the  water  (Job 
xli.  2  i  :  the  word  meaning  the  cord  is  rendered 
"  hook"  in  the  A.  V.  and  =  ffx°^vos- 

3.  Pin  and  Plin,  generally  rendered  "hook"  in 
the  A.  A',  after  the  LXX.  &yiu<npov,  but  properly 
a  rin  i  (circulus),  such  as  in  our  country  is  placed 
through  the  nose  of  a  bull,  and  similarly  used  in  the 
Last  for  leading  about  lions  (Ez.  xix.  4,  where  the 
A.  V.  has  "  with  chains"),  camels  and  other  animals. 
A  similar  method  was  adopted  for  leading  prisoners, 
as  in  the  case  of  Manasseh  who  was  led  with  rings 
(2  Chr.  xxxiii.  11 ;  A.  V.  "  in  the  thorns  ").  An 
illustration  of  this  practice  is  found  in  a  bas-relief 
discovered  at  Khorsabad  (Layard,  ii.  376).  The 
expression  is  used  several  times  in  this  sense  (2  K. 
xix.  28  ;  Is.  xxxvii.  29  ;  Lz.  xxix.  4,  xxxviii.  4). 
The  term  t'pIO  is  used  in  a  similar  sense  in  Job 
\l.  24  (A.  V.  "  bore  his  nose  with  a  gin,"  margin). 


HOK,  MOUNT 


823 


4.  D'11,  a  term  exclusively  used  in  reference  to 
the  Tabernacle,  rendered  "hooks"  in  the  A.  V. 
the  l.\\  varus  in  its  rendering  sometimes  gmng 
we^aAi's',  i.  e.  the  capil  il  of  the  pillars,  sometimes 
Kp'iKos  and  ayKvAr) ;  the  expenditure  of  gold,  as 
given  in  Ex.  xxxviii.  28,  has  led  to  this  douhl  ;  thej 
were  however  most  prob  ;  Ex.  xwi.  32, 
37,  xxvii.  In  il'.,  xxxviii.  10  ff.);  the  word  seems 
to  have  given  name  to  the  letter  1  in  the  Hebrew 
alphabet,  possibly  from  a  similarity  of  the  form  in 
which  the  latter  appears  in  the  Greek  Digamma, 
to  that  of  a  hook. 

5.  mDTO,  a  vine-dresser's  pruning-hook  (Is.  ii. 
4,  xviii.  5  •  Alio,  iv.  3;  Joel  in.  1"). 

6.  J?TE  and  rwTO  (Kptaypa),  a  flesh-hook  for 


getting  up  the  joints  of  meat  out  of  the  boiling-pot 
(Ex.  xxvii.  3  ;  1  Sam.  ii.  13-14). 

7.  D^flBtJ'  (Ez.  xl.  43),  a  term  of  very  doubtful 
meaning,  probably  meaning  "  hooks "  (as  in  the 
A.  V.),  used  for  the  purpose  of  hanging  up  animals 
to  flay  them  (paxilli  bifurci,  Gesen.  Thesaur, 
1470):  other  meanings  given  are — ledges  (labia, 
Vulg.),  or  eaves,  as  though  the  word  were  DTIDC  • 
pens  for  keeping  the  animals  previous  to  their  being 
slaughtered  ;  heaith-stones,  as  in  the  margin  of  the 
A.  V. ;  and  lastly,  gutters  to  receive  and  carry  off 
the  blood  from  the  slaughtered  animals.  [W.  L.  B.] 
HOPH'NI  pJSn,  "  a  fighter ;"  'CHpvi)  and 
Phinehas  (DW2,  Qivees),  the  two  sous  of  Eli, 
who  fulfilled  their  hereditary  sacerdotal  duties  at. 
Shiloh.  Their  brutal  rapacity  and  lust,  which 
seemed  to  acquire  fresh  violence  with  their  father's 
increasing  years  (1  Sam.  ii.  22,  12-17),  filled  the 
people  with  disgust  and  indignation,  and  provoked 
the  curse  which  was  denounced  against  their  father's 
house  first  by  an  unknown  prophet  ( 27-36),  and  then 
by  Samuel  (1  Sam.  iii.  11-14).  They  were  both  cut 
off  in  one  day  in  the  flower  of  their  age,  and  the  ark 
which  they  had  accompanied  to  battle  against  the 
Philistines  was  lost  on  the  same  occasion  (1  Sam. 
iv.  10,  11).  The  predicted  ruin  and  ejectment  of 
Eli's  house  were  fulfilled  in  the  reign  of  Solomon. 
[Eli;  Zadok.]  The  unbridled  licentiousness  of 
these'  young  priests  gives  us  a  terrible  glimpse  into 
the  fallen  condition  of  the  chosen  people  (Ewald, 
Gesch.  ii.  538-638).  The  Scripture  calls  them 
"  sons  of  Belial  "  (1  Sam.  ii.  12)  ;  and  to  this  our 
great  poet  alludes  in  the  words — 

"  to  him  no  temple  stood 

Or  altar  smoked ;  yet  who  more  oft  than  he 
In  temples  and  at  altars,  when  the  priest 
Turns  atheist,  as  did  Eli's  sons,  who  filled 
With  lust  and  violence  the  house  of  God  I" 

Par.  Lost,  i.  492.  [E.  W.  F.] 

HOR,  MOUNT  ("inn  VI,  i.  e.  "  Hor  the 
mountain,"  remarkable  as  the  only  case  in  which 
the  name  comes  first).  1.  Cflp  to  opos:  Mons 
Hor),  the  mountain  in  which  Aaron  died  (Num. 
xx.  25,  27).  The  word  Hor  is  regarded  by  the 
lexicographers  as  an  archaic  form  of  Hur,  the  usual 
Hebrew  term  for  "mountain"  (Gesenius,  Thes. 
391  6;  Fuerst,  Handwb.  ad  voc.  &c),  so  that  the 
meaning  of  the  name  is  simply  "  the  mountain  of 
mountains,"  as  the  LXX.  have  it  in  another  case 
(see  below,  No.  2)  rb  opos  to  opos  ;  Vulg.  mmis 
altissirtms;  and  Jerome  (Ep.  ad  Fabiolam)  nan  in 
monte  simpliciter  sed  in  mantis  monte. 

The  few  farts  given  us  in  the  Bible  regarding 
Mount  Hor  are  soon  told,  it  was  •'  on  the  boundary 
line"  (Num.  xx.  23)  or  "at  the  edge"  (xxxiii. 
.".7)  of  the'  land  of  Edom.  It  was  the  next  halting- 
placc  of  the  people  after  K'adesh  (xx.  22,  xwiii. 
37),  and  they  quitted  it  for  Zalmonah  (xxxiii.  41) 
in  the  road  to  tin-  Red  Sea  (xxi.  4).  It  was  during 
the  encampment  at  Kadesh  thai  Aaron  was  gathered 
to  his  fathers.  At  the  command  of  Jehovah,  he, 
his  brother,  and  bis  Bon  ascended  the  mountain,  in 
the  presence  of  the  people,  "  in  the  eyes  of  all  the 
congregation."  The  garments,  and  with  thi 
ments  tli Bee,  of  h  gh-priest  were  taken  from 

Aaron  and  pul  Upon  Llea/.ar.  and  Aaron   died  there 

in  the  top  of  the  mountain.  Iii  the  circumstances 
of  the  ascent  of  the  height  to, lie, and  in  the  marked 
exclusion  from  the  Promised  Land,  the  end  of  the 
one  brother  resembled  the  end  of  the  other  :  but  in 


824 


HOR,  MOUNT 


the  presence  of  the  two  survivors,  and  of  the  gazing 
crowd  below,  there  is  a  striking  difference  between 
this  event  and  the  solitary  death  of 'Moses. 

Mount  Hor  "  is  one  of  the  very  few  spots  con- 
nected with  the  wanderings  of  the  Israelites  which 
admit  of  no  reasonable  doubt"  (Stanley,  S.  fy  P. 
86).  It  is  almost  unnecessary  to  state  that  it  is 
situated  on  the  eastern  side  of  the  great  valley 
of  the  Arabah,  the  highest  and  most  conspicuous  of 
the  whole  range  of  the  sandstone  mountains  of 
Edom,  having  close  beneath  it  on  its  eastern  side — 
though  strange  to  say  the  two  are  not  visible  to 
each  other — the  mysterious  city  of  Petra.  The 
tradition  has  existed  from  the  earliest  date.  Josephus 
does  not  mention  the  name  of  Hor  (Ant.  iv.  4,  §7), 
but  he  describes  the  death  of  Aaron  as  taking  place 
"on  a  very  high  mountain  which  surrounded  the 
metropolis  of  the  Arabs,"  which  latter  "was  for- 
merly called  Arke,  but  now  Petra."  In  the  Ono- 
masticon  of  Eusebius  and  Jerome  it  is  Or  mons — 
"  a  mountain  in  which  Aaron  died,  close  to  the 
city  of  Petra."  When  it  was  visited  by  the  Cru- 
saders (see  the  quotations  in  Rob.  521)  the  sanctuary 


HOR,  MOUNT 

was  already  on  its  top,  and  there  is  little  doubt 
that  it  was  then  what  it  is  now — the  Jebel  Nebi- 
ILiraii,  "  the  mountain  of  the  Prophet  Aaron." 

Of  the  geological  formation  of  Mount  Hor  we 
have  no  very  trustworthy  accounts.  The  general 
structure  of  the  range  of  Edom,  of  which  it  forms 
the  most  prominent  feature,  is  new  red  sandstone, 
displaying  itself  to  an  enormous  thickness.  Above 
that  is  the  Jura  limestone,  and  higher  still  the  creta- 
ceous beds,  which  latter  in  Mount  Seir  are  reported 
to  be  3500  feet  in  thickness  (Wilson,  Lands,  i.  194). 
Through  these  deposited  strata  longitudinal  dykes 
of  red  granite  and  porphyry  have  forced  their  way, 
running  nearly  north  and  south,  and  so  completely 
silicifying  the  neighbouring  saudstone  as  often  to 
give  it  the  look  of  a  primitive  rock.  To  these 
combinations  are  due  the  extraordinary  colours  for 
which  Petra  is  so  famous.  Mount  Hor  itself  is 
said  to  be  entirely  sandstone,  in  very  horizontal 
strata  (Wilson,  i.  290).  Its  height,  according  to 
the  latest  measurements,  is  4800  feet  (Eng.)'  above 
the  Mediterranean,  that  is  to  say  about  1700  feet 
i  above  the  town  of  Petra,  4000  above  the  level  of 


the  Arabah,  and  more  than  6000  above  the  Dead 
Sea  (Roth,  in  Petermann's  Mittheil.  1S58,  i.  3). 
The  mountain  is  marked  far  and  near  by  its 
double  top,  which  rises  like  a  huge  castellated 
building  from  a  lower  base,  and  is  surmounted  by 
the  circular  dome  of  the  tomb  of  Aaron,  a  distinct 
white  spot  on  the  dark  red  surface  of  the  mountain 
(.Stanley,  86  ;  Laborde,  143  ;  Stephens,  Incidents). 
This  lower  base  is  the  "  plain  of  Aaron,"  beyond 
which  Burckhardt  was,  after  all  his  toils,  prevented 
from  ascending.  "  Out  of  this  plain,  culminating 
in  its  two  summits,  springs  the  red  sandstone  mass, 
from  its  base  upwards  rocky  and  naked,  not  a  bush 
or  a  tree  to  relieve  the  rugged  and  broken  corners 
of  the  sandstone  blocks  which  compose  it.  On  as- 
cending this  mass  a  little  plain  is  found  to  lie  be- 
tween the  two  peaks,  marked  by  a  white  cypress,  and 
not  unlike  the  celebrated  plain  of  the  cypress  under 
the  summit  of  Jebel  Afusa,  traditionally  believed  to 
be  the  scene  of  Elijah's  vision.  The  southernmost 
of  the  two,  on  approaching,  takes  a  conical  form. 
The  northernmost  is  truncated,  and  crowned  by 
the  chapel  of  Aaron's  tomb."     The  chapel  or  mosk 


(From  Laborde.) 


is  a  small  square  building,  measuring  inside  about 
28  feet  by  33  (Wilson,  295),  with  its  door  in  the 
S.W.  angle.  It  is  built  of  rude  stones,  in  part 
broken  columns ;  all  of  sandstone,  but  fragments 
of  granite  and  marble  lie  about.  Steps  lead  to 
the  fiat  roof  of  the  chapel,  from  which  rises  a  white 
dome  as  usual  over  a  saint's  tomb.  The  interior 
of  the  chapel  consists  of  two  chambers,  one  below 
the  other.  The  upper  one  has  four  large  pillars 
and  a  stone  chest,  or  tombstone,  like  one  of  the 
ordinary  slabs  in  churchyards,  but  larger  and  higher, 
and  rather  bigger  at  the  top  than  the  bottom.  At 
its  head  is  a  high  round  stone,  on  which  sacrifices 
are  made,  and  which  retained,  when  Stephens  saw 
it,  the  marks  of  the  smoke  and  blood  of  recent 
offerings.  "On  the  slab  are  Arabic  inscriptions,  and 
it  is  covered  with  shawls  chiefly  red.  One  of 
the  pillars  is  hung  with  votive  offerings  of  beads, 
&c,  and  two  ostrich  eggs  are  suspended  over  the 
chest.  Steps  in  the  N.W.  angle  lead  down  to 
the  lower  chamber,  which  is  partly  in  the  rock, 
but  plastered.  It  is  perfectly  dark.  At  the  end, 
apparently  under  the  stone  chest  above,  is  a  recess 


HOR,  MOUNT 

guarded  by  a  grating.  Within  this  is  a  rude  pro- 
tuberance, whether  of  stone  or  plaster  was  not  ascer- 
tainable, resting  on  wood,  and  covered  by  a  ragged 
pall.  This  lower  recess  is  no  doubt  the  tomb,  and 
possibly  ancient.  What  is  above  is  only  the  arti- 
licial  monument  and  certainly  modern."  a  In  one 
of  the  walls  of  this  chamber  is  a  "  round  polished 
black  stoue,"  one  of  those  mysterious  stones  of 
which  the  prototype  is  the  Kaaba  at  Mecca,  and 
which,  like  that,  would  appear  to  be  the  object  of 
great  devotion  (Martineau,  419,  20). 

The  impression  received  on  the  spot  is  that 
Aaron's  death  took  place  in  the  small  basin  between 
the  two  peaks,  and  that  the  people  were  stationed 
either  on  the  plain  at  the  base  of  the  peaks,  or  at 
that  part  of  the  Wady  Abu-Kusheybeh  from  which 
the  top  is  commanded.  Josephus  says  that  the 
ground  was  sloping  downwards  (/carafTer  ?iv  to 
XaipiW ;  Ant.  iv.  4,  §7).  But  this  may  be  the 
mere  general  expression  of  a  man  who  had  never 
been  on  the  spot.  The  greater  part  of  the  above 
information  has  been  kindly  communicated  to  the 
writer  by  Professor  Stanley. 

The  chief  interest  of  Mount  Hor  will  always  con- 
sist in  the  prospect  from  its  summit — the  last 
view  of  Aaron — "  that  view  which  was  to  him  what 
Pisgah  was  to  his  brother."  It  is  described  at  length 
by  Irby  (134),  Wilson  (i.  292-9),  Martineau  (420), 
and  is  well  summed  up  by  Stanley  in  the  following 
words :  "  We  saw  all  the  main  points  on  which  his 
eye  must  have  rested.  He  looked  over  the  valley 
of  the  Arabah  countersected  by  its  hundred  water- 
courses, and  beyond,  over  the  white  mountains  of  the 
wilderness  they  had  so  long  traversed  ;  and  at  the 
northern  edge  of  it  there  must  have  been  visible  the 
heights  through  which  the  Israelites  had  vainly  at- 
tempted to  force  their  way  into  the  Promised  Land. 
This  was  the  western  view.  Close  around  him  on 
the  east  were  the  rugged  mountains  of  Edom,  and 
tar  along  tin1  horizon  the  wide  downs  of  Mount  Seir, 
through  which  the  passage  had  been  denied  by  the 
wild  tribes  of  Esau  who  hunted  over  their  long 
slopes.''  On  the  north  lay  the  mysterious  Dead  Sea 
gleaming  from  the  depths  (if  its  profound  basin 
(Stephens,  Incidents).  li  A  dreary  moment,  and  a 
dreary  scene — such  it  must  have  seemed  to  the  aged 
priest.  .  .  .  The  peculiarity  of  the  view  is  the  com- 
bination of  wide  extension  with  the  scarcity  of  marked 
features.  Petra  is  shut  out  by  intervening  rocks. 
But  the  survey  of  the  Desert  on  one  side,  and  the 
mountains  of  Edom  on  the  other,  is  complete;  and 
of  these  last  the  great  feature  is  the  mass  of  red 
bald-headed  sandstone  rocks,  intersected  not  by  val- 
leys but  by  deep  seams"  (S.  Sf  P.  87).  Though 
Petra  itself  is  entirely  shut  out,  one  outlying  build- 
ing— if  it  may  be  called  a  building— is  visible,  thai 
which  goes  by  the  name  of  the  Deir,  or  Convent. 
Professor  Stanley  has  thrown  out  a  suggestion  on 
the  connexion  between  the  two  which  is  well  worth 
farther  i  n  vest  i  gat  i  on . 

Owing  to  the  natural  difficulties  <>f  the  locality 
and  the  caprices  of  the  Arabs,  Mount  Hor  and 
Petra  are  more  difficult  of  access  than  any  other 
places  which  Europeans  usually  attempt  to  visit. 
The  records  of  these  attempts — not  all  of  them 
successes — will  be  found  in  the  works  of  Burck- 
hardt,  Irby  and  Mangles,  Stephens,  Wilson,  Robin- 
son,  Martineau,  and  Stanley.     They  are  sufficient 


HOREM 


825 


1  If  Burckhardt's  informants  were  correct  [Syria, 
431),  there  is  a  considerable  difference  between  what 
the  tomb  was  even  when  be  sacrificed  bis  kid  on  the 


to  invest  the  place  with  a  secondary  interest,  hardly 
inferior  to  that  which  attaches  to  it  as  the  halting- 
place  of  the  children  of  Israel,  and  the  burial-place 
of  Aaron. 

2.  (to  uposrh  upos  ;  mons  altissimus.')  A  moun- 
tain, entirely  distinct  from  the  preceding,  named,  in 
Num.  xxxiv.  7,  8,  only,  as  one  of  the  marks  of  the 
northern  boundary  of  the  land  which  the  children 
of  Israel  were  about  to  conquer.  The  identification 
of  this  mountain  has  always  been  one  of  the  puzzles 
of  Sacred  Geography.  The  Mediterranean  was  the 
western  boundary.  The  northern  boundary  started 
from  the  sea ;  the  first  point  in  it  was  Mount  Hor, 
and  the  second  the  entrance  of  Hamath.  Since 
Sidon  was  subsequently  allotted  to  the  most  north- 
ern tribe— Asher,  and  was,  as  far  as  we  know,  the 
most  northern  town  so  allotted,  it  would  seem 
probable  that  the  northern  boundary  would  com- 
mence at  about  that  point ;  that  is,  opposite  to 
where  the  great  range  of  Lebanon  breaks  down  to 
the  sea.  The  next  landmark,  the  entrance  to  Ha- 
math, seems  to  have  been  determined  by  Mr.  Porter 
as  the  pass  at  Kalat  el-Husn,  close  to  Hums,  the 
ancient  Hamath — at  the  other  end  of  the  range  of 
Lebanon.  Surely  "  Mount  Hor"  then  can  be  nothing 
else  than  the  great  chain  of  Lebanon  itself.  Looking 
at  the  massive  character  and  enormous  height  of  the 
range,  it  is  very  difficult  to  suppose  that  any  indivi- 
dual peak  or  mountain  is  intended  and  not  the  whole 
mass,  which  takes  nearly  a  straight  course  between 
the  two  points  just  named,  and  includes  below  it 
the  great  plain  of  the  Buka'a  and  the  whole  of 
Palestine  properly  so  called. 

The  Targum  Pseudojon.  renders  Mount  Hor  by 
Unianos,  probably  intending  Amana.  The  latter 
is  also  the  reading  of  the  Talmud  (Gittin  8,  quoted 
by  Fuerst,  sub  voce),  in  which  it  is  connected  with 
the  Amana  named  in  Cant.  iv.  8.  But  the  situation 
of  this  Amana  is  nowhere  indicated  by  them.  It 
cannot  have  any  connexion  with  the  Amana  or 
Abana  river  which  flowed  through  Damascus,  as 
that  is  quite  away  from  the  position  required  in 
the  passage.  By  the  Jewish  geographers  Schwarz 
(24,  25)  and  Parchi  (Benj.  of  fudela,  413,  &c), 
for  various  traditional  and  linguistic  reasons,  a 
mountain  is  fixed  upon  very  far  to  the  north,  be- 
tween Tripoli  and  Hamath,  in  fact,  though  they  do 
not  say  so,  very  near  the,  Mons  Amanus  of  the 
classical  geographers.  But  this  is  some  200  miles 
north  of  Sidon,  and  150  above  Hamath,  and  is 
surely  an  unwarranted  extension  of  the  limits  of  the 
Holy  Land.  The  great  range  of  Lebanon  is  so 
clearly  the  natural  northern  boundary  of  the  coun- 
try, that  there  seems  no  reason  to  doubt  that  the 
whole  range  is  intended  by  the  term  Hor.       [(J.] 

HO'RAMfDlh;  'EAa^Alex.AiAaju;  Soram), 
kingofGEZER  at  the  time  of  the  conquest  of  the 
south-western  part  of  Palestine  (Josh.  x.  33).  He 
came,  to  the  assistance  ofLachish,bu1  was  slaughtered 
by  Joshua  with  all  his  people.  Whether  the  Gezer 
which  he  governed  was  that  commonly  mentioned, 
or  another  place  further  south,  is  not  determinable. 

IH  f'REB.  Ex.  iii.  1,  wii.  6,  raiii.  <>;  Deut. 
i.  '_',  6,  19,  iv.  LO,  1">,  v.  2,  i\.  8,  .wiii.  16,  .wix. 
1  ;  1  K.  \iii.  9,  \i\.  s:  2  Chr.  v.  10 ;  iv.  cvi. 
in;  Mai.  iv.  4;   Ecclus.  xlviii.  7.     [Sinai.] 

HO'REM  (Dnn  ;   MeyuKaaplfx,  Alex.  McrySa- 

plain  below,  and  when  Irby  ami  Mangles  visited  it, 

six  years  after. 

3   II 


826 


HOK  HAGIDGAD 


AiTjoipa/x,  both  by  inclusion  of  the  preceding  name  ; 
Horem),  one  of  the  fortified  places  in  the  territory 
of  Naphtali ;  named  with  Iron  and  Migdal-el  (Josh. 
\ix.  38).  Van  deVelde  (i.  178,  9;  Memoir,  322) 
suggests  Hurah  as  the  site  of  Horem.  It  is  an 
ancient  site  in  the  centre  of  the  country,  half-way 
between  the  Ras  en-Nakhura  and  the  Lake  Merom, 
on  a  tell  at  the  southern  end  of  the  Wady  el-Ain, 
one  of  the  natural  features  of  the  country.  It  is 
also  in  favour  of  this  identification  that  Hurah  is 
near  Yarun,  probably  the  representative  of  the 
ancient  IRON,  named  with  Hoiem.  [G.] 

HOE  HAGID'GAD  (*ir]|rp'n:  to  ipos 
TaSydS:  Moris  Gadijad — both  reading  nil  for  "111), 
the  name  of  a  desert  station  where  the  Israelites 
encamped  (Num.  xxxiii.  32),  probably  the  same 
as  Gudgodah  (Deut.  x.  7).  In  both  passages  it 
stands  in  sequence  with  three  others,  Moserah  or 
Moseroth,  (Beeroth)  Bene  Jaakan,  and  Jotbath  or 
Jotbathah;  but  the  order  is  not  strictly  preserved. 
Hengstenberg  (Genuineness  of  the  Pentateuch,  ii. 
356)  has  sought  to  account  for  this  by  supposing 
that  they  were  in  Deut.  x.  7  going  the  opposite 
way  to  that  in  Num.  xxxiii.  32.  For  the  considera- 
tion of  this  see  Wilderness  of  Wanderinu. 
-  o  .- 

Gedged  (Arab.  tX~.k\~.)  means  a  hard  and  level 

3   O   J 

tract.  We  have  also  Gudgud  (Arab.  tXs.<X=s.)> 
which  has  among  other  meanings  that  of  a  well 
abounding  in  water.  The  plural  of  either  of  these 
might  closely  approximate  in  sound  to  Gudagid.  It 
is  observable  that  on  the  west  side  of  the  Arahah 
Robinson  (vol.  i.,  map)  has  a  Wady  Ghvdaghidh, 
which  may  bear  the  same  meaning ;  but  as  that 
meaning  might  be  perhaps  applied  to  a  great  num- 
ber of  localities,  it  would  be  dangerous  to  infer 
identity.  The  junction  of  this  wady  with  the 
Arabah  would  not,  however,  be  unsuitable  for  a 
station  between  Mount  Hor,  near  which  Moserah 
lay  (comp.  Num.  xx.  28,  Deut.  x.  6),  and  Ezion 
Geber.     Kobiuson  also  mentions  a  shrub  growing 

in  the  Arabah  itself,  which  he  calls  U^r,   GItudah 

(ii.  121  comp.  119),  which  may  also  possibly  sug- 
gest a  derivation  for  the  name.  [H.  H.j 

HO'EI.  1.  Cnh,  but  in  Chron.  nil!  ;  Xop'pol, 
Alex.  Xoppei,  in  Chron.  Xoppi ;  Hori),  a  Horite, 
as  his  name  betokens  ;  son  of  Lotan  the  son  of  Seir, 
.ind  brother  to  Hemam  or  Homam  (Gen.  xxxvi.  22  ; 
1  Chr.  i.  39).  No  trace  of  the  name  appears  to 
have  been  met  with  in  modern  times. 

2.  {Xoppi,  Alex. Xuppei ;  Horraeorum).  In  Gen. 
xxxvi.  30,  the  name  has  in  the  original  the  definite 

■  article  prefixed — ''"inn  =  "  the  Horite ;"  and  is  in 
fact  precisely  the  same  word  with  that  which  in  the 
preceding  verse,  and  also  in  21,  is  rendered  in  the 
A.  V.  "  the  Horites." 

3.  0"liP1;  '  2ovpi  in  both  MSS. ;  Hun).  A  man 
of  Simeon  ;  father  of  Shaphat,  who  represented  that 
tribe  among  the  spies  sent  up  into  Canaan  by  Moses 
(Num.  xiii.  5). 

HO'EITES  and  HO'EIMS  C*)n,  (Jen.  xiv.  G, 
and  Dnh,  Deut.  ii.  12;  Xoppcuoi ;  Chorraei), 
the  aboriginal  inhabitants  of  Mount  Seir  (Gen.  xiv. 
6),  and  probably  allied  to  the  Emims  and  Rephaims. 

a  For  this  2,  representing  |"l,  comp.  Hilen,  Hillel, 
Hosaii. 


HOEN 

The  name  Horite  ("Hn,  "  a  troglodyte,"  from 
"II II,  "  a  hole"  or  "cave")  appears  to  have  been 
derived  from  their  habits  as  '•  cave-dwellers."  Their 
excavated  dwellings  are  still  found  in  hundreds  in 
the  sandstone  cliffs  and  mountains  of  Edom,  and 
especially  in  Petra.  [Edom  and  Edomites.]  It 
may,  perhaps,  be  to  the  Horites  Job  refers  in 
xxx.  6,  7.  They  are  only  three  times  mentioned  in 
Scripture:  first,  when  they  were  smitten  by  the 
kings  of  the  East  (Gen.  xiv.  6) ;  then  when  their 
genealogy  is  given  in  Gen.  xxxvi.  20-30  and  1  Chr. 
i.  38-42;  and  lastly  when  they  were  exterminated 
by  the  Edomites  (Deut.  ii.  12,. 22).  It  appears 
probable  that  they  were  not  Canaanites,  but  an 
earlier  race,  who  inhabited  Mount  Seir  before  the 
posterity  of  Canaan  took  possession  of  Palestine 
(Ewald,  Geschichte,  vol.  i.  304,  5).       [J.  L.  P.] 

HOE'MAH  (ilEnn  ;  its  earlier  name  Zephath, 
DSV,  is  found  Judg.  i.  17)  was  the  chief  town  of 
a  "  king"  of  a  Canaanitish  tribe  on  the  south  of 
Palestine,  reduced  by  Joshua  (Joseph,  xii.  14), 
and  became  a  city  of  the  territory  of  Judah  (xv. 
30;  1  Sam.  xxx.  30),  but  apparently  belonged 
to  Simeon,  whose  territory  is  reckoned  as  parcel  of 
the  foimer  (Joseph,  xix.  4;  comp.  Judg.  i.  17; 
1  Chr.  iv.  30).  The  seeming  inconsistency  be- 
tween Num.  xxi.  3,  and  Judg.  i.  17  may  be  re- 
lieved by  supposing  that,  the  vow  made  at  the 
former  period  was  fulfilled  at  the  latter,  and  the 
name  (the  root  of  which,  Din,  constantly  occurs  in 
the  sense  of  to  devote  to  destruction,  or  utterly  to 
destroy)  given  by  anticipation.  Robinson  (ii.  181) 
identifies  the  pass  Es-Stifa,  sUu^li  with  Zephath, 

in  respect  both  of  the  name,  which  is  sufficiently 
similar,  and  of  the  situation,  which  is  a  probable 
one,  viz.  the  gap  in  the  mountain  barrier,  which, 
running  about  S.W.  and  N.E.,  completes  the 
plateau  of  Southern  Palestine,  and  rises  above  the 
less  elevated  step — the  level  of  the  desert  et-  Tih — 
interposed  between  it  and  the  Ghor.  [Wilder- 
ness of  Wandering.]  [H.  H.] 

HOEN.  I.  Literal.  (Josh.  vi.  4,  5  ;  comp. 
Ex.  xix.  13;  1  Sam.  xvi.  1,  13;  1  K.  i.  39;  Job 
xlii.  14). — Two  purposes  are  mentioned  in  the 
Scriptures  to  which  the  horn  seems  to  have  been 
applied.  Trumpets  were  probably  at  first  merely 
horns  perforated  at  the  tip,  such  as  are  still  used 
upon  mountain-farms  for  calling  home  the  labourers 
at  meal-time.  If  the  A.  V.  of  Josh.  vi.  4,  5 
("  rams'  horns,"  73VTI  j")p)  were  coirect,  this 
would  settle  the  question :  but  the  fact  seems  to  be 
that  ?2,V  has  nothing  to  do  with  ram,  and  that 
Y"[p,  horn,  serves  to  indicate  an  instrument  which 
originally  was  made  of  horn,  though  afterwards, 
no  doubt,  constructed  of  different  materials  (comp. 
Varr.  L.  L.  v.  24,  33,  "  comua  quod  ea  quae  nunc 
sunt  ex  aere  tunc  fiebant  bubulo  e  cornu"). 
[Cornet.]  The  horns  which  were  thus  made 
into  trumpets  were  probably  those  of  oxen  rather 
than  of  rams:  the  latter  would  scarcely  produce  a 
note  sufficiently  imposing  to  suggest  its  association 
with  the  fill  of  Jericho. 

The  word  horn  is  also  applied  to  a  flask,  or 
vessel  made  of  horn,  containing  oil  (1  Sam.  xvi.  1, 
13;  1  K.  i.  39),  or  used  as  a  kind  of  toilet-bottle^ 
filled  with  the  preparation  of  antimony  with  which 
women  tinged  their  eye-lashes  |  Keren-happuch  = 
paint-horn,  name  of  one  of  Job's  daughters,  Job 


HOEN 

xlii.  14).  So  in  English  drinking-horn  (commonly 
called  a  horn).  In  the  same  way  the  Greek  Kipas 
.sometimes  signifies  bugle,  trumpet  (Xen.  An.  ii.  2, 
§-ti,  and  sometimes  drinking-horn   (vii.  2,  §23). 

In  like  maimer  the  Latin  coma  means  trumpet, 
and  also  oil-cruet  (Hor.  Sat.  ii,  2,  61),  and  funnel 
(Virg.  Georg.  iii.  509  I. 

II.  Metaphorical.  —  1.  From  similarity  of 
form. — To  this  use  belongs  the  application  of  the 
word  horn  to  a  trumpet  of  metal,  as  ahead}7  men- 
tioned. Horns  of  ivory,  that  is,  elephants'  teeth, 
are  mentioned  in  Ez.  xxvii.  15;  either  metaphori- 
cally from  similarity  of  form ;  or,  as  seems  more 
probable,  from  a  vulgar  error.  The  horns  of  the 
altar  (Ex.  xxvii.  2)  are  not  supposed  to  have  been 
made  of  horn,  but  to  have  been  metallic  projections 
from  the  tour  corners  (yoiviai  KeparotiSe'is,  Joseph 
/''../.v.  5,  §•>).  [Altai:,  p.  53  a.]  The  peak  or 
summit  of  a  hill  was  called  a  horn  (Is.  v.  1,  where" 
hill  =  horn  in  Heb.  ;  comp.  Kepas,  Xen.  An.  v.  6, 
§7,  and  corn  a,  Stat.  Tlieb.  v.  532  ;  Arab.  Kurun 
Hattin,  Robinson,  Bibl.  lies.  ii.  370 ;  Gerin. 
Schrechh'irn,  Wctterhorn,  Aarliorn ;  Celt,  cairn). 
In  Hab.  iii.  4  ("he  had  horns  coming  out  of  his 
hand  ")  the  context  implies  rays  of  light. 

The  denominative  |~lp  =  "  to  emit  rays,"  is  used 
of  Moses'  face  (Ex.  xxxiv.  29,  30,  35)  ;  so  all  the 
versions  except  Aquila  and  the  Vulgate,  which  have 
the  translations  KepardS-ns  i\v,  comuta  Brat.  This 
curious  idea  has  not  only  been  perpetuated  by 
paintings,  coins,  and  statues  (Zornius,  Biblioth. 
Antiq.  i.  121  ),  but  has  at  least  passed  muster  with 
Grotius  (Annot.  ad  foe),  who  cites  Aben-Ezra's 
identification  of  Moses  with  the  horned  Mnevis  of 
Egypt,  and  suggests  that  the  phenomenon  was  in- 
tended to  remind  the  Israelites  of  the  gojden  calf! 
Spencer  {Leg.  Sebr.  iii.,  Diss.  i.  4)  tries  a  recon- 
ciliation of  renderings  upon  the  ground  that  cornua 
=radii  Inn's;  but  Spanheim  (Diss.  vii.  1),  not 
content  with  stigmatising  the  efforts  of  art  in  this 
direction  as  "  praepostera  industria,"  distinctly  at- 
tributes to  Jerome  a  belief  in  the  veritable  horns  of 
Moses.  Bishop  Taylor,  in  all  good  faith,  though 
of  course  rhetorically,  compares  the  "  sun's  golden 
horns"  to  those  of  the  Hebrew  Lawgiver. 

2.  From  Similarity  of  position  and  use. — Two 
principal  applications  of  this  metaphor  will  be  found 
— strength  anil  honour.  ( It  strength  the  horn  of  the 
unicorn  [Unicokn]  was  the  most  frequent  repre- 
sentative (Dent,   xxxiii.  17,  &c),  but  not  always; 

eomp.  1  K.  xxii.  11,  where  probably  bonis  of  i 

worn   defiantly  and   symbolically  on   the   head,  are 


HORNET 


827 


oi  South  African* amentod  with  buBalo-hi 

Livings!  n  ,  r,  avd  ,  -i  n,  (31, 

intended.  Expressive  of  tie-  same  idea,  or  per- 
haps merely  a  decoration,  is  the  Oriental  military 
ornament  mentioned  by  Taylor  (Calmetfs  Frag. 
c»:iv.).  and  the  conical  cap  observed  by  Dr.  Living- 
-i.'iie  among  the  natives  of  S.  Africa,  and  not  im- 
probably suggested  by  the  horn  of  the  rhinoceros, 
so  abundant  in  that  country  (see  Livingstone's  Zro- 
oels,  365, 450,  557  ;  comp.  Taylor, /.  c).     Among 


tin'  Druses  upon  Mount  Lebanon  the  married 
women  wear  silver  horns  on  their  heads.  The 
spiral  coils  cf  gold  wire  projecting  on  either  side 
from  the  female  head-dress  of  some  of  the  Dutch 
provinces  are  evidently  an  ornament  borrowed  from 
the  same  original  idea. 


Heads  of  modern  Asiatics  ornamented  with  horns. 

In  the  sense  of  honour,  the  word  horn  stands  for 
the  abstract  (my  hom,  Job  xvi.  15;  all  the  horns 
of  Israel,  Lam.  ii.  3),  and  so  for  the  supreme  au- 
thority (comp.  the  story  of  Cippus,  Ovid,  Met.  xv. 
5(15;  and  the  horn  of  the  Indian  Sachem  mentioned 
in  Clarkson's  Life  of  Fenii).  It  also  stands  for 
concrete,  whence  it  comes  to  mean  king,  kingdom 
(Dan.  viii.  2,  &c. ;  Zech.  i.  18;  comp.  Tarquin's 
dream  in  Accius,  ap.  Cic.  Din.  i.  22) ;  hence  on 
coins  Alexander  and  the  Seleucidae  wear  horns  (see 
drawings  on  p.  44),  and  the  former  is  called  in 
Arab,  two-horned  (Kor.  xviii.  85  ff),  not  without 
reference  to  Dan.  viii. 

Out  of  either  or  both  of  these  two  last  metaphors 
sprang  the  idea  of  representing  gods  with  bonis. 
Spanheim  has  discovered  such  figures  on  the  Roman 
denarius,  and  on  numerous  Egyptian  coins  of  the 
reigns  of  Trajan,  Hadrian,  and  the  Antonines(ZVss.v. 
p.  353).  The  Bacchus  TavpoKfpws,  or  comutus,  is 
mentioned  by  Euripides  (Bacch.  100),  and  among 
other  pagan  absurdities  Arnobi us  enumerates  "  Dii 
cornuti  "  (c.  Gent.  vi.).  In  like  manner  river-gods 
are  represented  with  horns  ("  tauriformis  Aufidus," 
Hor.  Od.  iv.  14,  25;  ravp6jj.op<pov  o/x/ua  Kr]<pL(Tov, 
Eur.  Ion.  1261).  For  various  opinions  on  the 
ground-thought  of  this  metaphor,  see  Notes  and 
Queries,  i.  410,  450.  Manx  legends  speak  of  a 
tarroo-ushtey,  i.e.  water-bidl  (see  Cregeen's  Manx 
Diet.').  (See  Bochart,  Hieroz.  ii.  288 ;  and.  lor  an 
admirable  compendium,  with  references,  Zornius, 
Bxbliotheca  Antiquaria,  ii.  106  If.).      [T.  E.  B.] 

HORNET  (nyiV;    crQyKLa ;   crabro).     That 

the  Hebrew  word  tzir'&h  describes  the  hornet,  may 

be    taken     tin'    granted    on    the    almost    unanimous 

authority  of  the  ancient  versions.  Not  only  were 
Iv  numerous  in  Palestine,  hut  from 
the  name  Zoieah  (Josh.  XV.  •"••"',  we  may  infer 
that  lionets  in  particular  infested  some  parts  of  the 
country:  the  frequent  notices  of  the  animal  in  the 
Talmudical  writers  (Lewysohn,  Zool.  §4u5)  lead 
to  the  sane-  conclusion,     in  Seriptmv  th.'  hornet  is 

'  to  only  a-   the   means   which   Jehovah    em- 
ployed  tor   the  extirpation   of  the   ('anaanit. 
nriii.  28;   Kent.  vii.  20;    Josh,  xxiv.   12;  Wisd. 
xii.  s).     Some  commentators  regard  the  word  as 

3  II  2 


828 


HORONAIM 


used  in  its  literal  sense,  and  adduce  authenticated 
instances,  where  armies  have  been  seriously  mo- 
lested by  hornets  (Aelian,  xi.  28,  xvii.  35  ;  Am- 
mian.  Marcellin.  xxiv.  8).  But  the  following 
arguments  ^geem  to  decide  in  faVour  of  a  meta- 
phorical sense :— (1)  that  the  word  "hornet"  in 
Ex.  xxiii.  28  is  parallel  to  "fear"  in  ver.  27; 
(2)  that  similar  expressions  are  undoubtedly  used  me- 
taphorically, e.  g.  "  to  chase  as  the  bees  do  "  (Deut. 
i.  44;  Ps.  cxviii.  12)  ;  (S)  that  a  similar  transfer 
from  the  literal  to  the  metaphorical  sense  may  be 
instanced  in  the  classical  oestrus,  originally  a  "  gad- 
fly," afterwards  terror  and  madness;  and  lastly 
(4),  that  no  historical  notice  of  such  intervention 
as  hornets  occur  in  the  Bible.  We  may  therefore 
regard  it  as  expressing  under  a  vivid  image  the 
consternation  with  which  Jehovah  would  inspire 
the  enemies  of  the  Israelites,  as  declared  in  Deut.  ii. 
25,  Josh.  ii.  11.  [W.  L.  B.] 

HORONAIM  (D^'in  = "  two  caverns ;"  ' Apcc- 

ptetju,  Alex.  'ASuvieifi ;  'npcuyai/u ;  Oronaim),  a 
town  of  Moab  named  with  Zoar  and  Luhith  (Is.  xv. 
5  ;  Jer.  xlviii.  3,  5,  34),  but  to  the  position  of 
which  no  clue  is  afforded  either  by  the  notices  of  the 
Bible  or  by  mention  in  other  works.  It  seems  to 
have  been  on  an  eminence,  and  approached  (like 
Beth-horon)  by  a  road  which  is  styled  the  "  way  " 
(Tpl,  Is.  xv.  5),  or  the  "  descent  "   (TT10,  Jer. 

xlviii.  5).  From  the  occurrence  of  a  similar  ex- 
pression in  reference  to  Luhith,  we  might  imagine 
that  these  two  places  were  sanctuaries,  on  the  high 
places  to  which  the  Eastern  worship  of  those  days 
was  so  addicted.  If  we  accept  the  name  as  Hebrew, 
we  may  believe  the  dual  form  of  it  to  arise,  either 
from  the  presence  of  two  caverns  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood, or  from  there  having  been  two  towns, 
possibly  an  upper  and  a  lower,  as  in  the  case  of 
the  two  Beth-horons,  connected  by  the  ascending 
road. 

From  Horonaim  possibly  came  Sanballat  the  Ho- 
ronite.  [G.] 

HOR'ONITE,  THE  prinn  ;  6  'Apwvl ;  Ho- 
ronitis),  the  designation  of  Sanballat,  who  was  one 
of  the  .principal  opponents  of  Nehemiah's  works  of 
restoration  (Neh.  ii.  10, 19  ;  xiii.  28).  It  is  derived 
by  Gesenius  (7%es.  459)  from  Horonaim  the  Moabite 
town,  but  by  Fiirst  (ffandwh.)  from  Hoion,  i.  c. 
Beth-horon.  Which  of  these  is  the  more  accurate 
is  quite  uncertain.  The  former  certainly  accords 
well  with  the  Ammonite  and  Arabian  who  were 
Sanballat's  comrades  ;  the  latter  is  perhaps  more 
grammatically  correct.  [G.] 

HORSE.  The  most  striking  feature  in  the 
Biblical  notices  of  the  horse  is  the  exclusive  applica- 
tion of  it  to  warlike  operations ;  in  no  instance  is 
that  useful  animal  employed  for  the  purposes  of 
ordinary  locomotion  or  agriculture,  if  we  except  Is. 
xxviii.  28,  where  we  learn  that  horses  (A.  V. 
"horsemen")  were  employed  in  threshing,  not 
however  in  that  case  put  in  the  gears,  but  simply 
driven  about  wildly  over  the  strewed  grain.  This 
remark  will  bo  found  to  be  borne  out  by  the  histo- 
rical passages  hereafter  quoted ;  but  it  is  equally 
striking  in  the  poetical  parts  of  Scripture.  The 
animated  description  of  the  horse  in  Job  xxxix.  19- 
25,  applies  solely  to  the  war-horse ;  the  mane 
streaming  in  the  breeze  (A.  V.  "  thunder")  which 
"  clothes  his  neck  ;"  his  lofty  bounds  "  as  a  grass- 
hopper;" his  hoofs  "digging  in  the  valley"  with 


HORSE 

excitement ;  his  terrible  snorting — are  brought  be- 
fore us,  and  his  ardour  for  the  strife — 
He  swalloweth  the  ground  with  fierceness  and  rage  ; 
Neither  believeth  he  that  it  is  the  sound  of  the  trumpet. 
He  saith  among  the  trumpets,  Ha,  ha  ! 
And  he  smelleth  the  battle  afar  off,  the  thunder  of  the 

captains,  and  the  shouting-. 
So  again  the  bride  advances  with  her  charms  to  an 
immediate  conquest  "  as  a  company  of  horses  in 
Pharaoh's  chariots"  (Cant.  i.  9);  and  when  the 
prophet  Zechariah  wishes  to  convey  the  idea  of  per- 
fect peace,  he  represents  the  horse,  no  more  mixing 
in  the  fray  as  before  (ix.  10),  but  bearing  mi  his 
bell  (which  was  intended  to  strike  terror  into  the 
foe)  the  peaceable  inscription  "  Holiness  unto  the 
Lord"  (xiv.  20).  Lastly,  the  characteristic  of  the 
horse  is  not  so  much  his  speed  or  his  utility,  but 
his  strength  (Ps.  xxxiii.  17,  cxlvii.  10),  as  shown 
in  the  special  application  of  the  term  abbir  (T2N) 
i.e.  strong,  as  an  equivalent  for  a  horse  (Jer.  viii. 
16,  xlvii.  3,  1.  11). 

The  terms  under  which  the  horse  is  described  in 
the  Hebrew  languuge  are  usually,  sus  and  pardsh 
(D-1D.  CHS).  The  origin  of  these  terms  is  not 
satisfactorily  made  out ;  Pott  (Etym.  Forsch.  i  60) 
connects  them  respectively  with  Susa  and  Pares,  or 
Persia,  as  the  countries  whence  the  horse  was  de- 
rived ;  and  it  is  worthy  of  remark  that  sus  was  also 
employed  in  Egypt  for  a  mare,  showing  that  it  was 
a  foreign  term  there,  if  not  also  in  Palestine.  There 
is  a  marked  distinction  between  the  sus  and  the 
2)arash  ;  the  former  were  horses  for  driving  in  the 
war  chariot,  of  a  heavy  build,  the  latter  were  for 
riding,  and  particularly  for  cavalry.  This  distinc- 
tion is  not  observed  in  the  A.  V.  from  the  circum- 
stance that  pardsh  also  signifies  horseman  ;  the 
correct  sense  is  essential  in  the  following  passages — 
1  K.  iv.  26,  "  forty-thousand  ch'i  riot-horses  and 
twelve  thousand  c<rert?/'i/-horses ;"  Ez.  xxvii.  14, 
"  driving-horses  and  riding-horses ;"  Joel  ii.  4,  "  as 
riding-horses,  so  shall  they  run:"  and  Is.  xxi.  7,  "  a 
train  of  horses  in  couples."  In  addition  to  these 
terms  we  have  rcccsh  (C3^,  of  undoubted  Hebrew 
origin)  to  describe  a  swift  horse,  used  for  the  royal 
post  (Esth.  viii.  10,  14)  and  similar  purposes  (1  K. 
iv.  28  ;  A.  V.  "dromedary"  as  also  in  Esth.)  or 
for  a  rapid  journey  (Mic.  i.  13);  r'amm&c  (T\12")\ 
used  once  for  a  mare  (Esth.  viii.  10);  and  susah 
HD-ID  in  Cant.  i.  9,  where  it  is  regarded  in  the 
A.  V.  as  a  collective  term,  "  company  of  horses  ;" 
it  rather  means,  according  to  the  received  punctua- 
tion, "  my  mare,"  but  still  better,  by  a  slight  altera- 
tion in  the  punctuation,  "  marcs." 

The  Hebrews  in  the  patriarchal  age,  as  a  pastoral 
race,  did  not  stand  in  need  of  the  services  of  the 
horse,  and  for  a  long  period  after  their  settlement 
in  Canaan  they  dispensed  with  it,  partly  in  conse- 
quence of  the  hilly  nature  of  the  country,  which 
only  admitted  of  the  use  of  chariots  in  certain  loca- 
lities (Judg.  i.  19),  and  partly  in  consequence  of 
the  prohibition  in  Deut.  xvii.  16,  which  would  he 
held  to  apply  at  all  periods.  Accordingly  they 
hamstrung  the  horses  of  the  Canaanites  Josh.  xi. 
6,  9).  David  first  established  a  force  of  cavalry 
and  chariots  after  the  defeat  of'Hadadezer  (2  Sam. 
viii.  4),  when  he  reserved  a  hundred  chariots,  and, 
as  we  may  infer,  all  the  horses:  for  the  rendering 
"  houghed  all  the  chariot-Aorscv?,"  is  manifestly  in- 
correct. Shortly  after  this  Absalom  was  possessed 
of  some  (2  Sam.  xv.  1).     But  the  great  supply  of 


HORSE 

horses  was  subsequently  effected  by  Solomon  through 
his  connexion  with  Egypt;  he  is  reported  to  have 
had  "40,000* stalls  of  horses  for  his  chariots,  and 
12,000  cavalry-horses"  (1  K.  iv.  26),  and  it  is 
worthy  of  notice  that  these  forces  are  mentioned 
parenthetically  to  account  for  the  great  security  of 
life  and  property  noticed  in  the  preceding  verse. 
There  is  probably  an  error  in  the  former  of  these 
numbers  ;  for  the  number  of  chariots  is  given  in 
1  K.  x.  26  ;  2  Chr.  i.  14,  as  1400,  and  consequently 
if  we  allow  three  horses  for  each  chariot,  two 
in  use  and  one  as  a  reserve,  as  was  usual  in  some 
countries  (Xen.  Cyrop.  vi.  1,  §27),  the  number 
required  would  be  4200,  or,  in  round  numbers, 
4000,  which  is  probably  the  correct  reading.  Solo- 
mon also  established  a  very  active  trade  in  horses, 
which  were  brought  by  dealers  out  of  Egypt 
and  resold  at  a  profit  to  the  Hittites,  who  lived 
between  Palestine  ami  the  Euphrates.  The  passage 
in  which  this  commerce  is  described  (1  K.  x.  28, 
29  !,  is  unfortunately  obscure  ;  the  tenour  of  ver.  28 
seems  to  be  that  there  was  a  regularly  established 
traffic,  the  Egyptians  bringing  the  horses  to  a  mart 
in  the  south  of  Palestine  and  handing,  them  over 
to  the  Hebrew  dealers  at  a  fixed  tariff.  The  price 
of  a  horse  was  fixed  at  150  shekels  of  silver,  and 
that  of  a  chariot  at  600;  in  the  latter  we  must 
include  the  horses  (for  an  Egyptian  war-chariot 
was  of  no  great  value)  and  conceive,  as  before, 
that  three  horses  accompanied  each  chariot,  leaving 
the  value  of  the  chariot  itself  at  150  shekels.  In 
addition  to  this  source  of  supply,  Solomon  received 
horses  by  way  of  tribute  (1  K.  x.  25).  The  force 
was  maintained  by  the  succeeding  kings,  and  fre- 
quent notices  occur  both  of  riding  horses  and  cha- 
riots (2  K.  ix.  21,  33,  xi.  16),  and  particularly  of 
War-chariots  (1  K.  xxii.  4;  2 IK.  iii.  7  ;  Is.  ii.  7). 
The  force  seems  to  have  failed  in  the  time  of  Heze- 
kiah  (2  K.  xviii.  23)  in  Judah,  as  it  had  previously 
in  Israel  under  Jehoahaz  (2  K.  xiii.  7).  The  number 
of  horses  belonging  to  the  Jews  on  their  return 
from  Babylon  is  stated  as  730  i  Neb.  vii.  68). 

In  the  countries  adjacent  to  Palestine,  the  use  of 
the  horse  was  much  more  frequent.  It  was  intro- 
duced  into  Egypt  probably  by  the  Hyksos,  as  it  is 
not  represented  on  the  monuments  before  the  18th 
dynasty  (Wilkinson,  i.  386,  abridgm.).  At  the 
period  of  the  Kxodus  horses  were  abundant  there 
(Gen.  xlvii.  17,  1.  9;  Ex.  ix.  3,  xiv.  9,  23  ;  Dent. 
xvii.  17 !.  and  subsequently,  as  we  have  already 
seen,  tiny  were  able  to  supply  the  nations  of 
Western  Asia.  The  Jewish  kin--  nought  tin-  n.^sis-t- 
anceofthe  Egyptians  against  the  Assyrians  in  this 
respecl  (Is.  xxxi.  l,  xxxvi.  8;  Ez.  xvii.  15).  The 
Canaanites  were  possessed  of  them  (Deut.  xx.  1  ; 
Josh.  xi.  4;  Judg.  iv.  .'!,  v.  22,  28),  and  likewise 
the  Syrians  (2  Sam.  viii.  4;  IK.  xx.  1 ;  2  K.  vi. 
14,  vii.  7,  10) — notices  which  are  confirmed  by 
the  pictorial  representations  on  Egyptian  monu- 
ments (Wilkinson,  i.  393,  397,  401),  and  by  the 
Assyrian  inscriptions  relating  to  Syrian  expedi- 
tions. Put  the  cavalry  of  the  Assyrians  them- 
selves and  other  eastern  nations  was  regarded  as 
mosl  formidable;  tin-  horses  themselves  were  highly 
bred,  as  the  Assyrian  sculptures  still  testify,  and 
fully  merited  the  praise  bestowed  on  them  by  Ha- 
bakkuk  (i.  8),  "swifter  than  leopards,  and  more 
fierce    than   the    evening    wolves;"    their    riders 

"clothed    in    blue,   captains  and  rulers,   all  of  them 

desirable  young  men "  (Ez.  xxiii.  6),  armed  with 
■•the  bright  sword  and  glittering  spear"  (Nab.  iii. 
3),  madea  deep  impression  on  tie-  Jews,  \\  ho,  plainly 


HOSANNA 


829 


clad ,  went  on  foot ;  as  also  did  their  regular  array 
as  they  proceeded  in  couples,  contrasting  with  the 
disorderly  troops  of  asses  and  camels  which  fol- 
lowed with  the  baggage  (Is.  xxi.  7,  receb  in  this 
passage  signifying  rather  a  train  than  a  single 
chariot).  The  number  employed  by  the  eastern 
potentates  was  very  great,  Holofernes  possessing  not 
less  than  12,000  (Jud.  ii.  15).  At  a  later  period 
we  have  frequent  notices  of  the  cavalry  of  the 
Graeco-Syrian  monarchs  (1  Mace.  i.  18,  iii.  39,  &c). 
With  regard  to  the  trappings  and  management 
of  the  horse,  we  have  little  information  ;  the  bridle 
{resen)  was  placed  over  the  horse's  nose  (Is.  xxx. 
28),  and  a  bit  or  curb  (metheg)  is  also  noticed 
(2  K.  six.  28;  Ps.  xxxii.  9;  Prov.  xxvi.  3;  Is. 
xxxvii.  29  ;  in  the  A.  V.  it  is  incorrectly  given 
"  bridle,"  with  the  exception  of  Ps.  xxxii.).  The 
harness  of  the  Assyrian  horses  was  profusely  deco- 
rated, the  bits  be- 
ing gilt  (1  Esdr. 
iii.  6),  and  the 
bridles  adorned 
with  tassels;  on 
the  neck  was  a 
collar  terminat- 
ing in  a  bell, 
as  described  by 
Zechariah  (xiv. 
20).  Saddles  were 
not  used  until  a 
late  period ;  only 
one  is  represented 
on  the  Assyrian 
sculptures  (Lay- 
ard,ii.357).  The 
horses  were  not 
shod,  and  there- 
fore hoofs  as  hard 
"  as  flint"  (Is.v. 
28)  were  regard- 
ed as  a  great  merit.  The  chariot-horses  were  covered 
with  embroidered  trappings — the  "  precious  clothes" 
manufactured  at  Dedan  (Ez.  xxvii.  20)  :  these  were 
fastened  by  straps  and  buckles,  and  to  this  perhaps 
reference  is  made  in  Prov.  xxx.  3 1 ,  in  the  term  zarzir, 
"one  girded  about  the  loins"  (A.  V.  "greyhound"). 
Thus  adorned,  Mordecai  rode  in  state  through  the 
streets  of  Shushan  (Esth.  vi.  9).  White  horses  were 
more  particularly  appropriate  to  such  occasions  as 
being  significant  of  victory  ( Rev.  vi.  2,  xix.  11,  14). 
Horses  and  chariots  were  used  also  in  idolatrous 
processions,  as  noticed  in  regard  to  the  sun  (2  K. 
xxiii.  11).  [W.L.  B.] 

HO'SAH  (HDn  ;  Alex.  2wo-<£  ;  Vat.  omits ; 
Ebsa),  a  city  of  Asher  (Josh.  xix.  29),  the  next 
landmark  on  the  boundary  to  Tyre.  [G.] 

HO'SAH  (HDh  ;  'Orxa,  Alex,  'flo-rjeand  'Clad  ; 
Hbsa),  a  man  who  was  chosen  by  I 'avid  to  lie  one 

Of   the  first  doorkeepers  (A.   V.    "  pOTters")    to    the 

ark  after  its  arrival  in  Jerusalem  (1  Chr.  xvi,  38). 
He  was  a  Merarite  Levite  (xxvi.  I"),  with  "sons 
and  brethren"  thirteen,  of  whom  tour  were  certainly 
sons  (lo,  11);  and  his  charge  was  especially  the 
"gate  Shallei  heth,"  and  tie1  causeway,  or  raised 
road  which  ascended  (16,  rb'tyn  rY^DO). 

IlnSAVXA  (&<rcu>pd;  Heb.  X*  yt^fV'Save, 

we  pray;"  craxTui'  5i),  as  Theophylacl  correctly 
interprets   in,   the  cry   of  the   multitudes   as   they 

I  in  our  Lord's  triumphal  procession  into 

lerusal.  in    (Matt.    xxi.    0,    15;     Mar.    xi.    9,     10; 


TrappirjgB  of  Assyrian  horse.  (Layard.) 


830 


HOSEA 


John  xii.  13).  The  Psalm,  from  which  it  was 
taken,  the  118th,  was  one  with  which  they  were 
familiar  from  being  accustomed  to  recite  the  25th 
and  26th  verses  at  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles.  On 
that  occasion  the  Great  Hallcl,  consisting  of  Psalms 
cxiii.-cxviii.,  was  chanted  by  one  of  the  priests, 
and  at  certain  intervals  the  multitudes  joined  in  the 
responses,  waving  their  branches  of  willow  and 
palm,  and  shouting  as  they  waved  them  Hallelujah, 
or  Hosanna,  or  "  0  Lord,  I  beseech  thee,  send  now 
prosperity"  (Ps.  cxviii.  25).  This  was  done  at 
the  recitation  of  the  first  and  last  verses  of  Ps. 
cxviii. ;  but,  according  to  the  school  of  Hillel,  at 
the  words  "  Save  now,  we  beseech  thee"  (ver.  25). 
The  school  of  Shammai,  on  the  contrary,  say  it 
was  at  the  words  "  Send  now  prosperity  "  of  the 
same  verse.  Rabban  Gamaliel  and  K.  Joshua  were 
observed  by  R.  Akiba  to  wave  their  branches  only 
at  the  words  "Save  now,  we  beseech  thee"  (Mishna, 
Sicccah,  iii.  9).  On  each  of  the  seven  days  during 
which  the  feast  lasted  the  people  thronged  in  the 
court  of  the  Temple,  and  went  in  procession  about 
the  altar,  setting  their  boughs  bending  towards  it ; 
the  trumpets  sounding  as  they  shouted  Hosanna. 
But  on  the  seventh  day  they  marched  seven  times 
round  the  altar,  shouting  meanwhile  the  great 
Hosanna  to  the  sound  of  the  trumpets  of  the 
Levites  (Lightfoot,  Temple  Service,  xvi.  2).  The 
very  children  who  could  wave  the  palm  branches 
were  expected  to  take  part  in  the  solemnity  (Mishna', 
Succah,  iii.  15;  Matt.  xxi.  15).  From  the  cus- 
tom of  waving  the  boughs  of  myrtle  and  willow 
during  the  service  the  name  Hosanna  was  ulti- 
mately transferred  to  the  boughs  themselves,  so 
that  according  to  Elias  Levita  (Thisbi,  s.  v.), 
"  the  bundles  of  the  willows  of  the  brook  which 
they  carry  at  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  are  called 
Hosannas."  The  term  is  frequently  applied  by 
Jewish  writers  to  denote  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles, 
the  seventh  day  of  the  feast  being  distinguished 
as  the  great  Hosanna  (Buxtorf,  Lex.  Talm.  s.  v. 
y£").  It  was  not  uncommon  for  the  Jews  in 
later  times  to  employ  the  observances  of  this 
feast,  which  was  pre-eminently  a  feast  of  gladness, 
to  express  their  feelings  on  other  occasions  of  re- 
joicing (1  Mace.  xiii.  51  ;  2  Mace.  x.  6,  7),  and 
it  is  not,  therefore,  matter  of  surprise  that  they 
should  have  done  so  under  the  circumstances 
recorded  in  the  Gospels.  [W.  A.  W.] 

HOSE'A  (VBnn,  'Ho-Tje,  LXX. ;  'Cane,  N.  T. ; 
Osee),  son  of  Beeri,  and  first  of  the  Minor  Prophets 
as  they  appear  in  the  A.  V.  The  name  is  precisely 
the  same  as  Hoshea,  which  is  more  nearly  equiva- 
lent to  the  Hebrew. 

Time. — This  question  must  be  settled,  as  far  as 
it  can  be  settled,  partly  by  reference  to  the  title, 
partly  by  an  inquiry  into  the  contents  of  the  book. 
(<t.)  As  regards  the  title,  an  attempt  has  been  made 
to  put  it  out  of  court  by  representing  it  as  a  later 
addition  (Calmet,  Rosenmiiller,  Jahn).  But  it  can 
easily  be  shown  that  this  is  unnecessary ;  and 
Eichhorn,  suspicious  as  he  ordinarily  is  of  titles,  lets 
that  of  Hosea  pass  without  question.  It  has  been 
most  unreasonably  inferred  from  this  title  that  it 
intends  to  describe  the  prophetic  life  of  Hosea  as 
extending  over  the  entire  reigns  of  the  monarchs 
whom  it  mentions  as  his  contemporaries.  Starting 
with  this  hypothesis,  it  is  easy  to  show  that  these 
reigns,  including  as  they  do  upwards  of  a  century, 
ai.e  an  impossible  period  for  the  duration  of  a  pro- 
phet's  ministry.     Bu<  the  title  does  not  necessarily 


HOSEA 

imply  any  such  absurdity  ;  and  interpreted  in  the 
light  of  the  prophecy  itself  it  admits  of  an  obvious 
and  satisfactory  limitation.  For  the  beginning  of 
Hosea's  ministry  the  title  gives  us  the  reign  oi 
Uzziah,  king  of  Judah,  but  limits  this  vague  defini- 
tion by  reference  to  Jeroboam  II.,  king  of  Israel. 
The  title  therefore  gives  us  Uzziah,  and  more  defi- 
nitely gives  us  Uzziah  as  contemporary  with  Jero- 
boam ;  it  therefore  yields  a  date  not  later  than 
B.C.  783.  The  question  then  arises  how  much 
farther  back  it  is  possible  to  place  the  first  public 
appearance  of  Hosea.  To  this  question  the  title 
gives  no  answer;  for  it  seems  evident  that  the  only 
reason  for  mentioning  Jeroboam  at  all  may  have 
been  to  indicate  a  certain  portion  of  the  reign  of 
Uzziah.  (6.)  Accordingly  it  is  necessary  to  refer  to 
the  contents  of  the  prophecy ;  and  in  doing  this  Eich- 
horn has  clearly  shown  that  we  cannot  allow  Hosea 
much  ground  in  the  reign  of  Jeroboam  (823-783). 
The  book  contains  descriptions  which  are  utterly 
inapplicable  to  the  condition  of  the  kingdom  ot 
Israel  during  this  reign  (2  K.  xiv.  25  ff.).  The 
pictures  of  social  and  political  life  which  Hosea 
draws  so  forcibly  are  rather  applicable  to  the  in- 
terregnum which  followed  the  death  of  Jeroboam 
(782-772),  and  to  the  reign  of  the  succeeding  kings. 
The  calling  in  of  Egypt  and  Assyria  to  the  aid  of 
rival  factions  (x.  3,  xiii.  10)  has  nothing  to  do  with 
the  strong  and  able  government  of  Jeroboam.  Nor 
is  it  conceivable  that  a  prophet  who  had  lived  long 
under  Jeroboam  should  have  omitted  the  mention  of 
that  monarch's  conquests  in  his  enumeration  of 
Jehovah's  kindnesses  to  Israel  (ii.  8).  It  seems 
then  almost  certain  that  very  few  at  least  of  his 
prophecies  were  written  until  after  the  death  of 
Jeroboam  (783 ). 

So  much  for  the  beginning ;  as  regards  the  end 
of  his  career  the  title  leaves  us  in  still  greater 
doubt.  It  merely  assures  us  that  he  did  not  pro- 
phesy beyond  the  reign  of  Hezekiah.  But  here 
again  the  contents  of  the  book  help  us  to  reduce  the 
vagueness  of  this  indication.  In  the  sixth  year  of 
Hezekiah  the  prophecy  of  Hosea  was  fulfilled,  ami 
it  is  very  improbable  that  he  should  have  permitted 
this  triumphant  proof  of  his  Divine  mission  to  pass 
unnoticed.  He  could  not  therefore  have  lived  long 
into  the  reign  of  Hezekiah  ;  and  as  it  does  not  seem 
necessary  to  allow  more  than  a  year  of  each  reign 
to  justify  his  being  represented  as  a  contemporary 
on  the  one  hand  of  Jeroboam,  on  the  other  of  Heze- 
kiah, we  may  suppose  that  the  life,  or  rather  the 
prophetic  career  of  Hosea,  extended  from  78-1  to 
725,  a  period  of  fifty-nine  years. 

The  Hebrew  reckoning  of  ninety  years  (Corn,  a 
Lap.)  was  probably  limited  by  the  fulfilment  of  the 
prophecy  in  the  sixth  of  Hezekiah,  and  by  the  date 
of  the  accession  of  Uzziah,  as  apparently  indicated 
by  the  title:  809-720,  or  719  =  90  years. 

Place. — There  seems  to  be  a  general  impression 
among  commentators  that  the  prophecies  contained 
in  this  collection  were  delivered  in  the  kingdom  of 
Israel,  for  whose  warning  they  were  principally 
intended.  Eichhorn  does  not  attempt  to  decide  this 
question  (iv.  284).  He  thinks  it  possible  that  they 
may  have  been  primarily  communicated  to  Judah, 
as  an  indirect  appeal  to  the  conscience  of  that  king- 
dom;  but  he  evidently  leans  toward  the  opposite 
supposition  that  having  been  first  published  in 
Israel  they  were  collected,  and  a  copy  sent  into 
Judah.  the  title  is  at  least  an  evidence  that  at  a 
very  early  period  these  prophecies  were  supposed  to 
concern  both  Israel  and  Judah, and,  unless  we  allow 


HOSEA 

them  to  have  been  transmitted  from  the  one  to  the 
other,  it  is  difficult  to  account  for  their  presence  in 
our  canon.  As  a  proof  of  their  northern  origin 
Eichhorn  professes  to  discover  a  Samaritanism  in  the 
use  of  ~|N  as  masc.  suff.  of  the  second  person. 

Tribe  and  Parentage. — Tribe  quite  unknown. 
The  Pseudo  Epiphanius,  it  is  uncertain  upon  what 
ground,  assigns  Hosea  to  the  tribe  of  Issachar. 
His  father,  Beeri,  lias  by  -.nine  writers  been  con- 
founded with  Beerah,  of  the  tribe  of  Reuben  (1 
Chr.  v.  6):  this  is  an  anachronism.  The  Jewish 
fancy  that  all  prophets  whose  birth-place  is  not 
specified  arc  to  be  referred  to  Jerusalem  (It.  David, 
Yatab.)  is  probably  nothing  more  than  a  fancy 
(Corn,  a  Lap.).  Of  his  father  Beeri  we  know 
absolutely  nothing.  Allegorical  interpretations  of 
the  name,  marvellous  for  their  frivolous  ingenuity, 
have  been  adduced  to  prove  that  he  was  a  prophet 
(Jerome  ad  Zeph.  init.:  Basil  ad  Is.  i.) ;  but  they 
are  as  little  trustworthy  as  the  Jewish  dogma, 
which  decides  that,  when  the  father  of  a  prophet  is 
mentioned  by  uame,  the  individual  so  specified  was 
himself  a  prophet. 

Order  in  the  Prophetic  series. — Most  ancient 
and  mediaeval  interpretators  make  Hosea  the  first 
of  the  prophets  ;  their  great  argument  being  an  old 
rendering  of  i.  2,  according  to  which  "the  begin- 
ning of  the  word  by  Hosea  "  implies  that  the 
streams  of  prophetic  inspiration  began  with  him, 
as  distinct  from  the  other  prophets.  Modern  com- 
mentators have  rejected  this  interpretation,  and 
substituted  the  obvious  meaning  that  the  particular 
prophecy  which  follows  was  the  first  communicated 
by  God  to  Hosea.  The  consensus  for  some  time 
seems  to  have  been  for  the  third  place.  Wall  (Crit. 
Vbi.  i).  T.)  gives  Jonah,  Joel,  Hosea  ;  Home's  Table 
gives  Jonah,  Amos,  Hosea;  Gesenius  writes  Joel, 
Anjps,  Hosea.  The  order  adopted  in  the  Hebrew 
and  the  Versions  is  of  little  consequence. 

Jn  short  there  is  great  difficulty  in  arranging 
these  prophets:  as  far  as  titles  go,  Amos  is  Hosea's 
only  rival ;  but  2  K.  xiv.  25  goes  far  to  show  that 
the]  must  both  yield  to  Jonah,  ft  is  perhaps  more 
important  to  know  that  Hdlea  must  have  been 
more  or  less  contemporary  with  Isaiah,  Amos, 
J. mail.  Joel,  and  Nahtim. 

Division  of  the  /Jon/;.- — It  is  easy  to  recognise  two 
great  divisions,  which  accordingly  have  been  gene- 
rally adopted  :  (  l.)  chap.  i.  to  iii.  ;  ('_'.)  iv.  to  end. 
'l'he  subdivision  of  these  several  parts  is  a  work 
of  greater  difficulty  :  that  of  Eichhorn  will  be  found 
to  be  based  upon  a  iughly  subtle,  though  by  no 
means  precarious  criticism. 

( 1.)  According  to  him  the  firsi  division  should  be 
subdivided  into  three  separate  poem-,  each  originat- 
ing in  a  distinct  aim,  and  each  alter  its  own  fashion 
attempting  to  express  the  idolatry  of  Israel  bj 
imagery  borrowed  from  the  matrimonial  relation. 
The  inst.  and  therefore  the  least  elaborate  of  these 
is  contained  in  chap.  iii..  the  second  in  i.  '2-1  1,  the 
third  in  i.  2-9,  and  ii.  1-23.  These  three  are  pro- 
gressively elaborate  developments  of  the  same 
reiterated  idea.     Chap.  i.  2-9  is  common   to   the 

second  and  third  poems,  but  not  repeated  with  each 

severally  (iv.  273  I  Attempts  have  been 

made  by  Wells,  Eichhorn, &c., to  subdivide  the  second 
pari  of  the  book.  These  divisions  an-  made  either 
according  to  reigns  of  contemporary  kings,  or  accord- 
ing to  the  subject-matter  of  the  poem.  The 
former  course  has  been  adopted  bj  Wells,  « 
ii.-  latter  l.\  Eichhorn,  wh 
i  of  tlii>  part  of  the  book. 


HOSEA 


831 


Those  prophecies — so  scattered,  so  unconnected 
that  Bishop  Lowth  has  compared  them  with  the 
leaves  of  the  Sibyl — were  probably  collected  by 
Hosea  himself  towards  the  end  of  his  career. 

Hosea's  marriage  with  Gomer. — This  passage  (i. 
2  foil.)  is  the  vexata  quaestio  of  the  book.  Of  course 
it  has  its  literal  and  its  allegorical  interpreters.  For 
the  literal  view  we  have  the  majority  of  the  fathei  s, 
and  of  the  ancientand  mediaeval  commentators.  There 
is  some  little  doubt  about  Jerome,  who  speaks  of  « 
figurative  and  typical  interpretation  ;  but  he  evi- 
dently means  the  word  typical  in  its  proper  sensi 
as  applied  to  a  factual  reality  figuratively  represen- 
tative of  something  else  (Corn,  a  Lap.).  At  the 
period  of  the  Reformation  the  allegorical  interpre- 
ters could  only  boast  the  Chaldee  Paraphrase,  some 
i'ew  Rabbins,  and  the  Hermeneutic  school  of  Ori- 
gen.  .Soon  afterwards  the  theory  obtained  a  vigor- 
ous supporter  in  Junius,  and  more  recently  lias 
been  adopted  by  the  bulk  of  modern  commenta- 
tors. Both  views  are  embarrassed  by  serious  incon- 
veniences, though  it  would  seem  that  those  which 
beset  the  literal  theory  are  the  more  formidable. 
One  question  which  sprang  out  of  the  literal  view- 
was  whether  the  connexion  between  Hosea  and  Co- 
rner was  marriage,  or  fornication.  Another  ques- 
tion which  followed  immediately  upon  the  preced- 
ing was  "an  Deus  possit  dispensaie  ut  fomicatio  sit 
lieita."  This  latter  question  was  much  discussed 
by  the  schoolmen,  and  by  the  Thomists  it  was 
avowed  in  the  affirmative.  But,  notwithstanding 
the  difficulties  besetting  the  literal  interpretation, 
Bps.  Horsley  and  Lowth  have  declared  in  its  favour. 
Eichhorn  sees  all  the  weight  on  the  side  of  the  literal 
interpretation,  and  shows  that  marrying  a  harlot  is 
not  necessarily  implied  by  D'3-1  JT  H^'X,  which  may 
very  well  imply  a  wife  who  after  marriage  becomes 
an  adulteress,  though  chaste  before.  In  favour  of 
the  literal  theory,  he  also  obseives  the  unfitness 
of  a  wife  unchaste  before  marriage  to  be  a  type  of 
Israel. 

References. in  X.  T. — Matt.  ix.  13,  xii.  7,  Hos. 
vi.  ii;  Luke  xxiii.  30,  Rev.  vi.  It!,  Hos.  x.  8; 
Matt.  ii.  15,  Hos.  xi.  1  ;  Rom.  ix.  25,  26,  1  Pet. 
ii.  1",  Hos.  i.  in,  ii.  23;  1  Cor.  xv.  4,  Hos.  vi. 
2;   Heb.  xiii.  15,  Hos.  xiv.  2. 

Style. — "  Commaticus,"  Jerome.  "  Osea  quanto 
profundius  loquitur,  tanto  opeiosius  penetratur," 
August.  Obscure  brevity  seems  to  be  the  charac- 
teristic quality  of  Hosea;  and  all  commentators 
agree  that  ''of  all  the  prophets  he  is.  in  point  of 
language,  the  most  obscure  and  haul  to  be  under- 
stood" (Henderson*  \lmxr  Prophets,  p.  2).  Eich- 
horn is  of  opinion  that  he  has  never  been  adequately 
translated,  and  in  fact  could  not  be  translated  into 
an\   European  language.     He  compares  him  to  a  bee 

dying  from  Bower  to  flower,  to  a  painter  revelling 

in  strong  and  glaring  colours,  to  a  tree  that  wants 
pruning.  Horsley  detects  another  important  specialty 
in  pointing  out  the  excessively  local  and  individual 
tone  of  these  prophecies,  which  above  all  others  he 

declares  to   he   intellselv   Jew  ish. 

Hosea's  obscurity  has  been  variously  accounted 

for.  Lowth  attributes  it  to  the  fact  that  the  extant 
poems  are  but  a  sparse  collection  of  compositions 
scattered  over  a  gnat  number  of  years  Pro*  >'.  wi.  i 
Horsley  I  Pref.  makes  this  obscurity  individual  and 
:  and  certainly  the  heart  of  the  prophet 
seems  to  have  been  so  toll  and  fiery  that  it  might 
w.ll  burst  through  all  restraints  ol  diction  Eich- 
horn .  [T.  E.  B. 


832 


HOSHAIAH 


H08HAI'AH(nW'in;  Osnias).  l.QacraU). 
A  man  who  assisted  in  the  dedication  of  the  wall 
of  Jerusalem  after  it  had  been  rebuilt  by  Nehemiah 
(Neh.  xii.  32).  He  led  the  princes  (nb>)  of  Judah 
in  the  procession,  but  whether  himself  one  of  them 
we  are  not  told. 

2.  ( Maacraios).  The  father  of  a  certain  Jezaniah, 
or  Azariah,  who  was  a  man  of  note  after  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem  by  Nebuchadnezzar  (Jer.  xlii. 
1,  xliii.  2). 

.  HOSH'AMA  (yrX'in  ;  'ClaafidO,  Alex.  'Ia>- 
(ra/j.di  ;  Sama),  one  of  the  sons  of  Jeconiah,  or 
Jehoiachin,  the  last  king  of  Judah  but  one  (1  Chr. 
iii.  18).  It  is  worthy  of  notice  that,  in  the  nar- 
rative of  the  capture  of  Jeconiah  by  Nebuchadnezzar, 
though  the  mother  and  the  wives  of  the  king  are 
mentioned,  nothing  is  said  about  his  sons  (2  K.  xxiv. 

12,  15).  In  agreement  with  this  is  the  denunciation 
of  him  as  a  childless  man  in  Jer.  xxii.  30.  There  is 
good  reason  for  suspecting  some  confusion  in  the 
present  state  of  the  genealogy  of  the  royal  family 
in  1  Chr.  iii.  ;  and  these  facts  would  seem  to 
confirm  it. 

HOSHE'A  (ytfin;  'floV;  Osee),  the  nine- 
teenth, last,  and  best  king  of  Israel.  He  succeeded 
Pekah,  whom  he  slew  in  a  successful  conspiracy, 
thereby  fulfilling  a  prophecy  of  Isaiah  (Is.  vii.  16). 
Although  Josephus  calls  Hoshea  a  friend  of  Pekah 
(<pl\ov    Tivbs    ziril$ov\€vffavTos    <zvt$,    Ant.    ix. 

13,  §1),  we  have  no  ground  for  calling  this  "a 
treacherous  murder"  (Prideaux,  i.  16).  It  took 
place  B.C.  737,  "in  the  20th  year  of  Jotham" 
(2  K.  xv.  30),  i.  e.  "  in  the  20th  year  after  Jotham 
became  sole  king,"  for  he  only  reigned  16  years 
(2  K.  xv.  33).  But  there  must  have  been  an  in- 
terregnum of  at  least  eight  years  before  Hoshea 
came  to  the  throne,  which  was  not  till  B.C.  729,  in 
the  12th  year  of  Ahaz  (2  K.  xvii.  1  :  we  cannot, 
with  Clericus,  read  4th  for  12th  in  this  verse,  be- 
cause of  2  K.  xviii.  9).  This  is  the  simplest  way 
of  reconciling  the  apparent  discrepancy  between  the 
passages,  and  has  been  adopted  by  Ussher,  Des 
Vignoles,  Tiele,  &c.  (Winer,  s.  v.  Hoseas).  The 
other  methods  suggested  by  Hitzig,  Lightfoot,  &c, 
are  mostly  untenable  (Keil  on  2  K.  xv.  30). 

It  is  expressly  stated  (2  K.  xvii.  2)  that  Hoshea 
was  not  so  sinful  as  his  predecessors.  According 
to  the  Rabbis  this  superiority  consisted  in  his  re- 
moving from  the  frontier-cities  the  guards  placed 
there  by  his  predecessors  to  prevent  their  subjects 
from  worshipping  at  Jerusalem  (Seder  OlaniRabba, 
cap.  22,  quoted  by  Prideaux,  i.  -16),  and  in  his  not 
hindering  the  Israelites  from  accepting  the  invita- 
tion of  Hezekiah  (2  Chr.  xxx.  10),  nor  checking 
their  zeal  against  idolatry  (id.  xxxi.  1).  .This  en- 
comium, however,  is  founded  on  the  untenable  sup- 
position that  Hezekiah's  passover  preceded  the  fall 
of  Samaria  [Hezekiah],  and  we  must  be  content 
with  the  general  fact  that  Hoshea  showed  a  more 
theocratic  spirit  than  the  former  kings  of  Israel. 
The  compulsory  cessation  of  the  calf-worship  may 
have  removed  his  greatest  temptation,  for  Tiglath- 
Pileser  had  carried  off  the  golden  calf  from  Dan 
some  years  before  (Sed.  01.  Rah.  22),  and  that  at 
Bethel  was  taken  away  by  Shalmaneser  in  his  first 
invasion  (2  K.  xvii.  3  ;  Hos.  x.  14;  Prideaux,  I.  c). 
But,  whatever  may  have  been  his  excellencies,  he 
still  "  did  evil  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord,"  and  it  was 
too  late  to  avert  retribution  by  any  improvements. 

[n  the  third  year  of  his  reign  (b.c.  726)  Slial- 


HOSHEA 

maneser,  impelled  probably  by  mere  thirst  of  con- 
quest, came  against  him,  cruelly  stormed  the  strong 
caves  of  Beth-arbel  (Hos.  x.  14),  and  made  Israel 
tributary  (2  K.  xvii.  3)  for  thiee  years.  At  the 
end  of  this  period,  encouraged  perhaps  by  the  revolt 
of  Hezekiah,  Hoshea  entered  into  a  secret  alliance 
with  So,  king  of  Egypt  (who  was  either  the 
'Xevexos  of  Manetho,  and  son  of  Sa/UaKccis,  Herod, 
ii.  137  ;  Keil,  Vitringa,  Gesenius,  &c. ;  Jahn,  Hebr. 
Com.  §xl.  ;  or  else  Sabaco  himself,  Wilkinson,  Am:. 
Eg.  i.  139;  Ewald,  Gesch.  iii.  610),  to  throw  otl 
the  Assyrian  yoke.  The  alliance  did  him  no  good  ; 
it  was  revealed  to  the  court  of  Nineveh  by  the 
Assyrian  party  in  Ephraim,  and  Hoshea  was  imme- 
diately seized  as  a  rebellious  vassal,  shut  up  in 
prison,  and '  apparently  treated  with  the  utmost 
indignity  (Mic.  v.  1).  If  this  happened  before 
the  siege  (2  K.  xvii.  4),  we  must  account  for  it 
either  by  supposing  that  Hoshea,  hoping  to  dis- 
semble and  gain  time,  had  gone  to  Shalmaneser  to 
account  for  his  conduct,  or  that  he  had  been  de- 
feated and  taken  prisoner  in  some  unrecorded  battle. 
That  he  disappeared  very  suddenly,  like  "  foam 
upon  the  water,"  we  may  infer  from  Hos.  xiii.  11, 
x.  7.  The  siege  of  Samaria  lasted  three  years  ;  for 
that  "glorious  and  beautiful"  city  was  strongly 
situated  like  "  a  crown  of  pride  "  among  her  hills 
(Is.  xxviii.  1-5).  During  the  course  of  the  siege 
Shalmaneser  must  have  died,  for  it  is  certain  that 
Samaria  was  taken  by  his  successor  Sargon,  who 
thus  laconically  describes  the  event  in  his  annals : — ■ 
"Samaria  I  looked  at,  I  captured;  27,280  men 
(families  ?)  who  dwelt  in  it  I  earned  away.  I 
constructed  fifty  chariots  in  their  country  .... 
I  appointed  a  governor  over  them,  and  continued 
upon  them  the  tribute  of  the  former  people"  (Botta, 
145,  11,  quoted  by  Dr.  Hincks,  J.  of  Sacr.  Lit. 
Oct.  1858  ;  Layard,  Nin.  and  Bab.  i.  148).  This 
was  probably  B.C.  721  or  720.  For  the  future 
history  of  the  unhappy  Ephraimites,  the  places  to 
which  they  were  transplanted  by  the  policy  of  their 
conqueror  and  his  officer,  "  the  great  and  noble 
Asnapper"  (Ezr.  iv.  10),  and  the  nations  by  which 
they  were  superseded,  see  Samaria.  Of  the  sub- 
sequent fortunes  of  Hoshea  we  know  nothing.  He 
came  to  the  throne  too  late,  and  governed  a  king- 
dom torn  to  pieces  by  foreign  invasion  and  intestine 
broils.  Sovereign  after  sovereign  had  fallen  by  the 
dagger  of  the  assassin ;  and  we  see  from  the  dark 
and  terrible  delineations  of  the  contemporary  pro- 
phets [Hosea,  Micah,  Isaiah],  that  murder  and 
idolatry,  drunkenness  and  lust,  had  eaten  like  "  an 
incurable  wound"  (Mic.  i.  9)  into  the  inmost  heart 
of  the  national  morality.  Ephraim  was  dogged  to 
its  ruin  by  the  apostate  policy  of  the  renegade  who 
had  asserted  its  independence  (2  K.  xvii.;  Joseph. 
Ant.  ix.  14;  Prideaux,  i.  15  sq. ;  Keil,  On  Kings, 
ii.  50  sq., 'Engl.  ed. ;  Jahn,  Hebr.  Com.  §xl.  ; 
Ewald,  Gesch.  iii.  607-613 ;  Rosenmuller,  Bibl. 
Geoqr.  chap,  ix.,  Engl,  transl. ;  Rawlinson,  Herod. 
i.  149.)  [F.  W.  F.] 

HOSHE'A  (J^'in  =  help).  The  name  is  pre- 
cisely the  same  as  that  of  the  prophet  known  to  us 
as  Hosea.  1.  The  son  of  Nun,  »".  e.  Joshua  (Deut. 
xxxii.  44  ;  and  also  in  Num.  xiii.  8,  though  there 
the  A.  V.  has  Oshea).  It  was  probahly  his  ori- 
ginal name,  to  which  the  Divine  name  of  dull  was 
afterwards  added — Jehoshua,  Joshua—"  Jehovah's 
help."  The  LXX.  in  this  passage  miss  the  distinc- 
tion, and  have  'Ir/iroi;?;  Vulg.  Josnc. 

2.   ('nari;   Oxer).  Son  of  Azaziah  (1  Chr.  \xvii. 


HOSPITALITY 

20)  ;  like  his  great  namesake,  a  man  of  Ephraim, 
ruler  (nagid)  of  his  tribe  in  the  time  of  king  David. 

3.  ('h«nje;  Osee).  One  of  the  heads  of  the 
"  people  " — i.  e.  the  laymen — who  sealed  the  cove- 
nant with  Nehemiah  (Xeh.  x.  23). 

HOSPITALITY.  The  rites  of  hospitality  are 
to  be  distinguished  from  the  customs  prevailing  in 
the  entertainment  of  guests  [Food;  Meals],  and 
from  the  laws  and  'practices  relating  to  charity, 
almsgiving,  &e. ;  and  they  are  thus  separately 
treated,  as  far  as  possible,  in  this  article. 

Hospitality  was  regarded  by  most  nations  of  the 
ancient  world  as  one  of  the  chief  virtues,  and 
especially  by  peoples  of  the  Semitic  stock  ;  but  that 
it  was  not  characteristic  of  the  latter  alone  is  amply 
shown  by  the  usages  of  the  Greeks  and  even  the 
Romans.  Race  undoubtedly  influences  its  exercise, 
and  it  must  also  be  asciibed  in  no  small  degree  to 
the  social  state  of  a  nation.  Thus  the  desert  tribes 
have  always  placed  the  virtue  higher  in  their  esteem 
than  the  townsfolk  of  the  same  descent  as  themselves  ; 
and  in  our  own  day,  though  an  Arab  townsman  is 
hospitable,  he  entertains  different  notions  on  the 
subject  from  the  Arab  of  the  desert  (the  Bedawee). 
The  former  has  fewer  opportunities  of  showing  his 
hospitality  ;  and  when  he  does  so,  he  does  it  not  as 
much  with  the  feeling  of  discharging  an  obligatory 
act  as  a  social  and  civilised  duty.  With  the  ad- 
vance of  civilisation  the  calls  of  hospitality  become 
less  and  less  urgent.  The  dweller  in  the  wilder- 
ness, however,  finds  the  entertainment  of  wayfarers 
to  be  a  part  of  his  daily  life,  and  that  to  refuse  it 
is  to  deny  a  common  humanity.  Viewed  in  this 
light,  the  notions  of  the  Greeks  and  the  Romans 
must  be  appreciated  as  the  recognition  of  the  virtue 
where  its  necessity  was  not  of  the  urgent  character 
that  it  possesses  in  the  more  primitive  lands  of  the 
East.  The  ancient  Egyptians  resembled  the  Greeks ; 
but,  with  a  greater  exclusiveness,  they  limited  their 
entertainments  to  their  own  countrymen,  being  con- 
strained by  the  national  and  priestly  abhorrence  and 
dread  of  foreigners.  This  exclusion  throws  some 
obscurity  on  their  practices  in  the  discharge  of  hos- 
pitality; but  otherwise  their  customs  in  the  enter- 
tainment of  guests  resembled  those  well  known  to 
classical  scholars — customs  probably  derived  in  a 
great  measure  from  Egypt. 

While  hospitality  is  acknowledged  to  have  been 
a  wide-spread  virtue  in  ancient  times,  we  must  con- 
cede that  it  flourished  chiefly  among  the  race  of 
Shem.  The  0.  T.  abounds  with  illustrations  of  the 
divine  command  to  use  hospitality,  and  of  the  strong 
national  belief  in  its  importance:  so  too  in  the 
writings  of  the  X.  T.;  and  though  the  Eastern 
.lews  of  modern  times  dare  not  entertain  a  stranger 
lest  he  be  an  enemy,  and  the  long  oppression  they 
have  endured   lias  begotten  that  greed  of  gain  that 

has  made  their  name  a  proverb1,  the  ancient  hospi- 
tality still  lives  in  their  hearts.  The  desert,  how- 
ever, is  vet  free;  it  is  as  of  old  a  howling  wilder- 
ness ;  and  hospitality  is  as  necessary  and  as  freely 
given  as  in  patriarchal  times.  Among  the  Arabs 
we  rind  the  best  illustrations  of  tin'  old  Bible  narra- 
tives, and  among  them  see  traits  that  might  beseem 
their  ancestor  Abraham. 

The  laws  respecting  strangers  (Lev.  xix.  15:5,  34) 
and  the  poor  (Lev.  xxv.  14  seq. ;  Dent.  xv.  7),  and 
concerning  redemption  (Lev.  xxv.  23  seqq.),  \< ..  are 
framed  in  accordance  with  the  spirit  of  hospitality; 
and  the  strength  of  the  national  feeling  regarding  it 
is  shown  in  the  incidental   mentions  of  its    practice. 

In  the  Law.  compassion  to  strangers  i-  constantly 


HOSPITALITY 


833 


enforced  by  the  words,  "  for  ye  were  strangers  in 
the  land  of  Egypt "  (as  Lev.  xix.  34).  And  before 
the  Law,  Abraham's  entertainment  of  the  angels 
(Gen.  xviii.  1  seqq.),  and  Lot's  (xix.  1),  are  in  exact 
agreement  with  its  precepts  and  with  modern  usage. 
So  Moses  was  received  by  Jethro,  the  priest  of 
Midian,  who  reproached  his  daughters,  though  he 
believed  him  to  be  an  Egyptian,  saying,  "  And 
where  is  he?  why  is  it  [that]  ye  have  left  the 
man?  call  him,  that  he  may  eat  bread"  (Ex.  ii. 
20).  The  story  of  Joseph's  hospitality  to  his 
brethren,  although  he  knew  them  to  be  such,  ap- 
pears to  be  narrated  as  an  ordinary  occurrence;  and 
in  like  manner  Pharaoh  received  Jacob  with  a  libe- 
rality not  merely  dictated  by  his  relationship  to  the 
saviour  of  Egypt.  Like  Abraham,  "  Manoah  said 
unto  the  angel  of  the  Lord,  I  pray  thee  let  us 
detain  thee  until  we  shall  have  made  ready  a  kid 
for  thee"  (Judg.  xiii.  15);  and  like  Lot,  the  old 
man  of  Gibeah  sheltered  the  Levite  when  he  saw 
him,  "  a  wayfaring  man  in  the  street  of  the  city : 
and  the  old  man  said,  Whither  goest  thou?  and 
whence  comest  thou  ?  .  .  .  Peace  be  with  thee ; 
howsoever  [let]  all  thy  wants  [lie]  upon  me ;  only 
lodge  not  in  the  street.  So  he  brought  him  into 
his  house,  and  gave  provender  unto  the  asses ;  and 
they  washed  their  feet,  and  did  eat  and  drink  " 
(Judg.  xix.  17,  20,  21). 

In  the  N.  T.  hospitality  is  yet  more  markedly 
enjoined ;  and  in  the  more  civilised  state  of  society 
which  then  prevailed,  its  exercise  became  more  a 
social  virtue  than  a  necessity  of  patriarchal  life. 
The  good  Samaritan  stands  for  all  ages  as  an 
example  of  Christian  hospitality,  embodying  the 
command  to  love  one's  neighbour  as  himself;  and 
our  Lord's  charge  to  the  disciples  strengthened  that 
command:  "He  that  receiveth  you  receiveth  me. 
and  he  that  receiveth  me  receiveth  him  that  sent 
me.  .  .  .  And  whosoever  shall  give  to  drink  unto 
one  of  these  little  ones  a  cup  of  cold  water  [only], 
in  the  name  of  a  disciple,  verily  I  say  unto  youj  he 
shall  in  nowise  lose  his  reward"  (Matt.  x.  42). 
The  neglect  of  Christ  is  symbolised  by  inhospitality 
to  our  neighbours,  in  the  words,  "  I  was  a  stranger 
and  ye  took  me  not  in"  (Matt.  xxv.  43).  .  The 
Apostles  urged  the  church  to  "  follow  after  hospi- 
tality," using  the  forcible  words  t)]v  <ptAo£eviav 
SiWKOfTes  (Rom.  xii.  13;  cf.  1  Tim.  v.  10),  to 
remember  Abraham's  example,  "  Be  not  forgetful  to 
entertain  strangers,  for  thereby  some  have  enter- 
tained angels  unawares"  (Heb.  xiii.  2);  to  "use 
hospitality  one  to  another  without  grudging" 
(1  Pet.  iv.  9);  while  a  bishop  must  be  a  "lover 
of  hospitality"  (Tit,  i.  8,  cf.  1  Tim.  iii.  2).  The 
practice  of  the  early  Christians  was  in  accord  with 
these  precepts.  They  had  all  things  in  common,  and 
tin  n  hospit  dih  was  a  characterise:  ot  then  belli t 
If  such  has  been  the  usage  ot'  Biblical  times,  it  is 
in  the  next  place  important  to  remark  how  hospi- 
tality was  shown.  In  the  patriarchal  ages  we  maj 
take  Abraham's  example  ;is  the  most  fitting,  a--  we 
have  of  it  the  fullest   account;    and  by  the  light  of 

\i.iii  custom  we  may  Bee,  without  obscurity,  his 

hasting   to  the   tent-door   to   meet    his   guests,  with 

the  words,  "My  lord,  if  now  I  have  found  favour 
in  thy  sight,  pass  not  away,  I  pray  thee,  from  thy 
servant:  let  a  little  water,  1  pray  you,  be  fetched, 
and  wasli  your  feet,  and  rest  yourselves  under  the 
tivc.  and  I  will  fetch  ■•!  morsel  of  bread,  and  comfort 
ve  your  hearts."  ••  And,"  to  continue  the  narrative 
in  the  vigorous  language  ot'  tbe  ,\.  V.,  ••  Abraham 
hastened  into  the  tent  unto  Sarah,  and  said,  Make 


834 


HOSPITALITY 


ready  quickly  three  measures  of  Hue  meal,  knead 
[it],  and  make  cakes  upon  the  hearth.  And  Abra- 
ham ran  unto  the  herd,  and  fetched  a  calf  tender 
and  good,  and  gave  [it]  unto  a  young  man,  and  he 
hasted  to  dress  it.  And  he  took  butter  and  milk, 
and  the  calf  which  he  had  dressed,  and  set  [it] 
before  them  ;  and  he  stood  by  them  under  the  tree, 
and  they  did  eat."  A  traveller  in  the  Eastern 
desert  may  see,  through  the  vista  of  ages,  this  far- 
off  example  in  its  living  traces.  Mr.  Lane's  remarks 
on  this  narrative  and  the  general  subject  of  this 
article  are  too  apposite  to  be  omitted:  he  says, 
"  Hospitality  is  a  virtue  for  which  the  natives  of 
the  East  in  general  are  highly  and  deservedly  ad- 
mired ;  and  the  people  of  Egypt  are  well  entitled 
to  commendation  on  this  account'.  A  word  which 
signifies  literally  'a  person  on  a  journey'  (musafir) 
is  the  term  most  commonly  employed  in  this  coun- 
try in  the  sense  of  a  visitor  or  guest.  There  are 
very  few  persons  here  who  would  think  of  sitting 
down  to  a  meal,  if  there  was  a. stranger  in  the 
house,  without  inviting  him  to  partake  of  it,  unless 
the  latter  were  a  menial,  in  which  case  he  would 
be  invited  to  eat  with  the  servants.  It  would  be 
considered  a  shameful  violation  of  good  manners 
if  a  Muslim  abstained  from  ordering  the  table  to 
be  prepared  at  the  usual  time  because  a  visitor 
happened  to  be  present.  Persons  of  the  middle 
classes  in  this  country  [Egypt],  if  living  in  a 
retired  situation,  sometimes  take  their  supper 
before  the  door  of  their  house,  and  invite  every 
passenger  of  respectable  appearance  to  eat  with 
them.3  This  is  very  commonly  done  among  the 
lower  orders.  In  cities  and  large  towns  claims 
on  hospitality  are  unfrequent,  as  there  are  many 
wekalehs  or  khans,  where  strangers  may  obtain 
lodging ;  and  food  is  very  easily  procured :  but  in 
the  villages  travellers  are  often  lodged  and  enter- 
tained by  the  Sheykh  or  some  other  inhabitant ; 
and  if  the  guest  be  a  person  of  the  middle  or 
higher  classes,  or  even  not  very  poor,  he  gives  a 
present  to  the  host's  servants,  or  to  the  host  him- 
self. In  the  desert,  however,  a  present  is  seldom 
received  from  a  guest.  By  a  Sunneh  law  a  tra- 
veller may  claim  entertainment,  of  any  person  able 
to  afford  it  to  him,  for  three  days.  The  account 
of  Abraham's  entertaining  the  three  angels,  related 
in  the  Bible,  presents  a  perfect  picture  of  the  man- 
ner in  which  a  modern  Bedawee  sheykh  receives 
travellers  arriving  at  his  encampment.  He  imme- 
diately orders  his  wife  or  women  to  make  bread, 
slaughters  a  sheep  or  some  other  animal,  and  dresses 
it  in  haste,  and  bringing  milk  and  any  other  pro- 
visions that  he  may  have  ready  at  hand,  with  the 
bread  and  the  meat  which  he  has  dressed,  sets 
them  before  his  guests.  If  these  be  persons  of  high 
rank,  he  stands  by  them  while  they  eat,  as  Abra- 
ham did  in  the  case  above  alluded  to.  Most 
Bedawees  will  suffer  almost  any  injury  to  them- 
selves or  their  families  rather  than  allow  their 
guests  to  be  ill-treated  while  under  their  pro- 
tection.     There  are  Arabs   who   even  regard  the 

"  "It  is  said  to  have  .been  a  custom  of  some  of  the 
Barmekees  (the  family  so  renowned  for  their  gene- 
rosity) to  keep  open  house  during'  the  hours  of  meals, 
and  to  allow  no  one  who  applied  at  such  times  for  ad- 
mission to  be  repulsed." — Lane's  Thousand  and  One 
Nights,  ch.  v.  note  97. 

b  The  time  of  entertainment,  according  to  the  pre- 
( ept  of  Mohammad,  is  three  days,  and  he  permitted  a 
Kiiest  to  take  this  right  by  force  ;  although  one  day 
and  one  night  is  the  period  of  the  host's  being  "  kind  " 


HOSPITALITY 

chastity  of  their  wives  as  not  too  precious  to  be 
sacrificed  for  the  gratification  of  their  guests  (see 
Burckhardt's  Notes  on  the  Bedouins,  $rc,  8vo.  ed. 
i.  179,  180)  ;  and  at  an  encampment  of  the  Bisha- 
reen,  I  ascertained  that  there  are  many  persons  in 
this  great  tribe  (which  inhabits  a  large  portion  oi 
the  desert  between  the  Nile  and  the  Ked  Sea)  who 
offer  their  unmarried  daughters  (cf.  Gen.  xxi.  8; 
Judg.  six.  24)  to  their  guests,  merely  from  motives 
of  hospitality,  and  not  for  hire"  {Mod.  Eg.  ch. 
xiii.).  Mr.  Lane  adds  that  there  used  to  be  a  very 
numerous  class  of  persons,  called  Tufeylees,.  who 
lived  by  spunging,  presuming  on  the  well-known 
hospitality  of  their  countrymen,  and  going  from 
house  to  house  where  entertainments  were  being 
given.  The  Arabs  along  the  Syrian  frontier  usually 
pitch  the  Sheykh's  tent  towards  the  west,  that  is, 
towards  the  inhabited  country,  to  invite  passengers 
and  lodge  them  on  their  way  (Burckhardt's  Notes 
on  the  Bedouins,  $c..,  8vo.  ed.,  i.  33)  ;  it  is  held  to 
be  disgraceful  to  encamp  in  a  place  out  of  the  way 
of  travellers ;  and  it  is  a  custom  of  the  Bedawees 
to  light  fires  in  their  encampments  to  attract  tra- 
vellers, and  to  keep  dogs  who,  besides  watching 
against  robbers,  may  in  the  night-time  guide  way- 
farers to  their  tents.  Hence  a  hospitable  man  is 
proverbially  called  "  one  whose  dogs  bark  loudly.''b 
Approaching  an  encampment,  the  traveller  often 
sees  several  horsemen  coming  towards  him,  and 
striving  who  shall  be  first  to  claim  him  as  a 
guest.  The  favourite  national  game  of  the  Arabs 
before  El-Islam  illustrates  their  hospitality.  It 
was  called  "  Meysir,"  and  was  played  with  arrows, 
some  notched  and  others  without  marks.  A  young 
camel  was  bought  and  killed,  and  divided  into 
24-  portions ;  those  who  drew  marked  arrows  had 
shares  in  proportion  to  the  number  of  notches  ; 
those  who  drew  blanks  paid  the  cost  of  the  camel 
among  them.  Neither  party,  however,  ate  of  the 
flesh  of  the  camel,  which  was  always  given  to  the 
poor,  and  "this  they  did  out  of  pride  and  ostenta- 
tion,"' says  Sale,  "  it  being  reckoned  a  shajne  for  a 
man  to  stand  out,  and  not  venture  his  money  on 
such  an  occasion."  Sale,  however,  is  hardly  philo- 
sophical in  this  remark,  which  concerns  only  the 
abuse  of  a  practice  originally  arising  from  a  na- 
tional virtue:  but  Mohammad  forbade  the  game, 
with  all  other  games  of  chance,  on  the  plea  that  it 
gave  rise  to  quarrels,  &c.  (Sale's  Preliminary  Dis- 
course, p.  96,  ed.  1836,  and  Kur-dn,  ch.  ii.  and  v.). 
The  Oriental  respect  for  the  covenant  of  bread 
and  salt,  or  salt  alone,  certainly  sprang  from  the 
high  regard  in  which  hospitality  was  held.  Even 
accidentally '  to  taste  another's  salt  imposes  this 
obligation  ;  and  to  so  great  an  extent  is  the  feeling 
carried  that  a  thief  has  been  known  to  give  up  his 
booty  in  obedience  to  it.  Thus  El-Leys  Es-Saffar, 
when  a  robber,  left  his  booty  in  the  passage  of  the 
royal  treasury  of  Sijistan  ;  accidentally  he  stumbled 
over,  and,  in  the  dark,  tasted  a  lump  of  rock-salt : 
his  respect  for  his  covenant  gained  his  pardon,  and 
he  became  the  founder  of  a  royal  dynasty  ( Lane's 


to  him  [Mishk&t  el-Musdbeeh,  ii.  329,  cited  in  Lane's 
Thousand  and  <)»,■  Nights,  Intr.  note  13).  Bnrckhardt 
[Notes  on  the  Bedouins,  See.,  i.  178,  179,  cited  in  the 
same  note)  says  that  a  stranger  without  friends  in  a 
camp  alights  at  the  first  tent,  where  tin  women,  in 
the  absence  of  the  owner,  provide  for  his  refreshment. 
After  the  lapse  of  three  days  and  four  hours,  lie  must, 
if  he  would  avoid  censure,  either  assist  in  household 
duties,  or  claim  hospitality  at  another  tent. 


HOTHAM 

Thousand  and  One  Nights,  xv.  aote  21).  The 
Arab  peculiarity  was  carried  into  Spain  by  the  so- 
called  Moors. 

For  the  customs  of  the  Greeks  and  Romans  in 
the  entertainment  of  guests,  and  the  exercise  ot 
hospitality  generally,  the  reader  is  referred  to  the 
Dictionary  of  Antiquities,  art.  Hospitium.  They 
are  incidentally  illustrated  by  passages  in  the  N.  T., 
but  it  is  difficult  to  distinguish  between  those  so 
derived,  and  the  native  Oriental  customs  which, 
as  we  have  said,  are  very  similar.  To  one  of  the 
customs  of  classical  antiquity  a  reference  is  sup- 
posed to  exist  in  Rev.  ii.  17:  "  To  him  that  over- 
cometh  will  I  give  to  eat  of  the  hidden  manna,  and 
will  give  him  a  white  stone,  and  in  the  stone  a 
new  name  written,  which  no  man  knoweth,  saving- 
he  that  receiveth  [it]."  [E.  S.  .1'.] 

HO'THAM  (nn'in  ;  Xu0dv,  Alex.  Xwedn ; 
Hotham),  a  man  of  Asher;  son  of  Heber,  of  the 
family  of  Beriah  (1  Chr.  vii.  32). 

HO'THAN  (Dn'in,  i.  a.  Hotham  ;  XooOd/i, 
Alex.  XoiQdv ;  Hotham),  a  man  of  Aroer,  father 
of  Shama  and  Jehiel,  two  of  the  heroes  of  David's 
guard  ( 1  Chr.  xi.  44).  The  substitution  of  Hothan 
for  Hotham  is  an  error  which  has  been  retained 
from  the  edition  of  1611  till  now.  (Comp.  the 
rendering  of  the  LXX.  both  of  this  and  the  pre- 
ceding name.) 

HO'THIK  CVnin  ;  'ae-npl,  Alex,  'iweflipf  ; 
Othir),  the  13th  son  of  Heman  "  the  king's  seer" 
(1  Chr.  xxv.  4),  and  therefore  a  Kohathite  Levite. 
lie  had  the  charge  of  the  twenty-first  course  of  the 
musicians  in  the  service  of  the  tabernacle  (xxv.  28). 

HOUR.  (HyL",  XnjTL",  Chald.).     This  word  is 

first  found  in  Dan.  iii.  6,  iv.  19,  33,  v.  5;  and  it 
occurs  several  times  in  the  Apocrypha  (Jud.  xiv.  8, 
2  Esd.  ix.  44).  It  seems  to  be  a  vague  expression 
for  a  short  period,  and  the  frequent  phrase  "  in  the 
same  hour  "  means  "  immediately  "  :  hence  we  find 
ni?L';3,  substituted  in  theTargum  for  Jj;n3,  "in  a 
moment ''  (Num.  xvi.  21, &c).  "Cipa  is  frequently 
used  in  the  same  way  by  the  X.  T.  miters  (Matt. 
viii.  13  ;  Luke  xii.  39,  &c).  It  occurs  in  the  LXX. 
as  a  rendering  for  various  words  meaning  time,  just 
as  it  docs  iii  Greek  writers  long  before  it  acquired 
the  specific  meaning  of  our  word  "hour.''  Saah  is 
still  used  in  Arabic  both  for  an  hour  and  a  moment, 
'flic  ancient  Hebrews  were  probably  unacquainted 
with  the  division  of  the  natural  day  into  i'4  parts. 
The  general  distinctions  of  "  morning,  evening,  and 
noonday"  (Ps.  Iv.  17)  were  sufficient  for  them  at 

first,  as  they  were  for  the  early   Greeks    (Horn.    //. 

xxi.  Ill);  afterwards  the  Greeks  adopted  five 
marked  periods  of  the  day  (Jul.  Pollux,  Onom.  i. 
68;  Dip  Chrysost.  Orat.  ii.  de  Gbr.),  and  the 
Hebrews  parcelled  out  the  period  between  sunrise 
and  sunset  into  a  series  of  minute  divisions  distin- 
guished by  the  sun's  course  ( Da'y  ].  as  is  still  done 
by  the  Arabs,  who  have  stated  forms  of  prayers  for 
each  period  (Lane's  Mod.  /.)/.  i.  ch. 

The  early  Jews  appear  to  have  divided  the  day 
into  four  pails  (Neh.  ix.  3),  and  the  night  into 
three  watches  (Judg.vii.  19)  [DAT;  WATCHE8], 
and  even  in  the  X.  T.  we  lind  a  trace  of  this  division 

in  Matt.  xx.  1-"'.    There  is  however  no  proof  of  the 
assertion  sometimes  made,  that  wpa  in  the  Gospels 
may  occasionally  mean  a  space  ol  three  hours. 
The  Greeks  adopted  the  division  of  the  day  into 


HOUR 


835 


12  hours  from  the  Babylonians  (Herod,  ii.  109; 
comp.  Kawlinson,  Herod,  ii.  p.  334).  At  what 
period  the  Jews  became  first  acquainted  with  this 
way  of  reckoning  time  is  unknown,  but  it  is  gene- 
rally supposed  that  they  too  learnt  it  from  the 
Babylonians  during  the  Captivity  (Waehner,  Ant. 
Hebr.  §v.  i.  8,9.).  They  may  have  had  some  such 
division  at  a  much  earlier  period,  as  has  been  inferred 
from  the  fact  that  Ahaz  erected  a  sun-dial  in  Jeru- 
salem, the  use  of  which  had  probably  been  learnt, 
from  Babylon.  There  is  however  the  greatest  un- 
certainty as  to  the  meaning  of  the  word  m?J?D 
(A.  V.  "  degrees,"  Is.  xxxviii.  8).  [Dial.]  It  is 
strange  that  the  Jews  were  not  acquainted  with  this 
method  of  reckoning  even  earlier,  for,  although  a 
purely  conventional  one,  it  is  naturally  suggested 
by  the  months  in  a  year.  Sir  G.  Wilkinson  thinks 
that  it  arose  from  a  less  obvious  cause  (Kawlinson, 
Herod,  ii.  3134).  In  whatever  way  originated,  it 
was  known  to  the  Egyptians  at  a  very  early  period. 
They  had  12  hours  of  the  day  and  of  the  night 
(called  Nau  =  hour),  each  of  which  had  its  own 
genius,  drawn  with  a  star  on  its  head.  The 
word  is  said  by  Lepsius  to  be  found  as  far  back 
as  the  5th  dynasty  (Rawlinson,  Herod,  ii.  135). 

There  are  two  kinds  of  hours,  viz.  (1.)  the  astro- 
nomical or  equinoctial  hour,  i.  e.  the  24th  part  of 
a  civil  day,  which  although  "  known  to  astrono- 
mers, was  not  used  in  the  affairs  of  common  life 
till  towards  the  end  of  the  4th  century  of  the 
Christian  era"  {Diet,  of  Ant.  s.  v.  Hora):  and 
(2.)  the  natural  hour  (which  the  Rabbis  called 
riVJftT,  KcupiKal  or  temporales),  i.  e.  the  12th 
part  of  the  natural  day,  or  of  the  time  between 
sunrise  and  sunset.  These  are  the  hours  meant 
in  the  N.  T.,  Josephus,  and  the  Rabbis  (John  xi. 
9,  &c.  ;  Jos.  Ant.  xiv.  4,  §3),  and  it  must  be  re- 
membered that  they  perpetually  vary  in  length,  so 
as  to  be  very  different  at  different  times  of  the  year. 
Besides  this  an  hour  of  the  day  would  always  mean 
a  different  length  of  time  from  an  hour  of  the 
night  except  at  the  equinox.  From  the  consequent 
uncertainty  of  the  teim  there  arose  the  proverbial 
expression  ''not  all  hours  are  equal"  (R.Joshua 
iiji.  Carpzov,  App.  Crit.  345).  At  the  equinoxes 
the  third  hour  would  correspond  to  9  o'clock  ;  the 
sixth  would  always  be  at  noon.  To  find  the  exact 
time  meant  at  other  seasons  of  the  year  we  must 
know  when  the  sun  rises  in  Palestine,  and  reduce 
the  hours  to  our  reckoning  accordingly.  [Day.] 
(  Winer,  s.  c.  Tag,  Uhren ;  Jahn  Arch.  Bibl.  §101.) 
What  horologic  contrivances  the  Jews  possessed  in 
the  time  of  our  Lord  is  uncertain:  but  we  may 
safely  suppose  that  they  had  gnomons,  dials,  and 
clepsydrae,  all  of  which  had  long  been  known  to 
the  Persians  ami  other  nations  with  whom  they  had 
come  in  contact.  Of  course  the  two  firsl  were  in- 
accurate and  uncertain  indications,  but  the  water- 
clock  by  ingenious  modifications,  according  to  the 

season  of  the  year,  beci 'a  verj    tolerable  assi>t- 

ance  in  marking  time.  Mention  is  also  made  of  a 
curious  invention  called  Hl'L"  TilV.  by  which  a 
figure  was  constructed  so  as  to  drop  a  stone  into 
a  brazen  basin  every  hour,  the  sound  of  which  was 

heard  for  a  great  distance  and  announced  the  time 
I  (  Mho.    /.,  r.   /,',('■.  8,   \  .    // 

For  tin'  inn  p..>es  ot'  prayer  the  old  di\  ision  of  the 
day  into  4  portions  was  continued  in  the  Temple 
service,  as  we  see  from   Acts  ii.  15,  iii.  1.  \.  9. 
Tli,'  Jews  supposed  that   the  "ail  hour  had 
consecrated   by   Abraham,  the  6th   b\    [aaa< 


836 


HOUSE 


the  9th  by  Jacob  (Kimchi ;  Schoettgen,  Hor. 
Hebr.  ad  Acts  iii.  1 ).  It  is  probable  that  the  ca- 
nonical hours  observed  by  the  Romanists  (of  which 
there  are  8  in  the  24)  are  derived  from  these  Temple 
hours  {Moses  and  Aar.  iii.  9). 

The  Rabbis  pretend  that  the  hours  were  divided 
into  1080  D^n  (minutes),  and  56,848  D"jn~l 
(seconds),  which  numbers  were  chosen  because  they 
are  so  easily  divisible  {Gen.  Hier.  Berachoth,  2,  4; 
hi  Reland  Ant.  Hebr.  iv.  1,  §19).         [F.  W.  F.] 

HOUSE  (JV3  ;  oJkos  ;  domus ;  Child,  n-13, 

topass  the  night,  Gesen.  Thes.  191  6.),  a  dwelling  in 
general,  whether  literally,  as  house,  tent,  palace,  cita- 
del, tomb,  derivatively  as  tabernacle,  temple,  heaven, 
or  metaphorically  as  family.  Although  in  Oriental 
language,  every  tent  (see  Gesen.  p.  32)  may  be 
regarded  as  a  house  (Harmer,  Obs.  i.  194),  yet  the 
distinction  between  the  permanent  dwelling-house 
and  the  tent  must  have  taken  rise  from  the  moment 
of  the  division  of  mankind  into  dwellers  in  tents 
and  builders  of  cities,  i.  e.  of  permanent  habitations 
(Gen.  iv.  17,  20  ;  Is.  xxxviii.  12).  The  Hebrews 
did  not  become  dwellers  in  cities  till  the  sojourn  in 
Egypt  and  after  the  conquest  of  Canaan  (Gen.  xlvii. 
3  ;  Ex.  xii.  7  ;  Heb.  xi.  9),  while  the  Canaanites  as 
well  as  the  Assyrians  were  from  an  earlier  period 
builders  and  inhabitants  of  cities,  and  it  was  into 
the  houses  and  cities  built  by  the  former  that  the 
Hebrews  entered  to  take  possession  after  the  con- 
quest (Gen.  x.  11,  19,  xix.  1,  xxiii.  10,  xxxiv.  20  ; 
Num.  xi.  27;  Deut.  vi.  10,  11).  The  private 
dwellings  of  the  Assyrians  and  Babylonians  have 
altogether  perished,  but  the  solid  material  of  the 
houses  of  Syria,  east  of  the  Jordan,  may  perhaps 
have  preserved  entire  specimens  of  the  ancient 
dwellings,  even  of  the  original  inhabitants  of  that 
region  (Porter,  Damascus,  ii.  195,  196;  C.  C.  Gra- 
ham in  Camb.  Essays,  1859,  p.  160,  &c.  ;  comp. 
Buckingham,  Arab  Tribes,  p.  171,  172). 

In  inferring  the  plan  and  arrangement  of  ancient 
Jewish  or  Oriental  houses,  as  alluded  to  in  Scrip- 
ture, from  existing  dwellings  in  Syria,  Egypt,  and 
the  East  in  general,  allowance  must  be  made  for  the 
difference  in  climate  between  Egypt,  Persia,  and 
Palestine,  a  cause  from  which  would  proceed 
differences  in  certain  cases  of  material  and  construc- 
tion, as  well  as  of  domestic  arrangement. 

1 .  The  houses  of  the  rural  poor  in  Egypt,  as 
well  as  in  most  parts  of  Syria,  Arabia,  and  Persia, 
are  for  the  most  part  mere  huts  of  mud,  or  sun- 
burnt bricks.  In  some  parts  of  Palestine  and 
Arabia  stone  is  used,  and  in  certain  districts  caves 
in  the  rock  are  used  as  dwellings  (Amos,  v.  11  ; 
Bartlett,  Walks,  p.  117;  Caves).  The  houses 
are  usually  of  one  story  only,  viz.  the  ground 
floor,  and  sometimes  contain  only  one  apartment. 
Sometimes  a  small  court  for  the  cattle  is  attached  ; 
and  in  some  cases  the  cattle  are  housed  in  the  same 
building,  or  the  people  live  on  a  raised  platform, 
and  the  cattle  round  them  on  the  ground  (1  Sam. 
xxviii.  24;  Irby  and  Mangles,  p.  70;  Jolliffe, 
Letters,  i.  43;  Buckingham,  Arab  Tribes,  p.  170  ; 
Burckhardt,  Travels,  ii.  119).  In  lower  Egypt 
the  oxen  occupy  the  width  of  the  chamber  farthest 
from  the  entrance  ;  it  is  built  of  brick  or  mud, 
about  four  feet  high,  and  the  top  is  often  used  as 
a  sleeping  place  in  winter.  The  windows 'are  small 
apertures  high  up  in  the  walls,  sometimes  grated 
with  wood  (Burckhardt,  Travels,  i.  241,  ii."  101, 
119,  301,  329  ;  Lane,  Mod.  Eg.  i.  44).  The  roofs 
are  commonly  but  not  always  flat,  and  are  usually  ■ 


HOUSE 

formed  of  a  plaster  of  mud  and  straw  laid  upon 
boughs  or  rafters  ;  and  upon  the  flat  roofs,  tents  or 
"  booths  "  of  boughs  or  rushes  are  often  raised  to 
be   used  as  sleeping-places   in  summer   (Irby  and 


i  upon  the  root'  tor  sleeping. 
(Layard,  Nineveh,  i.  17/.) 

Mangles,  71;  Niebuhr,  Dcscr.  49,  53;  Layard, 
Nin.  fy  Bab.  112;  Nineveh,  i.  176;  Burckhardt, 
Syria,  280  ;  Travels,  i.  190 ;  Van  Egmont,  ii.  32  ; 
Malan,  Magdala  §  Bethany,  15).  To  this  descrip- 
tion the  houses  of  ancient  Egypt  and  also  of  Assyria, 
as  represented  in  the  monuments,  in  great  measure 
correspond  (Layard,  Monuments  of  Nineveh,  pt.  ii. 
pi.  49,  50  ;  bas-relief  in  Brit.  Mus.  Assyrian  room, 
No.  49  ;  first  Egypt,  room,  case  17  ;  Wilkinson, 
Anc.  Eg.  i.  13  ;  Martineau,  East.  Life,  i.  19,  97). 
In  the  towns  the  houses  of  the  inferior  kind  do  not 
differ  much  from  the  above  description,  but  they 
are  sometimes  of  more  than  one  story,  and  the  roof- 
terraces  are  more  carefully  constructed.  In  Palestine 
they  are  often  of  stone 
(Jolliffe.  i.  26). 

2.  The  difference  be- 
tween the  poorest  houses 
and  those  of  the  class 
next  above  them  is  greater 
than  between  these  and 
the  houses  of  the  first 
rank.  The  prevailing  plan 
of  Eastern  houses  of  this 
class  presents,  as  was  the 
case  in  ancient  Egypt,  a 
front  of  wall,  whose  blank 
and  mean  appearance  is 
usually  relieved  only  by 
the  door  and  a  i'ew  latticed  and  projecting  windows 
(  Views  in  Syria,  ii.  25).  Within  this  is  a  court  or 
courts  with  apartments  opening  into  them.  Some 
of  the  finest  houses  in  the  East  are  to  be  found  at 
Damascus,  where  in  some  of  them  are  seven  such 
courts.  When  there  are  only  two,  the  innermost  is 
the  harecm,  in  which  the  women  and  children  live, 
and  which  is  jealously  secluded  from  the  entrai 
any  man  but  the  master  of  the  house  (Burckhardt, 
Travels,  i.  188  ;  Van  Egmont.  ii.  246.  253  ;  Shaw, 
p.  207  ;  Porter,  Damascus,  i.  34,  37,  60  ;  <  bardin, 
Voyages,yi.  6;  Lane.  Mod.  Eg.  i.  179,207).  Over 
the  door  is  a  projecting  window  with  a  lattice  more 
or  less  elaborately  wrought,  which,  except  in  times  of 


Assyrian  house,  Koyounjik. 


HOUSE 

public  celebrations,  is  usually  closed  (2  K.  ix.  30  ; 
Shaw,  Travels,  207 ;  Lane,  Mod.  Eg.  i.  27). 
The  doorway  or  door  bears  an  inscription  from  the 


HOUSE 


837 


Cain*.    (Luna,  Modern  Egyptians.') 


Kurau,  as  the  ancient  Egyptian  houses  had  inscrip- 
tions over  their  doors,  and  as  the  Israelites  were 
directed  to  write  sentences  from  the  Law  over  their 
gates.  [Gate.]  The  entrance  is  usually  guarded 
within  from  sight  by  a  wall  or  some  arrangement 
of  the  passages.  In  the  passage  is  a  stone  seat  for 
the  porter  and  other  servants  (Lane,  Mod.  Eg.  i. 
32;  Shaw,  Trav.  .207  ;  Chardin,  Vby.  iv.  111). 
Beyond  this  passage  is  an  open  court  like  the  Roman 
impluvium,  often  paved  with  marble.  Into  this 
tin'  principal  apartments  look,  and  are  cither  open 
to  it  in  front,  or  are  entered  from  it  by  doors. 
An   awning  is  sometimes  drawn  over  the  court, 


Ml!   Ol    tlOUBO  Ml   I  '.HI''!,   H 

( Linn',  Mo 


and  the  floor 
sinus  (Shaw, 
generally  an 


strewed  with  carpets  on  festive"  occa- 
208).  On  lie  ground-Hour  there  is 
apartment  for  male  visitors,   called 


mandarah,  having  a  portion  of  the  floor  sunk  below 
the  rest  called  durkd'ah.  This  is  often  paved  with 
marble  or  coloured  tiles,  and  has  in  the  centre  a 
fountain.  The  rest  of  the  floor  is  a  raised  plat- 
form called  leeicdn,  with  a  mattress  and  cushions 
at  the  back  on  each  of  the  three  sides.  This  seat 
or  sofa  is  called  dceicdn.  Every  person  on  en- 
trance takes  off  his  shoes  on  the  durkd'ah  before 
stepping  on  the  leeicdn  (Ex.  iii.  5;  Josh.  v.  15; 
Luke  vii.  38).  The  ceilings  over  the  leeicdn  and 
durkd'ah  are  often  richly  panelled  and  ornamented 
(Jer.  xxii.  14).  [Ceiling.]  The  stairs  to  the  upper 
apartments  are  in  Syria  usually  in  a  comer  of  the 
court  (Robinson,  iii.  302).  When  there  is  no 
upper  story  the  lower  rooms  are  usually  loftier. 
In  Persia  they  are  open  from  top  to  bottom,  and 
only  divided  from  the  court  by  a  low  partition 
(Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  i.  10;  Chardin,  iv.  11!); 
Burckhardt,  Travels,  i.  18,  19  ;  Vicars  in  Syria, 
i.  56).  Around  part,  if  not  the  wdiole,  of  the  court 
is  a  verandah,  often  nine  or  ten  feet  deep,  over 
which,  when  there  is  more  than  one  floor,  runs  a 
second  gallery  of  like  depth  with  a  balustrade 
(Shaw,  p.  2u8).  Bearing  in  mind  that  the  recep- 
tion room  is  raised  above  the  level  of  the  court 
(Chardin,  iv.  118;  Views  in  Syria,  i.  5(3),  we 
may,  in  explaining  the  circumstances  of  the  miracle 


Court  of  hou>c  at  Antioch. 

of  the  paralytic  (Mark  ii.  3  ;  Luke  v.  18),  suppose, 
1.  either  that  our  Lord  was  standing  under  the 
verandah,  and  the  people  in  front  in  the  court. 
The  bearers  of  the  sick  man  ascended  tin'  stairs  to 
the  roof  of  the  house,  and  taking  oil'  a  portion  of  the 
boarded  covering  of  the  verandah,  or  removing  the 
awning  over  the  impluvium,  rb  fitcrov,  in  the 
former  ease  let  down  the  bed  through  the  verandah 
roof,  or  in  the  latter,  down  by  way  of  the  roof,  Sia. 
twv  Kepdfxuy,  and  deposited  it  before  the  Saviour 
(Shaw,  212).  2.  Another  explanation  presents  it- 
self in  considering  the  room  where  the  company 
were  assembled  as  the  imep&ov,  and  the  roof  opened 
for  the  lied  to  be  die  true  roof  of  the  house  (Trench, 
Miracles,  H»'.»;  Lane,  Mod.  Eg.  i.  39).  •"••  And 
one  still  more  simple  is  found  in  regarding  the 
bouse  as  one  of  the  rude  dwellings  new  to  be  seen 
near  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  a  mere  room  "  1<>  or  12  feet 
high  and  as  many  or  more  square,"  with  no  Opening 
except  the  dour.  The  roof,  used  as  a  sleeping- place, 
is    reached    by    a    ladder   from   the  outside,  and   the 

bearers  of  the  paralytic,  unable  to  approach  the 
door,  would  thus  have  ascended  the  roof,  and  hav- 
ing uncovered  it  {e^opv^aurts),  let  him  down  into 
the  room  where  our  Lord  was  |  Malan,  l.r.j. 

The  stairs  to  the  upper  apartments  or  to   the 
roof  are  often  shaded  by  vines  or  creeping  plants, 


838 


HOUSE 


and  the  courts,  especially  the  inner  ones,  planted 
with  trees.  The  court  has  often  a  well  or  tank  in  it 
'  Ps.  cxxviii.  3;  2  Sam.  xvii.  18  ;  Russell,  Aleppo, 
i.  24,  32  ;  Wilkinson,  i.  6,  S  ;  Lane,  Mod.  Eg.  i.  32  ; 
Views  in  Syria,  i.  56). 


Besides  the  mmdarah,  there  is  sometimes  a  second 
room,  either  on  the  ground  or  the  upper  Moor,  called 
Ka  ah,  fitted  with  deewdns,  and  at  the  corners  of 
these  rooms  portions  taken  off  and  enclosed  form 
retiring  rooms  (Lane,  i.  39  ;  Russell,  i.  31,33). 

When  there  is  no  second  floor,  but  more  than  one 
court,  the  women's  apartments,  hareem,  harem  or 


harem  {^^.  and 


^ 


,  secluded,  or  prohibited, 


with  which  may  be  compared  the  Hebrew  Armon 
|iO-}S\  Stanley,  S.  $  P.  App.  §82),  are  usually  in 
the  second  court  ;  otherwise  they  form  a  separate 
building  within  the  general  enclosure,  or  are  above  on 
the  first  floor  (Lane,\fl/bd.  Eg.  i.  179,  207;  Views  in 
Syria,i.  56).  The  entrance  to  the  harem  is  crossed  by 
no  one  but  the  master  of  the  house  and  the  domestics 
belonging  to  the  female  establishment.  Though  this 
remark  would  not  apply  in  the  same  degree  to  Jewish 
habits,  the  privacy  of  the  women's  apartments  may 
possibly  be  indicated  by  the  "  inner  chamber"  ("HPI ; 
rainilov;  cubiculum)  resorted  to  as  a  hiding-place 
(1  K.  sx.  30,  xxii.  25  ;  see  Judg.  xv.  1).  Solomon, 
in  his  marriage  with  a   foreigner,  introduced  also 


"©•"a*  w 


HOUSE 

foreign  usage  in  this  respect,  which  was  carried 
farther  in  subsequent  times  (1  K.  vii.  8;  2  K. 
xxiv.  15.  [Womex.J  The  harem  of  the  Persian 
monarch  (D*EJO  TT'S  ;  o  yvvaiKwv  ;  domus  femi- 
naruni)  is  noticed  in  the  book  of  Esther  (ii.  3). 

When  there  is  an  upper  story,  the  Ka'ah  forms 
the  most  important  apartment,  and  thus  probably 
answers  to  the  inreptjiov,  which  was  often  the 
"guest-chamber"  (Luke  xxii.  12;  Acts  i.  13,  ix. 
37,  xx.  8;  Burckhardt,  Trav.  i.  154).  The 
windows  of  the  upper  rooms  often  project  one  or 
two  feet,  and  form  a  kiosk  or  latticed  chamber,  the 
ceilings  of  which  are  elaborately  ornamented  (Lane, 
i.  27;  Russell,  i.  102;  Burckhardt,  Trav.  1.190). 
Such  may  have  been  the  "  chamber  in  the  wall  " 
(HvJ?;   inrepyov  ;  coenaculum  ;  Gesen.  p.  1030) 

made,  or  rather  set  apart  for  Elisha,  by  the  Shu- 
nemite  woman  (2  K.  iv.  10,  11).  So  also  the 
"summer  parlour"  of  Eglon  (Judg.  iii.  20,  23. 
but  see  Wilkinson,  i.  11),  the  "  loft "  of  the  widow  of 
Zarephath  (1  K.  xvii.  19).  The  "  lattice"  (PlD3b> ; 
biKTvunbv;  cancelli)  through  which  Ahaziah  fell, 
perhaps  belonged  to  an  upper  chamber  of  this  kind 
(2  K.  i.  2),  as  also  the  "third  loft"  (rplffTvyov) 
from  which  Eutychus  fell  (Acts  xx.  9;  comp.  Jer. 
xxii.  13).  There  are  usually  no  special  bed-rooms 
in  Eastern  houses,  and 
thus  the  room  in  which 
Ishbosheth  was  mur- 
dered was  probably  an 
ordinary  room  with  a 
deeicdn,  on  which  he 
was  sleeping  during 
the  heat  of  the  day  (2 
Sam.  iv.  5,  6  ;  Lane, 
i.  41). 

Sometimes  the  dec- 
wan  is  raised  sulH- 
ciently  to  allow  of 
cellars  underneath  for 
stores  of  all  kinds  (ra- 
fxieia,  Matt.  xxiv.  26  ; 
Russell,  i.  32). 

The  outer  doors  are 
closed  with  a  wooden 
lock,  but  in  some  cases 
the  apartments  are  di- 
vided from  each  other 
by  curtains  only  (Lane, 
i.  42  ;  Chardin,  iv. 
123;   Russell,  i.  21). 

There  are  no  chim- 
neys, but  fire  is  made 
when  required  with 
charcoal  in  a  chafing- 
dish  ;  or  a  fire  of  ""^I 
wood  might  be  kindled 
in  the  open  court  of 
the  house  (Luke  xxii. 
55  ;  Russell,  i.  21 ;  Lane,  i.  41 ;  Chardin,  h .  12"). 

Besides  the  mandarak  some  houses  in  Cairo  have 
an  apartment  called  mak'ad,  open  in  front  to  the 
court,  with  two  or  more  arches,  and  a  railing;  and 
a  pillar  to  support  the  wall  above  (Lane.  i.  38). 
It  was  in  a  chamber  of  this  kind,  probably  one  of 
the  largest  size  to  be  found  in  a  palace,  that  our 
Lord  .was  being  arraigned  before  tin-  High-priest, 
at  the  time  when  the  denial  of  Him  by  St.  Peter 
took  place.f  He  "  turned  and  looked"  on  Peter  as 
he  stood  by  the  fire  in  the  court  (Luke  xxii.  56,61  ; 


i  Btreet  at  Cairo.     (From 
Roberts.) 


HOUSE 

John  xviii.  24),  whilst  He  himself  was  in  the  "  hall 
of  Judgment,"  the  mak'ad.  Such  was  the  "porch 
of  judgment"  built  by  Solomon  (1  K.  vii.  7)  which 
finds  a  parallel  in  the  golden  alcove  of  Mohammed 
Uzbek  (Ibn  Batuta,  Trav.  76,  ed.  Lee). 

Before^uitting  the  interior  of  the  house  we  may 
observe,  that  on  the  deewdn,  the  corner  is  the  place 
of  honour,  which  is  never  quitted  by  the  master  of 
tlie  house  in  receiving  strangers  (Russell,  i.  27  ; 
iMalan,  Tyre  and  Sidon,  38  >.  Tin'  roofs  of  Eastern 
houses  are,  as  lias  been  said,  mostly  Hat,  though 
there  are  sometimes  domes  over  some  of  the  rooms. 
The  Hat  portions  are  plastered  with  a  composi- 
tion of  mortar,  tar,  ashes,  anil  sand,  which  in 
time  becomes  very  hard,  hut  when  not  laid  on  at 
the  proper  season  is  apt  to  crack  in  winter,  and  the 
rain  is  thus  admitted.  In  order  to  prevent  this, 
every  root'  is  provided  with  a  roller,  which  is  set 
at  work  after  rain.  In  many  cases  the  terrace 
roof  is  little  better  than  earth  rolled  hard.  On  ill- 
compacted  roofs  grass  is  often  found  springing  into 
a  short-lived  existence  (Prov.  xix.  13,  xxvii.  15; 
Ps.  exxix.  (J,  7  ;  Is.  xxxvii.  27  ;  Shaw,  210  ;  Lane, 
i.  -_'7  ;   Robinson,  iii.  39,  44,  60). 

In  no  point  do  Oriental  domestic  habits  differ 
more  from  European  than  in  the  use  of  the  roof. 
Its  flat  surface  is  made  useful  for  various  house- 
hold purposes,  as  drying  corn,  hanging-  up  linen, 
and  preparing  figs  and  raisins  (Shaw,  211; 
Burckhardt,  Trav.  i.  101).  The  roofs  are  used 
as  places  of  recreation  in  the  evening,  and  often  as 
sleeping-places  at  night  ( '_'  Sam.  xi.  2,  xvi.  22  ;  Dan. 
iv.  29;  1  Sam.  ix.  25,  26  ;  Job  xxvii.  18  ;  l'rov.  xxi. 
(» ;  Shaw,  211  ;  Russell,  i-  35;  Chardra,  iv.  lit!; 
Layard,  Nineveh,  i.  177).  They  were  also  used  as 
places  tin-  devotion,  and  even  idolatrous  worship 
(Jer.  xwii.  29,  xix.  13;  '-'  K.  xxiii.  12  ;  Zeph. 
i.  "> ;  Acts  x.  9).  At  the  time  of  the  Feast  of  Taber- 
nacles booths  were  elected  by  the  Jews  on  the 
tops  of  their  houses,  as  in  the  present  day  huts  of 
boughs  are  sometimes  erected  on  the  housetops  as 
sleeping-places,  or  places  of  retirement  from  the 
heat  in  summertime  (Xeh.  viii.  1G;  Burckhardt, 
Syria,  280).  As  among  the  Jews  the  seclusion 
of  women  was  not  carried  to  the  extent  of  Moham- 
medan usage,  it  is  probable  that  the  house-top  was 
made,  as  it  is  among  Christian  inhabitants,  more  a 
place  "i'  public  meeting  both  for  men  and  women, 
than  is  the  case  among  Mohammedans,  who  care- 
fully seclude  their  root's  from  inspection  by  parti- 
tions (Burckhardt,  Trav.  i.  li'l  ;  comp. Wilkinson, 
i.  2:'.).  'l'he  Christians  at  Aleppo,  in  Russell's  time, 
lived  contiguous,  and  made  their  housetops  a  means 
of  mutual  communication  to  avoid  passing  through 
the  streets  in  time  of  plague  Russell,  i.  35).  In 
the  same  manner  the  house-top  might  he  made  a 
means  of  escape  by  the  stairs  by  which  it  was 
reached  without  entering  aiu  of  the  apartments  of 
the  house  (Matt.  xxiv.  17,  x.  27  ;   Luke  xii.  3  . 

Both    Jews   and    heathens    were    in    the    habit    of 
wailing    publicly    on    the    house-tops    (Is.    xv.    ."., 
xxii.  1  ;    Jer.  xlviii.  :'.S).     Protection  of  the  roof 
by  para] lets  was  enjoined  by  the  law  (Deut, 
The  parapets  thus  constructed,  of  which  the  types 
may  be  seen  in  ancient  Egyptian  houses,  were  some- 
times of  open  work,  and  it  is  to  a  fill  through,  or 
oxer  one  of  these  that  the  injury  by  which  Ahaziah 
suffered  is  sometimes  ascribed   (Shaw,  211).     To 
pass  over  root's  for  plundering  purposes,  as  well  as 
for  safety,  would  he  no  difficult  matter     Joi  I 
In   ancient  Egyptian  and  also  in  Assyrian    houses  a  - 
sort  of  raised  story  was  sometimes  built  above  the 


HUE 


839 


roof,  and  in  the  former  an  open  chamber,  roofed  or 
covered  with  awning,  was  sometimes  erected  on  the 
house-top  (Wilkinson,  i.  9  ;  Layard,  Mon.  of  Ntn. 
ii.  pi.  49,  5U). 

There  are  usually  no  tire-places,  except  in  the 
kitchen,  the  furniture  of  which  consists  of  a  sort  of 
raised  platform  of  brick  with  receptacles  in  it  for 
fire,  answering  to  the  "  boiling  places  "  (fl'l  /O'iP  ; 
fiayeipeia  ;  enlinae)  of  Ezekiel  (xlvi.  23  ;  Lane. 
i.  41  ;  Gesen.  p.  249), 

Special  apartments  were  devoted  in  larger  houses 
to  winter  and  summer  uses  (Jer.  xxxvi.  22;  Am. 
iii.  15;  Chardin,  iv.  119). 

The  ivory  house  of  Ahab  was  probably  a  palace 
largely  ornamented  with  inlaid  ivory.    [Palack.] 

The  circumstance  of  Samson's  pulling  down  the 
house  by  means  of  the  pillars,  may  be  explained 
by  the  fact  of  the  company  being  assembled  on 
tiers  of  balconies  above  each  other,  supported  by 
central  pillars  on  the  basement ;  when  these  were 
pulled  down  the  whole  of  the  upper  floors  would 
tall  also  (Judg.  xvi.  26;  Shaw,  211). 

Houses  for  jewels  and  armour  were  built  and 
furnished  under  the  kings  (2  K.  xx.  13).  'l'he 
draught  house  (JIlKinD  ;  Koirpcliv;  latrinae)  was 
doubtless  a  public  latrine,  such  as  exists  in  modern 
Eastern  cities  (2  K.  x.  27  ;    Russell,  i.  34). 

Leprosy  in  the  house  was  probably  a  nitrous 
efflorescence  on  the  walls,  which  was  injurious  to 
the  salubrity  of  the  house,  and  whose  removal  was 
therefore  strictly  enjoined  by  the  law  (Lev.  xiv. 
34,  55;  Kitto,  I'lujs.  Geogr.  of  Pal.  p.  112; 
Winer,  s.v.  H< i user). 

The  word  JV3  is  prefixed  to  words  constituting 
a  local  name,  as  Bethany,  Bethhoron,  &c.  In  modern 
names  it  is  represented  by  Beit,  as  Beitlahm. 

[H.  W.  P.] 

HtlK'KOK  (pj?n  ;  'lanava,  Alex.  'Ikuk  ; 
Hucuca),  a  place  on  the  boundary  of  Xaphtali 
(Josh.  xix.  34)  named  next  to  Aznoth-Tabor.  It 
is  mentioned  by  Eusebius  and  Jerome  (Ohoniast. 
"  Icoc"),  but  in  such  a  manner  as  to  show  that 
they  knew  nothing  of  it  but  from  the  Text.  By 
Hap-Parchi  in  1320,  and  in  our  own  times  by 
Wolcott  and  by  Robinson,  Hukkok  has  been  reco- 
vered in  Yahlk,  a  village  in  the  mountains  of 
Naphtali,  west  of  the  upper  end  of  the  Sea  of 
Galilee,  about  7  miles  S.S.VV.  of  Safed,  and  at  the 
head  of  Wady-el-Amud.  An  ancient  Jewish  tra- 
dition locates  here  the  tomb  of  Habakkuk  (Zunz, 
in  B.  Tudela,  ii.  421;  Schwarz.  182*  Robinson, 
iii.  81,  82.  [ii.] 

HU'KOK  (pp-in  ;  v  'Akclk,  Alex.  'Iukcik  ; 
//"'<'''',  a  name  which  in  1  Chr.  vi.  7">  is  sub- 
stituted for  Helkath  in  the  parallel  list  of  the  Cer- 
shonite  cities  in  Asher,  in  Josh.  xxi. 

HUE  (/-in  ;  "OvAl,  the  second  son  of  Aram,  and 
grandson  ofShem  (Gen.  \.  2:;,.     The  geographical 

po-ition  of  the  people  whom  he   represents,    is   not 

W'e]|    decided.        Josephlls    |  Alii .    i.    6,  §4)    allll  Jeiollle 

tix  it  in  Armenia;  Schurthess  {Parad,  p,  262)  on 
etymological  grounds  (as  though  the  name  =  ?in, 
ind)  proposes  the  southern  part  of  .Mesopotamia; 
iron  Bohlen  (Tntrod.  to  Gen.  ii.  249)  places  it  in 
bbourhood  of  Chaldaea.  The  strongest  evi- 
dence  is  in  favour  of  the  district  about  the  roots  of 
Lebanon,  where  the  names  Ard-elrHuleh,  a  district 
to  the  north  of  Lake  Mei'om  ;  OiXada,  a  town 
notice,!    by    Josephus  (Ant.   xv.    Id.  §3),   between 


840 


HULDAH 


Galilee  and  Trachonitis  ;  Golan,  and  its  modern 
form  Djaulan,  bear  some  affinity  to  the  original 
name  of  Hid,  or,  as  it  should  rather  be  written. 
Chid.  [W.  L.  B.] 

HUL'DAH  (JFbn  ;  "OXUv  ;  Olda),  a  pro- 
phetess, whose  husband  Shallum  was  keeper  of  the 
wardrobe  in  the  time  of  king  Josiah,  and  who 
dwelt  in  the  suburb  (Rosenmiiller  ad  Zcph.  i.  10) 
of  Jerusalem.  While  Jeremiah  was  still  at  Ana- 
thoth,  a  young  man  unknown  to  fame,  Huldah  was 
the  most  distinguished  person  for  prophetic  gifts  in 
Jerusalem  ;  and  it  was  to  her  that  Josiah  had  re- 
course when  Hilkiah  found  a  book  of  the  law,  to 
procure  an  authoritative  opinion  on  it  (2  K.  xxii. 
14;   2  Chr.  xxxiv.  22).  [W.  T.  B.] 

HUM'TAH  (iltOpn  ;  Ety«£,  Alex.  Xa/xfxard  ; 
Athmathd),  a  city  of  Judah,  one  of  those  in  the 
mountain-district,  the  next  to  Hebron  (Josh.  xv. 
54).  It  was  not  known  to  Eusebius  and  Jerome 
(see  Onomasticon,  "Ammatha"),  nor  has  it  since 
been  identified.  There  is  some  resemblance  between 
the  name  and  that  of  Kimath  (Ki^dO),  one  of  the 
places  added  in  the  Vat.  LXX.  to  the  list  in  the 
Hebrew  tezt  of  1  Sam.  xxx.  27-31.     '  [G.] 

HUNTING.  The  objects  for  which  hunting 
is  practised,  indicate  the  various  conditions  of  so- 
ciety and  the  progress  of  civilization.  Hunting,  as 
a  matter  of  necessity,  whether  for  the  extermina- 
tion of  dangerous  beasts,  or  for  procuring  suste- 
nance, betokens  a  rude  and  semi-civilized  state  ; 
as  an  amusement,  it  betokens  an  advanced  state. 
In  the  former,  personal  prowess  and  physical 
strength  are  the  qualities  which  elevate  a  man 
above  his  fellows  and  fit  him  for  dominion,  and 
hence  one  of  the  greatest  heroes  of  antiquity  is  de- 
scribed as  a  "mighty  hunter  before  the  Lord" 
(Gen.  x.  9),  while  Ishmael,  the  progenitor  of  a  wild 
race,  was  tamed  as  an  archer  (Gen.  xxi.  20),  and 
Esau,  holding  a  similar  position,  was  "  a  cunning 
hunter,  a  man  of  the  field  "  (Gen.  xxv.  27).  The 
latter  state  may  be  exemplified,  not  indeed  from 
Scripture  itself,  but  from  contemporary  records. 
Among  the  accomplishments  of  Herod,  his  skill  in 
tire  chace  is  particularly  noticed  ;  he  kept  a  regular 
stud  and  a  huntsman  (Joseph.  Ant.  xvi.  10,  §3), 
followed  up  the  sport  in  a  wild  country  {Ant.  xv. 
7,  §7)  which  abounded  with  stags,  wild  asses,  and 
bears,  and  is  said  to  have  killed  as  many  as  forty 
head  in  a  day  {B.  J.\.  21,  §13).  The  wealthy  in 
Egypt  and  Assyria  followed  the  sports  of  the  field 
with  great 'zest;  they  had  their  preserves  for  the 
express  purpose  of  preserving  and  hunting  game 
(Wilkinson's  Ancient  Egyptians,  i.  215;  Xen.  Cy- 
rop.  i.  4,  §5,  14),  and  drew  from  hunting  scenes 
subjects  for  decorating  the  walls  of  their  buildings, 
and  even  the  robes  they  wore  on  state  occasions. 

The  Hebrews,  as  a  pastoral  and  agricultural 
people,  were  not  given  to  the  sports  of  the  field ; 
the  density  of  the  population,  the  earnestness  of 
their  character,  and  the  tendency  of  their  ritual 
regulations,  particularly  those  affecting  food,  all 
combined  to  discourage  the  practice  of  hunting; 
and  perhaps  the  examples  of  Ishmael  and  Esau  were 
recorded  with  the  same  object.  There  was  no  lack 
of  game  in  Palestine  ;  on  their  entrance  into  the 
land,  the  wild  beasts  were  so  numerous  as  to  be 
dangerous  (Ex.  xxiii.  29) ;  the  utter  destruction  of 
them  was  guarded  against  by  the  provisions  of  the 
Mosaic  law  (Ex.  xxiii.  11 ;  Lev.  xxv.  7).  Some  of 
the  fiercer  animals  survived  to  a  late  period,  as  lions 


HUPPIM 

(Judg.   xiv.  5  ;  1  Sam.  xvii.  34  ;  2  Sam.  xxiii.  20  ; 

1  K.  xiii.  24,  xx.  36),  and  bears  (1  Sam.  xvii.  34  ; 

2  K.  li.  24) ;  jackals  (Judg.  xv.  4)  and  foxes 
(Cant.  ii.  15)  were  also  numerous  ;  hart,  roebuck, 
and  fallow  deer  (Deut.  xii.  15;  IK.  iv.  23)  formed 
a  regular  source  of  sustenance,  and  were"  possibly 
preserved  in  enclosures.  The  manner  of  catching 
these  animals  was  either  by  digging  a  pitfall 
(nn^*),  which  was  the  usual  manner  with  the 
larger  animals,  as  the  lion  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  20  ;  Ez. 
xix.  4,  8) ;  or  secondly  by  a  trap  (PIS),  which  was 
set  under  ground  (Job  xviii.  10),  in  the  run  of 
the  animal  (Prov.  xxii.  5),  and  caught  it  by  the 
leg  (Job  xviii.  9)  ;  or  lastly  by  the  use  of  the  net, 
of  which  there  were  various  kinds,  as  for  the 
gazelle  (?)  (Is.  li.  20,  A.  V.  "wild  bull,")  and 
other  animals  of  that  class.  [Net.]  The  method  in 
which  the  net  was  applied  is  familiar  to  us  from 
the  descriptions  in  Virgil  (Aen.  iv.  121,  151  ft'., 
x.  707  ff.)  ;  it  was  placed  across  a  ravine  or  narrow 
valley,  frequented  by  the  animals  for  the  sake  of 
water,  and  the  game  was  driven  in  by  the  hunters 
and  then  despatched  either  with  bow  and  arrow,  or 
spears  (comp.  Wilkinson,  i.  214).  The  game  se- 
lected was  generally  such  as  was  adapted  for  food 
(Prov.  xii.  27),  and  care  was  taken  to  pour  out 
the  blood  of  these  as  well  as  of  tame  animals  (Lev. 
xvii.  13). 

Birds  formed  an  article  of  food  among  the  He- 
brews (Lev.  xvii.  13),  and  much  skill  was  exercised 
in  catching  them.  The  following  were  the  most 
approved  methods.  (1.)  The  trap  (l"IS),  which 
consisted  of  two  parts,  a  net,  strained  over  a  frame, 
and  a  stick  to  support  it,  but  so  placed  that  it 
should  give  way  at  the  slightest  touch ;  the  stick 
or  springe  was  termed  Cp'lD  (Am.  iii.  5,  "gin;"  Ps. 
lxix.  22,  "  trap  ") ;  this  was  the  most  usual  method 
(Job  xviii.  9;  Eccl.  ix.  12;  Prov.  vii.  23).  (2.) 
The  snare  (D^JSV,  from  DO¥,  to  braid ;  Job  xviii. 
9,  A.  V.  "  robber,"),  consisting  of  a  cord  (7311,  Job 
xviii.  10  ;  comp.  Ps.  xviii.  5,  cxvi.  3,  cxl.  5),  so  set 
as  to  catch  the  bird  by  the  leg.  (3.)  The  net, 
which  probably  resembled  those  used  in  Egypt, 
consisting  of  two  sides  or  frames,  over  which  net- 
work was  strained,  and  so  arranged  that  they  could 
be  closed  by  means  of  a  cord :  the  Hebrew  names 
are  various.  [Net.]  (4.)  The  decoy,  to  which  re- 
ference is  made  in  Jer.  v.  26,  27 — a  cage  of  a  pecu- 
liar construction  (2-173)— was  filled  with  birds, 
which  acted  as  decoys ;  the  door  of  the  cage  was 
kept  open  by  a  piece  of  stick  acting  as  a  springe 
(  nTlt^'tt),  and  closed  suddenly  with  a  clap  (whence 
perhaps  the  term  club)  on  the  entrance  of  a  bird. 
The  partridge  appears  to  have  been  used  as  a  decoy 
(Ecclus.  xi.^30).  .  [W.  L.  B.] 

HUP'HAM(nQ-in  ;  LXX.  omits  in  both  MSS. ; 
Hupharn),  a  son  of  Benjamin,  founder  of  the  family 
(  Mishpachah)  of  the  Huphamites  (Num.  xxvi. 
39).  In  the  lists  of  Gen.  xlvi.  and  1  Chr.  vii.  the 
name  is  given  as  Huppui,  which  see. 

HUP'PAH  (HSn  ;  6  'Oir(pd,  Alex.  '0<p<pd  ; 
Hoppha),  a  priest  in' the  time  of  David,  to  whom 
was  committed  the  charge  of  the  l.'.th  of  the  24 
courses  in  the  service  of  the  house  of  God  (1  Chr. 
xxiv.  13). 

HUP'PIM  (D^SII;  Gen.  xlvi.  21;  1  Chr. 
vii.  12  ;  omitted  in  LXX.,  but  Coil.  Alex,  has  'Ocpi- 


HUE 

jxlv  in  Gen.  ;  'Atrtylv,  and  in  Cod.  Alex.  'A<pelV, 
1  Chr.  vii.  12 — the  former  is  the  correct  form,  if, 
as  we  read  in  Num.  xxvi.  39,  the  name  was  Hup- 
ham ;  Hupham  and  Ophim),  head  of  a  Benjamite 
family.  According  to  the  text  of  the  I. XX.  in 
Gen.,  a  son  of  Bela  [Bela  ;  Becher]  ;  but  1  Chr. 
vii.  12  tells  us  that  he  was  sou  of  Ir,  or  Iri  (ver. 
7),  who  was  one  of  the  rive  sous  of  Bela.  Accord- 
ing to  Num.  xxvi.  the  Huphamites  were  one  of  the 
original  families  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin.  The 
sister  of  Huppim  married  into  the  tribe  of  Manas- 
seh,  1  Chr.  vii.  15.  [A.  C.  H.] 

HUE  (Tin  ;  Ear).  1.  ("rip;  Joseph.  Tflpos). 
A  man  who  is  mentioned  with  Moses  and  Aaron 
on  the  occasion  of  the  battle  with  Amalek  at 
Rephidim  (Ex.  xvii.  10),  when  with  Aaron  he 
stayed  up  the  hands  of  Moses  (12).  He  is  men- 
tioned again  in  xxiv.  14,  as  being,  with  Aaron,  left 
in  charge  of  the  people  by  Moses  during  his  ascent 
of  Sinai.  It  would  appear  from  this  that  he  must 
have  been  a  person  connected  with  the  family  of 
Moses  and  of  some  weight  in  the  camp.  The 
latter  would  follow  from  the  former.  The  Jewish 
tradition,  as  preserved  by  Josephus  (Ant.  iii.  2, 
§4),  is  that  he  was  the  husband  of  Miriam,  and 
(iii.  6,  §1)  that  he  was  identical  with 

2.  ("fl/>).  The  grandfather  of  Bezaleel,  the  chief 
artificer  of  the  tabernacle — "  son  of  Uri,  son  of  Hut, 
— of  the  tribe  of  Judah"  (Ex.  xxxi.  2,  xxxv.  3<>, 
xxxviii.  22),  the  full  genealogy  being  given  on  each 
occasion  (see  also  2  Chr.  i.  5).  In  the  lists  of  the 
descendants  of  Judah  in  1  Chr.  the  pedigree  is 
more  fully  preserved.  Hur  there  appears  as  one 
of  the  great  family  of  Pharez.  He  was  the  son  of 
Caleb  ben-Hezron,  by  a  second  wife,  Ephrath  (ii. 
19,  20  ;  comp.  5,  also  iv.  1),  the  first  fruit  of  the 
marriage  (ii.  50,  iv.  4),  and  the  father,  besides  Uri 
(ver.  20),  of  three  sons,  who  founded  the  towns  of 
Kirjath-jearim,  Beth-lehem,  and  Beth-gader  (51). 
Hur's  connexion  with  Beth-lehem  would  seem  to 
have  been  of  a  closer  nature  than  with  the  others 
of  these  places,  for  he  himself  is  emphatically 
called  "  Abi-Bethlehem  " — the  "father  of  Beth- 
lehem "  (iv.  4).  Certainly  Beth-lehem  enjoyed, 
down  to  a  very  late  period,  a  traditional  reputation 
fir  the  arts  which  distinguished  his  illustrious 
grandson.  Jesse,  the  father  of  David,  is  said  to 
have  been  a  weaver  of  the  vails  of  the  sanctuary 
(Targ.  Jonathan,  2  Sam.  xxi.  Ill),  and  the  dyers 
were  still  liugering  there  when  Benjamin  of  Tudela 
visited  Bethlehem  in  the  13th  century. 

In  the  Targum  on  1  Chr.  ii.  19  and  iv.  4, 
Ephrath  is  taken  as  identical  with  Miriam  :  but 
this  would  be  to  contradict  the  more  trustworthy 
tradition  given  above  from  Josephus. 

In  his  comments  on  1  Chr.  iv.  1  (Quacst.  Uebr. 
in  Paralip.  i,  Jerome  overlooks  the  fact  that  the  live 
persons  there  named  as  "sous"  of  Judah  are  really 
members  of  successive  generations  ;  and  he  attempts, 
as  his  manner  is,  to  show  that  each  of  them  is 
identical  with  one  of  the  immediate  sons  of  the 
patriarch.  Hur  he  makes  to  be  another  name  for 
Onan. 

3.  (Ovp;  Joseph.  OHpi)s).  The  fourth  of  the  five 


HUEAM  841 

"  kings  "  Cy?ft  ;  LXX.  and  Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  7,  §1, 
f}affi\e7s)  of  Midian,  who  were  slain  with  Balaam 
after  the  "  matter  of  Peor"  (Num.  xxxi.  8).  In  a 
later  mention  of  them  (Josh.  xiii.  21)  they  are 
called  "  princes"  (WtW)  of  Midian  and  "dukes" 
("O^D}  ;  not  the  word  commonly  rendered  "  duke," 
but  probably  with  the  force  of  dependence,  see  Keil 
ad  he. ;  LXX.  ivapa)  of  Sihon  king  of  the  Amor- 
ites,  who  was  killed  at  the  same  time  with  them. 
No  further  light  can  be  obtained  as  to  Hur. 

4,  (Soup).  Father  of  Rephaiah,  who  was  ruler 
of  half  of  the  environs  (^J/S,  A.  V.  "  part")   of 

Jerusalem,  and  assisted  Nehemiah  in  the  repair  of 
the  wall  (Neh.  iii.  9). 

5.  The  "son  of  Hur" — Beu-Chur — was  com- 
missariat officer  for  Solomon  in  Mount  Ephraim 
(1  K.  iv.  8).  The  LXX.  (both  MSS.)  give  the 
word  Ben  both  in  its  original  and  its  translated 
form  (BeeV — Alex.  BeV — vlbs  "0.p),  a  not  infrequent 
custom  with  them.  Josephus  (Ant.  viii.  2,  §3) 
has  Oxjp7]s  as  the  name  of  the  officer  himself.  The 
Vulg.  (Benhur)  follows  the  Hebrew,  and  is  in  turn 
followed  in  the  margin  of  the  A.  V.  It  is  remark- 
able that  the  same  form  is  observed  in  giving  the 
names  of  no  less  than  five  out  of  the  twelve  officers 
in  this  list.  [G.] 

HU'EAI  (n-in  ;  Ovpi ;  Hurai),  one  of  David's 
guard — Hurai  of  the  torrents  of  Gaash — according 
to  the  list  of  1  Chr.  xi.  32.  In  the  parallel  cata- 
logue of  2  Sam.  xxiii.  the  R  is  changed  to  D,  as  is 
frequently  the  case,  and  the  name  stands  as  Hiddai. 
Kennicott  has  examined  the  discrepancy,  and  in- 
fluenced by  the  readings  of  some  of  the  MSS.  of  the 
LXX.,  decides  in  favour  of  Hurai  as  the  genuine 
name  [Dissert.  194). 

HU'EAM,  1.  (Dn-in  ;  Ovpd/x,  Alex.  'Uti/t ; 
Hurani),  a  Benjamite  ;  son  of  Bela,  the  first-born 
of  the  patriarch  (1  Chr.  viii.  5). 

2.  The  form  in  which  the  name  of  the  king  of 
Tyre  in  alliance  with  David  and  Solomon — and 
elsewhere  given  as  Hiram — appears  in  Chronicles, 
(c).  At  the  time  of  David's  establishment  at  Jeru- 
salem (1  Chr.  xiv.  1).  In  the  A.  V.  the  name  is 
Hiram,  in  accordance  with  the  Cetib  or  original 
Hebrew  text  ( DTTI )  ;  but  in  the  marginal  correc- 
tion of  the  Masorets  (A'eri)  it  is  altered  to  Huram 
(DTll"!),  the  form  which  is  maintained  in  all  its 
other  occurrences  in  these  books.  The  LXX.  Xeipd/j., 
Vulg.  Hiram,  and  Targum,  all  agree  with  the  ( 'ebib. 
(6).  At  theaccession  of  Solomon  (  2  ( !hr.  ii.  3,  11,12; 
viii.  2, 18  ;  ix.  10, 21 :  in  each  of  these  cases  also  the 
LXX.  have  Xipafi,  Alex.  Xeipa/U.  Vulg.  Hiram). 

3.  The  same  change  occurs  in  Chronicles  in  the 
name  of  Hiram  the  artificer,  which  is  given  as 
Huram  in  the  following  places :  2  Chr.  ii.  13;  iv. 
11,  1»;.  In  the  6rs(  and  last  of  these  a  singular 
title  is  given  him — the  word  A  b,  "father" — "  Mil- 
ium m v  rather,"*  and  "Huram  his  father."     No 

doubt   this  denotes  the  respect    and    esteem  in  wllieh 
he  was  held,  according  to  the  similar  custom  of  the 

I pie  of  the  Bast  at  the  present  day.*    There  also 

the  I. XX.  and  Vulgate  follow  the  form  Hiram. 


a  The  A.V.  of  2  Chr.  ii.  IS  renders  the  words  "of 
Huram  my  father's,"  meaning  the  lute  king;  but 
this  is  unnecessary,  and  the  Hebrew  will  well  bear 
the  rendering  given  above. 

h  Analogous  to  this,  though  not  exactly  similar,  is 
Joseph's  expression  (Gen.  slv.  8  ,  "God  bath  made 


me  a  hither  unto  Pharaoh."    Compare  also  i  Mace 

xi.  39 ;  where  note  the  use  of  the  two  terms  "  cousin" 

((rvyycnjs,   ver.  31)    and    "father"    [82).      Somewhat 

analogous,  too,  is  the  use  of  terms  of  relationship 
— "brother,"  "cousin" — in  legal  ami  official  docu- 
ments of  our  own  and  other  countries. 

3  1 


842 


HUM 


HU'M  (n-in  ;  'I5<u,  Alex.  'ASat ;  ZTitn),  a 
Gadite;  father  of  Abihail,  a  chief  man  in  that  tribe 
(1  Chr.  v.  14). 

HUSBAND.     [Marriage.] 

HU'SHAH  (HB'-in  ;  'iladv  ;  Hosa),  a  name 
which  occurs  in  the  genealogies  of  the  tribe  of  Judah 
(1  Chr.  iv.  4)—"  Ezer,  father  of  Hushali."  It  may 
well  be  the  name  of  a  place,  like  Etam,  Gedor, 
Beth-lehem,  and  others,  in  the  preceding  and  suc- 
ceeding verses  ;  but  we  have  no  means  of  ascer- 
taining the  fact,  since  it  occurs  no  where  else.  «For 
a  patronymic  possibly  derived  from  this  name  see 

HUSHATHITE. 

HUSHAI  Ot^in  :  Xovffl,  LXX.  and  Joseph. ; 
CAitsai),  an  Arehite,  i.e.  possibly  an  inhabitant  of 
a  place  called  Erec  (2  Sam.  xv.  32  ft'.,  xvi.  16  ff.). 
He  is  called  the  "  friend  "  of  David  (2  Sam.  xv.  37  ; 
in  1  Chr.  xxvii.  33,  the  word  is  rendered  "com- 
panion ;"  comp.  Joseph.  Ant.  vii.  9,  §2  :  the  LXX. 
has  a  strange  confusion  of  Arehite  and  apx'eTa<f>0S 
=  chief  friend).  To  him  David  confided  the  deli- 
cate and  dangerous  part  of  a  pretended  adherence  to 
the  cause  of  Absalom.  His  advice  was  preferred  to 
that  of  Ahithophel,  and  speedily  brought  to  pass 
the  ruin  which  it  meditated. 

We  are  doubtless  correct  in  assuming  that  the 
Hushai,  whose  son  Baana  was  one  of  Solomon's  com- 
missariat officers  (1  K.  iv.  16),  was  the  famous  coun- 
sellor of  his  father.  Hushai  himself  was  probably 
no  longer  living  ;  at  any  rate  his  office  was  filled  by 
another  (comp.  ver.  5).  [Archite.]    [T.  E.  B.] 

HU'SHAM  (p&n,  in  Chron.  DD'-in  ;  'Aerdfi, 
'AffSfj. ;  Husam),  one  of  the  kings  of  Edom,  before 
the  institution  of  monarchy  in  Israel  (Gen.  xxxvi. 
34,  35  ;  1  Chr.  i.  45,  46).  He  is  described  as 
"  Husham  of  the  land  of  the  Temanite  ;"  and  he 
succeeded  Jobab,  who  is  taken  by  the  LXX.  in  their 
addition  to  the  Book  of  Job  as  identical  with  that 
patriarch. 

HU'SHATHITE,  THE  (Tj^nn,  and  twice 
in  Chron.  Tiffin  ;  6  'Affrarcodi,  Ovffadi,  2ou- 
aa6i ;  de  Husati,  Husuthites),  the  designation  of 
two  of  the  heroes  of  David's  guard.  1.  Sibbechai 
(2  Sam.  xxi.  18;  1  Chr.  xi.  29,  xx.  4,  xxvii.  11). 
In  the  last  of  these  passages  he  is  said  to  have 
belonged  to  the  Zarhites,  that  is  (probably)  the  de- 
scendants of  Zerah  of  the  tribe  of  Judah.  So  far 
this  is  in  accordance  with  a  connexion  between  this 
and  HuSHAH,  a  name,  apparently  of  a  place,  in  the 
genealogies  of  Judah.  Josephus,  however  (Ant.  vii. 
12,  §2),  mentions  Sibbechai  as  a  Hittite. 

2.  Mebunnai  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  27).  There  seems 
no  doubt  that  this  name  is  a  mere  corruption  of 
Sibbechai. 

HUSHIM,  1.  (D^'H  ;  'A<ro>  ;  Husim).  In 
Gen.  xlvi.  23,  "  the  children  (*33)  of  Dan"  are 
said  to  have  been  Hushim.  The  name  is  plural, 
as  if  of  a  tribe  rather  than  an  individual,  which 
perhaps  is  sufficient  to  account  for  the  use  of  the 
plural a  in  "children."  In  the  list  of  Num.  xxvi. 
the  name  is  changed  to  Shuiiam. 

Hushim  figures  prominently  in  the  Jewish  tradi- 
tions of  the  recognition  of  Joseph,  and  of  Jacob's 
burial  at  Hebron.  See  the  quotations  from  the 
Midi-ash  in  Weil's  Bib.  Let/auk,  88  note,  and  the 


HUZZAB 

Targum   Pseudojon.  on  (Jen.  1.  \'.\.      In  the  latter 
he  is  the  executioner  of  Esau. 

2.  DO'n  (i.  e.  Chusshim  ;  ' Affifx.,  Alex.  'Affo'^  ; 
Hasim),  a  member  of  the  genealogy  of  Benjamin 
'  1  Chr.  vii.  12);  and  here  again  apparently  (as  the 
text  now  stands)  the  plural  nature  of  the  name  is 
recognized,  and  Hushim  is  stated  to  be  "  the  sons 
{Bene)  of  Aher."  (See  Bertheau  in  Exetj.  Hdbuch. 
ad  loc") 

3.  D^'-in,  and  WW  ;  'Claiv,  Alex,  'ntrifi ; 
Husim,  but  in  ver.  11  Mehusim,  by  inclusion  of 
the  Hebrew  particle).  The  name  occurs  again  in 
the  genealogy  of  Benjamin,  but  there  as  that  of 
one  of  the  two  wives  of  Shaharaim  (1  Chr.  viii.  8), 
and  the  mother  of  two  of  his  sons  (11).  In  this 
case  the  plural  significance  of  the  name  is  nut- 
alluded  to. 

HUSKS.  The  word  Keparia,  which  our  tians- 
lators  have  rendered  by  the  general  term  "  husks  " 
(Luke  xv.  16),  describes  really  the  fruit  of  a  parti- 
cular kind  of  tree,  viz.:  the  carob  or  Geratonia 
siliqua  of  botanists.  This  tree  is  very  commonly 
met  with  in  Syria  and  Egypt ;  it  produces  pods, 
shaped  like  a  horn  (whence  the  Greek  name),  varying 
in  length  from  6  to  10  inches,  and  about  a  ringer's 
breadth,  or  rather  more.  These  pods,  containing  a 
thick  pithy  substance,  very  sweet  to  the  taste,  were 
eaten  ;  and  afforded  food  not  only  for  cattle  (Mishn. 
Shabb.24:,  §2),  and  particularly  pigs  (Colum.  R.  B. 
vii.  9),  but  also  for  the  poorer  classes  of  the  popula- 
tion (Hor.  Ep.  ii.  1,  123  ;  Juv.  xi.  58).  The  same 
uses  of  it  prevail  in  the  present  day  ;  as  the  tree 
readily  sheds  its  fruit,  it  forms  a  convenient  mode  of 
feeding  pigs.  The  tree  is  also  named  St.  John's 
Bread,  from  a  tradition  that  the  Baptist  lived  upon 
its  fruit  ih  the  wilderness.  [W.  L.  B.] 

HUZ  ()')]},  i.  e.  Uz,  in  which  form  the  name  is 
uniformly  given  elsewhere  in  the  A.  V.:  Ov£,  Alex. 
"n| ;  fins),  the  eldest  son  of  Xahor  and  Milcah  (Gen . 
xxii.  21.     [Buz;  Uz.] 

HUZZAB  (2-Vn  ;  v  inroaraa^;  miles  cap- 
tivns),  according  to  the  general  opinion  of  the  Jews 
(Buxtorfs  Lexicon  ad  voc.  IS*),  was  the  queen  of 
Nineveh  at  the  time  when  Nahurti  delivered  his 
prophecy.  This  view  appeal's  to  be  followed  in 
our  version  (Nah.  ii.  7),  and  it  has  been  recently 
defended  by  Ewald.  Most  modern  expositors,  how- 
ever, incline  to  the  belief  that  Huzzab  here  is  not  a 
proper  name  at  all,  but  the  Hophal  of  the  verb 
3V3  (see  Buxtorf,  as  above;  Gesenius,  Lex.  p. 
9u:;),  and  this  is  allowed  as  possible  by  the  alter- 
native rendering  in  the  margin  of  our  English 
Bible — '•  that  which  was  established."  Still  there 
are  difficulties  in  the  way  of  such  an  understand^- 
infr  of  the  passage,  and  it  is  not  improbable  that 
after  all  Huzzab  may  really  be  a  proper  name. 
That  a  Ninevite  queen  otherwise  unknown  should 
suddenly  be  mentioned,  is  indeed  exceedingly  un- 
likely ;  for  we  cannot  grant  to  Ewald  that  "  the 
Ninevite  queens  were  well  nigh  as  powerful  as  the 
kings."  But  there  is  no  reason  why  the  word 
should  not  be  a  geograpliic  term — an  equivalent  or 
representative  of  Assyria,  which  the  prophet  in- 
tends to  threaten  with  captivity.  Huzzab  may 
mean  "  the  Zab  country,"  or  the  fertile  tract  east 
of  the  Tigris,  watered  by  the  upper  and  lower  Zab 
rivers   (Zab  Ala  and  Zab   Asfal),   the  A-diab-ene 


a  Gen.  xxxvi.  25,  adduced  by  Knobel  ad  loc.  as  a 
parallel  case  to  this,  is  hardly  so,  since  a  daughter  of 


Anah  is  given  as  well  as  his  son,  and  the  word  Bene 
covers  both. 


HYAENA 

of  the  geographers.  This  province — the  most  va- 
luable part  of  Assyria — might  well  stand  for  Assy- 
ria itself,  with  which  it  is  identified  by  Pliny 
(//".  A',  v.  12)  and  Amniianus  (xxiii.  6).  The  name 
Z'lli,  as  applied  to  the  rivers,  is  certainly  very 
ancient,  being  found  in  the  great  inscription  of 
Tiglath-Pileser  L,  which  belongs  to  the  middle  of 
the  twelfth  century  B.C.  [G.  R.] 

HYAENA.  Authorities  are  at  variance  as  to 
whether  the  term  tzabua  (JM3¥)  in  Jer.  xii.  9 
means  a  "hyaena,"  as  the  LXX.  has  it,  or  a 
'•  speckled  bird,"  as  in  the  A.  V.  The  etymolo- 
gical force  of  the  word  is  equally  adapted  to  either, 
tin?  hyaena  being  stre  iked.  The  only  other  instance 
in  which  it  occurs  is  as  a  proper  name,  Zehoim 
(1  Sam.  xiii.  18,  "the  valley  of  hyaenas,"  Aquila; 
Neh.  xi.  34).  The  Talmudical  writers  describe 
the  hyaena  by  no  less  than  four  names,  of  which 
tzdbu'a  is  one  (Lewysohn,  Zool.  §119).  The  opi- 
nions of  Bochart  (Hieroz.  ii.  lb.'i)  and  Gesenius 
(T/ws.  p.  1149)  are  in  favour  of  the  same  view; 
nor  could  any  room  for  doubt  remain,  were  it  not 
for  the  word  ait  (O^J? ;  A.  V.  "bird")  connected 
with  it,  which  in  all  other  passages  refers  to  a  bird. 
The  hyaena  was  common  in  ancient  as  in  modern 
Egypt,  and  is  constantly  depicted  on  monuments 
(Wilkinson,  i.  213,  225):  it  must  therefore  have 
been  well  known  to  the  Jews,  if  indeed  not  equally 
common  in  Palestine.*  The  sense  of  the  passage 
in  Jeremiah  implies  a  fierce  strong  beast,  not  far 
below  the  lion  in  the  parallel  passage  (v.  8):  the 
hyaena  fully  answers  to  this  description.  Though 
cowardly  in  his  nature,  he  is  very  savage  when  once 
he  attacks,  and  the  strength  of  his  jaws  is  such  that 
he  can  crunch  the  thigh-bone  of  an  ox  (Living- 
stone's Travels,  p.  GOO)-     [ZEBOIM.]      [\V.  I..  B.] 

HYDAS'PES  ('rSdffirrjs),  a  river  noticed  in 
Jud.  i.  ii,  in  connexion  with  the  Euphrates  and 
Tigris.  It  is  uncertain  what  river  is  referred  to; 
the  well-known  Hydaspes  of  India  (tie.'  Jelum  of 
tie'  Panja)  is  too  remote  to  accord  with  the  other 
localities  noticed  in  the  context.  We  may  perhaps 
identity  it  with  the  ( Ihoaspes  of  Susiana.  [\V.  L.  B.] 

HYMENAE'US  ("i>eVa<os),  the  name  of  a 
person  occurring  twice  in  the  correspondence  !>>•- 
tweeii  St.  Paul  and  Timothy;  the  first  tim<  classed 
with  Alexander,  and  with  him  "delivered  to  Satan, 
that  they  mighl  learn  not  to  blaspheme"  (1  Tim. 
i.  20  :  and  tic  second  time  classed  with  Philetus, 
and  with  him  charged  with  having  "erred  concern- 
ing the  truth,  saying  that  the  resurrection  is  pasl 
."  and  thereby  "  overthrown  the  faith  of 
some"  (2  Tjm.  ii.  17,  18).  These  latter  expres- 
sions, coupled  with  "the  shipwreck  of  faith  at- 
tributed to  Hymenaeus  in  the  context  of  the  former 
passage  (ver.  19),  surely  warrant  our  understand- 
'h  passages  of  the  same  person,  notwith- 
standing tin'  interval  between  the  dates  of  the 
two  letter-,.  When  the  first  was  written  he  had 
:i!  .ail-,    made   one    proselyte ;    I"  foi e   the   second 

was  penned  he  had  seduced  another:   and  it' mi,  the 

ouly  points  further  t"  be  considered  are,  th 

attributed  to  him,  and  the  sentence  imposed  upon 
him. 

I.  The  error  attributed  to  him  was  one  that  had 
been  in  part  appropriated  from  others,  and  has  fre- 


HYMENAEUS 


843 


■  Prof.   Stanley  records     8.  $  V.   p.  162  »Ol 
the   only   wild    animal    he    saw    in    Palestine    Was    a 

hyaena. 


quently  been  revived  since  with  additions.  What 
initiation  was  to  the  Pythagoreans,  wisdom  to  the 
Stoics,  science  to  the  followers  of  Plato,  contempla- 
tion to  the  Peripatetics,  that  "  knowledge  "  (yvai- 
<ns)  was  to  tin-  Gnostics.  As  there  were  Likewise 
in  the  Greek  schools  those  who  looked  forward  to  a 
complete  restoration  of  all  things  (diroKaTdaracris, 
v.  Heyne  ad  Virg.  J.'il.  iv.  5,  comp.  A<u.  vi.  745)  j 
so  there  was  "a  regeneration  "  (Tit.  iii.  5  ;  Matt. 
xix.'JS),  "a  new  creation"  (2  Cor.  v.  17,  see  Al- 
ford  ad  loc. ;  Rev.  xxi.  1),  "  a  kingdom  of  heaven 
and  of  Messiah  or  Christ "  (Matt.  xiii. ;  Rev.  vii.) 
— and  herein  popular  belief  among  the  Jews  coin- 
cided— unequivocally  propounded  in  the  X.  T. ;  but 
here  with  this  remarkable  difference,  namely,  that, 
in  a  great  measure,  it  was  present  as  well  as  future 
— the  same  thing  in  germ  that  was  to  be  had  in 
perfection  eventually.  "The  kingdom  of  God  is 
within  you,"  said  our  Lord  (Luke  xvii.  21).  "He 
that  is  spiritual  judgeth  all  things,"  stud  St.  Paul 
(1  Cor.  ii.  15).  "He  that  is  born  of  God  cannot 
sin,"  said  St.  John  (1  Ep.  iii.  9).  There  are  like- 
wise two  deaths  and  two  resurrections  spoken  of  in 
the  X.  T. ;  the  first  of  each  sort,  that  of  the  soul 
to  and  from  sin  (John  iii.  3-8),  "  the  hour  which 
now  is"  (ibid.  v.  24,  25,  on  which  see  Aug.  De 
Civ.  Dei,  xx.  6) ;  the  second,  that  of  the  body  to  and 
from  corruption  (1  Cor.  xv.  36-44 ;  also  John  v.  28, 
29),  which  last  is  prospective.  Now  as  the  doc- 
trine of  the  resurrection  of  the  body  was  found  to 
involve  immense  difficulties  even  in  those  early  days 
( Acts  xvii.  32  ;  1  Cor.  xv.  35 :  how  keenly  they 
were  pressed  may  be  seen  in  St.  Aug.  De  Civ.  Dei, 
xxii.  1 2,  et  seq.) ;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  there  was 
so  great  a  predisposition  in  the  then  current  philo- 
sophy (not  even  extinct  now)  to  magnify  the  excel- 
lence of  the  soul  above  that  of  its  earthly  tabernacle, 
it  was  at  once  the  easier  and  more  attractive  course 
to  insist  upon  and  argue  from  the  force  of  those 
passages  of  Holy  Scripture  which  enlarge  upon  the 
glories  of  the  spiritual  life  that  now  is,  under  Christ, 
and  to  pass  over  or  explain  away  allcgoricallv  all 
that  refers  to  a  future  state  in  connexion  with  the 
resurrection  of  the  body.  In  this  manner  we  may 
derive  the  first  errors  of  the  Gnostics,  of  whom  Hy- 
menaeus was  one  of  the  earliest.  They  were  on  the 
spread  when  St.  John  wrote  ;  and  his  grand-disciple, 
St.  [renaeus,  compiled  a  volaminous  work  against 
them  {Adv.  Bitter.").  A  good  account  of  their  full 
development  is  given  by  Gieseler,  K.  IT.,  Per.  I. 
Div.  I.  §44,  et  seq. 

II.  As  regards  the  sentence  passed  upon  him — 
It  has  been  asserted  by  some  writers  of  eminence 
(  see  <  'urn.  a  l.apide  ad  1  ( 'or.  v.  5  |,  that  the  ••  deliv- 
ering to  Satan"  is  a  mere  synonym  for  ecclesi- 
astical excommunication.  Such  can  hardly  be  the 
ca  •  .  The  Apostle,  possessed  niaiiv  extraordinary 
prerogatives,  which  none  ha\  e  since  at  rogated.    K\  en 

the  title  which  they  bore  has  1 n    it  apart  to  them 

ever  since.     The  shaking  oil'  the  dust  of  their  feet 
ould  not  ie,  i  h  e  them  i  St.  Matt. 

\.   1  )  i.  even  though  the  same  injunction  was  after- 

iven  to  the  Seventy  (St.  Luke  x.  11),  and 

which  St.  Paid  found  it  ni  I  I    i'j"  D  tw  id 

ill    tie'    co, use   of   his    ministry     Acts  xiii.  .".1,   and 

.win  £)  has  never  been  a  prada:  cince  with  Chris- 
tian ministers.     "  Anathema,"  Bays  Bingham,  "  i~ 

a  word  that  occurs  frequently  in  the  ancient  canons" 

n  i.  -',  16),  but  the  form  "  Anathi  m 
ranatha  "  is  one  that  none  have  ever  ventured  upon 
since  St.  Paul    i  1  Cor.    svi.  '-"-';.      As  the  Apostles 
healed  all  manner  of  bodil j  infirmities,  so  the)  seem 

3  I   2  ' 


844 


HYMN 


to  have  possessed  and  exercised  the  same  power  in 
inflicting  them, — a  power  far  too  perilous  to  be 
continued  when  the  manifold  exigencies  of  the  Apos- 
tolical age  had  passed  away.  Ananias  and  Sapphira 
both  fell  down  dead  at  the  rebuke  of  St.  Peter  (Acts 
v.  5  and  10)  ;  two  words  from  the  same  lips, 
"  Tabitha,  arise,"  sufficed  to  raise  Dorcas  from  the 
dead  (ibid.  ix.  40).  St.  Paul's  first  act  in  entering 
upon  his  ministry  was  to  strike  Elymas  the  sorcerer 
with  blindness,  his  own  sight  having  been  restored 
to  him  through  the  medium  of  a  disciple  (ibid, 
ix.  17,  and  xiii.  11)  ;  while  soon  afterwards  we  read 
of  his  healing  the  cripple  of  Lystra  (ibid.  xiv.  8). 
Even  apart  from  actual  intervention  by  the  Apostles, 
bodily  visitations  are  spoken  of  in  the  case  of  those 
who  approached  the  Lord's  Supper  unworthily, 
when  as  yet  no  discipline  had  been  established  : 
"  For  this  cause  many  are  weak  and  sickly  among 
you,  and  a  good  number  (iKavoi,  in  the  former  case 
it  is  iroXKoi)  sleep"  (1  Cor.  xi.  30). 

On  the  other  hand  Satan  was  held  to  be  the 
instrument  or  executioner  of  all  these  visitations. 
Such  is  the  character  assigned  to  him  in  the  book 
of  Job  (i.  6-12,  ii.  1-7).  Similar  agencies  are  de- 
scribed 1  K.  xxii.  19-22,  and  1  Chr.  xxi.  1.  In 
Ps.  lxxviii.  49,  such  are  the  causes  to  which  the 
plagues  of  Egypt  are  assigned.  Even  our  Lord 
submitted  to  be  assailed  by  him  more  than  once 
(Matt.  iv.  1-10  :  Luke  iv.  13  says,  "  departed 
from  Him  for  a  season");  and  "a  messenger  of 
Satan  was  sent  to  buffet"  the  very  Apostle  whose 
act  of  delivering  another  to  the  same  power  is  now 
under  discussion.  At  the  same  time  large  powers 
over  the  world  of  spirits  were  authoritatively  con- 
veyed by  our  Lord  to  His  immediate  followers  (to 
the  Twelve,  Luke  ix.  1 ;  to  the  Seventy,  as  the 
results  showed,  ibid.  x.  17-20). 

It  only  remains  to  notice  five  particulars  connected 
with  its  exercise,  which  the  Apostle  supplies  himself. 
1.  That  it  was  no  mere  prayer,  but  a  solemn  autho- 
ritative sentence,  pronounced  in  the  name  and  power 
of  Jesus  Christ  (1  Cor.  v.  3-5).  2.  That  it  was 
never  exercised  upon  any  without  the  Church : 
"  them  that  are  without  God  judgeth"  (ibid.  v.  13), 
he  says  in  express  terms.  3.  That  it  was  "  for  the 
destruction  of  the  flesh,"  i.  e.  some  bodily  visita- 
tion. 4.  That  it  was  for  the  improvement  of  the 
offender ;  that  "  his  spirit  might  be  saved  in  the 
day  of  the  Lord  Jesus"  (ibid.  v.  5);  and  that  "he 
might  learn  not  to  blaspheme"  while  upon  earth 
(1  Tim.  i.  20).  5.  That  the  Apostle  could  in  a 
given  case  empower  others  to  pass  such  sentence 
in  his  absence  (1  Cor.  v.  3,  4). 

Thus,  while  the  "  delivering  to  Satan "  may 
resemble  ecclesiastical  excommunication  in  some 
respects,  it  has  its  own  characteristics  likewise, 
which  show  plainly  that  one  is  not  to  be  con- 
founded or  placed  on  the  same  level  with  the  other. 
Nor  again  does  St.  Paul  himself  deliver  to  Satan 
all  those  in  whose  company  he  bids  his  converts 
"  not  even  to  eat"  (1  Cor.  v.  11).  See  an  able 
review  of  the  whole  subject  by  Bingham,  Antiq. 
vi.  2,  15.  ^[E.  S.  Ff.] 

HYMN.  This  word  is  not  used  in  the  English 
version  of  the  O.  T.,  and  only  twice  in  the  N.  T. 
(Eph.  v.  19  ;  Col.  iii.  16)  ;  though  in  the  original  of 
the  latter  the  derivative  verb  occurs  in  three  places 
(Matt.  xxvi.  30  ;  comp.  Mark  xiv.  26  ;  Acts  xvi. 
25;  Heb.  ii.  12).  The  LXX.,  however,  employ  it 
freely  in  translating  the  Heb.  names  for  almost 
every  kind  of  poetical  composition  (Sehleusu.  Lex. 
lifivos).     In  fact  the  word  does  not  seem  to  have 


HYMN 

had  for  the  LXX.  any  very  special  meaning ;  and 
they  called  the  Heb.  book  of  Tehillim  the  book  of 
Psalms,  not  of  Hymns.  Accordingly  the  word 
psalm  had  for  the  later  Jews  a  definite  meaning, 
while  the  word  hymn  was  more  or  less  vague  in  its 
application,  and  capable  of  being  used  as  occasion 
should  arise.  If  a  new  poetical  form  or  idea  should 
be  produced,  the  name  of  hymn,  not  being  em- 
barrassed by  a  previous  determination,  was  ready 
to  associate  itself  with  the  fresh  thought  of  another 
literature.  And  this  seems  to  have  been  actually 
the  case. 

Among  Christians  the  Hymn  has  always  been 
something  different  from  the  Psalm ;  a  different 
conception  in  thought,  a  different  type  in  com- 
position. There  is  some  dispute  about  the  hymn 
sung  by  our  Lord  and  his  Apostles  on  the  occasion 
of  the  Last  Supper  ;  but  even  supposing  it  to  have 
been  the  Hallcl,  or  Paschal  Hymn,  consisting  of. 
Pss.  cxiii.-cxviii.,  it  is  obvious  that  the  word  hymn 
is  in  this  case  applied  not  to  an  individual  psalm, 
but  to  a  number  of  psalms  chanted  successively, 
and  altogether  forming  a  kind  of  devotional  exercise 
which  is  not  unaptly  called  a  hymn.  The  prayer 
in  Acts  iv.  24-30  is  not  a  hymn,  unless  we  allow 
non-metrical  as  well  as  metrical  hymns.  It  may 
have  been  a  hymn  as  it  was  originally  altered  ;  but 
we  can  only  judge  by  the  Greek  translation,  and 
this  is  without  metre,  and  therefore  not  properly  a 
hymn.  In  the  jail  at  Philippi,  Paul  and  Silas 
"sang  hymns"  (A.  V.  "praises")  unto  God,  and 
so  loud  was  their  song  that  their  fellow-prisoners 
heard  them.  This  must  have  been  what  we  mean 
by  singing,  and  not  merely  recitation.  It  was  in 
fact  a  veritable  singing  of  hymns.  And  it  is  re- 
markable that  the  noun  hymn  is  only  used  in 
reference  to  the  services  of  the  Greeks,  and  in  the 
same  passages  is  clearly  distinguished  from  the 
psalm  (Eph.  v.  19,  Col.  iii.  10),  "  psalms,  and 
hymns,  and  spiritual  songs." 

It  is  probable  that  no  Greek  version  of  the 
Psalms,  even  supposing  it  to  be  accommodated  to 
the  Greek  metres,  would  take  root  in  the  affections 
of  the  Gentile  converts.  It  was  not  only  a  question 
of  metre,  it  was  a  question  of  tunc  ;  and  Greek 
tunes  required  Greek  hymns.  So  it  was  in  Syria. 
Richer  in  tunes  than  Greece,  for  Greece  had  but 
eight,  while  Syria  had  275  (Benedict.  Pref.  vol.  v. 
Op.  Eph.  Syr.),  the  Syrian  hymnographers  revelled 
in  the  varied  luxury  of  their  native  music;  and 
the  result  was  that  splendid  development  of  the 
Hymn,  as  moulded  by  the  genius  of  Bardesanes, 
Harmonius,  and  Ephrem  Syrus.  In  Greece  the 
eight  tunes  which  seem  to  have  satisfied  the  exi- 
gencies of  church-music  were  probably  accommo- 
dated to  fixed  metres,  each  metre  being  wedded  to 
a  particular  tune ;  an  arrangement  to  which  we 
can  observe  a  tendency  in  the  Directions  about 
tunes  and  measures  at  the  end  of  our  English 
metrical  version  of  the  Psalms.  This  is  also  the 
case  in  the  German  hymnology,  where  certain  an- 
cient tunes  are  recognised  as  models  for  the  metres 
of  later  compositions,  and  their  names  are  always 
prefixed  to  the  hymns  in  common  use. 

It  is  worth  while  inquiring  what  profane  models 
the  Greek  hymnographers  chose  to  work  after.  In 
the  old  religion  of  Greece  the  word  hymn  had 
already  acquired  a  sacred  and  liturgical  meaning, 
which  could  not  fail  to  suggest  its  application  to 
the  productions  of  the  Christian  muse.  So  much 
for  the  name.  The  special  forms  of  the  Greek 
hymn   were  various.      The   Homeric    and    Orphic 


HYMN 

hymns  were  written  in  the  epic  style,  and  in 
hexameter  verse.  Their  metre  was  not  adapted  for 
singing  ;  and  therefore,  though  they  may  have  been 
recited,  it  is  not  likely  that  they  were  sung  at  the 
celebration  of  the  mysteries.  We  turn  to  the  Pin- 
daric hymns,  and  here  we  rind  a  sufficient  variety 
of  metre,  and  a  definite  relation  to  music.  These 
hymns  were  sung  to  the  accompaniment  of  the 
lyre;  and  it  is  very  likely  that  they  engaged  the  at- 
tention of  the  early  hymn-writers.  The  dithyramb, 
with  its  development  into  the  dramatic  chorus, 
was  sufficiently  connected  with  musical  traditions 
to  make  its  form  a  fitting  vehicle  for  Christian 
poetry  ;  and  there  certainly  is  a  dithyrambic  savour 
about  the  earliest  known  Christian  hymn,  as  it 
appears  in  Clem.  Ales.  pp.  312,  313,  ed.  Potter. 

The  first  impulse  of  Christian  devotion  was  to 
run  into  the  moulds  ordinarily  used  by  the  wor- 
shippers of  the  old  religion.  This  was  more  than 
an  impulse,  it  was  a  necessity,  ami  a  twofold  neces- 
sity. The  new  spirit  was  strong ;  but  it  had  two 
limitations  :  the  difficulty  of  conceiving  a  new 
musico-poetical  literature;  and  the  quality  so  pe- 
culiar to  devotional  music:,  of  lingering  in  the  heart 
after  the  head  has  been  convinced  and  the  belief 
changed.  The  old  tunes  would  be  a  real  necessity 
to  the  new  life ;  and  the  exile  from  his  ancient 
faith  would  delight  to  hem-  on  the  foreign  soil  of  a 
new  religion  the  familiar  melodies  of  home.  Dean 
Trench  has  indeed  laboured  to  show  that  the  re- 
verse was  the  case,  and  that  the  early  Christian 
shrank  with  horror  from  the  sweet,  but  polluted, 
enchantments  of  his  unbelieving  state.  We  can 
only  assent  to  this  in  so  far  as  we  allow  it  to  be 
tin'  second  phase  in  the  history  of  hymns.  When 
old  traditions  died  away,  and  the  Christian  acquired 
not  only  a  new  belief,  but  a  new  social  humanity, 
it  was  possible,  and  it  was  desirable  too,  to  break 
for  ever  the  attenuated  thread  that  bound  him  to 
the  ancient  world.  And  so  it  was  broken  ;  and  the 
trochaic  and  iambic  metres,  unassociated  as  they 
were  with  heathen  worship,  Chough  largely  asso- 
ciated with  the  heathen  drama,  obtained  an  ascend- 
ant iii  the  Christian  church.  In  1  Cor.  xiv.  26 
allusion  is  made  to  improvised  hymns,  which  being 
the  outburst  of  a  passionate  emotion  woulil  pro- 
liahlv  assume  the  dithyrambic  form.  Put  attempts 
have  been  made  to  detect  fragments  of  ancient 
hymns  conformed  to  more  obvious  metres  in  Eph. 
v.  14;  ,1am.  i.  17  ;  Rev.  i.  8  ft".,  xv.  '■'>.  These  pre- 
tended fragments, however, may  with  much  greater 
likelihood  he  referred  to  tie-  swing  of  a  prose  com- 
position unconsciously  culminating  into  metre,  it 
was  in  the  Latin  church  that  the  trochaic  and 
iambic  metres  became  most  deeply  rooted,  and  ac- 
quired the  greatesl  depth  of  tone  and  grace  of  finish. 
As  an  exponent  of  Christian  feeling  they  soon, super- 
seded the  accentual  hexameters;  they  were  used 
mnemonically  against  the  heathen  and  the  heretics 
by  Commodianus  and  Augustine.  The  introduction 
of  hymns  into  tie'  Latin  church  is  commonly  re- 
ferred to  Ambrose.  Put  it  is  impossible  t..  con- 
ceive that  the  West  should  have  been  so  far  behind 
the  East:  similar  necessities  must  have  produced 
similar  results  ;  and  it  is  more  likely  that  the  tra- 
dition is  due  to  the  very  marked  prominence  of 
Ambrose  as  the  greatest  of  all  the  Latin  h\muo- 
graphers. 

The  trochaic  and  iambic  metres,  thus  impressed 
into  the  service  of  the  church,  have  continued  to 
hold  their  ground,  and  arc  in   fact   the   T's,  S.M. 


HYSSOP 


845 


CM.  and  L.M.  of  our  modem  hymns ;  many  of 
which  are  translations,  or  at  any  rate  imitations, 
of  Latin  originals.  These  metres  were  peculiarly 
adapted  to  the  grave  and  sombre  spirit  of  Latin 
Christianity.  Less  ecstatic  than  the  varied  chorus 
of  the  Greek  church,  they  did  not  soar  upon  the 
pinion  of  a  lofty  praise,  so  much  as  they  drooped 
and  sank  into  the  depths  of  a  great  sorrow.  They 
were  subjective  rather  than  objective ;  they  ap- 
pealed to  the  heart  more  than  to  the  understanding  ; 
and  if  they  contained  less  theology,  they  were  fuller 
of  a  rich  and  Christian  humanity.  (Daniel's  The- 
saurus Hymnologicus,  Halis,  et  Lipsiae,  1841-1855  ; 
Lateinischc  Hymnen,  &c,  by  F.  G.  Mone  ;  Gesangc 
Christlicher  Vorzeit,  by  C.  Fortlage,  Berlin,  1844; 
Sacred  Latin  Poetry,  by  K.  C.  Trench ;  Ephrem 
Syrus,  by  Dr.  Purgess ;   Halm's  Bardesanes.) 

[T.  E.  P.] 

HYSSOP  d'ttN,  ez6b;  tfcrcranros).  Perhaps 
no  plant  mentioned  in  the  Scriptures  has  given  rise 
to  greater  differences  of  opinion  than  this.  The 
question  of  the  identification  of  the  ezob  of  the 
Hebrews  with  any  plant  known  to  modern  botanists 
was  thought  by  Casaubon  "  adco  difficilis  ad  ex- 
plicandum,  xd  videatur  Esias  expectandus,  qui  certi 
aliquid  nos  doceat."  Had  the  botanical  works  of 
Solomon  survived  they  might  have  thrown  some 
light  upon  it.  The  chief  difficulty  arises  from  the 
fact  that  in  the  LXX.  the  Greek  vaixanros  is  the 
uniform  rendering  of  the  Hebrew  ezob,  and  that 
this  rendering  is  endorsed  by  the  Apostle  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebiews  (ix.  19,  21),  when  speaking 
of  the  ceremonial  observances  of  the  Levitical  law. 
Whether,  therefore,  the  LXX.  made  use  of  the 
Greek  vcrffanros  as  the  word  most  nearly  resembling 
the  Hebrew  in  sound,  as  Stanley  suggests  (S.  ^  P. 
21  note),  or  as  the  true  representative  of  the  plant 
indicated  by  the  latter,  is  a  point  which,  in  all 
probability,  will  never  be  decided.  Botanists  differ 
widely  even  with  regard  to  the  identification  of  the 
vaacoiros  of  Dioscorides.  The  name  has  been  given 
to  the  Sutureia  Graeca  and  the  <$'.  Juliana,  to 
neither  of  which  it  is  appropriate,  and  the  hyssop 
of  Italy  and  South  France  is  not  met  with  in 
Greece,  Syria,  or  Egypt.  Daubeny  (Zed.  on  Pom. 
Husbandry,  p.  313),  following  Sibthorpe,  identities 
the  mountain-hyssop  with  the  Thymbra  spicata, 
but  this  conjecture  is  disapproved  of  by  Kuhn 
(Comm.  in  IHosc.  iii.  27),  wdio  in  the  same  passage 
gives  it  as  his  opinion  that  the  Hebrews  used  the 
Origanum  Aegyptiacum  in  Egypt,  the  O.Syriacum 
in  Palestine,  and  that  the  hyssop  of  Dioscorides 
was  the  O.  Smyrnaeum.  The  Greek  botanist  de- 
scribes two  kinds  of  hyssop,  ofieivrj  and  /iTjttiji/ttJ, 
and  gives  ir«traA.e'yu  as  the  Egyptian  equivalent. 
The  Talmudists  make  the  same  distinction  between 
the  wild  hyssop  and  the  garden -plant  used  tin-  food. 

The  ezob  was  used  to  sprinkle  the  dooi posts  of 

the    Israelites    in    Egypt    with    the    1,1 1    of   the 

paschal  lamb  (Ex.  xii.  22);  it  was  employed  in 
the  purification  of  lepers  and  leprous  houses  Lev. 
xiv.  4,  51),  and  in  the  sacrifice  of  the  red 
I  Num.  xix.  6).  In  consequence  of  its  detergent 
qualities,  or  from  its  being  associated  with  the 
purificatory  services,  the  Psalmist  makes  use  of  the 
expression,  "  purge  me  w  itfa  itib  "  I  Ps.  li.  7).  It 
is  described  in  1  K.  i\ .  33  as  growing  on  or  near 
walls.  In  John  xix.  2'.'  the  phrase  van-wiry  irept- 
devrts  corresponds  to  -ntptdeU  KaKany  in  Matt. 
xxvii.  4s  and  Mark  w.  36.     If  therefore  Ka\dfiw 


846 


HYSSOP 


be  the  equivalent  of  vnawizy,  the  latter  must  be  a 
plant  capable  of  producing  a  stick  three  or  four  feet 
in  length. 

Five  kinds  of  hyssop  are  mentioned  in  the  Talmud. 
One  is  called  31TX  simply,  without  any  epithet : 
the  others  are  distinguished  as  Greek,  Roman,  wild 
hyssop,  and  hyssop  of  Cochali  (Mishna,  Negaim,  xiv. 
6).  Of  these  the  four  last  mentioned  were  profane, 
that  is,  not  to  be  employed  in  purifications  i  Mishna, 
Parah,  xi.  7).  Maimonides  (de  Vaeca  Rufa,  iii.  '_') 
says  that  the  hyssop  mentioned  in  the  law  is  that 
which  was  used  as  a  condiment.  According  to 
Porphyry  (De  Abstin.  iv.  7),  the  Egyptian  priests 
on  certain  occasions  ate  their  bread  mixed  with 
hyssop;  and  the  zaatar,  or  wild  marjoram,  with 
which  it  has  been  identified,  is  often  an  ingredient 
in  a  mixture  called  dukkah,  which  is  to  this  day 
used  as  food  by  the  poorer  classes  in  Egypt  (Lane, 
Mod.  Eg.  i.  200).  It  is  not  improbable,  therefore, 
that  this  may  have  been  the  hyssop  of  Maimonides, 
who  wrote  in  Egypt  ;  more  especially  as  R.  D. 
Kimchi  {Lex,  s.  v.),  who  reckons  seven  different 
kinds,  gives  as  the  equivalent,  the  Arabic  oj^> 

zaatar,  origanum,  or  marjoram,  and  the  German 
Dosten  or  Wohlgemuth  (Rosenm.  Handb.).  With 
this  agrees  the  Tanchum  Hieros.  MS.  quoted  by 
Gesenius.  So  in  the  Judaeo-Spanish  version,  Ex. 
xii.  22  is  translated  "  y  tomaredes  manojo  de 
origano."  But  Dioscorides  makes  a  distinction  be- 
tween origanum  and  hyssop  when  he  describes  the 
leaf  of  a  species  of  the  former  as  resembling  the 
latter  (cf.  Plin.  xx.  67),  though  it  is  evident  that 
he,  as  well  as  the  Talmudists,  regarded  them  as 
belonging  to  the  same  family.     In  the  Syriac  of 

1  K.  iv.  33  hyssop  is  rendered  by  |l2Ql^,  tyfo, 
"  houseleek,"  although  in  other  passages  it  is  repre- 
sented by  JlSO/,  zufu,  which  the  Arabic  translation 
follows  in  Ps.  li.  9  and  Heb.  ix.  19,  while  in  the 
Pentateuch  it  has  zaatar  for  the  same.  Patrick  (on 
1  K.  iv.  33)  was  of  opinion  that  ezob  is  the  same 
with  the  Ethiopic  azub,  which  represents  the  hyssop 
of  Ps.  li.  9,  as  well  as  r/SuoVjuoy,  or  mint,  in  Matt, 
xxiii.  23. 

Bochart  decides  in  favour  of  marjoram,  or  some 
plant  like  it  (Hieroz.  i.  b.  2,  c.  50),  and  to  this 
conclusion,  it  must  be  admitted,  all  ancient  tra- 
dition points.  The  monks  on  Jebel  Musa  give 
the  name  of  hyssop  to  a  fragrant  plant  called 
ja'deh,  which  grows  in  great  quantities  on  that 
mountain  (Robinson,  Bibl.  Res.  i.  157).  Celsius 
(Hierobot.  i.  423),  after  enumerating  eighteen 
different  plants,  thyme,  southernwood,  rosemary, 
French  lavender,  wall  rue,  and  the  maidenhair  fern 
among  others,  which  have  been  severally  identified 
with  the  hyssop  of  Scripture,  concludes  that  we 
have  no  alternative  but  to  accept  the  Hyssop  us 
officinalis,  "  nisi  velirous  apostolum  corrigere  qui 
to  31TX  vcra-coTTov  reddit  Heb.  ix.  19."  He  avoids 
the  difficulty  in  John  xix.  29  by  supposing  that  a 
sponge  filled  with  vinegar  was  wrapped  round  a 
bunch  of  hyssop,  and  that  the  two  were  then 
fastened  to  the  end  of  a  stick.  Dr.  Kitto  conceived 
tliat  he  had  found  the  peculiarities  of  the  Hebrew 
ezob  in  the  Phytolacca  decandra,  a  native  of  Ame- 
rica. Tremeilius  and  Ben  Zeb  render  it  by  "  moss." 
It  has  been  reserved  for  the  ingenuity  of  a  German 
to  trace   a   connexion  between  Aesop,   the   Greek 


HYSSOP 

fabulist,  and  the  ezob  of  1   K.  iv.  33  (Hitzig,  Die 
Spruche  Salomo's,  Einl.  §2). 

An  elaborate  and  interesting  paper  by  the  late 
Dr.  J.  Forbes  Royle,  On  the  Hyssop  of  Scripture, 
in  the  Journ.  of  the  Roy.  As.  Soc.  viii.  19$-212, 
goes  far  to  throw  light  upon  this  difficult  question. 
Dr.  R.,  after  a  careful  investigation  of  the  subject, 
arrived  at  the  conclusion  that  the  hyssop  is  no 
other  than  the  caper- plant .  or  capparis  spinosa  of 
Linnaeus.  The  Arabic  name  of  this  plant,  asuf, 
by  which  it  is  sometimes,  though  not  commonly, 
described,  bears  considerable  resemblance  to  the 
Hebrew.  It  is  found  in  Lower  Egypt  (Forskal, 
Flor.  Eg.-Arab. ;  Plin.  xiii.  44)."  Buickhardt 
(  Tram,  in  Syr.  536)  mentions  the  aszef  as  a  tree 
of  frequent  occurrence  in  the  valleys  of  the  penin- 
sula of  Sinai,  "  the  bright  green  creeper  which 
climbs  out  of  the  fissures  of  the  rocks  "  (Stanley, 
S.  <Sf  P.  21,  &c),  and  produces  a  fruit  of  the  size 
of  a  walnut,  called  by  the  Arabs  Felfel  Jibbcl,  or 
mountain-pepper  (Shaw,  Spec.  Phytogr.  Afr.  39). 
Dr.  R.  thought  this  to  be  undoubtedly  a  species 
of  capparis,  and  probably  the  caper-plant.  The 
capparis  spinosa  was  found  by  M.  Bove  (Rel.  d'un 
Voy.  Botan.  en  Eg.,  c|e.)  in  the  desert  of  Sinai,  at 
Gaza,  and  at  Jerusalem.  Lynch  saw  it  in  a  ravine 
near  the  convent  of  Mar  Saba  (Exped.  388).  It 
is  thus  met  with  in  all  the  localities  where  the 
ezob  is  mentioned  in  the  Bible.  With  regard  to  its 
habitat,  it  grows  in  dry  and  rocky  places  and  on 
walls:  "  quippe  quum  capparis  quoque  seratur 
siccis  maxime"  (Plin.  xix.  48).  De  Candolle  de- 
scribes it  as  found  "  in  muris  et  rupestribus."  The 
caper-plant  was  believed  to  be  possessed  of  detergent 
qualities.  According  to  Pliny  (xx.  59)  the  root 
was  applied  to  the  cure  of  a  disease  similar  to  the 
leprosy.  Lamarck  (Enc.  Botan.  art.  Caprier  \ 
says,  "  les  capriers  .  .  .  sont  regardes  comme  .  .  . 
antiscoibutiques."  Finally,  the  caper-plant  is  ca- 
pable of  producing  a  stick  three  or  four  feet  in 
length.  Pliny  (xiii.  44)  describes  it  in  Egypt  as 
"  firmioris  ligni  frutex,"  and  to  this  property  Dr. 
Royle  attaches  great  importance,  identifying  as  he 
does  the  vaawncv  of  John  xix.  29  with  the  KaAa./j.w 
of  Matthew  and  Mark.  He  thus  concludes  :  "  A 
combination  of  circumstances,  and  some  of  them 
apparently  too  improbable  to  be  united  in  one 
plant,  I  cannot  believe  to  be  accidental,  and  have 
therefore  considered  myself  entitled  to  infer,  what 
I  hope  I  have  succeeded  in  proving  to  the  satis- 
faction of  others,  that  the  caper-plant  is  the  hyssop 
of  Scripture."  Whether  his  conclusion  is  sound 
or  not,  his  investigations  are  well  worthy  of  atten- 
tion ;  but  it  must  be  acknowledged  that,  setting 
aside  the  passage  in  John  xix.,  which  may  possibly 
admit  of  another  solution,  there  seems  no  reason 
for  supposing  that  the  properties  of  the  ezob  of  the 
Hebrews  may  not  be  found  in  some  one  of  the 
plants  with  which  the  tradition  of  centuries  has 
identified  it.  That  it  may  have  been  possessed  of 
some  detergent  qualities  which  led  to  its  significant 
employment  in  the  purificatory  service  is  possible  ; 
but  it  does  not  appear  from  the  narrative  in 
Leviticus  that  its  use  was  such,  as  to  call  into 
action  any  medicinal  properties  by  which  it  might 
have  been  characterised.  In  the  present  state  of 
the  evidence,  therefore,  there  does  not  seem  suffi- 
cient reason  for  departing  from  the  old  inter- 
pretation, which  identified  the  Greek  vaaunros  with 
the  Hebrew  31TN.  [W.  A.  \\\] 


IBHAIt 


IB'HAlt  ("iri3)  ;  'E0edp,  Efiadp,  Badp,  Alex. 
'lefidp,  'lefiadp  ;  Syr.  Jucobor ;  Jcbahar,  Jebaar), 
one  of  the  sons  of  David,  mentioned  in  the  lists  next 
utter  Solomon  and  before  Elishua  (2  Sam.  v.  15; 
t  Chr.  iii.  0,  xiv.  5).  Ibhar  was  burn  in  Jerusalem, 
and  from  the  second  of  these  passages  it  appears  that 
he  was  the  son  of  a  wife  and  not  of  a  concubine.  He 
never  comes  forward  in  the  history  in  person,  nor 
are  there  any  traditions  concerning  him.  For  the 
Genealogy  of  David's  family  see  David. 

IB'LEAM  (DJ&T  ;  'IfPAadp,  Alex.  BaXadfj.  ; 
Jeblaam),  a  city  of  Manasseh,  with  villages  or 
towns  (Heb.  "daughters "J  dependent  on  it  (Judg. 
i.  27).  Though  belonging  to  Manasseh,  it  appears 
not  to  have  lain  within  the  limits  allotted  to  that 
tribe,  but  to  have  been  situated  in  the  territory  of 
cither  Isaaehar  or  Asher  (Josh.  xvii.  11).  It  is  not 
said  which  of  the  two,  though  there  is  no  doubt 
from  other  indications  that  it  was  the  former.  The 
ascent  of  (in:,  the  spot  at  which  Ahaziah  received 
his  death  wound  from  the  soldiers  of  Jehu,  was 
"at  (3)  Ibleam"  (2  K.  ix.  27),  somewhere  near  the 
present  Jenin,  probably  to  the  north  of  it,  about 
where  the  village  Jelama  now  stands. 

In  the  list  of  cities  given  out  of  Manasseh  to 
the  Kohathite  Levites  (1  Chr.  vi.  70),  Bileam  is 
mentioned,  answering  to  Gathrimmon  in  the  list 
of  Josh.  xxi.  Bileam  is  probably  a  mere  alteration 
of  Ibleam  (comp.  the  form  given  in  the  Alex.  LXX. 
above),  though  this  is  not  certain.  [G.] 

IBNEI'AH  (iTOT  ;  'Ufxvad,  Alex.  'Ufrvad  ; 
Jobania),  son  of  Jeroham,  a  Benjamite,  who  was  a 

chief  man  in  the  tribe  apparently  at  the  time  of  the 
first  settlement  in  Jerusalem  (1  Chr.  ix.  8). 

IBNI'JAH  {TV12.)  ;  'Uftvcit,  Alex.'  Ufiauaai; 
Tebanid),  a  Benjamite  (1  Chi-,  ix.  8). 

IB'EI  0"PJ?  ;  'A/3ai',  Alex.  'fl/88(;  Hcbri),  a 
Merarite  Levite  of  the  family  of  Jaaziah  (1  Chr. 
xxi  v.  27),  in  the  time  of  king  David,  concerned  in 
the  service  of  the  bouse  of  Jehovah. 

The  word  is  precisely  the  same  as  that  elsewhere 
rendered  in  the  \.  V.  ''Hebrew." 

IB'ZAN  (|¥3N  ;  'hfrzicradv,  Alex.  'Katfiuv ; 
Joseph.  ' k\\idwi]s ;  Abesari),  a  native  of  Bethlehem, 
who  judged  Israel  for  seven  yean  after  Jephthah 

(Judg.  xii.  S,  III).  lie  bad  30  sons  and  30 
daughters,   and   took   home   30  wives  for  his  sons, 

and   sent  out   his   daughters    to   as   many  husbands 

abroad.  He  was  buried  at  Bethlehem.  From  the 
non-addition  of  "  Ephratah,"  or  "  Judah,"  after 
Bethlehem,  and  from  Ibzan  having  been  succeeded 
by  a  Zebulouite,  it  seems  pretty  certain  that  the 
Bethlehem  here  meant  is  that  in  the  tribe  of 
Zebulon  (Josh.  six.  15:  see  Joseph.  Ant.  v.  7, 
§73).  There  is  not  a  shadow  of  probability  in  tie 
notion  which  lias  been  broached  as  to  tbi'  identity 
of  Ibzan  with  BoaZ  Tl'3  •  The  history  of  his  large 
family  is  singularly  at  variance  with  the  impression 
of  Boaz  given  us  in  the  book  of  Ruth.      [A.  « '.  1 1 .  j 

ICH'ABOD  OUD-*K,  from  \X,  "where?" 
equivalent   to  the  negative,  and  *1133,  •• 
<  iesen.  p.  79,  "  inglorious;"  Ovatl5apxa&u9,  which 


ICONIUM 


8-47 


seems  to  derive  from  "OX,  "  woe,"  oval,  1  Sam.  iv. 
8,  Gesen.  p.  39  ;  Ichabod),  the  son  of  1'hinehas, 
and  grandson  of  Eli.  In  giving  birth  to  him  his 
mother  died  of  grief  at  the  news  of  the  sudden 
deaths  of  her  husband  and  father-in-law.  His 
brother's  name  was  Ahiah  or  Ahimeleeh  ( 1  Sam. 
iv.  21,  xiv.  3).  [H.  W.  P.] 

ICONIUM  {'\k6viov),  the  modern  Konieh,  is   O^Kj^J^ 
situated  in  the  western  part  of  an  extensive  plain,  |  qi 

on  the  central  table-land  of  Asia  Minor,  and  not 
far  to  the  north  of  the  chain  of  Taurus.  This  I'f-'  <-*• 
level  district  was  anciently  allied  Lycaonia.  Xe- 
nophon  (Anab.  i.  2,  19)  reckons  Icouium  as  the 
most  easterly  town  of  PllRYUiA  ;  but  all  other 
writers  speak  of  it  as  being  in  Lycaonia,  of  which 
it  was  practically  the  capital.  It  was  on  the  great 
line  of  communication  between  Ephesus  and  the 
western  coast  of  the  peninsula  on  one  side,  and 
Tarsus,  Antioch,  and  the  Euphrates  on  the  other. 
We  see  this  indicated  by  the  narrative  of  Xenophon 
'(/.  c.)  and  the  letters  of  Cicero  (ad  Fam.  iii.  8,  v. 
20,  xv.  4).  When  the  Roman  provincial  system 
was  matured,  some  of  the  most  important  roads  in- 
tersected one  another  at  this  point,  as  may  be  seen 
from  the  map  in  Leake's  Asia  Minor.  These  cir- 
cumstances should  be  borne  in  mind,  when  we  trace 
St.  Paul's  journeys  through  the  district.  Iconium 
was  a  well  chosen  place  for  missionary  operations. 
The  Apostle's  first  visit  was  on  his  first  circuit,  in 
company  with  Barnabas ;  and  on  this  occasion  he 
approached  it  from  Antioch  in  Pisidia,  which  lay 
to  the  west.  From  that  city  he  had  been  driven 
by  the  persecution  of  the  Jews  (Acts  xiii.  50,  51). 
There  were  Jews  in  Iconium  also;  and  St.  Paul's 
first  efforts  here,  according  to  his  custom,  were 
made  in  the  synagogue  (xiv.  1).  The  results  were 
considerable  both  among  the  Hebrew  and  Gentile  po- 
pulation of  the  place  (ibid.).  We  should  notice  that 
the  working  of  miracles  in  Iconium  is  emphatically 
mentioned  (xiv.  3).  The  intrigues  of  the  Jews 
again  drove  him  away;  he  was  in  danger  of  being 
stoned,  and  he  withdrew  to  Lystra  and  DERBE, 
in  the  eastern  and  wilder  part  of  Lycaonia  (xiv.  0"). 
Thither  also  the  enmity  of  the  Jews  of  Antioch  and 
Iconium  pursued  him ;  and  at  Lystra  he  was 
actually  stoned  and  left  for  dead  (xiv.  19).  After 
an  interval,  however,  he  returned  over  the  old 
ground,  revisiting  Iconium  and  encouraging  the 
chinch  which  he  had  founded  there  (xiv.  21,  22). 
These  sufferings  and  difficulties  are  alluded  to  in 
2  Tim.  iii.  11;  and  this  brings  us  to  the  considera- 
tion of  his  next  visit  to  this  neighbourhood,  which 
was  the  occasion  of  his  first  practically  associating 
himself  with  Timothy.  Paul  left  the  Syrian  Antioch, 
in  company  with  Silas  (Acts  sv.  40  I,  on  his  second 
missionary  circuit :  and  travelling  through  Cilici  \ 
(xv.  41),  and  up  through  the  passes  of  Taurus  into 
Lycaonia,  approached  Iconium  from  the  east,  by 
Derbeand  Lystra  (xvi.  1,2).  Though  apparently  a 
native  of  Lystra,  Timothy  was  e\  idently  well  known 
to  the  I  Ihristians  of  Iconium  (xvi.  2)  ;  ami  it  is  not 

improbable  that  his eiivumcisioii  \\  i.  3)  and  ordina- 
tion (  1  Tim.  i.  is,  iv.  11.  vi.  12  ;  2  Tim.  i.  6)  took 
place  there.  <>n  leaving  Iconium  St.  Paul  and  his 
party  travelled  to  the  N.W. ;  and  the  place  is  not 
mentioned  again  in  the  sacred  narrative;  though 

there    is    little   doubt     that    it    was    visited    by    the 

Apostle  again  in  the  early  part  of  Ins  third  circuit 

Acts  iviii.  23).     Prom  its  position  it  could  not 

fail  to  be  an  important  centre  of  Christian  influence 

in  the  early  ages  of  the  <  liurch.  The  curious  apo- 
ervphal  legend  ofSt.  Thecla,  of  which  Iconium   is 


848 


IDALAH 


the  scene,  must  not  be  entirely  passed  by.  The 
"  Acta  Pauli  et  Theclai "  are  given  in  full  by 
Grabe  (Spirit,  vol.  i.),  and  by  Jones  ( On  the  Canon, 
vol.  ii.  pp.  353-411).  It  is  natural  here  to  notice 
one  geographical  mistake  in  that  document,  viz., 
that  Lystra  is  placed  on  the  west  instead  of  the 
east.  In  the  declining  period  of  the  Roman  empire, 
Iconium  was  made  a  culonia.  In  the  middle  ages 
it  became  a  place  of  great  consequence,  as  the  ca- 
pital of  the  Seljukian  sultans.  Hence  the  remains  of 
.Saracenic  architecture,  which  are  conspicuous  here, 
and  which  are  described  by  many  travellers.  Konieh 
is  still  a  town  of  considerable  size.  [J.  S.  H.] 

IDALAH  (n?KT  ;  'Ig/mx^i  Ales-  'lo-l-qXa. ; 
Jedala,  and  Jerala),  one  of  the  cities  of  the  tribe 
of  Zebulun,  named  between  Shimron  and  Beth- 
lehem (Josh.  xix.  15).  Schwarz  (172),  without 
quoting  his  authority,  but  probably  from  one  of 
the  Talmudical  books,  gives  the  name  as  "  Yidalah 
or  Chirii,"  and  would  identify  it  with  the  vil- 
lage "  Kellah  al-Chire',  6  miles  S.W.  of  Semunii." 
Semuniyeh  is  known  and  marked  on  many  of  the 
maps,  rather  less  than  3  miles  S.  of  Beit-lahm  ; 
but  the  other  place  mentioned  by  Schwarz  has 
evaded  observation.  It  is  not  named  in  the  Ono- 
masticon.  [G.] 

ID'BASH  (B>2T  ;  'U^Sds,  Alex,  'lyaffis  ; 
Jedebos),  one  of  the 'three  sons  of  Abi-Etam — "the 
father  of  Etam  " — among  the  families  of  Judah 
(1  Chr.  iv.  3).  The  Tzelelponite  is  named  as  his 
sister.  This  list  is  probably  a  topographical  one, 
a  majority  of  the  names  being  those  of  places. 

ID'DO.  1.  (iny:  2a55dS,  Alex.  2a5d5« :  Addo). 
The  father  of  Abinadab,  one  of  Solomon's  monthly 
purveyors  (1  K.  iv.  14). 

2.  (HJ?;  'A55J;  Addo).  A  descendant  of  Ger- 
shom,  son  of  Levi  (1  Chr.  vi.  21).  In  the  reversed 
genealogy  (ver.  41)  the  name  is  altered  to  Udaiah, 
and  we  there  discover  that  he  was  one  of  the  fore- 
fathers of  Asaph  the  seer. 

3.  (n\;  'lSaai,  Alex.  'laSSai;  Jaddo).  Son 
of  Zechariah,  ruler  (nwjid)  of  the  tribe  of  Manas- 
seh  east  of  Jordan  in  the  time  of  David  (1  Chr. 
xxvii.  21). 

4.  Ciy'',  i.e.  Ye'doi;  but  in  the  correction  of 
the  Keri  \1]}\  Ye'do  ;  'Io>1j\,  'ASSw  ;  Addo).  A 
seer  (!"!}?"!)  whose  "visions"  (JIITI"!)  against  Jero- 
boam incidentally  contained  some 'of  the  acts  of 
Solomon  (2  Chr.  is.  29).  He  also  appears  to  have 
written  a  chronicle  or  story  (Midrash,  Gesen.  p. 
357)  relating  to  the  life  and" reign  of  Abijah  (2  Chr. 
xiii.  22),  and  also  a  book  "  concerning  genealogies," 
in  which  the  acts  of  Rehoboam  were  recorded  (xii. 
15).  These  books  are  lost,  but  they  may  have 
formed  part  of  the  foundation  of  the  existing  books 
of'  Chronicles  (Bertheau,  On  Chron.  Introd.  §3). 
The  mention  of  his  having  prophesied  against  Jero- 
boam probably  led  to  his  identification  in  the  an- 
cient Jewish  traditions  (Jerome,  Quaest.  Bebr.  in 
2  Chr.  xii.  15,  Jaddo;  Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  3,  §5, 
'laSwv)  with  the  "Man  of  Cod"  out  of  Judah 
who  denounced  the  altar  of  that  king  (1  K.  xii.  1). 
He  is  also  identified  with  Oded  (see  Jerome  on  2  Chr. 
xv.  1). 

5.  (KVUP;  in  Zech.  "V^ ;  'A58cS;  Addo).  The 
grandfather  of  the  prophet  Zechariah  (Zech.  i. 
1,  7),  although  in  other  places  Zechariah  is  called 
"the  sun  oflddo"  (Ezr.  v.    1;    vi.    14).     Iddo 


IDOL 

returned  from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  and  Jeshua 
(Neh.  xii.  4),  and  in  the  next  generation — the 
"  days  of  Joiakim,"  son  of  Jeshua  (10,  12) — his 
house  was  represented  by  Zechariah  (ver.  14). 
In  1  Esdr.  vi.  1,  the  name  is  Addo. 

6.  (ilK  ;  Alex.  'Adavel/j. ;  'Eddo.)  The  chief 
of  those  who  assembled  at  Casiphia,  at  the  time  of 
the  second  caravan  from  Babylon,  in  the  reign  of 
Artaxerxes  Longimanus  B.C.  458.  He  was  one  of 
the  Nethinjm,  of  whom  220  responded  to  the  appeal 
of  Ezra  to  assist  in  the  Return  to  Judaea  (Ezr.  viii. 
17  ;  comp.  20).  In  the  Apocr.  Esdras  the  name 
is  Saddeus  and  Daddeus.  [G.] 

IDOL,  IMAGE.  As  no  less  than  twenty-one 
different  Hebrew  words  have  been  rendered  in  the 
A.  V.  either  by  idol  or  image,  and  that  by  no 
means  uniformly,  it  will  be  of  some  advantage  to 
attempt  to  discriminate  between  them,  and  assign, 
as  nearly  as  the  two  languages  will  allow,  the 
English  equivalents  for  each.  But,  before  proceed- 
ing to  the  discussion  of  those  words  which  in  them- 
selves indicate  the  objects  of  false  worship,  it  will 
be  necessary  to  notice  a  class  of  abstract  terms, 
which,  with  a  deep  moral  significance,  express  the 
degradation  associated  with  it,  and  stand  out  as  a 
protest  of  the  language  against  the  enormities  of 
idolatry.     Such  are — 

1.  J1K,  dven,  rendered  elsewhere  "  nought," 
"vanity,"  "iniquity,"  "wickedness,"  "sorrow," 
&c,  and  once  only  "  idol"  (Is.  lxvi.  3).  The  primary 
idea  of  the  root  seems  to  be  emptiness,  nothingness, 
as  of  breath  or  vapour;  and,  by  a  natural  transition, 
in  a  moral  sense,  wickedness  in  its  active  form  of 
mischief,  and  then,  as  the  result,  sorrow  and  trouble. 
Hence  dven  denotes  a  vain,  false,  wicked  thing,  and 
expresses  at  once  the  essential  nature  of  idols,  and 
the  consequences  of  their  worship.  The  character 
of  the  word  may  be  learnt  from  its  associates.  It 
stands  in  parallelism  with  DQX,  ephes  (Is.  xii.  29), 
which,  after  undergoing  various  modifications,  comes 
at  length  to  signify  "nothing;"  with  ?3 ii,  hebel, 
"  breath  "  or  "  vapour,"  itself  applied  as  a  term  of 
contempt  to  the  objects  of  idolatrous  reverence 
(Deut.  xxxii.  21  ;  1  K.  xvi.  13;  Ps.  xxxi.  6;  Jer. 
viii.  19,  x.  8)  ;  with  NIK*,  shdv,  "-  nothingness," 
"vanity;"  and  with  "Ipt^,  shelter,  "falsehood" 
(Zech.  x.  2) :  all  indicating  the  utter  worthlessness 
of  the  idols  to  whom  homage  was  paid,  and  the 
false  and  delusive  nature  of  their  worship.  It  is 
employed  in  an  abstract  sense  to  denote  idolatry  in 
general  in  1  Sam.  xv.  23.  There  is  much  signifi- 
cance in  the  change  of  name  from  Bethel  to  Beth- 
aven,  the  great  centre  of  idolatry  in  Israel  (Hos. 
iv.  15). 

2.  ?vN,  elil,  is  thought  by  some  to  have  a  sense 
akin  to  that  of  ~lpC,  shelter,  "  falsehood,"  with 
which  it  stands  in  parallelism  in  Job  xiii.  4,  and 
would  therefore  much  resemble  dven,  as  applied  to 
an  idol.  Delitzsch  (on  Hab.  ii.  18)  derives  it  from 
the  negative  particle  pH,  at,  "die  Nichtigeu."  But 
according  to  Fiirst  (Handw.  s.  v.)  it  is  a  diminu- 
tive of  ?N,  "  god,"  the  additional  syllable  indi- 
cating the  greatest  contempt.  In  this  case  the 
signification  above  mentioned  is  a  subsidiary  one. 
The  same  authority  asserts  that  the  word  denotes 
a  small  image  of  the  god,  which  was  consulted  as 
an  oracle  among  the  Egyptians  and  Phoenicians  (Is. 


IDOL 

.\ix.  ."> ;  Jcr.  xiv.  14).  It  is  certainly  used  of  the 
idols  of  Noph  or  Memphis  (Ez.  xxx.  13).  In  strong 
contrast  with  Jehovah  it  appears  in  Ps.  xc.  5,  xcvii. 
7 :  the  contrast  probably  being  heightened  by  the 
resemblance  between  elilim  and  elohim.  A  some- 
what similar  play  upon  words  is  observable  in  Hab. 

ii.  IS,  D^X  DWK,  elilim  illemim  ("dumb 
idols,"  A.V7). 

3.  nOsX,  emdh,  "  honor"  or  "  terror,"  and 
hence  an  object  of  horror  or  terror  (Jer.  1.  38),  in 
reference  either  to  the  hideousness  of  the  idols  or 
to  the  gross  character  of  their  worship.  In  this 
respect  it  is  closely  connected  with — 

4.  JYsPSft,  miphletseth,  a  "  fright,"  " horror," 

applied  to  the  idol  of  Maachah,  probably  of  wood, 
which  Asa  cut  down  and  burned  (1  K.  xv.  13j 
2  Chr.  xv.  16),  and  which  was  unquestionably  the 
Phallus,  the  symbol  of  the  productive  power  of 
nature  (Movers,  Phoen.  i.  571;  Selden,  de  Dis  Syr. 
ii.  5),  and  the  nature-goddess  Ashera.  Allusion  is 
supposed  to  be  made  to  this  in  Jer.  x.  5,  and  Epist. 
of  Jer.  70.  In  2  Chr.  xv.  16  the  Vulg.  render 
"simulacrum  Priapi "  (cf.  Hor.,  "  furum  avium- 
que  maxima,  formklo").  The  LXX.  had  a  different 
leading,  which  it  is  not  easy  to  determine.  They 
translate  in  1   K.  xv.  13  the  same  word  both  by 

crvvodos  (with  which  corresponds  the  Syr.  J  *| — ^*.-> 

'ido,  "  a  festival,"  reading  perhaps  DIVJ?,  'dtsereth, 
as  in  2  K.  x.  20 ;  Jer.  ix.  2)  and  KaraSvcreis, 
while  in  Chronicles  it  is  elScoAov.  Possibly  in  1  K. 
xv.  IS  they  may  have  read  rUTPVD,  iritsvlldthdh, 
for  MHsPDO,  miphlatst&h,  as  the  Vulg.  specum, 

of  which  ••simulacrum  turpissimum"  is  a  cor- 
rection.  With  this  must  be  noticed,  though  not 
actually  rendered  "  image"  or  "idol," 

5.  ntl'3,  bdsheth,  "  shame,"  or  "shameful  thing" 
(A.  V.  Jer.  xi.  13  ;  Hos.  ix.  10),  applied  to  Baal 
or  Baal-Peor,  as  characterising  the  obscenity  of  his 
worship.     With  elil  is  found  in  close  connexion — 

6.  Dv-1?3,  gillui'un,  also  a  term  of  contempt, 
but  of  uncertain  origin  (Ez.  xxx.  13).  The  Rab- 
binical authorities,  referring  to  such  passages  as 
Ez.  iv.  2,  Zeph.  i.  17,  have  favoured  the  inter- 
pretation given  in  the  margin  of  the  A.  V.  to  Deut. 
\\ix.  17,  ••  dungy  gods"  (Vulg.  "  sordes,"  "sordes 
idolorum,"   1  K.  xv.  12).     Jahn  connects  it  with 

.773,  g&lal,  "  to  roll,"  and  applies  it  to  the  stocks 
of  trees  of  which  idols  were  made,  and  in  mockery 
called  gill&lim,  "rolling  things"  (a  volvendo,  he 
says,  though  it  is  difficult  to  see  the  point  of  his 
remark).    Gesenius,  repudiating  the  derivation  from 

the  Arab.  \^,  jalla,  "to  lie  great,  illustrious," 
gives  his  preference  to  the  rendering  "  stones,  stone 
gods,"  thus  deriving  it  from  73,  ja/,  "a  heap  of 
stones;"  and  in  this  he  is  followed  by  Fiirst,  who 
translates  gilMUhy  the  Germ.  " Steinhaufe."  The 
expression  is  applied,  principally  in  Ezekiel,  to  false 
gods  and  their  symbols  (Deut.  xxix.  17;  Ez.  viii. 
10,  &C.).      It  stands  side   by   side  with   other  con- 


IDOL  849 

xvi.  36,  xx.  8  ;   as  for 

61th,"   "abomination" 


a  There  are  many  passages  in  the  Syr.  of  Chronicles 
which  it  is  impossible  to  reconcile  with  the  received 
Hebrew  text ;  and  the  translation  of  these  books  is  on 


temptuous  terms  in   Ez. 
example   ]*p^',    shekets, 
(Ez.  viii.  10),  and 

7.  The  cognate  )'-1j3ty,  shikkuts,  "filth,"  "im- 
purity," especially  applied,  like  shekets,  to  that  which 
produced  ceremonial  uncleanness  (Ez.  xxxvii.  '_':}; 
Nah.  iii.  6),  such  as  food  offered  in  sacrifice  to  idols 
(Zech.  ix.  7  ;  comp.  Acts  xv.  20,  29).  As  referring 
to  the  idols  themselves,  it  primarily  denotes  the  ob- 
scene rites  with  which  their  worship  was  associated, 
and  hence,  by  metonymy,  is  applied  both  to  the  ob- 
jects of  worship  and  also  to  their  worshippers,  who 
partook  of  the  impurity,  and  thus  "  became  loathsome 
like  their  love,"  the  foul  Baal-Peor  (Hos.  ix.  10). 

We  now  come  to  the  consideration  of  those  words 
which  more  directly  apply  to  the  images  or  idols,  as 
the  outward  symbols  of  the  deity  who  was  wor- 
shipped through  them.  These  may  be  classified 
according  as  they  indicate  that  the  images  were 
made  in  imitation  of  external  objects,  and  to  repre- 
sent some  idea,  or  attiibute  ;  or  as  they  denote  the 
workmanship  by  which  they  were  fashioned.  To 
the  first  class  belong — 

8.  7?DD,  semel,  or  7)0D,  semel,  with  which 
Gesenius  compares  as  cognate  ?CD,  mds/tdl,  and 
D7^,  tselem,  the  Lat.  similis  and  Greek  6/xaA.o's, 
signifies  a  "  likeness,"  "  semblance."  The  Targ. 
in  Deut.  iv.  16  gives  N1-1X,  tsurd,  "  figure  "  as  the 
equivalent;  while  iu  Ez.  viii.  3,  5  it  is  rendered 
by  D7^>,  ts'lam,  "  image."     Iu  the  latter  passages 

Q  p 

the  Syriac  has  J^Vt^f),  'koimto,  "a  statue" 
(the  <tt^\tj  of  the  LXX.),  which  more  properly 
corresponds    to    matstsebdh    (see    No.    15   below); 

and  in   Deut.  COJ^.  genes,  "kind"  (=  yevos). 

The  passage  in  2  Chr.  xxxiii.  7  is  rendered  "  images 
of  four  faces,"  the  latter  words  representing  the  one 
under  consideration."  In  2  Chr.  xxxiii.  15  it 
appears  as  "  carved  images,"  following  the  LXX. 
to  yKviniv.  On  the  whole  the  Gk.  elicdiv  of  Deut. 
iv.  16,  2  Chr.  xxxiii.  7,  and  the  "  simulacrum"  of 
the  Vulgate  (2  Chr.  xxxiii.  15)  most  nearly  re- 
semble the  Hebrew  semel. 

9.  D7¥,  tselem  (Ch.  id.  and  D7V,  tselani)  is  by 
all  lexicographers,  ancient  and  modern,  connected 
with  7V,  tsel,  "  a  shadow."  It  is  the  "  image  "  of 
(iod  in  which  man  was  created  (Gen.  i.  27  ;  cf.  Wisd. 
ii.  23),  distinguished  from  rWOT,  dem&th,  or  "  like- 
ness," as  the  "  image"  from  the  "  idea"  which  it 
represent:,  i  Schmidt,  </c  fiaiuj.  Dei  m  //"///.  p.  84  |, 
though  it  would  be  rash  to  insist  upon  this  distinc- 
tion. In  the  N.  T.  uk&v  appears  to  represent  the 
latter  (Col.  iii.  10;  cf.  I. XX.  oi  Gen.  v.  1),  as 
u/uoitofxa  the  former  of  the  two  words  (Rom.  i. 
23;  viii.  29;  Phil.  ii.  7),  but  iu  Hcb.  x.  1  elfcuv 
is  opposed  to  atc'ia  as  the  substance  to  the  unsub- 
stantial form,  of  which  it  is  the  perfect  representative. 
The  LXX.  render  dem&th  by  Aixulaxris,  d/xuicAtfia, 
(Ikuv,  'dfxoios,  and  tselem  most  frequently  bycucc&ir, 
though  dfjLolai/xa,  ('iSw\oi',  anil  tvttos  also  occur. 
l'.ut  whatever  abstract  term  may  best  define  the 
meaning  of  tselem,  it  is  unquestionably  used  to 

the  whole  interior  in  accuracy  to  that  of  the  rest  of 
the  O.  T. 


850 


IDOL 


denote  the  visible  forms  of  external  objects,  and  is 
applied  to  figures  of  gold  and  silver  (1  Sam.  vi.  5  ; 
Num.  xxxiii.  52  ;  Dan.  iii.  1),  such  as  the  golden 
image  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  as  well  as  to  those 
painted  upon  walls  (Ez.  xxxiii.  14).  "Image" 
perhaps  most  nearly  represents  it  in  all  passages. 
Applied  to  the  human  countenance  (Dan.  iii.  19)  it 
signifies  the  "  expression,"  and  corresponds  to  the 
idea  of  Matt,  xxviii.  3,  though  demuth  agrees 
rather  with  the  Platonic  usage  of  the  latter  word. 

10.  ilMQn,  temundh,  rendered  "image"  in 
Job  iv.  16  ;  elsewhere  "  similitude"  (Dent.  iv.  12), 
"likeness"  (Dent.  v.  8):  "form,"  or  "shape" 
would  be  better.  In  Dent.  iv.  10  it  is  in  parallelism 
with  JVJ2P),  tabnith,  literally  "build;"  hence 
"  plan,"  or  "  model  "  (2  K.  xvi.  10  ;  of.  Ex.  xx.  4-; 
Num.  xii.  8). 

11.  3^'V,  'atsab,  12.  n>;y,  'etseb  (Jer.  xxii. 
28),  or  137nVty,  'otscb  (Is.  xi'viii.  5),  "  a  figure," 
all  derived  from  a  root  3VJJ,  'atsab,  "  to  work," 
or  "fashion"   (akin    to   3i>*n,    chdtsab,    and    the 

-     T 

like),  are  terms  applied  to  idols  as  expressing  that 
their  origin  was  due  to  the  labour  of  man.  The 
verb  in  its  derived  senses  indicates  the  sorrow  and 
trouble  consequent  upon  severe  labour,  but  the 
latter  seems  to  be  the  radical  idea.  If  the  notion 
of  sorrow  were  most  prominent  the  words  as  applied 
to  idols  might  be  compared  with  dven  above.  Is. 
Iviii.  :>  is  rendered  in  the  Peshito  Syriac  "idols" 
(A.  V.  "labours"),  but  the  reading  was  evidently 
different.  In  Ps.cxxxix.  24,  2VJJ  ^"1^,  dcrec'utseb, 
is  "  idolatry." 

14.  *VV,  tsir,  once  only  applied  to  an  idol 
(Is.  xlv.  16;  LXX.  vrjtroi,as  if  D,SN, iyyiiri).  The 
word  usually  denotes  "  a  pang,'  but  in  this  instance 
is  probably  connected  with  the  roots  "I-IV,  tsur, 
and  "l^"',  ydtsar,  and  signifies  "a  shape,"  or 
"  mould,"  and  hence  an  "  idol." 

15.  DS-'ifO,  matstsebah,  anything  set  up,  a 
"statue"  (=  2r^3,  n'tsib,  Jer.  xliii.  13),  ap- 
plied to  a  memorial  stone  like  those  erected  by 
Jacob  on  four  several  occasions  (Gen.  xxviii.  18, 
xxxi.  45,  xxxv.  14,  15)  to  commemorate  a  crisis  in 
his  life,  or  to  mark  the  grave  of  Rachel.  Such 
were  the  stones  set  up  by  Joshua  (Josh.  iv.  9) 
after  the  passage  of  the  Jordan,  and  at  Shechem 
(xxiv.  26),  and  by  Samuel  when  victorious  over 
the  Philistines  (1  Sam.  vii.  12).  When  solemnly 
dedicated  they  were  anointed  with  oil,  and  libations 
were  poured  upon  them.  The  word  is  applied  to 
denote  the  obelisks  which  stood  at  the  entrance  to 
the  temple  of  the  Sun  at  Heliopolis  (Jer.  xliii.  13), 
two  of  which  were  a  hundred  cubits  high  and  eight 
broad,  each  of  a  single  stone  (Her.  ii.  111).  It  is 
also  used  of  the  statues  of  Baal  (2  K.  iii.  2), 
whether  of  stone  (2  K.  x.  27)  or  wood  (id.  26), 
which  stood  in  the  innermost  recess  of  the  temple 
at  Samaria.  Movers  (Phoen.  i.  674)  conjectures 
that  the  latter  were  statues  or  columns  distinct  from 
that  of  Baal,  which  was  of  stone  and  conical  (67:!), 
like  the  "  meta  "  of  Paphos  (Tac.  H.  ii.  3),  and 
probably  therefore  belonging  to  other  deities  who 
were  his  irdpeSpui  or  <Tvjj.flcoiJ.oi.  The  Phoenicians 
consecrated  and  anointed  stones  like  that  at  Bethel, 
which  were  called,  as  some  think,  from  this  cir- 
cumstance Baetylia.  Many  such  are  said  to  have 
been  seen  on  the  Lebanon,  near  Heliopolis,  dedicated 
to  various  gods,  and  many  prodigies  are  related  of 


IDOL 

them  (Damascius  in  Photius,  quoted  by  Boehart, 
Canaan,  ii.  2).  The  same  authority  describes 
them  as  aerolites,  of  a  whitish  and  sometimes  purple 
colour,  spherical  in  shape,  and  about  a  span  in 
diameter.  The  Palladium  of  Troy,  the  black  stone 
in  the  Kaaba  at  Mecca,  said  to  have  been  brought 
from  heaven  by  the  angel  Gabriel,  and  the  stone  at 
Ephesus  "which  fell  down  from  Jupiter"  (Acts 
xix.  35),  are  examples  of  the  belief,  anciently  so 
common,  that  the  gods  sent  down  their  images 
upon  earth.  In  the  older  worship  of  Greece  stones, 
according  to  Pausanias  (vii.  22,  §4),  occupied  the 
place  of  images.  Those  at  Pharae,  about  thirty  in 
number,  and  quadrangular  in  shape,  near  the  statue 
of  Hermes,  received  divine  honours  from  the  Pha- 
rians,  and  each  had  the  name  of  some  god  conferred 
upon  it.  The  stone  in  the  temple  of  Jupiter 
Amnion  (umhilico  maximc  similis),  enriched  with 
emeralds  and  gems  (Curt.  iv.  7,  §31);  that  at 
Delphi,  which  Saturn  was  said  to  have  swallowed 
(Pans.  Phoc.  24.  §6  ;  the  black  stone  of  pyramidal 
shape  in  the  temple  of  Juggernaut,  and  the  holy 
stone  at  Pessimism  Galatia,  sacred  to  Cybele,  show 
how  widely  spread  and  almost  universal  were  these 
ancient  objects  of  worship.  Closely  connected  with 
these  "  statues  "  of  Baal,  whether  in  the  form  of 
obelisks  or  otherwise,  were 

16.  D'OQn,  chammdnim,  rendered  in  the  margin 
of  most  passages  "sun-images."  The  word  has 
given  rise  to  much  discussion.  In  the  Vulgate 
it  is  translated  thrice  simulacra,  thrice  delvhra, 
and  once  fana.  The  LXX.  give  rgjueVrj  twice. 
ea5o>Aa  twice.  ^vMva  x€ipo7roi?jTa,  jSSeAuy^aTa, 
and  rd  vipTjAa.  With  one  exception  (2  Chr.  xxxiv. 
4,  which  is  evidently  corrupt)  the  Syriac  has 
vaguely  either  "  fears,"  i.  e.  objects  of  fear,  or 
"  idols."  The  Targum  in  all  passages  translates  it 
by  N'DJD^n,    chanisn'sayyd,    "  houses  for  star- 

worship  "  (Fiirst  compares  the  Arab.    .^J^L.,  Churir 

nas,  the  planet  Mercury  or  Venus),  a  rendering 
which  Kosenmiiller  supports.  Gesenius  preferred 
to  consider  these  chanisn'sayyd  as  "  veils "  or 
"  shrines  surrounded  or  shrouded  with  hangings  " 
(Ez.xvi.  16  ;  Targ.  on  Is.  iii.  19),  and  scouted  the 
interpretation  of  Buxtorf — "  statuae  solares" — as 
a  mere  guess,  though  he  somewhat  paradoxically 
assented  to  Rosenmiiller's  opinion  that  they  were 
"  shrines  dedicated  to  the  worship  of  the  stars." 
Kimchi,  under  the  root  }On,  mentions  a  conjec- 
ture that  they  were  trees  like  the  Asherim,  but 
(s.  o.  DDI1)  elsewhere  expresses  his  own  belief, 
that  the  Nun  is  epenthetic,  and  that  they  were  so 
called  "  because  the  sun-worshippers  made  them." 
Abeu  Ezra  (on  Lev.  xxvi.  30)  says  they  were 
"  houses  made  for  worshipping  the  sun."  which 
Boehart  approves  {Canaan,  ii.  17),  and  Jarchi, 
that  they  were  a  kind  of  idol  placed  on  the  root's  oi 
houses.  Vossius  (de  Idol.  ii.  353),  as  Scaliger 
before  him,  connects  the  word  with  Amanus,  or 
Omanus,  the  sacred  fire,  the  symbol  of  the  Persian 
sun-god,  and  lenders  it  pyraea  (cf.  Selden,  ii.  8). 
Adelung  (Mithrid.  i.  159,  quoted  by  Gesen.  on  Is. 
xvii.  8)  suggested  the  same,  and  compared  it  with 
the  Sanscrit  Iwma.  But  to  such  interpr< 
the  passage  in  2  Chr.  xxxiv.  4,  is  inimical  (Vii 
on  Is.  xvii.  8).  Gesenius'  own  opinion  appeal's  to 
have  fluctuated  considerably.  In  his  notes  on  Isaiah 
(I.  c.)  he  prefers  the  general  rendering  "  celamns  " 
to  the  more  definite  one  of  "sun-columns,"  and   is 


IDOL 

inclined  to  look  to  ;i  Persian  origin  for  the  deriva- 
tion of  the  word.  But  in  Ids  Thesaurus  he  men- 
tions the  occurrence  of  Chamman  as  a  synonym  of 
Baal  in  the  Phoenician  and  Palmyrene  inscriptions 
in  the  sense  of  "  Dominus  Solaris,"  and  its  after 
application  to  the  statues  or  columns  erected  for 
Ins  worship.  Spencer  (deLegg.  Bebr.  ii.  25),  and 
after  him  Michaelis  {Suj>ji/.  ml  Lex.  Bebr.  s.  v.), 
maintained  that  it  signified  statues  or  lofty  columns, 
like  the  pyramids  or  ohelisks  of  Egypt.  Movers 
(Phoen.  i.  441)  concludes  with  good  reason  that 
the  sun-god  I'.aal  and  the  idol  "  Chamman  "  are  not 
essentially  different.  In  his  discussion  of  Gham- 
mdiihii,  he  says,  "  These  images  of  the  tire-god 
were  placed  on  foreign  or  non-Israelitish  altars,  in 
conjunction  with  the  symbols  of  the  nature-goddess 
Asherah',  as  crvfxfi(x!/j.oL  (2  Chr.  xiv.  •">,  5,  xxxiv.  4, 
7  ;  Is.  xvii.  9,  xxvii.  9),  as  was  otherwise  usual 
with  Baal  and  Asherah."  They  are  mentioned 
with  the  Asherim,  and  the  latter  are  coupled  with 
the  statues  of  Baal  (1  K.  xiv.  23  ;  2  K.  xxiii. 
14).  The  chammanim  and  statues  are  used  pro- 
miscuously (cf.  2  K.  xxiii.  14,  and  2  Chr.  xxxiv.  4  ; 
2  Chr.  xiv.  3  and  5),  but  are  never  spoken  of  to- 
gether. Such  are  the  steps  by  which  he  arrives  at 
his  conclusion.  He  is  supported  by  the  Palmyrene 
inscription  at  Oxford,  alluded  to  above,  which  has 
been  thus  rendered  :  "This  column  (fcO?3n,  Cham- 
fndnd  ),  and  this  altar,  the  sons  of  Malchu,  &c.  have 
erected  and  dedicated  to  the  Sun."  The  Veneto 
Greek  Version  leaves  the  word  untranslated  in  the 
strange  form  aKafSavTes.  From  the  expressions  in 
Ez.  vi.  4,  •>.  and  Lev.  xxvi.  30,  it  may  be  inferred 
that  these  columns,  which  perhaps  represented  a 
rising  flame  of  tire  and  stood  upon  the  altar  of  Baal 
(2  Chr.  xxxiv.  4),  were  of  wood  or  stone. 

17.  rVSC'D,  mascitlt,  occurs  in  Lev.  xxvi.  1  ; 
Num.  xxiii.  52;  Ez.  viii.  12:  "device,"  most 
nearly  suits  all  passages  (cf.  Ps.  lxxiii.  7  ;  Prov. 
xviii.  11,  xxv.  11).  This  word  has  been  the 
fruitful  cause  of  as  much  dispute  as  the  preceding. 
The  general  opinion  appears  to  be  that  D  |3N 
eben  mascith,  signifies  a  stone  with  figures  graven 
upon  it.  Ben  Zeb  explains  it  as  "a  stone  with  figures 
or  hieroglyphics  carved  upon  it,"  and  so  Michaelis  ; 
and  it  is  maintained  by  Movers  (  Phoen.  i.  105)  that 
the  baetylia  or  columns  with  painted  figures,  the 
"lapides  cfligiati  "  of  Minucius  Felix  (c.  3),  are 
these  "  stones  of  device,"  and  that  the  characters  en- 
graven on  them  are  the  Upa  <TTOi\da,  or  characters 
sacred  to  the  several  deities.  The  invention  of  these 
characters,  which  is  ascribed  to  Taaut,  he  conjectures 
originated  with  the  Seres,  Gesenius  explains  it  as 
a  stone  with  the  image  of  an  idol,  Baal  or  Astarte, 
and  refers  to  his  . !/<>/,.  Phoen.  21-24  lor  others  of 
similar  character.  Rashi  (on  Lev.  xxxi.  1)  derives 
it  from  the  root  "pt!\  to  cover,  "  because  they 
cover  the  floor  with  a  pavement  of  stones."  The 
Targum  and  Syr.,  Lev.  xxvi.  1.  give  ••  stone  of  de- 
votion," and  the  former  in  Num.  xxxiii.  52,  has 
"house  of  their  devotion,"  where  the  Syr.  only 
renders  "  their  objects  of  devotion."  For  the  former 
the  LXX.  have  \ldos  (Tkott6s,  and  for  the  latter 
Tas  ffKoirias  avr&V,  connecting  the  word  with  the 
root  HDb',  "to  look,"  a  circumstance  which  has 
induced  Saalschiitz  (Mos.  Recht,  382-385)  to  con- 


IDOL 


851 


b  More  probably  still  pesel  denotes  by  anticipation 

the  molten   image  in  a  later    stage  alter   it   bad    been 

trimmed  into  shape  by  the  caster. 


jecture  that  ebt  n  mascith  was  originally  a  smooth 
elevated  stone  employed  for  the  purpose  of  obtain- 
ing from  it  a  freer  prospect,  and  of  offering  prayer 
in  prostration  upon  it  to  the  deities  of  heaven. 
Hence,  generally,  he  concludes  it  signifies  a  stone  of 
prayer  or  devotion,  and  the  "  chambers  of  imagery  " 
of  Fz.  viii.  7,  are  "  chambers  of  devotion."  The 
renderings  of  the  last  mentioned  passage  in  the 
LXX.  and  Targum,_  are_  curious  as  pointing  to 
a    various    reading    inS^'D,    or    more    probably 

insc'p. 

18.  D^aiD,  terdphhn.      [TERAPHIM.] 
The    terms    which    follow    have    regard    to   the 

material  and  workmanship  of  the  idol  rather  than 
to  its  character  as  an  object  of  worship. 

19.  ?D3,  pesel,  and  20.  CTDS,  pesilim, 
usually  translated  in  the  A.V.  "graven  or  carved 
images."  In  two  passages  the  latter  is  ambiguously 
rendered  "quarries"  (Judg.  iii.  19,  26)  following 
the  Targum,  but  there  seems  no  reason  for  depart- 
ing from  the  ordinary  signification.  In  the  majority 
of  instances  the  LXX.  have  ■yAvirT6v,  once  yAvfi/j-a. 
The  verb  is  employed  to  denote  the  finishing  which 
the  stone  received  at  the  hands  of  the  masons, 
after  it  had  been  rough-hewn  from  the  quarries 
(Fx.  xxxiv.  4;  IK.  v.  32).  It  is  probably  a 
later  usage  which  has  applied  pcselh  to  a  figure  cast 
in  metal,  as  in  Is.  xl.  19,  xliv.  10.  These  "  sculp- 
tured "  images  were  apparently  of  wood,  iron,  or 
stone,  covered  with  gold  or  silver  (Dent.  vii.  25  ; 
Is.  xxx.  22  ;  Hab.  ii.  19),  the  more  costly  being  of 
solid  metal  (Is.  xl.  19).  They  could  be  burnt 
(Deut.  vii.  5  ;  Is.  xiv.  20  ;  2  Chr.  xxxiv.  4),  or 
cut  down  (Deut.  xii.  3)  and  pounded  (2  Chr. 
xxxiv.  7),  or  broken  in  pieces  (Is.  xxi.  9).  In 
making  them,  the  skill  of  the  wise  iron-smith 
(Deut.  xxvii.  15;  Is.  xl.  20)  or  carpenter,  and  of 
the  goldsmith,  was  employed  (Judg.  xvii.  3,  4; 
Is.  xli.  7),  the  former  supplying  the  rough  mass  of 
iron  beaten  into  shape  on  his  anvil  (Is.  xliv.  12), 
while  the  latter  overlaid  it  with  plates  of  gold  and 
silver,  probably  from  Tarshish  (Jer.  x.  9),  and 
decorated  it  with  silver  chains.  The  image  thus 
formed  received  the  further  adornment  of  em- 
broidered robes  (Fz.  xvi.  18),  to  which  possibly 
allusion  may  be  made  in  Is.  iii.  19.  Brass  and 
clay  were  among  the  materials  employed  for  the 
same  purpose  (Dan.  ii.  33,  v.  23). c  A  description 
of  the  three  great  images  of  Babylon  on  the  top  of 
the  temple  of  Belus  will  bo  found  in  Diod.  Sic.  ii. 
9  (comp.  Layard,  Nin.  ii.  433  ).  The  several  stages 
of  the  process  by  which  the  metal  or  wood  became 
the  "  graven  image"  are  so  vividly  deseffbed  in  Is. 
xliv.  10-20,  that  it  is  only  necessary  to  refer  to 
that  passage,  and  we  are  at  once  introduced  to  the 
mysteries  of  idol  manufacture,  which,  as  at  Ephesus, 
"brought  no  small  gain  unto  tin-  craftsmen." 

21.  T]D3,  nesec,  or  "qD3,  nesec,  ami  22.  H2DO, 
massecdh,  are  evidently  synonymous  (Is.  xli.  29, 
\hiii.  5;  Jer.  \.  l  l)  in  later  Hebrew,  and  denote 
a  "molten"  image.  Masnecdh  is  frequently  used 
in  distinction  from  pesel  or  pestltm  (Deut.  xxvii. 

15;  Judg.  xvii.  3,  &C.).  Tie'  -olden-call'  which 
Aaron  made  was  fashioned  with  "the  graver" 
(0"in,  clieref),  bu1  it  i-  not  quite  clear  for  what 
purpose  the  graver  was  used  (Fx.  xxxii.  4).     The 

c  Images  of  (.'lazed  pottery  have  been  found  in 

Egypt  Wilkinson.  Anc.  J-.),,  iii.  '.Ml;  comp.  Wi-d. 
xv.  8). 


852 


IDOL 


cheret  (cf.  Ok.  xaparTco)  appears  to  have  been  a 
sharp-pointed  instrument,  used  like  the  stylus  for  a 
writing  implement  (Is.  viii.  1).  Whether  then 
Aaron,  by  the  help  of  the  cheret,  gave  to  the  molten 
mass  the  shape  of  a  calf,  or  whether  he  made  use 
of  the  graver  for  the  purpose  of  carving  hiero- 
glyphics upon  it,  has  been  thought  doubtful.  The 
•       '  9  > 

Syr.  has  |lI20-Z1Q.„\  ttipso  (twos),  "the  mould," 
for  cheret.  But  the  expression  *1S*1,  vayydtsdr, 
decides  that  it  was  by  the  cheret,  in  whatever 
manner  employed,  that  the  shape  of  a  calf  was 
given  to  the  metal. 

In  N.  T.  *Ikwv  is  the  "  image"  or  head  of  the 
emperor  on  the  coinage  (Matt.  xxii.  20). 

Among  the  earliest  objects  of  worship,  regarded 
as  symbols  of  deity,  were,  as  has  been  said  above, 
the  meteoric  stones  which  the  ancients  believed  to 
have  been  the  images  of  the  gods  sent  down  from 
heaven.  From  these  they  transferred  their  regard 
to  rough  unhewn  blocks,  to  stone  columns  or  pillars 
of  wood,  in  which  the  divinity  worshipped  was  sup- 
posed to  dwell,  and  which  were  consecrated,  like 
the  sacred  stone  at  Delphi,  by  being  anointed  with 
oil,  and  crowned  with  wool  on  solemn  days  (Pans. 
Phoc.  24,  §13.  Tavernier  (quoted  by  Rosenmiiller, 
Alt.  #  iV.  Morgenland,  i.  §89)  mentions  a  black 
stone  in  the  pagoda  of  Benares  which  was  daily 
anointed  with  perfumed  oil,  and  such  are  the 
"  Lingams  "  in  daily  use  in  the  Siva  worship  of 
Bengal  (cf.  Arnobius,  i.  39  ;  Min.  Fel.  c.  3).  Such 
customs  are  remarkable  illustrations  of  the  solemn 
consecration  by  Jacob  of  the  stone  at  Bethel,  as  show- 
ing the  religious  reverence  with  which  these  memo- 
rials were  regarded.  And  not  only  were  single  stones 
thus  honoured,  but  heaps  of  stone  were,  in  later 
times  at  least,  considered  as  sacred  to  Hermes  (Horn. 
Od.  xvi.  471  ;  cf.  Vulg.  Prov.  xxvi.  8,  "  sicut  qui 
mittit  lapidem  in  acervum  Mercmii"),  and  to  these 
each  passing  traveller  contributed  his  offering  (Creu- 
zer,  Symb.  i.  24).  The  heap  of  stones  which  Laban 
erected  to  commemorate  the  solemn  compact  between 
himself  and  Jacob,  and  on  which  he  invoked  the 
gods  of  his  fathers,  is  an  instance  of  the  interme- 
diate stage  in  which  such  heaps  were  associated 
with  religious  observances  before  they  became 
objects  of  worship.  Jacob,  for  his  part,  dedicated 
a  single  stone  as  his  memorial,  and  called  Jehovah 
to  witness,  thus  holding  himself  aloof  from  the  rites 
employed  by  Laban,  which  may  have  partaken  of 
his  ancestral  idolatry.     [Jkgar-Sahadutha.] 

Of  the  forms  assumed  by  the  idolatrous  images 
we  have  uot  many  traces  in  the  Bible.  Dagon,  the 
fish-god  of-  the  Philistines,  was  a  human  figure 
terminating  jn  a  fish  [Dagon]  ;  and  that  the 
Syrian  deities  were  represented  in  later  times  in  a 
symbolical  human  shape  we  know  for  certainty. 
The  Hebrews  imitated  their  neighbours  in  this  re- 
spect as  in  others  (Is.  xliv.  13  ;  Wisd.  xiii.  13), 
and  from  various  allusions  we  may  infer  that  idols 
in  human  forms  were  not  uncommon  among  them, 
though  they  were  more  anciently  symbolised  by 
animals  (Wisd.  xiii.  14),  as  by  the  calves  of  Aaron 
and  Jeroboam,  and  the  brazen  serpent  which  was 
afterwards  applied  to  idolatrous  uses  (2  K.  xviii. 
4;  Rom.  i.  23).  When  the  image  came  from  the 
hands  of  the  maker  it  was  decorated  richly  with 
silver  and  gold,  and  sometimes  crowned  (Epist. 
Jer.  9) ;  clad  in  robes  of  blue  and  purple  (Jer.  x. 
9),  like  the  draped  images  of  Pallas  and  Hera 
(Miiller,    Hand.  d.   Arch.  d.  Kunst,    §09),   and 


IDOLATRY 

fastened  in  the  niche  appropriated  to  it  by  means 
of  chains  and  nails  (Wisd.  xiii.  15),  in  order  that 
the  influence  of  the  deity  which  it  represented  might 
be  secured  to  the  spot.  So  the  Ephesians,  when 
besieged  by  Croesus,  connected  the  wall  of  their 
city  by  means  of  a  rope  to  the  temple  of  Aphrodite, 
with  the  view  of  ensuring  the  aid  of  the  goddess 
(Her.  i.  26);  and  for  a  similar  object  the  Tyrians 
chained  the  stone  image  of  Apollo  to  the  altar  of 
Hercules  (Curt.  iv.  3,  §15).  Some  images  were 
painted  red  (Wisd.  xiii.  14)  like  those  of  Dionysus 
and  the  Bacchantes,  of  Hermes,  and  the  god  Pan 
(Paus.  ii.  2,  §5;  Miiller,  Hand.  d.  Arch.  d.  A' mist, 
§69).  This  colour  was  formerly  considered  sacred. 
Pliny  relates,  on  the  authority  of  Yerrius,  that  it 
was  customary  on  festival  days,  to  colour  with  red- 
lead  the  lace  of  the  image  of  Jupiter,  and  the 
bodies  of  those  who  celebrated  a  triumph  (xxxiii. 
36).  The  figures  of  Priapus,  the  god  of  gardens, 
were  decorated  in  the  same  manner  ("  ruber  custos  " 
Tibull.  i.  1,  18).  Among  the  objects  of  worship 
enumerated  by  Arnobius  (i.  39)  are  bones  of  ele- 
phants, pictures,  and  garlands  suspended  on  trees, 
the  "rami  coronati "  of  Apuleius  {tie  Mag.  c.  56). 
When  the  process  of  adorning  the  image  was 
completed,  it  was  placed  in  a  temple  or  shrine  ap- 
pointed for  it  (ot/fia,  Epist.  Jer.  12,  19  ;  oIkthao., 
Wisd.  xiii.  15;  elSwXeTov,  1  Cor.  viii.  10;  see 
Stanley's  note  on  the  latter  passage).  In  Wisd.  xiii. 
15,  olKTifxa  is  thought  to  be  used  contemptuously, 
as  in  Tibull.  i.  10,  19,  20 — "  cum  paupere  cultu 
Stabat  in  exigua  ligueus  aede  deus  "  (Fritsche  and 
Grimm,  Handb.),  but  the  passage  quoted  is  by  no 
means  a  good  illustration.  From  these  temples  the 
idols  were  sometimes  carried  in  procession  (Epist. 
Jer.  4,  26)  on  festival  days.  Their  priests  were 
maintained  from  the  idol  treasury,  and  feasted  upon 
the  meats  which  were  appointed  for  the  idols'  use 
(Bel  and  the  Dragon,  3,  13).  These  sacrificial 
feasts  formed  an  important  part  of  the  idolatrous 
ritual  [Idolatry],  and  were  a  great  stumbling- 
block  to  the  early  Christian  converts.  They  were 
to  the  heathen,  as  Prof.  Stanley  has  well  observed, 
what  the  observance  of  circumcision  and  the  Mosaic 
ritual  were  to  the  Jewish  converts,  and  it  was  for 
this  reason  that  St.  Paul  especially  directed  his 
attention  to  the  subject,  and  laid  down  the  rules  of 
conduct  contained  in  his  first  letter  to  the  Corin- 
thians (viii.-x.).  [W.  A.  W.] 

IDOLATRY  (D^a  fraphim,  '•  teraphim," 
once  only,  1  Sam.  xv.  23 :  eiScoAoAarpeia),  strictly 
speaking,  denotes  the  worship  of  deity  in  a  visible 
form,  whether  the  images  to  which  homage  is  paid 
are  symbolical  representations  of  the  true  God,  or 
of  the  false  divinities  which  have  been  made  the 
objects  of  worship  in  His  stead.  With  its  origin 
and  progress  the  present  article  is  not  concerned. 
The  former  is  lost  amidst  the  dark  mists  of  an- 
tiquity, and  the  latter  is  rather  the  subject  of  -pe- 
culation than  of  history.  But  under  what  aspect  it 
is  presented  to  us  in  the  Scriptures,  how  it  affected 
the  Mosaic  legislation,  and  what  influence  it  had  on 
the  history  of  the  Israelites,  are  questions  which 
may  be  more  properly  discussed,  with  sumo  hope 
of  arriving  at  a  satisfactory  conclusion.  Whether, 
therefore,  the  deification  of  the  powers  of  nature, 
and  the  representation  of  them  under  tangible  forms, 
preceded  the  worship  of  departed  heroes,  who  were 
regarded  as  the  embodiment  of  some  virtue  which 
distinguished  their  lives,  is  not  in  this  respect  of 
much  importance.     Some  Jewish  writers,   indeed, 


IDOLATRY 

grounding  their  theory  on  a  forced  interpretation 
of  (Jen.  iv.  26,  assign  to  Enos,  the  son  of  Seth,  the 
unenviable  notoriety  of  having  been  the  first  to 
pay  divine  honours  to  the  host  of  heaven,  and  to 
lead  others  into  the  like  error  (Maimon.  de  Idol.  i. 
1).  K.  Solomon  Jarchi,  on  the  other  hand,  while 
admitting  the  same  verse  to  contain  the  first  ac- 
count of  the  origin  of  idolatry,  understands  it  as 
implying  the  deification  of  men  and  plants.  Arabic 
tradition,  according  to  Sir  W.  Jones,  connects  the 
people  of  Yemen  with  the  same  apostasy.  The 
third  in  descent  from  Joktan,  and  therefore  a  con- 
temporary of  Nahor,  took  the  surname  of  Abdu 
Shams,  or  "  servant  of  the  sun,"  whom  he  and  his 
family  worshipped,  while  other  tribes  honoured  the 
planets  and  fixed  stars  (Hales,  Chronol.  ii.  59,  4to 
ed.).  Nimrod,  again,  to  whom  is  ascribed  the  in- 
troduction of  Zabianism,  was  after  his  death  trans- 
ferred to  the  constellation  Orion,  and  on  the  slender 
foundation  of  the  expression  "  Ur  of  the  Chaldees  " 
(Gen.  xi.  31)  is  built  the  fabulous  history  of  Abra- 
ham and  Nimrod,  narrated  in  the  legends  of  the  Jews 
and  Mussulmans  (Jellinek,  Bet  ha-Midrash,  i.  23; 
Weil,  Bibl.  Leg.  47-74;   Hyde,  liel.  Pers.  c.  2). 

I.  But,  descending  from  the  regions  of  fiction  to 
sober  historic  narrative,  the  first  undoubted  allusion 
to  idolatry  or  idolatrous  customs  in  the  Bible  is  in 
the  account  of  Rachel's  stealing  her  father's  tera- 
phim  (Gen.  xxxi.  19),  a  relic  of  the  worship  of 
other  gods,  whom  the  ancestor  of.  the  Israelites 
served  "  on  the  other  side  of  the  river,  in  old  time  " 
(Josh.  xxiv.  2).  By  these  household  deities  Laban 
was  guided,  and  these  he  consulted  as  oracles  (obs. 
■"FlC'nj,  Gen.  xxx.  27,  A.  V.  "  learned  by  expe- 
rience ")  though  without  entirely  losing  sight  of 
the  God  of  Abraham  and  the  God  of  Nahor,  to 
whom  he  appealed  when  occasion  offered  (Gen. 
xxxi.  53),  while  he  was  ready,  in  the  presence  of 
Jacob,  to  acknowledge  the  benefits  conferred  upon 
him  by  Jehovah  (Gen.  xxx.  27).  Such,  indeed, 
was  the  character  of  most  of  the  idolatrous  wor- 
ship of  the  Israelites.  Like  the  Cuthean  colo- 
nists in  Samaria,  who  "  feared  Jehovah  and  served 
their  own  gods  "  (2  K.  xvii.  I'..'!),  they  blended  in  a 
strange  manner  a  theoretical  belief  in  the  true  God 
with  the  external  reverence  which,  in  different 
stages  of  their  history,  they  were  led  to  pay  to  the 
idols  of  the  nations  by  whom  they  were  surrounded. 
For  this  species  of  false  worship  they  seem,  at  all 
times,  to  have  had  an  incredible  propensiou.  On 
their  journey  from  Shechem  to  Bethel,  the  family 
of  Jacob  pat  away  from  among  them  "  the  gods  of 
tho  foreigner'"  not  the  teraphim  of  Laban,  but  the 
gods  of  the  Canaanites  through  whose  land  they 
passed,  and  the  amulets  and  charms  which  were 
worn  as  the  appendages  of  their  worship  (Gen. 
xxxv.  2,  4).  And  this  marked  feature  of  the  He- 
brew character  is  traceable  throughout  the  entire 
history  of  the  people.  Daring  their  long  residence 
in  Egypt,  tin'  country  of  symbolism,  they  defiled 

themselves  with  the  idols  of  tin'  land,  and  it  was 
long  before  the  taint  was  removed  (Josh.  xxiv.  14; 
Ez.  xx.  7).  To  these  gods  Moses,  as  the  herald  of 
Jehovah,  thing  down  the  gauntlet  of  defiance 
(Kurtz,  Gesch.  d.  Alt.  B.  ii.  86),  ami  the  plagues 
of  Egypt  smote  their  symbols  (Num.  \.\\iii.  4). 
Set,  with  the  memory  of  their  deliverance  fresh  in 
their  minds,  their  leader  absent,  the  Israelites  cla- 
moured for  some  visible  shape  in  which  they  might 
worship  the  God  who  had  brought  them  up  out 
of  Egypt  (Ex.  xxxii.).     Aaron  lent  himself  to  the 


IDOLATRY 


853 


popular  cry,  and  chose  as  the  symbol  of  deity  one 
with  which  they  had  long  been  familiar — the  calf — 
embodiment  of  Apis,  and  emblem  of  the  productive 
power  of  nature.  But,  with  a  weakness  of  cha- 
racter to  which  his  greater  brother  was  a  stranger, 
he  compromised  with  his  better  impulses  by  pro- 
claiming a  solemn  feast  to  Jehovah  (Ex.  xxxii.  5). 
How  much  of  the  true  God  was  recognised  by  the 
people  in  this  brutish  symbol  it  is  impossible  to 
conceive ;  the  festival  was  characterised  by  all  the 
shameless  licentiousness  with  which  idolatrous  wor- 
ship was  associated  (ver.  25),  and  which  seems  to 
have  constituted  its  chief  attraction.  But  on  this 
occasion,  as  on  all  others,  the  transgression  was 
visited  by  swift  vengeance,  and  three  thousand  of 
the  offenders  were  slain.  For  a  while  the  erection 
of  the  tabernacle,  and  the1  establishment  of  the 
worship  which  accompanied  it,  satisfied  that  craving 
for  an  outward  sign  which  the  Israelites  constantly 
exhibited;  and  for  the  remainder  of  their  march 
through  the  desert,  with  the  dwelling-place  of 
Jehovah  in  their  midst,  they  did  not  again  degene- 
rate into  open  apostasy.  But  it  was  only  so  long 
as  their  contact  with  the  nations  was  of  a  hostile 
character  that  this  seeming  orthodoxy  was  main- 
tained. The  charms  of  the  daughters  of  Moab,  as 
Balaam's  bad  genius  foresaw,  were  potent  for  evil : 
the  Israelites  were  "  yoked  to  Baal-Peor "  in  the 
trammels  of  his  fair  worshippers,  and  the  character 
of  their  devotions  is  not  obscurely  hinted  at  (Num. 
xxv.).  The  great  and  terrible  retribution  which 
followed  left  so  deep  an  impress  upon  the  hearts 
of  the  people  that,  after  the  conquest  of  the  pro- 
mised land,  they  looked  with  an  eye  of  terror  upon 
any  indications  of  defection  from  the  worship  of 
Jehovah,  and  denounced  as  idolatrous  a  memorial 
so  slight  as  the  altar  of  the  Reubenites  at  the  pas- 
sage of  Jordan  (Josh.  xxii.  lti). 

During  the  lives  of  Joshua  and  the  elders  who 
outlived  him,  they  kept  true  to  their  allegiance ; 
but  the  generation  following,  who  knew  not  Jehovah, 
nor  the  works  he  had  done  for  Israel,  swerved  from 
the  plain  path  of  their  fathers,  and  were  caught  in 
the  toils  of  the  foreigner  (Judg.  ii.).  From  this 
time  forth  their  history  becomes  little  more  than  a 
chronicle  of  the  inevitable  sequence  of  offence  and 
punishment.  "  They  provoked  Jehovah  to  anger 
.  .  .  and  the  anger  of  Jehovah  was  hot  against 
Israel,  and  he  delivered  them  into  the  hands  of 
spoilers  that  spoiled  them"  (Judg.  ii.  12,  14). 
The  narratives  of  the  book  of  Judges,  contempo- 
raneous or  successive,  tell  of  the  fierce  struggle 
maintained  against  their  hated  foes,  and  how  women 
forgot  their  tenderness  and  forsook  their  retirement 
to  sing  the  song  nt' victory  over  the  oppressor.  By 
turns  each  conquering  nation  strove  to  establish 
the  worship  of  its  national  god.  During  the  rule 
of  Midian,  Joash  the  father  of  Gideon  had  an  altar 
to  Baal,  and  an  Asherah  (Judg.  vi.  25),  though  he 
proved  but  a  lukewarm  worshipper  (ver.  31 ).  Even 
Gideon  himself  gave  occasion  to  idolatrous  worship; 
yet  the  ephod  which  he  made  From  the  spoils  of 
the  .Midianites  was  perhaps  buf  a  votive  offering  to 
the  true  God  (Judg.  viii.  .7  ).  It  is  not  improbable 
that  the  gold  ornaments  of  which  it  was  composed 
were  in  some  way  connected  with  idolatry  (cf.  fs. 
iii.  I  s--_»4 |,  and  that  from  their  having  '"'en  worn  as 

amulets,  si, me  supeistitioiis  virtue  was  conceived  to 

cling  to  them  even  iii  their  new  form.    But  though 
in  Gideon's  lifetime  no  over!  act   of  idolatry  was 

practised,  he  was  no  BOOner  dead  than    the    Israelites 
again  returned  to  the  service  of  the  Baalim,  and,  as 


854 


IDOLATRY 


it'  in  solemn  mockery  of  the  covenant  made  with 
Jehovah,  chose    from   among  them    Baal   Berith, 
••  Baal  of  the  Covenant "  (cf.  Zeus  opKios),  as  the 
object  of  their   special   adoration  (Judg.  viii.  33). 
Of  this  god  we  know  only  that  his  temple,  probably 
of  wood  (Judg.  ix.  49),  was  a  stronghold   in  time 
of  need,  and  that  his  treasury  was  filled  with  the 
silver  of  the  worshippers  (ix.  4).     Nor  were  the 
calamities  of  foreign  oppression  confined  to  the  land 
of  Canaan.     The  tribes  on  the  east  of  Jordan  went 
astray  after  the  idols  of  the  land,  and  were  delivered 
into  the  hands  of  the  children  of  Amnion  (Judg.  x. 
8).     But  they  put  away  from  among  them  "  the 
gods    of  the   foreigner,"    and   with    the    baseborn 
Jephthah  for  their  leader  gained  a  signal  victory 
over  their    oppressors.      The   exploits    of  Samson 
against  the  Philistines,  though  achieved  within  a 
narrower   space   and   with   less    important    results 
than  those  of  his  predecessors,  fill  a  brilliant  page 
in  his  country's  history.     But  the  tale  of  his  mar- 
vellous deeds    is    prefaced   by  that    ever-recurring 
phrase,  so  mournfully   familiar,  "  the  children  of 
Israel  did  evil  again  in  the  eyes  of  Jehovah,  and 
Jehovah  gave  them   into  the  hand  of  the  Philis- 
tines."    Thus  far  idolatry  is  a  national  sin.     The 
episode   of  Micah,   in  Judg.   xvii.   xviii.,  sheds  a 
lurid  light  on  the  secret  practices  of  individuals, 
who  without  formally  renouncing  Jehovah,  though 
ceasing  to  recognise   Him  as  the  theocratic   King 
(xvii.  6),  linked  with  His  worship  the  symbols  of 
ancient  idolatry.     The  house  of  God,  or  sanctuary, 
which  Micah  made  in  imitation  of  that  at  Shiloh, 
was  decorated  with  an  ephod  and  teraphim  dedi- 
cated to  God,  and  with  a  graven  and  molten  image 
consecrated   to   some   inferior   deities    (Selden,  de 
Ji'is  Syris,  synt.  i.  2).      It  is  a  significant  fact, 
showing  how  deeply  rooted  in  the  people  was  the 
tendency  to  idolatry,  that  a  Levite,  who,   of  all 
others,  should  have  been  most  sedulous  to  maintain 
Jehovah's    worship    in    its   purity,    was    found   to 
assume  the  office  of  priest  to  the  images  of  Micah  ; 
and  that  this  Levite,  priest  afterwards  to  the  idols 
of  Dan,  was  no  other  than  Jonathan,  the  son  of 
Gershom,  the  son  of  Moses.     Tradition  says  that 
these    idols    were    destroyed   when  the   Philistines 
defeated  the  army  of  Israel  and  took  from  them  the 
ark  of  the  covenant  of  Jehovah  (1  Sam.  iv.).     The 
Danites  are  supposed  to  have  carried  them  into  the 
field,  as  the  other  tribes  bore  the  ark,  and  the  Phi- 
listines the  images  of  tfieir  gods,  when  they  went 
forth  to  battle  (2  Sam.  v.  21 ;   Lewis,  Orig.  Hebr. 
v.  9).    But  the  Seder  Olam  Rabba  (c.  24)  interprets 
"  the  captivity  of  the  land"  (Judg.  xviii.  30),  of 
the  captivity  of  Manasseh;  and  Benjamin  of  Tudela 
mistook  the  remains  of  later  Gentile  worship  for 
traces  of  the  altar  or  statue  which  Micah  had  dedi- 
cated, and  which  was  worshipped  by  the  tribe  of 
Dan   (Selden,  de  D'ts  Syr.  synt.  i.  c.  2 ;  Stanley, 
X.  4'  P.  398.)     In  later  times  the  practice  of  i-ecret 
idolatry  was   carried  to  greater  lengths.     Images 
were  set  up  on  the  corn-floors,  in  the  wine-vats, 
and  behind  the  doors  of  private  houses  (Is.  lvii.  8  ; 
Hos.  ix.  1,  2);  and  to  check  this  tendency  the  sta- 
tute in  Deut.  xxvii.  15  was  originally  promulgated. 
Under  Samuel's  administration  a  fast  was  held, 
and  purificatory  rites  performed ,  to  mark  the  public 
renunciation  of  idolatry  (1  Sam.  vii.  3-6).     But  in 
the  reign  of  Solomon  all  this  was  forgotten.     Each 
of  his  many  foreign  wives  brought  with  her  the 
gods  of  her  own  nation;  and  the  gods  of  Amnion, 
Moab,  and  Zidon,  were  openly  worshipped.     Three 
of  the  summits  of  Olivet  were  crowned  with  the 


IDOLATRY 

high-places  of  Ashtoreth,  Chemosh,  and  Moloch 
(1  K.  xi.  7  ;  2  K.  xxiii.  13),  and  the  fourth, 
in  memory  of  his  great  apostasy,  was  branded 
with  the  opprobrious  title  of  the  "  Mount  of  Cor- 
ruption." Rehoboam,  the  son  of  an  Ammonite 
mother,  perpetuated  the  worst  features  of  Solomon's 
idolatry  (1  K.  xiv.  22-24);  and  in  his  reign  was 
made  the  great  schism  in  the  national  religion : 
when  Jeroboam,  fresh  from  his  recollections  of  the 
Apis  worship  of  Egypt,  erected  golden  calves  at 
Bethel  and  at  Dan,  and  by  this  crafty  state-policy 
severed  for  ever  the  kingdoms  of  Judah  and  Israel 
(1  K.  xii.  26-33).  To  their  use  were  temples  con- 
secrated, and  the  service  in  their  honour  was  stu- 
diously copied  from  the  Mosaic  ritual.  High-priest 
himself,  Jeroboam  ordained  priests  from  the  lowest 
ranks  (2  Chr.  xi.  15);  incense  and  sacrifices  were 
offered,  and  a  solemn  festival  appointed,  closely 
resembling  the  feast  of  tabernacles  (1  K.  xii.  23, 
33;  cf.  Am.  iv.  4,  5).  [Jeroboam.]  The  worship 
of  the  calves,  "  the  sin  of  Israel  "  (Hos.  x.  8),  which 
was  apparently  associated  with  the  goat-worship 
of  Mendes  (2  Chr.  xi.  15  ;  Herod,  ii.  46)  or  of  the 
ancient  Zabii  (Lewis,  Orig.  Hebr.  v.  3),  and  the 
Asherim  (1  K.  xiv.  15 ;  A.  V.  "  groves"),  ultimately 
spread  to  the  kingdom  of  Judah,  and  centred  in 
Beersheba  (Am.  v.  5,  vii.  9).  At  what  precise  period 
it  was  introduced  into  the  latter  kingdom  is  not 
certain.  The  Chronicles  tell  us  how  Abijah  taunted 
Jeroboam  with  his  apostasy,  while  the  less  partial 
narrative  in  1  Kings  represents  his  own  conduct  as 
far  from  exemplary  (1  K.  xv.  3).  Asa's  sweeping 
reform  spared  not  even  the  idol  of  his.  grandmother 
Maachah,  and,  with  the  exception  of  the  high-places, 
he  removed  all  relics  of  idolatrous  worship  (1  K. 
xv.  12-14),  with  its  accompanying  impurities.  His 
reformation  was  completed  by  Jehoshaphat  (2  Chr. 
xvii.  6). 

The  successors  of  Jeroboam  followed  in  his 
steps,  till  Ahab,  who  married  a  Zidonian  princess, 
at  her  instigation  (1  K.  xxi.  25)  built  a  temple  and 
altar  to  Baal,  and  revived  all  the"  abominations  of 
the  Amorites  (1  K.  xxi.  26).  For  this  he  attained 
file  bad  pre-eminence  of  having  done  "  more  to 
provoke  Jehovah,  the  God  of  Israel,  to  auger  than 
all  the  kings  of  Israel  that  were  before  him"  (1  K. 
xvi.  33).  Compared  with  the  worship  of  Baal,  the 
worship  of  the  calves  was  a  venial  offence,  probably 
because  it  was  morally  less  detestable  and  also  less 
anti-national  (1  K.  xii.  28  ;  2  K.  x.  28-31).  [Eli- 
jah, 526  a.]  Henceforth  Baal-worship  became  so 
completely  identified  with  the  northern  kingdom 
that  it  is  described  as  walking  in  the  way  or  sta- 
tutes of  the  kings  of  Israel  (2  K.  xvi.  3,  xvii.  8), 
as  distinguished  from  the  sin  of  Jeroboam,  which 
ceased  not  till  the  captivity  (2  K.  xvii.  23),  and  the 
corruption  of  the  ancient  inhabitants  of  the  land. 
'flu1  idolatrous  priests  became  a  numerous  and  im- 
portant caste  (1  K.  xviii.  19),  living  under  the 
patronage  of  royalty,  and  fed  at  the  royal  table. 
The  extirpation  of  Baal's  priests  by  Elijah,  and  of 
his  followers  by  Jehu  (2  K.  x.),  in  which  tin' 
royal  family  of  Judah  shared  (2  Chr.  xxii.  7),  was 
a  "deathblow  to  this  form  of  idolatry  in  Israel, 
though  other  systems  still  remained  (2  K.  xiii.  6). 
But  while  Israel  thus  sinned  and  was  punished, 
Judah  was  more  morally  guilty  (Ez.  xvi.  51). 
The  alliance  of  Jehoshaphat  with  the  family  of 
Ahab  transferred  to  the  southern  kingdom,  during 
the  reigns  of  his  son  and  grandson,  all  the  appur- 
tenances of  Baal-worship  (2  K.  viii.  is,  27).  In 
less  than  ten  years  after  the  death  of  that   king,  in 


IDOLATRY 

whose  praise  it  is  recorded  that  he  "  sought  not 

the  Baalim,"  nor  walked  "  after  the  d 1  <>t'  Israel  " 

(■_'  Chr.  xvii.  3,  4),  a  temple  had  been  built  for  the 
idol,  statues  and  altars  erected,  and  priests  ap- 
pointed to  minister  in  Ins  service  (2  K.  xi.  18). 
Jehoiada's  vigorous  measures  checked  the  evil  for  a 
time,  but  his  reform  was  incomplete,  and  the  high- 
places  still  remained,  as  in  the  days  of  Asa,  a 
nucleus  tor  any  fresh  system  of  idolatry  (2  K.  xii. 
.".).  Much  of  this  might  be  due  to  the  influence 
of  the  king's  mother,  Zibiah  of  Beersheba,  a  place 
intimately  connected  with  the  idolatrous  detection 
of  Judah  (Am.  viii.  14).  After  the  death  of 
Jehoiada,  the  princes  prevailed  upon  Joash  to  re- 
store at  least  some  portion  id'  his  father's  idolatry 
( '_'  Chr.  xxiv.  18).  The  conquest  of  the  Edomites 
by  Amaziah  introduced  the  worship  of  their  gods, 
which  had  disappeared  since  the  days  of  Solomon 
('_'  Chr.  xxv.  14,  20).  After  this  period  even  the 
kings  who  did  not  lend  themselves  to  the  encourage- 
ment of  false  worship  hail  to  contend  with  the  cor- 
ruption which  still  lingered  in  the  hearts  of  the 
people  (2  K.  xv.  35;  '-'  Chr.  xxvii.  2).  Hitherto 
the  temple  had  been  kept  pure.  The  statues  of 
Baal  and  the  other  gods  were  worshipped  in  their 
own  shrines,  but  Ahaz,  who  "  sacrificed  unto  the 
gods  of  Damascus,  which  smote  him  "  (2  Chr.  xxviii. 
23),  and  built  altars  to  them  at  every  corner  of 
Jerusalem,  and  high-places  in  every  city  of  Judah, 
replaced  the  brazen  altar  of  burnt-offering  by  one 
made  after  the  model  of  "  the  altar"  of  Damascus, 
and  desecrated  it  to  his  own  uses  (2  K.  xvi. 
10-I5).a 

The  conquest  of  the  ten  tribes  by  Shalmaneser 
was  for  them  the  last  scene  of  the  drama  of  abomi- 
nations which  had  been  enacted  uninterruptedly 
for  upwards  of  250  years.  In  the  northern  king- 
dom no  reformer  arose  to  vary  the  long  line  of 
royal  apostates  ;  whatever  was  effected  in  the  way 
of  reformation,  was  done  by  the  hands  of  the  people 
(2  Chr.  xxxi.  1).  But  even  in  their  captivity  they 
helped  to  perpetuate  the  corruption.  The  colonists, 
whom  the  Assyrian  conquerors  placed  in  their 
stead  in  the  cities  of  Samaria,  brought  with  them 
thfiir  own  gods,  and  were  taught  at  Bethel  by  a 
priest  of  the  captive  nation  "  the  manner  of  the 
God  of  the  land,"  the  lessons  thus  learnt  resulting 
in  a  strange  admixture  of  the  calf-worship  of  Jero- 
boam with  the  homage  pajd  to  their  national  deities 

(2  K.  xvii.  24-41  i.  Their  descendants  were  in 
consequence  regarded  with  suspicion  by  the  elders 
who  returned  from  the  captivity  with  Ezra,  and 
their  offers  of  assistance  rejected  I  Ezr.  iv.  3) 

'fhe  first  act  of  Hezekiah  on  ascending  the  throne 
was  the  restoration  and  purification  of  the  temple 
which  had  been  dismantled  and  closed  during  the 
latter  part  of  bis  Father's  life  (2  chr.  xxviii.  24, 
xxix.  :;).  The  multitudes  who  (locked  to  Jeru- 
salem to  celebrate  tie-  passover,  so  long  in  abey- 
ance, renio\  el  the  idolatrous  altars  of  burnt-offering 
and  incense  erected  by  Aha/.  (2  Chr.  cue.  14  . 
The  iconoclastic  spirit  was  not  confined  to  Judah 
and  Benjamin,  but  spread  throughout  Ephraim  and 
Manasseh  (2  chr.  xxxi.  1 ),  and  to  all  external  ap- 
i  e  idolatry  was  extirpate  I.     But   tie'  reform 

*  The  Syr.  supports  the  rendering  of  ~\\?2?  i" 
v.  1.3,  which  the  A.  V.  has  adopted — "  to  enquire  by"  : 
hut  Keil  translates  the  clause,  "it  will  lie  tor  me  to 
consider,"  i.e.  what  shall  lie  done  with  the  altar,  in 
order  to  support  his  theory  that  this  altar  erected  by 
Ahaz  was  not  directly  intended  to  profane  the  temple 


IDOLATRY 


855 


extended  little  below  the  surface  (Is.  .xxix.  13). 
Among  the  leaders  of  the  people  there  were  many 
in  high  position  who  conformed  to  the  necessities  of 
the  time  (Is.  xxviii.  14),  and  under  Manasseh' s 
patronage  the  false  worship,  which  had  been  merely 
driven  into  obscurity,  broke  out  with  tenfold  viru- 
lence. Idolatry  of  every  form,  and  with  all  the 
accessories  of  enchantments,  divination,  and  witch- 
craft, was  again  rife ;  no  place  was  too  sacred,  no 
associations  too  hallowed,  to  be  spared  the  contami- 
nation. If  the  conduct  of  Ahaz  in  erecting  an  altar 
in  the  temple  court  is  open  to  a  charitable  con- 
struction, Mauasseh's  was  of  no  doubtful  character. 
The  two  courts  of  the  temple  were  profaned  by  altars 
dedicated  to  the  host  of  heaven,  and  the  image  of 
the  Asherah  polluted  the  holy  place  (2  K.  xxi.  7  ; 
2  Chr.  xxxiii.  7,  15  ;  cf.  Jer.  xxxii.  34).  Even  in 
his  late  repentance  he  did  not  entirely  destroy  all 
traces  of  his  former  wrong.  The  people,  easily 
swayed,  still  burned  incense  on  the  high  places; 
but  Jehovah  was  the  ostensible  object  of  their  wor- 
ship. The  king's  son  sacrificed  to  his  father's 
idols,  but  was  not  associated  with  him  in  his  re- 
pentance, and  in  his  short  reign  of  two  years, 
restored  all  the  altars  of  the  Baalim,  and  the  images 
of  the  Asherah.  With  the  death  of  Josiah  ended 
the  last  effort  to  revive  among  the  people  a  purer 
ritual,  if  not  a  purer  faith.  The  lamp  of  David, 
which  had  long  shed  but  a  struggling  ray,  flickered 
for  a  while  and  then  went  out  in  the  darkness  of 
Babylonian  captivity. 

But  foreign  exile  was  powerless  to  eradicate  the 
deep  inbred  tendency  to  idolatry.  One  of  the  first 
difficulties  with  which  Ezra  had  to  contend,  and 
which  brought  him  well  nigh  to  despair,  was  the 
haste  with  which  his  countrymen  took  them  foreign 
wives  of  the  people  of  the  land,  and  followed  them 
in  all  their  abominations  (Ezr.  ix.).  The  priests 
and  rulers,  to  whom  he  looked  for  assistance  in  his 
great  enterprize,  were  among  the  first  to  fill  away 
(Ezr.  ix.  2,  x.  18;  Neh.  vi.  17,  IS,  xiii.  2:'.j. 
Even  during  the  captivity  the  devotees  of  false 
worship  plied  their  craft  as  prophets  and  diviners 
(Jer.  xxix.  8;  Ez.  xiii.),  and  the  Jews  wdio  fled  to 
Egypt  carried  with  them  recollections  of  the  ma- 
terial prosperity  which  attended  their  idolatrous 
sacrifices  in  Judah,  and  to  the  neglect  of  which  they 
attributed  their  exiled  condition  (Jer.  xliv.  17,  18). 
The  conquests  of  Alexander  in  Asia  caused  Greek 
influence  to  be  extensively  felt,  and  Greek  idolatry 
to  be  first  tolerated,  and  then  practised,  by  the  Jews 
(1  Mace.  i.  43-50,  54).  The  attempt  of  Antiochus 
to  establish  this  form  of  worship  was  vigorously 
resisted  by  Mattathias  ( 1  Mace.  ii.  23-26),  who  was 
joined  in  Ins  rebellion  by  the  Assidaeans  (ver.  42), 

and  destroyed  the  altars  at  which  the  king  '"in- 
manded  them  to  sacrifice  (1  Mace.  ii.  25,  45). 
The  erection  of  synagogues  has  been  assigned  as  a 

reason  for  the  comparative  purity  of  the  Jewish 
worship  after  the  captivity  (Pridoaux,  <;.,nt. 
i.  :'.7  1   .  while  another  cause  has  1 u  discovered  in 

the  hatred  tin-  images  acquired  by  the  Jews  in  their 
intercourse  with  the  Persians. 

It  has  been  a  question  much  debated  whether 
the  Israelites  were  ever  so  far  given  up  to  idolatry 

by  idolatrous  worship.  Bui  it  is  clear  that  something 
of  an  idolatrous  nature  had  been  introduced  into  the 

temple,  and  was  afterwards  removed  by  Hezekiab 
J  Chr.  xxix.  5;  cf.  Ezr.  vi.  21,  ix.  11  .  It  is  pos- 
sihie  that  this  might  have  reference  to  tin-  inn/en 
serpent. 


856 


IDOLATRY 


as  to  lose  all  knowledge  of  the  true  God.  It  would 
be  hard  to  assert  this  of  any  nation,  and  still  more 
difficult  to  prove.  That  there  always  remained 
among  them  a  faithful  few,  who  in  the  face  of 
every  danger  adhered  to  the  worship  of  Jehovah, 
may  readily  be  believed,  for  even  at  a  time  when 
Baal  worship  was  most  prevalent  there  were  found 
seven  thousand  in  Israel  who  had  not  bowed  before 
his  image  (1  K.  xix.  18).  But  there  is  still  room  for 
grave  suspicion  that  among  the  masses  of  the  people, 
though  the  idea  of  a  supreme  Being — of  whom  the 
images  they  worshipped  were  but  the  distorted  repre- 
sentatives— was  not  entirely  lost,  it  was  so  obscured 
as  to  be  but  dimly  apprehended.  And  not  only  were 
the  ignorant  multitude  thus  led  astray,  but  the 
priests,  scribes,  and  prophets,  became  leaders  of  the 
apostasy  (Jer.  ii.  8).  Warburton,  indeed,  main- 
tained that  they  never  formally  renounced  Jehovah, 
and  that  their  defection  consisted  "  in  joining  foreign 
worship  and  idolatrous  ceremonies  to  the  ritual  of 
the  true  God"  (Div.  Leg.  B.  v.  §3).  But  one 
passage  in  their  history,  though  confessedly  obscure, 
seems  to  point  to  a  time  when,  under  the  rule  of 
the  judges,  "  Israel  for  many  days  had  no  true  God, 
and  no  teaching  priest,  and  no  law  "  (2  Chr.  xv. 
3).  The  correlative  argument  of  Cudworth,  who 
contends  from  the  teaching  of  the  Hebrew  doctors 
and  rabbis  "  that  the  pagan  nations,  anciently,  at 
least  the  intelligent  amongst  them,  acknowledged 
one  supreme  God  of  the  whole  world;  and  that  all 
other  gods  were  but  creatures  and  inferior  minis- 
ters," is  controverted  by  Mosheim  (fntell.  Syst.  i. 
4,  §  30,  and  notes).  There  can  be  no  doubt  that 
much  of  the  idolatry  of  the  Hebrews  consisted  in 
worshipping  the  true  God  under  an  image,  such  as 
the  calves  at  Bethel  and  Dan  (Jos.  Ant.  viii.  8,  §5  ; 
8a/j.d\eis  eiruivvfiovs  tw  6e$)  and  by  associating 
his  worship  with  idolatrous  rites  (Jer.  xli.  5),  and 
places  consecrated  to  idols  (2  K.  xviii.  22).  From 
the  peculiarity  of  their  position  they  were  never 
distinguished  as  the  inventors  of  a  new  pantheon, 
nor  did  they  adopt  any  one  system  of  idolatry  so 
exclusively  as  ever  to  become  identified  with  it.b 
But  they  no  sooner  came  in  contact  with  other 
nations  than  they  readily  adapted  themselves  to 
their  practices,  the  old  spirit  of  antagonism  died 
rapidly  away,  and  intermarriage  was  one  step  to 
idolatry. 

II.  The  old  religion  of  the  Semitic  races  consisted, 
in  the  opinion  of  Movers  (Phoen.  i.  c.  5),  in  the  dei- 
fication of  the  powers  and  laws  of  nature ;  these 
powers  being  considered  either  as  distinct  and  inde- 
pendent, or  as  manifestations  of  one  supreme  and 
all-ruling  being.  In  most  instances  the  two  ideas 
were  co-existent.  The  deity,  following  human  ana- 
logy, was  conceived  as  male  and  female :  the  one 
representing  the  active,  the  other  the  passive  prin- 
ciple of  nature;  the  former  the  source  of  spiritual, 
the  latter  of  physical  life.  The  transference  of  the 
attributes  of  the  one  to  the  other  resulted  either  in 
their  mystical  conjunction  in  the  hermaphrodite,  as 
the  Persian  Mithra  and  Phoenician  Baal,  or  the 
two  combined  to  form  a  third,  which  symbolized 
the  essential  unity  of  both.c  With  these  two  su- 
preme beings  all  other  deities  are  identical;  so  that 


IDOLATRY 

in  different  nations  the  same  nature-worship  appears 
under  different  forms,  representing  the  various  as- 
pects under  which  the  idea  of  the  power  of  nature 
is  presented.  The  sun  and  moon  were  early  selected 
as  outward  symbols  of  this  all-pervading  power,  and 
the  worship  of  the  heavenly  bodies  was  not  only  the 
most  ancient  but  the  most  prevalent  system  of  idol- 
atry. Taking  its  rise,  according  to  a  probable  hypo- 
thesis, in  the  plains  of  Chaldea,  it  spread  through 
Egypt,  Greece,  Scythia,  and  even  Mexico  and  Cey- 
lon. It  was  regarded  as  an  offence  amenable  to 
the  civil  authorities  in  the  days  of  Job  (xxxi.  2G- 
28),  and  one  of  the  statutes  of  the  Mosaic  law  was 
directed  against  its  observance  (Deut.  iv.  19;  xvii. 
3)  ;  the  former  referring  to  the  star-worship  of 
Arabia,  the  latter  to  the  concrete  form  in  which  it 
appeared  among  the  Syrians  and  Phoenicians.  It 
is  probable  that  the  Israelites  learnt  their  first 
lessons  in  sun-worship  from  the  Egyptians,  in  whose 
religious  system  that  luminary,  as  Osiris,  held  a  pro- 
minent place.  The  city  of  On  (Bethshemesh  or  He- 
liopolis)  took  its  name  from  his  temple  (Jer.  xliii. 
13),  and  the  wife  of  Joseph  was  the  daughter  of  his 
priest  (Gen.  xli.  45).     The  Phoenicians  worshipped 

him  under  the  title  of  "  Lord  of  heaven,"  7J?3 
□1Oty,  Baal-shamayim  (^eeXad/xrii',  ace.  to  San- 

choniatho  in  Philo  Byblius),  and  Adon,  the  Greek 
Adonis,  and  the  Thammuz  of  Ezekiel  (viii.  14). 
[Thammuz.]  As  Molech  or  Milcom,  the  sun  was 
worshipped  by  the  Ammonites,  and  as  Ghemosh  by 
the  Moabites.  The  Hadad  of  the  Syrians  is  the 
same  deity,  whose  name  is  traceable  in  Benhadad, 
Hadadezer,  and  Hadad  or  Adad,  the  Edomite.  The 
Assyrian  Bel  or  Belus,  is  another  form  of  Baal. 
According  to  Philo  (de  Vit.  Cont.  §3)  the  Essenes 
were  wont  to  pray  to  the  sun  at  morning  and  evening 
(Jos.  B.  J.  ii.  8,  §5).  By  the  later  kings  of  Judah, 
sacred  horses  and  chariots  were  dedicated  to  the  sun- 
god,  as  by  the  Persians  (2  K.  xxiii.  1 1  ;  Bochart, 
Hieroz.  pt.  1 ,  b.  ii.  c.  xi ;  Selden,  de  Bis  Syr.  ii.  8)  ; 
to  march  in  procession  and  greet  his  rising  (R.  Sol. 
Jarchi  on  2  K.  xxiii.  11.)  The  Massagetae  offered 
horses  in  sacrifice  to  him  (Strabo,  xi.  p.  513),  on 
the  principle  enunciated  by  Macrobius  {Sat.  vii.  7), 
"like  rejoieeth  in  like"  ("  similibus  similia  gau- 
dent;"  cf.  Her.  i.  216),  and  the  custom  was  com- 
mon to  many  nations. 

The  moon,  worshipped  by  the  Phoenicians  under 
the  name  of  Astarte  (Lucian  de  Dea  Syra,  c.  4), 
or  Baaltis,  the  passive  power  of  nature,  as  Baal  was 
the  active  (Movers,  i.  149),  and  known  to  the  He- 
brews as  Ashtaroth  or  Ashtoreth,  the  tutelary  god- 
dess of  the  Zidonians,  appears  early  among  the 
objects  of  Israelitish  idolatry.  But  this  Syrophoe- 
nician  worship  of  the  sun  and  moon  was  of  a  grosser 
character  than  the  pure  star-worship  of  the  Magn 
which  Movers  distinguishes  as  Upper  Asiatic  or 
Assyro-Persian,  and  was  ecmally  removed  from  the 
Chaldean  astrology  and  Zabianism  of  later  times. 
The  former  of  these  systems  tolerated  no  images  or 
altars,  and  the  contemplation  of  the  heavenly  bodies 
from  elevated  spots  constituted  the  greater  part  of 
its  ritual. 

But,  though  we  have  no  positive  historical  ac- 


b  As  the  Moabites  with  the  worship  of  Chemosh 
(Num.  xxi.  29). 

c  This  will  explain  the  occurrence  of  the  name  of 
Baal  with  the  masculine  anil  feminine  articles  in  the 
LXX  ;  cf.  Has.  xi.  2;  Jer.  xix.  5;  Horn.  xi.  4. 
Philochorus,  quoted  by  Macrobius  [Sat.  iii .  8),  says 


that  men  and  women  sacrificed  to  Venus  or  the  Moon, 
with  the  garments  of  the  sexes  interchanged,  because 
she  was  regarded  both  as  masculine  and  feminine 
(see  Selden,  de  Dts  Syr.  ii.  2).  Hence  humus  and 
Luna. 


IDOLATRY 

count  of  star- worship  before  the  Assyrian  period, 
we  may  infer  that  it  was  early  practised  in  a  con- 
crete form  among  the  Israelites  from  the  allusions 
in  Amos  v.  26,  and  Acts  vii.  42,  43.  Even  in  the 
desert  they  are  said  to  have  been  given  up  to  wor- 
ship the  host  oHieaven,  while  Chiun  and  Kemphan, 
or  Kephan,  have  on  various  grounds  been  identified 
with  the  planet  Saturn.  It  was  to  counteract 
idolatry  of  this  nature  that  the  stringent  law  of 
Deut.  xvii.  3  was  enacted,  and  with  the  view  of 
withdrawing  the  Israelites  from  undue  contempla- 
tion of  the  material  universe,  Jehovah,  the  God  of 
Israel,  is  constantly  placed  before  them  as  Jehovah 
Zebaoth,  Jehovah  of  Hosts,  the  king  of  heaven 
(Dan.  iv.  35,  37),  to  whom  the  heaven  and  heaven 
of  heavens  belong  (Deut.  x.  14).  However  this 
may  be,  Movers  {Phoen.  i.  65,  66)  contends  that 
the  later  star-worship,  introduced  by  Ahaz  and  fol- 
lowed by  Manasseh,  was  purer  and  more  spiritual 
in  its  nature  than  the  Israelite-Phoenician  worship 
of  the  heavenly  bodies  under  symbolical  forms  as 
Baal  and  Asherah ;  and  that  it  was  not  idolatry  in 
the  same  sense  that  the  latter  was,  but  of  a  simply 
contemplative  character.  He  is  supported,  to  some 
extent,  by  the  fact  that  we  find  no  mention  of  any 
images  of  the  sun  or  moon  or  the  host  of  heaven, 
but  merely  of  vessels  devoted  to  their  service  (2  K. 
xxiii.  4).  But  there  is  no  reason  to  believe  that 
the  divine  honours  paid  to  the  "  Queen  of  Heaven  " 
(or  as  others  render,  "  the  frame"  or  "  structure  of 
the  heavens  ")d  were  equally  dissociated  from  image- 
worship.  Mr.  Layard  (Nin.  ii.  451)  discovered  a' 
bas-relief  at  Nimroud,  which  represented  four  idols 
carried  in  procession  by  Assyrian  warriors.  One 
of  these  figures  he  identifies  with  Hera  the  Assy- 
rian Astarte,  represented  with  a  star  on  her  head 
(Am.  v.  26),  and  with  the  "queen  of  heaven," 
who  appears  on  the  rock-tablets  of  Pterium  "  stand- 
ing erect  on  a  lion,  and  crowned  with  a  tower,  or 
mural  coronet,"  as  in  the  Syrian  temple  of  Hiera- 
polis  {Id.  p.  456  ;  Lucian,  de  Dea  Syra,  31,  32). 
But,  in  his  remarks  upon  a  figure  which  resembles 
the  Phea  of  Diodorus,  Mr.  Layard  adds,  "  the  re- 
presentation in  a  human  form  of  the  celestial  bodies, 
themselves  originally  but  a  type,  was  a  corruption 
which  appears  to  have  crept  at  a  later  period  into 
the  mythology  of  Assyria  ;  for,  in  the  more  ancient 
bas-reliefs,  figures  with  caps  surmounted  by  stars  do 
not  occur,  and  the  sun,  moon,  and  planets  stand 
alone"  {Id.  p.  457,  458). 

The  allusions  in  Job  xxxviii.  31,  32,  are  too  ob- 
scure to  allow  any  inference  to  be  drawn  as  to  the 
mysterious  influences  which  were  held  by  the  old 
astrologers  to  be  exercised  by  the  stars  over  human 
destiny,  nor  is  there  sufficient  evidence  to  connect 
them  with  anything  mure  recondite  than  the  astro- 
nomical knowledge  of  the  period.  The  same  may 
be  said  of  the  poetical  figure  in  Deborah's  chant  of 
triumph,  "  the  stars  from  their  highways  waned 
with  Si  sera  "  (Judg.  v.  20).  In  the  later  times  of 
the  monarchy,  Mazzaloth,  the  planets,  or  the  zodi- 
acal signs,  received,  nexi  to  the  sun  and  moon,  their 
share  of  popular  adoration  (2  K.  xxiii.  .r>);  and  the 
history  of  idolatry  among  the  Hebrews  shows  at 
all  times  an  intimate  connexion  between  the  deifi- 


IDOLATRY 


857 


d  Jer.  vii.  18  ;  xlix.  19.     In  the  former  passage 

some  MSS.  have  n3X?P  for  D3?D,  a  reading  sup- 
ported by  the  LXX.,  t;j  (rrparitf,  a-  well  as  by  the 

Syr.   .*ASVClg3,   pnhht'm,  its   equivalent.      But   in 

the  latter  they  both  agree  in  the  rendering  "  queen." 


cation  of  the  heavenly  bodies,  and  the  superstition 
which  watched  the  clouds  for  signs,  and  used  divi- 
nation and  enchantments.  It  was  but  a  step  from 
such  culture  of  the  sidereal  powers  to  the  worship 
of  Gad  and  Meni,  Babylonian  divinities,  symbols 
of  Venus  or  the  moon,  as  the  goddess  of  luck  or 
fortune.  Under  the  latter  aspect,  the  moon  was 
reverenced  by  the  Egyptians  (Macrob.  Sat.  i.  19) ; 
and  the  name  Baal  Gad  is  possibly  an  example  of  the 
manner  in  which  the  worship  of  the  planet  Jupiter 
as  the  bringer  of  luck  was  grafted  on  the  old  faith 
of  the  Phoenicians.  The  false  gods  of  the  colonists 
of  Samaria  were  probably  connected  with  Eastern 
astrology :  Adrammelech,  Movers  regards  as  the 
sun-fire — the  Solar  Mars,  and  Anammelech  the  Solar 
Saturn  {Phoen.  i.  410,  411).  The  Vulgate  render- 
ing of  Prov.  xxvi.  8,  "sicut  qui  mittit  lapidem  in 
acervum  Mercurii,"  follows  the  Midrash  on  the 
passage  quoted  by  Jarchi,  and  requires  merely  a 
passing  notice  (see  Selden,  de  Lis  Syris,  ii.  15  ; 
Maim,  de  Idol.  iii.  2  ;  Buxtorf,  Lex.  Talm.  s.  v. 

Beast-worship,  as  exemplified  in  the  calves  of 
Jeroboam  and  the  dark  hints  which  seem  to  point 
to  the  goat  of  Mendes,  has  already  been  alluded  to. 
There  is  no  actual  proof  that  the  Israelites  ever 
joined  in  the  service  of  Dagon,e  the  fish-god  of  the 
Philistines,  though  Ahaziah  sent  stealthily  to  Baal- 
zebub,  the  fly-god  of  Ekron  (2  K.  i.),  and  in  later 
times  the  brazen  serpent  became  the  object  of  idola- 
trous homage  (2  K.  xviii.  4).  But  whether  the 
latter  was  regarded  with  superstitious  reverence  as 
a  memorial  of  their  early  history,  or  whether  in- 
cense was  offered  to  it  as  a  symbol  of  some  power 
of  nature,  cannot  now  be  exactly  determined.  The 
threatening  in  Lev.  xxvi.  30,  "  I  will  put  your 
carcases  upon  the  carcases  of  your  idols,"  may 
fairly  be  considered  as  directed  aganist  the  ten- 
dency to  regard  animals,  as  in  Egypt,  as  the 
symbols  of  deity.  Tradition  says  that  Nergal, 
the  god  of  the  men  of  Cuth,  the  idol  of  fire  ac- 
cording to  Leusden  {Phil.  Hcbr.  II let.  diss.  43), 
was  worshipped  under  the  form  of  a  cock ;  Ashima 
as  a  he-goat,  the  emblem  of  generative  power  ; 
Nibhaz  as  a  dog ;  Adrammelech  as  a  mule  or  pea- 
cock ;  and  Anammelech  as  a  horse  or  pheasant. 

Of  pure  hero-worship  among  the  Semitic 
races  we  find  no  trace.  Moses  indeed  seems  to 
have  entertained  some  dim  apprehension  that  his 
countrymen  might,  after  his  death,  pay  him  more 
honours  than  were  due  to  man  ;  and  the  anticipa- 
tion of  this  led  him  to  review  his  own  conduct  in 
terms  of  strong  reprobation  (Deut.  iv.  21,  22). 
The  expression  in  Ps.  cvi.  28,  "  the  sacrifices  of  the 
dead,"  is  in  all  probability  metaphorical,  and  Wisd. 
xiv.  15  refers  to  a  later  practice  due  to  Greek  in- 
fluence. The  rabbinical  commentators  discover  in 
Gen.  zlviii.  16,  an  allusion  to  the  worshipping  of 
angels  (Col.  ii.  18),  while  they  defend  their  an- 
cestors  from  the  charge  of  regarding  them  in  any 
other  light  than  mediators,  or  intercessors  with 
God  (Lewis,  Orig.  ffebr.  v.  3).  It  is  needless  to 
add  that  their  inference  and  apology  are  equally 
groundless.  With  like  probability  has  been  ad- 
vanced the  theory  of  the  demon-worship  of  the 


■  Borne  have  explained  the  allusion  in  Zeph.  i.  9, 
as  referring  to  a  practice  oonnected  with  the  worship 

Of  Dagon  ;   comp.  1  Sam.  v.  5.      The  Syrians,  on  the 

authority  of  Xcnophon  [Anab    i.  4,  §9),  paid  divine 
honours  to  tisli. 

3  K 


858 


IDOLATRY 


Hebrews,  the  only  foundation  for  it  being  two 
highly  poetical  passages  (Deut.  xxxii.  17;  Ps. 
cvi.  37).  It  is  possible  that  the  Persian  dualism 
is  hinted  at  in  Is.  xlv.  7. 

But  if  the  forms  of  the  false  gods  were  manifold, 
the  places  devoted  to  their  worship  were  almost 
equally  numerous.  The  singular  reverence  with 
which  trees  have  in  all  ages  been  honoured  is  not 
without  example  in  the  history  of  the  Hebrews. 
The  terebinth  at  Mamre,  beneath  which  Abraham 
built  an  altar  ((Sen.  xii.  7,  xiii.  18),  and  the  me- 
morial grove  planted  by  him  at  Beersheba  (Gen. 
xxi.  33),  were  intimately  connected  with  patri- 
archal worship,  though  in  after  ages  his  descend- 
ants were  forbidden  to  do  that  which  he  did  with 
impunity,  in  order  to  avoid  the  contamination  of 
idolatry.'  As  a  symptom  of  their  rapidly  degener- 
ating spirit,  the  oak  of  Shechem,  which  stood  in  the 
sanctuary  of  Jehovah  (Josh.  xxiv.  26),  and  beneath 
which  Joshua  set  up  the  stone  of  witness,  perhaps 
appears  in  Judges  (ix.  87),  as  "  the  oak  (not 
'  plain,'  as  in  A.  V.)  of  soothsayers  "  or  "  augurs."  s 
Mountains  and  high  places  were  chosen  spots  for 
offering  sacrifice  and  incense  to  idols  (1  K.  xi.  7, 
xiv.  23) ;  and  the  retirement  of  gardens  and  the 
thick  shade  of  woods  offered  great  attractions  to 
their  worshippers  (2  K.  xvi.  4 ;  Is.  i.  29  ;  Hos. 
iv.  13).  Jt  was  the  ridge  of  Carmel  which  Elijah 
selected  as  the  scene  of  his  contest  with  the  priests 
of  Baal,  fighting  with  them  the  battle  of  Jehovah  as 
it  were  on  their  own  ground.  [Carmel.]  Carmel 
was  regarded  by  the  Roman  historians  as  a  sacred 
mountain  of  the  Jews  (Tac.  H.  ii.  78  ;  Suet.  Vesp. 
7).  The  host  of  heaven  was  worshipped  on  the 
housetop  (2  K.xxiii.  12;  Jer.  xix.  3,xxxii.  29;  Zeph. 
l.  5).  In  describing  the  sun-worship  of  the  iS'abataei, 
Strabo  (xvi.  p.  784)  mentions  two  characteristics 
which  strikingly  illustrate  the  worship  of  Baal. 
They  built  their  altars  on  the  roofs  of  houses,  and 
offered  on  them  incense  and  libations  daily.  On 
the  wall  of  his  city,  in  the  sight  of  the  besieging 
armies  of  Israel  and  Edom,  the  king  of  Moab  offered 
his  eldest  son  as  a  burnt-offering.  The  Persians, 
who  worshipped  the  sun  under  the  name  of  Mithra 
(Strabo,  xv.  p.  732),  sacrificed  on  an  elevated  spot, 
but  built  no  altars  or  images. 

The-  priests  of  the  false  worship  are  sometimes 
designated  Chemarim,  a  word  of  Syriac  origin,  to 
which  different  meanings  have  been  assigned.  It 
is  applied  to  the  non-Levitieal  priests  who  burnt 
incense  on  the  high-places  (2  K.  xxiii.  5)  as  well 
as  to  the  priests  of  the  calves  (Hos.  x.  5)  ;  and 
the  corresponding  word  is  used  in  the  Peshito 
(Judg.  xviii.  30)  of  Jonathan  and  his  descend- 
ants, priests  to  the  tribe  of  Dan,  and  in  Targ. 
Onkelos  (Gen.  xlvii.  22)  of  the  priests  of  Egypt. 
The  Rabbis,  followed  by  Gesenius,  have  derived 
it  from  a  root  signifying  "  to  be  black,"  and 
without  any  authority  assert  that  the  name  was 
given   to  idolatrous  priests  from  the   black  vest- 


f  Jerome  (Onomast.  s.  v.  Drys)  mentions  an  oak 
near  Hebron  which  existed  in  his  infancy,  and  was 
the  traditional  tree  beneath  which  Abraham  dwelt. 
It  was  regarded  with  great  reverence,  and  was  made 
an  object  of  worship  by  the  heathen.  Modern  Pales- 
tine abounds  with  sacred  trees.  They  are  found 
"  all  over  the  land  covered  with  bits  of  rags  from 
the  garments  of  passing  villagers,  hung  up  as  ac- 
knowledgments or.as  deprecatory  signals  and  charms  : 
and  we  find  beautiful  clumps  of  oak  trees  sacred  to  a 
kind  of  beings  called  Jacob's  daughters  "  (Thomson, 
The  Land  and  the  Book,  ii.  151).      [See  Grove.] 


IDOLATRY 

ments  which  they  wore.  But  white  was  the  dis- 
tinctive colour  in  the  priestly  garments  of  all  nations 
from  India  to  Gaul,  and  black  was  only  worn  when 
they  sacrificed  to  the  subterranean  gods  (Bahr, 
Si/ml),  ii.  87,  &c).  That  a  special  dress  was  adopted 
by  the  Baal-worshippers,  as  well  ns  by  the  false 
prophets  (Zech.  xiii.  4),  is  evident  from "2  K.  x.  22 
(where  the  rendering  should  be  "the  apparel"): 
the  vestments  were  kept  in  an  apartment  of  the 
idol  temple,  under  the  charge  probably  of  one  of 
the  inferior  priests.  Micah's  Levite  was  provided 
with  appropriate  robes  (Judg.  xvii.  11).  The 
"foreign  apparel"  mentioned  in  Zeph.  i.  8,  refers 
doubtless  to  a  similar  dress,  adopted  by  the  Is- 
raelites in  defiance  of  the  sumptuary  law  in  Num. 
xv.  37-40. 

In  addition  to  the  priests  there  were  other  per- 
sons intimately  connected  with  idolatrous  rites,  and 
the  impurities  from  which  they  were  inseparable. 
Both  men  and  women  consecrated  themselves  to  the 
service  of  idols :  the  former  as  D^C'Ip.  kedeshim, 
for  which  there  is  reason  to  believe  the  A.  V. 
(Deut.  xxiii.  17,  &c.)  has  not  given  too  harsh 
an  equivalent;,  the  latter  as  JIVJHp,  kedeshoth, 
who  wove  shrines  for  Astarte  (2  K.  xxiii.  7),  and 
resembled  the  eraipai  of  Corinth,  of  whom  Strabo 
(viii.  p.  378)  says  there  were  more  than  a  thou- 
sand attached  to  the  temple  of  Aphrodite.  Egyp- 
tian prostitutes  consecrated  themselves  to  Isis  (Juv. 
vi.  489,  ix.  22-24).  The  same  class  of  women 
existed  among  the  Phoenicians,  Armenians,  Ly- 
dians,  and  Babylonians  (Her.  i.  93,  199  ;  Strabo, 
xi.  p.  532  ;  Epist.  of  Jerem.  ver.  43).  They 
are  distinguished  from  the  public  prostitutes  (Hos. 
iv.  14)  and  associated  with  the  performances  of 
sacred  rites,  just  as  in  Strabo  (xii.  p.  559)  we 
find  the  two  classes  co-existing  at  Comana,  the 
Corinth  of  Pontus,  much  frequented  by  pilgrims 
to  the  shrine  of  Aphrodite. h  The  wealth  thus  ob- 
tained flowed  into  the  treasury  of  the  idol  temple, 
and  against  such  a  practice  the  injunction  in  Deut. 
xxiii.  18  is  directed.  Dr.  Maitland,  anxious  to 
defend  the  moral  character  of  Jewish  women,  has 
with  much  ingenuity  attempted  to  show  that  a 
meaning  foreign  to  their  true  sense  has  been  at- 
tached to  the  words  above  mentioned ;  and  that, 
though  closely  associated  with,  idolatrous  services, 
they  do  not  indicate  such  foul  corruption  (Essay 
on  False  Worship).  But  if,  as  Movers,  with 
great  appearance  of  probability,  has  conjectured 
( Phoen.  i.  679),  the  class  of  per>ons  alluded  to 
was  composed  of  foreigners,  the  Jewish  women  in 
this  respect  need  no  such  advocacy.  That  such 
customs  existed  among  foreign  nations  there  is 
abundant  evidence  to  prove  (Lucian,  de  Syra  Pea, 
c.  5) ;  and  from  the  juxta-position  of  prostitution 
and  the  idolatrous  rites  against  which  the  laws  in 
Lev.  xix.  are  aimed,  it  is  probable  that,  next  to  its 
immorality,  one  main  reason  why  it   was  visited 


s  Unless,  indeed,  this  be  a  relic  of  the  ancient  Ca- 
naanitish  worship  ;  an  older  name  associated  with 
idolatry,  which  the  conquering  Hebrews  were  com- 
manded and  endeavoured  to  obliterate  (Deut.  xii.  3). 

h  An  illustration,  though  not  an  example,  of  this  is 
found  in  the  modern  history  of  Europe.  At  a  period 
of  great  proflgacy  and  corruption  of  morals,  licentious- 
ness was  carried  to  such  an  excess  in  Strasburg  that 
the  public  prostitutes  received  the  appellation  of  the 
swallows  of  the  cathedral  (Miller,  Phil,  of  Hist.  ii. 
441). 


IDOLATRY 

with  such  stringency  was  its  connexion  with  idolatry 
(comp.  1  Cor.  vi.  9). 

But  besides  these  accessories  there  were  the  ordin- 
ary rites  of  worship  which  idolatrous  systems  had 
in  common  with  the  religion  of  the  Hebrews. 
Offering  burnt  sacrifices  to  the  idol  gods  (2  K. 
v.  17),  burning  incense  in  their  honour  (1  K. 
xi.  8),  and  bowing  down  in  worship  before  their 
images  (1  K.  xix.  18)  were  the  chief  parts  of  their 
ritual  ;  and  from  their  very  analogy  with  the  cere- 
monies of  true  worship  were  more  seductive  than 
the  grosser  forms.  Nothing  can  be  stronger  or  more 
positive  than  the  language  in  which  these  cere- 
monies were  denounced  by  Hebrew  law.  Every 
detail  of  idol-worship  was  made  the  subject  of  a 
separate  enactment,  and  many  of  the  laws,  which  in 
themselves  seem  trivial  and  almost  absurd,  receive 
from  this  point  of  view  their  true  significance. 
We  are  told  by  Maimonides  {Mor.  Neb.  c.  12)  that 
the  prohibitions  against  sowing  a  field  with  mingled 
seed,  and  wearing  garments  of  mixed  material,  were 
directed  against  the  practices  of  idolaters,  who  attri- 
buted a  kind  of  magical  influence  to  the  mixture 
(Lev.  xix.  19  ;  Spencer,  de  Leg.  Hebr.  ii.  18). 
Such  too  were  the  precepts  which  forbade  that  the 
garments  of  the  sexes  should  be  interchanged  (Deut. 
xxiii.  5;  Maimon.  De  Idol.  xii.  9).  According  to 
Maerobius  {Sat.  iii.  8)  other  Asiatics  when  they 
sacrificed  to  their  Venus  changed  the  dress  of  the 
sexes.  The  priests  of  Cybele  appeared  in  women's 
clothes,  and  used  to  mutilate  themselves  (Creuzer, 
Sipnb.  ii.  34,  42):  the  same  custom  was  observed 
"  by  the  Ithyphalli  in  the  rites  of  Bacchus,  and  by 
the  Athenians  in  their  Ascophoria  "  (Young,  Idol. 
(  'or.  in  Eel.  i.  105;  cf.  Lucian,  de  Dea  Syra,  c. 
15).  To  preserve  the  Israelites  from  contamination, 
they  were  prohibited  for  three  years  after  their 
conquest  of  Canaan  from  eating  of  the  fruit-trees 
of  the  land,  whose  cultivation  had  been  attended 
with  magical  rites  (Lev.  xix.  23).  They  were 
forbidden  to  "  round  the  corner  of  the  head," 
and  to  "mar  the  corner  of  the  beard"  (Lev.  xix. 
27),  as  the  Arabians  did  in  honour  of  their  gods 
(Her.  iii.  8,  iv.  175).  Hence,  the  phrase  'VlVp 
HND,  ketsutse  plii'i'ih,  (literally)  "shorn  of  the 
corner,"  is  especially  applied  to  idolaters  (Jer.  ix. 
26,  xxv.  23).  Spencer  (de  Leg.  Hebr.  ii.  9,  §2) 
explains  the  law  forbidding  the  offering  of  honey 
(Lev.  ii.  11)  as  intended  to  oppose  an  idolatrous 
practice.  Strata  describes  the  Magi  as  offering  in 
all  their  sacrifices  libations  of  oil  mingled  with 
honey  and  milk  (xv.  p.  733).  Offerings  in  which 
honey  was  an  ingredient  were  made  to  the  inferior 
deities  and  the  dead  (Horn.  Od.  x.  519  ;  Porph. 
de  Ante.  Nymph,  c.  17).  So  also  the  practice  of 
eating  the  flesh  of  sacrifices  "  over  the  blood  " 
(Lev.  xix.  26  ;  Ez.  xxxiii.  25,  26)  was,  according 
to  Maimonides,  common  among  the  Zabii.  Spencer 
gives  a  double  reason  for  the  prohibition:  that  it 
was  a  rite  of  divination,  ami  divination  of  the  WOrsI 
kind,  a  species  of  necromancy  by  which  they  at- 
tempted to  raise  the  spirits  of  the  dead  (comp. 
Hor.  Sat.  i.  8).  There  are  supposed  to  be  .illu- 
sions to  the  practice  of  necromancy  in  Is.  lxv.  4, 
or  at  any  rate  to  superstitious  rites  in  connexion 
with  the  dead.  The  grafting  of  one  tree  upon 
another  was  forbidden,  because  among  idolaters 
the  process  was  aeeompaniod  by  gross  obscenity 
(Maim.  Mor.  Neb.  c.  12).  Cutting  the  flesh  for 
the  dead  (Lev.  xix.  28;  1  K.  xviii.  28),  and  mak- 
ing a  baldness  between  theeyes  (Deut.  xiv.  1)  were 


IDOLATRY 


859 


associated  with  idolatrous  rites :  the  latter  being  a 
custom  among  the  Syrians  (Sir  G.  Wilkinson  in 
Kawlinson's  Herod,  ii.  p.  158  note).  The  thrice 
repeated  and  much-vexed  passage,  "Thou  shalt  not 
seethe  a  kid  in  his  mother's  milk"  (Ex.  xxiii.  19, 
xxxiv.  26  ;  Deut.  xiv.  21),  interpreted  by  some  as  a 
precept  of  humanity,  is  explained  by  Cudworth  in 
a  very  different  manner.  He  quotes  from  a  Karaite 
commentary  which  he  had  seen  in  MS. : — "  It  was 
a  custom  of  the  ancient  heathens,  when  they  had 
gathered  in  all  their  fruit,  to  take  a  kid  and  boil  it 
in  the  dam's  milk,  and  then  in  a  magical  way  go 
about  and  besprinkle  with  it  all  the  trees  and  fields 
and  gardens  aud  orchards  ;  thinking  by  this  means 
they  should  make  them  fructify,  and  bring  forth 
again  more  abundantly  the  following  year"  {On 
the  Lord's  Supper,  c.  2).1  The  law  which  re- 
gulated clean  and  unclean  meats  (Lev.  xx.  23-26) 
may  be  considered  both  as  a  sanitary  regulation 
aud  also  as  having  a  tendency  to  separate  the 
Israelites  from  the  surrounding  idolatrous  nations. 
It  was  with  the  same  object,  in  the  opinion  of 
Michaelis,  that  while  in  the  wilderness  they  were 
prohibited  from  killing  any  animal  for  food  without 
first  offering  it  to  Jehovah  {Laws  of  Moses,  trans. 
Smith,  art.  203).  The  mouse,  one  of  the  unclean 
animals  of  Leviticus  (xi.  29),  was  sacrificed  by  the 
ancient  Magi  (Is.  lxvi.  17  ;  Movers,  Phoen.  i.  219). 
It  may  have  been  some  such  reason  as  that  assigned 
by  Lewis  {Orig.  Hebr.  v.  1),  that  the  dog  was  the 
symbol  of  an  Egyptian  deity,  which  gave  rise  to  the 
prohibition  in  Deut.  xxiii.  18.  Movers  says  the 
dog  was  offered  in  sacrifice  to  Moloch  (i.  404),  as 
swine  to  the  moon  and  Dionysus  by  the  Egyptians, 
wdio  afterwards  ate  of  the  flesh  (Her.  iii.  47  ;  Is. 
lxv.  4).  Eating  of  the  things  offered  was  a  neces- 
sary appendage  to  the  sacrifice  (comp.  Ex.  xviii.  12, 
xxxii.  6;  xxxiv.  15;  Num.  xxv.  2,  &c).  Among 
the  Persians  the  victim  was  eaten  by  the  worshippers, 
and  the  soul  alone  left  for  the  god  (Strabo,  xv.  732). 
"  Hence  it  is  that  the  idolatry  of  the  Jews  in  wor- 
shipping other  gods  is  so  often  described  synec- 
dochically  under  the  notion  of  feasting.  Is.  Ivii.  7, 
'  Upon  a  high  and  lofty  mountain  thou  hast  set  thy 
bed,  aud  thither  wentest  thou  up  to  offer  sacrifice;' 
for  in  those  ancient  times  they  were  not  wont  to 
sit  at  feasts,  but  lie  down  on  beds  or  couches.  Ez. 
xxiii.  41  ;  Amos  ii.  8,  '  They  laid  themselves  down 
upon  clothes  laid  to  pledge  by  every  altar,'  i.  e. 
laid  themselves  down  to  eat  of  the  sacrifice  that  was 
offered  on  the  altar :  comp.  Ez.  xviii.  11"  (Cud- 
worth,  ut  supra,  c.  1 ;  cf.  1  Cor.  viii.  10).  The 
Israelites  were  forbidden  "  to  print  any  mark  upon 
them  "  (  Lev.  xix.  28),  because  it  was  a  custom  of 
idolaters  to  brand  upon  their  flesh  some  symbol  of 
the  deity  they  worshipped,  as  the  ivy-leaf  of  Bac- 
chus (3  Mace.  ii.  29).  According  to  Lucian  {de 
Dea  Syra,  -ri9)  all  the  Assyrians  wore  marks  of  this 
kind  on  their  necks  and  wrists  (comp.  Is.  xliv.  5  : 
Gal.  vi.  17;  Rev.  xiv.  1,  11).  Many  other  prac- 
tices of  false  worship  an'  alluded  to,  aud  made  the 
subjects  of  rigorous  prohibition,  but  none  are  more 
frequently  or  more  severely  denounced  than  those 
winch  peculiarly  distinguished  the  worship  of  Mo- 
lech.  It  has  been  attempted  to  deny  that  the  wor- 
ship of  this  idol  was  polluted  by  the  foul  stain  of 
human  sacrifice,  but  the  allusions  are  too  plain  and 
too  pointed  to  admit  of  reasonable  doubt  (Deut. 


1  Hi-.  Thomson  mentions  a  favourite  (J i -H  amnnp 
the  Arabs  called  lebn  immii,  to  which  he  conceives 
allusion  is  made     The  Land  anil  /lie  Book,  i.  135). 

3   K  2 


860 


IDOLATRY 


xii.  31 ;  2  K.  iii.  27  ;  Jer.  vii.  31 ;  Ps.  cvi.  37  ; 
Ez.  xxiii.  39).  Nor  was  this  practice  confined  to 
the  rites  of  Molech  ;  it  extended  to  those  of  Baal 
(Jer.  xix.  5),  and  the  king  of  Moab  (2  K.  iii.  27) 
offered  his  son  as  a  burnt-offering  to  his  god  Che- 
mosh.  The  Phoenicians,  we  are  told  by  Porphyry 
(de  Abstin.  ii.  c.  56),  on  occasions  of  great  national 
calamity  sacrificed  to  Kronos  one  of  their  dearest 
friends.  Some  allusion  to  this  custom  may  be  seen 
in  Micah  vi.  7.  Kissing  the  images  of  the  gods 
(1  K.  xix.  18;  Hos.  xiii.  2),  hanging  votive  offer- 
ings in  their  temples  (1  Sam.  xxxi.  10),  and 
carrying  them  to  battle  (2  Sam.  v.  21),  as  the 
Jews  of  Maccabaeus'  army  did  with  the  things 
consecrated  to  the  idols  of  the  Jamnites  (2  Mace, 
xii.  40),  are  usages  connected  with  idolatry  which 
are  casually  mentioned,  though  not  made  the  objects 
of  express  legislation.  But  soothsaying,  interpreta- 
tion of  dreams,  necromancy,  witchcraft,  magic, 
and  other  forms  of  divination,  are  alike  forbidden 
(Deut.'  xviii,  9 ;  2  K.  i.  2  ;  Is.  lxv.  4 ;  Ez.  xxi.  21). 
The  history  of  other  nations — and  indeed  the  too 
common  practice  of  the  lower  class  of  the  popula- 
tion of  Syria  at  the  present  day — shows  us  that 
such  a  statute  as  that  against  bestiality  (Lev. 
xviii.  23)  was  not  unnecessary  (cf.  Her.  ii.  46  ; 
Rom.  i.  26).  Purificatory  rites  in  connexion  with 
idol-worship,  and  eating  of  forbidden  food,  were 
visited  with  severe  retribution  (Is.  Ixvi.  17).  It  is 
evident,  from  the  context  of  Ez.  viii.  17,  that  the 
votaries  of  the  sun,  who  worshipped  with  their 
faces  to  the  east  (v.  16),  and  "  put  the  branch 
to  their  nose,"  did  so  in  observance  of  some  idola- 
trous rite.  Movers  (Phoen.  i.  66)  unhesitatingly 
affirms  that  the  allusion  is  to  the  branch  Barsom, 
the  holy  branch  of  the  Magi  (Strabo,  xv.  p.  733), 
while  Hiivernick  {Coram,  zu  Ezech.  p.  117),  with 
equal  confidence,  denies  that  the  passage  supports 
such  an  inference,  and  renders,  having  in  view  the 
lament  of  the  women  for  Thammuz,  "  sie  entsenden 
den  Trauergesang  zu  ihren  Zorn."  The  waving  of 
a  myrtle  branch,  says  Maimonides  (de  Idol.  vi.  2), 
accompanied  the  repetition  of  a  magical  formula  in 
incantations.  An  illustration  of  the  usage  of  boughs 
in  worship  will  be  found  in  the  Greek  iKeTitpia 
(Aesch.  Eum.  43  ;  Suppl.  192  ;  Schol.  on  Aristoph. 
Plat.  383;  Porpnyr.  de  Ant.  nymph,  c.  33).  For 
detailed  accounts  of  idolatrous  ceremonies,  reference 
must  be  made  to  the  articles  upon  the  several  idols. 
III.  It  remains  now  briefly  to  consider  the  light 
in  which  idolatry  was  regarded  in  the  Mosaic  code, 
and  the  penalties  with  which  it  was  visited.  If 
one  main  object  of  the  Hebrew  polity  was  to  teach 
the  unity  of  God,  the  extermination  of  idolatry 
was  but  a  subordinate  end.  Jehovah,  the  God  of 
the  Israelites,  was  the  civil  head  of  the  State.  He 
was  the  theocratic  king  of  the  people,  who  had 
delivered  them  from  bondage,  and  to  whom  they 
had  taken  a  willing  oath  of  allegiance.  They  had 
entered  into  a  solemn  league  and  covenant  with  him 
as  their  chosen  king  (comp.  1  Sam.  viii.  7),  by  whom 
obedience  was  requited  with  temporal  blessings, 
and  rebellion  with  temporal  punishment.  This 
original  contract  of  the  Hebrew  government,  as  it 


k  The  point  of  this  verse  is  lost  in  the  A.  V.  :  it 
should  he  "  for  the  sin  of  witchcraft  (is)  rebellion  ; 
and  idolatry  (lit.  vanity)  and  teraphim  (are)  stub- 
bornness." The  Israelites,  contrary  to  command, 
had  spared  of  the  spoil  of  the  idolatrous  Amalekites  to 
offer  to  Jehovah,  and  thus  associated  His  worship 
with  that  of  idols. 


IDOLATRY 

has  been  termed,  is  contained  in  Ex.  xix.  3-8,  xx. 
'_'-.">;  l>eut.  xxix.  lo-xxx.  ;  the  blessings  promised 
to  obedience  are  enumerated  in  Deut.  xxviii.  1-14, 
and  the  withering  curses  on  disobedience  in  verses 
15-68.  That  this  covenant  was  faithfully  observed 
it  needs  but  slight  acquaintance  with  Hebrew 
history  to  perceive.  Often  broken  and  often  re- 
newed on  the  part  of  the  people  (Judg.  x.  10; 
2  Chr.  xv.  12,  13 ;  Neh.  ix.  38),  it  was  kept  with 
unwavering  constancy  on  the  part  of  Jehovah.  To 
their  kings  he  stood  in  the  relation,  so  to  speak,  of 
a  feudal  superior:  they  were  His  representatives 
upon  earth,  and  with  them,  as  with  the  people 
before,  His  covenant  was  made  (IK.  iii.  14,  xi.  1  lj. 
Idolatry,  therefore,  to  an  Israelite  was  a  state  offence 
(1  Sam.  xv.  23),k  a  political  crime  of  the  gravest 
character,  high  treason  against  the  majesty  of  his 
king.  It  was  a  transgression  of  the  covenant 
(Deut.  xvii.  2),  "  the  evil  "  pre-eminently  in  the 
eyes  of  Jehovah  (1  K.  xxi.  25,  opp.  to  ")£'sn? 
"  the  right,"  2  Chr.  xxvii.  2).  But  it  was  much 
more  than  all  this.  While  the  idolatry  of  foreign 
nations  is  stigmatised  merely  as  an  abomination 
in  the  sight  of  God,  which  called  for  his  vengeance, 
the  sin  of  the  Israelites  is  regarded  as  of  more 
glaring  enormity,  and  greater  moral  guilt.  In  the 
figurative  language  of  the  prophets,  the  relation 
between  Jehovah  and  his  people  is  represented  as  a 
marriage  bond  (Is.  liv.  5 ;  Jer.  iii.  14),  and  the 
worship  of  false  gods  with  all  its  accompaniments 
(Lev.  xx.  56)  becomes  then  the  greatest  of  social 
wrongs  (Hos.  ii. ;  Jer.  iii.,  &c).  This  is  beauti- 
fully brought  out  in  Hos.  ii.  16,  where  the  heathen 
name  Baali,  my  master,  which  the  apostate  Israel 
has  been  accustomed  to  apply  to  her  foreign  pos- 
sessor, is  contrasted  with  Ishi,  my  man,  my  hus- 
band, the  native  word  which  she  is  to  use  when 
restored  to  her  rightful  husband,  Jehovah.  Much 
of  the  significance  of  this  figure  was  unquestionably 
due  to  the  impurities  of  idolaters,  with  whom  such 
corruption  was  of  no  merely  spiritual  character  (Ex. 
xxxiv.  16;  Num.  xxv.  1,  2,  &c),  but  manifested 
itself  in  the  grossest  and  most  revolting  forms 
(Rom.  i.  26-32). 

Regarded  in  a  moral  aspect,  false  gods  are  called 
"stumbling  blocks"  (Ez.  xiv.  3),  "lies"  (Am. 
ii.  4;  Rom.  i.  25),  "horrors"  or  "frights"  (1  K. 
xv.  13;  Jer.  1.  38),  "abominations"  (Deut.  xxix. 
17,  xxxii.  16  ;  1  K.  xi.  5  ;  2  K.  xxiii.  13),  "  guilt" 
(abstract  for  concrete,  Am.  viii.  14,  ilOC'N,  ashmdh, 
comp.  2  Chr.  xxix.  18,  perhaps  with  a  play  on 
Ashima,  2  K.  xvii.  30),  and  with  a  profound  sense  of 
the  degradation  consequent  upon  their  worship,  they 
are  characterised  by  the  prophets,  whose  mission  it 
was  to  warn  the  people  against  them  (Jer.  xliv.  4), 
as  "shame"  (Jer.  xi.  13;  Hos.  ix.  10).  As  con- 
sidered with  reference  to  Jehovah,  they  are  ,:  other 
gods"  (Josh.  xxiv.  2,  16),  "  strange  gods  "  (Deut. 
xxxii.  16),  "new gods"  (Judg.  v.  8),  "devils, — not 
God"  (Deut.  xxxii.  17  ;  1  Cor.  x.  20,  21) ;  and,  as 
denoting  their  foreign,  origin,  "gods  of  the  foreigner" 
(Josh.  xxiv.  14,  15).m  their  powerlessness  is  indi- 
cated by  describing  them  as  "gods  that  cannot  save" 

m  In  the  A.  V.  the  terms  "If,  edr,  "  strange,"  and 
~D3  or  i"13 J,  necdr  or  nclcri,  "  foreign,"  are  not  uni- 
formly distinguished,  and  the  point  of  a  passage  is 
frequently  lost  by  the  interchange  of  one  with  the 
other,  or  by  rendering  both  by  the  same  word.  So 
Ps.  lxxxi.  9  should  be,  "  There  shall  not  be  in  thee  a 
strange  god,  nor  shalt  thou  worship  a  foreign  god." 


IDOLATRY 

(Is.  xlv.  20),  "  that  made  not  the  heavens"  (Jer. 
x.  11),  "nothing"  (Is.  xli.  24;  1  Cor.  yiii.  4), 
"  wind  and  emptiness  "  (Is.  xli.  29),  "  vanities  of 
the  heathen  "  (.Jer.  xiv.  22  ;  Acts.  xiv.  15)  ;  and  yet, 
while  their  deity  is  denied,  their  personal  existence 
seems  to  have  been  acknowledged  (Kurtz,  Gesch. 
d.  A.B.  ii.  86,  &c),  though  not  in  the  same  man- 
ner in  which  the  pretensions  of  local  deities  were 
reciprocally  recognised  by  the- heathen  (1  K.  xx. 
23,  28  ;  2  K.  xvii.  26).  Other  terms  of  contempt 
are  employed  with  reference  to  idols,  Dvv^ 
SHUui  (Lev.  xix.  4),  and  Dv-1?JI,  gillulim  (Deut. 
xxix.  17),  to  which  different  meanings  have  been 
assigned,  and  many  which  indicate  ceremonial  un- 
cleanness.     [Idol,  p.  849.] 

Idolatry,  therefore,  being  from  one  point  of  view 
a  political  offence,  could  be  punished  without  in- 
fringement of  civil  rights.  No  penalties  were  at- 
tached to  mere  opinions.  For  aught  we  know, 
theological  speculation  may  have  been  as  rife  among 
the  Hebrews  as  in  modern  times,  though  such  was 
not  the  tendency  of  the  Semitic  mind.  It  was  not, 
however,  such  speculations,  heterodox  though  they 
might  be,  but  overt  acts  of  idolatry,  which  were 
made  the  subjects  of  legislation  (Michaelis,  Laws 
of  Moses,  art.  245,  246).  The  first  and  second 
commandments  are  directed  against  idolatry  of  every 
form.  Individuals  and  communities  were  equally 
amenable  to  the  rigorous  code.  The  individual 
offender  was  devoted  to  destruction  (Ex.  xxii.  20); 
his  nearest  relatives  were  not  only  bound  to  de- 
nounce him  and  deliver  him  up  to  punishment 
(Deut.  xiii.  2-10),  but  their  hands  were  to  strike 
the  first  blow  when,  on  the  evidence  of  two  wit- 
nesses at  least,  he  was  stoned  (Deut.  xvii.  2-5). 
To  attempt  to  seduce  others  to  false  worship  was  a 
crime  of  equal  enormity  (Deut.  xiii.  6-10).  An 
idolatrous  nation  shared  a  similar  fate.  No  facts 
are  more  strongly  insisted  on  in  the  0.  T.  than 
that  the  extermination  of  the  Canaanites  was  the 
punishment  of  their  idolatry  (Ex.  xxxiv.  15,  16  ; 
Deut.  vii.,  xii.  29-31,  xx.  17),  and  that  the  cala- 
mities of  the  Israelites  were  due  to  the  same  cause 
(Jer.  ii.  17).  A  city  guilty  of  idolatry  was  looked 
upon  as  a  cancer  of  the  state;  it  was  considered  to 
be  in  rebellion,  and  treated  according  to  the  laws 
vt'  war.  Its  inhabitants  and  all  their  cattle  were 
put  to  death.  No  spoil  was  taken,  but  everything 
it  contained  was  burnt  with  itself;  nor  was  it 
allowed  to  be  rebuilt  (Deut.  xiii.  13-18;  Josh.  vi. 
26).  Saul  lost  his  kingdom,  Achan  his  life,  and 
Hiel  his  family,  for  transgressing  this  law  (1  Sam. 
xv. ;  Josh.  vii. ;  1  K.  xvi.  34).  The  silver  and 
gold  with  which  the  idols  were  covered  were  ac- 
cursed (Deut.  vii.  25,  26).  And  not  only  were 
the  Israelites  forbidden  to  serve  the  gods  of  Ca- 
naan (Ex.  xxiii.  24),  but  even  to  mention  their 
names,  that  is,  to  call  upon  them  in  prayer  or 
;inv  form  of  worship  (Ex.  xxiii.  13;  .lush,  xxiii.  7). 
( In  taking  possession  of  the  land  they  were  t<> 
obliterate  all  traces  of  the  existing  idolatry  ;  sta- 
tues, altars,  pillars,  idol-temples,  every  person  and 
everything  connected  with  it,  were  to  be  swept 
away  (Ex.  xxiii.  24,  32,  xxxiv.  13;  Deut.  vii.  5. 
25,  xii.  1-3,  xx.  17),  and  the  name  and  worship  of 


IDOLATRY 


861 


the  idols  blotted  out.  Such  were  the  precautions 
taken  by  the  framer  of  the  Mosaic  code  to  preserve 
the  worship  of  Jehovah,  the  true  God,  in  its 
purity.  Of  the  manner  in  which  his  descendants 
have  "  put  a  fence  "  about  "  the  law  "  with  reference 
to  idolatry,  many  instances  will  be  found  in  Mai- 
monides  (de  Idol.).  They  were  prohibited  from 
using  vessels,  scarlet  garments,  bracelets,  or  rings, 
marked  with  the  sign  of  the  sun,  moon,  or  dragon 
(vii.  10) ;  trees  planted  or  stones  erected  for  idol- 
worship  vvxtc  forbidden  (viii.  5,  10);  and,  to  guard 
against  the  possibility  of  contamination,  if  the  image 
of  an  idol  were  found  among  other  images  intended 
for  ornament,  they  were  all  to  be  cast  into  the 
Dead  Sea  (vii.  11). 

IV.  Much  indirect  evidence  on  this  subject  might 
be  supplied  by  an  investigation  of  proper  names. 
Mr.  Layard  lias  remarked,  "  According  to  a  custom 
existing  from  time  immemorial  in  the  East,  the 
name  of  the  Supreme  Deity  was  introduced  into 
the  names  of  men.  This  custom  prevailed  from 
the  banks  of  the  Tigris  to  the  Phoenician  colonies 
beyond  the  Pillars  of  Hercules  ;  and  we  recognize 
in  the  Sardanapalus  of  the  Assyrians,  and  the  Han- 
nibal of  the  Carthaginians,  the  identity  of  the  reli- 
gious system  of  the  two  nations,  as  widely  distinct 
in  the  time  of  their  existence  as  in  their  geographical 
position"  (Nin.  ii.  450).  The  hint  which  he  has 
given  can  be  but  briefly  followed  out  here.  Traces 
of  the  sun-worship  of  the  ancient  Canaanites  remain 
in  the  nomenclature  of  their  country.  Beth-She- 
mesh,  "house  of  the  sun,"  En-Shemesh,  "spring 
of  the  sun,"  and  Ir-Shemesh,  "  city  of  the  sun," 
whether  they  be  the  original  Canaanitish  names 
or  their  Hebrew  renderings,  attest  the  reverence 
paid  to  the  source  of  light  and  heat,  the  symbol 
of  the  fertilising  power  of  nature.  Samson,  the 
Hebrew  national  hero,  took  his  name  from  the 
same  luminary,  and  was  born  in  a  mountain-village 
above  the  modern  'Am  S/tcms  (En-Shemesh  :  Thom- 
son, The  Land  and  the  Book,  ii.  361).  The  name 
of  Baal,  the  sun-god,  is  one  of  the  most  common 
occurrence  in  compound  words,  and  is  often  asso- 
ciated with  places  consecrated  to  his  worship,  and 
of  which  perhaps  he  was  the  tutelary  deity. 
Bamoth-Baal,  "the  high-places  of  Baal;"  Baal- 
Hermon,  Beth-Baal-Meon,  Baal-Gad,  Baal-Hamon, 
in  which  compound  the  names  of  the  sun-god  of 
Phoenicia  and  Egypt  are  associated,  Baal-Tamar, 
and  many  others,  are  instances  of  this."  Nor  was 
the  practice  confined  to  the  names  of  places:  pro- 
per names  are  found  with  the  same  element.  Esh- 
baal,  Ish-baal,  &c,  are  examples.  The  Amorites, 
whom  Joshua  did  not  drive  out,  dwelt  on  Mounl 
Heres,  in   Aijalon,    "  the  mountain  of  the  sun  " 

[TlMN.Vl 'H-HEBES].      Here  and  tliele  we  lilid  trace- 

of  the  attempt  made  by  the  Hebrews,  on  their  con- 
quest of  the  country,  to  extirpate  idolatry.  Thus 
Baalah  or  Kirjath- Baal,  "  the  town  of  Baal,"  be- 
came Kirjath-Jearim,  "the  town  of  forests"  (Josh, 
xv.  60).  The  Moon,  Astarte  or  Ashtaroth,  gave 
her  name  to  a  city  of  Bashan  (.Josh.  xiii.  12,  31 ). 
and  it  is  not  improbable  that  the  name  Jericho 
may  have  been  derived  from  being  associated  with 
the  worship  of  this  goddess.  [Jericho.]  Neb... 
whether  it  be  the  name  under  which  the  Chal 


n  That  temples  in   Syria,  dedicated  to  the  several     familiar   with  the  circumstance   (df  Dea   S;/r.  c.  11. 


divinities,  did  transfer  their  names  to  the  places  where 
they  stood  is  evident  from  the  testimony  Oi  l.ucian, 
an  Assyrian  himself.  His  derivation  of  Hicra  from 
the  temple  of  the  Assyrian  Ilcra  sh,.\v>   that   he  was 


Baisampsa  |  =  Bethshemesh),  a  town  of  Arabia,  de- 
rived its  name  from  the  sun-worship     Vossius,  de 
Theol.  Gent.  ii.  e.  8)  like  Kir  Heres  (Jer.  slviii,  ;;i 
of  Bloat). 


862 


ID  LIE  L 


worshipped  the  Moon  or  the  planet  Mercury,  enters 
into  many  compounds:  Nebu-zaradan,  Samgar-nebo, 
and  the  like.  Bel  is  found  in  Belshazzar,  Belte- 
shazzar,  and  others.  Were  Baladan  of  Semitic 
origin,  it  would  probably  be  derived  from  Baal- 
Adon,  or  Adonis,  the  Phoenician  deity  to  whose 
worship  Jer.  xxii.  18  seems  to  refer;  but  it  has 
more  properly  been  traced  to  an  Indo-Germanic  root. 
Hadad,  Hadadezer,  Beuhadad,  are  derived  from  the 
tutelar  deity  of  the  Syrians,  and  in  Nergalsharezer 
we  recognise  the  god  of  the  Cushites.  Chemosh, 
the  fire-god  of  Moab,  appears  in  Carchemish,  and 
Peor  in  Beth-Peor.  Malcom,  a  name  which  occurs 
but  once,  and  then  of  a  Moabite  by  birth,  may 
have  been  connected  with  Molech  and  Milcom,  the 
abomination  of  the  Ammonites.  A  glimpse  of  star- 
worship  may  be  seen  in  the  name  of  the  city  Chesil, 
the  Semitic  Orion,  and  the  month  Chisleu,  without 
recognising  in  Raiab  "  the  glittering  fragments  of 
the  sea-snake  trailing  across  the  northern  sky."  It 
would  perhaps  be  going  too  far  to  trace  in  Engedi, 
"  spring  of  the  kid,"  any  connexion  with  the  goat- 
worship  of  Mendes,  or  any  relics  of  the  wars  of  the 
giants  in  Rapha  and  Rephaim.  Fiirst,  indeed,  x-ecog- 
nises  in  Gedi,  Venus  or  Astarte,  the  goddess  of  for- 
tune, and  identical  with  Gad  (Handw.  s.  v.).  But 
there  are  fragments  of  ancient  idolatry  in  other 
names  in  which  it  is  not  so  palpable.  Ishbosheth 
is  identical  with  Eshbaal,  and  Jerubbesheth  with 
Jerubbaal,  and  Mephibosheth  and  Meribbaal  are  but 
two  names  for  one  person  (cf.  Jer.  xi.  13).  The 
worship  of  the  Syrian  Rimmon  appears  in  the 
names  Hadad,  Rimmon,  and  Tabrimmon  ;  and  if,  as 
some  suppose,  it  be  derived  from  pB"l,  Rimmon, 
"  a  pomegranate-tree,"  we  may  connect  it  with  the 
towns  of  the  same  name  in  Judah  and  Benjamin, 
with  En-Rimmon  and  the  prevailing  tree-worship. 
It  is  impossible  to  pursue  this  investigation  to  any 
length :  the  hints  which  have  been  thrown  out  may 
prove  suggestive.  [W.  A.  W.] 

ID'UEL  ('iSoinjAos  ;  Eccelon),  1  Esd.  viii.  43. 
[Ariel,  1.] 

IDUME'A  (DV1K  :  v  'lSov/xaia  :  Idumaea, 
Edom),  Is.  xxxiv.  5,  6;  Ez.  xxxv.  15,  xxxvi.  5; 
1  Mace.  iv.  15,  29,  61,  v.  3,  vi.  3l ;  2  Mace.  xii. 
32  ;  Mark  iii.  8.     [Edom.] 

IDUME'ANS  (ol  'Idovpcuoi :  Tdumaei),  2 
Mace.  x.  15,  10.     [Edom.] 

I'GAL  (biO?).  1.  ('lAaaA,  Alex.  'ly&K  ; 
Iijal,  Ljaal).  Sou  of  Joseph,  of  the  tribe  of  Issachar ; 
chosen  by  Moses  to  represent  that  tribe  among 
the  spies  who  went  up  from  Kadesh  to  search  the 
Promised  Land  (Num.  xiii.  7). 

2.  One  of  the  heroes  of  David's  guard,  son  of 
Nathan  of  Zobah  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  36,  TaaX).  In 
the  parallel  list  of  1  Chr.  the  name  is  given  as 
"Joel  the  brother  of  Nathan"  (xi.  38,  'io^A). 
Keunicott,  after  a  minute  examination  of  the  pas- 
sage both  in  the  original  and  in  the  ancient  ver- 
sions, decides  in  favour  of  the  latter  as  most  like 
the  genuine  text  (Dissertation,  212-214). 

This  name  is  really  identical  with  Igeal. 

IGDALI'AH  (•in^'naS  i.e.  Igdaliahu;  ToSo- 
Aias  ;  Jcgedelias),  a  prophet  or  holy  man — "  the 
man  of  God  " — named  once  only  (Jer.  xxxv.  4),  as 
the  father  of  Hanan,  in  the  chamber  of  whose  sons, 
the  Bene-Hanan,  in  the  house  of  Jehovah,  Jeremiah 
hail  that  remarkable  interview  with  the  Rechabites 
which  is  recorded  in  that  chapter. 


IJE-ABARIM 
I'GEAL  (7K3* ;  'I&J7JA ;  Jegaal),  a  son  of 
Shemaiah  ;  a  descendant  of  the  royal  house  of  Judah 
(1  Chr.  iii.  22).  According  to  the  present  state  ol 
the  text  of  this  difficult  genealogy  he  is  fourth  in 
descent  from  Zerubbabel ;  but,  according  to  Lord 
A.  Hervey's  plausible  alteration,  he  is  the  son  of 
Shimei,  brother  to  Zerubbabel,  and  therefore  but 
one  generation  distant  from  the  latter  (  Genealogy  of 
our  Lord,  107-109).  The  name  is  identical  with  Igal ; 
and,  as  in  that  case,  the  LXX.  give  it  as  Joel. 

1'IM  (D^V).  1.  (Tai;Iieabarim).  The  partial 
or  contracted  form  of  the  name  Ije-Abarim,  one 
of  the  later  stations  of  the  Israelites  on  their  journey 
to  Palestine  (Num.  xxxiii.  45).  In  the  Samaritan 
version  lim  is  rendered  by  Cephrani,  "  villages ;" 
and  in  the  Targum  Pseudojon.  by  Gizzeh,  H-Til 
possibly  pointing  to  sheep-shearing  in  the  locality. 
But  in  no  way  do  we  gain  any  clue  to  the  situation 
of  the  place. 

2.  (B<xk:c6k  ;  Alex.  Avei/x  ;  Tim),  a  town  in  the 
extreme  south  of  Judah,  named  in  the  same  group 
with  Beersheba,  Hormah,  &c.  (Josh.  xv.  28).     The 

Peshito   Syriac   version    has   Elin,    »>».^^>.      No 

trace  of  the  name  has  yet  been  discovered  in  this 
direction.  [G.] 

IJE-AB'AEIM  (Dn3J?n  «V>  with  the  definite 
article,  lye  ha-Abarim — "  the  heaps,  or  ruins,  of  the 
further  regions ;"  Jerome  ad  Fabiolam,  acervos  la- 
pidum  transeuntium ;  'AxaKyai,  and  Fai ;  Jeab- 
arim,  and  licabarini),  one  of  the  later  halting 
places  of  the  children  of  Israel  as  they  were  ap- 
proaching Palestine  (Num.  xxi.  11,  xxxiii.  44).  It 
was  next  beyonft  Oboth,  and  the  station  beyond  it 
again  was  the  Wady  Zared — the  torrent  of  the 
willows — probably  one  of  the  streams  which  run 
into  the  S.E.  angle  of  the  Dead  Sea.  Between  Ije- 
abarim  and  Dibon-gad,  which  succeeds  it  in  Num. 
xxxiii.,  the  Zared  and  the  Arnon  have  to  be  inserted 
from  the  parallel  accounts  of  xxi.  and  Deut.  ii. 
Dibon-gad  and  Almon-Diblathaim,  which  lay  above 
the  Arnon,  having  in  their  turn  escaped  from  the 
two  last-named  narratives.  Ije-abarim  was  on  the 
boundary — the  S.E.  boundary — of  the  territory  of 
Moab  ;  not  on  the  pasture-downs  of  the  Mishor,  the 
modern  Belka,  but  in  the  midbar,  the  waste  un- 
cultivated "wilderness"  on  its  skirts  (xxi.  11). 
Moab  they  were  expressly  forbidden  to  molest 
(Deut.  ii.  9-12)  ;  but  we  may  perhaps  be  allowed 
to  conclude  from  the  terms  of  ver.  1 3,  "  now  rise 
up"  (-10p),  that  they  had  remained  on  his  frontier 
in  Ije-Abarim  for  some  length  of  time.  No  identi- 
fication of  its  situation  has  been  attempted,  nor 
has  the  name  been  found  lingering  in  the  locality, 
which,  however,  has  yet  to  be  explored.  If  there 
is  anv  connexion  between  the  Ije-Abarim  and  the 
Har-Abarim,  the  mountain-range  opposite  Jericho, 
then  Abarim  is  doubtless  a  general  appellation  for 
the  whole  of  the  highland  east  of  the  Dead  Sea. 
[Abarim.] 

The  rendering  given  by  the  LXX.  is  remarkable. 
Tai  is  no  doubt  "a  version  of  lye — the  Ain  being 
converted  into  G :  but  whence  does  the  'AxaA 
come?  Can  it  be  the  vestige  of  a  nachal — " tor- 
rent" or  "wady" — once  attached  to  the  name? 
The  Targum  Pseudojon.  has  Meshre  Megiztha — the 
plain  of  shearing — which  is  equally  puzzling. 

In  Num.  xxxiii.  45  it  is  given  in  the  shorter 
form  of  Iim.  [G.] 


IJON 
I'JON  {]}*)),  "  ruin;"  Kiwv  and  'Aiv  \  A/iiou), 
a  town  in  the  north  of  Palestine,  belonging  to  the 
tribe  of  Naphtali.  It  was  taken  and  plundered  by 
the  captains  of  Benhadad,  along  with  Dan  and  other 
store-cities  of  Naphtali  (1  K.  xv.  20;  2  Chr.  xvi. 
4).  It  was  plundered  a  second  time  by  Tiglath- 
pileser  (2  K.  xv.  29).  We  find  no  farther  mention 
of  it  in  history.  At  the  base  of  the  mountains  of 
Naphtali,  a  few  miles  N.W.  of  the  site  of  Dan,  is  a 
fertile  and  beautiful  little  plain  called  Merj  'Ayfui 

(i.\+!^  7?  *-«  ;  the  Arabic  word  ,  .  *££,  though 
different  in  meaning,  is  radically  identical  with  the 
Heb.  |l*y);  and  near  its  northern  end  is  a  large 
mound  called  Tell  Dibbin.  The  writer  visited  it 
some  years  ago,  and  found  there  the  traces  of  a 
strong  and  ancient  city.  This,  in  all  probability,  is 
the  site  of  the  long-lost  Ijon  (Robinson's  Palestine, 
iii.  375).  [J.  L.  P.] 

IK'KESH  (fcJJpy  ;  "lffKa,  'Ekk'is,  'Ek'ktjs,  Alex. 
'Ekkixs  ;  Aoces),  the  father  of  Ira  the  Tekoite,  one 
of  the  heroes  of  David's  guard  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  26  ; 
1  Chr.  xi.  28,  xxvii.  9). 

I'LAI  ("by  ;  'HAi  ;  Ilai),  an  Ahohite,  one  of 
the  heroes  of  David's  guard  (1  Chr.  xi.  29).  In 
the  list  of  2  Sam.  xxiii.  the  name  is  given  Zalmon. 
Kennicott  (Dissertation,  1S7-9)  examines  the  vari- 
ations at  length,  and  decides  in  favour  of  Ilai  as  the 
original  name. 

ILLYRICUM  ('lAAvpiitSv),  an  extensive  dis- 
trict lying  along  the  eastern  coast  of  the  Adriatic 
from  the  boundary  of  Italy  on  the  north  to  Epirus 
on  the  south,  and  contiguous  to  Moesia  and  Mace- 
donia on  the  east :  it  was  divided  by  the  river  Drilo 
into  two  portions,  Illyris  Barbara,  the  northern,  and 
Illyris  Graeca,  the  southern.  Within  these  limits 
was  included  Dalmatia,  which  appears  to  have  been 
used  indifferently  with  Illyricum  for  a  portion,  and 
ultimately  for  the  whole  of  the  district.  St.  Paul 
records  that  he  preached  the  Gospel  "  round  about 
unto  Illyricum"  (Rom.  xv.  19):  he  probably  uses 
the  term  in  its  most  extensive  sense,  and  the  part 
visited  (if  indeed  he  crossed  the  boundary  at  all) 
would  have  been  about  Dyrrachium.     [\V.  L.  B.] 

IMAGE.     [Idol.] 

IM'LA  (K70?  ;  'Ie^Act,  Alex.'le^Aa;  Jemla), 
father  or  progenitor  of  Micaiah,  the  prophet  of 
Jehovah,  who  was  consulted  by  Ahab  and  Jeho- 
shaphat  before  their  fatal  expedition  to  Ramoth- 
gilead  (2  Chr.  xviii.  7,  8).     The  form 

IM'LAH  (nbp*;  'U/xPAad,  Alex.  'ULiad; 
.liiiiJ  ')  is  employed  in  the  parallel  narrative  (1  K. 
xxii.  8,  9). 

IMMAN'UEL  (?tti3&y,  or  in  two  word.-,  in 
many  MSS.  and  editions,  768  -13^:  'E/x/xavovr^  ; 
Emmanuel),  the  symbolical  name  given  by  the  pro- 
phet Isaiah  to  the  child  who  was  announced  to 
Ahaz  and  the  people  of  Judah,  as  the  sign  which 
God  would  give  of  their  deliverance  from  their 
enemies  (Is.  vii.  14).  It  is  applied  by  the  Apostle 
Matthew  to  the  Messiah,  born  of  the  Virgin  (Matt. 

a  'Almdli  denotes  a  girl  of  marriageable  age,  but 
not  married,  and  therefore  a  virgin  by  implication. 

It  is  never  even  used,  as  H^-inS.  bcthuldh,  which 
more  directly  expresses  virginity,  Of  a  bride  or  be- 
trothed wife  (Joel  i.  8).     'Almdh   and  betMllah  are 


IMMANUEL 


863 


i.  23).  By  the  LXX.  in  one  passage  (Is.  vii.  14), 
and  in  both  passages  by  the  Vulg.,  Syr.,  and  Targ., 
it  is  rendered  as  a  proper  name ;  but  in  Is.  viii.  8 
the  LXX.  translate  it  literally  /j.ed'  r\iLu>v  6  deos. 
The  verses  in  question  have  been  the  battle-field  of 
critics  for  centuries,  and  in  their  discussions  there 
has  been  no  lack  of  the  odium  theologicum.  As 
early  as  the  times  of  Justin  Martyr  the  Christian 
interpretation  was  attacked  by  the  Jews,  and  the 
position  which  they  occupied  has  of  late  years  been 
assumed  by  many  continental  theologians.  Before 
proceeding  to  a  discussion,  or  rather  to  a  classifica- 
tion, of  the  numerous  theories  of  which  this  subject 
has  been  the  fruitful  source,  the  circumstances  under 
which  the  prophecy  was  delivered  claim  especial 
consideration. 

In  the  early  part  of  the  reign  of  Ahaz  the  king- 
dom of  Judah  was  threatened  with  annihilation  by 
the  combined  armies  of  Syria  and  Israel.  A  hun- 
dred and  twenty  thousand  of  the  choice  warriors  of 
Judah,  all  "  sons  of  might,"  had  fallen  in  one  day's 
battle.  The  Edomites  and  Philistines  had  thrown 
off  the  yoke  (2  Chr.  xxiii.).  Jerusalem  was  me- 
naced with  a  siege ;  the  hearts  of  the  king  and  of 
the  people  "  shook,  as  the  trees  of  a  forest  shake 
before  the  wind  "  (Is.  vii.  2).  The  king  had  gone 
to  "  the  conduit  of  the  upper  pool,"  probably  to  take 
measures  for  preventing  the  supply  of  water  from 
being  cut  off  or  falling  into  the  enemy's  hand,  when 
the  prophet  met  him  with  the  message  of  consola- 
tion. Not  only  were  the  designs  of  the  hostile 
armies  to  fail,  but  within  sixty-five  years  the  king- 
dom of  Israel  would  be  overthrown.  In  con- 
firmation of  his  words,  the  prophet  bids  Ahaz  ask 
a  sign  of  Jehovah,  which  the  king,  with  pretended 
humility,  refused  to  do.  After  administering  a 
severe  rebuke  to  Ahaz  for  his  obstinacy,  Isaiah  an- 
nounces the  sign  which   Jehovah  Himself  would 

give  unasked  :  "  behold  !  the  virgin  (i"lu?yn,  ha- 

almuh)3  is  with  child  and  beareth  a  son,  and  she 
shall  call  his  name  Immanuel." 

The  interpreters  of  this  passage  are  naturally 
divided  into  three  classes,  each  of  which  admits  of 
subdivisions,  as  the  differences  in  detail  are  numer- 
ous. The  first  class  consists  of  those  who  refer  the 
fulfilment  of  the  prophecy  to  a  historical  event, 
which  followed  immediately  upon  its  delivery. 
The  majority  of  Christian  writers,  till  within  the 
last  fifty  years,  form  a  second  class,  and  apply  the 
prophecy  exclusively  to  the  Messiah,  while  a  third 
class,  almost  equally  numerous,  agree  in  considering 
both  these  explanations  true,  and  hold  that  the  pro- 
phecy had  an  immediate  and  literal  fulfilment,  but 
was  completely  accomplished  in  the  miraculous  con- 
ception and  birth  of  Christ.  Among  the  first  are 
numbered  the  Jewish  wi  iters  of  all  ages,  without 
exception.  Jerome  refutes,  on  chronological  grounds, 
a  theory  which  was  current  in  bis  day  amongst  the 
.bus  that  the  prophecy  had  reference  to  Hezekiah, 
the  son  of  Ahaz,  who  from  a  comparison  of  2  K. 
xvi.  2  with  xviii.  2,  must  have  been  nine  years  old 
at  the  time  it  was  delivered.  The  force  of  bis 
argument  is  somewhat  weakened  by  the  evident 
obscurity  of  the  numbers  in  the  passages  in  ques- 
tion,   from    which   we  must,  infer   that  Ahaz  was 


both  applied  to  Rebekah  (Gen.  xxiv.  i(i,  43),  as 
apparently  convertible  terms ;  and  in  addition  to  the 
evidence  from  the  cognate  languages,  Arabic  and 
Syriac,  we  have  the  testimony  of  Jerome  (on  Is.  vii. 
II    that  in  Punic  Mum  denoted  a  virgin. 


864 


IMMANUEL 


eleven  years  old  at  the  time  of  Hezekiah's  birth. 
By  the  Jews  in  the  middle  ages  this  explanation 
was  abandoned  as  untenable,  and  in  consequence 
some,  as  Jarchi  and  A  ben  Ezra,  refer  the  prophecy 
to  a  son  of  Isaiah  himself,  and  others  to  a  son  of 
Ahaz  by  another  wife,  as  Kimchi  and  Abarbanel. 
In  this  case,  the  'almah  is  explained  as  the  wife  or 
betrothed  wife  of  the  prophet,  or  as  a  later  wife  of 
Ahaz.  Kelle  (Gesen.  Comm.  iiber  den  Jesaia)  de- 
grades her  to  the  third  rank  of  ladies  in  the  harem 
(comp.  Cant.  vi.  28).  Hitzig  (der  Proph.  Jesaia)  re- 
jects Gesenius'  application  of  almah  to  a  second  wife 
of  the  prophet,  and  interprets  it  of  the  prophetess 
mentioned  in  viii.  3.  Hendewerk  (des  Proph. 
Jesaia  Weissag.)  follows  Gesenius.  In  either  case 
the  prophet  is  made  to  fulfil  his  own  prophecy. 
Isenbiehl,  a  pupil  of  Michaelis,  defended  the  his- 
torical sense  with  considerable  learning,  and  suffered 
unworthy  persecution  for  expressing  his  opinions. 
The  'almah  in  his  view  was  some  Hebrew  girl  whc 
was  present  at  the  colloquy  between  Isaiah  and 
Ahaz,  and  to  whom  the  prophet  pointed  as  he  spoke. 
This  opinion  was  held  by  Bauer,  Cube,  and  Rosen- 
miiller  (1st  ed.).  Michaelis,  Eichhom,  Paulus, 
and  Amnion,  give  her  a  merely  ideal  existence  ; 
while  Umbreit  allows  her  to  be  among  the  by- 
standers, but  explains  the  pregnancy  and  birth  as 
imaginary  only.  Interpreters  of  the  second  class, 
who  refer  the-  prophecy  solely  to  the  Messiah,  of 
course  understand  by  the  'almah  the  Virgin  Mary. 
Among  these,  Vitringa  (Obs.  Sacr.  r.  c.  1)  vigor- 
ously opposes  those,  who,  like  Grotius,  Pellicanus, 
and  Tirinus,  conceded  to  the  Jews  that  the  reference 
to  Christ  Jesus  was  not  direct  and  immediate,  but 
by  way  of  typical  allusion.  For,  he  maintains,  a 
young  married  woman  of  the  time  of  Ahaz  and 
Isaiah,  could  not  be  a  type  of  the  Virgin,  nor  could 
her  issue  by  her  husband  be  a  figure  of  the  child 
to  be  born  of  the  Virgin  by  the  operation  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.  Against  this  hypothesis  of  a  solely 
Messianic  reference,  it  is  objected  that  the  birth  of 
the  Messiah  could  not  be  a  sign  of  deliverance  to 
the  people  of  Judah  in  the  time  of  Ahaz.  In  reply 
to  this,  Theodoret  advances  the  opinion  that  the 
birth  of  the  Messiah  involved  the  conservation  of 
the  family  of  Jesse,  and  therefore  by  implication  of 
the  Jewish  state.  Cocceius  argues  on  the  same  side, 
that  the  sign  of  the  Messiah's  birth  would  intimate 
that  in  the  interval  the  kingdom  and  state  of  the 
Jews  could  not  be  alienated  from  God,  and  besides 
it  confirms  ver.  8,  indicating  that  before  the  birth 
of  Christ  Judaea  should  not  be  subject  to  Syria,  as 
it  was  when  Archelaus  was  removed,  and  it  was 
reduced  to  the  form  of  a  Roman  province.  Of  all 
these  explanations  Vitringa  disapproves  and  states 
his  own  conclusion,  which  is  also  that  of  Calvin 
and  Piscator,  to  be  the  following: — In  vers.  14-16, 
the  prophet  gives  a  sign  to  the  pious  in  Israel  of 
their  deliverance  from  the  impending  danger,  and 
in  vers.  17,  &c.  announces  the  evils  which  the 
Assyrians,  not  the  Syrians,  should  inflict  upon 
Ahaz  and  such  of  his  people  as  resembled  him.  As 
surely  as  Messiah  would  be  born  of  the  virgin,  so 
surely  would  God  deliver  the  Jews  from  the  threat- 
ened evil.  The  principle  of  interpretation  here 
made  use  of  is  founded  by  Calvin  on  the  custom  of 
the  prophets,  who  confirmed  special  promises  by  the 
assurance  that  God  would  send  a  redeemer.  But 
this  explanation  involves  another  difficulty,  besides 
that  which  arises  from  the  distance  of  the  event 
predicted.  Before  the  child  shall  arrive  at  years  of 
discretion  the  prophet  announces  the  desolation  of 


IMMANUEL 

the  land  whose  kings  threatened  Ahaz.  By  this 
Vitringa  understands  that  no  more  time  would 
elapse  before  the  former  event  was  accomplished 
than  would  intervene  between  the  birth  and  youth 
of  Immanuel,  an  argument  too  far-fetched  to  have 
much  weight.  Hengstenberg  ( Christology,  ii.  44-66 
Eng.  trans.)  supports  to  the  full  the  Messianic 
interpretation,  and  closely  connects  vii.  14,  with 
ix.  6.  He  admits  frankly  that  the  older  explana- 
tion of  vers.  15,  16  has  exposed  itself  to  the  charge 
of  being  arbitrary,  and  confidently  propounds  his 
own  method  of  removing  the  stumbling-block. 
"  In  ver.  14  the  prophet  had  seen  the  birth  of  the 
Messiah  as  present.  Holding  fast  this  idea  and  ex- 
panding it,  the  prophet  makes  him  who  has  been 
bom  accompany  the  people  through  all  the  stages 
of  its  existence.    We  have  here  an  ideal  anticipation 

of  the  real  incarnation What  the  prophet 

means,  and  intends  to  say  here  is,  that,  in  the 
space  of  about  a  twelvemonth,  the  overthrow  of  the 
hostile  kingdoms  would  already  have  taken  place. 
As  the  representative  of  the  contemporaries,  he 
brings  forward  the  wonderful  child  who,  as  it  were, 

formed  the  soul  of  the  popular  life In  the 

subsequent  prophecy,  the  same  wonderful  child, 
grown  up  into  a  warlike  hero,  brings  the  deliverance 
from  Asshur,  and  the  world's  power  represented  by 
it."  The  learned  professor  thus  admits  the  double 
sense  in  the  case  of  Asshur,  but  denies  its  applica- 
tion to  Immanuel.  It  would  be  hard  to  say  whether 
text  or  commentary  be  the  more  obscure. 

In  view  of  the  difficulties  which  attend  these 
explanations  of  the  prophecy,  the  third  class  of  in- 
terpreters above  alluded  to  have  recourse  to  a 
theory  which  combines  the  two  preceding,  viz.,  the 
hypothesis  of  the  double  sense.  They  suppose  that 
the  immediate  reference  of  the  prophet  was  to  some 
contemporary  occurrence,  but  that  his  words  re- 
ceived their  true  and  full  accomplishment  in  the 
birth  of  the  Messiah.  Jerome  (Comm.  in  Esaiam, 
vii.  14)  mentions  an  interpretation  of  some  Ju- 
daizers  that  Immanuel  was  the  son  of  Isaiah,  bom 
of  the  prophetess,  as  a  type  of  the  Saviour,  and 
that  his  name  indicates  the  calling  of  the  nations 
after  the  Word  became  flesh  and  dwelt  among  us. 
Something  of  the  same  kind  is  proposed  by  Dathe; 
in  his  opinion  "  the  miracle,  while  it  immediately 
respected  the  times  of  the  prophet,"  was  a  type  of 
the  birth  of  Christ  of  the  Virgin  Mary."  Dr.  Pye 
Smith  conjectured  that  it  had  an  immediate  refer- 
ence to  Hezekiah,  "  the  virgin"  being  the  queen  of 
Ahaz  ;  but,  like  some  other  prophetic  testimonies, 
had  another  and  a  designed  reference  to  some  re- 
moter circumstance,  which  when  it  occurred  would 
be  the  real  fulfilment,  answering  every  feature  and 
filling  up  the  entire  extent  of  the  original  delinea- 
tion (Scrip.  Test,  to  the  Messiah,  i.  357,  3rd  ed.). 
A  serious  objection  to  the  application  of  the  pro- 
phecy of  Hezekiah  has  already  been  mentioned. 
Kennieott  separates  ver.  16  from  the  three  preced- 
ing, applying  the  latter  to  Christ,  the  former  to  the 
son  of  Isaiah  (Sermon  on  Is.  vii.  13-16). 

Such  in  brief  are  some  of  the  principal  opinions 
which  have  been  held  on  this  important  question. 
From  the  manner  in  which  the  quotation  occurs  in 
Matt.  i.  23,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  Evan- 
gelist did  not  use  it  by  way  of  accommodation,  but 
as  having  in  view  its  actual  accomplishment.  What- 
ever may  have  been  his  opinion  as  to  any  contem- 
porary or  immediate  reference  it  might  contain, 
this  was  completely  obscured  by  the  full  convic- 
tion that    burst   upon   him   when    he  realised   its 


IMMER 

completion  in  the  Messiah.  What  may  have  been 
the  light  in  which  the  promise  was  regarded  by  the 
prophet's  contemporaries  we  are  not  in  a  position 
to  judge  ;  the  hypothesis  of  the  double  sense  satisfies 
most  of  the  requirements  of  the  problem,  and  as 
it  does  less  violence  to  the  text  than  the  others 
which  have  been  proposed,  and  is  at  the  same  time 
supported  by  the  analogy  of  the  Apostle's  quota- 
tions from  the  O.  T.  (Matt.  ii.  15, 18,  23 ;  iv.  15), 
we  accept  it  as  approximating  most  nearly  to  the 
true  solution.  [W.  A.  W.] 

IM'MER  ("IJ3X  ;  'E/jL^p  ;  Ernmer),  apparently 
the  founder  of  an  important  family  of  priests, 
although  the  name  does  not  occur  in  any  genealogy 
which  allows  us  to  discover  his  descent  from  Aaron 
(1  Chr.  ix.  12 ;  Neh.  xi.  13).  This  family  had 
charge  of,  and  gave  its  name  to,  the  sixteenth  course 
of  the  service  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  14).  From  them  came 
Pashur,  chief  governor  of  the  Temple  in  Jeremiah's 
time,  and  his  persecutor  (Jer.  xx.  1).  They  re- 
turned from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  and  Jeshua 
(Ezr.  ii.  37  ;  Neh.  vii.  40).  Zadok  ben-Immer 
repaired  his  own  house  (Neh.  iii.  29),  and  two 
other  priests  of  the  family  put  away  their  foreign 
wives  (Ezr.  x.  20).  But  it  is  remarkable  that  the 
name  is  omitted  from  the  list  of  those  who  sealed 
the  covenant  with  Nehemiah,  and  also  of  those  who 
came  up  with  Zerubbabel  and  Jeshua,  and  who  are 
stated  to  have  had  descendants  surviving  in  the 
next  generation — the  days  of  Joiakim  (see  Neh.  xii. 
1-,  10,  12-21).  [Emmer.]  Different  from  the 
foregoing  must  be 

2.  ('E/xfxrip,  'Ie/rrjp,  Enter),  apparently  the  name 
of  a  place  in  Babylonia  from  which  certain  persons 
returned  to  Jerusalem  with  the  first  caravan,  who 
could  not  satisfactorily  prove  their  genealogy  (Ezr. 
ii.  59;  Neh.  vii.  61).  In  1  Esdras  the  name  is 
given  as  'AaAap. 

IM'NA  (yip*  ;  '1/J.avd ;  Jemna),  a  descendant 
of  Asher,  son  of  Helem,  and  one  of  the  "  chief 
princes"  of  the  tribe  (1  Chr.  vii.  35;  comp.  40). 

IM'NAH  (niW ;    'U/xvd  ;  Jemnd).      1.  The 

first-born  of  Asher  (1  Chr.  vii.  30).  In  the  Penta- 
teuch the  name  (identical  with  the  present)  is  given 
in  the  A.  V.  as  JlMNAH. 

2.  Kore  ben-Imsah,  the  Levite,  assisted  in  the 
reforms  of  Hezekiah  (2  Chr.  xxxi.  14). 

IM'RAH  (PHD) ;  'Ifj-pdv,  Alex.  'Ufipd;  Jamra), 
a  descendant  of  Asher,  of  the  family  of  ZoPHAH 
( I  Chr.  vii.  3G),  and  named  as  one  of  the  chiefs  of 
the  tribe. 

IM'BI  P*lOK).      1.  (A^paifi,   Alex,   omits; 

Omrai,  but  it  seems  to  have  changed  places  with 
the  preceding  name).  A  man  of  Judah  of  the  great 
family  of  Pharez  (I  Chr.  ix.  4). 

2.  {' Ajxa^l  :  Amri),  father  or  progenitor  of 
Zaccuk,  who  assisted  Nehemiah  in  the  rebuilding 
of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  2). 

INCENSE,  rn'lDp  (ketordh),  Deut.  xxxiii. 
10  ;  n*litOp  (ketoreth),  Ex.  ixv.  6,  xxx.  1,  &c. ; 
mb?  Qebonah),  Is.  xliii.  23,  lx.  G,  &c.  The  in- 
cense employed  in  the  service  of  the  tabernacle  was 
distinguished  as  D^DH  rPDp  (ketoreth  hassam- 
miiri),  Ex.  xxv.  0,  from  being  compounded  of  the 
perfume-;    stucte,    onycha,    galbanum,    and    pure 


INCENSE  865 

frankincense.  All  incense  which  was  not  made  of 
these  ingredients  was  called  iT"IT  HTlDp  (hetorah 
zdrdh),  Ex.  xxx.  9,  and  was  forbidden  to  be  offered. 
According  to  Eashi  on  Ex.  xxx.  34,  the  abovemen- 
tioned  perfumes  were  mixed  in  equal  proportions, 
seventy  manehs  being  taken  of  each.  They  were 
compounded  by  the  skill  of  the  apothecary,  to 
whose  use,  according  to  Rabbinical  tradition,  was 
devoted  a  portion  of  the  temple,  called,  from  the 
name  of  the  family  whose  especial  duty  it  was  to 
prepare  the  incense,  "  the  house  of  Abtines."  So 
in  the  large  temples  of  India  "  is  retained  a  man 
whose  chief  business  it  is  to  distil  sweet  waters 
from  flowers,  and  to  extract  oil  from  wood,  flowers, 
and  other  substances"  (Roberts,  Orient.  Illw. 
p.  82).  The  priest  or  Levite  to  whose  care  the  in- 
cense was  intrusted,  was  one  of  the  fifteen  D'OIJOD 
(rnemunnirn),  or  prefects  of  the  temple.  Constant 
watch  was  kept  in  the  house  of  Abtines  that  the 
incense  might  always  be  in  readiness  (Buxtorf, 
Lex.  Talm.  s.  v.  D^B^N). 

In  addition  to  the  four  ingredients  already  men- 
tioned Jarchi  enumerates  seven  others,  thus  making- 
eleven,  which  the  Jewish  doctors  affirm  were  com- 
municated to  Moses  on  Mount  Sinai.  Josephus 
(B.  J.  v.  5,  §5)  mentions  thirteen.  The  propor- 
tions of  the  additional  spices  are  given  by  Maimo- 
nides  (Cele  hammikd&sh,  ii.  2,  §3)  as  follows.  Of 
myrrh,  cassia,  spikenard,  and  saffron,  sixteen  ma- 
nehs each.  Of  costus  twelve  manehs,  cinnamon 
nine  manehs,  sweet  bark  three  manehs.  The  weight 
of  the  whole  confection  was  368  manehs.  To  these 
was  added  the  fourth  part  of  a  cab  of  salt  of  Sodom, 
with  amber  of  Jordan,  and  a  herb  called  "  the  smoke- 
raiser  "  (P*y  i"Py?D,  maaleh  ashdn),  known  only 
to  the  cunning  in  such  matters,  to  whom  the  secret 
descended  by  tradition.  In  the  ordinary  daily  ser- 
vice one  maneh  was  used,  half  in  the  morning  ami 
half  in  the  evening.  Allowing  then  one  maneh  of 
incense  for  each  day  of  the  solar  year,  the  three 
manehs  which  remained  were  again  pounded,  ami 
used  by  the  high-priest  on  the  day  of  atonement 
(Lev.  xvi.  12).  A  store  of  it  was  constantly  kept 
in  the  temple  (Jos.  B.  J.  vi.  8,  §3). 

The  incense  possessed  the  threefold  characteristic 
of  being  salted  (not  tempered  as  in  A.  V.),  pme 
and  holy.  Salt  was  the  symbol  of  incorruptness, 
and  nothing,  says  Maimonides,  was  offered  without 
it,  except  the  wine  of  the  drink-offerings,  the  blood, 
and  the  wood  (ci.  Lev.   ii.    13).     The   expression 

"133  12  (bad  bebad),  Ex.  xxx.  34,  is  interpreted 
by  the  Chaldee  "weight  by  weight,"  that  is,  an 
equal  weight  of  each  (cf.  Jarchi,  in  foe);  and  this 
rendering  is  adopted  by  our  version.  Others  how- 
ever, ami  among  them  Alien  Ezra  ami  Maimonides, 
consider  it  as  signifying  that  'each  of  the  spices  was 
separately  prepared,  and  that  all  were  afterwards 
mixed.  The  incense  thus  compounded  was  spe- 
cially set  apart  lor  the  service  of  the  sanctuary:  its 
desecration  was  punished  with  death  (Ex.  xxx.  ;;?, 

at   in  b pari  of  India,  according  to  Mi- 

chaelis  (Mosaisch.  Recht,  art.  249),  it  was  con- 
sidered high  treason  for  any  person  to  make  use  of 
the  best  sort  of  i  .  which  was  for  the  mt- 

\  ice  of  the  kin-'  alone. 

Aaron,  as  high-priest,  was  originally  appointed 
to  oiler  incense,  hut  in  the  daily  service  of  the  se- 
cond  temple  the  office  devolved  upon  the  inferior 
priests,  from  among  whom  one  was  chosen  by  Lot 
(Mishna,   Varna,  ii.  1;   Luke  i.  9),  each  morning 


866 


INCENSE 


and  evening  (Abarbauel  on  Lev.  x.  1).  A  peculiar 
blessing  was  supposed  to  be  attached  to  this  service, 
and  in  order  that  all  might  share  in  it,  the  lot  was 
cast  among  those  who  were  "  new  to  the  incense," 
if  any  remained  (Mish.  Yoma,l.c;  Bartenoraon 

Tumid,  v.  2).  Uzziah  was  punished  tor  his  pre- 
sumption in  attempting  to  infringe  the  prerogatives 
of  the  descendants  of  Aaron,  who  were  consecrated 
to  burn  incense  (2  Chr.  xxvi.  16-21 ;  Jos.  Ant. 
ix.  10,  4).  The  officiating  priest  appointed  an- 
other, whose  office  it  was  to  take  the  tire  from  the 
brazen   altar.     According  to   Maimonides    ( Tmid. 

Unvts.  ii.  8,  iii.  5)  this  fire  was  taken  from  the 
second  pile,  which  was  over  against  the  S.E.  corner 
of  the  altar  of  burnt-cfl'ering,  and  was  of  rig-tree 
wood.     A  silver  shovel  ( iinriD,  machtdh)  was  first 

t   :  - 

filled  with  the  live  coals,  and  afterwards  emptied 
into  a  golden  one,  smaller  than  the  former,  so  that 
some  of  the  coals  were  spilled  (Mishna,  Tamid,  v.  5, 
Yoma,  iv.  4;  cf.  Rev.  viii.  5).  Another  priest 
cleared  the  golden  altar  from  the  cinders  which  had 
been  left  at  the  previous  ottering  of  incense  (Mishna, 
Tamid,  iii.  6,  9,  vi.  1). 

The  times  of  ottering  incense  were  specified  in 
the  instructions  first  given  to  Moses  (Ex.  xxx.  7,  8). 
The  morning  incense  was  ottered  when  the  lamps 
were  trimmed  in  the  Holy  place,  and  before  the 
sacrifice,  when  the  watchman  set  for  the  purpose  an- 
nounced the  break  of  day  (Mishna,  Yoma,  iii.  1,  5). 
When  the  lamps  were  lighted  "  between  the  even- 
ings" after  the  evening  sacrifice  and  before  the 
drink-offerings  were  ottered,  incense  was  again  burnt 
on  the  golden  altar,  which  "  belonged  to  the  oracle  " 
(1  K.  vi.  22),  and  stood  before  the  veil  which  sepa- 
rated the  Holy  place  from  the  Holy  of  Holies,  the 
throne  of  God  (Rev.  viii.  4  ;  Philo,  de  Anim.  idon. 
§  3). 

When  the  priest  entered  the  Holy  place  with  the 
incense,  all  the  people  were  removed  from  the 
temple,  and  from  between  the  porch  and  the  altar 
(Maimon.  Tmid.  Umus.  iii.  3;  cf.  Luke  i.  10). 
The  incense  was  then  brought  from  the  house  of 
Abtines  in  a  large  vessel  of  gold  called  P]3  (caph), 
in  which  was  a  phial  C"pT3.  bazte,  properly  "  a 
salver")  containing  the  incense  (Mishna,  Tamid, 
v.  4).  The  assistant  priests  who  attended  to  the 
lamps,  the  clearing  of  the  golden  altar  from  the 
cinders,  and  the  fetching  fire  from  the  altar  of 
burnt-offering,  performed  their  offices  singly,  bowed 
towards  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  and  left  the  Holy 
place  before  the  priest,  whose  lot  it  was  to  otter  in- 
cense, entered.  Profound  silence  was  observed  among 
the  congregation  who  were  praying  without  (cf. 
Rev.  viii.  1),  and  at  a  signal  from  the  prefect  the 
priest  cast  the  incense  on  the  tire  (Mishna,  Tamid, 
vi.  ',_)),  and  bowing  reverently  towards  the  Holy  of 
Holies  retired  slowly  backwards,  not  prolonging 
his  prayer  that  he  might  not  alarm  the  congrega- 
tion, or  cause  them  to  fear  that  he  had  been  struck 
dead  for  ottering  unworthily  (Lev.  xvi.  13 ;  Luke 
i.  21  ;  Mishna,  Foot  y,  v.  1)  When  he  came  out 
he  pronounced  the  blessing  in  Num.  vi.  24-26,  the 
'•  magrephah"  sounded,  and  the  Levites  burst  forth 
into  song,  accompanied  by  the  full  swell  of  the 
temple  music,  the  sound  of  which,  say  the  Rabbins, 
could  be  heard  as  far  as  Jericho  (Mishna,  Tamid, 
iii.  8).  It  is  possible  that  this  may  be  alluded  to  in 
Rev.  viii.  5.  The  priest  then  emptied  the  censer 
in  a  clean  place,  and  hung  it  on  one  of  the  horns  of 
the  altar  of  burnt-offering. 

<  hi  the  day  of  atonement  the  service  was  different. 


INCENSE 

The  high-priest,  after  sacrificing  the  bullock  as  a 
sin-ottering  for  himself  and  his  family,  took  incense 
in  his  left  hand  and  a  golden  shovel  filled  with  live 
coals  from  the  west  side  of  the  brazen  altar  (Jarchi 
on  Lev.  xvi.  12)  in  his  right,  and  went  into  the 
Holy  of  Holies.  He  then  placed  the  shovel  upon 
the  ark  between  the  two  bars.  In  the  second 
temple,  where  there  was  no  ark,  a  stone  was  sub- 
stituted. Then  sprinkling  the  incense  upon  the 
coals,  he  stayed  till  the  house  was  filled  with 
smoke,  and  walking  slowly  backwards  came  without 
the  veil,  where  he  prayed  for  a  short  time  ( Maimo- 
nides, Toot  hakkippur,  quoted  by  Ainsworth  on 
Lev.  xvi.;   Outram  de  Sacrijiciis,  i.  8.  §11). 

The  ottering  of  incense  has  formed  a  part  of  the 
religious  ceremonies  of  most  ancient  nations.  The 
Egyptians  burnt  resin  in  honour  of  the  sun  at  its 
rising,  myrrh  when  in  its  meridian,  and  a  mixture 
called  Kuphi  at  its  setting  (Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  v. 
315).  Plutarch  (de  Is.  et  Os.  c.  52,  80)  describes 
Kuphi  as  a  mixture  of  sixteen  ingredients.  "  In 
the  temple  of  Siva  incense  is  ottered  to  the  Lingam 
six  times  in  twenty-four  hours "  (Roberts,  Orient. 
Illiis.  p.  468).  It  was  an  element  in  the  idolatrous 
worship  of  the  Israelites  (Jer.  xi.  12,  17,  xlviii. 
35  ;  2  Chr.  xxxiv.  25). 

With  regard  to  the  symbolical  meaning  of  in- 
cense, opinions  have  been  many  and  widely  differing. 
While  Maimonides  regarded  it  merely  as  a  perfume 
designed  to  counteract  the  effluvia  arising  from  the 
beasts  which  were  slaughtered  for  the  daily  sacrifice, 
other  interpreters  have  allowed  their  imaginations 
to  run  riot,  and  vied  with  the  wildest  speculations 
of  the  Midrashim.  Philo  (Quis  rer.  die.  kaer.  sit. 
§41,  p.  501)  conceives  the  stacte  and  onycha  to  be 
symbolical  of  water  and  earth ;  galbanum  and 
frankincense  of  air  and  fire.  Josephus,  following 
the  traditions  of  his  time,  believed  that  the  ingre- 
dients of  the  incense  were  chosen  from  the  prod  nets 
of  the  sea,  the  inhabited  and  the  uninhabited  parts 
of  the  earth,  to  indicate  that  all  things  are  of  God 
and  for  God  (2?.  J.  v.  5,  §5).  As  the  temple  or 
tabernacle  was  the  palace  of  Jehovah,  the  theocratic 
king  of  Israel,  and  the  ark  of  the  covenant  his 
throne,  so  the  incense,  in  the  opinion  of  some,  cor- 
responded to  the  perfumes  in  which  the  luxurious 
monarchs  of  the  East  delighted.  It  may  mean  all 
this,  but  it  must  mean  much  more.  Grotius,  on 
Ex.  xxx.  1,  says  the  mystical  signification  is  "  sur- 
sum  habenda  corda."  Cornelius  a  Lapide,  on  Ex. 
xxx.  34,  considers  it  as  an  apt  emblem  of  propitia- 
tion, and  finds  a  symbolical  meaning  in  the  several 
ingredients.  Fairbairn  (Typology  of  Scripture,  ii. 
320),  with  many  others,  looks  upon  prayer  as  the 
reality  of  which  incense  is  the  symbol,  founding  his 
conclusion  upon  Ps.  cxli.  2 ;  Rev.  v.  8,  viii.  3,  4. 
Biihr  (Symb.  d.  Mos.  Cult.  vol.  i.,  c.  vi.  §4)  op- 
poses this  view  of  the  subject,  on  the  ground  that 
the  chief  thing  in  ottering  incense  is  not  the  pro- 
ducing of  the  smoke,  which  presses  like  prayer  to- 
wards heaven,  but  the  spreading  of  the  fragrance. 
His  own  exposition  may  be  summed  up  as  follows. 
Prayer,  among  all  Oriental  nations,  signifies  calling 
upon  the  name  of  God.  The  oldest  prayers  con- 
sisted in  the  mere  enumeration  of  the  several  titles 
of  God.  The  Scripture  places  incense  in  close  rela- 
tionship to  prayer,  so  that  ottering  incense  is  syn- 
onymous with  'worship.  Hence  incense  itself  is  a 
symbol  of  the  name  of  God.  The  ingredients  of 
the  incense  correspond  severally  to  the  perfections 
of  God,  though  it  is  impossible  to  decide  to  which 
of  the  four  names  of  God  each  belongs.      Perhaps 


INDIA 

stacte  corresponds  to  Hl'lT  (Jehovah),  onycha  to 
DT17N  (Elohlni),  galbanum  to  ^n  (chai),  and 
frankincense  to  t^np  (kddosh).  Such  is  Bahr's 
exposition  of  the  symbolism  of  incense,  rather  inge- 
nious than  logical.  Looking  upon  incense  in  con- 
nexion with  the  other  ceremonial  observances  of 
the  Mosaic  ritual,  it  would  rather  seem  to  be  sym- 
bolical, not  of  prayer  itself,  but  of  that  which 
makes  prayer  acceptable,  the  intercession  of  Christ. 
In  Rev.  viii.  3,  4,  the  incense  is  spoken  of  as  some- 
thing distinct  from,  though  offered  with,  the  prayers 
of  all  the  saints  (cf.  Luke  i.  10) ;  and  in  Rev.  v.  8 
it  is  the  golden  vials,  and  not  the  odours  or  incense, 
which  are  said  to  be  the  prayers  of  saints.  Ps. 
cxli.  2,  at  first  sight,  appears  to  militate  against  this 
conclusion  ;  but  if  it  be  argued  from  this  passage 
that  incense  is  an  emblem  of  prayer,  it  must  also 
be  allowed  that  the  evening  sacrifice  has  the  same 
symbolical  meaning.  [\V.  A.  W.] 

IN'DIA  (-nh,  i.  e.  Hoddu;  v  'IvSikt)  ;  India). 

The  name  of  India  does  not  occur  in  the  Bible  before 
the  book  of  Esther,  where  it  is  noticed  as  the  limit 
of  the  territories  of  Ahasuerus  in  the  east,  as  Ethi- 
opia was  in  the  west  (i.  1  ;  viii.  9);  the  names 
are  similarly  connected  by  Herodotus  (vii.  9).  The 
Hebrew  form  "  Hoddu "  is  an  abbreviation  of 
Honadu,  which  is  identical  with  the  indigenous 
names  of  the  river  Indus,  "  Hindu,"  or  "  .Sindhu," 
and  again  with  the  ancient  name  of  the  country  as 
it  appears  in  the  Vendidad,  "  Hapta  Hendu."  The 
native  form  "  Sindus"  is  noticed  by  Pliny  (vi.  23). 
The  India  of  the  book  of  Esther  is  not  the  penin- 
sula of  Hindostan,  but  the  country  surrounding  the 
Indus — the  Punjab,  and  perhaps  Scinde — the 
India  which  Herodotus  describes  (iii.  98)  as  form- 
ing part  of  the  Persian  empire  under  Darius,  and 
the  India  which  at  a  later  period  was  conquered  by 
Alexander  the  Great.  The  name  occurs  in  the 
inscriptions  of  Persepolis  and  Nakhsh-i-Rustam, 
but  not  in  those  of  Behistuh  (Rawlinson,  Herod,  ii. 
485).  In  1  Mace.  viii.  8  India  is  reckoned  among 
the  countries  which  Eumenes,  king  of  Pergamus, 
received  out  of  the  former  possessions  of  Antiochus 
the  Great.  It  is  clear  that  India  proper  cannot  be 
understood,  inasmuch  as  this  never  belonged  either 
to  Antiochus  or  Eumenes.  At  the  same  time  none 
of  the  explanations  offered  by  commentators  are 
satisfactory:  the  Eneti  of  Paphlagonia  have  been 
suggested,  but  these  people  had  disappeared  lung 
before  (Strab.  xii.  534):  the  India  of  Xenophon 
(Cyrop.  i.  5,  §•'>,  iii.  2,  §25),  which  may  have  been 
above  the  Carian  stream  named  Indus  (Plin.  v.  29, 

probably  theCalbis),  is  more  likely;  but  tl menda- 

tion  "  Mysia  and  Ionia  "  for  Media  and  India,  offers 
the  best  solution  of  the  difficulty.  [Ionia.]  A  more 
authentic  notice  of  the  country  occurs  in  1  Mace.  vi. 
."'7,  where  Indians  are  noticed  as  the  drivers  of  the 
war-elephants  introduced  into  the  army  of  the  Syrian 
king.  (See  also  1  Esd.  iii.  2  ;  Esth,  xiii.  1  ;  xvi.  1). 
But  tbougb  the  nam  of  India  occurs  so  seldom, 
the  people  and  productions  of  that  country  must 
have  been  tolerably  well  known  to  the  Jews.  There 
is  undoubted  evidence  thai  an  active  trade  v. 
ried    on    between     India    and    Western    Asia:     the 


INN 


867 


a  In  the  language  of  the  A.  V.  "  to  lodge  "  has  the 

force  of  remaining  for  the  night.     The  word  |v  is 

rendered  in    1    K.   xix.  !)   "lodge;"  in  Gen.  xix.  2 
"tarry  all  night  ;"  coin]),  also  ,lcr.  xiv.  8,  &e. 

''  The  erection  of  hospitals  in  the  middle  ages  was 


Tynans  established  their  depots  on  the  shores  of  the 
Persian  gulf,  and  procured  "horns  of  ivory  and 
ebony,"  "  broidered  work  and  rich  apparel"  (Ez. 
xxvii.  15,  24),  by  a  route  which  crossed  the  Ara- 
bian desert  by  land,  and  then  followed  the  coasts  of 
the  Indian  ocean  by  sea.  The  trade  opened  by 
Solomon  with  Ophir  through  the  Red  Sea  chiefly 
consisted  of  Indian  articles,  and  some  of  the  names 
even  of  the  articles,  aljuinmim,  "  sandal  wood," 
kophim,  "  apes,"  thvcciim,  "  peacocks,"  are  of 
Indian  origin  (Humboldt,  Kosiiws,  ii.  133) ;  to 
which  we  may  add  the  Hebrew  name  of  the 
"  topaz,"  pitdah,  derived  from  the  Sanscrit  pita. 
There  is  a  strong  probability  that  productions  of 
yet  greater  utility  were  furnished  by  India  through 
Syria  to  the  shores  of  Europe,  and  that  the  Greeks 
derived  both  the  term  Kaffairepos  (comp.  the  San- 
scrit kastira),  and  the  article  it  represents,  "  tin," 
from  the  coasts  of  India.  The  connexion  thus  esta- 
blished with  India  led  to  the  opinion  that  the  Indians 
were  included  under  the  ethnological  title  of  Cush, 
(Gen.  x.  6),  and  hence  the  Syrian,  Chaldaean,  and 
Arabic  versions  frequently  render  that  term  by  India 
or  Indians,  as  in  2  Chr.  xxi.  1<3  ;  Is.  xi.  11,  xviii. 
1;  Jer.  xiii.23;  Zeph.  iii.  10.  For  the  connexion 
which  some  have  sought  to  establish  between  India 
and  Paradise,  see  Eden.  [W.  L.  B.] 

INHERITANCE.     [Heir.] 

INK,  INKHORN.     [Wetting.] 

INN  (p?ft,  ma/on :  KaraKv/xa,  iravfioKuov). 
The  Hebrew  word  thus  rendered  literally  signifies  "a 
lodging-place  for  the  night."  a  Inns,  in  our  sense  of 
the  term,  were,  as  they  still  are,  unknown  in  the  East 
where  hospitality  is  religiously  prai  tised.  The  khans, 
or  caravanserais,  are  the  representatives  of  European 
inns,  and  these  were  established  but  gradually.  It 
is  doubtful  whether  there  is  any  allusion  to  them 
in  the  Old  Testament.  The  halting-place  of  a  ca- 
ravan was  selected  originally  on  account  of  its 
proximity  to  water  or  pasture,  by  which  the  tra- 
vellers pitched  their  tents  and  passed  the  night. 
Such  was  undoubtedly  the  "  inn "  at  which  oc- 
curred the  incident  in  the  life  of  Moses,  narrated  in 
Ex.  iv.  24.  It  was  probably  one  of  the  halting- 
places  of  the  Ishmaelitisb  merchants  who  traded  to 
Egypt  with  their  camel-loads  of  spices.  Moses  was 
on  his  journey  from  the  land  of  Midian,  and  the 
merchants  in  Gen.  xxxvii.  are  called  indiscrimi- 
nately Ishmaelites  and  Midianites.  At  one  of  these 
stations,  too,  the  first  which  they  reached  after 
leaving  the  city,  and  no  doubt  within  a  short  dist- 
ance from  it,  Joseph's  brethren  discovered  that  their 
money  had  been  replaced  in  their  wallets  (Gen. 
xlii.  27). 

Increased  commercial  intercourse,  and  in  later 
times  religious  enthusiasm  for  pilgrimages11  gave 
rise  to  the  establishment  of  more  permanent  accom- 
modation for  travellers,  (in  the  more  frequented 
remote  from  towns  (Jer.  i\.  2),  caravan- 
serais were  in  course  of  time  erected,  often  af  the 

expense    of   the   wealthy.        The   following  deseript  ioll 

of  one  of  those  on  the  road  from  Baghdad  to  Baby- 
Ion  will  suffice  lor  all:—"  It  is  a  large  and  sub- 
stantia] square  building,  in  the  distance  resem 


due  to  the  same  cause.  Paula,  the  friend  of  Jerome, 
built  several  on  the  road  to  Bethlehem  ;  and  the 
Scotch  and  Irish  residents  in  Fiance  erected  hospitals 
for  the  use  of  pilgrims  of  their  own  nation,  on  their 
way  to  Koine  licckmann.  Silt,  oflnv.  ii.  457  •  Hence 
hospital,  hostel,  and  finally  hott  I. 


868 


INN 


a  fortress,  being  surrounded  with  a  lofty  wall,  and 
flanked  by  round  towers  to  defend  the  inmates  in 
case  of  attack.  Passing  through  a  strong  gateway, 
the  guest  enters  a  large  court,  the  sides  of  which 
are  divided  into  numerous  arched  compartments, 
open  in  front,  for  the  accommodation  of  separate 
parties  and  for  the  reception  of  goods.  In  the 
centre  is  a  spacious  raised  platform,  used  for  sleep- 
ing upon  at  night,  or  for  the  devotions  of  the  faith- 
ful during  the  day.  Between  the  outer  wall  and 
the  compartments  are  wide  vaulted  arcades,  ex- 
tending round  the  entire  building,  where  the  beasts 
of  burden  are  placed.  Upon  the  roof  of  the  arcades 
is  an  excellent  terrace,  and  over  the  gateway  an 
elevated  tower  containing  two  rooms — one  of  which 
is  open  at  the  sides,  permitting  the  occupants  to 
enjoy  every  breath  of  air  that  passes  across  the 
heated  plain.  The  terrace  is  tolerably  clean  ;  but 
the  court  and  stabling  below  are  ankle-deep  in 
-chopped  straw  and  filth"  (Loftus,  Ghaldea,  p.  13). 
The  great  khans  established  by  the  Persian  kings  and 
great  men,  at  intervals  of  about  six  miles  on  the  roads 
from  Baghdad  to  the  sacred  places,  are  provided  with 
stables  for  the  horses  of  the  pilgrims.  "  Within  these 
stables,  on  both  sides,  are  other  cells  for  travellers  " 
(Layard,  Nin.  and  Bab.  p.  478  note).  The  "  stall " 
or  "  manger,"  mentioned  in  Luke  ii.  7,  was  probably 
in  a  stable  of  this  kind.  Such  khans  are  sometimes 
situated  near  running  streams,  or  have  a  supply  of 
water  of  some  kind,  but  the  traveller  must  carry 
all  his  provisions  with  him  (Ouseley,  Trav.  in 
Persia,  i.  261  note).  At  Damascus  the  khans  are, 
many  of  them,  substantial  buildings ;  the  small 
rooms  which  surround  the  court,  as  well  as  those 
above  them  which  are  entered  from  a  gallery,  are 
used  by  the  merchants  of  the  city  for  depositing 
their  goods  (Porter's  Damascus,  i.  33).  The 
wekalchs  of  modern  Egypt  are  of  a  similar  descrip- 
tion (Lane,  Mud.  Eg.  Ii.  10). 

"The  house  of  paths"  (Prov.  viii.  2,  iv  oIkoi 
Si6Saiv,  Vers.  ]'en.),  where  Wisdom  took  her  stand, 
is  understood  by  some  to  refer  appropriately  to  a 
khan  built  where  many  ways  met  and  frequented 
by  many  travellers.  A  similar  meaning  has  been 
attached  to  DHEG  fl-IIS,  gei~iith  Cimh&m,  "  the 
hostel  of  Chimham"  (Jer.  xli.  17)  beside  Bethle- 
hem, built  by  the  liberality  of  the  son  of  Barzillai 
for  the  benefit  of  those  who  were  going  down  to 
Egypt  (Stanley,  S.  3f  P.,  163  ;  App.  §90).  The  Tar- 
gum  says,  "  which  David  gave  to  Chimham,  son  of 
Barzillai  the  Gileadite"  (comp.  2  Sam.  xix.  37,  38). 
With  regard  to  this  passage,  the  ancient  versions  are 
strangely  at  variance.  The  LXX.  had  evidently 
another  reading  with  2  and  J  transposed,  which 
they  left  untranslated  yu^'pax^H-da,  Alex.  yn- 
PripwOxafJ-dap.  The  Vulgate,  if  intended  to  be 
literal,  must  have  read  "D32  D'HJI,  peregrin- 
antes  in  Chanaam.  The  ,  Arabic,  following  the 
Alexandrian  MS.,  read  it  ev  yrj  B-npaiOxa/J-dafi, 
"  in  the  land  of  Berothchamaam."     The  Syriac  has 

P?J^,  b'edre,  "in  the  threshing-floors,"  as  if 
HI  3")  32,  begomuth.  Josephus  had  a  reading  different 
from  all,  IT1T]J2,  begidroth,  "in  the  folds  of" 
Chimham  ;  for  he  says  the  fugitives  went  "  to  a 
certain  place,called  Mandra  "  (Mdvdpa  Key6/xevov, 
Ant.  x.  9,  §5),  and  in  this  he  was  followed  by 
Aquila  and  the  Hexaplar  Syriac. 

The  iravSoKtlov  (Luke  x.  34)  probably  differed 
from  the  KaraAvnu  (Lukeii.  7)  in  having  a  "  host  " 


INSTANT 

or  "  innkeeper"  (iravfioKevs,  Luke  x.  35),  who  sup- 
plied some  few  of  the  necessary  provisions,  and 
attended  to  the  wants  of  travellers  left  to  his 
charge.  The  word  has  been  adopted  in  the  later 
Hebrew,  and  appears  in  the  Mishna  (Yebamoth,  xvi. 
7)  under  the  form  plJIQ,  pundak,  and  the  host 
is  ''plJ'ID,  pundaki.  The  Jews  were  forbidden  to 
put  up  their  beasts  at  establishments  of  this  kind 
kept  by  idolaters  {Aboda  Zara,  ii.  1).  It  appears 
that  houses  of  entertainment  were  sometimes,  as  in 
Egypt  (Her.  ii.  35),  kept  by  women,  whose  cha- 
racter was  such  that  their  evidence  was  regarded 
with  suspicion.  In  the  Mishna  (Yebamoth,  xvi.  7) 
a  tale  is  told  of  a  company  of  Levites  who  were 
travelling  to  Zoar,  the  City  of  Palms,  when  one  of 
them  fell  ill  on  the  road  and  was  left  by  his  com- 
rades at  an  inn,  under  the  charge  of  the  hostess 
(rVplilS,  piindekith  =  irav8oKevTpla).  On  their 
return  to  enquire  for  their  friend,  the  hostess  told 
them  he  was  dead  and  buried,  but  they  refused  to 
believe  her  till  she  produced  his  staff,  wallet,  and 
roll  of  the  law.  In  Josh.  ii.  1,  HilT;  zonah,  the 
term  applied  to  Rahab,  is  rendered  in  the  Targum 
of  Jonathan  iXrVplJIS,  pundekitha,  "  a  woman 
who  keeps  an  inn."  So  in  Judg.  xi.  1,  of  the  mo- 
ther of  Jephthah  ;  of  Dalilah  (Judg.  xvi.  1 )  and 
the  two  women  who  appealed  to  Solomon  (1  K. 
iii.  16).  The  words,  in  the  opinion  of  Eimchi  on 
Josh.  ii.  1,  appear  to  have  been  synonymous. 

In  some  parts  of  modern  Syria  a  nearer  approach 
has  been  made  to  the  European  system.  The 
people  of  es-Salt,  according  to  Burckhardt,  support 
four  taverns  (Menzel  or  Medkafe)  at  the  public 
expense.  At  these  the  traveller  is  furnished  with 
everything  he  may  require,  so  long  as  he  chooses 
to  remain,  provided  his  stay  is  not  unreasonably 
protracted.  The  expenses  are  paid  by  a  tax  on  the 
heads  of  families,  and  a  kind  of  landlord  super- 
intends the  establishment  {Trav.  in  Syria,  p. 
36).  [W.  A.  W.] 

INSTANT,  INSTANTLY.  A  word  em- 
ployed by  our  translators  in  the  N.  T.  with  the 
force  of  urgency  or  earnestness,  to  render  five  dis- 
tinct Greek  words.  We  still  say  "  at  the  instance 
of,"  but  as  that  sense  is  no  longer  attached  to  "  in- 
stant " — though  it  is  still  to  the  verb.  "  insist," 
and  to  other  compounds  of  the  same  root,  such  as 
"  persist,"  "  constant " — it  has  been  thought  ad- 
visable to  notice  its  occurrences.  They  afford  an 
interesting  example,  if  an  additional  one  be  needed, 
of  the  close  connexion  which  there  is  between  the 
Authorised  Version  and  the  Vulgate;  the  Vulgate 
having,  as  will  be  seen,  suggested  the  word  in 
three  out  of  its  five  occurrences. 

1.  (TTrovSaiois — "they  besought  Him  instantly" 
(Luke  vii.  4).  This  word  is  elsewhere  commonly 
rendered  "  earnestly,"  which  is  very  suitable  here. 

2.  ineKeivTO,  fiom  iTriicei/j.ai,  to  lie  upon: — 
"  they  were  instant  with  loud  voices"  (Vulg.  in- 
stabant),  Luke  xxiii.  23.  This  might  be  rendered 
"they  were  pressing''  (as  in  ver.  1). 

3.  iv  tKTti>eia,  "  instantly  serving  God  "  (Acts 
xxvi.  7).  The  metaphor  at  the  root  of  this  word 
is  that  of  stretching — on  the  stretch.  Elsewhere 
in  the  A.  V.  it  is  represented  by  "  fervently." 

4.  TrpocrKapTepovvTis,  "  continuing  instant  " 
(Rom.  xii.  12),  Vulg.  instantes.  Here  thi 
jective  is  hardly  necessary,  the  word  being  else- 
where rendered  by  ''continuing" — or  U>  preserve 
the  rhythm  of  so  familiar  a  sentence — "continuing 
stedfast"  (as  Acts  ii.  42). 


IONIA 

5.  e'iri(TT7j0i,  from  ifpiffrdvai,  to  stand  by  or 
upon  —  "be  instant  in  season  ont  of  season" 
(2  Tim.  iv.  2),  Vulg.  insta.  Four  verses  further 
on  it  is  rendered,  "is  at  hand."  The  sense  is 
"stand  ready" — "be  alert"  for  whatever  may 
happen.  Of  the  five  words  this  is  the  only  one 
which  contains  the  same  metaphor  as  "  instant." 

In  Luke  ii.  38,  "that  instant"  is  literally  "that 
same  hour," —  avrfj  rfj  8>pa.  [G.] 

IO'NIA  ('loivia).  The  substitution  of  this  word 
for  7)  'IpSikti  in  1  Mace.  viii.  8  (A.  V.  "  India") 
is  a  conjecture  of  Grotius  without  any  authority 
of  MSS.  It  must  be  acknowledged,  however,  that 
the  change  removes  a  great  difficulty,  especially  if. 
asfthe  same  commentator  suggests,  Mutn'a  [Mysia] 
be  substituted  for  MrjSeia  or  Mrjdta  in  the  same 
context.  The  passage  refers  to  the  cession  of  terri- 
tory which  the  Romans  forced  Antiochus  the  Great 
to  make  ;  and  it  is  evident  that  India  and  Media 
are  nothing  to  the  purpose,  whereas  Ionia  and 
Mysia  were  among  the  districts  cis  Taurum,  which 
were  given  up  to  Eumenes. 

As  to  the  term  Ionia,  the  name  was  given  in 
early  times  to  that  part  of  the  western  coast  of 
Asia  Minor  which  lay  between  Aeolis  on  the  north 
and  Doris  on  the  south.  These  were  properly  eth- 
nological terms,  and  had  reference  to  the  tribes  of 
Greek  settlers  along  this  shore.  Ionia,  with  its 
islands,  was  celebrated  for  its  twelve,  afterwards 
thirteen  cities ;  five  of  which,  Ephesus,  Smyrna, 
Miletus,  Chios,  and  Samos,  are  conspicuous  in  the 
N.  T.  In  Roman  times  Ionia  ceased  to  have  any 
political  significance,  being  absorbed  in  the  province 
of  Asia.  The  term,  however,  was  still  occasionally 
used,  as  in  Joseph.  Ant.  xvi.  2,  §3,  from  which 
passage  we  learn  that  the  Jews  were  numerous  in 
this  district.  This  whole  chapter  in  Josephus  is 
very  interesting,  as  a  geographical  illustration  of 
that  part  of  the  coast.      [Javas.]         [J.  S.  H.] 

IPHEDEI'AH  (n^BJ  ;  'Ucpadlas,  Alex. 
'le<pa$ia :  Jephdaia),  a  descendant  of  Benjamin, 
one  of  the  Bene-Shashak  (1  Chr.  viii.  25) ;  specially 
named  as  a  chief  of  the  tribe,  and  as  residing  in 
Jerusalem  (comp.  28). 

IR  (T»y :  "Clp,  as  if  "liy ;  Alex,  'flpa :  Sir), 
1  Chr.  vii.'  12.     [Ira.] 

IRA  (N"lsy  ;  Ira).  1.  (Ipds,  Alex.  -Elpds.) 
"  The  Jairite,''  named  in  the  catalogue  of  David's 
great  officers  (2  Sam.  xx.  26)  as  "  priest  to 
David"  (jn'3  ;  A.  V.  "a  chief  ruler").  The 
Peshito  version  for  "Jairite"  has  "from  Jathir," 
I.  e.,  probably  Jattir,  where  David  had  found 
fiiends  during  hi.^  troubles  with  Saul.  [Jaiuiti:.] 
If  this  can  be  maintained,  and  it  certainly  has  an 
air  of  probability  then  this  Ira  is  identical  with 

2.  (vIpas,  'Ipd,  Alex.  Elpds)  "  Ira  the  Ithrite" 
(*"lD'n  ;  A.  V.  omits  the  article),  that  is,  the 
Jattirite,  one  of  the  heroes  of  David's  guard 
(2  Sam.  wiii.  38:  1  Chr.  xi.  40).  [ITHRITE; 
Jattii:;   JETHER.] 

3.  ('ipaj,  'npd,  Alex.  'Cipai;  Hird).  Another 
member  of  David's  guard,  a  Tekoite,  son  of  Ikkesh 
C_'  Sam.  xxiii.  26;  1  Chr,  xi.  28).  Ira  was  leader 
of  the  sixth  monthly  course  of  2  1,000,  as  appointed 
by  David  (  1  Chr.  xxvii.  9). 

I'RAD(YVy;  YaHa5  in  both  MSS.;  Joseph. 
lapeSris ;  Syr.  Mar ;  trad),  son  of  Enoch;  grand- 
son (it' Cain,  and  father  of  Mehujael  (Gen.  iv.   18). 


IR-HA-HERES 


869 


I'RAM(Dmy;  Zafpwiv;  Hiram;  "belonging 
to  a  city,"  Ges.)  ,  a  leader  (5|1?K  ;  LXX.  yyefjubv  ; 
"  phy  larch,"  A.V.  "duke")  of  the  Edomites  ''Gen. 
xxxvi.  43  ;  1  Chr.  i.  54),  i.  e.,  the  chief  of  a  family 
or  tribe.  He  occurs  in  the  list  of  "  the  names  of 
the  dukes  [that  came]  of  Esau,  according  to  their 
families,  after  their  places,  by  their  names"  (Gen. 
xxxvi.  40-43)  ;  but  none  of  these  names  is  found 
in  the  genealogy  of  Esau's  immediate  descendants  ; 
the  latter  being  separated  from  them  by  the  enu- 
meration of  the  sons  of  Seir  and  the  kings  of  Edom, 
both  in  Geu.  and  Chr.  They  were  certainly  de- 
scendants of  Esau,  but  in  what  generation  is  not 
known  ;  evidently  not  in  a  remote  one.  The  sacred 
records  are  generally  confined  to  the  history  of  the 
chosen  race,  and  the  reason  of  the  exclusion  of  the 
Edomite  genealogy  beyond  the  second  generation  is 
thus  explicable.  In  remarking  on  this  gap  in  the 
genealogy,  we  must  add  that  there  appears  to  be 
no  safe  ground  for  supposing  a  chronological  se- 
quence of  sons  and  grandsons  of  Esau,  sons  of  Seir, 
kings  of  Edom,  and  lastly  descendants  of  Esau 
again,  ruling  over  the  Edomites.  These  were  pro- 
bably in  part,  or  wholly,  contemporaneous ;  and 
f]-1?N  we  think  should  be  regarded  as  signifying  a 
chief  of  a  tribe,  &c.  (as  rendered  above),  rather  than  a 
king.  The  Jewish  assertion  that  these  terms  signified 
the  same  rank,  except  that  the  former  was  uncrowned 
and  the  latter  Crowned,  may  be  safely  neglected. 

The  names  of  which  Irani  is  one  are  "according 
to  their  families,  after  their  places  (or  "  towns," 
DnbpO),  by  their  names  "  (ver.  40)  ;  and  again 
(ver.  43),  "  These  [be]  the  dukes  of  Edom,  ac- 
cording to  their  habitations  in  the  land  of  their 
possession."  These  words  imply  that  tribes  and 
places  were  called  after  their  leaders  and  founders, 
and  tend  to  confirm  the  preceding  remarks  on  the 
descendants  of  Esau  being  chiefs  of  tribes,  and  pro- 
bably more  or  less  contemporaneous  with  each  other, 
and  with  the  kings  and  Horites  named  together 
with  them  in  the  same  records.  It  has  been  sug- 
gested that  the  names  we  are  considering  are  those 
of  the  tribes  and  places  founded  by  Esau's  imme- 
diate descendants,  mentioned  earlier  in  the  record ; 
but  no  proof  has  been  adduced  in  support  of  this 
theory. 

The  time  of  the  final  destruction  of  the  Horites 
is  uncertain :  by  analogy  writh  the  conquest  of 
Canaan  (ef.  Dent.  ii.  12,  22)  we  may  perhaps  infer 
that  it  was  not  immediate  on  Esau's  settlement.  No 
identification  of  Iram  has  been  found.     [E.  S.  I'.] 

IR-HA-HE'RES,  in  A.V.  Tin:  City  of  De- 
struction (D"inn  my, var. Dinn  my-.  'Axle's: 

Civitas  Solis),  the  name  or  an  appellation  of  a  city 
in  Egypt,  mentioned  only  in  Is.  xix.  18.  The  read- 
ing D"in  is  that  of  most  MSS.  the  Syr.  Aq.  and 
Theod.,  the  other  reading,  D"in.  is  supported  by 
the  LXX.,  but  only  in  form,  by  Symm.  who  has 
n6\ts  fi\lov,  and  the  Vulg.  Gesenius  f  Thes.  391, 
•  '.  522)  prefers  the  latter  reading.  There  are  va- 
rious explanations:  we  shall  first  take  thus,,  that 
treal  it  as  a  proper  name,  then  those  thai  suppose 
it  to  be  an  appellation  used  by  the  prophet  to  denote 
the  future  of  the  city. 

1.  D"inn  my,  "the  city  of  the  sun,"  a  trans- 
lation of  the  Egyptian  sacred  name  of  Hehopolis, 
generally  called  in  the  liible  On,  the  Hebrew  form 
of  its  civil  name  An  [On],  and  once  Beth-Shemesh, 
"tin-  house  of  the  sun"  (Jer.  xliii.  13),  a  move 


870 


IR-HA-HERES 


literal  translation   than  this  supposed  one  of  the 
sacred  name  [Beth  SHEMESH]. 

2.  Dnnn  ~\%  or  D"inn  "l*y,  "the  city  Hexes," 
a  transcription  in  the  second  word  of  the  Egyptian 
sacred  name  of  Heliopolis,  Ha-ra,  "the  abode  ;lit. 
"house"),  of  the  sun."  This  explanation  would 
necessitate  the  omission  of  the  article.  The  LXX. 
favours  it. 

3.  Dliin  *Vy,  "  a  city  destroyed,"  lit.  "a  city 
of  destruction  ;"  in  A.  V.  "  the  city  of  destruction," 
meaning  that  one  of  the  five  cities  mentioned  should 
be  destroyed,  according  to  Isaiah's  idiom. 

4.  Dinn  TV,  "  a  city  preserved,"  meaning 
that  one' of  the  five  cities  mentioned  should  be  pre- 
served. Gesenius,  who  proposes  this  construction, 
if  the  second  word  be  not  part  of  the  name  of  the 

place,  compares  the  Arabic  ,j^j~a.»  "he  guarded, 

kept,  preserved,"  &c.  It  may  be  remarked  that 
the  word  Heres  or  Hres  in  ancient  Egyptian, 
probably  signifies  "  a  guardian."  This  rendering 
of  Gesenius  is  however  merely  conjectural,  and 
seems  to  have  been  favoured  by  him  on  account  of 
its  directly  contradicting  the  rendering  last  noticed. 
The  first  of  these  explanations  is  highly  impro- 
bable, for  we  find  elsewhere  both  the  sacred  and 
the  civil  names  of  Heliopolis,  so  that  a  third  name 
merely  a  variety  of  the  Hebrew  rendering  of  the 
sacred  name  is  very  unlikely.  The  name  Bcth- 
Shcmesh  is,  moreover,  a  more  literal  translation  in 
its  first  word  of  the  Egyptian  name  than  this  sup- 
posed one.  It  may  be  remarked,  however,  as  to 
the  second  word,  that  one  of  the  towns  in  Palestine 
called  Beth-shemesh,  a  town  of  the  Levites  on  the 
borders  of  Judah'  and  Dan,  was  not  far  from  a 
Mount  Heres,  D~>n  IH  (Judg.  i.  35),  so  that  the 
two  names  as  applied  to  the  sun  as  an  object  of 
worship  might  probably  be  interchangeable.  The 
second  explanation,  which  we  believe  has  not  been 
hitherto  put  forth,  is  liable  to  the  same  objection  as 
the  preceding  one,  besides  that  it  necessitates  the 
exclusion  of  the  article.  The  fourth  explanation 
would  not  have  been  noticed  had  it  not  been  sup- 
ported by  the  name  of  Gesenius.  The  common 
reading  and  old  rendering  remains,  which  certainly 
present  no  critical  difficulties.  A  very  careful  ex- 
amination of  the  xixth  chap,  of  Isaiah,  and  of  the 
xviiith  and  xxth,  which  are  connected  with  it,  has 
inclined  us  to  prefer  it.  Egypt  and  Ethiopia  were 
then  either  under  a  joint  rule  or  under  an  Ethiopian 
sovereign.  We  can,  therefore,  understand  the  con- 
nexion of  the  three  subjects  comprised  in  the  three 
chapters.  Chap,  xviii.  is  a  prophecy  against  the 
Ethiopians,  xix.  is  the  Burden  of  Egypt,  and  xx., 
delivered  in  the  year  of  the  capture  of  Ashdod  by 
Tartan,  the  general  of  Sargon,  predicts  the  leading 
captive  of  the  Egyptians  and  Ethiopians,  probably 
the  garrison  of  that  great  stronghold,  as  a  warning 
to  the  Israelites  who  trusted  in  them  for  aid.  Chap, 
xviii.  ends  with  an  indication  of  the  time  to  which 
it  refers,  speaking  of  the  Ethiopians — as  we  under- 
stand the  passage — as  sending  "a  present"  "  to  the 
place  of  the  name  of  the  Lord  of  hosts,  the  mount 
Zion''  (ver.  7).  If  this  is  to  be  taken  in  a  proper 
and  not  a  tropical  sense,  it  would  refer  to  the  con- 
version of  Ethiopians  by  the  preaching  of  the  Law 
while  the  Temple  yet  stood.  That  such  had  been 
the  case  before  the  gospel  was  preached  is  evident 
from  the  instance  of  the  eunuch  of  Queen  Candace, 
whom   Philip  met  on  his  return  homeward  from 


IRIJAH 

worshipping  at  Jerusalem,  and  converted  to  Chris- 
tianity (Acts  viii.  26-39).  The  Burden  of  Egypt 
seems  to  point  to  the  times  of  the  Persian  and  Greek 
dominions  over  that  country.  The  civil  war  agrees 
with  the  troubles  of  the  Dodecarchy,  then  we  read 
of  a  time  of  bitter  oppression  by  "a  cruel  lord  and 
[or  "  even  "]  a  fierce  king,''  probably  pointing  to 
the  Persian  conquests  and  rule,  and  specially  to 
Cambyses,  or  Cambyses  and  Ochus,  and  then  of 
the  drying  of  the  sea  (the  Red  Sea,  comp.  xi.  15) 
and  the  river  and  canals,  of  the  destruction  of  the 
water-plants,  and  of  the  misery  of  the  fishers  and 
workers  in  linen.  The  princes  and  counsellors  are 
to  lose  their  wisdom  and  the  people  to  be  filled 
with  fear,  all  which  calamities  seem  to  have  begun 
in  the  desolation  of  the  Persian  rule.  It  is  not  easv 
to  understand  what  follows  as  to  the  dread  of  the 
land  of  Judah  which  the  Egyptians  should  feel, 
immediately  preceding  the  mention  of  the  subject 
of  the  article  : — "  In  that  day  shall  five  cities 
in  the  land  of  Egypt  speak  the  language  of  Ca- 
naan, and  swear  to  the  Lord  of  hosts;  one  shall 
be  called  Ir-ha-heres.  In  that  day  shall  there  be 
an  altar  to  the  Lord  in  the  midst  of  the  land  of 
Egypt,  and  a  pillar  at  the  border  thereof  to  the 
Lord.  And  it  shall  be  for  a  sign  and  for  a  witness 
unto  the  Lord  of  hosts  in  the  laud  of  Egypt ;  for 
they  shall  cry  unto  the  Lord  because  of  the  op- 
pressors, and  he  shall  send  them  a  saviour,  and  a 
great  one,  and  he  shall  deliver  them"  (xix.  18-20). 
The  partial  or  entire  conversion  of  Egypt  is  pro- 
phesied in  the  next  two  verses  (21,  22).  The  time 
of  the  Greek  dominion,  following  the  Persian  rule, 
may  be  here  pointed  to.  There  was  then  a  great 
influx  of  Jewish  settlers,  and  as  we  know  of  a 
Jewish  town,  Onion,  and  a  great  Jewish  popula- 
tion at  Alexandria,  we  may  suppose  that  there  were 
other  large  settlements.  These  would  "speak  the 
language  of  Canaan,"  at  first  literally,  afterwards 
in  their  retaining  the  religion  and  customs  of  their 
fathers.  The  altar  would  well  correspond  to  the 
temple  built  by  Onias;  the  pillar,  to  the  synagogue 
of  Alexandria,  the  latter  on  the  northern  and  western 
borders  of  Egypt.  In  this  case  Alexander  would  be 
the  deliverer.  We  do  not  know,  however,  that  at 
this  period  there  was  any  recognition  of  the  true 
God  on  the  part  of  the  Egyptians.  If  the  pro- 
phecy is  to  be  understood  in  a  proper  "sense,  we  can 
however  see  no  other  time  to  which  it  applies,  and 
must  suppose  that  Ir-ha-heres  was  one  of  the  cities 
partly  or  wholly  inhabited  by  the  Jews  in  Egypt : 
of  these  Onion  was  the  most  important,  and  to  it  the 
rendering,  "One  shall  be  called  a  city  of  destruc- 
tion," would  apply,  since  it  was  destroyed  by  Titus, 
while  Alexandria,  and  perhaps  the  other  cities  yet 
stand.  If  the  prophecy  is  to  be  taken  tropically, 
the  best  reading  and  rendering  can  only  be  deter- 
mined by  verbal  criticism.  [R.  S.  P.] 

I'RI  (Oi/pia;  Alex.  Ovpi:  Jorus)  1  Esdr.  viii. 
62.  This  name  answers  to  Uriah  in  Ezra  (viii. 
33.)  But  whence  did  our  translators  get  their 
form? 

I'RI  or  IR  (n^J?  or  "Vy  ;  'Ovpl  and  "tip  ;  Urai 
and  Hir),  a  Benjamite  son  of  Bela,  according  to 
1  Chr.  vii.  7,  12.  The  name  does  not  occur  in 
any  of  the  other  genealogies  of  the  tribe.  [Hdp- 
HA.M.]  [A.  C.  H.] 

IRI'JAH  (n,,!,KT;  tapoviu;  Jerias),  son  of 
Shelemiah,  a  "  captain  of  the  ward  "  (rHpS  PV2), 
who  met  Jeremiah  in  the  srnte  of  Jerusalem  called 


IR-NAHASH 

the  "  gate  of  Benjamin,"  accused  him  of  being 
about  to  desert  to  the  Chaldeans,  and  led  him  back 
to  the  princes  (Jer.  xxxvii.  13,  14). 

IR-NAHASH  (C'm-I"y  =  "  serpent-city;" 
■n-SXis  Naas  ;  Urbs  Nuns),  a  name  which,  like 
many  other  names  of  places,  occurs  in  the  genea- 
logical lists  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  iv.  12).  Tehinnah 
Alii  Ir-nahash — "  father  of  Ir-nahash  '* — was  one  of 
the  sons  of  Eshton,  all  of  them  being  descendants 
of  <  'belub(ver.  11).  But  it  seems  impossible  to  con- 
nect this  special  genealogy  with  the  general  gene- 
alogies of  Judah,  and  it  has  the  air  of  being  a  frag- 
ment of  the  records  of  some  other  family,  related, 
of  course,  or  it  would  not  be  here,  but  not  the 
same.  May  not  "  Shuah,  the  brother  of  Chelub  " 
(ver.  11),  be  Shuah  the  Canaanite,  by  whose 
daughter  Judah  bad  his  three  eldest  sons  (Gen. 
xxxviii.  2,  &c.),  and  these  verses  be  a  fragment  ol 
Canaanite  record  preserved  amongst  those  of  the 
great  Israelite  family,  who  then  became  so  closely 
related  to  the  Canaanites?  True,  the  two  Shuahs 
are  written  differently  in  Hebrew — yi^' and  nntC. 
but  considering  the  early  date  of  the  one  passage 
and  the  corrupt  and  incomplete  state  of  the  other: 
this  is  perhaps  not  irreconcilable. 

No  trace  of  the  name  of  Ir-nahash  attached  to 
any  site  has  been  discovered.  Jerome's  interpreta- 
tion (Qn.  Hebr.  ad  loe.) — whether  his  own  or  a 
tradition  lie  does  not  say — is  that  Ir-nahash  is 
Bethlehem,  Nahash  being  another  name  for  Jesse. 
[Naiiash.]  [G.] 

I'RON  (pN^  ;  Kepaif,  Alex,  'lapidu ;  Jerori), 
one  of  the  cities  of  Naphtali,  named  between  En- 
hazor  ami  Migdal-el  (Josh.  six.  38)  ;  hitherto  totally 
unknown.  [G.] 

IRON  (Sna,  barzel;  Ch.  N^PS,  parz'ld : 
<n'5T/pos),  mentioned  with  brass  as  the  earliest  of 
known  metals  (<ien.  iv.  22).  As  it  is  rarely  found 
in  its  native  state,  but  generally  in  combination 
with  oxygen,  the  knowledge  of  the  art  of  forging 
iron,  which  is  attributed  to  Tubal  Cain,  argues  an 
acquaintance  with  the  difficulties  which  attend  the 
smelting  of  this  metal.  Iron  melts  at  a  tempera- 
ture of  about  3000°  Fahrenheit,  and  to  produce 
this  heat  large  furnaces  supplied  by  a  strong  blast 
of  air  are  necessary.  But,  however  difficult  it  may 
be  to  imagine  a  knowledge  of  such  appliances  at  so 
early  a  period,  it  is  perfectly  certain  that  the  use  of 
iron  is  of  extreme  antiquity,  and  that  therefore 
some  mean--  of  overcoming  the  obstacles  in  question 
must  have  been  discovered.      What  the  process  may 

have  been  is  left  entirely  to  conjecture;  a  method 
is  employed  by  the  natives  of  India,   extremely 

simple  and  of  great  antiquity,  which  though  rude  is 
very  effective,  and  suggests  the  possibility  of  similar 
knowledge  in  an  early  stage  of  civilization  (Ure, 
Diet.  Arts  •nut  Sciences,  art.  steel).  The  smelting 
furnaces  of  Aethalia,  described  by  Diodorus  (v.  13), 
correspond  roughly  with  the  modern  bloomeries, re- 
mains of  which  still  exist  in  this  country  (Napier, 
Metallurgy  of  the  Bible,  140).  Malleable  iron  was 
in  common  use.  but  it  is  doubtful  whether  the  an- 
cients were  acquainted  with  cast-iron.  The  allu- 
sions in  the  Bible  supply  the  following  facts. 

The  natural  wealth  of  the  -oil  of  Canaan  is  indi- 
cated by  describing it  as  "a  land  whose  sto 
iron"    (Dent.    viii.    9).      By    this    Winer 
art.  Eiseri)  understands  the  basalt  which  predomi- 
nates in  the  llauran,  is  the  material  of  which  Og's 
bedstead  (Deut.  hi.  11)  was  made,  and  contains  a 


IRON 


871 


large  per-centage  of  iron.  It  is  more  probable  that 
the  expression  is  a  poetical  figure.  Pliny  (xxxvi. 
11),  who  is  quoted  as  an  authority,  says  indeed 
that  basalt  is  "  ferrei  colons  atque  duritiae,"  but 
does  not  hint  that  iron  was  ever  extracted  from  it. 
The  book  of  Job  contains  passages  which  indicate 
that  iron  was  a  metal  well  known.  Of  the  manner 
of  procuring  it,  we  learn  that  "iron  is  taken  from 
dust"  (xxviii.  2).  It  does  not  follow  from  Job 
xix.  24,  that  it  was  used  for  a  writing  implement, 
though  such  may  have  been  the  case,  any  more  than 
that  adamant  was  employed  for  the  same  purpose 
( Jer.  xvii.  1),  or  that  shoes  were  shod  with  iron  and 
brass  (Deut.  xxxiii.  25).  Indeed  iron  so  frequently 
occurs  in  poetic  figures,  that  it  is  difficult  to  dis- 
criminate between  its  literal  and  metaphorical  sense. 
In  such  passages  as  the  following,  in  which  a  "  yoke 
of  iron"  (Deut.  xxviii.  48),  denotes  hard  service; 
"  a  rod  of  iron  "  (Ps.  ii.  9),  a  stern  government ; 
"  a  pillar  of  iron"  (Jer.  i.  18),  a  strong  support 
"and  threshing  instruments  of  iron"  (Am.  i.  3), 
the  means  of  cruel  oppression  ;  the  hardness  and 
heaviness  (Ecclus.  xxii.  15)  of  iron  are  so  clearly 
the  prominent  ideas,  that  though  it  may  have  been 
used  for  the  instruments  in  question,  such  usage  is 
not  of  necessity  indicated.  The  "furnace  of  iron  " 
(Deut.  iv.  28;  1  K.  viii.  51)  is  a  figure  which 
vividly  expresses  hard  bondage,  as  represented  by 
the  severe  labour  which  attended  the  operation  of 
smelting.  Iron  was  used  for  chisels  (Deut.  xxvii. 
5),  or  something  of  the  kind;  for  axes  (Deut.  xix. 
5  ;  2  K.  vi.  5,  6  ;  Is.  x.  34;  Horn.  II.  iv.  485); 
for  harrows  and  saws  (2  Sam.  xii.  31  ;  1  Chr.  xx. 
3)  ;  for  nails  (1  Chr.  xxii.  3).  and  the  fastenings  of 
the  temple;  for  weapons  of  war  (1  Sam.  xvii.  7; 
Job  xx.  24),  and  for  war  chariots  (Josh.  xvii.  16, 
is  :  Judg.  i.  10,  iv.  3,  13).  The  latter  weie 
plated  or  studded  with  it.  Its  usage  in  defensive 
armour  is  implied  in  2  Sam.  x.xiii.  7  (of.  Rev. 
ix.  9),  and  as  a  safeguard  in  peace  it  appears  in 
fetters  (Ps.  cv.  18),  prison-gates  (Acts  xii.  10  , 
and  bars  of  gates  or  doors  (Ps.  cvii.  16;  Is.  xlv. 
2),  as  well  as  for  surgical  purposes  (1  Tim.  iv. 
2).  Sheet-iron  was  used  for  cooking  utensils  (Ez. 
iv.  3;  cf.  Lev.  vii.  9),a  and  bars  of  hammered 
iron  are  mentioned  in  Job  \1.  18,  though  here  the 
LXX.  perversely  render  <ri5rjpoj  xUT"s'  "r'lst- 
iron."  That  it  was  plentiful  in  the  time  of  David 
appears  from  1  Chr.  xxii.  3.  It  was  used  by  So- 
lomon, according  to  Joseplms,  to  clamp  the  large 
rocks  with  which  he  built  up  the  Temple  mount. 
(Ant.  xv.  11.  §3)  ;  ami  by  Hezekiah's  workmen  to 
hew  out  the  conduits  of  Gihon  (Ecclus.  xlviy.  17). 
Images  were  fastened  in  their  niches  in  later  times 
by  iron  brackets  or  clamps  (Wisd.  xiii.  15).  Agri- 
cultural implements  were  early  made  of  the  same 
material.  In  the  treaty  made  l.y  1'oisona  was  in- 
serted a  condition  like  that  imposed  on  the  Hebrews 
by  the  Philistines,  that  no  iron  should  be  used 
except  for  agricultural  purposes  (Piin.  xxxiv.  39). 

'['be  market  of  Tyre  was  supplied  with  bright 
or  polished  iron  by  the  merchants  of  1  'an  and  Javan 
(Ez.   xxvii.    19).      Some,   as   the    I. XX.   and  Vulg., 

render  this  "wrought  iron:"  so  De  Wetto  "  e- 
schmiedetes  Eisen."  The  Targum  has  "bars  of 
iron,"  which  would  correspond  with  the  stt 

of  Pliny  (\x\iv.  41).     l'.ut    Kimelu  (Lex.  s.  v.i 

expounds  niL''J/\   'dslldth,  BS   "  pure  and   polished  " 


"  The  passage  of  K/.ekicl  is  illustrated  by  the 
screens  behind  which  the  archers  stand  in  the  repre- 
sentations of  a  siege  on  the  Nimroud  sculptures. 


872 


IRON 


(  =  Span.  acero,  steel),  in  which  he  is  supported  by 
R.  Sol.  Parchon,  and  by  Ben  Zeb,  who  gives  "  gliinz- 
end  "  as  the  equivalent  (comp.  the  Homeric  aWwv 
aiSwpos,  II.  vii.  473).  If  the  Javan  alluded  to  were 
Greece,  and  not,  as  Bochart  (Phaleij,  ii.  21)  seems 
to  think,  some  place  in  Arabia,  there  might  be 
reference  to  the  iron  mines  of  Macedonia,  spoken  of 
in  the  decree  of  Aemilius  Paulus  (Liv.  xlv.  29); 
but  Bochart  urges  as  a  very  strong  argument  in 
support  of  his  theory  that,  at  the  time  of  Ezekiel's 
prophecy,  the  Tyrians  did  not  depend  upon  Greece 
for  a  supply  of  cassia  and  cinnamon,  which  are 
associated  with  iron  in  the  merchandise  of  Dan  and 
Javan,  but  that  rather  the  contrary  was  the  case. 
Pliny  (xxxiv.  41)  awards  the  palm  to  the  iron  of 
Serica,  that  of  Parthia  being  next  in  excellence. 
The  Chalybes  of  the  Pontus  were  celebrated  as 
workers  in  iron  in  very  ancient  times  (Aesch.  Prom. 
7:13).  They  were  identified  by  Strabo  with  the 
Chaldaei  of  his  day  (xii.  549),  and  the  mines  which 
they  worked  were  in  the  mountains  skirting  the 
sea-coast.  The  produce  of  their  labour  is  supposed 
to  be  alluded  to  in  Jer.  xv.  12,  as  being  of  superior 
quality.  Iron  mines  are  still  in  existence  on  the 
same  coast,  and  the  ore  is  found  "  in  small  nodular 
masses  in  a  dark  yellow  clay  which  overlies  a  lime- 
stone rock"  (Smith's  Geoij.  Diet.  art.  Chalybes). 

It  was  for  a  long  time  supposed  that  the  Egyp- 
tians were  ignorant  of  the  use  of  iron,  and  that  the 
allusions  in  the  Pentateuch  were  anachronisms,  as 
no  traces  of  it  have  been  found  in  their  monuments  ; 
but  in  the  sepulchres  at  Thebes  butchers  are  repre- 
sented as  sharpening  their  knives  on  a  round  bar  of 
metal  attached  to  their  aprons,  which  from  its  blue 
colour  is  presumed  to  be  steel.  The  steel  weapons 
on  the  tomb  of  Rameses  III.  are  also  painted  blue; 
those  of  bronze  being  red  (Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  III. 
247).  One  iron  mine  only  has  been  discovered  in 
Egypt,  which  was  worked  by  the  ancients.  It  is  at 
Hamm&mi  between  the  Nile  and  the  Red  Sea ;  the 
iron  found  by  Mr.  Burton  was  in  the  form  of 
specular  and  red  ore  (Id.  iii.  246).  That  no 
articles  of  iron  should  have  been  found  is  easily 
accounted  for  by  the  fact  that  it  is  easily  destroyed 
by  exposure  to  the  air  and  moisture.  According  to 
Pliny  (xxxiv.  43)  it  was  preserved  by  a  coating  of 
white  lead,  gypsum,  and  liquid  pitch.  Bitumen 
was  probably  employed  for  the  same  purpose  (xxxv. 
52).  The  Egyptians  obtained  their  iron  almost 
exclusively  from  Assyria  Proper  in  the  form  of 
bricks  or  pigs  (Layard,  Sin.  ii.  415).  Specimens 
of  Assyrian  iron-work  overlaid  with  bronze  were 
discovered  by  Mr.  Layard,  and  are  now  in  the 
British  Museum  (Sin.  and  Bab.  191).  Iron  wea- 
pons of  various  kinds  were  found  at  Nimroud,  but 
fell  to  pieces  on  exposure  to  the  air.  Some  portions 
of  shields  and  arrow-heads  (Id.  194,  596)  were 
rescued,  and  are  now  in  England.  A  pick  of  the 
same  metal  (Id.  194)  was  also  found,  as  well  as 
part  of  a  saw  (195),  and  the  head  of  an  axe  (357), 
and  remains  of  scale-armour  and  helmets  inlaid 
with  copper  (Sin.  i.  340).  It  was  used  by  the 
Etruscans  for  offensive  weapons,  as  bronze  for  defen- 
sive armour.  The  Assyrians,  had  daggers  and 
arrow-heads  of  copper  mixed  with  iron,  and  har- 
dened with  an  alloy  of  tin  (Layard,  Sin.  ii.  418). 
So  in  the  days  of  Homer  war-clubs  were  shod  with 
iron  (II.  vii.  141)  ;  arrows  were  tipped  with  it 
( II.  iv.  123)  ;  it  was  used  for  the  axles  of  chariots 
(II.  v.  723),  for  fetters  (Od.  i.  204),  for  axes  aud 
bills  (II.  iv.  485  ;  Od.  xxi.  3,  81).  Adrastus  (//. 
vi.   48)  and  Ulysses   (Od.  xxi.  10)    reckoned   it 


IR-SHEMESH 

among  their  treasures,  the  iron  weapons  being  kept 
in  a  chest  in  the  treasury  with  the  gold  and  brass 
(Od.  xxi.  61).  In  Od.' i.  184,  Mentes  tells  Tele- 
machus  that  he  is  travelling  from  Taphos  to  Tamese 
to  procure  brass  in  exchange  for  iron,  which  Eusta- 
thius  says  was  not  obtained  from  the  mines  of  the 
island,  but  was  (he  produce  of  piratical  excursions 
(Millin,  Mineral.  Horn.  p.  115,  2nd  ed.).  Pliny 
(xxxiv.  40)  mentions  iron  as  used  symbolically  for 
a  statue  of  Hercules  at  Thebes  (cf.  Dan.  ii.  33, 
v.  4),  and  goblets  of  iron  as  among  the  offerings  in 
the  temple  of  Mars  the  Avenger,  at  Rome.  Alyattes 
the  Lydian  dedicated  to  the  oracle  at  Delphi  a  small 
goblet  of  iron,  the  workmanship  of  Glaucus  of 
Chios,  to  whom  the  discovery  of  the  art  of  solder- 
ing this  metal  is  attributed  (Her.  i.  25).  The 
goblet  is  described  by  Pausanias  (x.  16).  From 
the  fact  that  such  offerings  were  made  to  the 
temples,  and  that  Achilles  gave  as  a  prize  of  con- 
test a  rudely-shaped  mass  of  the  same  metal  (II. 
xxiii.  826),  it  has  been  argued  that  in  early  times 
iron  was  so  little  known  as  to  be  greatly  esteemed 
for  its  rarity.  That  this  was  not  the -case  in  the 
time  of  Lycurgus  is  evident,  and  Homer  attaches  to 
it  no  epithet  which  would  denote  its  preciousness 
(Millin,  p.  106).  There  is  reason  to  suppose  that 
the  discovery  of  brass  preceded  that  of  iron  (Lucr. 
v.  1292),  though  little  weight  can  be  attached  to 
the  line  of  Hesiod  often  quoted  as  decisive  on  this 
point  (Op.  et  Dies,  150).  The  Dactyli  Idaei  of 
Crete  were  supposed  by  the  ancients  to  have  the 
merit  of  being  the  first  to  discover  the  properties  of 
iron  (Plin.  vii.  57  ;  Diod.  Sic.  v.  64),  as  the 
Cyclopes  were  said  to  have  invented  the  iron-smith's 
forge  (Plin.  vii.  57).  According  to  the  Arundelian 
marbles,  iron  was  known  B.C.  1370,  while  Larcher 
(Chronol.  d'Herod.  570)  assigns  a  still  earlier  date, 
B.C.  1537.  Enough  has  been  said  to  prove  that 
the  allusions  to  iron  in  the  Pentateuch  and  other 
parts  of  the  O.  T.  are  not  anachronisms. 

There  is  considerable  doubt  whether  the  ancients 
were  aequainted  with  cast-iron.  The  rendering 
given  by  the  LXX.  of  Job  xl.  18,  as  quoted  above, 
seems  to  imply  that  some  method  nearly  like  that 
of  casting  was  known,  and  is  supported  by  a  pas- 
sage in  Diodorus  (v.  13).  -  The  inhabitants  of 
Aethalia  traded  with  pig-iron  in  masses  like  large 
sponges  to  Dicaearchia  aud  other  marts,  where  it 
was  bought  by  the  smiths  and  fashioned  into  various 
moulded  forms  (TrXaff/xaTa  iravroScnra). 

In  Ecclus.  xxxviii.  28,  we  have  a  picture  of  the 
interior  of  an  iron-smith's  (Is.  xliv.  12)  workshop: 
the  smith,  parched  with  the  smoke  and  heat  of  the 
furnace,  sitting  beside  his  anvil  and  contemplating 
the  unwrought  iron,  his  ears  deafened  with  the  din 
of  the  heavy  hammer,  his  eyes  fixed  on  his  model, 
and  never  sleeping  till  he  has  accomplished  his  task. 
[Steel.]  [W.  A.  W.] 

IR'PEEL  (^XST  ;  Ka<pdv,  Alex.  'lep<par)\  ; 
Jarephel),  one  of  the  cities  of  Benjamin  (Josh, 
xviii.  27),  occurring  in  the  list  between  Rekem  and 
Taralah.  No  trace  has  yet  been  discovered  of  its 
situation.  It  will  be  observed  that  the  Ir  in  this 
name  is  radically  different  from  that  in  the  names 
Ir-nahash,  Ir-shemesh,  &c.  Taken  as  a  Hebrew 
name  it  is  Irpe-El  =  "  restored  by  God."  [G.] 

IR-SHE'MESH  (£;DK>  "1^  =  "  city  of  the 
sun;"  ir6\eis  ~2.ap.ixa.vs,  Alex.  tt6\is  Safe's; 
Hersemes,  id  est,  Civitas  Solis),  a  city  of  the 
Danites  (Josh.  xix.  41),  probably  identical  with 
Beth-SHEMESH,  and,  if  not  identical,  at  least  con- 


IEU 

nected  with  Mount  Herbs  (Judg.  i.  35),  the 
"  mount  of  the  sun."  Bcth-shemesh  is  probably  the 
later  form  of  the  name.  In  other  cases  Beth  ap- 
pears to  have  been  substituted  for  other  older  terms 
[see  Baal-meon,  &c.],  Such  as  Ir  or  Ax,  which  is 
unquestionably  a  very  ancient  word.  [G.] 

I'KU  (-IT"!? ;  "Up,  Alex.  "Hpa  ;  Sir),  the  eldest 
son  of  the  great  Caleb  son  of  Jephunneh  (1  Chr. 
iv.  15).  It  is  by  some  supposed  that  this  name 
should  be  Ir,  the  vowel  at  the  end  being  merely 
the  conjunction  "  and,"  properly  belonging  to  the 
following  name. 

I'SAAC  (pPIVJ,  or  prW),  laughter ;  'Itraa/c), 
the  son  whom  Sarah,  in  accordance  with  the  Di- 
vine promise,  bore  to  Abraham  in  the  hundredth 
year  of  his  age,  at  Gerar.  In  his  infancy  he 
became  the  object  of  Ishmael's  jealousy  ;  and  in 
his  youth  (when  twenty-five  years  old,  according  to 
Joseph.  Ant.  i.  13,  §2)  the  victim,  in  intention,  of 
Abraham's  great  sacrificial  act  of  faith.  When  forty 
years  old  he  married  Hebekah  his  cousin,  by  whom, 
when  he  was  sixty,  he  had  two  sons,  Esau  and  Jacob. 
In  his  seventy-fifth  year  he  and  his  brother  Ishmael 
buried  their  father  Abraham  in  the  cave  of  Maeh- 
pelah.  From  his  abode  by  the  well  Lahai-roi,  in 
the  South  Country — a  barren  tract,  comprising  a 
few  pastures  and  wells,  between  the  hills  of  Judaea 
and  the  Arabian  desert,  touching  at  its  western  end 
Philistia,  and  on  the  north  Hebron — Isaac  was 
driven  by  a  famine  to  Gerar.  Here  Jehovah 
appeared  to  him  and  bade  him  dwell  there  and 
not  go  over  into  Egypt,  and  renewed  to  him  the 
promises  made  to  Abraham.  Here  he  subjected 
himself,  like  Abraham  in  the  same  place  aud 
under  like  circumstances  (Gen.  xx.  2),  to  a  rebuke 
from  Abimelech  the  Philistine  king  for  an  equivo- 
cation. Here  he  acquired  great  wealth  by  his 
flocks ;  but  was  repeatedly  dispossessed  by  the 
Philistines  of  the  wells  which  he  sunk  at  con- 
venient stations.  At  Beersheba  Jehovah  appeared 
to  him  by  night  and  blessed  him,  and  he  built  an 
altar  there:  there,  too,  like  Abraham,  he  received 
a  visit  from  the  Philistine  king  Abimelech,  with 
whom  he  made  a  covenant  of  peace.  After  the 
deceit  by  which  Jacob  acquired  his  father's  bless- 
ing, Isaac  sent  his  son  to  seek  a  wife  in  Padan- 
aram ;  and  all  that  we  know  of  him  during  the 
last  forty-three  years  of  his  life  is  that  he  saw 
that  son,  with  a  large  and  prosperous  family, 
return  to  him  at  Hebron  (xxxv.  27)  before  he  died 
there  at  the  age  of  180  years.  He  was  buried  by 
his  two  sons  in  the  cave  of  Machpelah. 

In  the  N.T.  reference  is  made  to  the  offering  of 
Isaac;  (  Heb.  \i.  17;  and  Janus  ii.  21)  and  to  his 
blessing  his  sons  (Heb.  xi.  20).  As  the  child  of  the 
promise,  and  as  the  progenitor  of  the  children  of 
the  prpmise,  he  is  contrasted  with  Ishmael  (Rom.  ix. 
7,  10;  Gal.  iv.  28;  Heb.  xi.  18).  In  "in-  Lord's 
remarkable  argument  with  the  Sadducees,  his  his- 
tory is  carried  beyond  the  point  at  which  it  is  left 
in  the  0.  T.,  into  and  beyond  the  grave.  I 
whom  itVas  said  (Gen.  xxxv.  29)  that  lie  was 
gathered  to  his  people,  is  represented  as  >till 
living  to  God  (like  sx.  38,  & .  ;  and  by  the 
same  Divine  authority  he  is  proclaimed  as  an 
acknowledged  heir  of  future  glory  (Matt,  viii. 
11.  &c.). 

II.  Such  are  the  facts  which  the  Bible  supplies 
of  the  longest-lived  of  the  three  Patriarchs,  the  leasi 
migratory,   the    least    prolific,   and   the   least    fa- 


ISAAC 


873 


voured  with  extraordinary  divine  revelations.  A 
few  events  in  this  quiet  life  have  occasioned  dis- 
cussion. 

(a.)  The  signification  of  Isaac's  name  is  thrice 
alluded  to  (Gen.  xvii,  17,  xviii.  12,  xxi.  6-)."  Jose- 
phus  (Ant.  i.  12,  §2)  refers  to  the  second  of  tho.,e 
passages  for  the  origin  of  the  name  ;  Jerome 
(Quaest.  Heb.  in  Gen.)  vehemently  confines  it  to 
the  first ;  Ewald  {Gesch.  i.  425),  without  assign- 
ing reasons,  gives  it  as  his  opinion  that  all  three 
passages  have  been  added  by  different  writers  to 
the  original  record. 

(&.)  It  has  been  asked  what  are  the  persecutions 
sustained  by  Isaac  from  Ishmael  to  which  St.  Paul 
refers  (Gal.  iv.  29)  ?  If,  as  is  generally  supposed,  he 
refers  to  Gen.  xxi.  9,  then  the  word  pnVD,  iral^ovra, 
may  be  translated  mocking,  as  in  the  A.  V.,  or 
insulting,  as  in  xxxix.  14,  and  in  that  case  the 
trial  of  Isaac  was  by  means  of  "  cruel  mockings  " 
(iixiraiy/xuv),  in  the  language  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  (xi.  36).  Or  the  word  may  include  the 
signification  paying  idolatrous  worship,  as  in  Ex. 
xxxii.  6,  or  fighting,  as  in  2  Sam.  ii.  14.  These 
three  significations  are  given  by  Jarchi,  who  relates 
a  Jewish  tradition  (quoted  more  briefly  by  Wetstein 
on  Gal.  iv.  29)  of  Isaac  suffering  personal  violence 
from  Ishmael,  a  tradition  which,  as  Mr.  Ellicott 
thinks,  was  adopted  by  St.  Paul.  The  English 
reader  who  is  content  with  our  own  version,  or  the 
scholar  who  may  prefer  either  of  the  other  ren- 
derings of  Jarchi,  will  be  at  no  loss  to  connect 
Gal.  iv.  29  with  Gen.  xxi.  9.  But  Origen  («'jj 
Gen.  Horn.  vii.  §3),  and  Augustine  (Sermo  iii.), 
and  apparently  Professor  Jovvett  (on  Gal.  iv.  29), 
not  observing  that  the  gloss  of  the  LXX.  and  the 
Latin  versions  "  playing  with  her  son  Isaac 
forms  no  part  of  the  simple  statement  in  Genesis, 
and  that  the  words  ptlXD,  Trai^ovra,  are  not  to  be 
confined  to  the  meaning  "  playing,"  seem  to  doubt 
(as  Mr.  Ellicott  does  on  other  grounds),  whether 
the  passage  in  Genesis  bears  the  construction  appa- 
rently put  upon  it  by  St.  Paul.  On  the  other 
hand,  Kosenmiiller  (Schol.  in  Gen.  xxi.  9)  even 
goes  so  far  as  to  characterise  iSiwKe — "persecuted" 
— as  a  very  excellent  interpretation  of  pil^'O.  (See 
Drusius  on  Gen.  xxi.  9  in  Crit.  Sacr.,  and  Estius 
on  Gal.  iv.  29.) 

(c.)  The  offering  up  of  Isaac  by  Abraham  has 
been  viewed  in  various  lights.  It  is  the  subject  of 
five  dissertations  by  Frisehmuth  in  the  Thes.  Theol. 
Philol.  p.  197  (attached  to  Crit.  Stjcri).  P.y  Bishop 
Warburton  (Dir.  Leg.  b.  vi.  §5)  the  whole  trans- 
action was  regarded  as  "  merely  an  information  by 
action  (compare  Jer.  xxvii.  2;  Ez.  xii.  3;  Hos. 
i.  2),  instead  of  words,  of  the  great  sacrifice  of 
Christ  for  the  redemption  of  mankind,  given  at  the 
earnest  request  of  Abraham,  who  longed  impa- 
tiently to  see  Christ's  day."  This  view  is  adopted 
by  Dean  Graves  {On  the  Pentateuch,  pt.  iii.  §4) 
and  has  become  popular.  But  it  is  pronounced  tn 
be  unsatisfactory  bj  Davison  (Primitivi 
pt.  iv.  §2),  who,  pleading  for  the  |  ■  _n  w  com- 
munication of  the  knowledge  of  the  Christian 
atonement,  protests  against  the  assumption  of  a 
contemporary  disclosure  of  the  import  of  the  sacri- 
fice to  Abraham,  and  points  out  that  no  expiation 
or  atonement  was  joined  with  this  emblematic 
oblation,  which  consequently  symbolised  only  the 
act,  not  the  power  or  virtue  of  the  Christian  sacri- 
fice.    Mr.   Maurice   (Patriarchs   and  Lawgivers, 

3  L 


874 


TSAAC 


iv.)  draws  attention  to  the  offering  of  Isaac  as 
tha  last  and  culminating  point  (compare  Ewald, 
Qcschichte  i.  430-4)  in  the  divine  education  of 
Abraham,  that  which  taught  him  the  meaning  and 
ground  of  self-sacrifice.  The  same  line  of  thought 
is  followed  up  in  a  very  instructive  and  striking 
sermon  on  the  sacrifice  of  Abraham  in  Doctrine  of 
Sacrifice,  iii.  33-48.  Some  German  writers  have 
spoken  of  the  whole  transaction  as  a  dream  (Eieh- 
horn),  or  a  myth  (De  Wette),  and  treat  other 
events  in  Isaac's  life  as  slips  of  the  pen  of  a 
Jewish  transcriber.  Even  the  merit  of  novelty 
cannot  be  claimed  for  such  views,  which  appear  to 
have  been  in  some  measure  forestalled  in  the  time 
of  Augustine  (Sermo  ii.  de  tcntatione  Abrahae). 
They  are,  of  course,  irreconcileable  with  the  decla- 
ration of  St.  James,  that  it  was  a  work  by  which 
Abraham  was  justified.  Eusebius  (Praep.  Evcrng. 
iv.  10,  and  i.  10)  has  preserved  a  singular  and 
inaccurate  version  of  the  offering  of  Isaac  in  an 
extract  from  the  ancient  Phoenician  historian  San- 
chouiathon  ;  but  it  is  absurd  to  suppose  that  the 
widely-spread  (see  Ewald,  Alterthiimer,  p.  79, 
and  Thomson's  Hampton  Lectures,  1853,  p.  38) 
heatlfen  practice  of  sacrificing  human  beings  re- 
ceived any  encouragement  from  a  sacrifice  which 
Abraham  was  forbidden  to  accomplish  (see  Water- 
land,  Works,  iv.  203).  Some  writers  have  found 
for  this  transaction  a  kind  of  parallel — it  amounts 
to  no  more — in  the  classical  legends  of  Iphigenia 
and  Phrixus.  The  story  of  Iphigenia,  which  in- 
spired the  devout  Athenian  dramatist  with  sublime 
notions  of  the  import  of  sacrifice  and  suffering 
(Aesch.  Agam.  147,  ct  seq.),  supplied  the  Roman 
infidel  only  with  a  keen  taunt  against  religion 
(Lucret.  i.  102),  just  as  the  great  trial  which 
perfected  the  faith  of  Abraham  and  moulded  the 
character  of  Isaac,  draws  from  the  Romanised  Jew 
of  the  first  century  a  rhetorical  exhibition  of  his 
own  unaequaintance  with  the  meaning  of  sacrifice 
(see  Joseph.  Ant.  i.  13,  §3). 

(d.)  No  passage  of  his  life  has  produced  more 
reproach  to  Isaac's  character  than  that  which  is 
recorded  in  Gen.  xxvi.  6-11.  Abraham's  conduct 
while  in  Egypt  (xii.)  and  in  Gerar  (xx.),  where  he 
concealed  the  closer  connexion  between  himself  and 
his  wife,  was  imitated  by  Isaac  in  Gerar.  On  the 
one  hand,  this  has  been  regarded  by  avowed  adver- 
saries of  Christianity  as  involving  the  guilt  of 
"  lying  and  endeavouring  to  betray  the  wife's  chas- 
tity," and  even  by  Christians,  undoubtedly  zealous 
for  truth  and  right,  as  the  conduct  of  "  a  very  poor 
paltry  earthwoim,  displaying  cowardice,  selfishness, 
readiness  to  put  his  wife  in  a  terrible  hazard  for 
his  own  sake."  But,  on  the  other  hand,  with 
more  reverence,  more  kindness,  and  quite  as  much 
probability,  Waterland,  who  is  no  indiscriminate 
apologist  for  the  errors  of  good  men,  after  a 
minute  examination  of  the  circumstances,  con- 
cludes that  the  patriarch  did  "right  to  evade  the 
difficulty  so  long  as  it  could  lawfully  be  evaded, 
and  to  await  and  see  whether  Divine  Providence 
might  not,  some  way  or  other,  interpose  before 
the  last  extremity.  The  event  answered.  God 
did  interpose."  {Scripture  Vindicated,  in  Works, 
iv.  188,  190.) 

(e.)  Isaac's  tacit  acquiescence  in  the  conduct  of 
his  sons  has  been  brought  into  discussion.  Perhaps 
Fairbairn  (Tt/polngy,  i.  334)  seems  scarcely  justi- 
fied by  facts  in  his  conclusion  that  the  later  days 
of  Isaac  did  not  fulfil  the  promise  of  his  earlier ; 
that,  instead   of  reaching  to  high  attainments  in 


ISAAC 

faith,  he  fell  into  general  feebleness  and  decay 
moral  and  bodily,  and  made  account  only  of  the 
natural  element  in  judging  of  his  sous.  The  in- 
exact translation   (to  modern  ears)  of  "PV,  prey 

taken  in  hunting,  by  "  venison  "  (Gen.  xxv.  28), 
may  have  contributed  to  form,  in  the  minds  of  Eng- 
lish readers,  a  low  opinion  of  Isaac.  Nor  can  that 
opinion  be  supported  by  a  reference  to  xxvii.  4 ; 
for  Isaac's  desire  at  such  a  time  for  savoury  meat 
may  have  sprung  either  from  a  dangerous  sickness 
under  which  he  was  labouring  (Blunt,  Undesigned 
Coincidences,  pt.  i.  ch.  vi.),  or  from  the  same 
kind  of  impulse  preceding  inspiration  as  prompted 
Elisha  (2  K.  iii.  15)  to  demand  the  soothing  influ- 
ence of  music  before  he  spoke  the  word  of  the 
Lord.  For  sadness  and  grief  are  enumerated  in 
the  Gemara  among  the  impediments  to  the  exer- 
cise of  the  gift  of  prophecy  (Smith's  Select  Dis- 
courses, vi.  245).  The  reader  who  bears  in  mind 
the  peculiarities  of  Isaac's  character,  will  scarcely 
infer  from  those  passages  any  fresh  accession  of 
mental  or  moral  feebleness. 

III.  Isaac,  the  gentle  and  dutiful  son,  the  faith- 
ful and  constant  husband,  became  the  father  of  a 
house  in  which  order  did  not  reign.  If  there  were 
any  very  prominent  points  in  his  character  they 
were  not  brought  out  by  the  circumstances  in 
which  lie  was  placed.  He  appears  less  as  a  man 
of  action  than  as  a  man  of  suffering,  from  which 
he  is  generally  delivered  without  any  direct  effort 
of  his  own.  Thus  he  suffers  as  the  object  of 
Ishmael's  mocking,  of  the  intended  sacrifice  on 
Moriah,  of  the  rapacity  of  the  Philistines,  and  of 
Jacob's  stratagem.  But  the  .thought  of  his  suf- 
ferings is  effaced  by  the  ever-present  tokens  of 
God's  favour ;  and  he  suffers  with  the  calmness 
and  dignity  of  a  conscious  heir  of  heavenly  pro- 
mises, without  uttering  any  complaint,  and  gene- 
rally without  committing  any  action  by  which  he 
would  forfeit  respect.  Free  from  violent  passions, 
he  was  a  man  of  constant,  deep,  and  tender  affec- 
tions. Thus  he  mourned  for  his  mother  till  her 
place  was  filled  by  his  wife.  His  sons  were  nur- 
tured at  home  till  a  late  period  of  their  lives;  and 
neither  his  grief  for  Esau's  marriage,  nor  the 
anxiety  in  which  he  was  involved  in  consequence 
of  Jacob's  deceit,  estranged  either  of  them  from 
his  affectionate  care.  His  life  of  solitary  blame- 
lessness  must  have  been  sustained  by  strong  ha- 
bitual piety  such  as  showed  itself  at  the  time  of 
Rebekah's  barrenness  (xxv.  21),  in  his  special  inter- 
course with  God  at  Gerar  and  Beersheba  (xxvi.  2, 
23),  in  the  solemnity  with  which  he  bestows  his 
blessing  and  refuses  to  change  it.  His  life,  judged 
by  a  worldly  standard,  might  seem  inactive,  ig- 
noble, and  unfruitful ;  but  the  "  guileless  years, 
prayers,  gracious  acts,  and  daily  thank-offerings  of 
pastoral  life  "  are  not  to  be  so  esteemed,  although 
they  make  no  show  in  history.  Isaac's  character 
may  not  have  exercised  any  commanding  influence 
upon  either  his  own  or  succeeding  generations; 
but  it  was  sufficiently  marked  and  consistent  to 
win  respect  and  envy  from  his  contemporaries. 
By  his  posterity  his  name  is  always  joined  in  equal 
honour  with  those  of  Abraham  and  Jacob  ;  and  so 
it  was  even  used  as  part  of  the  formula  which 
Egyptian  magicians  in  the  time  of  Origen  {Contra 
Cclsum,  i.  22)  employed  as  efficacious  to  bind  the 
demons  whom  they  adjured  (comp.  Gen.  xxxi. 
42,  53). 

If  Abraham's   enterprising   unsettle!   life   fore- 


ISAAC 

shadowed  the  early  history  of  his  descendants ;  if 
Jacob  was  a  type  of  the  careful,  commercial,  uuwar- 
like  character  of  their  later  days,  Isaac  may  repre- 
sent the  middle  period,  in  which  they  lived  apart 
from  nations,  and  enjoyed  possession  of  the  fertile 
land  of  promise. 

IV.  The  typical  view  of  Isaac  is  barely  referred 
to  in  the  N.  T. ;  but  it  is  drawn  out  with  minute 
particularity  by  Philo  and  those  interpreters  of 
Scripture  who  were  influenced  by  Alexandrian  phi- 
losophy. Thus  in  Philo,  Isaac  =  laughter  =  the 
most  exquisite  enjoyment  =  the  soother  and  cheerer 
of  peace-loving  souls,  is  foreshadowed  in  the  facts 
that  his  father  had  attained  100  years  (the  perfect 
number)  wheu  he  was  born,  and  that  he  is  spe- 
cially designated  as  given  to  his  parents  by  God. 
His  birth  from  the  mistress  of  Abraham's  house- 
hold symbolizes  happiness  proceeding  from  pre- 
dominant wisdom.  His  attachment  to  one  wife 
(Rebekah  =  perseverance)  is  contrasted  with  Abra- 
ham's multiplied  connexions  and  with  Jacob's  toil- 
^■on  wives,  as  showing  the  superiority  of  Isaac's 
heaven-born,  self-sufficing  wisdom,  to  the  accumu- 
lated knowledge  of  Abraham  ami  the  painful  expe- 
rience of  Jacob.  In  the  intended  sacrifice  of  Isaac 
Philo  sees  only  a  sign  that  laughter  =  rejoicing  is 
the  prerogative  of  God,  and  is  a  fit  offering  to 
Him,  and  that  He  gives  back  to  obedient  man  as 
much  happiness  as  is  good  for  him.  Clement  of 
Rome  (ch.  31),  with  characteristic  soberness,  merely 
refers  to  Isaac  as  an  example  of  faith  in  God. 
In  Tertullian  he  is  a  pattern  of  monogamy  and  a 
type  of  Christ  bearing  the  cross.  But  Clement 
of  Alexandria  finds  an  allegorical  meaning  in  the 
incidents  which  connect  Abimelech  with  Isaac  and 
Uehekah  (Gen.  xxvi.  8)  as  well  as  in  the  offering 
of  Isaac.  In  this  latter  view  he  is  followed  by 
Origen,  and  by  Augustine,  and  by  Christian  ex- 
positors generally.  The  most  minute  particulars 
of  that  transaction  are  invested  with  a  spiritual 
meaning  by  such  writers  as  Kabanus  Maurus,  in 
<?<?».•  §iii.  Abraham  is  made  a  type  of  the  First 
Person  in  the  blessed  Trinity,  Isaac  of  the  Second ; 
the  two  servants  dismissed  are  the  Jewish  sects 
who  did  not  attain  to  a  perception  of  Christ  in  His 
humiliation  ;  the  ass  bearing  the  wood  is  the 
Jewish  nation,  to  whom  were  committed  the 
oracles  of  God  which  they  failed  to  understand; 
the  three  days  are  the  Patriarchal,  Mosaic,  and 
Christian  dispensations;  the  ram  is  Christ  on  the 
Cross ;  the  thicket  they  who  placed  Him  there. 
Modern  English  writers  hold  firmly  the  typical 
significance  of  the  transaction,  without  extending 
it  into  such  detail  (see  Pearson  on  the  Creed, 
i.  24:;,  251,  ed.  !<S4:i;  Fail  bairn's  Typology, 
i.  332).  A  recent  writer  (A.  .hikes,  Types  of 
Genesis),  who  has  shown  much  ingenuity  in  at- 
taching a  spiritual  meaning  to  the  characters  and 
incidents  in  the  book  of  Genesis,  regards  Isaac  as 
representing  the  spirit  of  sonship,  in  a  scries  in 
which  Adam  represents  human  nature,  Cain  the 
carnal  mind,  Abel  the  spiritual,  Noah  regeneration, 
Abraham  the  spirit  of  faith,  Jacob  the  spirit  of 
service,  Joseph  suffering  or  glory.  With  this  series 
may  bo  compared  the  view  of  Ewald  {Gesch.  i. 
387-4(io),  in  which  the  whole  patriarchal  family 
is  a  prefigurative  group,  comprising  twelve  mem- 
bers with  seven  distinct  modes  of  relation :  1 . 
Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  are  throe  fathers,  respect- 
ively personifying  active  power,  quiet  enjoyment, 
success  after  struggles,  distinguished  from  the  lest 
as  Agamemnon,  Achilles,  and   Ulysses  among  the 


ISAIAH  87f> 

heroes  of  the  Iliad,  or  as  the  Trojan  Anchises, 
Aeneas,  and  Ascanius,  and  mutually  related  as 
Romulus,  Remus,  and  Kuma  ;  2.  Sarah,  with 
Hagar,  as  mother  and  mistress  of  the  household  ; 
3.  Isaac  as  child :  4.  Isaac  with  Eebekah  as  the 
type   of  wedlock   (comp.  Alterthumer,   p.- 233); 

5.  Leah  and  Rachel  the  plurality  of  coequal  wives  ; 

6.  Deborah  as  nurse  (compare  Anna  and  Caieta, 
Aen.  iv.  654,  and  vii.  1);  7.  Eliezer  as  steward, 
whose  office  is  compared  to  that  of  the  messenger 
of  the  Olympic  deities. 

V.  Jewish  legends  represent  Isaac  as  an  angel 
made  before  the  world,  and  descending  to  earth  in 
human  form  (Origen,  in  Joann.  ii.  §25)  ;  as  one 
of  the  three  men  in  whom  human  sinfulness  has 
no  place,  as  one  of  the  six  over  whom  the  angel 
of  death  has  no  power  (Eisenmenger,  Ent.  J  ad.  i. 
343,  864).  He  is  said  to  have  been  instructed 
in  divine  knowledge  by  Shem  (Jarchi,  on  Gen. 
xxv.).  The  ordinance  of  evening  prayer  is  ascribed 
to  him  (Gen.  xxiv.  63),  as  that  of  morning  prayer 
to  Abraham  (xix.  27),  and  night  prayer  to  Jacob 
(xxviii.  IT),  (Eisenmenger,  Ent.  Jud.  i.  483). 

The  Arabian  traditions  included  in  the  Koran 
represent  Isaac  as  a  model  of  religion,  a  righteous 
person  inspired  with  grace  to  do  good  works,  ob- 
serve prayer,  and  give  alms  (ch.  21),  endowed 
with  the  divine  gifts  of  prophecy,  children,  and 
wealth  (ch.  19).  The  promise  of  Isaac  and  the 
offering  of  Isaac  are  also  mentioned  (ch.  11, 
38).  Faith  in  a  future  resurrection  is  ascribed  to 
Abraham;  but  it  is  connected,  not  as  in  Heb. 
xi.  19  with  the  offering  of  Isaac,  but  with  a 
fictitious  miracle  (ch.  2).  [W.  T.  B.] 

ISAIAH  (liTJ?^,  i.e.  Yeshayahu,  always  in 
Hebr.  Text;  but  in  Rabbinical  supersciiptions  of  the 
Hebr.  Bible  TVW  \  'Hffctfas;  Isaias).  The  He- 
brew name,  our  shortened  form  of  which  occurs  of 
other  persons  [see  Jesaiah,  Jeshaiah],  signifies 
Salvation  of  Jahu  (a  shortened  form  of  JehovoJi). 
Reference  is  plainly  made  by  the  prophet  him- 
self, Is.  viii.  18,  to  the  significance  of  his  own 
name  as  well  as  of  those  of  his  two  sons.  His 
father  Amoz  (pDN,  'Afids)  must  not  be  con 
founded,  as  was  done  by  Clemens  Alexandrinus  and 
some  other  of  the  Fathers  through  their  ignorance 
of  Hebrew,  with  the  prophet  Amos  (Q)ft]),  in 
LXX.  also  'A/xws),  who  flourished  in  the  reign  of 
Jeroboam  II.  Nothing  whatever  is  known  of  Amoz. 
He  is  said  by  some  of  the  Rabbins  to  have  been  also 
a  prophet,  and  brother  of  king  Amaziah, — the  latter 
apparently  a  mere  guess  founded  on  the  affinity  of 
the  two  names.  Kimchi  (A.D.  1230)  says  in  his 
commentary  on  Is.  i.  1,  "We  know  not  his  race, 
nor  of  what  tribe  he  was." 

I.  The  first  verse  of  the  book  runs  thus:  "The 
vision  of  Isaiah  the  son  of  Amoz,  which  he  saw 
concerning  Judah  and  Jerusalem  in  the  days  of 
I'/./.iah,  Jotham,  Ahaz,  and  Hezekiah,  kings  of 
Judah."  A  t'cw  remarks  on  this  verse  will  open 
the  way  to  the  solution  of  several  enquiries  relative 
to  the  prophet  and  his  writings. 

1.  This  verse  is  not  the  preface  to  the  firsi  eh. 

only,  nor  to  any  small  portion  of  the  book,  as  is 
clear  from  the  enumeration  of  the  four  kings.  It 
plainly  prefaces  at  least  the  first  part  of  the  bods 
(chs.    i.— xxxix.),  which  leaves   oil  in    Hezekiah's 

reign  ;   and   as  there  appears  no  reason  for  limiting 

it~  reference  even  to  the  first  part,  tin1  obvious  con- 
struction would  take  it  as  applying  to  the  whole 

3    I.   2 


876 


ISAIAH 


book  (comp.  Hos.  i.  1  ;  Mic.  i.  1).  The  word  vision 
is  a  collective  noun,  as  in  2  Chr.  xxxii.  32  ;  the  Heb. 
|1?n  is  never  found  in  the  plural.  As  this  is  the 
natural  find  obvious  bearing  of  the  verse, 

2.  We  are  authorised  to  infer,  that  no  part  of  the 
vision,  the  fruits  of  which  are  recorded  in  this  book, 
belongs  to  the  reign  of  Manasseh.  Hypotheses  there- 
fore, which  lengthen  Isaiah's  prophetic  ministiation 
into  the  reign  of  Manasseh,  appear  to  lack  historical 
foundation.  A  rabbinical  tradition  it  is  true,  appa- 
rently confirmed  by  the  SieirpiffOricrav  of  Heb.  xi. 
37,  which  can  be  referred  to  no  other  known  fact,  re- 
ports the  prophet  to  have  been  sawn  asunder8  in  the 
trunk  of  a  tree  by  order  of  Manasseh  ;  but  the  hos- 
tility of  the  party  opposed  to  the  service  of  Je- 
hovah, which  gained  the  ascendency  at  the  acces- 
sion of  that  prince,  had  been  sufficiently  excited  by 
the  prophet  during  the  reign  of  his  predecessor  to 
prompt  them  to  the  murder,  without  our  lengthen- 
ing the  period  of  his  prophesying  beyond  the  limits 
which  this  verse  assigns.     For  indeed, 

3.  Isaiah  must  have  been  an  old  man  at  the  close 
of  Hezekiah's  reign.  The  ordinary  chronology  gives 
758  B.C.  for  the  date  of  Jotham's  accession,  and 
698  for  that  of  Hezekiah's  death.  This  gives  us  a 
period  of  60  years.  And  since  his  ministry  com- 
menced before  Uzziah's  death  (how  long  we  know 
not),  supposing  him  to  have  been  no  more  than  20 
years  old  when  he  began  to  prophesy,  he  would 
have  been  8U  or  90  at  Manasseh' s  accession. 

4.  The  circle  of  hearers  upon  whom  his  ministry 
was  immediately  designed  to  operate  is  determined 
to  be  "  Judah  ami  Jerusalem."  True,  we  have  in 
the  book  prophecies  relating  to  the  kingdom  of 
Israel, — as  also  to  Moab,  Babylon,  and  other  hea- 
then states ;  but  neither  in  the  one  case  nor  the 
other  was  the  prophesying  designed  for  the  benefit 
of  these  foreign  states,  or  meant  to  be  communi- 
cated to  them,  but  only  for  Judah,  now  becoming 
the  sole  home  of  Hebrew  blessings  and  hopes. 
Every  other  interest  in  the  prophet's  inspired  view 
moves  round  Judah,  and  is  connected  with  her. 

5.  It  is  the  most  natural  and  obvious  supposi- 
tion that  the  "  visions  "  are  in  the  main  placed  in 
the  collection  according  to  their  chronological  order; 
and  this  supposition  it  would  be  arbitrary  to  set 
aside  without  more  solid  reasons  than  the  mere  im- 
pulses of  subjective  fancy.  We  grant  that  this 
presumption  might  be  overruled,  if  good  cause 
were  shown ;  but  till  it  is  shown,  we  have  no  war- 
rant for  rejecting  the  principle  that  the  present 
arrangement  is  in  the  main  founded  upon  chronolo- 
gical propriety,  only  departed  from  in  cases  where 
(as  is  very  natural  to  suppose)  similarity  of  cha- 
racter occasioned  the  grouping  together  of  visions 
which  were  not  uttered  at  the  same  time. 

0.  If  then  we  compare  the  contents  of  the  book 
with  the  description  here  given  of  it,  we  recognise 
prophesyings  which  are  certainly  to  be  assigned  to 
the  reigns  of  Uzziah,  Ahaz.  and  Hezekiah ;  but  we 
cannot  so  certainly  find  any  belonging  to  the  reign 
of  Jotham.  The  form  of  the  expression  in  vi.  1, 
"  the  year  that  king  Uzziah  died,"  fixes  the  time  of 
that  vision  to  the  close  of  Uzziah's  reign,  and  not 
to  the  commencement  of  Jotham's.  What  precedes 
ch.  vi.  may  be  referred  to  some  preceding  part  of 
Uzziah's  reign : — except  perhaps  the  first  chapter  ; 
this  may  be  regarded  as  a  general  summary  of  advice 
founded  upon  the  whole  of  what  follows, — a  kind 


a  The  traditional  spot  of  the  martyrdom  is  a  very 
old  mulberry -tree  which   stands  near   the   Pool   of 


ISAIAH 

of  general  preface;  corresponding  at  the  commence- 
ment of  the  book  to  the  para^nesis  of  the  nine 
chapters  at  its  close.  Ch.  vii.  brings  us  at  once 
from  "  the  year  that  king  Uzziah  died  "  to  "  the 
days  of  Ahaz."  We  have  then  nothing  left  for 
Jotham's  reign,  unless  we  suppose  that  some  of  the 
group  of  "burdens"  in  xiii.-xxiii.  belong  to  it,  or 
some  of  the  perhaps  miscellaneous  utterances  in 
xxviii.-xxxv.  It  may  be  that  prophesyings  then 
spoken  were  not  recorded,  because,  applying  to  a 
state  of  things  similar  to  what  obtained  in  the  latter 
part  of  Uzziah,  they  were  themselves  of  a  similar 
strain  with  chs.  ii.-v. 

7.  We  naturally  ask,  Who  was  the  compiler  of  the 
book?  The  obvious  answer  is,  that  it  was  Isaiah 
himself  aided  by  a  scribe  ;  comp.  the  very  interest- 
ing glimpse  afforded  us  by  Jer.  xxxvi.  1-5,  of  the 
relation  between  the  utterance  of  prophecies  and 
their  writing.  Isaiah  we  know  was  otherwise  an 
author ;  for  in  2  Chr.  xxvi.  22  we  read :  "  Now 
the  rest  of  the  acts  of  Uzziah  first  and  last  did 
Isaiah  the  son  of  Amoz  the  prophet  write";  and 
though  that  historical  work  has  perished,  the  fact 
remains  to  show  that  Isaiah's  mind  was  not  alien 
from  the  cares  of  written  composition  (comp.  also 
2  Chr.  xxxii.  32  ;  and  observe  the  first  person  used 
in  viii.  1-5).  The  organic  structure  of  the  whole 
book  also,  which  we  hope  to  make  apparent,  favours 
the  same  belief.  On  the  whole,  that  Isaiah  was 
himself  the  compiler,  claims  to  be  accepted  as  the 
true  view.  The  principal  objection  deserving  of 
notice  is  that  founded  upon  xxxvii.  38.  It  has  been 
alleged  (Hitzig,  in  loc.)  that  Sennacherib's  murder 
took  place  B.C.  696,  two  years  after  Manasseh's 
accession  ;  others,  however,  question  this  (comp.  Ha- 
vernick's  Einleitung)  :  at  all  events  the  passage  is 
quite  reconcileable  with  the  belief  of  Isaiah's  being 
the  compiler,  if  we  suppose  him  to  have  lived  two  or 
three  years  after  Manasseh's  accession,  even  without 
our  having  recourse  to  the  expedient  of  attributing 
the  verse  in  question  and  the  one  before  it  to  a 
later  hand.  The  name  given  in  xxxvi.  11,43  to 
the  Hebrew  spoken  in  Jerusalem,  "  the  Jews'  lan- 
guage," JVT1IT,  is  no  evidence  of  a  later  age;  it  is 
perfectly  conceivable  that  while  the  written,  lan- 
guage remained  the  same  in  both  kingdoms,  as  is 
evidenced  by  the  prophetical  books,  the  spoken  dia- 
lect (comp.  Judg.  xii.  6)  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah 
may  have  diverged  so  far  from  that  of  the  (now 
perished)  kingdom  of  Israel  as  to  «have  received  a 
distinct  designation  ;  and  its  name  would  naturally, 
like  that  of  the  kingdom  itself,  be  drawn  from  the 
tribe  which  formed  the  chief  constituent  of  the  popu- 
lation. As  we  are  seeking  for  objective  evidence, 
we  may  neglect  those  wild  hypotheses  which  some 
have  indulged  in,  respecting  an  original  work  and 
its  subsequent  modifications  ;  for  since  they  origi- 
nate in  the  denial  of  divine  inspiration  conjoined 
with  reliance  on  a  merely  subjective  appreciation 
of  the  several  writings,  such  hypotheses  must  be 
assigned  to  the  region  of  fancy  rather  than  of  his- 
toric investigation. 

8.  In  this  introductory  verse  we  have  yet  to 
notice  the  description  which  it  gives  of  Isaiah's 
prophesyings:  they  are  "  the  vision  which  he  saw." 
When  we  hear  of  visions  we  arc  apt  to  think  of  a 
mental  condition  in  which  the  mind  is  withdrawn 
altogether  from  the  perception  of  objects  actually 
present,  and  contemplates,  instead  of  these,  another 


Siloam  on  the  slopes  of  Ophcl,  below  the  S.12.  wall 
of  Jerusalem. 


ISAIAH 

set  of  objects  which  appear  at  the  moment  sensibly 
present; — a  sort  of  dream  without  sleep.  Such  a 
vision  was  that  of  St.  Peter  at  Joppa.  Such  again 
we  recognise  in  Is.  vi. — the  only  instance  of  this 
kind  of  pure  vision  in  the  book  ;  in  Jeremiah,  Eze- 
kiel,  and  Zechariah,  they  abound.  But  Isaiah's 
mental  state  in  his  prophesying  appears  ordinarily 
to  have  been  different  from  this.  Outward  objects 
really  present  were  not  withdrawn  from  his  percep- 
tion, but  appear  to  have  blended  to  his  view,  at 
times,  with  the  spiritual  which  was  really  present 
though  not  recognisable  except  to  the  eye  of  faith 
(e.g.,  the  presence  of  Jehovah),  at  times  with  the 
future  whether  sensible  or  spiritual  which  seemed 
to  the  prophet  as  if  actually  present.  In  this  view, 
his  prophesyings  are  not  to  be  regarded  as  utter- 
ances, in  the  delivery  of  which  the  Holy  Ghost  em- 
ployed the  intellectual  and  physical  organs  of  the 
prophet  as  mere  instruments  wielded  by  Itself,  but 
as  vision,  i.  e.,  the  description  by  the  prophet  him- 
self under  divine  direction  (2  Tim.  iii.  16)  of  that 
which  at  the  time  he  seemed  to  himself  to  see.  If 
this  view  be  just,  it  follows  that  in  the  descriptions 
which  the  prophet  gives  of  that  which  appeared  to 
be  before  him,  we  cannot  be  at  once  sure,  whether 
he  is  describing  what  was  actually  objectively  pre- 
sent, or  whether  the  objects,  delineated  as  present 
belonged  to  tiie  future.  For  example ;  at  first  sight 
the  description  given  of  the  condition  of  Judah  in  i. 
5-9,  portraying  an  invasion,  might  be  understood 
of  what  was  actually  present,  and  so  might  lead  us 
either  to  supplement  the  history  of  2  K.  with  a 
hypothetical  invasion,  or  put  forward  the  time  of 
the  prophesying  to  Ahaz  or  Hezekiah.  But  recol- 
lecting that  it  is  vision,  we  see  that  it  may  be  taken 
as  simply  predictive  and  threatening,  and  therefore 
as  still  spoken  in  Uzziah's  reign.  Similarly  iii.  8, 
v.  13,  x.  28-32,  are  all  predictive.  So  in  the 
second  part  is  lxiv.  11.  Further,  it  would  be  only 
in  accordance  with  this  method  of  prophetic  sight 
if  we  found  the  prophet  describing  some  future 
time  as  if  present,  and  from  that  standing-point 
announcing  some  more  distant  future,  sometimes  as 
future,  and  sometimes,  again,  as  present.  And  in 
fact  it  is  thus  that  Isaiah  represents  the  coming  for- 
tunes of  God's  people  in  the  second  part  of  his  pro- 
phecy. Comp.  xlii.  13-17,  xlix.  18,  xlv.  1-4,  liii. 
3-10, 11,12,  lxiii.  1-0,  as  illustrations  of  the  manner 
in  which  the  relations  of  past,  present,  and  future 
time,  are  in  vision  blended  together. 

It  has  been  remarked  above  as  characteristic  of 
Isaiah's  ordinary  prophetic  vision,  that  the  actually 
present  is  not  lost  to  view.  In  fact  this  was  essen- 
tial to  his  proper  function.  His  first  and  imme- 
diate concern  was  with  his  contemporaries,  as  the 
reprover  of  sin,  and  to  build  up  the  piety  of  be- 
lievers. Even  when  his  vision  the  most  contemplates 
the  future,  he  yet  does  not  lose  his  reference  to  the 
present,  but  (as  we  shall  see  even  in  the  second 
part)  he  makes  his  prophesyings  tell  by  exhortation 
ami  reproof  upon  the  state  of  things  actually  around 
him.  From  all  this  it  results,  that  we  often  find 
it  difficult  to  discriminate  his  predictions  from  his 
rebukes  of  present  disorders.  His  contempo 
however,  would  be  under  no  such  difficulty.  The 
idolatrous  and  ungodly  Hebrew  would  promptly 
recognise  his  own  description;  tin'  pious  would  be 
confirmed  and  cheered. 

II.  In  order  to  realise  the  relation  of  Isaiah's  pro- 
phetic ministry  to  his  own  contemporaries,  we  Deed 
to  take  account  both  of  the  foreign  relations  of 
Judah  at  the  time,  and  internally  vt'  its  social  and 


ISAIAH 


877 


religious  aspects.  Our  materials  are  scanty,  and 
are  to  be  collected  partly  out  of  2  K.  and  2  Chr., 
and  partly  out  of  the  remaining  writings  of  con- 
temporary prophets,  Joel  (probably),  Obadiah,  and 
Micah,  in  Judah  ;  and  Hosea,  Amos,  and  Jonah,  in 
Israel.  Of  these  the  most  assistance  is  obtained 
from  Micah. 

1.  Under  Uzziah  the  political  position  of  Judah 
had  greatly  recovered  from  the  blows  suffered  under 
Amaziah  ;  the  fortifications  of  Jerusalem  itself  were 
restored ;  castles  were  built  in  the  country  ;  new 
arrangements  in  the  army  and  equipments  of  defen- 
sive artillery  were  established ;  and  considerable 
successes  in  war  gained  against  the  Philistines,  the 
Arabians,  and  the  Ammonites.  [Uzziah.]  This 
prosperity  continued  during  the  reign  of  Jotham, 
except  that  towards  the  close  of  this  latter  reign, 
troubles  threatened  from  the  alliance  of  Israel  and 
Syria.  [Jotham.]  The  consequence  of  this  pros- 
perity was  an  influx  of  wealth,  and  this  with  the 
increased  means  of  military  strength  withdrew  men's 
confidence  from  Jehovah,  and  led  them  to  trust  in 
worldly  resources.  Moreover  great  disorders  ex- 
isted in  the  internal  administration,  all  of  which, 
whether  moral  or  religious,  were,  by  the  very  na- 
ture of  the  commonwealth,  as  theocratic,  alike  ame- 
nable to  prophetic  rebuke.  It  was  the  very  business 
of  Isaiah  and  other  prophets  to  raise  their  voices  as 
public  reformers,  as  well  as  to  fulfil  the  work  which 
belongs  to  religious  teachers  in  edifying  God's  true 
servants  and  calling  the  irreligious  to  repentance. 
Accordingly  our  prophet  steps  forward  into  public 
view  with  the  divine  message,  dressed  after  the 
manner  of  prophets  in  general — girded  in  coarse 
and  black,  or  at  least  dark  coloured,  hair-cloth  (comp. 
Is.  xx.  2,  1.  3  ;  2  K.  i.  8;  Zech.  xiii.  4), — emblem- 
atically indicating  by  this  attire  of  mourning  that 
Jehovah  spoke  to  His  people  in  grief  and  resent- 
ment. [Sack-cloth.]  From  his  house,  which  ap- 
pears to  have  been  in  Jerusalem  (comp.  vii.  3, 
xxxvii.  5),  he  goes  forth  to  places  of  general  con- 
course, chiefly  no  doubt,  as  Christ  and  His  Apostles 
afterwards  did,  to  the  colonnades  and  courts  of  the 
Temple,  and  proclaims  in  the  audience  of  the  people 
"the  word  of  Jehovah." 

2.  And  what  is  the  tenor  of  his  message  in  the 
time  of  Uzziah  and  Jotham  ?  This  we  read  in  chs. 
i.-v.  Chap.  i.  is  very  general  in  its  contents.  In 
perusing  it  we  may  fancy  that  we  hear  the  very  voice 
of  the  Seer  as  he  stands  (perhaps)  in  the  Court  of 
the  Israelites  denouncing  to  nobles  and  people,  then 
assembling  for  divine  worship,  the  whole  estimate 
of  their  character  formed  by  Jehovah,  and  His 
approaching  chastisements.  "They  are  a  sinful 
nation  ;  they  have  provoked  the  Holy  One  of  Israel 
to  anger.  Flourishing  as  their  worldly  condition 
now  appears,  the  man  whose  eyes  are  opened  sees 
another  scene  before  him  (1-9), — the  land  laid 
waste,  and  Zion  left  as  a  cottage  in  a  vineyard. — 
(a  picture  realised  in  the  Syro-Ephraimitish  war, 
and  more  especially  in  the  Assyrian  invasion — the 
great  event  round  which  the  whole  of  the  first  part 
ot'  the  hook  revolves).  Men  of  Sodom  and  Go- 
morrah that  they  are,  let  them  hearken!   they  may 

if  they    will    witli    their    ritual    worship, 
'.trampling'   Jehovah's  courts;    nevertheless,   He 

loathe,  them:    the  stain  of  innocent    bl I  is  on 

their  hands;  the  weak  aie  oppressed;  there  is 
briber]  and  corruption  in  the  administration  of 
justice,  bet  them  reform;  it' they  will  not.  Je- 
hovah will  barn  out  their  sins  in  the  smelting  fire 
of  His  judgment.     Zion  >1ki11  be  purified,  and  thus 


878 


ISAIAH 


saved,  whilst  the  sinners  and  recreants  from  Je- 
hovah in  her  shall  perish  in  their  much-loved 
idolatries."  This  discourse  suitably  heads  the 
book  ;  it  sounds  the  keynote  of  the  whole  ;  fires  of 
judgment  destroying,  but  purifying  a  remnant, — 
such  was  the  burden  all  along  of  Isaiah's  pro- 
phesyings. 

Of  the  other  public  utterances  belonging  to  this 
period,  chs.  ii.-iv.  are  by  almost  all  critics  con- 
sidered to  be  one  prophesying, — the  leading  thought 
of  which  is  that  the  present  prosperity  of  Judah 
should  be  destroyed  for  her  sins,  to  make  room  for 
the  real  glory  of  piety  and  virtue  ;  while  ch.  v. 
forms  a  distinct  discourse,  whose  main  purport  is 
that  Israel,  God's  vineyard,  shall  be  brought  to 
desolation.  The  idolatry  denounced  in  these  chap- 
ters is  to  be  taken  as  that  of  private  individuals,  for 
both  Uzziah  and  Jotham  served  Jehovah.  They 
are  prefaced  by  the  vision  of  the  exaltation  of  the 
mountain  on  which  Jehovah  dwells  above  all  other 
mountains,  to  become  the  source  of  light  and  moral 
transformation  to  all  mankind  (ii.  2-4). 

Here  we  are  met  by  the  fact  that  this  same 
vision  is  found  in  very  nearly  the  same  words  in 
Mieah  iv.  1-3.  The  two  prophets  were  contem- 
porary, and  one  may  very  well  have  heard  the 
other,  and  adopted  his  words.  Compare  a  nearly 
similar  phenomenon  in  1  Pet.  v.  5-9,  compared 
with  Jam.  iv.  6-10  ;  for  Peter  and  James  had  no 
doubt  often  heard  each  other's  public  teaching  at 
Jerusalem.  Which  was  the  prior  speaker  of  the 
words  we  cannot  in  either  case  determine.  In 
many  cases  writers  of  Scripture  adopt  the  words  of 
former  inspired  writers;  why  not  speakers  also? 
In  this  instance,  Isaiah  or  Micah  may  without 
improbability  be  imagined  as  standing  by  whilst 
the  other  announced  Jehovah's  word,  and  himself, 
still  under  divine  inspiration,  afterwards  repeating 
the  same  word.  As  among  the  prophets  in  the 
Christian  Church  some  were  directed  to  remain  in 
silence,  and  "judge"  whilst  others  spoke;  so  we 
may  believe  that  occasions  frequently  occurred  in 
which  the  prophesying  of  one  sable-dressed  prophet 
was  listened  to,  and  ratified  by  other  prophets,  one 
or  more,  standing  by,  who  might  add  their  testi- 
mony :  "  This  is  the  word  of  Jehovah "  (comp. 
1  K.  xxii.  11,12). 

After  thus  refreshing  pious  souls  witli  delineating 
future  (Messianic)  glories,  Isaiah  is  recalled  by  the 
sad  present.  Far  distant  is  God's  people  as  yet 
from  the  high  calling  of  being  the  teacher  of  the 
world.  "  All  is  now  wrong.  Heathenism  is  flood- 
ing the  land  with  charmers  and  diviners,  with 
silver  and  gold,  with  horses  arid  chariots,  and  with 
idols!  Jehovah,  forgive  them  not!  —  Jehovah's 
day  of  judgment  is  coming,  when  all  human  glory 
shall  disappear  before  His  glory,  and  in  consterna- 
tion Hebrew  idolaters  shall  hurl  their  images  into 
any  corner.  Lo,  Jehovah-Zebaoth  will  take  away 
every  stay  of  order  and  well-being  in  the  state, 
leaving  only  the  refuse  of  society  to  rule  (if  indeed 
they  will)  the  desolated  city.  Look  at  them  only  ! 
They  are  as  shameless  as  Sodom  !  0  my  people, 
thy  leaders  lead  thee  astray,  thy  princes  oppress: 
what  mean  ye  that  ye  grind  the  faces  of  My  poor? 
saith  Jehovah.  Look  again  at  their  ladies,  with 
their  jewels  and  their  head-gear,  and  their  fine 
dresses,  and  their  trinkets!  Jehovah  will  take 
all  of  it  away,  leaving  to  them  only  shame  and 
sack-cloth.  Yes,  /ion  shall  lose  both  sous  and 
daughters  (so  many  are  they  who  offend!),  and 
bcieaved  of  all  shall  sil  on  the  bare  ground.     Yet 


ISAIAH 

out  of  these  judgments  shall  issue  purity  and  peace. 
He,  the  Branch  of  Jehovah's  appointing  (iv.  2), 
shall  appear  in  glory,  and  the  redeemed  springing 
out  of  the  earth  shall  shine  with  accordant  splen- 
dour in  what  is  left  of  Israel.  All  in  Zion  shall 
then  be  holy,  and  the  pillar  of  fire  by  night,  and 
the  overshadowing  cloud  by  day,  shall  as  of  yore 
cheer  and  protect ; — what  is  precious  must  need  be 
protected  !  Sweet  shall  be  the  security  and  refresh- 
ment of  those  days." 

Again  the  prophet  is  seen  in  the  public  con- 
course. At  first  he  invites  attention  by  reciting  a 
parable  (of  the  vineyard)  in  calm  and  composed 
accents  (ch.  v.).  But  as  he  interprets  the  parable 
his  note  changes,  and  a  sixfold  "woe"  is  poured 
forth  with  terrible  invective.  It  is  levelled  against 
the  covetous  amassers  of  land,  breaking  down  those 
landmarks  which  fenced  the  small  hereditary  free- 
holders whose  perpetuity  formed  an  essential  ele- 
ment in  the  original  constitution  of  the  Hebrew 
commonwealth  (comp.  1  K.  xxi.  3) ;  against  luxu- 
rious revellers ;  against  bold  sinners  who  defied 
'God's  works  of  judgment,  with  which  the  prophets 
threatened  them  (comp.  the  similar  association  of 
revelling  with  hardened  unbelief  in  Israel,  Am.  v. 
18,  vi.  3-6)  ;  against  those  who  confounded  moral 
distinctions  ;  against  self-conceited  sceptics  ;  and 
against  profligate  perverters  of  judicial  justice.  In 
fury  of  wrath  Jehovah  stretches  forth  His  hand. 
Here  there  is  an  awful  vagueness  in  the  images  of 
terror  which  the  prophet  accumulates,  till  at  length 
out  of  the  cloud  aud  mist  of  wrath  we  hear  Jeho- 
vah hiss  for  the  stern  and  irresistible  warriors  (the 
Assyrians),  who  from  the  end  of  the  earth  should 
crowd  forward  to  spoil, — after  which  all  distinct- 
ness of  description  again  fades  away  in  vague  images 
of  sorrow  and  despair. 

What  effect  (we  may  ask)  would  such  denuncia- 
tions produce  upon  the  mass  of  Hebrew  hearers? 
It  was  not  from  Isaiah  only  that  the  same  per- 
sons heard  them.  Oppression,  denounced  by  him 
(iii.  14,  15,  v.  7-10),  was  denounced  also  by 
Micah  (ii.  1,  2)  ;  maladministration  of  justice 
(Is.  i.  23,  v.  23)  is  noted  also  by  Micah  (iii.  1-3, 
9-11,  vii.  3)  ;  the  combination  of  idolatry,  diviners, 
and  horses  found  in  Is.  ii.  6-8,  15,  is  paralleled  in 
Mic.  v.  10-15.  This  concurrence  of  prophetical 
testimony  would  not  be  without  weight  with  those 
who  had  still  some  faith  in  Jehovah.  But  the 
worldly-minded,  however  silent  when  flagrant  im- 
morality was  censured,  might  rind  what  they  would 
count  plausible  ground  for  demurring,  when  the 
prophet  put  the  multiplication  of  gold,  silver, 
horses,  and  chariots,  in  the  same  category  with 
idols,  or  when  with  unsparing  satire  he  particu- 
larised articles  of  female  adornment  as  objects  of 
Jehovah's  wrath.  But  God's  law  through  Moses 
had  given  similar  injunctions  (Deut.  xvii.  16,  17)  ; 
and  indeed  in  general  there  is  not  a  single  page  of 
the  prophetic  books  in  which  the  Pentateuch  is  not 
again  and  again  referred  to.  The  Hebrew  common- 
wealth was  not  designed  to  be  a  commercial  state, 
but  a  system  of  small  hereditary  landowners  under 
a  theocracy.  Material  progress  and  ever  heightening 
embellishment,  whether  in  the  court  or  in  society  in 
general,  with  the  men  or  witli  the  women,  re- 
moved it  further  and  further  from  its  original  con- 
stitution, and  from  Jehovah  its  God.  Something 
resembling  Spartan  plainness  belonged  essentially 
to  the  idea  of  the  Hebrew  state. 

3.  In  the  year  of  Uzziah's  death  an  ecstatic  vision 
fell  upon  Isaiah,  which,  in  compiling  his  prophet  iec 


ISAIAH  ISAIAH  879 

Jong  after,  hfe  was  careful  to  record,  both  for  other 
reasons,  and  also  because  he  had  then  become  aware 
of  the  failure  of  his  ministry  in  reference  to  the 
bulk  of  his  contemporaries,  and  of  the  desolation, 
yet  not  without  hope,  which  awaited  his  people. 
We  see  in  the  case  of  St.  Peter  at  Joppa  (Acts  x. 
9-16)  that  such  a  state  of  ecstasis,  though  un- 
questionably of  divine  origin,  yet  in  its  form  adapts 
itself  to  the  previous  condition,  whether  corporeal 
or  psychological,  of  the  patient.  Isaiah  at  this 
period  (as  we  must  infer  from  the  placing  of  the 
narrative)  had  been  already  for  some  time  engaged 
in  his  ministry;  and  we  may  venture  to  surmise 
he  lamented  his  little  success.  Seeing  what  he 
saw  around  him,  and  foreseeing  what  he  foresaw, 
could  he  do  otherwise  than  feel  deeply  how  little 
he  was  able  to  effect  for  the  welfare  of  his  beloved 
country?  In  this  vision  he  saw  Jehovah,  in  the 
Second  Person  of  the  Godhead  (John  xii.  41  ; 
comp.  Mai.  iii.  1),  enthroned  aloft  in  His  own 
earthly  tabernacle,  attended  by  seraphim,  whose 
praise  filled  the  sanctuary  as  it  were  with  the 
smoke  of  incense.  As  John  at  Patmos,  SO  Isaiah 
was  overwhelmed  with  awe:  he  felt  his  own  sinful- 
ness and  that  of  all  with  whom  he  was  connected, 
and  cried  "  woe"  upon  himself  as  if  brought  before 
Jehovah  to  receive  the  reward  of  his  deeds.  But, 
as  at  Patmos  the  Son  of  Man  laid  His  hand  upon 
John  saying  "  Fear  not!"  so,  in  obedience  evidently 
t<>  the  will  of  Jehovah,  a  seraph  with  a  hot  stone 
taken  from  the  altar  touched  his  lips,  the  principal 
organ  of  good  and  evil  in  man,  and  thereby  re- 
moving his  sinfulness,  qualified  him  to  join  the 
seraphim  in  whatever  service  he  might  be  called  to. 
And  now  the  condescending  invitation  of  the  Great 
King  is  heard:  "Whom  shall  I  send?  Who  will 
go  for  us?"  "Here  am  I!  send  me."  Had  he 
not  borne  Jehovah's  commission  before?  Xo  doubt 
he  had  ;  yet  now,  with  the  intenser  sense  of  the 
reality  of  divine  things  which  that  hour  brought 
him,  lie  felt  as  it'  lie  had  not.  What  heaven-taught 
minister  does  not  understand  this?  And  what  was 
to  be  the  nature  of  his  work?  "  Make  the  under- 
standing of  this  people  (not  "  my  people  ")  torpid  ; 
dull  their  ears;  close  up  their  eyes;  the  more  they 
hear  thy  word,  the  more  hardened  they  shall  be- 
come; they  must  not,  they  shall  not,  receive  the 
message  so  as  to  repent."  A  heart-crushing  com- 
mission tor  one  who  loved  his  people  as  Isaiah  did  ! 
The  moan  of  grief  at  length  finds  utterance:  "  Lord, 
liow  long?"  "  'fill  tin'  land  be  desolate — saving  a 
small  remnant   utterly  desolat< — a  remnant  of  a 

holy  s I,  which  will   be  a   stock   to   sprout   forth, 

but  again  and  again  to  be  cut  back  and  burnt,  and 
yet  still  to  survive." 

This  vision  in  the  main  was  another  mode  of  re- 
presenting what,  both  in  previous  and  in  subsequent 
prophesyiugs,  is  so  continually  denounced — the 
almost   utter  destruction  of  the   Hebrew  ] pie, 

with  yet  a  purified  remnant,  Hut  while  this  pie- 
diction  was  its  principal  purport,  we  are  sure  that 
the  inspired  Editor  of  his  prophesyiugs  so  many 
years  after,  beheld  in  it  also  the  sketch  of  the 
fruits  of  his  ministry,  which  at  the  time  when 
the  revelation  was  made  to  him  must  have  had 
no  small  effect  upon  his  own  private  feelings.  He 
afresh  about  his  work,  despairingly  as  to  the 
main  result  for  the  present,  yet  with  seraph-like 
zeal,   ardent    and    heaven-purged,  and    nol    without 

b  The  reader  will  observe  the  particular  speeifica-    narrative.      (Comp.   Blunt'8  Undesigned  Coincidences, 
tion  of  the  place,   indicating  the  authenticity  of  the  '  pt.  iii.  no.  i.) 


hope  too,  for  the  time  to  come.  The  "  holy  seed  " 
was  to  be  the  "  stock."  .  It  was  to  be  his  business 
to  form  that  holy  seed. 

It  is  a  touching  trait,  illustrating  the  prophet's 
own  feelings,  that  when  he  next  appears  before  us, 
some  years  later,  he  has  a  son  named  Shearjashub, 
"  Remnant-shall-return."  The  name  was  evidently 
given  with  significance;  and  the  fact  discovers  alike 
the  sorrow  which  ate  his  heart,  and  the  hope  in 
which  he  found  solace. 

4.  Some  years  elapse  between  chs.  vi.  and  vii., 
and  the  political  scenery  has  greatly  altered.  The 
Assyrian  power  of  Nineveh  now  threatens  the  He- 
brew nation ;  Tiglath-pileser  has  already  spoiled 
Pekah  of  some  of  the  fairest  parts  of  his  dominions 
— of  the  country  east  of  Jordan  and  the  vale  of  the 
Sea  of  Galilee,  removing  the  inhabitants  probably 
to  people  the  wide  and  as  yet  uninhabited  space  in- 
closed by  the  walls  of  Nineveh  (B.C.  746).  After  the 
Assyrian  army  was  withdrawn,  the  Syrian  kingdom 
of  Damascus  rises  into  notice;  its  monarch,  hezin, 
combines  with  the  now  weakened  king  of  Israel, 
and  probably  with  other  small  states  around,  to 
consolidate  (it  has  been  conjectured)  a  power  which 
shall  confront  Asshur,  Ahaz  keeps  aloof,  and  lie- 
comes  the  object  of  attack  to  the  allies  ;  lie  has 
been  already  twice  defeated  (2  Chr.  xxviii.  5,  6); 
and  now  the  allies  are  threatening  him  with  a  com- 
bined invasion  (741).  The  news  that  "  Aram  is 
encamped  in  Ephraim  "  (Is.  vii.  2)  fills  both  king 
and  people  with  consternation,  and  the  king  is  gone 
forth  from  the  city  to  take  measures,  as  it  would 
seem,  to  prevent  the  upper  reservoir  of  water 
from  falling  into  the  hands  of  the  enemy.  Under 
Jehovah's  direction  Isaiah  goes  forth  to  meet  the 
king,  surrounded  no  doubt  by  a  considerable  com- 
pany of  his  officers  and  of  spectators. b  The  prophet 
is  directed  to  take  with  him  the  child  whose  name, 
Shearjashub,  was  so  full  of  mystical  promise,  to  add 
greater  emphasis  to  his  message.  "  Fear  not,"  he 
tells  the  king,  "  Damascus  is  the  head  of  Syria,  and 
of  Syria  only;  and  Rezin  head  of  Damascus,  and 
not  of  Jerusalem  ;  and  within  65  years  Ephraim 
shall  be  broken  to  be  no  more  a  kingdom  :  so  far 
shall  Ephraim  be  from  annexing  Judah  !  Samaria 
again  is  head  only  of  Ephraim,  and  Remaliah's  son 
only  of  Samaria.  If  ye  will  lie  established,  believe 
this  ! " 

"  Dost  thou  hesitate  ?  Ask  what  sign  thou  wilt 
to  assure  thee  that  thus  it  shall  be."  The  young 
king  is  already  resolved  not  to  let  himself  into  the 
line  of  policy  which  Isaiah  is  urging  upon  him;  he 
is  bent  upon  an  alliance  with  Assyria.  To  ask  a 
sign  might  prove  embarrassing;  for,  if  it  should  be 

given ?  Ahaz  therefore,  with  a  half-mocking 

show  of  reverence,  declines  to  "  tempt  Jehovah." 
"0  house  of  David,  are  ye  not  satisfied  with  trying 
the  patience  of  an  honest  and  wisely  advising  pro- 
phet, that  you  will  put  this  contempt  also  upon 
the  God  who  speaks  through  me?  Jehovah  Him- 
self, irrespective  of  your  des'ervings,  gives  you  a 
guarantee  that  the  commonwealth  of  Israel  is  not 
yet  to  perish.  Behold,  the  Virgin  is  with  child, 
and  is  bearing  a  son,  and  thou,  0  mother  (comp.  Gen. 

xvi.  11),  shalt  call  his  name  Ininiantiel.      I  seem  to 
1    Child   already  born  !      Behold   Him  then'  ! 

iii  honey,  abundant  e  c   t]  e  be  t  food,  shall 
when,  ten  or  twenty  years  hence,  he  comes 

to  the  age  of  discretion  ;    the  devastating   inroad   of 


880 


ISAIAH 


Syria  and  Israel  shall  be  past  then  ;  for  before  that, 
the  land  of  the  two  kings  thou  holdest  so  formidable 
shall  be  desolate.  But" — here  the  threat  which 
mingles  with  the  promise  in  Shearjaskub  appears — 
"  upon  thy  people  and  upon  thy  family,  not  only  in 
thy  lifetime,  but  afterwards,  Jehovah  will  bring  an 
enemy  more  terrible  than  Jacob  has  ever  known, 
Asshur — Asshur,  whom  thou  wouldest  fain  hire  to 
help  (v.  20),  but  who  shall  prove  a  razor  that  will 
shave  but  too  clean  ;  he  shall  so  desolate  the  land  that 
its  inhabitants  shall  be  sparse  and  few."  Again  Isaiah 
predicts  the  Assyrian  invasion  ;  comp.  ch.  xxxvi.0 

5.  As  the  Assyrian  empire  began  more  and  more  to 
threaten  the  Hebrew  commonwealth  with  utter  over- 
throw, it  is  now  that  the  prediction  of  the  Messiah, 
the  Restorer  of  Israel,  becomes  more  positive  and 
clear.  Micah  (v.  2)  points  to  Bethlehem  as  the 
birthplace,  and  (v.  3)  speaks  of  "  her  that  tra- 
vaileth"  as  an  object  to  prophetic  vision  seeming 
almost  present.  Would  not  Micah  and  Isaiah  con- 
fer with,  each  other  in  these  dark  days  of  prevailing 
unbelief,  upon  the  cheering  hope  which  the  Spirit 
of  Christ  that  was  in  them  suggested  to  their 
minds?  (comp.  Mai.  iii.  16). 

The  king  was  bent  upon  an  alliance  with  Assyria. 
This  Isaiah  stedfastly  opposes  (comp.  x.  20).  In  a 
theocracy  the  messenger  of  Jehovah  would  fre- 
quently appear  as  a  political  adviser.  "  Neither 
fear  Aram  and  Israel,  for  they  will  soon  perish  ; 
nor  trust  in  Asshur,  for  she  will  be  thy  direst 
oppressor."  Such  is  Isaiah's  strain.  And  by 
divine  direction  he  employs  various  expedients  to 
make  his  testimony  the  mora  impressive.  He  pro- 
cured a  large  tablet  (viii.  1),  and  with  witnesses 
(for  the  purpose  of  attesting  the  fact,  and  display- 
ing its  especial  significance)  he  wrote  thereon  in 
large  characters  suited  for  a  public  notice  the 
words d  Hastenbooty  Speedspoil  ;  which  tablet 
was  no  doubt  to  be  hung  up  for  public  view,  in 
the  entrance  (we  may  suppose)  to  the  Temple 
(comp.  "priest,"  ver.  2).  And  further:  his  wife 
— who,  by  the  way,  appears  to  have  been  herself 
possessed  of  prophetic  gifts,  for  "  prophetess  " 
always  has  this  meaning  and  nowhere  indicates  a 
prophet's  wife  merely— just  at  this  time  apparently 
gave  birth  to  a  son.     Jehovah   bids  the  prophet 


ISAIAH 

give  him  the  name  IListenbooty  Speedspoil,  adding, 
what  Isaiah  was  to  avow  on  all  occasions,  that 
before  the  child  should  be  able  to  talk,  the  wealth 
of  Damascus  and  the  booty  of  Samaria  should  be 
carried  away  before  the  king  of  Assyria. 

The  people  of  Judah  was  split  into  political 
factions.  The  court  was  for  Assyria,  and  indeed 
formed  an  alliance  with  Tiglathpileser ;  but  a 
popular  party  was  for  the  Syro-Ephraimitic  con- 
nexion formed  to  resist  Assyria, — partly  actuated 
by  their  fears  of  a  confederacy  from  which  they  had 
already  severely  suffered,  and  partly  perhaps  in- 
fluenced by  sympathies  of  kindred  race,  drawing 
them  to  Israel,  and  even  to  Aram,  in  opposition  to 
the  more  foreign  Assyria.  "  Fear  none  but  Je- 
hovah only!  fear  Him,  trust  Him;  He  will  be 
your  safety."  Such  is  the  purport  of  the  discourse 
viii.  5-ix.  7  ,•  in  which,  however,  he  augurs  com- 
ing distress  through  the  rejection  of  his  counsels, 
but  refreshes  himself  with  the  thought  of  the  birth 
of  the  Great  Deliverer. e 

The  inspired  advice  was  not  accepted.  Unbelief 
not  discerning  the  power  and  faithfulness  of  Jeho- 
vah would  argue  that  isolation  was  ruin,  and  ac- 
cordingly involved  Judah  in  alliances  which  soon 
brought  her  to  almost  utter  destruction. 

6.  A  Prophecy  was  delivered  at  this  time  against 
the  kingdom  of  Israel  (ix.  8-x.  4),  consisting  of 
four  strophes,  each  ending  with  the  terrible  re- 
frain :  "  for  all  this,  His  anger  is  not  turned 
away,  but  His  hand  is  stretched  out  still."  It  an- 
nounces that  all  expedients  for  recovering  the  power 
which  Israel  had  lately  lost  were  nugatory ;  they 
had  forsaken  Jehovah,  and  therefore  God-forsaken 
(x.  4)  they  should  perish.  As  Isaiah's  message 
was  only  to  Judah,  we  may  infer  that  the  object  of 
this  utterance  was  to  check  the  disposition  shown 
by  many  in  Judah  to  connect  Judah  with  the 
policy  of  the  sister  kingdom. 

7.  The  utterance  recorded  in  x.  5-xii.  6,  one  of 
the  most  highly  wrought  passages  in  the  whole 
book,  was  probably  one  single  outpouring  of  inspi- 
ration. It  stands  wholly  disconnected  with  the 
preceding  in  the  circumstances  which  it  presupposes  ; 
and  to  what  period  to  assign  it,  is  not  easy  to 
determine.'     To  allay  the  dread  of  Assyria  which 


0  That  the  birth  of  the  Messiah  is  here  pointed  to 
cannot  he  doubted  ;  indeed  even  Ewald  sees  this. 
But  the  exact  interpretation  of  vers.  15,  16,  is  hard 
to  determine.  That  given  above  is  in  the  main 
Hengstenberg's  {Christology,  vol.  ii.).  The  great 
difficulty  which  attaches  to  it  is  that  the  prophet 
represents  Christ  as  already  appearing,  reckoning 
from  His  birth  at  the  then  present  time,  forward 
to  the  desolation  of  Syria  and  Israel  within  a  few 
years.  This  difficulty  is,  however,  alleviated  by  the 
consideration  that  the  prophet  states  the  future  as 
exhibited  to  him  in  "  vision,"  and  in  such  prophetic 
vision  the  distances  between  events  in  point  of  time 
are  often  unperceived  by  the  seer,  who  perhaps  might 
sometimes  in  his  own  private  interpretation  of  the 
vision  (comp.  IPet.  i.  10)  have  misconceived  the  rela- 
tions of  time  in  regard  to  events.  The  very  clear- 
ness with  which  the  future  event  was  exhibited  to 
him  might  deceive  him  in  judging  of  its  nearness. 
In  the  N.  T.  we  have  a  somewhat  similar  phenomenon 
in  the  estimate  formed  by  the  Apostles  and  others  of 
the  relation  of  time  between  Christ's  coming  to  judge 
Jerusalem  and  His  second  coming  at  the  end  of  the 
world. 

d  A.  V.  Maher-shalal  hash-baz  ;  by  Luther  ren- 
dered Saubebald,  Eilebeute. 

e  With   reference    to   Tiglathpileser's   having   re- 


cently removed  the  population  of  Galilee,  the  prophet 
specifies  that  "  as  the  former  time  brought  humilia- 
tion in  the  direction  of  Zebulun  and  Naphtali,"  located 
on  the  western  shore  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  "  so  the 
latter  time  should  bring  these  regions  honour."  A 
mysterious  oracle  then  !  But  made  clear  to  us  by  the 
event  (Matt.  iv.  16). 

f  Since  the  great  object  of  this  discourse  is  to  allay 
Judah's  fear  of  the  Assyrian  (x.  24),  it  can  hardly 
belong  to  the  very  early  part  of  the  reign  (742  to 
727)  of  Ahaz  ;  for  then  the  more  immediate  fear  was 
the  Syro-Ephraimite  alliance.  According  to  the  prin- 
ciple of  chronological  arrangement  which  we  suppose 
to  have  been  followed  by  Isaiah  in  his  compilation, 
it  would  be  before  the  death  of  Ahaz  (comp.  xiv.  28). 
Ahaz  had  "hired"  the  help  of  Tiglathpileser  by  a 
large  present  (2  K.  xvi.),  and  the  Assyrian  had  come 
and  fulfilled  (738)  the  prediction  of  Isaiah  (viii.  4) 
by  capturing  and  spoiling  Damascus.  But  already, 
in  the  time  of  Ahaz,  Assyria  began  to  occasion  un- 
easiness to  Judah  (2  Chr.  xxviii.  20).  Shaunaneser 
succeeded  Tiglathpileser  not  later  than  728,  and  might 
not  care  much  for  his  predecessor's  engagements — if, 
indeed,  Tiglathpileser  himself  felt  bound  by  Hum. 
At  any  rate,  so  encroaching  a  power,  bent  on  conquest, 
must  needs  be  formidable  to  the  feeble  kingdom  of 
Judah,  Syria  being  now  conquered  and  Israel  power- 


ISAIAH 

now  prevailed,  Isaiah  was  in  God's  mercy  to  His 
people  inspired  to  declare,  that  though  heavy  judg- 
ments would  consume  the  bulk  of  the  nation,  yet 
Shearjashub  !  the  remnant  should  return  (x.  20-22  ; 
comp.  vii.  3),  and  that  the  Assyrian  should  be 
overthrown  in  the  very  hour  of  apparently  certain 
success  by  agency  whose  precise  nature  is  left  in 
awful  mystery  (x.  33,  34).  From  the  destruction 
of  Judah's  enemies  thus  representatively  fore- 
shadowed, he  then  takes  wing  to  predict  the  happy 
and  peaceful  reign  of  the  "  Twig  which  was  to 
come  forth  from  the  stump  of  Jesse,"  when  the 
united  commonwealth  of  Judah  and  Ephraim  should 
be  restored  in  glory,  and  Jam  Jkhcvah  should  be 
celebrated  as  the  proved  strength  of  His  people. 
Here  again  is  set  forth  a  great  deliverance,  possibly 
the  foreshadowing  of  xxxvii. 

8.  The  next  eleven  chapters,  xiii.-xxiii.,  contain 
chiefly  a  collection  of  utterances,  each  of  which  is 
styled  a  "  burden."  s  As  they  are  detached  pieces 
it  is  possible  they  have  been  grouped  together 
without  strict  observance  of  their  chronological 
order. 

(«.)  The  first  (xiii.  1-xiv.  27)  is  against  Babylon  ; 
placed  first,  either  because  it  was  first  in  point  of 
utterance,  or  because  Babylon  in  prophetic  vision, 
particularly  when  Isaiah  compiled  his  book,  headed 
in  importance  all  the  earthly  powers  opposed  to 
God's  people,  and  therefore  was  to  be  first  struck 
down  by  the  shaft  of  prophecy.  As  yet,  not  Baby- 
lon but  Nineveh  was  the  imperial  city  ;  but  Isaiah 
possessed  not  a  mere  foreboding  drawn  from  poli- 
tical sagacity,  but  an  assured  knowledge,  that  Ba- 
bylon would  be  the  seat  of  dominion  and  a  leading 
antagonist  to  the  theocratic  people.  Not  only  did 
he  tell  Hezekiah  a  few  years  later,  when  Nineveh 
was  still  the  seat  of  empire,  that  his  sons  should 
be  carried  captive  "  to  Babylon, "  but  in  this 
"  burden"  he  also  foretells  both  the  towering  am- 
bition and  glory  of  that  city,  and  its  final  over- 
throw.1" The  ode  of  triumph  (xiv.  3-23)  in  this 
burden  is  among  the  most  poetical  passages  in  all 
literature.  It  is  remarkable  that  the  overthrow  of 
Babylon  is  in  ver.  24,  25  associated  with  the  blow 
indicted  upon  the  Ninevite  empire  in  the  destiuc- 


ISAIAH 


881 


less.  Critics,  who  do  not  take  sufficient  account  of 
the  manner  in  which  future  events  are  represented 
in  the  predictions  of  inspiration  as  already  taking 
place,  have  been  led  to  unsettle  the  chronology  by 
observing  that  Samaria  is  described  by  the  boasting 
Assyrian  as  being  already  as  Damascus,  and  that  the 
invading  army  is  already  near  Jerusalem.  But  the 
conquest  of  Samaria  « as  already  announced  at  the 
beginning  of  the  reign  of  Ahaz  (viii.  4)  as  equally 
certain  with  that  of  Damascus  ;  and  the  imagery  of 
x.  28-32  is  probably  that  in  which  the  imagination 
of  one  familiar  with  the  passes  of  the  country  would 
obviously  portray  an  invader's  approach.  The  de- 
struction of  Sennacherib's  army  is  the  centre  object 
of  the  first  part  of  the  book ;  and  the  action  of  pre- 
dictive prophecy,  and  of  miracle  in  relation  to  it, 
cannot  be  gainsaid  without  setting  aside  the  authen- 
ticity of  the  narrative  altogether. 

e  This  remarkable  word,  Nw'O,  "  lifting  up,"  is 
variously  understood,  some  taking  it  to  refer  to  evils 
to  be  borne  by  the  parties  threatened,  others  as  a  lifting 
up  of  the  voice  in  a  solemn  utterance.  A  hundred  years 
later  the  term  had  been  so  misused  by  false  prophets, 
that  Jeremiah  (xxiii.  33-4(1,  seems  to  forbid  its  use. 
Sec  1  Chr.  xv.  22,  where  in  text  ami  margin  of  A.  V. 
it  is  rendered  "  song,"  "  carriage,"  and  "  lifting  up." 

h  Compare  our  remarks  in  p.  sss.  Even  if  this  were 
conceded  to  be  the  production  of  a  later  prophet  than 


tion  of  Sennacherib's  army  (for  here  again  this 
great  miracle  of  divine  judgment  looms  out  into  the 
prophet's  view),  which  very  disaster,  however, 
piobably  helped  on  the  rise  of  Babylon  at  the  cost 
of  its  northern  rival.  The  explanation  seems  to  be 
that  Babylon  was  regarded  as  merely  another  phase 
of  Asshur's  sovereignty  (comp.  2  K.  xxiii.  29),  so 
that  the  overthrow  of  Sennacherib's  army -was  a  har- 
binger of  that  more  complete  destruction  of  the  power 
of  Asshur  which  this  burden  announces.  This  pro- 
phecy is  a  note  of  preparation  for  the  second  part  of 
the  book  ;  for  the  picture  which  it  draws  of  Babylon, 
as  having  Jacob  in  captivity,  and  being  compelled 
to  relinquish  her  prey  (xiv.  1-3),  is  in  brief  the 
same  as  is  more  fully  delineated  in  xlvii.;  while 
the  concluding  verses  about  Sennacherib's  army 
(24-27)  stand  in  somewhat  the  same  relation  to 
the  rest  of  the  "  burden,"  as  the  full  history  in 
xxxvi.  xxxvii.  stands  to  xl.-xlviii. 

(6.)  The  short  and  pregnant  "  burden "  against 
Philistia  (xiv.  29-32)  in  the  year  that  Ahaz  died, 
was  occasioned  by  the  revolt  of  the  Philistines  from 
Judah,  and  their  successful  inroad  recorded  2  Chr. 
xxviii.  18.  "  If  Judah's  rule  was  a  sequent,  that  of 
Assyria  would  prove  a  basilisk, — a  flying  dragon  ; 
let  their  gates  howl  at  the  smoke  which  announced 
the  invading  army  !  Meanwhile  Ziou  would  repose 
safe  under  the  protection  of  her  king : " — language 
plainly  predictive,  as  the  compiler  in  giving  the  date 
evidently  felt ;   comp.  xxxvii. 

(c.)  The  "  burden  of  Moab "  (xv.  xvi.)  is 
remarkable  for  the  elegiac  strain  in  which  the 
prophet  bewails  the  disasters  of  Moab,  and  for  the 
dramatic  character  of  xvi.  1-6,  in  which  3-5  is 
the  petition  of  the  Moabites  to  Judah,  and  ver.  6 
Judah's  answer.'  For  Moab's  relation  to  Israel 
see  Moab. 

(J.)  Chapters  xvii.  xviii.  This  prophecy  is 
headed  "the  burden  of  Damascus;"  and  yet  after 
ver.  3  the  attention  is  withdrawn  from  Damascus 
and  turned  to  Israel,  and  then  to  Ethiopia.  Israel 
appears  as  closely  associated  with  Damascus,  and 
indeed  dependent  upon  her,  and  as  having  adopted 
her  religious  rites,  "  strange,slips,''  ver.  10  (comp. 
2  K.  xvi.  10,  of  Ahaz),  which  shall  not  profit  her. 


Isaiah  (which  there  is  no  just  cause  whatever  for 
believing),  the  problem  which  it  presents  to  scep- 
ticism would  remain  as  hard  as  ever  ;  for  whence 
should  its  author  learn  that  the  ultimate  condition  of 
Babylon  would  be  such  as  is  here  delineated?  (xiii. 
19-22).  In  no  time  of  Hebrew  literature  was  there 
reason  to  anticipate  this  of  Babylon  in  particular  more 
than  of  other  cities.  In  vain  does  scepticism  quote 
xvii.  1  ;  nothing  is  said  there  of  the  ultimate  condi- 
tion of  Damascus  ;  and  it  is  obvious  enough  that  any 
such  blow  as  that  (e.  g.)  inflicted  by  Tiglathpileser 
would  make  Damascus  for  a  while  appear  to  be  "  no 
city"  compared  with  what  it  had  been,  and  would  con- 
vert many  of  its  streets  into  desolation.  How  different 
the  language  used  of  Babylon  !  And  how  wonderfully 
verified  by  time  !  We  have  the  parallel  language  and 
verification  in  reference  to  Idumea  (xxxiv.). 

'  \  good  deal  of  this  burden  is  an  enlargement 
of  Num.  xxi.  27-30,  from  the  imitation  of  which  the 
colouring  of  its  style  in  part  arises.  It  in  turn  re- 
appears in  an  enlarged  edition  in  Jer.  xlviii.  The  two 
concluding  verses  Is.  xvi.  13,  14),  which  furnish  no 
real  ground  for  doubting  whether  Isaiah  wrote  the 
whole  of  it,  recount  that  of  old  lime  the  purport  of 
this  denunciation  has  been  decreed  (viz.  in  Num.  xxi. 
and  xxiv.  17),  but  that  within  three  \e;irs  it  should 
begin  to  lie  fulfilled.  It  was  not  completely  fullillcU 
even  in  Jeremiah's  time. 


882 


ISAIAH 


This  brings  us  to  the  time  of  the  Syro-Ephraimitie 
alliance  ;  at  all  events  Ephraim  has  not  yet  ceased  to 
exist.  Chap.  xvii.  12-14,  as  well  as  xviii.  1-7,  point 
again  to  the  event  of  xxxvii.  But  why  this  here? 
The  solution  seems  to  be  that,  though  Assyria 
would  be  the  ruin  both  of  Aram  and  of  Israel,  and 
though  it  would  even  threaten  Judah  ("  us,"  ver. 
14),  it  should  not  then  conquer  Judah  (comp.  turn 
of  xiv.  31,  32).  And  with  this  last  thought  ch. 
xviii.  is  inseparably  connected  ;  for  it  is  a  call  of 
congratulation  to  Ethiopia  ("  woe "  in  ver.  1  of 
A.  V.  should  be  "ho!"  as  lv.  1  ;  also  in  ver.  2 
omit  "  saying  "),  whose  deputies,  predictively  ima- 
gined as  having  come  to  Palestine  to  learn  the  pro- 
gress of  the  Assyrian  invasion  (comp.  xxxvii.  9), 
are  sent  back  by  the  pi-ophet  charged  with  the  glad 
news  of  Asshur's  overthrow  described  in  ver.  4-6. 
In  ver.  7  we  have  the  conversion  of  Ethiopia ;  for 
'  the  people  tall,  and  shorn  "  is  itself  "  the  pre- 
sent" to  be  brought  unto  Jehovah.  (Comp.  Acts 
viii.  26-40,  ami  the  present  condition  of  Ethiopia.) 

These  repeated  predictions  of  Zion's  deliverance 
from  Asshur  in  conjunction  with  Asshur's  triumph 
over  Zion's  enemies,  entered  deeply  into  the  essence 
of  the  prophet's  public  ministry  ;  the  great  aim  of 
which  was  to  fix  the  dependence  of  his  countrymen 
entirely  upon  Jehovah. 

(c.)  In  the  "  burden  of  Egypt  "  (xix.)  the  prophet 
seems  to  be  pursuing  the  same  object.  Bbth  Israel 
(2  K.  xvii.  4)  and  Judah  (Is.  xxxi.)  were  naturally 
disposed  to  look  towards  Egypt  for  succour  against 
Assyria.  Probably  it  was  to  counteract  this  ten- 
dency that  the  prophet  is  here  directed  to  prophesy 
the  utter  helplessness  of  Egypt  under  God's  judg- 
ments :  she  should  be  given  over  to  Asshur  (the 
"  cruel  lord  "  and  "  fierce  king "  of  ver.  4,  not 
Psammetichus),  and  should  also  suffer  the  most 
dreadful  calamities  through  civil  dissensions  and 
through  drought, — unless  this  drought  is  a  figure 
founded  upon  the  peculiar  usefulness  of  the  Nile, 
and  the  veneration  with  which  it  was  regarded 
(1-15).  But  the  result  should  be  that  numerous 
cities  of  Egypt  should  own  Jehovah  for  their  God, 
and  be  joined  in  brotherhood  with  His  worshippers 
in  Israel  and  in  Asshur ; — a  reference  to  Messianic 
times.k 

(/.)  In  the  midst  of  these  "burdens"  stands  a 
passage  which  presents  Isaiah  in  a  new  aspect,  an 
aspect  in  which  he  appears  in  this  instance  only. 
It  was  not  uncommon  both  in  the  0.  T.  and  in  the 
New  (comp.  Acts  xxi.  11)  for  a  prophet  to  add  to 
his  spoken  word  an  action  symbolising  its  import. 
Sargon,  known  here  only,  was  king  of  Assyria,  pro- 
bably between  Shalmaneser  and  Sennacherib.  His 
armies  were  now  in  the  south  of  Palestine  besieging 
Ashdod.  It  has  been  plausibly  conjectured  that 
Tirhakah,  king  of  Meroe,  and  Sethos,  the  king  of 
Egypt,  were  now  in  alliance.  The  more  emphati- 
cally to  enforce  the  warning  already  conveyed  in 
the  "  burden  of  Egypt " — not  to  look  thitherward 
for  help — Isaiah  was  commanded  to  appear  in 
the  streets  and  temple  of  Jerusalem  stripped  of  his 

k  Comp.  the  close  of  the  "  burden  of  Tyre."  The 
"city  of  destruction"  (xix.  IS)  is  supposed  by  many  to 
be  the  Bethshemesb  of  Jer.  xliii.  1 3,  specified  because 
hitherto  an  especial  seat  of  idolatry.  Onias's  misure 
of  this  prediction  is  well  known,    [See  Ir-ha-hkrks.] 

1  In  vers.  3  and  4  the  poet  dramatically  represents 
the  feelings  of  the  Babylonians. 

m  That  it  is  not  Sennacherib's  invasion,  we  infer 
from  the  unrelieved  description  of  godlessne>s  and 
recklessness  (vers.  11,  12),  and  the  threatened  punish- 


ISAIAH 

sackcloth  mantle,  and  wearing  his  vest  onlv,  with 
his  feet  also  bare.  "  Thus  shall  Egyptians  and 
Ethiopians  walk,  captives  before  the  king  of  Assyria." 
For  three  years  was  he  directed  (from  time  to  time, 
we  may  suppose)  thus  to  show  himself  in  public 
view, — to  make  the  lesson  the  more  impressive  by 
constant  repetition. 

(jr.)  In  "  the  burden  of  the  desert  of  the  sea,"  a 
poetical  designation  of  Babylonia  (xxi.  1-10),  the 
images  in  which  the  fall  of  Babylon  is  indicated  are 
sketched  with  Aeschylean  rapidity,  and  certainty 
not  less  than  Aeschylean  awfulness  and  grandeur. 
As  before  (xiii.  17),  the  Medes  are  the  captors.  It 
is  to  comfort  .Judah  sighing  under  the  "  treacherous 
spoiling"  (v.  2)  and  continual  "  threshing"  (v.  10) 
of  Asshur — Ninevite  and  Babylonian — that  the 
Spirit  of  God  moves  the  prophet  to  this  utterance.1 

(h.)  "  The  burden  of  Dumah," — in  which  the 
watchman  can  see  nothing  but  night,  let  them  ask 
him  as  often  as  they  will — and  "of  Arabia"  (xxi. 
11-17),  relate  apparently  to  some  Assyrian  in- 
vasion. 

(i.)  In  "  the  burden  of  the  valley  of  vision " 
(xxii.  1-1-1)  it  is  doubtless  Jerusalem  that  is  thus 
designated,  and  not  without  sadness,  as  having  been 
so  long  the  home  of  prophetic  vision  to  so  little  re- 
sult. The  scene  presented  is  that  of  Jerusalem 
during  an  invasion ;  in  the  hostile  army  are  named 
Elam  and  Kir,  nations  which  no  doubt  contributed 
troops  both  to  the  Ninevite  and  to  the  Babylonian 
armies.  The  latter  is  probably  here  contemplated.111 
The  homiletic  purpose  of  this  prediction  in  refer- 
ence to  Isaiah's  contemporaries,  was  to  inculcate  a 
pious  and  humble  dependence  upon  Jehovah  iu 
place  of  any  mere  fleshly  confidence. 

{/:.)  The  passage  xxii.  15-25  is  singular  in  Isaiah 
as  a  prophesying  against  an  individual.  Comp.  the 
word  of  Amos  (vii.)  against  Amaziah,  and  of  Jere- 
miah (xx.)  against  Pashur.  Shebna  was  probably 
as  ungodly  as  they.  One  of  the  king's  highest 
functionaries,  he  seems  to  have  been  leader  of  a 
party  opposed  to  Jehovah  (v.  25,  "  the  burden  that 
is  upon  it ").  Himself  a  stranger  in  Jerusalem — 
perhaps  an  alien,  as  Ewald  conjectures  from  the  un- 
Hebrew  form  of  his  name — he  may  have  been  in- 
troduced by  Hezekiah's  predecessor  Ahaz ;  he  made 
great  parade  of  his  rank  (ver.  18  ;  comp.  2  Sam.  xv. 
1),  and  presumed  upon  his  elevatiou  so  far  as  to 
hew  out  a  tomb  high  up  in  the  cliffs  (probably  on 
the  western  or  south-western  side  of  Jerusalem 
where  so  many  were  excavated)  as  an  ostentatious 
display  of  his  greatness  (comp.  2  Chr.  xxxii.  33, 
margin).  We  may  believe  him  to  have  been  en- 
gaged with  this  business  outside  the  walls  when 
Isaiah  came  to  him  with  his  message.  Shebna 
fancies  his  power  securely  rooted ;  but  Jehovah 
will  roll  him  up  as  a  ball  and  toss  him  away  into 
a  fir  distant  land, — disgrace  that  he  is  to  his 
muster!  his  stately  robes  of  office,  with  his  broad 
magnificent  girdle,  shall  invest  another,  Eliakim. 
Ch.  xxxvi.  3,  seems  to  indicate  a  decline  of  his 
power,  as  it  also   shows    Eliakim's  promotion  to 


ment  unto  death  (ver.  14),  whereas  Hezekiah's  piety 
was  conspicuous,  and  saved  the  city.  (Comp.  2  Chi-. 
xxxvi.  12,  16.)  Moreover,  the  famine  in  2  K.  xxv.  3 
throws  light  on  Is.  xxii.  2.  That  vers.  9-11  agTee 
with  2  Chr.  xxxii.  3-5  proves  nothing  :  the  same 
measures  would  be  taken  in  any  invasion  'coin;).  Is. 
vii.  3).  The  former  part  of  ver.  2  and  vers.  12,  13, 
describe  the  state  of-  things  preceding  the  imagined 
present. 


ISAIAH 

Shebna's  former  post.  Perhaps  he  was  disgraced 
and  exiled  by   Hezekiah,  after  the  event  of  xxxvii., 

when  the  sinners  in  Zion  were  overawed  and  great 
ascendency  for  a  while  secured  to  the  party  which 
was  true  to  Jehovah.  If  his  tall  was  the  consequence 
of  the  Assyrian  overthrow,  we  can  better  understand 
both  the  denunciation  against  the  individual  and  the 
position  it  occupies  in  the  record. 

(7.)  The  last  "  burden"  is  against  Tyre  (xxiii.). 
The  only  cause  specified  by  Isaiah  for  the  judgment 
upon  Tyre  is  her  pride  (ver.  9 ;  comp.  Ez.  xxviii. 
2,  6) ;  and  we  can  understand  how  the  Tynans, 
proud  of  their  material  progress  and  its  outward 
displays,  may  have  looked  with  contempt  upon  the 
plainer  habits  of  the  theocratic  people.  But  this 
was  not  the  only  ground.  The  contagion  of  her 
idolatry  reached  Jerusalem  (1  K.  xi.  5,  33  ;  2  K. 
xi.  1*,  xxiii.  13).  Otherwise  also  she  was  an  in- 
jurious neighbour  (Ps.  lxxxiii.  7  ;  Joel  iii.  6;  Am. 
i.  9).  It  therefore  behoved  Jehovah,  both  as 
avenging  His  own  worship,  and  as  the  guardian  and 
avenger  of  His  peculiar  people,  to  punish  Tyre. 
Shalmaneser  appears  to  have  been  foiled  in  his  live 
years'  siege;  Nebuchadnezzar  was  more  successful, 
capturing  at  least  the  mainland  part  of  the  city; 
and  to  this  latter  circumstance  ver.  13  refers."  In 
vers.  15-17  it  seems  to  be  intimated  that  when 
the  pressure  of  Asshur  should  be  removed  (by  the 
Medo-Persian  conquest)  Tyre  should  revive.  Her 
utter  destruction  is  not  predicted  by  Isaiah  as  it 
afterwards  was  by  Ezekiel.  Ver.  18  probably 
points  .to  Messianic  times:  comp.  Mark  vii.  26; 
Acts  xxi.  3  ;  Euseb.  H.  E.  x.  4. 

9.  The  next  four  chapters,  xxiv  .-xxvii.,  form  one 
prophecy  essentially  connected  with  the  preceding 
ten  "burdens"  (xiii. -xxiii.),  of  which  it  is  in 
effect  a  general  summary  ;  it  presents  previous  de- 
nunciations in  one  general  denunciation  which  in- 
cludes the  theocratic  people  itself,  and  therewith 
also  the  promise  of  blessings,  especially  Messianic 
blessings,  for  the  remnant.  It  no  longer  particu- 
larises i  .Moab,  xxv.  10,  represents  all  enemies  of 
God's  people,  as  Edom  does  in  lxiii.  1),  but  speaks 
of  judgments  upon  lands,  cities,  and  oppressors  in 
general  terms,  the  reference  of  which  is  to  be  ga- 
thered from  what  goes  before.0 

The  elegy  of  xxiv.  is  interrupted  at  ver.  13  by  a 
glimpse  at  the  happy  remnant  (ver.  15,  fires  pro- 
bably means  east),  but  is  resumed  at  ver.  16,  till 
at  ver.  21  the  dark  night  passes  away  altogether  to 
usher  in  an  inexpressibly  glorious  day.'1 

"  "  Heboid  the  land  of  the  Chaldeans  ;  this  people," 
i.  e.  the  Chaldeans,  "  was  not  :  Asshur  founded  it  for 
the  inhabitants  of  the  wilderness,"  assigning  a  loca- 
tion to  the  Chaldeans,  heretofore  nomadic,  Job  i.  17  ; 
"  they,"  the  Chaldeans,  "  set  up  their  watch-towers  ; 
th*J  demolished  her  Tyre's,  palaces:  He  made  her 
a  ruin."  In  the  face  of  all  external  evident  c,  we  can- 
not accept  Kwald's  ingenious  conjecture  of  D*JJ?j3 
for  DHB>3- 

°  Thus  comp.  xxiv.  13-15,  xxvii.  9,  with  xvii.  5-8  ; 
also  xxv.  2  witli  xiii.  lfl  ;  also  xxv.  :i-)2  with  xviii. 
7,  xxiii.  18  ;  and  XXV.  5  with  xviii.  4-6. 

P  In  ver.  21,  "Jehovah  shall  visit  the  host  of  the 
height" — stars,  symbolic  of  rulers,  as  Mark  xiii.  2.">. 
The  "ancients"  oi  ver.  -■;  represent  the  Church,  like 
the  elders  in  Rev.  Lv.   I. 

i  In  ver.  7  "  the  face,"  i.  e.  "  the  surface  of  the 
covering,"  is  the  veil  itself  as  lying  upon  the  earth, 
"of  the  covering."      In  ver.   1  1  we  have  the  fruitless 

endeavours  of  Moab  to  escape  out  of  the  flood  i 

wrath. 


ISAIAH 


883 


In  xxv.,  after  commemorating  the  destruction  of 
all  oppressors  ("  city"  ver.  2,  contemplates  Baby- 
lon as  type  of  all),  the  prophet  gives  us  in  vers. 
6-9  a  most  glowing  description  of  Messianic  bless- 
ings, which  connects  itself  with  the  N.  T.  by  num- 
berless links,  indicating  the  oneness  of  the  prophetic 
Spirit  ("  the  Spirit  of  Christ,"  1  Pet.  i.  11),  with 
that  which  dwells  in  the  later  revelation."1 

In  xxvi.,  vers.  12-18  describe  the  new,  happy 
state  of  God's  people  as  God's  work  wholly  (comp. 
13,  "by  thee  only  ")  ;  all  their  efforts  were  fruit- 
less till  God  graciously  interposed.  The  new  con- 
dition of  Israel  is  figuratively  a  resurrection  (comp. 
Ezekiel's  vision  of  dry  bones,  Ez.  xxxvii.),  a  fruit 
of  omnipotent  agency  ;  as  indeed  the  glorified  state 
of  the  Church  hereafter  will  be  literally  a  resur- 
rection. 

In  xxvii.  1,  "Leviathan  the  fleeing  serpent,  and 
Leviathan  the  twisting  serpent,  and  the  dragon  in 
the  sea,"  are  perhaps  Nineveh  and  Babylon — two 
phases  of  the  same  Asshur — and  Egypt  (comp.  ver. 
13) ;  all,  however,  symbolizing  adverse  powers  of 
evil.  The  reader  will  observe  that  in  this  period  of 
his  ministry,  Isaiah  already  contemplates  the  future 
deliverance  of  his  people  as  a  restoration  from  cap- 
tivity, especially  from  Assyria,  vers.  12,  13  (comp. 
xi.  11,  1G),  as  he  does  in  the  second  part; — Babylon 
being  a  second  phase  of  Asshur. 

10.  Chs.  xxviii.-xxxv.  The  former  part  of  this  sec- 
tion seems  to  be  of  a  fragmentary  character,  being 
as  Hengstenberg  with  much  probability  conjectures, 
the  substance  of  discourses  not  fully  communicated, 
and  spoken  at  different  times.  The  latter  part 
hangs  more,  closely  together,  and  may  with  consi- 
derable certainty  be  assigned  to  the  time  of  Senna- 
cherib's invasion.  At  such  a  season  the  spirit  of 
prophecy  would  be  especially  awake. 

xxviii.  1-b'  is  clearly  predictive;  it  therefore 
preceded  Shalmaneser's  invasion,  when  Samaria, 
"the  crown  -of  pride  "  surmounting  its  beautiful 
hill,  was  destroyed.  But  the  men  of  Judah  also, 
ver.  7  (comp.  ver.  14)  are  threatened.  And  here  we 
have  a  picture  given  us  of  the  way  in  which  Jeho- 
vah's word  was  received  by  Isaiah's  contemporaries. 
Priest  and  prophet  were  drunk  with  a  spirit  of  in- 
fatuation,— "  they  erred,  in  vision,  they  stumbled 
in  judgment,"  and  therefore  only  scoffed  at  his 
ministrations/ 

In  the  lips  of  these  false  prophets,  prophesying, 
in  proportion  to  its  falsehood,  would  be  exaggerated 
in  the  wildness  and  incoherency  of  the  style.   Hence 


r  "  The  priest  and  the  prophet."  There  is  no 
re,  son  to  understand  these  as  connected  with  idolatry. 
There  were  always  (it  would  seem)  a  numerous  party 
who  assumed  the  hair-wove  mantle  of  the  prophet 
("  wearing  a  hairy  garment  to  deceive")  ;  and  these 
sable-clad  men  perhaps  even  swarmed  in  the  Streets 
of  Jerusalem.  [Elijah,  p.  •r)25  //,  note.]  The  priests, 
on  the  other  hand,  were  the  aristocracy  of  Judah, 
and,  under  the  king,  to  a  great  extent  ruled  its 
policy,  l.ike  the  coalition  of  strategus  and  orator 
at  Athens,  so  priest  and  prophet  played  into  eaeli 
other's  hands  at  Jerusalem.  \\  hatevcr  public  po- 
licy the  priests  advised,  they  would  he  seconded 
therein  by  prophets,  "  in  the  name  of  Jehovah." 
Isaiah's  contemporary  shews  us  in  what  an  unprin- 
cipled manner  the  prophets  abused  their  function 
for  their  own  advantage  (Mic.  iii.  5-7,  11):  "The 
prophets    prophesied    falsely,    and    the    priests    bare 

rule  by  their  means"  (Jer.  v.  31).     Hence  prophets 

and    priests    are    so    often    named     together    (comp. 

xxix.  9 


884 


ISAIAH 


the  scoffing  prophets  and  priests  made  it  a  matter 
of  reproach  against  Isaiah  that  his  style  was  so 
plain  and  simple, — as  if  he  were  dealing  with  little 
children,  ver.  9.  And  in  mockery  they  accumu- 
late monosyllables  as  imitating  his  style  (tsav  la- 
tsav,  tsav  la-tsav,  kav  la-kav,  kav  la-kav,  zeeir 
sham,  zeeir  sham,  ver.  10).  "  Twist  my  words  " 
(is  Isaiah's  reply)  "  into  a  mocking  jabber  if  ye 
will  ;  God  shall  in  turn  speak  to  you  by  the  jabber 
of  foreign  invaders!"  (comp.  Deut.  xxviii.  49). 
They  trusted  that  they  had  made  a  "  vision  "—a 
compact  with  death  and  hell  (vers.  15,  18,  "  agree- 
ment," Hebr.  vision),  and  that  through  the  mea- 
sures which  they,  seer  and  priest  together,  had 
adopted,  no  invasion  should  hurt  them.  But,  the 
stone  which  Jehovah  lays  in  Zion  (God's  own  pro- 
phets) alone  secures  those  who  trust  in  it ;  ye  shall 
peiish  (16-22),  Ver.  16  is  applied  in  the  N.  T.  to 
Christ;  He  is  now  the  prophet  who  saves  those 
who  believe  in  Him. — This  glimpse  into  Hebrew 
life  explains  to  us  in  part  the  cause  of  the  failure  of 
the  prophetic  ministry.  The  travesty  of ' '  the  word 
of  Jehovah  "  preoccupied  men's  minds,  or  at  least 
confused  them  ;  while  further  the  conflicting  voices 
of  different  prophets,  the  false  and  the  true,  would 
.  furnish  then,  as  in  all  ages  it  does  to  the  worldly 
and  the  sceptical,  a  ground  for  entire  disbelief. 

"  Cannot  ye  wise  men  apply  to  the  conduct  of 
your  affairs  in  relation  to  God  that  shrewdness  and 
wisdom,  which  the  farmer  displays  in  dealing  with 
his  various  businesses,  and  which  God  has  given 
alike  to  him  and  to  you?"  (23-29). 

Ch.  xxix.  Jerusalem  was  to  be  visited  with 
extreme  danger  and  terror,  and  then  sudden  deli- 
verance, vers.  1-8.  (Sennacherib's  invasion  again  !) 
But  tire  threatening  and  promise  seemed  very  enig- 
matical ;  prophets,  and  rulers,  and  scholars,  could 
make  nothing  of  the  riddle  (9-12).  Alas!  the 
people  themselves  will  only  hearken  to  the  prophets 
and  priests  speaking  out  of  their  own  heart ;  even 
their  so-called  piety  to  Jehovah  is  regulated,  not  by 
His  true  organs,  but  by  pretended  ones,  ver.  13 
(comp.  the  condition  of  the  Jews  in  relation  to  their 
rabbins  and  to  Christ,  Matt.  xv.  8,  9) ;  but  all  their 
vaunted  policy  shall  be  confounded ;  the  wild  wood 
shall  become  a  fruitful  field,  and  the  fruitful  field 
a  wild  wood  ; — the  humble  pupils  of  Jehovah  and 
these  self-wise  leaders  shall  interchange  their  places 
of  dishonour  and  prosperity,  vers.  ]  3-24. 

One  instance  of  the  false  leading  of  these  prophets 
and  priests  (xxx.  1)  in  opposition  to  the  true  pro- 
phets (vers.  10,  11),  was  the  policy  of  courting  the 
help  of  Egypt  against  Assyria.  Against  this, 
Isaiah  is  commanded  to  protest,  which  he  does  both 
in  xxx.  1-17,  and  in  xxxi.  1-3,  pointing  out  at  the 
same  time  the  fruitlessness  of  all  measures  of  hu- 
man policy  and  the  necessity  of  trusting  in  Jehovah 
alone  for  deliverance.  In  xxx.  18-33,  and  xxxi. 
4-9,  there  is  added  to  each  address  the  prediction 
of  the  Assyrian's  overthrow  and  its  consequences, 
xxx.  19-24,  in  terms  which,  when  read  in  the  light 
of  the  event,  seem  very  clear,  hut  which  no  doubt 
appeared  to  the  worldly  and  sceptical  at  the  time 
mere  frenzy. 

As  the  time  approaches,  the  spirit  of  prophecy 

6  In  ver.  10,  read  "some  days  over  a  year  shall 
ye  be  troubled." 

'  The  reference  to  "the  book  of  Jehovah,"  v.  16, 
as  containing  this  prediction,  deserves  notice.  As  the 
prophet's  spoken  word  was  "  the  word  of  Jehovah," 
so  his  written  word    is    here   called    "  the   book  of 


ISAIAH 

becomes  more  and  more  glowing  ;  that  marvellous 
deliverance  from  Asshur,  wherein  God's  "  Name" 
(xxx.  27)  so  gloriously  came  near,  opens  even  clearer 
glimpses  into  the  time  when  God  should  indeed  come 
and  reign,  in  the  Anointed  One,  and  when  virtue  and 
righteousness  should  everywhere  prevail  (xxxii.  1-8, 
15-20) ;  then  the  mighty  Jehovah  should  be  a  king 
dwelling  amongst  His  people  (xxxiii.  17,  22)  ;  He 
should  Himself  be  a  sea  of  glory  and  defence  en- 
circling them,  in  which  all  hostile  galleys  should 
perish.  At  that  glorious  display  of  Jehovah's 
nearness  (namely,  that  afforded  in  the  Assyrian's 
overthrow),  they  who  had  rejected  Jehovah  in  His 
servants  and  prophets,  the  sinners  in  Zion,  should  be 
filled  with  dismay,  dreading  lest  His  terrible  judg- 
ment should  alight  upon  themselves  also  (xxxiii. 
14).  With  these  glorious  predictions  are  blended 
also  descriptions  of  the  grief  and  despair  which 
should  precede  that  hour,  xxxii.  9-14  (?/  and 
xxxiii.  7-9,  and  the  earnest  prayer  then  to  be 
offered  by  the  pious  (xxxiii.  2). 

In  ch.  xxxiv.  the  prediction  must  certainly  be 
taken  with  a  particular  reference  to  Idumea  (this 
is  shown  by  the  challenge  in  ver.  16,  to  compare 
the  fulfilment  with  the  prophecy)  ;  we  are  however 
led  both  by  the  placing  of  the  prophecy  and  by 
lxiii.  2,  to  take  it  in  a  general  sense  as  well  as 
typical.1 

As  xxxiv.  has  a  general  sense,  so  xxxv.  indicates 
in  general  terms  the  deliverance  of  Israel  as  if  out  of 
captivity,  rejoicing  in  their  secure  and  happy  march 
through  the  wilderness.  It  may  be  doubted  whether 
the  description  is  meant  to  apply  to  any  deliver- 
ance out  of  temporal  captivity,  closely  as  the 
imagery  approaches  that  of  the  second  part.  It 
rather  seems  to  picture  the  march  of  the  spiritual 
Israel  to  her  eternal  Zion  (Heb.  xii.  22). 

11.  xxxvii.-xxxix.  —  At  length  the  season  so 
often,  though  no  doubt  obscurely  foretold,  arrived. 
The  Assyrian  was  near  with  forces  apparently  irre- 
sistible. In  the  universal  consternation  which  en- 
sued, all  the  hope  of  the  state  centred  upon  Isaiah  ; 
the  highest  functionaries  of  the  state,  —  Shebna 
too, — wait  upon  him  in  the  name  of  their  sove- 
reign, confessing  that  they  were  now  in  the  very 
extremity  of  danger,  xxxvii.  3,  and  entreating  his 
prayers ; — a  signal  token,  this,  of  the  approved 
fidelity  of  the  prophet  in  the  ministry  which  he 
had  so  long  exercised.  The  short  answer  which 
Jehovah  gave  through  him  was,  that  the  Assyrian 
king  should  hear  intelligence  which  would  send  him 
back  to  his  own  land,  there  to  perish.  The  event 
shows  that  the  intelligence  pointed  to  was  that  cf 
the  destruction  of  his  army.  Accordingly  Heze- 
kiah  communicated  to  Sennacherib,  now  at  Libnah, 
his  refusal  to  submit,  expressing  his  assurance  of 
being  protected  by  Jehovah  (comp.  ver.  10).  This 
drew  from  the  Assyrian  king  a  letter  of  defiance 
against  Jehovah  Himself,  as  being  no  more  able  to 
defend  Jerusalem,  than  other  tutelary  gods  had 
been  to  defend  the  countries  which  he  had  con- 
quered. On  Hezekiah  spreading  this  letter  before 
Jehovah  in  the  Temple  for  Him  to  read  and  answer 
(ver.  17),  Isaiah  was  commissioned  to  scud  a  toiler 
reply  to  the  pious  king  (21-35),  the  manifest  object 


Jehovah."  It  shews  Isaiah's  estimate  of  his  pro- 
phetical -writings.  So  xxx.  8  points  to  an  enduring 
record  in  which  he  was  to  deposit  his  testimony  con- 
cerning Egypt.  (,!»  xxx.  9,  for  "  That  this  is,"  &c, 
read  "  Because  this  is,"  <xc.) 


ISAIAH 

of  which  was  the  more  completely  to  signalise, 
especially  to  God's  own  people  themselves,  the 
meaning  of  the  coming  event."  How  the  deliver- 
ance was  to  be  effected,  Isaiah  was  not  commis- 
sioned to  tell ;  but  the  very  next  night  (2  K.  xix. 
35)  brought  the  appalling  fulfilment.  A  divine 
interposition  so  marvellous,  so  evidently  miraculous, 
was  in  its  magnificence  worthy  of  being  the  kernel 
of  Isaiah's  whole  book ;  it  is  indeed  that  without 
which  the  whole  book  falls  to  pieces,  but  with 
which  it  forms  a  well  organised  whole  (Comp.  Ps. 
lxxvi.,,xlvi.,  xlviii.). 

Chs.  xxxviii.,  xxxix.  chronologically  precede  the 
two  previous  ones  ;*  but  there  seems  to  be  a  two- 
fold purpose  in  this  arrangement ;  one  ethical,  to 
illustrate  God's  discipline  exercised  over  His  most 
favoured  servants,  and  the  other  literary,  to  intro- 
duce by  the  prediction  of  the  Babylonian  captivity 
the  second  part  of  the  book.  As  the  two  pre- 
ceding chapters  look  back  upon  the  prediction  of 
the  first  part,  and  therefore  stand  even  before 
xxxviii.,  so  xxxix.  looks  forward  to  the  subsequent 
prophesyings,  and  is  therefore  placed  immediately 
before  them/ 

12.  The  last  27  chapters  form  a  prophecy, 
whose  coherence  of  structure  and  unity  of  author- 
ship are  generally  admitted  even  by  those  who  deny 
that  it  was  written  by  Isaiah.  The  point  of  time 
anil  situation  from  which  the  prophet  here  speaks, 
is  for  the  most  part  that  of  the  captivity  in  Baby- 
lon (comp.,  e.g.,  lxiv.  10,  11).  But  this  is  adopted 
on  a  principle  already  noted  as  characterising  "vi- 
sion," viz.,  that  the  prophet  sees  the  future  as  if 
present.  That  the  present  with  the  prophet  in  this 
section  was  imagined  and  not  real,  is  indicated  by 
the  specification  of  sins  which  are  rebuked  ;  as  neg- 
lect of  sacrifices  (xliii.  22-24),  unacceptable  sacri- 
fices (lxvi.  3),  various  idolatries  (lvii.  3-10,  lxv. 
3,  4) ;  sins  belonging  to  a  period  before  the  exile, 
and  not  to  the  exile  itself.1  But  that  this  ima- 
gined time  and  place  should  be  maintained  through 
so  long  a  composition  is  unquestionably  a  remark- 
able phenomenon.  It  is,  however,  explained  by  the 
fact,  that  the  prophet  in  these  later  prophesyings 
is  a  writer  rather  than  a  public  speaker,  writing 
for  the  edification  of  God's  people  in  those  future 
days  of  the  approach  of  which  Isaiah  was  aware. 
For  the  punishment  of  exile  had  been  of  old  de- 
nounced in  case  of  disobedience  even  by  Moses  him- 
self (Lev.  xxvi.  31-35),  and  thus  contemplated  by 


u  How  like  Isaiah's  style  the  whole  passage  is  ! 
xxxvii.  26  refers  to  the  numerous  predictions  of  As- 
shur's  conquests  and  overthrow  found  in  preceding 
parts  of  the  book  (eonip.  xliv.  8;  xlvi.  9-11,  &c). 
Comp.  ver.  27  with  xli.  2.  "  Sign"  in  ver.  30,  as  in 
vii.  11-10; — "There  must  be  a  remnant;  therefore 
ye  shall  now  he  delivered."  Tor  further  explanation, 
Ewald  refers  to  the  law  in  Lov.xx  v.  5,  11  : — "  Tour 
condition  this  year  will  he  like  that  of  a  Sabbath  year  ; 
next  year  (the  land  being  even  then  not  quite  cleared 
of  invaders)  like  that  of  the  jubilee  year  :  as  at  the 
jubilee    the     Hebrew    commonwealth     starts     afresh, 

restored  to  its  proper  condition,  so  now  reformation, 
the  fruit  of  affliction,  shall  introduce  better  days," 
(ver.  31). 

x   For  Etezekiah's  sickness  was  15  years  before   his 

death,  whereas  the  destrui  tion  of  Sennacherib's  army 

(so  ehronologers  determine)  occurred  12  or  13  years 
before  the  same  date. 

y  Since  xxxviii.  9-20  is  not  in  2  K.,   and  on   the 
other  hand  in  2  K.  are  found  many  touches  DOl 
in    Is.   (e.g.   2   K.   xviii.   11-1(1;   xx.   4,   5,   9,   &c), 
critics  are  generally  agreed  that  neither  account  was 


ISAIAH  885 

Solomon  (1  K.  viii.  4C-50)  ;  moreover,  Isaiah  had 
himself  often  realised  and  predicted  it,  with  refer- 
ence repeatedly  to  Babylon  in  particular  (xxxix.  6, 
7,  xxvii.  12,  13,  xxi.  2,  10,  xiv.  2,  3,  xi.  11,  12, 
vi.  11,  12);  which  was  also  done  by  Jlicah  (iv.  10, 
vii.  12,  13).  Apart  therefore  from  the  immediate 
suggestion  of  an  inspiring  afflatus,  it  was  a  thought 
already  fixed  in  Isaiah's  mind  by  a  chain  of  fore- 
going revelations,  that  the  Hebrews  would  be  de- 
ported to  Babylon,  and  that  too  within  a  generation 
or  two.  We  dwell  upon  this,  because  it  must  be 
acknowledged,  and  we  have  already  made  the  re- 
mark, that  "vision"  even  in  its  most  heightened 
form  still  adapted  itself  more  or"  less  to  the  pre- 
vious mental  condition  of  the  seer.  We  can  under- 
stand, therefore,  how  Isaiah  might  be  led  to  write 
prophesyings,  such  as  should  serve  as  his  ministerial 
bequest  to  his  people  when  the  hour  of  their  cap- 
tivity should  have  fallen  upon  them. 

This  same  fact,  namely,  that  the  prophet  is  here, 
in  the  undisturbed*  retirement  of  his  chamber,  giv- 
ing us  a  written  prophecy,  and  not  recording,  as  in 
the  early  part  of  the  book,  spoken  discourses,  goes 
far  to  explain  the  greater  profusion  of  words,  and  the 
clearer,  more  flowing,  and  more  complete  exposition 
of  thoughts,  which  generally  characterise  this  second 
part;  whereas  the  first  part  frequently  exhibits 
great  abruptness,  and  a  close  compression  and  terse- 
ness of  diction,  at  times  almost  enigmatical — as  an 
indignant  man  might  speak  among  gainsayers  from 
whom  little  was  to  be  hoped.  This  difference  of 
style,  so  far  as  it  exists  (for  it  has  been  greatly 
exaggerated)  may  be  further  ascribed  to  the  differ- 
ence of  purpose ;  for  here  Isaiah  generally  appears 
as  the  tender  and  compassionate  comforter  of  the 
pious  and  afflicted  ;  whereas  before  he  appears 
rather  as  accuser  and  denouncer.  There  exists 
after  all  sufficient  similarity  of  diction  to  indi- 
cate Isaiah's  hand  (see  Keil's  Einleitung,  §72, 
note  7). 

This  second  part  falls  into  three  sections,  each,  as 
it  happens,  consisting  of  nine  chapters ;  the  two 
first  end  with  the  refrain,  "  There  is  no  peace,  saith 
.Jehovah  (or  "my  God"),  to  the  wicked;"  and  the 
third  with  the  same  thought  amplified. 

(1.)  The  first  section  (xl.-xlviii.)  has  for  its  main 
topic  the  comforting  assurance  of  the  deliverance 
from  Babylon  by  Koresh  (Cyrus)  who  is  even 
named  twice  (xli.  2,  3,  25,  xliv.  28,  xlv.  1-4,  13, 
xlvi.  11,  xlviii.   14,   15).a      This  section  abounds 


drawn  from  the  other,  but  both  of  them  from  the 
record  mentioned  in  2  Chr.  xxxii.  32  as  "  the  vision 
of  Isaiah  the  prophet,  the  son  of  Amoz,  (found)  in 
(not,  as  in  A.  V.,  "  and  in  ")  the  book  of  the  kings 
of  Judah'  and  Israel  ;"  which  record  Isaiah  adopted 
with  modifications  into  the  compilation  of  his  pro- 
phecies. 

2  As  it  is  for  the  benefit  of  God's  own  people  that 
Isaiah  writes,  and  not  to  affect  heathen  nations  to 
whom  he  had  no  commission,  the  arguing  against 
idolatry,  of  which  we  have  so  much  in  this  pal  I,  is  to 
be  ascribed  to  idolatrous  tendencies  among  the  He- 
brews themselves,  which  ceased  at  the  captivity ;  for 
the  deportation  probably  (Ilengst.)  affected  chiefly 

the  best  disposed  of  the  nation,  especially  the  priesls, 
of  whom  there  appears  to  have  been  a  dispropor- 
tionate number  both  among  those  who  wire  exiled 
and  those  who  returned. 

a  The  point  has  been  argued  for,  and  the  evidence 
seems  satisfactory  (Ilavernick,  Ilengst.),  that  Koresh, 
a  word  meaning  Sun,  was  commonly  in  the  East,  and 
particularly  in  Persia,  a  title  of  princes,  and  that  it 
was   assumed   by  Cyrus,    whose   original    name    was 


886 


ISAIAH 


with  arguments  against  idolatry,  founded  mainly 
(not  wholly,  see  the  noble  passage  xliv.  9-20)  upon 
the  gift  of  prediction  possessed  by  Jehovah's  pro- 
phets, especially  as  shown  by  their  predicting  Cy- 
rus, and  even  naming  him  (xli.  26,  xliv.  8,  24-26, 
xlv.  4,  19,  21,  xlvi.  8-11,  xlviii.  3-8,  15).  Idols 
and  heathen  diviners  are  taunted  with  not  being 
able  to  predict  (xli.  1-7,  21-24,  xliii.  8-13,  xlv. 
20-21,  xlvii.  10-13).  This  power  of  foretelling  the 
future,  as  shown  in  this  instance,  is  insisted  upon 
as  the  test  of  divinity .^  It  is  of  importance  to  ob- 
serve, in  reference  to  the  prophet's  standing-point 
in  this  second  part,  that  in  speaking  both  of  the 
captivity  in  Babylon  and  of  the  deliverance  out  of 
it,  there  is  (excepting  Cyrus's  name)  no  specifica- 
tion of  particular  circumstances,  such  as  we  might 
expect  to  find  if  the  writer  had  written  at  the  end 
of  the  exile ;  the  delineation  is  of  a  general  kind, 
borrowed  frequently  from  the  history  of  Moses  and 
Joshua.  Let  it  be  observed,  in  particular,  that  the 
language  respecting  the  ivildcmess  (c.  g.  xli.  17-20), 
through  which  the  redeemed  were  to  pass,  is  un- 
mistakeably  ideal  and  symbolical. 

It  is  characteristic  of  sacred  prophecy  in  general, 
thai  the  "  vision  "  of  a  great  deliverance  leads  the 
seer  to  glance  at  the  great  deliverance  to  come 
through  Jesus  Christ.  This  association  of  ideas  is 
foimd  in  several  passages  in  the  first  part  of  Isaiah, 
in  which  the  destruction  of  the  Assyrian  army 
suggests  the  thought  of  Christ  (e.  g.  x.  24-xi.  16, 
xxxi.  8-xxxii.  2).  This  principle  of  association 
prevails  in  the  second  part  taken  as  a  whole ;  but 
in  the  first  section,  taken  apart,  it  appears  as  yet 
imperfectly.  However,  xlii.  1-7  is  a  clear  pre- 
diction of  the  Messiah,  and  that  too  as  viewed  in 
part  in  contrast  with  Cyrus  ;  for  the  "  servant "  of 
Jehovah  is  meek  and  gentle  (ver.  2,  3),  and  will 
establish  the  true  religion  in  the  earth  (ver.  4). 
Nevertheless,  since  the  prophet  regards  the  two 
deliverances  as  referable  to  the  same  type  of  thought 
(comp.  lxi.  1-3),  so  the  announcement  of  one  (xl.  3-5) 
is  held  by  all  the  four  Evangelists,  and  by  John 
Baptist  himself,  as  predictive  of  the  announcement 
of  the  other. c 

(2.)  The  second  section  (xlix.-lvii.)  is  distin- 
guished from  the  first  by  several  features.  The 
person  of  Cyrus  as  well  as  his  name,  and  the  speci- 
fication of  Babylon  (named  in  the  first  section  four 
times)  and  of  its  gods,  and  of  the  Chaldaeans 
(named  before  five  times),  disappear  altogether. 
Return  from  exile  is  indeed  repeatedly  spoken  of 


Agradates,  on  his  ascending  the  throne.  It  stands, 
however,  in  history  as  his  own  proper  name.  This 
instance  of  particularising  in  prophecy  is  paralleled 
by  the  specification  of  Josiah's  name  (1  K.  xiii.  2) 
some  350  years  before  his  time. 

b  It  is  difficult  to  acquit  the  passages  above  cited 
of  impudent  and  indeed  suicidal  mendacity,  if  they 
were  not  written  before  Cyrus  appeared  on  the  poli- 
tical scene. 

c  For  the  discussion  and  refutation  of  all  exposi- 
tions which  understand  by  "  the  servant  of  Jehovah  " 
here  or  in  the  second  section  the  Jewish  people,  or 
the  pious  among  them,  or  the  prophetical  order,  or 
some  other  object  than  the  Messiah,  comp.  Hengsten- 
berg's  Christology,  vol.  ii. 

d  In  this  passage  Christ  is  called  "  Israel,"  as  the 
concentration  and  consummation  of  the  covenant- 
people — as  He  in  whom  its  idea  is  to  be  realised. 

e  That  Jesus  of  Nazareth  is  the  object  which  in 
"vision"  the  prophet  saw  in  1.  G,  and  in  lii.  13, 
liii.  12  (connecting  lii.  13  with  liii.  12  as  one 
passage),    will   hardly  be  questioned   amongst  our- 


ISALAH 

and  at  length  (xlix.  9-26,  li.  9-lii.  12,  to.  12,  13, 
lvii.  14)  ;  but  in  such  general  terms  as  admit  of 
being  applied  to  the  spiritual  and  Messianic,  as 
well  as  to  the  literal  restoration.  And  that  the 
Messianic  restoration  (whether  a  spiritual  restora- 
tion or  not)  is  principally  intended,  is  clear  from 
the  connexion  of  the  restoration  promised  in  xlix. 
9-25  with  the  Messiah  portrayed  in  xlix.  1-8  ;d 
from  the  description  of  the  suffering  Christ  (in  1. 
5,  6)  in  the  midst  of  the  promise  of  deliverance 
(1.  1-11)  ;  from  the  same  description  in  lii.  1 3 — liii. 
12,  between  the  passages  li.  1  —lii.  12,  and  liv,  1-17  ; 
and  from  the  exhibition  of  Christ  .in  lv.  4  (con- 
nected in  ver.  3  with  the  Messianic  promise  given 
to  David),  forming  the  foundation  on  which  is 
raised  the  promise  of  lv.  3-13.  Comp.  also  the 
interpretation  of  liv.  13  given  by  Christ  Himself 
in  John  vi.  45,  and  that  of  lxi.  1-3  in  Luke  iv.  18. 
In  fact  the  place  of  Cyrus  in  the  first  section  is  in 
this  second  section  held  by  his  greater  Antitype.e 

(3.)  In  the  third  section  (lviii.-lxvi.)  as  Cyrus 
nowhere  appears,  so  neither  does  "  Jehovah's  ser- 
vant" occur  so  frequently  to  view  as  in  the  se- 
cond. The  only  delineation  of  the  latter  is  in 
lxi.  1-3  and  in  Ixiii.  1-6,  9.  He  no  longer  ap- 
pears as  suffering,  but  only  as  saving  ami  aveng- 
ing Zion.f  The  section  is  mainly  occupied  with 
various  practical  exhortations  founded  upon  the 
views  of  the  future  already  set  forth.  In  the 
second  the  paraenesis  is  almost  all  consoling,  taking 
in  lv.  1-7  the  form  of  advice ;  only  in  lii.  and  to- 
wards the  close  in  lvi.  9— lvii.  14  is  the  language 
accusing  and  minatory.  In  this  third  section,  on 
the  other  hand,  the  prophesying  is  very  much  in 
this  last  named  strain  (cf.  lviii.  1-7,  lix.  1-8,  lxv. 
1-16,  Ixvi.  1-6,  15-17,  24);  taking  the  form  of 
national  self-bewailment  in  lix.  9-15  and  lxiii.  15- 
lxiv.  12.  Still,  interspersed  in  this  admonition, 
accusation,  and  threatening,  there  are  gleams,  and 
even  bright  tracts,  of  more  cheering  matter;  be- 
sides the  conditional  promises  as  arguments  for  well- 
doing in  lviii.  8-14  and  lxvi.  1,  2,  we  have  the 
long  passage  of  general  and  unconditional  promise 
in  lix.  20— lxiii.  6,  and  the  shorter  ones  lxv.  17-25, 
lxvi.  7-14,  18-23  ;  and  in  some  of  these  passages 
the  future  of  Zion  is  depicted  with  brighter  colour- 
ing than  almost  anywhere  before-  in  the  whole 
book.  But  on  the  whole  the  predominant  feature 
of  this  section  is  exhortation  with  the  view,  as  it 
should  seem,  of  qualifying  men  to  receive  the  pro- 
mised blessings.     There  was  to  be  "  no  peace  for 


selves,  except  by  those  whose  minds  are  prepos- 
sessed by  the  notion  that  predictive  revelation  is  in- 
conceivable. Meanwhile  all  will  acknowledge  the 
truth  of  Ewald's  remark  :  "  In  the  Servant  of  Jahve, 
who  so  vividly  hovers  before  his  view,  the  prophet 
discerns  a  new  clear  light  shed  abroad  over  all  pos- 
sible situations  of  that  time  ;  in  Him  he  finds  the 
balm  of  consolation,  the  cheer  of  everlasting  hope, 
the  weapon  wherewith  to  combat  and  shame  down 
those  who  understand  not  the  time,  the  means  of 
impressive  exhortation.  And  if  in  this  long  piece 
(xl.-lxvi.)  a  multitude  of  very  diverse  weighty 
thoughts  emerge  into  view,  yet  this  is  the  dominant 
thought  which  binds  everything  together"  (Fro- 
pJieten,  ii.  p.  407). 

f  Restoration  from  captivity  is  spoken  of  in  lviii.  1 2, 
lxi.  4-7,  lxii.  4,  5,  10  ;  but  for  the  most  part  in  such 
general  terms  as  might  easily  be  understood  as  re- 
ferring to  spiritual  restoration  only  :  hut  since  the 
literal  restoration  pre-required  repentance,  this  ex- 
hortation may  be  taken  with  a  reference  to  literal 
restoration  as  well. 


ISAIAH 

the  wicked,"  but  only  for  those  who  turned  from 
ungodliness  in  Jacob  ;  and  thereto)  e  the  prophet  in 
such  various  forms  of  exhortations  urges  the  topic 
of  repentance, — promising,  advising,  leading  to  con- 
fession (lxiv.  6-12;  comp.  Hos.  xiv.  2,  .'J),  warn- 
ing, threatening.  In  reference  to  the. sins  especially 
selected  for  rebuke,  we  find  specified  idolatry  lxv. 
3,  4,  11,  lxvi.  17  (as  in  the  second  section  lvii. 
3-10),  bloodshedding,  and  injustice  (lix.  1-15), 
selfishness  (lxv.  5),  and  merely  outward  and  cere- 
monial religiousness  (lxvi.  1-3).  If  it  were  not  for 
the  place  given  to  idolatry,  we  might  suppose  with 
Dr.  Henderson  that  the  spirit  of  God  is  already  by 
prophetic  anticipation  rebuking  the  Judaism  of  the 
time  of  Jesus  Christ, — so  accurately  in  many  places 
are  its  features  delineated  as  denounced  in  theN.  T. 
But  the  specification  of  idolatry  leads  us  to  seek  for 
the  immediate  objects  of  this  paraenesis  in  the  pro- 
phet's own  time,  when  indeed  the  Pharisaism  dis- 
played in  the  N.  T.  already  existed,  being  in  tact  in 
all  ages  the  natural  product  of  an  unconverted, 
unspiritual  heart  combining  with  the  observance  of 
a  positive  religion,  and  in  all  ages  (comp.  e.  g.  Ps. 
1.)  antagonistic  to  true  piety. 

While  we  can  clearly  discern  certain  dominant 
thoughts  and  aims  in  each  or  these  three  sections, 
we  must  not,  however,  expect,  to  find  them  pursued 
with  the  regularity  which  we  look  tor  in  a  modern 
sermon  ;  such  treatment  is  wholly  alien  from  the 
spirit  of  prophecy,  which  always  more  or  less  is  in 
the  strict  sense  of  the  word  desultory.  Accordingly 
we  find  in  these,  as  in  the  earlier  portions  of  the 
book,  the  transitions  sudden,  and  the  exhortation 
every  now  and  then  varied  by  dramatic  interlocu- 
tion, by  description,  by  odes  of  thanksgiving,  by 
prayers. 

III.  Numberless  attacks  have  been  made  by 
German  critics  upon  the  integrity  of  the  whole 
book,  different  critics  pronouncing  different  por- 
tions of  the  first  part  spurious,  and  many  concur- 
ring to  reject  the  second  part  altogether.  A  few 
observations,  particularly  on  this  latter  point,  ap- 
pear therefore  to  be  necessary. 

1.  The  first  writer  who  ever  breathed  a  suspicion 
that  Isaiah  was  not  the  author  of  the  last  twenty- 
seven  chapters  was  Koppe,  in  remarks  upon  ch.  1., 
in  his  German  translation  of  Lowth's  Isaiah,  pub- 
lished in  the  years  1779-1781.  This  was  pre- 
sently alter  followed  up  by  Doderlein,  especially  in 
his  Latin  translation  and  commentary  in  1789  ;  by 
Eichhorn  who  in  a  later  period  most  fully  developed 
his  views  on  this  point  in  his  Hebraischen  Pro- 
pheten,  181(3-1819;  and  the  most  fully  and 
effectively  by  Justi.  The  majority  of  the  German 
critics  have  given  in  their  adhesion  to  these  views  : 
as  Paulus  (1793),  Iieithol.lt  (1812),  De  Wette 
(1817),  Gesenius  (1820,  1821),  Hitzig  (1833), 
Knobel  (1838),  Umbreit  and  Ewald  (1841).  De- 
fenders of  the  integrity  of  the  book  have  not,  how- 
ever, been  wanting  —  particularly  Jahn  in  his 
Einleitung  (1802);  Moller  in  his  De  Authentid 
Oraculorum  Jesaiae  (Copenhagen,  1825) ;  Kleinert 
in  his  Aechtheit  des  Jesaias  (1829) ;  Hengsten- 
berg  in  his  C/iristology,  vol.  ii. ;  Haveniick, 
Einh  itung,  B.  ill.  1 1849) ;  Stier  in  his  Jesaias  nicht 
Pseudo-Jesaias (1850);  andKtil,  Einleittmg  (l8o'6), 
in  which  last  the  reader  will  find  a  most  satis- 
factory compendium  of  the  controversy  and  of  the 
grounds  for  the  generally  received  view. 

2.  The  catalogue  of  authors  who  gainsay  Isaiah's 
authorship  of  this  second  part  is,  in  point  of  num- 
bers, of  critical  ability,  and  of  profound  Hebrew 


ISAIAH 


887 


scholarship,  sufficiently  imposing.  Nevertheless 
when  we  come  to  inquire  into  their  grounds  of  ob- 
jection, we  soon  cease  to  attach  much  value  to  this 
formidable  array  of  authorities.  The  circumstance 
mainly  urged  by  fiiem  is  the  unquestionable  fact 
that  the  author  has  to  a  considerable  view  taken 
his  standing-point  at  the  close  of  the  Babylonish 
Captivity  as  if  that  were  his  present,  and  from 
thence  looks  forward  into  the  subsequent  future. 
Now  is  it  possible  (they  ask)  that  in  such  a  manner 
and  to  such  a  degree  a  Seer  should  step  out  of  his 
own  time,  and  plant  his  foot  so  firmly  in  a  later 
time  ?  We  must  grant  (they  urge)  that  he  might 
gaze  upon  a  future  not  very  distant,  as  if  present, 
and  represent  it  accordingly  ;  but  in  the  case  before 
us  infallible  insight  and.  prescience  must  be  pre- 
dicated of  him  ;  for  this  idea  of  an  Isaiah  who 
knows  even  Cyrus's  name  was  not  realised  for 
two  centuries  later,  and  a  chance  hit  is  here  out 
of- the  question.  "This,  however,  is  inconceivable. 
A  prophet's  prescience  must  be  limited  to  the  no- 
tion of  foreboding  (Ahnung),  and  to  the  deduc- 
tions from  patent  facts  taken  in  combination  with 
real  or  supposed  truths.  Prophets  were  bounded 
like  other  men  by  the  horizon  of  their  own  age ; 
they  borrowed  the  object  of  their  soothsaying  from 
their  present ;  and  excited  by  the  relations  of  their 
present  they  spoke  to  their  contemporaries  of  what 
affected  other  people's  minds  or  their  own,  occu- 
pying themselves  only  with  that  future  whose  re- 
wards or  punishments  were  likely  to  reach  their 
contemporaries.  For  exegesis  the  position  is  im- 
pregnable, that  the  prophetic  writings  are  to  be 
interpreted  in  each  case  out  of  the  relations  be- 
longing to  the  time  of  the  prophet ;  and  from 
this  follows  as  a  corollary  the  critical  Canon :  that 
that  time,  those  time-relations,  out  of  which  a  pro- 
phetic writer  is  explained,  are  his  time,  his  time- 
relations  ; — to  that  time  he  must  be  referred  as  the 
date  of  his  own  existence"  (Hitzig,  p.  463-468). 

3.  This  is  the  main  argument.  Other  grounds 
which  are  alleged  are  confessedly  "  secondary  and 
external,"  and  are  really  of  no  great  weight.  The 
most  important  of  these  is  founded  upon  the  differ- 
ence in  the  complexion  of  style  which  has  already 
been  noticed  ;  this  point  will  come  into  view  again 
presently.  A  number  of  particulars  of  diction  said 
to  be  non-Isaianic  have  been  accumulated ;  but  the 
reasoning  founded  upon  them  has  been  satisfactorily 
met  by  opposing  evidence  of  a  similar  kind  (see 
Keil,  Einleitung,  §72).  It  is  not,  however,  on 
such  considerations  that  the  chief  stress  is  laid  by 
the  impugners  of  the  Isaianic  authorship  of  this 
portion  of  Scripture:  the  great  ground  of  objection 
is,  as  already  stated,  the  incompatibility  of  those 
phaenomena  of  prediction  which  are  noted  in  the 
writings  in  question,  with  the  subjective  theories  ot 
inspiration  (or  rather  non-inspiration)  which  the 
reader  has  just  had  submitted  to  him.  The  incom- 
patibility is  confessed.  But  where  is  the  solution 
of  the  difficulty  to  be  sought?  Are  those  theories 
so  certainly  true  that  all  evidence  must  give  way 
to  them  ?  This  is  not  the  place  for  combating 
them  ;  but,  for  our  own  part,  we  are  so  firmly  con- 
vinced that  the  theory  is  utterly  discredited  by  the 
facts  exhibited  to  us  in  the  liible  throughout,  that 
we  are  content  to  lack  in  this  case  the  countenance 
of  its  upholders.  Their  judgment  in  the  critical 
question  before  us  is  determined,  not  by  their 
scholarship,  but  avowedly  by  the  prepossessions  of 
their  unbelief. 
4.  For  our  present  purpose.it  must  suffice  briefly 


888  ISAIAH 

to  indicate  the  following  reasons  as  establishing;  the 
integrity  of  the  whole  book,  and  as  vindicating  the 
authenticity  of  the  second  part : — 

(«.)  Externally . — The  unanimous  testimony  of 
Jewish  and  Christian  tradition — Ecclus.  xlviii.  24, 
25,  which  manifestly  (in  the  words  TrapeKaXecre 
tovs  ireudovi/ras  eV  ~2,iwv  and  U7re5ei|e —  ra 
vTroKpvrpa  irplv  7)  Tvapayevicrdai  avrd)  refers  to 
this  second  part. — The  use  apparently  made  of  the 
second  part  by  Jeremiah  (x.  1-16,  v.  25,  xxv. 
31,  1.  li.),  Ezekiel  (xxiii.  40,  41)  and  Zephaniah 
(ii.  15,  iii.  10). — The  decree  of  Cyrus  in  Ezr.  i.  2-4, 
which  plainly  is  founded  upon  Is.  xliv.  23,  xlv. 
1,  13,  accrediting  Josephus's  statement  (Ant.  xi. 
1,  §2)  that  the  Jews  showed  Cyrus  Isaiah's  predic- 
tions of  him. — The  inspired  testimony  of  the  N.  T. 
which  often  (Matt.  iii.  3  and  the  parallel  passages ; 
Luke  iv.  17;  Acts  viii.  28;  Horn.  x.  16,  20) 
quotes  with  specification  of  Isaiah's  name  pro- 
phecies found  in  the  second  part. 

(6.)  Internally. — The  unity  of  design  and  con- 
struction which,  as  we  have  seen,  connects  these  last 
twenty-seven  chapters  with  the  preceding  parts  of 
the  book. — The  oneness  of  diction  which  pervades 
the  whole  book. — The  peculiar  elevation  and  gran- 
deur of  style,  which,  as  is  universally  acknowledged, 
distinguishes  the  whole  contents  of  the  second  part 
as  much  as  of  the  first,  and  which  assigns  their 
composition  to  the  golden  age  of  Hebrew  literature. 
— The  absence  of  any  other  name  than  Isaiah's 
claiming  the  authorship.  At  the  time  to  which 
the  composition  is  assigned,  a  Zechariah  or  a  Ma- 
lachi  could  gain  a  separate  name  and  book  ;  how 
was  it  that  an  author  of  such  transcendent  gifts,  as 
"the  Great  Unnamed"  who  wrote  xl.-lxvi.,  could 
gain  none  ? — The  claims  which  the  writer  makes  to 
the  /oreknowledge  of  the  deliverance  by  Cyrus, 
which  claims,  on  the  opposing  view,  must,  be  re- 
garded as  a  fraudulent  personation  of  an  earlier 
writer. — Lastly,  the  predictions  which  it  contains 
of  the  character,  sufferings,  death,  and  glorifica- 
tion of  Jesus  Christ :  a  believer  in  Christ  cannot 
fail  to  regard  those  predictions  as  affixing  to  this 
second  part  the  broad  seal  of  Divine  Inspiration  ; 
whereby  the  chief  ground  of  objection  against  its 
having  been  written  by  Isaiah  is  at  once  anni- 
hilated. 

IV.  It  remains  to  make  a  few  observations  on 
Isaiah's  style  ;  though  in  truth  the  abundance  of  the 
materials  which  offer  themselves  makes  it  a  diffi- 
cult matter  to  give  anything  like  a  just  and  definite 
view  of  the  subject,  without  trespassing  unduly 
upon  the  limits  necessarily  prescribed  to  us.  On 
this  point  we  cannot  do  better  than  introduce  some 
of  the  remarks  with  which  Ewald  prefaces  his 
translation  of  such  parts  of  the  book  as  he  is  dis- 
posed to  acknowledge  as  Isaiah's  (Propheten,  i. 
166-179):— 

.  "  In  Isaiah  we  see  prophetic  authorship  reaching 
its  culminating  point.  Everything  conspired  to 
raise  him  to  an  elevation  to  which  no  prophet 
either  before  or  after  could  as  wi  iter  attain.  Among 
the  other  prophets,  each  of  the  more  important 
ones  is  distinguished  by  some  one  particular  excel- 
lence, and  some  one  peculiar  talent:  in  Isaiah,  all 
kinds  of  talent  and  all  beauties  of  prophetic  dis- 
course meet  together  so  as  mutually  to  temper  and 
qualify  each  other ;  it  is  not  so  much  any  single 
feature  that  distinguishes  him  as  the  symmetry  and 
perfection  of  the  whole. 

"  We  cannot  tail  to  assume,  as  the  first  condition 
of  Isaiah's  peculiar  historical   greatness,  a  native 


ISAIAH 

power  and  a  vivacity  of  spirit,  which  even  amOng 
prophets  is  seldom  to  be  met  with.  It  is  but 
rarely  that  we  see  combined  in  one  and  the  same 
spirit  the  three  several  characteristics  of— first,  the 
most  profound  prophetic  excitement  and  the  purest 
sentiment ;  next,  the  most  indefatigable  and  success- 
ful practical  activity  amidst  all  perplexities  and 
changes  of  outward  life  ;  and,  thirdly,  that  facility 
and  beauty  in  representing  thought  which  is  the 
prerogative  of  the  genuine  poet :  but  this  threefold 
combination  we  find  realised  in  Isaiah  as  in  no  other 
prophet ;  and  from  the  traces  which  we  can  per- 
ceive of  the  unceasing  joint-working  of  these  three 
powers  we  must  draw  our  conclusions  as  to  the 
original  greatness  of  his  genius. — Both  as  prophet 
and  as  author  Isaiah  stands  upon  that  calm,  sunny 
height,  which  in  each  several  branch  of  ancient 
literature  one  eminently  favoured  spirit  at  the 
right  time  takes  possession  of;  which  seems  as  it 
were  to  have  been  waiting  for  him  ;  and  which,  when 
he  has  come  and  mounted  the  ascent,  seems  to  keep 
and  guard  him  to  the  last  as  its  own  right  man. 
In  the  sentiments  which  he  expresses,  in  the  topics 
of  his  discourses,  and  in  the  manner  of  expression, 
Isaiah  uniformly  repeals  himself  as  the  Kingly 
Prophet. 

"  In  reference  to  the  last  named  point,  it  cannot 
be  said  that  his  manner  of  representing  thought 
is  elaborate  and  artificial :  it  rather  shows  a  lofty 
simplicity  and  an  unconcern  about  external  attiac- 
tiveness,  abandoning  itself  freely  to  the  leading  and 
requirement  of  each  several  thought ;  but  neverthe- 
less it  always  rolls  along  in  a  full  stream  which 
overpowers  all  resistance,  and  never  fails  at  the 
right  place  to  accomplish  at  every  turn  its  object 
without  toil  or  effort. 

"  The  progress  and  development  of  the  discourse 
is  always  majestic,  achieving  much  with  few  words, 
which  though  short  are  yet  clear  and  transparent ; 
an  overflowing,  swelling  fulness  of  thought,  which 
might  readily  lose  itself  in  the  vast  and  indefinite, 
but  which  always  at  the  right  time  with  tight  rein 
collects  and  tempers  its  exuberance ;  to  the'  bottom 
exhausting  the  thought  and  completing  the  utter- 
ance, and  yet  never  too  diffuse.  This  severe  self- 
control  is  the  most  admirably  seen  in  those  shorter 
utterances,  which  by  briefly  sketched  images  and 
thoughts,  give  us  the  vague  apprehension  of  some- 
thing infinite,  whilst  nevertheless  they  stand  before 
us  complete  in  themselves  and  clearly  delineated ; 
e.g.,  viii.  6-ix.  6,  xiv.  29-32,  xviii.  1-7,  xxi.  11, 
12  ;  while  in  the  long  piece,  xxviii.-xxxii.,  if  the 
composition  here  and  there  for  a  moment  languishes, 
it  is  only  to  lift  itself  up  again  afresh  with  all  the 
greater  might.  In  this  rich  and  thickly  crowded 
fulness  of  thought  and  word,  it  is  but  seldom  that 
the  simile  which  is  employed  appears  apart,  to  set 
forth  and  complete  itself  (xxxi.  4,  5);  in  general, 
it  crowds  into  the  delineation  of  the  object  which  it 
is  meant  to  illustrate  and  is  swallowed  up  in  it, — 
aye,  and  frequently  simile  after  simile ;  and  yet 
the  many  threads  of  the  discourse  which  for  a  mo- 
ment appeared  ravelled  together  soon  disentangle 
themselves  into  perfect  clearness  ;— a  characteristic 
which  belongs  to  this  prophet  alone,  a  freedom  of 
language  which  with  no  one  else  so  easily  succeeds. 

"  The  versification  in  like  manner  is  always  full, 
and  yet  strongly  marked:  while  however  this  pro- 
phet is  little"  concerned  about  anxiously  weighing 
out  to  each  verse  its  proper  number  of  words  ;  not 
unfrequently  he  repeats  the  same  word  in  two 
members  (xxxi.  8,  xxxii.  17,  xi.  5,   xix.  13),  as  if, 


ISAIAH 

with  so  much  power  and  beauty  in  the  matter 
within,  he  did  not  so  much  require  a  painstaking 
finish  in  the  outside.  The  structure  of  the  strophe 
is  always  easy  and  beautifully  rounded. 

"  Still  the  main  point  lies  here, — that  we  cannot 
in  the  case  of  Isaiah,  as  in  that  of  other  prophets, 
specify  any  particular  peculiarity,  or  any  favourite 
colour  as  attaching  to  his  general  style.  He  is  not 
the  especially  lyrical  prophet,  or  the  especially 
elegiacal prophet,  or  the  especially  oratorical  and 
hortatory  proph  f.  as  we  should  describe  a  Joel,  a 
Hosea,  a  Mica  It,  with  whom  there  is  a  greater  pre- 
vail nee  of  souk1  particular  colour ;  but,  just  as  the 
subject  requires,  he  has  readily  at  command  every 
several  kind  of  style  and  every  several  change  of 
•  leh'ueation  ;  and  it  is  precisely  this  that,  in  point 
of  language,  establishes  his  greatness,  as  well  as  in 
general  forms  one  of  hi*  most  towering  points  of  ex- 
cellence. His  only  fundamental  peculiarity  is  the 
lofty,  majestic  calmness  of  his  style,  proceeding  put 
of  the  perfect  command  which  he  feels  he  possesses 
over  his  subject-matter.  This  calmness,  however, 
no  way  demands  that  the  strain  shall  not,  when 
occasion  requires,  be  more  vehemently  excited  and 
assail  the  hearer  with  mightier  blows;  but  even 
the  extremest  excitement,  which  does  here  and  there 
intervene,  is  in  the  main  bridled  still  by  the  same 
spirit  of  calmness,  and,  not  overstepping  the  limits 
which  that  spirit  assigns,  it  soon  with  lofty  self- 
control  returns  back  to  its  wonted  tone  of  equabi- 
lity (ii.  10-iii.  1,  xxviii.  11-2:5,  xxix.  9-14).  Nei- 
ther does  this  calmness  in  discourse  require  that 
the  subject  shall  always  be  treated  only  in  a  plain 
level  why,  without  any  variation  of  form  ;  rather, 
Isaiah  shows  himself  master  in  just  that  variety  of 
manner  which  suits  the  relation  in  which  his 
hearers  stand  to  the  matter  now  in  hand.  If  he 
wishes  to  bring  home  to  their  minds  a  distant  truth 
which  they  like  not  to  hear,  and  to  judge  them  by 
a  sentence  pronounced  by  their  own  mouth,  he 
retreats  back  into  a  popular  statement  of  a  case 
drawn  from  ordinary  lite  (v.  l-(>,  xxviii.  23-29), 
If  lie  will  draw  the  attention  of  the  over-wise  to 
some  new  truth,  or  to  some  future  prospect,  he 
surprises  them  by  a  brief  oracle  clothed  in  an  enig- 
matical dress,  leaving  it  to  their  penetration  to  dis- 
cover its  solution  (vii.  14-16,  xxix.  1-8).  When 
the  unhappy  temper  of  people's  minds  which  no- 
thing can  amend  leads  to  loud  lamentation,  his 
speech  becomes  for  a  while  the  strain  of  elegy  and 
i  (i.  21-23,  xxii.  4,  5).  Do  the  frivolous 
leaders  of  the  people  mock?— he  outdoes  them  at 
their  own  weapons,  and  crushes  them  under  the 
fearful  earnest  of  divine  mockery  (xxviii.  10-13). 
Even  a  single  ironical  word  in  passing  will  drop 
from  the  lofty  prophet  (xvii.  :;,  glory),  '/'/ex  his 
//iseaues,'  varies  into  every  complexion :  il  is  tender 
///, /l  stern,  didactic  ''mi  threatening,  mourning 
ami  again  exulting  in  'Heine  joy,  mocking  and 
earnest;  but  ever  at  the  right  time  it  returns 
back  to  its  original  elevation  and  repose,  and 
never  loses  the  clear  ground-colour  of  its  divine 
seriousness." 

In  this  delineation  of  Isaiah's  style,  Ewald  con- 
templates exclusively  the  Isaiah  of  i.-xxxix.,  in 
which  part  of  the  bonk  itself,  however,  <i 
several  passages  of  which  he  will  not  allow  Isaiah 
to  be  the  author.  These  are  the  following:  xii., 
xiii.  2-xiv.  23,  xxi.  1-10,  xxiv.  -  xxvii.,  xxxiv., 
xxxv.  In  reference  to  all  these  passages,  with  the 
exception  of  the  first,  the  ground  of  objection  i 
obvious  upon  a  moment's  observation  of  the  con- 


ISAIAH 


889 


tents ;  on  rationalistic  views  of  prophecy,  none 
of  them  can  be  ascribed  to  Isaiah.  For  the  proof 
of  their  genuineness  it  is  sufficient  to  refer  to 
Drechsler's  Prophet  Jesaja,  or  to  Keil's  Einleituny. 
We  cannot,  however,  help  noticing  the  estimate 
which  the  honesty  of  Ewald's  aesthetical  judgment 
forms  of  the  style  of  nearly  all  these  passages.  He. 
pronounces  the  magnificent  denunciation  of  Baby- 
lon, xiii.  2-xiv.  23,  to  be  referable  to  the  same 
author  as  the  prediction  of  Babylon's  overthrow  in 
xxi.  1-10,  and  both  as  alike  remarkable  for  "the 
poetical  facility  of  the  words,  images,  and  sen- 
timents," particularising  xiv.  5-20  especially  as 
"  an  ode  of  high  poetical  finish,"  which  in  the  last 
strophe  (vers.  2U-23)  rises  to  "  prophetical  sub- 
limity." In  xxiv. -xxvii.  he  finds  parts,  particu- 
larly the  "beautiful  utterances"  in  xxv.  6-8, 
xxvii.  9,  12,  13,  which  he  considers  as  plainly  bor- 
rowed from  oracles  which  are  now  lost;  while 
lastly,  in  xx.xiv.,  xxxv.  (which  in  his  20th  lecture 
on  Hebrew  poetry  Bp,  Lowth  selects  for  particular 
comment  on  account  of  its  peculiar  poetical  merit), 
he  traces  much  that  "re-echoes  words  of  the  ge- 
nuine Isaiah." 

If  we  refer  to  that  part  of  Ewald's  Propheten 
which  treats  of  xl.-lxvi.,  which  he  ascribes  to  "  the 
Great  Unnamed,"  the  terms  in  which  he  speaks  of 
its  style  of  composition  do  not  tall  far  short  of  those 
which  he  has  employed  respecting  the  former  part. 
"  ( 'native  as  this  prophet  is  in  his  views  and 
thoughts,  he  is  not  less  peculiar  and  new  in  his 
language,  which  at  times  is  highly  inspired  and 
carries  away  the  reader  with  a  wonderful  power. — 
Although,  after  the  general  manner  of  the  later  pro- 
phets, the  discourse  is  apt  to  be  too  diffuse  in  deli- 
neation ;  yet,  on  the  other  side,  it  often  moves  con- 
fusedly and  heavily,  owing  to  the  over-gushing 
fulness  of  fresh  thoughts  continually  streaming  in. 
But  whenever  it  rises  to  a  higher  strain,  as  e.  g., 
xl.,  xiii.  1-4,  it  then  attains  to  such  a  pure  lumin- 
ous sublimity,  and  carries  the  hearer  away  with 
such  a  wonderful  charm  of  diction,  that  one  might 
be  ready  to  fancy  he  was  listening  to  another  pro- 
phet altogether,  if  other  grounds  did  not  convince 
us  that  it  is  one  and  the  same  prophet  speaking, 
only  in  different  moods  ofi  feeling. — In  no  prophet 
dues  the  mood  in  the  composition  of  particular 
passages  so  much  vary,  as  throughout  the  three 
.->  veral  sections  into  which  this  part  of  the  book  is 
divided,  while  under  vehement  excitement  the  pro- 
phet pursues  the  most  diverse  objects.  It  is  his 
business  at  different  times,  to  comfort,  to  exhort,  to 
shame,  to  chasten;  to  show,  as  out  of  heaven,  the 
heavenly  imago  of  the  Servant  of  the  Lord,  and,  in 
contrast,  to  scourge  the  tolly  and  base  grovelling  of 
image-worship;  to  teach   what   conduct   the  times 

require,  ami  to  rebuke  tho  e  h  bo  I r  behind  the 

occasion,  and  then  also  to  draw  them  along  by  his 
own  example — his  prayers,  confessions,  and  thanks- 
givings, thus  smoothing  for  them  the  approach  to 

il salted  object  of  the   New  Time.     Thus  the 

complexion   of   the    style,   although   hardly   any- 
where passing  into   the   representation   of  visions 
properly  so  called,  varies  in  a  constant  interchange; 
ami  rightly  to  recognise  these  changes  is  thi 
problem  fin-  the  interpretation"  t,  vol. 

ii.  M)7- 

For  obvious  reasons  we  have  preferred  citing  the 
aesthetical  jud  so  accomplished  a  critic 

as  Ewald,  to  attempting  any  original  criticism  of 

our    own  ;    ami  thi-  all   the  more  willingly,    because 

the   inference  to  be  drawn  from  the  above  cited 

3  M 


890 


ISC  AH 


passages  (the  reader  will  please  especially  to  mark 
the  sentences  which  we  have  put  into  Italics)  is 
clear,  that  in  point  of  style,  after  taking  account  of 
the  considerations  already  stated  by  us,  we  can 
find  no  difficulty  in  recognising  in  the  second  part 
the  presence  of  the  same  plastic  genius  as  we  dis- 
cover in  the  first.  And,  altogether,  the  aesthetic 
criticism  of  all  the  different  parts  of  the  book 
brings  us  to  the  conclusion  substantiated  by  the 
evidence  previously  accumulated  ;  namely,  that 
the  whole  of  the  book  originated  in  one  mind,  and 
that  mind  one  of  the  most  sublime  and  variously 
gifted  instruments  which  the  .Spirit  of  God  has 
ever  employed  to  pour  forth  Its  Voice  upon  the 
world. 

V.  The  following  are  the  most  important  works 
on  Isaiah  : — Vitringa's  Commentarius  in  Lihruiii 
Prophetiarum  Isaiae,  2  vols.  fol.  1714,  a  vast 
mine  of  materials;  Rosenmuller's  Scholia,  1818- 
1820,  or  his  somewhat  briefer  Scholia  in  Compen- 
dium redacta,  18:;  1,  which,  though  rationalistic, 
is  sober,  and  valuable  in  particular  for  the  full  use 
which  he  makes  of  Jerome  and  the  Jewish  expo- 
sitors ;  Gesenius's  Philologisch-Kritischer  unci  His- 
torischer  Commentar.  1821  ;  Hitzig's  Prophet 
Isaiah  iibersetzt  unci  ausgelegt,  1833;  and  Kno- 
bel,  1843,  in  the  Kurzgefasztes  Exegetisches 
Handbuch  zum  Alt.  Testam.,  which  are  all  three 
decidedly  sceptical,  but  for  lexical  and  historical 
materials  are  of  very  great  value ;  Ewald's  Pro- 
■pheten  des  Alten  Bundes,  which,  though  likewise 
sceptical,  is  absolutely  indispensable  for  a  just 
appreciation  of  the  poetry ;  the  second  vol.  of 
Hengstenberg's  Christology,  translated  in  Clark's 
Foreign  Theological  Library,  18.">6;  Drechsler's 
Prophet  Jesaja  iibersetzt  und  erkliirt,  now  in 
course  of  publication,  and  Rud.  Stier's  Jesaias 
nicht  Pseuclo-Jesaias,  1850-51,  which  is  a  com- 
mentary on  the  last  27  chapters.  The  two  chief 
English  works  are  Bp.  Lowth's  Isaiah,  a  new 
translation,  with  Notes,  Critical,  Philological,  and 
Explanatory,  1778  (whose  incessant  correction  of 
the  Hebrew  text  is  constantly  to  be  mistrusted),  and 
Dr.  Ebenezer  Henderson's  Translation  and  Com- 
mentary, 2nd  edit.,  1857.  [E.  H — e.] 

IS'CAH  (i"!3D^ :  'leaxd  :  Jesca),  daughter  of 
Harau  the  brother  of  Abram,  and  sister  of  Milcah 
and  of  Lot  (Gen.  xi.  29).  In  the  Jewish  traditions 
as  preserved  by  Josephus  {Ant.  i.  6,  §5),  Jerome 
(Quaest.  in  Genesim),  and  the  Targum  Pseudo- 
jonathan — not  to  mention  later  writers — she  is  iden- 
tified with  Sarai. 

ISCAR'IOT.     [Judas  Iscariot.] 

IS'DAEL  ('Io-Sotja:  Gaddahel),  1  Esd.  v.  33. 
[Giddkl,  2]. 

ISH'BAH  (n3fJ;;>:  o  'Ieo-/3o  ;  Alex.  'lecra/3a : 
Iesba),  a  man  in  the  line  of  Judah,  commemorated 
as  the  "  father  of  Eshtemoa"  (I  Chr.  iv.  17);  but 
from  whom  he  was  immediately  descended  is,  in  the 
very  confused  state  of  this  part  of  the  genealogy, 
not  to  be  ascertained.  The  most  feasible  conjecture 
is  that  he  was  one  of  the  sons  of  Mered  by  his 
Egyptian  wife  BiTUiAH.  (See  Bertheau,  Chronih, 
ad  loc.) 

ISH'BAK  (p2V» ;  'U<t$J,k,  2o/3c{«:  ;  Jes- 
boc ;  "  leaving  behind,"  Ges.),  a  son  of  Abra- 
ham and  Keturah  (Gen.  xxv.  2;  1  Chr.  i.  32), 
and  the  progenitor  of  a  tribe  of  northern  Ara- 
bia.    The  settlements  of  this  people  are  very  ob- 


ISH-BOSHETH 

scure,  and  we  can  only  suggest  as  possible  that 
they  may  be  recovered  in  the  name  of  the  valley 

called  Sabjik,  or,  it  is  said,  Sibitk  (<jjl>ww)'  m  ^ie 

»_  o  s  -OS 

Dahna.  (^U^JsJJ  and  Li^j^xJ^),  {Mardsid,  s.  v.). 
The  Heb.  root  p2£'  corresponds  to  the  Arabic 
i_iA*w  in  etymology  and  signification :  therefore 
identifications  with  names  derived  from  the  root 
^j^,  are  improbable.     There  are  many  places  of 

the   latter  derivation,  as  Shebek  (&tjj*),  Shibak 

-OX 

{£\jJl),   and  Esh-Shobak  {AjJ^S)'-   the  Iast 

having  been  supposed  (as  by  Bunsen,  Bibelwerk,  i. 
pt.  ii.  53)  to  preserve  a  trace  of  Ishbak.  It  is  a 
fortress  in  Arabia  Petraea;  and  is  near  the  well- 
known  fortress  of  the  Crusaders'  times  called  El- 
Karak. 

The  Dahna,  in  which  is  situate  Sahstk,  is  a  fertile 
and  extensive  tract,  belonging  to  the  Benee-Temeem, 
in  Nejd,  or  the  highland,  of  Arabia,  on  the  north-east 
of  it,  and  the  borders  of  the  great  deseit,  reaching 
from  the  rugged  tract  ("  hazn  ")  of  Yensoo'ah  to 
the  sands  of  Yebreen.  It  contains  much  pasturage, 
with  comparatively  few  wells,  and  is  greatly  fre- 
quented by  the  Arabs  when  the  vegetation  is  plen- 
tiful (Mushtarak  and  Mardsid,  s.  v.).  There  is, 
however,  another  Dahna,  nearer  to  the  Euphrates 
(»'&.),  and  some  confusion  may  exist  regarding  the 
true  position  of  Sabiik ;  but  either  Dahna  is  suit- 
able for  the  settlements  of  Ishbak.  The  first-men- 
tioned Dahnk  lies  in  a  favourable  portion  of  the 
widely-stretching  country  known  to  have  been 
peopled  by  the  Keturahites.  They  extended  from 
the  borders  of  Palestine  even  to  the  Persian  Gulf, 
and  traces  of  their  settlements  must  be  looked  for 
all  along  the  edge  of  the  Arabian  peninsula,  where 
the  desert  merges  into  the  cultivable  land,  or  (itself 
a  rocky  undulating  plateau)  rises  to  the  wild,  moun- 
tainous country  of  Nejd.  Ishbak  seems  from  his 
name  to  have  preceded  or  gone  before  his  brethren  : 
the  place  suggested  for  his  dwelling  is  far  away  to- 
wards the  Persian  Gulf,  and  penetrates  also  into  the 
peninsula.  On  these,  as  well  as  mere  etymological 
grounds,  the  identification  is  sufficiently  probable, 
and  every  way  better  than  that  which  connects  the 
patriarch  with  Esh-Shobak,  &c.  [E.  S.  P.] 

TSH'BI-BE'NOB  (3ln '  12C;\  Keri,  »3tJ»  ; 
'Ie<r£l ;  Jesbi  benob),  son  of  Kapha,  one  of  the 
race  of  Philistine  giants,  who  attacked  David  in 
battle,  but  was  slain  by  Abishai  (2  Sam.  xxi.  16, 
17).  [H.  W.  P.] 

ISH-BO'SHETH  (n^2  B»K  ;  'UPoaOe;  Is- 

boseth),  the  youngest  of  Saul's  foui;  sons,  and  his 
legitimate  successor.  His  name  appears  (1  Chr. 
viii.  33,  ix.  39)  to  have  been  originally  Esh-baal, 
byi'VH,  "  the  man  of  Baal."  Whether  this  indi- 
cates that  Baal  was  used  as  equivalent  to  Jehovah, 
or  that  the  reyerence  for  Baal  still  lingered  in  Israel- 
itish  families,  is  uncertain;  but  it  can  baldly  be 
doubted  that  the  name  (Ish-bosheth,  "  the  man  of 
shame")  by  which  he  is  commonly  known,  must 
have  been  substituted  for  the  original  word,  with  a 
view  of  removing  the  scandalous  sound  of  Baa] 
from   the  name  of  an  Israelitish   kin-,   and  super- 


ISH-BOSHETH 

seeling  it  by  the  contemptuous  word  (Bosheth — 
"  shame  ")  which  was  sometimes  used  as  its  equiva- 
lent in  later  times  (Jer.  iii.  '-'4;  xi.  13;  Hos.  ix. 
10).  A  similar  process  appears  in  the  alteration 
of  Jerubbaal  (Judg.  viii.  35)  into  Jerubbesheth 
(2  Sam.  xi.  21);  Meri-baa]  (2  Sam.  iv.  4)  into 
Mephibosheth  (1  Chr.  viii.  34,  ix.  4(1).  The  three 
last  cases  all  occur  in  Saul's  family.  He  was  35 
years  of  age  at  the  time  of  the  battle  of  Gilboa, 
in  which  his  father  and  three  oldest  brothers  pe- 
rished ;  and  therefore,  according  to  the  law  of 
Oriental,  though  notof  European  succession, ascended 
the  throne,  as  the  oldest  of  the  royal  family,  rather 
than  Mephibosheth,  son  of  his  elder  brother  Jona- 
than, who  was  a  child  of  rive  years  old.  He  was 
immediately  taken  under  the  care  of  Abner,  his 
powerful  kinsman,  who  brought  him  to  the  ancient 
sanctuary  of  Mahanaim  on  the  east  of  the  Jordan, 
beyond  the  reach  of  the  victorious  Philistines 
(2  Sam.  ii.  8).  There  was  a  momentary  doubt 
even  in  those  remote  tribes  whether  they  should 
not  close  with  the  offer  of  David  to  be  their  king 
(2  Sam.  ii.  7,  iii.  17).  But  this  was  overruled  in 
favour  of  Ishbosheth  by  Abner  (2  Sam.  iii.  17),  who 
then  for  five  years  slowly  but  effectually  restored 
the  dominion  of  the  house  of  Saul  over  the  Trans- 
jordanic  territory,  the  plain  of  Esdraelon,  the  central 
mountains  of  Ephraim,  the  frontier  tribe  of  Benjamin, 
and  eventually  "  over  all  Israel"  (except  the  tribe 
of  Judah,  2  Sam.  iii.  9).  Ishbosheth  was  then  "  40 
years  old  when  he  began  to  reign  over  Israel,  and 
reigned  two  years  "  (2  Sam.  iii.  10).  This  form  of 
expression  is  used  only  for  the  accession  of  a  fully 
recognised  sovereign  (romp,  in  the  case  of  David, 
2  Sam.  ii.  4,  and  v.  4). 

During  these  two  years  he  reigned  at  Mahanaim, 
though  only  in  name.  The  wars  and  negotiations 
with  David  were  entirely  carried  on  by  Abner 
(2  Sam.  ii.  12,  iii.  6,  12).  At  length  Ishbosheth 
accused  Abner  (whether  rightly  or  wrongly  does 
not  appear)  of  an  attempt  on  his  father's  concu- 
bine, Rizpah ;  which,  according  to  Oriental  usage, 
amounted  to  treason  (2  Sam.  iii.  7  ;  comp.  1  K.  ii. 
13;  2  Sam.  xvi.  21,  xx.  3).  Abner  resented  this 
suspicion  in  a  burst  of  passion,  which  vented  itself 
in  a  solemn  vow  to  transfer  the  kingdom  from  the 
house  of  Saul  to  the  house  of  David.  Ishbosheth 
was  too  much  cowed  to  answer;  and  when, shortly 
afterwards,  through  Abner's  negotiation,  David 
demanded  the  restoration  of  his  former  wife,  Michal, 
he  at  once  tore  his  sister  from  her  reluctant  husband, 
and  committed  her  to  Miner's  charge  (2  Sam. 
iii.  14,  15). 

The  death  of  Abner  deprived  the  house  of  Saul 
of  their  last  remaining  support.  When  Ishbosheth 
heard  of  it,  "his  hands  were  feeble  and  all  the 
Israelites  were  troubled"  (2  Sam.  iv.  1). 

In  this  extremity  of  weakness  he  fell  a  victim. 
probably,  to  a  revenge  for  a  crime  of  his  father. 
The  guard  of  Ishbosheth.  as  of  Saul,  was  taken 
from  their  own  royal  tribe  of  Benjamin  (1  Chr. 
xii.  20 ).  But  amongsl  the  sons  of  Benjamin  were 
reckoned  the  descendants  of  the  old  I  lanaanitisb  in- 
habitants of  B th.   one  of  the  cities   in 

with  Gibeon   '2  Sam.   iv.   2.  .".).     Two  of  those 

Beerothites,  Baana  and  Rechab,  in  remembi *,  ii 

has  been  conjectured,  of  Saul's  slaughter  of  their 
kinsmen  the  (iii lites,  determined  to  take  ad- 
vantage of  the  helplessness  of  the  royal  house  to 
destroy  the  only  representative  that  was  [eft,  ex- 
cepting the  child  Mephibosheth  (2  Sam.  iv.  4). 
They  were  "chiefs  of  the  marauding  troops"  which 


ISHIJAH 


891 


used  from  time  to  time  to  attack  the  territory  of  Judah 
(comp.  2  Sam.  iv.  2,  iii.  22,  where  the  same  word 
TTtJI  is  used ;  Vulg.  principes  latronum).  [Ben- 
jamin, p.  189&  ;  Gittaim,  p.  703«.]  They  knew 
the  habits  of  the  king  and  court,  and  acted  ac- 
cordingly. In  the  stillpess  of  an  eastern  noon  they 
entered  the  palace,  as  if  to  carry  off  the  wheat 
which  was  piled  up  near  the  entrance.  The  female 
slave,  who,  as  usual  in  eastern  houses,  kept  the 
door,  and  was  herself  sifting  the  wheat,  had,  in 
the  heat  of  the  day,  fallen  asleep  at  her  task 
(2  Sam.  iv.  5,  6,  in  LXX.  and  Vulg.).  They  stole  in, 
and  passed  into  the  royal  bedchamber,  where  Ish- 
bosheth was  asleep  on  his  couch.  They  stabbed 
him  in  the  stomach,  cut  off  his  head,  made 
their  escape,  all  that  afternoon,  all  that  night, 
down  the  valley  of  the  Jordan  (Arabah,  A.  V. 
"  plain;"  2  Sam.  iv.  7),  and  presented  the  head  to 
David  as  a  welcome  present.  They  met  with  a 
stern  reception.  David  rebuked  them  for  the  cold- 
blooded murder  of  an  innocent  man,  and  ordered 
them  to  be  executed  ;  their  hands  and  feet  were 
cut  off,  and  their  bodies  suspended  over  the  tank  at 
Hebron.  The  head  of  Ishbosheth  was  carefully 
buried  in  the  sepulchre  of  his  great  kinsman  Abner, 
at  the  same  place  (2  Sam.  iv.  9-12)."     [A.  P.  S.] 

I'SHI  (W>  :  Jest).  1.  ("Io-e^A  ;  Alex. 
'leaet).  A  man  of  the  descendants  of  Judah,  son  of 
Appaim  (1  Chr.  ii.  31);  one  of  the  great  house  of 
Hezron,  and  therefore  a  near  connexion  of  the  family 
of  Jesse  (comp.  9-13).  The  only  son  here  attri- 
buted to  Ishi  is  Sheshan. 

2.  (2e«;  Alex.  'Es).  In  a  subsequent  genealogy 
of  Judah  we  find  another  Ishi,  with  a  son  Zoheth 
(1  Chr.  iv.  20).  There  does  not  appear  to  be  any 
connexion  between  the  two. 

3.  {'leai;  Alex,  'leaet).  Four  men  of  the  Bene- 
Ishi,  of  the  tribe  of  Simeon,  are  named  in  1  Chr. 
iv.  42  as  having  headed  an  expedition  of  500  of  their 
brethren,  who  took  Mount  Seir  from  the  Amalekites, 
and  made  it  their  own  abode. 

4.  CZei  ;  Alex,  'leaet).  One  of  the  heads  of  the 
tribe  of  Manasseh  on  the  east  of  Jordan  (1  Chr. 
v.  24). 

I'SHI  (*tJMN  :  o  awfip  fiov  :  Vir  mcus).  This 
word  has  no  connexion  whatever  with  the  foregoing. 
It  occurs  in  Hos.  ii.  16,  and  signifies  "  my  man," 
"  my  husband."  It  is  the  Israelite  term,  in  opposi- 
tion to  Baali,  the  Canaanite  term,  with  the  same 
meaning,  though  with  a  significance  of  its  own. 
See  ]i.  14l>o,  where  the  difference  between  the  two 
appellations  is  noticed  more  at  length. 

[SHI'AH  (njK-*,  i.  e.  Isshiyah:  'Uffla:  the 
fifth    of   the    five  sons   of  Izrahiah  ;    one  of  the 

heads  of  the  tribe  of  Issachar  in  the  time  of  David 
(  1  Chr.  vii.  3). 

The  name  is  identical  with  that  elsewhere  given 
as  Nni.i  aii.  IssiiiAii,  .Ii.m  \n. 

lSIII'JAH  (jMfa:  'leaia;  Alex.  'Uaala: 
Josue),  a  lay  Israelite  of  the  Bene-Harim,  who  had 
i  foreigr  wife,  and  was  compelled  to  relin- 
quish her  (  V./.w  \.  31 ).    Iii  Esdras  the  name  is  Affl  IS. 

This  name  appears  in  the  A.  V.  under  the  various 
forms  of  Dm  \n.  tesm  \n,  Jesj  \ii. 

'  In  Dryden's  Absalom  and  Ahithophel,  "  foolish 
Ishbosheth  "  is  ingeniously  taken  to  represent  Richard 
Cromwell. 

3   M  2 


892 


ESHMA 


ISH'MA  (X»B>;  :  'Uo-fuiv  ;  Alex.  'I«r/«£  ; 
Jesema),  a  name  in  the  genealogy  of  Judah  (1  Chr. 
iv.  3).  The  passage  is  very  obscure,  and  in  the  case 
of  many  of  the  names  it  is  difficult  to  know  whether 
they  are  of  persons  or  places.  Ishma  and  his  com- 
panions appear  to  be  closely  connected  with  Beth- 
lehem (see  ver.  4). 

ISH'MAEL  (^NJJ»t?>J  ;  'Io^A  ;  Ismael ; 
"whom  God  hears"),  the  son  of  Abraham  by 
Hagar,  his  concubine,  the  Egyptian ;  born  when 
Abraham  was  fourscore  and  six  years  old  (Gen. 
xvi.  15,  16).  Ishmael  was  the  first-born  of  his 
father:  in  ch.  xv.  we  read  that  he  was  then  child- 
less, and  there  is  no  apparent  interval  for  the  birth 
of  any  other  child ;  nor  does  the  teaching  of  the 
narrative,  besides  the  precise  enumeration  of  the 
sons  of  Abraham  as  the  father  of  the  faithful,  admit 
of  the  supposition.  The  saying  of  Sarah,  also, 
when  she  gave  him  Hagar,  supports  the  inference 
that  until  then  he  was  without  children.  When 
he  "  added  and  took  a  wife"  (A.  V.  "  Then  again 
Abraham  took  a  wife,"  xxv.  1),  Keturah,  is  uncer- 
tain, but  it  is  not  likely  to  have  been  until  after 
the  birth  of  Isaac,  and  perhaps  the  death  of  Sarah. 
The  conception  of  Ishmael  occasioned  the  flight  of 
Hagar  [Hagar]  ;  and  it  was  during  her  wander- 
ing in  the  wilderness  that  the  angel  of  the  Lord 
appeared  to  her,  commanding  her  to  return  to  her 
mistress,  and  giving  her  the  promise,  "  I  will  mul- 
tiply thy  seed  exceedingly,  that  it  shall  not  be 
numbered  for  multitude;''  and,  "Behold,  thou 
[art]  with  child,  and  shalt  bear  a  son,  and  shalt 
call  his  name  Ishmael,  because  the  Lord  hath  heard 
thy  affliction.  And  he  will  be  a  wild  man;  his 
hand  [will  be]  against  every  man,  and  every  man's 
hand  against  him  ;  and  he  shall  dwell  in  the  pre- 
sence of  all  his  brethren"  (xvi.  10-12). 

Ishmael  was  born  in  Abraham's  house,  when  he 
dwelt  in  the  plain  of  Mamre  ;  and  on  the  institu- 
tion of  the  covenant  of  circumcision,  was  circumcised, 
he  being  then  thirteen  years  old  (xvii.  25).  With 
the  institution  of  the  covenant,  God  renewed  his 
promise  respecting  Ishmael.  In  answer  to  Abra- 
ham's entreaty,  when  he  cried,  "  0  that  Ishmael 
might  live  before  Thee  !"  God  assured  him  of  the 
birth  of  Isaac,  and  said,  "  As  for  Ishmael,  I  have 
heard  thee:  behold,  I  have  blessed  him,  and  will 
make  him  fruitful,  and  will  multiply  him  exceed- 
ingly ;  twelve  princes*  shall  he  beget,  and  I  will 
make  him  a  great  nation"  (xvii.  18,  20).  Before 
this  time,  Abraham  seems  to  have  regarded  his 
first-born  child  as  the  heir  of  the  promise,  his 
belief  in  which  was  counted  unto  him  for  righteous- 
ness (xv.  6)  ;  and  although  that  faith  shone  yet 
more  brightly  after  his  passing  weakness  when 
Isaac  was  first  promised,  his  love  for  Ishmael  is 
recorded  in  the  narrative  of  Sarah's  expulsion  of 
the  latter :  "  And  the  thing  was  very  grievous  in 
Abraham's  sight  because  of  his  son"  (xxi.  11). 

Ishmael  does  not  again  appear  in  the  narrative 
until  the  weaning  of  Isaac.  The  latter  was  born 
when  Abraham  was  a  hundred  years  old  (xxi.  5), 
and  as  the  weaning,  according  to  Eastern  usage,  pro- 


a  The  Hel).  rendered  "  prince "  in  this  case,  is 
iVC'2,  which  signifies  both  a  "  prince "  and  the 
"  leader,"  or  "  captain  "  of  a  tribe,  or  even  of  a  family 
(Gesen.).  It  here  seems  to  mean  the  leader  of  a  tribe, 
and  Ishmael's  twelve  sons  are  enumerated  in  Gen. 
xxv.  10  "  according  to  their  nations,"  more  correctly 
"  peoples,"   nifttf. 


ISHMAEL 

bably  took  place  when  the  child  was  between  two  and 
three  years  old,  Ishmael  himself  must  have  been  then 
between  fifteen  and  sixteen  years  old.  The  age  of  the 
latter  at  the  period  of  his  circumcision,  and  at  that 
of  his  expulsion  (which  we  have  now  reached),  has 
given  occasion  for  some  literary  speculation.  A  care- 
ful consideration  of  the  passages  referring  to  it  fails, 
however,  to  show  any  discrepancy  between  them. 
In  Gen.  xvii.  25,  it  is  stated  that  he  was  thirteen 
years  old  when  he  was  circumcised  ;  and  in  xxi. 
14  (probably  two  or  three  years  later)  "  Abraham 
.  .  .  took  bread,  and  a  bottle  of  water,  and  gave 
[it]  unto  Hagar,  putting  [it]  on  her  shoulder,  and 
the  child,  and  sent  her  away."  Here  it  is  at  least 
unnecessary  to  assume  that  the  child  was  put  on 
her  shoulder,  the -construction  of  the  Hebrew  (mis- 
translated by  the  LXX.,  with  whom  seems  to  rest 
the  origin  of  the  question)  not  requiring  it ;  and  the 
sense  of  the  passage  renders  it  highly  improbable: 
Hagar  certainly  carried  the  bottle  on  her  shoulder, 
and  perhaps  the  bread  :  she  could  hardly  have  also 
thus  carried  a  child.  Again,  these  passages  are  quite 
reconcileable  with  ver.  20  of  the  last  quoted  chap., 

where  Ishmael  is  termed  "1^311,  A.  V.  "lad"  (comp., 

for  use  of  this  word,  Gen.  xxxiv.  19,  xxxvii.  2, 
xli.  12). 

At  the  "  great  feast"  made  in  celebration  of  the 
weaning,  "  Sarah  saw  the  son  of  Hagar  the  Egyp- 
tian, which  she  had  born  unto  Abraham,  mocking," 
and  urged  Abraham  to  cast  out  him  and  his  mother. 
The  patriarch,  comforted  by  God's  renewed  promise 
that  of  Ishmael  He  would  make  a  nation,  sent  them 
both  away,  and  they  departed  and  wandered  in  the 
wilderness  of  Beersheba.  Here  the  water  being 
spent  in  the  bottle,  Hagar  cast  her  son  under  one 
of  the  desert  shrubs,  and  went  away  a  little  dis- 
tance, "  for  she  said,  Let  me  not  see  the  death  of 
the  child,"  and  wept.  "  And  God  heard  the  voice 
of  the  lad,  and  the  angel  of  the  Lord  called  to 
Hagar  out  of  heaven,"  renewed  the  promise  already 
thrice  given,  "  I  will  make  him  a  great  nation," 
and  "  opened  her  eyes  and  she  saw  a  well  of  water." 
Thus  miraculously  saved  from  perishing  by  thirst, 
"  God  was  with  the  lad  ;  and  he  grew,  and  dwelt 
in  the  wilderness ;  and  became  an  archer."  It  is 
doubtful  whether  the  wanderers  halted  by  the 
well,  or  at  once  continued  their  way  to  the  "  wil- 
derness of  Paran,"  where,  we  are  told  in  the  next 
verse  to  that  just  quoted,  he  dwelt,  and  where  "  his 
mother  took  him  a  wife  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt  " 
(Gen.  xxi.  9-21).  This  wife  of  Ishmael  is  not  else- 
where mentioned  ;  she  was,  we  must  infer,  an 
Egyptian ;  and  this  second  infusion  of  Hamitic 
blood  into  the  progenitors  of  the  Arab  nation, 
Ishmael's  sons,  is  a  fact  that  has  been  generally 
overlooked.  No  record  is  made  of  any  other  wife 
of  Ishmael,  and  failing  such  record,  the  Egyptian 
was  the  mother  of  his  twelve  sons,  and  daughter. 
This  daughter,  however,  is  called  the  "sister  of 
Nebajoth  "  (Gen.  xxviii.  9),  and  this  limitation  of 
the  parentage  of  the  brother  and  sister  certainly 
seems  to  point  to  a  different  mother  for  Ishmael  s 
other  sons.b 


b  According  to  Rabbinical  tradition,  Ishmael  put 
away  his  wife  and  took  a  second  ;  and  the  Arabs,  pro- 
bably borrowing  from  the  above,  assert  that  lie  t»  ice 
married  ;  the  first  wife  being  an  Amalekitc,  by  whom 
he  had  no  issue  ;  and  the  second,  a  Joktanite,  of  the 
tribe  of  Jurhum  (Mir-fd  ez-Zeman,  MS.,  ([doting  a 
tradition  of  Mohammad  Ibn-Is-hak). 


ISHMAEL 

Of  the  later  life  of  lshmael  we-  know  little.  He 
was  present  with  Isaac  at  the  burial  of  Abraham  ; 
and  Esau  contracted  an  alliance  with  him  when  he 
"took  unto  the  wives  which  he  had  Mahalath  [or 
Bashemath  or  Basmath,  Gen.  xxxxi.  3]  the 
daughter  of  lshmael  Abraham's  son,  the  sister  of 
Nebajoth,  to  be  his  wife  ;"  and  this  did  Esau  be- 
cause the  daughters  of  Canaan  pleased  not  Isaac  and 
Rebekah,  and  Jacob  in  obedience  to  their  wishes  had 
gone  to  Laban  to  obtain  of  his  daughters  a  wife 
(  xxviii.  6-9).  The  death  of  lshmael  is  recorded  in  a 
previous  chapter,  after  the  enumeration  of  his  sons, 
as  having  taken  place  at  the  age  of  a  hundred  and 
thirty-seven  years ;  and,  it  is  added,  "  he  died  in 
the  presence  of  all  his  brethren"  (xxv.  17,  18). 
The  alliance  with  Esau  occurred  before  this  event 
(although  it  is  mentioned  in  a  previous  passage),  for 
he  "  went  .  .  .  unto  lshmael ;"  but  it  cannot  have 
been  long  before,  if  the  chronological  data  be  cor- 
rectly preserved.0 

It  remains  for  us  to  consider,  1,  the  place  of 
lshmael' s  dwelling;  and,  2,  the  names  of  his  chil- 
dren, with  their  settlements,  and  the  nation  sprung 
from  them. 

1.  From  the  narrative  of  his  expulsion,  we  learn 
that  lshmael  first  went  into  the  wilderness  of  Beer- 
sheba,  and  thence,  but  at  what  interval  of  time  is 
uncertain,  removed  to  that  of  Paran.  His  con- 
tinuance in  these  or  the  neighbouring  places  seems 
to  be  proved  by  his  having  been  present  at  the 
burial  of  Abraham;  for  it  must  be  remembered 
that  in  the  East,  sepulture  follows  death  after  a 
few  hours'  space  ;  and  by  Esau's  marrying  his 
daughter  at  a  time  when  he  (Esau)  dwelt  at 
Beersheba:  the  tenor  of  the  narrative  of  both  these 
events  favouring  the  inference  that  lshmael  did  not 
settle  tar  from  the  neighbourhood  of  Abraham  and 
Isaac.  There  are,  however,  other  passages  which 
must  be  taken  into  account.  It  is  prophesied  of 
him,  that  "  he  shall  dwell  in  the  presence  of  all  his 
brethren,"  and  thus  too  he  ''died  in  the  presence  of 
all  his  brethren"  (xxv.  18;.  The  meaning  of  these 
jes  is  confessedly  obscure  ;  but  it  seems  only 
to  signify  that  he  dwelt  near  them.  He  was  the 
first  Abrahamic  settler  in  the  east  country.  In 
ch.  xxv.  ti  it  is  said,  "  But  unto  the  sons  of  the 
concubines,  which  Abraham  had,  Abraham  gave 
gifts,  and  sent  them  away  from  Isaac  his  son,  while 
he  yet  lived,  eastward,  unto  the  east  country." 
The  "east  country"  perhaps  was  restricted  in  early 
times  to  tie-  wildernesses  of  Beersheba  and  Paran, 
and  it  afterwards  seems  t<>  have  included  those  dis- 
tricts (though  neither  supposition  necessarily  follows 
from  tin'  above  passage);  or,  lshmael  removed  to 
that  east  country,  Dorthwards,  without  being  dis- 
tant from  his   father  and    his   brethren  ;    each   ease 

being  agreeable  with  <  !en,  xxv.  •;.  The  appellation 
of  the '*  east  country  "  became  afterwards  applied 
to  the  whole  desert  extending  from  the  frontier  of 
Palesti ast  to  the  Euphrates, and  south  probably 

to  the  borders  of    Egypf  and  the  Arabian  peninsula. 

This  question  is  discussed  in  art.  I'.i.m.-Ki  m  u; 
and  it  is  interwoven,  though  obscurely,  with  the 
next  subject,  that  of  the  names  and  settlements  of 

the   sons   of   lshmael.      See    also    Kill  RAH,    &C.  ; 
for  the  "  brethren"  of  lshmael,  in  whose  | 
lie  dwelt  and  died,  included  the  sons  of  Keturah. 


ISHMAEL 


893 


2.  The  sons  of  lshmael  were,  Nebajoth  (expressly 
stated  to  be  his  first-born),  Kedar,  Adbeel,  Mibsam, 
Mishma,  Dumah,  Massa,  Hadar,  Tema,  Jetur, 
Naphish,  Kedemah  (lien.  xxv.  13-15);  and  he  had 
a  daughter  named  Mahalath  (xxviii.  9),  elsewhere 
written  Bashemath  (or  Basmath,  Gen.  XXX vi.  3), 
the  sister  of  Nebajoth,  before  mentioned.  The  sons 
are  enumerated  with  the  particular  statement  that 
"  these  are  their  names,  by  their  towns,  and  by  their 
castles;  twelve  princes  according  to  their  nations" 
or  "  peoples"  (xxv.  16).  In  seeking  to  identify  Ish- 
mael's  sous,  this  passage  requires  close  attention  : 
it  bears  the  interpretation  of  their  being  fathers 
of  tribes,  having  towns  and  castles  called  after 
them  ;  and  identifications  of  the  latter  become  the)  e- 
fore  more  than  usually  satisfactory.  "  They  dwelt 
from  Havilah  unto  Shur,  that  is  before  Egypt,  as 
thou  goest  unto  Assyria"  (xxv.  18),  and  it  is  cei  tain, 
in  accordance  with  this  statement  of  their  limits 
[see  Havilah,  Shur],  that  they  stretched  in  very 
early  times  across  the  desert  to  the  Persian  Gulf, 
peopled  the  noith  and  west  of  the  Arabian  penin- 
sula, and  eventually  formed  the  chief  element  of  the 
Arab  nation.  Their  language,  which  is  generally 
acknowledged  to  have  been  the  Arabic  commonly  so 
called,  has  been  adopted  with  insignificant  exceptions 
throughout  Arabia.  It  has  been  said  that  the  Bible 
requires  the  whole  of  that  nation  to  be  sprung  from 
lshmael,  and  the  fact  of  a  large  admixture  of  Jokta- 
nite  aud  even  Cushite  peoples  iu  the  south  and  south- 
east has  been  regarded  as  a  suggestion  of  scepticism. 
Yet  not  only  does  the  Bible  contain  no  warrant 
for  the  assumption  that  all  Arabs  are  Ishmaelites  ; 
but  the  characteristics  of  the  Ishmaelites,  strongly 
marked  in  all  the  more  northern  tribes  of  Arabia, 
and  exactly  fulfilling  the  prophecy  "  he  will  be  a 
wild  man  ;  his  hand  [will  be]  against  every  man, 
and  every  man's  hand  against  him,"  become  weaker 
in  the  south,  and  can  scarcely  be  predicated  of  all 
the  peoples  of  Joktanite  and  other  descent.  The 
true  Ishmaelites,  however,  and  even  tribes  of  very 
mixed  race,  are  thoroughly  "  wild  men,"  living  by 
warlike  forays  and  plunder ;  dreaded  by  their 
neighbours;  dwelling  in  tents,  with  hardly  any 
household  chattels,  but  rich  in  flocks  and  herds,  mi- 
gratory,and  recognising  no  law  but  the  authority  of 
the  chiefs  of  their  tribes.  Even  the  religion  of 
Mohammad  is  held  in  light  esteem  by  many  of  the 
more  remote  tribes,  among  whom  the  ancient 
usages  of  their  people  obtain  in  almost  their  old 
simplicity,  besides  idolatrous  practices  altogether 
repugnant  to  Mohaniniadanism  as  they  are  to  the 
faith  of  the  patriarchs;  practices  which  may  be 
ascribed  to  the  influence  of  the  Canaanites,  of 
Moab,  Amnion,  mid  Edom,  with  whom,  by  inter- 
marriages, commerce,  and  war,  the  tribes  of  lshmael 
must  have  had  long  and  intimate  relations. 

The   term    Isiimaki.iti:    (vNJMX^)   occurs   on 

three  occasions,  Gen.  xxxvii.  25,  27,  28,  \\\i\.  1  ; 
Judg.  \iii.  I'd  ;  l's.  lxxxiii.  6.  from  the  context 
of  the  iirst  two  instances,  it  seems  to  have  been  a 
general  name  for  the  Abrahamic  peoples  of  the 
east  country,  the  Bene-Eedem:  but  the  second 
admits  also  of  a  closer  meaning.  In  the  third 
instance  the  name  is  applied  in  its  strict  sense  to 
tli.'  [shmaelites.    It  is  also  applied  to  Jether,  the 


c  Abraham  at  the  birth  of  lshmael  was  86  years  was  60;  and  Esau  was  more  than  40  when  lie  mar- 
old,  and  at.  Isaac's  about  100.     Isaac  took  Rebekah  lied  [shmael's  daughter.   Therefore  lshmael  was  then 

to    wife    when    he  was    1(1    years    old,     when    lshmael  at    least     III       14  +  20  +  40        Ml    ,    leaving    23    years 

would  be  about  54.      Esau  was  horn  when  his  father  before  his  death  t"i   Esau's  coming  to  him. 


894 


ISHMAEL 


father  of  Amasa  by  David's  sister  Abigail  (1  Chr. 
ii.  17.)     [Ithra  ;  Jether.] 

The   notions    of  the   Arabs  respecting   Ishmael 
-  o 
(  V^L***})   are   partly    derived   from  the  Bible, 

" '-  %■ 
partly  from  the  Jewish  Rabbins,  and  partly  from 
native  traditions.  The  origin  of  many  of  these 
traditions  is  obscure,  but  a  great  number  may 
be  ascribed  to  the  fact  of  Mohammad's  having 
for  political  reasons  claimed  Ishmael  for  his  an- 
cestor, and  striven  to  make  out  an  impossible 
pedigree  ;  while  both  he  and  his  followers  have, 
as  a  consequence  of  accepting  this  assumed  descent, 
sought  to  exalt  that  ancestor.  Another  reason 
may  be  safely  found  in  Ishmael's  acknowledged 
headship  of  the  naturalised  Arabs,  and  this  cause 
existed  from  the  very  period  of  his  settlement. 
[Arabia.]  Yet  the  rivalry  of  the  Joktanite  king- 
dom of  southern  Arabia,  and  its  intercourse  with 
classical  and  mediaeval  Europe,  the  waudering  and 
unsettled  habits  of  the  Ishmaelites,  their  having  no 
literature,  and  as  far  as  we  know  only  a  meagre 
oral  tradition,  all  contributed,  till  the  importance 
it  acquired  with  the  promulgation  of  El-Islam, 
to  render  our  knowledge  of  the  Ishmael  itic  por- 
tion of  the  people  of  Arabia,  before  Mohammad, 
lamentably  defective.  That  they  maintained,  and 
still  maintain,  a  patriarchal  and  primitive  form 
of  life  is  known  to  us.  Their  religion,  at  least 
in  the  period  immediately  preceding  Mohammad, 
was  in  central  Arabia  chiefly  tire  grossest  fetish- 
ism, probably  learnt  from  aboriginal  inhabitants  of 
the  laud  ;  southwards  it  diverged  to  the  cosmic 
worship  of  the  Joktanite  Himyerites  (though  these 
were  far  from  being  exempt  from  fetishism),  and 
northwards  (so  at  least  in  ancient  times)  to  an 
approach  to  that  true  faith  which  Ishmael  carried 
with  him,  and  his  descendants  thus  gradually  lost. 
This  last  point  is  curiously  illustrated  by  the  num- 
bers who,  in  Arabia,  became  either  Jews  (Caraites) 
or  Christians  (though  of  a  very  corrupt  form  of 
Christianity),  and  by  the  movement  in  search  of 
the  faith  of  the  patriarchs  which  had  been  put 
forward,  not  long  before  the  birth  of  Mohammad, 
by  men  not  satisfied  with  Judaism  or  the  corrupt 
form  of  Christianity  with  which  alone  they  were 
acquainted.  This  movement  first  aroused  Mo- 
hammad, and  was  afterwards  the  main  cause  of  his 
success. 

The  Arabs  believe  that  Ishmael  was  the  first- 
born of  Abraham,  and  the  majority  of  their  doctors 
(but  the  point  is  in  dispute)  assert  that  this  son, 
and  not  Isaac,  was  offered  by  Abraham  in  sacrifice.*1 
The  scene  of  this  sacrifice  is  Mount  'Arafat,  near 
Mekkeh,  the  last  holy  place  visited  by  pilgrims, 
it  being  necessary  to  the  completion  of  pilgrimage 
to  be  present  at  a  sermon  delivered  there  on  the 
9th  of  the  Mohammadan  month  Zu-1-Hejjeh,  in 
commemoration  of  the  offering,  and  to  sacrifice  a 
victim  on  the  following  evening  after  sunset,  in 
the  valley  of  Mine.  The  sacrifice  last  mentioned 
is  observed  throughout  the  Muslim  world,  and 
the  day  on  which  it  is  made  is  called  "  The  Great 
Festival"  (Mr.  Lane's  Mod.  Egypt,  ch.  iii.).  Ish- 
mael, say  the  Arabs,  dwelt  with  his  mother  at  Mek- 


d  "With  this,  and  some  other  exceptions,  the  Mus- 
lims have  adopted  the  chief  facts  of  the  history  of 
Ishmael  recorded  in  the  Bible. 

e  ilSl'pOn  J?"IT-     Jerome  (Qk.  Sebr.  on  2'Chron. 

xwiii.  7)  interprets  this  expression  as  meaning  "  of 


ISHMAEL 

keh,  and  both  are  buried  in  the  place  called  the 
"  Hejr,"  on  the  north-west  (termed  by  the  Arabs  the 
north)  side  of  the  Kaabeh,  and  inclosed  by  a  curved 
wall  called  the  "  Hateem."  Ishmael  was  visited  at 
Mekkeh  by  Abraham,  and  they  together  rebuilt  the 
temple,  whicli  had  been  destroyed  by  a  flood.  At 
Mekkeh,  Ishmael  married  a  daughter  of  Mudad  or 
El-Mudad,  chief  of  the  Joktanite  tribe  Jurhum 
[Almodad;  Arabia],  and  had  thirteen  children 
(Mir-dt-ez-Zcinda  MS.),  thus  agreeing  with  the 
Biblical  number,  including  the  daughter. 

Mohammad's  descent  from  Ishmael  is  totally 
lost,  for  an  unknown  number  of  generations,  to 
'Adnan,  of  the  twenty-first  generation  before  the 
prophet :  from  him  downwards  the  latter's  descent 
is,  if  we  may  believe  the  genealogists,  fairly  proved. 
But  we  have  evidence  far  more  trustworthy  than 
that  of  the  genealogists ;  for  while  most  of  the 
natives  of  Arabia  are  unable  to  trace  up  their  pedi- 
grees, it  is  scarcely  possible  to  find  one  who  is 
ignorant  of  his  race,  seeing  that  his  very  life  often 
depends  upon  it.  The  law  of  blood-revenge  necessi- 
tates his  knowing  the  names  of  his  ancestors  for 
four  generations,  but  no  more  ;  and  this  law  extend- 
ing from  time  immemorial  has  made  any  confusion 
of  race  almost  impossible.  This  law,  it  should  be 
remembered,  is  not  a  law  of  Mohammad,  but  an 
old  pagan  law  that  he  endeavoured  to  suppress,  but 
could  not.  In  casting  doubt  on  the  prophet's  pedi- 
gree, we  must  add  that  this  cannot  affect  the  proofs 
of  the  chief  element  of  the  Arab  nation  being  Ish- 
maelite  (and  so  too  the  tribe  of  Kureysh  of  whom 
was  Mohammad).  Although  partly  mixed  with  Jok- 
tanites,  they  are  more  mixed  with  Keturahites,  &c. ; 
the  characteristics  of  the  Joktanites,  as  before  re- 
marked, are  widely  different  from  those  of  the  Ish- 
maelites; and  whatever  theories  may  be  adduced 
to  the  contrary,  we  believe  that  the  Arabs,  from 
physical  characteristics,  language,  the  concurrence 
of  native  traditions  {before  Mohammadanism  made 
them  untrustworthy),  and  the  testimony  of  the 
Bible,  are  mainly  and  essentiallv  Ishmaelite.  [Is- 
BIAEL,   1.]  [E.  S.  P.] 

2.  One  of  the  sons  of  Azel,  a  descendant  of  Saul 
through  Merib-baal,  or  Mephibosheth  (1  Chr.  viii. 
38,  ix.  44).     See  the  genealogy,  under  Saul. 

3.  A  man  of  Judah,  whose  son  or  descendant 
Zebadiaii  was  ruler  (TJ3)  of  the  house  of  Judah 
in  the  time  of  Jehoshaphat  (2  Chr.  xix.  11). 

4.  Another  man  of  Judah,  son  of  Jehohanan ; 
one  of  the  "  captains  (,-)C)  of  hundreds  "  who  as- 
sisted Jehoiada  in  restoring  Joash  to  the  throne 
(2  Chr.  xxiii.  1). 

5.  A  priest,  of  the  Bene-Pashur,  who  was  forced 
by  Ezra  to  relinquish  his  foreign  wife  (Ezr.  x.  22). 
[Ismael,  2.] 

6.  The  son  of  Nethauiah ;  a  perfect  marvel  of 
craft  and  villainy,  whose  treachery  forms  one  of  the 
chief  episodes  of  the  history  of  the  period  imme- 
diately succeeding  the  first  fall  of  Jerusalem.  His 
exploits  are  related  in  Jer.  xl.  7-xli.  15,  with  a  short 
summary  in  2  K.  xxv.  23-25,  and  they  read  almost 
like  a  page  from  the  annals  of  the  late  Indian  mutiny. 

His  full  description  is  "Ishmael,  the  son  of 
Nethaniah,  the  son  of  Elishama,  of  the  seed  royal"  e 

the  seed  of  Moleeh."  He  gives  the  same  meaning  to 
the  words  "  the  King's  son  "  applied  to  Maaaeiah  in 
the  above  passage.  The  question  is  an  interesting 
one,  and  has  been  recently  revived  by  Geiger  |  I'r- 
schrift,  &c.  p.  307),  who  extends  it  to  other  passages 


ISHMAEL 

of  Judali  (Jer.  xli.  1  ;  2  K.  xxv.  25).  Whether 
by  this  is  intended  that  he  was  actually  a  sou  of 
Zedekiah,  or  one  of  the  later  kings,  or,  inure  gene- 
rally, that  he  had  royal  blood  in  his  veins — perhaps 
adescendant  of  Elishama,  the  son  of  David  (2  Sam. 
v.  16) — we  cannot  tell.  During  the  siege  of  the 
city  he  had,  like  many  others  of  his  countrymen 
(Jer.  xl.  11),  fled  across  the  Jordan,  where  he  found 
a  refuge  at  the  court  of  Baalis,  the  then  king  of  the 
Bene-Ammon  (Jos.  Ant.  x.  9,  §2).  Ammonite 
women  were  sometimes  found  in  the  harems  of  the 
kings  of  Jerusalem  (1  K.  xi.  1),  and  Ishmael  may 
have  been  thus  related  to  the  Ammonite  court  on 
his  mother's  side.  At  any  rate  he  was  instigated 
by  Baalis  to  the  designs  which  he  accomplished 
but  too  successfully  (Jer.  xl.  14;  Ant.  x.  9,  §3). 
Several  bodies  of  Jews  appear  to  have  been  lying 
under  arms  in  the  plains  on  the  S.E.  of  the  Jordan,1 
during  the  last  days  of  Jerusalem,  watching  the 
progress  of  affairs  in  Western  Palestine,  commanded 
by  "  princes  "e  (^W),  the  chief  of  whom  were 
Ishmael,  and  two  brothers,  Johanan  and  Jonathan, 
sons  of  Kareah.  Immediately  after  the  departure 
of  the  Chaldean  army  these  men  moved  acioss  the 
Jordan  to  pay  their  respects  to  Gedaliah,  whom 
the  king  of  Babylon  had  left  as  superintendent 
(TpS)  of  the  province.  Gedaliah  had  taken  up  his 
residence  at  MlZPAH,  a  few  miles  north  of  Jeru- 
salem, on  the  main  road,  where  Jeremiah  the  pro- 
phet resided  with  him  (xl.  6).  The  house  would 
appear  to  have  been  isolated  from  the  rest  of  the 
town.  We  can  discern  a  high  inclosed  court-yard 
and  a  deep  well  within  its  precincts.  The  well 
was  certainly  (Jer.  xli.  9  ;  comp.  1  K.  xv.  22),  and 
the  whole  residence  was  probably,  a  relic  of  the 
military  works  of  Asa  king  of  Judah. 

Ishmael  made  no  secret  of  his  intention  to  kill 
the  superintendent,  and  usurp  his  position.  Of 
this  Gedaliah  was  warned  in  express  terms 
by  Johanan  and  his  companions;  and  Johanan, 
in  a  secret  interview,  foreseeing  how  irreparable 
a  misfortune  Gedaliah' s  death  would  be  at  this 
juncture  (xl.  15).  offered  to  remove  the  danger  by 
killing  Ishmael'.  This,  however,  Gedaliah,  a  man 
evidently  of  a  high  and  unsuspecting  nature,  would 
not  hear  of  (xl.  16,  and  see  the  amplification  in  Jos. 
Ant.  x.  9,  §3).  They  all  accordingly  took  leave. 
Thirty  days  after  [Ant.  x.  9,  §4),  in  the  seventh 
mouth  (xli.  1),  on  the  third  day  of  the  month — 
so  says  the  tradition — Ishmael  again  appeared  at 
Mizpah,  this  time  accompanied  by  ten  men,  who 
were,  according  to  the  Hebrew  text,    "  princes  of 

the  king"  ("^EH  \JTl),  though  this  is  omitted 
by  the  I.XX.  and  by  Josephus.  Gedaliah  enter- 
tained them  at  a  feast  (xli.  1).  According  to 
the  statement  of  Josephus  this   was  a   very  lavish 

and  persons.  [Molech.]  Jerome  (as  above)  further 
says  — perhaps  on  the  strength  of  a  tradition — that 
Ishmael  was  the  son  of  an  Egyptian  slave,  (iera  :  as 
a  reason  why  the  "  seed  royal "  should  hear  the 
meaning  he  gives  it.  This  the  w  liter  has  not  hitherto 
succeeded  in  elucidating. 

'  So  perhaps,  taking  it  with  the  express  statement 
of  xl.  11,  we  may  interpret  the  words  "the  forces 
which  were  in  the  field"  (Jer.  xl.  7,  13),  where  the 
term  rendered  "the  field"  (mL!'3)  is  one  used  to 
denote  the  pasture  grounds  of  MoaD  the  modern 
lli-llai-— oftcner  than  any  other  district.  Bee  Gen. 
xxxvi.  35  ;  Num.  xxi.  20  ;  Ruth  i.  1,  and  passim  ; 
1  Chr.  viii.  8;  and  Stanley's  .s.  \  /'.  App.  §15.     The 


ISHMAEL 


895 


entertainment,  and  Gedaliah  became  much  intoxi- 
cated. It  must  have  been  a  private  one,  for 
before  its  close  Ishmael  and  his  followers  had 
murdered  Gedaliah  and  all  his  attendants  with 
such  secresy  that  no  alarm  was  given  outside  the 
room.  The  same  night  he  killed  all  Gedaliah' s 
establishment,  including  some  Chaldean  soldiers 
who  were  there.  Jeremiah  appears  fortunately  to 
have  been  absent,  and,  incredible  as  it  seems,  so 
well  had  Ishmael  taken  his  precautions  that  for  two 
days  the  massacre  remained  perfectly  unknown  to 
the  people  of  the  town.  On  the  second  day  Ishmael 
perceived  from  his  elevated  position  a  large  party 
coming  southward  along  the  main  road  from 
Shechem  and  Samaria.  He  went  out  to  meet  them. 
They  proved  to  be  eighty  devotees,  who  with  rent 
clothes,  and  with  shaven  beards,  mutilated  bodies, 
and  other  marks  of  heathen  devotion,  and  weeping  h 
as  they  went,  were  bringing  incense  and  offerings  to 
the  ruins  of  the  Temple.  At  his  invitation  they 
turned  aside  to  the  residence  of  the  superintendent. 
And  here  Ishmael  put  into  practice  the  same 
stratagem,  which  on  a  larger  scale  was  employed  by 
Mehemet  Ali  in  the  massacre  of  the  Mamelukes 
at  Cairo  in  1806.  As  the  unsuspecting  pilgrims 
passed  into  the  court-yard '  he  closed  the  entrances 
behind  them,  and  there  he  and  his  band  butchered 
the  whole  number :  ten  only  escaped  by  the  offer 
of  heavy  ransom  for  their  lives.  The  seventy 
corpses  were  then  thrown  into  the  well  which,  as 
at  Cawnpore,  was  within  the  precincts  of  the 
house,  and  which  was  completely  filled  with  the 
bodies.  It  was  the  same  thing  that  had  been  done 
by  Jehu— a  man  in  some  respects  a  prototype  of 
Ishmael,  with  the  bodies  of  the  forty-two  relatives 
ofAhaziah  (2K.  x.  14).  This  done  he  descended 
to  the  town,  surprised  and  carried  off'  the  daughters 
of  king  Zedekiah,  who  had  been  sent  there  by 
Nebuchadnezzar  for  safety,  with  their  eunuchs  and 
their  Chaldean  guard  (xli.  In,  16),  and  all  the 
people  of  the  town,  and  made  off' with  his  prisoners 
to  the  country  of  the  Ammonites.  Which  road  he 
took  is  not  quite  clear;  the  Hebrew  text  and  LXX. 
say  by  Gibeon,  that  is  north  ;  but  Josephus,  by 
Hebron,  round  the  southern  end  of  the  Dead  Sea. 
The  news  of  the  massacre  had  by  this  time  got 
abroad,  and  Ishmael  was  quickly  pursued  by  Jo- 
hanan and  his  companions.  Whether  north  or 
south,  they  soon  tracked  him  and  his  unwieldy 
booty,  and  found  them  reposing  by  some  copious 
wateis  (D^l  D'O).  He  v.:is  attacked,  two  of  his 
bravoes  slain,  the  whole  of  the  prey  recovered,  and 
Ishmael  himself,  with  the  remaining  eight  of  his 
I pie,  escaped  to  the  Ammonites,  and  thence- 
forward passes  into  the  obscurity  from  which  it 
would  have  been  well  if  In1  had  never  emerged. 
Johanan 's  foreboding  was  fulfilled.    The  result  of 


persistent  use  of  the  word  in  the  semi-Moahite  book 
of  Uuth  is  alone  enough  to  fix  its  meaning. 

*  It  is  a  pity  that  some  different  word  is  not  em- 
ployed to  render  this  Hebrew  term  from  that  used  in 
xli.  1   to  translate  one  totally  distinct. 

''  This  is  the  I. NX.  version  of  tlie  matter — airot 
ejrop«0oi'TO  Kal  otAaior.  The  statement  of  the  llehrew 
Text  and  A.  V.  that   Ishmael  wept  is  unintelligible. 

1  The  Hebrew  has  "Vyn — "the  city"  (A.  V.  vcr. 
7).  This  has  been  read  by  Josephus  "YYn — "court- 
yard." The  alteration  carries  it-  genuineness  in  its 
face.  The  same  change  has  been  made  by  the  Ma- 
sorets    Sj  ri    in  2  K.  xx.  4. 


896 


ISHMAIAH 


this  tragedy  was  an  immediate  panic.  The  small 
remnants  of  the  Jewish  commonwealth — the  cap- 
tains of  the  forces,  the  king's  daughters,  the  two 
prophets  Jeremiah  and  Baruch,  and  all  the  men, 
women,  and  children — at  once  took  flight  into  Egypt 
(Jer.  xii.  17  ;  xliii.  5-7)  ;  and  all  hopes  of  a  settle- 
ment were  for  the  time  at  an  end.  The  remem- 
brance of  the  calamity  was  perpetuated  by  a  fast — 
the  fast  of  the  seventh  month  (Zech.  vii.  5;  viii. 
19),  which  is  to  this  day  strictly  kept  by  the  Jews 
on  the  third  of  Tishri.  (See  Reland,  Antiq.  iv.  10  ; 
Kiniehi  on  Zech.  vii.  5.)  The  part  taken  by  Baalis 
in  this  transaction  apparently  brought  upon  his 
nation  the  denunciations  both  of  Jeremiah  (xlix. 
l-(i),  and  the  more  distant  Ezekiel  (xxv.  1-7),  but 
we  have  no  record  how  these  predictions  were  ac- 
complished, [c.j 

ISHMA'IAH  (•irVjnSB'*,  i.e.  Ishmayahu : 
Sctjucuas  :  Jesmaias),  son  of  Obadiah  :  the  ruler  of 
the  tribe  of  Zebulun  in  the  time  of  king  David 
(1  Chr.  xxvii.  19). 

ISH'MEELITE  and  ISH'MEELITES 
C^NyOtp)  and  D^KJJDB"  respectively),  the  form 
— in  agreement  with  the  vowels  of  the  Hebrew — in 
which  the  descendants  of  Ishmael  are  given  in  a 
few  places  in  the  A.  V.  ;  the  former  in  1  Chr.  ii. 
17  ;  the  latter  in  Gen.  xxxvii.  25,  27,  28,  xxxix.  1. 

ISH'MEKAI  (not?"  :  'Iffa^api;  Alex.  'Iecra- 
fxapi :  Jcsaiaari),  a  Benjamite ;  one  of  the  family 
of  Elpaal,  and  named  as  a  chief  man  in  the  tribe 
(1  Chr.  viii.  18). 

ISH'OD  O'm^N,  t.  e.  Ish-hod :  6  'I<rouS ; 
Alex.  2ouS  :  virum  decorum),  one  of  the  tribe  of 
Manasseh  on  the  east  of  Jordan,  son  of  Hammo- 
leketh,  i.  e.  the  Queen,  and  from  his  near  con- 
nexion with  Gilead,  evidently  an  important  person 
(1  Chr.  vii.  18). 

ISH'-PAN  (j.BB»  :  'Ua<pdv  ;  Alex.  'Eo^aV  ; 
Jespham),  a  Benjamite,  one  of  the  family  of  Sha- 
shak  ;  named  as  a  chief  man  in  his  tribe  (I  Chr. 
viii.  22). 

ISHTOB  (TUTtAx :  'lartip  ;  Jos.  *\<ttw$os: 
Tstdb),  apparently  one  of  the  small  kingdoms  or 
states  which  formed  part  of  the  general  country  of 
Aram,  named  with  Zobah,  Rehob,  and  Maacah 
(2  Sam.  x.  (i,  8).  In  the  parallel  account  of  1  Chr. 
xix.  Ishtob  is  omitted.  By  Josephus  {Ant.  vii.  6, 
§1)  the  name  is  given  as  that  of  a  king.  But 
though  in  the  ancient  versions  the  name  is  given  as 
one  word,  it  is  probable  that  the  real  signification  is 
"  the  men  of  Tob,"  a  district  mentioned  also  in 
connexion  with  Ammon  in  the  records  of  Jephthah, 
and  again  perhaps,  under  the  shape  of  Tobie  or 
Tubieni,  in  the  history  of  the  Maccabees.      [G.j 

ISHU'AH  (i11B»:  'Ucrirovd,  Alex.  'Uffffal: 
Jesua),  the  second  son  of  Asher  (Gen.  xlvi.  17). 
In  the  genealogies  of  Asher  in  1  Chr.  vii.  30  the 
name,  though  identical  in  the  original,  is  in  the 
A.  V.  given  as  Isr/AH.  In  the  lists  of  Num.  xxvi., 
however,  Ishuah  is  entirely  omitted. 

ISH'UAI  Q)Vfr,  i.  e.  Ishvi  :  'Iffovl,  Alex. 
'Ua-ovi:  Jessui),  the  third  sou  of  Asher  (1  Chr. 
vii.  30),  founder  of  a  family  bearing  his  name 
(Num.  xxvi.  4-1 ;  A.  V.  "  Jesuites  ").  His  descend- 
ants, however,  are  not  mentioned  in  the  genealogy 
m  Chronicles.  His  name  is  elsewhere  given  in  the 
A.  V".  as  Isui,  Jesui,  and  (another  person)  Ishui. 


ISRAEL 

ISHUI  (»}B»,  i.e.  Ishvi:  'Uffffiot;  Alex. 
Iffovei ;  Joseph.  'IecroDs :  Jessui),  the  second  son 
dt'  Saul  by  his  wife  Ahinoam  (I  Sam.  xiv.  49, 
comp.  50)  :  his  place  in  the  family  was  between 
Jonathan  and  Melehishua.  In  the  list  of  Saul's 
genealogy  in  1  Chr.  viii.  and  ix.,  however,  the  name 
of  Ishui  is  entirely  omitted ;  and  in  the  sad  nar- 
rative of  the  battle  of  Gilboa  his  place  is  occupied 
by  Abinadab  (1  Sam.  xxxi.  2).  We  can  only  con- 
clude that  he  died  young. 

The  same  name  is  elsewhere  given  in  the  A.  V. 
as  Isui,  and  Ishuai.  [G.J 

ISLE  CN  ;  vrjaos).  The  radical  sense  of  the 
Hebrew  word  seems  to  be  "  habitable  places,"  as 
opposed  to  water,  and  in  this  sense  it  occurs  in  Is. 
xlii.  15.  Hence  it  means  secondarily  any  mari- 
time district,  whether  belonging  to  a  continent  or 
to  an  island :  thus  it  is  used  of  the  shore  of  the 
Mediterranean  (Is.  xx.  6,  xxiii.  2,  6),  and  of  the 
coasts  of  Elishah  (Ez.  xxvii.  7),  i.  e.  of  Greece  and 
Asia  Minor.  In  this  sense  it  is  more  particularly 
restricted  to  the  shores  of  the  Mediterranean,  some- 
times in  the  fuller  expression  "  islands  of  the  sea" 
(Is.  xi.  11),  or  "  isles  of  the  Gentiles''  (Gen.  x.  5  ; 
comp.  Zeph.  ii.  11),  and  sometimes  simply  as 
"isles"  (Ps.  lxxii.  10;  Ez.  xxvi.  15,  18,  xxvii.  3, 
■'!."),  xxxix.  6;  Dan.  xi.  18):  an  exception  to  this, 
however,  occurs  in  Ez.  xxvii.  15,  where  the  shores 
of  the  Persian  gulf  are  intended.  Occasionally  the 
word  is  specifically  used  of  an  island,  as  of 
Caphtor  or  Crete  (Jer.  xlvii.  4),  and  Chittim  or 
Cyprus  (Ez.  xxvii.  6  ;  Jer.  ii.  10),  or  of  islands  as 
opposed  to  the  mainland  (Esth.  x.  1).  But  more 
generally  it  is  applied  to  any  region  separated  from 
Palestine  by  water,  as  fully  described  in  Jer.  xxv. 

22,  "  the  isles  which  are  beyond  the  sea,"  which 
were  hence  regarded  as  the  most  remote  regions 
of  the  earth  (Is.  xxiv.  15,  xlii.  10,  lix.  18,  com- 
pare the  expression  in  Is.  lxvi.  19,  "  the  isles  afar 
oft"')  ami  also  as  large  and  numerous  (Is.  xl.  15  ; 
Ps.  xcvii.  1):  the  word  is  more  particularly  used 
by  the  prophets.  (See  J.  D.  Michaelis,  Spicilegium, 
i.  131-142.)  [W.  L.  B.] 

ISMACHI'AH  (-liTSIOpj,  i.e.  Ismac-yahu: 
6  Sayuax'a  :  Jesmachias),  a  Levite  who  was  one  of 

the  overseers  (D^T'pQ)  of  offerings,  during  the  re- 
vival under  king  Hezekiah  (2  Chr.  xxxi.  13). 

IS'MAEL.      1.   ("IoTicnjA:    Tsmael),  Jud.  ii. 

23.  Another  form  for  the  name  Ishmael,  son  of 
Abraham. 

2.  ('ItTyiiaTJAos :  Hismaenis),  1  Esd.  ix.  29. 
[Ishmael,  5.] 

ISMAI'AH  (i"Py»K» :  Za^atas  :  Samaias),  a 

Gibeonite,  one  of  the  chiefs  of  those  warriors  who 
relinquished  the  cause  of  Saul,  the  head  of  their 
trib#.  and  joined  themselves  to  David,  when  he  was 
at  Ziklag  (1  Chr.  xii.  4).  He  is  described  as  "  a 
hero  (Gibbor)  among  the  thiity  and  over  the 
thirty" — i.  e.  David's  body-guard:  but  his  name 
does  not  appear  in  the  lists  of  the  guard  in  2  Sam. 
xxiii.  and  1  Chr.  xi-  Possibly  he  was  killed  in 
some  encounter  before  David  reached  the  throne. 

ISTAH  (HSt^,  i.  e.  Isbpah :  'U<r<pu,  Alex. 
'Ea-<pdx  ■  Jespha),  a  Benjamite,  of  the  family  of 
Beriah ;  one  of  the  heads  of  his  tribe  (1  Chr.  viii.  1  o). 

ISRAEL  (^Tlb»:  'lapa-ijK).  1.  The  name 
given  (Gen.  xxxii.  28)  to  Jacob  after  his  wrestling 
with  the  Angel   (Hos.  xii.  4)  at    Peniel.     In  the 


ISRAEL,  KINGDOM  OF 

time  of  Jerome  (Quaest.  Jfebr.  in  Gen.  Opp.  iii. 
857)  the  signification  of  the  name  was  commonly 
believed  to  be  "the  man  {or  the  mind)  seeing 
God."  But  he  prefers  another  interpretation,  and 
paraphrases  the  verse  after  this  manner,  "  Thy 
name  shall  not  be  called  Jacob,  Supplant er,  but 
Israel,  Prince  with  God.  Fur  as  I  am  a  Prince,  so 
thou  who  hast  been  able  to  wrestle  with  Me  shalt  be 
called  a  Prince.  But  if  with  Me  who  am  God 
(or  an  Angel)  thou  hast  been  able  to  contend,  how 
much  more  [shalt  thou  be  able  to  contend]  with 
men,  i.e.  with  Esau,  whom  thou  oughtest  not  to 
dread?"     The  A.  V.,  apparently  following  Jerome, 

translates  ]VX',  "as  a  prince  thou  hast  power;" 
but  Rosenmiiller  and  Gesenius  give  it  the  simpler 
meaning,  "  thou  hast  contended."  Gesenius  inter- 
prets Israel  "  soldier  of  God." 

2.  It  became  the  national  name  of  the  twelve 
tribes  collectively.  They  are  so  called  in  Ex.  iii. 
1(3  and  afterwards. 

3.  It  is  used  in  a  narrower  sense,  excluding 
Judah,  in  1  Sam.xi.  8.  It  is  so  used  in  the  famous 
cry  of  the  rebels  against  David  (2  Sam.  xx.  1),  and 
against  his  grandson  (1  K.  xii.  16).  Thenceforth 
it  was  assumed  aud  accepted  as  the  name  of  the 
Northern  Kingdom,  in  which  the  tribes  of  Judah, 
Benjamin,  Levi,  Dan,  and  Simeon,  had  no  share. 

4.  After  the  Babylonian  captivity,  the  returned 
exiles,  although  they  were  mainly  of  the  kingdom 
of  Judah,  resumed  the  name  Israel  as  the  designa- 
tion of  their  nation  ;  but  as  individuals  they  are 
almost  always  described  as  Jews  in  the  Apocrypha 
and  X.  T.  Instances  occur  in  the  Books  of  Chronicles 
of  the  application  of  the  name  Israel  to  Judah  (e.  g. 
2  ( !hr.  xi.  3,  xii.  6) ;  and  in  Esther  of  the  name  Jews 
to  the  whole  people.  The  name  Israel  is  also  used 
to  denote  laymen,  as  distinguished  from  Priests,  Le- 
vites,  and  other  ministers  (Ezr.  vi.  16  ;  ix.  1  ;  x. 
25  ;  Neb.,  xi.  3,  &c).  [W.  T.  B.] 

ISRAEL,  KINGDOM  OF.  1.  The  prophet 
Ahijah  of  Shiloh  who  was  commissioned  in  the 
latter  days  of  Solomon  to  announce  the  division  of 
the  kingdom,  left  one  tribe  (Judah)  to  the  house  of 
David,  and  assigned  ten  to  Jeroboam  (1  K.  xi.  35, 
31).  These  were  probably  Joseph  (  =  Ephraim 
and  Manasseh),  [ssachar,  Zebulun,  Asher,  Naphtali, 
Benjamin,  Dan,  Simeon,  Gad,  and  Reuben;  Levi 
being  intentionally  omitted.  Eventually,  the 
greater  part  of  Benjamin,  and  probably  the  whole 
of  Simeon  and  Dan  were  included  as  if  by  common 
consent  in  the  kingdom  of  Judah.  Withrespect  to 
the  conquests  of  David,  Moab  appears  to  have  been 
attached  to  the  kingdom  of  Israel  (2  K.  iii.  4);  so 
much  of  Syria  as  remained  subject  to  Solomon 
(see  l  K.  xi.  24)  would  probably  be  claimed  by  his 
-or  in  the  northern  kingdom  ;  and  Amnion, 
though  connected  with  Rehoboam  as  his  mother's 

native  land  (2  Chr.  xii.  Ill),  ami  though  afterwards 
tributary  to  Judah  (2  ( 'hr.  xxvii.  .">  I  was  at  one  time 
allied  (2  Chr.  xx.  1  ),  we  know  not  how  closely,  or 
how  early,  with  Moab.  The  sea-coast  between  Accho 
and  Japho  remained  in  the  possession  of  Israel, 
2.  The   population    of  the    kingdom    is   not   ex- 


ISRAEL,  KINGDOM  OF         897 

pressly  stated,  and  in  drawing  any  inference  from 
the  numbers  of  fighting-men,  we  must,  bear  in  mind 
that  the  numbers  in  the  Hebrew  text  of  the  0.  T. 
are  strongly  suspected  to  have  been  subjected  to 
extensive,  perhaps  systematic,  corruption.  Forty 
years  before  the  disruption  the  census  taken  by 
direction  of  David  gave  800,000  according  to  2  Sam. 
xxiv.  9,  or  1,100,000  a  according  to  1  Chr.  xxi.  5, 
as  the  number  of  fighting-men  in  Israel.  Jero- 
boam, B.C.  957,  brought  into  the  field  an  army  of 
800,000  men  (2  Chr.  xiii.  3).  The  small  number 
of  the  army  of  Jehoahaz  (2  K.  xiii.  7)  is  to  be 
attributed  to  his  compact  with  Hazael ;  for  in  the 
next  reign  Israel  could  spare  a  mercenary  host  ten 
times  as  numerous  for  the  wars  of  Amaziah  (2  Chr. 
xxv.  6).  Ewald  is  scarcely  correct  in  his  remark 
that  we  know  not  what  time  of  life  is  reckoned  as 
the  military  age  (Gesch.  Isr.  iii.  185)  ;  for  it  is 
defined  in  Num.  i.  3,  and  again  2  Chr.  xxv.  5,  as 
"  twenty  years  old  and  above."  If  in  B.C.  957 
there  were  actually  under  arms  800,000  men  of 
that  age  in  Israel,  the  whole  population  may  per- 
haps have  amounted  to  at  least  three  millions  and  a 
half.b  Later  observers  have  echoed  the  disappoint- 
ment with  which  Jerome  from  his  cell  at  Beth- 
lehem contemplated  the  small  extent  of  this  cele- 
brated country  {Ep.  129,  ad  Bar  dan.  §4).  The 
area  of  Palestine,  as  it  is  laid  down  in  Kiepert's 
Bibel-Atlas  (ed.  Lionnet,  1859),  is  calculated  at 
13,620  English  square  miles.  Deducting  from  this 
810  miles  for  the  strip  of  coast  S.  of  Japho,  be- 
longing to  the  Philistines,  we  get  12,810  miles  as 
the  area  of  the  land  occupied  by  the  12  tribes  at 
the  death  of  Solomon  :  the  area  of  the  two  kingdoms 
being — Israel  9375,  Judah  3435.  Hence  it  appears 
that  the  whole  area  of  Palestine  was  nearly  equal 
to  that  of  the  kingdom  of  Holland  ( 13.610  sq.  m.)  ; 
or  rather  more  than  that  of  the  six  northern  coun- 
ties of  England  (13,136  sq.  m.).  The  kingdom  of 
Judah  was  rather  less  than  Northumberland,  Dur- 
ham, and  Westmoreland  (3683  sq.  m.,  with 
752,852  population  in  1851)  :  the  kingdom  of  Israel 
was  very  nearly  as  large  as  Yorkshire,  Lancashire, 
and  Cumberland  (9453  sq.  m.,  with  4,023,713 
population  in  1851). 

3.  Shechem  was  the  first  capital  of  the  new 
kingdom  (1  K.  xii.  25),  venerable  tor  its  traditions, 
and  beautiful  in  its  situation.  Subsequently  Tirzah, 
whose  loveliness  had  fixed  the  wandering  gaze  of 
Solomon  (Cant.  vi.  4),  became  the  royal  residence, 
if  not  the  capital,  of  Jeroboam  i  1  l\.  xiv.  17)  and  of 
his  successors  (xv.  33,  xvi.  8,  17.  23).  Samaria, 
uniting  in  itself  the  qualities  of  beauty  and  fertility, 
and  a  commanding  position,  was  chosen  by  Omri 
(I  K.  xvi.  24),  and  remained  the  capital  of  the 
kingdom  until  it  had  given  the  last  proof  of  its 
strength  by  sustaining  for  three  years  the  onset  of 
the  hosts  of  Assyria,  Jezree]  was  probably  only  a 
royal  residence  of  some  of  the  lsiaelitish  kings.  It 
may  have  been  in  awe  of  the  ancient  holiness  of 

shiloh,  that  Jeroboam  fori to  pollute  the  secluded 

site  of  the  Tabernacle  with  the  golden  calves.  He 
chose  for  the  religious  capitals  of  his  kingdom  Dan, 
the  old  home  of  northern  schism,  aud  Bethel ,c  a 


a  Bp.  Patrick  proposes  to  reconcile  these  two  nun-  garded  as  invariable:  or,  it  has  been  assumed  that 

bers,  by  adding  to  the  former  288,000  on  account  of  the  males  of  the  age  of  20  and  upwards  are  equal  in 

David's  standing  Legions,  number  to  a  fourth  part  of  the  whole  population." — 

b  "  Mr.  Hickman  noticed  that  in  1821  and  in  1831  Census  of  Great  Britain,  1851,  Population  Tables,  II., 

the  number  of  males  under  20  years  of  age,   and   the  Ages,  Ac.,  p.  vi. 

number  of  males  of  20  years  of  age  and  upwards,  were  c  On    these    seven    places    see    Stanley's   8.   A   /'., 

nearly  equal  ;  and  this  proportion  has  been  since  re-  chaps,  iv.  v.  and  xi. 


898         ISRAEL,  KINGDOM  OF 

Benjamite  city  not  far  from  Shiloh,  and  marked  out 
by  history  and  situation  as  the  rival  of  Jerusalem. 

4.  The  disaffection  of  Ephraim  and  the  northern 
tribes  having  grown  in  secret  under  the  prosperous 
but  burdensome  reign  of  Solomon,  broke  out  at  the 
critical  moment  of  that  great  monarch's  death.  It 
was  just  then  that  Ephraim,  the  centre  of  the 
movement,  found  in  Jeroboam  an  instrument  pre- 
pared to  give  expression  to  the  rivalry  of  centuries, 
with  sufficient  ability  and  application  to  raise  him 
to  high  station,  with  the  stain  of  treason  on  his 
name,  and  with  the  bitter  recollections  of  an  exile 
in  his  mind.  Judah  and  Joseph  were  rivals  from 
the  time  that  they  occupied  the  two  prominent 
places,  and  received  the  amplest  promises  in  the 
blessing  of  the  dying  patriarch  (Gen.  xlix.  8,  22). 
When  the  twelve  tribes  issued  from  Egypt,  only 
Judah  and  Joseph  could  muster  each  above  70,000 
warriors.  In  the  desert  and  in  the  conquest, 
Caleb  and  Joshua,  the  representatives  of  the  two 
tribes,  stand  out  side  by  side  eminent  among  the 
leaders  of  the  people.  The  blessing  of  Moses  (Deut. 
xxxiii.  13)  and  the  divine  selection  of  Joshua  inau- 
gurated the  greater  prominence  of  Joseph  for  the  next 
three  centuries.  Othniel,  the  successor  of  Joshua, 
was  from  Judah:  the  last,  Samuel,  was  born 
among  the  Ephraimites.  Within  that  period  Eph- 
raim supplied  at  Shiloh  (Judg.  xxi.  19)  a  resting- 
place  for  the  ark,  the  centre  of  divine  worship  ;  and 
a  rendezvous,  or  capital  at  Shechem  (Josh.  xxiv.  1  ; 
Judg.  ix.  2)  for  the  whole  people.  Ephraim  arro- 
gantly claimed  (Judg.  viii.  1,  xii.  1)  the  exclusive 
right  of  taking  the  lead  against  invaders.  Royal 
authority  was  ottered  to  one  dweller  in  Ephraim 
(viii.  22),  aud  actually  exercised  for  three  years  by 
another  (ix.  22).  After  a  silent,  perhaps  sullen, 
acquiescence  in  the  transfer  of  Samuel's  authority 
with  additional  dignity  to  a  Benjamite,  they  resisted 
for  seven  years  (2  Sam.  ii.  9-11)  its  passing  into 
the  hands  of  the  popular  Jewish  leader,  and  yielded 
reluctantly  to  the  conviction  that  the  sceptre  which 
seemed  almost  within  their  grasp  was  reserved  at 
last  for  Judah.  Even  in  David's  reign  their  jealousy 
did  not  always  slumber  (2  Sam.  xix.  43)  ;  and 
though  Solomon's  alliance  and  intercourse  with 
Tyre  must  have  tended  to  increase  the  loyalty 
of  the  northern  tribes,  they  took  the  first  oppor- 
tunity to  emancipate  themselves  from  the  rule  of 
his  son.  Doubtless  the  length  of  Solomon's  reign, 
■  and  the  clouds  that  gathered  round  the  close  of  it  (1 
K.  xi.  14-25),  and  possibly  his  increasing  despotism 
(Ewald,  Gesch.  Isr.  iii.  395),  tended  to  diminish 
the  general  popularity  of  the  house  of  David  ;  and 
the  idolatry  of  the  king  alienated  the  affection  of 
religious  Israelites.  But  none  of  these  was  the 
immediate  cause  of  the  disruption.  No  aspiration 
after  greater  liberty,  political  privileges,  or  ag- 
grandisement at  the  expense  of  other  powers,  no 
spirit  of  commercial  enterprise,  no  breaking  forth  of 
pent-up  energy  seems  to  have  instigated  the  move- 
ment. Ephraim  proudly  longed  for  independence, 
without  considering  whether  or  at  what  cost  he 
could  maintain  it.  Shechem  was  built  as  a  capital, 
and  Tirzah  as  a  residence,  for  an  Ephraimite  king, 
by  the  people  who  murmured  under  the  burdeu 
imposed  upon  them  by  the  royal  state  of  Solomon. 
Ephraim  felt  no  patriotic  pride  in  a  national  splen- 
dour of  which  Judah  was  the  centre.  The  dwelling- 
place  of  God  when  fixed  in  Jerusalem  ceased  to  be 
so  honourable  to  him  as  of  old.  It  was  ancient 
jealousy  rather  than  recent  provocation,  the  oppor- 
tune death  of  Solomon  rather  than  unwillingness  to 


ISRAEL,  KINGDOM  OF 

incur  taxation,  the  opportune  return  of  a  persecuted 
Ephraimite  rather  than  any  commanding  genius  for 
rule  which  Jeroboam  possessed,  that  finally  broke 
up  the  brotherhood  of  the  children  of  Jacob.  It 
was  an  outburst  of  human  feeling  so  soon  as  that 
divine  influence  which  restrained  the  spirit  of  dis- 
union was  withdrawn  in  consequence  of  the  idolatry 
of  Solomon,  so  soon  as  that  stern  prophetic  Voice 
which  had  called  Saul  to  the  throne  under  a  protest, 
and  David  to  the  throne  in  repentance,  was  heard  in 
anger  summoning  Jeroboam  to  divide  the  kingdom. 

5.  Disruption  where  there  can  be  no  expansion, 
or  dismemberment  without  growth,  is  fatal  to  a 
state.  If  England  and  America  have  prospered 
since  1783  it  is  because  each  found  space  for  increase, 
and  had  vital  energy  to  fill  it.  If  the  separation  of 
east  and  west  was  but  a  step  in  the  decline  of  the 
Roman  empire,  it  was  so  because  each  portion  was 
hemmed  in  by  obstacles  which  it  wanted  vigour  to 
surmount.  The  sources  of  life  and  strength  begin 
to  dry  up;  the  state  shrinks  within  itself,  withers, 
and  falls  before  some  blast  which  once  it  might  have 
braved. 

The  kingdom  of  Israel  developed  no  new  power. 
It  was  but  a  portion  of  David's  kingdom  deprived 
of  many  elements  of  strength.  Its  frontier  was  as 
open  and  as  widely  extended  as  before ;  but  it 
wanted  a  capital  for  the  seat  of  organised  power. 
Its  territory  was  as  fertile  and  as  tempting  to  the 
spoiler,  but  its  people  were  less  united  and  patriotic. 
A  corrupt  religion  poisoned  the  source  of  national 
life.  When  less  reverence  attended  on  a  new  and 
unconsecrated  king,  aud  less  respect  was  felt  for  an 
aristocracy  reduced  by  the  retirement  of  the  Levites, 
the  army  which  David  found  hard  to  control  rose 
up  unchecked  in  the  exercise  of  its  wilful  strength; 
and  thus  eight  houses,  each  ushered  in  by  a  revolu- 
tion, occupied  the  throne  in  quick  succession.  Tyre 
ceased  to  be  an  ally  when  the  alliance  was  no  longer 
profitable  to  the  merchant-city.  Moab  and  Amnion 
yielded  tribute  only  while  under  compulsion.  A 
powerful  neighbour,  Damascus,  sat  armed  at  the 
gate  of  Israel  ;  and,  beyond  Damascus,  might  be  dis- 
cerned the  rising  strength  of  the  first  great  mo- 
narchy of  the  world. 

These  causes  tended  to  increase  the  misfortunes, 
and  to  accelerate  the  early  end  of  the -kingdom  of 
Israel.  It  lasted  254  years,  from  B.C.  975  to  B.C. 
721,  about  two-thirds  of  the  duration  of  its  more 
compact  neighbour  Judah. 

But  it  may  be  doubted  whether  the  division  into 
two  kingdoms  greatly  shortened  the  independent 
existence  of  the  Hebrew  race,  or  interfered  with  the 
purposes  which,  it  is  thought,  may  be  traced  in  the 
establishment  of  David's  monarchy.  If  among 
those  purposes  were  the  preservation  of  the  true 
religion  in  the  world,  and  the  preparation  of  an 
agency  adapted  for  the  diffusion  of  Christianity  in 
due  season,  then  it  must  be  observed — first,  that  as 
a  bulwark  providentially  raised  against  the  corrupt- 
ing influence  of  idolatrous  Tyre  and  Damascus, 
Israel  kept  back  that  contagion  from  Judah,  and 
partly  exhausted  it  before  its  arrival  in  the  south  ; 
next,'  that  the  purity  of  Divine  worship  was  not 
impaired  by  the  excision  of  those  tribes  which  were 
remote  from  the  influence  of  the  Temple,  and  by 
the  concentration  of  priests  and  religious  Israelites 
within  the  southern  kingdom;  and  lastly,  that  to 
the  worshippers  at  Jerusalem  the  early  decline  and 
fall  of  Israel  was  a  solemn  and  impressive  spectacle 
of  judgment, — the  working  out  of  the  great  problem 
of  God's  toleration  of  idolatry.     This  prepared  the 


ISRAEL,  KINGDOM  OF 

heart  of  Judah  for  the  revivals  under  Hezekiah  and 
Josiah,  softened  them  into  repentance  during  the 
captivity,  and  strengthened  them  for  their  absolute 
renunciation  of  idolatry,  when  after  seventy  years 
they  returned  to  Palestine,  to  teach  the  world  that 
there  is  a  spiritual  bond  more  efficacious  than  the 
occupancy  of  a  certain  soil  for  keeping  up  national 
existence,  and  to  become  the  channel  through  which 
God's  greatest  gift  was  conveyed  to  mankind.  [Cap- 
tivity.] 

6.  The  detailed  history  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel 
will  be  found  under  the  names  of  its  nineteen 
kings.  [See  also  Ei-HRAiii.]  A  summary  view  may 
be  taken  in  four  periods : — 

(a.)  B.C.  975-929.  Jeroboam  had  not  sufficient 
force  of  character  in  himself  to  make  a  lasting  im- 
pression on  his  people.  A  king,  but  not  a  founder 
of  a  dynasty,  he  aimed  at  nothing  beyond  securing 
his  present  elevation.  Without  any  ambition  to 
share  in  the  commerce  of  Tyre,  or  to  compete  with 
tin'  growing  power  of  Damascus,  or  even  to  com- 
plete the  humiliation  of  the  helpless  monarch  whom 
he  had  deprived  of  half  a  kingdom,  Jeroboam  acted 
entirely  on  a  defensive  policy.  He  attempted  to 
give  his  subjects  a  centre  which  they  wanted  for 
their  political  allegiance,  in  Shechem  or  in  Tirzah. 
He  sought  to  change  merely  so  much  of  their  ritual 
as  was  inconsistent  with  his  authority  over  them. 
But  as  soon  as  the  golden  calves  were  set  up,  the 
priests  and  Levites  and  many  religious  Israelites 
(2  Chr.xi.  16)  lett  their  country,  and  the  disastrous 
emigration  was  not  effectually  checked  even  by  the 
attempt  of  Baasha  to  build  a  fortress  (2  Chr.  xvi.  6) 
at  Kamah.  A  new  priesthood  was  introduced 
(1  K.  xii.  31)  absolutely  dependent  on  the  king 
(Am.  vii.  13),  not  forming  as  under  the  Mosaic  law 
a  landed  aristocracy,  not  respected  by  the  people, 
and  unable  either  to  withstand  the  oppression  or  to 
strengthen  the  weakness  of  a  king.  A  priesthood 
created  and  a  ritual  devised  for  secular  purposes 
had  no  hold  whatever  on  the  conscience  of  the 
people.  To  meet  their  spiritual  cravings  a  suc- 
cession of  prophets  was  raised  up,  great  in  their 
poverty,  their  purity,  their  austerity,  their  self- 
dependence,  their  moral  influence,  hut  imperfectly 
organised; — a  rod  to  correct  and  check  the  civil 
government,  not,  as  they  might  have  been  under 
happier  circumstances,  a  stall'  to  support  it.  The 
army  soon  learned  its  power  to  dictate  to  the  iso- 
lated monarch  and  disunited  people.  Baasha  in 
the  midst  of  the  army  at  Gibbethon  slew  the  son 
and  successor  of  Jeroboam;  Zimri,  a  captain  of 
chariots,  slew  the  son  and  successor  of  Baasha; 
Omri,  the  captain  of  the  host,  was  chosen  to  punish 
Zimii ;  and  after  a  civil  war  of  four  years  he  pre- 
vailed over  Tibni,  the  choice  of  half  the  people. 

(6.)  b.c.  929-884.  For  forty-five  years  Israel 
was  governed  by  the  house  of  Omri.  That  saga- 
cious king  pitched  on  the  strong  hill  of  Samaria  as 
the  site  of  his  capital.  Damascus,  which  in  the 
days  of  Baasha  had  proved  itself  more  than  a  mat  li 
for  Israel,  now  again  assumed  a  threatening  atti- 
tude. Edom  and  Moab  showed  a  tendency  to  in- 
dependence, or  even  aggression.  Hence  the  princes 
of  Omri's  house  cultivated  an  alliance  with  the 
contemporary  kings  of  Judah,  which  was  cemented 
by  the  marriage  of  Jehoram  and  Athaliah,  and 
marked  by  the  community  of  names  among  the 
royal  children.  Allah's  Tyiiau  alliance  strengthened 
him  with  the  counsels  of  the  masculine  mind  of 
Jezebel,  but  brought  him  no  farther  support.  The 
entire  rejection  of  the  God  of  Abraham,  under  the 


ISRAEL,  KING!  DOM  OF 


899 


disguise  of  abandoning  Jeroboam's  unlawful  sym- 
bolism, and  adopting  Baal  as  the  god  of  a  luxurious 
court  and  subservient  populace,  led  to  a  reaction  in 
the  nation,  to  the  moral  triumph  of  the  prophets  in 
the  person  of  Elijah,  and  to  the  extinction  of  the 
house  of  Ahab  in  obedience  to  the  bidding  of  Elisha. 

(c.)  B.C.  884-772.  Unparalleled  triumphs,  but 
deeper  humiliation,  awaited  the  kingdom  of  Israel 
under  the  dynasty  of  Jehu.  The  worship  of  Baal 
was  abolished  by  one  blow  ;  but,  so  long  as  the 
kingdom  lasted,  the  people  never  rose  superior  to 
the  debasing  form  of  religion  established  by  Jero- 
boam. Hazael,  the  successor  of  the  two  Benhadads, 
the  ablest  king  of  Damascus,  reduced  Jehoahaz  to 
the  condition  of  a  vassal,  and  triumphed  for  a 
time  over  both  the  disunited  Hebrew  kingdoms. 
Almost  the  first  sign  of  the  restoration  of  their 
strength  was  a  war  between  them  ;  and  Jehoash, 
the  grandson  of  Jehu,  entered  Jerusalem  as  the 
conqueror  of  Amaziah.  Jehoash  also  turned  the 
tide  of  war  against  the  Syrians  ;  and  Jeroboam  II., 
the  most  powerful  of  all  the  kings  of  Israel,  cap- 
tured Damascus,  and  recovered  the  whole  ancient 
frontier  from  Hamath  to  the  Dead  Sea.  In  the 
midst  of  his  long  and  seemingly  glorious  reign  the 
prophets  Hosea  and  Amos  uttered  their  warnings 
more  clearly  than  any  of  their  predecessors.  The 
short-lived  greatness  expiied  with  the  last  king  of 
Jehu's  line. 

(>/.)  B.C.  772-721.  Military  violence,  it  would 
seem,  broke  off  the  hereditary  succession  after  the 
obscure  and  probably  convulsed  reign  of  Zachariah. 
An  unsuccessful  usurper,  Shallum,  is  followed  by 
the  cruel  Menahem,  who,  being  unable  to  make 
head  against  the  first  attack  of  Assyria  under  Ful, 
became  the  agent  of  that  monarch  for  the  op- 
pressive taxation  of  his  subjects.  Yet  his  power  at 
home  was  sufficient  to  insure  for  his  son  and  suc- 
cessor Pekahiah  a  ten  years'  reign,  cut  short  1  ly  a 
bold  usurper,  Pekah.  Abandoning  the  northern 
and  transjordanic  regions  to  the  encroaching  power 
of  Assyria  under  Tiglath-pileser,  he  was  very  near 
subjugating  Judah,  with  the  help  of  Damascus, 
now  the  coequal  ally  of  Israel.  But  Assyria  inter- 
posing summarily  put  an  end  to  the  independence 
of  Damascus,  and  perhaps  was  the  indirect  cause 
of  the  assassination  of  the  ballled  Pekah.  The  irre- 
solute Hoshea,  the  next  and  last  usurper,  became 
tributary  to  his  invader,  Shahnaneser,  betrayed  the 
Assyrian  to  the  rival  monarchy  of  Egypt,  and  was 
punished  by  the  loss  of  his  liberty,  and  by  the  cap- 
ture, after  a  three  years'  siege,  of  his  strong  capital, 
Samaria.  Some  gleanings  of  the  ten  tribes  yet 
remained  in  the  land  after  si.  many  years  of  reli- 
gious decline,  moral  debasement,  national  degrada- 
tion, anarchy,  bl Ished,  and  deportation.      Even 

these  were  gathered  up  by  the  conqueror  and 
carried  to  Assyria,  never  again,  as  a  distinct  people, 
tn  occupy  their  portion  of  thai  goodly  and  pleasant 
land  which  their  forefathers  won  under  Joshua 
from  the  heathen. 

7.  The  following  table  shows  at  one"  view  the 

chr< logy   of   the    kings   of   Israel   and   Judah. 

Columns  1,  2,  3,  7,  8,  9,  In  are  taken  from  the 
Bible.  Columns  -1.  ■">.  6  are  the  computations  of 
eminent  modern  chronologists :  column  4  being  the 
scheme  adopted  in  the  margin  of  the  English  Ver- 
sion, which  is  founded  mi  tin-  calculations  of  Arch- 
bishop Ussher:  column  •">  being  the  computation 
of  Clinton  [Fasti  tlellenici,  iii.  App.  §5);  and 
column  6  being  the  computation  of  Winer  {Real- 
wSrterbuch  \. 


900 


ISRAEL,  KINGDOM  OF 


Year  of 

Dura- 

Kings 

of 
Israel. 

Commencement 

Kings 

OF 
JuDAH. 

Dura- 

Year of 

preceding 

tion 

of  Reign 

tion 

preceding 

Queen  Mother 

King  of 
Judah. 

of 
Reign. 

of 
Reign. 

King  of 
Israel. 

in  Judah. 

A.  V. 

Clinton. 

Winer. 

22 

Jeroboam  . 

975 

976 

975 

Rehoboam 

17 

Naamah. 

958 

959 

957 

Abijah        .     . 

3 

18th    . 

Michaiah  (?). 

955 

956 

955 

Asa        .     .     . 

41 

20th    . 

Maachah  (!). 

2nd   . 

2 

Nadab  .     .     . 

954 

955 

954 

3rd    . 

24 

Baasha . 

953 

954 

953 

26th    . 

2 

Elah      .     .     . 

930 

930 

930 

27th    . 

0 

Zimri    .     . 

929 

930 

928 

12 

Omri     . 

929 

930 

928 

38th    . 

22 

Ahab     .     .     . 

918 

919 

918 

914 

915 

•  914 

Jehoshaphat   . 

25 

4th    . 

Azubah. 

17th    . 

2 

Ahaziah     .     . 

898 

896 

897 

18th    . 

12 

Jehoram     . 

896 

895 

896 

892 

891 

889 

Jehoram     . 

8 

5  th     . 

885 

884 

885 

Ahaziah 

1 

12th     . 

Athaliah. 

28 

Jehu      .     .     . 

884 

883 

884 

Athaliah     . 

6 

878 

877 

878 

Jehoash      .     . 

40 

7  th    . 

Zibiah. 

23rd    . 

17 

Jehoahaz    . 

856 

855 

856 

37th    . 

16 

Jehoash 

841 

839 

840 

839 

837 

838 

Amaziah    . 

23 

2nd    . 

Jehoaddan. 

15th    . 

41 

Jeroboam  II.  . 

825 

823 

825 

810 

808 

809 

Uzziah      or 
Azariah. 

52 

27th     . 

Jccholiah. 

11 

Interregnum. 

38th    . 

0 

Zachariah  . 

773 

771 

772 

0 

Shallum 

772 

770 

771 

39th    . 

10 

Menahem  .     . 

772 

770 

771 

50th    . 

.      2 

Pekahiah   . 

761 

759 

760 

52nd    . 

20 

Pekah  .     .     . 

759 

757 

758 

758 

756 

758 

Jotham      .     . 

16 

2nd    . 

Jerusha. 

742 

741 

741 

Ahaz     .  ,  .     . 

16 

17th     . 

9 

2nd    Interreg- 
num. 

12th 

9 

Hoshea 

730 

730 

729 

726 

726 

725 

Hezekiah   .     . 

29 

3rd    . 

Abi. 

6th 

Samaria  taken 

721 

721 

721 

698 

697 

696 

Manasseh  . 

55 

Ilephzibah. 

643 

642 

641 

Anion    . 

o 

Meshullemeth. 

641 

640 

639 

Josiah   . 

31 

Jedidah. 

610 

609 

609 

Jehoahaz    . 

0 

Hamutal. 

610 

609 

609 

Jehoiachim'     . 

11 

Zebudah. 

599 

598 

598 

Jehoiachin    or 
Coniah. 

0 

Iv'ehushta. 

599 

598 

598 

Zedekiah    .     . 

11 

Hamutal. 

588 

587 

586 

Jerusalem  de- 

stroyed. 

The  numerous  dates  given  in  the  Bible  as  the 
limits  of  the  duration  of  the  king's  reigns  act  as  a 
continued  check  on  each  other.  The  apparent  dis-( 
crepancies  between  them  have  been  unduly  exagge- 
rated by  some  writers.  To  meet  such  difficulties 
various  hypotheses  have  been  put  forward; — that 
an  interregnum  occurred ;  that  two  kings  (father 
and  son)  reigned  conjointly ;  that  certain  reigns 
were  dated  not  from  their  real  commencement,  but 
from  some  arbitrary  period  in  that  Jewish  year  in 
which  they  commenced  ;  that  the  Hebrew  copyists 
have  transcribed  the  numbers  incorrectly,  either  by 
accident  or  design  ;  that  the  original  writers  have 
made  mistakes  in  their  reckoning.  All  these  are 
mere  suppositions,  and  even  the  most  probable  of 
them  must  not  be  insisted  on  as  if  it  were  a  his- 
torical fact.  But  in  truth  most  of  the  discrepancies 
may  be  accounted  for  by  the  simple  fact  that  the 
Hebrew  annalists  reckon  in  round  numbers,  never 
specifying  the  months  in  addition  to  the  years  of 
the  duration  of  a  king's  reign.  Consequently  some 
of  these  writers  seem  to  set  down  a  fragment  of  a 
year  as  an  entire  year,  and  others  omit  such  frag- 


ments altogether.  Hence  in  computing  the  date 
of  the  commencement  of  each  reign,  without  attri- 
buting any  error  to  the  writer  or  transcribers,  it  is 
necessary  to  allow  for  a  possible  mistake  amounting 
to  something  less  than  two  years  in  our  inter- 
pretation of  the  indefinite  phraseology  of  the  He- 
brew writers.  But  there  are  a  few  statements  in 
the  Hebrew  text  which  cannot  thus  be  reconciled. 

(a.)  There  are  in  the  Second  Book  of  Kings  three 
statements  as  to  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of 
Jehoram  king  of  Israel,  which  in  the  view  of  some 
writers  involve  a  great  error,  and  not  a  mere  nu- 
merical one.  His  accession  is  dated  (1)  in  the 
second  year  of  Jehoram'king  of  Judah  ('-'  K.i.  17)  ; 
(2)  in  the  lii'th  year  before  Jehoram  king  of  Judah 
(2  K.  viii.'  16) ;  (3)  in  the  eighteenth  year  of  Jeho- 
shaphat (2  K.  iii.  1).  But  these  statements  may 
be  reconciled  by  the  fact  that  Jehoram  king  of 
Judah  had  two  accessions  which  are  recorded  in 
Scripture,  and  by  the  probable  supposition  of  Arch- 
bishop Ussher  that  he  had  a  third  and  earlier  ac- 
cession which  is  not  recorded.  These  threi 
sions  are,  (1)  when  Jehoshaphat  left  his  kingdom 


ISSACHAR 

to  go  to  tlie  battle  of  Ramoth-gilead,  in  his  17th 
year;  (2)  when  Jehoshaphat  (2  K.  viii.  1G)  either 
retired  from  the  administration  of  affairs,  or  made 
his  son  joint-king,  in  his  23rd  year ;  (3)  when 
Jehoshaphat  died,  in  his  25th  year.  .So  that,  if  the 
supposition  of  Ussher  be  allowed,  the  accession  of 
Jehoram  king  of  Israel  in  Jehoshaphat's  18th  year 
synchronized  with  (1)  the  second  year  of  the  first 
accession,  and  (2)  the  fifth  year  before  the  second 
accession  of  Jehoram  king  of  Judah. 

(/O  The  date  of  the  beginning  of  Uzziah's  reign 
(2  K.  xv.  1 )  in  the  27th  year  of  Jeroboam  11. 
cannot  be  reconciled  witli  the  statement  that  Uz- 
ziah's father,  Amaziah,  whose  whole  reign  was  •_!'.! 
years  only,  came  to  the  throne  in  the  second  year 
of  Joash  (2  K.  xiv.  1),  and  so  reigned  14  years 
contemporaneously  with  Joash  and  27  with  Jero- 
boam.  lusher  and  others  suggest  a  reconciliation 
of  these  statements  by  the  supposition  that  Jero- 
boam's reign  had  two  commencements,  the  first  not 
mentioned  in  Scripture,  on  his  association  with  his 
father  Joash,  B.C.  837.  But  Keil,  after  Capellus 
and  Grotius,  supposes  that  12  is  an  error  of  the 
Hebrew  copyists  for  ID,  and  that  instead  of  27th 
of  Jeroboam  we  ought  to  read  15th. 

(c.)  The  statements  that  Jeroboam  II.  reigned 
41  years  (2  K.  xiv.  23)  after  the  15th  year  of 
Amaziah,  who  reigned  29  years,  and  that  Jero- 
boam's son  Zachariah  came  to  the  throne  in  the 
38th  year  of  Uzziah  (2  K.  xv.  8),  cannot  be  recon- 
ciled without  supposing  that  there  was  an  inter- 
regnum of  11  years  between  Jeroboam  and  his  son 
Zachariah.  And  almost  all  chronologists  accept  this 
as  a  feet,  although  it  is  not  mentioned  in  the  Bible. 
Some  chronologists,  who  regard  an  interregnum  as 
intrinsically  improbable  after  the  prosperous  reign 
of  Jeroboam,  prefer  the  supposition  that  the  num- 
ber 41  in  2  K.  xiv.  21!  ought  to  be  changed  to  51, 
and  that  the  number  27  in  xv.  1  should  be  changed 
to  14,  and  that  a  few  other  corresponding  alterations 
should  be  made. 

(i/.1  In  order  to  bring  down  the  date  of  Pekah's 
murder  to  the  dale  of  Hoshea's  accession,  some 
chronologists  propose  to  read  29  years  for  20,  in 
2  K.  xv.  27.  Others  prefer  to  let  the  dates  stand 
as  at  present  in  the  text,  and  suppose  that  an 
interregnum,  not  expressly  mentioned  in  the  Bible, 
occurred  between  those  two  usurpers.  The  words 
of  Isaiah  (ix.  20,  21)  seem  to  indicate  a  time  of 
anarchy  in  Israel. 

The  Chronology  of  the  Kings  lias  been  minutely 
investigated  by  Abp.  Ussher,  Chronologia  Sacra, 
Pars  Posterior,  De  Annis  Regum,  Works,  xii. 
95-144;  by  Lightfoot,  Order  of  the  Texts  of  the 
a.  '/'..  Works,  i.  77-130  ;  by  Hales,  New  Analysis 
of  Chronology,  ii.  372-447  ;  by  Clinton,  I.e. ;  and 
by  II.  Browne,  Ordo  Saeclorutn.         [\V.  T.  1',.] 

IS'SACHAR  pDW*,  i.  e.  Isascar— such  is 
the  invariable  spilling  of  the  name  in  the  Hebrew, 
the  Samaritan  Codex  and  Version,  the  Targums  of 
Onkelos  and  Pseudojonathan,  hut  the  Masorets  have 
pointed  it  so  as  to  supersede  the  second  S,  "O^'C^ 
Issa[s]car:  'I<r<rax<*p  ;  Rec.  Tex1  of  N.  T.  I<ra<r- 
X&p,  but  Cod.  <',  'Iffaxdp  ;  Joseph,  laadxapts  : 
Tsachar),  the  ninth  son  ol  Jacob  and  the  fifth  of 
Leah  ;  the  firstborn  to  Leah  after  the  interval  which 


ISSACHAR 


901 


a  The  words  occur  ajjain  almost  identically  in 
2  Chr.  xv.  7,  and  Jer.  xxxi.  1G  :  IX'  65»  =  «<  there 
is  a  reward  tor,"  A.  V.  "  shall  he  rewarded." 

An  expansion  of  the  story  of  the  mandrakes,  with 


occurred  in  the  births  of  her  children  (Gen.  xxx.  17  ; 
comp.  xxix.  35).  As  is  the  case  with  each  of  the  sons 
the  name  is  recorded  as  bestowed  on  account  of  a  cir- 
cumstance connected  with  the  birth.  But,  as  may 
be  also  noticed  in  more  than  one  of  the  others,  two 
explanations  seem  to  be  combined  in  the  narrative, 
which  even  then  is  not  in  exact  accordance  with  the 
requirements  of  the  name.     "  God  hath  given  me 

my  hire  ("DC,  sdcar)    .   .    .    and  she  called   his 

name  Issdchar,"  is  the  record;  but  in  verse  18 
that  "hire"  is  for  the  surrender  of  her  maid  to 
her  husband — while  in  ver.  14-17  it  is  for  the  dis- 
covery and  bestowal  of  the  mandrakes.  Besides,  as 
indicated  above,  the  name  in  its  original  form — 
Isascar — rebels  against  this  interpretation,  an  inter- 
pretation which  to  be  consistent  requires  the  form 
subsequently  imposed  on  the  word,  Is-sachar.a  The 
allusion  is  not  again  brought  forward  as  it  is  with 
Dan,  Asher,  &c,  in  the  blessings  of  Jacob  and  Moses. 
In  the  former  only  it  is  perhaps  allowable  to  discern 
a  faint  echo  of  the  sound  of  "  Issachar  "  in  the  word 
shicmo — "  shoulder"  (Gen.  xlix.  15). 

Of  Issachar  the  individual  we  know  nothing. 
In  Genesis  he  is  not  mentioned  after  his  birth,  and 
the  few  verses  in  Chronicles  devoted  to  the  tribe 
contain  merely  a  brief  list  of  its  chief  men  and 
heroes  in  the  reign  of  David  (1  Chr.  vii.  1-5). 

At  the  descent  into  Egypt  four  sons  are  ascribed 
to  him,  who  founded  the  four  chief  families  of  the 
tribe  (Gen.  xlvi.  13  ;  Num.  xxvi.  23,  25 ;  1  Chr. 
vii.  1).  Issachar's  place  during  the  journey  to 
Canaan  was  on  the  east  of  the  Tabernacle  with  his 
brothers  Judah  and  Zebulun  (Num.  ii.  5),  the 
group  moving  foremost  in  the  march  (x.  15),  and 
having  a  common  standard  which,  according  to  the 
Iiabhiuical  tradition,  was  of  the  three  colours  of 
sardine,  topaz,  and  carbuncle,  inscribed  with  the 
names  of  the  three  tribes,  and  bearing  the  figure  ol 
a  lion's  whelp  (see  Targum  Pseudojon.  on  Num.  ii.  3). 
At  this  time  the  captain  of  the  tribe  was  Nethaneel 
ben-Zuar  (Num.  i.  8,  ii.  5,  vii.  18,  x.  15).  He 
was  succeeded  by  Igal  ben-Joseph,  who  went  as 
representative  of  his  tribe  among  the  spies  (xiii.  7), 
and  he  again  by  Paltiel  ben-Azzan,  who  assisted 
Joshua  in  apportioning  the  laud  of  Canaan  (xxxiv. 
26).  Issachar  was  one  of  the  six  tribes  who 
were  to  stand  on  Mount  Gerizim  during  the  cere- 
mony of  blessing  and  cursing  (Deut.  xxvii.  12). 
He  was  still  in  company  with  Judah,  Zebulun 
being  opposite  on  Ebal.  The  number  of  the  fight- 
ing men  of  Issachar  when  taken  in  the  census 
,-it  Sinai  was  54,400.  During  the  journey  they  seem 
to  have  steadily  increased,  and  after  the  mortality 
at  Peor  they  amounted  to  64,300,  being  inferior 
to  none  but  Judah  and  Dan — to  the  latter  by  100 
souls  only.  The  numbers  given  in  1  Chr.  vii.  2, 
4,  5,  probably  the  census  of  Joab,  amount  in  all  to 
I  1-5,600. 

The  Promised  hand  oner  reached,  the  connexion 
between  Issachar  and  Judah  seems  to  have  closed, 
to  ln>  renewed  only  on  two  brief  occasions,  which 
will  be  noticed  in  their  turn.  The  intimate  rela- 
tion with  Zebulun  was  however  maintained.  The 
two  brothei  -tribes  had  their  portions  close  together, 
and  more  than  once  they  are  mentioned  in  com- 
pany.     The  allotment  of  [ssachar  lay  above  that  of 

CUriOUS    details,    will    he    found    in    the    'I'istiimiiiliiin 

Isachar,  Fabrlcius,  Cod.  Tseudepigr.  n'2ii-i;j:!.     They 

were  ultimately  deposited  "  in  the  house  of  the  Lord," 
whatever  that  expression  may  mean. 


902 


ISSACHAR 


Manasseh.  The  specification  of  its  boundaries  and 
contents  is  contained  in  Josh.  xix.  17-23.  But  to 
the  towns  there  named  must  be  added  Daberath, 
given  in  the  catalogue  of  Levitical  cities  (xxi.  28  : 
Jarmuth  here  is  probably  the  Remeth  of  xix.  21), 
and  five  others — Beth-shean,  Ibleam,  En-dor,  Taa- 
nach, and  Megiddo.  These  last,  though  the  pro- 
perty of  Manasseh,  remained  within  the  limits  of 
Issachar  (Josh.  xvii.  11;  Judg.  i.  27),  and  they 
assist  us  materially  in  determining  his  boundary. 
In  the  words  of  josephus  (Ant.  v.  1,  §22),  "it 
extended  in  length  from  Carmel  to  the  Jordan,  in 
breadth  to  Mount  Tabor."  In  fact  it  exactly  con- 
sisted of  the  plain  of  Esdraelon  or  Jezreel.  The 
south  boundary  we  can  trace  by  En-gannim,  the 
modern  Jenin,  on  the  heights  which  form  the 
southern  enclosure  to  the  Plain;  and  then  further 
westward  by  Taanach  and  Megiddo,  the  authentic 
fragments  of  which  still  stand  on  the  same  heights 
as  they  trend  away  to  the  hump  of  Carmel.  On 
the  north  the  territory  also  ceased  with  the  plain, 
which  is  there  bounded  by  Tabor,  the  outpost  of 
the  hills  of  Zebulun.  East  of  Tabor  the  hill-country 
continued  so  as  to  screen  the  tribe  from  the  Sea  of 
Galilee,  but  a  continuous  tract  of  level  on  the  S.E. 
led  to  Bethshean  and  the  upper  part  of  the  Jordan 
valley.  West  of  Tabor  again,  a  little  to  the  south, 
is  Chesulloth,  the  modern  Iksal,  close  to  the  tra- 
ditional "  Mount  of  Precipitation  ;"  and  over  this 
the  boundary  probably  ran  in  a  slanting  course  till 
it  joined  Mount  Carmel,  where  the  Kishon  (Josh, 
xix.  20)  worked  its  way  below  the  eastern  bluff  of 
that  mountain — and  thus  completed  the  triangle 
at  its  western  apex.  Nazareth  lies  among  the  hills, 
a  few  miles  north  of  the  so-called  Mount  of  Pre- 
cipitation, and  therefore  escaped  being  in  Issachar. 
Almost  exactly  in  the  centre  of  this  plain  stood 
Jezreel,  on  a  low  swell,  attended  on  the  one  hand  by 
the  eminence  of  Mount  Gilboa,  on  the  other  by  that 
now  called  Ed  Duhj,  or  "  little  Hermon,"  the  latter 
having  Shunem,  Nain,  and  Endoron  its  slopes,  names 
which  recal  some  of  the  most  interesting  and  im- 
portant events  in  the  history  of  Israel. 

This  territory  was,  as  it  still  is,  among  the  richest 
land  in  Palestine.  Westward  was  the  famous  plain 
which  derived  its  name,  the  "  seed-plot  of  God" — 
such  is  the  signification  of  Jezreel — from  its  fertility, 
and  the  very  weeds  of  which  at  this  day  testify  to 
its  enormous  powers  of  production  (Stanley,  S.  fy  P. 
348).  [Esdraelon  ;  Jezreel.]  On  the  north 
is  Tabor,  which  even  under  the  burning  sun  of 
that  climate  is  said  to  retain  the  glades  and  dells 
of  an  English  wood  (ibid.  350).  On  the  east, 
behind  Jezreel,  is  the  opening  which  conducts  to 
the  plain  of  the  Jordan — to  that  Beth-shean  which 
was  proverbially  among  the  rabbis  the  gate  of 
Paiadise  for  its  fruitfulness.  It  is  this  aspect  of 
the  territory  of  Issachar  which  appears  to  be  al 
luded  to  in  the  Blessing  of  Jacob.  The  image  of 
the  "strong-boned  he-ass"  (D^lil  *10n) — the  large 
animal  used  for  burdens  and  field-work,  not  the 
lighter  and  swifter  she-ass  for  riding — "  couching 


b  The  word  here  rendered  "  hedge-rows "  is  one 
which  only  occurs  in  Judg.  v.  16.  The  sense  there  is 
evidently  similar  to  that  in  this  passage.  But  a*  to 
what  that  sense  is  all  the  authorities  differ.  See 
Gesenius,  Ben  Zev,  &c.  The  rendering  given  seems 
to  be  nearer  the  real  force  than  any. 

c  "Qty  DO?-  By  the  LXX.  rendered  a.vr\p  yewpyds. 
Comp.  their  similar  rendering  of  ["R^J?  (A.  V.  "  ser- 
vants," and  "  husbandry  ")  in  Gen.  xxvi.  14. 


ISSACHAR 

down  between  the  two  hedge-rows,"1'  chewing  the 
cud  of  stolid  ease  and  quiet — is  very  applicable, 
not  only  to  the  tendencies  and  habits,  but  to  the 
very  size  and  air  of  a  rural  agrarian  people,  while 
the  sequel  of  the  verse  is  no  less  suggestive  of 
the  certain  result  of  such  tendencies  when  unre- 
lieved by  any  higher  aspirations  : — "  He  saw  that 
rest,  was  good  and  the  land  pleasant,  and  he  bowed 
his  back  to  bear  and  became  a  slave'  to  tribute  " — 
the  tribute  imposed  on  him  by  the  various  ma- 
rauding tribes  who  were  attracted  to  his  territory 
by  the  richness  of  the  crops.  The  Blessing  of  Moses 
completes  the  picture.  He  is  not  only  "  in  tents" 
— in  nomad  or  semi-nomad  life — but  "  rejoicing  " 
in  them,  and  it  is  perhaps  not  straining  a  point  to 
observe  that  he  has  by  this  time  begun  to  lose  his 
individuality.  He  and  Zebulun  are  mentioned  to- 
gether as  having  j  art  possession  in  the  holy  moun- 
tain of  Tabor,  which  was  on  the  frontier  line  of 
each  (Deut.  xxxiii.  18,  19).  We  pass  from  this  to 
the  time  of  Deborah :  the  chief  struggle  in  the 
great  victory  over  Sisera  took  place  on  the  territory 
of  Issachar,  "  by  Taanach  at  the  waters  of  Megiddo  " 
(Judg.  v.  19) ;  but  the  allusion  to  the  tribe  in  the 
song  of  triumph  is  of  the  most  cursory  nature,  not 
consistent  with  its  having  taken  any  prominent  part 
in  the  action. 

One  among  the  Judges  of  Israel  was  from  Issa- 
char— Tola  (Judg.  x.  1) — but  beyond  the  length 
of  his  sway  we  have  only  the  fact  recorded  that  he 
resided  out  of  the  limits  of  his  own  tribe — at  Sha- 
mir in  Mount  Ephraim.  By  Josephus  he  is  omitted 
entirely  (see  Ant.  v.  7,  §6).  The  census  of  the 
tribe  taken  in  the  reign  of  David  has  already  been 
alluded  to.  It  is  contained  in  1  Chr.  vii.  1-5,  and 
an  expression  occurs  in  it  which  testifies  to  the 
nomadic  tendencies  above  noticed.  Out  of  the  whole 
number  of  the  tribe  no  less  than  36,000  were 
marauding  mercenary  troops — "bands"  (Dl|*l;n5) 
— a  term  applied  to  no  other  tribe  in  this  enu- 
meration, though  elsewhere  to  Gad,  and  uniformly 
to  the  irregular  bodies  of  the  Bedouin  nations  round 
Israel.d  This  was  probably  at  the  close  of  David's 
reign.  Thirty  years  before,  when  two  hundred  of 
the  head  men  of  the  tribe  had  gone  to  Hebron  to 
assist  in  making  David  king  over  the  entire  realm, 
different  qualifications  are  noted  in  them — they 
"  had  understanding  of  the  times  to  know  what 
Israel  ought  to  do  .  .  .  and  all  their  brethren  were 
at  their  commandment."  To  what  this  "  under- 
standing of  the  times  "  was  we  have  no  clue.  By 
the  later  Jewish  interpreters  it  is  explained  as  skill 
in  ascertaining  the  periods  of  the  sun  and  moon, 
the  intercalation  of  months,  and  dates  of  solemn 
feasts,  and  the  interpretation  of  the  signs  of  the 
heavens  (Targum,  ad  loc. ;  Jerome,  Quaest.  Heb.). 
Josephus  (Ant.  vii.  2,  §2)  gives. it  as  "  knowing 
the  things  that  were  to  happen  ;"  and  he  adds  that 
the  armed  men  who  came  with  these  leaders  were 
20,000.  One  of  the  wise  men  of  Issachar,  accord- 
ing to  an  old  Jewish  tradition  preserved  by  Jerome 
(Quaest.  Heb.  on  2  Chr.  xvii.  10),  was  Amasiah 


d  The  word  "  bands,"  which  is  commonly  employed 
in  the  A.  V.  to  render  Gedoodim,  as  above,  is  unfor- 
tunately used  in  1  Chr.  xii.  23  for  a  very  different 
term,  by  which  the  orderly  assembly  of  the  fighting 
men  of  the  tribes  is  denoted  when  they  visited  Hebron 
to  make  David  king.  This  term  is  *tJ>fcO  =  "  heads." 
We  may  almost  suspect  a  mere  misprint,  especially  as 
the  Vulgate  has  principes. 


ISSACHAR 

son  of  Zichri,  who  with  200,000  men  offered  him- 
self to  Jehovah  in  the  service  of  Jehoshaphat 
(2  Chr.  xvii.  16):  but  this  is  very  questionable, 
as  the  movement  appears  to  have  been  confined  to 
Judah  and  Benjamin.  The  ruler  of  the  tribe  at 
this  time  was  Omri,  of  the  great  family  of  Michael 
(1  Chr.  xxvii.  18  ;  comp.  vii.  3).  May  he  not  have 
been  the  forefather  of  the  king  of  Israel  of  the  same 
name — -the  founder  of  the  "  house  of  Omri "  and 
of  the  "  house  of  Ahab,"  the  builder  of  Samaria, 
possibly  on  the  same  hill  of  Shamir  on  which  the 
Issacharite  judge,  Tola,  had  formerly  held  his 
court?  But  whether  this  was  so  or  not  at  any  rate 
one  dynasty  of  the  Israelite  kings  was  Issacharite. 
Baasha,  the  son  of  Ahijah,  of  the  house  of  Issa- 
char,  a  member  of  the  army  with  which  Nadab  and 
all  Israel  were  besieging  Gibbethon,  apparently  not 
of  any  standing  in  the  tribe  (comp.  1  K.  xvi.  2), 
slew  the  king,  and  himself  mounted  the  throne 
( I  K.  xv.  27,  &c).  He  was  evidently  a  tierce  and 
warlike  man  (xvi.  29  ;  1  Chr.  xvi.  1),  and  an  ido- 
later like  Jeroboam.  The  Issacharite  dynasty  lusted 
during  the  24  years  of  his  reign  and  the  2  of  his 
son  Elah.  At  the  end  of  that  time  it  was  wrested 
from  him  by  the  same  means  that  his  father  had 
acquired  it,  and  Zimri,  the  new  king,  commenced 
his  reign  by  a  massacre  of  the  whole  kindred  and 
connexions  of  Baasha — he  left  him  "  not  even  so 
much  as  a  dog"  (xvi.  11). 

One  more  notice  of  Issachar  remains  to  be  added 
to  the  meagre  information  already  collected.  It  is 
fortunately  a  favourable  one.  There  may  be  no  truth 
in  the  tradition  just  quoted  that  the  tribe  was  in 
any  way  connected  with  the  reforms  of  Jehosha- 
phat, but  we  are  fortunately  certain  that,  distant  as 
Jezreel  was  from  Jerusalem,  they  took"  part  in  the 
passover  with  which  Hezekiah  sanctified  the  opening 
of  his  reign.  On  that  memorable  occasion  a  multi- 
tude of  the  people  from  the  northern  tribes,  and 
amongst  them  from  Issachar,  although  so  long 
estranged  from  the  worship  of  Jehovah  as  to  have 
forgotten  how  to  make  the  necessary  purifications, 
yet  by  the  enlightened  wisdom  of  Hezekiah  wen.' 
allowed  to  keep  the  feast;  and  they  did  keep  it 
seven  days  with  great  gladness — with  such  tu- 
multuous joy  as  had  not  been  known  since  the  time 
of  Solomon,  when  the  whole  land  was  one.  Nor 
diil  they  separate  till  the  occasion  had  been  sig- 
.nalised  by  an  immense  destruction  of  idolatrous 
altars  and  symbols,  "  in  Judah  and  Benjamin,  in 
Ephraim  and  Manasseh,"  up  to  the  very  confines 
of  [ssachar's  own  land — ami  then  "all  the  children 
of  Israel  returned  every  man  to  his  possession  into 
their  own  cities"  ( •_'  Chr.  xxxi.  1).  It  is  a  satis- 
factory farewell  to  take  of  the  tribe.  Within  five 
years  from  this  date  Shalmaneser  king  of  Assyria 
had  invaded  the  north  of  Palestine,  and  after  three 
years1  siege  had  taken  Samaria,  and  with  the  rest 
of  Israel  had  carried  Issachar  away  to  his  distant 
dominions.  There  we  must  be  content  to  leave 
them  until,  with  the  rest  of  their  brethren  of  nil 
the  tribes  of  the  children  of  Israel  (Dan  only  ex- 
cepted), the  twelve  thousand  of  the  tribe  of  Issachar 
shall  be  sealed  in  their  foreheads  (Rev.  vii.  7). 

2.  ("l^^'L;"1 :  'Iircaxap).  A  Korhite  Levite, one 
of  the  doorkeepers  (A.  V.  "  porter/")  of  the  house 
of  Jehovah,  seventh  son  of  OfiED-EDOM  (1  Chr. 
xxvi.  5).  [<!.] 

■  The  expressions  are,  iX'SQ  2?,  or  2?  alone, 
also  1TIT  FIN  Y1B>3  ~n  ;    and' those"  of  the"  I. XX., 


ISU1 


903 


.ISSHIAH  (iWJ).  1.  (Vat.  omits;  Alex. 
'leaias  :  Jesias).  A  descendant  of  Moses  by  his 
younger  son  Eliezer ;  the  head  of  the  numerous 
family  of  Kehabiah,  in  the  time  of  David  (1  Chr. 
xxiv.  21  ;  comp.  xxiii.  17,  xxvi.  25).  His  name  is 
elsewhere  given  as  JESHAIAH. 

2.  (laid  ;  Alex.  'Atria:  Jesia).  A  Levite  of  the 
house  of  Kohath  and  family  of  Uzziel ;  named  in 
the  list  of  the  tribe  in  the  time  of  David  (1  Chr. 
xxiv.  25). 

ISSUE  RUNNING.  The  texts  Lev.  xv.  2,  3, 
xxii.  4,  Num.  v.  2  (and  2  Sam.  iii.  29,  where  the 
malady  a  is  invoked  as  a  curse),  are  probably  to  be 
interpreted  of  gonorrhoea.  In  Lev.  xv.  3  a  distinc- 
tion is  introduced,  which  merely  means  that  the 
cessation  of  the  actual  flux  does  not  constitute  cere- 
monial cleanness,  but  that  the  patient  must  bide 
the  legal  time,  7  days  (ver.  13),  and  perform  the 
prescribed  purifications  and  sacrifice  (ver.  14).  See, 
however,  Surenhusius's  preface  to  the  treatise  Zabim 
of  the  Mishna,  where  another  interpretation  is  given. 
As  regards  the  specific  varieties  of  this  malady,  it 
is  generally  asserted  that  its  most  severe  form  (gon. 
virulenta)  is  modern,  having  first  appeared  in  the 
15th  century.  Chardin  (  Voyages  en  Perse,  ii.  200) 
states  that  he  observed  that  this  disorder  was  pre- 
valent in  Persia,  but  that  its  effects  were  far  less 
severe  than  in  western  climates.  If  this  be  true, 
it  would  go  some  way  to  explain  the  alleged  absence 
of  the  gon.  virul.  from  ancient  nosology,  which 
found  its  field  of  observation  in  the  East,  Greece, 
&c.  ;  and  to  confirm  the  supposition  that  the  milder 
form  only  was  the  subject  of  Mosaic  legislation. 
But,  beyond  this,  it  is  probable  that  diseases  may 
appear,  run  their  course,  and  disappear,  and,  for 
want  of  an  accurate  observation  of  their  symptoms, 
leave  no  trace  behind  them.  The  "  bed,"  "  seat," 
&c.  (Lev.  xv.  5,  6,  &c),  are  not  to  be  supposed 
regarded  by  that  law  as  contagious,  but  the  de- 
filement extended  to  them  merely  to  give  greater 
prominence  to  the  ceremonial  strictness  with  which 
the  case  was  ruled.  In  the  woman's  "  issue" 
(ver.  19)  the  ordinary  menstruation  seems  alone 
intended,  supposed  prolonged  (ver.  25)  to  a  morbid 
extent.  The  scriptural  handling  of  the  subject 
not  dealing,  as  in  the  case  of  leprosy,  in  symp- 
toms, it  seems  gratuitous  to  detail  them  here: 
those  who  desire  such  knowledge  will  find  them  in 
any  compendium  of  therapeutics.  The  reft',  are 
Joseph,  tie  B.  J.  v.  5,  6,  vi.  9,  3 ;  Mishna,  Chelim.  i. 
3,  8  ;  Maimon.  ad  Zabim.  ii.  2  :  whence  we  learn 
that  persons  thus  affected  might  not  ascend  the 
Temple  mount,  nor  share  in  any  religious  celebra- 
tion, nor  even  enter  Jerusalem.  See  also  Michaelis, 
Laws  of  Moses,  iv.  282.  [H.  H.] 

ISTALCUEUS.  In  1  Esd.  viii.  40,  the  "son 
of  Istalcurus "  (<5  rov  laraXKovpov)  is  substituted 
for  "  and  Zabbud  "  of  the  corresponding  list  in  Ezra 
(viii.  14).     The  Keri  has  Ziccur  instead  of  Zabbud, 

and  of  this  there  is  perhaps  some  trace  in  Istalcurus. 

IS'UAII   (Tmh,   i.e.    Isnvah:    2uvid,   Alex. 

t  :  • 
'Itcrovd  :  Jesud),  second   son  of  Asher  (1  Chr.  vii. 
30  .     Elsewhere  in  the  A.  V .   his  name,  though 
the  same  in  Hebrew,  appears  as  [SHUAH. 

IS'UI  CYC'\  i.  e.  Ishvi:  Vat.  and  Alex.  'UovK : 
Jessui),  third  sou  of  Asher    I  len.  xlvi.  17)  ;  founder 


pu<ri?  i<   to0   (ru^m-ros,   the   verb  yovopiiveU;   or    the 
adj.  yovoppvi'is,  &C. 


904 


ITALY 


of  a  family  called  after  him,  though  in  the  A.  V. 
appearing  as  the  Jestjites  (Num.  xxvi.  44).  Else- 
where the  name  also  appears  as  Ishuai. 

IT'ALY  {'lru\la).  This  word  is  used  in  the 
N.  T.  in  the  usual  sense  of  the  period,  t.  e.  in  its 
true  geographical  sense,  as  denoting  the  whole  na- 
tural peninsula  between  the  Alps  and  the  Straits  of 
Messina.  For  the  progress  of  the  history  of  the 
word,  first  as  applied  to  the  extreme  south  of  the 
peninsula,  then  as  extended  northwards  to  the  right 
bank  of  the  Po,  see  the  Diet,  of  Geogr.,  vol.  ii.  pp. 
75,  76.  From  the  time  of  the  close  of  the  Republic 
it  was  employed  as  we  employ  it  now.  In  the  N.  T. 
it  occurs  three,  or  indeed,  more  correctly  speaking, 
four  times.  In  Acts  x.  1,  the  Italian  cohort  at 
Caesarea  (ji  cnre'ipa  r\  KaXovfxivt]  iTaAi/crj,  A.  V. 
"  Italian  baud"),  consisting,  as  it  doubtless  did,  of 
men  recruited  in  Italy,  illustrates  the  military  rela- 
tions of  the  imperial  peninsula  with  the  provinces. 
[Army.]  In  Acts  xviii.  2,  where  we  are  told  of  the 
expulsion  of  Aquila  and  Priscilla  with  their  com- 
patriots "  from  Italy,"  we  are  reminded  of  the 
large  Jewish  population  which  many  authorities 
show  that  it  contained.  Acts  xxvii.  1,  where  the 
beginning  of  St.  Paul's  voyage  "  to  Italy  "  is  men- 
tioned, and  the  whole  subsequent  narrative,  illus- 
trate the  trade  which  subsisted  between  the  penin- 
sula and  other  parts  of  the  Mediterranean.  And 
the  words  in  Heb.  xiii.  24,  "  They  of  Italy  (ol  curb 
ttjs  'IraXlas)  salute  you,"  whatever  they  may 
prove  for  or  against  this  being  the  region  in  which 
the  letter  was  written  (and  the  matter  has  been 
strongly  argued  both  ways),  are  interesting  as  a 
specimen  of  the  progress  of  Christianity  in  the 
west.  [J.  S.  H.] 

ITH'AI  01VK :  Alpli  'Wov.  Ethai),  a  Ben- 

jamite,  sou  of  Ribai  of  Gibeah,  one  of  the  heroes 
of  David's  guard  (1  Chr.  xi.  31).  In  the  parallel 
list  of  2  Sam.  xxiii.  the  name  is  given  as  Ittai. 
But  Kennicott  decides  that  the  form  Ithai  is  the 
original  [Dissertation,  ad  loc). 

ITHAMAR    (TOnW;    'iflajufy;    Ithamar'), 

the  youngest  son  of  Aaron  (Ex.  vi.  23).  After  the 
deaths  of  Nadab  and  Abihu  (Lev.  x.  1),  Eleazar  and 
Ithamar,  having  been  admonished  to  show  no  mark 
of  sorrow  for  their  brothers'  loss,  were  appointed  to 
succeed  to  their  places  in  the  priestly  office,  as  they 
had  left  no  children  (Ex.  xxviii.  1,  40,  43  ;  Num.  iii. 
3,  4  ;  1  Chr.  xxiv.  2).  In  the  distribution  of  ser- 
vices belonging  to  the  Tabernacle  and  its  transport 
on  the  march  of  the  Israelites,  the  Gershonites  had 
charge  of  the  curtains  and  hangings,  and  the  Merar- 
ites  of  the  pillars,  cords,  and  boards,  and  both  of 
these  departments  were  placed  under  the  super- 
intendence of  Ithamar  (Ex.  xxxviii.  21  ;  Num.  iv. 
21-33).  These  services  were  continued  under  the 
Temple  system,  so  far  as  was  consistent  with  its 
stationary  character,  but  instead  of  being  appro- 
priated to  families,  they  were  divided  by  lot;  the 
rirst  lot  being  taken  by  the  family  of  Eleazar, 
whose  descendants  were  more  numerous  than  those 
of  Ithamar  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  4,  6).  The  high-priest- 
hood passed  into  the  family  of  Ithamar  in  the  per- 
son of  Eli,  but  for  what  reason  we  are  not  in- 
formed. It  reverted  into  its  original  line  in  the 
person  of  Zadok,  in  consequence  of  Abiathar's  par- 
ticipation in  the  rebellion  of  Adonijah.  Thus  was 
fulfilled  the  prophecy  delivered  to  Samuel  against 
Eli  (1  Sam.  ii.  31-35  ;  1  K.  ii.  26,  27,  35 ;  Joseph. 
Ant.  viii.  1,  §:'.). 


ITHRITE,  THE 

A  descendant  of  Ithamar,  by  name  Daniel,  is 
mentioned  as  ifcturning  from  captivity  in  the  time 
of  Artaxerxes  (Ezr.  viii.  2).  [H.  W.  P.] 

ITH'IEL  iWftWM:  'E0^\:  Ethecl).  1.  A 
Benjamite,  son  of  Jesaiah  (Neh.  xi.  7). 

2.  (LXX.  omits  ;  Vul.  translates,  cum  quo  est 
Dens).  One  of  two  persons — Ithiel  and  Heal — to 
whom  Agur  ben-Jakeh  delivered  his  discourse 
(Prov.  xxx.  1).     [Ucal.] 

ITH'MAH  (nnn*  :  'nOafid;  Alex.  'ueefid: 
Jethma),  a  Moabite,  one  of  the  heroes  of  David's 
guard,  according  to  the  enlarged  list  of  Chronicles 
(1  Chr.  xi.  46). 

ITH'NAN  (prV ;  in  both  MSS.  of  the  LXX. 
the  name  is  corrupted  by  being  attached  to  that 
next  it:  'Acropiavaiv,  Aiex.  'I0j/a£i(£ :  Jethnam), 
one  of  the  towns  in  the  extreme  south  of  Judafa 
(Josh.  xv.  23),  named  with  Kedesh  and  Telem 
(comp.  1  Sam.  xv.  4),  and  therefore  probably  on 
the  borders  of  the  deseit,  if  nut  actually  in  the 
desert  itself.  No  trace  of  its  existence  has  yet  been 
discovered — nor  does  it  appear  to  have  been  known 
to  Jerome.  The  village  Idna,  which  recals  the 
name,  is  between  Hebron  and  Beit-Jibrin,  and  there- 
fore much  too  far  north.  [fi\\ 

ITHRA  (fcTuV:  'U64p,'lo66p;  Joseph.  Ant. 
vii.  10,  §1,  leBdp&os :  Jetra),  an  Israelite  (2  Sam. 
xvii.  25)  or  Ishmaelite  (1  Chr.  ii.  17,  "  Jether  the 
Ishmeelite ") ;  the  father  of  Amasa  by  Abigail, 
David's  sister.  He  was  thus  brother-in-law  to 
David  and  uncle  to  Joab,  Abishai,  and  Asahel,  the 
three  "  sons  of  Zeruiah."  There  is  no  absolute 
means  of  settling  which  of  these — Israelite  or  Ish- 
maelite— is  correct :  but  there  can  be  little  doubt 
that  the  latter  is  so ;  the  fact  of  the  admixture  of 
Ishmaelite  blood  in  David's  family  being  a  tit  sub- 
ject for  notice^in  the  genealogies,  whereas  Ithra's 
being  an  Israelite  would  call  for  no  remark. 
[Jether.]  [<;.] 

ITH'RAN  (pJV).  1.  'Wpdv,  'UOpdfj. :  Jeth- 
ram,  Jethran),  a  son  of  Dishon,  a  Horite  (Gen. 
xxxvi.  26;  1  Chr.  i.  41);  and  probably  a  phyl- 
arch  ("  Duke,"  A.  V.)  of  a  tribe  of  the  Horim, 
as  was  his  father  (Gen.  xxxvi.  30)  ;.  for  the  latter 
was  evidently  a  son  of  Seir  (vers.  21  and  30),  and 
not  a  son  of  Anah  (ver.  25). 

2.  Cledpd :  Jethran),  a  descendant  of  Asher, 
in  the  genealogy  contained  in  1  Chr.  vii.  30-40. 

[E.  S.  P.] 

ITH'REAM  (DiniV:  'ledepadfi,  'Udpad/J.; 
Alex.  EleOepad/x,  'ItOpdfj.  ;  Joseph.  Te8pad/j.rjs : 
Jethraam),  a  son  of  David,  born  to  him  in  Hebron, 
and  distinctly  specified  as  the  sixth,  and  as  the 
child  of  "  Eglah,  David's  wife"  (2  Sam.  iii.  5; 
1  Chr.  iii.  3).  In  the  ancient  Jewish  traditions 
Eglah  is  said  to  have  been  Michal,  and  to  have  died 
in  giving  birth  to  Ithream. 

ITH'RTTE,  THE  (nn^H  :  6  •Efrpcubs,  -E0€- 
vaios,  'leOpl ;  Alex.  6  'EOpcuos,  Tedpirrjs,  'leBept, 
'Wr/pei:  Jethrites,  Jethraeus),  the  native  of  a  place, 
or  descendant  of  a  man,  called  Iether  (according  to 
the  Hebrew  mode  of  foiming  derivatives)  :  the  de- 
signation of  two  of  the  members  of  David's  guard, 
Ira  and  Gareb  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  38;  1  Chr.  xi.  40). 
The  Ithrite  (A.  V.  "Ithrites")  is  mentioned  in 
1  Chr.  ii.  53  as  among  the  "  families  of  Kirjath- 
jearim  ;"  but  this   does   net   give  us  much  chic  to 


ITTAH-KAZIN 

the  derivation  of  the  teim,  except  that  it  fixes  it  as 
belonging  to  Judah.  The  two  Ithrite  heroes  of 
David's  guard  may  have  come  from  Jattir,  in  the 
mountains  of  Judah,  one  of  the  places  which  were 
the  "  haunt "  of  David  and  his  men  in  their  free- 
booting  wanderings,  and  where  he  had  "friends" 
(1  Sam.  xxx.  27;  comp.  31).  Ira  has  been  sup- 
posed to  be  identical  with  "  Ira  the  Jairite,"  David's 
priest  (2  Sam.  xx.  2(5) — the  Syriac  version  reading 
"  from  Jatir  "  in  that  place.  But  nothing  more 
than  conjecture  can  be  arrived  at  on  the  point. 

IT'TAH-KA'ZIN  (fV?  HFIX? :  iirl  irtAivKa- 
Taad/j.  •  Alex Kaffifj. :   Thacasin),  one  of  the 

landmarks  of  the  boundary  of  Zebulun  (Josh.  xix. 
13),  named  next  to  Gath-hepher.  Like  that  place 
(A.  V.  "  Gittah-hepher")  the  name  is  probably 
Eth-kazin,  with  the  Hebrew  particle  of  motion  (ah) 
added — i.  e.  "  to  Eth-kazin."  Taken  as  Hebrew  the 
name  bears  the  interpretation  "  time,  or  people,  of  a 
judge  "  (Ges.  Thes.  1083  6).  It  has  not  been  iden- 
tified. [G.] 

IT'TAI  0m).  1.  ('Edt,  and  so  Josephus  ; 
Alex.  'E66ei:  Ethai)  "  Ittai  the  Gittite,"  i.e. 
the  native  of  Gath,  a  Philistine  in  the  army  of 
king  David.  He  appears  only  during  the  revo- 
lution of  Absalom.  We  first  discern  him  on  the 
morning  of  David's  flight,  while  the  king  was 
standing  under  the  olive-tree  below  the  city,  watch- 
ing the  army  and  the  people  defile  past  him.  [See 
David,  p.  412a.]  Last  in  the  procession  came 
the  600  heroes  who  had  formed  David's  band 
during  his  wanderings  in  Judah,  and  had  been 
with  him  at  Gath  (2  Sam.  xv.  18  ;  comp.  1  Sam. 
x::iii.  13,  xxvii.  2,  xxx.  9,  10 ;  and  see  Joseph.  Ant. 
vii.  9,  §2).  Amongst  these,  apparently  command- 
ing them,  was  Ittai  the  Gittite  (ver.  19).  He  caught 
the  eye  of  the  king,  who  at  once  addressed  him 
and  besought  him  as  "a  stranger  and  an  exile." 
and  as  one  who  had  but  very  recently  joined  his 
service,  not  to  attach  himself  to  a  doubtful  cause, 
but  to  return  "with  his  brethren"  and  abide  with 
the  king"  (19,  20).  But  Ittai  is  firm;  he  is  the 
king'-;  slave  ("OJ?,  A.  Y.  "servant"),  and  wherever 
his  master  goes  he  will  go.  Accordingly  he  is  allowed 
by  David  to  proceed,  and  he  j  asses  over  the  Kedron 
with  the  king  (xv.  22.  LXX.i,  with  all  bis  men, 
and  "all  the  little  ones  that  were  with  him." 
The>e  "  little  ones"  (P]t3n-t?3,  "all  the  children  ") 
must  have  been  the  families  of  the  band,  their 
"households"  (1  Sam.  xxvii.  3).  They  accom- 
panied them  during  their  wanderings  in  Judah,  often 
in  great  risk  (1  Sam.  xxx.  il),  and  they  W( 
likely  to  have  them  behind  in  this  fresh  commence- 
ment of  their  wandering  life. 

When  the  army  was  numbered  and  organised  by 
David  at  Mahanaim,  Ittai  again  appears,  now  in 
command  of  a  third  part  of  the  force,  and  (for  the 
time  at  least)  enjoying  equal  rank  with  Juab  and 
Abishai  (2  Sam.  xviii.  2,  5,  12).  Bui  here,  on  the 
eve  of  the  great  battle,  we  take  Leave  of  this  valiant 
and  faithful  stranger;  his  conduct  in  the  light  and 
his  subsequent  late  are  alike  unknown  to  as.  Nor 
is  he  mentioned  in  the  lists  of  David's  captains  and 
of  the  hemes  of  his  body-guard  (see  -j  Sam.  ixiii. ; 
I  Chr.  xi.i,  lists  which  are  possibly  of  a  elate  pre- 
vious td  Ittai's  arrival  in  Jerusalem. 

A  The  meaning  of  this  is  doubtful.  "The  kin^r" 
may  tie  Absalom,  or  it  may  be  [ttai's  former  king, 
Achish.    By  the  LXX.  the  words  are  omitted. 


ITURAEA 


HOo 


An  interesting  tradition  is  related  by  Jerome 
(Quaest.  Hebr.  on  1  Chr.  xx.  2).  "  David  took 
the  crown  off  the  head  of  the  image  of  Milcom 
(A.  V.  'their  king').  But  by  the  law  it  was 
forbidden  to  any  Israelite  to  touch  either  gold  or 
silver  of  an  idol.  Wherefore  they  say  that  Ittai 
the  Gittite,  who  had  come  to  David  from  the 
Philistines,  was  the  man  who  snatched  the  crown 
from  the  head  of  Milcom  ;  tor  it  was  lawful  for 
a  Hebrew  to  take  it  from  the  hand  of  a  man, 
though  not  from  the  head  of  the  idol."  The  main 
difficulty  to  the  reception  of  this  legend  lies  in  the 
tact  that  if  Ittai  was  engaged  in  the  Ammonite 
war,  which  happened  several  years  before  Absa- 
lom's revolt,  the  expression  of  David  (2  Sam.  xv. 
20),  "  thou  earnest  but  yesterday  "  loses  its  force. 
However  these  words  may  be  merely  a  strong 
metaphor. 

From  the  expression  "thy  brethren"  (xv.  20) 
we  may  infer  that  there  were  other  Philistines 
besides  Ittai  in  the  six  hundred ;  but  this  is  un- 
certain. Ittai  was  not  exclusively  a  Philistine 
name,  nor  does  "  Gittite  " — as  in  the  case  of 
Obed-edom,  who  was  a  Levite — necessarily  im- 
ply Philistiae  parentage.  Still  David's  words, 
"  stranger  and  exile,"  seem  to  show  that  he  was 
not  an  Israelite. 

2.  ('Etrfloi';  Ithai).  Son  of  Ribai,  from  Gibeah 
of  Benjamin  ;  one  of  the  thirty  heroes  of  David's 
guard  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  29).  In  the  parallel  list  of 
I  Chr.  xi.  the  name  is  given  as  Ithai.  [G.] 

ITURAEA  Qlrovpaia),  a  small  province  on 
the  north-western  border  of  Palestine,  lying  along 
the  base  of  Mount  Hermon.  In  Luke  iii.  1  it  is 
stated  that  Philip  was  "tetrarch  of  Ituraea  and  the 
region  of  Trachonitis  ;"  and  this  is  the  on'y  men- 
tion in  Scripture  of  the  district  under  its  Greek 
name.  But  the  country  became  historic  long  before 
the  rule  of  the  Herodian  family  or  the  advent  of 
the  Greeks.  Jetur  ("1-112))  was  a  son  of  Ishmael, 
and  he  gave  his  name,  like  the  rest  of  his  brethren, 
to  the  little  province  he  colonised  (Gen.  xxv.  15, 
10).  In  after  years,  when  the  Israelites  had  settled 
in  Canaan,  a  war  broke  out  between  the  half-tribe 
of  Manasseh  and  the  Ragarites  (or  Ishmaelites), 
Jetur,  Nephish,  and  Nodab.  The  latter  were 
conquered,  and  the  children  of  Manasseh  "  dwelt 
in  the  land,  and  they  increased  I'mni  Bashan  unto 
Baal-Hermon."  They  already  possessed  tin'  whole 
of  Bashan,  including  Gaulanitis  and  Trachonitis; 
and  now  they  conquered  and  colonised  the  little 
province  of  Jetur,  which  lay  between  Bashan  and 
.Mount  Herman  (1  C\w.  v.  19-23).  Subsequent 
history  shows  that  the  Ishmaelites  were  neither 
annihilated  nor  entirely  dispossessed,  for  in  the 
second  century  B.O.,  Aristobulus,  king  of  the  Jews, 
tered  tin-  province,  then  called  by  its  Greek 
name  ii  ive  the  inhabitants  theii  - 

of  Judai  in  or  bani  hment   (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  11, 
l. mined,  many  retired  to  their 

own  TOl  •,  and  to  the  defiles    of  lie:  in. .11 

tainoiis    regions    in    the    kingdom    of    Cliale: 

inhabited  partly  by  Ituraeans,  whom   '• 
as    Katcovpyai    itavrts    i\\\.    518,    520).       Other 
eai  ly  u  nti  rs  repre  i  at  them  as  \  and 

daring  plunderers  (Cic.  Phil.  2,  -l  !  ;   Virg,  Oeorg. 
;  Lucan.   Phar.  \ii.  230).      Ituraea,  with 
the  adjoining  proi  ince  .  fell  into  the  hand 

lied  Zcnodorus ;   but,  al t   B.C.  20,  they 

roin  him  b)  the  Roman  i  mperor,  and 
3  N 


906 


IVAH 


given  to  Herod  the  Great  (Joseph.  Ant.  xv.  10,  §1), 
who  bequeathed  them  to  his  son  Philip  (Ant. 
xvii.  8,  §1 ;  Luke  iii.  1;  comp.  Joseph.  B.J.  ii. 
6,  §3). 

The  passages  above  referred  to  point  clearly  to 
the  position  of  Ituraea,  and  show,  notwithstanding 
the  arguments  of  Reland  and  others  (Reland,  p.  106  ; 
Lightfoot,  Hor.  Heb.  s.  v.  Ituraea),  that  it  was 
distinct  from  Auranitis.  Pliny  rightly  places  it 
north  of  Bashan  and  near  Damascus  (v.  23) ;  and 
J.  de  Vitry  describes  it  as  adjoining  Trachonitis, 
and  lying  along  the  base  of  Libanus  between  Tibe- 
rias and  Damascus  (Gesta  Dei,  p.  1074;  comp.  pp. 
771,  1003).     At  the  place  indicated  is  situated  the 

modern  province  of  Jedur  (  ,»»X»ls»)>  which  is  just 
the  Arabic  form  of  the  Hebrew  Jetur  ("V)t3*).  It 
is  bounded  on  the  east  by  Trachonitis,  on  the  south 
by  Gaulanitis,  on  the  west  by  Hermon,  and  on  the 
north  by  the  plain  of  Damascus.  It  is  table-land 
with  an  undulating  surface,  and  has  little  conical 
and  cup-shaped  hills  at  intervals.  The  southern 
section  of  it  has  a  rich  soil,  well  watered  by  nu- 
merous springs,  and  streams  from  Hermon.  The 
greater  part  of  the  northern  section  is  entirely 
different.  The  surface  of  the  ground  is  covered 
with  jagged  rocks ;  in  some  places  heaped  up  in 
huge  piles,  in  others  sunk  into  deep  pits;  atone 
place  smooth  and  naked,  at  another  seamed  with 
yawning  chasms  in  whose  rugged  edges  rank  grass 
and  weeds  spring  up.  The  rock  is  all  basalt,  and 
the  formation  similar  to  that  of  the  Lejah.  [Argob.] 
The  molten  lava  seems  to  have  issued  from  the 
earth  through  innumerable  pores,  to  have  spread 
over  the  plain,  and  then  to  have  been  rent  and 
shattered  while  cooling  (Porter's  Handbook,  p.  465). 
Jedur  contains  thirty-eight  towns  and  villages,  ten 
of  which  are  now  entirely  desolate,  and  all  the  rest 
contain  only  a  few  families  of  poor  peasants,  living 
in  wretched  hovels  amid  heaps  of  ruins  (Porter's 
Damascus,  ii.  272  sq.).  [J.  L.  P.] 

I'VAH,  or  AVA  (!"IW,  or  Nty ;  'Aid  or  'A/3<£: 
Ava),  which  is  mentioned  in  Scripture  twice  (2  X. 
xviii.  34,  xix.  13  ;  comp.  Is.  xxxvii.  13)  in  con- 
nexion with  Hena  and  Sepharvaim,  and  once  (2  K. 
xvii.  24)  in  connexion  with  Babylon  and  Cutliah, 
must  be  sought  in  Babylonia,  and  is  probably 
identical  with  the  modern  Hit,  which  is  the  "is  of 
Herodotus  (i.  179).  This  town  lay  on  the  Eu- 
phrates, between  Sippara  (Sepharvaim)  and  Anah 
(Hena),  with  which  it  seems  to  have  been  politi- 
cally united  shortly  before  the  time  of  Sennacherib 
(2  K.  six.  13).  It  is  probably  the  Ahava  (NIHK) 
of  Ezra  (viii.  15).  The  name  is  thought  to  have 
been  originally  derived  from  that  of  a  Babylonian 
god,  Iva,  who  represents  the  sky  or  Aether,  and  to 
whom  the  town  is  supposed  to  have  been  dedicated 
(Sir  H.  Rawlinson,  in  Rawlinson 's  Herodotus,  i. 
606,  note).  In  this  case  Ivv-ah  (H-IJ?)  would  seem 
to  be  the  most  proper  pointing.  The  pointing 
Ava,  or  rather  Aw  a  (N-1J7),  shows  a  corruption  of 
articulation,  which  might  readily  pass  on  to  Ahava 
(JOHN).  In  the  Talmud  the  name  appears  as 
Ihih  (NTT1)  ;  and  hence  would  be  formed  the 
Greek  Als,  and  the  modern  Hit,  where  the  t  is 
merely  the  feminine  ending.  Isidore  of  Charax 
seems  to  intend  the  same  place  by  his  'AzI-ttoKis 
(Mans.  Parth.  p.  5).  .Some  have  thought  that  it 
occurs  as  1st  in  the  Egyptian  Inscriptions  of  the 


IVORY 

time  of  Thothmes  III.,  about  B.C.  1450  (Birch,  in 
Otia  Aegyptiaca,  p.  80). 

This  place  has  always  been  famous  for  its  bitumen 
springs.  It  is  bitumen  which  is  brought  to 
Thothmes  III.  as  tribute  from  1st.  From  Is,  ac- 
cording to  Herodotus,  was  obtained  the  bitumen 
used  as  cement  in  the  walls  of  Babylon  (I.  s.  c). 
Isidore  calls  Aeipolis,  "  the  place  where  are  the 
bitumen  springs"  (tvda  atr^aAriTiSes  nrtyai). 
These  springs  still  exist  at  Hit,  and  sufficiently 
mark  the  identity  of  that  place  with  the  Herodotean 
Is,  and  therefore  probably  with  the  Ivah  of  Scrip- 
ture. They  have  been  noticed  by  most  of  our 
Mesopotamian  travellers  (see,  among  others,  Rich's 
First  Memoir  on  Babylon,  p.  64,  and  Chesuey's 
Euphrates  Expedition,  i.  55).  *     [G.  R.] 

IVORY  (Jf,  shen,  in  all  passages,  except  1  If. 
x.  22,  and  2  Chr.  ix.   21,  where  D*3iW,  shen- 

habbim,  is  so  rendered).  The  word  shen  literally 
signifies  the  "tooth"  of  any  animal,  and  hence  more 
especially  denotes  the  substance  of  the  projecting 
tusks  of  elephants.  By  some  of  the  ancient  nations 
these  tusks  were  imagined  to  be  horns  (Ez.  xxvii.  15  ; 
Plin.  viii.  4,  xviii.  1),  though  Diodorus  Siculus 
(i.  55)  correctly  calls  them  teeth.  As  they  were 
first  acquainted  with  elephants  through  their  ivory, 
which  was  an  important  article  of  commerce,  the 
shape  of  the  tusks,  in  all  probability,  led  them  into 
this  error.  It  is  remarkable  that  no  word  in 
Biblical  Hebrew  denotes  an  elephant,  unless  the 
latter  portion  of  the  compound  skenhabbim  be  sup- 
posed to  have  this  meaning.  Gesenius  derives  it 
from  the  Sanscrit  ibhas,  "an  elephant ;"  Keil  (on 
1  K.  x.  22)  from  the  Coptic  eboy  ;  while  Sir  Henry 
Rawlinson  mentions  a  word  habba,  which  he  met 
with  in  the  Assyrian  inscriptions,  and  which  he 
understands  to  mean  "  the  large  animal,"  the  term 
being  applied  both  to  the  elephant  and  the  camel 
{Joum.  of  As,  Soc.  xii.  463).  It  is  suggested  in 
Gesenius'  Thesaurus  (s.  v.)  that  the  original  read- 
ing may  have  been    D^^H  |t>,  "ivory,  ebony" 

(cf.  Ez.  xxvii.  15).  Hitzig  (Isaiah,  p.  643),  with- 
out any  authority,  renders  the  word  "  nubischen 
Zalm."  The  Targum  Jonathan  on  1  K.  x.  22  has 
yQI  )p,  "elephant's  tusk,"  while  the Peshito gives 
simply  "  elephants."  In  the  Targum  of  the  Pseudo 
Jonathan,  Gen.  1.  1  is  translated,  "  and  Joseph 
placed  his  father  upon  a  bier  of  fOl^t?  "  (shin- 
daphiri),  which  is  conjectured  to  be  a  valuable 
species  of  wood,  but  for  which  Buxtorf,  with  great 
probability,  suggests  as  another  reading  ^DT  Jp", 
"  ivory." 

The  Assyrians  appear  to  have  carried  on  a  great 
traffic  in  ivory.  Their  early  conquests  in  India 
had  made  them  familiar  with  it,  and  (according  to 
one  rendering  of  the  passage)  their  artists  supplied 
the  luxurious  Tynans  with  carvings  in  ivory  from 
the  isles  of  Chittim  (Ez.  xxvii.  6)."  On  the  obelisk 
in  the  British  Museum  the  captives  or  tribute- 
bearers  are  represented  as  carrying  tusks.  Among 
the  merchandise  of  Babylon,  enumerated  in  Rev. 
xviii.  12,  are  included  "all  manner  vessels  of 
ivory."  The  skilled  workmen  of  Hiram,  king  of 
Tyre,  fashioned  the  great  ivory  throne  of  Sol.  mon, 
aiid  overlaid  it  with  pure  gold  (1  K.  X.  18  ; 
ix.  17).  The  ivory  thus  employed  was  supplied 
by  the  caravans  of  Dedan  (Is.  xxi.  1:5  ■  Ez.  xxvii. 
15),  or  was  brought  witli  apes  ami  peacocks  by  the 
navy  of  Tharshish  (1  K.  x.  22).     The  Egyptians, 


IVORY 

at  a  very  early  period,  ma  le  use  of  this  material  in 
decoration.  The  cover  of  a  small  ivory  box  in  the 
Egyptian  collection  at  the  Louvre  is  "  inscribed 
with  the  praenomen  Nefer-ka-re:  or  Neper-cheies, 
adopted  by  a  dynasty  found  in  the  upper  line  ot 
the  tablet  of  Abydos,  and  attributed  by  M.  Bunsen 
to  the  fifth.  ...  In  the  time  of  Thothmes  III. 
ivory  was  imported  in  considerable  quantities  into 
Egypt,  either  '  in  boats  laden  with  ivory  and 
ebony  '  from  Ethiopia,  or  else  in  tusks  and  cups 
from  the  Kuten-nu.  .  .  .  The  celebrated  car  at 
Florence  has  its  linchpins  tipped  with  ivory" 
(Birch,  in  Trans,  of  Roy.  Soc.  of  Lit.  iii.  2nd 
series).  The  specimens  of  Egyptian  ivory  work, 
which  are  found  in  the  principal  museums  of  Eu- 
rope, are,  most  of  them,  in  the  opinion  of  Mr.  Birch, 
of  a  date  anterior  to  the  Persian  invasion,  and  some 
even  as  old  as  the  18th  dynasty. 

The  ivory  used  by  the  Egyptians  was  principally 
brought  from  Ethiopia  (Herod,  iii.  114),  though 
their  elephants  were  originally  from  Asia.  The 
Ethiopians,  according  to  Diodorus  Siculus  (i.  55), 
brought  to  Sesostris  "  ebony  and  gold,  and  the  teeth 
of  elephants."  Among  the  tribute  paid  by  them  to 
the  Persian  kings  were  "  twenty  large  tusks  of 
ivory"  (Herod,  iii.  97).  In  the  Periplus  of  the 
Red  Sea  (c.  4,,  attributed  to  Arrian,  Coloe  (Calai) 
is  said  to  be  "  the  chief  mart  for  ivory."  It  was 
thence  carried  down  to  Adouli  {Zalla,  or  Thulla), 
a  port  on  the  Red  Sea,  about  three  days'  journey 
from  Coloe,  together  with  the  hides  of  hippopotami, 
tortoise-shell,  apes,  and  slaves  (Plin.  vi.  34).  The 
elephants  and  rhinoceroses,  from  which  it  was  ob- 
tained, were  killed  further  up  the  country,  and  few 
were  taken  near  the  sea,  or  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
Adouli.  At  Ptolemais  Theron  was  found  a  little 
ivory  like  that  of  Adouli  (Peripl.  c.  3).  Ptolemy 
Philadelphia  made  this  port  the  depot  of  the  ele- 
phant trade  (Plin.  vi.  34).  According  to  Pliny 
(viii.  10),  ivory  was  so  plentiful  on  the  borders  of 
Ethiopia  that  the  natives  made  door-posts  of  it,  and 
even  fences  and  stalls  for  their  cattle.  The  author 
of  the  Periplus  (c.  1C)  mentions  Khapta  as  another 
station  of  the  ivory  trade,  but  the  ivory  brought 
down  to  this  puit  is  said  to  have  been  of  an  inferior 
quality,  and  "  for  the  most  part  found  in  the  woods, 
damaged  by  rain ,  or  collected  from  animals  drowned 
by  the  overflow  of  the  livers  at  the  equinoxes" 
(Smith,  Diet.  Qeogr.  art  Ehapta).  The  Egyptian 
merchants  traded  for  ivory  and  onyx  stones  to 
Barygaza,  the  port  to  which  was  carried  down  the 
commerce  of  Western  India  from  Ozene  (Peripl.  c. 
49). 

In  the  early  ages  of  Greece  ivory  was  frequently 
employed  for  put  poses  of  ornament.  The  trappings 
of  horses  were  studded  with  it  (Horn.  II.  v.  58  I  |: 
it  was  used  for  the  bandies  of  keys  {Oil.  xxi.  7), 
and  for  the  bosses  of  shield'?  files.  8c.  Here.  141, 
142).  The  '-ivory  house"  ot  Ahab  (1  K.  mi. 
39)  was  probably  a  palace,  the  walls  of  which  were 
panelled  with  ivory,  like  the  palace  of  Menelaus 
described  by  Home  iv.  7:'.;  cf.  Eur.  Iph. 

Anl.  583,  eKe<pai/To5eToi  S6fj.oi.  Com]),  also  Am. 
iii.  15,  and  I's.  \h.  s,  unless  tin-  "ivory  palaces" 
in  the  latter  passage  were  perfume  boxes  m 

that   material,   as    ha-   l a    conjectured  .      Beds 

inlaid  or  veneered  with   ivory  were  in   use  ai g 

the  Hebrews  (Am.  vi.  1;  of.  llom.  "</.  nriii. 
200),  as  also  amnii-    the  Egyptians    (Wilkinson, 


IZRI 


907 


Anc.  Eg.  iii.  1G9).  The  practice  of  inlaying  and 
veneering  wool  with  ivory  and  tortoise-shell  is 
described  by  Pliny  (xvi.  84).  The  great  ivory 
throne  of  Solomon,  the  work  of  the  Tyrian  crafts- 
men, has  been  already  mentioned  (cf.  Rev.  xx.  11)  ; 
but  it  is  difficult  to  determine  whether  the  "  tower 
of  ivory"  of  Cant.  vii.  4  is  merely  a  figure  of 
speech,  or  whether  it  had  its  original  among  the 
things  that  were.  By  the  luxurious  Phoenicians 
ivory  was  employed  to  ornament  the  boxwood 
rowing  benches  (or  "  hatches"  according  to  some)  of 
their  galleys  (Ez.  xxvii.  6).  Many  specimens  of 
Assyrian  carving  in  ivory  have  been  found  in  the 
excavations  at  Nimroud,  and  among  the  rest  some 
tablets  "  richly  inlaid  with  blue  and  opaque  glass, 
lapis  lazuli,  &c."  (Bonomi,  Nineveh  and  its  Palaees, 
p.  334  ;  cf.  Cant.  v.  14).  Part  of  an  ivory  stall', 
apparently  a  sceptre,  and  several  entire  elephants' 
tusks  were  discovered  by  Mr.  Layard  in  the  last 
stage  of  decay,  and  it  was  with  extreme  difficulty 
that  these  interesting  relics  could  be  restored  (Nin. 
$  Bab.  p.  195).  [W.  A.  W.] 

IZ'EHAR.  The  form  in  which  the  name 
Izhar  is  given  in  the  A.V.  of  Num.  iii.  19  only. 
In  ver.  27  the  family  of  the  same  person  is  given 
as  Izeharites.  The  Hebrew  word  is  the  same  as 
Izhar. 

IZ'HAR  (spelt  Izehar  in  Num.  iii.  19,  27, 
of  A.  V. ;  in  Heb.  always  "\T\)i\  ;  'lacraap  and 
'lcraap :  Jesaar,  Isaar),  son  of  Kohath,  grand- 
son of  Levi,  uncle  of  Aaron  and  Moses,  and  father 
of  Korah  (Ex.  vi.  18,  21  ;  Num.  iii.  19,  xvi.  1  ; 
1  Chr.  vi.  2,  18).  But  in  1  Chr.  vi.  22  Amminadah 
is  substituted  for  Izhar,  as  the  son  of  Kohath  and 
father  of  Korah,  in  the  line  of  Samuel.  This,  how- 
ever, must  be  an  accidental  error  of  the  scribe,  as 
in  ver.  38,  where  the  same  genealogy  is  repeated, 
Izhar  appears  again  in  his  right  place.  The  Cod. 
Alex,  in  ver.  22  reads  Izhar  in  place  of  Ammi- 
nadah, and  the  Aldine  and  Complut.  read  Ammi- 
nadah between  Izhar  and  Kore,  making  another 
generation.  But  these  are  probably  only  correc- 
tions of  the  text.  (See  Burrington's  Genealogies 
of  the  0.  T.)  Izhar  was  the  head  of  the  family 
of  the  [ZHARITKS  or  IZEB[AK1TES  (Num.  iii.  27; 
1  Chr.  xxvi.  23,  29),  one  of  the  four  families  of 
the  Kohathites.  [A.  C.  H.] 

TZRAHI'AH  (iTrnr  :"  'Ufra'ia,  'Efrafa  ; 
Alex.  'It fpia:   Izrahia),  a  man  of  [ssachar.  one  of 

the  Bene-Uzzi,  and  father  of  four,  or  five — which. 
is  not  clear — of  the  principal  men  in  the  tribe 
(1  Chr.  vii.  ;i  i. 

IZ'RAHITE,  THE  (  mftl,  i.  e.  "  the  [zr&cb :-' 

<5  'leffpa*  ;  Alex.  'le(pde\  :  Jeeerites),  the 
nation  ofShamhuth,  the  captain  of  the  fifth  monthly 
course  as  appointed  by  David  1 1  Chr.  xxvii.  8).  In 
its  present  form  the  Hebrew  will  not  bear  the  inter- 
pretation put  on  it  in  the  A.  V.  Its  real  force 
ably  Zerahite,  thai  i>.  from  the  great  Judaic 
family  of  Zerah     the  Zarhites. 

I/.  Ill   (n>*»n,   i.e.    "the    [tsrite:"    'Urrpi ; 

Alex.  'Itcropl :  I  »•»'),  a  Levite,  leader  of  the  fourth 
course  or  waul  in  the  service  of  the  hoti  >■  of  God 

i  1  Chr.  xxv.  I  1  i.     In  \er.  :;  lie  is  called  ZERI. 


908 


.1 A  ARAN 


JA'AKAN  (}pJ7»  :  'Ia/d/x  ;  Alex.  'laKei/x  : 
Jacan),  the  forefather  of  the  Bene-Jaakan,  round 
whose  wells  the  children  of  Israel  encamped  after 
they  left  Mosera,  and  from  which  they  went  on  to 
Hor-Hagidgad  (Dent.  x.  6).  Jaakan  was  son  of 
Ezer,  the  son  of  Seir  the  Horite  (1  Chr.  i.  42). 
The  name  is  here  given  in  the  A.  V.  as  Jakan, 
though  without  any  reason  for  the  change.  In 
Gen.  xxxvi.  27  it  is  in  the  abbreviated  form  of 
Akan.  The  ^ite  of  the  wells  has  not  been  identi- 
fied.    Some  suggestions  will  be  seen  under  Bene- 

JAAKAN.  [G.] 

JAAKO'BAH  (rnp_ir» :  'laiKaPd  ;  Alex.  'Ia- 
Ka&d:  Jacoba),  one  of  the  princes  (□"'N'1^)  of  the 
families  of  Simeon  (1  Chr.  iv.  36).  Excepting  the 
termination,  the  name  is  identical  with  that  of 
Jacob. 

JA'ALA  (SOJJ>  :  'IeATjA :  Jahala).  Bene- 
Jaala  were  among  the  descendants  of  "  Solomon's 
slaves  "  who  returned  from  Babylon  with  Zerub- 
babel  (Neh.  vii.  58).    The  name  also  occurs  as 

JA'ALAH  (Thy\ :  'Ie7)Aa;  Alex.  'IeAa:  Jala), 
Ezr.  ii.  56 ;  and  in  Esdras  as  Jeeli. 

JA'ALAM  (thy  :  "  whom  God  hides,"  Ges.  : 
'Ie-yAoTt :  Ihelon,  I'kelom),  a  son  of  Esau  by  his 
wife  Aiiolibamah  (Gen.  xxxvi.  5,  14,  18  ;  cf. 
1  Chr.  i.  35),  and  a  phylarch  (A.  V.  "  duke")  or 
head  of  a  tribe  of  Edom.  [E.  S.  P.] 

JA  ANAI  (^y* :  'laviv  ;  Alex,  'lavai :  Janai), 
A  chief  man  in  the  tribe  of  Gad  (1  Chr.  v.  12). 
The  LXX.  have  connected  the  following  name, 
Shaphat,  to  Jaanai,  and  rendered  it  as  1.  6  ypappa- 
revs. 

JAARE-OR'EGIM  (D^*1*N  n$P:  'Apiwpyi^, 
in  both  MSS. :  Saltus  polymitarius),  according  to 
the  present  text  of  2  Sam.  xxi.  19,  a  Bethlehemite, 
and  the  father  of  Elhauan  who  slew  Goliath  (the 
words  "  the  brother  of,"  are  added  in  the  A.  V.). 
in  the  parallel  passage,  1  Chr.  xx.  5,  besides  other 
differences,  Jair  is  found  instead  of  Jaare,  and 
Oregim  is  omitted.  Oregim  is  not  elsewhere  found 
as  a  proper  name,  nor  is  it  a  common  word ;  and 
occurring  as  it  does  without  doubt  at  the  end  of 
the  verse  (A.  V.  "  weavers"),  in  a  sentence  exactly 
parallel  to  that  in  1  Sam.  xvii.  7,  it  is  not  pio- 
bable  that  it  should  also  occur  in  the  middle  of  the 
same.  The  conclusion  of  Kennicott  (^Dissertation, 
80)  appears  a  just  one— that  in  the  latter  place  it 
has  been  interpolated  from  the  former,  and  that 
Jair  or  Jaor  is  the  correct  reading  instead  of  Jaare. 
[Elhanan,  p.  52u.] 

Still  the  agreement  of  the  ancient  versions  with 
the  present  Hebrew  text  atibrds  a  certain  corrobora- 
tion to  that  text,  and  should  not  be  overlooked. 
[Jair.] 

The  Peshito,  followed  by  the  Arabic,  substitutes 
for  Jaare-Oregim  the  name  "  Malaph  the  weaver,"  to 
the  meaning  of  which  we  have  no  clue.  The 
Targum  on  the  other  hand,  doubtless  anxious  to 
avoid  any  apparent  contradiction  of  the  i  ar- 
rative  in  1  Sam.  xvii.,  substitutes  David  for  Elha- 
nan,  Jesse  for  Jaare,  and  i<  led  by  the  word  <  >j-i  trim 


JAAZER 

to  relate  or  possibly  to  invent  a  statement  as  to 
Jesse's  calling — "And  David  son  of  Jesse,  weaver 
of  the  veils  of  the  house  of  the  sanctuary,  who  was 
of  Bethlehem,  slew  Goliath  the  Gittite."  By  Je- 
rome Jaare  is  translated  by  saltus, and  Oregim  bypo- 
lymitarius  (com p.  Quaest.  Hebr.  on  both  passages). 
In  Josephus's  account  (Ant.  vii.  12,  §2)  the 
Israelite  champion  is  said  to  have  been  "  Nephan 
the  kinsman  of  David"  (tie<pdvos  6  avyyevr^s 
avrov) ;  the  word  kinsman  perhaps  referring  to  the 
Jewish  tradition  of  the  identity  of  Jair  and  Jesse, 
or  simply  arising  from  the  mention  of  Bethlehem. 

In  the  received  Hebrew  text  Jaare  is  written 
with  a  small  or  suspended  R,  showing  that  in  the 
opinion  of  the  Masorets  that  letter  is  uncertain. 

JAASAU  (ib'JP,  but  the  Keri  has  <W\  i.  e. 
Jaasai :  and  so  the  Vulg.  Jasi),  one  of  the  Bene- 
Baui  who  had  married  a  foreign  wife,  and  had  to 
put  her  away  (Ezr.  x.  37).  In  the  parallel  list 
of  1  Esclras  the  name  is  not  recognisable.  The  LXX . 
had  a  different  text, — Kal  eiroirjcrav  =  -1jyy*l. 

JAA'SIEL  (Wl'T  :  'Iao-rifa.;  Alex.  'A«ri4jA : 

Jasiel),  son  of  the  great  Abner,  ruler  (*VJJ)  or 
"  prince  "  (IB*)  of  his  tribe  of  Benjamin,  in  the 
time  of  David  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  21). 

JAAZANI'AH  OiTOTK*  and  iVOr^).  1. 
Yaazan-YAHU  ('le^ovias:  Jezionias),  one  of  the 
"  captains  of  the  forces"  who  accompanied  Johanan 
ben-Kareah  to  pay  his  respects  to  Gedaliah  at  Miz- 
pah  after  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  (2.K.  xxv.  23),  and 
who  appears  afterwards  to  have  assisted  in  recover- 
ing IshmaeFs  prey  from  his  clutches  (comp.  Jer. 
xli.  11).  After  that  he  probably  went  to  Egypt 
with  the  rest  (Jer.  xliii.  4,  5).  He  is  described  as 
the  "  son  of  the  (not '  a ')  Maaehathite."  In  the 
narrative  of  Jeremiah  the  name  is  slightly  changed 
to  Jezaniah. 

2.  YAAZAS-YAHTJ  ('lexovias  ;  Alex.'U&vias; 
Jezonias),  son  of  Shaphan:  leader  of  the  band  of 
seventy  of  the  elders  of  Israel,  who  were  seen  by 
Ezekiel  worshipping  before  the  idols  on  the  wall  of 
the  court  of  the  house  of  Jehovah  (Ez.  viii.  11). 
It  is  possible  that  he  is  identical  with 

3.  Yaazan-yah  (^lexovias :  Jezonias),  son  of 
Azur ;  one  of  the  "  princes  "  CH£>)  of  the  people 
against  whom  Ezekiel  was  directed  to  prophesy 
(Ez.  xi.  1). 

4.  Yaazan-yah  ('lexovias:  Jezonias),  a  Re- 
chabite,  son  of  Jeremiah.  lie  appears  to  have  been 
the  sheikh  of  the  tribe  at  the  tune  of  Jeremiah's 
interview  with  them  (Jer.  xxxv.  3).   [JlciIONADAli.] 

JA'AZER  and  JA'ZER.  (The  form  of  this 
name  is  much  varied  both  in  the  A.  Y.  and  the 
Hebrew,  though  the  one  does  not  follow  the  other. 
In  Num.  xxxii.  it  is  twice  given  Jazer  and  once 
Jaazer,  the  Hebrew  being  in  all  three  cases  *HJ?', 
i.  c.  Yaezzer.  Elsewhere  in  Numbers  and  in  Josh, 
xiii.  it  is  Jaazer  ;  but  in  Josh,  xxi.,  in  2  Sam.  xxiv., 
Isaiah  and  Jeremiah,  Jazer  :  the  Hebrew  in  all  these 
is  "[TIP,  Yaezer.  In  Chronicles  it  is  also  Jazer  ;  but 
here  the  Hebrew  is  in  the  extended  form  of  "VTJP, 
Yaezeir,  a  form  which  the  Samar.  Codex  also  pre- 
sents in  Num.  xxxii..  The  LXX.  have  'la^p,  but 
once  'EAie'fep.  Alex.  'TLXi&fap — including  the  affixed 
heb.  particle  :  Vulg.  Jazer,  Jaser).  A  town  on  the 
east  of  Jordan,  in  or  near  to  Gilead  (Num.  xxxii.  1,3; 
1  Chr.  xxvi.  31).     We  first  hear  of  it  in  possession 


JAAZIAH 

of  the  Amorites,  and  as  taken  by  Israel  after 
Heshbon,  and  on  their  way  from  thence  to  Bashan 
(Num.  xxi.  32). a  It  was  rebuilt  subsequently  by 
the  children  of  Gad  (xxxii.  35),  and  was  a  promi- 
nent place  iu  their  territory  (Josh.  xiii.  25;  2  Sam. 
xxiv.  5).  It  was  allotted  to  the  Merari  te  Levites 
(Josh.  xxi.  30  ;  1  Chr.  vi.  81),  but  in  the  time  of 
David  it  would  appear  to  have  been  occupied  by 
Hebronites,  i.  e.  descendants  of  Kohath  (1  Chr. 
xxvi.  31).  It  seems  to  have  given  its  name  to  a 
district  of  dependent  or  "  daughter"  towns  (Num. 
xxi.  32,  A.  V.  "villages;"  1  Mace.  v.  8),  the 
"land  of  Jazer"  (Num.  xxxii.  1).  Inthe  "burdens" 
proclaimed  over  Moah  by  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah, 
Jazer  is  mentioned  so  as  to  imply  that  there  were 
vineyards  there,  and  that  the  cultivation  of  the  vine 
had  extended  thither  from  SlBMAH  (Is.  xvi.  8,  9  ; 
Jer.  xlviii.  32).  In  the  latter  passage,  as  the  text 
at  present  stands,  mention  is  made  of  the  "  Sea  of 
Jazer  "  OTi^  W1).  This  may  have  been  some  pool 
or  lake  of  water,  or  possibly  is  an  antient  cor-' 
ruption  of  the  text,  the  LXX.  having  a  different 
reading — tt6\ls  'I.     (See  Gesenius,  Jesida,  550.) 

Jazer  was  known  to  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  and 
its  position  is  laid  down  with  minuteness  in  the 
Onomasticon  as  lo  (or  8,  s.  voc.  "Afap)  Roman 
miles  west  of  Philadelphia  (Amman),  and  15  from 
Heshbon,  and  as  the  source  of  a  river  which  falls 
into  the  Jordan.  Two  sites  bearing  the  names  of 
Ghurbet  Szdr  and  es  Szir,  on  the  road  west- 
ward of  Amman,  were  pointed  out  to  Seetzen  in 
1806  (Reisen,  1854,  i.  397,  8).  The  latter  of  these 
was  passed  also  by  Burckhardt  [Syr.  3154)  at  2§ 
hours  below  Fuheis  going  south.  The  ruins  appear 
to  have  been  on  the  left  (east)  of  the  road,  and 
below  them  and  the  road  is  the  source  of  the  Wctdy 

Szir  (y*ja),  or  Mojeb  es  Szir  (Seetzen),  an- 
swering, though  certainly  but  imperfectly,  to  the 
■KOTCLfxhs  /iifyitJTOs  of  Eusebius.  Seetzen  conjectures 
that  the  sea  of  Jazer  may  have  been  at  the  source  of 
this  brook,  considerable  marshes  or  pools  sometimes 
existing  at  these  spots.  (Comp.  his  earlier  suggestion 
of  the  source  of  the  WadySerha,  p.  393.)  Szir, 
or  Seir,  is  shown  on  the  map  of  Van  de  Velde  as  9 
Roman  miles  W.  of  Amman,  and  about  12  from 
Heshbon.  And  here,  until  further  investigation, 
we  must  be  content  to  place  Jazer.  [G.] 


JABESH 


909 


.Tubal.  Though  descended  from  a  dweller  in  a  city 
(ver.  17),  he  is  described  as  the  father  of  such  as 
dwell  in  tents  and  have  cattle.  Bochart  (Hieroz. 
i.  ii.  c.  44,  near  the  end)  points  out  the  difference 
between  his  mode  of  life  and  Abel's.  Jabal's  was  a 
migratory  life,  and  his  possessions  probably  included 
other  animals  besides  sheep.  The  shepherds  who 
were  before  him  may  have  found  the  land  on  which 
they  dwelt  sufficiently  productive  for  the  constant 
sustenance  of  their  Hocks  iu  the  neighbourhood  of 
their  fixed  abodes.  [W.  T.  B.] 

JAB'BOK  ( pin11 ;  'lafiwx  ;  Jaboc),  a  stream 
which  intersects  the  mountain-range  of  Gilead 
(comp.  Josh.  xii.  2,  and  5),  and  falls  into  the 
Jordan  about  midway  between  the  sea  of  Galilee 
and  the  Dead  Sea.  There  is  some  difficulty  in 
interpreting  two  or  three  passages  of  Scripture  in 
which  the  Jabbok  is  spoken  of  as  "  the  border  of 
the  children  of  Ammon."  The  following  facts  may 
perhaps  throw  some  light  upon  them  :  —  The  Am- 
monites at  one  time  possessed  the  whole  country 
between  the  rivers  Anion  and  Jabbok,  from  the 
Jordan  on  the  west  to  the  wilderness  en  the  east. 
They  were  driven  out  of  it  by  Sihon  king  of  the 
Amorites ;  and  he  was  in  turn  expelled  by  the 
Israelites.  Yet  long  subsequent  to  these  events, 
the  country  was  popularly  called  "  the  land  of  the 
Ammonites,"  and  was  even  claimed  by  them  ( Judg. 
xi.  12-22).  For  this  reason  the  Jabbok  is  still 
called  "  the  border  of  the  children  of  Amnion  " 
in  Deut.  hi.  1G,  and  Josh.  xii.  2.  Again,  when  the 
Ammonites  were  driven  out  by  Sihon  from  their 
ancient  territory,  they  took  possession  of  the 
eastern  plain,  and  of  a  considerable  section  of  the 
eastern  defiles  of  Gilead,  around  the  sources  and 
upper  branches  of  the  Jabbok.  Rabbath- Ammon. 
their  capital  city  (2  Sam.  xi.),  stood  within  the 
mountains  of  Gilead,  and  on  the  banks  of  a  tributary 
to  the  Jabbok.  This  explains  the  statement  in 
Num.  xxi.  24 — "  Israel  possessed  his  (Sihon's)  land 
from  Anion  unto  Jabbok,  unto  the  children  of 
Ammon  (flJSJ?  \32rHy),  for  the  border  of  the 
children  of  Amnion  was  strong  "—the  bordei  among 
the  defiles  of  the  upper  Jabbok  was  strong.  This 
also  illustrates  Deut.  ii.  37,  "  Only  unto  the  land 
of  the  children  of  Ammon  thou  earnest  not,  unto 
every  place  of  the  torrent  Jabbok  (pS*  7l"13  ~P"?3)  ; 
JAAZIAH  (-in'tyS   i.e.  Yaaziyahu  :  '0£ia :  !  and  unto  the  cities   in   the  mountains,  and  every 


Oziau),  apparently  a  third  son,  or  a  descendant,  of 
Merari  the  Levite,  and  the  founder  of  an  inde- 
pendent house  in  that  family  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  26,  27)  ; 
neither  he  nor  his  descendants  are  mentioned  else- 
where (com]),  the  lists  in  xxiii.  21-23;  Ex.  vi. 
19,  &c).  The  word  Beno  (133),  which  follows 
Jaaziah,  should  probably  be  translated  "his  son," 
i.  e.  the  son  of  Merari. 

JAA'ZIEL  &WW  :    'OOv*  ;    Alex.  'lVov\  : 


place  which  the  Lord  our  God  forbad." 

It  was  on  the  south  bank  of  the  Jabbok  the  inter- 
view took  place  between  Jacob  and  Esau  (Gen. 
xxxii.  22) ;  and  this  river  afterwards  became, 
towards  its  western  part,  the  boundary  between  the 
kingdoms  of  Sihon  and  <  >g  (Josh-,  xii.  2,  5).  Euse- 
bius rightly  places  it  between  Gerasa  and  Phila- 
delphia (Omm.  s.  v.);  and  at  the  present  day  it 
separates  the  province  of  Belka  from  Jebel  Ajli'ni. 
Its  modern  name  is   Wady  /ur/;".     It  rises  in  the 


JazieV),  one  of  the  Levites  of  the  second  order  who  plateau  east  of  Gilead,   and  receives  many  tribu- 

were  appointed  by    David   to  perform  the  musical  b*m  from  both  north  and  south  in  the  eastern 

service  before  the  ark  (1  Chr.  xv.  18).     If  Azibl  declivities   of  the  mountain-range-  one   of   these 

in  ver.  20  is  a  conti acted  f.cm  of  the  same  nam,—  <•"»"'*  from  Gerasa,  another  from  Rabbath-Ammop  ; 


and  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  it  (comp.  Jesha- 
relah  and  Asharelah,  1  Chr.  xxv.  2,  14  — his  bu- 
siness was  to  "sound  the  psaltery  on  Alamoth." 

JA'BAL   ("?3»:    'I^rj\ :    label),   the    son  of 
Lamech   and    Adah    (Gen.  iv.   20)   and   brother   of 

*  In  Num.  xxi.  24,  where  the  present  Hebrew  text 
has  ty  (A.V.  "strong"),  the  LXX.  have  read  'lafrp- 


but  all  nt'  them  are  mere  winter  streams.  The 
Z^irka  cuts  through  Gilead  in  a  deep,  narrow  defile. 
Throughout  the  lower  part  of  its  course  it  is  fringed 
with  thickets  of  cane  and  oleander,  and  the  banks 
above  are  clothed  with  oak-forests.  Towards  its 
mouth  the  stream  is  perennial,  and  in  winter  often 
impasi  able.  [J.  L.  l'.J 

JATSE&HQ&y-.'laPis;  Alex.'AjSefc  'laPMs; 


910 


JABESH 


Joseph. 'Inferos:  Jabes).     1.  Father  of  Shallum, 

the  15th  king  of  Israel  (2  K..xv.  10,  13,  14). 

2.  The  short  form  of  the  name  Jabesii-Gilead 
(1  Chr.  x.  12  only). 

JA'BESH-GIL'EAD  Oj6s  V2\  also  ^T, 
1  Sam.  xi.  1,  9,  &c,  "  dry,"  from  W2\  "  to  be 
dry ;"  'Ia/3ls  Ta\aa5  ;  J«bes  Galaad),  or  Jabesh 
in  the  territory  of  Gilead.  [Gilead.]  In  its  widest 
sense  Gilead  included  the  half  tribe  of  Manasseh 
(1  Chr.  xxvii.  21)  as  well  as  the  tribes  of  Gad  and 
Reuben  (Num.  xxxii.  1-42)  east  of  the  Jordan— ami 
of  the  cities  of  Gilead,  Jabesh  was  the  chief.  It  is 
first  mentioned  in  connexion  with  the  cruel  vengeance 
taken  upon  its  inhabitants  for  not  coming  up  to  Miz- 
peh  on  the  occasion  of  the  fierce  war  between  the 
children  of  Israel  and  the  tribe  of  Benjamin.  Every 
male  of  the  city  was  put  to  the  sword,  and  all  virgins 
— to  the  number  of  400 — seized  to  be  given  in  mar- 
riage to  the  600  men  of  Benjamin  that  remained 
(Judg.  xxi.  8-1 4).  Nevertheless  the  city  survived  the 
Joss  of  its  males;  and  being  attacked  subsequently 
by  Nahash  the  Ammonite,  gave  Saul  an  opportunity 
of  displaying  his  prowess  in  its  defence,  and  silenc- 
ing all  objections  made  by  the  children  of  Belial  to 
his  sovereignty  (1  Sam.  xi.  1-15).  Neither  were 
his  exertions  in  behalf  of  this  city  unrequited  ;  for 
when  he  and  his  three  sons  were  slain  by  the  Phi- 
listines in  Mount  Gilboa  (1  Sam.  xxxi.  8),  the  men 
of  Jabesh-Gilead  came  by  night  and  took  down 
their  corpses  from  the  walls  of  Bethshan  where  they 
had  been  exposed  as  trophies  ;  then  burnt  the  bodies, 
and  buried  the  bones  under  a  tree  near  the  city — 
observing  a  strict  funeral  fast  for  seven  days  (Ibid. 
13).  David  does  not  forget  to  bless  them  for 
this  act  of  piety  towards  his  old  master,  and  his 
more  than  brother  (2  Sam.  ii.  5) ;  though  he  after- 
wards had  their  remains  translated  to  the  ancestral 
sepulchre  in  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  (2  Sam.  xxi.  14). 
As  to  the  site  of  the  city,  it  is  not  defined  in  the 
O.  T.,  but  Eusebius  (Onomast.  s.  v.)  places  it 
beyond  Jordan,  6  miles  from  Bella  on  the  mountain- 
road  to  Gerasa ;  where  its  name  is  probably  pre- 
served in  the  Wadij  Yabcs,  which  flowing  from  the 
east,  enters  the  Jordan  below  Bethshan  or  Scytho- 
polis.  According  to  Dr.  Robinson  (Bibl.  Res.  iii. 
319),  the  ruin  ed-Deir,  on  the  S.  side  of  theWady, 
still  marks  its  site.  [E.  S.  Ff.j 

JA'BEZ  (f3JP:  'IajSis;  Alex.  Ta^s :  Jabes), 
apparently  a  place,  at  which  the  families  of  the 
scribes  (D'HSD)  resided,  who  belonged  to  the  fa- 
milies of  the  Kenites  (1  Chr.  ii.  55).  It  occurs 
among  the  descendants  of  Salma,  who  was  of  Judah, 
and  closely  connected  with  Bethlehem  (ver.  51), 
possibly  the  father  of  Boaz  ;  and  also — though  how 
is  not  clear — with  Joab.  The  Targum  states  some 
curious  particulars,  which,  however,  do  not  much 
elucidate  the  difficulty,  and  which  are  probably  a 
mixture  of  trustworthy  tradition  and  of  mere  in- 
vention based  on  philological  grounds.  Kechab  is 
there  identified  with  Reehabiah  the  son  of  Eliezer, 
Moses'  younger  son  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  25),  and  Jabez 
with  Othniel  the  Kenezzite,  who  bore  the  name  of 
Jabez  "  because  he  founded  by  his  counsel  (fl¥ JJJ )  a 
school  (XV2"in)  of  disciples  called  Tirathites, 
Shimeathites,  and  Sucathites."  See  also  the  quota- 
tions from  Talmud,  Tcmurah,  in  Buxtorf's  Lex. 
col.  96(5,  where  a  similar  derivation  is  given. 

2.  The  name  occurs  again  m  the  genealogies  of 
Judah  (1  Chr.  iv.  9,  10),  in  a  passage  of  remark- 


JABIN 

able  detail  inserted  in  a  genealogy  again  connected 
with  Bethlehem  (ver.  4).  Here  a  different  force  is 
attached  to  the  name.  It  is  made  to  refer  to  the 
sorrow  (3¥JJ,  otzeb~)  with  which  his  mother  bore 
him,  and  also  to  his  prayer  that  evil  may  not 
grieve  C^Vl?)  him..  Jabez  was  "  more  honourable 
than  his  brethren,"  though  who  they  were  is  not 
ascertainable.  It  is  very  doubtful  whether  any  con- 
nexion exists  between  this  genealogy  and  that  in  ii. 
50-55.  Several  names  appear  in  both — Hur,  Ephra- 
tah,  Bethlehem,  Zareathites  (in  A.  V.  iv.  2  inaccu- 
rately "  Zorathites"),  Joab,  Caleb;  and  there  is 
much  similarity  between  others,  as  Kechab  and  Re- 
chah,  Eshton  and  Eshtaulites ;  but  any  positive 
connexion  seems  undemonstrable.  The  Targum  re- 
peats its  identification  of  Jabez  and  Othniel. 

These  passages  in  the  Targums  are  worthy  of  re- 
mark, not  only  because  they  exemplify  the  same 
habit  of  playing  on  words  and  seeking  for  deriva- 
tions which  is  found  in  the  above  and  many  other 
passages  of  the  Bible,  both  early  and  late,  but  also 
because,  as  often  as  not,  the  puns  do  not  now  exist 
in  the  Rabbinical  Hebrew  in  which  these  para- 
phrases are  written,  although  they  appear  if  that 
Rabbinical  Hebrew  is  translated  back  into  Biblical 
Hebrew.  There  are  several  cases  of  this  in  the 
Targum  above  quoted,  viz.  on  1  Chr.  ii.  55  (see 
Tirathim,  Socathim,  &c),  and  others  in  the  Tar- 
gum on  Ruth,  in  the  additions  to  the  genealogy  at 
the  end  of  that  Book.  One  example  will  show  what 
is  intended.  "  Obed  ("l^llM  was  he  who  screed, 
the  Lord  of  the  world  with  a  perfect  heart." 
"  Served  "  in  Biblical  Hebrew  is  *12y\  from  the 
same  root  as  Obed,  but  in  the  dialect  of  the  Tar- 
gum it  is  n?Q1,  so  that  the  allusion  (like  that  in 
Coleridge's  famous  pun)  exists,  as  it  stands,  neither 
for  the  eye  nor  the  ear.  [G.  j 

JA'BINQ'aS  'Ia/3i's).  1.  King  of  Hazor,  a 
royal  city  in  the  north  of  Palestine,  near  the  waters 
of  Merom,  who  organised  a  confederacy  of  the 
northern  princes  against  the  Israelites  (Josh.  xi.  1-3). 
He  assembled  an  army,  which  the  Scripture  nar- 
rative merely  compares  to  the  sands  for  multitude 
(ver.  4),  but  which  Jo'sephus  reckons  at  300,000 
foot,  10,000  horse,  and  20,000  chariots.  Joshua, 
encouraged  by  God,  surprised  this  vast  army  of  allied 
forces  "  by  the  waters  of  Merom  "  (ver.  7  ;  near 
Kedesh,  according  to  Josephus),  utterly  routed  them, 
cut  the  hoof-sinews  of  their  horses,  and  burnt  their 
chariots  with  fire  at  a  place  which  from  that  cir- 
cumstance may  have  derived  its  name  of  MlSRE- 
piioth-Maim  (Heivey,  On  the  Genealogies,  p. 
228).  [Misrephoth-Maim.]  It  is  probable  that 
in  consequence  of  this  battle  the  confederate  kings, 
and  Jabin  among  them,  were  reduced  to  vassalage, 
for  we  find  immediately  afterwards  that  Jabin  is 
safe  in  his  capital.  But  during  the  ensuing  wars 
(which  occupied  some  time,  Josh.  xi.  18),  Joshua 
"  turned  back,"  and  perhaps  on  some  fresh  rebellion 
of  Jabin,  inflicted  on  him  a  signal  and  summary 
vengeance,  making  Hazor  an  exception  to  the 
general  rule  of  not  burning  the  conquered  cities  of 
Canaan  (xi.  1-14;  Joseph.  Ant.  v.  1,  §18;  F.wald, 
Gcsch.  ii.  328). 

2.  A  king  of  Hazor,  whose  general  Sisera  was 
defeated  by  Barak,  whose  army  is  described  in  much 
the  same  terms  as  that  of  his  predecessor  (Jlldg.  iv. 
3,  13),  and  who  suffered  precisely  the  same  fate. 
We  have  already  pointed  out  the  minute  sim  larity 
of  the  two  nanatives-(Josh.  xi.;  Judg.  iv.  v.).  and 


JABNEEL 

an  attentive  comparison  of  them  with  Josephus  (who 
curiously  omits  the  name  of  Jabin  altogether  in 
liis  mention  of  Joshua's  victory,  although  his  ac- 
counl  is  full  of  details),  would  easily  supply 
further  points  of  resemblance.  [BAKAK;  DEBO- 
RAH.] It  is  indeed  by  no  means  impossible  that 
in  the  course  of  150  years  Hazor  should  have  risen 
from  its  ashes,  and  even  reassumed  its  pre-eminence 
under  sovereigns  who  still  bore  the  old  dynastic 
name.  But  entirely  independent  considerations 
show  that  the  period  between  Joshua  and  Barak 
could  not  have  been  150  years,  and  indeed  tend 
to  prove  that  those  two  chiefs  were  contempo- 
raries (Hervey,  Geneal.  228) ;  and  we  are  there- 
fore led  to  regard  the  two  accounts  of  the  de- 
struction of  Hazor  and  Jabin  as  really  applying  to 
the  same  monarch,  and  the  same  event.  What  is 
to  prevent  us  from  supposing  that  Jabin  and  his 
confederate  kings  were  defeated  both  by  Joshua  and 
hy  Barak,  and  that  distinct  accounts  of  both  vic- 
tories were  preserved  'i  The  most  casual  reader  of 
the  narrative  cannot  but  be  struck  by  the  remark- 
able resemblance  between  the  two  stories.  There 
is  no  ground  whatever  to  throw  doubts  on  the  his- 
torical veracity  of  the  earlier  narrative,  as  is  done 
by  Hasse  (p.  129),  Maurer  (ad  foe),  Studer  (on 
Judges,  p.  90),  and  De  Wette  (Einl.  p.  231), 
according  to  Keil,  on  Josh.  xi.  10-15;  and  by  Ro- 
senmiiller  (Schol.  Jos.  xi.  11)  ;  but  when  the  chro- 
nological arguments  are  taken  into  consideration, 
we  do  not  (in  spite  of  the  difficulties  which  still 
remain)  consider  Havernick  successful  in  removing 
the  improbabilities  which  beset  the  common  suppo- 
sition that  this  Jabin  lived  long  after  the  one  which 
Joshua  defeated.  At  any  rate  we  cannot  agree 
with  Winer  in  denouncing  any  attempt  to  identify 
them  with  each  other  as  the  ne  plus  Ultra  of 
uncritical  audacity.  [F.  W.  F.] 

JAB'NEEL  (?*?33*).    The  name  of  two  towns 
in  Palestine. 

1.  (In  0.  T.  At/3vd  ;  Alex.  'Ia/SHjA.  ;  in  Apocr. 
'Ia/ieefa:  Jebneel,  Jabnia,  Jamnia),  One  of  the 
points  on  the  northern  boundary  of  Judah,  not 
quite  at  the  sea,  though  near  it"  (Josh.  xv.  11). 
There  is  no  sign,  however,  of  its  ever  having  been 
occupied  by  Judah.  Josephus  (Ant.  v.  1,  §22) 
attributes  it  to  the  Danites.  There  was  a  constant 
straggle  going  on  between  that  tribe  and  the  Phi- 
listines for  the  possession  of  all  the  places  in  the 
lowland  plain  [Dan],  and  it  is  not  surprising  that 
the  next  time  we  meet  with  Jabneel  it  should  be 
in  the  hands  of  the  latter  (2  Chr.  xxvi.  6).  Uzziah 
dispossessed  them  of  it,  and  demolished  its  fortifi- 
cations. Here  it  is  in  the  ahorter  form  of  Jab- 
neh.  In  its  Greek  garb,  Iamnia,  it  is  frequently 
mentioned  in  the  Maccabees  (I  Mace.  iv.  15,  v. 
58,  \.  69,  xv.  4n  ,.  in  whose  time  it  was  s 
strong  place.  According  to  Josephus  I  Ant.  xii.  8, 
§6)  Gorgias  was  governor  of  it;  but  the  text  of 
the  Maccabees  ('2  Mace.  xii.  32)   has  Idumaea.      At 

this  time  there  was  a  harbour  on  the  coast,  to 

which,  and  the  vessels  lying  there,  Judas  set  fire, 
and  the  conflagration  was  seen  at  Jerusalem,  a 
distance  of  about  25  miles  (2  Mace.  xii.  9).  The 
harbour  is  also  mentioned  by  Pliny,  who  in  conse- 


JACHIN 


911 


»  In  Josh.  xv.  40,  after  the  words  "  from  Kkron," 
the  LXX.  adds  'ley-vdi,  .Tatmeh,  instead  of  "even  unto 
the  sea  ;"    probably  reading   H30^   for   the  present 

word  nw- 


quence  speaks  of  the  town  as  double — duae  Jamnes 
(see  the  quotations  in  Reland,  8211).  Like  Ascalon 
and  Gaza  the  harbour  bore  the  title  of  Majumas, 
perhaps  a  Coptic  word,  meaning  the  "  place  on  the 
sea"  (Reland,  590,  &c. ;  Raumer,  174  note,  184 
note;  Kenrick,  Phoenicia,  27,  29).  At  the  time 
of  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  Jabneh  was  one  of  the 
most  populous  places  of  Judaea,  and  contained  a 
Jewish  school  of  great  fame,  whose  learned  doctors 
are  often  mentioned  in  the  Talmud.  The  great 
Sanhedrim  was  also  held  here.  In  this  holy  city, 
according  to  an  early  Jewish  tradition,  was  buried 
the  great  Gamaliel.  His  tomb  was  visited  by 
Parchi  in  the  14th  cent.  (Zunz,  in  Asher's  Benj.  of 
Tudela,  ii.  439,  440  ;  also  98).  In  the  time  of 
Eusebius,  however,  it  had  dwindled  to  a  small 
place,  TroXixy-/],  merely  requiring  casual  mention 
[Onomasticon).  In  the  6th  century,  under  Justi- 
nian, it  became  the  seat  of  a  Christian  bishop 
(Epiphanius,  adv.  ffaer.  lib.  ii.  730).  Under  the 
Crusaders  it  bore  the  corrupted  name  of  Ibelin,  and 
gave  a  title  to  a  line  of  Counts,  one  of  whom,  Jean 
d'Ibelin,  about  1250,  restored  to  efficiency  the 
famous  code  of  the  "  Assises  de  Jerusalem  "  (Gibbon, 
eh.  58  ad  fin. ;  also  the  citations  in  Raumer,  Pa- 
last  ina,  185). 

The  modern  village  of  Yebna,  or  more  accu- 
rately Ibna  (ljuo),  stands  about  2  miles  from  the 

sea  on  a  slight  eminence  just  south  of  the  Nahr 
Rubin.  It  is  about  11  miles  south  of  Jaffa,  7 
from  Ramleh,  and  4  from  Akir  (Ekron).  It  pro- 
bably occupies  its  ancient  site,  for  some  remains  of 
old  buildings  are  to  be  seen,  possibly  relics  of  the 
fortress  which  the  Crusaders  biiilt  there  (Porter, 
Handbook,  274). 

2.  (tU(p6a./j.aL ;  Alex.  'lafivriX:  Jebnael.)  One 
of  the  landmarks  on  the  boundary  of  Naphtali 
(Josh.  xix.  33,  only).  It  is  named  next  after 
Adami-Nekeb,  and  had  apparently  Lakkum  between 
it  and  the  "  outgoings "  of  the  boundary  at  the 
Jordan.  But  little  or  no  clue  can  be  got  from 
the  passage  to  its  situation.  Doubtless  it  is  the 
same  place  which,  as  'Ia/xi/eia  (  Vita,  §37  ),  and 
'laixvlQ  (B.  J.  ii.  20,  §6),  is  mentioned  by  Jo- 
sephus among  the  villages  in  Upper  <  ialilee,  which, 
though  strong  in  themselves  (irerpuSeis  ovaas), 
were  fortified  by  him  in  anticipation  of  the  arrival 
of  the  Romans.  The  other  villages  named  by  him 
in  the  same  connexion  are  Meroth,  Achabare,  or 
the  rock  of  the  Achabari,  and  Seph.  Schwarz  (181) 
mentions  that  the  later  name  of  Jabneel  was  Kefr 
TamaJi, u  the  village  by  the  sea.  Taking  this  with 
the  vague  indications  of  Josephus1,  we  should  be 
disposed  to  look  for  its  traces  at  the  N.W.  part  of 
the  Sea  of  (ialilee,  in  the  hill  country.  [G.] 

JABNEH  (m3»:  'IojS^p  ;  Alex.  'IojSefo ; 
i,  2  chr.  xxvi.  6.    [Jabneel.] 

JA'CHAN  (J3JT:  'Icoaxdu  ;  Alex,  'laxdu  : 
J  tchan),  one  of  seven  chief  men  of  the  tribe  of  Gad 
(1   Chr.  v.   13). 

"    JA'CHIN  (P3V  in  Kings 'Iox"iV:  Ak'x-    Ia" 

Xow;  but  in  Chron.  Kar6p8w(ns  in  both  MSS.; 

is  'laxiV.  J  "  .  one  of  the  two 

pillai     nine;,  were  *  I   up  "  in  the  porch"  1 1  K. 

m  the  name  in  the  Vat.  LXX.  (given  above) 
be  a  corruption  of  this?  It  can  hardly  be  corrupted 
from  Jamnia  or  Jabneel. 


912 


JACHIN 


vii.  21)  or  before  the  temple  (2  Chr.  iii.  17)  of 
Solomon.  It  was  the  "right-hand"  one  of  the 
two;  by  which  is  probably  meant  the  south  (comp. 
1  K.  vii.  39).  However,  both  the  position  and  the 
structure  of  these  famous  columns  are  full  of  diffi- 
culties, and  they  will  be  most  suitably  examined  in 
describing  the  Temple.  Interpreted  as  a  Hebrew 
word  Jachin  signifies  firmness. 

JA'CHIN  (P*:  'AXeh,  'laxeiv,  'laj(iv ; 
Alex. 'lax**/* :  Jachin).  1.  Fourth  son  of  Simeon 
((len.  xlvi.  10;  Ex.  vi.  15) ;  founder  of  the  family 
of  the  Jachinites  (Num.  xxvi.  12). 

2.  Head  of  the  '21st  course  of  priests  in  the  time 
of  David.  Some  of  the  course  returned  from  Babylon 
(1  Chr.  ix.  10,  xxiv.  17 ;  Neh.  xi.  10).  [Joiarib.] 
Jacimus,  the  original  name  of  Alcimus  (1  Mace.  vii. 
5,  &c. ;  Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  ix.  §7),  who  was  the  first 
of  his  family  that  was  high-priest,  may  possibly 
have  been  in  Hebrew  Jachin,  though  the  k  more 
properly  suggests  Jakim. 

'Axe'iV,  ACHIM  (Matt.  i.  14),  seems  also  to  be 
the  same  name.  [A.  C.  H.] 

JA'CHINITES,THE  Qi^J] :  'IaXtvl ;  Alex. 
6  'laxei-vi  :  familia  Jachinitarum),  the  family 
founded  by  Jachin,  son  of  Simeon  (Num.  xxvi.  12). 

JACINTH  (vu.kivQos  ;  hyacinthus),  a  pre- 
cious stone,  forming  one  of  the  foundations  of  the 
walls  of  the  new  Jerusalem  (Rev.  xxi.  20).    It  seems 

to  be  identical  with  the  Hebrew  leshem  (0t^7, 
A.  V.  "ligure"),  which  was  employed  in  the 
formation  of  the  high-priest's  breastplate  (Ex.  xxviii. 
19).  The  jacinth  or  hyacinth  is  a  red  variety  of 
zircon,  which  is  found  in  square  prisms,  of  a  white, 
grey,  red,  reddish -brown,  yellow,  or  pale-green 
colour.  Ligurite  is  a  crystallised  mineral  of  a 
yellowish-green  or  apple-green  hue,  found  in  Li- 
guria,  and  thence  deriving  its  name.  It  was  reputed 
to  possess  an  attractive  power  similar  to  that  of 
amber  (Theophrast.  Capp.  28),  and  perhaps  the 
Greek  Kvyvpiov,  which  the  LXX.  gives,  was  sug- 
gested by  an  apparent  reference  to  this  quality 
(as  if  from  MtX^v,  "to  lick").  The  expression 
in  Rev.  ix.  17,  "  of  jacinth,"  applied  to  the  breast- 
plate, is  descriptive  simply  of  a  hyacinthine,  i.  e. 
dark-purple  colour,  and  has  no  reference  to  the 
stone.  [W.  L.  B.] 

JA'COB  (2pr  =  "supplanter:"  'ia/cwjS :  Ja- 
cob), the  second  son  of  Isaac  and  Rebekah.  He  was 
born  with  Esau,  when  Isaac  was  59  and  Abraham 
159  years  old,  probably  at  the  well  Lahai-roi.  His 
history  is  related  in  the  latter  half  of  the  book  of 
Genesis.  He  grew  up  a  quiet,  domestic  youth,  the 
favourite  son  of  his  mother.  He  bought  the  birth- 
right from  his  brother  Esau  ;  and  afterwards,  at  his 
mother's  instigation,  acquired  the  blessing  intended 
for  Esau,  by  practising  a  well-khown  deceit  on  Isaac. 
Hitherto  the  two  sons  shared  the  wanderings  of  Isaac 
in  the  South  Country  ;  but  now  Jacob  in  his  78th 
year  was  sent  from  the  family  home,  to  avoid  his 
brother,  and  to  seek  a  wife  among  his  kindred  in 
Padan-aram.  As  he  passed  through  Bethel,  God 
appeared  to  him.  After  the  lapse  of  2 1  years  he 
returned  from  Padan-ajam  with  two  wives,  two 
concubines,  eleven  sons,  and  a  daughter,  and  large 
property.  He  escaped  from  the  angry  pursuit  of 
Laban,  from  a  rencontre  with  Esau,  and  from  the 
vengeance  of  the  Canaanites  provoked  by  the  murder 
of  Shechem;  and  in  each  of  those  thrc    emergencies 


JACOB 

he  was  aided  and  strengthened  by  the  interposition 
of  God,  and  in  sign  of  the  grace  won  by  a  night  of 
wrestling  with  God  his  name  was  changed  at  Jab- 
bok  into  Israel  ("soldier  of  God").  Deborah  and 
Rachel  died  before  he  reached  Hebron ;  and  it  was 
at  Hebron,  in  the  122nd  year  of  his  age,  that  he 
and  Esau  buried  their  father  Isaac.  Joseph,  the 
favourite  son  of  Jacob,  was  sold  into  Egypt  eleven 
years  before  the  death  of  Isaac  ;  and  Jacob  had  pro- 
bably exceeded  his  130th  year  when  he  went  thither, 
being  encouraged  in  a  divine  vision  as  he  passed 
for  the  last  time  through  Beersheba.  He  was  pre- 
sented to  Pharaoh,  and  dwelt  for  seventeen  years  in 
Rameses  and  Goshen.  After  giving  his  solemn 
blessing  to  Ephraim  and  Manasseh,  and  his  own  sons 
one  by  one,  and  charging  the  ten  to  complete  their 
reconciliation  with  Joseph,  he  died  in  his  147th 
year.  His  body  was  embalmed,  carried  with  great 
care  and  pomp  into  the  land  of  Canaan,  and  depo- 
sited with  his  fathers,  and  his  wife  Leah,  in  the 
cave  of  Machpelah. 

The  example  of  Jacob  is  quoted  by  the  first  and 
the  last  of  the  minor  prophets.  Hosea,  in  the  latter 
days  of  the  kingdom,  seeks  (xii.  3,  4,  12)  to  con- 
vert the  descendants  of  Jacob  from  their  state  of 
alienation  from  God,  by  recalling  to  their  memory 
the  repeated  acts  of  God's  favour  shown  to  their 
ancestor.  And  Malachi  (i.  2)  strengthens  the  de- 
sponding hearts  of  the  returned  exiles  by  assuring 
them  that  the  love  which  God  bestowed  upon  Jacob 
was  not  withheld  from  them.  Besides  the  frequent 
mention  of  his  name  in  conjunction  with  those  of 
the  other  two  Patriarchs,  there  are  distinct  refer- 
ences to  events  in  the  life  of  Jacob  in  four  books 
of  the  N.  T.  In  Rom.  ix.  11-13,  St.  Paul  adduces 
the  history  of  Jacob's  birth  to  prove  that  the  favour 
of  God  is  independent  of  the  order  of  natural  de- 
scent. In  Heb.  xii.  16,  and  xi.  21,  the  transfer  of 
the  birthright  and  Jacob's  dying  benediction  are 
referred  to.  His  vision  at  Bethel,  and  his  posses- 
sion of  land  at  Shechem  are  cited  in  St.  John  i. 
51,  and  iv.  5,  12.  And  St.  Stephen,  in  his  speech 
(Acts  vii.  12,  16),  mentions  the  famine  which  was 
the  means  of  restoring  Jacob  to  his  lost  son  in 
Egypt,  and  the  burial  of  the  patriarch  in  Shechem. 
Such  are  the  events  of  Jacob's  life  recorded  in 
Scripture.  Some  of  them  require  additional  notice. 
1.  For  the  sale  of  his  birthright  to  Jacob,  Esau 
is  branded  in  the  N.  T.  as  a  "  profane  person  " 
(Heb.  xii.  16).  The  following  sacred  and  important 
privileges  have  been  mentioned  as  connected  with 
primogeniture  in  patriarchal  times,  and  as  consti- 
tuting the  object. of  Jacob's  desire,  (a.)  Superior 
rank  in  the  family:  see  Gen.  xlix.  3,  4.  (6.)  A 
double  portion  of  the  father's  property ;  so  Aben 
Ezra:  see  Deut.  xxi.  17,  and  Gen.  xlviii.  22. 
(c.)  The  priestly  office  in  the  patriarchal  church  : 
see  Num.  viii.  17-19.  In  favour  of  this,  see  Je- 
rome ad  Evang.  Ep.  lxxiii.  §6;  J;irchi  in  Gen. 
xxv.;  Estius  in  Ifcbr.  xii.;  Shuckford's  Connexion, 
bk.  vii.;  Blunt,  Undes.  Coincid.  Pt.  i.  1.  §'-',:'.; 
and  against  it,  Vitringa,  Obs.  Sac,  and  J.  D.  Mi- 
chaelis,  Mosaisch.  Recht,  ii.  §64,  cited  by  Rosen- 
miiller  in  Gen.  xxv.  (d.)  A  conditional  promise  or 
adumbration  of  the  heavenly  inheritance :  see  Cart- 
wright  in  the  Crit.  Sacr.  on  Gen  xxv.  (e.)  The 
promise  of  the  Seed  in  which  all  nations  should  be 
blessed,  though  not  included  in  the  birthright,  may 
have  been  so  regarded  by  the  patriarchs  as  it  was  by 
their  descendants,  Rom.  ix.  8,  and  Shuckford,  viii. 

The  whole  subject  has  been  treated   i:i   separate 
essays  by  Vitringa  in  his  Observat.  Sacr.  I't.  i.  11, 


JACOB 


JADDUA 


913 


§2  ;  also  by  J.  H.  Hottinger,  and  by  J.J.  Schroder,  I  the  enterprising  habits  of  a  warlike  hunter-chief. 


cited  by  Winer 

2.   With    regard    to   Jacob's   acquisition   of  his 
father's  blessing,  ch.  xxvii.,  few  persons  will  accept 
the  excuse  offered  by  Augustine,  Serm.  iv.  §22, 
23,  for  the  deceit  which  he  practised — that  it  was 
merely  a  figurative  action,  and  that  his  personation 
of  Esau  was  justified  by  his  previous  purchase  of 
Esau's  birthright.      It  is  not  however  necessary, 
with  the  view  of  cherishing  a  Christian  hatred  of 
sin,  to  heap  opprobrious  epithets  upon  a  fallible 
man  whom  the  choice  of  God  has  rendered  venerable 
in    the   eyes   of  believers.     Waterland    (iv.   208) 
speaks  of  the  conduct  of  Jacob  in  language  which 
is  neither  wanting  in  reverence  nor  likely  to  encou- 
rage    the  extenuation   of  guilt.     "  I  do  not  know 
whether  it  be  justifiable  in  every  particular :  I  sus- 
pect  that    it   is   not.      There   were   several   very 
good  and  laudable  circumstances  in  what  Jacob  and 
Rebekah  did  ;  but  1  do  not  take  upon  me  to  acquit 
them  of  all  blame."     And  Blunt  (  Undes.  Coinc.) 
observes  that  none  "  of  the  patriarchs  can  be  set 
141  as   a   model   of  Christian   morals.     They  lived 
under  a  code  of  laws  that  were  not  absolutely  good, 
perhaps  not  so  good  as  the  Levitical  ;  for  as  this 
was  but  a  preparation  for  the  more  perfect  law  of 
Christ,  so  possibly  was  the  patriarchal  but  a  pre- 
paration   for   the    Law  of  Moses."     The  circum- 
stances which  led  to  this  unhappy  transaction,  and 
the    retribution    which   fell  upon  all  parties  con- 
cerned in  it,  have  been  carefully  discussed  by  Ben- 
son, Hulsean  Lectures  (1822)  on  Scripture  Diffi- 
culties, xvi.  and  xvii.     See  also  Woodgate's  Histo- 
rical  Sermons,  is. ;  and  Maurice,    Patriarchs  and 
Lawgivers,  v.    On  the  fulfilment  of  the  Prophecies 
concerning  Esau  and  Jacob,  and  on  Jacob's  dying 
blessing,  see  Bp.  Newton,  Dissertations  onthePro- 
phecies,  §^  iii.  and  iv. 

.">.  Jacob's  vision  at  Bethel  .is  considered  by  Mie- 
gius  in  a  treatise,  De  Scald  Jacobi  in  the  Thesau- 
rus novus  Theoiogico-Philologicus,  i.  195.  See  also 
Augustine,  Serin,  exxii.  His  stratagem  with  La- 
ban's  cattle  is  commented  on  by  Jerome,  Quaest.  in 
Hin.  Opp.  iii.  352,  and  by  Nitschmann,  De  co- 
rylo  Jacobi  in  T/tes.  WO.  Thcol.-Phil.  i.  201. 

4.  Jacob's  polygamy  is  an  instance  of  a  pati  iarehal 
practice  quite  repugnant  to  Christian  molality,  but 
to  be  accounted  for  on  the  ground  that  the  time 
had  not  then  come  for  a  full  expression  of  the  will 
of  God  mi  this  subject.  The  mutual  rights  of  hus- 
band and  wife  were  recognised  in  the  history  of  the 
Creation;  but  instances  of  polygamy  are  frequent 
among  persons  mentioned  in  the  sacred  records 
from  Lamech  (Gen.  iv.  19)  to  Herod  (Joseph.  Ant. 
xvii.  1,  §2).  In  times  when  frequent  wars  in- 
creased the  number  of  captives  ami  orphans,  and 
reduced  nearly  all  service  t<>  slavery,  there  may 
have  been  some  reason  foj  extending  the  recognition 
and  protection  of  the  law  to  concubines  ot  half- 
wives  as  Bilhah  and  Zilpah.  And  in  the  case  of 
Jacob,  it  is  right  to  bear  in  mind  that  it  was  not 
bis  original  intention  to  marry  both  the  daughters 
ofLaban.  (See  on  this  subject  Augustine,  Contra 
Faustum,  xxii.  47- 

."..   Jacob's  wrestling  with  the  angel  at  Jab 
the  subject  of  Augustine's  Sermo  \.;  compare  with 
it  De  Oivitate  Dei,  xvi.  39. 

In  Jacob  may  be  traced  a  combination  of  the 
quiet  patience  of  his  father  with  the  acquisitiveness 
which  seems  to  have  marked  bis  mothers  family  : 
and  in  Esau,  as  in  Ishmael.  the  migratory  and  inde- 
pendent  character  of  Abraham   was  developed  into 


Jacob,  whose  history  occupies  a  larger  space,  leave 
on   the  reader's  mind  a  less  favourable  impression 
than  either  of  the  other  patriarchs  with  whom  he 
is  joined  in  equal  honour  in  the  N.  T.  (Matt.  viii. 
11).    But  in  considering  his  character  we  must  bear 
in  mind  that  we  know  not  what  limits  veie  set  in 
those  days  to  the  knowledge  of  God  and  the  sancti- 
fying influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  A  timid  thought- 
ful boy  would  acquire  no  self-reliance  in  a  secluded 
home.     There  was  little  scope  for  the  exercise  of 
intelligence,  wide  sympathy,  generosity,  frankness. 
Growing  up  a  stranger  to  the  great  joys  and  great 
sorrows  of  natural  life — deaths,  and  wedlock,  and 
births ;  inured  to  caution  and  restraint  in  the  pre- 
sence of  a  more  vigorous  brother;   secretly  stimu- 
lated by  a  belief  that  God  designed  for  him  some 
superior  blessing,  Jacob  was  perhaps  in  a  fair  way 
to  become  a  narrow,  selfish,  deceitful,  disappointed 
man.     But,  after  dwelling  for  more  than  half  a  life- 
time in  solitude,  he  is  driven  from  home  by  the 
provoked  hostility  of  his  more  powerful  brother. 
Then  in  deep  and  bitter  sorrow  the  outcast  begins 
life  afresh  long  after  youth  has  passed,  and  finds 
himself  brought  first  of  all  unexpectedly  into  that 
close  personal  communion  with  God  which  elevates 
the  soul,  and  then   into  that  enlarged  intercourse 
with  men  which  is  capable  of  drawing  out  all   the 
better  feelings  of  human  nature.     An  unseen  world 
was  opened.     God  revived  and  renewed  to  him  that 
slumbering  promise  over  which  he  had  brooded  for 
threescore  years   since  he  learned  it   in  childhood 
from    his   mother.     Angels   conversed    with   him. 
Gradually  he  felt  more  and  more  the  watchful  care 
of  an  ever  present  spiritual  Father.     Face  to  fee  de 
wrestled  with  the  Representative  of  the  Almighty. 
And  so,  even  though  the  moral  consequences  of  his 
early  transgressions. hung  about  him,  and  saddened 
him  with  a  deep  knowledge  of  all  the  evil  of  treach- 
ery and  domestic  envy,  and  partial  judgment,  and 
filial  disobedience,  yet  the  increasing  revelations  of 
God  enlightened  the  old  age  of  the  patriarch  ;   and 
at  last  the  timid  "  supplanter,"  the  man  of  subtle 
devices,  waiting  for  the  salvation  of  Jehovah,  dies 
the  "soldier  of  God"  uttering  the  messages  of  God 
to  his  remote  posterity. 

For  reflections  on  various  incidents  in  Jacob's  life 
see  Bp.  Hall's  Contemplations,  Bk.  iii.  Many  Rab- 
binical legends  concerning  him  may  be  found  in 
Eisenmenger's  Entd.  Judenthum,  and  in  the  Jeru- 
salem Targum.  In  the  Koran  he  is  often  men- 
tioned in  conjunction  with  the  other  two  patriarchs 
(ch.  2,  and  elsewhere).  [W.  T.  !'».] 

JACU'BUS  ('Iokoi/0os  :  Accubus),  1  Esd.  ix. 
48.     [Akkuk,  4.] 

JA'DAfyT:  IaSae,  and  at  ver.  32  Aa5al ; 
Alex.  'Ie53ae').  son  of  Guam,  and  brother  of  Sham? 
mai,  in  the  genealogy  of  the  pons  of  Jerahmeel  by 
his  wife  Atarah  (l  Chr.  ii.  28,  32).  This  genea- 
logy is  very  corrupt  in  the  L.W.,  especially  in  the 

Vatican  Codex.  [A.  C.  H.] 

JA'DATJ  (YV,  but  the  Kcri  has  «P,  i.  <  •  Yad- 
dai:  'laSai:  Jeddu),  one  of  the  Bene-Neho  who 
had  taken  a  foreign  wite,  and  was  compelled  by 
Ezra  to  relinquish  her  (Ezr.  x.  4:>). 

.IAD  IU'A   ,y.lT  :    'IoSou,     iSuva  :    Jed 
son,  and  successor  in  the  high-priesthood,  of  Jona- 
oi  Johanan.    He  is  tin:  last  of  the  high-priests 
mentioned  in  the  0.  T.,  and  probablj  altogether 


914 


JADDUA 


the  latest  name  in  the  canon  (Neh.  xii.  11,  22),  at 
least  if  1  Chr.  iii.  22-24  is  admitted  to  be  corrupt 
(see  Geneal.  of  our  Lord,  101,  107).  His  name 
marks  distinctly  the  time  when  the  latest  additions 
were  made  to  the  book  of  Nehemiah  and  the  canon 
of  Scripture,  and  perhaps  affords  a  clue  to  the  age 
of  Malachi  the  prophet.  All  that  we  learn  con- 
cerning him  in  Scripture  is  the  fact  of  his  being 
the  son  of  Jonathan,  and  high-priest.  We  gather 
also  pretty  certainly  that  he  was  priest  in  the  reign 
of  the  last  Persian  king  Darius,  and  that  he  was 
still  high-priest  after  the  Persian  dynasty  was  over- 
thrown, i.  e.  in  the  reign  of  Alexander  the  Great. 
For  the  expression  "  Darius  the  Persian "  must 
hare  been  used  after  the  accession  of  the  Grecian 
dynasty ;  and  had  another  high-priest  succeeded, 
his  name  would  most  likely  have  been  mentioned. 
Thus  far  then  the  book  of  Nehemiah  bears  out  the 
truth  of  Josephus's  history,  which  makes  Jaddua 
high-priest -when  Alexander  invaded  Judaea.  But 
the  story  of  his  interview  with  Alexander  [High- 
priest,  p.  811  5]  does  not  on  that  account  deserve 
credit,  nor  his  account  of  the  building  of  the  temple 
on  Mount  Gerizim  during  Jaddua's  pontificate,  at 
the  instigation  of  Sanballat,  both  of  which,  as  well 
as  the  accompanying  circumstances,  are  probably 
derived  from  some  apocryphal  book  of  Alexandrian 
growth,  since  lost,  in  which  chronology  and  history 
gave  way  to  romance  and  Jewish  vanity.  Josephus 
seems  to  place  the  death  of  Jaddua  after  that  of  Alex- 
ander („4.  /.  xi.  8,  §7).  Eusebius  assigns  20  years 
to  Jaddua's  pontificate  (Geneal.  of  our  Lord,  323 
sqq. ;  Selden,  de  Succ. ;  Prideaux,  &c).  [A.  C.  H.] 

JAD'DUA  (J7-VP:  'USSoia;  Alex.  'USSoiic  : 
Jeddua),  one  of  the  chief  of  the  people,  i.  e.  of  the 
laymen,  who  sealed  the  covenant  with  Kehemiah 
(Neh.  x.  21). 

JA'DON(}1T:  Evdpwv  in  both  MSS. :  Jadon), 
a  man,  who  in  company  with  the  Gibeonites  and 
the  men  of  Mizpah  assisted  to  repair  the  wall  of 
Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  7).  His  title,  "  the  Mero- 
nothite"  (comp.  1  Chr.  xxvii.  30),  and  the  mention 
of  Gibeonites,  would  seem  to  point  to  a  place 
Meroneth,  and  that  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Gibeon  ; 
but  no  such  place  has  yet  been  traced. 

Jadon  ('laSdv)  is  the  name  attributed  -by  Jo- 
sephus (Ant.  viii.  8,  §5)  to  the  man  of  God  from 
Judah,  who  withstood  Jeroboam  at  the  altar  at 
Bethel — probably  intending  Iddo  the  seer.  By 
Jerome  (Qu.  Hcbr.  on  2  Chr.  ix.  29)  the  name  is 
given  as  Jaddo. 

JA'EL  (?JP  :  Hex.  Syr.  Anael:  'Io^A  ;  Joseph. 
'idATj :  Jahel),  the  wife  of  Heber  the  Kenite.  Heber 
was  the  chief  of  a  nomadic  Arab  clan,  who  had  sepa- 
rated from  the  rest  of  his  tribe,  and  had  pitched  his 
tent  underthe  oaks,  which  had  in  consequence  received 
the  name  of  "  oaks  of  the  wanderers"  (A.  V.  plain 
of  Zaanaim,  Jndg.  iv.  1 1),  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
Kedesh-Naphthaii.  [HEBER ;  KENITES.]  The  tribe 
of  Heber  had  secured  the  quiet  enjoyment  of  their 
pastures  by  adopting  a  neutral  position  in  a  troublous 
period.  Their  descent  from  Jethro  secured  them  the 
favourable  regard  of  the  Israelites,  and  they  were 
sufficiently  important  to  conclude  a  formal  peace 
with  Jabin  king  of  Hazor. 


"  Mantle "    is    here    inaccurate,    the   word    is 
n^Dt^n — with  the  definite  article.    But  as  the  term 


what  the  Semicah  was.     Probarbly  some  part  of  the 
regular  furniture  of  the  tent. 

b  irdc-craKos,  LXX.  ;    but    according   to  Josephus, 
is  not  found  elsewhere,  it  is  not  possible  to  recognise    aiSrjptov  yKov. 


JAEL 

In  the  headlong  route  which  followed  the  defeat 
of  the  Canaanites  by  Barak,  Sisera,  abandoning  his 
chariot  the  more  easily  to  avoid  notice  (comp.  Horn. 
LI.   v.   20),  fled    unattended,  and  in  an  opposite 
direction  from  that  taken  by  his  army,  to  the  tent 
of  the  Kenite  chieftaiiiess.     "  The  tent  of  Jael " 
is  expressly  mentioned  either  because  the  harem  of 
Heber  was  in  a  separate  tent  (Rosenmiiller,  Morgenl. 
iii.  22),  or  because  the  Kenite  himself  was  absent 
at  the  time.     In  the  sacred  seclusion  of  this  almost 
inviolable  sanctuary,  Sisera  might  well  have  felt 
himself  absolutely  secure  from  the  incursions  of  the 
enemy  (Calmet,  Fragm.  xxv.)  ;  and  although  he  in- 
tended to  take  refuge  among  the  Kenites,  he  would 
not  have  ventured  so  openly  to  violate  all  idea  ot 
Oriental  propriety  by  entering  a  woman's  apart- 
ments (D'Herbelot,  Bibl.  Orient,  s.  v.  Haram),  had 
he  not   received   Jael's   express,   earnest,  and   re- 
spectful entreaty  to  do  so.     He  accepted  the  invita- 
tion, and  she  flung  a  mantle3  over  him  as  he  lay 
wearily  on  the  floor.     When  thirst  prevented  sleep, 
and  he  asked  for  water,  s'he  brought  him  butter- 
milk in  her  choicest  vessel,  thus  ratifying  with  the 
semblance  of  officious  zeal  the  sacred  bond  of  East- 
ern hospitality.     Wine  would  have  been  less  suitable 
to  quench  his  thirst,  and  may  possibly  have  been 
eschewed  by  Heber 's  clan  (Jer.  xxxv.  2).     Butter- 
milk, according  to  the  quotations  in  Harmer,  is  still 
a  favourite  Arab  beverage,  and  that  this  is  the  drink 
intended  we  infer  from  Judges  v.  25,  as  well  as  from 
the  direct  statement  of  Josephus  (70X0  8ie<p8opbs 
fjSr],  Ant.  v.  5,  §4),  although  there  is  no  reason  to 
suppose  with  Josephus  and  the  Rabbis  (D.  Kimchi, 
Jarchi,  &c),  that  Jael  purposely  used  it  because  of 
its  soporific  qualities  (Bochart,  Hieroz.  i.  473).    But 
anxiety  still  prevented  Sisera  from  composing  him- 
self to  rest,  until  he  had  exacted  a  promise  from  his 
protectress  that  she  would  faithfully  preserve  the 
secret  of  his  concealment;  till  at  last,  with  a  feeling 
of  perfect  security,  the  weary  and  unfortunate  ge- 
neral resigned  himself  to  the  deep  sleep  of  misery 
and  fatigue.     Then  it  was  that  Jael  took  in  her  left 
hand  one  of  the  great  wooden  b  pins  (A.  V.  "  nail") 
which  fastened  down  the  cords  of  the  tent,  and  in 
ha-  right  hand  the  mallet  (A.  V.  "a  hammer") 
used  to  drive  it  into  the  ground,  and  creeping  up  to 
her  sleeping  and  confiding  guest,  with  one  terrible 
blow  dashed  it  through  Sisera's  temples  deep  into 
the  earth.     With  one  spasm  of  fruitless  agony,  with 
one  contortion  of  sudden  pain,    "  at  her  feet  he 
bowed,  he  fell;  where  he  bowed,  there  he  fell  down 
dead"  (Judg.  v.  27).     She  then  waited  to  meet 
the  pursuing  Barak,  and  led  him  into  her  tent  that  she 
might  in  his  presence  claim  the  glory  of  the  deed  ! 

Many  have  supposed  that  by  this  act  she  ful- 
filled the  saying  of  Deborah,  that  God  would  sell 
Sisera  into  the  hand  of  a  woman  (Judg.  iv.  9  ; 
Joseph,  v.  5,  §4)  ;  and  hence  they  have  supposed 
ili.'it  Jael  was  actuated  by  some  divine  and  hidden 
influence.  But  the  Bible  gives  no  hint  of  such  an 
inspiration,  and  it  is  at  least  equally  probable  that 
Deborah  merely  intended  to  intimate  the  share  of  the 
honour  which  would  be  assigned  by  posterity  to 
her  own  exertions.  If  therefore  we  eliminate  the 
still  more  monstrous  supposition  of  the  Rabbis  that 
Sisera  was  slain  by  Jael  because  he  attempted  to 
offer  her  violence — the  murder  will  appear  in  all 


JAGUR 

its  hideous  atrocity.  A  fugitive  had  asked,  ;m<i 
received  dakheel  (or  protection)  at  her  hands, — he 
was  miserable,  defeated,  weary, — he  was  the  ally  of 
her  husband, — he  was  her  invited  and  honoured 
guest, — he  was  in  the  sanctuary  of  the  haram, — 
above  all,  he  was  confiding,  defenceless,  and  asleep ; — 
yet  she  broke  her  pledged  faith,  violated  her  solemn 
hospitality,  and  murdered  a  trustful  and  unpro- 
tected slumberer.  Surely  we  require  the  clearest 
and  most  positive  statement  that  Jael  was  insti- 
gated to  such  a  murder  by  divine  suggestion. 

But  it  may  be  asked,  "  Mas  not  the  deed  of 
Jael  been  praised  by  an  inspired  authority?" 
"  Blessed  above  women  shall  Jael  the  wife  of  Heber 
the  Kenite  be,  blessed  shall  she  be  above  women  in 
the  tent"  (Judg.  v.  24),  Without  stopping  to 
ask  when  and  where  Deborah  claims  for  herseli  any 
infallibility,  or  whether,  in  the  passionate  moment 
of  patriotic  triumph,  she  was  likely  to  pause  in  such 
wild  times  to  scrutinise  the  moral  bearings  of  an 
act  which  had  been  so  splendid  a  benefit  to  herself 
and  her  people,  we  may  question  whether  any 
moral  commendation  is  directly  intended.  What 
Deborah  stated  was  a  fact,  viz.,  that  the  wives  of 
the  nomad  Arabs  would  undoubtedly  regard  Jael 
as  a  public  benefactress,  and  praise  her  as  a  popular 
heroine. 

The  suggestion  of  Gesenius  (Thes.  608  6),  Holl- 
mann,  and  others,  that  the  Jael  alluded  to  in  Judg. 
v.  6  is  not  the  wife  of  Heber,  but  some  unknown 
Israelitish  judge,  appears  to  us  extremely  unlikely, 
especially  as  the  name  Jael  must  almost  certainly 
be  the  name  of  a  woman  (1'rov.  v.  19,  A.  V. 
"roe").  At  the  same  time  it  must  be  admitted 
that  the  phrase  "in  the  days  of  Jael"  is  one  which 
we  should  hardly  have  expected.  [F.  W.  F.] 

JA'GUR  (1-1V  :  'Affwp  ;  Alex,  'layovp:  Jagur), 
a  town  of  Judah,  one  of  those  furthest  to  the  south, 
on  the  frontier  of  Edom  (Josh.  xv.  21).  Kabzeel, 
one  of  its  companions  in  the  list,  recurs  subse- 
quently ;  but  Jagur  is  not  again  met  with,  nor 
has  the  name  been  encountered  in  the  imperfect 
explorations  of  that  dreary  region.  The  Jagur, 
quoted  by  Schwarz  (p.  99)  from  the  Talmud  as 
one  of  tlh.'  boundaries  of  the  territory  of  Ashkelon, 
must  have  been  farther  to  the  N.W.  [G.] 

JA'HATH  (niT  :  le'0).  1.  Son  of  Libni,  the 
son  of  Gershom,  the  son  of  Levi  (1  Chr.  vi.  20, 
A.  V.).     He  was  ancestor  to  Asaph  (ver.  43). 

2.  Head  of  a  later  bouse  in  the  family  of  Gershom, 
being  the  eldest  son  of  Shimei,  the  son  of  Laadan. 
The  house  of  Jahath  existed  in  David's  time  ( 1  Chr. 
xxiii.  10,  11).  [A.  C.  H.] 

3.  ('led ;  Alex,  omits.)  A  man  in  the  genealogy 
of  Judah  (1  Chr.  iv.  ■_!),  son  of  Keaiah  ben-Shobal. 
His  sons  were  Ahumai  and  Lahad,  the  families  of 
the  Zorathites.  If  Reaiah  and  Haroeh  are  identical, 
Jahath     was     a     descendant     of    Caleb     ben-Hur. 

I  Haroeh.] 

4.  (Alex.  'Wfl.)  A  Levite,  son  of  Shelomoth, 
the  representative  of  the  Kohathite  family  of  I/.iiak 
in  the  reign  of  David  ( 1  Chr.  xxiv.  22). 

5.  A  Merarite  Levite  in  the  reign  of  Josiah,  one 
of  the  overseers  of  the  repairs  to  the  Temple  (2  Chr. 
xxxiv.  l'_'). 

JA"HAZ,  also  JAHAZA,  JAHA'ZAII,  and 
JAH'ZAH.  Coder  these  lour  forms  are  g'ven  in 
the  A.  Y.  tlie  name  ol  a  place  which  in  the  Hebrew 

appears  as  ]'!"P  and  !"IVn\  the  H  being  in  s 

cases — as  Num.  and  Dent. —  the  particle  of  motion, 


JAHAZIEL 


915 


but  elsewhere  an  integral  additioii  to  the  name.  It 
has  been  uniformly  so  taken  by  the  LXX.,  who  have 
lacrcrd,  and  twice  'laad.  Jaiiaz  is  found  Num. 
xxi.  2:>  ;  Dent,  ii,  32;  Judg.  xi.  20;  Is.  xv.  4  ; 
Jer.  xlviii.  34.  In  the  two  latter  only  is  it  ]*i"P, 
without  the  final  i"l.  The  Samaritan  Cod.  has 
n¥rV.  Vulg.  Jasa). 

At  Jahaz  the  decisive  battle  was  fought  between 
the  children  of  Israel  and  Sihon  king  of  the 
Amorites,  which  ended  in  the  overthrow  of  the 
latter  and  in  the  occupation  by  Israel  of  the  whole 
pastoral  souutry  included  between  the  Anion  and 
the  Jabbok,  the  Belka  of  the  modern  Arabs  (Num. 
xxi.  2.".  ;  Deut.  ii.  32;  Judg.  xi.  20).  It  was  in 
the  allotment  of  Keuben  (Josh.  xiii.  18),  though 
not  mentioned  in  the  catalogue  of  Num.  xxxii. ;  and 
it  was  given  with  its  suburbs  to  the  Merarite 
Levites  (1  Chr.  vi.  78  ;  and  Josh.  xxi.  36,  though 
here  omitted  in  the  ordinary  Hebrew  text). 

Jahazah  occurs  in  the  denunciations  of  Jeremiah 
and  Isaiah  on  the  inhabitants  of  the  "  plain  country," 
I.  e.  the  Mishor,  the  modern  Belka  (Jer.  xlviii.  21, 
34 ;  Is.  xv.  4) ;  but  beyond  the  fact  that  at  this 
period  it  was  in  the  hands  of  Moab  we  know  no- 
thing of  its  history. 

From  the  terms  of  the  narrative  in  Num.  xxi. 
and  Deut.  ii.,  We  should  expect  that  Jahaz  was  in 
the  extreme  south  part  of  the  territory  of  Sihon, 
but  yet  north  of  the  river  Arnon  (see  Deut.  ii.  24, 
36 ;  and  the  words  in  31,  "  begin  to  possess  "\  and 
in  exactly  this  position  a  site  flamed  Jazaza  is 
mentioned  by  Schwarz  (227),  though  by  him  only. 
But  this  does  not  agree  with  the  statements  of  Eu- 
sebius  ( Onom.  'Ietr<ra),  who  says  it  was  existing 
in  his  day  between  Medeba  and  A-q[Sovs,  by  which 
he  probably  intends  Dibon,  which  would  place 
Jahaz  considerably  too  far  to  the  North.  Like 
many  others  relating  to  the  places  East  of  the  Dead 
Sea,  this  question  must  await  further  research. 
(See  Ewald,  Gesc/iichte,  ii.  266,  271.)  [G.] 

JA'HAZA  (HVn>,  i.  c.  Yahtzah :  Baadv;  Alex. 
'lavad;  Jassa),  Josh,  xiii.- 18.     [Jahaz.] 

JA'HAZAH  (ilVrV :  in  Jer.  'Pe<pds,  in  both 
JISS. :  Juser,Ja90),  Josh.  xxi.  36  (though  omitted 
in  the  Rec.  Hebrew  Text,  and  not  recognizable  in 
the  LXX.),  Jer.  xlviii.  21.     [Jahaz.] 

JAHAZI'AH  (nnnV.e.  Yach'zeyah:  'laQas: 
Jaasia),  son  of  Tikvah,  apparently  a  priest ;  com- 
memorated as  one  of  the  four  who  originally  sided 
with  Ezra  in  the  matter  of  the  foreign  wives  (Kzr. 
x.  15).     In  Esdras  the  name  becomes  Ezkchias. 

JAHA'ZIEL  (^K'JJT).  1.  ('I«C"'A  :  Jehe- 
ziel.)  One  of  the  heroes  of  Benjamin  whodeseited 
the  cause  of  Saul  and  joined  David  when  he  was  at 
Ziklag  (  1  Chr.  xii.  4). 

2.  Jaziel  ('OfrrjA.),  a  priest  in  the  reign  of  Da- 
vid, whose  office  it  was.  in  conjunction  with  Be- 
naiah,  to  blow  the  trumpet  at  the  ministrations 
before  the  ark,  when  David  had  brought  it  to 
Jerusalem  (1  Chr.  xvi.  6).     [HlGH-PRIEST.] 

3.  ('U(iti\,  'IafnJA;  and  so  Alex.'  a  Kohathite 
Levite,  third  boh  of  Hebron.  His  house  is  men- 
tioned in  the  enumeration  of  the  Levites  in  the  time 
of  David  !l  Chr.  xxiii.   1'.';   xxiv.  2.",).    [A.  C.  11. J 

4.  ('0(,it;A:  Jahaziel.)  Son  of  Zechariah,  a 
Levite  of  the  Bene-Asaph,  who  was  inspired  by  flic 
Spirit  of  Jehovah  to  animate  Jehoshaphal  and  the 
army  of  Judah   in   a   moment   of  great   ii ai 

namely,  when   they   were  anticipating   the   invasion 


916 


JAHDA1 


of  an  enormous  horde  of  Moabites,  Ammonites, 
Meluinims,  and  other  barbarians  (2  Chr.  xx.  14). 
Ps.  lxxxiii.  is  entitled  a  Psalm  of  Asaph,  and  this, 
coupled  with  the  mention  of  Edom,  Moab,  Amnion, 
and  others,  in  hostility  to  Israel,  has  led  some  to 
connect  it  with  the  above  event.  [Gebal.]  But, 
however  desirable,  this  is  very  uncertain. 

5.  f'Aj^A.  :  Ezechiel.)  The  "  son  of  Jahaziel  " 
was  the  chief  of  the  Bene-Shecaniah  who  returned 
from  Babylon  with  Ezra,  according  to  the  present 
state  of  the  Hebrew  text  (Ezr.  viii.  5).  But  accord- 
ing to  the  LXX.,  and  the  parallel  passage* in  1  Esd. 
( viii.  32),  a  name  has  escaped  from  the  text, 
and  it  should  read,  "  of  the  Bene-Zathoe  (probably 
Zattu),  Shecaniah  son  of  Jahaziel."  In  the  latter 
place  the  name  appears  as  Jezelus. 

JAH'DAI  C^ilV  i.e.  Yehdai :  'ASSa'i;  Alex. 
'IaSot:  Jahoddai),  a  man  who  appeal's  to  be  thrust 
abruptly  into  the  genealogy  of  Caleb,  as  the  father 
of  six  sons  (1  Chr.  ii.  47).  Vaiious  suggestions 
regarding  the  name  have  been  made:  as  that  Gazez, 
the  name  preceding,  should  be  Jahdai ;  that  Jahdai 
was  a  concubine  of  Caleb,  &c. :  but  these  are  mere 
groundless  suppositions  (see  Burrington,  i.  2.1  G; 
Bertheau,  ad  Inc.). 

JAH'DIEL  (WW:    'IeSWjA:    Jediel),  one 

of  the  heroes  who  were  heads  of  the  halt-tribe  of 
Manasseh  on  the  east  of  Jordan  (I  Chr.  v.  24). 

JAH'DO  (VW :  Uddai,  as  if  the  name  had 
originally  been  'Hn'1  ;  comp.  Jaasact,  Jadau  : 
Jeddo),  a  Gadite  named  in  the  genealogies  of  his 
tiibe  (1  Chr.  v.  14)  as  the  sou  of  Buz  and  father 
of  Jeshishai. 

JAH'LEELf^rT:  'AXo?}A;  Alex.  'AAorJA, 
'AAAtjA  :  Jahelet),  the  third  of  the  three  sons  of 
Zebulun  (Gen.  xlvi.  14  ;  Num.  xxvi.  26),  founder 
of  the  family  of  the  Jahleelites.  Nothing  is 
heard  of  him  or  of  his  descendants. 

JAH'MAI  0E>rP  :  'I^cu  ;  Alex.  'U/xov  : 
Jemai),  a  man  of  Issachar,  one  of  the  heads  of  the 
house  of  Tola  (1  Chr.  vii.  2). 

JAH'ZAH  (PIXiT:  'lacrd:  Jassa),  1  Chr.  vi. 
78.     [Jahaz.] 

JAH'ZEEL  ("?NXrV :  'Acn'jA:  Jasiel),  the 
first  of  the  four  sons  of  Naphtali  (Gen.  xlvi.  24), 
tounder  of  the  family  of  the  Jahzeelites 
(vNVn'n,  Num.  xxvi.  48).  His  name  is  once 
again  mentioned  (1  Chr.  vii.  13)  in  the  slightly 
ditferent  form  of  Jahziel. 

JAH'ZEEAH  (rnm*:  'uCptis,  E£ipds : 
Jezras),  a  priest,  of  the  house  of  Immer ;  ancestor 
of  Maasiai  (read  Maaziah),  one  of  the  courses  which 
returned  (1  Chr.  ix.  12).  [Jehoiarib.]  In  the 
duplicate,  passage  in  Neh.  xi.  13  he  is  called  ''TnX 
Aiiasai,  and  all  the  other  names  are  much 
varied.  [A.  C.  H.] 

JAH'ZIEL  ((?X,Vn^ :  'lourvfa. :  Jasiel),  the 
form  iu  which  the  name  of  the  first  of  Naphtali's 
sons,  elsewhere  given  Jahzeel,  appears  in  1  Chr. 
vii.  13  only. 

JAIR  "(TNP :     latp:  Jair).      1.  A  man  who 


JAIRUS 

on  his  father's  side  was  descended  from  Judah,  and 
on  his  mother's  from  Manasseh.  His  father  was 
Segub,  son  of  Hezron  the  son  of  Pharez,  by  his 
third  wife,  the  daughter  of  the  great  Machir,  a  man 
so  great  that  his  name  is  sometimes  used  as  equi- 
valent to  that  of  Manasseh  (1  Chr.  ii.  21,  22). 
Thus  on  both  sides  he  was  a  member  of  the  most 
powerful  family  of  each  tribe.  By  Moses  he  is 
called  the  "son  of  Manasseh"  (Num.  xxxii.  41  ; 
Deut.  iii.  14),  and  according  to  the  Chronicles 
(1  Chr.  ii.  23),  he  was  one  of  the  "  sons  of  Machir 
the  father  of  Gilead."  This  designation  from  his 
mother  rather  than  his  father,  perhaps  arose  from 
his  having  settled  in  the  tribe  of  Manasseh,  east  of 
Jordan.  During  the  conquest  he  performed  one  of 
the  chief  feats  recorded.  He  took  the  whole  of  the 
tract  of  AKGOB  (Deut.  iii.  14),  the  naturally  inac- 
cessible Trachonitis,  the  modern  Lejah — and  iu  ad- 
dition possessed  himself  of  some  nomad-villages  in 
Gilead,  which  he  called  after  his  own  name,  Hav- 
VOTH-Jair  (Num.  xxxii.  41  ;  1  Chr.  ii.  23).*.  None 
of  his  descendants  are  mentioned  with  certainty  ; 
but  it  is  perhaps  allowable  to  consider  Ira  the 
Jairite  as  one  of  them.     Possibly  another  was 

2.  "  Jair  the  Gileadite,"  who  judged  Israel 
for  two  and  twenty  years  (Judg.  x.  3-5).  He  had 
thirty  sons  who  rode  30  asses  (D^V),  and  pos- 
sessed 30  "cities"  (D,Ty)  in  the  land  of  Gilead, 
which,  like  those  of  their  namesake,  were  called  Hav- 
voth-Jair.  Possibly  the  original  twenty-three 
formed  part  of  these.  Josephus  (Ant.  v.  7,  §6) 
gives  the  name  of  Jair  as  'Iaei'prjs  ;  he  declares 
him  to  have  been  of  the  tribe  of  Manasseh,  and  his 
burial  place  Qamon,  to  have'  been  iu  Gilead. 
[Havoth  Jair.] 

3.  (A  Benjamite,  son  of  Kish  and  father  of  Mor- 
decai  (Esth.  ii.  5).  In  the  Apocrypha  his  name  is 
given  as  Jairus. 

4.  ("PyN  a  totally  different  name  from  the  pre- 
ceding; 'latp,  Alex.  'ASei'p  ;  SaltusS)  The  father 
of  Elbanan,  one  of  the  heroes  of  David's  army,  who 
killed  Lachmi  the  brother  of  Goliath  (1  Chr.  xx.  5). 
In  the  original  Hebrew  text  (Cethib)  the  name  is 
Jaor  (TIJP).  In  the  parallel  nanative  of  Samuel 
(2  Sam.  xxi.  19)  Jaare-Oregim  is  substituted  for 
Jair.  The  arguments  for  each  will  be  found  under 
Elhasan  and  Jaare-Oregim. 

In  the  N.  Test.,  as  in  the  Apocrypha,  we  en- 
counter Jair  under  the  Greek  form  of  Jairus.    [G.] 

JAIRITE,  THE  (nx»n :  6  'laplv;  Alex. 
6  laeipei  :  Jairitcs).  Ira  the  Jairite  was  a 
priest  (jn'3,  A.  V.  "  chief  ruler")  to  David  (2  Sam. 
xx.  26).  If  "Priest"  is  to  be  taken  here  in  its 
sacerdotal  sense,  Ira  must  have  been  a  descendant 
of  Aaron,  in  whose  line  however  no  Jair  is  men- 
tioned. But  this  is  not  imperative  [see  Priest], 
and  he  may  therefore  have  sprung  from  the  great 
Jair  of-Manasseh,  or  some  lesser  person  of  the  name 

JAI'RTJS*.  1.  ('ideipoy),  a  ruler  of "5  syna- 
gogue, probably  in  some  town  near  the  western 
shore  of  the  sea  of  Galilee.  He  was  the  father  of  the 
maiden  whom  Jesus  restored  to  life  (Matt.  ix.  18  ; 
Mark  v.  22  ;  Luke  viii.  41).  The  uame  is  probably 
the  Grecised  form  of  the  Hebrew  Jair. 

2.  Claipos.)  Esth.  xi.  2.  [Jair,  3.)    [W.T.  B.] 


This  verse  would  seem  not  to  refer  to  the  ori-  rendering  is  said  to  be,  "  And  Geshur  and  Aram 
ginal  conquest  of  these  villages  by  Jair,  as  the  A.  V.  re-  took  the  Havvoth-Jair  from  them,  with  Kenath  and  her 
presents,  but  rather  to  their  recapture.     The  accurate  i  daughter-towns,  sixty  cities"  (Bertheau,  Chrimik,  16). 


JAKAN 

JA'KAN  QpVH'  'A/cdV;  Alex.  Oiicd/j.:  Jacan), 
son  of  Ezer  the  Horite  (1  Chr.  i.  42).  The  name  is 
identical  with  that  more  commonly  expressed  in  the 
A.  V.  as  Jaakan.     And  lee  Akan. 

JAKEH  (nj?\  and  in  some  MSS.  Hp\  which 
is  followed  by  a  MS.  of  the  Targum  in  the  Cam- 
bridge Univ.  Libr.,  and  was  evidently  the  reading 
of  the  Vulgate  where  the  whole  clause  is  rendered 
symbolically — "  Verba  congregantis  filii  vomentis"). 
The  A.  V.  of  Prov.  xxx.  1,  following  the  authority 
of  the  Targum  and  Syriac,  has  represented  this  as 
the  proper  name  of  the  father  of  Agur,  whose 
sayings  are  collected  in  Prov.  xxx.,  and  such  is  the 
natural  interpretation.  But  beyond  this  we  have 
no  clue  to  the  existence  of  either  Agur  or  Jakeh. 
Of  course  if  Agur  be  .Solomon,  it  follows  that 
Jakeh  was  a  name  of  David  of  some  mystical  sig- 
nificance. .But  for  this  there  is  not  a  shadow  of 
support.  Jarchi,  punning  on  the  two  names,  ex- 
plains the  clause,  "  the  words  of  Solomon,  who 
gathered  understanding  and  vomited  it,"  evidently 
having  before  him  the  reading  Np\  which  he  de- 
rived from  Xlp,  "  to  vomit."  This  explanation,  it 
needs  scarcely  be  said,  is  equally  chaiacterised  by 
elegance  and  truth.  Others,  adopting  the  form 
np\  and  connecting  it  with  nilfp^  (or  as  Fiirst  gives 
it,  nnp  ),  yikk'hah,  "obedience,"  apply  it  to 
Solomon  in  his  late  repentance.  But  these  and  the 
like  are  the  merest  conjectures.  If  Jakeh  be  the 
name  of  a  person,  as  there  is  every  reason  to  believe, 
we  know  nothing  more  about  him ;  if  not,  there  is 
no  limit  to  the  symbolical  meanings  which  may  be 
extracted  from  the  clause  in  which  it  occurs,  and 
which  change  with  the  ever-shifting  ground  of  the 
critic's  point  of  view.  That  the  passage  was  early 
corrupted  is  clear  from  the  rendering  of  the  LXX., 
who  insert  ch.  xxx.  1-14  in  the  middle  of  ch.  xxiv. 
The  first  clause  they  translate  robs  e/xovs  \6yovs 
vie  (po/3r)8T]Ti,  /cat  Se^auevos  avrobs  fieraviei — 
"  My  son,  fear  my  words,  and  having  received  them, 
repent:"  a  meaning  which  at  first  sight  seems  hard 
to  extract  from  the  Hebrew,  and  which  has  there- 
fore been  abandoned  as  hopelessly  corrupt.  But  a 
slight  alteration  of  one  or  two  letters  and  the  vowel- 
points  will,  if  it  do  no  more,  at  least  show  how  the 
LXX.    arrived    at   their    extraordinary   translation. 

They  must  have  read  dl';ni  nnp  *33  i-un  n:n, 

in  which  the  letters  of  the  last  word  are  slightly 
transposed,  in  order  to  account  for  fj.eTa.v6ei.  In 
support  of  this  alteration  see  Zech.  xi.  5,  where 
•"ID'J'X'1  is  rendered  jxerefxeKovro.^  The  Targum 
and  Syriac  point  to  different  readings  also,  though 
not  where  Jakeh  is  concerned. 

Hitzig  (die  Spruche  Salomo's),  unable  to  find 
any  other  explanation,  has  recourse  to  an  alteration 
of  the  text  as  violent  as  it  is  unauthorised,  lb- 
proposes  to  read  XtTO  nnp'  J3,  "the  son  of  her 
whose  obedience  is  Massa: '  which,  to  say  the  least 
of  it,  is  a  very  remarkable  way  of  indicating  "  the 
queen  of  Massa."  But  in  order  to  arrive  at  this 
reading  he  first  adopts  the  rare  word  nnp)  (which 
only  occurs  in  the  const,  state  in  two  passages, 
Cen.  xlix.  .10,  and  l'rov.  xxx.  17),  to  which  be 
attaches  the  unusual  form  of  the  pronominal  suffix, 


JAMBRI 


017 


a  This  conjecture  incidentally  throws  light  on  the 
LXX.  of  l'rov.  xiv.  15,  epxerai.  els  lUTtwoiav,  for 
liP'S1?  1*2*,  which  they  probably  read  D'^'tO  R*3J. 
Valeat  quantum. 


and  ekes  out  his  explanation  by  the  help  of  an 
elliptical  and  highly  poetical  construction,  which  is 
strangely  out  of  place  in  the  bald  prose  heading  of 
the  chapter.  Yet  to  this  theory  Bertheau  yields  a 
coy  assent  ("  nicht  ohne  Zogern,"  die  Spr.  Sal. 
Einl.  p.  xviii.)  :  and  thus  Agur  and  Lemuel  are 
brothers,  both  sons  of  a  queen  of  Massa,  the  former 
being  the  reigning  monarch  (Prov.  xxxi.  1).  NtS'D 
massa,  "  prophecy  "  or  "  burden,"  is  considered  as 
a  proper  name  and  identical  with  the  region  named 
Massa  in  Arabia,  occupied  by  the  descendants 
of  a  son  of  Ishmael  (Gen.  xxv.  14;  1  Chr.  i.  30), 
and  mentioned  in  connexion  with  Dumah.  This 
district  Hitzig  conjectures  was  the  same  which  was 
conquered  and  occupied  by  the  5U0  Simeonites, 
whose  predatory  excursion  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah 
is  narrated  in  1  Chr.  iv.  41-43.  They  are  there 
said  to  have  annihilated  the  Amalekites  in  Mount 
Seir,  and  to  have  seized  their  country.  That  this 
country  was  Massa,  of  which  Lemuel  was  king, 
and  that  Agur  was  a  descendant  of  the  conquering 
Simeonites,  is  the  opinion  of  Hitzig,  approved  by 
Bunsen.  But  the  latter,  retaining  the  received  text, 
and  considering  Jakeh  as  a  proper  name,  takes 
NG'Sn,  hammassd,  as  if  it  were  '•NtS'ftn,  ham- 
massai,  a  gentilic  name,  "  the  man  of  Massa," 
supporting  this  by  a  reference  to  Gen.  xv.  2,  where 
pt^'Sn,  Dammesek,  is  apparently  used  in  the  same 
manner  (Bibelwerh,  i.  clxxviii.).  There  is  good 
reason,  however,  to  suspect  that  the  word  in  ques- 
tion in  the  latter  passage  is  an  interpolation,  or 
that  the  verse  is  in  some  way  corrupt,  as  the  ren- 
dering of  the  Chaldee  and  Syriac  is  not  supported 
by  the  ordinary  usages  of  Hebrew,  though  it  is 
adopted  by  the  A.  V.,  and  by  Gesenius,  Knobel, 
and  others.  In  any  case  the  instances  are  not 
analogous.  [YV.  A.  W.l 

JA'KIM  (D^p11:  'laKLfi,  Alex.  'laKelfx:  Jacim). 
1.  lb-ad  of  the  12th  course  of  priests  in  the  reign 
of  David  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  12).  The  Alex.  LXX.  gives 
the  name  Eliakim  (i'E\ta/c6tiu).    [ Jehoiahib  ;  Ja- 

CIIIN.] 

2.  A  Benjamite,  one  of  the  Beni-Shimhi  (1  Chr. 
viii.  19).  [A.  C.  H.] 

JA'LON(pT:  'lafxoou;  Alex.  'iaAcjp :  Jalon), 
one  of  the  sons  of  Ezrah  ;  a  person  named  in  the 
genealogies  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  iv.  17). 

JAM'BIIES.  [See  Jannes  and  Jamcres.] 
JAM'BRI.  Shortly  after  the  death  of  Judas 
Maccabaeus  (b.c.  lbl ),  "  the'  children  of  Jambri" 
are  said  to  have  made  a  predatory  attack  on  a 
detachment  of  the  Maccabaean  forces  and  to  have 
suffered  reprisals  (1  Mace.  ix.  36-41).  The  name 
does  n<'t  occur  elsewhere,  and  the  variety  of  read- 
ings is  considerable:  'lafx/lpl.  Cod.  B ;  '\ufxfipdv, 
Cod.  A  ;  alii.  W/xPpoi,  'Afifipi;  Syr.  Ainbrei. 
Josephus  I  Ant.  xiii.  I,  §2)  reads  ol  'Afj.apa.iov 
iraloes,  and  it  seems  almost  certain  that  the  true 
leading  h'Afipi  (-ei ),  a  form  which  occurs  elsevi  here 
I  I  K.xvi.22  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  L2,  §5,  'A.uapiVos; 
1  Chr.  xxvii.  is.  ileb.  npy,  Vulg.  Amri;  1  Chr. 
ix.  4,  'Aixfipatfj.). 

It    has    been    conjectured    (Drusius,    Michaelis, 

Grimm,   1    Mace.    i\.  :iil)  that  the  original   text   was 

H1DS  '33,  "the  sons  of  the  Amorites,"  and  that 
the  reference  is  to  a  fumilj  of  (be  Amorites  who 

had  in  early  times  occupied  the  town  Medeba 
(ver.  3fi)  on  the  borders  of  Reuben  Num.  xxi. 
30,   ■!  .  [!'..  F.  W.] 


918 


JAMES 


■JAMES  ('Ic£/cco|8os :  Jacobus),'1  the  name  of 
several  persons  mentioned  in  the  N.  T. 

1.  James  the  "Son  of  Zebedee.  This  is  the 
only  one  of  the  Apostles  of  whose  life  and  death  we 
can  write  with  certainty.  The  little  that  we  know 
of  him  we  have  on  the  authority  of  Scripture.  All 
else  that  is  reported  is  idle  legend,  with  the  possible 
exception  of  one  tale,  handed  down  by  Clement  ot 
Alexandria  to  Eusebius,  and  by  Eusebius  to  us. 
With  this  single  exception  the  line  of  demarcation 
is  drawn  clear  and  sharp.  There  is  no  fear  of  con- 
founding the  St.  James  of  the  New  Testament  with 
the  hero  of  Compostella. 

Of  St.  James's  early  life  we  know  nothing.  We 
first  hear  of  him  A.D.'  27,  when  he  was  called  to  be 
our  Lord's  disciple ;  and  he  disappears  from  view 
A.D.  44,  when  he  suffered  martyrdom  at  the  hands 
of  Herod  Agrippa  I.  We  proceed  to  thread  together 
the  severarpieces  of  information  which  the  inspired 
writers  have  given  us  respecting  him  during  these 
seventeen  years. 

1.  His  history. — In  the  spring  or  summer  of  the 
year  27,  Zebedee,1"  a  fisherman,  but  possessed  at 
"least  of  competence  (Mark  i.  20),  was  out  on  the 
Sea  of  Galilee,  with  his  two  sons,  James  and  John, 
and  some  boatmen,  whom  either  he  had  hired  for 
the  occasion,  or  who  more  probably  were  his  usual 
attendants.  He  was  engaged  in  his  customary  oc- 
cupation of  fishing,  ami  near  him  was  another  boat 
belonging  to  Simon  and  Andrew,  with  whom  he 
and  his  sons  were  in  partnership.  Finding  them- 
selves unsuccessful,  the  occupants  of  both  boats 
came  ashore,  and  began  to  wash  their  nets.  At 
this  time  the  new  Teacher,  who  had  now  been 
ministering  about  six  months,  and  with  whom 
•Simon  and  Andrew,  and  in  all  probability  John, 
were  already  well  acquainted  (John  i.  41),  ap- 
peared upon  the  beach.  He  requested  leave  of 
Simon  and  Andrew  to  address  the  crowds  that 
flocked  around  him  from  their  boat,  which  was 
lying  at  a  convenient  distance  from  the  shore. 
The  discourse  being  completed,  and  the  crowds  dis- 
persing, Jesus  desired  Simon  to  put  out  into  the 
deeper"  water,  and  to  try  another  cast  for  fish. 
Though  reluctant,  Simon  did  as  he  was  desired, 
through  the  awe  which  he  already  entertained  for 
One  who,  he  thought,  might  possibly  be  the  pro- 
mised Messiah  (John  i.  41,  42),  and  whom  even 
now  he  addressed  as  "  Rabbi"  (i-mo-rdra,  Luke  v. 
5,  the  word  used  by  this  Evangelist  for  'Pa0£i). 
Astonished  at  the  success  of  his  draught,  he  beckoned 


a  The  name  itself  will  perhaps  repay  a  few  mo- 
ments' consideration.  As  borne  by  the  Apostles  and 
their  contemporaries  in  the  N.  T.,  it  was  of  course 
Jacob,  and  it  is  somewhat  remarkable  that  in  them  it 
reappears  for  the  first  time  since  the  patriarch  himself. 
In  the  unchangeable  East  St.  James  is  still  St.  Jacob 

Mar  Yakoob  ;  but  no  sooner  had  the  name  left  the 

shores  of  Palestine  than  it  underwent  a  series  of 
curious  and  interesting  changes  probably  unparalleled 
in  any  other  case.  To  the  Greeks  it  became  'Ia«w/3o9, 
with  "the  accent  on  the  first  syllable ;  to  the  Latins, 
Jacobus,  doubtless  similarly  accented,  since  in  Italian 
it  is  Idcomo  or  Giacomo.  In  Spain  it  assumed  two 
forms,  apparently  of  different  origins  : — Jago— in  mo- 
dern Spanish  Diego,  Portuguese,  Tiago— and  Xayme 
or  Jayme,  pronounced  Hayme,  with  a  strong  initial 
guttural.  In  France  it  became  Jacques ;  but  another 
form  was  Jamc,  which  appears  in  the  metrical  life  of 
St.  Thomas  a  Becket  by  Gamier  (A.D.  1170-74),  quoted 
in  Robertson's  Becket,  p.  139  note.  From  this  last 
the  transition  to  our  James   is   easy.      When  it  first 


JAMES 

to  his  partners  in  the  other  boat  to  come  and  help 
him  and  his  brother  in  landing  the  fish  caught. 
The  same  amazement  communicated  itself  to  the 
sons  of  Zebedee,  and  flashed  conviction  on  the  souls 
of  all  the  tour  fishermen.  They  had  doubted  and 
mused  before ;  now  they  believed.  At  His  call  they 
left  all,  and  became,  once  and  for  ever,  His  disciples, 
hereafter  to  catch  men. 

This  is  the  call  of  St.  James  to  the  discipleship. 
It  will  be  seen  that  we  have  regarded  the  events 
narrated  by  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark  (Matt.  iv. 
18-22  ;  Mark  i.  16-20)  as  identical  with  those 
related  by  St.  Luke  (Luke  v.  1-1 1)$  in  accordance 
with  the  opinion  of  Hammond,  Lightfoot,  Maldo- 
natus,  Lardner,  Trench,  Wordsworth,  &c. ;  not  as 
distinct  from  them,  as  supposed  by  Alford,  Gres- 
well,  &c. 

For  a  full  year  we  lose  sight  of  St.  James.  He 
is  then,  in  the  spring  of  28,  called  to  the  apostle- 
ship  with  his  eleven  brethren  (Matt.  x.  2  ;  Mark  iii. 
14  ;  Luke  vi.  13  ;  Acts  i.  13).  In  the  list  of  the 
Apostles  given  us  by  St.  Mark,  and  in  the  book  of 
Acts,  his  name  occurs  next  to  that  of  Simon  Peter : 
in  the  Gospels  of  St,  Matthew  and  St.  Luke  it 
comes  third.  It  is  clear  that  in  these  lists  the 
names  are  not  placed  at  random.  In  all  four,  the 
names  of  Peter,  Andrew,  James,  and  John  are 
placed  first ;  and  it  is  plain  that  these  four  Apostles 
were  at  the  head  of  the  twelve  throughout.  Thus 
we  see  that  Peter,  James,  and  John,  alone  were 
admitted  to  the  miracle  of  the  raising  of  Jairus's 
daughter  (Mark  v.  37  ;  Luke  Viii.  51).  The  same 
three  Apostles  alone  were  permitted  to  be  present 
at  the  Transfiguration  (Matt.  xvii.  1 ;  Mark  ix.  2  ; 
Luke  ix.  28).  The  same  three  alone  were  allowed 
to  witness  the  Agony  (Matt.  xxvi.  37  ;  Mark  xiv. 
33).  And  it  is  Peter,  James,  John,  and  Andrew 
who  ask  our  Lord  for  an  explanation  of  his  dark 
sayings  with  regard  to  the  end  of  the  world  and 
his  second  coming  (Mark  xiii.  3).  It  is  worthy  of 
notice  that  in  all  these  places,  with  one  exception 
(Luke  ix.  28),  the  name  of  James  is  put  before 
that  of  John,  and  that  John  is  twice  described  as 
"  the  brother  of  James  "  (Mark  v.  37  ;  Matt.  xvii. 
1).  This  would  appear  to  imply  that  at  this  time 
James,  either  from  age  or  character,  took  a  higher 
position  than  his  brother.  On  the  last  occasion  on 
which  St.  James  is  mentioned  we  find  this  position 
reversed.  That  the  prominence  of  these  three 
Apostles  was  founded  on  personal  character  (as  out 
of  every  twelve  persons  there  must  be  two  or  three 


appeared  in  English,  or  through  what  channel,  the 
writer  has  not  been  able  to  trace.  Possibly  it  came 
from  Scotland,  where  the  name  was  a  favourite  one. 
It  exists  in  Wycliffe's  Bible  (1381).  In  Russia,  and 
in  Germany  and  the  countries  more  immediately  re- 
lated thereto,  the  name  has  retained  its  original  form, 
and  accordingly  there  alone  there  would  seem  to  be 
no  distinction  between  Jacob  and  James  ;  which  was 
the  case  even  in  mediaeval  Latin,  where  Jacob  and 
Jacobus  were  always  discriminated.  Its  modern 
dress,  however,  sits  very  lightly  on  the  name  ;  and 
we  see  in  "Jacobite"  and  "Jacobin"  how  ready  it 
is  to  throw  it  off,  and,  like  a  true  Oriental,  reveal  its 
original  form.  ["■] 

*>  An  ecclesiastical  tradition,  of  uncertain  date, 
places  the  residence  of  Zebedee  and  the  birth  of  St. 
James  at  Japhia,  now  Yafa,  near  Nazareth.  Hence 
that  village  is  commonly  known  to  the  members  of 
the  Latin  Church  in  that  district  as  San  Giacomo. 
[Japhia.] 


JAMES 

to  tajve  the  lead),  and  that  it  was  not  an  office  held 
by  them  "  quos  Dominus,  ordinis  servaudi  causa, 
coeteris . praeposuit,"  as  King  James  I.  has  said 
(Praefat.  Man.  in  Apul.pro  Jur.  Fid.),  can  scarcely 
be  doubted  (cf.  Eusebius,  ii.  14). 

It  would  seem  to  have  been  at  the  time  of  the 
appointment  of  the  twelve  Apostles  that  the  name 
of  Boanerges  [Boanerges]  was  given  to  the  sons 
of  Zebedee.  It  might,  however,  like  Simon's  name 
of  Peter,  have  been  conferred  before.  This  name 
plainly  was  not  bestowed  upon  them  because  they 
heard  the  voice  like  thunder  from  the  cloud  (Je- 
rome), nor  because  "  divina  eorum  praedicatio  mag- 
num quendam  et  illustrem  sonitum  per  terrarum 
orbem  datura  erat "  (Vict.  Antioch.),  nor  ws  /ue- 
yaAoKripvKas  Kcd  deo\oyct)rd,Tovs  (Theoph.  \  but 
it  was,  like  the  name  given  to  Simon,  at  once  de- 
scriptive ami  prophetic.  The  "  Kockman  "  had  a 
natural  strength,  which  was  described  by  his  title, 
and  he  was  to  have  a  divine  strength,  predicted  by 
the  same  title.  In  the  same  way  the  "  Sons  of 
Thunder "  had  a  burning  and  impetuous  spirit, 
which  twice  exhibits  itself  in  its  unchastened  form 
(Luke  ix.  5+ ;  Mark  x.  37),  and  which,  when 
moulded  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  taking  different 
shapes,  led  St.  James  to  be  the  first  apostolic 
martyr,  and  St.  John  to  become  in  an  especial 
manner  the  Apostle  of  Love. 

The  first  occasion  on  which  this  natural  cha- 
racter manifests  itself  in  St.  James  and  his  brother 
is  at  the  commencement  of  our  Lord's  last  journey 
to  Jerusalem  in  the  year  30.  He  was  passing 
through  Samaria;  and  now  courting  rather  than 
avoiding  publicity,  he  "  sent  messengers  before  his 
face  "  into  a  certain  village,  "  to  make  ready  for 
him"  (Luke  ix.  52),  i.  c.  in  all  probability  to 
announce  him  as  the  Messiah.  The  Samaritans, 
with  their  old  jealousy  strong  upon  them,  refused 
to  receive  him,  because  he  was  going  to  Jerusalem 
instead  of  to  Cerizim ;  and  in  exasperation  James 
ami  John  entreated  their  Master  to  follow  the 
example  of  Elijah,  and  call  down  fire  to  consume 
them.  The  rebuke  of  their  Lord  is  testified  to  by 
all  the  New  Testament  MSS.  The  words  of  the 
rebuke,  "  Ye  know  not  what  manner  of  spirit  ye 
are  of,'*  rest  mi  the  authority  of  the  Codex  Beznc, 
and  a  few  MSS.  of  minor  value.  The  rest  of  the 
verse,  "  For  the  Son  of  Man  is  not  come  to  destroy 
men's  lives,  but  to  save  them,"  is  an  insertion 
without  authority  of  MSS.  (see  Alford,  in  loc).  • 

At  the  end  of  the  same  journey  a  similar  spirit 
appears  again.  As  they  went  up  to  Jerusalem  our 
Lord  declared  to  his  Apostles  the  circumstances  of 
his  coming  Passion,  and  at  the  same  time  strengthened 

them  by  th"  promise  that  they  should  sit  on  twelve 
thrones  judging  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel.  These 
words  seem  to  hare  made  a  great  impression  upon 
Salome,  and  she  may  have  thought  her  two  sons 
quite  as  tit  as  the  sons  of  Jonas  to  he  th 
ministers  of  their  Lord  in  the  mysterious  fed] 
which  he  was  about  to  assume.  She  approached 
then  ore,  aud  besought,  perhaps  with  a  special  re- 
ference in  her  mind  to  Peter  and  Andrew,  that  her 


JAMES 


919 


c  The  same  form  is  common  throughout  the  East. 
See  Lane's  Arab.  Nights,  vol.  iii.  p.  212,  8cc, 


two  sons  might  sit  on  the  right  hand  and  on  the 
left  in  his  kingdom,  i.  e.  according  to  a  Jewish 
form  of  expression*  (Joseph.  Ant.  vi.  11,  §9),  that 
they,  might  be  next  to  the  King  in  honour.  The 
two  brothers  joined  with  her  in  the  prayer  (Mark 
x.  35).  The  Lord  passed  by  their  petition  with  a 
mild  reproof,  showing  that  the  request  had  not 
arisen  from  an  evil  heart,  but  from  a  spirit  which 
aimed  too  high.  He  told  them  that  they  should 
drink  His  cup  and  be  baptised  with  His  baptism  of 
suffering,  but  turned  their  minds  away  at  once 
from  the  thought  of  future  pre-eminence:  in  His 
kingdom  none  of  his  Apostles  were  to  be  lords  over 
the  rest.  The  indignation  felt  by  the  ten  would 
show  that  they  regarded  the  petition  of  the  two 
brothers  as  an  attempt  at  infringing  on  their  privi- 
leges as  much  as  on  those  of  Peter  and  Andrew. 

From  the  time  of  the  Agony  in  the  Garden, 
A.D.  30,  to  the  time  of  his  martyrdom,  A.D.  44, 
we  know  nothing  of  St.  James,  except  that  after 
the  ascension  he  persevered  in  prayer  with  the 
other  Apostles,  and  the  women,  and  the  Lord's 
brethren  (Acts  i.  13).  In  the  year  44  Herod 
Agrippa  I.,  son  of  Aristobulus,  was  ruler  of  all  the 
dominions  which  at  the  death  of  his  grandfather, 
Herod  the  Great,  had  been  divided  between  Arehe- 
laus,  Antipas,  Philip,  and  Lysanias.  He  had  re- 
ceived from  Caligula,  Trachonitis  in  the  year  37, 
Galilee  and  Peraea  in  the  year  40.  On  the  accession 
of  Claudius,  in  the  year  41,  he  received  from  him 
Idumaea,  Samaria,  and  Judaea.  This  sovereign  was 
at  once  a  supple  statesman  and  a  stern  Jew  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xviii.  6,  §7,  xix.  5-8) :  a  king  with  not  a  few 
grand  and  kingly  qualities,  at  the  same  time  eaten 
up  with  Jewish  pride — the  type  of  a  lay  Pharisee. 
"  He  was  very  ambitious  to  oblige  the  people  with 
donations,"  and  "  he  was  exactly  careful  in  the 
observance  of  the  laws  of  his  country,  keeping  him- 
self entirely  pure,  and  not  allowing  one  day  to  pass 
over  his  head  without  its  appointed  sacrifice"  (Ant. 
xix.  7,  §3).  Policy  and  inclination  would  alike 
lead  such  a  monarch  "to  lay  hands"  (not  "  stretch 
forth  his  hands,"  A.  V.  Acts  xii.  1)  "  on  certain  of 
the  church;"  and  accordingly,  when  the  passover 
of  the  year  44  had  brought  St.  James  and  St.  Peter 
to  Jerusalem,  he  seized  them  both,  considering  doubt- 
less that  if  he  cut  off  the  "  Son  of  Thunder  "  and  the 
"  Kockman"  the  new  sect  would  be  more  tractable 
or  more  weak  under  the  presidency  of  James  the 
Just,  for  whose  character  he  probably  had  a  linger- 
ing and  sincere  respect.  James  was  apprehended 
first — his  natural  impetuosity  of  temper  would 
seem  to  have  urged  him  on  even  beyond  Peter. 
And  "  Herod  the  king,"  the  historian  simply  tells 
us,  "  killed  James  the  brother  of  John  with  the 
sword"  (Acts  xii.  '2 ).  This  is  all  that  we  know 
fiji  ertain  of  his  death. d  We  tnrij  notice  two  things 
respecting  it — first,  that  James  is  now  described  as 
tic  brother  of  John,  whereas  previously  John  had 
beeu  described  as  the  brother  of  dames,  showing 
reputation  of  John  had  increased,  and  that 
of  lames  diminished,  by  the  tine  that  St.  Luke 
wrote:    and   secondly,    that    he   perished   not   by 


558).    Its  most  interesting  possession  is  the  chair  of 
the  Apo-tle,   a  venerable  relic,    the  age  of  which  is 


d  The  great  Armenian  convent  at  Jerusalem  on  the  perhaps  traceable  as  far  hack   as   the  4th  century 

so-called  Mount  Zion  is  dedicated  to  "St.  James  tie-  Williams,  560  .     But   as   it  would   seem   that  it  is 

son  of  Zebedee."     The  church  of  the  i  d  to  have  belonged  '"  "  tll('  hrst  Bishop  of 

rather  a  small  chapel  on  its  north-cast   -:■  llem,"  it  is  doubtful  to  \\  inch  of  the  two  Jameses 

the  traditional  site  of  his  martyrdom.   This,  however,  the  tradition  would  attach  it. 
can  hardly  he  the  actual  site  (-Williams,  Holy  <'ity,  ii.  ' 

■ 


920 


JAMES 


stoning,  but  by  the  sword.  The  Jewish  law  laid 
down  that  if  seducers  to  strange  worship  were  few, 
they  should  be  stoned  ;  if  many,  that  they  should 
be  beheaded.  Either  therefore  Herod  intended  that 
James's  death  should  be  the  beginning  of  a  sanguinary 
persecution,  or  he  merely  followed  the  Roman  cus- 
tom of  putting  to  death  from  preference  (see  Light- 
foot,  in  foe). 

The  death  of  so  prominent  a  champion  left  a 
huge  gap  in  the  ranks  of  the  infant  society,  which 
was  filled  partly  by  St.  James,  the  brother  of  our 
Lord,  who  now  steps  forth  into  greater  prominence 
in  Jerusalem,  and  partly  by  St.  Paul,  who  had  now 
been  seven  years  a  convert,  and  who  shortly  after- 
wards set  out  on  his  first  apostolic  journey. 

II.  Chronological  recapitulation.—  In  the  spring 
or  summer  of  the  year  27  James  was  called  to  be 
a  disciple  of  Christ.  In  the  spring  of  28  he  was  ap- 
pointed one  of  the  Twelve  Apostles,  and  at  that 
time  probably  received,  with  his  brother,  the  title 
of  Boanerges.  In  the  autumn  of  the  same  year  he 
was  admitted  to  the  miraculous  raising  of  Jairus's 
daughter.  In  the  spring  of  the  year  29  he  wit- 
nessed the  Transfiguration.  Very  early  in  the  year 
30  he  urged  his  Lord  to  call  down  fire  from  heaven 
to  consume  the  Samaritan  village.  About  thiee 
months  later  in  the  same  year,  just  before  the  final 
arrival  in  Jerusalem,  he  and  his  brother  made  their 
ambitious  request  through  their  mother  Salome. 
On  the  night  before  the  Crucifixion  he  was  present 
at  the  Agony  in  the  Garden.  On  the  day  of  the 
Ascension  he  is  mentioned  as  persevering  with  the 
rest  of  the  Apostles  and  disciples  in  prayer.  Shortly 
before  the  day  of  the  Passover,  in  the  year  44,  he 
was  put  to  death.  Thus  during  fourteen  out  of 
the  seventeen  years  that  elapsed  between  his  call 
and  his  death  we  do  not  even  catch  a  glimpse  of 
him. 

III.  Tradition  respecting  him. — Clement  of  Alex- 
andria, in  the  seventh  book  of  the  Hj/potyposeis,  re- 
lates, concerning  St.  James's  martyrdom,  that  the 
prosecutor  was  so  moved  by  witnessing  his  bold 
confession  that  he  declared  himself  a  Christian  on 
the  spot:  accused  and  accuser  were  therefore 
hurried  off  together,  and  on  the  road  the  latter 
begged  St.  James  to  grant  him  forgiveness ;  after  a 
moment's  hesitation,  the  Apostle  kissed  him,  saying, 
"  Peace  be  to  thee!"  and  they  were  beheaded  to- 
gether. This  tradition  is  preserved  by  Eusebius 
(//.  E.  ii.  6).  There  is  no  internal  evidence  against 
it,  and  the  external  evidence  is  sufficient  to  make 
it  credible,  for  Clement  flourished  as  early  as  A.D. 
195,  and  he  states  expressly  that  the  account  was 
given  him  by  those  who  went  before  him. 

For  legends  respecting  his  death  and  his  connexion 
with  Spain,  see  the  Roman  Breviary  (in  Fest.  S. 
Jac.  Ap.),  in  which  the  healing  of  a  paralytic  and 
the  conversion  of  Hermogenes  are  attribute!  to 
him,  and  where  it  is  asserted  that  he  preached  the 
Gospel  in  Spain,  and  that  his  remains  were  trans- 
lated to  Compostella.  See  also  the  fourth  book  of 
the  Apostolical  History  written  by  Abdias,  the 
(pseudo)  first  bishop  of  Babylon  (Abdiae,  Baby- 
loniae  primi  Episcopi  ab  Apostolus  constituti,  dc 
histories  certaminis  Apostolici,  Libri  decern,  Paris, 
1566);  Isidore  De  vita  et  obitu  SS.  utritisque 
Test.  No.  LXXIII.  (Hagonoae,  1529);  Pope  Cal- 
lixtus  II.'s  Four  Sermons  on  St.  James  the  Apostle 
(Bibl.  Pair.  Magn.  xv.  p.  324) ;  Mariana,  De  ad- 
ventu  Jacobi  Apostoli  Majoris  in  Hispaniam  (Col. 
Agripp.  1609);  Baronius,  Martyrologium  Roma- 
nian ad  Jul.  '25,  p.  325  (Antwerp,  1 589 ) ;  Bollandus, 


JAMES 

Acta  Sanctorum  ad  Jul.  25,  torn.  vi.  pp.  1-124 
(Antwerp,  1729);  Estius,  Comm.  in  Act.  Ap.  c. 
xii. ;  Annot.  in  difficiliora  loca  8.  Script.  (Col. 
Agripp.  16  22);  Tillemont,  3/emoires  pour  servir 
a  r Histoirc  Ecclesiastiquc  des  six  premiers  siecles, 
torn.  i.  p.  899  (Brussels,  1706).  As  there  is  no 
shadow  of  foundation  for  any  of  the  legends  here 
referred  to  we  pass  them  by  without  further  notice. 
Even  Baronius  shows  himself  ashamed  of  them  ; 
Estius  gives  them  up  as  hopeless;  and  Tillemont 
rejects  them  with  as  much  contempt  as  his  position 
would  allow  him  to  show.  Epiphanius,  without 
giving  or  probably  having  any  authority  for  or 
against  his  statement,  reports  that  St.  James  died 
unmarried  (S.  Epiph.  Adv.  Haer.  ii.  4,  p.  491, 
Paris,  1622),  and  that,  like  his  namesake,  he  lived 
the  life  of  a  Nazarite  (ibid.  iii.  2,  13,  p.  1045). 

2.  James  the  Son  of  Alphaeus.  Matt.  x. 
3  ;  Mark  iii.  18  ;  Luke  vi.  15  ;  Acts  i.  13. 

3.  James  the  Brother  op  the  Lord.  Matt. 
xiii.  55;  Mark  vi.  3;  Gal.  i.  19. 

4.  James  the  Son  of  Mary,  Matt,  xxvii.  56  ; 
Luke  xxiv.  10.  Also  called  the  Little,  Mark 
xv.  40. 

5.  James  the  Brother  of  Jcde.    Jude  1. 

6.  James  the  Brother  (?)  of  Jude.  Luke 
vi.  16;   Acts  i.  13. 

7.  James.  Acts  xii.  17,  xv.  13,  xxi.  18  ;  1  Cor. 
xv.  7  ;   Gal.  ii.  9,  12. 

8.  James  the  Servant  of  God  and  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ.     James  i.  1. 

We  reserve  the  question  of  the  authorship  of  the 
Epistle  for  the  present. 

St.  Paul  identifies  for  us  Nos.  3.  and  7.  (see  Gal. 
ii.  9  and  12  compared  with  i.  19). 

If  we  may  translate  'IouSas  'laKwfiuv,  Judas 
the  brother,  rather  than  the  son  of  James,  we  may 
conclude  that  5.  and  6.  are  identical.  And  that 
we  may  so  translate  it,  is  proved,  if  proof  were 
needed,  by  Wilier  (Grammar  of  the  Idioms  of  the 
A7".  T.,  translated  by  Agnew  and  Ebbeke,  New 
York,  1850,  §§lxvi.  and  xxx.),  by  Hanlein  (Handb. 
der  Einl.  in  die  Schriften  des  Neuen  Test.,  Er- 
langen,  1809),  by  Arnaud  (Recherches  Critiques 
sur  I'Epitre  de  Jude,  Strasbourg,  1851). 

We  may  identify  5.  and  6.  with  3.,  because 
we  know  that  James  the  Lord's  brother  had  a 
brother  named  Jude. 

We  may  identify  4.  with  3.  because  we  know 
James  the  son  of  Mary  had  a  brother  named  Joses, 
and  so  also  had  James  the  Lord's  brother. 

Thus  there  remain  two  only,  James  the  son  ot 
Alphaeus  (2.),  and  James  the  brother  of  the  Lord 
(3.).  Can  we,  or  can  we  not,  identify  them? 
This  requires  a  longer  consideration. 

I.  By  comparing  Matt,  xxvii.  56  and  Mark  xv. 
40,  with  John  xix.  25,  we  find  that  the  Virgin  Mary 
had  a  sister  named  like  herself,  Mary,  who  was  the 
wife  of  Clopas,  and  who  had  two  sons,  James  the 
Little,  and  Joses.  It  has  been  suggested  that 
"Mary  the  wife  of  Clopas"  in  John  xix.  25  need 
not  be  the  same  person  as  "  his  mother's  sister ' 
(Kitto,  Lange,  Davidson),  but  the  Greek  will  not 
admit  of  this  construction  without  the  addition  or 
the  omission  of  a  Kal.  By  referring  to  Matt.  xiii. 
55  and  Mark  vi.  3  we  find  that  a  James  and  a  Joses, 
with  two  other  brethren  called  Jude  and  Simoli, 
and  at  least  three  (irZcrcu)  sisters,  were  living  with 
the  Virgin  Mary  at  Nazareth.  By  referring  to 
Luke  vi.  16  and. Acts  i.  13  we  find  that  there  were 
two  brethren  named  James  and  Jude  among  the 
Apostles.     It   would  certainly  be  natural   to  think 


JAMES 

that  we  had  here  but  one  family  of  tour  brothers 
and  three  or  more  sisters,  the  children  of  Clopas 
and  Mary,  nephews  and  nieces  of  the  Virgin  Mary. 
There  are  diliieulties,  however,  in  the  way  of  this 
conclusion.  For,  1.  the  four  brethren  in  Matt, 
xiii.  55  are  described  as  the  brothers  [a8e\<f>ol)  of 
Jesus,  not  as  His  cousins  ;  2.  they  are  found  living 
as  at  their  home  with  the  Virgin  Mary,  which 
seems  unnatural  if  she  were  their  aunt,  their  mother 
being,  as  we  know,  still  alive ;  3.  the  James  of 
Luke  vi.  15  is  described  as  the  son  not  of  Clopas, 
but  of  Alphaeus  ;  4.  the  "brethren  of  the  Lord" 
(who  are  plainly  James,  Joses,  Jude,  and  Simon) 
appear  to  be  excluded  from  the  Apostolic  band  by 
their  declared  unbelief  in  his  Messiahship  (John  vii. 
3-5)  and  by  being  formally  distinguished  from  the 
disciples  by  the  Gospel-writers  (Matt.  xii.  48  ;  Mark 
lii.  '■'>'■'•  ;  John  ii.  12;  Acts  i.  14);  5.  James  and 
rude  are  not  designated  as  the  Lord's  brethren  in 
the  lists  of  the  Apostles;  6.  Mary  is  designated  as 
mother  of  James  and  Joses,  whereas  she  would  have 
been  called  mother  of  James  and  Jude,  had  James 
and  Jude  been  Apostles,  and  Joses  not  an  Apostle 
(Matt,  xxvii.  46). 

These  are  the  six  chief  objections  which  may  be 
made  to  "the  hypothesis  of  there  being  but  one  family 
of  brethren  named  James,  Joses,  Jude,  mid  Simon. 
The  following  answers  may  be  given  : — 

Objection  1. — "  They  are  called  brethren."  It  is 
■  i  sound  rule  of  criticism  that  words  are  to  be  under- 
stood in  their  most  simple  and  literal  acceptation  ; 
but  there  is  a  limit  to  this  rule.  When  greater 
diliieulties  are  caused  by  adhering  to  the  literal 
meaning  of  a  word,  than  by  interpreting  it  more 
liberally,  it  is  the  part  of  the  critic  to  interpret 
more  liberally,  rather  than  to  cling  to  the  ordinary 
and  literal  meaning  of  a  word.  Now  it  is  clearly 
not  necessary  to  unde;  stand  atieAtyol  as  "  brothers  " 
in  the  nearest  sense  of  brotherhood,  it  need  not 
mean  more  than  relative  (comp.  LXX.  Gen.  xiii.  8, 
xiv.  14,  xx.  12,  xxix.  12,  xxxi.  23  ;  Lev.  xxv.  48  ; 
Dent.  ii.  8;  Job  six.  13,  xiii,  11;  Xen.  Cyrop. 
i.  5,  §47  ;  Isocr.  Paneg.  20:  Plat.  Phaed.  57,  Crit. 
16;  see  also  Cic.  ad  Att.  15;  Tac.  Ann.  iii. 
38;  Quint.  Curt.  vi.  10,  §34;  comp.  Suicer  and 
Schleusner  in  roc).  But  perhaps  the  circumstances 
of  the  case  would  lead  us  to  translate  it  brethren? 
On  the  contrary,  such  a  translation  appears  to  pro- 
duce very  grave  difficulties.  For,  first,  it  intro- 
duces two  sets  of  four  first-cousins,  bearing  the 
same  names  of  James,  Joses,  Jude,  and  Simon,  who 
appear  upon  the  stage  without  anything  to  show 
which  is  the  son  of  Clopas,  and  which  his  cousin; 
and  secondly,  it  drives  us  to  take  our  choice  between 
three  doubtful  and  improbable  hypotheses  as  to  the 
parentage  of  this  second  set.  of  James,  Joses,  Jude, 
and  Simon.  There  are  three  such  hypotheses: — (<'.) 
The  Eastern  hypothesis,  that  they  were  the  children 
of  Joseph  bya  former  wife.  This  notion  originated 
in  the  apocrypha]  Gospel  of  Peter  (Orig.  in  Matt. 
riii.  55,  Op.  torn.  iii.  p.  462,  E.  ed.  Delarue),  and 
was  adopted  by  St.  Epiphanius,  St.  Hilary,  and  St. 
Ambrose,  and  handed  on  to  the  later  Greek  < 'lunch 
(Epiph.  Haer.  xxvii.  Op.  torn.  iii.  p.  115;  lid.  in 
Matt,  i.,  St.  Ambr.  Op.  torn.  ii.  p.  260,  Ed.  Leu.). 
(/(.)  The  Helvidian  hypothesis,  put  forward  at  first 
by  Bonosus,  rlelvidius,  and  Joviuian,  and  revived  bj 
Strauss  and  Herder  in  Germany,  and  by  1 
and  Alford  in  England,  that  James,  Joses,  Jude, 
sin  ion,  and  the  three  sisters,  were  children  of  Jo  eph 
and  Mary.  This  notion  is  opposed,  whether  rightly 
or  wrongly,  to  the  general  sentimen!   of  the  Chris- 


JAMES 


921 


tian  body  in  all  ages  of  the  Church  ;  like  the  other 
two  hypotheses,  it  creates  two  sets  of  cousins  with 
the  same  name  :  it  seems  to  be  scarcely  compatible 
with  our  Lord's  recommending  His  mother  to  the 
care  of  St.  John  at  His  own  death  (see  Jerome,  Op. 
torn.  ii.  p.  10)  ;  for  if,  as  has  been  suggested,  though 
with  great  improbability,  her  sons  might  at  that 
time  have  been  unbelievers  (Blom.  Disp.  Theol.  p. 
07,  Lugd.  Bat. ;  Neander,  Planting,  &c,  iv.  1), 
JiostJS  would  have  known  that  that  unbelief  was 
only  to  continue  for  a  few  days.  That  the  irpwro- 
tokos  vTos  of  Luke  ii.  7,  and  the  ecos  ov  ereice  of 
Matt.  i.  25,  imply  the  birth  of  after  children,  is  not 
now  often  urged  (see  Pearson,  On  the  Creed,  i. 
304,  ii.  220).  (c.)  The  Levirate  hypothesis  may  be 
passed  by.  It  was  a  mere  attempt  made  in  the 
eleventh  century  to  reconcile  the  Greek  and  Latin 
traditions  by  supposing  that  Joseph  and  Clopas 
were  brothers,  and  that  Joseph  raised  up  seed  to  his 
dead  brother  (Theoph.  in  Matt.  xiii.  55  ;  Op.  torn, 
i.  p.  71,  E.  ed.  Venet.  17G4). 

Objection  2. — "  The  four  brothers  and  their  sisters 
are  always  found  living  and  moving  about  with  the 
Virgin  Mary."  If  they  were  the  children  of  Clopas, 
the  Virgin  Mary  was  their  atmt.  Her  own  husband 
would  appear  without  doubt  to  have  died  at  some 
time  between  A.D.  8  and  A.D.  26.  Nor  have  we 
any  reason  for  believing  Clopas  to  have  been  alive 
during  our  Lord's  ministry.  (We  need  not  pause 
here  to  prove  that  the  Cleophas  of  Luke  .xxiv.  is  an 
entirely  different  person  and  name  from  Clopas.) 
What  difficulty  is  there  in  supposing  that  the  two 
widowed  sisters  should  have  lived  together,  the 
more  so  as  one  of  them  had  but  one  son,  and  he  was 
often  taken  from  her  by  his  ministerial  duties? 
Anil  would  it  not  be  most  natural  that  two  families 
of  first  cousins  thus  living  together  should  be  popu- 
larly looked  upon  as  one  family,  and  spoken  of  as 
brothers  and  sisters  instead  of  cousins  ?  It  is 
noticeable  that  St.  Mary  is  nowhere  called  the 
mother  of  the  four  brothers. 

Objection  3. — "  James  the  Apostle  is  said  to  be 
the  son  of  Alphaeus,  not  of  Clopas."  But  Alphaeus 
and  Clopas  are  the  same  name  rendered  into  the  Greek 
language  in  two  different  but  ordinary  and  recog- 
nized ways,  from  the  Aramaic  XS7PI  or  l^^.-^- 

(See  Mill,  Accounts  of  Our  Lord's  Brethren  vindi- 
cated, &c.,  p.  236,  who  compares  the  two  forms 
Clovis  and  Aloysius  ;   Aruaud,  Eecherches,  &c.) 

Objection  4. — Dean  Alford  considers  John  vii.  5, 
compared  with  vi.  67-70,  to  decide  that  none  of  the 
brothers  of  the  Lord  were  of  the  number  of  the 
Twelve  (Proleg,  to  /./».  of  James,  G.  T.  iv.  88,  and 
t'niiiui.  iii  Ivr.).  It'  this  verse,  as  he  states,  makes 
"  the  crowning  difficulty  "  to  the  hypothesis  of  the 
identity  of  James  the  son  of  Alphaeus.  the  Apostle, 
with  James  the  brother  of  the  Lord,  the  difficulties 

are  not  too  formidable  to  lie  overcome.  Many  of 
the  disciples  having  left  Jesus,  St.  Peter  bursts  out 

in  the  name  of  the  Twelve  with  a  warm  expression 
of  faith  and  love;    and  alter   that  —  vcly  likely  (see 

G  res  well's  Harmony)  full  six  months  afterwards 
the  V.\  angelisl  states  that  "  neither  did  His  brethren 

l>e|i,>\  e  oil  Him."      I  k)e     it    follow    from    hence   that 

all  His  brethren  disbelieved  ?  Let  as  compare  other 
passages  in  Scripture.     St.  Matthew  and  St.  Marl 

tate  that  the  thieve,  lade  I  on  our  Lmd  upon  the 
( Iross.     Ai e   '■  to  disbelieve  St.  Luke, 

who  says  thai  one  of  the  thieves  wa    penitent,  and 
did  not  rail?  (  Luke  xxiii.  39,  40).     St.  Lul 
St.  John  say  that  the  soldiers  offered  vinegar.     Are 


922 


JAMES 


we  to  believe  that  all  did  so  ?  or,  as  St.  Matthew  and 
St.  Mark  tell  us,  that  only  one  did  it  ?  (Luke  xxiii. 
36  ;  John  xix.  29 ;  Mark  xv.  36  ;  Matt,  xxvii.  48). 
St.  Matthew  tells  us  that  "  his  disciples "  had 
indignation  when  Mary  poured  the  ointment  on 
the  Lord's  head.  Are  we  to  suppose  this  true  of 
all  ?  or  of  Judas  Iscariot,  and  perhaps  some  others, 
according  to  John  xii.  4  and  Mark  xiv.  4?  It  is 
not  at  all  necessary  to  suppose  that  St.  John  is  here 
speaking  of  all  the  brethren.  If  Joses,  Simon,  and 
the  throe  sisters  disbelieved,  it  would  be  quite  suffi- 
cient  ground  for  the  statement  of  the  Evangelist. 
The  same  may  be  said  of  Matt.  xii.  47,  Mark  iii.  32, 
where  it  is  reported  to  Him  that  His  mother  and 
His  brethren,  designated  by  St.  Mark  (iii.  21)  as 
ol  irap  avTov,  were  standing  without.  Nor  does 
it  necessarily  follow  that  the  disbelief  of  the  brethren 
was  of  such  a  nature  that  James  and  Jude,  Apostles 
though  they  were,  and  vouched  for  half  a  year  before 
by  the  warm-tempered  Peter,  could  have  had  no 
share  in  it.  It  might  have  been  similar  to  that 
feeling  of  unfaithful  restlessness  which  perhaps 
moved  St.  John  Baptist  to  send  his  disciples  to 
make  their  inquiry  of  the  Lord,  (see  Grotius  in 
foe,  and  Lardner,  vi.  p.  497,  Lond.  1788).  With 
regard  to  John  ii.  12,  Acts  i.  14,  we  may  say  that 
"  his  brethren"  are  no  more  excluded  from  the  dis- 
ciples in  the  first  passage,  and  from  the  Apostles  in 
the  second,  by  being  mentioned  parallel  with  them, 
than  "  the  other  Apostles,  and  the  brethren  of  the 
Lord,  and  Cephas"  (1  Cor.  ix.  5),  excludes  Peter 
from  the  Apostolic  band. 

Objection  5. — "  If  the  title  of  brethren  of  the 
Lord  had  belonged  to  James  and  Jude,  they  would 
have  been  designated  by  it  in  the  list  of  the  Apostles." 
The  omission  of  a  title  is  so  slight  a  ground  for  an 
argument  that  we  may  pass  this  by. 

Objection  6. — That  Mary  the  wife  of  Clopas 
should  be  designated  by  the  title  of  Mary  the 
mother  of  James  and  Joses,  to  the  exclusion  of  Jude, 
if  James  and  Jude  were  Apostles,  appeal's  to  Dr.  Da- 
vidson (Introd.  to  N.  T.,  iii.  295,  London,  1851) 
aud  to  Dean  A 1  ford  (Prol.  to  Ep.  of  James,  G.  T., 
iv.  90)  extremely  improbable.  There  is  no  impro- 
bability in  it,  if  Joses  was,  as  would  seem  likely, 
an  elder  brother  of  Jude,  aud  next  in  order  to 
James. 

II.  We  have  hitherto  argued  that  the  hypothesis 
which  most  naturally  accounts  for  the  facts  of  Holy 
Scripture  is  that  of  the  identity  of  James  the  Little, 
the  Apostle,  with  James  the  Lord's  brother.  We 
have  also  argued  that  the  six  main  objections  to 
this  view  are  not  valid,  inasmuch  as  they  may  either' 
be  altogether  met,  or  at  best  throw  us  back  on  other 
hypotheses  which  create  greater  difficulties  than  that 
under  consideration.  We  proceed  to  point  out  some 
further  confirmations  of  our  original  hypothesis. 

1.  It  would  be  unnatural  that  St.  Luke,  in  a  list 
of  twelve  persons,  in  which  the  name  of  James  twice 
occurred,  with  its  distinguishing  patronymic,  should 
describe  one  of  the  last  persons  on  his  list  as  brother 
to  "James,"  without  any  further  designation  to 
distinguish  him,  unless  he  meant  the  James  whom 
he  had  just  before  named.  The  James  whom  he 
had  just  before  named  is  the  son  of  Alphaeus  ;  the 
person  designated  by  his  relationship  to  him  is  Jude. 
We  have  reason  therefore  for  regarding  Jude  as  the 
brother  of  the  son  of  Alphaeus  ;  on  other  grounds 
(Matt.  xiii.  55  ;  Mark  vi.  3)  we  have  reason  for 
regarding  him  as  the  brother  of  the  Lord  :  therefore 
we  have  reason  for  regarding  the  son  of  Alphaeus  as 
the  brother  of  the  Lord. 


JAMES 

2.  It  would  be  unnatural  that  St.  Luke,  after 
having  recognized  only  two  Jameses  throughout  his 
Gospel  and  down  to  the  twelfth  chapter  of  the  Acts 
of  the  Apostles,  and  having  in  that  chapter  narrated 
the  death  of  one  of  them  (James  the  sou  of  Zebedee), 
should  go  on  in  the  same  and  following  chapters  to 
speak  of  "  James,"  meaning  thereby  not  the  other 
James,  with  whom  alone  his  readers  are  acquainted, 
but  a  different  James  not  yet  mentioned  by  him. 
Alford's  example  of  Philip  the  Evangelist  [Proleg. 
to  the  Ep.  of  Jamds,  p.  89)  is  in  no  manner  of 
way  to  the  point,  except  as  a  contrast.  St.  Luke 
introduces  Philip  the  Evangelist,  Acts  vi.  5,  and 
after  recounting  the  death  of  Stephen  his  colleague, 
continues  the  history  of  the  same  Philip. 

3.  James  is  represented  throughout  the  Acts  as 
exercising  great  authority  among,  or  even  over, 
Apostles  (Acts  xii.  17,  xv.  13,  xxi.  18);  and  in 
St.  Paul's  Epistles  he  is  placed  before  even  Cephas 
and  John,  and  declared  to  be  a  pillar  of  the  Church 
with  them  (Gal.  ii.  9-12).  It  is  more  likely  that 
an  Apostle  would  hold  such  a  position,  than  one 
who  had  not  been  a  believer  till  after  the  Resur- 
rection. 

4.  St.  Paul  says  (Gal.  i.  19),  "  Other  of  the 
Apostles  saw  I  none,  save  James  the  Lord's  brother" 
("Erepoi'  5e  twv  airoffrSXcov  ovk  €?Sof  (I  /j.7] 
'laKwfiov  rbv  aSeAcpbv  rod  Kvpiou.)  This  passage, 
though  seeming  to  assert  distinctly  that  James  the 
Lord's  brother  was  an  Apostle,  and  therefore  iden- 
tical with  the  son  of  Alphaeus,  cannot  be  taken  as 
a  direct  statement  to  that  effect,  for  it  is  possible 
that  a.TTOffT6\aiv  may  be  used  in  the  looser  sense, 
though  this  is  not  agreeable  with  the  line  of  defence 
which  St.  Paul  is  here  maintaining,  viz.  that  he  had 
received  his  commission  from  God,  and  not  from 
the  Twelve  (see  Thorndike,  i.  p.  5,  Oxf.  1844).  And 
again,  el  fify  may  qualify  the  whole  sentence,  and 
not  only  the  word  airoffrdAooy  (Mayerdorff,  Hist, 
krit.  Einleit.  in  die  Petrin.  Schr.  p.  52,  Hamb. 
1833;  Neander,  Michaelis,  Winer,  Alford).  Still 
this  is  not  often,  if  ever,  the  case,  when  e!  fijj 
follows  €T€pov  (Schneckenburger,  Adnot.  ad  Epist. 
J ac.  per  pet.  p.  144,  Stuttg.  1832:  see  also  Winer, 
Grammatik.  5th  ed.,  p.  G47,  and  Meyer,  comm.  in 
foe.)  ;  and  if  St.  Paul  had  not  intended  to  include 
St.  James  among  the  Apostles,  we  should  rather 
have  expected  the  singular  o.tt6(TtoKov  than  the 
plural  twv  atroariXaiv  (Arnaud,  Recherches,  &c). 
The  more  natural  interpretation  of  the  verse  would 
appear  to  be  that  which  includes  James  among  the 
Twelve,  identifying  him  with  the  son  of  Alphaeus. 
But,  as  we  have  said,  such  a  conclusion  does  not 
necessarily  follow.  Compare,  however,  this  verse 
with  Acts  ix.  27,  and  the  probability  is  increased 
by  several  degrees.  St.  Luke  there  asserts  that 
Barnabas  brought  Paul  to  the  Apostles,  irpbs  robs 
airoaToKovs.  St.  Paul,  as  we  have  seen,  asserts 
that  during  that  visit  to  Jerusalem  he  saw  Peter, 
and  none  other  of  the  Apostles,  save  James  the 
Lord's  brother.  Peter  and  James,  then,  were  tin; 
two  Apostles  to  whom  Barnabas  brought  Paul.  Of 
course,  it  may  be  said  here  also  that  airSffToAoi  is 
used  in  its  lax  sense  ;  but  it  appears  to  be  a  more 
natural  conclusion  that  James  the  Lord's  brother 
was  one  of  the  Twelve  Apostles,  being  identical 
with  James  the  son  of  Alphaeus,  or  James  the  Little. 

III.  We  must  now  turn  for  a  short  time  from 
Scripture  to  the  early  testimony  of  uninspired 
writers.  Here,  as  among  modem  writers,  we  find 
the  same  three  hypotheses  which  we  have  already 
mentioned  : — 


JAMES 

For  the  identity  of  James  the  Lord's  brother  with 
James  the  Apostle,  the  son  of  Alphaeus,  we  find 
Papias  of  Hierapolis,  a  contemporary  of  the  Apostles 
(see  Routh,  Beliq.  Sacr.  i.  16,  43,  '230,  Oxon, 
1840)  St.  Clement  of  Alexandria  (Hypotyposeis, 
Bk.  vii.  apud  Euseb.  H.  E.  ii.  1),  St.  Chrysostom 
(in  Gal.  i.  19). 

Parallel  with  this  opinion  there  existed  another 
in  favour  of  the  hypothesis  that  James  was  the  son 
of  Joseph  by  a  former  marriage,  and  therefore  not 
identical  with  the  son  of  Alphaeus.  This  is  first 
found  in  the  apocryphal  Gospel  of  Peter  (see  Origen, 
in  Matt.  xiii.  55),  in  the  Protevangelium  of  James, 
and  the  Pseudo-Apostolical  Constitutions  of  the 
third  century  (Thilo,  Cod.  Apocr.  torn.  i.  p.  228  ; 
Const.  Apost.  vi.  12).  It  is  adopted  by  Eusebius 
(Comm.  in  Esai.  xvii.  6;  H.  E.  i.  12,  ii.  1). 
Perhaps  it  is  Origen 's  opinion  (see  Comm.  in  Joh. 
ii.  12).  St.  Epiphanius,  St.  Hilary,  and  St.  Am- 
brose, we  have  already  mentioned  as  being  on  the 
same  side.  So  are  Victorinus  (Vict.  Phil,  in  Gal. 
apud  Maii  Script,  vet.  nov.  coll.  Romae,  1828)  and 
Gregory  Nyssen  (Op.  torn.  ii.  p.  844,  I),  ed.  Par. 
1618),  and  it  became  the  recognised  belief  of  the 
Greek  Church. 

Meantime  the  hypothesis  maintaining  the  identity 
of  the  two  was  maintained;  and  being  warmly 
defended  by  St.  Jerome  (in  Matt.  xii.  49),  and 
supported  by  St.  Augustine  (Contra  Faust,  xxii. 
35,  &c),  it  became  the  recognised  belief  of  the 
Western  Church. 

The  third  hypothesis  was  unknown  until  it 
was  put  forward  by  Bonosus  in  Macedonia,  and 
by  Helvidius  and  Jovinian  in  Italy,  as  an  opinion 
which  seemed  to  them  conformable  with  Scrip- 
ture. Their  followers  were  called  Autidicoma- 
rianites.  The  fact  of  their  having  a  name  given 
them  shows  that  their  numbers  must  have  been 
considerable;  they  date  from  the  latter  part  of  the 
fourth  century. 

English  theological  writers  have  been  divided 
between  the  first  and  second  of  these  views,  with, 
however,  a  preference  on  the  whole  for  the  first 
hypothesis.  See,  for  example,  Lardner,  vi.  495, 
Lond.  1788 ;  Pearson,  Minor  Works,  i.  350, 
Oxf.  1844,  and  On  the  Creed,  i.  308,  ii.  224, 
Oxf.  1833;  Thorndike,  i.  5,  Oxf.  1844;  Home's 
Introd.  to  II.  S.  iv.  427,  Lond.  1834,  &c.  On 
the  same  side  are  Lightfoot,  YVitsius,  Lampe, 
Baumgarten,  Semler,  (fabler,  Eichhom,  Hug,  Ber- 
tholdt,  Guericke,  Schneckenburger,  Meier,  Steiger, 
( iieseler,  Theile,  Lange.  Taylor  ( Op.  torn.  v.  p.  20, 
Loud.  1849),  Wilson  (Op.  torn.  vi.  p.  673,  Oxf. 
1859  .  Cave  (Life  of  St.  James)  maintain  the 
second  hypothesis,  with  Vossius,  Basnage,  Valesius, 
&c.  The  thin!  is  held  by  Dr.  Davidson  (Mr.  N.  T. 
vol.  iii.)  and  by  Dean  Alford  (Greek  Test.  iv.  87    .' 

The  chief  treatises  on  the  subject  are  Dr.  Mill's 
Accounts  of  our  Lord's  brethren  vindicated,  Cam- 
bridge, 1843;  Alford,  as  above  referred  to* ;  Lange's 
Article  in  Herzog's  Real-Encyklopadie  fiir  /'/•■/- 
testantische  Theologie  und  Kirche,  Stuttgart,  1856  ; 
Neander's  Pflanzung  und  Leitung;  Schnecken- 
burger's  Annotatio  ad  Episi  Jac.  perpetua,  Stutt- 
gart, 1832;  Arnaud's  Jiecherches  Critiques  sur 
PJSpitre  de  Jude,  Strasbourg,  1851  ;  Schafi*s  Das 
Verhaltniss  des  Jacobus  Bruders  des  /A 
Jacobus  Alph'di,  Berlin,   1842;   Gabler's  De  Ja- 


JAMES 


923 


e  The  author  of  the  article  on  the  "  Brethren  of 
our  Lord"  takes  a  different  view  from  the  one  given 
above  (see  p.  231). 


cobo,    epistolae    eidem    ascriptae  auctori,   Altorf, 
1787. 

Had  we  not  identified  James  the  son  of  Alphaeus 
with  the  brother  of  the  Lord  we  should  have  but 
little  to  write  of  him.  When  we  had  said  that  his 
name  appears  twice  in  the  catalogue  of  the  Twelve 
Apostles,  our  history  of  him  would  be  complete.  In 
like  manner  the  early  history  of  the  Lord's  brother 
would  be  confined  to  the  fact  that  he  lived  and 
moved  from  place  to  place  with  his  brothers  and 
sisters,  and  with  the  Virgin  Mary  ;  and,  except  the 
appearance  of  the  risen  Lord  to  him,  we  should  have 
nothing  more  to  recount  of  him  until  after  the 
death  of  James  the  son  of  Zebedee,  in  the  year  44,  or 
at  least,  till  St.  Paul's  first  visit  to  Jerusalem  after 
his  conversion,  in  the  year  40.  Of  James  the 
Little,  who  would  probably  be  distinct  from  each  of 
the  above  (for  an  argument  against  the  identity  of 
the  Jameses  is  the  doubt  of  the  identity  of  Alphaeus 
and  Clopas),  we  should  know  nothing,  except  that 
he  had  a  mother  named  Mary,  who  was  the  sister 
of  the  Virgin  Mary  and  the  wife  of  Clopas. 

James  the  Little,  the  son  of  Alphaeus, 
the  brother  OF  the  Lord. — Of  James'  father 
Xs'pn,  rendered  by  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark  Al- 
phaeus ('AA<pcuos),  and  by  St.  John  Clopas  (KAo>- 
nds),  we  know  nothing,  except  that  he  married  Mary, 
the  sister  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  and  had  by  her  four 
sons  and  three  or  more  daughters/  He  appears  to 
have  died  before  the  commencement  of  our  Lord's 
ministry,  and  after  his  death  it  would  seem  that  his 
wife  and  her  sister,  a  widow  like  herself,  and  in  poor 
circumstances,  lived  together  in  one  house,  generally 
at  Nazareth  (Matt.  xiii.  55),  but  sometimes  also  at 
Capernaum  (John  ii.  12)  and  Jerusalem  (Acts 
i.  14).  It  is  probable  that  these  cousins,  or,  as 
they  were  usually  called,  brothers  and  sisters,  of  the 
Lord  were  older  than  Himself;  as  on  one  occasion  we 
find  them,  with  His  mother,  indignantly  declaring 
that  He  was  beside  Himself,  and  going  out  to  "  lay 
hold  on  Him  "  and  compel  Him  to  moderate  His  zeal 
in  preaching,  at  least  sufficiently  "  to  eat  bread  " 
(Mark  iii.  20,  21,  31).  This  looks  like  the  con- 
duct of  elders  towards  one  younger  than  themselves. 

Of  James  individually  we  know  nothing  till  the 
spring  of  the  year  28,  when  we  find  him,  together 
with  his  younger  brother  Jude,  called  to  the 
Apostolate.  It  has  been  noticed  that  in  all  the 
four  lists  of  the  Apostles  James  holds  the  same 
place,  heading  perhaps  the  third  class,  consisting  of 
himself,  Jude,  Simon,  and  Iscariot;  as  Philip  heads 
the  second  class,  consisting  of  himself,  Bartholomew, 
Thomas,  and  Matthew;  and  Simon  Peter  the  first, 
consisting  of  himself,  Andrew,  James,  and  John 
(Alford,  in  Mult.  x.  2).  The  tact  of  Jude  being 
described  by  reference  to  James  ('lovSas  laKw^ov) 
shows  the  name  and  reputation  which  he  had, 
either  at  the  time  of  the  calling  of  the  Apostles  or 
at  the  time  when  St.  Luke  wrote. 

It  is  not  likely  (though  far  from  impossible) 
that  James  and  Jude  took  part  with  their  brothei.s 
and  sisters,  and  the  Virgin  Mary,  in  trying  "  to  lay 
hold  on"  Jebds  iii  the  autumn  of  the  same  year 


Joachim  (?)  =  Ann  >  ( I ) 


Mnry  =  Clopas  or  Alphaeus 


loses       Judfi       Simon       Threei 


.;  o  2 


924 


JAMES 


(Mark  iii.  21)  ;  and  it  is  likely,  though  not  certain, 
that  it  is  of  the  other  brothers  and  sisters,  without 
these  two,  that  St.  John  says,  "  Neither  did  His 
brethren  believe  on  Him"  (John  vii.  5),  in  the 
autumn  of  a.d.  29. 

We  hear  no  more  of  James  till  after  the  Cruci- 
lixion  and  the  Resurrection.  At  some  time  in  the 
forty  days  that  intervened  between  the  Resurrection 
and  the  Ascension  the  Lord  appeared  to  him.  This 
is  not  related  by  the  Evangelists,  but  it  is  men- 
tioned by  St.  Paul  (1  Cor.  xv.  7)  ;  and  there  never 
has  been  any  doubt  that  it  was  to  this  James  rather 
than  to  the  sou  of  Zebedee  that  the  manifestation 
was  vouchsafed.  We  may  conjecture  that  it  was 
for  the  purpose  of  strengthening  him  for  the  high 
position  which  he  was  soon  to  assume  in  Jerusalem, 
and  of  giving  him  the  instructions  on  "  the  things 
pertaining  to  the  kingdom  of  Gor>"  (Acts  i.  3) 
which  were  necessary  for  his  guidance,  that  the 
Lord  thus  showed  Himself  to  James.  We  cannot 
fix  the  date  of  this  appearance.  It  was  probably 
only  a  few  days  before  the  Ascension  ;  after  which 
we  find  James,  Jude,  and  the  rest  of  the  Apostles, 
together  with  the  Virgin  Mary,  Simon,  and  Joses, 
in  Jerusalem,  awaiting  in  faith  and  prayer  the  out- 
pouring of  the  Pentecostal  gift. 

Again  we  lose  sight  of  James  for  ten  years,  and 
when  he  appears  once  more  it  is  in  a  tin'  higher 
position  than  any  that  he  has  yet  held.  In  the 
year  37  occurred  the  conversion  of  Saul.  Three 
years  after  his  conversion  he  paid  his  first  visit  to 
Jerusalem,  but  the  Christians  recollected  what  they 
had  suffered  at  his  hands,  and  feared  to  have  any- 
thing to  do  with  him.  Barnabas,  at  this  time  of 
far  higher  reputation  than  himself,  took  him  by  the 
hand,  and  introduced  him  to  Peter  and  James 
(Acts  ix.  27;  Gal.  i.  18,  19),  and  by  their  au- 
thority he  was  admitted  into  the  society  of  the 
Christians,  and  allowed  to  associate  freely  with 
them  during  the  fifteen  days  of  his  stay.  Here  we 
find  James  on  a  level  with  Peter,  and  with  him 
deciding  on  the  admission  of  St.  Paul  into  fellow- 
ship with  the  Church  at  Jerusalem ;  and  from 
henceforth  we  always  find  him  equal,  or  in  his  own 
department  superior,  to  the  very  chiefest  Apostles, 
Peter,  John,  and  Paul.  For  by  this  time  he  had 
been  appointed  (at  what  exact  date  we  know  not) 
to  preside  over  the  infant  Church  in  its  most  im- 
portant centre,  in  a  position  equivalent  to  that 
of  Bishop.  This  pre-eminence  is  evident  throughout 
the  after  history  of  the  Apostles,  whether  we  read 
it  in  the  Acts,  in  the  Epistles,  or  in  Ecclesiastical 
writers.  Thus  in  the  year  44-,  when  Peter  is  re- 
leased from  prison,  he  desires  that  information  of 
his  escape  may  be  given  to  "  James,  and  to  the 
brethreu  "  (Acts  xii.  17).  In  the  year  49  he  pre- 
sides at  the  Apostolic  Council,  and  delivers  the 
judgment  of  the  Assembly,  with  the  expression  Sib 
iyw  Kf)ivw  (Acts  xv.  13, 19  ;  see  St.  Chrys.  in  loc). 
In  the  same  year  (or  perhaps  in  the  year  51,  on  his 
fourth  visit  to  Jerusalem)  St.  Paul  recognises  James 
as  one  of  the  pillars  of  the  Church,  together  with 
Cephas  and  John  (Gal.  ii.  9),  mid  places  his  name 
before  them  both.  Shortly  afterwards  it  is  "  certain 
who  came  from  James,"  that  is,  from  the  mother- 
church  of  Jerusalem,  designated  by  the  name  of  its 
Bishop,  who  lead  Peter  into  tergiversation  at  An- 
tioch.  Ami  in  the  year  57  Paul  pays  a  formal  visit 
to  James  in  the  presence  of  all  his  presbyters,  after 
having  been  previously  welcomed  with  joy  the  day 
before  by  the  brethren  in  an  unofficial  manner  (Acts 
xxi.  18\ 


JAMES 

Entirely  accordant  with  these  notices  of  Scrip- 
ture is  the  universal  testimony  of  Christian  anti- 
quity to  the  high  oIKce  held  by  James  in  the 
Church  of  Jerusalem.  That  he  was  formally 
appointed  Bishop  of  Jerusalem  by  the  Lord  Him- 
self, as  reported  by  Epiphanius  [Haeres.  lxxviii.) ; 
Chrysostom  {Horn.  xi.  in  1  Cor.  vii.)  ;  Proclus  of 
Constantinople  {T)e  Trad.  Div.  Liturg.~) ;  and 
Photius  (Ep.  157)  is  not  likely.  Eusebius  follows 
this  account  in  a  passage  of  his  history,  but  says 
elsewhere  that  he  was  appointed  by  the  Apostles 
{H.  E.  ii.  23).  Clement  of  Alexandria  is  the  first 
author  who  speaks  of  his  Episcopate  (Hypotyposeis, 
Bk.  vi.  ap.  Euseb.  II.  E.  ii.  1),  and  he  alludes  to 
it  as  a  thing  of  which  the  chief  Apostles,  Peter, 
James,  and  John,  might  well  have  been  ambitious. 
The  same  Clement  reports  that  the  Lord,  after  His 
resurrection,  delivered  the  gift  of  knowledge  to 
James  the  Just,  to  John,  and  Peter,  who  delivered 
it  to  the  rest  of  the  Apostles,  and  they  to  the 
Seventy.  This  at  least  shows  the  estimation  in 
which  James  was  held.  But  the  author  to  whom 
we  are  chiefly  indebted  for  an  account  of  the  life 
and  death  of  James  is  Hegesippus  ii.  e.  Joseph),  a 
Christian  of  Jewish  origin,  who  lived  in  the  middle 
of  the  second  century.  His  narrative  gives  us  such 
an  insight  into  the  position  of  St.  James  in  the  Church 
of  Jerusalem  that  it  is  best  to  let  him  relate  it  in 
his  own  words : — 

Tradition  respecting  James,  as  given  by  Hege- 
sippus.— "  With  the  Apostles  James,  the  brother  of 
the  Lord,  succeeds  to  the  charge  of  the  Church — 
that  James,  who  has  been  called  Just  from  the 
time  of  the  Lord  to  our  own  days,  for  there  were 
many  of  the  name  of  James.  He  was  holy  from 
his  mother's  womb,  he  drank  not  wine  or  strong 
drink,  nor  did  he  eat  animal  food  ;  a  razor  came 
not  upon  his  head ;  he  did  not  anoint  himself  with 
oil ;  he  did  not  use  the  bath.  He  alone  might  go 
into  the  holy  place ;  for  he  wore  no  woollen  clothes, 
but  linen.  And  alone  he  used  to  go  into  the  temple, 
and  there  he  was  commonly  found  upon  his  knees, 
praying  for  forgiveness  for  the  people,  so  that  his 
knees  grew  dry  and  thin  [generally  translated  hard] 
like  a  camel's,  from  his  constantly  bending  them  in 
prayer,  and  entreating  forgiveness  for  the  people. 
On  account  therefore  of  his  exceeding  righteousness 
he  was  called  '  Just,'  and  '  Oblias,'  which  means 
in  Greek  '  the  bulwark  of  the  people,'  and  'right- 
eousness,' as  the  prophets  declare  of  him.  Some 
of  the  seven  sects  then  that  1  have  mentioned  en- 
quired of  him,  '  What  is  the  door  of  Jesus?'  And 
he  said  that  this  man  was  the  Saviour,  wherefore 
some  believed  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ.  Now  the 
forementioned  sects  did  not  believe  in  the  Resurrec- 
tion, nor  in  the  coming  of  one  who  shall  recom- 
pense every  man  according  to  his  works ;  but  all 
who  became  believers  believed  through  James. 
When  many  therefore  of  the  rulers  believed,  there 
was  a  disturbance  among  the  Jews,  and  Scribes, 
and  Pharisees,  saying,  '  There  is  a  risk  that  the 
whole  people  will  expect  Jesus  to  be  the  Christ.' 
They  came  together  therefore  to  James,  and  said, 
'  We  pray  thee,  stop  the  people,  for  they  have  gone 
astray  after  Jesus  as  though  he  weir  the  Christ. 
We  pray  thee  to  persuade  ail  tli.it  come  to  the  Pass- 
over concerning  Jesus:  tor  we  all  give  heed  to  thee, 
for  we  and  all  the  people  testify  to  thee  that  thou 
ait  just,  and  acceptesf  not  the  person  of  man.  Per- 
suade the  people  therefore  not  to  go  a  tray  about 
Jesus,  for  the  whole  people  and  all  of  us  give  heed 
to  thee.      Stand  therefore  on  the  gable  of  the  temple, 


JAMES 

that  thou  mayest  be  visible,  and  that  thy  words 
may  be  heard  by  all  the  people;  for  all  the  tribes 
and  even  the  Gentiles  are  come  together  for  the 
Passover.'  Therefore  the  forementioned  Scribes  and 
Pharisees  placed  James  upon  the  gable  of  the  temple, 
and  cried  out  to  him,  and  said,  '  0  Just  one,  to 
whom  we  ought  all  to  give  heed,  seeing  that  the 
people  are  going  astray  after  Jesus  who  was  cru- 
cified, tell  us  what  is  the  door  of  Jesus?'  And  he 
answered  with  a  loud  voice,  '  Why  ask  ye  me  about 
Jesus  the  Son  of  Man?  He  sits  in  heaven  on  the 
right  hand  of  great  power,  and  will  come  on  the 
clouds  of  heaven.'  And  many  were  convinced  and 
gave  glory  on  the  testimony  of  James,  crying  Ho- 
sannah  to  the  Son  of  David.  Whereupon  the  same 
Scribes  and  Pharisees  said  to  each  other,  '  We  have 
done  ill  in  bringing  forward  such  a  witness  to 
Jesus ;  but  let  us  go  up,  and  throw  him  down, 
that  they  may  be  terrified,  and  not  believe  on  him.' 
And  they  cried  out,  saying,  '  Oh  !  oh  !  even  the 
Just  is  gone  astray.'  And  they  fulfilled  that  which 
is  written  in  Isaiah,  'Let  us  take  away  the  just 
man,  for  he  is  displeasing  to  us ;  therefore  shall 
they  eat  of  the  fruit  of  their  deeds.'  They  went 
up  therefore,  and  threw  down  the  Just  one,  and 
said  to  one  another,  '  Let  us  stone  James  the 
Just.'  And  they  began  to  stone  him,  for  he  was 
not  killed  by  the  fall  ;  but  he  turned  round,  and 
knelt  down,  and  cried,  '  I  beseech  thee,  Lord  God 
Father,  forgive  them,  for  they  know  not  what  they 
do.'  And  whilst  they  were  stoning  him,  one  of 
the  priests,  of  the  sons  of  Rechab,  a  son  of  the 
Rechabites  to  whom  Jeremiah  the  prophet  bears  tes- 
timony, cried  out  and  said,  'Stop!  What  are  you 
about  ?  The  Just  one  is  praying  for  you  !'  Then 
one  of  them,  who  was  a  fuller,  took  the  club  with 
which  he  pressed  the  clothes,  and  brought  it  down 
on  the  head  of  the  Just  one.  And  so  he  bore  his 
witness.  And  they  buried  him  on  the  spot  by  the 
temple,  and  the  column  still  remains  by  the  temple. 
This  man  was  a  true  witness  to  Jews  and  Greeks 
that  JeSDS  is  the  Christ.  And  immediately  Ves- 
pasian commenced  the  siege"  (Euseb.  ii.  'j:>,  and 
Routh,  Rel.  Sacr.  p.  208,  Oxf.  is4b). 

For  tin'  difficulties  which  occur  in  this  extract, 
reference  may  !><■  made  to  Routh's  Reliquiae  Sacrae 
(vol.  i.  p.  228),  and  to  Canon  Stanley's  Apostolical 
AijC  (p.  319,  Oxf.  1847).  It  represents  St.  James 
to  us  in  Ins  life  and  in  his  death  more  vividly  than 
any  modern  words  could  picture  him.  We  see 
him,  a  married  man  perhaps  (1  Cor.  ix.  5),  but  in 
all  other  respects  a  rigid  and  ascetic  follower  after 
righteousness,  keeping  the  Nazarite  rule,  like  Anna 
the  prophetess  (Luke  ii.  37),  serving  the  Lord  in 
the  temple  "  with  fastings  and  prayers  night  and 
day,"  regarded  by  the  Jews  themselves  as  one  who 
had  attained  to  the  sanctity  of  the  priesthood, 
though  not  of  the  priestly  family  or  tribe  (unless 
indeed  we  argue  from  this  that  Clopas  did  belong 
to  the  tribe  of  I  evi,  led  draw  thence  anothi  i  ar  u- 
nient  for  the  identity  of  James  the  son  of  Clopas 
ami  James  the  Lord's  brother),  and  as  the  very  type 

B  The  monument— part  excavation,  pari    edifice 
which  is  now  commonly  known  as  the  "  Tomb  of  st. 
James,"  is  on  the  cast  side  of  the  so-called  Valley  of 
Jehoshaphat,  and  therefore  at  a  considerable  distance 

from  the  spot  on  which  the  Apostle  was  killed,  which 
the  narrative  of  HegesippUS  would  seem  to  li\  as 
somewhere  under  the  south-east  corner  of  the  wall  of 

the  Baram,  or  perhaps  further  down  the  slope  nearer 
the  " Fountain  of  the  Virgin."  It  can- 

not at  anj  rate  be  said  to  stand  "  hj  thi  Temple."    I  he 


JAMES 


925 


of  what  a  righteous  or  just  man  ought  to  be.  If 
any  man  could  have  converted  the  Jews  as  a  nation 
to  Christianity,  it  would  have  been  James. 

Josephus'  narrative  of  his  death  is  apparently 
somewhat  different.  He  says  that  in  the  interval 
between  the  death  of  Festus  and  the  coming  of 
Albinus,  Ananus  the  high-priest  assembled  the 
Sanhedrim,  and  "  brought  before  it  James  the  bro- 
ther of  him  who  is  called  Christ,  and  some  others, 
and  having  charged  them  with  breaking  the  laws, 
delivered  them  over  to  be  stoned."  But  if  we  are 
to  reconcile  this  statement  with  that  of  Hegesippus, 
we  must  suppose  that  they  vveie  not  actually  stoned 
on  this  occasion.  The  historian  adds  that  the 
better  part  of  the  citizens  disliked  what  was  done, 
and  complained  of  Ananus  to  Agrippa  and  Albi- 
nus, whereupon  Albinus  threatened  to  punish  him 
for  having  assembled  the  Sanhedrim  without  his 
consent,  and  Agrippa  deprived  him  of  the  high- 
priesthood  (Ant.  xx.  9).  The  woids  "brother  of 
him  who  is  called  Christ,"  are  judged  by  Le  Clerc, 
Lardner,  &c,  to  be  spurious. 

Epiphanius  gives  the  same  account  that  Hege- 
sippus does  in  somewhat  different  words,  having 
evidently  copied  it  for  the  most  part  from  him. 
He  adds  a  few  particulars  which  are  probably  mere 
assertions  or  conclusions  of  his  own  (Haeres.  xxix. 
4,  and  lxxviii.  13).  He  considers  James  to  have 
been  the  son  of  Joseph  by  a  former  wife,  and  cal- 
culates that  he  must  have  been  96  years  old  at  the 
time  of  his  death  ;  and  adds,  on  the  authority,  as  he 
says,  of  Eusebius,  Clement,  and  others,  that  he 
wore  the  -ireraXov  on  his  foiehead,  in  which  he 
probably  confounds  him  with  St.  John  (Polycr. 
apud  Euseb.  If.  E.  v.  24.  But  see  Cotta,  Do  lam. 
pont.  App.  Joan.  Joe.  et  Marci,  Tub.  1755). 

Gregory  of  Tours  reports  that  he  was  buried, 
not  where  he  fell,  but  on  the  Mount  of  01ives,sin  a 
tomb  in  which  he  had  already  buried  Zacharias  and 
Simeon  (De glor.  Mart.  i. '27).  Eusebius  tells  us 
that  his  chair  was  preserved  down  to  his  time;  on 
which  see  Heinichen's  Excursus  (Exc.  xi.  ad  Euseb. 
II.  E.  vii.  19,  vol.  iv.  p.  957,  ed.  Burton). 

We  must  add  a  strange  Talmudic  legend,  which 
appears  to  relate  to  James.  It  is  found  in  tin' 
Midrash  Koheleth,  or  Commentary  on  Ecclesiastes, 
and  also  in  the  Tiact  Abodah  Zarah  of  the  Jeru- 
salem Talmud.  It  is  as  follows:  "  I,'.  Eliezer,  the 
son  of  Dama,  was  bitten  by  a  serpent;  and  there 
came  to  him  Jacob,  a  man  of  Caphar  Secama,  to 
heal  him  by  the  name  of  Jesii  the  son  of  Pandera  : 
but  R.  Ismael  suffered  him  not,  saving,  'That  is  not 
allowed  thee,  sun  of  llama.'  He  answered,  'Sillier 
me,  and  I  will  produce  an  authority  against  thee 
that  it  is  lawful;'  but  he  could  net  produce  the  au- 
thority before  he  expired.  And  what  was  the 
authority? — This:  'Which  if  a  man  do,  he  shall 
live  in  them'  i  Lev.  xviii.  .">).  But  it  is  not  said 
that  he  shall  die  in  them."  The  sun  of  Pandera 
is  the  name  that  the  Jews  have  always  given  to 
our  Lord,  when  representing  Him  as  a  magician. 
The  same  name  is  given  in   Epiphanius  [Haeres, 


tradition  about  the  monument  ill  question  is  that  St. 

ere   alter   the  capture   of  Christ, 

and  remained,  eating  and  drinking  nothing,  until  our 

Lord  appeared  to  him  on  the  daj   t  I   His   resurrection 

Si  e  Quaresmius,  &c,  quoted  in  Tobler,  Siloah,  &c, 

i  he  legend  of  his  death  there  sei  ins  to  he  first 
mentioned  by  Maumlc\  illc    \.\>.  1  320  :  sec  Early  Trur. 

L76  .     Bj  the  old  travellers   ii    ie  often   called  the 
"  Church  of  St.  James." 


920 


JAMES,  EPISTLE  OF 


lxxviii.)  to  the  grandfather  of  Joseph,  and  by  John 
Damascene  (De  Fide  Orth.  iv.  15)  to  the  grand- 
father of  Joachim,  the  supposed  father  of  the  Virgin 
Mary.  For  the  identification  of  James  of  Secama 
(a  place  in  Upper  Galilee)  with  James  the  Just, 

see  Mill  (Historic.  Criticism  of  the  Gospel,  p.  318,  |  have  withdrawn  his  expression  that  it  was  "  a  right 
Camb.  1840).     The  passage  quoted  by  Origen  and  I  strawy  Epistle,"  compared  with  the  Gospel  of  St. 


JAMES,  EPISTLE  OP 

raised,  and  now  upon  the  ground  of  internal  evi- 
dence. Erasmus  and  Cardinal  Cajetan  in  the 
Church  of  Rome,  Cyril  Lucar  in  the  Greek  Church, 
Luther  and  the  Magdeburg  Centuriators  among 
Protestants,  all  objected  to  it.     Luther  seems  to 


Eusebius  from  Josephus,  in  which  the  latter  speaks 
of  the  death  of  James  as  being  one  of  the  causes  of 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  seems  to  be  spurious 
(Orig.  in  Matt.  xhi.  55  ;  Euseb.  H.  E.  ii.  23). 

It  is  possible  that  there  may  be  a  reference  to 
James  in  Heb.  xiii.  7  (see  Theodoret  in  he),  which 
would  fix  his  death  at  some  time  previous  to  the 
writing  of  that  Epistle.  His  apprehension  by  Ana- 
nus  was  probably  about  the  year  62  or  63  (Lard- 
ner,  Pearson,  Mill,  Whitby,  Le  Clerc,  Tillemont). 
There  is  nothing  to  fix  the  date  of  his  martyrdom 
as  narrated  by  Hegesippus,  except  that  it  must  have 
been  shoitly  before  the  commencement  of  the  siege 
of  Jerusalem.  We  may  conjecture  that  he  was  be- 
tween 70  and  80  years  old.h  [F.  M.] 

JAMES,  THE  GENERAL  EPISTLE  OF. 

I.  Its  Genuineness  and  Canonicitij. — In  the  third 
book  of  his  Ecclesiastical  History,  Eusebius  makes 
his  well-known  division  of  the  books,  or  pretended 
books,  of  the  New   Testament  into    four    classes 


John  and  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  and  St.  Peter, 
after  that  expression  had  been  two  years  before  the 
world.  The  chief  objection  on  internal  grounds  is 
a  supposed  opposition  between  St.  Paul  and  St. 
James,  on  the  doctrine  of  Justification,  concerning 
which  we  shall  presently  make  some  remarks.  At 
present  we  need  only  say  that  it  is  easy  to  account 
for  the  non-universal  reception  of  the  Epistle  in  the 
Early  Church,  by  the  fact  that  it  was  meant  only 
for  Jewish  believers,  and  was  not  likely  therefore  to 
circulate  widely  among  Gentile  Christians,  for  whose 
spiritual  necessities  it  was  primarily  not  adapted; 
and  that  the  objection  on  internal  grounds  proves 
nothing  except  against  the  objectors,  for-  it  really 
rests  on  a  mistake. 

II.  Its  Author. — The  author  of  the  Epistle  must 
be  either  James  the  son  of  Zebedee,  according  to  the 
subscription  of  the  Syriac  version  ;  or  James  the  son 
of  Alphaeus,  according  to  Dr.  Davidson's  view  (Int. 
to  N.  T.  iii.  p.  312)  ;  or  James  the  brother  of  the 


Under  the  head  of  b^oXo-yovjxeva  he    places  the    Lord,  which  is  the  general  opinion  (see  Euseb.  H.  E. 


Gospels,  the  Acts,  the  Pauline  Epistles,  the  First 
Epistle  of  St.  John,  and  the  First  Epistle  of  St. 
Peter.  In  the  class  of  avTiXeyS/xeva  he  places  the 
Epistle  of  St.  James,  the  Second  and  Third  Epistles 
of  St.  John,  and  the  Epistle  of  St.  Jude.  Amongst 
the  v6Qa  he  enumerates  the  Acts  of  St.  Paul,  the 
Shepherd,  the  Apocalypse  of  St.  Peter,  the  Epistle 
of  Barnabas,  the  Doctrine  of  the  Apostles,  the 
Gospel  to  the  Hebrews.  The  alperiKd  consist  of 
the  Gospels  of  Peter,  Thomas,  Matthias,  and  others, 
the  Acts  of  Andrew,  John,  and  others.  The  clvtl- 
keyofieva,  amongst  which  he  places  the  Epistle  of 
St.  James,  are,  he  says,  yvu>pi/xa  '6/j.ws  roTs  ttoA- 
Ao7/s,  whether  the  expression  means  that  they  were 
acknowledged  by,  or  merely  that  they  were  known  to, 
the  majority  (H.  E.  iii.  25).  Elsewhere  he  refers 
the  Epistle  to  the  class  of  v6Qa,  for  this  is  the 
meaning  of  voBeverai  /xev,  which  was  apparently 
misunderstood  by  St.  Jerome  (De  Vir.  Illust.) ; 
but  he  bears  witness  that  it  was  publicly  read  in 
most  churches  as  genuine  (H.  E.  ii.  23),  and  as 
such  accepts  it  himself.  This  then  was  the  state 
of  the  question  in  the  time  of  Eusebius  ;  the  Epistle 
was  accepted  as  canonical,  and  as  the  writing  of 
James,  the  brother  of  the  Lord,  by  the  majority, 
but  not  universally.  Origen  bears  the  same  testi- 
mony as  Eusebius  (torn.  iv.  p.  306),  and  probably 
like  him,  himself  accepted  the    Epistle  as  genuine 


23;  Alford,  G.  T.  iv.  p.  28);  or  an  unknown 
James  (Luther).  The  likelihood  of  this  last  hypo- 
thesis falls  to  the  ground  when  the  canonical  cha- 
racter of  the  Epistle  is  admitted.  James  the  son 
of  Zebedee  could  not  have  written  it,  because  the 
date  of  his  death,  only  seven  years  after  the  mar- 
tyrdom of  Stephen,  does  not  give  time  for  the 
growth  of  a  sufficient  number  of  Jewish  Christians, 
iv  rfj  Siaffiropa.  Internal  evidence  (see  Stanley, 
Apost.  Age,  p.  292)  points  unmistakeably  to  James 
the  Just  as  the  writer,  and  we  have  already  iden- 
tified James  the  Just  with  the  son  of  Alphaeus. 

The  Jewish  Christians,  whether  residing  at  Je- 
rusalem or  living  scattered  among  the  Gentiles,  and 
only  visiting  that  city  from  time  to  time,  were  the 
especial  charge  of  James.  To  them  he  addressed  this 
Epistle;  not  to  the  unbelieving  Jews  (Lardner, 
Macknight,  Hug,  &c),  but  only  to  believers  iu 
Christ,  as  is  undoubtedly  proved  by  i.  1,  ii.  1,  ii.  7, 
v.  7.  The  rich  men  of  v.  1 ,  may  be  the  unbelieving 
Jews  (Stanley,  p.  299),  but  it  does  not  follow  that 
the  Epistle  was  written  to  them.  It  is  usual  for 
an  orator  to  denounce  in  the  second  person.  It  was 
written  from  Jerusalem,  which  St.  James  does  not 
seem  to  have  ever  left.  The  time  at  which  he 
wrote  it  has  been  fixed  as  late  as  62,  and  as  early 
as  45.  Those  who  see  in  its  writer  a  desire  to 
counteract  the  effects  of  a  misconstruction  of  St. 


(torn.  iv.  p.  535,  &c).     It  is  found  in  the  Syriac  ]  Paul's  doctrine  of  Justification  by  faith,  in  ii.  14 


version,  and  appears  to  be  referred  to  by  Clement 
of  Rome  (ad  Cor.  x.),  Hennas  (lib.  ii.,  Mand.  xii. 
5),  Irenaeus  (Adv.  Haeres.  16,  2),  and  is  quoted 
by  almost  all  the  Fathers  of  the  4th  century,  e.  g. 
Athanasius,  Cyril,  Gregory  Nazianzen,  Epiphanius, 
Chrysostom  (see  Davidson,  Intr.  to  N.  T.,  iii.  p. 
338).  In  397  the  Council  of  Carthage  accepted  it 
as  canonical,  and  from  that  time  there  has  been  no 
further  question  of  its  genuineness  on  the  score  of 
external  testimony.  But  at  the  time  of  the  Refor- 
mation the  question  of  its  authenticity  was  again 

h  It  is  almost  unnecessary  to  say  that  the  Jacobite  —do  not  derive  their  title  from  St.  .Tames,  but  from 
churches  of  the  East— consisting  of  the  Armenians,  I  a  later  person  of  the  same  name,  Jacob  liaiadaeus, 
the  Copts,  and  other  Monophysite  or  F.utychian  bodies  '  who  died  Bishop  of  Edessa  in  -r>ss. 


6  (Wiesinger),  and  those  who  see  a  reference  to 
the  immediate  destruction  of  Jerusalem  in  v.  1 
(Macknight),  and  an  allusion  to  the  name  Chris- 
tians in  ii.  7  (De  Wette),  argue  in  favour  of  the 
later  date.  The  earlier  date  is  advocated  by 
Schneckenburger,  Meander,  Thiersch,  Davidson, 
Stanley,  and  Alford  ;  chiefly  on  the  ground  that  the 
Epistle  could  not  have  been  written  by  St.  James 
after  the  Council  in  Jerusalem,  without  some  allusion 
to  what  was  there  decided,  and  because  flic  Gentile 
Christian  does  not  yet  appear  to  be  recognised. 


JAMES,  EPISTLE  OF 

III.  Its  object. — -The  main  object  of  the  Epistle 
is  not  to  teach  doctrine  but  to  improve  morality. 
.St.  James  is  the  moral  teacher  of  the  N.  T. ;  not  in 
such  sense  a  moral  teacher  as  not  to  be  at  the  same 
time  a  maintainor  and  teacher  of  Christian  doctrine, 
but  yet  mainly  in  this  Epistle  a  moral  teacher. 
There  are  two  ways  of  explaining  this  characteristic 
of  the  Epistle.  Some  commentators  and  writers 
see  in  St.  James  a  man  who  had  not  realised  the 
essential  principles  and  peculiarities  of  Christianity, 
but  was  in  a  transition  state,  half-Jew  and  halt- 
Christian.  Schneckenburger  thinks  that  Chris- 
tianity had  not  penetrated  his  spiritual  life.  Nean- 
derisofmuch  the  same  opinion  (Pflanzung  unci 
Leitung,  p.  579).  And  the  same  notion  may  perhaps 
be  ti  aced  in  Prof.  Stanley  and  Dean  Alford.  But  thei  e 
is  another  and  much  more  natural  way  of  account- 
ing for  the  tact.  St.  James  was  writing  for  a 
special  class  of  persons,  and  knew  what  that 
class  especially  needed ;  and  therefore,  under 
the  guidance  of  Cod's  Spirit,  he  adapted  his  in- 
structions to  their  capacities  and  wants.  Those  for 
whom  he  wrote  were,  as  we  have  said,  the  Jewish 
Christians  whether  in  Jerusalem  or  abroad.  St. 
James,  living  in  the  centre  of  Judaism,  saw  what 
were  the  chief  sins  and  vices  of  his  countrymen  ; 
and,  tearing  that  his  flock  might  share  in  them,  he 
lifted  up  his  voice  to  warn  them  against  the  con- 
tagion from  which  they  not  only  might,  but  did 
in  part,  suffer.  This  was  his  main  object;  but 
there  is  another  closely  connected  with  it.  As  Chris- 
tians, his  readers  were  exposed  to  trials  which  they 
did  not  bear  with  the  patience  and  faith  that  would 
have  become  them.  Here  then  are  the  two  objects  of 
the  Epistli  —  1.  to  warn  against  the  sins  to  which  as 
Jews  they  were  most  liable ;  2.  to  console  and  exhort 
them  under  the  sufferings  to  which  as  Christians  they 
were  most  exposed.  The  warnings  and  consolations 
are  mixed  together,  for  the  writer  does  not  seem  to 
have  set  himself  down  to  compose  an  essay  or  a 
letter  of  which  he  had  previously  arranged  the 
heads;  bat,  like  one  of  the  old  prophets,  to  have 
pom  id  out  what  was  uppermost  in  his  thoughts, 
or  closest  to  his  heart,  without  waiting  to  connect 
his  matter,  or  to  throw  bridges  across  from  subject 
to  subject.  ^Vhile,  in  the  purity  of  his  Greek  and 
tin'  \  igour  of  his  thoughts,  we  mark  a  man  of  edu- 
cation, in  the  abruptness  of  his  transitions  and 
the  unpolished  roughness  of  his  style  we  may  trace 
one  of  the  family  of  the  Davideans,  who  disarmed 
Domitian  by  the  simplicity  of  their  minds  and  by 
exhibiting  their  hands  hard  with  toil  (llegesipp. 
apud  Eust  b.  iii.  20). 

The  Jewish  vices  against  which  he  warns  them 
are — Formalism,  which  made  the  service  {dpriffKela) 
ofGod  consist  in  washings  and  outward  ceremonies, 
whereas  he  reminds  them  (i.  27)  that  it  consists 
rather  in  Active  Love  and  Purity  (see  Coleridge's 
Aids  to  I V<; fleet  ion,  Aph.  '_':>  ;  note  also  Active  Love 
=  Bp.  Butler's  "  Benevolence,"  and  Purity  =  Bp. 
Butler's  "  Temperance")  ;  Fanaticism,  whirl,  under 
the  cloak  of  'eligious  zeal  was  tearing  Jerusalem 
to  pieces  <[.  20);  Fatalism,  which  threw  its  sins 
on  God  (i.  13) ;  Meanness,  which  or :hed  before 

the  rich  (ii.  2)  :  falsehood,  which  had  made  words 
and  oaths  playthings  i  iii.  2-12  )  ;  Partizanship  i  iii. 
14);  Evil-speaking  (iv.  11);  Boasting  iiv.  16); 
Oppression  v.  4).  The  great  Lesson  which  he 
them,  as  Christians,  is  1'atienci — Patience 
in  trial  (i.  2);  Patience  in  ."oil  works  (i.  22-25); 
Patience  under  provocations  ( iii.  1 7  i ;  Patience  under 
oppression   (v.  7);    Patience  under  persecution  (v. 


JAMES,  EPISTLE  OF 


927 


10):  and  the  ground  of  their  Patience  is,  that  the 
Coming  of  the  ford  draweth  nigh,  which  is  to  right 
all  wrongs  (v.  S). 

IV.  There  are  two  points  in  the  Epistle  which 
demand  a  somewhat  more  lengthened  notice.  These 
are  («.)  ii.  14-26,  which  has  been  represented  as  a 
formal  opposition  to  St.  Paul's  doctrine  of  Justifi- 
cation by  Faith,  and  (6.)  v.  14,  15,  which  is  quoted 
as  the  authority  for  the  Sacrament  of  Extreme 
Unction. 

(a)  Justification  being  an  act  not  of  man  but  of 
God, both  the  phrases  "  Justification  by  Faith  "  and 
"  Justification  by  Works  "  are  inexact.  Justification 
must  either  be  by  Grace,  or  of  Reward.  Therefore 
our  question  is,  Did  or  did  not  St.  James  hold  Justifi- 
cation by  Grace?  If  he  did,  there  is  no  contradic- 
tion between  the  Apostles.  Now  there  is  not  one 
word  in  St.  James  to  the  efiect  that  a  man  can 
earn  his  justification  by  works ;  and  this  would  be 
necessary  in  order  to  prove  that  he  held  Justifica- 
tion of  Reward.  Still  St.  Paul  does  use  the  ex- 
pression "Justified  by  faith"  (Rom.  v.  1),  and  St. 
James  the  expression,  "Justified  by  works,  not  by 
faith  only."  And  here  is  an  apparent  opposition. 
But,  if  we  consider  the  meaning  of  the  two  Apostles, 
we  see  at  once  that  there  is  no  contradiction  either 
intended  or  possible.  St.  Paul  was  opposing  the 
Judaizing  party,  which  claimed  to  earn  acceptance 
by  good  works,  whether  the  works  of  the  Mosaic 
law,  or  works  of  piety  done  by  themselves.  In  op- 
position to  these,  St.  Paul  lays  down  the  great 
truth  that  acceptance  cannot  be  earned  by  man 
at  all,  but  is  the  free  gift  of  God  to  the  Christian 
man,  for  the  sake  of  the  merits  of  Jesus  Christ, 
appropriated  by  each  individual,  and  made  his  own 
by  the  instrumentality  of  faith. — St.  James,  on  the 
other  hand,  was  opposing  the  old  Jewish  tenet  that 
to  be  a  child  of  Abraham  was  all  in  all  ;  that  god- 
liness was  not  necessary,  so  that  the  belief  was 
correct.  This  presumptuous  confidence  had  trans- 
ferred itself,  with  perhaps  double  force,  to  the 
Christianized  Jews.  They  had  said,  "  Lord,  Lord," 
and  that  was  enough,  without  doing  His  father's 
will.  They  had  recognised  the  Messiah:  what 
more  was  wanted?  They  had  faith:  wdiat  more 
was  required  of  them?  It  is  plain  that  their 
"  faith  "  was  a  totally  different  thing  from  the 
"  faith  "  of  St.  Paul.  St.  Paul  tells  us  again  and 
again  that  his  "  faith"  is  a  "  faith  that  worketh  by 
love;"  but  the  very  characteristic  of  the  "faith" 
which  St.  James  is  attacking,  and  the  very  reason 
why  he  attacked  it,  wis  that  it  did  not  work  by 
love,  but  was  a  bare  assent  of  the  head,  not  influ- 
encing the  heart,  a  faith  such  as  devils  can  have, 
and  tremble.  St.  James  tells  us  that  "fides  infor- 
mis  "  is  not  sufficient  on  the  part  of  man  for  Justi- 
fication; St.  Paul  tells  us  thai   "fides  formata" 

is  sufficient  :  and  the  iea-ou  why  _//</<  s  iii/ormis  Will 
not  justify  us  is,  according  to  St.  James,  because  it 
lacks  that  special  quality,  the  addition  of  which 

< stitutes  it  fides  formata.     See  on  this  subject 

Bull's  Efarmonia  Apostolica  ei  Examen  Censurae; 
Taylor's  Senium  on  "  Faith  working  l>>i  Love"  vol. 
viii.  p.  '-'St.  I. end.  1850;  and,  as  a  collective  of 
Pull's  view,  Laurence'  Bampton  Lectures,  iv.v.  vi. 
(6)  With  respect  to  \.  14.  15,  it  is  enough  to  say 
that  the  ceremony  of  Extreme  Unction  and  the 
ceremony  described  by  St.  James  differ  both  in 
their  subject  and  in  their  object.  The  subject  of 
Extreme  Unction  is  a  sick  man  who  is  about  to 
die:  and  its  object  is  not  his  cure.  The  sul 
the  ceremonj  St.  . lames  is  a  sick  man 


928 


JAMIN 


who  is  not  about  to  die ;  and  its  object  is  his  euro, 
together  with  the  spiritual  benefit  of  absolution. 
St.  James  is  plainly  giving  directions  with  respect 
to  the  manner  of  a  Iministering  one  of  those  extra- 
ordinary gifts  of  the  Spirit  with  which  the  Church 
was  endowed  only  in  the  Apostolic  age  and  the  age 
immediately  succeeding  the  Apostles. 

The  following  editions,  &c,  of  St.  James'  Epistle 
may  be  mentioned  as  worthy  of  notice.  The  edi- 
tion of  Benson  and  Michaelis,  Halae  Magdeburgi- 
cae,  1746;  Semler's  Paraphrasis,  Halae,  1781; 
Mori  Praclectioncs  in  Jacobi  et  Petri  Epistolas, 
Lipsiae,  1794  ;  Schneckenburger's  Annotatio  ad 
Epist.  Jac.  perpetua,  Stuttg.  1832 ;  Davidson's 
Introduction  to  the  New  Test.  vol.  iii.  p.  296,  seq., 
Lond.  1851  ;  Alford's  Greek  Test.  vol.  iv.  p.  274, 
Lond.  1859. 

The  following  spurious  works  have  been  attributed 
to  St.  James: — 1.  The  Protevangelium.  2.  His- 
toria  de  Nativitate  Mariae.  3.  Be  miraculis  in- 
fantiae  Domini  nostri,  &c.  Of  these,  the  Protevan- 
gelium is  worth  a  passing  notice,  not  for  its  contents, 
which  are  a  mere  parody  on  the  early  chapters  of 
St.  Luke,  transferring  the  events  which  occurred  at 
our  Lord's  Birth  to  the  birth  of  St.  Mary  his  mother, 
but  because  it  appears  to  have  been  known  so  early 
in  the  Church.  It  is  possible  that  Justin  Martyr 
{Dial,  cum  Trgph.  c.  78),  and  Clement  of  Alexandria 
{Strom,  lib.  viii.)  refer  to  it.  Origen  speaks  of  it 
(in  Matt.  xiii.  55);  Gregory  Nyssen  (Op.  p.  346, 
ed.  Paris),  Epiphanius  {Haer.  lxxix.),  John  Da- 
mascene (Orat.  i.  ii.  in  Nativ.  Mariae),  Photius 
(  Orat.  in  Nativ.  Mariae),  and  others  allude  to  it. 
It  was  first  published  in  Latin  in  1552,  in  Greek 
in  1564.  The  oldest  MS.  of  it  now  existing  is  of 
the  10th  century.  (See  Thilo's  Codex  Apocrg- 
p/ms  Novi  Tcstamcnti,  torn.  i.  pp.  45,  108,  159, 
337,  Lips.  1852.  [F.  M.] 

JA'MIN  (fO'1 :  ,lag.eii>,'lag.eig.,'laij.lv.  Jamin). 
1.  Second  son  of  Simeon  (Gen.  xlvi.  10;  Ex.  vi. 
15  ;  1  Chr.  iv.  24),  founder  of  the  family  (mish- 
pacah)  of  the  Jaminites  (Num.  xxvi.  12). 

2.  (Alex,  'la&eiv).  A  man  of  Judah,  of  the  great 
house  of  Hezron ;  second  son  of  Lam  the  Jerah- 
meelite  (1  Chr.  ii.  27). 

3.  One  of  the  Levites  who  under  Ezra  and  Ne- 
hemiah  read  and  expounded  the  law  to  the  people 
(Neb.,  viii.  7).  By  the  LXX.  the  greater  part  of 
the  names  in  this  passage  aie  omitted. 

JA'MINITES,  THE  (^tt>n :  6  'lafitvt :  fa- 
milia  Jachinitarum),  the  descendants  of  Jamin  the 
son  of  Simeon  (Num.  xxvi.  12). 

JAM'LECH  C$W  :  'U/xo\6x  ;  Alex.  'AMa- 
\tik  :  Jcmlech),  one  of  the  chief  men  (D^bO 
A.  V.  "princes")  of  the  tribe  of  Simeon  (1  Chr. 
iv.  34),  probably  in  the  time  of  Hezekiah  (see 
ver.  41). 

JAM'NIA  (^lajxvia,  'la/xveia  ;  and  so  Josephus  : 
Jamnia),  1  Mace.  iv.  15;  v.  58;  x.  69;  xv.  40. 
[Jabneel.] 

JAM'NITES,  THE  (ol  iv  'lagvtta,  ol  'la/x- 
vlrar.  Jamniiae),  2  Marc.  xii.  8,  9,  40.  [JAB- 
NEEL.] 

JAN'NA  Clavvd  ,  son  of  Joseph,  and  father  of 
Melchi,  in  the  genealogy  of  Christ  (Luke  iii.  24). 
It    is    perhaps    duly    a    variation    of  Joannas    or 

'"bn.  [A,  ('.  I],] 


JANNES 

JANNES  and  JAM'BRES  ('idw-ns,  'lafi- 
jSprjs-),  the  names  of  two  Egyptian  magicians  who 
opposed  Moses.  St.  Paul  alone  of  the  sacred  writers 
mentions  them  by  name,  and  says  no  more  than 
that  they  "withstood  Moses,"  and  that  their  folly 
in  doing  so  became  manifest  (2  Tim.  iii.  8,  9).  It 
appears  from  the  Jewish  commentators  that  these 
names  were  held  to  be  those  of  the  magicians  who 
opposed  Moses  and  Aaron,  spoken  of  in  Exodus  (or 
perhaps  their  leaders),  of  whom  we  there  read  that 
they  first  imitated  the  wonders  wrought  by  Moses 
and  Aaron,  but,  afterwards  failing,  confessed  that  the 
power  of  God  was  with  those  whom  they  had  with- 
stood (chap.  vii.  11,  where  the  Targum  of  Jonathan 
inserts  these  names,  22,  viii.  18,  19).  With  this 
St.  Paul's  words  perfectly  agree. 

Jambres  is  written  in  some  codices  Ma/j.PpTJs  : 
both  forms,  the  latter  being  slightly  varied,  arc 
found  in  the  Jewish  commentaries  ( D~130'>  DIOO ) : 
the  former  appears  to  be  the  earlier  form.  We 
have  been  unable  to  discover  an  Egyptian  name  re- 
sembling Jambres  or  Mambres.  The  termination 
is  like  that  of  many  Egyptian  compounds  ending 
with  ha,  "  the  sun ;"  as  Men-kau-ra,  Mevx*pWs 
(Manetho,  ivth  Dyn.). 

Jannes  appears  to  be  a  transcription  of  the  Egyp- 
tian name  Aan,  probably  pronounced  Ian.  It  was 
the  nomen  of  two  kings :  one  of  the  xith  Dynasty, 
the  father  or  ancestor  of  Sesertesen  I.  of  the  xiith  ; 
the  other,  according  to  our  arrangement,  fourth 
or  fifth  king  of  the  xvth  Dyn.,  called  by  Manetho 
'luvvas  or  'lavtas  (Jos.)  or  %Tadv  (Afr.).  Sec 
Horae  Aeggptiacae,  pp.  174,  5.  There  is  also 
a  king  bearing  the  name  Annu,  whom  we  assign 
to  tin'  iind  Dyn.  (//<&■.  Aeg.  p.  101).  The  sig- 
nification of  Aan  is  doubtful:  the  coguate  wind 
Aant  means  a  valley  or  plain.  The  earlier  king 
Aan  may  be  assigned  to  the  twenty-first  century 
B.C. :  the  later  one  we  hold  to  be  probably  the  second 
predecessor  of  Joseph's  Pharaoh.  This  shows  that 
a  name  which  may  be  reasonably  supposed  to  be  the 
original  of  Jannes,  was  in  use  at  or  near  the  period 
of  the  sojourn  in  Egypt.  The  names  of  the  ancient 
Egyptians  were  extremely  numerous  and  very  fluc- 
tuating in  use  :  generally  the  most  prevalent  at  any 
time  were  those  of  kings  then  reigning  or  not  long 
dead. 

Our  result  as  to  the  name  of  Jannes  throws  light 
upon  a  curious  question  raised  by  the  supposition 
that  St.  Paul  took  the  names  of  the  magicians  from 
a  prevalent  tradition  of  the  Jews.  This  conjecture 
is  as  old  as  the  time  of  Theodoret,  who  makes  the 
supposed  tradition  oral.  (Ta  g.ivTOt  tovtoov  6v6- 
/j.ara  ovk  e/c  ttjs  Qeias  ypacp-qs  g.e/j.d6riK€V  6  duos 
anoffToAos,  aAA'  in  t)}s  dypdepov  rtvv  'lovSaicov 
SiSacrKaXias  :  ad  foe).  This  opinion  would  be  of 
little  importance  were  it  not  for  the  circumstance 
that  these  names  were  known  to  the  Gieeks  and 
Romans  at  too  early  a  period  for  us  to  suppose  that 
their  information  was  derived  from  St  Paul's  men- 
tion (see  Plin.  //.  N.  xxx.  1  ;  Apul.  Apol.  p.  24, 
Bipont. ;  Numenius  ap.  Euseb.  Praep.  Evan.  ix.  8), 
It  has  therefore  been  generally  supposed  that  St. 
Paul  took  these  names  from  Jewish  tradition.  It 
seems,  however,  inconsistent  with  the  character  of  an 
inspired  record  for  a  baseless  or  incorrect  current 
tradition  to  be  cited  ;  it  is  therefore  satisfactory  to 
find  there  is  good  reason  for  thinking  these  names 
to  be  authentic.  Whether  Jannes  and  Jambres 
were  mentioned  in  some  long-lost  book  relating  to 
the  early  history  of  the  Israelites,  or  whether  there 
were  a  veritable  mal  tradition  respecting  them  can- 


JANOAH 

not  now  be  determined.  The  former  is  the  more 
pro  liable  supposition — if,  as  we  believe,  the  names 
are  correct — since  oral  tradition  is  rarely  exact  in 
minute  particulars. 

The  conjecture  of  Majus  (Observ.  Sacr.  ii.  42, 
seqq.,  ap.  Winer,  Realwort.  s.  v.)  that  Jannes  and 
Jambres  are  merely  meaningless  words  put  for  lost 
proper  names  is  scarcely  worth  refuting.  The 
words  are  not  sufficiently  similar  to  give  a  colour 
to  the  idea,  and  there  is  no  known  instance  of  the 
kind  in  the  Bible. 

The  Rabbius  state  that  Jannes  and  Jambres  were 
sons  of  Balaam,  and  among  various  forms  of  their 
names  give  Johannes  and  Ambrosius.  There  was 
an  apocryphal  work  called  Jannes  and  Mambres, 
condemned  by  Pope  Gelasius. 

The  Arabs  mention  the  names  of  several  magi- 
cians who  opposed  Moses  ;  among  them  is  none  re- 
sembling Jannes  and  Jambres  (U'Herbelot,  art. 
Moussa  Ben  Amran). 

There  are  several  dissertations  on  this  subject 
(J.  Grotius,  Diss,  de  Janne  et  Jambre,Yia.i\\.  1707  ; 
J.  G.  Michaelis,  Id.  Hal.  1747;  Zentgrav,  Id. 
Argent,  1G69  ;  Lightfbot,  Sermon  on  Jannes  and 
Jambres,  &c). 

There  is  a  question  of  considerable  interest  as  to 
these  Egyptian  magicians  which  we  cannot  here 
discuss: — Is  their  temporary  success  attributable 
to  pure  imposture?  The  passages  relating  to 
them  in  the  Bible  would  lead  us  to  reply  affirma- 
tively, as  we  have  already  said  in  speaking  of 
ancient  Egyptian  magic.    [Egypt.]       [R.  S.  P.] 

JANO  AH  (TV\y  :  r)  'Avii&x  5  Alex.  'laua>x  : 
Janoe~),  a  place  apparently  in  the  north  of  Galilee, 
or  the  "land  of  Naphtali" — one  of  those  taken  by 
Tiglath-Pileser  in  his  first  incursion  into  Palestine 
(2  K.  xv.  29).  No  trace  of  it  appears  elsewhere. 
By  Eusebius  and  Jerome  (Onom.  "Ianon"),  and 
even  by  Reland  {Pal.  826),  it  is  confounded  with 
Janohah,  in  the  centre  of  the  country.  [G.] 

JANO'HAH  (nmr,  i.e.  Yanochah:  'lavwica., 

but  in  next  verse  Ma^w  ;  Alex,  'lavd :  Janoe),  a 
place  on  the  boundary  of  Ephraim  (possibly  that 
between  it  and  Manasseh).  It  is  named  between 
Taanath-Shiloh  and  Ataroth,  the  enumeration  pro- 
el  eding  from  west  to  east  (Josh.  xvi.  6,  7).  Euse- 
bius [Onomasticon,  "Iano")  gives  it  as  twelve 
miles  east  of  Neapolis.  A  little  less  than  that  dis- 
tance  from  Nabl&s,  and  about  S.E.  in  direction,  two 
miles  from  Akrabeh,  is  the  village  of  Yanun,  doubt- 
less identical  with  the  ancient  Janohah.  It  seems 
to  have  been  first  visited  in  modern  times  by  Van 
de  Velde  (ii.  303,  May  8,  1852;  see  also  Rob.  iii. 
297).  It  is  in  a  valley  descending  sharply  eastward 
towards  the  Jordan.  The  modern  village  is  very 
small,  but  the  ancient  ruins  "  extensive  and  in- 
teresting." "  I  have  not  seen,"  says  V.,  "any  of 
Israel's  ancient  cities  in  such  a  condition:  entire 
houses  and  walls  exist,  covered  with  immense  heaps 
of  earth."  Bui  there  are  also  ruins  on  the  hill 
N.H.  of  )'ii,u)ii.  called  Khirbei  Y.,  which  may  be 
the  site  of  the  original  place  |  Rob.  297).         [(;.] 

JA'NUM  (D-13\  following  the  Keri  of  the  Ma- 
sorets,  but  in  the  original  text,  Cetib,  it  is  DO\ 
Janim:  'lf/xd'ip  ;  Alex.  'Avuv/j.:  Janum),  a  town 
of  Judah  in  the  mountain  district,  apparently  aoi 
tar  from  Hebron,  and  named  between  Eshcaii  and 
Beth-tappuah  (Josh.  xv.  53).  It  was  not  known 
to  Eusebius  ami  Jeron  [anw  "  i, 


JAPHIA 


929 


nor  does  it  appear  to  have  been  yet  met  with  by 
any  modern  investigator.  [G.J 

JA'PHETH  (flBI ;  'IdQed ;   Japheth),  one  of 

the  three  sons  of  Noah.  From  the  order  in  which 
their  names  invariably  occur  (Gen.  v.  32,  vi.  In) 
we  should  naturally  infer  that  Japheth  was  the 
youngest,  but  we  learn  from  ix.  24  that  Ham  held 
that  position,  and  the  precedence  of  Japheth  before 
this  one  of  the  three  is  indicated  in  the  order  of  the 
names  in  x.  2,  6.  It  has  been  generally  supposed 
from  x.  21  that  Japheth  was  the  eldest;  but  it 
should  be  observed  that  the  word  gadol  in  that 
passage  is  better  connected  with  "  brother,"  as  in 
the  Vulg.  "  fratre  Japhet  majore."  Not  only  does 
the  usage  of  the  Hebrew  language  discountenance 
the  other  construction,  but  the  sense  of  the  passage 
requires  that  the  age  of  Shem  rather  than  of 
Japheth  should  be  there  specified.  We  infer  there- 
fore that  Japheth  was  the  second  son  of  Noah. 
The  origin  of  the  name  is  referred  by  the  sacred 
writer  to  the  root  pathah  (PIDS),  "  to  extend,"  as 
predictive  of  the  wide  spread  of  his  descendants 
over  the  northern  and  western  regions  of  the  world 
(Gen.  ix.  27).  The  name  has  also  been  referred 
to  the  root  yaphah  (nQ*1),  "  to  be  fair,"  as  signifi- 
cant of  the  light  complexion  of  the  Japhetic  races 
(Gesenius,  Thcs.  p.  1138;  Knobel,  Volkert.  p.  22). 
From  the  resemblance  of  the  name  to  the  mytho- 
logical Iapetus,  some  writers  have  sought  to  esta- 
blish a  connexion  between  them.  Iapetus  was 
regarded  by  the  Greeks  as  the  ancestor  of  the 
human  race.  The  descendants  of  Japheth  occupied 
the  "isles  of  the  Gentiles"  (Gen.  x.  5),  i.  e.  the 
coast-lands  of  the  Mediterranean  Sea  in  Europe  anil 
Asia  Minor,  whence  they  spread  northwards  over 
the  whole  continent  of  Europe  and  a  considerable 
portion  of  Asia.  [W.  L.  B.] 

JAPHIA  (JPB*:  Qayyai;  Alex,  'lacpayai : 
Japhie).  The  boundary  of  Zebulun  ascended  from 
Daberath  to  Japhia,  and  thence  passed  to  Gath- 
hepher  (Josh.  xix.  12).  Daberath  appears  to  be  on 
the  slopes  of  Mount  Tabor,  ami  Gath-hepher  may 
possibly  be  cl-Mcshhad,  2  miles  N.  of  Nazareth. 
Six  miles  W.  of  the  former,  and  2  miles  S.  of 
Nazareth,  is  Yafa.*  which  is  not  unlikely  to  lie 
identical  with  Japhia  (Rob.  ii.  343-4):  at  least 
this  is  much  more  probable  than  Chaifa  (Sycamino- 
polis)  in  the  bay  of  Akka — the  suggestion  of  Euse- 
bius (Ononvist.  "  Iapheth"), and  endorsed  by  Reland 
{Pal.  82G) — an  identification  which  is  neither  ety- 
mologically  nor  topographically  admissible.  Yafa 
may   also   be  the   same   with    the  'la<pd   which  was 

occupied  by  Josephus  during  his  struggle  with  the 
Romans — "a  very  large  village  of  l.ower  Galilee, 
fortified  with  walls  ami  full  of  people"  (  Vita,  §45  ; 
comp.  37,  and  /.'../.  ii.  20,  §6),  of  whom  15,000 
were  killed  and  2130  taken  prisoners  by  the  Romans 
(/;../.  iii.  7,  §.".l):  though  if  Jefat  be  Jotapata 

this  can  hardly  lie,  as  the  two  are  more  than  ten 
miles  apait,  and  he  expressly  says  that  they  were 
i  to  eai  li  other. 
A  tradition,  which  first  appears  in  Sir  John 
Maundeville,  makes  Yafa  the  birthplace  of  Ze- 
bedee  and  of  the  Apostles  dames  and  John,  his 
sons.     Hence  it   i->  called   by  the  Latin  monks  of 

»  It  should  be  remarked  that   Pa/a,  Lil_>,    is    th< 

modern  representative  ol  both  13*.  <■  '•  Joppa,  and 
y*Q\  Japhia,  two  nann  -  originallj  vi  n  distinct. 


930 


JAPHIA 


Nazareth  "  San  Giacomo."  See  Quarosmius,  Elu- 
cidatio,  ii.  843;  and  Early  Tram.  186:  Maunde- 
ville  calls  it  the  '*  Castle  of  Saffra."  So  too  Von 
Harff,  a.d.  1498  :  —  "  Saft'ra,  eyn  casteel  van 
wylchem'e  Alpheus  und  Sebedeus  geboren  vvaren " 
(Pilgerfahri,  195).  [G.] 

JAPHI'A  (J?>C> :  'UtpBa;  Alex,  'lafae;  Ja- 
phia). 1.  King  ofLachish  at  the  time  of  the  conquest 
of  Canaan  by  the  Israelites  (Josh.  x.  3) ;  one  of  the 
live  "  kings  of  the  Amorites  "  who  entered  into  a 
confederacy  against  Joshua,  and  who  were  defeated 
at  Beth-horon,  and  lost  their  lives  at  Makkedah. 
The  king  of  Lachish  is  mentioned  more  than  once 
in  this  narrative  (ver.  5,  23),  but  his  name  occurs 
only  as  above. 

2.  ('levies,  'la(pie;  Alex.  'Acpie:  Japhia).  One 
of  the  sons  of  David,  tenth  of  the  fourteen  born  to 
him  by  his  wives  after  his  establishment  in  Jeru- 
salem (2  Sam.  v.  15;  1  Ghr.  in.  7,  xiv.  6).  In 
the  Hebrew  form  of  this  name  there  are  no  varia- 
tions. The  Peshito  has  Nephia,  and,  in  1  Chr. 
iii.,  Nepheg.  In  the  list  given  by  Josephus  {Ant. 
vii.  3,  §3)  it  is  not  recognizable :  it  may  be 
'}\vva<p7]v,  Or  it  may  be  'leva.4.  There  do  not 
appear  to  be  any  traditions  concerning  Japhia.  The 
genealogy  is  given  under  David,  p.  409.       [G.] 

JAPH'LET  (L&S»:  'lacpK-hr ;  Alex.  'la<pa- 
\tjt  :  Jephlai),  a  descendant  of  Asher  through 
Bei iah,  his  youngest  sou;  named  as  the  father  of 
three  Bene-Japhlet  (1  Chr.  vii.  32,  33). 

JAPHLE'TI  CP^n  =  "  the  Japhletite  :" 
'ATrraXi/x  ;  Alex,  rov  'le<pa\6i:  Jephleti).  The 
"  boundary  of  the  Japhletite  "  is  one  of  the  land- 
marks on  the  south  boundary-line  of  Ephraim 
(Josh.  xvi.  3),  west  of  Beth-horon  the  lower,  and 
between  it  and  Ataroth.  Who  "  the  Japhletite  " 
was  who  is  thus  perpetuated  we  cannot  ascertain. 
Possibly  the  name  preserves  the  memory  of  some 
ancient  tribe  who  at  a  remote  age  dwelt  on  these 
hills,  just  as  the  former  presence  of  other  tribes  in 
the  neighbourhood  may  lie  inferred  from  the  names 
of  Zemaraim,  Ophni  (the  Ophnite),  Cephar  ha- 
Ammonai,  and  others.  [Benjamin,  p.  188  note.~\ 
We  can  hardly  suppose  any  connexion  with  J  APHLB T 
of  the  remote  Asher.  No  trace  of  the  name  has  yet 
been  discovered  in  the  district.  [G.] 

JA'PHO  ('IS*:  'Umrrf.  Joppc).  This  word 
occurs  in  the  A.  V.  but  once,  Josh.  xix.  46.  It  is  the 
accurate  representation  of  the  Hebrew  word  which  on 
its  other  occurrences  is  rendered  in  the  better  known 
form  of JOPPA  (2  Chr.  ii.  16  ;  Ezr.  iii.  7  ;  Jon.  i.  3). 

In  its  modern  garb  it  is  Yafa  (\JLj),  which  is  also 

the  Arabic  name  of  jArniA,  a  very  dirlerent  word 
in  Hebrew.     [Joppa  ;  Joppe.] 

JA'EAH  (rnj?\  and  in  some  MSS.  mjT  ; 
'Ia5a :  Jara),  a  man  among  the  descendants  of 
Saul ;  son  of  Micah,  and  great-grandson  of  Merib- 
baal,  or  Mephibosheth  (1  Chr.  ix.  42,  comp.  40). 
In  the  parallel  list  of  ch.  viii.  the  name  is  mate- 
rially altered  to  Jehoadaii. 

JA'EEB  (3T:  'lapel/*,  as  if  DT,  in  bothHos. 
v.  13  ;urdx.  6;a  though  Theodoiet  gives  'Iapei/3  in 
the  former  passage,  and  "iapei/x  in  the  latter ;  and 
Jerome  has  Jarib  for  the  Greek  equivalent  of  the 


JAREB 

LXX.)  is  either  to  be  explained  as  the  proper  name 
of  a  country  or  person,  as  a  noun  in  apposition,  or 
as  a  verb  from  a  root  2-11,  rub,  "  to  contend,  plead." 
All  these  senses  are  represented  in  the  A.  V.  and 
the  marginal  readings,  and,  as  has  been  not  un- 
frequently  the  case,  the  least  preferable  has  been 
inserted  in  the  text.  Had  Jareb  been  the  proper 
name  of  the  king  of  Assyria,  as  it  would  be  if  this 
rendering  were  correct,  the  word  preceding  CJ|?f3, 
melee,  "  king  ")  would  have  required  the  article. 
K.  D.  Kimchi  saw  this  difficulty,  and  therefore  ex- 
plained Jareb  as  the  name  of  some  city  of  Assyria, 
or  as  another   name  of   the  country   itself.     The 

Syriac  gives  «-2>i-A,  ydrob,  as  the  name  of  a  coun- 
try, which  is  applied  by  Ephrem  Syrus  to  Egypt, 
reference  being  made  to  Hoshea  king  of  Israel,  who 
had  sent  to  So  the  king  of  Egypt  for  assistance  in 
his  conspiracy  against  Shalmanezer  (2  K.  xvii.  4). 
So  also  the  'lapeifi  or  'lapeifj.  of  Theodoret  is 
Egypt.  The  clause  in  which  it  occurs  is  supposed 
by  many  to  refer  to  Judah,  in  order  to  make  the 
parallelism  complete;  and  with  this  in  view  Jarchi 
interprets  it  of  Ahaz,  who  sent  to  Tiglath-I'ileser 
(2  K.  xvi.  S)  to  aid  him  against  the  combined 
forces  of  Syria  and  Israel.  But  there  is  no  reason 
to  suppose  that  the  two  clauses  do  not  both  refer 
to  Ephraim,  and  the  allusion  would  then  be,  as 
explained  by  Jerome,  to  Pul,  who  was  subsidized 
by  Menahem  (2  K.  xv.  19),  and  Judah  would  be 
indirectly  included.  The  rendering  of  the  Vulgate, 
"avenger"  ("ad  regem  ultorem  "),  which  follows 
Symmachus,  as  well  as  those  of  Aquila  (Siwafo- 
fitvov)  and  Theodotion,  "  judge,"  are  justified  by 
Jerome  by  a  reference  to  Jerubbaal,  the  name  of 
Gideon,  which  he  renders  "  ulciscatur  se  Baal,"  or 
" judicet  eum  Baal,"  "let  Baal  avenge  himself," 
or  "  let  Baal  judge  him."  b  The  Targumist  evi- 
dently looked  upon  it  as  a  verb,  the  apocopated 
future  Hiphil  of  2-1"l,  rub,  and  translated  the 
clause,  "  and  sent  to  the  king  that  he  might  come 
to  avenge  them."  If  it  be  a  Hebrew  word,  it  is 
most  probably  a  noun  formed  from  the  above-men- 
tioned root,  like  3^T,  yarib  (Is.  xlix.  25 ;  Ps. 
xxxv.  1),  and  is  applied  to  the  land  of  Assyria,  or 
to  its  king,  not  in  the  sense  in  which  it  is  under- 
stood in  the  Targum,  but  as  indicating  their  deter- 
mined hostility  to  Israel,  and  their  generally  ag- 
gressive character.  Cocceius  had  this  idea  before 
him  when  he  translated  "rex  adversarius."  Michaelis 
(Suppl.  ad  Lex.  Heb.),  dissatisfied  with  the  usual 
explanations,  looked  for  the  true  meaning  of  Jareb 

in  the  Syriac  root  «,^i->>,  ircb,    "  to   be  great," 

and  for  "king  Jareb"  substituted  "the  great 
king,"  a  title  frequently  applied  to  the  kings  oi 
Assyria.  If  it  were  the  proper  name  of  a  place,  he 
says  it  would  denote  that  of  a  castle  or  palace  in 
which  the  kings  of  Assyria  resided.  But  of  this 
there  can  be  no  proof,  the  name  has  not  descended 
to  us,  and  it  is  better  to  take  it  in  a  symbolical 
sense  as  indicating  the  hostile  character  of  Assyria. 
That  it  is  rather  to  be  applied  to  the  country  than 
to  the  king  may  be  inferred  from  its  standing  in 
parallelism  with  Asshur.  Such  is  the  opinion  of 
burst  {Handic.  s.  v.),  who  illustrates  the  symbolical 
usage  by  a  comparison  with   Rahab  as   applied  to 


a  As  an  instance  of  the  contrary,  see   NcftjwS  for 
Nimrod. 


h  In   another   place   he   iiives   "  Jarib ;   dijudicans, 
vcl  ulciscens"  (de  num.  Ilebr.). 


JARED 

Egypt.  At  the  same  time  he  hazards  a  conjecture 
that  it  may  have  been  an  old  Assyrian  word, 
adopted  into  the  Hebrew  language,  and  so  modified 
as  to  express  an  intelligible  idea,  while  retaining 
something  of  its  original  form.  Hitzig  (die  12  Id. 
l'ruph.)  goes  further,  and  finds  in  a  mixed  dialect, 
akin  to  the  Assyrian,  a  verb  jarbam,  which  denotes 
"  to  struggle  or  fight,"  and  jarbech,  the  Aethiopic 
for  "a  hero  or  bold  warrior;"  but  it  would  be 
desirable  to  have  more  evidence  on  the  point. 

Two  mystical  interpretations,  alluded  to  by 
Jerome  as  cm-rent  among  commentators  in  his 
time,  are  remarkable  for  the  singularly  opposite 
conclusions  at  which  they  arrived ;  the  one  re- 
ferring the  word  to  the  devil,  the  other  to  Christ. 
Rivetus  (([noted  by  Glassius,  Fhilol.  Sacr.  iv.  tr.  3) 
was  of  opinion  that  the  title  Jareb  or  "  avenger" 
was  assumed  by  the  powerful  king  of  Assyria,  as 
that  of  "  Defender  of  the  Faith"  by  our  own 
monarchs.  •       [\V.  A.  \V.] 

JAR/ED  (TV,  i.  c.  Jered,  as  the  name  is  given 
in  A.V.  of  Chron.,  but  in  pause  TV,  from  which 
tlie  present  form  may  have  been  derived,  though 
more  probably  from  the  Vulgate:  IdpeS,  Alex,  also 
IapeT  ;  N.  T.  'lapeS  and  'ldped ;  Joseph.  'Iape'Srjs : 
Jural),  one  of  the  antediluvian  patriarchs,  the  fifth 
from  Adam  ;  son  of  Mahalaleel,  and  father  of  Enoch 
(Gen.  v.  15,  16,  18,  19,  20;  Luke  iii.  37).  In 
the  lists  of  Chronicles  the  name  is  given  in  the 
A.  V.  Jered. 

JARESI'AH  (rVCnjr  :  'lapcuria :  Jersia),  a 

Benjamite,  one  of  the  Bene-Jeroham ;  a  chief  man 
of  his  tribe,  but  of  whom  nothing  is  recorded 
(I  Chr.  viii.  27). 

JAR'HA  (J7ITV :  'I^x^A :  Jcraa),  the  Egyp- 
tian servant  of  Sheshan,  about  the  time  of  Eli,  to 
whom  his  master  gave  his  daughter  and  heir  in 
marriage,  and  who  thus  became  the  founder  of  a 
chief  house  of  the  Jerahmeelites,  which  continued  at 
least  to  the  time  of  king  Hezekiah,  and  from  which 
sprung  several  illustrious  persons3  such  as  Zabad 
in  the  reign  of  David,  and  Azariah  in  the  reign  of 
Joash  ( 1  Chr.  ii.  31,  sqq.).  [Azariah  13;  Za- 
BAD.]  It  is  a  matter  of  somewhat  curious  inquiry 
what  was  tin;  name  of  Jarha's  wife.  In  ver.  31 
we  read  "  the  children  of  Sheshan,  Ahlai,"  and  in 
ver.  34,  "  Sheshan  had  no  sons  but  daughters."  In 
ver.  35,  Sheshan's  daughter  "  bare  him  Attai," 
whose  grandson  was  Zabad;  and  in  ch.  xi.  41, 
••  Zabad  tin  son  of  Ahlai."  Hence  some  have  ima- 
gined that  Jailia  mi  his  marriage  with  Sheshan's 
daughter  had  the  name  of  Ahlai  (interpreted  a  •■  bro- 
ther-to-me")  given  him  by  Sheshan,  to  signify  his 
adoption  into  Israel.  Others  thai  Ahlai  and  Attai 
arc  merely  clerical  variations  of  the  same  name. 
Others  that  Aldai  was  a  son  of  Sheshan,  bom  after 
the  marriage  of  his  daughter.  But  the  view  which 
the  A.  V.  adopts,  as  appears  by  their  rendering 
'C  *J3  in  ver.  .".1.  the  children  of  Sheshan,  instead 
of  sons,  is  undoubtedly  the  right  one,  viz.  that 
Ahlai  is  the  name  of  Sheshan's  daughter.  Her  de- 
scendants were  called  after  her,  just  as  Joab,  and 
Abishai,  and  Asahel,  were  always  called  "the  sons 
of  Zcruiah,"  and  as  Abigail  stands  at  the  head  of 
Amasa's   pedigree,    1   Chr.  ii . .IT.     It   may  be  no- 


JARMUTH 


931 


a  Bertheau's  remark,  that  none  of  the  persons 
named  in  this  long  genealogy  recur  elsewhere,  is 
singularly  misplaced. 


ticed  as  an  undesigned  coincidence  that  Jarha  the 
Egyptian  was  living  with  Sheshan,  a  Jerahmeelite, 
and  that  the  Jerahmeelites  had  their  possessions  on 
the  side  of  Judah  nearest  to  Egypt,  1  Sam.  xxvii. 
lU;  comp.  2  Sam.  xxiii.  20,  21  ;  Josh.  xv.  21 ;  1  Chr. 
iv.  18.  [Jerahmeel  ;  Jehudijah.]  The  etymo- 
logy of  Jarha's  name  is  quite  unknown  (Gesen. 
Tlws.;  Fiirst,  Concord.  &c. ;  Burrington's  Geneal.; 
Beeston,  Geneal.;  Hervey's  Geneal.,  p.  34;  Ber- 
theau,  on  1  Chr.  ii.  24,  &c).  [A.  C.  H.] 

JA'RIB  (3*V  :  'lapifr;  Alex.  'lapelQ:  Jarib). 
1.  Named  in  the  list  of  1  Chr.  iv.  24  only,  as  a  son 
of  Simeon.  He  occupies  the  same  place  as  Jaciiin 
in  the  parallel  lists  of  Gen.  xlvi.,  Ex.  vi.,  and  Num. 
xxvi.,  and  the  name  is  possibly  a  corruption  from 
that  (see  Burlington,  i.  55). 

2.  One  of  the  "chief  men"  (D^'Nl,  "  heads") 
who  accompanied  Ezra  on  his  journey  from  Babylon 
to  Jerusalem  (Ezr.  viii.  1(1),  whether  Levite  or 
layman  is  not  clear.  In  1  Esdras  the  name  is  given 
as  Joriisas. 

3.  A  priest  of  the  house  of  Jeshua  the  son  of 
Jozadak,  who  had  married  a  foreign  wife,  and  was 
compelled  by  Ezra  to  put  her  away  (Ezr.  x.  18). 
In  1  Esdras  the  name  is  Jorihus. 

4.  ('lapifi;  Alex.  'Iwapifr:  1  Mace.  xiv.  29). 
A  contraction  or  corruption  of  the  name  Joarik, 
which  occurs  correctly  in  ch.  ii.  1. 

JAR'IMOTH  ('lapiixdbe:  Larimoth),  1  Esd. 
ix.  28.     [Jeremoth.] 

JAR'MUTH  (WOT*  :  Jarimuth).  1.  ('Upi- 
fiovd ;  Alex.  'Ipi/xovQ.)  A  town  in  the  Shefelah  or 
low  country  of  Judah,  named  with  Adullam,  Socoh, 
and  others  (Josh.  xv.  35).  Its  king,  Piram,  was 
one  of  the  five  who  conspired  to  punish  Gibeon  for 
having  made  alliance  with  Israel  (Josh.  x.  3,  5), 
and  who  were  routed  at  Bethhoron  and  put  to  death 
by  Joshua  at  Makkedah  (23).  In  this  narrative, 
and  also  in  the  catalogue  of  the  "  royal  cities " 
destroyed  by  Joshua,  Jarmuth  is  named  next  to 
Hebron,  which,  however,  was  quite  in  the  moun- 
tains. In  Neh.  xi.  29  it  is  named  as  having  been 
the  residence  of  some  of  the  children  of  Judah  after 
the  return  from  captivity.  Eusebius  and  Jerome 
either  knew  two  places  of  this  name,  or  an  error 
has  crept  into  the  text  of  the  Onomasticon ;  for 
under  "  Jarimuth  "  they  state  it  to  be  near  Eshtaol, 
4  miles  from  Eleutberopolis ;  while  under"  Jirmus" 
they  give  it  as  10  miles  from  Eleutberopolis,  on 
the  road  going  up  to  Jerusalem.  A  site  named 
Tarmuk,  with  a  contiguous  eminence  called  7c//- 
ErmUd,  was  visited  by  Robinson  (ii.  17),  and  Van 
do  Velde  (ii.  193;  Memoir,  324).  It  is  about 
1^  mile  from  Beit-netif,  which  again  is  some 
,s  miles  from  Beit-gibrin,  on  the  left  of  tic  road  to 
Jerusalem.  Shuweikeh  (the  ancient  Socoh)  lies  on 
a  neighbouring  hill.  We  have  yet  to  discover  the 
principles  on  which  the  topographical  divisions  of 
the  ancient  Hebrews  were  made.  Was  the  She- 
felah— the"  Low  country" — a  district  which  took 
its  designation  from  the  plain  which  formed  its 
major  portion,  but  which  extended  over  ome  of  the 
bill-country?  In  the  hill-country  Jarmuth  is  un- 
doubtedly situated,  though  specified  as  in  tie'  plain. 
'.  has  been  la-t  visited  by  Tobler  (3We  Wan- 
,120, 
2.  (y  'Pefifidd ;  Alex. 'Ifp/xwO).  A  city  of  [ssa- 
ehar,  allotted  with  its  suhurhs  to  the  ( ierslionite 
Levites  (Josh,  xxi.  29).     In  the  specification  of  the 


032 


JAROAH 


boundaries  of  Issachar,  no  mention  is  made  of  Jar- 
muth  (see  Josh.  xix.  17-23),  l>ut  a  REMETH  is  men- 
tioned there  (20) ;  and  in  the  duplicate  list  of 
Levitical  cities  (1  Chr,  vi.  73)  Ramoth  occupies 
the  place  of  Jarmuth.  The  two  names  are  modi- 
fications of  the  same  root,  and  might  without  diffi- 
culty be  interchanged.  This  Jarmuth  does  not  ap- 
pear to  have  been  yet  identified.  [Ramoth.]    [G.] 

JAROAH  (nh'1 :  'l5of;  Alex.  'ASai:  Jam), 
a  chief  man  of  the  tribe  of  Gad  (1  Chr.  v.  14). 

JA'SAEL  (Jla(Tarj\os  ;  Alex.  'AffafjAos  :  Aza- 
bus),  1  Esd.  ix.  30.     [Sheal.] 

JA'SHEN  (ffi :  'A<rai/:  Jaseri).  Bene- Jashen 

— "  sons  of  Jashen  " — are  named  in  the  catalogue 
of  the  heroes  of  David's  guard  in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  32. 
In  the  Hebrew,  as  accented  by  the  Masorets,  the 
words  have  no  necessary  connexion  with  the  names 
preceding  or  following  them  ;  but  in  the  A.  V.  they 
are  attached  to  the  latter — "  of  the  sons  of  Jashen, 
Jonathan."  The  passage  has  every  appearance  of 
being  imperfect,  and  accordingly,  in  the  parallel  list 
in  Chronicles,  it  stands,  "  the  sons  of  Hashem  the 
Gizonite"  (1  Chr.  xi.  34).  Kennicott  has  examined 
it  at  length  (Dissertation,  198-203),  and,  on  grounds 
which  cannot  here  be  stated,  has  shown  good  cause 
for  believing  that  a  name  has  escaped,  and  that  the 
genuine  text  was,  "  of  the  Bene-Hashem,  Gouni ; 
Jonathan  ben-Shamha."  In  the  list  given  by  Jerome 
in  his  Quaestiones  Hebraicae,  Jashen  and  Jonathan 
are  both  omitted. 

JA'SHER,  BOOK  OF  (l^n  "IDD),  or,  as 

the  margin  of  the  A.  V.  gives  it,  "the  book  of  the 
upright,"  a  record  alluded  to  in  two  passages  only 
of  the  0.  T.  (Josh.  x.  13,  and  2  Sam.  i.  18),  and 
consequently  the  subject  of  much  dispute.  The 
former  passage  is  omitted  in  the  LXX.,  while  in 
the  latter,  the  expression  is  rendered  (Sifihiov  rov 
evdovs  :  the  Vulgate  has  liber  justorum  in  both  in- 
stances. The  Peshito  Syriac  in  Josh,  has  "  the 
book  of  praises  or  hymns,"  reading  T'EJ'n  for 
*lB"n,  and  a  similar  transposition  will  account  for 
the  rendering  of  the  same  version  in  Sam.,  "  the 
book  of  Ashir."  The  Targum  interprets  it  "  the 
book  of  the  law,"  and  this  is  followed  by  Jarchi,  who 
gives,  as  the  passage  alluded  to  in  Joshua,  the  pro- 
phecy of  Jacob  with  regard  to  the  future  greatness 
of  Ephraim  (Gen.  xlviii.  19),  which  was  fulfilled 
when  the  sun  stood  still  at  Joshua's  bidding.  The 
same  Rabbi,  in  his  commentary  on  Samuel,  refers 
to  Genesis  "  the  book  of  the  upright,  Abraham, 
Isaac,  and  Jacob,"  to  explain-  the  allusion  to  the 
book  of  .lasher  ;  and  Jerome,  while  discussing  the 
etymology  of  Israel,"  which  he  interprets  as  "  rectus 
Dei,"  rl  incidentally  mentions  the  tact  that  Genesis 
was  called  "  the  book  of  the  just "  (liber  Genesis 
appellator  evd^cav,  id  est,  justorum),  from  its 
containing  the  histories  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and 
Israel  (Comm.  in  Jes.  xliv.  2).  The  Talmudists 
attribute  this  tradition  to  11.  Johanan.  R.  Eliezer 
thought  that  by  the  book  of  Jasher  was  signified 
the  book  of  Deuteronomy  from  the  expressions  in 
Deut.  vi.  18,  xxxiii.  7,  the  latter  being  quoted  in 
proof  of  the  skill  of  the  Hebrews  in  archery.  In 
the  opinion  of  R.  Samuel  ben  Nachman,  the  book  of 
Judges  was  alluded  to  as  the  book  of  Jasher  (Aboda 


*  Dr.  Donaldson  had  overlooked  this  passage  when 
n.  asserted  that  his  own  analysis  of  the  word  "Israel" 


JASHER,  BOOK  OF 

Zara,  c.  ii.)  ;  and  that  it  was  the  book  of  the 
twelve  minor  prophets  was  held  by  some  Hebrew 
writers,  quoted  without  name  by  Sixtus  Senensis 
(Bibl.  Sanct.  lib.  ii.).  R.  Levi  ben  Gershom  re- 
cognises, though  he  does  not  follow,  the  tradition 
given  by  Jarchi,  while  Kimchi  and  Abarbanel  adopt 
the  rendering  of  the  Targum.  This  diversity  of 
opinions  proves,  if  it  prove  nothing  more,  that  no 
book  was  known  to  have  survived  which  could  lay 
claim  to  the  title  of  the  book  of  Jasher. 

Josephus,  in  relating  the  miracle  narrated  in 
Joshua  x.,  appeals  for  confirmation  of  his  account 
to  certain  documents  deposited  in  the  Temple  (Ant. 
v.  1,  §17),  and  his  words  are  supposed  to  contain 
a  covert  allusion  to  the  book  of 'Jasher  as  the  source 
of  his  authority.  But  in  his  treatise  against  Apion 
(B.  I.)  he  says  the  Jews  did  not  possess  myriads 
of  books,  discordant  and  contradictory,  but  twenty- 
two  only ;  from  which  Abicht  concludes  that  tin- 
books  of  Scripture  were  the  sacred  books  hinted  at 
in  the  foiTner  passage,  while  Masius  understood  by 
the  same  the  Annals  which  were  written  by  the 
prophets  or  by  the  royal  scribes.  Theodoret  (  Quai <gt 
xiv.  in  Jcsum  Nave)  explains  the  words  in  Josh, 
x.  13,  which  he  quotes  as  to  fiifixiov  rb  evpedev 
(prob.  an  error  for  evOh,  as  he  has  in  Quaest.  iv. 
in  2  Reg.),  as  referring  to  the  ancient  record  from 
which  the  compiler  of  the  book  of  Joshua  derived  the 
materials  of  his  history,  and  applies  the  passage  in 
2  Sam.  ii.  18  to  prove  that  other  documents,  written 
by  the  prophets,  were  made  use  of  in  the  composi- 
tion of  the  historical  books.  Jerome,  or  rather  the 
author  of  the  Quaestiones  Hebraicae,  understood  by 
the  book  of  Jasher  the  books  of  Samuel  themselves, 
inasmuch  as  they  contained  the  history  of  the  just 
prophets,  Samuel,  Gad,  and  Nathan.  Another  opi- 
nion, quoted  by  Sixtus  Senensis,  but  on  no  autho- 
rity, that  it  was  the  book  of  eternal  predestination, 
is  scarcely  worth  more  than  the  bare  mention. 

That  the  book  of  Jasher  was  one  of  the  writings 
which  perished  in  the  captivity  was  held  by  R. 
Levi  ben  Gershom,  though  he  gives  the  traditional 
explanation  above  mentioned.  His  opinion  has  been 
adopted  by  Junius,  Hottinger  (Thes.  Phil.  ii.  2, 
§2),  and  many  other  modern  writers  (Wolfii  Bibl. 
Heb.  ii.  223).  What  the  nature  of  the  book  may 
have  been  can  only  be  inferred  from  the  two  pas- 
sages in  which  it  is  mentioned  and  their  context, 
and,  this  being,the  case,  there  is  clearly  wide  room 
for  conjecture.  The  theory  of  Masius  (quoted  by 
Abicht)  was,  that  in  ancient  times  whatever  was 
worthy  of  being  recorded  for  the  instruction  of  pos- 
terity, was  written  in  the  form  of  Annals  by 
learned  men,  and  that  among  these  Annals  or  records 
was  the  book  of  Jasher,  so  called  from  the  trust- 
worthiness and  methodical  arrangement  of  the  nar- 
rative, or  because  it  contained  the  relation  of  the 
deeds  of  the  people  of  Israel,  who  are  elsewhere 
spoken  of  under  the  symbolical  name  Jeshurun. 
Of  the  later  hypothesis  Fiirst  approves  (I Linda- . 
s.  v.).  Sanctius  (Coram,  ad  2  Keg.  i.)  conjectured 
that  it  was  a  collection  of  pious  hymns  written  by 
different  authors  and  sung  on  various  occasions,  and 
that  from  this  collection  the  Psalter  was  compiled. 
That  it  was  written  in  verse  may  reasonably  be  in- 
ferred from  the  only  specimens  extant,  which  exhibit 
unmistakeable  signs  of  metrical  rhythm,  but  that 
it  took  its  name  from  this  circumstance  is  not  sup- 
ported by  etymology.     Lowth,  indeed  (Prael.  pp. 


had  hitherto  escaped  the  notice  of  all  commentator! 
[Jashar,  p.  23). 


JASHEli,  BOOK  OF 

306,  307),  imagined  that  it  was  a  collection  of  na- 
tional songs,  so  called  because  it  probably  com- 
menced with  Tt^11  TN,  az  yashir,  "  then  sang,  &c," 

like  the   song  of  Moses  in  Ex.  xv.  1  ;  his  view  of 
the  question  was  that  of  the  Syriac  and  Arabic 
translators,    and    was    adopted    by    Herder.      But, 
granting  that  the  form  of  the  book  was  poetical,  a 
difficulty  still  remains  as  to  its  subject.     That  the 
book    of   Jasher   contained    the   deeds    of  national 
heroes  of  all  ages  embalmed  in  verse,  among  which 
David's  lament  over  Saul  and  Jonathan  had  an  ap- 
propriate place,   was  the  opinion  of  Calovius.     A 
fragment  of  a  similar  kind  is  thought  to  appear  in 
Num.  xxi.  14.     Gesenius  conjectured  that  it   was 
an  anthology  of  ancient  songs,  which  acquired  its 
name,    "  the  book  of  the  just  or   upright,"   from 
being  written  in  praise  of  upright  men.    He  quotes, 
but   dees    nut   approve,   the   theory  of  Illgen  that, 
like  the  Hamasa  of  the   Arabs,  it  celebrated  the 
achievements  of  illustrious  warriors,  and  from  this 
derived  the  title  of  "  the  book  of  valour."     But 
the  idea  of  warlike  valour  is  entirely  foreign  to  the 
mot '  i/i'isJun-.     Dupin  contended  from    2    Sam.  i. 
IS,  that  the  contents  of  the  book  were  of  a  military 
nature;  but  Montanus,  regarding  rather  the  etymo- 
logy,   considered    it   a    collection   of  political    and 
mural    precepts.      Abicht,    taking   the    lament   of 
David  as  a  sample  of  the  whole,  maintained  that 
the  fragment  quoted  in   the  book  of  Joshua  was 
part  of  a  funeral  ode  composed  upon  the  death  of 
that  hero,  and  narrating  his  achievements.     At  the 
same  time  he  does  not  conceive  it  necessary  to  sup- 
pose that  one  book  only  is  alluded  to  in  both  in- 
stances.    It  must  be  admitted,  however,  that  there 
is   very  slight  ground  for  any  conclusion  beyond 
that  which  affects  the  form ,  and  that  nothing  can 
he  confidently  asserted  with  regard  to  the  contents. 
But,  though  conjecture  might  almost  be  thought 
to  have  exhausted  itself  on  a  subject  so  barren  of 
premises,  a  scholar  of  our  own  day  has  not  despaired 
of  being  able,  not  only  to  decide  what  the  book  of 
Jasher  was  in  itself,  but  of  reconstructing  it  from 
the  fragments  which,  according   to  his  theory,  he 
throughout   the  several   books  of  the  0.  T. 
In  the  preface  to  his  Jashar,  or  Fragmenta  Arche- 
typa  Carminum  Hebraicorwm  in  Masorethico  Ve- 
tcris  Testamenti  textu  passim  tessellata,  Dr.  Don- 
aldson   advances   a   scheme  tin-  the  restoration  of 
this  ancient  record,  in  accordance  with  his  own  idea 
of  its  scope  and  contents.     Assuming  that,  during 
the  tranquil  and  prosperous  reign  of  Solomon,  an 
unwonted  impulse  was  given  to  Hebrew  literature, 
and  that   the  worshippers  of  Jehovah  were  desirous 
of  possessing  something  on  which  their  faith  might 
rest,  the  book  of  "Jashar,"  or  "  uprightness,"  lie 
asserts,  was  written,  or  rather  compiled,  to  meet 
this    want.      Its   object    was   to   show    that    in    the 

Ding    man    was    upright,    but     had    b] 
wisdom  forsaken  the  spiritual  law  ;  that  the  Israelites 
had  been  chosen  to  preserve  and  transmit  this  law 
of  uprightness ;  that  David  had  been  made  king  for 
his  religious  integrity,  leaving  the  kingdom  to  Ins 
o  i    olomon,  in  whose  reign,  after  the    I  • 
of  tlie  Temple,  the  prosperity  of  the  chosen  people 
reached  it.--  culminating  point.    The  com  pile,  of  the 
book   was    probably   Nathan  the  prophet,  assisted 
perhaps  by  Gad  the  seer,     h   was  thus  "the  first 
offspring  of  the  prophet       ehool     and    m 
spiritual  fool  to  the  greater  prophets."     i 
therefore,  the  authoritj   of  the   Masoretic  text,  :i^ 
founded  entirely  on  tradition,  and  adhering  to  hi- 


JASHER,  BOOK  OF 


933 


own  theory  of  the  origin  and  subject  of  the  book  of 
.lasher,  Dr.  Donaldson  proceeds  to  show  that  it 
contains  the  religious  marrow  of  Holy  Scripture. 
In  such  a  case,  of  course,  absolute  proof  is  not  to 
be  looked  for,  and  it  would  lie  impossible  here  to 
discuss  what  measure  of  probability  should  be 
assigned  to  a  scheme  elaborated  with  considerable 
ingenuity.  Whatever  ancient  fragments  in  the 
sacred  books  of  the  Hebrews  exhibit  the  nature 
of  uprightness,  celebrate  the  victories  of  the  true 
Israelites,  predict  their  prosperity,  or  promise  future 
blessedness,  have,  according  to  this  theory,  a  claim 
to  be  considered  among  the  relies  of  the  book  of 
Jasher.  Following  such  •  a  principle  of  selection, 
the  fragments  fall  into  seven  groups.  The  first 
part,  the  object  of  which  is  to  show  that  man  was 
created  upright  ("IK",  yushur),  but  fell  into  sin  by 
carnal  wisdom,  contains  two  fragments,  an  Elohistic 
and  a  Jehovistic,  both  poetical,  the  latter  being  the 
more  full.  The  first  of  these  includes  Gen.  i.  27, 
28,  vi.  1,  2,  4,  5,  viii.  21,  vi.  6,  3  ;  the  other  is 
made  up  of  Gen.  ii.  7-9,  15-18,  25,  hi.  1-19,  21, 
23,  2-1.  The  second  part,  consisting  of  four  frag- 
ments, shows  how  the  descendants  of  Abraham,  as 
being  upright  (DHCJ^,  yesharirri),  were  adopted  by 

God,  while  the  neighbouring  nations  were  rejected. 
Fragment  (1)  Gen.  ix.  18-27;  fragment  (2)  Gen. 
iv.  2-8,  8-16;  fragment  (3)  Gen.  xvi.  1-4,  15, 
1(3,  xvii.  9-16,  18-26,  xxi.  1-14,  20,  21  ;  fragment 
(4)  Gen.  xxv.  20-34,  xxvii.  1-10,  14,  18-20,  25- 
40,  iv.  18,  19,  xxvi.  34,  xxxvi.  2,  iv.  23,  24, 
xxxvi.  8,  xxviii.  9,  xxvi.  35,  xxvii.  46,  xxviii.  1-4, 
11-19,  xxix.  1,  &c,  24,  29,  xxxv.  22-26,  xxxiv. 
25-29,  xxxv.  9-14,  15,  xxxii.  31.  In  the  third 
part  is  related  under  the  figure  of  the  deluge  how 
the  Israelites  escaped  from  Egypt,  wandered  forty 
years  in  the  wilderness,  and  finally,  in  the  reign  of 
Solomon,  built  a  temple  to  Jehovah.  The  passages 
in  which  this  is  found  are  Gen.  vi.  5-14,  vii.  ii, 
11,  12,  viii.  6,  7,  viii.  8,  12,  v.  29,  viii.  4;  1  K. 
vi.  viii.  43;  Deut.  vi.  18  ;  Ps.  v.  8.  The  three 
fragments  of  the  fourth  part  contain  the  divine 
laws  to  be  observed  by  the  upright  people,  and  are 
found  (1)  Deut.  v.  1-22;  (2)  vi.  1-5;  Lev.  xix. 
18;  Deut.  x.  12-21,  xi.  1-5,  7-9;  (3)  viii.  1-3, 
vi.  6-18,  20-25.  The  blessings  of  the  upright  and 
their  admonitions  are  the  subject  of  the  fifth  part, 
which  contains  the  songs  of  Jacob  (Gen.  xlix.J, 
Balaam  (Num.  xxiii.  xxiv.),  and  Moses  (Deut. 
xxxii.  xxxiii.).  The  wonderful  victories  and  de- 
liverances of  Israel  are  celebrated  in  the  sixth  part, 
in  the  triumphal  songs  of  Moses  and  Miriam  |  Ex. 
xv.  1-19),  of  Joshua  (Josh.  x.  12-13),  and  of 
Deborah  (Judg.  v.  1-20).  .  The  seventh  is  a  collec- 
tion of  various  hymns  composed  in  the  reigns  of 
David  and  .'•olomon.  and  contains  David's  song  of 
triumph  over  Goliath  (1  Sam.  ii.  1-10) ;  his 
lament  for  Saul  and  Jonathan  (2  Sam.  i.  19-27;, 
a, id  for  Abler  (2  Sam.  iii.  33,  34);  his  psalm  of 
thanksgiving  (Ps.  xviii. ;  2  Sam.  xxii.);  his 
triumphal  ode  on  the  conquest  of  the  Edomites 
(Ps.  Ix.),  and  his  prophecy  ol  Messiah's  kingdom 
(2  Sam.  wiii.  1-7).  together  with  Solomon's  epi- 
thalamium  (Ps.  si  v.),  and  the  hymn  sung  at  the 
"ii  of  the  T.  mple  '  Ps.  Ixviii.). 
Aiirc  alts  of  I  his  arrange- 

ment, ~ lnin.  Ham,  and  Japhe)  are  no  Ion 
sons  of  Noah,  who  i^  Israel  under  a  figure,  but  of 
Adam  ;  and  the  circum  i  wees  of  Noah's  life  related 
q.  ix.    18-27  arc    transferred    to  the    latter. 
I  are  tie    sons  of  Shem,  Abraham  is 


934 


JASHOBEAM 


the  son  of  Abel,  and  Esau  becomes  Lamech  the  son 
of  Methuselah. 

There  are  also  extant,  under  the  title  of  "  the 
Book  of  Jasher,"  two  Rabbinical  works,  one  a 
moral  treatise,  written  in  a.d.  1394  by  R.  Shabba- 
tai  Carmuz  Levita,  of  which  a  copy  in  MS.  exists 
in  the  Vatican  Library;  the  other,  by  R.  Tham, 
treats  of  the  laws  of  the  Jews  in  eighteen  chapters, 
and  was  printed  in  Italy  in  1544,  and  at  Cracow  in 
1586.  An  anonymous  work,  printed  at  Venice  and 
Prague  in  1625,  and  said  to  have  made  its  first  ap- 
pearance at  Naples,  was  believed  by  some  Jews  to 
be  the  record  alluded  to  in  Joshua.  It  contains 
the  historical  narratives  of  the  Pentateuch,  Joshua, 
and  Judges,  with  many  fabulous  additions.  R.  Jacob 
translated  it  into  German,  and  printed  his  version 
at  Frankfort  on  the  Blaine  in  1674.  It  is  said  in 
the  preface  to  the  1st  ed.  to  have  been  discovered 
at  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  by  Sidrus,  one  of 
the  officers  of  Titus,  who,  while  searching  a  house 
for  the  purpose  of  plunder,  found  in  a  secret  cham- 
ber a  vessel  containing  the  books  of  the  Law,  the 
Prophets,  and  Hagiographa,  with  many  others,  which 
a  venerable  man  was  reading.  Sidrus  took  the  old 
man  under  his  protection  and  built  for  him  a  house 
at  Seville,  where  the  books  were  safely  deposited. 
The  book  in  question  is  probably  the  production  of 
a  Spanish  Jew  of  the  13th  century  (Abicht,  De 
libr.  Recti,  in  Thes.  Nov.  Theol.  Phil.  i.  525-534). 
A  clumsy  forgery  in  English,  which  first  appeared 
in  1751  under  the  title  of  "  the  Book  of  Jasher," 
deserves  notice  solely  for  the  unmerited  success 
with  which  it  was  palmed  off  upon  the  public.  It 
professed  to  be  a  translation  from  the  Hebrew  into 
English  by  Alcuin  of  Britain,  who  discovered  it  in 
Persia  during  his  pilgrimage.  It  was  reprinted  at 
Bristol  in  1827,  and  was  again  published  in  1833, 
in  each  case  accompanied  by  a  fictitious  com- 
mendatory note  by  WiclifFe.  [VV.  A.  \V.] 

JASHOBE'AM  (DJDE»  :    'lea-eflaSa  :    Jes- 

baani).  Possibly  one  and  the  same  follower  of  David, 
bearing  this  name,  is  described  as  a  Haehmunite 
(1  Chr.  xi.  11),  a  Korhite  (1  Chr.  xii.  6),  and  son 
of  Zabdiel  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  2).  He  came  to  David  at 
Ziklag.  His  distinguishing  exploit  was  that  he  slew 
300  (or  800,  2  Sam.  xxiiL  8)  men  at  one  time.  He 
is  named  first  among  the  chief  of  the  mighty  men 
of  David  (1  Chr.  xi.  11)  ;  and  he  was  set  over  the 
first  of  the  twelve  monthly  courses  of  24,000  men 
who  served  the  king  (xxvii.  2).  In  2  Sam  xxiii.  8, 
his  name  seems  to  be  erroneously  transcribed,  2C'1 
riZlL!,2  (A.  V.  "  that  sat  in  the  seat,"),  instead  of 
Dy^'1'  ;  and  in  the  same  place  "  Adino  the 
Eznite "  are  possibly  a  corruption  either  of 
irTOn-riN  Vpy,  "he  lift  up  his  spear"  (l  Chr. 
xi.  11),  or,  as  Gesenius  conjectures,  of  "IJ^yn  'W^y, 

which  he  translates,  "  he  shook  it,  even  his  spear." 
[Eznite.]  [W.  T.  B.] 

JAS'HUB  (MB*  ;  in  the  Cctib  of  1  Chr.  vii.  1 
it  is  ^W* ;  in  the  Samaritan  Cod.  of  Num.  xxvi. 
IW:  'laaoip-.  Jasub).  1.  The  third  son  of 
Issachar,  and  founder  of  the  family  of  the  Jashubites 
(Num.  xxvi.  24;  1  Chr.  vii.  1).  In  the  list  of 
Gen.  xlvi.  the  name  is  given  (possibly  in  a  con- 
tracted or  erroneous  form,  Gesen.  Thes.  583)  as 
Job  ;  but  in  the  Samaritan  Codex — followed  by  the 
LXX. — Jashub. 

2.  One  of  the  sons  of  Bani,  a  layman  in  the  time 


JASON 

of  Ezra  who  had  to  put  away  his  foreign  wife  (Ezr. 
x.  29).     In  Esdras  the  name  is  Jasubus. 

JASHU'BI-LE'HEM  (firb  ,'2K>\   in  some 

copies  v  ^3KM  :  Kal  airecrrpe^ev  avrovs,  in  both 
MSS.  :  ct  qui  reversi  sunt  in  Laherri),  a  person 
or  a  place  named  among  the  descendants  of  Shelah, 
the  son  of  Judafa  by  Bath-shua  the  Canaanitess 
(1  Chr.  iv.  22).  The  name  does  not  occur  again. 
It  is  probably  a  place,  and  we  should  infer  from 
its  connexion  with  Maresha  and  Chozeba — if  Cho- 
zeba  be  Chezib  or  Achzib — that  it  lay  on  the 
western  side  of  the  tribe,  in  or  near  the  Shefelah. 
The  Jewish  explanations  of  this  and  the  following 
verse  are  very  curious.  They  may  be  seen  in 
Jerome's  Quaest.  Hebr.  on  this  passage,  and,  in  a 
slightly  different  form,  in  the  Targum  on  the 
Chronicles  (ed.  Wilkins,  29,  30).  The  mention  of 
Moab  gives  the  key  to  the  whole.  Chozeba  is 
Elimelech ;  Joash  and  Saraph  are  Mahlon  and 
Chilion,  who  "  had  the  dominion  in  Moab"  from 
marrying  the  two  Moabite  damsels :  Jashubi-Lehem 
is  Naomi  and  .Ruth,  who  returned  (Jashubi,  from 
3-1ty>  "  t°  return")  to  bread,  or  to  Beth-lehem,  after 
the  famine:  and  the  "  ancient  words"  point  to  the 
book  of  Ruth  as  the  source  of  the  whole.         K*.] 

JASH'UBITES,  THE  (nt^n  ;  Samaritan, 
"Q^lTl  :  6  'laffovfil :  familia  Jasubitarum).  The 
family  founded  by  Jashub  the  son  of  Issachar  (Num. 
xxvi.  24).     [Jashub,  1.] 

JASI'EL  (^PfeflP  :  'Ieo-o-^A  ;  Alex.  'Eco-^A  : 
Jasiel),  the  last  named  on  the  increased  list  of 
David's  heroes  in  1  Chr.  xi.  47.  He  is  described  as 
the  Mesobaite.     Nothing  more  is  known  of  him. 

JA'SON  {'idffcov),  a  common  Greek  name  which 
was  frequently  adopted  by  HelleniziDg  Jews  as  the 
equivalent  of  Jesus,  Joshua  ('IijfroDs ;  comp.  Joseph. 
Ant.  xii.  5,  §l),a  probably  with  some  reference  to  its 
supposed  connexion  with  iacrdou  (».  e.  the  Healer). 
A  parallel  change  occurs  in  Alcimus  (Eliakim)  ; 
while  Nicolaus,  Dositheus,  Menelaus,  &c,  were 
direct  translations  of  Hebrew  names. 

1.  Jason  the  son  of  Eleazer  (cf.  Ecclus.  1. 
27,  'lycrovs  vlds  Sipax  'EAeafap,  Cod.  A.)  was 
one  of  the  commissioners  sent  by  Judas  Maccabaeus 
to  conclude  a  treaty  with  the  Romans  B.C.  161 
(1  Mace.  viii.  17  ;   Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  10,  §6). 

2.  Jason  the  father  of  Antipater,  who 
was  an  envoy  to  Rome  at  a  later  period  (1  Mace.  xii. 
16,  xiv.  22),  is  probably  the  same  person  as  No.  I. 

3.  Jason  of  Cvrene,  a  Jewish  historian  who 
wrote  "  in  five  books"  a  history  of  the  Jewish  war 
of  liberation,  which  supplied  the  chief  materials  for 
the  second  book  of  the  Maccabees.  [2  MACCABEES.] 
His  name  and  the  place  of  his  residence  seem  to 
mark  Jason  as  a  Hellenistic  Jew,  and  it  is  probable 
on  internal  grounds  that  his  history  was  written  in 
Greek.  This  narrative  included  the  wars  under 
Antiochus  Eupator,  and  he  must  therefore  have 
written  after  B.C.  162  ;  but  nothing  more  is  known 
of  him  than  can  be  gathered  from  2  Mace.  ii.  l'J-2.",. 

4.  Jason  the  High-priest,  the  second  son  of 
Simon  II.,  and  brother  of  Onias  III.,  who  suc- 
ceeded in  obtaining  the  high-priesthood  from  An- 
tiochus Epiphanes  (c.  175  B.C.)  to  the  exclusion  of 


a  Jason  and  Jesus  occur  together  as  Jewish  names 
in  the  history  of  Aristeas  (Ilody,  De  text.  p.  vii.). 


JASPER 

his  elder  brother  (2  Mace.  iv.  7-26,  4  Mace.  iv. 
17  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  5,  §  1).  He  laboured  in  every 
way  to  introduce  Greek  customs  among  the  people, 
ami  that  with  great  success  (2  Mace.  iv. ;  Joseph. 
I.  c).  In  order  to  give  permanence  to  the  changes 
which  he  designed,  he  established  a  gymnasium 
at  Jerusalem,  and  even  the  priests  neglected  their 
sacred  functions  to  take  part  in  the  games  (2  Mace. 
iv.  9,  14),  and  at  last  he  went  so  i;tr  as  to  send 
a  deputation  to  the  Tyrian  games  in  honour  of*  Her- 
cules. [Hercules.]  After  three  years  (cir.  B.C. 
172)  he  was  in  turn  supplanted  in  the  king's  favour 
by  his  own  emissary  Menelaus  [Menelal's],  who 
obtained  the  office  of  High-priest  from  Antiochus 
by  the  offer  of  a  larger  bribe,  and  was  forced  to  take 
refuge  among  the  Ammonites  (2  Mace.  iv.  26). 
On  a  report  of  the  death  of  Antiochus  (c.  1 70  B.C.) 
lie  made  a  violent  attempt  to  recover  his  power 
('_'  Mace.  v.  5-7),  but  was  repulsed,  and  again  fled 
to  the  Ammonites.  Afterwards  he  was  compelled 
to  retire  to  Egypt,  and  thence  to  Sparta,  whither 
he  went  in  the  hope  of  receiving  protection  "  in 
virtue  of  his  being  connected  with  them  by  race" 
(_'  Maec.  v.  9;  comp.  1  Mace.  xii.  7;  Frankel, 
Monatsschrift,  1853,  p.  456),  and  there  "perished 
in  a  strange  land"  (2  Mace.  I.e.;  cf.  Dan.  xii. 
30  ff. ;   1  Mace.  i.  12  ff.).  [15.  F.  W.] 

5.  Jason  the  Thessalonian.wIk)  entertained 
Paul  and  Silas,  and  was  iii  consequence  attacked  by 
the  Jewish  mob  (Acts  xvii.  5,  6,  7,  9).  He  is 
probably  the  same  as  the  Jason  mentioned  in  Rom. 
xvi.  21,  as  a  companion  of  the  apostle,  and  one  of 
his  kinsmen  or  fellow-tribesmen.  Lightfoot  con- 
jectured that  Jason  and  Secundus  (Acts  xx.  4) 
were  the  same.  [W.  A.  W.] 

JASPER  (nDK"*' ;   Idffiris;  jaspis),  a  precious 

stone  frequently  noticed  in  Scripture.  It  was  the 
last  of  the  twelve  inserted  in  the  high-priest's 
breastplate  (Ex.  xxviii.  20,  xxxix.  13),  ami  the  first 
of  the  twelve  used  in  the  foundations  of  the  new 
Jerusalem  (Rev.  xxi.  19):  the  difference  in  the 
order  seems  to  show  that  no  emblematical  im- 
portance was  attached  to  that  feature.  It  was  the 
stone  employed  in  the  superstructure  (eVSojUijim) 
of  the  wall  of  the  new  Jerusalem  (Rev.  xxi.  18).  It 
further  appears  among  the  stones  which  adorned 
the  king  of  Tyre  i  Ez.  xxviii.  13).  lastly,  it  is  the 
emblematical  image  of  the  glory  of  the  Divine  Being 
(Rev.  iv.  3  j.  The  characteristics  of  the  stone,  as 
far  as  they  are  specified  in  Scripture  (Rev.  xxi.  11), 
are  that  it  was  "  most  precious,"  and  "like  crystal  " 
( KpvcrraW ifav  ;  not  exactly  "  clear  as  crystal,"  as 
in  A.  Y.,  but  of  a  crystal  hue;  the  term  is  applied 
to  it  in  this  sense  by  Dioscorides  (v.  160;  \i6os 
Idtrirts,  d  [lev  rls  effri  ffnapaySi^wv,  u  8e  KpvaraX- 
AoJStjs):   we  may  also   inter  from   Uev.  iv.  .'!,  that 

it  was  a  stoi t'  brilliant  and  transparent  light. 

The  stone  which  we  name  "jasper"  dor,  qo! 
accord  with  this  description :  it  is  an  opaque  species 
of  quartz,  of  a  red,  yellow,  green,  or  mixed  brownish- 
yellow  hue,  sometimes  striped  ami  sometimes  spotted, 
in  no  respect  presenting  the  characteristics  of  the 
crystal.  The  only  feature  in  the  stone  which  at  all 
accords  with  the  Scriptural  account  is  that  it 
admits  of  a  high  polish,  and  this  appears  to  be 
indicated  in  flic  Hebrew  name.  With  regard  to 
the  Hebrew  term,  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  render  it 
by  the  "onyx"  and  "  beryl"  respectively,  and 
represent  the  jasper  by  the  term  yahalom  (A.  \. 
"emerald").  There  can  he  no  doubt  that  the 
diamond   would   more   adequately    answer   to   the 


JAVAN 


935 


description  in  the  book  of  Revelation,  and  unless 
that  beautiful  and  valuable  stone  is  represented  by 
the  Hebrew  yashpheh  and  the  Greek  Idcnris,  it  does 
not  appear  at  all  in  the  passages  quoted  ;  for  the 
term  rendered  "diamond"  in  Ex.  xxviii.  18  really 
refers  to  the  emerald.  We  are  disposed  to  think, 
therefore,  that  though  the  names  yashpheh,  Ida-iris, 
ami  jasper  are  identical,  the  stones  may  have  been 
different,  and  that  the  diamond  is  meaut.  [W.  L.  B.] 

JASU'BUS  ('laffodpos:  Jasub),  1  Esd.  ix.  30. 
[Jashub,  2.] 

JA'TAL  {'Ardp,  both  MSS. :  Azcr),  1  Esd.  v. 
28  ;  but  whence  was  the  form  in  A.  V.  adopted  ? 
[Ater,  1.] 

JATH'NIEL  (bwiW  :  'Uvovf,\;   Alex.  Na- 

Qavd :  Jathanaef),  a  Korhite  Levite,  and  a  door- 
keeper (A.  V.  "  porter")  to  the  house  of  Jehovah, 
i.  e.  the  tabernacle ;  the  fourth  of  the  family  of 
Meshelemiah  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  2). 

JAT'TIR  CW,  in  Josh.  xv.  48;  elsewhere 
"If)'1 :  'le6ep,  AlXw/x,  Te66p,  'le0dp ;  Alex.  'Iefle'p, 
EleOep  :  Jether),  a  town  of  Judah  in  the  mountain 
district  (Josh.  xv.  48),  one  of  the  group  containing 
Socho,  Eshtemoa,  &c.  ;  it  was  among  the  nine 
cities  which  with  their  suburbs  were  allotted  out 
of  Judah  to  the  priests  (xxi.  14  ;  1  Chr.  vi.  57), 
and  was  one  of  the  places  in  the  south  in  which 
David  used  to  haunt  in  his  freebooting  days,  and 
to  his  friends  in  which,  he  sent  gifts  from  the  spoil 
of  the  enemies  of  Jehovah  (1  Sam.  xxx.  27).  By 
Eusebius  and  Jerome  (Onomasticon,  Jether)  it  is 
spoken  of  as  a  very  large  place  in  the  middle  of 
Daroma,  near  Malatha,  and  20  miles  from  Eleuthe- 
ropolis.  It  is  named  by  Hap-Parchi,  the  Jewish 
traveller;  but  the  passage  is  defective,  and  little 
can  be  gathered  from  it  (Zunz  in  Asher's  Benj. 
Tudela,  ii.  442).  By  Robinson  (i.  494,  5)  it 'is 
identified  with  'Attir,  6  miles  N.  of  Molada,  and  10 
miles  S.  of  Hebron,  and  having  the  probable  sites  of 
Socho,  Eshtemoa,  and  other  southern  towns  within 
short  distances.  This  identification  may  be  .ac- 
cepted, notwithstanding  the  discrepancy  in  the  dist- 
ance of  Attir  from  Eleutheropolis  (if  Beit-Jibrin 
be  Eleutheropolis) — which  is  by  road  nearer  30 
than  20  Roman  miles.  We  may  suspect  an  error 
in  the  text  of  the  Onomast.,  often  very  corrupt  ;  or 
Eusebius  may  have  confounded  Attir  witli  Jutta, 
which  does  lie  exactly  20  miles  from  J!.  Jibrm. 
And  it  is  by  no  means  absolutely  proved  that  B. 
Jibrin  is  Eleutheropolis.  Robinson  notices  that  it 
is  not  usual  for  the  Jod  with  which  Jattir  com- 
mences to  change  into  the  Aiti  of  'Attir  (  Bib. 
Res.  i.  49  1  note). 

The  two  I tli i  i to  heroes  of  David's  guard  were 
probably  from  Jattir,  living  memorials  to  him  of 
his  early  difficulties.  [G.] 

JAVAN  (II"1;  'loovav;  Javan).      1.  A  son  of 

Japheth,  and  the  lather  of  Elishah  ami  Tarshish, 
Kittim  and  Dodanim  (Gen.  x.  2,  4).  The  name 
appears  in  Is.  Ixvi.  1'.',  where  it  is  coupled  with 
Tarshish,  Pul,  and  hud,  and  more  particularly  with 
and  the  "  isles  afar  off,"  as  representatives 
of  the  Gentile  world:  again  in  Ez.  xxvii.  13,  where 
it  is  coupled  with  Tubal  and  Meshech,  as  carrying 
on  considerable  commerce  with  the  Tyrians,  who 

imported  from  these  countries  slaves  and  brazen 
vessels:  in  Dan.  viii.  21,  \.  20,  xi.  '-'.  in  reference 
to  the  Macedonian  empire;  and  lastly  in  Zech.  i.\. 


936 


JAVAN 


13,  in  reference  to  the  Graeco-Syrian  empire.  From 
a  comparison  of  these  various  passages  there  can  be 
no  doubt  that  Javan  was  regarded  as  the  repre- 
sentative of  the  Greek  race :  the  similarity  of  the 
name  to  that  branch  of  the  Hellenic  family  with 
which  the  Orientals  were  best  acquainted,  viz.  the 
lonians,  particularly  in  the  older  form  in  which 
their  name  appears  ('laoov),  is  too  close  to  be  re- 
garded as  accidental:  and  the  occurrence  of  the 
name  in  the  cuneiform  inscriptions  of  the  time  of 
Sargon  (about  B.C.  709),  in  the  form  of  Yarn  an  or 
Yunan,  as  descriptive  of  the  isle  of  Cyprus,  where 
the  Assyrians  first  came  in  contact  with  the  power 
of  the  Greeks,  further  shows  that  its  use  was  not 
confined  to  the  Hebrews,  but  was  widely  spread 
throughout  the  East.  The  name  was  probably  in- 
troduced into  Asia  by  the  Phoenicians,  to  whom 
the  lonians  were  naturally  better  known  than  any 
other  of  the  Hellenic  races,  on  account  of  their 
commercial  activity  and  the  high  prosperity  of 
their  towns  on  the  western  coast  of  Asia  Minor. 
The  extension  of  the  name  westward  to  the  general 
body  of  the  Greeks,  as  they  became  known  to  the 
Hebrews  through  the  Phoenicians,  was  but  a  na- 
tural process,  analogous  to  that  which  we  have 
already  had  to  notice  in  the  case  of  Chittim.  It 
can  hardly  be  imagined  that  the  early  Hebrews 
themselves  had  any  actual  acquaintance  with  the 
Greeks:  it  is,  however,  worth  mentioning  as  illus- 
trative of  the  communication  which  existed  between 
the  Greeks  and  the  East,  that  among  the  artists 
who  contributed  to  the  ornamentation  of  Esar- 
haddon's  palaces  the  names  of  several  Greek  artists 
appear  in  one  of  the  inscriptions  (  Rawlinsou's  Herod. 
i.  483).  At  a  later  period  the  Hebrews  must 
have  gained  considerable  knowledge  of  the  Greeks 
through  the  Egyptians.  Psammetichus  (B.C.  664- 
610)  employed  lonians  and  Carians  as  mercenaries, 
and  showed  them  so  much  favour  that  the  war- 
caste  of  Egypt  forsook  him  in  a  body :  the  Greeks 
were  settled  near  Bubastis,  in  a  part  of  the  country 
with  which  the  Jews  were  familiar  (Herod,  ii.  154). 
The  same  policy  was  followed  by  the  succeeding 
monarchs,  especially  Amasis  (571-525),  who  gave 
the  Greeks  Naucratis  as  a  commercial  emporium. 
It  is  tolerably  certain  that  any  information  which 
the  Hebrews  acquired  in  relation  to  the  Greeks 
must  have  been  through  the  indirect  means  to 
which  we  have  adverted :  the  Greeks  themselves 
were  very  slightly  acquainted  with  the  southern 
coast  of  Syria  until  the  invasion  of  Alexander  the 
Great.  The  earliest  notices  of  Palestine  occur  in 
the  works  of  Hecataeus  (b.c.  549-486),  who  men- 
tions only  the  two  towns  Canytis  and  Cardytus ; 
the  next  are  in  Herodotus,  who  describes  the  coun- 
try as  Syria  Palaestina,  and  notices  incidentally  the 
towns  Ascalon,  Azotus,  Ecbatana  (Batanaea?),  and 
Cadytis,  the  same  as  the  Canytis  of  Hecataeus, 
probably  Gaza.  These  towns  were  on  the  border 
of  Egypt,  with  the  exception  of  the  uncertain  Ec- 
batana ;  and  it  is  therefore  highly  probable  that 
no  Greek  had,  down  to  this  late  period,  travelled 
through  Palestine. 

2.  A  towniu  the  southern  pai't  of  Arabia  (  Yemen'), 
whither  the  Phoenicians  traded  (Ez.  xxvii.  19): 
the  connexion  with  Uzal  decides  in  favour  of  this 
place  rather  than  Greece,  as  in  the  Vulg.  The 
same  place  may  be  noticed  in  Joel  iii.  6  :  the 
parallelism  to  the  Sabaeans  in  vrer.  8,  ami  the  fact 
that  tlir  Phoenicians  bought  instead  of  selling  slaves 
to  the  Greeks  (Ez.  xxvii.  13),  are  in  favour  of  this 
view.  [W.  L.  P.] 


JEBERECHIAH 
JAVELIN.     [Arms.]  ' 

JA'ZAR   (77  'laCvp;    Alex,   'latfv:    Gazer), 

1  Mace.  v.  8.     [Jaazer.] 

JA'ZER  (Num.   xxxii.   1,   3;   Josh.  xxi.  39; 

2  Sam.  xxiv.  5;  1  Chr.  vi.  81,  xxvi.  31;  Is.  xvi. 
8,9;  Jer.  xlviii.  32).     [Jaazer.] 

JA'ZIZ  (VV:  'laCtC;  Alex.  'looa^C-  Jaziz), 
a  Hagarite  who  had  charge  of  the  "  flocks,"  i.  c. 
the  sheep  and  goats  (}tftfn),  of  king  David  (1  Chr. 
xxvii.  31),  which  were  probably  pastured  on  the 

east  of  Jordan,  in  the  nomad  country  where  the 
forefathers  of  Jaziz  had  for  ages  roamed  (comp.  v. 
19-22). 

JE'AEIM, MOUNT  (DnjP-lPI :  wSKis'lapip ; 

Alex,  'lapifi:  Jllous  Jarim),  a  place  named  in  spe- 
cifying the  northern  boundary  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv. 
10).  The  boundary  ran  from  Mount  Seir  to  "  the 
shoulder  of  Mount  Jearim,  which  is  Cesalon  " — 
that  is,  Cesalon  was  the  landmark  on  the  mountain. 
Kcsla  stands,  7  miles  due  west  of  Jerusalem,  "  on 
a  high  point  on  the  north  slope  of  the  lofty  ridge 
between  Wady  Ghurdb  and  W.  Ismail.  The  latter 
of  these  is  the  south-western  continuation  of  W. 
Beit  Hanina,  and  the  former  runs  parallel  to  and 
northward  of  it,  and  they  are  separated  by  this 
ridge,  which  is  probably  Mount  Jearim  "  (Rob.  iii. 
154).  If  Jearim  be  taken  as  Hebrew  it  signifies 
"  forests."  Forests  in  our  sense  of  the  word  there 
are  none :  but  we  have  the  testimony  of  the  latest 
traveller  that  "  such  thorough  woods,  both  for 
loneliness  and  obscurity,  he  had  not  seen  since  he 
left  Germany"  (Tobler,  Wanderung,  1857,  p.  178). 
Kirjath- Jearim  (if  that  be  Kuriet  cl-Enab)  is  only 
2^  miles  off  to  the  northward,  separated  by  the 
deep  and  wide  hollow  of  Wady  Ghurdb.  [Che- 
salon.]  [G.] 

JEA'TEEAI  Cnn*0:  'uePl  :  Jethrai),  a 
Gershonite  Levite,  son  of  Zerah  (1  Chr.  vi.  21); 
apparently  the  head  of  his  family  at  the  time  that 
the  service  of  the  Tabernacle  was  instituted  by 
David  (comp.  ver.  31).  In  the  reversed  genealogy 
of  the  descendants  of  Gershom,  Zerah's  son  is  stated 
as  Ethni  C^riN,  ver.  41).  The  two  names  have 
quite  similarity  enough  to  allow  of  the  one  being 
a  corruption  of  the  other,  though  the  fact  is  not 
ascertainable. 

JEBEKECHIAH  (-liTOn:^,  with  the  final  u : 
Bapaxias:  Barachias),  father  of  a  certain  Zecha- 
riah, in  the  reign  of  Ahaz,  mentioned  Is.  viii.  2. 
As  this  form  occurs  nowhere  else,  and  both  the 
LXX.  and  Vulgate  have  Berechiah,  it  is  pro- 
bably only  an  accidental  corruption.  Possibly  a  * 
was  in  some  cop)'  by  mistake  attached  to  the  pre- 
ceding J2,  so  as  to  make  it  plural,  and  thence 
was  transferred  to  the  following  word,  Berechiah. 
Berechiah  and  Zechariah  are  both  common  names 
among  the  priests  (Zech.  i.  1).  These  are  not  the 
Zacharias  and  Barachias  mentioned  as  father  and  son, 
Matt,  xxiii.  35,  as  it  is  certain  that  Zechariah,  the 
son  of  Jehoiada,  in  the  reign  of  Joash,  is  there  meant. 
They  may  however  be  of'  tire  same  family;  and  if 
Berechiah  was  the  father  of  the  house,  not  of  the 
individuals,  the  same  person  might  be  meant  in 
Is.  viii.  2  and  Matt,  xxiii.  35.  It  is  singular  that 
Josophus  (!'>. ./.  iv.  .r>,  §4)  mentions  anothi  1  Zacha- 
rias, son  ofBaruch,  who  was  slain  by  the  Jews  in  the 
Temple  shortly  before  the  last  siege  of  Jerusalem 
began.     (See  VVhiston's  note,  ad  Inc.)     [A.  < '.  1J.J 


JEBUS 

JETBUS  (D-in* :  'Ie/3ous :  Jehus),  one  of  the 
names  of  Jerusalem,  the  city  of  the  Jebusites,  also 
called  Jebusi.  It  occurs  only  twice:  first  in  con- 
nexion with  the  journey  of  the  Levite  and  his  un- 
happy concubine  from  Bethlehem  to  Giheah  (Judg. 
xix.  10,  11);  and  secondly,  in  the  narrative  of 
the  capture  of  the  place  by  David  in  1  Chr.  xi. 
4,  5.  In  2  Sam.  v.  6-9  the  name  Jerusalem  is 
employed.  By  Gesenius  {Thes.  189,  D-12)  and 
Fiirst  (Himdirh.  477)  Jebus  is  interpreted  to  mean 
a  place  dry  or  down-trodden  like  a  threshing-floor  ; 
an  interpretation  which  by  Ewald  (iii.  155)  and 
Stanley  {S.  $  P.  177)  is  taken  to  prove  that  Jebus 
must  have  been  the  south-western  hill,  the  "  dry 
rock"  of  the  modern  Zion,  and  "not  the  Mount 
Moriah,  the  city  of  Solomon,  in  whose  centre  arose 
the  perennial  spring."  But  in  the  great  uncer- 
tainty which  attends  these  ancient  names,  this  is, 
t<i  say  the  least,  very  doubtful.  Jebus  was  the  city 
of  the  Jebusites.  Either  the  name  of  the  town  is 
derived  from  the  name  of  the  tribe,  or  the  reverse. 
If  the  former,  then  the  interpretation  just  quoted 
falls  to  the  ground.  If  the  latter,  then  the  origin 
of  the  name  of  Jebus  is  thrown  back  to  the  very 
beginning  of  the  Canaanite  race — so  far  at  any  rate 
as  to  make  its  connexion  with  a  Hebrew  root  ex- 
tremely uncertain.  [G.] 

JEB'USIOp-U*n  =  "theJebusite:"  'IejSotW, 

'le/3oDs:  Jebusaeus),  the  name  employed  for  the 
city  of  JEBUS,  only  in  the  ancient  document  de- 
scribing the  landmarks  and  the  towns  of  the  allot- 
ment of  Judah  and  Benjamin  (Josh.  xv.  8,  xviii. 
Iii,  L'S).  In  the  first  and  last  place  the  explanatory 
words,  "which  is  Jerusalem,"  are  added.  In  the 
first,  however,  our  translators  have  given  it  as 
"  the  Jebusite." 

A  parallel  to  this  mode  of  designating  the  town 
by  its  inhabitants  is  found  in  this  very  list  in 
Zemaraim  (xviii.  22),  Avim  (23),  Ophni  (24),  and 
Japhletite  (xvi.  3),  &c.  [G.] 

JEBUSITE,  JEBUSITES, THE.  Although 
these  two  forms  are  indiscriminately  employed  in 
the  A.  V.,  yet  in  the  original  the  name,  whether 
applied  to  individuals  or  to  the  nation,  is  never 
found  in  the  plural ;  always  singular.  The  usual 
form  is  1|D;l2!,n  ;  but  in  a  few  places — viz.,  2  Sam. 
v.  ii.  xxiv.  16,  18;  1  Chr.  xxi.  18  only— it  is 
''DUTl.     Without  the  article,  ,|D;)2\  it  occurs  in 

2  Sam.  v.  8  ;  1  Chr.  xi.  ii  ;  Zech.  ix.  7.  In  the 
two  first  of  these  the  force  is  much  increased  by 
removing  the  article  introduced  in  the  A.  V.,  and 
reading  "  and  smiteth  a  Jebusite."  We  do  not 
hear  of  a  progenitor  to  the  tribe,  but  the  name 
which  would  have  been  bis  had  he  existed  has 
attached  itself  to  the  city  in  which  we  meet  with 
the  Jebusites  in  historic  times.  [Jebus.]  The 
LXX.  give  the  name  'ltflovcrcuos :  Vulg.  •/(  bliSai  US. 
1.  According  to  the  table  in  Genesis  x.  "the 
Jebusite  "  is  the  third  son  of  Canaan.  His  place  iu 
the  list  is  between  Heth  and  the  Amorites  (Gen. 
x.  Iii;  1  Chi',  i.  14),  a  position  which  the  tribe 
maintained  long  after  Num.  \iii.  29;  Josh.  xi. 
3);    and  the  same   connexion  is  traceable  in  the 

*  In  ver.  5  the  kinir  of  Jerusalem  i^  Btyled  one  of 

the    "five    kings   of   the   Amorites."      Bnt   the   1..W". 

(lioth  Mss.)  have  rStv  'le|3ou<raiW  of  the  Jebusites. 
b  By  Josephus  (Ant.  vii.  13,  §0)  Araunah  is  said 

to  have  been  one  of  I  >a\  id's  chief  friends  (ev  rois  ixa- 

AioTtt  Aam'Sou),  and  to  have  been  expressly  spared  by 


JEBUSITE 


937 


words  of  Ezekiel  (xvi.  3,  45),  who  addresses  Jeru- 
salem as  the  fruit  of  the  union  of  an  Amorite  with 
a  Hittite.  But  in  the  formula,  by  which  the  Pro- 
mised Land  is  so  often  designated,  the  Jebusites 
are  uniformly  placed  last,  which  may  have  arisen 
from  their  small  number,  or  their  quiet  disposition*. 
See  Cen.  xv.  21  ;  Ex.  iii.  8,  17,  xiii.  5,  xxiii.  2'.), 
xxxiii.  2,  xxxiv.  11  ;  Deut.  vii.  1,  xx.  17;  Josh, 
iii.  10,  ix.  1,  xii.  8,  xxiv.  11  ;  IK.  ix.  20;  2  Chr. 
viii.  7  ;  Ezr.  ix.  1  ;  Neh.  ix.  8. 

2.  Our  first  glimpse  of  the  actual  people  is  in 
the  invaluable  report  of  the  spies — "  the  Hittite, 
and  the  Jebusite,  and  the  Amorite  dwell  in  the 
mountain"  (Num.  xiii.  29).  This  was  forty  years 
before  the  entrance  into  Palestine,  but  no  change 
in  their  habitat  had  been  made  in  the  interval  ;  for 
when  Jabin  organised  his  rising  against  Joshua  he 
sent  amongst  others  "  to  the  Amorite,  the  Hittite,  the 
Perizzite,  and  the  Jebusite  in  the  mountain  "  (Josh. 
xi.  3).  A  mountain-tribe  they  were,  and  a  moun- 
tain-tribe they  remained.  "  Jebus,  which  is  Jeru- 
salem," lost  its  king  in  the  slaughter  of  Bethhoron 
(Josh.  x.  1,  5,  26  ;  comp.  xii.  10) — was  sacked 
and  burnt  by  the  men  of  Judah  (Judg.  i.  21),  and 
its  citadel  finally  scaled  and  occupied  by  David 
(2  Sam.  v.  6)  ;  but  still  the  Jebusites  who  in- 
habited Jerusalem,  the  "  inhabitants  of  the  land," 
could  not  be  expelled  from  their  mountain-seat, 
but  continued  to  dwell  with  the  children  of  Judah 
and  Benjamin  to  a  very  late  date  (Josh.  xv.  8,  63  ; 
Judg.  i.  2 1 ,  xix.  1 1 ).  This  obstinacy  is  characteristic 
of  mountaineers,  and  the  few  traits  we  posse>s  of 
the  Jebusites  show  them  as  a  warlike  people.  Be- 
fore the  expedition  under  Jabin,  Adoni-Zedek,  the 
king  of  Jerusalem,  had  himself  headed  the  attack 
on  the  Gibeonites,  which  ended  in  the  slaughter  of 
Bethhoron,  and  cost  him  his  life  on  that  eventful 
evening  under  the  trees  at  Makkedah.3  That  they 
were  established  in  the  strongest  natural  fortress  of 
the  country  in  itself  says  much  for  their  courage 
and  power,  and  when  they  lost  it,  it  was  through 
bravado  rather  than  from  any  cowardice  on  their 
part.     [Jerusalem.] 

After  this  they  emerge  from  the  darkness  but 
once,    in  the   person    of  Araunah b    the    Jebusite, 

"Araunah  the  king"  C^ftn  n^lN),  who  ap- 
pears before  us  in  true  kingly  dignity  in  his  well- 
known  transaction  with  David  (2  Sam.  xxiv.  23; 
1  Chr.  xix.  23).  The  picture  presented  us  in 
these  well-known  passages  is  a  very  interesting  one. 
We  see  the  fallen  Jebusite  king  and  his  four  sons 
on  their  threshing-floor  on  the  bald  top  of  Moriah, 
treading  out  their  wheat  (B>'!J :  A.  V.  "threshing") 
by  driving  the  oxen  with  the  heavy  sledges  (D*J*1D 

A.  V.  "threshing  instruments")  over  the  corn, 
round  the  central  heap.  We  see  Araunah  on  the 
approach  of  David  fall  on  his  face  on  the  ground, 
and  we  hear  him  ask,  "Why  is  my  lord  the  king 
come  to  bis  slave?"  followed  by  his  willing  sur- 
render  of  all    his   property.      But    this    reveals    no 

traits  peculiar  to  the  Jebusites,  or  characteristic  of 
them  more  than  of  their  contemporaries  in  Israel, 
or  in  the  other  nations  of  Canaan.  The  early  judges 
and  kings  of  Israel  threshed  wheat  in   the  wine- 


him  when  the  citadel  was  taken.  If  there  is  anv 
truth  in  this,  David  no  doubt  made  his  friendship 
during  his  wanderings,  when  lie  also  acquired  that  of 

Uriah   the    Hittite,  Ahiineleih,  Sibbechiii,    and   others 

of  his  associates  who  belonged  to  the  old  nations. 

3  I' 


938 


JECAMIAH 


press  (Judg.  vi.  11),  followed  the  herd  out  of  the 
field  (1  Sam.  xi.  5),  and  were  taken  from  the  sheep- 
cotes  (2  Sam.  vii.  8),  and  the  pressing  courtesy  of 
Araunah  is  closely  paralleled  by  that  of  Ephron  the 
Hittite  in  his  negotiation  with  Abraham. 

We  are  not  favoured  with  further  traits  of  the 
Jebusites,  nor  with  any  clue  to  their  leligion  or 
rites. 

Two  names  of  individual  Jebusites  are  preserved. 
In  ADONIZEDEK  the  only  remarkable  thing  is  its 
Hebrew  form,  in  which  it  means  "  Lord  of  justice." 

That  of  Araunah  is  much  more  uncertain — so 
much  so  as  to  lead  to  the  belief  that  we  possess  it 
more  nearly  in  its  original  shape.  In  the  short 
narrative  of  Samuel  alone  it  is  given  in  three  forms 
— "the  Avarnah"  (ver.  16);  Araneah  (18); 
Aravnah,  or  Araunah  ('20,  21).  In  Chronicles  it 
is  Arnan,  while  by  the  LXX.  it  is  'Opva,  and  by 
Josephus  'OpSvva.  [Aradnah;  Ornan.] 

In  the  Apocryphal  Acts  of  the  Apostles  the  ashes 
of  Barnabas,  after  his  martyrdom  in  Cyprus,  are 
said  to  have  been  buried  in  a  cave,  where  the  race 
of  the  Jebusites  formerly  dwelt  ;  and  previously  to 
this  is  mentioned  the  arrival  in  the  island  of  a  pious 
Jebusite,  a  kinsman  of  Nero  {Act.  Apost.  Apocr. 
pp.  72,  73,  ed.  Tisch.).  [G.] 

JEOAMI'AH  (iTȣ\  i.  e.  Jekamiah,  as  the 

name  is  elsewhere  given:  'leice/xla,  Alex.  'leKevia: 
Jecemia),  one  of  a  batch  of  seven,  including  Sala- 
thiel  and  Pedaiah,  who  were  introduced  into  the 
royal  line,  on  the  failure  of  it  in  the  person  of  Je- 
hoiachin  (1  Chr.  iii.  18).  They  were  all  appa- 
rently sons  of  Neri,  of  the  line  of  Nathan,  since 
Salathiel  certainly  was  so  (Luke  iii.  27).  [Gene- 
aeogy  of  Jescs  Christ,  p.  675a.]    [A.  C.  H.] 

JECHOLIAH  QTyfyy;,  with  the  final  u: 
'IexeAia,  Alex.  'Ie'xe,""*  ;  Joseph.  'Ax<aAas  :  Je- 
cheliti),  wife  of  Amaziah  king  of  Judah,  and  mother 
of  Azariah  or  Uzziah  his  successor  (2  K.  xv.  2). 
Both  this  queen  and  Jehoaddan,  the  mother  of 
her  husband,  are  specified  as  "  of  Jerusalem."  In 
the  A.  V.  of  Chronicles  her  name  is  given  as 
Jecoliah. 

JECHONrASClexo""":  Jechonias).  1.  The 
Greek  form  of  the  name  of  king  JeCHONIAH,  fol- 
lowed bv  our  translators  in  the  books  rendered  from 
the  Greek,  viz.,  Esth.  xi.  4 ;  Bar.  i.  3,  9  ;  Matt.  i. 
11,  12. 

2.   1  Esd.  viii.  92.     [Shechaniah.] 

JECOLIAH  (n£3»:  'UXe\ia:  Jcchelia), 
2  Chr.  xxvi.  3.  In  the  original  the  name  differs 
from  its  form  in  the  parallel  passage  in  Kings, 
only  in  not  having  the  final  u.     [Jeciioliah.] 

JECONI'AH  (rrO^;  excepting  once,  -"liTJD?, 
with  the  final  u,  Jer.  xxiv.  1  ;  and  once  in  Cctib, 
!"PyiD?,  Jer.  xxvii.  20:  'lexovias:  Jeclwnias),  an 
altered  form  of  the  name  of  Jehoiaciitn,  last  but 
one  of  the  kings  of  Judah,  which  is  found  in  the 
following  passages: — 1  Chr.  iii.  16,  17  ;  Jer.  xxiv. 
1,  xxvii.  20,  xxviii.  4,  xxix.  1  ;  Esth.  ii.  6.  It  is 
still  further  abbreviated  to  Coxiah.  See  also  Je- 
chonias and  Joacim. 

JECONIAS  Clexoflas:  Jechonias),  1  Esd.  i. 
9.     [Conaniah.] 

JEDAI'AH  (rryv  :  'I«8ae,  'letioue,  laSid: 
Jadaia,  Jedei).     1.  Head  of  the  second  course  of 


JEDIDAH 

priests,  as  they  were  divided  in  the  time  of  David 
( 1  Chr.  xxiv.  7).  Some  of  them  survived  to  return 
to  Jerusalem  after  the  Babylonish  captivity,  as  ap- 
pears from  Ezr.  ii.  36,  Neh.  vii.  39 — "the  children 
of  Jedaiah,  of  the  house  of  Jeshua,  973."  The  addi- 
tion "  of  the  house  of  Jeshua  "  indicates  that  there 
were  two  priestly  families  of  the  name  of  Jedaiah, 
which  it  appears  from  Neh.  xii.  6,  7,  19,  21,  was 
actually  the  case.  If  these  sons  of  Jedaiah  had  for 
their  head  Jeshua,  the  high-priest  in  the  time  of 
Zerubbabel,  as  the  Jewish  tradition  says  they  had 
(Lewis's  Ori/.  Heb.  bk.  ii.  ch.  vii.),  this  may  lie 
the  reason  why,  in  1  Chr.  ix.  10,  and  Neh.  xi.  10, 
the  course  of  Jedaiah  is  named  before  that  of  Joia- 
rib,  though  Joiarib's  was  the  first  course.  But 
perhaps  Jeshua  was  another  priest  descended  from 
Jedaiah,  from  whom  this  branch  sprung.  It  is  cer- 
tainly a  corrupt  reading  in  Neh.  xi.  10  which  makes 
Jedaiah  son  of  Joiarib.  1  Chr.  ix.  10  preserves  the 
true  text.     In  Esdras  the  name  is  Jeddu. 

2 .  A  priest  in  the  time  of  Jeshua  the  high-priest 
(Zech.  vi.  10,  14).  [A.  C.  H.] 

JEDAI'AH  (H^T :  'USid;  Alex.'ESja/IeSoua: 

Fdaia,  Jedaia).  This  is  a  different  name  from  the 
last,  though  the  two  are  identical  in  the  A.  V. 

1.  A  man  named  in  the  genealogies  of  Simeon  as 
a  forefather  of  Ziza,  one  of  the  chiefs  of  the  tribe, 
apparent! v  in  the  time  of  king  Hezekiah  (1  Chr. 
iv.  37). 

2.  Son  of  Harumaph;  a  man  who  did  his  part 
in  the  rebuilding  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  (Neh. 
iii.  10). 

JED'DU  Cle55ov:  Jeddus),  1  Esd.  v.  24. 
[Jedaiah,  1.] 

JEDE'US  CuSalos:  Jeddeus),  1  Esd.  ix.  30. 
[Adaiah,  5.] 

JEDI'AEL  (W^T  ;  'ieSnjA ;  Jadiel).  1.  A 
chief  patriarch  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  from 
whom  sprung  many  Benjamite  houses  of  fathers, 
numbering  17.200  mighty  men  of  valour,  in  the 
days  of  David  (1  Chr".  vii.  6,  11).  It  is 
usually  assumed  that  Jediael  is  the  same  as  Ashbel 
(Gen.  xlvi.  21;  Num.  xxvi.  38;  1  Chr.  viii.  1). 
But  though  this  may  be  so.  it  cannot  be  affirmed 
with  certainty.  [Becher  ;  Bela.J  Jediael  might 
be  a  later  descendant  of  Benjamin  not  mentioned  in 
tin'  Pentateuch,  but  who,  from  the  fruitfulness  of 
his  house  and  the  decadence  of  elder  branches,  rose 
to  the  first  rank. 

2.  Second  son  of  Meshelemiah,  a  Levite,  of  the 
sons  of  Ebiasaph  the  sou  of  Korah.  One  of  the 
doorkeepers  of  the  temple  in  the  time  of  David 
(1  Chr.  xxvi.  1,  2).  [A.  C.  H.] 

3.  Son  of  Shimri  ;  one  of  the  heroes  of  David's 
guard  in  the  enlarged  catalogue  of  Chronicles  (1  Chr. 
xi.  45).  In  the  absence  of  further  information, 
we  cannot  decide  whether  or  not  he  is  the  same 
person  as 

4.  ('PaSnjA;  Alex.  'IeSnjA.),  one  of  the  chiefs 
(lit.  "heads")  of  the  thousands  ofManasseh  who 
joined  David  on  his  march  from  Aphek  to  Ziklag 
when  he  left  the  Philistine  army  on  the  eve  of 
Gilboa,  and  helped  him  in  his  revenge  on  t! 
rauding  Amalekites  (1  Chr.  xii.  20;  comp.  1  Sam. 
xxix.,  xxx.). 

JEDI'DAH  (nTT,  "darling:"  "UUa  ;  Alex. 

t     • : 

'ESiSa:  Llida),  queen  of  Anion,  and  mother  of  the 


JEDIDIAH 

good  king  Josiah  (2  K.  xxii.  1).  She  was  a  native 
of  Bozkath  near  Lachish,  the  daughter  of  a  certain 
Adaiah.  By  Josephus  (Ant.  x.  4,  §1)  her  name  is 
given  as  'leSis. 

JEDIDI'AH  (iT-p-i;1,  "  .killing  of  Jehovah  :" 
TeSStSf ;  Alex.  'EieSiSnx:  Amabilis  Domino),  the 
name  bestowed,  through  Nathan  the  prophet,  on 
David's  son  Solomon  ('_'  Sam.  xii.  25). 

Bathsheba's  first  child  had  died — "  Jehovah  struck 
it"  Tver.  15).  A  second  son  was  bom,  and  David 
—  whether  in  allusion  to  the  state  of  his  external 
affairs,  or  to  his  own  restored  peace  of  mind — called 
his  name  Sheldmoh  ("  Peaceful ") ;  and  Jehovah 
loved  the  child,  i.  e.  allowed  him  to  live.  And 
David  sent  by  the  hand  of  Nathan,  to  obtain  through 
him  some  oracle  or  token  of  the  Divine  favour  on  the 
babe,  and  the  babe's  name  was  called  Jedid-Jah. 
It  is  then  added  that  this  was  done  "  because  of 
Jehovah."  The  clue  to  the  meaning  of  these  last 
words,  and  indeed  of  the  whole  circumstance,  seems 
to  reside  in  the  fact  that  "  Jedid  "  and  "David" 
are  both  derived  from  the  same  root,  or  from  two 
very  closely  related  (see  Gesen.  Thes.  565a — "  "IT1, 
idem  quod  TIT  ").  To  us  these  plays  on  words  have 
little  or  no  significance ;  but  to  the  old  Hebrews, 
as  to  the  modern  Orientals,  they  were  full  of  mean- 
ing. To  David  himself,  the  "  darling  "  of  his  family 
and  his  people,  no  more  happy  omen,  no  more 
precious  seal  of  his  restoration  to  the  Divine  favour 
after  his  late  fall,  could  have  been  afforded,  than  this 
announcement  by  the  prophet,  that  the  name  of  his 
child  was  to  combine  his  own  name  with  that  of 
Jehovah — Jedid-Jah,  "  darling  of  Jehovah." 

The  practice  of  bestowing  a  second  name  on 
children,  in  addition  to  that  given  immediately  on 
birth — such  second  name  having  a  religious  bearing, 
as  Noor-ed-Din,  Saleh-ed-Din  (Saladin),  &c. — still 
exists  in  the  East.  [G.] 

JED'UTHUN  (f-irVIT,  except  in  1  Chr.  xvi. 
38  ;  Neh.  xi.  17  ;  Ps.  xxx.  title  ;  and  lxxvii.  title, 
where  it  is  j-ITVT,  i.  e.  Jedithun ;  'lHovBwv 
and  'IStOovv,  or  -ovfj. ;  Idithun),  a  Levite,  of  the 
family  of  Merari,  who  was  associated  with  Heman 
the  Kohathite,  and  Asaph  the  Gershouite,  in  the 
conduct  of  the  musical  service  of  the  tabernacle,  in 
the  time  of  David  ;  according  to  what  is  said  1  Chr. 
xxiii.  (i,  that  David  divided  the  Levites  "into 
courses  among  the  sons  of  Levi,  namely,  Gershon, 
Kohath,  and  Merari."  The  proof  of  his  being  a 
Merarite  depends  upon  his  identification  with  Ethan 
in  1  Chr.  xv.  17,  who,  we  learn  from  that  passage 
as  well  as  from  the  genealogy  in  vi.  44  (A.  V.), 
was  a  Merarite  [Hem an].  But  it  may  be  added 
that  the  very  circumstance  of  Ethan  being  a  Me- 
rarite, which  Jedutbun  must  have  been  (since  the 
only  reason  of  there  being  three  musical  chiefs  was 
to  have  one  for  each  division  of  the  Levites),  is  a 
strong  additional  proof  of  this  identity.  Another 
proof  may  be  found  in  the  mention  ofHosah  (xvi.  38, 
42),  as  a  son  of  Jeduthun*  and  a  gatekeeper,  com- 
pared  .with  wvi.  10,  where  we  read  thai  Hosah  was 
of  the  children  of  Merari.  Assuming  then  that, 
as  regards  l  Chr.  vi.  II,  xv.  17,  19,  jrVN  is  a 
mere  clerical  variation  for  {-lrW  -  which  a  compa- 
rison of  xv.  17,  11)  with  xvi.  41,  42,  xxv.  1.  3,  6, 


JEELUS 


939 


1  The  reason  why  "son  of  Jeduthun"  is  espe- 
cially attached  to  the  name  of  Obed-Edom  in  this 
verse,  is  to  distinguish  him  from  the  other  Obed- 
Edom  the  Gittite  (2  Sam.  vi.    10)  mentioned  in   the 


2  Chr.  xxxv.  15,  makes  almost  certain — we  have 
Jeduthun's  descent  as  son  of  Kishi,  or  Kushaiah, 
from  Mahli,  the  son  of  Mushi,  the  son  of  Merari, 
the  son  of  Levi,  being  the  fourteenth  generation 
from  Levi  inclusive.  His  office  was  generally  to 
preside  over  the  music  of  the  temple  service,  con- 
sisting of  the  nebel,  or  nablium,  the  tinner,  or  harp, 
and  the  cymbals,  together  with  the  human  voice 
(the  trumpets  being  confined  to  the  priests).  But 
his  peculiar  part,  as  well  as  that  of  his  two  col- 
leagues Heman  and  Asaph,  was  "to  sound  with 
cymbals  of  brass,"  while  the  others  played  on  the 
nablium  and  the  harp.  This  appointment  to  the 
office,  was  by  election  of  the  chiefs  of  the  Levites 
(D^CO  at  David's  command,  each  of  the  three 
divisions  probably  choosing  one.  The  first  occa- 
sion of  Jeduthun's  ministering  was  when  David 
brought  up  the  ark  to  Jerusalem.  He  then  took 
his  place  in  the  procession,  and  played  on  the 
cymbals.  But  when  the  division  of  the  Levitical 
services  took  place,  owing  to  the  tabernacle  being 
at  Gibeon  and  the  ark  at  Jerusalem,  while  Asaph 
and  his  brethren  were  appointed  to  minister  before 
the  ark,  it  fell  to  Jeduthun  and  Heman  to  be 
located  with  Zadok  the  priest,  to  give  thanks  "  be- 
fore the  tabernacle  of  the  Lord  in  the  high  place 
that  was  at  Gibeon,"  still  by  playipg  the  cymbals 
in  accompaniment  to  the  other  musical  instruments 
(comp.  Ps.  cl.  5).  In  the  account  of  Josiah's  Pass- 
over in  2  Chr.  xxxv.  reference  is  made  to  the 
singing  as  conducted  in  accordance  with  the  ar- 
rangements made  by  David,  and  by  Asaph,  Heman, 
and  Jeduthun  the  king's  seer  (IpEn  nth).  [He- 
man.]  Perhaps  the  phrase  rather  means  the 
king's  adviser  in  matters  connected  with  the  mu- 
sical service.  The  sons  of  Jeduthun  were  em- 
ployed (1  Chr.  xxv.)  partly  in  music,  viz.  six  of 
them,  who  prophesied  with  the  harp — Gedaliah, 
head  of  the  2nd  ward,  Zeri,  or  Izri,  of  the  4th, 
Jeshaiah  of  the.  8th,  Shimei  of  the  10th,b  Hasha- 
biah  of  the  12th,  and  Mattithiah  of  the  14th  ;  and 
partly  as  gatekeepers  (A.  V.  "porters")  (xvi. 
42),  viz.  Obed-Edom  and  Hosah  (v.  38),  which 
last  had  thirteen  sons  and  brothers  (xxvi.  11). 
The  triple  division  of  the  Levitical  musicians 
seems  to  have  lasted  as  long  as  the  temple,  and 
each  to  have  been  called  after  their  respective 
leaders.  At  the  dedication  of  Solomon's  temple 
"  the  Levites  which  were  the  singers,  all  of 
them  of  Asaph,  of  Heman,  of  Jeduthun"  per- 
formed their  proper  part.  In  the  reign  of  Heze- 
kiah,  again,  we  find  the  sons  of  Asaph,  the  sons  of 
Heman,  and  the  sons  of  Jeduthun,  taking  their  part 
in  purifying  the  temple  (2  Chr.  xxix.  13,  14); 
they  are  mentioned,  we  have  seen,  in  Josiah's  reign, 
and  so  late  as  in  Nehemiah's  time  we  still  rind 
descendants  of  Jeduthun  employed  about  the  sing- 
ing (Neh.  xi.  17;  1  Chr.  ix.  16).  His  name 
stands  at  the  head  of  the  39th,  62nd,  and  77th 
Psalms,  indicating  probably  that  they  were  to  be 
sung  by  his  choir.  [A.  C.  EL] 

JEE1/I  ('Uii)\l ;  Alex.  'ien\i:  Celt),  1  Esd. 
v.  33.     [Jaalah.] 

.IKK'LUS    f'leTJAos   (IfTJAoiv)  ;    Alex.    'Iei)A  : 
,  1  Esd.  viii.  92.     [Jkiukl.] 


same    verse,    who   was    probably    B    Kohathite    (Josh. 
xxi.  24). 

''  Omitted  in  ver.  •'>.  but  necessary  to  make  up  the 
li  sons. 

.;  P  a 


940 


JEEZER 


JEE'ZER  ("WW:  'AXie(ep:  Hiezer),  the 
form  assumed  in  the  list  in  Numbers  (xxvi.  30)  by 
the  name  of  a  descendant  of  Manasseh,  eldest  son 
of  Gilead,  and  founder  of  one  of  the  chief  families 
of  the  tribe.  [Jeezekites.]  In  parallel  lists  the 
name  is  given  as  Abi-ezek,  and  the  family  as  the 
Ar.iEZRiTES — the  house  of  Gideon.  Whether  this 
change  has  arisen  from  the  accidental  addition  or 
omission  of  a  letter,  or  is  an  intentional  variation, 
akin  to  that  in  the  case  of  Abie]  and  Jehiel,  cannot 
be  ascertained.     The  LXX.  perhaps  read  "iTi^nN. 

JEE'ZERITES,  THE  (nTJPKil  :  'AXiz£*pl : 
familia  Hiezer itarum),  the  family  of  the  foregoing 
(Num.  xxvi.  30). 

JE'GAR  SAHADUTHA  (KJl-nnb  1^, 
"  heap  of  testimony "  :  fiovvbs  rr/s  fj-aprvpias : 
tumulus  testis),  the  Aramaean  name  given  by  Laban 
the  Syrian  to  the  heap  of  stones  which  he 'erected 
as  a  memorial  of  the  compact  between  Jacob  and 
himself,  while  Jacob  commemorated  the  same  by 
setting  up  a  pillar  (Gen.  xxxi.  47),  as  was  his  custom 
on  several  other  occasions.  Galeed,  a  "  witness 
heap,''  which  is  given  as  the  Hebrew  equivalent, 
does  not  exactly  represent  Jegar-sahadutha.  The 
LXX.  have  preserved  the  distinction  accurately  in 
rendering  the  latter  by  fiovvbs  rr\s  fxapTvptas, 
and  the  former  by  /3.  fj-aprvs.  The  Vulgate,  oddly 
enough,  has  transposed  the  two,  and  translated 
Galeed  by  "  acervns  testimonii,"  and  Jegar  Saha- 
dutha  by  "  tumulus  testis."  But  in  the  mind  of  the 
writer  they  were  evidently  all  but  identical,  and  the 
manner  in  which  he  has  adapted  the  name  to  the 
circumstances  narrated,  and  to  the  locality  which 
was  the  scene  of  the  transaction,  is  a  curious  in- 
stance of  a  tendency  on  the  part  of  the  Hebrews,  of 
which  there  are  many  examples  in  the  0.  T.,a  so 
to  modify  an  already  existing  name  that  it  might 
convey  to  a  Hebrew  an  intelligible  idea,  and  at  the 
same  time  preserve  essentially  its  original  form. 
There  is  every  reason  to  believe  that  the  name 
Gilead  is  derived  from  a  root  which  points  to  the 
natural  features  of  the  region  to  which  it  is  applied, 
and  to  which  it  was  in  all  probability  attached 
before  the  meeting  of  Jacob  and  Laban,  or  at  any 
rate  before  the  time  at  which  the  historian  was 
writing.  In  fact  it  is  so  used  in  verses  23  and  '_'5 
of  this  chapter.  The  memorial  heap  erected  by 
Laban  marked  a  crisis  in  Jacob's  life  which  severed 
him  from  all  further  intercourse  with  his  Syrian  kin- 
dred, and  henceforth  his  wanderings  were  mainly 
confined  to  the  land  which  his  descendants  were  to 
inherit.  Such  a  crisis,  so  commemorated,  was 
thought  by  the  historiau  of  sufficient  importance  to 
have  left  its  impress  upon  the  whole  region,  and  in 
Galeed,  "  the  witness  heap,"  was  found  the  original 
name  of  the  mountainous  district  (I  dead. 

A  similar  etymology  is  given  for  MiZPEH  in  the 
parenthetical  clause  consisting  of  the  latter  part  of 
vers.  48  and  49,  which  is  not  unlikely  to  have  been 
suggested,  though  it  is  not  so  stated — by  the  similarity 
between  HSVD,  mitspeh,  and  Hll-lfO,  matstsebah, 
the  "  standing  stone  "  or  "  statue  "  which  Jacob 
set  up  to  be  his  memorial  of  the  transaction,  as  the 
heap  of  stones  was  Laban's.  On  this  pillar  or 
standing  stone   lie  swore  by  Jehovah,  the  "  fear  of 


JEHIEL 

his  father  Isaac,"  as  Laban  over  his  heap  invoked 
the  God  of  Abraham,  and  Nahor,  the  God  of  their 
father  Terah  ;  each  marking,  by  the  most  solemn 
form  of  adjuration  he  could  employ,  his  own  sense 
of  the  grave  nature  of  the  compact.      [W.  A.  W.] 

JEHAL'ELEEL  6&6ViT:  'AAs,')A ;  Alex. 
'IaAAeAijA :  Jaleleel).  Four  men  of  the  Bene- 
Jehalleleiil  are  introduced  abruptly  into  the  genea- 
logies of  Judah  (1  Chr.  iv.  16).  The  name  is 
identical  with  that  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  Jeiia- 
LELEL.     Neither  form  is  however  quite  correct. 

JEHAL'ELEL  ('PN^rP  :  'IAaeA-^A  ;  Alex. 
'laAAr)A :  Jaalelel),  a  Merarite  Levite,  whose  son 
Azariah  took  part  in  the  restoration  of  the  temple 
in  Hezekiah's  time  (2  Chr.  xxix.  12). 

JEHDEI'AH  (-in^rP,  i.  e.  Yechde-yahu). 
1.  ('leSia;  Alex. 'IaSai'a,  ApaSeia:  Jedeia.)  The 
representative  of  the  Beue-Shubael, — descendants  of 
Gersbom,  son  of  Moses — in  the  time  of  David 
(1  Chr.  xxiv.  20).  But  in  xxvi.  24,  a  man  of  the 
name  of  Shebuel  or  Shubael,  is  recorded  as  the  head 
of  the  house  ;  unless  in  this  passage  the  family 
itself,  and  not  an  individual,  be  intended. 

2.  (TaSi'as:  Judias.)  A  Meronothite  who  had 
charge  of  the  she-asses — the  riding  and  breeding 
stock— of  David  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  30). 

JEHEZ'EKEL^KpTrY1:  o'E^A:  Jezccel), 
a  priest  to  whom  was  given  by  David  the  charge 
of  the  twentieth  of  the  twenty-four  courses  in  the 
service  of  the  house  of  Jehovah  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  Hi). 

The  name  in  the  original  is  almost  exactly  similar 

to  EZEKIEL. 

JEHI'AH  (PlW  :  'Uia;  Alex.  'Uata:  Jehias). 
He  and  Obed-edom  were  "doorkeepers  for  the  ark" 
(D'Hyty,  the  word  elsewhere  expressed  by  "por- 
ters ")  at  the  time  of  its  establishment  in  Jerusalem 
(1  Chr.  xv.  24).  The  name  does  not  recur,  but  it 
is  possible  it  may  be  exchanged  for  the  similar 
Jehiel  or  Jeiel  m  xvi.  5. 

JEHI'EL  fawtP :  Jahiel).  1.  ("IenjA.)  One 
of  the  Levites  appointed  by  David  to  assist  in 
the  service  of  the  house  of  God  (1  Chr.  xv.  18,  20  ; 
xvi.  4). 

2.  One  of  the  sons  of  Jehoshaphat  king  of  Judah, 
who  was  put  to  death  by  his  brother  Jehoram 
shortly  after  his  becoming  king  (2  Chr.  xxi.  2). 

3.  ('iei^A.)  One  of  the  rulers  of  the  house  of 
God  at  the  time  of  the  reforms  of  Josiah  (2  Chr. 
xxxv.  8).     [Syelus.] 

4.  ('IeirjA.)  A  Gershonite  Levite,  head  of  the 
Bene-Laadan  in  the  time  of  David  (1  Chr.  xxiii. 
8),  who  had  charge  of  the  treasures  (xxix.  8).  His 
family — Jehieu,  i.  e.  Jehielite,  or  as  we  should 
say  now  Jehielites — is  mentioned,  xxvi.  21. 

5.  ('Ier/A,  Alex.  'IepnjA.)  Son  of  Hachmoni,  or 
of  a  Hachmonite,  named  in  the  list  of  David's  offi- 
cers (1  Chr.  xxvii.  32)  as  "  with  (DJ?)  the  king's 
sons,"  whatever  that  may  mean.  The  mention  oi 
Ahithophel  (33)  seems  to  fix  the  date  of  this  list  as 
before  the  revolt.  In  Jerome's  Quaestiones  He- 
braicae  on  this  passage,  Jehiel  is  said  to  be  David's 
son  Chileab  or  Daniel ;  mid  "  Achamoni,"  interpreted 


a  The  double  account  of  the  origin  of  Beersheba 
(Gen.  xxi.  31,  xxvi.  33),  the  explanation  of  Zoar 
(Gen.  xix.  20,  22)  and  of  the  name  of  Moses  (Ex.  ii. 
10),   are  illustrations  of  this;  and   there   are   many 


such.  This  tendency  is  not  peculiar  to  the  Hebrews. 
It  exists  in  every  language,  but  has  not  yet  been  re- 
cognised in  the  case  of  Hebrew. 


JEHIEL 

as  Sapientissimus,  is  taken  as  an  alias  of  David 
himself.  . 

6.  (In  the  original  text,  ?XirV,  Jehuel— the 
A.  V.  follows  the  alteration  of  the  Keri :  'Isn'jA.) 
A  Levite  of  the  Bene-Heman,  who  took  part  in  the 
restorations  of  king  Hezekiah  (■_'  Chr.  xxix.  14). 

7.  Another  Levite  at  the  same  period  (2  Chr. 
xxxi.  13),  one  of  the  "overseers"  (□'•T'pS)  of  the 
articles  ottered  to  Jehovah.  His  parentage  is  not 
mentioned. 

8.  ('IeirjA,  Alex.  'ieenjX.)  Father  of  Obadiah, 
who  headed  '-'18  men  of  the  Bene- Joab  in  the  return 
from  Babylon  with  Ezra  (Ezr.  viii.  9).  In  Esdras 
the  name  is  JEZELDS,  and  the  uumber  of  his  clan 
is  stated  at  212. 

9.  ('Ie??A,  Alex.  'IeenijA:  Jehiel.)  One  of  the 
Bene-Elam,  father  of  Shechaniah,  who  encouraged 
Ezra  to  put  away  the  foreign  wives  of  the  people 
(Ezr.  x.  2).      In  Esdras  it  is  JEELUS. 

10.  ('IaiijA,  Alex.  AleiT)X:  Jehiel.)  A  member 
of  the  same  family,  who  had  himself  to  part  with 
his  wife  (Ezr.  x.  26).      [HlERIELTJS.] 

11.  ('IctJA,  Alex.  'IenijA:  Jehiel.)  A  priest,  one 
of  the  Bene-Harim,  who  also  had  to  put  away  his 
foreign  wife  (Ezr.  x.  21).     [HlEREEI,.] 

JEHIEL,3  a  perfectly  distinct  name  from  the 
last,  though  the  same  in  the  A.  V.  1.  (^N^y1 ;  so 
the  Keri,  but  the  Cetib  has  ^Xiy1,  i.  e.  Jeucl: 
'I67)A:  Alex.  'IeiTjA  :  Jehiel),  a  man  described  as 
Abi-Gibeon — father  of  Gibeon;  a  forefather  of  king 
Saul  (1  Chr.  ix.  35).  In  viii.  29  the  name  is 
omitted.  The  presence  of  the  stubborn  letter  Ain 
in  Jehiel  forbids  our  identifying  it  with  Abiel  in 
1  Sam.  ix.  1,  as  some  have  been  tempted  to  do. 

2.  (Here  the  name  is  as  given  in  No.  1).  One  of 
the  sons  of  Hotham  the  Aroerite  ;  a  member  of  the 
guard  of  David,  included  in  the  extended  list  of 
1  Chr.  xi.  44. 

JEHIE'LI  C^NTV':  'laair,\  ;  Alex.  "Ao-njA : 
Jehieli),  according  to  the  A.  V.  a  Gershonite  Levite 
of  the  family  of  Laadan.  The  Bejie-Jehieli  had 
charge  of  the  treasures  of  the  house  of  Jehovah 
(  1  Chr.  xxvi.  21,  '-'2).  In  other  lists  it  is  given 
as  Jehiel.  The  name  appears  to  be  strictly  a  pa- 
tronymic—Jebielite. 

JEHIZKI'AH  (-"injpTrV,  i.  c.  Yechizki-yahu  ; 

Miiue  name  as  Hezekiah:  E(euias  :  Ezechias),  soil 
of  Shallum,  one  of  the  heads  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim 
in  the  time  of  Ahaz,  who  at  the  instance  of  Oded 
the  prophet,  nobly  withstood  the  attempt  to  bring 
into  Samaria  a  large  number  of  captives  and  much 
booty,  which  the  Israelite  armv  under  king  Pekah 
had  taken  in  the  campaign  against  Judah.  By  the 
exertions  of  Jehizkiahu  and  his  fellows  the  captives 
were  clothed,  fed,  and  tended,  and  returned  to  Jeri- 
cho  en  route  tor  Judah  (2  Chr.  xxviii.  12;  comp. 
8,  13,  15). 

JEIIO'ADAH  (i-ny'in),  i.e.  Jehoaddah,:  'IaSet ; 
Alex. 'I&uaSa :  J<"t<l<i),  one  of  the  descendants  of 
Saul   (1  Chr.  viii.  36);  id  on   to   Merib- 

baal,  i.  e.  Mephibosheth.    In  the  duplicate  genealogy 

(ix.  42)  the  name  i$  changed   to  JARAH. 

JEHOADDAN  (j^jnrP  ;   but   in   Kings  the 

original  text  has  pnyirT1;    and  so  the  [.XX.    lw- 


JEHOIIANAN 


941 


a  Here  our  translators  represent  Ain  by  11,  unless 
they    simply    follow    the    Vulgate.      Comp.    Jkiicsii, 

Ml.Lll'NIM. 


aS'ifM  ;  Alex.  'IcoaSei'^u,  'icoaSaeV:  Joadan,Joadam). 
;'  Jehoaddan  of  Jerusalem "  was  queen  to  king 
Joash,  and  mother  of  Amaziah  of  Judah  (2  K.  xiv. 
2  ;   2  Chr.  xxv.  1). 

JEHO'AHAZ  (TnNilT  :  'lccdXa().   1.  The  son 

and  successor  of  Jehu,  reigned  17  years  li.C.  850- 
840  over  Israel  in  Samaria.  His  inglorious  history 
is  given  in  2  K.  xiii.  1-9.  Throughout  his  reign 
(ver.  22)  he  was  kept  in  subjection  by  Hazael  king 
of  Damascus,  who,  following  up  the  successes  which 
he  had  previously  achieved  against  Jehu,  compelled 
Jehoahaz  to  reduce  his  army  to  50  horsemen, 
10  chariots,  and  10,000  infantry.  Jehoahaz  main- 
tained the  idolatry  of  Jeroboam  ;  but  in  the  ex- 
tremity of  his  humiliation  he  besought  Jehovah  ; 
and  Jehovah  gave  Israel  a  deliverer  —  probably 
either  Jehoash  (vv.  23  and  25),  or  Jeroboam  11. 
(2  K.  xiv.  24,  25)  (see  Keil,  ( 'ommentary  on  Kings  . 
The  prophet  Elisha  survived  Jehoahaz  ;  and  Ewald 
(Gesch.  Isr.  iii.  557)  is  disposed  to  place  in  his 
reign  the  incursions  of  the  Syrians  mentioned  in 
2  K.  v.  2,  vi.  8,  and  of  the  Ammonites  mentioned 
in  Amos  i.  13. 

2.  Jehoahaz,  otherwise  called  SHALLUM,  the 
fourth  (ace.  to  1  Chr.  iii.  15),  or  third,  if  Zede- 
kiah's  age  be  correctly  stated  (2  Chr.  xxxvi.  11), 
son  of  Josiah,  whom  he  succeeded  as  king  of  Judah. 
He  was  chosen  by  the  people  in  preference  to  his 
elder  (comp.  2  K.  jxiii..  31  and  36)  brother,  B.C. 
610,  and  he  reigned  three  months  in  Jerusalem.  His 
anointing  (ver.  30)  was  probably  some  additional 
ceremony,  or  it  is  mentioned  with  peculiar  em- 
phasis, as  if  to  make  up  for  bis  want  of  the  ordinary 
title  to  the  throne.  He  is  described  by  his  con- 
temporaries as  an  evil-doer  (2  K.  xxiii.  32)  and  an 
oppressor  (Ez.  xix.  3),  and  such  is  his  traditional 
character  in  Josephus  (Ant .  x.  5,  §2) ;  but  his 
deposition  seems  to  have  been  lamented  by  the 
people  (Jer.  xxii.  10,  and  Ez.  xix.  1).  Pharaoh- 
necho  on  his  return  from  Carchemish,  perhaps 
resenting  the  election  of  Jehoahaz,  sent  to  Jeru- 
salem to  depose  him,  and  to  fetch  him  to  Riblab. 
There  he  was  cast  into  chains,  and  from  thence  he 
was  taken  into  Egypt,  where  he  died  (see  Prideanx, 
Connection,  anno  610;  Ewald,  Gesch.  Isr.  iii. 
719  ;  Rosenmiiller,  Schol.  in  Jerem,  xxii.  11). 

3.  The  name  given  (2  Chr.  xxi.  17,  where,  how- 
ever, the  LXX.  has  'Ox<>Cias)  during  his  father's 
lifetime  (Bertheau)  to  the  youngest  son  of  Jehoiam 
king  of  Judah.  As  king  he  is  known  by  the  name 
of  Ahaziah,  which  is  written  Azariah  in  the  pre- 
sent Hebrew  text  of  2  Chr.  xxii.  6,  perhaps  through 
a  transcriber's  error.  [\\  .  T.  B.] 

JEHO'ASH  (B>NW:  'lads:  Joas),  the  ori- 
ginal uucontracted  form  of  the  name  which  is  more 
commonly  found  compressed  into  Joash.  The  two 
forms   appear  to  be  used  quite  indiscriminately  ; 

sometimes  both  occur  in  one  verse  (c.  J.  2  K.  xiii. 
It),  xiv.  17). 

1.  The  eighth  king  of  Judah;  son  of  Ahaziah 
(2  K.  xi.  21,  xii.  1,  2,  4,  6,  7,  18,  xiv.  13). 
|  JOASH,  I.] 

2.  The  twelfth  king  of  Israel ;  sou  of  Jehoahaz 

(2  K.  xiii.  Id,  25,  xiv.  s,  9,  11,  13,  15,  16,  17). 
[JOASH,  2.] 

JEHOHA'NAN  (|3ni<T=  "Jehovah's  gift," 
answering   to   Theodore:    'iwavdv.    Johan 
name  much    in   use,  both    in  this   form  and   in   the 
contracted  shape  of  JOHANAN,  in  the  later  periods 


942 


JEHOIACHIN 


of  Jewish  history.  It  has  come  clown  to  us  as 
John,  and  indeed  is  rendered  by  Josephus  'IwccwSjs 
(Ant.  viii.  15,  §2). 

1.  ('IcavdQav ;  Alex.  'Wcte).  A  Levite,  one  of 
the  doorkeepers  (A.  V.  "  porters  ")  to  the  house  of 
Jehovah,  i.  e.  the  Tabernacle,  according  to  the  ap- 
pointment of  David  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  3;  comp.  xxv.  1). 
He  was  the  sixth  of  the  seven  sons  of  Meshelemiah  ; 
a  Korbite,  that  is  descended  from  Korah,  the  founder 
of  that  great  Kohathite  house.  He  is  also  said  (ver. 
1)  to  have  been  of  the  Bene-A%aph;  but  Asaph  is 
a  contraction  for  Ebiasaph,  as  is  seen  from  the  ge- 
nealogy in  ix.  19.  The  well  known  Asaph  too  was 
not  a  Kohathite  but  a  Gershonite. 

2.  One  of  the  principal  men  of  Judah,  under 
king  Jehoshaphat;  he  commanded  280,000  men, 
apparently  in  and  about  Jerusalem  (2  Chr.  xvii. 
15;  comp.  13  and  19).  He  is  named  second  on 
the  list,  and  is  entitled  "I'teTI,  "  the  captain,"  a 
title  also  given  to  Adnah  in  the  preceding  verse, 
though  there  rendered  "  the  chief."  He  is  pro- 
bably the  same  person  as 

3.  Father  of  Ishmael,  one  of  the  "captains 
CHE?,  as  before)  of  hundreds  " — evidently  residing 
in  or  near  Jerusalem — whom  Jehoiada  the  priest 
took  into  his  confidence  about  the  restoration  of  the 
line  of  Judah  (2  Chr.  xxiii.  1). 

4.  One  of  the  Bene-Bebai,  a  lay  Israelite  who 
was  forced  by  Ezra  to  put  away  his  foreign  wife 
(Ezr.  x.  28).     In  Esdras  the  name  is  Johannes. 

5.  A  priest  (Neh.  xii.  13) ;  the  representative  of 
the  house  of  Amariah  (comp.  2),  during  the  high- 
priesthood  of  Joiakim  (ver.  12),  that  is  to  say  in 
the  generation  after  the  first  return  from  captivity. 

6.  (Vat.  LXX.  omits.)  A  priest  who  took  part 
in  the  musical  service  of  thanksgiving,  at  the  dedi- 
cation of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  by  JSIehemiah 
(Neh.  xii.  42).  In  two  other  cases  this  name  is 
given  in  the  A.  V.  as  Joiianan. 

JEHOI'ACHIN  (p»irP  =  "appointed  of  Je- 
hovah;" once  only,  Ez.  i.  2,  contracted  to  pS"1!"1  : 
in  Kings  'Ieoctxi/x,  Chron.  'lexovlas,  Jer.  and  Ez. 
'lwaKeifJ. ;  Alex.  'IwaKeifx.  throughout ;  Joseph. 
'lcodx^os:  Joachin).  Elsewhere  the  name  is  al- 
tered to  Jeconiah,  and  Coniah.  See  also  Jecho- 
nias,  Joiakim,  and  Joacim. 

Son  of  Jehoiakim  and  Nehushta,  and  for  three 
mouths  and  ten  days  king  of  Judah,  after  the  death 
of  his  father,  being  the  nineteenth  king  from  David, 
or  twentieth,  counting  Jehoahaz.  According  to 
2  K.  xxiv.  8,  Jehoiachin  was  eighteen  years  old 
at  his  accession;  but  2  Chr.  xxxvi.  0,  as  well  as 
1  Esdr.  i.  43,  has  the  far  more  probable  readino- 
eight  years,a  which  fixes  his  birth  to  the  time 
of  his  father's  captivity,  according  to  Matt.  i.  11. 

Jehoiachin  came  to  the  throne  at  a  time  when 
Egypt  was  still  prostrate  in  consequence  of  the 
victory  at  Carchemish,  and  when  the  Jews  had 
been  for  three  or  four  years  harassed  and  distressed 
by  the  inroads  of  the  armed  bands  of  Chaldeans, 
Ammonites,  and  Moabites,  sent  against  them  by 
Nebuchadnezzar  in  consequence  of  Jehoiakim's  re- 
bellion. [Jehoiakim.]  Jerusalem  at  this  time, 
therefore,  was  quite  defenceless,  and  unable  to  offer 
any  resistance  to  the  regular  army  which   Nebu- 


JEHOIACHIN 

chadnezzar  sent  to  besiege  it  in  the  8th  year  of 
his  reign,  and  which  he  seems  to  have  joined  in 
person  after  the  siege  was  commenced  (2  K.  xxiv. 
10,  11).  In  a  very  short  time,  apparently,  and 
without  any  losses  from  famine  or  fighting  which 
would  indicate  a  serious  resistance,  Jehoiachin  sur- 
rendered at  disci  etion  ;  and  he,  and  the  queen- 
mother,  and  all  his  servants,  captains,  and  officers, 
came  out  and  gave  themselves  up  to  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, who  carried  them,  with  the  harem  and  the 
eunuchs,  to  Babylon  (Jer.  xxix.  2  ;  Ezek.  xvii.  12, 
xix.  9).  All  the  king's  treasures,  and  all  the 
treasure  of  the  temple,  were  seized,  and  the  golden 
vessels  of  the  temple,  which  the  king  of  Babylon 
had  left  when  he  pillaged  it  in  the  fourth  of  Jehoi- 
akim, were  now  either  cut  up  or  carried  away  to 
Babylon,  with  all  the  nobles,  and  men  of  war,  and 
skilled  artizans,  none  but  the  poorest  and  weakest 
being  left  behind  (2  K.  xxiv.  13  ;  2  Chr.  xxxvi.  19). 
According  to  2  K.  xxiv.  14,  16,  the  number  taken 
at  this  time  into  captivity  was  10,000,  viz.  7000 
soldiers,  1000  craftsmen  and  smiths,  and  2000 
whose  calling  is  not  specified.  But,  according  to 
Jer.  lii.  28  (a  passage  which  is  omitted  in  the 
LXX.),  the  number  carried  away  captive  at  this 
time  (called  the  seventh  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  instead 
of  the  eighth,  as  in  2  K.  xxiv.  12)  was  3023. 
Whether  this  difference  arises  from  any  corruption 
of  the  numerals,  or  whether  only  a  portion  of  those 
originally  taken  captive  were  actually  carried  to 
Babylon,  the  others  being  left  with  Zedekiah  upon 
his  swearing  allegiance  to  Nebuchadnezzar,  cannot 
perhaps  be  decided.  The  numbers  in  Jeremiah  are 
certainly  very  small,  only  4600  in  all,  whereas  the 
numbers  who  returned  from  captivity,  as  given  in 
Ezr.  ii.  and  Neh.  vii.  were  42,360.  However, 
Jehoiachin  was  himself  led  away  captive  to  Babylon, 
and   there    he    remained    a   prisoner,   actually   in 

prison  (K?3  IT'S),  and  wearing  prison  garments, 

for  thirty-six  years,  viz.  till  the  death  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, when  Evil-Merodach  succeeding  to  the 
throne  of  Babylon,  treated  him  with  much  kind- 
ness, brought  him  out  of  prison,  changed  his  gar- 
ments, raised  him  above  the  other  subject  or 
captive  kings,  and  made  him  sit  at  his  own  table. 
Whether  Jehoiachin  outlived  the  two  years  of  Evil- 
Merodach's  reign  or  not  does  not  appear,  nor  have 
we  any  particulars  of-  his  life  at  Babylon.  The 
general  description  of  him  in  2  K.  xxiv.  9,  "  He 
did  evil  in  the  sight  of  Jehovah,  according  to  all 
that  his  father  had  done,"  seems  to  apply  to  his 
character  at  the  time  he  was  king,  and  but  a  child ; 
and  so  does  the  prophecy  of  Jeremiah  (xxii.  24-30  ; 
Ezek.  xix.  5-9).  We  also  learn  from  Jer.  xxviii. 
4,  that  four  years  after  Jehoiachin  had  gone  to 
Babylon,  there  was  a  great  expectation  at  Jeru- 
salem of  his  return,  but  it  does  not  appear  whether 
Jehoiachin  himself  shared  this  hope  at  Babylon. 
[Hananiah,  4.]  The  tenor  of  Jeremiah's  letter 
to  the  elders  of  the  captivity  (xxix.)  would,  how- 
ever, indicate  that  there  was  a  party  among  the 
captivity,  encouraged  by  false  prophets,  who  were 
at  this  time  looking  forward  to  Nebuchadnezzar's 
overthrow  and  Jehoiachin's  return  ;  and  perhaps 
the  fearful  death  of  Ahab  the  son  of  Kolaiah  (lb. 
v.  22),  and  the  close  confinement  of  Jehoiachin 
through  Nebuchadnezzar's   reign,   may   have   been 


*  Such  is  the  text  of  the  Vat.  LXX.  ;  the  A,  V.  Jer.  xxii.  28,  30,  imply  sex  rather  than  age,  and 
follows  the  Alex,  and  Vulgate  in  reading  "  eighteen."  are  both  actually  used  of  infants.  See  Gesen.  This. 
The    words  WH  and  ""Qj|,   applied  to  Jehoiakim    in     6.  vv. 


JEHOIACHIN 

the  result  of  some  disposition  to  conspire  against 
Nebuchadnezzar  on  the  part  of  a  portion  of  the 
captivity.  But  neither  Daniel  nor  Ezekiel,  who 
were  Jehoiachin's  fellow-captives,  make  any  further 
allusion  to  him,  except  that  Ezekiel  dates  his  pro- 
phecies by  the  year  "  of  Kino;  Jehoiachin's  cap- 
tivity "  (i.  2,  viii.  1,  xxiv.  1,  &c);  the  latest  date 
being  "  the  twenty-seventh  year"  (xxix.  17,  xl.  1 ). 
We  also  learn  from  Esth.  ii.  6,  that  Kish,  the 
ancestor  of  Mordecai,  was  Jehoiachin's  fellow-cap- 
tive. But  the  apocryphal  books  are  more  com- 
municative. Thus  the  author  of  the  book  of 
Baruch  (i.  3)  introduces  "  Jechonias  the  son  of 
Jehoiakim  king  of  Juilah"  into  his  narrative,  and 
represents  Baruch  as  reading  his  prophecy  in  his 
ears,  and  in  the  ears  of  the  king's  sons,  and  the 
nobles,  and  elders,  and  people,  at  Babylon.  At  the 
hearing  of  Baruch's  words,  it  is  added,  they  wept, 
and  fasted,  ami  prayed,  and  sent  a  collection  of  silver 
to  Jerusalem,  to  Joiakim,  the  son  of  Hilkiah,  the  son 
of  Shallum  the  high-priest,  with  which  to  purchase 
burnt-offerings,  and  sacrifice,  and  incense,  bidding 
them  pray  for  the  prosperity  of  Nebuchadnezzar 
and  Belshazzar  his  son.  The  history  of  Susanna 
and  the  Elders  also  apparently  makes  Jehoiachin  an 
important  personage;  for,  according;  to  the  author, 
the  husband  of  Susanna  was  Joiakim,  a  man  of 
great  wealth,  and  the  chief  person  among  the 
captives,  to  whose  house  all  the  people  resorted 
for  judgment,  a  description  which  suits  Jehoiachin. 
Africanus  [L)i.  ad  Oriij.;  Louth,  Eel.  Sac.  ii. 
llo)  expressly  calls  Susanna's  husband  king,  and 
says  that  the  king  of  Babylon  had  made  him  his 
royal  companion  (crwdpovos).  He  is  also  men- 
tioned 1  Esdr.  v.  5,  but  the  text  seems  to  be 
corrupt.  It  probably  should  be  "  Zorobabel,  the 
son  of  Salathiel,  the  son  of  Joacim,"  i.  e.  Jehoi- 
chin.  It  does  not  appear  certainly  from  Scrip- 
ture, whether  Jehoiachin  was  married  or  had  any 
children.  That  Zedekiah,  who  in  1  Chr.  iii.  16  is 
called  "  his  son,"  is  the  same  as  Zedekiah  his 
uncle  (called  "  his  brother,"  '2  Chr.  xxxvi.  10), 
who  was  his  successor  on  the  throne,  seems  certain, 
lint  it  is  not  impossible  that  Assir  ("IDN  =  captive), 
who  is  reckoned  among  the  "  sons  of  Jeconiah  "  in 
1  Chr.  iii.  17,  may  have  been  so  really,  and  either 
have  died  young  or  been  made  an  eunuch  (Is.  xxxix. 
7).  This  is  quite  in  accordance  with  the  term 
"  childless,"  ,,"V~iy.  applied  to  Jeconiah  by  Jere- 
miah (xxii.  30).  [Genealogy  oe  Christ,  p.  675.] 

Jehoiachin  was  the  last  of  Solomon's  line,  and  on 
its  failure  in  his  person,  the  right  to  the  succession 
passed  to  the  line  of  Nathan,  whose  descendant 
Shealtiel,  or  Salathiel,  the  son  of  Neri,  was  conse- 
quently inscribed  in  the  genealogy  as  of  '"the  sons 
of  Jehoiachin."  Hence  his  place  in  the  genealogy  of 
Christ  (.Matt.  i.  11,  12).  For  the  variations  in  the 
Hebrew  forms  of  Jeconiah' s  name  see  H  an  an  i  ah, 
S;  and  for  the  eontiision  in  Greek  and  Latin 
writers  between  Jehoiakim  and  Jehoiachin,  'iwaxetV 
and  'luaKelfi,  see  Genealogy  of  Jesds  Christ, 
and  Hervey's  Genealogy,  p.  71-7:!. 

X.r>.  'l'iie  compiler  of  1  Esdr.  gives  the  name  of 
Jechonias  to  Jehoahaz  the  son  of  Josiah,  who 
reigned  three  months  after  Josiah's  death,  and  was 
deposed  and  earned  to  Egypl  by  Pharaoh-Necho 
(1  Esdr.  i.  :'.f ;  -'  K.  xxiii.  30).  He  i>  followed 
in  this  blunder  by  Epiphanius  (vol.  i.  p.  21), 
who  savs  "Josiah  begat  Jechoniah,  who  is  also 
called  Shallum.  'this  Jechoniah  begat  Jechoniah, 
who    is   called   Zedekiah   and  Joakim."     It   has    its 


JEHOIADA 


943 


origin  doubtless  in  the  confusion  of  the  names 
when  written  in  Greek  by  writers  ignorant  of 
Hebrew.  [A.  C.  IE] 

JEHOI'ADA  (JJTirP  =  "  known  of  Jehovah  :" 

'IcoOae  ;  Alex.  'IajaSae,  'IanaSa,  'IaxaSac,  and  also 
as  Vat.;  Joseph.  'IdaSos:  Joiada).  In  the  later 
books  the  name  is  contracted  to  Joiada. 

1.  Father  of  Benaiah,  David's  well  known 
warrior  (2  Sam.  viii.  18,  1  K.  i.  and  ii.  passim, 
1  Chr.  xviii.  17,  &c).  From  1  Chr.  xxvii.  5,  we 
learn  that  Benaiah's  father  was  the  chief  priest,  and 
he  is  therefore  doubtless  identical  with 

2.  ('IaiccSas)  Leader  (T'JJ)  of  the  Aaronites  (ac- 
curately "  of  Aaron  ")  i.  e.  the  priests  ;  who  joined 
David  at  Hebron,  bringing  with  him  3700  priests 
(1-Chr.  xii.  27). 

3.  According  to  1  Chr.  xxvii.  34,  son  of  Benaiah, 
and  one  of  David's  chief  counsellors,  apparently 
having  succeeded  Ahithophel  in  that  office.  But 
in  all  probability  Benaiah  the  son  of  Jehoiada  is 
meant,  by  a  confusion  similar  to  that  which  has 
arisen  with  regard  to  Ahimelech  and  Abiathar, 
1  Chr.  xviii.  16,  2  Sam.  viii.  17. 

4.  High-priest  at  the  time  of  Athaliah's  usurpa- 
tion of  the  throne  of  Judah  (B.C.  884-878),  and 
during  the  greater  portion  of  the  40  years'  reign  of 
Joash.  It  does  not  appear  when  he  first  became 
high-priest,  but  it  may  have  been  as  early  as  the 
latter  part  of  Jehoshaphat's  reign.  Any  how,  he 
probably  succeeded  Amariah.  [High-Priest.]  He 
married  Jehosheha,  or  Jehoshabeath,  daughter  of 
king  Jehoram,  and  sister  of  king  Ahaziah  (2  Chr. 
xxii.  11)  ;  and  when  Athaliah  slew  all  the  seed  royal 
of  Judah  after  Ahaziah  had  been  put  to  death  by 
.Jehu,  he  and  his  wife  stole  Joash  from  among  the 
king's  sons,  and  hid  him  for  six  years  in  the  Temple, 
and  eventually  replaced  him  on  the  throne  of  his 
ancestors.  [Joash;  Athaliah.]  In  effecting  this 
happy  revolution,  by  which  both  the  throne  of  David 
and  the  worship  of  the  true  God  according  to  the 
law  of  Moses  were  rescued  from  imminent  danger 
of  destruction,  Jehoiada  displayed  great  ability  and 
prudence.  Waiting  patiently  till  the  tyranny  of 
Athaliah,  and,  we  may  presume,  her  foreign  prac- 
tices and  preferences,  had  produced  disgust  in  the 
land,  he  at  length,  in  the  7th  year  of  her  reign, 
entered  into  secret  alliance  with  all  the  chief  par- 
tizans  of  the  house  of  David  and  of  the  true  religion. 
He  also  collected  at  Jerusalem  the  Levites  from  the 
different  cities  of  Judah  and- Israel,  probably  under 
cover  of  providing  for  the  Temple  services,  and 
then  concentrated  a  large  and  concealed  force  ill 
the  Temple,  by  the  expedient  of  not  dismissing  the 
old  courses  of  priests  and  Levites  when  their  suc- 
cessors came  to  relieve  them  on  the  Sabbath.     By 

means  of  the  consecrated  shields  and  spears  which 
David  had  taken  in  his  wars,  and  which  were  pre- 
served in  the  treasury  of  the  Temple  (comp.  1  Chr. 
xviii.  7-1 1,  xxvi.  20-28,  1  K.  xiv.  26,  27),  he  sup- 
plied tin'  captains  of  hundreds  with  arms  for  their 
men.  Having  then  divided  the  priests  and  Levites 
into  three  bands,  which  Weie  posted  at   the  principal 

entrances,  and  tilled  the  courts  with  people  favour- 
able to  the  cause,  he  produced  tin-  young  king  before 
tin'  whole  assembly,  and  crowned  ami  anointed  him, 
and  presented  to  him  a  copy  of  the  Law  according 
to  Deut.  x,ii.  18-20.  [Hilkiah.]  The  excitemenl 
of  the  moment  did  not  make  him  forget  the  sanctity 
of  God's  house.  None  but  the  priests  ami  minis- 
tering Levites  were  permitted  by  him  to  enter  the 


914 


JEHOIADA 


Temple  ;  and  he  gave  strict  orders  that  Athaliah 
should  be  carried  without  its  precincts  before  she 
was  put  to  death.  In  the  same  spirit  he  inaugu- 
rated the  new  reign  by  a  solemn  covenant  be- 
tween himself,  as  high-priest,  and  the  people  and 
the  king,  to  renounce  the  Baal-worship  which  had 
been  introduced  by  the  house  of  Ahab,  and  to 
serve  Jehovah.  This  was  followed  up  by  the 
immediate  destruction  of  the  altar  and  temple  of 
Baal,  and  the  death  of  Mattan  his  priest.  He  then 
took  order  for  the  due  celebration  of  the  Temple 
service,  and  at  the  same  time  for  the  perfect  re- 
establishment  of  the  monarchy;  all  which  seems  to 
have  been  effected  with  great  vigour  and  success, 
and  without  any  cruelty  or  violence.  The  young 
king  himself,  under  this  wise  and  virtuous  coun- 
sellor, ruled  his  kingdom  well  and  prosperously,  and 
was  forward  in  works  of  piety  during  the  lifetime 
of  Jehoiada.  The  reparation  of  the  Temple  in  the 
23rd  year  of  his  reign,  of  which  a  full  and  interest- 
ing account  is  given  2  K.  xii.  and  2  Chr.  xxiv.,  was 
one  of  the  most  important  works  at  this  period. 
At  length,  however,  Jehoiada  died,  B.C.  834,  and 
though  far  advanced  in  years,  too  soon  for  the  wel- 
fare of  his  country,  and  the  weak  unstable  character 
of  Joash.  The  text  of  2  Chr.  xxiv.  15,  supported 
by  the  LXX.  and  Josephus,  makes  him  130  years 
old  when  he  died.  But  supposing  him  to  have  lived 
to  the  35th  year  of  Joash  (which  only  leaves  5 
years  for  all  the  subsecpaent  events  of  the  reign) ,  he 
would  in  that  case  have  been  95  at  the  time  of  the 
insurrection  against  Athaliah  ;  and  15  years  before, 
when  Jehoram,  whose  daughter  was  his  wife,  was 
only  32  years  old,  he  would  have  been  80  :  than 
which  nothing  can  be  more  improbable.  There  must 
therefore  be  some  early  corruption  of  the  numeral. 
Perhaps  we  ought  to  read  ilK^-l  D^bt?  (83), 
instead  of  D't^-1  HXD.  Even  103  (as  suggested,' 
Geneal.  of  our  Lord,  p.  304)  would  leave  an  impro- 
bable age  at  the  two  above-named  epochs.  If  83 
at  his  death,  he  would  have  been  33  years  old  at 
Joram's  accession.  For  his  signal  services  to  his 
God,  his  king,  and  his  country,  which  have  earned 
him  a  place  among  the  very  foremost  well-doers  in 
Israel,  he  had  the  unique  honour  of  burial  among 
the  kings  of  Judah  in  the  city  of  David.  He  was 
probably  succeeded  by  his  son  Zechariah.  In  Jo- 
sephus' list  {A.  J.  rviii.  §6)  the  name  of  IHAEA2 
by  an  easy  corruption  is  transformed  into  <t>IAEA2, 
and  in  the  Seder  Olam  into  Phadea. 

In  Matt,  xxiii.  35,  Zechariah  the  son  of  Jehoiada 
is  mentioned  as  the  "  son  of  Barachias,"  i.  e.  Bere- 
chiah.  This  is  omitted  in  Luke  (xi.  51),  and  has 
probably  been  inserted  from  a  confusion  between 
this  Zechariah  and  2,  the  prophet,  who  was  son  of 
Berechiah ;  or  with  the  son  of  Jeberechiah  (Is. 
viii.  2). 

5.  .Second  priest,  or  sagan,  to  Seraiah  the  high- 
,i<?st.  He  was  deposed  at  the  beginning  of  the  reign 
of  Zedekiah,  probably  for  adhering  to  the  prophet 
Jeremiah  ;  when  Zephaniah  was  appointed  sagan 
in  his  room8  (Jer.  xxix.  25-29;  2  K.  xxv.  18). 
This  is  a  clear  instance  of  the  title  "  the  priest  " 
being  applied  to  the  second  piiest.  The  passage  in 
Jeremiah  shows  the  nature  of  the  sagan's  authority 
at  this  time,  when  he  was  doubtless  "ruler  of  the 

*  It  is  however  possible  that  Jehoiada  vacated  the 
office  by  death. 

b  It  does  not  appear  from  the  narrative  in  2  K. 
xxiii.  (which  is  the  fullest)  whether  Necho  went 
straight  to  Egypt  from  Jerusalem,   or   whether   the 


JEHOIAKIM 

house  of  Jehovah"  (rVl.T   rP3  T33).      [HlGH- 

PRIEST.]  Winer  (Reaiwb.')  has  quite  misunder- 
stood the  passage,  and  makes  Jehoiada  the  same  as 
the  high-priest  in  the  reign  of  Joash. 

6.  (VVV,   i.e.   Joiada;   'IcoiSa,  Alex.  'IoeiSa; 

TT 

Jojada),  son  of  Paseach,  who  assisted  to  repair  the 
"  old  gate  "  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  6).     [A.  C.  H.] 

JEHOI'AKIM   (D'j?^n?:    'lacuclfi,  or  -etfi; 

Joseph.  'loia.Kifj.os :  Joakim),  18th  (or,  counting 
Jehoahaz,  19th)  king  of  Judah  from  David 
inclusive — 25  years  old  at  his  accession,  and 
originally  called  Eliakiji.  He  was  the  son  of 
Josiah  and  Zebudah,  daughter  of  Pedaiah  of  Rumah, 
possibly  identical  with  Arumah  of  Judg.  ix.  41 
(where  the  Vulg.  has  Rumah),  and  in  that  case 
in  the  tribe  of  Manasseh.  His  younger  brother 
Jehoahaz,  or  Shallum,  as  he  is  called  Jer.  xxii.  11, 
was  in  the  first  instance  made  king  by  the  people 
of  the  land  on  the  death  of  his  father  Josiah,  pro- 
bably with  the  intention  of  following  up  Josiah's 
policy,  which  was  to  side  with  Nebuchadnezzar 
against  Egypt,  being,  as  Prideaux  thinks,  bound 
by  oath  to  the  kings  of  Babylon  (i.  50).  Pharaoh- 
Necho,  therefore,  having  borne  down  all  resistance 
with  his  victorious  army,  immediately  deposed  Je- 
hoahaz, and  had  him  brought  in  chains  to  Riblah, 
where,  it  seems,  he  was  on  his  way  to  Carchennsh 
(2  K.  xxiii.  33,34;  Jer.  xxii.  10-12).  He  then  set 
Eliakim,  his  elder  brother,  upon  the  throne — 
changed  his  name  to  Jehoiakim  —  and  having 
charged  him  with  the  task  of  collecting  a  tribute 
of  100  talputs  of  silver,  and  1  talent  of  gold  =  nearly 
40,000/.-, -in  which  he  mulcted  the  land  for  the 
part  Josiah  had  taken  in  the  war  with  Babylon,  he 
eventually  returned  to  Egypt  taking  Jehoahaz  with 
him,  who  died  there  in  captivity  (2  K.  xxiii.  34; 
Jer.  xxii.  10-12  ;  Ezek.  xix.  4).b  Pharaoh-Necho 
also  himself  returned  no  more  to  Jerusalem,  for 
after  his  great  defeat  at  Carchemish  in  the  fourth 
year  of  Jehoiakim  he  lost  all  his  Syrian  possessions 
(2  K.  xxiv.  7  ;  Jer.  xlvi.  2),  and  his  successor 
Psammis  (Herod,  ii.  clxi.)  made  no  attempt  to 
recover  them.  Egypt,  therefore,  played  no  part  in 
Jewish  politics  during  the  seven  or  eight  years  of 
Jehoiakim' s  reign.  After  the  battle  of  Carchemish 
Nebuchadnezzar  came  into  Palestine  as  one  of  the 
Egyptian  tributary  kingdoms,  the  capture  of  which 
was  the  natural  fruit  of  his  victory  over  Necho. 
He  found  Jehoiakim  ejuite  defenceless.  After  a 
short  siege  he  entered  Jerusalem,  took  the  king  pri- 
soner, bound  him  in  fetters  to  carry  him  to  Baby- 
lon, and  took  also  some  of  the  precious  vessels  of 
the  temple  and  carried  them  to  the  land  of  Shinar 
to  the  temple  of  Bel  his  god.  It  was  at  this  time, 
in  the  fourth,  or,  as  Daniel  reckons,  in  the  third 
year  of  his  reign,c  that  Daniel,  and  Hananiah,  Mi- 
shael,  and  Azariah,  were  taken  captives  to  Babylon  ; 
but  Nebuchadnezzar  seems  to  have  changed  his 
purpose  as  regarded  Jehoiakim,  and  to  have  ac- 
cepted his  submission,  and  reinstated  him  on  the 
throne,  perhaps  in  remembrance  of  the  fidelity  of 
his  father  Josiah.  What  is  certain  is,  that  Jehoi- 
akim became  tributary  to  Nebuchadnezzar  after  his 
invasion  of  Judah,  and  continued  so  for  three  years, 
but  at  the  end  of  that  time  broke  his  oath  of  allc- 


calamitous  campaign  on  the  Euphrates  intervened. 

,:  It  is  possible  that  this  diversity  of  reckoning  may 
lie  caused  by  some  reckoning  a  year  for  Jeboahaz's 
reign,  while  some  omitted  it. 


JEHOIAKIM 

glance  and  rebelled  against  him  (2  K.  xxiv.  1). 
What  moved  or  encouraged  Jehoiakim  to  this  re- 
bellion it  is  difficult  to  say,  unless  it  were  the  rest- 
less turbulence  of  his  own  bad  disposition  and  the 
dislike  of  paying  the  tribute  to  the  king  of  Babylon, 
which  he  would  have  rather  lavished  upon  his  own 
luxury  and  pride  (Jer.  xxii.  13-17),  for  there  is 
nothing  to  bear  out  Winer's  conjecture,  or  Jose- 
phus's  assertion,  that  there  was  anything  in  the 
attitude  of  Egypt  at  this  time  to  account  for  such 
a  step.  It  seems  more  probable  that  seeing  Egypt 
entirely  severed  from  the  affairs  of  Syria  since  the 
battle  of  Carchemish,  and  the  king  of  Babylon 
wholly  occupied  with  distant  wars,  he  hoped  to 
make  himself  independent.  But  whatever  was  the 
motive  of  this  foolish  and  wicked  proceeding,  which 
was  contrary  to  the  repeated  warnings  of  the  pro- 
phet Jeremiah,  it  is  certain  that  it  brought  misery 
and  ruin  upon  the  king  and  his  country.  Though 
Nebuchadnezzar  was  not  able  at  that  time  to  come 
in  person  to  chastise  his  rebellious  vassal  he  sent 
against  him  numerous  bands  of  Chakleans,  with 
Syrians,  Moabites,  and  Ammonites,  who  were  all 
now  subject  to  Babylon  (2  Iv.  xxiv.  7),  and  who 
cruelly  harassed  the  whole  country.  It  was  per- 
haps at  this  time  that  the  great  drought  occurred 
described  in  Jer.  xiv.  (comp.  Jer.  xv.  4  with  2  K. 
xxiv.  2,  .">).  The  closing  years  of  this  reign 
must  have  been  a  time  of  extreme  misery.  The 
Ammonites  appear  to  have  overrun  the  land  of 
Gad  (Jer.  xlix.  1),  and  the  other  neighbouring 
nations  to  have  taken  advantage  of  the  helpless- 
ness of  Israel  to  ravage  their  land  to  the  utmost 
( Kz.  xxv.).  There  was  no  rest  or  safety  out  of 
the  walled  cities.  We  are  not  acquainted  with 
the  details  of  the  close  of  the  reign.  Probably  as 
the  time  approached  for  Nebuchadnezzar  himself 
to  come  against  Judea  the  desultory  attacks  and 
invasions  of  his  troops  became  more  concentrated. 
Either  in  an  engagement  with  some  of  these  forces, 
or  else  by  the  hand  of  his  own  oppressed  subjects, 
who  thought  to  conciliate  the  Babylonians  by  the 
murder  of  their  king,  Jehoiakim  came  to  a  violent 
end  in  the  11th  year  of  his  reign.  His  body  was 
cist  out  ignominiously  on  the  ground ;  perhaps 
thrown  over  the  walls  to  convince  the  enemy  that 
he  was  dead ;  and  then,  after  being  left  exposed  for 
sonic  time,  was  dragged  away  and  buried  "with 
the  burial  of  an  ass,"  without  pomp  or  lamenta- 
tion, "beyond  the  gates  of  Jerusalem"  (Jer.  xxii. 
18,  19,  xxxvi.  30).  Within  three  months  of  his 
death  Nebuchadnezzar  arrived,  and  put  an  end  to 
his  dynasty  by  carrying  Jehoiachin  off  to  Babylon. 
[Jehoiachin.1  All  the  accounts  we  have  of  Jehoi- 
akim concur  in  ascribing  to  him  a  vicious  and 
irr<J\ nuns  character.  Ifce  writer  ct  2  K.  xxm  .7, 
tells  us  that  "  lie  did  that  which  was  evil  in  the 
sight  of  Jehovah,"  a  statement  which  is  repeated 
xxiv.   9,   and   2   Chr.   xxxvi.   .">.     The  latter  writer 


JEHOIAKIM 


945 


ii  The  passage  seems  to  be  corrupt.  The  words 
tw  aSe\<j>'ov  aiiTov  seem  to  be  repeated  From  the  pre- 
ceding line  but  one,  and  ZapaKipi  is  a  corruption  of 

Oiipiac.      crv\\a.fiuii>  anjyaytr    is   a    paraphrase    of    the 

Alexandrian  Codex  of  Jer.  xxxiii.  l1;;  ^xxvi.  23,  A.  V.), 

\rvvtAdf$o<ra.v  clvt'ov,  Kai  i^rj-yayof. 

e   Nothing  can  be  more  improbable  than  an  invasion 

of  Egypt  by  Nebuchadnezzar  at  this  time.     All  the 

Syrian  possessions  of  Egypt  fell  into  the  power  of 
Babylon  soon  alter  the  victory  at  Carchemish,  and  the 
king  of  Egypt  retired  thenceforth  into  liis  own  country. 
His  Asiatic  wars  seem  to  have  engrossed  Nebuchad- 
nezzar's attention  for  the  next  7  years  ;   and  in  like 


uses  the  yet  stronger  expression,  "  the  acts  of  Jehoi- 
akim, and  tin;  abominations  which  he  did"  (v.  8). 
But  it  is  in  the  writings  of  Jeremiah  that  we  have 
the  fullest  portraiture  of  him.  If,  as  is  probable, 
the  19th  chapter  of  Jeremiah  belongs  to  this  reign, 
we  have  a  detail  of  the  abominations  of  idolatry 
practised  at  Jerusalem  under  the  king's  sanction, 
with  which  Ezekiel's  vision  of  what  was  going  on 
six  years  later,  within  the  very  precincts  of  the 
temple,  exactly  agrees ;  incense  offered  up  to 
"  abominable  beasts ;"  "  women  weeping  for  Tham- 
miiz  ,"  and  men  in  the  inner  court  of  the  temple 
"  with  their  backs  towards  the  temple  of  the 
Lord  "  worshipping  "  the  sun  towards  the  east  " 
(Ez.  viii.).  ■  The  vindictive  pursuit  and  murder  of 
Urijah  the  son  of  Shemaiah,  and  the  indignities 
offered  to  his  corpse  by  the  king's  command,  in 
revenge  for  his  faithful  prophesying  of  evil  against 
Jerusalem  and  Judah,  are  samples  of  his  irreligion 
and  tyranny  combined.  Jeremiah  only  narrowly 
escaped  the  same  fate  (Jer.  xxvi.  20-24).  The 
curious  notice  of  him  in  1  Esdr.  i.  38,  that  he  put 
his  nobles  in  chains  and  caught  Zaraces  his  brother 
in  Egypt d  and  brought  him  up  thence  (to  Jeru- 
salem)  also  points  to  his  cruelty.  His  daring  im- 
piety in  cutting  up  and  burning  the  roll  containing 
Jeremiah's  prophecy,  at  the  very  moment  when  the 
national  fast  was  being  celebrated,  is  another  speci- 
men of  his  character,  and  drew  down  upon  him  the 
sentence,  "  He  shall  have  none  to  sit  upon  the 
throne  of  David"  (Jer.  xxxvi.).  His  oppression, 
injustice,  covetousness,  luxury,  and  tyranny,  are 
most  severely  rebuked  (xxii.  13-17),  and  it  has 
been  frequently  observed,  as  indicating  his  thorough 
selfishness  and  indifference  to  the  sufferings  of  his 
people,  that  at  a  time  when  the  land  was  so  im- 
poverished by  the  heavy  tributes  laid  upon  it  by 
Egypt  and  Babylon  in  turn,  he  should  have  squan- 
dered large  sums  in  building  luxurious  palaces  for 
himself  (xxii.  14,  15).  Josephus'a  history  of  Je- 
hoiakim's  reign  is  consistent  neither  with  Scripture 
nor  with  itself.  His  account  of  Jehoiakim's  death 
and  Jehoiachin's  accession  appears  to  be  only  his 
own  inference  from  the  Scripture  narrative.  Ac- 
cording to  Josephus  (Ant.  x.  6)  Nebuchadnezzar 
came  against  Judea  in  the  8th  year  of  Jehoiakim's 
reign,  and  compelled  him  to  pay  tribute,  which  he 
did  for  three  years,  and  then  revolted  in  the 
11th  year,  on  hearing  that  the  king  of  Babylon 
was  gone  to  invade  Egypt. c  He  then  inserts  the 
account  of  Jehoiakim's  burning  Jeremiah's  pro- 
phecy in  his  5th  year,  ami  concludes  by  saying, 
that  a  little  time  afterwards  the  king  of  Babylon 
made  an  expedition  against  Jehoiakim,  who  ad- 
mitted Nebuchadnezzar  into  the  city  upon  certain 
conditions,  which  Nebuchadnezzar  immediately 
broke;  that  lie  slew  Jehoiakim  and  the  flower  of 
the  citizens,  and  sent  3000  captives  to  Babylon, 
and   set    up  Jehoiachin   for  king,  but  almost  iinnie- 


manner  the  king  of  Egypt  seems  to  have  confined 

himself  to   Ethiopian  wars,      'the  tirst    hint    v\  c   have 

of  Egypt  aiming  at   recovering  her  lost  influence  in 

Syria  is  at  the  accession  of  l'haraoh-Ilophra,  in  the 
■I  th  of  ZodeUi.ih.      [HANAKIAH,  4.]       1  le  made  se\  eral 

abortive  attempts  against  Nebuchadnezzar  in  Zede- 
kiah's  reign,  and  detached  tin'  Ammonites,  Moabites, 
Edomites,' Tyrians,  andZidoniana  from  the  Babylonish 
alliance  (Jer.  xwii.l.  In  consequence,  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, alter  thoroughly  subduing  these  nations,  and 
devoting  l  '■'•  years  to  the  siege  of  Tyre,  strength  in- 
vaded ami  subdued  Egypt  in  the  35th  year  of  his  reign 
(Ez.  x\l\.    1  7    . 


946 


JEHOIARIB 


diately  afterwards  was  seized  with  fear  lest  the 
young  king  should  avenge  his  father's  death,  and 
so  sent  back  his  army  to  besiege  Jerusalem  ;  that 
Jehoiaehin,  being  a  man  of  just  and  gentle  disposi- 
tion, did  not  like  to  expose  the  city  to  danger  on 
his  own  account,  and  therefore  surrendered  himself, 
his  mother,  and  kindred,  to  the  king  of  Babylon's 
officers  on  condition  of  the  city  suffering  no  harm  ; 
but  that  Nebuchadnezzar,  in  direct  violation  of 
the  conditions,  took  10,832  prisoners,  and  made 
Zedekiah  king  in  the  room  of  Jehoiaehin,  whom 
he  kept  in  custody — a  statement  the  principal  por- 
tion of  which  seems  to  have  no  foundation  what- 
ever in  facts.  The  account  given  above  is  derived 
from  the  various  statements  in  Scripture,  and 
seems  to  agree  perfectly  with  the  probabilities  of 
Nebuchadnezzar's  movements  and  with  what  the 
most  recent  discoveries  have  brought  to  light  con- 
cerning him.  [Nebuchadnezzar.]  The  reign 
of  Jehoiakim  extends  from  B.C.  609  to  B.C.  598,  or 
as  some  reckon  599. 

The  name  of  Jehoiakim  appears  in  a  contracted 
form  in  Joiakim,  a  high-priest.  [A.  C.  H.] 

JEHOI'ARIB  (l^'lIT,  1  Chr.  ix.  10,  xxiv. 
7,  only;  elsewhere,  both  in  Hebrew  and  A.  V.,  the 
name  is  abbreviated  to  Joiarib:  'Iwupi/x;  Alex. 
'lo)ape(/3  and  'Iapei/3:  Joiarib),  head  of  the  first 
of  the  24  courses  of  priests,  according  to  the 
arrangement  of  king  David  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  7). 
Some  of  his  descendants  returned  from  the  Baby- 
lonish captivity,  as  we  learn  from  1  Chr.  ix.  10, 
Neh.  xi.  10.  [Jedaiah.]  Their  chief  in  the  days 
of  Joiakim  the  son  of  Jeshua  was  Mattenai  (Neh. 
xii.  6,  19).  They  were  probably  of  the  house  of 
Eleazar.  To  the  course  of  Jehoiarib  belonged  the 
Asmonean  family  (1  Mace.  ii.  1),  and  Josephns,  as 
he  informs  us  [Ant.  xii.  6.  §1,  and  Life,  §1). 
[High-priest.]  Prideaux  indeed  (Connection,  i. 
129),  following  the  Jewish  tradition,  affirms  that 
only  4  of  the  courses  returned  from  Babylon,  Je- 
daiah, Immer,  Pashur,  and  Harim — for  which  last, 
however,  the  Babylonian  Talmud  has  Joiarib — be- 
cause these  4  only  are  enumerated  in  Ezr.  ii.  36-39, 
Neh.  vii.  39-42.  And  he  accounts  for  the  mention 
of  other  courses,  as  of  Joiarib  (1  Mace.  ii.  1),  and 
Abiah  (Luke  i.  5),  by  saying  that  those  4  courses 
were  subdivided  into  6  each,  so  as  to  keep  up  the 
old  number  of  24,  which  took  the  names  of  the 
original  courses,  though  not  really  descended  from 
them.  But  this  is  probably  an  invention  of  the 
Jews,  to  account  for  the  mention  of  only  these  4 
families  of  priests  in  the  list  of  Ezr.  ii.  and  Neh. 
vii.  And  however  difficult  it  may  be  to  say  with 
certainty  why  only  those  4  courses  are  mentioned 
in  that  particular  list,  we  have  the  positive  authority 
of  1  Chr.  ix.  10,  and  Neh.  xi.  10,  for  asserting  that 
Joiarib  did  return  ;  and  we  have  two  other  lists  of 
courses,  one  of  the  time  of  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  2-8), 
the  other  of  Zerubbabel  (Neh.  xii.  1-7)  ;  the  former 
enumerating  21,  the  latter  22  courses;  and  the 
latter  naming  Joiarib  as  one  of  them,8  and  adding, 
at  v.  19,  the  name  of  the  chief  of  the  course  of 
Joiarib  in  the  days  of  Joiakim.  So  that  there  can 
be  no  reasonable  doubt  that  Joiarib  did  return. 
The  notion  of  the  Jews  does  not  receive  any  con- 


a  It  is,  however,  very  singular  that  the  names  after 
Shemaiah  in  Neh.  xii.  6,  including  Joiarib  and  Jedaiah, 
have  the  appearance  of  being  added  on  to  the  pre- 
viously existing  list,  which  ended  with  Shemaiah,  as 
does  that  in  Neh.  x.  2-8.  For  Joiarib's  is  introduced 
with  the  copula  "  and  ;"  it  is  quite  out  of  its  right 


JEIIONADAB 

firmation  from  the  statement  in  the  Latin  version 
of  Josephus  (Cont.  Apion.  ii.  §8),  that  there  were 
4  courses  of  prie&ts,  as  it  is  a  manifest  corruption 
of  the  text  for  24,  as  Whiston  and  others  have  shown 
(note  to  Life  of  Joseplms,  §1 ).  The  subjoined  table 
gives  the  three  lists  of  courses  which  returned,  with 
the  original  list  in  David's  time  to  compare  them 
by:- 

COURSES    OF    PRIESTS. 


In  David's 

In  Nehemiah'a 

In  ZerubbabeTs 

l  Chr.  xxiv. 

In  list  in 
Ezr.  ii.,  Neh.  vii. 

time, 
Neh.  x. 

time, 
Neh.  xii. 

1.  Jehoiarib, 

_ 

_ 

Joiarib. 

1  Chr.  is.  10, 

Neh.  xi.  10. 

2.  Jedaiah. 

Chililren  of 
Jedaiah. 

— 

Jedaiah. 

3.  Harim. 

Children  of 

Harim. 

Rehum, 

Harim. 

(Harim,  v.  15). 

4.  Seoriin. 

5.  Malchijah. 

Children  of 
Pashur,  1  Chr. 

ix.  12. 

Malchijah. 

6.  Mijamin. 

— 

Mijamin. 

Miamin 

(Miniamin.v.in 

-.  Hakkoz. 

Meremoth,  son 
of  Hakkoz, 
Neh.  iii.  4. 

Meremoth. 

S.   Abijah. 

— 

Abijah. 

Abijah. 

9.  Jesiiiiah. 

House  of 
iK-huat?) 
E;r.  ii   36, 
Neh.  vii.  30. 

10.  Shecaniah. 

Shebaniah. 

Shreb.iniah, 
(Shebaniah, 

ver.  14  . 

11.  Eliashib. 

— 

— 

— 

12.  Jakim. 

— 

— 

— 

13.  Huppah. 

— 

— 

— 

14.  Jesneheab. 

13.  Bilgah. 

— 

Hilgai. 

Hilgal, . 

lb'.  Immur. 

Children  of 

Amariah. 

Amariah. 

17.  Hczir. 

_  ' 

_ 

_. 

IS.  Aphses. 

— 

— 

— 

19.  Pethaliiah. 

an.  Jchczekel. 

— 

— 

— 

21.  Jachin, 

— 

— 

— 

Neh.  xi.  10, 

I  Chr.  ix.  10. 

2S.  Gamul. 

23.  Delaiah. 

— 

— 

— 

24.  Maaziah, 

Maaziah. 

Mandiah 
(Moadiah.v.  17). 

The  courses  which  cannot  be  identified  with  the 
original  ones,  but  which  are  enumerated  as  existing 
after  the  return,  are  as  follows:  — 


Neh.  x. 

Neh.  xii. 

Neh.  xi.,  1  Chr.  ix. 

Seraiah. 

Seraiah. 

Seraiah  (?) 

Azariah. 

Ezra. 

•  Azariah. 

Jeremiah. 

Jeremiah. 

— 

Pashur. 

— 

— 

Haf.tush. 

Hattush. 

— 

Malluch. 

Malluch. 

— 

Obadiah. 

Iddo. 

Adaiah(?) 

Daniel. 

— 

— 

Ginnetbon. 

Ginnetho. 

— 

Baruch. 

— 

— 

Meshullam. 

— 

— 

Shemaiah. 

Shemaiah. 

Sallu. 
Amok. 
Hilkiah. 
Jedaiah  (2). 

For  some  account  of  the   courses,   see   Lewis's 
Orig.  Hebr.  bk.  ii.  ch.  vii. 

In  Esdras  the  name  is  given  JoaRIB.    [A.  C.  H.] 

JEHO'NADAB,  and  JO'NADAB  (the  longer 
form,  nJlrP,  is  employed  in  2  K.  x.  and  .lor.  xxsv. 


order  as  the  first  course  ;  and,  moreover,  these  names 
are  entirely  omitted  in  the  LXX.  till  we  dime  to  the 
times  of  Joiakim  at  ver.  12-21.  Still  the  utmost  that 
could  be  concluded  from  this  is,  that  Joiarib  returned 
later  than  the  time  of  Zerubbabel. 


JEHONADAB 

8,  14,  16,  18  ;  the  shorter  one,  2131\  in  Jer.  xxxv. 
6,  10,  lit :  'Icoya5a/3),  the  son  of  Rechab,  founder 
of  the  Rechabites.  It  appears  from  1  Chr.  ii.  55, 
that  his  father  or  ancestor  Rechab  ("the  rider") 
belonged  to  a  branch  of  the  Kenites  ;  the  Arabian 
tribe  which  entered  Palestine  with  the  Israelites. 
One  settlement  of  them  was  to  be  found  in  the 
extreme  north,  under  the  chieftainship  of  Heber 
(Judg.  iv.  11),  retaining  their  Bedouin  customs 
under  the  oak  winch  derived  its  name  from  their 
nomadic  habits.  The  main  settlement  was  in  the 
south.  Of  these,  one  branch  had  nestled  in  the 
cliffs  of  Engedi  (Judg.  i.  16 ;  Num.  xxiv.  21). 
Another  had  returned  to  the  frontier  of  their  native 
wilderness  on  the  south  of  Judah  (Judg.  i.  1(3).  A 
third  was  established,  under  a  fourfold  division,  at 
or  near  the  town  of  Jabez  in  Judah  (1  Chr.  ii.  55). 
To  these  last  belonged  Rechab  ami  his  son  Jehonadab. 
The  Be  louin  habits,  which  were  kept  up  by  the 
other  branches  of  the  Kenite  tribe,  were  inculcated 
by  Jehonadab  with  the  utmost  minuteness  on  his 
descendants  ;  the  more  so,  perhaps,  from  their  being 
brought  into  closer  connexion  with  the  inhabitants 
of  the  settled  districts.  The  vow  or  rule  which  he 
prescribed  to  them  is  preserved  to  us :  "  Ye  shall 
drink  no  wine,  neither  ye  nor  your  sons  for  ever. 
Neither  shall  ye  build  houses,  nor  sowr  seed,  nor 
plant  vineyard,  nor  have  any:  but  all  your  days 
ye  shall  dwell  in  tents  ;  that  ye  may  live  many  days 
in  the  laud  where  ye  be  strangers"  (Jer.  xxxv.  6,  7). 
This  life,  partly  monastic,  partly  Bedouin,  was  ob- 
served with  the  tenacity  with  which  from  generation 
to  generation  such  customs  are  continued  in  Arab 
tribes ;  and  when,  many  years  after  the  death  of 
Jehonadab,  the  Rechabites  (as  they  were  called  from 
his  father)  were  forced  to  take  refuge  from  the 
Chaldaean  invasion  within  the  walls  of  Jerusalem, 
nothing  would  induce  them  to  transgress  the  rule 
of  their  ancestor  ;  and  in  consequence  a  blessing  was 
pronounced  upon  him  and  them  by  the  prophet 
Jeremiah  (xxxv.  19):  "  Jouadab  the  son  of  Rechab 
shall  not  want  a  man  to  stand  before  me  for  ever." 

[Rechabites.] 

Bearing  in  mind  this  general  character  of  Jeho- 
nadab as  an  Arab  chief,  and  the  founder  of  a  half- 
religious  sect,  perhaps  in  connexion  with  the  austere 
Elijah,  and  tlir  Xa/.arites  mentioned  in  Amos  ii.  1  1 
(see  Ewald,  Alterthiimer,  92,  93),  we  are  the  better 
able  to  understand  the  single  occasion  on  which  he 
appears  before  us  in  the  historical  narrative. 

Jehu  was  advancing,  alter  the  slaughter  "i'  Beth- 
eked,  on  the  city  of  Samaria,  when  he  suddenly  met 
tin.'  austere  Bedouin  coming  towards  him  (2  K.  x. 
15).  It  .seems  that  they  were  already  known  to 
each  ether  (Jos.  Ant.  i.\.  6,  §6).  The  king  was  in 
his  chariot  ;  the  Arab  was  on  foot.  It  is  not  clear, 
from    the   present   state  of  the   text,  which  was   the 

iii>t  to  speak.  The  Hebrew  text — followed  by  the 
A.  V.  implies  that  the  king  blessed  (A.  V.  "  sa- 
luted") Jel adab.   The  LXX.  and  Josephu      I     . 

ix.  6,  §6)  imply  that  Jehonadab  blessed  the  king. 
Each  would  have  its  peculiar  appropriateness.    The 

king   then   pro] d   their  close   union.     "  Is  thy 

heart  light,  as  my  heart  is  with  thy  heart?" 
The  answer  of  Jehonadab  is  slightly  varied.  In 
the  Hebrew  text  he  vehemently  replies,  '-It  is. 
it  is:  give  me  thine  hand."  In  the  I. XX.,  and  in 
the  A.  V. — he  replies  simply  '"It  is;"  and  Jehu 
then  rejoins,  "  If  it  is.  give  me  thine  hand."  The 
lun  1,  whether  of  Jehonadab  or  Jehu,  was  offered 
and  grasped.  The  king  lifted  him  up  to  the  edge 
of  the  chariot,  apparently  thai  he  mighi  whisper  his 


JEHOKAM 


947 


secret  into  his  ear,  and  said,  "  Come  with  me,  and 
see  my  zeal  for  Jehovah."  It  was  the  first  indica- 
tion of  Jehu's  design  upon  the  worship  of  Baal,  for 
which  he  perceived  that  the  stern  zealot  would  he 
a  lit  coadjutor.  Having  entrusted  him  with  the 
secret,  he  (LXX.)  or  his  attendants  (Heb.  and  A.  V.) 
caused  Jehonadab  to  proceed  with  him  to  Samaria 
in  the  royal  chariot. 

So  completely  had  the  worship  of  Baal  become 
the  national  religion,  that  even  Jehonadab  was  able 
to  conceal  his  purpose  under  the  mask  of  conformity. 
No  doubt  he  acted  in  concert  with  Jehu  throughout ; 
but  the  only  occasion  on  which  he  is  expressly  men- 
tioned is  when  (probably  from  his  previous  know- 
ledge of  the  secret  worshippers  of  Jehovah)  he  went 
with  Jehu  through  the  temple  of  Baal  to  turn  out 
any  that  there  might  happen  to  he  in  the  mass 
of  Pagan  worshippers  (2  K.  x.  23).  [JEHU.] 
This  is  the  last  we  hear  of  him.  [A.  P.  S.] 

JEHON'ATHAN  (Jim"!? :  'IaWflas  :  Jo- 
nathan) :  the  more  accurate  rendering  of  the 
Hebrew  name,  which  is  most  frequently  given  in 
the  A.  V.  as  Jonathan.  It  is  ascribed  to  three 
persons : — 

1.  Son  of  Uzziah ;  superintendent  of  ceitain  of 
king  David's  storehouses  (DITik^  :  the  word  ren- 
dered "treasures"  earlier  in  the  verse,  and  in 
27,  28  "cellars")  ;  1  Chr.  xxvii.  25. 

2.  One  of  the  Levites  who  were  sent  by  Jehosha- 
phat  through  the  cities  of  Judah,  with  a  book  of 
the  Law,  to  teach  the  people  (2  Chr.  xvii.  8). 

3.  A  priest  (Neh.  xii.  18);  the  representative 
of  the  family  of  Shemaiah  (ver.  6),  when  Joiakim 
was  high-priest,  that  is  in  the  next  generation  after 
the  return  from  Babylon  under  Zerubbabel  and 
Jeshua. 

JEHO'RAM  (D"VliT  =  " exalted  by  Jehovah:" 
'lwpd/j.;  Joseph.  'Icopafios:  Joram).  The  name  is 
more  often  found  in  the  contracted  form  of  Jo- 
raM.  1.  Son  of  Ahab  king  of  Israel,  who  suc- 
ceeded his  brother  Ahaziah  (who  had  no  son)  upon 
the  throne  at  Samaria,  B.C.  896,  and  died  B.C.  ^'s  1. 
During  the  first  four  years  of  his  reign  his  con- 
temporary on  the  throne  of  Judah  was  Jehoshaphat, 
and  for  the  next  seven  years  and  upwards  Joram 
the  son  of  Jehoshaphat,  and  for  the  la.'t  year,  or 
portion  of  a  year,  Ahaziah  the  son  of  Joram,  who 
was  killed  the  same  day  that  he  was  (2  K.  ix.  '11). 
The  alliance  between  the  kingdoms  of  Israel  and 
Judah,  commenced  by  his  father  and  Jehoshaphat, 
was  very  close  throughout  his  reign.  We  tiist  find 
him  associated  with  Jehoshaphat  and  the  king  of 
Edom,  at  that  time  a  tributary  of  the  kingdom  of 
Judah,  in  a  war  against  the  Moabites.  Mesha, 
their  king,  on  the  death  of  Ahab,  had  revolted  from 
Israel,  and  refused  tn  pay  the  customary  tribute  of 
100,000  lambs  and  100,000  rams.  Joram  asked 
and  obtained  Jehoshaphat's  help  to  reduce  him  to 
his  obedience,  and  accordingly  the  three  kings,  of 
Israel,  Judah, and  Edom,  marched  through  the  wil- 
derness of  Edom  to  attack  him.  The  three  armies 
we,,,  in  the  utmost  danger  of  perishing  for  want 
of  water.  The  piety  of  Jehoshaphat  suggested  an 
inquiry  of  some  piophet  of  Jehovah,  and  Elisha 
the  son  of  Shaphat,  at  that  time  and  since  the 
latter  part  of  Ahab' s  reign  Elijah's  attendant  (2  K. 
iii.    11;     1     K.    xix.     19-2]  ,,    was    found     with    the 

host.  [Elisha,  p.  537.]  Prom  him  Jehoram 
received  a   severe  rebuke,  and  was  hid  to  inquire 

of   the    prophets    of   his    father    and    mother,    the 


948 


JEHORAM 


prophets  of  Baal.  Nevertheless  for  Jehoshaphat's 
sake  Elisha  inquired  of  Jehovah,  and  received 
the  promise  of  an  abundant  supply  of  water, 
and  of  a  great  victory  over  the  Moabites :  a  pro- 
mise which  was  immediately  fulfilled.  The  same 
water  which,  filling  the  valley,  and  the  trenches 
dug  by  the  Israelites,  supplied  the  whole  army  and 
all  their  cattle  with  drink,  appeared  to  the  Rloab- 
ites,  who  were  advancing,  like  blood,  when  the 
morning  sun  shone  upon  it.  Concluding  that  the 
allies  had  fallen  out  and  slain  each  other,  they 
marched  incautiously  to  the  attack,  and  were  put 
to  the  rout.  The  allies  pursued  them  with  great 
slaughter  into  their  own  land,  which  they  utterly 
ravaged  and  destroyed  with  all  its  cities.  Kir- 
haraseth  alone  remained,  and  there  the  king  of 
Moab  made  his  last  stand.  An  attempt  to  break 
through  the  besieging  army  having  failed,  he  re- 
sorted to  the  desperate  expedient  of  offering  up  his 
eldest  son,  the  heir  to  his  throne,  as  a  burnt- 
offering,  upon  the  wall  of  the  city,  in  the  sight  of 
the  enemy.  Upon  this  the  Israelites  retired  and 
returned  to  their  own  land  (2  K.  iii.).  It  was 
perhaps  in  consequence  of  Elisha's  rebuke,  and  of 
the  above  remarkable  deliverance  granted  to  the 
allied  armies  according  to  his  word,  that  Jehoram, 
on  his  return  to  Samaria,  put  away  the  image  of 
Baal  which  Ahab  his  father  had  made  (2  K.  iii.  2). 
For  in  2  K.  iv.  we  have  an  evidence  of  Elisha's 
being  on  friendly  terms  with  Jehoram,  in  the  offer 
made  by  him  to  speak  to  the  king  in  favour  of  the 
Shunammite.  The  impression  on  the  king's  mind 
was  probably  strengthened  by  the  subsequent  inci- 
dent of  Naaman's  cure,  and  the  temporary  cessation 
of  the  inroads  of  the  Syrians,  which  doubtless  re- 
sulted from  it  (2  K.  v.).  Accordingly  when,  a 
little  later,  war  broke  out  between  Syria  and  Israel, 
we  find  Elisha  befriending  Jehoram.  The  king  was 
made  acquainted  by  the  prophet  with  the  secret 
counsels  of  the  king  of  Syria,  and  was  thus  enabled 
to  defeat  them  ;  and  on  the  other  hand,  when  Elisha 
had  led  a  large  band  of  Syrian  soldiers  whom  God 
had  blinded,  into  the  midst  of  Samaria,  Jehoram 
reverentially  asked  him,  "  My  father,  shall  I  smite 
them?"  and,  at  the  prophet's  bidding,  not  only 
forbore  to  kill  them,  but  made  a  feast  for  them, 
and  then  sent  them  home  unhurt.  This  procured 
another  cessation  from  the  Syrian  invasions  for  the 
Israelites  (2  K.  vi.  23).  What  happened  after  this 
to  change  the  relations  between  the  king  and  the 
prophet  we  can  only  conjecture.  But  putting  to- 
gether the  general  bad  character  given  of  Jehoram 
(2  K.  iii.  2,  3)  with  the  fact  of  the  prevalence  of 
Baal-worship  at  the  end  of  his  reign  (2  K.  x. 
21-28),  it  seems  probable  that  when  the  Syrian 
inroads  ceased,  and  he  felt  less  dependent  upon  the 
aid  of  the  prophet,  he  relapsed  into  idolatry,  and 
was  rebuked  by  Elisha,  and  threatened  with  a 
return  of  the  calamities  from  which  he  had  escaped. 
Kefusing  to  repent,  a  fresh  invasion  by  the  Syrians, 
and  a  close  siege  of  Samaria,  actually  came  to  pass, 
according  probably  to  the  word  of  the  prophet. 
Hence,  when  the  terrible  incident  arose,  in  conse- 
quence of  the  famine,  of  a  woman  boiling  and 
eating  her  own  child,  the  king  immediately  attri- 
buted the  evil  to  Elisha  the  son  of  Shaphat,  and 
determined  to  take  away  his  life.  The  message 
which  he  sent  by  the  messenger  whom  he  com- 


a  The  "  then "  of  the  A.  V.  of  2  K.  viii.  1  is 
a  thorough  misrepresentation  of  the  order  of  the 
events.     The  narrative  goes  back  seven  years,  merely 


JEHORAM 

missioned  to  cut  off  the  prophet's  head,  "  Behold 
this  evil  is  from  Jehovah,  why  should  1  wait  for 
Jehovah  any  longer?"  coupled  with  the  fact  of  his 
having  on  sackcloth  at  the  time  (2  E.  vi.  30,  33), 
also  indicates  that  many  remonstrances  and  warnings, 
similar  to  those  given  by  Jeremiah  to  the  kings  of 
his  day,  had  passed  between  the  prophet  and  the 
weak  and  unstable  son  of  Ahab.  The  providential 
interposition  by  which  both  Elisha's  life  was  saved 
and  the  city  delivered,  is  narrated  2  K.  vii.,  and 
Jehoram  appears  to  have  returned  to  friendly  feel- 
ings towards  Elisha  (2  K.  viii.  4).  His  life,  how- 
ever, was  now  drawing  near  to  its  close.  It  was 
very  soon  after  the  above  events  that  Elisha  went 
to  Damascus,  and  predicted  the  revolt  of  Hazael, 
and  liis  accession  to  the  throne  of  Syria  in  the  room 
of  Ben-hadad  ;  and  it  was  during  Elisha's  absence, 
probably,  that  the  conversation  between  Jehoram 
and  Gehazi,  and  the  return  of  the  Shunammite 
from  the  land  of  the  Philistines,  recorded  in  2  K. 
viii.,  took  place.  Jehoram  seems  to  have  thought 
the  revolution  in  Syria,  which  immediately  followed 
Elisha's  prediction,  a  good  opportunity  to  puisue 
his  father's  favourite  project  of  recovering  Kamoth- 
Gilead  from  the  Syrians.  He  accordingly  made  an 
alliance  with  his  nephew  Ahaziah,  who  had  just 
succeeded  Joram  on  the  throne  of  Judah,  and  the 
two  kings  proceeded  to  occupy  Ramoth-Gilead  by 
force.  The  expedition  was  an  unfortunate  one. 
Jehoram  was  wounded  in  battle,  and  obliged  to 
return  to  Jezreel  to  be  healed  of  his  wounds  (2  K. 
viii.  29,  ix.  14,  15),  leaving  his  army  under  Jehu 
to  hold  Ramoth-Gilead  against  Hazael.  Jehu,  how- 
ever, and  the  army  under  his  command,  revolted 
from  their  allegiance  to  Jehoram  (2  K.  ix.),  and, 
hastily  marching  to  Jezreel,  surpiised  Jehoram, 
wounded  and  defenceless  as  he  was.  Jehoram,  going 
out  to  meet  him,  fell  pierced  by  an  arrow  from 
Jehu's  bow  on  the  very  plat  of  ground  which  Ahab 
had  wrested  from  Naboth  the  Jezreelite ;  thus  ful- 
filling to  the  letter  the  prophecy  of  Elijah  (1  K. 
xxi.  21-29).  With  the  life  of  Jehoram  ended  the 
dynasty  of  Omii. 

Jehoram's  reign  was  rendered  very  remarkable 
by  the  two  eminent  prophets  who  lived  iu  it, 
Elijah  and  Elisha.  The  former  seems  to  have 
survived  till  the  sixth  year  of  his  reign  ;  the 
latter  to  have  begun  to  be  conspicuous  quite  in 
the  beginning  of  it.  For  the  famine  which  Elisha 
foretold  to  the  Shunammite*  (2  K.  viii.  1),  and 
which  seems  to  be  the  same  as  that  alluded  to 
iv.  38,  must  have  begun  in  the  sixth  year  of 
Jehoram's  reign,  since  it  lasted  seven  years,  and 
ended  in  the  twelfth  year.  In  that  case  his  ac- 
quaintance with  the  Shunammite  must  have  begun 
not  less  than  five  or  at  least  four  years  sooner,  as 
the  child  must  have  been  as  much  as  three  years 
old  when  it  died  ;  which  brings  us  back  at  latest  to 
the  beginning  of  the  second  year  of  Jehoram's  reign. 
Elisha's  appearance  in  the  camp  of  the  three  kings 
(2  K".  iii.)  was  probably  as  early  as  the  first  year 
of  Jehoram.  With  reference  to  the  very  entangled 
chronology  of  this  reign,  it  is  important  to  remark 
that  there  is  no  evidence  whatever  to  show  that 
Elijah  the  prophet  was  translated  at  the  tune  of 
Elisha's  first  piophetic  ministrations.  The  history 
in  2  K.,  at  this  part  of  it,  having  much  the  nature 
of  memoirs  of  Elisha,  and  the  active  ministrations 


to  introduce  the  woman's  return  at  this  time.  The 
king's  conversation  with  Gehazi  was  doubtless  caused 
by  the  providential  deliverance  related  in  ch.  vii. 


JEHORAM 

of  Elijah  having  closed  with  the  death  of  Ahaziah, 
it  was  very  natural  to  complete  Elijah's  personal 
history  with  the  narrative  of  his  translation  in 
ch.  ii.  before  beginning  the  series  of  Elisha's  mi- 
racles. But  it  by  no  means  follows  that  ch.  ii.  is 
really  prior  in  order  of  time  to  ch.  iii.,  or  that, 
though  the  raising  from  the  dead  of  the  Shunam- 
mite's  sou  was  subsequent,  as  it  probably  was,  to 
Elijah's  translation,  therefore  all  the  preliminary 
circumstances  related  in  eh.  iv.  were  so  likewise. 
Neither  again  does  the  expression  (2  K.  iii.  11), 
"  Here  is  Elisha,  which  poured  water  on  the  hands 
of  Elijah," b  imply  that  this  ministration  had  at 
that  time  ceased,  and  still  less  that  Elijah  was 
removed  from  the  earth.  We  learn,  on  the  con- 
trary, from  '_'  Chr.  xxi.  12,  that  he  was  r-t ill  on 
earth  in  the  reign  of  Joram  son  of  Jehoshaphat, 
who  did  not  begin  to  reign  till  the  fifth  of  Jehoram 
(2  K.  viii.  lb') ;  and  it  seems  highly  probable  that 
the  note  of  time  in  2  K.  i.  17,  "  in  the  second  year 
of  Jehoram  the  son  of  Jehoshaphat,"  which  is  ob- 
viously and  certainly  out  of  its  place  where  it  now 
is,  properly  belongs  to  the  narrative  in  eh.  ii.  With 
regard  to  the  other  discordant  dates  at  this  epoch, 
it  must  suffice  to  remark  that  all  attempts  to  re- 
concile them  are  vain.  That  which  is  based  upon 
the  supposition  of  Joram  having  been  associated 
with  his  father  in  the  kingdom  for  three  or  seven 
years,  is  of  all  perhaps  the  most  unfortunate,  as 
being  utterly  inconsistent  with  the  history,  anni- 
hilating his  independent  reign,  and  after  all  failing 
to  produce  even  a  verbal  consistency.  The  table 
given  below  is  trained  on  the  supposition  that 
Jehoshaphat' s  reign  really  lasted  only  22  years, 
aud  Ahab's  only  19,  as  appears  from  the  texts 
cited ;  that  the  statement  that  Jehoshaphat  reigned 
25  years  is  caused  by  the  probable  circumstance  of 
his  having  taken  part  in  the  government  during  the 
three  last  years  of  Asa's  reign,  when  his  father  was 
incapacitated  by  the  disease  in  his  feet  (2  Chr.  xvi. 
12)  ;  and  that  three  years  were  then  added  to 
Ahab's  reign,  to  make  the  whole  number  of  the 
years  of  the  kings  of  Israel  agree  with  the  whole 
number  of  those  of  the  kings  of  Judah,  thus  unduly 
lengthened  by  an  addition  of  three  years  to  Jeho- 
shaphat's  reign.  This  arrangement,  it  is  believed, 
reconciles  the  greatest  number  of  existing  texts, 
agrees  best  with  history,  and  especially  coincides 
with  what  is  the  most  certain  of  all  the  elements 
of  tin'  chronology  of  this  time,  viz.  that  the  twelve 
years'  reign  of  Jehoram  son  of  Ahab,  and  the  few 
months'  reign  of  Ahaziah,  the  successor  of  Joram 
son  of  Jehoshaphat,  ended  simultaneously  at  the 
accession  of  John. 


JEHOSHAPHAT 


949 


KINGS  or  ISRAEL. 
Ahab  (reigned  in  yrs.)   1st  yr.  = 

A  hub -1th  yr.  = 

Ahab  .  .  last  and  IDtli  yr.  = 
Ahaziah  (reigned  2  vis. i  istYr.  = 
Ahaziah      ....    2nd  yr. 

anil 

Jehoram  (reigned  I2yre.)  Isty 


KINGS  OF  JUDAH. 

;ni'il 
i.  W. 

I  Jehoshaphat  |  rgnd,  -J2  vrs.)  1st, 
I      I  l\.  xxii.  41. 
Jehoshaphat  .    .    loth,  ih.  51. 
Jehoshaphat,  17th,  1  K.  xxii.  at. 


Jehoram 

Jehoi 
Elija 

Jchoni 


.     5th  yi 


=    ^Jehoshaphat,     lmh,  2  K.  iii.  i. 

{Jehoshaphat  last  ami  22nd, 
ami  [Viii.16. 

lorara  i  re  gned  n  vrs.)  ist,  2  K. 
oram,    2nd,   *  K.   i.   i;,    ii. ; 

■>  Chr.  xxi.  12. 
.nam,    lltli,   2  K.  viii.  I", 

and  [2  K.  viii.  20. 

Lhaziah   (reigned    1  yr.)     1st. 


2.  Eldest  son  of  Jehoshaphat,  succeeded  his  father 

b  The  use  of  the  perfect  tense  in  Hebrew  often 
implies  the  habit  or  the  repetition  of  an  action,  as 
e.  //.  l's.  i.  1,  ii.  1,  &e. 


on  tin;  throne  of  Judah  at  the  age  of  32,  and  reigned 
eight  years,  from  B.C.  893-2  to  885-4-.  [Jeho- 
RAM,  1.]  Jehosheba  his  daughter  was  wife  to  the 
high-priest  Jehoiada.    The  ill  effects  of  his  marriage 

with  Athaliah  the  daughter  of  Ahab,  and  the  in- 
fluence of  that  second  Jezebel  upon  him  were  im- 
mediately apparent.  As  soon  as  he  was  fixed  on 
the  throne,  he  put  his  six  brothers  to  death,  with 
many  of  the  chief  nobles  of  the  land.  He  then 
proceeded  to  establish  the  worship  of  Baal  and 
other  abominations,  and  to  enforce  the  practice  of 
idolatry  by  persecution.  A  prophetic  writing  from 
the  aged  prophet  Elijah  (2  Chr.  xxi.  12),  the  last 
recorded  act  of  his  life,  reproving  him  for  his  crimes 
and  his  impiety,  and  foretelling  the  most  grievous 
judgments  upon  his  person  and  his  kingdom,  failed 
to  produce  any  good  effect  upou  him.  This  was  in 
the  first  or  second  year  of  his  reign.  The  remainder 
of  it  was  a  series  of  calamities.  First  the  Edomites, 
who  hail  been  tributary  to  Jehoshaphat,  revolted 
from  his  dominion,  and  established  their  permanent 
independence.  It  was  as  much  as  Jehoram  could 
do  by  a  night-attack  with  all  his  forces,  to  extricate 
himself  from  their  army,  which  had  surrounded 
him.  Next  Libnah,  one  of  the  strongest  fortified 
cities  in  Judah  (2  K.  xix.  8),  and  perhaps  one  of 
those  "fenced  cities"  (2  Chr.  xxi.  3)  which  Jeho- 
shaphat had  given  to  his  other  sons,  indignant  at 
his  cruelties,  and  abhorring  his  apostasy,  rebelled 
against  him.  Then  followed  invasions  of  armed 
bands  of  Philistines  and  of  Arabians  (the  same  who 
paid  tribute  to  Jehoshaphat,  2  Chr.  xvii.  11),  who 
burst  into  Judaea,  stormed  the  king's  palace,  put 
his  wives  and  all  his  children,  except  his  youngest 
son  Ahaziah,  to  death  (2  Chr.  xxii.  1),  or  carried 
them  into  captivity,  and  plundered  all  his  trea- 
sures. And,  to  crown  all,  a  terrible  aud  incurable 
disease  in  his  bowels  fell  upon  him,  of  which  ho 
died,  after  two  years  of  misery,  unregretted  ;  and 
went  down  to  a  dishonoured  grave  in  the  prime  of 
life,  without  either  private  or  public  mourning, 
and  without  even  a  resting-place  in  the  sepulchres 
of  his  fathers  (2  Chr.  xxi.  19,  20).  He  died  early 
in  the  twelfth  year  of  his  brother-in-law  Jehoram's 
reign  over  Israel.  [A.  C.  H.] 

JEHOSHABE'ATH  (njh^irP :  'Iwaafcte ; 

Alex.  'ltAxrafieQ:  Josubeth):  the  form  in  which  the 
name  of  JEHOSHEBA  is  given  in  2  Chr.  xxii.  11. 
We  are  here  informed,  what  is  not  told  us  in 
Kings,  that  she  was  the  wife  of  Jehoiada  the  high- 
priest. 

JEHOSHAPHAT  (DS^in"1 :  'Wa^r :  Jo- 

saphat).  1.  The  son  of  Asa  and  Azubah,  succeeded 
to  the  throne  B.C.  914,  when  be  was  :;.">  years  old, 
and  reigned  25  years.  His  history  is  to  be  found 
among  the  events  recorded  in  I  1\.  xv.  24  ;  2  K. 
viii.  16,  or  in  a  continuous  narrative  in  2  Chr. 
xvii.  1-xxi.  :;.  He  was  contemporary  with  Ahab, 
Ahaziah,  and  Jehoram.  At  first  he  strengthened 
himself  tgainst  Israel  Iv  fcrtifviug  ami  garrisoning 

the  cities  of  Judah  and   tile  Ephraiinito  conquests  of 

Asa.  Bui  soon  afterwards  the  two  Hebrew  kings, 
perhaps  appreciating  their  common  danger  from 
Damascus  and  the  tribe-,  on'  their  eastern  frontier, 
came  to  an  understanding.  Israel  and  Judah  drew 
together  for  the  first  time  since  they  parted  at 
Schechem  sixty  years  previously.  Jehoshaphat's 
eldest  s(l]1  Jehoram  married  Athaliah,  the  daughter 
of  Ahab  and  Jezebel.  It  does  not  appear  bow  fat 
Jehoshaphat    encouraged    that    ill-starred    union. 


950 


JEHOSHAPHAT 


The  closeness  of  the  alliance  between  the  two  kings 
is  shown  by  many  circumstances: — Elijah's  re- 
luctance when  in  exile  to  set  foot  within  the  terri- 
tory of  Judah  (Blunt,  Und.  Coine.  ii.  §19,  ]>. 
199);  the  identity  of  names  given  to  the  children 
of  the  two  royal  families;  the  admission  of  names 
compounded  with  the  name  of  Jehovah  into  the 
family  of  Jezebel,  the  zealous  worshipper  of  Baal  ; 
and  the  extreme  alacrity  with  which  Jehoshaphat 
afterwards  accompanied  Ahab  to  the  field  of  battle. 

But  in  his  own  kingdom  Jehoshaphat  ever  showed 
himself  a  zealous  follower  of  the  commandments  of 
God  :  he  tried,  it  would  seem  not  quite  successfully, 
to  put  down  the  high  places  and  the  groves  »in 
which  the  people  of  Judah  burnt  incense.  In  his 
third  year,  apprehending  perhaps  the  evil  example 
of  Israelitish  idolatry,  and  considering  that  the 
Levites  were  not  fulfilling  satisfactorily  their  func- 
tion of  teaching  the  people,  Jehoshaphat  sent  out  a 
commission  of  certain  princes,  priests,  and  Levites, 
to  go  through  the  cities  of  Judah,  teaching  the 
people  out  of  the  Book  of  the  Law.  He  made 
separate  provision  for  each  of  his  sons  as  they  grew 
up,  perhaps  with  a  foreboding  of  their  melancholy 
end  (2  Chr.  xxi.  4).  Riches  and  honours  increased 
around  him.  He  received  tribute  from  the  Philis- 
tines and  Arabians;  and  kept  up  a  large  standing 
army  in  Jerusalem. 

It  was  probably  about  the  16th  year  of  his  reign 
(B.C.  898)  when  he  went  to  Samaria  to  visit  Ahab 
and  to  become  his  ally  in  the  great  battle  of  Ramoth- 
gilead — not  very  decisive  in  its  result,  though  fatal 
to  Ahab.  From  thence  Jehoshaphat  returned  to 
Jerusalem  in  peace ;  and,  after  receiving  a  rebuke 
from  the  prophet  Jehu,  went  himself  through  the 
people  "  from  Beersheba  to  Mount  Ephraim,"  re- 
claiming them  to  the  law  of  God.  He  also  took 
measures  for  the  better  administration  of  justice 
throughout  his  dominions;  on  which  see  Seidell, 
Be  Synedriis,  ii.  cap.  8,  §4.  Turning  his  attention 
to  foreign  commerce,  he  built  at  Eziou-geber,  with 
the  help  of  Ahaziah,  a  navy  designed  to  go  to  Tar- 
shish  :  but,  in  accordance  with  a  prediction  of  a 
prophet  Eliezer,  it  was  wrecked  at  Ezion-geber ; 
and  Jehoshaphat  resisted  Ahaziah's  proposal  to 
renew  their  joint  attempt. 

Before  the  close  of  his  reign  he  was  engaged  in 
twoa  additional  wars.  He  was  miraculously  de- 
livered from  a  threatened  attack  of  the  people  of 
Amnion,  Moab,  and  Seir  ;  the  result  of  which  is 
thought  by  some  critics  to  be  celebrated  in  Ps. 
48  and  92,  and  to  be  alluded  to  by  the  prophet 
Joel,  iii.  2,  12.  After  this,  perhaps,  must  be  dated 
the  war  which  Jehoshaphat,  in  conjunction  with 
Jehoram  king  of  Israel  and  the  king  of  Edom, 
carried  on  against  the  rebellious  king  of  Moab 
(2  K.  iii.).  After  this  the  realm  of  Jehoshaphat 
was  quiet.  In  his  declining  years  the  administration 
cf  affairs  was  placed  (probably  B.C.  891)  in  the 
hands  of  his  son  Jehoram  ;  to  whom,  as  Usher  con- 
jectures, the  same  charge  had  been  temporarily 
committed  during  Jehoshaphat \s  absence  at  Ramoth- 
gilead. 

Like  the  prophets  with  whom  he  was  brought 
in  contact,  we  cannot  describe  the  character  of  this 
good  king  without  a  mixture  of  blame.  Eminently 
pious,  gentle,  just,  devoted  to  the  spiritual  and 
temporal    welfare  of  his   subjects,   active  in  mind 


a  Gcsenius  and  Professor  Newman  are  of  opinion 
that  the  two  narratives  in  2  K.  iii.  and  2  Chr.  xx.  re- 
late to  one,  event.     Their  view  has  been  successfully 


JEHOSHAPHAT,  VALLEY  OF 

and  body,  he  was  wanting  in  firmness  and  con- 
sistency. His  character  has  been  carefully  sketched 
in  a  sermon  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Hessey,  Biographies 
of  the  Kings  of  Judah,  ii. 

2.  Son  of  Ahilud,  who  filled  the  office  of  recorder 
or  annalist  in  the  court  of  David  (2  Sam.  viii.  1(5, 
&c),  and  afterwards  of  Solomon  (1  K.  iv.  3). 
Such  officers  are  found  not  only  in  the  courts  of 
the  Hebrew  kings,  but  also  in  those  of  ancient  and 
modern  Persia,  of  the  Eastern  Roman  Empire  (Ge- 
senius),  of  China,  &c.  (Keil).  An  instance  of  the 
use  made  of  their  writings  is  given  in  Esth.  vi.  1. 

3.  One  of  the  priests  who,  in  the  time  of  David 
(1  Chr.  xv.  24),  were  appointed  to  blow  trumpets 
before  the  ark  in  its  transit  from  the  house  of 
Obed-edom  to  Jerusalem. 

4.  Son  of  Paruah  ;  one  of  the  twelve  purveyors 
of  king  Solomon  (1  K.  iv.  17).  His  district  was 
Issachar,  from  whence,  at  a  stated  season  of  the 
year,  he  collected  such  taxes  as  were  paid  in  kind, 
and  sent  them  to  the  king's  court. 

5.  Son  of  Nimshi,  and  father  of  king  Jehu  (2  K. 
ix.  2,  14).  [W.  T.  B.] 

JEHOSHAPHAT,    VALLEY   OP   (pDJ> 

DDw'irP  :  KoiActs  'Icimtckjmzt  :  Vallis  Josaphat),  a 
valley  mentioned  by  the  prophet  Joel  only,  as  the 
spot  in  which,  after  the  return  of  Judah  and  Jeru- 
salem from  captivity,  Jehovah  would  gather  all  the 
heathen  (Joel  iii.  2;  hebr.  iv.  2),  and  would  there 
sit  to  judge  them  for  their  misdeeds  to  Israel  (iii. 
12  ;  hebr.  v.  4).  The  passage  is  one  of  great 
boldness,  abounding  in  the  verbal  turns  in  which 
Hebrew  poetry  so  much  delights,  and  in  particular 
there  is  a  play  between  the  name  given  to  the 
spot — Jehoshaphat,  i.e.  "  Jehovah's  judgment," — ■ 
and  the  "judgment"  there  to  be  pronounced.  The 
Hebrew  prophets  often  refer  to  the  ancient  glories 
of  their  nation :  thus  Isaiah  speaks  of  the  "  day  of 
Midian,"  and  of  the  triumphs  of  David  and  of 
Joshua  in  "  Mount  Perazim,"  and  in  the  "  Valley 
of  Gibeon;"  and  in  like  manner  Joel,  in  announc- 
ing the  vengeance  to  be  taken  on  the  strangers 
who  were  annoying  his  country  (iii.  14),  seems 
to  have  glanced  back. to  that  triumphant  day  when 
king  Jehoshaphat,  the  greatest  king  the  nation  had 
seen  since  Solomon,  and  the  greatest  champion 
of  Jehovah,  led  out  his  people  to  a  valley  in  the 
wilderness  of  Tekoah,  and  was  there  blessed  with 
such  a  victory  over  the  hordes  of  his  enemies  as 
was  without  a  parallel  in  the  national  records 
(2  Chr.  xx.). 

But  though  such  a  reference  to  Jehoshaphat 
is  both  natural  and  characteristic,  it  is  not  certain 
that  it  is  intended.  The  name  may  be  only  an 
imaginary  one  conferred  on  a  spot  which  existed 
nowhere  but  in  the  vision  of  the  prophet.  Such 
was  the  view  of  some  of  the  ancient  translators. 
Thus  Theodotion  renders  it  x®Pa  Kpiaecos ;  and 
so  the  Targum  of  Jonathan — ■"  the  plain  of  the 
division  of  judgment."  Michaelis  (Bibel  fur  JJn- 
gelehrten,  Remarks  on  Joel)  takes  a  similar  view, 
and  considers  the  passage  to  be  a  prediction  of 
the  Maccabean  victories.  By  others,  however,  the 
prophet  has  been  supposed  to  have  had  flic  end 
of  the  world  in  view.  And  not  only  tin's,  but 
the  scene  of  "Jehovah's  judgment"  has  been 
localised,    and    the  name  has    come    down    to    us 


opposed  by  Keil  and  Movers  in  Germany,    and  by  the 
Rev.  II.  Browne,  Ordo  Saeclorum,  235. 


JEHOSHAPHAT,  VALLEY  OF 

attached  to  the  deep  ravine  which  separates  Jeru- 
salem from  the  Mount  of  Olives,  through  which  at 
one  time  the  Kedron  forced  its  stream.  At  what 
period  the  name  was  first  applied  to  this  spot  is  not 
known.  There  is  no  trace  of  it  in  the  Bible  or 
in  Josephus.  In  both  the  only  name\ised  for  this 
gorge  is  Kidron  (X.  T.  Cedro.v).  We  first 
encounter  its  new  title  in  the  middle  of  the  4th 
century  in  the  Onomasticon  of  Eusebius  and 
Jerome  (Art.  Coelas),  and  in  the  Commentary  of 
the  latter  Father  on  Joel.  Since  that  time  the 
name  has  been  recognised  and  adopted  by  travellers 
of  all  ages  and  all  faiths.  It  is  used  by  Christians 
— as  Arculf  in  700  {Early  Trav.  i.  4),  the  author 
of  the  Citez  de  Jherusalem,  in  1 187  (Rob.  ii.  562), 
and  Maundrell,  in  1(397  (E.  Trav.  469)  ;  and  by 
Jews — as  Benjamin  of  Tudela  about  1170  (Aslier, 
i.  7 1  ;  and  see  Reland,  Pal.  356).  By  the  Moslems 
it  is  still  said  to  be  called  Wady  Jushafat  (Seetzen, 
ii.  23,  26),  or  Shafat,  though  the  name  usually 
given  to  the  Valley  is  Wady  Sitti-Maryam.  Both 
Moslems  and  Jews  believe  that  the  last  judgment 
is  to  take  place  there.  To  find  a  grave  there  is 
the  dearest  wish  of  the  latter  (Briggs,  Heathen  and 
Holy  Lands,  290),  and  the  former  show — as  they 
have  shown  for  certainly  two  centuries — the  place 
on  which  Mahomet  is  to  be  seated  at  the  Last  Judg- 
ment, a  stone  jutting  out  from  the  east  wall  of  the 
Haram  area  near  the  south  corner,  one  of  the  pillars  * 
which  once  adorned  the  churches  of  Helena  or  Jus- 
tinian, and  of  which  multitudes  are  now  embedded 
in  the  rude  masonry  of  the  more  modern  walls  of 
Jerusalem.  The  steep  sides  of  the  ravine,  wherever 
a  level  strip  affords  the  opportunity,  are  crowded — 
in  places  almost  paved — by  the  sepulchres  of  the 
Moslems,  or  the  simpler  slabs  of  the  Jewish  tombs, 
alike  awaiting  the  assembly  of  the  Last  Judgment. 
So  narrow  and  precipitous  b  a  glen  is  ([uite  un- 
suited  for  such  an  event ;  but  this  inconsistency 
does  not  appear  to  have  disturbed  those  who  framed 
or  those  who  hold  the  tradition.  It  is  however  im- 
plied in  the  Hebrew  terms  employed  in  the  'two 
cases.     That  by  Joel    is   Emek   (pDJ?),    a  word 

applied  to  spacious  valleys  such  as  those  of  Esdrae- 
lon  or  Gibeon  (Stanley,  S.  4'  P-  App.  §1).  On 
the  other  hand  the  ravine  of  the  Kidron  is  inva- 
riably designated  by  Nachal  (7rTJ),  answering  to 
the  modern  Arabic  Wady.  There  is  no  instance 
in  the  0.  T.  of  these  two  terms  being  convertible, 
and  this  fact  alone  would  warrant  the  inference 
that  the  tradition  of  the  identity  of  the  Emek  of 
Jehoshaphat  and  tin'  Nachal  Kedron,  did  not  vise 
until  Hebrew  bad  begun  to  become  a  dead  language.' 
Tin'  grounds  on  which  it  did  arise  were  probably 
two: — 1.  The  frequent  mention  throughout  this 
passage  of  Joel  of  Mount  Zion,  Jerusalem,  and  the 


a  This  pillar  is  said  to  be  called  et-Tarik,  "  the 

road"  (De  Saulcy,  Voyage,  ii.  109).  From  it  will 
spring  the  Bridge  of  As-Sirat,  the  crossing  of  which 

is  to  test  the  true  believers.  Those  who  cannot  Stand 
the  test  will  drop  off  into  the  abyss  of  Gehenna  in  the 
depths  of  the  valley  (Ali  Bey,  224,  ">  :  Mcjr  cd  Din, 
in  Rob.  i.  2G9). 

b  St.  Cyril  (of  Alexandria)  either  did  not  know  the 
spot,  or   lnis  another  Valley  in  his  eye;   probably  the 

former.     Do  describes  it  as  not  many  Btadia   from 

Jerusalem  ;  and  says  he  is  told  (fairC)  that  it  is 
"hare  and  apt  for  horses"  (tpiKbv  ko\  iirm'iXa.TOi'' 
Comm.  an  Joel,  quoted  by  Reland,  S55).  Perhaps 
this  indicates  that  tin  tradition  was  not  at  that  time 
quite  fixed. 


JEHOSHAPHAT,  VALLEY  OF    951 

Temple  (ii.  32,  iii.  1,  6,  16,  17,  18),  may  have  led 
to  the  belief  that  the  locality  of  the  great  judgment 
would  be  in  their  immediate  neighbourhood.  This 
would  lie  assisted  by  the  mention  of  the  Mount  of 
Olives  in  the  somewhat  similar  passage  in  Zecha- 
riah  (xiv.  3,  4). 

2.  The  belief  that  Christ  would  reappear  in 
judgment  on  the  Mount  of  Olives,  from  which  He 
had  ascended.  This  was  at  one  time  a  received 
article  of  Christian  belief,  and  was  grounded  on  the 
words  of  the  Angels,  "  He  shall  so  come  in  like 
manner  as  ye  have  seen  Him  go  into  heaven."  '' 
(Adrichomius,  Theatr.  Ter.  Sanctae,  Jerusalem, 
§192  ;  Corn,  a  Lapide,  on  Acts  i.). 

3.  There  is  the  alternative  that  the  valley  of  Je- 
hoshaphat was  really  an  ancient  name  of  the  Valley 
of  the  Kedron,  and  that  from  the  name,  the  connexion 
with  Joel's  prophecy,  and  the  belief  in  its  being 
the  scene  of  Jehovah's  last  judgment  have  followed. 
This  may  be  so ;  but  then  we  should  expect  to  find 
some  trace  of  the  existence  of  the  name  before  the 
4th  century  after  Christ.  It  was  certainly  used  as 
a  burying  place  as  early  as  the  reign  of  Josiah 
(2  K.  xxiii.  6),  but  no  inference  can  fairly  be  drawn 
from  this. 

But  whatever  originated  the  tradition,  it  has 
held  its  ground  most  firmly,  (a.)  In  the  valley 
itself,  one  of  the  four  remarkable  monuments  which 
exist  at  the  foot  of  Olivet  was  at  a  very  early  date 
connected  with  Jehoshaphat.  At  Arculf's  visit 
(about.  700)  the  name  appears  to  have  been  borne 
by  that  now  called  "  Absalom's  tomb,"  but  then 
the  "  tower  of  Jehoshaphat  "  (E.  Trav.  4).  In  the 
time  of  Maundrell  the  "  tomb  of  Jehoshaphat "  was*, 
what  it  still  is,  an  excavation,  with  an  architectural 
front,  in  the  face  of  the  rock  behind  "  Absalom's 
tomb."  A  tolerable  view  of  this  is  given  in  plate 
33  of  Munk's  Palestine ;  and  a  photograph  by 
Salzmann,  with  a  description  in  the  Texte  (p.  31) 
to  the  same.  The  name  may,  as  already  observed, 
really  point  to  Jehoshaphat  himself,  though  not  to 
his  tomb,  as  he  was  buried  like  the  other  kings  in 
the  city  of  David  (2  Chr.  xxi.  1).  (6.)  One  of  the 
gates  of  the  city  in  the  e<ist  wall,  opening  on  the 
valley,  bore  the  same  name.  This  is  plain  from  the 
Citez  de  Jherusalem,  where  the  Porte  de  losafas  is 
said  to  have  been  a  "postern"  close  to  the  golden 
gateway  (Portez  Oiris),  and  to  the  south  of  that 
gate  (pars  devers  midi ;  §iv.,  near  the  end,  Hob. 
ii.  559).  It  was  therefore  at  or  near  the  small 
walled-up  doorway,  to  which  M.  de  Saulcy  has  re- 
stored the  name  of  the  I'oterne  de  Josaphat,  and 
which  is  but  a  few  feet  to  the  south  of  the  golden 
gateway.  However  this  may  be,  this  "postern" 
is  evidently  of  later  date  than  the  wall  in  which  it 
occurs,  as  some  of  (be  enonnous  stones  of  the  wall 
have  been  cut  through   to  admit  it:''  ami  in  so  far, 


c  It  appears  in  the  Targum  on  Cant.  viii.  1. 

■1  In  Sir  John  Maundcville  a  different  reason  is  <riven 
for  the  same.  "Very  near  this" — the  place  where 
Christ  wept  over  Jerusalem — "  is  the  stone  on  which 

our  Lord  sat  when  lie  preached;  and  on  that  same 
stone   shall  lie   sit    on    the   day  of  doom,  right  as  lie 

said  Himself."  Bernard  the  wise,  in  the  8th  century, 
speaks  of  the  church  of  st.  Leon,  in  the  Valley, 
"where  our  Lord  will  come  to  judgment"  [Early 
Trav.  28).. 

1  To  this  fact  the  writer  can  testify  from  recent 
observation.  It  is  evident  enough  in  Salzmann's 
photograph,  though  not  in  De  Baulcy's  sketch  (Atlas, 
pl.  24). 


952 


JEHOSHEBA 


therefore,  it  is  a  witness  to  the  date  of  the  tradition 
being  subsequent  to  the  time  of  Herod,  by  whom 
this  wall  was  built.  It  is  probably  the  "  little 
gatef  leading  down  by  steps  to  the  valley,"  ot 
which  Arculf speaks  (E.  Trav.).  Benjamin  ofTudela 
(1163)  also  mentions  the  gate  of  Jehoshaphat,  but 
without  any  nearer  indication  of  its  position  than 
that  it  led  to  the  valley  and  the  monuments  (Asher, 
i.  71).  '  (c.)  Lastly,  leading  to  this  gate  was 
a  street  called  the  street  of  Jehoshaphat  (Citez  de  J. 
§vii.,  Rob.  ii.  561). 

The  name  would  seem  to  be  generally  confined 
by  travellers  to  the  upper  part  of  the  glen,  from 
about  the  "Tomb  of  the  Virgin"  to  the  south-east 
corner  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem.     [Tombs.]     [G.] 

JEHOSH'EBA  (VltfllT:  LXX.  Taxrafc'e ; 
Joseph.  'Icoa-a;8e07j),  daughter" of  Joram  king  of  Is- 
rael, and  wife  of  Jenoiada  the  high-priest  (2  K.  xi. 
2).  Her  name  in  the  Chronicles  is  given  Jehos- 
iiabeatii.  It  thus  exactly  resembles  the  name  of 
the  only  two  other  wives  of  Jewish  priests  who  are 
known  to  us,  viz.,  Elisheba  (LXX.  and  N.  T. 
'EAKTajSeT,  whence  our  Etisrtwth),  the  wife  of 
Aaron,  Ex.  vi.  23,  and  the  wife  of  Zechariah,  Luke 
i.  7.  In  the  former  case  the  word  signifies  "  Jeho- 
vah's oath  ;"  in  the  second  "  God's  oath." 

As  she  is  called,  2  K.  xi.  2,  "  the  daughter  of 
Jorum,  sister  of  Ahaziah,"  it  has  been  conjectured 
that  she  was  the  daughter,  not  of  Athaliah,  but  of 
Joram,  by  another  wife  ;  and  Josephus  (Ant.  ix. 
7,  §1)  calls  her 'Oxo^i'a  6p.<ma.Tpios  &5eA<pr).  This 
may  be  ;  but  it  is  also  possible  that  the  omission  of 
Athaliah  s  name  may  have  been  occasioned  by  the 
detestation  in  which  it  was  held, — in  the  same  way 
as  modem  commentators  have,  for  the  same  reason, 
eagerlv  embraced  this  hypothesis.  That  it  is  not 
absolutely  needed  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  the 
worship  of  Jehovah  was  tolerated  under  the  reigns 
both  of  Joram  and  Athaliah — and  that  the  name  of 
Jehovah  was  incorporated  into  both  of  their  names. 

She  is  the  only  recorded  instance  of  the  marriage 
of  a  princess  of  the  royal  house  with  a  high-priest. 
On  this  occasion  it  was  a  providential  circumstance 
("  for  she  was  the  sister  of  Ahaziah,"  2  Chr.  xxii.  11), 
as  inducing  and  probably  enabling  her  to  rescue  the 
infant  Joash  from  the  massacre  of  his  brothers.  By 
her,  he  and  his  nurse  were  concealed  in  the  palace, 
and  afterwards  in  the  temple  (2  K.  xi.  2,  3  ;  2  Chr. 
xxii.  1 1),  where  he  was  brought  up  probably  with 
her  sons  (2  Chr.  xxiii.  11),  who  assisted  at  his  co- 
ronation. One  of  these  was  Zechariah,  who  succeeded 
her  husband  in  his  office,  and  was  afterwards  mur- 
dered (2  Chr.  xxiv.  20).  [A.  P.  S.] 

JEHOSH'UA  (JKflfV:  'Irjo-oDs  :  Josuc).  In 
this  form — contracted'  in  the  Hebrew,  but  fuller 
than  usual  in  the  A.  V. — is  given  the  name  of 
Joshua  in  Num.  xiii.  16,  on  the  occasion  of  its 
bestowal  by  Moses,  The  addition  of  the  name  of 
Jehovah  probably  marks  the  recognition  by  Moses 
of  the  important  part  taken  in  the  affair  of  the 
spies  by  him,  who  till  this  time  had  been  Hoshea, 
"  help,"  but  was  henceforward  to  be  Je-hoshua, 
"  help  of  Jehovah  "  (Ewald,  ii.  306).  Once  -more 
only  the  name  appears  in  its  full  form  in  the  A.  V. 
— this  time  with  a  redundant  letter — as 

JEHOSH'UAH  (the  Heb.  is  as  above*:  'bjoW, 
in  both  MSS. :  Josue),  in  the  genealogy  of  Ephraim 


JEHOVAH 

(1  Chr.  vii.  27).  We  should  be  thankful  to  the 
translators  of  the  A.  V.  for  giving  the  first  syllables 
of  this  great  name  their  full  form,  if  only  in  these 
two  cases;  though  why  in  these  only  it  is  difficult 
to  understand.  Nor  is  it  easier  to  see  whence  they 
got  the  final  h  in  the  latter  of  the  two.  [G.] 

JEHO'VAH  (mn\   usually  with    the  vowel 
points  of  "0"lNt  ;  but  when  the  two  occur  together, 
the  former  is  pointed  iTliT,  that  is  with  the  vowels 
of  DTT^N,  as  in  Obad.  i.  i,  Hah.  iii.  19  :   the  LXX. 
generally  render  it  by  Kvpws,  the  Vulgate  by  Do- 
minus  ;   and  in  this  respect  they  have  been  followed 
by  the  A.  V.,  where  it  is  translated  "  The  Lord  "  ). 
The  true  pronunciation  of  this  name,  by  which  God 
was  known  to  the  Hebrews,  has  been  entirely  lost, 
the  Jews  themselves  scrupulously  avoiding  every 
mention  of  it,  and  substituting  in  its  stead  one  or 
other  of  the  words  with  whose  proper  vowel -points 
it  may  happen  to  be  written.     This  custom,  which 
had  its  origin  in  reverence,  and  has  almost  dege- 
nerated into  a  superstition,  was  founded  upon  an 
erroneous  rendering  of  Lev.  xxiv.  16,  from  which  it 
was  inferred  that  the  mere  utterance  of  the  name 
constituted  a  capital   offence.      In    the   Rabbinical 
writings  it  is  distinguished  by  various  euphemistic 
expressions  ;  as  simply  "  the  name,"  or  "  the  name 
of  four  letters"  (the  Greek  tetragrammaton) ;  "the 
great  and  terrible  name;"   "the  peculiar  name," 
i.  e.  appropriated   to  God   alone  ;    "  the   separate 
name,"  i.  e.  either  the  name  which  is  separated  or 
removed  from  human  knowledge,  or,  as  some  render, 
"the  name  which  has  been  interpreted  or  revealed" 
(t/'~)1DDi"!  Dt^,  shem  hammephordsh).     The  Sama- 
ritans followed  the  same  custom,  and  in  reading  the 
Pentateuch  substituted  for  Jehovah  (^D^t/',  shemd) 
"  the  name,"  at  the  same  time  perpetuating  the 
practice  in  their  alphabetical  poems  and  later  writ- 
ings (Geiger,  Urschrift,  &c,  p.  262).     According 
to  Jewish  tradition,   it  was  pronounced  but  once 
a  year  by  the  high-priest  on  the  day  of  Atonement 
when  he  entered  the  Holy  of  Holies  ;  but  on   this 
point  there  is  some  doubt,  Maimonides  (Mor.  Neb. 
i.  61)  asserting  that  the  use  of  the  word  was  con- 
fined to  the  blessings  of  the  priests,  and  restricted 
to  the  sanctuary,  without  limiting  it  still  further 
to  the  high-priest  alone.     On  the  same  authority 
we   learn    that    it    ceased   with    Simeon    the   Just 
(  Yacl.  Chaz.  c.  14,  §10),  having  lasted  through  two 
generations,  that  of  the  men  of  the  Great  Synagogue 
and   the  age  of  Shemed,  while  others  include  the 
generation  of  Zedekiah  among  those  who  possessed 
the  use  of  the  shem  hammephordsh  (Midrash  on 
Ps.  xxxvi.  11,  epioted  by  Buxtorf  in  Reland's  Decas 
Exereit.).     But  even  after  the  destruction  of  the 
second  temple  we  meet  with  instances  of  individuals 
who  were  in  possession  of  the  mysterious  secret. 
A  certain  Bar  Kamzar  is  mentioned  in  the  Mishna 
'  Toma  iii.  §11)  who  was  able  to  write  this  name  of 
God  ;  but  even  on  such  evidence  we  may  conclude, 
that  after  the  siege  of  Jerusalem  the  true  pronun- 
ciation almost  if  not  entirely  disappeared,  the  pro- 
bability being  that  it  had   been  lost   long  before. 
Josephus,  himself  a  priest,  confesses  that  on   this 
point  he  was  not  permitted  to  speak  {Ant.  ii.  12, 
§4) ;  and  Philo  states  (de  Vit.  Mos.  iii.  p.  510)  that 
for  those  alone  whose  ears  and  tongue  were  purged 
by  wisdom  was  it  lawful  to  hear  or  utter  Uiis  awful 


f  Next  to  the    above  "  little  gate,"  Arculf  names 
the  gate  "  Thecuitis."     Can  this  strange  name  con- 


tain an  allusion  to  Thecoa,  the  valley  in  which  Jeho- 
shaphat's  great  victory  was  gained  ? 


JEHOVAH 

name.  It  is  evident  therefore  that  no  reference  to 
ancient  writers  can  be  expected  to  throw  any  light 
upon  the  question,  and  any  quotation  of  them  will 
only  render  the  darkness  in  which  it  is  involved 
more  palpable.  At  the  same  time  the  discussion, 
though  barren  of  actual  results,  may  on  other  ac- 
counts be  interesting ;  and  as  it  is  one  in  which 
great  names  are  ranged  on  both  sides,  it  would  for 
this  reason  alone  be  impertinent  to  dismiss  it  with 
a  cursory  notice.  In  the  decade  of  dissertations 
collected  by  Reland,  Fuller,  Gataker,  and  Leusden 
do  battle  for  the  pronunciation  Jehovah,  against 
such  formidable  antagonists  as  Drusius,  Amama, 
Cappellus,  Buxtorf,  and  Altingius,  who,  it  is  scarcely 
necessary  to  say,  fairly  beat  their  opponents  out  of 
the  licld  ;  the  only  argument,  in  fact,  of  any  weight, 
which  is  employed  by  the  advocates  of  the  pronun- 
ojation  of  the  word  as  it  is  written  being  that  de- 
rived from  the  form  in  which  it  appears  in  proper 
names,  such  as  .lehoshaphat,  Jehoram,  &e.  Their 
antagonists  make  a  strong  point  of  the  fact  that,  as 
has  been  noticed  above,  two  different  sets  of  vowels 
are  applied  to  the  same  consonants  under  certain 
circumstances.  To  this  Leusden,  of  all  the  cham- 
pions on  his  side,  but  feebly  replies.  The  same  may 
be  said  of  the  argument  derived  from  the  fact  that 
the  letters  27310,  when  prefixed  to  HI  IT1,  take,  not 
the  vowels  which  they  would  regularly  receive  were 
the  present  punctuation  true,  but  those  with  which 
they  would  be  written  if  ^TX,  adondi,  were  the 
reading ;  and  that  the  letters  ordinarily  taking 
dagesh  lene  when  following  HIPP  would,  according 
to  the  rules  of  the  Hebrew  points,  be  written 
without  dagesh,  whereas  it  is  uniformly  inserted. 
Whatever,  therefore,  be  the  true  pronunciation  of 
the  word,  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  it  is  not 
Jehovah. 

In  Greek  writers  it  appears  under  the  several 
forms  of 'law  (  Kod.  Sic.  i.  94;  Irenaeus,  i.  4,  §1). 
'levd  (Porphyry  in  Eusebius,  Praep.  Evan.  i.  9, 
§21),  'laov  (Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  v.  p.  666),  and  in 
a  catena  to  the  Pentateuch  in  a  MS.  at  Turin  'la 
ove  ;  both  Theodoret  (Quaest.  15  in  Exod.)  and 
Epiphanius  (  Haer.  20)  give  'la/8e,  the  former  dis- 
tinguishing it  as  the  pronunciation  of  the  Sama- 
ritans, while  'Aid  represented  that  of  the  Jews. 
But  even  if  these  writers  were  entitled  to  speak 
with  authority,  their  evidence  only  tends  to  show 
in  how  many  different  ways  the  four  letters  of  the 
word  nin*  could  be  represented  in  Greek  characters, 
and  throws  no  light  either  upon  its  real  pronuncia- 
tion or  its  punctuation.  In  like  manner  Jerome 
(on  Ps.  viii.j,  who  acknowledges  that  the  Jews 
considered  it  an  ineffable  name,  at  the  same  time 
says  it.  may  be  read  Jaho, — of  course,  supposing  the 
passage  in  question  to  be  genuine,  which  is  open  to 
doubt.  In  the  absence,  therefore,  of  anything  satis- 
factory from  these  sources,  there  is  plainly  left  a 

wide  field  for  conjecture.     What  has  been  d in 

this  field  the  following  pages  will  shorn  [twill  be 
better  perhaps  to  ascend  from  the  most  improbable 
hypotheses  to  those  which  cany  with  them  more 
show  of  reason,  and  thus  prepare  the  way  for  the 
considerations  which  will  follow. 

I.   Von  Bohlen,  at  once  most  sceptical  and  mosl 

credulous, whose  hasty  c ilusions  are  only  paralleled 

by  the  rashness  of  his  assumptions,  unhesitatingly 
asserts  that  beyond  all  doubt  the  word  Jehovah  is 
not  Semitic  in  its  origin.  Pinning  his  faith  upon 
the  Abraxas  gems,  in  which  he  finds  it  in  the  form 
Jao,   he  connects  it  with   the  Sanscrit  ./<  V  IS,  deVO, 


JEHOVAH 


953 


the  Creek  Ai6s,  and  Latin  Jovis  or  Diovis.  But, 
apart  from  the  consideration  that  his  authority  is  at 
least  questionable,  he  omits  to  explain  the  striking 
phenomenon  that  the  older  form  which  has  the  <l 
should  be  preserved  in  the  younger  languages,  the 
Greek  and  ancient  Latin,  while  not  a  trace  of  it 
appears  in  the  Hebrew.  It  would  be  desirable  also 
that,  before  a  philological  argument  of  this  nature 
can  be  admitted,  the  relation  between  the  Semitic 
and  Indo-Germanic  languages  should  be  more  clearly 
established.  In  the  absence  of  this,  any  inferences 
which  may  be  drawn  from  apparent  resemblances 
(the  resemblance  in  the  present  case  not  being  even 
apparent)  will  lead  to  certain  error.  That  the 
Hebrews  learned  the  word  from  the  Egyptians  is 
a  theory  which  has  found  some  advocates.  The 
foundations  for  this  theory  are  sufficiently  slight. 
As  has  been  mentioned  above,  Diodorus  (i.  94)  gives 
the  Greek  from  'Ia<£  ;  and  from  this  it  has  been 
inferred  that  'law  was  a  deity  of  the  Egyptians, 
whereas  nothing  can  be  clearer  from  the  context  than 
that  the  historian  is  speaking  especially  of  the  God 
of  the  Jews.  Again,  in  Macrobius  {Sat.  i.  c.  18), 
a  line  is  quoted  from  an  oracular  response  of  Apollo 
Clarius, 

<j>pd£eo  rbv  navTuiu  vnarov  6eov  e/u.juei''  'law, 

which  has  been  made  use  of  for  the  same  purpose. 
But  Jablonsky  {Punth.  Aeg.  ii.  §5)  has  proved  in- 
contestably  that  the  author  of  the  verses  from 
which  the  above  is  quoted,  was  one  of  the  Judaiz- 
ing  Gnostics,  who  were  in  the  habit  of  making 
the  names  'law  and  ~2,e$a<i9  the  subjects  of  mys- 
tical speculations.  The  Ophites,  who  were  Egyp- 
tians, are  known  to  have  given  the  name  'law  to 
the  Moon  (Neander,  Gnost.  252),  but  this,  as  Tho- 
luck  suggests,  may  have  arisen  from  the  fact  that 
in  Coptic  the  Moon  is  called  ioh  {Verm.  Schriften. 
th.  i.  385).  Movers  (Phoen.  i.  540),  while  defend- 
ing the  genuineness  of  the  passage  of  Macrobius, 
connects  'law,  which  denotes  the  Sun  or  Dionysus, 
with  the  root  ilin,  so  that  it  signifies  "  the  life- 
giver."  In  any  case,  the  fact  that  the  name  'law 
'is  found  among  the  Greeks  and  Egyptians,  or 
among  the  Orientals  of  Further  Asia,  in  the  2nd  or 
3rd  century,  cannot  be  made  use  of  as  an  argument 
that  the  Hebrews  derived  their  knowledge  of  the 
word  from  any  one  of  these  nations.  On  the  con- 
trary, there  can  be  but  little  doubt  that  the  process 
in  reality  was  reversed,  and  that  in  this  case  the 
Hebrews  were,  not  the  borrowers,  but  the  lenders. 
We  have  indisputable  evidence  that  it  existed  among 
them,  whatever  may  have  been  its  origin,  many 
centuries  before  it  is  found  in  other  records  ;  of  the 
contrary  we  have  no  evidence  whatever.  Of  the 
singular  manner  in  which  the  word  has  been  intro- 
duced into  other  languages,  we  have  a  remarkable 
instance  in  a  passage  quoted  by  M.  llemusat,  from 
one  of  the  works  of  the  Chinese  philosopher  Cao- 
tseu,  who  flourished,  according  to  Chinese  chrono- 
logy, about  the  6th  or  7th  century  B.C.,  and  held 
the  opinions  commonly  attributed  to  Pythagoras, 
Plato,  and  others  of  the  Greeks,  This  passage  M. 
lie'miisat  translates  as  follows: — "  Celui  que  vous 
regardez  el  que  vous  ae  voyez  pas,  se  nomme  j ; 
celui  (|ue  vous  e'coutez  et  que  vous  n'entendez  pas, 
se  nomme  Hi ;  celui  que  voire  main  cherche  et 
qu'elle  ne  pent  pas  saisir,  se  nomme  Wei.  Ce  sunt, 
trois  etres  qu'on  ne  peut  comprendre,  et  qui,  con- 
fondus,  n'en  font  qu'UD."  In  these  three  letters 
J  II  V  Keinusat  thinks  that  he  recognizes  the  name 
Jehovah  of  the  Hebrews,  which  might  have  beeu 

3  Q 


954 


JEHOVAH 


learnt  by  the  philosopher  himself  or  some  of  his 
pupils  in  the  course  of  his  travels;  or  it  might 
have  been  brought  into  China  by  some  exiled  Jews 
or  Gnostics.  The  Chinese  interpreter  of  the  passage 
maintains  that  these  mystical  letters  signify  "  the 
void,"  so  that  in  his  time  every  trace  of  the  origin  of 
the  word  had  in  all  probability  been  lost.  And  not 
only  does  it  appear,  though  perhaps  in  a  question- 
able form,  in  the  literature  of  the  Chinese.  In  a 
letter  from  the  missionary  Plaisant  to  the  Vicar 
Apostolic  Boucho,  dated  18th  Feb.  1847,  there  is 
mention  made  of  a  tradition  which  existed  among  a 
tribe  in  the  jungles  of  Burmah,  that  the  divine 
being  was  called  Jova  or  Kara-Jova,  and  that  the 
peculiarities  of  the  Jehovah  of  the  Old  Testament 
were  attributed  to  him  (Reinke,  Beitriljc,  iii.  65). 
But  all  this  is  very  vague  and  more  curious  than 
convincing,  The  inscription  in  front  of  the  temple 
of  Isis  at  Sais  quoted  by  Plutarch  (de  Is.  ct  Us. 
§9),  "I  am  all  that  hath  been,  and  that  is,  and 
that  shall  be,"  which  has  been  employed  as  an 
argument  to  prove  that  the  name  Jehovah  was 
known  among  the  Egyptians,  is  mentioned  neither 
by  Herodotus,  Diodorus  nor  Strabo;  and  Proclus, 
who  does  allude  to  it,  says  it  was  in  the  adytum 
of  the  temple.  But,  even  if  it  be  genuine,  its  au- 
thority is  worthless  for  the  purpose  for  which  it  is 
adduced.  For,  supposing  that  Jehovah  is  the  name 
to  which  such  meaning  is  attached,  it  follows 
rather  that  the  Egyptians  borrowed  it  and  learned 
its  significance  from  the  Jews,  unless  it  can  be 
proved  that  both  in  Egyptian  and  Hebrew  the  same 
combination  of  letters  conveyed  the  same  idea. 
Without,  however,  having  recourse  to  any  hypo- 
thesis of  this  kind,  the  peculiarity  of  the  inscrip- 
tion is  sufficiently  explained  by  the  place  which,  as 
is  well  known,  Isis  holds  in  the  Egyptian  mytho- 
logy as  the  universal  mother.  The  advocates  of 
the  Egyptian  origin  of  the  word  have  shown  no 
lack  of  ingenuity  in  summoning  to  their  aid  autho- 
rities the  most  unpromising.  A  passage  from  a 
treatise  on  interpretation  (Trepl  zpfj.r]veias,  §71), 
written  by  one  Demetrius,  in  which  it  is  said  that 
the  Egyptians  hymned  their  gods  by  means  of  the 
seven  vowels,  has  been  tortured  to  give  evidence  on 
the  point.  Scaliger  was  in  doubt  whether  it  re- 
ferred to  Serapis,  called  by  Hesychius  "  Serapis  of 
seven  letters"    (rb  iirTwypiixjxarov  papains),   or 

to  the  exclamation  il'lil)  Mil,  Mi  ye/wvah,  "  He 

is  Jehovah."  Of  the  latter  there  can  be  but  little 
doubt.  Gesner  took  the  seven  Greek  vowels,  and 
arranging  them  in  the  order  IEHHOTA,  found 
therein  Jehovah.  But  he  was  triumphantly  re- 
futed by  Didymus,  who  maintained  that  the  vowels 
were  merely  used  for  musical  notes,  and  in  this  very 
probable  conjecture  he  is  supported  by  the  Milesian 
inscription  elucidated  by  Barthelenry  and  others. 
In  this  the  invocation  of  God  is  denoted  by  the 
seven  vowels  five  times  repeated  in  different  arrange- 
ments, Actjiouo).  Er]iouwa,  Hiovwae,  louwaeyj, 
Qvwaer)i :  each  group  of  vowels  precedes  a  "  holy  " 
(ctyie),  and  the  whole  concludes  with  the  following  : 
"  the  city  of  the  Milesians  ami  all  the  inhabitants 
are  guarded  by  archangels."  Jliiller,  with  much 
probability,  concludes  that  the  seven  vowels  repre- 
sented the  seven  notes  of  the  octave.  One  more  ar- 
gument for  the  Egyptian  origin  of  Jehovah  remains 
to  be  noticed.  It  is  found  in  the  circumstance 
that  Pharaoh  changed  the  name  of  Eliakim  to  Je- 
hoiakim  (2  K.  xxiii.  34),  which  it  is  asserted  is  not 
in  accordance  with   the  practice  of  conquerors  to- 


JEHOVAH 

wards  the  conquered,  unless  the  Egyptian  king  im- 
posed upon  the  king  of  Judah  the  name  of  one  of 
his  own  gods.  But  the  same  reasoning  would 
prove  that  the  oiigin  of  the  word  was  Babylonian, 
for  the  king  of  Babylon  changed  the  name  of  Mat- 
taniah  to  Zedeki'aA  (2  K.  xxiv.  17). 

But  many,  abandoning  as  untenable  the  theory 
of  an  Egyptian  origin,  have  sought  to  trace  the 
name  among  the  Phoenicians  and  Canaanitish  tribes. 
In  support  of  this,  Hartmann  brings  forward  a 
passage  from  a  pretended  fragment  of  Sanchoniatho 
quoted  by  Philo-Byblius,  a  writer  of  the  age  of 
Nero.  But  it  is  now  generally  admitted  that  the  so 
called  fragments  of  Sanchoniatho,  the  ancient  Phoe- 
nician chronicler,  are  most  impudent  forgeries  con- 
cocted by  Philo-Byblius  himself.  Besides,  the  passage 
to  which  Hartmann  refers  is  not  found  in  Philp 
Byblius,  but  is  quoted  from  Porphyry  by  Euse- 
bius  (Praep.  Evan.  i.  9,  §21),  and,  genuine  or  not, 
evidently  alludes  to  the  Jehovah  of  the  Jews.  It 
is  there  stated  that  the  most  trustworthy  authority 
in  matters  connected  with  the  Jews  was  Sancho- 
niatho of  Beyrout,  who  received  his  information 
from  Hierombalos  (Jerubbaal)  the  priest  of  the  god 
'Ieu&j.  From  the  occurrence  of  Jehovah  as  a  com- 
pound in  the  proper  names  of  many  who  were  not 
Hebrews,  Hamaker  {Misc.  Phocn.  p.  174,  &c.) 
contends  that  it  must  have  been  known  among 
heathen  people.  But  such  knowledge,  if  it  existed, 
was  no  more  than  might  have  been  obtained  by 
their  necessary  contact  with  the  Hebrews.  The 
names  of  Uriah  the  Hittite,  of  Araunah  or  Axanjah. 
the  Jebusite,  of  Tobiah  the  Ammorite,  and  of  the 
Canaanitish  town  Bizjothjah,  may  be  all  explained 
without  having  recourse  to  Hamaker's  hypothesis. 
Of  as  little  value  is  his  appeal  to  1  K.  v.  7,  where 
we  find  the  name  Jehovah  in  the  mouth  of  Hiram, 
king  of  Tyre.  Apart  from  the  consideration  that 
Hiram  would  necessarily  be  acquainted  with  the 
name  as  that  of  the  Hebrews'  national  god,  its  oc- 
currence is  sufficiently  explained  by  the  tenor  of 
Solomon's  message  (1  K.  v.  3-5).  Another  point 
on  which  Hamaker  relies  for  support  is  the  name 
'Aj85a?os,  which  occurs  as  that  of  a  Tyrian  suHete 
in  Menander  (Jos.  c.  Apion.  i.  21),  and  which  he 
identifies  with  Obadiah  (iVpy).  But  both  Fiirst 
and  Hengstenberg  represent  it  in  Hebrew  characters 
by  "H^y,  'abdai,  which  even  Hamaker  thinks  more 

probable. 

II.  Such  are  the  principal  hypotheses  which  have 
been  constructed  in  order  to  account  for  a  non- 
Hebraic  origin  of  Jehovah.  To  attribute  much 
value  to  them  requires  a  large  share  of  faith.  It 
remains  now  to  examine  the  theories  on  the  opposite 
side ;  for  on  this  point  authorities  are  by  no  means 
agreed,  and  have  frequently  gone  to  the  contrary 
extreme.  S.  I).  Luzzatto  (Auim.  in  Jcs.  Vat. 
in  Rosenmuller's  Compend.  xxiv.)  advances  witli 
singular  naivete'  the  extraordinary  statement  that 
Jehovah,  or  rather  rTli"P  divested  of  points,  is  com- 
pounded of  two  inteijections,  ill,  rah.  of  pain,  and 
•in\  ydhu,  of  joy,  and  denotes  the  author  of  good 
and  evil.  Such  an  etymology,  from  one  who  is 
unquestionably  among  the  first  of  modern  Jewish 
scholars,  is  a  remarkable  phenomenon.  Ewald, 
referring  to  Gen.  xix.  24,  suggests  as  the  origin  of 

Jehovah,  the  Arab.  Jyfc,  which  signifies  ••height, 
heaven  ;"  a  conjecture,  the  honour  of  which  no  one 


JEHOVAH 

will  desire  to  rob  him.  But  most  have  taken  for  | 
the  basis  of  their  explanations,  ami  the  different 
methods  of  punctuation  which  they  propose,  the 
passage  in  Ex.  iii.  14,  to  which  we  must  naturally 
look  for  a  solution  of  the  question.  When  Muses 
received  his  commission  to  be  the  deliverer  of  Israel, 
the  Almighty,  who  appeared  in  the  burning  bush, 
communicated  to  him- the  name  which  he  should 
give  as  the  credentials  of  his  mission:  "And  God 
said  unto  Moses,  I  am  THAT  1  AM  pt'S  n^ilX 
JlTlX,  ehyeh  usher  ehych)  ;  and  he  said,  Thus 
shalt  thou  say  unto  the  children  of  Israel,  I  AM 
hath  sent  me  unto  you."  That  this  passage  is 
intended  to  indicate  the  etymology  of  Jehovah,  as 
understood  by  the  Hebrews,  no  one  has  ventured  to 
doubt:  it  is  in  fact  the  key  to  the  whole  mystery. 
But,  though  it  certainly  supplies  the  etymology, 
the  interpretation  must  be  determined  from  other 
considerations.  According  to  this  view  then,  niiT 
must  be. the  3rd  sing.  muse.  fut.  of  the  substantive 
verb  iTn,  the  older  form  of  which  was  mil,  still 

found  in   the  Chaldee  !"I1i"I,   and  Syriac  JOOI,  a 

fact  which  will  be  referred  to  hereafter  in  discussing 
the  antiquity  of  the  name.  If  this  etymology  be 
correct,  and  there  seems  little  reason  to  call  it  in 
question,  one  stop  towards  the  true  punctuation 
and  pronunciation  is  already  gained.  Many  learned 
men,  and  among  them  Grotius,  Galatinus,  Crusius, 
and  Leusden,  in  an  age  when  such  fancies  were  rife, 
imagined  that,  reading  the  name  with  the  vowel 
points  usually  attached  to  it,  they  discovered  an 
indication  of  the  eternity  of  God  in  the  fact  that 
the  name  by  which  He  revealed  Himself  to  the 
Hebrews  was  compounded  of  the  Present  Participle, 
and  the  Future  and  l'raeteiite  tenses  of  the  sub- 
stantive verb.  The  idea  may  have  been  suggested 
by  the  expression  in  Rev.  iv.  K  16  i)v  kcu  6  &>v  koI 
6  epxapevos),  and  received  apparent  confirmation 
from  the  Targ.  Jon.  on  Deut.  xxxii.  39,  and  Targ. 
Jer.  on  Ex.  iii.  14.  These  passages,  however, 
throw  no  light  upon  the  composition  of  the  name, 
and  merelj  asseri  thai  in  its  significance  it  embraces 
past,  present,  and  future.  But  having  agreed  to 
reject  the  present  punctuation,  it  is  useless  to  discuss 
any  theories  which  may  he  based  upon  it.  had  they 
even  greater  probability  in  their  favour  than  the 
one  just  mentioned.  As  one  of  the  forms  in  which 
Jehovah  appeals  in  Greek  characters  is  'law,  it  has 
been  proposed  by  Cappellus  to  punctuate  it  nUT. 
yahvoh,  which  is  clearly  contrary  to  the  analogy  of 
n"?  verbs.  Gussetius  suggested  rThT,  yehSceh, 
or  mrV,  yihveh,  in  the  former  of  which  he  is  sup- 
ported by  the  authority  ofFiirst;  ami  Mercer  and 
Coin,  a  Lapide  read  it  nifV,  yefiveh:  hid  on  all 
these  suppositions  we  should  have  •in1'  for  -in*  in 
the  terminations  of  compound  proper  names.  The 
suffrages  of  others  arc  divided  between  mi"l\  or 
nin\  supposed  to  be  represented  by  the  'iaftt  of 
Kpiphanius  above  mentioned,  and  ilin*  or  fHPP 
which  1'i'nst  holds  to  be  the  'levw  of  Porphyry, 
or  the  'Iaou  of  Clemens  Alexandrinus.  Cn  pari 
(  Uicha,  p.  .">.  &c.)  decides  in  favour  of  the  former 
on  the  ground  that  this  foim  only  would 
to  the  contraction  •in'1  in  proper  names,  ami  opposes 
both  Fiirst's  punctuation  mil'1  or  fllf]*,  as  well  as 
that  of  rn!"!''  or   nin\  which  would  he  contracted 


JEHOVAH 


955 


into  •"I!"!''.  Gesenius  punctuates  the  word  nil"!*,  fiom 
which,  or  from  mil1',  are  derived  the  abbreviated 
form  n\  yah,  used  in  poetry,  and  the  form  in"1  = 
in1'  =  )r\>  (so  ^IT1  becomes  TP),  which  occuis  at 
the  commencement  of  compound  proper  names  (Hit- 
zig,  Jesaia,  p.  4).  Delitzsch  maintains  that,  which- 
ever punctuation  be  adopted,  the  quiescent  sheva 
under  fl  is  ungrammatical,  and  Chateph  Pathach  is 
the  proper  vowel.  He  therefore  writes  it  niilV 
yilhaudh,  to  which  he  says  the  'Aid  of  Theodore! 
corresponds;  the  last  vowel  being  Kametz  instead 
of  Segol,  according  to  the  analogy  of  proper  names 
derived  from  it'1?  verbs  (e.g.  HJEV  PHE)'',  H3DS 
ami  others).  In  his  opinion  the  form  PP  is  not  an 
abbreviation,  but  a  concentration  of  the  Te- 
tragrammaton  [Comm.  iiber  den  Psalter,  einl.). 
There  remains  to  be  noticed  the  suggestion  of  Gese- 
nius that  the  form  nii"l\  which  he  adopted,  might 
be  the  Hiph.  fut.  of  the  substantive  verb.  Of  the 
same  opinion  was  Keuss.  Others  again  would 
make  it  Piel,  and  read  H-irP.  Fiirst  (Handw.  s.  v.) 
mentions  some  other  etymologies  which  affect  the 
meaning  rather  than  the  punctuation  of  the  name  ; 
such,  for  instance,  as  that  it  is  derived  from  a  root 
iTin,  "  to  overthrow,"  and  signifies  "  the  destroyer 
or  storm-sender;"  or  that  it  denotes  "  the  light  or 
heaven"  from  a  root  nin=nQ\  "to  be  bright," 
or  "the  life-giver,"  from  the  same  root  =  nil"!, 
"  to  live."  We  have  therefore  to  decide  between 
HIPP  or  nil"]'',  and  accept  the  former,  i.  e.  Yahaveh, 
as  the  more  probable  punctuation,  continuing  at  the 
same  time  for  the  sake  of  convenience  to  adopt  "the 
form  "  Jehovah"  in  what  follows,  on  account  of  its 
familiarity  to  English  readers. 

III.  The  next  point  for  consideration  is  of  vastly 
more  importance:  what  is  the  meaning  of  Jehovah, 
and  what  does  it  express  of  the  being  and  nature  of 
God,  more  than  or  in  distinction  from  the  other 
names  applied  to  the  deity  in  the  0.  T.  ?  That 
there  was  some  distinction  in  these  different  appella- 
tions was  early  perceived,  and  various  explanations 
were  employed  to  account  for  it.  Tertullian  (adr. 
Hermog.  c.  3)  observed  that  God  was  not  called 
Lord  (Kvpios)  till  after  the  Creation,  and  in  conse- 
quence of  it ;  while  Augustine  found  in  it  an  indi- 
cation id' the  absolute  dependence  of  man  upon  God 
[de  Gen.  ad  lit.  viii.  2).  Chrysostom  (//.*/».  xiv. 
in  Gen.)  considered  the  two  names,  Lord  and 
God,  as  equivalent,  and  the  alternate  use  of  them 
arbitrary.  But  all  their  arguments  proceed  upon 
the  supposition  that  the  Kvpws  of  the  LXX.  is  the 
true  rendering  of  the  original,  whereas  it  is  merely 
the   translation  of  ^"liX,  Sdondi,  whose  points  it 

r       '         i. 
hears.      With  regard  to  D\-pX,  Slohim,  the  other 

chief  name  by  which  the  Deity  is  designated  in  the 
<).  T.,  it  has  been  held  by  many,  and  the  opinion 
does  not  even  now  want  supporters,  that  in  the 
plural    form   of  the  word   was   shadowed    forth    the 

plurality  of  persons  in  the  godhead,  and  the  mystery 
of  the  Trinity  was  inferred  therefrom.  Such, 
according  to  Peter  Lombard,  was  the  true  signifi- 

e.i of  Elohim.     l'.ut  Calvin,  Mercer,   Drusius, 

and  Bellartnine  have  given  the  weight  of  their 
authority  against  an  explanation  so  fanciful  and 
arbitrary.  •  Among  the  Jewish  writers  of  the 
middle  ages  the  question  much  more  nearly  ap- 
proached1 its  solution.  R.  Jehuda  Hallevi  (12th 
.  i he  author  of  the  booh  Cozri,  found  in  the 
3  (I  2 


056 


JEHOVAH 


usaee  of  Elohim  a  protest  against  idolaters,  who 
call  each  personified  power  I-PK,  S.odh,  and  all  col- 
lectively Elohim.     He  interpreted  it  as  the  most 
general  name  of  "the  Deity,  distinguishing  Him  as 
manifested  in  the  exhibition  of  His  power,  without 
reference  to  His  personality  or  moral  qualities,  or  to 
any  special  relation  which  He  bears  to  man.     Je- 
hovah, on  the  contrary,  is  the  revealed  and  known 
God.     While  the  meaning  of  the  former  could  be 
evolved  by  reasoning,  the  true  significance  of  the 
latter  could  only  be  apprehended  "  by  that  pro- 
phetic vision  by  which  a  man  is,  as  it  were,  separated 
and  withdrawn  from  his  own  kind,  and  approaches 
to  the  angelic,  and  another  spirit  enters  into  him." 
In   like   manner   Maimonides  (Mor.   Neb.   i.    61, 
Buxt.)  saw  in  Jehovah  the  name  which  teaches  of 
the  substance  of  the  Creator,  and  Abarbanel  (quoted 
by    Buxtorf,    de   Norn.   Dei,    §39)    distinguishes 
Jehovah,  as  denoting  God  according  to  what  He  is 
in  Himself,  from  Elohim  which  conveys  the  idea  of 
the  impression  made  by  His  power.     In  the  opinion 
of  Astruc,   a  Belgian  physician,   with  whom   the 
documentary  hypothesis   originated,   the   alternate 
use  of  the  two  names  was  arbitrary,  and  determined 
by  no  essential  difference.     Hasse  (Entdeckumjcn) 
considered  them  as  historical  names,  and  Sack  (de 
usu  nom.  dei,  &c.)    regarded  Elohim  as  a  vague 
term    denoting    "  a   certain   infinite,   omnipotent, 
incomprehensible    existence,     from    which    things 
finite  and  visible  have  derived  their  origin,"  while 
to  God,  as  revealing  himself,  the  more  definite  title 
of  Jehovah  was  applied.     Ewald,  in  his  tract  on 
the  composition  of  Genesis  (written  when  he  was 
nineteen),  maintained  that  Elohim  denoted  the  Deity 
in    general,   and    is  the  common  or  lower   name, 
while  Jehovah  was  the  national  god  of  the  Israelites. 
But  in  order  to  carry  out  his  theory  he  was  com- 
pelled in  many  pkces  to  alter  the  text,   and  was 
afterwards  induced  to  modify  his  statements,  which 
were  opposed  by  Gramberg  and  Stahelin.     Doubt- 
less Elohim  is  used  in  many  cases  of  the  gods  of  the 
heathen,  who  included  in  the  same  title  the  God  of 
the  Hebrews,  and  denoted  generally  the  Deity  when 
spoken  of  as  a  supernatural  being,  and  when  no 
national  feeling   influenced   the    speaker.     It  was 
Elohim  who,  in  the  eyes  of  the  heathen,  delivered 
the  Israelites  from  Egypt  (1  Sam.  iv.  8),  and  the 
Egyptian   lad   adjured  David   by  Elohim,    rather 
than  by  Jehovah,  of  whom  he  would  have  no  know- 
ledge (1  Sam.  xxx.   15).     So   Ehud  announces  to 
the  Moabitish  king  a  message  from  Elohim  (Judg. 
iii.  20)  ;  to  the  Syrians  the  Jehovah  of  the  Hebrews 
was  only  their  national  God,  one  of  the  Elohim 
(1  K.  xx.  23,  28),  and  in  the  mouth  of  a  heathen 
the  name  Jehovah  would  convey  no  more  intelligible 
meaning  than  this.     It  is  to  be  observed  also  that 
when  a  Hebrew  speaks  with  a  heathen   he    uses 
the   more  general  term   Elohim.     Joseph,  in  ad- 
dressing  Pharaoh   (Gen.  xli.   16),  and    David,  in 
appealing  to  the  king  of  Moab  to  protect  his  family 
(1  Sam.  xxii.  3),  designate  the  Deity  by  the  less 
specific  title  ;  and  on  the  other  hand  the  same  rule 
is  generally  followed  when   the    heathen  are    the 
speakers,  as  in  the  case  of  Abimelech  (Gen.  xxi.  23), 
the  Hittites  (Gen.  xxiii.  6),  the  Midianite  (Judg.  vii. 
14),  and  Joseph  in  his  assumed  character  as  an 
Egyptian  (Qen.  xlii.  18).     But,  although  this  dis- 
tinction between  Elohim,  as  the  general  appellation 
of  Deity,  and  Jehovah,   the  national   God  of  the 
Israelites,  contains  some  superficial  truth,'  the  real 
nature  of  their  difference  must  be  sought  for  far 


JEHOVAH 

deeper,  and  as  a  foundation  for  the  arguments 
which  will  be  adduced  recourse  must  again  be  had 
to  etymology. 

IV.  With  regard  to  the  derivation  of  DTPS,  elo- 
him, the  pi.  of  r\) 7H,  etymologists  are  divided  in  their 
opinions  ;  some  connecting  it  with  ?S,  el,  and  the 
unused  root  >1X,  id,  "  to  be  strong,"  while  others 

refer  it  to  the  Arabic  j^\,  cdiha,  "  to  be  astonished," 

and  hence  £\,  alalia,  "to  worship,  adore,"  Elohim 

thus  denoting  the  Supreme  Being  who  was  worthy 
of  all  worship  and  adoration,  the  dread  and  awful 
One.  But  Fiirst,  with  much  greater  probability, 
takes  the  noun  in  this  case  as  the  primitive  from 
which  is  derived  the  idea  of  worship  contained  in 
the  verb,  and  gives  as  the  true  root  rT?K=>1N, 
"  to  be  strong."  Delitzsch  would  prefer  a  root, 
7\bi<  =  PPK  =  b^H  (Symb.  ad  Psalm,  illustr.  p.  29). 
From  whatever  root,  however,  the  word  may  be 
derived,  most  are  of  opinion  that  the  primary  idea 
contained  in  it  is  that  of  strength,  power ;  so  that 
Klohim  is  the  proper  appellation  of  the  Deity,  as 
manifested  in  His  creative  and  universally  sustaining 
agency,  and  in  the  general  divine  guidance  and  go- 
vernment of  the  world.  Hengstenberg,  who  adheres 
to  the  derivation  above-mentioned  from  the  Aral)., 
aliha  and  alaha,  deduces  from  this  etymology  his 
theory  that  Elohim  indicates  a  lower,  and  Jehovah 
a  higher  stage  of  the  knowledge  of  God,  on  the 
ground  that  "the  feeling  of  fear  is  the  lowest  which 
can  exist  in  reference  to  God,  and  merely  in  respect 
of  this  feeling  is  God  marked  by  this  designation." 
But  the  same  inference  might  also  be  drawn  on  the 
supposition  that  the  idea  of  simple  power  or  strength 
is  the  most  prominent  in  the  word ;  and  it  is  more 
natural  that  the  divine  Being  should  be  conceived 
of  as  strong  before  He  became  the  object  of  fear  and 
adoration.  To  this  view  Gesenius  accedes,  when  he 
says  that  the  notion  of  woi  shipping  and  fearing  is 
rather  derived  from  the  power  of  the  Deity  which 
is  expressed  in  his  name.  The  question  now  arises, 
What  is  the  meaning  to  be  attached  to  the  plural 
form  of  the  word  ?  As  has  been  already  mentioned, 
some  have  discovered  therein  the  mystery  of  the 
Trinity,  while  others  maintain  that  it  points  to 
polytheism.  The  Rabbis  generally  explain  it  as  the 
plural  of  majesty  ;  Rabbi  Bechai,  as  signifying  the 
lord  of  all  powers.  Abarbanel  and  Kimchi  consider 
it  a  title  of  honour,  in  accordance  with  the  Hebrew 
idiom,  of  which  examples  will  be  found  in  Is.  liv.  5, 
Job  xxxv.  10,  Gen.  xxxix.  20,  xlii.  30.  In  I'rov. 
ix.  1,  the  plural  rV)£3n,  cltdcmuth,  "wisdoms," 
is  used  for  wisdom  in  the  abstract,  as  including  all 
the  treasures  of  wisdom  and  knowledge.  Hence  it 
is  probable  that  the  plural  form  Elohim,  instead  of 
pointing  to  polytheism,  is  applied  to  God  as  com- 
prehending in  Himself  the  fulness  of  all  power, 
and  uniting  in  a  perfect  degree  all  that  which  the 
name  signifies,  and  all  the  attributes  which  the 
heathen  ascribe  to  the  several  divinities  of  their 
pantheon.  The  singular  rfiblt,  eloah,  with  few  ex- 
ceptions (Neh.  ix.  17  ;  2  Chf.  xxxii.  15),  occurs 
only  in  poetry.  It  will  be  found,  upon  examination 
of  the  passages  in  which  Elohim  occurs,  that  it  is 
chiefly  in  places  where  God  is  exhibited  only  in  the 
plenitude  of  his  power,  and  where  no  especial  re- 


JEHOVAH 

ference  is  made  to  his  unity,  personality,  or  holiness, 
or  to  his  relation  to  Israel  and  the  theocracy.  (See 
Ps.  xvi.  1,  six.  1,  7,  8.)  Hengstenberg's  etymology 
of  the  word  is  disputed  by  Delitzseh  (Symb.  ad  Pss, 
illustr.  p.  29n.),  who  refers  it,  as  has  been  men- 
tioned above,  to  a  root  indicating  power  or  might, 
and  sees  in  it  an  expression  not  of  what  men  think 
of  God,  but  of  what  He  is  in  Himself,  in  so  far  as 
He  has  life  omnipotent  in  Himself,  and  according 
as  He  is  the  beginning  and  end  of  all  lite.  For  the 
true  explanation  of  the  name  he  refers  to  the  reve- 
lation of  the  mystery  of  the  Trinity.  But  it  is  at 
least  extremely  doubtful  whether  to  the  ancient 
Israelites  any  idea  of  this  nature  was  conveyed  by 
Elohim  ;  and  in  making  use  of  the  more  advanced 
knowledge  supplied  by  the  New  Testament,  there  is 
some  danger  of  discovering  more  meaning  and  a 
more  subtle  significance  flian  was  ever  intended  to 
be  expressed. 

Y.  Hut  while  Elohim  exhibits  God  displayed  in 
his  power  as  the  creator  and  governor  of  the  phy- 
sical universe,  the  name  Jehovah  designates  his 
nature  as  He  stands  in  relation  b  man,  as  the  only, 
almighty,  true,  personal,  holy  Being,  a  spirit,  and 
"the  father  of  spirits"  (Num.  xvi.  22;  comp. 
John  iv.  24),  who  revealed  himself  to  his  people, 
made  a  covenant  with  them,  and  became  their  law- 
giver, and  to  whom  all  honour  and  worship  are 
due.  If  the  etymology  above  given  be  accepted, 
and  the  name  be  derived  from  the  future  tense  of 
the  substantive  verb,  it  would  denote,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  general  analogy  of  proper  names  of  a 
similar  form,  "He  that  is,"  "  the  Being,"  whose 
chief  attribute  is  eternal  existence.  Jehovah  is 
represented  as  eternal  (Gen.  xxi.  33  ;  comp.  1  Tim. 
vi.  16),  unchangeable  (Ex.  iii.  14;  Mai.  iii.  6), 
the  only  being  (Josh.  xxii.  22;  Ps.  1.  1),  Creator 
and  lord  of  all  things  (Ex.  xx.  11;  comp.  Num. 
xvi.  22  with  xxvii.  16;  Is.  xlii.  .5).  It  is  Jehovah 
who  made  the  covenant  with  his  people  (Gen.  xv. 
18  ;  Num.  x.  33,-&c.).  In  this  connexion  Elohim 
occurs  but  once  (Ps.  lxxviii.  10),  and  even  with 
the  article,  Ha-Elohim,  which  expresses  more  per- 
sonality than  Eh 'him  alone,  is  found  but  seldom 
(Judg.  .xx.  27;  1  Sam.  iv.  4).  The  Israelites  were 
enjoined  to  observe  the  commandments  of  Jehovah 
(Lev.  iv.  -7,  &c. ),  to  keep  His  law,  and  to  worship 
Ilim  alone.  Hence  the  phrase  "  to  serve  Jehovah" 
(Ex.  x.  7,  8,&c.)  is  applied  to  denote  true  worship, 
whereas  "  to  serve  Ha-Elohim"  is  used  but  once  in 
this  sense  (Ex.  iii.  12),  and  Elohim  occurs  in  the 
same  association  only  when  the  worship  of  idols  is 
spoken  of  (Deut.  iv.  28  ;  Judg.  iii.  6).  As  Jeho- 
vah, the  only  true  God,  is  the  only  object  of  true 
worship,  to  Ilim  In-long  th'-  sabbaths  and  festivals, 
and  all  the  ordinances  connected  with  the  religious 
services  of  the  Israelites  (Ex.  x.  !t,  xii.  11  ;  Lev. 
xxiii.  2).  His  are  the  altars  on  which  offerings  are 
made  to  the  true  God;  the  priests  and  ministers 
are  His  (1  Sam.  ii.  11,  xiv.  ■">).  and  so  exclusively 
that  a  priest  of  Elohim  is  always  associated  with 
idolatrous  worship.  To  Jehovah  alone  are  offerings 
made  '  Ex.  viii.  s  ),  and  if  Elohim  is  ever  used  in 
this  connexion,  it  is  always  qualified  by  pronominal 
suffixes,  or  some  word  in  construction  with  it  so  as 
to  indicate  the  true  God;  in  all  other  cases  it  refers 
to  idols  i :  Ex.  xxii.  20,  xxxiv.  15  .  it  follows  natu- 
rally that  the  temple  and  taboinaele  are  Jehovah's, 
and  if  they  are  attributed  to  Elohim,  the  latter  is 
in  some  manner  restricted  as  before.    The  prophets 

are    the   prophets  of  Jehovah,  ami  their  am nce- 

ments  proceed   from   him,   seldom    from    Elohim. 


JEHOVAH 


957 


The  Israelites  are  the  people  of  Jehovah  (Ex.  xxxvi. 
120),  the  congregation  of  Jehovah  (Num.  xvi.  3), 
as  the  Moabites  are  the  people  of  Chemosh  (Jer. 
xlviii.  46).  Their  king  is  the  anointed  of  Jehovah  ; 
their  wars  are  the  wars  of  Jehovah  (Ex.  xiv.  25  ; 
1  Sam.  xviii.  17)  ;  their  enemies  are  the  enemies  of 
Jehovah  (2  Sam.  xii.  14) ;  it  is  the  hand  of  Jehovah 
that  delivers  them  up  to  their  toes  (Judg.  vi.  1, 
xiii.  1,  Sec.),  and  He  it  is  who  raises  up  for  them 
deliverers  and  judges,  and  on  whom  they  call  in 
times  of  peril  (Judg.  ii.  18,  iii.  9,  15;  Josh.  xxiv. 
7  ;  1  Sam.  xvii.  37).  In  tine,  Jehovah  is  the  theo- 
cratic king  of  his  people  (Judg.  viii.  23),  by  him 
their  kings  reign  and  achieve  success  against  the 
national  enemies  (1  Sam.  xi.  13,  xiv.  23).  Their 
heroes  are  inspired  by  His  Spirit  (Judg.  iii.  10, 
vi.  34),  and  their  hand  steeled  against  their  foes 
(2  Sam.  vii.  23);  the  watchword  of  Gideon  was 
"  The  Sword  of  Jehovah,  and  of  Gideon  1 "  (Judg. 
vii.  20).  The  day  on  which  God  executes  judg- 
ment on  the  wicked  is  the  day  of  Jehovah  (is.  ii. 
12,  xxxiv.  S  ;  comp.  Rev.  xvi.  14).  Asthe  Israelites 
were  in  a  remarkable  manner  distinguished  as  the 
people  of  Jehovah,  who  became  their  'lawgiver  and 
supreme  ruler,  it  is  not  strange  that  He  should  lie 
put  in  strong  contrast  with  Chemosh  (Judg.  xi. 
24),  Ashtaroth  (Judg.  x.  6)  and  the  Baalim  (Judg. 
iii.  7),  the  national  deities  of  the  surrounding  na- 
tions, and  thus  be  pre-eminently  distinguished  as 
the  tutelary  deity  of  the  Hebrews  in  one  aspect  of 
his  character.  Such  and  no  more  was  He  to  the 
heathen  (1  K.  xx.  23)  ;  but  all  this  and  much  more 
to  the  Israelites,  to  whom  Jehovah  was  a  distinct 
personal  subsistence, — the  living  God,  who  reveals 
himself  to  man  by  word  and  deed,  helps,  guides, 
saves,  and  delivers,  and  is  to  the  Old  what  Christ 
is  to  the  New'Testament.  Jehovah  was  no  abstract 
name,  but  thoroughly  practical,  and  stood  in  inti- 
mate connexion  with  the  religious  life  of  the  people. 
While  Elohim  represents  God  only  in  his  most  out- 
ward relation  to  man,  and  distinguishes  him  as 
recognised  in  his  omnipotence,  Jehovah  describes 
him  according  to  his  innermost  being.  In  Jehovah 
the  moral  attributes  are  presented  as  constituting 
the  essence  of  his  nature;  whereas  in  Elohim  there 
is  no  reference  to  personality  or  moral  character. 
The  relation  of  Elohim  to  Jehovah  has  been  va- 
riously explained.  The  former,  in  Hengstenberg's 
opinion,  indicates  a  lower,  ami  the  latter  a  higher, 
stage  of  consciousness  of  God;  Elohim  becoming 
Jehovah  by  an  historical  process,  and  to  show  how 
He  became'  so,  being  the  main  object  of  the  sacred 
history.  Kurtz  considers  the  two  names  as  related 
to  each  other  as  power  and  evolution  :  Elohim  the 
•God  of  the  beginning,  Jehovah  of  the  development  ; 
Elohim  the  Creator,  Jehovah  the  mediator.   Elohim 

is    (iod    of   the    beginning   and    end,   the  creator  and 

the  judge  ;  Jehovah  the  God  of  the  middle,  of  the 

development  Which  lies  between  the  beginning  and 
end  (/'/<■  Einheitder  Gen.).  That  Jehovah  is  iden- 
tical with  Elohim,  and  not  a  separate  being,  is  indi- 
cated  by  the  joint   n f  the    names   Jehovah- 

Elohim. 

VI.  The  antiquity  of  the  name  Jehovah  among  the 

Hebrew-  ha-  formed  the  subject  of  much  dlSCUSSion. 

That  it  was  not  known  before  the  age  of  Moses  has 
been  inferred  from  Ex.  vi.  .">  ;  while  Von  Bohlen 
assigns  to  it  a  much  more  recent  date,  and  contends 

that  we  have  "  no  conclusive  proof  of  the  worship 
of  Ji  ii"\  all  anterior  to  the  ancient  hymns  of  I  >a\  id" 
(  //./.  to  Gen.  i.  I'll',  Eng.  tr.).  But,  on  the  other 
band,  we  should  lie  inclined   to   infer  from  the  et\- 


958 


JEHOVAH 


mology  of  the  word  that  it  originated  in  an  age 
long  prior  to  that  of  Moses,  in  whose  time  the  root 
nin  =  n,n  was  already  antiquated.  From  the 
Aramaic  form  in  which  it  appears  (comp.  Chald. 
mri,  Syr.  JOCTI),  Jahn  refers  to  the  earliest  times 

of  Abraham  for  its  date,  and  to  Mesopotamia  or  Ur 
of  the  Chaldees  for  i!s  birthplace.     Its  usage  in 
Genesis  cannot  be  explained,  as  Le  Clerc  suggests, 
by  supposing  it  to  be  employed  by  anticipation,  for 
it   is  introduced  where   the  persons  to  whom   the 
histoi  y  relates  are  speaking,  and  not  only  where  the 
narrator  adopts  terms  familiar  to  himself;  and  the 
same   difficulty    remains   whatever    hypothesis    be 
assumed  with    regard    to    the   original  documents 
which  formed  the  basis  of  the  history.     At  the 
same  time  it  is  distinctly  stated  in  Ex.  vi.  3,  that 
to  the  patriarchs  God  was  not  known  by  the  name 
Jehovah.     If,  therefore,  this  passage  has  reference 
to  the  first  revelation  of  Jehovah  simply  as  a  name 
and  title  of  God,    there   is   clearly  a  discrepancy 
which  requires  to  be  explained.     In  renewing  his 
promise  of  deliverance  from   Egypt,  "  God   spake 
unto  Moses  and  said  unto  him,  I  am  Jehovah ;  and 
I   appeared   unto  Abraham,  unto  Isaac,   and  unto 
Jacob,  by  (the  name  of)  God  Almighty  {El Shaddai, 
,'TIC'  ?N),   but  by  my  name  Jehovah  was  I  not 
known  to  them."     It  follows  then  that,  if  the  re- 
ference were   merely  to  the  name  as  a  name,  the 
passage    in    question    would    prove    equally    that 
before    this    time    Elohim    was    unknown    as    an 
appellation  of  the  Deity,  and  God  would  appear 
uniformly  as  El  Shaddai  iu  the  patriarchal  history. 
But  although   it  was  held  by  Theodoret  (Quaest. 
15  in  Ex.)  and   many  of  the   Fathers,   who   have 
been  followed  by  a  long  list  of  moderns,  that  the 
name  was  first    made  known    by  God    to  Moses, 
and  then  introduced  by  him  among  the  Israelites, 
the  contrary  was  maintained  by  Cajetan,  Lyranus, 
Calvin,  Rosenmiiller,  Hengstenberg,  and  others,  who 
deny  that  the  passage  in  Ex.  vi.  alludes  to  the  in- 
troduction of  the  name.     Calvin  saw  at  once  that 
the  knowledge  there  spoken  of  could  not  refer  to 
the  syllables  and  letter:-,  but  to  the  recognition  of 
God's   glory  and  majesty.     It  was  not  the  name, 
but  the  true  depth  of  its  significance  which   was 
unknown  to  and  uncomprehended  by  the  patriarchs. 
They  had  known  God  as  the  omnipotent,  El  Shad- 
dai (Gen.  xvii.  1,  xxviii.  3),  the  ruler  of  the  phy- 
sical universe,  and  of  man  as  one  of  his  creatures  ; 
as  a  God  eternal,  immutable,  and  true  to  his  pro- 
mises he  was  yet  to  be  revealed.     In  the  character 
expressed  by  the  name  Jehovah  he  had  not  hitherto 
been  fully  known  ;  his  true  attributes  had  not  been1- 
recognised  (comp.  Jarchi  on  Ex.  vi.  3)  in  his  work- 
ing and  acts  for  Israel.     Aben  Ezra  explained  the 
occurrence  of  the  name  in  Genesis  as  simply  indi- 
cating the  knowledge  of  it  as  a  proper  name,  not 
as  a  qualificative  expressing  the  attributes  and  qua- 
lities of  God.      Referring  to  other  passages  in  which 
the  phrase   "  the  name  of  God"  occurs,  it  is  clear 
that  something  more  is  intended  by  it  than  a  mere 
appellation,  and  that  the  proclamation  of  the  name 
of  God  is  a  revelation  of  his  moral  attributes,  and 
of  his  true  character  as  Jehovah  (Ex.  xxxiii.  19, 
xxxiv.  6,  7)  the  God  of  the  covenant.     Maimonides 
(Mar.  Neb.  i.  64,  ed.  Buxtorf)  explains  the  name 
of  God  as  signifying  his  essence  and  his  truth,  and 
Olshausen  (on  Matt,  xviii.  20)  interprets  "  name" 
{vvofxa)    as    denoting   '*  personality   and    essential 
being,   and  that  not  as  it  is   incomprehensible  or 


JEHOVAH 

unknown,  but  in  its  manifestation."  The  name 
of  a  thing  represents  the  thing  itself  so  far  as  it 
can  be  expressed  in  words.  That  Jehovah  was  not 
a  new  name  Hiivernick  concludes  from  Ex.  iii.  14, 
where  "  the  name  of  God  Jehovah  is  evidently 
pre-supposed  as  already  in  use,  and  is  only  ex- 
plained, interpreted,  and  applied.  .  .  It  is  certainly 
not  a  new  name  that  is  introduced  ;  on  the  con- 
trary, the  rPriX  ""C'tf  rPnN  (I  am   that  I  am) 

would  he  unintelligible,  if  the  name  itself  were  not 
presupposed  as  already  known.  The  old  name  of 
antiquity,  whose  precious  significance  had  been  for- 
gotten and  neglected  by  the  children  of  Israel,  here 
as  it  were  rises  again  to  life,  and  is  again  brought 
home  to  the  con^iousness  of  the  people"  (Tntrod. 
to  the  Pent.  p.  61).  The  same  passage  supplies  an 
argument  to  prove  that  by  "  name"  we  aie  not  to 
understand  merely  letters  and  syllables,  for  Jehovah 
appears  at  first  iu  another  form,  ehyeh  (HTlX). 
The  correct  collective  view  of  Ex.  vi.  3,  Hengsten- 
berg conceives  to  be  the  following: — "Hitherto 
that  Being,  who  in  one  aspect  was  Jehovah,  in  an- 
other had  always  been  Elohim.  The  great  crisis 
now  drew  nigh  in  which  Jehovah  Elohim  would  be 
changed  into  Jehovah.  In  prospect  of  this  event 
God  solemnly  announced  himself  as  Jehovah." 

Great  stress  has  been  laid,  by  those  who  deny 
the  antiquity  of  the  name  Jehovah,  upon  the  tact 
that  proper  names  compounded  witli  it  occur  but 
seldom  before  the  age  of  Samuel  and  David.  It  is 
undoubtedly  true  that,  after  the  revival  of  the  true 
faith  among  the  Israelites,  proper  names  so  com- 
pounded did  become  more  frequent,  but  if  it  can  be 
shown  that  prior  to  the  time  of  Moses  any  such 
names  existed,  it  will  be  sufficient  to  prove  that  the 
name  Jehovah  was  not  entirely  unknown.  Among 
those  which  have  been  quoted  for  this  purpose  are 
Jochebed  the  mother  of  Moses,  and  daughter  of 
Levi,  and Moriah, the  mountain  on  which  Abraham 
was  commanded  to  oHer  up  Isaac.  Against  the 
former  it  is  urged  that  Moses  might  have  changed 
her  name  to  Jochebed  after  the  name  Jehovah  had 
been  communicated  by  God  ;  but  this  is  very  im- 
probable, as  he  was  at  this  time  eighty  years  old, 
and  his  mother  in  all  probability  dead.  W  this  only 
be  admitted  as  a  genuine  instance  of  a  name 
compounded  with  Jehovah,  it  takes  us  at  once  back 
into  the  patriarchal  age,  and  proves  that  a  wmd 
which  was  employed  in  forming  the  proper  name 
of  Jacob's  granddaughter  could  not  have  been  un- 
known to  that  patriarch  himself.  The  name 
Moriah  (!"I*"I1D)  is  of  more  importance,  for  in  one 
passage  in  which  it  occurs  it  is  accompanied  by  an 
etymology  intended  to  indicate  what  was  then 
understood  by  it  ('2  Chr.  iii.  1).  Hengstenberg 
regards  it  as  a  compound  of  nXIO,  the  Hoph.  Part. 
of  nXI,  and  M\  the  abbreviated  form  of  ill!"!)  ; 
so  that,  according  to  this  etymology,  it  would 
signify  "  shown  by  Jehovah."  Gesenius,  adopting 
the  meaning  of  HN"I  in  Gen.  xxii.  8,  renders  it 
"  chosen  by  Jehovah,"  but  suggests  at  the  same 
time  what  he  considers  a  more  probable  derivation, 
according  to  which  Jehovah  does  not  form  a  part 
of  the  compound  word.  But  there  is  reason  to 
believe  from  various  allusions  in  Gen.  xxii.  that 
the  former  was  regarded  as  the  true  etymology. 

Having  thus  considered  the  origin,  significance, 
and  antiquity  of  the  name  Jehovah,  the  reader  will 
be  in  a  position  to  judge  how  much  of  truth  there 
is  in  the  assertion  of  Schwind  (quoted  by  lieinke, 


JEHOVAH-JLREH 

Beitr.  iii.  135,  n.  10)  that  the  terms  Elohim, 
Jehovah  Elohim,  and  then  Jehovah  alone  applied 
to  God,  show  "  to  the  philosophic  inquirer  the  pro- 
gress of  the  human  mind  from  a  plurality  of  gods 
to  a  superior  god,  and  from  this  to  a  single  Al- 
mighty Creator  and  ruler  of  the  world." 

The  principal  authorities  which  have  been  made 
use  of  in  this  article  are  Hengstenberg,  On  the 
Authenticity  of  the  Pentateuch,  i.  213-307,  Eng. 
trans. ;  Reiiike,  Phil,  histor.  Abhandlung  iiber  den 
Gottesnamen  Jchova,  Beitrage,  vol.  iii.;  Tho- 
luck,  Vermischtc  Schriften,  th.  i.  377-405  ;  Kurtz, 
Die  Einheit  der  Genesis  xliii.-liii. ;  Keil,  Ueber 
die  Gottesnamen  im  Pcntatenche  in  Pudelbach  and 
Guericke's  Zeitschrift ;  Ewald,  Die  Composition 
der  Genesis ;  Gesenius,  Thesaurus;  Bunsen,  Bibel- 
werk,  and  Reland,  Decas  exercitationum  philo- 
logicarum  de  vera  pronuntiatione  nominis  Jehova, 
besides  those  already  quoted.  [W.  A.  W.] 

JEHO'VAH-JI'REH  (ilSO)  HIH* :  Kipws 

el8ei> :  Domiwis  videt),  i.  e.  "  Jehovah  will  see," 
or  provide,  the  name  given  by  Abraham  to  the 
place  on  which  he  had  been  commanded  to  offer 
Isaac,  to  commemorate  the  interposition  of  the 
angel  of  Jehovah,  who  appeared  to  prevent  the 
sacrifice  (Gen.  xxii.  14)  and  provided  another 
victim.  The  immediate  allusion  is  to  the  expres- 
sion in  the  8th  verse,  "  God  will  look  out  for 
Himself  a  lamb  for  a  burnt  offering,"  but  it  is  not 
unlikely  that  there  is  at  the  same  time  a  covert 
reference  to  Moriah,  the  scene  of  the  whole  occur- 
rence. The  play  upon  words  is  followed  up  in  the 
latter  clause  ofver.  14,  which  appears  in  the  form 
of  a  popular  proverb  :  "  as  it  is  said  this  day,  In  the 
mountain  of  Jehovah,  He  will  be  seen,"  or  "  pro- 
vision shall  be  made."  .Such  must  be  the  render- 
ing if  the  received  punctuation  be  accepted,  but  on 
this  point  there  is  a  division  of  opinion.  The  text 
from  which  the  LXX.  made  their  translation  must 
have  been  JIN"^  ffii"P  "IH2,  iv  ™  opei  Kvpios 
tiepdy,  "on  the  mountain  Jehovah  appeared," 
and  the  same,  with  the  exception  of  i"IN"P  for  the 
last  word,  must  have  been  the  reading  ot  the  Vul- 
gate and  Syriac.  The  Targum  of  Onkelos  is  ob- 
jure. [W.  A.  W.] 

JEHO'VAH-NIS'SI  (">DJ  iTiiV :  Kvpios  kcl- 
rafpvyi]  fxov  :  Dontfnus  exaltatio  mea),  i.  e.  "  Je- 
hovah my  banner",  the  name  given  by  Moses  to 
the  altar  which  he  built  in  commemoration  of  the 
discomfiture  of  tin-  Amalekites  by  Joshua  and  his 
chosen  warriors  at  Rephidim  (Ex.  xvii.  15).  It 
was  erected  either  upon  the  hill  overlooking  the 
battle-field,  upon  which  .Moses  sat  with  the  stall'  of 
God  in  his  hand,  or  [i\«A[  the  battle-field  itself. 
According  to  Aben  Ezra  it  was  on  the  Horeb.  The 
Targum  of  Onkelos  paraphrases  the  verse  thus:— 
"  Moses  built  an  altar  and  worshipped  upon  it 
before  Jehovah,  who  had  wrought  for  him  mi- 
racles  (PD*i,  nisin)."  Such  too  is  Jarchi's  expla- 
nation of  the  name,  referring  to  the  miraC!  lous 
interposition  of  God  in  the  defeat  of  the  Amalekites. 

The  LXX.  in  their  translation,  "the  Lord  on 
refuge,"  evidently  supposed  nissi  to  be  derived 
from  tin-  root  D-1J,  '"'S  "  to  lie,'."  and  the  Vulgate 
traced  it  to  NL"J,  "  to  lift  up."  The  significance 
of  the  name  is  probably  contained  in  the  allusion 
to  the  stall'  which  Moses  held  in  his  hand  as  a 
banner  during  the  engagement,  and  the  raising  or 
lowering  of  which  turned  the  fortu f  battle  in 


JEHOZADAK 


959 


favour  of  the  Israelites  or  their  enemies.  God  is 
thus  recognised  in  the  memorial  altar  as  the  deli- 
verer of  his  people,  who  leads  them  to  victory,  and 
is  their  rallying  point  in  time  of  peril.  On  the 
figurative  use  of  "banner,"  see  Ps.  lx.  4;  Is. 
xi.  10.  [W.  A.  W.]    I 

JEHOTAH-SHA'LOM-tDi^  ITJrP:  elpf,vn 
Kvplov.  Domini  pax),  i.  e.  "  Jehovah  (is)  peace," 
or,  with  the  ellipsis  of  TON,  "  Jehovah,  the  God 
of  peace  ",  the  altar  erected  by  Gideon  in  Ophrah 
was  so  called  in  memory  of  the  salutation  addressed 
to  him  by  the  angel  of  Jehovah,  "  Peace  be  unto 
thee"  (Judg  vi.  24).  Piscator,  however,  follow- 
ing the  Hebrew  accentuation,  which  he  says  requites 
a  different  translation,  renders  the  whole  passage, 
without  introducing  the  proper  name,  "  when  Je- 
hovah hail  proclaimed  peace  to  him  ;"  but  his 
alteration  is  harsh  and  unnecessary.  The  LXX. 
and  Vulg.  appear  to  have  inserted  the  words  as 
they  stand  in  the  present  Hebrew  text,  and  to  have 
read  niPP  tiwW,  but  they  are  supported  by  no 
MS.  authority.  '  [W.  A.  \V.] 

JEHO'ZABAD  03Tii"P  •la>Ca/3a0-/3a5-£e'S : 
Jozabad).  1.  A  Korachite  Levite,  second  son  of 
Obed-edom,  and  one  of  the  porters  of  the  south 
gate  of  the  temple,  and  of  the  storehouse  there 
(D?BDN  rP3)  in  the  time  of  David  (1  Chr.  xxvi. 
4,  15,  compared  with  Neh.  xii.  25). 

2.  {Joseph.  'Oxo|3aTOS.)  A  Benjamite,  captain 
of  180,0(HJ  armed  men,  in  the  days  of  king  Jeho- 
shaphat  (2  Chr.  xvii.  18). 

3.  Son  of  Shomer  or  Shimrith,  a  Moabitish  wo- 
man, and  possibly  a  descendant  of  the  preceding, 
who  with  another  conspired  against  king  Joash  and 
slew  him  iu  his  bed  (2  K.  xii.  21  ;  2  Chr.  xxiv.  26). 
[Joash.]  The  similarity  in  the  names  of  both 
conspirators  and  their  parents  is  worth  notice. 

This  name  is  commonly  abbreviated  in  the  Hebrew 
to  Jozabad.  [A.  C.  II.] 

JEHO'ZADAK  (pnyiiT\  'Itoo-aSa/c;  Alex. 
'IaxreSe/c:  Josedec),  son  of  the  high-priest  SERAIAH 
( 1  Chr.  vi.  14,  15)  in  the  reign  of  Zedekiah.  When 
his  father  was  slain  at  Riblah  by  order  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, in  the  11th  of  Zedekiah  (2  E.  xxv.  IS, 
21),  Jehozadak  was  led  away  captive  to  Babylon 
(1  Chr.  vi.  15),  where  he  doubtless  spent  the  re- 
mainder of  his  days.  He  himself  never  attained 
the  high-priesthood,  the  Temple  being  burnt  to  the 
ground,  and  so  continuing,  ami  he  himself  being  a 
captive  all  his  life.  But  he  was  the  father  of  Je- 
sm.'A  the  high-priest — who  with  Zerubbabel  headed 
tlie  Return  from  Captivity — and  of  all  bis  successors 
till  the  pontificate  of  Alcimus  (Ezr.  iii.  2  ;  Neh. 
xii.  26,  &c.  [High-priest.]  Nothing  more  is 
known  about  him.     It.  is  perhaps  worth  remarking 

that   his  name   is  compounded  of  the  same  elements, 

and  has  exactly  the  .same  meaning,  as  that  of  the 
contemporary  king  Zedekiah — "Cod  is  righteous;" 
and  that   the  righteousness  of  Cod  was  signally  dis- 

played  in  the  simultaneous  suspension  of  the  throne 
of  David  and  the  priesthood  of  Aaron,  on  account  of 
the  sins  of  Judah.  This  remark  perhaps  acquires 
from  the  fact  of  his  successor  Jeshua, who 
restored   the  priesthood  ami   rebuilt   the  Temple, 

having  the  same  name  as  Joshua,  who  brought   the 

nation  into  the  land  of  promise,  and  Jesus,  a  name 
.significative  of  salvation. 

In   Haggai  and  Zechariah,  though  the  name  in 


960 


JEHU 


the  original  is  exactly  as  above,  yet  our  translators 
have  chosen  to  follow  the  Greek  form,  and  present 
it  as  JOSEDECH. 

In  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  it  is  abbreviated,  both  in 
Hebrew  and  A.  V.,  to  Jqzadak.  [A.  C.  H.] 

JE'HU.  1.  (K-lrh  =  "Jehovah  is  He;" 
'lov;  Alex.  'irjoD  ;  Joseph.  'IrjoDs).  The  founder 
of  the  fifth  dynasty  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel.  His 
history  was  told  in  the  lost  "Chronicles  of  the 
Kings  of  Israel  "  (2  K.  x.  34-).  His  father's  name 
was  Jehoshaphat  (2  K.  ix.  2)  ;  his  grandfather's 
(which,  as  being  better  known,  was  sometimes 
affixed  ^to  his  own — 2  K.  ix.)  was  Nimshi.  In 
his  youth  he  had  been  one  of  the  guards  of 
Ahab.  His  first  appearance  in  history  is  when, 
with  a  comrade  in  arms,  Bidkar,  or  Bar-Dakar 
(Ephreni  Syr.  Opp.  iv.  540),  he  rode a  behind 
Ahab  on  the  fatal  journey  from  Samaria  to  Jezreel, 
and  heard,  and  laid  up  in  his  heart,  the  warning  of 
Elijah  against  the  murderer  of  Naboth  (2  K.  ix. 
25).  But  he  had  already,  as  it  would  seem,  been 
known  to  Elijah  as  a  youth  of  promise,  and,  ac- 
cordingly, in  the  vision  at  Horeb  he  is  mentioned 
as  the  future  king  of  Israel,  whom  Elijah  is  to 
anoint  as  the  minister  of  vengeance  on  Israel  (1  K. 
xix.  16,  17).  This  injunction,  for  reasons  unknown 
to  us,  Elijah  never  fulfilled.  It  was  reserved  long 
afterwards  for  his  successor  Elisha. 

Jehu  meantime,  in  the  reigns  of  Ahaziah  and 
Jehoram,  had  risen  to  importance.  The  same  acti- 
vity and  vehemence  which  had  fitted  him  for  his 
earlier  distinctions  still  continued,  and  he  was  known 
far  and  wide  as  a  charioteer  whose  rapid  driving, 
as  if  of  a  madman  b  (2  K.  ix.  21),  could  be  distin- 
guished even  from  a  distance.  He  was,  under  the 
last-named  king,  captain  of  the  host  in  the  siege  of 
Ramoth-Gilead.  According  to  Ephraim  Syrus  (who 
omits  the  words  "  saith  the  Lord"  in  2  K.  ix.  26, 
and  makes  "  I"  refer  to  Jehu)  he  had,  in  a  dream 
the  night  before,  seen  the  blood  of  Xaboth  and  his 
sons  (S.  Ephr.  Syr.  Opp.  iv.  540).  Whilst  in  the 
midst  of  the  officers  of  the  besieging  army  a  youth 
suddenly  entered,  of  wild  appearance  (2  K.  ix.  11), 
and  insisted  on  a  private  interview  with  Jehu. 
They  retired  into  a  secret  chamber.  The  youth 
uncovered  a  vial  of  the  sacred  oil  (Jos.  Ant.  ix. 
6,  1)  which  he  had  brought  with  him,  poured  it 
over  Jehu's  head,  and  after  announcing  to  him  the 
message  from  Elisha,  that  he  was  appointed  to  be 
king  of  Israel  and  destroyer  of  the  house  of  Ahab, 
rushed  out  of  the  house  and  disappeared. 

Jehu's  countenance,  as  he  re-entered  the  assembly 
of  officers,  showed  that  some  strange  tidings  had 
reached  him.  He  tried  at  first  to  evade  their  ques- 
tions, but  then  revealed  the  situation  in  which  he 
found  himself  placed  by  the  prophetic  call.  In  a 
moment  the  enthusiasm  of  the  army  took  fire. 
They  threw  their  garments — the  large  square  Be- 


a  The  Hebrew  word  is  D'HTOV  ;  usually  employed 

for  the  coupling  together  of  oxen.  This  the  LXX. 
understands  as  though  the  two  soldiers  rode  in  sepa- 
rate chariots — ejri/3e/37)K6Ves  ewl  ^ivyq  (2  K.  ix.  25).  Jq- 
sephus  ■  Ant.  ix.  6,  §3)  as  though  they  sat  in  the  same 
chariot  with  the  king  (/caSefo/xeVous  oiriaQtv  rov  app.a- 
tos  toO  'A^a/Sou). 

h  This  is  the  force  of  the  Hebrew  word,  which, 
as  in  2  K.  ix.  11,  the  LXX.  translate  ev  TrapaWayfi. 
Josephus  (Ant.  ix.  6,  §3)  says  crxo\a.iTepov  re  /cat  /u.eT 
evra^ia?  a»5evei'. 

c  The  expression  translated  "  on  the  top  of  the 
stairs"  is  one  the  clue  to  which  is  lost.     The  word 


JEHU 

ged,  similar  to  a  wrapper  or  plaid — under  his  feet, 
so  as  to  form  a  rough  carpet  of  state,  placed  him 
on  the  top  of  the  stairs,c  as  on  an  extempore  throne, 
blew  the  royal  salute  on  their  trumpets,  and  thus 
ordained  him  king.  He  then  cut  oft'  all  communi- 
cation between  Ramoth-Gilead  and  Jezreel,  and  set 
oft',  full  speed,  with  his  ancient  comrade  Bidkar, 
whom  he  had  made  captain  of  the  host  in  his  place, 
and  a  band  of  horsemen.  From  the  tower  of  Jez- 
reel a  watchman  saw  the  cloud  of  dust  (nj/SEi' 

KovtopTov;  A.  V.  "company")  and  announced 
his  coming  (2  K.  ix.  17).  The  messengers  that 
were  sent  out  to  him  he  detained,  on  the  same 
principle  of  secrecy  which  had  guided  all  his  move- 
ments. It  was  not  till  he  had  almost  reached  the 
city,  and  was  identified  by  the  watchman,  that 
alarm  was  taken.  But  even  then  it  seems  as  if 
the  two  kings  in  Jezreel  anticipated  news  from 
the  Syrian  war  rather  than  a  revolution  at  home. 
It  was  not  till,  in  answer  to  Jehoram's  question, 
"Is  it  peace,  Jehu?"  that  Jehu's  fierce  denuncia- 
tion of  Jezebel  at  once  revealed  the  danger.  Jehu 
seized  his  opportunity,  and  taking  full  aim  at  Jeho- 
ram, with  the  bow  which,  as  captain  of  the  host, 
was  always  with  him,  shot  him  through  the  heart 
(ix.  24).  The  body  was  thrown  out  on  the  fatal 
field,  and  whilst  his  soldiers  pursued  and  killed  the 
king  of  Judah  at  Beth-gan  (A.  V.  "the  garden- 
house"),  probably  Engannim,  Jehu  himself  ad- 
vanced to  the  gates  of  Jezreel  and  fulfilled  the 
divine  warning  on  Jezebel  as  already  on  Jehoram. 
[Jezebel.]  He  then  entered  on  a  work  of  exter- 
mination hitherto  unparalleled  in  the  history  of  the 
Jewish  monarchy.  All  the  descendants  of  Ahab 
that  remained  in  Jezreel,  together  with  the  officers 
of  the  court,  and  hierarchy  of  Astarte,  were  swept 
away.  His  next  step  was  to  secure  Samaria.  Every 
stage  of  his  ■progress  was  marked  with  blood.  At 
the  gates  of  Jezreel  he  found  the  heads  of  seventy 
princes  of  the  house  of  Ahab,  ranged  in  two  heaps, 
sent  to  him  as  a  propitiation  by  their  guardians  in 
Samaria,  whom  he  had  defied  to  withstand  him,  and 
on  whom  he  thus  threw  the  responsibility  of  de- 
stroying their  own  royal  charge.  Next,  at  "  the 
shearing-house  "  (or  Betheked)  between  Jezreel  and 
Samaria  he  encountered  forty-two  sons  or  nephews 
(2  Chr.  xx.  8)  of  the  late  king  of  Judah,  and  there- 
fore connected  by  marriage  with  Ahab,  on  a  visit 
of  compliment  to  their  relatives,  of  whose  fall, 
seemingly,  they  had  not  heard.  These  also  were 
put  to  the  sword  at  the  fatal  well,  as,  in  the  later 
history,  of  Mizpah,  and,  in  our  own  days,  of  Cawn- 
pore  (2  K.  x.  14).  [Ishmael,  6.]  As  he  drove 
ou  he  encountered  a  strange  figure,  such  as  might 
have  reminded  him  of  the  great  Elijah.  It  was 
Jehonadab,  the  austere  Arabian  sectary,  the  son 
of  Rechab.  In  him  his  keen  eye  discovered  a  ready 
ally.     He  took  him  into  his  chariot,  and  they  con- 


is  gerem,  D1JI,  i.  e.  a  bone,  and  the  meaning  appears 
to  be  that  they  placed  Jehu  on  the  very  stairs  them- 
selves— if  ni7j?JD  be  stairs — without  any  seat  or  chair 
below  him.  The  stairs  doubtless  ran  round  the  inside 
of  the  quadrangle  of  the  house,  as  they  do  still,  for 
instance,  in  the  ruin  called  the  house  of  Zacchacus 
at  Jericho,  and  Jehu  sat  where  they  joined  the  flat 
platform  which  formed  the  top  or  roof  of  the  house. 
Thus  he  was  conspicuous  against  the  sky,  while  the 
captains  were  below  him  in  the  open  quadrangle.  The 
old  Versions  throw  little  or  no  light  on  the  passage  : 
the  LXX.  simply  repeat  the  Hebrew  wind,  eirl  to 
yapip.  noi'  ai'a/3afyiu>e.      By  Josephus  it  is  avoided. 


JEHU 

cocted  their  schemes  as  they  entered  Samaria  (x. 
15,  16).     [Jehonadab.] 

Some  stragglers  of  the  house  of  Ahab  in  that 
city  still  remained  to  be  destroyed.  But  the  great 
stroke  was  yet  to  come ;  and  it  was  conceived  and 
executed  with  that  union  of  intrepid  daring  and 
profound  secrecy  which  marks  the  whole  career  of 
Jehu.  Up  to  this  moment  there  was  nothing  which 
showed  anything  beyond  a  determination  to  exter- 
minate in  all  its  branches  the  personal  adherents  of 
Ahab.  He  might  still  have  been  at  heart,  as  he 
seems  up  to  this  time  to  have  been  in  name,  dis- 
posed  to  tolerate,  if  not  to  join  in,  the  Phoenician 
worship.  "  Ahab  served  Baal  a  little,  but  Jehu 
shall  serve  him  much."  There  was  to  be  a  new 
inauguration  of  the  worship  of  Baal.  A  solemn 
assembly,  sacred  vestments,  innumerable  victims, 
were  ready.  The  vast  temple  at  Samaria  raised 
by  Ahab  (1  K.  xvi.  32  ;  Jos.  Ant.  x.  7,  §6)  was 
crowded  from  end  to  end.  The  chief  sacrifice  was 
offered,  as  if  in  the  excess  of  his  zeal,  by  Jehu  him- 
self. Jehonadab  joined  in  the  deception.  There 
was  Mime  apprehension  lest  worshippers  of  Jehovah 
might  be  found  in  the  temple  ;  such,  it  seems,  had 
been  the  intermixture  of  the  two  religions.  As 
.soon,  however,  as  it  was  ascertained  that  all,  and 
none  but,  the  idolaters  were  there,  the  signal  was 
given  to  eighty  trusted  guards,  and  a  sweeping 
massacre  removed  at  one  blow  the  whole  heathen 
population  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel.  The  inner- 
most sanctuary  of  the  temple  (translated  in  the 
A.  V.  "the  city  of  the  house  of  Baal")  was 
stormed,  the  great  stone  statue  of  Baal  was  de- 
molished, the  wooden  figures  of  the  inferior  divi- 
nities sitting  round  him  were  torn  from  their  places 
and  burnt  (Ewald,  Gesch.  iii.  526),  and  the  site  of 
tin'  sanctuary  itself  became  the  public  resort  of  the 
inhabitants  of  the  city  for  the  basest  uses.  This 
is  the  last  public  act  recorded  of  Jehu.  The  re- 
maining twenty-seven  years  of  his  long  reign  are 
passed  over  in  a  few  words,  in  which  two  points 
only  are  material : — He  did  not  destroy  the  calf- 
worship  of  Jeroboam: — The  Trans-jordanic  tribes 
suffered  much  from  the  ravages  of  Hazael  (2  K. 
\.  29-33).  lb'  was  buried  in  state  in  Samaria, 
and  was  succeeded  by  his  son  JEHOAHAZ  (2  K. 
x.  35).  His  name  is  the  first  of  the  Israelite  kings 
which  appears  in  the  Assyrian  monuments.  It  is 
found  on  the  black  obelisk  discovered  at  Nimroud 
(  Layard,  Nineveh,  i.  390),  and  now  in  the  British 
Museum,  amongst  the  names  of  kings  who  are 
bringing  tribute  (in  this  case  gold  and  silver,  and 
articles  manufactured  in  gold)  to  Shalmaneser  1. 
His  name  is  given  as  "  Jehu"  (or  "  Yahua")  "  the 
sou  of  Khumri  "  (Omri).  This  substitution  of  the 
name  of  Omri  for  that  of  his  own  father  may  be 
accounted  fur,  either  by  the  importance  which 
Omri  had  assumed  as  the  second  founder  of  the 
northern  kingdom,  or  by  the  name  of  "Beth- 
Kliuimi,"  only  given  to  Samaria  in  these  monu- 
ments as  "the  House  or  Capital  of  Omri"  (Laj  ard, 
Siiti'vrh  ami  IJaht/lou,  t'A'-\ ;  1'awlinson's  Hi 
i.  465). 

The  character  of  Jehu  is  not  difficult  to  under- 
stand, if  We  take  it  as  a  whole,  and  judge  it  from 
a  eenei'al  point  nf  view. 

He  must  be  regarded,  like  many  others  in  his- 
tory, as   an    instrument  for   accomplishing 

purposes  rather  than  as  gnat  or  g 1  in  himself. 

In  the  long  period,  during  which  his  destiny — 
though  known  to  others  and.  perhaps  to  himself, 
lay   dormant — in   the  suddenness   of  his   rise   to 


JEHUD 


9G1 


power ;  in  the  ruthlessness  with  which  he  carried 
out  his  purposes;  in  the  union  of  profound  silence 
and  dissimulation  with  a  stern,  fanatic,  wayward 
zeal, — he  has  not  been  without  his  likenesses  in 
modern  times :  The  Scripture  narrative,  although 
it  fixes  our  attention  on  the  services  which  he 
rendered  to  the  cause  of  religion  by  the  extermi- 
nation of  a  worthless  dynasty  and  a  degrading 
worship,  yet  on  the  whole  leaves  the  sense  that 
it  was  a  reign  barren  in  great  results.  His  dy- 
nasty, indeed,  was  firmly  seated  on  the  throne 
longer  than  any  other  royal  house  of  Israel  (2  K. 
x.),  and  under  Jeroboam  II.  it  acquired  a  high 
name  amongst  the  Oriental  nations.  But  Elisha, 
who  had  raised  him  to  power,  as  far  as  we  know, 
never  saw  him.  In  other  respects  it  was  a  failure  ; 
the  original  sin  of  Jeroboam's  worship  continued ; 
and  in  the  Prophet  Hosea  there  seems  to  be  a  re- 
tribution exacted  for  the  bloodshed  by  which  he 
had  mounted  the  throne  :  "  I  will  avenge  the  blood 
of  Jezreel  upon  the  house  of  Jehu"  (Hos.  i.  4), 
as  in  the  similar  condemnation  of  Baasha  (1  K.  xvi. 
2).  See  a  striking  poem  to  this  effect  on  the  cha- 
racter of  Jehu  in  the  Lyra  Apostolica. 

2.  Jehu,  sou  of  Hanani ;  a  prophet  of  Judah, 
but  whose  ministrations  were  chiefly  directed  to 
Israel.  His  father  was  probably  the  seer  who 
attacked  Asa  (2  Chr.  xvi,  7).  He  must  have 
begun  his  career  as  a  prophet  when  very  young. 
He  first  denounced  Baasha,  both  for  his  imitation 
of  the  dynasty  of  Jeroboam,  and  also  (as  it  would 
seem)  for  his  cruelty  in  destroying  it  (1  K.  xvi. 
1,  7),  and  then,  after  an  interval  of  thirty  years, 
reappears  to  denounce  Jehoshaphat  for  his  alliance 
with  Ahab  (2  Chr.  xix.  2,  3).  He  survived  Je- 
hoshaphat and  wrote  his  life  (xx.  34).  From  an 
obscurity  in  the  text  of  1  K.  xvi.  7  the  Vulgate 
has  represented  him  as  killed  by  Baasha.  But 
this  is  not  required  by  the  words,  and  (except  on 
the  improbable  hypothesis  of  two  Jehus,  both  sons 
of  Hanani)  is  contradicted  by  the  later  appearance 
of  this  prophet. 

3.  ('lr)ov:  Jehu,  Jeu.)  A  man  of  Judah  of  the 
house  of  Hezron  (1  Chr.  ii.  38).  He  was  the  son 
of  a  certain  Obed,  descended  from  the  union  of  an 
Egyptian,  Jakha,  with  the  daughter  of  Sheshan, 
whose  slave  Jarha  was  (comp.  34). 

4.  ('Irjou.)  A  Simeonite,  son  of  Josibiah  (1  Chr. 
iv.  35).  He  was  one  of  the  chief  men  of  the  tribe, 
apparently  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah  (comp.  41). 

5.  ('ItjouA.)  Jehu  the  Antothite,  i.e.  native  of 
Anatlioth,  was  one  of  the  chief  of  the  heroes  of  Ben- 
jamin, who  forsook  the  cause  of  Saul  for  that  of  I  (avid 
when  the  latter  was  at  Ziklag  (1  Chr.  xii.  :i).  He  does 
not  reappear  in  any  of  the  later  lisrs.       [A.  1'.  S.] 

JEHUB'BAH  (HarP:  'Ia/3o;  Alex.  'O0o : 
fab  '  I,  a  man  of  Asher;  son  of  Simmer  or  Shomer, 
of  the  house  of  l'.eiiah  |  1   Chr.  vii.  :'>4). 

JEHU'CAL  (^lrV:   6   lcodXa\  ;  Alex.  'low 

X<i('-  Juchat),  son  of  Shelemiah ;  one  of  two  per- 
sons sent  by  king  Zedekiah  to  Jeremiah,  to  entreat 
lii-  prayers  ami  advice  (Jer.  \\\\ii.  3).  His  name 
is  also  given  as  Ji  cal,  ami  he  appears  to  have 
me  of  the  "princes  of  the  king"  (comp. 
xxxviii.  1,  4). 

JE'HUD  (1!T  :  'A(a>p  ;  Alex.  'lovO:  Jud),  one 

of  the  towns  oi'  tin-  tril f  Dan  (Josh.  xix.  4.". ), 

named  between  Baalath  ami  Bene-berak.  Neither 
of  these  two  places,  however,  have  been  identified. 


962 


JEHUDI 


By  Eusebius  and  Jerome  Jehud  is  not  named. 
Dr.  Robinson  (ii.  242)  mentions  that  a  place  called 
el-  Yehudiyeh  exists  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Lydd, 
but  he  did  not  visit  it.  It  is,  however,  inserted  on 
Van  de  Velde's  map  at  7  miles  east  of  Jaffa  and  5 
north  of  Lydd.  This  agrees  with  the  statement  of 
Schwarz  (141)  that  "  Jehud  is  the  village  Jehudie, 
7±  miles  S.E.  of  Jaffa,"  except  as  to  the  direction, 
which  is  nearer  E.  than  S.E.  [G.J 

.JEHU'DI  OTirP  =  "  Jew  :"  6  TouSiV  ;  Alex. 
'lovSel :  Judi),  son  of  Nethaniah,  a  man  employed 
by  the  princes  of  Jehoiakim's  court  to  fetch  Baruch 
to  read  Jeremiah's  denunciation  (Jer.  xxxvi.  14), 
and  then  by  the  king  to  fetch  the  volume  itself 
and  read  it  to  him  (21,  23). 

JEHUDrjAH(rPnp!'ri:  A5fa;  Alex.  'iSia: 

Jiultia).  There  is  really  no  such  name  in  the 
Heb.  Bible  as  that  which  our  A.  V.  exhibits  at 
1  Ghr.  iv.  18.  If  it  is  a  proper  name  at  all  it  is 
Ha-jehudijah,  like  Ham-melech,  Hak-koz,  &c. ;  and 
it  seems  to  be  rather  an  appellative,  "  the  Jewess." 
As  far  as  an  opinion  can  be  formed  of  so  obscure 
and  apparently  corrupt  a  passage,  Mered,  a  de- 
scendant of  Caleb  the  son  of  Jephunneh,  and  whose 
towns,  Gedor,  Socho, and  Eshtemoa,  lay  in  the  south 
of  Judah,  married  two  wives— one  a  Jewess,  the 
other  an  Egyptian,  a  daughter  of  I'haraoh.  The 
Jewess  was  sister  of  Naham,  the  father  of  the  cities 
of  Keilah  and  Eshtemoa.  The  descendants  of 
Mered  by  his  two  wives  are  given  in  vers.  18,  19, 
and  perhaps  in  the  latter  part  of  ver.  17.  Hodijah 
in  ver.  19  is  doubtless  a  corruption  of  Ha-jehudijah, 
"  the  Jewess,"  the  letters  Til  having  fallen  out  from 
the  end  of  DEJ'N  and  the  beginning  of  the  following 
word;  and  the  full  stop  at  the  end  of  ver.  18 
should  be  removed,  so  as  to  read  as  a  recapitulation 
of  what  precedes : — "  These  are  the  sons  of  Bithiah, 
the  daughter  of  Pharaoh,  which  Mered  took  (for 
his  wife),  and  the  sons  of  his  wife,  the  Jewess,  the 
sister  of  Naham  (which  Naham  was)  the  father  of 
Keilah,  whose  inhabitants  areGarmites,  and  of  Esh- 
temoa, whose  inhabitants  are  Maachathites  ;"  the 
last  being  named  possibly  from  Maachah,  Caleb's 
concubine,  as  the  Ephrathites  were  from  Ephrata. 
Bertheau  ( Chronik)  arrives  at  the  same  general 
result,  by  proposing  to  place  the  closing  words  of 
ver.  18,  before  the  words  "  And  she  bare  Miriam," 
&c,  in  ver.  17.     See  also  Vatablus.     [A.  C.  H.] 

JEHU'SH  (tyty; :  'Us  ;  Alex.  'Iaias  :  Us), 
son  of  Eshek,  a  remote  descendant  of  Saul  ( 1  Chr. 
viii.  39).  The  parallel  genealogy  in  ch.  ix.  stojjs 
short  of  this  man. 

For  the  representation  of  Ain  by  H,  see  Jeiiiel, 
Meiiunim,  feci 

JEI'EL  6^:  JchieT).  1.  (ToijA.)  A  chief 
man  among  the  Keubenites,  one  of  the  house  of  Joel 
(1  Chr.  v.  7). 

2.  ('Iei'TjA ;  Alex,  once  Tfli^A.)  A  Merarite 
Levite,  one  of  the  gate-keepers  (D'HyK';  A.  V. 
"  porters,"  and  "  doorkeepers")  to  the  sacred  tent, 
at  the  first  establishment  of  the  Ark  in  Jerusalem 
(1  Chr.  xv.  18).  His  duty  was  also  to  play  the 
harp  (ver.  21.),  or  the  psaltery  and  harp  (xvi.  5), 
in  the  service  before  the  Ark. 

3.  ('EAfirjA,  Alex. 'EAetjA.)  A- Gershonite  Le- 
vite, one  of  the  Bene-Asaph.,  forefather  of  Jaiia- 
zeel  in  the  time  of  king  Jehoshaphat  (2  Chr. 
\x.  14). 


JEMIMA 

4.  (bfrOy,   i.e.   Jeuel,  but  the  A.  V.  follows 
the  correction  of  the  Keri:  'IeiyjA.)    The  Scribe 
ClSIDn)  who  kept  the  account  of  the  numbers  of 
king  Uzziah's  irregular  predatory  warriors  (D^T'llil 
A.  V.  "  bands,"  2  Chr.  xxvi.  11). 

5.  (Jeuel,  as  in  the  preceding;  but  the  A.  V. 
again  follows  the  Keri:  \leL^\:  Jahiel.)  A  Ger- 
shonite  Levite,  one  of  the  Bene-Elizaphan,  who 
assisted  in  the  restoration  of  the  house  of  Jehovah 
under  king  Hezekiah  (2  Chr.  xxix.  13). 

6.  ('Iej^A,  Alex.  'Iei'ijA.)  One  of  the  chiefs 
CHC)  of  the  Levites  in  the  time  of  Josiah,  and  an 
assistant  in  the  rites  at  his  great  Passover  (2  Chr. 
xxxv.  9). 

7.  (Jeuel  as  above,  but  in  Keri  and  A.  V. 
Jeiel:  'Ie^A,  Alex.  "Et^A..)  One  of  the  Bene-Adn- 
nikam  who  formed  part  of  the  caravan  of  Ezra 
from  Babylon  to  Jerusalem  (Ezr.  viii.  13).  In 
Esdras  the  name  is  Jeuel. 

8.  ('lorijA,  Alex.  'IeeiTjA.)  A  layman,  of  the 
Bene  Nebo,  who  had  taken  a  foreign  wife  and  had 
to  relinquish  her  (Ezr.  x.  43).  In  Esdras  it  is 
omitted  from  the  Greek  and  A.  V.,  though  the 
Vulgate  has  Idelus. 

JE'IvABZEEL  (^NV2^ :  Vat.  omits;  Alex. 

Ka/8(re7)A :  Cabseel),  a  fuller  form  of  the  name  of 
Kabzeel,  the  most  remote  city  of  Judah  on  the 
southern  frontier.  This  form  occurs  only  in  the 
list  of  the  places  reoccupied  after  the  captivity 
(Neh.  xi.  25).  [G.] 

JEKAMEAM  (DJJEj^:  'UKepias,  'Ie/c^ua/*; 
Alex.  'lace/Aid. :  Jecmaam,  Jeonaan),  a  Levite  in 
the  time  of  King  David:  fourth  of  the  sons  of 
Hebron,  the  son  of  Kohath  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  19,  xxiv. 
23). 

JEKAMIAH  (iTttfV  :  'UXe^as  ;  Alex.  'Ie- 
KOfxias:  Icamias),  son  of  Shallum,  in  the  line  of 
Ahlai,  about  contemporary  with  king  Ahaz.  In 
another  passage  the  same  name,  borne  by  a  differ- 
ent person,  is  given  Jecajieaii  (1  Chr.  ii.  41). 
[Jakiia.]  [A.  C.  H.] 

JEKUTHIEL  (t?N,n-1p.'1 :  o  Xer^A  ;  Alex. 
'IeK0i(r')A  :  Tcuthiel),  a  man  recorded  in  the  genea- 
logies of  Judah  (1  Chr.  iv.  18)  as  the  son  of  a 
certain  Ezrah  by  his  Jewish  wife  (A.  V.  Jehudijah), 
and  in  his  turn  the  father,  or  founder,  of  the  town 
of  Zauoah.  This  passage  in  the  Targum  is  not 
without  a  certain  interest.  Jered  is  interpreted  to 
mean  Moses,  and  each  of  the  names  following  are 
taken  as  titles  borne  by  him.  Jekuthiel — "  trust 
in  God  " — is  so  applied  "  because  in  his  days  the 
Israelites  trusted  in  the  God  of  heaven  for  forty 
years  in  the  wilderness." 

In  a  remarkable  prayer  used  by  the  Spanish  and 
Portuguese  Jews  in  the  concluding  service  of  the 
Sabbath,  Elijah  is  invoked  as  having  had  "  tidings 
of  peace  delivered  to  him  by  the  hand  of  Jekuthiel." 
This  is  explained  to  refer  to  some  transaction  in  the 
life  of  Phineas,  with  whom  Elijah  is,  in  the  tra- 
ditions of  the  Jews,  believed  to  be  identical  (see  the 
quotations  in  Modern  Judaism,  229). 

JEMIMA  (nEW :  'U^pa :  Dies,  as  if  from 
Di\  "a  day"),  the  eidest  of  the  three  daughters 
born  to  Job  after  the  restoration  of  his  prosperity 
(Job  xlii.  14).  Ivosenmiiller  compares  the  name 
to  the  classical.  Diana ;  but  Gesenius  identifies  it 
with    an    Arabic    word    signifying    "dove."     The 


JEMNAAN 

Rev.  C.  Forster  (Historical  Geography  of  Arabia, 
ii.  07),  in  tracing  the  posterity  of  Job  in  Arabia, 
considers  that  the  name  of  Jemima  survives  in 
Jemama,  the  name  of  the  central  province  of  the 
Arabian  peninsula,  which,  according  to  an  Ara- 
bian tradition  (see  Bochart,  Phaleg,  ii.  §26),  was 
called  after  Jemama,  an  ancient  Queen  of  the 
Arabians.  [W.  T.  B.] 

JEM'NAAN  ('lefj.va.di> :  Vulg.  omits),  men- 
tioned among  the  places  on  the  sea-coast  of  Rales- 
tine  to  which  the  panic  of  the  incursion  of  Holo- 
fernes  extended  (Jud.  ii.  28).  No  doubt  Jabneel — 
generally  called  Jamnia  by  the  Greek  writers — is 
intended.  The  omission  of  Joppa  however  is  re- 
markable. [<;.] 

JEMU'EL  ('PN-'I^:    'Is^otWJA :   Jemuel,  Ju- 

mnel),  the  eldest  son  of  Simeon  (Gen.  xlvi.Ju; 
Ex.  vi.  1.")).  In  the  lists  of  Num.  xxvi.  and  1  Chr. 
iv.  tin'  name  is  given  as  Nemuel,  which  Gesenius 
derides  to  be  the  corrupted  form. 

JEPHTHA'E  ('le<p0de :  Tepthe,  Jephte),  Heb. 
xi.  32.     The  Greek  form  of  the  name  JePHTHAH. 

JEPHTHAH  (nriS)i.e.  Tiphtah:  'UQdde: 

Jephte),  a  judge,  about  B.  c.  1143-1137.  His  his- 
tory is  contained  in  Judg.  xi.  1 — xii.  7.  He  was  a 
Gileadite,  the  son  of  Gilead  and  a  concubine.  Driven 
by  the  legitimate  sons  from  his  father's  inheritance, 
he  went  to  Tob,  and  became  the  head  of  a  company 
of  freebooter!  in  a  debatable  land  probably  belong- 
ing to  Amnion  (2  Sam.  x.  G).  The  idolatrous 
Israelites  in  Gilead  were  at  that  time  smarting 
under  the  oppression  of  an  Ammonitish  king;  and 
Jephthah  was  led,  as  well  by  the  unsettled  character 
of  the  age  as  by  his  own  family  circumstances,  to 
adopt  a  kind  of  life  unrestrained,  adventurous,  and 
insecure  as  that  of  a  Scottish  border-chieftain  in  the 
middle  ages.  It  was  not  unlike  the  life  which 
David  afterwards  led  at  Ziklag,  with  this  exception, 
that  Jephthah  had  no  friend  among  the  heathen  in 
whose  land  he  lived.  His  fame  as  a  bold  and  suc- 
cessful captain  was  carried  back  to  his  native 
(iilead  ;  and  when  the  time  was  ripe  for  throwing 
oft' the  yoke  of  Amnion,  the  Gileadite  elders  sought 
in  vain  for  any  leader,  who  in  an  equal  degree  with 
the  base-born  outcast  could  command  the  confidence 
of  his  countrymen.  Jephthah  consented  to  become 
their  captain,  on  the  condition — solemnly  ratified 
before  the  Lord  in  Mizpeh — that  in  the  event  of  his 
success  against  Amnion  he  should  still  remain  as 
their  acknowledged  head.  Messages,  urging  their 
respective  claims  to  occupy  the  trans-Jordanic  re- 
gion, were  exchanged  between  the  Ammonitish 
king  ami  Jephthah.  Then  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord 
(i.e.  "  force  of  mind  for  great  undertakings,  and 
bodily  strength,''  Tanchum:  comp.  Judg.  iii.  10, 
vi.  3-1,  xi.  29,  xiv.  (i,  xv.  14)  came  upon  Jeph- 
thah. He  collected  warriors  throughout  <  iilead  and 
Manasseh,  the  provinces  which  acknowledged  his 
authority.      And  then  he   vowed  his  vow  unto   the 

Lord,  "  whatsoever  cometh  forth  [i.e.  first]  of  the 
doors  of  my  house  to  meet  me,  when  1  return  in 
peace  from  the  children  of  Amnion,  shall  surely  be 
Jehovah's,  and  1  will  oiler  it  up  for  a  burnt-offer- 
ing." The  Ammonites  were  routed  with  great 
slaughter.  Twenty  cities,  from  Aroer  on  the  Anion 
to  Minnith  and  to  Abel  Keramim,  were  taken  from 
them.  But  as  the  conqueror  returned  to  Mizpeh 
there  came  out  to  meet  him  a  procession  of  damsels 
with  dances  and  timbrels,  and  among  them — the 


JEPHTHAH 


963 


first  person  from  his  own  house — his  daughter  and 
only  child.  "Alas!  my  daughter,  thou  hast 
brought  me  very  low,"  was  the  greeting  of  the 
heart-stricken  father.  But  the  high-minded  maiden 
is  ready  for  any  personal  suffering  in  the  hour  of 
her  father's  triumph.  Only  she  asks  for  a  respite 
of  two  months  to  withdraw  to  her  native  moun- 
tains, and  in  their  recesses  to  weep  with  her  virgin- 
friends  over  the  early  disappointment  of  her  life. 
When  that  time  was  ended  she  returned  to  her 
father ;  and  "  he  did  unto  her  his  vow." 

But  Jephthah  had  not  long  leisure,  even  if  he 
were  disposed-,  for  the  indulgence  of  domestic  grief. 
The  proud  tribe  of  Ephraim  challenged  his  right  to 
go  to  war,  as  he  had  done  without  their  concur- 
rence, against  Amnion  ;  and  they  proceeded  to  vin- 
dicate the  absurd  claim  by  invading  Jephthah  in 
Gilead.  They  did  but  add  to  his  triumph  which 
they  en,vied.  He  first  defeated  them,  then  inter- 
cepted the  fugitives  at  the  fords  of  Jordan,  and 
there,  having  insultingly  identified  them  as  Ephraim- 
ites  by  their  peculiar  pronunciation,  he  put  forty- 
two  thousand  men  to  the  sword. 

The  eminent  office  for  whicli  Jephthah  had  stipu- 
lated as  the  reward  of  his  exertions,  and  the  glory 
which  he  had  won,  did  not  long  abide  with  him. 
He  judged  Israel  six  years  and  died. 

It  is  generally  conjectured  that  his  jurisdiction 
was  limited  to  the  trans-Jordanic  region. 

The  peculiar  expression,  xi.  34.  faithfully  trans- 
lated in  the  margin  of  the  A.  V.,  has  been  inter- 
preted as  signifying  that  Jephthah  had  step-chil- 
dren. 

That  the  daughter  of  Jephthah  was  really  offered 
up  to  God  in  sacrifice,  slain  by  the  hand  of  her 
father  and' then  burned — is  a  horrible  conclusion ; 
but  one  which  it  seems  impossible  to  avoid.  This 
was  understood  to  be  the  meaning  of  the  text  by 
Jonathan  the  paraphrast,  and  Ilashi,  by  Josephus, 
Ant.  v.  7,  §10,  and  by  perhaps  all  the  early  Chris- 
tian Fathers,  as  Origen,  in  Joannem,  torn.  vi.  cap. 
36  ;  Chrysostom,  Ham.  ad  pop.  Antioch.  xiv.  3  ; 
0pp.  ii.  145  ;  Theodoret,  Quaest.  in  Jud.  xx.;  Je- 
rome, Ep.  ad  Jul.  118;  Opp.  i.  791,  Sec. ;  Augus- 
tine, Quaest.  in  Jud.  viii.  §4'J  ;  Opp.  iii.  1,  p.  610. 
For  the  first  eleven  centuries  of  the  Christian  era  this 
was  the  current,  perhaps  the  universal  opinion  of  Jews 
and  Christians.  Yet  none  of  them  extenuates  the 
act  of  Jephthah.  Josephus  calls  it  neither  lawful 
nor  pleasing  to  God.  Jewish  writers  say  that  he 
ought  to  have  referred  it  to  the  high-priest;  but 
either  he  failed  to  do  so,  or  the  high-priest  culpably 
omitted  to  prevent  the  rash  act.  Origen  strictly 
confines  his  praise  to  the  heroism  of  Jephthah's 
daughter. 

Another  interpretation  was  suggested  by  Joseph 
Kimchi.  He  supposed  that,  instead  of  being  sacri- 
ficed, she  was  shut  up  in  a  house  which  her  father 
built  for  the  purpose,  and  thai  she  was  there  visited 
by  the'  daughters  of  Israel  four  days  in  each  year 
so  long  as  she  lived.  This  interpretation  bus  been 
adopted  by  many  eminent  men.  as  by  Levi  lien 
Gersoni  and  Bechai  among  the  Jews,  and  by  Dru- 
sius,  Grotius,  Estius,  de  Dieu,  Bishop  Hall,  Water- 
land,  Dr.  Hales,  and  others.  More  names  of  the 
sa period,  and  of  not  less  authority,  might  how- 
ever fe  adduced  on  tin'  other  side.     Lightfoot  once 

though!  (Erubhin,  §16  that  Jephthah  did  not  slay 
his  daughter;  but  upon  more  mature  reflection  he 
came  to  the  opposite  conclusion  (Harmony,  &c; 
Judg.  xi.,  Works,  i.  51  , 

Each  of  these  two  opinions  i.^  supported  by  argu- 


964 


JEPHTHAH 


,  merits  grounded  on  the  original  text  and  on  the 
customs  of  the  Jews.  (1.)  In  Judg.  xi.  31,  the 
word  translated  in  the  A.  V.  "whatsoever  "  knows 
no  distinction  of  gender,  and  may  as  correctly  be 
translated  "whosoever*"  and  in  favour  of  the  latter 
version  it  is  urged  that  Jephthah  could  not  have 
expected  to  be  met  by  an  ox  or  other  animal  fit  for 
sacrifice,  coming  forth  from  the  door  of  his  house  ; 
and  that  it  was  obviously  his  intention  to  signalize 
his  thanksgiving  for  victory  by  devoting  some 
human  being  to  destruction,  to  that  end  perverting 
the  statute,  Lev.  xxvii.  28,  29  (given  with  another 
purpose,  on  which  see  Jahn,  Archaeologia,  §  294, 
or  Ewald,  Alterthilmcr,  89),  to  the  taking  of  a  life 
which  was  not  forfeit  to  the  law.  (2.)  To  J. 
Kimchi's  proposal  to  translate  "  and  I  will  offer," 
verse  31,  "or  I  will  offer,"  it  has  been  replied  that 
this  sense  of  the  conjunction  is  rare,  that  it  is  not 
intended  in  two  vows  couched  in  parallel  phrase- 
ology, Gen.  xxviii.  21,  22,  and  1  Sam.  i.  11,  and 
that  it  creates  two  alternatives  between  which  there 
is  no  opposition,  (3.)  The  word  rendered  in  A.  V. 
"  to  lament,"  or  "  to  talk  with,"  verse  40,  is  trans- 
lated by  later  scholars,  as  in  Judg.  v.  11,  "  to  cele- 
brate." (4.)  It  has  been  said  that  if  Jephthah  put 
his  daughter  to  death,  according  to  verse  39,  it  is 
■  unmeaning  to  add  that  she  "knew  no  man;"  but 
on  the  other  hand  it  is  urged  that  this  circumstance  is 
added  as  setting  in  a  stronger  light  the  rashness  of 
Jephthah  and  the  heroism  of  his  daughter.  (5.)  It 
has  been  argued  that  human  sacrifices  were  opposed 
to  the  principles  of  the  Jewish  law,  and  therefore  a 
Jew  could  not  have  intended  to  make  a  thank- 
offering  of  that  sort ;  but  it  is  replied  that  a  Gi- 
leadite  born  in  a  lawless  age,  living  as  a  freebooter 
in  the  midst  of  rude  and  idolatrous  people  who 
practised  such  sacrifices,  was  not  likely  to  be  un- 
usually acquainted  with  or  to  pay  unusual  respect 
to  the  pure  and  humane  laws  of  Israel.  (0.)  Lastly, 
it  has  been  argued  that  a  life  of  religious  celibacy 
is  without  injunction  or  example  to  favour  it  in  the 

0.  T. 

Some  persons,  mindful  of  the  enrolment  of  Jeph- 
thah among  the  heroes  of  faith  in  Heb.  xi.  32,  as 
well  as  of  the  expression  "  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  came 
upon  him,"  Judg.  xi.  29,  have  therefore  scrupled 
to  believe  that  he  could  be  guilty  of  such  a  sin  as 
the  murder  of  his  child.  But  it  must  be  remem- 
bered also  that  deep  sins  of  several  other  faithful 
men  are  recorded  in  Scripture,  sometimes  without 
comment;  and  as  Jephthah  had  time  afterwards, 
so  he  may  have  had  grace  to  repent  of  his  vow  and 
his  fulfilment  of  it.  At  least  we  know  that  he  felt 
remorse,  which  is  often  the  foreshadow  of  retribu- 
tion or  the  harbinger  of  repentance. 

Doubtless  theological  opinions  have  sometimes 
had  the  effect  of  leading  men  to  prefer  one  view  of 
Jcphthah's  vow  to  the  other.  Selden  mentions  that 
(ienebrard  was  told  by  a  Jew  that  Kimchi's  inter- 
pretation was  devised  in  order  to  prevent  Christians 
quoting  the  sacrifice  of  Jephthah's  daughter  as  a 
type  of  the  sacrifice  of  the  Son  of  God.  And  Chris- 
tians, who  desire  or  fear  an  example  alleged  in 
favour  of  celibate  vows  or  of  the  fallibility  of  in- 
spired men,  may  become  partial  judges  of  the 
question. 

The  subject  is  discussed  at  length  in  Augustine, 

1.  c.  Opp.  iii.  1,  p.  610  ;  a  Treatise  by  L.  Capellus 
inserted  in  Grit.  Sacr.  on  Judg.  xi. ;  Bp.  Hall's 
Contemplations  on  0.  T.,  bk.  x. ;  Selden,  De  jure 
naturali  et  gentium,  iv.  §11  ;  Lightfoot,  Sermon 
on  Judg.  xi.   39,   in    Works,  ii.    1215;    Pfeiffer, 


JERAH 

De  voto  Jephtae,  Opp.  591  ;  Dr.  Hales'  Analysis 
of  Chronology,  ii.  288 ;  and  in  Kosenmiiller's 
Scholia.  [W.  T.  B.] 

JEPHUN'NE  C\e<povvri  :  Jeplwne),  Ecclus. 
xlvi.  7.     [Jephunneh.] 

JEPHUN'NEH(n_3!^:    Jephone).    I.  ('Ie- 

cpovvf))  :  father  of  Caleb  the  spy,  who  is  usually  de- 
signated as  "  Caleb  the  son  of  Jephunneh."  He 
appears  to  have  belonged  to  an  Edomitish  tribe  called 
Kenezites,  from  Kenaz  their  founder  ;  but  his  father 
or  other  ancestors  are  not  named.  [Caleb,  2  ;  Ke- 
naz.] (See  Num.  xiii.  6,  &c.,  xxxii.  12, &c;  Josh, 
xiv.  14,  &c. ;  1  Chr.  iv.  15.)  2.  CUQivd  in  both 
MSS.)  A  descendant  of  Asher,  eldest  of  the  three 
sons  of  Jether  (1  Chr.  vii.  38).  [A.  C.  H.] 

JE'EAH  (m* :  'lapdx'-  Jare),  the  fourth  in 
order  of  the  sons  of  Joktan  (Gen.  x.  26  ;  1  Chr.  i. 
20),  and  the  progenitor  of  a  tribe  of  southern  Arabia. 
He  has  not  been  satisfactorily  identified  with  the 
name  of  any  Arabian  place  or  tribe,  though  a  fortress 
(and  probably  an  old  town,  like  the  numerous  for- 
tified places  in  the  Yemen,  of  the  old  Himyerite 

kingdom)  named  Yerakh   (jMwj  =  ^T.)  's  mm~ 

tioned  as  belonging  to  the  district  of  the  Nijjad 
(Mardsid,  s.  v.  Yerakh),  which  is  in  Mahreh,  at 
the  extremity  of  the  Yemen  (Kamoos,  in  article 

^X^j  ;  cf.  Arabia).  The  similarity  of  name, 
however,  and  the  other  indications,  we  are  not  dis- 
posed to  lay  much  stress  on. 

A  very  different  identification  has  been  proposed 
by  Bochart  (Phaleg,  ii.  19).  He  translates  Jerah 
= "  the  moon "  into  Arabic,  and  finds  the  de- 
scendants of  Jerah  in  the  Alilaei,  a  people  dwelling 
near  the  Red  Sea  (Agatharch.  ap.  Diod.  Sic.  iii.  45), 
on  the  strength  of  a  passage  in  Herodotus  (iii.  8), 
in  which  he  says  of  the  Arabs,  "  Bacchus  they  call 
in  their  language  Orotal  ;  and  Urania,  Alilat." 
He  further  suggests  that  these  Alilaei  are  the  Benee- 

Hilal  of  more  modern  times,  Hilal  (^^V^O  meaning, 

in  Arabic,  "  the  moon  when,  being  near  the  sun, 
it  shows  a  narrow  rim  of  light."  Gesenius  does  not 
object  to  this  theory,  which  he  quotes ;  but  says 
that  the  opinion  of  Michaelis  (Spicileg.  ii.  60)  is 
more  probable ;  the  latter  scholar  finding  Jerah  in 
the  "coast  of  the  moon"  (correctly,  "low  land 

of  the  moon,"  j^jiJI   «_*£)>  or  in  tne  "mountain 
„.-  o     -5  -  - 

of  the    moon"   (^iJ|  J>A^») — in  each  case  the 

moon  being  "  kamar,"  not  "  hilal."  The  former  is 
"a  place  between  Zafari  and  Esh-Shihr"  (Kamoos) ; 
the  latter  in  the  same  part,  but  more  inland ;  botli 
being,  as  Gesen.  remarks,  near  to  Hadramiiwt,  next 
to  which,  in  the  order  of  the  names,  is  Jerah  in  the 
record  in  Genesis;  and  the  same  argument  may  be 
adduced  in  favour  of  our  own  possible  identification 
with  the  fortress  of  Yerakh,  named  at  the  com- 
mencement of  this  article.  Whatever  may  be  said 
in  support  of  translating  Jerah,  as  both  Bochart  and 
Michaelis  have  done,  the  former's  theory  involves 
some  grave  difficulties,  which  must  be  stated. 

The  statement  of  Herodotus  above  quoted  (cf.  i. 
131,  "the  Arabians  call  Venus  Alitta"),  that  Alilat 
signifies  Urania,  cannot  be  accepted  without  further 


JERAH 

evidence  than  we  at  present  possess.  Alilat  was 
almost  doubtless  the  same  as  the  object  of  worship 
called  by  the  Arabs  "  El-£at,"  and  any  new  infor- 
mation respecting  the  latter  is  therefore  important. 
It  would  require  too  much  space  in  this  work  to 
state  the  various  opinions  of  the  Arabs  respecting 
El-Lat,  its  etymology,  &c,  as  collected  in  the  great 
MS.  Lexicon  entitled  the  "  Mohkam,"  a  work  little 

known  in  Europe  ;  from  which  (articles  £,J  ;U1^ 
t£»J)  we  S''ve  f'le  following  particulars.  "  El- 
Latt  "  is  [generally]  said  to  he  originally  "  El- 
L&th,"  the  name  of  an  object  of  worship,  so  called 
by  the  appellation  of  a  man  who  used  to  moisten 
meal  of  parched  barley  (saweek)  with  clarified  butter 
or  the  like,  at  the  place  thereof,  for  the  pilgrims  : 
"El-Latt"  signifying  "the  person  who  performs 
that  operation."  The  object  of  worship  itself  is 
said  to  have  been  a  mass  of  rock  [upon  which  he 
moistened  the  meal ;  and  which  was  more  properly 
called  "  the  Rock  of  El-Latt "]  :  after  the  death  of 
the  man  above  mentioned  this  rock  was  worshipped. 
But  some  say  that  "El-Lat"  is  originally  "  El- 

—  o 
Ibiheh"  (ajfc^)^),  meaning  [not  "  the  Goddess," 

but]  "  the  Serpent."  To  this  we  may  add  from 
El-Beydawee  (Knr-an,  liii.  10  and  20),  El-Lat  was 
an  idol  of  Thakeef,  at  Et-Taif,  or  of  Kureysh,  at 

Nakhleh ;   and  was  so  called  from  <_£.J,  because 

they  used  to  go  round  about  it :  or  it  was  called 
"  El-Latt,"  because  it  was  the  image  of  a  man  who 
used  to  moisten  meal  of  parched  barley  with  cla- 
rified butter,  and  to  feed  the  pilgrims. — Our  own 
opinion  is  that  it  may  be  a  contraction  of  "  El- 
Ilahet"  ("  the  Serpent,"  or  perhaps  "theGoddess"), 
pronounced  according  to  the  dialect  of  Himyer,  with 
"  t "  instead  of  "  h  "  in  the  case  of  a  pause.     (See 

the  Sihdh,  MS.,  art.  <_<o'..)      It  's  said   in   the 

Lexicon  entitled  the  Tahdheeb  (MS.,  art.  tlXl)>  that 

El-Kisa-ee  used  to  pronounce  it,  in  the  case  of  a 
pause,  "  El-Lah  ;"  and  that  those  who  worshipped 
it  compared  its  name  with  that  of  "  Allah." 

Pococke  has  some  remarks  on  the  subject  of  El- 
Latt,  which  the  reader  may  consult  (Spec.  Hist. 
Arab.  p.  90)  ;  and  also  Sir  G.  Wilkinson,  in  his  notes 
to  Herodotus  (ed.  Kawlinson,  ii.  402,  foot-note,  and 
Essay  i.  to  15k.  iii.)  :  he  seems  to  be  wrong,  how- 
ever,  in  saying  that  the  Arabic  "'awel,'  'first'" 
[correctly,  "  awwal  "J  is  "related  to"  ?N,  or 
Allah,  &e.  ;  and  that  Alitta  and  Mylitta  are  Semitic 
names  deiived  from  •'  weled,  walada,  'to  bear  chil- 
dren'"  {Essay  i.  p.  537).  The  comparison  of 
Alitta  anil  Mylitta  is  also  extremely  doubtful;  and 
probably  Herodotus  assimilated  the  former  name  to 
the  latter. 

It  is  necessary  to  observe,  in  endeavouring  to 
elucidate  the  ancient  religion  of  the  [shmaelite 
Arabs,  that  fetishism  was  largely  developed  among 
them  ;  and  that  their  idols  were  generally  absurdly 
rude  and  primitive.  Beyond  thai  relic  of  primeval 
revelation  which  is  found  in  most  beliefs — a  rei  Og- 
nition  of  one  universal  ami  supreme  God— the  prac- 
tices of  fetishism  obtained  more  or  less  throughout 
Arabia:   on   the   north   giving   place   t"    the  faith  of 

the  patriarchs ;  on  the  south  merging  into  the  cos- 
mic worship  of  the  Himyerites. 

That  the  Alihei  were  worshippers  of  Alilat  is  an 


JKItKMIAH 


965 


assumption  unsupported  by  facts ;  but  whatever 
may  be  said  in  its  favour,  the  people  in  question 
are  not  the  Benee-Hilal,  who  take  their  name  from 
a  kinsman  of  Mohammad,  in  the  fifth  generation 
before  him,  of  the  well-known  stock  of  Keys. 
(Caussin,  Essai.  Tab.  X  A  ;  Abu-1-Fidh,,  Hist,  an- 
teisl.,  ed.  Fleischer,  p.  194.)  [E.  S.  P.] 

JEEAH'MEEL  (^KDPIT  :  'Upa/x^x,  'Upe- 

^ueifjA  :  Jeramcel).  1.  First-born  son  of  Hezron,  the 
son  of  Pharez,  the  son  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  ii.  9,  25- 
27,  33,  42).  His  descendants  are  given  at  length 
in  the  same  chap.  [Azariaii,  13  ;  Zabad.]  They 
inhabited  the  southern  border  of  Judah  (1  Sam. 
xxvii.  10,  comp.  8  ;  xxx.  29). 

2.  A  Merarite  Levite ;  the  representative,  at 
the  time  of  the  organisation  of  the  Divine  service 
by  king  David,  of  the  family  of  Kish,  the  son  of 
Mahli  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  29;  comp.  xxiii.  21). 

3.  Son  of  Hammelech,  or,  as  the  LXX.  render  it, 
"  the  king,"  who  was  employed  by  Jehoiakim  to 
make  Jeremiah  and  Baruch  prisoners,  after  he  had 
burnt  the  roll  of  Jeremiah's  prophecy  (Jer.  xxxvi. 
26).  [A.  C.  H.] 

JERAHMEELITES,  THE  ofolprrPri : 
'lea-fxeyd,  6  'Iepe^ue^A ;  Alex.  'Iffpa/xriAet,  'Upa- 
firiAei :  Jeramcel).  The  tribe  descended  from  the 
first  of  the  foregoing  persons  (1  Sam.  xxvii.  10). 
Their  cities  are  also  named  amongst  those  to  which 
David  sent  presents  from  his  Amalekite  booty 
(xxx.  29),  although  to  Achish  he  had  represented 
that  he  had  attacked  them. 

JER'ECHUS  ('Ie'pexos:  Ericus),  1  Esd.  v. 
22.     [Jericho.] 

JE'RED  ("IT  :  'IapeS :  Jared,  Jaret).  1.  One 
of  the  patriarchs  before  the  flood,  son  of  Mahalaleel 
and  lather  of  Enoch  (1  Chr.  i.  2).  In  Genesis  the 
name  is  given  as  Jared. 

2.  One  of  the  descendants  of  Judah  signalised  as 
the  "  father — i.  e.  the  founder — of  Gedor  "  (1  Chr. 
iv.  18).  He  was  one  of  the  sons  of  Ezrah  by  his 
wife  Ha-Jehudijah,  i.e.  the  Jewess.  The  Jews, 
however,  give  an  allegorical  interpretation  to  the 
passage,  and  treat  this  and  other  names  therein  as 
titles  of  Moses — Jered  because  he  caused  the  manna 
to  descend.  Here — as  noticed  under  Jabez — the 
pun,  though  obvious  in  biblical  Hebrew,  where 
Jarad  (the  root  of  Jordan)  means  "to  descend,"  is 
concealed  in  the  rabbinical  paraphrase,  which  has 
rpniN,  a  word  with  the  same  meaning,  but  with- 
out any  relation  to  Jered,  either  for  eye  or  ear.  [G.] 

JER'EMAI  C»T  :  'Upafil  ;  Alex.  'Uptfii  : 
Jermai),  a  layman  ;  one  of  the  F.enc-IIashum,  who 
was  compelled  by  Ezra  to  put  away  his  foreign 
wife  (Ezr.  x.  33).  In  the  lists  of  Esdras  it  is 
omitted. 

JEREMIAH    (•irVft'V,    as    the    more   usual 

form,   or    PPO'V,   eh.    xxxvi.-xxxviii.  ;  'Upefiias  ; 

Jeremias,  Vulg.  ;  ffieremias,  llieron.  etal.).  The 
name  has  been  variously  explained:  by  Jerome  and 
Simmiis  [Onomast.  p.  .'>"..">),  as  "  the  exalted  of  the 
Lord  ;"  by  <iesenius  (s.  v.),  as  "appointed  of  the 
Lord;"  by  Carpzov  (intrxxl,  ■"'  lib.  1'.  '/'.  p.  id. 
,.  3  .  followed  by  Hengstenberg  (Chriatologie  des 
A.  B.  vol.  i.i.  as  -'the  Lord  throws"— the  latter 
seeing  in  the  name  a  prophetic  reference  to  the 
work  described  in  i.  In. 


96G 


JEREMIAH 


I.  Life. — It  will  be  convenient  to  arrange  what 
is  known  as  to  the  life  and  work  of  this  Prophet  in 
sections  corresponding  to  its  chief  periods.  The 
materials  for  such  an  account  are  to  be  found 
almost  exclusively  in  the  book  which  bears  his 
name.  Whatever  interest  may  attach  to  Jewish 
or  Christian  traditions  connected  with  his  name, 
they  have  no  claim  to  be  regarded  as  historical, 
and  we  are  left  to  form  what  picture  we  can  of  the 
man  and  of  his  times  from  the  narratives  and  pro- 
phecies which  he  himself  has  left.  Fortunately, 
these  have  come  down  to  us,  though  in  some  dis- 
order, with  unusual  fulness ;  and  there  is  no  one  in 
the  "  goodly  fellowship  of  the  prophets  "  of  whom, 
in  his  work,  feelings,  sufferings,  we  have  so  distinct 
a  knowledge.  He  is  for  us  the  great  example  of 
the  prophetic  life,  the  representative  of  the  pro- 
phetic order.  It  is  not  to  be  wondered  at  that  lie 
should  have  seemed  to  the  Christian  feeling  of  the 
Early  Church  a  type  of  Him  in  whom  that  life  re- 
ceived its  highest  completion  (Hieron.  Comm.  in 
Jerem.  xxiii.  9  ;  Origen,  Horn,  in  Jcrem.  i.  and 
viii.  ;  Aug.  de  Praes.  Dai,  c.  x.xxvii.),  or  that 
recent  writers  should  have  identified  him  with  the 
"Servant  of  the  Lord"  in  the  later  chapters  of 
Isaiah  (Bunsen,  Gott  in  Geschiehte,  i.  p.  42">- 
447  ;  Nagelsbach,  art.  Jerem.  in  Herzog's  Re  <l- 
encyclop.}. 

(1.)  Under  Josiah,  B.C.  638-60S.— In  the  13th 
year  of  the  reign  of  Josiah,  the  Prophet  speaks  of 
himself  as  still  "a  child"  (HJ?J,  i.  6).    We  cannot 

rely  indeed  on  this  word  as  a  chronological  datum. 
It  may  have  been  used  simply  as  the  expression  of 
conscious  weakness,  and  as  a  word  of  age  it  extends 
from  merest  infancy  (Ex.  ii.  6;  1  Sam.  iv.  21)  to 
adult  manhood  (1  Sam.  xxx.  17  ;  1  K.  iii.  7).  We 
may  at  least  infer,  however,  as  we  can  trace  his  life 
in  full  activity  for  upwards  of  forty  years  from  this 
period,  that  at  the  commencement  of  that  reign  he 
could  not  have  passed  out  of  actual  childhood.  He 
is  described  as  "  the  son  of  Hilkiah  of  the  priests 
that  were  in  Anathoth"  (i.  I).  Were  we  able, 
with  some  earlier  (Clem.  Al.  Strom,  i.  p.  142  ; 
Jerome,  Opp.  torn.  iv.  §  116,  D.)  and  some  later 
writers  (Eichhorn,  Calovius,  Maldonatus,  von  Boh- 
len,  Umbreit)  to  identify  this  Hilkiah  with  the 
"high-priest  who  bore  so  large  a  share  in  Josiah's 
work  of  reformation,  it  would  be  interesting  to 
think  of  the  king  and  the  prophet,  so  nearly  of  the 
same  age  (2  Chr.  xxxiv.  1),  as  growing  up  together 
under  the  same  training,  subject  to  the  same  in- 
fluences. Against  this  hypothesis,  however,  there 
have  been  urged  the  facts  (Carpzov,  Keil,  Ewald, 
and  others) — (1.)  that  the  name  is  too  common  to 
be  a  ground  of  identification  ;  (2.)  that  the  manner 
in  which  this  Hilkiah  is  mentioned  is  inconsistent 
with  the  notion  of  his  having  been  the  High-priest  of 
Israel  ;  (3.)  that  neither  Jeremiah  himself,  nor  his 
opponents,  allude  to  this  parentage  ;  (4.)  that  the 
priests  who  lived  at  Anathoth  were  of  the  House 
of  Ithamar  (1  K.  ii.  26  ;  1  Chr.  xxiv.  3),  while  the 
high-priests  from  Zadok  downwards  were  of  the 
line  of  Eleazar  (Carpzov,  Introcl.  in  lib.  V.  T. 
Jerem.).  The  occurrence  of  the  same  name  may 
be  looked  on,  however,  in  this  as  in  many  other  in- 
stances in  the  0.  T.,  as  a  probable  indication  of 
affinity  or  friendship ;  and  this,  together  with  the 
coincidences — (1.)  that  the  uncle  of  Jeremiah 
(xxxii.  7)  bears  the  same  name  as  the  husband  of 
Huldah  the  prophetess  (2  K.  xxii.  14),  and  (2.) 
that  Ahikam  the  son  of  Shaphan,  the  great  sup- 


JEEEMIAH 

porter  of  Hilkiah  and  Huldah  in  their  work  (2  Chr. 
xxxiv.  20)  was  also,  throughout,  the  great  pro- 
tector of  the  prophet  (Jer.  xxvi.  24),  may  help  to 
throw  some  light  on  the  education  by  which  he 
was  prepared  (or  that  work  to  which  he  was  taught 
he  had  been  "  sanctified  from  his  mother's  womb." 
The  strange  Rabbinic  tradition  (Carpzov,  I.  c), 
that  eight  of  the  persons  most  conspicuous  in  the 
religious  history  of  this  period  (Jeremiah,  Baruch, 
Seraiah,  Maaseiah,  Hilkiah,  Hanameel,  Huldah. 
Shall  um)  were  all  descended  from  the  harlot  Rahab, 
may  possibly  have  been  a  distortion  of  the  fact 
that  they  were  connected,  in  some  way  or  other, 
as  members  of  a  family.  If  this  were  so,  we  can 
form  a  tolerably  distinct  notion  of  the  influences 
that  were  at  work  on  Jeremiah's  youth.  The  boy 
would  hear  among  the  priests  of  his  native  town, 
not  three  miles  distant  from  Jerusalem  [Ana- 
thoth], of  the  idolatries  and  cruelties  of  Manasseh 
and  his  sou  Anion.  He  would  be  trained  in  the 
traditional  precepts  and  ordinances  of  the  Law.  He 
would  become  acquainted  with  the  names  ami 
writings  of  older  prophets,  such  as  Micah  and 
Isaiah.  As  he  grew  up  towards  manhood,  he 
would  hear  also  of  the  work  which  the  king  and 
his  counsellors  were  carrying  on,  and  of  the  teach- 
ing of  the  woman,  who  alone,  or  nearly  so,  in  the 
midst  of  that  religious  revival,  was  looked  upon  as 
speaking  from  direct  prophetic  inspiration.  In  all 
likelihood,  as  we  have  seen,  he  came  into  actual 
contact  with  them.  Possibly,  too,  to  this  period  of 
his  life  we  may  trace  the  commencement  of  that 
friendship  with  the  family  of  Neriah  which  was 
afterwards  so  fruitful  in  results.  The  two  brothers 
Baruch  and  Seraiah  both  appear  as  the  disciples  of 
the  Prophet  (xxxvi.  4,  li.  59)  ;  both  were  the  sons 
of  Neriah,  the  son  of  iMaaseiah  (I.  c.) ;  and  Maa- 
seiah (2  Chr.  xxxiv.  8)  was  governor  of  Jerusalem, 
acting  with  Hilkiah  and  Shaphan  in  the  religious 
reforms  of  Josiah.  As  the  result  of  all  these  influ- 
ences we  find  in  him  all  the  conspicuous  features 
of  the  devout  ascetic  character :  intense  conscious- 
ness of  his  own  weakness,  great  susceptibility  to 
varying  emotions,  a  spirit  easily  bowed  down.  But 
there  were  also,  we  may  believe  (assuming  only, 
that  the  prophetic  character  is  the  development, 
purified  and  exalted,  of  the  natural,  not  its  contia- 
diction),  the  strong  national  feelings  of  an  Israelite, 
the  desire  to  see  his  nation  becoming  in  reality 
what  it  had  been  called  to  be,  anxious  doubts  whe- 
ther this  were  possible,  for  a  people  that  had  sunk 
so  low  (cf.  Maurice,  Prophets  and  Kings  of  the 
0.  T.,  Sena.  xxii. -xxiv.  ;  Ewald,  Prqpheten,  ii.  p. 
6-8).  Left  to  himself,  he  might  have  borne  his  part 
among  the  reforming  priests  of  Josiah's  reign,  free 
from  their  formalism  and  hypocrisy.  But  "  the 
word  of  Jehovah  came  to  him"  (i.  2);  and  by 
that  divine  voice  the  secret  of  his  future  life  was 
revealed  to  him,  at  the  very  time  when  the  work 
of  reformation  was  going  on  with  fresh  vigour 
(2  Chr.  xxxiv.  3),  when  he  himself  was  beginning 
to  have  the  thoughts  and  feelings  of  a  man."  He  was 
to  lay  aside  all  self-distrust,  all  natural  fear  and 
trembling  (i.  7,  8),  and  to  accept  his  calling  as  a  pro- 
phet of  Jehovah  "  set  over  the  nations  and  over  the 
kingdoms,  to  root  out  and  to  pull  down,  and  to  de- 
stroy and  to  throw  down,  to  build  and  to  plant"  (i. 
10)."  A  life-long  martyrdom  was  set  before  him,  a 
struggle   ao-ainst  kings   and   priests   and    people  (i. 


a  Carpzov  (/.  c.)  fixes  twenty  as  the  probable  aire 
of  Jeremiah  at  the  time  of  his  call. 


JEREMIAH 

18).     When  was  this,  wonderful  mission  developed 
into  action?     What  effect  did  it  have  on  the  inward 
and  outward  life  of  the  man  who  received  it?     For 
a  time,  it  would  seem  he  held  aloof  from  the  work 
which  was  goiug  on  throughout  the  nation.     His 
name  is  nowhere  mentioned   in  the  history  of  the 
memorable  eighteenth  year  of  Josiah.    Though  five 
years  had  passed  since  he  had  entered  on  the  work 
of  a  prophet,  it  is  from  Huldah,  not  from  him,  that 
the  king  and  his    princes  seek   for  counsel.     The 
discovery  of  the  Book  of  the  Law,  however  (we 
need  not  now  inquire  whether  it  were  the  Penta- 
teuch as  a  whole,  or  a  lost  portion  of  it,  or  a  com- 
pilation altogether  new),  could  not  fail  to  exercise 
an  influence  on  a   mind  like  Jeremiah's :  lfls  later 
writings   show   abundant   traces   of  it  (cf.  inf.) ; 
and  the  result  apparently  was,  that  he  could  not 
share  the  hopes  which  others  cherished.     To  them 
the  reformation  seemed  more  thorough  than  that 
accomplished  by  Hezekiah.     They  might  think  that 
fasts,  and  sacrifices,  and  the  punishment,  of  idolaters, 
might  avert  the  penalties  of  which  they  heard  in 
the  book  so  strangely  found  (Dent,  xxvii.,  xxviii., 
xxxii.),  and  might  look  forward  to  a  time  of  pros- 
perity and  peace,  of  godliness  and  security  (vii.  4). 
He  saw  that  the  reformation  was  but  a  surface  one. 
Israel  had  gone  into  captivity,  and  Judah  was  worse 
than  Israel  (iii.  1 1).     It  was  as  hard  for  him,  as  it 
bad  been  for  Isaiah,  to  find  among  the  princes  and 
people  who  worshipped  in  the  Temple,  one  just, 
truth-seeking  man  (v.  1,  28).     His   own  work,  as 
a  priest  and  prophet,  led  him  to  discern   the  false- 
hood and  lust  of  rule  which  were  at  work  under 
,  the  form  of  zeal  (v.  31).     The  spoken  or  written 
prophecies  of  his  contemporaries,  Zephnniah,  Hab- 
akkuk,  Urijah,  Huldah,  may  have  served  to  deepen 
his  convictions  that  the  sentence  of  condemnation 
was  already  passed,  and  that  there  was  no  escape 
from  it.     The  strange  visions  which  had  followed 
upon  his  call   (i.  11-16)  taught  him  that  Jehovah 
would  "  hasten"  the  performance  of  His  word  ;  and 
if  the  Scythian  inroads  of  the  later  years  of  Josiah's 
reign  seemed  in  part  to  correspond  to  the  "  destruc- 
tion coming  from  the  North"  (  Ewald,  Prophetcn, 
in  loc),   they  could  hardly  be  looked  upon  as  ex- 
hausting the  words  that  spoke  of  it.  Hence,  though 
we  have  hardly  any  mention  of  special  incidents  in 
the  life  of  Jeremiah  during  the  eighteen  years  be- 
tween his  call  and  Josiah's  death,  the  main  features 
of  his  lite  come  distinctly  enough  before  us.      He  had 
even  then  his  experience  of  the  bitterness  of  the  hit  to 
which    God    had  called    him.     The   duties   of  the 
priest,  even  if  he  continued  to  discharge  them,  were 
merged    in    those   of  the  new   and   special  office. 
Strange  as  it  was   for  a  priest  to  remain  unmarried, 
his   lot  was  to  be  one  of  solitude  (xvi.  2).b     It  was 
not  for  him  to  enter  into  tin-  house  of  feasting,  or 
even  into  that  of  mourning  (xvi.  5,  8).    From  time 
to  time  he  appeared,   clad   probably  in  the  "  rough 
garment"  of  a  prophet  (Zech.  xiii.  4),  in  Anathoth 
and  Jerusalem.   He  was  heard  warning  and  protest- 
ing, "  rising  early  and  speaking"  (xxv.  3),  and   as 
tin'  result  of  this  there  came  "  reproach  and  derision 
daily"  (xx.  8).     He  was  betrayed  by  his  own  kin- 
dred fxii.  (i),  persecuted  with  murderous  hate  by 
his  own  townsmen  (xi.  21),  mocked  with  the  taunt- 


JEREMIAH 


967 


ing  question,  Where  is  the  word  of  Jehovah  ? 
(xvii.  15).  And  there  were  inner  spiritual  trials 
as  well  as  these  outward  ones.  He  too,  like  the 
writers  of  Job  and  Ps.  lxxiii.,  was  haunted  by  per- 
plexities rising  out  of  the  disorders  of  the  world 
(  xii.  1,2);  on  him  there  came  the  bitter  feeling,  that 
he  was  "a  man  of  contention  to  the  whole  earth  ;" 
(xv.  10),  the  doubt  whether  his  whole  work  was 
not  a  delusion  and  a  lie  (xx.  7),  tempting  him  at 
times  to  fall  back  into  silence,  until  the  fire  again 
burnt  within  him,  and  he  was  weary  of  forbearing 
(xx.  9).  Whether  the  passages  that  have  been  re- 
ferred to  belong,  all  of  them,  to  this  period  or  a 
later  one,  they  represent  that  which  was  inseparable 
from  the  prophet's  life  at  all  times,  and  which,  in  a 
character  like  Jeremiah's,  was  developed,  in  its 
strongest  form.  Towards  the  close  of  the  reign, 
however,  he  appears  to  have  taken  some  part  in 
the  great  national  questions  then  at  issue.  The 
overthrow  of  the  Assyrian  monarchy  to  which  Ma- 
nasseh  had  become  tributary  led  the  old  Egyptian 
party  among  the  princes  of  Judah  to  revive  their 
plans,  and  to  urge  an  alliance  with  Pharaoh-Xecho 
as  the  only  means  of  safety.  Jeremiah,  following 
in  the  footsteps  of  Isaiah  (Is.  xxx.  1-7),  warned 
them  that  it  would  lead  only  to  confusion  (ii.  18, 
36).  The  policy  of  Josiah  was  determined,  pro- 
bably, by  this  counsel.  He  chose  to  attach  himself 
to  the  new  Chaldaean  kingdom,  and  lost  his  life  in 
the  vain  attempt  to  stop  the  progress  of  the  Egyp-  • 
tian  king.  We  may  think  of  this  as  one  of  the 
first  great  sorrows  of  Jeremiah's  life.  His  lamenta- 
tions for  'the  king  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  25),c  may  have 
been  those  of  personal  friendship.  They  were  cer- 
tainly those  of  a  man  who,  with  nothing  before 
him  but  the  prospect  of  confusion  and  wrong,  looks 
back  upon  a  reign  of  righteousness  and  truth  (xxii. 
3,  16). 

(2.)  Under  Jehoahaz  (  =  Shallum),  B.C.  608.— 
The  short  reign  of  this  prince — chosen  by  the  people 
on  hearing  of  Josiah's  death,  and  after  three  months 
deposed  by  Pharaoh-N echo-  gave  little  scope  for 
direct  prophetic  action.  The  fact  of  his  deposition, 
however,  shows  that  he  had  been  set  up  against 
Egypt,  and  therefore  as  representing  the  policy  of 
which  Jeremiah  had  been  the  advocate  ;  and  this 
may  account  for  the  tenderness  and  pity  with  which 
he  speaks  of  him  in  his  Egyptian  exile  (xxii.  11,12).  , 

(3.)  Under  Jehoiakimj  n.C.  007-597.— In  the 
weakness  and  disorder  which  characterised  this 
reign,  the  work  of  Jeremiah  became  daily  more  pro- 
minent. The  king  had  come  to  the  throne  as  the 
vassal  of  Egypt,  and  for  a  time  the  Egyptian  party 
was  dominant  in  Jerusalem.  It  numbered  among 
its  members  many  of  the  princes  of  Judah,  many 
priests  and  prophets,  the  Pashurs  and  the  Ilana- 
niahs.  Others,  however,  remained  faithful  to  the 
policy  of  Josiah,  and  held  that  the  only  way  of 
satetv  lay  in  accepting  the  supremacy  of  the  Chal- 
daeans.  Jeremiah  appeared  as  the  chief  represen- 
tative of  this  party.  He  had  learnt  to  discern  the 
signs    of  the   times;   the  evils  of  the    nation   were 

not  to  be  cured  by  any  half-measures  of  reform,  or 

by  foreign  alliances.  The  king  of  Babylon  was 
Cod's  servant  (xxv.  9,  xxvii.  6)  doing  His  work, 
and  was  for  a  time  to  prevail  'over  all  resistance. 


b  This  is  clearly  the  natural  inference  from  the 
words,  and  patristic  writers  take  the  fact  tor  granted. 
In  later  times  it  has  been  supposed  to  have  some 
bearing  on  the  question  of  the  celibacy  of  the 
clergy,    and    has    been    denied    by    Protestant,    and 


re-asserted  by  Romish  critics  accordingly  (cf.  Carp- 
zov,  /.  c). 

c  The  hypothesis  which  ascribes  these  lamentations 
to  Jeremiah  of  Libnah,  Josiah's  father-in-law,  is 
hardly  worth  refuting. 


968 


JEREMIAH 


Hard  as  it  was  for  one  who  sympathised  so  deeply 
with  all  the  sufferings  of  his  country,  this  was  the 
conviction  to  which  he  had  to  bring  himself.  He 
had  to  expose  himself  to  the  suspicion  of  treachery 
by  declaring  it.  Men  claiming  to  be  prophets  had 
their  "  word  of  Jehovah  "  to  set  against  his  (xiv. 
13,  xxiii.  7),  and  all  that  he  could  do  was  to 
commit  his  cause  to  God,  and  wait  for  the  result. 
Some  of  the  most  striking  scenes  in  this  conflict  are 
brought  before  us  with  great  vividness.  Soon  after 
the  accession  of  Jehoiakim,  on  one  of  the  solemn 
feast-days — when  the  courts  of  the  Temple  were 
filled  with  worshippers  from  all  the  cities  of  Judah — 
the  prophet  appeared,  to  utter  the  message  that  Je- 
rusalem should  become  a  curse,  that  the  Temple 
should, share  the  fate  of  the  tabernacle  of  Shiloh 
(xxvi.  G).  Then  it  was  that  the  great  struggle  of  his 
life  began  :  priests  and  prophets,  and  people  joined 
in  the  demand  for  his  death  (xxvi.  8).  The  princes 
of  Judah,  among  whom  were  still  many  of  the 
counsellors  of  Josiah,  or  their  sons,  endeavoured  to 
protect  him  (xxvi.  16).  His  friends  appealed  to 
the  precedent  of  Micah  the  Morasthite,  who  in  the 
reign  of  Hezekiah  had  uttered  a  like  prophecy  with 
impunity,  and  so  for  a  time  he  escaped.  The  fate 
of  one  who  was  stirred  up  to  prophesy  in  the  same 
strain  showed,  however,  what  he  might  expect  from 
the  weak  and  cruel  king.  If  Jeremiah  was  not  at 
once  hunted  to  death,  like  Urijah  (xxvi.  23),  it  was 
only  because  his  friend  Ahikam  was  powerful 
enough  to  protect  him.  The  fourth  year  of  Je- 
hoiakim was  yet  more  memorable.  The  battle  of 
Carchemish  overthrew  the  hopes  of  the  Egyptian 
party  (xlvi.  2),  and  the  armies  of  Nebuchadnezzar 
drove  those  who  had  no  defenced  cities  to  take 
refuge  in  Jerusalem  (xxxv.  11).  As  one  of  the 
consequences  of  this,  we  have  the  interesting  episode 
of  the  Rechabites.  The  mind  of  the  prophet, 
ascetic  in  his  habits,  shrinking  from  the  common 
forms  of  social  life,  was  naturally  enough  drawn 
towards  the  tribe  which  was  at  once  conspicuous  for 
its  abstinence  from  wine  and  its  traditional  hatred  of 
idolatry  (2  K.  x.  15).  The  occurrence  of  the  name 
of  Jeremiah  amoug  them,  and  their  ready  reception 
into  the  Temple,  may  point,  perhaps,  to  a  previous 
intimacy  with  him  and  his  brother  priests.  Now 
they  and  their  mode  of  life  had  a  new  significance 
for  him.  They,  with  their  reverence  for  the  pre- 
cepts of  the  founder  of  their  tribe,  were  as  a  living 
protest  against  the  disobedience  of  the  men  of 
Judah  to  a  higher  law  (xxxv.  18).  In  this  year 
too  came  another  solemn  message  to  the  king : 
prophecies  which  had  been  uttered,  here  and  there 
at  intervals,  were  now  to  be  gathered  together, 
written  in  a  book,  and  read  as  a  whole  in  the  hear- 
ing of  the  people.  Baruch,  already  known  as  the 
Prophet's  disciple,  acted  as  scribe ;  and  in  the  fol- 
lowing year,  when  a  solemn  fast-day  called  the 
whole  people  together  in  the  Temple  (xxxvi.  1-9), 
Jeremiah — hindered  himself,  we  know  not  how — 
sent  him  to  proclaim  them.  The  result  was  as  it  had 
been  before  :  the  princes  of  Judah  connived  at  the 
escape  of  the  Prophet  and  his  scribe  (xxxvi.  19). 
The  king  vented  his  impotent  rage  upon  the  scroll 
which  Jeremiah  had  written.  Jeremiah  and  Ba- 
ruch, in  their  retirement,  re-wrote  it  with  many 
added  prophecies;  among  them,  probably,  the  special 
prediction  that  the  king  should  die  by  the  sword, 
and  be  cast  out  unburied  and  dishonoured  (xxii. 
30).  In  ch.  xlv.,  which  belongs  to  this  period,  we 
have  a  glimpse  into  the  relations  which  existed 
betweeii    the    master    and    the   scholar,    and    into 


JEREMIAH 

what  at  that  time  writ  the  thoughts  of  each  of 
them.  Baruch,  younger  and  more  eager,  had  ex- 
pected a  change  for  the  better.  To  play  a  promi- 
nent part  in  the  impending  crisis,  to  be  the  hero  of 
a  national  revival,  to  gain  the  favour  of  the  con- 
queror whose  coming  he  announced — this,  or  some- 
thing like  this,  had  been  the  vision  that  had  come 
before  him,  and  when  this  passed  away  he  sank  into 
despair  at  the  seeming  fruitlessness  of  his  efforts. 
Jeremiah  had  passed  through  that  phase  of  trial 
and  could  sympathise  with  it,  and  knew  how  to 
meet  it.  To  the  mind  of  his  disciple,  as  once  to 
his  own,  the  future  was  revealed  in  all  its  drea- 
riness. He  was  not  to  seek  "great  things"  for 
himself  in  the  midst  of  his'  country's  ruin  :  his 
life,  and  that  only,  was  to  be  given  him  "for  a  prey." 
As  the  danger  chew  nearer,  there  was  given  to  the 
Prophet  a  clearer  insight  into  the  purposes  of  God 
for  His  people.  He  might  have  thought  before,  as 
others  did,  that  the  chastisement  would  be  but 
for  a  short  time,  that  repentance  would  lead  to 
strength,  and  that  the  yoke  of  the  Chaldeans  might 
soon  be  shaken  off:  now  he  learnt  that  it  would 
last  for  seventy  years  (xxv.  12),  till  he  and  all  that 
generation  had  passed  away.  Nor  was  it  on  Judah 
only  that  the  king  of  Babylon  was  to  execute  the 
judgments  of  Jehovah  :  all  nations  that  were 
within  the  prophet's  ken  were  to  drink  as  fully  as 
she  did  of  "the  wine-cup  of  His  fury"  (xxv. 
15-38).  In  the  absence  of  special  dates  for  other 
events  in  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim,  we  may  bring 
together  into  one  picture  some  of  the  most  striking 
features  of  this  period  of  Jeremiah's  life.  As  the 
danger  from  the  Chaldeans  became  more  threaten- 
ing, the  persecution  against  him  grew  hotter,  his 
own  thoughts  were  more  bitter  and  desponding 
(xviii.).  The  people  sought  his  life:  his  voice 
rose  up  in  the  prayer  that  God  would  deliver  and 
avenge  him.  Common  facts  became  significant  to 
him  of  new  and  wonderful  truths ;  the  work  of 
the  potter  aiming  at  the  production  of  a  perfect 
form,  rejecting  the  vessels  which  did  not  attain  to 
it,  became  a  parable  of  God's  dealings  with  Israel 
and  with  the  world  (xviii.  1-6  ;  comp.  Maurice, 
1'roph.  and  Kings,  I.  c).  That  thought  he  soon 
reproduced  in  act  as  well  as  word.  Standing  in  the 
valley  of  Ben-Hinnom,  he  broke  the  earthen  vessel 
he  carried  in  his  hands,  and  prophesied  to  the  people 
that  the  whole  city  should  be  defiled  with  the  dead, 
as  that  valley  had  been,  within  their  memory,  by 
Josiah  (xix.  10-13).  The  boldness  of  the  speech 
and  act  drew  upon  him  immediate  punishment. 
The  priest  Pashur  smote  and  put  him  "  in  the 
stocks"  (xx.  2) ;  and  then  there  came  upon  him,  as 
in  all  seasous  of  suffering,  the  sense  of  failure  and 
weakness.  The  work  of  God's  messengers  seemed 
to  him  too  terrible  to  be  borne:  he  would  fain 
have  withdrawn  from  it  (xx.  9).  He  used  for 
himself  the  cry  of  wailing  that  had  belonged  to  the 
extremest  agony  of  Job  (xx.  14-18).  The  years 
that  followed  brought  no  change  for  the  better. 
Famine  and  drought  were  added  to  the  miseries  of 
the  people  (xiv.  1),  but  false  prophets  still  deceived 
them  with  assurances  of  plenty;  and  Jeremiah  was 
looked  on  with  dislike,  as  "  a  prophet  of  evil,"  and 
"every  one  cursed  "  him  (xv.  10).  He  -was  set, 
however,  "  as  a  fenced  brazen  wall  "  (xv.  20),  and 
went  on  with  his  work,  reproving  king  and  nobles 
and  people;  as  for  other  sins,  so  also  especially  for 
their  desecration  of  the  Sabbath  (xvii.  19-27),  for 
their  blind  reverence  for  the  Temple,  and  yet 
blinder  trust  in  it,  even  while  they  were  worship- 


JEREMIAH 

ping  the  Queen  of  Heaven  in  the  very  streets  of 
Jerusalem  (vii.  14,  18).  Now  too,  as  before,  his 
work  extended  to  other  nations :  they  were  not  to 
exult  in  the  downfall  of  Judah,  but  to  share  it. 
All  were  to  be  swallowed  up  in  the  empire  of  the 
Chaldeans  (xlviii.-xlix.).  If  there  had  been  nothing 
beyond  this,  no  hope  for  Israel  or  this  world  but 
that  of  a  universal  monarchy  resting  on  brute 
strength,  the  prospect  would  have  been  altogether 
overwhelming;  but  through  this  darkness  there 
gleamed  the  dawning  of  a  glorious  hope.  When 
the  seventy  years  were  over,  there  was  to  be  a 
restoration  as  wonderful  as  that  from  Egypt  had 
been  (xxxiii.  7).  In  the  far  oft'  future  there  was 
the  vision  of  a  renewed  kingdom  ;  of  a  "  righteous 
branch"  of  the  house  of  David,  "  executing  judg- 
ment and  justice,"  of  Israel  and  Judah  dwelling 
safely,  once  more  united,  under  "  the  Lord  our 
Righteousness  "  (xxiii.  5,  6). 

It  is  doubtful  how  far  we  can  deal  with  the  strange 
narrative  of  ch.  xiii.  as  a  fact  in  Jeremiah's  life. 
Ewald  (Propheten  dcs  A.  B.,  in  loc.)  rejects  the 
reading  "  Euphrates  "  altogether  ;  Hitzig,  following 
Bochart,  conjectures  Ephratah.  Most  other  modern 
commentators  look  on  the  narrative  as  merely  sym- 
bolic. Assuming,  however  (with  Calmet  and 
Henderson,  and  the  consensus  of  patristic  expo- 
sitors), that  here,  as  in  xix.  1,  10,  xxvii.  2  ;  Is.  xx. 
2,  the  symbols,  however  strange  they  might  seem, 
were  acts  and  not  visions,  it  is  open  to  us  to  con- 
jecture that  in  this  visit  to  the  land  of  the  Chal- 
deans may  have  originated  his  acquaintance  with 
the  princes  and  commanders  who  afterwards  be- 
friended him.  The  special  commands  given  in  his 
favour  by  Nebuchadnezzar  (xxxix.  11)  seem  at  any 
rate  to  imply  some  previous  knowledge. 

(4.)  Under  Jehoiachin  (  =  Jeconiah),  B.C.  597. — 
The  danger,  which  Jeremiah  had  so  long  foretold,  at 
last  came  near.  First  Jehoiakim,  and  afterwards 
his  successor,  were  carried  into  exile,  and  with  them 
all  that  constituted  the  worth  and  strength  of  the 
nation, — princes,  warriors,  artisans  (2  K.  xxiv.). 
Among  them  too  were  some  of  the  false  prophets 
who  had  encouraged  the  people  with  the  hope  of  a 
speedy  deliverance,  and  could  not  yet  abandon  their 
blind  confidence.  Of  the  work  of  the  prophet  in 
this  short  reign  we  have  but  the  fragmentary 
record  of  xxii.  24-30.  We  may  infer,  however, 
from  the  language  of  his  later  prophecies,  that 
he  looked  with  sympathy  and  sorrow  on  the  fate  of 
the  exiles  in  Babylon  ;  and  that  the  fulfilment  of  all 
that  he  had  been  told  to  utter  made  him  stronger 
than  ever  m  his  resistance  to  all  schemes  of  inde- 
pendence and  revolt. 

(5.)  Under  Zedekiah,  B.C.  597-586. —  In  this 
prince  (probably,  as  having  been  appointed  by  Nebu- 
chadnezzar), we  do  not  find  the  same  obstinate  re- 
sistance to  the  prophet's  counsels  as  in  Jehoiakim. 
He  respects  him,  fears  him,  seeks  his  counsel  ;  but 
he  is  a  mere  shadow  of  a  king,  powerless  even 
against  his  own  counsellors,  and  in  his  reign,  ac- 
cordingly, the  sufferings  of  Jeremiah  were  sharper 
than  they  had  been  before.  The  struggle  with  the 
false  prophets  went  on :  the  more  desperate  the 
condition  of  their  country,  the  more  daring  were 
their  predictions  of  immediate  deliverance.  Be- 
tween such  men,  living  in  the  present,  and  the  true 
prophet,  walking  by  faith  in  the  unseen  future  of  a 
righteous  kingdom  (xxiii.  5,  6),  there  could  not 
but  be  an  internecine  enmity.  He  saw  too  plainly 
that  nothing  but  the  most  worthless  remnant  of 
the  nation  had  been   left  in  Judah  fxxiv.  f>-,- 


JEREMIAH 


969 


denounced  the  falsehood  of  those  who  came  with 
lying  messages  of  peace.  His  counsel  to  the  exiles 
(conveyed  in  a  letter  which,  of  all  portions  of  the 
0.  T.,  comes  nearest  in  form  and  character  to  the 
Epistles  of  the  N.  T.)  was  that  they  should  submit 
to  their  lot,  prepare  for  a  long  captivity,  and  wait 
quietly  for  the  ultimate  restoration.  In  this  hope 
he  found  comfort  for  himself  which  made  his  sleep 
"sweet"  unto  him,  even  in  the  midst  of  all  his 
weariness  and  strife  (xxxi.  26).  Even  at  Babylon, 
however,  there  were  false  prophets  opposing  him, 
speaking  of  him  as  a  "  madman  "  (xxix.  26),  urging 
the  priests  of  Jerusalem  to  more  active  persecution. 
The  trial  soon  followed.  The  king  at  first  seemed 
willing  to  be  guided  by  him,  and  sent  to  ask  for  his 
intercession  (xxxvii.  3),  but  the  apparent  revival 
of  the  power  of  Egypt  under  Apries  (Pharaoh- 
Hophra)  created  false  hopes,  and  drew  him  and 
the  princes  of  the  neighbouring  nations  into  projects 
of  revolt.  The  clearness  with  which  Jeremiah  had 
foretold  the  ultimate  overthrow  of  Babylon,  in  a 
letter  sent  to  the  exiles  in  that  city  by  his  disciple, 
Baruch's  brother  Seraiah  (assuming  the  genuineness 
of  1.  and  li.),  made  him  all  the  more  certain  that 
the  time  of  that  overthrow  had  not  yet  arrived, 
and  that  it  was  not  to  come  from  the  hand  of 
Egypt.  He  appears  in  the  streets  of  the  city  with 
bonds  and  yokes  upon  his  neck  (xxvii.  2),  an- 
nouncing that  they  were  meant  for  Judah  and  its 
allies.  The  false  prophet  Hananiah — who  broke 
the  offensive  symbol  (xxviii.  10),  and  predicted  the 
destruction  of  the  Chaldaeans  within  two  years 
(xxviii.  3) — learnt  that  "  a  yoke  of  iron  "  was  upon 
the  neck  of  all  the  nations,  and  died  himself  while 
it  was  still  pressing  heavily  on  Judah  (xxviii. 
16,  17).  The  approach  of  an  Egyptian  army, 
however,  and  the  consequent  departure  of  the 
Chaldaeans,  made  the  position  of  Jeremiah  full  of 
danger ;  and  he  sought  to  effect  his  escape  from  a 
city  in  which,  it  seemed,  he  could  no  longer  do 
good,  and  to  take  refuge  in  his  own  town  of  Anathoth 
or  its  neighbourhood  (xxxvii.  12).  The  discovery 
of  this  plan  led,  not  unnaturally  perhaps,  to  the 
charge  of  desertion :  it  was  thought  that  he  too 
was  "falling  away  to  the  Chaldaeans,"  as  others 
were  doing  (xxxviii.  19),  and,  in  spite  of  his  denial, 
he  was  thrown  into  a  dungeon  (xxxvii.  16).  The 
interposition  of  the  king,  who  still  respected  and 
consulted  him,  led  to  some  mitigation  of  the  rigour 
of  his  confinement  (xxxvii.  21 1 ;  but,  as  this  did  not 
hinder  him  from  speaking  to  the  people,  the  princes 
of  Judah — bent  on  an  alliance  with  Egypt,  and 
calculating  on  the  king's  being  unable  to  resist 
them  (xxxviii.  5) — threw  him  into  the  prison-pit,  to 
die  there.  From  this  horrible  fete  he  was  again 
delivered,  by  the  friendship  of  the  Ethiopian  Eu- 
nuch, Ebed-Melech,  and  the  king's  regard  for  him  ; 
and  was  restored  to  the  milder  custody  in  which  he 
had  been  kept  previously,  where  we  find  (xxxii. 
16)  he  hail  the  companionship  ofBarach.  In  the 
impotence  of  his  perplexity,  Zedekiah  once  again 
secretly  consulted  him  (xxxviii.  14),  but  only  to 
hear  the  certainty  df  failure,  if  he  continued  to 
resist  the  authority  of  the  Chaldaeans.  The  same 
counsel   was  repeated  more  openly  when  the  king 

sent   I'ashur   (not   th e  already  mentioned)  and 

Zephaniah — before  friendly,  it  appears,  to  Jeremiah, 
or  at  least  neutral  (xxix.  2'.'  —to  ask  for  his  advice. 
Fruitless  as  it  was.  we  may  yet  trace,  in  the  softened 
language  of  xxxiv.  5.  one  consequence  of  the  king's 
:  though  exile  was  inevitable,  he  was  yet 
to  "die  in  peace."     The  return  of  the  Chaldaean 

3  i: 


970 


JEREMIAH 


army  filled  both  king  ami  people  with  dismay 
(xxxii.  1);  and  the  risk  now  was  that  they  would 
pass  from  their  presumptuous  confidence  to  the 
opposite  extreme  and  sink  down  in  despair,  with  no 
faith  in  God  and  no  hope  for  the  future.  The 
prophet  was  taught  how  to  meet  that  danger  also. 
Jn  his  prison,  while  the  Chaldaeans  were  ravaging 
the  country,  he  bought,  with  all  requisite  for- 
malities, the  field  at  Anathoth,  which  his  kinsman 
Hanameel  wished  to  get  rid  of  (xxxii.  6-9).  His 
faith  in  the  promises  of  God  did  not  fail  him. 
With  a  confidence  in  his  country's  future,  which 
has  been  compared  (Nagelsbach,  I.  c.)  to  that  of 
the  Roman  who  bought  at  its  full  value  the  very 
ground  on  which  the  forces  of  Hannibal  were 
encamped  (Liv.  xxxvi.  11),  he  believed  not  only 
that  "  houses  and  fields  and  vineyards  should  again 
be  possessed  in  the  land  "  (xxxii.  15),  but  that  the 
voice  of  gladness  should  still  be  heard  there  (xxxiii. 
11),  that,  under  "  the  Lord  our  Righteousness,"  the 
house  of  David  and  the  priests  the  Levites  should 
never  be  without  representatives  (xxxiii.  15-18). 
At  last  the  blow  came.  The  solemn  renewal  of 
the  national  covenant  (xxxiv.  19),  the  offer  of 
freedom  to  all  who  had  been  brought  into  slavery, 
were  of  no  avail.  The  selfishness  of  the  nobles 
was  stronger  even  than  their  fears,  and  the  prophet, 
who  had  before  rebuked  them  for  their  desecration 
of  the  sabbath,  now  had  to  protest  against  their  dis- 
regard of  the  sabbatic  year  (xxxiv.  14).  The  city 
was  taken,  the  temple  burnt.  The  king  and  his 
princes  shared  the  fate  of  Jehoiachin.  The  prophet 
gave  utterance  to  his  sorrow  in  the  Lamentations. 
(6.)  After  the  capture  of  Jerusalem,  B.C.  586-(?). 
The  Chaldaean  party  in  Judah  had  now  the  pros- 
pect of  better  things.  Nebuchadnezzar  could  not 
tail  to  reward  those  who,  in  the  midst  of  hard- 
ships of  all  kinds,  had  served  him  so  faithfully. 
We  find  accordingly  a  special  charge  given  to  Nebu- 
zaradan  (xxxix.  11)  to  protect  the  person  of  Jere- 
miah ;  and,  after  being  carried  as  far  as  Ramah  with 
the  crowd  of  captives  (xl.  1),  he  was  set  free,  and  Ge- 
daliah,  the  son  of  his  steadfast  friend  Ahikam,  made 
governor  over  the  cities  of  Judah.  The  feeling  of 
the  Chaldaeans  towards  him  was  shown  yet  more 
strongly  in  the  offer  made  him  by  Nebuzaradan 
(xl.  4,  5).  It  was  left  to  him  to  decide  whether 
he  would  go  to  Babylon,  with  the  prospect  of  living 
there  under  the  patronage  of  the  king,  or  remain  in 
his  own  land  with  Gedaliah  and  the  remnant  over 
whom  he  ruled.  Whatever  may  have  been  his 
motive — sympathy  with  the  suff'eringsof  the  people, 
attachment  to  his  native  land,  or  the  desire  to  help 
his  friend — the  prophet  chose  the  latter,  and  the 
Chaldaean  commander  "  gave  him  a  reward,"  and 
set  him  free.  For  a  short  time  there  was  an  in- 
terval of  peace  (xl.  9-12),  soon  broken,  however, 
by  the  murder  of  Gedaliah  by  Ishmael  and  his  asso- 
ciates. We  are  left  to  conjecture  in  what  way  the  pro- 
phet escaped  from  a  massacre  which  was  apparently 
intended  to  include  all  the  adherents  of  Gedaliah. 
The  fulness  with  which  the  history  of  the  massacre 
is  narrated  in  chap,  xli.,  makes  it  however  probable 
that  he  was  among  the  prisoners  whom  Ishmael  was 
carrying  oft'  to  the  Ammonites,  and  who  were  re- 
leased by  the  arrival  of  Johanan.  One  of  Jeremiah's 
friends  was  thus  cut  oft',  but  Baruch  still  remained 
with  him  ;  and  the  people,  under  Johanan,  who  had 
taken  the  command  on  the  death  of  Gedaliah, 
tinned  to  him  for  counsel.  "  The  governor  ap- 
pointed by  the  Chaldaeans  had  been  assassinated. 
Would   not    their    vengeance    fall    on    the   whole 


JEREMIAH 

people  ?  Was  there  any  safety  but  in  escaping  to 
Egypt  while  they  could?"  They  came  accordingly 
to  Jeremiah  with  a  foregone  conclusion.  With  the 
vision  of  peace  and  plenty  in  that  land  of  fleshpots 
(xlii.  14),  his  warnings  aud  assurances  were  in 
vain  and  did  but  draw  on  him  and  Baruch  the  old 
charge  of  treachery  (xliii.  3).  The  people  fol- 
lowed their  own  counsel,  and — lest  the  two  whom 
they  suspected  should  betray  or  counteract  it — took 
them  also  by  force  to  Egypt.  There,  in  the  city  of 
Tahpanhes,  we  have  the  last  clear  glimpses  of  the 
prophet's  life.  His  words  are  sharper  and  stronger 
than  ever.  He  does  not  shrink,  even  there,  from 
speaking  of  the  Chaldaean  king  once  more  as  the 
"  servant  of  Jehovah "  (xliii.  10).  He  declares 
that  they  should  see  the  throne  of  the  conqueror 
set  up  in  the  very  place  which  they  had  chosen  as 
the  securest  refuge.  He  utters  a  final  protest 
(xliv.)  against  the  idolatries  of.  which  they  aud 
their  fathers  had  been  guilty,  and  which  they  were 
even  then  renewing.  After  this  all  is  uncertain. 
If  we  could  assume  that  lii.  31  was  written  by  Jere- 
miah himself,  it  would  show  that  he  reached  an 
extreme  old  age,  but  this  is  so  doubtful  that  we  are 
left  to  other  sources.  On  the  one  hand  there  is  the 
Christian  tradition,  resting  doubtless  on  some  earlier 
belief  (  Tertull.  adv.  Gnost.  c.  8;  Pseudo-Epiphan. 
Opp.  iii.  239 ;  Hieron.  adv.  Jovin.  ii.  37)  that  the 
long  tragedy  of  his  life  ended  in  actual  martyrdom, 
and  that  the  Jews  at  Tahpanhes,  irritated  by  his 
rebukes,  at  last  stoned  him  to  death.  Most  com- 
mentators on  the  N.  T.  find  an  allusion  to  this  in 
Heb.  xi.  37.  An  Alexandrian  tradition  reported 
that  his  bones  had  been  brought  to  that  city  by 
Alexander  the  Great  (Chron.  Pasch.  p.  156,  ed. 
Dindorf,  quoted  by  Carpzov  and  Nagelsbach).  In 
the  beginning  of  the  last  century  travellers  were  told, 
though  no  one  knew  the  precise  spot,  that  he  had 
been  buried  at  Ghizeh  (Lucas,  Travels  in  the  Levant, 
p.  28).  On  the  other  side  there  is  the  Jewish 
statement  that  on  the  conquest  of  Egypt  by  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, he,  with  Baruch,  made  his  escape  to 
Babylon  (Seder  Olam  Rabba,  c.  26  ;  Genebrard, 
Chronol.  Heb.  1608)  or  Judaea  (R.  Solomon 
Jarchi,  on  Jer.  xliv.  14),  and  died  in  peace. 
Josephus  is  altogether  silent  as  to  his  fate,  but 
states  generally  that  the  Jews  who  took  refuge  in 
Egypt  were  finally  carried  to  Babylon  as  captives 
(Ant.x.  9).  It  is  not  impossible,  however,  that 
both  the  Jewish  tradition  and  the  silence  of  Josephus 
originated  in  the  desire  to  gloss  over  a  great  crime, 
and  that  the  offer  of  Nebuzaradan  (xl.  4)  suggested 
the  conjecture  that  afterwards  grew  into  an  asser- 
tion. As  it  is,  the  darkness  and  doubt  that  brood 
over  the  last  days  of  the  prophet's  life  are  more 
significant  than  either  of  the  issues  which  pre- 
sented themselves  to  men's  imaginations  as  the 
winding-up  of  his  career.  He  did  not  need  a  death 
by  violence  to  make  him  a  true  martyr.  To  die, 
with  none  to  record  the  time  or  manner  of  his 
death,  was  the  right  end  for  one  who  had  spoken 
all  along,  not  to  win  the  praise  of  men,  but 
because  the  word  of  the  Lord  was  in  him  as  a 
"  burning  fire"  (xx.  9).  May  we  not  even  con- 
jecture that  this  silence  was  due  to  the  prophet 
himself?  If  we  believe  (cf.  inf.)  that  Baruch, 
who  was  with  Jeremiah  in  Egypt,  survived  him, 
and  had  any  share  in  collecting  and  editing  his 
prophecies,  it  is  hard  to  account  for  the  omission  of 
a  fact  of  so  much  interest,  except  on  the  hypothesis 
that  his  lips  were  sealed  by  the  injunctions  of  the 
master  who  thus  taught  him,  by  example  as  well  as 


JEREMIAH 

by  precept,  that  he  was  not  to  seek  "  great  tilings  " 
for  himself. 

Other   traditions    connected  with   the  name   of 
Jeremiah,  though  they  throw  no  light  on  his  his- 
tory, are  interesting,  as   showing   the   impression 
left  by  his  work  and  life  on  the  minds  of  later 
generations.     As  the  captivity  dragged  on,  the  pro- 
phecy of  the  Seventy  Years,  which    had  at   first 
been  so  full  of  terror,  came  to  be  a  ground  of  hope 
(Dan.  is.  2;    2  Chr.  xxxvi.  21;    Ezr.  i.   1).     On 
the  return  from  Babylon,  his  prophecies  were  col- 
lected and  received  into  the  canon,  as  those  of  the 
second   of  the  Great  Prophets    of  Israel.     In  the 
arrangement  followed  by  the  Babylonian  Talmudic 
writers  (Baba  Bathr.  §  14  b  ;  quoted  by  Lightfoot 
on  Matt,  xxvii.  9),  and  perpetuated  among  some  of 
the    mediaeval  Jewish   transcribers    (Wolff,  Bibl. 
Hebr.  ii.   148),  he,  and  not  Isaiah,   occupies  the 
first  place.     The  Jewish  saying  that  "  the  spirit  of 
Jeremiah  dwelt  afterwards  in  Zechariah  "  (Grotius 
in  Matt,  xxvii.  9)  indicates  how  greatly  the  mind  of 
the  one  was  believed  to  have  been  influenced  by  the 
teaching  of  the  other.     The  fulfilment  of  his  pre- 
dictions of  a    restored    nationality   led    men    to 
think  of  him,  not  as  a  prophet  of  evil  only,  but  as 
watching   over   his    countrymen,    interceding    for 
them.     More  than  any  other   of  the  prophets,  he 
occupies  the  position  of  the  patron-saint  of  Judaea. 
He  had  concealed  the  tabernacle  and  the  ark,  the 
great  treasures  of  the  Temple,  in  one  of  the  caves  of 
Sinai,  there   to   remain   unknown  till  the  day  of 
restoration  (2  Mace.  ii.  1-8).     He  appeal's  "a  man 
with  grey  hairs  and  exceeding  glorious,"  "  the  lover 
of  the  brethren,   who  prayed  much  for  the  holy 
city,"  in  the  vision  of  Judas  Maccabaeus;  and  from 
him  the  hero  receives  his  golden  sword,  as  a  gift  of 
God  (2  Mace.  xv.  13-16).     His  whole  vocation  as 
a  prophet  is  distinctly  recognised  (Ecclus.  xlix.  7). 
The   authority   of  his  name  is  claimed  for   long 
didactic  declamations  against  the  idolatry  of  Babylon 
(Bar.  vi.).     At  a  later  period  it  was  attached  as 
that  of  the  representative   prophet   to    quotations 
from  other  books  in  the  same  volume  (Lightfoot, 
/.  c.)   or    to   prophecies,   apocryphal,    or    genuine, 
whose  real  author  was  forgotten  (Hieion.  in  Matt. 
xxvii.  9  ;   Fabricius,  Cod.  Pseudepig.  V.  T.  i.  1 103  ; 
Grot,  in  Eph.  .v.  14).     Even  in  the   time  of  our 
Lords  ministry  there  prevailed  the  belief  (resting, 
in  part  perhaps,  in  this  case  as  in  that  of  Elijah,  on 
the  mystery  which  shrouded  the  time  and  manner 
of   his  death)   that   his  work   was    not    yet    over. 
Some   said  of  Jesus    that    he   was   "  Jeremias,  or 
one  of  the  prophets  "  (Matt.  xvi.  14).     According 
to   many   commentators   he   was   "the  prophet" 
whom  all  the   people  were  expecting  (John  i.  21). 
The  belief  that  he  was  the  fulfilment   of   Deut. 
xviii.  18  has  been  held  by  later  Jewish  interpreters 
(Abarbanel  in  Carpzov,  I.  c).     The  traditions  con- 
nected with  him  lingered  on  even  in  the- Christian 
church,   ami  appeared   in   the  notion   that  he  hail 
neve,'  really  died,  but  would  return  one  day  from 
Paradise  as   one  of  the  "two  witnesses"  of  the 
Apocalypse  (Victorinus,  Cotnm.  in  Apoc.  xi.  13). 
Egyptian    legends  assumed    yet   wilder  and   more 
fantastic  forms.     He  it  was  who  foretold  to  the 
priests  of  Egypt  that  their  idols  should  one  day 
fall   to   the   ground   in  the  presence   of  the   virgin 
born  (Epiphan.  de  vit.  Propli.  Opp.  ii.  p.  239). 
Playing  the  part  of  a  St.  Patrick,  he  had  delivered 
one  district  on  the  shores  of  the  Nile  from  croco- 
diles and  asps,  and  even  in  the  4th  century  of  the 
Christian  Ira  the  dust  of  that  region  was  Looked  on 


JEREMIAH 


971 


as  a  specific  against  their  bites  (ibid.).  According 
to  another  tradition,  he  had  returned  from  Egypt  to 
Jerusalem,  and  lived  there  for  300  years  (D'Herbelot, 
Biblioth.  Orient,  p.  499).  The  O.  T.  narrative  of 
his  sufferings  was  dressed  out  with  the  incidents  of 
a  Christian  martyrdom  '(Eupolem.  Polyhist.  in  . 
Euseb.  Praep.  Evang.  ix.  39). 

II.  Character  and  style. — It  will  have  been  seen 
from  this  narrative  that  there  fell  to  the  lot  of 
Jeremiah  sharper  suffering  than  any  previous  pro- 
phet had  experienced.  It  was  not  merely  that  the 
misery  which  others  had  seen  afar  off  was  actually 
pressing  on  him  and  on  his  country,  nor  that  he 
had  to  endure  a  life  of  persecution,  while  they  hail 
intervals  of  repose,  in  which  they  were  honoured 
and  their  counsel  sought.  In  addition  to  all  differ- 
ences of  outward  circumstances,  there  was  that  of 
individual  character,  influenced  by  them,  reacting 
ou  them.  In  every  page  of  his  prophecies  we 
recognise  the  temperament  which,  while  it  does  not 
lead  the  man  who  has  it  to  shrink  from  doing  God's 
work,  however  painful,  makes  the  pain  of  doing  it 
infinitely  more  acute,  and  gives  to  the  whole  cha- 
racter the  impress  of  a  deeper  and  more  lasting 
melancholy.  He  is  pre-eminently  "  the  man  that 
hath  seen  afflictions"  (Lam.  iii.  1).  There  is  no 
sorrow  like  unto  his  sorrow  (Lam.  i.  12).  He  wit- 
nesses the  departure,  one  by  one,  of  all  his  hopes  of 
national  reformation  and  deliverance.  He  has  to 
appear,  Cassandra-like,  as  a  prophet  of  evil,  dashing 
to  the  ground  the  false  hopes  with  which  the  people 
are  buoying  themselves  up.  Other  prophets,  Samuel, 
Elisha,  Isaiah,  had  been  sent  to  rouse  the  people 
to  resistance.  He  (like  Phocion  in  the  parallel 
crisis  of  Athenian  history)  has  been  brought  to  the 
conclusion,  bitter  as  it  is,  that  the  only  safety  for 
his  countrymen  lies  in  their  accepting  that  against 
which  they  are  contending  as  the  worst  of  evils ; 
and  this  brings  on  him  the  charge  of  treachery  and 
desertion.  If  it  were  not  for  his  trust  in  the  God 
of  Israel,  for  his  hope  of  a  better  future  to  be 
brought  out  of  all  this  chaos  and  darkness,  his 
heart  would  fail  within  him.  But  that  vision  is 
clear  and  bright,  and  it  gives  to  him,  almost  as 
fully  as  to  Isaiah,  the  character  of  a  prophet  of  the 
Gospel.  He  is  not  merely  an  Israelite  looking  for- 
ward to  a  national  restoration.  In  the  midst  of  all 
the  woes  which  he  utters  against  neighbouring  na- 
tions he  has  hopes  and  promises  for  them  also 
(xlviii.  47,  xlix.  (j,  39).  In  that  stormy  sunset  of 
prophecy  he  beholds,  in  spirit,  the  dawn  of  a  brighter 
and  eternal  day.  He  sees  that,  if  there  is  any  hope 
of  salvation  for  his  people,  it  cannot  be  by  a  return 
to  the  old  system  and  the  old  ordinances,  divine 
though  they  once  had  been  (xxxi.  31).  There  must 
be  a  New  Covenant.  That  word,  destined  to  be  so 
full  of  power  for  all  after-ages,  appears  first  in  his 
prophecies.  The  relations  between  the  people  and 
the  Lord  of  Israel, between  mankind  and  Cod,  must 
rest,  not  on  an  outward  law,  with  its  requirements 
of  obedience,  bul  on  that  of  an  inward  fellowship 
with  Him,  and  the  consciousness  of  entile  depend- 
ence. For  all  this  he  saw  clearly  there  must  he  a 
personal  centre.  The  kingdom  of  God  could  not  be 
manifested  hut  through  a  perfectly  righteous  man, 
ruling  over  men  on  earth.  The  prophet's  hopes  are 
not  merely  vague  visions  of  a  better  future.  They 
gather  round  the  person  of  a  Christ,  and  are  essen- 
tially Messianic. 

In  much  of  all  this— in  their  personal  character, 
in  their  sufferings,  in  the  view  they  took  of  the 
great  questions  of  their  time — there  is  a  resemblance, 

3  R  2 


972 


JEKEMIAH 


at  once  significant  and  interesting,  between  the 
prophet  of  Anathoth  and  the  poet  of  the  Divina 
Commedia.  What  Egypt  and  Babylon  were  to  the 
kingdom  of  Judah,  France  and  the  Empire  were  to 
the  Florentine  republic.  In  each  case  the  struggle 
between  the  two  great  powers  reproduced  itself  in 
the  bitterness  of  contending  factions.  Dante,  like 
Jeremiah,  saw  himself  surrounded  by  evils  against 
which  he  could  only  bear  an  unavailing  protest. 
The  worst  agents  in  producing  those  evils  were  the 
authorised  teachers  of  his  religion.  His  hopes  of 
better  things  connected  themselves  with  the  su- 
premacy of  a  power  which  the  majority  of  his 
countrymen  looked  on  with  repugnance.  For  him 
also  there  was  the  long  weariness  of  exile,  brightened 
at  times  by  the  sympathy  of  faithful  friends.  In 
him,  as  in  the  prophet,  we  find — united,  it  is  true, 
with  greater  strength  and  sternness — that  intense 
susceptibility  to  the  sense  of  wrong  which  shows 
itself  sometimes  in  passionate  complaint,  sometimes 
in  bitter  words  of  invective  and  reproach.  In  both 
we  find  the  habit  of  mind  which  selects  an  image, 
not  for  its  elegance  or  sublimity,  but  for  what  it 
means ;  not  shrinking  even  from  what  seems  gro- 
tesque and  trivial,  sometimes  veiling  its  meaning  in 
allusions  more  or  less  dark  and  enigmatic.  Both 
are  sustained  through  all  their  sufferings  by  their 
strong  faith  in  the  Unseen,  by  their  belief  in  an 
eternal  righteousness  which  shall  one  day  manifest 
itself  and  be  victorious."1 

A  yet  higher  parallel,  however,  presents  itself. 
In  a  deeper  sense  than  that  of  the  patristic  divines, 
the  life  of  the  prophet  was  a  type  of  that  of  Christ. 
In  both  there  is  the  same  early  manifestation  of  the 
consciousness  of  a  Divine  mission  (Luke  ii.  49).  The 
persecution  which  drove  the  prophet  from  Anathoth 
has  its  counterpart  in  that  of  the  men  of  Nazareth 
(Luke  iv.  29).  His  protests  against  the  priests  and 
prophets  are  the  forerunners  of  the  woes  against 
the  scribes  and  pharisees  (Matt,  xxiii.).  His  la- 
mentations over  the  coming  miseries  of  his  country 
answer  to  the  tears  that  were  shed  over  the  Holy 
City  by  the  Son  of  Man.  His  sufferings  come 
nearest,  of  those  of  the  whole  army  of  martyrs,  to 
those  of  the  Teacher  against  whom  princes  and 
priests  and  elders  and  people  were  gathered  to- 
gether. He  saw  more  clearly  than  others  that 
New  Covenant,  with  all  its  gifts  of  spiritual  life  and 
power,  which  was  proclaimed  and  ratified  in  the 
death  upon  the  cross.  On  the  assumption  that 
Jeremiah,  not  David,  was  the  author  of  the  22nd 
Psalm  (Hitzig,  in  foe,  followed  in  this  instance  by 
Niigelsbach,  I.  c),  the  words  uttered  in  the  agony 
of  the  crucifixion  would  point  to  a  still  deeper  and 
more  pervading  analogy. 

The  character  of  the  man  impressed  itself  with 
more  or  less  force  upon  the  language  of  the  writer. 
Criticisms  on  the  "  style  "  of  a  prophet  are,  indeed, 
for  the  most  part,  whether  they  take  the  form  of 
praise  or  blame,  wanting  both  in  reverence  and  dis- 
cernment. We  do  not  gain  much  by  knowing  that 
to  one  writer  he  appears  at  once  "  sermone  quidem 
.  .  .  quibusdam  aliis  prophetis  rusticior"  (Hieron. 
Praef.  in  Jerem.),  and  yet  "  majestate  sensuum 
profundissimus  "  (Prooem.  in  c.  L.)  ;  that  another 
compares  him  to  Simonides  ( Lowth,  Proel.  xxi.)  : 
a  third  to  Cicero  (Seb.  Schmidt)  ;  that  bolder  critics 
find  in  him  a  great  want  of  originality  (Knobel, 


JEKEMIAH 

Prophet  ismus)  ;  "  symbolical  images  of  an  inferior 
order,  and  symbolical  actions  unskilfully  contrived" 
(Davidson,  Introd.  to  0.  T.  c.  xix.).    Leaving  these 
judgments,  however,  and  asking  in  what  way  the 
outward  form  of  his  writings  answers  to  his  life, 
we  find  some  striking  characteristics  that  help  us 
to  understand  both.     As  might  be  expected  in  one 
who  lived  in  the  last  days  of  the  kingdom,  and  had 
therefore  the  works  of  the  earlier  prophets  to  look 
back  upon,  we  find  in  him  reminiscences  and  repro- 
ductions of  what  they  had  written,  which  indicate 
the  way  in  which  his  own  spirit  had  been  educated 
(comp.   Is.  xl.  19,  20,  with  x.  3-5;    Ps.  exxxv.  7 
with  x.  13 ;  Ps.  lxxix.  6  with  x.   23  ;  Is.  xlii.  16 
with  xxxi.   9;    Is.  iv.    2,   xi.   1,  with  xxxiii.    15; 
Is.  xv.  with  xlviii. ;  Is.  xiii.  and  xlvii.  with  1.,  Ii.: 
see  also  Kuper,  Jerem.  librorum  sac.  interpres  et 
vindex).     Traces  of  the   influence   of  the  newly- 
discovered  Book  of  the  Law,  and  in  particular  of 
Deuteronomy,  appear  repeatedly  in  his,  as  in  other 
writings  of  the  same  period  (Deut.  xxvii.  26,  iv. 
20,   vfi.    12,  with  xi.   3-5  ;    Deut.  xv.    12    with 
xxxiv.   14;    Ex.  xx.  6  with  xxxii.   18;    Ex.  vi.  6 
with    xxxii.    21).       It   will    be    noticed    that    the 
parallelisms  in  these  and  other  instances  are  far  the 
most  part,  not  those  that  rise  out  of  direct  quota- 
tion, but  such  as  are  natural  in  one  whose  language 
and  modes  of  thought  have  been  tashioned  by  the 
constant  study  of  books  which  came  before  him  with 
a  divine  authority.     Along  with  this,  there  is  the 
tendency,   natural  to  one  who  speaks   out  of  the 
fulness  of  his  heart,  to  reproduce  himself — to  repeat 
in  nearly  the  same  words  the  great  truths  on  which 
his  own  heart  rested,  and  to  which  he  was  seeking 
to  lead  others  (comp.  marginal  references  passim, 
and  list  in  Keil,  Einleit.  §74).     Throughout,  too, 
there  are  the  tokens  of  his  individual  temperament: 
a  greater  prominence  of  the  subjective,  elegiac  ele- 
ment than  in  other  prophets,  a  less  sustained  energy, 
a  less  orderly  and  completed  rhythm  (De  Wette, 
Einleit.  §217;    Ewald,  Propheten,  ii.  1-11).     A 
careful   examination    of  the    several    parts   of  his 
prophecy  has  led  to  the  conviction  that  we  may 
trace  an  increase  of  these  characteristics  correspond- 
ing to  the  accumulating  trials  of  his  life  (Ewald, 
I.  c).      The  earlier  writings    are    calmer,  loftier, 
more  uniform  in  tone :  the  later  show  marks  of  age 
and  weariness  and  sorrow,  and  are  more  strongly 
imbued  with  the  language  of  individual  suffering. 
Living  at  a  time  when   the    purity  of  the  older 
Hebrew  was  giving  way  under  continual  contact 
with    other    kindred    dialects,    his   language    came 
under  the  influence  which  was  acting  on  all  the 
writers  of  his   time,   abounds   in  Aramaic  forms, 
loses  sight  of  the  finer  grammatical  distinctions  of 
the  earlier  Hebrew,  includes  many  words  not  to  be 
found  in  its  vocabulary  (Eichhorn,  Einleit.  in  das 
A.  T.  iii.  121).     It  is  in   part  distinctive  of  the 
man  as  well  as  of  the   time,  that   single    words 
should  have  appeared  full  of  a  strange  significance 
(i.  11),  that  whole  predictions   should   have  been 
embodied  in  names  coined  for  the  purpose  (xix.  G. 
xx.  3),  and  that  the  real  analogies  which  presented 
themselves  should  have  been  drawn-  not  from  the 
region  of  the  great  and  terrible,  but  from  the  most 
homely  and  familiar   incidents    (xiii.   1-11,   xviii. 
1-10).     Still  more  startling  is  his  use  of  a  kind 
of  cipher  (the  Atbash  ;  e  comp.  Hitzig  and  Ewald 


d  The  fact  that  Jer.  v.  6  suggested  the  imagery  of 
the  opening- Canto  of  the  Inferno  is  not  without  signi- 
ficance, as  bearing  on  this  parallelism. 


e  The  system  of  secret  writing  which  hears  this 
name  forms  part  of  the  Kabbala  of  thef  later  Jews. 
The  plan  adopted  is  that  of  using  the  letters  of  the 


JEREMIAH 

on  xxv.  26),  concealing;,  except  from  the  initiated, 
the  meaning  of  his  predictions. 

To  associate  the  name  of  Jeremiah  with  any 
other  portion  of  the  0.  T.  is  to  pass  from  the  field 
of  history  into  that  of  conjecture  ;  but  the  fact  that 
Hitzig  (<  ijuim.  iiber  die  Psalm."),  followed  in  part 
by  Kodiger  (Ersch  und  Griiber,  Encycl.  art.  Jerem.), 
assigns  not  less  than  thirty  psalms  (sc.  v.,  vi.,  xiv., 
xxii.-xli.,  lii.-lv.,  lxix.-lxxi.)  tu  his  authorship  is, 
at  least,  so  far  instructive  that  it  indicates  what 
were  the  hymns,  belonging  to  that  or  to  an  earlier 
period,  with  which  his  own  spirit  had  most  affinity, 
and  to  which  he  and  other  like  sufferers  might 
have  turned  as  the  fit  expression  of  their  feelings. 

III.  Arrangement. — The  absence  of  any  chrono- 
logical order  in  the  present  structure  of  the  col- 
lection of  Jeremiah's  prophecies  is  obvious  at  the 
first  glance  ;  and  this  has  led  some  writers  (Blayney, 
Pref.  to  Jeremiah)  to  the  belief  that  as  the  book 
now  stands  there  is  nothing  but  the  wildest  con- 
fusion—" a  preposterous  jumbling  together "  of 
prophecies  of  different  dates.  Attempts  to  recon- 
struct the  book  on  a  chronological  basis  have  been 
made  by  almost  all  commentators  on  it  since  the 
revival  of  criticism  (Simonis,  Yitringa,  Cornelius  a, 
Lapide,  among  the  earliest;  cf.  De  Wette,  Einleit. 
§220)  ;  and  the  result  of  the  labours  of  the  more 
recent  critics  has  been  to  modify  the  somewhat 
hasty  judgment  of  the  English  divine.  Whatever 
points  of  difference  there  may  be  in  the  hypotheses 
of  Movers,  Hitzig,  Ewald,  Bunsen,  Nagelsbach,  and 
others,  they  agree  in  admitting  traces  of  an  order 
in  the  midst  of  the  seeming  irregularity,  and  en- 
deavour to  account,  more  or  less  satisfactorily,  for 
the  apparent  anomalies.  The  conclusion  of  the 
three  last-named  is  that  we  have  the  book  sub- 
stantially in  the  same  state  as  that  in  which  it  left 
the  hands  of  the  prophet,  or  his  disciple  Baruch. 
( 'oniining  ourselves,  for  the  present,  to  the  Hebrew 
order  (reproduced  in  the  A.  V.)  we  have  two  great 
divisions: — 

(1.)  Ch.  i.-xlv.  Prophecies  delivered  at  various 
times,  directed  mainly  to  Judah,  or  con- 
nected with  Jeremiah's  personal  history: 

(2.)  Ch.  xlvi.-li.  Prophecies  connected  with  other 
nations. 

Ch.  lii.,  taken  largely,  though  not  entirely,  from 
2  K.  xxv.,  may  be  taken  either  as  a  supplement  to 
the  prophecy,  or  (with  Grotius  and  Lowth)  as  an 
introduction  to  the  Lamentations. 

Looking  more  closely  into  each  of  these  divisions, 


JEREMIAH 


973 


Hebrew  alphabet  in  an  inverted  order,  so  that  fl 
stands  for  X,  t^  for  2>  and  so  on,  and  the  word  is 
formed  out  of  the  first  four  letters  which  are  thus 
interchanged  (£'2nX)-  In  the  passage  referred  to 
(xxv.  2G),  the  otherwise  unintelligible  word  Sheshach 
becomes,  on  applying  this  key,  the  equivalent  of  Babel. 
The  position  of  the  same  word  in  li.  41  confirms  this 
interpretation  ;  and  all  other  explanations  of  the  word 
are  conjectural  and  far-fetched.  The  application  of 
tin-  Atbash  to  these  passages  rests  historically  on  the 
authority  of  Jerome  \{Comm.  in  Jerem.  in  loc.),  who 
refers  to  the  consensus  of  the  Jewish  expositors  of  his 
own  time.  There  is,  of  course,  Something  startling  in 
the  appearance  of  one  or  two  solitary  instances  of  a 
technical  notation  like  this  so  long  before  it  I 
conspicuous  as  a  BJ  -tern  ;  and  this  lias  led  commen- 
tators to  attempt  other  explanations  of  the  mysfc  rious 
word  (comp.  J.  D.  Michaclis,  in  loc).  On  the  other 
hand,  it  should  he  borne  in  mind  that  the  age  of  alpha- 
betic Psalms,  such  as  Ps.  cxix.,  was  one  in  which  we 
might  expect  to  find  the  minds  of  men  occupied  with 


we  have  the  following  sections.  The  narrative  of 
xxxvi.  32  serves  to  explain  the  growth  of  the  book 
in  its  present  shape,  and  accounts  for  some,  at  least, 
of  its  anomalies.  Up  to  the  4th  year  of  Jehoiakim, 
it  would  appear,  no  prophecies  had  been  committed 
to  writing,  or,  if  written,  they  had  not  been  col- 
lected and  preserved.  Then  the  more  memorable 
among  the  messages  which  the  word  of  the  Lord 
had  from  time  to  time  brought  to  him  were  writ- 
ten down  at  the  dictation  of  the  prophet  himself. 
When  that  roll  was  destroyed,  a  second  was  written 
out,  and  other  prophecies  or  narratives  added  as 
they  came.  We  may  believe  that  this  MS.  was 
the  groundwork  of  our  present  text ;  but  it  is  easy 
to  understand  how,  in  transcribing  such  a  docu- 
ment, or  collection  of  documents,  the  desire  to  in- 
troduce what  seemed  to  the  transcriber  a  better 
order  might  lead  to  many  modifications.  As  it  is, 
we  recognise — adopting  Bunsen's  classification  (Gott 
in  Geschichte,  i.  113),  as  being  the  most  natural, 
and  agreeing  substantially  with  Ewald' s — the  fol- 
lowing groups  of  prophecies,  the  sections  in  each 
being  indicated  by  the  recurrence  of  the  formula, 
"  The  word  of  the  Lord  came  to  Jeremiah,"  in 
fuller  or  abbreviated  forms. 

1.  Ch.  i.-xxi.  Containing  probably  the  substance 
of  the  book  of  xxxvi.  32,  and  including  prophecies 
from  the  13th  year  of  Josiah  to  the  4th- of  Jehoia- 
kim :  i.  3,  however,  indicates  a  later  revision,  and 
the  whole  of  ch.  i.  may  possibly  have  been  added 
on  the  prophet's  retrospect  of  his  whole  work  from 
this  its  first  beginning.  Ch.  xxi.  belongs  to  a  later 
period,  but  has  probably  found  its  place  here  as 
connected,  by  the  recurrence  of  the  name  Pashur, 
with  ch.  xx. 

2.  Ch.  xxii.-xxv.  Shorter  prophecies,  delivered 
at  different  times,  against  the  kings  of  Judah  and 
the  false  prophets,  xxv.  13,  14,  evidently  marks 
the  conclusion  of  a  series  of  prophecies  ;  and  that 
which  follows,  xxv.  15-38,  the  germ  of  the  fuller 
predictions  in  xlvi.-xlix.,  has  been  placed  here  as  a 
kind  of  completion  to  the  prophecy  of  the  Seventy 
Years  and  the  subsequent  fall  of  Babylon. 

3.  Ch.  xxvi.-xxviii.  The  two  great  prophecies 
of  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  and  the  history  connected 
with  them.  Ch.  xxvi.  belongs  to  the  earlier,  ch. 
xxvii.  and  xxviii.  to  the  later  period  of  the  prophet's 
work.  Jehoiakim  in  xxvii.  1  is  evidently  (comp. 
ver.  3)  a  mistake  for  Zedekiah. 

4.  Ch.  xxix.-xxxi.  The  message  of  comfort  for 
the  exiles  in  Babylon. 


the  changes  and  combinations  to  which  the  letters  of 
the  Hebrew  alphabet  might  be  subjected,  and  in  which 
therefore  such  a  system  of  cipher-writing  was  likely 
to  suggest  itself.  The  fact  that  Jeremiah  himself 
adopted  a  complicated  alphabetic  structure  for  his 
great  dirge  over  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  (comp.  Lamen- 
tations), indicates  a  special  tendency  in  him  to  carry 
to  its  highest  point  this  characteristic  of  the  literature 
of  his  time.  Nor  is  this  the  only  instance.  Hitzig 
finds  another  example  of  the  Atbash  in  li.  1.  The 
words  ''Dp  3?  ('i>"  cor  tuum  levavenmt,  Vulg. ; 
"  in  the  midst  of  them  that  rise  op  against  me,"  A.  V.), 
for  which  the  L\X.  substitutes  XaAWous,  becomes, 
on  applying  the  above  notation,  the  equivalent  of 
COb'S.  It  should  be  added,  however,  that  the  LXX. 
omits  the  entire  passage  in  xxv.  20,  and  the  word 
Sheshach  in  li-  -II;  and  that  Ewald  rejects  it  accord- 
ingly as  a  later  interpolation,  conjecturing  that  the 
word  first  came  into  use  among  the  Jews  who  lived 
in  exile  at  Eabvlon. 


974 


JEREMIAH 


5.  Ch.  xxxii.-xliv.  The  history  of  the  last  two 
years  before  the  capture  of  Jerusalem,  and  of  Jere- 
miah's work  in  them  and  in  the  period  that  fol- 
lowed. Ch.  xxxv.  and  xxxvi.  are  remarkable  as 
interrupting  the  chronological  order,  which  other- 
wise would  have  been  followed  here  more  closely 
than  in  any  other  part.  The  position  of  ch.  xlv., 
unconnected  with  anything  before  or  after  it,  may 
be  accounted  for  on  the  hypothesis  that  Baruch  de- 
sired to  place  on  record  so  memorable  a  passage  in 
his  own  life,  and  inserted  it  where  the  direct  narra- 
tive of  his  master's  life  ended.  The  same  explanation 
applies  in  part  to  ch.  xxxvi.,  which  was  evidently  at 
one  time  the  conclusion  of  one  of  the  divisions. 

6.  Ch.  xlvi.-li.  The  prophecies  against  foreign 
nations,  ending  with  the  great  prediction  against 
Babylon. 

7.  The  supplementary  narrative  of  ch.  lii. 

IV.  Text. — The  translation  of  the  LXX.  presents 
many  remarkable  variations,  not  only  in  details 
indicating  that  the  translator  found  or  substituted 
readings  differing  widely  from  those  now  extant  in 
Hebrew  codices  (Keil,  Einleit.  §76),  but  in  the 
order  of  the  several  parts.  Whether  we  suppose 
him  to  have  had  a  different  recension  of  the  text, 
or  to  have  endeavoured  to  introduce  an  order  ac- 
cording to  his  own  notions  into  the  seeming  con- 
fusion of  the  Hebrew,  the  result  is,  that  in  no  other 
book  of  the  0.  T.  'is  there  so  great  a  diversity  of 
arrangement.  It  is  noticeable,  as  illustrating  the 
classification  given  above,  that  the  two  agree  as  far 
as  xxv.  13.  From  that  point  all  is  different,  and 
the  following  table  indicates  the  extent  of  the  di- 
vergency. It  will  be  seen  that  here  there  was  the 
attempt  to  collect  the  prophecies  according  to  their 
subject-matter.  The  thought  of  a  consistently 
chronological  arrangement  did  not  present  itself  in 
one  case  more  than  the  other. 


LXX. 
xxv.  14-18 
xxvi. 

xxvii.-xxviii. 
xxix.  1-7 
7-22 
xxx.  1-5 
G-ll 
12-16 
xxxi. 
xxxii. 
xxxiii.-li. 
lii. 


Hebrew. 
xlix.  34-39. 
xlvi. 
l.-li. 

xlvii.  1-7. 
xlix.  7-22. 
xlix.  1-6. 

28-33. 

23-27. 
xlviii. 
xxv.  15-39. 
xxvi.-xlv. 
lii. 


As  having  the  charac- 
ter of  vaticinia  ex 
eventu. 


The  difference  in  the  arrangement  of  the  two 
texts  was  noticed  by  the  critical  writers  of  the 
Early  Church  (Origen,  Ep.  ad  African.  Hieron. 
Praef.  in  Jerem.).  For  fuller  details  tending 
to  a  conclusion  unfavourable  to  the  trustworthi- 
ness of  the  Greek  translation,  see  Keil,  Einleit. 
(I.  c),  and  the  authors  there  referred  to. 

Supposed  Interpolations. — The  genuineness  of 
some  portions  of  this  book  has  been  called  in  ques- 
tion, partly  on  the  hypothesis  that  the  version  of 
the  LXX.  presents  a  purer  text,  partly  on  internal 
and  more  conjectural  grounds.  The  following 
tables  indicate  the  chief  passages  affected  by  each 
class  of  objections. 

1.  As  omitted  in  the  LXX. 

(1.)  x.  6,  7,  8,  10. 

(2.)  xxvii.  7. 

(3.)  xxvii.  16-21  [not  omitted,  hut  with  many 
variations]. 

;  1.)   xxxiii.  14-26. 

(5.)   xxxix.  4-13. 


JEEEMIAH 

2.   On  other  grotinds. 
(1.)  x.  1-16.     As  being  altogether  the  work  of  a 
later  writer,  probably  the  so-called  Pseudo- 
Isaiah.     The  Aramaic  of  ver.  11  is  urged 
as  confirming  this  view. 
(2.)  xxv.  11-14. 
(3.)  xxvii.  7. 
(4.)  xxxiii.  14-26. 
(5.)  xxxix.  1,  2,  4-13. J 
(6.)  xxvii.-xxix.     As  showing,  in  the  shortened 
form  of  the  prophet's  name  (i"PD"l*),  and 
the  addition  of  the  epithet  "  Jeremiah  the 
prophet"  the  revision  of  a  later  writer. 
(7.)  xxx. -xxxiii.     As  partaking  of  the  character 

of  the  later  prophecies  of  Isaiah. 
(8.)  xlviii.    As  betraying  in  language  and  state- 
ments the  interpolations  either  of  the  later 
prophecies  of  Isaiah  or  of  a  still  later 
writer. 
(9.)  1.  li.     As   being    a   vaticinium   ex   eventu, 
inserted   probably  by    the  writer  of  Is. 
xxxiv.,     and   foreign    in   language    and 
thought    to    the    general    character    of 
Jeremiah's  prophecies. 
(10.)  lii.     As  being  a  supplementary  addition 
to  the"  book,  compiled  from   2  K.  xxv. 
and  other  sources. 
In  these,   as  in   other  questions  connected  with 
the  Hebrew  text  of  the  0.  T.  the  impugners  of  the 
authenticity  of  the  above  passages  are  for  the  most 
part — De  Wette,  Movers,  Hitzig,  Ewald,  Knobel : 
Havernick,   Hengstenberg,  Kiiper,  Keil,    Umbreit, 
are  among  the  chief  defenders.    (Comp.  Keil,  Ein- 
leitung,  §  76  ;   and  for  a  special  defence  of  1.  and 
li.  the  Monograph  of  Nagelsbach,  Jeremias  und  Ba- 
bylon.^) 

V.  Literature. 
Origen,  Horn,  in  Jerem. 
Theodoyet,  Schol.  in  Jerem.,  Opp.  ii.  p.  143. 
Hieron.  Comm.  in  Jerem.,  c.  i.-xxxii. 
Commentaries  by  Oecolampadius  (1530)  ;  Cal- 
vin (1563);    Piscator  (1614);  Sanctius  (1618); 
Venema    (1765)  ;     Michaelis    (1793)  ;    Blayney 
(1784);    Umbreit    (1842);    Neumann    (1856); 
Dahler  (1825)  ;  Henderson. 

The  following  treatises  may  also  be  consulted  : — 
Schnurrer,  C.  F.,   Observationes  ad  vaticin.  Je- 
rem., 1793. 

Gaab,  Erklarung  schwerer  Stellen  in  d.  Weis- 
sag.  Jerem.,  1824. 

Hensler,    Bemerkk.    iiber    Stellen    in   Jerem. 
Wcissag.,  1805. 
Spohn,  Jerem.  Vates  e  vers.  Jud.  Alex.,  1794. 
Kiiper,  Jerem.  librorum  Sacrorum  interpres  et 
vindex,  1837. 

Movers,  De  utriusque  recensionis  vaticin.  Jerem. 
indole  et  origine,  1837. 

Wiehalhaus,  Be  Jerem.  versione  Alex.,  1847. 
Hengstenberg,   Christologie  des  A.  T.     (Section 
on  Jeremiah).  [E.  H.  P.] 

JEREMI'AH.    Seven  other  persons  bearing  the 
same  name  as  the  prophet  are  mentioned  in  the  0.  T. 
(1.)  Jeremiah    of  Libuah,    father   of  Hamutal 
wife  of  Josiah,  2  K.  xxiii.  31. 

(2.)  (3.)  (4.)  Three  warriors— two  of  the  tribe 
of  Gad— in  David's  army,  1  Chr.  xii.  4,  10,  13. 

(5.)  One  of  the  "mighty  men  of  valour"  of 
the  trans-Jordanic  half-tribe  of  Manasseh,  1  Chr. 
v.  24. 

(6.)  A  priest  of  high  rank,  head  of  the  second  or 
third  of  the  21  courses  which  are  apparently  enu- 
merated in  Neh.  x.  2-8.  He  is  mentioned  again, 
i.  e.  the  course  which  was  called  after  him  is,  in 


JEREMIAS 

Neh.  xii.  1 ;  and  we  are  told  at  v.  12  that  the 
personal  name  of  the  head  of  this  course  in  the  days 
of  Joiakim  was  Hananiah.  This  course,  or  its 
chief,  took  part  in  the  dedication  of  the  wall  of 
Jerusalem  (Neh.  xii.  34). 

(7.)  The  father  of  Jaazaniah  the  Reehabite,  Jer. 
xxxv.  3. 

JEREMI'AS  ('lepras:  Jcremias, Ilicremias). 
1.  The  Greek  form  of  the  name  of  Jeremiah  the 
prophet,  used  in  the  A.  V.  of  Ecclus.  xlix.  6  ; 
2  Mace.  xv.  14;  Matt.  xvi.  14.  [Jeremiau; 
Jeremy.] 

2.  1  Esd.  ix.  34.     [Jeremai.] 

JER'EMY  ('Upefiias:  Jeremias,  Hicremias), 
the  prophet  Jeremiah.  1  Esd.  i.  28,  32,  47,  57  ; 
ii.  1 ;  2  Esd.  ii.  18  ;  2  Mace.  ii.  1,  5,  7 ;  Matt.  ii. 
17;  xxvii.  9.  [Jeremiah;  Jeremias.]  These 
abbreviated  forms  were  much  in  favour  about  the 
time  that  the  A.  V.  was  translated.  Elsewhere  we 
find  Esay  for  Isaiah  ;  and  in  the  Homilies  such 
abbreviations  as  Zachary,  Toby,  &C,  are  frequent. 

JER'IBAI  Onn?:  'IopijSi;  Alex,  'IapijBaf: 
Jeribai),  one  of  the  Bene-Elnaam,  named  among 
the  heroes  of  David's  guard  in  the  supplemental  list 
of  1  Chronicles  (xi.  46). 

JER'ICHO  (OTj],  J'recho,  Num.  xxii.  1 ;  also 
\riH*,  J'richo,  Josh.  ii.  1,  2,  3  ;  and  DITT, 
J'richoh,  1  K.  xvi.  34;  \  *^-,  ,  \,  Eriha,  "  place 
of  fragrance,"  from  nil,  Bunch,  "  to  breathe," 
IT"!!"!,  "  to  smell :"  older  commentators  derive  it 
from  m*,  Jareach,  "  the  moona ;"  also  from  ni*l 
Bavach,  "  to  be  broad,"  as  in  a  wide  plain ; 
'IepiX^  ;  Strabo  and  Josephus,  'Iepi%oDs),  a  city 
of  high  antiquity,  and,  for  those  days,  of  consider- 
able importance,  situated  in  a  plain  traversed  by 
the  Jordan,  and  exactly  over  against  where  that 
river  was  crossed  by  the  Israelites  under  Joshua 
(Josh.  iii.  16).  Such  was  either  its  vicinity,  or 
the  extent  of  its  territory,  that  Gilgal,  which 
formed  their  primary  encampment,  stood  in  its  east 
border  (iv.  19).  That  it  had  a  king  is  a  very 
secondary  consideration,  for  almost  every  small  town 
had  one  (xii.  9-24) ;  in  fact  monarchy  was  the 
only  form  of  government  known  to  those  primitive 
times — the  government  of  the  people  of  God  pre- 
senting a  marked  exception  to  prevailing  usage. 
But  Jericho  was  further  enclosed  by  walls — a  fenced 
city- — its  walls  were  so  considerable  that  at  least 
one  person  (Rahab)  had  a  house  upon  them  (ii.  15), 
and  its  gates  were  shut,  as  throughout  the  East 
still,  "  when  it  was  dark"  (v.  5).  Again,  the  spoil 
that  was  found  in  it  betokened  its  affluence — Ai, 
Makkedah,  Libnah,  Lachish,  Eglon,  Hebron,  Debir, 
and  even  Hazor,  evidently  contained  nothing  worth 
mentioning  in  comparison — besides  sheep,  oxen,  and 
asses,  we  hear  of  vessels  of  brass  and  iron.  These 
possibly  may  have  been  the  first-fruits  of  those 
brass  foundries  "  in  the  plain  of  Jordan  "  of  which 
.Solomon  afterwards  so  largely  availed  himself  (2 
Chr.  iv.  17).  Silver  and  gold  was  found  in  such 
abundance  that  one  man  (Achan)  could  appropriate 
stealthily  200  shekels  (100  oz.  avoird.,  see  Lewis, 
Hcb.  Hep.  vi.  57)  of  the  former,  and  "  a  wedge  of 
gold   of  50    shekels   (25  oz.)    weight;"  -a    g Uj 


JERICHO 


975 


Babylonish  garment,"  purloined  in  the  same  dis- 
honesty, may  be  adduced  as  evidence  of  a  then 
existing  commerce  between  Jericho  and  the  far  East 
(Josh.  vi.  24,  vii.  21).  In  fact  its  situation  alone 
— in  so  noble  a  plain  and  contiguous  to  so  prolific  a 
river — would  bespeak  its  importance  in  a  country 
where  these  natural  advantages  have  been  always 
so  highly  prized,  and  in  an  age  when  people  de- 
pended so  much  more  upon  the  indigenous  resources 
of  nature  than  they  are  compelled  to  do  now.  But 
for  the  curse  of  Joshua  (vi.  26)  doubtless  Jericho 
might  have  proved  a  more  formidable  counter- 
charm  to  the  city  of  David  than  even  Samaria. 

Jericho  is  first  mentioned  as  the  city  to  which 
the  two  spies  were'  sent  by  Joshua  from  Shittim  : 
they  were  lodged  in  the  house  of  Rahab  the  harlot 
upon  the  wall,  and  departed,  having  first  promised  to 
save  her  and  all  that  were  found  in  her  house  from 
destruction  (ii.  1-21).  In  the  annihilation  of  the  city 
that  ensued  this  promise  was  religiously  observed. 
Her  house  was  recognised  by  the  scarlet  line  bound 
in  the  window  from  which  the  spies  were  let  down, 
and  she  and  her  relatives  were  taken  out  of  it,  anil 
"lodged  without  the  camp;"  but  it  is  nowhere 
said  or  implied  that  her  house  escaped  the  general 
conflagration.  That  she  "  dwelt  in  Israel  "  for  the 
future ;  that  she  married  Salmon  son  of  Kaasson, 
"  prince  of  the  children  of  Judah,"  and  had  by  him 
Boaz,  the  husband  of  Ruth  and  progenitor  of  David 
and  of  our  Lord ;  and  lastly,  that  she  is  the  first 
and  only  Gentile  name  that  appears  in  the  list  of 
the  faithful  of  the  O.  T.  given  by  St.  Paul  (Josh, 
vi.  25  ;  1  Chr.  ii.  10  ;  Matt.  i.  5  ;  Heb.  xi.  31), 
all  these  tacts  surely  indicate  that  she  did  not  con- 
tinue to  inhabit  the  accursed  site :  and,  if  so,  and  in 
absence  of  all  direct  evidence  from  Scripture,  how 
could  it  ever  have  been  inferred  that  her  house 
was  left  standing  ? 

Such  as  it.  had  been  left  by  Joshua,  such  it  was 
bestowed  by  him  upon  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  (Josh. 
xviii.  21),  and  from  this  time  a  long  interval 
elapses  before  Jericho  appears  again  upon  the  scene. 
It  is  only  incidentally  mentioned  in  the  life  of 
David  in  connexion  with  his  embassy  to  the  Am- 
monite king  (2  Sam.  x.  5).  And  the  solemn 
manner  in  which  its  second  foundation  under  Hiel 
the  Bethelite  is  recorded — upon  whom  the  curse  of 
Joshua  is  said  to  have  descended  in  full  force 
(1  K.  xvi.  34) — would  certainly  seem  to  imply 
that  up  to  that  time  its  site  had  been  uninhabited. 
It  is  true  that  mention  is  made  of  "  a  city  of  palm- 
trees"  (Judg.  i.  16,  and  iii.  13)  in  existence  appa- 
rently at  the  time  when  spoken  of;  and  that 
Jericho  is  twice — once  before  its  first  overthrow, 
and  once  after  its  second  foundation — designated  by 
that  name  (see  Deut.  xxxiv.  •'!,  and  2  Chr.  xxvii. 
15).  But  it  would  be  diilicultto  prove  the  identity 
of  the  city  mentioned  in  the  book  of  Judge,-,  an. I 
as  in  the  territory  of  Judah,  with  Jericho.  How- 
ever, once,  actually  rebuilt,  Jericho  rose  again  slowly 
into  consequence.  In  its  immediate  vicinity  the 
sons  of  the  prophets  sought  retirement  from  the 
world  :  Elisha  '•  healed  the  spring  of  the  water-  ; 
and  over  and  against  it.  beyond  .Ionian,  Elijah 
"  went  up  by  a  whirlwind  into  heaven  "  (2  K.  ii.  1- 
22).  In  its  plains  Zedekiah  fell  into  the  hands  of  the 
Chaldeans  (2  K.  or.  5  ;  Jer.  xx.\i.\.  5).  By  what 
may  be  called  a  retrospective  account  of  it,  we  may 


a  In  which  case  it  would  probably  be  a  remnant  of 
the  old  Canaanitish  worship  of  the  heavenly  bodies, 
which    has  left   its  traces  in   such   names  as  Chesil, 


Bethshemesh,  and  others  (see  Inoi.ATitY,  p.  861&), 
which  may  have  been  the  head-iniartors  of  the  wor- 
ship indicated  in  the  names  they  bear. 


976 


JEKICHO 


infer  that  Hiel's  restoration  had  not  utterly  failed  ; 
for  in  the  return  under  Zerubbabel  the  "  children 
of  Jericho,"  345  in  number,  are  comprised  (Ez.  iii. 
34  ;  Neh.  vii.  3b) ;  and  it  is  even  implied  that  they 
removed  thither  again,  for  the  men  of  Jericho 
assisted  Nehemiah  in  rebuilding  that  part  of  the 
wall  of  Jerusalem  that  was  next  to  the  sheep-gate 
(Neh.  iii.  2).  We  now  enter  upon  its  more  modem 
phase.  The  Jericho  of  the  days  of  Josephus  was 
distant  15l)  stadia  from  Jerusalem,  and  50  from 
the  Jordan.  It  lay  in  a  plain,  overhung  by  a 
barren  mountain  whose  roots  ran  northwards  to- 
wards Scythopolis,  and  southwards  in  the  direction 
of  Sodom  and  the  Dead  Sea.  These  formed  the 
western  boundaries  of  the  plain.  Eastwards,  its 
barriers  were  the  mountains  of  Moab,  which  ran 
parallel  to  the  former.  In  the  midst  of  the  plain — 
the  great  plain  as  it  was  called — flowed  the  Jordan, 
and  at  the  top  and  bottom  of  it  were  two  lakes : 
Tiberias,  proverbial  for  its  sweetness,  and  Asphal- 
tites  for  its  bitterness.  Away  from  the  Jordan  it 
was  parched  and  unhealthy  during  summer  ;  but 
during  winter,  even  when  it  snowed  at  Jerusalem, 
the  inhabitants  here  wore  linen  garments.  Hard 
by  Jericho — bursting  forth  close  to  the  site  of  the 
old  city,  which  Joshua  took  on  his  entrance  into 
Canaan — was  a  most  exuberant  fountain,  whose 
waters,  before  noted  for  their  contrary  properties, 
had  received,  proceeds  Josephus,  through  Elisha's 
prayers,  their  then  wonderfully  salutary  and  pro- 
lific efficacy.  Within  its  range— 70  stadia  (Strabo 
says  100)  by  20 — the  fertility  of  the  soil  was  unex- 
ampled ;  palms  of  various  names  and  properties, 
some  that  produced  honey  scarce  inferior  to  that  of 
the  neighbourhood — opobalsamum,  the  choicest  of 
indigenous  fruits — Cyprus  (Ar.  "  el-henna  ")  and 
myrobalanum  ("Zukkum")  throve  there  beauti- 
fully, and  thickly  dotted  about  in  pleasure-grounds 
(B.  J.  iv.  8,  §3).  Wisdom  herself  did  not  disdain 
comparison  with  "the  rose-plants  of  Jericho" 
(Ecclus.  xxiv.  14).  Well  might  Strabo  (Geogr. 
xvi.  2,  §41,  ed.  M tiller)  conclude  that  its  revenues 
were  considerable.  By  the  Romans  Jericho  was 
first  visited  under  Pompey :  he  encamped  there  for 
a  single  night ;  and  subsequently  destroyed  two 
forts,  Threx  and  Taurus,  that  commanded  its  ap- 
proaches (Strabo,  ibid.  §40).  Gabinius,  in  his 
re-settlement  of  Judaea,  made  it  one  of  the  five 
seats  of  assembly  (Joseph.  B.  J.  i.  8,  §5).  With 
Herod  the  Great  it  rose  to  still  greater  prominence ; 
it  had  been  found  full  of  treasure  of  all  kinds,  as  in 
the  time  of  Joshua,  so  by  his  Roman  allies  who 
sacked  it  (ibid.  i.  15,  §6);  and  its  revenues  were 
eagerly  sought,  and  rented  by  the  wily  tyrant  from 
Cleopatra,  to  whom  Antony  had  assigned  them  ( Ant. 
xv.  4,  §2).  Not  long  afterwards  he  built  a  fort 
there,  which  he  called  "  Cyprus"  in  honour  of  his 
mother  (ibid.  xvi.  5)  ;  a  tower,  which  he  called  in 
honour  of  his  brother  "  Phasaelus  ;  "  and  a  number 
of  new  palaces — superior  in  their  construction  to 
those  which  had  existed  there  previously — which 
he  named  after  his  friends.  He  even  founded  a 
new  town,  higher  up  the  plain,  which  he  called, 
like  the  tower,  Phasaelis  (B.  J.  i.  21,  §9).  If  he 
did  not  make  Jericho  his  habitual  residence,  he  at 
least  retired  thither  to  die — and  to  be  mourned,  if 
he  could  have  got  his  plan  carried  out — and  it  was 
in  the  amphitheatre  of  Jericho  that  the  news  of  his 
death  was  announced  to  the  assembled  soldiers  and 
people  by  Salome  (B.  J.  i.  38,  §8).  Soon  after- 
wards the  palace  was  burnt,  and  the  town  plun- 
dered by  one  Simon,  a  revolutionary  that  had  been 


JERICHO 

slave  to  Herod  (Ant.  xvii.  10,  §6)  ;  but  Archelaus 
rebuilt  the  former  sumptuously — founded  a  new 
town  in  the  plain,  that  bore  his  own  name — and, 
most  important  of  all,  diverted  water  from  a  village 
called  Neaera,  to  irrigate  the  plain  which  he  had 
planted  with  palms  (Ant.  xvii.  13,  §1).  Thus 
Jericho  was  once  more  "  a  city  of  palms "  when 
our  Lord  visited  it ;  such  as  Herod  the  Great  and 
Archelaus  had  left  it,  such  He  saw  it.  As  the  city 
that  had  so  exceptionally  contributed  to  His  own 
ancestry — as  the  city  which  had  been  the  first 
to  fall — amidst  so  much  ceremony — before  "  the 
captain  of  the  Lord's  host,  and  His  servant  Joshua" 
— we  may  well  suppose  that  His  eyes  surveyed  it 
with  unwonted  interest.  It  is  supposed  to  have 
been  on  the  rocky  heights  overhanging  it  (hence 
called  by  tradition  the  Quarentana),  that  He  was 
assailed  by  the  Tempter ;  and  over  against  it, 
according  to  tradition  likewise,  He  had  been  pre- 
viously baptized  in  the  Jordan.  Here  He  restored 
sight  to  the  blind  (two  certainly,  perhaps  three, 
St.  Matt.  xx.  30 ;  St.  Mark  x.  46 :  this  was  in 
leaving  Jericho.  St.  Luke  says  "  as  He  was  come 
niijh  unto  Jericho,"  &c.,  xviii.  35).  Here  the  de- 
scendant of  Rahab  did  not  disdain  the  hospitality  of 
Zacchaeus  the  publican — an  office  which  was  likely 
to  be  lucrative  enough  in  so  rich  a  city.  Finally, 
between  Jerusalem  and  Jericho  was  laid  the  scene 
of  His  story  of  the  good  Samaritan,  which,  if  it  is 
not  to  be  regarded  as  a  real  occurrence  throughout, 
at  least  derives  interest  from  the  fact,  that  robbers 
have  ever  been  the  terror  of  that  precipitous  road ; 
and  so  formidable  had  they  proved  only  just  before 
the  Christian  era,  that  Pompey  had  been  induced  tr 
undertake  the  destruction  of  their  strongholds 
(Strabo,  as  before,  xvi.  2,  §40  ;  comp.  Joseph.  Ant. 
xx.  6,  §1,  et  seq.).  Dagon,  or  Docus  (1  Mace, 
xvi.  15;  comp.  ix.  50),  where  Ptolemy  assas- 
sinated his  father-in-law,  Simon  the  Maccabee, 
may  have  been  one  of  these. 

Posterior  to  the  Gospels  the  chronicle  of  Jericho 
may  be  briefly  told.  Vespasian  found  it  one  of 
the  toparchies  of  Judaea  (Bell.  Jud.  iii.  3,  §5),  but 
deserted  by  its  inhabitants  in  a  great  measure  when 
he  encamped  there  (ibid.  iv.  8,  §2).  He  left  a  gar- 
rison on  his  departure — not  necessarily  the  10th 
legion,  which  is  only  stated  to  have  marched 
through  Jericho — which  was  still  there  when  Titus 
advanced  upon  Jerusalem.  Is  it  asked  how  Jericho 
was  destroyed  ?  Evidently  by  Vespasian  ;  for 
Josephus,  rightly  understood,  is  not  so  silent  as  Dr. 
Robinson  (Bibl.  Res.  i.  566,  2nd  ed.)  thinks.  The 
city  pillaged  and  burnt  in  Bell.  Jud.  iv.  9,  §1 ,  was 
clearly  Jericho  with  its  adjacent  villages,  and  not 
Gerasa,  as  may  be  seen  at  once  by  comparing  the 
language  there  with  that  of  c.  8,  §2,  and  the  agent 
was  Vespasian.  Eusebius  and  St.  Jerome  (Onomast. 
s.  v.)  say  that  it  was  destroyed  when  Jerusalem 
was  besieged  by  the  Romans.  They  further  add 
that  it  was  afterwards  rebuilt — they  do  not  say  by 
whom — and  still  existed  in  their  day ;  nor  had  the 
ruins  of  the  two  preceding  cities  been  obliterated. 
Could  Hadrian  possibly  have  planted  a  colony  there 
when  he  passed  through  Judaea  and  founded  Aelia? 
(Dion  Cass.  Hist.  lxix.  c.  11,  ed.  Store.;  more  at 
large  Chron.  Paschal.  254,  ed.  Du  Fresne.)  The 
discovery  which  Origen  made  there  of  a  version  of 
the  O.  T.  (the  5th  in  his  Hexapla),  together  with 
sundry  MSS.,  Greek  and  Hebrew,  suggests  that  it 
could  not  have  been  wholly  without  inhabitants 
(Euseb.  E.  H.  vi.  16  ;  S.  Epiphan.  Lib.  dc  Pond. 
et    Mensur.   circa  med.^:  or  again,  as  is  perhaps 


JERICHO 

more  probable,  did  a  Christian  settlement  arise 
there  under  Constantine,  when  baptisms  in  the 
Jordan  began  to  be  the  rage?  That  Jericho  became 
an  episcopal  see  about  that  time  under  Jerusalem 
appears  from  more  than  one  ancient  Notitia  (Geo- 
graph.  8.  a  Carolo  Paulo,  306,  and  the  Parergon 
appended  to  it ;  comp.  William  of  Tyre,  Hist.  lib. 
xxiii.  ad  f.).  Its  bishops  subscribed  to  various 
councils  in  the  4th,  5th,  and  6th  centuries  (ibid, 
and  Le  Quien's  Oriens  Christian,  iii.  654).  Jus- 
tinian, we  are  told,  restored  a  hospice  there,  and 
likewise  a  church  dedicated  to  the  Virgin  (Procop. 
De  Aedij.  v.  9).  As  early  as  a.d.  337,  when  the 
Bourdeaux  pilgrim  (ed.  Wesseling)  visited  it,  a 
house  existed  there  which  was  pointed  out,  after 
the  manner  of  those  days,  as  the  house  of  Rahab. 
This  was  roofless  when  Arculfus  saw  it  ;  and  not 
oidy  so,  but  the  third  city  was  likewise  in  ruins 
(Adamn.  de  Locis  S.  ap  Migne,  Patrolog.  V. 
lxxxviii.  799).  Had  Jericho  been  visited  by  an 
earthquake,  as  Antoninus  reports  (ap.  Ugol.  The- 
saur.  vii.  p.  mccxiii.,  and  note  to  c.  3),  and  as  Syria 
certainly  was,  in  the  27th  year  of  Justinian,  a.d. 
553  ?  If  so,  we  can  well  understand  the  restora- 
tions  already  referred  to  ;  aud  when  Antoninus  adds 
that,  the  house  of  Kahab  had  now  become  a  hospice 
and  oratory,  we  might  almost  pronounce  that  this 
was  the  very  hospice  which  had  been  restored  by 
that  emperor.  Again,  it  may  be  asked,  did  Chris- 
tian Jericho  receive  no  injury  from  the  Persian 
Komizan,  the  ferocious  general  of  Chosroes  II. 
a.d.  614?  (Bar-Hebraei,  Chron.  99,  Lat.  v.  ed. 
Kirsch).  It  would  rather  seem  that  there  were 
more  religious  edifices  in  the  7th  than  in  the  6th 
century  round  about  it.  According  to  Arculfus 
one  church  marked  the  site  of  Gilgal ;  another  the 
spot  where  our  Lord  was  supposed  to  have  deposited 
His  garments  previously  to  His  baptism  ;  a  third 
within  the  precincts  of  a  vast  monastery  dedicated 
to  St.  John,  situated  upon  some  rising  ground 
overlooking  the  Jordan.  (See  as  before.)  Jericho 
meanwhile  had  disappeared  as  a  town  to  rise  no 
more.  Churches  and  monasteries  sprung  up  around 
it  on  all  sides,  but  only  to  moulder  away  in  their 
turn.  The  anchorite  caves  in  the  rocky  flanks  of 
the  Quarentana  are  the  most  striking  memorial 
that  remains  of  early  or  mediaeval  enthusiasm. 
Arculfus  speaks  of  a  diminutive  race — Canaanites 
he  calls  them — that  inhabited  the  plain  in  great 
numbers  in  his  day.  They  have  retained  posses- 
sion of  those  fairy  meadow-lands  ever  since,  and 
have  made  their  head-quarters  for  some  centuries 
round  the  "square  tower  or  castle"  first  men- 
tioned by  Willebrand  (ap.  Leon.  Allat.  Su/XjUi/ct. 
p.  151)  in  a.d.  1211,  when  it  was  inhabited  by 
the  Saracens,  whose  work  it  may  be  supposed  to 
have  been,  though  it  has  since  been  dignified  by 
the  name  of  the  house  of  Zacchaeus.  Their  village 
is  by  Brocardus  (ap.  Cains.  Thesaur.  iv.  Hi),  in 
a.d.  1230,  styled  "a  vile  place;"  by  Sir  J. 
Maundeville,   in  a.d.   1322,   "a  little  village;" 

ami  by  Henry  Maundrell,  in  a.d.  L697,  "a  ] r 

nasty  village;"  in  which  verdict  all  modern  tra- 
vellers that  have  ever  visited  Riha  must  concur. 
( See  Early  Travels  in  P.  by  Wright,  pp.  177  and 
451).  They  are  looked  upon  by  the  Arabs  as  a 
debased  race;  and  are  probably  nothing  more  or 
less  than  veritable  Gipsies,  who  are  still  to  be  met 
with  in  the  neighbourhood  of  the  Frank  mountain 
near  Jerusalem,  and  on  the  heights  round  the 
village  and  convent  of  St.  John  in  the  desert,  and 
are  still  called  "  Scomunicati  "  by  the  native  Cliris- 


JERICHO 


977 


tians — one  of  the  names  applied  to  them  when 
they  first  attracted  notice  in  Europe  in  the  15th 
century  (i.e.  from  feigning  themselves  "penitents" 
and  under  censure  of  the  Pope.  See  Hoyland's 
Histor.  Survey  of  the  G.  p.  18;  also  the  G.  a 
poem  by  A.  P.  Stanley). 

Jericho  does  not  seem  to  have  been  ever  re- 
stoied  as  a  town  by  the  crusaders  ;  but  its  plains 
had  not  ceased  to  be  prolific,  and  were  extensively 
cultivated  aud  laid  out  in  vineyards  aud  gardens 
by  the  monks  (Phocas  ap.  Leon.  Allat.  2iW"K:T- 
(c.  20),  p.  31).  They  seem  to  have  been  included 
in  the  domains  of  the  pati  iarchate  of  Jerusalem, 
and  as  such  were  bestowed  by  Arnulf  upon  his 
niece  as  a  dowry  (Wm.  of  Tyre,  Hist.  xi.  15). 
Twenty-five  years  afterwards  we  find  Melisendis, 
wife  of  king  Fulco,  assigning  them  to  the  convent 
of  Bethany,  which  she  had  founded  A.D.  1137. 

The  site  of  ancient  (the  first)  Jericho  is  with 
reason  placed  by  Dr.  Robinson  (Bibl.  Res.  i.  552- 
568)  in  the  immediate  neighbourhood  of  the  foun- 
tain of  Elisha ;  and  that  of  the  second  (the  city  of 
the  N.T.  and  of  Josephus)  at  the  opening  of  the 
Wady  Kelt  (Cherith),  half  an  hour  from  the 
fountain.  These  are  precisely  the  sites  that  one 
would  infer  from  Josephus.  On  the  other  hand  we 
are  much  more  inclined  to  refer  the  ruined  aque- 
ducts round  Jericho  to  the  irrigations  of  Archelaus 
(see  above)  than  to  any  hypothetical  "  culture  or 
preparation  of  sugar  by  the  Saracens."  Jacob  of 
Vitry  says  but  generally,  that  the  plains  of  the 
Jordan  produced  canes  yielding  sugar  in  abundance 
— from  Lebanon  to  the  Dead  Sea — and  when  he 
speaks  of  the  mode  in  which  sugar  was  obtained 
from  them,  he  is  rather  describing  what  was  done 
in  Syria  than  any  where  near  Jericho  (Hist.  Hie- 
rosol.  c.  93).  Besides,  it  may  fairly  be  questioned 
whether  the  same  sugar-yielding  reeds  or  canes 
there  spoken  of  are  not  still  as  plentiful  as  ever 
they  were  within  range  of  the  Jordan  (see  Lynch's 
Narrative,  events  of  April  16,  also  p.  266-7). 
Almost  every  reed  in  these  regions  distils  a  sugary 
juice,  and  almost  every  herb  breathes  fragrance. 
Palms  have  indeed  disappeared  (there  was  a  soli- 
tary one  remaining  not  long  since)  from  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  the  "  city  of  palms  ;"  yet  there  were 
groves  of  them  in  the  days  of  Arculfus,  and  palm- 
branches  could  still  be  cut  there  when  Fulcherius 
traversed  the  Jordan,  A.D.  1100  (ap.  Gesta  Dei 
per  Francos,  vol.  L  part  1,  p.  402).  The  fig- 
mulberry  or  "tree-fig"  of  Zacchaeus — which  all 
modern  travellers  confound  with  our  Acer  pseudo- 
platanus,  or  common  sycamore  (see  Diet,  a" Hist. 
Nat.  torn,  xliii.  p.  2 is,  and  Cruden's  Concord. 
s.  v.) — mentioned  by  the  Bourdeaux  pilgrim  and  by 
Antoninus,  no  longer  exists.  The  opobalsarman 
has  become  extinct  both  in  Egypt — whither  Cleo- 
patra is  said  to  have  transplanted  it — and  in  its 
favourite  vale,  Jericho.  The  myrobalaman  [Zvk- 
kvan  of  the  Arabs)  alone  survives,  ami  from  its 
nut  oil  is  still  extracted.  Homy  may  be  still 
found  here  and  there,  in  the  nest  of  the  wild  bee. 
Fig-trees,  maize,  and  cucumbers,  may  be  said  to 

i iprise  all  that  is  now  cultivated  in  the  plain  ; 

but  wild  flowers  of  brightest  and  most  varied  hue 
bespangle  the  rich  herbage  on  all  sides. 

Lastly,  the  blight  yellow  apples  of  Sodom  are 
still  to  be  met  with  round  Jericho  j  though  Jose- 
phus (  Bell.  Jui.  iv.  84)  and  others  (Havercamp, 
ad  '/'.ft*:/!.  Apol.  c,  40,  and  Jacob  of  Vitry,  as 
abovi  make  their  locality  rather  the  shores  of  the 
Dead  Sea;  and  some  modern  travellers  assert  that 


978 


JERIEL 


they  are  found  out  of  Palestine  no  less  {Bill.  Res. 
i.  522,  et  seq.).  In  fact  there  are  two  different  plants 
that,  correctly  or  incorrectly,  have  obtaiued  that 
name,  both  bearing  bright  yellow  fruit  like  apples, 
but  with  no  more  substance  than  fungus-balls.  The 
former  or  larger  sort  seems  confined  in  Palestine  to 
the  neighbourhood  of  the  Dead  Sea,  while  the  latter 
or  smaller  sort  abounds  near  Jericho.     [E.  S.  Ft".] 

JERI'EL  (/SO'V  :  'Uptr)\ :  Jcricl),  a  man  of 
Jssachar,  one  of  the  six  heads  of  the  house  of  Tola 
at  the  time  of  the  census  in  the  time  of  David 
(1  Chr.  vii.  2). 

JERE'MOTH  (TfWV :  'laptf"bO,  'lepipoiO  : 
Jerimoth,  Jerimuth). 

1.  ('Api/j.dd.)  A  Benjamite  chief,  a  son  of  the 
house  of  Beriah  of  Elpaal,  according  to  an  obscure 
genealogy  of  the  age  of  Hezekiah  (1  Chr.  viii.  14 ; 
comp.  12  and  18).  His  family  dwelt  at  Jerusalem, 
as  distinguished  from  the  other  division  of  the  tribe, 
located  at  Gibeon  (ver.  28). 

2.  A  Merarite  Levite,  son  of  Mushi  (1  Chr.  xxiii. 
23)  ;  elsewhere  called  Jerimoth. 

3.  Son  of  Heman  ;  head  of  the  13th  course  of 
musicians  in  the  Divine  service  (1  Chr.  xxv.  22) 
In  ver.  4  the  name  is  Jerimoth. 

4.  One  of  the  sons  of  Elam,  and,  5.  (^Apfiwd) 
one  of  the  sons  of  Zattu,  who  had  taken  strange 
wives ;  but  put  them  away,  and  oiiered  each  a  ram 
for  a  trespass  offering,  at  the  persuasion  of  Ezra 
(Ezr.  x.  26,  27).  In  Esdras  the  names  are'  respec- 
tively Hieremoth  and  Jarimoth. 

6.  The  name  which  appears  in  the  same  list  as 
"  and  Ramoth  "  (ver.  29) — following  the  correction 
of  the  Eeri— is  in  the  original  text  (Cetib)  Jeremoth, 
in  which  form  also  it  stands  in  1  Esd.  ix.  30,  'Iep€- 
ficid,  A.  V.  Hieremoth.  [A.  C.  H.] 

JERI'AH  PiVV,  i.  e.  Yeri-yahu :  'Upia ; 
'EkSiixs;  Alex. 'Ie5/as :  Jeriai i),  a  Kohathite  Levite, 
chief  of  the  great  house  of  Hebron  when  David 
organised  the  service  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  19,  xxiv.  23: 
in  the  latter  passage  the  name  of  Hebron  has  been 
omitted  both  in  the  Hebrew  and  LXX.).  The 
same  man  is  mentioned  again,  though  with  a  slight 
difference  in  his  name,  as 

JERI'JAH  (n»T  :  Ovpias  ;  Alex.  'Icopias  : 
Jeria),  in  1  Chr.  xxvi.  31.  The  difference  con- 
sists in  the  omission  of  the  final  u,  not  in  the 
insertion  of  the  j,  which  our  translators  should 
have  added  in  the  former  case. 

JER'IMOTH  (T\\On) :  'Upi/iAd,  'lapi/idd, 
'lepi/iovd :  Jerimoth). 

1.  Son  or  descendant  of  Bela,  according  to 
1  Chr.  vii.  7,  and  founder  of  a  Benjamite  house, 
which  existed  in  the  time  of  David  (ver.  2).  He 
is  perhaps  the  same  as 

2.  ('Api/AovO;  Alex,  'lapi/movd :  Jerimuth),  who 
joined  David  at'Ziklag  (1  Chr.  xii.  5).       [Bela.] 

3.  (DID^,  i.  e.  Jeremoth.)  A  son  of  Becher 
(1  Chr.  vii.  8),  and  head  of  another  Benjamite 
house.     [Becher.] 

4.  Son  of  Mushi,  the  son  of  Merari,  and  head  of 
one  of  the  families  of  the  Merarites  which  were 
counted  in  the  census  of  the  Levites  taken  by  David 
(1  Chr.  xxiv.  30).     [See  Jeremoth,  2.] 

5.  Son  of  Heman,  head  of  the  15th  ward  of 


JEROBOAM 

musicians  (1  Chr.  xxv.  4,  22).     In  the  latter  he  is 
called  Jeremoth.     [Heman.] 

6.  Son  of  Azriel,  "  ruler"  ("P3J)  of  the  tribe  of 
Naphtali  in  the  reign  of  David  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  19). 
The  same  persons,  called  rulers,  are  in  ver.  22  called 
"  princes"  (D'HtJ')  of  the  tribes  of  Israel. 

7.  ('Iepi/ito'ufl;  Alex.  'Epfiovd.)  Son  of  king  David, 
whose  daughter  Mahalath  was  one  of  the  wives  of 
Kehoboam,  her  cousin  Abihail  being  the  other  (2  Chr. 
xi.  18).  As  Jerimoth  is  not  named  in  the  list  of 
children  by  David's  wives  in  1  Chr.  iii.  or  xiv.  4-7, 
it  is  fair  to  infer  that  he  was  the  son  of  a  concubine, 
and  this  in  fact  is  the  Jewish  tradition  (Jerome, 
Quaestiones,  ad  loc).  It  is  however  questionable 
whether  Kehoboam  would  have  married  the  grand- 
child of  a  concubine  even  of  the  great  David.  The 
passage  2  Chr.  xi.  18  is  not  quite  clear,  since  the 
word  "  daughter  "  is  a  correction  of  the  Keri :  the 
original  text  had  |2,  i.  e.  "  son." 

8.  A  Levite  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  one  of  the 
overseers  of  offerings  and  dedicated  things  placed  in 
the  chambers  of  the  temple,  who  were  under 
Couoniah  and  Shimei  the  Levites,  by  command 
of  Hezekiah,  and  Azariah  the  high-priest  (2  Chr. 
xxxi.  13).  [A.  C.  H.] 

JERI'OTH  (n'vyT:  'Upu&O),  according  to 
our  A.  V.  and  the  LXX.,  one  of  the  elder  Caleb's 
wives  (1  Chr.  ii.  18) ;  but  according  to  the  Vulgate 
she  was  his  daughter  by  his  first  wife  Azubah.  The 
Heb.  text  seems  evidently  corrupt,  and  will  not 
make  sense ;  but  the  probability  is  that  Jerioth  was 
a  daughter  of  Caleb  the  son  of  Hezron.  (In  this  case 
we  ought  to  read  lDC'N  m-lTJJ  JO  T^PI.)  The 
Latin  version  of  Sautes  Pagninus,  which  makes 
Azubah  and  Jerioth  both  daughters  of  Caleb,  and 
the  note  of  Vatablus,  which  makes  Ishah  (A.  V. 
"  wife")  a  proper  name  and  a  third  daughter,  are 
clearly  wrong,  as  it  appears  from  ver.  19  that 
Azubah  was  Caleb's  wife.  [A.  C.  IL] 

JEROBOAM  (D]?3"P  =  Yarab'am  ;     'Upo- 

T     :   TT 

fiod/u.).  The  name  signifies  "  whose  people  is 
many,"  and  thus  has  nearly  the  same  meaning 
with  Kehoboam,  "  enlarger  of  the  people."  Both 
names  appear  for  the  first  time  in  the  reign  of  Solo- 
mon, and  were  probably  suggested  by  the  increase 
of  the  Jewish  people  at  that  time. 

1.  The  first  king  of  the  divided  kingdom  of  Israel. 
The  ancient  authorities  for  his  reign  and  his  wars 
were  "  the  Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of  Israel  "  (1  K. 
xiv.  19),  and  "  the  visions  of  Iddo  the  seer  against 
Jeroboam  the  son  of  Nebat  "  (2  Chr.  ix.  29).  The 
extant  account  of  his  life  is  given  in  two  versions, 
so  different  from  each  other,  and  yet  each  so  ancient, 
as  to  make  it  difficult  to  choose  between  them.  The 
oue  usually  followed  is  that  contained  in  the  He- 
brew text,  and  in  one  portion  of  the  LXX.  The 
other  is  given  in  a  separate  account  inserted  by  the 
LXX.  at  1  K.  xi.  43,  and  xii.  24.  This  last  con- 
tains such  evident  marks  of  authenticity  in  some  of 
its  details,  and  is  so  much  more  full  than  the  other, 
that  it  will  be  most  conveniently  taken  as  the  basis 
of  the  biography  of  this  remarkable  man,  as  the 
nearest  approach  which,  in  the  contradictory  state 
of  the  text,  we  can  now  make  to  the  truth. 

I.  He  was  the  son  of  an  Ephraimite  of  the  name 
of  Nebat  ;a  his  father  had  died  whilst  he  was  young  ; 


a  According  to  the  old  Jewish  tradition  preserved 
by  Jerome  (Quivst.  Hcbr.  2  Sam.  xvi.  10),  Xebat, 
the  father  of  Jeroboam,  was  identical  with  Shimei  of 


Gera,  who  was  the  first  to  insult  David  in  his  flight, 
and  the  "  first  of  all  the  house  of  Joseph"  to  congra- 
tulate hi:n  on  his  return. 


JEROBOAM 

but  his  mother,  who  had  been  a  person  of  loose 
character  (LXX.),  lived  in  her  widowhood,  trusting 
apparently  to  her  son  for  support.  Her  name  is 
variously  given  as  Zeruah  (Heb.),  or  Sarira 
(LXX.),  and  the  place  of  their  abode  on  the  moun- 
tains of  Ephraim  is  given  either  as  Zereda,  or 
(LXX.)  as  Sarira :  in  the  latter  case,  indicating  that 
there  was  some  connexion  between  the  wife  of  Nebat 
and  her  residence. 

At  the  time  when  Solomon  was  constructing 
the  fortifications  of  Millo  underneath  the  citadel  of 
Zion,  his  sagacious  eye  discovered  the  strength  and 
activity  of  a  young  Ephraimite  who  was  employed 
on  the  works,  and  he  raised  him  to  the  rank  of  supcr- 
intendant  ("IpS,  A.  V.  "ruler")  over  the  taxes 
and  labours  exacted  from  the  tribe  of  Ephraim 
(1  K.  xi.  28).  This  was  Jeroboam.  He  made  the 
most  of  his  position.  He  completed  the  fortifica- 
tions, and  was  long  afterwards  known  as  the  man 
who  had  "enclosed  the  city  of  David"  (1  K.  xi. 
24 ;  LXX.).  He  then  aspired  to  royal  state.  Like 
Absalom  before  him,  in  like  circumstances,  though 
now  on  a  grander  scale,  in  proportion  to  the  en- 
largement of  the  royal  establishment  itself,  he  kept 
300  chariots  and  horses  (LXX.),  and  at  last  was 
perceived  by  Solomon  to  be  aiming  at  the  monarchy. 
These  ambitious  designs  were  probably  fostered 
by  the  sight  of  the  growing  disaffection  of  the  great 
tribe  over  which  he  presided,  as  well  as  by  the 
alienation  of  the  Prophetic  order  from  the  house  ot 
Solomon.  According  to  the  version  of  the  story 
in  the  Hebrew  text  (Jos.  Ant.  viii.  7,  §7),  this 
alienation  was  made  evident  to  Jeroboam  very 
early  in  his  career.  He  was  leaving  Jerusalem, 
and  he  encountered  on  one  of  the  black-paved  roads 
which  ran  out  of  the  city,  Ahijah,  "  the  prophet" 
of  the  ancient  sanctuary  of  Shiloh.  Ahijah  drew  him 
aside  from  the  road  into  the  field  (LXX.),  and,  as 
soon  as  they  found  themselves  alone,  the  Prophet,  who 
was  dressed  in  a  new  outer  garment,  stripped  it  off. 
and  tore  it  into  12  shreds  ;  10  of  which  he  gave  to 
Jeroboam,  with  the  assurance  that  on  condition  of 
his  obedience  to  His  laws,  God  would  establish  lor 
him  a  kingdom  and  dynasty  equal  to  that  of  David 
(1  K.  xi.  29-40). 

The  attempts  of  Solomon  to  cut  short  Jeroboam's 
designs  occasioned  his  flight  into  Egypt.  There 
he  remained  during  the  rest  of  Solomon's  reign — in 
the  court  of  Shishak  (LXX.),  who  is  here  first 
named  in  the  sacred  narrative.  On  Solomon's 
death,  he  demanded  Shishak's  permission  to  return. 
The  Egyptian  king  seems,  in  his  reluctance,  to  hare 
offered  any  gift  which  Jeroboam  chose,  as  a  reason 
for  his  remaining,  and  the  consequence  was  the 
marriage  with  Ano,  the  elder  sister  of  the  Egyptian 
queeu,  Tahpenes  (LXX.  Thekemina),  and  of  another 
princess  (LXX.)  who  bad  married  the  Edomite 
chief,  Hailad.  A  year  elapsed,  and  a  son,  Ahijah 
(or  Abijam),  was  burn.  Then  Jeroboam  again  re- 
quested permission  to  depart,  which  was  grmited  ; 
and  he  returned  with  his  wife  and  child  to  his 
native  place,  Sarira,  or  Zereda,  which  he  fortified, 
and  which  in  consequence  became  a  centre  for  his 
fellow  tribesmen  (1  K.  xi.  41,  xii.  24,  LXX.). 
Still  there  was  no  open  act  of  insurrection,  and  it 
was  in  this  period  of  suspense  (according  to  the 
LXX.)  that  a  pathetic  incident  darkened  his  domes- 
tic history.     His  infant  sou  fell  sick.     The  anxious 


JEROBOAM 


979 


father  sent  liis  wife  to  inquire  of  God  concerning 
him.      Jerusalem   would   have   been    the   obvious 
place  to  visit  for  this  purpose.     But  no  doubt  poli- 
tical reasons  forbade.     The  ancient  sanctuary    of 
Shiloh  was  nearer  at  hand  ;  and  it  so  happened  that 
a  prophet  was  now  residing  there,  of  the  highest 
repute.     It  was  Ahijah — the  same  who,  according 
to  the  common  version  of  the  story,  had  already 
been  in  communication  with  Jeroboam,  but  who, 
according  to  the  authority  we  are  now  following, 
appears  for  the  first  time  on  this  occasion.    He  was 
60  years  of  age — but  was  prematurely  old,  and  his 
eyesight  had  already  failed  him.    He  was  living,  as 
it  would  seem,  in  poverty,  with  a  boy  who  waited 
on  him,  and  with  his  own  little  children.    For  him 
and  for  them,  the  wife  of  Jeroboam  brought  such 
gifts  as  were  thought  likely  to  be  acceptable ;  ten 
loaves;  and  two  rolls  for  the  children  (LXX.),  a  bunch 
of  raisins  (LXX.),  and  a  jar  of  honey.     She  had  dis- 
guised herself,  to  avoid  recognition;  and  perhaps  these 
humble  gifts  were  part  of  the  plan.     But  the  blind 
prophet,   at  her   first   approach,    knew  who   was 
coming ;  and  bade  his  boy  go  out  to  meet  her,  and 
invite  her  to  his  house  without  delay.     There  he 
warned  her  of  the  uselessness  of  her  gifts.     There 
was  a  doom  on  the  house  of  Jeroboam,  not  to  be 
averted ;  those  who  grew  up  in  it  and  died  in  the 
city  would  become  the  prey  of  the  hungry  dogs; 
they  who  died  in  the  country  would  be  devoured 
by  the  vultures.     This  child  alone  would  die  before 
the  calamities  of  the  house  arrived  ;    "  They  shall 
mourn  for  the  child,  Woe,   0  Lord,  for  in  him 
there  is  found  a  good  word  regarding  the  Lord," — 
or  according  to  the  other  version,  "  all  Israel  shall 
mourn  for  him,  and  bury  him  ;  for  he  only  of  Je- 
roboam shall  come  to  the  grave,  because  in  him 
there  is  found  some  good  thing  toward  Jehovah  the 
God  of  Israel  in  the  house  of  Jeroboam"    (1  K. 
xiv.  13,  LXX.  xii.).     The  mother  returned.     As 
she  re-entered  the  town  of  "Sarira  (Heb.  Tirzah, 
1  K.  xiv.  17),  the  child  died.     The  loud  wail  of 
her  attendant  damsels  greeted  her  on  the  threshold 
(LXX.).      The  child  was  buried,  as  Ahijah  had 
foretold,  with  all  the  state  of  the  child  of  a  royal 
house.     "  All  Israel  mourned  for  him"  (1  K.  xiv. 
18).     This  incident,  if  it  really  occurred  at  this 
time,  seems  to  have  been   the  turning    point  in 
Jeroboam's  career.     It  drove  him  from  his  ances- 
tral home,  and  it  gathered  the  sympathies  of  the 
tribe  of  Ephraim  round  him.      He  left  Sarira  and 
came  to  Shechem.    The  Hebrew  text  describes  that 
he  was  sent  for.     The  LXX.  speaks  of  it  as  his 
own  act.     However  that  may  be,  he  was  thus  at 
the  head  of  the  northern  tribes,  when  Rehoboam, 
after  he  had  been  on  the  throne  for  somewhat  more 
than  a  year,  came  up  to  be  inaugurated  in  that 
ancient  capit;d.     Then  (if  we  may  take  the  account 
already  given  of  Ahijah' s  interview  as  something 
separate  from  this),  fur  the  second  time,  and  in  a 
like  manner,  the  Divine  intimation   of  his  future 
greatness  is  conveyed  to  him.      The  prophet  She- 
maiah,  the  Enlamite  (?)  (6  'EvXa/xi,   LXX.)  ad- 
dressed to  him  the  same  acted  parable,  in  the  ten 
shreds  of  a  new  unwashed  garmenl  I  LXX.).     Then 
took  place  the  conference  wit li  Rehoboam  (Jeroboam 
appearing   in   it,  in    the  Hebrew   text,  but  notb 
in  (he  LXX.  i,  and  the  final  revolt;1'  which   ended 
(expressly  in   the  Hebrew  text,  in  the  LXX.   by 


b  This  omission  is  however  borne  out  by  the  Hebrew 
text,  1  K.  xii.  20,  "  when  all  Israel  heard  that  J. 
was  come  again." 


c  The  cry  of  revolt,  1  K.  xii.  1G,  is  the  same  as  that 
in  2  Sam.  xx.  i. 


980 


JEROBOAM 


implication)  in  the  elevation  of  Jeroboam  to  the 
throne  of  the  northern  kingdom.  Shemaiah  re- 
mained on  the  spot  and  deterred  Rehoboam  Scorn  an 
attack.  Jeroboam  entered  at  once  on  the  duties  of 
his  new  situation,  and  fortified  Shechem  as  his  ca- 
pital on  the  west,  and  Penuel  (close  by  the  old 
Transjordanic  capital  of  Mahanaim)  on  the  east. 

II.  Up  to  this  point  there  had  been  nothing  to 
disturb  the  anticipations  of  the  Prophetic  Order  and 
of  the  mass  of  Israel  as  to  the  glory  of  Jeroboam's 
future.  But  from  this  moment  one  fatal"  error 
crept,  not  unnaturally,  into  his  policy,  which  under- 
mined his  dynasty  and  tarnished  his  name  as  the 
first  king  of  Israel.  The  political  disruption  of  the 
kingdom  was  complete  ;  but  its  religious  unity  was 
as  yet  unimpaired.  He  feared  that  the  yearly  pil- 
grimages to  Jerusalem  would  undo  all  the  work 
which  he  effected,  and  he  took  the  bold  step  of 
rending  it  asunder.  Two  sanctuaries  of  venerable 
antiquity  existed  already— one  at  the  southern,  the 
other  at  the  northern  extremity  of  his  dominions. 
These  he  elevated  into  seats  of  the  national  worship, 
which  should  rival  the  newly  established  Temple  at 
Jerusalem.  As  Abderrahman,  caliph  of  Spain,  ar- 
rested the  movement  of  his  subjects  to  Mecca,  by 
the  erection  of  the  holy  place  of  the  Zecca  at  Cor- 
dova, so  Jeroboam  trusted  to  the  erection  of  his 
shrines  at  Dan  and  Bethel.  But  he  was  not  >ati>- 
fied  without  another  deviation  from  the  Mosaic 
idea  of  the  national  unity.  His  long  stay  in  Egypt 
had  familiarised  him  with  the  outward  forms  under 
which  the  Divinity  was  there  represented  ;  and  now 
for  the  first  time  since  the  Exodus,  was  an  Egyp- 
tian element  introduced  into  the  national  worship 
of  Palestine.  A  golden  figure  of  Mnevis,  the  sacred 
calf  of  Heliopolis,  was  set  up  at  each  sanctuary, 
with  the  address,  "  Behold  thy  God  ('  Elohim  ' — 
comp.  Xeh.  ix.  18)  which  brought  thee  up  out  of 
the  land  of  Egypt."  The  Sanctuary  at  Dax,  as 
the  most  remote  froiTi  Jerusalem,  was  established 
first  (1  K.  xii.  30)  with  priests  from  the  distant 
tribes,  whom  he  consecrated  instead  of  the  Levites 
(xii.  31 ;  xiii.  33).  The  more  important  one,  as 
nearer  the  capital  and  in  the  heart  of  the  kingdom, 
was  Bethel.  The  worship  and  the  sanctuary 
continued  till  the  end  of  the  northern  kingdom. 
The  priests  were  supplied  by  a  peculiar  form  of 
consecration — any  one  from  the  non-Levitical  tribes 
could  procure  the  office  on  sacrificing  a  vouns  bul- 
lock and  seven  rams  (1  K.  xiii.  33  ;  2  Chr.  xiii.  9). 
1-dr  the  dedication  of  this  he  copied  the  precedent  ot 
Solomon  in  choosing  the  feast  of  Tabernacles  as  the 
occasion  ;  but  postponing  it  for  a  month,  probably 
in  order  to  meet  the  vintage  of  the  most  northern 
parts.  On  the  fifteenth  day  of  this  month  (the 
8th),  he  went  up  in  state  to  offer  incense  on  the 
altar  which  was  before  the  calf.  It  was  at  this  so- 
lemn and  critical  moment  that  a  prophet  from  Judah 
suddenly  appeared,  whom  Josephus  with  great  pro- 
bability identities  with  Iddo  the  Seer  (he  calls  him 
Iadon,  Ant.  viii.  8,  §5  ;  and  see  Jerome,  Qu.  Hebr. 
on  2  Chr.  x.  4),  who  denounced  the  altar,  and  fore- 
told its  desecration  by  Josiah,  and  violent  overthrow. 
It  is  not  clear  from  the  account,  whether  it  is  in- 
tended that  the  overthrow  took  place  then,  or  in  the 
earthquake  described  by  Amos  (ix.  1).  Another  sign 
is  described  as  taking  place  instantly.  The  king 
stretching  out  his  hand  to  arrest  the  prophet,  felt  it 
withered  and  paralyzed,  and  only  at  the  prophet's 


d  The  Targum  on  Kuth  iv.  20,  mentions  Jero- 
boam's having  stationed  guards  on  the  roads,  which 
guards  had  been  slain  by  the  people  of  Xctophah  ; 


JEROBOAM 

prayer  saw  it  restored,  and  acknowledged  his  divine 
mission.  Josephus  adds,  but  probably  only  in  con- 
jecture from  the  sacred  narrative,  that  the  prophet 
who  seduced  Iddo  on  his  return,  did  so  in  order  to 
prevent  his  obtaining  too  much  influence  over  Jero- 
boam, and  endeavoured  to  explain  away  the  miracles 
to  the  king,  by  representing  that  the  altar  fell 
because  it  was  new,  and  that  his  hand  was  para- 
lyzed from  the  fatigue  of  sacrificing.  A  further 
allusion  is  made  to  this  incident  in  the  narrative  of 
Josephus  (Ant.  viii.  15,  §4),  where  Zedekiah  is 
represented  as  contrasting  the  potency  of  Iddo  in 
withering  the  hand  of  Jeroboam  with  the  power- 
lessness  of  Jlicaiah  to  wither  the  hand  of  Zedekiah. 
The  visit  of  Ano  to  Ahijah,  which  the  common  He- 
brew text  places  after  this  event,  and  with  darker 
intimations  in  Ahijah's  warning  only  suitable  to  a 
later  period,  has  already  been  described. 

Jeroboam  was  at  constant  war  with  the  house  of 
Judah,  but  the  only  act  distinctly  recorded  is  a  battle 
with  Abijah,  son  of  Rehoboam  ;  in  which  in  spite  of 
a  skilful  ambush  made  by  Jeroboam,  and  of  much 
superior  force,  he  was  defeated,  and  for  the  time 
lost  three  important  cities,  Bethel,  Jeshanah,  and 
Ephraim.d  The  calamity  was  severely  felt;  he 
never  recovered  the  blow,  and  soon  after  died,  in 
the  22nd  year  of  his  reign  (2  Chr.  xiii.  20),  and  was 
buried  in  his  ancestral  sepulchre  (1  K.  xiv.  20). 
His  son  Nadab,  or  (LXX.)  Xebat  (named  after  the 
grandfather),  succeeded,  and  in  him  the  dynasty  was 
closed.  The  name  of  Jeroboam  long  remained  under 
a  cloud  as  the  king  who  "  had  caused  Israel  to  sin." 
At  the  time  of  the  Reformation,  it  was  a  common 
practice  of  Roman  Catholic  writers  to  institute  com- 
parisons between  his  separation  from  the  sanctuary 
of  Judah,  and  that  of  Henry  VIII.  from  the  see  of 
Rome. 

2.  Jeroboam  II.,  the  son  of  Joash,  the  4th  of 
the  dynasty  of  Jehu.  The  most  prosperous  of  the 
kings  of  Israel.  The  contemporary  accounts  of  his 
reign  are,  (1.)  in  the  "  Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of 
Israel"  (2  K.  xiv.  28),  which  are  lost,  but  of  which 
the  substance  is  given  in  2  K.  xiv.  23-29.  (2.)  In 
the  contemporary  prophets  Hosea  and  Amos,  and 
(perhaps)  in  the  fragments  found  in  Is.  xv.,  xvi. 
It  had  been  foretold  in  the  reign  of  Jehoahaz  that  a 
great  deliverer  should  come,  to  rescue  Israel  from 
the  Syrian  yoke  (comp.  2  K.  xiii.  4,  xiv.  26,  27), 
and  this  had  been  expanded  into  a  distinct  predic- 
tion of  Jonah,  that  there  should  be  a  restoration  of 
the  widest  dominion  of  Solomon  (xiv.  25).  This 
"saviour"  and  "restorer"  was  Jeroboam.  He 
not  only  repelled  the  Syrian  invaders,  but  took 
their  capital  city  Damascus  (2  K.  xiv.  28  ;  Am.  i. 
3-5),  and  recovered  the  whole  of  the  ancient  domi- 
nion from  Hamath  to  the  Dead  Sea  (xiv.  25  ;  Am. 
vi.  14).  Ammon  and  Moab  were  reconquered 
(Am.  i.  13,  ii.  1-3)  ;  the  Transjordanic  tribes  were 
restored  to  their  territory  (2  K.  xiii.  5  ;  1  Chi-,  v. 
17-22). 

But  it  was  merely  an  outward  restoration. 
The  sanctuary  at  Bethel  was  kept  up  in  royal  state 
(Am.  vii.  13),  but  drunkenness,  licentiousness,  and 
oppression,  prevailed  in  the  country  (Am.  ii.  S-8, 
iv.  1,  vi.  6;  Hos.  iv.  12-14.  i.  2  ,  and  idolatry 
was  united  with  the  worship  of  Jehovah  (Hos.  iv. 
13,  xiii.  6). 

Amos  prophesied  the  destruction  of  Jeroboam 
and  his  house  by  the  sword  (Am.  vii.  9,  17),  and 


but  what  is  here  alluded  to,  or  when  it  took  place,  we 
have  at  present  no  clue  to. 


JEROHAM 

Amaziah,  the  high-priest  of  Bethel,  complained  to 
the  king  (Am.  vii.  10-13).  The  effect  does  not 
appear.  Hosea  (Hos.  i.  1)  also  denounced  the 
crimes  of  the  nation.  The  prediction  of  Amos  was 
not  fulfilled  as  regarded  the  king  himself.  He  was 
buried  with  his  ancestors  in  state  (2  K.  xiv.  29). 

Ewald  (Gesch.  iii.  561  note)  supposes  that  Jero- 
boam was  the  subject  of  Ps.  xlv.  [A.  P.  S.] 

JERO'HAM  (DIVI? :  Jerohnm).  1.  (Upo- 
Podn,  both  MBS.  at  1  Chr.  vi.  27 ;  but  Alex. 
'lepedfJ.  at  ver.  34),  father  of  Elkanah,  the  father 
of  Samuel,  of  the  house  of  Kohath.  His  father  is 
called  Eliab  at  1  Chr.  vi.  27,  Eliel  at  ver.  34,  and 
Elihu  at  1  Sam.  i.  1.  Jeroham  must  have  been 
about  the  same  age  as  Eli.  [A.  C.  H.] 

2.  I^lpod/x,  Alex.  'IepoctjU.)  A  Benjamite,  and 
the  founder  of  a  family  of  Bene-Jeroham  (1  Chr. 
viii.  27).  They  were  among  the  leaders  of  that  part 
of  the  tribe  which  lived  in  Jerusalem,  and  which  is 
here  distinguished  from  the  part  which  inhabited 
Gibeon.     Probably  the  same  person  is  intended  in 

3.  ('lepofZod/j..)  Father  (or  progenitor)  of  Ibneiah, 
one  of  the  leading  Benjamites  of  Jerusalem  (1  Chr. 
ix.  8 ;  comp.  3  and  9). 

4.  Qlpad/x,  Alex,  'lepadfx.)  A  descendant  of 
Aaron,  of  the  house  of  Immer,  the  leader  of  the 
sixteenth  course  of  priests  ;  son  of  Pashur  and  father 
of  Adaiah  (1  Chr.  ix.  12).  He  appears  to  be  men- 
tioned again  in  Neh.  xi.  12  (a  record  curiously  and 
puzzlingly  parallel  to  that  of  1  Chr.  ix.,  though 
with  some  striking  differences),  though  there  he  is 
stated  to  belong  to  the  house  of  Malchiah,  who  was 
leader  of  the  fifth  course  (and  comp.  Neh.  xi.  14). 

5.  ('Ipoa^t.)  Jeroham  of  Gedor  ("in^il  \0), 
some  of  whose  "  sons  "  joined  David  when  he  was 
taking  refuge  from  Saul  at  Ziklag  (1  Chr.  xii.  7). 
The  list  purports  to  be  of  Benjamites  (see  ver.  2, 
where  the  word  "  even  "  is  interpolated,  and  the 
last  five  words  belong  to  ver.  3).  But  then  how 
can  the.  presence  of  Korhites  (ver.  7),  the  descend- 
ants of  Korah  the  Levite,  be  accounted  for  ? 

6.  Qlpcodfi,  Alex.  'Iwpdfj..)  A  Danite,  whose  son 
or  descendant  Azareel  was  head  of  his  tribe  in  the 
time  of  David  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  22). 

7.  {'laipd/A.)  Father  of  Azariah,  one  of  the  "cap- 
tains of  hundreds  "  in  the  time  of  Athaliah  ;  one  of 
those  to  whom  Jehoiada  the  priest  confided  his  scheme 
for  the  restoration  of  Joash  (2  Chr.  xxiii.  1).  [G.l 

JERUBBAAL  (/MSD*  :  'Upo/idaX  ;  Alex. 
StKCMTTTipiov  rod  BdaX,  Judg.  vi.  32,  'IpojSaaA.  in 
vii.  1  :  Jcrobaal),  the  surname  of  Gideon  which  he 
acquired  in  consequence  of  destroying  the  altar  of 
Baal,  when  his  father  defended  him  from  the 
vengeance  of  the  Abi-ezrites.  The  A.  V.  of  Judg. 
vi.  32,  which  has  "  therefore  on  that  day  he  called 
him  Jerubbaal,"  implying  that  the  surname  was 
given  by  Joash,  should  rather  be,  in  accordance 
with  a  well-known  Hebrew  idiom,  "  one  called 
him,"  i.  e.  he  was  called  by  the  men  of  his  city. 


JERUSALEM 


981 


e  67ri  Tijs  ai'a/SaaeuJS,  AeyOjUeVi]?  8'  c^o^t)?,  Jos.  Ant. 
ix.  1,  §2. 

A  Other  names  borne  by  Jerusalem  are  as  follows  : 

1.  Arikl,  the  "  lion  of  God,"  or  according  to  another 
interpretation,  the  "  hearth  of  God "  (Is.  xxix.  1,  2, 
V  ;  comp.  Ez.  xliii.  16).  For  the  former  significa- 
tion compare  I's.  lxxvi.  1,  2  (Stanley,  S.  t$-  /'.  1711. 

2.  ri  ayia  7roAis,  "  the  holy  city,"  Malt.  iv.  5  and 
xxvii.  53  only.  Both  these  passages  would  seem  to 
refer  toZion — the  sacred  portion  of  (he  place,  in  which 
the  Temple  was  situated.    It  also  occurs— ri  n.  r)  iy. — 


bw 


The  LXX.  in  the  same  passage  have  e/caAeo-ei/ 
avrb,  "  he  called  it,"  i.  e.  the  altar  mentioned  in 
the  preceding  verse  ;  but  as  in  all  other  passages 
they  recognise  Jerubbaal  as  the  name  of  Gideon, 
the  reading  should  probably  be  avrbv.  In  Judg. 
viii.  35  the  Vulg.  strictly  follows  the  Heb.,  Jerobaal 
Gedeon.  The  Alex,  version  omits  the  name  alto- 
gether from  Judg.  ix.  57.  Besides  the  passages 
quoted  it  is  found  in  Judg.  vii.  1,  viii.  29,  ix.  1, 
5,  10,  19,  24,  28,  and  1  Sam.  xii.  11.  In  a  frag- 
ment of  Porphyry,  quoted  by  Eusebius  (Praep. 
Ev.  i.  9,  §21),  Gideon  appears  as  Hierombalos 
( 'Iepo/xjSaAos),  the  priest  of  the  God  'Ieuco,  or 
Jehovah,  from  whom  the  Phoenician  chronicler, 
Sanchoniatho  of  Beyrout,  received  his  information 
with  regard  to  the  affairs  of  the  Jews.  It  is  not  a 
little  remarkable  that  Josephus  omits  all  mention 
both  of  the  change  of  name  and  of  the  event  it 
commemorates.     ^Gideon.]  [W.  A.  W.] 

JERUB'BESHETH  (nB^T:  LXX., followed 
by  the  Vulgate,  reads  'UpofedaA,  or  Cod.  Alex. 
'lepofioa/u.),  a  name  of  Gideon  (2  Sam.  xi.  21).  A 
later  generation  probably  abstained  from  pronouncing 
the  name  (Ex.  xxiii.  13)  of  a  false  god,  and  there- 
fore changed  Gideon's  name  (Judg.  vi.  32)  of  Je- 
rubbaal  =  "  with  whom  Baal  contends,"  into  Jerub- 
besheth  =  "  with  whom  the  idol  contends."  Comp. 
similar  changes  (1  Chr.  viii.  .",2,  34)  of  Eshbaal 
for  Ishbosheth,  and  Jleribbaal  for  Mephibosheth. 

[W.  T.  B.] 

JERU'EL,  the  WILDERNESS  of  p21D 
1 :  7]  ip-ft/xos  'Iepn'jA :  Jeruel),  the  place  in 
which  Jehoshaphat  was  informed  by  Jahaziel  the 
Levite  that  he  should  encounter  the  hordes  of  Am- 
nion, Moab,  and  the  Mehunims,  who  were  swarming 
round  the  south  end  of  the  Dead  Sea  to  the  attack  of 
Jerusalem :  "  Ye  shall  .find  them  at  the  end  of  the 
wady,  facing  the  wilderness  of  Jeruel"  (2  Chr.  xx. 
16).  The  "  wilderness "  contained  a  watch-tower 
(ver.  24),  from  which  many  a  similar  incursion  had 
probably  been  descried.  It  was  a  well-known  s]  n>t , 
for  it  has  the  definite  article.  Or  the  word  (nSVftH  ) 
may  mean  a  commanding  ridge,e  below  which  the 
"  wilderness  "  lay  open  to  view.  The  name  has  not 
been  met  with,  but  may  yet  be  found  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  Tekoaand  Berachah  (perhaps  Bereikut), 
east  of  the  road  between  Urtds  and  Hebron.    [G.] 

JERUSALEM  (D^>BMT,  i.e.  Terushalaim; 
or,  in  the  more  extended  form,  DvB'-IT,  in  1  Chr. 
iii.  5,  2  Chr.  xxv.  1,  xxxii.  9.  Esth.  ii.  6,  Jer.  xxvi. 
IS,  only  ;  iu  the  Chaldee  passages  of  Ezra  and  Daniel, 
DX'-IT1,  i*.  c.  yerushlem  :  LXX.  'UpovaaX-i^j.  ; 
N.  T.  apparently  indifferently  'UpovaaX-fi/j.  and 
t*  'UpoffSXufxa:  Vulg.  Cod.  Amiat.  Hierusalem 
and  Hiefosolyma,  but  in  other  old  copies  ,/.,//- 
salem,  Jcrosolyma.  In  the  A.  V.  of  1611  it  is 
"  Ierusalem,"  in  0.  T.  and  Apocr. ;  but  in  X.  T. 
"  Hierusalem.")  a 

Rev.  xi.  2.  3.  Aelia  Capitolina,  the  name  bestowed  by 
the  emperor  Hadrian  (Aelius  Hadrianns)  on  the  city  as 

rebuilt  by  him,  a.d.  135,  130.  These  two  names  of  the 
Emperor  are  inscribed  on  the  well-known  stone  in  the 
south-wall  of  the  Aksa,  one  of  the  few  Roman  relics 
about  which  there  can  be  no  dispute.  This  name  is 
usually  employed  by  Kusebius  (AcAux.)  and  Jerome,  in 
their  Onomasticon.  By  Ptolemy  it  is  given  as  Kain- 
twAio?  (lieland,  r<il .  462).  4.  The' Arabic  names 
are  cl-Klnttls,  "the  holy,"  or  Beit  eUMakdis,  "the 
holy  house,"  "  the  sanctuary."    The  former  is  that  in 


082 


JERUSALEM 


On  the  derivation  and  signification  of  the  name 
considerable  difference  exists  among  the  authorities. 
The  Rabbies  state  that  the  name  Shalem  was  be- 
stowed on  it  by  Shem  (identical  in  their  traditions 
with  Melchizedek),  and  the  name  Jireh  by  Abra- 
ham, after  the  deliverance  of  Isaac  on  Mount  Mo- 
riah,b  and  that  the  two  were  afterwards  combined, 
lest,  displeasure  should  be  felt  by  either  of  the  two 
Saints  at  the  exclusive  use  of  one  (Beresh.  Rab.  in 
Otho,  Lex.  Bab.  s.  v.,  also  Lightfoot).  Others, 
quoted  by  Reland  (833),  would  make  it  mean  "  fear 
of  Salem,"  or  "  sight  of  peace."  The  suggestion  of 
Reland  himself,  adopted  by  Simonis  (Onom.  467), 
and  Ewald  {Gcsch.  iii.  155  note)  is  tbf  B'-IT, 
"  inheritance  of  peace,"  but  this  is  questioned  by 
Gesenius  (Thcs.  628  6)  and  Fiirst  (Handwb.  547  6), 
who  prefer  D?i^  -IIS  the  "  foundation  of  peace."  c 
Another  derivation,  proposed  by  the  fertile  Hitzig 
{Jesaia,  p.  2),  is  named  by  the  two  last  great 
scholars  only  to  condemn  it.  Others  again,  looking 
to  the  name  of  the  Canaauite  tribe  who  possessed 
the  place  at  the  time  of  the  conquest,  would  pro- 
pose Jebus-salem  (Reland,  834),  or  even  Jebus- 
Solomou,  as  the  name  conferred  on  the  city  by 
that  monarch  when  he  began  his  reign  of  tran- 
quillity. 

Another  controversy  relates  to  the  termination 
of  the  name — Jerushalaim  —  the  Hebrew  dual ; 
and  which,  by  Simonis  and  Ewald,  is  unhesitatingly 
referred  to  the  double  formation  of  the  city,  while 
reasons  are  shown  against  it  by  Reland  and  Gese- 
nius. It  is  certain  that  on  the  two  occasions  where 
the  latter  portion  of  the  name  appears  to  be  given 
for  the  whole  (Gen.  adv.  18  ;  Ps.  lxxvi.  2)  it  is 
Shalem,  and  not  Shalaim  ;  also  that  the  five  places, 
where  the  vowel  points  of  the  Masorets  are  sup- 
ported by  the  letters  of  the  original  text,  are  of  a 
late  date,  when  the  idea  of  the  double  city,  and 
its  reflection  m  the  name,  would  have  become 
familiar  to  the  Jews.  In  this  conflict  of  authorities 
the  suggestion  will  perhaps  occur  to  a  bystander 
that  the  original  formation  of  the  name  may  have 
been  anterior  to  the  entrance  of  the  Israelites  on 
Canaan,  and  that  Jerushalaim  may  be  the  attempt 
to  give  an  intelligible  Hebrew  form  to  the .  original 
archaic  name,  just  as  centuries  afterwards,  when 
Hebrews  in  their  turn  gave  way  to  Greeks,  at- 
tempts were  made  to  twist  Jerushalaim  itself  into 
a  shape  which  should  be  intelligible  to  Greek 
ears.d  'Iepo  ffoAvfxa,  "  the  holy  Solyma  "  (Joseph. 
B.  J.  vi.  10),  'Upbv  y,a\ofj.a>vos,e  the  "  holy 
place  of  Solomon"  (Eupolemus,  in  Euseb.  Br. 
Ev.  ix.  34),  or,  on  the  other  hand,  the  curious 
fancy  quoted  by  Josephus  (Ap.  i.  34,  35)  from 
Lysimachus — 'Up6<rv\a,  "  spoilers  of  temples  " — 


ordinary  use  at  present.  The  latter  is  found  in  Arabic 
chronicles.  The  name  esh-Shertf,  "  the  venerable,"  or 
"  the  noble,"  is  also  quoted  by  Schultens  in  his  Index 
Gcogr.  in  Vit.  Salad.  5.  The  corrupt  form  of  Au- 
rushlim  is  found  in  Edrisi  (Jaubert,  i.  315),  possibly 
quoting  a  Christian  writer. 

b  The  question  of  the  identity  of  MoiUAn  with 
Jerusalem  will  be  examined  under  that  head. 

0  Such  mystical  interpretations  as  those  of  Origen, 
to  nveviJ.a.  xapiros  avrmv  (from  fill  and  D?E£*),  or 
Upbv  eipiji'T);,  where  half  the  name  is  interpreted  as 
Greek  and  half  as  Hebrew,  curious  as  they  are,  cannot 
be  examined  here.  (See  the  catalogues  preserved  by 
Jerome.) 

d  Other  instances  of  similar  Greek  forms  given  to 
Hebrew  names  are  'Ieptxw  and  'Iepo^aj. 


JERUSALEM 

are  perhaps  not  more  violent  adaptations,  or  more 
wide  of  the  real  meaning  of  "  Jerusalem,"  than  that 
was  of  the  original  name  of  the  city. 

The  subject  of  Jerusalem  naturally  divides  itself 
into  three  heads  : — 

I.  The  place  itself:  its  origin,  position,  and 
physical  characteristics. 

II.  The  annals  of  the  city. 

III.  The  topography  of  the  town;  the  relative 
localities  of  its  various  parts  ;  the  sites  of  the 
"  Holy  Places  "  ancient  and  modern,  &c. 

I.  The  place  itself. 

The  arguments— if  arguments  they  can  be  called 
— for  and  against  the  identity  of  the  "  Salem  "  of 
Melchizedek  (Gen.  xiv.  18)  with  Jerusalem — the 
"Salem"  of  a  late  Psalmist  (Ps.  lxxvi.  2) — are 
almost  equally  balanced.  In  favour  of  it  are  the 
unhesitating  statement  of  Josephus  {Ant.  i.  10,  2  ; 
vii.  3,  2;  B.  J.  vi.  10 f)  and  Eusebius  {Onom. 
'lepovaa\y)/j.),  the  recurrence  of  the  name  Salem 
in  the  Psalm  just  quoted,  where  it  undoubtedly 
means  Jerusalem,s  and  the  general  consent  in  the 
identification.  On  the  other  hand  is  the  no  less 
positive  statement  of  Jerome,  grounded  on  more 
reason  than  he  often  vouchsafes  for  his  statements  h 
(Ep.  ad  Evangelum,  §7),  that  "  Salem  was  not 
Jerusalem,  as  Josephus  and  all  Christians  (nostri 
omnes)  believe  it  to  be,  but  a  town  near  Scythopolis, 
which  to  this  day  is  called  Salem,  where  the 
magnificent  ruins  of  the  palace  of  Melchizedek  are 
still  seen,  and  of  which  mention  is  made  in  a  subse- 
quent passage  of  Genesis — '  Jacob  came  to  Salem, 
a  city  of  Shechem  '  (Gen.  xxxiii.  18)."  Elsewhere 
(Onomasticon,  "Salem")  Eusebius  and  he  identify 
it  with  Shechem  itself.  This  question  will  be  dis- 
cussed under  the  head  of  Salem.  Here  it  is 
sufficient  to  say  (1)  that  Jerusalem  suits  the  cir- 
cumstances of  the  narrative  rather  better  than  any 
place  further  north,  or  more  in  the  heart  of  the 
country.  It  would  be  quite  as  much  in  Abiam's 
road  from  the  sources  of  Jordan  to  his  home 
under  the  oaks  of  Hebron,  and  it  would  be  more 
suitable  for  the  visit  of  the  king  of  Sodom.  In 
fact  we  know  that,  in  later  times  at  least,  the  usual 
route  from  Damascus  avoided  the  central  highlands 
of  the  country  and  the  neighbourhood  of  Shechem, 
where  Salim  is  now  shown.  (See  Pompey's  route 
in  Joseph.  Ant.  xiv.  3,  §4  ;  4,  §1.)  (2)  It  is  per- 
haps some  confirmation  of  the  identity,  at  any  rate 
it  is  a  remarkable  coincidence,  that  the  king  of 
Jerusalem  in  the  time  of  Joshua  should  bear  the 
title  Adoni-zedek — almost  precisely  the  same  as 
that  of  Melchizedek. 

The  question  of  the  identity  of  Jerusalem  with 
"  Cadytis,  a  large  city  of  Syria,"  "  almost  as  large 


e  Philo  carries  this  a  step  further,  and,  bearing  in 
view  only  the  sanctity  of  the  place,  he  discards  the 
Semitic  member  of  the  name,  and  calls  it  'Iepon-oAts. 
It  is  exactly  the  complement  of  ttoAis  SoA.u^a  (Pausa- 
nias,  viii.  16). 

f  In  this  passage  he  even  goes  so  far  as  to  say  that 
Melchizedek,  "  the  first  priest  of  God,"  built  there  the 
first  temple,  and  changed  the  name  of  the  city  from 
Soluma  to  Hierosoluma. 

8  A  contraction  analogous  to  others  with  which  we 
are  familiar  in  our  own  poetry  ;  e.  gr.  hdiu,  or  Kdina, 
for  Edinburgh. 

h  Winer  is  wrong  in  stating  {Seahob.  ii.  79)  that 
Jerome  bases  this  statement  on  a  Kabbinical  tradition. 
The  tradition  that  he  quotes,  in  §5  of  the  same  Ep., 
is  as  to  the  identity  of  Melchizedek  with  Shem. 


JERUSALEM 

as  Sardis,"  which  is  mentioned  by  Herodotus  (ii. 
159,  iii.  5)  as  having  been  taken  by  Pharaoh- 
Necho,  need  not  be  investigated  in  this  place.  It  is 
interesting,  and,  if  decided  in  the  affirmative,  so 
far  important  as  confirming  the  Scripture  narrative , 
but  does  not  in  any  way  add  to  our  knowledge  of 
the  history  of  the  city.  The  reader  will  find  it 
fully  examined  in  Rawlinson's  Herod,  ii.  246 ; 
Blakesley's  Herod. — Excursus  on  Bk.  iii.  ch.  5 
(both  against  the  identification)  ;  and  in  Kenrick's 
Egypt,  ii.  406,  and  Diet,  of  Gk.  and  Rom.  Geogr, 
ii.  17  (both  for  it). 

Nor  need  we  do  more  than  refer  to  the  traditions 
— if  traditions  they  are,  and  not  mere  individual 
speculations — of  Tacitus  (Hist.  v.  2. )  and  Plutarch 
(/is.  et  Osir.  ch.  31)  of  the  foundation  of  the  city 
by  a  certain  Hierosolymus,  a  son  of  the  Typhou 
(see  Winer's  note,  i.  545).  All  the  certain  infor- 
mation to  be  gathered  as  to  the  early  history  of 
Jerusalem,  must  be  gathered  from  the  books  of  the 
Jewish  historians  alone. 

It  is  during  the  conquest  of  the  country  that 
Jerusalem  first  appears  in  definite  form  on  the 
scene  in  which  it  was  destined  to  occupy  so 
prominent  a  position.  The  earliest  notice  is  pro- 
bably that  in  Josh.  xv.  8  and  xviii.  16,  28,  describ- 
ing the  landmarks  of  the  boundaries  of  Judah  and 
Benjamin.  Here  it  is  styled  Ha-Jebusi,  i.  e.  "  the 
Jebusite"  (A.  V.  Jebusi),  after  the  name  of  its 
occupiers,  just  as  is  the  case  with  other  places  in 
these  lists.  [Jebusi.]  Next,  we  find  the  fonn 
Jebus  (Judg.  xix.  1U,  11)—"  Jebus,  which  is 
Jerusalem  ....  the  city  of  the  Jebusites;"  and 
lastly,  in  documents  which  profess  to  be  of  the 
same  age  as  the  foregoing — we  have  Jerusalem 
(Josh.  x.  1,  &c,  xii.  10  ;  Judg.  i.  7,  &c).  To  this 
we  have  a  parallel  in  Hebron,  the  other  great  city 
of  Southern  Palestine,  which  bears  the  alternative 
title  of  Kirjath-Arba  iu  these  very  same  documents. 

It  is  one  of  the  obvious  peculiarities  of  Jerusalem 
—  but  to  which  Professor  Stanley  appears  to  have 
been  the  first  to  call  attention — that  it  did  not 
become  the  capital  till  a  comparatively  late  date 
in  the  career  of  the  nation.  Bethel,  Shechem,  He- 
bron, had  their  beginnings  in  the  earliest  periods  of 
national  life — but  Jerusalem  was  not  only  not  a 
chief  city,  it  was  not  even  possessed  by  the 
Israelites  till  they  had  gone  through  one  complete 
stage  of  their  life  in  Palestine,  and  the  second — 
the  monarchy — had  been  fairly  entered  on.  (See 
Stanley,  S.  i'  7'.  169.) 

Thr  explanation  of  this  is  no  doubt  in  some  mea- 
sure to  be  found  in  the  fact  that  the  seats  of  the 
government  ami  the  religion  of  the  nation  were 
originally  fixed  farther  north — first  at  Shechem 
ami  Shiloh  ;  then  at  Gibeah,  Nob,  and  Gibeon  ; 
but  it  is  also  no  doubt  partly  due  to  the  natural 
strength  of  Jerusalem.  The  heroes  of  Joshua's 
army  who  traced  the  boundary-line  which  was  to 
separate  the  possessions  of  Judah  and  Benjamin, 
when,  after  passing  the  spring  of  En-rogel,  they 


JERUSALEM 


983 


1  This  appears  from  an  examination  of  the  two 
corresponding  documents,  Josh.  xv.  7,  8,  and  xviii. 
16,  17.  The  line  was  drawn  from  En-shcmesh — 
probably  Ain  Hum/,  below  Bethany  —to  En-rogel— 
cither  Ain  Ayub  or  the  fountain  of  the  Virgin; 
thence  it  went  by  the  ravine  of  Ilinnom  and  the 
southern  shoulder  of  the  Jebusite — the  steep  slope  of 
the  modern  Zion  ;  climbed  the  heights  on  the  weal  of 
the  ravine,  and  struck  off  to  the  spring  at  Nephtoab, 
probably  I.ifl/i.  The  other  view,  which  is  made  tin- 
most  of  bv   Blunt   in  one  of  his  ingenious   "  coin- 


went  along  the  "  ravine  of  the  son  of  Hinnom," 
and  looked  up  to  the  "  southern  shoulder  of  the 
Jebusite"  (Josh.  xv.  7,  8)  must  have  felt  that  to 
scale  heights  so  great  and  so  steep  would  have 
fully  tasked  even  their  tried  prowess.  We  shall 
see  when  we  glance  through  the  annals  of  the  city 
that  it  did  effectually  resist  the  tribes  of  Judah  and 
Simeon  not  many  years  later.  But  when,  after  the 
death  of  Ishbosheth,  David  became  king  of  a  united 
and  powerful  people,  it  was  necessary  for  him  to 
leave  the  remote  Hebron  and  approach  nearer  to  the 
bulk  of  his  dominions.  At  the  same  time  it  was 
impossible  to  desert  the  great  tribe  to  which  he 
belonged,  and  over  whom  he  had  been  reigning  for 
seven  years.  Out  of  this  difficulty  Jerusalem  was 
the  natural  escape,  and  accordingly  at  .Jerusalem 
David  fixed  the  seat  of  his  throne  and  the  future 
sanctuary  of  his  nation. 

The  boundary  between  Judah  and  Benjamin, 
the  north  boundary  of  the  former  and  the  south  of 
the  latter,  ran  at  the  foot  of  the  hill  on  which  the 
city  stands,  so  that  the  city  itself  was  actually  in 
Benjamin,  while  by  crossing  the  narrow  ravine  of 
Hinnom  you  set  foot  on  the  territory  of  Judah.' 
That  it  was  not  far  enough  to  the  north  to  com- 
mand the  continued  allegiance  of  .the  tribe  of 
Ephraim,  and  the  others  which  lay  above  him,  is 
obvious  from  the  fact  of  the  separation  which  at 
last  took  place.  It  is  enough  for  the  vindication  of 
David  in  having  chosen  it  to  remember  that  that 
separation  did  not  take  place  during  the  reigns  of 
himself  or  his  son,  and  was  at  last  precipitated  by 
misgovernment  combined  with  feeble  shortsighted- 
ness. And  if  not  actually  in  the  centre  of  Palestine 
it  was  yet  virtually  so.  "  It  was  on  the  ridge,  the 
broadest  and  most  strongly  marked  ridge  of  the 
back-bone  of  the  complicated  hills  which  extend 
through  the  whole  country  from  the  Plain  of 
Esdraelon  to  the  Desert.  Every  wanderer,  every 
conqueror,  every  traveller  who  has  trod  the  central 
route  of  Palestine  from  N.  to  S.  must  have  passed 
through  the  table-land  of  Jerusalem.  It  was  the 
water-shed  between  the  streams,  or  rather  the  tor- 
rent-beds, which  find  their  way  eastward  to  the 
Jordan,  and  those  which  pass  westward  to  the 
Mediterranean  (Stanley,  S.  $  P.  176)." 

This  central  position,  as  expressed  in  the  words 
of  Ezekiel  (v.  5),  "I  have  set  Jerusalem  in  the 
midst  of  the  nations  and  countries  round  about  her," 
led  in  later  ages  to  a  definite  belief  that  the  city 
was  actually  in  the  centre  of  the  earth — in  the 
words  of  Jerome,  "  umbilicus  terrae,"  the  central 
boss  or  navel  of  the  world. J  (See  the  quotations 
in  Reland,  Pal.  52  and  838  ;  Jos.  B.  J.  iii.  3,  §;> ; 
•also  Stanley,  S.  Sf  P.  116.) 

At  the  same  time  it  should  not  be  overlooked 
that,  while  thus  central  to  the  people  of  the 
country,  it  had  the  advantage  of  being  remote  from 
the  great  high  road  of  the  nations  which  so  fre- 
quently passed  by  Palestine,  and  therefore  enjoyed 
a  certain  immunity  from  disturbance.     The  only 


cidences"  (Pt.  ii.  17),  and  is  also  favoured  by  Stan- 
ley (5.  .$•  P.  176),  is  derived  from  a  .Jewish  tradition, 
quoted  by  Lightfoot  (Prospect  of  the  Temple,  eh.  1), 

to  the  effect  that  the  altars  and  sanctuary  were  in 
Benjamin,  the  courts  of  the  Temple  were  in  Judah. 

j  This  is  prettily  expressed  in  a  rabbinical  figure 
quoted  by  Otho  (Lex.  266)  :— "  The  world  is  like  to 
an  eye;  the  white  of  the  eye  is  tin'  ocean  BUrrounding 
tlir  world  ;  the  black  is  the  world  itself;  the  pupil  is 
Jerusalem,  and  the  image  in  the  pupil,  the  Temple." 


984 


JERUSALEM 


practicable  route  for  a  great  army,  with  baggage, 
siege-trains,  &c,  moving  between  Egypt  and  Assyria 
was  by  the  low  plain  which  bordered  the  sea-coast 
from  Tyre  to  Pelusium.  From  that  plain  the  cen- 
tral table-land  on  whirl)  Jerusalem  stood  was  ap- 
proached by  valleys  and  passes  generally  too  indi- 
cate and  precipitous  for  the  passage  of  large  bodies. 
One  road  there  was  [ess  rugged  than  the  rest — that 
from  Jafia  and  Lydda  up  the  pass  of  the  Beth- 
herons  to  Gibeon,  and  f.hcncc,  over  the  hills,  to  the 
north  side  of  Jerusalem ;  and  by  this  route,  with 
few  if  any  exceptions,  armies  seem  to  have  ap- 
proached the  city.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  we 
shall  find,  in  tracing  the  annals  of  Jerusalem,  thai 
great  forces  frequently  passed  between  Egypt  and 
Assyria,  and  battles  were  fought  in  the  plain  by 
large  armies,  nay,  that  sieges  of  the  towns  on  the 
Mediterranean  coast  were  conducted,  lasting  tin- 
years,  without  apparently  affecting  Jerusalem  in 
the  least. 

Jerusalem  stands  in  latitude  :;l°  46'  35"  North, 
and  longitude  '■>'>"  18'  30"  Ea  t  of  Greenwich.' 
It  is  32  miles  distant  from  the  sea,  and  l.S  from  the 
Jordan  ;  20  from  Hebron,  and  36  from  Samaria. 
"  In  several  respects,"  says  Professor  Stanley,  "  its 
situation  is  singular  among  the  cities  of  Palestine. 

Its  elevation  is  remarkable;  occasioned  not  from  its 
being  on  the  summit  of  one  of  the  numerous  hills  of 
Judaea,  like  most  of  the  towns  and  villages,  but 
because  it  is  on  the  edge  of  one  of  the  highest  table- 
lands of  the  country.  Hebron  indeed  is  higher  still 
by  some  bundled  feet,  and  from  the  south,  accord- 
ingly (even  from  Bethlehem),  the  approach  to 
Jerusalem  is  by  a  slight  descent.  But  from  any 
other  sidethe  ascent  is  perpetual  ;  and  to  tie-  tra- 
veller approaching  the  city  from  the  E.  or  W. 
it  must  always  have  presented  the  appearance 
beyond  any  other  capital  of  the  then  known  world 
— we  may  say  beyond  any  important  city  that  has 
ever  existed  on  the  earth — of  a  mountain  city; 
breathing,  as  compared  with  the  sultry  plains  of 
Jordan,  a  mountain  air;  enthroned,  as  compared 
with  Jericho  or  Damascus,  Gaza  or  Tyre,  on  a 
mountain  outness"  (8.  &  I'.  I 7m,  I  ), 

The  elevation  of  Jerusalem  is  a  subject  of  con- 
stant reference  and  exultation  by  the  Jewish  writers. 
Their  fervid  poetry  abounds  with  allusions  to  its 

height,"1  to  the  ascent  thither  of  the  tribes  from  all 
parts  of  the  country.  It  was  the  habitation  of 
Jehovah,  from  which  "  lb-  Looked  upon  all  the 
inhabitants  of  the  world"  (Ps.  xrxiii.  14):  its  kings 
Were  "higher  than  the  kings  of  the  earth"  (I's. 
I x x x i \ .  27).  In  the  latei-  Jewish  literature  of  nar- 
rative and  description  this  poetry  is  reduced  i<> 
prose,  and  in  the  most  exaggerated  form.    Jerusalem 

was  so  high  that  the  flames  of  .lamnia  were  visible 
from   it    (2   Mace.    xii.   !l).      From   the   tower  of 

I'scphinus,  outside  the  walls,  COuld  be  discerned  (Hi 
the  one   hand    the  Mediterranean  Sea,   on   the  other 

the  country  of  Arabia  (Jos.  />'../.  v.4,§3).    Hebron 

could  lie  seen  from  the  roofs  of  the  Temple  (Light- 
foot,  Chor.  Cent.  xlix.).  The  same  thing  can  he 
traced  in  .losephus's  account  of  the  environs  of  the 
city,  in  which  he  has  exaggerated  what  is  in  truth  a 
remarkable  ravine,  to  a  depth  so  enormous  that  the 

heel  swam  and  the  eves  failed  in  gazing  into  its 
recesses  (Ant.  xv.  I  I,  §5). 


k  Such  is  tin-  result,  (if  tie-  latest,  ol.serval  ions  pos- 
sessed by  the  Lords  of  the  Admiralty,  ami  officially 
communicated  to  the  Consul  of  Jerusalem  in  1852 
(Rob.  iii.  183).     To  what  part  of  the  town  tin-  ob- 


JERUSALEM 

In  exemplification  of  these  remarks  it  may  be 

said  that,  the  general  elevation  of  the  \\e,te,ii 
ridge  of  the  city,  which  forms  its  highest  point, 
is  about  2600  feet  above  the  level  of  tlr 
The  Mount  of  Olives  rises  slightly  above'  this — 
2724  feet.  Beyond  the  Mount  of  Olives,  however, 
the  descent  is  remarkable;  Jericho-  I:;  miles  off — 
being  no  less  than  3624  feet  below,  viz.,  900  feet, 
under  the  Mediterranean.  On  the  north,  Bethel,  at 
a  i!i  lance  of  1 1  miles,  is  4  ID  feet  below  Jerusalem. 
On  the  west  1,'amleh — 25  miles— is  2271  feel,  below. 
Only  to  the  south,  as  already  remarked,  are  the 
heights  slightly  superior,-  Bethlehem,  2704  ;  He- 
bron, 3029.     A  table  of  the  heights  of  the  varion 

parts  of  the  city  I  environs  is  given  further  on. 

'file  situation  of  the  eily  in  reference    to    the    rest 

of  Palestine,  has  been  described  by  Dr.   Robinson 

in  a  well-known  passage,  which  is  so  complete  and 
graphic  a  statement  of  the  case,  that  we  take  fche 
liberty  of  giving  it  entire. 

"  Jerusalem  lies  near  the  summit  of  a  broad 
mountain  ridge.  This  ridge  or  mountainous  tract 
extends,  without  interruption,  from  the  plain  of 
Esdraelon  to  a  line  drawn  between  the  south  end 
of  the  Head  Sea  and  the  S.  K.  corner  of  the  Medi- 
terranean: or  more  properly,  perhaps,  it,  may  be 
regarded  as  extending  as  liir  south  as  to  Jebel 
'Ann'/'  in  the  desert;  where  it  sinks  down  at  once 
to  the  level  of  the  great,  western  plateau.  This 
tract,    which    is    every   where    not,    less    than    from 

twenty  to  twenty-five  geographical  miles  in  breadth, 
is  in  fact  high  uneven  table-land.  It  every  where: 
forms  flu'  precipitous  western  wall  of  the 
valley  of  the  Jordan  and  the  Dead  Sea;  while  to- 
wards the  west  it  sinks  down  by  an  offset  into  a 
range  of  lower  hills,  which  lie  between  it  and  the 
great  plain  along  the  coast  of  the  Mediterranean. 
The  surface  of  this  upper  region  is  everywhere 
rocky,  uneven,  and  mountainous;  and  is  moreover 
cut    up   by  deep   valleys  which  run  east  or  west  on 

either  side  towards  the  .Ionian  or  the  Mediterra- 
nean. The  line  of  division,  or  water-shed,  between 
the  waters  of  these  valleys, — a  term  which  here 
applies  almost  exclusively  to  the  waters  of  the  rainy 
.  —follows  for  the  most  part  the  height  of 

land  along  the  ridge  ;  yet,  not,  so  but  that  the  heads 
of  the  valleys,  which  run  oil' in  dillerent    directions, 

often   interlap  for  a  con  iderable  distance.    Thus, 

for  example,  a.  valley  which  descends  to  the  Jordan 

often    has   its   head   a   mile  or  two  westward  of  the 

commencement  ol  other  valleys  which  run  to  the 

western  sea. 

"  From  the  great  plain  of  Ksdraelon  onwards  to- 
wards the  south,  the  mountainous  country  rises 
gradually,    forming    the   tract   anciently    known    as 

the  mountains  of  Ephraim  and  Judah ;  until  in  the 

vicinity  of  Hebron  if  attains  an  elevation  of  nearly 
3000  Paris  feel,  above  the  level  of  the  Mediterra- 
nean Sea.  Further  north,  on  a  line  drawn  from 
the    north    end    of   the    Head    Sea   towards  the  true 

west,  the  ridge  has  an  elevation  of  only  about  2500 

I'aris  feet;  and  here,  close  upon  the  water-shed,  lies 
the  city  of  Jerusalem. 

"Six  or  seven  miles  N.  and  N.W.  of  the  city 
is  spread  out  the  open  plain  or  basin  round  about 
el-Jib  (Gibeon),  extending  also  toward-  el-Btreh 
(Beeroth)  ;  the  waters  of  which  How  off  at  its  8.E. 


serrations  apply  is  not  stated.     '  :  only 

slightly  differing-,  will  be  found  In  Van  de  Velde'a 
Memoir,  6  I,  and  in  Rob.  i.  2.">n. 
1,1  See  the  passages  quoted  by  Stanley  {8.4  P.  171). 


JERUSALEM 

part  through  (he  deep  valley  here  called  by  the 
Arabs  Wady  Beit  Hanlnaj  but  to  which  the  monks 
and  travellers  have  usually  given  the  name  of  the 
Valley  of  Turpentine,  or  of  the  Terebinth,  on  the 
mistaken  supposition  that  it  is  the  ancient  Valley 
of  Elan.  This  great  valley  passes  along  is  a  S.W. 
direction  aa  hour  or  more  weal  of  Jerusalem  ;  and 
finally  opens  out  from  the  mountains  into  the 
western  plain,  at  the  distance  of  six  or  eight  hours 
S.W.  from  the  city,  under  the  name  of  Wady  es- 
S&rdr.  The  traveller,  on  his  way  from  Ramleh  to 
Jerusalem,  descends  into  and  crosses  this  deep 
valley  at  the  village  of  Kuldnieh  on  its  western 
side,  an  hour  and  a  half  from  the  latter  city.  On 
again  reaching  the  high  ground  on  its  eastern  side, 
he  enters  upon  an  open   tract  sloping  gradually 

downwards   towards   the   south   and   oast  :   and  sees 

before  bira,  at  the  distance  of  a  mile  and  a  half,  the 
walls  and  domes  of  the  Holy  City,  and  beyond  them 
the  higher  ridge  or  summit  of  the  Mount  of  ( 'lives. 
"The  traveller  now  descends  gradually  towards 
the  city  along  a  broad  swell  of  ground,  having  at 
some  distance  on  his  left  the  shallow  northern  part 
of  the  Valley  of  Jehoshaphat;  and  close  at  hand 

00    his    right   the   basin  which  forms   the  beginning 

of  the  Valley  of  llinnom.  Upon  the  broad  and 
elevated  promontory  within  the  fork  of  these  two 

valleys,  lies  the  Holy  City.  All  around  are  higher 
hills;  on  thi'  east,  the  Mount  of  Olives  ;  on  tlje 
south,  the  ilill  id'  Kvil  ('ounsel,  BO  called,  rising 
directly    from    the    Vale   of   llinnom;   on    tic   west, 

the  ground  rises  gently,  as  above  described,  to  the 

borders  of  the  greal   Wady;    while  on  the rth,  a 

bend  of  the  ridge  connected  with  the  Mount  of 
olives  bounds  the  prospect  at  the  distance  of  more 

than  a  mile.  Towards  the  S.W.  the  view  is  some- 
what more  open  ;  for  here  lies  the  plain  of  1,'ophaini, 

already  described,  commencing  just  at  the  southern 
brink  of  the  Valley  of  llinnom,  ami  stretching  oil' 

S.W. .where  it,  runs  to  the  western  sea.  In  the 
N.W.,  too,  the  eye  reaches  up  alone;  the  upper  part 

of  the  Valley  of  Jehoshaphal  ;  ami  from  many 
points,  can  discern  the  mosque  of  Neby  Samwil,  situ- 
ated on  a  lofty  ridge  beyond  the  gnat  Wady,  at 
the  distance  of  two  hours"  (Robinson's  Bibl.  Re- 
searches, i.  258-260). 

So  much   for   the   local    and   political    relation  of 

Jerusalem  to  the  country  in  general.    To  convex 

an  idea  of  its  individual  position,  we  may  say 
roughly,  ami  with  reference  to  the  accompanying 
Plan,  that  the  city  occupies  the  southern  termi- 
nation of  a  table-land,  which  is  cut  oil'  from  the 
Country    round    it  on  its  west,  South,  and  east  sides, 

by  ravines  more  than  usually  deep  and  precipitous. 
These  ravines  leave  tin'  level  of  the  table-land,  the 

our  on  the  west  ami  the  other  on  the  north-oast  of 
the  city,  and  fall  rapidly  until  they  form  a  junction 
below  its  south-east  corner.  The  eastern  one — the 
valley   of  the   Kedron,   commonly  called  the  Valley 

of  Jehoshaphat,  runs  nearly  straight  from  north  to 
south.  But  the  western  one  -the  Valley  of  Hin- 
nom — runs  south  for  a  time  and  then  takes  a  sudden 
bend  to  the  east  until  it  meets  the  Valley  of  Jeho- 

shaphal,  after  which  the  two  rush  oil' as  i to  the 

Dead  Sea,  How  sudden  is  their  descent  may  I"' 
gathered  from  the  fact,  that  the  level  at  the  point 
of  junction    al I  a  mile  and  a  quarter  from  the 

n  The  character  of  the  ravines  and  tlie  eastward 
slope  of  the  site  are  very  well  and  very  truthfully 
shown  in  a  view  in  Kaitlotl's  Wolkt,  entitled  "Mount 

Zion,  Jerusalem,  from  the  itiii  or  Kvil  counsel." 


JERUSALEM 


98/5 


starting  point  of  each  —  is  more  than  600  feet 
below  that  of  the  upper  plateau  from  which  they 
commenced  their  descent.  Thus,  while  on  the  north 
there  is  no  material  difference  between  the  general 
level  of  the  country  outside  the  walls,  and  that  of 
the  highest  parts  of  the  city;  on  the  other  three 
sides,  so  steep  is  the  fall  of  the  ravines,  so  trench- 
like  their  character,  and    so  close  do  t  he  v  keep  to  the 

promontory,  at  whose  feel  they  run,  as  to  leave  on  the 
beholder  almost  the  impression  of  the  ditch  at  the  foot 

of  a  fortress,  rather  than  of  valleys  formed  by  nature. 
The   promontory   thus  encircled   is   itself  divided 

by  a  longitudinal  ravine  running  up  it  from  south 
to  north,  rising  gradually  from  the  south  like  the 

external  ones,  till  at  last  it  arrives  at  the  level  of 
the  upper   plateau,   and   dividing    the   central    mass 

into  two  unequal  portions,  Of  these  two,  that  on 
the  west-  the  "Upper  City"  of  the  .lews, — the 
Mount  Zion  of  modem  tradition  -is  the  higher  and 

more  massive;  that  on  the  east  Mount  Mm  iah, 
the   "  Akra"   or  "lower  city"   of  JosephuS,   now 

occupied  by  the  great  Mohammedan  sanctuary  with 
its  mosques  and  domes— is  at  once  considerably  lower 

and  smaller,  so  that,  to  a  Spectator  from  the  south, 
the  city  appeal's  to  slope  sharply  towards  the  east." 
This  central  valley,  at  alioul   halfway  up  its  length, 

threw  out  a  subordinate  on  its  left  or  west  side, 
which  apparently  quitted  it  at  about  right  angles, 

and   made  its  way  up  to   the   general    level    of  the 

ground  at  the  present  Jaffa  or  Bethlehem  gate.  We 
say  apparently,  because  covered  as  the  ground  now 
is,  it  is  difficult  to  ascertain  the  point  exactly, 
(•pinions  differ  as  to  whether  the  straight  valley 

north  and  south,  or  its  southern  half,  with  the 
branch  just  spoken  of,  was  the  "  Tyropoeon  v  alley  " 

.■I  Josephus.     The  question  will  1 xamined   in 

Section  HI.  under  the  head  of  the  Topography  of  the 
Ancient  City. 

()ne  more  valley  must  be  noted.  It  was  on  the 
north  of  Moriah,  and  separated  it  from  a  hill  on 
which,  in  the  time  of  Josephus,  stood  a  suburb  or 
part  of  the  city  called  Bezetha,  or  the  New-town. 
Part  of  this  depression  is  still  preserved  in  the  large 

reservoir  with  two  arches,  usually  called  the  Tool 

ofBethesda,  near  the  St.  Stephen's  gate.  It  also 
will  bo  more  explicitly  spoken  of  in  the  examination 
of  the  ancient  topography. 

This  rough  sketch  of  the  terrain  of  Jerusalem, 

will   enable    the    reader   to   appreciate  I  he  tWO  great 

advantages  of  its  position.    On  the  one  hand  the 

ravines  which  entrench  it  on  the  west,  south,  and 
oast — out  of  which,  as  has  been  said,  the  roi  I  | 
slopes  of  the  cilv  rise  almost  liko  the  walls  of  a 
fortress  out  of  its  ditches,  must  have  rendered  it  im- 
pregnable on  those  quarters  to  the  warfare  of  the 
old  world.      On   the  other    hand,   its  junction  with 

the   more   level   ground  on  its  north  and  "th-West 

sides,  a  Horded  an  Opportunity  of  ox  pan  ion,  of  w  Inch 
we  know    advantage  was   taken,  and  which  gave  it. 

remarkable  superiority'  over  other  cities  of  Palestine, 
ami  especially  of  Judafa,  which,  though  secure  on 

their  hill-tops,  were  unable  to  expand  beyond  them 
(Stanley,  S.  $  /'.,   171,  5). 

The  heights  of  the  principal  points  in  and  round 

the    city,  above    the    Mnldcrr; an    Sea,    as    given, 

by  Lt.  Nan  de  Wide,  in  the  Mrnmir"  accompany- 
ing his  Map,  1858,  are  as  follow: — 

"  a  table  of  levels,  differing  somewhat  front  those 

ol    l.t.  Van  de  Velde,  will  he  found   in  Barclay's  City, 

LOS,  i. 

3  S 


986 


JEKUSALEM 


Feet. 

N.W.  corner  of  the  city  (Kasr  Jalud)    ....  2610 

Mount  Zion  (Coevacidmn) 2537 

Mount  Moriata  (Haram  esh  SheriJ")        ....  2429 

Bridge  over  the  Kedron,  near  Oe'thsemane  .     .     .  2281 

PoolofSiloam 2114 

Bir-ayub,  at  the  confluence  of  Hinnom  and  Kedron  1996 

Mount  of  Olives,  Church  of  Ascension  on  summit .  2724 

From  these  figures  it  will  be  seen  that  the  ridge 
on  which  the  western  half  of  the  city  is  built,  is 
tolerably  level  from  north  to  south  ;  that  the 
eastern  hill  is  more  than  a  hundred  feet  lower; 
and  that  from  the  latter  the  descent  to  the  floor  of 
the  valley  at  its  feet — the  Bir-ayub — is  a  drop 
of  nearly  450  feet. 

The  Mount  of  Olives  overtops  even  the  highest 
part  of  the  city  by  rather  more  than  100  feet,  and 
the  Temple-hill  by  no  less  than  300.  Its  northern 
and  southern  outliers — the  Viri  Galilaei,  Scopus, 
and  Mount  of  Offence — bend  round  slightly  towards 
the  city,  and  give  the  effect  of  "  standing  round 
about  Jerusalem."  Especially  would  this  be  the 
case  to  a  worshipper  in  the  Temple.  "  It  is  true," 
says  Professor  Stanley,  "  that  this  image  is  not 
realised,  as  most  persons  familiar  with  European 
scenery  would  wish,  and  expect  it  to  be  realised. 
.  .  .  Any  one  facing  Jerusalem  westward,  north- 
ward, or  southward  will  always  see  the  city  itself 
on  an  elevation  higher  than  the  hills  in  its  imme- 
diate neighbourhood,  its  towers  and  walls  standing 
out  against  the  sky,  and  not  against  any  high  back- 
ground, such  as  that  which  incloses  the  mountain 
towns  and  villages  of  our  own  Cumbrian  or  West- 
moreland valleys.  Nor  again  is  the  plain  on  which 
it  stands  inclosed  by  a  continuous,  though  distant, 
circle  of  mountains  like  Athens  or  Innspruck.  The 
mountains  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem  are  of 
unequal  height,  and  only  in  two  or  three  instances 
— Neby-Samicil,  Er-Eam,  and  Tuleil  el-Ful — 
rising  to  any  considerable  elevation.  Still  the}' 
act  as  a  shelter ;  they  must  be  surmounted  before 
the  traveller  can  see,  or  the  invader  attack,  the 
Holy  City;  and  the  distant  line  of  Moab  would 
always  seem  to  rise  as  a  wall  against  invaders  from 
the  remote  east.  It  is  these  mountains,  expressly 
including  those  beyond  the  Jordan,  which  are  men- 
tions! as  "standing  round  about  Jerusalem"  in 
another  and  more  terrible  sense,  when,  on  the  night 
of  the  assault  of  Jerusalem  by  the  Roman  armies, 
they  "  echoed  back  "  the  screams  of  the  inhabitants 
of  the  captured  city,  and  the  victorious  shouts  of 
the  soldiers  of  Titus.  The  situation  of  Jerusalem 
was  thus  not  unlike,  on  a  small  scale,  to  that  of 
Home,  saving  the  great  difference  that  Rome  was  in 
a  well-watered  plain,  leading  direct  to  the  sea, 
whereas  Jerusalem  was  on  a  bare  table-land,  in  the 
heart  of  the  country.  But  each  was  situated  on 
its  own  cluster  of  steep  hills ;  each  had  room  for 
future  expansion  in  the  surrounding  level ;  each, 
too,  had  its  nearer  and  its  more  remote  barriers  of 
protecting  hills — Rome  its  Janiculum  hard  by,  and 
its  Apennine  and  Alban  mountains  in  the  distance ; 
Jerusalem  its  Olivet  hard  by,  and  on  the  outposts 
of  its  plain,  Mizpeh,  Gibeon,  and  Ramah,  and  the 
ridge  which  divides  it  from  Bethlehem  (S.  fy  P. 
174,  5). 

Roads. — There  appear  to  have  been  but  two 
main  approaches  to  the  city.  1 .  From  the  Jordan 
valley  by  Jericho  and  the  Mount  of  Olives.  Tin's 
was  the  route  commonly  taken  from  the  north  and 
east  of  the  country  — as  from  Galilee  by  our  Lord 
(Luke  xvii.  11,  xviii.  35,  xix.  1,  29,  45,  &c),  from 
Damascus  by  Pompey  (Joseph.   Ant.  xiv.  3,  §4  ; 


JERUSALEM 

4,  §1),  to  Mahanaim  by  David  (2  Sam.  xv.  xvi."). 
It  was  also  the  route  from  places  in  the  central 
districts  of  the  country,  as  Samaria  (2  Chr.  xxviii. 
15).  The  latter  part  of  the  approach,  over  the  Mount 
of  Olives,  as  generally  followed  at  the  present  day, 
is  identical  with  what  it  was,  at  least  in  one  me- 
morable instance,  in  the  time  of  Christ.  A  path 
there  is  over  the  crown  of  the  hill,  but  the  com- 
mon route  still  runs  more  to  the  south,  round  the 
shoulder  of  the  principal  summit  (see  S.  if  P.  193). 
In  the  later  times  of  Jerusalem  this  road  crossed  the 
valley  of  the  Kedron  by  a  bridge  or  viaduct  on  a 
double  series  of  arches,  and  entered  the  Temple  by 
the  gate  Susan.  (See  the  quotations  from  the  Talmud 
in  Otho,  Lex.  Rab.  265 ;  and  Barclay,  102,  282.) 
The  insecure  state  of  the  Jordan  valley  has  thrown 
this  route  very  much  into  disuse,  and  has  diverted  the 
traffic  from  the  north  to  a  road  along  the  central  ridge 
of  the  country.  2.  From  the  great  maritime  plain 
of  Philistia  and  Sharon.  This  road  led  by  the  two 
Bethhorons  up  to  the  high  ground  at  Gibeon,  whence 
it  turned  south,  and  came  to  Jerusalem  by  Ramah 
and  Gibeah,  and  over  the  ridge  north  of  the  city. 
This  is  still  the  route  by  which  the  heavy  traffic  is 
carried,  though  a  shorter  but  more  precipitous  road 
is  usually  taken  by  travellers  between  Jerusalem 
and  Jaffa.  In  tracing  the  annals  we  shall  find  that 
it  was  the  route  by  which  large  bodies,  such  as 
armies,  always  approached  the  city,  whether  from 
Gaza  on  the  south,  or  from  Caesarea  and  Ptolemais 
on  the  north.  3.  The  communication  with  the 
mountainous  districts  of  the  south  is  less  distinct. 
Even  Hebron,  after  the  establishment  of  the  mo- 
narchy at  Jerusalem,  was  hardly  of  importance 
enough  to  maintain  any  considerable  amount  of 
communication,  and  only  in  the  wars  of  the  Macca- 
bees do  we  hear  of  any  military  operations  in  that 
region. 

The  roads  out  of  Jerusalem  were  a  special  sub- 
ject of  Solomon's  care.  He  paved  them  with  black 
stone — probably  the  basalt  of  the  Transjordanic 
districts  (Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  7,  §4). 

Gates. — The  situation  of  the  various  gates  of  the 
city  is  examined  in  Section  III.  It  may,  however, 
be  desirable  to  supply  here  a  complete  list  of  those 
which  are  named  in  the  Bible  and  Josephus,  with 
the  references  to  their  occurrences : — 

1.  Gate  of  Ephraim.  2  Chr.  xxv:  23;  Neh. 
viii.  16,  xii.  39.     This  is  probably  the  same  as  the 

2.  Gate  of  Benjamin.  Jer.  xx.  2,  xxxvii.  13  ; 
Zech.  xiv.  10.  If  so,  it  was  400  cubits  distant 
from  the 

3.  Corner  gate.  2  Chr.  xxv.  23,  xxvi.  9;  Jer. 
xxxi.  38;  Zech.  xiv.  10. 

4.  Gate  of  Joshua,  governor  of  the  city.  2  K. 
xxiii.  8. 

5.  Gate  between  the  two  walls.  2  K.  xxv.  4; 
Jer.  xxxix.  4. 

6.  Horse  gate.  Neh.  iii.  38  ;  2  Chr.  xxiii.  15; 
Jer.  xxxi.  40. 

7.  Ravine  gate  («'.  c.  opening  on  ravine  of  Hin- 
nom).    2  Chr.  xxvi.  9  ;  Neh.  ii.  13,  15,  iii.  13. 

8.  Fish  gate.  1  Chr.  xxxiii.  14  ;  Neh.  iii.  1  ; 
Zeph.  i.  16. 

9.  Dung  gate.     Neh.  ii.  13,  iii.  13. 

10.  Sheep  gate.     Neh.  iii.  1,  32,  xii.  39. 

11.  East  gate.     Neh.  iii.  29. 

12.  Miphkad.     Neh.  iii.  31. 

13.  Fountain  gate  (Siloam?).     Neh.  xii.  37. 

14.  Water  gate.  '  Neh.  xii.  37. 

15.  Old  gate.     Neh.  xii.  39. 

16.  Prison  gate.     Neh.  xii.  39. 


JERUSALEM 

17.  Gate  Harsith  (perhaps  the  .Sun  ;  A.  V.  East 
gate).     Jer.  xix.  2. 

18.  First  gate.     Zech.  xiv.  10. 

19.  Gate  Gennath  (gardens).     Joseph.  B.  J.  v. 
4,  §4. 

20.  Essenes'  gate.     Jos.  B.  J.  4,  §'2. 

To  these  should  be  added  the  following  gates  of 
the  Temple : — 

Gate  Sur.     2  K.  xi.  6.     Called  also 

Gate  of  foundation.     2  Chr.  xxiii.  5. 

Gate  of  the  guard,  or  behind  the  guard.  2  K. 
xi.  6,  19.     Called  the 

High  gate.    2  Chr.  xxiii.  20,  xxvii.  3;  2  K.  xv.  35. 

Gate  Shallecheth.     1  Chr.  xxvi.  16. 

Burial-grounds. — The  main  cemetery  of  the  city 
seems  from  an  early  date  to  have  been  where  it  is 
still — on  the  steep  slopes  of  the  valley  of  the  Kidron. 
Here  it  was  that  the  fragments  of  the  idol  abomina- 
tions, destroyed  by  Josiah,  were  cast  on  the  "  graves 
of  the  children  of  the  people  "  (2  K.  xxiii.  6),  and 
the  valley  was  always  the  receptacle  for  impurities 
'  of  all  kinds.  There  Maachah's  idol  was  burnt  by 
Asa  (1  K.  xv.  13)  ;  there,  according  to  Josephus, 
Athaliah  was  executed  ;  and  there  the  "  filthiness  " 
accumulated  in  the  sanctuary,  by  the  false-worship 
of  Ahaz,  was  discharged  (2  Chr.  xxix.  5,  16). 
But  in  addition  to  this,  and,  although  there  is  only 
a  slight  allusion  in  the  Bible  to  the  fact  (Jer.  vii. 
32),  many  of  the  tombs  now  existing  in  the  face  of 
the  ravine  of  Hinnom,  on  the  south  of  the  city, 
must  be  as  old  as  Biblical  times — and  if  so,  show 
that  this  was  also  used  as  a  cemetery.  The  monu- 
ment of  Ananus  the  high-priest  (Joseph.  B.  J.  v.  12, 
§2)  would  seem  to  have  been  in  this  direction. 

The  tombs  of  the  kings  were  in  the  city  of 
David,  that  is,  Mount  Zion,  which,  as  will  be 
shown  in  the  concluding  section  of  this  article,  was 
an  eminence  on  the  northern  part  of  Mount  Moriah. 
The  royal  sepulchres  were  probably  chambers  con- 
taining separate  recesses  for  the  successive  kings. 
[Tombs.]  Of  some  of  the  kings  it  is  recorded  that, 
not  being  thought  worthy  of  a  resting-place  there, 
they  were  buried  in  separate  or  private  tombs  in 
Mount  Zion  (2  Chr.  xxi.  20,  xxiv.  25  ;  2  K.  xv.  7). 
Ahaz  was  not  admitted  to  Zion  at  all,  but  was 
buried  in  Jerusalem  (2  Chr.  xxviii.  27).  Other 
spots  also  were  used  for  burial.  Somewhere  to 
the  north  of  the  Temple,  and  not  far  from  the  wall, 
was  the  monument  of  king  Alexander  (Jos.  B.  J. 
v.  7,  §3).  Near  the  north-west  corner  of  the 
city  was  the  monument  of  John  the  high-priest 
(Jos.  v.  6,  §2,  &c),  and  to  the  north-east  the 
"  monument  of  the  Fuller"  (Jos.  B.  J.  v.  4,  §2). 
On  the  north,  too,  were  the  monuments  of  Herod 
(v.  3,  §2)  and  of  queen  Helena  (v.  2,  §2,  3,  §3), 
the  former  close  to  the  "  Serpent's  Pool." 

Wood}  Gardens. — We  have  very  little  evidence 
as  to  the  amount  of  wood  and  of  cultivation  that 
existed  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem.  The 
king's  gardens  of  David  ami  Solomon  seem  to  have 
been  in  the  bottom  formed  by  the  confluence  of  the 
Kedron  and  Hinnom  (Neh.  iii.  15;  Joseph.  Aul. 
vii.  14,  §4,  ix.  10,  §4).  The  Mount  of  Olives,  as 
its  name  and  those  of  various  places  upon  it  seem 
to  imply,  was  a  fruitful  spot.  At  its  foot  was 
situated  the  Garden  of  Gethsemane.  At  the  time 
of  the  final  siege  the  space  north  of  the  wall  of 
Agrippa  was  covered  with  gardens,  groves,  and 
plantations  of  fruit-trees,  inclosed  by  hedges  and 
walls  ;  and  to  level  these  was  one  of  Titus's  first 
operations  (/•'.  ./.  v.  :'.,  §2).  We  know  that  the 
gate  Gennath  (i.  ('.  " of  gardens ")  opened  on  this 


JERUSALEM 


987 


side  of  the  city  (B.  J.  v.  4,  §2).  The  valley  of 
Hinnom  was  in  Jerome's  time  "  a  pleasant  and 
woody  spot,  full  of  delightful  gardens  watered  from 
the  fountain  of  Siloah "  (Comm.  in  Jer.  vii.  30). 
In  the  Talmud  mention  is  made  of  a  certain  rose- 
garden  outside  the  city,  which  was  of  great  fame, 
but  no  clue  is  given  to  its  situation  (Otho,  Lex. 
Rab.  266).  [Garden.]  The  sieges  of  Jerusalem 
were  too  frequent  during  its  later  history  to  admit 
of  any  considerable  growth  of  wood  near  it,  even  if 
the  thin  soil,  which  covers  the  rocky  substratum, 
would  allow  of  it.  And  the  scarcity  of  earth  again 
necessitated  the  cutting  down  of  all  the  trees  that 
could  be  found  for  the  banks  and  mounds,  with 
which  the  ancient  sieges  were  conducted.  This  is 
expressly  said  in  the  accounts  of  the  sieges  of 
Pompey  and  Titus.  In  the  latter  case  the  country 
was  swept  of  its  timber  for  a  distance  of  eight  or 
nine  miles  from  the  city  (B.  J.  vi.  8,  §1,  &c). 

Water. — How  the  gardens  just  mentioned  on 
the  north  of  the  city  were  watered  it  is  difficult  to 
understand,  since  at  present  no  water  exists  in 
that  direction.  At  the  time  of  the  siege  (Jos. 
B.  J.  v.  3,  §2)  there  w7as  a  reservoir  in  that  neigh- 
bourhood called  the  Serpent's  Pool ;  but  it  has  not 
been  discovered  in  modern  times.  The  subject  of 
the  waters  is  more  particularly  discussed  in  the 
third  section,  and  reasons  are  shown  for  believing 
that  at  one  time  a  very  copious  source  existed  some- 
where north  of  the  town,  the  outflow  of  which 
was  stopped — possibly  by  Hezekiah,  and  the  water 
led  underground  to  reservoirs  in  the  city  and  below 
the  Temple.  From  these  reservoirs  the  overflow 
escaped  to  the  so  called  Fount  of  the  Virgin,  and 
thence  to  Siloam,  and  possibly  to  the  Bir-ayub, 
or  "  Well  of  Nehemiah."  This  source  would  seem 
to  have  been,  and  to  be  still  the  only  spring  in  the 
city — but  it  was  always  provided  with  private  and 
public  cisterns.  Some  of  the  latter  still  remain. 
(Outside  the  walls  the  two  on  the  west  side  (Birhet 
Mamilla,  and  Birket  es-Sultan),  generally  known  as 
the  upper  and  lower  reservoirs  of  Gihon,  the  small 
"  pool  of  Siloam,"  with  the  larger  B.  el-Hamra  close 
adjoining,  and  the  B .  Hammam  Sitti  Maryam,  close 
to  the  St.  Stephen's  Gate.  Inside  are  the  so-called 
Pool  of  Hezekiah  (B.  cl-Batrak),  near  the  Jaffa 
gate,  which  receives  the  surplus  water  of  the 
Birhct  Mamilla;  and  the  B.  Jsrail  on  the  opposite 
side  of  the  city,  close  to  the  St.  Stephen's  Gate, 
commonly  known  as  the  Pool  of  Bethesda.  These 
two  reservoirs  are  probably  the  Pools  of  Amygdalon 
and  Struthius  of  Josephus,  respectively.  Dr.  Bar- 
clay has  discovered  another  reservoir  below  the 
Mekemch  in  the  low  part  of  the  city — the  Tyro- 
poeon  valley — west  of  the  Haram,  supplied  by  the 
aqueduct  from  Bethlehem  and  "  Solomon's  Pools." 
It  is  impossible  within  the  limits  of  the  present 
article  to  enter  more  at  length  into  the  subject  of 
the  waters.  The  reader  is  referred  to  the  chapters 
on  the  subject  in  Barclay's  City  of  the  Great  King, 
(x.  and  xviii.)  and  Williams's  Holy  City;  also  to 
the  articles  Kidron  ;  Siloam;  Pool. 

Streets,  Houses,  &c. — Of  the  nature  of  these 
in  the  ancient  city  we  have  only  the  most  scat- 
tered notices.  The  "East  street"  (2  Chr.  xxix. 
4) ;  the  "  street  of  the  city  " — »'.  e.  the  city  of 
David  (xxxii.  (i) ;  the  "street  facing  the  water 
gate"  (Neh.  viii.  1,  3) — or,  according  to  the  pa- 
rallel account  in  1  Esdr.  ix.  :;s,  the  "broad  place 
( tvpvxtopov)  of  the  Temple  towards  the  East  ;" 
the  street  of  the  house  of  God  (Ezr.  x.  '.*) ;  the 
street    of  the  <;ate  of  Kphraim  "  (Neh.  viii.  16); 

:;  s  2 


988 


JERUSALEM 


and  the  "  open  place  of  the  first  gate  towards  the 
East"  must  have  been  not  "streets"  in  our  sense 
of  the  word,  so  much  as  the  open  spaces  found  in 
eastern  towns  round  the  inside  of  the  gates.  This 
is  evident,  not  only  from  the  word  used,  Sechob, 
which  has  the  force  of  breadth  or  room,  but  also 
from  the  nature  of  the  occurrences  related  in  each 
case.  The  same  places  are  intended  in  Zech.  viii. 
5.  Streets,  properly  so  called  (ChutzotK),  there 
were  (Jer.  v.  1  ;  xi.  13,  &c),  but  the  name  of  only 
one,  "the  bakers'  street'-  (Jer.  xxxvii.  21),  is 
preserved  to  us.  This  is  conjectured,  from  the 
names,  to  have  been  near  the  tower  of  ovens 
(Neh.  xii.  38  ;  "  furnaces  "  is  incorrect).  A  notice 
of  streets  of  this  kind  in  the  3rd  century  R.C.  is 
preserved  by  Aristeas  (see  p.  999a).  At  the  time 
of  the  destruction  by  Titus  the  low  part  of  the  city 
was  rilled  with  narrow  lanes,  containing  the  bazaars 
of  the  town,  and  when  the  breach  was  made  in  the 
second  wall  it  was  at  the  spot  where  the  cloth, 
brass,  and  wool  bazaars  abutted  on  the  wall. 

To  the  houses  we  have  even  less  clue,  but  there 
is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  in  either  houses  or 
streets  the  ancient  Jerusalem  differed  very  mate- 
rially from  the  modern.  No  doubt  the  ancient  city 
did  not  exhibit  that  air  of  mouldering  dilapidation 
which  is  now  so  prominent  there — that  sooty  look 
which  gives  its  houses  the  appearance  of  "  having 
been  burnt  down  many  centuries  ago"  (Richardson, 
in  S.  fy  P.  183),  and  which,  as  it  is  characteristic 
of  so  many  Eastern  towns,  must  be  ascribed  to 
Turkish  neglect.  In  another  respect  too  the  modern 
city  must  present  a  different  aspect  from  the  ancient 
— the  dull  monotony  of  colour  which,  at  least 
dining  a  part  of  the  year,P  pervades  the  slopes 
of  the  hills  and  ravines  outside  the  walls.  Not 
only  is  this  the  case  on  the  west,  where  the  city 
does  not  relieve  the  view,  but  also  on  the  south. 
A  dull  leaden  ashy  hue  overspreads  all.  No  doubt 
this  is  due,  wholly  or  in  part,  to  the  enormous 
quantities  of  debris  of  stone  and  mortar  which  have 
been  shot  over  the  precipices  after  the  numerous 
demolitions  of  the  city.  The  whole  of  the  slopes 
south  of  the  Haram  area  (the  aucient  Ophel),  and 
the  modern  Zion,  and  the  west  side  of  the  valley  of 
Jehoshaphat,  especially  near  the  St.  Stephen's  gate, 
are  covered  with  these  debris,  lying  as  soft  and  loose 
as  the  day  they  were  poured  over,  and  presenting 
the  appearance  of  gigantic  mounds  of  rubbish. 

In  this  point  at  least  the  ancient  city  stood  in 
favourable  contrast  with  the  modern,  but  in  many 
others  the  resemblance  must  have  been  strong.  The 
nature  of  the  site  compels  the  walls  in  many  places 
to  retain  their  old  positions.  The  southern  part  of 
the  summit  of  the  Upper  city  and  the  slopes  of 
Ophel  are  now  bare,  where  previous  to  the  final  siege 
they  were  covered  with  houses,  and  the  North  wall 
has  retired  very  much  south  of  where  it  then  stood  ; 
but,  on  the  other  hand,  the  West  and  East,  and  the 
western  corner  of  the  North,  wall,  are  what  they 
always  were.  And  the  look  of  the  walls  and  gates, 
especially  the  Jaffa-gate,  with  the  "Citadel"  ad- 
joining, and  the  Damascus-gate,  is  probably  hardly 
changed  from  what  it  was.  True,  the  minarets, 
domes,  and  spires,  which  give  such  a  variety  to  the 
modern  town,  must  have  been  absent ;  but  their 
place  was  supplied  by  the  four  great  towers  at  the 
north-west  part  of  the  wall ;  by  the  upper  stories 


p  The  writer  was  there  in  September,  and  the 
aspect  above  described  left  an  ineffaceable  impression 
on  him. 


JERUSALEM 

and  turrets  of  Herod's  palace,  the  palace  of  the 
Asmoneans,  and  the  other  public  buildings ;  while  the 
lofty  fortress  of  Antonia,  towering  far  above  every 
building  within  the  city,i  and  itself  surmounted 
lay  the  keep  on  its  south-east  corner,  must  have 
formed  a  feature  in  the  view  not  altogether  unlike 
(though  more  prominent  than)  the  "citadel"  of 
the  modern  town.  The  flat  roofs  and  the  absence 
of  windows,  which  give  an  Eastern  city  so  startling 
an  appearance  to  a  Western  traveller,  must  have 
existed  then  as  now. 

But  the  greatest  resemblance  must  have  been  on 
the  south-east  side,  towards  the  Mount  of  Olives. 
Though  there  can  be  no  doubt  (see  below,  Section 
III.  p.  1019,  20)  that  the  enclosure  is  now  much 
larger  than  it  was,  yet  the  precinct  of  the  Haram  es 
She/if,  with  its  domes  and  sacred  buildings,  some  of 
them  clinging  to  the  very  spot  formerly  occupied  by 
the  Temple,  must  preserve  what  we  may  call  the 
personal  identity  of  this  quarter  of  the  city,  but 
little  changed  in  its  general  features  from  what  it 
was  when  the  Temple  stood  there.  Nay,  more  :  in 
the  substructions  of  the  enclosure,  those  massive  and 
venerable  walls,  which  once  to  see  is  never  to  forget, 
is  the  very  masonry  itself,  its  lower  courses  undis- 
turbed, which  was  laid  there  by  Herod  the  Great,  and 
by  Agrippa,  possibly  even  by  still  older  builders. 

Environs  of  the  City. — The  various  spots  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  the  city  will  be  described  at  length 
under  their  own  names,  and  to  them  the  reader  is 
accordingly  referred.  See  Ex-UOGEL  ;  Hinnom  ; 
Kedron  ;  Olives,  Mount  of,  &c.  &c. 

II.  The  Annals  op  the  City. 

In  considering  the  annals  of  the  city  of  Jerusalem, 
nothing  strikes  one  so  forcibly  as  the  number  and 
severity  of  the  sieges  which  it  underwent.  We  catch 
our  earliest  glimpse  of  it  in  the  brief  notice  of  the 
1st  chapter  of  Judges,  which  describes  how  the 
"  children  of  Judah  smote  it  with  the  edge  of  the 
sword,  and  set  the  city  on  fire ;"  and  almost  the 
latest  mention  of  it  in  the  New  Testament  is  con- 
tained in  the  solemn  warnings  in  which  Christ  tore- 
told  how  Jerusalem  should  be  "  compassed  with 
armies"  (Lukexxi.  20),  and  the  abomination  of  de- 
solation be  seen  standing  in  the  Holy  Place  (Matt. 
xxiv.  15).  In  the  fifteen  centuries  which  elapsed 
between  those  two  points  the  city  was  besieged  no 
fewer  than  seventeen  times  ;  twice  it  was  razed  to 
the  ground  ;  and  on  two  other  occasions  its  walls 
were  levelled.  In  this  respect  it  stands  without  a 
parallel  in  any  city  ancient  or  modern.  The  fact 
is  one  of  great  significance.  The  number  of  the 
sieges  testifies  to  the  importance  of  the  town  as  a 
key  to  the  whole  country,  and  as  the  depositary  of 
the  accumulated  treasures  of  the  Temple,  no  less 
forcibly  than  do  the  severity  of  the  contests  and  their 
protracted  length  to  the  difficulties  of  the  posi- 
tion, and  the  obstinate  enthusiasm  of  the  Jewish 
people.  At  the  same  time  the  details  of  these  ope- 
rations, scanty  as  they  are,  throw  considerable  light 
on  the  difficult  topography  of  the  place ;  and  on 
the  whole  they  are  in  every  way  so  characteristic, 
that  it  has  seemed  not  unfit  to  use  them  as  far  as 
possible  as  a  frame-work  for  the  following  rapid 
sketch  of  the  history  of  the  city. 

The  first  siege  appeal's  to  have  taken  place 
almost  immediately  after  the  death  of  Joshua  (cir. 


q  "Conspicuo  fastigio  turns  Antonia"   (Tac.  Hist. 
v.  11). 


JERUSALEM 

1400  B.C.).  Judah  and  Simeon  had  been  ordered  by 
the  divine  oracle  at  Shiloh  or  Shechem  to  commence 
the  task  of  actual  possession  of  the  portions  distri- 
buted by  Joshua.  As  they  traversed  the  region 
south  of  these  they  encountered  a  large  force  of 
Caiiaauites  at  Bezek.  These  they  dispersed,  took 
prisoner  Adoni-bezek,  a  ferocious  petty  chieftain, 
who  was  the  terror  of  the  country,  and  swept  on 
their  southward  road.  Jerusalem  was  soon  reached/ 
It  was  evidently  too  important,  and  also  too  near  the 
actual  limits  of  Judah,  to  be  passed  by.  "  They 
fought  against  it  and  took  it,  and  smote  it  with  the 
edge  of  the  sword,  and  set  the  city  on  fire"  (Judg. 
i.  8).  To  this  brief  notice  Josephus  (Ant.  v.  2,  §-) 
makes  a  material  addition.  He  tells  us  that  the 
siege  lasted  some  time  (ffvv  -)(p6vu)  ;  that  the  part 
which  was  taken  at  last,  and  in  which  the  slaughter 
was  made,  was  the  lower  city ;  but  that  the  upper 
city  was  so  strong,  "by  reason  of  its  walls  and  also 
of  the  nature  of  the  place,"  that  they  relinquished 
the  attempt  and  moved  off  to  Hebron  {Ant.  v. 
2,  §23).  These  few  valuable  words  of  the  old 
Jewish  historian  reveal  one  of  those  topographical 
peculiarities  of  the  place — the  possession  of  an 
upper  as  well  as  a  lower  city — which  differenced  it 
so  remarkably  from  the  other  towns  of  Palestine — 
which  enabled  it  to  survive  so  many  sieges  and 
partial  destructions,  and  which  in  the  former  section 
we  have  endeavoured  to  explain.  It  is  not  to  be 
wondered  at  that  these  characteristics,  which  must 
have  been  impressed  with  peculiar  force  on  the 
mind  of  Josephus  during  the  destruction  of  Jeru- 
salem,  of  which  he  had  only  lately  been  a  witness, 
should  have  recurred  to  him  when  writing  the 
account  of  the  earlier  sieges.8 

As  long  as  the  upper  city  remained  in  the  hands 
of  the  Jebusites  they  practically  had  possession  of 
the  whole— and  a  Jebusite  city  in  fact  it  remained 
for  a  long  period  after  this.  The  Benjamites  fol- 
lowed the  men  of  Judah  to  Jerusalem,  but  with 
no  better  result — "  They  could  not  drive  out  the 
Jebusites,  but  the  Jebusites  dwell  with  the  children 
of  Benjamin  in  Jerusalem  unto  this  day  "  (Judg.  i. 
21).  At  the  time  of  the  sad  story  of  the  Levite 
(Judg.  xix.) — which  the  mention  of  Phinehas  (xx. 
28)  fixes  as  early  in  the  period  of  the  Judges — 


JERUSALEM 


989 


r  According  to  Josephus,  they  did  not  attack  Jeru- 
salem tilt  after  they  had  taken  many  other  towns 
— 7rAe«rTa?  re  Aa/36i'T«,  eTro\t.6pKovw  'I. 

s  Sec  this  noticed  and  contrasted  with  the  situation 
of  tlic  villages  in  other  parts  by  Prof.  Stanley  (S.  .$■  I'. 
161,  577,  &c). 

1  About  half  way  through  the  period  of  the  Judges 
— i.  e.  cir.  B.C.  1320 — occurred  an  invasion  of  the 
territory  of  the  Ilittitcs  (Khatti)  by  Sethee  I.  king  of 
Egypt,  and  the  capture  of  the  capital  city,  Ketcsh,  in 
the  land  of  Ainar.  This  would  not  have  been  noticed 
here,  had  not  Ketcsh  been  by  some  writers  identified 
with  Jerusalem  (Osburn,  F.</iu>t,  her  Testimony,  &c. ; 
also  Williams  in  Diet,  of  Oeogr.  ii.  23,  4).  The 
grounds  of  the  identification  are  (1)  the  apparent 
affinity  of  the  name  (which  they  read  Chadasb  with 
the  Greek  KaSvnt,  the  modern  Arabic  rl-KiuIa,  and 
the  Syriac  Kadatha  ;  (2)  the  affinity  of  Amar  with 
Amoritcs  ;  (?>)  a  likeness  between  the  form  and  situa- 
tion of  the  city,  as  shown  in  a  rude  sketch  in  the 
Egyptian    records,    and    that   of  Jerusalem.      But   on 

closer  examination  these  correspondences  vanish. 
Egyptian  scholars  arc  now  agreed  that  Jerusalem  is 
much  too  far  south  to  suit  the  requirements  of  the 
lest  of  the  campaign,  and  that  ECetesb  survives  in 
Kedes,  a  name  discovered  by  Robinson  attached  to  n 
lake  and  island  on  the  Otolites  between  Ribleh  and 


Benjamin  can  hardly  have  had  even  so  much  footino- 
as  the  passage  just  quoted  would  indicate;  for  the 
Levite  refuses  to  enter  it,  not  because  it  was  hos- 
tile, but  because  it  was  "  the  city  of  a  stranger,  and 
not  of  Israel."  And  this  lasted  during  the  whole 
period  of  the  Judges,  the  reign  of  Saul,  and  the 
reign  of  David  at  Hebron.'  Owing  to  several  cir- 
cumstances— the  residence  of  the  Ark  at  Shiloh — 
Saul's  connexion  with  Gibeah,  and  David's  with 
Ziklag  and  Hebron — the  disunion  of  Benjamin  and 
Judah,  symbolised  by  Saul's  persecution  of  David — 
the  tide  of  affairs  was  drawn  northwards  and  south- 
wards, and  Jerusalem,  with  the  places  adjacent,  was 
left  in  possession  of  the  Jebusites.  But  as  soon  as 
a  man  was  found  to  assume  the  rule  over  all  Israel 
both  north  and  south,  so  soon  was  it  necessary  that 
the  seat  of  government  should  be  moved  from  the 
remote  Hebron  nearer  to  the  centre  of  the  country, 
and  the  choice  of  David  at  once  fell  on  the  city  of 
the  Jebusites. 

David  advanced  to  the  siege  at  the  head  of  the 
men-of-war  of  all  the  tribes  who  had  come  to 
Hebron  "to  turn  the  kingdom  of  Saul  to  him." 
They  are  stated  as  280,000  men,  choice  warriors  of 
the  flower  of  Israel  (1  Chr.  xii.  23-39).  No  doubt 
they  approached  the  city  from  the  south.  The 
ravine  of  the  Kedron,  the  valley  of  Hiunom,  the 
hills  south  and  south-east  of  the  town,  the  uplands 
on  the  west  must  have  swarmed  with  these  hardy 
warriors.  As  before,  the  lower  city  was  imme- 
diately taken — and  as  before,  the  citadel  held  out 
(Josh.  Ant.  vii.  3,  §1).  The  undaunted  Jebusites, 
believing  in  the  impregnability  of  their  fortress, 
manned  the  battlements  "with  lame  and  blind."" 
But  they  little  understood  the  temper  of  the  king 
or  of  those  he  commanded.  David's  anger  was  tho- 
roughly roused  by  the  insult  (dpyLrrdeis,  Joseph.), 
and  he  at  once  proclaimed  to  his  host  that  the  first 
man  who  would  scale  the  rocky  side  of  the  fortress 
and  kill  a  Jebusite  should  be  made  chief  captain  of 
the  host.  A  crowd  of  warriors  (irdvTes,  Joseph.) 
rushed  forward  to  the  attempt,  but  Joab's  superior 
agility  gained  him  the  day/  and  the  citadel,  the 
fastness  of  Ziox,  was  taken  (cir.  10-46  B.C.).  It 
is  the  first  time  that  that  memorable  name  appears 
in  the  history. 


Hums,  and  still  showing  traces  of  extensive  artificial 
works.  Nor  does  the  agreement  between  the  repre- 
sentation in  the  records  and  the  site  of  Jerusalem 
fare  better.  For  the  stream,  which  was  supposed  to 
lepresent  the  ravines  of  Jerusalem — the  nearest  point 
of  the  resemblance— contained  atKctcsh  water  enough 
to  drown  several  persons  (Brugsch,  Geogr.  Inschrift, 
ii.  21,  &c). 

u  The  passage  which  forms  the  latter  clause  oi 
2  Sam.  v.  8  is  generally  taken  to  mean  that  the  blind 
and  the  lame  were  excluded  from  the  Temple.  But 
where  is  the  proof  that  this  was  the  fact?  On  one 
occasion  at  least  we  know  that  "  the  blind  and  the 
lame"  came  to  Christ  in  the  Temple,  and  He  healed 
them  (Matt.  xxi.  14).  And  indeed  what  had  the 
Temple,  which  was  not  founded  till  long  after  this, 
to  do  With  the  matter  J  The  explanation — which  is 
in  accordance  with  the  accentuation  of  the  Masorets, 
and  for  which  the  writer  is  indebted  to  the  kindness 
of  the  Rev.  .1.  .1.  S.  Perowne — would  seem  to  be  that 
it  \sas:i  proverb  used  in  future  with  regard  to  any 
impregnable  fortress— "  The  blind  and  the  lame  are 
there  ;   let  him  enter  the  place  if  he  can." 

v  A  romantic  legend  is  preserved  in  the  Midrash 
Tehillim,  on  l's.  xviii.  20,  of  tin  stratagem  by  which 
Joab  succeeded  in  reaching  the  top  oi  the  wall.  (See 
it  quoted  in  Eisenmenger,  i.  176,  7.) 


990 


JERUSALEM 


David  at  once  proceeded  to  secure  himself  in  his 
new  acquisition.  He  inclosed  the  whole  of  the 
city  with  a  wall,  and  connected  it  with  the  citadel. 
In  the  latter  he  took  up  his  own  quarters,  and  the 
Zion  of  the  Jebusites  became  "  the  city  of  David."  x 
[ZiON  ;  MiLLO.]  The  rest  of  the  town  was  left  to 
the  more  immediate  care  of  the  new  captain  of  the 
host. 

The  sensation  caused  by  the  fall  of  this  im- 
pregnable fortress  must  have  been  enormous.  It 
reached  even  to  the  distant  Tyre,  and  before  long 
an  embassy  arrived  from  Hiram,  the  king  of 
Phoenicia,  with  the  characteristic  offerings  of  arti- 
ficers and  materials  to  erect  a  palace  for  David  in 
his  new  abode.  The  palace  was  built,  and  occupied 
by  the  fresh  establishment  of  wives  and  concubines 
which  David  acquired.  Two  attempts  were  made 
— the  one  bv  the  Philistines  alone  (2  Sam.  v.  17- 
21 ;  1  Chr.  xiv.  8-12),  the  other  by  the  Philistines, 
with  all  Syria  and  Phoenicia  (Joseph.  Ant.  vii.  4, 
§1 ;  2  Sam.  v.  22-25)  to  attack  David  in  his  new 
situation,  but  they  did  not  affect  the  city,  and  the 
actions  were  fought  in  the  "  Valley  of  Giants," 
apparently  north  of  Jerusalem,  near  Gibeah  or 
Gibeon.  The  arrival  of  the  Ark,  however,  was  an 
event  of  great  importance.  The  old  Tabernacle  of 
Bezaleel  and  Aholiab  being  now  pitched  on  the 
height  of  Gibeon,  a  new  tent  had  been  spread  by 
David  in  the  fortress  for  the  reception  of  the 
Ark  ;  and  here,  "  in  its  place,"  it  was  deposited 
with  the  most  impressive'  ceremonies,  and  Zion 
became  at  once  the  great  sanctuary  of  the  nation. 
It  now  perhaps  acquired  the  name  of  Beth  ha-har, 
the  "  house  of  the  mount,"  of  which  we  catch  a 
glimpse  in  the  LXX.  addition  to  2  Sam.  xv.  24. 
In  this  tent  the  Ark  remained,  except  for  its  short 
flight  to  the  foot  of  the  Mount  of  Olives  with  David 
(xv.  24-29),  until  it  was  removed  to  its  permanent 
resting-place  in  the  temple  of  Solomon. 

In  the  fortress  of  Zion,  too,  was  the  sepulchre  of 
David,  which  became  also  that  of  most  of  his 
successors. 

The  only  works  of  ornament  which  we  can 
ascribe  to  David  are  the  "  royal  gardens,"  as  they 
are  called  by  Josephus,  which  appear  to  have  been 
formed  by  him  in  the  level  space  south-east  of  the 
city,  formed  by  the  confluence  of  the  valleys  of 
Kedron  and  Hinnom,  screened  from  the  sun  during 
part  of  the  day  by  the  shoulders  of  the  inclosing 
mountains,  and  irrigated  by  the  well  Ain  Ayuh, 
which  still  appears  to  retain  the  name  of  Joab  (Jos. 
Ant.  vii.  14,  §4, ;  ix.  10,  §4). 

Until  the  time  of  Solomon  we  hear  of  no  addi- 
tions to  the  city.  His  three  great  works  were  the 
Temple,  with  its  east  wall  and  cloister  (Jos.  B.  J. 
v.  5,  §1),  his  own  Palace,  and  the  Wall  of  Jeru- 
salem. The  two  former  will  be  best  described 
elsewhere.  [Palace  ;  Solomon  ;  Temple.]  Of 
the  last  there  is  an  interesting  notice  in  Josephus 
{Ant.  viii.  2,  §1  ;  6,  §1),  from  which  it  appears 
that  David's  wall  was  a  mere  rampart  without 
towers,  and  only  of  moderate  strength  and 
height.  One  of  the  first  acts  of  the  new  king 
was  to  make  the  walls  larger — probably  extend 
them  round  some  outlying  parts  of  the  city — and 
strengthen  them  (1  K.  iii.  1,  with  the  explanation 
of  Josephus,  viii.  2,  §1).     But  on  the  completion 


JERUSALEM 

of  the  Temple  he  again  turned  his  attention 
to  the  walls,  and  both  increased  their  height, 
and  constructed  very  large  towers  along  them 
(ix.  15,  and  Jos.  Ant.  viii.  6,  §1).  Another 
work  of  his  in  Jerusalem  was  the  repair  or  fortifica- 
tion of  Millo,  whatever  that  strange  term  may 
signify  (1  K.  ix.  15,  24).  It  was  in  the  works  at 
Millo  and  the  city  of  David  —  it  is  uncertain 
whether  the  latter  consisted  of  stopping  breaches 
(as  in  A.  V.)  or  filling  a  ditch  round  the  fortress 
(the  Vulg.  and  others)—  that  Jeroboam  first  came 
under  the  notice  of  Solomon  (1  K.  si.  27).  Another 
was  a  palace  for  his  Egyptian  queen — of  the  situa- 
tion of  which  all  we  know  is  that  it  was  not  in  the 
city  of  David  (1  K.  vii.  8,  ix.  24,  with  the  addition 
in  2  Chr.  viii.  11).  But  there  must  have  been 
much  besides  these  to  fill  up  the  measure 'of  "all 
that  Solomon  desired  to  build  in  Jerusalem " 
(2  Chr.  viii.  6)— the  vast  Harem  for  his  700 
wives  and  300  concubines,  and  their  establish- 
ment—  the  colleges  for  the  priests  of  the  various 
religions  of  these  women  —  the  stables  for  the 
1400  chariots  and  12,000  riding  horses.  Out- 
side the  city,  probably  on  the  Mount  of  Olives, 
there  remained,  down  to  the  latest  times  of  the 
monarchy  (2  K.  xxiii.  13),  the  fanes  which  he  had 
erected  for  the  worship  of  foreign  gods  (1  K.  xi.  7), 
and  which  have  still  left  their  name  clinging  to  the 
"  Mount  of  Offence." 

His  care  of  the  roads  leading  to  the  city  is  the 
subject  of  a  special  panegyric  from  Josephus  {Ant. 
viii.  7,  §4).  They  were,  as  before  observed,  paved 
with  black  stone,  probably  the  hard  basalt  from 
the  region  of  Argob,  on  the  east  of  Jordan,  where 
he  had  a  special  resident  officer. 

As  long  as  Solomon  lived,  the  visits  of  foreign 
powers  to  Jerusalem  were  those  of  courtesy  and 
amity ;  but  with  his  death  this  was  changed.  A 
city,  in  the  palaces  of  which  all  the  vessels  were 
of  pure  gold,  where  spices,  precious  stones,  rare 
woods,  curious  animals  were  accumulated  in  the 
greatest  profusion ;  where  silver  was  no  more 
valued  than  the  stones  of  the  street,  and  considered 
too  mean  a  material  for  the  commonest  of  the 
royal  purposes — such  a  city,  governed  by  such 
a  faineant  prince  as  Rehoboam,  was  too  tempting 
a  prey  for  the  surrounding  kings.  He  had  only 
been  on  the  throne  four  years  (cir.  970  B.C.)  before 
Shishak,  king  of  Egypt,  invaded  Judah  with  an 
enormous  host,  took  the  fortified  places  and  ad- 
vanced to  the  capital.  Jerusalem  was  crowded 
with  the  chief  men  of  the  realm  who  had  taken 
refuge  there  (2  Chr.  xii.  5),  but  Rehoboam  did  not 
attempt  resistance.  He  opened  his  gates  apparently 
on  a  promise  from  Shishak  that  he  would  not 
pillage  (Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  10,  §3).  However  the 
promise  was  not  kept,  the  treasures  of  the  Temple 
and  palace  were  carried  off,  and  special  mention  is 

made  of  the  golden  bucklers  (|3ft),  which  were  hung 

by  Solomon  in  the  house  of  the  forest  of  Lebanon 
(1  K.  xiv.  25 ;  2  Chr.  xii.  9 ;  comp.  1  K.  x.  17)/ 

Jerusalem  was  again  threatened  in  the  reign  ot 
Asa  (grandson  of  Rehoboam),  when  Zerah  the 
Cushite,  or  king  of  Ethiopia  (Joseph.  Ant.  viii. 
12,  §1),  probably  incited  by  the  success  of  Shishak, 
invaded  the  country  with  an  enormous  horde  of  fol- 


x  In  the  N.  T.  "  the  city  of  David "  means  Beth- 
lehem. 

■v  According  to  Josephus  he  also  carried  off  the 
anils  which  David  had  taken  from  the  king  of  Zobah  ; 


but  these  were  afterwards  in  the  Temple,  and  did 
service  at  the  proclamation  of  king  Joaah.  [Arms, 
Shelet,  p.  112  a.] 


JERUSALEM 

lowers  (2  Chr.  xiv.  9).  He  came  by  the  road  through 
the  low  country  of  Philistia,  where  his  chariots  could 
Hud  level  ground,  But  Asa  was  more  faithful  and 
more  valiant  than  Rehoboam  had  been.  He  did  not 
remain  to  be  blockaded  in  Jerusalem,  but  went  forth 
and  met  the  enemy  at  Mareshah,  and  repulsed  him 
with  great  slaughter  (cir.  940).  The  consequeiice 
of  this  victory  was  a  great  reformation  extending 
throughout  the  kingdom,  but  most  demonstrative 
at  Jerusalem  A  vast  assembly  of  the  men  of 
Judah  and  Benjamin,  of  Simeon,  even  of  Ephraim 

and   Mauasseh  —  now"  strangers"  (D'HJI) —  was 

gathered  at  Jerusalem.  Enormous  sacrifices  were 
offered  ;  a  prodigious  enthusiasm  seized  the  crowded 
city,  and  amidst  the  clamour  of  trumpets  and 
shouting,  oaths  of  loyalty  to  Jehovah  were  ex- 
changed, and  threats  of  instant  death  denounced 
on  all  who  should  forsake  His  service.  The  altar 
of  Jehovah  in  front  of  the  porch  of  the  Temple, 
which  had  fallen  into  decay,  was  rebuilt ;  the 
horrid  idol  of  the  queen-mother — the  mysterious 
Asherah,  doubtless  an  abomination  of  the  Syrian 
worship  of  her  grandmother  —  was  torn  down, 
ground  to  powder,  and  burnt  in  the  ravine  of  the 
Kedron.  At  the  same  time  the  vessels  of  the 
Temple,  which  had  been  plundered  by  Shishak, 
were  replaced  fiom  the  spoil  taken  by  Abijah  from 
Ephraim,  and  by  Asa  himself  from  the  (Jushites 
(2  Chr.  xv.  8-19;  1  K.  xv.  12-15).  This  pro- 
sperity lasted  for  more  than  ten  years,  but  at  the 
end  of  that  interval  the  Temple  was  once  more 
despoiled,  and  the  treasures  so  lately  dedicated  to 
Jehovah  were  sent  by  Asa,  who  had  himself  dedi- 
cated them,  as  bribes  to  Benhadad  at  Damascus, 
where  they  probably  enriched  the  temple  of 
Rimmon  (2  Chr.  xvi.  2,  3;  1  K.  xv.  18).  Asa 
was  buried  in  a  tomb  excavated  by  himself  in  the 
royal  sepulchres  in  the  citadel. 

The  reign  of  his  son  Jehoshaphat,  though  of 
great  prosperity  and  splendour,  is  not  remarkable 
as  regards  the  city  of  Jerusalem.  We  hear  of  a 
"  new  court"  to  the  Temple,  but  have  no  clue  to 
its  situation  or  its  builder  (2  Chr.  xx.  5).  An 
important  addition  to  the  government  of  the  city 
was  made  by  Jehoshaphat  in  the  establishment 
of  courts  for  the  decision  of  causes  both  eccle- 
siastical and  civil  (2  Chr.  xix.  8-11). 

Jehoshaphat's  son  Jehoram  was  a  prince  of  a 
different  temper.  He  began  his  reign  (cir.  887)  by  a 
massacre  of  bis  brethren  and  of  the  chief  men  of  the 
kingdom.  Instigated  no  doubt  by  his  wile  Athu- 
liah,  he  reintroduced  the  profligate  licentious  worship 
of  Ashtaroth  ami  the  high  places  (2  Chr.  xxi.  11), 
and  built  a  temple  for  Baal  (2  Chr.  xxiii.  17; 
comp.  Jos.  Ant.  ix.  7,  §4).  Though  a  man  of 
great  vigour  and  coinage  he  was  overcome  by  an 
invasion  of  one  of  those  huge  hordes  which  were 
now  almost  periodical.  The  Philistines  and  Arabians 
attacked  Jerusalem,  broke  into  the  palace,  spoiled  it 
of  all  its  treasures,  sacked  the  royal  harem,  killed 
or  carried  off  the  king's  wives,  and  all  his  sons 
but  one.     This  was  the  fourth  siege.     Two  wars 

1  The  horse-gate  is  mentioned  again  in  connexion 
with  Kidron  by  Jeremiah  (xxxi.  40).     Possibly  the 

name  was  perpetuated  in  the  gate  Susan  (Atf  =  horse) 
of  the  second  Temple,  the  only  gate  on  the  east  side 
of  the  outer  wall  (Lightfoot,  Proap.  of  Temple,  iii.). 

a  From  the  expression  in  xxiv.  2 .">,  "  sons  of  ,7e- 
hoiada,"  we  are  perhaps  warranted  in  helie\iti^r  that 
Zechariah's  brethren  or  his  sons  were  put  to  death 
with  him.     The  LXX.  and  Vulg.   have   the  word   in 


JERUSALEM 


991 


after  it  the  king  died,  universally  detested,  and  so 
strong  was  the  feeling  against  him  that  he  was 
denied  a  resting-place  in  the  sepulchres  of  the  kings, 
but  was  buried  without  ceiemony  in  a  private  tomb 
on  Zion  (2  Chr.  xxi.  20). 

The  next  events  in  Jerusalem  were  the  massacre 
of  the  royal  children  by  Joram's  widow  Athaliah, 
and  the  six  years'  reign  of  that  queen.  During  her 
sway  the  worship  of  Baal  was  prevalent  and  that 
of  Jehovah  propoi  tionately  depressed.  The  Temple 
was  not  only  suffered  to  go  without  repair,  but 
was  even  mutilated  by  the  sons  of  Athaliah,  and 
its  treasures  removed  to  the  temple  of  Baal  (2  Chr. 
xxiv.  7).  But  with  the  increasing  years  of  Joash, 
the  spirit  of  the  adherents  of  Jehovah  returned,  and 
the  confederacy  of  Jehoiada  the  priest  with  the 
chief  men  of  Judah  resulted  in  the  restoration  of  the 
true  line.  The  king  was  crowned  and  proclaimed 
in  the  Temple.  Athaliah  herself  was  hurried  out  to 
execution  from  the  sacred  precincts  into  the  valley  of 
the  Kedron  (Jos.  Ant.  ix.  7,  §3)  between  the  Temple 
and  Olivet,  through  the  horse  gate.2  The  temple 
of  Baal  was  demolished  ;  his  altars  and  images 
destroyed,  his  priests  put  to  death,  and  the  religion 
of  Jehovah  was  once  more  the  national  religion. 
But  the  restoration  of  the  Temple  advanced  but 
slowly,  and  it  was  not  till  three  and  twenty  years 
had  elapsed,  that  through  the  personal  interference 
of  the  king  the  ravages  of  the  Baal  worshippers 
were  repaired  (2  K.  xii.  6-16),  and  the  necessary 
vessels  and  utensils  furnished  for  the  service  of  the 
Temple  (2  Chr.  xxiv.  14.  But  see  2  K.  xii.  13; 
Jos.  Ant.  iv.  8,  §2).  But  this  zeal  tor  Jehovah 
soon  expired.  The  solemn  ceremonial  of  the  burial 
of  the  good  priest  in  the  royal  tombs,  among  the 
kings,  can  hardly  have  been  forgotten  before  a 
general  relapse  into  idolatry  took  place,  and  his 
son  Zechariah  was  stoned  with  his  family8  in  the 
very  court  of  the  Temple  for  protesting. 

The  retribution  invoked  by  the  dying  martyr 
quickly  followed.  Before  the  end  of  the  year  (cir. 
838),  Hazael  king  of  Syria,  after  possessing  himself 
of  Gath,  marched  against  the  much  richer  prize  of 
Jerusalem.  The  visit  was  averted  by  a  timely 
ottering  of  treasure  from  the  Temple  and  the  royal 
palace  (2  K.  xii.  18;  2  Chr.  xxiv.  23;  Joseph. 
Ant.  ix.  8,  §4),  but  not  before  an  action  had  been 
fought,  in  which  a  large  army  of  the  Isiaelites 
was  routed  by  a  very  inferior  force  of  Syrians,  with 
the  loss  of  a  great  number  of  the  principal  people 
and  of  a  vast  booty.  Nor  was  this  all.  These 
reverses  so  distressed  the  Icing  as  to  bring  on  a 
dangerous  illness,  in  the  midst  of  which  he  was 
assassinated  by  two  of  his  own  servants,  sons  of 
two  of  the  foreign  women  who  were  common  in 
the  royal  harems.  He  was  buried  on  Mount  Zion, 
though,  like  Jehoram,  denied  a  resting  place  in  the 
royal  tombs  (2  Chr.  xxiv.  25).  The  predicted  danger 
to  the  city  was  however  only  postponed.  Amaziah 
begun  bis  reign  B.C.  837  i  with  a  promise  of  good  ; 
his  first  act  showed  that  while  he  knew  how  to 
avenge  the  murder  of  bis  father,  he  could  also 
restrain  his  wrath  within  the  bounds  prescribed  by 

the  singular  number,  "  son  ;"  but,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  Syr.  and  Arabic  and  the  Talcum  all  agree  with 
the  Hebrew  text,  and  it  is  specially  mentioned  in 
Jerome's  Qu.  Sebr.     it  is  perhaps  supported  by  the 

special  notice  taken  of  the  exception  made  by  Amaziah 
in  the  case  of  the  murderers  of  his  father  (2  K.  xiv.  (I  ; 
2  Chr.  xxv.  4).  The  case  of  Naboth  is  a  parallel. 
[See  Elijah,  p.  529 a]. 


992 


JERUSALEM 


the  law  of  Jehovah.  But  with  success  came  dete- 
rioration.  He  returned  from  his  victories  over  the 
Edomites,  and  the  massacre  at  Petra,  with  fresh 
idols  to  add  to  those  which  already  defiled  Jeru- 
salem— the  images  of  the  children  of  Seir,  or 
of  the  Amalekites  (Josephus),  which  were  erected 
and  worshipped  by  the  king.  His  next  act  was  a 
challenge  to  Joaslr  the  king  of  Israel,  and  now  the 
danger  so  narrowly  escaped  from  Hazael  was  ac- 
tually encountered.  The  battle  took  place  at  Beth- 
shemesh  of  Judah,  at  the  opening  of  the  hills,  about 
12  miles  west  of  Jerusalem.  It  ended  in  a  total 
rout.  Amaziah,  forsaken  by  his  people,  was  taken 
prisoner  by  Joash,  who  at  once  pioceeded  to  Jeru- 
salem and  threatened  to  put  his  captive  to  death 
before  the  walls,  if  he  and  his  army  were  not 
admitted.  The  gates  were  thrown  open,  the  trea- 
sures of  the  Temple— still  in  the  charge  of  the 
same  family  to  whom  they  had  been  committed  by 
David — and  the  king's  private  treasures,  were  pil- 
laged, and  for  the  first  time  the  walls  of  the  city 
were  injured.  A  clear  breach  was  made  in  them 
of  400  cubits  in  length  "  from  the  gate  of  Ephraim 
to  the  corner  gate,"  and  through  this  Joash  drove 
in  triumph,  with  his  captive  in  the  chariot,  into 
the  city.b  This  must  have  been  on  the  north  side, 
and  probably  at  the  present  north-west  corner  of 
the  walls.  If  so,  it  is  the  first  recorded  attempt  at 
that  spot,  afterwards  the  favourite  point  for  the 
attack  of  the  upper  city. 

The  long  reign  of  Uzziah  (2  K.  xv.  1-7  ;  2  Chr. 
xxvi.)  brought  about  a  material  improvement  in 
the  fortunes  of  Jerusalem.  He  was  a  wise  and 
good0  prince  (Joseph,  is,  10,  §3),  very  warlike, 
and  a  great  builder.  After  some  campaigns  against 
foreign  enemies,  he  devoted  himself  to  the  care  of 
Jerusalem  for  the  whole  of  his  life  (Joseph.).  The 
walls  were  thoroughly  repaired,  the  portion  broken 
down  by  Joash  was  rebuilt  and  fortified  with  towers 
at  the  corner  gate;  and  other  parts  which  had  been 
allowed  to  go  to  ruin — as  the  gate  opening  on  the 
Valley  of  Hinnom,d  a  spot  called  the  "  turning " 
(see  Neh.  iii.  19,  20,  24),  and  others,  were  renewed 
and  fortified,  and  furnished  for  the  first  time  with 
machines,  then  expressly  invented  for  shooting  stones 
and  arrows  against  besiegers.  Later  in  this  reign 
happened  the  great  earthquake,  which,  although  un- 
mentioned  in  the  historical  books  of  the  Bible,  is 
described  by  Josephus  (ix.  10,  §4),  and  alluded  to 
by  the  Prophets  as  a  kind  of  era  (see  Stanley,  S.  tf  P. 
184,  125).  A  serious  breach  was  made  in  the 
Temple  itself,  and  below  the  city  a  large  fragment 
was  detached  from  the  hille  at  En-rogel,  and  rolling 
down  the  slope,  overwhelmed  the  king's  gardens 
at  the  junction  of  the  Valleys  of  Hinnom  and  Ke- 
dron,  and  rested  against  the  bottom  of  the  slope  of 
Olivet.  After  the  leprosy  of  Uzziah,  he  left  the 
sacred  precincts,  in  which  the  palace  would  there- 
fore seem  to  have  been  situated,  and  resided  in  the 
hospital  or  lazar-house  till  his  death. f  He  was 
buried  on  Zion,  with  the  kings  (2  K.  xv.  7) ;  not 

b  This  is  an  addition  by  Josephus  (ix.  9,  §9).  If  it 
really  happened,  the  chariot  must  have  been  sent 
round  by  a  flatter  road  than  that  which  at  present 
would  be  the  direct  road  from  Ain-Shems.  Since  the 
time  of  Solomon,  chariots  would  seem  to  have  become 
unknown  in  Jerusalem.  At  any  rate  we  should  infer, 
from  the  notice  in  2  K.  xiv.  20,  that  the  royal  esta- 
blishment could  not  at  that  time  boast  of  one. 

c  The  story  of  his  leprosy  at  any  rate  shows  his 
zeal  for  Jehovah. 

d  2  Chr.  xxvi.  9.     The  word  rendered  "  the  valley" 


JERUSALEM 

in  the  sepulchre  itself,  but  in  a  garden  or  field  at- 
tached to  the  spot. 

Jotham  (cir.  756)  inherited  his  father's  sagacity, 
as  well  as  his  tastes  for  architecture  and  warfare. 
His  works  in  Jerusalem  were  building  the  upper 
gateway  to  the  Temple — apparently  a  gate  commu- 
nicating with  the  palace  (2  Chr.  xxiii.  20) — and  also 
porticoes  leading  to  the  same  {Ant.  ix.  11,  §2).  He 
also  built  much  on  Ophel — probably  on  the  south 
of  Moiiah  (2  K.  xv.  55 ;  2  Chr.  xxvii.  3),  repaired 
the  walls  wherever  they  were  dilapidated,  and 
strengthened  them  by  very  large  and  strong  towers 
(Jos.).  Before  the  deatli  of  Jotham  (b.c.  740) 
the  clouds  of  the  Syrian  invasion  began  to  gather. 
They  broke  on  the  head  of  Ahaz  his  successor ; 
Kezin  king  of  Syria  and  Pekah  king  of  Israel  joined 
their  armies  and  invested  Jerusalem  (2  K.  xvi.  5). 
The  fortifications  of  the  two  previous  kings  enabled 
the  city  to  hold  out  during  a  siege  of  great  length 
(iirl  iroAuv  -^p6vov,  Jos.).  During  its  progress 
Rezin  made  an  expedition  against  the  distant  town 
of  Elath  on  the  Red  Sea,  from  which  he  expelled  the 
Jews,  and  handed  it  over  to  the  Edomites  (2  K.  xvi. 
b'  ;  Ant.  ix.  12,  §1).  [Ahaz.]  Finding  on  his 
return  that  the  place  still  held  out,  Rezin  ravaged 
Judaea  and  returned  to  Damascus  with  a  multitude 
of  captives,  leaving  Pekah  to  continue  the  blockade. 

Ahaz,  thinking  himself  a  match  for  the  Israelite 
army,  opened  his  gates  and  came  forth.  A  tre- 
mendous conflict  ensued,  in  which  the  three  chiefs 
of  the  government  next  to  the  king,  and  a  hundred 
and  twenty  thousand  of  the  able  warriors  of  the 
army  of  Judah,  are  stated  to  have  been  killed,  and 
Pekah  returned  to  Samaria  with  a  crowd  of  captives, 
and  a  great  quantity  of  spoil  collected  fi  om  the  Ben- 
jamite  towns  north  of  Jerusalem  (Joseph.).  Ahaz 
himself  escaped,  and  there  is  no  mention  in  any  of 
the  records,  of  the  city  having  been  plundered.  The 
captives  and  the  spoil  were  however  sent  back  by 
the  people  of  Samaria — a  fact  which,  as  it  has  no 
bearing  on  the  history  of  the  city,  need  here  only  be 
referred  to,  because  from  the  narrative  we  learn  that 
the  nearest  or  most  convenient  route  from  Samaria 
to  Jerusalem  at  that  time  was,  not,  as  now,  along 
the  plateau  of  the  country,  but  by  the  depths  of  the 
Jordan  valley,  and  through  Jericho  (2  K.  xvi.  5 ; 
2  Chr.  xxviii.  5-15  ;   Jos.  Ant.  ix.  12,  §2). 

To  oppose  the  confederacy  which  had  so  injured 
him,  Ahaz  had  recourse  to  Assyria.  He  appears 
first  to  have  sent  an  embassy  to  Tiglath  Pileser 
with  presents  of  silver  and  gold  taken  from  the 
treasures  of  the  Temple  and  the  palace  (2  K.  xvi. 
8),  which  had  been  recruited  during  the  last  two 
reigns,  and  with  a  promise  of  more  if  the  king 
would  overrun  Syria  and  Israel  [Ant.  ix.  12,  §3). 
This  Tiglath  Pileser  did.  He  marched  to  Damascus, 
took  the  city,  and  killed  Rezin.  While  there, 
Ahaz  visited  him,  probably  to  make  his  formal  sub- 
mission of  vassalage,?  and  gave  him  the  further  pre- 
sents. To  collect  these  he  went  so  far  as  to  lay 
hands    on    part    of  the  permanent   works   of  the 


is  JOSH,  always  employed  for  the  valley  on  the  West 
and  South  of  the  town,  as  ?f\2  is  for  that  on  the  East. 

e  This  will  be  the  so-called  Mount  of  Evil  Counsel, 
or  the  hill  below  Moriah,  according  as  En-rogcl  is  taken 
to  be  the  "  Well  of  Joab  "  or  the  "Fount  of  tin-  Virgin." 

f  rnC'Snn  JTO-  The  interpretation  given  above 
is  that  of  Kimchi,  adopted  by  Gesenius,  Fttrst,  and 
Bertheau.  Keil  (on  2  K.  xv.  5)  and  Hengsteuberg, 
however,  contend  for  a  different  meaning. 

e  This  follows  from  the  words  of  2  K.  wiii.  7. 


JERUSALEM 

Temple — the  original  constructions  of  Solomon, 
which  none  of  his  predecessors  had  been  bold  enough 
or  needy  enough  to  touch.  He  cut  off  the  richly 
chased  panels  which  ornamented  the  brass  bases  of 
the  cisterns,  dismounted  the  large  tank  or  "sea" 
from  the  brazen  bulls,  and  supported  it  on  a  pedestal 
of  stone,  and  removed  the  "  cover  for  the  sabbath," 
and  the  ornamental  stand  on  which  the  kings  were 
accustomed  to  sit  in  the  Temple  (2  K.  xvi.  17,  18). 
Whether  the  application  to  Assyria  relieved 
Ahaz  from  one  or  both  of  his  enemies,  is  not  clear. 
From  one  passage  it  would  seem  that  Tiglath 
l'ileser  actually  came  to  Jerusalem  (2  Chr.  x.wiii. 
20).  At  any  rate  the  intercourse  resulted  in  fresh 
idolatries,  and  fresh  insults  to  the  Temple.  A  new 
brazen  altar  was  made  after  the  profane  fashion 
of  one  he  had  seen  at  Damascus,  and  was  set  up  in 
the  centre  of  the  court  of  the  Temple,  to  occupy  the 
place  and  perform  the  functions  of  the  original 
altar  of  Solomon,  now  removed  to  a  less  pro- 
minent position  (see  2  K.  xvi.  12-1.5,  with  the 
expl.  of  Keil) ;  the  very  sanctuary  itself  (y3\"l,  and 
CHpn)  was  polluted  by  idol-worship  of  some  kind 
or  other  (2  Chr.  xxix.  5,  16).  Horses  dedicated  to 
the  sun,  were  stabled  at  the  entrance  to  the  court, 
with  their  chariots  (2  K.  xxiii.  11).  Altars  for 
sacrifice  to  the  moon  and  stars  were  erected  on  the 
flat  roofs  of  the  Temple  (ibid.  12).  Such  conse- 
crated vessels  as  remained  in  the  house  of  Jehovah 
were  taken  thence,  and  either  transferred  to  the 
service  of  the  idols  (2  Chr.  xxix.  19)  or  cut  up 
and  re-manufactured  ;  the  lamps  of  the  sanctuary 
were  extinguished11  (xxix.  7),  and  for  the  first  time 
the  doors  of  the  Temple  were  closed  to  the  wor- 
shippers (xxviii.  24),  and  their  offerings  seized  for 
the  idols  (Jos.  Ant.  ix.  12,  §3).  The  famous  sun-dial 
was  erected  at  this  time,  probably  in  the  Temple.' 
When  Ahaz  at  last  died,  it  is  not  wonderful  that 
a  meaner  fate  was  awarded  him  than  that  of 
even  the  leprous  Uzziah.  He  was  excluded  not 
only  from  the  royal  sepulchres,  but  from  the  pre- 
cincts of  Zion,  and  was  buried  "  in  the  city — in  Je- 
rusalem." J  The  very  first  act  of  Hezekiah  (B.C. 
724)  was  to  restore  what  his  father  had  desecrated 
(2  riir.  xxix.  3;  and  see  36,  "suddenly").  The 
Levites  were  collected  and  inspirited  ;  the  Temple 
freed  from  its  impurities  both  actual  and  cere- 
monial ;  the  accumulated  abominations  being  dis- 
charged  into  the  valley  of  the  h'edron.  The  full 
musical  service  of  the  Temple  was  re-organised, 
with  the  instruments  and  the  hymns  ordained 
by  David  and  Asaph;  ami  after  a  solemn  sin- 
offering  for  the  late  transgressions  had  been 
nili  red  in  the  presence  of  the  king  and  princes, 
the  public  were  allowed  to  testify  their  acqui- 
escence in  the  change  by  bringing  their  own  thank- 
offerings  (2  Chr.  xxix.  1-36).  This  was  done  on 
the  17th  of  the  first  month  of  his  reign.     The  re- 


JERUSALEM 


993 


h  In  the  old  Jewish  Calendar  the  18th  of  Ah  was 
kept  as  a  fast,  to  commemorate  the  putting  out  the 
western  light  of  the  great  candlestick  by  Alia/. 

1  There  is  an  n  priori  probability  that  the  dial 
WOUld  he  placed  ill  a  sacred  precinct  ;  hut  may  we 
not  infer,  from  comparing  2  I\.  xx.  1  with  9,  that 
it  was  in  the  "  middle  court,"  and  that  the  sight 
of  it  there  as  he  passed  through  had  suggested  to 
Isaiah  the  "sign"  which  was  to  accompany  the 
kind's  recovery  ? 

.i  Such  is  the  express  statement  of  2  Chr.  xxviii. 
27.  The  book  of  Kings  repeats  its  regular  formula. 
Josephus  omits  all  notice  of  the  burial. 


gular  time  for  celebrating  the  Passover  was  there- 
fore gone  by.  But  there  was  a  law  (Num.  ix.  10, 
11)  which  allowed  the  feast  to  be  postponed  for  a 
month  on  special  occasions,  and  of  this  law  Heze- 
kiah took  advantage,  in  his  anxiety  to  obtain  from 
the  whole  of  his  people  a  national  testimony  to 
their  allegiance  to  Jehovah  and  His  laws  (2  Chr. 
xxx.  2,  3).  Accordingly  at  the  special  invitation 
of  the  king  a  vast  multitude,  not  only  from  his 
own  dominions,  but  from  the  northern  king- 
dom, even  from  the  remote  Asher  and  Zebulun, 
assembled  at  the  capital.  Their  first  act  was  to 
uproot  and  efface  all  traces  of  the  idolatry  of  the 
preceding  and  former  reigns.  High-places,  altars, 
the  mysterious  and  obscene  symbols  of  Baal  and 
Asherah,  the  venerable  brazen  serpent  of  Moses 
itself,  were  torn  down,  broken  to  pieces,  and  the 
fragments  cast  into  the  valley  of  the  Kedron k 
(2  Chr.  xxx.  14;  2  K.  xviii.  4).  This  done,  the 
feast  was  kept  for  two  weeks,  and  the  vast  con- 
course dispersed.  The  permanent  service  of  the 
Temple  was  next  thoroughly  organised,  the  subsist- 
ence of  the  officiating  ministers  arranged,  and  pro- 
vision made  for  storing  the  supplies  (2  Chr.  xxxi. 
2-21).  It  was  probably  at  this  time  that  the  de- 
corations of  the  Temple  were  renewed,  and  the  gold 
or  other  precious  plating  m  which  had  been  removed 
by  former  kings,  re-applied  to  the  doors  and  pillars 
(2  K.  xviii.  lij). 

And  now  approached  the  greatest  crisis  which 
had  yet  occuned  in  the  history  of  the  city:  the 
dreaded  Assyrian  army  was  to  appear  under  its 
walls.  Hezekiah  had  in  some  way  intimated  that 
he  did  not  intend  to  continue  as  a  dependent— and 
the  great  king  was  now  (in  the  14th  year  of  Heze- 
kiah, cir.  711  B.C.)  on  his  way  to  chastise  him.  The 
Assyrian  army  had  been  for  some  time  in  Phoenicia 
and  on  the  sea-coast  of  Philistia  (Rawlinson,  Herod. 
i.  476),  and  Hezekiah  had  therefore  had  warning  of 
his  approach.  The  delay  was  taken  advantage  ot 
to  prepare  for  the  siege.  As  before,  Hezekiah  made 
the  movement  a  national  one.  A  great  concourse 
came  together.  The  springs  round  Jerusalem  were 
stopped — that  is,  their  outflow  was  prevented,  and 
the  water  diverted  underground  to  the  interior  of 
the -city  (2  K.  xx.  20  ;  2  Chr.  xxxii.  4).  This  was 
particularly  the  case  with  the  spring  which  formed 
the  source  of  the  stream  of  the  Kedron,"  elsewhere 
called  the  "upper  springhead  of  Gihon"  (2  Chr. 
xxxii.  30  ;  A.  V .  most  incorrectly  "  water-course  "). 
It  was  led  down  by  a  subterraneous  channel 
"through  the  hard  rock"  (2  Chr.  xxxii.  30; 
Ecclus.  xlviii.  17),  to  the  west  side  of  the  city  of 
David  (2  K.  xx.  20),  that  is,  into  the  valley 
which  separated  the  Mount  Moriah  and  Zion  from 
the  Upper  City,  and  where  traces  of  its  presence 
appear  to  this  day  (Barclay,  310,  538).  This 
done,  be  carefully  repaired  the  walls  of  the  city, 
furnished  them  with   additional    towers,  and  built  a 


k  And  yet  it  would  seem,  from  the  account  of 
Josiah's  reforms  (2  K.  xxiii.  11,  12),  that  many  of 
Ah;i/"s  intrusions  survived  even  the  zeal  of  Hezekiah. 

1,1  The  word  "  gold"  is  supplied  by  our  translators  : 
but   the   word    "overlaid"   (flBif)    shows   that    some 

metallic  coating  is  intended.     ' 

"  The  authority  tor  this  is  the  use  here  of  the  word 
Nuchal,  which  is  uniformly  applied  to  the  valley  east 
of  the  city,  as  ffe  is  to  that  west  and  south.  There 
are  other  grounds  which  arc  stated  in  the  concluding 

section  of  this  article.  Similar  measures  were  taken 
by  tin'  Moslems  on  the  approach  of  the  Crusaders  Will, 
of  Tyre,  viii.  7,  quoted  by  Uohinson,  i.  346  noU    . 


994 


JERUSALEM 


second  wall  (2  Chr.  xxxii.  5  ;  Is.  xxii.  10).  The 
water  of  the  reservoir,  called  the  "  lower  pool,"  or 
the  "  old  pool,"  was  diverted  to  a  new  tank  in  the 
city  between  the  two  walls0  (Is.  xxii.  11).  Nor 
was  this  all :  as  the  straggle  would  certainly  be  one 
tor  lite  and  death  he  strengthened  the  fortifications 
of  the  citadel  (2  Chr.  xxxii.  5,  "Millo;"  Is.  xxii. 
9),  and  prepared  abundance  of  ammunition.  He  also 
organised  the  people,  and  officered  them,  gathered 
them  together  in  the  open  place  at  the  gate,  and  in- 
spired them  with  confidence  in  Jehovah  (xxxii.  6). 

The  details  of  the  Assyrian  invasion  or  invasions 
will  be  found  under  the  separate  heads  of  Senna- 
CHERIB  and  Hezekiah.  It  is  possible  that  Jeru- 
salem was  once  regularly  invested  by  the  Assyrian 
arary.  It  is  certain  that  the  army  encamped  there 
on  another  occasion  ;  that  the  generals — the  Tartan, 
the  chief  Cup-bearer,  and  the  chief  Eunuch — held 
a  conversation  with  Hezekiah's  chief  officers  outside 
the  walls,  most  probably  at  or  about  the  present 
Kasr  Jalud  at  the  N.  VV.  corner  of  the  city,  while 
the  wall  above  was  crowded  with  the  anxious  in- 
habitants. At  the  time  of  Titus's  siege  the  name 
of  "  the  Assyrian  Camp"  was  still  attached  to  a  spot 
north  of  the  city  in  remembrance  either  of  this  or 
the  subsequent  visit  of  Nebuchadnezzar  (Jos.  B.  J. 
v.  12,  §2).  But  though  untaken — though  the  ci- 
tadel was  still  the  "  virgin-daughter  of  Zion" — yet 
Jerusalem  did  not  escape  unharmed.  Hezekiah's 
treasures  had  to  be  emptied,  and  the  costly  ornaments 
he  had  added  to  the  Temple  were  stripped  off  to  make 
up  the  tribute.  This,  however,  he  had  recovered  by 
the  time  of  the  subsequent  visit  of  the  ambassadors 
from  Babylon,  as  we  see  from  the  account  in  2  K. 
xx.  12  ;  and  2  Chr.  xxxii.  27-29.  The  death  of 
this  good  and  great  king  was  indeed  a  national 
calamity,  and  so  it  was  considered.  He  was  buried 
in  one  of  the  chief  of  the  royal  sepulchres,  and  a 
vast  concourse  from  the  country,  as  well  as  of  the 
citizens  of  Jerusalem,  assembled  to  join  in  the  wail- 
ings  at  the  funeral  (2  Chr.  xxxii.  33). 

The  reign  of  Manasseh  (B.C.  696)  must  have  been 
an  eventful  one  in  the  annals  of  Jerusalem,  though 
only  meagre  indications  of  its  events  are  to  be  found 
in  the  documents.  He  began  by  plunging  into 
all  the  idolatries  of  his  grandfather — restoring  all 
that  Hezekiah  had  destroyed,  and  desecrating  the 
Temple  and  the  city  with  even  more  offensive  idola- 
tries than  those  of  Ahaz  (2  Chr.  xxxiii.  2-9  ;  2  K.  xxi. 
2-9).  In  this  career  of  wickedness  he  was  stopped 
by  an  invasion  of  the  Assyrian  army,  by  whom  he 
was  taken  prisoner  and  carried  to  Babylon,  where  he 
remained  for  some  time.  The  rest  of  his  long  reign 
was  occupied  in  attempting  to  remedy  his  former 
misdoings,  and  in  the  repair  and  conservation  of  the 
city  (Josh.  Ant.  x.  3,  §2).  He  built  a  fresh  wall 
to  the  citadel,  "  from  the  west  side  of  Gihon-in-the- 
valley  to  the  fish-gate,"  i.  e.  apparently  along  the 
east  side  of  the  central  valley,  which  parts  the 
upper  and  lower  cities  from  S.  to  N.  He  also 
continued  the  works  which  had  been  begun  by 
Jotham  at  Ophel,  and  raised  that  fortress  or  struc- 


°  The  reservoir  between  the  Jaffa  gate  and  the 
Church  of  the  Sepulchre,  now  usually  called  the  Pool 
of  Hezekiah,  cannot  be  either  of  the  works  alluded 
to  above.  If  an  ancient  construction  it  is  probably 
2he  Almond  Pool  of  Josephus.  (For  the  reasons,  see 
Williams,  Holy  City,  35-8,  488.) 

p  The  narrative  in  Kings  appears  to  place  the  de- 
struction of  the  images  after  the  king's  solemn  cove- 
nant in  the  Temple,  ;'.  c.  after  the  completion  of  the 
repairs.     But,  on  the  other  hand,  there  are  the  dates 


JERUSALEM 

ture  to  a  great  height.  On  his  death  he  was  buried 
in  a  private  tomb  in  the  garden  attached  to  his 
palace,  called  also  the  garden  of  Uzza  (2  K.  xxi.  18  ; 
2  Chr.  xxxiii.  20).  Here  also  was  interred  his  son 
Anion  after  his  violent  death,  following  an  unevent- 
ful but  idolatrous  reign  of  two  years  (2  Chr.  xxxiii. 
21-25;  2  K.  xxi.  19-26). 

The  reign  of  Josiah  (B.C.  639)  was  marked  by  a 
more  strenuous  zeal  for  Jehovah  than  even  that  of 
Hezekiah  had  been.  He  began  his  reign  at  eight 
years  of  age,  and  by  his  20th  year  (12  th  of  his 
reign — 2  Chr.  xxxiv.  3)  commenced  a  thorough  re- 
moval of  the  idolatrous  abuses  of  Manasseh  and 
Amon,  and  even  some  of  Ahaz,  which  must  have 
escaped  the  purgations  of  Hezekiah  p  (2  K.  xxviii. 
12).  As  on  former  occasions  these  abominations 
were  broken  up  small  and  carried  down  to  the  bed 
of  the  Kidron — which  seems  to  have  served  almost, 
the  purpose  of  a  common  sewer,  and  there  calcined 
and  dispersed.  The  cemetery,  which  still  paves  the 
sides  of  that  valley,  had  already  begun  to  exist,  and 
the  fragments  of  the  broken  altars  and  statues  were 
scattered  on  the  graves  that  they  might  be  effectu- 
ally defiled,  and  thus  prevented  from  further  use. 
On  the  opposite  side  of  the  valley,  somewhere  on  the 
Mount  of  Olives,  were  the  erections  which  Solomon 
had  put  up  for  the  deities  of  his  foreign  wives.  Not 
one  of  these  was  spared  ;  they  were  all  annihilated, 
and  dead  bones  scattered  over  the  places  where  they 
had  stood.  These  things  occupied  six  years,  at  the 
expiration  of  which,  in  the  first  month  of  the  18th 
year  of  his  reign  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  1  ;  2  K.  xxiii.  23), 
a  solemn  passover  was  held,  emphatically  recorded 
to  have  been  the  greatest  since  the  time  of  Samuel 
(2  Chr.  xxxv.  18).  This  seems  to  have  been  the 
crowning  ceremony  of  the  purification  of  the  Tem- 
ple ;  and  it  was  at  once  followed  by  a  thorough  re- 
novation of  the  fabric  (2  Chr.  xxxiv.  8  ;  2  K.  xxii.  3). 
The  cost  was  met  by  offerings  collected  at  the  doors 
(2  K.  xxii.  4),  and  also  throughout,  the  country 
(Jos.  Ant.  x.  4,  §1),  not  only  of  Judah  and  Ben- 
jamin, but  also  of  Ephraim  and  the  other  northern 
tribes  (2  Chr.  xxxiv.  9).  It  was  during  these  re- 
pairs that  the  book  of  the  Law  was  found  ;  and 
shortly  after  all  the  people  were  convened  to  Jeru- 
salem to  hear  it  read,  and  to  renew  the  national 
covenant  with  Jehovah.q  The  mention  of  Huldah 
the  prophetess  (2  Chr.  xxxiv.  22  ;  2-  K.  xxii.  14) 
introduces  us  to  the  lower  city  under  the  name  of 

"  the    Mishneh  "    (rOtJ'En,    A.    V.    "  college," 

"school,"  or  "second  part").r  The  name  also 
survives  in  the  book  of  Zephaniah,  a  prophet  of 
this  reign  (i.  10),  who  seems  to  recognize  "  the 
fish-gate,"  and  "  the  lower  city,"  and  "  the  hills," 
as  the  three  main  divisions  of  the  city. 

Josiah's  death  took  place  at  a  distance  from  Jeru- 
salem ;  but  he  was  brought  there  for  his  burial, 
and  was  placed  in  "his  own  sepulchre"  (2  K.  xxiii. 
30),  or  "  in  the  sepulchre  of  his  fathers  "  (2  Chr. 
xxxv.  24),  probably  that  already  tenanted  by  Ma- 
nasseh and  Amon.     (See  1  Esd.  i.  31.) 


given  in  2  Chr.  xxxiv.  8,  xxxv.  1,  19,  which  fix  the 
Passover  to  the  14th  of  the  1st  month  of  hi-  18th  year, 
too  early  in  the  year  for  the  repair  which  was  begun 
in  the  same  year  to  have  preceded  it. 

i  This  narrative  has  some  interesting  corre- 
spondences with  that  of  Joash's  coronation  (2  K.  xi.i. 
Amongst  these  is  the  singular  expression  the  king 
stood  "  on  the  pillar."     In  the  present  c  ius 

understands  this  as  an  official  spot— e*«  tou  ^^otos. 

r  See  Keil  on  2  K.  xxii.  14. 


JEEUSALEM 

Josiah's  rash  opposition  to  Pharaoh-Neeho  cost 
him  his  life,  his  son  his  throne,  and  Jerusalem 
much  suffering.  Before  Jehoahaz  (B.C.  008)  had 
been  reigning  three  months,  the  Egyptian  king  found 
opportunity  to  send  to  Jerusalem,8  from  Riblah 
where  he  was  then  encamped,  a  force  sufficient  to 
depose  and  bike  him  prisoner,  to  put  his  brother 
Eliakim  on  the  throne,  and  to  exact  a  heavy  fine 
from  the  city  and  country,  which  was  paid  in  ad- 
vance by  the  new  king,  and  afterwards  extorted  by 
taxation  (2  K.  xxiii.  33,  35). 

The  fall  of  the  city  was  now  rapidly  approach- 
ing. During  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim — such  was  the 
new  name  which  at  Necho's  order  Eliakim  had  as- 
sumed— Jerusalem  was  visited  by  Nebuchadnezzar, 
with  the  Babylonian  army  lately  victorious  over  the 
Egyptians  at  Carchemish.  The  visit  was  possibly 
repeated  once,  or  even  twice.1  A  siege  there  must 
have  been ;  but  of  this  we  have  no  account.  We 
may  infer  how  severe  was  the  pressure  on  the  sur- 
rounding country,  from  the  fact  that  the  very  Be- 
douins were  driven  within  the  walls  by  "  the  fear 
of  the  Chaldeans  and  of  the  Syrians"  (Jer.  xxxv. 
1 1).  We  may  also  infer  that  the  Temple  was  entered, 
since  Nebuchadnezzar  earned  off  some  of  the  vessels 
therefrom  for  his  temple  at  Babylon  (2  Chr.  xxxvi. 
7),  and  that  Jehoiakim  was  treated  with  great  in- 
dignity (ib.  6).  In  the  latter  part  of  this  reign  we 
discern  the  country  harassed  and  pillaged  by  maraud- 
ing bands  from  the  east  of  Jordan  (2  K.  xxiv.  2). 

Jehoiakim  was  succeeded  by  his  son  Jehoiachiii 
(b.c.  597).  Hardly  had  his  short  reign  begun  be- 
fore the  terrible  army  of  Babylon  re-appeared  before 
the  city,  again  commanded  by  Nebuchadnezzar  (2  K. 
xxiv.  10,  11).  Jehoiachin's  disposition  appears  to 
have  made  him  shrink  from  inflicting  on  the  city 
the  horrors  of  a  long  siege  (B.  J.  vi.  2,  §1),  and 
he  therefore  surrendered  in  the  third  month  of  his 
reign.  The  treasures  of  the  palace  and  Temple  were 
pillaged,  certain  golden  articles  of  Solomon's  original 
establishment,  which  had  escaped  the  plunder  and 
desecrations  of  the  previous  reigns,  were  cut  up 
(2  K.  xxiv.  13),  and  the  more  desirable  objects  out 
of  the  Temple  carried  off  (Jer.  xxvii.  19).  The  first 
deportation  that  we  hear  of  from  the  city  now  took 
place.  The  king,  his  wives,  and  the  queen  mother, 
with  their  eunuchs  and  whole  establishment,  the 
princes,  7000  warriors,  and  1000  artificers — in  all 
L0,000  souls,  were  carried  off  to  Babylon  (ibid. 
14-16).  The  uncle  of  Jehoiachin  was  made  king  in 
his  stead,  by  the  name  of  Zedekiah,  under  a  solemn 
oath  ("  by  God")  of  allegiance  (2  Chr.  xxxvi.  13; 
Ezek.  xvii.  13,  14,  18).  Had  he  been  content  to 
remain  quiet  under  the  rule  of  Babylon,  the  city 
might  have  stood  many  years  longer;  but  he  was 
not.  lie  appears  to  have  been  tempted  with  the 
chance  of  relief  afforded  by  the  accession  of  Pharaoh 
Hophra,  and  to  have  applied  to  him  for  assistance 
(Ezek.    xvii.    15).      Upon    this    Nebuchadnezzar 


JEEUSALEM 


995 


9  This  event  would  surely  be  more  emphatically  re- 
lated in  the  Bible,  if  Jerusalem  were  the  Cadytis  w  nieh 
Nccho  is  recorded  by  Herodotus  to  have  destroyed 
after  the  battle  at  Megiddo.  The  Bible  records  pass 
over  in  total  silence,  or  notice  only  in  a  casual  way, 
events  which  occurred  close  to  the  Israelite  territory, 
when  those  events  do  not  affect  the  Israelites  them- 
selves ;  instance  the  29-years'  siege  "t  Ashdod  by 
Psammetichus,  Necho's  predecessor  ;  the  destruction 
of  Gezer  by  a  former  Pharaoh  (1  K.  ix.  Hi  ,  .Ye. 
But  when  events  do  affect  them,  they  arc  mentioned 
with  more  or  less  detail.  The  question  of  Cadytis  is  dis- 
cussed by  Sir  G.Wilkinson,  in  Bawlinson's  Herodotus, 
ii.  240,  note  ;  also  by  Kcurick,  Anc.  Egypt,  ii.  106. 


marched  in  person  to  Jerusalem,  arriving  in  the 
ninth  year  of  Zedekiah,  on  the  10th  day  of  the 
lUth  month"  (B.C.  588),  and  at  once  began  a  re- 
gular siege,  at  the  same  time  wasting  the  country 
far  and  near  (Jer.  xxxiv.  7).  The  siege  was  con- 
ducted by  erecting  forts  on  lofty  mounds  round  the 
city,  from  which  on  the  usual  Assyrian  plan,x  mis- 
siles were  discharged  into  the  town,  and  the  walls 
and  houses  in  them  battered  by  rams  (Jer.  xxxii. 
24,  xxxiii.  4,  lii.  4;  Ezek.  xxi.  22);  Jos.  Ant.  x. 
8,  §1).  The  city  was  also  surrounded  with  troops 
(Jer.  lii.  7).  The  siege  was  once  abandoned,  owing 
to  the  approach  of  the  Egyptian  army  (Jer.  xxxvii. 
5,11),  and  during  the  interval  the  gates  of  the  city 
were  re-opened  (ibid.  13).  But  the  relief  was  only 
temporary,  and  in  the  11th  of  Zedekiah  (B.C.  586), 
on  the  9th  day  of  the  4th  month  (Jer.  lii.  6),  being 
just  a  year  and  a  half  from  the  first  investment,  the 
city  was  taken.  Nebuchadnezzar  had  in  the  mean- 
time retired  from  Jerusalem  to  Riblah  to. watch  the 
more  important  siege  of  Tyre,  then  in  the  last  year 
of  its  progress.  The  besieged  seem  to  have  suffered 
severely  both  from  hunger  and  disease  (Jer.  xxxii. 
24),  but  chiefly  from  the  former  (2  K.  xxv.  3  ;  Jer. 
lii.  6  ;  Lam.  v.  10).  But  they  would  perhaps  have 
held  out  longer  had  not  a  breach  in  the  wall  been 
effected  on  the  clay  named.  It  was  at  midnight 
(Joseph.).  The  whole  city  was  wrapt  in  the  pitchy 
darkness y  characteristic  of  an  eastern  town,  and 
nothing  was  known  by  the  Jews  of  what  had 
happened  till  the  generals  of  the  army  entered  the 
Temple  (Joseph.)  and  took  their  seats  in  the  middle 
court1  (Jer.  xxxix.  3  ;  Jos.  Ant.  x.  8,  §2).  Then 
the  alarm  was  given  to  Zedekiah,  and  collecting  his 
remaining  warriors,  they  stole  out  of  the  city  by  a 
gate  at  the  south  side,  somewhere  near  the  present 
Bab  el-Mugharibeh,  crossed  the  Kedron  above  the 
royal  gardens  and  made  their  way  over  the  Mount 
of  Olives  to  the  Jordan  valley.  At  break  of  day 
information  of  the  flight  was  brought  to  the  Chal- 
deans by  some  deserters.  A  rapid  pursuit  was 
made:  Zedekiah  was  overtaken  near  Jericho,  his 
people  were  dispersed,  and  he  himself  captured  and 
leserved  for  a  miserable  fate  at  Riblah.  Meantime 
the  wretched  inhabitants  suffered  all  the  horrors  of 
assault  and  sack:  the  men  were  slaughtered,  old 
ami  young,  prince  and  peasant;  the  women  violated 
in  Mount  Zion  itself  (Lam.  ii.  4  ;  v.  11,  12). 

On  the  seventh  day  of  the  following  month  ( 2  K . 
xxv.  8),  Nebuzaradan,  the  commander  of  the  king's 
body-guard,  who  seems  to  have  been  charged  with 
Nebuchadnezzar's  instructions  as  to  what  should  be 
done  with  the  city,  arrived.  Two  days  were  passed, 
probably  in  collecting  the  captives  and  booty;  and 
on  the  tenth  (Jer.  lii.  12)  the  Temple,  the  royal 
palace,  mid  all  the  more  important  buildings  of  the 
city,  were  set  on  fire,  and  the  wall- thrown  down  and 
left  as  heaps  of  disordered  rubbish  on  the  ground 
(Neh.  iv.  2).      The  spoil  of  the  city  consisted  appa- 

1   It  seems   impossible  to   reconcile  the  accounts  of 

this  period  in  Kings,  Chronicles,  ami  Jeremiah,  with 
Josephus  and  the  other  sources.  For  one  view  see 
Jehoiakim.  For  an  opposite  one  see  Rawlinson's 
Herodotus,  i.  509-514. 

u  According  to  Josephus  [Ant.  x.  7,  §4),  this  date 
was  the  commencement  of  the  final  portion  of  the 
siege.  But  there  is  nothing  in  the  Bible  records  to 
support  this. 

x  For  the  sieges  see  Layard's  Nineveh,  ii.  30G,  &c. 

y  The  moon  being  but  nine  days  old,  there  can  have 
been  little  or  no  moonlight  at  this  hour. 

'  This  was  the  regular  Assyrian  custom  at  the  con- 
clusion of  a  siege  jLayard,  Xinevch,  ii.  375). 


996 


JERUSALEM 


rently  of  little  more  than  the  furniture  of  the 
Temple.  A  few  small  vessels  in  gold  a  and  silver, 
and  some  other  things  in  brass  were  carried  away 
whole — the  former  under  the  especial  eye  of  Nebu- 
zaradan  himself  (2  K.  xxv.  15;  comp.  Jer.  xxvii. 
19).  But  the  larger  objects,  Solomon's  huge  brazen 
basin  or  sea  with  its  twelve  bulls,  the  ten  bases,  the 
two  magnificent  pillars,  Jachin  and  Boaz,  too  heavy 
and  too  cumbrous  for  transport,  were  broken  up. 
The  pillars  were  almost  the  only  parts  of  Solomon's 
original  construction  which  had  not  been  mutilated 
by  the  sacrilegious  hands  of  some  Baal-worshipping 
monarch  or  other,  and  there  is  quite  a  touch  of 
pathos  in  the  way  in  which  the  chronicler  lingers 
over  his  recollections  of  their  height,  their  size, 
and  their  ornaments — capitals,  wreathen  work,  and 
pomegranates,  "  all  of  brass." 

The  previous  deportations,  and  the  sufferings  en- 
dured in  the  siege,  must  to  a  great  extent  have 
drained  the  place  of  its  able-bodied  people,  and  thus 
the  captives,  on  this  occasion,  were  but  few  and  un- 
important. The  high-priest,  and  four  other  officers 
of  the  Temple,  the  commanders  of  the  fighting  men, 
five  b  people  of  the  court,  the  mustering  officer  of 
the  army,  and  sixty  selected  private  persons,  were 
reserved  to  be  submitted  to  the  king  at  Riblah. 
The  daughters  of  Zedekiah,  with  their  children  and 
establishment  (Jer.  xli.  10,  16;  comp.  Ant.  x.  9, 
§4),  and  Jeremiah  the  prophet  (ibid.  xl.  5),  were 
placed  by  Nebuzaradan  at  Mizpah  under  the  charge 
of  Gedaliah  ben-Ahikam,  who  had  been  appointed 
as  superintendent  of  the  few  poor  labouring  people 
left  to  cany  on  the  necessary  husbandry  and  vine- 
dressing.  In  addition  to  these  were  some  small 
bodies  of  men  in  arms,  who  had  perhaps  escaped 
from  the  city  before  the  blockade,  or  in  the  interval 
of  the  siege,  and  who  were  hovering  on  the  outskirts 
of  the  country  watching  what  might  turn  up  (Jer. 
xl.  7,  8).  [iSHMAEL,  6.]  The  remainder  of  the 
population — numbering,  with  the  72  abovenamed, 
832  souls  (Jer.  lii.  29),  were  marched  off  to  Baby- 
lon. About  two  months  after  this  Gedaliah  was 
murdered  by  Ishmael,  and  then  the  few  people  of 
consideration  left  with  Jeremiah,  went  into  Egypt. 
Thus  the  land  was  practically  deserted  of  all  but 
the  very  poorest  class.  Even  these  were  not  allowed 
to  remain  in  quiet.  Five  years  afterwards— the 
23rd  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  reign- — the  insatiable  Ne- 
buzaradan, on  his  way  to  Egypt  (Jos.  Ant.  x.  9, 
§7),  again  visited  the  ruins,  and  swept  off  745 
more  of  the  wretched  peasants  (Jer.  lii.  30). 

Thus  Jerusalem  at  last  had  fallen,  and  the  Temple, 
set  up  under  such  fair  auspices,  was  a  heap  of  black- 
ened ruins. c  The  spot,  however,  was  none  the  less 
sacred  because  the  edifice  was  destroyed,  and  it  was 
still  the  resort  of  devotees,  sometimes  from  great 
distances,  who  brought  their  offerings — in  strange 
heathenish  guise  indeed,  but  still  with  a  true  feel- 
ing— to  weep  and  wail  over  the  holy  place  (Jer. 
xli.  5).     It  was  still  the  centre   of  hope    to    the 

a  Josephus  (x.  8,  §5)  says  the  candlestick  and  the 
golden  table  of  shewbread  were  taken  now  ;  but  these 
were  doubtless  carried  off  on  the  previous  occasion. 

b  Jeremiah  (lii.  25)  says  "seven." 

c  The  events  of  this  period  are  kept  in  memory  by 
the  Jews  of  the  present  day  by  various  commemora- 
tive fasts,  which  were  instituted  immediately  after 
the  occurrences  themselves.  These  are  : — the  10th 
Tebeth  (Jan.  5),  the  day  of  the  investment  of  the  city 
by  Nebuchadnezzar;  the  10th  Ab  (July  29),  destruc- 
tion of  the  Temple  by  Nebuzaradan,  and  subsequently 
by  Titus  ;  the  3rd  Tisri  (Sept.  19),  murder  of  Gedaliah  ; 
'.Uli  Tebeth,  when  Kzekicl  and  the   other  captives  at 


JERUSALEM 

people  in  captivity,  and  the  time  soon  arrived  for 
their  return  to  it.  The  decree  of  Cyrus  authorizing 
the  rebuilding  of  the  "  house  of  Jehovah,  God  of 
Israel,  which  is  in  Jerusalem,"  was  issued  B.C.  536. 
In  consequence  thereof  a  very  large  caravan  of 
Jews  arrived  in  the  country.  The  expedition  com- 
prised all  classes — the  royal  family,  priests,  Levites, 
inferior  ministers,  lay  people  belonging  to  various 
towns  and  families — and  numbered  42,360  d  in  all. 
They  were  well  provided  with  treasure  for  the  ne- 
cessary outlay  ;  and — -a  more  precious  burden  still — 
they  bore  the  vessels  of  the  old  Temple  which  had 
been  preserved  at  Babylon,  and  were  now  destined 
again  to  find  a  home  at  Jerusalem  (Ezr.  v.  14,  vi.  5). 
A  short  time  was  occupied  in  settling  in  their 
former  cities,  but  on  the  first  day  of  the  7th  month 
(Ezr.  iii.  6)  a  general  assembly  was  called  together 
at  Jerusalem  in  "  the  open  place  of  the  first  gate 
towards  the  east"  (1  Esd.  v.  47)  ;  the  altar  was  set 
up,  and  the  daily  morning  and  evening  sacrifices 
commenced. e  Other  festivals  were  re-instituted, 
and  we  have  a  record  of  the  celebration  of  at  least 
one  anniversary  of  the  day  of  the  first  assembly  at 
Jerusalem  (Neh.  viii.  1,  &c).  Arrangements  were 
made  for  stone  and  timber  for  the  fabric,  and  in 
the  2nd  year  after  their  return  (B.C.  534),  on  the 
1st  day  of  the  2nd  month  (1  Esd.  v.  57),  the  foun- 
dation of  the  Temple  was  laid  amidst  the  songs 
and  music  of  the  priests  and  Levites  (according  to 
the  old  rites  of  David),  the  tears  of  the  old  men 
and  the  shouts  of  the  young.  But  the  work  was 
destined  to  suffer  material  interruptions.  The  chiefs 
of  the  people  by  whom  Samaria  had  been  colonised, 
finding  that  the  Jews  refused  their  orlers  of  assist- 
ance (Ezr.  iv.  2),  annoyed  and  hindered  them  in, 
every  possible  way  ;  and  by  this  and  some  natural 
drawbacks — such  as  violent  storms  of  wind  by 
which  some  of  the  work  had  been  blown  down 
(Hag.  i.  9),  drought,  and  consequent  failure  of 
crops,  and  mortality  amongst  both  animals  and 
men — the  work  was  protracted  through  the  rest 
of  the  reign  of  Cyrus,  and  that  of  Ahasuerus,  till 
the  accession  of  Artaxerxes  (Darius  I.)  to  the  throne 
of  Persia  (B.C.  522).  The  Samaritans  then  sent 
to  the  court  at  Babylon  a  formal  memorial  (a 
measure  already  tried  without  success  in  the  pre- 
ceding reign),  representing  that  the  inevitable  con- 
sequence of  the  restoration  of  the  city  would  be  its 
revolt  from  the  empire.  This  produced  its  effect, 
and  the  building  entirely  ceased  for  a  time.  In  the 
meantime  houses  of  some  pretension  began  to 
spring  up — "  ceiled  houses"  (Hag.  i.  4), — and  the 
enthusiasm  of  the  builders  of  the  Temple  cooled 
(ibid.  9).  But  after  two  years  the  delay  became 
intolerable  to  the  leaders,  and  the  work  was  recom- 
menced at  all  hazards,  amidst  the  encouragements 
and  rebukes  of  the  two  prophets,  Zechariah  and 
Haggai,  on  the  24th  day  of  the  6th  month  of 
Darius'  2nd  year.  Another  attempt  at  interrup- 
tion was  made  by  the  Persian  governor  of  the  dis- 


Babylon  received  the  news  of  the  destruction  of  the 
Temple.  The  entrance  of  the  Chaldees  into  the  city 
is  commemorated  on  the  17th  Tamuz  (July  8),  the 
day  of  the  breach  of  the  Antonia  by  Titus.  The  modern 
dates  here  given  are  the  days  on  which  the  fasts  are 
kept  in  the  present  year,  1860. 

d  Josephus  says  42,462. 

e  The  feast  of  tabernacles  is  also  said  to  have  been 
celebrated  at  this  time  (iii.  4;  Jos.  Ant.  xi.  4.  ,'1  ; 
but  this  is  in  direct  opposition  to  Neh.  viii.  17.  which 
states  that  it  was  first  celebrated  when  Ezra  was  pre- 
sent comp.  13),  which  he  was  not  on  the  former 
occasion. 


JERUSALEM 

trict  west  ot'  the  Euphrates'  (Ezr.  v.  3),  but  the 
result  was  only  a  confirmation  by  Darius  of  the 
privileges  granted  by  his  predecessor  (vi.  6-13), 
and  an  order  to  render  all  possible  assistance.  The 
work  now  went  on  apace,  and  the  Temple  was 
finished  and  dedicated"  in  the  6th  year  of  Dai  ins 
(B.G.  516),  on  the  3rd  (or  23rd,  1  Esdr.  vii.  5) 
of  Adar — the  last  month,  and  on  the  14th  day  of 
the  new  year  the  first  Passover  was  celebrated. 
The  new  Temple  was  60  cubits  less  in  altitude 
than  that  of  Solomon  (Jos.  Ant.  xv.  11,  §1)  ;  but 
its  dimensions  and  form — of  which  there  are  only 
scanty  notices — will  be  best  considered  elsewhere. 
[TEMPLE.]  All  this  time  the  walls  of  the  city 
remained  as  the  Assyrians  had  left  them  (Xeh.  ii. 
12,  &c).  A  period  of  58  years  now  passed  of 
which  no  accounts  are  preserved  to  us  ;  but  at  the 
end  of  that  time,  in  the  year  457,  Ezra  arrived 
from  Babylon  with  a  caravan  of  Priests,  Levites, 
Nethinims,  and  lay  people,  among  the  latter  some 
members  of  the  royal  family,  in  all  1777  persons 
( Ezr.  vii.  viii.),  and  with  valuable  offeriugs  from 
the  Persian  king  and  his  court,  as  well  as  from  the 
Jews  who  still  remained  in  Babylonia  (ib.  vii.  14, 
viii.  25).  He  left  Babylon  on  the  1st  day  of  the 
year  and  reached  Jerusalem  on  the  1st  of  the  5th 
month  (Ezr.  vii.  9,  viii.  32). 

Ezra' at  once  set  himself  to  correct  some  irregu- 
larities into  which  the  community  had  fallen.  The 
chief  of  them  was  the  practice  of  marrying  the 
native  women  of  the  old  Canaanite  nations.  The 
people  were  assembled  at  three  days'  notice,  and 
harangued  by  Ezra — so  urgent  was  the  case — in  the 
midst  of  a  pouring  rain,  and  in  very  cold  weather, 
in  the  open  space  in  fiont  of  the  main  entrance  to 
the  Temple  (Ezr.  x.  9;  1  Esdr.  ix.  6).  His 
exhortations  were  at  once  acceded  to,  a  form  of 
trespass-offering  was  arranged,  and  no  less  than 
17  priests,  10  Levites,  and  86  laymen,  renounced 
their  foreign  wives,  and  gave  up  an  intercourse 
which  had  been  to  their  fathers  the  cause  and  the 
accompaniment  of  almost  all  their  misfortunes. 
The  matter  took  three  months  to  carry  out,  and 
was  completed  on  the  1st  day  of  the  new  year: 
but  the  practice  was  not  wholly  eradicated  (Neh. 
xiii.  23),  though  it  never  was  pursued  as  before 
the  Captivity. 

We  now  pass  another  period  of  eleven  years  until 
the  arrival  of  Nehemiah,  about  B.C.  445.  He  had 
been  moved  to  come  to  Jerusalem  by  the  accounts 
given  him  of  the  wretchedness  of  the  community, 
and  of  the  state  of  ruin  in  which  the  walls  of  the 
city  continued  (Neh.  i.  3).  Arrived  there  he  kept 
his  intentions  quiet  for  three  days,  but  on  the  night 
of  the  third  he  went  out  by  himself,  and,  as  far  as 
the  ruins  would  allow,  made  the  circuit  of  the  place 
(ii.  11-16).  On  the  following  day  he  collected  the 
chief  people  and  proposed  the  immediate  rebuilding 
of  the  walls.  One  spirit  seized  them.  Priests, 
rulers,  Levites,  private  persons,  citizens  of  distant 
towns,1'  as  well  as  those  dwelling  on  the  spot,  all 
put  their  hand  vigorously  to  the  work.     And  not- 


JERUSALEM 


997 


1  mi"l3  "Qy  =  beyond  the  river,  but  by  our  trans- 
lators rendered  "  on  this  side,"  as  if  speaking  from 
Jerusalem.     (See  Kwald,  iv.  110  note.) 

g  Psalm  xxx.  by  its  title  purports  to  have  been 
used  on  this  occasion  (F.wald,  Dichter,  i.  210,  223). 
Kwald  also  suggests  that  l's.  lxviii.  was  finally  used 
for  this  festival  [Gesch.  iv.  127  note). 

h  Among  these  we  find  Jericho  and  the  Jordan 
valley  (A.  V.  "plain"),  Bethzur,  near  Hebron, 
Gibeon,  liethhoron,  perhaps  Samaria,  and  the  other 


withstanding  the  taunts  and  threats  of  Sanballat, 
the  ruler  of  the  Samaritans,  and  Tobiah  the  Am- 
monite, in  consequence  of  which  one-half  of  the 
people  had  to  remain  armed  while  the  other  halt 
built,  the  work  was  completed  in  52  days,  on  the 
25th  of  Elul.  The  wall  thus  rebuilt  was  that 
of  the  city  of  Jerusalem  as  well  as  the  city  "f 
David  or  Zion,  as  will  be  shown  in  the  next  sec- 
tion, where  the  account  of  the  rebuilding  is  ex- 
amined in  detail  (Section  III.  p.  1027).  At  this  time 
the  city  must  have  presented  a  forlorn  appearance  ; 
but  few  houses  were  built,  and  large  spaces  re- 
mained unoccupied,  or  occupied  but  with  the  ruins 
of  the  Assyrian  destructions  (Neh.  vii.  4).  In  this 
respect  it  was  not  unlike  much  of  the  modern  city. 
The  solemn  dedication  of  the  wall,  recorded  in  Neh. 
xii.  27-43,  probably  took  place  at  a  later  period, 
when  the  works  had  been  completely  finished. 

Whether  Ezra  was  here  at  this  time  is  uncer- 
tain.' [Ezra,  p.  6056].  But  we  meet  him  during 
the  government  of  Nehemiah,  especially  on  one 
interesting  occasion — the  anniversary,  it  would  ap- 
pear, of  the  first  return  of  Zerubbabel's  caravan  — 
on  the  1st  of  the  7th  month  (Neh.  viii.  1).  He 
there  appears  as  the  venerable  and  venerated  in- 
structor of  the  people  in  the  forgotten  law  of  Moses, 
amongst  other  reforms  reinstitnting  the  feast  of 
Tabernacles,  which  we  incidentally  learn  had  nut 
been  celebrated  since  the  time  that  the  Israelites 
originally  entered  on  the  land  (viii.  17). 

Nehemiah  remained  in  the  city  for  twelve  years 
(v.  14,  xiii.  6),  during  which  time  he  held  the 
office  and  maintained  the  state  of  governor  of  the 
province  (v.  14)  from  his  own  private  resources 
(v.  15).  He  was  indefatigable  in  his  regulation 
and  maintenance  of  the  order  and  dignity  both  of 
the  city  (vii.  3,  xi.  1,  xiii.  15,  &c.)  and  Temple 
(x.  32,  39,  xii.  44);  abolished  the  excessive  rates 
of  usury  by  which  the  richer  citizens  had  griev- 
ously oppressed  the  poor  (v.  6-12);  kept  up  the 
genealogical  registers,  at  once  so  characteristic  of, 
and  important  to,  the  Jewish  nation  (vii.  5,  xi., 
xii.) ;  and  in  various  other  ways  showed  himself 
an  able  and  active  governor,  and  possessing  a  com- 
plete ascendancy  over  his  fellow-citizens.  At  the 
end  of  this  time  he  returned  to  Babylon  ;  but  it 
does  not  appear  that  his  absence  was  more  than 
a  short  one,k  and  he  was  soon  again  at  his  post,  as 
vigilant  and  energetic  as  ever  (xiii.  7).  Of  his 
death  we  have  no  record. 

The  foreign  tendencies  of  the  high-priest  Eliashib 
anil  his  family  had  already  given  Nehemiah  some 
concern  (xiii.  4,  28),  and  when  the  checks  exercised 
by  his  vigilance  and  good  sense  were  removed,  they 
quickly  led  to  serious  disorders,  unfortunately 
the  only  occurrences  which  have  come  down  to  us 
during  the  next  epoch.      Eliashib's  son  Joiada,  who 

succ led  him  in  the  high-priesthood  (apparently 

a  few  years  before  the  death  ot'  Nehemiah),  had  two 
sons,  the  one  Jonathan  (Neh.  xii.  11)  or  Johanan 
(Neh.  xii.  22;  Jos.  Ant.  xi.  7,  §1),  the  other 
Joshua  (Jos.  ibid.).    Joshua  had  made  interest  with 

side  of  Jordan  (see  iv.  12,  referring  to  those  who 
lived  near  Sanballat  and  Tobiah ). 

1  The  name  occurs  among  those  who  assisted  in  the 
dedication  of  the  wall  (xii.  33)  ;  but  so  as  to  make  us 
believe  that  it  was  some  inferior  person  of  the  same 
name. 

k  Prideauz  says  five  years  ;  but  his  reasons  arc 
not  satisfactory,  and  would  apply  to  ten  as  well  as  to 
five. 


998 


JERUSALEM 


JERUSALEM 


the  general  of  the  Persian  army  that  he  should  j  that  a  full  one — of  the  city  and  Temple  is  pro- 
displace  his  brother  in  the  priesthood :  the  two  |  " 
quarrelled,  and  Joshua  was  killed  by  Johanau  in  the 
Temple  (B.C.  cir.  366)  :  a  horrible  occurrence,  and 
even  aggravated  by  its  consequences  ;  for  the  Persian 
general  made  it  the  excuse  not  only  to  pollute  the 
sanctuary  (va6s)  by  entering  it,  on  the  ground  that 
he  was  certainly  less  unclean  than  the  body  of  the 
murdered  man— but  also  to  extort  a  tribute  of  50 
darics  on  every  lamb  offered  in  the  daily  sacrifice 
for  the  next  seven  years  (Jos.  Ant.  ibid.). 

Johanan  in  his  turn  had  two  sons,  Jaddua  (Neh. 
xii.  11,  22)  and  Manasseh  (Jos.  Ant.  xi.  7,  §2). 
Manasseh  married   the  daughter  of  Sanballat  the 
Horonite,m  and  eventually  became  the  first  priest 
of  the  Samaritan  temple  on  Gerizim  (Jos.  Ant.  xi. 
8,  §2,  4).     But  at  first  he  seems  to  have  been 
associated  in  the  priesthood  of  Jerusalem  with  his 
brother  (Jos.  fxeri%eLV  r^s  apx'€Pa"r"'"?y)>  and  to 
have  relinquished  it  only  on  being  forced  to  do  so 
on  account  of  his  connexion  with  Sanballat.     The 
foreign  marriages  against  which   Ezra  and  Nehe- 
miah  had  acted  so  energetically  had  again  become 
common  among  both  the  priests  and  laymen.     A 
movement  was  made  by  a  reforming  party  against 
the  practice ;  but  either  it  had  obtained  a  firmer 
hold  than  before,  or  there  was  nothing  to  replace 
the  personal  influence  of  Nehemiah,  for  the  move- 
ment only  resulted  in  a  large  number  going  over 
with  Manasseh   to   the  Samaritans  (Jos.  Ant.  xi. 
8,  §2,  4).     During  the  high-priesthood  of  Jaddua 
occurred  the  famous  visit  of  Alexander  the  Great 
to  Jerusalem.     Alexander  had  invaded  the  north 
of  Syria,  beaten  Darius's  army  at  the  Granicus, 
and  again  at  Issus,  and  then,  having  besieged  Tyre, 
sent  a  letter  to  Jaddua  inviting  his  allegiance,  and 
desiring  assistance   in   men   and    provisions.     The 
answer  of  the  high-priest  was,  that  to  Darius  his 
allegiance  had  been  given,  and  that  to  Darius  he 
should  remain  faithful  while  he  lived.     Tyre  was 
taken  in  July  B.C.  331  (Kenrick's  Phoenicia,  431), 
and  then  the  Macedonians  moved   along  the  flat 
strip  of  the  coast  of  Palestine  to  Gaza,  which  in 
its   turn    was   taken   in    October.      The    road    to 
Egypt  being  thus  secured  Alexander  had  leisure  to 
visit  Jerusalem,  and  deal  in  person  with  the  people 
who  had  ventured  to  oppose  him.     This  he  did 
apparently  by  the  same  route  which  Isaiah  (x.  28- 
32)  describes  Sennacherib  as  taking.    The"  Sapha" 
at  which  he  was  met  by  the  high-priest  must  be 
Mizpeh — Scopus — the  high  ridge  to  the  north  of 
the  city,  the  Nob  of  Isaiah,  which  is  crossed  by  the 
northern  road,  and  from  which  the  first  view — and 


cured.  The  result  to  the  Jews  of  the  visit  was 
an  exemption  from  tribute  in  the  Sabbatical  year : 
a  privilege  which  they  retained  for  long." 

We  hear  nothing  more  of  Jerusalem  until  it  was 
taken  by  Ptolemy  Soter,  abo.ut  B.C.  320,  during 
his  incursion  into   Syria.     The  account  given  by 
Josephus  (Ant.  xii.  1 ;   Apion,  i.  §22),  partly  from 
Agatharchides,  and  partly  from  some  other  source, 
is  extremely  meagre,  nor  is  it  quite  consistent  with 
itself.     But   we   can    discern   one   point  to  which 
more  than  one  parallel  is  found  in  the  later  history 
— that  the  city  fell  into  the  hands  of  Ptolemy  be- 
cause the  Jews  would  not  fight  on  the  Sabbath. 
Great  hardships  seem  to  have  been  experienced  by 
the  Jews  after  this  conquest,  and  a  large  number 
were  transported  to  Egypt  and  to  Northern  Africa. 
A  stormy  period  succeeded — that  of  the  struggles 
between  Antigonus  and  Ptolemy  for  the  possession 
of  Syria,  which  lasted  until  the  defeat  of  the  former 
at  Ipsus  (B.C.  301),  after  which  the  country  came 
into  the  possession  of   Ptolemy.     The   contention 
however  was  confined  to  the  maritime  region  of 
Palestine,0  and  Jerusalem  appears  to  have  escaped. 
Scanty  as  is  the  information  we  possess  concerning 
the  city,   it  yet  indicates  a  state  of  prosperity  ; 
the  only  outward  mark   of  dependence  being  an 
annual  tax  of  twenty  talents  of  silver  payable  by 
the   high-priests.     Simon  the  Just,  who  followed 
his  father  Onias  in  the  high-priesthood  (cir.  B.C. 
300),  is  one  of  the  favourite  heroes  of  the  Jews. 
Under    his    care    the    sanctuary    (veto's)    was   re- 
paired, and  some  foundations  of  great  depth  added 
round  the  Temple,  possibly  to  gain  a  larger  surface 
on  the  top  of  the  hill  (Ecclus.  1.  1,  2).     The  large 
cistern   or    "  sea "   of  the   principal   court  of  the 
Temple,  which  hitherto  would  seem  to  have  been 
but  temporarily  or  roughly  constructed,  was  sheathed 
in  brassP  (ibid.  3) ;  the  walls  of  the  city  were  more 
strongly  fortified  to  guard  against  such  attacks  as 
those  of  Ptolemy  (ib.  4)  ;  and  the  Temple  service 
was  maintained  with  great   pomp  and   ceremonial 
(ib.  11-21).     His  death  was  marked  by  evil  omens 
of  various  kinds  presaging  disasters q  (Otho,  Lex. 
Rab.  "  Messias  ").     Simon's  brother  Eleazar  suc- 
ceeded him  as  high-priest  (B.C.  291),  and  Antigonus 
of  Socho  as  president  of  the  Sanhedrim '  (Prideaux). 
The  disasters  presaged  did  not  immediately  arrive, 
at  least  in  the  grosser  forms  anticipated.     The  in- 
tercourse  with   Greeks   was   fast   eradicating    the 
national  character,  but  it  was  at  any  rate  a  peace- 
ful intercourse  during  the  reigns  of  the  Ptolemies 
who  succeeded  Soter,  viz.,  Philadelphia  (B.C.  285), 


m  According  to  Neh.  xiii.  28,  the  man  who  married 
Sanhallat's  (laughter  was  "  son  of  Joiada ;"  hut  this 
is  in  direct  contradiction  to  the  circumstantial  state- 
ments of  Josephus,  followed  in  the  text ;  and  the 
word  "  son  "  is  often  used  in  Hebrew  for  "  grandson," 
or  even  a  more  remote  descendant  (see,  e.  g.  Carmi, 
281  a). 

n  The  details  of  this  story,  and  the  arguments  for 
and  against  its  authenticity,  are  given  under  Alex- 
ander (p.  43J);  see  also  High-Priest  (8116).  It 
should  be  observed  that  the  part  of  the  Temple  which 
Alexander  entered,  and  where  he  sacrificed  to  God, 
was  not  the  fads,  into  which  Bagoas  had  forced  him- 
self after  the  murder  of  Joshua,  but  the  iepov — the 
court  only  (Jos.  Ant.  xi.  8,  §5).  The  Jewish  tradi- 
tion is  that  he  was  induced  to  put  off  his  shoes  before 
treading  the  sacred  ground  of  the  court,  by  being 
told  that  they  would  slip  on  the  polished  marble 
(Meg.  taanith,  in  Reland,  Antiq.  i.  8,  5). 


°  Diod.  Sic.  xix  ;  Hecataeus  in  Jos.  Apion.  i.  22. 

p  So  the  A.  V.,  apparently  following  a  different 
text  from  either  LXX.  or  Vulgate,  which  state  that 
the  reservoir  was  made  smaller.  But  the  passage  is 
probably  corrupt. 

°*  One  of  the  chief  of  these  was  that  the  scapegoat 
was  not,  as  formerly,  dashed  in  pieces  by  his  fall  from 
the  rock,  but  got  off  alive  into  the  desert,  where  he 
was  eaten  by  the  Saracens. 

r  Simon  the  Just  was  the  last  of  the  illustrious 
men  who  formed  "  the  Great  Synagogue."  Antigonus 
was  the  first  of  the  Tanaim,  or  expounders  of  the 
written  law,  whose  dicta  are  embodied  in  the  Mishna. 
From  Sadoc,  one  of  Antigonus's  scholars,  is  said  to 
have  sprung  the  sect  of  the  Sadducees  (Prideaux,  ii. 
2  ;  Ewald,  Gcsch.  iv.  313).  It  is  remarkable  that 
Antigonus  is  the  first  Jew  we  meet  with  bearing  a 
Greek  name. 


JERUSALEM 

and  Euergetes  (n.c.  247).  It  was  Philadelphia, 
who,  according  to  the  story  preserved  by  Josephus, 
had  the  translation  of  the  Septuagint8  made,  in 
connexion  with  which  he  sent  Aristeas  to  Jeru- 
salem during  the  priesthood  of  Eleazar.  He  also 
bestowed  on  the  Temple  very  rich  gifts,  consisting 
of  a  table  for  the  shewbread,  of  wonderful  work- 
manship, basins,  bowls,  phials,  &c,  and  other 
articles  both  for  the  private  and  public  use  of 
the  priests  (Jos.  Ant.  xii.  2,  §5 — 10,  15).  A 
description  of  Jerusalem  at  this  period  under  the 
name  of  Aristeas  still  survives,'  which  supplies  a 
lively  picture  of  both  Temple  and  city.  The 
Temple  was  *'  enclosed  with  three  walls  70  cubits 

high,    and    of  proportionate   thickness The 

spacious  courts  were  paved  with  marble,  and  be- 
neath them  lay  immense  reservoirs  of  water,  which 
by  mechanical  contrivance  was  made  to  rush  forth, 
and  thus  wash  away  the  blood  of  the  sacrifices." 
The  city  occupied  the  summit  and  the  eastern  slopes 
of  the  opposite  hill — the  modern  Zion.  The  main 
streets  appear  to  have  run  north  and  south  ;  some 
"  along  the  brow  .  .  .  others  lower  down  but  pa- 
rallel, following  the  course  of  the  valley,  with  cross 
streets  connecting  them."  They  were  "  furnished 
with  raised  pavements,"  either  due  to  the  slope  of 
the  ground,  or  possibly  adopted  for  the  reason  given 
by  Aristeas,  viz.  to  enable  the  passengers  to  avoid 
contact  with  persons  or  things  ceremonially  unclean. 
The  bazaars  were  then,  as  now,  a  prominent  fea- 
ture of  the  city.  There  were  to  be  found  gold, 
precious  stones,  and  spices  brought  by  caravans 
from  the  East,  and  other  articles  imported  from 
the  West  by  way  of  Joppa,  Gaza,  and  Ptolemais, 
which  served  as  its  commodious  harbour.  It  is 
not  impossible  that  among  these  Phoenician  impor- 
tations from  the  West  may  have  figured  the  dyes 
and  the  tin  of  the  remote  Britain. 

Eleazar  was  succeeded  (cir.  B.C.  276)  by  his 
uncle  Manasseh,  brother  to  Onias  I. ;  and  he  again 
(cir.  250)  by  Onias  II.  Onias  was  a  son  of  the 
great  Simon  the  Just ;  but  he  inherited  none  of 
his  father's  virtues,  and  his  ill-timed  avarice  at 
length  endangered  the  prosperity  of  Jerusalem. 
For  the  payment  of  the  annual  tax  to  the  court 
of  Egypt  having  been  for  several  years  evaded, 
Ptolemy  Euergetes,  about  226,  sent  a  commis- 
sioner to  Jerusalem  to  enforce  the  arrears  (Jos. 
Ant.  xii.  4,  §1  :  Prideaux).  Onias,  now  in  his 
second  childhood  {Ant.  xii.  4,  §3),  was  easily 
prevailed  on  by  his  nephew  Joseph  to  allow  him  to 
return  with  the  commissioner  to  Alexandria,  to 
endeavour  to  arrange  the  matter  with  the  king. 
Joseph,  a  man  evidently  of  great  ability,™  not  only 
procured  the  remission  of  the  tax  in  question,1  but 
also  persuaded  Ptolemy  to  giant  him  the  lucrative 
privilege  of  farming  the  whole  revenue  of  Judaea, 
Samaria,  (Joele-Syiia,  and  Phoenicia — a  privilege 
which  he  retained  till  the  province  was  taken  from 
the  Ptolemies  by  Antiochus  the  <  Ireat.  Hitherto  the 
family  of  the  high-priest  had  been  the  most  powerful 

9  The  legend  of  the  translation  by  72  interpreters 
is  no  longer  believed  ;  but  it  probably  rests  on  some 
foundation  of  fact.  The  sculpture  of  the  table  and 
howls  (lilies  and  vines,  without  any  figures)  seems 
to  have  been  founded  on  the  descriptions  in  the  Law. 
In  5  Mace.  ii.  14,  &c.,  it  is  said  to  have  had  also  a 
map  of  Egypt  upoa  it. 

1  It  is  to  be  found  in  the  Appendix  to  Ilavcrcamp's 
Josephus,  and  in  Gallandii  Bibl.  Vet.  Pair.  ii.  805. 
An  extract  is  given  in  article  "  Jerusalem  "  (Diet,  of 


JERUSALEM 


999 


in  the  country  ;  but  Joseph  had  now  founded  one 
able  to  compete  with  it,  and  the  contention  and 
rivalry  between  the  two — manifesting  itself  at  one 
time  in  enormous  bribes  to  the  court,  at  another 
in  fierce  quarrels  at  home — at  last  led  to  the  inter- 
ference of  the  chief  power  with  the  affairs  of  a  city, 
which,  if  wisely  and  quietly  governed,  might  never 
have  been  molested. 

Onias  II.  died  about  217,  and  was  succeeded  by 
Simon  II.  In  221  Ptolemy  Philopator  had  suc- 
ceeded Euergetes  on  the  throne  of  Egypt.  He  had 
only  been  king  three  years  when  Antiochus  the 
Great  attempted  to  take  Syria  from  him.  Antiochus 
partly  succeeded,  but  in  a  battle  at  Raphia,  south 
of  Gaza,  fought  in  the  year  217  (the  same  as  that 
of  Hannibal  at  Thrasymene),  he  was  completely 
routed  and  forced  to  fly  to  Antioch.  Ptolemy 
shortly  after  visited  Jerusalem.  He  ottered  sacrifice 
in  the  court  of  the  Temple,  and  would  have  entered 
the  sanctuary,  had  he  not  been  prevented  by  the 
firmness  of  the  high-priest  Simon,  and  also  by  a 
supernatural  terror  which  struck  him  and  stretched 
him  paralyzed  on  the  pavement  of  the  court  (3  Mace, 
ii.  22). J  This  repulse  Ptolemy  never  forgave,  and 
the  Jews  of  Alexandria  suffered  severely  in  conse- 
quence. 

Like  the  rest  of  Palestine,  Jerusalem  now  be- 
came alternately  a  prey  to  each  of  the  contending 
parties  (Jos.  Ant.  xii.  3,  §3).  In  203  it  was 
taken  by  Antiochus.  In  199  it  was  retaken  by 
Scopas  the  Alexandrian  general,  who  left  a  garrison 
in  the  citadel.  In  the  following  year  Antiochus 
again  beat  the  Egyptians,  and  then  the  Jews,  who 
had  suffered  most  from  the  latter,  gladly  opened 
their  gates  to  his  army,  and  assisted  them  in 
reducing  the  Egyptian  garrison.  This  service 
Antiochus  requited  by  large  presents  of  money  and 
articles  for  sacrifice,  by  an  order  to  Ptolemy  to 
furnish  cedar  and  other  materials  for  cloisters  and 
other  additions  to  the  Temple,  and  by  material  relief 
from  taxation.  He  also  published  a  decree  affirming 
the  sacredness  of  the  Temple  from  the  intrusion 
of  strangers,  and  forbidding  any  infractions  of  the 
Jewish  law  (Jos.  Ant.  xii.  3,  §3,  4). 

Simon  was  followed  in  195  by  Onias  III.  In 
187  Antiochus  the  Great  died,  and  was  succeeded 
by  his  son  Seleucus  Soter  (Jos.  Ant.  xii.  4,  §10). 
Jerusalem  was  now  in  much  apparent  prosperity. 
Onias  was  greatly  respected,  and  governed  with  a 
firm  hand  ;  and  the  decree  of  the  late  king  was  so  far 
observed,  that  the  whole  expenditure  of  the  sacrifices 
was  borne  by  Seleucus  (2  Mace.  iii.  1-3).  But  the 
city  soon  began  to  be  much  disturbed  by  the  dis- 
putes between  Hyrcanus,  the  illegitimate  son  of  Jo- 
seph the  collector,  and  his  elder  and  legitimate 
brothers,  on  the  subject  of  the  division  of  the  pro- 
perty left  by  their  father.  The  high-priest,  Onias, 
after  some  hesitation,  seems  to  have  taken  the  part 
of  Hyrcanus,  whose  wealth— after  the  suicide  of 
Hyi'canus  (about  n.c.  180) — he  secured  in  the 
treasury  of  the  Temple.      The  office  of  governor 


Geogr.  ii.  25,  26). 

u  The  story  of  the  stratagem  by  which  he  made  his 
fortune  is  told  in  Prideaux  (anno  22G),  and  in  Mil- 
man's  Hist,  of  the  Jews    ii.  34). 

x  At  least  we  hear  nothing  of  it  afterwards. 

y  The  third  book  of  the  Maccabees,  though  so  called, 
has  no  reference  to  the  Maccabean  heroes,  but  is  taken 
up  with  the  relation  of  this  visit  of  Ptolemy  to  Jeru- 
salem, and  its  consequences  to  the  Jews. 


1000 


JERUSALEM 


(irpoo-TaTTjs)  of  the  Temple  was  now  held  by 
one  Simon,  who  is  supposed  to  have  been  one 
of  the  legitimate  brothers  of  Hyrcanus.  By  this 
man  Seleucus  was  induced  to  send  Heliodorns  to 
Jerusalem  to  get  possession  of  the  treasure  of  Hyr- 
canus. How  the  attempt  failed,  and  the  money 
was  for  the  time  preserved  from  pillage,  may  be 
seen  in  2  Mace.  iii.  24-30,  and  in  the  well-known 
picture  of  Raffaelle  Sanzio. 

In  175  Seleucus  Soter  died,  and  the  kingdom  of 
Syria  came  to  his  brother,  the  infamous  Antiochus 
Epiphanes.  His  first  act  towards  Jerusalem  was 
to  sell  the  office  of  high-priest — still  filled  by  the 
good  Onias  III. — to  Onias'  brother  Joshua  (2  Mace, 
iv.  7  ;  Ant.  xii.  5,  §1).  Greek  manners  had  made 
many  a  step  at  Jerusalem,  and  the  new  high-priest 
was  not  likely  to  discourage  their  further  progress. 
His  first  act  was  to  Grecise  his  own  name,  and  to 
become  "  Jason ;"  his  next  to  set  up  a  gymna- 
sium— that  is  a  place  where  the  young  men  of  the 
town  were  trained  naked — to  introduce  the  Greek 
•dress,  Greek  sports,  and  Greek  appellations.  Now 
(1  Mace.  i.  13,  &c. ;  2  Macc.iv.  9, 12)  for  the  first 
time  we  hear  of  an  attempt  to  efface  the  distinguish- 
ing mark  of  a  Jew — again  to  "  become  uncircum- 
cised."  The  priests  quickly  followed  the  example  of 
their  chief  (2  Mace.  iv.  14),  and  the  Temple  service 
was  neglected.  A  special  deputation  of  the  youth  of 
Jerusalem — "  Antiochians"  they  were  now  called — ■ 
was  sent  with  offerings  from  the  Temple  of  Jehovah 
to  the  festival  of  Hercules  at  Tyre.  In  172  Jeru- 
salem was  visited  by  Antiochus.  He  entered  the 
city  at  night  by  torch-light  and  amid  the  acclama- 
tions of  Jason  and  his  party,  and  after  a  short  stay 
returned  y  (2  Mace.  iv.  22)  And  now  the  treachery 
of  Jason  was  to  be  requited  to  him.  His  brother 
Onias,  who  had  assumed  the  Greek  name  of  Mene- 
laus,  in  his  turn  bought  the  high-priesthood  from 
Antiochus,  and  drove  Jason  out  to  the  other  side  of 
the  Jordan  (2  Mace.  iv.  26).  To  pay  the  price  of 
the  office,  Menelaus  had  laid  hands  on  the  conse- 
crated plate  of  the  Temple.  This  became  known, 
and  a  riot  was  the  consequence  (2  Mace.  iv.  32, 
39,  40). 

During  the  absence  of  Antiochus  in  Egypt, 
Jason  suddenly  appeared  before  Jerusalem  with 
a  thousand  men,  and  whether  by  the  fury  of  his 
attack,  or  from  his  having  frieuds  in  the  city, 
he  entered  the  walls,  drove  Menelaus  into  the 
citadel,  and  slaughtered  the  citizens  without  mercy. 
Jason  seems  to  have  failed  to  obtain  any  of  the 
valuables  of  the  Temple,  and  shortly  after  retreated 
beyond  Jordan,  where  he  miserably  perished  (2 
Mace.  v.  7-10).  But  the  news  of  these  tumults  reach- 
ing Antiochus  on  his  way  from  Egypt  brought 
him  again  to  Jerusalem  (B.C.  170).  He  appears 
to  have  entered  the  city  without  much  difficulty.1 
An  indiscriminate  massacre  of  the  adherents  of 
Ptolemy  followed,  and  then  a  general  pillage  of  the 
contents  of  the  Temple.  Under  the  guidance  of 
Menelaus,  Antiochus  went  into  the  Sanctuary,  and 
took  from  thence  the  golden  altar,  the  candlestick, 
the  magnificent  table  of  shewbread,  and  all  the 
vessels  and  utensils,  with  1800  talents  out  of  the 
treasury.     These  things  occupied  three  days.     He 


y  This  visit  is  omitted  in  1  Mace.  Josephus  men- 
tions it,  but  says  that  it  was  marked  by  a  great 
slaughter  of  the  Jewish  party  and  by  plunder  (Ant. 
xii.  5,  §3).  This  however  does  not  agree  with  the 
festal  character  given  to  it  in  the  2  Mace.,  and 
followed  above. 

*  There  is  a  great  discrepancy  between  the  accounts 


JERUSALEM 

then  quitted  for  Antioch,  carrying  off,  besides  his 
booty,  a  large  train  of  captives ;  and  leaving,  as  go- 
vernor of  the  city,  a  Phrygian  named  Philip,  a  man 
of  a  more  savage  disposition  than  himself  (1  Mace.  i. 
20-24;  2  Mace.  v.  11-21;  Jos.  Ant.  xii.  5,  §3; 
B.  J.  i.  1,  §1).  But  something  worse  was  reserved 
for  Jerusalem  than  pillage,  death,  and  slavery, 
worse  than  even  the  pollution  of  the  presence  of  this 
monster  in  the  holy  place  of  Jehovah.  Nothing 
less  than  the  total  extermination  of  the  Jews  was 
resolved  on,  and  in  two  years  (B.C.  1*38)  an  army 
was  sent  under  Apollonius  to  carry  the  resolve  into 
effect.  He  waited  till  the  sabbath,  and  then  for  the 
second  time  the  entry  was  made  while  the  people 
were  engaged  in  their  devotions.  Another  great 
slaughter  took  place,  the  city  was  now  in  its  turn 
pillaged  and  burnt,  and  the  walls  destroyed. 

The  foreign  gamson  took  up  its  quarters  in  what 
had  from  the  earliest  times  been  the  strongest  part 
of  the  place — the  ancient  city  of  David  (1  Mace.  i. 
33,  vii.  32),  the  famous  hill  of  Zion,  described 
as  being  on  an  eminence  adjoining*  the  North 
wall  of  the  Temple,  and  so  high  as  to  overlook  it 
{Ant.  xii.  5,  §4).  This  hill  was  now  fortified  with 
a  very  strong  wall  with  towers,  and  within  it  the 
garrison  secured  their  booty,  cattle,  and  other  pro- 
visions, the  women  of  their  prisoners,  and  a  certain 
number  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  city  friendly  to 
them. 

Antiochus  next  issued  an  edict  to  compel  heathen 
worship  in  all  his  dominions,  and  one  Athenaeus 
was  sent  to  Jerusalem  to  enforce  compliance.  As 
a  first  step,  the  Temple  was  reconsecrated  to  Zeus 
Olympius  (2  Mace.  vi.  2).  The  worship  of  idols 
(1  Mace.  i.  47),  with  its  loose  and  obscene  accom- 
paniments (2  Mace.  vi.  4),  was  introduced  there — 
an  altar  to  Zeus  was  set  up  on  the  brazen  altar  of 
Jehovah,  pig's-flesh  offered  thereon,  and  the  broth 
or  liquor  sprinkled  about  the  Temple  (Jos.  Ant. 
xiii.  8,  §2).  And  while  the  Jews  were  compelled 
not  only  to  tolerate  but  to  take  an  active  part 
in  these  foreign  abominations,  the  observance  of  their 
own  rites  and  ceremonies — sacrifice,  the  sabbath, 
circumcision — was  absolutely  forbidden.  Many  no 
doubt  complied  (Ant.  xii.  5,  §4) ;  but  many  also 
resisted,  and  the  torments  inflicted,  and  the  heroism 
displayed  in  the  streets  of  Jerusalem  at  this  time, 
almost  surpass  belief.  But  though  a  severe,  it  was 
a  wholesome  discipline,  and  under  its  rough  teach- 
ing the  old  spirit  of  the  people  began  to  revive. 

The  battles  of  the  Maccabees  were  fought  on  the 
outskirts  of  the  country,  and  it  was  not  till  the 
defeat  of  Lysias  at  Bethzur  that  they  thought  it 
safe  to  venture  into  the  recesses  of  the  central  hills. 
Then  they  immediately  turned  their  steps  to  Jeru- 
salem. On  ascending  the  Mount  Moriah,  and  entering 
the  quadrangle  of  the  Temple,  a  sight  met  their  eyes, 
which  proved  at  once  how  complete  had  been  the 
desecration,  and  how  short-lived  the  triumph  of  the 
idolaters  ;  for  while  the  altar  still  stood  there  with 
its  abominable  burden,  the  gates  in  ashes,  the 
priests'  chambers  in  ruins,  and,  as  they  reached  the 
inner  court,  the  very  sanctuary  itself  open  and 
empty — yet  the  place  had  been  so  long  disused  that 
the  whole  precincts  were  full  of  vegetation,  "  the  ■ 


of  1  Mace.,  2  Mace,  and  Josephus. 

a  This  may  be  inferred  from  many  of  the  expres- 
sions concerning  this  citadel ;  but  Josephus  expressly 
uses  the  word  emr'iceiTO  (Ant.  xii.  9,  §8),  and  says  it 
was  on  an  eminence  in  the  lower  city.  i.  c.  the 
Eastern  hill,  as  contradistinguished  from  the  Western 
hill  or  upper  city. 


JEEUSALEM 

shrubs  grew  in  the  quadrangle  like  a  forest."  The 
precincts  were  at  once  cleansed,  the  polluted  altar 
put  aside,  a  new'  one  constructed,  and  the  holy 
vessels  of  the  sanctuary  replaced,  and  on  the  third 
anniversary  of  the  desecration — the  25th  of  the 
month  Chisleu,  in  the  year  B.C.  165,  the  Temple 
was  dedicated  with  a  least  which  lasted  for  eight 
days.b  After  this  the  outer  wall  of  the  Temple c 
was  very  much  strengthened  (1  Mace.  iv.  60),  and 
it  was  in  fact  converted  into  a  fortress  (Gomp.  vi. 
26,  61,  02),  and  occupied  by  a  garrison  (iv.  61). 
The  Acra  was  still  held  by  the  soldiers  of  Antiochus. 
One  of  the  first  acts  of  Judas  on  entering  the 
Temple  had  been  to  detach  a  party  to  watch  them, 
and  two  years  later  (B.C.  163)  so  frequent  had 
their  sallies  and  annoyances  become — particularly 
an  attempt  on  one  occasion  to  confine  the  wor- 
shippers within  the  Temple  inclosured  (1  Mace.  vi. 
18)—  that  Judas  collected  his  people  to  take  it,  and 
began  a  siege  with  banks  and  engines.  In  the  mean- 
time Antiochus  had  died  (B.C.  164),  and  was  suc- 
ceeded by  his  son  Antiochus  Eupator,  a  youth.  The 
garrison  in  the  Acra,  finding  themselves  pressed  by 
Judas,  managed  to  communicate  with  the  king, 
who  brought  an  army  from  Antioch  and  at- 
tacked Bethzur,  one  of  the  key-positions  of  the 
Maccabees.  This  obliged  Judas  to  give  up  the 
siege  of  the  Acra,  and  to  march  southwards  against 
the  intruder  (1  Mace.  vi.  32  ;  Jos.  Ant.  xii.  9,  §4). 
Antiochus's  army  proved  too  much  for  his  little 
force,  his  brother  Eleazar  was  killed,  and  he  was 
compelled  to  fall  back  ou  Jerusalem  and  shut 
himself  up  in  the  Temple.  Thither  Lysias, 
Antiochus's  general — and  later,  Antiochus  himself 
—  followed  him  (vi.  48,  51,  57,  62)  and  com- 
menced an  active  siege.  How  long  it  lasted  we  are 
not  informed,  but  the  provisions  of  the  besieged 
were  rapidly  becoming  exhausted,  and  famine  had 
driven  many  to  make  their  escape  (54),  when 
news  of  an  insurrection  elsewhere  induced  Lysias 
to  advise  Antiochus  to  oifer  terms  to  Judas  (vi. 
55-58).  The  terms,  which  were  accepted  by  him, 
were  liberty  to  live  after  their  own  laws,  and 
immunity  to  their  persons  and  their  fortress.  On 
inspection,  however,  Antiochus  found  the  place  so 
strong  that  he  refused  to  keep  this  part  of  the 
agreement,  and  before  he  left,  the  walls  were  pulled 
down  (vi.62  ;  Ant.  xii.  9,  §7).  Judas  apparently 
remained  in  Jerusalem  for  the  next  twelve  months. 
During  this  time  Antiochus  and  Lysias  had  been 
killed  and  the  throne  seized  by  Demetrius  I  B.C. 
162),  and  the  new  king  had  dispatched  Bacchides 
and  Alcimus,  the  then  high-priest  —  a  'man  of 
Grecian  principles — with  a  large  force,  to  Jeru- 
salem. Judas  was  again  within  the  walls  of  the 
Temple,  which  in  the  interval  he  must  have  re- 
built. He  could  not  be  tempted  forth,  but  sixty 
of  the  Assideans  were  treacherously  murdered  by 
the  Syrians,  who  then  moved  oil',  first  to  a  short 
distance  from  the  city,  and  finally  back  to  Antioch 
(1  Mace.  vii.  1-25;  Ant.  xii.  in,  §1-:;  .  Deme- 
trius then  sent  another  army  under  Nicanor,  but 
with  no  better  success.  An  action  was  fought  at 
Caphar-salama,  an  unknown  place  not  far  from 
the   city.      Judas    was    victorious,    and    Nicanor 


JERUSALEM 


1001 


b  This  feast  is  alluded  to  in  John  x.  22.  Chisleu 
was  the  mid-winter  month.  The  feast  of  tin-  Dedi- 
cation falls  this  year — 1860 — on  the  9th  lire. 

c  In  1  Mace.  iv.  00  it  is  said  that  they  buildcd  up 
"  Mount  Sion  ;"  but  in  the  parallel  passages,  vi.  7,  26, 
the  word   used    is    "  sanctuary,"    or    rather   "  holy 


escaped  and  took  refuge  in  the  Acra  at  Jerusalem. 
Shortly  after  Nicanor  came  down  from  the  fortress 
and  paid  a  visit  to  the  Temple,  where  he  insulted 
the  priests  (1  Mace.  vii.  33,  4  ;  2  Mace.  xiv.  31-33), 
He  also  caused  the  death  of  Razis,  one  of  the  elders 
of  Jerusalem,  a  man  greatly  esteemed,  who  killed 
himself  in  the  most  horrible  manner,  rather  than 
tall  into  his  hands  (2  Maec.  xiv.  37-46).  He  then 
procured  some  reinforcements,  met  Judas  at  Adasa, 
probably  not  far  from  Eamle/i,  was  killed,  and  his 
army  thoroughly  beaten.  Nieanor's  head  and  right 
arm  were  brought  to  Jerusalem.  The  head  was 
nailed  on  the  wall  of  the  Acra,  and  the  hand  and 
arm  on  a  conspicuous  spot  facing  the  Temple 
(2  Mace.  xv.  3U-35),  where  their  memory  was 
perhaps  perpetuated  in  the  name  of  the  gate 
Nicanor,  the  eastern  entrance  to  the  Great  Court 
(Reland,  Antiq.  i.  9,  4). 

The  death  of  Judas  took  place  in  161.  After 
it  Bacchides  and  Alcimus  again  established  them- 
selves at  Jerusalem  in  the  Acra  (Jos.  Ant.  xiii. 
1,  §3),  and  in  the  intervals  of  their  contests  with 
Jonathan  and  Simon,  added  much  to  its  fortifica- 
tions, furnished  it  with  provisions,  and  confined  there 
the  children  of  the  chief  people  of  Judaea  as  hos- 
tages for  their  good  behaviour  (1  Mace.  ix.  50-53). 
In  the  second  month  (May)  of  160  the  high-priest 
Alcimus  began  to  make  some  alterations  in  the 
Temple,  apparently  doing  away  with  the  inclosure 
between  one  court  and  another,  and  in  particular 
demolishing  some  wall  or  building,  to  which  pecu- 
liar sanctity  was  attached  as  "  the  work  of  the  pro- 
phets "  (1  Mace.  ix.  54).  The  object  of  these  altera- 
tions was  doubtless  to  lessen  the  distinction  between 
Jew  and  Gentile.  But  they  had  hardly  been  com- 
menced before  he  was  taken  suddenly  ill  and  died. 

Bacchides  now  returned  to  Antioch,  and  Jeru- 
salem remained  without  molestation  for  a  period  of 
seven  years.  It  does  not  appear  that  the  Macca- 
bees resided  there ;  part  of  the  time  they  were 
at  Michmash,  in  the  entangled  country  seven  or 
eight  miles  north  of  Jerusalem,  and  part  of  the 
time  fighting  with  Bacchides  at  Beth-basi  in  the 
Jordan-valley  near  Jericho.  All  this  time  the 
Acra  was  held  by  the  Macedonian  garrison  [Ant. 
xiii.  4,  §92)  and  the  malcontent  Jews,  who  still 
held  the  hostages  taken  from  the  other  part  of 
the  community  (1  Mace.  x.  6).  In  the  year  L53 
Alexander  Balas,  the  real  or  pretended  .--on  of 
Antiochus  Epiphanes,  having  landed  at  l'tolemais, 
Demetrius  sent  a  communication  to  Jonathan  with 
the  view  of  keeping  him  attached  to  his  cm-,' 
(1  Mace.  x.  1,  &c.  ;  Ant.  xiii.  2,  §1).  Upon  this 
Jonathan  moved  up  to  Jerusalem,  rescued  the 
hostages  from  the  Aeia,  and  began  to  repair  the 
city.  Tin1  destructions  of  the  last  few  years  were 
remedied,  the  walls  round  Mount  /.ion  particularly 
being  rebuilt  in  the  most  substantial  manner,  as  a 
regular  fortification  (x.  11;.  From  this  time  tor- 
ward  Jonathan  received  privileges  and  professions  of 
confidence  from  both  sides.  First,  Alexander  autho- 
rized him  to  assume  the  office  of  high-priest,  which 
had  not  been  filled  up  since  the  death  of  Alcimus 
(comp.  Ant.  xx.  10,  §1)j  This  he  took  at  the 
Feast  of  Tabernacles,  in  the  autumn  of  the  year  153, 


plat  es,"  uyiW/ja.    The  meaning  probably  is  the  entire 
enclosure.    Josephus  [Ant.  xii.  7,  7)  says  "  the  city." 

•*  (TvyKKeiovTes  TOf  'IcrparjA  kvkAu>  twv  ayiuji'.  The 
A.  V.  "  shut  up  the  Israelites  round  about  the  sanc- 
tuary," does  not  here  give  the  sense,  which  seems  to 
be  as  above. 

3  T 


1002 


JERUSALEM 


and  at  the  same  time  collected  soldiers  and  ammu- 
nition (1  Mace.  x.  21).  Next,  Demetrius,  amongst 
other  immunities  granted  to  the  country,  recognized 
Jerusalem  and  its  environs  as  again  "  holy  and 
free,"  relinquished  all  right  to  the  Acra  —  which 
was  henceforward  to  be  subject  to  the  high-priest 
(x.  31,  32),  endowed  the  Temple  with  the  revenues 
of  Ptolemais,  and  also  with  15,000  shekels  of  silver 
charged  in  other  places,  and  ordered  not  only  the 
payment  of  the  same  sum,  in  regard  to  former 
years,  but  the  release  of  an  annual  tax  of  5000 
shekels  hitherto  exacted  from  the  priests.  Lastly, 
he  authorized  the  repairs  of  the  holy  place,  and  the 
building  and  fortifying  of  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  to 
be  charged  to  the  royal  accounts,  and  gave  the 
privilege  of  sanctuary  to  all  persons,  even  mere 
debtors,  taking  refuge  in  the  Temple  or  in  its  pre- 
cincts (1  Mace.  x.  31,  32,  39-45). 

The  contentions  betweeii  Alexander  and  Deme- 
trius, in  which  he  was  actively  engaged,  prevented 
Jonathan  from  taking  advantage  of  these  grants  till 
the  year  145.  He  then  began  to  invest  the  Acra 
(xi.  20;  Ant.  xiii.  4,  §9),  but,  owing  partly  to 
the  strength  of  the  place,  and  partly  to  the  con- 
stant dissensions  abroad,  the  siege  made  little  pro- 
gress during  fully  two  years.  It  was  obvious 
that  no  progress  could  be  made  as  long  as  the  in- 
mates of  the  Acra  could  get  into  the  city  or  the 
country,  and  there  buy  provisions  (xiii.  49),  as 
hitherto  was  the  case ;  and,  therefore,  at  the  first 
opportunity,  Jonathan  built  a  wall  or  bank  round 
the  base  of  the  citadel-hill,  cutting  off  all  commu- 
nication both  with  the  city  on  the  west  and  the 
country  on  the  east  (xii.  36 ;  comp.  xiii.  49),  and 
thus  completing  the  circle  of  investment,  of  which 
the  Temple  wall  formed  the  south  and  remaining 
side.  At  the  same  time  the  wall  of  the  Temple  was 
repaired  and  strengthened,  especially  on  the  east 
side,  towards  the  valley  of  Kedron.  In  the  mean- 
time Jonathan  was  killed  at  I'tolemais,  and  Simon 
succeeded  him  both  as  chief  and  as  high  priest 
(xiii.  8,  42).  The  investment  of  the  Acra  proved 
successful,  but  three  years  still  elapsed  before  this 
enormously  strong  place  could  be  reduced,  and  at 
last  the  garrison  capitulated  only  from  famine 
(xiii.  49  ;  comp.  21).  Simon  entered  it  on  the 
23rd  of  the  2nd  month  B.C.  142.  The  fortress 
was  then  entirely  demolished,  and  the  eminence  on 
which  it  had  stood  lowered,  until  it  was  reduced 
below  the  height  of  the  Temple  hill  beside  it. 
The  last  operation  occupied  three  years  (Ant.  xiii. 
G.  §7).  The  valley  north  of  Moriah  was  probably 
tilled  up  at  this  time  (B.  J.  v.  5,  §1).  A  fort 
was  then  built  on  the  north  side  of  the  temple 
hill,  apparently  against  the  wall,  so  as  directly  to 
command  the  site  of  the  Acra,  and  here  Simon 
and  his  immediate  followers  resided  (xiii.  52). 
This  was  the  Baris — so  called  after  the  Hebrew 
word  Birah — which,  under  the  name  of  Antonia, 
became  subsequently  so  prominent  a  feature  of  the 
city.  Simon's  other  achievements,  and  his  alliance 
with  the  Romans,  must  be  reserved  for  another 
place.  We  hear  of  no  further  occurrences  at  Jeru- 
salem during  his  life  except  the  placing  of  two  brass 
tablets,  commemorating  his  exploits  on  Mount  Zion, 
in  the  precinct  of  the  sanctuary  (xiv.  27,  48).  In 
135  Simon  was  murdered  at  Dok  near  Jericho,  and 
then  all  was  again  confusion  in  Jerusalem. 

One  of  the  first  steps  of  his  son  John  Hyrcanus 
was  to  secure  both  the  city  and  the  Temple  (Jos.  Ant. 
xiii.  7,  §4).  The  people  were  favourable  to  him, 
and  repulsed  Ptolemy,  Simon's  murderer,  when  he 


JERUSALEM 

attempted  to  enter  (Jos.  Ant.  xiii.  7,  §4;  />'.  J.  i. 
2,  §3).  Hyrcanus  was  made  high-priest.  Shortly 
after  this,  Antiochus  Sidetes,  king  of  Syria,  brought 
an  army  into  southern  Palestine,  ravaged  and  burnt 
the  country,  and  attacked  Jerusalem.  To  invest 
the  city,  and  cut  off  all  chance  of  escape,  it  was 
encircled  by  a  girdle  of  seven  camps.  The  active 
operations  of  the  siege  were  carried  on  as  usual 
at  the  north,  where  the  level  ground  comes  up 
to  the  walls.  Here  a  hundred  towers  of  attack 
were  erected,  each  of  three  stories,  from  which 
projectiles  were  cast  into  the  city,  and  a  double 
ditch,  broad  and  deep,  was  excavated  before  them 
to  protect  them  from  the  sudden  sallies  which  the 
besieged  were  constantly  making.  On  one  occasion 
the  wall  of  the  city  was  undermined,  its  timber 
foundations  burnt,  and  thus  a  temporary  breach 
effected  (5  Mace.  xxi.  5).  For  the  first  and  last 
time  we  hear  of  a  want  of  water  inside  the  city,  but 
from  this  a  seasonable  rain  relieved  them.  In 
other  respects  the  besieged  seem  to  have  been  well 
off.  Hyrcanus  however,  with  more  prudence  than 
humanity,  anticipating  a  long  siege,  turned  out  of 
the  city  all  the  infirm  and  non-fighting  people. 
The  Feast  of  Tabernacles  had  now  arrived,  and,  at 
the  request  of  Hyrcanus,  Antiochus,  with  a  mode- 
ration which  gained  him  the  title  of  "  the  Pious," 
agreed  to  a  truce.  This  led  to  further  negotiations, 
which  ended  in  the  siege  being  relinquished.  Anti- 
ochus wished  to  place  a  garrison  in  the  city,  but 
this  the  late  experience  of  the  Jews  forbade,  and 
hostages  and  a  payment  were  substituted.  The 
money  for  this  subsidy  was  obtained  by  Hyrcanus 
from  the  sepulchre  of  David,  the  outer  chamber  of 
which  he  is  said  to  have  opened,  and  to  have  taken 
3000  talents  of  the  treasure  which  had  been  buried 
with  David,  anil  had  hitherto  escaped  undiscovered 
(Ant.  vii.  15,  §3;  xiii.  8,  §4;  B.  J.  i.  2,  §5). 
After  Antiochus's  departure  Hyrcanus  carefully  re- 
paired the  damage  done  to  the  walls  (5  Mace.  xxi. 
18) ;  and  it  may  have  been  at  this  time  that  he  en- 
larged the  Baris  or  fortress  adjoining  the  north-west 
wall  of  the  Temple  inclosure,  which  had  been  founded 
by  his  father,  and  which  he  used  for  his  own  re- 
sidence and  for  the  custody  of  his  sacred  vestments 
worn  as  high-priest  (Jos.  Ant.  xviii.  4,  §3). 

During  the  rest  of  his  long  and  successful  reign 
John  Hyrcanus  resided  at  Jerusalem,  ably  adminis- 
tering the  government  from  thence,  and  regularly 
fulfilling  the  duties  of  the  high-priest  (see  5  Mace, 
xxiii.  3  ;  Jos.  Ant.  xiii.  10,  §3).  The  great  sects 
of  Pharisees  and  Sadducees  first  appear  in  promi- 
nence at  this  period.  Hyrcanus,  as  a  Maccabee, 
had  belonged  to  the  Pharisees,  but  an  occurrence 
which  happened  near  the  end  of  his  reign  caused 
him  to  desert  them  and  join  the  Sadducees,  and 
even  to  persecute  his  former  friends  (see  the  story 
in  Jos.  Ant.  xiii.  10,  §5  ;  5  Mace.  xxv.  7-11  ;  Mil- 
man,  ii.  73).  He  died  in  peace  and  honour  (Ant. 
xiii.  10,  §7.)  There  is  no  mention  of  his  burial, 
but  it  is  nearly  certain  that  the  "  monument  of 
John  the  high-priest,"  which  stood  near  the  north- 
west corner  of  the  city  and  is  so  frequently  referred 
to  in  the  account  of  the  final  siege,  was  his  tomb; 
at  least  no  other  high-priest  of  the  name  of  John  is 
mentioned.     [High-priest,  p.  813.] 

Hyrcanus  was  succeeded  (b.c.  107)  by  his  son 
Aristobulus.6     Like  his  predecessors  he  was  Iiigh- 


c  The  adoption  of  Greek  names  by  the  family  of  the 
Maccabees,  originally  the  great  opponents  of  every- 
thing Greek,  shows  how  much  and  how  unconsciously 


JERUSALEM 

priest;  but  unlike  them  he  assumed  the  title  as 
well  as  the  power  of  a  king  (Jos.  Ant.  xiii.  1 1, 
§1 ;  5  Mace,  xrvii.  1).  Aristobulus  resided  in  the 
Baris  (Ant.  xiii.  11,  §2).  A  passage,  dark  and  sub- 
terraneous (B.  J.  i.  3,  §3),  led  from  the  Baris  to 
the  Temple ;  one  part  of  this  passage  was  called 
"  Strato's  tower,"  and  here  Antigonus,  brother  of 
Aristobulus,  was  murdered  by  his  order. f  Aristo- 
bulus died  very  tragically  immediately  after,  having 
reigned  but  one  year.  His  brother  Alexander  Jan- 
neas  (B.C.  105),  who  succeeded  him,  was  mainly 
engaged  in  wars  at  a  distance  from  Jerusalem,  re- 
turning thither  however  in  the  intervals  (Ant.  xiii. 
12,  §3,  ad  fin.).  About  the  year  95  the  animosi- 
ties of  the  Pharisees  and  Sadducees  came  to  an  alarm- 
ing explosion.  Like  his  father,  Alexander  belonged 
to  the  Sadducees*.  The  Pharisees  had  never  forgiven 
Hyrcanus  for  having  deserted  them,  and  at  the  trust 
of  Tabernacles,  as  the  king  was  officiating,  they  in- 
vited the  people  to  pelt  him  with  the  citrons  which 
they  carried  in  the  feast  (Jos.  Ant.  xiii.  13,  §5: 
comp.  10,  §5;  Reland,  Ant.  iv.  5,  §9).  Alexander 
retaliated,  and  six  thousand  persons  were  at  that 
time  killed  by  his  orders.  But  the  dissensions  lasted 
for  six  years,  and  no  fewer  than  50,000  are  said  to 
have  lost  their  lives  (Ant.  xiii.  13,  §5 ;  5  Mace, 
xxix.  2).  These  severities  made  him  extremely  un- 
popular with  both  parties,  and  led  to  their  inviting 
the  aid  of  Demetrius  Euchaerus  king  of  Syria, 
against  him.  The  actions  between  them  were 
fought  at  a  distance  from  Jerusalem  ;  but  the  city 
did  not  escape  a  share  in  the  horrors  of  war  ;  for 
when,  after  some  fluctuations,  Alexander  returned 
successful,  he  crucified  publicly  800  of  his  oppo- 
nents, and  had  their  wives  and  children  butchered 
before  their  eyes,  while  he  and  his  concubines 
feasted  in  sight  of  the  whole  scene  (Ant.  xiii.  14, 
§2).  Such  an  iron  sway  as  this  was  enough  to 
crush  all  opposition,  and  Alexander  reigned  till  the 
year  79  without  further  disturbances.  He  died 
while  besieging  a  fortress  called  Kagaba,  somewhere 
beyond  Jordan.  He  is  commemorated  as  having  at 
the  time  of  his  disputes  with  the  people,  erected  a 
wooden  screen  round  the  altar  and  the  sanctuary 
(va6s),  as  far  as  the  parapet  of  the  priests'  court, 
to  prevent  access  to  him  as  he  was  ministering  s 
(Ant.  xiii.  13,  §5).  The  "  monument  of  king  Alex- 
ander" was  doubtless  his  tomb.  It  stood  some- 
where near,  but  outside,  the  north  wall  of  the 
Temple  (/»'.  /.  v.  7,  §3),  probably  not  far  from  the 
situation  of  the  tombs  of  the  old  kings  (see  section 
111.  p.  L031).  In  spite  of  opposition  the  Pharisees 
were  now  by  far  the  most  powerful  party  in  Jeru- 
salem, and  Alexander  had  therefore  before  his  death 
instructed  his  queen,  Alexandra — whom  he  left  ti> 
succeed  him  with  two  sons — to  commit  herself  to 
them.  She  diil  so,  and  the  consequence  was  that 
though  the  feuds  between  the  two  great  parties 
continued  at  their  height,  yet  the  government, 
being  supported  by  the  strongest,  was  always 
serine.  The  elder  of  the  two  sons,  Hyrcanus, 
was  made  high-priest,  and  Aristobulus  had  the 
command  of  the  army.  The  queen  lived  till  the 
year   7D.     On   her  death,    Ilyrraniis   attempted    to 

take  the  crown,  hut  was  opposed  by  his  brother,  to 

the  Jews  were  now  departing  from  their  ancient 
standards. 

f  For  the  story  of  his  death,  and  tin-  accomplish- 
ment of  the  prediction  that  lie  should  die  in  Strata's 
Tower  —  /.''.  Caesarea — compare  the  well-known  story 
of  the  death  of  Henry  IV.  in  Jerusalem,  i.  e.  the  Jeru- 
salem Chamber  at  Westminster. 


JERUSALEM 


1003 


whom  in  three  months  he  yielded  its  possession, 
Aristobulus  becoming  king  in  the  year  69.  Before 
Alexandra's  death  she  had  imprisoned  the  family  of 
Aristobulus  in  the  Baris  (B.  J.  i.  5,  §4).  There 
too  Hyrcanus  took  refuge  during  the  negotiations 
with  his  brother  about  the  kingdom,  and  from 
thence  had  attacked  and  vanquished  his  opponents 
who  were  collected  in  the  Temple  (Ant.  xiv.  1,  §2). 
Josephus  here  first  speaks  of  it  as  the  Acropolis,11 
and  as  being  above  the  Temple  (virep  rod  lepov). 
After  the  reconciliation  Aristobulus  took  possession 
of  the  royal  palace  (tii  PaaiXeia).  This  can  hardly 
be  other  than  the  "  palace  of  the  Asmoneans,"  of 
which  Josephus  gives  some  notices  at  a  subsequent 
part  of  the  history  (Ant.  xx.  8,  §11  ;  B.  J.  ii. 
16,  §3).  From  these  it  appears  that  it  was  situ- 
ated west  of  the  Temple,  on  the  extreme  highest 
point  of  the  upper  city  (the  modern  Zion)  imme- 
diately facing  the  south-west  angle  of  the  Temple 
inclosure,  and  at  the  west  end  of  the  bridge  which 
led  from  the  Temple  to  the  Xystus. 

The  brothers  soon  quarrelled  again,  when  Hyr- 
canus called  to  his  assistance  Aretas,  king  of  Da- 
mascus. Before  this  new  enemy  Aristobulus  fled 
to  Jerusalem  and  took  refuge  within  the  fortifica- 
tions of  the  Temple.  And  now  was  witnessed  the 
strange  anomaly  of  the  high-priest  in  alliance  with 
a  heathen  king  besieging  the  priests  in  the  Temple. 
Suddenly  a  new  actor  appears  on  the  scene  ;  the 
siege  is  interrupted  and  eventually  raised  by  the 
interference  of  Scaurus,  one  of  Pompey's  lieute- 
nants, to  whom  Aristobulus  paid  400  talents  for 
the  relief.  This  was  in  the  year  65.  Shortly  after 
Pompey  himself  arrived  at  Damascus.  Both  the 
brothers  came  before  him  in  person  (Ant.  xiv.  3,  §2), 
and  were  received  with  moderation  and  civility. 
Aristobulus  could  not  make  up  his  mind  to  submit, 
and  after  a  good  deal  of  shuffling  betook  himself  to 
Jerusalem  and  prepared  for  resistance.  Pompey 
advanced  by  way  of  Jericho.  As  he  approached 
Jerusalem,  Aristobulus,  who  found  the  city  too 
much  divided  for  effectual  resistance,  met  him  and 
offered  a  large  sum  of  money  and  surrender.  Pom- 
pey sent  forward  Gabinius  to  take  possession  of  the 
place;  but  the  bolder  party  among  the  adherents  of 
Aristobulus  had  meantime  gained  the  ascendancy, 
and  he  found  the  gates  closed.  Pompey  on  this 
threw  the  king  into  chains  and  advanced  on  Jeru- 
salem. Hyrcanus  was  in  possession  of  the  city  and 
received  the  invader  with  open  arms.  The  Temple 
on  the  other  hand  was  held  by  the  party  of  Aris- 
tobulus, which  included  the  priests  (xiv.  4,  §3). 
They  cut  oft' the  bridges  and  causeways  which  con- 
nected the  Temple  with  the  town  on  the  west  and 
north,  and  prepared  for  an  obstinate  defence.  Pom- 
pey put  a  garrison  into  the  palace  of  the  Asmoneans, 
and  into  other  positions  in  tin1  upper  city,  ami  for- 
tified the  houses  adjacenl  to  the  Temple.  The  north 
side  was  the  most  practicable,  and  there  he  com- 
nieneed  his  attack.  But  even  there  the  hill  was 
entrenched  by  an  artificial  ditch  in  addition  to  tie 
very  deep  natural  valley,  and  was  defended  by  lofty 
towers  on  the  wall  ot'  tin'  Temple  (Ant.  xiv.  4,  §2  ; 

/;. ./.  i.  7,  §i). 

Pompey  appears  to  have  stationed  some  part  of 


B  Josophus's  words  are  not  very  clear  : — Spv^axrov 
fuAu'Of  nepi  rbv  fSwu'ov  Kai  tov  vabv  /3otAAojaeros  nexP1 
tov  Bpiyicov,  si?  ov  /iorot?  «f»)i'  toc?  ieptv<rtv  ei<Tievai. 

h  lie  also  here  applies  t<>  it  the  term  i/ipoupior  .\„t. 
xiii.  Hi,  §5  ;  />'.  •'■  i.  5,  §1),  which  he  commonly  uses 
for  smaller  fortresses. 

3  T  2 


1004 


JERUSALEM 


his  force  on  the  high  ground  west  of  the  city  (Jos. 
B.  J.  v.  12,  §2),  but  he  himself  commanded  iri 
person  at  the  north.  The  first  efforts  of  his  soldiers 
were  devoted  to  filling  up  the  ditch  '  and  the  valley, 
and  to  constructing  the  banks  on  which  to  place 
the  military  engines,  for  which  purpose  they  cut 
down  all  the  timber  in  the  environs.  These  had 
in  the  meantime  been  sent  for  from  Tyre,  and  as 
soon  as  the  banks  were  sufficiently  raised  the  ba- 
listae  were  set  to  work  to  throw  stones  over  the 
wall  into  the  crowded  courts  of  the  Temple ;  and 
lofty  towers  were  erected,  fiom  which  to  discharge 
arrows  and  other  missiles.  But  these  operations 
were  not  carried  on  without  great  difficulty,  for  the 
wall  of  the  Temple  was  thronged  with  slingers,  who 
most  seriously  interfered  with  the  progress  of  the 
Romans.  Pompey,  however,  remarked  that  on  the 
seventh  day  the  Jews  regularly  desisted  from  fight- 
ing {Ant.  xiv.  4,  §2  ;  Strab.  xvi.  p.  763),  and  this 
afforded  the  Romans  a  great  advantage,  for  it  gave 
them  the  opportunity  of  moving  the  engines  and 
towers  nearer  the  walls,  filling  up  the  trenches, 
adding  to  the  banks,  and  in  other  ways  making 
good  the  damage  of  the  past  six  days  without  the 
slightest  molestation.  In  fact  Josephus  gives  it  as 
his  opinion,  that  but  for  the  opportunity  thus  af- 
forded, the  necessary  works  never  could  have  been 
completed.  In  the  Temple  itself,  however  fierce 
the  attack,  the  daily  sacrifices  and  other  ceremo- 
nials, down  to  the  minutest  detail,  were  never  inter- 
rupted, and  the  priests  pursued  their  duties  unde- 
terred, even  when  men  were  struck  down  near  them 
by  the  stones  and  arrows  of  the  besiegers.  At  the 
end  of  three  months  the  besiegers  had  approached 
so  close  to  the  wall  that  the  battering-rams  could  be 
worked,  and  a  breach  was  effected  in  the  largest  of 
the  towers,  through  which  the  Romans  entered,  and 
after  an  obstinate  resistance  and  loss  of  life,  re- 
mained masters  of  the  Temple.  Many  Jews  were 
killed  by  their  countrymen  of  Hyrcanus's  party 
who  had  entered  with  the  Romans ;  some  in  their 
confusion  set  fire  to  the  houses  which  abutted  on  a 
portion  of  the  Temple  walls,  and  perished  in  the 
flames,  while  others  threw  themselves  over  the  pre- 
cipices (B.  J.  i.  7,  §4).  The  whole  number  slain 
is  reported  by  Josephus  at  12,000  (Ant.  xiv.  4, 
§4).  During  the  assault  the  priests  maintained  the 
same  calm  demeanour  which  they  had  displayed 
during  the  siege,  and  were  actually  slain  at  their 
duties  while  pouring  their  drink-offerings  and  burn- 
ing their  incense  (B.  J.  i.  7,  §4).  It  should  be 
observed  that  in  the  account  of  this  siege  the  Baris 
is  not  once  mentioned  ;  the  attack  was  on  the 
Temple  alone,  instead  of  on  the  fortress,  as  in 
Titus's  siege.  The  inference  is  that  at  this  time  it 
was  a  small  and  unimportant  adjunct  to  the  main 
fortifications  of  the  Temple. 

Pompey  and  many  of  his  people  explored  the  re- 
cesses of  the  Temple,  and  the  distress  of  the  Jews 
was  greatly  aggravated  by  their  holy  places  being 
thus  exposed  to  intrusion  and  profanation  (B.J.  i.  7, 
§6).  In  the  sanctuary  were  found  the  great  golden 
vessels — the  table  of  shew-bread,  the  candlestick, 
the  censers,  and  other  articles  proper  to  that  place. 
But  what  most  astonished  the  intruders,  on  passing 
beyond  the  sanctuary,  and  exploring  the  total  dark- 
ness of  the  Holy  of  Holies,  was  to  find  in  the  adytum 
neither  image  nor  shrine.    It  evidently  caused  much 


1  The  size  of  the  ditch  is  eriven  by  Strabo  as  60  feet 
deep  and  250  wide  (xvi.  p.  763). 

k  See  the  reasons  urged  by  Prideaux,  ad  loc. 


JERUSALEM 

remark  ("  hide  vulgatum  "),  and  was  the  one  fact 
regarding  the  Temple  which  the  historian  thought 
worthy  of  preservation — "  nulla  intus  deum  effigie  ; 
vacuam  sedem  et  inania arcana"  (Tacitus,  Hist.  v.  9). 
Pompey' s  conduct  on  this  occasion  does  him  great 
credit.  He  left  the  treasures  thus  exposed  to  his 
view — even  the  spices  and  the  money  in  the  trea- 
sury— untouched,  and  his  examination  over,  he 
ordered  the  Temple  to  be  cleansed  and  purified 
from  the  bodies  of  the  slain,  and  the  daily  worship 
to  be  resumed.  Hyrcanus  was  continued  in  his 
high-priesthood,  but  without  the  title  of  king  (Ant. 
xx.  10)  ;  a  tribute  was  laid  upon  the  city,  the  walls 
were  entirely  demolished  (Karaairdaai  .  ...  ra 
Tei'x7?  irdvra,  Strabo,  xvi.  p.  763),  and  Pompey 
took  his  departure  for  Rome,  carrying  with  him 
Aristobulus,  his  sons  Alexander  and  Antigonus,  and 
his  two  daughters.  The  Temple  was  taken  in  the 
year  63,  in  the  3rd  month  (Sivan),  on  the  day  of  a 
great  fast  (Ant.  xiv.  4,  §3)  ;  probably  that  for 
Jeroboam,  which  was  held  on  the  23rd  of  that 
month. 

During  the  next  few  years  nothing  occurred  to 
affect  Jerusalem,  the  struggles  which  desolated  the 
unhappy  Palestine  during  that  time  having  taken 
place  away  from  its  vicinity.  In  56  it  was  made 
the  seat  of  one  of  the  five  senates  or  Sanhedrim,  to 
which  under  the  constitution  of  Gabinius  the  civil 
power  of  the  country  was  for  a  time  committed. 
Two  years  afterwards  (B.C.  54)  the  rapacious  Crassus 
visited  the  city  on  his  way  to  Parthia,  and  plun- 
dered it  not  only  of  the  money  which  Pompey  had 
spared,  but  of  a  considerable  treasure  accumulated 
from  the  contributions  of  Jews  throughout  the 
world,  in  all  a  sum  of  10,000  talents,  or  about 
2,000,000?.  sterling.  The  pillage  was  aggravated 
by  the  fact  of  his  having  first  received  from  the 
.priest  in  charge  of  the  treasure  a  most  costly  beam 
of  solid  gold,  on  condition  that  everything  else 
should  be  spared  (Ant.  xiv.  7,  §1). 

During  this  time  Hyrcanus  remained  at  Jeru- 
salem, acting  under  the  advice  of  Antipater  the 
Idumeau,  his  chief  minister.  The  assistance  which 
they  rendered  to  Mithridates,  the  ally  of  Julius 
Caesar,  in  the  Egyptian  campaign  of  48-47,  in- 
duced Caesar  to  confirm  Hyrcanus  in  the  high- 
priesthood,  and  to  restore  him  to  the  civil  govern- 
ment under  the  title  of  Ethnarch  (Ant.  xiv.  10). 
At  the  same  time  he  rewarded  Antipater  with  the 
procuratorship  of  Judaea  (Ant.  xiv.  8,  §5),  and 
allowed  the  walls  of  the  city  to  be  rebuilt  (Ant.  xiv. 
10,  §4).  The  year  47  is  also  memorable  for  the 
first  appearance  of  Autipater's  son  Herod  in  Jerusa- 
lem, when,  a  youth  of  fifteen  (or  more  probably  k  25), 
he  characteristically  overawed  the  assembled  San- 
hedrim. In  43  Antipater  was  murdered  in  the 
palace  of  Hyrcanus  by  one  Malichus,  who  was  very 
soon  after  himself  slain  by  Herod  (Ant.  xiv.  11, 
§4,  6).  The  tumults  and  revolts  consequent  on 
these  murders  kepit  Jerusalem  in  commotion  for  some 
time  (B.  J.  i.  12).  But  a  more  serious  danger 
was  at  hand.  Antigonus,  the  younger  and  now 
the  only  surviving  son  of  Aristobulus,  suddenly 
appeared  in  the  country  supported  by  a  Parthian 
army.  Many  of  the  Jews  of  the  district  about 
Carmel  and  Joppa '  flocked  to  him,  and  he  instantly 
made  for  Jerusalem,  giving  out  that  his  onlj 
was  to  pay  a  visit  of  devotion  to  the  Temple  (.">  Mace. 


1  At  that  time,  and  even  as  late  as  the  Crusades, 
called  the  Woodland  or  the  Forest  country  (Spv/xoi, 
Jos.  Ant.  xiv.  13,  §3). 


JERUSALEM 

xlix.  .">).  So  sudden  was  his  approach,  that  he  got 
into  the  city  and  reached  the  palace  in  the  upper 
market-place — the  modern  Ziou — without  resist- 
ance. Here  however  he  was  met  by  Hyrcanus  and 
Phasaelus  (Herod's  brother)  with  a  strong  party 
of  soldiers.  A  fight  ensued,  which  ended  in  Anti- 
gonus  being  driven  over  the  bridge  into  the  Temple, 
where  he  was  constantly  harassed  and  annoyed  by 
Hyrcanus  and  Phasaelus  from  the  city.  Pent,  cost 
arrived,  and  the  city,  and  the  suburbs  between  it 
and  the  Temple,  were  crowded  with  peasants  and 
others  who  had  come  up>  to  keep  the  feast.  Herod 
too  arrived,  and  with  a  small  party  had  taken 
charge  of  the  palace.  Phasaelus  kept  the  wall. 
Anti-onus'  people  seem  (though  the  account  is 
very  obscure)  to  have  got  out  through  the  Baris 
into  the  part  north  of  the  Temple.  Here  Herod  and 
Phasaelus  attacked,  dispersed,  and  cut  them  up. 
Pacorus,  the  Parthian  general,  was  lying  outside 
the  walls,  and  at  the  earnest  request  of  Antigouus, 
he  and  500  horse  were  admitted,  ostensibly  to  me- 
diate. The  result  was,  that  Phasaelus  and  Hyrcanus 
were  outwitted,  and  Herod  overpowered,  and  the 
Parthians  got  possession  of  the  place.  Antigonus 
was  made  king,  and  as  Hyrcanus  knelt  a  suppliant 
before  him,  the  new  king — with  all  the  wrongs 
which  his  lather  and  himself  had  suffered  full  in 
his  mind — bit  off  the  ears  of  his  uncle,  so  as  effec- 
tually to  incapacitate  him  from  ever  again  taking 
the  high-priesthood.  Phasaelus  killed  himself  in 
prison.     Herod  alone  escaped  {Ant.  xiv.  13). 

Thus  did  Jerusalem  (B.C.  40)  find  itself  in  the 
hands  of  the  Parthians. 

In  three  months  Herod  returned  from  Rome  king 
of  Judaea,  and  in  tin/  beginning  of  39  appeared  be- 
fore Jerusalem  with  a  force  of  Romans,  commanded 
by  Silo,  and  pitched  his  camp  on  the  west  side  of 
the  city  i  II.  J.  i.  1."),  §5).  Other  occurrences,  how- 
ever, called  him  away  from  the  siege  at  this  time, 
and  tor  more  than  two  years  he  was  occupied  else- 
where. In  the  mean  time  Antigonus  held  the  city, 
ami  had  dismissed  his  Pa  thian  allies.  In  37  Herod 
appeared  again,  now  driven  to  fury  by  the  death  of 
his  favourite  brother  Joseph,  whose  dead  body  Anti- 
gonus had  shamefully  mutilated  (Z>\  /.  i.  17,  §2). 
lie  came,  as  Pompey  had  done,  from  Jericho,  and, 
like  Pompey,  he  pitched  his  camp  and  made  his 
attack  on  the  north  side  of  the  Temple.  The 
genera]  circumstances  of  the  siege  seem  also  very 
much  to  have  resembled  the  former,  except  that 
there  were  now  two  walls  no,  th  of  the  Temple,  and 
that  the  driving  of  mines  was  a  great  feature  in  the 
siege  operations  |  /•'. ./.  i.  is,  §  i  ;  Ant.  xiv.  1  6,  s>_' ), 
The  Jews  distinguished  themselves  by  the  same 
reckless  courage  as  before;  and  although  it  is  not 
expressly  said  that  the  services  of  the  Temple  were 
carried  on  with  such  minute  regularity  as  when  they 
excited  (lie  astonishment  of  pompey,  vet  we  may 
infer  it  from  the  fact  that,  during  the  hottest  of 
the  operations,  the  besieged  desired  a  short  truce 
in  which  to  bring  in  animals  for  sacrifice  (Ant. 
xiv.  16,  §2).  In  one  respect — the  factions  which 
raged  among  the  besieged — -this  siege  somewhat 
foreshadows  that  of  Titus. 

For  a  short  time  after  the  commencement  of  the 

operations  Herod  absented  himself  for  his  marriage 


JERUSALEM 


100- 


m  These  periods  probably  date  from  the  return  of 
Herod  with  Sosius,  ami  the  resumption  of  mole  active 
hostilities. 

11  True  he  was  one  of  the  same  race  who  at  a  former 
sack  of  Jerusalem  had  cried  "Down  with  it.  down 


at  Samaria  with  Mariamne.  On  his  return  he  was 
joined  by  Sosius,  the  Roman  governor  of  Syria,  with 
a  force  of  from  50,000  to  60,000  men,"  and  the 
siege  was  then  resumed  in  earnest  (Ant.  xiv.  16). 

The  first  of  the  two  walls  was  taken  in  forty 
days,  and  the  second  in  fifteen  more.m  Then  the 
outer  court  of  the  Temple,  and  the  lower  city — 
lying  in  the  hollow  between  the  Temple  and  "the 
modern  Zion — was  taken,  and  the  Jews  were  driven 
into  the  inner  parts  of  the  Temple  and  to  the  upper 
market-place,  which  communicated  therewith  by 
the  bridge.  At  this  point  some  delay  seems  to 
have  arisen,  as  the  siege  is  distinctly  said  to  have 
occupied  in  all  live  mouths  (B.  J.  i.  IS,  §2;  see 
also  Ant.  xiv.  16,  §2).  At  last,  losing  patience, 
Herod  allowed  the  place  to  be  stormed  ;  and  an  indis- 
criminate massacre  ensued,  especially  in  the  narrow 
streets  of  the  lower  city,  which  was  only  termi- 
nated at  his  urgent  and  repeated  solicitations. a 
Herod  and  his  men  entered  first,  and  in  his  anxiety 
to  pi  event  any  plunder  and  desecration  of  the 
Temple,  he  himself  hastened  to  the  entrance  of  the 
sanctuary,  and  there  standing  with  a  drawn  sword 
in  his  hand,  threatened  to  cut  clown  any  of  the 
Roman  soldiers  who  attempted  to  enter. 

Through  all  this  time  the  Baris  had  remained 
impregnable:  there  Antigonus  had  taken  refuge, 
and  thence,  when  the  whole  of  the  city  was  in 
the  power  of  the  conquerors,  he  descended,  and  in 
an  abject  manner  craved  his  life  from  Sosius.  It 
was  granted,  but  only  to  be  taken  from  him  later 
at  the  order  of  Antony. 

Antigonus  was  thus  disposed  of,  but  the  Asmo- 
nean  party  was  still  strong  both  in  numbers  and 
influence.  Herod's  first  care  was  to  put  it  down. 
The  chiefs  of  the  party,  including  the  whole  of  the 
Sanhedrim  but  two,"  were  put  to  death,  and  their 
property,  with  that  of  others  whose  lives  wen; 
spared,  was  seized.  The  appointment  of  the  high- 
priest  was  the  next  consideration.  Hyrcanus  re- 
turned from  Parthia  soon  after  the  conclusion  of 
the  siege;  but  even  if  his  mutilation  had  not 
incapacitated  him  for  the  office,  it  would  have  been 
unwise  to  appoint  a  member  of  the  popular  family. 
Herod  therefore  bestowed  the  office  (B.C.  3G)  on  one 
Ananel,  a  former  adherent  of  his  and  a  Babylonian 
Jew  (Ant.  xv.  3,  §1),  a  man  without  interest  or 
influence  in  the  politics  of  Jerusalem  (xv.  2,  §4). 
Ananel  was  soon  displaced  through  the  machi- 
nations of  Alexandra,  mother  of  Herod's  wife 
.Mariamne,  who  prevailed  on  him  to  appoint  her 
son  Aristobulus,  a  youth  of  sixteen.  But  tin! 
young  Asmonean  was  too  warmly  received  by  the 
people  (/;.,/.  i.  22,  §2)  for  Herod  to  allow  him 
to  remain.  Hardly  had  he  celebrated  his  first  feast. 
before    he    was     murdered     at     Jericho,    and    then 

Ananel  resumed  the  office  (  Ant.  \\ .  3,  §3 ). 

The  intrigues  and  tragedies  of  th,-  next  thirty 
years  are  too  complicated  and  too  long  to  be 
treated  of  here.  A  general  sketch  of  the  events 
id'  Herod's  life  will  he  Muni  under  his  nam,',  and 
other  opportunities  will  occur  for  noticing  them. 
Moreover,  a  great  part  of  these  occurrences  have  no 
special  connexion  with  Jerusalem,  and  therefore  have 
no  place  in  a  brief  notice  like  the  present  of  those 
things  which  more  immediately  concern  the  city. 

with  it  even  to  the  ground  !"     But  times  had  altered 
since  then. 

These  two  were  Hillel  and  Shammai,  renowned 
in  the  Jewish  literature  as  the  founders  of  tin-  two 
great  rival  schools  of  doctrine  and  practice. 


1006 


JERUSALEM 


In  many  respects  this  period  was  a  repetition 
of  that  of  the  Maccabees  and  Antiochus  Epiphanes. 
True,  Herod  was  more  politic,  and  more  prudent, 
and  also  probably  had  more  sympathy  with  the 
Jewish  character  than  Antiochus.  But  the  spirit 
of  stern  resistance  to  innovation  and  of  devotion  to 
the  law  of  Jehovah  burnt  no  less  fiercely  in  the 
breasts  of  the  people  than  it  had  done  before ;  and 
it  is  curious  to  remark  how  every  attempt  on 
Herod's  part  to  introduce  foreign  customs  was  met 
by  outbreak,  and  how  futile  were  all  the  benefits 
which  he  conferred  both  on  the  temporal  and  eccle- 
siastical welfare  of  the  people  when  these  obnoxious 
intrusions  were  in  question.P 

In  the  year  34  the  city  was  visited  by  Cleo- 
patra, who,  having  accompanied  Antony  to  the 
Euphrates,  was  now  returning  to  Egypt  through 
her  estates  at  Jericho  (Ant.  xv.  4,  §2). 

In  the  spring  of  31,  the  year  of  the  battle  of 
Actium,  Judaea  was  visited  by  an  earthquake,  the 
effects  of  which  appear  to  have  been  indeed  tre- 
mendous: 10,000  (Ant.  xv.  5,  §2)  or,  according  to 
another  account  (B.  J.  i.  19,  §3),  20,000  persons 
were  killed  by  the  fall  of  buildings,  and  an  im- 
mense quantity  of  cattle.  The  panic  at  Jerusalem 
was  very  severe ;  but  it  was  calmed  by  the  argu- 
ments of  Herod,  then  departing  to  a  campaign  on 
the  east  of  Jordan  for  the  interests  of  Cleopatra. 

The  following  year  was  distinguished  by  the 
death  of  Hyrcanus,  who,  though  more  than  80  years 
old,  was  killed  by  Herod,  ostensibly  for  a  treasonable 
correspondence  with  the  Arabians,  but  really  to 
remove  the  last  remnant  of  the  Asmonean  race, 
who,  iD  the  fluctuations  of  the  times,  and  in  Herod's 
absence  from  his  kingdom, might  have  been  dangerous 
to  him.  He  appears  to  have  resided  at  Jerusalem 
since  his  return  ;  and  his  accusation  was  brought 
before  the  Sanhedrim  (Ant.  xv.  0,  §1-3). 

Mariamne  was  put  to  death  in  the  year  29, 
whether  in  Jerusalem  or  iu  the  Alexandreion,  in 
which  she  had  been  placed  with  her  mother  when 
Herod  left  for  his  interview  with  Octavius,  is  not 
certain.  But  Alexandra  was  now  in  Jerusalem 
again ;  and  in  Herod's  absence,  ill,  at  Samaria 
( Sebaste),  she  began  to  plot  for  possession  of  the 
Baris,  and  of  another  fortress  situated  in  the  city. 
The  attempt,  however,  cost  her  her  life.  The 
same  year  saw  the  execution  of  Costobaras,  husband 
of  Herod's  sister  Salome,  and  of  several  other 
persons  of  distinction  (Ant.  xv.  7,  §8-10). 

Herod  now  began  to  encourage  foreign  practices 
and  usages,  probably  with  the  view  of  "counter- 
balancing by  a  strong  Grecian  party  the  turbulent 
and  exclusive  spirit  of  the  Jews."  Amongst  his 
acts  of  this  description  was  the  building  of  a  theatre  q 
at  Jerusalem  (Ant.  xv.  8,  §1).  Of  its  situation 
no  information  is  given,  nor  have  any  indica- 
tions yet  been  discovered.  It  was  ornamented  witli 
the  names  of  the  victories  of  Octavius,  and  with 
trophies  of  arms  conquered  in  the  wars  of  Herod. 
Quinquennial    games    in    honour    of   Caesar    were 


p  The  principles  and  results  of  the  whole  of  this 
later  period  are  ably  summed  up  in  Merivalc's  Ro- 
mans, iii.,  chap.  29. 

q  The  amphitheatre  "  in  the  plain  "  mentioned  in 
this  passage  is  commonly  supposed  to  have  been  also 
at  Jerusalem  (Barclay,  City  of  Great  King,  174,  and 
others)  ;  but  this  is  not  a  necessary  inference.  The 
word  ire&Lov  is  generally  used  of  the  plain  of  the  Jordan 
near  Jericho,  where  we  know  there  was  an  amphi- 
theatre   (B.   J.  i.    33,    §8).     From  another  passage 


JERUSALEM 

instituted  on  the  most  magnificent  scale,  with 
racing,  boxing,  musical  contests,  fights  of  gladiators 
and  wild  beasts.  The  zealous  Jews  took  fire  at 
these  innovations,  but  their  wrath  was  specially 
excited  by  the  trophies  round  the  theatre  at  Jeru- 
salem, which  they  believed  to  contain  figures  of 
men.  Even  when  shown  that  their  suspicions  were 
groundless,  they  remained  discontented.  The  spirit 
of  the  old  Maccabees  was  still  alive,  and  Herod  only 
narrowly  escaped  assassination,  while  his  would-be 
assassins  endured  torments  and  death  with  the 
greatest  heroism.  At  this  time  he  occupied  the 
old  palace  of  the  Asmoneans,  which  crowned  the 
eastern  face  of  the  upper  city,  and  stood  adjoining 
the  Xystus  at  the  end  of  the  bridge  which  formed 
the  communication  between  the  south  part  of  the 
Temple  and  the  upper  city  (xv.  8,  §5 ;  comp.  xx. 
8,  §11,  and  B.  J.  ii.  16,  §3).  This  palace  was  not 
yet  so  magnificent  as  he  afterwards  made  it,  but  it 
was  already  most  richly  furnished  (xv.  9,  §2). 
Herod  had  now  also  completed  the  improvements 
of  the  Baris — the  fortress  built  by  John  Hyrcanus 
on  the  foundations  of  Simon  Maccabaeus — which 
he  had  enlarged  and  strengthened  at  great  expense, 
and  named  Antonia — after  his  friend  Mark  Antony/ 
A  description  of  this  celebrated  fortress  will  be 
given  in  treating  of  the  Temple,  of  which,  as 
reconstructed  by  Herod,  it  formed  an  intimate  part. 
It  stood  at  the  west  end  of  the  north  wall  of  the 
Temple,  and  was  inaccessible  on  all  sides  but  that. 
See  section  III.  p.  1023. 

The  year  25 — the  next  after  the  attempt  on 
Herod's  life  in  the  theatre — was  one  of  great  mis- 
fortunes. A  long  drought,  followed  by  unproduc- 
tive seasons,  involved  Judaea  in  famine,  and  its  usual 
consequence,  a  dreadful  pestilence  ( Ant.  xv.  9,  §1). 
Herod  took  a  noble  and  at  the  same  time  a  most  politic 
course.  He  sent  to  Egypt  for  corn,  sacrificing  for 
the  purchase  the  costly  decorations  of  his  palace 
and  his  silver  and  gold  plate.  He  was  thus  able  to 
make  regular  distribution  of  corn  and  clothing,  on 
an  enormous  scale,  for  the  present  necessities  of  the 
people,  as  well  as  to  supply  seed  for  the  next  year's 
crop  (Ant.  xv.  9,  §2).  The  result  of  this  was  to 
remove  to  a  great  degree  the  animosity  occasioned 
by  his  proceedings  in  the  previous  year. 

In  this  year  or  the  next  Herod  took  another  wife, 
the  daughter  of  an  obscure  priest  of  Jerusalem 
named  Simon.  Shortly  before  the  marriage  Simon 
was  made  high-priest  in  the  room  of  Joshua,  or 
Jesus,  the  son  of  Phaneus,  who  appears  to  have 
succeeded  Ananel,  and  was  now  deposed  to  make 
way  for  Herod's  future  father-in-law  (Ant.  xv.  9, 
§3).  It  was  probably  on  the  occasion  of  this  mar- 
riage that  he  built  a  new  and  extensive  palaces  im- 
mediately adjoining  the  old  wall,  at  the  north-west 
corner  of  the  upper  city  (B.  J.  v.  4,  §4),  about 
the  spot  now  occupied  by  the  Latin  convent,  in 
which,  as  memorials  of  his  connexion  with  Caesar 
and  Agrippa,  a  large  apartment — superior  in  size  to 
the  Sanctuary  of  the  Temple — was  named  alter  each 


(B.  J.  i.  21,  8)  it  appears  there  was  one  at  Caesarca. 
Still  the  tttSiov  at  Jerusalem  is  mentioned  in  B.  J.  ii. 

1,  §3-). 

r  The  name  was  probably  not  bestowed  later  than 
B.C.  34  or  33 — the  date  ol  Herod's  closest  relations  with 
Antony :  and  we  may  therefore  inferthat  the  alterations 
to  the  fortress  had  been  at  least  7  or  8  years  in  pp  ig  less. 

s  The  old  palace  of  the  Asmoneans  continued  to  be 
known  as  "the  royal  palace,"  to  $a.aik<nov  [Ant.  xx. 
8,  §11). 


JERUSALEM 

{Ant.  ibid.;  B.J.  i.  21,  §1).  This  palace  was 
very  strongly  fortified  ;  it  communicated  with  the 
three  great  towers  on  the  wall  erected  shortly  after, 
and  it  became  the  citadel,  the  special  fortress  (Xowv 
(ppovpiov,  B.  J.  v.  5,  §8),  of  the  upper  city.  A 
load  led  to  it  from  one  of  the  gates — naturally 
the  northern — in  the  west  wall  of  the  Temple  in- 
closure  (Ant.  xv.  14,  §5).  But  all  Herod's  works 
in  Jerusalem  were  eclipsed  by  the  rebuilding  of  the 
Temple  in  more  than  its  former  extent  and  magni- 
ficence. He  announced  his  intention  in  the  year  19, 
probably  when  the  people  were  collected  in  Jerusa- 
lem at  the  Passover.  At  first  it  met  with  some 
opposition  from  the  fear  that  what  he  had  begun 
he  would  not  be  able  to  finish,  ami  the  consequent 
risk  involved  in  demolishing  the  old  Temple.  This 
he  overcame  by  engaging  to  make  all  the  necessary 
preparations  before  pulling  down  any  part  of  the 
existing  buildings.  Two  years  appear  to  have  been 
occupied  in  these  preparations — among  which  Jose- 
phus  mentions  the  teaching  of  some  of  the  priests 
and  Levites  to  work  as  masons  anil  carpenters — and 
then  the  work  began  (xv.  11,  §2).  Both  Sanctuary 
and  Cloisters — the  latter  double  in  extent  and  far 
larger  and  loftier  than  before — were  built  from  the 
very  foundations  (B.  J.  i.  21,  §1;  Ant.  xv.  11, 
§•')).  [Temple.]  The  holy  house  itself  (i/a6s), 
i.  e.  the  Porch,  Sanctuary,  and  Holy  of  Holies — 
was  finished  in  a  year  and  a  half  (xv.  11,  §(3). 
Its  completion  on  the  anniversary  of  Herod's  inau- 
guration, B.C.  16,  was  celebrated  by  lavish  sacri- 
fices and  a  great  feast.  Immediately  after  this  He- 
rod made  a  journey  to  Rome  to  fetch  home  his  two 
sons,  Alexander  and  Aristobulus — with  whom  he 
returned  to  Jerusalem,  apparently  in  the  spring  of 
15  {Ant.  xvi.  1,  §2).  In  the  autumn  of  this  year 
he  was  visited  by  his  friend  Marcus  Agrippa,  the 
favourite  of  Augustus.  Agrippa  was  well  leceived 
by  the  people  of  Jerusalem,  whom  he  propitiated 
by  a  sacrifice  of  a  hundred  oxen  and  by  a  magnifi- 
cent entertainment  [Ant.  xvi.  2,  $1).  Herod  left 
again  in  the  beginning  of  14  to  join  Agrippa  in  the 
Black  Sea.  <  ta  his  return,  in  the  autumn  or  winter 
of  the  same  year,  he  addressed  the  people  assembled 
at  Jerusalem — for  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles — and 
remitted  them  a  fourth  of  the  annual  tax  (xv.  2, 
§4).  Another  journey  was  followed  by  a  similar 
assembly  in  the  year  11,  at  which  time  Herod  an- 
nounced Antipater  as  his  immediate  successor  (xvi. 
4,  §0;  H.  ./.  i.  2.'!,  §4). 

About  B.C.  9 — eight  years  from  the  commence- 
ment— the  court  and  cloisters  of  the  Temple  were 
finished  (Ant.  xv.  11,  §.">,,  and  the  bridge  between 
the  south  cloister  and  the  upper  city — demolished 
by  Pompey — was  doubtless  now  rebuilt  with  that 
massive  masonry  of  which  some  remains  still  sur- 
vive (see  the  woodcut,  p.  1019).  At  this  time 
equally  magnificent  works  were  being  carried  mi  in 
another  part  of  the  city,  viz.,  in  the  old  wall  at  the 
north-west  comer,  contiguous  to  the  palace,  where 
three  towers  of  great  size  and  magnificence  were 
erected  on  the  wall,  and  one  as  an  outwork  at  a 
small  distance  to  the'  iioith.  The  Utter  was  called 
I'sephinus  (B.J.  v.  4,  §2,  .'!,  4),  the  three  former 
were  Hippicus,  after  one  of  his  friends — Phasaelus, 
after  his  brother — and  Mariamne,  after  his  queen 
(Ant.  xvi.  5,  2  ;  B.  J.\.  4,  3).  For  their  positions 
seesection  III.  p.  1021.  Phasaelus  appears  to  have 
been  erected  first  of  the  three  (Ant.  xvii.  In,  §2), 
though  it  cannot  have  been  began  at  the  time  of 
Phasaelus's  death,  as  that  took  place  some  years 
before  Jerusalem  came  into  Herod's  hands. 


JERUSALEM 


1007 


About  this  time  occurred — if  it  occurred  at  all, 
which  seems  more  than  doubtful  (Prideaux,  Anno 
134) — Herod's  unsuccessful  attempt  to  plunder  the 
sepulchre  of  David  of  the  remainder  of  the  treasures 
left  there  by  Hyrcanus  (Jos.  Ant.  xvi.  7,  §1). 

In  or  about  the  year  7  occurred  tin;  affair  of  the 
Golden  Eagle,  a  parallel  to  that  of  the  theatre,  and, 
like  that,  important,  as  showing  how  strongly  the 
Maccabeean  spirit  of  resistance  to  innovations  on  the 
Jewish  law  still  existed,  and  how  vain  were  any 
concessions  in  the  other  direction  in  the  presence  of 
such  innovations.  Herod  had  fixed  a  large  golden 
eagle,  the  symbol  of  the  Iioman  empire,  of  which 
Judaea  was  now  a  province,  over  the  entrance  to 
the  Sanctuary,  probably  at  the  same  time  that 
he  inscribed  the  name  of  Agrippa  on  the  gate 
(B.J.  i.  21,  §8).  As  a  breach  of  the  2nd  com- 
mandment— not  as  a  badge  of  dependence — this  had 
excited  the  indignation  of  the  Jews,  and  especially 
of  two  of  the  chief  rabbis,  who  instigated  their  dis- 
ciples to  tear  it  down.  A  false  report  of  the  king's 
death  was  made  the  occasion  of  doing  this  in  open 
day,  and  in  the  presence  of  a  large  number  of  people. 
Being  taken  before  Herod  the  rabbis  defended  their 
conduct  and  were  burnt  alive.  The  high-priest 
Matthias  was  deposed,  and  Joazar  took  his  place. 

This  was  the  state  of  things  in  Jerusalem  when 
Herod  died,  in  the  year  4  B.C.  of  the  common  chro- 
nology (Dionysian  era),  but  really  a  few  months 
after  the  birth  of  Christ  (see  p.  1072). 

The  government  of  Judaea,  and  therefore  of  Je- 
rusalem, had  by  the  will  of  Herod  been  bequeathed 
to  Archelaus.  He  lost  no  time  after  the  burial  of 
his  father  in  presenting  himself  in  the  Temple,  and 
addressing  the  people  on  the  affairs  of  the  kingdom 
— a  display  of  confidence  and  moderation,  strongly 
in  contrast  to  the  demeanour  of  the  late  king,  it 
produced  an  instant  effect  on  the  excited  minds  of 
the  Jews,  still  smarting  from  the  failure  of  the  af- 
fair of  the  eagle,  and  from  the  chastisement  it  had 
brought  upon  them  ;  and  Archelaus  was  besieged 
with  clamours  for  the  liberation  of  the  numerous 
persons  imprisoned  by  the  late  king,  and  for  remis- 
sion of  the  taxes.  As  the  people  collected  for  the 
evening  sacrifice  the  matter  became  more  serious, 
and  assumed  the  form  of  a  public  demonstration,  of 
lamentation  for  the  two  martyrs,  Judas  and  Mat- 
thias, and  indignation  against  the  intruded  high- 
priest.  So  loud  and  shrill  were  the  cries  of  lament 
that  they  were  heard  over  the  whole  city.  Arche- 
laus meanwhile  temporised  ami  promised  redress 
when  his  government  should  be  confirmed  by 
Rome.  The  Passover  was  close  at  hand,  and  the 
city  was  last  idling  with  the  multitudes  of  rustics 
ami  of  pilgrims  (e«:  ttjs  virepopias),  who  crowded 
to  the  great  Feast  (B.  ■/.  ii.  1,  §:> ;  Ant.  xvii.  9, 
§>).  These  strangers  not  being  able  or  willing  to 
find  admittance  into  the  houses,  pitched  their  tents 
(tovs  avridi  t (r/cvjroj/coTar  |  on  the  open  ground 
around  the  Temple  (Aid.  ibid.)  Meanwhile'  the 
tumult  in  the  Temple  itself  was  maintained  and 
increased  daily;  a  multitude  of  fanatics  never  left 
the  courts,  but  continued  there,  incessantly  clamour- 
ing ami  imprecal  ing. 

Longer  delay  in  dealing  with  such  a  state  of 
things    would    have    been    madness  ;    a   small   party 

of  soldiers  had  already  been  roughly  handled  by  the 
mob  (B.  J.  ii.  1,13),  and  Archelaus  at   last   did 

what  his  father  would  have  done  at  first.  He  de- 
spatched the  whole  garrison,  horse  and  foot,  the  foot- 
soldiers  by  way  of  the  city  to  clear  the  Temple, 
the   horse-soldiers    b\    a   detour   round   the   level 


100S 


JERUSALEM 


ground  north  of  the  town,  to  surprise  the  pilgrims 
on  the  eastern  slopes  of  Moriah,  and  prevent  their 
rushing  to  the  succour  of  the  fanatics  in  the  Temple. 
The  movement  succeeded:  3000  were  cut  up  and 
the  whole  concourse  dispersed  over  the  country. 

During  Archelaus'  absence  at  Rome,  Jerusalem 
was  in  charge  of  Sabinus,  the  Roman  procurator  of 
the  province,  and  the  tumults — ostensibly  on  the 
occasion  of  some  exactions  of  Sabinus,  but  doubtless 
with  the  same  real  ground  as  before — were  renewed 
with  worse  results.  At  the  next  feast,  Pentecost, 
the  throng  of  strangers  was  enormous.  They  formed 
regular  encampments  round  the  Temple,  and  on  the 
western  hill  of  the  upper  city,  and  besieged  Sabinus 
and  his  legion,  who  appear  to  have  been  in  the  An- 
tonia.1 At  last  the  Romans  made  a  sally  and  cut  their 
way  into  the  Temple.  The  struggle  was  desperate, 
a  great  many  Jews  were  killed,  the  cloisters  of  the 
outer  court  burnt  down,  and  the  sacred  treasury 
plundered  of  immense  sums.  But  no  reverses  could 
quell  the  fury  of  the  insurgents,  and  matters  were 
not  appeased  till  Varus,  the  prefect  of  the  province, 
arrived  from  the  north  with  a  large  force  and  dis- 
persed the  strangers.     On  this  quiet  was  restored. 

In  the  year  3  B.C.  Archelaus  returned  from  Rome 
ethnarch  of  the  southern  province.  He  immediately 
displaced  Joazar,  whom  his  father  had  made  high- 
priest  after  the  affair  of  the  Eagle,  and  put  Joazars 
brother  Eleazar  in  his  stead.  This  is  the  only 
event  affecting  Jerusalem  that  is  recorded  in  the  10 
years  between  the  return  of  Archelaus  and  his  sum- 
mary departure  to  trial  at  Rome  (a.d.  6). 

Judaea  was  now  reduced  to  an  ordinary  Roman 
province;  the  procurator  of  which  resided,  not  at 
Jerusalem,  but  at  Caesarea  on  the  coast  (Jos.  Ant. 
xviii.  3,  §1).  The  first  appointed  was  Coponius, 
who  accompanied  Quirinus  to  the  country  immedi- 
ately on  the  disgrace  of  Archelaus.  Quirinus  (the 
Cyrenius  of  the  N.  T.)— now  for  the  second  time 
pi  elect  of  Syria — was  charged  with  the  unpopular 
measure  of  the  enrolment  or  assessment  of  the  inha- 
bitants of  Judaea.  Notwithstanding  the  riots  which 
took  place  elsewhere,  at  Jerusalem  the  enrolment 
was  allowed  to  proceed  without  resistance,  owing 
to  the  prudence  of  Joazar  {Ant.  xviii.  1,  §1),  again 
high-priest  for  a  short  time.  One  of  the  first  acts 
of  the  new  governor  had  been  to  take  formal  posses- 
sion of  the  state  vestments  of  the  high-priest,  worn 
on  the  three  Festivals  and  on  the  Day  of  Atonement. 
Since  the  building  of  the  Baris  by  the  Maccabees 
these  robes  had  always  been  kept  there,  a  custom 
continued  siuce  its  reconstruction  by  Herod.  But 
henceforward  they  were  to  be  put  up  after  use  in 
an  underground  stone  chamber,  under  the  seal  of 
the  priests,  and  in  charge  of  the  captain  of  the 
guard.  Seven  days  before  use  they  were  brought 
out,  to  be  consigned  again  to  the  chamber  after  the 
ceremony  was  over  (Jos.  Ant.  xviii,  4,  §3). 

4  The  determination  of  the  locality  of  the  legion 
during  this  affair  is  most  puzzling.  On  the  one  hand 
the  position  of  the  insurgents,  who  lay  completely 
round  the  Temple,  South,  East,  North,  and  West, 
and  who  are  expressly  said  thus  to  have  hemmed  in 
the  Romans  on  all  sides  (Ant.  xvii.  10,  ^2),  and  also 
the  expression  used  about  the  sally  of  the  legion, 
namely,  that  they  "  leaped  out "  into  the  Temple, 
seem  to  point  inevitably  to  the  Antonia.  On  the 
other  hand,  Sabinus  gave  the  signal  for  the  attack 
from  the  tower  Phasaelus  (Ant.  ibid.).  But  Phasaelus 
was  on  the  old  wall,  close  to  Herod's  palace,  fully  half 
a  mile,  as  the  crow  flies,  from  the  Temple — a  strange 
distance  for  a  Roman  commander  to  be  off  from  his 
troops !    The  only  suggestion  that  occurs  to  the  writer 


JERUSALEM 

Two  incidents  at  once  most  opposite  in  their  cha- 
racter, and  in  their  significance  to  that  age  and  to 
ourselves,  occurred  during  the  procuratorship  of 
Coponius.  First,  in  the  year  8,  the  finding  of  Christ 
in  the  Temple.  Annas  had  been  made  high-priest 
about  a  year  before.  The  second  occurrence  must 
have  been  a  most  distressing  one  to  the  Jews,  un- 
less they  had  become  inured  to  such  things.  But 
of  this  we  cannot  so  exactly  fix  the  date.  It  was 
nothing  less  than  the  pollution  of  the  Temple  by 
some  Samaritans,  who  secretly  brought  human  bones 
and  strewed  them  about  the  cloisters  during  the 
night  of  the  Passover."  Up  to  this  time  the  Sama- 
ritans had  been  admitted  to  the  Temple;  they  weie 
heuceforth  excluded. 

In  or  about  A.D.  10,  Coponius  was  succeeded  by 
M.  Ambivius,  and  he  by  Annius  Rufus.  In  14 
Augustus  died,  and  with  Tiberius  came  a  new  pro- 
curator— Val.  Gratus,  who  held  office  till  26, 
when  he  was  replaced  by  Pontius  Pilate.  During 
this  period  the  high-priests  had  been  numerous,T 
but  it  is  only  necessary  here  to  say  that  when 
Pilate  arrived  at  his  government  the  office  was  held 
by  Joseph  Caiaphas,  who  had  been  appointed  but  a 
few  months  before.  The  freedom  from  disturbance 
which  marks  the  preceding  20  years  at  Jerusalem, 
was  probably  due  to  the  absence  of  the  Roman  troops, 
who  were  quartered  at  Caesarea  out  of  the  way  of 
the  tierce  fanatics  of  the  Temple.  But  Pilate  trans- 
ferred the  winter  quarters  of  the  army  to  Jeru- 
salem (Ant.  xviii.  3,  §1),  and  the  very  first  day 
there  was  a  collision.  The  offence  was  given  by 
the  Roman  standards — the  images  of  the  emperor 
and  of  the  eagle— which  by  former  commanders 
had  been  kept  out  of  the  city.  A  representation 
was  made  to  Pilate ;  and  so  obstinate  was  the 
temper  of  the  Jews  on  the  point,  that  he  yielded, 
and  the  standards  were  withdrawn  (Ant.  ibid.). 
He  afterwards,  as  if  to  try  how  far  he  might  go, 
consecrated  some  gilt  shields — not  containing  figui  es, 
but  inscribed  simply  with  the  name  of  the  'deity 
and  of  the  donor — and  hung  them  in  the  palace  at 
Jerusalem.  This  act  again  aroused  the  resistance 
of  the  Jews ;  and  on  appeal  to  Tiberius  they  were 
removed  (Philo,  Trpbs  Taiov,  Mangey,  ii.  589).  . 

Another  riot  was  caused  by  his  appropriation  of 
the  Corban — a  sacred  revenue  arising  from  the  re- 
demption of  vows — to  the  cost  of  an  aqueduct  which 
he  constructed  for  bringing  water  to  the  city  from 
a  distance  of  200  (Ant.  xviii.  3,  §2)  or  400  (B.  J. 
ii.  9,  §4)  stadia.  This  aqueduct  has  been  supposed 
to  be  that  leading  from  "  Solomon's  Pools"  at  Ur- 
tas  to  the  Temple  hill  (Krafft,in  Hitter,  Erdkunde, 
Pal.  276),  but  the  distance  of  Urtas  is  against  the 
identification. 

A.D.  29.  At  the  Passover  of  this  year  our  Lord 
made  His  first  recorded  visit  to  the  city  since  His 
boyhood  (John  ii.  13). 


is  that  Phasaelus  was  the  name  not  only  of  the  tower 
on  the  wall,  but  of  the  south-east  corner  turret  of 
Antonia,  which  we  know  to  have  been  20  cubits  higher 
than  the  other  three  (B.  J.  v.  5,  §8).  This  would 
agree  with  all  the  circumstances  of  the  narrative, 
and  with  the  account  that  Sabinus  was  "  in  the 
highest  tower  of  the  fortress ;"  the  very  position 
occupied  by  Titus  during  the  assault  on  the  Temple 
from  Antonia.  But  this  suggestion  is  quite  unsup- 
ported by  any  direct  evidence. 

u  The  mode  of  pollution  adopted  by  Josiah  towards 
the  idolatrous  shrines  (see  p.  994  i). 

v  Their  names  and  succession  will  be  found  under 
Higji-Prikst,  p.  813.     See  also  Annas. 


JERUSALEM 

A.D.  33.  At  the  Passover  of  this  year,  occurred 
His  crucifixion  and  resurrection. 

In  a.d.  37,  Pilate  having  been  recalled  to  Pome, 
Jerusalem  was  visited  by  Vitellius,  the  prefect  of 
Syria,  at  the  time  of  the  Passover.  Vitellius  con- 
ferred two  great  benefits  on  the  city.  He  remitted 
the  duties  levied  on  produce,  and  he  allowed  the 
Jews  again  to  have  the  free  custody  of  the  high- 
priest's  vestments.  He  removed  Caiaphas  from  the 
high-priesthood,  and  gave  it  to  Jonathan  son  of 
Annas.  He  then  departed,  apparently  leaving  a 
Roman  oilicer  (cppovpapxos)  in  charge  of  the  An- 
t'liiia  {Ant.  xviii.  4,  §3).  Vitellius  was  again  at 
Jerusalem  this  year,  probably  in  the  autumn,  with 
Herod  the  tetrarch  (xviii.  5,  §3)  ;  while  there  he 
again  changed  the  high-priest,  substituting  for  Jo- 
nathan, Theophilus  his  brother.  The  news  of  the 
death  of  Tiberius  and  the  accession  of  Caligula 
reached  Jerusalem  at  this  time.  Marcellus  was  ap- 
pointed procurator  by  the  new  emperor.  In  the 
following  year  Stephen  was  stoned.  The  Chris- 
tians were  greatly  persecuted,  and  all,  except  the 
Apostles,  driven  out  of  Jerusalem  (Acts  viii.  1, 
xi.  19). 

Jn  a.d.  40  Vitellius  was  superseded  by  P.  Pe- 
tronius,  who  arrived  in  Palestine  with  an  order  to 
place  in  the  Temple  a  statue  of  Caligula.  This 
order  was  ultimately,  by  the  intercession  of  Agrippa, 
countermanded,  but  not  until  it  had  roused  the 
whole  people  as  one  man  (Ant.  xviii.  8,  §2-9 ;  and 
see  the  admirable  narrative  of  Milman,  Hist,  of 
Jens,  bk.  x.). 

With  the  accession  of  Claudius  in  41  came  an 
edict  of  toleration  to  the  Jews.  Agrippa  arrived 
in  Palestine  to  take  possession  of  his  kingdom,  and 
one  of  his  first  acts  was  to  visit  the  Temple,  where 
he  orlered  sacrifice  and  dedicated  the  golden  chain 
which  the  late  emperor  had  presented  him  after 
his  release  from  captivity.  It  was  hung  over  the 
Treasury  (Ant.  xix.  (3,  §1).  Simon  was  made  high- 
priest  ;  the  house-tax  was  remitted. 

Agrippa  resided  very  much  at  Jerusalem,  and 
added  materially  to  its  prosperity  and  convenience. 
The  city  had  for  some  time  been  extending  itself 
towards  the  north,  and  a  large  suburb  had  come  into 
existence  on  the  high  ground  north  of  the  Temple, 
and  outside  of  the  "second  wall"  which  enclosed 
the  northern  part  of  the  great  central  valley  of  the 
city.  Hitherto  the  outer  portion  of  this  suburb — 
which  was  called  Bezetha,  or  "  Newtown,"  and  had 
grown  up  very  rapidly— was  unprotected  by  any 
formal  wall,  and  practically  lay  open  to  attack." 
This  defenceless  condition  attracted  the  attention  of 
Agrippa,  who,  like  the  first  Herod,  was  a  great 
builder,  and  he  commenced  enclosing  it  in  so  sub- 
stantial and  magnificent  a  manner  as  to  excite  the 
suspicions  of  the  Prefect,  at  whose  instance  it 
was  stopped  by  Claudius  (Ant.  ibid.;  B.  ,/.  ii. 
11,  §6;  v.  4,  §■_').  Subsequently  the  Jews  seem 
to  have  purchased  permission  to  complete  the  «mk 
(Tacit.  Hist.  v.  12;  Jos.  /.'.  J.  v.  4,  §2  ad  fin.). 
This  new  wall,  the  outermost  of  the  three  which 

em  lo  ed  the  city  on   the  north,  started  from  tl Id 

wall  at  the  Tower  Hippicus,  near  the  \'.\V.  corner 
of  the  city.  It  ran  northward,  bending  by  a  large 
circuit  to  the  east,  and  at  last  returning  southward 
along  the  western  brink  of'  the  valley  ofKedron  till 
it  joined  the  southern  wall  of  the  Temple.  Thus  it 
enclosed    not    only   the    new   suburb,    but   also   the 


JERUSALEM 


1009 


*    The  statements  of  Josephus  are  not  quit. 
citable.     In  one  passage  he   says  distinctly  thai    lie- 


district  immediately  north  and  north-east  of  the 
Temple  on  the  brow  of  the  Kedron  valley,  which 
up  to  the  present  date  had  lain  open  to  the  country. 
The  huge  stones  which  still  lie — many  of  them 
undisturbed — in  the  east  and  south  walls  of  the 
Haram  area,  especially  the  south-east  corner  under 
the  "Bath  and  Cradle  of  Jesus,"  are  parts  of  this 
wall. 

The  year  43  is  memorable  as  that  of  St.  Paul's 
first  visit  to  Jerusalem  after  his  conversion.  The 
year  44  began  with  the  murder  of  St.  James  by 
Agrippa  (Acts  xii.  1),  followed  at  the  Passover  by 
the  imprisonment  and  escape  of  St.  Peter.  Shortly 
after  Agrippa  himself  died.  Cuspius  Fadus  arrived 
from  Rome  as  procurator,  and  Longinus  as  prefect 
of  Syria.  An  attempt  was  made  by  the  Romans 
to  regain  possession  of  the  pontifical  robes;  but  on 
reference  to  the  emperor  the  attempt  was  aban- 
doned. In  45  commenced  a  seveie  famine  which 
lasted  two  years  (Ewald,  Gesch.  vi.  409,  note). 
To  the  people  of  Jerusalem  it  was  alleviated  by  the 
presence  of  Helena,  queen  of  Adiabene,  a  convert  to 
the  Jewish  faith,  who  visited  the  city  in  46  and  im- 
ported corn  and  dried  fruit,  which  she  distributed  to 
the  poor  (Ant.  xx.  2,  §5  ;  5,  §2).  During  her  stay 
Helena  constructed,  at  a  distance  of  three  stadia 
from  the  city,  a  tomb,  marked  by  three  pyramids, 
to  which  her  remains,  with  those  of  her  son,  weie 
afterwards  brought  (Ant.  xx.  4,  §3).  It  was 
situated  to  the  north,  and  formed  one  of  the  points 
in  the  course  of  the  new  wall  (B.  J.  v.  4,  §2).  At 
the  end  of  this  year  St.  Paul  arrived  in  Jerusalem 
for  the  second  time. 

a.d.  48.  Fadus  was  succeeded  by  Ventidius  Cu- 
manus.  A  frightful  tumult  happened  at  the  Pass- 
over of  this  year,  caused,  as  on  former  occasions,  by 
the  presence  of  the  Roman  soldiers  in  the  Antonia 
and  in  the  courts  and  cloisters  of  the  Temple 
during  the  festival.  Ten,  or,  according  to  another 
account,  twenty,  thousand,  are  said  to  have  met 
their  deaths,  not  by  the  sword,  but  trodden  to  death 
in  the  crush  through  the  narrow  lanes  which  led 
from  the  Temple  down  into  the  city  (Ant.  xx.  5, 
§3;  B.J.  ii.  12,  §1).  Cumanus  was  recalled, 
and  Felix  appointed  in  his  room  (Ant.  xx.  7,  §1  ; 
B.  J.  ii.  12,  §8),  partly  at  the  instance  of  Jona- 
than, the  then  high-priest  (Ant.  xx.  8,  §5).  A  set 
of  ferocious  fanatics,  whom  Josephus  calk  Sicar ii, 
had  lately  begun  to  make  their  appearance  in  the 
city,  whose  creed  it  was  to  rob  and  murder  all 
whom  they  judged  hostile  to  Jewish  interests. 
Felix,  weary  of  the  remonstrances  of  Jonathan 
on  his  vicious  life,  employed  some  of  these  wretches 
to  assassinate  him.  He  was  killed  in  the  Temple, 
while  sacrificing.  The  murder  was  never  inquired 
into,  and,  emboldened  by  this,  the  Sicarii  repeated 
their  horrid  act,  thus  adding,  in  the  eves  of  the 
Jews,  the  awful  ciime  of  sacrilege  to  that  of  mur- 
der \B<.  .1 .  ii.  13,  §3;  Ant.  ibid.).  The  city,  too, 
was  tilled  with  impostors  pretending  to  inspira- 
tion, but  inspired  only  with  hatred  to  all  govern- 
ment and  order.  Nor  was  the  disorder  confined  to 
the  lower  classes:  tin'  chief  people  of  the  city,  the 
very  high-piiests  themselves,  robbed  the  thr< 
floors  of  the  tithes  common  to  all  the  priests,  aid 
led  parties  of  rioters  to  open  tumult  and  lighting  in 
ts  i  Ant.  xx.  8,  §8).  In  feet,  Dot  only  Jeru- 
salem, but  tin-  whol,-  country  far  ami  wide,  was  in 
the  most  frightful  confusion  and  insecurity. 


/.cilia    lay   quite   naked   (1S..1.  \.   I.  §2),    in   another 
that  it  hail  some  kind  of  wall  [Ant.  xix.  7,  §2). 


1010 


JERUSALEM 


At  length  a  riot  at  Caesarea  of  the  most  serious 
description  caused  the  recall  of  Felix,  and  in  the 
end  of  60  or  the  beginning  of  61,  Policies  FKSTTJS 
succeeded  him  as  procurator.  Festus  was  an  able 
and  upright  officer  (B.  J.  ii.  14,  §1),  and  at  the 
same  time  conciliatory  towards  the  Jews  (Acts 
xxv.  9).  In  the  brief  period  of  his  administration 
he  kept  down  the  robbers  with  a  strong  hand,  and 
gave  the  province  a  short  breathing  time.  His  in- 
terview with  St.  Paul  (Acts  xxv.,  xxvi.)  took  place, 
not  at  Jerusalem,  but  at  Caesarea.  On  one  occa- 
sion both  Festus  and  Agrippa  came  into  collision 
with  the  Jews  at  Jerusalem.  Agrippa — who  had 
been  appointed  king  by  Nero  in  52— had  added 
an  apartment  to  the  old  Asmonean  palace  on  the 
eastern  brow  of  the  upper  city,  which  commanded 
a  full  view  into  the  interior  of  the  courts  of  the 
Temple.  This  view  the  Jews  intercepted  by  build- 
ing a  wall  on  the  west  side  of  the  inner  quadrangle.7 
But  the  wall  not  only  intercepted  Agrippa,  it  also 
interfered  with  the  view  from  the  outer  cloisters  in 
which  the  Roman  guard  was  stationed  during  the 
festivals.  Both  Agrippa  and  Festus  interfered,  and 
required  it  to  be  pulled  down ;  but  the  Jews 
pleaded  that  once  built  it  was  a  part  of  the  Temple, 
and  entreated  to  be  allowed  to  appeal  to  Nero. 
Nero  allowed  their  plea,  but  retained  as  hostages 
the  high-priest  and  treasurer,  who  had  headed  the 
deputation.  Agi  ippa  appointed  Joseph,  called  Cabi, 
to  the  vacant  priesthood.  In  62  (probably)  Festus 
died,  and  was  succeeded  by  Albinus  ;  and  he  again 
very  shortly  alter  by  Annas  or  A  nanus,  son  of  the 
Annas  before  whom  Our  Lord  was  taken.  In  the 
interval  a  persecution  was  commenced  against  the 
Christians  at  the  instance  of  the  new  high-priest, 
a  rigid  Sadducee,  and  St.  James  and  others  were 
arraigned  before  the  Sanhedrim  (Jos.  Ant.  xx. 
9,  §1).  They  were  "  delivered  to  be  stoned,"  but 
St.  James  at  any  rate  appears  not  to  have  been 
killed  till  a  few  years  later.  The  act  gave  great 
offence  to  all,  and  cost  Annas  his  office  after  he  had 
held  it  but  three  months.  Jesus  (Joshua),  the  son 
of  Damneus,  succeeded  him.  Albinus  began  his  rule 
by  endeavouring  to  keep  down  the  Sicarii  and  other 
disturbers  of  the  peace  ;  and  indeed  he  preserved 
throughout  a  show  of  justice  and  vigour  {Ant.  xx. 
11,  §1),  though  in  secret  greedy  and  rapacious.  But 
before  his  recall  he  pursued  his  end  more  openly, 
and  priests,  people,  and  governors  alike  seem  to 
have  been  bent  on  rapine  and  bloodshed:  rival  high- 
priests  headed  bodies  of  rioters,  and  stoned  each 
other,  and  in  the  words  of  Josephus,  "  all  things 
grew  from  worse  to  worse  "  {Ant.  xx.  9,  §4).  The 
evils  were  aggravated  by  two  occurrences — first, 
the  release  by  Albinus,  before  his  departure,  of  all 
the  smaller  criminals  in  the  prisons  (Ant.  xx. 
9,  §5)  ;  and  secondly,  the  sudden  discharge  of  an 
immense  body  of  workmen,  on  the  completion  of  the 
repairs  to  the  Temple  (xx.  9,  §7).  An  endeavour 
was  made  to  remedy  the  latter  by  inducing 
Agrippa  to  rebuild  the  eastern  cloister ;  but  he  re- 
fused to  undertake  a  work  of  such  magnitude, 
though  he  consented  to  pave  the  city  with  marble. 
The  repairs  of  a  part  of  the  sanctuary  that  had 
fallen  down,  and  the  renewal  of  the  foundations  of 


y  No  one  in  Jerusalem  might  build  so  high  that  his 
house  could  overlook  the  Temple.  It  was  tlfe  subject 
of  a  distinct  prohibition  by  the  Doctors.  See  Maimo- 
nides,  quoted  by  Otho,  Lex.  Rab.  266.  Probably 
this  furnished  one  reason  for  so  hostile  a  step  to  so 
friendly  a  person  as  Agrippa. 


JERUSALEM 

some  portions  were  deferred  for  the  present,  but 
the  materials  were  collected  and  stored  in  one  of 
the  courts  (B.  J.  v.  1,  §5). 

Bad  as  Albinus  had  been,  Gessius  Floras,  who 
succeeded  him  in  65,  was  worse.  In  fact,  even 
Tacitus  admits  that  the  endurance  of  the  oppressed 
Jews  could  last  no  longer — duravit  patientia  Judacis 
usque  ad  Gessium  Florum  (Hist.  v.  10).  So  great 
was  his  rapacity,  that  whole  cities  and  districts  were 
desolated,  and  the  robbers  openly  allowed  to  -pur- 
chase immunity  in  plunder.  At  the  Passover,  pro- 
bably in  66,  when  Cestius  Callus,  the  prefect  of 
Syria,  visited  Jerusalem,  the  whole  assembled 
people*  besought  him  for  redress;  but  without 
effect.  Floras'  next  attempt  was  to  obtain  some  of 
the  treasure  from  the  Temple.  He  demanded  17 
talents  in  the  name  of  the  emperor.  The  demand 
produced  a  frantic  disturbance,  in  the  midst  of 
which  he  approached  the  city  with  both  cavahy 
and  foot-soldiers.  That  night  Floras  took  up  his 
quarters  in  the  royal  palace — that  of  Herod  at  the 
N.W.  corner  of  the  city.  On  the  following  morn- 
ing he  took  his  seat  on  the  Bema,  and  the  high- 
priest  and  other  principal  people  being  brought 
before  him,  he  demanded  that  the  leaders  of  the  late 
riot  should  be  given  up.  On  their  refusal  he  or- 
dered his  soldiers  to  plunder  the  upper  city.  This 
order  was  but  too  faithfully  carried  out ;  every  house 
was  entered  and  pillaged,  and  the  Jews  driven 
out.  In  their  attempt  to  get  through  the  nar- 
row streets  which  lay  in  the  valley  between  the 
upper  city  and  the  Temple,  many  were  caught 
and  slain,  others  were  brought  before  Floras, 
scourged,  and  then  crucified.  No  grade  or  class 
was  exempt.  Jews  who  bore  the  Roman  eques- 
trian oider  were  among  the  victims  treated  with 
most  indignity.  Queen  Bernice  herself  (B.  J.  ii. 
15,  §1) — residing  at  that  time  in  the  Asmonean 
palace  in  the  very  midst  of  the  slaughter — was  so 
affected  by  the  scene,  as  to  intercede  in  person  and 
barefoot  before  Floras,  but  without  avail,  and  in 
returning  she  was  herself  nearly  killed,  and  only 
escaped  by  taking  refuge  in  her  palace  and  calling 
her  guards  about  her.  The  further  details  of  this 
dreadful  tumult  must  be  passed  over."  Floras  was 
foiled  in  his  attempt  to  press  through  the  old  city 
up  into  the  Antonia — whence  he  would  have  had 
nearer  access  to  the  treasures — and  finding  that  the 
Jews  had  broken  down  the  north  and  west  cloisters 
wheie  they  joined  the  fortress,  so  as  to  cut  off  the 
communication,  he  relinquished  the  attempt  and 
withdrew  to  Caesarea  (B.J.  ii.  15,  §6). 

Cestius  G alius,  the  prefect,  now  found  it  neces- 
sary for  him  to  visit  the  city  in  person.  He 
sent  one  of  his  lieutenants  to  announce  him,  but 
before  he  himself  arrived  events  had  become  past 
remedy.  Agrippa  had  shortly  before'  returned  from 
Alexandria,  and  had  done  much  to  calm  the  people. 
At  his  instance  they  rebuilt  the  part  of  the  cloisters 
which  had  been  demolished,  and  collected  the  tribute 
in  arrear,  but  the  mere  suggestion  from  him  that  they 
should  obey  Floras  until  he  was  replaced,  produced 
such  a  storm  that  he  was  obliged  to  leave  the  city 
(B.J.  ii.  16,  §5  ;  17,  §1).  The  seditious  party  in  the 
Temple  led  byyoungEleazar,  son  of  Ananias,  rejected 


2  Josephus  says  three  millions  in  number  !  Three 
millions  is  very  little  under  the  population  of  London 
with  all  its  suburbs. 

a  The  whole  tragic  story  is  most  forcibly  told  by 
Milman  (ii.  219-22-1). 


JERUSALEM 

the  offerings  of  the  Roman  emperor,  which  since 
the  time  of  Julius  Caesar  had  been  regularly  made. 
This,  as  a  direct  renunciation  of  allegiance,  was  the 
true  beginning  of  the  war  with*  Hume  {B.J.  ii.  17, 
§2).  Such  acts  were  not  done  without  resistance 
from  the  older  and  wiser  people.  But  remonstrance 
was  unavailing,  the  innovators  would  listen  to  no 
representations.  The  peace  party,  therefore,  de- 
spatched some  of  their  number  to  Floras  and  to 
Agrippa,  and  the  latter  sent  3000  horse-soldiers  to 
assist  in  keeping  order. 

Hostilities  at  once  hegan.  The  peace  party, 
headed  by  the  high-priest,  and  fortified  byAgrippa's 
soldiers,  threw  themselves  into  the  upper  city. 
The  insurgents  held  the  Temple  and  the  lower  city. 
In  the  Antonia  was  a  small  Roman  garrison.  Fierce 
contests  lasted  for  seven  days,  each  side  endea- 
vouring to  take  possession  of  the  part  held  by  the 
other.  At  last  the  insurgents,  who  behaved  with 
the  greatest  ferocity,  and  were  reinforced  by  a  num- 
ber of  Sicarii,  were  triumphant.  They  gained  the 
upper  city,  driving  all  before  them — the  high-priest 
and  other  leaders  into  vaults  and  sewers,  the  sol- 
diers into  Herod's  palace.  The  Asmonean  palace, 
the  high-priest's  house,  and  the  repository  of  the 
Archives — in  Josephus's  language,  "  the  nerves  of 
the  city"  (B.  J.  ii.  17,  §(3) — were  set  on  tire. 
Antonia  was  next  attacked,  and  in  two  days  they 
had  effected  an  entrance,  sabred  the  garrison,  and 
burnt  the  fortress.  The  balistae  and  catapults 
found  there  were  preserved  for  future  use  (v.  6,  §3). 
The  soldiers  in  Herod's  palace  were  next  besieged ; 
but  so  strong  were  the  walls,  and  so  stout  the  re- 
sistance, that  it  was  three  weeks  before  an  entrance 
could  be  effected.  The  soldiers  were  at  last  forced 
from  the  palace  into  the  three  great  towers  on  the 
adjoining  wall  with  great  loss ;  and  ultimately  were 
all  murdered  in  the  most  treacherous  manner.  The 
high-priest  and  his  brother  were  discovered  hidden 
in  the  aqueduct  of  the  palace ;  they  were  instantly 
put  to  death.  Thus  the  insurgents  were  now  com- 
pletely masters  of  both  city  and  temple.  But  they 
were  not  to  remain  so  long.  After  the  defeat  of 
Cestius  Callus  at  Bethhoroii  dissensions  began  to 
arise,  and  it  sooii  became  known  that  there  was 
still  a  large  moderate  party;  and  Cestius  took 
advantage  of  this  to  advance  from  Scopus  on 
the  city.  He  made  his  way  through  Bezetha,  the 
new  suburb  north  of  the  Temple,b  and  through 
the  wood-market,  burning  everything  as  he  went 
(/>'.  J.  v.  7,  §2),  and  at  last  encamped  opposite  the 
palace  at  the  foot  of  the  second  wall.  The  Jews 
retired  to  the  upper  city  and  to  the  Temple.  For 
five  days  Cestius  assaulted  the  wall  without  success  ; 
on  the  sixth  he  resolved  to  make  one  more  attempt, 
this  time  at  a  different  spot— the  north  wall  of  the 
Temple,  east  <>f,  and  behind,  the  Antonia.  The  Jews, 
however,  fought  with  such  fury  from  the  tup  of  the 
cloisters,  that  he  could  effect  nothing,  and  when 
night  came  he  drew  off  to  his  camp  at  Scopus. 
Thither  the  insurgents  follo\vd  him,  and  in  three 
davs  gave  him  one  of  the  most  complete  defeats 
that  a  Roman  army  had  ever  undergone.  His 
catapults  and  balistae  were  taken  liom  him,  and 
reserved  by  the  Jew*  for  the  final  siege  (v.  6,  §3). 

b  It  is  remarkable  that  nothing  is  said  of  any 
resistance  to  his  passage  through  the  great  wall  of 
Agrippa,  which  encircled  Bezetha. 

c  Dean  Milman's  History  of  the  .Im-s,  Bks.  xiv.,  x  v., 
xvi. ;  and  Mori  vale's  History  of  the  Romans,  vi.  ch.  59. 
To  botli  of  these  works  the  writer  begs  leave  to  express 
his  obligations  throughout  the  above  meagre  sketch  of 


JERUSALEM 


1011 


This  occurred  on  the  8th  of  Marchesvan  (beginning 
of  November),  66. 

The  war  with  Rome  was  now  inevitable,  and  it 
was  evident  that  the  siege  of  Jerusalem  was  only  a 
question  of  time.  Ananus,  the  high-priest,  a  mo- 
derate and  prudent  man,  took  the  lead  ;  the  walls 
were  repaired,  arms  and  warlike  instruments  and 
machines  of  all  kinds  fabricated,  and  other  pre- 
parations made.  In  this  attitude  of  expectation — 
with  occasional  diversions,  such  as  the  expedition 
to  Ascalon  (B.  J.  iii.  2,  §1,  2),  and  the  skirmishes 
with  Simon  Bar-Gioras  (ii.  22,  §2) — the  city  re- 
mained while  Vespasian  was  reducing  the  north 
of  the  country,  and  till  the  fall  of  Giscala  (Oct.  or 
Nov.  67),  when  John,  the  son  of  Levi,  escaped 
thence  to  Jerusalem,  to  become  one  of  the  most 
prominent  persons  in  the  future  conflict. 

From  the  arrival  of  John,  two  years  and  a  half 
elapsed  till  Titus  appeared  before  the  walls  of  Jeru- 
salem. The  whole  of  that  time  was  occupied  in 
contests  between  the  moderate  party,  whose  desire 
was  to  take  such  a  course  as  might  yet  preserve  the 
nationality  of  the  Jews  and  the  existence  of  the 
city,  and  the  Zealots  or  fanatics,  the  assertors 
of  national  independence,  who  scouted  the  idea  of 
compromise,  and  resolved  to  regain  their  freedom  or 
perish.  The  Zealots,  being  utterly  unscrupulous, 
and  resorting  to  massacre  on  the  least  resistance, 
soon  triumphed,  and  at  last  reigned  paramount, 
with  no  resistance  but  such  as  sprang  from  their 
own  internal  factions.  For  the  repulsive  details  of 
this  frightful  period  of  contention  and  outrage  the 
reader  must  be  referred  to  other  works.'  It  will 
be  sufficient  to  say  that  at  the  beginning  of  70, 
when  Titus  made  his  appearance,  the  Zealots  them- 
selves were  divided  into  two  parties — that  of  John 
of  Giscala  and  Eleazar,  who  held  the  Temple  and 
its  courts  and  the  Antonia — S400  men  ;  that  of 
Simon  Bar-Gioras,  whose  head-quarters  were  in 
the  tower  Phasaelus  (v.  4,  §3),  and  who  held  the 
upper  city,  from  the  present  Coenaculum  to  the 
Latin  Convent,  the  lower  city  in  the  valley,  and 
the  district  where  the  old  Acra  had  formerly  stood, 
north  of  the  Temple — 10,000  men,  and  5000 
Idumeans  (i>.  J.  v.  6,  §1),  in  all  a  force  of 
between  23,000  and  24,000  soldiers  trained  iu  the 
civil  encounters  of  the  last  two  years  to  great  skill 
and  thorough  recklessness.a  The  numbers  of  the 
other  inhabitants,  swelled,  as  they  were,  by  the 
strangers  and  pilgrims  who  flocked  from  the  country 
to  the  Passover,  it  is  extremely  difficult  to  decide. 
Tacitus,  do  u  lit  less  from  some  Roman  source,  gives 
the  whole  at  000,000.  Josephus  states  that 
1,100,000  perished  during  the  siege  (B.  J.  vi.  9, 
§3;  comp.  v.  13,  7),  and  that  more  than  40,000 
were  allowed  to  depart  into  the  country  i  vi.  8,  §2), 
in  addition  to  an  "  immense  number "  sold  to  the 
army,  and  who  of  course  form  a  proportion  of  the 
1)7,000  "carried  captive  during  the  whole  war" 
(vi.  9,  §3).  We  may  therefore  take  Josephus's 
computation  of  the  numbers  at  about  1,200,000. 
Reasons  are  given  in  the  third  section  of  this  article 
for  believing  that  even  the  smaller  of  these  numbers 
is  very  greatly  in  excess,  and  that  it  cannot  have 
exa  eded  60,000  or  70,000  (see  p.  L025). 

"  the  most  soul-stirrin  -  ii  all  ancient  history." 

()!'  coarse  the  materials  for  all  modern  accounts  are  in 
Josephus  only,  excepting  the  few  touches— strong, 
but  not  always  accurate — in  the  5th  book  of  Tacitus' 
Histories. 

d  These  are  the  numbers  given  by  Josephus  ;  but 
it  i>  probable  that  the}  arc  exaggerated. 


1012 


JERUSALEM 


Titus's  force  consisted  of  four  legions,  and  some 
auxiliaries — at  the  outside  30,000  men  {B.J.  v.  1, 
§t>).  These  weie  disposed  on  their  first  arrival  in 
three  camps — the  12th  and  15th  legions  on  the 
ridge  of  Scopus,  about  a  mile  north  of  the  city  ;  the 
5th  a  little  in  the  rear;  and  the  10th  on  the  top 
of  the  Mount  of  Olives  (v.  2,  §3,  5),  to  guard  the 
road  to  the  Jordan  valley,  and  to  batter  the  place 
(if  the  expression  may  be  allowed)  from  that 
commanding  position.  The  army  was  well  fur- 
nished with  artillery  and  machines  of  the  latest 
and  most  approved  invention — "  cuncta  expug- 
nanilis  urbibus,  reperta  apud  veteres,  aut  novis 
ingeniis,"  says  Tacitus  (liist.  v.  13).  The  first 
operation  was  to  clear  the  ground  between  Scopus 
and  the  north  wall  of  the  city — fell  the  timber, 
destroy  the  fences  of  the  gardens  which  fringed  the 
wall,  and  level  the  rocky  protuberances.  This 
occupied  four  days.  After  it  was  done  the  three 
legions  were  marched  forward  from  Scopus,  and 
encamped  off  the  north-west  corner  of  the  walls, 
stretching  from  the  Tower  Psephinus  to  opposite 
Hippicus.  The  first  step  was  to  get  possession  of 
the  outer  wall.  The  point  of  attack  chosen  was  in 
Simon's  portion  of  the  city,  at  a  low  and  com- 
paratively weak  place  near  the  monument  of  John 
Hyrcanus  (v.  6,  §2),  close  to  the  junction  of  the 
three  walls,  and  where  the  upper  city  came  to  a 
level  with  the  surrounding  ground.  Round  this 
spot  the  three  legions  erected  banks,  from  which 
they  opened  batteries,  pushing  up  the  rams  and 
other  engines  of  attack  to  the  foot  of  the  wall. 
One  of  the  rams,  more  powerful  than  the  rest,  went 
among  the  Jews  by  the  soubriquet  of  Nikon,e  the 
conqueror.  Three  large  towers,  75  feet  high,  were 
also  erected,  overtopping  the  wall.  Meantime  from 
their  camp  on  the  Mount  of  Olives  the  10th  legion 
opened  fire  on  the  Temple  and  the  east  side  of 
the  city.  They  had  the  heaviest  balistae,  and  did 
great  damage.  Simon  and  his  men  did  not  suffer 
these  works  to  go  on  without  molestation.  The 
catapults,  both  those  taken  from  Cestius,  and  those 
found  in  the  Antonia,  were  set  up  on  the  wall,  and 
constant  desperate  sallies  were  made.  At  last  the 
Jews  began  to  tire  of  their  fruitless  assaults.  They 
saw  that  the  wall  must  fall,  and,  as  they  had  done 
during  Nebuchadnezzar's  siege,  they  left  their  posts 
at  night,  and  went  home.  A  breach  was  made  by  the 
redoubtable  Nikon  on  the  7th  Artemisius  (cir.  April 
15)  ;  and  here  the  Romans  entered,  driving  the  Jews 
before  them  to  the  second  wall.  A.  great  length 
of  the  wall  was  then  broken  down  ;  such  parts  of 
Bezetha  as  had  escaped  destruction  by  Cestius  were 
levelled,  and  a  new  camp  was  formed,  on  the  spot 
formerly  occupied  by  the  Assyrians,  mid  still  known 
as  the  "Assyrian  camp."f 

This  was  a  great  step  in  advance.  Titus  now 
lay  with  the  second  wall  of  the  city  close  to 
him  on  his  right,  while  before  him  at  no  con- 
siderable distance  rose  Antonia  and  the  Temple, 
with  no  obstacle  in  the  interval  to  his  attack. 
Still,  however,  he  preferred,  before  advancing,  to 
get  possession  of  the  second  wall,  and  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  John's  monument  was  again  chosen. 
Simon  was  no  less  reckless  in  assault,  and  no  less 
fertile  in  stratagem,  than  before  ;  but,  notwith- 
standing all  his  efforts,  in  five  days  a  breach  was 
again  eflected.     The  district  into  which  the  Romans 


JERUSALEM 

had  now  penetrated  was  the  great  Valley  which 
lay  between  the  two  main  hills  of  the  city,  occupied 
then,  as  it  is  still,  by  an  intricate  mass  of  narrow 
and  tortuous  lanes,  and  containing  the  markets  of 
the  city — no  doubt  very  like  the  present  bazaars. 
Titus's  breach  was  where  the  wool,  cloth,  and  brass 
bazaars  came  up  to  the  wall  (v.  8,  §1).  This 
district  was  held  by  the  Jews  with  the  greatest 
tenacity.  Knowing,  as  they  did,  every  turn  of  the 
lanes  and  alleys,  they  had  an  immense  advantage 
over  the  Romans,  and  it  was  only  after  four  days' 
incessant  fighting,  much  loss,  and  one  thorough 
repulse,  that  the  Romans  were  able  to  make  good 
their  position.  However,  at  last,  Simon  was 
obliged  to  retreat,  and  then  Titus  demolished  the 
wall.     This  was  the  second  step  in  the  siege. 

Meantime  some  shots  had  been  interchanged  in 
the  direction  of  the  Antonia,  but  no  serious  attack 
was  made.  Before  beginning  there  in  earnest 
Titus  resolved  to  give  his  troops  a  few  days' 
rest,  and  the  Jews  a  short  opportunity  for  reflection. 
He  therefore  called  in  the  10th  legion  from  the 
Mount  of  Olives,  and  held  an  inspection  of  the 
whole  army  on  the  ground  north  of  the  Temple — 
full  in  view  of  both  the  Temple  and  the  upper  city, 
every  wall  and  house  in  which  were  crowded  with 
spectators  (Z>.  J.  v.  9,  §1).  But  the  opportunity 
was  thrown  away  upon  the  Jews,  and  after  four 
days  orders  were  given  to  recommence  the  attack. 
Hitherto  the  assault  had  been  almost  entirely  on  the 
city:  it  was  now  to  be  simultaneous  on  city  and 
Temple.  Accordingly  two  pairs  of  large  batteries 
.were  constructed,  the  one  pair  in  front  of  Antonia; 
the  other  at  the  old  point  of  attack — the  monu- 
ment of  John  Hyrcanus.  The  first  pair  was 
erected  by  the  5th  and  12th  legions,  and  was 
near  the  pool  Struthius  —  probably  the  present 
Birket  Tsrail,  by  the  St.  Stephen's  gate  ;  the  second 
by  the  10th  and  15th,  at  the  pool  Called  the  Almond 
pool — possibly  that  now  known  as  the  pool  of  Heze- 
kiah — and  near  the  high-priest's  monument  (v.  11, 
§4).  These  banks  seem  to  have  been  constructed 
of  timber  and  fascines,  to  which  the  Romans  must 
have  been  driven  by  the  scarcity  of  earth.  They 
absorbed  the  incessant  labour  of  seventeen  days,  and 
were  completed  on  the  29th  Artemisius  (cir.  May  7). 
John  in  the  meantime  had  not  been  idle ;  he  had 
employed  the  seventeen  days'  respite  in  driving 
mines,  through  the  solid  limestone  of  the  hill,  from 
within  the  fortress  (v.  xi.  §4;  vi.  1,  §3)  to  below 
the  banks.  The  mines  were  formed  with  timber 
roofs  and  supports.  When  the  banks  were  quite 
complete,  and  the  engines  placed  upon  them,  the 
timber  of  the  galleries  was  fired,  the  superincumbent 
ground  gave  way,  and  the  labour  of  the  Romans 
was  totally  destroyed.  At  the  other  point  Simon 
had  maintained  a  resistance  with  all  his  former 
intrepidity,  and  more  than  his  former  success. 
He  had  now  greatly  increased  the  number  of  his 
machines,  and  his  people  were  much  more  expert 
in  handling  them  than  before,  so  that  he  was  able 
to  impede  materially  the  progress  of  the  works. 
And  when  they  were  completed,  and  the  battering 
rams  had  begun  to  make  a  sensible  impression  on 
the  wall,  he  made  a  furious  assault  on  them,  and  suc- 
ceeded in  firing  the  rams,  seriously  damaging ;thi  other 
engines,  and  destroying  the  banks  (v.  11,  §5,  6  ■ 

It  now  became  plain  to  Titus  that  sonic  other 


e    O   NtKWV  .  •  .  OLTTO    TOV    TTOLUTa    VIKO.V     [B .  J.    V.   7,    §2). 

A  curious  question  is  raised  by  the  occurrence  of  this 
and  other  Greek  names  in  Josephus  ;  so  stated  as  to 
lead  to  the  inference  that  Greek  \uis  familiarly  used 


by  the  Jews  indiscriminately  with  Hebrew.      Bee   the 
catalogues  of  names  in  B.  J.  v.  4,  §2. 

f  Compare  Mahaneh-Dan,  "camp  of  Dan"  (Judg. 

xviii.  12). 


JERUSALEM 

measures  for  the  reduction  of  the  place  must  be 
adopted.  It  would  appear  that  hitherto  the  southern 
and  western  parts  of  the  city  had  not  been  invested, 
and  on  that  side  a  certain  amount  of  communication 
was  kept  up  with  the  country,  which,  unless 
stopped,  might  prolong  the  siege  indefinitely  (/>'.  /. 
v.  12,  §1  ;  10,  §3  ;  1 1,  §1  ;  12,  §3).  The' n umber 
who  thus  escaped  is  stated  by  Josephus  at  more 
than  500  a  day  (v.  11,  §1).  A  council  of  war 
was  therefore  held,  and  it  was  resolved  to  encom- 
pass the  whole  place  with  a  wall,  and  then  re- 
commence the  assault.  The  wall  began  at  the 
Roman  camp — a  spot  probably  outside  the  modern 
north  wall,  between  the  Damascus  gate  and  the  N.E. 
corner.  From  thence  it  went  to  the  lower  part  of 
Bezetha  —  about  St.  Stephen's  gate;  then  across 
Kedron  to  the  Mount  of  Olives;  thence  south,  by  a 
rock  called  the  "  Pigeon's  rock," — possibly  the  mo- 
dern "  Tombs  of  the  Prophets  " — to  the  Mount  of 
Offence.  It  then  turned  to  the  west ;  again  dipped 
into  the  Kedron, ascended  the  Mount  of  Evil  Counsel,, 
and  so  kept  on  the  upper  side  of  the  ravine  to  a 
village  called  Beth-Erebinthi,  whence  it  ran  outside 
of  Herod's  monument  to  its  starting  point  at  the 
camp.  Its  entire  length  was  39  furlongs, — very  near 
5  miles  ;  and  it  contained  13  stations  or  guard- 
houses. The  whole  strength  of  the  army  was  em- 
ployed on  the  work,  and  it  was  completed  in  the 
short  space  of  three  days.  The  siege  was  then  vigor- 
ously pressed.  The  north  attack  was  relinquished, 
and  the  whole  force  concentrated  on  the  Antonia 
(12,  §4).  Four  new  banks  of  greater  size  than 
before  were  constructed,  and  as  all  the  timber  in 
the  neighbourhood  had  been  already  cut  down,  the 
materials  had  to  be  procured  from  a  distance  of 
eleven  miles  (vi.  1,  §1).  Twenty-one  days  were 
occupied  in  completing  the  banks.  Their  position  is 
not  specified,  but  it  is  evident,  from  some  of  the  ex- 
pressions of  Josephus,  that  they  were  at  a  consider- 
able distance  from  the  fortress  (vi.  1,  §3).  At  length 
on  the  1st  Panemus  or  Tamuz  (cir.  June  7),  the  fire 
from  the  banks  commenced,  under  cover  of  which 
the  rams  were  set  to  work,  and  that  night  a  part  of 
the  wall  fell  at  aspot  where  the  inundations  had  been 
weakened  by  the  mines  employed  against  the  former 
attacks.  Still  this  was  but  an  outwork,  and  between 
it  and  the  fortress  itself  a  new  wall  was  discovered, 
which  John  had  taken  the  precaution  to  build.  At 
length,  after  two  desperate  attempts,  this  wall  and 
that  of  the  inner  fortress  were  scaled  by  a  bold 
surprise,  and  on  the  5th8  Panemus  (June  11)  the 
Antonia  was  in  the  hands  of  the  Romans  (vi.  1,  §7). 
Another  week  was  occupied  in  breaking  down  the 
outer  walls  of  the  fortress  for  the  passage  of  the 
machines,  and  a  further  delay  took  place  in  erecting 
new  banks,  on  the  fresh  level,  for  the  bombardment 
and  battery  of  the  Temple.  During  the  whole  of 
this  time — the  miseries  of  which  are  commemorated 
in  the  traditional  name  of  yomin  deUka,  "days  of 
wretchedness,"  applied  by  the  Jews  to  the  peiiod 
between  the  17th  Tamuz  and  the  9th  Ab  —  the 
most  desperate  hand-to-hand  encounters  took  place, 
some  in  the  passages  from  the  Antonia  to  the 
cloisters,  some  in  the  cloisters  themselves,  the 
Romans  endeavouring  to  force  their  way  in,  the 
Jews  preventing  them.  Put  the  Romans  gradually 
gained  ground.  First  the  western,  and  then  the 
whole  of  the  northern   external   cloister  was  burnt 


JERUSALEM 


1013 


e  Josephus  contradicts  himself  about  this  date, 
since  in  vi.  2,  §1  he  says  that  the  17th  Panemus  was 
the  "  very  day  "  that  Antonia  was  entered.     The  date 


(27th  and  28th  Pan.),  and  then  the  wall  enclosing 
the  court  of  Israel  and  the  holy  house  itself.  In 
the  interval,  on  the  17th  Panemus,  the  daily 
sacrifice  had  failed,  owing  to  the  want  of  officiating 
priests  ;  a  circumstance  which  had  greatly  distressed 
the  people,  and  was  taken  advantage  of  by  Titus  to 
make  a  further  though  fruitless  invitation  to  sur- 
render. At  length,  on  the  tenth  day  of  Lous  or  Ab 
(July  15),  by  the  wanton  act  of  a  soldier,  contrary  to 
the  intention  of  Titus,  and  in  spite  of  every  exertion 
he  could  make  to  stop  it,  the  sanctuary  itself  was 
fired  (vi.  4,  §5-7).  It  was,  by  one  of  those  rare 
coincidences  that  sometimes  occur,  the  very  same 
mouth  and  day  of  the  month  that  the  first  temple 
had  been  burnt  by  Nebuchadnezzar  (vi.  4,  §8). 
John,  and  such  of  his  party  as  escaped  the  flames 
and  the  carnage,  made  their  wajT  by  the  bridge  on 
the  south  to  the  upper  city.  The  whole  of  the 
cloisters  that  had  hitherto  escaped,  including  the 
magnificent  triple  colonnade  of  Herod  on  the  south 
of  the  Temple,  the  treasury  chambers,  and  the 
rooms  round  the  outer  courts,  were  now  all  burnt 
and  demolished.  Only  the  edifice  of  the  sanctuary 
itself  still  remained.  On  its  solid  masonry  the 
fire  had  had  comparatively  little  effect,  and  there 
were  still  hidden  in  its  recesses  a  few  faithful  priests 
who  had  contrived  to  rescue  the  most  valuable  of 
the  utensils,  vessels,  and  spices  of  the  sanctuary 
(vi.  6    §1;  8,  §3). 

The  Temple  was  at  last  gained ;  but  it  seemed 
as  if  half  the  work  remained  to  be  done.  The  upper 
city,  higher  than  Moriah,  enclosed  by  the  original 
wall  of  David  and  Solomon,  and  on  all  sides  preci- 
pitous except  at  the  north,  where  it  was  defended 
by  the  wall  and  towers  of  Herod,  was  still  to  be 
taken.  Titus  first  tried  a  parley — he  standing  on 
the  east  end  of  the  bridge  between  the  Temple 
and  the  upper  city,  and  John  and  Simon  on  the 
west  end.  His  teims,  however,  were  rejected,  and 
no  alternative  was  left  him  but  to  force  on  the 
siege.  The  whole  of  the  low  part  of  the  town- — the 
crowded  lanes  of  which  we  have  so  often  heard — 
was  burnt,  in  the  teeth  of  a  frantic  resistance  from 
the  Zealots  (vi.  7,  §1),  together  with  the  council- 
house,  the  repository  of  the  records  (doubtless 
occupied  by  Simon  since  its  former  destruction), 
and  the  palace  of  Helena,  which  were  situated  in  this 
quarter—  the  suburb  of  Ophel  under  the  south  wall 
of  the  Temple,  and  the  houses  as  tar  as  Siloam  on 
the  lower  slopes  of  the  Temple  mount. 

It  took  18  days  to  erect  the  necessary  work's  for 
the  siege  ;  the  four  legions  were  once  more  stationed 
at  the  west  or  north-west  corner  where  Herod's 
palace  abutted  on  the  wall,  and  where  the  three 
magnificent  ami  impregnable  towers  of  Hippicus, 
I'hasaelus.  and  Mariamne  rose  conspicuous  vi.  S,  §1. 
and  §4  ml  Jin.)  This  was  the  main  attack.  ( >pp  site 
the  Temple,  the  precipitous  nature  of  the  slop  -  of 

the  upper  city  rendered  it  unlikely  that  any  serious 
attempt  would  lie  made  by  the  Jews,  and  this  part 
accordingly,  between  the  bridge  and  the  Xvstus, 
was  kit  to  the  auxiliaries.  The  attack  was  com- 
menced on  the  7th  ofGorpiaeus  (cir.  Sept.  11),  and 
by  the  next  day  a  breach  was  made  in  the  wall. 
and  tin1  Romans  at  last  entered  the  city.  During 
the  attack  John  and  Simon  appeal'  to  have  stationed 
themselves  in  the  towers  just  alluded  to ;  and  had 
they  remained  there  they  would  probably  h.r 


^iven  in  the  text  agrees  best  with  the  narrative.  But 
on  the  other  hand  the  i"th  is  the  day  commemorated 
in  the  Jewish  Calendar. 


1014 


JERUSALEM 


able  to  make  terms,  as  the  towers  were  considered 
impregnable  (vi.  8,  §4).  But  on  the  first  signs  of 
the  breach,  they  took  flight,  and,  traversing  the 
city,  descended  into  the  valley  of  Hinnom  below 
Siloam,  and  endeavoured  to  force  the  wall  of  cir- 
cumvallation  and  so  make  their  escape.  On  being 
repulsed  there,  they  took  refuge  apart  in  some  of 
the  subterraneous  caverns  or  sewers  of  the  city. 
John  shortly  after  surrendered  himself;  but  Simon 
held  out  for  several  weeks,  and  did  not  make  his 
appearance  until  after  Titus  had  quitted  the  city. 
They  were  botli  reserved  for  the  Triumph  at  Rome. 

The  city  being  taken,  such  parts  as  had  escaped 
the  former  conflagrations  were  burned,  and  the 
whole  of  both  city  and  Temple  was  ordered  to  be 
demolished,  excepting  the  west  wall  of  the  upper 
city,  and  Herod's  three  great  towers  at  the  north- 
west corner,  which  were  left  standing  as  memorials 
of  the  massive  nature  of  the  fortifications. 

Of  the  Jews,  the  aged  and  infirm  were  killed ; 
the  children  under  seventeen  were  sold  as  slaves ; 
the  rest  were  sent,  some  to  the  Egyptian  mines, 
some  to  the  provincial  amphitheatres,  and  some  to 
grace  the  Triumph  of  the  Conqueror.11  Titus  then 
departed,  leaving  the  tenth  legion  under  the  com- 
mand of  Terentius  Rufus  to  carry  out  the  work  of 
demolition.  Of  this  Joseplms  assures  us  that  "  the 
whole'  was  so  thoroughly  levelled  and  dug  up  that 
no  one  visiting  it  would  believe  it  had  ever  been 
inhabited"  (B.  J.  vii.  1,  §1).  [G.] 

From  its  destruction  by  Titus  to  the  present  time. 
—For  more  than  fifty  years  after  its  destruction  by 
Titus  Jerusalem  disappears  from  history.  During 
the  revolts  of  the  Jews  in  Cyrenaica,  Egypt,  Cyprus, 
and  Mesopotamia,  which  disturbed  the  latter  years 
of  Trajan,  the  recovery  of  their  city  was  never 
attempted.  There  is  indeed  reason  to  believe  that 
Lucuas,  the  head  of  the  insurgents  in  Egypt,  led 
his  followers  into  Palestine,  where  they  were  de- 
feated by  the  Roman  general  Turbo,  but  Jerusalem 
is  not  once  mentioned  as  the  scene  of  their  opera- 
tions. Of  its  annals  during  this  period  we  know 
nothing.  Three  towers  and  part  of  the  western 
wall  alone  remained  of  its  strong  fortifications  to 
protect  the  cohorts  who  occupied  the  conquered 
city,  and  the  soldiers'  huts  were  long  the  only 
buildings  on  its  site.  But  in  the  reign  of  Hadrian 
it  again  emerged  from  its  obscurity,  and  became 
the  centre  of  an  insurrection,  which  the  best  blood 
of  Rome  was  shed  to  subdue.  In  despair  of  keep- 
ing the  Jews  in  subjection  by  other  means,  the 
Emperor  had  formed  a  design  to  restore  Jeru- 
salem, and  thus  prevent  it  from  ever  becoming  a 
rallying  point  for  this  turbulent  race.  In  further- 
ance of  his  plan  he  had  sent  thither  a  colony  of 
veterans,  in  numbers  sufficient  for  the  defence  of  a 
position  so  strong  by  nature  against  the  then  known 
modes  of  attack.  To  this  measure  Dion  Cassius 
(lxix.  12)  attributes  a  renewal  of  the  insurrection, 
while  Eusebius  asserts  that  it  was  not  earned  into 
execution  till  the  outbreak  was  quelled.  Be  this  as 
it  may,  the  embers  of  revolt,  long  smouldering, 
burst  into  a  flame  soon  after  Hadrian's  departure 


h  The  prisoners  were  collected  for  this  final  parti- 
tion in  the  Court  of  the  Women.  Josephus  states 
that  during  the  process  eleven  thousand  died !  It  is 
a  good  instance  of  the  exaggeration  in  which  he 
indulges  on  these  matters  ;  for  taking  the  largest 
estimate  of  the  Court  of  the  Women  (Lightfoot's), 
it  contained  35,000  square  feet,  i.  e.  little  more  than 
3  square  feet  for  each  of  those  who  died,  not  to  speak 
of  the  living. 


JERUSALEM 

from  the  East   in  A.».    132.     The  contemptuous 
indifference  of  the  Romans,  or  the  secrecy  of  their 
own  plans,  enabled  the  Jews  to  organise  a  wide- 
spread conspiracy.     Bar  Cocheba,  their  leader,  the 
third,  according  to  Rabbinical  writers,  of  a  dynasty 
of  the  same  name,  princes  of  the  captivity,  was 
crowned  king  at  Bether  by  the  Jews  who  thronged 
to  him,  and  by  the  populace  was  regarded  as  the 
Messiah.     His   armour-bearer,   R.   Akiba,   claimed 
descent  from  Sisera,  and  hated  the  Romans  with 
the  fierce  rancour  of  his  adopted  nation.     All  the 
Jews  in  Palestine  flocked  to  his   standard.     At  an 
early  period  in  the  revolt  they  became  masters  of 
Jerusalem,  and  attempted  to  rebuild  the  Temple. 
The  exact  date  of  this  attempt  is  uncertain,  but  the 
fact  is  inferred  from  allusions  in  Chrysostom  (Or.  3 
in  Judaeos),  Nicephorus  (If.  E.  iii.  24),  and  George 
Cedrenus  {Hist.    C'omp.  249),  and    the    collateral 
evidence  of  a  coin  of  the  period.     Hadrian,  alarmed 
at  the   rapid  spread  of  the  insurrection,  and   the 
.ineffectual  efforts  of  his  troops  to  repress  it,  sum- 
moned from  Britain   Julius  Severus,  the   greatest 
general  of  his  time,  to  take  the  command   of  the 
army  of  Judaea.     Two  years  were  spent  in  a  fierce 
guerilla  warfare  before  Jerusalem  was  taken,  after  a 
desperate  defence  in  which  Bar  Cocheba  perished. 
The  courage  of  the  defenders  was  shaken  by  the 
falling  in  of  the  vaults  on  Mount  Zion,  and  the 
Romans  became  masters  of  the  position  (Milman, 
Hist,  of  Jews,  iii.  122).     But  the  war  did  not  end 
with  the  capture  of  the  city.     The  Jews  in  great 
force  had  occupied  the  fortress  of  Bether,  and  there 
maintained  a  struggle  with  all  the  tenacity  of  despair 
against  the  repeated  onsets  of  the  Romans.      At 
length,  worn  out  by  famine  and  disease,  they  yielded 
on  the  9th  of  the  month  Ab,  A.D.   135,  and  the 
grandson  of  Bar  Cocheba  was  among  the  slain.    The 
slaughter  was  frightful.    The  Romans,  say  the  Rab- 
binical historians,   waded  to  their  horse-bridles  in 
blood,  which  flowed  with  the  fury  of  a  mountain  tor- 
rent.   The  corpses  of  the  slain,  according  to  the  same 
veracious  authorities,  extended  for  more  than  thirteen 
miles,  and  remained  unburied  till  the  reign  of  Anto- 
ninus.    Five  hundred  and  eighty  thousand  are  said 
to  have  fallen  by  the  sword,  while  the  number  of 
victims  to  the  attendant  calamities  of  war  was  count- 
less.    On  the  side  of  the  Romans  the  loss  was  enor- 
mous, and  so  dearly  bought  was  their  victory,  that 
Hadrian,  in  his  letter  to  the  Senate,  announcing  the 
conclusion  of  the  war,  did  not  adopt  the  usual  con- 
gratulatory phrase.     Bar  Cocheba  has  left  traces  of 
his  occupation  of  Jerusalem  in  coins  which  were 
struck  during  the  first  two  years  of  the  war.     Four 
silver  coins,  three  of  them  undoubtedly  belonging 
to   Trajan,  have  been   discovered,  restamped  with 
Samaritan  characters.     But  the  rebel-leader,  amply 
supplied  with  the  precious  metals  by  the  contribu- 
tions of  his   followers,  afterwards  coined  his  own 
money.     The  mint  was  probably  during  the  first 
two  years  of  the  war  at  Jerusalem  ;  the  coins  struck 
during  that  period  bearing  the  inscription,  "  to  the 
freedom  of  Jerusalem,"  or  "  Jerusalem  the  holy." 
They  are  mentioned  in  both  Talmuds. 

1  The  word  used  by  Josephus— jrept^oAos  ttjs  ttoAcws 
—may  mean  either  the  whole  place,  or  the  inclosing 
walls,  or  the  precinct  of  the  Temple.  The  statements 
of  the  Talmud  perhaps  imply  that  the  foundations  of 
the  Temple  only  were  dug  up  (see  the  quotations  in 
Schwarz,  335)  ;  and  even  these  seem  to  have  been  in 
existence  in  the  time  of  Chrysostom  (Ad  Judaeos, 
iii.  431). 


JERUSALEM 

Hadrian's  first  policy,  after  the  suppression  of  the 

revolt,  was  to  obliterate  the  existence  of  Jerusalem 
as  a  city.     The  ruins  which  Titus  had  left  were 
razed  to  the  ground,  and  the  plough  passed  over  the 
foundations  of  the  Temple.     A  colony   of  Roman 
citizens  occupied  the  new  city  which  rose  from  the 
ashes  of  Jerusalem,  and   their  number  was  after- 
wards   augmented    by    the    Emperor's   veteran  le- 
gionaries.    A  temple  to  the  Capitoline  Jupiter  was 
erected  on  the  site  of  the  sacred  edifice  of  the  Jews, 
and  among  the  ornaments  of  the  new  city  weie  a 
theatre,  two  maiket  places  (STj/^ffja),  a  building 
called  Terpdvvfj.4>ov,  and  another  called  ic68pa..     It 
was  divided  into  seven  quarters,  each  of  which  had 
its  own  warden.    Mount  Zion  lay  without  the  walls 
(Jerome,  Mic.  iii.   12  ;   Itiu.  Ificros.  p.  592,  ed. 
Wesseling).     That  the  northern  wall  inclosed  the 
so-called  sacred  places,  though  asserted  by  Deyling, 
is  regarded  by  Miinter  as  a  fable  of  a  later  date. 
A  temple  to  Astarte,  the  Phoenician  Venus,  on  the 
site  afterwards  identified  with  the  Sepulchre,  appeai-s 
on   coins,  with   four  columns  and   the  inscription 
C.  A.  C.,  Colonia  Aelia  Capitolina,  but  it  is  more 
than  doubtful  whether  it  was  erected  at  this  time. 
The  worship  of  Serapis  was  introduced  from  Egypt. 
A  statue  of  the  Emperor  was  raised  on  the  site  ot  the 
Holy  of  Holies  (Niceph.  //.  E.  iii.  24)  ;  and  it  must 
have  been  near  the  same  spot  that  the  Bourdeaux 
pilgrim  saw  two  statues  of  Hadrian,  not  far  from  the 
"lapis  pertusus"  which  the  Jews  of  his  day  yearly 
visited  and  anointed  with  oil  (Itin.  Hieros.  p.  591). 
It  was   not,  however,   till    the  following   year, 
A.D.  13t>,  that  Hadrian,  on  celebrating  his  Vieennalia, 
bestowed   upon  the    new    city  the  name  of  Aelia 
Capitolina,  combining  with  his  own  family  title  the 
name  of  Jupiter  of  the  Capitol,  the  guardian  deity 
of  the  colony.     Christians  anil  pagans  alone  were 
allowed  to  reside.     Jews  were  forbidden  to  enter  on 
pain    of  death,  and  this   prohibition   remained    in 
force  in  the  time  of  Tertullian.    But  the  conqueror, 
though  stern,  did  not  descend  to  wanton  mockery. 
The  swine,  sculptured  by  the  Emperor's  command 
over  the  gate  leading  to  Bethlehem  (Euseb.  Chron. 
Hadr.  Ann.  xx.),  was  not  intended  as  an  insult  to  the 
conquered  race  to  bar  their  entrance  to  the  city  of 
their  fathers,  but  was  one  of  the  signa  militaria 
of  the  Roman  army.     About  the  middle  of  the  4th 
century  the  Jews  were  allowed  to  visit  the  neigh- 
bourhood, and  afterwards,  once  a  year,  to  enter  the 
city  itself,  and  weep  over  it  on  the  anniversary  of  its 
capture.     Jerome  (on  Zeph.  i.  15)  draws  a  vivid 
picture  of  the  wretched  crowds  of  Jews  who  in  his 
day  assembled  at  the  wailing-place  by  the  west  wall 
of  the  Temple  to  bemoan  the  loss  of  their  ancestral 
greatness.    On  the  ninth  of  the  month  Ab  might  be 
seen  the  aged  ami  decrepit   of  both  sexes,  with  tat- 
tered  garments  and  dishevelled    bail',  who   met   to 
weep  over  the  downfall  of  Jerusalem,  and  purchased 
permission  of  the  soldiery  to  prolong  their  lamenta- 
tions   ("et   miles  mercedem   po.stulat   ut   illis   Here 
plus  lieeat"). 

So  completely  were  all  traces  of  the  ancient  city 
obliterated  that  its  very  name  was  in  process  of 
time  forgotten.  It  was  not  till  after  Constantine 
built  the  Martyrion  on  the  site  of  the  crucifixion, 
that  its  ancient  appellation  was  revived.  In  the 
7th  canon  of  the  Council  ot'  Nicaea  the  bishop 
of  Aelia  is  mentioned;  but  Macarius,  iii  subscribing 
to  the  canons,  designated  himself  bishop  of  Jeru- 
salem. The  name  Aelia  occurs  as  late  as  AJamnanus 
(a.i>.  697), and  is  even  found  in  bldrfsi  and  Mejr  ed- 
Din  about  1495. 


JERUSALEM 


1015 


After  the    inauguration    of  the  new    colony  of 
Aelia  the  annals  of  the  city  again  relapse  into  an 
obscurity  which  is  only  represented  in  history  by  a 
list   of  twenty-three   Christian  bishops,  who  filled 
up  the  interval  between  the  election  of  Marcus,  the 
first  of  the   series,  and  Macarius   in  the  reign  of 
Constantine.     Already   in    the   third   century    the 
Holy  Places  had  become  objects  of  enthusiasm,  and 
the  pilgrimage  of  Alexander,  a  bishop  in  Cappadocia, 
and  afterwards  of  Jerusalem,  is  matter  of  history. 
In  the  following  century  such  pilgrimages  became 
more  common.     The  aged  Empress  Helena,  mother 
of  Constantine,  visited  Palestine  in  A.D.  326,  and, 
according  to  tradition,  erected  magnificent  churches 
at  Bethlehem,  and  on  the  Mount  of  Olives.     Her 
son,  fired  with  the    same    zeal,    swept  away   the 
shrine  of  Astarte,  which  occupied  the  site  of  the 
resurrection,  and  founded  in  its  stead  a  chapel  or 
oratory.     On  the  east  of  this  was  a  large  court,  the 
eastern  side  being  formed  by  the  Basilica,  erected 
on  the  spot  where  the  cross  was  said  to  have  been 
found.     The  latter  of  these  buildings  is  that  known 
as  the  Martyrion  ;  the  former  was  the  church  of  the 
Anastasis,  or  Resurrection :  their  locality  will  be  con- 
sidered in  the  following  section  (p.  1029,  &c).    The 
Martyrion  was  completed  A.D.  335,  and  its  dedica- 
tion celebrated  by  a  great  council  of  bishops,  first  at 
Tyre,  and  afterwards  at  Jerusalem,  at  which  Euse- 
bius  was  present.     In  the  reign  of  Julian  (A.D.  362) 
the  Jews,  with  the  permission  and  at  the  instiga- 
tion of  the  Emperor,  made  an  abortive  attempt  to 
lay  the  foundations  of  a  temple.     From  whatever 
motive,  Julian  had  formed  the  design  of  restoring 
the  Jewish  worship  on  Mount  Moriah  to  its  pristine 
splendour,  and  during  his  absence  in  the  East  the 
execution    of    his    project    was    entrusted    to    his 
favourite,  Alypius  of  Antioch.     Materials  of  every 
kind  were  provided  at  the  emperor's  expense,  and 
so  great  was  the  enthusiasm  of  the  Jews  that  their 
women  took  part  in  the  work,  and  in  the  laps  of 
their  garments  carried  off  the  earth  which  covered 
the  ruins  of  the  Temple.     But  a  sudden  whirlwind 
and  earthquake  shattered  the  stones  of  the  former 
foundations  ;  the  workmen  fled  for  shelter  to  one 
of  the  neighbouring  churches  (eiri  tj  twv  irX-fjfftov 
hpSiv,  Greg.  Naz.  Or.  iv.  Ill),  the  doors  of  which 
were  closed  against  them  by  an  invisible  hand,  and 
a  fire  issuing  from   the  Temple-mount  raged   the 
whole  day  and  consumed  their  tools.      Numbers 
perished  in  the  flames.     Some  who  escaped   took 
refuge   in   a  portico   near  at   hand,   which   fell   at 
night  and  crushed  them   as  they  slept   (Theodor. 
//.  E.  iii.  15;  Sozomen,  v.  21;   see  also   Amines. 
Epist.  ad  Thcodosium,  lib.  ii.  ep.  17).     Whatever 
may   have   been    the    colouring    which    this    story 
received   as  it   passed   through  the   hands  of  the 
ecclesiastical   historians,  the   impartial   narrative  of 
Ammianus  Marcellinus  (xxiii.  1),  the  friend  and 
companion  in  arms  of  the  emperor,  [eaves  ii"  reason- 
able doubt  of  the  truth  of  the   main  facts  that  the 
work  was   interrupted   by  tire,  which  all   attributed 

to  supernatural  agency.  In  the  time  of  Chrysostom 
the  foundations  of  the  Temple  stil]  remained,  to 
which  the  orator  could  appeal  (adjudaeos,  iii.  431  ; 
Paris,  1636).  The  event  was  regarded  as  a  judg- 
ment of  God  upon  the  impious  attempt  ot'  Julian 
to  falsify  the  predictions  of  Christ :  a  position  which 
Bishop  Warburton  defends  with  great  skill  in  his 
treatise  on  the  subject. 

During  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries  Jerusalem 
became  the  centre  of  attraction  for  pilgrims  from 
all  regions,  and  its  bishops  contended  with  those  of 


1016 


JERUSALEM 


Caesarea  for  the  supremacy;  but  it  was  not  till 
after  the  council  of  Chalcedon  (451-453)  that  it 
was  made  an  independent  patriarchate.  In  the 
theological  controversies  which  followed  the  decision 
of  that  council  with  regard  to  the  two  natures  of 
Christ,  Jerusalem  bore  its  share  with  other  Oriental 
churches,  and  two  of  its  bishops  were  deposed  by 
Mouophysite  fanatics.  The  synod  of  Jerusalem  in 
A.D.  536  confirmed  the  decree  of  the  synod  of  Con- 
stantinople against  the  Monophysites. 

In  529  the  Emperor  Justinian  founded,  at  Jerusalem 
a  splendid  church  in  honour  of  the  Virgin,  which 
lias  been  identified  by  most  writers  with  the  building 
known  in  modern  times  as  the  Mosque  el-Aksa,  but 
of  which  probably  no  remains  now  exist  (see  p. 
1033  6).  Procopius,  the  historian,  ascribes  to  the 
same  Emperor  the  erection  of  ten  or  eleven  monas- 
teries in  the  neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem  and  Jericho. 
Eutychius  adds  that  he  built  a  hospital  for  strangers 
in  Jerusalem,  and  that  the  church  above-mentioned 
was  begun  by  the  patriarch  Elias,  and  completed  by 
Justinian.  Later  in  the  same  century  Gregory  the 
Great  (590-604)  sent  the  abbot  Probus  to  Jeru- 
salem with  a  large  sum  of  money,  and  endowed 
a  hospital  for  pilgrims,  which  Robinson  suggests  is 
the  same  as  that  now  used  by  the  Muslims  for  the 
like  purpose,  and  called  by  the  Arabs  et-Takiyeh. 

For  nearly  five  centuries  the  city  had  been  free 
from  the  horrors  of  war.  The  merchants  of  the 
Mediterranean  sent  their  ships  to  the  coasts  of 
Syria,  and  Jerusalem  became  a  centre  of  trade,  as 
well  as  of  devotion.  But  this  rest  was  roughly 
broken  by  the  invading  Persian  army  under  Chos- 
roes  II.,  who  swept  through  Syria,  drove  the 
imperial  troops  before  them,  and,  after  the  cap- 
ture of  Antioch  and  Damascus,  marched  upon 
Jerusalem.  A  multitude  of  Jews  from  Tiberias 
and  Galilee  followed  in  their  train.  The  city  was 
invested,  and  taken  by  assault  in  June,  614;  thou- 
sands of  the  monks  and  clergy  were  slain  ;  the 
suburbs  were  burnt,  churches  demolished,  and  that 
of  the  Holy  Sepulchre  injured,  if  not  consumed,  by 
fire.  The  invading  army  in  their  retreat  carried 
with  them  the  patriarch  Zacharias,  and  the  wood 
of  the  true  cross,  besides  multitudes  of  captives. 
During  the  exile  of  the  patriarch,  his  vicar  Mo- 
destus,  supplied  with  money  and  workmen  by  the 
munificent  John  Eleemon,  patriarch  of  Alexandria, 
restored  the  churches  of  the  Resurrection  and  Cal- 
vary, and  also  that  of  the  Assumption.  After  a 
struggle  of  fourteen  years  the  imperial  arms  were 
again  victorious,  and  in  628  Heraclius  entered  Jeru- 
salem on  foot,  at  the  head  of  a  triumphal  pro- 
cession, bearing  the  true  cross  on  his  shoulder. 
The  restoration  of  the  churches  is,  with  greater 
probability,  attributed  by  William  of  Tyre  to  the 
liberality  of  the  emperor  (Hist.  i.  1). 

The  dominion  of  the  Christians  in  the  Holy  City 
was  now  rapidly  drawing  to  a  close.  After  an 
obstinate  defence  of  four  months,  in  the  depth  of 
winter,  against  the  impetuous  attacks  of  the  Arabs, 
the  patriarch  Sophronius  surrendered  to  the  Khalif 
Omar  in  person  A.D.  637.  The  valour  of  the  besieged 
extorted  unwilling  admiration  from  the  victors,  and 
obtained  for  them  terms  unequalled  for  leniency 
in  the  history  of  Arab  conquest.  The  Khalif, 
after  ratifying  the  terms  of  capitulation,  which 
secured  to  the  Christians  liberty  of  worship  in  the 
churches  which  they  had,  but  prohibited  the  erection 
of  more,  entered  the  city,  and  was  met  at  the  gates 
by  the  patriarch.  Sophronius  received  him  with 
the  uncourteous  exclamation,  "  Verily  this  is  the 


JERUSALEM 

abomination  of  desolation,  spoken  of  by  Daniel  the 
prophet,  standing  in  the  holy  place!"  and  the 
chronicler  does  not  forget  to  record  the  ragged  dress 
and  "  satanic  hypocrisy "  of  the  hardy  khalif 
(Cedrenus,  Hist.  Comp.  426).  Omar  then,  in  com- 
pany with  the  patriarch,  visited  the  Church  of  the 
Resurrection,  and  at  the  Muslim  time  of  prayer 
knelt  down  on  the  eastern  steps  of  the  Basilica, 
refusing  to  pray  within  the  buildings,  in  order  that 
the  possession  of  them  might  be  secured  to  the 
Christians.  Tradition  relates  that  he  requested  a  site 
whereon  to  erect  a  mosque  for  the  Mohammedan 
worship,  and  that  the  patriarch  assigned  him  the 
spot  occupied  by  the  reputed  stone  of  Jacob's  vision  : 
over  this  he  is  said  to  have  built  the  mosque  after- 
wards known  by  his  name  (Eutychii  Chron.  ii.  285  ; 
Ockley,  Hist,  of  Sar.  205-214,  Bohn),  and  which 
still  exists  in  the  S.E.  corner  of  the  Aksa.  Hence- 
forth Jerusalem  became  for  Muslims,  as  well  as 
Christians,  a  sacred  place,  and  the  Mosque  of  Omar 
shared  the  honours  of  pilgrimage  with  the  renowned 
Kaaba  of  Mecca. 

In  the  reign  of  Charlemagne  (771-814)  ambas- 
sadors were  sent  by  the  Emperor  of  the  West  to 
distribute  alms-  in  the  Holy  City,  and  on  their 
return  were  accompanied  by  envoys  from  the 
enlightened  Khalif  Harun  er-Rashid,  bearing  to 
Charlemagne  the  keys  of  Calvary  and  the  Holy 
Sepulchre.  But  these  amenities  were  not  of  long 
continuance.  The  dissensions  which  ensued  upon 
the  death  of  the  khalif  spread  to  Jerusalem,  and 
churches  and  convents  suffered  in  the  general 
anarchy.  About  the  same  period  the  feud  between 
the  Joktanite  aud  Ishmaelite  Arabs  assumed  an 
alarming  aspect.  The  former,  after  devastating 
the  neighbouring  region,  made  an  attempt  upon 
Jerusalem,  but  were  repulsed  by  the  signal  valour 
of  its  garrison.  In  the  reign  of  the  Khalif  El  Mo- 
tasem  it  was  held  for  a  time  by  the  rebel  chief 
Tamil  n  Abu-Hareb. 

With  the  fall  of  the  Abassides  the  Holy  City 
passed  into  the  hands  of  the  Fatimite  conqueror 
Muez,  who  fixed  the  seat  of  his  empire  at  Musr 
el-Kahirah,  the  modern  Cairo  (a.d.  969).  Under 
the  Fatimite  dynasty  the  sufferings  of  the  Christians 
in  Jerusalem  reached  their  height,  when  El-Hakem, 
the  third  of  his  line,  ascended  the  throne  (A.D. 
996).  The  church  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre,  which 
had  been  twice  dismantled  and  burnt  within  the 
previous  seventy  years  (Eutych.  Ann.  ii.  529, 
530;  Cedren.  Hist.  Comp.  p.  661),  was  again 
demolished  (Ademari  Citron,  a.d.  1010),  and  its 
successor  was  not  completed  till  A.D.  1048.  A 
small  chapel  ("oratoria  valde  modica,"  Will.  Tyr. 
viii.  3)  supplied  the  place  of  the  magnificent 
Basilica  on  Golgotha. 

The  pilgrimages  to  Jerusalem  in  the  1  lth  century 
became  a  source  of  revenue  to  the  Muslims,  who 
exacted  a  tax  of  a  byzant  from  every  visitor  to  the 
Holy  Sepulchre.  Among  the  most  remarkable  pil- 
grimages of  this  century  were  those  of  Robert  oi 
Normandy  (1035),  Lietbert  of  Cambray  (1054), 
and  the  German  bishops  (1065). 

In  1077  Jerusalem  was  pillaged  by  Afeis  the 
Kharismiau,  commander  of  the  army  sent  by 
Melek  Shah  against  the  Syrian  dominions  of  the 
khalif.  About  the  year  1084  it  was  bestowed  by 
Tutush,  the  brother  of  Melek  Shah,  upon  I 
chief  of  a  Turkman  horde  under  his  command. 
From  this  time  till  1091  Ortok  was  emir  oi  the 
city,  and  on  his  death  it  was  held  as  a  kind  ■ 
bv  his  sons  Ilghazy  and  Sukman,  whose  severity 


JERUSALEM 

to  the  Christians  became  the  proximate  cause  of  the 
Crusades,  Rudhwan,  sou  of  Tutush,  made  an  in- 
effectual attack  upon  Jerusalem  in  1096.  The  city 
was  ultimately  taken,  after  a  siege  of  forty  days, 
by  Afdal,  vizir  of  the  khalif  of  Egypt,  and  for 
eleven  months  had  been  governed  by  the  Emir 
Jftikar  ed-Dauleh,  when,  on  the  7th  of  June,  1099, 
the  crusading  army  appeared  before  the  walls. 
After  the  fall  of  Antioch  in  the  preceding  year  the 
remains  of  their  numerous  host  marched  along  be- 
tween Lebanon  and  the  sea,  passing  Byblos,  Bey- 
rout,  and  Tyre  on  their  road,  and  so  through  Lydda, 
Ramleh,  and  the  ancient  Emmaus,  to  Jerusalem. 
The  crusaders,  40,000  in  number,  but  with  little 
more  than  20,000  effective  troops,  reconnoitred  the 
city,  and  determined  to  attack  it  on  the  north. 
Their  camp  extended  from  the  gate  of  St.  Stephen 
to  that  beneath  the  tower  of  David.  Godfrey  of 
Lorraine  occupied  the  extreme  left  (East)  ;  next  him 
was  Count  Robert  of  Flanders  ;  Robert  of  Normandy 
held  the  third  place ;  and  Tancred  was  posted  at  the 
N.W.  corner  tower,  afterwards  called  by  his  name. 
Raymond  of  Toulouse  originally  encamped  against 
the  west  gate,  but  afterwards  withdrew  half  his 
force  to  the  part  between  the  city  and  the  church 
of  Zion.  At  the  tidings  of  their  approach  the 
khalif  of  Egypt  gave  orders  for  the  repair  of  the 
towers  and  walls ;  the  fountains  and  wells  for  five 
or  six  miles  round  (Will.  Tyr.  vii.  23),  with  the 
exception  of  Si  loam,  were  stopped,  as  in  the  days 
of  Hezekiah,  when  the  city  was  invested  by  Senna- 
cherib's host  of  Assyrians.  On  the  fifth  day  after 
their  arrival  the  crusaders  attacked  the  city  and 
drove  the  Saracens  from  the  outworks,  but  were 
compelled  to  suspend  their  operations  till  the  arrival 
of  the  Genoese  engineers.  Another  month  was 
consumed  in  constructing  engines  to  attack  the 
walls,  and  meanwhile  the  besiegers  suffered  all  the 
horrors  of  thirst  in  a  burning  sun.  At  length 
the  engines  were  completed  and  the  day  fixed  for 
the  assault.  On  the  night  of  the  13th  of  July 
Godfrey  had  changed  his  plan  of  attack,  and  re- 
moved his  engines  to  a  weaker  part  of  the  wall 
between  the  gate  of  St.  Stephen  and  the  corner 
tower  overlooking  the  valley  of  Jehoshaphat  on 
the  north.  At  break  of  day  the  city  was  assaulted 
in  three  points  at  once.  Tancred  and  Raymond  of 
Toulouse  attacked  the  walls  opposite  their  own 
positions.  Night  only  separated  the  combatants, 
and  was  spent  by  both  armies  in  preparations  for 
the  morrow's  contest.  Next  day,  after  seven  hours' 
hard  lighting,  the  drawbridge  from  Godfrey's  tower 
was  letdown.  Godfrey  was  first  upon  the  wall, 
followed  by  the  Count  of  Flanders  ami  the  Duke  "f 
Normandy;  the  northern  gate  was  thrown  open, 
and  at  three  "'cluck  on  Friday  the  15th  of  July 
Jerusalem  was  in  the  hands  of  the  crusaders. 
Raymond  of  Toulouse  entered  without  opposition 
by  tin-  Zion  gate  The  carnage  was  terrible: 
10,000  Muslims  fell  within  the  sacred  enclosure. 
Order  was  gradually  restored,  and  Godfrey  of 
Bouillon  elected  king  (Will.  Tyr.  viii.).  Churches 
were  established,  and  for  eighty-eight  years  Jeru- 
salem remained  in  the  hands  of  the  Christians.  In 
1187  it  was  retaken  by  Saladin  after  a  siege  of 
several  weeks,  five  years  afterwards  (1192),  in 
anticipation  of  an  attack  by  Richard  of  England, 
the  fortifications  were  strengthened  and  new  walls 

built,  and  the  supply  of  water   again   cut   oil'  |  l'.ar- 

hebr.  Chron.  p.  421).  During  the  winter  of  1 191-2 
the  work  was  prosecuted  with  the  utmost  vigour. 
Fifty  skilled  masons,  sent  by   Alaeddin  of  Mosul, 


JERUSALEM 


1017 


rendered  able  assistance,  and  two  thousand  Christian 
captives  were  pressed  into  the  service.  The  Sultan 
rode  round  the  fortifications  each  day  encouiwina- 
the  workmen,  and  even  brought  them  stones  on 
his  horse's  saddle.  His  sons,  his  brother  Malek 
al-Adel,aud  the  Emirs  ably  seconded  his  efforts,  and 
within  six  months  the  works  were  completed,  solid 
and  durable  as  a  rock  (Wilken,  Kreuzziige,  iv. 
4.">7,  458).  The  walls  and  towers  were  demolished 
by  order  of  the  Sultan  Melek  el  Mu'adhdhem  of  Da- 
mascus in  1219,  and  in  this  defenceless  condition 
the  city  was  ceded  to  the  Christians  by  virtue  of 
the  treaty  with  the  Emperor  Frederick  II.  An 
attempt  to  rebuild  the  walls  in  1239  was  frustrated 
by  an  assault  by  David  of  Kerak,  who  dismantled 
the  city  anew.  In  1243  it  again  came  into  the 
hands  of  the  Christians,  and  in  the  following  year 
sustained  a  siege  by  the  wild  Kharismian  hordes, 
who  slaughtered  the  priests  and  monks  who  had 
taken  refuge  in  the  church  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre, 
and  after  plundering  the  city  withdrew  to  Gaza. 
After  their  departure  Jerusalem  again  reverted  to 
the  Mohammedans,  in  whose  hands  it  still  remains. 
The  defeat  of  the  Christians  at  Gaza  was  followed 
by  the  occupation  of  the  Holy  City  by  the  forces  of 
the  Sultan  of  Egypt. 

In  1277  Jerusalem  was  nominally  annexed  to 
the  kingdom  of  Sicily.  In  1517  it  passed  under 
the  sway  of  the  Ottoman  Sultan  Selim  I.,  whose 
successor  Suliman  built  the  present  walls  of  the 
city  in  1542.  Mohammed  Aly,  the  Pasha  of 
Egypt,  took  possession  of  it  in  1832.  In  1834  it 
was  seized  and  held  for  a  time  by  the  Fellahin  during 
the  insurrection,  and  in  18-40,  after  the  bombard- 
ment of  Acre,  was  again  restored  to  the  Sultan. 

Such  in  brief  is  a  sketch  of  the  chequered  for- 
tunes of  the  Holy  City  since  its  destruction  by 
Titus.  The  details  will  be  found  in  Gibbon's 
Decline  and  Fall ;  Prof.  Robinson's  Bibl.  Res.  i. 
3(35-407  ;  the  Rev.  G.  Williams'  Holy  City,  vol.  i. ; 
Wilken 's  Gesch.  der  Kreuzziige;  Deyling's  Diss. 
de  Aeliae  Capitolinae  orig.  et  historia  ;  and  P>p. 
Miinter's  History  of  the  Jewish  War  under  Trajan 
and  Hadrian,  translated  in  Robinson's  Bibliotlieca 
Sacra,  pp.  393-455.  [W.  A.  W.] 

III.  Topography  of  the  City. 
There  is  perhaps  no  city  in  the  ancient  world 
the  topography  of  which  ought  to  be  so  easily 
determined  as  that  of  Jerusalem.  In  the  first 
place,  the  city  always  was  small,  and  is  surrounded 
by  deep  valleys,  while  the  form  of  the  ground 
within  its  limits  is  so  strongly  marked  that  there 
never  could  apparently  be  any  great  difficulty 
in  ascertaining  its  general  extent,  or  in  fixing  its 
more  prominent  features:  and  on  the  other  hand 
we  have  in  the  works  of  Josephus  a  more  full  and 
complete  topographical  description  of  this  city  than 
of  almost  any  other  in  the  ancient  world.  It  is 
certain  that  he  was  intimately  acquainted  with  the 

localities  he  describes,  and  as  his  copious  descrip- 
tions can  be  tested  by  comparing  them  with  the 
details  of  the  siege  by  Titus  which  he  afterwards 
narrates,  there  ought  to  be  no  difficulty  in  settling 

at  leasl  all  the  main  points.  Nor  would  there  ever 
have  been  any.  but  for  the  circumstance  that  for 
a  long  period  after  the  destruction  of  the  city  by 
Titos,  tin-  place  was  practically  deserted  by  its  ori- 
ginal inhabitants,  and  the  continuity  of  tradition 
consequently  broken  in  upon;  and  after  this,  when 
it  igain  appears  in  history,  it  is  as  a  sacred  city, 
and  at  a  period  the  most  uncritical  of  anv  known  in 

:;   r 


1018 


JEEUSALEM 


the  modern  history  of  the  world.  Daring  at  least 
ten  centuries  of  what  are  called  most  properly  the 
dark  ages,  it  was  thought  necessary  to  find  a  locality 
for  every  event  mentioned  in  the  Sacred  Scriptures 
which  had  taken  place  within  or  near  its  walls. 
These  were  in  most  instances  fixed  arbitrarily,  there 
being  no  constant  tradition  to  guide  the  topographer, 
so  that  the  confusion  which  has  arisen  has  become 
perplexing,  to  a  degree  that  can  only  be  appreciated 
by  those  who  have  attempted  to  unravel  the  tangled 
thread  ;  and  now  that  long  centuries  of  constant 
tradition  have  added  sanctity  to  the  localities,  it  is 
extremely  difficult  to  shake  oneself  free  from  its 
influence,  and  to  investigate  the  subject  in  that 
critical  spirit  which  is  necessary  to  elicit  the  truth 
so  long  buried  in  obscurity. 

It  is  only  by  taking  up  the  thread  of  the  narra- 
tive from  the  very  beginning,  and  admitting  nothing 
which  cannot  be  proved,  either  by  direct  testimony 
or  by  local  indications,  that  wc  can  hope  to  clear 
up  the  mystery;  but,  with  the  ample  materials 
that  still  exist,  it  only  requires  that  this  should 
be  done  in  order  to  arrive  at  a  correct  determination 
of  at  least  all  the  principal  points  of  the  topography 
of  this  sacred  city. 

So  little  has  this  been  done  hitherto,  that  there 
are  at  present  before  the  public  three  distinct  views 
of  the  topography  of  Jerusalem,  so  discrepant  from 
one  another  in  their  most  essential  features,  that  a 
disinterested  person  might  fairly  feel  himself  justi- 
fied in  assuming  that  there  existed  no  real  data  for 
the  determination  of  the  points  at  issue,  and  that 
the  disputed  questions  must  for  ever  remain  in  the 
same  unsatisfactory  state  as  at  present. 

1 .  The  first  of  these  theories  is  the  most  obvious, 
and  has  at  all  events  the  great  merit  of  simplicity. 
It  consists  in  the  belief  that  all  the  sacred  localities 
were  correctly  ascertained  in  the  early  ages  of  Chris- 
tianity ;  and,  what  is  still  more  important,  that  none 
have  been  changed  daring  the  dark  ages  that  fol- 
lowed, or  in  the  numerous  revolutions  to  which  the 
city  has  been  exposed.  Consequently,  inferring  that 
all  which  the  traditions  of  the  middle  ages  have 
handed  down  to  us  may  be  implicitly  relied  upon. 
The  advantages  of  this  theory  are  so  manifest,  that 
it  is  little  wonder  that  it  should  be  so  popular  and 
find  so  many  advocates. 

The  first  person  who  ventured  publicly  to  express 
his  dissent  from  this  view  was  Korte,  a  German 
printer,  who  travelled  in  Palestine  about  the  year 
1728.  On  visiting  Jerusalem  he  was  struck  with 
the  apparent  impossibility  of  reconciling  the  site  of 
the  present  church  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre  with  the 
exigencies  of  the  Bible  narrative,  and  on  his  return 
home  published  a  work  denying  the  authenticity  of 
the  so-called  sacred  localities.  His  heresies  excited 
very  little  attention  at  the  time,  or  for  long 
afterwards ;  but  the  spirit  of  enquiry  which  has 
sprung  up  during  the  present  century  has  revived 
the  controversy  which  has  so  long  been  dormant, 
and  many  pious  and  earnest  men,  both  Protestant 
and  Catholic,  have  expressed  with  more  or  less  dis- 
tinctness the  difficulties  they  feel  in  reconciling  the 
assumed  localities  with  the  indications  in  the  Bible. 
The  arguments  in  favour  of  the  present  localities 
being  the  correct  ones,  are  well  summed  up  by  the 
Rev.  George  Williams  in  his  work  on  the  Holy  City, 
and  with  the  assistance  of  Professor  Willis  all  has 
been  said  that  can  be  urged  in  favour  of  their  au- 
thenticity. Nothing  can  exceed  the  ingenuity  of 
the  various  hvpotheses  that  are  brought  forward  to 
explain  away  the  admitted  difficulties  of  the  case  ; 


JEEUSALEM 

but  we  look  in  vain  for  any  new  facts  to  counter- 
balance the  significance  of  those  so  often  urged  on 
the  other  side,  while  the  continued  appeals  to  faith 
and  to  personal  arguments,  do  not  inspire  confidence 
in  the  soundness  of  the  data  brought  forward. 

2.  Professor  Robinson,  on  the  other  hand,  in  his 
elaborate  works  on  Palestine,  has  brought  together 
all  the  arguments  which  from  the  time  of  Korte 
have  been  accumulating  against  the  authenticity  of 
the  mediaeval  sites  and  traditions.  He  has  done  this 
with  a  power  of  logic  which  would  probably  have 
been  conclusive  had  he  been  able  to  carry  the  argu- 
ment to  its  legitimate  conclusion.  His  want  of 
knowledge  of  architecture  and  of  the  principles  of 
architectural  criticism,  however,  prevented  him  from 
perceiving  that  the  present  church  of  the  Holy  Sepul- 
chre was  wholly  of  an  age  subsequent  to  that  of  the 
Crusades,  and  without  a  trace  of  the  style  of  Con- 
stantine.  Nor  was  he,  from  the  same  causes,  able 
to  correct  in  a  single  instance  the  erroneous  adscrip- 
tions  given  to  many  other  buildings  in  Jerusalem, 
whose  dates  might  have  afforded  a  clue  to  the  mys- 
tery. When,  in  consequence,  he  announced  as  the 
result  of  his  researches  the  melancholy  conclusion, 
that  the  site  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre  was  now,  and 
must  in  all  probability  for  ever  remain  a  mystery, 
the  effect  was,  that  those  who  were  opposed  to  his 
views  clung  all  the  more  firmly  to  those  they  before 
entertained,  preferring  a  site  and  a  sepulchre  which 
had  been  hallowed  by  the  tradition  of  ages  rather 
than  launch  forth  on  the  shoreless  sea  of  specula- 
tion which  Dr.  Robinson's  negative  conclusion  opened 
out  before  them. 

3.  The  third  theory  is  that  put  forward  by  the 
author  of  this  article  in  his  "  Essay  on  the  Ancient 
Topography  of  Jerusalem."  It  agrees  generally 
with  the  views  urged  by  all  those  from  Korte  to 
Robinson,  who  doubt  the  authenticity  of  the  pre- 
sent site  of  the  sepulchre  ;  but  instead  of  acquiescing 
in  the  desponding  view  taken  by  the  latter,  it  goes 
on  to  assert,  for  reasons  which  will  be  given  here- 
after, that  the  building  now  known  to  Christians 
as  the  Mosque  of  Omar,  but  by  Moslems  called  the 
Dome  of  the  Rock,  is  the  identical  church  which 
Constantine  erected  over  the  Rock  which  contained 
the  Tomb  of  Christ. 

If  this  view  of  the  topography  can  be  maintained, 
it  at  once  sets  to  rest  all  questions  that  can  pos- 
sibly arise  as  to  the  accordance  of  the  sacred  sites 
with  the  Bible  narrative ;  for  there  is  no  doubt  but 
that  at  the  time  of  the  crucifixion  this  locality  was 
outside  the  walls,  "  near  the  judgment-seat,"  and 
"  towards  the  country;"  and  it  agrees  in  every  re- 
spect with  the  minutest  indication  of  the  Scriptures. 

It  confirms  all  that  was  said  by  Eusebius,  and 
all  Christian  and  Mohammedan  writers  before  the 
time  of  the  Crusades,  regarding  the  sacred  localities, 
and  brings  the  Jewish,  Christian,  and  Mohammedan 
topography  into  order,  and  explains  all  that  before 
was  so  puzzling. 

It  substitutes  a  building  which  no  one  doubts  was 
built  long  before  the  time  ot  the  Crusades,  for  one 
which  as  undoubtedly  was  erected  after  that  event ; 
and  one  that  now  possesses  in  its  centre  a  mass  of 
living  rock  with  one  cave  in  it  exactly  as  described 
by  Eusebius,  for  one  with  ouly  a  small  tabernacle 
of  marble,  where  no  rock  ever  was  seen  by  human 
eyes;  and  it  groups  together  buildings  undoubtedly 
of  the  age  of  Constantine,  whose  juxta-position  it  is 
otherwise  impossible  to  account  for. 

A  theory  offering  such  advantage!  as  these 
ouo-ht  either  to  be  welcomed  by  all  Christian  men, 


■ 


'  - 


bcop  i j  s 


Ibmbs  ot  the.  At/tg< 
or  Hercduvn    : 


nu\ru,pbp  of 


J     'J'.     '        '.'/.■■         'If   1S.7 


J    ERUSALEM 


JERUSALEM 

or  assailed  by  earnest  reasoning,  and  not  rejected 
without  good  and  solid  objections  being  brought 
against  it.  For  it  never  can  be  unimportant  even 
to  the  best  established  creeds  to  deprive  scoffers 
of  every  opportunity  for  a  sneer,  and  it  is  always 
wise  to  offer  to  the  wavering  every  testimony  which 
may  tend  to  confirm  them  in  their  faith. 

The  most  satisfactory  way  of  investigating  the 
subject  will  probably  be  to  commence  at  the  time 
of  the  greatest  prosperity  of  Jerusalem,  imme- 
diately before  its  downfall,  which  also  happens  to 
be  the  period  when  we  have  the  greatest  amount 
of  knowledge  regarding  its  features.  If  we  can 
determine  what  was  then  its  extent,  and  fix  the 
more  important  localities  at  that  period,  there  will 
be  no  great  difficulty  in  ascertaining  the  proper  sites 
for  the  events  which  may  have  happened  either  be- 
fore or  after.  All  that  now  remains  of  the  ancient 
city  of  course  existed  then  ;  and  the  descriptions  of 
Josephus,  in  so  far  as  they  are  to  be  trusted,  apply 
to  the  city  as  he  then  saw  it ;  so  that  the  evidence 
is  at  that  period  more  complete  and  satisfactory 
than  at  any  other  time,  and  the  city  itself  being 
then  at  its  greatest  extent,  it  necessarily  included 
all  that  existed  either  before  or  afterwards. 

It  will  not  be  necessary  here  to  dwell  upon  the 
much  disputed  point  of  the  veracity  of  the  his- 
torian on  whose  testimony  we  must  principally 
rely  on  this  matter.  It  will  be  sufficient  to  remark 
that  every  new  discovery,  every  improved  plan 
that  has  been  made,  has  served  more  and  more  to 
confirm  the  testimony  of  Josephus,  and  to  give  a 
higher  idea  of  the  minute  accuracy  of  his  local 
knowledge.  In  no  one  instance  has  he  yet  been 
convicted  of  any  material  error  in  describing 
localities  in  plan.  Many  difficulties  which  were 
thought  at  one  time  to  be  insuperable  have  dis- 
appeared with  a  more  careful  investigation  of  the 
data ;  and  now  that  the  city  has  been  carefully 
mapped  and  explored,  there  seems  every  probability 
of  our  being  able  to  reconcile  all  his  descriptions 
with  the  appearance  of  the  existing  localities.  So 
much  indeed  is  this  the  case  that  one  cannot  help 
suspecting  that  the  Roman  army  was  provided  with 
surveyors  who  could  map  out  the  localities  with 
very  tolerable  precision ;  and  that,  though  writing 
at  Rome,  Josephus  had  before  him  data  which 
checked  and  guided  him  in  all  he  said  as  to  hori- 
zontal dimensions.  This  becomes  more  probable 
when  we  consider  how  moderate  all  these  are,  and 
how  consistent  with  existing  remains,  and  compare 
them  with  his  strangely  exaggerated  statements 
whenever  he  speaks  of  heights  or  describes  the 
arrangement  of  buildings  which  had  been  destroyed 
in  the  siege,  and  of  which  it  may  be  supposed  no 
record  or  correct  description  (hen  existed.  He 
seems  to  have  felt  himself  at  liberty  to  indulge  his 
national  vanity  in  respect  to  these,  but  to  have  been 
cheeked  when  speaking  of  what  still  existed,  and 
could  never  be  falsified.  The  consequence  is.  that 
in  almost  all  instances  we  may  implicitly  rely  on 
anything  he  says  with  regard  to  the  j>f"i/  of  Jeru- 
salem, and  as  to  anything  that  existed  or  could  he 
tested  at  the  time  he  wrote,  but  must  receive  with 
the  greatest  caution  any  assertion  with  regard  to 
what  did  not  then  remain,  or  respecting  which  no 
accurate  evidence  could  be  adduced  to  refute  his 
statement. 

In  attempting  to  follow  the  description  of  Jo- 
sephus there  are  two  points  which  it  is  necessary 
should  be  fixed  in  order  to  understand  what  follows. 

I  he  first  of'  these  is  the  position  and  dimensions 


JERUSALEM 


1019 


of  the  Temple  ;  the  second  the  position  of  the 
Tower  Hippicus. 

Thanks  to  modern  investigation  there  now  seems 
to  be  little  difficulty  in  determining  the  first,  witli 
all  the  accuracy  requisite  to  our  present  purposes. 
The  position  of  the  Tower  Hippicus  cannot  be  de- 
termined with  the  same  absolute  certainty,  but  can 
be  fixed  within  such  limits  as  to  allow  no  reason- 
able doubts  as  to  its  locality. 

I.  Site  of  the  Temple. — Without  any  exception, 
all  topographers  are  now  agreed  that  the  Temple 
stood  within  the  limits  of  the  great  area  now 
known  as  the  Haram,  though  few  are  agreed  as  to 
the  portion  of  that  space  which  it  covered  ;  and 
at  least  one  author  places  it  in  the  centre,  and 
not  at  the  southern  extremity  of  the  enclosure. 
With  this  exception  all  topographers  are  agreed 
that  the  south-western  angle  of  the  Haram  area 
was  one  of  the  angles  of  the  ancient  Jewish  Temple. 
In  the  first  place  it  is  admitted  that  the  Temple 
was  a  rectangle,  and  this  happens  to  be  the  only 
light  angle  of  the  whole  enclosure.  In  the  next 
place,  in  his  description  of  the  great  Stoa  Basilica 
of  the  Temple,  Josephus  distinctly  states  that  it 
stood  on  the  southern  wall  and  overhung  the  valley 
{Ant.  xv.  1G,  §5).  Again,  the  discovery  of  the  re- 
mains of  the  arch  of  a  bridge,  commencing,  about 
40  feet  from  the  S.W.  angle  in  the  western  wall, 


No.  1. — Remains  of  Arch  of  Hndg 


and  consequently  coinciding  with  the  centre  of  the 
great  Stoa  (as  will  be  shown  under  the  head 
Tkmpi.k),  so  exactly  corresponds  with  the  descrip- 
tion of  Josephus  [Aid.  xiv.  4,  §2;  B.  /.  i.  2,  §5, 
2,  ii.  16,  §:i,  vi.  <i,  §2,  vi.  7,  §1)  as  in  itself  to  be 
sufficient  to  decide  the  question.  The  size  of  the 
stones  and  the  general  character  of  the  masonry  at 
die  Jews'  Wailing-place  (woodcui  No.  _')  in  the 
westem  wall  near  its  southern  extremity  have  been 
considered  by  almost  all  topographers  as  a  proof 
that  the  wail  there  formed  part  of  the  substruc- 
tures of  the  Temple;  and  lastly,  the  discovery  of 
one  of  the  old  gateways  which  Josephus  (B.  J. 
vi.  6,  §2)  mentions  as  leading  from  the  Temple  to 
Parbar, on  this  side,  mentioned  by  Ali  Bey, ii.  226, 
and  Dr.  Barclay  i  City  of  the  Great  King,  p.  190), 
besides  minor  indications,  make  up  such  a  chain  of 
proof  as  to  leave  scarcely  a  doubt  on  this  point. 

The  extent  of  the  Temple  northwards  and  east- 
wards from  this  point  is  a  questi i  which  there 

is   much    less  agreement    than    with  regard    to   the 

fixation  of  its  south-western  angle,  though  tl ri- 

dence,  both  written  and  local,  points  inevitably  to 
3  U  2 


1020 


JEEUSALEM 


the  conclusion  that  Josephus  was  literally  correct 
when  he  said  that  the  Temple  was  an  exact  square 
of  a  stadium,  or  600  Greek  feet,  on  each  side  {Ant. 
xv.  11,  §3).  This  assertion  he  repeats  when  de- 
scribing the  great  Stoa  Basilica,  which  occupied  the 
whole  of  the  southern  side  (xv.  11,  §9)  ;  and  again, 
in  describing  Solomon's,  or  the  eastern,  portico,  he 
says  it  was  400  cubits,  or  600  feet,  in  extent  (xx. 
10,  §7)  ;  and  lastly,  in  narrating  the  building  of 
the  Temple  of  Solomon  (viii.  3,  §9),  he  says  he 
elevated  the  ground  to  400  cubits,  meaning,  as  the 
context  explains,  on  each  side.  In  fact  there  is  no 
point  on  which  Josephus  repeats  himself  so  often, 
and  is  throughout  so  thoroughly  consistent. 


No.  2. — Jews'  wailing  place.. 

There  is  no  other  written  authority  on  this 
subject  except  the  Talmud,  which  asserts  that  the 
Temple  was  a  square  of  500  cubits  each  side 
{Mishna,  v.  334) ;  but  the  Rabbis,  as  if  aware  that 
this  assertion  did  not  coincide  with  the  localities, 
immediately  correct  themselves  by  explaining  that  it 
was  the  cubit  of  15  inches  which  was  meant,  which 
would  make  the  side  625  feet.  Their  authority, 
however,  is  so  questionable  that  it  is  of  the  least 
possible  consequence  what  they  said  or  meant. 

The  instantia  cruris,  however,  is  the  existing 
remains,  and  these  confirm  the  description  of  Jo- 
sephus to  the  fullest  possible  extent.  Proceeding 
eastward  along  the  southern  wall  from  the  south- 
western angle  we  find  the  whole  Haram  area  rilled 
up  perfectly  solid,  with  the  exception  of  the  great 
tunnel-like  entrance  under  the  mosque  El  Aksa, 
until,  at  the  distance  of  600  feet  from  the  angle, 
we  arrive  at  a  wall  running  northwards  at  ritrht 


JEEUSALEM 

angles  to  the  southern  wall,  and  bounding  the  solid 
space.  Beyond  this  point  the  Haram  area  is  filled 
up  with  a  series  of  light  arches  supported  on  square 
piers  (shown  in  the  annexed  woodcut,  No.  3),  the 
whole  being  of  so  slight  a  construction  that  it  may 
be  affirmed  with  absolute  certainty  that  neither  the 
Stoa  Basilica,  nor  any  of  the  larger  buildings  of 
the  Temple,  ever  stood  on  them.  The  proof  of  this 
is  not  difficult.  Taking  Josephus'  account  of  the 
great  Stoa  as  we  find  it,  he  states  that  it  consisted 
of  four  rows  of  Corinthian  pillars,  40  in  each  row. 
If  they  extended  along  the  whole  length  of  the  pre- 
sent southern  wall  they  must  have  been  spaced  be- 
tween 23  and  24  feet  apart,  and  this,  from  our 
knowledge  of  the  works  of  the  ancients,  we  may 
assert  to  be  architecturally  impossible.  But,  far 
move  than  this,  the  piers  that  support  the  vaults  in 
question  are  only  about  3  feet  6  inches  by  3  feet 
3  inches  square,  while  the  pillars  which  it  is  assumed 
they  supported  were  between  5  and  6  feet  in  dia- 
meter {Ant.  xv.  11,  §5),  so  that,  if  this  were  so, 
the  foundations  must  have  been  practically  about 
half  the  area  of  the  columns  they  supported.  Even 
this  is  not  all :  the  piers  in  the  vaults  are  so  irre- 
gularly spaced,  some  17,  some  20  or  21,  and  one 
even  30  feet  apart,  that  the  pillars -of  the  Stoa 
must  have  stood  in  most  instances  on  the  crown  or 
sides  of  the  arches,  and  these  are  so  weak  (as  may 
be  seen  from  the  roots  of  the  trees  above  having 
struck  through  them),  that  they  could  not  for  one 
hour  have  supported  the  weight.  In  fact  there  can 
be  no  doubt  whatever  that  the  buildings  of  the 
Temple  never  stood  on  this  frail  prop,  and  also 
that  no  more  solid  foundations  ever  existed  here  ; 
for  the  bare  rock  is  everywhere  visible,  and  if  ever 
more  solidly  built  upon,  the  remains  of  such  con- 
structions could  not  have  disappeared.  In  so  far 
therefore  as  the  southern  wall  is  concerned,  we  may 
rest  perfectly  satisfied  with  Josephus'  description 
that  the  Temple  extended  east  and  west  600  feet. 

The  position  of  the  northern  wall  is  as  easily 
fixed.  If  the  Temple  was  square  it  must  have 
commenced  at  a  point  600  feet  from  the  south-west 
angle,  and  in  fact  the  southern  wall  of  the  platform 
which  now  surrounds  the  so-called  Mosque  of  Omar 
runs  parallel  to  the  southern  wall  of  the  inclosure, 
at  a  distance  of  exactly  600  feet,  while  westward  it 
is  continued  in  a  causeway  which  crosses  the  valley 
just  600  feet  from  the  south-western  angle.  It  may 
also  be  mentioned  that  from  this  point  the  western 
wall  of  the  Haram  area  no  longer  follows  the  same 
direction,  but  inclines  slightly  to  the  westward,  in- 
dicating a  difference  (though  perhaps  not  of  much 
value)   in  the  purpose   to  which  it  was  applied. 


jirmrii  ,':  "r  1  UHH 


oi  vaults  in  S.E.  angle  of  Hal 


JERUSALEM 

Moreover  the  south  wall  of  what  is  now  the  plat- 
form of  the  Dome  of  the  Rock  runs  eastward  from 
the  western  wall  for  just  600  feet ;  which  again 
gives  the  same  dimension  for  the  north  wall  of  the 
Temple  as  was  found  for  the  southern  wall  by  the 
limitation  of  the  solid  space  before  the  commence- 
ment of  the  vaults.  All  these  points  will  be  now 
clear  by  reference  to  the  Plan  on  the  next  page 
(woodcut  No.  4),  where  the  dimensions  are  stated 
in  English  feet,  according  to  the  best  available 
authorities,  not  in  Greek  feet,  which  alone  are  used 
in  the  text. 

The  only  point  in  Josephus's  description  which 
seems  to  have  misled  topographers  with  regard  to 
these  dimensions  is  his  assertion  that  the  Temple 
extended  from  one  valley  to  the  other  {Aid.  xv. 
11,  §5).  If  he  had  named  the  valley  or  iden- 
tified it  in  any  way  with  the  valley  of  Kedron 
this  might  have  been  a  difficulty ;  but  as  it  is 
only  a  valley  it  is  of  less  importance,  especially 
as  the  manner  in  which  the  vaults  extend  north- 
wards immediately  beyond  the  eastern  wall  of  the 
Temple  is  sufficient  to  show  that  such  a  depres- 
sion once  existed  here  as  to  justify  his  expression. 
But,  whatever  importance  may  be  attached  to  these 
indefinite  words,  they  never  can  be  allowed  to  out- 
weigh the  written  dimensions  and  the  local  indica- 
tions, which  show  that  the  Temple  never  could  have 
extended  more  than  600  test  from  the  western  Vail. 

It  has  been  objected  to  this  conclusion  that  if 
the  Temple  were  only  600  feet  square,  it  would  be 
impossible  to  find  space  within  its  walls  for  all  the 
courts  and  buildings  mentioned  by  Josephus  and  in 
the  Talmud.  This  difficulty,  however,  has  no  real 
foundation  in  fact,  and  the  mode  in  Which  the  interior 
may  have  been  arranged,  so  as  to  meet  all  the  exi- 
gencies of  the  case,  will  be  explained  in  treating  of 
the  Temple.  But  in  the  meanwhile  it  seems  im- 
possible to  escape  from  the  conclusion  that  the 
square  space  indicated  by  shading  in  the  plan  (wood- 
cut No.  4)  was  the  exact  area  occupied  by  the 
Jewish  Temple  as  rebuilt  by  Herod,  and  as  described 
by  Josephus. 

II.  Hippicus. — Of  all  the  towers  that  once  adorned 
the  city  of  Jerusalem  only  one  now  exists  in  any- 
thing like  a  state  of  perfection.  Being  in  the  centre 
of  the  citadel,  on  one  of  the  most  elevated  points  of 
the  city,  it  strikes  the  traveller's  eye  whichever 
way  he  turns  ;  and  from  its  prominence  now,  and 
the  importance  which  Josephus  ascribes  to  the  tower 
Hippicus,  it  has  been  somewhat  hastily  assumed 
that  the  two  are  identical.  The  reasons,  however, 
against  this  assumption  are  too  cogent  to  allow  of  the 
identity  being  admitted.  Josephus  gives  the  dimen- 
sions of  the  Hippicus  as  25  cubits,  or  37£  feet  square, 
whereas  the  tower  in  the  citadel  is  50  feet  6  inches 
by  70  feet :;  inches  (Rob.  />'.  11.  1st  ed.  i.  456  |,  and, 
as  Josephus  never  diminishes  the'  size  of  anything 
Jewish,  this  alone  should  make  us  pause.  Even  if 
we  are  to  assume  that  it  is  one  of  the  three  -i'it 
towers  built  by  Herod;  as  t'ar  as  its  architecture  is 
concerned,  it  may  as  well  lie  Phasaelus  or  Mariamne 
as  Hippicus.  Indeed  its  dimensions  accord  with  the 
first  named  of  these  far  better  than  with  the1  last. 
But  the  great  test  is  the  locality,  and  unfortunately 
the  tower  in  the  citadel  hardly  agrees  in  this  respect 
in  one  point  with  the  description  pf  Josephus.  In  the 
first  place  he  makes  it  a  corner  tower,  whereas  at 
the  time  he  wrote,  the  tower  in  the  citadel  must  have 
been  in  a  re-entering  angle  of  the  wall,  as  it  is  now. 
In  the  next  he"  says  it  was  "over  against  Psephinus" 
(/>'.  /.  v.  4,  §.'i),  which  never  could  be  said  of  this 


JERUSALEM 


1021 


tower.  Again,  in  the  same  passage,  he  describes 
the  three  towers  as  standing  on  the  north  side  of  the 
wall.  If  this  were  so,  the  two  others  must  have 
been  in  his  time  in  the  centre  of  the  city,  where 
Herod  never  would  have  placed  them.  They  also  are 
said  to  have  stood  on  a  height,  whereas  eastward 
of  the  citadel  the  ground  falls  rapidly.  Add  to  this 
that  the  position  of  the  army  of  Titus  when  he  sat 
down  before  Jerusalem  is  in  itself  almost  sufficient 
to  settle  the  point.  After  despatching  the  10th 
Legion  to  the  Mount  of  Olives  he  located  himself 
with  the  principal  division  of  his  army  opposite 
the  Tower  Psephinus,  but  his  right  wing  "  fortified 
itself  at  the  tower  called  Hippicus,  and  was  distant 
in  like  manner  about  two  stadia  from  the  city" 
(-B.  J.  v.  3,  §5).  It  is  almost  impossible  to 
apply  this  passage  to  the  tower  in  the  citadel, 
against  winch  no  attack  ever  was  made  or  in- 
tended. Indeed  at  no  period  of  the  siege  did  Titus 
attempt  to  storm  the  walls  situated  on  the  heights. 
His  attack  was  made  from  the  northern  plateau, 
and  it  was  there  that  his  troops  were  encamped, 
and  consequently  it  must  have  been  opposite  the 
angle  now  occupied  by  the  remains  called  the  Kasr 
Jalud  that  they  were  placed.  From  the  context  it 
seems  almost  impossible  that  they  could  have  been 
encamped  in  the  valley  opposite  the  present  citadel. 

These,  and  other  objections  which  will  be  noticed 
in  the  sequel,  seem  fatal  to  the  idea  of  the  tower  in 
the  citadel  being  the  one  Josephus  alludes  to.  But 
at  the  north-western  angle  of  the  present  city  there 
are  the  remains  of  an  ancient  building  of  bevelled 
masonry  and  large  stones,  like  those  of  the  foundations 
of  the  temple  (Rob.  B.  R.  i.  471  ;  Schultz,  95; 
Krarl't,  37,  &c),  whose  position  answers  so  completely 
every  point  of  the  locality  of  Hippicus  as  described 
by  Josephus,  as  to  leave  no  reasonable  doubt  that  it 
marks  the  site  of  this  celebrated  edifice.  It  stood 
and  stands  "  on  the  northern  side  of  the  old  wall  " 
— "  on  a  height,"  the  very  highest  point  in  the 
town — "  over  against  Psephinus  "— "  is  a  corner 
tower,"  and  just  such  a  one  as  would  naturally  be 
taken  as  the  starting  point  for  the  desciiption  of  the 
walls.  Indeed,  if  it  had  happened  that  the  Kasr 
Jalud  were  as  well  preserved  as  the  tower  in  the 
citadel,  or  that  the  latter  had  retained  only  two  or 
three  courses  of  its  masonry,  it  is  more  than  probable 
that  no  one  would  have  doubted  that  the  Kasr  Jalud 
was  the  Hippicus  ;  but  with  that  tendency  which 
prevails  to  ascribe  a  name  to  what  is  prominent 
rather  than  to  what  is  less  obvious,  these  remains 
have  been  overlooked,  and  difficulties  have  been 
consequently  introduced  into  the  description  of  the 
city,  which  have  hitherto  seemed  almost  insuperable. 

III.  Walls. — Assuming  therefore  for  the  present 
that  the  Kasr  Jalud,  as  these  ruins  are  now  popu- 
larly called,  is  the  remains  of  the  Bippicus,  we  have 
no  difficulty  in  determining  either  the  direction  or 
the  extent  of  the  walls  of  Jerusalem,  as  described  by 
Josephus  (/.'.  ./.  v.  4,  §-_'!,  and  as  shown  in  Plate  1. 

'flu1  first  or  old   wall   began  on   the  north  at   the 

towei  called  Hippicus, and,  extending  t>.  the  Systus, 
joined  the  council  house,  ami  ended  at  the  west 
cloister  of  the  temple.  Its  southern  direction  is 
described  as  passing  the  gate  of  the  Kssenes  (pro- 
bably the  modern  Jaffa  gate.,  and,  bending  above 
the  fountain  of  Siloam,  it  reached  Ophel,  and  was 
joined  to  the  eastern  cloister  of  tin-  temple.  The 
importance  of  this  last  indication  will  be  apparent 
in  the  sequel  when  speaking  of  the  third  wall. 

The  second  wall  began  at  the  gate  Gennath,  in 
the  old  wall,  probably  near  the  Hippicus,  and  passed 


1022 


JERUSALEM. 


H 


POOL    OF  CETHESDt 


o 


No.  4.—  Plan  of  Ilaram  Area  at  Jerusalem. 


JERUSALEM 

round  the  northern  quarter  of  the  city,  enclosing, 
as  will  be  shown  hereafter,  the  great  valley  of  the 
Tyropoeon,  which  leads  up  to  the  Damascus  gate; 
and  then,  proceeding  southward,  joined  the  fortress 
Antonia.  Recent  discoveries  of  old  bevelled  masonry 
in  the  immediate  proximity  of  the  Damascus  gate 
leave  little  doubt  but  that,  so  far  at  least,  its  direc- 
tion was  identical  with  that  of  the  modern  wall ; 
and  some  part  at  least  of  the  northern  portion  of 
the  western  wall  of  the  Haram  area  is  probably 
built  on  its  foundations. 

The  third  wall  was  not  commenced  till  twelve 
years  after  the  date  of  the  Crucifixion,  when  it  was 
undertaken  by  king  Herod  Agrippa ;  and  was 
intended  to  enclose  the  suburbs  which  had  grown 
out  on  the  northern  sides  of  the  city,  which  before 
this  had  been  left  exposed  (B,  J.  v.  4,  §2).  It 
began  at  the  Hippicus,  and  reached  as  far  as  the 
tower  Psephinus,  till  it  came  opposite  the  monu- 
ment of  Queen  Helena  of  Adiabene  ;  it  then  passed 
by  the  sepulchral  monuments  of  the  kings — a  well- 
known  locality — and  turning  south  at  the  monu- 
ment of  the  Fuller,  joined  the  old  wall  at  the  valley 
called  the  valley  of  Kedron.  This  last  is  perhaps 
the  most  important  point  in  the  description.  If 
the  temple  had  extended  the  whole  width  of  the 
modern  Haram  area,  this  wall  must  have  joined  its 
northern  cloister,  or  if  the  whole  of  the  north  side 
of  the  temple  were  covered  by  the  tower  Antonia  it 
might  have  been  said  to  have  extended  to  that  fort- 
ress, but  in  either  of  these  cases  it  is  quite  impos- 
sible that  it  could  have  passed  outside  the  present 
Haram  wall  so  as  to  meet  the  old  wall  at  the  south- 
eastern angle  of  the  temple,  where  Josephus  in  his 
description  makes  the  old  wall  end.  There  does  not 
seem  to  be  any  possible  solution  of  the  difficulty, 
except  the  one  pointed  out  above,  that  the  temple 
was  only  600  feet  square  ;  that  the  space  between 
the  temple  and  the  valley  of  Kedron  was  not  en- 
closed within  the  walls  till  Agrippa's  time,  and  that 
the  present  eastern  wall  of  the  Haram  is  the  identical 
wall  built  by  that  king — a  solution  which  not  only 
accords  with  the  words  of  Josephus  but  with  all 
the  local  peculiarities  of  the  place. 

It  may  also  be  added  that  .Tosephus's  description 
(Z?.  J.  v.  4,  §12)  of  the  immense  stones  of  which 
this  wall  was  constructed,  fully  bears  out  the 
appearance  of  the  great  stones  at  the  angles,  and 
does  away  with  the  necessity  of  supposing,  on 
account  of  their  magnificence,  that  they  are  parts  of 
the  substructure  of  the  Temple  proper. 

After  describing  these  walls,  Josephus  adds  that 
the  whole  circumference  of  the  city  was  33  stadia, 
or  nearly  four  English  miles,  which  is  as  near  as 
may  be  the  extent  indicated  by  the  localities.  He 
then  adds  {B.  J.  v.  4,  §3)  that  the  number  of 
towers  in  the  old  wall  was  GO,  the  middle  wall 
40,  and  the  new  wall  99.  Taking  the  distance 
of  these  towers  as  150  feet  from  centre  to  centre, 
which  is  probably  very  near  the  truth  on  the 
average,  the  first  and  last  named  walls  are  as 
nearly  as  may  be  commensurate,  but  the  middle 
wall  is  so  much  too  short  that  either  we  must 
assume  a  mistake  somewhere,  or,  what  is  more  pro- 
bable, that  Josephus  enumerated  tin1  towers  not 
only  to  where  it  ended  at  the  Antonia,  but  round 
the  Antonia  and  temple  to  where  it  joined  the  old 
wall  above  Siloam.  With  this  addition  the  150 
feet  again  is  perfectly  consistent  with  the  facts 
of  the  case  and  with  the  localities.  Altogether 
it  appears  that  the  extent  ami  direction  of  the 
walls  is  not  now  a  matte)-  admitting  of  much  con- 


JEEUSALEM 


1023 


troversy,  and  probably  would  never  have  been  so,  but 
for  the  difficulties  arising  from  the  position  of  the 
Church  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre,  which  will  be  alluded 
to  hereafter. 

IV.  Antonia. — Before  leaving  the  subject  of  the 
walls,  it  may  be  well  to  fix  the  situation  of  the 
Turris  Antonia,  as  far  as  the  data  at  our  command 
will  admit.  It  ceitaiuly  was  attached  to  the 
temple  buildings,  and  on  the  northern  side  of  them  ; 
but  whether  covering  the  whole  space,  or  only  a 
portion,  has  been  much  disputed.  After  stating 
that  the  temple  was  foursquare,  and  a  stadium  on 
each  side,  Josephus  goes  on  to  say  {B.  J.  v.  5, 
§2),  that  with  Antonia  it  was  six  stadia  in  circum- 
ference. The  most  obvious  conclusion  from  this 
would  be  that  the  Antonia  was  of  the  same  dimen- 
sions as  the  temple  and  of  the  form  shown  in  the 
diagram  (woodcut  No.  b),  where  A  marks  the 
Temple,  and  B  Antonia,  according  to  this  theory.  In 
other  words,  it  assumes  that  the  Antonia  occupied 
practically  the  platform  on  which  the  so-called 
Mosque  of  Omar  now  stands,  and  there  is  nothing 
in  the  locality  to  contradict  such  an  assumption 
(see  B.  J.  vi.  5,  §4).  On  the  contrary,  the  fact  of 
the  Sakhra  being  the  highest  rock  in  the  immediate 
neighbourhood  would  confirm  all  we  are  told  of  the 
situation  of  the  Jewish  citadel.  There  are,  how- 
ever, certain  facts  mentioned  in  the  account  of  the 
siege  which  render  such  a  view  nearly  if  not  quite 
untenable. 


It  is  said  that  when  Titus  reviewed  his  army  on 
Bezetha  (B.  J.  v.  9,  §1),  the  Jews  looked  on  from 
the  north  wall  of  the  temple.  If  Antonia,  on 
higher  ground,  and  probably  with  higher  walls, 
had  intervened,  this  could  not  have  been  possible ; 
and  the  expression  must  have  been  that  they  looked 
on  from  the  walls  of  Antonia.  We  have  also  a  pas- 
sage (i>.  J.  v.  7,  §3)  which  makes  this  even  clearer  ; 
it  is  there  asserted  that  "John  and  his  faction 
defended  themselves  from  the  tower  Antonia,  and 
from  the  northern  cloisters  of  the  temple,  and 
fought  the  Romans "  (from  the  context  evidently 
simultaneously)  "  before  the  monument  of  king 
Alexander."  We  are  therefore  forced  to  adopt  the 
alternative,  which  the  words  of  Josephus  equally 
justify,  that  the  Antonia  was  a  tower  or  keep  at- 
tached to  the  north-western  angle  of  the  temple,  as 
shown  in  the  plan.  Indeed,  the  words  of  Josephus 
hardly  justify  any  other  interpretation  ;  for  he  says 
(  /.'. ./.  v.  5.  §S)  that  "  it  was  situated  at  the  corner 
of  two  cloisters  of  the  couit  of  the  temple — of  that 
on  the  west,  and  that  on  the  north."  Probably  it 
was  surrounded  by  a  wall,  enclosing  courts  and  other 
appurtenances  of  a  citadel,  and  with  its  enclosing 
wall  at  least  two  stadia  in  circuit.  It  may  have 
been  two  and  a  half,  or  even  three,  as  shown  in  the 
diagram  (woodcut  No.  fi),  where  ('  marks  the  size 
and  position  of  the  Antonia  on  the  supposition  that 
its  entire  circumference  was  two  stadia,  and  D  D 


1024 


JERUSALEM 


the  size  it  would  attain  if  only  three  of  its  sides 
were  counted,  and  if  Josephus  did  not  reckon 
the  four  stadia  of  the  temple  as  a  fixed  quantity, 
and  deducted  the  part  covered  by  the  fortress  from 
the  whole  sum ;  but  in  this  instance  we  have  no 
local  indication  to  guide  us.  The  question  has 
become  one  of  no  very  great  importance,  as  it  is 
quite  certain  that,  if  the  Temple  Was  only  600  feet 
square,  it  did  not  occupy  the  whole  of  the  northern 
half  of  the  Haram  area,  and  consequently  that 
neither  was  the  "  pool  of  Bethesda,"  its  northern 
ditch,  nor  the  rock  on  which  the  governor's  house 
now  stands  its  rock  foundation.  With  the  temple 
area  fixed  as  above,  by  no  hypothesis  could  it  be 
made  to  stretch  as  far  as  that ;  and  the  object, 
therefore,  which  many  topographers  had  in  view  in 
extending  the  dimensions,  must  now  be  abandoned. 

V.  Hills  ami  Valleys.  —  Notwithstanding  the 
very  great  degree  of  certainty  with  which  the  site  of 
the  Temple,  the  position  of  the  Hippicus,  and  the 
direction  of  the  walls  may  be  determined,  there  are 
still  one  or  two  points  within  the  city,  the  positions 
of  which  have  not  yet  been  fixed  in  so  satisfactory  a 
manner.  Topographers  are  still  at  issue  as  to  the 
true  direction  of  the  upper  part  of  the  Tyropoeon 
valley,  and,  consequently,  as  to  the  position  of 
Acra,  and  various  smaller  points  dependent  on  the 
fixation  of  these  two.  Fortuuately  the  determi- 
nation of  these  points  has  no  bearing  whatever  on 
any  of  the  great  historical  questions  arising  out  of 
the  topography  ;  and  though  it  would  no  doubt  be 
satisfactory  if  they  could  be  definitively  settled, 
they  are  among  the  least  important  points  that 
arise  in  discussing  the  descriptions  of  Josephus. 

The  difficulty  of  determining  the  true  course  of 
the  upper  part  of  the  Tyropoeon  valley  is  caused  by 
our  inability  to  determine  whether  Josephus,  in  de- 
scribing the  city  {B.  J.  v.  4,  §1),  limits  his  descrip- 
tion to  the  city  of  Jerusalem,  properly  so  called,  as 
circumscribed  by  the  first  or  old  wall,  or  whether 
he  includes  the  city  of  David  also,  and  speaks  of  the 
whole  city  as  enclosed  by  the  third  or  great  wall 
of  Agrippa.  In  the  first  case  the  Tyropoeon  must 
have  been  the  depression  leading  from  a  spot  oppo- 
site the  north-west  angle  of  the  Temple  towards 
the  Jaffa  gate ;  in  the  second  it  was  the  great  valley 
leading  from  the  same  point  northwards  towards 
the  Damascus  gate. 

The  principal  reason  for  adopting  the  first  hypo- 
thesis arises  from  the  words  of  Josephus  himself, 
who  describes  the  Tyropoeon  as  an  open  space  or 
depression  within  the  city,  at  "  which  the  corre- 
sponding rows  of  houses  on  both  hills  end"  {B.  J. 
v.  4,  §1).  This  would  exactly  answer  the  position 
of  a  valley  running  to  the  Jaffa  gate,  and  conse- 
quently within  the  old  walls,  and  would  apply  to 
such  a  ravine  as  might  easily  have  been  obliterated 
by  accumulation  of  rubbish  in  after  times  ;  but  it 
is  not  so  easy  to  see  how  it  can  be  made  applicable 
to  such  a  valley  as  that  running  towards  the  Da- 
mascus gate,  which  must  have  had  a  wall  on  either 
side,  and  the  slope  of  which  is  so  gradual,  that  then, 
as  now,  the  "  rows  of  houses  "  might— though  it 
by  no  means  follows  that  they  must — have  run 
across  it  without  interruption.  We  cannot  indeed 
apply  the  description  to  this  valley,  unless  we 
assume  that  the  houses  were  built  close  up  to  the 
old  wall,  so  as  to  leave  almost  no  plain  space  in 
front  of  it,  or  that  the  formation  of  the  bottom 
of  the  valley  was  originally  steeper  and  narrower 
than  it  now  is.  On  the  whole,  this  view  presents 
perhaps  less  difficulty  than  the  obliteration  of  the 


JERUSALEM 

other  valley,  which  its  most  zealous  advocates  are 
now  forced  to  admit,  after  the  most  patient  search  ; 
added  to  the  difficulty  that  must  have  existed  in 
carrying  the  old  wall  across  its  goige,  which  Jose- 
phus would  have  hinted  at  had  it  existed. 

The  direct  evidence  seems  so  nearly  balanced,  that 
either  hypothesis  might  be  adopted  if  we  were  con- 
tent to  fix  the  position  of  the  hill  Acra  from  that 
of  this  valley,  as  is  usually  done,  instead  of  from 
extraneous  evidence,  as  we  fortunately  are  able  to  do 
with  tolerable  certainty  in  this  matter. 

In  all  the  transactions  mentioned  in  the  12th 
and  13th  books  of  the  Antiquities,  Josephus  com- 
monly uses  the  word  yA/cpa  as  the  corresponding 
term  to  the  Hebrew  word  Metzudah,  translated 
stronghold,  fortress,  and  tower  in  the  books  of  the 
Maccabees,  when  speaking  of  the  fortress  which 
adjoined  the  Temple  in  the  north  ;  and  if  'we 
might  assume  that  the  hill  Acra  and  the  tower 
Acra  were  one  and  the  same  place,  the  question 
might  be  considered  as  settled. 

It  is  more  than  probable  that  this  was  so,  for  in  de- 
scribing the  "upper  market  place,"  which  was  called 
the  "citadel"  by  David  {B.J.  v.  4,  §1),  Josephus 
uses  the  word  <ppovpwv,  which  he  also  applies  to 
the  Acra  after  it  was  destroyed  {Ant.  xiii.  16,  §5), 
or  Bapir,  as  the  old  name  apparently  immediately 
before  it  was  rebuilt  by  Herod,  and  by  him  called 
the  Antonia  {Ant.  xviii.  iv.  3). 

It  is  also  only  by  assuming  that  the  Acra  was  on 
the  temple  hill  that  we  can  understand  the  position 
of  the  valley  which  the  Asamoneans  filled  up.  It 
certainly  was  not  the  northern  part  of  the  Tyropoeon 
which  is  apparent  at  the  present  day,  nor  the  other 
valley  to  the  westward,  the  filling  up  of  which 
would  not  have  joined  the  city  to  the  Temple  {B.  J. 
v.  4,  §1).  It  could  only  have  been  a  transverse 
valley  running  in  the  direction  of,  and  nearly  in  the 
position  of,  the  Via  Dolorosa. 

It  is  true  that  Josephus  describes  the  citadel  or 
Acra  of  Jerusalem  {Ant.  xiii.  4,  9)  as  situated  in  the 
"  lower  city  "  {iv  rfj  kcxtoo  ir6\€i,  xii.  5,  §4,  B.  J.  i. 
1,  §4),  which  would  equally  apply  to  either  of  the 
assumed  sites,  were  it  not  that  he  qualifies  it  by 
saying  that  it  was  built  so  high  as  to  dominate  the 
Temple,  and  at  the  same  time  lying  close  to  it 
{Ant.  xii.  9,  §3),  which  can  only  apply  to  a  building 
situated  on  the  Temple  hill.  It  must  also  be  ob- 
served that  the  whole  of  the  Temple  hill  is  very 
much  lower  than  the  hill  on  which  the  city  itself 
was  located,  and,  consequently,  that  the  Temple  and 
its  adjuncts  may,  with  great  propriety,  be  called  the 
lower  city,  as  contradistinguished  from  the  other 
half,  which,  from  the  superior  elevation  of  the  pla- 
teau on  which  it  stands,  is  truly  the  upper  city. 

If  we  adopt  this  view,  it  will  account  for  the 
great  levelling  operations  which  at  one  time  have 
been  carried  on  at  the  north-western  angle  of  the 
Haram  area,  and  the  marks  of  which  have  been 
always  a  puzzle  to  antiquaries.  These  are  utterly 
unmeaning  on  any  hypothesis  yet  suggested,  for  so 
far  from  contributing  to  the  defence  of  any  work 
erected  here,  their  effect  from  their  position  must 
have  been  the  very  reverse.  But  if  we  admit  that 
they  were  the  works  which  occupied  the  Jews  for 
three  years  of  incessant  labour  {Ant.  xiii.  7,  §6) 
after  the  destruction  of  the  Acra,  their  appe 
is  at  once  accounted  for,  and  the  description  of 
Josephus  made  plain. 

If  this  view  of  the  matter  be  correct,  the  word 
a/j.(plKvpTos  (B.  J.  v.  6,  §1),  about  which  bo  much 
controversy  has   been    raised,   must  lie  translated 


JERUSALEM 

"  sloping  down  on  either  side."  a  meaning  which  it 
will  bear  equally  as  well  as  "  gibbons,"  which  is 
usually  affixed  to  it,  and  which  only  could  be  applied 
if  the  hill  within  the  old  wall  were  indicated. 

On  reviewing  the  whole  question,  the  great  pre- 
ponderance of  evidence  seems  to  be  in  favour  of  the 
assumption  that  the  hill  Acra  and  the  citadel  Acra 
were  one  and  the  same  place.  That  Acra  was  situ- 
ated on  the  northern  side  of  the  Temple,  on  the  same 
hill,  and  probably  on  the  same  spot,  originally  occu- 
pied by  David  as  the  stronghold  of  Zion  (2  Sam. 
v.  7-9),  and  near  where  Bails  and  Antonia  after- 
wards stood  ;  and  consequently  that  the  great  north- 
ern depression  running  towards  the  Damascus  gate 
is  the  Tyropoeon  valley,  and  that  the  valley  of  the 
Asamoueans  .was  a  transverse  cut,  separating  the 
hill  Bezetha  from  the  Acra  or  citadel  on  the  Temple 
hill. 

It  this  view  of  the  internal  topography  of  the 
city  be  granted,  the  remaining  hills  and  valleys  fall 
into  their  places  easily  and  as  a  matter  of  course. 
The  citadel,  or  upper  market-place  of  Josephus, 
was  the  modern  Zion,  or  the  city  enclosed  within 
the  old  wall ;  Acra  was  the  ancient  Zion,  or  the 
hill  on  which  the  Temple,  the  City  of  David,  Baris, 
Acra,  and  Antonia,  stood.  It  lay  over  against  the 
other  ;  and  apparently  between  these  two,  in  the 
valley,  stood  the  lower  city,  and  the  place  called 
Millo.  Bezetha  was  the  well-defined  hill  to  the 
north  of  the  Temple,  just  beyond  the  valley  in 
which  the  Piscina  Probatica  was  situated.  The 
fourth  hill  which  Josephus  enumerates,  but  does 
not  name,  must  have  been  the  ridge  between  the 
last-named  valley  and  that  of  the  Tyropoeon,  and 
was  separated  from  the  Temple  hill  by  the  valley  of 
the  Asamoneans.  The  other  minor  localities  will  be 
pointed  out  in  the  sequel  as  they  occur  in  order. 

VI.  Population — There  is  no  point  in  which  the 
exaggeration  in  which  Josephus  occasionally  in- 
dulges is  more  apparent  than  in  speaking  of  the 
population  of  the  city.  The  inhabitants  were 
dead  ;  no  record  remained ;  and  to  magnify  the 
greatness  of  the  city  was  a  compliment  to  the 
prowess  of  the  conquerors.  Still  the  assertions  that 
three  millions  were  collected  at  the  Passover  (B.  J. 
vi.  9,  §3)  ;  that  a  million  of  people  perished  in  the 
siege;  that  100,000  escaped,  &c.,  are  so  childish, 
that  it  is  surprising  any  one  could  ever  have  re- 
peated them.  Even  the  more  moderate  calculation 
of  Tacitus  of  600,000  inhabitants,  is  far  beyond 
the  limits  of  probability  .k 

Placing  the  Hippicus  on  the  farthest  northern 
point  possible,  and  consequently  extending  the  walls 
as  far  as  either  authority  or  local  circumstances 
will  admit,  still  the  area  within  the  old  walls 
never  could  have  exceeded  180  acres.  Assuming, 
as  is  sometimes  done,  that  the  site  of  the  present 
Church  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre  was  outside  the  old 
walls,  this  area  must  he  reduced  to  120  or  130 
acres  ;  but  taking  it  at  the  larger  area,  its  power  of 
accommodating  such  a  multitude  as  Josephus  de- 
scribes may  be  illustrated  by  reference  to  a  recent 
example.     The  great  Exhibition  Building  of  1851 

covered  1*  acres — just  a  tenth  of  this.  On  three 
days  near  its  closing  100,000  or  105,000  persons 
visited  it;  but  it  is  not  assumed  that  more  than 
from  60,000  to  70,000  were  under  its  roof  at  the 


JERUSALEM 


1025 


k  It  is  instructive  to  compare  these  with  the  moderate 
figures  of  Jeremiah  (lii.  28-30)  where  lie  enumerates 
the  number  of  persons  carried  into  captivity  by  Nebu- 
chadnezzar in  three  deportations  from  both  city  and 


same  moment.  Any  one  who  was  in  the  building 
on  these  days  will  recollect  how  impossible  it  was 
to  move  from  one  place  to  another  ;  how  frightful 
in  fact  the  crush  was  both  in  the  galleries  and  on 
the  floor,  and  that  in  many  places  even  standing 
room  could  hardly  be  obtained  ;  yet  if  600,000  or 
700,000  people  were  in  Jerusalem  after  the  fall  of 
the  outer  wall  (almost  at  the  beginning  of  the  siege), 
the  crowd  there  must  have  been  denser  than  in  the 
Crystal  Palace  ;  eating,  drinking,  sleeping,  or  fight- 
ing, literally  impossible  ;  and  considering  how  the 
site  of  a  town  must  be  encumbered  with  buildings, 
300,000  in  Jerusalem  would  have  been  more 
crowded  than  were  the  sight-seer,s  at  the  Crystal 
Palace  in  its  most  crowded  moments. 

But  fortunately  we  are  not  left  to  such  vague 
data  as  these.  ISo  town  in  the  east  can  be  pointed 
out  where  each  inhabitant  has  not  at  least  50  square 
yards  on  an  average  allowed  to  him.  In  some  of 
the  crowded  cities  of  the  west,  such  as  parts  of 
London,  Liverpool,  Hamburgh,  &c,  the  space  is 
reduced  to  about  30  yards  to  each  inhabitant ;  but 
this  only  applies  to  the  poorest  and  more  crowded 
places,  with  houses  many  stories  high,  not  to  cities 
containing  palaces  and  public  buildings.  London, 
on  the  other  hand,  averages  200  yards  of  superficial 
space  for  every  person  living  within  its  precincts. 
But,  on  the  lowest  estimate,  the  ordinary  popula- 
tion of  Jerusalem  must  have  stood  nearly  as  fol- 
lows : —  Taking  the  area  of  the  city  enclosed  by 
the  two  old  walls  at  750,000  yards,  and  that 
enclosed  by  the  wall  of  Agrippa  at  1,500,000,  we 
have  2,250,000  for  the  whole.  Taking  the  popu- 
lation of  the  old  city  at  the  probable  number  of 
one  person  to  50  yards  we  have  15,000,  and  at 
the  extreme  limit  of  30  yards  we  should  have 
25,000  inhabitants,  for  the  old  city.  And  at  100 
yards  to  each  individual  in  the  new  city  al>out 
15,000  more  ;  so  that  the  population  of  Jerusalem, 
in  its  days  of  greatest  prosperity,  may  have  amounted 
to  from  30,000  to  45,000  souls,  but  could  hardly 
ever  have  reached  50,000 ;  and  assuming  that  in 
times  of  festival  one-half  were  added  to  this  amount, 
which  is  an  extreme  estimate,  there  may  have  been 
60,000  or  70,000  in  the  city  when  Titus  came  up 
against  it.  As  no  one  would  stay  in  a  beleaguered 
city  who  had  a  home  to  flee  to,  it  is  hardly  probable 
that  the  men  who  came  up  to  fight  for  the  defence 
of  the  city  would  equal  the  number  of  women  and 
children  who  would  seek  refuge  elsewhere  ;  so  that 
the  probability  is  that  about  the  usual  population 
of  the  city  were  in  it  at  that  time. 

It  may  also  be  mentioned  that  the  army  which 
Titus,  brought  up  against  Jerusalem  did  not  exceed 
from  -'."..huh  to  30,000  effective  men  of  all  arms, 
which,  taking  the  probabilities  of  the  case,  is  about 
the  number  that  would  be  required  to  attack  a 
fortified  town  defended  by  from  8000  to  10,000 
men  capable  of  hearing  arms.  Had  the  garrison 
been  more  numerous  the  siege  would  have  been  im- 
probable, but  taking  the  whole  incidents  of  Jo- 
sephus's  narrative,  there  is  nothing  to  lead  us  to 
suppose  that  the  Jews  ever  could  have  mustered 
10,000  combatants  at  any  period  of  the  siege;  half 
that  number  i>  probably  nearer  the  truth.  The 
main  interest  this  question  has  in  a  topographical 
point  of  view,   is  the  additional  argument  it  affords 


province  as  only  4000,  though  they  seem  to  have 
swept  off  every  one  who  could  go,  nearly  depopulating 
the  place. 


1026 


JERUSALEM 


for  placing  Hippicus  as  far  north  as  it  lias  been 
placed  above,  and  generally  to  extend  the  walls  to 
the  greatest  extent  justifiable,  in  order  to  accom- 
modate a  population  at  all  worthy  of  the  greatness 
of  the  city.  It  is'  also  interesting  as  showing  the 
utter  impossibility  of  the  argument  of  those  who 
would  except  the  whole  north-west  corner  of  the 
present  city  from  the  old  walls,  so  as  to  accommo- 
date the  Holy  Sepulchre  with  a  site  outside  the 
walls,  in  accordance  with  the  Bible  narrative. 

VII.  Zion. — One  of  the  great  difficulties  which 
has  perplexed  most  authors  in  examining  the  ancient 
topography  of  Jerusalem,  is  the  correct  fixation  of 
the  locality  of  the  sacred  Mount  of  Zion.  It  cannot 
be  disputed  that  from  the  time  of  Constautine 
downwards  to  the  present  day,  this  name  has  been 
applied  to  the  western  hill  on  which  the  city  of 
Jerusalem  now  stands,  and  in  fact  always  stood. 

Notwithstanding  this  it  seems  equally  certain 
that  up  to  the  time  of  the  destruction  of  the  city 
by  Titus,  the  name  was  applied  exclusively  to  the 
eastern  hill,  or  that  on  which  the  Temple  stood. 

Unfortunately  the  name  Zion  is  not  found  in 
the  works  of  Josephus,  so  that  we  have  not  his 
assistance,  which  would  be  invaluable  in  this  case, 
and  there  is  no  passage  in  the  Bible  which  directly 
asserts  the  identity  of  the  hills  Moriah  and  Zion, 
though  many  which  cannot  well  be  understood 
without  this  assumption.  The  cumulative  proof, 
however,  is  such  as  almost  perfectly  to  supply  this 
want. 

From  the  passages  in  2  Sam.  v.  7,  and  1  Chr. 
xi.  5-8,  it  is  quite  clear  that  Zion  and  the  city  of 
David  were  identical,  for  it  is  there  said,  "David 
took  the  castle  of  Zion,  which  is  the  city  of 
David."  "  And  David  dwelt  in  the  castle,  there- 
fore they  called  it  the  city  of  David.  And  he  built 
the  city  round  about,  even  from  Millo  round  about, 
and  Joab  repaired  the  rest  of  the  city."  This  last 
expression  would  seem  to  separate  the  city  of  Jeru- 
salem which  was  repaired,  from  that  of  David 
which  was  built,  though  it  is  scarcely  distinct 
enough  to  be  relied  upon.  Besides  these,  perhaps 
the  most  distinct  passage  is  that  in  the  48th  Psalm, 
verse  2,  where  it  is  said,  "Beautiful  for  situation, 
the  joy  of  the  whole  earth,  is  Mount  Zion,  on  the 
sides  of  the  north,  the  city  of  the  great  King," 
which  it  seems  almost  impossible  to  apply  to  the 
modern  Zion,  the  most  southern  extremity  of  the 
city.  There  are  also  a  great  many  passages  in 
the  Bible  where  Zion  is  spoken  of  as  a  separate 
city  from  Jerusalem,  as  for  instance,  "For  out  of 
Jerusalem  shall  go  forth  a  remnant,  and  they  that 
escape  out  of  Mount  Zion"  (2  K.  xix.  31).  ■  "  Do 
good  in  thy  good  pleasure  unto  Zion ;  build  thou 
the  walls  of  Jerusalem"  (Ps.  li.  18).  "  The  Lord 
shall  yet  comfort  Zion,  and  shall  yet  choose  Jeru- 
salem "  (Zech.  i.  17).  "  For  the  people  shall  dwell 
in  Zion  at  Jerusalem"  (Is.  xxx.  19).  "The  Lord 
shall  roar  out  of  Zion,  and  utter  his  voice  from 
Jerusalem"  (Joel  iii.  16;  Am.  i.  2).  There  are 
also  numberless  passages  in  which  Zion  is  spoken 
of  as  a  Holy  place  in  such  terms  as  are  never 
applied  to  Jerusalem  and  which  can  only  be 
understood  as  applied  to  the  Holy  Temple  Mount. 
Such  expressions,  for  instance,  as  "  I  set  my  king 
on  my  holy  hill  of  Zion  "  (Ps.  ii.  fi) — "  The  Lord 
loveth  the  gates  of  Zion  more  than  all  the  dwellings 
of  Jacob  "  (Ps.  lxxxvii.  2) — "  The  Lord  has  chosen 
Zion"  (Ps.  exxxii.  13) — "The  city  of  the  Lord, 
tin'  Zion  of  the  holy  one  of  Israel"  (Is.  Ix.  14) — 
"  Arise  ye,  and  let  u>  ;_;<>  ii)>  to  Zion  t"   the    I. "I'd" 


JERUSALEM 

(Jer.  xxxi.  6) — "Thus  saith  the  Lord,  I  am  re- 
turned to  Zion"  (Zech.  viii.  3) — "  I  am  the  Lord 
thy  God,  dwelling  in  Zion,  my  holy  mountain" 
(Joel  iii.  17) — "For  the  Lord  dwelleth  in  Zion  " 
(Joel  iii.  21),  and  many  others,  which  will  occur 
to  every  one  at  all  familiar  with  the  Scriptures, 
seem  to  us  to  indicate  plainly  the  hill  of  the 
Temple.  Substitute  the  word  Jerusalem  for  Zion 
in  these  passages,  and  we  feel  at  once  how  it  grates 
on  the  ear ;  for  such  epithets  as  these  are  never 
applied  to  that  city  ;  on  the  contrary,  if  there  is  a 
curse  uttered,  or  term  of  disparagement,  it  is  seldom 
applied  to  Zion,  but  always  to  her  unfortunate 
sister,  Jerusalem.  It  is  never  said, — The  Lord 
dwelleth  in  Jerusalem  ;  or,  loveth  Jerusalem ;  or 
any  such  expression,  which  surely  would  have  oc- 
curred, had  Jerusalem  and  Zion  been  one  and  the 
same  place,  as  they  now  are,  and  generally  sup- 
posed to  have  been.  Though  these  cannot  be  taken 
as  absolute  proof,  they  certainly  amount  to  strong 
presumptive  evidence  that  Zion  and  the  Temple 
Hill  were  one  and  the  same  place.  There  is  one 
curious  passage,  however,  which  is  scarcely  intelli- 
gible ou  any  other  hypothesis  than  this  ;  it  is  known 
that  the  sepulchres  of  David  and  his  successors 
were  on  Mount  Zion,  or  in  the  city  of  David,  but 
the  wicked  king  Ahaz  for  his  crimes  was  buried  in 
Jerusalem,  "in  the  city,"  and  "  not  in  the  sepul- 
chres of  the  kings"  (2  Chr.  xxviii.  27).  Jehoram 
(2  Chr.  xxi.  20)  narrowly  escaped  the  same  punish- 
ment, and  the  distinction  is  so  marked  that  it 
cannot  be  overlooked.  The  modern  sepulchre  of 
David  (Neby  Baud)  is,  and  always  must  have  been 
in  Jerusalem  ;  not,  as  the  Bible  expressly  tells  us, 
in  the  city  of  David,  as  contradistinguished  from 
the  city  of  the  Jebusites. 

When  from  the  Old  Test,  we  turn  to  the  Books  of 
the  Maccabees,  we  come  to  some  passages  written 
by  persons  who  certainly  were  acquainted  with 
the  localities,  which  seem  to  fix  the  site  of  Zion 
with  a  considerable  amount  of  certainty  ;  as,  for 
instance,  "  They  went  up  into  Mount  Zion,  and 
saw  the  sanctuary  desolate  and  the  altar  pro- 
faned, and  the  shrubs  growing  in  the  courts  as  a 
forest"  (1  Mace.  iv.  37  and  60).  "  After  this 
went  Nicanor  up  to  Mount  Zion,  and  there  came 
out  of  the  sanctuary  certain  persons"  (1  Mace, 
vii.  33),  and  several  others,  which  seem  to  leave 
no  doubt  that  at  that  time  Zion  and  the  Temple 
Hill  were  considered  one  and  the  same  place. 
It  may  also  be  added  that  the  Rabbis  with  one 
accord  place  the  Temple  on  Mount  Zion,  and 
though  their  authority  in  matters  of  doctrine  may 
be  valueless,  still  their  traditions  ought  to  have 
been  sufficiently  distinct  to  justify  their  being  con- 
sidered as  authorities  on  a  merely  topographical 
point  of  this  sort.  There  is  also  a  passage  in  Nehe- 
miah  (iii.  16)  which  will  be  alluded  to  in  the  next 
section,  and  which,  added  to  the  above,  seems  to 
leave  very  little  doubt  that  in  ancient  times  the 
name  of  Zion  was  applied  to  the  eastern  and  not 
to  the  western  hill  of  Jerusalem. 

VIII.  Topography  of  the  Book  of  Nehemiah. — 
The  only  description  of  the  ancient  city  of  Jeru- 
salem which  exists  in  the  Bible,  so  extensive  in 
form  as  to  enable  us  to  follow  it  as  a  topographical 
description,  is  that  found  in  the  Book  of  Nehemiah, 
and  although  it  is  hardly  sufficiently  distinct  to  en- 
able us  to  settle  all  the  moot  points,  it  contains 
such  valuable  indications  that  it  is  well  worthy  of 
the  most  attentive  examination. 

The  easiest  way  to  arrive  at  any  correel  conclu- 


JERUSALEM 

sion  regarding  it,  is  to  take  lirst  the  description  of 
the  Dedication  of  the  Walls  in  ch.  xii.  (31-40),  and 
drawing  such  a  diagram  as  this,  we  easily  get  at  the 
main  features  of  the  old  wall  at  least. 


JERUSALEM 


1027 


FISHCBTB 


SON  CATE 


WATER  CUTE 


No.  7. — Diagram  of  places  mentioned  in  dedication  of  wails. 

The  order  of  procession  was  that  the  princes  of 
Judah  went  up  upon  the  wall  at  some  point  as 
nearly  as  possible  opposite  to  the  Temple,  and  one 
half  of  them,  turning  to  the  right,  went  towards 
the  dung-gate,  "  and  at  the  fountain-gate,  which 
was  urcr  against  them"  (or,  in  other  words,  on  the 
opposite  or  Temple  side  of  the  city),  "  went  up  by 
the  stairs  of  the  city  of  David  at  the  going  up  of 
tin'  wall,  above  the  house  of  David,  even  unto  the 
water-gate  eastward."  The  water-gate  therefore 
was  one  of  the  southern  gates  of  the  Temple,  and 
the  stairs  that  led  up  to  it  are  here  identified  with 
those  of  the  city  of  1  >avid,  and  consequently  with 
Zion. 

The  other  party  turned  to  the  left,  or  north- 
wards, and  passed  from  beyond  the  tower  of  the 
furnaces  even  "  unto  the  broad  wall,"  and  passing 
the  gate  of  Ephraim,  the  old  gate,  the  fish-gate, 
tin'  towers  of  Hananeel  and  Mean,  to  the  sheep- 
gate,  "  stood  still  in  the  prison-gate,"  as  the  other 
party  had  in  the  water-gate.  "  So  stood  the  two 
companies  of  them  that  gave  thanks  in  the  house 
of  God." 

If  from  this  we  turn  to  the  third  chapter,  which 
gives  a  description  of  the  repairs  of  the  wall,  we 
have  no  difficulty  in  identifying  all  the  places  men- 
tioned in  the  first  sixteen  verses,  with  those  enu- 
merated in  the  12th  chapter.  The  repairs  began 
at  the  sheep-gate  on  the  north  side,  and  in  im- 
mediate proximity  with  the  Temple,  and  all  the 
places  named  in  the  dedication  are  again  named, 
but  in  the  reverse  order,  till  we  come  to  the  tower 
of  the  furnaces,  which  if  not  identical  with  the 
tower  in  the  citadel,  so  often  mistaken  for  the  Ilip- 
picus,  must  at  least  have  stood  very  near  to  it. 
Mention  is  then  made,  but  now  in  the  direct  order  of 
the  dedication,  of  "  the  valley-gate,"  the  "  dung- 
gate,"  "  the  fountain-gate;"  and  lastly,  the  >•  stair> 
that  go  down  from  the  city  of  David."  Between 
these  last  two  places  we  find  mention  made  of  the 

1 1  of  Siloah  and  the  king's  garden,  so  that  we  li;i\e 

long  passed  the  so-called  sepulchre  of  David  on  the 
modern  Zion,  and  are  in  the  immediate  proximity 
of  the  Tempi'  :  most  probably  in  the  valley  be- 
tween the  city  "I'  David  and  tie  citj  of  Jeru- 
salem.     What    follows  is  most    important 


16),  ''After  him  repaired  Nehemiah,  the  son  of 
Azbuk,  the  ruler  of  the  half  part  of  Bethzur,  unto 
the  place  over  against  the  sepulchres  of  David, 
and  to  the  pool  that  was  made,  and  unto  the 
house  of  the  mighty."  This  passage,  when  taken 
with  the  context,  seems  in  itself  quite  sufficient  to 
set  at  rest  the  question  of  the  position  of  the  city 
of  David,  of  the  sepulchres  of  the  kings,  and  con- 
sequently of  Zion,  all  which  could  not  be  men- 
tioned after  Siloah  if  placed  where  modern  tradition 
has  located  them. 

If  the  chapter  ended  with  the  16th  verse,  there 
would  be  no  difficulty  in  determining  the  sites  men- 
tioned above,  but  unfortunately  we  have,  according 
to  this  view,  retraced  our  steps  very  nearly  to 
the  point  from  which  we  started,  and  have  got 
through  only  half  the  places  enumerated.  Two 
hypotheses  may  be  suggested  to  account  for  this 
difficulty ;  the  one  that  there  was  then,  as  in  the 
time  of  Josephus,  a  second  wall,  and  that  the  re- 
maining names  refer  to  it ;  the  other  that  the  first 
16  verses  refer  to  the  walls  of  Jerusalem,  and  the 
remaining  16  to  those  of  the  city  of  David.  An 
attentive  consideration  of  the  subject  renders  it 
almost  certain  that  the  latter  is  the  true  explanation 
of  the  case. 

In  the  enumeration  of  the  places  repaired,  in  the 
last  part  of  the  chapter,  we  have  two  which  we 
know  from  the  description  of  the  dedication  really 
belonged  to  the  Temple.  The  prison-court  (iii.  25),  • 
which  must  have  been  connected  with  the  prison- 
gate,  and,  as  shown  by  the  order  of  the  dedication, 
to  have  been  on  the  north  side  of  the  Temple,  is 
here  also  connected  with  the  king's  high  house ; 
all  this  clearly  referring,  as  shown  above,  to  the 
castle  of  David,  which  originally  occupied  the  site 
of  the  Turns  Antonia.  We  have  on  the  opposite 
side  the  "  water-gate,"  meutioned  in  the  next  verse 
to  Ophel,  and  consequently  as  clearly  identified  with 
the  southern  gate  of  the  Temple.  We  have  also  the 
horse-gate,  that  by  which  Athaliah  was  taken  out 
of  the  Temple  (2  K.  xi.  16  ;  2  Chr.  xxiii.  15),  which 
Josephus  states  led  to  the  Kedron  (Ant.  ix.  7,  §  3), 
and  which  is  here  mentioned  as  connected  with  the 
priests'  houses,  and  probably,  therefore,  a  part  of 
the  Temple.  Mention  is  also  made  of  the  house  of 
Eliashib,  the  high-priest,  and  of  the  eastern  gate, 
probably  that  of  the  Temple.  In  tact,  no  place  is 
mentioned  in  these  last  verses  which  cannot  be  more 
or  less  directly  identified  with  the  localities  on  the 
Temple  hill,  and  not  one  which  can  be  located  in 
Jerusalem.  The  whole  of  the  city  of  David,  how- 
ever, was  so  completely  rebuilt  and  remodelled  by 
Herod,  that  there  are  no  local  indications  to  assist 
us  in  ascertaining  whether  the  order  of  description 
of  the  places  mentioned  after  verse  16  proceeds 
along  the  northern  face,  and  round  by  Ophel,  and 
up  behind  the  Temple  back  to  the  sheep-gate;  or 
whether,  after  crossing  the  causeway  to  the  armoury 
and  prison,  it  does  not  proceed  along  the  western 
face  "l'  the  Temple  to  Ophel  in  the  south,  and  then 
along  the  eastern  face,  back  along  the  northern,  to 
the   place  from  which  the  description  started.      The 

latter  seems  the  more  probable  hypothesis,  but  the 
determination  of  the  poinl  is  not  of  very  great  con- 
sequence.   It  is  enough  to  know  that  the  description 

in  the  lirst   16  verse-  applies  to  Jerusalem,  and  in 
the  last  16  to  Zion,  or  the  city  of  David  :  as  this  is 
sufficient  to  explain  almost  all  the  difficult  passages 
in  the  (»ld  Testament  which  refer  to  the  ai 
topography  "f  the  citj . 

IV    Watei    ■"   Jerusalem.     Thi   abovi    detcmi 


1028 


JERUSALEM 


nation  explains  most  of  the  difficulties  in  bnder- 
standing  what  is  said  in  the  Bible  with  regard 
to  the  water-supply  of  the  city.  Like  Mecca, 
Jerusalem  seems  to  have  been  in  all  ages  remark- 
able for  some  secret  source  of  water,  from  which 
it  was  copiously  supplied  during  even  the  worst 
periods  of  siege  and  famine,  and  which  never 
appears  to  have  foiled  during  any  period  of  its  his- 
tory. The  principal  source  of  this  supply  seems 
to  have  been  situated  to  the  north  ;  either  on  the 
spot  known  as  the  "  camp  of  the  Assyrians,"  or  in 
the  valley  to  the  northward  of  it.  The  earliest  dis- 
tinct mention  of  these  springs  is  in  2  Chr.  xxxii.  4, 
30,  where  Hezekiah,  fearing  an  attack  from  the 
Assyrians,  "  stopped  the  upper  water-course  of 
Cihon,  and  brought  it  straight  down  to  the  west 
side  of  the  city  of  David ;" — and  again  "  he  fortified 
the  city,  and  brought  in  water  into  the  midst  thereof, 
and  digged  the  rock  with  iron,  and  made  wells  for 
water"  (Ecclus.  xlviii.  17),  in  other  words,  he 
brought  the  waters  under  ground  down  the  valley 
leading  from  the  Damascus  gate,  whence  they  have 
been  traced  at  the  present  day  "  to  a  pool  which  he 
made"  between  "  the  two  walls,"  viz.,  those  of  the 
cities  of  David  and  Jerusalem.  Thanks  to  the  re- 
searches of  Drs.  Robinson  and  Barclay,  we  know  how 
correct  the  description  of  Tacitus  is,  when  he  de- 
scribes the  city  as  containing,  "  tons  perennis  aquae 
et  cavati  sub  terra  montes,"  &c,  for  great  rock-cut 
reservoirs  have  been  found  under  the  Temple  area, 
and  channels  connecting  them  with  the  fountain  of 
the  Virgin,  and  that  again  with  the  pool  of  Siloam  ; 
and  many  otheis  may  probably  yet  be  discovered. 

It  would  appear  that  originally  the  overflow 
from  the  great  reservoir  under  the  Temple  area 
must  have  been  by  some  underground  channels, 
probably  alongside  of  the  great  tunnel  under  the 
Mosque  El  Aksah.  This  may  at  least  be  inferred 
from  the  form  of  the  ground,  as  well  as  from  the 
fact  of  the  southern  gate  of  the  Temple  being  called 
the  Water-gate.  This  is  further  confirmed  by  the 
fact  that  when  the  Caliph  Omar  was  searching  for 
the  Sakrah  or  holy  Rock,  which  was  then  covered 
with  filth  by  the  Christians  (Jelal  Addin,  p.  174), 
he  was  impeded  by  the  water  which  "  ran  down 
the  steps  of  the  gate,  so  that  the  greater  part  of 
the  steps  were  under  water:"  a  circumstance  which 
might  very  well  occur  if  these  channels  were  ob- 
structed or  destroyed  by  the  ruins  of  the  Temple. 
Of  course,  if  it  is  attempted  to  apply  this  tradition 
to  the  Sakrah  under  the  "  Dome  of  the  Rock,"  it  is 
simply  absurd ;  as,  that  being  the  highest  point  in 
the  neighbourhood,  no  water  could  lie  around  it : 
but  applying  it  to  the  real  Sakrah  under  the  Aksa, 
it  is  not  only  consistent  with  facts,  but  enables  us 
to  understand  one  more  circumstance  with  regard 
to  the  waters  of  Jerusalem.  It  will  require,  how- 
ever, a  more  critical  examination  than  even  that  of 
Dr.  Barclay  before  we  can  feel  quite  certain  by 
which  channel  the  underground  waters  were  col- 
lected into  the  great  "  excavated  sea "  (woodcut 
No.  4)  under  the  Temple,  or  by  what  exact  means 
the  overflow  was  managed. 

A  considerable  portion  of  these  waters  was  at  one 
time  diverted  to  the  eastward  to  the  great  reservoir 
known  sometimes  as  the  pool  of  Bethesda,  but,  from 
its  probable  proximity  to  the  sheep-gate,  as  shown 
above,  more  properly  the  "  piscina  piobatica,"  and 
which,  from  the  curiously  elaborate  character  of 
its  hydraulic  masonry,  must  always  have  been  in- 
tended as  a  reservoir  of  water,  and  never  coidd 
have   been    the    ditch   of    a    fortification.      From 


JERUSALEM 

the  woodcut  No.  8  it  will  be  perceived  that  the 
masonry  consists  first  of  large  blocks  of  stone,  1 8 
or  20  inches  square,  marked  A.  The  joints  between 
their  courses  have  been  hollowed  out  to  the  depth 
of  8  inches,  and  blocks  16  inches  deep  inserted  in 
them.  The  interstices  are  then  filled  up  with 
smaller  stones,  8  inches  deep,  B.  These  are  covered 
with  a  layer  of  coarse  plaster  and  concrete  (c),  and 
this  again  by  a  fine  coating  of  plaster  (d)  half  an 
inch  in  thickness.  It  is  impossible  to  conceive  such 
elaborate  pains  being  taken  with  a  ditch  of  a  fortress, 
even  if  we  had  any  reason  to  suppose  that  a  wet 
ditch  ever  formed  part  of  the  fortifications  of  Jeru- 
salem ;  but  its  locality,  covering  only  one -half  of 
one  side  of  the  assumed  fortress,  is  sufficient  to  dis- 
pose of  that  idea,  even  if  no  other  reason  existed 
against  converting  this  carefully  formed  pool  into  a 
ditch  of  defence. 


t  of  Masonry  lining  Pool  of  Buthes<]a 
(Krom  Salzmann.) 


It  seems,  however,  that  even  in  very  ancient 
times  this  northern  supply  was  not  deemed  suffi- 
cient, .even  with  all  these  precautions,  for  the 
supply  of  the  city  ;  and  consequently  large  reser- 
voirs were  excavated  from  the  rock,  at  a  place  near 
Etham,  now  known  as  Solomon's  pools,  and  the 
water  brought  from  them  by  a  long  canal  which 
enters  the  city  above  Siloam,  and,  with  the  northern 
supply,  seems  at  all  times  to  have  been  sufficient 
for  the  consumption  of  its  limited  population,  aided 
of  course  by  the  rain  water,  which  was  probably 
always  stored  in  cisterns  all  over  the  town.  The 
tank  now  known  as  the  pool  of  Hezekiah,  situated 
near  the  modern  church  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre,  can- 
not possibly  be  the  work  referred  to,  as  executed  by 
him.  It  is  merely' a  receptacle  within  the  walls  for 
the  surplus  rain  water  drained  into  the  pool  now 
known  as  the  Birket  Mamilla,  and  as  no  outlet  east- 
wards or  towards  the  Temple  has  been  found,  it 
cannot  ever  have  been  of  the  importance  ascribed  to 
the  work  of  Hezekiah,  even  supposing  the  objections 
to  the  locality  did  not  exist  These,  however, 
cannot  possibly  be  got  over. 

X.  Site  of  Holy  Sepulchre. — If  the  preceding 
investigations  have  rendered  the  topography  of  the 
ancient  city  at  all  clear,  there  ought  to  be  no  diffi- 
culty in  determining  the  localities  mentioned  in  the 
N.  T.  as  those  in  which  the  various  scenes  of  the 
Passion  and  Crucifixion  of  our  Lord  took  place. 
There  would  in  fact  be  none,  were  it  not.  that,  as 
will  be  shown  hereafter,  changes  were  made  in  the 
dark  ages,  which  have  confused  the  Christian  topo- 
graphy of  the  city  to  even  a  greater  extent  than  the 
change  of  the  name  ofZion  from  the  eastern  to  the 


Plate  II. 


.-•      . 


.^v""" 


&*' 


Moiini  ,.i 
Olives 


o 


tl^ibU. 


J    ERUSALEM. 


en  Jard*r> 


JEEUSALEM 

western  hill  did  that  of  the  Jewish  descriptions  of 
the  place. 

As  the  question  now  stands,  the  fixation  of  the 
sites  depends  mainly  on  the  answers  that  may  be 
giveu  to  two  questions: — First,  did  Constantine 
and  those  who  acted  with  him  possess  sufficient 
information  to  enable  them  to  ascertain  exactly  the 
precise  localities  of  the  crucifixion  and  burial  of 
Christ  ?  Secondly,  is  the  present  church  of  the 
Holy  Sepulchre  that  which  he  built,  or  does  it  stand 
on  the  same  spot  ? 

To  the  second  question  a  negative  answer  must 
be  given,  if  the  first  can  be  answered  with  any 
reasonable  degree  of  probability.  Either  the  locali- 
ties could  not  have  been  correctly  ascertained  in 
the  time  of  Constantine,  or  it  must  be  that  at 
some  subsequent  period  they  were  changed.  The 
site  of  the  present  church  is  so  obviously  at  variance 
with  the  facts  of  the  Bible  narrative,  that  almost 
all  the  best  qualified  investigators  have  assumed 
that  the  means  did  not  exist  for  ascertaining  the 
localities  correctly  when  the  church  was  built, 
without,  its  suggesting  itself  to  them  that  subse- 
quent change  may  perhaps  contain  the  true  solution 
of  the  difficulty.  On  the  other  hand  everything 
seems  to  tend  to  confirm  the  probability  of  the  first 
question  being  capable  of  being  answered  satis- 
factorily. 

In  the  first  place,  though  the  city  was  destroyed 
by  Titus,  and  the  Jews  were  at  one  time  prohibited 
from  approaching  it,  it  can  almost  certainly  be 
proved  that  there  were  Christians  always  present  on 
the  spot,  and  the  succession  of  Christian  bishops  can 
lie  made  out  with  very  tolerable  certainty  and 
completeness  ;  so  that  it  is  more  than  probable  they 
would  retain  the  memory  of  the  sacred  sites  in 
unbroken  continuity  of  tradition.  Besides  this,  it 
can  be  shown  (Findlay,  On  the  Site  of  the  Holy 
Sepulchre)  that  the  Romans  recorded  carefully 
all  the  principal  localities  in  their  conquered  pro- 
vinces, and  had  maps  or  plans  which  would  enable 
them  to  ascertain  any  important  locality  with  very 
tolerable  precision.  It  must  also  be  bome  in  mind 
that  during  the  three  centuries  that  elapsed  between 
the  crucifixion  and  the  age  of  Constantine,  the 
Christians  were  too  important  a  sect,  even  in  the 
eyes  of  the  Romans,  to  be  neglected,  and  their  pro- 
ceedings and  traditions  would  certainly  attract  the 
attention  of  at  least  the  Roman  governor  of  Judaea; 
and  some  records  must  certainly  have  existed  in 
Jerusalem,  which  ought  to  have  been  sufficient  to 
fix  the  localities.  Even  if  it  is  argued  that  this 
knowledge  might  not  have  been  sufficient  to  identify 
the  exact  rock-cut  sepulchre  of  Joseph  of  Arimathea, 
it  must  have  been  sufficient  to  determine  the  site 
of  such  a  place  as  Golgotha,  and  of  the  l'raetorium  ; 
and  as  the  scenes  of  tin'  Passion  all  lay  near  one 
another,  materials  must  have  existed  for  fixing  them 
with  at  Least  very  tolerable  approximate  certainty. 
As  tin'  question  now  lies  between  two  sites  which 
aii'  very  far  apart,  one  being  in  the  town,  the  other 
on  its  eastern  boundary,  it  is  nearly  certain  that  the 
authorities  had  the  knowledge  sufficient  to  determine 
at  least  which  of  the  two  was  the  most  probable. 

The  account  given  by  Eusebius  of  the  unOOVi  rin  / 
of  the  rock,  expresses  no  doubt  or  uncertainty 
about  the  matter.  In  order  to  insult  the  Christians, 
according  to  his  account  ( Vita  Const,  iii.  26), 
"  impious  persons  had  heaped  earth  upon  it,  and 
erected  an  idol  temple  on  the  site."  The  earth 
was  removed,  and  he  says  (  Theophania,  Lee's 
Translation,  p.  199),  "  it  is  astonishing  to  see  even 


JEEUSALEM 


1029 


the  rock  standing  out  erect  and  alone  on  a  level 
land,  and  having  only  one  cave  in  it ;  lest,  had  there 
been  many,  the  miracle  of  Him  who  overcame  death 
might  have  been  obscured;"  and  as  if  in  order 
that  there  might  be  no  mistake  as  to  its  position,  he 
continues,  "  Accordingly  on  the  very  spot  that  wit- 
nessed our  Savour's  sufferings  a  new  Jerusalem  was 
constructed  over  against  the  one  so  celebrated  of 
old,  which  since  the  foul  stain  of  guilt  brought  on 
it  by  the  murder  of  the  Lord  has  experienced  the 
last  extremity  of  desolation.  It  was  opposite  this 
city  that  the  Emperor  began  to  rear  a  monument 
of  our  Saviour's  victory  over  death  with  rich  and 
lavish  magnificence"  {Vita  Const,  iii.  33).  This 
passage  ought  of  itself  to  be  sufficient  to  set  the 
question  at  rest,  for  it  is  minutely  descriptive  of 
the  site  of  the  building  now  known  as  the  Moscpie 
of  Omar,  but  wholly  inapplicable  to  the  site  of  the 
present  church,  which  was  then,  and  must  certainly 
in  the  time  of  Titus  or  of  Herod  have  been  within  the 
walls  of  the  city  of  Jerusalem,  and  neither  opposite 
to  nor  over  against  it. 

The  buildings  which  Constantine  or  his  mother, 
Helena,  erected,  will  be  more  particularly  described 
elsewhere  [Sepulchre]  ;  in  the  meanwhile  it  is 
sufficient  to  say  that  it  will  be  proved  by  what  fol- 
lows, that  two  of  them  now  remain — the  one  the 
Anastasis,  a  circular  building  erected  over  the  tomb 
itself;  the  other  the  "  Golden  Gateway,"  which  was 
the  propylea  described  by  Eusebius  as  leading  to 
the  atrium  of  the  basilica.  He  says  it  opened 
"  iwl  rrjs  irAareias  ayopas,"  in  other  words, 
that  it  had  a  broad  market-place  in  front  of  it, 
as  all  sacred  places  or  places  of  pilgrimage  had, 
and  have,  in  the  East.  Beyond  this  was  an  atrium 
leading  to  the  basilica.  This  was  destroyed  in 
the  end  of  the  tenth  century  by  El  Hakeem,  the 
mad  Ehalif  of  Egypt ;  in  the  words  of  William  of 
Tyre  (lib.  i.  c.  iv.),  "  usque  ad  solum  diruta,"  or 
as  it  is  more  quaintly  expressed  by  Albericus  (Le 
Quieii,  Oriens  Christiana,  p.  47 5),"  Solo  coaequare 
maudavit."  Fortunately,  however,  even  the  Mos- 
lems respected  the  tomb  of  Christ,  whom  they  con- 
sider one  of  the  seven  prophets,  inferior  only  to  the 
Founder  of  their  own  religion  ;  and  they  left  the 
"  Dome  of  the  Rock  "  uninjured  as  we  now  see  it. 

In  order  to  prove  these  assertions,  there  aie  three 
classes  of  evidence  which  may  be  appealed  to,  and 
which  must  coincide,  or  the  question  must  remain 
still  in  doubt: — 

First,  it  is  necessary  that  the  circumstances  of 
the  locality  should  accord  with  those  of  the  Bible 
narrative. 

Secondly,  the  incidental  notices  furnished  by  those 
travellers  who  visited  Jerusalem  between  the  time 
of  Constantine  and  that  of  the  Crusades  must  be 
descriptive  of  these  localities  ;  and, 

Thirdly,  the  architectural  evidence  of  the  build- 
ings themselves  must  be  that  of'  the  age  to  which 
they  are  assigned. 

Taking  the  last  first,  it  is  hardly  necessary  to 
remark  how  important  this  class  of  evidence  has 
become  in  all  questions  of'  this  sort  of  late  years. 
Before  the  gradation  of  styles  had  been  properly 
investigated  nothing  could  be  more  wild  than  the 
determination  of  the  dates  assigned  to  all  the 
mediaeval  buildings  of  Europe.  Now  that  the 
chronometric  scale  has  been  fixed,  nothing  is  either 
so  easy  or  so  certain  as  to  fix  the  date  of  any 
building,  or  any  part  of  one,  and  it  is  admitted 
by  all  archaeologists  that  it  is  the  most  sine  and  con- 
clusive evidence  that  can  be  adduced  on  the  subject. 


1030 


JERUSALEM 


In  this  country  the  progression  of  style  is  only 
generally  understood  as  applied  to  mediaeval  build- 
ings, but  with  sufficient  knowledge  it  is  equally 
applicable  to  Indian,  Mohammedan,  Classical,  or 
Roman,  in  tact  to  all  true  styles,  and  no  one 
who  is  familiar  with  the  gradation  of  styles  that 
took  place  between  the  time  of  Hadrian  and  that 
of  Justinian  can  tail  to  see  that  the  Golden  Gate- 
way and  Dome  of  the  Rock  are  about  half-way  in 
the  series,  and  are  in  fact  buildings  which  must 
have  been  erected  within  the  century  in  which  Con- 
stantine  flourished.  With  regard  to  the  Golden 
Gateway,  which  is  practically  unaltered,  this  is  un- 
doubted. It  is  precisely  of  that  style  which  is 
found  only  in  the  buildings  of  the  end  of  the  third, 
or  beginning  of  the  fourth,  century,  and  accords  so 
completely  with  those  found  at  Rome,  Spalatro, 
and  elsewhere,  as  to  leave  no  reasonable  doubt  on 
the  subject.  Had  it  been  as  early  as  the  time  of 
Hadrian,  the  bent  entablature  which  covers  both 
the  external  and  internal  openings  could  not  have 
existed,  while  had  it  been  as  late  as  the  age  of  Justi- 
nian, its  classical  features  would  have  been  ex- 
changed for  the  peculiar  incised  style  of  his  build- 
ings. It  may  also  be  remarked,  that,  although  in 
the  outer  wall,  it  is  a  festal,  not  a  fortified  entrance, 
and  never  could  have  been  intended  as  a  city  gate, 
but  must  have  led  to  some  sacred  or  palatial  edifice. 
It  is  difficult,  indeed,  to  suggest  what  that  could  have 
been,  except  the  Basilica  described  by  Eusebius. 


The  exterior  of  the  other  building  (the  Anas- 
tasis)  has  been  repaired  and  covered  with  coloured 
tiles  and  inscriptions  in  more  modern  times ;  but 
the  interior  is  nearly  unaltered  (vide  Plates  by 
Cathervvood  and  Aruudale,  in  Fergusson's  Topo- 
graphy  of  Ancient  Jerusalem),  and  even  exter- 
nally, wherever  this  coating  of  tiles  has  peeled  off, 
the  old  Roman  round  arch  appears  in  lieu  of  its 
pointed  substitute.  It  must  also  be  added  that  it 
is  essentially  a  tomb-building,  similar  in  form  and 
arrangement,  as  it  is  in  detail,  to  the  Tomb  of  the 
Emperor  Constantine  at  Rome,  or  of  his  daughter 
Constantia,  outside  the  walls,  and  indeed  more  or 
less  like  all  the  tomb-buildings  of  that  age. 

Though  the  drawings  of  these  buildings  have 
been  published  for  more  than  ten  years,  and  photo- 
graphs are  now  available,  no  competent  archaeo- 
logist or  architect  has  ventured  to  deny  that  these 
are  buildings  of  the  age  here  ascribed  to  them;  and 
we  have  therefore  the  pertinent  question,  which 
still  remains  unanswered,  What  tomb-like  building 


JERUSALEM 

did  Constantine  or  any  one  in  his  age  erect  at 
Jerusalem,  over  a  mass  of  the  living  rock,  rising 
eight  or  nine  feet  above  the  bases  of  the  columns, 
and  extending  over  the  whole  central  area  of  the 
church,  with  a  sacred  cave  in  it,  unless  it  were 
the  church  of  the  Holy  Anastasis,  described  by 
Eusebius  ? 

Supposing  it  were  possible  to  put  this  evidence 
aside,  the  most  plausible  suggestion  is  to  appeal 
to  the  presumed  historical  fact  that  it  was  built  by 
Omar,  or  by  the  Moslems  at  all  events.  There  is, 
however,  no  proof  whatever  of  this  assumption. 
What  Omar  did  build  is  the  small  mosque  on  the 
east  of  the  Aksah,  overhanging  the  southern  wall, 
and  which  still  bears  his  name ;  and  no  Moham- 
medan writer  of  any  sort,  anterior  to  the  recovery 
of  the  city  from  the  Christians  by  Saladin,  ventures 
to  assert  that  his  countrymen  built  the  Dome  of  the 
Rock.  On  the  contrary,  while  they  are  most  minute 
in  describing  the  building  of  the  Aksa,  they  are 
entirely  silent  about  this  building,  and  only  assume 
that  it  was  theirs  after  they  came  into  permanent 
possession  of  it  after  the  Crusades.  It  may  also  be 
added  that,  whatever  it  is,  it  certainly  is  not  a  mosque. 
The  principal  and  essential  feature  in  all  these  build- 
ings is  the  Kibleh,  or  niche  pointing  towards  Mecca. 
No  mosque  in  the  whole  world,  of  whatever  shape 
or  form,  is  without  this ;  but  in  the  place  where  it 
should  be  in  this  building  is  found  the  principal 
entrance,  so  that  the  worshipper  enters  with  his 
back  to  Mecca — a  sacrilege  which  to  the  Moham- 
medans, if  this  were  a  mosque,  would  be  impossible. 
Had  it  been  called  the  Tomb  of  Omar,  this  incon- 
gruity would  not  have  been  apparent,  for  all  the 
old  Moslem  and  Christian  tombs  adopt  nearly  the 
same  ordinance ;  but  no  tradition  hints  that  either 
Omar  or  any  Moslem  saint  was  ever  buried  within 
its  precincts. 

Nor  will  it  answer  to  assume,  as  is  generally 
done,  that  it  was  built  in  the  first  century  of  the 
Hegira  over  the  Sacred  Rock  of  the  Temple ;  for 
from  the  account  of  the  Moslem  and  Christian 
historians  of  the  time  it  is  quite  evident  that  at 
that  time  the  site  and  dimensions  of  the  Jewish 
Tern jile  could  be  ascertained,  and  were  known.  As 
shown  above,  this  building  certainly  always  was  out- 
side the  limits  of  the  Temple,  so  that  this  could  not 
be  the  object  of  its  erection.  The  Mosque  of  Omar 
properly  so  called,  the  great  mosque  El  Aksa,  the 
mosques  of  the  Mogrebins  and  of  Abu  Bekr,  are 
all  within  the  limits  of  the  old  Temple,  and  were 
meant  to  be  so  (see  woodcut  No.  4).  They  are  so 
because  in  all  ages  the  Mohammedans  held  the 
Jewish  Temple  to  be  a  sacred  spot,  as  certainly  as 
the  Christians  held  it.  to  be  accursed,  and  all  their 
sacred  buildings  stand  within  its  precincts.  So  far 
as  we  now  know  there  was  nothing  in  Jerusalem  of 
a  sacred  character  built  by  the  Mohammedans  out- 
side the  four  walls  of  the  Temple  anterior  to  the 
recovery  of  the  city  by  Saladin. 

Irrefragable  as  this  evidence  appears  to  be,  it 
would  be  impossible  to  maintain  it  otherwise  than 
bv  assuming  that  Constantine  blindly  adopted  a 
wrong  locality,  if  the  sites  now  assumed  to  be  true 
were  such  as  did  not  accord  with  the  details  of  the 
Bible  narratives:  fortunately,  however,  they  agree 
with  them  to  the  minutest  detail. 

To  understand  this  it  is  necessary  to  bear  in 
mind  that  at  the  time  of  the  crucifixion  the  third 
wall,  or  that  of  Agrippa  (as  shown  in  Plate  II.), 
did  not  exist,  but  was  commenced  twelve  years 
afterwards:   the  spot  where  the  Dome  of  the  Rock 


JERUSALEM 

therefore  now  stands  was  at  that  time  outside  the 
walls,  and  open  to  the  country. 

It  was  also  a  place  where  certainly  tombs  did 
exist.  It  has  been  shown  above  that  the  sepulchres 
of  David  and  the  other  kings  of  Israel  were  in  this 
neighbourhood.  We  know  from  Josephus  (B.  J. 
v.  7,  §o)  that  "  John  and  his  taction  defended  them- 
selves from  the  Tower  of  Antonia,  and  from  the 
northern  cloister  of  the  Temple,  and  fought  the 
Romans  before  the  monument  of  king  Alexander;" 
so  that  there  certainly  were  tombs  hereabouts ;  and 
there  is  a  passage  in  Jeremiah  (xxxi.  38-40. ') 
which  apparently  describes  prophetically  the  build- 
ing of  the  third  wall  and  the  enclosure  of  the 
northern  parts  of  the  city  from  Gareb — most  pro- 
bably the  hill  on  which  Psephinos  stood — to  Goath, 
which  is  mentioned  as  in  immediate  juxtaposition 
to  the  horse-gate  of  the  Temple,  out  of  which  the 
wicked  queen  Athaliah  was  taken  to  execution  ; 
and  the  description  of  "  the  whole  valley  of  the 
dead  bodies  and  of  the  ashes,  and  all  the  fields 
unto  the  brook  of  Kidron,  and  the  corner  of  the 
horse-gate  toward  the  east,"  is  in  itself  suth'eient 
to  prove  that  this  locality  was  then,  as  it  is  now, 
the  great  cemetery  of  Jerusalem  ;  and  as  the  sepul- 
chre was  nigh  at  hand  to  the  place  of  execution 
(John  xix.  42),  every  probability  exists  to  prove 
that  this  may  have  been  the  scene  of  the  passion. 

The  Praetor ium  where  Christ  was  judged  was 
most  probably  the  Antonia,  which  at  that  time,  as 
before  and  afterwards,  was  the  citadel  of  Jerusalem 
and  the  residence  of  the  governors,  and  the  Xysfus 
and  Council-house  were  certainly,  as  shown  above, 
in  this  neighbourhood.  Leaving  these  localities  the 
Saviour,  bearing  his  cross,  must  certainly  have 
gone  towards  the  country,  and  might  well  meet 
Simon  or  any  one  coming  towards  the  city  ;  thus 
every  detail  of  the  description  is  satisfied,  and 
none  offended  by  the  locality  now  assumed. 

The  third  class  of  evidence  is  from  its  nature  by 
no  means  so  clear,  but  there  is  nothing  whatever  in 
it  to  contradict,  and  a  great  deal  that  directly  con- 
firms the  above  statements.  The  earliest  of  the 
travellers  who  visited  Jerusalem  after  the  discovery 
of  the  Sepulchre  by  Constantine  is  one  known  as 
the  Bordeaux  pilgrim  ;  he  seems  to  have  visited 
the  place  about  the  year  333.  In  his  Itinerary, 
after  describing  the  palace  of  David,  the  Great  Syn- 
agogue, and  other  objects  inside  the  city,  he  adds, 
"  hide  ut  eas  forts  iimriiiii  de  Sione  euntibus  ad 
Portam  Neopolitanam  ad  partem  dextram  deorsum 
in  valle  sunt  panetes  ubi  donius  fuit  sive  palatium 
Pontii  1'ilati.  Ibi  Dominus  auditus  est  antequam 
pateretur.  A  sinistra  autem  parte  est  monticulua 
Golgotha,  ubi  Dominus  crucifixus  est.  Inde  cpiasi 
ad  lapidem  tnissum  est  cripta  ubi  corpus  ejus 
positum  fuit,  et  tertia  die  resurrexit.  Ibidem  modo 
jussu  Constantini  [mperatoris  Basilica  facta  est,  id 
est  Dominicum  mirae  pulchritudinis."  From  this 
it  is  evident  that  passing  out  of  the  modem  Zion 
gate  he  turned  round  the  outside  of  the  walls  to 
the  left.  Hail  he  gone  to  the  right,  past  the  Jaffa 
gate,  both  the  ancient  and  modern  Golgotha  would 

have  been  on  his  right  hand;   but  passing  round 

the   Temple  area    he   may   have   had   the    house   of 
Pilate  on  his  right  in  the  valley,  where  some  tradi- 


JERUSALEM 


1031 


1  "  Behold  the  day  is  come,  saith  the  Lord,  that 
the  city  shall  he  built  to  th.fi  Lord,  from  the  tower 
of  Hananeel  unto  the  irate  of  the  corner.  And  the 
measuring-line  shall  yet  go  forth  over  against  it  upon 
the  hill  Gareb,  and  shall  compass  about  to  Goath. 


tions  placed  it.  He  must  have  had  Golgotha  and  the 
Sepulchre  on  his  left,  as  he  describes  them.  In  so  far 
therefore  as  his  testimony  goes,  it  is  clear  he  was  not 
speaking  of  the  modern  Golgotha,  which  is  inside  the 
city,  while  the  very  expression  "  foris  nninim"  seems 
to  indicate  what  the  context  confirms,  that  it  was  a 
place  on  the  verge  of  the  city,  and  on  the  left  hand 
of  one  passing  round  the  walls,  or  in  other  words 
the  place  marked  on  the  accompanying  map. 

Antoninus  Martyrus  is  the  only  other  traveller 
whose  works  have  come  down  to  us,  who  visited 
the  city  before  the  Mohammedan  conquest ;  his  de- 
scription is  not  sufficiently  distinct  for  much  reli- 
ance to  be  placed  on  it,  though  all  it  does  say  is 
more  in  accordance  with  the  eastern  than  the 
western  site  ;  but  he  incidentally  supplies  one  fact. 
He  says,  "  Juxta  ipsum  altare  est  crypta  ubi  si 
ponas  aurem  audies  flumen  aquarum,  et  si  jaetas 
intus  pomum  ant  quid  natare  potest  et  vade  ad 
fontem  Siloam  et  ibi  illud  suscipies  "  (Ant.  Mart. 
Iter.  p.  14).  There  is  every  reason  to  believe,  from 
the  researches  of  Drs.  Robinson  and  Barclay,  that 
the  whole  of  the  Haram  area  is  excavated  with 
subterranean  water-channels,  and  that  therefore  if 
you  place  your  ear  almost  anywhere  you  may 
hear  the  flowing  of  the  water;  and  all  these  waters 
can  only  drain  out  towards  Siloam.  We  also  know 
that  under  the  cave  in  the  Dome  of  the  Rock 
there  is  a  well,  called  the  Bir  Arruah,  and  that  it 
does  communicate  with  the  great  excavated  sea  or 
cistern  in  front  of  the  Aksa,  and  that  its  overflow 
is  towards  Siloam,  so  that  if  an  apple  were  dropped 
into  it,  in  so  far  as  we  now  know,  it  would  come 
out  there.  If  we  presume  that  Antoninus  was 
speaking  of  the  present  sepulchre  the  passage  is 
utterly  unintelligible.  There  is  no  well,  and  no 
trace  has  ever  been  discovered  of  any  communi- 
cation with  Siloam.  As  far  as  our  present  know- 
ledge goes,  this  objection  is  in  itself  fatal  to  the 
modern  site. 

A  third  and  most  important  narrative  has  been 
preserved  to  us  by  Adamnanus,  an  abbot  of  Iona, 
who  took  it  down  from  the  mouth  of  Arculfus,  a 
French  bishop  who  visited^  the  Holy  Land  in  the 
end  of  the  seventh  century.  He  not  only  describes, 
but  gives  from  memory  a  plan  of  the  Church  of 
the  Holy  Sepulchre,  but  without  any  very  precise 
indication  of  its  locality.  He  then  describes  the 
mosque  El  Aksa  as  a  square  building  situated  on 
the  site  of  the  Temple  of  Solomon,  and  with  details 
that  leave  no  doubt  as  to  its  identity  ;  but  either  he 
omits  all  mention  of  the  Dome  of  the  Rock,  which 
certainly  Was  then,  as  it  is  now,  the  most  con- 
spicuous and  most  important  building  in  Jerusalem, 
or  the  inference  is  inevitable,  that,  lie  has  alivmh 
described  it  under  the  designation  of  the  Church  of 

the  Sepulchre,  which  the  whole  context  would  lead 
us  to  infer  was  really  the  case. 

Resides  these,  there  are  various  passages  in  the 
writings  of  the  fathers  which  are  unintelligible  if 
we  assume  that  the  present  church  was  the  on.' 
built  by  Constantine.  Dositheus,  for  instance  Hi. 
1,  §7),  says,  that  owing  to  the  steepness  of  the 
ground,  or  to  tin'  hill  or  valley,  to  the  westward  of 
the  Churc-h  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre,  it  had  only  its 
one   wall    on    that    side,  "Exei   <5   vabs  rov  ayiov 

And  the  whole  valley  of  the  dead  bodies  and  of  the 
ashes,  and  all  the  fields  unto  the  brook  of  Kidron, 
unto  the  corner  of  the  horse-irate  tow  aid  the  east, 
shall  he  holy  unto  the  Lord  ;  it  shall  not  lie  plucked 
up  nor  thrown  down  any  more  for  ever." 


1032 


JERUSALEM 


ra(pov  Kara  fisv  t?;i/  Svffiv  Sia  rb  elvat  opos  ix6vov 
rov  tolxov  avrov.  This  cannot  be  applied  to  the 
present  church,  inasmuch  as  towards  the  west  in 
that  locality  there  is  space  for  any  amount  of  build- 
ing ;  but  it  is  literally  correct  as  applied  to  the  so- 
called  Dome  of  the  Rock,  which  does  stand  so  near 
the  edge  of  the  valley  between  the  two  towns  that 
it  would  be  impossible  to  erect  any  considerable 
building  there. 

The  illuminated  Cross,  mentioned  by  St.  Cyril 
(Epist.  ad  Const.)  is  unintelligible,  unless  we 
assume  the  Sepulchre  to  have  been  on  the  side  of 
the  city  next  to  the  Mount  of  Olives.  But  even 
more  distinct  than  this  is  a  passage  in  the  writings 
of  St.  Epiphanius,  writing  in  the  4th  century,  who, 
speaking  of  Golgotha,  says,  "  It  does  not  occupy 
an  elevated  position  as  compared  with  other  places 
surrounding  it.  Over  against  it,  the  Mount  of 
Olives  is  higher.  Again,  the  hill  that  formerly 
existed  in  Zion,  but  which  is  now  levelled,  was  once 
higher  than  the  sacred  spot."  As  we  cannot  be 
sure  to  which  hill  he  applies  the  name,  Zion,  no 
great  stress  can  be  laid  on  that ;  but  no  one  ac- 
quainted with  the  localities  would  speak  of  the 
modern  Golgotha  as  over  against  the  Mount  of 
Olives.  So  far  therefore  as  this  goes,  it  is  in  favour 
of  the  proposed  view. 

The  slight  notices  contained  in  other  works  are 
hardly  sufficient  to  determine  the  question  one  way 
or  the  other,  but  the  mass  of  evidence  adduced 
above  would  probably  never  have  been  questioned, 
were  it  not  that  from  the  time  of  the  Crusades 
down  to  the  present  day  (which  is  the  period 
during  which  we  are  really  and  practically  ac- 
quainted with  the  history  and  topography  of  Jeru- 
salem), it  is  certain  that  the  church  in  the  Latin 
quarter  of  the  city  has  always  been  considered  as 
containing  the  Tomb  of  Christ,  and  as  being  the 
church  which  Constantine  erected  over  the  sacred 
cave  ;  and  as  no  record  exists — nor  indeed  is  it  likely 
that  it  should — of  a  transference  of  the  site,  there 
is  a  difficulty  in  persuading  others  that  it  really 
took  place.  As  however  there  is  nothing  to  con- 
tradict, and  every  tiling  to  confirm,  the  assumption 
that  a  transference  did  take  place  about  this  time, 
it  is  not  important  to  the  argument  whether  or 
not  we  are  able  to  show  exactly  how  it  took  place, 
though  nothing  seems  to  be  more  likely  or  natural 
under  the  circumstances. 

Architecturally,  there  is  literally  no  feature  or 
no  detail  which  would  induce  us  to  believe  that 
any  part  of  the  present  church  is  older  than  the 
time  of  the  Crusades.  The  only  things  about  it  of 
more  ancient  date  are  the  fragments  of  an  old 
classical  cornice,  which  are  worked  in  as  string 
courses  with  the  Gothic  details  of  the  external 
facade,  and  singularly  enough  this  cornice  is  identical 
in  style  with,  and  certainly  belongs  to  the  age  of, 
the  Golden  Gateway,  and  Dome  of  the  Rock,  and 
consequently  can  scarcely  be  anything  else  than  a 
fragment  of  the  old  basilica,  which  El  Hakeem  had 
destroyed  in  the  previous  century,  and  the  remains 
of  which  must  still  have  been  scattered  about  when 
the  Crusaders  arrived. 

It  is  well  known  that  a  furious  persecution  of 
the  Christians  was  carried  on,  as  above-mentioned, 
at  the  end  of  the  10th  century.  Their  great  Ba- 
silica was  destroyed,  their  Tomb  appropriated*  they 
were  driven  from  the  city,  and  dared  not  approach 
the  holy  places  under  pain  of  death.  As  the  perse- 
cution relaxed  a  few  crept  back  to  their  old  quarter 
of  the  city,  and  there  most  naturally  built  them- 


JEEUSALEM 

selves  a  church  in  which  to  celebrate  the  sacred 
mysteries  of  Easter.  It  is  not  necessary  to  assume 
fraud  in  this  proceeding  any  more  than  to  impute 
it  to  those  who  built  sepulchral  churches  in  Italy, 
Spain,  or  England.  Thousands  have  prayed  and 
wept  in  these  simulated  sepulchres  all  over  the 
world,  and  how  much  more  appropriately  at  Jeru- 
salem !  Being  in  the  city,  and  so  near  the  spot,  it 
was  almost  impossible  but  that  it  should  eventually 
come  to  be  assumed  that  instead  of  a  simulated,  it 
was  the  true  sepulchre,  and  it  would  have  required 
more  than  human  virtue  on  the  part  of  the  priests 
if  they  had  undeceived  the  unsuspecting  pilgrims, 
whose  faith  and  liberality  were  no  doubt  quickened 
by  the  assumption.  Had  the  Christians  never 
recovered  the  city,  the  difference  would  never  have 
been  discovered  in  the  dark  ages  ;  but  when  unex- 
pectedly those  who  had  knelt  and  prayed  as  pil- 
grims, came  back  as  armed  men,  and  actually  pos- 
sessed the  city,  it  was  either  necessary  to  confess  the 
deception  or  to  persevere  in  it ;  and,  as  was  too 
often  the  case,  the  latter  course  was  pursued,  and 
hence  all  the  subsequent  confusion. 

Nothing,  however,  can  be  more  remarkable  than 
the  different  ways  in  which  the  Crusaders  treated 
the  Dome  of  the  Rock  and  the  Mosque  El  Aksa. 
The  latter  they  always  called  the  "  Templum  seu 
palatium  Solomonis,"  and  treated  it  with  the  con- 
tempt always  applied  by  Christians  to  anything 
Jewish.  The  Mosque  was  turned  into  a  stable,  the 
buildings  into  dwellings  for  knights,  who  took  the 
title  of  Knights  Templars,  from  their  residence  in 
the  Temple.  But  the  Dome  of  the  Rock  they  allied 
"  Templum  Domini."  (Jacob  de  Vitry,  c.  62  ; 
Ssewolf,  Eel.  de  Voyage,  iv.  833 ;  Maundeville, 
Voiage,  &c,  100,  105  ;  Mar.  Sanutus,  iii.  xiv.  9  ; 
Brocardus,  vi.  1047.)  Priests  and  a  choir  were 
appointed  to  perform  service  in  it,  and  during  the 
whole  time  of  the  Christian  occupation  it  was  held 
certainly  as  sacred,  if  not  more  so,  than  the  church 
of  the  Holy  Sepulchre  in  the  town.  (Will,  of  Tyre, 
viii.  3.)  Had  they  believed  or  suspected  that  the 
rock  was  that  on  which  the  Jewish  temple  stood  it 
would  have  been  treated  as  the  Aksa  was,  but  they 
knew  that  the  Dome  of  the  Rock  was  a  Christian 
building,  and  sacred  to  the  Saviour ;  though  in  the 
uncritical  spirit  of  the  age  they  never  seem  exactly 
to  have  known  either  what  it  was,  or  by  whom  it 
was  erected. 

XI.  Rebuilding  of  the  Temple  by  Julian. — Before 
leaving  the  subject,  it  is  necessary  to  revert  to 
the  attempt  of  Julian  the  Apostate  to  rebuild  the 
Temple  of  the  Jews.  It  was  undertaken  avowedly 
as  a  slight  to  the  Christians,  and  with  the  idea 
of  establishing  a  counterpoise  to  the  influence  and 
position  they  had  attained  by  the  acts  of  Constan- 
tine. It  was  commenced  about  six  months  before 
his  death,  and  during  that  period  the  work  secerns 
to  have  been  pushed  forward  with  extraordinary 
activity  under  the  guidance  of  his  friend  Alypiusi 
Not  only  weie  large  sums  of  money  collected  for 
the  purpose,  and  an  enormous  concourse  of  the 
Jews  assembled  on  the  spot,  but  an  immense  mass 
of  materials  was  brought  together,  and  the  works 
of  the  foundations  at  least  carried  vigorously  on 
during  this  period  of  excitement,  before  the  miracle 
occurred,  which  put  a  final  stop  to  the  undertaking. 
Even  if  we  have  not  historical  evidence  of  these 
facts,  the  appearance  of  the  south  wall  of  the  Harara 
would  lead  us  to  expect  that  something  of  the 
sort  had  been  attempted  at  this  period.  As  before 
mentioned,  the  great  tunnel-like  vault   under  the 


mbi  of 

■ 


Mouut 
of   Qffeiiri 


flan 


Mouth    at' 
Evil     Couui 


■ 


JERUSALEM 


JERUSALEM 

Mosque  El  Aksa,  with  its  four-domed  vestibule,  is 
almost  certainly  part  of  the  temple  of  Herod  [see 
Tkmplk],  and  coeval  with  his  period,  but  exter- 
nally to  this,  certain  architectural  decorations  have 
been  added  (woodcut  No.  10),  and  that  so  slightly, 
that  daylight  can  be  perceived  between  the  old 
walls  and  the  subsequent  decorations,  except  at  the 
points  of  attachment.8  It  is  not  difficult  to  ascertaiu, 
approximately  at  least,  the  age  of  these  adjuncts. 
From  their  classical  forms  they  cannot  be  so  late  as 
the  time  of  Justinian  ;  while  on  the  other  hand 
they  are  slightly  more  modern  in  style  than  the 
architecture  of  the  Golden  Gateway,  or  than  any  of 
the  classical  details  of  the  Dome  of  the  Rock.  They 
may  therefore  with  very  tolerable  certainty  be 
ascribed  to  the  age  of  Julian,  while,  from  the  his- 
torical accounts,  they  are  just  such  as  we  would 
expect  to  find  them.  Above  them  an  inscription 
bearing  the  name  of  Hadrian  has  been  inserted  in 
the  wall,  but  turned  upside  down  ;  and  the  whole 
of  the  masonry  being  of  that  intermediate  cha- 
racter between  that  which  we  know  to  be  ancient, 
and  that  which  we  easily  recognise  as  the  work  of 
the  Mohammedans,  there  can  be  little  doubt  but 
that  it  belongs  to  this  period. 


JERUSALEM 


1033 


3~ 


No.  10.— Frontispiece  ul  Julian  i 


mil  wall  u!' llarai 


Among  the  incidents  mentioned  as  occurring  at 
this  time  is  one  bearing  rather  distinctly  on 
the  topography  of  the  sit.'.  It  is  said  (Gregory 
Nazianzen,  >"/  ./ml.  et  Gent.  7,1, and  confirmed  by 
Sozomen)  that  when  the  workmen  were  driven 
from  their  works  by  tie'  globes  of  lire  that 
issued  from  the  foundations,  they  sought  refuge 
in  a    neighbouring    church   (eVl   ti  raiv  -KK^alov 


1  This   fact    the    Writer    owes,    with    many  other 
valuable  rectifications,  to  the  observation  of  his  friend 

Mr.   (i.   Grove.      The    \v lent,    &C,  is   from   a   large 

photograph    which,    with   many  others,    were   taken 


tepwv,  or,  as  Sozomen  has  it,  els  rb  tepbv) — an 
expression  which  would  be  unintelligible  did  not. 
the  buildings  of  Constantine  exist  at  that  time  on 
the  spot ;  for,  except  these,  there  could  not  be  any 
church  or  sacred  place  in  the  neighbourhood  to 
which  the  expression  could  be  applied.  The  principal 
bearing,  however,  of  Julian's  attempt  on  the  topo- 
graphy of  Jerusalem  consists  iu  the  fact  of  its 
proving  not  only  that  the  site  of  the  Jewish 
temple  was  perfectly  well  known  at  this  period — 
a.d.  362 — but  that  the  spot  was  then,  as  always, 
held  accursed  by  the  Christians,  and  as  doomed  by 
the  denunciation  of  Christ  Himself  never  to  be 
re-established ;  and  this  consequently  makes  it  as 
absurd  to  suppose  that  the  Aksa  is  a  building  of 
Justinian  as  that  the  Dome  of  the  Rock  or  the 
Golden  Gateway — if  Christian  buildings  —  ever 
stood  within  its  precincts. 

XII.  Church  of  Justinian. — Nearly  two  centuries 
after  the  attempt  of  Julian,  Justinian  erected  a 
church  at  Jerusalem  ;  of  which,  fortunately,  we  have 
so  full  and  detailed  an  account  in  the  works  of 
Procopius  {de  Aedificiis  Const.)  that  we  can  have 
little  difficulty  in  fixing  its  site,  though  no  remains 
(at  least  above  ground)  exist  to  verify  our  conjec- 
tures. The  description  given  by  Procopius  is  so 
clear,  and  the  details  he  gives  with  regard  to  the 
necessity  of  building  up  the  substructure  point  so 
uumistakeably  to  the  spot  near  to  which  it  must 
have  stood,  that  almost  all  topographers  have  jumped 
to  the  conclusion  that  the  mosque  El  Aksa  is  the 
identical  church  referred  to.  Apait  from  the  con- 
sideration already  mentioned,  the  architecture  of 
that  building  is  alone  sufficient  to  refute  any  such 
idea.  No  seven-aisled  basilica  was  built  in  that  age, 
and  least  of  all  by  Justinian,  whose  favourite  plan 
was  a  dome  on  pendentives,  which  in  fact,  in  his  age, 
had  become  the  type  of  an  Oriental  Church.  Besides, 
the  Aksa  has  no  apse,  and,  from  its  situation,  nevti r 
could  have  had  either  that  or  any  of  the  essential 
features  of  a  Christian  basilica.  Its  whole  archi- 
tecture is  that  of  the  end  of  the  7th  century,  and 
its  ordinance  is  essentially  that  of  a  mosque.  It 
is  hardly  necessary  to  argue  this  point,  however, 
as  the  Aksa  stands  on  a  spot  which  was  perfectly 
known  then,  and  ever  afterwards,  to  be  the  very 
centre  of  the  site  of  Solomon's  Temple.  Not  only 
is  this  shown  from  Julian's  attempt,  but  all  the 
historians,  Christian  and  Mohammedan,  who  refer  to 
Omar's  visit  to  Jerusalem,  relate  that  the  Sakhrah 
was  covered  with  filth  and  abhorred  by  the  Chris- 
tians ;  and  more  than  this,  we  have  the  direct  testi- 
mony of  Eutychius,  writing  in  the  9th  century, 
from  Alexandria  (Annales,  ii.  289),  "  That  the 
Christians  had  built  no  church  within  the  area  of 
the  Temple  on  account  of  the  denunciations  of  the 
Lord,  and  had  left  it  in  ruins." 

Notwithstanding  this  there  is  no  difficulty  in  fix- 
ing on  the  site  of  this  church,  inasmuch  as  the  vaults 

that  (ill  up  the  south-eastern  angle  of  the  Ilarani 
area  are  almost  certainly  of  the  age  of  Justinian 
i  woodcuts  Nos.  3, 4),  and  are  just  such  as  Procopius 
describes  ;  so  that  if  it  were  situated  at  the  northern 
extremity  of  the  \aults,  all  the  arguments  that  apply 
to  the  Aksa  equally  apply  to  this  situation. 

We  have  also  direct  testimony  that  a  church  did 
exist  here  immediately  alter  Justinian's  time  in  the 


specially  for  the  Writer  on  the  spot,  and  to  which  he 
owes  much  of  the  information  tetailed  above,  though 
it  has  been  impossible  to  refer  to  it  on  nil  occasions. 


X 


1034 


JERUSALEM 


following  words  of  Ant.  Martyr. :  "  Ante  ruinas  j 
vero  templi  Solomonis  aqua  decurrit  ad  fontem 
Siloam,  secus  porticum  Solomonis  in  ecclesia  est : 
sedes  in  qua  sedit  Pilatus  quando  audivit  Domi-  ! 
nurn"  (Itin.  p.  16).  As  the  portico  of  Solomon 
was  the  eastern  portico  of  the  Temple,  this  exactly 
describes  the  position  of  the  church  in  question. 

But  whether  we  assume  the  Aksa,  or  a  church  J 
outside  the  Temple,  on  these  vaults,  to  have  been  the 
Mary  church  of  Justinian,  how  comes  it  that  Jus- 
tinian chose  this  remote  corner  of  the  city,  and  so 
difficult  a  site,  for  the  erection  of  his  church? 
Why  did  he  not  go  to  the  quarter  where — if  the 
modern  theory  be  correct— all  the  sacred  localities 
of  the  Christians  were  grouped  together  in  the 
middle  of  the  city  ?  The  answer  seems  inevitable  : 
that  it  was  because  in  those  times  the  Sepulchre 
and  Golgotha  were  here,  and  not  on  the  spot  to 
which  the  Sepulchre  with  his  Mary-church  have 
subsequently  been  transferred.  It  may  also  be 
added  that  the  fact  of  Justinian  having   built  a 


JERUSALEM 

church  in  the  neighbourhood  is  in  itself  almost 
sufficient  to  prove  that  in  his  age  the  site  and 
dimensions  of  the  Jewish  temple  were  known,  and 
also  that  the  localities  immediately  outside  the  tem- 
ple were  then  considered  as  sacred  by  the  Christians. 
XIII.  Conclusion. — Having  now  gone  through  all 
the  principal  sites  of  the  Christian  edifices,  as  they 
stood  anterior  to  the  destruction  of  the  churches  by 
El  Hakeem,  the  plan  (No.  4)  of  the  area  of  the 
Haram  will  be  easily  understood.  Both  Constan- 
tine's  and  Justinian's  churches  having  disappeared, 
of  course  the  restoration  of  these  is  partly  conjec- 
tural. Nothing  now  remains  in  the  Haram  area 
but  the  Mohammedan  buildings  situated  within  the 
area  of  Solomon's  Temple.  Of  the  Christian  build- 
ings which  once  existed  there,  there  remains  only 
the  great  Anastasis  of  Constantine — now  known  as 
"  the  Mosque  of  Omar "  and  "  the  Dome  of  the 
Rock  " — certainly  the  most  interesting,  as  well  as 
one  of  the  most  beautiful  Christian  buildings  in  the 
i  East,  and  a  small  but  equally  interesting  little  do- 


•       NORTH. 

V 


SOUTH. 


No.  11.— Plan  of  Jeiusalcm  in  the  12th  century. 


mical  building  called  the  Little  Sakhrah  at  the 
north  end  of  the  enclosure,  and  said  to  contain  a 
fragment  of  the  rock  which  the  angel  sat  upon,  and 
which  closed  the  door  of  the  sepulchre  (Ali  Bey, 
ii.  225).  These  two  buildings  are  entire.  Of  Con- 
stantine's  church  we  have  only  the  festal  entrance, 
known  as  the  Golden  Gateway,  and  of  Justinian's 
only  the  substructions. 

It  is  interesting  to  compare  this  with  a  plan  of 
the  city  (woodcut  No.  1 1)  made  during  the  Crusades, 
and  copied  from  a  manuscript  of  the  twelfth  eentury, 
in  the  Library  at  Brussels.  It  gives  the  traditional 
localities  pretty  much  as  they  are  now  ;  with  the 
exception  of  St.  Stephen's  gate,  which  was  the  name 
then  applied  to  that  now  known  as  the  Damascus 
Gate.     The  gate  which  now  bears  his  name  was 


then  known  as  that  of  the  Valley  of  Jehoshaphat. 
The  "Temple  of  Solomon,"  i.e.  "the  Mosque  of  el 
Aksa,  is  divided  by  a  wide  street  from  that  of  our 
Lord  ;  and  the  Sepulchre  is  represented  as  only  a 
smaller  copy  of  its  prototype  within  the  Haram 
area,  but  very  remarkably  similar  in  design,  to  say 
the  least  of  it. 

Having  now  gone  through  the  main  outlines  of 
the  topography  of  Jerusalem,  in  so  far  as  the  limits 
of  this  article"  would  admit,  or  as  seems  necessary 
for  the  elucidation  of  the  subject,  the  many  details 
which  remain  will  be  given  under  their  separate 
titles,  as  Temple,  Tomb,  Palace,  &c.  It  only 
remains,  before  concluding,  to  recapitulate  here  that 
the  great  difficulties  which  seem  hitherto  to  have 
rendered  the  subject  confused,  and   in   fact    inex- 


JERUSHA 

plicable,  were  (1)  the  improper  application  of  the 
name  of  Zion  to  the  western  hill,  and  (2)  the 
assumption  that  the  present  Church  of  the  Holy 
Sepulchre  was  that  built  by  Constautine. 

The  moment  we  transfer  the  name,  Zion,  from  the 
western  to  the  eastern  hill,  and  the  scenes  of  the 
Passion  from  the  present  site  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre 
to  the  area  of  the  Haram,  all  the  difficulties  dis- 
appear ;  and  it  only  requires  a  little  patience,  and 
perhaps  in  some  instances  a  little  further  investiga- 
tion on  the  spot,  for  the  topography  of  Jerusalem 
to  become  as  well,  or  better  established,  than  that 
of  any  city  of  the  ancient  world.  [J.  F.j 

JERU'SHA  (N^'-IT:  'lepovad;  Alex.  Upovs: 
Jerusa),  daughter  of  Zadok,  queen  of  Uzziah,  and 
mother  of  Jotham  king  of  Judah  (2  K.  xv.  33). 
In  Chronicles  the  name  is  given  under  the  altered 
form  of 

JERU'SHAH  (nmy  :  'Upovad  :  Jerusa), 
2  Chr.  xxvii.  1.     See  the  preceding  article. 

JESAIAH  (nW| :  'Uaias :  Jescias).  1.  Son 
of  Hananiah.  brother  of  Pelatiah,  and  grandson  of 
Zerubbabel  (1  Chr.  iii.  21).  But  according  to  the 
LXX.  and  the  Vulgate,  he  was  the  son  of  Pelatiah. 
For  au  explanation  of  this  genealogy,  and  the  diffi- 
culties connected  with  it,  see  Lord  A.  Hervey's 
Genealogies  of  our  Lord,  ch.  iv.  §v. 

2.  (i"PJJi^,  i.e.  Jeshaiah:  'leffia  ;  Alex.  'Ie<r- 
cei'a  :  Tsaia.)  A  Benjamite,  whose  descendants  were 
among  those  chosen  by  lot  to  reside  in  Jerusalem 
after  the  return  from  Babylon  (Neh.  xi.  7). 

JESHAI'AH.  1.  (•inW'?:  'I<"'<"  i»  1  Chr. 
xxv.  3,  and  'Ioxn'a  in  ver.  15  ;  in  the  former  the 
Alex.  MS.  has  'leeta  Kal  Se/ie'i',  and  in  the  latter 
'Iffias  :  the  Vulg.  has  Jeseias  and  Jcsaias.)  One  of 
the  six  sons  of  Jeduthun,  set  apart  for  the  musical 
service  of  the  Temple,  under  the  leadership  of  their 
father,  the  inspired  minstrel:  he  was  the  chief  of 
the  eighth  division  of  the  singers.  The  Hebrew 
name  is  identical  with  that  of  the  prophet  Isaiah. 

2.  Clwcrius  ;  Alex. 'Xltraias:  Isaias.)  A  Levite 
in  the  reign  of  David,  eldest  son  of  Rehabiah,  a 
descendant  of  Aniram  through  Moses  (1  Chr.  xxvi. 
25).  He  is  called  Isshiah  in  1  Chr.  xxiv.  21.  in 
A.  V.,  though  the  Hebrew  is  merely  the  shortened 
form  of  the  name.  Shebuel,  one  of  his  ancestors, 
appears  among  the  Hemanites  in  1  Chr.  xxv.  4. 
and  is  said  in  Targ.  on  1  Chr.  xxvi.  24  to  be  the 
same  with  Jonathan  the  son  of  Gershom,  the  priest 
of  the  idols  of  the  Danites,  who  afterwards  returned 
to  the  fear  of  Jehovah. 

3.  (rvytri  :  'laaias;  Alex.  'Haaia:  Isaias.) 
The  son  or  Athaliah  and  chief  of  the  house  of  the 
BeneElam  who  retained  with  Ezra  (Ezr.  viii.  7). 
In  l  Esd.  viii.  ;;:;  lie  is  called  Josias. 

4.  Clffa'ia:  Tsalas.')  A  Merarite,  who  returned 
with  Ezra  (Ezr.  viii.  19).  He  is  called  (Isaias  in 
1  Esd.  viii.  48. 

JESHA'NAH  (n3B»  i  y  'Ucrvvd ;  Alex.  •Avd  ; 
Joseph.  r)  'Xaavas :  Jesana),  a  town  which,  with 
its  dependent  villages  (Heb.  ami  Alex.  I. XX. 
"daughters"),  was  one  of  tin'  three  taken  from 
Jeroboam  by  Abijah  (2  Chr.  xiii.  19).  The  other 
two  were  Bethel  and  Ephraim,  and  Jeshanah  i< 
named  between  them.  A  place  of  the  same  name 
was  the  scene  of  an  encounter  between  Herod  and 
Pappus,  the   general    of  Antigonus'   army,   related 


JESHIMON 


1035 


by  Josephus  with  curious  details  (Ant.  xiv.  15, 
§12),  which  however  convey  no  indication  of  its 
position.  It  is  not  mentioned  in  the  Onomasticon, 
unless  we  accept  the  conjecture  of  Reland  (Pal. 
861)  that  "  Jethaba,  urbs  antiqua  Judaeae,"  is  at 
once  a  corruption  and  a  translation  of  the  name 
Jeshana,  which  signifies  "  old."  Nor  has  it  been 
identified  in  modern  times,  save  by  Schwarz  (158), 
who  places  it  at  "  Al-Sanim,  a  village  two  miles 
W.  of  Bethel,"  but  undiscoverable  in  any  map 
which  the  writer  has  consulted.  [G.l 

JESHARE'LAH  (iTJwnfe"  :  'IrrePn?A,  'I<r- 
perjAd,  Cod.  Alex.),  head  of  the  seventh  of  the  24 
wards  into  which  the  musicians  of  the  Levites  were 
divided  (1  Chr.  xxv.  14).  [Heman;  Jeduthun.] 
He  belonged  to  the  house  of  Asaph,  and  had  12  of 
his  house  under  him.  At  ver.  2  his  name  is  written 
Asarelah,  with  an  initial  N  instead  of  *;  in  the 
LXX.  'EpaTjA.  [A.  C.  H.] 

JESHE'BEAB  (3X3^  :  'UapadK :  Isbaab), 
head  of  the  14th  course  of  priests  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  13). 
[Jehoiarib.]  [A.  C.  H.] 

JE'SHER  ("1B?J :  'laadp  ;  Alex,  'laiaixdp  :  Ja- 
ser),  one  of  the  sons  of  Caleb  the  son  of  Hezron  by 
his  wife  Azubah  (1  Chr.  ii.  18).  In  two  of  Kenni- 
cott's  MSS.  it  is  written  in"1,  Jether,  from  the  pre- 
ceding verse,  and  in  one  MS.  the  two  names  are 
combined.  The  Peshito  Syiiac  has  Oshir,  the  same 
form  in  which  Jasher  is  represented  in  2  Sam.  i.  18. 

JESHI'MON  (|iO^;»n  =  the  waste:  in  Num. 
7]  epr)/j.os  ;  in  Sam.  6  'li(Tffaifx6s,  and  'UaaefiSs  ; 
Alex.  'Eieccai/tfJs  :  desertum,  solitudo,  Jesimuth), 
a  name  which  occurs  in  Num.  xxi.  20  and  xxiii.  28, 
in  designating  the  position  of  Pisgah  and  Peor :  both 

described  as  "  facing  ("OB"?!?)  the  Jeshimon."  Not 
knowing  more  than  the  general  locality  of  either 
Peor  or  Pisgah,  this  gives  us  no  clue  to  the  situation 
of  Jeshimon.  But  it  is  elsewhere  used  in  a  similar 
manner  with  reference  to  the  position  of  two  places 
very  distant  from  both  the  above— the  hill  of  Ha- 
chilah,  "on  the  south  of,"  or  "facing,  the  Jeshimon" 
(1  Sam.  xxiii.  19,  xxvi.  1,  3),  and  the  wilderness 
of  Maon,  also  south  of  it  (xxiii.  24).  Ziph  (xxiii. 
1  5 )  and  Maon  are  known  at  the  present  day.  They 
lie  a  few  miles  south  of  Hebron,  so  that  the  diltrict 
strictly  north  of  them  is  the  hill-country  of  Judah. 
But  a  line  drawn  between  Maon  and  the  probable 
position  of  Peor — on  the  high  country  opposite' 
Jericho— passes  over  the  dreary,  barren  waste  of  the 
hills  lying  immediately  on  the  east  of  the  Dead  Sea. 
To  this  district  the  name,  if  interpreted  as  a  Hebrew 
word,  would  be  not  inapplicable.  It  would  also 
suit  as  to  position,  as  it  would  be  full  in  view  from 
an  elevated  point  on  the  highlands  of  Moab,  and  not 
far  from  north  of  Maon  and  Ziph.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  use  of  the  word  ha-Arabdh,  in  1  Sam. 
xxiii.  24,  must  not  be  overlooked,  meaning,  as  that 
elsewhere  'lees,  the  sunk  district  of  the  Jordan  and 
Dead  Sea,  the  modern  Ghor.  Beth-Jeshimoth  too, 
which  by  its  name  ought  to  have  some  connection 

with  Jeshimon,  would  appear  to  have  ! o  on  the 

lower  level,  somewhere  near  the  mouth  <  if  the  Jordan. 
[Beth-Jeshimoth.]    Perhaps  it  is  not  safe  to  lay 

much  stress  on  the  Hebrew  sense'  of  the  name.  The 
passages  in  which  it  is  first  mentioned  are  indis- 
putably of  very  early  'late,  and  it  is  quite  possible 
that  it  is  an  archaic  name  found  and  adopted  by 
(he  Israelites.  [<;.] 

3  X  2 


1036 


JESHISHAI 


JESHI'SHAI  (W«  :  'Uffcit;  Alex.  'Uffffcfi: 
Jcsisi),  one  of  tlie  ancestors  of  the  Gadites  who 
dwelt  in  Gilead,  and  whose  genealogies  were  made 
out  in  the  days  of  Jotham  king  of  Judah  (1  Chr. 
v.  14).  In  the  Peshito  Syriao  the.  latter  part  of 
the  verse  is  omitted. 

JESHOHA'IAH  (iTniC^ :  'Icurovla:  Isur 
Mia),  a  chief  of  one  of  the  families  of  that  branch 
of  the  Simeonites,  which  was  descended  from  Shimei, 
and  was  more  numerous  than  the  rest  ot  the  tribe 
(1  Chr.  iv.  36).  He  was  concerned  in  the  raid 
upon  the  Hamites  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah. 

JESH'TJA  (JME^ ;  'Itjctovs;  Jeshue  and  Joshue), 
a  later  Hebrew  contraction  for  Joshua,  or  rather 
Jehoshua.     [Jehoshua.] 

1.  Joshua,  the  son  of  Nun,  is  called  Jeshua  in 
one  passage  (Neh.  viii.  17).     [Joshua.] 

2.  A  priest  in  the  reign  of  David,  to  whom  the 
ninth  course  fell  by  lot  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  11).  He  is 
called  Jeshuah  in  the  A.  V.  One  branch  of  the 
house,  viz.  the  children  of  Jedaiah,  returned  from 
Babylon  (Ezr.  ii.  36;  but  see  Jedaiah). 

3.  One  of  the  Levites  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah, 
after  the  reformation  of  worship,  placed  in  trust 
in  the  cities  of  the  priests  in  their  classes,  to  dis- 
tribute to  their  brethren  of  the  offerings  of  the 
people  (2  Chr.  xxxi.  15). 

4.  Son  of  Jehozadak,  first  high-priest  of  the  third 
series,  viz.  of  those  after  the  Babylonish  captivity, 
and  ancestor  of  the  fourteen  high-priests  his  suc- 
cessors down  to  Joshua  or  Jason,  and  Onias  or 
Menelaus,  inclusive.  [High- priest.]  Jeshua,  like 
his  contemporary  Zerubbabel,  was  probably  born  in 
Babvlon,  whither  his  father  Jehozadak  had  been 
taken  captive  while  young  (1  Chr.  vi.  15,  A.  V.). 
He  came  up  from  Babylon  in  the  first  of  Cyrus 
with  Zerubbabel,  and  took  a  leading  part  with  him 
in  the  rebuilding  of  the  temple,  and  the  restoration 
of  the  Jewish  commonwealth.  Everything  we  read 
of  him  indicates  a  man  of  earnest  piety,  patriotism, 
and  courage.  One  of  less  faith  and  resolution 
would  never  have  surmounted  all  the  difficulties 
and  opposition  he  had  to  contend  with.  His  first 
care  on  arriving  at  Jerusalem  was  to  rebuild  the 
altar,  and  restore  the  daily  sacrifice,  which  had 
been  suspended  for  some  fifty  years.  He  then,  in 
conjunction  with  Zerubbabel,  hastened  to  collect 
materials  for  rebuilding  the  temple,  and  was  able 
to  lay  the  foundation  of  it  as  early  as  the  second 
month  of  the  second  year  of  their  return  to  Jeru- 
salem. The  services  on  this  occasion  were  con- 
ducted by  the  priests  in  their  proper  apparel,  with 
their  trumpets,  and  by  the  sons  of  Asaph,  the 
Levites,  with  their  cymbals,  according  to  the  ordi- 
nance of  king  David  (Ezr.  iii.).  However,  the  pro- 
gress of  the  work  was  hindered  by  the  enmity  of 
the  Samaritans,  who  bribed  the  counsellors  of  the 
kings  of  Persia  so  effectually  to  obstruct  it  that 
the  Jews  were  unable  to  proceed  with  it  till  the 
second  year  of  Darius  Hystaspis — an  interval  of 
about  fourteen  years.  In  that  year,  B.C.  520,  at 
the  prophesying  of  Haggai  and  Zechariah  (Ezr.  v.  1, 
vi.  14;  Hagg.  i.  1,  12,  14,  ii.  1-9;  Zech.  i.-viii.), 
the  work  was  resumed  by  Jeshua  and  Zerubbabel 
with  redoubled  vigour,  and  was  happily  completed 
on  the  third  day  of  the  month  Adar  ( =  March),  in 

a  The  7  th,  after  the  Babylonian  reckoning,  accord- 
ing to  Prideaux. 

b  The  connexion  with  Bani,  Ilashahiah  (or  Ilash- 


JESHUKUN 

the  sixth  of  Darius.3  The  dedication  of  the  temple, 
and  the  celebration  of  the  Passover,  in  the  next 
month,  were  kept  with  great  solemnity  and  rejoicing 
(Ezr.  vi.  15-22),  and  especially  "  twelve  he-goats, 
according  to  the  number  of  the  tribes  of  Israel," 
were  offered  as  a  sin-oifering  for  all  Israel.  Jeshua's 
zeal  in  the  work  is  commended  by  the  Son  ofSirach 
(Ecclus.  xlix.  12).  Besides  the  great  importance  of 
Jeshua  as  a  historical  character,  from  the  critical 
times  in  which  he  lived,  and  the  great  work  which 
he  accomplished,  his  name  Jesus,  his  restoration  of 
the  temple,  his  office  as  high-priest,  and  especially 
the  two  prophecies  concerning  him  in  Zech.  iii.  and 
vi.  9-15,  point  him  out  as  an  eminent  type  of  Christ. 
[High-priest.]  Nothing  is  known  of  Jeshua  later 
than  the  seventh  year  of  Darius,  with  which  the 
narrative  of  Ezr.  i.— vi.  closes.  Josephus,  who  says 
the  temple  was  seven  years  in  building,  and  places 
the  dedication  of  it  in  the  ninth  of  Darius,  con- 
tributes no  information  whatever  concerning  him : 
his  history  here,  with  the  exception  of  the  9th  sect. 
of  b.  xi.  chi  iv.,  being  merely  a  paraphrase  of  Ezra 
and  1  Esdras,  especially  the  latter.  [Zerubbabel.] 
Jeshua  had  probably  conversed  often  with  Daniel 
and  Ezekiel,  and  may  or  may  not  have  known 
Jehoiachin  at  Babylon  in  his  youth.  He  probably 
died  at  Jerusalem.  It  is  written  Jehoshua  or  Joshua 
in  Zech.  iii.  1,  3,  &c. ;  Hagg.  i.  1,  12,  &c. 

5.  Head  of  a  Levitical  house,  one  of  those  which 
returned  from  the  Babylonish  captivity,  and  took 
an  active  part  under  Zerubbabel,  Ezra,  ami  Nehe- 
miah.  The  name  is  used  to  designate  either  the 
whole  family  or  the  successive  chiefs  of  it  (Ezr.  ii. 
40,  iii.  9  ;  Neh.  iii.  19,b  viii.  7,  ix.  4,  5,  xii.  8,  &c). 
Jeshua,  and  Kadmiel,  with  whom  he  is  frequently 
associated,  were  both  "sons  of  Hodaviah"  (called 
Judah,  Ezr.  iii.  9),  but  Jeshua's  more  immediate 
ancestor  was  Azaniah  (Neh.  x.  9).  In  Neh.  xii.  24 
"Jeshua  the  son  of  Kadmiel"  is  a  manifest  cor- 
ruption of  the  text.  The  LXX.  read  kb.1  viol 
KaSjUirjA.  It  is  more  likely  that  J3  is  an  accidental 
error  for  1. 

6.  A  branch  of  the  family  of  Pahath-Moab,  one 
of  the  chief  families,  probably,  of  the  tribe  of  Judah 
(Neh.  x.  14,  vii.  11,  &c. ;  Ezr.  x.  30).  His  de- 
scendants were  the  most  numerous  of  all  the 
families  which  returned  with  Zerubbabel.  The 
verse  is  obscure,  and  might  be  translated,  "  The 
children  of  Pahath-Moab,  for  (».  e.  representing) 
the  children  of  Jeshua  aud  Joab;"  so  that  Pahath- 
MoaT)  would  be  the  head  of  the  family.     [A.  C.  H.] 

JESH'UA  (V-165^ :  'Ivo-od :  Jcsue),  one  of  the 
towns  re-inhabited  by  the  people  of  Judah  after  the 
return  from  captivity  (Neh.  xi.  26).  Being  men- 
tioned with  Moladah,  Beeisheba,  &c,  it  was  appa- 
rently in  the  extreme  south.  It  does  not,  however, 
occur  in  the  original  lists  of  Judah  and  Simeon 
(Josh,  xv.,  xix.),  nor  is  there  any  name  in  those 
lists  of  which  this  would  be  probably  a  corruption. 
It  is  not  mentioned  elsewhere.  [G.] 

JESH'UAH  QftB*  :  TrjtroOs  :  Jesua),  a  priest 
in  the  reign  of  David  (1  Chron.  xxiv.  11),  the  same 
as  Jeshua,  No.  2. 

JESHU'KUN,  and  once  by  mistake  in  A.  V. 
JESU'EUN,  Is.  xliv.  2  (]VTC?J :  o  i^yawv^os, 


abniah),  Henadad,  and  the  Levites  (17-19),  indicates 
that  Jeshua,  the  father  of  Ezer,  is  the  same  person  as 
in  the  other  passages  cited. 


JESHURUN 

once  with  the  addition  of  'Itrpa^A,  which  the 
Arabic  of  the  Lond.  Polyglot  adopts  to  the  exclu- 
sion of  the  former ;  dilectus,  rectissimus),  a  sym- 
bolical name  for  Israel  in  Deut.  xxxii.  15,  xxxiii. 
5,  26  ;  Is.  xliv.  2,  for  which  various  etymologies 
have  been  suggested.  Of  its  application  to  Israel 
there  seems  to  be  no  division  of  opinion.  The 
Targum  and  Peshito  Syriac  uniformly  render  Jeshu- 
run  by  "  Israel."  Kimchi  (on  Is.  xliv.  2)  derives 
it  from  the  root  "lt^s,  yashar,  "  to  be  right  or  up- 
right," because  Israel  was  "upright  among  the 
nations ;"  as  D^"!^,  yeshdrim,  "  the  upright  " 
(Num.  xxiii.  10;  Ps.  cxi.  1)  is  a  poetical  appella- 
tion of  the  chosen  people,  who  did  that  which  was 
right  ("lK"n,  hay-ydshdr)  in  the  eyes  of  Jehovah, 
in  contradistinction  from  the  idolatrous  heathen 
who  did  that  which  was  pre-eminently  the  evil 
(yin,  hd-r'a),  and  worshipped  false  gods.  This 
seems  to  have  been  the  view  adopted  by  Aquila, 
Symmachus,  and  Theodotion — who  according  to  the 
account  of  their  version  given  by  Jerome  (on  Is. 
xliv.  2),  must  have  had  tvdvs  or  evQvTaros — and 
by  the  Vulgate  in  three  passages.  Malvenda  (quoted 
in  Poole's  Sipiopsis,  Deut.  xxxii.  1 5) ,  taking  the  same 
root,  applies  it  ironically  to  Israel.  For  the  like 
reason,  on  the  authority  of  the  above  mentioned 
Father,  the  book  of  Genesis  was  called  "  the  book 
of  the  just  "  (siifleW),  as  relating  to  the  histories 
of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Israel.  The  termination 
}•!"  is  either  intensive,  as  the  Vulgate  takes  it,  or  an 
affectionate  diminutive  ("  Frommchen,"  Hitzig,  and 
Fiirst ;  "  Liebling"  Hendewerk,  and  Bunsen).  Si- 
monis  {Lex.  Hebr.  s.  v.,  and  Arc.  Form.  Nom.  p. 

582)  connects  Jeshurun  with  the  Arabic  root  vw*J, 

yasara,  which  in  the  second  conj.  signifies  "to 
prosper,"  and  in  the  4th  "  to  be  wealthy,"  and  is 
thus  cognate  with  the  Hebr.  "1K>N,  dshar,  which  in 
Pual  signifies  "  to  be  blessed."  With  the  intensive 
termination  Jeshurun  would  then  denote  Israel  as 
supremely  happy  or  prosperous,  and  to  this  signifi- 
cation it  must  be  allowed  the  context  in  Deut. 
xxxii.  1.5,  points.  Michaelis  {Suppl.  ad  Lex.  Heb.") 
considers  it  as  a  diminutive  of  Israel,  and  would 
read  j-1"lEJ>*,  yisrun,  contracted  from  |-17N")E^ 
yisreelun.  Such  too  was  the  opinion  of  Grotius  and 
Vitringa,  and  of  the  author  of  the  Veneto-Gk.  ver- 
sion, who  renders  it  'Io-paeAic/cos.  For  this  theory, 
though  supported  by  the  weight  of  Gesenius'  au- 
thority, it  is  scarcely  necessary  to  say  there  is  not 
the  smallest  foundation,  either  in  analogy  or  proba- 
bility. In  the  application  of  the  name  Jeshurun 
to  Israel,  we  may  discover  that  fondness  for  a  play 
upon  words  of  which  there  are  so  many  examples, 
and  which  might  he  allowed  to  have  some  influence 
in  the  selection  of  the  appellation.  But  to  derive 
the  one  from  the  other  is  a  fancy  unworthy  of  a 
scholar. 

Two  other  etymologies  of  the  name  may  be 
noticed  as  showing  to  what  lengths  conjecture 
may  go  when  not  regulated  by  any  definite  prin- 
ciples. The  first  of  these,  which  is  due  to  Forster 
(quoted  by  Glassius,  ^Phil.  Soar.  lib.  iv.  tr.  2), 
connects  it  with  "llt^,  shot;  ''an  ox,"  in  conse- 
quence of  the  allusion  in  the  context  of  Deut.  xxxii. 

■  Jerome  (Liber  dc  Nnminibus)  gives  the  strange 
interpretation  of  insular  libatnen, 


JESSE 


1037 


15 ;  the  other  with  "MS5>,  shur,  "  to  behold,"  be- 
cause Israel  beheld  the  presence  of  God. 

[W.  A.  W.] 

JESI'AH  QiYW,  i.  e.  Yisshiyahu:  'lijvowi  ■ 
Alex,  'leand:  Jcsia).  1.  A  Korhite,  one  of  the 
mighty  men,  "  helpers  of  the  battle,"  who  joined 
David's  standard  at  Ziklag  during  his  flight  from 
Saul  (1  Chr.  xii.  6). 

2.  (il'iS'J :  'laid  ;  Alex,  'leacrid.)  The  second 
son  of  Uzziel,  the  son  of  Kohath  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  20). 
He  is  the  same  as  Jeshiah,  whose  representative 
was  Zechariah  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  25) ;  but  our  trans- 
lators in  the  present  instance  followed  the  Vulg., 
as  they  have  too  often  done  in  the  case  of  proper 
names. 

JESIM'IEL  (bND^J :    'Io-^aTjA  :  Tsmiel),  a 

Simeonite,  descended  from  the  prolific  family  of 
Shimei,  and  a  prince  of  his  own  brauch  of  the  tribe, 
whom  he  led  against  the  peaceful  Hamites  in  the 
reign  of  Hezekiah  (1  Chr.  iv.  36). 

JES'SE  Q>Vh,  i.e.  Ishai:a  'ietnrcu  ;  Joseph. 
'lecrcrcuos :  Tsai:  in  the  margin  of  1  Chr.  x.  14, 
our  translators  have  given  the  Vulgate  form),  the 
father  of  David,  and  thus  the  immediate  progenitor 
of  the  whole  line  of  the  kings  of  Judah,  and  ulti- 
mately of  Christ.  He  is  the  only  one  of  his  name 
who  appears  in  the  sacred  records.  Jesse  was  the  son 
of  Obed,  who  again  was  the  fruit  of  the  union  of 
Boaz  and  the  Moabitess  Ruth.  Nor  was  Ruth's 
the  only  foreign  blood  that  ran  in  his  veins  ;  for 
his  great-grandmother  -was  no  less  a  person  than 
Rahab  the  Canaanite,  of  Jericho  (Matt.  i.  5). 
Jesse's  genealogy  b  is  twice  given  in  full  in  the  Old 
Testament,  viz",  Ruth  iv.  18-22,  and  1  Chr.  ii.  5-12. 
We  there  see  that  long  before  David  had  rendered 
his  family  illustrious,  it  belonged  to  the  greatest 
house  of  Judah,  that  of  Pharez,  through  Hezron 
his  eldest  son.  One  of  the  links  in  the  descent  was 
Nahshou  (N.  T.  Naason),  chief  man  of  the  tribe  at 
the  critical  time  of  the  Exodus.  In  the  N.  T.  the 
genealogy  is  also  twice  given  (Matt.  i.  3-5 ;  Luke 
hi.  32-34). 

He  is  commonly  designated  as  "  Jesse  the  Beth- 
lehemite"  (I  Sam.  xvi.  1,  18).  So  he  is  called  by 
his  son  David,  then  fresh  from  home  (xvii.  58)  ; 
but  his  full  title  is  "the  Ephrathite  of  Bethlehem 
Judah  "  (xvii.  12).  The  double  expression  and 
the  use  of  the  antique  word  Ephrathite  perhaps 
imply  that  lie  was  one  of  the  oldest  families  in 
the  place.  He  is  an  "  old  man "  when  we  first 
meet  with  him  (1  Sam.  xvii.  12),  with  eight  sons 
(xvi.  lo,  xvii.  12),  residing  at  Bethlehem  (xvi.  4, 
5).  It  would  appear,  however,  from  the  terms  of 
xvi.  4,  5,  and  of  Josephus  {Ant.  vi.  8,  §1),  that 
Jesse  was  not  one  of  the  "elders"  of  the  town. 
The  few  slight  glimpses  we  can  catch  of  him  are 
soon  recalled.  According  to  an  ancient  Jewish  tra- 
dition, recorded  in  the  Targum  on  2  Sam.  xxi.  19, 
he  was  a  weaver  of  the  vails  of  the  sanctuary,  but 
as  there  is  no  contradiction,  so  there  i>  no  corro- 
boration of  this  in  the  Bible,  and  it  is  possible  that 
it  was  suggested  by  the  occurrence  of  the  word 
orgim,  "weavers,"  in  connexion  with  a  member 
of  his  family.     [JaARE-OeegIM.]     Jesse's  wealth 


windows  of  English  churches.    One  of  the  finest  is  at 
I  torchester,  <  >xon.    The  tree  springs  from  Jesse,  who  is 


b  This  genealogy  is  embodied  in  the  "  Jesse  tree,"     recumbent  at  the  bottom  of  the  window,  and  contains 
not  unfrequently  to  be  found  in  the  rcrcdos  and  cast    25  members  of  the  line,  culminating  in  our  Lord. 


1038 


JESSE 


seems  to  have  consisted  of  a  flock  of  sheep  and 
goats  (|K¥,  A.  V.  "  sheep"),  which  were  under  the 
care  of  David  (xvi.  11,  xvii.  34,  35).  Of  the  pro- 
duce of  this  flock  we  find  him  on  two  occasions 
sending  the  simple  presents  which  in  those  days  the 
highest  persons  were  wont  to  accept — slices  ot  milk 
cheese  to  the  captain  of  the  division  of  the  army  in 
which  his  sons  were  serving  (xvii.  18),  and  a  kid 
to  Saul  (xvi.  20)  ;  with  the  accompaniment  in  each 
case  of  parched  corn  from  the  fields  of  Boaz,  loaves 
of  the  bread  from  which  Bethlehem  took  its  very 
name,  and  wine  from  the  vineyards  which  still 
enrich  the  terraces  of  the  hill  below  the  village. 

When  David's  rupture  with  Saul  had  finally 
driven  him  from  the  court,  and  he  was  in  the  cave  of 
Adullam,  "  his  brethren  and  all  his  father's  house" 
joined  him  (xxii.  1).  His  "brother"  (probably 
Eliab)  is  mentioned  on  a  former  occasion  (xx.  29)  as 
taking  the  lead  in  the  family.  This  is  no  more  than 
we  should  expect  from  Jesse's  great  age.  David's 
anxiety  at  the  same  period  to  find  a  safe  refuge  for 
his  parents  from  the  probable  vengeance  of  Saul,  is 
also  quite  in  accordance  with  their  helpless  condi- 
tion. He  took  his  father  and  his  mother  into  the 
country  of  Moab,  and  deposited  them  with  the  king, 
and  there  they  disappear  from  our  view  in  the  re- 
cords of  Scripture.  But  another  old  Jewish  tradi- 
tion (Rabboth  Seder,  NtPJ,  25G,  col.  2)  states  that 
after  David  had  quitted  the  hold,  his  parents  and 
brothers  were  put  to  death  by  the  king  of  Moab,  so 
that  there  remained,  besides  David,  but  one  brother, 
who  took  refuge  with  Nahash,  king  of  the  Bene- 
Ammon. 

Who  the  wife  of  Jesse  was  we  are  not  told.  His 
eight  sons  will  be  found  displayed  under  David, 
p.  401.  The  family  contained  in  addition  two 
female  members,  Zeruiah  and  Abigail,  but  it  is  un- 
certain whether  these  were  Jesse's  daughters,  for 
though  they  are  called  the  sisters  of  his  sons  ( 1  Chr. 
ii.  16),  yet  Abigail  is  said  to  have  been  the  daugh- 
ter of  Nahash  (2  Sam.  xvii.  25).  Of  this  two  ex- 
planations have  been  proposed.  (1.)  The  Jewish — 
that  Nahash  was  another  name  for  Jesse  (Jerome, 
Q.  Hebr.  on  2  Sam.  xvii.  25 c).  (2.)  Professor 
Stanley's — that  Jesse's  wife  had  been  formerly  wife 
or  concubine  to  Nahash,  possibly  the  king  of  the 
Ammonites  (David,  401  &.). 

An  English  reader'  can  hardly  fail  to  remark 
how  often  Jesse  is  mentioned  long  after  the  name  of 
1  >avid  had  become  famous  enough  to  supersede  that 
of  his  obscure  and  humble  parent.  While  David 
was  a  struggling  outlaw,  it  was  natural  that  to  friend 
and  foe — to  Saul,  Doeg,  and  Nabal,  no  less  than  to 
the  captains  of  Judah  and  Benjamin — he  should  be 
merely  the  "son  of  Jesse"  (1  Sam.  xxii.  9,  13; 
comp.  xxiv.  16,  xxv.  10  ;  1  Chr.  xii.  18)  ;  but  that 
Jesse's  name  should  be  brought  forward  in  records 
of  so  late  a  date  as  1  Chr.  xxix.  26,  and  Ps.  lxxii. 
20,  long  after  the  establishment  of  David's  own 
house,  is  certainly  worthy  of  notice.  Especially  is 
it  to  be  observed  that  it  is  in  his  name — the  "  bhoot 
out  of  the  stump  of  Jesse  ....  the  root  of  Jesse 
which  should  stand  as  an  ensign  to  the  people" 
(Is.   xi.   1,   10),   that   Isaiah   announces  the  most 


JESUS 

splendid  of  his  promises,  intended  to  rouse  and 
cheer  the  heart  of  the  nation  at  the  time  of  its 
deepest  despondency.  [G.] 

JES'SUE  ('lri<rovs;  Alex.  '\t\<tov£:  Jesu),  a 
Levite,  the  same  as  Jeshua  (1  Esd.  v.  26  ;  comp. 
Ezr.  ii.  40). 

JE'SXJ  ('l7)(Tuvs:  Jesu),  the  same  as  Jeshua  the 
Levite,  the  lather  of  Jozabad  (1  Esd.  viii.  63  ;  see 
Ezr.  viii.  33),  also  called  Jessue,  and  Jesus. 

JE'SUI  Ott?*:  'Ieo-ou;  Alex.  'Uffov'i:  Jessui), 
the  son  of  Asher,  whose  descendants  the  Jesuites 
were  numbered  in  the  plains  of  Moab  at  the  Jordan 
of  Jericho  (Num.  xxvi.  44).  He  is  elsewhere 
called  Isui  (Gen.  xlvi.  17)  and  Ishuai  (1  Chr.  vii. 
30). 

JE'SUS  ('Itjo-oCs  :  Jesu,  Jesus,  Josue),  the 
Greek  form  of  the  name  Joshua  or  Jeshua,  a  con- 
traction of  Jehoshua  (yC'liT),  that  is,   "  help  of 

Jehovah"  or  "Saviour"  (Numb.  xiii.  16).  [Je- 
hoshua.] 

1.  Joshua  the  priest,  the  son  of  Jehozadak  (1  Esd. 
v.  5,  8,  24,  48,  56,  68,  70,  vi.  2,  ix.  19  ;  Ecclus. 
xlix.  12).     Also  called  Jeshua.    [Jeshua,  No.  4.] 

2.  (Jesics.)  Jeshua  the  Levite  (1  Esd.  v.  58, 
ix.  48). 

3.  Joshua  the  son  of  Nun  (2  Esd.  vii.  37  ; 
Ecclus.  xlvi.  1  ;  1  Mace.  ii.  55 ;  Acts  vii.  45 ; 
Heb.  iv.  8).     [Joshua.] 

JESUS    THE    FATHER   OF   SIEACH. 

[Jesus  the  Soft  of  Sirach.] 

JESUS  THE  SON  OF  SIRACH  ('Irj<roCs 
vlbs  2eipa%  ;  Jesus  filius  Sirach)  is  described  in 
the  text  of  Ecclesiasticus  (1.  27)  as  the  author 
of  that  book,  which  in  the  LXX.,  and  generally, 
except  in  the  Western  Church,  is  called  by  his 
name  the  Wisdom  of  Jesus  the  Son  of  Sirach,  or 
simply  the  Wisdom  of  Sirach  (Ecclesiasticus, 
§1).  The  same  passage  speaks  of  him  as  a  native 
of  Jerusalem  (Ecclus.  /.  c);  and  the  internal  cha- 
racter of  the  book  con  firms  its  Palestinian  origin. 
The  name  Jesus  was  of  frequent  occurrence,  and 
was  often  represented  by  the  Greek  Jason.  In  the 
apocryphal  list  of  the  LXXII  commissioners  sent  by 
Eleazar  to  Ptolemy  it  occurs  twice'  (Arist.  Hist. 
ap.  Hody,  De  text.  p.  vii.)  ;  but  there  is  not  the 
slightest  ground  for  connecting  the  author  of  Eccle- 
siasticus with  either  of  the  persons  there  mentioned. 
The  various  conjectures  which  have  been  made  as 
to  the  position  of  the  son  of  Sirach  from  the  con- 
tents of  his  book ;  as,  for  instance,  that  he  was 
a  priest  (from  vii.  29  ff.,  xlv.,  xlix.,  1.),  or  a 
physician  (from  xxxviii.  1  ff.),  are  equally  un- 
founded. 

Among  the  later  Jews  the  "  Son  of  Sirach  "  was 
celebrated  under  the  name  of  Ben  Sira  as  a  writer 
of  proverbs,  and  some  of  those  which  have  been 
preserved  otter  a  close  resemblance  to  passages  in 
Ecclesiasticus  [Ecclesiasticus,  §4,  n.b.];  but 
in  the  course  of  time  a  later  compilation  was  sub- 
stituted for  the  original  work  of  Ben  Sira  (Zunz, 


0  This  is  given  also  in  the  Targum  to  Ruth  iv.  22. 
"  And  Obcd  begat  Ishai  (Jesse) ,  whose  name  is  Nachash, 
because  there  were  not  found  in  him  iniquity  and 
corruption,  that  he  should  be  delivered  into  the  hand 
of  the  Angel  of  Death  that  he  should  take  away  his 
soul  from  him  ;  and  he  lived  many  days  until  was 
fulfilled  before  Jehovah  the  counsel  which  the  Serpent 


gave  to  Chavvah  the  wife  of  Adam,  to  eat  of  the  tree, 
of  the  fruit  of  which  when  they  did  eat  they  were 
able  to  discern  between  good  and  evil ;  and  by  reason 
of  this  counsel  all  the  inhabiters  of  the  earth  became 
guilty  of  death,  and  in  that  iniquity  only  died  Ishai 
the  righteous." 


JESUS 

Gottesd.  Vortr.  d.  Jvdm,  100  ff.),  and  tradition 
has  preserved  no  authentic  details  of  his  person  or 
his  life. 

The  chronological  difficulties  which  have  been 
raised  as  to  the  date  of  the  Son  of  Sirach  have 
been  already  noticed  [ECCLESIASTICUS,  §4],  and 
do  not  call  for  further  discussion. 

According  to  the  rirst  prologue  to  the  book  of 
Ecclesiasticus,  taken  from  the  Synopsis  of  the 
Pseudo-Athanasius  (iv.  p.  377,  ed.  Migne),  the 
translator  of  the  book  bore  the  same  name  as  the 
author  of  it.  If  this  conjecture  were  true,  a  genea- 
logy of  the  following  form  would  result:  1.  Sirach. 
_'.  Jesus,  son  (lather)  of  Sirach  (author  of  the 
book).  3.  Sirach.  4.  Jesus,  son  of  Sirach  [trans- 
lator of  the  book).  It  is,  however,  most  likely 
that  the  last  chapter,  "  The  prayer  of  Jesus  the  son 
of  Sirach"  gave  occasion,  to  this  conjecture.  The 
prayer  was  attributed  to  the  translator,  and  then 
the  table  of  succession  followed  necessarily  from  the 
title  attached  to  it.  [B.  F.  W.] 

JE'SUS,  called  JUSTUS,  a  Christian  who 
was  with  St.  Paul  at  Rome,  and  joined  him  in 
sending  salutations  to  the  Colossians.  He  was  one 
of  the  fellow-workers  who  were  a  comfort  to  the 
Apostle  (Col.  iv.  11).  In  the  Acta  Sanct.  Jun. 
iv.  o'7,  he  is  commemorated  as  bishop  of  Eleu- 
theropolis.  [W.T.B.] 

JESUS  CHRIST.  The  name  Jesus  ('Itj<toOs) 
signifies  Saviour.  Its  origin  is  explained  above,  and 
it  seems  to  have  been  not  an  uncommon  name 
among  the  Jews.  It  is  assigned  in  the  New 
Testament  (1.)  to  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who 
"  saves  His  people  from  their  sins"  (Matt.  i.  21)  ; 
also  I  2.)  to  Joshua  the  successor  of  Moses,  who 
brought  the  Israelites  into  the  land  of  promise 
(Num.  xxvii.  18  ;  Acts  vii.  45;  Heb.  iv.  8);  and 
(3.)  to  Jesus  surnamed  Justus,  a  converted  Jew,  as- 
sociated with  St.  Paid  (Col.  iv.  11). 

The  name  of  Christ  (X/hctto's  from  XP''°»  I 
anoint)  signifies  Anointed.  Priests  were  anointed 
amongst  the  Jews,  as  their  inauguration  to  their 
office  (1  Chr.  xvi.  22  ;  Ps.  cv.  15),  and  kings  also 
(2  Mace.  i.  24;  Ecclus.  xlvi.  19).  In  the  New 
Testament  the  name  Christ  is  used  as  equivalent  to 
Messiah  (Greek  Metrtn'as;   Hebrew    ITtJTD,  John 

i.  41),  the  name  given  to  the  long  promised  Pro- 
phet and  King  whom  the  Jews  had  been  taught  by 
their  prophets  to  expect ;  and  therefore  =  6  e'px°" 
pevos  (Acts  xix.  4  ;  Matt.  xi.  3).  The  use  of  this 
name  as  applied  to  the  Lord  has  always  a  reference 
tn  the  promises  of  the  Prophets.  In  Matt.  ii.  4, 
\i.  2,  it  is  assumed  that  the  Christ  when  He  should 
come  would  live  and  act  in  a  certain  way,  described 
by  the  Prophets.  So  Matt.  xxii.  42,  xxiii.  lo, 
xxiv.  5,  23;  Mark  xii.  35,  xiii.  21  ;  Luke  iii.  l.">, 
xx.  41  ;  John  vii.  27,  31,  41,  42,  xii.  .".4,  in  all 
which  places  there  is  a  reference  to  the  Messiah  as 
delineated  by  the  Prophets.  That  they  had  fore- 
told that  Christ  should  sutler  appears  Luke  xxiv. 
•Jii,  46.  The  name  of  Jesus  is  the  proper  name  of 
our  Lord,  and  that  of  Christ  is  added  to  identify 
Him  with  the  promised  Messiah,  other  names  an' 
sometimes  added  to  the  names  Jesus  Christ,  or 
Christ  Jesus:  thus  "Lord"  (frequently)  "  a  King" 
(added  as  a  kind  of  explanation  of  the  «  "id  ( Ihrisl . 
Luke  wiii.  2),  "King  of  Israel"  (Mark  w.  32), 
Son  of  David  (Mark  xii.  .".."> ;  Luke  xx.  -11),  chosen 
of  <  lod  (Luke  xxiii.  35). 

Remarkable  are  such  expressions  as  "  the  Christ 


JESUS  CHRIST 


1039 


of  God"  (Lukeii.  26,  ix.  20;  Lev.  xi.  15,  xii. 
10);  and  the  phrase  "in  Christ,"  which  occurs 
about  78  times  in  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  and  is 
almost  peculiar  to  them.  But  the  germ  of  it  is  to 
be  found  in  the  words  of  our  Lord  Himself,  "  Abide 
in  me,  and  I  in  you.  As  the  branch  cannot  bear 
fruit  of  itself,  except  it  abide  in  the  vine  ;  no  more 
can  ye,  except  ye  abide  in  me "  (John  xv.  4,  also 
5,  G,  7,  9,  10).  The  idea  that  all  Christian  life  is 
not  merely  an  imitation  and  following  of  the  Lord, 
but  a  living  and  constant  union  with  Him,  causes  the 
Apostle  to  use  such  expressions  as  "  fallen  asleep  in 
Christ"  (1  Cor.  xv.  18),  "1  knew  a  man  in 
Christ"  (2  Cor.  xii.  2),  "I  speak  the  truth  in 
Christ"  (1  Tim.  ii.  7),  and  many  others.  (See 
Schleusner's  Lexicon ;  Wahl's  Claris ;  Fritzsche  on 
St.  Mattheio  ;  De  Wette's  Commentary  ;  Schmidt's 
Greek  Concordance,  &c.) 

The  Life,  the  Person,  and  the  Work  of  our  Lord 
and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ  occupy  the  whole  of  the 
New  Testament.  Of  this  threefold  subject  the 
present  article  includes  the  first  part,  namely, 
the  Life  and  Teaching;  the  Person  of  our  Lord 
will  be  treated  under  the  article  Son  of  God  ; 
and  His  Work  will  naturally  fall  under  the  word 
Saviour. 

Towards  the  close  of  the  reign  of  Herod  the 
Great,  arrived  that  "  fulness  of  time  "  which  God 
in  His  inscrutable  wisdom  had  appointed  tor  the 
sending  of  His  Sou  ;  and  Jesus  was  born  at  Beth- 
lehem, to  redeem  a  sinful  and  ruined  world.  Ac- 
cording to  the  received  chronology,  which  is  in  fact 
that  of  Dionysius  Exiguus  in  the  6th  century,  this 
event  occurred  in  the  year  of  Rome  754.  But 
modern  writers,  with  hardly  an  exception,  believe 
that  this  calculation  places  the  nativity  some  years 
too  late;  although  they  differ  as  to  the  amount  of 
error.  Herod  the  Great  died,  according  to  Jo- 
sephus,  in  the  thirty-seventh  year  after  lie  was 
appointed  king  {Ant.  xvii.  8,  §1,  B.  J.  i.  33,  §8). 
His  elevation  coincides  with  the  consulship  of  Cn. 
Domitius  Calvinus  and  C.  Asinius  Pollio,  and  this 
determines  the  date  A.U.C.  714  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiv. 
14,  §5).  There  is  reason  to  think  that  in  such 
calculations  Josephus  reckons  the  years  from  the 
month  Nisan  to  the  same  month  ;  and  also  that  the 
death  of  Herod  took  place  in  the  beginning  of  the 
thirty-seventh  year,  or  just  before  the  Passover 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xvii.  9,  §3)  ;  if  then  thirty-six 
complete  years  are  added  they  give  the  year  of 
Herod's  death  A.U.C.  750  (see  Note  on  Chronology 
at  the  end  of  this  article).  As  Jesus  was  born 
during  the  life  of  Herod,  it  follows  from  these  data 
that  the  Nativity  took  place  some  time  before  the 
month  of  April  750,  and  it' it  took  place  only  a  few 
months  before  Herod's  death,  then  its  date  would 
l>e  tour  years  earlier  than  the  Dionysian  reckoning 
(Wieseler). 

Three  other  chronological  data  occur  in  the 
(io^prls,  hut.  the  arguments  founded  on  them  are 
not  conclusive.  1.  The  Baptism  of  Jesus  was 
followed  by  a  Passover  (John  ii.  13),  at  which 
certain  Jews  mention  that  the  restoration  of  their 
temple  had  keen  in  progress  for  forty-six  years 
ii.  20),  Jesus  himself  being  at  this  time  "about 
thirty  years  of  age"  (Luke  iii.  2:!).  As  the  date 
of  the  Temple-restoration  can  be  ascertained,  it  has 

1 n  argued  from  these  facts  also  that   the   nativity 

took  place  at  the  beginning  of  A.U.C.  7.">i).  Put 
it  is  sometimes  argued  that  the  words  that  deter- 
mine our  fold's  age  are  not  exact  enough  to  serve 
as  the  basis  for  6uch  a  calculation.     2.  The  ap- 


1040 


JESUS  CHKIST 


pearance  of  the  star  to  the  wise  men  has  been 
thought  likely,  by  the  aid  of  astronomy,  to  deter- 
mine the  date.  But  the  opinion  that  the  star  in 
the  East  was  a  remarkable  conjunction  of  Jupiter 
and  Saturn  in  the  sign  Pisces,  is  now  rejected. 
Besides  the  difficulty  of  reconciling  it  with  the 
sacred  narrative  (Matt.  ii.  9)  it  would  throw  back 
the  birth  of  our  Lord  to  A.U.C.  747,  which  is  too 
early.  3.  Zacharias  was  "  a  priest  of  the  course 
of  Abia  "  (Luke  i.  5),  and  he  was  engaged  in  the 
duties  of  his  course  when  the  birth  of  John  the 
Baptist  was  foretold  to  him ;  and  it  has  been 
thought  possible  to  calculate,  from  the  place  which 
the  course  of  Abia  held  in  the  cycle,  the  precise 
time  of  the  Saviour's  birth.  All  these  data  are 
discussed  below  (p.  1072). 

In  treating  of  the  Life  of  Jesus,  a  perfect  record 
of  the  events  would  be  no  more  than  a  reproduc- 
tion of  the  four  Gospels,  and  a  discussion  of  those 
events  would  swell  to  the  compass  of  a  voluminous 
commentary.  Neither  of  these  would  be  appro- 
priate here,  and  in  the  present  article  a  brief  sketch 
only  of  the  Life  can  be  attempted,  drawn  up  with 
a  view  to  the  two  remaining  articles,  on  the  SON 
of  God  and  Saviour. 

The  Man  who  was  to  redeem  all  men  and  do  for 
the  human  race  what  no  one  could  do  for  his  bro- 
ther, was  not  born  into  the  world  as  others  are. 
The  salutation  addressed  by  the  Angel  to  Mary  His 
mother,  "  Hail !  Thou  that  ait  highly  favoured," 
was  the  prelude  to  a  new  act  of  divine  creation  ; 
the  first  Adam  that  sinned  was  not  born  but  cre- 
ated ;  the  second  Adam,  that  restored,  was  born 
indeed,  but  in  supernatural  fashion.  "  The  Holy 
Ghost  shall  come  upon  thee,  and  the  power  of  the 
Highest  shall  overshadow  thee ;  therefore  also  that 
holy  thing  which  shall  be  born  of  thee  shall  be 
called  the  Son  of  God  "  (Luke  i.  35).  Mary  re- 
ceived the  announcement  of  a  miracle,  the  full 
import  of  which  she  could  not  have  understood, 
with  the  submission  of  one  who  knew  that  the 
message  came  from  God ;  and  the  Angel  departed 
from  her.  At  first,  her  bet  rothed  husband,  when  he 
heard  from  her  what  had  taken  place,  doubted  her, 
but  a  supernatural  communication  convinced  him 
of  her  purity,  and  he  took  her  to  be  his  wife.  Not 
only  was  the  approaching  birth  of  Jesus  made 
the  subject  of  supernatural  communications,  but 
that  of  John  the  Baptist  the  forerunner  also.  Thus 
before  the  birth  of  either  had  actually  taken  place, 
a  small  knot  of  persons  had  been  prepared  to  expect 
the  fulfilment  of  the  divine  promises  in  the  Holy 
One  that  should  be  born  of  Mary  (Luke  i.). 

The  prophet  Micah  had  foretold  (v.  2)  that  the 
future  king  should  be  born  in  Bethlehem  of  Judaea, 
the  place  where  the  house  of  David  had  its  origin ; 
but  Mary  dwelt  in  Nazareth.  Augustus,  however, 
had  ordered  a  general  census  of  the  Roman  empire, 
and  although  Judaea,  not  being  a  province  of  the 
empire,  would  not  necessarily  come  under  such  an 
order,  it  was  included,  probably  because  the  inten- 
tion was  already  conceived  of  reducing  it  after  a 
time  to  the  condition  of  a  province  (see  Note  on 
Chronology).  That  such  a  census  was  made  we 
know  from  Cassiodorus  (  Var.  iii.  52).  That  in  its 
application  to  Palestine  it  should  be  made  with 
reference  to  Jewish  feelings  and  prejudices,  being 
carried  out  no  doubt  by  Herod  the  Jewish  king, 
>vas  quite  natural ;  and  so  Joseph  and  Mary  went  to 
Bethlehem,  the  city  of  David,  to  be  taxed.  From  the 
arell-known  and  much-canvassed  passage  in  St.  Luke 
(ii.  2)  it  appears  that  tin1  taxing  was  not  completed 


JESUS  CHEIST 

till  the  time  of  Quirinus  (Cyrenius),  some  years 
later ;  and  how  far  it  was  carried  now,  cannot  be 
determined ;  all  that  we  learn  is  that  it  brought 
Joseph,  who  was  of  the  house  of  David,  from  his 
home  to  Bethlehem,  where  the  Lord  was  bora.  As 
there  was  no  room  in  the  inn,  a  manger  was  the 
cradle  in  which  Christ  the  Lord  was  laid.  But  signs 
were  not  wanting  of  the  greatness  of  the  event 
that  seemed  so  unimportant.  Lowly  shepherds  were 
the  witnesses  of  the  wonder  that  acc*npanied  the 
lowly  Saviour's  birth  ;  an  angel  proclaimed  to  them 
"  good  tidings  of  great  joy  ;"  and  then  the  exceed- 
ing joy  that  was  in  heaven  amongst  the  angels 
about  this  mystery  of  love  broke  through  the  silence 
of  night  with  the  words — "Glory  to  God  in  the 
highest,  and  on  earth  peace,  good  will  towards 
men"  (Luke  ii.  8-20).  We  need  not  suppose  that 
these  simple  men  were  cherishing  in  their  hearts 
the  expectation  of  the  Messiah  which  others  had 
relinquished  ;  they  were  chosen  from  the  humble, 
as  were  our  Lord's  companions  afterwards,  in  order 
to  show  that  God  "  hath  chosen  the  weak  things 
of  the  world  to  confound  the  things  which  are 
mighty"  (1  Cor.  i.  26-31),  and  that  the  poor 
and  meek  could  apprehend  the  message  of  salva- 
tion to  which  kings  and  priests  could  turn  a 
deaf  ear. 

The  subject  of  the  Genealogy  of  our  Lord,  as 
given  by  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke,  is  discussed 
fully  in  another  article.  [See  Genealogy  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.] 

The  child  Jesus  is  circumcised  in  due  time,  is 
brought  to  the  temple,  and  the  mother  makes  the 
offering  for  her  purification.  That  offering  wanted 
its  peculiar  meaning  in  this  case,  which  was  an  act 
of  new  creation,  and  not  a  birth  after  the  common 
order  of  our  fallen  nature.  But  the  seed  of  the 
new  kingdom  was  to  grow  undiscernibly  as  yet ; 
no  exemption  was  claimed  by  the  "  highly  favoured" 
mother,  and  no  portent  intervened.  She  made  her 
humble  offering  like  any  other  Judaean  mother, 
and  would  have  gone  her  way  unnoticed ;  but  here 
too  God  suffered  not  His  beloved  Son  to  be  without 
a  witness,  and  Simeon  and  Anna,  taught  from  God 
that  the  object  of  their  earnest  longings  was  before 
them,  prophesied  of  His  divine  work :  the  one 
rejoicing  that  his  eyes  had  seen  the  salvation  of 
God,  and  the  other  speaking  of  Him  "  to  all  that 
looked  for  redemption  in  Jerusalem "  (Luke  ii. 
28-38). 

Thus  recognised  amongst  His  own  people,  the 
Saviour  was  not  without  witness  amongst  the 
heathen.  "Wise  men  from  the  East" — that  is, 
Persian  magi  of  the  Zend  religion,  in  which  the 
idea  of  a  Zoziosh  or  Redeemer  was  clearly  known — 
guided  miraculously  by  a  star  or  meteor  created 
for  the  purpose,  came  and  sought  out  the  Saviour 
to  pay  him  homage.  We  have  said  that  in  the 
year  747  occurred  a  remarkable  combination  of  the 
planets  Jupiter  and  Saturn,  and  this  is  supposed  to 
be  the  sign  by  which  the  wise  men  knew  that  the 
birth  of  some  great  one  had  taken  place.  But,  as 
has  been  said,  the  date  doe's  not  agree  with  this 
view,  and  the  account  of  the  Evangelist  describes  a 
single  star  moving  before  them  and  guiding  their 
steps.  We  must  suppose  that  God  saw  good  to 
speak  to  the  magi  in  their  own  way:  they  were 
seeking  light  from  the  study  of  the  stars,  whence 
only  physical  light  could  be  found,  and  He  guided 
them  to  the  Source  of  spiritual  light,  to  the  era  lie 
of  His  Son,  by  a  star  miraculously  made  to  appeal- 
to  them,  and  to  speak  intelligibly  to  them  through 


JESUS  CHEIST 

their  preconceptions.  The  offerings  which  they 
brought  have  been  regarded  as  symbolical :  the  gold 
was  tribute  to  a  king,  the  frankincense  was  for  the 
use  of  a  priest,  and  the  myrrh  for  a  body  preparing 
for  the  tomb — 

"  Aorea  nascenti  fuderunt  munera  regi, 
Thura  dedere  Deo,  myrrham  tribuere  sepulto," 

(says  Sedulius) :  but  in  a  more  general  view  these 
were  at  any  rate  the  offerings  made  by  worshippers, 
and  in  that  light  must  the  magi  be  regarded.  The 
events  connected  with  the  birth  of  our  Lord  are  all 
significant,  and  here  some  of  the  wisest  of  the 
heathen  kneel  before  the  Redeemer  as  the  first- 
fruits  of  the  Gentiles,  and  as  a  sign  that  His  do- 
minion was  to  be  not  merely  Jewish,  but  as  wide 
as  the  whole  world.  (See  Matt.  ii.  1-12  ;  Miintei*, 
Star  of  the  Wise  Men,  Copenhagen,  18"27  ;  the 
Commentaries  of  Alford,  Williams,  Olshausen,  and 
Heubner,  where  the  opinions  as  to  the  nature  of 
the  star  are  discussed.) 

A  little  child  made  the  great  Herod  quake  upon 
his  throne.  When  he  knew  that  the  magi  were 
come  to  hail  their  King  and  Lord,  and  did  not  stop 
at  his  palace,  but  passed  on  to  a  humbler  roof,  and 
when  he  found  that  they  would  not  return  to 
betray  this  child  to  him,  he  put  to  death  all  the 
children  in  Bethlehem  that  were  under  two  years 
old.  The  crime  was  great ;  but  the  number  of  the 
victims,  in  a  little  place  like  Bethlehem,  was  small 
enough  to  escape  special  record  amongst  the  wicked 
acts  of  Herod  from  Josephus  and  other  historians, 
as  it  hail  no  political  interest.  A  confused  indi- 
cation of  it,  however,  is  found  in  Macrobius  (Saturn. 
ii.  4). 

Joseph,  warned  by  a  dream,  flees  to  Egypt  with 
the  young  child,  beyond  the  reach  of  Herod's  arm. 
This  flight  of  our  Lord  from  His  own  land  to  the 
land  of  darkness  and  idolatry — a  land  associated 
even  to  a  proverb  with  all  that  was  hostile  to 
God  and  His  people,  impresses  on  us  the  reality 
of  His  humiliation.  Herod's  cup  was  well  nigh 
full ;  and  the  doom  that  soon  overtook  him  could 
have  arrested  him  then  in  his  bloody  attempt ;  but 
Jesus,  in  accepting  humanity,  accepted  all  its  inci- 
dents. He  was  saved,  not  by  the  intervention  of 
God,  but  by  the  obedience  of  Joseph  ;  and  from  the 
storms  of  persecution  He  had  to  use  the  common 
means  of  escape  (Matt.  ii.  13-23  ;  Thomas  a  Kempis, 
iii.  l.r>,  and  Commentaries).  After  the  death  of 
Herod,  in  less  than  a  year,  Jesus  returned  with  His 
parents  to  their  own  land,  and  went  to  Nazareth, 
where  they  abode. 

Except  :i<  to  one  event  the  Evangelists  are  silent 
upon  the  succeeding  years  of  our  Lord's  life  down 
to  the  commencement  of  His  ministry.  When  He 
was  twelve  years  old  He  was  found  in  the  temple, 
hearing  the  doctors  and  asking  them  questions 
(Luke  ii.  40-52).  We  are  shown  tins  one  fact  that 
we  may  know  that  at  the  time  when  the  Jews 
considered  childhood  tube  passing  into  youth,  Jesus 

was  already  aware  of  His  mission,  and  consciously 

preparing  for  it,  although  years  elapsed  before  its 
actual  commencement.  This  fact  at  once  confirms 
and  illustrates  such  a  general  expression  as  "  Jesus 
increased  in  wisdom  and  stature,  and  in  favour 
with  God  and  man"  (Luke  ii.  52).  His  public 
ministry  did  not  begin  with  a  sudden  impulse,  but 
was  prepared  for  by  his  whole  life.  The  conscious- 
ness of  His  divine  nature  and  power  grew,  and 
ripened  and  strengthened  until  the  time  of  Hi- 
showing  unto  Israel. 


JESUS  CHEIST 


1041 


Thirty  years  had  elapsed  from  the  birth  of  our 
Lord  to  the  opening  of  His  ministry.  In  that  time 
great  changes  had  come  over  the  chosen  people. 
Herod  the  Great  had  united  under  him  almost  all 
the  original  kingdom  of  David  ;  after  the  death  of 
that  prince  it  was  dismembered  for  ever.  Archelaus 
succeeded  to  the  kingdom  of  Judaea,  under  the  title 
of  Ethnarch  ;  Herod  Antipas  became  tetrarch  of 
Galilee  and  Peraea,  and  Philip  tetrarch  of  Tra- 
chonitis,  Gaulonitis,  Batanaea,  and  Paneas.  The 
Emperor  Augustus  promised  Archelaus  the  title  of 
king,  if  he  should  prove  worthy ;  but  in  the  tenth 
year  of  his  reign  (u.C.  759)  he  was  deposed  in 
deference  to  the  hostile  feelings  of  the  Jews,  was 
banished  to  Vienne  in  Gaul,  and  from  that  time 
his  dominions  passed  under  the  direct  power  of 
Home,  being  annexed  to  Syria,  and  governed  by  a 
procurator.  No  king  nor  ethnarch  held  Judaea 
afterwards,  if  we  except  the  three  years  when"  it 
was  under  Agrippa  I.  Marks  are  not  wanting  of 
the  irritation  kept  up  in  the  minds  of  the  Jews  by 
the  sight  of  a  foreigner  exercising  acts  of  power 
over  the  people  whom  David  once  ruled.  The 
publicans  (portitores)  who  collected  tribute  for  the 
Roman  empire  were  everywhere  detested;  and  as  a 
marked  class  is  likely  to  be  a  degraded  one,  the 
Jews  saw  everywhere  the  most  despised  among  the 
people  exacting  from  them  all,  and  more  than  all 
(Luke  iii.  13),  that  the  foreign  tyrant  required. 
Constant  changes  were  made  by  the  same  power  in 
the  office  of  high-priest,  perhaps  from  a  necessary 
policy.  Josephus  says  that  there  were  twenty-eight 
high-priests  from  the  time  of  Herod  to  the  burning 
of  the  temple  (Ant.  xx.  10).  The  sect  of  Judas  the 
Gaulonite,  which  protested  against  paying  tribute 
to  Caesar,  and  against  bowing  the  neck  to  an  alien 
yoke,  expressed  a  conviction  which  all  Jews  shared. 
The  sense  of  oppression  and  wrong  would  tend  to 
shape  all  the  hopes  of  a  Messiah,  so  far  as  they 
still  existed,  to  the  conception  of  a  warrior  who 
should  deliver  them  from  a  hateful  political 
bondage. 

It  was  in  the  fifteenth  year  of  Tiberius  the  Em- 
peror, reckoning  from  his  joint  rule  with  Augustus 
(Jau.  U.C.  765),  and  not  from  his  sole  rule  (Aug. 
U.C.  767),  that  John  the  Baptist  began  to  teach. 
In  this  year  (U.C.  779)  Pontius  Pilate  was  pro- 
curator of  Judaea,  the  worldly  and  time-serving 
representative  of  a  cruel  and  imperious  master ; 
Herod  Antipas  and  Philip  still  held  the  tetrarchies 
left  them  by  their  father.  Annas  and  Caiaphas  are 
both  described  as  holding  the  office  of  high-priest ; 
Annas  was  deposed  by  Valerius  Gratus  in  this  very 
year,  and  his  son-in-law  Joseph,  called  also  Caiaphas, 
was  appointed,  after  some  changes,  iii  his  room; 
but  Annas  seems  to  have  retained  after  this  time 
(John  xviii.  13)  much  of  the  authority  of  the  office, 
which  the  two  administered  together.  John  the 
Baptist,  of  whom  a  full  account  is  given  below 
under  his  own  name,  came  to  preach  in  the  wilder- 
ness. He  was  tin'  last  representative  of  the  pro- 
phets of  the  old  covenant  ;  and  his  work  was  two- 
fold— to  enforce  repentance  and  the  terrors  of  the 
old  law,  and  to  revive  the  almost  forgotten  ex- 
pectation of  the  Messiah  (Matt.  iii.  l-lli  ;  Mark  i. 
t-8;  Luke  iii.  1-18).  Loth  these  objects,  which 
are  very  apparent  in  bis  preaching,  were  connected 
equally  With  the  coming  of  Jesus,  since  tie-  need 
of  a  Saviour  from  sin  is  not  felt  but  when  sin 
itself  is  felt  to  be  a  bondage  and  a  terror.     The 

career  of  John  seems  to  have  I a  my  short ;  and 

it  has  been  asked  how  such  great  influence  could 


1042 


JESUS  CHRIST 


have  been  attained  in  a  short  time  (Matt.  iii.  5). 
But  his  was  a  powerful  nature  which  soon  took 
possession  of  those  who  came  within  its  reach  ;  and 
his  success  becomes  less  surprising  if  we  assume 
with  Wieseler  that  the  preaching  took  place  in  a 
sabbatical  year  (Baumgarten,  Geschichte  Jesu,  40). 
It  is  an  old  controversy  whether  the  baptism  of 
John  was  a  new  institution,  or  an  imitation  of  the 
baptism  of  proselytes  as  practised  by  the  Jews. 
But  at  all  events  there  is  no  record  of  such  a  rite, 
conducted  in  the  name  of  and  with  reference  to  a 
particular  person  (Acts  xix.  4),  before  the  ministry 
of  John.  Jesus  came  to  Jordan  with  the  rest  to 
receive  this  rite  at  John's  hands  ;  first,  in  order 
that  the  sacrament  by  which  all  were  hereafter  to 
be  admitted  into  His  kingdom  might  not  want  His 
example  to  justify  its  use  (Matt.  iii.  15);  next, 
that  John  might  have  an  assurance  that  his  course 
as  the  herald  of  Christ  was  now  completed  by  His 
appearance  (John  i.  33)  ;  and  last,  that  some  public 
token  might  be  given  that  He  was  indeed  the 
Anointed  of  God  (Heb.  v.  5).  A  supposed  dis- 
crepancy between  Matt.  iii.  14  and  John  i.  31,  33, 
disappears  when  we  remember  that  from  the  rela- 
tionship between  the  families  of  John  and  our  Lord 
(Luke  i.),  John  must  have  known  already  some- 
thing of  the  power,  goodness,  and  wisdom  of  Jesus  ; 
what  he  did  not  know  was,  that  this  same  Jesus 
was  the  very  Messiah  for  whom  he  had  come  to 
prepare  the  world.  Our  Lord  received  the  rite  of 
baptism  at  His  servant's  hands,  and  the  Father 
attested  Him  by  the  voice  of  the  Spirit,  which  also 
was  seen  descending  on  Him  in  a  visible  shape: 
"  This  is  my  beloved  Son  in  whom  I  am  well 
pleased"  (Matt.  iii.  13-17;  Mark  i.  9-11;  Luke 
iii.  21,  22). 

Immediately  after  this  inauguration  of  His  mi- 
nistry Jesus  was  led  up  of  the  Spirit  into  the  wil- 
derness to  be  tempted  of  the  devil  (Matt.  iv.  1-11  ; 
Mark  i.  12,  13 ;  Luke  iv.  1-13).  As  the  baptism 
of  our  Lord  cannot  have  been  for  Him  the  token 
of  repentance  and  intended  reformation  which  it 
was  for  sinful  men,  so  does  our  Lord's  sinlessness 
affect  the  nature  of  His  temptation  ;  for  it  was  the 
trial  of  One  Who  could  not  possibly  have  fallen. 
This  makes  a  complete  conception  of  the  temptation 
impossible  for  minds  wherein  temptation  is  always 
associated  with  the  possibility  of  sin.  But  whilst 
we  must  be  content  with  an  incomplete  conception, 
we  must  avoid  the  wrong  conceptions  that  are  often 
substituted  tor  it.  Some  suppose  the  account  before 
us  to  describe  what  takes  place  in  a  vision  or 
ecstasy  of  our  Lord ;  so  that  both  the  temptation 
and  its  answer  arise  from  within.  Others  think 
that  the  temptation  was  suggested  from  within, 
but  in  a  state,  not  of  sleep  or  ecstasy,  but  of  com- 
plete consciousness.  Others  consider  this  narrative 
to  have  been  a  parable  of  our  Lord,  of  which  He 
has  made  Himself  the  subject.  All  these  suppo- 
sitions set  aside  the  historical  testimony  of  the 
Gospels :  the  temptation  as  there  described  arose 
not  from  the  sinless  mind  of  the  Son  of  God,  where 
indeed  thoughts  of  evil  could  not  have  harboured, 
but  from.  Satan,  the  enemy  of  the  human  race. 
Nor  c;iii  it  be  supposed  that  this  account  is  a  mere 
parable,  unless  we  assume  that  Matthew  and  Luke 
have  wholly  misunderstood  their  Master's  meaning. 
The  story  is  that  of  a  fact,  hard  indeed  to  be  under- 
stood, but  not  to  be  made  easier  by  explanations 
such  as  would  invalidate  the  only  testimony  on 
which  it  rests  (Heubner's  Practical  Commentary 
on  Matthew). 


JESUS  CHRIST 

The  three  temptations  are  addressed  to  the  three 
forms  in  which  the  disease  of  sin  makes  its  appear- 
ance on  the  soul — to  the  solace  of  sense,  and  the 
love  of  praise,  and  the  desire  of  gain  (1  John  ii. 
16).  But  there  is  one  element  common  to  them 
all — they  are  attempts  to  call  up  a  wilful  and 
wayward  spirit  in  contrast  to  a  patient  self-deny- 
ing one. 

In  the  first  temptation  the  Redeemer  is  an 
hungered,  and  when  the  devil  bids  Him,  if  He 
be  the  Son  of  God,  command  that  the  stones 
may  be  made  bread,  there  would  seem  to  be  no 
great  sin  in  this  use  of  divine  power  to  overcome 
the  pressing  human  want.  Our  Lord's  answer  is 
required  to  show  us  where  the  essence  of  the 
temptation  lay.  He  takes  the  words  of  Moses  to 
the  children  ot  Israel  (Dent.  viii.  3),  which  mean, 
not  that  men  must  dispense  with  bread  and  feed 
only  on  the  study  of  the  divine  word,  but  that  our 
meat  and  drink,  our  food  and  raiment,  are  all  the 
work  of  the  creating  hand  of  God  ;  and  that  a  sense 
of  dependence  on  God  is  the  duty  of  man.  He 
tells  the  tempter  that  as  the  sons  of  Israel  standing 
in  the  wilderness  were  forced  to  humble  themselves 
and  to  wait  upon  the  hand  of  God  for  the  bread 
from  heaven  which  He  gave  them,  so  the  Son  of 
Man,  fainting  in  the  wilderness  from  hunger,  will 
be  humble  and  will  wait  upon  His  Father  in 
heaven  for  the  word  that  shall  bring  Him  food,, 
and  will  not  be  hasty  to  deliver  Himself  from  that 
dependent  state,  but  will  wait  patiently  for  the 
gifts  of  His  goodness.  In  the  second  temptation,  it 
is  not  probable  that  they  left  the  wilderness,  but 
that  Satan  was  allowed  to  suggest  to  our  Lord's 
mind  the  place,  and  the  marvel  that  could  be 
wrought  there.  They  stood,  as  has  been  suggested, 
on  the  lofty  porch  that  overhung  the  valley  of 
Kedron,  where  the  steep  side  of  the  valley  was 
added  to  the  height  of  the  temple  (Joseph.  Ant. 
xv.  11,  §5),  and  made  a  depth  that  the  eye  could 
scarcely  have  borne  to  look  down  upon.  "  Cast 
thyself  down" — perform  in  the  Holy  City,  in  a 
public  place,  a  wonder  that  will  at  once  make  all 
men  confess  that  none  but  the  Son  of  God  could 
perform  it.  A  passage  from  the  91st  Psalm  is 
quoted  to  give  a  colour  to  the  argument.  Our  Lord 
replies  by  an  allusion  to  another  text  that  carries 
us  back  again  to  the  Israelites  wandering  in  the 
wilderness:  "  Ye  shall  not  tempt  the  Lord  your 
God, as  ye  tempted  Him  in  Massah"  (Deut.  vi.  16). 
Their  conduct  is  more  fully  described  by  the 
Psalmist  as  a  tempting  of  God:  "  They  tempted 
God  in  their  heart  by  asking  meat  for  their  lust ; 
yea,  they  spake  against  God:  they  said,  Can  God 
furnish  a  table  in  the  wilderness?  Behold  he  smote 
the  rock  that  the  waters  gushed  out,  and  the 
streams  overflowed.  Can  He  give  bread  also? 
Can  He  provide  flesh  for  His  people?"  (Ps.  lxxviii.) 
Just  parallel  was  the  temptation  here.  God  has 
protected  Thee  so  far,  brought  Thee  up,  put  His 
seal  upon  Thee  by  manifest  proofs  of  His  favour. 
Can  He  do  this  also  ?  Can  He  send  ,the  angels  to 
buoy  Thee  up  in  Thy  descent?  Can  He  make  the 
air  thick  to  sustain,  and  the  earth  soft  to  receive 
Thee?  The  appropriate  answer  is,  "Thou  shalt 
not  tempt  the  Lord  thy  God."  In  the  third 
temptation  it  is  not  asserted  that  there  is  any 
mountain  from  which  the  eyes  of  common  men  can 
see  the  world  'and  its  kingdoms  at  once  displayed  ; 
it  was  with  the  mental  vision  of  One  who  knew  all 
things  that  these  kingdoms  and  their  glory  were 
seenf    And  Satan  has  now  begun  to  discover,  if  he 


JESUS  CHRIST 

knew  not  from  the  beginning,  that  One  is  here  who 
can  become  the  King  over  them  all.  He  says, 
"  All  these  things  will  I  give  Thee  if  Thou  wilt 
fall  down  and  worship  me."  In  St.  Luke  the  words 
are  fuller:  "All  this  power  will  I  give  Thee,  and 
the  glory  of  them,  for  that  is  delivered  unto  me, 
and  to  whomsoever  I  will  I  give  it:"  but  these 
words  are  the  lie  of  the  tempter,  which  he  uses  to 
mislead.  "  Thou  art  come  to  be  great — to  be  a 
King  on  the  earth ;  but  I  am  strong,  and  will  resist 
Thee.  Thy  followers  shall  be  imprisoned  and  slain  ; 
some  of  them  shall  fall  away  through  fear ;  others 
shall  forsake  Thy  cause,  loving  this  present  world. 
Cast  in  Thy  lot  with  me ;  let  Thy  kingdom  be  an 
earthly  kingdom,  only  the  greatest  of  all — a  king- 
dom such  as  the  Jews  seek  to  see  established  on 
the  throne  of  David.  Worship  me  by  living  as  the 
children  of  this  world  live,  and  so  honouring  me  in 
Thy  life:  then  all  shall  be  Thine."  The  Lord  knows 
that  the  tempter  is  right  in  foretelling  such  trials 
to  Him  ;  but  though  clouds  and  darkness  hang  over 
the  path  of  His  ministry  He  must  work  the  work 
of  Him  that  sent  Him,  and  not  another  vvoik:  He 
must  worship  God  and  none  other.  "  Get  thee 
hence,  Satan  ;  for  it  is  written,  Thou  shalt  worship 
the  Lord  thy  God,  and  Him  only  shalt  thou  serve." 
As  regards  the  order  of  the  temptations,  there  are 
internal  marks  that  the  account  of  St.  Matthew 
assigns  them  their  historical  order :  St.  Luke  trans- 
poses the  two  last,  for  which  various  reasons  are 
suggested  by  commentators  (Watt.  iv.  1-1 1  ;  Mark 
i.  12,  13;  Lukeiv.  1-13). 

Deserting  for  a  time  the  historical  order,  we 
shall  rind  that  the  records  of  this  first  portion  of 
His  ministry,  from  the  temptation  to  the  trans- 
figuration, consist  mainly — (1)  of  miracles,  which 
prove  His  divine  commission  ;  (2)  of  discourses  and 
parables  on  the  doctrine  of  "  the  kingdom  of 
heaven;"  (3)  of  incidents  showing  the  behaviour 
of  various  persons  when  brought  into  contact  with 
our  Lord.  The  two  former  may  require  some 
general  remarks,  the  last  will  unfold  themselves 
with  the  narrative. 

1.  The  Miracles. — The  power  of  working  mi- 
racles was  granted  to  many  under  the  Old  Cove- 
nant: Moses  (Ex.  iii.  20,  vii.-xi.)  delivered  the 
people  of  Israel  from  Egypt  by  means  of  them  ; 
and  Joshua,  following  in  his  steps,  enjoyed  the 
same  power  for  the  completion  of  his  work  (Josh, 
iii.  13-  10).  Samson  (Judg.  xv.  19),  Elijah 
(1  K.  xvii.  10,  &c),  and  Elisha  (2  K.  ii.-vi.) 
possessed  the  same  gift.  The  prophets  foretold 
that  the  Messiah,  of  whom  Moses  was  the  type, 
would  show  signs  and  wonders  as  he  had  done. 
Isaiah,  in  describing  His  kingdom,  says — "  Then 
the  eyes  of  the  blind  shall  be  opened,  and  the 
ears  of  the  deaf  shall  be  unstopped.  Then  Bhall 
the  lame  man  leap  as  an  hart,  and  the  tongue  of 
the  dumb  Bing"  (xxxv.  5,  6).  According  to  the 
same  prophet,  the  Christ  was  called  "  to  "pen  the 
blind  eyes,  to  bring  out  the  prisoners  from  the 
prison,  and  them  that  sit  in  darkness  out  of  the 
prison-house"  (xlii.7).  And  all  who  looked  for 
the  coining  of  the  Messiah  expected  thai  the  power 
of  miracles  would  be  one  of  the  tokens  of  His  com- 
mission. When  John  the  Baptist,  in  his  prison, 
heard  of  the  works  of  Jesus,  he  sent  his  disciples 
to  inquire,  "Art  Thou  He  that  should  come  (d 
tpxd/j-ivos  —  the  Messiah),  or  do  we  look  for  an- 
other?" Our  Lord,  in  answer  to  this,  only  points 
to  His  miracles,  leaving  to  John  the  inference  from 
them,  that  no  one  could  do  such  works  except  the 


JESUS  CHRIST 


1043 


promised  One.     When  our  Lord  cured  a  blind  and 
dumb  demoniac,  the  people,  struck  with  the  miracle, 
said,  "Is  not  this  the  Son  of  David?"  (Matt.  xii. 
23).    On  another  like  occasion  it  was  asked,  "  When 
Christ  cometh  will  He  do  more  miracles  than  these 
which  this  man  hath  done?"  (John  vii.  31).     So 
that   the    expectation    that    Messiah    would    work 
miracles    existed    amongst    the    people,    and    was 
founded  on  the  language  of  prophecy.     Our  Lord's 
miracles  are  described  in  the  New  Testament  by 
several  names:   they  are  signs   (ffr]ixe?a),  wonders 
(TepoTo),  works   {epya,    most    frequently    in   St. 
John),  and  mighty  works  (Swd/xeis),  according  to 
the  point  of  view  from  which  they  are  regarded. 
They   are   indeed    astonishing   works,   wrought  as 
signs  of  the  might  and  presence  of  God;  and  they 
are  powers  or  mighty  works  because  they  are  such 
as  no  power  short  of  the  divine  could  have  effected. 
But  if  the  object  had  been  merely  to  work  wonders, 
without  any  other  aim  than  to  astonish  the  minds 
of  the  witnesses,  the  miracles  of  our  Lord  would 
not  have  been  the  best  means  of  producing  the  effect, 
since  many  of  them  were  wrought  for  the  good  of 
obscure  people,  before  witnesses  chiefly  of  the  humble 
and  uneducated  class,  and  in  the  course  of  the  ordinary 
life  of  our  Lord,  which  lay  not  amongst  those  who 
made  it  their  special  business  to  inquire  into  the 
claims  of  a  prophet.     When   requests  were  made 
for  a  more  striking  sign  than  those  which  He  had 
wrought,  for  "  a  sign  from  heaven  "  (Luke  xi.  1 6), 
it  was  refused.     When  the  tempter  suggested  that 
He  should  cast  Himself  down  from  the  pinnacle  of 
the   temple   before   all   men,  the  temptation  was 
rejected.     The  miracles  of  our  Lord   were  to  be, 
not  wonders  merely,   but  signs ;   and  not  merely 
signs  of  preternatural  power,  but  of  the  scope  and 
character  of  His  ministry,  and  of  the  divine  nature 
of  His  Person.     This  will  be  evident  from  an  ex- 
amination of  those  which    are   more   particularly 
described  in  the  Gospels.    Nearly  forty  cases  of  this 
kind  appear;  but  that  they  are  only  examples  taken 
out  of  a  very  great  number,  the  Evangelists  fre- 
quently remind   us    (John  ii.  23  ;    Matt.  viii.  16 
and  parall. ;  iv.  23;  xii.  15  and  parall. ;   Luke  vi. 
19;  Matt.  xi.  5;   xiii.  58;  ix.  35;  xiv.  14,  36; 
xv.  30;  xix.  2;   xxi.  14).      These  cases  might  be 
classified.     There  are  three  instances  of  restoration 
to  life,  each  under  peculiar  conditions:  the  daughter 
of  Jairus  was  lately  dead;  the  widow's  son  at  Nain 
was  being  carried  out  to  the  grave  ;  and  Lazarus 
had  been  four  days  dead,  and  was  returning  to  cor- 
ruption (Matt.  ix.  18  ;  Luke  vii.  11,  12;   John  xi. 
1,  &c).    There  are  about  six  cases  of  demoniac  pos- 
session, each  with  its  own  circumstances:  one  in 
the  synagogue  at  Capernaum,  where  the  unclean 
spirit  bore  witness  to  Jesus  as  "  the  holy  one  of 
God"    (Mark   i.   24);   a  second,  that  of  the   man 
who  dwelt  among  the  tombs  in  the  country  of  the 
Gadarenes,  whose  state  is  so  forcibly  described  by 
St.   Mark   (v.  2),  and   who  also   bore  witness  to 
Him  as  "  the  Son  of  the  Most  High  God  ;"  a  third, 
the  case  of  a  dumb  man   (  Matt.  i\.  32  i  ;   a  fourth, 
thiit  of  a   youth  who  was   brought   to   Him  as   He 
came  down    from   the    Mount    of  Transfiguration 
(  Matt.  wii.  15), and  whom  the  disciples  had  vainly 
tried  to  heal;   a    tilth,  that    of  another  dumb  man, 
whom  the  Jews  thought    he   had   healed  "  through 
Beelzebub  the  prince  of  the 'devils"  (Luke  xi.  15); 
and  a  sixth,  that  of  the  Syro-Phoenician  girl  whose 
mother's    faith    was   so   tenacious   (Matt.   xv.   22). 
There  are  about    seventeen   recorded  cases  of  the 
cure   of  bodily    sickness,    including    fever,   leprosy, 


1044 


JESUS  CHRIST 


palsy,  inveterate  weakness,  the  maimed  limb,  the 
issue  of  blood  of  twelve  years'  standing,  dropsy, 
blindness,  deafness,  and  dumbness   (John  iv.   47 ; 
Matt.  viii.  2,  14,  ix.  2  ;  John  v.  5  ;  Matt.  xii.  10, 
viii.  5,  ix.  20,   27 ;    Mark  viii.  22 ;  John  ix.   1 ; 
Luke  xiii.  10,  xvii.  11,  xviii.  35,  xxii.  51).     These 
three  groups  of  miracles  all  pertain  to  one  class ; 
they  all  brought  help  to  the  suffering  or  sorrowing, 
and  proclaimed  what  love  the  Man  that  did  them 
bore  towards  the  children  of  men.    There  is  another 
class,  showing  a  complete  control  over  the  powers 
of  nature  ;  first  by  acts  of  creative  power,  as  when 
in   trie   beginning   of  His   ministry    He  made  the 
water  wine;   and  when  He  fed  at  one  time  five 
thousand,  and  at  another  four,  with  bread  miracu- 
lously provided  (John  ii.  7,  vi.  10  ;  Matt.  xv.  32)  ; 
secondly,  by  setting  aside  natural  laws  and  con- 
ditions— now  in  passing  unseen  through  a  hostile 
crowd  (Luke  iv.  30)  ;  now  in  procuring  miraculous 
draughts  of  fishes,  when  the  fisher's  skill  had  failed 
(Luke  v.  4;   John  xxi.  6)  ;  now  in  stilling  a  tem- 
pest (Matt.   viii.   26) ;    now    in   walking    to    His 
disciples  on  the  sea  (Matt.  xiv.  25);  now  in  the 
transformation  of  His  countenance  by  a  heavenly 
light  and  glory  (Matt.  xvii.  1)  ;  and  again  in  seek- 
ing and  finding  the  shekel  for  the  customary  tribute 
to  the  temple  in  the  fish's  mouth  (Matt.  xvii.  27). 
In  a  third  class  of  these  miracles  we  find  our  Lord 
over-awing  the  wills  of  men ;  as  when  He  twice 
cleared  the  temple  of  the  traders  (John  ii.  13  ;  Matt, 
xxi.  12)  ;  and  when  His  look  staggered  the  officers 
that  came  to  take  Him  (John  xviii.  6).     And  in  a 
fourth  subdivision  will    stand    one    miracle   only, 
where  His  power  was   used  for  destruction — the 
case  of  the  barren  fig-tree  (Matt.  xxi.  18).     The 
destruction  of  the  herd  of  swine  does  not  properly 
rank  here ;  it  was  a  permitted  act   of  the  devils 
which  he  cast  out,  and  is  no  more  to  be  laid  to  the 
account  of  the  Redeemer  than  are  all  the  sicknesses 
and  sufferings  in  the  land  of  the  Jews  which  He 
permitted  to   waste   and   destroy,    having,  as   He 
showed  by  His  miracles,  abundant  power  to  pre- 
vent them.     All   the  miracles  of  this  latter  class 
show  our  Lord  to  be  One  who  wields  the  power  of 
God.     No  one  can  suspend  the  laws  of  nature  save 
Him  who  made  them :   when  bread  is  wonderfully 
multiplied,  and  the  fickle  sea  becomes  a  firm  floor 
to  walk  on,  the  God  of  the  universe  is  working  the 
change,  directly  or  through  His  deputy.     Very  re- 
markable, as  a  claim  to  divine  power,  is  the  mode 
in  which  Jesus  justified   acts   of  healing   on  the 
Sabbath — "  My    Father   worketh   hitherto,  and  I 
work"  (John  v.  17):  which  means,  "  As  God  the 
Father,  even  on  the  Sabbath-day,  keeps  all  the  laws 
of  the  universe  at  work,  making  the  planets  roll, 
and  the  grass  grow,  and  the  animal,  pulses  beat,  so 
do  I  my  work ;  I  stand  above  the  law  of  the  Sab- 
bath, as  He  does."  a 

On  reviewing  all  the  recorded  miracles,  we  see  at 
once  that  they  are  signs  of  the  nature  of  Christ's 
Person  and  mission.    None  of  them  are  done  merely 


a  The  Saviour's  miracles  are — 

iln  raising  the  dead. 
In  curing  mental  disease. 
In  heading  the  body. 
!In  creating. 
In  destroying. 
In  setting  aside  the  ordinary  laws  of  being. 
In  overawing  the  opposing  wills  of  men. 

In  the  account  in  the  text,  the  miracles  that  took 
place  after  the  Transfiguration  have  been  included, 
for  the  sake  of  completeness. 


JESUS  CHRIST 

to  astonish  ;  and  hardly  any  of  them,  even  of  those 
which  prove  His  power  more  than  His  love,  but 
tend  directly  towards  the  good  of  men  in  some  way 
or  other.     They  show  how  active  and  unwearied 
was  His  love ;  they  also  show  the  diversity  of  its 
operation.      Every  degree    of  human   need — from 
Lazarus  now  returning  to  dust — through  the  palsy 
that  has  seized  on  brain  and  nerves,  and  is  almost 
death — through  the   leprosy  which,  appearing  on 
the  skin,  was  really  a  subtle  poison  that  had  tainted 
every  drop  of  blood  in  the  veins — up  to  the  injury 
to  the  particular  limb — received  succour  from  the 
powerful  word  of  Christ ;  and  to  wrest  His  buried 
friend  from  corruption  and  the  worm  was  neither 
more  nor  less  difficult' than  to  heal  a  withered  hand 
or  restore  to  its  place  an  ear  that  had  been  cut  off. 
And  this  intimate  connexion  of  the  miracles  with 
the  work  of  Christ  will  explain  the  fact  that  faith 
was  in  many  cases  required  as  a  condition  for  their 
performance.     According  to  the  common  definition 
of  a  miracle,  any  one  would  seem  to  be  a  capable 
witness  of  its  performance :   yet  Jesus  sometimes 
refrained  from    working   wonders   before    the   un- 
believing (Mark  vi.  5,  6),  and  sometimes  did  the 
work  that  was  asked  of  Him  because  of  the  faith 
of  them  that  asked  it  (Mark  vii.  29).    The  miracles 
were  intended  to  attract  the  witnesses  of  them  to 
become  followers  of  Jesus   and   members   of  the 
kingdom  of  heaven.     Where  faith  was  already  so 
far  fixed  on  Him  as  to  believe  that  He  could  do 
miracles,  there  was  the  fit  preparation  for  a  faith 
in  higher  and  heavenly  things.     If  they  knew  that 
He  could  heal  the  body,  they  only  required  teach- 
ing to  enlarge  their  view  of  Him  into  that  of  a 
healer  of  the  diseased  spirit,  and  a  giver  of  true  life 
to  those  that  are  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins.     On 
the  other  hand,  where  men's  minds  were  in  a  state 
of  bitterness  and  antagonism  against  Him,  to  display 
miracles  before  them  would  but  increase  their  con- 
demnation.    "  If  I  had  not  done  among  them  the 
works  which  none  other  man  did,  they  had  not  had 
sin  ;  but  now  have  they  both  seen  and  hated  both 
Me  and  My  Father "  (John  xv.  24).     This  result 
was  inevitable :  in  order  to  offer  salvation  to  those 
who  are  to  be  saved,  the  offer  must  be  heard  by 
some  of  those  who  will  reject  it.     Miracles  then 
have  two  purposes — the  proximate,  and  subordinate 
purpose  of  doing  a  work  of  love  to  them  that  need 
it,  and  the  higher  purpose  of  revealing  Christ  in 
His  own  Person  and  nature  as  the  Son  of  God  and 
Saviour  of  men.      Hence  the  rejection  of  the  de- 
mand   for   a   sign    from    heaven — for  some  great 
celestial  phenomenon  which  all  should  see  and  none 
could  dispute.     He  refused  to  give  such  a  sign  to 
the   "  generation "   that   asked    it :    and    once   He 
offered  them  instead  the   fact  that   Jonah   was   a 
type  of  Him  as  to  His  burial   and   resurrection : 
thus  refusing  them  the  kind  of  sign  which  they 
required.    So  again,  in  answer  to  a  similar  demand, 
He  said,  "  Destroy  this  temple  and  in  three  days 
I  will  raise  it  up" — alluding  to  his  death  and  re- 
surrection.    It  is  as  though  He  had  said,  "  All  the 
miracles  that  I   have  been  working   are   only  in- 
tended to  call  attention  to  the  one  great  miracle 
of  My  presence  on  earth  in  the  form  of  a  servant. 
No  other  kind  of  miracle  will  I  work.    If  you  wisli 
for  a  greater  sign,  I  refer  you  to  the  great  miracle 
about"to  be  wrought  in  Me— that  of  My  resur- 
rection."    The   Lord's    words   do  not  mean  that 
there  shall  be  no  sign  ;    He  is   working  wonders 
daily:  but  that  He  will  not  travel  out  of  the  plan 
He  has  proposed  for  Himself.     A  sign  in  the  sun 


JESUS  CHRIST 

and  moon  and  stars  would  prove  that  the  power 
of  God  was  there ;  but  it  would  not  teach  nun  to 
understand  the  mission  of  God  Incarnate,  of  the 
loving  and  suffering  friend  and  brother  of  men. 
The  miracles  which  He  wrought  are  those  best 
suited  to  this  purpose;  and  those  who  had  faith, 
though  but  in  small  measure,  were  the  fittest  to 
behold  them.  They  knew  Him  but  a  little ;  but 
even  to  think  of  Him  as  a  Prophet  who  was  able  to 
heal  their  infirmity  was  a  germ  of  faith  sufficient 
to  make  them  fit  hearers  of  His  doctrine  and  spec- 
tators of  His  deeds.  But  those  gained  nothing  from 
the  Divine  work  who,  unable  to  deny  the  evidence 
of  their  eyes  and  ears,  took  refuge  in  the  last  argu- 
ment of  malice,  "  He  casteth  out  devils  through 
Beelzebub  the  prince  of  the  devils." 

What  is  a  miracle?     A  miracle  must  be  either 
something  done  in  contravention  of  all  law,  or  it  is 
a  transgression  of  all  the  laws  known  to  us,  but 
not  of  some  law  which  further  research  may  discover 
for  us,  or  it  is  a  transgression  of  all  natural   laws, 
whether  known  now  or  to  be  known  hereafter,  on 
account  of  some  higher  law  whose  operation  inter- 
feres with  them.     Only  the  last  of  these  definitions 
could  apply  to  the  Christian  miracles.    God  having 
chosen  to  govern  the  world  by  laws,  having  im- 
pressed on  the  face  of  nature  in  characters  not  to 
be  mistaken  the  great  truth  that  He  rules  the  uni- 
verse by  law  and  order,  would   not  adopt  in  the 
kingdom  of  grace  a  different  plan  from  that  which 
in  the  kingdom  of  nature  He  has  pursued.     If  the 
seen  universe  requires  a  scheme  of  order,  and  the 
spiritual  world  is  governed  without  a  scheme  (so  to 
speak)  by  caprice,  then  the  God  of  Nature  appears 
to  contradict  the  God  of  Grace.     Spinoza  has  not 
failed  to  make  the  most  of  this  argument ;   but  he 
assails  not  the  true  Christian  idea  of  a  miracle,  but 
one    which   he   substitutes  for  it    {Tract.   Theol. 
Polit.  6).     Nor  can  the  Christian  miracles  be  re- 
garded as  cases  in   which  the  wonder  depends  on 
the  anticipation  only  of  some  law  that  is  not  now 
understood,  but  shall  be  so  hereafter.     In  the  first 
place  many  of  them  go  beyond,  in  the  amount  of 
their  operation,  all  the  wildest  hopes  of  the  scientific 
discoverer.     In  the  second  place,  the  very  concep- 
tion of  a  miracle  is  vitiated  by  such  an  explanation. 
All  distinction  in  kind   between  the  man  who  «s 
somewhat  in  advance  of  his  age  in  physical  know- 
ledge, and  the  worker  of  miracles,  would  be  taken 
away;   and  the  miracles  of  one  age,  as  the  steam- 
engine,  the    telegraph-wire,  become  the  tools  and 
toys  of  the  next.     It  remains  then  that  a  miracle 
is  to  be  regarded  as  the  over-ruling  of  some  physical 
law  by  some  higher  law  that  is  brought  in.     We 
are   invited   in  the  Gospels  to  regard  the  miracles 
not  as  wonders,  but  as  the  wonderful  nets  of  Jesus 
of  Nazareth.     They  are  identified  with  the  work 
of  redemption.    There   are  even  cautions    against 
teaching  them  separately — against   severing  them 
from  their  connexion    with    His  wmk.     Eye-wit- 
nesses  of  His   miracles   were   strictly    charged  to 
make  no  report  of  them  to  others  (Matt.  ix.  30; 
Mark  v.  4:>.   vii.  36).     And  yet  when  John  the 
Baptist  sent  his  disciples  to  ascertain   whether  the 
Messiah  were  indeed  come  or  not,  the  answer  they 
took  back  was  the  very  thing  which  was  forbidden 
to  others — a  report  of  miracles.     The  explanation 
of  this  seeming  contradiction   is  thai   wherever  a 
report  of  the  signs  and  wonders  was  likely  to  be 
conveyed  without  a  right  conception  of  tin1  Person 
of  Christ  and  the  kind  of  doctrine  which  he  taught, 
there    He   suffered    not  the    report  to   lie  carried. 


JESUS  CHRIST 


1045 


Now  had  the  purpose  been  to  reveal  His  divine 
nature   only,    this  caution  would    not    have    been 
needed,  nor  would  faith  have  been  a  needful  preli- 
minary for  the  apprehension  of  miracles,  nor  would 
the  temptations   of  Satan   in   the  wilderness  have 
been  the  cunning  snares  they  were  intended  to  be, 
nor  would  it  have  been  necessary  to  refuse  the  con- 
vincing sign  from  heaven  to  the  Jews  that  asked 
it.     But  the  part  of  His  work  to  which  attention 
was  to  be  directed  in  connexion  with   the  miracles, 
was  the  mystery  of  our  redemption  by  One  "  who 
being  in  the  form  of  God,  thought  it  not  robbery 
to  be  equal  With  God,  but  made  Himself  of  no  re- 
putation, and  took  upon  Him  the  form  of  a  servant, 
and  was  made  in  the  likeness   of  men  :   and  being 
found  in  fashion  as  a  man,  He  humbled  Himself, 
and  became  obedient  unto  death,  even  the  death  of 
the  Cross"  (Phil.  ii.  5-8).     Very  few  are  the  mi- 
racles in  which  divine  power  is  exercised  without  a 
manifest  reference  to  the  purpose  of  assisting  men. 
He  works  for  the  most  part  as  the  Power  of  God 
in    a  state   of  humiliation  for  the  good    of  men. 
Not  insignificant  here  are  the  cases  in  which  He 
condescends  to  use  means,  wholly  inadequate  indeed 
in  any  other  hands  than  His ;  but  still  they  are  a 
token  that  He  has  descended  into  the  region  where 
means  are  employed,  from  that  in  which  even  the 
spoken  word  can  control  the  subservient  agents  of 
nature.     He  laid  His  hand  upon  the  patient  (Matt. 
viii.  3,  15,  ix.  29,  xx.  34;  Luke  vii.  14 ;  xxii.  51). 
He  anointed  the  eyes  of  the  blind  with  clay  (John 
ix.  6).     He  put  His  finger  into  the  ear  and  touched 
the  tongue  of  the  deaf  and  dumb  sufferer  in  Deca- 
polis  (Mark  vii.   33,   34).     He  treated  the  blind 
man  at  Bethsaida  in  like  fashion  (Mark  viii.  23). 
Even  where  He  fed  the  five  thousand  and  the  four, 
He  did   not  create  bread  out   of  nothing,   which 
would  have  been  as  easy  for  Him,  but  much  bread 
out  of  little;   and  He  looked  up  to  heaven   and 
blessed    the   meat   as  a   thankful    man  would    do 
(Matt.  xiv.  19  ;  John  vi.  11  ;  Matt.  xv.  36).     At 
the  grave  of  Lazarus  He  lifted  up  His  eyes  and  gave 
thanks  that  the   Father  had  heard  Him  (John  xi. 
41,  42),  and  this  great  miracle  is  accompanied   by 
tears  and  groanings,  that  show  how  One  so  mighty 
to  save  has  truly  become  a  man  with  human  soul 
and   sympathies.     The  worker  of  the  miracles  is 
God  become  Man ;  and  as  signs  of  his  Person  and 
work  are  they  to  be  measured.     Hence,  when  the 
question  of  the  credibility  of  miracles  is  discussed, 
it  ought  to  be  preceded  by  the  question,  Is  redemp- 
tion from  the  sin  of  Adam  a  probable  thing?     Is  it 
probable  that  there  are  spiritual  laws  as  well  as 
natural,  regulating  the  relations   between   us    and 
the  Father  of  our  spirits?     Is  it  probable   that, 
such  laws  existing,  the  needs  of  men  and  the  good- 
ness of  God  would  lead  to  an  expression  of  them, 
complete  or  partial,  by  means  of  revelation?     If 
these  questions  are  all  decided  in  the  affirmative, 
then  Hume's  argument  against  miracles  is  already 
half  overthrown.    '•  No  testimony,"  says  Hume.  ••  is 
sufficient   to   establish   a    miracle,    unless    the   testi- 
mony  be  of  such  a  kind   that  its  falsehood  would  lie 
more  miraculous  than  the  fact   whieh  it  endeavours 
to  establish  :  and  even  in  that  ease  there  is  a  mu- 
tual  destruction  of  arguments,  and    the  superior 
only  gives  us  an  assurance  suitable  t<>  that  degree 
of  force  which  remains  after  deducting  the  inferior  " 
(Essays,  vol.  ii.   p.  130).     If  the  Christian  mi- 
racles are  parts  of  a   scheme    which    bears   other 
marks  of  a  divine  origin,  they  point  to  tin'  existence 
of  a  set  of  spiritual  laws  with   which  Christianity 


1046 


JESUS  CHRIST 


is  connected,  and  of  which  it  is  the  expression ;  and 
then  the  difficulty  of  believing  them  disappears. 
They  are  not  "  against  nature,"  but  above  it ;  they 
are  not  the  few  caprices  of  Providence  breaking  in 
upon  ages  of  order,  but  they  are  glimpses  of  the 
divine  spiritual  cosmos  permitted  to  be  seen  amidst 
the  laws  of  the  natural  world,  of  which  they  take 
precedence,  just  as  in  the  physical  world  one  law 
can  supersede  another.  And  as  to  the  testimony 
for  them  let  Paley  speak: — "  If  twelve  men,  whose 
probity  and  good  sense  I  had  long  known,  should 
seriously  and  circumstantially  relate  to  me  an  ac- 
count of  a  miracle  wrought  before  their  eyes,  and 
in  which  it  was  impossible  they  should  be  de- 
ceived ;  if  the  governor  of  the  country,  hearing  a 
rumour  of  this  account,  should  call  those  men  into 
his  presence,  and  offer  them  a  short  proposal,  either 
to  confess  the  imposture  or  submit  to  be  tied  up  to 
a  gibbet ;  if  they  should  refuse  with  one  voice  to 
acknowledge  that  there  existed  any  falsehood  or  im- 
posture in  the  case ;  if  this  threat  were  communi- 
cated to  them  separately,  yet  with  no  different 
effect;  if  it  was  at  last  executed,  if  I  myself  saw 
them  one  after  another  consenting  to  be  racked,  burnt 
or  strangled,  rather  than  give  up  the  truth  of  their 
account ;  .  .  .  there  exists  not  a  sceptic  in  the  world 
who  would  not  believe  them ,  or  who  would  defend  such 
incredulity"  {Evidences,  Introduction,  p.  6).  In  the 
theory  of  a  "  mutual  destruction  "  of  arguments  so 
that  the  belief  in  miracles  would  represent  exactly 
the  balance  between  the  evidence  for  and  against 
them,  Hume  contradicts  the  commonest  religious, 
and  indeed  worldly,  experience ;  he  confounds  the 
state  of  deliberation  and  examination  with  that  of 
conviction.  When  Thomas  the  Apostle,  who  had 
doubted  the  great  central  miracle  of  the  resurrec- 
tion, was  allowed  to  touch  the  Saviour's  wounded 
side,  and  in  an  access  of  undoubting  faith  exclaimed, 
"  My  Lord,  and  my  God  I"  who  does  not  see  that  at 
that  moment  all  the  former  doubts  were  wiped  out, 
and  were  as  though  they  had  never  been  ?  How 
could  he  carry  about  those  doubts  or  any  recollec- 
tion of  them,  to  be  a  sei>off  against  the  complete 
conviction  that  had  succeeded  them  ?  It  is  so  with 
the  Christian  life  in  every  case;  faith,  which  is 
"  the  substance  of  things  hoped  for,  the  evidence  of 
things  not  seen,"  could  not  continue  to  weigh  and 
balance  evidence  for  and  against  the  truth  ;  the 
conviction  either  rises  to  a  perfect  moral  certainty, 
or  it  continues  tainted  and  worthless  as  a  prin- 
ciple of  action. 

The  lapse  of  time  may  somewhat  alter  the  aspect 
of  the  evidence  for  miracles,  but  it  does  not  weaken 
it.  It  is  more  difficult  (so  to  speak)  to  cross-exa- 
mine witnesses  who  delivered  their  testimony  ages 
ago ;  but  another  kind  of  evidence  has  been  gather- 
ing strength  in  successive  ages.  The  miracles  are 
all  consequences  and  incidents  of  one  great  miracle, 
the  Incarnation  ;  and  if  the  Incarnation  is  found 
true,  the  rest  become  highly  probable.  But  this 
very  doctrine  has  been  thoroughly  proved  through 
all  these  ages.  Nations  have  adopted  it,  and  they 
are  the  greatest  nations  of  the  world.  Men  have 
lived  and  died  in  it,  have  given -up  their  lives  to 
preach  it ;  have  found  that  it  did  not  disappoint 
them,  but  held  true  under  them  to  the  last.  The 
existence  of  Christianity  itself  has  become  an  evi- 
dence. It  is  a  phenomenon  easy  to  understand  if  we 
grant  the  miracle  of  the  Incarnation,  but  is  an 
effect  without  an  adequate  cause  if  that  be  denied. 

Miracles  then  are  offered  us  in  the  Gospels,  not 
as  startling  violations  of  the  order  of  nature,  but  as 


JESUS  CHRIST 

consequences  of  the  revelation  of  Himself  made  by 
Jesus  Christ  for  men's  salvation,  and  as  such  they 
are  not  violations  of  order  at  all,  but  interferences 
of  the  spiritual  order  with  the  natural.  They  are 
abundantly  witnessed  by  earnest  and  competent 
men,  who  did  not  aim  at  any  earthly  reward  for 
their  teaching;  and  they  are  proofs,  together  with 
His  pure  life  and  holy  doctrine,  that  Jesus  was  the 
Son  of  God.  (See  Dean  Trench  on  the  Miracles,  an 
important  work ;  Baumgarten,  Leben  Jesu ;  Pa- 
ley's  Evidences ;  Butler's  Analo(/i/ ;  Hase,  Leben 
Jesu  ;  with  the  various  Commentaries  on  the  New 
Testament.) 

2.  The  Parables. — In  considering  the  Lord's 
teaching  we  turn  first  to  the  parables.  In  all  ages 
the  aid  of  the  imagination  has  been  sought  to  assist 
in  the  teaching  of  abstract  truth,  and  that  in  various 
ways  :  in  the  parable,  where  some  story  of  ordinary 
doings  is  made  to  convey  a  spiritual  meaning,  beyond 
what  the  narrative  itself  contains,  and  without 
any  assertion  that  the  narrative  does  or  does  not 
present  an  actual  occurrence :  in  the  fable,  where 
a  story,  for  the  most  part  an  impossible  one,  of 
talking  beast  and  reasoning  bird,  is  made  the 
vehicle  of  some  shrewd  and  prudent  lesson  of 
worldly  wisdom :  in  the  allegory,  which  is  a  story 
with  a  moral  or  spiritual  meaning,  in  which  the 
lesson  taught  is  so  prominent  as  almost  wholly  to 
supersede  the  story  that  clothes  it,  and  the  names 
and  actions  are  so  chosen  that  no  interpreter  shall 
be  required  for  the  application :  and  lastly,  in  the 
proverb,  which  is  often  only  a  parable  or  a  fable 
condensed  into  a  few  pithy  words  [Parablk] 
(Ernesti,  Lex.  Tech.  Graecum,  under  irapafioX)), 
\6yos,  aWyjyopia ;  Trench,  On  the  Parables ; 
Alt'ord  on  Matt.  xiii.  1,  and  other  Commentators; 
Hase,  Leben  Jesu,  §67,  Ed.  iv. ;  Neander,  Leben 
Jesu,  568,  foil.).  Nearly  fifty  parables  are  pre- 
served in  the  Gospels,  and  they  are  only  selected 
from  a  larger  number  (Mark  iv.  33).  Each  Evan- 
gelist, even  St.  Mark,  has  preserved  some  that  are 
peculiar  to  himself.  St.  John  never  uses  the  word 
parable,  but  that  of  proverb  (irapoi/iiu),  which  the 
other  Evangelists  nowhere  employ.  In  reference 
to  this  mode  of  teaching,  our  Lord  tells  the  dis- 
ciples, "  Unto  you  it  is  given  to  know  the  mys- 
tiiies  of  the  kingdom  of  God ;  but  to  others  in 
parables,  that  seeing  they  might  not  see,  and  hear- 
ing they  might  not  understand"  (Luke  viii.  10): 
and  some  have  hastily  concluded  from  this  that 
the  parable — the  clearest  of  all  modes  of  teaching — 
was  employed  to  conceal  knowledge  from  those 
who  were  not  susceptible  of  it,  and  that  this  was 
its  chief  purpose.  But  it  was  chosen  not  for  this 
negative  object,  but  for  its  positive  advantages  in 
the  instruction  of  the  disciples.  The  nature  of  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  was  not  understood  even  by 
disciples ;  hard  even  to  them  were  the  sayings  that 
described  it,  and  the  hearing  of  them  caused  many 
to  go  back  and  walk  no  more  with  Him  (John  vi. 
66).  If  there  was  any  mode  of  teaching  better 
suited  than  another  to  the  purpose  of  preserving 
truths  for  the  memory  that  were  not  yet  accepted 
by  the  heart — for  keeping  the  seed  safe  till  the  time 
should  arrive  for  the  quickening  Spirit  to  come 
down  and  give  it  growth — that  mode  would  be  the 
best  suited  to  the  peculiar  position  of  the  disciples. 
And  any  means  of  translating  an  abstract  thought 
into  sensuous  language  has  ever  been  the  object  of 
poet  and  teacher  in  all  countries.  He  who  can  best 
employ  the  symbols  of  the  visible  world  for  the 
deeper  acts  of  thought  has  been  the  clearest  and 


JESUS  CHRIST 

must  successful  expositor,  The  parable  affords  JubI 
such  :ui  inst ruiiK'iit  ms  was  required.  Who  could 
banish  from  liis  mind,  when  mice  understood,  the 
Image  of  the  house  built  on  the  Band,  as  the  symbol 
of  the  faithless  soul  unable  to  stand  by  the  truth 
in  the  day  of  temptation?  To  whom  does  noi  the 
parable  of  the  prodigal  sou  bring  back  the  though! 
of  God's  merciful  kindness  towards  the  erring? 
But  without  such  striking  images  it  would  have 
been  Impossible  (to  use  mere  human  language)  to 

make  known  to  the  disciples  in  their  hall'-culi'lil  ,ne,  I 
state  the  mysteries  of  I  a  it  h  in  t  he   Son    of  God  BS  8 

principle  of  life,  of  repentance  from  sin,  ami  of  an 

assurance  of  peace    ami    welcome    1'rotn   the   God   of 

meroy.  Eastern  teachers  hare  made  this  mode  of 
Instruction  familiar;  the  originality  ok  (he  parables 
lay  not,  in  the  method  ok  teaching  by  stories,  bu1 
in  the  profound  ami  new  truths  which  the  stories 
i  Me  hi  io  aptly.  And  Jesus  had  another  purpose 
in  selecting  ihis  form  of  Instruction:  He  foresaw 

thai     many    Would    reject     Mini,    ami    on    them    lie 

would  not  lay  n  heavier  burden  than  they  n Is 

must,  hear,   lie  did  not  offer  i  hem  daily  and  hourly, 

in  their  plainest   form,  the  grand    truths  ok  sin  ami 

atonement,  of  judgment  ami  heaven  and  hell,  ami 
in  so  doing  multiply  occasions  ok  blaspheming, 
"Those  that   were  without"  heard  tie1  parable; 

hut  it  was  an  aimless  story  to  them  If  they  BQUghi 
no    moral    purpose    Under    it,    ami     a     dai  I        i    i-i    . 

passing  comprehen  ion,  if  they  'lid  so  geek.  When 
the  i, old  gathered  round  Him  those  thai  were 
willing  to  he  His,  and  explained  to  them  at  length 
Hie  parable  and  Its  application  (Matt.  \iii.  10-18), 

then  the  light  thus    thrown    on    it    was    not   easy  to 
Hi    in. h   in   their   memory.      And   amongsi    (hose 

without  there  was  no  doubt  a  difference;  .some 
listened  with  indifferent,  and  .'nine  with  unbelieving 

and    resisting    minds;    ami    ok    both    mind,    some 

remained  in  their  aversion,  more  or  less  aotive, 

from   the  Son  of  God    Unto    the  end,  and    some  were 

oonverted  after  lie  was  risen,  To  these  we  may 
suppose  that  the  parables  which  had  rested  in  their 
memories  as  vivid  pictures,  jrei  still  a  dead  letter, 

so  for  as  moral  Import  is  a r I,  became  by  the 

Holy  Spirit,  whose  business  it  was  to  teach  men 
all  things  and  to  bring  all  things  to  their  remem- 
brance (John  riv.  26),  a  quick  ami  powerful  light 
ok  truth,  lighting  up  the  dai  k  places  with  a  hi  Ight 

m     .    im\  ei     Bgain    tO    lade     from     I  heir    eyes.        The 

parable  unapplied  is  a  dark  savin.;   the  parable 

explained   Is  the  clearest    ok  all  teaching;     When 

used  in  Holy  Scripture  which  would 

seem  to  treat  the  parables  a  •  mean  •  of  c sealment 

rather    than    ok   Instruction,    it     must,    he    taken    to 

refer  to  the  ixplained   parable    to  the  cyphei 

without,  the  key — the  symbol  wiihout  Hie  inter- 
pretation, 

i'..  ides  the  parable •,  the  mop.  direel  teaching  oi 
our  Lord  is  eon\ ..\ ed  111  ro, in',-  .h  ooui  les,  dl  pei  ed 
through  if.-  i o,  pi  i   j  ,,t  win,  h  ihic  may  !"•  here 

selected  a;  examples,  the  Sermon  on  the  M< t 

(  Man.  v.-vn. ),  the  di  .com  .■  after  He-  feeding  oi 
the  five  thousand  (John  vi.  22-85),  and  the  final 

discourse  and  prayer  which  preceded  the   Pas 

(John  riv.-xvii.),  These  are  selected  principal!] 
becau  ie  they  mat  I  fchrei  dlstincl  pei  lod  Id  the 
ministry  of  Jesus,  the  opening  of  it,  the  principal 
change  in  the  tone  of  its  teaching,  and  the    ols 

close. 

Notwithstanding  the  endeavoui  to  .•  i  i.i   ii  thai 
the  Sermon  cm  the  \fount  of  St.  Matthew 
cut  from  tic  Sermon  on  the  Plain  ol  St.  Luke,  the 


1 1  si  s  CHRIST 


1017 


evidence  for  their  being  one  ami  the  aim.  discourse 
greatly  preponderates,  If  so,  then  Its  historical 
position  mil  .i  he  fixed  from  si.  Luke ;  and  u  i 
earlier  place  in  si.  Matthew's  Qospel  must  he 
ou  in  ■  io  the  Evangell  t's  wish  to  commence  the 
account  of  the  ministry  of  Jesus  with  a  summary 
ol  Ik  teaching;  an  intention  further  Illustrated  by 
the  mode  in  winch  the  Evangel!  i  has  w  roughl   In 

with  his  report  of  the  discourse  several  a\m  . 
which    SI.    I, like   connects    with    the    various    facts 

whichon  different  occasions  drew  them  forth  (comp. 

I, nkc  uv.  .".I,  \i.  ".:;,  mi.  17.  \ii.  ;.s,  59,  svi,  is, 

with  places  in  Mall,  v.;  also  laike  \i.  I  I,  mi.  :;  ;. 
:$4,' xi.  :!l  36,  fVi,  IS,  \ii.  22-31,  with  places  in 
Malt.vi.;  also  Luke  Xi.  9-18,  Kill.  24,  25-27,  With 
places  iii  Mall.  \ii.  i.  Vei  this  is  done  wlthoul 
violence  to  tic  connexion  ami  structure  ok  the 
whole  discourse,  Ma ti hew,  to  whom  Jesus  is  ever 
pie  ..-Hi  as  the  Messiah,  the  Anointed  Prophet  ol 
the  chosen  i pie,  the  successor  ok  Moses,  sets  at 

the  head    ok    His     mini    I  I  V     lie'    gll  urn   ol'  the  Chrl 

iian  law  with  its  bearing  on  the  Jewish,  from 
Luke  «,•   learn  ihat   Je id    had  gone  up  Into  a 

mountain    Io   play,    thai,  on    the  mnniiim;  following 

lie  made  up  the  number  ok  Hi.  twelve  Apostles, 
ami  solemnly  appointed  them,  and  then  descending 

He   stood  upon  a  level   p|: t  icaTafias  jUST*  abrwv 

tcTTTi  e7r!  T<irrou  WltlVOV,  Luke  vi.   17),    D0t    no,  e  . 

sarily  ai  the  hoiiom  ok  the  mountain,  hut,  where 

the    multitude    OOUld    stand    round    and    hear;   and 

there  he  taught  them  In  a  solemn  address  the  laws 

and  COD  itltUtiOD  ok  III  .  new  kue ..loin.  Hie  kni-dom 
of    Heaven.        lie     tell.    III. MM     who    ale    lueek      In      he 

citizens  ok  that  heavenly  polity,  ami  in  so  doing 
rebukes  almost  every  quality  on  winch  the  world 

iel    a  value.    The  i i  iii   pmi,  that  Is  the  lowly 

minded,   the  i i  •  and  the  meek,   those  who 

inn and  iiin  i   km   i    i.i.  ,,i   I,,. . |(  ii,,.  merciful, 

the  pure,  and  the  peacemakers,  are  all  "blessed," 

are   oil    po    '     'd   ,,l    Ik,     temper   Which   will  assort. 

well  with  that  heavenly  kingdom,  in  contra. t  to 
He'  proud,  the  confident,  the  great  and    i,,i. 

whom    the    world     honours.       (St.    Lid  ,■    ..,1.1  .    ,1, 

iations  ok  woe    to  the    tempers  which    are 

op] i  I"  ii,,  i ,,,  p,.|,  which  St.  Matthew  omit  .  i 

'kin .  novel  exordium  i  fcai  ties  nil  the  hearoi  i,  for  ii 

Bern  i  in  | in,,  .-,  new  wo]  id,  new  imp,,,  and 

new  vii  ine  ;  and  k„i,i  Hmn  proceed  i  to  meet 

the  question  that  rises  up  In  their  minds    "  If  these 

dispositions  and    not  a    literal    nhedmime  |,,    miuUte 

precepts  con  itltute  a  <  Ihristlan,  what  then  become 
of  the  law  ?  '     \n  iwei  Ing  this  tacit  objection!  the 

Lord  Lids  them  "  think  iml  thai  I  am  emne  In  de- 
li ny    (  KaTaAvrrat,   aboliih)    the    law   and   the  pro 

I'!,,  I    .     I    am     not    COffle    I"    ,1,    l,nV    hut     I,,    lulnl  " 

(ir\iii>w<rai,  complete,   Malt.   v.   17),      II. ,, 

io  I'M  iii.  iii  ii,. ,i  i,,,i  i i  ,,,  |ettei  ,,i  ii,,.  law 

was  written  in  vain  ;  that  what  wa  .  Innpni  .n  \  ,,, 
il   doe  .  Q0<    kail  away  till    il      p,n  p..  .     ,      ;,,,    „,.,,  ,|_ 

what  was  of  permanent  obligation    hall  nevei    be 

in  i.     ii-   il,.  ii    how  i   how    f  1 1    more  deep  ami 
ii,  inn"  I  moral  lawgivor  if'  i    than  wa     Mo  • 

il  ■  prototj  pe,  who  like  Him    poke  the  i I  of 

1  lod.    'klm  ,  i, 'in  ,i  pi  n>,  |p]es  which   Mo  e    « rote 

ni   I, mad   hue  .,     m  h  a     a  .lull   and      i     pn  nu.il   people 

»<"  /  "ad,  ii,.  applie  in  '!• '  i»  i  '  ,i'  d  ii,  and  to 
all  He  'ne  i    badi    of  evil.    Murdei  «.,  d mi  i  d 

by    Hm    LaW  ;     hul    an  TCI    an, I    |,i,e,,l  pei  ,  I,  .n, 

Of  the     .an,,        l,„  I  ||j.    Q0|     ,„,|v     |,.,  _    |,n) 

bate,  that  i  i  Hm  root  oi  thai  i i    fruit  which 

God  abhors,  Hate  defiles  the  very  offering  thai  a 
man  mai  b  toGod  |  let  hnu  leave  hi     ifl  uno 


1048 


JESUS  CHRIST 


and  get  the  hate  cast  out,  and  not  waste  his  time 
in  an  unacceptable  sacrifice.  Hate  will  affect  the 
soul  for  ever,  if  it  goes  out  of  the  world  to  meet 
its  Judge  in  that  defiling  garment;  "agree  with 
thine  adversary  quickly,  whiles  thou  art  in  the  way 
with  him"  (ver.  25).  The  act  of  adultery  is 
deadly,  and  Moses  forbade  it.  But  to  permit  the 
thought  of  lust  to  rest  in  the  heart,  to  suffer  the 
desire  to  linger  there  without  combating  it  U3\4- 
Tretvirpbsrb  itrtdufifjaai)  is  of  the  same  nature,  ana1 
shares  the  condemnation.  The  breach  of  an  oath 
(Lev.  xix.  12)  was  forbidden  by  the  Law;  and  the 
rabbinical  writers  had  woven  a  distinction  between 
oaths  that  were  and  oaths  that  were  not  binding 
(Maimonides  in  Lightfoot,  Hoi:  Heb.  ii.  p.  1'27). 
Jesus  shows  that  all  oaths,  whether  they  name 
the  Creator  or  not,  are  an  appeal  to  Him,  and  all 
are  on  that  account  equally  binding.  But  the  need 
of  an  oath  "  cometh  of  evil;"  the  bare  asseveration 
of  a  Christian  should  be  as  solemn  and  sacred  to  him 
as  the  most  binding  oath.  That  this  in  its  simple 
literal  application  would  go  to  abolish  all  swearing  is 
beyond  a  question  ;  but  the  Lord  is  sketching  out  a 
perfect  Law  for  a  perfect  kingdom  ;  and  this  is  not 
the  only  part  of  the  sermon  on  the  Mount  which 
in  the  present  state  of  the  world  caunot  be  carried 
out  completely.  Men  there  are  on  whom  a  word 
is  less  binding  than  an  oath ;  and  in  judicial  pro- 
ceedings the  highest  test  must  be  applied  to  them 
to  elicit  the  truth;  therefore  an  oath  must  still 
form  part  of  a  legal  process,  and  a  good  man  may 
take  what  is  really  kept  up  to  control  the  wicked. 
Jesus  Himself  did  not  refuse  the  oath  administered 
to  Him  in  the  Sanhedrin  (Matt.  xxvi.  63).  And 
yet  the  need  of  an  oath  "cometh  of  evil,"  for 
among  men  who  respect  the  truth  it  would  add 
nothing  to  the  weight  of  their  evidence.  Almost 
the  same  would  apply  to  the  precepts  with  which 
our  Lord  replaces  the  much-abused  law  of  retalia- 
tion, "  An  eye  for  an  eye,  and  a  tooth  for  a  tooth  " 
(Ex.  xxi.  24).  To  conquer  an  enemy  by  sub- 
mission where  he  expected  resistance  is  of  the  very 
essence  of  the  Gospel;  it  is  an  exact  imitation  of 
our  Lord's  own  example,  who,  when  He  might 
have  summoned  more  than  twelve  legions  of  Angels 
to  His  aid,  allowed  the  Jews  to  revile  and  slay 
Him.  And  yet  it  is  not  possible  at  once  to  wipe 
out  from  our  social  arrangements  the  principle  of 
retribution.  The  robber  who  takes  a  coat  must 
not  be  encouraged  to  seize  the  cloak  also ;  to  give 
to  every  one  that  asks  all  that  he  asks  would  be 
an  encouragement  to  sloth  and  shameless  impor- 
tunity. But  yet  the  awakened  conscience  will 
find  out  a  hundred  ways  in  which  the  spirit  of  this 
precept  may  be  carried  out,  even  in  our  imperfect 
social  state  ;  and  the  power  of  this  loving  policy 
will  be  felt  by  those  who  attempt  it.  Finally, 
our  Lord  sums  up  this  portion  of  His  divine  law 
by  words  full  of  sublime  wisdom.  To  the  cramped 
and  confined  love  of  the  Rabbis,  "  Thou  shalt  love 
( thy  neighbour  and  hate  thine  enemy,"  He  opposes 
this  nobler  rule — •"  Love  your  enemies,"  bless  them 
that  curse  you,  do  good  to  them  that  hate  you, 
and  pray  for  them  which  despitefully  use  you,  and 
persecute  you,  that  ye  may  be  the  childien  of  your 
Father  which  is  in  heaven  ;  for  He  mak'eth  His 
sun  to  rise  on  the  evil  and  on  the  good,  and  sendeth 
rain  on  the  just  and  on  the  unjust  ...  Be  ye 
therefore  perfect,  even  as  your  Father  which  is  in 
heaven  is  perfect"  (Matt.  v.  44,  4:>,  48).  To 
this  part  of  the  sermon,  which  St.  Luke  has  not 
preserved,  but  which  .St.  Matthew,  writing  as  it 


JESUS  CHEIST 

were  with  his  face  turned  towards  his  Jewish 
countrymen,  could  not  pretermit,  succeed  precepts 
on  almsgiving,  on  prayer,  on  forgiveness,  on 
fasting,  on  trust  in  God's  providence,  and  on 
tolerance ;  all  of  them  tuned  to  one  of  two  notes  : 
that  a  man's  whole  nature  must  be  offered  to  God, 
and  that  it  is  mail's  duty  to  do  to  others  as  he 
would  have  them  do  to  him.  An  earnest  appeal  on 
the  difficulty  of  a  godly  life,  and  the  worthlessness 
of  mere  profession,  cast  in  the  form  of  a  parable,- 
concludes  this  wonderful  discourse.  The  differences 
between  the  reports  of  the  two  Evangelists  are 
many.  In  the  former  Gospel  the  sermon  occupies 
one  hundred  and  seven  verses  ;  in  the  latter,  thirty. 
The  longer  report  includes  the  exposition  of  the 
relation  of  the  Gospel  to  the  Law :  it  also  draws 
together,  as  we  have  seen,  some  passages  which 
St.  Luke  reports  elsewhere  and  in  another  con- 
nexion ;  and  where  the  two  contain  the  same  matter, 
that  of  Luke  is  somewhat  more  compressed.  But  in 
taking  account  of  this,  the  purpose  of  St.  Matthew 
is  to  be  borne  in  mind:  the  morality  of  the  Gospel 
is  to  be  fully  set  forth  at  the  beginning  of  our 
Lord's  ministry,  and  especially  in  its  bearing  on  the 
Law  as  usually  received  by  the  Jews,  for  whose  use 
especially  this  Gospel  was  designed.  And  when  this 
discourse  is  compared  with  the  later  examples  to 
which  we  shall  presently  refer,  the  fact  comes  out 
more  distinctly,  that  we  have  here  the  Code  of  the 
Christian  Lawgiver,  rather  than  the  whole  Gospel ; 
that  the  standard  of  Christian  duty  is  here  fixed, 
but  the  means  for  raising  men  to  the  level  where 
the  observance  of  such  a  law  is  at  all  possible  are 
not  yet  pointed  out.  The  hearers  learned  how 
Christians  would  act  and  think,  and  to  what  degree 
of  moral  purity  they  would  aspire,  in  the  state  of 
salvation  ;  but  how  that  state  was  to  be  purchased 
for  them,  and  conveyed  over  to  them,  is  not  yet 
pointed  out. 

The  next  example  of  the  teaching  of  Jesus  must 
be  taken  from  a  later  epoch  in  His  ministry.  It  is 
probable  that  the  great  discourse  in  John  vi.  took 
place  about  the  time  of  the  Transfiguration,  just 
before  which  He  began  to  reveal  to  the  disciples  the 
story  of  His  sufferings  (Matt.  xvi.  and  parallels), 
which  was  the  special  and  frequent  theme  of  His 
teaching  until  the  end.  The  effect  of  His  personal 
work  on  the  disciples  now  becomes  the  prominent 
subject.  He  had  taught  them  that  He  was  the 
Christ,  and  had  given  them  His  law,  wider  and 
deeper  far  than  that  of  Moses.  But  the  objection 
to  every  law  applies  more  strongly  the  purer  and 
higher  the  law  is  ;  and  "  how  to  perform  that  which 
I  will  "  is  a  question  that  grows  more  difficult  to 
answer  as  the  standard  of  obedience  is  raised.  It  is 
that  question  which  our  Lord  proceeds  to  answer 
here.  The  feeding  of  the  five  thousand  had  lately 
taken  place ;  and  from  this  miracle  He  preaches  yet 
a  greater,  namely,  that  all  spiritual  life  is  imparted 
to  the  disciples  from  Him,  and  that  they  must  feed 
on  Him  that  their  souls  may  live.  He  can  feed 
them  with  something  moie  than  manna,  even  with 
Himself;  "  for  the  bread  of  God  is  He  which  cometh 
down  from  heaven  and  giveth  life  unto  the  world" 
(John  vi.  26-40).  The  Jews  murmur  at  this  hard 
doctrine,  and  He  warns  them  that  it  is  a  kind  of  test 
of  those  who  have  been  with  Him  :  "  No  man  can 
come  to  Me  except  the  Father  which  hath  sent  Me 
draw  him."  He  repeats  that  He  is  the  bread  of  life  ; 
and  they  murmur  yet  more  (vers.  41-.V2).  He 
presses  it  on  them  still  more  strongly  :  "  Verily, 
verily,  1  say  unto  you.  Except  ye  eat   the  flesh  of 


JESUS  CHRIST 

the  Son  of  man  and  dunk  His  blood,  ye  have  no  life 
in  you.  Whoso  eateth  My  flesh  and  drinketh  My 
blood  hath  eternal  life  ;  and  I  will  raise  him  up  at 
the  last  day.  For  My  flesh  is  meat  indeed,  and  My 
blood  is  drink  indeed.  He  that  eateth  My  flesh, 
and  drinketh  My  blood,  dwelleth  in  Me  and  1  in 
him.  As  the  living  Father  hath  sent  Me,  and  I 
live  by  the  Father,  so  he  that  eateth  Me,  even  he 
shall  live  by  Me"  (vers.  53-57).  After  this  dis- 
course many  of  the  disciples  went  back  and  walked 
no  more  with  Him.  They  could  not  conceive  how 
salvation  could  depend  on  a  condition  so  strange, 
nay,  even  so  revolting.  However  we  may  blame 
them  for  their  want  of  confidence  in  their  Teacher, 
it  is  not  to  be  imputed  to  them  as  a  fault  that  they 
found  a  doctrine,  which  in  itself  is  difficult,  and 
here  was  clothed  in  dark  and  obscure  expressions, 
beyond  the  grasp  of  their  understanding  at  that 
time.  For  that  doctrine  was,  that  Christ  had  taken 
our  fleshly  nature,  to  sutler  in  it,  and  to  shed  His 
blood  in  it ;  and  that  those  to  whom  the  benefits  of 
His  atoning  death  are  imparted  find  it  to  be  their 
spilitual  food  and  life,  and  the  condition  of  their 
resurrection  to  life  everlasting. 

Whether  this  passage  refers,  and  in  what  degree, 
to  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  is  a  ques- 
tion on  which  commentators  have  been  much  di- 
vided, but  two  observations  should  in  some  degree 
guide  our  interpretation :  the  one,  that  if  tixeprimary 
reference  of  the  discourse  had  been  to  the  Lord's 
Sapper,  it  would  have  been  uttered  at  the  institu- 
tion of  that  rite,  and  not  before,  at  a  time  when 
the  disciples  could  not  possibly  make  application  of 
it  to  a  sacrament  of  which  they  had  never  even 
heard  ;  the  other,  that  the  form  of  speech  in  this 
discourse  comes  so  near  that  which  is  used  in  in- 
stituting the  Lord's  Supper,  that  it  is  impossible 
to  exclude  all  reference  to  that  Sacrament.  The 
Redeemer  alludes  here  to  His  death,  to  the  body 
which  shall  sutler  on  the  Cross,  and  to  the  blood 
which  shall  be  poured  out.  This  great  sacrifice  is 
not  only  to  be  looked  on,  but  to  be  believed  ;  and 
not  only  believed,  but  appropriated  to  the  believer, 
to  become  part  of  his  very  heart  and  life.  Faith, 
here  as  elsewhere,  is  the  means  of  apprehending  it : 
but  when  it  is  once  laid  hold  of,  it  will  be  as  much 
a  part  of  the  believer  as  the  food  that  nourishes  the 
body  becomes  incorporated  with  the  body.  In  three 
passages  in  the  other  Evangelists,  in  which  our  Lord 
about  this  very  time  prepares  them  for  His  sufferings, 
He  connects  with  the  announcement  a  warning  to 
the  disciples  that  all  who  would  come  after  Him 
must  show  the  fruit  of  His  death  in  their  lives 
(Matt,  xvi.,  Mark  viii.,  Luke  ix.).  And  this  new 
principle,  infused  into  them  by  the  life  and  death 
of  the  liedeemer,  by  His  taking  our  flesh  and  then 
suflering  in  it  (for  neither  of  these  is  excluded),  is 
'to  believers  the  seed  of  eternal  life.  The  believer 
"  hath  eternal  life;  and  I  will  raise  him  up  at  the 
last  day"  (John  vi.  54).  Now  the  words  of  Jesus 
in  instituting  the  Lord's  Supper  come  very  near  to 
the  expressions  in  this  discourse:  "This  is  Mybody 
which  is  given  for  you  [virep  v/xwv)  .  .  .  This  cup 
is  the  new  testament  in  My  blood,  which  is  shed 
for  you"  (Luke  xxii.  10,  20).  That  the  Lord's 
Supper  is  a  means  of  applying  to  us  through  faith 
the  fruits  of  the  incarnation  and  the  atonement  of 
Christ,  is  generally  admitted  ;  anil  if  BO,  the  dis- 
course before  us  will  apply  to  that  sacrament,  not 
certainly  to  the  exclusion  of  other  means  of  appro- 
priating the  saving  death  of  Christ,  but  still  with 
great  force,  inasmuch  as  the  Lord's  Supper  is  the 


JESUS  CHRIST 


1049 


most  striking  symbol  of  the  application  to  us  of  the 
Lord's  body.  Heie  in  a  bold  figure  the  disciples 
are  told  that  they  must  eat  the  flesh  of  Christ  and 
drink  His  blood  ;  whilst  in  the  sacrament  the  same 
figure  becomes  an  act.  Here  the  language  is  meant 
to  be  general ;  and  there  it  finds  its  most  striking 
special  application,  but  not  its  only  one.  And 
the  uttering  of  these  words  at  an  epoch  that 
preceded  by  some  months  the  first  celebration  of 
the  Lord's  Supper  was  probably  intended  to  pre- 
clude that  special  and  limited  application  of  it 
which  would  narrow  it  down  to  the  sacrament 
only,  and  out  of  which  much  false  and  even  idola- 
trous teaching  has  grown.  (Compare  Commentaries 
of  Alford,  Liicke,  Meyer,  Stier,  fleubner,  Williams, 
Tholuck,  and  others,  on  this  passage.)  It  will 
still  be  asked  how  we  are  to  account  for  the  start- 
ling form  in  which  this  most  profound  Gospel- 
truth  was  put  before  persons  to  whom  it  was  likely 
to  prove  an  offence.  The  answer  is  not  difficult. 
Many  had  companied  with  the  Lord  during  the  early 
part  of  His  ministry,  to  see  His  miracles,  perhaps 
to  derive  some  fruit  from  them,  to  talk  about  Him, 
and  to  repeat  His  sayings,  who  were  quite  unfit  to 
go  on  as  His  followers  to  the  end.  There  was  a 
wide  difference  between  the  two  doctrines,  that 
Jesus  was  the  Christ,  and  that  the  Christ  must 
hang  upon  the  tree,  as  to  their  effects  on  unrege- 
nerate  and  worldly  minds.  For  the  latter  they 
were  not  prepared :  though  many  of  them  could 
possibly  accept  the  former.  Now  this  discourse 
belongs  to  the  time  of  transition  from  the  easier  to 
the  harder  doctrine.  And  we  may  suppose  that  it 
was  meant  to  sift  the  disciples,  that  the  good  grain 
might  remain  in  the  garner  and  the  chaff  be  scat- 
tered to  the  wind.  Hence  the  hard  and  startling 
form  in  which  it  was  cast ;  not  indeed  that  this 
figure  of  eating  and  drinking  in  reference  to  spi- 
ritual things  was  wholly  unknown  to  Jewish  teach- 
ers, for  Lightfoot,  Schbttgen  and  Wetsteiu,  have 
shown  the  contrary.  But  hard  it  doubtless  was ; 
and  if  the  condition  of  discipleship  had  been  that 
they  should  then  and  there  understand  what  they 
heard,  their  turning  back  at  this  time  would  have 
been  inevitable.  But  even  on  the  twelve  Jesus 
imposes  no  such  condition.  He  only  asks  them, 
"Will  ye  also  go  away?"  If  a  beloved  teacher 
says  something  which  overturns  the  previous  notions 
of  the  taught,  and  shocks  their  prejudices,  then 
whether  they  will  continue  by  his  side  to  hear 
him  explain  further  what  they  find  difficult,  or 
desert  Him  at  once,  will  depend  on  the  amount  of 
their  confidence  in  Him.  Many  of  the  disciples 
went  back  and  walked  no  more  with  Jesus,  because 
their  conviction  that  He  was  the  Messiah  had  no 
real  foundation.  The  rest  remained  with  Him  for 
the  reason  so  beautifully  expressed  by  1'eter: 
"  Lord,  to  whom  shall  we  go?  Thou  hast  the  words 
of  eternal  life.  And  we  believe  and  are  sure  that 
Thou  art  that  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God" 
(John  vi.  (38,  69).  The  sin  of  the  faint-hearted 
followers  who  now  deserted  Him  was  not  that 
they  found  this  difficult  ;  but  that  finding  it  diffi- 
cult they  had  not  confidence  enough  to  wait  for 
light. 

The  third  example  of  our  Lord's  discnurses 
which  may  be  selected  is  that  which  closes  his 
ministry — "  Now  is  the  Sun  of  Mail  glorified,  and 
God  is  glorified  in  Him.  If  God  be  glorified  in 
Him,  God  shall  also  glorify  Him  in  Himself,  and 
shall  straightway  glorify  Him  "  (John  xiii.  31,  32). 
This  great  discourse,  recorded  only  by  St.  John, 

3  Y 


1050 


JESUS  CHRIST 


extends  from  the  thirteenth  to  the  end  of  the  seven- 
teenth chapter.  It  hardly  admits  of  analysis.  It 
announces  the  Saviour's  departure  in  the  fulfilment 
of  His  mission  ;  it  imposes  the  "  new  commandment 
on  the  disciples  of  a  special  love  towards  each  other 
which  should  he  the  outward  token  to  the  world  of 
their  Christian  profession  ;  it  consoles  them  with 
the  promise  of  the  Comforter  who  should  be  to 
them  instead  of  the  Saviour ;  it  tells  them  all  that 
He  should  do  for  them,  teaching  them,  reminding 
them,  reproving  the  world  and  guiding  the  dis- 
ciples into  all  truth.  It  otters  them,  instead  of  the 
bodily  presence  of  their  beloved  Master,  free  access 
to  the  throne  of  His  Father,  and  spiritual  blessings 
such  as  they  had  not  known  before.  Finally,  it 
culminates  in  that  sublime  prayer  (ch.  xvii.)  by 
which  the  High-priest  as  it  were  consecrates  Himself 
the  victim  ;  and  so  doing,  prays  for  those  who  shall 
hold  fast  and  keep  the  benefits  of  that  sacrifice, 
offered  for  the  whole  world,  whether  His  disciples 
already,  or  to  be  brought  to  Him  thereafter  by  the 
ministry  of  Apostles.  He  wills  that  they  shall  be 
with  Him  and  behold  His  glory.  He  recognises 
the  righteousness  of  the  Father  in  the  plan  of  sal- 
vation, and  in  the  result  produced  to  the  disciples  ; 
in  whom  that  highest  and  purest  love  wherewith 
the  Father  loved  the  Son  shall  be  present,  and  with 
and  in  that  love  the  Son  Himself  shall  be  present 
with  them.  "  With  this  elevated  thought,"'  says 
Olshausen,  "  the  Redeemer  concludes  His  prayer 
for  the  disciples,  and  in  them  for  the  Church 
through  all  ages.  He  has  compressed  into  the  last 
moments  given  Him  for  intercourse  with  His  own 
the  "most  sublime  and  glorious  sentiments  ever 
uttered  by  human  lips.  Hardly  has  the  sound  of 
the  last  word  died  away  when  Jesus  passes  with 
His  disciples  over  the  brook  Kedion  to  Gethsemane; 
and  the  bitter  conflict  draws  on.  The  seed  of  the 
new  world  must  be  sown  in  death  that  thence  life 
may  spring  up." 

These  three  discourses  are  examples  of  the  Sa- 
viour's teaching — of  its  progressive  character  from 
the  opening  of  His  ministry  to  the  close.  The  first 
exhibits  His  practical  precepts  as  Lawgiver  of  His 
people  ;  the  second,  an  exposition  of  the  need  of  His 
sacrifice,  but  addressed  to  the  world  without,  and 
intended  to  try  them  rather  than  to  attract ;  and  the 
third,  where  Christ,  the  Lawgiver  and  the  High- 
priest,  stands  before  God  as  the  Son  of  God,  and 
speaks  to  Him  of  His  inmost  counsels,  as  one  who 
had  known  them  from  the  beginning.  They  will 
serve  as  illustrations  of  the  course  of  His  doctrine  ; 
whilst  others  will  be  mentioned  in  the  narrative  as 
it  proceeds. 

The  scene  of  the  Lord's  ministry. — As  to  the 
scene  of  the  ministry  of  Christ,  no  less  than  as  to 
its  duration,  the  three  Evangelists  seem  at  first 
sight  to  be  at  variance  with  the  fourth.  Matthew, 
Mark,  and  Luke  record  only  our  Lord's  doings  in 
Galilee;  if  we  put  aside  a  few  days  before  the 
Passion,  we  find  that  they  never  mention  His 
visiting  Jerusalem.  John,  on  the  other  hand, 
whilst  he  records  some  acts  in  Galilee,  devotes  the 
chief  part  of  his  Gospel  to  the  transactions  in 
Judaea.  But  when  the  supplemental  character  of 
John's  Gospel  is  borne  in  mind  there  is  little  diffi- 
culty in  explaining  this.  The  three  Evangelists 
do  not  profess  to  give  a  chronology  of  the  ministry, 
but  rather  a  picture  of  it:  notes  of  time  are  not 
frequent  in  their  narrative.  And  as  they  chiefly 
confined  themselves  to  Galilee,  where  the  Redeemer's 
chief  acts  were  done,  they  might  naturally  omit  to 


JESUS  CHIIIST 

mention  the  feasts,  which  being  passed  by  our  Lord 
at  Jerusalem,  added  nothing  to  the  materials  for 
His  Galilean  ministry.  John,  on  the  other  hand, 
writing  later,  and  giving  an  account  of  the  Re- 
deemer's life  which  is  still  less  complete  as  a 
history  (for  more  than  one-half  of  the  fourth 
Gospel  is  occupied  with  the  last  three  months  of 
the  ministry,  and  seven  chapters  out  of  twenty-one 
are  filled  with  the  account  of  the  few  days  of  the 
Passion),  vindicates  his  historical  claim  by  sup- 
plying several  precise  notes  of  time:  in  the  oc- 
currences after  the  baptism  of  Jesus,  days  and  even 
hours  are  specified  (i.  29,  35,  39,  43,  ii.  1)  ;  the 
first  miracle  is  mentioned,  and  the  time  at  which  it 
was  wrought  (ii.  1-11).  He  mentions  not  only 
the  Passovers  (ii.  13,  23  ;  vi.  4  ;  xiii.  l,and  perhaps 
v.  1),  but  also  the  feast  of  Tabernacles  (vii.  2) 
and  of  Dedication  (x.  22) ;  and  thus  it  is  ordered 
that  the  Evangelist  who  goes  over  the  least  part 
of  the  ground  of  our  Lord's  ministry  is  yet  the 
same  who  fixes  for  us  its  duration,  and  enables  us 
to  arrange  the  facts  of  the  rest  more  exactly  in 
their  historical  places.  It  is  true  that  the  three 
Gospels  record  chiefly  the. occurrences  in  Galilee; 
but  there  is  evidence  in  them  that  labours  were 
wrought  in  Judaea.  Frequent  teaching  in  Jeru- 
salem is  implied  in  the  Lord's  lamentation  over 
the  lost  city  (Matt,  xxiii.  37).  The  appearance  in 
Galilee  of  scribes  and  pharisees  and  others  from  Jeru- 
salem (Matt.  iv.  25,  xv.  1)  would  be  best  explained 
on  the  supposition  that  their  enmity  had  been  excited 
against  Him  during  visits  to  Jerusalem.  The  in- 
timacy with  the  family  of  Lazarus  (Luke  x.  38  . .  .), 
and  the  attachment  of  Joseph  of  Arimathea  to  the 
Lord  (Matt,  xxvii.  57),  would  imply,  most  pro- 
bably, frequent  visits  to  Jerusalem.  But  why  was 
Galilee  chosen  as  the  principal  scene  of  the  mi- 
nistry ?  The  question  is  not  easy  to  answer.  The 
Prophet  would  resort  to  the  Temple  of  God  ;  the 
King  of  the  Jews  would  go  to  His  own  royal  city  ; 
the  Teacher  of  the  chosen  people  would  preach  in 
the  midst  of  them.  But  their  hostility  prevented 
it.  The  Saviour,  who,  accepting  all  the  infirmities 
of  "  the  form  of  a  servant,"  which  He  had  taken, 
fled  in  His  childhood  to  Egypt,  betakes  Himself  to 
Galilee  to  avoid  Jewish  hatred  and  machinations, 
and  lays  the  foundations  of  His  church  amid  a 
people  of  impure  and  despised  race.  To  Jerusalem 
He  comes  occasionally,  to  teach  and  suffer  perse- 
cution, and  finally  to  die:  "  for  it  cannot  be  that  a 
prophet  perish  out  of  Jerusalem  "  (Luke  xiii.  33). 
It  was  upon  the  first  outbreak  of  persecution 
against  Him  that  He  left  Judaea :  "  When  Jesus 
had  heard  that  John  was  cast  into  prison,  He  de- 
parted into  Galilee  "  (Matt.  iv.  12).  And  that  this 
persecution  aimed  at  Him  also  we  gather  from 
St.  John :  "  When  therefore  the  Lord  knew  how 
that  the  Pharisees  had  heard  that  Jesus  made  and 
baptised  more  disciples  than  John  ...  He  left 
Judaea  and  departed  into  Galilee"  (iv.  1,  3).  If 
the  light  of  the  Sun  of  Righteousness  shone  on  the 
Jews  henceforward  from  the  far-off  shores  of  the 
Galilean  lake,  it  was  because  they  had  refused  and 
abhorred  that  light. 

Duration  of  the  Ministry. — It  is  impossible  to 
determine  exactly  from  the  Gospels  the  number  of 
years  during  which  the  Redeemer  exercised  his 
ministry  before  the  Passion;  but  the  doubt  lies 
between  two  and  three  ;  for  the  opinion,  adopted 
from  an  interpretation  of  Isaiah  lxi.  2  by  more  than 
one  of  the  ancients,  that  it  lasted  only  mi.'  year, 
cannot  be  borne  out  (Euseb.  iii.  24 ;  Clem.  Alex. 


JESUS  CHRIST 

Strom.  1  ;  Origen,  Prlnc.  4,  5).     The  data  are  to 
be  drawn  from  St.  John.     This  Evangelist  men- 
tions six  feasts,  at  five  of  which  Jesus  was  present ; 
the   Passover  that  followed  His  baptism  (ii.  13); 
"a  feast  of  the  Jews"  (eoprij  without  the  article, 
v.  1)  a  Passover  during  which  Jesus  remained  in 
Galilee  (vi.  4) ;  the  feast  of  Tabernacles  to  which 
the  Lord  went  up  privately  (vii.  2)  ;  the  feast  of 
Dedication  (x.  22)  ;   and   lastly  the  feast  of  Pass- 
over, at  which  he   suffered  (xii.  xiii.).     There  are 
certainly  three  Passovers,  and  it  is  possible  that 
"a  feast"   (v.    1)   may  be  a   fourth.     Upon  this 
possibility  the  question  turns.     Liicke  in  his  Com- 
mentary (vol.   ii.  p.   1),  in  collecting  with  great 
research  the  various  opinions  on  this  place,  is  un- 
able to  arrive  at  any  definite  conclusion  upon  it, 
and  leaves  it  unsolved.     But  if  this  feast  is  not  a 
Passover,  then  no  Passover  is  mentioned  by  John 
between  the  first  (ii.  13),  and  that  which  is  spoken 
of  in    the   sixth  chapter ;   and  the   time   between 
those  two  must  be  assumed  to  be  a  single  year 
only.     Now,  although  the  record  of  John  of  this 
period  contains  but  few  facts,   yet  when  all   the 
Evangelists  are  compared,   the  amount  of  labour 
compressed  into  this  single  year  would  be  too  much 
for  its  compass.      The  time  during  which  Jesus 
was  baptizing   (by  his   disciples)  near  the  Jordan 
was  probably  considerable,   and  lasted  till   John's 
imprisonment  (John  iii.  22-36,   and   see    below). 
The  circuit  round  Galilee,  mentioned  in  Matt.  iv. 
23-25,  was  a  missionary  journey  through  a  country 
of  considerable  population,  and  containing  two  hun- 
dred towns ;   and   this    would  occupy  some  time. 
But  another  such  journey,  of  the  most  compre- 
hensive kind,  is  undertaken  in  the  same  year  (Luke 
viii.  1),  in  which  He  "went  throughout  every  city 
and  village."     And  a  third  circuit  of  the  same  kind, 
and  equally  general  (Matt.  ix.  35-38),  would  close 
the  same  year.    Is  it  at  all  probable  that  Jesus,  after 
spending  a  considerable  time  in  Judaea,  would  be  able 
to  make  three  circuits  of  Galilee  in  the  remainder 
of  the  year,  preaching  and  doing  wonders  in  the 
various  places  to  which  He  came  ?     This  would  be 
more    likely    if   the  journeys    were   hurried    and 
partial ;  but  all  three  are  spoken  of  as  though  they 
were  the  very  opposite.     It  is,   to  say  the  least, 
easier  to  suppose  that  the  "feast"  (John  v.  1)  was 
:i  Passover,  dividing  the  time  into  two,  and  throw- 
ing two  of  these  circuits  into  the  second  year  of  the 
ministry  ;  provided  there  be  nothing  to  make  this 
interpretation  improbable  in  itself.    The  words  are, 
"  After  this  there  was  a  feast  of  the  Jews ;  and 
Jesus  went  up  to  Jerusalem."     These  two  facts  are 
meant   as  cause  and  effect ;  the  feast  caused   the 
visit.     If  so,  it  was  probably  one  of  the  three  feasts 
at  which  the  Jews  were  expected  to  appear  before 
God  at  Jerusalem.     Was  it  the  Passover,  the  Pen- 
tecost, or  the  feast  of  Tabernacles?     In  the  preced- 
ing chapter  tin-  Passover  has  been  spoken  of  as  "  the 
feast  "  (ver.  4.">) ;  ami  if  another  feast  were  meant 
here  the  name  of  it  would  have  been  added,  as  in  vii. 
2,  x.  •_'■_'.   The  omission  of  the  article  is  not  decisive, 
for  it  occurs  in  other  eases  where  the  Passover  is 
certainly   intended   (.Matt,  xxvii.  15;  Mark  XV.  6    : 
nor  is  it  clear  that  the  Passover  was  called  the 
feast,  as  the  moat  eminent,  although  the  feast  of 
Tabernacles  was  sometimes  so  described.     All  that 
the  omission  could  prove  would  be  that  the  Evan- 
gelist did  not  think  it  needful  to  describe  the  feast 
more  precisely.     The  words  in  John  iv.  35,  "  There 
are  yet  four  months  ami  then  cometh  harvest,"  would 
agree  with    tlii>,  lor   the   barley   harvest   began  on 


JESUS  CHRIST 


1051 


the  16th  Nisan,  and  reckoning  back  four  months 
would  bring  this  conversation  to  the  beginning  of 
December,  i.  e.  the  middle  of  Kisleu.  If  it  be 
granted  that  our  Lord  is  here  merely  quoting  a 
common  form  of  speech  (Alford),  still  it  is  more 
likely  that  He  would  use  one  appropriate  to  the 
time  at  which  He  was  speaking.  And  if  these 
words  were  uttered  in  December,  the  next  of'  the 
three  great  feasts  occurring  would  be  the  Passover. 
The  shortness  of  the  interval  between  v.  1  and 
vi.  4,  would  afford  an  objection,  if  it  were  not  for 
the  scantiness  of  historical  details  in  the  early  part 
of  the  ministry  in  St.  John:  from  the  other  Evan- 
gelists it  appears  that  two  great  journeys  might 
have  to  be  included  between  these  verses.  Upon 
the  whole,  though  there  is  nothing  that  amounts 
to  proof,  it  is  probable  that  there  were  four  Pass- 
overs, and  consequently  that  our  Lord's  ministry 
lasted  somewhat  moie  than  three  years,  the  "be- 
ginning of  miracles  "  (John  ii.)  having  been  wrought 
before  the  first  passover.  On  data  of  calculation 
that  have  already  been  mentioned,  the  year  of  the 
first  of  these  Passovers  was  u.C.  780,  and  the 
Baptism  of  our  Lord  took  place  either  in  the  begin- 
ning of  that  year  or  the  end  of  the  year  preceding. 
The  ministry  of  John  the  Baptist  began  in  u.c. 
779.  (See  Commentaries  on  John  v.  1,  especially 
Kuinol  and  Liicke.  Also  Winer,  Realwdrterbuch, 
Art.  Jesus  Christ;  Greswell,  Dissertations,  vol.  i., 
Diss.  iv.  vol.  ii.,  Diss.  22.) 

After  this  sketch  of  the  means,  the  scene,  and  the 
duration  of  the  Saviour's  ministry,  the  historical 
order  of  the  events  may  be  followed  without  inter- 
ruption. 

Our  Lord  has  now  passed  through  the  ordeal  of 
temptation,  and  His  ministry  is  begun.  At  Beth- 
abara,  to  which  He  returns,  disciples  begin  to  be 
drawn  towards  Him  ;  Andrew  and  another,  pro- 
bably John,  the  sole  narrator  of  the  fact,  see  Jesus,* 
and  hear  the  Baptist's  testimony  concerning  Him. 
Andrew  brings  Simon  Peter  to  see  Him  also ;  and 
He  receives  from  the  Lord  the  name  of  Cephas. 
Then  Philip  and  Nathanael  are  brought  into  contact 
with  our  Lord.  All  these  reappear  as  Apostles,  if 
Nathauael  be,  as  has  often  been  supposed,  the 
same  as  Bartholomew  ;  but  the  time  of  their  calling 
to  that  office  was  not  yet.  But  that  their  minds, 
even  at  this  early  time,  were  wrought  upon  by 
the  expectation  of  the  Messiah  appears  by  the  con- 
fession of  Nathanael :  "  Thou  art  the  Son  of  God  ; 
Thou  art  the  King  of  Israel"  (John  i.  35-51). 
The  two  disciples  last  named  saw  Him  as  He  was 
about  to  set  out  for  Galilee,  on  the  third  day  of  His 
sojourn  at  Bethabara.  The  third  day  after  this 
interview  Jesus  is  at  ('ana  in  Galilee,  and  works 
His  first  miracle,  by  making  the  water  wine  (John 
i.  29,  35,  43;  ii.  1).  All  these  particulars  are 
supplied  from  the  fourth  Gospel,  and  come  in 
between  the  11th  and  12th  verses  of  the  4th 
chapter  of  St.  Matthew.  They  show  that  our 
Lord  left  Galilee  expressly  to  lie  baptized  and  to 
sutler  temptation,  ami  returned  to  his  own  country 
when  these  were  accomplished,  lie  now-  betakes 
Himself  to  Capernaum,  and  after  a  sojourn  there 
of  "  not  many  days,"  set-  out  tin-  Jerusalem  to  the 
Passover,  which  was  to  be  the  beginning  of  His 
ministry  in  Judaea  (John  ii.   12,   13). 

The  cleansing  of  the  Temple  is  associated  by  St. 
John  with  this  first  Passover  (ii.  12-22).  and  a 
similar  cleansing  is  assigned  to  the  last  Passover 
by  the  other  Evangelists.  These  two  cannot  be 
confounded  without  throwing  discredit  on  the his- 

3   V  2 


1052 


JESUS  CHRIST 


torical  character  of  one  narrative  or  the  other ;  the 
notes  of  time  are  too  precise.  But  a  host  of  inter- 
preters have  pointed  out  the  probability  that  an 
action  symbolical  of  the  power  and  authority  of 
Messiah  should  be  twice  performed,  at  the  opening 
of  the  ministry  and  at  its  close.  The  expulsion  of 
the  traders  was  not  likely  to  produce  a  permanent 
effect,  and  at  the  end  of  three  years  Jesus  found 
the  tumult  and  the  traffic  defiling  the  court  of  the 
Temple  as  they  had  done  when  He  visited  it  before. 
Besides  the  difference  of  time,  the  narrative  of  St. 
John  is  by  no  means  identical  with  those  of  the 
others ;  he  mentions  that  Jesus  made  a  scourge  of 
small  cords  (<ppuye\Xwv  e/c  ffxoivlwv,  ii.  15)  as  a 
symbol — we  need  not  prove  that  it  could  be  no 
more — of  His  power  to  punish  ;  that  here  He  cen- 
sured them  for  making  the  Temple  "a  house  of 
merchandize,"  whilst  at  the  last  cleansing  it  was 
pronounced  "  a  den  of  thieves,"  with  a  distinct  re- 
ference to  the  two  passages  of  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah 
(Is.  lvi.  7  ;  Jer.  vii.  11).  Writers  like  Strauss  would 
persuade  us  that  "  tact  and  good  sense  "  would  pre- 
vent the  Redeemer  from  attempting  such  a  violent 
measure  at  the  beginning  of  His  ministry,  before  His 
authority  was  admitted.  The  aptness  and  the 
greatness  of  the  occasion  have  no  weight  with  such 
critics.  The  usual  sacrifices  of  the  law  of  Jehovah, 
and  the  usual  half-shekel  paid  for  tribute  to  the 
Temple,  the  very  means  that  were  appointed  by 
God  to  remind  them  that  they  were  a  consecrated 
people,  were  made  an  excuse  for  secularizing  even 
the  Temple ;  and  in  its  holy  precincts  all  the  busi- 
ness of  the  world  went  on.  It  was  a  time  when 
"  the  zeal  of  God's  house"  might  well  supersede 
the  "tact"  on  which  the  German  philosopher 
lays  stress  ;  and  Jesus  failed  not  in  the  zeal,  nor 
did  the  accusing  consciences  of  the  traders  fail  to 
justify  it,  for  at  the  rebuke  of  one  man  they  re- 
treated from  the  scene  of  their  gains.  Their  hearts 
told  them,  even  though  they  had  been  long  im- 
mersed in  hardening  traffic,  that  the  house  of  God 
could  belong  to  none  other  but  God;  and  when 
a  Prophet  claimed  it  for  Him,  conscience  deprived 
them  of  the  power  to  resist.  Immediately  after 
this,  the  Jews  asked  of  Him  a  sign  or  proof  of 
His  right  to  exercise  this  authority.  He  answered 
them  by  a  promise  of  a  sign  by  which  He  would 
hereafter  confirm  His  mission,  "  Destroy  this  Temple 
and  in  three  days  I  will  raise  it  up"  (John  ii.  19), 
alluding,  as  the  Evangelist  explains,  to  His  resur- 
rection. But  why  is  the  name  of  the  building 
before  them  applied  by  our  Lord  so  darkly  to 
Himself?  There  is  doubtless  a  hidden  reference 
to  the  Temple  as  a  type  of  the  Church,  which 
Christ  by  His  death  and  resurrection  would  found 
and  raise  up.  He  who  has  cleared  of  buyers  and 
sellers  the  courts  of  a  perishable  Temple  made  with 
hands,  will  prove  hereafter  that  He  is  the  Founder 
of  an  eternal  Temple  made  without  hands,  and 
your  destroying  act  shall  be  the  cause.  The  reply 
was  indeed  obscure  ;  but  it  was  meant  as  a  refusal 
of  their  demand ;  and  to  the  disciples  afterwards  it 
became  abundantly  clear.  At  the  time  of  the 
passion  this  saying  was  brought  against  Him,  in  a 
perverted  form — "  At  the  last  came  two  false  wit- 
nesses, and  said,  This  fellow  said,  I  am  able  to  de- 
stroy the  temple  of  God,  and  to  build  it  in  three 
days"  (Matt.  xxvi.  61).  They  hardly  knew  per- 
haps how  utterly  false  a  small  alteration  in  the  tale 
had  made  it.  They  wanted  to  hold  him  up  as  one 
who  dared  to  think  of  the  destruction  of  the  Temple ; 
and  to  change  "  destroy  "    into  "  I  can  destroy," 


JESUS  CHRIST 

might  seem  no  great  violence  to  do  to  the  truth. 
But  those  words  contained  not  a  mere  circumstance 
but  the  very  essence  of  the  saying,  "  you  are  the 
destroyers  of  the  temple  ;  you  that  were  polluting 
it  now  by  turning  it  into  a  market-place  shall  de- 
stroy it,  and  also  your  city,  by  staining  its  stones 
with  my  blood."  Jesus  came  not  to  destroy  the 
Temple  but  to  widen  its  foundations  ;  not  to  destroy 
the  law  but  to  complete  it  (Matt.  v.  17).  Two 
syllables  changed  their  testimony  into  a  lie. 

The  visit  of  Nicodemus  to  Jesus  took  place  about 
this  first  passover.  It  implies  that  our  Lord  had 
done  more  at  Jerusalem  than  is  recorded  of  Him 
even  by  John;  since  we  have  here  a  Master  of 
Israel  (John  iii.  10),  a  member  of  the  Sanhedrim 
(John  vii.  50)  expressing  his  belief  in  Him,  although 
too  timid  at  this  time  to  make  an  open  profession. 
The  object  of  the  visit,  though  not  directly  stated, 
is  still  clear:  he  was  one  of  the  better  Pharisees, 
who  were  expecting  the  kingdom  of  Messiah,  and 
having  seen  the  miracles  that  Jesus  did,  he  came  to 
enquire  more  fully  about  these  signs  of  its  approach. 
This  indicates  the  connexion  between  the  remark  of 
Nicodemus  and  the  Lord's  reply :  "  You  recognise 
these  miracles  as  signs  of  the  kingdom  of  God; 
verily  I  say  unto  you,  no  one  can  truly  see  and 
know  the  kingdom  of  God,  unless  he  be  born  again 
(&vu>Qev,  from  above;  see  Lightfoot,  Hor»  Hebr. 
■in  loc,  vol.  iv.).  The  visitor  boasted  the  blood  of 
Abraham,  and  expected  to  stand  high  in  the  new 
kingdom  in  virtue  of  that  birthright.  He  did  not 
wish  to  surrender  it,  and  set  his  hopes  upon  some 
other  birth  (com p.  Matt.  iii.  9)  ;  and  there  is  some- 
thing of  wilfulness  in  the  question — "  How  can  a 
man  be  born  when  he  is  old?"  (ver.  4).  Our  Lord 
again  insists  on  the  necessity  of  the  renewed  heart, 
•in  him  who  would  be  admitted  to  the  kingdom  of 
heaven.  The  new  birth  is  real  though  it  is  unseen, 
like  the  wind  which  blows  hither  and  thither 
though  the  eye  cannot  watch  it  save  in  its  effects. 
Even  so  the  Spirit  sways  the  heart  towards  good, 
carries  it  away  towards  heaven,  brings  over  the 
soul  at  one  time  the  cloud,  at  another  the  sunny 
weather.  The  sound  of  Him  is  heard  in  the  soul, 
now  as  the  eager  east  wind  bringing  pain  and  re- 
morse ;  now  breathing  over  it  the  soft  breath  of 
consolation.  In  all  this  He  is  as  powerful  as  the 
wind ;  and  as  unseen  is  the  mode  of  His  operations. 
For  the  new  birth,  of  water  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
without  which  none  can  come  to  God,  faith  in 
the  Son  of  God  is  needed  (ver.  18);  and  as  im- 
plied in  that,  the  renouncing  of  those  evil  deeds 
that  blind  the  eyes  to  the  truth  (vers.  19,  20). 
It  has  been  well  said  that  this  discourse  contains 
the  whole  Gospel  in  epitome  ;  there  is  the  kingdom 
of  grace  into  which  God  will  receive  those  who 
have  offended  Him,  the  new  truth  which  God  the 
holy  Spirit  will  write  in  all  those  who  seek  the 
kingdom  ;  and  God  the  Son  crucified  and  slain  that 
all  who  would  be  saved  may  look  on  Him  when 
He  is  lifted  up,  and  find  health  thereby.  The  three 
Persons  of  the  Trinity  are  all  before  us  carrying 
out  the  scheme  of  man's  salvation.  If  it  be  asked 
how  Nicodemus,  so  timid  and  half-hearted  as  yet, 
was  allowed  to  hear  thus  early  in  the  ministry 
what  our  Lord  kept  back  even  from  His  disciples 
till  near  the  end  of  it,  the  answer  must  be,  that, 
wise  as  it  was  to  keep  back  from  the  general  body 
of  the  hearers  the  doctrine  of  the  Crucifixion,  the 
Physician  of  souls  would  treat  each  case  with  the 
medicine  that  it  most  required.  Nicodemus  was 
an  enquiring  spirit,  ready  to  believe  all  the  Gospel, 


JESUS  CHRIST 

but  for  his  Jewish  prejudices  and  his  social  position. 
He  was  one  whom  even  the  shadow  of  the  Cross 
would  not  estrange ;  and  the  Lord  knew  it,  and 
laid  open  to  him  all  the  scheme  of  salvation.  Not 
in  vain.  The  tradition,  indeed,  may  not  be  tho- 
roughly certain,  which  reports  his  open  conversion 
and  his  baptism  by  Peter  and  John  (Phot.  Biblioth. 
Cod.  171).  But  three  years  after  this  conversa- 
tion, when  all  the  disciples  have  been  scattered 
by  the  death  of  Jesus,  he  comes  forward  with 
Joseph  of  Arimathea,  at  no  little  risk,  although 
with  a  kind  of  secrecy  still,  to  perioral  the  last 
offices  for  the  Master  to  whom  his  soul  cleaves 
(John  xix.  39). 

After  a  sojourn  at  Jerusalem  of  uncertain  dura- 
tion, Jesus  went  to  the  Jordan  with  His  disciples; 
and  they  there  baptized  in  His  name.  The  Baptist 
was  now  at  Aenon  near  Salim ;  and  the  jealousy  of 
his  disciples  against  Jesus  drew  from  John  an 
avowal  of  his  position,  which  is  remarkable  for  its 
humility  (John  iii.  27-30),  "  A  man  can  receive 
nothing  except  it  be  given  him  from  heaven.  Ye 
yourselves  bear  me  witness,  that  I  said,  I  am  not 
the  Christ,  but  that  I  have  been  sent  before  Him. 
He  that  hath  the  bride  is  the  bridegroom;  but  the 
friend  of  the  bridegroom,  which  standeth  and  hear- 
eth  him,  rejoieeth  greatly  because  of  the  bride- 
groom's voice :  this  my  joy  therefore  is  fulfilled. 
He  must  increase,  but  1  must  decrease."  The 
speaker  is  one  who  has  hitherto  enjoyed  the  highest 
honour  and  popularity,  a  prophet  extolled-  by  all 
the  people.  Before  the  Sun  of  Righteousness  his 
reflected  light  is  turning  pale ;  it  shall  soon  be  ex- 
tinguished. Yet  no  word  of  reluctance,  or  of  at- 
tempt to  cling  to  a  temporary  and  departing  great- 
ness, escapes  him.  "  He  must  increase  but  I  must 
decrease."  It  had  been  the  same  before  ;  when  frhe 
Sanhedrim  sent  to  enquire  about  him  he  claimed  to 
be  no  more  than  "  the  voice  of  One  crying  in  the 
wilderness,  Make  straight  the  way  of  the  Lord,  as 
said  the  prophet  Esaias  "  (John  i.  23)  ;  there  was 
one  "  who  coming  after  me  is  preferred  before  me, 
whose  shoe's  latchet  I  am  not  worthy  to  unloose  " 
(i.  27).  Strauss  thinks  this  height  of  self-renun- 
ciation beautiful,  but  impossible  (Leben  Jcsu,  ii. 
1,  §46)  ;  but  what  divine  influence  had  worked  in 
the  Baptist's  spirit,  adorning  that  once  rugged 
nature  with  the  grace  of  humility,  we  do  not  admit 
that  Dr.  Strauss  is  in  a  position  to  measure. 

How  long  this  sojourn  in  Judaea  lasted  is  uncer- 
tain. But  in  order  to  reconcile  John  iv.  1  with 
Matt.  iv.  12,  we  must  suppose  that  it  was  much 
longer  than  the  "  twenty-six  or  twenty-seven  "  days, 
to  which  the  learned  Mr.  Greswell  upon '  mere 
conjecture  would  limit  it.  From  the  two  passages 
together  it  would  seem  that  John  was  after  a  short 
time  cast  into  prison  (Matt.),  and  that  Jesus,  see- 
ing that  the  enmity  directed  against  the  Baptist 
would  now  assail  Him,  because  of  the  increasing 
success  of  His  ministry  (John),  resolved  to  with- 
draw from  its  reach. 

In  the  way  to  Galilee  Jesus  passed  by  the  shortest 
route,  through  Samaria.  This  country,  peopled 
by  men  from  five  districts,  whom  the  king  of 
Assyria  had  planted  there  in  the  time  of  Hoshca 
(2  K.  xvii.  24,  &c),  and  by  the  residue  of  the 
ten  tribes  that  was  left  behind  from  the  captivity, 
had  once  abounded  in  idolatry,  though  latterly 
faith  in  the  true  God  had  gained  ground.  The 
Samaritans  even  claimed  to  share  with  the  people 
of  Judaea  the  restoration  of  the  Temple  at  Jeru- 
salem, aud  were  repulsed  (Ezra  iv.  1-3).     In  the 


JESUS  CHRIST 


1053 


time  of  our  Lord  they  were  hated  by  the  Jews 
even  more  than  if  they  had  been  Gentiles.  Their 
corrupt  worship  was  a  shadow  of  the  true ;  their 
temple  on  Gerizim  was  a  rival  to  that  which 
adorned  the  hill  of  Zion.  "  He  that  eats  bread 
from  the  hand  of  a  Samaritan,"  says  a  Jewish 
writer,  "  is  as  one  that  eats  swine's  flesh."  Yet 
even  in  Samaria  were  souls  to  be  saved ;  and  Jesus 
would  not  shake  off  even  that  dust  from  His  feet. 
He  came  in  His  journey  to  Sichem,  which  the 
Jews  in  mockery  had  changed  to  Sychar,  to  indi- 
cate that  its  people  were  drunkards  (Lightfoot),  or 

that  they  followed  idols  ("Ipt?,   Kelaud,   see   Hab. 

ii.  18).  Wearied  and  athirst  He  sat  on  the  side  of 
Jacob's  well.  A  woman  from  the  neighbouring 
town  came  to  draw  from  the  well,  and  was  as- 
tonished that  a  Jew  should  address  her  as  a  neigh- 
bour, with  a  request  for  water.  The  conversation 
that  ensued  might  be  taken  for  an  example  of  the 
mode  in  which  Christ  leads  to  Himself  the  souls  of 
men.  The  awakening  of  her  attention  to  the 
privilege  she  is  enjoying  in  communing  with  Him 
(John  iv.  10-15);  the  self-knowledge  and  self- 
conviction  which  He  arouses  (vers.  15-19),  and 
which  whilst  it  pains  does  not  repel;  the  complete 
revelation  of  Himself,  which  she  cannot  but  believe 
(vers.  19-29),  are  effects  that  He  has  wrought  in 
many  another  case.  The  woman's  lightness  and 
security,  until  she  finds  herself  in  the  presence  of  a 
Prophet,  who  knows  all  her  past  sins ;  her  readi- 
ness afterwards  to  enter  on  a  religious  question, 
which  perhaps  had  often  been  revolved  in  her  mind 
in  a  worldly  and  careless  way,  are  so  natural  that 
they  are  almost  enough  of  themselves  to  establish 
the  historical  character  of  the  account. 

In  this  remarkable  dialogue  are  many  things  to 
ponder  over.  The  living  water  which  Christ  would 
give;  the  announcement  of  a  change  in  the  wor- 
ship of  Jew  and  Samaritan  ;  lastly,  the  confession 
that  He  who  speaks  is  truly  the  Messiah,  are  all 
noteworthy.  The  open  avowal  that  He  is  the 
Messiah,  made  to  the  daughter  of  an  abhorred  people, 
is  accounted  for  if  we  remember  that  this  was  the 
first  and  last  time  when  He  taught  personally  in 
Samaria,  and  that  the  woman  showed  a  special  fit- 
ness to  receive  it,  for  she  expected  in  the  Christ  a 
spiritual  teacher  not  a  temporal  prince :  "  When  He 
is  come  He  will  tell  us  all  things"  (ver.  25).  The 
very  absence  of  national  pride,  which  so  beset  the 
Jews,  preserved  in  her  a  right  conception  of  the 
Christ.  Had  she  thought — had  she  said,  "  When 
He  is  come  He  will  restore  the  kingdom  to  Israel, 
and  set  His  followers  in  high  places,  on  His  right 
and  on  His  left,"  then  He  could  not  have  answered, 
as  now,  "  I  that  speak  unto  thee  am  He."  The 
words  would  have  conveyed  a  falsehood  to  her.  The 
Samaritans  came  out  to  Him  on  the  report  of  the 
woman  ;  they  heard  Him  and  believed:  "  We  have 
heard  Him  ourselves,  and  know  that  this  is  indeed 
the  Christ,  the  Saviour  of  the  world  "  (ver.  42). 
Was  this  groat  grace  thrown  away  upon  them? 
Did  it  abide  by  them,  or  was  it  lost?  In  the  per- 
secution that  arose  about  Stephen,  Philip  "  went 
down  to  a  city  of  Samaria  (not  "the  city,"  as  in 
the  English  version),  and  preached  Christ  unto 
them"  (Acts  viii.  5).  We  dare  not  pronounce  as 
certain  that  this  city  was  Svehar :  but  tile  readi- 
ness of  the  Samaritans  to  believe  (viii.  6)  recals 
the  candour  and  readiness  of  the  men  of  Sychar, 
and  it  is  difficult  not  to  connect  the  two  events 
together. 


1054 


JESUS  CHEIST 


Jesus  now  returned  to  Galilee,  and  came  to 
Nazareth,  His  own  city.  In  the  Synagogue  He 
expounded  to  the  people  a  passage  from  Isaiah 
(lxi.  1),  telling  them  that  its  fulfilment  was  now 

at  hand  in  His  person.  The  same  truth  that  had 
filled  the  Samaritans  with  gratitude,  wrought  up 
to  fury  the  men  of  Nazareth,  who  would  have  de- 
stroyed Him  if  He  had  not  escaped  out  of  their 
hands  (Luke  iv.  16-30).  He  came  now  to  Caper- 
naum. On  his  way  hither,  when  He  had  reached 
('ana,  He  healed  the  son  of  one  of  the  courtiers  of 
Herod  Antipas  (John  iv.  46-54),  who  "himself  be- 
lieved, and  his  whole  house."  This  was  the  second 
Galilean  miracle.  At  Capernaum  He  wrought  many 
miracles  for  them  that  needed.  Here  two  disciples 
who  had  known  Him  before,  namely,  Simon  Peter 
and  Andrew,  were  called  from  their  fishing  to 
become  "fishers  of  men  "  (Matt.  iv.  19),  and  the 
two  sons  of  Zebedee  received  the  same  summons. 
After  healing  on  the  Sabbath  a  demoniac  in  the 
Synagogue,  a  miracle  which  was  witnessed  by  many, 
and  was  made  known  everywhere,  He  returned  the 
same  day  to  Simon's  house,  and  healed  the  mother- 
in-law  of  Simon  who  was  sick  of  a  fever.  At 
sunset,  the  multitude,  now  fully  aroused  by  what 
they  had  heard,  brought  their  sick  to  Simon's  door 
to  get  them  healed.  He  did  not  refuse  His  succour, 
and  healed  them  all  (Mark  i.  29-34).  He  now, 
atter  showering  down  on  Capernaum  so  many 
cures,  turned  His  thoughts  to  the  rest  of  Galilee, 
where  other  "  lost  sheep  "  were  scattered : — "  Let 
us  go  into  the  next  towns  {Ku>fj.oir6\eis)  that 
I  may  preach  there  also,  for  therefore  came  I  forth" 
(Mark  i.  38).  The  journey  through  Galilee,  on 
which  He  now  entered,  must  have  been  a  general 
circuit  of  that  country.  His  object  was  to  call  on 
the  Galileans  to  repent  and  believe  the  Gospel. 
This  could  only  be  done  completely  by  taking  such 
a  journey  that  His  teaching  might  be  accessible  to 
all  in  turn  at  some  point  or  other.  Josephus  men- 
tions that  there  were  two  hundred  and  four  towns 
and  villages  in  (ialilee  (Vita,  45):  therefore 
such  a  circuit  as  should  in  any  real  sense  embrace 
the  whole  of  Galilee  would  require  some  months 
for  its  performance.  "  The  course  of  the  present 
circuit,"  says  Mr.  Gresswell  (Dissertations,  vol.  ii. 
293),  "  we  may  conjecture,  was,  upon  the  whole, 
as  follows : — First,  along  the  western  side  of  the 
Jordan,  northward,  which  would  disseminate  the 
fame  of  .Jesus  in  Decapolis;  secondlv,  along  the 
confines  of  the  tetrarchy  of  Philip,  westward,  which 
would  make  Him  known  throughout  Syria  ;  thirdly, 
by  the  coasts  of  Tyre  and  Sidon,  southward  ;  and, 
lastly,  along  the  verge  of  Samaria,  and  the  western 
region  of  the  lake  of  Galilee — the  nearest  points  to 
Judaea  proper  and  to  Peraea — until  it  returned  to 
Capernaum."  In  the  course  of  this  circuit,  besides 
the  works  of  mercy  spoken  of  by  the  Evangelists 
(Matt.  iv.  23-25;'  Mark  i.  32-34;  Luke  iv.  40- 
44)  He  had  probably  called  to  Him  more  of  His 
Apostles. '  Four  at  least  were  His  companions 
from  the  beginning  of  it.  The  rest  (except  perhaps 
Judas  Iscariot)  were  Galileans,  and  it  is  not  im- 
probable that  they  were  found  by  their  Master 
during  this  circuit.  Philip  of  Bethsaida  and  Nath- 
anael  or  Bartholomew  were  already  prepared  to 
become  His  disciples  by  an  earlier  interview.  On 
this  circuit  occurred  the  first  case  of  the  healing 
of  a  leper;  it  is  selected  for  record  by  the  Evan- 
gelists, because  of  the  incurableness  of  the  ailment. 
So  great  was  the  dread  of  this  disorder — so  strict 
the  precautions  against  its  infection — that  even  the 


JESUS  CHEIST 

raising  of  Jairus'  daughter  fiom  the  dead,  which 
probably  occurred  at  Capernaum  about  the  end  of 
this  circuit,  would  hardly  impress  the  beholders 
more  profoundly. 

Second  year  of  the  Ministry. — Jesus  went  up  to 
Jerusalem  to  "  a  feast  of  the  Jews,"  which  we  have 
shown  (p.  1051)  to  have  been  probably  the  Pass- 
over. At  the  pool  Bethesda  (  =  house  of  mercy), 
which  was  near  the  sheep-gate  (Neh.  iii.  1)  on 
the  north-east  side  of  the  temple,  Jesus  saw  many 
infirm  persons  waiting  their  turn  for  the  healing 
virtues  of  the  water.  (John  v.  1-18.  On  the 
genuineness  of  the  fourth  verse,  see  Scholz,  N.  T.; 
Tischendorf,  N.  T.;  and  Liicke,  in  Inc.  It  is 
wanting  in  three  out  of  *the  four  chief  MSS.  ; 
it  is  singularly  disturbed  with  variations  in  the 
MSS.  that  insert  it,  and  it  abounds  in  Words 
winch  do  not  occur  again  in  this  Gospel.)  Among 
them  was  a  man  who  had  had  an  infirmity  thirty 
eight  years:  Jesus  made  him  whole  by  a  word, 
bidding  him  take  up  his  bed  and  walk.  The 
miracle  was  done  on  the  Sabbath  ;  and  the  Jews, 
by  which  name  in  St.  Johns  Gospel  we  aie  to 
understand  the  Jewish  authorities,  who  acted 
against  Jesus,  rebuked  the  man  for  cariying  his 
bed.  It  was  a  labour,  and  as  such  forbidden  (Jer. 
xvii.  21).  The  answer  of  the  man  was  too  logical 
to  be  refuted :  "  He  that  made  me  whole,  the  same 
said  unto  me,  Take  up  thy  bed  and  walk  "  (v.  11). 
If  He  had  not  authority  for  the  latter,  whence 
came  His  power  to  do  the  former?  Their  anger 
was  now  directed  against  Jesus  for  healing  on  the 
Sabbath,  even  for  well-doing.  They  sought  to  put 
Him  to  death.  In  our  Lord's  justification  of  Him- 
self, "  My  Father  worketh  hitherto,  and  I  work  " 
(v.  17),  there  is  an  unequivocal  claim  to  the 
Divine  nature.  God  the  Father  never  rests :  if 
sleep  could  visit  His  eyelids  for  an  instant;  if  His 
hand  could  droop  for  a  moment's  rest,  the  universe 
would  collapse  in  ruin.  He  rested  on  the  seventh 
day  from  the  creation  of  new  beings  ;  but  from  the 
maintenance  of  those  that  exist  He  never  rests.  His 
love  streams  forth  on  every  day  alike;  as  do  the 
impartial  beams  from  the  sun  that  He  has  placed 
in  the  heavens.  The  Jews  rightly  understood  the 
saying:  none  but  God  could  utter  it;  none  could 
quote  God's  example,  as  setting  Him  over  and 
above  God's  law,  save  One  who  was  God  Himself. 
They  sought  the  more  to  kill  Him.  He  ex- 
pounded to  them  more  fully  His  relation  to  the 
Father.  He  works  with  the  strength  of  the 
Father  and  according  to  His  will.  He  can  do 
all  that  the  Father  does.  He  can  raise  men  out 
of  bodily  and  out  of  spiritual  death  ;  and  He  can 
judge  all  men.  John  bore  witness  to  Him;  the 
works  that  He  does  bear  even  stronger  witness. 
The  reason  that  the  Jews  do  not  believe  is  their 
want  of  discernment  of  the  meaning  of  the  Scrip- 
tures ;  and  that  comes  from  their  worldliness,  their 
desire  of  honour  from  one  another.  Unbelief  shall 
bring  condemnation ;  even  out  of  their  Law  they 
can  be  condemned,  since  they  believe  not  even 
Moses,  who  foretold  that  Christ  should  come  (John 
v.  19-47). 

Another  discussion  about  the  Sabbath  arose  from 
the  disciples  plucking  the  ears  of  coin  as  they  went 
through  the  fields  (Matt.  xii.  1-8).  The  time  of 
this  is  somewhat  uncertain:  some  would  place  it  a 
year  later,  just  after  the  third  Passover  (Clausen); 
but  its  place  is  much  more  probably  here  (New- 
come,  Robinson,  &c).  The  needy  were  permitted 
by  the  Law  (Dent,  xxiii.  25)  to  pluck  the  ears  of 


JESUS  CHRIST 

corn  with  their  hand,  even  without  waiting  for 
the  owner's  permission.  The  disciples  must  have 
been  living  a  hard  and  poor  lite  to  resort  to  such 
means  of  sustenance.  But  the  Pharisees  would  not 
allow  that  it  was  lawful  on  the  Sabbath-clay. 
Jesus  reminds  them  that  David,  whose  example 
they  are  not  likely  to  challenge,  ate  the  sacred 
shewbread  in  the  tabernacle,  which  it  was  not 
lawful  to  eat.  The  priests  might  partake  of  it, 
but  not  a  stranger  (Ex.  xxix.  33  ;  Lev.  xxiv.  5,  9). 
David,  on  the  principle  that  mercy  was  better  than 
sacrifice  (Hos.  vi.  6),  took  it  and  gave  to  the  young 
men  that  were  with  him  that  they  might  not 
perish  for  hunger.  In  order  further  to  show  that 
a  literal  mechanical  observance  of  the  law  of  the 
Sabbath  would  lead  to  absurdities,  Jesus  reminds 
them  that  this  law  is  perpetually  set  aside  on 
account  of  another:  "  The  priests  profane  the  Sab- 
bath and  are  blameless"  (Matt,  .xii.  5).  The  work 
of  sacrifice,  the  placing  of  the  shewbread,  go  on  on 
the  Sabbath,  and  labour  even  on  that  day  may  be 
done  by  priests,  and  may  please  God.  It  was  the  root 
of  the  Pharisees'  fault  that  they  thought  sacrifice 
better  than  mercy,  ritual  exactness  more  than  love: 
"  If  ye  had  known  what  this  meaneth,  I  will  have 
mercy  and  not  sacrifice,  ye  would  not  have  con- 
demned the  guiltless.  For  the  Son  of  Man  is  Lord 
even  of  the  Sabbath-day"  (Matt.  xii.  7,  8).  These 
last  words  are  inseparable  from  the  meaning  of  our 
Lord's  answer.  In  pleading  the  example  of  David, 
the  king  and  prophet,  and  of  the  piiests  in  the 
temple,  the  Lord  tacitly  implies  the  greatness  of 
His  own  position.  He  is  indeed  Prophet,  Priest, 
and  King  ;  and  had  He  been  none  of  these,  the 
argument  would  have  been  not  merely  incom- 
plete, but  misleading.  It  is  undeniable  that  the 
law  of  the  Sabbath  was  very  strict.  Against 
labours  as  small  as  that  of  winnowing  the  corn 
a  severe  penalty  was  set.  Our  Lord  quotes  cases 
where  the  law  is  superseded  or  set  aside,  because 
He  is  One  who  has  power  to  do  the  same.  And 
the  rise  of  a  new  law  is  implied  in  those  words 
which  St.  Mark  alone  has  recorded:  "  The  Sabbath 
was  made  for  man,  and  not  man  for  the  Sabbath." 
The  law  upon  the  Sabbath  was  made  in  love  to 
men,  to  preserve  for  them  a  due  measure  of  rest, 
to  keep  room  for  the  worship  of  God.  The  Son  of 
Man.  lias  power  to  re-adjust  this  law,  if  its  work  is 
done,  or  if  men  are  lit  to  receive  a  higher. 

This  may  have  taken  place  on  the  way  from 
Jerusalem  after  the  Passover.  On  another  Sabbath, 
probably  at  Capernaum,  to  which  Jesus  had  ie- 
turned,  the  Pharisees  gave  a  far  more  striking 
proof  of  the  way  in  which  their  hard  and  narrow 
and  unloving  interpretation  would  turn  the  bene- 
ficence  of  the  Law  into  a  blighting  oppression. 
Our  Lord  entered  into  the  synagogue,  and  found 
there  a  man  with  a  withered  hand — some  poor 
artizau  perhaps  whose  handiwork  was  his  means 
of  life,  Jesus  was  abov.t  to  heal  him — which 
would  give  back  life  to  the  sufferer — which  would 
give  joy  to  every  beholder  who  had  one  touch  of 
pity  in  his  heart.  The  Pharisees  interfere:  '•  Is  it 
lawful  to  heal  on  the  Sabbath-day?"    Their  doctors 

would  have  allowed  them  to  pull  a  sheep  out  of  a 
pit:  but  they  will  not  have  a  man  rescued  from 
the  depth  of  misery.    Rarely  is  that  loving  Teacher 

wroth,  but  here  His  anger,  mixed  with  grief,  showed 
itself:    lie  looked    round   about    upon    them   "with 
anger,  being  grieved  at  the  hardness  of  theu 
and  answered  their  cavils  by  healing  the  man  i  Matt. 
xii.  9-14  ;  Mark  iii.  1-6  ;   Luke  vi.  (i-11). 


JESUS  CHRIST 


1055 


In  placing  (he  ordination  or  calling  of  the  Twelve 
Apostles  just  before  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  we 
are  under  the  guidance  of  St.  Luke  (vi.  13,  17). 
But  this  more  solemn  separation  for  their  work  by 
no  means  marks  the  time  of  their  first  approach  to 
Jesus.  Scattered  notices  prove  that  some  of  them 
at  least  were  drawn  gradually  to  the  Lord,  so  that 
it  would  be  difficult  to  identify  the  moment  when 
they  earned  the  name  of  disciples.  In  the  case  of 
St.  Peter,  live  degrees  or  stages  might  be  traced 
(John  i.  41-43;  Matt.  iv.  19,  xvi.  17-19;  Luke 
xxii.  31,  32  ;  John  xxi.  15-19),  at  each  of  which  he 
came  somewhat  nearer  to  his  Master.  That  which 
takes  place  here  is  the  appointment  of  twelve  dis- 
ciples to  be  a  distinct  body,  under  the  name  of 
Apostles.  They  are  not  sent  forth  to  preach  until 
later  in  the  same  year.  The  number  twelve  must 
have  reference  to  the  number  of  the  Jewish  tribes  : 
it  is  a  number  selected  on  account  of  its  symbolical 
meaning,  for  the  work  confided  to  them  might  have 
been  wrought  by  more  or  fewer.  Twelve  is  used 
with  the  same  symbolical  reference  in  many  passages 
of  the  0.  T.  Twelve  pillars  to  the  altar  which 
Moses  erected  (Ex.  xxiv.  4; ;  twelve  stones  to  com- 
memorate the  passing  of  the  ark  over  Jordan  (Josh. 
iv.  3)  ;  twelve  precious  stones  in  the  breastplate  of 
the  priest  (Ex.  xxviii.  21) ;  twelve  oxen  bearing  up 
the  molten  sea  in  the  Temple  of  Solomon  (1  K.  vii. 
25)  ;  twelve  officers  over  Solomon's  household  (IK. 
iv.  7)  :  all  these  are  examples  of  the  perpetual  repe- 
tition of  the  Jewish  number.  Bahr  (Sytnbolik, 
vol.  i.)  has  accumulated  passages  from  various 
authors  to  show  that  twelve,  the  multiple  of  four 
and  three,  is  the  type  or  symbol  of  the  universe : 
but  it  is  enough  here  to  say  that  the  use  of  the 
number  in  the  foundation  of  the  Christian  Church 
has  a  reference  to  the  tribes  of  the  Jewish  nation. 
Hence  the  number  continues  to  be  used  aftei  the 
addition  of  Paul  and  Barnabas  had  made  it  inap- 
plicable. The  Lord  Himself  tells  them  that  they 
"  shall  sit  on  thrones  judging  the  twelve  tribes  of 
Israel"  (Matt.  xix.  27,  28).  When  He  began  His 
ministry  in  Galilee,  He  left  His  own  home  at  Na- 
zareth, and  separated  Himself  from  His  kinsmen 
after  the  flesh,  in  order  to  devote  Himself  more 
completely  to  His  prophetical  office ;  and  these 
Twelve  were  "to  be  with  Him"  (Mark),  and  to 
he  instead  of  family  and  friends.  But  the  enmity 
of  the  Jews  separated  Him  also  from  His  country- 
men. Every  day  the  prospect  of  the  Jews  receiving 
Him  as  their  Messiah,  to  their  own  salvation,  became 
more  faint ;  ami  the  privileges  of  the  favoured  people 
passed  gradually  over  to  the  new  Israel,  the  new 
Church,  the  new  Jerusalem,  of  which  the  Apostles 
were  the  foundation.  The  precise  day  in  which 
this  defection  was  completed  could  not  be  specified. 
The  Sun  of  Righteousness  rose  on  the  world,  and 
set  for  the  Jews,  through  all  the  shades  of  twilight. 
In  the  education  of  tin'  Twelve  for  their  appointed 
work,  we  see  the  superseding  of  the  Jews;  in  the 
(ration  of  the  symbolical  Dumber  we  see  pre- 
served a  recognition  of  their  original  right. 

In  the  four  fists  of  tin'  names  of  the  Apostles 
preserved  to  us  (Matt,  x.,  Mark  iii.,  Luke  vi..  Acts 
i.),  there  is  a  certain  order  preserved,  amidst  varia- 
tions. The  two  pairs  ofbrothers,  Simon  and  Andrew, 
and  tin'  sonsof  Zebedee,  are  always  named  th 
and  of  t!i.  se  Simon  Peter  ever  holds  tin'  tiist  place. 
Philip  and  Bartholomew,  Thomas  and  Matthew, 
are  always  in  the  next  rank  ;  and  of  them  Philip  is 
always  the  first.  In  the  third  rank  James  the  son 
ofAlpheus  is  the  first,  as  Judas  Iscariot  is  always 


10.r)6 


JESUS  CHRIST 


the  last,  with  Simon  the  Zealot  and  Thaddaeus 
between.  The  principle  that  governs  this  arrange- 
ment cannot  be  determined  very  positively  ;  bnt  as 
no  doubt  Simon  Peter  stands  first  because  of  his 
zeal  in  his  Master's  service,  and  Judas  ranks  last 
because  of  his  treason,  it  is  natural  to  suppose  that 
they  are  all  arranged  with  some  reference  at  least 
to  their  zeal  and  fitness  for  the  apostolic  office. 
Some  of  the  Apostles  were  certainly  poor  and  un- 
learned men ;  it  is  probable  that  the  rest  were  of 
the  same  kind.  Four  of  them  were  fishermen,  not 
indeed  the  poorest  of  their  class ;  and  a  fifth  was  a 
"  publican,"  one  of  the  portitores,  or  tax-gatherers, 
who  collected  the  taxes  farmed  by  Romans  of  higher 
rank.  Andrew,  who  is  mentioned  with  Peter,  is 
less  conspicuous  in  the  history  than  he,  but  he 
enjoyed  free  access  to  his  Master,  and  seems  to  have 
been  more  intimate  with  him  than  the  rest  (John 
vi.  S,  xii.  22,  with  Mark  xiii.  3).  But  James  and 
John,  who  are  sometimes  placed  above  him  in  the 
list,  were  especially  distinguished  by  Jesus.  They 
were  unmarried  ;  and  their  mother,  of  whose  ambi- 
tion we  have  a  well-known  instance,  seems  to  have 
had  much  influence  over  them.  The  zeal  and  fire 
of  their  disposition  is  indicated  in  the  name  of 
Boanerges  bestowed  upon  them.  One  seems  hardly 
to  recognize  in  the  fierce  enthusiasts  who  would 
have  called  down  fire  from  heaven  to  consume  the 
inhospitable  Samaritans  (Luke  ix.  52-56)  the  Apostle 
of  Love  and  his  brother.  It  is  probable  that  the 
Bartholomew  of  the  Twelve  is  the  same  as  Na- 
thanael  (John  i.)  ;  and  the  Lebbaeus  or  Thaddaeus 
the  same  as  Judas  the  brother  of  James.  Simon 
the  Zealot  was  so  railed  probably  from  his  belonging 
to  the  sect  of  Zealots,  who,  from  Num.  xxv.  7,  8, 
took  it  on  themselves  to  punish  crimes  against  the 
law.  If  the  name  Iscariot  (  =  man  of  Cariot  = 
Kerioth)  refers  the  birth  of  the  traitor  to  Kerioth 
in  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  25),  then  it  would  appear  that 
the  traitor  alone  was  of  Judaean  origin,  and  the 
eleven  faithful  ones  were  despised  Galileans. 

From  henceforth  the  education  of  the  twelve 
Apostles  will  be  one  of  the  principal  features  of 
the  Lord's  ministry.  First  He  instructs  them  ; 
then  He  takes  them  with  Him  as  companions  of  His 
wayfaring ;  then  He  sends  them  forth  to  teach  and 
heal  for  Him.  The  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  although 
it  is  meant  for  all  the  disciples,  seems  to  have  a  spe- 
cial reference  to  the  chosen  Twelve  ( Matt.  v.  1 1  .  .  .). 
Its  principal  features  have  been  sketched  already ; 
but  they  will  miss  their  full  meaning  if  it  is  for- 
gotten that  they  are  the  first  teaching  which  the 
Apostles  were  called  on  to  listen  to  after  their  ap- 
pointment. 

About  this  time  it  was  that  John  the  Baptist, 
long  a  prisoner  with  little  hope  ot  release,  sent  his 
disciples  to  Jesus  with  the  question,  "  Art  thou  He 
that  should  come,  or  do  we  look  for  another?" 
In  all  the  Gospels  there  is  no  more  touching  inci- 
dent. Those  who  maintain  that  it  was  done  solely 
for  the  sake  of  the  disciples,  and  that  John  himself 
needed  no  answer  to  support  his  faith,  show  as 
little  knowledge  of  the  human  mind  as  exactness  in 
explaining  the  words  of  the  account.  The  great 
privilege  of  John's  life  was  that  he  was  appointed 
to  recognize  and  bear  witness  to  the  Messiah  (John 
i.  31).  After  languishing  a  year  in  a  dungeon, 
after  learning  that  even  yet  Jesus  had  made  no 
steps  towards  the  establishment  of  His  kingdom  of 
the  Jews,  and  that  His  following  consisted  of  only 
twelve  poor  Galileans,  doubts  began  to  cloud  over 
his  spirit.     Was  the  kingdom  of  Messiah  as  near  as 


JESUS  CHRIST 

he  had  thought  ?  Was  Jesus  not  the  Messiah,  but 
some  forerunner  of  that  Deliverer,  as  he  himself 
had  been  ?  There  is  no  unbelief  ;  he  does  not  sup- 
pose that  Jesus  has  deceived  ;  when  the  doubts  arise, 
it  is  to  Jesus  that  he  submits  them.  But  it  was 
not  without  great  depression  and  perplexity  that  he 
put  the  question,  "  Art  thou  He  thai  should  come?" 
The  scope  of  the  answer  given  lies  in  its  recalling 
John  to  the  grounds  of  his  former  confidence.  The 
very  miracles  are  being  wrought  that  were  to  be 
the  signs  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  ;  and  therefore 
that  kingdom  is  come  (Is.  xxxv.  5,  xlii.  6,  7). 
There  is  more  of  grave  encouragement  than  of  re- 
buke in  the  words,  "  Blessed  is  he  who  shall  not 
be  offended  in  me"  (Matt.  xi.  6).  They  bid  the 
Forerunner  to  have  a  good  heart,  and  to  hope  and 
believe  to  the  end.  He  has  allowed  sorrow,  and 
the  apparent  triumph  of  wickedness,  which  is  a 
harder  trial,  to  trouble  his  view  of  the  divine  plan  ; 
let  him  remember  that  it  is  blessed  to  attain  that 
state  of  confidence  which  these  things  cannot  disturb  ; 
and  let  the  signs  which  Jesus  now  exhibits  suffice 
him  to  the  end" (Matt.  xi.  1-6  ;  Luke  vii.  18-23). 

The  testimony  to  John  which  our  Lord  graciously 
adds  is  intended  to  reinstate  him  in  that  place  in 
the  minds  of  His  own  disciples  which  he  had  occupied 
before  this  mission  of  doubt.  John  is  not  a  weak 
waverer ;  not  a  luxurious  courtier,  attaching  him- 
self to  the  new  dispensation  from  worldly  motives  ; 
but  a  prophet,  and  more  than  a  prophet,  for  the 
prophets  spoke  of  Jesus  afar  off,  but  John  stood 
before  the  Messiah,  and  with  his  hand  pointed  Him 
out.  He  came  in  the  spirit  and  power  of  Elijah 
(Mai.  iii.  1,  iv.  5),  to  prepare  for  the  kingdom  of 
heaven.  And  yet  great  as  he  was,  the  least  of  those 
in  the  kingdom  of  heaven  when  it  is  completely 
planted  should  enjoy  a  higher  degree  of  religious  illu- 
mination than  he  (Matt.  xi.  7-11 ;  Luke  vii.  24-28). 

Now  commences  the  second  circuit  of  Galilee 
(Luke  viii.  1-3),  to  which  belong  the  parables  in 
Matt.  xiii.  ;  the  visit  of  our  Lord's  mother  and  bre- 
thren (Luke  viii.  19-21),  and  the  account  of  his 
reception  at  Nazareth  (Mark  vi.  1-6). 

During  this  time  the  twelve  have  journeyed  with 
Him.  But  now  a  third  circuit  in  Galilee  is  re- 
corded, which  probably  occurred  during  the  last 
three  months  of  this  year  (Matt.  ix.  35-38)  ;  and 
during  this  circuit,  after  reminding  them  how 
great  is  the  harvest  and  how  pressing  the  need  of 
labourers,  He  carries  the  training  of  the  disciples 
one  step  further  by  sending  them  forth  by  them- 
selves to  teach  (Matt,  x.,  xi.).  Such  a  mission  is 
not  to  be  considered  as  identical  in  character  with 
the  mission  of  the  Apostles  after  the  Resurrection. 
It  was  limited  to  the  Jews  ;  the  Samaritans  and 
heathen  were  excluded ;  but  this  arose,  not  from  any 
narrowness  in  the  limits  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven 
(Matt,  xxviii.  19;  Mark  xvi.  15),  but  from  the 
limited  knowledge  and  abilities  of  the  Apostles. 
They  were  sent  to  proclaim  to  the  Jews  that  "  the 
kingdom  of  heaven,"  which  their  prophets  taught 
them  to  look  for,  was  at  hand  (Matt.  x.  7) ;  but  they 
were  unfit  as  yet  for  the  task  of  explaining  to  Jews 
the  true  nature  of  that  kingdom,  and  still  more  to 
Gentiles  who  had  received  no  preparation  for  any  such 
doctrine.  The  preaching  of  the  Apostles  whilst  Jesus 
was  yet  on  earth  was  only  ancillary  to  His  and  a 
preparation  of  the  way  for  Him.  It  was  probably 
of  the  simplest  character.  "  As  ye  go,  preach, 
saying,  the  kingdom  of  Heaven  is  at  hand."  Power 
was  given  them  to  confirm  it  by  signs  and  wonders; 
and  the  purpose  of  it  was  to  throw  the  minds  of 


JESUS  CHRIST 

those  who  heard  it  into  an  enquiring  state,  so  that 
they  might  seek  and  rind  the  Lord  Himself.  But 
whilst  their  instructions  as  to  the  matter  of  their 
preaching  were  thus  brief  and  simple,  the  cautions, 
warnings,  and  encouragements  as  to  their  own  con- 
dition were  far  more  full.  They  were  to  do  their 
work  without  anxiety  for  their  welfare.  No  provi- 
sion was  to  be  made  for  their  journey ;  in  the 
house  that  first  received  them  in  any  city  they  were 
to  abide,  not  seeking  to  find  the  best.  Dangers 
would  befall  them,  for  they  were  sent  forth  "  as 
sheep  in  the  midst  of  wolves  "  (Matt.  x.  16)  ;  but 
they  were  not  to  allow  this  to  disturb  their  thoughts. 
The  same  God  who  wrought  their  miracles  for  them 
would  protect  them  ;  and  those  who  confessed  the 
name  of  Christ  before  men  would  be  confessed  by 
Christ  before  the  Father  as  His  disciples.  These 
precepts  for  the  Apostles  even  went  somewhat  be- 
yond what  their  present  mission  required  ;  it  does 
not  appear  that  they  were  at  this  time  delivered 
up  to  councils,  or  scourged  in  synagogues.  But  in 
training  their  feeble  wings  for  their  first  flight  the 
same  rules  and  cautions  were  given  which  would 
be  needed  even  when  they  soared  the  highest  in 
their  zeal  and  devotion  to  their  crucified  Master. 
There  is  no  difficulty  here,  if  we  remember  that 
this  sending  forth  was  rather  a  training  of  the 
Apostles  than  a  means  of  converting  the  Galilean 
people. 

They  went  forth  two  and  two ;  and  our  Lord 
continued  His  own  circuit  (Matt.  xi.  1),  with  what 
companions  does  not  appear.  By  this  time  the 
leaven  of  the  Lord's  teaching  had  begun  powerfully 
to  work  among  the  people.  Herod,  we  read,  "was 
perplexed,  because  that  it  was  said  of  some,  that 
John  was  risen  from  the  dead,  and  of  some  that 
Elijah  had  appeared;  and  of  others,  that  one  of  the 
old  prophets  was  risen  again"  (Luke  ix.  7,  8). 
The  false  apprehensions  about  the  Messiah  that  he 
should  be  a  temporal  ruler,  were  so  deep-rooted, 
that  whilst  all  the  rumours  concurred  in  assigning 
a  high  place  to  Jesus  as  a  prophet,  none  went  beyond 
to  recognise  Him  as  the  King  of  Israel — the  Saviour 
of  His  people  and  the  world. 

After  a  journey  of  perhaps  two  months'  dura- 
tion the  twelve  return  to  Jesus,  and  give  an  ac- 
count of  their  ministry.  The  third  Passover 
was  now  drawing  near ;  but  the  Lord  did  not 
go  up  to  it,  because  His  time  was  not  come  for 
submitting  to  the  malice  of  the  Jews  against  Him  ; 
because  His  ministry  in  Galilee  was  not  completed  ; 
and  especially,  because  He  wished  to  continue  the 
training  of  tire  Apostles  for  their  work,  now  one  of 
the  chief  objects  of  His  ministry.  He  wished  to 
commune  with  them  privately  upon  their  work, 
and,  we  may  suppose,  to  add  to  the  instruction 
they  had  already  received  from  Him  (Mark  vi.  30, 
31).  He  therefore  went  with  them  from  the 
neighbourhood  of  Capernaum  to  a  mountain  on  the 
eastern  shore  of  the  Sea  of  Tiberias,  near  Bethsaida 
Julias,  not  far  from  the  head  of  the  sea.  Great 
multitudes  pursued  them;  and  here  the  Lord, 
moved  to  compassion  by  the  hunger  and  weariness 
of  the  people,  wrought  for  them  one  of  His  most 
remarkable  miracles.  Out  of  five  barley  loaves 
and  two  small  fishes,  He  produced  food  tor  live 
thousand  men  besides  women  and  children.  The 
act  was  one  of  creation,  and  therefore  was  both  an 
assertion  andaproof  of  divine  power;  and  the  dis- 
course which  followed  it,  recorded  by  John  only, 
was  an  important  step  in  the  training  of  (lie  Apos- 
tles,  for  it   hinted  to  them  for  the  first  time  the 


JESUS  .CHRIST 


1057 


unexpected  truth  that  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ, 
that  is,  His  passion,  must  become  the  means  of 
man's  salvation.  This  view  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  which  they  had  been  preaching, 
could  not  have  been  understood  ;  but  it  would  pre- 
pare those  who  still  clave  to  Jesus  to  expect  the 
hard  facts  that  were  to  follow  these  hard  words. 
The-  discourse  itself  has  already  been  examined 
(p.  1048).  After  the  miracle,  but  before  the  com- 
ment on  it  was  delivered,  the  disciples  crossed  the 
sea  from  Bethsaida  Julias  to  Bethsaida  of  Galilee, 
and  Jesus  retired  alone  to  a  mountain  to  commune 
with  the  Father.  They  were  toiling  at  the  oar, 
for  the  wind  was  contrary,  when,  as  the  night  drew 
towards  morning,  they  saw  Jesus  walking  to  them 
on  the  sea,  having  passed  the  whole  night  on  the 
mountain.  They  were  amazed  and  terrified.  He 
came  into  the  ship  and  the  wind  ceased.  They 
worshipped  Him  at  this  new  proof  of  divine  power — 
"Of  a  truth  thou  art  the  Son  of  God"  (Matt. 
xiv.  33).  The  storm  had  been  another  trial  of 
their  faith  (comp.  Matt.  viii.  23-26),  not  in  a  present 
Master,  as  on  a  former  occasion,  but  in  an  absent 
one.  But  the  words  of  St.  Mark  intimate  that 
even  the  feeding  of  the  five  thousand  had  not  built 
up  their  faith  in  Him, — "  for  they  considered  not 
the  miracle  of  the  loaves :  for  their  heart  was  hard- 
ened "  (vi.  52).  Peter,  however,  as  St.  Matthew 
relates,  with  his  usual  zeal  wishing  to  show  that 
he  really  possessed  that  faith  in  Jesus,  which  per- 
haps in  the  height  of  the  storm  had  been  somewhat 
forgotten,  requests  Jesus  to  bid  him  come  to  Him 
upon  the  water.  When  he  made  the  effort,  his 
faith  began  to  tail,  and  he  cried  out  for  succour. 
Christ's  rebuke,  "  0  thou  of  little  faith,  wherefore 
didst  thou  doubt  ?"  does  not  imply  that  he  had  no 
faith,  or  that  it  wholly  deserted  him  now.  All  the 
failings  of  Peter  were  of  the  same  kind  ;  there  was 
a  faith  fidl  of  zeal  and  eagerness,  but  it  was  not 
constant.  He  believed  that  he  could  walk  on  the 
waters  if  Jesus  bade  him  ;  but  the  roar  of  the 
waves  appalled  him,  and  he  sank  from  the  same 
cause  that  made  him  deny  his  Lord  afterwards. 

When  they  reached  the  shore  of  Gennesaret  the 
whole  people  showed  their  faith  in  Him  as  a  Healer 
of  disease  (Mark  vi.  53-56) ;  and  he  performed 
very  many  miracles  on  them.  Nothing  could  sur- 
pass the  eagerness  with  which  the)'  sought  Him. 
Yet  on  the  next  day  the  great  discourse  just  alluded 
to  was  uttered,  and  "  from  that  time  many  of  His 
disciples  went  back  and  walked  no  more  with  Him  " 
(John  vi.  66). 

Third  year  of  the  Ministry. — Hearing  perhaps 
that  Jesus  was  not  coming  to  the  feast,  Scribes  and 
Pharisees  from  Jerusalem  went  down  to  see  Him 
at  Capernaum  (Matt.  xv.  1).  They  found  fault 
with  His  disciples  for  breaking  the  tradition  about 
purifying,  and  eating  with  unwasben  hands.  It  is 
not  necessary  to  suppose  that  they  came  to  lie  in 
wait  for  Jesus.  The  objection  was  one  which 
they  would  naturally  take.  Our  Lord  in  His  an- 
swer tries  to  show  them  how  far  external  rule, 
claiming  to  lie  religious,  may  lead  men  away  from 
the  true  spirit  of  the  Gospel.  "  Ye  say,  whosoever 
shall  say  to  his  father  or  his  mother,  it  is  a  gift,  by 
whatsoever  thou  mightest  be  profited  by  me;  and 
honour  nut  Ins  father  or  bis  mother,  lie  shall  be 
free"  Matt.  xv.  ■">,  6).  They  admitted  the  obli- 
gation of  the  fifth  commandment,  but  had  intro- 
duced a  moans  of  evading  it.  by  enabling  a  son  to 
say  to  his  father  and  mother  who  sought  his  help 
that   he  had  made  his  property   "a  gift"   to  the 


1058 


JESUS  CHRIST 


Temple,  which  took  precedence  of  his  obligation. 
Well  might  He  apply  to  a  people  where  such  a 
miserable  evasion  could  find  place,  the  words  of 
Isaiah  (xxix.  13) — "This  people  draweth  nigh 
unto  me  with  their  mouth,  and  honoureth  me  with 
their  lips,  but  their  heart  is  far  from  me.  But  in 
vain  they  do  worship  me,  teaching  for  doctrines 
the  commandments  of  men." 

Leaving  the  neighbourhood  of  Capernaum  our 
•Lord  now  travels  to  the  north-west  of  Galilee,  to 
the  region  of  Tyre  and  Sidon.  The  time  is  not 
strictly  determined,  but  it  was  probably  the  early 
summer  of  this  year.  It  does  not  appear  that  He 
retired  into  this  heathen  country  for  the  purpose 
of  ministering ;  more  probably  it  was  a  retreat  from 
the  machinations  of  the  Jews.  A  woman  of  the 
country,  of  Greek  education  ('EAAtjj/ls  'Svpcxpoi- 
viKKraa,  Mark)  came  to  entreat  Him  to  heal  her 
daughter  who  was  tormented  with  an  evil  spirit. 
The  Lord  at  first  repelled  her  by  saying  that  He 
was  not  sent  but  to  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of 
Israel  ;  but  not  so  was  her  maternal  love  to  be 
baffled.  She  besought  Him  again  and  was  again 
repelled  ;  the  bread  of  the  children  was  not.  to  be 
given  to  dogs.  Still  persisting,  she  besought  His 
help  even  as  one  of  the  dogs  so  despised  :  "  the  dogs 
eat  of  the  crumbs  that  fall  from  the  Master's  table." 
Faith  so  sincere  was  not  to  be  resisted.  Her  daughter 
was  made  whole  (Matt.  xv.  21-28;  Mark  vii. 
24-30). 

Returning  thence  He  passed  round  by  the  north 
of  the  sea  of  Galilee  to  the  region  of  Decapolis  on 
its  eastern  side  (Mark  vii.  31-37).     In  this  district 
He   performed    many   miracles,  and  especially   the 
restoration  of  a  deaf  man  who  had  an  impediment 
in  his  speech,  remarkable  for  the  seeming  effort  with 
which  He  wrought  it.      To  these    succeedsd  the 
feeding  of  the  lour  thousand  with  the  seven  loaves 
(Matt.  xv.  32).     He  now  crossed  the  Lake  of  Mag- 
dala,  where  the  Pharisees  and  Sadducees  asked  and 
were  refused  a  "  sign  ;"  some  great  wonder  wrought 
expressly  for  them  to  prove  that  He  was  the  Christ- 
He  answers   them   as  He  had  answered  a  similar 
request  before  ;  "  the  sign  of  the  prophet  Jonas " 
was  all  that  they  should  have.     His  resurrection 
after  a  death   of  three  days  should   be  the  great 
•sign,  and  yet  in  another  sense  no  sign  should  be 
given  them,  for  they  should  neither  see  it  nor  be- 
lieve it.     The  unnatural  alliance  between  Pharisee 
and  Saddueee  is  worthy  of  remark.     The  zealots  of 
tialition,  and  the  political  partisans  of  Herod  (for 
"  leaven  of  the  Sadducees,  in  Matt.  xvi.  6  =  "  leaven 
of  Herod,"  Mark  viii.  15)  joined  together  for  once 
with  a  common  object  of  hatred.     After  they  had 
departed,  Jesus  crossed  the  lake  with  his  disciples, 
and,  combining  perhaps  for  the  use  of  the  disciples 
the  remembrance  of  the  feeding  of  the  four  thou- 
sand with  that  of  the  conversation   they  had  just 
heard,  warned   them   to   "beware  of  the  leaven  of 
the  Pharisees  and  of  the  leaven  of  Herod "  (Mark 
viii.  15).     So  little  however  were  the  disciples  pre- 
pared for  this,  tint  they  mistook   it   for  a  reproof 
for  having  brought  only  one  loaf  with  them  !  They 
had  forgotten  the  five  thousand  and  the  four  thou- 
sand, or  they  would  have  known   that  where  He 
was,   natural   bread  could  not  fail  them.     It  was 
needful   to  explain  to  them  that  the  leaven  of  the 
Pharisees  was  the  doctrine  of  those  who  bad  made 
the  word  of  God  of  none  effect  by  traditions  which 
appearing  to  promote  religion   really  overlaid  and 
destroyed  it,  and  the  leaven  of  the  Sadducees  was 
the  doctrine  of  those   who,  under  the  show  ofsu- 


JESUS  CHRIST 

perior  enlightenment,  denied  the  foundations  of  the 
fear  of  God  by  denying  a  future  state.  At  Beth- 
saida  Julias,  Jesus  restored  sight  to  a  blind  man ; 
and  here,  as  in  a  former  case,  the  form  and  prepa- 
ration which  He  adopted  are  to  be  remarked.  As 
though  the  human  Saviour  has  to  wrestle  with  and 
painfully  overcome  the  sufferings  of  His  people,  He 
takes  him  by  the  hand,  and  leads  him  out  of  the 
town,  and  spits  on  his  eyes  and  asks  him  if  he  sees 
aught.  At  first  the  sense  is  restored  imperfectly; 
and  Jesus  lays  His  hand  again  upon  him  and  the 
cure  is  complete  (Mark  viii.  22-26). 

The  ministry  in  Galilee  is  now  drawing  to  its 
close.     Through  the  length  and  breadth  of  that 
country  Jesus'has  proclaimed  the  kingdom  of  Christ, 
and  has  shown  by  mighty  works  that  He  is  the 
Christ  that  was  to  come.     He  begins   to  ask   the 
disciples  what  are   the  results  of  all  His  labour. 
"  Whom  say  the  people  that  I  am  ?"  (Luke  ix.  18). 
It  is  true  that  the  answer  shows  that  they  took 
Him  for  a  prophet.     But  we  are  obliged  to  admit 
that  the  rejection  of  Jesus  by  the  Galileans  had  been 
as  complete  as  His  preaching  to  them  had  been  uni- 
versal.    Here  and  there  a  few  may  have  received 
the  seeds  that  shall  afterwards  be  quickened  to  their 
conversion.     But  the  great  mass  had  heard  without 
earnestness    the    preached  word,   and  forgotten    it 
without  regret.      ''  Whereunto  shall   I   liken   this 
generation?"  says  Christ.    "  It  is  like  unto  children 
sitting  in  the  market,  and  calling  unto  their  fellows, 
and  saying,  We  have  piped  unto  you,  and  ye  have 
not  danced ;  we  have  mourned  unto  you,  and  ye 
have  not  lamented"  (Matt.  xi.  16,  17).     This  is 
a  picture  of  a  wayward  people  without   earnest 
thought.     As  children,  from  want  of  any  real  pur- 
pose, cannot  agree  in  their  play,  so  the  Galileans 
quarrel  with  every  form  of  religious  teaching.    The 
message  of  John  and  that  of  Jesus  they  did   not 
attend   to  ;    but    they  could  discuss   the  question 
whether  one  was  right  in  tasting  and  the  other  in 
eating  and  drinking.       He  denounces  woe  to   the 
cities  where  He  had  wrought  the  most,  to  Chorazin, 
Bethsaida,  and  Capernaum,  for  their  strange  insen- 
sibility, using  the  strongest  expressions.     "  Thou, 
Capernaum,  which  art  exalted  unto  heaven,  shalt 
be  brought  down  to  hell ;  for  if  the  mighty  works, 
which  have  been  done  in  thee,  had  been  done  in 
Sodom,  it  would  have  remained  until  this  day.    But 
I  say  unto  you  that  it  shall  be  more  tolerable  for 
the  land  of  Sodom  in  the  day  of  judgment  than  for 
thee"  (Matt.  xi.  23,  24).     Such  awful  language 
could  only  be  used  to  describe  a  complete  rejection 
of  the  Lord.     And  in  truth  nothing  was  wanting 
to  aggravate  that  rejection.     The  lengthened  jour- 
neys through  the  land,  the  miracles,  far  more  than 
are  recorded  in  detail,  had  brought  the  Gospel  home 
to  all  the  people.     Capernaum  was  the  focus  of  His 
ministry.    Through  Chorazin  and  Bethsaida  He  had 
no  doubt  passed  with  crowds  behind  Him,  drawn 
together  by  wonders  that  they  had  seen,  and  by  the 
hope  of  others  to  follow  them.     Many  thousands 
had  actually  been  benefited  by  the  miracles  ;   ami 
yet  of  all  these  there  were  only  twelve  that  really 
clave  to  Him,  and  one  of  them  was  Judas  the  traitor. 
With  this  rejection  an  epoch  of  the  history  is  con- 
nected.    He  begins  to  unfold  now  the  doctrine  of 
His  passion  more  fully.     First  inquiring  whom  the 
people  said  that  He 'was,  He  then  put  the  same 
question  to  the  Apostles  themselves.     Simon  Peter, 
the  ready  spokesman  of  the  rest,  answers.  "  Thou 
ait   the  "Christ,  the   Son  of  the  living  God."      It 
miti-ht  almost  seem  that  such  a  manifest  inference 


JESUS  CHRIST 

from  the  wonders  tliev  had  witnessed  was  too 
obvious  to  deserve  praise,  did  not  the  sight  of  a 
whole  country  which  had  witnessed  the  same  won- 
ders, and  despised  them,  prove  how  thoroughly 
callous  the  Jewish  heart  was.  "  Blessed  art  thou, 
Simon  Bar-Jona:  for  flesh  and  blood  hath  not  re- 
vealed it  unto  thee,  hut  ray  Father  which  is  in 
heaven.  And  I  say  also  unto  thee,  That  thou  art 
Peter,  and  upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  church ; 
and  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it. 
And  I  will  give  unto  thee  the  keys  of  the  kingdom 
of  heaven:  ami  whatsoever  thou  shalt  bind  on  earth 
shall  be  bound  in  heaven  :  and  whatsoever  thou 
shalt  loose  on  earth  shall  be  loosed  in  heaven" 
(Matt.  xvi.  16-20).  We  compare  the  language 
applied  to  Capernaum  for  its  want  of  faith  with 
that  addressed  to  Peter  and  the  Apostles,  and  we 
see  how  wide  is  the  gulf  between  those  who  believe 
and  those  who  do  not.  Jesus  now  in  the  plainest 
language  tells  them  what  is  to  be  the  mode  of  His 
departure  from  the  world  ;  "  how  that  He  must  go 
unto  Jerusalem,  and  surfer  many  things  of  the  elders 
and  chief  priests  and  scribes,  and  be  killed,  and  be 
raised  again  the  third  day  "  (Matt.  xvi.  2 1).  Peter, 
wlio  had  spoken  as  the  representative  of  all  the 
Apostles  before,  in  confessing  Jesus  as  the  Christ,, 
now  speaks  for  the  rest  in  ottering  to  our  Lord  the 
commonplace  consolations  of  the  children  of  this 
world  to  a  friend  beset  by  danger.  The  danger  they 
think  will  be  averted :  such  an  end  cannot  befall 
one  so  great.  The  Lord,  "  when  he  had  turned 
about  and  looked  on  His  disciples"  (Mark),  to  show 
that  He  connected  Peter's  words  with  them  all, 
a  [dresses  Peter  as  the  tempter — "  Cet  thee  behind 
me,  Satan ;  thou  art  an  offence  unto  me."  These 
words  open  up  to  us  the  fact  that  this  period  of  the 
ministry  was  a  time  of  special  trial  and  temptation 
to  the  sinless  Son  of  God.  "  Escape  from  sufferings 
and  deatli  !  Do  not  drink  the  cup  prepared  of  Thy 
Father;  it  is  too  bitter  ;  it  is  not  deserved."  Such 
was  the  whisper  of  the  Prince  of  this  World  at  that 
time  to  our  Lord;  and  Peter  has  been  unwittingly 
taking  it  into  his  mouth.  The  doctrine  of  a  sufler- 
ing  Messiah,  so  plainly  exhibited  in  the  prophets, 
had  reeded  from  sight  in  the  current  religion  of 
that  time.  The  announcement  of  it  to  the  disciples 
was  at  once  new  and  shocking.  By  repelling  it, 
even  when  offered  by  the  Lord  Himself,  they  fell 
into  a  deeper  sin  than  they  could  have  conceived. 
'fhe  chief  of  them  was  called  "  Satan,"  because  he 
was  unconsciously  pleading  on  Satan's  side  (Matt. 
.xvi.  21-23). 

Turning  now  to  the  whole  body  of  those  who 
followed  Him  (Mark,  Luke),  lie'  published  the 
Christian  doctrine  of  self-denial.  The  Apostles  had 
just  shown  that  they  took  the  natural  view  of 
suffering,  that  it  was  an  evil  to  lie  shunned.  They 
shrank  from  conflict,  and  pain,  ami  deatli,  as  it  is 
natural  men  should,  lint  Jesus  teaches  that,  in  com- 
parison with  the  higher  life, the  life  of  the  soul,  the 
life  of  the  body  is  valueless.  And  as  the  renewed 
life  of  the  Christian  implies  his  dying  to  his  old 
wishes  and  desires,  suffering,  which  causes  thi  'Clio 
of  earthly  hopes  and  wishes,  may  ho  a  good.  "  If 
any  man  will  come  after  .Me.  let  him  denj  himself, 
and  take  up  his  cross  and  follow  me.  For  whoso- 
ever will  save  his  lit'e  shall  lose  it,  and  whosoever 
will  lose  his  hfe  for  My  sake  shall  find  it.  For 
what  is  a  man  profited,  if  he  should  gain  the  whole 
World,  and  lose  his  own  soul?  or  what  shall  a  man 
give  in  exchange  for  his  soul?"  (  Matt.  xvi.  I.  From 
this   part  of  the   history  to  the  end   we  shall  not 


JESUS  CHRIST 


1059 


lose  sight  of  the  sufferings  of  the  Lord.  The  Cross 
is  darkly  seen  at  the  end  of  our  path  ;  and  we  shall 
ever  draw  nearer  that  mysterious  implement  of 
human  salvation  (Matt.  xvi.  21-28;  Mark  viii. 
;Sl-:58;   Lukeix.  22-27). 

The  Transfiguration,  which  took  place  just  a  week- 
after  this  conversation,  is  to  be  understood  in  con- 
nexion with  it.  The  minds  of  the  twelve  were 
greatly  disturbed  at  what  they  had  heard.  The 
Messiah  was  to  perish  by  the  wrath  of  men.  The 
Master  whom  they  served  was  to  be  taken  away  from 
them.  Now,  if  ever,  they  needed  support  for  their 
perplexed  spirits,  and  this  their  loving  Master  failed 
not  to  give  them.  He  takes  with  Him  three  chosen 
disciples,  Peter,  John,  and  James,  who  formed  as 
it  were  a  smaller  circle  nearer  to  Jesus  than  that  of 
the  rest,  into  a  high  mountain  apart  by  themselves. 
There  are  no  means  of  determining  the  position  of 
the  mountain  ;  although  Caesarea  Philippi  was  the 
scene  of  the  former  conversations,  it  does  not  follow 
that  this  occurred  on  the  eastern  side  of  the  lake, 
for  the  intervening  week  would  have  given  time 
enough  for  a  long  journey  thence.  There  is  no 
authority  for  the  tradition  which  identifies  this 
mountain  with  Mount  Tabor,  although  it  may  be 
true.  The  three  disciples  were  taken  up  with 
Him,  who  should  afterwards  be  the  three  witnesses 
of  His  agony  in  the  garden  of  Gethsemane:  those 
who  saw  His  glory  in  the  holy  mount  would  be 
sustained  by  the  remembrance  of  it  when  they  be- 
held His  lowest  humiliation.  The  calmness  and 
exactness  of  the  narrative  preclude  all  doubt  as  to 
its  historical  character.  It  is  no  myth,  nor  vision ; 
but  a  sober  account  of  a  miracle.  When  Jesus  had 
come  up  into  the  mountain  He  was  praying,  and  as 
He  prayed,  a  great  change  came  over  Him.  "His 
face  did  shine  as  the  sun  (Matt.)  ;  and  His  raiment 
became  shining,  exceeding  white  as  snow  ;  so  as  no 
fuller  on  earth  can  white  them  "  (Mark).  Beside 
Him  appeared  Moses  the  great  lawgiver,  and  Elijah, 
great  amongst  the  prophets  ;  and  they  spake  of  His 
departure,  as  though  it  was  something  recognised 
both  by  Law  and  prophets.  The  three  disciples 
were  at  first  asleep  with  weariness ;  and  when  they 
woke  they  saw  the  glorious  scene.  As  Moses  and 
Elijah  were  departing  (Luke),  Peter,  wishing  to 
arrest  them,  uttered  those  stiange  words,  "  Loid,  it 
is  good  for  us  to  be  heie,  and  let  us  make  three 
tabernacles,  one  for  Thee,  and  one  for  Moses,  and 
one  for  Elijah."  They  were  the  words  of  one 
astonished  and  somewhat  afraid,  yet  of  one  who 
felt  a  strange  peace  in  this  explicit  testimony  from 
the  Father  that  Jesus  was  His.  It  was  good  for 
them  to  be  there,  he  felt,  where  no  Pharisees  could 
set  traps  for  them,  where  neither  Pilate  nor  Herod 
could  take  Jesus  by  force.  Just,  as  lie  spoke  a 
cloud  came  over  them,  and  the  voice  of'  the  Heavenly 
Father  attested  once  more  His  Son — '•  This  is  my 
beloved  Son  ;  hear  Him."  There  has  been  much 
discussion  on  the  purport  of  this  great  wonder. 
But  thus  much  seems  highly  probable.  First,  as 
it  was  connected  with  the  prayer  of  Jesus,  to 
which  it  was  no  doubt  an  answer,  it  is  to  be 
regarded  as  a  kind  of  inauguration  of  Him  in  His 
new  office  as  the  High-priest  who  should  make 
atonement  lor  the  sins  of  the  people  with  His  own 
blood.      The  mystery  of  His  trials  and   temptations 

he,   t leep   tor   speculation:    but    He   received 

strength  against  human  intiimity — against  the 
prospect  of  sufferings  so  terrible — in  this  His  glori- 
fication. Secondly,  as  the  witnesses  of  this  scene 
Wert  the  same   three   disciples   who   were   with   the 


10G0 


JESUS  CHRIST 


Master  in  the  garden  of  Gethsemane,  it  may  be 
assumed  that  the  one  was  intended  to  prepare  them 
for  the  other,  and  that  they  were  to  be  borne  up 
under  the  spectacle  of  His  humiliation  by  the  re- 
membrance that  they  had  been  eye-witnesses  of  His 
majesty  (2  Pet.  i.  16-18). 

As  they  came  down  from  the  mountain  He 
charged  them  to  keep  secret  what  they  had  seen 
till  after  the  Resurrection;  which  shows  that  this 
miracle  took  place  for  His  use  and  for  theirs,  rather 
than  for  the  rest  of  the  disciples.  This  led  to 
questions  about  the  meaning  of  His  rising  again 
from  the  dead,  and  in  the  course  of  it,  and  arising 
out  of  it,  occurred  the  question,  "  Why  then  {oZv, 
which  refers  to  some  preceding  conversation)  say 
the  scribes  that  Elias  must  first  come?"  They 
had  been  assured  by  what  they  had  just  seen  that 
the  time  of  the  kingdom  of  God  was  now  come ; 
and  the  objection  brought  by  the  Scribes,  that  be- 
fore the  Messiah  Elijah  must  re-appear,  seemed  hard 
.to  reconcile  with  their  new  conviction.  Our  Lord 
answers  them  that  the  Scribes  have  rightly  under- 
stood the  prophecies  that  Elijah  would  first  come 
(Mai.  iv.  5,  6),  but  have  wanted  the  discernment 
•to  see  that  this  prophecy  was  already  fulfilled. 
"  Elias  is  come  already,  and  they  knew  him  not, 
but  have  done  unto  him  whatever  they  listed." 
In  John  the  Baptist,  who  came  in  the  spirit  and 
power  of  Elijah,  were  the  Scriptures  fulfilled  (Matt. 
xvii.  1-13;  Mark  ix.  2-13;   Luke  ix.  28-36). 

Meantime  amongst  the  multitude  below  a  scene 
was  taking  place  which  formed  the  strongest  con- 
trast to  the  glory  and  the  peace  which  they  had 
witnessed,  and  which  seemed  to  justify  Peter's 
remark,  "  It  is  good  for  us  to  be  here."  A  poor 
youth,  lunatic  and  possessed  by  a  devil — for  here 
as  elsewhere  the  possession  is  superadded  to  some 
known  form  of  that  bodily  and  mental  evil  which 
came  in  at  first  with  sin  and  Satan — was  brought 
to  the  disciples  who  were  not  with  Jesus,  to  be 
cured.  They  could  not  prevail ;  and  when  Jesus 
appeared  amongst  them  the  agonized  and  disap- 
pointed father  appealed  to  Him,  with  a  kind  ot 
complaint  of  the  impotence  of  the  disciples.  "  0 
faithless  and  perverse  generation  !  "  said  our  Lord  ; 
"  how  long  shall  I  be  with  you  ?  how  long  shall  I 
sutler  you?"  The  rebuke  is  not  to  the  disciples, 
but  to  all,  the  father  included;  for  the  weakness 
of  faith  that  hindered  the  miracle  was  in  them  all. 
St.  Mark's  account,  the  most  complete,  describes 
the  paroxysm  that  took  place  in  the  lad  on  our 
Lord's  ordering  him  to  be  brought;  and  also  records 
the  remarkable  saying,  which  well  described  the 
father's  state,  "  Lord,  I  believe,  help  thou  my  un- 
belief!" What  the  disciples  had  failed  to  do,  Jesus 
did  at  a  word.  He  then  explained  to  them  that 
their  want  of  faith  in  their  own  power  to  heal,  and 
in  His  promises  to  bestow  the  power  upon  them, 
was  the  cause  of  their  inability  (Matt.  xvii.  14-2 1 ; 
Mark  ix.  14-29  ;  Luke  ix.  37-43). 

Once  more  did  Jesus  foretell  His  sufferings  on 
their  way  back  to  Capernaum ;  but  "  they  under- 
stood not  that  saving,  and  were  afraid  to  ask  Him  " 
(Mark  ix.  30-32). 

But  a  vague  impression  seems  to  have  been  pro- 
duced on  them  that  His  kingdom  was  now  very 
near.  It  broke  forth  in  the  shape  of  a  dispute 
amongst  them  as-to  which  should  rank  the  highest 
in  the  kingdom  when  it  should  come.  Taking  a 
little  child,  He  told  them  that,  in  His  kingdom,  not 
ambition,  but  a  childlike  humility,  would  entitle  to 
the  highest  place  (Matt,  xviii.  1-5 ;   Mark  ix.  33- 


JESUS  CHRIST 

37  ;  Luke  ix.  46-48).  The  humility  of  the  Christian 
is  so  closely  connected  with  consideration  for  the 
souls  of  others,  that  the  transition  to  a  warning 
against  causing  offence  (Matt.,  Mark),  which  might 
appear  abrupt  at  first,  is  most  natural.  From  this 
Jesus  passes  naturally  to  the  subject  of  a  tender 
consideration  for  "  the  lost  sheep  ;"  thence  to  the 
duty  of  forgiveness  of  a  brother.  Both  /)f  these 
last  points  are  illustrated  by  parables.  These,  and 
some  other  discourses  belonging  to  the  same  time, 
are  to  be  regarded  as  designed  to  carry  on  the  edu- 
cation of  the  Apostles,  whose  views  were  still  crude 
and  unformed,  even  after  all  that  had  been  done  for 
them  (Matt,  xviii.). 

From  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  Third  Year. — 
The  Feast  of  Tabernacles  was  now  approaching.  For 
eighteen  months  the  ministry  of  Jesus  had  been 
confined  to  Galilee  ;  and  his  brothers,  not  hostile  to 
Him,  yet  only  half-convinced  about  His  doctrine, 
urged  Him  to  go  into  Judaea  that  His  claims  might 
be  known  and  confessed  on  a  more  conspicuous  field. 
This  kind  of  request,  founded  in  human  motives, 
was  one  which  our  Lord  would  not  assent  to ; 
witness  His  answer  to  Mary  at  Cana  in  Galilee 
when  the  first  miracle  was  wrought.  He  told  them 
that,  whilst  all  times  were  alike  to  them,  whilst 
they  could  always  walk  among  the  Jews  without 
danger,  His  appointed  time  was  not  come.  They 
set  out  for  the  feast  without  Him,  and  He  abode 
in  Galilee  for  a  few  days  longer  (John  vii.  2-10). 
Afterwards  He  set  out,  taking  the  more  direct  but 
less  frequented  route  by  Samaria,  that  His  journey 
might  be  "  in  secret."  It  was  in  this  journey  that 
James  and  John  conceived  the  wish — so  closely 
parallel  to  facts  in  the  Old  Covenant,  so  completely 
at  variance  with  the  spirit  of  the  New,  that  fire 
should  be  commande'cl  to  come  down  from  heaven 
to  consume  the  inhospitable  Samaritans  (Luke  ix. 
51-62). 

St.  Luke  alone  records,  in  connexion  with  this 
journey,  the  sending  forth  of  the  seventy  disciples. 
This  event  is  to  be  regarded  in  a  different  light 
from  that  of  the  twelve.  The  seventy  had  received 
no  special  education  from  our  Lord,  and  their  com- 
mission was  of  a  temporary  kind.  The  number 
has  reference  to  the  Gentiles,  as  twelve  had  to  the 
Jews;  and  the  scene  of  the  work,  Samaria,  reminds 
us  that  this  is  a  movement  directed  towards  the 
stranger.  It  takes  place  six  months  after  the  send- 
ing forth  of  the  twelve ;  for  the  Gospel  was  to  be 
delivered  to  the  Jew  first  and  afterwards  to  the 
Gentile.  In  both  cases  probably  the  preaching  was 
of  the  simplest  kind — "  The  kingdom  of  God  is 
come  nigh  unto  you."  The  instructions  given  were 
the  same  in  spirit;  but,  on  comparing  them,  we 
see  that  now  the  danger  was  becoming  greater  and 
the  time  for  labour  shorter  (Luke  x.  1-16). 

After  healing  the  ten  lepers  in  Samaria,  He  came 
"  about  the  midst  of  the  feast "  to  Jerusalem.  Here 
the  minds  of  the  people  were  strongly  excited  and 
drawn  in  different  ways  concerning  Him.  The 
Pharisees  and  rulers  sought  to  take  Him  ;  some  of 
the  people,  however,  believed  in  Him,  but  concealed 
their  opinion  for  fear  of  the  rulers.  To  this  division 
of  opinion  we  may  attribute  the  failure  of  the 
repeated  attempts  on  the  part  of  the  Sanhedrim  to 
take  One  who  was  openly  teaching  in  the  Temple 
(John  vii.  11-53;  see  esp.  ver.  30,  32,  44,  45,  46). 
The  officers  were  partly  afraid  to  seize  in  the  pre- 
sence of  the  people  the  favourite  Teacher  ;  and  they 
themselves  were  awed  and  attracted  by  Him.  They 
came  to  seize  Iliin,  but  could  not  lift  their  hands 


JESUS  CHRIST 

against  Him.  Notwithstanding  the  ferment  of  opi- 
nion, and  the  fixed  hatred  of  those  in  power,  He 
seems  to  have  taught  daily  to  the  end  of  the  feast 
in  the  Temple  before  the  people. 

The  history  of  the  woman  taken  in  adultery 
belongs  to  this  time.  But  it  must  be  premised  that 
several  MSS.  of  highest  authority  omit  this  passage, 
and  that  in  those  which  insert  it  the  text  is  singu- 
larly disturbed  (see  Liicke,  in  loc,  and  Tischendorf, 
Gr.  Test.,  ed.  vii.).  The  remark  of  Augustine  is 
perhaps  not  far  from  the  truth,  that  this  story 
formed  a  genuine  portion  of  the  apostolic  teaching, 
but  that  mistaken  people  excluded  it  from  their 
copies  of  the  written  Gospel,  thinking  it  might  be 
perverted  into  a  license  to  women  to  sin  {Ad 
Pollent.  ii.  ch.  7).  That  it  was  thus  kept  apart, 
without  the  safeguards  which  Christian  vigilance 
exercised  over  the  rest  of  the  text,  and  was  only 
admitted  later,  would  at  once  account  for  its  ab- 
sence from  the  MSS.  and  for  the  various  forms 
assumed  by  the  text  where  it  is  given.  But  the 
history  gives  no  ground  for  such  apprehensions. 
The  law  of  Moses  gave  the  power  to  stone  women 
taken  in  adultery.  But  Jewish  morals  were  sunk 
very  low,  like  Jewish  faith  ;  and  the  punishment 
could  not  be  inflicted  on  a  sinner  by  those  who 
had  sinned  in  the  same  kind :  "  Etenim  non  est 
ferendus  accusator  is  qui  quod  in  altero  vitium 
reprehendit,  in  eo  ipso  deprehenditur "  (Cicero, 
c.  Verrepi,  hi.).  Thus  the  punishment  had  passed 
out  of  use.  But  they  thought,  by  proposing  this 
case  to  our  Lord,  to  induce  Him  either  to  set  the 
Law  formally  aside,  in  which  case  they  might 
accuse  Him  of  profaneness ;  or  to  sentence  the 
guilty  wretch  to  die,  and  so  become  obnoxious  to 
the  charge  of  cruelty.  From  such  temptations 
Jesus  was  always  able  to  escape.  He  threw  back 
the  decision  upon  them  ;  He  told  them  that  the 
man  who  was  free  from  that  sin  might  cast  the 
first  stone  at  her.  Conscience  told  them  that  this 
was  unanswerable,  and  one  by  one  they  stole  away, 
leaving  the  guilty  woman  alone  before  One  who 
was  indeed  her  Judge.  It  has  been  supposed  that 
the  words  '"Neither  do  I  condemn  thee"  convey 
an  absolute  pardon  for  the  sin  of  which  she  had 
just  been  guilty.  But  they  refer,  as  has  long  since 
been  pointed  out,  to  the  doom  of  stoning  only. 
"  As  they  have  not  punished  thee,  neither  do  I ; 
go,  and  let  this  danger  warn  thee  to  sin  no  more  " 
(John  viii.  1-11). 

The  conversations  (John  viii.  12-59)  show  in  a 
strong  light  the  perversity  of  the  Jews  in  misun- 
derstanding our  Lord's  words.  They  refuse  to  see 
any  spiritual  meaning  in  them,  and  drag  them  as  it 
were  by  force  down  to  a  low  and  carnal  interpreta- 
tion. Our  Lord's  remark  explains  the  cause  of 
this,  "  Why  do  ye  not  understand  my  speech  [way 
of  speaking]  ?  Even  because  ye  cannot  hear  my 
word"  (ver.  43).  His  mode  of  expression  was 
strange  to  them,  because  they  were  neither  able  nor 
willing  to  understand  the  real  purport  of  His  teach- 
ing. To  this  place  belongs  the  account,  given  by 
John  alone,  of  the  he-aling  of  one  who  was  born  blind, 
and  the  consequences  of  it  (John  ix.  1-41,  x.  1-21). 
The  poor  patient  was  excommunicated  for  refusing  to 
undervalue  the  agency  of  Jesus  in  restoring  him. 
He  believed  on  Jesus ;  whilst  the  Pharisees  were 
only  made  the  worse  for  what  they  had  witnessed. 
Well  might  Jesus  exclaim,  "  For  judgment  I  am 
come  into  this  world,  that  they  which  see  not 
might  see  ;  and  that  they  which  see  might  lie  made 
blind"  (ix.  39).     The  well-known  parable  of  the 


JESUS  CUEIST 


10(31 


good  shepherd  is  an  answer  to  the  calumny  of  the 
Pharisees,  that  He  was  an  impostor  and  breaker  of  the 
law,  "  This  man  is  not  of  God,  because  he  keepeth 
not  the  Sabbath  day"  (ix.  16). 

We  now  approach  a  difficult  portion  of  the  sacred 
history.  The  note  of  time  given  us  by  John  im- 
mediately afterwards  is  the  Feast  of  the  Dedica- 
tion, which  was  celebrated  on  the  25th  of  Kisleu, 
answering  nearly  to  December.  According  to  this 
Evangelist  our  Lord  does  not  appear  to  have  re- 
turned to  Galilee  between  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles 
and  that  of  Dedication,  but  to  have  passed  the  time 
in  and  near  Jerusalem.  Matthew  and  Mark  do  not 
allude  to  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles.  Luke  appears 
to  do  so  in  ix.  51  ;  but  the  words  there  used 
would  imply  that  this  was  the  last  journey  to  Je- 
rusalem. Now  in  St.  Luke's  Gospel  a  large  section, 
from  ix.  51  to  xviii.  14,  seems  to  belong  to  the 
time  preceding  the  departure  from  Galilee ;  and  the 
question  is  how  is  this  to  be  arranged,  so  that  it 
shall  harmonize  with  the  narrative  of  St.  John  ? 
In  most  Harmonies  a  return  of  our  Lord  to  Ga- 
lilee has  been  assumed,  in  order  to  find  a  place  for 
this  part  of  Luke's  Gospel.  "  But  the  manner," 
says  the  English  editor  of  Robinson's  Harmony, 
"  in  which  it  has  been  arranged,  after  all  is  ex- 
ceedingly various.  Somer  as  Le  Clerc,  Harm. 
Evany,  p.  264,  insert  nearly  the  whole  during  this 
supposed  journey.  Others,  as  Lightfoot,  assign  to 
this  journey  only  what  precedes  Luke  xiii.  23  ;  and 
refer  the  remainder  to  our  Lord's  sojourn  beyond 
Jordan,  John  x.  40  (Chron.  Temp.  N.  T.  Opp.  II. 
p.  37,  39).  Greswell  {Dissert,  xvi.  vol.  ii.)  main- 
tains that  the  transactions  in  Luke  ix.  51 — xviii. 
14,  all  belong  to  the  journey  from  Ephraim 
(through  Samaria,  Galilee,  and  Peraea)  to  Jeru- 
salem, which  he  dates  in  the  interval  of  four 
months,  between  the  Feast  of  Dedication  and  our 
Lord's  last  passover.  Wieseler  (  Chron.  Synops.  p. 
328)  makes  a  somewhat  different  arrangement,  ac- 
cording to  which,  Luke  ix.  51 — xiii.  21,  relates  to 
the  period  from  Christ's  journey  from  Galilee  to 
the  Feast  of  the  Tabernacles,  till  after  the  Feast  of 
Dedication  (parallel  to  John  vii.  10 — x.  42).  Luke 
xiii.  22 — xvii.  10,  relates  to  the  interval  between 
that  time  and  our  Lord's  stay  at  Ephiaim  (pa- 
rallel to  John  xi.  1-54)  ;  and  Luke  xvii.  11 — xviii. 
14,  relates  to  the  journey  from  Ephraim  to  Jeru- 
salem, through  Samaria,  Galilee,  and  Peraea"  (Ro- 
binson's Harmony,  English  ed.  p.  92).  If  the 
table  of  the  Harmony  of  the  Gospels  given  above  is 
referred  to  [Gospels],  it  will  be  found  that  this 
great  division  of  St.  Luke  (x.  17 — xviii.  14)  is 
inserted  entire  between  John  x.  21  and  22  ;  not 
that  this  appeared  certainly  correct,  but  that  there 
are  no  points  of  contact  with  the  other  Gospels  to 
assist  us  in  breaking  it  up.  That  this  division 
contains  partly  or  chiefly  reminiscences  of  occur- 
rences in  Galilee  prior  to  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles, 
is  untenable.  A  journey  of  some  kind  is  implied 
in  the  course  of  it  (see  xiii.  22),  and  beyond  this 
we  shall  hardly  venture  to  go.  It  is  quite  pos- 
sible, as  Wieseler  supposes,  that  part  of  it  should 
be  placed  before,  and  part  after  the  Feast  of  Dedi- 
cation. Notwithstanding  the  uncertainty,  it  is  as 
the  history  of  this  period  of  the  Redeemer's  career 
that  the  Gospel  of  St.  Luke  possesses  its  chief 
distinctive  value  for  us.  Some  of  the  most  striking 
parables,  preserved  only  by  this  Evangelist,  belong 
to  this  period.  The  parables  of  the  good  Samaritan, 
the  prodigal  son,  the  unjust  steward,  the  rich  man 
and    Lazarus,   and   the    Pharisee  and   publican,  all 


1062 


JESUS  CHRIST 


peculiar  to  this  Gospel;  belong  to  the  present  section. 
The  instructive  account  of  Maiy  and  Martha,  on 
which  so  many  have  taken  a  wrong  view  of  Mar- 
tha's conduct,  reminds  us  that  there  are  two  ways  oi 
serving  the  truth,  that  of  active  exertion,  and  that  ot 
contemplation.  The  preference  is  given  to  Mary's 
meditation,  because  Martha's  labour  belonged  to 
household  cares,  and  was  only  indirectly  religious. 
The  miracle  of  the  ten  lepers  belongs  to  this  portion 
of  the  narrative.  Besides  these,  scattered  sayings 
that  occur  in  St.  Matthew  are  here  repeated  in  a 
new  connexion.  Here  too  belongs  the  return  of  the 
seventy  disciples,  but  we  know  not  precisely  where 
they  rejoined  the  Lord  (Luke  x.  17-20).  They  were 
full  of  triumph,  because  they  found  even  the  devils 
subject  to  them  through  the  weight  of  Christ's 
word.  In  anticipation  of  the  victory  which  was  now 
begun,  against  the  powers  of  darkness,  Jesus  replies, 
"  I  beheld  Satan  as  lightning  fall  from  heaven.'' 
He  sought  however  to  humble  their  triumphant 
spirit,  so  near  akin  to  spiritual  pride ;  "  Notwith- 
standing, in  this  rejoice  not,  that  the  spirits  are 
subject  unto  you  ;  but  rather  rejoice,  because  your 
names  are  written  in  heaven." 

The  account  of  the  bringing  of  young  children 
to  Jesus  unites  again  the  three  Evangelists.  Here, 
as  often,  St.  Mark  gives  the  most  minute  account 
of  what  occurred.  After  the  announcement  that 
the  disposition  of  little  children  was  the  most  meet 
for  the  kingdom  of  God,  "  He  took  them  up  in  His 
arms,  put  His  hands  upon  them  and  blessed  them." 
The  childlike  spirit,  which  in  nothing  depends  upon 
its  own  knowledge  hut  seeks  to  be  taught,  is  in 
contrast  with  the  haughty  pharisaism  with  its 
boast  of  learning  and  wisdom  ;  and  Jesus  tells  them 
that  the  former  is  the  passport  to  His  kingdom 
(Matt.  xix.  13-15  ;  Mark  x.  13-16  ;  Luke  xviii. 
15-17). 

■  The  question  of  the  ruler,  "  What  shall  I  do  to 
inherit  eternal  life?"  was  one  conceived  wholly  in 
the  spirit  of  Judaism.  The  man  asked  not  how  he 
should  be  delivered  from  sin,  but  how  his  will, 
already  free  to  righteousness,  might  select  the  best 
and  most  meritorious  line  of  conduct.  The  words, 
"  Why  callest  thou  me  good  ?  there  is  none  good 
but  one,  that  is  God,"  were  meant  first  to  draw 
him  down  to  a  humbler  view  of  his  own  state  ;  the 
title  good  is  easy  to  give,  but  hard  to  justify,  except 
when  applied  to  the  One  who  is  all  good.  Jesus 
by  no  means  repudiates  the  title  as  applied  to 
Himself,  but  only  as  applied  on  any  other  ground 
than  that  of  a  reference  to  His  true  divine  nature. 
Then  the  Lord  opened  out  to  him  all  the  moral 
law,  which  in  its  full  and  complete  sense  no  man 
has  observed  ;  but  the  ruler  answered,  perhaps  sin- 
cerely, that  he  had  observed  it  all  from  his  youth 
up.  Duties  however  there  might  be  which  had 
not  come  within  the  range  of  his  thoughts  ;  and  as 
the  demand  had  reference  to  his  own  special  case, 
our  Lord  gives  the  special  advice  to  sell  all  his 
possessions  and  to  give  to  the  poor.  Then  for  the 
first  time  did  the  man  discover  that  his  devotion  to 
God  and  his  yearning  after  the  eternal  life  were  not 
so  pei  feet  as  he  had  thought ;  and  he  went  away 
sorrowful,  unable  to  bear  this  sacrifice.  And  Jesus 
told  the  disciples  how  hard  it  was  for  those  who 
had  riches  to  enter  the  kingdom.  Peter,  ever  the 
most  ready,  now  contrasts,  with  somewhat  too 
much  emphasis,  the  mode  in  which  the  disciples 
had  left  all  for  Him,  with  the  conduct  of  this  rich 
ruler.  Our  Lord,  sparing  him  the  rebuke  which 
he  might  have  expected,  tells  them  that  those  who 


JESUS  CHRIST 

have  made  any  sacrifice  shall  have  it  richly  repaid 
even  in  this  life  in  the  shape  of  a  consolation  and 
comfort,  which  even  persecutions  cannot  take  away 
(Mark)  ;  and  shall  have  eternal  life  (Matt.  xix. 
16-30;  Mark  x.  17-31;  Luke  xviii.  18-30).  Words 
of  warning  close  the  narrative,  "  Many  that  are 
first  shall  be  last,  and  the  last  shall  be  first,"  lest 
the  disciples  should  be  thinking  too  much  of  the 
sacrifices,  not  so  very  great,  that  they  had  made. 
And  in  St.  Matthew  only,  the  well-known  parable 
of  the  labourers  in  the  vineyard  is  added  to  illus- 
trate the  same  lesson.  Whatever  else  the  parable 
may  contain  of  reference  to  the  calling  of  Jews 
and  Gentiles,  the  first  lesson  Christ  was  to  give  was 
one  of  caution  to  the  Apostles  against  thinking  too 
much  of  their  early  calling  and  arduous  Labours. 
They  would  see  many,  who,  in  comparison  with 
themselves,  were  as  the  labourers  called  at  the 
eleventh  hour,  who  should  be  accepted  of  God  as 
well  as  they.  But  not  merit,  not  self-sacrifice,  but 
the  pure  love  of  God  and  His  mere  bounty,  con- 
ferred salvation  on  either  of  them  ;  "  Is  it  not 
lawful  for  me  to  do  what  I  will  with  my  own?" 
(Matt.  xx.  1-16.) 

On  the  way  to  Jerusalem  through  Peraea,  to  the 
Feast  of  Dedication,  Jesus  again  puts  before  the 
minds  of  the  twelve  what  they  are  never  now  to 
forget,  the  sufferings  that  await  Him.  They  "  un- 
derstood none  of  these  things"  (Luke),  for  they 
could  not  reconcile  this  foreboding  of  suffering  with 
the  signs  and  announcements  of  the  coming  of  His 
kingdom  (Matt.  xx.  17-19  ;  Mark  x.  32-34  ;  Luke 
xviii.  31-34).  In  consequence  of  this  new,  though 
dark,  intimation  of  the  coming  of  the  kingdom, 
Salome,  with  her  two  sons,  James  and  John,  came 
to  bespeak  the  two  places  of  highest  honour  in  the 
kingdom.  Jesus  tells  them  that  they  know  not 
what  they  ask ;  that  the  places  of  honour  in  the 
kingdom  shall  be  bestowed,  not  by  Jesus  in  answer 
to  a  chance  request,  but  upon  those  for  whom  they 
are  prepared  by  the  Father.  As  sin  ever  pro- 
vokes sin,  the  ambition  of  the  ten  was  now 
aroused,  and  they  began  to  be  much  displeased 
with  James  and  John.  Jesus  once  more  recalls  the 
principle  that  the  childlike  disposition  is  that  which 
He  approves.  "  Ye  know  that  the  princes  of  the 
Gentiles  exercise  dominion  over  them,  and  they 
that  are  great  exercise  authority,  upon  them.  But 
it  shall  not  be  so  among  you :  but  whosoever  will 
be  great  among  you,  let  him  be  your  minister ; 
and  whosoever  will  be  chief  among  you,  let  him  be 
your  servant :  Even  as  the  Son  of  Man  came  not  to 
be  ministered  unto  but  to  minister,  and  to  give  His 
life  a  ransom  for  many  "  (Matt.  xx.  20-28  ;  Mark 
x.  35-45). 

The  healing  of  the  two  blind  men  at  Jericho  is 
chiefly  remarkable  among  the  miracles  from  the 
difficulty  which  has  arisen  in  harmonizing  the 
accounts.  Matthew  speaks  of  two  blind  men,  and  of 
the  occasion  as  the  departure  from  Jericho  ;  Mark  of 
one,  whom  he  names,  and  of  their  arrival  at  Jericho  ; 
and  Luke  agrees  with  him.  This  point  has  received 
much  discussion ;  but  the  view  of  Lightfoot  finds 
favour  with  many  eminent  expositors,  that  there 
were  two  blind  men,  and  both  were  healed  under 
similar  circumstances,  except  that  Bartimaeus  was 
on  one  side  of  the  city,  and  was  healed  by  Jesus  as 
He  entered,  and  the  other  was  healed  on  the  other 
sid<'  as  they  departed  (see  Gresswell,  Diss.  xx.  ii.  ; 
Wieseler,  Chron.  Syn.  p.  332  ;  Matt.  xx.  29-34  ; 
Mark  x.  46-52  ;  Luke  xviii.  35-4:;). 

The  callinsr  of  Zacchaeus  has  more  than  a  mere 


JESUS  CHRIST 

personal  interest.  He  was  a  publican,  one  of  a  class 
hated  and  despised  by  the  Jews.  But  be  was  one 
who  sought  to  serve  God  ;  he  gave  largely  to  the 
poor,  and  restored  fourfold  when  he  had  injured  any 
man.  Justice  and  love  were  the  law  of  his  life.  From 
such  did  Jesus  wish  to  call  His  disciples,  whether 
they  were  publicans  or  not.  "  This  day  is  salva- 
tion come  to  this  house,  for  that  he  also  is  a  son  of 
Abraham.  For  the  Son  of  Man  is  come  to  seek  and 
to  save  that  which  was  lost"  (Luke  xix.  1-10). 

We  have  reached  now  the  Feast  of  Dedication; 
but,  as  has  been  said,  the  exact  place  of  the  events 
in  St.  Luke  about  this  part  of  the  ministry  has  not 
been  conclusively  determined.  After  being  present 
at  the  feast,  Jesus  returned  to  Bethabara  beyond 
Jordan,  where  John  had  formerly  baptised,  and 
abode  there.  The  place  which  the  beginning  of 
His  ministry  had  consecrated,  was  now  to  be 
adorned  with  His  presence  as  it  drew  towards  its 
close,  and  the  scene  of  John's  activity  was  now  to 
witness  the  presence  of  the  Saviour  whom  he  had  so 
faithfully  proclaimed  (John  x.  22-42).  The  Lord 
intended  by  this  choice  to  recall  to  the  minds  of 
many  the  good  which  John  had  done  them,  and 
also,  it  may  be,  to  prevent  an  undue  exaltation  of 
John  in  the  minds  of  some  who  had  heard  him 
pnly.  "  Many,"  we  read,  "resorted  to  Him,  and 
said  John  did  no  miracle :  but  all  things  that  John 
s] iake  of  this  man  were  true.  And  many  believed 
on  Him  there"  (vers.  41,  42). 

How  long  He  remained  here  does  not  appear. 
It  was  probably  for  some  weeks.  The  sore  need  of 
a  family  in  Bethany,  who  were  what  men  call  the 
intimate  friends  of  our  Lord,  called  Him  thence. 
Lazarus  was  sick,  and  his  sisters  sent  word  of  it  to 
Jesus,  whose  power  they  well  knew.  Jesus  an- 
swered that  the  sickness  was  not  unto  death,  but 
for  the  glory  of  God,  and  of  the  Son  of  God.  This 
had  reference  to  the  miracle  about  to  be  wrought ; 
even  though  he  died,  not  his  death  but  his  restora- 
tion to  life  was  the  purpose  of  the  sickness.  But 
it  was  a  trial  to  the  faith  of  the  sisters  to  find  the 
words  of  their  friend  apparently  falsified.  Jesus 
abode  foi  two  days  where  He  was,  and  then  pro- 
posed to  the  disciples  to  return.  The  rage  of  the 
J.ws  against  him  filled  the  disciples  with  alaim  ; 
and  Thomas,  whose  mind  leant  always  to  the 
desponding  side,  and  saw  nothing  in  the  expedition 
but  certain  death  to  all  of  them,  said,  "  Let  us  also 
go  that  we  may  die  with  Him."  It  was  not  till 
Lazarus  had  been  four  days  in  the  grave  that  the 
Saviour  appeared  on  the  scene.  The  practical 
energy  of  .Martha,  and  the  retiring  character  of 
Mary,  show  themselves  here,  as  once  before.  It  was 
Martha  who  met  Him,  and  addressed  to  Him  words 
of  sorrowful  reproach.  Jesus  probed  her  faith 
deeply,  and  found  that  even  in  this  extremity  of 
sorrow  it  would  not  fail  her.  Mary  now  joined 
them,  summoned  by  her  sister ;  and  she  too  re- 
proached  the  Lord  for  the  delay.  Jesus  does  not 
resisi  the  contagion  of  their  sorrow,  and  as  a  Man 
lb'  weeps  true  human  tears  by  the  side  of  the 
grave  of  a  friend.  But  with  the  power  of  God  he 
breaks  the  fetters  of  brass  in  which  Lazarus  was 
held  by  death,  and  at  His  word  the  man  on  whom 
corruption  had  already  begun  to  do  its  work,  came 
forth  alive  and  whole  (John  xi.  l-4.">).  It  might 
seem  difficult  to  account  for  the  omission  of  this, 
perhaps  the  most  signal  of  the  miracles  of  Jesus, 
by  the  three  synoptical  evangelists.  No  doubt  it 
was  intentional,  and  the  wish  not  to  direct  atten- 
tion,  and    pei  haps  persecution,   to   Lazarus   in   his 


JESUS  CHRIST 


10G3 


lifetime  may  go  far  to  account  for  it.  But  it 
stands  well  in  the  pages  of  John,  whose  privilege  it 
has  been  to  announce  the  highest  truths  connected 
with  the  divine  nature  of  Jesus,  and  who  is  now 
also  permitted  to  show  him  touched  with  sym- 
pathy for  a  sorrowing  family  with  whom  He  lived 
in  intimacy. 

A  miracle  so  public,  for  Bethany  was  close  to 
Jerusalem,  and  the  family  of  Lazarus  well  known 
to  many  people  in  the  mother-city,  could  not 
escape  the  notice  of  the  Sanhedrim.  A  meeting  of 
this  Council  was  called  without  loss  of  time,  and 
the  matter  discussed,  not  without  symptoms  of 
alarm,  for  the  members  believed  that  a  popular 
outbreak,  with  Jesus  at  its  head,  was  impending, 
and  that  it  would  excite  the  jealousy  of  the  Romans 
and  lead  to  the  taking  away  of  their  "  place  and 
nation."  Caiaphas  the  high-priest  gave  it  as  his 
opinion  that  it  was  expedient  for  them  that  one 
man  should  die  for  the  people,  and  that  the  whole 
nation  should  not  perish.  The  Evangelist  adds 
that  these  words  bore  a  prophetic  meaning,  of 
which  the  speaker  was  unconscious:  "This  spake 
he  not  of  himself,  but  being  high-priest  that  year 
he  prophesied  that  Jesus  should  die  for  that  nation." 
That  a  bad  and  worldly  man  may  prophesy,  the 
case  of  Balaam  proves  (Num.xxii.) ;  and  the  Jews, 
as  Schottgen  shows,  believed  that  prophecy  might 
also  be  unconscious.  But  the  connexion  of  the 
gift  of  prophecy  with  the  office  of  the  high-priest 
otters  a  difficulty.  It  has  been  said  that,  though 
this  gift  is  never  in  Scripture  assigned  to  the  high- 
priest  as  such,  yet  the  popular  belief  at  this  time 
was  that  he  did  enjoy  it.  There  is  no  proof,  how- 
ever, except  this  passage,  of  any  such  belief;  and 
the  Evangelist  would  not  appeal  to  it  except  it 
were  true,  and  if  it  were  true,  then  the  O.  T. 
would  contain  some  allusion  to  it.  The  endeavours 
to  escape  from  the  difficulty  by  changes  of  punctua- 
tion are  not  to  be  thought  of.  The  meaning  of  the 
passage  seems  to  be  this : — The  Jews  were  about  to 
commit  a  crime,  the  real  results  of  which  they  did 
not  know,  and  God  overruled  the  words  of  one  of 
them  to  make  him  declare  the  reality  of  the  trans- 
action, but  unconsciously  ;  and  as  Caiaphas  was  the 
high-priest,  the  highest  minister  of  God,  and  there- 
fore the  most  conspicuous  in  the  sin,  it  was  natural 
to  expect  that  he  and  not  another  would  be  the  chan- 
nel of  the  prophecy.  The  connexion  between  his 
office  and  the  prophecy  was  not  a  necessary  one  ;  but 
if  a  prophecy  was  to  be  uttered  by  unwilling  lips, 
it  was  natural  that  the  high-priest,  who  ottered  for 
the  people,  should  be  the  person  compelled  to  utter 
it.  The  death  of  Jesus  was  now  resolved  on,  and 
He  fled  to  Ephraim  for  a  few  days,  because  his  hour 
was  not  yet  come  (John  xi.  45-.r>7). 

We  now  approach  the  final  stage  of  the  history, 
and  every  word  and  act  tend  towards  the  great  act 
of  suffering.  The  hatred  of  the  Pharisees,  now 
converted  into  a  settled  purpose  of  murder,  the 
vile  wickedness  of  Judas,  and  the  utter  fickleness  of 
the  people  are  all  displayed  before  us.  Each  day 
is  marked  by  its  own  events  or  instructions.  Our 
Lord  entered  into  Bethany  on  Friday  the  8th  of 
Nisan,  the  eve  of  the  Sabbath,  and  remained  over 
the  Sabbath. 

Saturday  the  '.•/',  of  Nisan  (April  1st). — As  He 
was  at  supper  in  the  house  of  one  Simon,  surnamed 

"  the  leper,"  a  relation  of  Lazarus,  who  was  at  table 

with  Him,  Mary,  full  of  gratitude  for  the  wonderful 
raising  of  her  brother  from  the  dead,  took  a  vessel 
containing  a  quantity  of  pure  ointment  of  spikenard, 


10G4 


JESUS  CHKIST 


and  anointed  the  feet  of  Jesus,  and  wiped  His  feet 
with  her  hair,  and  anointed  His  head  likewise. 
She  thought  not  of  the  cost  of  the  precious  ointment, 
in  an  emotion  of  love  which  was  willing  to  part 
with  anything  she  possessed  to  do  honour  to  so 
great  a  Guest,  so  mighty  a  Benefactor.  Judas  the 
traitor,  and  some  of  the  disciples  (Matt.,  Mark), 
who  took  their  tone  from  him,  began  to  murmur 
at  the  waste :  "  It  might  have  been  sold  for  more 
than  three  hundred  pence,  and  have  been  given  to 
the  poor."  But  Judas  cared  not  for  the  poor; 
already  he  was  meditating  the  sale  of  his  Master's 
life,  and  all  that  he  thought  of  was  how  he  might 
lay  hands  on  something  more,  beyond  the  price  of 
blood.  Jesus,  however,  who  knew  how  true  was 
the  love  which  had  dictated  this  sacrifice,  silenced 
their  censure.  He  opened  out  a  meaning  in  the 
action  which  they  had  not  sought  there :  "  She  is 
come  aforehand  to  anoint  My  body  to  the  burying." 
Passion  Week.  Sunday  the  tenth  day  of  Nisan 
(April  2nd). — The  question  of  John  the  Baptist 
had  no  doubt  often  been  repeated  in  the  hearts  of 
the  expectant  disciples:  —  "Art  thou  He  that 
should  come,  or  do  we  look  for  another  ? "  All 
His  conversations  with  them  of  late  had  been  filled, 
not  with  visions  of  glory,  but  with  forebodings  of 
approaching  death.  The  world  thinks  them  de- 
ceived, and  its  mockery  begins  to  exercise  some 
influence  even  over  them.  They  need  some  encou- 
raging sign  under  influences  so  depressing,  and 
this  Jesus  affords  them  in  the  triumphal  entry  into 
Jerusalem.  If  the  narrative  is  carefully  examined, 
it  will  be  seen  how  remarkably  the  assertion  of  a 
kingly  right  is  combined  with  the  most  scrupulous 
care  not  to  excite  the  political  jealousy  of  the 
Jewish  powers.  When  He  arrives  at  the  Mount  of 
Olives  He  commands  two  of  His  disciples  to  go  into 
the  village  near  at  hand,  where  they  would  find  an 
ass,  and  a  colt  tied  with  her.  They  were  neither 
to  buy  nor  hire  them,  and  "  if  any  man  shall  say 
aught  unto  you,  ye  shall  say  the  Lord  hath  need  of 
them,  and  straightway  he  will  send  them."  With 
these  beasts,  impressed  as  for  the  service  of  a  King, 
He  was  to  enter  into  Jerusalem.  The  disciples 
spread  upon  the  ass  their  ragged  cloaks  for  Him  to 
sit  on.  And  the  multitudes  cried  aloud  before 
Him,  in  the  words  of  the  118th  Psalm,  "Hosanna, 
Save  now !  blessed  is  He  that  cometh  in  the  name 
of  the  Lord."  This  Messianic  psalm  they  applied 
to  Him,  from  a  belief,  sincere  for  the  moment,  that 
he  was  the  Messiah.  It  was  a  striking  and  to  the 
Pharisees  an  alarming  sight ;  but  it  only  serves  in 
the  end  to  show  the  feeble  hearts  of  the  Jewish 
people.  The  same  lips  that  cried  jHosanna  will 
before  long  be  crying,  Crucify  Him,  crucify  Him  ! 
Meantime,  however,  all  thoughts  were  carried 
back  to  the  promises  of  a  Messiah.  The  very  act 
of  riding  in  upon  an  ass  revived  an  old  prophecy  of 
Zechariah  (ix.  9).  Words  of  prophecy  out  of  a 
psalm  sprang  unconsciously  to  their  lips.  All 
the  city  was  moved.  Blind  and  lame  came  to  the 
Temple  when  He  arrived  there  and  were  healed. 
The  august  conspirators  of  the  Sanhedrim  were  sore 
displeased.  But  all  these  demonstrations  did  not 
deceive  the  divine  insight  of  Christ.  He  wept  over 
the  city  that  was  hailing  Him  as  its  King,  and  said, 
"  If  thou  hadst  known,  even  thou,  at  least  in  this 
thy  day,  the  things  which  belong  unto  thy  peace ! 
but  now  they  are  hid  from  thine  eyes"  (Luke). 
He  goes  on  to  prophesy  the  destruction  of  the  cit)r, 
just  as  it  afterwards  came  to  pass.  After  working 
miracles  in  the  Temple  He  returned  to  Bethany. 


JESUS  CHRIST 

The  10th  of  Nisan  was  the  day  for  the  separation 
of  the  paschal  lamb  (Ex.  xii.  3).  Jesus,  the  Lamb 
of  God,  entered  Jerusalem  and  the  Temple  on  this 
day,  and  although  none  but  He  knew  that  He  was 
the  Paschal  Lamb,  the  coincidence  is  not  unde- 
signed (Matt.  xxi.  1-11,  14-17;  Mark  xi.  1-11; 
Luke  xix.  29-44;   John  xii.  12-19) 

Monday  the  11  th  of  Nisan  (April  3r(F). — The 
next  day  Jesus  returned  to  Jerusalem,  again  to 
take  advantage  of  the  mood  of  the  people  to  in- 
struct them.  On  the  way  He  approached  one  of 
the  many  fig-trees  which  grew  in  that  quarter 
(Bethphage  =  "  house  of  figs"),  and  found  that  it 
was  full  of  foliage,  but  without  fruit.  He  said, 
"  No  man  eat  fruit  of  thee  hereafter  for  ever !" 
and  the  fig-tree  withered  away.  This  was  no 
doubt  a  work  of  destruction,  and  as  such  was  un- 
like the  usual  tenor  of  His  acts.  But  it  is  hard  to 
understand  the  mind  of  those  who  stumble  at  the 
destruction  of  a  tree  which  seems  to  have  ceased  to 
bear  by  the  word  of  God  the  Son,  yet  are  not 
offended  at  the  famine  or  the  pestilence  wrought  by 
God  the  Father.  The  right  of  the  Son  must  rest 
on  the  same  ground  as  that  of  the  Father.  And 
this  was  not  a  wanton  destruction ;  it  was  a  type 
and  a  warning.  The  barren  fig-tree  had  already 
been  made  the  subject  of  a  parable  (Luke  xiii.  6), 
and  here  it  is  made  a  visible  type  of  the  destruction 
of  the  Jewish  people.  He  had  come  to  them  seek- 
ing fruit,  and  now  it  was  time  to  pronounce  their 
doom  as  a  nation — there  should  be  no  fruit  on 
them  for  ever  (Matt.  xxi.  18, 19  ;  Mark  xi.  12-14). 
Proceeding  now  to  the  Temple,  He  cleared  its  court 
of  the  crowd  of  traders  that  gathered  there.  He 
had  performed  the  same  act  at  the  beginning  of 
His  ministry,  and  now  at  the  close  He  repeats  it, 
for  the  house  of  prayer  was  as  much  a  den  of 
thieves  as  ever.  With  zeal  for  God's  house  His 
ministry  began,  with  the  same  it  ended  (see 
p.  1051 ;  Matt  xxi.  12, 13  ;  Mark  xi.  15-19  ;  Luke 
xix.  45-48).  In  the  evening  He  returned  again  to 
Bethany. 

Tuesday  the  12th  of  Nisan  (April  4th). — On 
this  the  third  day  of  Passion  week  Jesus  went  into 
Jerusalem  as  before,  and  visited  the  Temple.  The 
Sanhedrim  came  to  Him  to  call  Him  to  account 
for  the  clearing  of  the  Temple.  "  By  what  au- 
thority doest  thou  these  things  ? "  The  Lord 
answered  their  question  by  another,  which,  when 
put  to  them  in  their  capacity  of  a  judge  of  spiritual 
things,  and  of  the  pretensions  of  prophets  and 
teachers,  was  very  hard  either  to  answer  or  to  pass 
in  silence — what  was  their  opinion  of  the  baptism 
of  John  ?  If  they  replied  that  it  was  from  heaven, 
their  own  conduct  towards  John  would  accuse 
them ;  if  of  men,  then  the  people  would  not  listen 
to  them  even  when  they  denounced  Jesus,  because 
none  doubted  that  John  was  a  prophet.  They 
refused  to  answer,  and  Jesus  refused  in  like  manner 
to  answer  them.  In  the  parable  of  the  Two  Sons, 
given  by  Matthew,  the  Lord  pronounces  a  strong 
condemnation  on  them  for  saying  to  God,  "  I  go, 
Sir,"  but  not  going  (Matt.  xxi.  23-32;  Mark  xi. 
27-33  ;  Luke  xx.  1-8).  In  the  parable  of  the  wicked 
husbandmen  the  history  of  the  Jews  is  represented, 
who  had  stoned  and  killed  the  prophets,  and  were 
about  to  crown  their  wickedness  by  the  death  of 
the  Son.  In  the  parable  of  the  wedding  garment 
the  destruction  of  the  Jews,  and  the  invitation  to 
the  Geutiles  to  the  feast  in  their  stead,  are  vividly 
represented  (Matt.  xxi.  33-46,  xxii.  1-14  ;  Mark  xii'. 
1-12;   Luke  xx.  9-19). 


JESUS  CHRIST 

Not  content  with  their  plans  fov  His  death,  the 
different  parties  try  to  entangle  Him  in  argument 
and  to  bring  hi.ni  into  contempt.  First  come  the 
Pharisees  and  Herodiaus,  as  if  to  ask  Him  to  settle 
a  dispute  between  them.  "  Is  it  lawful  to  give 
tribute  to  Caesar,  or  not?"  The  spirit  of  the 
answer  of  Christ  lies  here  :  that,  since  they  had 
accepted  Caesar's  money,  they  had  confessed  his 
rule,  and  were  bound  to  render  to  the  civil  power 
what  they  had  confessed  to  be  due  to  it,  as  they 
were  to  render  to  God  and  to  His  holy  temple 
the  offerings  due  to  it.  Next  appeared  the  Sad- 
ducees,  who  denied  a  future  state,  and  put  before 
Him  a  contradiction  which  seemed  to  them  to 
arise  out  of  that  doctrine.  Seven  brethren  in  suc- 
cession married  a  wife  (Deut.  xrv.  5)  :  whose  wife 
should  she  be  in  a  future  state  ?  The  answer 
was  easy  to  find.  'The  law  in  question  referred 
obviously  to  the  present  time :  it  would  pass  away 
in  another  state,  and  so  would  all  such  earthly 
relations,  and  all  jealousies  or  disputes  founded  on 
them.  Jesus  now  retorts  the  argument  on  the 
Sadducees.  Appealing  to  the  Pentateuch,  because 
His  hearers  did  not  acknowledge  the  authority  of 
the  later  books  of  the  Bible,  He  recites  the  words, 
"  I  am  the  God  of  Abraham,  and  the  God  of  Isaac, 
and  the  God  of  Jacob,"  as  used  to  Moses,  and 
draws  from  them  the  argument  that  these  men 
must  then  have  been  alive.  Although  the  words 
would  not  at  first  sight  suggest  this  infeience, 
they  really  contain  it ;  for  the  form  of  expression 
implies  that  He  still  exists  and  they  still  exist 
(Matt.  xxii.  15-33;  Mark  xii.  13-27;  Luke  xx. 
20-40).  Fresh  questions  awaited  Him,  but  His 
wisdom  never  tailed  to  give  the  appropriate  answer. 
And  theu  he  uttered  to  all  the  people  that  terrible 
denunciation  of  woe  to  the  Pharisees  with  which 
we  are  familiar  (Matt,  xxiii.  1-39).  If  we  com- 
pare it  with  our  Lord's  account  of  His  own  position 
in  reference  to  the  Law,  in  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount,  we  see  that  the  principles  there  laid  down 
are  everywhere  violated  by  the  Pharisees.  Their 
almsgiving  was  ostentation;  their  distinctions  about 
oaths  led  to  falsehood  and  profaneness ;  they  were 
exact  about  the  small  observances  and  neglected 
the  weightier  ones  of  the  Law;  they  adorned  the 
tombs  of  the  prophets,  saying  that  if  they  had 
lived  in  the  time  of  their  fathers  they  would  not 
have  slain  them  ;  and  yet  they  were  about  to  fill 
up  the  measure  of  their  fathers'  wickedness  by 
slaving  the  greatest  of  the  prophets,  and  perse- 
cuting and  slaying  His  followers.  After  an  indig- 
nant denunciation  of  the  hypocrites  who,  with  a 
show  of  religion,  had  thus  contrived  to  stifle  the 
true  spirit  of  religion  and  were  in  reality  its  chief 
persecutors,  He  apostrophizes  Jerusalem  in  words 
full  of  compassion,  yet  carrying  with  them  a 
sentence  of  death  :  "  0  Jerusalem,  Jerusalem,  thou 
that  killest  the  prophets  and  stonest  them  which 
are  sent  unto  thee,  how  often  would  I  have 
gathered  thy  children  together,  even  as  a  hen 
gathereth  her  chickens  under  her  wings,  and  ye 
would  not!  Behold,  your  house  is  left  unto  you 
desolate.  For  I  say  unto  you,  ye  shall  not  see 
me  henceforth,  till  ye  shall  say,  Blessed  is  he 
that  cometh  in  the  name  of  the  Lord "  (Matt, 
xxiii.). 

Another  great  discourse  belongs  to  this  day, 
which,  more  than  any  other,  presents  Jesus  as 
the  great  Prophet  of  His  people.  On  leaving  the 
Temple  His  disciples  drew  attention  to  the  beauty 
of   it^    structure,    its    "goodly    stone.-,   ami    gifts," 


JESUS  CHRIST. 


1005 


their  remarks  probably  arising  from  the  threats 
of  destruction  which  had  so  lately  been  uttered 
by  Jesus.  Their  Master  answered  that  not  one 
stone  of  the  noble  pile  should  be  left  upon  another. 
When  they  reached  the  Mount  of  Olives  the  dis- 
ciples, or  rather  the  first  four  (Mark),  speaking 
for  the  rest,  asked  Him  when  this  destruction 
should  be  accomplished.  To  understand  the  answer 
it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  Jesus  warned  them 
that  He  was  not  giving  them  an  historical  account 
such  as  would  enable  them  to  anticipate  the  events. 
"  Of  that  day  and  hour  knoweth  no  man,  no,  not 
the  angels  of  heaven,  but  my  Father  only."  Exact 
data  of  time  are  to  be  purposely  withheld  from 
them.  Accordingly,  two  events,  analogous  in 
character  but  widely  sundered  by  time,  are  so 
treated  in  the  prophecy  that  it  is  almost  impos- 
sible to  disentangle  them.  The  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  and  the  day  of  judgment — the  national 
and  the  universal  days  of  account — aie  spoken  of 
together  or  alternately  without  hint  of  the  great 
interval  of  time  that  separates  them.  Thus  it 
may  seem  that  a  most  important  fact  is  omitted  ; 
but  the  highest  work  of  prophecy  is  not  to  fix 
times  and  seasons,  but  to  disclose  the  divine  sig- 
nificance of  events.  What  was  most  important  to 
them  to  know  was  that  the  destruction  of  Jeru- 
salem followed  upon  the  probation  and  rejection  of 
her  people,  and  that  the  crucifixion  and  that 
destruction  were  connected  as  cause  and  effect 
(Matt.  xxiv. ;  Mark  xiii.  ;  Luke  xxi.J.  The  con- 
clusion which  Jesus  drew  from  his  own  awful 
warning  was,  that  they  were  not  to  attempt  to 
fix  the  date  of  his  return :  "  Therefore  be  ye  also 
ready,  for  in  such  an  hour  as  ye  think  not  the 
Son  of  Man  cometh."  The  lesson  of  the  parable 
of  the  Ten  Virgins  is  the  same ;  the  Christian 
soul  is  to  be  ever  in  a  state  of  vigilance  and 
preparation  (Matt.  xxiv.  44,  xxv.  13).  And  the 
parable  of  the  Talents,  here  repeated  in  a  modified 
form,  teaches  how  precious  to  souls  are  the  uses 
of  time  (xxv.  14-30).  In  concluding  this  momen- 
tous discourse,  our  Lord  puts  aside  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem,  and  displays  to  our  eyes  the  picture 
of  the  final  judgment.  There  will  He  Himself  be 
present,  and  will  separate  all  the  vast  family  of 
mankind  into  two  classes,  and  shall  appraise  the 
works  of  each  class  as  works  done  to  Himself, 
present  in  the  world  though  invisible  ;  and  men 
shall  see,  some  with  terror  and  some  with  joy, 
that  their  life  here  was  spent  either  for  Him  or 
against  Him,  and  that  the  good  which  lav  befoie 
them  to  do  was  piovided  tor  them  by  Him,  and 
not  by  chance,  and  the  reward  and  punishment 
shall  be  apportioned  to  each  (Watt.  xxv.  31-46). 

With  these  weighty  words  ends  the  third  day  ; 
and  whether  we  consider  the  importance  of  His 
lecoided  teaching,  or  the  amount  of  opposition  and 
of  sorrow  presented  to  His  mind,  it  was  oi:e  of 
the  greatest  days  of  all  His  earthly  ministrations. 
The  general  reflections  of  John  (xii.  37-50),  which 
contain  a  retrospect  of  His  ministry  and  of  the 
strange  reception  of  Him  by  His  people,  may  well 
be  read  as  it  they  came  in  here. 

Wednesday  tin-  \'Mh  of  Niscm  (April  5th). — 
This  day  was  passed  in  retirement  with  the 
Apostles.  Satan  had  put  it  into  the  mind  of  one 
of  them  to  betray  Him  ;  and  Judas  [scariot  made 
a  covenant  to  betray  Him  to  the  chief  priests  for 
thirty  pieces  of  silver.  The  character  of  Judas, 
and  the  degrees  by  which  he  reached  the  abyss  of 
guilt  in  which  he  was  at   last  destroyed,  deserve 

3  / 


1066 


JESUS  CHRIST 


much  attention.  There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that 
when  he  was  chosen  by  Jesus  he  possessed,  like 
the  rest,  the  capacity  of  being  saved,  and  was 
endued  with  gifts  which  might  have  made  him 
an  able  minister  of  the  New  Testament.  But  the 
innate  worldliness  and  covetousness  were  not 
purged  out  from  him.  His  practical  talents  made 
him  a  kind  of  steward  of  the  slender  resources  of 
that  society,  and  no  doubt  he  conceived  the  wish 
to  use  the  same  gifts  on  a  larger  field,  which  the 
realization  of  "  the  kingdom  of  Heaven  "  would 
open  out  before  him.  These  practical  gifts  were 
his  ruin.  Between  him  and  the  rest  there  could 
be  no  real  harmony.  His  motives  were  worldly, 
and  theirs  were  not.  They  loved  the  Saviour 
more  as  they  knew  Him  better.  Judas,  living 
under  the  constant  tacit  rebnke  of  a  most  holy 
example,  grew  to  hate  the  Lord ;  for  nothing, 
perhaps,  more  strongly  draws  out  evil  instincts 
than  the  enforced  contact  with  goodness.  And 
when  he  knew  that  his  Master  did  not  trust 
him,  was  not  deceived  by  him,  his  hatred  grew 
more  intense.  But  this  did  not  break  out  into 
overt  act  until  Jesus  began  to  foretel  His  own 
crucifixion  and  death.  If  these  were  to  happen, 
all  his  hopes  that  he  had  built  on  following  the 
Lord  would  be  dashed  down.  If  they  should 
crucify  the  Master  they  would  not  spare  the 
servants  ;  and,  in  place  of  a  heavenly  kingdom, 
he  would  find  contempt,  persecution,  and  probably 
death.  It  was  high  time,  therefore,  to  treat  with 
the  powers  that  seemed  most  likely  to  prevail  in 
the  end  ;  and  he  opened  a  negotiation  with  the 
high-priests  in  secret,  in  order  that,  if  his  Master 
were  to  fall,  he  might  be  the  instrument,  and  so 
make  friends  among  the  triumphant  persecutors. 
And  yet,  strange  contradiction,  he  did  not  wholly 
cease  to  believe  in  Jesus :  possibly  he  thought 
that  he  would  so  act  that  he  might  be  safe  either 
way.  If  Jesus  was  the  Prophet  and  Mighty  One 
that  he  had  once  thought,  then  the  attempt  to 
take  Him  might  force  Him  to  put  forth  all  His 
resources  and  to  assume  the  kingdom  to  which 
He  laid  claim,  and  then  the  agent  in  the  treason, 
even  if  discovered,  might  plead  that  he  foresaw 
the  result :  if  He  were  unable  to  save  Himself 
and  His  disciples,  then  it  were  well  for  Judas  to 
betake  himself  to  those  who  were  stronger.  The 
bribe  of  money,  not  very  considerable,  could  not 
have  been  the  chief  motive ;  but  as  two  vicious 
appetites  could  be  gratified  instead  of  one,  the 
thirty  pieces  of  silver  became  a  part  of  the  tempta- 
tion. The  treason  was  successful,  and  the  money 
paid  ;  but  not  one  moment's  pleasure  did  those 
silver  pieces  purchase  for  their  wretched  possessor, 
not  for  a  moment  did  he  reap  any  fruit  from 
his  detestable  guilt.  After  the  crucifixion,  the 
avenging  belief  that  Jesus  was  what  He  professed 
to  be  rushed  back  in  full  force  upon  his  mind. 
He  went  to  those  who  had  hired  him;  they 
derided  his  remorse.  He  cast  away  the  accursed 
silver  pieces,  defiled  with  the  "  innocent  blood " 
of  the  Son  of  God,  and  went  and  hanged  him- 
self (Matt.  xxvi.  14-16;  Mark  xiv.  10-11;  Luke 
xxii.  1-6). 

Thursday  the  14th  of  Nisan  {April  6th). — On 
"the  first  day  of  unleavened  bread,"  when  the 
Jews  were  wont  to  put  away  all  leaven  out  of  their 
houses  (Lightfoot,  If  or.  Iieb.  on  Mark  xiv.  12), 
the  disciples  asked  their  Master  where  they  were  to 
eat  the  Passover.  He  directed  Peter  and  John  to 
go  into  Jerusalem,  and  to  follow  a  man  whom  they 


JESUS  CHRIST 

should  see  bearing  a  pitcher  of  water,  and  to  de- 
mand of  him,  in  their  Master's  name,  the  use  of 
the  guestchamber  in  his  house  for  this  purpose. 
All  happened  as  Jesus  had  told  them,  and  in  the 
evening  they  assembled  to  celebrate,  for  the  last 
time,  the  paschal  meal.  The  sequence  of  the  events 
is  not  quite  clear  from  a  comparison  of  the  Evange- 
lists ;  but  the  difficulty  arises  with  St.  Luke,  and 
thine  is  external  evidence  that  he  is  not  following 
the  chronological  order  (Wieseler,  Chron.  Syn.  p. 
399).  The  order  seems  to  be  as  follows.  When 
they  had  taken  their  places  at  table  and  the  supper 
had  begun,  Jesus  gave  them  the  first  cup  to  divide 
amongst  themselves  (Luke).  It  was  customary  to 
drink  at  the  paschal  supper  four  cups  of  wine 
mixed  with  water ;  and  this  answered  to  the  first 
of  them.  There  now  arose  a  contention  among  the 
disciples  which  of  them  should  be  the  greatest ; 
perhaps  in  connexion  with  the  places  which  they 
iiad  taken  at  this  feast  (Luke).  After  a  solemn 
warning  against  pride  and  ambition  Jesus  performed 
an  act  which,  as  one  of  the  last  of  His  life,  must 
ever  have  been  remembered  by  the  witnesses  as  a 
great  lesson  of  humility.  He  rose  from  the  table, 
poured  water  into  a  basin,  girded  himself  with  a 
towel,  and  proceeded  to  wash  the  disciples'  feet 
(John).  It  was  an  office  for  slaves  to  perform,  and 
from  Him,  knowing,  as  He  did,  "  that  the  Father 
had  given  all  things  into  His  hand,  and  that  He 
was  come  from  God  and  went  to  God,"  it  was  an 
unspeakable  condescension.  But  His  love  for  them 
was  infinite,  and  if  there  were  any  way  to  teach 
them  the  humility  which  as  yet  they  had  not 
learned,  He  would  not  tail  to  adopt  it.  Peter,  with 
his  usual  readiness,  was  the  first  to  refuse  to  accept 
such  menial  service — "  Lord,  dost  thou  wash  my 
feet?"  When  he  was  told  that  this  act  was  signi- 
ficant of  the  greater  act  of  humiliation  by  which 
Jesus  saved  His  disciples  and  united  them  to  Him- 
self, his  scruples  vanished.  After  all  had  been 
washed,  the  Saviour  explained  to  them  the  meaning 
of  what  He  had  done.  "  If  I,  your  Lord  and  Master, 
have  washed  your  feet,  ye  also  ought  to  wash  one 
another's  feet.  For  I  have  given  you  an  example, 
that  ye  should  do  as  I  have  done  to  you."  But 
this  act  was  only  the  outward  symbol  of  far  greater 
sacrifices  for  them  than  they  could  as  yet  under- 
stand. It  was  a  small  matter  to.  wash  their  feet ; 
it  was  a  great  one  to  come  down  from  the  glories 
of  heaven  to  save  them.  Later  the  apostle  Paul 
put  this  sa"me  lesson  of  humility  into  another  form, 
and  rested  it  upon  deeper  grounds.  "  Let  this 
mind  be  in  you  which  was  also  in  Christ  Jesus : 
who,  being  in  the  form  of  God,  thought  it  not  rob- 
bery to  be  equal  with  God;  but  made  himself  of 
no  reputation,  and  took  upon  him  the  form  of  a 
servant,  and  was  made  in  the  likeness  of  men,  and 
being  found  in  fashion  as  a  man  He  humbled  Him- 
self and  became  obedient  unto  death,  even  the  death 
of  the  cross"  (Phil.  ii.  5-8;  Matt.  xxvi.  17-20; 
Mark  xiv.  12-17;  Luke  xxii.  7-30;  John  xiii. 
1-20). 

From  this  act  of  love  it  does  not  seem  that  even 
the  traitor  Judas  was  excluded.  But  his  treason 
was  thoroughly  known  ;  and  now  Jesus  denounces 
it.  One  of  them  should  betray  Him.  They  were 
all  sorrowful  at  this,  and  each  asked  "Is  it  I?" 
and  even  Judas  asked  and  received  an  affirmative 
answer  (Matt.),  hut  probably  in  an  undertone,  for 
when  Jesus  said  "That  thou  doest  do  quickly." 
none  of  the  rest  understood.  Tiie  traitor  having 
gone  straight  to  his  wicked  object,  the  end  of  the 


JESUS  CHRIST 

Saviour's  ministry  seemed  already  at  hand.  "  Now 
is  the  Son  of  Man  glorified,  and  God  is  glorified  in 
Him."  He  gave  them  the  new  commandment,  to 
love  one  another,  as  though  it  were  a  last  bequest 
to  them.  To  love  was  not  a  new  thing,  it  was  en- 
joined in  the  old  Law;  but  to  be  distinguished  for 
a  special  Christian  love  and  mutual  devotion  was 
what  He  would  have,  and  this  was  the  new  element 
in  the  commandment.  Founded  by  a  great  act  of 
love,  the  Church  was  to  be  marked  by  love  (Matt. 
xxvi.  21-25;  Mark  xiv.  18-21  ;  Luke  xxii.  21-2:1  ; 
John  xiii.  21-35). 

Towards  the  close  of  the  meal  Jesus  instituted 
the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper.  He  took  bread, 
and  gave  thanks  and  brake  it,  and  gave  to  His  dis- 
ciples, saying,  "  This  is  my  body  which  is  given  for 
you;  this  do  in  remembrance  of  me."  He  then 
took  the  cup,  which  corresponded  to  the  third  cup 
in  the  usual  course  of  the  paschal  supper,  and  after 
giving  thanks,  He  gave  it  to  them,  saying.  "This 
is  my  blood  of  the  new  testament  [covenant]  which 
is  shed  tor  many."  It  was  a  memorial  of  His  pas- 
sion and  of  this  last  supper  that  preceded  it,  and  in 
dwelling  on  His  passion  in  this  sacrament,  iii  true 
faith,  all  believers  draw  nearer  to  the  cross  of  His 
sufferings  and  taste  more  strongly  the  sweetness  of 
His  love  and  the  efficacy  of  His  atoning  death  '  Matt. 
xxvi.  26-29  ;  Mark  xiv.  22-25 ;  Luke  xxii.  19,  20 ; 
1  Cor.  xi.  23-25). 

The  denial  of  Peter  is  now  foretold,  and  to  no 
one  would  such  an  announcement  be  more  ineie- 
dible  than  to  Peter  himself.  "  Lord,  why  cannot 
1  follow  thee  now?  I  will  lay  down  my  life  for 
thy  sake."  The  zeal  was  sincere,  and  as  such  did 
the  Lord  regard  it ;  but  here,  as  elsewhere,  Peter 
did  not  count  the  cost.  By  and  bye,  when  the 
Holy  Spirit  lias  come  down  to  give  them  a  strength 
not  their  own,  Peter  and  the  rest  of  the  disciples 
will  be  bold  to  resist  persecution,  even  to  the  death. 
It  needs  strong  love  and  deep  insight  to  view  such 
an  act  as  this  denial  with  sorrow  and  not  with  in- 
dignation (Matt.  xxvi.  31-35;  Mark  xiv.  27-31; 
Luke  xxii.  31-38;   John  xiii.  36-38). 

That  great  final  discourse,  which  John  alone  has 
recorded,  is  now  delivered.  Although  in  the  middle 
of  it  there  is  a  mention  of  departure  (John  xiv.  31), 
this  perhaps  only  implies  that  they  prepared  to  go; 
and  then  the  whole  discourse  was  delivered  in  the 
house  before  they  proceeded  to  Gethsemane.  Of 
the  contents  of  this  discourse,  which  is  the  voice  of 
tin'  Priest  in  the  holy  of  holies,  something  has  beeD 
said  already  (p.  1050;   John  xiv.-xvii.). 

Friday  the  15th  of  Nisan  (April  7),  including 
part  of  the  eve  of  it. — "  When  they  had  sung  a 
hymn,"  which  perhaps  means,  when  they  had  sung 
the  second  part  of  the  Hallel,  or  song  of  praise, 
which  consisted  of  Psalms  exv.-c.wiii.,  the  former 
part  (Psalms  cxiii.-cxiv.)  having  been  sung  at  an 
earlier  part  of  the  supper,  they  »vnt  out  mto  the 
Mount  of  Olives.  They  came  to  a  plate  cajled 
Gethsemane  (oil-press),  and  it  is  probable  that  the 
place  now  pointed  out  to  travellers  is  the  real  scene 
of  that  which  follows,  and  even  that  its  huge  olive- 
trees  are  the  legitimate  successors  of  those  which 
were  there  when  Jesus  visited  it.  A  moment  of  ter- 
rible agony  is  approaching,  of  which  a\l  the  apostles 
need  not  be  spectators,  for  He  thinks  of  them,  and 
wishes  to  span.'  them  this  addition  to  their  sorrows. 
So  lb'  takes  only  His  three  proved  companions,  Peter, 
James,  and  John,  and  passes  with  them  farther 
into  the  garden,  leaving  the  rest  seated,  probably 
near  the  entrance.    No  pen  can  attempt  to  describe 


JESUS  CHRIST 


106^ 


what  passed  that  night  in  that  secluded  spot.  He 
tells  them  ■•my  soul  is  exceeding  sorrowful,  even 
unto  death:  tarry  ye  here  and  watch  with  me," 
and  then  leaving  even  the  three  He  goes  further, 
and  in  solitude  wrestles  with  an  inconceivable  trial. 
The  words  of  .Mark  are  still  more  expressive — "  He 
began  to  be  sore  amazed,  and  to  be  very  heavy " 
(eKdafj.Pe7(r6ai  kcu  aSr] /xuuelv,  xiv.  33).  Thefoimer 
word  means  that-  he  was  struck  with  a  great  dread  ; 
not  from  the  fear  of  physical  suffering,  however 
excruciating,  we  may  well  believe,  but  from  the 
contact  with  the  sins  of  the  world,  of  which,  in 
some  inconceivable  way,  He  here  felt  the  bitterness 
and  the  weight.  He  did  not  merely  contemplate 
them,  but  bear  and  feel  them.  It  is  impossible  to 
explain  this  scene  in  Gethsemane  in  any  other  way. 
If  it  were  merely  the  fear  of  the  terrors  of  death 
that  overcame  Him,  then  the  martyr  Stephen  and 
many  another  would  surpass  Him  in  constancy. 
But  when  He  says,  "Abba,  Father,  all  things  are 
possible  unto  Thee;  take  away  this  cup  from  me: 
nevertheless  not  what  I  will  but  what  thou  wilt" 
(Mark),  the  cup  was  filled  with  a  far  bitterer- 
potion  than  death ;  it  was  flavoured  with  the 
poison  of  the  sins  of  all  mankind  against  its  God. 
Whilst  the  sinless  Son  is  thus  can  ied  two  ways  by 
the  present  horror  and  the  strong  determination  to 
do  the  Father's  will,  the  disciples  have  sunk  to 
sleep.  It  was  in  search  of  consolation  that  He  came 
back  to  them.  The  disciple  who  had  been  so  ready 
to  ask  "Why  cannot  I  follow  thee  now? "must 
hear  another  question,  that  rebukes  his  former  con- 
fidence— "  Couldest  not  thou  watch  one  hour  ?  " 
A  second  time  He  departs  and  wrestles  in  prayer 
with  the  Father;  but  although  the  words  He  utters 
are  almost  the  same  (Mark  says  "  the  same  "),  He 
no  longer  asks  that  the  cup  may  pass  away  from 
Him — "If  this  cup  may  not  pass  away  from  me 
except  I  drink  it,  Thy  will  be  done  "  (Matt.).  A 
second  time  He  returns  and  finds  them  sleeping. 
The  same  scene  is  repeated  yet  a  third  time  ;  and 
then  all  is  concluded.  Hencefoith  they  may  sleep 
aird  take  their  rest ;  never  more  shall  they  be  asked 
to  watch  one  hour  with  Jesus,  for  His  ministry  in 
the  flesh  is  at  an  end.  "The  hour  is  at  hand,  and 
the  Son  of  Man  is  betrayed  into  the  hands  of  sin- 
ners" (Matt.).  The  prayer  of  Jesus  in  this  place 
has  always  been  regarded,  and  with  reason,  as  of 
great  weight  against  the  monothelite  heresy.  It 
expresses  the  natural  shrinking  of  the  human  will 
from  a  horror  which  the  divine  nature  has  admitted 
into  it,  yet  without  sin.  Never  does  He  say,  "  I 
will  flee  ;"  He  says,  "  If  it  be  possible  ;"  and 
leaves  that  to  the  decision  of  the  Father.  That 
horror  and  dread  arose  from  the  spectacle  of  human 
sin;  from  the  bearing  the  weight  and  guilt  of 
human  sin  as  about  to  make  atonement  tin-  it  ;  and 
from  a  conflict,  with  the  powers  of  darkness.  Thus 
this  scene  is  in  complete  contrast  to  the  Transfigura- 
tion. The  same  companions  witnessed  both;  but 
there  there  was  peace,  and  glory,  ami  honour,  for 
the  sinless  Son  of  God;  here  fear  and  conflict: 
there  God  bore  testimony  to  Him;  here  Satan  for 
tlie  last  time  tempted  Him.  (On  the  account  of  the 
Agony  see  Krummacher,  Dcr  Leidende  Christus, 
l>.  Jim;;  Matt.  xxvi.  36-46;  Mark  xiv.  32-42; 
Luke  xxii.  39-46;  John  xviii.  1.) 

Judas  now  appeared  to  complete  his  work.  In 
tie-  doubtful  light  ol  torches,  a  kiss  from  him  was 
the  sign  to  the  officers  whom  they  should  take. 
Peter,  whose  name  is  firsl  given  in  John's  Gospel, 
drew    a    SWOl'd    and   smote   a    sen  ant    ol    the   high- 

:',   Z   'J 


1068 


JESUS  CHRIST 


priest,  and  cut  off  his  ear ;  but  his  Lord  refused 
such  succour,  and  healed  the  wounded  man.     He 


JESUS  CHRIST 

(Luke).     Let  no  man  who  cannot  fathom  the  utter 
perplexity  and  distress  of  such  a  time  presume  to 


treated  the  seizure  as  a  step  in  the  fulfilment  of  the  :  judge  the  zealous  disciple  hardly.  ^He^  trusted  too 

prophecies  about  Him,  and  resisted  it  not.     All  the  , 

disciples  forsook  Him  and  tied  (Matt.  xxvi.  47-56; 

Mark  xiv.  43-52 ;  Luke  xxii.  47-53  ;  John  xviii. 

2-12). 

There  is  some  difficulty  in  arranging  the  events 
that  immediately  follow,  so  as  to  embrace  all  the 
four  accounts. — The   data  will    be   found    in    the 
Commentary   of  Olshausen,   in  Wieseler   (Chrm. 
Syn.  p.  401,  sqq.),  and  in  Greswell's  Dissertations 
(iii.  200,  sqq.).     On  the  capture  of  Jesus  He  was 
first  taken  to  the  house  of  Annas,  the  father-in-law 
of  Caiaphas  (see  p.  1041)  the  high-priest.     It  has 
been  argued  that  as  Annas  is  called,  conjointly  with 
Caiaphas,  the  high-priest,  he  must  have  held  some 
actual  office  in  connexion  with  the  priesthood,  and 
Lightfoot  and  others  suppose  that  he  was  the  vicar 
or  deputy  of  the  high-priest,  and   Selden  that  he 
was   president   of  the   Council  of  the  Sanhedrim; 
but  this  is  uncertain.*     It  might  appear  from  the 
course  of  John's  narrative  that  the  examination  of 
our  Lord,  and  the  first  denial  of  Peter,  took  place  in 
the  house  of  Annas  (John  xviii.  13,  14).     But  the 
24th  verse  is  retrospective — "  Now  Annas  had  sent 
Him  bound  unto  Caiaphas  the  high-priest"  (oire- 
(TreiAe,   aorist  for  pluperfect,   see  Winer's   Gram- 
mar) ;  and  probably  all  that  occurred  after  verse  14 
took  place  not  at  the  house  of  Annas,  but  at  that  of 
Caiaphas.     It  is  not  likely  that  Peter  gained  admit- 
tance to  two  houses  in  which  two  separate  judicial 
examinations  took  place  with  which  he  had  nothing 
ostensibly  to  do,  and  this  would  be  forced  on  us  if  we 
assumed  that  John  described  what  took  place  before 
Annas,  and  the  other  Evangelists  what  took  place 
before  Caiaphas.     The  house  of  the  high-priest  con- 
sisted probably,  like  other  Eastern  houses,  of  an  open 
central  court  with   chambers  round  it.     Into  this 
court  a  gate  admitted  them,  at  which  a  woman 
stood  to  open.     Peter,  who  had  fled  like  the  rest 
from    the    side    of  Jesus,    followed    afar   off  with 
another  disciple,  probably  John,  and  the  latter  pro- 
cured him  admittance  into  the  court  of  the  high- 
priest's  house.     As  he  passed  in,  the  lamp  of  the 
portress  threw  its  light  on  his  face,  and  she  took 
note  of  him  ;  and  afterwards,  at  the  fire  which  had 
been  lighted,   she  put  the  question  to  him,  "  Art 

not  thou  also  one  of  this  man's  disciples?"  (John.) 

All  the  zeal  and  boldness  of  Peter  seems  to  have 

deserted  him.     This   was  indeed  a  time  of  great 

spiritual  weakness  and  depression,  and  the  power  of 

darkness  had  gained  an  influence  over  the  Apostle's 

mind.     He  had  come  as  in  secret ;  he  is  determined 

so  to  remain,  and  he  denies  his  Master!     Feeling 

now  the  danger  of  his  situation,  he  went  out  into 

the  porch,  and  there  some  one,  or,  looking  at  all  the 

accounts,  probably  several  persons,  asked  him  the 

question  a  second  "time,  and  he  denied  more  strongly. 

About  an  hour  after,  when  he  had  returned  into 

the  court,  the  same    question  was  put  to  him  a 

third  time,  with  the  same  result.     Then  the  cock 

crew ;  and  Jesus,  who  was  within  sight,  probably 

in  some  open  room  communicating  with  the  court, 

"turned  and  looked   upon   Peter.     And  Peter  re- 
membered the  word  of  the  Lord,  how  He  had  said 

unto  him,  Before  the  cock  crow,  thou  shalt  deny 

Me  thrice.     And  Peter  went  out  and  wept  bitterly  " 


a  Air.  Greswell  sees  no  uncertainty  ;  and  asserts 
as  a  fact  that  he  was  the  high-priest,  vicar,  and  pice- 
president  of  the  Sanhedrim  (p.  200). 


much  to  his  strength  ;  he  did  not  enter  into  the 
full  meaning  of  the  words,  "Watch  and  pray  lest 
ye  enter  into  temptation."  Self-  confidence  be- 
trayed him  into  a  great  sin  ;  and  the  most  merciful 
Lord  restored  him  after  it.  "  Let  him  that  thinketh 
he  standeth  take  heed  lest  he  fall"  (1  Cor.  x.  12  ; 
Matt.  xxvi.  57,  58,  69-75  ;  Mark  xiv.  53,  54, 
66-72;  Luke  xxii.  54-62;  John  xviii.  13-18, 
24-27). 

The  first  interrogatory  to  which  our  Lord  was 
subject  (John  xviii.   19-24)  was  addressed  to  Him 
by  Caiaphas  (Annas?,  Olshausen,  Wieseler),  pro- 
bably before  the  Sanhedrim  had  time  to  assemble. 
It  was  the  questioning  of  an  inquisitive  person  who 
had  an  important  criminal  in  his  presence,  rather 
than  a  formal  examination.  ,  The  Lord's  refusal  to 
answer  is  thus  explained  and  justified.     When  the 
more    regular   proceedings   begin  He   is   ready    to 
answer.    A  servant  of  the  high-priest,  knowing  that 
he  should  thereby  please  his  master,  smote  the  cheek 
of  the  Son  of  God  with  the  palm  of  his  hand.     But 
this  was  only  the  beginning  of  horrors.     At  the  dawn 
of  day  the  Sanhedrim,  summoned  by  the  high-priest 
in  the  course  of  the  night,  assembled,  and  brought 
their  band  of  false  witnesses,  whom  they  must  have 
had    ready    before.     These   gave    their    testimony 
(see  Psalm  xxvii.  12),  but  even  before  this  unjust 
tribunal  it  could  not  stand  ;  it  was  so  full  of  con- 
tradictions.     At  last  two  false  witnesses  came,  and 
their  testimony  was  very  like  the   truth.     They 
deposed  that   He    had  said,  "  I  will    destroy  this 
temple,    that    is    made    with    hands,    and    within 
three    days    I    will    build  another    made   without 
hands"  (Mark  xiv.  58).     The  perversion  is  slight 
but  important ;    for  Jesus  did   not  say  that  He 
would  destroy  (see  John  ii.   19),  which  was  just 
the  point  that    would    irritate   the    Jews.      Even 
these  two  fell  into  contradictions.     The  high-priest 
now  witli  a  solemn  adjuration  asks  Him  whether 
He  is  the  Christ  the  Son  of  God.     He  answers 
that  He  is,  and  foretells  His  return  in  glory  and 
power  at  the  last  day.     This  is  enough   for  their 
purpose.     They  pronounce  Him  guilty  of  a  crime 
for  which  death    should  be   the   punishment.     It 
appears   that  the  Council   was  now  suspended  or 
broken    up ;  •  for   Jesus    is   delivered    over  to  the 
brutal  violence  of  the    people,   which    could    not 
have   occurred  whilst    the  supreme   court  of  the 
Jews  was  sitting.     The  prophets  had  foretold  this 
violence   (Is.   1.   6),  and   also   the  meekness  with 
which  it  would  be  borne  (Is.  liii.  7).      And   yet 
this  "  lamb  led   to   the  slaughter "  knew  that  it 
was  He  that  should  judge   the  world,    including 
every  one  of  His  persecutors.     The  Sanhedrim  had 
been  within  the  range  of  its  duties  in  taking  cog- 
nizance of  all  who  claimed  to  be  prophets.     If  the 
question  put  to  Jesus  had  been  merely,  Art  Thou 
the  Messiah  ?  this  body  should  have  gone  into  the 
question  of  His  right  to  the  title,  and  decided  upon 
the  evidence.     But  the  question  was  really  twofold, 
"  Art  Thou  the  Christ,  and  in  that  name  dost  Thou 
also  call  Thyself  the  Son  of  God?"     There  was  no 
blasphemy  in  claiming  the  former  name,  but  there 
was  in  assuming  the  latter.     Hence  the  proceedings 
were  cut  short.     They  had  closed  their  eyes  to  the 
evidence,  accessible  to  all,  of  the  miracles  of  Jesus, 
that  He  was  indeed  the  Son  of  God,  and  without 
these  they  were  not  likely  to  believe  that  He  could 
claim   a  title    belonging    to   no    other   among   the 


JESUS  CHRIST 

children   of  men    (John   xviii.    111-24;   Luke  xxii. 
03-71  ;  Matt.  xxvi.  59-68;  Mark  xiv.  55-65). 

Although  they  had  pronounced  Jesus  to  be  guilty 
of  death,    the   Sanhedrim    possessed  no  power    to 
carry  out  such  a  sentence   (Josephus,  Ant.  xx.  6). 
So  as  soon  as  it  was  day  they  took  Him  to  Pilate, 
the    Roman    procurator.      The   hall    of  judgment, 
or  praetorium,  was  probably  a  part  of  the  tower  of 
Antonia  near  the  Temple,  where  the  Roman  gar- 
rison was.      Pilate  healing  that  .Jesus  was  an  offender 
under  their  law,  was  about  to  give  them  leave  to 
treat  him  accordingly;  and  this  would  have  made 
it  quite  safe  to  execute  Him.     But  the  council,  wish- 
ing to  shift  the  responsibility  from  themselves,  from 
a  fear  of  some  reaction  amongst  the  people  in  favour 
of  the  Lord,  such  as  they  had  seen  on  the  first  day 
of  that  week,  said  that  it  was  not  lawful  for  them 
to  put  any  man  to  death  ;   and   having  condemned 
Jesus  for  blasphemy,  they  now  strove  to  have  Him 
condemned    by    Pilate    for   a  political    crime,   for 
calling  Himself  the  King  of  the  Jews.     But  the 
Jewish  punishment  was  stoning;  whilst  crucifixion 
was  a  Roman  punishment,  inflicted  occasionally  on 
those  who  were  not   Roman  citizens ;   and  thus  it 
came  about  that  the  Lord's  saying  as  to  the  mode 
of  His  death  was  fulfilled  (Matt.  xx.  19,  with  John. 
xii.  32,  33).     From   the  first  Jesus  found  favour 
in  the  eyes  of  Pilate ;  His  answer  that  His  kingdom 
was  not  of  this  world,  and  therefore  could  not  me- 
nace the  Roman  rule,  was  accepted,  and  Pilate  pro- 
nounced that   he  found  no  fault  in  Him.     Not  so 
easily  were  the  Jews  to  be  cheated  of  their  prey. 
They  heaped  up  accusations  against  Him  as  a  dis- 
turber of  the  public  peace  (Luke  xxiii.  5).    Pilate 
was  no  match  for  their  vehemence.     Finding  that 
Jesus  was  a  Galilean,  he  sent  Him  to  Herod  to  be 
dealt  with  ;   but  Herod,   after  cruel   mockery  and 
persecution,  sent  Him  back  to  Pilate.     Now  com- 
menced the  fearful  struggle  between   the   Roman 
procurator,  a  weak  as  well  as  cruel  man,   and  the 
Jews.     Pilate  was  detested  by  the  Jews  as  cruel, 
treacherous,  and  oppressive.     Other  records  of  his 
life  do  not  represent  him  merely  as  the  weakling 
that  he  appears  here.     He  had  violated  their  na- 
tional prejudices,  and  had  used  the  knives  of  assas- 
sins  to   avert    the   consequences.     But  the    Jews 
knew  the  weak   point  in  his  breastplate.     He  was 
the  merely  worldly  and  professional  statesman,  to 
whom  the  favour  of  the  Emperor  was  lite  itself, 
and  the  only  evil  of  life  a  downfal  from  that  fa- 
vour.    It  was  their  policy  therefore  to  threaten  to 
denounce  him  to  Caesar  for  lack  of  zeal  in  sup- 
pressing a  rebellion,  the  leader  of  which  was  aiming 
at  a  crown.     In  his  way  Pilate  believed  in  Christ  ; 
this  the  greatest  crime  of  a  stained  life  was   that, 
with  which  his  own  will  hail  the  least  to  do.     But 
lie  did  not  believe,   so  as  to  make' him  risk   delation 
to  his  Master  and  all  its  possible  consequences.    He 
yielded  to  the  stronger   purpose   of  the   Jews,   and 

suffered  Jesus  to  be  put  to  death.  Not  many  years 
after,  the  consequences  which  he  had  stained  his 
soul  to  avert  came  upon  him.  He  was  accused 
and  banished,  and  like  Judas,  the  other  great  ac- 
complice in  this  crime  of  the  Jews,  put  an  end  to 
his  own  life  [see  Pilate].  The  well-known  inci- 
dents of  the  second  interview  are  soon  recalled. 
After  the  examination  by  lleiod,  and  the  return  of 
Jesus,  Pilate  proposed  to  release  Him,  as  it  was 
usual  on  the  feast-day  to  release  a  prisoner  to  the 
Jews  out  of  grace.  Pilate  knew  well  that  the 
priests  ami  rulers  would  object  to  this;  but  it  was 
a  covert  appeal  to  the  people,  also  present,  with 


JESUS  CHRIST 


1069 


whom  Jesus  had  so  lately  been  in  favour.  The 
multitude,  persuaded  by  the  priests,  preferred  an- 
other'prisoner,  called  Barabbas.  In  the  meantime 
the  wife  of  Pilate  sent  a  warning  to  Pilate  to  have 
nothing  to  do  with  the  death  of  "  that  just  man,"  as 
she  had  been  troubled  in  a  dream  on  accountof  Him. 
Obliged,  as  he  thought,  to  yield  to  the  clamours 
of  the  people,  he  took  water  and  washed  his  hands 
before  them,  and  adopting  the  phrase  of  his  wife, 
which  perhaps  represented  the  opinion  of  both  of 
them  formed  before  this  time,  he  said,  "  I  am  in- 
nocent of  the  blood  of  this  just  person ;  see  ye  to 
it."  The  people  imprecated  on  their  own  heads 
and  those  of  their  children  the  blood  of  Him  whose 
doom  was  thus  sealed. 

Pilate  released  unto  them  Barabbas  "  that  for 
sedition  and  murder  was  cast  into  prison  whom 
they  had  desired"  (comp.  Acts  iii.  14).  This  was 
no  unimportant  element  in  their  crime.  The  choice 
was  offered  them  between  one  who  had  broken  the 
laws  of  God  and  man,  aud  One  who  had  given 
His  whole  life  up  to  the  doing  good  and  speaking 
truth  amongst  them.  They  condemned  the  latter 
to  death,  and  were  eager  for  the  deliverance  of  the 
former.  "  And  in  fact  their  demanding  the  ac- 
quittal of  a  murderer  is  but  the  parallel  to  their 
requiring  the  death  of  an  innocent  person,  as  St. 
Ambrose  observes : — for  it  is  but  the  very  law  of 
iniquity,  that  they  which  hate  innocence  should 
love  crime.  They  rejected  therefore  the  Prince  of 
Heaven,  and  chose  a  robber  and  a  murderer,  and 
an  insurrectionist,  and  they  received  the  object  of 
their  choice  ;  so  was  it  given  them,  for  insurrections 
and  murders  did  not  fail  them  till  the  last,  when 
their  city  was  destroyed  in  the  midst  of  murders 
and  insurrections,  which  they  now  demanded  of 
the  Roman  governor"  (Williams  on  the  Passion, 
p.  215). 

Now  came  the  scourging,  and  the  blows  and 
insults  of  the  soldiers,  who,  uttering  truth  when  they 
thought  they  were  only  reviling,  crowned  Him  and 
addressed  Him  as  King  of  the  Jews.  According 
to  John,  Pilate  now  made  one  more  effort  for  His 
release.  He  thought  that  the  scourging  might 
appease  their  rage,  he  saw  the  frame  of  Jesus 
bowed  and  withered  with  all  that  it  had  gone 
through  ;  and,  hoping  that  this  moving  sight 
might  inspire  them  with  the  same  pity  that  he 
felt  himself,  he  brought  the  Saviour  forth  again  to 
them,  and  said,  '•  Heboid  the  Man  !"  Not  even  so 
was  their  violence  assuaged.  He  had  made  Himself 
the  Son  of  God,  and  must  die.  He  still  sought  to 
release  Jesus:  but  the  last  argument,  which  had 
been  in  the  minds  of  both  sides  all  along,  was  now 
openly  applied  to  him:  "  It'  thou  let  this  man  go, 
thou  art  not  Caesar's  friend."  This  saying,  which 
had  not  been  uttered  till  the  vehemence  of  rage 
overcame  their  decent  respect  for  Pilate's  position, 
decided  the  question.  He  delivered  Jesus  to  be 
crucified  (Matt,  xxvii.  L5-30;  Mark  xv.  6-19; 
Luke  xxiii.  17-2."):  John  xviii.  39,  40,  xix.  1-16  . 
John  mentions  that  this  occurred  about  the  sixth 
hour,  whereas  the  crucifixion,  according  to  Mark, 
was  accomplished  at  the  third  hour;  but  there  is 
every  reason  to  think,  with  Greswell  and  WIeseler. 
that  John  reckons  from  midnight,  and  that  this 
took  place  at  six  in  the  morning,  whilst  in  Mark 
the  Jewish  reckoning  from  six  in  the  morning  is 
followed,  so  that  the  crucifixion  took  place  it  nine 
o'clock,  the  intervening  time  having  been  spent  in 
preparations. 

Difficult,  but  not  insuperable,  chronological  ques- 


1070 


JESUS  CHRIST 


tions  arise  in  connexion  with  (a)  John  xiii.  1,  "be- 
fore the  feast  of  the  passover."  (6)  John  xviii.  28, 
"  and  they  themselves  went  not  into  the  judgment- 
hall  lest  they  should  be  defiled,  but  that  they  might 
eat  the  passover,"  and  (c)  John  xix.  14,  "  And  it 
was  the  preparation  of  the  passover  about  the  sixth 
hour,"  in  all  of  which  the  account  of  John  seems 
dissonant  with  that  of  the  other  Evangelists. 
These  passages  are  discussed  in  the  various  com- 
mentaries, but  nowhere  more  fully  than  in  a  paper 
by  Dr.  Robinson  (Bibliotheca  Sacra.  1845,  p. 
405),  reproduced  in  his  (English)  Harmony  in  an 
abridged  form. 

One  Person  alone  has  been  calm  amidst  the 
excitements  of  that  night  of  horrors.  On  Him  is 
now  laid  the  weight  of  His  cross,  or  at  least 
of  the  transverse  beam  of  it  ;  and,  with  this 
pressing  Him  down,  they  proceed  out  of  the  city 
to  Golgotha  or  Calvary,  a  place  the  site  of  which 
is  now  uncertain.  As  He  began  to  droop,  His 
persecutors,  unwilling  to  defile  themselves  with  the 
accursed  burden,  lay  hold  of  Simon  of  Gyrene 
and  compel  him  to  carry  the  cross  after  Jesus. 
Amongst  the  great  multitude  that  followed,  were 
several  women,  who  bewailed  and  lamented  Him. 
He  bade  them  not  to  weep  for  Him,  but  for  the 
widespread  destruction  of  their  nation  which  should 
be  the  punishment  for  His  death  (Luke).  After 
offering  Him  wine  and  myrrh,  they  crucified  Him 
between  two  thieves.  Nothing  was  wanting  to 
His  humiliation;  a  thief  had  been  preferred  before 
Him,  and  two  thieves  share  His  punishment.  The 
soldiers  divided  His  garments  and  cast  lots  for 
them  (see  Psalm  xxii.  18).  Pilate  set  over  Him 
in  three  languages  the  inscription  "Jesus,  the  King 
of  the  Jews."  The  chief-priests  took  exception  to 
this  that  it  did  not  denounce  Him  as  falsely  calling 
Himself  by  that  name,  but  Pilate  refused  to  alter 
it.  The  passers-by  and  the  Roman  soldiers  would 
not  let  even  the  minutes  of  deadly  agony  pass  in 
peace;  they  reviled  and  mocked  Him.  One  of  the 
two  thieves  underwent  a  change  of  heart  even  on 
the  cross:  he  reviled  at  first  (Matt.);  and  then, 
at  the  sight  of  the  constancy  of  Jesus,  repented 
(Luke)  (Matt,  xxvii.  ;  Mark  xv. ;  Luke  xxiii.  ; 
John  xix.). 

In  the  depths  of  His  bodily  suffering,  Jesus 
calmly  commended  to  John  (?),  who  stood  near, 
the  care  of  Mary  his  mother.  "Behold  thy  son! 
behold  thy  mother."  From  the  sixth  hour:  to  the 
ninth  there  was  darkness  over  the  whole  land.  At 
the  ninth  hour  (8  P.M.)  Jesus  uttered  with  a 
loud  voice  the  opening  words  of  the  2:2nd  Psalm, 
all  the  inspired  words  of  which  referred  to  the 
suffering  Messiah.  One  of  those  present  dipped 
a  sponge  in  the  common  sour  wine  of  the  soldiers 
and  put  it  on  a  reed  to  moisten  the  sufferer's 
lips.  Again  He  cried  with  a  loud  voice,  "  It  is 
finished"  (John),  "  Father,  into  thy  hands  I  com- 
mend my  spirit  "  ( Luke)  ;  and  gave  up  the  ghost. 
His  words  upon  the  cross  had  all  of  them  shown 
how  truly  He  possessed  His  soul  in  patience  even 
to  the  end  of  the  sacrifice  He  was  making: 
"Father,  forgive  them!"  was  a  prayer  for  His 
enemies.  "  This  day  shalt  thou  be  with  me  in 
Paradise,"  was  a  merciful  acceptance  of  the  offer 
of  a  penitent  heart.  "  Woman,  behold  thy  son," 
was  a  sign  of  loving  consideration,  even  at  the 
last,  for  those  He  had  always  loved.  "  Why  hast 
Thou  forsaken  me?"  expressed  the  fear  ami  the 
need  of  God.  "  I  thirst,"  the  only  word  that 
related    to    Himself,   was   uttered   because   it    was 


JESUS  CHRIST 

prophesied  that  they  were  to  give  Him  vinegar 
to  drink.  "  It  is  finished,"  expresses  the  comple- 
tion of  that  work  which,  when  He  was  twelve 
years  old,  had  been  present  to  His  mind,  and  never 
absent  since ;  and  "  Into  Thy  hands  I  commend 
My  spirit,"  was  the  last  utterance  of  His  resig- 
nation of  Himself  to  what  was  laid  upon  Him 
(Matt,  xxvii.  31-56 ;  Mark  xv.  20-41  ;  Luke  xxiii. 
33-49  ;  John  xix.  17-30). 

On  the  death  of  Jesus  the  veil  which  covered  the 
most  Holy  Places  of  the  Temple,  the  place  of  the 
more  especial  presence  of  Jehovah,  was  rent  in 
twain,  a  symbol  that  we  may  now  have  "  boldness 
to  enter  into  the  holiest  by  the  blood  of  Jesus  by 
a  new  and  living  way  which  He  hath  consecrated  for 
us,  through  the  veil,  that  is  to  say,  through  His 
flesh"  (Heb.  x.  19,  20).  The  priesthood  of  Christ 
superseded  the  priesthood  of  the  law.  There  was 
a  great  earthquake.  Many  who  were  dead  rose 
from  their  graves,  although  they  returned  to  the 
dust  again  after  this  great  token  of  Christ's  quick- 
ening power  had  been  given  to  many  (Matt.) : 
they  were  "saints"  that  slept — probably  those 
who  had  most  earnestly  longed  for  the  salvation 
of  Christ  were  the  first  to  taste  the  fruits  of  His 
conquest  of  death.  The  centurion  who  kept  guard, 
witnessing  what  had  taken  place,  came  to  the 
same  conclusion  as  Pilate  and  his  wife,  "  Certainly 
this  was  a  righteous  man  ;"  he  went  beyond  them, 
"Truly  this  man  was  the  .Son  of  God"  (Mark). 
Even  the  people  who  had  joined  in  the  mocking 
and  reviling  were  overcome  by  the  wonders  of  His 
death,  and  "  smote  their  breasts  and  returned " 
(Luke  xxiii.  48).  The  Jews,  very  zealous  for 
the  Sabbath  in  the  midst  of  their  murderous  work, 
begged  Pilate  that  he  would  put  an  end  to  the 
punishment  by  breaking  the  legs  of  the  criminals 
(Lactant.  iv.  26)  that  they  might  be  taken  down 
and  buried  before  the  Sabbath,  for  which  they  were 
preparing  (Deut,  xxi.  23 ;  Joseph.,  B.  J.  iv.  5, 
§  2).  Those  who  were  to  execute  this  duty 
found  that  Jesus  was  dead  and  the  thieves  still 
living ;  so  they  performed  this  work  on  the  latter 
only,  that  a  bone  of  Him  might  not  be  broken 
(Ex.  xii.  46  ;  Psalm  xxxiv.  20).  The  death  of  the 
Lord  before  the  others  was,  no  doubt,  partly  the 
consequence  of  the  previous  mental  suffering  which 
He  had  undergone,  and  partly  because  His  will 
to  die  lessened  the  natural  resistance  of  the  frame 
to  dissolution.  Some  seek  for  a  "  mysterious 
cause "  of  it,  something  out  of  the  course  of 
nature  ;  but  we  must  beware  of  such  theories  as 
would  do  away  with  the  reality  of  the  death,  as 
a  punishment  inflicted  by  the  hands  of  men. 
Joseph  of  Arimathea,  a  member  of  the  Council 
but  a  secret  disciple  of  Jesus,  came  to  Pilate  to 
beg  the  body  of  Jesus,  that  he  might  bury  it. 
Nicodemus  assisted  in  this  work  of  love,  and  they 
anointed  the  bodv  and  laid  it  in  Joseph's  new  tomb 
(Matt,  xxvii.  50-61  ;  Mark  xv.  37-47  ;  Luke  xxiii. 
46-56  ;  John  xix.  30-42). 

Saturday  the  16th  of  Nisan  {April  8th). — Love 
having  done  its  part,  hatred  did  its  part  also. 
The  chief  priests  and  Pharisees,  with  Pilate's  per- 
mission, set  a  watch  over  the  tomb,  " 'lest  His 
disciples  come  by  night  and  steal  Him  away,  and 
say  unto  the  people  He  is  risen  from  the  dead  " 
(Matt,  xxvii.  62-66). 

Sunday  the  17th  of  Nisan  (April  9th).- — The 
Sabbath  ended  at  six  on  the  evening  of  Nisan  16th. 
Early  the  next  morning  the  resurrection  of  Jesus 
took  place.     Although  He  had  lain  in  the  grave  for 


JESUS  CHRIST 

about  thirty-six  or  forty  hours,  yet  these  formed  part 
of  three  days,  and  thus,  by  a  mode  of  speaking  not 
unusual  to  the  Jews  (Josephus  frequently  reckons 
years  in  this  manner,  the  two  extreme  portions  of 
a  year  reckoning  as  two  years),  the  time  of  the 
dominion  of  death  over  Him  is  spoken  of  as  three 
days.  The  order  of  the  events  that  follow  is  some- 
what difficult  to  harmonise;  for  each  Evangelist 
selects  the  facts  which  belong  to  his  purpose.1" 
The  exact  hour  of  the  resurrection  is  not  men- 
tioned by  any  of  the  Evangelists.  But  from  Mark 
xvi.  '2  and  9  we  infer  that  it  was  not  long  before 
the  coming  of  the  women  ;  and  from  the  time  at 
which  the  guards  went  into  the  city  to  give  the 
alarm  the  same  inference  arises  (Matt,  xxviii.  11). 
Of  the  great  mystery  itself,  the  resumption  of  life 
by  Him  who  was  truly  dead,  we  see  but  little. 
"  There  was  a  great  earthquake,  for  the  angel  of  the 
Lord  descended  from  heaven,  and  came  and  rolled 
back  the  stone  from  the  door  and  sat  upon  it. 
His  countenance  was  like  lightning,  and  his  raiment 
white  as  snow  ;  and  for  fear  of  him  the  keepers  did 
shake,  and  became  as  dead  men  "  (Matt.).  The 
women,  who  had  stood  by  the  cross  of  Jesus,  had 
prepared  spices  on  the  evening  before,  perhaps  to 
complete  the  embalming  of  our  Lord's  body,  already 
performed  in  haste  by  Joseph  and  Nicodemus. 
They  came  very  early  on  the  first  day  of  the  week 
to  the  sepulchre.  The  names  of  the  women  are 
differently  put  by  the  several  Evangelists,  but  with 
no  real  discrepancy.  Matthew  mentions  the  two 
Marys ;  Mark  adds  Salome  to  these  two ;  Luke 
has  the  two  Marys,  Joanna,  and  others  with  them ; 
and  John  mentions  Mary  Magdalene  only.  In 
thus  citing  such  names  as  seemed  good  to  him, 
each  Evangelist  was  no  doubt  guided  by  some 
reason.  John,  from  the  especial  share  which 
Mary  Magdalene  took  in  the  testimony  to  the  fact 
of  the  resurrection,  mentions  her  only.  The  women 
discuss  with  one  another  who  should  roll  away  the 
stone,  that  they  might  do  their  pious  office  on  the 
body.  But  when  they  arrive  they  find  the  stone 
rolled  away,  and  Jesus  no  longer  in  the  Sepulchre. 
He  had  risen  from  the  dead.  Mary  Magdalene  at 
this  point  goes  back  in  haste  ;  and  at  once,  believing 
that  the  body  has  been  removed  by  men,  tells 
Peter  and  John  that  the  Lord  has  been  taken  away. 
The  other  women,  however,  go  into  the  Sepulchre, 
and  they  see  an  angel  ( Matt.,  Mark),  or  two  angels 
(Luke),  in  bright  apparel,  who  declare  to  them 
that  the  Lord  is  risen,  and  will  go  before  the 
disciples  into  Galilee.  The  two  angels,  mentioned 
by  St.  Luke,  are  probably  two  separate  appearances 

to  different   rubers  of  the  group;   for  he  alone 

mentions  an  indefinite  number  of  women.  They  now 
Leave  the  sepulchre, and  go  in  haste  to  make  known 
the  news  to  the  Apostles.  As  they  were  going, 
"  Jesus  met  them,  saying.  All  hail.  And  they 
came  and  held  Him  by  the  feet,  and  worshipped 
Him.  Then  said  Jesus  unto  them,  lie  not  afraid  ; 
go  tell  My  brethren  that  they  go  into  Galilee,  and 
then-  shall  they  see  Me."  The  eleven  do  not 
believe  the  account  when  they  receive  it.  In  the 
meantime  Peter  and  John  came  to  the  Sepulchre. 
They  ran,  in  their  eagerness,  and  John  arrived  ih^t 
and  Looked  in;  Peter  afterwards  came  up,  and  it  is 
characteristic  that  the  awe  which  had  prevented  the 
other  disciple  from  going  in  appeal's  to  have  been 


JESUS  CHRIST 


1071 


b   In  what  follows,  much    use    has  been  made  of  an 

excellent  paper  by  Dr.  Robinson,   Bibliothcca  Sacra, 

ISte,  J).  Ki2. 


untelt  by  Peter,  who  entered  at  once,  and  found  the 
grave-clothes  lying,  but  not  Him  who  had  worn 
them.  This  fact  must  have  suggested  that  the 
removal  was  not  the  work  of  human  hands.  They 
then  returned,  wondering  at  what  they  had  seen. 
Mary  Magdalene,  however,  remained  weeping  at 
the  tomb,  and  she  too  saw  the  two  angels  in  the 
tomb,  though  Peter  and  John  did  not.  They  ad- 
dress her,  and  she  answers,  still,  however,  without 
any  suspicion  that  the  Lord  is  risen.  As  she  turns 
away  she  sees  Jesus,  but  in  the  tumult  of  her 
feelings  does  not  even  recognise  Him  at  His  first 
address.  But  He  calls  her  by  name,  and  then  she 
joyfully  recognises  her  Master,.  He  says,  "  Touch 
Me  not,  for  1  am  not  yet  ascended  to  My  Father: 
but  go  to  My  brethren,  and  say  unto  them,  I 
ascend  unto -My  Father  and  your  Father,  and  to 
My  God  and  your  God."  The  meaning  of  the 
prohibition  to  touch  Him  must  be  sought  in  the 
state  of  mind  of  Mary,  since  Thomas,  for  whom 
it  was  desirable  as  an  evidence  of  the  identity  of 
Jesus,  was  permitted  to  touch  Him.  Hitherto  she 
had  not  realized  the  mystery  of  the  Resurrection. 
She  saw  the  Lord,  and  would  have  touched  His 
hand  or  His  garment  in  her  joy.  Our  Lord's 
answer  means,  "  Death  has  now  set  a  gulf  between 
us.  Touch  not,  as  you  once  might  have  done, 
this  body,  which  is  now  glorified  by  its  conquest 
over  death,  for  with  this  body  I  ascend  to  the 
Father"  (so  Euthymius,  Theophylact,  and  others). 
Space  has  been  wanting  to  discuss  the  difficulties 
of  arrangement  that  attach  to  this  part  of  the 
narrative.  The  remainder  of  the  appearances  pre- 
sent less  matter  for  dispute  ;  in  enumerating  them 
the  important  passage  in  1  Cor.  xv.  must  be  brought 
in.  The  third  appearance  of  our  Lord  was  to 
Peter  (Luke,  Paul) ;  the  fourth  to  the  two  disciples 
going  to  Emmaus  in  the  evening  (Mark,  Luke)  ; 
the  fifth  in  the  same  evening  to  the  eleven  as  they 
sat  at  meat  (Mark,  Luke,  John).  All  of  these 
occurred  on  the  first  day  of  the  week,  the  very  day 
of  the  Resurrection.  Exactly  a  week  after,  He 
appealed  to  the  Apostles,  and  gave  Thomas  a  con- 
vincing proof  of  His  Resurrection  (John)  ;  this 
was  the  sixth  appearance.  The  seventh  was  in 
Galilee,  where  seven  of  the  Apostles  were  assembled, 
some  of  them  probably  about  to  return  to  their  old 
trade  of  fishing  (John).  The  eighth  was  to  the 
eleven  (Matt.),  ami  probably  to  five  hundred  bre- 
thren assembled  with  them  (raid)  on  a  mountain 
in  Galilee.  The  ninth  was  to  James  (Paul);  and 
the  last  to  the  Apostles  at  Jerusalem  just  before 
the  Ascension  ( .Vets). 

Whether  this  be  1  he  exact  enumeration,  whether 
a  single  appearance  may  have  been  quoted  twice, 
or  two  distinct  ones  identified,  it  is  clear  that  for 
forty  days  the  lord  appeared  to  His  disciples  and 
to  others  at  intervals.  These  disciples,  ai  cording 
to  the  common  testimony  of  all  the  Evan: 
were  by  no  means  enthusiastic  and  prejudiced  ex- 
pectants of  the  resurrection.  They  were  sober- 
minded  men.  They  were  only  too  slow  to  appre- 
hend the  nature  of  our  Lord's  kingdom.  Almost 
to  the  last  they  shrank  from  the  notion  of  His 
suffering  death,  and  thought  that  such  a  calamity 
would  be  the  absolute  termination  of  all  their 
hopes.     Hut  from  the  time  of  tie1  Ascension  they 

went    about    preaching    the    truth    that    Jesus    was 

risen  from  the  dead.  Kings  could  not  alter  their 
conviction  on  this  point;  the  fear  of  death  could 
not  hinder  them  from  proclaiming  it  (see  Acts  ii. 
'J  J.  32,  iv.  8-13,  hi.,  x.  xiii.  ;   1  Cor.xv.  5;    1  IVt. 


1072 


JESUS  CHEIST 


i.  '-'1).  Against  this  event  no  veal  objection  has 
ever  been  brought,  except  that  it  is  a  miracle.  So 
far  as  historical  testimony  goes,  nothing  is  better 
established. 

In  giving  His  disciples  their  final  commission, 
the  Lord  said,  "  All  power  is  given  unto  me  in 
heaven  and  in  earth.  Go  ye  therefore  and  teach 
all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the 
Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost : 
Teaching  them  to  observe  all  things  whatsoever  I 
have  commanded  you:  and  lo,  I  am  with  you 
always,  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world"  (Matt. 
xxviii.  18-20).  The  living  energy  of  Christ  is 
ever  present  with  His  Church,  even  though  He  has 
withdrawn  from  it  His  bodily  presence.  And  the 
facts  of  the  life  that  has  been  before  us  are  the  sub- 
stance of  the  apostolic  teaching  now  as  in  all  ages. 
That  God  and  man  were  reconciled  by  the  mission 
of  the  Redeemer  into  the  world,  and  by  His  self- 
devotion  to  death  (2  Cor.  v.  18  ;  Eph.  i.  10  ;  Col. 
i.  20),  that  this  sacrifice  has  procured  for  man  the 
restoration  of  the  divine  love  (Rom.  v.  8,  viii.  32  ; 
1  John  iv.  9) ;  that  we  by  His  incarnation  become 
the  children  of  God,  knit  to  Him  in  bonds  of  love, 
instead  of  slaves  under  the  bondage  of  the  law 
(Rom.  viii.  15,  29  ;  Gal.  iv.  1);  these  are  the  com- 
mon ideas  of  the  apostolic  teaching.  Brought  into 
such  a  relation  to  Christ  and  His  life,  we  see  in  all 
its  acts  and  stages  something  that  belongs  to  and 
instructs  us.  His  birth,  His  baptism,  temptation, 
lowliness  of  life  and  mind,  His  sufferings,  death, 
burial,  resurrection,  and  ascension,  all  enter  into 
the  apostolic  preaching,  as  furnishing  motives,  ex- 
amples, and  analogies  for  our  use.  Hence  every 
Christian  should  study  well  this  sinless  life,  not  in 
human  commentaries  only,  still  less  in  a  bare  ab- 
stract like  the  present,  but  in  the  living  pages  of 
inspiration.  Even  if  he  began  the  study  with  a 
lukewarm  belief,  he  might  hope,  with  God's  grace, 
that  the  conviction  would  break  in  upon  him  that 
did  upon  the  Centurion  at  the  cross — "  Truly  this 
is  the  Son  of  God." 

Chronology. —  Year  of  the  birth  of  Christ. — 
It  is  certain  that  our  Lord  was  born  before  the 
death  of  Herod  the  Great.  Herod  died,  according 
to  Josephus  {Ant.  xvii.  8,  §  1),  "having  reigned 
thirty-four  years  from  the  time  that  he  had  pro- 
cured Antigonus  to  be  slain  ;  but  thirty-seven  from 
the  time  that  he  had  been  declared  king  by  the 
Romans"  (see  also  B.  J.  i.  33,  §  8).  His  appoint- 
ment as  king,  according  to  the  same  writer  {Ant. 
xiv.  14,  §  5),  coincides  with  the  184th  Olympiad, 
and  the  consulship  of  C.  Domitius  Calvinus  and 
C.  Asinius  Pollio.  It  appears  that  he  was  made 
king  by  the  joint  influence  of  Antony  and  Octavius  ; 
and  the  reconciliation  of  these  two  men  took  place 
on  the  death  of  Fulvia  in  the  year  714.  Again, 
the  death  of  Antigonus  and  the  siege  of  Jerusalem, 
which  form  the  basis  of  calculation  for  the  thirty- 
four  years,  coincide  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiv.  16,  §  4)  with 
the  consulship  of  M.  Vipsanius  Agrippa  and  L. 
Caninius  Gallus,  that  is  with  the  year  of  Rome 
717  ;  and  occurred  in  the  month  Sivan  (=  June 
or  July).  From  these  facts  we  are  justified  in 
placing  the  death  of  Herod  in  A.U.C.  750.  Those 
who  place  it  one  year  later  overlook  the  mode  in 
which  Josephus  reckons  Jewish  reigns.  Wieseler 
shows  by  several  passages  that  he  reckons  the  year 
from  the  month  Nisan  to  Nisan,  and  that  he  counts 
the  fragment  of  a  year  at  either  extreme  as  one 
complete  year.  In  this  mode,  thirty-four  years, 
from  June  or  July  717,  would  apply  to  any  date 


JESUS  CHRIST 

between  the  first  of  Nisan  750,  and  the  first  of 
Nisan  751.  And  thirty-seven  years  from  714 
would  apply  likewise  to  any  date  within  the  same 
termini.  Wieseler  finds  facts  confirmatory  of  this 
in  the  dates  of  the  reigns  of  Herod  Antipas  and 
Archelaus  (see  his  Chronologische  Synapse,  p.  55). 
Between  these  two  dates  Josephus  furnishes  means 
for  a  more  exact  determination.  Just  after  Herod's 
death  the  Passover  occurred  (Nisan  15th),  and 
upon  Herod's  death  Archelaus  caused  a  seven-days' 
mourning  to  be  kept  for  him  {Ant.  xvii.  9,  §  3,  xvii. 
8,  §  4) ;  so  that  it  would  appear  that  Herod  died 
somewhat  more  than  seven  days  before  the  Passover 
in  750,  and  therefore  in  the  first  few  days  of  the 
month  Nisan  A.u.C.  750.  Now,  as  Jesus  was  born 
before  the  death  of  Herod,  it  follows  that  the 
Dionysian  era,  which  corresponds  to  A.U.C.  754,  is 
at  least  four  years  too  late. 

Many  have  thought  that  the  star  seen  by  the 
wise  men  gives  grounds  for  an  exact  calculation  of 
the  time  of  our  Lord's  birth.  It  will  be  found, 
however,  that  this  is  not  the  case.  For  it  has 
first  been  assumed  that  the  star  was  not  properly  a 
star,  but  an  astronomical  conjunction  of  known 
stars.  Kepler  finds  a  conjunction  of  Jupiter  and 
Saturn  in  the  sign  Pisces  in  A.u.C.  747,  and 
again  in  the  spring  of  the  next  year,  with  the  planet 
Mars  added  ;  and  from  this  he  would  place  the  birth 
of  Jesus  in  748.  Ideler,  on  the  same  kind  of  calcu- 
lation, places  it  in  A.U.C.  747.  But  this  process 
only  proves  a  highly  improbable  date,  on  highly 
improbable  evidence.  The  words  of  St.  Matthew 
are  extremely  hard  to  reconcile  with  the  notion  of  a 
conjunction  of  planets  ;  it  was  a  star-  that  appeared, 
and  it  gave  the  Magi  ocular  proof  of  its  purpose  by 
guiding  them  to  where  the  young  child  was.  But 
a  new  light  has  been  thrown  on  the  subject  by 
the  Rev.  C.  Pritchard,  who  has  made  the  calcula- 
tions afresh.  Ideler  {Handbuch  d.  Chronologic) 
asserts  that  there  were  three  conjunctions  of 
Jupiter  and  Saturn  in  B.C.  7,  and  that  in  the 
third  they  approached  so  near  that,  "  to  a  person 
with  weak  eyes,  the  one  planet  would  almost  seem 
to  come  within  the  range  of  the  dispersed  light  of 
the  other,  so  that  both  might  appear  as  one  star." 
Dean  Alford  puts  it  much  more  strongly,  that 
on  November  12  in  that  year  the  planets  were 
so  close  "  that  an  ordinary  eye  would  regard  them 
as  one  star  of  surpassing  brightness  "  (Greek  Test. 
in  foe).  Mr.  Pritchard  finds,  and  his  calculations 
have  been  verified  and  confirmed  at  Greenwich, 
that  this  conjunction  occurred  not  on  November  12 
but  early  on  December  5 ;  and  that  even  with 
Ideler's  somewhat  strange  postulate  of  an  observer 
with  weak  eyes,  the  planets  could  never  have  ap- 
peared as  one  star,  for  they  never  approached  each 
other  within  double  the  apparent  diameter  of  the 
moon  ( Memoirs R.  Astr.Soc.  vol.  xxv.).  [Star  in 
the  East.]  Most  of  the  chronologists  find  an  element 
of  calculation  in  the  order  of  Herod  to  destroy  all 
the  children  "  from  two  years  old  and  under  "  (enrb 
Sierovs  Kal  Karwrepoo,  Matt.  ii.  16).  But  the 
age  within  which  he  destroyed,  would  be  mea- 
sured rather  by  the  extent  of  his  fears  than  by  the 
accuracy  of  the  calculation  of  the  Magi.  Greswell 
has  laboured  to  show  that,  from  the  inclusive  mode 
of  computing  years,  mentioned  above  in  this  article, 
the  phrase  of  the  Evangelist  would  apply  to  all 
children  just  turned  one  year  old,  which  is  true; 
but  he  assumes  that  it  would  not  apply  to  any 
that  were  older,  say  to,  those  aged  a  year  and 
eleven   months.     Herod  was  a  cruel  man.  angry, 


JESUS  CHRIST 

and  afraid  ;  and  it  is  vain  to  assume  that  he  adjusted 
the  limit  of  his  cruelties  with  the  nicest  accuracy. 
As  a  basis  of  calculation  the  visit  of  the  Magi, 
though  very  important  to  us  in  other  respects, 
must  be  dismissed  (but  see  Greswell,  Dissertations, 
&c,  Diss.  18th;  Wieseler,  Chron.  Syn.  p.  57, 
sqq.,  with  all  the  references  there). 

The  census  taken  by  Augustus  Caesar,  which 
led  to  the  journey  of  Mary  from  Nazareth  just 
before  the  birth  of  the  Lord,  has  also  been  looked 
on  as  an  important  note  of  time,  in  reference  to 
the  chronology  of  the  life  of  Jesus.  Several 
difficulties  have  to  be  disposed  of  in  considering 
it.  (i.)  It  is  argued  that  there  is  no  reeoid  in 
other  histories  of  a  census  of  the  whole  I  Ionian 
empire  in  the  time  of  Augustus.  (ii.)  Such  a 
census,  if  held  during  the  reign  of  Herod  the 
Great,  would  not  have  included  Judaea,  for  it 
was  not  yet  a  Roman  province,  (iii.)  The  Roman 
mode  of  taking  such  a  census  was  with  reference  to 
actual  residence,  so  that  it  would  not  have  been 
requisite  for  Joseph  to  go  to  Bethlehem,  (iv.)  The 
state  of  Mary  at  the  time  would  render  such  a 
journey  less  probable,  (v.)  St.  Luke  himself  seems 
to  say  that  this  census  was  not  actually  taken 
until  ten  years  later  (ii.  2).  To  these  objections, 
of  which  it  need  not  be  said  Strauss  has  made  the 
worst,  answers  may  be  given  in  detail,  though 
scarcely  in  this  place  with  the  proper  completeness, 
(i.)  "  As  we  know  of  the  leg  is  actiunes  and  their 
abrogation,  which  were  quite  as  important  in  re- 
spect to  the  early  period  of  Roman  history,  as  the 
census  of  the  empire  was  in  respect  to  a  later 
period,  not  from  the  historical  works  of  Livy, 
Dionysius,  or  Polybius,  but  from  a  legal  work,  the 
Institutes  ofGaius;  so  we  should  think  it  strange 
if  the  works  of  Paullus  and  [Jlpian  De  Censibus 
had  come  down  to  us  perfect,  and  no  mention  were 
made  in  them  of  the  census  of  Augustus  ;  while  it 
would  not  surprise  us  that  in  the  ordinary  histories 
of  the  time  it  should  be  passed  over  in  silence  " 
(Huschke  in  Wieseler,  p.  78).  "  If  Suetonius  in 
his  life  [of  Augustus]  does  not  mention  this  census, 
neither  does  Spartian  in  his  life  of  Hadrian  devote 
a  single  syllable  to  the  edictum  perpetmm,  which, 
in  later  times,  has  chiefly  adorned  the  name  of  that 
emperor"  (ibid.).  Thus  it  seems  that  the  un/n- 
mentum  de  tacitumitate  is  very  far  from  conclu- 
sive. The  edict  possibly  affected  only  the  provinces, 
and  in  them  was  not  carried  out  at  once  ;  and  in 
that  case  it  would  attract  less  attention  at  any  one 
particular  moment. 

In  the  time  of  Augustus  all  the  procurators  of 
tlii'  empire  were  brought  under  his  sole  control  and 
supervision  for  the  first  time  A.U.C.  731  (Dion  Cass. 
liii.  32).  This  movement  towards  centralisation 
renders  it  not  improbable  that  a  general  census  of 
the  empire  should  be  oidered,  although  it  may  not 
have  been  carried  into  effect  suddenly,  nor  intended 
to  be  so.  But  proceedings  in  the  way  of  an  esti- 
mate of  the  empire,  if  not  an  actual  census,  are 
distinctly  recorded  to  have  taken  place  in  the  time 
of  Augustus.  "  lluie  addendae  sunt  mensurae 
limit 1 1 in  et  terminorum  ex  libris  Augusti  et  Neronis 
Caesarum:  sed  et  Baibi  mensoris,  qui  temporibus 
Augusti  omnium  provinciarum  et  civitatiim  lormas 
et  mensuras  compertas  in  commentaries  retulit  et 
legem  agrariam  per  universitatena  provinciarum 
distinxit  et  declaravit"  (Frontinus,  in  the  Rei 
Agrar.  Auct.  of  Goes,  p.  109,  quoted  by  Wieseler). 
This  is  confirmed  from  other  sources  (Wieseler, 
pp.  81,  82).     Augustus  directed,  as  we  learn,  a 


JESUS  CHRIST 


1073 


breviarium  totius  imperii  to  be  made,  in  which, 
according  to  Tacitus,  "  Opes  publicae  continebantur: 
quantum  civium  sociorumque  in  armis,  quot 
classes,  regna,  provinciae,  tributa  aut  vectigalia  et 
necessitates  ac  largitiones  "  (Tacit.  Annul,  i.  1]  ; 
Sueton.  Aug.  28,  101  ;  Dion  Cass.  liii.  30  ;  lvi.  33, 
given  in  Wieseler ;  see  also  Ritschl,  in  Ilhein.  Mus. 
fiir  J'/iilol.  N.  Series,  i.  481).  All  this  makes  a 
census  by  order  of  Augustus  in  the  highest  degree 
probable,  apart  fi om  St.  Luke's  testimony.  The  time 
of  our  Lord's  birth  was  most  propitious.  Except 
some  troubles  in  Dacia  the  Roman  world  was  at 
peace,  and  Augustus  was  in  the  full  enjoyment  of 
his  power.  But  there  are  persons  who,  though  they 
would  at  once  believe  this  fact  on  the  testimony  of 
some  inferior  historian,  added  to  these  confirmatory 
facts,  reject  it  just  because  an  Evangelist  has  said 
it.  (ii.  and  iii.)  Next  comes  the  objection,  that, 
as  Judaea  was  not  yet  a  Roman  province,  such 
a  census  would  not  have  included  that  country, 
and  that  it  was  not  taken  from  the  residence  of  each 
person,  but  from  the  place  of  his  origin.  It  is  very 
probable  that  the  mode  of  taking  the  census  would 
afford  a  clue  to  the  origin  of  it.  Augustus  was 
willing  to  include  in  his  census  all  the  tributary 
kingdoms,  for  the  regna  are  mentioned  in  the  pas- 
sage in  Tacitus ;  but  this  could  scarcely  be  enforced. 
Perhaps  Herod,  desiring  to  gratify  the  Emperor, 
and  to  emulate  him  in  his  love  tor  this  kind  of 
information,  was  ready  to  undertake  the  census  for 
Judaea,  but  in  order  that  it  might  appear  to  be  his 
rather  than  the  emperor's,  he  took  it  in  the  Jewish 
manner  rather  than  in  the  Roman,  in  the  place 
whence  the  family  sprang,  rather  than  in  that  of 
actual  residence.  There  might  be  some  hardship 
in  this,  and  we  might  wonder  that  a  woman  about 
to  become  a  mother  should  be  compelled  to  leave 
her  home  for  such  a  purpose,  if  we  weie  sure  that 
it  was  not  voluntary.  A  Jew  of  the  house  and 
lineage  of  David  would  not  willingly  forego  that 
position,  and  if  it  were  necessary  to  assert  it  by 
going  to  the  city  of  David,  he  would  probably 
make  some  sacrifice  to  do  so.  Thus  the  objection 
(iv.),  on  the  ground  of  the  state  of  Mary's  health, 
is  entitled  to  little  consideration.  It  is  said  indeed 
that  '•  all  went  to  be  taxed,  every  one  into  his  own 
city"  (Luke  ii.  3);  but  not  that  the  decree  pre- 
scribed that  they  should.  Nor  could  there  well  be 
any  means  of  enforcing  such  a  regulation.  But  the 
principle  being  adopted,  that  Jews  were  to  be  taxed 
in  the  places  to  which  their  families  belonged, 
St.  Luke  tells  us  by  these  words  that  as  a  matter 
of  fact  it  was  generally  followed,  (v.)  The  objec- 
tion that,  according  to  St.  Luke's  own  admission, 
the  census  was  not  taken  now,  but,  when  Quirinus 
was  governor  of  Syria,  remains  to  be  disposed  of. 
St.  Luke  makes  two  statements,  that  at  the  time 
of  our  Lord's  birth  ("  in  those  days  ")  there  was  a 
decree  for  a  census,  and  that  this  taxing  tiist  came 
about,  or  took  effect  (irpdrri  tyivtrot,  when  Cv- 
renius,  or  Quirinus,  was  governor  of  Syria  (Luke  ii. 
1,2).  And  as  the  two  statements  are  quite  dis- 
tinct, and  the  very  form  of  expression  calls  special 
attention  to  some  remarkable  circumstance  about 
this  census,  no  historical  inaccuracy  is  proved, 
unless  the  statements  are  shown  to  lie  contra- 
dictory, or  one  or  other  of  them  to  be  untrue. 
That  Strauss  makes  such  a  charge  without  esta- 
blishing either  of  these  grounds,  is  worthy  of  a 
writer  so  dishonest  i  Leben  Jesu,  i.  iv.  32).  Now. 
without  going  into  all  the  theories  that  have  been 
proposed  to  explain  this  second  verse,  there  is  no 


1074 


JESUS  CHRIST 


doubt  that  the  words  of  St.  Luke  can  be  explained  in 
a  natural  manner,  without  violence  to  the  sense  or 
contradiction.  Herod  undertakes  the  census  accord- 
ing to  Jewish  forms ;  but  his  death  the  same  year 
puts  an  end  to  it,  and  no  more  is  heard  of  it :  but 
for  its  influence  as  to  the  place  of  our  Lord's  birth 
it  would  not  have  been  recorded  at  all.  But  the 
Evangelist  knows  that,  as  soon  as  a  census  (curo- 
ypcKprj)  is  mentioned,  persons  conversant  with 
Jewish  history  will  think  at  once  of  the  census 
taken  after  the  banishment  of  Archelaus,  or  about 
ten  years  later,  which  was  avowedly  a  Roman 
census,  and  which  caused  at  first  some  resistance  in 
consequence  (Joseph.  Ant.  xviii.  1 ,  §  1  J.  The  second 
verse  therefore  means — "  No  census  was  actually 
completed  then,  and  I  know  that  the  first  Roman 
census  was  that  which  followed  the  banishment  of 
Archelaus ;  but  the  decree  went  out  much  earlier, 
in  the  time  of  Herod."  That  this  is  the  only  pos- 
sible explanation  of  so  vexed  a  passage  cannot  of 
course  be  affirmed.0  But  it  will  bear  this  inter- 
pretation, and  ujjon  the  whole  evidence  theie  is  no 
ground  whatever  for  denying  either  assertion  of  the 
Evangelist,  or  for  considering  them  irreconcileable. 
.Many  writers  have  confounded  an  obscurity  with  a 
proved  inaccuracy.  The  value  of  this  census,  as  a 
fact  in  the  chronology  of  the  life  of  Christ,  depends 
on  the  connexion  which  is  sought  to  be  established 
between  it  and  the  insurrection  which  broke  out 
under  Matthias  and  Judas,  the  son  of  Sariphaeus,  in 
the  last  illness  of  Herod  (Joseph.  Ant.  xv.  6,  §  1). 
If  the  insurrection  arose  out  of  the  census,  a  point 
of  connexion  between  the  sacred  history  and  that  of 
Josephus  is  made  out.  Such  a  connexion,  however, 
lias  not  been  clearly  made  out  (see  Wieseler,  Ols- 
hauseu,  and  others,  for  the  giounds  on  which  it  is 
supposed  to  rest). 

The  age  of  Jesus  at  His  baptism  (Luke  iii.  23) 
affords  an  element  of  calculation.  "  And  Jesus 
Himself  began  to  be  about  (cLcrel)  thirty  years  of 
age."  Born  in  the  beginning  of  A.u.C.  750  (or 
the  end  of  749),  Jesus  would  be  thirty  in  the  be- 
ginning of  A.u.C.  780  (a.d.  27).  Greswell  is  pro- 
bably right  in  placing  the  baptism  of  our  Lord  in 
the  beginning  of  this  year,  and  the  first  Passover 
during  His  ministry  would  be  that  of  the  same 
year ;  Wieseler  places  the  baptism  later,  in  the 
spring  or  summer  of  the  same  year.  (On  the  sense 
of  apxofj-evos,  see  the  commentators.)  To  this  first 
Passover  after  the  baptism  attaches  a  note  of  time 
which  will  confirm  the  calculations  already  made. 
"  Then  said  the  Jews,  Forty  and  six  years  was  this 
Temple  in  building  (wko5o/j.t}07]),  and  wilt  Thou 
rear  it  up  in  three  days?"  There  can  be  no  doubt 
that  this  refers  to  the  rebuilding  of  the  Temple  by 
Herod :  it  cannot  mean  the  second  Temple,  built 
after  the  captivity,  for  this  was  finished  in  twenty 
years  (B.C.  535  to  B.C.  515).  Herod,  in  the 
eighteenth  year  of  his  reign  (Joseph.  Ant.  xv.  11, 
§  1),  began  to  reconstruct  the  Temple  on  a  larger 
and  more  splendid  scale  (A.U.C.  734).  The  work 
was  not  finished  till  long  after  his  death,  till 
A.U.C.  818.  It  is  inferred  from  Josephus  (Ant. 
xv.  11,  §  5  &  6)  that  it  was  begun  in  the  month 


c  See  a  summary  of  the  older  theories  in  Euinol 
(in  Lue.  ii.  2);  also  in  Meyer  (in  Luc.  ii.  2],  who 
gives  an  account  of  the  view,  espoused  by  many,  that 
Quirinus  was  now  a  special  commissioner  for  this 
census  in  Syria  (vye^  ■  tt?s  Supi'as),  which  the  Greek 
will  not  bear.  But  if  the-theory  of  the  younger  Zumpt 
(see  above,  Cykenius)  be  correct,  then  Quirinus  Mas 
twice  governor   of  Syria,   and    the   Evangelist  would 


JESUS  CHRIST 

Cisleu,  A.u.C.  734.  And  if  the  Passover  at  which 
this  remark  was  made  was  that  of  A.U.C.  78U, 
then  forty-five  years  and  some  months  have  elapsed, 
which,  according  to  the  Jewish  mode  of  leckoning 
(p.  1072),  would  be  spoken  of  as  "forty  and  six 
years." 

Thus  the  death  of  Herod  enables  us  to  fix  a 
boundary  on  one  side  to  the  calculations  of  our 
Lord's  birth.  The  building  of  the  Temple,  for 
forty-six  years,  confirms  this,  and  also  gives  a 
boundary  on  the  other.  From  the  star  of  the  Magi 
nothing  conclusive  can  be  gathered,  nor  from  the 
census  of  Augustus.  One  datum  remains :  the 
commencement  of  the  preaching  of  John  the  Baptist 
is  connected  with  the  fifteenth  year  of  the  reign  of 
Tiberius  Caesar  (Luke  iii.  1).  The  rule  of  Tiberius 
may  be  calculated  either  from  the  beginning  of  his 
sole  reign,  after  the  death  of  Augustus,  A.U.C.  7(37, 
or  from  his  joint  government  with  Augustus,  i.  e. 
from  the  beginning  of  A.U.C.  765.  In  the  latter 
case  the  fifteenth  year  would  correspond  with 
A.u.C.  779,  which  goes  to  confirm  the  rest  of  the 
calculations  relied  on  in  this  article. 

An  endeavour  has  been  made  to  deduce  the  time 
of  the  year  of  the  birth  of  Jesus  from  the  fact  that 
Zacharias  was  "a  priest  of  the  course  of  Abia" 
(Luke  i.  5).  The  twenty-four  courses  of  priests 
served  in  the  Temple  according  to  a  regular  weekly 
cycle,  the  order  of  which  is  known.  The  date  of 
the  conception  of  John  would  be  about  fifteen 
months  before  the  birth  of  our  Lord,  and  if  the 
date  of  the  latter  be  A.U.C.  750,  then  the  former 
would  tall  in  A.U.C  748.  Can  it  be  ascertained  in 
what  part  of  the  year  748  the  course  of  Abia  would 
be  on  duty  in  the  Temple?  The  Talmud  preserves 
a  tradition  that  the  Temple  was  destroyed  by 
Titus,  A.D.  70,  on  the  ninth  day  of  the  mouth  Ab. 
Josephus  mentions  the  date  as  the  10th  of  Ab 
{Bel.  Jud.  vi.  4,  §  5  &  8).  Without  attempting  to 
follow  the  steps  by  which  these  are  reconciled,  it 
seems  that  the  "  course"  of  Jehoiarib  had  just 
entered  upon  its  weekly  duty  at  the  time  the 
Temple  was  destroyed.  Wieseler,  assuming  that 
the  day  in  question  would  be  the  same  as  the 
5th  of  August,  A.U.C.  823,  reckons  back  the 
weekly  courses  to  A.U.C.  748,  the  course  of  Je- 
hoiarib being  the  first  of  all  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  7). 
"  It  follows,"  he  says,  "  that  the  ministration 
of  the  course  of  Abia,  74  years"  10  months  and 
2  days,  or  (reckoning  19  intercalary  years)  27,335 
days,  earlier  (  =  162  hieratic  circles  and  119  days 
earlier),  fell  between  the  3rd  and  9th  of  October, 
A.u.C.  748.  Reckoning  from  the  10th  of  October, 
on  which  Zacharias  might  reach  his  house,  and 
allowing  nine  months  for  the  pregnancy  of  Eliza- 
beth, to  which  six  months  are  to  be  added  (Luke 
i.  26),  we  have  in  the  whole  one  year  and  three 
months,  which  gives  the  loth  of  January  as  the 
date  of  Christ's  birth."  Greswell,  however,  from 
the  same  starting-point,  arrives  at  the  date  April 
5th;  and  when  two  writers  so  laborious  can  thus 
differ  in  their  conclusions,  we  must  rather  suspect 
the  soundness  of  their  method  than  their  accuracy 
in  the  use  of  it. 

here  refer  to  his  former  rule.  The  difficulty  is  that 
Josephus  (Ant.  xviii.  1,  §  1)  mentions  that  Quirinus 
was  sent,  after  the  banishment  of  Archelaus,  to  take 
a  census.  Either  Zumpt  would  set  this  authority 
aside,  or  would  hold  that  Quirinus,  twice  governor, 
twice  made  a  census ;  which  is  scarcely  an  easier 
hypothesis  than  some  others, 


JETHER 

Similar  differences  will  be  found  amongst  eminent 
writers  in  every  part  of  the  chronology  of  the  Gos- 
pels. For  example,  the  birth  of  our  Lord  is  placed 
in  B.C.  I  by  Pearson  and  Hug;  B.C.  2  by  Scaliger; 
B.C.  3  by  Baronius,  Calvisius,  Siiskind,  and  Paulus ; 
B.C.  4  by  Lamy,  Bengel,  Anger,  Wieseler,  and 
GreBwell;  B.C.  5  by  Usher  and  Petavius;  B.C.  7 
by  Ideler  and  Sanclemente.  And  whilst  the  cal- 
culations given  above  seem  sufficient  to  determine 
us,  with  Lamy,  Usher,  Petavius,  Bengel,  Wieseler, 
and  Greswell,  to  the  close  of  B.C.  5,  or  early  part 
of  B.C.  4,  let  it  never  be  forgotten  that  there  is  a 
distinction  between  these  researches,  which  the 
Holy  Spirit  has  left  obscure  and  doubtful,  and  "  tbe 
weightier  matters"  of  the  Gospel,  the  things  which 
directly  pertain  to  man's  salvation.  The  silence  of 
the  inspired  writers,  and  sometimes  the  obscurity 
of  their  allusions  to  matters  of  time  and  place, 
have  given  rise  to  disputation.  But  their  words 
admit  of  no  doubt  when  they  tell  us  that  Christ 
Jesus  came  into  the  world  to  save  sinners,  and  that 
wicked  hands  crucified  and  slew  Him,  and  that  we 
and  all  men  must  own  Him  as  the  Lord  and 
Redeemer. 

SOURCES. — The  bibliography  of  the  subject  of  the 
Life  of  Jesus  has  been  most  fully  set  out  in  Hase, 
Leben  Jesu,  Leipsic,  1854,  4th  edition.  It  would 
be  vain  to  attempt  to  .rival  that  enormous  catalogue. 
The  principal  works  employed  in  the  present  article 
are  the  Four  Gospels,  and  tbe  best-known  com- 
mentaries on  them,  including  those  of  Bengel,  Wet- 
stein,  Lightfoot,  I)e  Wette,  Liicke,  Olshausen,  Stier, 
Alford,  Williams,  and  others  ;  Neander,  Leben  Jesu 
(Hamburg,  1837),  as  against  Strauss,  Leben  Jesu 
(Tubingen,  1837),  also  consulted ;  Staekhouse's 
History  of  the  ISiblc  ;  Ewald,  Geschichte  ties  Volkes 
[srael,  vol.  v.,  Christus (Gottingen,  1857);  Baum- 
garten,  Geschichte  Jesu  (Brunswick,  1859)  ;  Krum- 
macher,  Der  Leidende  Christus  (Bielefeld,  1854). 
Upon  the  harmony  of  the  Gospels,  see  the  list  of 
works  given  under  GOSPELS :  the  principal  works 
used  for  the  present  article  have  been,  Wieseler, 
Chronohgische  Synapse,  &c,  Hamburg,  1843  ; 
(ireswell's  Harmony,  Prolegomena,  and  Disserta- 
tions, Oxford,  v.  y. ;  two  papers  by  Dr.  Robinson 
in  the  Bibliotheca  Sacra  for  1845  ;  and  Clausen, 
Tabulae Synopticae,  Havniae,  18*29.  Special  works, 
such  as  I  Iran  Trench  on  the  Parables  and  on  the 
Miracles,  have  also  been  consulted  ;  and  detached 
monographs,  sermons,  and  essays  in  periodicals. 
For  the  text  of  the  Gospels,  the  7th  edition  of 
Tichendorfs  Gr.  Text  has  been  employed.   [W.  T.] 

JE'THER  (-in*).  1.  ('Io0o>:  Jcthro.)  Jethro, 
the  father-in-la\V  of  .Moses,  is  so  called  in  Ex.  iv.  IS 
and  the  margin  of  A.  V..  though  in  the  Heb.-Sam. 
text  and  Sam.  version  the  reading  is  "l"in\  as  in 
the  Syriac  and  Targ.  Jon.,  one  of  Kennicott's  MSS., 
ami  a  MS.  of  Targ.  <  >nL,  No.'  1  ♦  ">  in  De  Rossi's  col- 
lection. 

2.  CliOip:  Jether.)  'flic  firstborn  of  Gideon's 
seventy  sons,  who  were  all,  with  the  exception  of 
Jotham,  the  youngest,  slain  at  Ophrah  by  Abirae- 
lech.  At  the  time  of  his  father's  victorious  pursuit 
of  the  Midianites  and  capture  of  their  kings  he  was 
still  a  lad  on  his  first  battle-field,  and  feared  to 
draw  his  sword  at  Gideon's  bidding,  and  avenge,  as 
the  representative  of  the  family,  the  slaughter  of 
his  kinsmen  at  Tabor  (Judg.  viii.  20  i. 

3.  {'UOep  in  IK.  ii.  .">.  32;  'lodop  in  1  Chr.  ii. 
17;  the  Alex.  MS.  has  'UOep  in  both  passages: 
Jether.)  The  father  of  Amasa,  captain-general  of 


JKTHETH 


1075 


Absalom's  army.  Jether  is  merely  another  form 
of  Ithra  (2  Sam.  xvii.  25),  the  latter  Vicing  pro- 
bably a  corruption.  He  is  described  in  1  Chr.  ii. 
17  as  an  Ishmaelite,  which  again  is  more  likely  to 
be  correct  than  the  "  Israelite"  of  the  Heb.  m 
2  Sam.  xvii.,  or  the  "  Jezreelite"  of  the  LXX.  and 
Yulg.  in  the  same  passage.  "  Ishmaelite "  is  said 
by  the  author  of  the  Quaest.  Hebr.  in  lib.  Beg.  to 
have  been  the  reading  of  the  Hebrew,  but  theie  is 
no  trace  of  it  in  the  MSS.  One  MS.  of  Chronicles 
reads  "  Israelite,"  as  does  the  Taiguni,  which  adds 
that  he  was  called  Jether  the  Ishmaelite,  "because 
he  girt  his  loins  with  the  sword,  to  help  David 
with  the  Arabs,  when  Abner  sought  to  drive  away 
David  and  all  the  race  of  Jesse,  who  were  not  puie 
to  enter  the  congregation  of  Jehovah  on  account 
of  Ruth  the  Moabitess."  According  to  Jarchi, 
Jether  was  an  Israelite,  dwelling  in  the  land  of 
Ishmael,  and  thence  acquired  his  surname,  like  the 
house  of  Obededom  the  Gittite.  Josephus  calls 
him  'leddpcrris  (Ant.  vii.  10,  §  1).  He  married 
Abigail,  David's  sister,  probably  during  the  sojourn 
of  the  family  of  Jesse  in  the  land  of  Moab,  under 
the  protection  of  its  king. 

4.  The  son  of  Jada,  a  descendant  of  Hezron,  of 
the  tribe  of  Judah  (i  Chr.  ii.  32).  He  died  with- 
out children,  and  being  the  eldest  son  the  succession 
fell  to  his  brother's  family. 

5.  The  son  of  Ezra,  whose  name  occurs  in  a 
dislocated  passage  in  the  genealogy  of  Judah  (1  ( !hr. 
iv.  17).  In  the  LXX.  the  name  is  repeated:  "and 
Jether  begat  Miriam,"  &c.  By  the  author  of  the 
Quaest.  Hebr.  in  Par.  he  is  said  to  have  been 
Aaron,  Ezra  being  another  name  for  Amram. 

6.  ('ledrip  ;  Alex.  'leBep.)  The  chief  of  a  family 
of  warriors  of  the  line  of  Asher,  and  father  of 
Jephunneh  (1  Chr.  vii.  38).  He  is  probably  the 
same  as  Ithran  in  the  preceding  verse.  One  of 
Kennicott's  MSS.  and  the  Alex,  had  Jether  in  both 
cases.  [W.  A.  W.] 

JE'THETH  (JIIT :  Te0e> :  Jethcth),  one  of 
the  phylarchs  (A.  V.  "dukes")  who  came  of  Esau 
(Gen.  xxxvi.  40;  1  Chr.  i.  51),  enumerated  sepa- 
rately from  the  genealogy  of  Esau's  children  in 
the  earlier  part  of  the  chapter,  "  according  to  their 
families,  after  their  places,  by  their  names,"  and 
"  according  to'  their  habitations  in  the  land  of 
their  possession"  (vers.  40-3).  This  recoid  of  the 
Edomite  phylarchs  may  point  specially  to  the  places 
and  habitations,  or  towns,  named  alter,  or  occupied 
by,  them  ;  and  even  otherwise,  we  may  look  for 
some  trace  of  their  names,  after  the  custom  of  the 
wandering  tribes  to  leave  such  footprints  in  the 
changeless  desert. ,  Identifications  of  several  ill  the 
list  have  been  proposed  :  Jetheth,  us  fir  as  the  writer 
knows,  has  not  been  yel  recovered.  He  may  how- 
ever be  probably  found  if  we  adopt  the  likely  sug- 
gestion of  Sinionis,  J"irP  =  mil*,  ''a  nail,"  "a 
tent-pin,"  &c.  (and metaphorically  "a  prince,"  &c, 

as  being  stable,  firm)  =  Arab.  Jsj..  .X^-.  with 


the  same  signification.    El-Wetideli 


unit-   ct  the  firmer)  tsaplicein  V)l  raid  to  be 

in  the  Dahna    (see  [SHBAK     :    there    is  also  a   place 

called    l.l-\\eti,|  ;    and    r.l-Wctidat    'perhaps   pi.   of 

the  first-named),  which  is  the  nan f  mountains 

belonging  to  Benee  'Abd-Allah   Ibn  Ghatfan  {Ma- 
rdsid,  s.  re).  [E.  s.  p. 


107(5  JETHLAH 

JETH'LAH  (rbn\  i.e.  Jithlah :  tiKaOd', 
Alex.  'le0Aa:  Jethela),  one  of  the  cities  of  the 
tribe  of  Dan  (Josh.  xix.  42),  named  with  Ajalon  and 
Thimnathah.  In  the  Onornasticon  it  is  mentioned, 
without  any  description  or  indication  of  position; 
as  'Itdhdv.  It  has  not  since  been  met  with,  even 
by  the  indefatigable  Tobler  in  his  late  Wandering 
ill  that  district.  [G.] 

JE'THEO  ('"TUT,  i.  e.  Jithro :  'lo06p),  called 

also  Jether  and  Hobab  ;  the  son  of  Reuel,  was 
priest  or  prince  of  Midian,  both  offices  probably 
being  combined  in  one  person.  Moses  spent  the 
forty  years  of  his  exile  from  Egypt  with  him, 
and  married  his  daughter  Zipporah.  By  the  advice 
of  Jethro,  Moses  appointed  deputies  to  judge  the 
congregation  and  share  the  burden  of  government 
with  himself  (Ex.  xviii.).  On  account  of  his  local 
knowledge  he  was  entreated  to  remain  with  the 
Israelites  throughout  their  journey  to  Canaan  ;  his 
room  however  was  supplied  by  the  ark  of  the  cove- 
nant, which  supernatural  ly  indicated  the  places  for 
encamping  (Num.  x.  31,  33).  The  idea  conveyed 
by  the  name  of  Jethro  or  Jether  is  probably  that 
of  excellence ;  and  as  Hobab  may  mean  beloved,  it 
is  quite  possible  that  both  appellations  were  given 
to  the  same  person  for  similar  reasons.  That  the 
custom  of  having  more  than  one  name  was  common 
among  the  Jews  we  see  in  the  case  of  Benjamin, 
Benoni ;  Solomon,  Jedidiah,  &c,  &c. 

It  is  said  in  Ex.  ii.  18  that  the  priest  of  Midian 
whose  daughter  Moses  married  was  Reuel ;  after- 
wards, at  chi.  iii.  1,  he  is  called  Jethro,  as  also  in 
ch.  xviii.;  but  in  Num.  x.  29  "Hobab  the  son  of 
Raguel  the  Midianite "  is  called  Moses'  father-in- 
law  :  assuming  the  identity  of  Hobab  and  Jethro, 
we  must  suppose  that  "  their  lather  Reuel,"  in  Ex. 
ii.  18,  was  really  their  grandfather,  and  that  the 
person  who  "  said,  How  is  it  that  ye  are  come  so 
soon  to-day?"  was  the  priest  of  ver.  l(i:  whereas, 
proceeding  on  the  hypothesis  that  Jethro  and  Hobab 
are  not  the  same  individual,  it  seems  difficult  to 
determine  the  relationship  of  Reuel,  Jethro,  Hobab, 
and  Moses.  The  hospitality,  freehearted  and  un- 
sought, which  Jethro  at  once  extended  to  the 
unknown  homeless  wanderer,  on  the  relation  of  his 
daughters  that  he  had  watered  their  flock,  is  a 
picture  of  Eastern  manners  no  less  true  than  lovely. 
We  may  perhaps  suppose  that  Jethro,  before  his 
acquaintance  with  Moses,  was  not  a  worshipper  of 
the  true  <<od.  Traces  of  this  appear  in  the  delay 
which  Moses  had  suffered  to  take  place  with  respect 
to  the  circumcision  of  his  son  (Ex.  iv.  24-26) : 
indeed  it  is  even  possible  that  Zipporah  had  after- 
wards been  subjected  to  a  kind  of  divorce  (Ex. 
xviii.  2,  iTn-1?^),  on  account  of  her  attachment 
to  an  alien  creed,  but  that  growing  convictions 
were  at  work  in  the  mind  of  Jethro,  from  the  cir- 
cumstance of  Israel's  continued  prosperity,  till  at 
last,  acting  upon  these,  he  brought  back  his  daugh- 
ter, and  declared  that  his  impressions  were  con- 
firmed, for  "  now  he  knew  that  the  Lord  was 
greater  than  all  gods,  for  in  the  thing  wherein  they 
dealt  proudly,  he  was  above  them  :"  consequently 
we  are  told  that  "  Jethro,  Moses'  father-in-law, 
took  a  burnt-offering  and  sacrifices  for  God:  and 
Aaron  came  and  all  the  elders  of  Israel  to  eat  bread 
with  Moses'  father-in-law  before  God;"  as  though 
to  celebrate  the  event  of  his  conversion.  Whether 
or  not  the  account  given  at  Num.  x.  29-32  refers 
to  this  same  event,  the  narrative  at  Ex.  xviii.  27 


JEUZ 

coincides  with  Hobab's  own  words  at  Num.  x.  30 ; 
and,  comparing  the  two,  we  may  suppose  that 
Moses  did  not  prevail  upon  his  father-in-law  to 
stay  with  the  congregation.  Calvin  {in  5  lib. 
Mosis  Comment.)  understands  ver.  31,  32  thus: 
"  Thou  hast  gone  with  us  hitherto,  and  hast  been 
to  us  instead  of  eyes,  and  now  what  profit  is  it  to 
thee  if,  having  suffered  so  many  troubles  and  diffi- 
culties, thou  dost  not  go  on  with  us  to  inherit  the 
promised  blessing?''  And  Mat.  Henry  imagines  that 
Hobab  complied  with  this  invitation,  and  that  traces 
of  the  settlement  of  his  posterity  in  the  land  of 
Canaan  are  apparent  at  Judg.  i.  16  and  1  Sam. 
xv.  6.  Some,  ami  among  them  Calvin,  take  Jethro 
and  Reuel  to  be  identical,  and  call  Hobab  the 
brother-in-law  of  Moses.  The  present  punctuation 
of  our  Bibles  does  not  warrant  this.  Why,  at 
Judg.  i.  16,  Moses'  father-in-law  is  called  "O^p 
(Kenite,  comp.  Gen.  xv.  19),  or  why,  at  Num. 
xii.  1,  Zipporah,  if  it  be  Zipporah,  is  called  rVC'3? 
A.  V.  Ethiopian,  is  not  clear. 

The  Mohammedan  name  of  Jethro  is  Shoaib 
(Koran  7  and  11).  There  is  a  tale  in  the  Midrash 
that  Jethro  was  a  counsellor  of  Pharaoh,  who  tried 
to  dissuade  him  from  slaughtering  the  Israelitish 
children,  and  consequently,  on  account  of  his  cle- 
mency, was  forced  to  flee  into  Midian,  but  was  re- 
warded by  becoming  the  father-in-law  of  Moses  (tee 
Weil's  Biblical  Legends,  p.  93,  note).  [Jether; 
Hobab.]  [S.  L.] 

JETUR  p-lD?  :  'lerovp,  'leTTOvp  ;  'irovpaioi : 
Jethur),   Gen.   xxv.    15;     1   Chr.   i.  31,  v.    19. 

[Ituraea.] 

JEU'EL.  1.  {bilW  ■  'lev*-  ■  Jeuel.)  A  chief 
man  of  Judah,  one  of  the  Bene-Zerah ;  apparently 
at  the  time  of  the  first  settlement  in  Jerusalem 
(1  Chr.  ix.  6;  comp.  2). 

2.  (Teou^A;  Alex.  'Ieou^A:  Gebel.)  One  of  the 
Bene-Adonikam  who  returned  to  Jerusalem  with 
Esdras  (1  Esdr.  viii.  39).     [Jeiel.] 

For  other  occurrences  of  this  name  see  Jeiel. 

JE'USH^'-IJT:  'Uovs,  'UovA,  'Uvs,  'laovs, 
'lews,   'ids,   'l5icw,   'lcods :    Jehus,  Jaus). 

1.  Son  of  Esau,  by  Aholibamah,  the  daughter 
of  Anah,  the  son  of  Zibeon  the  Hivite  (Gen.  xxxvi. 
5,  14,  18  ;  1  Chr.  i.  35).  It  appears  from  Gen. 
xxxvi.  20-25,  that  Anah  is  a  man's  name  (not  a 
woman's,  as  might  be  thought  from  ver.  2),  and, 
by  comparison  with  ver.  2,  that  the  Horites  were 
Hivites.  Jeush  was  one  of  the  Edomitish  dukes 
(ver.  18).     The  Cethib  has  repeatedly  B»JJ*,  Jeish. 

2.  Head  of  a  Benjamite  house,  which  existed  in  Da- 
vid's time,  son  of  Bilhan,  son  of  Jediael,  (1  Chr. 
vii.  10,  11). 

3.  A  Levite,  of  the  house  of  Shimei,  of  the 
family  of  the  Gershomites.  He  and  his  brother 
Beriah  were  reckoned  as  one  house  in  the  census  of 
the  Levites  taken  in  the  reign  of  David  (1  Chr. 
xxiii.  10,  11). 

4.  Son  of  Rehoboam  king  of  Judah,  by  Abihail, 
the  daughter  of  Eliab,  the  son  of  Jesse  (2  Chr.  xi. 
18,  19).  [A.  C.  H.] 

JE'UZ  (y-IJP:  'U/3o6s,  Alex.:  'Uois,  Jehus), 
head  of  a  Benjamite  house,  in  an  obscure  genealogy 
(1  Chr.  viii.  10),  apparently  son  of  Shaharaim  and 
Hodesh  his  third  wife,  and  born  in  Moab.  [A.  C.  II.] 


JEW 

JEW(H-1i"P  ;  'lovbcuos:  Judaeus,  i.e.  Judaean  ; 

'lovbatfa,  Esth.  viii.  17;  'lovba'iffixos,  2  Mace.  ii. 
21 ).  This  name  was  properly  applied  to  a  member 
of  the  kingdom  of  Judah  after  the  separation  of  the 
ten  tribes.  In  this  sense  it  occurs  twice  in  the 
second  book  of  Kings,  2  K.  xvi.  6,  XXV.  25,  and 
seven  times  in  the  later  chapters  of  Jeremiah  :  Jer. 
xxxii.  12,  xxxiv.  9  (in  connexion  with  Hebrew), 
xx.xviii.  19,  xl.  12,  xli.  3,  xliv.  1,  Hi.  28.  After 
the  Return  the  word  received  a  larger  application. 
Partly  from  the  predominance  of  the  members  of 
the  old  kingdom  of  Judah  among  those  who  re- 
turned to  Palestine,  partly  from  the  identification 
of  Judah  with  the  religious  ideas  and  hopes  of  the 
people,  all  the  members  of  the  new  state  were 
called  Jews  (Judaeans),  and  the  name  was  extended 
to  the  remnants  of  the  race  scattered  through- 
out the  nations  (Dan.  iii.  8,  12;  Ezr.  iv.  12, 
23,  &c;  Neh.  i.  2,  ii.  16,  v.  1,  &c. ;  Esth.  iii.- 
4  ft'.,  &c.  Cf.  Jos.  Ant.  xi.  5,  §7,  iicAr)0r)ffa.i'  8e 
rb  uvofxa  ('lovScuoi)  e|  tjs  ri/xepas  ave^rjerav  4k 
BafivAwvos  curb  rrjs  'lovSa  (pvArjs  .  .  .). 

Under  the  name  of  "  Judaeans,"  the  people  of 
Israel  were  known  to  classical  writers.  The  most 
famous  and  interesting  notice  by  a  heathen  writer 
is  that  of  Tacitus  {Hist.  v.  2  ft". ;  cf.  Orelli's  Ex- 
cursus). The  trait  of  extreme  exclusiveness  with 
which  he  specially  charged  them  is  noticed  by  many 
other  writers  (Juv.  Sat.  xiv.  103  ;  Piod.  Sic.  Eel. 
34,  1  ;  Quint.  Inst.  iii.  7,  21).  The  account  of 
Strabo  (xvi.  pp.  760  ff.)  is  more  favourable  (cf. 
Just,  xxxvi.  2),  but  it  was  impossible  that  a  stranger 
could  clearly  understand  the  meaning  of  Judaism 
as  a  discipline  and  preparation  for  a  universal  reli- 
gion (F.  C.  Meier,  Juclaica  seuveterum  scriptorum 
profanorum  de  rebus  Judaicis  fragmenta,  Jenae, 
1832). 

The  force  of  the  title  lovScuos  is  seen  particularly 
in  the  Gospel  of  St.  John.  While  the  other  Evan- 
gelists scarcely  ever  use  the  word  except  in  the  title 
"  King  of  the  Jews  "  (as  given  by  Gentiles),3  St. 
John,  standing  within  thA  boundary  of  the  Chris- 
tian age,  very  rarely  uses  any  other  term  to  describe 
the  opponents  of  our  Lord.  The  name,  indeed,  ap- 
peared at  the  close  of  the  apostle's  life  to  be  the  true 
antithesis  to  Christianity,  as  describing  the  limited 
and  definite  form  of  a  national  religion;  but  at  an 
earlier  stage  of  the  progress  of  the  faith,  it  was 
contrasted  with  Greek  ("EAArjf)  as  implying  an 
outward  covenant  with  God  (Rom.  i.  16;  ii.  9, 
ID;  Col.  iii.  11,  &c).  In  this  sense  it  was  of 
wider  application  than  Hebrew,  which  was  the 
correlative  of  Hellenist  [Hellenist],  and  marked 
a  division  of  language  subsisting  within  the  entire 
body,  and  at  the  same  time  less  expressive  than 
Israelite,  which  brought  out  with  especial  clearness 
the  privileges  and  hopes  of  the  children  of  Jacob 
(2  Cor,  xi.  22  ;  John  i.  47  ;  1  Mace.  i.  43,  53,  and 
often). 

The  history  of  Judaism  is  divided  by  .lost — the 
most  profound  writer  who  has  investigated  it — into 
two  great  eras,  the  Hist  extending  to  the  close  of 
the  collections  of  the  oral  laws,  536  B.C. — 600 
a.d.:  the  second  reaching  to  the  present  time.  Ac- 
cording to  this  view  the  lirst  is  the  period  of  original 
development,  the  second  of  formal  construction  ; 
the  one  furnishes  the  constituent  elements,  the  second 
the  varied  shape  of  the  present  faith.     But  as  far 


JEZANIAH 


1077 


a  The  exceptions  are,   Matt,  xxviii.  15  (a  note  of 
the  Evangelist  of  later  date  than  the  substance  of  the 


as  Judaism  was  a  great  stage  in  the  Divine  revela 
tion,  its  main  interest  closes  with  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem  in  70  a.d.  From  that  date  its  pre- 
sent living  force  was  stayed,  and  its  history  is  a 
record  of  the  human  shapes  in  which  the  Divine 
truths  of  earlier  times  were  enshrined  and  hidden. 
The  old  age  (ai&v)  passed  away,  and  the  new  age 
began  when  the  Holy  City  was  finally  wrested  from 
its  citizens  and  the  worship  of  the  temple  closed. 

Yet  this  shorter  period  from  the  Return  to  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  was  pregnant  with  great 
changes.  Four  different  dynasties  in  succession 
directed  the  energies  and  influenced  the  character  of 
the  Jewish  nation.  The  dominion  of  Persia  (536- 
333  B.C.),  of  Greece  (333-167  B.C.),  of  the  As- 
monaeans  (167-63  B.C.),  of  the  Herods  (40  B.C., 
70  A. P.)  sensibly  furthered  in  various  ways  the  disci- 
pline of  the  people  of  God,  and  prepared  the  way  for  a 
final  revelation.  An  outline  of  the  characteristic  fea- 
tures of  the  several  periods  is  given  in  other  articles. 
Briefly  it  may  be  said  that  the  supremacy  of  Persia 
was  marked  by  the  growth  of  organisation,  order, 
ritual  [Cyrus  ;  Dispersion  of  the  Jews],  that 
of  Greece  by  the  spread  of  liberty,  and  speculation 
[Alexander;  Alexandria;  Hellenists], 
that  of  the  Asmonaeans  by  the  strengthening  of 
independence  and  faith  [Maccabees],  that  of  the 
Herods  by  the  final  separation  of  the  elements  of 
temporal  and  spiritual  dominion  into  antagonistic 
systems  [Herod]  ;  and  so  at  length  the  inheritance 
of  six  centuries,  painfully  won  in  times  of  exhaustion 
and  persecution  and  oppression,  was  transferred  to 
the  treasury  of  the  Christian  Church.   [B.  F.  W.] 

JEWEL.     [Precious  Stones.] 

JEWESS  ('lovbu'ia :  Judaea),  a  woman  of 
Hebrew  birth,  without  distinction  of  tribe  (Acts 
xvi.  1,  xxiv.  24).  It  is  applied  in  the  former 
passage  to  Eunice  the  mother  of  Timothy,  who  was 
unquestionably  of  Hebrew  origin  (comp.  2  Tim.  iii. 
15),  and  in  the  latter  to  Drusilla,  the  wife  of  Felix 
and  daughter  of  Herod  Agrippa  I. 

JEWISH  ('IouScuko's  :  Jiidaicus),  of  or  belong- 
ing to  Jews :  an  epithet  applied  to  the  Rabbinical 
legends  against  which  the  elder  apostle  warns  his 
younger  brother  (Tit.  i.  14). 

JEWRY  ("1-irP:  'lovbaia:  Judaea),  the  same 
word  elsewhere  rendered  Judah  and  Judaea.  It 
occurs  but  once  in  the  O.  T.,  Dan.  v.  13,  in  which 
verse  the  Hebrew  is  translated  both  by  Judah  and 
Jewry:  the  A.  V.  retaining  the  latter  as  it  stands 
in  Coverdale,  Tyndale,  and  the  Geneva  Bible.  The 
variation  possibly  arose  from  a  too  faithful  imitation 
of  the  Vulg.,  which  has  Juda  and  Judaea.  Jewry 
comes  to  us  through  the  Norman-French,  and  is  of 
frequent  occurrence  in  Old  English.  It  is  found 
besides  in  1  Esd.  i.  32,  ii.  4,  iv.  49,  v.  7,  8,  57, 
vi.  1,  viii.  81,  ix.  3;  Bel,  33;  2  Mace.  x.  24: 
Luke  xxiii.  5;  John  vii.  1. 

JEZAOT'AH  (W :  'ECouias  ;   Alex.  'U(o- 

vias  in  Jer.  xl.  8  :  iTO?) ;  'Afrplas  in  Jer.  xlii.  1  : 

Jezonias),  the  son  of  Hoshaiah,  the  Maachathite, 
and  one  of  the  captains  of  the  forces,  who  had 
escaped  from  Jerusalem  during  the  final  attack  of 
the  beleaguering  army  of  the  Chaldaeans.  In  the 
consequent  pursuit,  which  resulted  in  the  capture 
of  Zedekiah,  the  army  was  scattered  from   him  and 

Gospel)  ;  Mark  vii.  3  (a  similar  note)  ;  Luke  vii.  3, 
xxiii.  51. 


1078 


JEZEBEL 


dispersed  throughout  the  open  country  among  the 
neighbouring  Ammonites  and  Moabites,  watching 
from  thence  the  progress  of  events.  When  the 
Babylonians  had  departed,  Jezaniah,  with  the  men 
under  his  command,  was  one  of  the  first  who 
returned  to  Gedaliah  at  Mizpah.  In  the  events 
which  followed  the  assassination  of  that  officer 
Jezaniah  took  a  prominent  part.  He  joined  Jo- 
hanan  in  the  pursuit  of  Ishmael  and  his  murderous 
associates,  and  in  the  general  consternation  and  dis- 
trust which  ensued  he  became  one  of  the  foremost 
advocates  of  the  migration  into  Egypt,  so  strongly 
opposed  by  Jeremiah.  Indeed  in  their  interview 
with  the  prophet  at  the  Khan  of  Chimham,  when 
words  ran  high,  Jezaniah  (there  called  Azariah) 
was  appirently  the  leader  in  the  dispute,  and  for 
once  took  precedence  of  Johanan  (Jer.  xliii.  2). 
In  2  K.  xxv.  23  he  is  called  Jaazaniah,  in  which 
form  the  name  was  easily  corrupted  into  Azariah, 
or  Zechariah,  as  one  MS.  of  the  LXX.  reads  it. 
The  Syriac  and  Josephus  follow  the  Hebrew.  In 
the  LXX.  his  father's  name  is  Maaseiah. 

JEZ'EBEL  {hlV$ ;    LXX.  and  N.  T.  'Ie£a- 

/3t)A  ;  Joseph.  'le£a/3oArj  ;  Jezabel :  probably  a 
name,  like  Agnes,  signifying  "chaste,"  sine  coitu, 
Gesenius  in  roc),  wife  of  Ahab,  king  of  Israel, 
and  mother  of  Athaliah,  queen  of  Judah,  and 
Ahaziah  and  Joram,  kings  of  Israel.*  She  was 
a  Phoenician  princess,  daughter  of  "  Ethbaal  king 
of  the  Zidonians  "  (or  Ithobal  king  of  the  Syrians 
and  Sidouians,  Menander  apud  Joseph.  Ant.  viii. 
13,  §  2  ;  c.  Apion,  i.  18).  Her  marriage  with  Ahab 
was  a  turning  point  in  the  history  of  Israel.  Not 
only  was  the  union  with  a  Canaanitish  wife  unpre- 
cedented in  the  northern  kingdom,  but  the  cha- 
racter of  the  queen  gave  additional  force  and  sig- 
nificance to  what  might  else  have  been  regarded 
merely  as  a  commercial  and  political  measure, 
natural  to  a  king  devoted,  as  was  Ahab,  to  the 
arts  of  peace  and  the  splendour  of  regal  luxury. 
She  was  a  woman  in  whom,  with  the  reckless  and 
licentious  habits  of  an  Oriental  queen,  were  united 
the  sternest  and  fiercest  qualities  inherent  in  the 
Phoenician  people.  The  royal  family  of  Tyre  was 
remarkable  at  that  time  both  for  its  religious  fana- 
ticism and  its  savage  temper.  Her  father  Ethbaal 
united  with  his  royal  office  the  priesthood  of  the 
goddess  Astarte,  and  had  come  to  the  throne  by 
the  murder  of  his  predecessor  Phelles  (Jos.  c.  Ap. 
i.  18).  The  next  generation  included  within  itself 
Sichaeus,  or  Matgenes,  king  and  priest  of  Baal,  the 
murderer  Pygmalion,  and  Elisa  or  Dido,  foundress 
of  Carthage  (ib.).  Of  this  stock  came  Jezebel. 
In  her  hands  her  husband  became  a  mere  puppet 
(1  K.  xxi.  25).  Even  after  his  death,  through 
the  reigns  of  his  sons,  her  influence  was  the  evil 
genius  of  the  dynasty.  Through  the  marriage 
of  her  daughter  Athaliah  with  the  king  of  Judah, 
it  extended  even  to  the  rival  kingdom.  The 
wild  licence  of  her  life,  the  magical  fascination  of 
her  arts  or  of  her  character,  became  a  proverb  in 
the  nation  (2  K.  ix.  22).  Long  afterwards  her 
name  lived  as  the  byword  for  all  that  was  execrable, 


a  Aniongst  the  Spanish  Jews  the  name  of  Jezebel 
was  given  to  Isabella  "the  Catholic,"  in  consequence 
of  the  detestation  in  which  her  memory  was  held  as 
their  persecutor  (Ford's  Handbook  of  Spain,  2nd  ed. 
p.  186).  Whether  the  name  Isabella  was  originally 
connected  with  that  of  Jezebel  is  doubtful. 

b  According  to  the  reading  of  A,  B,  and  the  older 


JEZEBEL 

and  in  the  Apocalypse  it  is  given  to  a  church  or  an 
individual11  in  Asia  Minor,  combining  in  like  manner 
fanaticism  and  profligacy  (Lev.  ii.  20).  If  we  may 
trust  the  numbers  of  the  text,  she  must  have  mar- 
ried Ahab  before  his  accession.  He  reigned  22 
years;  and  12  years  from  that  time  her  grandson 
Ahaziah  was  21  years  of  age.  Her  daughter  Atha- 
liah must  have  been  born  therefore  at  least  37 
years  before. 

The  first  effect  of  her  influence  was  the  imme- 
diate establishment  of  the  Phoenician  worship  on  a 
grand  scale  in  the  court  of  Ahab.  At  her  table 
were  supported  no  less  than  450  prophets  of  Baal, 
and  400  of  Astarte  (1  K.  xvi.  31,  32,  xviii. 
19).  The  prophets  of  Jehovah,  who  up  to  this 
time  had  found  their  chief  refuge  in  the  northern 
kingdom,  were  attacked  by  her  orders  and  put  to 
the  sword  (1  K.  xviii.  13;  2  K.  ix.  7).  When  at 
last  the  people,  at  the  instigation  of  Elijah,  rose 
against  her  ministers,  and  slaughtered  them  at  the 
foot  of  Carmel,  and  when  Ahab  was  terrified  into 
submission,  she  alone  retained  her  presence  of  mind  ; 
and  when  she  received  in  the  palace  of  Jezrecl  the 
tidings  that  her  religion  was  all  but  destroyed 
(1  X.  xix.  1),  her  only  answer  was  one  of  those 
fearful  vows  which  have  made  the  leaders  of  Semitic, 
nations  so  terrible  whether  for  good  or  evil — ex- 
pressed in  a  message  to  the  very  man  who,  as  it 
might  have  seemed  but  an  hour  before,  had  her 
life  in  his  power: — "As  surely  as  thou  art  Elijah 
and  as  /  am  Jezebel  (LXX.*,  so  may  God  do  to 
me  and  more  also,  if  by  this  time  to-morrow  1 
make  not  thy  life  as  the  life  of  one  of  them" 
(1  K.  xix.  2).  Elijah,  who  had  encountered  un- 
daunted the  king  and  the  whole  force  of  the  pro- 
phets of  Baal,  "  feared  "  (LXX.)  the  wrath  of  the 
awful  queen,  and  fled  for  his  life  beyond  the 
furthest  limits  of  Israel  (1  K.  xix.  3).     [Elijah.]  , 

The  next  instance  of  her  power  is  still  moie 
characteristic  and  complete.  When  she  found  her 
husband  cast  down  by  his  disappointment  at  being 
thwarted  by  Naboth,  she  took  the  matter  into  her 
own  hands,  with  a  spirit  which  reminds  us  of 
Clytemnestra  or  Lady  Macbeth.  "  Dost  thou  now 
govern  the  kingdom  of  Israel  ?  (play  the  king, 
Troie7s  fiao-iAea.  LXX).  Arise  and  eat  bread  and 
let  thine  heart  be  merry,  and  I  will  give  thee 
the  vineyard  of  Naboth  the  Jezreelite  "  (1  K.  xxi. 
7).  She  wrote  a  warrant  in  Ahab's  name,  and 
sealed  it  with  his  seal.  It  was  couched  in  the 
official  language  of  the  Israelite  law — a  solemn 
fast — witnesses — a  charge  of  blasphemy — the  au- 
thorized punishment  of  stoning.  To  her,  and  not 
to  Ahab,  was  sent  the  announcement  that  the  royal 
wishes  were  accomplished  (1  K.  xxi.  14),  and  she 
bade  her  husband  go  and  take  the  vacant  property; 
and  on  her  accordingly  fell  the  prophet's  curse,  as 
well  as  on  her  husband  (1  K.  xxi.  23). 

We  hear  no  more  of  her  for  a  long  period.  But 
she  survived  Ahab  by  14  years,  and  still,  as  queen- 
mother  (after  the  Oriental  custom),  was  a  great 
personage  in  the  court  of  her  sons,  and,  as  such, 
became  the  special  mark  for  vengeance  when  Jehu 
advanced  against  Jezreel  to  overthrow  the  dynasty 

versions,  it  is  tt)i'  yvvaCxa  <rov,  "  thy  wife."  In  that 
case  she  must  be.  the  wife  of  the  "  angel ;"  and  the 
expression  would  thus  confirm  the  interpretation 
which  makes  "the  angel"  to  he  the  bishop  or  pre- 
siding officer  of  the  Church  of  Thyatira  ;  and  this 
woman  would  thus  be  his  wife. 


JEZEBEL 

of  Ahab.    ••  What  peace  so  long  as  the  whoredoms 
of  thy  mother  Jezebel  and  her  witchcrafts  are  so 
many?"    (2   K.  ix.  22).      But   in  that  supreme 
hour  of  her   house  the   spirit  of  the  aged  queen 
rose  within  her,  equal  to  the  dreadful  emergency. 
She  was  in  the  palace,  which  stood  by  the  gate  of 
the  city,  overlooking  the  approach  from  the  east. 
Beueath  lay  the  open  space  under  the  city  walls. 
She  determined  to  face  the  destroyer  other  family, 
whom  she  saw  rapidly  advancing  in  his  chariot.8 
She  painted  her  eyelids  in  the  Eastern  fashion  with 
antimony,   so  as  to  give   a   darker  border   to  the 
eyes,    and    make    them    look    larger  and    brighter 
(Keil),    possibly  in    order    to  induce   Jehu,   after 
the  maimer  of  eastern  usurpers,   to  take  her,  the 
widow  of  his  predecessor,  for  his  wife,h  but  more 
probably  as  the  last  act  of  regal  splendour.     She 
tired  (••  made  good")  her  head,  and,  looking  down 
upon  him  from  the  high   latticed  window  in  the 
tower  (Jos.  Ant.  ix.  G,  §  4),  she  met  him  by  an 
allusion  to  a  former  act  of  treason  in  the  history  of 
her  adopted  country,  which  conveys  a  different  ex- 
pulsion, according  as  we  take  one  or  other  of  the 
different  interpretations  given  to   it.      (1)   "Was 
there  peace  to  Zimri,  who  slew   his  'lord'?"  as 
if  to  remind  Jehu,  now  in  the  fulness  of  his   tri- 
umph, how  Omri,  the  founder  of  the  dynasty  which 
he  was  destroying,  had  himself  come  into  power 
as  the  avenger  of  Zimri,  who  had  murdered  Baasha, 
as  he  now  had  murdered  Jehoram:  or  (2)  a  direct 
address    to    Jehu,    as    a    second    Zimri: — "Is    it 
peace?"  (following  up  the  question  of  her  son  in 
2  K.  ix.  21).     "  Is  it  peace,  0  Zimri,  slayer  of  his 
lord?"     (So    Keil  and  LXX.      t)   Elp-qvn  Za/xfipl 
6  (poutvrris  tov  Kvplov  avrov ;)     Or  (3)  "Peace 
to   Zimri,   who  slew   his    'lord'" — (according   to 
Josephus,  Ant.  ix.   6,  §  4,   KaXbs  SovAos   6  airo- 
KTiivas    rhv    SetnroTT)!/) — which    again    may    be 
taken  either  as  an  ironical  welcome,  or  (according 
to   Ewald,   iii.    166,   260)  as  a  reminder  that  as 
Zimri    had  spared  the  seraglio  of  Baasha,  so  she 
was  prepared  to  welcome  Jehu.     The  general  cha- 
racter of  Jezebel,  and  the  doubt  as  to  the  details 
of  the  history  of  Zimri,  would  lead   us  rather  to 
adopt  the  sterner  view  of  her  speech.     Jehu  looked 
up   from    his   chariot — and   his    answer,  again,  is 
variously  given  in  the    LXX.  and  in  the  Hebrew 
text.     In  the  former  he  exclaims,  "  Who  art  thou? 
— Come   down  to  me."      In   the  hitter,    "Who   is 
on   my  side,  who?"       In  either  case  the  issue  is 
the  same.      Two    or   three   eunuchs  of  the   royal 
harein  show  their  faces  at  the  windows,  and  at  his 
command  dashed0  the  ancient  princess  down  from 
the   chamber.       She    tell   immediately    in   front   of 
the  conqueror's  chariot.     The  blood  flew  from  her 
mangled  corpse  over  the  palace-wall   behind,  and 
over  the  advancing  horses  in  front.     The  merciless 
destroyer  passed  on;   and  the  last  remains  of  life 
wci'^  trampled  out  by  the  horses'  hoofs.     Tin-  body 
was  left  in  that  open  space  called  in  modern  Eastern 
language    "  tin1    mounds,"    where   offal    is    thrown 
from  th.'  city-walls.      The  dogs  of  Eastern  cities, 
which  prowl  around  these  localities,  and  which  the 
present  write)  met  on  tin-  very  spot  by  the  modern 
village  which  occupies  the  site  of  Jezreel,  pounced 
upon  this  unexpected  prey.      Nothing  was  left  by 
them   but  the   hard   portions   of  the   human   skele- 


JEZREEL 


1079 


a  A  graphic  conception  of  this  scene  occurs  in 
Racine's  Athalie,  Act  II.  8c.  5. 

'■  According  to  the  explanation  of  S.  Ephrem 
Syrus  ad  loe. 


ton,  the  skull,  the  hands,  and  the  feet.  Such  was 
the  night  which  met  the  eyes  of  the  messengers  of 
Jehu,  whom  he  had  sent,  from  his  triumphal  ban- 
quet, struck  with  a  momentary  feeling  of  com- 
passion for  the  tall  of  so  much  greatness.  "Go, 
see  now  this  cursed  woman  ami  bury  her,  for  she  is 
a  king's  daughter."  When  he  heard  the  fate  of  the 
body,  he  exclaimed  in  words  which  no  doubt  wee 
long  remembered  as  the  epitaph  of  the  greatest  and 
wickedest  of  the  queens  of  Israel — "  This  is  (lie 
word  of  Jehovah,  which  He  spake  by  His  servant 
Elijah  the  Tishbite,  saving,  In  the  portion d  of  Jez- 
reel shall  '  the  '  dogs  eat  the  flesh  of  Jezebel  ;  and 
the  carcase  of  Jezebel  shall  be  as  dung  on  the  face 
of  the  earth  ;  so  that  they  shall  not  say,  This  is 
Jezebel"  (2  K.  ix.  36,  37).  [A.  P.  S.] 

JEZE'LUS  (Tef^Aos  :  Zecholeus).  1.  The 
same  as  Jahaziel  (1  Esd.  viii.  32). 

2.  (Jeheliis.)  Jeiiikl,  the  lather  of  Obadiah 
(1  Esd.  viii.  35). 

JE'ZER  (~\¥\  :  'Iffffdap  in  Gen.  xlvi.  24: 
'\eaep,  Num.  xxvi.  49,  Alex,  'leapt  ;  'Acrrjp, 
1  Chr.  vii.  13,  Alex.  ~2,adp:  Jeser),  the  third  son 
of  Xaphtali,  and  father  of  the  family  of  the  Jezer- 
ites,  who  were  numbered  in  the  plains  of  Moab. 

JEZ'IAH  (PlH) :  'Afja :  Jezid),  properly  Yiz- 
ziyyah,  a  descendant  of  Parosh,  and  one  of  those 
among  the  laymen  after  the  return  from  Babylon 
who  had  married  strange  wives,  and  at  Ezra's 
bidding  had  promised  to  put  them  away  (Ezr.  x. 
25).  "in  1  Esd.  ix.  26  he  is  called  Eddias.  The 
Syriac  of  Ezra  reads  Jezaniah. 

JEZI'EL  {h$)V,  Keri  biVV,  which  is  the 
reading  of  some  MSS. :  TcotjA.  ;  .MS.  Fred.  Aug. 
'A^itJA  :  Jaziel),  one  of  the  skilled  Benjamite 
archers  or  slingers  who  joined  David  in  his  retreat 
at  Ziklag.  He  was  probably  the  son  of  Azmaveth 
of  Bahurim,  one  of  David's  heroes  (1  Chr.  xii.  3). 
In  the  Syriac  Jeziel  is  omitted,  and  the  sons  of 
Azmaveth  are  there  Pelet  and  Berachah. 

JEZLI'AH  {THVbv  :  'U{Kias,  Alex.  'Ufrta), 
one  of  a  long  list  of  Benjamite  heads  of  houses, 
sons  of  Elpaal,  who  dwelt  at  Jerusalem  (1  Chr. 
viii.  18).  [A.  C.  H.] 

JEZO'AR  (iri'i) :  ^aap :  fsaar),  the  sou  of 
Helah,  one  of  the  wives  of  Asher,  the  father  or 
founder  of  Tekoa,  and  posthumous  son  of  Hezron 
(1  Chr.  iv.  7).  The  Keri  has  -HTJfl  "and  Zohar," 
which  was  followed  by  the  LXX.  and  by  the  A.  Y. 
of  1611. 

JEZEAHIAH  (n*r?ir  :  omitted  in  Vat.  MS., 
Alex.  '\e£ovp,  and  MS.  Fred.  Aug.'le^p/os :  Jet  ■  aia  ), 

a  l.cvitc,  the  leader  of  the  choristers  at  the  solemn 
dedication  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  under  Xehcmiah 

(Neh.  xii.  42).     The  singers  had  built  themselves 

in  tin'  environs  of  the  city,  and  the  (  tasis  ol 
the  Jordan,  and  with  the  minstrels  they  gathered 
themselves  together  at  the  first  summons  to  Keep 
the  dedication  with  gladness. 

JEZ'REEL    !?KjnT?:    'Iefrd}A;    Alex.  'Icf- 

pfarJA  and  'Ie£pt^A :  JezraJiel),  according  to  the 
received  text,  a  desccndanl  of  the  father  or  founder 
of  Etam,  of  the  lii Judah  (1  chr.  iv.  3).     But 


0  IDOiV,  "  dash,"  as  from  a  precipice  (I's.  cxli.  6). 
''  p7n,  "  smooth  field." 


1080 


JEZREEL 


as  the  verse  now  stands,  we  must  supply  some  such 
word  as  "  families  ;"  "  these  (are  the  families  of) 
the  father  of  Etam."  Both  the  LXX.  and  Vulg. 
read  '•J^,  "  sons,"  for  *3X,  "  father,"  and  six  of 
Kennicott's  MSS.  have  the  same,  while  in  two 
of  De  Rossi's  the  readings  are  combined.  The 
Syriac  is  singularly  different  from  all: — "And 
these  are  the  sons  of  Aminodob,  Achizar'el,  &c, 
iS'eshmo,  and  Dibosh,"  the  last  clause  of  ver.  3 
being  entirely  omitted.  But,  although  the  Syriac 
text  of  the  Chronicles  is  so  corrupt  as  to  be  of  little 
authority  in  this  case,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that 
the  genealogy  in  vers.  3,  4  is  so  confused  as  to  be 
attended  with  almost  insuperable  difficulties. 
Tremellius  and  Junius  regard  Etam  as  the  proper 
name  of  a  person,  and  Jezreel  as  one  of  his  sons, 
while  Bertheau  considers  them  both  names  of  places. 
The  Targum  on  Chron.  has,  "  And  these  are  the 
Rabbis  dwelling  at  Etam,  Jezreel,"  &c.  In  ver.  4 
Hur  is  referred  to  as  the  ancestor  of  this  branch  of 
the  tribe  of  Judah,  and  therefore,  if  the  present  text 
be  adopted,  we  must  read,  "  and  these,  viz.  Abi- 
Etam,  Jezreel,"  &c.  But  the  probability  is  that  in 
ver.  3  a  clause  has  been  omitted.         [\V.  A.  W.] 

JEZ'REEL  ("PNjnr  ;  LXX.  'Ieo-paeA;  Joseph. 

'IetrpaTjAa,  Ant.  viii.  13,  §  6,  'IetrpaeAa,  Ant.  ix. 
6,  §  4,  'l(apa,a  Ant.  viii.  15,  §  4,  (5  ;  'EtrSpTjAaj/x, 
or  'Ecr8p7)Acoj',  Jud.  i.  8,  iv.  6  ;  'EtrSparjAa,  Eusebius 
and  Jerome,  in  Onomasticon,  voce  Jezrael,  Latinized 
into  Stradela.  See  Bordeaux  Pilgrim  in  Itin. 
Hierosol.  p.  586.)  Its  modern  name  is  Zerin,  which 
is  in  fact  the  same  word,  and  which  first  appears  in 
William  of  Tyre  (xxii.  26)  as  Gerin  (G erinwtn),  and 
Benjamin  of  Tudela  as  Zarzin.  The  history  of  the 
identification  of  these  names  is  well  given  in  Robin- 
son, B.  R.  1st  Ed.  iii.  163,  165,  and  is  curious  as  an 
example  of  the  tenacity  of  a  local  tradition,  in  spite 
of  the  carelessness  of  modern  travellers. 

The  name  is  used  in  2  Sam.  ii.  9  and  (?)  iv.  4, 
and  Hos.  i.  5,  for  the  valley  or  plain  between  Gilboa 
and  Little  Hermon ;  and  to  this  plain,  in  its  widest 
extent,  the  general  form  of  the  name  Esdraelon  (first 
used  in  Jud.  i.  8)  has  been  applied  in  modern  times. 
It  is  probably  from  the  richness  of  the  plain  that 
the  name  is  derived,  "  God  has  sown,"  "  God's 
sowing."  For  the  events  connected  with  this  great 
battle-field  of  Palestine,  see  Esdraelon. 

In  its  more  limited  sense,  as  applied  to  the  city, 
it  first  appears  in  Josh.  xix.  18,  where  it  is  men- 
tioned as  a  city  of  Issachar,  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  Chesulloth  and  Shunem  ;  and  it  had  citizens  (1  K. 
xxi.  1-3),  elders,  and  nobles  of  its  own  (1  Iv.  xxi. 
8-11).  But  its  historical  importance  dates  from  the 
reign  of  Ahab  ;  who  chose  it  for  his  chief  residence, 
as  Omri  had  chosen  Samaria,  and  Baasha  Tirzah. 

The  situation  of  the  modern  village  of  Zerin  still 
remains  to  show  the  fitness  of  his  choice.  It  is  on 
one  of  the  gentle  swells  which  rise  out  of  the  fertile 
plain  of  Esdraelon  ;  but  with  two  peculiarities  which 
mark  it  out  from  the  rest.  One  is  its  strength. 
On  the  N.E.  the  hill  presents  a  steep  rocky  descent 
of  at  least  100  feet  (Robinson,  1st  Ed.  iii.  162).  The 
other  is  its  central  locality.  It  stands  at  the  open- 
ing of  the  middle  branch  of  the  three  eastern  forks 
of  the  plain,  and  looks  straight  towards  the  wide 
western  level ;  thus  commanding  .the  view  towards 
the  Jordan  on  the  east  (2  K.  ix.  17),  and  visible 
from  Carmel  on  the  west  (1  K.  xviii.  46). 


"■  In  Jos.  Ant.  viii.  13,  §  6,  it  is  called  'IecrpdtjAa, 
'It,apou  ttoAis  ;  in  viii.  13,  §  7,  'Ifapov  7roAis  singly  ;  in 


JEZREEL 

In  the  neighbourhood,  or  within  the  town  pro- 
bably, was  a  temple  and  grove  of  Astarte,  with  an 
establishment  of  400  priests  suppoited  by  Jezebel 
(1  K.  xvi.  33  ;  2  K.  x.  11).  The  palace  of  Ahab 
(1  K.  xxi.  1,  xviii.  46),  probably  containing  his 
"  ivory  house"  (1  K.  xxii.  39),  was  on  the  eastern 
side  of  the  city,  forming  part  of  the  city  wall  (comp. 
1  K.  xxi.  1  ;  2  K.  ix.  25,  30,  33).  The  seraglio, 
in  which  Jezebel  lived,  was  on  the  city  wall,  and 
had  a  high  window  facing  eastward  (2  K.  ix.  30). 
Close  by,  if  not  forming  part  of  this  seraglio  (as 
Josephus  supposes,  araaa  eirl  rov  wupyov,  Ant. 
ix.  6,  §  4),  was  a  watch-tower,  on  which  a  sentinel 
stood,  to  give  notice  of  arrivals  from  the  disturbed 
district  beyond  the  Jordan  (2  K.  ix.  17).  This 
watch-tower,  well-known  as  "  the  tower  in  Jezreel," 
may  possibly  have  been  the  tower  or  "  migdol " 
near  which  the  Egyptian  army  was  encamped  in  the 
battle  between  Necho  and  Josiah  {Herod,  ii.  159). 
An  ancient  square  tower  which  stands  amongst  the 
hovels  of  the  modern  viliagemay  be  its  representative. 
The  gateway  of  the  city  on  the  east  was  also  the 
gateway  of  the  palace  (2  K.  ix.  34).  Immediately 
in  front  of  the  gateway,  and  under  the  city  wall, 
was  an  open  space,  such  as  existed  before  the  neigh- 
bouring city  of  Bethshan  (2  Sam.  xxi.  12),  and  is 
usually  found  by  the  walls  of  Eastern  cities,  under 
the  name  of  "the  mounds"  (see  Arabian  Nights, 
passim),  whence  the  dogs,  the  scavengers  of  the 
East,  prowled  in  search  of  offal  (2  K.  ix.  25). 
Here  Jezebel  met  with  her  end  (2  K.  ix.  35). 
[Jezebel.]  A  little  further  East,  but  adjoining  to 
the  royal  domain  (1  K.  xxi.  1),  was  a  smooth  tract  of 
land  cleared  out  of  the  uneven  valley  (2  K.  i.  25), 
which  belonged  to  Naboth,  a  citizen  of  Jezreel 
(2  K.  ix.  1),  by  an  hereditary  right  (1  K.  xxi.  3); 
but  the  royal  grounds  were  so  near  that  it  would 
have  been  easily  turned  into  a  garden  of  herbs  for 
the  royal  use  (2  K.  xxi.  2).  Here  Elijah  met 
Ahab,  Jehu,  and  Bidkar  (1  K.  xxi.  17) ;  and  here 
Jehu  met  Joram  and  Ahaziah  (2  K.  x.  21,  25). 
[Elijah  ;  Jehu.]  Whether  the  vineyard  of  Xaboth 
was  here  or  at  Samaria  is  a  doubtful  question. 
[Naboth.] 

Still  in  the  same  eastern  direction  are  two 
springs,  one  12  minutes  from  the  town,  the  other 
20  minutes  (Robinson,  1st  Ed.  iii.  167).  This  latter 
spring  "flows  from  under  a  sort  of  cavern  in  the 
wall  of  conglomerate  rock,  which  here  forms  the 
base  of  Gilboa.  The  water  is  excellent ;  and  issuing 
from  crevices  in  the  rocks,  it  spreads  out  at  once 
into  a  tine  limpid  pool,  40  or  50  feet  in  diameter, 
full  offish"  (Robinson,  B.R.  iii.  168).  This  pro- 
bably, both  from  its  size  and  situation,  was  known 
as  "  the  Spring  of  Jezreel  "  (mistranslated 
A.  V.  "a  fountain,"  1  Sam.  xxix.  1),  where  Saul 
was  encamped  before  the  battle  of  Gilboa ;  and 
probably  the  same  as  the  spring  of  "  Harod," 
where  Gideon  encamped  before  his  night  attack  on 
the  Midianites,  (Judg.  vii.  1,  mistranslated  A.  V. 
"  the  well  ").  The  name  of  Harod,  "  trembling," 
probably  was  taken  from  the  "  trembling"  of  Gi- 
deon's army  (Judg.  vii.  3).  It  was  the  scene  of 
successive  encampments  of  the  Crusaders  and  Sa- 
racens ;  and  was  called  by  the  Christians  Tubania, 
and  by  the  Arabs  Ain  Julud,  "  the  spring  of 
Goliath"  (Robinson,  B.  R.  iii.  69).  This  last  name, 
which  it  still  bears,  is  derived  from  a  tradition  men- 
tioned by  the  Bordeaux.  Pilgrim,  that  here  David 

viii.  15,  §4,  6,  "Ifapa.     Various  readings  are  given  of 
'le£ctpa,  'A/capov,  'A£apou,  'A£apa. 


JIBSAM 

killed  Goliath.  The  tradition  may  be  a  confused 
reminiscence  of  many  battles  fought  in  its  neighbour- 
hood (  Hitter,  Jordan,  416) ;  or  the  word  may  be  a 
corruption  of  "  Gilead,"  supposing  that  to  be  the 
ancient  name  of  Gilboa,  and  thus  explaining  Judg.  vii. 
3,  "  depart  from  Mount  Gilead  "  (Schwarz,  334). 

According  to  Joseph  us  {Ant.  viii.  15,  §4,  6),  this 
spring,  and  the  pool  attached  to  it,  was  the  spot 
where  Naboth  and  his  sons  were  executed,  where 
the  dogs  and  swine  licked  up  their  blood  and  that 
of  Ahab,  and  where  the  harlots  bathed  in  the  blood- 
stained water  (LXX).  But  the  natural  inference 
from  the  present  text  of  1  K.  xxii.  38  makes  the 
scene  of  these  events  to  be  the  pool  of  Samaria. 
[See  Naboth.] 

With  the  fall  of  the  house  of  Ahab  the  glory  of 
Jezreel  departed.  No  other  king  is  described  as 
living  there,  and  the  name  was  so  deeply  associated 
with  the  family  of  its  founder,  that  when  the  Divine 
retribution  overtook  the  house  of  their  destroyer, 
the  eldest  child  of  the  prophet  Hosea,  who  was  to 
be  a  living  witness  of  the  coming  vengeance,  was 
called  "  Jezreel ;"  "  for  I  will  avenge  the  blood  of 
Jezreel  upon  the  house  of  Jehu  .  .  .  and  at  that 
day  I  will  break  the  bow  of  Israel  in  the  valley 
of  Jezreel ;  .  .  .  and  great  shall  be  the  day  of  Jez- 
reel" (Hos.  i.  4,  5,  11).  And  then  out  of  that 
day  and  place  of  humiliation  the  name  is  to  go 
back  to  its  original  signification  as  derived  from 
the  beauty  and  fertility  of  the  rich  plain,  and  to 
become  a  pledge  of  the  revived  beauty  and  richness 
of  Israel.  "  I  will  '  hear  and  answer'  the  heavens, 
and  '  they  will  hear  and  answer '  the  earth,  and  the 
earth  shall  'hear  and  answer'  the  corn  and  the 
wine  and  the  oil  [of  that  fruitful  plain],  and  they 
shall  '  hear  and  answer '  Jezreel  [that  is,  the  seed 
of  God],  and  /  will  sow  her  unto  me  in  the  earth  " 
(Hos.  ii.  22 ;  see  Ewald  ad  loc,  and  Gesenius  hi 
voce  Jezreel).  From  this  time  the  image  seems 
to  have  been  continued  as  a  prophetical  expression 
for  the  sowing  the  people  of  Israel,  as  it  were 
broadcast ;  as  though  the  whole  of  Palestine  and 
the  world  were  to  become,  in  a  spiritual  sense,  one 
rich  plain  of  Jezreel.  "  I  will  sow  them  among 
the  people,  and  they  shall  remember  me  in  far 
countries"  (Zech.  x.  9).  "Ye  shall  be  tilled  and 
sown,  and  I  will  multiply  men  upon  you"  (Ez. 
xxxvi.  9,  10).  "  I  will  sow  the  house  of  Israel 
and  the  house  of  Judah  with  the  seed  of  men  and 
W'tli  the  seed  of  beast "  (Jer.  xxxi.  27).  Hence 
the  consecration  of  the  image  of  "  sowing,"  as  it 
appears  in  the  N.  T.,  Matt.  xiii.  2. 

2.  A  town  in  Judah,  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
the  southern  Caimel  (Josh.  xv.  5G).  Here  David  in 
his  wanderings  took  Ahinoam  the  Jezreelitess  for  his 
first  wife  ( 1  Sam.  xxvii.  3,  xxx.  5).      [A.  P.  S.] 

JIB'SAM  (Db'2*  :  'Uixaaav  ;  Alex.  'UPaaa/j. : 
Jebsenx),  one  of  the  sons  of  Tola,  the  son  oflssachar, 
who  were  heads  of  their  father's  house  and  heroes 
of  might  in  their  generations  (1  Chr.  vii.  2).  His 
descendants  appear  to  have  .served  in  David's  army, 
and  with  others  of  the  same  clan  mustered  to  the 
number  of  upwards  of  22,000. 

JID'LAPII  (f|^T,  "  weeping,"  Ges. :  'U\U$ : 
Jedlaph),  a  son  of  N'ahor  ((Jen.  xxii.  22),  whose 
settlements  have  not  been  identified,  though  they 
most  probably  are  to  be  looked  for  in  the  Euphrates 
country.  [E.  S.  P.] 

JIM'NA  (i"UE>V  1afi.lv,  Alex/Ia^ei'v:  Jemn  i), 

the  firstborn  of  Asher,  represented  in  the  num- 

•      I 


JOAB 


1081 


bering  on  the  plains  of  Moab  by  his  descendants 
the  Jimnites  (Num.  xxvi.  44).  He  is  elsewhere 
called  in  the  A.  V.  JiMNAH  (Gen.  xlvi.  17)  and 
Imnaii  (1  Chr.  vii.  30),  the  Hebrew  in  both  in- 
stances being  the  same. 

JIM'NAH  (PUD?  :  'Uixvd  ;  Alex.  'Uhvd  ; 
Ja/nue)=  Jimna  =  Imnah  (Gen.  xlvi.  17). 

JIM'NITES,  THE  (fUD»n  ;  »  e.  the  Jim- 
nah;  Sam.  and  one  MS.  ''JOTl :  6  'la/xivi;  Alex.  6 
'lu/ieivl:  Jemnaitae),  descendants  of  the  preceding 
(Num.  xxvi.  44). 

JTPH'TAH  (ftflBJ,  i.  c.  Yiftach  :  Vat.  omits  ; 
Alex.  'lecpdd  :  Jephtha),  one  of  the  cities  of  Judah 
in  the  maritime  lowland,  or  Shefelah  (Josh.  xv. 
43).  It  is  named  in  the  same  group  with  Mareshah, 
Nezib,  and  others.  Both  the  last-mentioned  places 
have  been  discovered,  the  former  to  the  south,  the 
latter  to  the  east  of  Bcit-Jibrin,  not  as  we  should 
expect  on  the  plain,  but  in  the  mountains.  Here 
Jiphtah  may  some  day  be  found,  though  it  has  not 
yet  been  met  with.  [G.] 

JIPHTHAH-EL,  THE  VALLEY  OF  (»| 

7NTIFlS^ :   Ta«paT]A,  'Eicycu   kcu,  *0cu7JA  ;  Alex. 

Fal  '\((pQa-(]X,  ,Yivyai  'le<p6afi\:  Jephtahel),  aval- 
ley  which  served  as  one  of  the  land-marks  for  the 
boundary  both  of  Zebulun  (Josh.  xix.  14)  and  Asher 
(27).  The  district  was  visited  in  1852  by  Dr.  Ko- 
binson,  who  suggests  that  Jiphtah-el  was  identical 
with  Jotapata,  the  city  which  so  long  withstood 
Vespasian  (Joseph.  B.  J.  iii.  7),  and  that  they 
survive  in  the  modern  Jefat,  a  village  in  the  moun- 
tains of  Galilee,  half-way  between  the  Bay  of  Acre 
and  the  Lake  of  Gennesareth.  In  this  case  the 
valley  is  the  great  Wady-Ahilin,  which  "  has  its 
head  in  the  hills  near  Jefat,  and  runs  thence  west- 
ward to  the  maritime  plain  (Kobinson,  iii.  107). 
Van  de  Velde  concurs  in  this,  and  identifies  Zebulun 
(Josh.  xix.  27),  which  he  considers  to  be  a  town, 
with  the  ruins  of  Abilin  {Memoir,  326).  It  should, 
however,  be  remarked  that  the  Hebrew  word  Ge, 
here  rendered  "  valley,"  has  commonly  rather  the 
force  of  a  ravine  or  glen,  and  is  distinct  from 
Natihal,  which  answers  exactly  to  the  Arabic  Wady 
(Stanley,  S.  §■  P.  App.  §2,  38).  [G.] 

JOAB  (3«V:  "  Jehovah  -  father :  "  'Iaia/S  : 
Joab),  the  eldest  and  most  remarkable  of  the  three 
nephews  of  David,  the  children  of  Zeruiah,  David's 
sister.  Their  lather  is  unknown,3  but  seems  to  have 
resided  at  Bethlehem,  and  to  have  died  before  his 
sons,  as  we  find  mention  of  his  sepulchre  at  that  place 
(2  Sam.  ii.  32).  They  all  exhibit  the  activity  and 
courage  of  David's  constitutional  character.  But 
they  never  rise  beyond  this  to  the  nobler  qualities 
which  lift  him  above  the  wild  soldiers  and  chief- 
tains of  the  time.  Asahel,  who  was  cut  off  in  his 
youth,  and  seems  to  have  been  the  darling  of  the 
family,  is  only  known  to  us  from  his  gazelle-like 
agility  (2  Sam.  ii.  18).  Abishai  and  Joab  are  alike 
in  their  implacable  revenge.  Joab,  however,  com- 
bines with  these  ruder  qualities  something  of  a  mure 
statesman-like  character,  which  brings  him  more 
nearly  to  a  level  with  his  youthful  uncle;  and  un- 
questionably gives  him  the  second  place  in  the 
whole  history  of  David's  reign. 


;'  By  Josephus  (Ant.  vii.  1,  §3)  his  name  is  given 
;is  Snri  (Sovpi);  but  this  may  be  merely  a  repetition 
of  Sarouiah  (iapouia). 

4  A 


1082 


JOAB 


1.  He  first  appears  after  David's  accession  to 
the  throne  at  Hebron,  thus  differing  from  his 
brother  Abishai,  who  was  already  David's  com- 
panion during  His  wanderings  (1  Sam.  xxvi.  6). 
He  with  his  two  brothers  went  out  from  Hebron 
at  the  head  of  David's  "  servants,"  or  guards,  to 
keep  a  watch  on  the  movements  of  Abner,  who 
with  a  considerable  force  of  Benjamites  had  crossed 
the  Jordan,  and  come  as  far  as  Gibeon,  perhaps  on 
a  pilgrimage  to  the  sanctuary.  The  two  parties 
sate  opposite  each  other,  on  each  side  of  the  tank  by 
that  city.  Abner's  challenge,  to  which  .loab  as- 
sented, led  to  a  desperate  struggle  between  twelve 
champions  from  either  side.  [Gibeon.]  The  left- 
handed  Benjamites,  and  the  right-handed  men  of 
Judah- — their  sword-hands  thus  coming  together 
— seized  each  his  adversary  by  the  head,  and  the 
whole  number  fell  by  the  mutual  wounds  they 
received. 

This  roused  the  blood  of  the  rival  tribes ;  a 
general  encounter  ensued  ;  Abner  and  his  company 
were  defeated,  and  in  his  flight,  being  hard  pressed 
by  the  swift-footed  Asahel,  he  reluctantly  killed 
the  unfortunate  youth.  The  expressions  which  he 
uses,  "  Wherefore  should  I  smite  thee  to  the  ground  ? 
how  then  should  I  hold  up  my  face  to  Joab  thy 
brother?"  (2  Sam.  ii.  22),  imply  that  up  to  this 
time  there  had  been  a  kindly,  if  not  a  friendly,  feel- 
ing between  the  two  chiefs.  It  was  rudely  extin- 
guished by  this  deed  of  blood.  The  other  soldiers  of 
Judah,  when  they  came  up  to  the  dead  body  of  their 
young  leader,  halted,  struck  dumb  by  grief.  But 
his  two  brothers,  on  seeing  the  corpse,  only  hurried 
on  with  greater  fury  in  the  pursuit.  At  sunset 
the  Benjamite  force  rallied  round  Abner,b  and'  he 
then  made  an  appeal  to  the  generosity  of  Joab  not 
to  push  the  war  to  extremities.  Joab  reluctantly 
consented,  drew  oft'  his  troops,  and  returned,  after 
the  loss  of  only  nineteen  men,  to  Hebron.  They 
took  the  corpse  of  Asahel  with  them,  and  on  the 
way  halted  at  Bethlehem  in  the  early  morning,  or 
at  dead  of  night,  to  inter  it  in  their  family  burial- 
place  (2  Sam.  ii.  32). 

But  Joab's  revenge  on  Abner  was  only  postponed. 
He  had  been  on  another  of  these  predatory  excur- 
sions from  Hebron,  when  he  was  informed  on  his 
return  that  Abner  had  in  his  absence  paid  a  visit  to 
David,  and  been  received  into  favour  (2  Sam.  iii. 
23).  He  broke  out  into  a  violent  remonstrance 
with  the  king,  and  then,  without  David's  know- 
ledge, immediately  sent  messengers  after  Abner, 
who  was  overtaken  by  them  at  the  well  of  Sirah, 
according  to  Josephus  (Ant.  vii.  1,  §5),  about  two 
miles  from  Hebron.0  Abner,  with  the  unsuspecting 
generosity  of  his  noble  nature,  returned  at  once. 
Joab  and  Abishai  met  him  in  the  gateway  of  the 
town;  Joab  took  him  aside  (2  Sam.  iii.  27),  as  if 
with  a  peaceful  intention,  and  then  struck  him  a 
deadly  blow  "  under  the  fifth  rib."  It  is  possible 
that  with  the  passion  of  vengeance  for  his  brother 
may  have  been  mingled  the  fear  lest  Abner  should 
supplant  him  in  the  king's  favour.  David  burst 
into  passionate  invective  and  imprecations  on  Joab 
when  he  heard  of  the  act,  and  forced  him  to  appear 
in  sackcloth  and  torn  garments  at  the  funeral  (iii. 
31).     But  it  was  an  intimation  of  Joab's  power, 


JOAB 

which  David  never  forgot.  The  awe  in  which  he 
stood  of  the  sons  of  Zeruiah  cast  a  shade  over  the 
whole  remainder  of  his  life  (iii.  39). 

III.  There  was  now  no  rival  left  in  the  way 
of  Joab's  advancements,  and  soon  the  opportunity 
occurred  for  his  legitimate  accession  to  the  highest 
post  that  David  could  confer.  At  the  siege  of 
Jebus,  the  king  offered  the  office  of  chief  of  the 
army,  now  grown  into  a  "  host,"  to  any  one  who 
would  lead  the  forlorn  hope,  and  scale  the  precipice 
on  which  the  besieged  fortress  stood.  With  an 
agility  equal  to  that  of  David  himself,  or  of  his 
brother  Asahel,  Joab  succeeded  in  the  attempt,  and 
became  in  consequence  commander-in-chief — "  cap- 
tain of  the  host  " — the  same  office  that  Abner  had 
held  under  Saul,  the  highest  in  the  state  after  the 
king(l  Chr.  xi.  6;  2  Sam.  viii.  16).  His  import- 
ance was  immediately  shown  by  his  undertaking 
the  fortification  of  the  conquered  city,  in  conjunc- 
tion with  David  (1  Chr.  xi.  8). 

In  this  post  he  was  content,  and  served  the  king 
with  undeviating  fidelity.  In  the  wide  range  of 
wars  which  David  undertook,  Joab  was  the  acting 
general,  and  he  therefore  may  be  considered  as  the 
founder,  as  far  as  military  prowess  was  concerned, 
the  Marlborough,  the  Belisarius,  of  the  Jewish 
empire.  Abishai,  his  brother,  still  accompanied 
him,  as  captain  of  the  king's  "mighty  men"  (1 
Chr.  xi.  20 ;  2  Sam.  x.  10).  He  had  a  chief 
armour-bearer  of  his  own,  Naharai,  a  Beerothite 
(2  Sam.  xxiii.  37  ;  1  Chr.  xi.  39),  aud  ten  attend- 
ants to  carry  his  equipment  and  baggage  (2  Sam. 
xviii.  15).  He  had  the  charge,  formerly  belonging 
to  the  king  or  judge,  of  giving  the  signal  by 
trumpet  for  advance  or  retreat  (2  Sam.  xviii.  16). 
He  was  called  by  the  almost  regal  title  of  "  Lord  " 
(2  Sam.  xi.  11),  "the  priuce  of  the  king's  army  " 
(1  Chr.  xxvii.  34).  His  usual  residence  (except 
when  campaigning)  was  in  Jerusalem — but  he  had 
a  house  and  property,  with  barley-fields  adjoining, 
in  the  country  (2  Sam.  xiv.  30),  in  the  "  wilder- 
ness "  (1  K.  ii.  34),  probably  on  the  N.E.  of  Jeru- 
salem (comp.  1  Sam.  xiii.  18,  Josh.  viii.  15,  20), 
near  an  ancient  sanctuary,  called  from  its  nomadic 
village  "  Baalhazor"  (2  Sam.  xiii.  23  ;  comp.  with 
xiv.  30),  where  there  were  extensive  sheepwalks. 
It  is  possible  that  this  "  house  of  Joab  "  may  have 
given  its  name  to  Ataroth,  Deth-Joab  (1  Chr.  ii.  54), 
to  distinguish  it  from  Ataroth-adar.  There  were 
two  Ataroths  in  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  [see  Ata- 
roth] . 

1.  His  great  war  was  that  against  Amnion, 
which  he  conducted  in  person.  It  was  divided 
into  three  campaigns,  (a)  The  first  was  against 
the  allied  forces  of  Syria  and  Amnion.  He  attacked 
and  defeated  the  Syrians,  whilst  his  brother  Abishai 
did  the  same  for  the  Ammonites.  The  Syrians  ral- 
lied with  their  kindred  tribes  from  beyond  the  Eu- 
phrates, and  were  finally  routed  by  David  himself. 
[Hadarkzer].  (6)  The  second  was  against  Edom. 
The  decisive  victory  was  gained  by  David  himself 
in  the  "valley  of  salt,"  and  celebrated  by  a  tri- 
umphal monument  (2  Sam.  viii.  13).  But  Joab 
had  the  charge  of  carrying  out  the  victory,  and  re- 
mained for  six  months,  extirpating  the  male  popu- 
lation, whom  he  then  buried  in  the  tombs  of  Petra 


b  The  word  describing  the  halt  of  Abner's  band, 
and  rendered  "troop"  in  the  A.  V.  (2  Sam.  ii.  25), 
is  an  unusual  one,  ["H^IX  [Aguddah),  elsewhere  em- 
ployed for  a  bunch  or  knot  of  hyssop. 


c  Possibly  the  spring  which  still  exists  about 
that  distance  out  of  Hebron  on  the  left  of  the  road 
going  northward,  and  bears  the  name  of  Ain-Serah. 
The  road  has  doubtless  always  followed  the  same 
track. 


JOAB 

(l  K.  xi.  15,  16).  So  long  was  the  terror  of  his 
name  preserved  that  only  when  the  fugitive  prince 
of  Edom,  in  the  Egyptian  court,  heard  that  "  David 
slept  with  his  fathers,  and  that  Joab  the  captain  of 
the  host  was  dead,"  did  he  venture  to  return  to  his 
own  country  (ib.  xi.  21,  22).  (c)  The  third  was 
against  the  Ammonites.  They  were  again  left  to 
Joab  (2  Sam.  x.  7-19).  He  went  against  them  at 
the  beginning  of  the  next  year  "at  the  time  when 
kings  go  out  to  battle" — to  the  siege  of  Kabbah. 
The  ark  was  sent  with  him,  and  the  whole  army 
was  encamped  in  booths  or  huts  round  the  be- 
leaguered city  (2  Sam.  xi.  1,  11).  After  a  sortie 
of  the  inhabitants,  which  caused  some  loss  to  the 
Jewish  army,  Joab  took  the  lower  city  on  the 
river,  and,  then,  with  true  loyalty,  sent  to  urge 
David  to  come  and  take  the  citadel,  "  Rabbah," 
lest  the  glory  of  the  capture  should  pass  from  the 
king  to  his  general  (2  Sam.  xii.  26-28). 

2.  The  services  of  Joab  to  the  king  were  not 
confined  to  these  military  achievements.  In  the 
entangled  relations  which  grew  up  in  David's  do- 
mestic life,  he  bore  an  important  part,  (a)  The  first 
occasion  was  the  unhappy  correspondence  which 
passed  between  him  and  the  king  during  the  Am- 
monite war  respecting  Uriah  the  Hittite,  which 
led  to  the  treacherous  sacrifice  of  Uriah  in  the 
above  mentioned  sortie  (2  Sam.  xi.  1-25).  It 
shows  both  the  confidence  reposed  by  David  in 
Joab,  and  Joab's  too  unscrupulous  fidelity  to  David. 
From  the  possession  which  Joab  thus  acquired  of 
the  terrible  secret  of  the  royal  household,  has  been 
dated,  with  some  probability,''  his  increased  power 
over  the  mind  of  the  king. 

(6)  The  next  occasion  on  which  it  was  displayed 
was  in  his  successful  endeavour  to  reinstate  Absalom 
in  David's  favour,  after  the  murder  of  Amnon.  It 
would  almost  seem  as  if  he  had  been  guided  by 
the  effect  produced  on  the  king  by  Nathan's  parable. 
A  similar  apologue  he  put  into  the  mouth  of  a 
"  wise  woman  of  Tekoah."  The  exclamation  of 
David  on  perceiving  the  application  intimates  the 
high  opinion  which  he  entertained  of  his  general, 
"  Is  not  the  hand  of  Joab  in  all  this  ?  "  (2  Sam.  xiv. 
1-20).  Alike  indication  is  found  in  the  confidence 
of  Absalom  that  Joab,  who  had  thus  procured  his 
return,  could  also  go  a  step  further  and  demand  his 
admission  to  his  father's  presence.  Joab,  who 
evidently  thought  that  he  had  gained  as  much  as 
could  be  expected  (2  Sam.  xiv.  22),  twice  refused 
to  visit  the  prince,  but  having  been  entrapped  into 
an  interview  by  a  stratagem  of  Absalom,  undertook 
the  mission,  and  succeeded  in  this  also.  (ib.  xiv.  28- 
33). 

(c)  The  same  keen  sense  of  his  master's  interests 
that  had  prompted  this  desire  to  heal  the  breach  in 
the  royal  family  ruled  the  conduct  of  Joab  no  less, 
when  the  relations  of  the  father  and  son  were 
reversed  by  the  successful  revolt  of  Absalom.  His 
former  intimacy  with  the  prince  did  not  impair 
his  fidelity  to  the  king.  He  followed  him  beyond 
the  Jordan,  and  in  the  final  battle  of  Ephraini 
assumed  the  responsibility  of  taking  the  rebel 
prince's  dangerous  life  in  spite  of  David's  injunction 
to  spare  him,  and  when  no  one  else  had  courage  to  act 
so  decisive  a  part  (2  Sam.  xviii.  2,  11-15).  He  was 
well  aware  of  the  terrible  effect  it  would  have  on  the 
king  (ib.  xviii.  20),  and  on  this  account  possibly 
dissuaded  his  young  friend  Ahimaaz  from  bearing  the 
news  ;  but,  when  the  tidings  had  been  broken,  he 


JOAB 


1083 


-d  See  Blunt's  Cmncidences,  ii.,  xi. 


had  the  spirit  himself  to  rouse  David  from  the 
frantic  grief  which  would  have  been  fatal  to  the 
royal  cause  (2  Sam.  xix.  5-7).  His  stern  resolu- 
tion (as  he  had  himself  anticipated)  well  nigh 
proved  fatal  to  his  own  interests.  The  king  could 
not  forgive  it,  and  went  so  far  in  his  unreasonable 
resentment  as  to  transfer  the  command  of  the  army 
from  the  too  faithful  Joab  to  his  other  nephew 
Amasa,  the  son  of  Abigail,  who  had  even  sided 
with  the  insurgents  (2  Sam.  xix.  32).  In  like 
maimer  he  returned  only  a  reproachful  answer  to 
the  vindictive  loyalty  of  Joab's  brother,  Abishai 
(ib.  22). 

(d)  Nothing  brings  out  more  strongly  the  good 
and  bad  qualities  of  Joab  than  his  conduct  in  this 
trying  crisis  of  his  history.  On  the  one  hand,  he 
remained  still  faithful  to  his  master.  On  the  other 
hand,  as  before  in  the  case  of  Abner,  he  was  deter- 
mined not  to  lose  the  post  he  so  highly  valued. 
Amasa  was  commander-in-chief,  but  Joab  had 
still  his  own,  small  following  of  attendants ;  and 
with  him  were  the  mighty  men  commanded  by 
his  brother  Abishai  (2  Sam.  xx.  7,  10),  and  the 
body-guard  of  the  king.  With  these  he  went  out 
in  pursuit  of  the  remnants  of  the  rebellion.  In  the 
heat  of  pursuit,  he  encountered  his  rival  Amasa, 
more  leisurely  engaged  in  the  same  quest.  At 
"the  great  stone"  in  Gibeon,  the  cousins  met. 
Joab's  sword  was  attached  to  his  girdle ;  by  de- 
sign or  accident  it  protruded  "from  the  sheath  ; 
Amasa  rushed  into  the  treacherous  embrace,  to 
which  Joab  invited  him,  holding  fast  his  sword  by 
his  own  right  hand,  whilst  the  unsheathed  sword 
in  his  left  hand  plunged  into  Amasa's  stomach ; 
a  single  blow  from  that  practised  arm,  as  in  the 
case  of  Abner,  sufficed  to  do  its  work.  Joab  and 
his  brother  hurried  on  to  discharge  their  com- 
mission, whilst  one  of  his  ten  attendants  staid  by 
the  corpse,  calling  on  the  royal  party  to  follow 
after  Joab.  But  the  deed  produced  a  frightful 
impression.  The  dead  body  was  lying  in  a  pool  of 
blood  by  the  roadside  ;  every  one  halted,  as  they 
came  up,  at  the  ghastly  sight,  till  the  attendant 
dragged  it  out  of  the  road,  and  threw  a  cloak  over 
it.  Then,  as  if  the  spell  was  broken,  they  followed 
Joab,  now  once  more  captain  of  the  host  (2  Sam. 
xx.  5-13).  He  too,  when  they  overtook  him, 
presented  an  aspect  long  afterwards  remembered 
with  horror.  The  blood  of  Amasa  had  spirted  all 
over  the  girdle  to  which  the  sword  was  attached, 
and  the  sandals  on  his  feet  were  red  with  the  stains 
left  by  the  falling  corpse  (1  K.  ii.  5). 

(e)  But,  at  the  moment,  all  were  absorbed  in 
the  pursuit  of  the  rebels.  Once  more  a  proof  was 
given  of  the  wide-spread  confidence  in  Joab's  judg- 
ment. In  the  besieged  town  of  Abel  Bethmaachah , 
far  in  the  north,  the  same  appeal  was  addressed  to 
his  sense  of  the  evils  of  an  endless  civil  war,  that 
had  been  addressed  to  him  years  before  by  Abner 
near  Gibeon.  He  demanded  only  the  surrender  of 
the  rebel  chief,  and  on  the  sight  of  his  head  thrown 
over  the  wall,  withdrew  the  army  and  returned  to 
Jerusalem  (2  Sam.  xx.  16-22).     [SHEBA.] 

(/)  His  last  remonstrance  with  David  was  on 
the  announcement  of  the  king's  desire  to  number 
the  people.  "The  king  prevailed  against  Joab" 
(2  Sam.  xxiv.  1-4).  But  Joab's  scruples  were  so 
strong  that  he  managed  to  avoid  numbering  two  of 
the  tribes,  Levi  ami  Benjamin  (1  Chr.  xxi.  6). 

3.  There  is  something  mournful  in  the  end  of 
Joab.  At  the  close  of  his  long  life,  his  loyalty, 
so  long  unshaken,  at  last  wavered.     "  Though  ho 

4  A  2 


1084 


JOACHAZ 


had  not  turned  after  Absalom  (or,  as  In  LXX. 
or  Jos.  Ant.  viii.  1,  §4,  "  He  turned  not  after 
Solomon"),  lie  turned  after  Adonijah "  (1  K. 
ii.  28).  This  probably  rilled  up  the  measure  of 
the  king's  long  cherished  resentment.  We  learn 
from  David's  last  song  that  his  powerlessness  over 
his  courtiers  was  even  then  present  to  his  mind 
(2  Sam.  xxiii.  6,  7),  and  uow,  on  his  deathbed,  he 
recalled  to  Solomon's  recollection  the  two  murders 
of  Abner  and  Amasa  (1  K.  ii.  5,  6),  with  an  in- 
junction not  to  let  the  aged  soldier  escape  with 
impunity. 

The  revival  of  the  pretensions  of  Adonijah  after 
David's  death  was  sufficient  to  awaken  the  suspi- 
cions of  Solomon.  The  king  deposed  the  high- 
priest  Abiathar,  Joab's  friend  and  fellow-conspi- 
rator— and  the  news  of  this  event  at  once  alarmed 
Joab  himself.  He  claimed  the  right  of  sanctuary 
within  the  curtains  of  the  sacred  tent,  under  the 
shelter  of  the  altar  at  Gibeon.  He  was  pursued 
by  Benaiah,  who  at  first  hesitated  tp  violate  the 
sanctuary  of  the  refuge ;  but  Solomon  urged  that 
the  guilt  of  two  such  murders  overrode  all  such 
protection.  With  his  hands  on  the  altar  therefore, 
the  grey-headed  warrior  was  slaughtered  by  hi? 
successor.  The  body  was  carried  to  his  house 
"  in  the  wilderness,"  and  there  interred.  He  left 
descendants,  but  nothing  is  known  of  them,  unless 
it  may  be  inferred  from  the  double  curse  of  David 
(2  Sam.  iii.  29)  atfd  of  Solomon  (].  K.  ii.  33)  that 
they  seemed  to  dwindle  away,  stricken  by  a  suc- 
cession of  visitations — weakness,  leprosy,  lameness, 
murder,  starvation.  His  name  is  by  some  supposed 
(in  allusion  to  his  part  in  Adonijah's  coronation  on 
that  spot)  to  be  preserved  in  the  modern  appella- 
tion of  Enrogel — "  the  well  of  Job  " — corrupted 
from  Joab.  [A.  P.  S.] 

2.  IKV  :  'Ia>/3a0  ;  Alex.  'lood$  :  Joab.)  Son  ot 
Seraiah,  and  descendant  of  Kenaz  (1  Chr.  iv.  14). 
He  was  father,  or  prince,  as  Jarchi  explains  it,  of 
the  valley  of  Charashim,  or  smiths,  so  called,  accord- 
ing to  the  tradition  quoted  by  Jerome  (Quaest. 
Heb.  in  Pared.),  because  the  architects  of  the 
Temple  were  selected  from  among  his  sons. 

3.  ('Icoa/8:  Job  in  1  Esd.).  The  head  of  a 
family,  not  of  priestly  or  Levitical  rank,  whose 
descendants,  with  those  of  Jeshua,  were -the  most 
numerous  of  all  who  returned  with  Zerubbabel 
(Ezr.  ii.  6,  viii.  9  ;  Neh.  vii.  11  ;  1  Esd.  viii.  35). 
It  is  not  clear  whether  Jeshua  and  Joab  were  two 
prominent  men  among  the  children  of  Pahath- 
Moab,  the  ruler  or  sultan  (sliulton)  of  Moab,  as  the' 
Syriac  renders,  or  whether,  in  the  registration  of 
those  who  returned,  the  descendants  of  Jeshua  and 
Joab  were  represented  by  the  sons  of  Pahath-Moab. 
The  latter  is  more  probably  the  true  solution,  and 
the  verse  (Ezr.  ii.  6  ;  Neh.  vii.  11)  should  then  be 
rendered  : — "  the  sons  of  Pahath-Moab,  for  (i.  c. 
representing)  the  sons  of  Jeshua  and  Joab."  In 
this  case  the  Joab  of  Ezr.  viii.  9  and  1  Esd.  viii. 
35  was  probably  a  distinct  personage. 

JOA'CHAZ  ('Uxovias;  Alex.  'lcixaC-  Je- 
chonias)  =  Jehoahaz  (1  Esd.  i.  34),  the  son  of 
Josiah.  The  LXX.  and  Vulgate  are  in  this  case 
followed  by  St.  Matthew  (i.  11),  or  have  been 
altered  so  as  to  agree  with  him. 

JOACHIM  ('IwaKei/.i:  JoaMm).  1.  (Bar. 
i.  3)  —  Jehoiakim,  called  also  Joacim. 

2.  A  "high-priest"    (6    tepevs)   at   Jerusalem 


JOAH 

In  the  time  of  Baruch  "  the  son  of  Chelcias,"  i.  e. 
Hilkiah  (Bar.  i.  7).  The  name  does  not  occur  in 
the  list  1  Chr.  vi.  13  ft'.  [B.  E.  W.] 

JOACIM  ('Ioioki'^:  Alex.  'loiKelfx  and  'lcoa- 
Kei/j. :  Joacim).  1.  =  Jehoiakim  (1  Esd.  i.  37, 
38,  39).     [Joacim,  1.] 

2.  (Joachin)  =  Jehoiachin  (1  Esd.  i.  43). 

3.  =  Joiakim,  the  son  of  Jeshua  (1  Esd.  v.  5). 
He  is  by  mistake  called  the  son  of  Zerubbabel,  as 
is  clear  from  Neh.  xii.  10,  26  ;  and  the  passage  has 
in  consequence  been  corrected  by  Junius,  who 
renders  it  "  Jeschuahh  films  Jehotzadaki  cum 
Jehojakimo  filio."  Burrington  (Geneal.  i.  72) 
proposed  to  omit  the  words  'IwaKifj.  6  tov  alto- 
gether as  an  interpolation.  [W.  A.  W.] 

4.  "  The  high-priest  which  was  m  Jerusalem " 
(Jud.  iv.  6,  14)  in  the  time  of  Judith,  who  welcomed 
the  heroine  after  the  death  of  Holofernes,  in  com- 
pany with  "  the  ancients  of  the  children  of  Israel  " 
{f]  yepovcria  tS>v  vlaiv  'icrpav'jA,  xv.  8  ft.).  The 
name  occurs  witli  the  various  reading  Eliahim,  but 
it  is  impossible  to  identify  him  with  any  historical 
character.  No  such  name  occurs  in  the  lists  of 
high-priests  in  1  Chr.  vi.  (Jos.  Ant.  x.  8,  §6)  ;  and 
it  is  a  mere  arbitrary  conjecture  to  suppose  that 
Eliakim  mentioned  in  2  K.  xviii.  18  was  afterwards 
raised  to  that  dignity.  Still  less  can  be.  said  foi  the 
identification  of  Joacim  with  Hilkiah  (2  K.  xxii.  4 ; 
'EAia/a'as,  Jos.  Ant.  x.  4,  §2  ;  XeA/aas,  LXX.). 
The  name  itself  is  appropriate  to  the  position  which 
the  high-priest  occupies  in  the  story  of  Judith 
("  The  Lord  hath  set  up"),  and  the  person  must 
be  regarded  as  a  necessary  part  of  the  fiction. 

5.  The  husband  of  Susanna  (Sus.  1  ff.).  The 
name  seems  to  have  been  chosen,  as  in  the  former 
case,  with  a  reference  to  its  meaning;  and  it  was 
probably  for  the  same  reason  that  the  husband  of 
Anna,  the  mother  of  the  Virgin,  is  called  Joacim 
in  early  legends  (I'rotev.  Jac.  i.,  &c). 

JOADA'NUS  ('luaSdvos :  Joadeus),  one  of 
the  sons  of  Jeshua,  the  son  of  Jozadak  (1  Esd.  ix. 
19).  His  name  occupies  the  same  position  as  that  of 
Gedaliah  in  the  corresponding  list  in  Ezr.  x.  18, 
but  it  is  uncertain  how  the  corruption  originated. 
Probably,  as  Burrington  suggests  {Geneal.  i.  167), 
the  T  was  corrupted  into  I,  and  AI  into  N,  a  change 
which  in  the  uncial  character  would  be  very  slight. 

JOAH  (riXT1 :  'lads  in  Kings,  'lwdx  in  Isaiah  ; 

Alex.  '\wffa<pdr  in  2  K.  xviii.  18,  20,  and  'laids  in 
ver.  37:  Jotdie).  1.  The  son  of  Asaph,  and  chro- 
nicler, or  keeper  of  the  records,  to  Hezekiah.  He 
was  one  of  the  three  chief  officers  sent  to  com- 
municate with  the  Assyrian  general  at  the  conduit 
of  the  upper  pool  (Is.  xxxvi.  3,  11,  22),  and  pro- 
bably belonged  to  the  tribe  of  Levi. 

2.  ('IcoctyS ;  Alex,  'luidx-  Joah.)  The  son  or 
grandson  of  Zimmah,  a  Gershonite  (1  Chr.  vi.  21), 
and  apparently  the  same  as  Ethan  (ver.  42),  unless, 
as  is  not  improbable,  in  the  latter  list  some  names 
are  supplied  which  are  omitted  in  the  former,  and 
vice  versa.  For  instance,  in  ver.  4-2  Shimei  is 
added,  and  in  ver.  43  Libni  is  omitted  (comp.  ver. 
20).  If  Joah  and  Lthan  are  identical,  the  passage 
must  have  been  early  corrupted,  as  all  ancient  ver- 
sions give  it  as  it  stands  at  present,  and  there  are 
no  variations  in  the  MSS. 

3.  ('Iwdd  ;  Alex,  'laiad:  Joaha.)  The  third 
son  of  Obed-edom  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  4).  a  Korhite,  and 
one  of  the  door-keepers  appointed  by  David.     With 


JOAHAZ 

tne  rest  of  his  family  he  is  characterised  as  a  man 
of  excellence  in  strength  for  the  service  (yer.  8). 
They  were  appointed  to  keep  the  southern  gate 
of  the  temple,  and  the  house  of  Asuppim,  or 
■•  gatherings,"  which  was  either  a  store-house  or 
council-chamber  in  the  outer  court  (yer.  15). 

4.  ('IaiSaaS;  Alex.  'Icoa:  Joah.)  A  Gershonite, 
the  son  of  Zimmah,  and  father  of  Eden  (2  Chr. 
xxix.  12).  As  one  of  the  representatives  of  the 
great  Levitical  family  to  which  he  belonged,  he 
took  a  leading  part  in  the  purification  of  the  temple 
in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah.  In  the  last  clause  of  the 
verse  the  LXX.  have  'licaxd,  which  is  the  reading 
of  both  MSS. ;  but  there  is  nothing  to  show  that 
the  same  person  is  not  in  both  instances  intended, 
nor  any  IMS.  authority  for  the  various  reading. 

5.  {'lovdx ;  Alex,  'loods :  John.)  The  son  of 
Joahaz,  and  keeper  of  the  records,  or  annalist  to 
Josiah.  Together  with  the  chief  officers  of  state, 
Shaphan  the  scribe,  and  Maaseiah,  the  governor  of 
the  city,  he  superintended  the  repair  of  the  Temple 
which  had  been  neglected  during  the  two  previous 
reigns  (2  Chr.  xxxiv.  8).  Josephus  calls  him 
'IwaTTjy,  as  if  he  read  ]"IN1\  The  Syriac  and 
Arabic  omit  the  name  altogether. 

JOA'HAZ  (TnN'V:  Ta>axaC:  Joachaz),  the 
lather  of  Joah,  the  chronicler  or  keeper  of  the 
records  to  king  Josiah  (2  Chr.  xxxiv.  8).  One  of 
Keimicott's  MS.  reads  tl"IN,  »'.  a.  Ahaz,  and  the 
margin  of  Bomberg's  Bible  gives  inXin,)  i.  e. 
Jehoahaz.  In  the  Syr.  and  Arab,  versions  the 
name  is  omitted. 

JOA'NAN  ('luvdv  ;  Alex.  'Iwavdv.  Jonathas) 
=  Johanan,  the  son  of  Eliashib  (1  Esd.  ix.  1). 

JOAN'NA  ('Iwavvas,  'icaavdv.  Joanna),  son 
of  Rhesa,  according  to  the  text  of  Luke  iii.  27,  and 
one  of  the  ancestors  of  Christ.  But  according  to 
the  view  explained  in  a  previous  article,  son  ofZerub- 
babel,  and  the  same  as  Hananiah  in  1  Chr.  iii.  19. 
[GENEAL.OF  Christ  ;  Hananiah,  8.]  [A.C.H.] 

JOAN'NA  {'Icodvva,  modem  form  "  Joan,"  of 
the  same  origin  with  ' loaavvas ,  the  leading  of  most 
MSS.  ;  also  rendered  A.  V.  "  Joanna,"  St.  Luke 
iii.  27,  ami  'lwdvvt)s=  Hebr.  Jehoiianan),  the 
name  of  a  woman,  occurring  twice  in  Luke  (viii. 
:j,  xxiv.  10),  but  evidently  denoting  the  same 
person.  In  the  first  passage  she  is  expressly  stated 
to  have  been  "wife  of  Chusa,  steward  (iwi- 
Tporros',  of  Herod,"  that  is,  Antipas,  tetrarch 
of  Galilee.  Professor  Blunt  has  observed  in  his 
Coincidences,  that  '•  we  find  here  a  reason  why 
Herod  should  say  to  his  servants  (Matt.  xiv.  2j, 
'  This  is  John  the  Baptist' . . .  because  his  steward's 
wife  was  a  disciple  of  Jesus,  and  so  there  would  be 
frequent  mention  of  him  among  the  servants  in 
Herod's  court  "  (Alford,  ■«/  /<«•. ;  comp.  Luke  ix.  7). 
Professor  Blunt  adds  the  still  more  interesting  in- 
stance of  Manaeu  (Acts  xiii.  lj,  the  tetrarch 's  own 
'•  foster-brother"  (avvrpixpos,  Blunt,  p.  263,  ed. 
1859).  Another  coincidence  is,  that  our  Lord's 
ministry  was  mostly  confined  to  Galilee,  the  scat 
of  Herod's  jurisdiction.  Farther,  if  we  might  sup- 
pose  Herod  at  length  to  have  dismissed  Chusa  from 
Ins  service,  on  account  of  Joanna's  attachment  to 
one  already  in  ill  odour  with  the  higher  powers 
(see  particularly  Luke  xiii.  :'.  1  |,  the  suppression  of 
her  husband's  name,  now  no  longer  holding  a  dis- 
tinguished office,  would  he  very  natural  in  the 
second  passage.     However,  Joanna  continued  faith- 


JOASH 


1085 


ful  to  our  Lord  throughout  Ills  ministry ;  and  as 
she  was  one  of  those  whose  circumstances  permitted 
them  to  "  minister  unto  Him  out  of  their  substance" 
during  His  lifetime,  so  she  was  one  of  those  who 
brought  spices  and  ointments  to  embalm  His  body 
when  dead.  [E.  S.  Ff.J 

JOANNAN      Qlwavvdv  ;      Alex,    'ludvvris  : 

Joannes),  the  eldest  brother  of  Judas  Maccabaeus 
(1  Mace.  ii.  2).  He  had  the  surname  of  Caddis, 
and  is  elsewhere  called  John.     [John,  2.] 

JOA'EIB  ('IoiopijS  ;  Alex.  'Iwaptl/A :  Joarih), 
chief  of  the  first  of  the  twenty-four  courses  of 
priests  in  the  reign  of  David,  and  ancestor  of  the 
Maccabees  (1  Mace.  ii.  1).  His  name  appears  also 
in  the  A.  V.  as  Jehoiarib  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  7),  and 
Jarib  (1  Mace.  xiv.  29).  Josephus  retains  the  form 
adopted  by  the  LXX.  {Ant.  xii.  6,  §1). 

JO'ASH  {^;HS\  the  contracted  form  of  the 
name  Jehoash,  in  which  it  is  frequently  found  : 
'lccds  :  Joas).  1.  Son  of  Ahaziah  king  of  Judah, 
and  the  only  one  of  his  children  who  escaped  the 
murderous  hand  of  Athaliah.  Jehoram  having  him- 
self killed  all  his  own  brethren,  and  all  his  sons, 
except  Ahaziah,  having  been  killed  by  the  irruption 
of  the  Philistines  and  Arabians,  and  all  Ahaziah's 
remoter  relations  having  been  slain  by  Jehu,  and 
now  all  his  sons  being  put  to  death  by  Athaliah 
(2  Chr.  xjd.  4,  17  ;  xxii.  1,  8,  9,  10),  the  house  of 
David  was  reduced  to  the  lowest  ebb,  and  Joash 
appears  to  have  been  the  only  surviving  descendant, 
of  Solomon.  After  his  father's  sister  Jehoshabeath, 
the  wife  of  Jehoiada,  had  stolen  him  from  among 
the  king's  sons,  he  was  hid  for  6  years  in  the 
chambers  of  the  Temple.  In  the  7th  year  of  his 
age  and  of  his  concealment,  a  successful  revolution 
placed  him  on  the  throne  of  his  ancestors,  and  freed 
the  country  from  the  tyranny  and  idolatries  of  Atha- 
liah. [Jehoiada.]  For  at  least  23  years,  while 
Jehoiada  lived,  this  reign  was  very  prosperous. 
Excepting  that  the  high-places  were  still  resorted  to 
for  incense  and  sacrifice,  pure  religion  was  restored, 
large  contributions  were  made  for  the  repair  of  the 
Temple,  which  was  accordingly  restored ;  and  the 
country  seems  to  have  been  free  from  foreign  in- 
vasion and  domestic  disturbance.  But,  after  the 
death  of  Jehoiada,  Joash,  who  was  evidently  of  weak 
character,  fell  into  the  hands  of  bad  advisers,  at 
whose  suggestion  he  revived  the  worship  of  Baal 
and  Ashtaroth.  When  he  was  rebuked  for  this  by 
Zechariah,  the  son  of  Jehoiada,  who  had  probably 
succeeded  to  the  high-priesthood,  with  base  ingra- 
titude and  daring  impiety  Joash  caused  him  to  he 
stoned  to  death  in  the  very  court  of  the  Lord's 
house,  "between  the  temple  and  the  altar"  (Matt. 
wiii.  35).  'fhe  vengeance  imprecated  by  the  mur- 
dered high-priest  was  not  long  delayed.  That  very 
year,  Hazaei  king  of  Syria,  after  a  successful  cam- 
paign against  the  Philistines,  came  up  against  Jeru- 
salem, and  carried  oil  a  vast  booty  as  the  price  of  his 

departure.  A  decisive  victory,  gained  by  a  small 
hand  of  Syrians  over  a  great  host  of  the  king  of 
Judah,  had  thus  placed  Jerusalem  at  his  mercy. 
This  defeat  is  expressly  said  to  be  a  judgment  upon 
Joash  for  having  forsakeu  the  God  of  his  fathers. 
lie  had  scarcely  escaped  this  danger,  when  he  fell 
into  another  and  a  fatal  one.  Two  of  his  servants, 
taking  advantage  of  his  severe  illness,  some  think 
of  a  wound  received  in  battle,  conspired  against  him, 
and  slew  him  in  his  bed  in  the  fortress  of  Millo, 
thus  avenging  the  innocent  blood  of  Zechariah.     He 


1086 


JOASH 


was  buried  in  the  city  of  David,  but  not  in  the 
sepulchres  of  the  kings  of  Judah.  Possibly  the  fact 
of  Jehoiada  being  buried  there  had  something  to  do 
with  this  exclusion.  Joash's  reign  lasted  40  years, 
from  878  to  8:38  B.C.  He  was  10th  king  from 
David  inclusive,  reckoning  the  reign  of  the  usurper 
Athaliah.  He  is  one  of  the  three  kings  (Ahaziah, 
Joash,  Amaziah)  omitted  by  St.  Matthew  in  the 
genealogy  of  Christ. 

With  regard  to  the  different  accounts  of  the 
Syrian  invasion  given  in  2  K.  and  in  2  Chr.,  which 
has  led  some  (as  Thenius  and  many  older  commen- 
tators), to  imagine  two  distinct  Syrian  invasions, 
and  others  to  see  a  direct  contradiction,  or  at  least  a 
strange  incompleteness  in  the  narratives,  as  Winer, 
the  difficulty  exists  solely  in  the  minds  of  the 
critics.  The  narrative  given  above,  which  is  also 
that  of  Keil  and  E.  Bertheau  {Exeg.  handb.  z. 
A.  T.)  as  well  as  of  Josephus,  perfectly  suits  the 
two  accounts,  which  are  merely  different  abridg- 
ments of  the  one  fuller  account  contained  in  the 
original  chronicles  of  the  kingdom.  Gramberg 
pushes  the  system  of  incredulous  criticism  to  such 
an  absurd  pitch,  that  he  speaks  of  the  murder  of 
Zacharias  as  a  pure  fable  (Winer,  Eeahcortb.  Je- 
haasch). 

It  should  be  added  that  the  prophet  Elisha  flou- 
rished in  Israel  throughout  the  days  of  Joash  ;  and 
there  is  some  ground  for  concluding  with  Winer 
(agreeing  with  Credner,  Movers,  Hitzig,  Meier,'  and 
others)  that  the  prophet  Joel  also  prophesied  in  the 
former  part  of  this  reign.  (See  Movers,  Chronik. 
pp.  119-121.) 

2.-  Son  and  successor  of  Jehoahaz  on  the  throne 
of  Israel  from  B.C.  840  to  825,  and  for  two  full 
years  a  contemporary  sovereign  with  the  preceding 
(2  K.  xiv.  1;  comp.  with  xii.  1,  xiii.  10).  When 
he  succeeded  to  the  crown,  the  kingdom  was  in  a 
deplorable  state  from  the  devastations  of  Hazael  and 
Benhadad,  kings  of  Syria,  of  whose  power  at  this 
time  we  had  also  evidence  in  the  preceding  article. 
In  spite  of  the  perseverance  of  Joash  in  the  worship 
set  up  by  Jeroboam,  God  took  compassion  upon  the 
extreme  misery  of  Israel,  and  in  remembrance  of 
His  covenant  with  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob, 
interposed  to  save  them  from  entire  destruction. 
On  occasion  of  a  friendly  visit  paid  by  Joash  to 
Elisha  on  his  deathbed,  where  he  wept  over  his  face, 
and  addressed  him  as  "  the  chariot  of  Israel  and  the 
horsemen  thereof,"  the  prophet  promised  him  deli- 
verance from  the  Syrian  yoke  in  Aphek,  the  scene 
of  Ahab's  great  victory  over  a  former  Ben-hadad 
(1  K.  xx.  26-30).  He  then  bid  him  smite  upon  the 
ground,  and  the  king  smote  thrice  and  then  stayed. 
The  prophet  rebuked  him  for  staying,  and  limited 
to  three  his  victories  over  Syria.  Accordingly 
Joash  did  beat  Ben-hadad  three  times  on  the  field 
of  battle,  and  recovered  from  him  the  cities  which 
Hazael  had  taken  from  Jehoahaz.  The  other  great 
military  event  of  Joash's  reign  was  his  successful 
war  with  Amaziah  king  of  Judah.  The  grounds 
of  this  war  are  given  fully  in  2  Chr.  xxv.  [Ama- 
ziah.] The  hiring  of  100,000  men  of  Israel  for 
100  talents  of  silver  by  Amaziah  is  the  only  in- 
stance on  record  of  such  a  transaction,  and  implies 
that  at  that  time  the  kingdom  of  Israel  was  free 
from  all  fear  of  the  Syrians.  These  mercenary  sol- 
diers having  been  dismissed  by  Amaziah,  at  the 
instigation  of  a  prophet,  without  being  allowed  to 
take  part  in  the  Edomitish  expedition,  returned  in 
great  wrath  to  their  own  country,  and  sacked  and 
plundered   the  cities   of  Judah   in   revenge   for   the 


JOASH 

slight  put  upon  them,  and  also  to  indemnify  them- 
selves for  the  loss  of  their  share  of  the  plunder. 
It  was  to  avenge  this  injury  that  Amaziah,  on  his 
return  from  his  triumph  over  the  Edomites,  declared 
war  against  Joash,  in  spite  of  the  warning  of  the 
prophet,  and  the  contemptuous  dissuasion  of  Joash 
under  the  table  of  the  cedar  and  the  thistle.  The 
result  was  that  the  two  armies  met  at  Beth-shemesh, 
that  Joash  was  victorious,  put  the  army  of  Amaziah 
to  the  rout,  took  him  prisoner,  brought  him  to 
Jerusalem,  broke  down  the  wall  of  Jerusalem,  all 
along  the  north  side  from  the  gate  of  Ephraim  to 
the  corner  gate,  a  distance  of  400  cubits,  plundered 
the  Temple  of  its  gold  and  silver  vessels,  seized  the 
king's  treasures,  took  hostages,  and  then  returned 
to  Samaria,  where  he  died,  probably  not  very  long 
afterwards,  and  was  buried  in  the  sepulchres  of  the 
kings  of  Israel.  He  died  in  the  15th  year  of  Ama- 
ziah king  of  Judah,  and  was  succeeded  by  his  son 
Jeroboam  II.  There  is  a  discrepance  between  the 
Bible  account  of  his  character  and  that  given  by 
Josephus.  For  whereas  the  former  says  of  him, 
"  He  did  that  which  was  evil  iu  the  sight  of  the 
Lord''  (2  K.  xiii.  11),  the  latter  says  that  he  was 
a  good  man,  and  very  different  from  his  father. 
Josephus  probably  was  guided  by  the  accouut  of 
Joash's  friendly  intercourse  with  Elisha,  which  cer- 
tainly  indicates  some  good  disposition  in  him,  al- 
though he  followed  the  sin  of  Jeroboam.    [A.  C.  H.J 

3.  The  father  of  Gideon,  and  a  wealthy  man 
among  the  Abiezrites.  At  the  time  of  the 
Midianitish  occupation  of  the  country,  he  appears 
to  have  gone  so  far  with  the  tide  of  popular 
opinion  in  favour  of  idolatry,  that  he  had  on  his 
own  ground  an  altar  dedicated  to  Baal,  and  an 
Asherah.  In  this,  however,  he  submitted  rather 
to  the  exigencies  of  the  time,  and  the  influence  of 
his  family  and  neighbours,  and  was  the  first  to 
defend  the  daring  act  of  his  son,  and  protect  him 
from  the  vengeance  of  the  Abiezrites,  by  sarcasm 
only  less  severe  than  that  which  Elijah  employed 
against  the  priests  of  Baal  in  the  memorable  scene 
on  Carmel  (Judg.  vi.  11,  29,  30,  31,  vii.  14, 
viii.  13,  29,  32).  The  LXX.  put  the  speech  in 
vi.  31  most  inappropriately  into  the  mouth  of 
Gideon,  but  this  is  corrected  in  the  Alex.  MS. 
In  the  Vulg.  the  name  is  omitted  in  vi.  31  and 
viii.  13. 

4.  Apparently  a  younger  son  of  Ahab,  who  held 
a  subordinate  jurisdiction  in  the  life-time  of  his 
father,  or  was  appointed  viceroy  (apxoura,  LXX. 
of  2  Chr.  xviii.  25)  during  his  absence  in  the 
attack  on  Ramoth-Gilead  (1  K.  xxii.  2(3;  2  Chr. 
xviii.  25).  Or  he  may  have  been  merely  a  prince 
of  the  blood-royal.  But  if  Geiger  be  right  in  his 
conjecture,  that  Maaseiah,  "the  king's  son,"  in 
2  Chr.  xxviii.  7,  was  a  prince  of  the  Moloch  wor- 
ship, Joash  would  be  a  priest  of  the  same.  There 
is,  however,  but  slender  foundation  for  the  belief  (Gei- 
ger, Urschrift,  &c,  p.  307).  The  Vulgate  calls  him 
"  the  son  of  Amelech,"  taking  the  article  as  part  of 
the  noun,  and  the  whole  as  a  proper  name. 
Thenius  suggests  that  he  may  have  been  placed 
with  the  governor  of  the  city  for  the  purpose  of 
military  education. 

5.  A  descendant  of  Shelah  the  son  of  Judah, 
but  whether  his  son  or  the  son  of  Jokim,  as  Bur- 
lington (Genealogies,  i.  179)  supposes,  is  not  clear 
(1  Chr.  iv.  22).  The  Vulgate  rendering  of  this 
name  by  Securus,  according  to  its  etymology,  as 
well  as   of  the  other  names   in   the  same    verse,   is 


JOASH 

very  remarkable.  The  Hebrew  tradition,  quoted 
by  Jerome  (Quaest.  Hebr.  in  Parol.')  and  Jarchi 
(Comm.  in  toe),  applies  it  to  Mahlon,  the  son 
of  Elimelech,  who  married  a  Moabitess.  The 
expression  rendered  in  A.  V.,  "  who  had  the  do- 
minion f-lpyH,  bdalu)  in  Moab,"  would,  according 
to  this  interpretation,  signify  "  who  mamed  in 
Moab."  The  same  explanation  is  given  in  the 
Targuni  of  R.  Joseph. 

6.  A  Benjamite,  son  of  Shemaah  of  Gibeah 
(1  Chr.  xii.  3).  He  was  one  of  the  heroes,  "  helpers 
of  the  battle,"  who  resorted  to  David  at  Ziklag, 
and  assisted  him  in  his  excursions  against  the 
marauding  parties  to  whose  attacks  he  was  exposed 
(ver.  21).  He  was  probably  with  David  in  his 
pursuit  of  the  Amalekites  (comp.  1  Chr.  xii.  21, 
with  1  Sam.  xxx.  8,  where  "l-llil  should  be 
"  troop  "  in  both  passages).  The  Peshito-Syriac, 
reading  133  for  '•33,  makes  him  the  son  of  Ahiezer. 

7.  One  of  the  officers  of  David's  household,  to 
whose  charge  were  entrusted  the  store-houses  of 
oil,  the  produce  of  the  plantations  of  sycomores  and 
the  olive-yards  of  the  lowlands  of  Judah  (1  Chr. 
xxvii.  28).  [W.  A.  W.] 

JO'ASH  (K'yi\  a  different  name  from  the  pre- 
ceding :  'Iwas :  Joas),  son  of  Becher,  and  head  of 
a  Benjamite  house,  which  existed  in  the  time  of  king 
David  (1  Chr.  vii.  8).  [A.  C.  H.]  _ 

JO'ATHAM  ('looaBafjL :  Joatham)  =  Jotham 
the  son  of  Uzziah  (Matt.  i.  9). 

JOAZAB'DUS  ('IoSCo/SSos :   Joradus)  =  Joz- 

abad  the  Levite  (1  Esd.  ix.  48  ;  comp.  Neh.  viii.  7). 

JOB  (IT1:  'Acrovfx  ;  Alex.  'laffoixj) :  Job),  the 
third  son  of  Issachar  (Gen.  xlvi.  13),  called  in 
another  genealogy  Jasiiub  (1  Chr.  vii.  1),  which 
is  the  reading  of  the  Heb.  Sam.  Codex  in  Genesis, 
as  it  was  also  in  all  probability  of  the  two  MSS.  of 
the  LXX.,  3  being  frequently  represented  by  jx. 

JOB  (iVX, ,-.  e.  Iyob  ;  'lc£|8  ;  Job).  The  nu- 
merous and  difficult  questions  touching  the  integrity 
of  this  book,  its  plan,  object,  and  general  character  ; 
and  the  probable  age,  country,  and  circumstances 
of  its  author,  cannot  be  satisfactorily  discussed  with- 
out a  previous  analysis  of  its  contents.  It  consists 
of  five  parts:  the  introduction,  the  discussion  be- 
tween Job  and  his  three  friends,  the  speech  of 
Elihu,  the  manifestation  and  address  of  Almighty 
God,  and  the  concluding  chapter. 

I.  Analysis. — 1.  The  Introduction  supplies  all  the 
facts  on  which  the  argument  is  based.  Job,  a  chief- 
tain in  the  land  of  Uz,a  of  immense  wealth  and  high 
rank,  "  the  greatest  of  all  the  men  of  the  East,"  is 
represented  to  us  as  a  man  of  perfect  integrity,  blame- 
less in  all  the  relations  of  lite,  declared  indeed  by 
the  Lord  Himself  to  lie  "  without  his  like  in  all  the 
earth,"  "  a  perfect,  and  an  upright  man,  one  that 
fearetfa  God,  and  escheweth  evil."  The  highest 
goodness,  and  the  most  perfect  temporal  happiness 
are  combined  in  his  person  ;  under  the  protection 
of  God,  surrounded  by  a  numerous  family,  In1  en- 
joys in  advanced  life*  an  almost  paradisiacal  state, 
exemplifying  the   normal  results  of  human  obe- 


JOB 


1087 


a  The  situation  of  Uz  is  doubtful.  Ewald  (Das  Ilucli 
Ijob,  p.  20)  supposes  it  to  have  been  the  district  south 
of  Bashan.  Spanhcim  and  Rosenmiillcr  (I'rull.  pp. 
29-33)  fix  it  in  the  N.E.  of  the  desert  near  the  Eu- 
phrates.   See  also  Dr.  Lee,  Introduction  to  Job,  p.  2'J. 


dience  to  the  will  of  a  righteous  God.  One  ques- 
tion could  be  raised  by  envy ;  may  not  the  goodness 
which  secures  such  direct  and  tangible  rewards  be 
a  refined  form  of  selfishness?  In  the  world  of 
spirits,  where  all  the  mysteries  of  existence  are 
brought  to  light,  Satan,  the  accusing  angel,  sug- 
gests the  doubt,  "  doth  Job  fear  God  for  nought?" 
and  asserts  boldly  that  if  those  external  blessings 
were  withdrawn  Job  would  cast  off  his  allegiance, 
— "  he  will  curse  thee  to  thy  face."  The  problem 
is  thus  distinctly  propounded  which  this  book 
is  intended  to  discuss  and  solve.  Can  goodness 
exist  irrespective  of  reward,  am  the  fear  of  God  be 
retained  by  man  when  every  inducement  to  selfish- 
ness is  taken  away  ?  The  problem  is  obviouslv  of 
infinite  importance,  and  could  only  be  answered  by 
inflicting  upon  a  man,  in  whom,  while  prosperous, 
malice  itself  could  detect  no  evil,  the  calamities  which 
are  the  due,  and  were  then  believed  to  be  invariably 
the  results,  even  in  this  life,  of  wickedness.  The 
accuser  receives  permission  to  make  the  trial.  He 
destroys  Job's  property,  then  his  children ;  and  after- 
wards, to  leave  no  possible  opening  for  a  cavil,  is  al- 
lowed to  inflict  upon  him  the  most  terrible  disease 
known  in  the  East.  Each  of  these  calamities  assumes 
a  form  which  produces  an  impression  that  it  must 
be  a  visitation  from  God,c  precisely  such  as  was  to 
be  expected,  supposing  that  the  Patriarch  had  been 
a  successful  hypocrite,  reserved  for  the  day  of 
wrath.  Job's  wife  breaks  down  entirely  under  the 
trial — in  the  very  words  which  Satan  had  antici- 
pated the  patriarch  himself  would  at  last  utter  in 
his  despair,  she  counsels  him  "  to  curse  God  and 
die."  Job  remains  steadfast.  The  destruction  of 
his  property  draws  not  from  him  a  word  of  com- 
plaint;  the  death  of  his  children  elicits  the  sub- 
limest  words  of  resignation  which  ever  fell  from 
the  lips  of  a  mourner — the  disease  which  made  him 
an  object  of  loathing  to  man,  and  seemed  to  desig- 
nate him  as  a  visible  example  of  divine  wrath,  is 
borne  without  a  murmur ;  he  repels  his  wife's  sug- 
gestion with  the  simple  words,  "  What !  shall  we 
receive  good  at  the  hand  of  the  Lord,  and  shall  we 
not  receive  evil  ?"  ' '  In  all  this  Job  did  not  sin 
with  his  lips." 

The  question  raised  by  Satan  was  thus  answered. 
His  assaults  had  but  issued  in  a  complete  removal 
of  the  outer  forms  which  could  mislead  men's  judg- 
ment, and  in  developing  the  highest  type  of  disin- 
terested worth.  Had  the  narrative  then  ended,  the 
problem  could  not  be  regarded  as  unsolved,  while  a 
sublime  model  would  have  been  exhibited  for  men 
to  admire  and  imitate. 

2.  Still  in  that  case  it  is  clear  that  many  points  of 
deep  interest  would  have  been  left  in  obscurity. 
Entire  as  was  the  submission  of  Job,  he  must  have 
been  inwardly  perplexed  by  events  to  which  he  had 
no  clue,  which  were  quite  unaccountable  on  any 
hypothesis  hitherto  entertained,  and  seemed  repug- 
nant to  the  ideas  of  justice  engraven  on  man's 
heart.  It  was  also  most  desirable  that  the  im- 
pressions made  upon  the  generality  of  men  by 
sudden  and  unaccountable  calamities  should  be  tho- 
roughly discussed,  and  that  a  broader  and  tinner 
basis  than  heretofore  should  be  found  for  specula- 
tions concerning  the  providential  government  of  the 


b  From  ch.  xlii.  1G  it  may  he  inferred  that  he  was 
about  70  years  old  at  this  time. 

c  <!>s  k<xi  ©coii  kolt  avTov  xwpoGi'Tos.  Didymus  Alex. 
cd.  Migne,  p.  1120. 


1088 


JOB 


world.  An  opportunity  for  such  discussion  is 
afforded  in  the  most  natural  manner  by  the  intro- 
duction of  three  men,  representing  the  wisdom  and 
experience  of  the  age,  who  came  to  condole  with 
Job  on  hearing  of  his  misfortunes.  Some  timed 
appears  to  have  elapsed  in  the  interim,  during 
which  the  disease  had  made  formidable  progress, 
and  Job  had  thoroughly  realised  the  extent  of  his 
misery.  The  meeting  is  described  with  singular 
beauty.  At  a  distance  they  greet  him  with  the 
wild  demonstrations  of  sympathising  grief  usual  in 
the  east;  coming  near  they  are  overpowered  by 
the  sight  of  his  wretchedness,  and  sit  seven  days 
and  seven  nights  without  uttering  a  word.  This 
awful  silence,  whether  Job  felt  it  as  a  proof  of  real 
sympathy,  or  as  an  indication  of  inward  suspicion e 
on  their  part,  drew  out  all  his  anguish.  In  an  agony 
of  desperation  he  curses  the  day  of  his  birth,  and 
sees  and  hopes  for  no  end  of  his  misery,  but  death. 

With  the  answer  to  this  outburst  begins  a  series 
of  discussions,  continued  probably  (as  Ewald  shows, 
p.  55)  with  some  Intervals,  during  several  suc- 
cessive days.  Eliphaz,Bildad,  and  Zophar  in  turn, 
bring  forward  arguments,  which  are  severally  an- 
swered by  Job. 

The  results  of  the  first  discussion  (from  c.  iii. 
-xiv.)  may  be  thus  summed  up.  We  have  on  the 
part  of  Job's  friends  a  theory  of  the  divine  govern- 
ment resting  upon  an  exact  and  uniform  correlation 
between  sin  and  punishment  (iv.  6,  1 1,  and  through- 
out).' Afflictions  are  always  penal,  issuing  in  the 
destruction  of  those  who  are  radically  opposed  to 
God,  or  who  do  not  submit  to  His  chastisements. 
They  lead  of  course  to  correction  and  amendment 
of  life  when  the  sufferer  repents,  confesses  his  sins, 
puts  them  away,  and  turns  to  God.  In  that  case 
restoration  to  peace,  and  even  increased  prosperity 
may  be  expected  (v.  17-27).  Still  the  fact  of  the 
suffering  always  proves  the  commission  of  some 
special  sin,  while  the  demeanour  of  the  sufferer  in- 
dicates the  true  internal  relation  between  him  and 
God. 

These  principles  are  applied  by  them  to  the  case 
of  Job.  They  are  in  the  first  place  scandalized  by  the 
vehemence  of  his  complaints,  and  when  they  rind  that 
he  maintains  his  freedom  from  wilful,  or  conscious 
sin,  they  are  driven  to  the  conclusion  that  his  faith 
is  radically  unsound;  his  protestations  appear  to 
them  almost  blasphemous,  they  become  convinced 
that  he  has  been  secretly  guilty  of  some  unpardon- 
.able  sin,  and  their  tone,  at  first  courteous,  though 
warning  (comp.  c.  iv.  with  c.  xv.),  becomes  stern, 
and  even  harsh  and  menacing.  It  is  clear  that  unless 
they  are  driven  from  their  partial  and  exclusive 
theory  they  must  be  led  on  to  an  unqualified  con- 
demnation of  Job. 

In  this  part  of  the  dialogue  the  character  of  the 
three  friends  is  clearly  developed.  Eliphaz  repre- 
sents the  true  patriarchal  chieftain,  grave  and  dig- 
nified, and  erring  only  from  an  exclusive  adherence 
to  tenets  hitherto  unquestioned,  and  influenced  in 
the  first  place  by  genuine  regard  for  Job,  and  sym  • 
pathy  with  his  affliction.  Bildad,  without  much 
originality  or  independence  of  character,  reposes 
partly  on  the  wise  saws  of  antiquity,  partly  on  the 
authority  of  his  older  friend.     Zophar  differs  from 


d  Otherwise  it  would  be  difficult  to  meet  Eosen- 
muller-'s  objection  (p.  8).  It  seems  indeed  probable 
that  some  months  even  might  pass  by  before  the  news 
would  reach  the  friends,  and  the}-  could  arrange  their 
meeting. 


JOB 

both,  he  seems  to  he  a  young  man ;  his  language  is 
violent,  and  at  times  even  coarse  and  offensive  (see 
especially  his  second  speech,  c.  xx.).  He  represents 
the  prejudiced  and  narrow-minded  bigots  of  his  age. 

In  order  to  do  justice  to  the  position  and  argu- 
ments of  Job,  it  must  be  borne  in  mind,  that  the 
direct  object  of  the  trial  was  to  ascertain  whether  he 
would  deny  or  forsake  God,  and  that  his  real  in- 
tegrity is  asserted  by  God  Himself.  His  answers 
throughout  correspond  with  these  data.  He  knows 
with  a  sure  inward  conviction  that  he  is  not  an 
offender  in  the  sense  of  his  opponents :  he  is  there- 
fore confident  that  whatever  may  be  the  object  of 
the  afflictions  for  which  he  cannot  account,  God 
knows  that  he  is  innocent.  This  consciousness, 
which  from  the  nature  of  things  cannot  be  tested 
by  others,  enables  him  to  examine  fearlessly  their 
position.  He  denies  the  assertion  that  punishment 
follows  surely  on  guilt,  or  proves  its  commission. 
Appealing  boldly  to  experience,  he  declares  that  in 
point  of  fact  prosperity  and  misfortune  are  not 
always,  or  generally  commensurate  ;  both  are  often 
irrespective  of  man's  deserts,  "  the  tabernacles  of 
robbers  prosper,  and  they  that  provoke  God  are 
secure"  (c.  xii.  6).  In  the  government  of  Provi- 
dence he  can  see  but  one  point  clearly,  viz.,  that  all 
events  and  results  are  absolutely  in  God's  hand 
(xii.  9-25),  but  as  for  the  principles  which  underlie 
those  events  he  knows  nothing.-  In  fact,  he  is  sure 
that  his  friends  are  equally  uninformed,  and  are 
sophists,  defending  their  position,  out  of  mere  pre- 
judice, by  arguments  and  statements  false  in  them- 
selves and  doubly  offensive  to  God,  being  hypocritic- 
ally advanced  in  his  defence  (xiii.  1-13).  Still  he 
doubts  not  that  God  is  just,  and  although  he  cannot 
see  how  or  when  that  justice  can  be  manifested,  he 
feels  confident  that  his  innocence  must  be  recog- 
nised. "Though  He  slay  me,  yet  I  will  trust  in 
Him  ;  he  also  will  be  my  salvation"  (xiii.  14,  16). 
There  remains  then  but  one  course  open  to  him,  and 
that  he  takes.  He  turns  to  supplication,  implores 
God  to  give  him  a  fair  and  open  trial  (xiii.  18-28). 
Admitting  his  liability  to  such  sins  as  are  common 
to  man,  being  unclean  by  birth  (xiii.  26,  xiv.  4) ; 
he  yet  protests  his  substantial  innocence,  and  in  the 
bitter  struggle  with  his  misery,  he  first  meets  the 
thought  which  is  afterwards  developed  with  re- 
markable distinctness.  Believing  that  with  death 
all  hope  connected  with  this  world  ceases,  he  prays 
that  he  may  be  hidden  in  the  grave  (xiv.  13),  and 
there  reserved  for  the  day  when  God  will  try  his 
cause  and  manifest  Himself  in  love  (ver.  15).  This 
prayer  represents  but  a  dim,  yet  a  profound  and 
true  presentiment,  drawn  forth,  then  evidently  for 
the  first  time,  as  the  possible  solution  of  the  dark 
problem.  As  for  a  renewal  of  life  here,  he  dreams 
not  of  it  (14),  nor  will  he  allow  that  the  possible 
restoration  or  prosperity  of  his  descendants  at  all 
meets  the  exigencies  of  his  case  (21,  22). 

In  the  second  discussion  (xv.-xxi.)  there  is  a 
more  resolute  elaborate  attempt  on  the  part  of 
Job's  friends  to  vindicate  their  theory  of  retributive 
justice.  This  requires  an  entire  overthrow  of  the 
position  taken  by  Job.  They  cannot  admit  his  in- 
nocence. The  fact  that  his  calamities  are  unparal- 
leled, proves  to  them  that  there  must  be  something 


e  Thus  Seblottmann. 

f  It  is  curious  that  this  theory  was  revived  and 
systematized  by  Basilides,  to  the  great  scandal  of  the 
early  Fathers.     See  Clem.  Al.  Str.  iv.  p.  JOG. 


JOB 

quite  unique  in  his  guilt.  Eliphaz  (c.  xv.),  wlin,  as 
usual,  lays  down  the  basis  of  the  argument,  does 
not  now  hesitate  to  impute  to  Job  the  worst  crimes 
of  which  man  could  be  guilty.  His  defence  is 
blasphemous,  and  proves  that  he  is  quite  godless; 
that  he  disregards  the  wisdom  of  age  and  experience, 
denies  the  fundamental  truths  of  religion  (3-16), 
and  by  his  rebellious  struggles  (25-27")  against 
God  deserves  every  calamity  which  can  befall  him 
(28-30).  Bildad  (xviii.)  takes  up  this  suggestion 
of  ungodliness,  and  after  enlarging  upon  the  inevit- 
able results  of  all  iniquity,  concludes  that  the 
special  evils  which  had  come  upon  Job,  such  as 
agony  of  heart,  ruin 'of  home,  destruction  of  family, 
are  peculiarly  the  penalties  due  to  one  who  is  with- 
out God.  Zophar  (xx.)  chaws  the  further  infer- 
ence that  a  sinner's  sufferings  must  needs  be  pro- 
portioned to  his  former  enjoyments  (5-14),  and  his 
losses  to  his  former  gains  (15-19),  and  thus  not 
only  accounts  for  Job's  present  calamities,  but  me- 
naces him  with  still  greater  evils  (20-29). 

In  answer  Job  recognises  the  hand  of  God  in  his 
afflictions  (xvi.  7-16,  and  six.  6-20),  but  rejects  the 
charge  of  ungodliness ;  he  has  never  forsaken  his 
Maker,  and  never  ceased  to  pray.  This  being  a 
matter  of  inward  consciousness  cannot  of  course  be 
proved.  He  appeals  therefore  directly  to  earth  and 
heaven : — "  My  witness  is  in  heaven,  and  my  re- 
cord is  on  high  "  (xvi.  19).  The  train  of  thought 
thus  suggested  carries  him  much  farther  in  the  way 
towards  the  great  truth — that  since  in  this  life  the 
righteous  certainly  are  not  saved  from  evil,  it  fol- 
lows that  their  ways  are  watched  and  their  suffer- 
ings recorded,  with  a  view  to  a  future  and  perfect 
manifestation  of  the  divine  justice.  This  view 
becomes  gradually  brighter  and  more  definite  as  the 
controversyS  proceeds  (xvi.  18,  19,  xvii.  8,  9,  and 
perhaps  13-16),  and  at  last  finds  expression  in  a 
strong  and  clear  declaration  of  his  conviction  that 
at  the  latter  day  (evidently  that  day  which  Job 
had  expressed  a  longing  to  see,  c.  xiv.  12-14)  God 
will  personally  manifest  Himself,  and  that  he,  Job, 
will  then  see  him,  in  his  body,'1  with  his  own  eyes, 
and  notwithstanding  the  destruction  of  his  skin^ 
i.e.,  the  outward  man,  retaining  or  recovering  his 
personal  identity  (xix.  25-27).  There  can  be  no 
doubt  that  Job  here  virtually  anticipates  the  final 
answer  to  all  difficulties  supplied  by  the  Christian 
revelation. 

On  the  other  hand,  stung  by  the  harsh  and 
narrow-minded  bigotry  of  his  opponents,  Job  draws 
out  (xxi.)  with  terrible  force  the  undeniable  fact, 
that  from  the  beginning  to  the  end  of  their  lives 
un'godly  men,  avowed  atheists  (vers.  14,  15), 
persons,  in  fact, guilty  of  the  very  crimes,  imputed, 
out  of  mere  conjecture,  to  himself,  frequently 
enjoy  greal  and  unbroken  prosperity.  From  this  he 
draws  the  inference,  which  he  states  in  a  very 
unguarded  maimer,  and  in  a  tone  calculated  to 
give  just  offence,  that  an  impenetrable  veil  hangs 
over  the  temporal  dispensations  of  God. 

In  the  third  dialogue  (xxii.— xxxi.)  no  real  pro- 


JOB 


1089 


=  This  gradual  and  progressive  development  was 

perhaps  first  brought  out  distinctly  by  Ewald. 

h  ^"IC'BD,  lit.  "  from  my  flesh,"  may  mean  in  the 
body,  or  out  of  the  body.  Each  rendering  is  equally 
tenable  on  grammatical  grounds ;  hut  the  specification 

of  the  time  (jiinN)  and  the  place  ("13^"?^)  requires 
a  personal  manifestation  of  God,  and  a  personal  re- 
cognition on  the  part  of  Job.  Complete  personality 
jn  the  mind  of  the  ancients  implies  a  living  body. 


gress  is  made  by  Job's  opponents.  They  will  not 
give  up  and  cannot  defend  their  position.  Eliphaz 
(xxii.  i  makes  a  last  effort,  and  raises  one  new  point 
which  he  states  with  some  ingenuity.  The  station 
in  which  Job  was  formerly  placed  presented  tempta- 
tions to  certain  crimes ;  the  punishments  which  he 
undergoes'are  precisely  such  as  might  be  expected 
had  those  crimes  been  committed;  hence  he  infers 
they  actually  were  committed.  The  tone  of  this 
discourse  thoroughly  harmonises  with  the  character 
of  Eliphaz.  He  could  scarcely  come  to  a  different 
conclusion  without  surrendering  his  fundamental 
principles,  and  he  urges  with  much  dignity  and 
Lmpressiveness  the  exhortations  and  warnings  which 
in  his  opinion  were  needed.  Bildad  has  nothing  to 
add  but  a  few  solemn  words  on  the  incomprehensible 
majesty  of  God  and  the  nothingness  of  man.1  Zo- 
phar, "the  most  violent  and  least  rational  of  the 
three,  is  put  to  silence,  and  retires  from  the  contest. 

In  his  two  last  discourses  Job  does  not  alter  his 
position,  nor,  properly  speaking,  adduce  any  new 
argument,  but  he  states  with  incomparable  force 
and  eloquence  the  chief  points  which  he  regards  as 
established  (o.  xxvi.).  All  creation  is  confounded 
by  the  majesty  and  might  of  ( iod  ;  man  catches  but 
a  faint  echo  of  God's  word,  and  is  baffled  in  the 
attempt  to  comprehend  his  ways.  He  then  (c. 
xxvii.)  describes  even  more  completely  than  his 
opponents  had  donek  the  destruction  which,  as  a 
rule,  ultimately  falls  upon  the  hypocrite,  and  which 
he  certainly  would  deserve  if  he  were  hypocritically 
to  disguise  the  truth  concerning  himself,  and  deny 
his  own  integrity.  He  thus  recognises  what  was 
true  in  his  opponent's  arguments,  and  corrects 
his  own  hasty  and  unguarded  statements.  Then 
follows  (xxviii.)  the  grand  description  of  Wisdom, 
and  the  declaration  that  human  wisdom  does  not 
consist  in  exploring  the  hidden  and  inscrutable 
ways  of  God,  but  in  the  fear  of  the  Lord,  and  in 
turning  away  from  evil.  The  remainder  of  this 
discourse  (xxix.-xxxi.)  contains  a  singularly  beau- 
tiful description  of  his  former  life,  contrasted  with 
his  actual  misery,  together  with  a  full  vindication 
of  his  character  from  all  the  charges  made  or  in- 
sinuated by  his  opponents. 

3.  Thus  ends  the  discussion,  in  which  it  is  evident 
both  parties  had  partially  failed.  Job  has  been 
betrayed  into  very  hazardous  statements,  while  his 
friends  had  been  on  the  one  hand  disingenuous,  on 
the  other  bigoted,  harsh,  and  pitiless.  The  points 
which  had  been  omitted,  or  imperfectly  developed, 
are  now  taken  up  by  a  new  interlocutor  (xxxii.- 
xxxvii.).  Elihu,  a  young  man,  descended  from  a 
collateral  branch  of.the  family  of  Abraham."1  has 
listened  in  indignant  silence  to  the  arguments  of  his 
elders  (xxxii.  7),  and,  impelled  by  an  inward  inspi- 
ration, he  now  addresses  bimself  to  both  parties  in 
the  discussion,  and  specially  to  Job.  lie  shows,  1. 
that  they  had  accused  Job  upon  false  or  insufficient 
grounds,  and  tailed  to  convict  him,  or  to  vindicate 
i  oid's  justice.  Job  again  had  assumed  hi-  entire 
ad  had  arraig 1  that  justice  (xxxiii. 


1  Mr.  Froude,  on  The  /<'<»'/,•  of  Job,  sums  not  to 
perceive,  or  to  ignore,  the  ground  on  which  Eliphaz 
reasons. 

k  Sec  Herder's  excellent  remarks,  quoted  by  Rosen- 
miiller,  ]i.  24.  Mr.  Fronde  quite  overlooks  the  fact 
that  .lob  here,  as  elsewhere,  takes  up  his  opponents' 
arguments,  ami  urges  all  the  truth  which  they  may 
with  greater  force,  thus  showing  himself 
master  of  the  position. 

'"   A  BuzitC. 


1090 


JOB 


9-11).  These  errors  he  traces  to  their  both  overlook- 
ing one  main  object  of  all  suffering.  God  speaks  to 
man  by  chastisement  (14,u  19-22) — warns  him, 
teaches  him  self-knowledge  and  humility  (16,  17) — 
and  prepares  him  (23)  by  the  mediation  of  a  spiri- 
tual interpreter  (the  angel  Jehovah0  of  Genesis)  to 
implore  and  to  obtain  pardon  (24),  renewal  of  life 
(25),  peifect  access  and  restoration  (26).  This 
statement  does  not  involve  any  charge  of  special 
guilt,  such  as  the  friends  had  alleged  and  Job  had 
repudiated.  Since  the  warning  and  suffering  are 
preventive,  as  well  as  remedial,  the  visitation  anti- 
cipates the  commission  of  sin  ;  it  saves  man  from 
pride,  and  other  temptations  of  wealth  and  power, 
and  it  effects  the  real  object  of  all  divine  interpo- 
sitions, the  entire  submission  to  God's  will.  Again, 
Elihu  argues  (xxxiv.  10-17)  that  any  charge  of 
injustice,  direct  or  implicit,  against  God  involves 
a  contradiction  in  terms.  God  is  the  only  source 
of  justice  ;  the  very  idea  of  justice  is  derived  from 
His  governance  of  the  universe,  the  principle  of 
which  is  love.  In  His  absolute  knowledge  God 
sees  all  secrets,  and  by  His  absolute  power  He  con- 
trols all  events,  and  that,  for  the  one  end  of  bring- 
ing righteousness  to  light  (21-30).  Man  has  of 
course  no  claim  upon  God  ;  what  he  receives  is 
purely  a  matter  of  grace  (xxxv.  6-9).  The  occa- 
sional appearance  of  unanswered  prayer  (9),  when 
evil  seems  to  get  the  upper  hand,  is  owing  merely 
to  the  fact  that  man  prays  in  a  proud  and  insolent 
spirit  (12,  13).  Job  may  look  to  his  heart, and  he 
will  see  if  that  is  true  of  himself. 

Job  is  silent,  and  Elihu  proceeds  (xxxvi.)  to 
show  that  the  Almightiness  of  God  is  not,  as  Job 
seems  to  assert,  associated  with  any  contempt  or 
neglect  of  His  creatures.  Job,  by  ignoring  this 
truth,  has  been  led  into  grave  error,  and  terrible 
danger  (12  ;  cf.  18),  but  God  is  still  drawing  him, 
and  if  he  yields  and  follows  he  will  yet  be  delivered. 
The  rest  of  the  discourse  brings  out  forcibly  the 
lessons  taught  by  the  manifestations  of  goodness,  as 
well  as  greatness  in  creation.  Indeed,  the  great 
object  of  all  natural  phenomena  is  to  teach  men — 
"  who  teacheth  like  Him?"  This  part  differs  from 
Job's  magnificent  description  of  the  mystery  and 
majesty  of  God's  works,  inasmuch  as  it  indicates 
a  clearer  recognition  of  a  loving  purpose — -and  from 
the  address  of  the  Lord  which  follows,  by  its  dis- 
cursive and  argumentative  tone.  The  last  words 
are  evidently  spoken  while  a  violent  storm  is 
coming  on,  in  which  Elihu  views  the  signs  of  a 
Theophany,  which  cannot  fail  to  produce  an  intense 
realisation  of  the  nothingness  of  man  before  God. 

4.  From  the  preceding  analysis  it  is  obvious  that 
many  weighty  truths  have  been  developed  in  the 
course  of  the  discussion — nearly  every  theory  of  the 
objects  and  uses  of  suffering  has  been  reviewed — 
while  a  great  advance  has  been  made  towards  the 
apprehension  of  doctrines  hereafter  to  be  revealed. 
such  as  were  known  only  to  God.  But  the  mystery 
is  not  as  yet  really  cleared  up.  The  position  of  the 
three  original  opponents  is  shown  to  be  untenable 
— the  views  of  Job  himself  to  be  but  imperfect 
— while  even  Elihu  gives  not  the  least  intimation 

n  A  point  well  drawn  out  by  Schlottrnann,  p.  33. 
Job  hart  specially  complained  of  the  silence  of  God. 

°  Thus  A.  Schultens.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that 
"  angel,"  not  "  messenger,"  is  the  true  translation  ; 
nor  that  the  angel,  the  one  of  a  thousand,  is  the 
HI  IT*  "\vbl2  of  Genesis. 

p  This  bearing  of  the  statement   upon   the  whole 


JOB 

that  he  recognises  one  special  object  of  calamity. 
In  the  case  of  Job,  as  we  are  expressly  told,  that 
object  was  to  try  his  sincerity,  and  to  demonstrate 
that  goodness,  integrity  in  all  relations,  and  devout 
faith  in  God  can  exist  independent  of  external 
circumstances.  This  object  never  occurs  to  the 
mind  of  any  one  of  the  interlocutors,  nor  could  it 
be  proved  without  a  revelation.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  exact  amount  of  censure  due  to  Job  for 
the  excesses  into  which  he  had  been  betrayed,  and 
to  his  three  opponents  for  their  harshness  and  want 
of  candour,  could  only  be  awarded  by  an  omniscient 
Judge.  Hence  the  necessity  for  the  Theophany — 
from  the  midst  of  the  storm  Jehovah  speaks. 

In  language  of  incomparable  grandeur  He  re- 
proves and  silences  the  murmurs  of  Job.  God 
does  not  condescend,  strictly  speaking,  to  argue 
with  His  creatures.  The  speculative  questions  dis- 
cussed in  the  colloquy  are  unnoticed,  but  the  declara- 
tion of  God's  absolute  power  is  illustrated  by  a 
marvellously  beautiful  and  comprehensive  survey 
of  the  glory  of  creation,  aud  His  all-embracing 
Providence  by  reference  to  the  phenomena  of  the 
animal  kingdom.  He  who  would  argue  with  the 
Lord  must  understand  at  least  the  objects  for  which 
instincts  so  strange  and  manifold  are  given  to  the 
beings  far  below  man  in  gifts  and  powers.  This 
declaration  suffices  to  bring  Job  to  a  light  mind : 
he  confesses  his  inability  to  .comprehend,  and  there- 
fore to  answer  his  Maker  (xl.  3,  4).  A  second 
address  completes  the  work.  It  proves  that  a 
charge  of  injustice  against  God  involves  the  conse- 
quence that  the  accuser  is  moie  competent  than 
He  to  rule  the  universe.  He  should  then  be  able 
to  control,  to  punish,  to  reduce  all  creatures  to 
order — but  he  cannot  even  subdue  the  monsters  of 
the  irrational  creation.  Baffled  by  leviathan  and 
behemoth,  how  can  he  hold  the  reins  of  government, 
how  contend  with  Him  who  made  and  rules  them 
all  ?P 

5.  Job's  unreserved  submission  terminates  the 
trial.  He  expresses  deep  contrition,  not  of  course 
for  sins  falsely  imputed  to  him,  but  for  the  bitter- 
ness and  arrogance  which  had  characterised  some 
portions  of  his  complaints.  In  the  rebuke  then 
addressed  to  Job's  opponents  the  integrity  of  his 
character  is  distinctly  recognised,  while  they  are 
condemned  for  untruth,  which,  inasmuch  as  it  was 
not  wilful,  but  proceeded  from  a  real  but  narrow- 
minded  conviction  of  the  Divine  justice,  is  pardoned 
on  the  intercession  of  Job.  The  restoration  of  his 
external  prosperity,  which  is  an  inevitable  result  of 
God's  personal  manifestation,  symbolizes  the  ulti- 
mate compensation  of  the  righteous  for  all  suffer- 
ings undergone  upon  earth. 

From  this  analysis  it  seems  clear  that  certain 
views  concerning  the  general  object  of  the  book  are 
partial  or  erroneous.  It  cannot  be  the  object  of 
the  writer  to  prove  that  there  is  no  connexion  be- 
tween guilt  and  sorrow ,q  or  that  the  old  orthodox 
doctrine  of  retribution  was  radically  unsound.  Job 
himself  recognises  the  general  truth  of  the  doctrine, 
which  is  in  fact  confirmed  by  his  ultimate  restora- 
tion to  happiness.'     Nor  is  the  development  of  the 


argument  is  satisfactorily  shown  by  Hahn  (Introduc- 
tion to  Job,  p.  4),  and  by  Schlottmann  in  his  com- 
mentary on  the  passage  (p.  489). 

i  This  is  the  strangely  exaggerated  form  in  which 
Mr.  Froude  represents  the  views  of  Ewald.  Nothing 
can  be  more  contrary  to  the  whole  tenor  of  the  book. 

r  See  Ewald's  remarks  in  his  Jahrb.   1858,  p.  33. 


JOB 

great  doctrine  of  a  future  state  the  primary  object." 
It  would  not  in  that  case  have  been  passed  over  in 
Job's  last  discourse,  in  the  speech  of  Elihu,  or  in 
the  address  of  the  Lord  God.  In  fact  critics  who 
hold  that  view  admit  that  the  doctrine  is  rather 
suggested  than  developed,  and  amounts  to  scarcely 
more  than  a  wish,  a  presentiment,  at  the  most  a 
subjective  conviction  of  a  truth  lirst  fully  revealed 
by  Him  "  who  brought  life  and  immortality  to 
light."  The  great  object  must  surely  be  that 
which  is  distinctly  intimated  in  the  introduction, 
and  confirmed  in  the  conclusion,  to  show  the  effects 
of  calamity  in  its  worst  and  most  awful  form  upon 
a  truly  religious  spirit.  Job  is  no  Stoic,  no  Titan 
(Ewald,  p.  26),  struggling  rebelliously  against  God  ; 
no  Prometheus '  victim  of  a  jealous  and  unrelenting- 
Deity:  he  is  a  suffering  man,  acutely  sensitive  to 
all  impressions  inward  and  outward,  grieved  by 
the  loss  of  wealth,  position,  domestic  happiness, 
the  respect  of  his  countrymen,  dependents,  and  fol- 
lowers, tortured  by  a  loathsome  and  all  but  un- 
endurable disease,  and  stung  to  an  agony  of  grief 
and  passion  by  the  insinuations  of  conscious  guilt 
and  hypocrisy.  Under  such  provocation,  being 
wholly  without  a  clue  to  the  cause  of  his  misery, 
and  hopeless  of  restoration  to  happiness  on  earth, 
he  is  shaken  to  the  utmost,  and  driven  almost  to 
desperation.  Still  in  the  centre  of  his  being  he 
remains  firm  and  unmoved — with  an  intense  con- 
sciousness of  his  own  integrity — without  a  doubt 
as  to  the  power,  wisdom,  truth,  or  absolute  justice 
of  God,  and  therefore  awaiting  with  longing  expec- 
tation" the  final  judgment  which  he  is  assured  must 
come  and  bring  him  deliverance.  The  representa- 
tion of  such  a  character,  involving  the  discomfiture 
of  man's  great  enemy,  and  the  development  of  the 
manifold  problems  which  such  a  spectacle  suggests 
to  men  of  imperfect  knowledge,  but  thoughtful  and 
inquiring  minds,  is  the  true  object  of  the  writer, 
who,  like  all  great  spirits  of  the  ancient  world, 
dealt  less  with  abstract  propositions  than  with  the 
objective  realities  of  existence.  Such  is  the  im- 
pression naturally  made  by  the  book,  and  which  is 
recognised  more  distinctly  in  proportion  as  the  reader 
grasps  the  tenour  of  the  arguments,  and  realises  the 
characters  and  events. 

II.  Integrity  of  the  boo!;. — It  is  satisfactory  to 
find  that  the  arguments  employed  by  those  who  im- 
pugn the  authenticity  of  considerable  portions  of  this 
hook  are  for  the  most  part  mutually  destructive, 
and  that  the  most  minute  and  searching  investiga- 
tions bring  out  the  most  convincing  proofs  of  the 
unity  of  its  composition,  and  the .  coherence  of  its 
constituent  parts.  One  point  of  great  importance 
is  noted  by  the  latest  and  one  of  the  most  ingenious 
writers  (M.  E.  Re'nan,  Le  Livre  de  Job,  Paris, 
1859)  on  this  subject.  After  some  strong  remarks 
upon  the  inequality  of  the  style,  and  appearance  of 


JOB 


1091 


The  notion  that  Job  is  a  type  of  the  Hebrew  nation 
in  their  sufferings,  and  that  the  book  was  written 
to  console  them  in  their  exile,  held  by  Clericos  and 
Bp.  Warburton,  is  generally  rejected.  See  Rosen- 
miiller,  pp.  13-16. 

8  Ewald's  theory,  on  which  Sehlottmann  lias  some 
excellent  observations  (p.  48). 

1  Sehlottmann  (p.  4(i),  who  draws  also  a  very  in- 
teresting comparison  between  Job  and  Vicramitra, 
in  the  Bamayana  (p.  128). 

u  See  the  passages  quoted  by  Ewald,  p.  27. 

1  It  is  a  very  remarkable  instance  both  of  the  incon- 
sistent v  of  M.  Kenan,  and  of  the  little  reliance  which 
can  be  placed  upon  the  judgment  of  critics  upon  such 


interpolation,  M.  E.  Re'nan  observes  (p.  xliv.)  : — 
"The  Hebrews,  and  Orientals  in  general,  di tiered 
widely  from  us  in  their  views  about  composition. 
Their  works  never  have  that  perfectly  defined  out- 
line to  which  we  are  accustomed,  and  we  should  be 
careful  not  to  assume  interpolations  or  alterations 
(retouches)  when  we  meet  with  defects  of  sequence 
which  surprise  us."  He  then  shows  that  in  parts 
of  the  work,  acknowledged  by  all  critics  to  be  by 
one  hand,  there  are  very  strong  instances  of  what 
Europeans  might  regard  as  repetition,  or  suspect 
of  interpolation:"  thus  Elihu  recommences  his  ar- 
gument four  times  ;  while  discourses  of  Job,  which 
have  distinct  portions,  such  as  to  modern  critics 
might  seem  unconnected  and  even  misplaced,  are 
impressed  with  such  a  character  of  sublimity  and 
force  as  to  leave  no  doubt  that  they  are  the  product 
of  a  single  inspiration.  To  this  just  and  true  ob- 
servation it  must  be  added  that  the  assumed  want 
of  coherence  and  of  logical  consistency  is  for  the 
most  part  only  apparent,  and  results  from  a  radical 
difference  in  the  mode  of  thinking  and  enunciating 
thought  between  the  old  Eastern,  and  modem  Eu- 
ropean. 

Four  parts  of  the  book  have  been  most  generally 
attacked.  Objections  have  been  made  to  the  intro- 
ductory and  concluding  chapters  (4)  on  account  of 
the  style.  Of  course  there  is  an  obvious  and  na- 
tural difference  between  the  prose  of  the  narrative 
and  the  highly  poetical  language  of  the  colloquy. 
Yet  the  best  critics  now  acknowledge  that  the  style 
of  these  portions  is  quite  as  antique  in  its  simple 
and  severe  grandeur  ,y  as  that  of  the  Pentateuch 
itself  (to  which  it  bears  a  striking  resemblance  z)  or 
as  any  other  part  of  this  book,  while  it  is  as 
strikingly  unlike  the  narrative  style  of  all  the  later 
productions  of  the  Hebrews.  Ewald  says  with 
perfect  truth,  "  these  prosaic  words  harmonise 
thoroughly  with  the  old  poem  in  subject-matter 
and  thoughts,  in  colouring  and  in  art,  also  in  lan- 
guage, so  far  as  prose  can  be  like  poetry."  It  is 
said  again  that  the  doctrinal  views  are  not  in  har- 
mony with  those  of  Job.  This  is  wholly  unfounded. 
The  fundamental  principles  of  the  patriarch,  as 
developed  in  the  most  solemn  of  his  discourses,  are 
identical  with  those  maintained  throughout  the 
book.  The  form  of  worship  belongs  essentially  to 
the  early  patriarchal  type  ;  with  little  of  ceremonial 
ritual,  without  a  separate  priesthood,  thoroughly 
domestic  in  form  and  spirit.  The  representation 
of  the  angels,  and  their  appellation,  "sons  of  God," 
peculiar  to  this  book  and  to  Genesis,  accord  entirely 
with  the  intimations  in  the  earliest  documents  of 
the  Semitic  race.  It  is  moreover  alleged  that  there 
are  discrepancies  between  the  facts  related  in  the 
introduction,  and  statements  or  allusions  in  the 
dialogue.  But  the  apparent  contradiction  between 
xix.   17   and   the  statement    that   all   .lob's  children 


questions,  that  he  and  Ewald  are  at  direct  issue  as 
to  the  state  in  which  the  text  of  this  book  has  been 
banded  down  to  us.      Ewald  considers  that  it  is  pure 

that  the  MSS.  must  have  been  very  good — the 
verbal  connexion  is  accurate — and  emendations  unne- 
cessary (see  p.  66).  M.  Kenan  asserts,  "  Cet  antique 
monument  nous  est  parvenu,  j'en  suis  persuade,  dans 
an  etat  fort  miserable  et  macule  en  plusieurs  eiulroits" 
(I,  lx.). 

>  Kenan  :  "  Le  grand  caraetcre  du  rccit  est  une 
preuve  dc  son  ancicnm  I    .  ' 

*  For  a  list  of  coincidences  see  Dr.  Lee's  Job,  p. 
19. 


1092 


JOB 


had  perished,  rests  upon  a  misinterpretation  of  the 
words  "OLSl  *33,  "  children  of  my  womb,"  i.e.  "of 
the  womb  that  bare  me" — "my  brethren,"  not 
"  my  children  "  (of.  iii.  10)  :  indeed  the  destruction 
of  the  patriarch's  whole  family  is  repeatedly  as- 
sumed in  the  dialogue  (e.  g.  viii.  4,  xxix.  5).  Again, 
the  omission  of  all  reference  to  the  defeat  of  Satan 
in  the  last  chapter  is  quite  in  accordance  with  the 
grand  simplicity  of  the  poem  (Schlottmann,  59, 
40).  It  was  too  obvious  a  result  to  need  special 
notice,  and  it  had  in  fact  been  accomplished  by  the 
stedfast  faith  of  the  patriarch  even  before  the  dis- 
cussions commenced.  No  allusion  to  the  agency  of 
that  spirit  was  to  be  expected  in  the  colloquy,  since 
Job  and  his  friends  are  represented  as  wholly  igno- 
rant of  the  transactions  in  heaven.  At  present 
indeed  it  is  generally  acknowledged"  that  the  entire 
work  would  be  unintelligible  without  these  por- 
tions. 

2.  Strong  objections  are  made  to  the  passage 
xxvii.  from  v.  7  to  the  end  of  the  chapter.  Here 
Job  describes  the  ultimate  fate  of  the  godless  hypo- 
crite in  terms  which  some  critics  hold  to  be  in  direct 
contradiction  to  the  whole  teuour  of  his  arguments 
in  other  discourses.  Dr.  Kennicott,  whose  opinion  is 
adopted  by  Eichhom,  Froude,  and  others,  held  that, 
owing  to  some  confusion  or  omission  in  the  MS., 
the  missing  speech  of  Zophar  has  been  put  into  the 
mouth  of  Job.  The  fact  of  the  contradiction  is 
denied  by  able  writers,  who  have  shown  that  it 
rests  upon  a  misapprehension  of  the  patriarch's  cha- 
racter and  fundamental  principles.  He  had  been 
provoked  under  circumstances  of  peculiar  aggra- 
vation into  statements  which  at  the  close  of  the 
discussion  he  would  be  anxious  to  guard  or  recal : 
he  was  bound,  having  spoken  so  harshly,  to  recog- 
nise, what  beyond  doubt  he  never  intended  to  deny, 
the  general  justice  of  divine  dispensations  even  in 
this  world.  Moreover  he  intimates  a  belief  or  pre- 
sentiment of  a  future  retribution,  of  which  there 
are  no  indications  in  any  other  speaker  (see  ver.  8). 
The  whole  chapter  is  '  thoroughly  coherent :  the 
first  part  is  admitted  by  all  to  belong  to  Job  ;  nor 
can  the  rest  be  disjoined  from  it  without  injury  to 
the  sense.  Ewald  says,  "  only  a  grievous  misunder- 
standing of  the  whole  book  could  have  misled  the 
modern  critics  who  hold  that  this  passage  is  inter- 
polated or  misplaced."  Other  critics  have  abund- 
antly vindicated  the  authenticity  of  the  passage 
(Hahn,  Schlottmann,  &c).  As  for  the  style,  E. 
Kenan,  a  most  competent  authority  in  a  matter  of 
taste,  declares  that  it  is  one  of  the  finest  develop- 
ments of  the  poem.  It  certainly  diners  exceedingly 
in  its  breadth,  loftiness,  and  devout  spirit,  from  the 
speeches  of  Zophar,  for  whose  silence  satisfactory- 
reasons  have  been  already  assigned  (see  the  analysis). 

3.  The  last  two  chapters  of  the  address  of  the 
Almighty  have  been  rejected  as  interpolations  by 


a  Hahn,  p.  13  ;  Rosenmiiller,  p.  4G  ;  Eiclihorn, 
Ewald,  Schlottmann,  Kenan,  &c. 

b  "  Le  style  du  fragment  dont  nous  parlons  est 
celui  des  meilleurs  endroits  du  poeme.  Nulle  part 
la  coupe  n'est  plus  vigoureuse,  le  parallelisme  plus 
sonore  :  tout  indique  que  ce  singulier  morceau  est 
dc  la  meme  main,  mais  mm  pas  du  meme  jet,  que  le 
reste  du  discours  de  Jehovah"  (p.  l). 

c  Berthold,  Gesenius,  Schaerer,  Jahn,  TJmhreit, 
Rosenmiiller  ;  and  of  course  by  moderate  or  orthodox 
writers,  as  Havernick,  Hahn,  Stickel,  Hengstenberg, 
and  Schlottmann.  Mr.  Froude  ventures,  neverthe- 
less, to  asticrt  that  this   speech  is   "  now  decisively 


JOB 

many,  of  course  rationalistic,  writers  (Stuhlman, 
Bernstein,  Eichhold,  Ewald,  Meier) ;  partly  because 
of  an  alleged  inferiority  of  style ;  partly  as  not 
having  any  bearing  upon  the  argument:  but  the 
connexion  of  reasoning,  involved,  though,  as  was  to 
be  expected,  not  drawn  out,  in  this  discourse,  has 
been  shown  in  the  preceding  analysis  ;  and  as  for 
the  style,  few  who  have  a  true  ear  for  the  resonant 
grandeur  of  ancient  Hebrew  poetry  will  dissent 
from  the  judgment  of  E.  Kenan, b  whose  suggestion, 
that  'it  may  have  been  written  by  the  same  author 
at  a  later  date,  is  far  from  weakening  the  force  of 
his  observation  as  to  the  identity  of  the  style. 

4.  The  speech  of  Elihu  presents  greater  diffi- 
culties, and  has  been  rejected  by  several  rationalists, 
whose  opinion,  however,  is  controverted  not  only 
by  orthodox  writers,  but  by  some  of  the  most 
sceptical  commentators.0  The  former  support  their 
decision  chiefly  on  the  manifest,  and  to  a  certain 
extent  the  real,  difference  between  this  and  other 
parts  of  the  book  in  tone  of  thought,  in  doctrinal 
views,  and  more  positively  in  language  and  general 
style.  Much  stress  also  is  laid  upon  the  facts  that 
Elihu  is  not  mentioned  in  the  introduction  nor  at 
the  end,  and  that  his  speech  is  unanswered  by  Job, 
and  unnoticed  in  the  final  address  of  the  Almighty. 
These  points  were  observed  by  very  early  writers, 
and  were  accounted  for  in  various  ways.  On  the 
one  hand,  Elihu  was  regarded  as  a  specially  in- 
spired person  (Schlottmann,  p.  53).  In  the  Seder 
Olam  (a  rabbinical  system  of  chronology)  he  is 
reckoned  among  the  prophets  who  declared  the  will 
of  God  to  the  G entiles  before  the  promulgation  of 
the  law.  S.  Bar  Nachman  (12th  century)  notes 
his  connexion  with  the  family  of  Abraham  as  a  sign 
that  he  was  the  fittest  person  to  expound  the  way* 
of  God.  The  Greek  Fathers  generally  follow  Chry- 
sostom  in  attributing  to  him  a  superior  intellect ; 
while  many  of  the  best  critics  of  the  two  last  cen- 
turies d  consider  that  the  true  dialectic  solution  of 
the  great  problems  discussed  in  the  book  is  to  be 
found  in  his  discourse.  On  the  other  hand,  Jerome,e 
who  is  followed  by  Gregory,'  and  many  ancient  as 
well  as  modem  writers  of  the  Western  Church, 
speak  of  his  character  and  arguments  with  singular 
contempt.  Later  critics,  chiefly  rationalists,6  see 
in  him  but  an  empty  babbler,  introduced  only  to 
heighten  by  contrast  the  effect  of  .the  last  solemn 
and  dignified  discourse  of  Job.  The  alternative  of 
rejecting  his  speech  as  an  interpolation  was  scarcely 
less  objectionable,  and  has  been  preferred  by  Stuhl- 
man, Bernstein,  Ewald,  Kenan,  and  other  writers 
of  similar  opinions  in  our  country.  A  candid  and 
searching  examination,  however,  leads  to  a  different 
conclusion.  It  is  proved  (see  Schlottmann,  Einl. 
p.  55)  that  there  is  a  close  internal  connexion  be- 
tween this  and  other  parts  of  the  book ;  there  are 
references  to  numerous  passages  in  the  discourses 
of  Job  and  his  friends  ;  so  covert  as  only  to  be  dis- 


pronouneed  by  Hebrew  scholars  not  to  he  genuine," 
and  he  disposes  of  the  question  in  a  short  note  [The 
Book  of  Job,  p.  24). 

d  Thus  Calvin,  Thomas  Aquinas,  and  A.  Schultens, 
who  speaks  of  his  speech  thus  :  "  Elihui  modera- 
tissima  ilia  quidem,  sed  tamen  zelo  Dei  flagrantissima 
redargutio,  qua  Jobum  subtiliter  non  minus  quam 
graviter  compeseere  aggreditur." 

e  The  commentary  on  Job  is  not  by  Jerome,  hut  one 
of  his  disciples,  and  probably  expresses  his  thoughts. 

f  Moralia  Magna,  lib.  xxviii.  1,  11. 

*  Eichhorn,  Berthold,  Umhreit. 


JOB 

covered  by  close  inquiry,  yet,  when  pointed  ont,  so 
striking  and  natural  as  to  leave  no  room  for  doubt. 
Elihu  supplies  exactly  what  Job  repeatedly  de- 
mands— a  confutation  of  his  opinions,  not  merely 
produced  by  an  overwhelming  display  of  divine 
power,  but  by  rational  and  human  arguments,  and 
proceeding  from  one,  not  like  his  other  opponents, 
bigoted  or  hypocritical,  but  upright,  candid,  and 
truthful  (comp.  xxxiii.  '■)  with  vi.  24,  25).  The 
reasonings  of  Elihu  are  moreover  such  as  are  needed 
for  the  development  of  the  doctrines  inculcated  in 
tie-  book,  while  they  are  necessarily  cast  in  a  form 
which  could  not  without  irreverence  be  assigned  to 
the  Almighty.11  As  to  the  objection  that  the  doc- 
trinal system  of  Elihu  is  in  some  points  more  ad- 
vanced than  that  of  Job  or  his  friends,  it  may  be 
answered,  first,  that  these  are  no  traces  in  this  dis- 
course of  certain  doctrines  which  were  undoubtedly 
known  at  the  earliest  date  to  which  those  critics 
would  assign  the  interpolation  ;  whereas  it  is  evi- 
dent that  it  known  they  would  have  been  adduced 
as  the  very  strongest  arguments  for  a  warning  and 
consolation.  No  reader  of  the  Psalms  and  of  the 
prophets  could  have  failed  to  urge  such  topics  as 
the  resurrection,  the  future  judgment,  and  the  per- 
sonal advent  of  Messiah.  Secondly,  the  doctrinal 
system  of  Elihu  differs  rather  in  degree  than  in 
kind  from  that  which  has  been  either  developed  or 
intimated  in  several  passages  of  the  work,  and  con- 
sists chiefly  in  a  specific  application  of  the  me- 
diatorial theory,  not  unknown  to  Job,  and  in  a 
deeper  appreciation  of  the  love  manifested  in  all 
providential  dispensations.  It  is  quite  consistent 
with  the  plan  of  the  writer,  and  with  the  admirable 
skill  shown  in  the  arrangement  of  the  whole  work, 
that  the  highest  view  as  to  the  object  of  afflictions, 
and  to  the  source  to  which  men  should  apply  for 
comfort  and  instruction,  should  be  reserved  for  this, 
which,  so  far  as  regards  the  human  reasoners,'  is 
the  culminating  point  of  the  discussion.  Little  can 
be  said  for  Lightfoot's  theory,  that  the  whole  work 
was  composed  by  Elihu;  or  for  E.  Kenan's  con- 
jecture that  this  discourse  may  have  been  composed 
by  the  author  in  his  old  age  ;k  yet  these  views 
imply  an  unconscious  impression  that  Elihu  is  the 
fullest  exponent  of  the  truth.  It  is  satisfactory  to 
know  that  two™  of  the  most  impartial  and  discern- 
ing critics,  who  unite  in  denying  this  to  be  an 
original  and  integral  portion  of  the  work,  fully 
acknowledge  its  intrinsic  excellence  and  beauty. 

There  is  no  difficulty  in  accounting  for  the  omis- 
sion of  Elihu's  name  in  the  introduction.  No  per- 
sons are  named  in  the  book  until  they  appear  as 
agents,  or  as  otherwise  concerned  in  the  events. 
Thus  Job's  brethren  are  named  incidentally  in 
one  of  his  speeches,  and  his  relatives  are  for  the 
first  time  in  the  concluding  chapter.  Had  Elihu 
been  mentioned  at  first,  we  should  of  course  have 
expected  him  to  take  part  in  the  discussion,  ami 
the  impression  made  by  his  startling  address  would 


JOB 


10P3 


have  been  lost.  Job  does  not  answer  him,  nor 
indeed  could  he  deny  the  cogency  of  his  arguments  ; 
while  this  silence  brings  out  a  curious  point  of 
coincidence  with  a  previous  declaration  of  the  patri- 
arch (vi.  '24,  25).  Again,  the  discourse  being  sub- 
stantially true  did  not  need  correction,  and  is  there- 
fore left  unnoticed  in  the  final  decision  of  the 
Almighty.15  Nothing  indeed  could  he  more  in  har- 
mony with  the  ancient  traditions  of  the  East  than 
that  a  youth,  moved  by  a  special  and  supernatural 
impulse  to  speak  out  God's  truth  in  the  presence  of 
his  elders,  should  retire  into  obscurity  when  he  had 
done  his  work.  More  weight  is  to  be  attached  to 
the  objection  resting  upon  diversity  of  style,  and 
dialectic  peculiarities.  The  most  acute  critics  differ 
indeed  in  their  estimate  of  both,  ;and  are  often 
grossly  deceived  (see  Schlottmann,  p.  01),  still 
there  can  be  little  doubt  as  to  the  fact.  It  may  be 
accounted  for  either  on  the  supposition  that  the 
author  adhered  strictly  to  the  form  in  which  tra- 
dition handed  down  the  dialogue;  in  which  case 
the  speech  of  a  Syrian  might  be  expected  to  bear 
traces  of  his  dialect:0  or  that  the  Chaldaic  forms 
and  idioms,  which  are  far  from  resembling  later 
vulgarisms  or  corruptions  of  Hebrew,  and  occur 
only  in  highly  poetic  passages  of  the  oldest  writers, 
are  such  as  peculiarly  suit  the  style  of  the  young 
and  fiery  speaker  (see  Schlottmann,  E'uil.  p.  61). 
It  has  been  observed,  and  with  apparent  truth,  that 
the  discourses  of  the  other  interlocutors  have  each 
a  very  distinct  and  characteristic  colouring,  shown 
not  only  in  the  general  tone  of  thought,  but  in 
peculiarities  of  expression  (Ewald  and  Schlottmann). 
The  excessive  obscurity  of  the  style,  which  is  uni- 
versally admitted,  may  be  accounted  for  in  a  similar 
manner.  A  young  man  speaking  under  strong  ex- 
citement, embarrassed  by  the  presence  of  his  elders, 
and  by  the  peculiar  responsibility  of  his  position, 
might  be  expected  to  use  language  obscured  by 
repetitions;  and,  though  ingenious  and  true,  yet 
somewhat  intricate  and  imperfectly  developed  argu- 
ments; such  as  in  fact  present  great  difficulties  in 
the  exegesis  of  this  portion  of  the  book. 

III.  Historical  character  of  the  work.—  Three  dis- 
tinct theories  have  been  maintained  at  various  times 
— some  believing  the  book  to  be  strictly  historical  ; 
others  a  religious  fiction ;  others  a  composition 
based  upon  facts.  Until  a  comparatively  late  time 
the  prevalent  opinion  was,  not  only  that  the  per- 
sons and  events  which  it  describes  are  real,  but 
that  the  very  words  of  the  speakers  were  accurately 
recorded.  It  was  supposed  either  that  Job  himself 
employed  the  latter  years  of  his  life  in  writing  it 
(A.  Schultens),  or  that  at  a  very  early  age  some 
inspired  Hebrew  collected  the  facts  and  sayings, 
faithfully  preserved  by  oral  tradition,  and  presented 
them  to  his  countrymen  in  their  own  tongue.  By 
some  the  authorship  of  the  work  was  attributed 
to  Moses  ;  by  others  it  was  believed  (and  this  theory 
has   lately  been   sustained    with   much   ingenuity1') 


h  see  Schlottmann  [I.e.).  The  reader  will  remem- 
ber the  just,  though  sarcastic,  criticism  of  Pope  on 
Milton's  irreverence  and  bad  taste. 

1  Uahn  says  of  Elihu :  "A  young  wise  man,  repre- 
senting all  the  intelligence  of  his  age"  (p.  5).  Cf. 
A.  Schultens  and  Ilengstenberg  in  Kitto's  Ilihl.  Knr. 

k  1'.  lvii.  This  implies,  at  any  rate,  that  in  his 
opinion  there  is  no  absolute  incompatibility  between 
this  and  other  parts  of  the  book  in  point  of  style  or 
thought.  The  conjecture  is  a  striking  instance  of 
inconsistency  in  a  very  dogmatic  writer. 

"'  Ewald  and  Kenan.    Ewald  says  :  "The  thoughts 


in  this  speech  arc  in  themselves  exceedingly  pure  and 
true,  conceived  with  greater  depth,  and  presented 
with  more  force  than  in  the  rest  of  the  book  "  (p.  320). 

n  This  seems  a  sufficient  answer  to  an  objection 
more  likely  to  occur  to  a  modern  European  than  to  a 
Hebrew. 

"  Stickel  supposes  that  the  Aramaic  forms  were 
intentionally  introduced  by  the  author  on  account  of 
the  Syrian  descent  of  Elihu. 

r  By  Dr.  Lee ;  see  his  Introduction.  Tie  accounts 
thus  for  the  use  of  the  name  nii"l\  found,  with  one 
exception,  only  in  these  chapters. 


1094 


JOB 


that  Moses  became  acquainted  with*  the  documents 
during  his  residence  in  Midian,  and  that  he  added 
the  introductory  and  concluding  chapters. 

The  fact  of  Job's  existence,  and  the  substantial 
truth  of  the  narrative,  were  not  likely  to  be  denied 
by  Hebrews  or  Christians,  considering  the  terms  in 
which  the  patriarch  is  named  in  the  14th  of  Eze- 
kiel  and  in  the  Epistle  of  St.  James  (v.  11).  It 
seemed  to  early  writers  incompatible  with  any  idea 
of  inspiration  to  assume  that  a  narrative,  certainly 
not  allegorical,  should  be  a  mere  fiction;  and  irre- 
verent to  suppose  that  the  Almighty  would  be  in- 
troduced as  a  speaker  in  an  imaginary  colloquy. 
In  the  East  numerous  traditions  (Ewald,  p.  17,  18  ; 
see  D'Herbelot,  s.  v.  Ayoub~)  about  the  patriarch 
and  his  family  show  the  deep  impression  made  by 
his  character  and  calamities:  these  traditions  may 
possibly  have  been  derived  from  the  book  itself; 
but  it  is  at  least  equally  probable  that  they  had  an 
independent  origin.  We  are  led  to  the  same  con- 
clusion by  the  soundest  principles  of  criticism. 
Ewald  says  (Einl.  p.  15)  most  truly,  "The  inven- 
tion of  a  history  without  foundation  in  facts — the 
creation  of  a  person,  represented  as  having  a  real 
historical  existence,  out  of  the  mere  head  of  the 
poet — is  a  notion  so  entirely  alien  to  the  spirit  of 
all  antiquity,  that  it  only  began  to  develope  itself 
gradually  in  the  latest  epoch  of  the  literature  of 
any  ancient  people,  and  in  its  complete  form  belongs 
only  to  the  most  modern  times."  In  the  canonical 
books  there  is  not  a  trace  of  any  such  invention. 
Of  all  people  the  Hebrews  were  the  least  likely  to 
mingle  the  mere  creations  of  imagination  with  the 
sacred  records  reverenced  as  the  peculiar  glory  ot 
their  race. 

This  principle  is  corroborated  by  special  argu- 
ments. It  is,  to  say  the  least,  highly  improbable 
that  a  Hebrew,  had  he  invented  such  a  character  as 
that  of  Job,  should  have  represented  him  as  belong- 
ing to  a  race  which,  though  descended  from  a  com- 
mon ancestor,  was  never  on  friendly,  and  generally 
on  hostile,  terms  with  his  own  people.  Uz,  the 
residence  of  Job,  is  in  no  way  associated  with 
Israelitish  history,  and,  apart  from  the  patriarch's 
own  history,  would  have  no  interest  for  a  Hebrew. 
The  names  ot  most  persons  introduced  have  no 
meaning  connected  with  the  part  attributed  to  them 
in  the  narrative.  The  name  of  Job  himself  is  but 
an  apparent  exception.  According  to  most  critics 
SI'S  is  derived  from  l^K,  infensus  fuit,  and 
means  "cruelly  or  hostilely  treated;"  according  to 
others  (Ewald  and  Rosenmiiller)  of  high  authority 
it  may  signify  "  a  true  penitent,"  corresponding  to 

^_)\A,  so  applied  to  Job,  and  evidently  with  re- 
ference to  his  name,  in  the  Koran  (Sur.  38,  44). 
In   either  case  the  name   would   give  but  a  very 


i  A  fictitious  name  would  of  course  have  meant 
what  the  ancients  supposed  that  Job  must  signify. 
to  'Iw/3  bvoixa.  vtvo/j-ovt)  voelrat,  xai  icmv,  cjs  yevia8ai 
toutoi>  o  7rpoeKA7j07),  r]  K\r)6r]vai  67rep  eyeVeTO.  Didymus 
Alexand.  p.  1120,  ed.  Migne. 

r  This  is  assumed  by  all  the  critics  who  helieve  the 
details  of  the  work  to  be  a  pure  creation  of  the  poet. 
"  He  has  represented  the  simple  relations  of  patri- 
archal life,  and  sustained  the  assumed  character  of  a 
rich  Arabian  chieftain  of  a  nomad  tribe,  with  the 
greatest  truthfulness."  (Hahn.)  Thus  Ewald,  Schlott- 
mann,  &c,  p.  70. 

8  Both  races  probably  dwelt  near  the  land  of  Uz. 
See  Kosenm.  Troll,  pp.  30,  31. 


JOB 

partial  view,  and  would  indeed  fail  to  represent  the 
central  principle q  of  the  patriarch's  heroic  cha- 
racter. It  is  moreover  far  from  improbable  that 
the  name  previously  borne  by  the  hero  ma}'  have 
been  changed  in  commemoration  of  the  event.  Such 
was  the  case  with  Abraham,  Jacob,  Joshua,  and  in 
all  probability  with  many  other  historical  per- 
sonages in  the  Old  Testament.  It  is  worth  noting, 
without  laying  much  stress  upon  the  fact,  that  in 
a  notice  appended  to  the  Alexandrian  version  it  is 
stated,  "he  bore  previously  the  name  of  Jobab ;" 
and  that  a  tradition  adopted  by  the  Jews  and  some 
Christian  Fathers,  identifies  Job  with  Jobab,  prince 
of  Edom,  mentioned  in  Gen.  xxxvi.  33.  Moreover 
a  coincidence  between  the  name  and  the  character 
or  history  of  a  real  person  is  not  uncommon  in  any 
age.  To  this  it  is  objected  that  the  resemblance 
in  Greek  does  not  exist  in  the  Hebrew — a  strange 
assertion :  3VN  and  23V  are  certainly  not  much 
less  alike  than  'Ia'/3  and  'Ia>/3d/3. 

To  this  it  must  be  added  that  there  is  a  singular 
air  of  reality  in  the  whole  narrative,  such  as  must 
either  proceed  naturally  from  a  faithful  adherence 
to  objective  truth,  or  be  the  result  of  the  most  con- 
summate art.r  The  effect  is  produced  partly  by 
the  thorough  consistency  of  all  the  characters, 
especially  that  of  Job,  not  merely  as  drawn  in- 
broad  strong  outlines,  but  as  developed  under  a 
variety  of  most  trying  circumstances:  partly  also 
by  the  minute  and  accurate  account  of  incidents 
which  in  a  fiction  would  probably  have  been  noted 
by  an  ancient  writer  in  a  vague  and  general  manner. 
Thus  we  remark  the  mode  in  which  the  super- 
natural trial  is  carried  into  execution  by  natural 
agencies — by  Chaldaean  and  S-|beans  robbers — by 
whirlwinds  common  in  and  peculiar  to  the  desert — 
by  fire — and  lastly  by  the  elephantiasis  (see  Schlott- 
mann,  p.  15  ;  Ewald,  I.  c. ;  aud  Hengstenberg),  the 
most  formidable  disease  known  in  the  East.  The 
disease  was  indeed  one  which  the  Indians'  and  most 
Orientals  then  probably  believed  to  be  peculiarly 
indicative  of  divine  wrath,  and  would  therefore  be 
naturally  selected  by  the  writer  (see  the  analysis 
above).  But  the  symptoms  are  described  so  faith- 
fully as  to  leave  no  doubt  that  the  writer  must 
either  have  introduced  them  with  a  view  of  giving 
an  air  of  truthfulness  to  his  work,  or  have  recorded 
what  he  hirhself  witnessed,  or  received  from  an 
exact  tradition.  The  former  supposition  is  confuted 
by  the  fact  that  the  peculiar  symptoms  are  not 
described  in  any  one  single  passage  so  as  to  attract 
the  reader's  attention,  but  are  made  out  by  a  critical 
and  scientific  examination  of  words  occurring  here 
and  there  at  intervals  in  the  complaints  of  the 
sufferer."  The  most  refined  art  fails  in  producing 
such  a  result:  it  is  rarely  attempted  in  the  most 
artificial  ages ;  was  never  dreamed  of  by  ancient 
writers,  and  must  here  be  regarded   as  a  strong 

'  Thus  Origen,  c.  Cels.  vi.  5,  2  ;  Abulfeda,  Hist. 
Antcisl.,  i»i«  '•y.^y'i',  p.  27,  ed.  Fleischer, 
i.  e.  his  body  was   smitten  with    elephantiasis   (the 

\  ,X~J,  and  eaten  by  worms.  The  disease  is  de- 
scribed by  Ainslie,  Transactions  R.  S.,  and  Bruce. 
See  Ewald,  p.  23. 

u  Ch.  ii.  7,  8;  vii.  5,  13;  xvi.  8;  xix.  17,  20; 
xxx.  IS  ;  and  other  passages.'  See  the  valuable 
remarks  of  Ewald,  p.  22. 


JOB 

instance  of  the  undesigned  coincidences  which  the 
soundest  criticism  regards  as  the  best  evidence  of 
genuineness  and  authenticity  in  any  work. 

Forcible  as  these  arguments  may  appear,  many 
critics  have  adopted  the  opinion  either  that  the 
whole  work  is  a  moral  or  religious  apologue,  or 
that,  upon  a  substratum  of  a  few  rudimentaJ  facts 
preserved  by  tradition,  the  genius  of  an  original 
thinker  has  raised  this,  the  most  remarkable  mo- 
nument of  the  Semitic  mind.  The  first  indications 
of  this  opinion  are  found  in  the  Talmud  (Baba 
Batlna,  14-16).  In  a  discussion  upon  the  age  of 
this  book,  while  the  Rabbins  in  general  maintain  its 
historical  character,  Samuel  Bar  Nachman  declares 
his  conviction  "  Job  did  not  exist,  and  was  not  a 
created  man,  but  the  work  is  a  parable."  v  Hai 
Gaon,"  A.D.  1000,  who  is  followed  by  Jarchi, 
altered  this  passage  to  "  Job  existed  and  was  created 
to  become  a  parable."  They  had  evidently  no  cri- 
tical ground  for  the  change,  but  bore  witness  to  the 
prevalent  tradition  of  the  Hebrews.  Maimonides 
(Moreh  Newchim,  iii.  2'2),  with  his  characteristic 
freedom  of  mind,  considers  it  an  open  question  of 
little  or  no  moment  to  the  real  value  of  the  inspired 
book,  lialbag,  i.e.  R.  Levi  BenGershom,  treats  it 
as  a  philosophic  work.  A  late  Hebrew  commen- 
tator, Simcha  Arieh  (Schlottmann,  p.  4),  denies 
the  historical  truth  of  the  narrative,  on  the  ground 
that,  it  is  incredible  the  patriarchs  of  the  chosen 
race  should  be  surpassed  in  goodness  by  a  child  of 
Edom.  This  is  worth  noting  in  corroboration  of 
the  argument  that  such  a  fact  was  not  likely  to 
have  been  invented  by  an  Israelite  of  any  age.y 

Luther  first  suggested  the  theory,  which,  in  some 
form  or  other,  is  now  most  generally  received.  In 
his  introduction  to  the  first  edition  of  his  transla- 
tion of  the  Bible,  he  speaks  of  the  author  as  having 
so  treated  the  historical  facts  as  to  demonstrate  the 
truth  that  God  alone  is  righteous — and  in  the  Tisch- 
reden  (ed.  Walsch,  torn.  xxii.  p.  2093),  he  says,  "  I 
look  upon  the  book  of  Job  as  a  true  history,  yet  I 
do  not  believe  that  all  took  place  just  as  it  is 
written,  but  that  an  ingenious,  pious,  and  learned 
man  brought  it  into  its  present  form."  This  posi- 
tion was  strongly  attacked  by  Bellarmin,  and  other 
Roman  theologians,  and  was  afterwards  repudiated 
by  most  Lutherans.  The  fact  that  Spinoza,  Cle- 
ricus,  I  hi  Pin,  and  Father  Simon,  held  nearly  the 
same  opinion,  the  first  denying,  and  the  others  no- 
toriously holding  low  views  of  the  inspiration  of 
Scripture,  had  of  course  a  tendency  to  bring  it  into 
disrepute.  J.  1).  Michaelis  first  revived  the  old 
theory  of' Bar  Nachman,  not  upon  critical  but  dog- 
matic grounds.  In  a  mere  history,  the  opinions  or 
doctrines  enounced  by  Job  and  his  friends  could 
have  no  dogmatic  authority ;  whereas  if  the  whole 
book  were  a  pure  inspiration,  the  strongest  argu- 
ments could  be  deduced  from  them  on  behalf  of  the 
great 'truths  of  the  resurrection  ami  a  future  judg- 
ment, which  though  implied  in  other  early  books,  are 
no  where  so  distinctly  inculcated.     The  arbitrary 

»  rvn  bvto  vbx  vnni  vb)  rvn  *6  ar« 

Mashal  has  a  much  wider  signification  than  parable, 
or  any  English  synonym. 

*  Ewald  and  Dukes'  Beitrage,  iii.  165. 

y  Theodoras  of  Mopsuestia  stands  alone  in  denying 
the  inspiration,  while  he  admits  the  historical  cha- 
racter of  the  hook,  which  he  asserted,  in  a  passage 
condemned  at  the  second  Council  of  Constantinople, 
to  he  replete  with  statements  derogatory  to  (iod,  and 
such  as  could  only  proceed  from  a  vain  and  ignorant 


JOB 


1005 


character  of  such  reasoning  is  obvious.  At  present 
no  critic  doubts  that  the  narrative  rests  on  facts, 
although  the  prevalent  opinion  among  continental 
scholars  is  certainly  that  in  its  form  and  general 
features,  in  its  reasonings  and  representations  of 
character,  the  book  is  a  work  of  creative  genius. 

The  question  however  cannot  be  settled,  nor 
indeed  thoroughly  understood,  without  reference  to 
other  arguments  by  which  critics  have  endeavoured 
to  determine. the  date  at  which  the  work  was  com- 
pleted in  its  present  form,  and  the  circumstances 
under  which  it  was  composed.  We  proceed  there- 
fore to  consider 

IV.  The  probable  age,  country,  and  position  of  the 
author. — The  language  alone  does  not,  as  some  have 
asserted,  supply  any  decisive  test  as  to  the  date  of  the 
composition.  Critics  of  the  last  century  generally 
adopted  the  opinion  of  A.  Schultens  (Praef.  ad 
librum  Jobi),  who  considered  that  the  indications  of 
external  influences  were  best  accounted  for  on  the 
supposition  that  the  book  was  written  at  a  very 
early  period,  before  the  different  branches  of  the 
Semitic  race  had  completely  formed  their  distinct 
dialects.  The  fact  that  the  language  of  this  work 
approaches  far  more  nearly  to  the  Arabic  than  any 
other  Hebrew  production  was  remarked  by  Jerome, 
and  is  recognised  by  the  soundest  critics.  On  the 
other  hand,  there  are  undoubtedly  many  Aramaic 
words,z  and  grammatical  forms,  which  some  critics 
have  regarded  as  a  strong  proof  that  the  writers 
must  have  lived  during,  or  even  after  the  captivity. 
At  present  this  hypothesis  is  universally  given  up  as 
untenable.  It  is  proved  (Ewald,  Re'nan,  Schlott- 
mann, and  Kosegarten)  that  there  is  a  radical  differ- 
ence between  the  Ararnaisms'  of  the  later  Hebrew 
writings  and  those  found  in  the  book  of  Job.  These 
latter  are,  without  an  exception,  such  as  charac- 
terise the  antique  and  highly  poetic  style ;  they 
occur  in  parts  of  the  Pentateuch,  in  the  Song  of 
Deborah,  in  the  earliest  Psalms,  and  the  Song  of 
Solomon,  all  of  which  are  now  admitted  even  by 
the  ablest  rationalistic  critics  to  be  among  the  ear- 
liest and  purest  productions  of  Hebrew  literature." 
So  far  as  any  argument  can  be  drawn  from  idiom- 
atic peculiarities,  it  may  be  regarded  as  a  settled 
point  that  the  book  was  written  long  before  the 
exile  (see  some  good  observations  by  Hiivernick, 
i.e.);  while  there  is  absolutely  nothing  to  prove  a 
later  date  than  the  Pentateuch,  or  even  those  parts 
of  the  Pentateuch  which  appear  to  beloug  to  the 
patriarchal  age. 

This  impression  is  borne  out  by  the  style.  All 
critics  have  recognised  its  grand  archaic  character. 
Firm,  compact,  sonorous  as  the  ring  ot'a  pure  metal, 
severe  and  at  times  rugged,  yet  always  dignified 
and  majestic,  the  language  belongs  altogether  to 
a  period  when  thought  was  slow,  but  profound  and 
intensely  concentrated,  when  the  weighty  and  ora- 
cular sayings  of  the  wise  were  wont  to  be  engraved 
upon  rocks  with  a  pen  of  iron  and  in  charactei  s  of 
molten  lead  (see  xix.  24).     It  is  truly  a  lapidary 


heathen.  Ahen  Ezra,  among  the  Jews,  maintained 
the  same  opinion. 

z  A  list  is  given  by  Lee,  p.  so.  See  alsoHavernick, 
Introd.  t„  a.  /'.  p.  176,  Eng.  Trans. 

a  Rgnan's  good  taste  and  candour  here,  as  else- 
where, neutralize  his  rationalistic  tendency.  In  the 
lli.stuiif  des  Larigues  Semitiques,  ed.   ls.'>7,  he  held 

that  the AramaismS  indicate  a  very  late  date;  in  the 
preface  to  Job  he  has  adopted  the  opinion  here  ex- 
pressed. 


1030 


JOB 


style,  such  as  was  natural  only  in  an  age  when 
wilting,  though  known,  was  rarely  used,  before 
language  had  acquired  clearness,  fluency,  and  flexi- 
bility, but  lost  much  of  its  freshness  and  native 
force.  Much  stress  has  been  laid  upon  the  fact 
that  the  book  bears  a  closer  resemblance  to  the 
Proverbs  of  Solomon  than  to  any  other  Hebrew 
work  (see  especially  Rosenmiiller,  1'roll.  p.  38). 
This  is  true  to  a  remarkable  extent  with  regard  to 
the  thoughts,  words  and  forms  of  expression,  while 
the  metre,  which  is  somewhat  peculiar  and  strongly 
marked,1'  is  almost  identical.  Hence  it  has  been 
inferred  that  the  composition  belongs  to  the  Solo- 
monian  era,  or  to  the  period  between  Solomon  and 
Hezekiah,  by  whose  orders,  as  we  are  expressly  in- 
formed, a  great  part  of  the  book  of  Proverbs  was 
compiled.  But  the  argument  loses  much  of  its  force 
when  we  consider  that  Solomon  did  not  merely  in- 
vent the  proverbs,  but  collected  the  most  ancient  and 
curious  sayings  of  olden  times,  not  only  of  the  He- 
brews, but  probably  of  other  nations  with  whom  he 
had  extensive  intercourse,  and  in  whose  philosophy  he 
is  supposed,  not  without  good  reason,  to  have  taken 
deep  interest  even  to  the  detriment  of  his  religious 
principles  (see  Kenan's  Job,  p.  xxiii.);  while  those 
proverbs  which  he  invented  himself  would  as 
a  matter  of  course  be  cast  in  the  same  metrical 
form,  and  take  an  archaic  character.  Again,  there 
can  be  little  doubt  that  the  passages  in  which  the 
resemblance  is  most  complete  and  striking,  were 
taken  from  one  book  by  the  author  of  the  other ; 
and  adapted,  according  to  a  Hebrew  custom,  com- 
mon among  the  prophets,  to  the  special  purposes  of 
his  work.  On  comparing  these  passages,  it  seems 
impossible  to  deny  that  they  belonged  in  the  first 
instance  to  the  book  of  Job,c  where  they  are  in 
thorough  harmony  with  the  tenour  of  the  argu- 
.  ment,  and  have  all  the  characteristics  of  the  author's 
genius.  Taking  the  resemblance  as  a  fact,  we  are 
entitled  to  conclude  that  we  have  in  Job  a  com- 
position not  later  than  the  most  ancient  proverbs, 
and  certainly  of  much  earlier  date  than  the  entire 
book. 

The  extent  to  which  the  influence  of  this  book 
is  perceptible  in  the  later  literature  of  the  Hebrews, 
is  a  subject  of  great  interest  and  importance  ;  but 
'it  has  not  yet  been  thoroughly  investigated.  Ha- 
vernick  has  a  few  good  remarks  in  his  general 
Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,  §30.  Dr.  Lee 
(Introd.  Section  vii.)  has  led  the  way  to  a  more 
complete  and  searching  inquiry  by  a  close  examination 
of  five  chapters,  in  which  he  produces  a  vast  number 
of  parallel  passages  from  the  Pentateuch  (which  he 
holds  to  be  contemporary  with  the  Introduction, 


b  Each  verse,  with  very  few  exceptions,  consists 
of  two  parallel  members,  and  each  member  of  three 
words  :  when  that  number  is  exceeded,  it  is  owing  to 
the  particles  or  subordinate  words,  which  are  almost 
always  so  combined  as  to  leave  only  three  tones  in 
each  member  (Schlottmann,  p.  G8). 

c  See  Rosenmiiller,  Troll,  p.  40.  Even  Renan,  who 
believes  that  Job  was  written  after  the  time  of  Solomon, 
holds  that  the  description  of  Wisdom  (ch.  xxviii.)  is 
the  original  source  of  the  idea  Which  we  find  in 
Proverbs  (ehs.  viii.,  ix.). 

d  See  some  excellent  remarks  by  Renan,  p.  xxxvii. 

e  The  Makamat  of  Hariri,  and  the  life  of  Timour 
by  Arabshah,  in  Arabic,  the  works  of  Lycophron  in 
Greek,  are  good  examples.  Somewhat  of  this  cha- 
racter may  perhaps  be  found  in  the  last  chapters  of 
Ecclesiastes,  while  it  is  conspicuous  in  the  apocry- 
phal books  of  Wisdom,  Ecclcsiasticus,   and  Baruch. 


JOB 

and  of  a  later  date  than  the  rest  of  the  book),  from 
Ruth,  Samuel,  the  Psalms,  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes, 
Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  Hosea,  Joel,  Amos,  Micah, 
and  Nahum,  all  of  which  are  probably,  and  some  of 
them  demonstrably,  copied  from  Job. 

Considerable  weight  must  also  be  attached  to 
the  fact  that  Job  is  far  more  remarkable  for 
obscurity  than  'any  Hebrew  writing.d  There  is  an 
obscurity  which  results  from  confusion  of  thought, 
from  carelessness  and  inaccuracy,  or  from  studied 
involutions  and  artificial  combination  of  metaphors 
indicating  a  late  age.e  But  when  it  is  owing  to 
obsolete  words,  intense  concentration  of  thought 
and  language,  and  incidental  allusions  to  long  for- 
gotten traditions,  it  is  an  all  but  infallible  proof  of 
primeval  antiquity.  Such  are  precisely  the  diffi- 
culties in  this  book.  The  enormous  mass  of  notes 
which  a  reader  must  wade  through,  before  he  can 
feel  himself  competent  to  decide  upon  the  most  pro- 
bable interpretation  of  a  single  chapter,'  proves  that 
this  book  stands  apart  from  all  other  productions  of 
the  Hebrews,  belongs  to  a  different  epoch,  and  in 
accordance  with  the  surest  canons  of  criticism,  to 
an  earlier  age. 

We  arrive  at  the  same  conclusion  from  consider- 
ing the  institutions,  manners,  and  historical  facts 
described  or  alluded  to  in  this  book.  It  must  be 
borne  in  mind  that  no  ancient  writer  ever  suc- 
ceeded in  reproducing  the  manners  of  a  past  age  ;s 
to  use  the  words  of  M.  Kenan,  "  antiquity  had  not  an 
idea  of  what  we  call  local  colouring."  The  attempt 
was  never  made  by  any  Hebrew ;  and  the  age  of 
any  writer  can  be  positively  determined  when  we 
know  the  date  of  the  institutions  and  customs  which 
he  describes.  Again  it  is  to  the  last  degree  impro- 
bable (being  without  a  precedent  or  parallel)  that  an 
ancient  author  h  should  intentionally  and  successfully 
avoid  all  reference  to  historical  occurrences,  and  to 
changes  in  religious  forms  or  doctrines  of  a  date 
posterior  to  that  of  the  events  which  he  narrates. 
These  points  are. now  generally  recognised,  but  they 
have  rarely  been  applied  with  consistency  and  can- 
dour by  commentators  on  this  book. 

In  the  first  place  it  is  distinctly  admitted  that 
from  the  beginning  to  the  end  no  reference  what- 
ever is  made  to  the  Mosaic  law,  or  to  any  of  the 
peculiar  institutions  of  Israel,'  or  to  the  great  car- 
dinal events  of  the  national  history  after  the  Exodus. 
It  cannot  be  proved  k  that  such' reference  was  un- 
likely to  occur  in  connexion  with  the  argument. 
The  sanctions  and  penalties  of  the  law  if  known, 
could  scarcely  have  been  passed  over  by  the  oppo- 
nents of  Job,  while  the  deliverance  of  Israel  and  the 
overthrow  of  the  Egyptians  supplied  exactly  the 


Instances  in  our  own  literature  will  occur  to  every 
reader. 

f  The  a.ira£,  Atyofiei'a,  and  passages  of  which  the 
interpretation  is  wholly  a  matter  of  conjecture,  far 
surpass  those  of  any  portion  of  the  O.  T. 

e  This  is  true  of  the  Greek  dramatists,  and  of  the 
greatest  original  writers  of  our  own,  and  indeed  of 
every  country  before  the  18th  century. 

h  In  fact,  scarcely  one  work  of  fiction  exists  in  which 
a  searching  criticism  does  not  detect  anachronisms  or 
inconsistencies. 

1  See  Renan,  p.  xvi.  It  should  be  noted  that  even 
the  word  miD,  so  common  in  every  other  book, 
especially  in  those  of  the  post-Bavidic  age,  occurs 
only  once  in  Job  xxii.  22,  and  then  not  in  the  special 
or  technical  signification  of  a  received  code. 

k  See,  on  the  other  side,  Pareau  ap.  Rosenm. 


JOB 

examples  which  they  required  in  order  to  silence  the 
complaints  and  answer  the  arguments  of  Job. 
The  force  of  this  argument  is  not  affected  by  the 
answer  that  other  books  written  long  after  the 
establishment  of  the  Mosaic  ritual  contain  few  or 
no  allusions  to  those  institutions  or  events.  The 
statement  is  inaccurate.  In  each  of  the  books  spe- 
cified™ there  are  abundant  traces  of  the  law.  It 
was  not  to  be  expected  that  a  complete  view  of  the 
Levitical  rites,  or  of  historical  facts  unconnected 
with  the  subject  matter  of  those  works,  could  be 
derived  from  them  ;  but  they  abound  in  allusions 
to  customs  and  notions  peculiar  to  the  Hebrews 
trained  under  the  law,  to  the  services  of  the  taber- 
nacle or  temple,  and  they  all  recognise  most  dis- 
tinctly the  existence  of  a  sacerdotal  system,  whereas 
our  author  ignores,  and  therefore,  as  we  may  rea- 
sonably conclude,  was  unacquainted  with,  any  forms 
of  religious  service,  save  those  of  tiie  patriarchal 
age. 

Ewald,  whose  judgment  in  this  case  will  not  be 
questioned,"  asserts  very  positively  that  in  all  the 
descriptions  of  manners  and  customs,  domestic, 
social,  and  political,  and  even  in  the  indirect  allu- 
sions and  illustrations,  the  genuine  colouring  of  the 
age  of  Job,  that  is  of  the  period  between  Abraham 
and  Moses,  is  very  faithfully  observed ;  that  all  his- 
torical examples  and  allusions  are  taken  exclusively 
from  patriarchal  times,  and  that  there  is  a  com- 
plete and  successful  avoidance  of  direct  reference  to 
later  occurrences,0  which  in  his  opinion  may  have 
been  known  to  the  writer.  All  critics  concur  in 
extolling  the  fresh,  antique  simplicity  of  manners 
described  in  this  book,  the  genuine  air  of  the  wild, 
free,  vigorous  life  of  the  desert,  the  stamp  of  hoar 
antiquity,  and  the  thorough  consistency  in  the  de- 
velopment of  characters,  equally  remarkable  for 
originality  and  force.  There  is  an  absolute  con- 
trast between  the  manners,  thoughts,  and  feelings, 
and  those  which  characterised  the  Israelites  during 
the  monarchical  period ;  while  whatever  difference 
exists  between  the  customs  of  the  older  patriarchs 
as  described  in  Genesis  and  those  of  Job's  family  and 
associates,  is  accounted  for  by  the  progress  of  events 
in  the  intervening  period.  The  chieftain  lives  in 
considerable  splendour  aud  dignity ;  menial  offices, 
such  as  commonly  devolved  upon  the  elder  patriarchs 
and  their  children,  are  now  performed  by  servants, 
between  whom  and  the  family  the  distinction  appears 
to  be  more  strongly  marked.  Job  visits  the  city 
frequently,  and  is  there  received  with  high  respect 
as  a  prince,  judge,  and  distinguished  warrior  (xxix. 
7-9).  There  are  allusions  to  courts  of  judicature, 
written  indictments, P  and  regular  forms  of  pro- 
cedure (xiii.  26,  and  xxxi.  28).  Men  had  begun 
to  observe  and  reason  upon  the  phenomena  of  na- 


JOB 


1097 


m  M.  Kenan  says  :  "  On  sYtonnait  de  ne  trouver 
dans  le  livre  de  Job  aucune  trace  des  prescriptions 
mosaiques.  Mais  on  n'en  trouve  pas  davar.tage  dans 
le  livre  des  Proverbes,  dans  l'histoirc  des  Juges  et  des 
premiers  Rois,  et  en  general  dans  les  ecrivains  ant£- 
rieurs  a  la  derniere  epoque  du  royaumc  dc  .luda." 
It  must  be  remembered  that  this  writer  denies  the 
authenticity  of  the  Pentateuch. 

n  See  the  fflnleitung,  p.  57.  M.  Itenan,  Hahn, 
Scblottmann,  and  other  critics,  agree  fully  with  this 
opinion. 

0  The  entire  disappearance  of  the  bushmen  (Job 
xxx.  4-7)  belongs  to  a  very  early  age.  Ewald  sup- 
poses them  to  have  been  descendants  of  the  Horites  ; 
and  SchJottmann  (p.  15)  observes,  truly,  that  the 
writer  must  have  known  them  from  his  own  observa- 
tion.   This  throws  us  of  course  back  to  the  Mosaic  age. 


ture,  and  astronomical  observations  were  connected 
with  curious  speculations  upon  primeval  traditions. 
We  read  (xx.  15,  xxiii.  10,  xxvii.  Ill,  17,  xxviii. 
1-21)  of  mining  operations,  great  buildings,  ruined 
sepulchres,  perhaps  even  of  sculptured  figures  of 
the  dead,q  and  there  are  throughout  copious  allu- 
sions to  the  natural  productions  and  the  arts  of 
Egypt.  Great  revolutions  had  occurred  within 
the  time  of  the  writer ;  nations  once  independent 
had  been  overthrown,  and  whole  races  reduced 
to  a  state  of  misery  and  degradation.  All  this 
might  be  expected,  even  supposing  the  work  to 
have  been  written  before  or  near  the  date  of  the 
Exodus.  The  communications  with  Egypt  were 
frequent,  and  indeed  uninterrupted  during  the  pa- 
triarchal age,  and  in  that  country  each  one  of  the 
customs  upon  which  most  reliance  is  placed  as  in- 
dicating a  later  date,  is  now  proved  to  have  been 
common  long  before  the  age  of  Moses  (see  Lepsius, 
Scblottmann,  p.  107).  Moreover,  there  is  sufficient 
reason  to  believe  that  under  favourable  circum- 
stances a  descendant  of  Abraham,  who  was  himself 
a  warrior,  and  accustomed  to  meet  princes  on  terms 
of  equality,  would  at  a  very  early  -age  acquire  the 
habits,  position,  and  knowledge,  which  we  admire 
in  Job.  He  was  the  head  of  a  great  family,  suc- 
cessful in  war,  prosperous  in  peace,  supplied  abund- 
antly with  the  necessaries  of  life,  and  enjoying 
many  of  its  luxuries  ;  he  lived  near  the  great  cities 
on  the  Euphrates r  and  Tigris,  and  on  the  route  of 
the  caravans  which  at  the  remotest  periods  ex- 
changed the  productions  of  Egypt  and  the  far  East, 
and  had  therefore  abundant  opportunities  of  pro- 
curing information  from  those  merchants,  supposing 
that  he  did  not  himself  visit  a  country  so  full  of 
interest  to  a  thoughtful  mind. 

Such  a  progress  in  civilization  may  or  may  not 
be  admitted  by  historical  critics  to  be  probable 
within  the  limits  of  time  thus  indicated,  but  no 
positive  historical  fact  or  allusion  can  be  produced 
from  the  book  to  prove  that  it  could  not  have  been 
written  before  the  time  of  Moses.  The  single  ob- 
jection (Re'nan,  p.  40)  which  presents  any  difficulty 
is  the  mention  of  the  Chaldeans  in  the  introductory 
chapter.  It  is  certain  that  they  appear  first  in 
Hebrew  history  about  the  year  B.C.  770.  But  the 
name  of  Chesed,  the  ancestor  of  ths  race,  is  found  in 
the  genealogical  table  in  Genesis  (xxii.  22),  a  fact 
quite  sufficient  to  prove  the  early  existence  of  the 
people  as  a  separate  tribe.  It  is  highly  probable 
that  an  ancient  race  bearing  that  name  in  Curdistan 
(see  Xenoph.,  Cyr.  iii.  1,  §34;  Anab.  iv.  3,  §4,  v. 
5,  §17)  was  the  original  source  of  the  nation,  who 
were  there  trained  in  predatory  habits,  aud  accus- 
tomed, long  before  their  appearance  in  history,  to 
make  excursions  into  the  neighbouring  deserts  ;s  a 


p  Known  in  Egypt  at  an  early  period  (I Hod.  Sic. 
i.  p.  75). 

i  Ch.  xxi.  32.    The  interpretation  is  very  doubtful. 

r  The  remarkable  treatise  by  Chwolsohn,  Ueberdie 
T'herrrste  ilir  linbylonisrlirn  l.ilcratitr  in  Arabischen 
Uebersetzungen,  proves  an  advance  in  mental  cultiva- 
tion in  those  regions  at  a  far  earlier  age,  more 
than  sufficient  to  answer  every  objection  of  this 
nature. 

•  This  is  now  generally  admitted.  See  M.  l'x'nan, 
Histoire  ffSnSrale  des  Langves  Simitiques,  ed.  1858, 
p.  5G.  He  says  truly  that  they  were  "  redoutes  dans 
tout  l'Orient  pour  leurs  brigandages"  (p.  <;.">  .  Bee 
also  Chwolsohn,  die  8sabier,  vol.  i.  p.  312.  Ur  of  the 
Chaldeans  was  undoubtedly  so  named  because  it  w  as 
founded  or  occupied  by  that  people. 

4   B 


1098 


JOB 


view  quite  in  harmony  with  the  part  assigned  to 
them  in  this  book. 

The  arguments  which  have  induced  the  gene- 
rality of  modern  critics  to  assign  a  later  date  to  this 
book,  notwithstanding  their  concurrence  in  most  of 
the  points  and  principles  which  we  have  just  con- 
sidered, may  be  reduced  to  two  heads,  which  we 
will  now  examine  separately : — 

1.  We   are   told   that   the   doctrinal   system    is 
considerably  in  advance  of  the  Mosaic ;  in  fact  that 
it  is  the  result  of  a  recoil  from  the  stern,  narrow 
dogmatism  of  the  Pentateuch.     Here  of  course  there 
can   be   no   common    ground   between    those    who 
admit,  and  those  who  secretly  or  openly  deny  the 
authenticity  and  inspiration  of  the  Mosaic  writings. 
Still  even  rationalistic  criticism  cannot  show,  what 
it  so  confidently  assumes,  that  there  is  a  demon- 
strable difference  in  any  essential  point  between  the 
principles  recognised  in  Genesis  and  those  of  our 
author.     The  absence  of  all  recognition  of  the  pecu- 
liar views  and  institutions  first  introduced  or  de- 
veloped in  the  law  has  been  already  shown  to  be  an 
evidence    of   an   earlier    date— all    that    is    really 
proved  is  that  the  elementary  truths  of  primeval 
revelation  are  represented,  and  their  consequences 
developed   under   a   great  variety  of  striking  and 
original  forms — a  fact  sufficiently  accounted  for  by 
the  highly  thoughtful  character  of  the  book,  and 
the  undoubted  genius  of  the  writer  (comp.  Job  x. 
9  ;  Gen.  iii.  19  ;  Isa.  xxvii.  3  ;  Gen.  ii.  7,  vii.  22  ; 
Job  xxii.  15,  16,  with  the  account  of  the  deluge). 
In   Genesis  and  in  this  work  we  have  the  same 
theology;  the  attributes  of  the  Godhead  are  identical. 
Man  is  represented  in  all  his  strength  and  in  all  his 
weakness,    glorious   in    capacities,  but  infirm  and 
impure  in  his  actual   condition,  with  a  soul  and 
spirit  allied  to  the  eternal,  but  witli  a   physical 
constitution  framed  from  the  dust  to  which  it  must 
return.     The  writer  of  Job  knows  just  so  much  of 
the  fall  of  Adam  and  the  early  events  of  man's  his- 
tory, including  the  deluge  (xxii.   15,  16),  as  was 
likely  to  be  preserved  by  tradition  in  all  the  fami- 
lies descended  from  Shem.     And  with  reference  to 
those   points  in   which    a  real  progress  was  made 
by   the    Israelites   after   the   time   of   Moses,   the 
position  from  which  this  writer  starts  is  precisely 
that  of  the  lawgiver.     One  great  problem  of  the 
book   is    the  reconciliation  of  unmerited  suffering 
with  the  love  and  justice  of  God.     In  the  prophets 
and  psalms  the  subject  is  repeatedly  discussed,  and 
receives,  if  not  a  complete,  yet  a  substantially  satis- 
factory   settlement    in    connexion   with    the   great 
doctrines  of  Messiah's  kingdom,  priesthood,  suffer- 
ings, and  second  advent,  involving  the  resurrection 
and  a  future  judgment.     In  the  book  of  Job,  as  it 
has  been  shown,   there  is  no  indication   that  the 
question  had  previously  been  raised.     The  answers 
given  to  it  are  evidently  elicited  by  the  discussions. 
Even    in   the   discourse   of   Elihu,    in    which   the 
nearest  approach  to  the  full    development  of  the 
true   theory    of   providential   dispensations    is   ad- 
mitted  to   be  found,  and  which  indeed  for  that 
very  reason   has   been  suspected  of  interpolation, 
there  is  no  sign  that  the  writer  knew  those  cha- 
racteristics   of  Messiah  which    from    the   time  of 


JOB 

David  were  continually  present  to  the  mind  of  the 
Israelites. 

Again  it  is  said  that  the  representation  of  angels, 
and  still  more  specially  of  Satan,  belongs  to  a  later 
epoch.  Some  have  even  asserted  that  the  notion 
must  have  been  derived  from  Persian  or  Assyrian 
mythology.  That  hypothesis  is  now  generally  re- 
jected— on  the  one  hand  it  would  fix  a  far  later 
date'  for  the  composition  than  any  critic  of  the 
least  authority  would  now  assign  to  the  book  ;  on 
the  other  it  is  proved  u  that  Satan  bears  no  resem- 
blance to  Ahriman ;  he  acts  only  by  permission 
from  God,  and  differs  from  the  angels  not  in  essence 
but  in  character.  It  is  true  that  Satan  is  not 
named  in  the  Pentateuch,  but  there  is  an  exact 
correspondence  between  the  characteristics  of  the 
malignant  and  envious  accuser  in  this  book  and 
those  of  the  enemy  of  man  and  God,  which  are 
developed  in  the  history  of  the  Fall."  The  appella- 
tion of  "  sons  of  God  "  is  peculiar  to  this  book  and 
that  of  Genesis. 

It  is  also  to  be  remarked  that  no  charge  of  idolatry 
is  brought  against  Job  by  his  opponents  when 
enumerating  all  the  crimes  which  they  can  imagine 
to  account  for  his  calamities.  The  only  allusion  to 
the  subject  (xxxi.  26)  refers  to  the  earliest  form  of 
false  religion  known  in  the  East.7  To  an  Israelite, 
living  after  the  introduction  of  heathen  rites,  such 
a  charge  was  the  very  first  which  would  have  sug- 
gested itself,  nor  can  any  one  satisfactory  reason  be 
assigned  for  the  omission. 

2.  Nearly  all  modern  critics,  even  those  who 
admit  the  inspiration  of  the  author,  agree  in  the 
opinion  that  the  composition  of  the  whole  work,  the 
highly  systematic  development  of  the  plot,  and  the 
philosophic  tone  of  thought  indicate  a  considerable 
progress  in  mental  cultivation  far  beyond  what  can, 
with  any  show  of  probability,  be  supposed  to  have 
existed  before  the  age  of  Solomon.  We  are  told 
indeed  that  such  topics  as  are  here  introduced  occu- 
pied men's  minds  for  the  first  time  when  schools  of 
philosophy  were  formed  under  the  influence  of  that 
prince.  Such  assertions  are  easily  made,  and  rest- 
ing on  no  tangible  grounds,  they  are  not  easily  dis- 
proved. It  should,  however,  be  remarked  that  the 
persons  introduced  in  this  book  belong  to  a  country 
celebrated  for  wisdom  in  the  earliest  times;  inso- 
much that  the  writer  who  speaks  of  ^hose  schools 
considers  that  the  peculiarities  of  the  Salomonian 
writings  were  derived  from  intercourse  with  its 
inhabitants  (Penan,  p.  xxiii.-xxv.).  The  book  of 
Job  differs  from  those  writings  chiefly  in  its  greater 
earnestness,  vehemence  of  feeling,  vivacity  of 
imagination,  and  free  independent  inquiry  into  the 
principles  of  divine  government,  characteristics  as  it 
would  seem  of  a  primitive  race,  acquainted  only 
with  the  patriarchal  form  of  religion,  rather  than  of 
a  scholastic  age.  There  is  indeed  nothing  in  the. 
composition  incompatible  with  the  Mosaic  age, 
admitting  (what  all  rationalistic  critics  who  assign 
a  later  date  to  this  book  deny)  the  authenticity  and 
integrity  of  the  Pentateuch. 

We  should  attach  more  weight  to  the  argument 
derived  from  the  admirable  arrangement  of  the 
entire  book  (Schlottmann,  p.  108),  did  we  not  re- 


1  To  the  epoch  of  the  Achaemenidae. 

u  See  Renan,  p.  xxxix.  This  was  previously  pointed 
out  by  Herder. 

*  Dr.  Lee  (Introduction  to  Job,  p.  13)  observes  that 
although  Satan  is  not  named  in  Genesis,  yet  that  the 
character  which  that  name  implies  is  clearly  intimated 
in  the  words,  "  I  will  put  enmity  (H^N)  between 


thee  and  him."  The  connexion  between  this  word 
and  the  name  of  Job  is  perhaps  more  than  an  acci- 
dental coincidence. 

y  The  worship  of  the  moon  was  introduced  into 
Mesopotamia,  probably  in  the  earliest  age,  by  the 
Aryans.     See  Chwolsohn,  Die  Ssabier,  i.  p.  313. 


JOB 

member  how  completely  the  same  course  of  reason- 
ing misled  the  acutest  critics  in  the  case  of  the 
Homeric  poems.  There  is  a  kind  of  artifice  in 
style  and  arrangement  of  a  subject  which  is  at 
once  recognised  as  an  infallible  indication  of  a  highly 
cultivated  or  declining  literature.  This,  however, 
differs  essentially  from  the  harmonious  and  majestic 
.simplicity  of  form,  and  the  natural  development  of 
a  great  thought  which  characterise  the  first  grand 
productions  of  genius  in  every  nation,  and  produce 
so  powerful  an  impression  of  reality  as  well  as  of 
grandeur  in  every  unprejudiced  reader  of  the  book 
of  Job. 

These  considerations  lead  of  course  to  the  con- 
clusion that  the  book  must  have  been  written  before 
the  promulgation  of  the  Law,  by  one  speaking  the 
Hebrew  language,  and  thoroughly  conversant  with 
the  traditions  preserved  in  the  family  of  Abraham. 
Whether  the  writer  had  access  to  original  docu- 
ments z  or  not  is  mere  matter  of  conjecture ;  but  it 
can  scarcely  be  doubted  that  he  adhered  very  closely 
to  the  accounts,  whether  oral  or  written,  which  he 
received. 

It  would  be  a  waste  of  time  to  consider  the 
arguments  of  those  who  hold  that  the  writer  lived 
near  the  time  of  the  captivity — that  view  is  now 
all  but  universally  repudiated :  but  oik;  hypothesis 
which  has  been  lately  brought  forward  (by  Stickel, 
who  is  followed  by  Schlottmann),  and  supported 
by  very  ingenious  arguments,  deserves  a  more  spe- 
cial notice.  It  meets  some  of  the  objections  which 
have  been  here  adduced  to  the  prevalent  opinion  of 
modern  critics,  who  maintain  that  the  writer  must 
have  lived  at  a  period  when  the  Hebrew  language 
and  literature  had  attained  their  full  develop- 
ment ;  while  it  accounts  in  a  satisfactory  manner 
for  some  of  the  most  striking  peculiarities  of  the 
book.  That  supposition  is,  that  Job  may  have 
been  written  after  the  settlement  of  the  Israelites 
by  a  dweller  in  the  south  of  Judaea,  in  a  district 
immediately  bordering  upon  the  Idumean  desert. 
The  inhabitants  of  that  district  were  to  a  consider- 
able extent  isolated  from  the  rest  of  the  nation : 
their  attendance  at  the  festivals  and  ordinances  of 
the  tabernacle  and  of  the  temple  before  the  time 
of  thi'  later  kings,  was  probably  rare  ami  irregular, 
if  it  were  nut  altogether  interrupted  during  a  long 
period.  In  that  case  it  would  be  natural  that  the 
author,  while  recognising  and  enforcing  the  funda- 
mental principles  of  religion,  should  be  sparing  in 
allusions  to  the  sanctions  or  observances  of  the  law. 
A  resident  in  that  district  would  have  peculiar 
opportunities  of  collecting  the  varied  and  extensive 
information  which  was  possessed  by  the  author  of 
Job.  It  was  not  tar  from  the  country  of  Elipttaz  ; 
and  it  is  probable  that  the  intercourse  with  all  the 
races  to  which  the  persons  named  in  the  book  be- 
longed was  frequent  during  the  early  years  of 
Israelitish  history.  The  caravans  of  Tenia  and 
Sheba  (Job  vi.  l'.li  crossed  there  in  a  route  much 
frequented  by  merchants,  and  the  communications 
with  Egypt  were  of  course  regular  and  uninter- 
rupted. A  man  of  wealth,  station,  and  cultivated 
mind,  such  -a,  we  cannot  doubt  the  author  must 
have  been,  would  either  learn  from  conversation 
with  merchants  the  peculiarities  to  which  he  so 
frequently  alludes,  or,  as  is  highly  probable,  he 
would  avail  himself  of  the  opportunity  thus  afforded 


JOB 


1099 


*  The  most  sceptical  critics  admit  that  the  Israel- 
ites had  written  documents  in  the  age  of  Moses.  See 
E.  Kenan,  Histoire  <lcs  Languea  Scmitit/ucs,  p.  11G. 


of  visiting  that  country,  of  all  the  most  interesting 
to  an  ancient.  The  local  colouring,  so  strikingly 
characteristic  of  this  book,  and  so  evidently  natural, 
is  just  what  might  be  expected  from  such  a  writer: 
the  families  in  southern  Palestine,  even  at  a  later 
age,  lived  very  much  after  the  manner  of  the  patri- 
archs; and  illustrations  derived  from  the  free,  wild, 
vigorous  life  of  the  desert,  and  the  customs  of  pas- 
toral tribes,  would  spontaneously  suggest  themselves 
to  his  mind.  The  people  appear  also  to  have  been 
noted  for  freshness  and  originality  of  mind — qua- 
lities seen  in  the  woman  of  Tekoah,  or  still  more 
remarkably  in  Amos,  the  poor  and  unlearned  herd- 
man,  also  of  Tekoah.  It  has  also  been  remarked 
that  Amos  seems  to  have  known  and  imitated  the 
book  of  Job  (comp.  Am.  iv.  13,  v.  8,  ix.  G,  with 
Job  ix.  8,  9,  xxxviii.  31,  xii.  15;  Schlottmann, 
p.  109):  a  circumstance  scarcely  to  be  explained, 
considering  the  position  and  imperfect  education  of 
that  prophet,  excepting  on  the  supposition  that  for 
some  reason  or  other  this  book  was  peculiarly  popu- 
lar in  that  district.  Some  weight  may  also  he  at- 
tached to  the  observation  (Stickel,  p.  276  ;  Schlott- 
mann, p.  Ill)  that  the  dialectic  peculiarities  of 
Southern  Palestine,  especially  the  softening  of  the 
aspirates  and  exchanges  of  the  sibilants,  resemble 
the  few  divergences  a  from  pure  Hebrew  which  are 
noted  in  the  book  of  Job. 

The  controversy  about  the  authorship  cannot 
ever  be  finally  settled.  From  the  introduction  it 
may  certainly  be  inferred  that  the  writer  lived 
many  years  after  the  death  of  Job.  From  the 
strongest  internal  evidence  it  is  also  clear  that  he 
must  either  have  composed  the  work  before  the  law 
was  promulgated,  or  under  most  peculiar  circum- 
stances which  exempted  him  from  its  influence. 
The  former  of  these  two  suppositions  has  nothing 
against  it  excepting  the  arguments,  which  have  been 
shown  to  be  far  from  conclusive,  derived  from  lan- 
guage, composition,  and  indications  of  a  high  state 
of  mental  cultivation  and  general  civilization.  It 
has  every  other  argument  in  its  favour,  while  it  is 
free  from  the  great,  and  surely  insuperable,  diffi- 
culty that  a  devout  Israelite,  deeply  interested  in 
all  religious  speculations,  should  ignore  the  doc- 
trines and  institutions  which  were  the  peculiar 
glory  of  his  nation:  a  supposition  which,  in  addi- 
tion to  its  intrinsic  improbability,  is  scarcely  con- 
sistent with  any  sound  view  of  the  inspiration  of 
holy  writ. 

A  complete  list  and  fair  estimate  of  all  the  pre- 
ceding commentators  on  Job  is  given  by  Roseu- 
rauller  (Elenckus  fust.  Jobi,  18'24).  The  l.-i 
Rabbinical  commentators  are — Jai'chi,  in  the  12th 
century;  Aben  Ezra,  a  good  Arabic  as  well  as  He- 
brew scholar,  f  A.n.  1168;  Levi  Ben  Gershom, 
commonly  known  as  Ralbag,  f  1370;  and  Nach- 
manides  in  the  13th  century.  Saadia,  the  well- 
known  translator  of  the  Pentateuch,  has  written  a 
paraphrase  of  Job,  and  Tanchum  a  good  commen- 
tary, both  in  Arabic  (Ewald,  Vbrrede,  p.  xi.).  The 
early  Fathers  contributed  little  to  the  explanation 
of  the  text  ;  but  some  good  remarks  on  the    i 

it  are  found  in  Chrysostom,  l>itlvinus  Alex- 
andrians, and  other  Greek  Fathers  quoted  in  the 
Catenae  of  Nicetas,  edited  by  Junius,  London,  fob, 
L637 — a  work  chiefly  valuable  with  reference  to 
the     Alexandrian     version.        Ephrem     Svrus     has 


a  E.g.  nsn?3  for  nynv,  vi.  b  ;  b-idb  for  :pL"ft 

vi.    10;   DL'*la  for  DOU,    v.    11  ;   prTJ'>   for  DnV 


4   P, 


1100 


JOBAB 


scholia,  chiefly  doctrinal  and  practical,  vol.  ii., 
Eomae,  1740.  The  translation  in  the  Latin  Vul- 
gate by  Jerome  is  of  great  value;  but  the  com- 
mentary ascribed  to  him  consists  merely  of  excerpts 
from  the  work  of  Philip,  one  of  Jerome's  disciples 
(see  Tillemont,  Mem.  Ecc.  xii.  661) :  it  is  of  little 
or  no  use  for  the  interpretation.  The  great  work 
of  Gregory  M.  is  practical,  spiritual,  or  mystical, 
but  has  little  connexion  with  the  literal  meaning, 
which  the  author  does  not  profess  to  explain. 
Among  the  long  list  of  able  and  learned  Romanists 
who  have  left  commentaries  on  the  book,  few  had 
any  knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  language  :  from  Caie- 
tan,  Zuniga,  little  can  be  learned  ;  but  A.  Schultens 
speaks  very  highly  of  Pineda,  whose  commentary 
lias  passed  through  many  editions.  Rosenmiiller 
says  the  German  translation  of  Job  by  T.  A.  De- 
reser  is  one  of  the  best  in  that  language.  The  early 
Protestants,  Bucer,  Oecolampadius,  and  Calvin,  con- 
tributed somewhat  to  the  better  understanding  of 
the  text ;  but  by  far  the  best  commentary  of  that 
age  is  that  prepared  by  C.  Bertram,  a  disciple  of 
Mercer,  after  the  death  of  his  master,  from  his  MS. 
notes.  This  work  is  well  worth  consulting.  Mercer 
was  a  sound  Hebrew  scholar  of  Reuchlin's  school, 
and  a  man  of  acute  discernment  and  excellent  judg- 
ment. The  great  work  of  Albert  Schultens  on  Job 
(A.D.  1737)  far  surpasses  all  preceding  and  con- 
temporary expositions,  nor  has  the  writer  as  yet 
been  surpassed  in  knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  and 
cognate  languages.  He  was  the  first  who  brought 
all  the  resources  of  Arabic  literature  to  bear  upon 
the  interpretation  of  Job.  The  fault  of  his  book  is 
diffuseness,  especially  in  the  statement  of  opinions 
long  since  rejected,  and  uninteresting  to  the  student. 
The  best  works  of  the  present  century  are  those  of 
Rosenmiiller,  3  vols.  1824;  and  H.  Ewald,  whose 
translation  and  commentary  are  remarkable  for  ac- 
curate learning  and  originality  of  genius,  but  also 
for  contempt  of  all  who  believe  in  the  inspiration  of 
Scripture.  The  Vorrede  is  most  painful  in  tone. 
The  commentaries  of  Umbreit,  Vaihinger,  Lange, 
Stickel,  Hahn,  Hirzel,  De  Wette,  Knobel,  and  Vatke 
are  generally  characterised  by  diligence  and  in- 
genuity ;  but  have  for  the  most  part  a  strong 
rationalistic  tendency,  especially  the  three  last. 
The  most  useful  analysis  is  to  be  found  in  the  in- 
troduction to  K.  Schlottmann's  translation,  Berlin, 
1851 ;  but  his  commentary  is  deficient  in  philological 
research.  M.  Renan  has  lately  given  an  excellent 
translation  in  French  (  Lc  Livre  de  Job,  Paris,  1859), 
with  an  introduction,  which,  notwithstanding  its 
thoroughly  sceptical  character,  shows  a  genial  ap- 
preciation of  some  characteristic  excellences  of  this 
book.  In  England  we  have  a  great  number  of  trans- 
lations, commentaries,  &c,  of  various  merit :  among 
which  the  highest  rank  must  be  assigned  to  the 
work  of  Dr.  Lee,  especially  valuable  for  its  copious 
illustrations  from  Oriental  sources.  [F.  C.  C] 

JO'BAB.  1.  (3n'T» :  To>/3«0 :  Jobab.)  The  last 
in  order  of  the  sons  of  Joktan  (Gen.  x.  29  ;  1  Chr. 
i.  23).  His  name  has  not  been  discovered  among 
the  Arab  names  of  places  in  Southern  Arabia,  where 
he  ought  to  be  found  with  the  other  sons  of  Joktan. 
But  Ptolemy  mentions  the  'Icc^apirai  near  the 
Sachalitae;  and  Bochart  {Phaleg,  ii.  21),  followed 
by  Salmasius  and  Gesenius,  suggests  the  reading 
MwjSajSiTOj,  by  the  common  interchange  of  p  and 
)8.  The  identification  is  perhaps  correct,  but  it  has 
not  been  connected  with  an  Arab  name  of  a  tribe 
or  place  ;  and  Bochart's  conjecture  of  its  being  i.  q. 


JOEL 

Arab.  (^Laj'  "  a  desert,"  &c,  from  <_(0,  though 
regarded  as  probable  by  Gesenius  and  Michaelis, 
seems  to  be  unworthy  of  acceptance.  Kalisch  {Com. 
on  Gen.)  says  that  it  is,  "  according  to  the  etymo- 
logy, a  district  in  Arabia  Deserta,"  in  apparent 
ignorance  of  the  famous  desert  near  Hadramawt, 
called  the  Ahksif,  of  proverbial  terror ;  and  the 
more  extensive  waste  on  the  north-east  of  the  former, 
called  the  "  deserted  quarter,"  Er-Ruba  el-Khalee, 
which  is  impassable  in  the  summer,  and  fitter  to  be 
called  desert  Arabia  than  the  country  named  deserta 
by  the  Greeks. 

2.  One  of  the  "kings"  of  Edom  (Gen.  xxxvi. 
33,  34;  1  Chr.  i.  44,  45),  enumerated  after  the 
genealogy  of  Esau,  and  Seir,  and  before  the  phyl- 
archs  descended  from  Esau.  [Edom.]  He  was 
"  son  of  Zerah  of  Bozrah,"  and  successor  of  Bela, 
the  first  king  on  the  list.  It  is  this  Jobab  whom 
the  LXX.,  quoting  the  Syriac,  identify  with  Job, 
his  father  being  Zerah  son  of  Esau,  and  his  mother, 
BoaSppa.  [E.  S.  P.] 

3.  King  of  Madon  ;  one  of  the  northern  chief- 
tains who  attempted  to  oppose  Joshua's  conquest, 
and  were  routed  by  him  at  Meron  (Josh.  xi.  1,  only). 

4.  'Ia>Aa/3,  Alex. ;  'loofidfi),  head  of  a  Benjamite 
house  (1  Chr.  viii.  10).     [Jeitz.]        [A.  C.  H.] 

JOCH'EBED  (*U3'V ;  'Io>xa/3e8 ;  Jochabed), 
the  wife  and  at  the  same  time  the  aunt  of  Amram, 
and  the  mother  of  Moses  and  Aaron  (Ex.  vi.  20). 
In  order  to  avoid  the  apparent  illegality  of  the 
marriage  between  Amram  and  his  aunt,  the  LXX. 
and  Vulg.  render  the  word  dddah  "  cousin"  instead 
of  "  aunt."  But  this  is  unnecessary :  the  example 
of  Abraham  himself  (Gen.  xx.  12)  proves  that  in 
the  pre-Mosaic  age  a  greater  latitude  was  permitted 
in  regard  to  marriage  than  in  a  later  age.  More- 
over it  is  expressly  stated  elsewhere  (Ex.  ii.  1  ; 
Num.  xxvi.  59)  that  Jochebed  was  the  daughter 
of  Levi,  and  consequently  sister  of  Kohath,  Am- 
ram's  father.  [W.  L.  B.] 

JO'DA  ('Ia)5a)  =  Judah  the  Levite,  in  a  passage 
which  is  difficult  to  unravel  (1  Esd.  v.  58  ;  see 
Ezr.  iii.  9).  Some  words  are  probably  omitted. 
The  name  elsewhere  appears  in  the  A.  V.  in  the 
forms  Hodaviah  (Ezr.  ii.  40),  Hodevah  (Neh.  vii. 
43),  Hodijah  (Neh.  x.  10),  and  Sudias  (1  Esd. 
v.  26). 

JO'ED  (ly'T' :  'IcoaS :  Joed),  a  Benjamite,  the 
son  of  Pedaiah  (Neh.  xi.  7).  Two  of  Kennicott's 
MSS.  read  ")Tin\  i.  e.  Joezer,  and  two  "PN'P,  »'.  e. 
Joel,  confounding  Joed  with  Joel  the  son  of  Pedaiah, 
the  Manassite.     The  Syriac  must  have  had  JHIV 

JO'EL  {bi(V :  'IcotJA:  Joel  and  Johel).  1. 
Eldest  son  of  Samuel  the  prophet  (1  Sam.  viii.  2  ; 
1  Chr,  vi.  33,  xv.  17),  and  father  of  Heman  the 
singer.  He  and  his  brother  Abiah  were  made 
judges  in  Beersheba  when  their  father  was  old,  and 
no  longer  able  to  go  his  accustomed  circuit.  But 
they  disgraced  both  their  office  and  their  parentage 
by  the  corrupt  way  in  which  they  took  bribes  and 
perverted  judgment.  Their  grievous  misconduct 
gave  occasion  to  the  change  of  the  constitution  of 
Israel  to  a  monarchy.  It  is  in  the  case  of  Joel  that 
the  singular  corruption  of  the  text  of  1  Chr.  vi.  13 
(28,  A.  V.")  has  taken  place.  Joel's  name  has 
dropped  out;  and  Vashni,  which  means  "and  the 
second,"  and  is  descriptive  of  Abijah*  has  been  taken 
for  a  proper  name. 


JOEL 

2.  In  1  Chr.  vi.  36,  A.  V.,  Joel  seems  to  be 
merely  a  corruption  of  Shaul  at  ver.  '24.    [A.  C.  H.J 

3.  due  of  the  twelve  minor  prophets ;  the  son 
of  Pethuel,  or,  according  to  the  LXX.,  Bethuel. 
Beyond  this  fact  all  is  conjecture  as  to  the  persona] 
history  of  Joel.  Pseudo-Epiphanius  (ii.  245)  re- 
cords a  tradition  that  he  was  of  the  tribe  of  Reuben, 
born  and  buried  at  Bethhoron,  between  Jerusalem 
and  Caesarea.  It  is  most  likely  that  he  lived  in 
Judaea,  for  his  commission  was  to  Judah,as  that  of 
Hosea  had  been  to  the  ten  tribes  (St.  Jerome, 
Comment,  in  Joel).  He  exhorts  the  priests,  and 
makes  frequent  mention  of  Judah  and  Jerusalem. 
It  has  been  made  a  question  whether  he  were  a 
priest  himself  (Winer,  liealic.),  but  there  do  not 
seem  to  be  sufficient  grounds  for  determining  it  in 
the  affirmative,  though  some  recent  writers  (e.  g. 
Maurice,  Prophets  and  Kings,  ft.  179)  have  taken 
this  view.  Many  different  opinions  have  beeu 
expressed  about  the  date  of  Joel's  prophecy. 
Credner  has  placed  it  in  the  reign  of  Joash,  Ber- 
tholdt  of  Hezekiah,  Kimchi,  Jahn,  &c.  of  Manasseh, 
and  Calmet  of  Josiah.  The  LXX.  places  Joel  after 
Amos  and  Micah.  But  there  seems  no  adequate 
reason  tor  departing  from  the  Hebrew  order.  The 
majority  of  critics  and  commentators  (Abarbanel, 
Vitringa,  Heiigstenberg,  Winer,  &c.)  fix  upon  the 
reign  of  Uzziah,  thus  making  Joel  nearly  contem- 
porary with  Hosea  and  Amos.  The  principal 
reasons  for  this  conclusion,  besides  the  order  of  the 
books,  are  the  special  and  exclusive  mention  of  the 
Egyptians  and  Edomites  as  enemies  of  Judah,  no 
allusion  being  made  to  the  Assyrians  or  Baby- 
lonians, who  arose  at  a  later  period.  Nothing,  says 
Heiigstenberg,  has  yet  been  found  to  overthrow 
this  conclusion,  and  it  is  confirmed  on  other  grounds, 
especially 

The  nature,  style,  and  contents  of  the  prophecy. 
— We  find,  what  we  should  expect  on  the  supposi- 
tion of  Joel  being  the  first  prophet  to  Judah,  only  a 
grand  outline  of  the  whole  terrible  scene,  which 
was  to  be  depicted  more  and  more  in  detail  by  sub- 
sequent prophets  (Browne,  Urdo  Saecl.  p.  691). 
The  scope,  therefore,  is  not  airy  particular  invasion, 
but  the  whole  day  of  the  Lord.  "  This  book  of 
Joel  is  a  type  of  the  early  Jewish  prophetical  dis- 
course,  ami  may  explain  to  us  what  distant  events 
in  the  history  of  the  land  would  expand  it,  and 
bring  fresh  discoveries  within  the  sphere  of  the 
inspired  man's  vision"  (Maurice,  Prophets  and 
Kings,  p.  179). 

The  proximate  event  to  which  the  prophecy 
related  was  a  public  calamity,  then  impending  on 
Judaea,  of  a  twofold  character:  want  of  water,  and 
a  plague  of  locusts,  continuing  for  several  years. 
The  prophet  exhorts  the  people  to  turn  to  God 
with  penitence,  tasting,  and  prayer,  and  then  he 
Says)  the  plague  .-shall  cease,  ami  the  rain  descend 
in  its  season,  and  the  land  yield  her  accustomed 
fruit.  Nay,  the  time  will  be  a  most  joyful  one; 
for  Gad,  by  the  outpouring  of  His  Spirit,  will  im- 
part to  His  worshippers  increased  knowledge  of 
Himself,  and  alter  the  excision  of  the  enemies  of 
His  people,  will  extend  through  them  the  blessings 
of  true  religion  to  heathen  lands.  This  is  the 
simple  argument  of  the  book  ;  only  that  it  is  beau- 
tilieil  and  enriched  with  variety  of  ornament  and 
pictorial  description.  The  style  of  the  original  is 
perspicuous  (except  towards  the  end)  and  elegant, 
surpassing  that  of  all  other  prophets,  excepl  Isaiah 
and  Habakkuk,  in  sublimity. 

Browne  {Q-rdo  Saecl.  p.  692    regards  the  con- 


JOEL 


1101 


tents  of  the  prophecy  as  embracing  two  visions,  but 
it  is  better  to  consider  it  as  one  connected  represen- 
tation (Hengst.,  Winer).  For  its  interpretation  we 
must  observe  not  isolated  facts'  of  history,  but 
the  idea.  The  swarm  of  locusts  was  the  medium 
through  which  this  idea,  "  the  ruin  upon  the 
apostate  church,"  was  represented  to  the  inward 
contemplation  of  the  prophet.  But,  in  one  un- 
broken connexion,  the  idea  goes  on  to  penitence, 
return,  blessing,  outpouring  of  the  .Spirit,  judgments 
on  the  enemies  of  the  Church  (1  Pet.  iv.  17), 
final  establishment  of  God's  kingdom.  All  prior 
destructions,  judgments,  and  victories  are  like  the 
smaller  circles  ;  the  final  consummation  of  all 
things,  to  which  the  prophecy  reaches,  being  the  out- 
most one  of  all. 

The  locusts  of  ch.  ii.  were  regarded  by  many 
interpreters  of  the  last  century  (Lowth,  Shaw,  &c.) 
as  figurative,  and  introduced  by  way  of  comparison 
to  a  hostile  army  of  men  from  the  north  country. 
This  view  is  now  generally  abandoned.  Locusts 
are  spoken  of  in  Deut.  xxviii.  38  as  instruments  of 
Divine  vengeance ;  and  the  same  seems  implied  in 
Joel  ii.  11,  25.  Maurice  {Prophets  and  Kings, 
p.  180;  strongly  maintains  the  literal  interpretation. 
And  yet  the  plague  contained  a  parable  in  it,  which 
it  was  the  prophet's  mission  to  unfold.  The  four 
kinds  or  swarms  of  locusts  (i.  4)  have  been  sup- 
posed to  indicate  four  Assyrian  invasions  (Titcomb, 
Bible  Studies),  or  four  crises  to  the  chosen  people 
of  God,  the  Babylonian,  Syro-Macedonian,  Roman, 
and  Antichristian  (Browne).  In  accordance  with 
the  literal  (and  certainly  the  primary)  interpreta- 
tion of  the  prophecy,  we  should  render  rniffiiVriN 

as  in  our  A.  V.,  "  the  former  rain,"  with  Kosenm. 
and  the  lexicographers,  rather  than  "a  (or  the) 
teacher  of  righteousness  "  with  marg.  of  A.  V., 
Hengst.,  and  others.  The  allusion  to  the  Messiah, 
which  Hengst.  finds  in  this  word,  or  to  the  ideal 
teacher  (Deut.  xviii.  18),  of  whom  Messiah  was  the 
chief,  scarcely  accords  with  the  immediate  context. 

The  |3*VIN  of  ch.  iii.  1  in  the  Hebrew,  "after- 
wards "'  ch.  ii.  27  of  the  A.  V.,  raises  us  to  a  higher 
level  of  vision,  aud  brings  into  view  Messianic 
times  and  scenes.  Here,  says  Steudel,  we  have  a 
Messianic  prophecy  altogether.  If  this  prediction 
has  ever  yet  been  fulfilled,  we  must  certainly  refer 
the  event  to  Acts  ii.  The  best  commentators  are 
agreed  upon  this.  We  must  not,  however,  inter- 
pret it  thus  to  the  exclusion  of  all  reference  to  pre- 
paratory events  under  the  earlier  dispensation,  and 
still  less  to  the  exclusion  of  later  Messianic  times. 
Acts  ii.  virtually  contained  the  whole  subsequent 
development.  The  outpouring  of  the  Spirit  on  the 
day  of  Pentecost  was  the  airapyii,  while  the  full 
accomplishment  and  the  final  reality  are  vet  to  come. 
But  here  both  are  blended  in  one,  and  the  whole 
passage  has  therefore  a  double  aspect.  The  pas- 
sage is  well  quoted  by  St.  Peter  from  the  first 
prophet  to  the  Jewish  kingdom.  And  his  quoting 
it  siiows  that  the  Messianic  reference  was  the  pre- 
vailing one  in  his  day  ;  though  Acts  ii.  39  proves 
that  he  extended  his  reference  to  the  end  of  the 
di  pensation.  The  expression  "all  flesh"(ii.  17) 
is  explained  by  the  following  clauses,  bv  which  no 
principle  of  distribution  is  meant,  but  only  that  all 
classes,  without  respeel  of  persons,  will  be  the  sub- 
jects of  the  Spirit's  influences.  All  distinction  of 
races,  too,  will  be  d  i  '.  ii.  :'>_',  with  Rom. 

x.  12,  13). 

Lastly,    the   accompanying    portents    and 


1102 


JOEL 


ments  upon  the  enemies  of  God  find  their  various 
solutions,  according  to  the  interpreters,  in  the 
repeated  deportations  of  the  Jews  by  neighbouring 
merchants,  and  sale  to  the  Macedonians  (1  Mace.  iii. 
41,  and  Ezek.  xxvii.  13),  followed  by  the  sweeping 
away  of  the  neighbouring  nations  (Maurice)  ;  in  the 
events  accompanying  the  crucifixion,  in  the  fall  of 
Jerusalem,  in  the  breaking  up  of  all  human  polities. 
But  here  again  the  idea  includes  all  manifestations 
of  judgment,  ending  with  the  last.  The  whole  is 
shadowed  forth  in  dim  outline  ;  and  while  some' 
crises  are  past,  others  are  yet  to  come  (comp.  iii. 
13-21  with  St.  Matt,  xxiv.,  and  Rev.  xix.). 

Among  the  commentators  on  the  book  of  Joel, 
enumerated  by  Rosennriiller,  Scholia  in  Vet.  Test., 
part  7,  vol.  i.,  may  be  specially  mentioned  Leusden's 
Joel  Explicatas,  Ultraj.  1657;  Dr.  Edw.  Pocock"s 
Commentary  on  the  Prophecy  of  Joel,  Oxford, 
1691 ;  and  A  Paraphrase  and  critical  Comments  try 
on  the  Prophecy  of  Joel,  by  Samuel  Chandler, 
London,  1735.  See  also  Die  Propheten  des  alien 
Piuules  crhliirt,  von  Heinrich  Ewald,  Stuttgart, 
1840  ;  Praktischen  Commcntar  iiber  die  Kleincn 
Propheten,  von  Dr.  Umbreit,  Hamburgh,  1844 ; 
and  Book  of  the  Twelve  Minor  Prophets,  by  Dr. 
E.  Henderson,  London,  1845.  [H.  B.] 

4.  (hiiV:  'IanjA:  Joel.)  The  head  of  one  of  the 
families  of  the  Simeonites  (1  Chr.  iv.  35).  He 
formed  part  of  the  expedition  against  the  Hamites 
of  Gedor  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah. 

5.  A  descendant  of  Reuben.  Junius  and  Tre- 
mellius  make  him  the  son  of  Hanoch,  while  others 
trace  his  descent  through  Carmi  (1  Chr.  v.  4). 
The  Syriac  for  Joel  substitutes  Carmi,  but  there  is 
reason  to  believe  that  the  genealogy  is  that  of  the 
eldest  son.  Burrington  {Geneal.  i.  53)  maintains 
that  the  Joel  mentioned  in  v.  8  was  a  descendant, 
not  of  Hanoch,  but  of  one  of  his  brethren,  probably 
Carmi,  as  Junius  and  Tremellius  print  it  in  .their 
genealogical  table.  But  the  passage  on  which  he 
relies  for  support  (ver.  7),  as  concluding  the  gene- 
alogy of  Hanoch,  evidently  refers  to  Beerah,  the 
prince  of  the  Reubenites,  whom  the  Assyrian  king 
carried  captive.  There  is,  however,  sufficient  simi- 
larity between  Shemaiah  and  Shema,  who  are  both 
represented  as  sons  of  Joel,  to  render  it  probable 
that  the  latter  is  the  same  individual  in  both 
instances.  Bertheau  conjectures  that  he  was  con- 
temporary with  David,  which  would  be  approxi- 
mately true  if  the  genealogy  were  traced  in  each 
case  from  father  to  son. 

6.  Chief  of  the  Gadites,  who  dwelt  in  the  land 
ofBashan  (1  Chr.  v.  12). 

7.  {Johel.)  The  son  of  Izrahiah,  of  the  tribe  of 
Issachar,  and  a  chief  of  one  of  "  the  troops  of  the 
host  of  the  battle"  who  numbeted  in  the  days  of 
David  36,000  men  (1  Chr.  viL  3).  Four  of  Kenni- 
cott's  MSS.  omit  the  words  "  and  the  sons  of 
Izrahiah;"  so  that  Joel  appears  as  one  of  the  five 
sons  of  Uzzi.  The  Syriac  retains  the  present  text, 
with  the  exception  of  reading  "  four  "  for  "  five." 

8.  The  brother  of  Nathan  of  Zobah  (1  Chr.  xi. 
38),  and  one  of  David's  guard.  He  is  called  Igal 
in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  36  ;  but  Kennicott  contends  that  in 
this  case  the  latter  passage  is  corrupt,  though  in 
other  words  it  preserved  the  true  reading. 

9.  The  chief  of  the  Gershomites  in  the  reign  of 
David,  who  sanctified  themselves  to  bring  up  the 
ark  from  the  house  of  Obededom  (1  Chr.  xv. 
7,11). 

10.  A  Gershomite  Levite  in  the  reign  of  David, 


JOHA 

son  of  Jehiel,  a  descendant  of  Landau,  and  probably 
the  same  as  the  preceding  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  8;  xxvi. 
22).  He  was  one  of  the  officers  appointed  to  take 
charge  of  the  treasures  of  the  Temple. 

11.  The  sou  of  Pedaiah,  and  prince  or  chief  of 
the  half-tribe  of  Manasseh,  west  of  Jordan,  in  the 
reign  of  David  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  20). 

12.  A  Eohathite  Levite  in  the  reign  of  Heze- 
kiah. He  was  the  son  of  Azariah,  and  one  of  the 
two  representatives  of  his  branch  of  the  tribe  in 
the  solemn  purification  by  which  the  Levites  pre- 
pared themselves  for  the  restoration  of  the  Temple 
(2  Chr.  xxix.  12). 

13.  One  of  the  sons  of  Nebo,  who  returned  with 
Ezra,  and  had  married  a  foreign  wife  (Ezr.  x.  43). 
He  is  called  Juel  in  1  Esd.  ix.  35. 

14.  The  son  of  Zichri,  a  Benjamite,  placed  in 
command  over  those  of  his  own  tribe  and  the  tribe 
of  Judah,  who  dwelt  at  Jerusalem  after  the  return 
from  Babylon  (Nell.  xi.  9).  [W.  A.  W.] 

JOE'LAH  (H^yV:  'Uxia;  Alex.  'iwnAd : 
Joela),  son  of  Jeroham  of  Gedor,  who  with  his 
brother  joined  the  band  of  warriors  who  rallied 
round  David  at  Ziklag  (1  Chr.  xii.  7). 

JOE'ZER  QTJ|V :  'la(apd  ;  Cod.  Fred.  Aug. 
Ta>£aap  ;  Joezer),  a  Korhite,  one  of  David's  captains 
who  fought  by  his  side  while  living  in  exile  among 
the  Philistines  (1  Chr.  xii.  6). 

JOG'BEHAH  (nn3^:  in  Num.  the  LXX. 

have  translated  it,  as  if  from  PQ3 — vtyuacv  auras  ; 

in  Judg.  'leyefiaA  ;  Alex.  e|  (vavrias  Ze/Se'e : 
Jegbaa),  one  of  the  cities  on  the  east  of  Jordan 
which  were  built  and  fortified  by  the  tribe  of  Gad 
when  they  took  possession  of  their  territory  (Num. 
xxxii.  35).  It  is  there  associated  with  Jaazer 
and  Beth-nimraii,  places  which  there  is  reason  to 
believe  were  not  far  from  the  Jordan,  and  south  of 
the  Jebel-Jilah.  It  is  mentioned  once  again,  this 
time  in  connexion  with  Nobah,  in  the  account  of 
Gideon's  pursuit  of  the  Midianites  (Judg.  viii.  11). 
They  were  at  Karkor,  and  he  made  his  way  from 
the  upper  part  of  the  Jordan  valley  at  Succoth  and 
Penuel,  and  "went  up" — ascended  from  the  Ghor 
by  one  of  the  torrent-beds  to  the  downs  of  the 
higher  level — by  the  way  of  the  dwellers  in  tents 
— the  pastoral  people,  who  avoided  the  district  of 
the  towns — to  the  east  of  Nobah  and  Jogbehah— 
making  his  way  towards  the  waste  country  in  the 
south-east.  Here,  according  to  the  scanty  informa- 
tion we  possess,  Karkor  would  seem  to  have  been 
situated.  No  trace  of  any  name  like  Jogbehah  has 
yet  been  met  with  in  the  above,  or  any  other 
direction.  [O.] 

JO'GLI  ('hi'1 :    'E7A.1;    Alex. 'E/cAi':    Jogli), 

the  father  of  Bukki,  a  chief  man  among  the  Dauites 
(Num.  xxxiv.  22). 

JO'HA.  1.  (KnV  :  'IcoSa  ;  Alex.  'Iwaxd  : 
Joha.~)  One  of  the  sons  of  Beriah,  the  Benjamite, 
who  was  a  chief  of  the  fathers  of  the  dwellers  in 
Aijalon,  and  had  put  to  flight  the  inhabitants  of 
Gath  (1  Chr.  viii.  16).  His  family  may  possibly 
have  founded  a  colony,  like  the  Danites,  within  the 
limits  of  another  tribe,  where  they  were  exposed, 
as  the  men  of  Ephraim  had  been,  to  the  attacks  of 
the  Gittites.  Such  border-warfare  was  too  common 
to  render  it  necessary  to  suppose  that  the  narratives 
in  1  Chr.  vii.  21  and  viii.  13  refer  to  the  same 


JOHANAN 

encounter,  although  it  is  not  a  little  singular  that 
the  name  Beriah  occurs  in  each. 

2.  ('Ico£ae;  Alex.  'Icoctfae'.)  The  Tizite,  one  of 
David's  guard.  Kennicott  decides  that  he  was  the 
son  of  Shiniri,  as  he  is  represented  in  the  A.  V., 
though  in  the  margin  the  translators  have  put 
"  Shimrite"  for  "  the  son  of  Shimri  "  to  the  name 
of  his  brother  Jedihel. 

JOHA'NAN  (JJn'r:  'looavdv),  a  shortened 
form  of  Jehohanaii  =  "  Jehovah's  gift."  It  is  the 
same  as  John.  [JEHOHANABT.]  1.  Son  of  Aza- 
riah  [AZABIAH,  2],  and  grandson  of  Ahimaaz  the 
son  of  Zadok,  and  father  of  Azariah,  3  (1  Chr.  vi. 
H,  K),  A.  V.).  In  Josephus  (Ant.  x.  8,  §6)  the 
name  is  corrupted  to  Joramus,  and  in  the  Seder 
<Jlu m  to  Joahaz.  The  latter  places  him  in  the  reign 
of  Jehoshaphat ;  but  merely  because  it  begins  by 
wrongly  placing  Zadok  in  the  reign  of  Solomon. 
Since  however  we  know  from  1  K.  iv.  2,  supported 
by  1  Chr.  vi.  10,  A.  V.,  that  Azariah  the  father  of 
Johanan  was  high-priest  in  Solomon's  reign,  and 
Amariah  his  grandson  was  so  in  Jehoshaphat's 
reign,  we  may  conclude  without  much  doubt  that 
Johanan's  pontificate  fell  in  the  reign  of  Kehoboam. 
(See  Hervey's  Genealogies,  $c,  ch.  x.) 

2.  Son  of  Elioenai,  the  son  of  Neariah,  the  son 
of  Shemaiah,  in  the  line  of  Zerub babel's  heirs 
[SHEMAIAJh],  (1  Chr.  iii.  24).  [A.  C.  H.J 

3.  ('Ia>vd  in  2  K.,  'Iwdvavm  Jer. ;  Alex,  "loodvav 
in  2  K.,  and  'Iwdvvav  in  Jer.,  except  xli.  11,  xlii.  8, 
xliii.  2,  4,  5 :  Johanan).  The  son  of  Kareah,  and 
one  of  the  captains  of  the  scattered  remnants  of  the 
army  of  Judah,  who  escaped  in  the  final  attack  upon 
Jerusalem  by  the  Chaldeans,  and,  after  the  capture 
of  the  king,  remained  in  the  open  country  of  Moab  and 
the  Ammonites,  watching  the  tide  of  events.  He  was 
one  of  the  first  to  repair  to  Mizpah,  after  the  with- 
drawal of  the  hostile  army,  and  tender  his  allegiance 
to  the  new  governor  appointed  by  the  king  of  Baby- 
lon. From  his  acquaintance  with  the  treacherous 
designs  of  Ishmael,  against  which  Gedaliah  was 
unhappily  warned  in  vain,  it  is  not  unreasonable  to 
suppose  that  he  may  have  been  a  companion  of 
Ishmael  in  his  exile  at  the  court  of  Baalis  king  of 
the  Ammonites,  the  promoter  of  the  plot  (Jer.  xl. 
8-1 G).  After  the  murder  of  Gedaliah,  Johanan  was 
one  of  the  foremost  in  the  pursuit  of  his  assassin, 
and  rescued  the  captives  he  had  carried  off  from 
Mizpah  (Jer.  xli.  11-16).  Fearing  the  vengeance 
of  the  Chaldeans  for  the  treachery  of  Ishmael,  the 
captains,  with  Johanan  at  their  head,  halted  by  the 
Khan  of  Chimham,  on  the  road  to  Egypt,  with 
the  intention  of  seeking  refuge  there ;  and,  notwith- 
standing the  warnings  of  Jeremiah,  settled  in  a 
body  at  Tahpanb.es.  They  were  afterwards  scat- 
tered throughout  the  country,  in  Migdol,  Noph, 
and  Pathros,  and  from  this  time  we  lose  sight  of 
Johanan  and  his  fellow-captains. 

4.  ('Iwavdv.)  The  firstborn  son  of  Josiah  king 
of  Judah  (1  Chr.  iii.  15),  who  either  died  before 
his  father,  or  fell  with  him  at.  Megiddo.  Junius, 
without  any  authority,  identifies  him  with  Zaraces, 
mentioned  1  Esd.  i.  38. 

5.  A  valiant  Benjamite,  one  of  David's  captains, 
who  joined  him  at  Ziklag  (1  Chr.  xii.  4). 

6.  (Alex.  'Icavdv;  Cod.  Fred.  Aug.  Icodv.)  The 
eighth  in  number  of  the  lion-faced  warriors  of  Gad, 
who  left  their  tribe  to  follow  the  fortunes  of  David, 
ami  spread  tin1  terror  of  their  arms  beyond  Jordan 
in  the  month  of  its  overflow  (1  Chr.  xii.  12). 

7.  (prfliT  :   'Icoamfc.)    The  father  of  Azariah, 


JOHN  THE  APOSTLE        1103 

an  Ephraimite  in  the  time  of  Ahaz  (2  Chr.  xxviii. 
12). 

8.  The  son  of  Hakkatan,  and  chief  of  the  Bene- 
Azgad  who  returned  with  Ezra  (Ezr.  viii.  12).  He 
is  called  Johannes  in  1  Esd.  viii.  38. 

9.  (pri'liT-)  The  son  of  Eliashib,  one  of  the  chief 
Levites  (Neh.'  xii.  23)  to  whose  chamber  (or  "  trea- 
sury," according  to  the  LXX.)  Ezra  retired  to 
mourn  over  the  foreign  marriages  which  the  people 
had  contracted  (Ezr.  x.  6).  He  is  called  Joanan 
in  1  Esd.  ix.  1  ;  and  some  have  supposed  him  to 
be  the  same  with  Jonathan,  descendant  of  another 
Eliashib,  who  was  afterwards  high-priest  (Neh. 
xii.  11). 

10.  (pnin* :  'lwvdv;  Alex.  'IcovdOav;  Cod.  Fred- 
Aug.  'lwavdv!)  The  sou  of  Tobiah  the  Ammonite, 
who  had  married  the  daughter  of  Meshullam  the 
priest  (Neh.  vi.  18).  [W.  A.  W.] 

JOHAN'NES  ('licdvvris  :  Joannes)  =  Jeho- 
hanan  son  of  Bebai  (1  Esd.  ix.  29;  comp.  Ezr. 
x.  28). 

JOHN  ('Icoctwrjs),  names  in  the  Apocrypha. 
1.  The  father  of  Mattathias,  and  grandfather  of 
the  Maccabaean  family  (1  Mace.  ii.  1). 

2.  The  (eldest)  son  of  Mattathias  ('Itaavvdv), 
surnamed  Caddis  (Ka55ts,  cf.  Grimm,  ad  1  Mace. 
ii.  2),  who  was  slain  by  "  the  children  of  Jambri" 
[Jambri]  (1  Mace.  ii.  2 ;  ix.  3G-38).  In  2  Mace, 
viii.  22  he  is  called  Joseph,  by  a  common  confusion 
of  name.     [Maccabees.] 

3.  The  father  of  Eupolemus,  one  of  the  envoys 
whom  Judas  Maccabaeus  sent  to  Rome  (1  Mace, 
viii.  17;   2  Mace.  iv.  11). 

4.  The  son  of  Simon,  the  brother  of  Judas  Mac- 
cabaeus (1  Mace.  xiii.  53,  xvi.  1),  "a  valiant  man," 
who,  under  the  title  of  Johannes  Hyrcanus,  nobly 
supported  in  after  time  the  glory  of  his  house. 
[Maccabees.] 

5.  An  envoy  from  the  Jews  to  Lysias  (2  Mace, 
xi.  17).  [B.  F.  W.] 

JOHN  ('lwavvvs ;  Cod.  Bezae,  'Iwvddas : 
Joannes).  1.  One  of  the  high-priest's  family,  who, 
with  Annas  and  Caiaphas,  sat  in  judgment  upon 
the  Apostles  Peter  and  John  for  their  cure  of  the 
lame  man  and  preaching  in  the  Temple  (Acts  iv.  6). 
Lightfoot  identifies  him  with  K.  Johanan  ben  Zac- 
cai,  who  lived  forty  years  before  the  destruction  of 
the  Temple,  and  was  president  of  the  great  Syna- 
gogue after  its  removal  to  Jabne,  or  Jamuia  (Light- 
toot,  Cent.  Chor.  Matth.  pracf.  ch.  15  ;  see  also 
Selden,  Dc  Synedriis,  ii.  ch.  15).  Grotius  merely 
says  he  was  known  to  Rabbinical  writers  as  "  John 
tin'  priest"  (Comm.  in  Act.  iv.). 

2.  The  Hebrew  name  of  the  Evangelist  Mark, 
who  throughout  the  narrative  of  the  Acts  is  de- 
signated by  the  name  by  which  he  was  known 
among  his  countrymen  (Acts  xii.  12,  25,  xiii.  5, 
13,  xv.  .'17  ). 

JOHN  THE  APOSTLE  ('Iwdwns).  It  will 
be  convenient  to  divide  the  life  which  is  the  subject 
of  the  present  article  into  periods  corresponding  both 
to  the  great  critical  epochs  which  separate  one  part 
of  it  from  another,  and  to  marked  differences  in  the 
trustworthiness  of  the  souices  from  which  our  ma- 
terials are  derived.  In  no  instance,  perhaps,  is  such 
a  division  more  necessary  than  in  this.  One  por- 
tion of  the  Apostle's  life  and  work  stands  out  before 
us  as  in   the   clearness  of  broad   daylight.     Over 


1104        JOHN  THE  APOSTLE 

those  which  precede  and  follow  it  there  brood  the 
shadows  of  darkness  and  uncertainty.  In  the  former 
we  discern  only  a  few  isolated  facts,  and  are  left  to 
inference  and  conjecture  to  bring  them  together  into 
something  like  a  whole.  In  the  latter  we  encounter, 
it  is  true,  images  more  distinct,  pictures  more  vivid  ; 
but  with  these  there  is  the  doubt  whether  the  dis- 
tinctness and  vividness  are  not  misleading— whe- 
ther half-traditional,  half-mythical  narrative  has 
not  taken  the  place  of  history. 

I.  Before  the  call  to  the  discipleship. — We  have 
no  data  for  settling  with  any  exactitude  the  time 
of  the  Apostle's  birth.  The  general  impression  left 
on  us  by  the  Gospel-narrative  is  that  he  was  younger 
than  the  brother  whose  name  commonly  precedes 
his  (Matt.  iv.  21,  x.  3,  xvii.  1,  &c. ;  but  comp. 
Luke  ix.  28,  where  the  order  is  inverted),  younger 
than  his  friend  Peter,  possibly  also  thau  his  Master. 
The  life  which  was  protracted  to  the  time  of  Trajan 
(Euseb.  H.E.  iii.  23,  following  Ireuaeus)  can  hardly 
have  begun  before  the  year  B.C.  4  of  the  Dionysian 
aera.  The  Gospels  give  us  the  name  of  his  father 
Zebedaeus  (Matt.  iv.  21)  and  his  mother  Salome 
(Matt,  xxvii.  56,  compared  with  Mark  xv.  40,  xvi. 
1).  Of  the  former  we  know  nothing  more.  The 
traditions  of  the  fourth  century  (Epiphan.  iii.  Haer. 
78)  make  the  latter  the  daughter  of  Joseph  by  his 
first  wife,  and  consequently  half-sister  to  our  Lord. 
By  some  recent  critics  she  has  been  identified  with 
the  sister  of  Mary  the  mother  of  Jesus,  in  John  xix. 
25  (Wieseler,  Stud,  in  Krit.  1840,  p.  648). a  They 
lived,  it  may  be  inferred  from  John  i.  44,  in  or 
near  the  same  town  [Bethsaida]  as  those  who 
were  afterwards  the  companions  and  partners  of 
their  children.  There  on  the  shores  of  the  Sea  of 
Galilee  the  Apostle  and  his  brother  grew  up.  The 
mention  of  the  "  hired  servants"  (Mark  i.  20),  of 
his  mother's  "  substance "  (&7rb  tSjv  virapxovToiv, 
Luke  viii.  3),  of"  his  own  house"  (to  fSta,  John 
xix.  27),  implies  a  position  removed  by  at  least 
some  steps  from  absolute  poverty.  The  fact  that 
the  Apostle  was  known  to  the  high-priest  Caiaphas, 
as  that  knowledge  was  hardly  likely  to  have  begun 
after  he  had  avowed  himself  the  disciple  of  Jesus 
of  Nazareth,  suggests  the  probability  of  some  early 
intimacy  between  the  two  men  or  their  families.1' 
The  name  which  the  parents  gave  to  their  younger 
child  was  too  common  to  serve  as  the  ground  of 
any  special  inference;  but  it  deserves  notice  (1) 
that  the  name  appears  among  the  kindred  of  Caia- 
phas (Acts  iv.  6)  ;  (2)  that  it  was  given  to  another 
priestly  child,  the  son  of  Zacharias  (Luke  i.  13),  as 
the  embodiment  and  symbol  of  Messianic  hopes. 
The  frequent  occurrence  of  the  name  at  this  period, 
unconnected  as  it  was  with  any  of  the  great  deeds 
of  the  old  heroic  days  of  Israel,  is  indeed  in  itself 
significant  as  a  sign  of  that  yearniug  and  expectation 
which  then  characterised,  not  only  the  more  faithful 
and  devout  (Luke  ii.  25,  38),  but  the  whole  people. 
The  prominence  given  to  it  by  the  wonders  con- 
nected with  the  birth  of  the  future  Baptist  may 
have  given  a  meaning  to  it  for  the  parents  of  the 
future  Evangelist  which  it  would  not  otherwise 
have  had.  Of  the  character  of  Zebedaeus  we  have 
hardly  the  slightest  trace.  He  interposes  no  refusal 
when  his  sons  are  called  on'to  leave  him  (Matt.  iv. 


a  Ewald  (Gesch.  Israels,  v.  p.  171)  adopts  Wieseler's 
conjecture,  and  connects  it  with  his  own  hypothesis 
that  the  sons  of  Zebedee,  and  our  Lord,  as  well  as  the 
Baptist,  were  of  the  tribe  of  Levi.  On  the  other  hand, 
more  sober  critics,  like  Neander  [PJlanz.  it.  Leit.  p. 


JOHN  THE  APOSTLE 

21).  After  this  he  disappears  from  the  scene  of  the 
Gospel-history,  and  we  are  led  to  infer  that  he  had 
died  before  his  wife  followed  her  children  in  their 
work  of  ministration.  Her  character  meets  us  as 
presenting  the  same  marked  features  as  those  which 
were  conspicuous  in  her  son.  From  her,  who  fol- 
lowed Jesus  and  ministered  to  Him  of  her  sub- 
stance (Luke  viii.  3),  who  sought  for  her  two  sous 
that  they  might  sit,  one  on  His  right  hand,  the 
other  on  His  left,  in  His  kingdom  (Matt.  xx.  20), 
he  might  well  derive  his  strong  affections,  his 
capacity  for  giving  and  receiving  love,  his  eager- 
ness for  the  speedy  manifestation  of  the  Messiah's 
kingdom.  The  early  years  of  the  Apostle  we  may 
believe  to  have  passed  under  this  influence.  He 
would  be  trained  in  all  that  constituted  the  ordi- 
nary education  of  Jewish  boyhood.  Though  not 
taught  in  the  schools  of  Jerusalem,  and  therefore, 
in  later  life,  liable  to  the  reproach  of  having  no 
recognised  position  as  a  teacher,  no  Rabbinical  edu- 
cation (Acts  iv.  13),  he  would  yet  be  taught  to 
lead  the  Law  and  observe  its  precepts,  to  feed  on 
the  writings  of  the  prophets  with  the  feeling  that 
their  accomplishment  was  not  far  off".  For  him 
too,  as  bound  by  the  Law,  there  would  be,  at  the 
age  of  thirteen,  the  periodical  pilgrimages  to  Jeru- 
salem. He  would  become  familiar  with  the  stately 
worship  of  the  Temple,  with  the  sacrifice,  the  in- 
cense, the  altar,  and  the  priestly  robes.  May  we 
not  conjecture  that  then  the  impressions  .were  first 
made  which  never  afterwards  wore  off?  Assuming 
that  there  is  some  harmony  between  the  previous 
training  of  a  prophet  and  the  form  of  the  visions 
presented  to  him,  may  we  not  recognise  them  in 
the  rich  liturgical  imagery  of  the  Apocalypse — in 
that  union  in  one  wonderful  vision  of  all  that  was 
most  wonderful  and  glorious  in  the  predictions  of 
the  older  prophets  ? 

Concurrently  with  this  there  would  be  also  the 
boy's  outward  life  as  sharing  in  his  father's  work. 
The  great  political  changes  which  agitated  the 
whole  of  Palestine  would  in  some  degree  make 
themselves  felt  even  in  the  village-town  in  which 
he  grew  up.  The  Galilean  fisherman  must  have 
heard,  possibly  with  some  sympathy,  of  the  efforts 
made  (when  he  was  too  young  to  join  in  them)  by 
Judas  of  Gamala,  as  the  great  asserter  of  the  free- 
dom of  Israel  against  their  Roman  rulers.  Like 
other  Jews  he  would  grow  up  with  strong  and 
bitter  feelings  against  the  neighbouring  Samaritans. 
Lastly,  before  we  pass  into  a  period  of  greater 
certainty,  we  must  not  forget  to  take  into  account 
that  to  this  period  of  his  life  belongs  the  com- 
mencement of  that  intimate  fellowship  with  Simon 
Bar-jonah  of  which  we  afterwards  find  so  many 
proofs.  That  friendship  may  even  then  have  been, 
in  countless  ways,  fruitful  for  good  upon  the  hearts 
of  both. 

II.  From  the  call  to  the  discipleship  to  the  de- 
parture from  Jerusalem. — The  ordinary  life  of  the 
fisherman  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee  was  at  last  broken 
in  upon  by  the  news  that  a  Prophet  had  once  more 
appeared.  The  voice  of  John  the  Baptist  was 
heard  in  the  wilderness  of  Judaea,  and  the  publicans, 
peasants,  soldiers,  and  fishermen  of  Galilee  gathered 
round  him.     Among  these  were  the  two  sons  of 


609,  4th  ed.),   and  Liicke  (Johannes,  i.  p.  9),  reject 
both  the  tradition  and  the  conjecture. 

b  Ewald  (I.  c.)  presses  this  also  into  the  service  of 
his  strange  hypothesis. 


JOHN  THE  APOSTLE 

Zebedaeus  and  their  friends.  With  them  perhaps 
was  One  whom  as  yet  they  knew  not.  They  heard, 
it  may  be,  of  his  protests  against  the  vices  of  their 
own  ruler — against  the  hypocrisy  of  Pharisees  and 
Scribes.  But  they  heard  also,  it  is  clear,  words 
which  spoke  to  tbem  of  their  own  sins — of  their 
own  need  of  a  deliverer.  The  words  "  Behold  the 
Lamb  of  God  that  taketh  away  the  sins"  imply 
that  those  who  heard  them  would  enter  into  the 
blessedness  of  which  they  spoke.  Assuming  that 
the  unnamed  disciple  of  John  i.  37-40  was  the 
evangelist  himself,  we  are  led  to  think  of  that 
meeting,  of  the  lengthened  interview  that  followed 
it  as  the  starting-point  of  the  entire  devotion  of 
heart  and  soul  which  lasted  through  his  whole  life. 
Then  Jesus  loved  him  as  he  loved  all  earnest  seekers 
after  righteousness  and  truth  (comp.  Mark  x.  ill). 
The  words  of  that  evening,  though  unrecorded, 
were  mighty  in  their  effect.  The  disciples  (John 
apparently  among  them)  followed  their  new  teacher 
to  Galilee  (John  i.  44),  were  with  him,  as  such,  at 
the  marriage-feast  of  Cana  (ii.  2),  journeyed  with 
him  to  Capernaum,  and  thence  to  Jerusalem  (ii. 
12,  22),  came  back  through  Samaria  (iv.  3),  and 
then,  for  some  uncertain  interval  of  time,  returned 
to  their  former  occupations.  The  uncertainty  which 
hangs  over  the  narratives  of  Matt.  iv.  18,  and  Luke 
v.  1-11  (comp.  the  arguments  for  and  against  their 
relating  to  the  same  events  in  Lampe,  Comment,  ad 
Joann.  i.  p.  20),  leaves  us  in  doubt  whether  they 
received  a  special  call  to  become  "  fishers  of  men  " 
once  only  or  twice.  In  either  case  they  gave  up 
the  employment  of  their  life  and  went  to  do  a  work 
like  it,  and  yet  unlike,  in  God's  spiritual  kingdom. 
From  this  time  they  take  their  place  among  the 
company  of  disciples.  Only  here  and  there  are 
there  traces  of  individual  character,  of  special  turn- 
ing-points in  their  lives.  Soon  they  rind  themselves 
in  the  number  of  the  Twelve  who  are  chosen,  not 
as  disciples  only,  but  as  their  Lord's  delegates — 
representatives — Apostles.  In  all  the  lists  of  the 
Twelve  those  four  names  of  the  sons  of  Jonah  and 
Zebedaeus  stand  foremost.  They  come  within  the 
innermost  circle  of  their  Lord's  friends,  and  are  as 
the  £K.Ksktu>v  €K\(KTOTepoi.  The  three,  Peter, 
James,  and  John,  are  with  him  when  none  else  are, 
in  the  chamber  of  death  (Mark  v.  37),  in  the  glory 
of  the  transfiguration  (Matt.  xvii.  1),  when  he 
forewarns  them  of  the  destruction  of  the  Holy  City 
(Mark  xiii.  3,  Andrew,  in  this  instance,  with  them), 
m  the  agony  of  Gethsemane.  St.  Peter  is  through- 
out the  leader  of  that  band  ;  to  John  belongs  the 
yet  more  memorable  distinction  of  being  the  dis- 
ciple whom  Jesus  loved.  This  love  is  returned 
with  a  more  single  undivided  heart  by  him  than 
by  any  other.  If  Peter  is  the  (piAoxptaTos,  John 
is  the  <pt\iT)(rovs  (Grotius,  Prolegom.  in  Joann.  \. 
Some  striking  facts  indicate  why  this  was  so;  what 
the  character  was  which  was  thus  worthy  of  the 
love  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth.  They  hardly  sustain 
the  popular  notion,  fostered  by  the  received  types  of 
Christian  ait,  of  a  nature  gentle,  yielding,  feminine. 
The  name  Boanerges  (Mark  iii.  17)  implies  a  vehe- 
mence, zeal,  intensity,  winch  gave  to  those  who  had 
it  the  might  of  Sons  of  Thunder.0  That  spirit  broke 
out,  once  and  again,  when  they  joined  their  mother  ill 

*c  The  consensus  of  patristic  interpretation  sees  in 
this  name  the  prophecy  of  their  work  as  preacher*  of 
the  Gospel.  This,  however,  would  deprive  the  epithet 
df  all  distinguishing  force1.  (Comp.  Suicer,  Thesaurus, 

-.  v.  Ppovrri ;  and  Lampe,  i.  p.  27.) 


JOHN  THE  APOSTLE        1105 

asking  for  the  highest  places  in  the  kingdom  of  their 
Master,  and  declared  that  they  were  ready  to  face 
the  dark  terrors  of  the  cup  that  he  drank  and  the 
baptism  that  he  was  baptised  with  (Matt.  xx.  20- 
24;  Mark  x.  35-41) — when  they  rebuked  one  who 
cast  out  devils  in  their  Lord's  name  because  he  was 
not  one  of  their  company  (Luke  ix.  49) — when 
they  sought  to  call  down  fire  from  heaven  upon  a 
village  of  the  Samaritans  (Luke  ix.  54).  About 
this  time  Salome,  as  if  her  husband  had  died,  takes 
her  place  among  the  women  who  followed  Jesus  in 
Galilee  (Luke  viii.  3),  ministering  to  him  of  their 
substance,  and  went  up  with  him  in  his  last  journey 
to  Jerusalem  (Luke  xxiii.  55).  Through  her,  we  may 
well  believe,  St.  John  first  came  to  know  that  Mary 
Magdalene  whose  character  he  depicts  with  such  a 
life-like  touch,  and  that  other  Mary  to  whom  he 
was  afterwards  to  stand  in  so  close  and  special  a 
relation.  The  fulness  of  his  narrative  of  what  the 
other  evangelists  omit  (John  xi.)  leads  to  the  con- 
clusion that  he  was  united  also  by  some  special 
ties  of  intimacy  to  the  family  of  Bethany.  It  is 
not  necessary  to  dwell  at  length  on  the  familiar 
history  of  the  Last  Supper.  What  is  characteristic 
is  that  he  is  there,  as  ever,  the  disciple  whom  Jesus 
loved ;  and,  as  the  chosen  and  favoured  friend,  re- 
clines at  table  with  his  head  upon  his  Master's 
breast  (John  xiii.  23).  To  him  the  eager  Peter 
— they  had  been  sent  together  to  prepare  the  supper 
(Luke  xxii.  8) — makes  signs  of  impatient  question- 
ing that  he  should  ask  what  was  not  likely  to  be 
answered  if  it  came  from  any  other  (John  xiii.  24). 
As  they  go  out  to  the  Mount  of  Olives  the  chosen 
three  are  nearest  to  their  Master.  They  only  are 
within  sight  or  hearing  of  the  conflict  in  Gethse- 
mane (Matt.  xxvi.  37).  When  the  betrayal  is  ac- 
complished, Peter  and  John,  after  the  first  moment 
of  confusion,  follow  afar  off,  while  the  others  simply 
seek  safety  in  a  hasty  flight d  (John  xviii.  15). 
The  personal  acquaintance  which  existed  between 
John  and  Caiaphas  enabled  him  to  gain  access  both 
for  himself  and  Peter,  but  the  latter  remains  ill  the 
porch,  with  the  officers  and  servants,  while  John 
himself  apparently  is  admitted  to  the  council- 
chamber,  and  follows  Jesus  thence,  even  to  the 
praetorium  of  the  Roman  Procurator  (John  xviii. 
16,  19,  28),  Thence,  as  if  the  desire  to  see  the 
end,  and  the  love  which  was  stronger  than  death, 
sustained  him  through  all  the  terrors  and  sorrows 
of  that  day,  he  followed — accompanied  probably  by 
his  own  mother,  Mary  the  mother  of  Jesus,  and  Maiy 
Magdalene — to  the  place  of  crucifixion.  The  teacher 
who  had  been  to  him  as  a  brother  leaves  to  him  a 
brother's  duty.  He  is  to  be  as  a  son  to  the  mother 
who  is  left  desolate  (John  xix.  26-27).  The  Sab- 
bath that  followed  was  spent,  it  would  appear,  in 
the  same  company.  He  receives  Peter,  in  spite  of 
his  denial,  on  the  old  terms  of  friendship.  It  is  to 
them  that  Mary  Magdalene  first  runs  with  the 
tidings  of  the  emptied  sepulchre  (John  xx.  2 ) ;  they 
are  the  first  to  go  together  to  see  what  the  strange 
winds  meant.  Not  without  some  bearing  on  their 
respective  characters  is  the  fact  that  John  is  the 
more  impetuous,  running  on  most  eagerly  to  the 
rock-tomb;  Peter,  the  least  restrained  by  awe,  the 
first  to  enter  in  mid  look  (John  xx.  4-G).     For  at 


d  A  somewhat  wild  conjecture  is  found  in  writers 
of  the  Western  Church.  Ambrose,  Gregory  the  Great, 
and  Bede,  identify  the  Apostle  witli  the  vtaviaKos  tis 
of  Mark  siv.  51,  52  (Lampe,  i.  p.  38). 


1106        JOHN  THE  APOSTLE 

least  eight  days  they  continued  in  Jerusalem  (John 
xx.  26).  Then,  in  the  interval  between  the  resur- 
rection and  the  ascension,  we  find  them  still  toge- 
ther on  the  sea  of  Galilee  (John  xxi.  1),  as  though 
they  would  calm  the  eager  suspense  of  that  period 
of  expectation  by  a  return  to  their  old  calling  and 
their  old  familiar  haunts.  Here  too  there  is  a  cha- 
racteristic difference.  John  is  the  first  to  recognise 
in  the  dim  form  seen  in  the  morning  twilight  the 
presence  of  his  risen  Lord ;  Peter  the  first  to  plunge 
into  the  water  and  swim  towards  the  shore  where 
he  stood  calling  to  them  (John  xxi.  7).  The  last 
words  of  the  Gospel  reveal  to  us  the  deep  affection 
which  united  the  two  friends.  It  is  not  enough 
for  Peter  to  know  his  own  future.  That  at  once 
suggests  the  question — "  And  what  shall  this  man 
do?"  (John  xxi.  21).  The  history  of  the  Acts 
shows  the  same  union.  They  are  of  course  together 
at  the  ascension  and  on  the  day  of  Pentecost.  To- 
gether they  enter  the  Temple  as  worshippers  (Acts 
iii.  1)  and  protest  against  the  threats  of  the  San- 
hedrim (iv.  13).  They  are  fellow-workers  in  the 
first  great  step  of  the  Church's  expansion.  The 
apostle  whose  wrath  had  been  roused  by  the  un- 
belief of  the  Samaritans  overcomes  his  national  ex- 
clusiveness,  and  receives  them  as  his  brethren 
(viii.  14).  The  persecution  which  was  pushed  on 
by  Saul  of  Tarsus  did  not  drive  him  or  any  of  the 
apostles  from  their  post  (viii.  1).  When  the  per- 
secutor came  back  as  the  convert,  he,  it  is  true,  did 
not  see  him  (Gal.  i.  19),  but  this  of  course  does 
not  involve  the  inference  that  he  had  left  Jerusalem. 
The  sharper  though  shorter  persecution  which  fol- 
lowed under  Herod  Agrippa  brought  a  great  sorrow 
to  him  in  the  martyrdom  of  his  brother  (Acts  xii. 
2).  His  friend  was  driven  to  seek  safety  in  flight. 
Fifteen  years  after  St.  Paul's  first  visit  he  was  still 
at  Jerusalem  and  helped  to  take  part  in  the  great 
settlement  of  the  controversy  between  the  Jewish 
and  the  Gentile  Christians  (Acts  xv.  6).  His  posi- 
tion and  reputation  there  were  those  of  one  ranking 
among  the  chief"  pillars"  of  the  Church  (Gal.  ii.  9). 
Of  the  work  of  the  Apostle  during  this  period  we 
have  hardly  the  slightest  trace.  There  may  have 
been  special  calls  to  mission-work  like  that  which 
drew  him  to  Samaria.  There  may  have  been  the 
work  of  teaching,  organising,  exhorting  the  Churches 
of  Judaea.  His  fulfilment  of  the  solemn  charge  en- 
trusted to  him  may  have  led  him  to  a  life  of  loving 
and  reverent  thought  rather  than  to  one  of  conspi- 
cuous activity.  We  may,  at  all  events,  feel  sure 
that  it  was  a  time  in  which  the  natural  elements 
of  his  character,  with  all  their  fiery  energy,  were 
being  purified  and  mellowed,  rising  step  by  step  to 
that  high  serenity  which  we  find  perfected  in  the 
closing  portion  of  his  life.  Here  too  we  may,  with- 
out much  hesitation,  accept  the  traditions  of  the 
Church  as  recording  a  historic  fact  when  they 
ascribe  to  him  a  life  of  celibacy  (Tertull.  de  Monoij. 
c.  xiii.).  The  absence  of  his  name  from  1  Cor.  ix.  5 
tends  to  the  same  conclusion.  It  harmonises  with 
all  we  know  of  his  character  to  think  of  his  heart 


c  The  hypothesis  of  Baronius  and  Tiflemont,  that 
the  Virgin  accompanied  him  to  Ephesus,  has  not  even 
the  authority  of  tradition  (Lampe,  i.  p.  51). 

f  Lampe  fixes  a.d.  GG,  when  Jerusalem  was  be- 
sieged by  the  Roman  forces  under  Cestius,  as  the 
most  probable  date. 

s  In  the  earlier  tradition  which  made  the  Apostles 
formally  partition  out  the  world  known  to  them, 
Parthia  falls  to  the  lot  of  Thomas,  while  John  receives 
the  Proconsular  Asia  (liuscb.  II.  E.  iii.  1).     In  one 


JOHN  THE  APOSTLE 

as  so  absorbed  in  the  higher  and  diviner  love  that 
there  was  no  room  left  for  the  lower  and  the 
human. 

Hi.  From  his  departure  from  Jerusalem  to  his 
death. — The  traditions  of  a  later  age  come  in,  with 
more  or  less  show  of  likelihood,  to  fill  up  the  great 
gap  which  separates  the  Apostle  of  Jerusalem  from 
the  Bishop  of  Ephesus.  It  was  a  natural  conjecture 
to  suppose  that'  he  remained  in  Judaea  till  the 
death  of  the  Virgin  released  him  from  his  trust.6 
When  this  took  place  we  can  only  conjecture. 
There  are  no  signs  of  his  being  at  Jerusalem  at  the 
time  of  St.  Paul's  last  visit  (Acts  xxi.).  The 
pastoral  epistles  set  aside  the  notion  that  he  had 
come  to  Ephesus  before  the  work  of  the  Apostle  of 
the  Gentiles  was  brought  to  its  conclusion.  Out 
of  many  contradictory  statements,  fixing  his  de- 
partuie  under  Claudius,  or  Nero,  or  as  late  even  as 

1  tomitian,  we  have  hardly  any  data  for  doing  more 
than  rejecting  the  two  extremes/  Nor  is  it  certain 
that  his  work  as  an  Apostle  was  transferred  at 
once  from  Jerusalem  to  Ephesus.  A  tradition  cur- 
rent in  the  time  of  Augustine  (Quaest.  Evamj.  ii. 
19),  and  embodied  in  some  MSS.  of  the  N.  T.,  re- 
presented the  1st  Epistle  of  St.  John  as  addressed 
to  the  Parthians,  and  so  far  implied  that  his 
Apostolic  work  had  brought  him  into  contact  with° 
them.  When  the  form  of  the  aged  disciple  meets  us 
again,  in  the  twilight  of  the  Apostolic  age,  we  are 
still  left  in  great  doubt  as  to  the  extent  of  his 
work  and  the  circumstances  of  his  outward  life. 
Assuming  the  authorship  of  the  Epistles  and  the 
Revelation  to  be  his,  the  facts  which  the  N.  T. 
writings  assert  or  imply  are — (1)  that,  having 
come  to  Ephesus,  some  persecution,  local  or  general, 
drove  him  to  Patmos  (Rev.  i.  9) :  h  (2)  that  the 
seven  churches,  of  which  Asia  was  the  centre,  were 
special  objects  of  his  solicitude  (Rev.  i.  11);  that 
in  his  work  he  had  to  encounter  men  who  denied 
the  truth  on  which  his  faith  rested  (1  John  iv.  1  ; 

2  John  7),  and  others  who,  with  a  railing  and 
malignant  temper,  disputed  his  authority  (3  John 
9,  10).  If  to  this  we  add  that  he  must  have  out- 
lived all,  or  nearly  all,  of  those  who  had  been  the 
friends  and  companions  even  of  his  maturer  years — 
that  this  lingering  age  gave  strength  to  an  old 
imagination  that  his  Lord  had  promised  him  im- 
mortality (John  xxi.  23) — that,  as  if  remembering 
the  actual  words  which  had  been  thus  perverted, 
the  longing  of  his  soul  gathered  itself  up  in  the 
cry,  "  Even  so,  come,  Lord  Jesus"  (Rev.  xxii.  2(j) 
— that  from  some  who  spoke  with  authority  he 
received  a  solemn  attestation  of  the  confidence  they 
reposed  in  him  (John  xxi.  24) — we  have  stated  all 
that  has  any  claim  to  the  character  of  historical 
truth.  The  picture  which  tradition  fills  up  for 
us  has  the  merit  of  being  full  and  vivid,  but  it 
blends  together,  without  much  regard  to  harmony, 
things  probable  and  improbable.  He  is  shipwrecked 
off  Ephesus  (Simeon  Metaph.  in  vita  Johan.  c.  2  ; 
Lampe,  i.  47),  and  arrives  there  in  time  to  check 
the  progress  of  the  heresies  which  sprang  up  after 


of  the  legends  connected  with  the  Apostles'  Creed, 
Peter  contributes  the  first  article,  John  the  second, 
but  the  tradition  appears  with  great  variations  as  to 
time  and  order  (comp.  Pseudo-August.  Serm.  ccxl. 
ccxli.). 

h  Here  again  the  hypotheses  of  commentators  range 
from  Claudius  to  Domitian,  the  consensus  of  patristic 
tradition  preponderating  in  favour  of  the  latter. 
[Comp.  Revelation.] 


JOHN  THE  APOSTLE 

St.  Paul's  departure.  Then,  or  at  a  later  period, 
he  numbers  among  his  disciples  men  like  Polycarp, 
Papias,  Ignatius  (Hieron.  de  Vir.  Blunt,  c.  xvii.). 
In  the  persecution  under  Domitian  he  is  taken  to 
Rome,  and  there,  by  his  boldness,  though  not  by 
death,  gains  the  crown  of  martyrdom.  The  boiling 
oil  into  which  he  is  thrown  has  no  power  to  hurt 
him  (Tertull.  de  Praesoript.  c.  xxxvi.).'  He  is 
then  sent  to  labour  in  the  mine-;,  and  l'atmos  is  the 
place  of  his  exile  (Victorinus,  in  Apoc.  ix. ;  Lampe, 
i.  66).  The  accession  of  Nerva  frees  him  from 
danger,  and  he  returns  to  Ephesus.  There  he 
settles  the  canon  of  the  Gospel-history  by  formally 
attesting  the  truth  of  the  first  three  Gospels,  and 
writing  his  own  to  supply  what  they  left  wanting 
(Euseb.  //.  E.  iii.  24).  The  elders  of  the  Church 
are  gathered  together,  and  he,  as  by  a  sudden  in- 
spiration, begins  with  the  wonderful  opening,  "  In 
the  beginning  was  the  word "  (Hieron.  de  Vir. 
Illust.  'JO).  Heresies  continue  to  show  themselves, 
but  he  meets  them  with  the  strongest  possible  pro- 
test. He  refuses  to  pass  under  the  same  roof  (that 
of  the  public  baths  of  Ephesus)  as  their  foremost 
leader,  lest  the  house  should  fall  down  on  them 
and  crush  them  (Iren.  iii.  3 ;  Euseb.  //.  E.  iii.  28, 
iv.  14). k  Through  his  agency  the  great  temple  of 
Artemis  is  at  last  reft  of  its  magnificence,  and 
even  (!)  levelled  with  the  ground  (Cyril.  Alex. 
Orat.  do  Mar.  Virg.  ;  Nicephor.  H.  E.  ii.  42  ; 
Lampe,  i.  90).  He  introduces  and  perpetuates  the 
Jewish  mode  of  celebrating  the  Easter  feast  (Euseb. 
H.  E.  iii.  3).  At  Ephesus,  if  not  before,  as  one 
who  was  a  true  priest  of  the  Lord,  bearing  on  his 
brow  the  plate  of  gold  (ireTaXov ;  comp.  Suicer. 
Thes.  s.  v.\  with  the  sacred  name  engraved  on  it, 
which  was  the  badge  of  the  Jewish  pontiff  (Poly- 
crates,  in  Euseb.  //.  E.  iii.  31,  v.  24). m  In  strange 
contrast  with  this  ideal  exaltation,  a  later  tradition 
tells  how  the  old  man  used  to  find  •  pleasure  in  the 
playfulness  and  fondness  of  a  favourite  bird,  and 
defended  himself  against  the  charge  of  unworthy  tri- 
fling by  the  familiar  apologue  of  the  bow  that  must 
sometimes  be  unbent  (Cassian.  Colled,  xxiv.  c.  2).n 
More  true  to  the  N.  T.  character  of  the  Apostle  is 
the  story,  told  with  so  much  power  and  beauty  by 
Clement  of  Alexandria  (_Quis  dives,  c.  42),  of  his 
special  and  loving  interest  in  the  younger  members 
of  his  flock  ;  of  his  eagerness  and  courage  in  the 
attempt  to  rescue  one  of  them  who  had  fallen  into 
evil  courses.  The  scene  of  the  old  and  loving  man, 
standing  face  to  face  with  the  outlaw-chief  whom, 


JOHN  THE  APOSTLE         1 107 

in  days  gone  by,  he  had  baptised,  and  winning  him 
to  repentance,  is  one  which  we  could  gladly  look 
on  as  belonging  to  his  actual  life — part  of  a  story 
which  is,  in  Clement's  words,  ov  jxvQos  a\\a 
\6yos.  Not  less  beautiful  is  that  other  scene 
which  comes  before  us  as  the  last  act  of  his  life. 
When  all  capacity  to  work  and  teach  is  gone — 
when  there  is  no  strength  even  to  stand — the  spirit 
still  retains  its  power  to  love,  and  the  lips  are  still 
opened  to  repeat,  without  change  and  variation, 
the  command  which  summed  up  all  his  Master's 
will,  "Little  children,  love  one  another"  (Hieron. 
in  Gal.  vi.).  Other  stories,  more  apocryphal  and 
less  interesting,  we  may  pass  over  rapidly.  That 
he  put  forth  his  power  to  raise  the  dead  to  life 
(Euseb.  //.  E.  v.  18);  that  he  drank  the  cup  of 
hemlock  which  was  intended  to  cause  his  death, 
and  suffered  no  harm  from  it°  (Pseudo- August, 
Soliloq. ;  Isidor.  Hispal.  de  Morte  Sanct.  c.  73) ; 
that  when  he  felt  his  death  approaching  he  gave 
orders  for  the  construction  of  his  own  sepulchre, 
and  when  it  was  finished  calmly  laid  himself  down 
in  it  and  died  (Augustin.  Tract,  in  Joann.  exxiv.); 
that  after  his  interment  there  were  strange  move- 
ments in  the  earth  that  covered  him  [ibid.);  that 
when  the  tomb  was  subsequently  opened  it  was 
found  empty  (Niceph.  H.  E.  ii.  42)  ;  that  he  was 
reserved  to  re-appear  again  in  conflict  with  the  per- 
sonal Antichrist  in  the  last  days  (Suicer.  Thes.  s.  v. 
'lwdvvt)s) :  these  traditions,  for  the  most  part,  in- 
dicate little  else  than  the  uncritical  spirit  of  the 
age  in  which  they  passed  current.  The  very  time 
of  his  death  lies  within  the  region  of  conjecture 
rather  than  of  history,  and  the  dates  that  have 
been  assigned  for  it  range  from  a.d.  89  to  A.d.  1 20 
(Lampe,  i.  92). 

The  result  of  all  this  accumulation  of  apocryphal 
materials  is,  from  one  point  of  view,  disappointing 
enough.  We  strain  our  sight  in  vain  to  distinguish 
between  the  false  and  the  true — between  the  sha- 
dows with  which  the  gloom  is  peopled,  and  the 
living  forms  of  which  we  are  in  search.  We  find 
it  better  and  more  satisfying  to  turn  again,  for  all 
our  conceptions  of  the  Apostle's  mind  and  character, 
to  the  scanty  records  of  the  N.  T.,  and  the  writings 
which  he  himself  has  left.  The  truest  thought 
that  we  can  attain  to  is  still  that  he  was  "  the 
disciple  whom  Jesus  loved" — 6  iirio-rriOios — re- 
turning that  love  with  a  deep,  absorbing,  unwaver- 
ing devotion.  One  aspect  of  that  feeling  is  seen  in 
the  zeal  for  his  Master's  glory,  the  burning  indig- 


1  The  scene  of  the  supposed  miracle  was  outside 
the  Porta  Latina,  and  hence  the  Western  Church  com- 
memorates it  by  the  special  festival  of  "  St.  John 
Pert.  Latin."  on  May  6th. 

k  Eusebius  and  Irenacus  make  Cerinthus  the  he- 
retic. In  Epiphanius  (litter,  xxx.  c.  24)  Ebion  is 
the  hero  of  the  story.  To  modern  feelings  the  anec- 
dote may  seem  at  variance  with  the  character  of  the 
Apostle  of  Love,  but  it  is  hardly  more  than  the  deve- 
lopment in  act  of  the  principle  of  2  John  10.  To  the 
mind  of  Epiphanius  there  was  a  difficulty  of  another 
kind.  Nothing  less  than  a  special  inspiration  could 
account  for  such  a  departure  from  an  ascetic  life  as 
going:  to  a  hath  at  all. 

m  The  story  of  the  iziraXov  is  perhaps  the  most 
perplexing;  of  all  the  traditions  as  to  the  age  of  the 
Apostles.  What  makes  it  still  stranger  is  the  ap- 
pearance of  a  like  tradition  (Hegesippus  in  Euseb. 
H.  E.  ii.  23  ;  Epiph.  Eaer.  78)  about  James  the  .lust. 
Measured  by  our  notions,  the  statement  seems  alto- 
gether improbable,  and  yet  how  tan  we  account  for 


its  appearance  at  so  early  a  date  ?  Is  it  possible  that 
this  was  the  symbol  that  the  old  exclusive  priest- 
hood had  passed  away?  Or  are  we  to  suppose  that 
a  strong  statement  as  to  the  new  priesthood  was 
misinterpreted,  and  that  rhetoric  passed  rapidly  into 
legend?  (Comp.  Neand.  l'Jianz.  u.  Led.  p.  613; 
Stanley,  Sermons  and  Essays  mi  Apostolic  Age,  p. 
283.)  Ewald  (I.  c.)  rinds  in  it  an  evidence  in  sup- 
port of  the  hypothesis  above  referred  to. 

n  The  authority  of  Cassian  is  but  slender  in  such  a 
ease  ;  but  the  story  is  hardly  to  be  rejected,  on  a  jirimi 
grounds,  as  incompatible  with  the  dignity  of  an  Apostle. 
Does  it  not  illustrate  the  truth — 

"  He  prayeth  best  who  loveth  best 

All  things  both  great  and  small  "  ? 

°  The  memory  of  this  deliverance  is  preserved  in 
the  symbolic  cup,  with  the  serpent  issuing  from  it, 
which  appears  in  the  mediaeval  representations  of 
the  Evangelist.  Is  it  possible  that  the  symbol  ori- 
ginated in  Mark  x.  3D,  and  th^t  the  legend  grew  out 
of  the  symbol  '. 


1108        JOHN  THE  BAPTIST 

nation  against  all  that  seemed  to  outrage  it,  which 
runs,  with  its  fiery  gleam,  through  his  whole  life, 
and  makes  him,  from  first  to  last,  one  of  the  Sous 
of  Thunder.  To  him,  more  than  to  any  other 
disciple,  there  is  no  neutrality  between  Christ  and 
Antichrist.  The  spirit  of  such  a  man  is  intolerant 
of  compromises  and  concessions.  The  same  strong 
personal  affection  shows  itself,  in  another  form,  in 
the  chief  characteristics  of  his  Gospel.  While  the 
other  Evangelists  record  principally  the  discourses 
and  parables  which  were  spoken  to  the  multitude, 
he  treasures  up  every  word  and  accent  of  dialogues 
and  conversations,  which  must  have  seemed  to  most 
men  less  conspicuous.  In  the  absence  of  any  re- 
corded narrative  of  his  work  as  a  preacher,  in  the 
silence  which  he  appears  to  have  kept  for  so  many 
years,  he  comes  before  us  as  one  who  lives  in  the 
unseen  eternal  world,  rather  than  in  that  of  secular, 
or  even  spiritual  activity.  If  there  is  less  apparent 
power  to  enter  into  the  minds  and  hearts  of  men 
of  different  temperament  and  education,  less  ability 
to  become  all  things  to  all  men  than  there  is  in 
St.  Paul,  there  is  a  perfection  of  another  kind. 
The  image  mirrored  in  his  soul  is  that  of  the  Son 
of  Man,  who  is  also  the  Son  of  God.  He  is  the 
Apostle  of  Love,  not  because  he  starts  from  the 
easy  temper  of  a  general  benevolence,  nor  again  as 
being  of  a  character  soft,  yielding,  feminine,  but 
because  he  has  grown,  ever  more  and  more,  into  the 
likeness  of  Him  whom  he  loved  so  truly.  Nowhere 
is  the  vision  of  the  Eternal  Word,  the  glory  as  of 
the  only-begotten  of  the  Father,  so  unclouded : 
nowhere  are  there  such  distinctive  personal  remi- 
niscences of  the  Christ,  Kara  crdpKa,  in  his  most 
distinctively  human  characteristics.  It  was  this 
union  of  the  two  aspects  of  the  Truth  which  made 
him  so  truly  the  "  Theologus"  of  the  whole  com- 
pany of  the  Apostles,  the  instinctive  opponent  of  all 
forms  of  a  mystical,  or  logical,  or  docetic  Gnosticism. 
It  was  a  true  feeling  which  led  the  later  interpreters 
of  the  mysterious  forms  of  the  four  living  creatures 
round  the  throne  (Rev.  iv.  7)— departing  in  this 
instance  from  the  earlier  tradition  P — to  see  in  him 
the  eagle  that  soars  into  the  highest  heaven  and 
looks  upon  the  unclouded  sun.  It  will  be  well  to 
end  with  the  noble  words  from  the  hymn  of  Adam 
of  St.  Victor,  in  which  that  feeling  is  embodied : — 

"  Coelum  transit,  veri  rotam 
Solis  vidit,  ibi  totam 

Mentis  fig-ens  aciem  ; 
Speculator  spiritalis 
.    Quasi  seraphim  sub  alis, 
Dei  vidit  faciein."q 

(Comp.  the  exhaustive  Prolegomena  to  Lampe's 
Commentary ;  Neauder,  Pflanz.  u.  Lett.  609-652; 
Stanley,  Sermons  and  Essays  on  the  Apostolic  Age, 
Sermon  iv.,  and  Essay  on  the  Traditions  respecting 
St.  John  ;  Maurice  On  the  Gospel  of  St.  John, 
Serm.  i.;  and  an  interesting  article  by  Ebrard, 
„  s.  v.  Johannes,  in  Herzog's  Heal-Encyclopddie.) 

[E.  H.  P.] 

JOHN  THE  BAPTIST  ('IcocWtjs  6  Bcnr- 
tktttJs),  a  saint  more  signally  honoured  of  God 
than  any  other  whose  name  is  recorded  in  either  the 
O.  or  the  N.  T.  John  was  of  the  priestly  race  by 
both  parents,  for  his  father  Zacharias  was  himself  a 


JOHN  THE  BAPTIST 

priest  of  the  course  of  Abia,  or  Abijah  (1  Chr.  xxiv. 
1U),  offering  incense  at  the  very  time  when  a  son 
was  promised  to  him  ;  and  Elizabeth  was  of  the 
daughters  of  Aaron  (Luke  i.  5).  Both,  too,  were 
devout  persons— walking  in  the  commandments  of 
God,  and  waiting  for  the  fulfilment  of  His  promise 
to  Israel.  The  divine  mission  of  John,  was  the  sub- 
ject of  prophecy  many  centuries  before  his  birth, 
for  St.  Matthew  (iii.  3)  tells  us  that  it  was  John 
who  was  prefigured  by  Isaiah  as  "  the  Voice  of  one 
crying  in  the  wilderness,  Prepare  ye  the  way  of  the 
Lord,  make  His  paths  straight"  (Is.xl.  3),  while  by 
the  prophet  Malachi  the  spirit  announces  more 
definitely,  "  Behold,  I  will  send  my  messenger,  and 
he  shall  prepare  the  way  before  Me "  (iii.  1). 
His  birth — a  birth  not  according  to  the  ordinary 
laws  of  nature,  but  through  the  miraculous  inter- 
position of  Almighty  power — was  foretold  by  an 
angel  sent  from  God,  who  announced  it  as  an  occa- 
sion of  joy  and  gladness  to  many — and  at  the  same 
time  assigned  to  him  the  name  of  John  to  signify 
either  that  he  was  to  be  born  of  God's  especial 
favour,  or,  perhaps,  that  he  was  to  be  the  har- 
binger of  grace.  The  angel  (Jabriel  moreover  pro- 
claimed the  character  and  office  of  this  wonderful 
child  even  before  his  conception,  foretelling  that  he 
would  be  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost  from  the  first . 
moment  of  his  existence,  and  appear  as  the  great 
reformer  of  his  countrymen — another  Elijah  in  the 
boldness  with  which  he  would  speak  truth  and 
rebuke  vice — but,  above  all,  as  the  chosen  forerunner 
and  herald  of  the  long-expected  Messiah. 

These  marvellous  revelations  as  to  the  character 
and  career  of  the  son,  for  whom  he  had  so  long 
prayed  in  vain,  were  too  much  for  the  faith  of  the 
aged  Zacharias ;  aud  when  he  sought  some  assur- 
ance of  the  certainty  of  the  promised  blessing,  God 
gave  it  to  him  in  a  judgment — the  privation  of 
speech — until  the  event  foretold  should  happen — a 
judgment  intended  to  serve  at  once  as  a  token  of 
God's  truth,  and  a  rebuke  of  his  owTn  incredulity. 
And  now  the  Lord's  gracious  promise  tarried  not — 
Elizabeth,  for  greater  privacy,  retired  into  the  hill- 
country,  whither  she  was  soon  afterwards  followed 
by  her  kinswoman  Mary,  who  was  herself  the 
object  and  channel  of  divine  grace  beyond  measure 
greater  and  more  mysterious.  The  two  cousins,  who 
were  thus  honoured  above  all  the -mothers  of  Israel, 
came  together  in  a  remote  city  of  the  south  (by 
some  supposed  to  be  Hebron,  by  others  Jutta),  and 
immediately  God's  purpose  was  confirmed  to  them 
by  a  miraculous  sign ;  for  as  soon  as  Elizabeth 
heard  the  salutations  of  Mary,  the  babe  leaped  in 
her  womb,  thus  acknowledging,  as  it  were  even 
before  birth,  the  presence  of  his  Lord  (Luke  i.  43, 
44).  Three  months  after  this,  and  while  Mary 
still  remained  with  her,  Elizabeth  was  delivered  of 
a  son.  The  birth  of  John  preceded  by  six  months  that 
of  our  blessed  Lord.  [Respecting  this  date,  see 
Jesus  Christ,  p.  1072.]  On  the  eighth  day  the 
child  of  promise  was,  in  conformity  with  the  law  of 
Moses  (Lev.  xii.  3),  brought  to  the  priest  for  circum- 
cision, and  as  the  performance  of  this  rite  was  the 
accustomed  time  for  naming  a  child,  the  friends  of 
the  family  proposed  to  call  him  Zacharias  after  the 
name  of  his  father.  The  mother,  however,  required 
that  he  should  be  called  John — a  decision  which 


P  The  older  interpretation  made  Mark  answer  to 
the  eagle,"  John  to  the  lion  (Suicer,  Thes.  s.  v. 
luayyeAicrnjs).  • 

i  Another  verse  of  this  hymn,    "  Vohit   avis   sine 


meta,"  et  seq.,  is  familiar  to  most  students  as  the 
motto  prefixed  by  Olshausen  to  his  commentary  on 
St.  John's  Gospel.  The  whole  hymn  is  to  be  found  in 
Trench's  Sacred  Latin  Poetry,  p.  71. 


JOHN  THE  BAPTIST 

Zachavias,  still  speechless,  confirmed  by  writing  on 
a  tablet,  "  his  name  is  John."  The  judgment  on 
his  want  of  faith  was  then  at  once  withdrawn,  and 
the  first  use  which  he  made  of  his  recovered  speech 
was  to  praise  Jehovah  for  his  faithfulness  and 
mercy  (Luke  i.  64-).  God's  wonderful  interposition 
in  the  birth  of  John  had  impressed  the  minds  of 
many  with  a  certain  solemn  awe  and  expectation 
(Luke  iii.  15).  God  was  surely  again  visiting  His 
people.  His  providence,  so  long  hidden,  seemed 
once  more  about  to  manifest  itself.  The  child 
thus  supernaturally  born  must  doubtless  be  com- 
missioned to  perform  some  important  part  in  the 
history  of  the  chosen  people.  Could  it  be  the 
Messiah  ?  Could  it  be  Elijah  ?  Was  the  era  of 
their  old  prophets  about  to  be  restored  ?  With 
such  grave  thoughts  were  the  minds  of  the  people 
occupied,  as  they  mused  on  the  events  which  had 
been  passing  under  their  eyes,  and  said  one  to 
another,  "  What  manner  of  child  shall  this  be?" 
while  Zacharias  himself,  "  filled  with  the  Holy 
Ghost,"  broke  forth  in  that  glorious  strain  of  praise 
and  prophecy  so  familiar  to  us  in  the  morning  ser- 
vice of  our  church — a  strain  in  which  it  is  to  be 
observed  that  the  father,  before  speaking  of  his 
own  child,  blesses  God  for  remembering  his  cove- 
nant and  promise,  in  the  redemption  and  salvation 
of  his  people  through  Him,  of  whom  his  own  son 
was  the  prophet  and  forerunner.  A  single  verse 
contains  all1  that  we  know  of  John's  history  for  a 
space  of  thirty  years — the  whole  period  which 
elapsed  between  his  birth  and  the  commencement  of 
his  public  ministry.  "  The  child  grew  and  waxed 
strong  in  the  spirit,  and  was  in  the  deserts  till  the 
day  of  his  showing  unto  Israel "  (Luke  i.  80). 
John,  it  will  be  remembered,  was  ordained  to  be  a 
Nazai ite  (see  Num.  vi.  1-21)  from  his  birth,  for 
the  words  of  the  angel  were,  "  He  shall  drink 
neither  wine  nor  strong  drink  "  (Luke  i.  15).  What 
we  are  to  understand  by  this  brief  announcement  is 
probably  this : — The  chosen  forerunner  of  the  Mes- 
siah and  herald  of  his  kingdom  was  required  to 
forego  the  ordinary  pleasures  and  indulgences' of 
the  world,  and  live  a  life  of  the  strictest  self-denial 
in  retirement  and  solitude. 

It  was  thus  that  the  holy  Nazarite,  dwelling  by 
himself  in  the  wild  and  thinly  peopled  region  westward 
of  the  Dead  Sea,  called  "  Desert"  in  the  text,  prepared 
himself  by  self-discipline,  and  by  constant  commu- 
nion with  God,  for  the  wonderful  otiice  to  which  he 
had  been  divinely  called.  Here  year  after  year  of  his 
stern  probation  passed  by,  till  at  length  the  time 
for  the  fulfilment  of  his  mission  arrived.  The 
very  appearance  of  the  holy  Baptist  was  of  itself  a 
lesson  to  his  countrymen  ;  his  dress  was  that  of  the 
old  prophets — a  garment  woven  of  camel's  hair 
(2  K.  i.  8),  attached  to  the  body  by  a  leathern 
girdle.  His  food  was  such  as  the  desert  afforded  — 
locusts  (Lev.  xi.  22)  and  wild  honey  (Ps.  lxxxi. 
1G). 

And  now  the  long  secluded  hermit  came  forth  to 
the  discharge  of  his  office.  His  supernatural  birth — 
his  hard  ascetic  lite — his  reputation  for  extraor- 
dinary sanctity  —  and  the  generally  prevailing 
expectation  that  some  great  one  was  about  fi>  ap- 
pear— these  causes,  without  the  aid  of  miraculous 
power,  for  "John  did  no  miracle"  (John  x.  41), 
were  sufficienl  to  attract  to  him  a  great  multitude 
from  "every  quarter"  (Matt.  iii.  5).  Brief  and 
startling  was  Ins  first  exhortation  to  them — "  Repent 
ye,  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand."  Some 
score  verses  contain  all  that  is  recorded  of  John's 


JOHN  THE  BAPTIST 


1109 


preaching,  and  the  sum  of  it  all  is  repentance  ;  not 
mere  legal  ablution  or  expiation,  but  a  change  of 
heart  and  life.  Herein  John,  though  exhibiting  a 
marked  contrast  to  the  scribes  and  pharisees  of  his 
own  time,  was  but  repeating  with  the  stimulus  of 
a  new  and  powerful  motive  the  lessons  which  had 
been  again  and  again  impressed  upon  them  by  their 
ancient  prophets  (cf.  Is.  i.  16,  17,  lv.  7  ;  Jer.  vii. 
3-7  ;  Ezek.  xviii.  19-32,  xxxvi.  25-27;  Joel  ii.  12, 
13;  Mic.  vi.  8;  Zech.  i.  3,  4).  But  while  such 
was  his  solemn  admonition  to  the  multitude  at 
large,  he  adopted  towards  the  leading  sects  of  the 
Jews  a  severer  tone,  denouncing  Pharisees  and 
Sadducees  alike  as  "a  generation  of  vipers,"  and 
warning  them  of  the'iolly  of  trusting  to  external 
privileges  as  descendants  of  Abraham  (Luke  iii.  8). 
Now  at  last  he  warns  them  that  "  the  axe  was  laid 
to  the  root  of  the  tree  " — that  formal  righteousness 
would  be  tolerated  no  longer,  and  that  none  would 
be  acknowledged  for  children  of  Abraham  but  such 
as  did  the  works  of  Abraham  (cf.  John  viii.  39). 
Such  alarming  declarations  produced  their  effect, 
and  many  of  every  class  pressed  forward  to  confess 
their  sins  and  to  be  baptised. 

.  What  then  was  the  baptism  which  John  ad- 
ministered ?  Not  altogether  a  new  rite,  for  it  was 
the  custom  of  the  Jews  to  baptise  proselytes  to  their 
religion — not  an  ordinance  in  itself  conveying  re- 
mission of  sins,  but  rather  a  token  and  symbol  of 
that  repentance  which  was  an  indispensable  condi- 
tion of  forgiveness  through  Him,  whom  John 
pointed  out  as  "  the  Lamb  of  God  that  taketh  awav 
the  sins  of  the  world."  Still  less  did  the  baptism 
of  John  impart  the  grace  of  regeneration —  of  a  new 
spiritual  life  (Acts  xix.  3,  4).  This  was  to  be 
the  mysterious  effect  of  baptism  "  with  the 
Holy  Ghost,"  which  was  to  be  ordained  by  that 
"  Mightier  One,"  whose  coming  he  proclaimed. 
The  preparatory  baptism  of  John  was  a  visible 
sign  to  the  people,  and  a  distinct  acknowledgment 
by  them,  that  a  hearty  renunciation  of  sin  and  a 
real  amendment  of  life  were  necessary  for  admission 
into  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  which  the  Baptist  pro- 
claimed to  be  at  hand.  But  the  fundamental  dis- 
tinction between  John's  baptism  unto  repentance, 
and  that  baptism  accompanied  with  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  which  our  Lord  afterwards  ordained,  is 
clearly  marked  by  John  himself  (Matt.  iii.  11,  12). 

As  a  preacher,  John  was  eminently  practical  and 
discriminating.  Self-love  and  covetousuess  were 
the  prevalent  sins  of  the  people  at  large:  on  them 
therefore  he  enjoined  charity,  and  consideration  for 
others.  The  publicans  he  cautioned  against  extor- 
tion, the  soldiers  against  violence  and  plunder. 
His  answers  to  them  are,  no  doubt,  to  be  regarded 
as  instances  ot  the  appropriate  warning  and  advice 
which  he  addressed  to  every  class. 

The  mission  of  the  Baptist — an  extraordinary  one 
for  an  extraordinary  purpose — was  not  limited  to 
those  who  had  openly  forsaken  the  covenant  of 
God,  and  so  forfeited  its  principles.  It  was  to  the 
whole  people  alike.  This  we  must  infer  horn  the 
baptism  of  one  who  had  no  confession  to  make,  and 
no  sins  to  wash  away.  Jesus  Himself  came  from 
Galilee  to  Jordan  to  be  baptised  of  John,  on  the 
special  ground  that  it  became  Him  "  to  fulfil  all 
righteousness."  and,  as  man,  to  submit  to  the  cus- 
toms and  in-. finances  which  were  binding  upon  the 
rest  of  the  Jewish  people.  John,  however,  naturally 
at  first  shrank  from  offering  the  symbols  of  purity 
to  the  sinless  Son  of  God,  But  here  a  difficult 
question  arises — How  is  John's  acknowledgment  of 


1110        JOHN  THE  BAPTIST 

Jesus  at  the  moment  of  His  presenting  Himself  for 
baptism  compatible  with  his  subsequent  assertion 
that  he  knew  Him  not,  save  by  the  descent  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  upon  Him,  which  took  place  after  His 
baptism  ?  If  it  be  difficult  to  imagine  that  the  two 
cousins  were  not  personally  acquainted  with  each 
other,  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  their  places  of 
residence  were  at  the  two  extremities  of  the  country, 
with  but  little  means  of  communication  between 
them.  Perhaps,  too,  John's  special  destination  and 
mode  of  life  may  have  kept  him  from  the  stated 
festivals  of  his  countrymen  at  Jerusalem.  It  is 
possible  therefore  that  the  Saviour  and  the  Baptist 
had  never  before  met.  It  was  certainly  of  the 
utmost  importance  that  there  should  be  no  suspicion 
of  concert  or  collusion  between  them.  John,  how- 
ever, must  assuredly  have  been  in  daily  expectation 
of  Christ's  manifestation  to  Israel,  and  so  a  word 
or  sign  would  have  sufficed  to  reveal  to  him  the 
person  and  presence  of  our  Lord,  though  we  may 
well  suppose  such  a  fact  to  be  made  known  by  a 
direct  communication  from  God,  as  in  the  case  of 
Simeon  (Luke  ii.  26;  cf.  Jackson  on  the  Creed, 
Works,  Ox.  Ed.  vi.  404).  At  all  events  it  is  wholly 
inconceivable  that  John  should  have  been  permitted 
to  baptise  the  Son  of  God  without  being  enabled*  to 
distinguish  Him  from  any  of  the  ordinary  multitude. 
Upon  the  whole,  the  true  meaning  of  the  words 
Kayo)  ovk  T^Siiv  avrov  would  seem  to  be  as 
follows : — And  I,  even  I,  though  standing  in  so 
near  a  relation  to  Him,  both  personally  and  minis- 
terially, had  no  assured  knowledge  of  Him  as  the 
Messiah.  I  did  not  know  Him,  and  I  had  not 
authority  to  proclaim  Him  as  such,  till  I  saw  the 
predicted  sign  in  the  descent  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
upon  Him.  It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  John 
had  no  means  of  knowing  by  previous  announce- 
ment, whether  this  wonderful  acknowledgment  of 
the  Divine  Son  would  be  vouchsafed  to  His  fore- 
runner at  His  baptism,  or  at  any  other  time  (see 
Dr.  Mill's  Hist,  diameter  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel, 
and  the  authorities  quoted  by  him). 

With  the  baptism  of  Jesus  John's  more  especial 
office  ceased.  The  king  had  come  to  his  kingdom. 
The  function  of  the  herald  was  discharged.  It 
was  this  that  John  had  with  singular  humility  and 
self-renunciation  announced  beforehand:  —  "He 
must  increase,  but  I  must  decrease." 

John,  however,  still  continued  to  present  himself 
to  his  countrymen  in  the  capacity  of  witness  to 
Jesus.  Especially  did  he  bear  testimony  to  Him  at 
Bethany  beyond  Jordan  (for  Bethany,  not  Bethabara, 
is  the  reading  of  the  best  MSS.).  So  confidently 
indeed  did  he  point  out  the  Lamb  of  God,  on  whom 
he  had  seen  the  Spirit  alighting  like  a  dove,  that 
two  of  his  own  disciples,  Andrew,  and  probably 
John,  being  convinced  by  his  testimony,  followed 
Jesus,  as  the  true  Messiah. 

From  incidental  notices  in  Scripture  we  learn 
that  John  and  his  disciples  continued  to  baptise 
some  time  after  our  Lord  entered  upon  His  ministry 
(see  John  iii.  23,  iv.  1  ;  Acts  xix.  3).  We  gather 
also  that  John  instructed  his  disciples  in  certain 
moral  and  religious  duties,  as  fasting  (Matt.  ix.  14  ; 
Luke  v.  33)  and  prayer  (Luke  xi.  1). 

But  shortly  after  he  had  given  his  testimony  to 
the  Messiah,  John's  public  ministry  was  brought  to 
a  close.  He  had  at  the  beginning  of  it  condemned 
the  hypocrisy  and  worldliness  of  the  Pharisees  and 
Sadducees,  and  he  now  had  occasion  to  denounce 
the  lust  of  aking.  In  daring  disregard  ofthe  divine 
laws,  Herod  Antipas  had  taken  to  himself  the  wife 


JOHN  THE  BAPTIST 

of  his  brother  Philip;  and  when  John  reproved 
him  for  this,  as  well  as  for  other  sins  (Luke  iii.  l'J), 
Herod  cast  him  into  prison.  The  place  of  his  con- 
finement was  the  castle  of  Machaerus — a  fortress  on 
the  eastern  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea.  It  was  here 
that  reports  reached  him  of  the  miracles  which  our 
Lord  was  working  in  Judaea  —  miracles  which, 
doubtless,  were  to  John's  mind  but  the  confirma- 
tion of  what  he  expected  to  hear  as  to  the  establish- 
ment of  the  Messiah's  kingdom.  But  if  Christ's 
kingdom  were  indeed  established,  it  was  the  duty  of 
John's  own  disciples  no  less  than  of  all  others  to 
acknowledge  it.  They,  however,  would  naturally 
cling  to  their  own  master,  and  be  slow  to  transfer 
their  allegiance  to  another.  With  a  view  therefore 
to  overcome  their  scruples,  John  sent  two  of  them 
to  Jesus  Himself  to  ask.  the  question,  "  Art  Thou 
He  that  should  come  ?"  They  were  answered  not 
by  words,  but  by  a  series  of  miracles  wrought 
before  their  eyes — the  very  miracles  which  prophecy 
had  specified  as  the  distinguishing  credentials  of  the 
Messiah  (Is.  xxxv.  5,  lxi.  1)  ;  and  while  Jesus  bade 
the  two  messengers  carry  back  to  John  as  his 
only  answer  the  report  of  what  they  had  seen  and 
heard,  He  took  occasion  to  guard  the  multitude  who 
surrounded  Him,  against  supposing  that  the  Baptist 
himself  was  shaken  in  mind,  by  a  direct  appeal  to 
their  own  knowledge  of  his  life  and  character. 
Well  might  they  be  appealed  to  as  witnesses  that 
the  stern  prophet  of  the  wilderness  was  no  waverer, 
bending  to  every  breeze,  like  the  reeds  on  the  banks 
of  Jordan.  Proof  abundant  had  they  that  John 
was  no  worldling  with  a  heart  set  upon  rich  cloth- 
ing and  dainty  fare  — the  luxuries  of  a  king's  court 
— and  they  must  have  been  ready  to  acknowledge 
that  one  so  inured  to  a  life  of  hardness  and  privation 
was  not  likely  to  be  affected  by  the  ordinary  terrors 
of  a  prison.  But  our  Lord  not  only  vindicates  his 
forerunner  from  any  suspicion  of  inconstancy,  He 
goes  on  to  proclaim  him  a  prophet,  and  more  than 
a  prophet,  nay,  inferior  to  none  born  of  woman, 
though  in  respect  to  spiritual  privileges  behind  the 
least  of  those  who  were  to  be  born  ofthe  Spirit  and 
admitted  into  the  fellowship  of  Christ's  body  (Matt, 
xi.  11).  It  should  be  noted  that  the  expression 
6  5e  fiiKp6repos,  k.t.A.  is  understood  by  Chry- 
sostom,  Augustin,  Hilary,  and  some  modern  com- 
mentators, to  mean  Christ  Himself,  but  this  inter- 
pretation is  less  agreeable  to  the  spirit  and  tone  of 
our  Lord's  discourse. 

Jesus  further  proceeds  to  declare  that  John  was, 
according  to  the  true  meaning  of  the  prophecy,  the 
Elijah  of  the  new  covenant,  foretold  by  Malachi 
(iii.  4).  The  event  indeed  proved  that  John  was  to 
Herod  what  Elijah  had  been  to  Ahab,  and  a  prison 
was  deemed  too  light  a  punishment  for  his  boldness 
in  asserting  God's  law  before  the  face  of  a  king  and 
a  queen.  Nothing  but  the  death  of  the  Baptist 
would  satisfy  the  resentment  of  Herodias.  Though 
foiled  once,  she  continued  to  watch  her  opportunity, 
which  at  length  arrived.  A  court  festival  was  kept 
at  Machaerus  in  honour  of  the  king's  birthday. 
After  supper,  the  daughter  of  Herodias  eame  in  and 
danced  before  the  company,  and  so  charmed  was 
the  king  by  her  grace  that  he  promised  with  an 
oath  to  give  her  whatsoever  she  should  ask. 

Salome,  prompted  by  her  abandoned  mother,  de- 
manded the,  head  of  John  the  Baptist.  The  pro- 
mise had  been  given  in  the  hearing  of  his  dis- 
tinguished guests,  and  so  Herod,  though  loth  to  be 
made  the  instrument  of  so  bloody  a  work,  gave  in- 
structions to  an  officer  of  his  guard,  who  went  and 


JOHN,  GOSPEL  OF 

executed  John  in  the  prison,  and  his  head  was 
brought  to  feast  the  eyes  of  the  adulteress  whose 
sins  he  had  denounced. 

Thus  was  John*  added  to  that  glorious  army  of 
martyrs  who  have  suffered  for  righteousness'  sake. 
His  death  is  supposed  to  have  occurred  just  before 
the  third  passover,  in  the  course  of  the  Lord's 
ministry.  It  is  by  Josephus  (Ant.  xviii.  5,  §2) 
attributed  to  the  jealousy  with  which  Herod  re- 
yarded  his  growing  influence  with  the  people. 
Herod  undoubtedly  looked  upon  him  as  some  extra- 
ordinary person,  for  no  sooner  did  he  hear  of  the 
miracles  of  Jesus  than,  though  a  Sadducee  himself, 
and  as  such  a  disbeliever  in  the  Resurrection,  he 
ascribed  them  to  John,  whom  he  supposed  to  be 
risen  from  the  dead.  Holy  Scripture  tells  us  that 
tlie  body  of  the  Baptist  was  laid  in  the  tomb  by  his 
disciples,  and  Ecclesiastical  history  records  the 
honours  which  successive  generations  paid  to  his 
memory. 

The  brief  history  of  John's  life  is  marked  through- 
out with  the  characteristic  graces  of  self-denial, 
humility,  and  holy  courage.  So  great  indeed  was 
his  abstinence  that  worldly  men  considered  him 
possessed.  "  John  came  neither  eating  nor  drink- 
ing, and  they  said  he  hath  a  devil."  His  humility 
was  such  that  he  had  again  and  again  to  disavow 
the  character,  and  decline  the  honours  which  an 
admiring  multitude  almost  forced  upon  him.  To 
their  questions  he  answered  plainly,  he  was  not  the 
Christ,  nor  the  Elijah  of  whom  they  were  thinking, 
nor  one  of  their  old  prophets.  He  was  no  one — 
a  voice  merely — the  Voice  of  God  calling  His  people 
to  repentance  in  preparation  for  the  coming  of  Him 
whose  shoe  latchet  he  was  not  worthy  to  unloose. 

For  his  boldness  in  speaking  truth,  he  went  a 
willing  victim  to  prison  and  to  death. 

The  student  may  consult  the  following  works, 
where  he  will  find  numerous  references  to 
ancient  and  modern  commentators: — Tillemont, 
Hist.  Eccles. ;  Witsius,  Miscell.  vol.  iv. ;  Thomas 
Aquinas,  Catena  Aurea,  Oxford,  1842.;  Neander, 
Life  of  Christ;  Le  Bas,  Scripture  Biography; 
Taylor,  Life  of  Christ ;  '  Olshausen,  Com.  on  the 
Gospels.  [E.  H — s.] 

JOHN,  GOSPEL  OF.  1.  Authority.— -No 
doubt  has  been  entertained  at  any  time  in  the 
Church,  either  of  the  canonical  authority  of  this 
Gospel,  or  of  its  being  written  by  St.  John.  The 
text  2  Pet.  i.  14  is  not  indeed  sufficient  to  support 
the  inference  that  St.  Peter  and  his  readers  were 
acquainted  with  the  fourth  Gospel,  and  recognised 
its  authority.  But  still  no  other  book  of  the  N.  T. 
is  authenticated  by  testimony  of  so  early  a  date  as 
that  of  tlie  disciples  which  is  embodied  in  the 
Gospel  itself  (xxi.  24,  25).  Among  the  Apostolic 
Fathers,  Ignatius  appears  to  have  known  ami  recog- 
nised this  Gospel.  His  declaration,  "  I  desire  the 
bread  of  God,  which  is  the  flesh  of  Jesus  Christ 
the  •Son  of  God  .  .  .  and  I  desire  the  drink  ofGod, 

His  blood,  which  is  incorruptible  love"  (ad  Rom. 
vii. ;  Cureton,  Corpus  Fgnatianum,  p.  '-'•">  1),  could 
scarcely  have  been  written  by  one  who  hail  in  it 
read  St.  John  vi.  32,  &c.  And  in  the  Ep.  <«/ 
Philadelphenos,  vii.  (which,  however,  is  not  con- 
tained in  Mr.  Cureti m's  Syriac  MSS.),  the  same 

writer  says,  "[  The  Holy  Spirit]  knoweth  whence 
He  cometh  and  whither  He  goeth,  and  reproveth 
the  things  which  are  hidden:"  this  is  surely  more 
than  an  accidental  verbal  coincidence  with  St.  John 
iii.  8  and  xvi.  8.  The  fact  that  this  Gospel  is  not 
quoted  by  Clement  of  Rome  (a.D.  08  or  96)  serves, 


JOHN,  GOSPEL  OF 


1111 


as   Dean  Alford  suggests,  merely  to  confirm  the 
statement  that  it  is  a  very  late  production  of  the 
Apostolic    age.       Polyearp    in    his    short    epistle, 
Hennas,  and  Barnabas  do  not  refer  to  it.     But  its 
phraseology  may  be  clearly  traced  in  the  Epistle  to 
Diognetus  ("  Christians  dwell   in   the   world,   but 
they  are  not  of  the  world;"  comp.  John  xvii.  11, 
14,  16:    "  He   sent  His  only -begotten  Son  ...  as 
loving,  not  condemning;"  comp.  John  iii.  16,  17), 
and   in   Justin    Martyr,  A.D.  150    ("  Christ    said, 
Except  ye  be  born  again  ye  shall  not  enter  into  the 
kingdom  of  heaven :  and  it  is  manifest  to  all  that 
it  is  impossible  for  those  who  have  been  once  born 
to  enter  into  the  wombs  of  those  that  bare  them;" 
Apol.  61 ;  comp.  John  iii.  3,  5 :  and  again,  "  His 
blood  having  been  produced,  not  of  human   seed, 
but  of  the  will  of  God;"  Tri/pho,  63  ;  comp.  John 
i.  13,  &c).     Tatian,  A.D.  170,  wrote  a  harmony 
of  the  four  Gospels ;  and  he  quotes  St.  John's  Gospel 
in  his  only  extant  work ;  so  do  his  contemporaries 
Apollinaris    of  Hierapolis,    Athenagoras,    and    the 
writer  of  the  Epistle  of  the  churches  of  Vienne  and 
Lyons.      The  Valentinians  made  great  use  of  it; 
and  one  of  their   sect,  Heracleon,  wrote  a  com- 
mentary on  it.     Yet  its  authority  among  orthodox 
Christians  was  too  firmly  established  to  be  shaken 
thereby.     Theophilus  of  Antioch   (ad  Autolycum, 
ii.)  expressly  ascribes  this  Gospel  to  St.  John  ;  and 
he  wrote,  according  to  Jerome  {Ep.  53  ad  Alt/as.), 
a  harmonised   commentary    on   the  four   Gospels. 
And,  to  close  the   list  of  writers   of  the    second 
century,    the    numerous    and    full    testimonies   of 
Irenaeus  in  Gaul  and  Tertullian  at  Carthage,  with 
the. obscure  but  weighty  testimony  of  the   Roman 
writer  of  the  Muratorian  Fragment  on  the  Canon, 
sufficiently  show   the  authority  attributed   in  the 
Western  Church  to  this  Gospel.    The  third  century 
introduces    equally    decisive    testimony    from    the 
Fathers  of  the  Alexandrian  Church,  Clement  and 
Origen,  which  it  is  unnecessary  here  to  quote  at 
length. 

Cerdon,  Marcion,  the  Montauists,  and  other  an- 
cient heretics  (see  Lampe,  Commentarius,  i.  136), 
did  not  deny  that  St.  John  was  the  author  of  the 
Gospel,  but  they  held  that  the  Apostle  was  mis- 
taken, or  that  his  Gospel  had  been  interpolated  in 
those  passages  which  are  opposed  to  their  tenets.  The 
Alogi,  a  sect  in  the  beginning  of  the  third  century, 
were  singular  in  rejecting  the  writings  of  St.  John. 
Guerike  (Einleitung  in  N.  T.  303)  enumerates  later 
opponents  of  the  Gospel,  beginning  with  an  English- 
man, Edw.  Evanson,  On  the  Dissonance  of  the  Four 
Evangelists,  Ipswich,  1 7 '.)_' ,  and  closing  with  Bret- 
schneider's  Probabilia  de  Evangelic  Johannis,  tfc., 
origine,  Lips.  1820.  His  arguments  are  charac- 
terised by  Guerike  as  strung  in  comparison  with 
those  of  his  predecessors.  They  are  grounded  chiefly 
mi  the  strangeness  of  such  language  ami  thoughts  as 
those  of  St.  John  coming  from  a  I  oil  i  lean  fisherman, 
and  on  the  difference  between  the  representations  of 
our  Lord's  person  and  of  his  manner  of  speech  given 
by  St.  John  ami  the  other  Evangelists.  Guerike 
answers  Bretschneider's  arguments  in  detail.  The 
scepticism  of  more  recent  times  has  found  its  fullest, 
ami,  according  to  Block,  its  most  important,  ex- 
pression in  a  treatise  by  l.iit/elberger  on  the  tra- 
dition respecting  the  Apostle  John  and  his  writings 
fl840).  His  arguments  are  recapitulated  and 
answered  by  Dr.  Davidson  (Introduction  to  the 
X.  '/'.,  L848,  vol.  i.  p.  2-14,  &c.).  It  may  sullice 
to  mention  one  specimen.  St.  Paul's  expression 
(Gal.   ii.  'i  j,  6iro7oi.  ttot«  i)aav.   is  translated  by 


1112  JOHN,  GOSPEL  OF 

Liitzelberger,  "  whatsoever  they  [Peter,  James, 
and  John]  were  formerly:"  he  discovers  therein 
an  implied  assertion  that  all  three  were  not  living 
when  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  was  written,  and 
infers  that  since  Peter  and  James  were  undoubtedly 
alive,  John  must  have  been  dead,  and  therefore  the 
tradition  which  ascribes  to  him  the  residence  at 
Ephesus,  and  the  composition,  after  A.D.  60,  of 
various  writings,  must  confound  him  with  another 
John.  Still  more  recently  the  objections  of  Baur 
to  St.  John's  Gospel  have  been  answered  by  Ebrard, 
Das  Evangelium  Johannis,  &c,  Zurich,  1845. 

2.  Place  and  time  at  which  it  was  written. — 
Ephesus  and  Patmos  are  the  two  places  mentioned 
by  early  writers;  and  the  weight  of  evidence  seems 
to  preponderate  in  favour  of  Ephesus.  Irenaeus 
(iii.  1  ;  also  apud  Euseb.  //.  E.  v.  8)  states  that 
John  published  his  Gospel  whilst  he  dwelt  in 
Ephesus  of  Asia.  Jerome  (Prol.  in  Matth.)  states 
that  John  was  in  Asia  when  he  complied  with  the 
request  of  the  bishops  of  Asia  and  others  to  write 
more  profoundly  concerning  the  Divinity  of  Christ. 
Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  {Prol.  in  Joannem)  relates 
that  John  was  living  at  Ephesus  when  he  was 
moved  by  his  disciples  to  write  his  Gospel. 

The  evidence  in  favour  of  Patmos  comes*  from 
two  anonymous  writers.  The  author  of  the  Sy- 
nopsis of  Scripture,  printed  in  the  works  of  Atha- 
nasius,  states  that  the  Gospel  was  dictated  by 
St.  John  in  Patmos,  and  published  afterwards  in 
Ephesus.  The  author  of  the  work  De  XII.  Apostolus, 
printed  in  the  Appendix  to  Fabricius'  Hippolytus 
(p.  952,  ed.  Migne),  states  that  John  was  banished 
by  Domitian  to  Patmos,  where  he  wrote  his  Gospel. 
The  later  date  of  these  unknown  writers,  and  the 
seeming  inconsistency  of  their  testimony  with  St. 
John's  declaration  (Rev.  i.  2)  in  Patmos,  that  he 
had  previously  borne  record  of  the  Word  of  God, 
render  their  testimony  of  little  weight. 

Attempts  have  been  made  to  elicit  from  the  lan- 
guage of  the  Gospel  itself  some  argument  which 
should  decide  the  question  whether  it  was  written 
before  or  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  But 
considering  that  the  present  tense  "  is  "  is  used  in 
v.  2,  and  the  past  tense  "was"  in  xi.  18,  xviii.  1, 
xix.  41,  it  would  seem  reasonable  to  conclude  that 
these  passages  throw  no  light  upon  the  question. 

Clement  of  Alexandria  {apud  Euseb.  H.  E.  vi. 
14)  speaks  of  St.  John  as  the  latest  of  the  Evan- 
gelists. The  Apostle's  sojourn  at  Ephesus  probably 
began  after  St.  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  was 
written,  i.  e.  after  A.D.  62.  Eusebius  (_ff.  E.  iii. 
20)  specifies  the  fourteenth  year  of  Domitian,  i.  e. 
A.D.  95,  as  the  year  of  his  banishment  to  Patmos. 
Probably  the  date  of  the  Gospel  may  lie  about  mid- 
way between  these  two,  about  A.D.  78.  The  re- 
ferences to  it  in  the  1st  Epistle  and  the  Pievelation 
lead  to  the  supposition  that  it  was  written  decidedly 
before  those  two  books  ;  and  the  tradition  of  its 
supplementary  character  would  lead  us  to  place  it 
some  little  time  after  the  Apostle  had  fixed  his 
abode  at  Ephesus. 

3.  Occasion  and  Scope. — After  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem  A.D.  69,  Ephesus  probably  became 
the  centre  of  the  active  life  of  Eastern  Christendom. 
Even  Antioch,the  original  source  of  missions  to  the 
Gentiles,  and  the  future  metropolis  of  the  Chris- 
tian Patriarch,  appears,  for  a  time,  less  conspicuous 
in  the  obscurity  of  early  church  history  than 
Ephesus,  to  which  St.  Paul  inscribed  his  Epistle, 
and  in  which  St.  John  found  a  dwelling-place  and 
a   tomb.       This    half- Greek,    half- Oriental    city, 


JOHN,  GOSPEL  OP 

"  visited  by  ships  from  all  parts  of  the  Mediter- 
ranean, and  united  by  great  roads  with  the  markets 
of  the  interior,  was  the  common  meeting-place  of 
various  characters  and  classes  of  men  "  (Conybeare 
and  Howson's  St.  Paul,  ch.  xiv.).  It  contained  a 
large  church  of  faithful  Christians,  a  multitude  of 
zealous  Jews,  an  indigenous  population  devoted  to 
the  worship  of  a  strange  idol  whose  image  (Jerome, 
Praef.  in  Ephcs.)  was  borrowed  from  the  East,  its 
name  from  the  West :  in  the  Xystus  of  Ephesus, 
free-thinking  philosophers  of  all  nations  disputed 
over  their  favourite  tenets  (Justin,  Trypho,  i.  vii.). 
It  was  the  place  to  which  Cerinthus  chose  to  bring  • 
the  doctrines  which  he  devised  or  learned  at  Alex- 
andria (Neander,  Church  History,  ii.  42,  ed.Bohn). 
In  this  city,  and  among  the  lawless  heathens  in  its 
neighbourhood  (Clem.  Alex.  Quis  dives  salv.  §42), 
St.  John  was  engaged  in  extending  the  Christian 
Church,  when,  for  the  greater  edification  of  that 
Church,  his  Gospel  was  written.  It  was  obviously 
addressed  primarily  to  Christians,  not  to  heathens  ; 
and  the  Apostle  himself  tells  us  (xx.  31)  what  was 
the  end  to  which  he  looked  forward  in  all  his 
teaching. 

Modern  criticism  has  indulged  in  much  curious 
speculation  as  to  the  exclusive  or  the  principal 
motive  which  induced  the  Apostle  to  write.  His 
design,  according  to  some  critics,  was  to  supplement 
the  deficiencies  of  the  earlier  three  Gospels ;  ac- 
cording to  others,  to  confute  the  Nicolaitans  and 
Cerinthus;  according  to  others,  to  state  the  time 
doctrine  of  the  Divinity  of  Christ.  But  let  it  be 
borne  in  mind  first  of  all  that  the  inspiring,  direct- 
ing impulse  given  to  St.  John  was  that  by  which 
all  "prophecy  came  in  old  time,"  when  "holy 
men  of  God  spake,"  "  not  by  the  will  of  man," 
"  but  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost." 
We  cannot  feel  confident  of  our  own  capacity  to 
analyse  the  motives  and  circumscribe  the  views  of 
a  mind  under  the  influence  of  Divine  inspiration. 
The  Gospel  of  St.  John  is  a  boon  to  all  ages,  and  to 
men  in  an  infinite  variety  of  circumstances.  Some- 
thing of  the  feelings  of  the  chronicler,  or  the 
polemic,  or  the  catechist  may  have  been  in  the 
heart  of  the  Apostle,  but  let  us  not  imagine  that 
his  motives  were  limited  to  any,  or  to  all  of  these. 

It  has  indeed  been  pronounced  by  high  critical 
authority  that  "  the  supplementary  theory  is  en- 
tirely untenable  ; "  and  so  it  becomes  if  put  forth  in 
its  most  rigid  form,  and  as  showing  the  whole 
design  of  St.  John.  But  even  Dr.  Davidson, 
while  pronouncing  it  unsupported  by  either  external 
tradition  or  internal  grounds,  acknowledges  that 
some  truth  lies  at  the  bottom  of  it.  Those  who 
hold  the  theory  in  its  extreme  and  exclusive  form 
will  find  it  hard  to  account  for  the  fact  that 
St.  John  has  many  things  in  common  with  his 
predecessors ;  and  those  who  repudiate  the  theory 
entirely  will  find  it  hard  to  account  for  his  omission, 
e.g.  of  such  an  event  as  the  Transfiguration,  which 
he  was  admitted  to  see,  and  which  would  have  been 
within  the  scope  (under  any  other  theory)  of  his 
Gospel.  Luthardt  concludes  most  judiciously  that, 
though  St.  John  may  not  have  written  with  direct 
reference  to  the  earlier  three  Evangelists,  he  did  not 
write  without  any  reference  to  them. 

And  in  like  manner,  though  so  able  a  critic  as 
Liicke  speaks  of  the  anti-Gnostic  reference  of 
St.  John  as  prevailing  throughout  his  Gospel,  while 
Luthardt  is  for  limiting  such  reference  to  his  first 
verses,  and  to  his  doctrine  of  the  Logos ;  and, 
though  other  writers  have  shown  much  ingenuity 


JOHN,  GOSPEL  OF 

in  discovering,  and  perhaps  exaggerating,  references 
to  Docetism,  Ebionitism,  and  Sabianism  ;  yet,  when 
controversial  references  are  set  forth  as  the  principal 
design  of  the  Apostle,  it  is  well  to  bear  in  mind 
the  cautious  opinion  expressed  by  Dr.  Davidson: — 
"  Designed  polemical  opposition  to  one  of  those 
errors,  or  to  all  of  them,  does  not  lie  in  the  contents 
dt'  the  sacred  book  itself;  and  yet  it  is  true  that 
they  were  not  unnoticed  by  St.  John.  He  intended 
to  set  forth  the  faith  alone,  and  in  so  doing  he  has 
written  passages  that  do  confute  those  erroneous 
tendencies." 

There  is  no  intrinsic  improbability  in  the  early 
tradition  as  to  the  occasion  and  scope  of  this  Gospel, 
which  is  most  fully  related  in  the  commentary  of 
Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  to  the  effect  that  while 
St.  John  live  1  at  Ephesus,  and  visited  all  parts  of 
Asia,  the  writings  of  Matthew,  Mark,  and  even 
Luke,  came  into  the  hands  of  the  Christians,  and 
were  diligently  circulated  everywhere.  Then  it 
occurred  to  the  Christians  of  Asia  that  St.  John 
was  "a  more  credible  witness  than  all  others,  foras- 
much as  from  the  beginning,  even  before  Matthew, 
he  was  with  the  Lord,  and  enjoyed  more  abundant 
grace  through  the  love  which  the  Lord  bore  to  him. 
And  they  brought  him  the  books,  and  sought  to 
know  his  opinion  of  them.  Then  he  praised  the 
writers  for  their  veracity,  and  said  that  a  few  things 
had  been  omitted  by  them,  and  that  all  but  a  little 
of  the  teaching  of  the  most  important  miracles'was 
recorded.  And  he  added  that  they  who  discourse 
of  the  coming  of  Christ  in  the  flesh  ought  not  to 
omit  to  speak  of  his  Divinity,  lest  in  course  of  time 
men  who  are  used  to  such  discourses  might  suppose 
that  Christ  was  only  what  He  appeared  to  be. 
Thereupon  the  brethren  exhorted  him  to  write 
at  once  the  things  which  he  judged  the  most  im- 
portant for  instruction,  and  which  he  saw  omitted 
by  the  others.  And  he  did  so.  And  the&fore 
from  the  beginning  he  discoursed  about  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Divinity  of  Christ,  judging  this  to  be  the 
necessary  beginning  of  the  Gospel,  and  from  it  he 
went  on  to  the  incarnation.    [See  above,  p.  1107.] 

4.  Contents  and  Litcgriti/. — Luthardt  says  that 
there  is  no  book  in  the  N.  T.  which  more  strongly 
than  the  fourth  Gospel  impresses  the  reader  with 
the  notion  of  its  unity  and  integrity.  And  yet 
it  does  not  appear  to  be  written  with  such  close 
adherence  to  a*  preconceived  plan  as  a  Western 
writer  would  show  in  developing  and  illustrating 
some  one  leading  idea.  The  preface,  the  break  at 
the  end  of  the  twelfth  chapter,  and  the  supple- 
mentary chapter,  are  divisions  which  will  occur  to 
every  reader.  The  ingenious  synopsis  of  Bengel 
and  the'thoughtful  one  of  Luthardt  are  worthy  of 
attention.  But  none  is  so  elaborate  and  minute  as 
that  of  Lampe,  of  which  the  following  is  an  abridg- 
ment : — 

A.  The  Prologue,  i.  1-18. 

B.  The  History,  i.  19-xx.  29. 

ii.  Various  events  relating  to  our  Lord's  ministry, 
narrated  in  connexion  with  seven  journeys,  i.  lit 
-xii.  50  :— 

1.  First,  journey,  into  Judaea  and  beginning  of 
His  ministry,  i.  19-ii.  12. 

2.  Second  journey,  at  Jhe  Passover  in  the  first 
year  of  His  ministry,  ii.  13— iv.  (The  manifesta- 
tion of  His  glory  in  Jerusalem,  ii.  13-iii.  21,  and 
in  the  journey  back,  iii.  22-iv. ) 

3.  Third  journey,  in  the  second  year  of  His 
ministry,  about  the  Passover,  v. 

4.  Fourth  journey,  about  the  Passover,  in  the 


JOHN,  GOSPEL  OF 


1113 


third  year  of  His  ministry,  beyond  Jordan,  vi. 
(His  glory  shown  by  the  multiplication  of  the 
loaves,  and  by  His  walking  on  the  sea,  and  by  the 
discourses  with  the  Jews,  His  disciples  and  His 
Apostles.) 

5.  Fifth  journey,  six  months  before  His  death, 
begun  at  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  vii.-x.  21. 
(Circumstances  in  which  the  journey  was  under- 
taken, vii.  1-13:  five  signs  of  His  glory  shown  at 
Jerusaletn,  vii.  14-x.  21.) 

6.  Sixth  journey,  about  the  Feast  of  Dedication, 
x.  22-42.  (His  testimony  in  Solomon's  porch,  and 
His  departure  beyond  Jordan.) 

7.  Seventh  journey  in  Judaea  towards  Bethany, 
xi.  1-54.  (The  raising  of  Lazarus  and  its  conse- 
quences.) 

8.  Eighth  journey,  before  His  last  Passover,  xi. 
55— xii.  (Plots  of  the  Jews,  His  entry  into  Jeru- 
salem, and  into  the  Temple,  and  the  manifestation 
of  His  glory  there.) 

6.  History  of  the  Death  of  Christ,  xiii.-xx.  29. 

1.  Preparation  for  His  l'assion,  xiii.-xvh.  (Last- 
Supper,  discourse  to  His  disciples,  His  commen- 
datory prayer.) 

2.  The  circumstances  of  His  Passion  and  Death, 
xviii.  xix.  (His  apprehension,  trial,  and  cruci- 
fixion.) 

3.  His  Resurrection,  and  the  proofs  of  it,  xx. 
1-29. 

C.  The  Conclusion,  xx.  30-xxi. : — 

1.  Scope  of  the  foregoing  history,  xx.  30,  31. 

2.  Confirmation  of  the  authority  of  the  Evan- 
gelist by  additional  historical  facts,  and  by  the 
testimony  of  the  elders  of  the  Church,  xxi.  1-24. 

3.  Reason  of  the  termination  of  the  history, 
xxi.  25. 

Some  portions  of  the  Gospel  have  been  regarded 
by  certain  critics  as  interpolations.  Luthardt  dis- 
cusses at  considerable  length  the  objections  of  Paulus, 
Weisse,  Schenkel,  and  Schweizer  to  ch.  xxi.  viii. 
1-11,  v.  3,  ii.  1-12,  iv.  44-54,  vi.  1-26.  The  dis- 
cussion of  these  passages  belongs  rather  to  a  com- 
mentary than  to  a  brief  introduction.  But  as  the 
question  as  to  ch..  xxi.  has  an  important  bearing  on 
the  history  of  the  Gospel,  a  brief  statement  respect- 
ing it  may  not  be  out  of  place  here. 

Guerike  {Einleitung,  p.  310)  gives  the  following 
lists  of  (1)  those  who  have  doubted,  and  (2)  those 
who  have  advocated  its  genuineness: — (1)  Grotius, 
Le  Clerc,  Pfaff,  Sender,  Paulus,  Gurlitt,  Bertholdt, 
Seyffarth,  Liicke,  De  Wette,  Schott ;  (2)  R.Simon, 
Lampe,  Wetstein,  Osiander,  Michaelis,  Beck,  Eich- 
horn,  Hug,  Wegscheider,*  Handschke,  Weber,  Tho- 
luck,  Scheffer.  The  objections  against  the  first 
twenty-three  verses  of  this  chapter  are  founded 
entirely  on  internal  evidence,  'flic  principal  objec- 
tions as  to  alleged  peculiarities  of  language  are 
completely  answered  in  a  note  in  Guerike's  Einlei- 
tung, 310,  and  arc  given  up  with  one  exception 
by  Dc  Wette.  Other  objections,  though  urged  by 
Liicke,  are  exceedingly  trivial  and  arbitrary,  e.  g. 
that  the  reference  to  the  author  in  verse  20  is 
unlike  the  manner  of  St.  John  ;  that  xx.  30,  31 
woidd  have  been  placed  at  the  end  of  xxi.  by 
St.  John  if  he  had  written  both  chapters  ;  that  the 
narrative  descends  to  strangely  minute  circum- 
stances, &c. 

The  25th  verse  ami  the  latter  half  of  the  24th  of 
ch.  xxi.  are  generally  received  as  an  undisguised 
addition,  probably  by  the  elders  of  the  Ephesim 
Church,  where  the  Gospel  was  first  published. 

There  is  an  earlv  tradition  recorded  by  the  au- 

4  C 


1114 


JOHN,  THE  FIRST  EriSTLE  GENERAL  OF 


thor  of  the  Synopsis  of  Scripture   in  Athanasius, 

that  this  Gospel  was  written  many  years  before  the 
Apostle  permitted  its  general  circulation.  This 
fact — rather  improbable  in  itself — is  rendered  less 
so  by  the  obviously  supplementary  character  of  the 
latter  part,  or  perhaps  the  whole  of  ch.  xxi.  Ewald 
(Gesch.  Israel,  vii.  217),  less  sceptical  herein  than 
many  of  his  countrymen,  comes  te  the  conclusion 
that  the  first  20  chapters  of  this  Gospel,  having 
been  written  by  the  Apostle,  about  A.D.  80,  at  the 
request,  and  with  the  help  of  his  more  advanced 
Christian  friends,  were  not  made  public  till  a  short 
time  before  his  death,  and  that  ch.  xxi.  was  a  later 
addition  by  his  own  hand. 

5.  Literature. — The  principal  Commentators  on 
St.  John  will  be  found  in  the  following  list : — 
(1)  Origen,  in  Opp.  ed.  1759,  iv.  1-460;  (2) 
Chrysostom,  in  Opp.  ed.  1728,  viii.  1-530;  (3) 
Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  and  others,  in  Corderii 
Catena  in  Joannem,  1630 ;  (4-)  Augustine,  in 
Opp.  ed.  1690,  iii.,  part  2,  290-826;  (5)  Theo- 
phylact ;  (6)  Euthymius  Zigabenus ;  (7)  Mal- 
donatus;  (8)  Luther;  (9)  Calvin;  (10)  Grotius 
and  others,  in  the  Critici  Sacri  ;  (11)  Cornelius  a 
Lapide;  (12)  Hammond;  (13)  Lampe,  Commcn- 
tarius  cxegetico-anali/ticus  in  Joannem,  1735; 
(14)  Bengel;  (15)  Whitby;  (16)  Liicke,  Com- 
mentar  zum  Evang.  Joann.  1820;  (17)  Ols- 
hausen,  Biblischer  Commcntar,  1834  ;  (18)  Meyer, 
Kritisch-exeijet.  Commcntar;  (19)  De  Wette, 
Exegct.  Handbuch  z.  N.  T. ;  (20)  Tholuck,  Comm. 
z.  Evang.  Johan.  ;  (21)  C.  E.  Luthardt,  das 
Johanneische  Evangelium  nach  seiner  Eigenthiim- 
lichkeit,  1853. 

Until  very  lately  the  English  reader  had  no  better 
critical  helps  in  the  study  of  St.  John's  Gospel  than 
those  which  were  provided  for  him  by  Hammond, 
Lightfoot,  and  Whitby.  He  now  has  access  through 
the  learned  Commentaries  of  Canon  Wordsworth  and 
Dean  Alford  to  the  interpretations  and  explanations 
of  the  ancient  Fathers,  and  several  English  theolo- 
gians, and  to  those  of  all  the  eminent  German  critics. 

The  Commentaries  of  Chrysostom.  and  Augus- 
tine have  been  translated  into  English  in  the 
Oxford  Library  <f  the  Fathers  (Parker,  1848). 
English  translations  have  been  published  also  of  the 
Commentaries  of  Bengel  and  Olshauseu.  And  the 
Rev.  F.  D.  Maurice  has  published  an  original  and 
devout  Commentary  under  the  title  of  Discourses  on 
the  Gospel  of  St.  John,  1857.  [W.  T.  B.] 

JOHN,  THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  GENE- 
RAL OF.  Its  Authenticity.-— The  external  evi- 
dence is  of  the  most  satisfactory  nature.  Eusebius 
places  it  in  his  list  of  dpoAoyuv/ueva  [see  above,  p. 
362],  and  we  have  ample  proof  that  it  was  acknow- 
ledged and  received  as  the  production  of  the  Apostle 
John  in  the  writings  of  Polycarp  (  Ep.  ad  Philipp. 
c.  vii.)  ;  Papias,  as  quoted  by  Eusebius  (H.  E.  iii. 
39);  Irenaeus  (Adv.  Haer.  iii.  18);  Origen  (apud 
Eus.  II.  E.  vi.  25)  ;  Clement  of  Alexandria  (Strom. 
lib.  ii.);  Tertullian  (Adv.  Prax.  c.  rv.) ;  Cyprian 
(Ep.  xxviii.):  and  there  is  no  voice  in  antiquity 
raised  to  the  contrary. 

On  the  grounds  of  internal  evidence  it  has  been 
questioned  by  Lange  (Die  Schrift.  des  Johann. 
iihcrsetzt  und  erklart,  vol.  iii.);  Cludius  (Unin- 
sichten  des  Christcnthums) ;  Bretschneider  (Proba- 
bilia  dc  Evang.  et  Epist.  Joan.  Ap.  indole  et  ori- 
gine)  ;  Zeller  (Theologischc  Jahrbuchcr  for  1845). 
The  objections  made  by  these  critics  are  too  slight 
to  lie  worth  mentioning.  On  the  other  hand  the 
internal  evidence  for  its  being  the  work  of  St.  .John 


from  its  similarity  in  style,  language,  and  doctrine  to 
the  Gospel  is  overwhelming.  Macknight  (Preface 
to  First  Epistle  of  John)  has  drawn  out  a  list  of 
nineteen  passages  in  the  Epistle  which  are  so  similar 
to  an  equal  number  of  passages  in  the  Gospel  that, 
we  cannot  but  conclude  that  the  two  writings  ema- 
nated from  the  same  mind,  or  that  one  author  was 
a  strangely  successful  copyist  both  of  the  words  and 
of  the  sentiments  of  the  other.  The  allusion  again  of 
the  writer  to  himself  is  such  as  would  suit  St.  John 
the  Apostle,  and  very  few  but  St.  .John  (1  Ep.  i.  1). 

Thus  we  see  that  the  high  probability  of  the  au- 
thorship is  established  both  by  the  internal  evidence 
and  by  the  external  evidence  taken  apart.  Unite 
them,  and  this  probability  rises  to  a  moral  certainty. 

With  regard  to  the  time  at  which  St.  John  wrote 
the  Epistle  (for  an  Epistle  it  essentially  is,  though 
not  commencing  or  concluding  in  the  epistolary 
form)  there  is  considerable  diversity  of  opinion. 
Grotius,  Hammond,  Whitby,  Benson,  Macknight, 
iix  a  date  previous  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem, 
understanding  (but  probably  not  correctly)  the  ex- 
pression "It  is  the  last  time"  (ii.  18)  to  refer  to 
the  Jewish  Church  and  nation.  Lardner,  Whistori, 
Lampe,  Mill,  Le  Clerc,  Basnage,  Beausobre,  Dupin, 
Davidson,  assign  it  to  the  close  of  the  first  century. 
This  is  the  more  probable  date.  There  are  several 
indications  of  the  Epistle  being  posterior  to  the 
Gospel. 

Like  the  Gospel  it  was  probably  written  from 
Ephesus.  Grotius  fixes  Patmos  as  the  place  at 
which  it  was  written — Macknight,  Judaea.  But  a 
late  date  would  involve  the  conclusion  that  it.  was 
Ephesus.  The  persons  addressed  are  certainly  not 
the  Parthians,  according  to  the  inscriptions  of  one 
Greek  and  several  Latin  MSS.  There  is  however 
a  somewhat  widely  spread  Latin  tradition  to  this 
effect  resting  on  the  authority  of  St.  Augustine, 
Cassfbdorus,  and  Bede;  and  it  is  defended  by  Estius. 
The  Greek  Church  knew  no  such  report.  Lardner 
is  clearly  right  when  he  says  that  it  was  primarilv 
meant  for  the  Churches  of  Asia  under  St.  Johi/s 
inspection,  to  whom  he  had  already  orally  delivered 
his  doctrine  (i.  3,  ii.  7). 

The  main  object  of  the  Epistle  does  not  appear 
to  be  that  of  opposing  the  errors  of  the  Docetae 
(Schmidt,  Bertholdt,  Xiemeyer),  or  of  the  Gnostics 
(Kleuker),  or  of  the  Nicolaitans  (Macknight),  or 
of  the  Cerinthians  (Michaelis),  oi*  of  all  of  them 
together  (Townsend),  or  of  the  Sabiaus  (Barkev, 
Storr,  Keil),  or  of  Judaizers  (LoefHer,  Sender),  or 
of  apostates  to  Judaism  (Lange,  Eichhorn,  Ham- 
lein)  :  the  leading  purpose  of  the  Apostle  appeal's  to 
be  rather  constructive  than  polemical.  St.  John 
is  remarkable  both  in  his  history  and  in  his  writings 
for  his  abhorrence  of  false  doctrine,  but  he  does  not 
attack  error  as  a  controversialist.  He  states  the 
deep  truth  and  lays  down  the  deep  moral  teaching 
of  Christianity,  and  in  this  way  rather  than  directly 
condemns  heresy.  In  the  introduction  (i.  1-4)  the 
Apostle  states  the  purpose  of  his  Epistle.  It  is  to 
declare  the  Word  of  life  to  those  whom  he  is  ad- 
dressing, in  order  that  he  and  they  might  be  united 
in  true  communion  with  each  other,'  and  with 
God  the  Father,  and  His  Son  Jesus  Christ.  He  at 
once  begins  to  explain  the  nature  and  conditions  of 
communion  with  God,  and  being  led  on  from  this 
point  into  other  topics,  he  twice  brings  himself 
back  to  the  same  subject.  The  first  part  of  the 
Epistle  may  be  considered  to  end  at  ii.  28.  The 
Apostle  begins  afresh  with  the  doctrine  of  sonship 
or  communion  at  ii.  29,  and  returns  to  the  same 


JOHN,  THE  SECOND  AND  THIRD  EPISTLES  OF 


1115 


theme  at  iv.  7.  His  lesson  throughout  is,  that  the 
means  of  union  with  God  are,  on  the  part  of  Christ, 
his  atoning  blood  (i.  7,  ii.  2,  iii.  5,  iv.  10,  14,  v. 
G)  and  advocacy  (ii.  1) — on  the  part  of  man,  holi- 
ness (i.  6),  obedience  (ii.  3),  purity  (iii.  3),  faith 
(iii.  23,  iv.  3,  v.  5),  and  above  all  love  (ii.  7,  iii. 
14,  iv.  7,  v.  1).  St.  John  is  designated  the  Apostle 
of  Love,  and  rightly  ;  but  it  should,  be  ever  remem- 
bered that  his  "  Love  "  does  not  exclude  or  ignore, 
but  embraces  both  faith  and  obedience  as  constituent 
paits  of  itself.  Indeed,  St.  Paul's  "Faith  that 
worketh  by  Love,"  and  St.  James'  "  Works  that 
are  the  fruit  of  Faith,"  and  St.  John's  "  Love 
which  springs  from  Faith  and  produces  Obedience," 
are  all  one  and  the  same  state  of  mind  described 
according  to  the  first,  third,  or  second  stage  into 
which  we  are  able  to  analyse  the  complex  whole. 

There  are  two  doubtful  passages  in  this  Epistle, 
ii.  23, "  but  he  that  acknowledgeth  the  Son  hath  the 
Father  also,"  and  v.  7,  "  For  there  are  three  that 
bear  record  in  heaven,  the  Father,  the  Word,  and 
the  Holy  Ghost,  and  these  three  are  one."  The 
question  of  their  authenticity  is  argued  at  length 
by  Mill  (note  at  the  end  of  1  John  v.),  and  Home 
(Introduction  to  H.  S.  iv.  p.  448,  Lond.  1834). 
It  would  appear  without  doubt  that  they  are  not 
genuine.  The  latter  passage  is  contained  in  four 
only  of  the  150  MSS.  of  "the  Epistle,  the  Codex 
Guelph'erbytanus  of  the  seventeenth  century,  the 
Codex  Ravianus,  a  forgery  subsequent  to  the  year 
15 14,  the  Codex  Britannicus  or  Monfortii  of  the 
fifteenth  or  sixteenth  century,  and  the  Codex  Ot- 
tobonianus  of  the  fifteenth  century.  It  is  not 
found  in  the  Syriac  versions,  in  the  Coptic,  the  Sa- 
hidic,  the  Ethiopic,  the  Armenian,  the  Arabic,  the 
Sclavonic,  nor  in  any  ancient  version  except  the 
Latin  ;  and  the  best  editions  of  even  the  Latin  ver- 
sion omit  it.  It  was  not  quoted  by  one  Greek 
Father,  or  writer  previous  to  the  14th  century. 
It  was  not  inserted  in  Erasmus's  editions  of  the 
Greek  Testament,  published  in  1516  and  1519,  nor 
in  that  of  Aldus,  1518;  nor  in  that  of  Gerbelius, 
1521;  nor  of  Cephalaeus,  1524 ;  nor  ofColinaeus, 
1534;  nor  in  Luther's  version  of  1546.  Against 
such  an  amount  of  external  testimony  no  internal 
evidence,  however  weighty,  could  be  of  avail.  For 
the  exposition  of  the  passage  as  containing  the  words 
in  question,  see  (as  quoted  by  Home)  Bp.  Horsley's 
Sermons  (i.  p.  193).  For  the  same  passage  inter- 
preted without  the  disputed  words,  see  Sir  Isaac 
Newton's  Hist,  of  Two  Texts  (Works,  v.  p.  528, 
Lond.  1779).  See  also  Emlyn's  Enquiry,  kc,  Lond. 
1717.  See  further,  Travis  {Letters  to  Gibbon,  Lond. 
1785);  Porson  (Letters  to  Travis,  Lond.  1790); 
Bishop  Marsh  (Letters  to  Travis,  Lond.  1795)  ; 
Michaelis  (Fntr.  to  New  Test.  iv.  p.  412,  Lond. 
1802  I ;  Griesbach  (Diatribe  appended  to  vol.  ii.  of 
Greek  Test.  Halae,  1806);  Butler  (Horae  Bi- 
blicac,  ii.  p.  245,  Lond.  18u7)  ;  Clarke  (Succession, 
&c,  i.  p.  71,  Lond.  1807)  ;  Bishop  Burgess  |  Vin- 
dication of  1  John  v.  7.  Lond.  L822  and  1823; 
Adnotationes  Millii.  &c.,  1822;  Litter  to  the 
Clergy  of  St.  David's,  1825  ;  Two  letters  to  Mrs. 
Joanna  Baillie,  1831,  1835),  to  which  may  be 
added  a  dissertation  in  the  Life  of  Bp.  Burgess,  p. 
398,  Lend.  1840.  [F.  M.] 

JOHN,  THE  SECOND  AND  THIRD 
EPISTLES  OF.  Their  Authenticity.— These 
two  Epistles  are  placed  by  Eusebius  in  the  class  of 
a.vriAey6/j.eva.  and  he  appears  himself  to  be  doubtful 
whether  they  were  written  by  the  Evangelist,  or  by 
some  ether  John  (//.  E.  iii.  25).     The  evidence  of 


antiquity  in  their  favour  is  not  very  strong,  but  yet 
it  is  considerable.  Clement  of  Alexandria  speaks  of 
the  first  Epistle  as  the  larger  (Strom,  lib.  ii.),  and 
if  the  Adumbrationes  are  his,  he  bears  direct  testi- 
mony to  the  second  Epistle  (Adumbr.  p.  1011,  ed. 
Potter).  Origen  appears  to  have  had  the  same' 
doubts  as  Eusebius  (apud  Euseb.  H.  E.  vi.  25).  Dio- 
nysius  (apud  Euseb.  H.  E.  vii.  25)  and  Alexander  of 
Alexandria  {apud  Socr.  If.  E.  i.  6)  attribute  them 
to  St.  John.  So  does  Irenaeus  (Adv.  Haer.  i.  16). 
Aurelius  quoted  them  in  the  Council  of  Carthage, 
A.D.  256,  as  St.  John's  writing  (Cyprian,  Op.  ii. 
p.  120,  ed.  Oberthiir).  Ephrem  Syrus  speaks  of 
them  in  the  same  way  in  the  fourth  century.  In 
the  fifth  century  they  are  almost  universally  re- 
ceived. A  homily,  wrongly  attributed  to  St.  Chry- 
sostom,  declares  them  uneanonical. 

If  the  external  testimony  is  not  as  decisive  as  wc 
might  wish,  the  internal  evidence  is  peculiarly 
strong.  Mill  has  pointed  out  that  of  the  13  verses 
which  compose  the  Second  Epistle,  8  are  to  be 
found  in  the  First  Epistle.  Either  then  the  Second 
Epistle  proceeded  from  the  same  author  as  the  First, 
or  from  a  conscious  fabricator  who  desired  to  pass 
off  something  of  his  own  as  the  production  of  the 
Apostle.  But  if  the  latter  alternative  had  been 
true,  the  fabricator  in  question  would  assuredly 
have  assumed  the  title  of  John  the  Apostle,  instead 
of  merely  designating  himself  as  John  the  elder, 
and  he  would  have  introduced  some  doctrine  which 
it  would  have  been  his  object  to  make' popular. 
The  title  and  contents  of  the  Epistle  are  strong 
arguments  against  a  fabricator,  whereas  they  would 
account  for  its  non-universal  reception  in  early 
times.  And  if  not  the  work  of  a  fabricator,  it  must 
from  style,  diction,  and  tone  of  thought,  be  the 
work  of  the  author  of  the  First  Epistle,  and,  we 
may  add,  of  the  Gospel. 

The  reason  why  St.  John  designates  himself  as 
wpecrfivTepos  rather  than  air6o~ToAos  (Ep.  ii.  1, 
Ep.  iii.  1),  is  no  doubt  the  same  as  that  which 
made  St.  Peter  designate  himself  by  the  same  title 
(1  Pet.  v.  1),  and  which  caused  St.  James  and  St. 
Jude  to  give  themselves  no  other  title  than  "  the 
servant  of  God  and  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ" 
(Jam.  i.  1),  "  the  servant  of  Jesus  Christ  and  bro- 
ther of  James  "  (Jude  1).  St.  Paul  had  a  special 
object  in  declaring  himself  an  apostle.  Those  who 
belonged  to  the  original  Twelve  had  no  such  necessity 
imposed  upon  them.  With  them  it  was  a  matter  of 
indifference  whether  thev  employed  the  name  of 
Apostle  like  St.  Peter  (1  Pet.  i.  1,  2  Pet.  i.  1),  or 
adopted  an  appellation  which  they  shared  with 
others  like  St.  John  and  St.  James,  and  St.  Jude. 

The  Second  Epistle  is  addressed  eVAf/crr?  Kvpiq. 
This  expression  cannot  mean  the  Church  (Jerome), 
nor  a  particular  Church  (Cassiodorus),  nor  the 
el  it  Church  which  comes  together  on  Sundays 
(Michaelis),  nor  the  Church  of  Philadelphia  (Wins- 
ton), nor  the  Church  of  Jerusalem  (Whitby).  .An 
individual  woman  who  had  children,  and  a  sister 
and  nieces,  is  clearly  indicated.  Whether  her  name 
en,  and  it'  sci,  what  it  is,  has  been  doubted. 
According  to  one  interpretation  she  is  "  the  Lady 
Electa,"  to  another,  "the  elect  Kyria."  to  a  third. 
"the  elect  Lady."  The  first  interpretation  is  that 
of  ('lenient  of  Alexandria  (ii'  the  passage  above 
referred  to  in  the  Adumbrationes  be  his);  Wetstein, 
Grotius,  Middleton.  The  second  is  thai  of  Benson, 
Carpzov,  Schleusner,  Heumann,  Bengel,  Rosen- 
lniiller,  De  Wette,  Liicke,  Neander,  Davidson. 
The  third  is  the  rendering  of  the  English  version, 

4  C  2 


1116        JOHN,  EPISTLES  OF 

Mill,  Wall,  Wolf,  Le  Clerc,  Lardner,  Beza,  Eich- 
horn,  Newcome,  Wakefield,  Macknight.  For  the 
rendering  "  the  Lady  Electa"  to  be  right,  the  word 
Kvpla  must  have  preceded  (as  in  modern  Greek) 
the  word  e/cAe/cr??,  not  followed  it ;  and  further, 
the  last  verse  of-  the  Epistle  in  which  her  sister  is 
also  spoken  of  as  e/cAe/cTT]  is  fatal  to  the  hypothesis. 
The  rendering  "  the  elect  Kyria,"  is  probably 
wrong,  because  there  is  no  article  before  the  ad- 
jective eKAe/cn?.  It  remains  that  the  rendering  of 
the  English  version  is  probably  right,  though  here 
too  we  should  have  expected  the  article. 

The  Third  Epistle  is  addressed  to  Gaius  or  Cains. 
We  have  no  reason  for  identifying  him  with  Caius 
of  Macedonia  (Acts  xix.  29),  or  with  Caius  of  Derbe 
(Acts  xx.  4),  or  with  Caius  of  Corinth  (Rom.  xvi. 
23  ;  1  Cor.  i.  14),  or  with  Caius  Bishop  of  Ephesus, 
or  with  Caius  Bishop  of  Thessalonica,  or  with  Caius 
Bishop  of  Pergamos.  He  was  probably  a  convert,  of 
St.  John  (Ep.  iii.  4),  and  a  layman  of  wealth  and 
distinction  (Ep.  iii.  5)  in  some  city  near  Ephesus. 

The  object  of  St.  John  in  writing  the  Second 
Epistle  was  to  warn  the  lady,  to  whom  he  wrote, 
against  abetting  the  teaching  known  as  that  of  Ba- 
silides  and  his  followers,  by  perhaps  an  undue  kind- 
ness displayed  by  her.  towards  the  preachers  of  the 
false  doctrine.  After  the  introductory  salutation, 
the  Apostle  at  once  urges  on  his  correspondent  the 
great  principle  of  Love,  which  with  him  (as  we 
have  before  seen)  means  right  affection  springing 
from  right  faith  and  issuing  in  right  conduct.  The 
immediate  consequence  of  the  possession  of  this 
Love  is  the  abhorrence  of  heretical  misbelief,  because 
the  latter,  being  incompatible  witli  right  faith,  is 
destructive  of  the  producing  cause  of  Love,  and 
therefore  of  Love  itself.  This  is  the  secret  of  St. 
John's  strong  denunciation  of  the  "  deceiver"  whom 
he  designates  as- "  anti-Christ."  Love  is  with  him 
the  essence  of  Christianity  ;  but  Love  can  spring 
only  from  right  faith.  Wrong  belief  therefore  de- 
stroys Love  and  with  it  Christianity.  Therefore  says 
he,  "  If  there  come  any  unto  you  and  bring  not  this 
doctrine,  receive  him  not  into  your  house,  neither  bid 
him  God  speed,  for  he  that  biddeth  him  God  speed 
is  partaker  of  his  evil  deeds"  (Ep.  ii.  10,  11). 

The  Third  Epistle  was  written  for  the  purpose 
of  commending  to  the  kindness  and  hospitality  of 
Caius  some  Christians  who  were  strangers  in  the 
place  where  he  lived.  It  is  probable  that  these  Chris- 
tians carried  this  letter  with  them  to  Caius  as  their 
introduction.  It  would  appear  that  the  object  of 
the  travellers  was  to  preach  the  Gospel  to  the  Gen- 
tiles without  money  and  without  price  (Ep.  iii.  7). 
St.  John  had  already  written  to  the  ecclesiastical 
authorities  of  the  place  {Zypa-tya,  ver.  9,  not  "  scrip- 
sissem,"  Vulg.)  ;  but  they,  at  the  instigation  of 
Diotrephes,  had  refused  to  receive  the  missionary 
brethren,  and  therefore  the  Apostle  now  commends 
them  to  the  care  of  a  layman.  It  is  probable  that 
Diotrephes  was  a  leading  presbyter  who  held  Ju- 
daizing  views,  and  would  not  give  assistance  to  men 
who  were  going  about  with  the  purpose  of  preaching 
solely  to  the  Gentiles.  Whether  Demetrius  (ver. 
12)  was  a  tolerant  presbyter  of  the  same  commu- 
nity, whose  example  St.  John  holds  up  as  worthy  of 
commendation  in  contradistinction  to  that  of  Dio- 
t replies,  or  whether  he  was  one  of  the  strangers  who 
bore  the  letter,  we  are  now  unable  to  determine. 
The  latter  supposition  is  the  more  probable. 

We  may  conjecture  that  the  two  Epistles  were 
written  shortly  after  the  First  Epistle  from  Ephesus. 
They  both  apply   to  individual    cases  of  conduct 


JOKMEAM 

the   principles  which  had  been  laid  down  in  their 
fulness  in  the  First  Epistle. 

The  title  Catholic  does  not  properly  belong  to 
the  Second  and  Third  Epistles.  It  became  attached 
to  them,  although  addressed  to  individuals,  because 
they  were  of  too  little  importance  to  be  classed  by 
themselves,  and  so  far  as  doctrine  went,  were  re- 
garded as  appendices  to  the  First  Epistle.    [F.  M.] 

JOI'ADA  (jn»V  :  'IcoSae,  'IcoaSa;  Alex.  'lm- 
a5a  ,  Joiada),  high-priest  after  his  father  Eliashib, 
but  whether  in  the  lifetime  of  Nehemiah  is  not  clear, 
as  it  is  doubtful  whether  the  title  in  Neh.  xiii.  28 
applies  to  him  or  his  father.  One  of  his  sons  mar- 
ried a  daughter  of  Sanballat  the  Horonite.  He  was 
succeeded  in  the  high-priesthood  by  his  son  Jonathan, 
or  Johanan  (Neh.  xii.  11,  22).  Josephus  calls  this 
Jehoiada,  Judas.  [A.  C.  H.] 

JOIAKIM  (D^fy  :  'Iwa/cf/t:  Joacini),  a  high- 
priest,  son  of  the  renowned  Jeshua  who  was  joint 
leader  with  Zerubbabel  of  the  first  return  from 
Babylon.  His  son  and  successor  was  ELIASHIB 
( Neh.  xii.  10).  In  Neh.  xii .  12-26  is  preserved  a  cata- 
logue of  the  heads  of  the  various  families  of  priests 
and  Levites  during  the  high-priesthood  of  Joiakim. 

The  name  is  a  contracted  form  of  JEHOIAKIM. 

JOIAKIB  (inty:  'IwapL/j.,  'Icoapf/3;  Alex. 
'laxxpei/A:  Joarib).  1.  A  layman  who  returned 
from  Babylon  with  Ezra  (Ezr.  viii.  16). 

2.  The  founder  of  one  of  the  courses  of  priests, 
elsewhere  called  in  full  Jeiioiarib.  His  descendants 
after  the  Captivity  are  given,  Neh.  xii.  6,  19,  and 
also  in  xi.  10  ;  though  it  is  possible  that  in  this 
passage  another  person  is  intended. 
'  3.  A  Shilonite — i.  e.  probably  a  descendant  of 
SHELAH  the  son  of  Judah — named  in  the  genealogy 
of  Maaseiah,  the  then  head  of  the  family  (Neh.  xi.  5). 

JOK'DEAM  (Djnj?*:  'ApiKa/x;  Alex.  'Uk- 
Sad/j. ;  Jacadaam),  a  city  of  Judah,  in  the  moun- 
tains (Josh.  xv.  56),  named  in  the  same  group  with 
Maon,  Carmel,  and  Ziph,  and  therefore  apparently 
to  be  looked  for  south  of  Hebron,  where  they  are 
situated.  It  has  not,  however,  been  yet  met  with, 
nor  was  it  known  to  Eusebius  and  Jerome.     [G.] 

JO'KIM  (D^ipi"1 :    'Icoa/aV  ;    Alex.    'Ia>a/cei>  : 

qui  stare  fecit  solcm),  one  of  the  sons  of  Shelah 
(the  third  according  to  Burlington)  the  son  of 
Judah  (1  Chr.  iv.  22),  of  whom  nothing  further  is 
known.  It  would  be  difficult  to  say  what  gave  rise 
to  the  rendering  of  the  Vulgate  or  the  Targum  on 
the  verse.  The  latter  translates,  "  and  the  prophets 
and  scribes  who  came  forth  from  the  seed  of  Joshua." 
The  reading  which  they  had  was  evidently  0"^^ 
which  some  Eabbinical  tradition  applied  to  Joshua, 
and  at  the  same  time  identified  Joash  and  Saraph, 
mentioned  in  the  same  verse,  with  Mahlon  and 
Chilion.  Jerome  quotes  a  Hebrew  legend  that 
Jokim  was  Elimelech  the  husband  of  Naomi,  in 
whose  clays  the  sun  stood  still  on  account  of  the 
transgressors  of  the  law  (Qwest.  Ifeh.  in  Paral.). 

JOK'MEAM  (Dl?JDp'' :  y  'UKfiadp:  Jccmaum^, 
a  city  of  Ephraim,  given  with  its  suburbs  to  the 
Kohathite  Levites  (1  Chr.  vi.  68).  The  catalogue 
of  the  towns  of  Ephraim  in  the  Book  of  Joshua  is 
unfortunately  very  imperfect  (see  xvi.),  but  in  the 
parallel  list  of  Levitical  cities  in  Josh,  xxi.,  KrBZAlM 
occupies  the  place  of  Jokmeam  (ver.  22).  The 
situation  of  Jokmeam  is  to  a  certain  extent  indi- 
cated in  1  K.  iv.  12,  where  it  is  named  with  places 


JOKNEAM 

which  we  know  to  have  been  in  the  Jordan  valley 
at  the  extreme  east  boundary  of  the  tribe.  (Here 
the  A.  V.  has,  probably  by  a  printer's  error, 
JOKNEAM.)  Tliis  position  is  further  supported  by 
that  of  the  other  Levitical  cities  of  this  tribe — 
Shechem  in  the  north,  Bethhoron  in  the  south,  and 
Gezer  in  the  extreme  west,  leaving  Jokmeam  to  take 
the  opposite  place  in  the  east  (see,  however,  the  con- 
trary opinion  of  Robinson,  iii.  115  note).  With 
regard  to  the  substitution  of  Kibzaim — which  is  not 
found  again — for  Jokmeam,  we  would  only  draw 
attention  to  the  fact  of  the  similarity  in  appearance 
of  the  two  names,  DJJOp*  and  D*X3p.  [G.] 

JOK'NEAM  (PVW  :  'leKfidv,  yMadv;  Alex. 
'leKovdfi,  'leKva/ii,  ^'Eitcei/i:  Jachanan,  Jeconam, 
•  /<  en  tm),.  a  city  of  the  tribe  of  Zebulun,  allotted 
with  its  suburbs  to  the  Merarite  Levites  ( Josh.  xxi. 
.'14),  but  entirely  omitted  in  the  catalogue  of  1  Chr. 
vi.  (comp.  ver.  77).  It  is  doubtless  the  same 
place  as  that  which  is  incidentally  named  in  con- 
nexion with  the  boundaries  of  the  tribe — "  the 
torrent  which  faces  Jokneam  "  (xix.  11  ),and  as  the 
Canaanite  town,  whose  king  was  killed  by  Joshua — 
"Jokneam  of  Carmel  "  (xii.  22).  The  require- 
ments of  these  passages  are  sufficiently  met  by  the 
modern  site  Tell  Kainvm,  an  eminence  which  stands 
just  below  the  eastern  termination  of  Carmel,  with 
the  Kishon  at  its  feet  about  a  mile  off.  Dr.  Robin- 
son has  shown  (B.  R.  iii.  115  note)  that  the 
modern  name  is  legitimately  descended  from  the 
ancient:  the  CYAMON  of  Jud.  vii.  3  being  a  step 
in  the  pedigree,  (See  also  Van  de  Velde,  i.  331, 
and  Memoir,  326.)  Jokneam  is  found  in  the  A.  V. 
of  1  K.  iv.  12,  but  this  is  unwarranted  by  either 
Hebrew  text,  Alex.  LXX.  or  Vulgate  (both  of 
which  have  the  reading  Jokmeam,  the  Vat.  LXX. 
is  quite  corrupt),  and  also  by  the  requirements  of 
the  passage,  as  stated  under  Jokmeam.       .  [G.] 

JOK'SHAN  {\V\?  :  'le(dv  ;  'U£dv :  Jecscm), 

a  son  of  Abraham  and  Keturah  (Gen.  xxv.  2,  3  ; 
1  Chr.  i.  32),  whose  sons  were  Sheba  and  Dedan. 
While  the  settlements  of  his  two  sons  are  presump- 
tively placed  on  the  borders  of  Palestine,  those  of 
Jokshan  are  not  known.  The  Keturahites  certainly 
stretched  across  the  desert  from  the  head  of  the 
Arabian,  to  that  of  the  Persian,  gulf;  and  the  rea- 
sons for  supposing  this  especially  in  the  case  of 
Jokshan  are  mentioned  in  Art.  Dedan.  If  those 
reasons  be  accepted,  we  must  suppose  that  Jokshan 
returned  westwards  to  the  trans- Jordanic  country, 
where  are  placed  the  settlements  of  his  sons,  or  at 
Least  the  chief  of  their  settlements;  for  a  wide 
spread  of  these  tribes  seems  to  be  indicated  in  the 
passages  in  the  Bible  which  make  mention  of  them. 
1'laces  or  tribes  bearing  their  names,  and  conse- 
quently that  of  Jokshan,  may  be  looked  for  over 
the  whole  of  the  country  intervening  between  the 
heals  of  the  two  gulfs. 

The  writings  of  the  Arabs  are  rarely  of  use  in  the 
case  of  Keturahite  tribes,  whom  they  seem  to  con- 
found with  [shmaelites  in  one  common  appellation. 
They  mention  a  dialect  of  Jokshan  (•'  Yakish,  who 
is  Yokshau,"  as  having  been  formerly  spoken  near 
'Aden  and  El-Jened,  in  Southern  Arabia,  Yakoot's 
Moajam,  cited  in  the  Zeitschrift  </.  Deutsch.  Mor- 
genl.  Geshell&chaft,  viii.  600-1,  x.  30-1);  but  that 
Midianites  penetrate  1  so  far  into  the  peninsula  we  hold 
to  be  highly  improbable  [see  Arabia].   [E.  S.  P.] 


JOKTAN 


1117 


a  It  is  remarkable  that  in  historical  questions,  th" 
tabbing  are  singularly  wide  of  the  truth,  dicpla;  mg 


JOK'TAN  (|Dj?\  "small,"  Ges. :  'leicrdv: 
Jectari),  son  of  Eber  (Gen.  x.  25  ;  1  Chr.  i. 
19)  ;  and  the  father  of  the  Joktanite  Arabs.  His 
sons  were  Almodad,  Sheleph,  Hazarmaveth,  Jerah, 
Hadoram,  Uzal,  Diklah,  Obal,  Abiinael,  Sheba, 
Ophir,  Havilah,  and  Jobab  ;  progenitors  of  tribes 
peopling  southern  Arabia,  many  of  whom  are  clearly 
identified  with  historical  tribes,  and  the  rest  probably 
identified  in  the  same  manner.  The  first-named 
identifications  are  too  well  proved  to  admit  of 
doubt ;  and  accordingly  scholars  are  agreed  in  plac- 
ing the  settlements  of  Joktan  in  the  south  of  the 
peninsula.  The  original  limits  are  stated  in  the 
Bible,  "  their  dwelling  was  from  Mesha,  as  thou 
goest  unto  Sephar,  a  mount  of  the  East"  (Gen.  x. 
30).  The  position  of  Mesha,  which  is  reasonably 
supposed  to  be  the  western  boundary,  is  still  un- 
certain [Mesha]  ;  but  Sephar  is  well  established 
as  being  the  same  as  Zafari,  the  sea-port  town  on 
the  east  of  the  modern  Yemen,  and  formeily  one  of 
the  chief  centres  of  the  great  Indian  and  African 
trade  [Sephar  ;  Arabia].  Besides  the  genealo- 
gies in  Gen.  x.,  we  have  no  record  of  Joktan  himself 
in  the,  Bible ;  but  there  are  mentions  of  the  peoples 
sprung  from  him,  which  must  guide  all  researches 
into  the  history  of  the  race.  The  subject  is  natu- 
rally divided  into  the  history  of  Joktan  himself, 
and  that  of  his  sons  and  their  descendants. 

The  native  traditions  respecting  Joktan  com- 
mence with  a  difficulty.  The  ancestor  of  the  great 
southern  peoples  were  called  Kahtan,  who,  say 
the  Arabs,  was  the  same  as  Joktan.  To  this  some 
European  critics  have  objected  that  there  is  no 
good  reason  to  account  for  the  change  of  name,  and 
that  the  identification  of  Kahtan  with  Joktan  is 
evidently  a  Jewish  tradition  adopted  by  Mohammad 
or  his  followers,  and  consequently  at  or  after  the 
promulgation  of  El-Islam.  M.  Caussin  de  Perceval 
commences  his  essay  on  the  history  of  Yemen 
Ess  "',  i.  39)  with  this  assertion,  and  adds,  "  Le 
nom  de  Cahtan,  disent-ils  [les  Arabes],  est  le  nom 
de  Yectan,  legerement  altere  en  passant  d'une  langue 
e'trangere  dans  la  langue  arabe."  In  reply  to  these 
objectors,  we  may  state : — 

1.  The  Rabbins  hold  a  tradition  that  Joktan 
settled  in  India  (see  Joseph.  Ant.  i.  6,  §4),  and  the 
supposition  of  a  Jewish  influence  in  the  Arab  tra- 
ditions respecting  him  is  therefore  untenable. a  In 
the  present  case,  even  were  this  not  so,  there  is  an 
absence  of  motive  for  Mohammad's  adopting  tradi- 
tions which  alienate  from  the  race  of  Ishmael  many 
tribes  of  Arabia:  the  influence  here  suspected  may 
rather  be  found  in  the  contradictory  assertion,  put 
forward  by  a  few  of  the  Arabs,  and  rejected  by  the 
great  majority,  and  the  most  judicious,  of  their  his- 
torians, that  Kahtan  was  descended  from  Ishmael. 

2.  That  the  traditions  in  question  are  post-Mo- 
hammadan  cannot  be  proved  ;  the  same  may  be 
said  of  everything  which  Arab  writers  tell  us  dates 
before  the  Prophet's  time;  for  then  or^  tradition 
alone  existed,  if  we  except  the  rock-cut  inscriptions 
of  the  Himyerites,  which  are  too  few,  and  our 
knowledge!  of  them  is  too  slight,  to  admit  of  much 
weight  attaching  to  them. 

•'!.  A  passage  in  the  Mir-dt  ez-Zemdn,  hitherto 
unpublished,  throws  new  light  on  the  point.  It  is 
as  follows: — •* Ibn-El-Kelbee  says,  Yuktan  [whose 
name  is  also  written  Yuktan]  is  the  same  as  Kah- 
tan son  of  'A'bir,"    i.e.  Eber,  ami  so  say  the  gene- 


a  deficiency  of  the  critical  faculty  that  is  character- 
istic of  shemitic  races. 


1118 


JOKTAN 


rality  of  the  Arabs.  "  El-Bdadhiree  says,  People 
differ  respecting  Kahtan  ;  some  say  he  is  the  same 
as  Yuktan,  who  is  mentioned  in  the  Pentateuch  ; 
but  the  Arabs  arabicized  his  name,  and  said  Kahtan 
the  son  of  Hood  [because  they  identified  their  pro- 
phet Hood  with  Eber,  whom  they  call  'A'bir]  ;  and 
some  say,  son  of  Es-Semeyfa',"  or  as  is  said  in  one 
place  by  the  author  here  quoted,  "  El-Hemeysa', 
the  son  of  Nebt  [or  Nabit,  i.  e.  Nebaioth],  the  son  of 
Isma'eel,"  i.  e.  Ishmael.  He  then  proceeds,  in  conti- 
nuation of  the  former  passage,  "  Aboo-Haneefeh  Ed- 
Deenawaree  says,  He  is  Kahtan  the  son  of  'A'bir  ; 
and  was  named  Kahtan  only  because  of  his  suffering 
from  drought "  [which  is  termed  in  Arabic  Kaht] . 
(Mir-at  ez-Zeman  ;  account  of  the  sons  of  Shem.) 
Of  similar  changes  of  names  by  the  Arabs  there 
are  numerous  instances.  Thus  it  is  evident  that 
the  name  of  "  Saul  "  (>1NE}>)  was  changed  by  the 

3  3      - 

Arabs  to  "Talootu"   (^jJUa),    because    of  his 

5     3  „     „ 

tallncss,  from  \A^  (tallness),  or  \j_kj  (he  was 
tall)  ;  although  the  latter  name,  being  impe»-fectly 
declinable,  is  not  to  be  considered  as  Arabic  (which 
several  Arabian  writers  assert  it  to  be),  but  as  a 
variation  of  &  foreign  name.  (See  the  remarks  on 
this  name,  as  occurring  in  the  Kur-an,  ch.  ii.  248, 
in  the  Expositions  of  Ez-Zamakhsheree  and  El- 
Beydawee.)  We  thus  obtain  a  reason  for  the  change 
of  name  which  appears  to  be  satisfactory,  whereas 
the  theory  of  its  being  arabicized  is  not  readily  to 
be  explained  unless  we  suppose  the  term  "  arabi- 
cized "  to  be  loosely  employed  in  this  instance. 

4.  If  the  traditions  of  Kahtan  be  rejected  (and 
in  this  rejection  we  cannot  agree),  they  are,  it  must 
be  remembered,  immaterial  to  the  fact  that  the 
peoples  called  by  the  Arabs  descendants  of  Kahtan, 
are  certainly  Joktanites.  His  sons'  colonisation  of 
Southern  Arabia  is  proved  by  indisputable,  and  undis- 
puted, identifications,  and  the  great  kingdom,  which 
there  existed  for  many  ages  before  our  era,  and  in 
its  later  days  was  renowned  in  the  world  of  classical 
antiquity,  was  as  surely  Joktanite. 

The  settlements  of  the  sons  of  Joktan  are  exa- 
mined in  the  separate  articles  bearing  their  names, 
and  generally  in  Arabia.  They  colonised  the 
whole  of  the  south  of  the  peninsula,  the  old  "Ara- 
bia Felix,"  or  the  Yemen  (for  this  appellation  had 
a  very  wide  significance  in  early  times),  stretching, 
according  to  the  Arabs  (and  there  is  in  this  case 
no  ground  for  doubting  their  general  correctness), 
to  Mekkeh,  on  the  north-west,  and  along  nearly 
the  whole  of  the  southern  coast  eastwards,  and  far 
inland.  At  Mekkeh,  tradition  connects  the  two 
great  races  of  Joktan  and  Ishmael,  by  the  marriage 
of  a  daughter  of  Jurhum  the  Joktanite  with  Ish- 
mael. It  is  necessary  in  mentioning  this  Jurhum, 
who  is  called  a  "  son"  of  Joktan  (Kahtan),  to  ob- 
serve tha^  "  son  "  in  these  cases  must  be  regarded 
as  signifying  "  descendant "  (cf.  Chronology,  in 
Hebrew  generations),  and  that  many  generations 
(though  how  many,  or  in  what  order,  is  not  known) 
are  missing  from  the  existing  list  between  Kahtan 
(embracing  the  most  important  time  of  the  Jok- 
tanites) and  the  establishment  of  the  comparatively- 
modern  Himyerite  kingdom  ;  from  this  latter  date, 
stated  by  Caussin,  Essai,  i.  63,  at  B.C.  cir.  100,  the 

b  It  is  curious  that  the  Greeks  first  mention  the 
Ilimyerites  in  the  expedition  of  Aelius  Gallus,  towards 
tho  close  of  the  1st  century  B.C.,  although  Himyer 


JOKTAN 

succession  of  the  Tubbaas  is  apparently  preserved 
to  us.b  At  Mekkeh,  the  tribe  of  Jurhum  long  held 
the  office  of  guardians  of  the  Kaabeh,  or  temple, 
and  the  sacred  enclosure,  until  they  were  expelled 
by  the  Ishmaelites  (Kutb-ed-Deen,  Hist,  of  Mekkeh, 
ed.  Wustenfeld,  pp.  35  and  39  seqq. ;  and  Caussin. 
Essai,\.  194).  But  it  was  at  Seba,  the  Biblical  Sheba, 
that  the  kingdom  of  Joktan  attained  its  greatness. 
In  the  south-western  angle  of  the  peninsula,  San 'a 
(Uzal),  Seba  (Sheba),  and  Hadramawt  (Hazarma- 
veth),  all  closely  neighbouring,  formed  together  the 
principal  known  settlements  of  the  Joktanites.  Here 
arose  the  kingdom  of  Sheba,  followed  in  later  times 
by  that  of  Himyer.  The  dominant  tribe  from  remote 
ages  seems  to  have  been  that  of  Seba  (or  Sheba, 
the  Sabaei  of  the  Greeks)  :  while  the  family  of 
Himyer  (flomeritae)  held  the  first  place  in  the 
tribe.  The  kingdom  called  that  of  Himyer  we  be- 
lieve to  have  been  merely  a  late  phasis  of  the  old 
Sheba,  dating,  both  in  its  rise  and  its  name,  only 
shortly  before  our  era. 

In  Arabia  we  have  alluded  to  certain  curious 
indications  in  the  names  of  Himyer,  Ophir,  the 
Phoenicians,  and  the  Erythraean  Sea,  and  the  tiaces 
of  their  westward  spread,  which  would  well  repay 
a  careful  investigation ;  as  well  as  the  obscure 
relations  of  a  connexion  with  Chaldaea  and  As- 
syria, found  in  Berosus  and  other  ancient  writers, 
and  strengthened  by  presumptive  evidence  of  a  con- 
nexion closer  than  that  of  commerce,  in  religion, 
&c,  between  those  countries  and  Arabia.  An 
equally  interesting  and  more  tangible  subject,  is 
the  apparently-proved  settlement  of  Cushite  races 
along  the  coast,  on  the  ground  also  occupied  by 
Joktanites,  involving  intermarriages  between  these 
peoples,  and  explaining  the  Cyclopean  masonry  of 
the  so-called  Himyerite  ruins  which  bear  no  mark 
of  a  Shemite's  hand,  the  vigorous  character  of  the 
Joktanites  and  their  sea-faring  propensities  (both 
qualities  not  usually  found  in  Shemites),  and  the 
Cushitic  elements  in  the  rock-cut  inscriptions  in  the 
"  Himyeritic"  language. 

Next  in  importance  to  the  tribe  of  Seba  was  that 
of  Hadramawt,  which,  till  the  fall  of  the  Himyerite 
power,  maintained  a  position  of  independence  and  a 
direct  line  of  rulers  from  Kahtan  (Caussin,  i.  135-6). 
Joktanite  tribes  also  passed  northwards,  to  Heereh, 
in  El-Trak,  and  to  Ghassan,  near  Damascus.  The 
emigration  of  these  and  other  tribes  took  place  on 
the  occasion  of  the  rupture  of  a  great  dyke  (the 
Dyke  of  El-'Arim),  above  the  metropolis  of  Seba  ; 
a  catastrophe  that  appears,  from  the  concurrent 
testimony  of  Arab  writers,  to  have  devastated  a 
great  extent  of  country,  and  destroyed  the  city 
Ma-rib  or  Seba.  This  event  forms  the  commence- 
ment of  an  era,  the  dates  of  which  exist  in  the  in- 
scriptions on  the  Dyke  and  elsewhere  ;  but  when  we 
should  place  that  commencement  is  still  quite  an 
open  question.  (See  the  extracts  from  El-Mes'oodee 
and  other  authorities,  edited  by  Schultens ;  Caus- 
sin, i.  84,  seqq.;  and  ARABIA.) 

The  position  which  the  Joktanites  hold  (in  native 
traditions)  among  the  successive  races  who  are  said' 
to  have  inhabited  the  peninsula  has  been  fully 
stated  in  Art.  Arabia  ;  to  which  the  reader  is  re- 
ferred  for  a  sketch  of  the  inhabitants  generally, 
their  descent,  history,  religion,  and  language.  There 
are  some  existing  places  named  after  Joktan  and 


himself  lived  long  before;  agreeing-  with  our  belief 
that  his  family  was  important  before  the  establish- 
ment of  the  so-called  kingdom.     See  Caussin,  /.  c. 


JOKTHEEL 

Kahtan  (El-Idreesee,  Ed.  Jaubert;  Niebuhr,  Dcscr. 
238  '')  ;  but  there  seems  to  lie  no  safe  ground  for 
attaching  to  them  any  special  importance,  or  for 
supposing  that  the  name  is  ancient  when  we  re- 
member that  the  whole  country  is  foil  of  the  tra- 
ditions of  Joktan.  [E.  S.  P.] 

JOK'THEEL   (SNTlpp.        1.  ('laxaptfa  ; 

Alex.  'lexOuTl*-  '•  Jecthcl),  a  city  in  the  low  coun- 
try of  Jiulah  (.Josh:  xv.  38),  named  next  to  Laehish 
— probably  Um-Lakis,  on  the  road  between  Bcit- 
gibrin  and  Gaza.  The  name  does  not  appear  to  have 
been  yet  discovered. 

2.  ('IefloTjA.;  Alex.  'UkOotjA  :  JectehcT) :  "God- 
subdued,"  the  title  given  by  Amaziah  to  the  cliff 
(V?BT\,  A.  V.  Selah)  — the  stronghold  of  the 
Edomites — after  he  had  captured  it  from  them 
(2  K.  xiv.  7).  The  parallel  narrative  of  2  Chr. 
xxv.  11-13  supplies  fuller  details.  From  it  we 
learn  that,  having  beaten  the  Edomite  army  with 
a  great  slaughter  in  the  "Valley  of  Salt" — the 
valley  south  of  the  Dead  Sea — Amaziah  took  those 
who  were  not  slain  to  the  cliff,  and  threw  them 
headlong  over  it.  This  cliff  is  asserted  by  Eusebius 
(Onomust.  irerpa)  to  be  "  a  city  of  Edam,  also 
called  by  the  Assyrians  Rekem,"  by  which  there 
is  no  doubt  that  he  intends  Petra  (see  Onomasticon, 
'PeKffj.,  and  the  quotations  in  Stanley's  S.  Sf  P. 
94  note).  The  title  thus  bestowed  is  said  to  have 
continued  "  unto  this  day."  This,  Keil  remarks, 
is  a  proof  that  the  history  was  nearly  contemporary 
with  the  event,  because  Amaziah's  conquest  was 
lost  again  by  Ahaz  less  than  a  century  after- 
wards (2  Chr.  xxviii.  17).  [G.] 

JO'NA  Qluva :  Jona),  the  father  of  the  Apostle 
Peter  (John  i.  42),  who  is  hence  addressed  as 
Simon  Barjona  in  Matt.  xvi.  17.  In  the  A.  V.  of 
John  xxi.  15-17  he  is  called  Jonas,  though  the 
<  ireek  is  'Iwavvqs,  and  the  Vulg.  Johannes  through- 
out. The  name  in  either  form  would  be  the  equi- 
valent of  the  Hebrew  Johanan. 

JON'ADAB.  1.  (2"m",  and  once  TUirP, 
i.e.  Jehonadab :  'IcoyaSa/S :  Jonadab),  son  of  Shimeah 
and  nephew  of  David.  He  is  described  as  "  very 
subtil"  (<ro<phs  ff<p65pa;  the  word  is  that  usually 
translated  ';  wise,"  as  in  the  case  of  Solomon,  2  Sam. 
xiii.  :'>).  He  seems  to  have  been  one  of  those  cha- 
racters who,  in  the  midst  of  great  or  royal  families, 
pride  themselves,  and  are  renowned,  for  being  ac- 
quainted with  the  secrets  of  the  whole  circle  in 
which  they  move.  His  age  naturally  made  him 
the  friend  of  his  cousin  Amnon,  heir  to  the  throne 
(2  Sam.  xiii.  3).  He  perceived  from  the  prince's 
altered  appearance  that  there  was  some  unknown 
grief — '■  Why  art  thou,  the  king's  son,  so  lean  ?" — 
and,  when  lie  had  wormed  it  out,  he  gave  him  the 
fatal  advice,  for  ensnaring  his  sister  Tamar  (5,  6). 

Again,  when,  in  a  later  stage  of  the  same  tragedy, 
Amnon  was  murdered  by  Absalom,  and  the  exag- 
gerated report  reached  David  that  all  the  princes 
were  slaughtered,  Jonadab  was  already  aware  of  the 
real  stale  of  the  ease,  lie  was  with  the  king,  and  was 
able  at  once  to  reassure  him  (2  Sam.  xiii.  32, ;);',). 

2.  Jen  xxxv.  •;,  s.  In,  14,  16,  18,  19,  in  which 
it  represents  sometimes  the  long,  sometimes  the  shod 
Heb.  form  of  the  name.  [Jehonadab.]  [A.P.S.] 


JONAH 


1119 


c   Niebuhr  also  [Deser.  249)  mentions   the    reputed 

tomb  (it  Kahtan,  hut  probably  refers  to  the  tomb  of 


JO'NAII  (ftfV  ;  'lavas,  LXX.  and  Matt.  xii. 
39),  a  prophet,  son  of  Amittai  (whose  name,  con- 
founded with  DDX,  used  by  the  widow  of  Zare- 

pheth,  1  K.  xvii.  24-,  has  given  rise  to  an  old  tra- 
dition, recorded  by  Jerome,  that  Jonah  was  Iter  son, 
and  that  Amittai  was  a  prophet  himself).  We 
further  learn  from  2  K.  xiv.  25,  he  was  of  Gath- 
hepher,  a  town  of  lower  Galilee,  in  Zebulun.  This 
verse  enables  us  to  approximate  to  the  time  at  which 
Jonah  lived.  It  was  plainly  after  the  reign  of  Jehu, 
when  the  losses  of  Israel  (2  K.  x.  32)  began ;  and 
it  may  not  have  been  till  the  latter  part  of  the 
reign  of  Jeroboam  II.  The  general  opinion  is  that 
Jonah  was  the  first  of  the  prophets  (Rosenm., 
Bp.  Lloyd,  Davison,  Browne,  Drake)  :  Hengsten- 
berg  would  place  him  after  Amos  and  Hosea,  and 
indeed  adheres  to  the  order  of  the  books  in  the 
canon  for  the  chronology.  The  king  of  Nineveh  at 
this  time  is  supposed  (Ussher  and  others)  to  have 
been  Pul,  who  is  placed  by  Layard  (JSrin.  awl  Bab. 
624)  at  B.C.  750 ;  but  an  earlier  king,  Adrammelech 
II.,  B.C.  840,  is  regarded  more  probable  by  Drake. 
Our  English  Bible  gives  B.C.  862. 

The  personal  history  of  Jonah  is  brief,  and  well 
known ;  but  is  of  such  an  exceptional  and  extra- 
ordinary character,  as  to  have  been  set  down  by 
many  German  critics  to  fiction,  either  in  whole  or 
in  part.  The  book,  say  they,  was  composed,  or 
compounded,  some  time  after  the  death  of  the 
prophet,  perhaps  (Rosenm.)  at  the  latter  part  of 
the  Jewish  kingdom,  during  the  reign  of  Josiah 
(S.  Sharpe),  or  even  later.  The  supposed  impro- 
babilities are  accounted  for  by  them  in  a  variety 
of  ways  ;  e.  g.  as  merely  fabulous,  or  fanciful  orna- 
ments to  a  true  history,  or  allegorical,  or  para- 
bolical and  moral,  both  in  their  origin  and  design. 
A  list  of  the  critics  who  have  advanced  these 
several  opinions  may  be.  seen  in  Davidson's  Intro- 
duction, p.  956.  Rosenmiiller  [Proleg.  in  Jonam  ) 
refutes  them  in  detail ;  and  then  propounds  his  own, 
which  is  equally  baseless.  Like  them,  he  begins 
with  proposing  to  escape  the  difficulties  of  the 
history,  but  ends  in  a  mere  theory,  open  to  still' 
greater  difficulties.  "  The  fable  of  Hercules,"  he 
says,  "  devoured  and  then  restored  by  a  sea-monster, 
was  the  foundation  on  which  the  Hebrew  prophet 
built  up  the  story.  Nothing  was  really  true  in  it." 
We  feel  ourselves  precluded  from  any  doubt  of  the 
reality  of  the  transactions  recorded  in  this  book,  by 
the  simplicity  of  the  language  itself;  by  the  histo- 
rical allusions  in  Tob.  xiv.  4-6,  15,  and  Joseph. 
Ant.  ix.  1 0,  §2  ;  by  the  accordance  with  other  autho- 
rities of  the  historical  and  geographical  notices;  by 
the  thought  that  we  might  as  well  doubt  all  other 
miracles  in  Scripture  as  doubt  these  ("  Quod  aut 
omnia  divina  miracula  credenda  non  sint,  aut  hoc 
cur  non  credetur  causa  multa  sit,"  Aug.  Ep.  cii.  in 
quaest.  >>  de  Jona,  ii.  284;  cf.  Cyril.  Alex.  Com- 
ment, in  Jonam,  hi.  367-389)  ;  above  all,  by  tie 
explicit  words  and  teaching  of  our  blessed  Lord 
Himself  (Matt.  xii.  39,  41,  xvi.  4  ;  Luke  xi.  29), 
and  by  the  correspondence  of  the  miracles  in  the 
histories  of  Jonah  ami  of  the  Messiah. 

We  shall  derive  additional  arguments  for  the 
same  conclusion  from  the  history  and  meaning  of 
the  prophet's  mission.  Having  already,  as  it  seems 
(from  l  iii  i.  1),  prophesied  to  Israel,  he  was  sent 


the  prophet  Hood,  who,  as  we  have  mentioned,  is  by 
some  thought  to  he  the  fathi  r  of  Kahtan. 


1120 


JONAH 


to  Nineveh.  The  time  was  one  of  political  revival 
in  Israel ;  but  ere  long  the  Assyrians  were  to  be 
employed  by  God  as  a  scourge  upon  them.  The 
Israelites  consequently  viewed  them  with  impulsive- 
ness ;  and  the  prophet,  in  accordance  with  his 
name  (HJV,  "  a  dove"),  out  of  timidity  and  love 
for  his  country,  shrunk  from  a  commission  which 
he  felt  sure  would  result  (iv.  2)  in  the  sparing  of  a 
hostile  city.  He  attempted  therefore  to  escape  to 
Tarshish,  either  Tartessus  in  Spain  (Bochart,  Tit- 
comb,  Hengst.),  or  more  probably  (Drake)  Tarsus 
in  Cilicia,  a  port  of  commercial  intercourse.  The 
providence  of  God,  however,  watched  over  him, 
first  in  a  storm,  and  then  in  his  being  swallowed 
by  a  large  fish  (?V1j|  }1)  for  the  space  of  three 
days  and  three  nights.  We  need  not  multiply 
miracles  by  supposing  a  great  fish  to  have  been 
created  for  the  occasion,  tor  Bochart  (fficroz.  ii. 
pp.  752-754)  has  shown  that  there  is  a  sort  of  shark 
which  devours  a  man  entire,  as  this  did  Jonah  while 
cast  into  the  water  (August.  Ep.  49,  ii.  284). 

After  his  deliverance,  Jonah  executed'  his  com- 
mission ;  and  the  king,  "  believing  him  to  be  a 
minister  from  the  supreme  deity  of  the  nation" 
(Layard's  Nineveh  and  Babylon),  and  having  heard 
of  his  miraculous  deliverance  (Dean  Jackson  On  the 
Creed,  bk.  ix.  c.  42),  ordered  a  general  fast,  and 
averted  the  threatened  judgment.  But  the  prophet, 
not  from  personal  but  national  feelings,  grudged  the 
meicy  shown  to  a  heathen  nation.  He  was  therefore 
taught,  by  the  significant  lesson  of  the  "  gourd," 
whose  growth  and  decay  (a  known  fact  to  natu- 
ralists, Layard's  Nineveh,  i.  123,  124)  brought  the 
truth  at  once  home  to  him,  that  he  was  sent  to 
testify  by  deed,  as  other  prophets  would  afterwards 
testify  by  word,  the  capacity  of  Gentiles  for  sal- 
vation, and  the  design  of  God  to  make  them  par- 
takers of  it.  This  was  "  the  sign  of  the  prophet 
Jonas "  which  was  given  to  a  proud  and  perverse 
generation  of  Jews  after  the  ascension  of  Christ  by 
the  preaching  of  His  Apostles.  (Luke  xi.  29,  30, 
32;  Jackson's  Comm.  on  the  Creed,  ix.  c.  42.) 

But  the  resurrection  of  Christ  it  ".elf  was  also 
shadowed  forth  in  the  history  of  the  prophets,  as  is 
made  certain  to  us  by  the  words  of  our  Saviour. 
(See  Jackson,  as  above,  bk.  ix.  c.  40.)  Titcomb 
(Bible  Studies,  p.  237,  n.)  sees  a  correspondence 
between  Jon.  i.  17  and  Hosea  vi.  2.  Besides  which, 
the  fact  and  the  faith  of  Jonah's  prayer  in  the 
belly  of  the  fish  betokened  to  the  nation  of  Israel 
the  intimation  of  a  resurrection  and  of  immortality. 

We  thus  see  distinct  purposes  which  the  mis- 
sion of  Jonah  was  designed  to  serve  in  the  Divine 
economy;  and  in  these  we  have  the  reason  of  the 
history's  being  placed  in  the  prophetic  canon.  It 
was  highly  symbolical.  The  facts  contained  a  con- 
cealed prophecy.  Hence,  too.  only  so  much  of  the 
prophet's  personal  history  is  told  us  as  suffices  for 
setting  forth  the  symbols  divinely  intended,  which 
accounts  for  its  fragmentary  aspect.  Exclude  the 
symbolical  meaning,  and  you  have  no  adequate 
reason  to  give  of  this  history :  admit  it,  and  you 
have  images  here  of  the  highest  facts  and  doctrines 
of  Christianity.     (Davison,  On  Prophecy,  p.  275.) 

Forthe  extent  of  the  site  of  Nineveh, see  Nineveh. 

The  old  tradition  made  the  burial-place  of  Jonah 
to  be  Gath-hepher :  the  modern  tradition  places  it 
at  Nebi-Yunus,  opposite  Mosul.  See  the  account 
of  the  excavations  in  Layard's  Nineveh  and  Babylon, 
pp.  596,  597.  And  consult  Drake's  Notes  on  Jonah 
(Macmillan  and  Co.,  1853). 


JONATHAN 

See  Leusden's  Jonas  Tllustratm,  Trajecti  ad  Ehen. 
1692;  Rosenmiiller's  Scholia  in  Vet.  Test.;  Ex- 
position upon  the  Prophet  Jonah,  by  Abp.  Abbott 
(reprinted).  London,  1845;  Notes  on.  the  Pro- 
phecies of  Jonah  and  Hosea,  by  Rev.  W.  Drake, 
Cambridge,  1 853  :  Ewald  ;  Umbreit ;  Henderson, 
Minor  Prophets.  [H.  B.] 

JO'NAN  ('Iwyaj':  Jond),  son  of  Eliakim,  in  the 
genealogy  of  Christ,  in  the  7th  generation  after  David, 
i.e.  about  the  time  of  king  Jehoram  (Luke  iii.  30). 
The  name  is  probably  only  another  form  of  Johanan, 
which  occurs  so  frequently  in  this  genealogy.  The  se- 
quence of  names,  Jonan,  Joseph,  Juda,  Simeon,  Levi, 
Matthat,  is  singularly  like  that  in  vers.  26,  27,  Jo- 
anna, Judah,  Joseph,  Semei — Mattalhias.   [A .C.H.] 

JO'NAS.  1.  ('lonvds;  Alex.  'ClovSds  :  Elionas~). 
This  name  occupies  the  same  position  in  1  Esd.  ix. 
23  as  Eliezer  in  the  corresponding  list  in  Ezr. 
x.  23.  Perhaps  the  corruption  originated  in  read- 
ing *J*J?  vN  for  "ITJ?  v8,  as  appears  to  have  been  the 
case  in  1  Esd.  ix.  32  (comp.  Ezr.  x.  31).  The 
former  would  have  caught  the  compiler's  eye  from 
Ezr.  x.  22,  and  the  original  form  Elionas,  as  it 
appears  in  the  Vulg.,  could  easily  have  become 
Jonas. 

2.  ('Icovas,  Jonas.)  The  prophet  Jonah  (2  Esd. 
i.  39;  Tob.  xiv.  4,8;  Matt.  xii.  39,  40,  41, 
xvi.  4). 

3.  ('\o}&vv7)s :  Johannes),  John  xxi.  15-17. 
[Jona.] 

JONATHAN  (jro'liT,  i.e.  Jehonathan,  and 
}Fl3V ;  the  two  forms  are  used  almost  alternately: 
'IwvdQav,  Jos.  'looudOrjs  :  Jonathan),  the  eldest  son 
of  king  Saul.  The  name  ("the  gift  of  Jehovah," 
corresponding  to  Theodorus  in  Greek)  seems  to  have 
been  common  at  that  period  ;  possibly  from  the 
example  of  Saul's  son  (see  Jonathan,  the  nephew 
of  David,  Jonathan,  the  son  of  Abiathar,  Jo- 
nathan, the  son  of  Shage,  and  Nathan  the 
prophet). 

He  first  appears  some  time  after  his  father's  ac- 
cession (1  Sam.  xiii.  2).  If  his  younger  brother 
Ishbosheth  was  4<>  at  the  time  of  Saul's  death 
(2  Sam.  ii.  8),  Jonathan  must  have  been  at  least 
30,  when  he  is  first  mentioned.'  Of  his  own 
family  we  know  nothing,  except  "the  birth  of  one 
son,  5  years  before  his  death  (2  Sam.  iv.  4).  He  was 
regarded  in  his  father's  lifetime  as  heir  to  the  throne. 
Like  Saul,  he  was  a  man  of  great  strength  and 
activity  (2  Sam.  i.  23),  of  which  the  exploit  at 
Michmash  was  a  proof.  He  was  also  famous  for  the 
peculiar  martial  exercises  in  which  his  tribe  excelled 
— archery  and  slinging  (1  Chr.  xii.  2).  His  bow 
was  to  him  what  the  spear  was  to  his  father:  "  the 
bow  of  Jonathan  turned  not  back"  (2  Sam.  i.  22). 
It  was  always  about  him  (1  Sam.  xviii.  4,  xx.  35). 
It  is  through  his  relation  with  David  that  he  is 
chiefly  known  to  us,  probably  as  related  by  'his 
descendants  at  David's  court.  But  there  is  a  back- 
ground, not  so  clearly  given,  of  his  relation  with 
his  lather.  From  the  time  that  he  first  appears 
he  is  Saul's  constant  companion.  He  was  always 
present  at  his  father's  meals.  As  Abner  and  David 
seem  to  have  occupied  the  places  afterwards  called 
the  captaincies  of  "  the  host  "  and  "  of  the  guard  ;" 
so  he  seems  to  have  been  (as  Hushai  -afterwards) 
"the  friend"  (comp.  1  Sam.  xx.  25;  2  Sam.  xv. 
37).  The  whole  story  implies,  without  expressing, 
tli.'  deep  attachment  of  the  father  and  son.     Jona- 


JONATHAN 

than  can  only  go  on  his  dangerous  expedition  (1  Smb. 
xiv.  1)  by  concealing  it  from  Saul.  Saul's  vow  is 
confirmed,  and  its  tragic  effect  deepened,  by  his  feel- 
ing for  his  son,  "  though  it  be  Jonathan  my  son" 
(ill.  xiv.  39).  "  Tell  me  what  thou  hast  done" 
(ib.  xiv.  4:3).  Jonathan  cannot  bear  to  believe  his 
father's  enmity  to  David,  "  my  father  will  do 
uothing  great  or  small,  but  that  he  will  show  it  to 
me :  and  why  should  my  father  hide  this  thing 
from  me?  it  is  not  so"  (1  Sam.  xx.  2).  To  him, 
if  to  any  one,  the  wild  frenzy  of  the  king  was 
amenable — "  Saul  hearkened  unto  the  voice  of  Jona- 
than" (1  Sam.  xix.  6).  Their  mutual  affection 
was  indeed  interrupted  by  the  growth  of  Saul's 
insanity.  Twice  the  father  would  have  sacrificed 
the  son:  once  in  consequence  of  his  vow  (1  Sam. 
xiv.) ;  the  second  time,  more  deliberately,  on  the 
discovery  of  David's  flight:  and  on  this  last  occa- 
sion, a  momentary  glimpse  is  given  of  some  darker 
history.  Were  the  phrases  "  son  of  a  perverse 
rebellious  woman,"  — "  shame  on  thy  mother's 
nakedness"  (1  Sam.  xx.  30,  31),  mere  frantic 
invectives?  or  was  theie  something  in  the  story  of 
Ahinoam  or  Rizpah  which  we  do  not  know  ?  "  In 
fierce  anger"  Jonathan  left  the  royal  presence  (ib. 
34).  But  he  cast  his  lot  with  his  lather's  decline, 
not  with  his  friend's  rise,  and  "  in  death  they  were 
not  divided  "  ('_'  Sam.  i.  23  ;    1  Sam.  xxiii.  16). 

His  life  may  be  divided  into  two  main  parts. 

1.  The  war  with  the  Philistines;  commonly 
called,  from  its  locality,  "the  war  of  Michmash," 
as  the  last  years  of  the  Peloponnesian  war  were 
called  for  a  similar  reason  "the  war  of  Decelea " 
(1  Sam.  xiii.  21,  LXX.)  In  the  previous  war 
with  the  Ammonites  (1  Sam.  xi.  4-15)  there  is  no 
mention  of  him  ;  and  his  abrupt  appearance,  with- 
out explanation,  in  xiii.  2,. may  seem  to  imply  that 
some  part  of  the  narrative  has  been  lost. 

He  is  already  of  great  importance  in  the  state. 
Of  the  3000  men  of  whom  Saul's  standing  army 
was  formed  (xiii.  2,  xxiv.  2,  xxvi.  1,  2),  1000  were 
under  the  command  of  Jonathan  at  Gibeah.  The 
Philistines  were  still  in  the  general  command  of  the 
country  ;  an  officer  was  stationed  at  Geba,  either 
the  same  as  Jonathan's  position  or  close  to  it. 
In  a  sudden  act  of  youthful  daring,  as  when 
'fell  rose  against  Gesler,  or  as  in  sacred  history 
Moses  rose  against  the  Egyptian,  Jonathan  slew 
this  officer,11  and  thus  gave  the  signal  for  a  general 
revolt.  Saul  took  advantage  of  it,  and  the  whole 
population  rose.  But  it  was  a  premature  attempt. 
The  Philistines  poured  in  from  the  plain,  and  the 
tyranny  became  more  deeply  rooted  than  ever. 
[Saul.]  Said  and  Jonathan  (with  their  imme- 
diate attendants)  alone  had  arms,  amidst  the  ge- 
neral weakness  and  disarming  of  the  people  (1  Sam. 
xiii.  22).     They  were  encamped  at  Gibeah,  with  a 

small  body  of  600  men.  ami  as  they  looked  down 
from  that  height  on  the  misfortunes  of  their  country, 
and  of  their  native  tribe  especially,  they  wept  aloud 
(tKAcuuv,  LXX.;   1   Sam.  xiii.  16). 

From  this  oppression,  as  Jonathan  by  his  former 
ait  had  been  the  first  to  provoke  it.  so  now  he  was 
the  first  to  deliver  his  people.    <  >n  the  former  occa- 


JONATHAN 


1121 


a  (A.V.  "  Garrison ")  rbv  Nao-i'j3,  LXX.;  1  Sain, 
xiii.  3,  4.     See  Ewald,  ii.  476. 

b  We  have  taken  the  LXX.  version  of  xiv.  13,  14  : 
ejre'/3Ati//ai'  Kara  Trpo'crw^oi'  'IwraOae,  kcu  €7raTa£et'auToi/s 
.  .  .  .  ei'  /SdAiai  «ai  ev   7reTpo/3dAot9   kgu   iv  ko\\o£i  tou 

tthSiov,  for  "  they  tell  before  Jonathan  ....  within 
as  it  were  a  half  acre  of  ground,  which  a  yoke  of  oxen 

might  plough."     The  alteration  of  the   Hebrew    nc- 


sion  Saul  had  been  equally  with  himself  involved 
in  the  responsibility  of  the  deed.  Saul  "  blew  the 
trumpet;"  Saul  had  "smitten  the  officer  of  the 
Philistines"  (xiii.  3,4).  But  now  it  would  seem 
that  Jonathan  was  resolved  to  undertake  the  whole 
risk  himself.  "  The  day,"  the  day  fixed  by  him 
(yiverai  y  yfxlpa,  LXX.;  1  Sam.  xiv.  1)  ap- 
proached ;  and  without  communicating  his  project 
to  any  one,  except  the  young  man,  whom,  like  all 
the  chiefs  of  that  age,  he  retained  as  his  armour- 
bearer,  he  sallied  forth  from  Gibeah  to  attack  the 
garrison  of  the  Philistines  stationed  on  the  other 
side  of  the  steep  defile  of  Michmash  (xiv.  1).  His 
words  are  short,  but  they  breathe  exactly  the  an- 
cient and  peculiar  spirit  of  the  Israelite  warrior. 
"  Come,  and  let  us  go  over  unto  the  garrison  of 
these  uncircumcised ;  it  may  be  that  Jehovah  will 
work  for  us :  for  there  is  no  restraint  to  Jehovah 
to  save  by  many  or  by  few."  The  answer  is  no 
less  characteristic  of  the  close  friendship  of  the  two 
young  men :  already  like  to  that  which  afterwards 
sprang  up  between  Jonathan  and  David.  "  Do  all 
that  is  in  thine  heart ;  . .  .  behold,  /  am  with  thee  ; 
as  thy  heart  is  my  heart  (LXX. ;  1  Sam.  xiv.  7)." 
After  the  manner  of  the  time  (and  the  more,  pro- 
bably, from  having  taken  no  counsel  of  the  high-priest 
or  any  prophet  "before  his  departure),  Jonathan 
proposed  to  draw  an  omen  for  their  course  from  the 
conduct  of  the  enemy.  If  the  garrison,  on^seeing 
them,  gave  intimations  of  descending  upon  them, 
they  would  remain  in  the  valley :  if,  on  the  other 
hand,  they  raised  a  challenge  to  advance,  they  were 
to  accept  it.  The  latter  turned  out  to  be  the  case. 
The  first  appearance  of  the  two  warriors  from  be- 
hind the  rocks  was  taken  by  the  Philistines,  as  a 
furtive  apparition  of  "  the  Hebrews  coming  forth 
out  of  the  holes  where  they  had  hid  themselves  ;" 
and  they  were  welcomed  with  a  scoffing  invitation 
(such  as  the  Jebusites  afterwards  offered  to  David), 
"  Come  up,  and  we  will  show  you  a  thing"  (xiv. 
4-12).  Jonathan  immediately  took  them  at  their 
word.  Strong  and  active  as  he  was,  "  strong  as  a  lion, 
and  swift  as  an  eagle  "  (2  Sam.  i.  23),  he  was  fully 
equal  to  the  adventure  of  climbing  on  his  hands  and 
feet  up  the  face  of  the  cliff.  When  he  came  directly 
in  view  of  them,  with  his  armourbearer  behind  him, 
they  both,  after  the  manner  of  their  tribe  (1  Chr. 
xii.  2)  discharged  a  flight  of  arrows,  stones,  and 
pebbles,b  from  their  bows,  crossbows,  and  slings, 
with  such  effect  that  20  men  fell  at  the  first  onset 
[Arms,  p.  Ilia].  A  panic  seized  the  garrison, 
thence  spread  to  the  camp,  and  thence  to  the 
surrounding  hordes  of  marauders  ;  an  earthquake 
combined  with  the  terror  of  the  moment  ;  the 
confusion  increased;  the  Israelites  who  bail  been 
taken  slaves  by  the  Philistines  dining  the  last  3 
days  (LXX.)  rose  in  mutiny,  the  Israelites  who  lay 
hid  in  the  numerous  caverns  and  deep  holes  in  which 
the  rocks  of  the  neighbourhood  abound,  sprang  out 
of  their  subterranean  dwellings.  Saul  and  his  little 
band  had  watched  in  astonishment  the  wild  retreat 
from  the  heights  of  Gibeah — he  now  joined  in  the 
pursuit,  which  led  him  headlong  after  the  fugitives, 

over  the  rugged  plateau  of  Bethel,  and  down0  the 

cessary  to  produce  this  reading  of  the  LXX.,  is 
given  by  Kennicott  Dissert,  on  1  Chron.  xi.  p.  153). 
Ewald  ;ii.  480)  makes  this  last  to  he,  "Jonathan 
anil  his  friend  were  as  a  yoke  of  oxen  ploughing, 
and  resisting  the  sharp  ploughshares." 

c  In  xiv.  23,  31,   the   LXX.   reads   "Bamoth"   for 
"  Beth-aven,"  and  omits  "Ajalon." 


1122 


JONATHAN 


pass  of  Beth-horon  to  Ajalon  (.\iv.  15-31).  [Gi- 
beah,  p.  69 1  a.]  The  father  and  son  had  not  met  on 
that  day:  Saul  only  conjectured  his  son's  absence 
from  not  finding  him  when  he  numbered  the  people. 
Jonathan  had  not  heard  of(  the  rash  curse  (xiv. 
24)  which  Saul  invoked  on  any  one  who  ate  before 
the  evening.  In  the  dizziness  and  darkness  (Hebrew, 
1  Sam.  xiv.  27)  that  came  on  after  his  desperate 
exertions,  he  put  forth  the  staff  which  apparently 
had  (with  his  sling  and  bow)  been  his  chief  wea- 
pon, and  tasted  the  honey  which  lay  on  the  ground 
as  they  passed  through  the  forest.  The  pursuers 
in  general  were  restrained  even  from  this  slight 
indulgence  by  fear  of  the  royal  curse ;  but  the 
moment  that  the  day,  with  its  enforced  fast,  was 
over,  they  flew,  like  Muslims  at  sunset  during 
the  fast  of  Ramadan,  on  the  captured  cattle ;  and 
devoured  them,  even  to  the  brutal  neglect  of  the  law 
which  forbade  the  dismemberment  of  the  fresh  car- 
cases with  the  blood.  This  violation  of  the  law 
Saul  endeavoured  to  prevent  and  to  expiate  by 
erecting  a  large  stone,  which  served  both  as  a  rude 
table  and  as  an  altar  ;  the  first  altar  that  was  raised 
under  the  monarchy.  It  was  in  the  dead  of  night 
after  this  wild  revel  was  over  that  he  proposed  that 
the  pursuit  should  be  continued  till  dawn ;  and 
then,  when  the  silence  of  the  oracle  of  the  high- 
priest  indicated  that  something  had  occurred  to  in- 
tercept the  Divine  favour,  the  lot  was  tried,  and 
Jonathan  appeared  as  the  culprit.  Jephthah's 
dreadful  sacrifice  would  have  been  repeated  ;  but 
the  people  interposed  in  behalf  of  the  hero  of  that 
great  day;  and  Jonathan  was  saved d  (xiv.  24-46). 
2.  This  is  the  only  great  exploit  of  Jonathan's 
life.  But  the  chief  interest  of  his  career  is  derived 
from  the  friendship  with  David,  which  began  on 
the  day  of  David's  return  from  the  victory  over 
the  champion  of  Gath,  and  continued  till  his  death. 
It  is  the  first  Biblical  instance  of  a  romantic  friend- 
ship, such  as  was  common  afterwards  in  Greece, 
and  has  been  since  in  Christendom ;  and  is  remark- 
able both  as  giving  its  sanction  to  these,  and  as 
filled  with  a  pathos  of  its  own,  which  has  been 
imitated,  but  never  surpassed,  in  modern  works  of 
fiction.  "  The  soul  of  Jonathan  was  knit  with  the 
soul  of  David,  and  Jonathan  loved  him  as  his  own 
soul " — "  Thy  love  to  me  was  wonderful,  passing 
the  love  of  women"  (1  Sam.  xviii.  1  ;  2  Sam.  i. 
2(3).  Each  found  in  each  the  affection  that  he 
found  not  in  his  own  family:  no  jealousy  of  rivalry 
between  the  two,  as  claimants  for  the  same  throne, 
ever  interposed :  "  Thou  shalt  be  king  in  Israel, 
and  I  shall  be  next  unto  thee"  (1  Sam.  xxiii.  17). 
The  friendship  was  confirmed,  after  the  manner  of 
the  time,  by  a  solemn  compact  often  repeated.  The 
first  was  immediately  on  their  first  acquaintance. 
Jonathan  gave  David  as  a  pledge  his  royal  mantle, 
his  sword,  his  girdle,  and  his  famous  bow  (xviii.  4). 
His  fidelity  was  soon  called  into,  action  by  the 
insane  rage  of  his  lather  against  David.  He  inter- 
ceded  for  his  lite,  at  first  with  success  (1  Sam.  xix. 
1-7).  Then  the  madness  returned  and  David  fled. 
It  was  in  a  secret  interview  during  this  flight,  by 
tlic  stone  of  Ezel,  that  the  second  covenant  was 
made  between  the  two  friends,  of  a  still  more 
binding  kind,  extending  to  their  mutual  posterity — 
Jonathan  laying  such  emphasis  on  this  portion  of 
the  compact,  as  almost  to   suggest   the   belief  of  a 


d  Josephus  [Ant.  vi.  G,  }5)  puts  into  Jonathan's 
mouth  a  speech  of  patriotic  self-devotion,  after  the 
manner  of  a  Greek  or  Roman.     Ewald  (ii.  183)  sup- 


JONATHAN 

slight  misgiving  on  his  part  of  David's  future  con- 
duct in  this  respect.  It  is  this  interview  which 
brings  out  the  character  of  Jonathan  in  the  liveliest 
colours — his  little  artifices — his  love  for  both  his 
father  and  his  friend — his  bitter  disappointment  at 
his  father's  unmanageable  fury — his  familial- spoi  t 
of  archery.  With  passionate  embraces  and  teais 
the  two  friends  parted,  to  meet  only  once  more 
(1  Sam.  xx.).  That  one  more  meeting  was  far 
away  in  the  forest  of  Ziph,  during  Saul's  pursuit 
of  David.  Jonathan's  alarm  for  his  friend's  life  is 
now  changed  into  a  confidence  that  he  will  escape: 
"  He  strengthened  his  hand  in  God."  Finally,  and 
for  the  third  time,  they  renewed  the  covenant,  and 
then  parted  for  ever  (1  Sam.  xxiii.  16-18). 

From  this  time  forth  we  hear  no  more  till  the 
battle  of  Gilboa.  In  that  battle  he  fell,  with  his 
two  brothers  and  his  father,  and  his  corpse  shared 
their  fate  (1  Sam.  xxxi.  2,  8).  [Saul.]  His  ashes 
were  buried  first  at  Jabesh-Gilead  (ib.  13),  but 
afterwards  removed  with  those  of  his  father  to 
Zelah  in  Benjamin  (2  Sam.  xxi.  12).  The  news 
of  his  death  occasioned  the  celebrated  elegy  of  David, 
in  which  he,  as  the  friend,  naturally  occupies  the 
chief  place  (2  Sam.  i.  22,  23,  25,  26),  and  which 
seems  to  have  been  sung  in  the  education  of  the 
archers  of  Judah,  in  commemoration  of  the  one 
great  archer,  Jonathan :  "He  bade  them  teach  the 
children  of  Judah  the  use  of  the  bow"  (2  Sam.  i. 
17,  18). 

He  left  one  son,  aged  five  years  old  at  the  time 
of  his  death  (2  Sam.  iv.  4),  to  whom  he  had  pro- 
bably given  his  original  name  of  Merib-baal,  after- 
wards changed  for  Mephibosheth  (comp.  1  Chr.  viii. 
:;4,  ix.  40).  [Mephibosheth.]  Through  him  the 
line  of  descendants  was  continued  down  to  the 
time  of  Ezra  (1  Chr.  ix.  40),  and  even  then  their 
great  ancestor's  archery  was  practised  amongst 
them.    [Saul.] 

2.  (jn^liT).  Son  of  Shimeah,  brother  of  Jonadab, 

and  nephew  of  David  (2  Sam.  xxi.  21 ;  1  Chr.  xx.  7  , 
He  inherited  the  union  of  civil  and  military  gifts,  so 
conspicuous  in  his  uncle.  Like  David,  he  engaged  in 
a  single  combat  and  slew  a  gigantic  Philistine  of  ( Jath, 
who  was  remarkable  for  an  additional  linger  and  toe 
on  each  hand  and  foot  (2  Sam.  xxi.  21).  If  we  may 
identify  the  Jonathan  of  1  Chr.  xxvii.  32  with  the 
Jonathan  of  this  passage,  where  the  word  translated 
"  uncle  "  may  be  "  nephew,"  he  was  (like  his  brother 
Jonadab)  "  wise" — and  as  such,  was  David's  coun- 
sellor and  secretary.  Jerome  ( Quaest.  Hob.  oh  1  Sam . 
xvii.  12)  conjectures  that  this  was  Nathan  the  pro- 
phet, thus  making  up  the  8th  son,  not  named  in 
1  Chr.  ii.  13-15.     But  this  is  not  probable. 

3.  The  son  of  Abiathar,  the  high-priest.  He  is 
the  last  descendant  of  Eli,  of  whom  we  hear  any- 
thing. He  appears  ou  two  occasions.  1.  On  the 
day  of  David's  flight  from  Absalom,  having  first 
accompanied  his  father  Abiathar  as  far  as  Olivet 
(2  Sam.  xv.  36),  he  returned  with  him  to  Jeru- 
salem, and  was  there,  with  Ahimaaz  the  son  of 
Zadok,  employed  as  a  messenger  to  carry  back  the 
news  of  Hushai's  plans  to  David  (xvii.  15-21). 
2.  On  the  day  of  Solomon's  inauguration,  he  sud- 
denly broke  in  upon  the  banquet  of  Adonijah,  to 
announce  the  success  of  the  rival  piince  (1  K.  i. 
42,  43).     It  may  be  inferred  from  Adonijah's  ex- 


poses that  a  substitute  was  killed  in  his  place. 
There  is  no  trace  of  either  of  these  in  the  sacred 
narrative. 


JONATHAN 

pression  ("  Thou  art  ;i  valiant  man,  and  bringest 
good  tidings"),  that  lie  bad  followed  the  policy  of 
his  father  Abiathar  in  Adonijab's  support. 

On  both  occasions,  it  may  be  remarked  that  he 
appears  as  the  swift  and  trusty  messenger. 

4.  The  son  of  Shage  the  Hararite  (1  Chr.  xi.  34 ; 
2  Sam.  xxiii.  32).  He  was  one  of  David's  heroes 
(gibborim).  The  LXX.  makes  his  father's  name 
Sola  (5o)/\.<x),  and  applies  the  epithet  "  Ararite" 
(o  'Apapi)  to  Jonathan  himself.  "Harar"  is  not 
mentioned  elsewhere  as  a  place ;  but  it  is  a  poetical 
word  for  "  Har "  (mountain),  and,  as  such,  may 
possibly  signify  in  this  passage  "  the  mountaineer." 
Another  officer  (Ahiam)  is  mentioned  with  Jo- 
nathan, as  bearing  the  same  designation  (1  Chr. 
xi.  35).  [A.  P.  S.] 

5.  ( jrUliT).  The  son,  or  descendant,  of  Gershom 
the  son  of  Moses,  whose  name  in  the  Masoretic  copies 
is  changed  to  Manasseh,  in  order  to  screen  the  me-* 
mory  of  the  great  lawgiver  from  the  disgrace  which 
attached  to  the  apostasy  of  one  so  closely  connected 
with  him  (Judg.xviii.3u).  While  wandering  through 
the  country  in  search  of  a  home,  the  young  Levite  of 
Bethlehem-Judah  came  to  the  house  of  Micah,  the 
rich  Ephraimite,  and  was  by  him  appointed  to  be  a 
kind  of  private  chaplain,  and  to  minister  in  the 
house  of  gods,  or  sanctuary,  which  Micah  had 
made  in  imitation  of  that  at  Shiloh.  He  was  recog- 
nised by  the  rive  Danite  spies  appointed  by  their 
tribe  to  search  the  land  for  an  inheritance,  who 
lodged  in  the  house  of  Micah  on  their  way  north- 
wards. The  favourable  answer  which  he  gave 
when  consulted  with  regard  to  the  issue  of  their 
expedition  probably  induced  them,  on  their  march 
to  Laish  with  the  warriors  of  their  tribe,  to  turn 
aside  again  to  the  house  of  Micah,  and  carry  oil' the 
ephod  mid  teraphim,  superstitiously  hoping  thus  to 
make  success  certain.  Jonathan,  to  whose  ambi- 
tion they  appealed,  accompanied  them,  in  spite  of 
the  remonstrances  of  his  patron  ;  he  was  present  at 
the  massacre  of  the  defenceless  inhabitants  of  Laish, 
and  in  the  new  city,  which  rose  from  its  ashes,  he 
was  constituted  priest  of  the  graven  image,  an 
office  which  became  hereditary  in  his  family  till  the 
captivity.  The  Targum  of  R.  Joseph,  on  1  Chr. 
xxiii.  10,  identifies  him  with  Shebuel  the  son  of 
<  lershom,  who  is  there  said  to  have  repented  ("13JJ 
NUirW)  in  his  old  age,  and  to  have  been  appointed 
by  David  as  chief  over  his  treasures.  All  this 
arises  from  a  play  upon  the  name  Shebuel,  from 
which  tiiis  meaning  is  extracted  in  accordance  with 
a  favourite  practice  of  the  Targumist. 

6.  (iru'r).  On<^-f  the  sonsof  Adin  (Ezr.  viii.  0), 
whose  representative  Ebed  returned  with  Ezra  at 
ile'  head  of  fifty  males,  a  number  which  is  increased 
to  two  hundred  and  fifty  in  I  Esd.  viii.  32,  where 
Jonathan  is  written  'loovddas. 

7.  A  priest,  the  son  of  Asahel,  one  of  the  four 
who  assisted  Ezra  in  investigating  the  marriages 
with  foreign  women,  which  had  been  contracted  by 
lli.  people  who  returned  from  Babylon  (Ezr. X.  I.'); 
I  Esd.  ix.  14). 

8.  A  priest,  and  one  of  the  chiefs  of  the  fathers 
in  the  days  of  Joiakim,  son  of  Jeshua.  He' was  the 
representative  of  the  family  ofMelicu  |  Nob. xii.  14). 

9.  One  of  the  sons  of  K'areah,  and  brother  oi 
Johanan  (Jer.  xl.  &).  The  LXX.  in  this  passage 
omit  his  name  altogi  fler,  and  in  this  they  are  sup- 
ported by  two  of  Kennicott's  MSS.,  and  the  pa- 
rallel passage  of  2  K.  XXV.  23.      In  three   others  of 


JONATHAN 


1123  • 


Kennicott's  it  was  erased,  and  was  originally 
omitted  in  three  of  Do  Rossi's.  He  was  one  of  the 
captains  of  the  army  who  had  escaped  from  Jeru- 
salem in  the  final  assault  by  the  Chaldeans,  and, 
after  the  capture  of  Zedekiah  at  Jericho,  had  crossed 
the  Jordan,  and  remained  in  the  open  country  of  the 
Ammonites  till  the  victorious  army  had  retired 
with  their  spoils  and  captives.  He  accompanied 
his  brother  Johanan  and  the  other  captains,  who  re- 
sorted to  Gedaliah  at  Mizpah,  and  from  that  time  we 
hear  nothing  more  of  him.  Hitzig  decides  against 
the  LXX.  and  the  MSS.  which  omit  the  name  (Der 
Proph.  Jeremias),  on  the  ground  that  the  very 
similarity  between  Jonathan  and  Johanan  favours 
the  belief  that  they  were  brothers.       [W.  A.  W.] 

10.  (|n3V  :  ^IwvaQav).  Son  of  Joiada,  and  his 
successor  in  the  high-priesthood.  The  only  fact 
connected  with  his  pontificate  recorded  in  Scrip- 
ture, is  that  the  genealogical  records  of  the  priests 
and  Levites  were  kept  in  his  day  (Neh.  xii.  11,  22), 
and  that  the  chronicles  of  the  state  were  continued 
to  his  time  (ib.  23).  Jonathan  (or,  as  he  is  called 
in  Neh.  xii.  22,  23,  John)  lived,  of  course,  long 
after  the  death  of  Nehemiah,  and  in  the  reign  of 
Artaxerxes  Mnemon.  Josephus,  who  also  calls  him 
John,  as  do  Eusebius  a  and  Nicephorus  likewise,  re- 
lates that  he  murdered  his  own  brother  Jesus  in  the 
Temple,  because  Jesus  was  endeavouring  to  get  the 
high-priesthood  from  him  through  the  influence  of 
Bagoses  the  Persian  general.  He  adds  that  John  by 
this  misdeed  brought  two  great  judgments  upon 
the  Jews:  the  one,  that  Bagoses  entered  into  the 
Temple  and  polluted  it ;  the  other,  that  he  imposed 
a  heavy  tax  of  50  shekels  upon  every  lamb  ottered 
in  sacrifice,  to  punish  them  tor  this  horrible  crime 
(A.  J.  xi.  vii.  §1).  Jonathan,  or  John,  was  high- 
priest  for  32  years,  according  to  Eusebius  and  the 
Alexandr.  Chron.  (Seld.  de  Success,  in  P.  E.  cap. 
vi.  vii.).  Milman  speaks  of  the  murder  of  Jesus  as 
"the  only  memorable  transaction  in  the  annals  of 
Judaea  from  the  death  of  Nehemiah  to  the  time  of 
Alexander  the  Great"  [Hist,  of  Jcics,  ii.  29). 

11.  Father  of  Zechariah,  a  piiest  who  blew  the 
trumpet  at  the  dedication  of  the  wall  (Neh.  xii.  35). 
He  seems  to  have  been  of  the  course  of  Shemaiah. 
The  words  "son  of"  seem  to  be  improperly  nisei  ted 
before  the  following  name,  Mattaniah,  as  appears 
by  comparing  xi.  17.  [A.  C.  H.] 

12.  ^liovdOas).  1  Esdr.  viii.  32.    [See  No.  O.J 

13.  A  son  of  Mattathias,  and  leader  of  the  Jews 
in  their  war  of  independence  after  the  death  of  his 
brother  Judas  Maccabaeus,  B.C.  161  (1  Mace.  ix. 
19  if.).    [Maccabees.] 

14.  A  son  of  Absalom  (1  Mace.  xiii.  11),  sent 
by  Simon  with  a  force  to  occupy  Joppa,  which  was 
already  in  the  hands  of  the  Jews  (1  Mace.  xii.  33), 
though  probably  held  only  by  a  weak  garrison. 
Jonathan  expelled  the  inhabitants  (robs  ovras  iv 

avrfi  ;  cf.  Jos.  Ant.  .\iii.  fi,  §3)  and  secured  the  city. 

Jonathan  was  probably  a  brother  of  Mattathias  (2) 
(1  Mace.  xi.  7' i  . 

15.  A  priest  who  is  said  to  have  offered  up  a 
solemn  prayer  on  the  occasion  of  the  sacrifice  made 
by  Nehemiah  after  the  recovery  of  the  sacred  tire 
(2  Mace.  i.  23  ff.:  cf.  Ewald,  Gesch.  d.  I  .  Tsr.  iv. 
184  l'.i.     'flu'  narrative  is  interesting,  as  it  presents 

■  l.-ii-  example  of,  the  combination  ot  public 
with  sacrifice  (Grimm,  ad  2  Mace.  I.e.). 
[B.  F.  W.J 


;1   ('hum.  Can.  lib.  poster,  p.  :ilo.      Out  ill  the  De- 
monst.  Evang.  lib.  viii.,  Jonathan. 


1124 


JONATHAS 


JON'ATHAS  {'luvdOav;  Alii.  'Ia6dv:  Jo- 
nathus;  Alii,  Nathan),  the  Latin  form  of  the  com- 
mon name  Jonathan,  which  is  preserved  in  A.  V.  in 
Tob.  v.  13.  [B.  F.  W.]. 

JO'NATH-E'LEM-KECHO'KIM  (DJ?N  TUV 

D^pin"),  "  a  dumb  dove  of  (in)  distant  places"), 
a  phrase  found  once  only  in  the  Bible  as  a  heading 
to  the  56th  psalm.  Critics  and  commentators  are 
very  far  from  being  agreed  on  its  meaning.  Rashi 
considers  that  David  employed  the  phrase  to  de- 
scribe his  own  unhappy  condition  when,  exiled 
from  the  land  of  Israel,  he  was  living  with  Achish, 
and  was  an  object  of  suspicion  and  hatred  to  the 
countrymen  of  Goliath :  thus  was  He  amongst  the 
Philistines  as  a  mute  (JVuPN)  dove.  Kimchi 
supplies  the  following  commentary: — "  The  Philis- 
tines sought  to  seize  and  slay  David  (1  Sam.  xxix. 
4-11),  and  he,  in  his  terror,  and  pretending  to  have 
lost  his  reason,  called  himself  Jonath,  even  as  a  dove 
driven  from  her  cote."  Knapp's  explanation  "  on 
the  oppression  of  foreign  rulers " — assigning  to 
Elem  the  same  meaning  which  it  has  in  Ex.  xv.  15 
— is  in  harmony  with  the  contents  of  the  psalm, 
and  is  worthy  of  consideration.  De-Wette  translates 
Jonath  Elem  Rechokim  "dove  of  the  distant  tere- 
binths," or  "of  the  dove  of  dumbness  (Stummheit) 
among  the  strangers"  or  "in  distant  places."  Accord- 
ing to  the  Septuagint,  virhp  rov  Kaov  rod  cnrb  twv 
ayiu>v  fiejj.aKpvfjLfx.4vov,  "  on  the  people  far  removed 

from  the  holy  places"  (probably  D?N=D?;IN,  the 

Temple-hall ;  see  Orient.  Litcratur.  Blatt.  p.  579, 
year  1841),  a  rendering  which  very  nearly  accords 
with  the  Chaldee  paraphrase:  "  On  the  congregation 
of  Israel,  compared  with  a  mute  dove  while  exiled 
from  their  cities,  but  who  come  back  again  and 
offer  praise  to  the  Lord  of  the  Universe."  Aben 
Ezra,  who  regards  Jonath  Elem  Rechokim  as 
merely  indicating  the  modulation  or  the  rhythm 
of  the  psalm  (comp.  the  title  "int'H  1")7*N,  Ps. 
xxii.),  appears  to  come  the  nearest  to  the  meaning 
of  the  passage  in  his  explanation,  "  after  the  melody 
of  the  air  which  begins  Jpnath-elcm-Rechokim."  In 
the  Biour  to  Mendelssohn's  version  of  the  Psalms 
Jonath  Elem  Rechokim  is  mentioned  as  a  musical 
instrument  which  produced  dull,  mournful  sounds. 
"  Some  take  it  for  a  pipe  called  in  Greek  h\vfxos, 
rOP,  from  |P,  Greek,  which  would  make  the 
inscription  read  "  the  long  Grecian  pipe,"  but  this 
does  not  appear  to  us  admissible  "  (Biourist's  Pre- 
face, p.  20).  [D.  W.  M.] 

JOP'PA  (1Q\  i.  c.  Tafo,  "  beauty; "  the  A.  V. 

follows  the  Greek  form,  except  once,  Japho: 
'Iottttti,  LXX.  N.  T.  and  Vulg. ;  '\6irr],  Joseph. 
— at  least  in  the  most  recent  editions  —  Strabo, 
and  others :  now  Yafa  or  Jaffa),  a  town  on  the  S.W. 
coast  of  Palestine,  the  port  of  Jerusalem  in  the  days 
of  Solomon,  as  it  has  been  ever  since.  Its  ety- 
mology  is  variously  explained  ;  some  deriving  it  from 
"  Japhet,"  others  from  "  Iopa,"  daughter  of  Aeolus 
and  wife  of  Cepheus,  Andromeda's  father,  its  re- 
puted founder  ;  others  interpreting  it  "  the  watch- 
tower  of  joy,"  or  "  beauty,"  and  so  forth  (Reland, 
Palest.  804).  The  fact  is,  that  from  its  being  a 
sea-port,  it  had  a  profane,  as  well  as  a  sacred  his- 
tory. Pliny  following  Mela  (Be  situ  Orb.  i.  12) 
says,  that  it  was  of  ante-diluvian  antiquity  (Nat. 
Hist.  v.  14)  ;  and  even  Sir  John  Maundeville,  in 
the  14th century, bears  witness — though  it  must  be 


JOPPA 

confessed  a  clumsy  one — to  that  tradition  (Earl;/ 
Travels  in  P.  p.  142).  According  to  Josephus, 
it  originally  belonged  to  the  Phoenicians  (Ant.  xiii. 
15,  §4).  Here,  writes  Strabo,  some  say  Andromeda 
was  exposed  to  the  whale  (Geograph.  xvi.  p.  759  ; 
comp.  Miiller's  Hist.  Grace.  Fragm.  vol.  iv.  p. 
325,  and  his  Geograph.  Grace.  Min.  vol.  i.  p.  79), 
and  he  appeals  to  its  elevated  position  in  behalf  of 
those  who  laid  the  scene  there  ;  though  in  order  to  do 
so  consistently,  he  had  already  shown  that  it  woidd 
be  necessary  to  transport  Aethiopia  into  Phoenicia 
(Strab.  i.  p.  43).  However,  in  Pliny's  age — and 
Josephus  had  just  before  affirmed  the  same  (Bell. 
J ud.  iii.  9,  §3) — they  still  showed  the  chains  by 
which  Andromeda  was  bound  ;  and  not  only  so, 
but  M.  Scaurus  the  younger,  the  same  that  was 
so  much  employed  in  Judaea  by  Pompey  (Bell. 
J  ml.  i.  6,  §2  et  seq.~),  had  the  bones  of  the  monster 
transported  to  Rome  from  Joppa — where  till  then 
they  had  been  exhibited  (Mela,  ibid.) — and  displayed 
them  there  during  his  aedileship  to  the  public 
amongst  other  prodigies.  Nor  would  they  have  been 
uninteresting  to  the  modern  geologist,  if  his  report  be 
correct.  For  they  measured  40  ft.  in  length  ;  the 
span  of  the  ribs  exceeding  that  of  the  Indian  ele- 
phant ;  and  the  thickness  of  the  spine  or  vertebra 
being  one  foot  and  a  half  ("  sesqui  pedal  is,"  i.  e.  in 
circumference — when  Solinus  says  "  semipedalis," 
he  means  in  diameter,  see  Plin.  Nat.  Hist.  ix.  5 
aud  the  note,  Delphin  ed.).  Reland  Avould  trace 
the  adventures  of  Jonah  in  this  legeudary  guise 
(see  above) ;  but  it  is  far  more  probable  that 
it  symbolises  the  first  interchange  of  commerce 
between  the  Greeks,  personified  in  their  errant 
hero  Perseus,  and  the  Phoenicians,  whose  lovely 
— but  till  then  unexplored — clime  may  be  well 
shadowed  forth  in  the  fair  virgin  Andromeda. 
Perseus,  in  the  tale,  is  said  to  have  plunged  his 
dagger  into  the  right  shoulder  of  the  monster. 
Possibly  he  may  have  discovered  or  improved  the 
harbour,  the  roar  from  whose  foaming  reef's  on  the 
north,  could  scarcely  have  been  surpassed  by  the 
barkings  of  Scylla  or  Charybdis.  Even  the  chains 
shown  there  may  have  been  those  by  which  his 
ship  was  attached  to  the  shore.  Rings  used  by  the 
Romans  for  mooring  their  vessels,  are  still  to  be 
seen  near  Terracina  in  the  S.  angle  of  the  ancient 
port  (Murray's  Handbk.  for  S.  Italy,  p.  10, 
2nd  ed.). 

Returning  to  the  province  of  history,  we  find 
that  Japho  or  Joppa  was  situated  in  the  portion  of 
Dan  (Josh.  xix.  40)  on  the  coast  towards  the  south  ; 
and  on  a  hill  so  high,  says  Strabo,  that  people 
affirmed  (but  incorrectly)  that  Jerusalem  was  visible 
from  its  summit.  Having  a  harbour  attached  to 
it — though  always,  as  still,  a  dangerous  one — it 
became  the  port  of  Jerusalem,  when  Jerusalem 
became  metropolis  of  the  kingdom  of  the  house  of 
David,  and  certainly  never  did  port  and  metropolis 
more  strikingly  resemble  each  other  in  difficulty  of 
approach  both  by  sea  and  land.  Hence,  except  in 
journeys  to  and  from  Jerusalem,  it  was  not  much 
used.  In  St.  Paul's  travels,  for  instance,  the  starting 
points  by  water  are,  Antioch  (Acts  xv.  39,  via  the 
Orontes,  it  is  presumed — xviii.  22,  23,  was  pro- 
bably a  land-journey  throughout):  Caesarea  (ix. 
30,  and  xxvii.  2),  and  once  Seleucia  (xiii.  4,  namely 
that  at  the  mouth  of  the  Orontes).  Also  once 
Antioch  (xiv.  25)  and  once  Tyre,  as  a  landing- 
place  (xxi.  3).  And  the  same  preference  for  the 
more  northern  ports  is  observable  in  the  early  pil- 
grims beginning  with  him  of  Bordeaux. 


JOPPA 

But  Joppa  was  the  place  fixed  upon  for  the  cedar 
and  pine-wood,  from  Mount  Lebanon,  to  bo  landed 
by  the  servants  of  Hiram  king  of  Tyre;  thence  to 
be  conveyed  to  Jerusalem,  by  the  servants  of  Solo- 
mon— for  the  erection  of  the  first  "  house  of  habita- 
tion" ever  made  with  hands  for  the  invisible  Je- 
hovah.  It  was  by  way  of  Joppa,  similarly  that 
like  materials  were  conveyed  from  the  same  lo- 
cality, by  permission  of  Cyrus,  for  the  rebuilding 
of  tin.'  2nd  Temple  under  Zerubbabel  (1  K.  v.  9; 
2  Chr.  ii.  16;  Ezr.  iii.  7).  Here  Jonah,  when- 
ever, and  wherever  he  may  have  lived  f2  K. 
xiv.  25,  certainly  does  not  clear  up  the  first  of 
these  points),  "took  ship  to  flee  from  the  presence 
of  his  Maker,"  and  accomplished  that  singular  his- 
tory, which  our  Lord  has  appropriated  as  a  type  of 
one  of  the  principal  sceues  in  the  great  Drama  of 
His  own  (Jon.  i.  3  ;  Matth.  xii.  40).  Here,  lastly, 
on  the  house-top  of  Simon  the  tanner,  "  by  the  sea- 
side"— with  the  view  therefore  circumscribed  on 
the  10.  by  the  high  ground  on  which  the  town 
stood  ;  hut  commanding  a  boundless  prospect  over 
the  western  waters  —St.  Peter  had  his  "  vision  of 
tolerance,"  as  it  has  been  happily  designated,  and 
went  forth  like  a  2nd  Perseus — but  from  the  East 
to  emancipate,  from  still  worse  thraldom,  the  virgin 
daughter  of  the  West.  The  Christian  poet  Arator 
has  not  failed  to  discover  a  mystical  connexion 
between  the  raising  to  life  of  the  aged  Tabitha — the 
occasion  of  St.  Peter's  visit  to  Joppa — and  the  bap- 
tism of  the  first  Gentile  household  (De  Act.  Apost. 
1.  840,  ap.  Migne,  Patrol.  Ctirs^  Compl.  lxviii. 
1G4). 

These  are  the  great  Biblical  events  of  which 
Joppa  has  been  the  scene.  In  the  interval  that 
elapsed  between  the  Old  and  New  Dispensations  it, 
experienced  many  vicissitudes.  It  had  sided  with 
Apollonius,  and  was  attacked  and  captured  by  Jo- 
nathan Maccabaeus  (1  Mace.  x.  76).  It  witnessed 
the  meeting  between  the  latter  and  Ptolemy  ( Ibid. 
xi.  6).  Simon  had  his  suspicions  of  its  inhabitants, 
and  set  a  garrison  there  (Ibid.  xii.  34),  which  he 
afterwards  strengthened  considerably  (Ibid.  xiii. 
11).  But  when  peace  was  restored,  he  re-esta- 
blished it  once  more  as  a  haven  (Ibid.  xiv.  5).  He 
likewise  rebuilt  the  fortifications  (Ibid.  v.  34). 
This  occupation  of  Joppa  was  one  of  the  grounds  of 
complaint  urged  by  Autiochus,  son  of  Demetrius, 
against  Simon;  but  the  latter  alleged  in  excuse  the 
mischief  which  had  been  done  by  its  inhabitants  to  his 
fellow-citizens  (Ibid.  xv.  30  and  35).  It  would 
appear  that  Judas  Maccabaeus  had  burnt  their' 
haven  some  time  back  for  a  gross  act  of  barbarity 
(2  Mace.  xii.  6).  Tribute  was  subsequently  exacted 
for  its  possession  from  Hyrcanus  by  Antiochus 
Sidetes.  By  Pompey  it  was  once  more  made  inde- 
pendent, ami  comprehended  under  Syria  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xiv.  4.  §4);  b;it  by  Caesar  it  was  not  only  re- 
stored to  the  Jews,  hut  its  revenues — whether  from 
land  or  from  export-duties — were  bestowed  upon 
tin-  'Jiid  Hyrcanus  and  his  heirs  (xiv.  10,  $'>). 
When  Herod  the  Great  commenced  operations,  it 
was  seized  by  him,  lest  he  should  leave  a  hostile 
strong-hold  in  his  rear,  when  he  marched  upon  Je- 
rusalem (xiv.  l.">,  §1),  and  Augustus  confirmed 
him  in  its  possession  (  xv.  7,  §4).  It  was  after- 
wards assigned  to  Archelaus,  when  constituted  eth- 
narch  (xvii.  11,  §4),  and  passed  with  Syria  under 
Cyrenius,  when  Archelaus  had  been  deposed  (xvii. 
12,  §5).  Under  Cestius  (i.  e.  Gessius  Floras) 
it  was  destroyed  amidst  great  slaughter  of  its 
inhabitants  {Bell.  Jud.   ii.   is,  §10);  and  such  a 


JorPA 


1125 


nest  of  pirates  had  it  become,  when  Vespasian 
arrived  in  those 'parts,  that  it  underwent  a  second 

and  entire  destruction — together  with  the  adjacent 
villages — at  his  hands  (iii.  9,  §3).  Thus  it  appears 
that  this  port  had  already  begun  to  be  the  den  of 
robbers  and  outcasts  which  it  was  in  Strabo's  time 
(Geoyraph.  xvi.p.  759);  while  the  district  around 
it  was  so  populous,  that  from  Jamnia,  a  neigh- 
bouring town,  and  its  vicinity,  40,000  armed  men 
could  be  collected  (Ibid.).  There  was  a  vast  plain 
around  it,  as  we  learn  from  Josephus  (Ant.  xiii. 
4,  §4)  ;  it  lay  between  Jamnia  and  Caesarea — 
the  latter  of  which  might  be  reached  "  on  the 
morrow"  from  it  (Acts  x.  9  and  24) — not  far  from 
Lydda  (Acts  ix.  38),  and  distant  from  Antipatris 
150  stadia  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  15,  §1). 

When  Joppa  first  became  the  seat  of  a  Christian 
bishop  is  unknown  ;  but  the  subscriptions  of  its 
prelates  are  preserved  in  the  acts  of  various  synods 
of  the  5th  and  6th  centuries  (Le  Quien,  Orieiis 
Christian,  iii.  629).  In  the  7th  century  Arculfus 
sailed  from  Joppa  to  Alexandria,  the  very  route 
usually  taken  now  by  those  who  visit  Jeru- 
salem ;  but  he  notices  nothing  at  the  former  place 
{Early  Travcls.in  P.  by  Wright,  p.  10).  Saewulf, 
the  next  who  set  sail  from  Joppa,  a.d.  1103,  is  not 
more  explicit  (Ibid.  p.  47).  Meanwhile  Joppa  had 
been  taken  possession  of  by  the  forces  of  Godfrey  de 
Bouillon  previously  to  the  capture  of  Jerusalem. 
The  town  had  been  deserted  and  was  allowed  to 
fall  into  ruin  :  the  Crusaders  contenting  themselves 
with  possession  of  the  citadel  (William  of  Tyre,  Hist. 
viii.  9)  ;  and  it  was  in  part  assigned  subsequently 
for  the  support  of  the  Church  of  the  Resurrection 
(Ibid.ix.  16);  though  there  seem  to  have  been  bishops 
of  Joppa  (perhaps  only  titular  after  all)  between 
A..D.  1253  and  1363  (Le  Quien,  1291;  comp. 
p.  1241).  Saladin,  in  a.d.  1188,  destroyed  its 
fortifications  (Sanut.  Secret.  Fid.  Cruris,  lib.  iii. 
part.  x.  c.  5) ;  but  Richard  of  England,  who  was 
confined  here  by  sickness,  rebuilt  them  (Ibid.,  and 
Richard  of  Devizes  in  Bonn's  Ant.  Lib.  p.  61).  Its 
last  occupation  by  Christians  was  that  of  St.  Louis, 
A.D.  1253,  and  when  he  came,  it  was  still  a  city 
and  governed  by  a  count.  "  Of  the  immense  sums,'' 
says  Joinville,  "  which  it  cost  the  king  to  enclose 
Jaffa,  it  does  not  become  me  to  speak ;  for  they 
were  countless.  He  enclosed  the  town  from  one 
side  of  the  sea  to  the  other ;  and  there  were  24 
towers,  including  small  and  great.  The  ditches 
were  well  scoured,  and  kept  clean,  both  within  and 
without.  There  were  3  gates  "  .  .  .  (Chron.  of  Cms. 
p.  495,  Bohn).  So  restored  it  fell  into  the  hands  of 
the  Sultans  of  Egypt,  together  with  the  rest  of  Pa- 
lestine, by  whom  it  was  once  more  laid  in  ruins. 
So  much  so,  that  Bertrand  de  la  Brocquiere  visiting 
it  about  tlie  middle  of  the  15th  century,  state.-,  that 
it  then  only  consisted  of  a  few  tents  covered  with 
reeds;  having  been  a  strong  place  under  the  Chris- 
tians. Guides,  accredited  by  the  Sultan,  here  met 
the  pilgrims  and  received  the  customary  tribute 
from  them;  and  here  the  papal  indulgences  offered 
to  pilgrims  commenced  (Early  Travels,  p.  286). 
Finally,  Jaffa  fell  under  the  Turks,  in  whose  hands 
it  still  is,  exhibiting  the  usual  decrepitude  of  the 
cities  possessed  by  them,  and  depending  on  Chris- 
tian commerce  for  its  feeble  existence.  '  During  the 

period  of  their  rule  it  has  been  three  times  sacked 

by  the  Arabs  in  1722  ;  by  the  Mamelukes  in  177;,  • 
ami  lastly,  by  Napoleon  I.  in  1799,  upon  the  glories 
of  whose  early  career  "the  massacre  of  Jaffa" 
leaves  .i   stain   that  can   never    he   washed    out    (v 


1126 


J01TE 


Moroni,  Dizion.  Eccl.  s.  r. ;  Porter,  Handbh. 
238,  9). 

The  existing  town  contains  in  round  numbers 
about  4000  inhabitants,  and  has  three  convents, 
Greek,  Latin,  and  Armenian  ;  and  as  many,  or  more 
mosques.  Its  bazaars  are  worth  a  visit;  yet  few 
places  could  exhibit  a  harbour  or  landing  more  mi- 
serable. Its  chief  manufacture  is  soap.  The  house 
of  Simon  the  tanner  of  course  purports  to  be  shown 
still :  nor  is  its  locality  badly  chosen  (Stanley,  S.  fy  P. 
263,  '274  ;  and  see  Seddon's  Memoir,  86,  7;  185). 

The  oranges  of  Jaffa  are  the  finest  in  all  Pales- 
tine and  Syria  :  its  pomegranates  and  water-melons 
are  likewise  in  high  repute,  and  its  gardens  and 
orange  and  citron-groves  deliciously  fragrant  and 
fertile.  But  among  its  population  are  fugitives 
and  vagabonds  from  all  countries ;  and  Europeans 
have  little  security,  whether  of  life  or  property,  to 
induce  a  permanent  abode  there.  [E.  S.  Ff.] 

JOP'PE  ('Io'iTTrr/ :  Joppe),  1  Esd.  v.  55  ; 
1  Mace.  x.  75,  76;  xi.  6  ;  xii.  33;  xiii.  11  ;  xiv. 
5,  34;    xv.  28,  35;    2  Mace.  iv.  21;    xii.  3,7. 

[JOPPA.] 

JO'EAH  (mi*  :  'Iwpd:  Jora\ the  ancestor  of 
a  family  of  112  who  returned  from-Babylon  with 
Ezra  (Ezr.  ii.  18).  In  Neh.  vii.  324  he  appears 
under  the  name  Hariph,  or  more  correctly  the 
same  family  are  represented  as  the  Bene-Hariph, 
the  variation  of  name  originating  probably  in  a 
very  slight  confusion  of  the  letters  which  compose 
it.  In  Ezr.  two  of  De  Rossi's  MSS.,  and  originally 
one  of  Kennicott's,  had  mi*,  i.  e.  Jodah,  which  is 
the  reading  ot  the  Syr.  and  Arab,  versions.  One 
of  Kennicott's  MSS.  had  the  original  reading  in 
Ezr.  altered  to  D")1*,  i.  e.  Joram  ;  and  two  in  Neh. 
read  D*~in,  i.  e.  Harim,  which  corresponds  with 
'Apeifj.  of  the  Alex.  MS.,  and  Hurom  of  the  Syriac. 
In  any  case  the  change  or  confusion  of  letters  which 
might  have  caused  the  variation  of  the  name  is  so 
slight,  that  it  is  difficult  to  pronounce  which  is  the 
true  form,  the  corruption  of  Jorah  into  Hariph  being 
as  easily  conceivable  as  the  reverse.  Burrington 
(Geneal.  ii.  75)  decides  in  favour  of  the  latter,  but 
from  a  comparison  of  both  passages  with.  Ezr.  x. 
31  we  should  be  inclined  to  regard  Harim  (QIH^ 
as  the  true  reading  in  all  cases.  But  on  any  sup- 
position it  is  difficult  to  account  for  the  form 
Azephurith,  or  more  properly  'ApaupovpiO,  in 
1  Esd.  v.  10,  which  Burrington  considers  as  having 
originated  in  a  corruption  of  the  two  readings  in 
Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  the  second  syllable  arising 
from  an  error  of  the  transcriber  in  mistaking  the 
uncial  E  for  2.  [W.  A.  W.] 

JO'RAI  (nV  :  'Iwpee  ;  Alex.  'Iwp4s  :  Jorai). 
One  of  the  Gadites  dwelling  in  Gilead  in  Bashan, 
whose  genealogies  were  recorded  in  the  reign  of 
Jotbam  king  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  v.  13).  Four  of 
Kennicott's  MSS.,  and  the  printed  copy  used  by 
Luther,  read  HI*,  i.  c.  Jodai. 

JORAM  (Ql'inj,  and  DTI*,  apparently  indis- 
criminately :  'loopdfj.:  Joram).  1.  Son  of  Ahab  ; 
king  of  Israel  (2  K.  viii.  16,  25,  28,  29;  ix.  14, 
17,  21-23,  29).     [Jeiiouam,  1.] 

2.  Son  of  Jehoshaphat  ;  king  of  Judah  (2  K. 
viii.  21,  23,  24;  1  Chr.  iii.  11 ;  2  Chr.  xxii.  5,  7. 
Matt.  i.  8).     [Jehokam,  2.] 

3.  A  priest  in  the  reign  of  Jehoshaphat,  one  of 
those  employed  by  him  to  teach  the  law  of  Moses 
through  the  cities  of  Judah  (2  Chr.  xvii.  8). 


JORDAN 

4.  (D"V).  ALevite,  ancestor  ofShelomith  in  the 
time  of  David  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  25). 

5.  CleSSoupdfx  ;  Alex.  'itfiSovpdv.)  SonofToi, 
king  of  Hamath,  sent  by  his  father  to  congratulate 
David  on  his  victories  over  Hadadezer  (2  Sam. 
viii.  10).     [Hadoram.] 

6.  1  Esd.  i.  9.     [Jozabad,  3.]       [A.  C.  H.] 

JORDAN  (jm*,  i.e.  Tardea, always  with  the 
definite  article  pTil,  except  Ps.  xlii.  6  and  Job  xl. 
23,  fism  m*,  Jarad,  "to descend:"  'lopddvrjs:  Jor- 
danis  :  now  called  by  the  Arabs  csh-Sheriah,  or  "  the 
watering-place,"  with  the  addition  of  el  Kebir, 
"  the  great,"  to  distinguish  it  from  the  Sheriat  el 
Mandhur,  the  Hieromax),  a  river  that  has  never 
been  navigable  (see  below),  flowing  into  a  sea  that 
lias  never  known  a  port — has  never  been  a  high- 
road to  more  hospitable  coasts — has  never  possessed 
a  fishery— a  river  that  has  never  boasted  of  a 
single  town  of  eminence  upon  its  banks.  It  winds 
through  scenery  remarkable  rather  for  sameness  and 
tameness  than  for  bold  outline.  Its  course  is  not 
much  above  200  miles  from  first  to  last,  less  than 
l-15th  of  that  of  the  Nile — from  the  roots  of  Anti- 
Lebanon,  where  it  bursts  forth  from  its  various 
sources  in  all  its  purity,  to  the  head  of  the  Dead 
Sea,  where  it  loses  itself  and  its  tributaries  in  the 
unfathomable  brine.  Such  is  the  river  of  the  "  great 
plain"  of  Palestine  —  the  "Descender"  —  if  not 
"  the  river  of  God  "  in  the  book  of  Psalms,  at  least 
that  of  His  chosen  people  throughout  their  history. 

As  Joppa  could  never  be  made  easy  of  access  or 
commodious  for  traffic  as  a  commercial  city,  so  neither 
could  Jordan  ever  vie  with  the  Thames  or  the  Tiber 
as  a  river  of  the  world,  nor  with  the  rivers  of  Naa- 
man's  preference,  the  Pharpar  and  Abana,  for  the 
natural  beauty  of  its  banks.  These  last  could  boast 
of  the  same  superiority,  in  respect  of  the  picturesque, 
over  the  Jordan,  that  Gerizim  and  Samaria  could 
over  Zion  and  Jerusalem. 

Wepropose  to  inquire,  I.  what  is  said  about  the  Jor- 
dan in  Holy  Scripture  ;  II.  the  accounts  given  of  it  by 
Joseph  us  and  others  of  the  same  date  ;  III.  the  state- 
ments respecting  it  by  later  writers  and  travellers. 

I.  There  is  no  regular  description  of  the  Jordan 
to  be  met  with  in  Holy  Scripture,  and  it  is  only  by 
putting  scattered  notices  of  it  together  that  we  can 
give  the  general  idea  which  runs  through  the  Bible 
respecting  it. 

And,  1.  the  earliest  allusion  is  not  so  much  to 
the  river  itself  as  to  the  plain  or  plains  which  it 
traversed:  "  Lot  lifted  up  his  eyes,  and  beheld  all 
the  plain  of  Jordan,  that  it  was  well  watered  every- 
where .  .  .  even  as  the  garden  of  the  Lord,  like  the 
land  of  Egypt"  (Gen.  xiii.  lo).  Abram  had  just 
left  Egypt  (xii.  10-20),  and  therefore  the  com- 
parison between  the  fertilising  properties  of  the 
Jordan  and  of  the  Nile  is  very  apposite,  though  it 
has  since  been  pushed  much  too  far,  as  we  shall  see. 
We  may  suppose  Lot  to  have  had  his  view  from 
one  of  the  summits  of  those  hills  that  run  north 
in  the  direction  of  Seythopolis  (B.  J.  iv.  7,  §2), 
bounding  the  plains  of  Jordan  on  the  W.  ;  for  Lot 
and  Abram  were  now  sojourning  between  Bethel  and 
Ai  (Gen.  xiii.  3).  How  far  the  plain  extended  in 
length  or  breadth  is  not  said:  other  passages  speak 
of"  Jordan  and  his  border"  (Josh.  xiii.  27),  "  the 
borders  of  Jordan"  (xxii.  11),  and  "the  plains  of 
Jericho  "  (iv.  13 ;  comp.  2  K.  xxv.  5)  :  all  evidently 
subdivisions  of  the  same  idea,  comprehending  the 
east  bank  equally  with  the  west  (Josh.  \iii.  27). 


JORDAN 

2.  We  must  anticipate  events  slightly  to  be  able 
to  speak  of  the  fords  or  passages  of  the  Jordan. 
Jordan  is  inexhaustible,  in  the  book  of  Job  (xl.  23), 
and  deep  enough  to  prove  a  formidable  passage  for 
belligerents  (1  Waco.  i.x.  48)  ;  yet,  as  in  all  rivers  of 
the  same  magnitude,  there  were  shallows  where  it 
could  be  forded  on  foot.  There  were  fords  over 
against  Jericho,  to  which  point  the  men  of  Jericho 
pursued  the  spies  (Josh.  ii.  7),  the  same  probably 
that  are  said  to  be  "  toward  Moab  "  in  the  book  of 
Judges,  where  the  Moabites  were  slaughtered  (iii. 
28).  Higher  up,  perhaps  over  against  Succoth,  some 
way  above  where  the  little  river  Jabbok  (Zerka) 
enters  the  Jordan,  were  the  fords  or  passages  of  Beth- 
barah  (probably  the  Bethabara,  "  house  of  passage," 
of  the  Gospel,  though  most  moderns  would  read 
"  Bethany,"  see  Stanley,  S.  fy  P.  p.  308,  note,  2nd 
ed.),  where  Gideon  lay  in  wait  for  the  Midianites 
(Judg.  vii.  24),  and  where  the  men  of  Gilead  slew 
the  Ephraimites  (xii.  6).  Not  far  off,  in  "  the  clay 
ground  between  Succoth  and  Zarthan,"  were  the 
brass  foundries  of  king  Solomon  (1  K.  vii.  46). 
These  fords  undoubtedly  witnessed  the  first  recorded 
passage  of  the  Jordan  in  the  0.  T. :  we  say  re- 
corded, because  there  can  be  little  dispute  but  that 
Abraham  must  have  crossed  it  likewise.  But  only 
the  passage  of  Jacob  is  mentioned,  and  that  in 
remarkable  language:  "  With  my  staff  I  passed 'over 
this  Jordan,  and  now  I  am  become  two  bands" 
(Gen.  xxxii.  10,  and  Jabbok  in  connexion  with  it, 
ver.  22).  And  Jordan  was  next  crossed — over 
against  Jericho — by  Joshua  the  son  of  Nun,  at  the 
head  of  the  descendants  of  the  twelve  sons  of  him 
who  signalized  the  first  passage.  The  magnitude 
of  their  operations  may  be  inferred  from  the  tact, 
that — of  the  children  of  Reuben,  and  of  Gad,  aud 
half  the  tribe  of  Manasseh,  only — "about  40,000 
prepared  for  war  passed  over  before  the  Lord  unto 
battle".  .  .  (Josh.  iv.'12  and  13). 

The  ceremonial  of  this  second  crossing  is  too  well 
known  to  need  recapitulation.  It  may  be  observed, 
however,  that,  unlike  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea, 
where  the  intermediate  agency  of  a  strong  east  wind 
is  freely  admitted  (Ex.  xiv.  21),  it  is  here  said,  in 
terms  equally  explicit,  not  only  that  the  river  was 
then  unusually  full  of  water,  but  that  "the  waters 
which  came  down  from  above  stood  and  rose  up 
upon  an  heap  .  .  .  while  those  that  came  down 
toward  the  sea  of  the  plain  .  .  .  failed  and  were  cut 
off,"  as  soon  as  ever  "the  feet  of  the  priests  that 
bare  the  ark  were  dipped  in  the  brim  of  the  water" 
(Josh.  iii.  15,  16).  That  it  happened  in  harvest- 
time  is  seen  also  from  eh.  v.  10-12.  Finally,  with 
regard  tq  the  memorial  of  the  twelve  stones,  such 
had  l»en  the  altar  erected  by  Moses  "under  the 
hill "  (Ex.  xxiv.  4)  ;  such  probably  the  altar  erected 
by  Joshua  upon  Mount  Ebal,  though  the  number 
of'  stones  is  not  denned  (Josh.  viii.  31),  and  such, 
long  afterwards,  the  altar  erected  by  Elijah  (1  K. 
xviii.  .U).  Whether  these  twelve  stones  were  de- 
posited in,  or  on  the  banks  of,  the  Jordan,  or  whe- 
ther there  were  two  sets,  one  for  each  locality,  has 
been  disputed.  Josephus  only  recognises  a  single 
construction — that  of  an  altar — in  either  case;  and 
this  was  built,  according  to  him,  in  the  present 
instance,  50  stadia  from  the  river,  and  In  stadia 
from  Jericho,  where  the  people  encamped,  with  the 
stones  which  the  heads  of  their  tribes  had  brought 
from  out  of  the  bed  of  the  Jordan.     It  may  be 

added  that  Josephus  -emis  loth  to  admit' a  miracle, 
both  in  the  passage  of  the  Jordan  and  thai  of  the 
Red  Sea  (Ant.  v.  1,  §4,  ii.  16,  §.">).     From  their 


JOED AN 


1127 


vicinity  to  Jerusalem  these  lower  fords  were  much 
used;  David,  it  is  probable,  passed  over  them  in 
one  instance  to  fight  the  Syrians  (2  Sam.  x.  17); 
aud  subsequently,  when  a  fugitive  himself,  in  his 
way  to  Mahanaim  (xvii.  22),  on  the  east  bank. 
Hither  Judah  came  to  reconduct  the  kin^-  home 
(2  Sam.  xix.  15),  and  on  this  one  occasion  a  ferry- 
boat— if  the  Hebrew  word  has  been  lightly  ren- 
dered— is  said  to  have  been  employed  (ver.  18). 
Somewhere  in  these  parts  Elijah  must  have  smitten 
the  waters  with  his  mantle,  "  so  that  they  divided 
hither  and  thither"  (2  K.  ii.  8),  for  he  had  just 
left  Jericho  (ver.  4),  and  by  the  same  route  that 
he  went  did  Elisha  probably  return  (ver.  14). 
Naaman,  on  the  other  hand,  may  be  supposed  to 
have  performed  his  ablutions  in  the  upper  fords, 
for  Elisha  was  then  in  Samaria  (v.  .">),  and  it  was 
by  these  fords  doubtless  that  the  Syrians  fled  when 
miraculously  discomfited  through  his  instrumen- 
tality (vii.  15).  Finally,  it  was  probably  by  these 
upper  fords  that  Judas  and  his  followers  went 
over  into  the  great  plain  before  Bethsan — not  that 
they  crossed  over  against  Bethsan  (Joseph.  Ant. 
xii.  8,  §5),  when  they  were  retracing  their  steps 
from  the  land  of  Galaad  to  Jerusalem  (1  Mace, 
v.  52). 

Thus  there  were  two  customary  places,  at  which 
the  Jordan  was  fordable,  though  there  may  have 
been  more,  particularly  during  the  summer,  which 
are  not  mentioned.  And  it  must  have  been  at  one 
of  these,  if  not  at  both,  that  baptism  was  after- 
wards administered  by  St.  John,  and  by  the  disciples 
of  our  Lord.  The  plain  inference  from  the  Gospels 
would  appear  to  be  that  these  baptisms  were  ad- 
ministered in  more  places  than  one.  There  was 
one  place  where  St.  John  baptised  in  the  first 
instance  (rb  irpwTov,  John  x.  40),  though  it  is  not 
named.  There  was  Bethabara — probably  the  upper 
Cords — where  the  Baptist,  having  previously  bap- 
tised our  Lord — whether  there  or  elsewhere — bears 
record  to  the  descent  of  the  Holy  Ghost  upon  Him 
which  ensued  (i.  29-34).  There  was  Aenon,  near 
to  Salem,  to  the  north,  where  St.  John  was  bap- 
tising upon  another  occasion,  "  because  there  was 
much  water  there"  (iii.  23).  This  was  during  the 
summer  evidently  (comp.  ii.  13-23),  that  is,  lung 
alter  the  feast  of  the  passover,  and  the  river  had 
become  low,  so  that  it  was  necessary  to  resort  to 
some  place  where  the  water  was  deeper  than  at  the 
ordinary  fords.  There  was  some  place  "  in  the 
land  of  Judaea"  where  our  Lord,  or  rather  His 
disciples,  baptised  about  the  same  time  (iii.  22). 
And  lastly,  there  was  the  place — most  probably 
the  lower  ford  near  Jericho — where  all  "  Jerusalem 
and  Judaea"  went  out  to  be  baptised  of  John  in 
the  Jordan  (Matt.  iii.  5;   Mark  i.  5). 

Where  our  Lord  was  baptised  is  not  stated  ex- 
pressly. What  is  stated  is,  (1 .)  that  as  St.  John  was 
a  native  of  some  "  city  in  the  hill-country  of  Judaea" 
(I. uke  i.  39),  so  his  preaching,  commencing  "in 
the  wilderness  of  Judaea"  (Matt.  iii.  1),  embraced 
"all  the  country  about  Jordan"  (Luke  iii.  3),  and 
drew  persons  from  Galilee,  as  for  off  as  Nazareth 
(Mark  i.  9)  and  Belhsaida  (John  i.  35,  40,  -1  1  .  as 
well  as  from  Jerusalem  ;  (2.)  thai  the  baptism  ol 
the  multitude  from  Jerusalem  and  Judaea  pi 
that  of  our  Lord  (Matt.  iii.  6,  13;  .Mark  i. 
(3.)  thai  our  Lord's  baptism  was  also  distini  I 
that  of  the  said  multitude  (Luke  iii.  21)  ;  and  (4.) 
that  He  came  from  Nazareth  in  Galilee,  and  nol 
from  Jerusalem  or  Judaea,  to  be  baptised.  The 
inference  from  all  which  would  seem  to  be,  i  1 .)  that 


1128 


JORDAN 


the  first  (rb  irpuTov)  baptisms  of  St.  John  took 
place  at  the  lower  ford  near  Jericho,  to  which  not 
only  he  himself,  a  native  of  Judaea,  but  all  Jeru- 
salem and  Judaea  likewise,  would  naturally  resort 
as  being  the  nearest;  where  similarly  our  Lord 
would  naturally  take  refuge  when  driven  out  from 
Jerusalem,  and  from  whence  He  would  be  within 
reach  of  tidings  from  Bethany,  the  scene  of  His 
next  miracle  (John  x.  39,  40,  xi.  1);  ('2.)  that  his 
second  baptisms  were  at  the  upper  ford,  or  Beth- 
atiara,  whither  he  had  arrived  in  the  course  of  his 
preachings,  and  were  designed  for  the  inhabitants 
of  the  more  northern  parts  of  the  Holy  Land, 
among  whom  were  Jesus  and  Andrew,  both  from 
Galilee;  (3.)  that  his  third  and  last  baptisms  were 
'in  the  neighbourhood  of  Aenon  and  Salem,  still 
further  to  the  north,  where  there  was  not  generally 
so  much  of  a  ford,  but,  on  the  contrary,  where  the 
water  was  still  sufficiently  deep,  notwithstanding 
the  advanced  season.  Thus  St.  John  would  seem 
to  have  moved  upwards  gradually  towards  Galilee, 
the  seat  of  Herod's  jurisdiction,  by  whom  he  was 
destined  to  be  apprehended  and  executed ;  while 
our  Lord,  coming  from  Galilee,  probably  by  way  of 
Samaria,  as  in  the  converse  case  (John  iv.  3,  4), 
would  seem  to  have  met  him  half-way,  and  to  have 
been  baptised  in  the  ford  nearest  to  that  locality — 
a  ford  which  had  been  the  scene  of  the  first  re- 
corded crossing.  The  tradition  which  asserts  Christ 
to  have  been  baptised  in  the  ford  near  Jericho,  has 
been  obliged  to  invent  a  Bethabara  near  that  spot, 
of  which  no  trace  exists  in  history,  to  appear  con- 
sistent with  Scripture  (Origen,  quoted  by  Alford 
on  John  i.  28). 

3.  These  fords — and  more  light  will  be  thrown 
upon  their  exact  site  presently — were  rendered  so 
much  the  more  precious  in  those  days  from  two 
circumstances.  First,  it  does  not  appear  that 
there  were  then  any  bridges  thrown  over,  or  boats 
regularly  established  on,  the  Jordan,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  transporting  either  pedestrians  or  mer- 
chandise from  one  bank  to  the  other.  One  case, 
perhaps,  of  either  bridge  or  boat  is  upon  record  ; 
but  it  would  seem  to  have  been  got  up  expressly 
for  the  occasion  (2  Sam.  xix.  18).  Neither  the 
LXX.  nor  Vulg.  contain  a  word  about  a  "  boat," 
and  Josephus  says  expressly  that  it  was  a  "  bridge  " 
that  was  then  extemporised  (Ant.  vii.  2,  §2).  And 
secondly,  because,  in  the  language  of  the  author  ot 
the  book  of  Joshua  (iii.  15),  "  Jordan  overflowed 
all  his  banks  all  the  time  of  harvest :"  a  "  swelling" 
which,  according  to  the  1st  book  of  Chronicles  (xii. 
15),  commenced  "in  the  first  month"  (i.  e.  about 
the  latter  end  of  our  March),  drove  the  lion  from 
his  lair  in  the  days  of  Jeremiah  (xii.  5,  xlix.  19, 
1.  44),  and  had  become  a  proverb  for  abundance  in 
the  davs  of  Jesus  the  son  of  Sirach  (Ecclus.  xxiv. 
26).  The  context  of  the  first  of  these  passages  may 
suffice  to  deteimiue  the  extent  of  this  exuberance. 
The  meaning  is  clearly  that  the  channel  or  bed  of 
the  river  became  brimfull,  so  that  the  level  of  the 
water  and  of  the  banks  was  then  the  same.  Dr. 
Robinson  seems  therefore  to  have  good  reason  for 
saying  that  the  ancient  rise  of  the  river  has  been 
greatly  exaggerated  (i.  540,  2nd  ed.),  so  much  so 
as  to  have  been  compared  to  that  of  the  Nile 
(Reland,  Palest,  xl.  111).  Evidently  too  there  is 
nothing  extraordinary  whatever  in  this  occurrence. 
On  the  contrary,  it  would  be  more  extraordinary 
were  it  otherwise.  All  rivers  that  are  fed  by 
melting  snows  are  fuller  between  March  and  Sep- 
tember than  between  September  and  March;   but 


JORDAN 

the  exact  time  of  their  increase  varies  with  the 
time  when  the  snows  melt.  The  l'o  and  Adisje  are 
equally  full  during  their  harvest-time  with  the 
Jordan;  but  the  snows  on  Lebanon  melt  eailier 
than  on  the  A]\>s,  and  harvest  begins  later  in  Italy 
than  in  the  Holy  Land.  "  The  heavy  rains  of  No- 
vember and  December,"  as  Dr.  R.  justly  remarks, 
"  find  the  earth  in  a  parched  and  thirsty  state,  ami 
are  consequently  absorbed  into  the  soil  as  they  fall. 
The  melting  of  the  snows,  on  the  other  hand,  on 
the  mountains  can  only  affect  the  rivers.  Possibly 
'  the  basins  of  Huleh  and  Tiberias '  may  so  far  act 
as  '  regulators '  upon  the  Jordan  as  to  delay  its 
swelling  till  they  have  Deen  replenished.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  snows  on  Lebanon  are  certainly 
melting  fast  in  April. 

4.  The  last  feature  which  remains  to  be  noticed 
in  the  Scriptural  account  of  the  Jordan  is  its  fre- 
quent mention  as  a  boundary:  "over  Jordan," 
"  this,"  and  "  the  other  side,"  or  "  beyond  Jordan," 
were  expressions  as  familiar  to  the  Israelites  as 
"  across  the  water,''  "  this,"  and  "  the  other  side 
of  the  Channel,"  are  to  English  ears.  In  one  sense 
indeed,  that  is,  in  so  for  as  it  was  the  eastern 
boundary  of  the  land  of  Canaan,  it  was  the  eastern 
boundary  of  the  promised  land  (Num.  xxxiv.  12). 
In  reality,  it  was  the  long  serpentine  vine,  trailing 
over  the  ground  from  N.  to  S.,  round  which  the 
whole  family  of  the  twelve  tribes  were  clustered. 
Four-fifths  of  their  number — nine  tribes  and  a  half 
— dwelt  on  the  W.  of  it,  and  one-fifth,  or  two 
tribes  and  a  half,  on  the  E.  of  it,  with  the  Levites 
in  their  cities  equally  distributed  amongst  both, 
and  it  was  theirs  from  its  then  reputed  fountain- 
head  to  its  exit  into  the  Dead  Sea.  Those  who 
lived  on  the  E.  of  it  had  been  allowed  to  do  so  on 
condition  of  assisting  their  brethren  in  their  con- 
quests on  the  W.  (Num.  xxxii.  20-33);  and  those 
who  lived  on  the  W.  "  went  out  with  one  consent" 
when  their  countrymen  on  the  E.  were  threatened 
(1  Sam.  xi.  6-11).  The  great  altar  built  by  the 
children  of  Reuben,  of  Gad,  and  the  half-tribe  of 
Manasseh,  on  the  banks  of  the  Jordan,  was  designed 
as  a  witness  of  this  intercommunion  and  mutual 
interest  (Josh.  xxii.  10-29).  In  fact,  unequal  as 
the  two  sections  were,  they  were  nevertheless  re- 
garded as  integral  parts  of  the  whole  land ;  and 
thus  there  were  three  cities  of  refuge  for  the  man- 
slayer  appointed  on  the  E.  of  the  Jordan ;  and  there 
were  three  cities,  and  no  more,  on  the  W.- — in  both 
cases  moreover  equi-distant  one  from  the  other 
(Num.  xxxv.  9-15;  Josh.  xx.  7-9;  Lewis,  Hcb. 
Republ.  ii.  13).  When  these  territorial  divisions 
had  been  broken  up  in  the  captivities  of  Israel  and 
Judah,  some  of  the  "coasts  beyond  Jordan"  seem 
to  have  been  retained  under  Judaea.     [Judaea.] 

II.  As  the  passage  which  is  supposed  to  speak 
of  "the  fountain  of  Daphne"  (Num.  xxxiv.  11, 
and  Patrick  ad  I.,  see  below)  is  by  no  means 
clear,  we  cannot  appeal  to  Holy  Scripture  for  any 
information  respecting  the  sources  of  the  Jordan. 
What  Josephus  and  others  say  about  the  Jordan 
may  be  briefly  told.  Panium,  says  Josephus  (i.  c. 
the  sanctuary  of  Pan),  appears  to  be  the  source  of 
the  Jordan  ;  whereas  it  has  a  secret  passage  hither 
under  ground  from  Phiala,  as  it  is  called,  about 
120  stadia  distant  from  Caesarea,  on  the  road  to 
Trachonitis,  and  on  the  right  hand  side  of,  and  not 
far  from  the  road.  Being  a  wheel-shaped  pool,  it 
is  rightly  called  Phiala  from  its  rotundity  (trepi- 
</>epei'as);  yet  the  water  always  remains  there  up 
to   the  brim,    neither  subsiding  nor   overflowing. 


JOKDAN 

That  this  is  the  true  source  of  the  Jordan  was  first 
discovered  by  Philip,  tetrarch  of  Tracbonitis — for 
l>v  his  orders  chaff  was  cast  into  the  water  at 
Phiala,  and  it  was  taken  up  at  Panium.  l'anium 
was  always  a  lovely  spot ;  but  the  embellishments 
of  Agrippa,  which  were  sumptuous,  added  greatly 
to  its  natural  charms  (from  Bell.  Jud.  i.  21,  §3  ; 
and  Ant.  xv.  10,  §3,  it  appears  that  the  temple 
there  was  due  to  Herod  the  Great).  It  is  from 
this  cave  at  all  events  that  the  Jordan  com- 
mences his  ostensible  course  above  ground  ;  tra- 
versing the  marshes  and  fens  of  Semechonitis  (L. 
Merom  or  Ili'dck),  and  then,  after  a  course  of  120 
stadia,  passing  by  the  town  Julias,  and  intersecting 
the  lake  of  Geuesareth,  winds  its  way  through  a 
considerable  wilderness,  till  it  rinds  its  exit  in  the 
lake  Asphaltites  {D.J.  iii.  10,  §7).  Elsewhere  he 
somewhat  modifies  his  assertion  respecting  the 
nature  of  the  great  plain  [Jericho]  ;  while 
on  the  physical  beauties  of  Genesareth,  the  palms 
and  figs,  olives  and  grapes,  that  flourished  round 
it,  and  the  fish  for  which  its  waters  were  far-famed, 
he  is  still  more  eloquent  (/>'.  J .  iii.  10,  §8).  In  the 
first  chapter  of  the  next  book  (iv.  1,  §1)  he  notices 
more  fountains  at  a  place  called  Daphne  (still  Dif- 
neh,  see  Rob.  Bibl.  lies.,  vol.  iii.  p.  393,  note), 
immediately  under  the  temple  of  the  golden  calf, 
which  he  calls  the  sources  of  the  little,  and 
its  communication  with  the  great,  Jordan  (comp. 
.Ant.  i.  10,  §1,  v.  3,  §1,  and  viii.  8,  §4).  While  Jo- 
sephus  dilates  upon  its  sources,  Pausanias,  who  had 
visited  the  Jordan,  dilates  upon  its  extraordinary 
disappearance.  He  cannot  get  over  its  losing  itself 
in  the  Dead  Sea  ;  and  compares  it  to  the  submarine 
course  of  the  Alpheus  from  Greece  to  Sicily  (lib.  v. 
7,  -1,  ed.  Dindorf.)  Pliny  goes  so  far  as  to  say 
that  the  Jordan  instinctively  shrinks  from  entering 
that  dread  lake,  by  which  it  is  swallowed  up.  On 
the  other  hand  Pliny  attributes  its  rise  to  the 
fountain  of  Paneas,  from  which  he  adds  Caesarea 
was  surnamed  (Nat.  H.  v.  15,).  Lastly  Strabo 
speaks  of  the  aromatic  reeds  and  rushes,  and  even 
balsam,  that  grew  on  the  shores  and  marshes  round 
Genesareth  ;  but  can  he  be  believed  when  he  asserts 
that  the  Aradians  and  others  were  in  the  habit  of 
sailing  up' Jordan  with  cargo?  (xvi.  2,  10.)  It 
will  be  remembered  that  he  wrote  during  the  first 
days  of  the  empire,  when  there  were  boats  in  abun- 
dance upon  Geuesareth  (John  vi.  22-24). 

III.  Among  the  latest  travellers  who  have  ex- 
plored and  afterwards  written  upon  the  course  or 
sources  of  the  .Jordan,  are  Messrs.  Irbyand  Wangles 
(Journal  of  Trav.),  Dr.  Robinson,  Lieut.  Lynch  and 
party  (Narrat.  and  Off.  Rep.),  Capt.  Newbold 
[Journal of  A'.  Asiat.  S.,  vol.  xvi. p.  8,ct  seq.),  Kev. 
W.  Thompson  (Bibl.  Size,  vol.  iii.  p.  184,  et  seq.), 
and  Professor  Stanley.  While  making  our  best  ac- 
knowledgments to  these  writers  for  what  is  contained 
in  the  following  summary,  we  shall  take  tin'  liberty 
of  offering  one  or  two  criticisms  where  personal  in- 
spection constrains  our  demurring  to  their  conclu- 
sions. According  to  the  older  commentators  "  Dan" 
was  a  stream  that  rose  in  a  fountain  called  Phiala, 
in  the  district  called  l'anium,  and  among  the  roots 
of  Lebanon;  then  after  a  subterraneous  course,  re- 
appeared  near  the  town  called  Paneas,  Dan,  oi 
Caesarea  I'hilippi.  where  it  was  joined  by  a  small 
stream  called  "Jor;w  ami  henceforth  united   both 

qi iii  on< — Jordan  |  ( '•  >ni.  .t  Lap.  in  Dent,  xxxiii. 

22).  But  it  has  been  well  observed  that  the  He- 
brew word  |TV,  Jarden,  has  no  relation  what- 
ever to  the  name   Dan  :  and  also  that  the  river  had 


JORDAN 


1129 


borne  that  name  from  the  days  of  Abraham,  and 
from  the  days  of  Job,  at  least  five  centuries  before 
the  name  of  Dan  was  given  to  the  city  at  its 
source  (Robinson,  iii.  412).  It  should  be  added 
that  the  number  of  streams  meeting  at  or  about 
Banias  very  far  exceeds  two. 

This  is  one  of  the  points  on  which  we  are  com- 
pelled to  dissent  from  one  and  all  of  the  foregoing 
travellers — not  one  of  them  dwells  upon  the  pheno- 
menon that  from  the  village  of  Hashbeiya  on  the 
N.W.  to  the  village  of  Shib'a  on  the  N.E.  of  Ba- 
nias, the  entire  slope  of  Anti-Lebanon  is  alive  with 
bui  sting  fountains  and  gushing  sti  earns,  every  one 
of  which,  great  or  small,  finds  its  way  sooner  or 
later  into  the  swamp  between  Banias  and  lake 
Ilnlch,  and  eventually  becomes  part  of  the  Jordan. 
Incidentally  this  of  course  comes  out ;  but  surely 
this,  and  not  those  three  prime  sources  exclusively,  to 
which  Captain  Newbold  has  most  justly  added  a  4th, 
passed  over  without  a  word  by  the  rest — should  be 
made  the  prominent  feature  of  that  charmed  locality. 
The  fact  is,  that  with  the  exception  of  Messrs.  Irby 
and  Mangles,  he  is  the  only  traveller  of  them  all 
who  has  in  any  degree  explored  the  S.E.  side  of  the 
slope ;  the  route  of  the  others  being  from  Banias 
to  Hashbeiya  on  the  western  side.  Then  again  all 
have  travelled  in  the  months  of  April,  May,  or 
June — that  is,  before  the  melting  of  the  snows  had 
ceased  to  have  influence — except  Messrs.  Irby  and 
Mangles,  whose  scanty  notices  were  made  in  Fe- 
bruary, or  just  after  the  heavy  rains.  Whereas  in 
order  to  be  able  to  decide  to  which  of  those  sources 
Jordan  is  most  indebted,  the  latter  end  of  October, 
the  end  of  the  dry  season,  and  just  before  the  rains 
set  in — when  none  but  streams  possessed  of  inhe- 
rent vitality  are  in  existence — should  have  been 
chosen.  Far  be  it  from  us  to  depreciate  those  time- 
honoured  parent  springs — the  noble  fountain  (of 
Daphne)  under  the  Tell,  or  hill  of  Dan  (Tell-el- 
Kady),  which  "  gushes  out  all  at  once  a  beautiful 
river  of  delicious  water "  in  the  midst  of  verdure 
and  welcome  shade ;  still  less,  that  magnificent 
"burst  of  water  out  of  the  low  slope"  in  front  of 
the  picturesque  cave  of  Banias,  inscriptions  in  the 
niches  of  which  still  testify  to  the  deity  that  was 
once  worshipped  there,  and  to  the  royal  munificence 
that  adorned  his  shrine.  Travellers  nevertheless 
who  have  seen  Clitumnus  (and  to  read  of  it  in 
Pliny,  Ex>.  lib.  viii.  8,  is  almost  to  see),  Vaucluse, 
or  even  Holywell  in  N.  Wales,  will  have  seen 
something  of  the  kind.  But  what  shall  we  say  to 
"  the  bold  perpendicular  rock  "  near  Hashbeiya, 
"  from  beneath  which,"  we  are  told,  "  the  river 
gushes  copious,  translucent,  and  cool,  in  two  rect- 
angular streams,  one  to  the  N.E.,  and  the  other  to 
the  N.W.  ?"  for  if  this  source,  being  the  most 
distant  of  all,  may  "claim  in  a  strictly  scientific 
sense  to  be  the  parent  stream  of  the  whole  valley," 
then  let  us  be  prepared  on  the  same  principle  to 
trace  the  Mississippi  back  to  the  Missouri.  Besides, 
Captain  Newbold — and  we  can  here  vouch  for  his 
Statement — has  detected  a  4th  source,  which  ac- 
cording  to  the  Arabs,  is  never  dry,  in  what  Mr 
Thompson  hastily  dismisses  as  the  uiountain-toi  i •  ii! 
Wadu  el-Kid,  and  Messrs.  Irby  and  Mangle-  as  ,i 
"  rivulet  ;"  but  which  the  ( 'aptain  appears  to  have 
followed  to  the  springs  called  Esh-Shar,  though 
we  must  add,  that  its  sources,  according  t.»  our  im- 
pression, Li d  iderably  more  to  the  N.     It  runs 

pasl   the  ruined   walls  and  forts  of  Banias i 
S.E.     Nobody  that  has  seen  its  dizzy  cataracts  in 
the  month  of  April,  or  its  deep-rock-hewn  lied  at 

4   I> 


1130 


JORDAN 


all  other  seasons,  can  speak  lightly  of  it ;   though 

it  is  naturally  lost  upon  all  those  who  quit  Banias 
for  the  N.W. 

Again,  we  make  bold  to  say,  that  the  Phiala  of 
.Toseplms  lias  not  yet  been  identified.  Any  lake 
would  have  been  called  Phiala  by  the  Greeks  that 
bore  that  shape  (Reland,  Palest.  41 ;  comp.  Hoff- 
man's Lex.  Univ.  s.  v. ;  if  we  mistake  not,  the  lake 
of  Delos  is  a  further  instance).  But  Birket  er 
Ram,  or  the  alleged  Phiala,  lying  to  the  S.E.  of, 
and  at  some  distance  from,  the  cave  of  Banias,  we 
are  not  surprised  that  the  story  of  Josephus  should 
be  voted  absurd  ;  for  he  is  thus  made  to  say  seri- 
ously, what  even  to  a  tragic  poet  was  the  climax 
of  impossibilities  (Eur.  Med.  410),  that  "the 
fountains  of  sacred  streams  flow  backwards,"  or 
uphill.  The  Arabs  doubtless  heard  of  the  story  of 
the  chaff  through  some  dragoman;  who  heard  it 
from  his  masters;  but  the  direction  of  Shib'a — 
"  six  hours  higher  up  the  southern  declivity  of 
Mount  Hermon,"  and  therefore  to  the  N.E.  of 
Banias — -is  beyond  doubt  the  true  one,  as  long  since 
pointed  out  by  Reland  (ibid.,  and  see  his  Map)  for 
the  site  of  the  lake.  According  to  Lynch,  "a  very 
large  fountain  issuing  from  the  base  of  a  high 
rock,"  exists  there  {Off.  Rep.  112).  Lastly,  the 
actual  description  given  by  Captain  Xewbold  of  the 
lake  Merj  el  Man,  "  3  hrs.  E.  10°  N.  from  Banias," 
proves,  at  all  events,  that  there  is  one  circular  lake, 
besides  Birket  er  Ram,  in  those  regions,  and  in  the 
very  direction  indicated  by  the  historian.  We  can- 
not help,  therefore,  entertaining  a  suspicion  that 
Merj  el  Man  will  turn  out  to  be  the  true  Phiala. 

Once  more,  Mr.  Thompson  had  stated  that  "  the 
Hashbeiya,  when  it  reaches  the  L.  Hiileh,  has  been 
immensely  enlarged  by  the  waters  from  the  great 
fountains  of  Banias,  Tell-el  Eddy,  el  Mellahdh, 
.Derakit  or  Beldt"  (both  on  the  western  side  of 
the  plain)  "  and  innumerable  other  springs."  Cap- 
tain Newbold,  on  the  other  hand,  found  it  impossible 
to  ascertain  whether  such  a  junction  took  place,  or 
not,  before  they  enter  the  lake  (p.  15).  His  Arabs 
strongly  maintained  the  negative.  It  was  reserved 
for  Dr.  Robinson  in  1852  to  settle  the  question  of 
their  previous  junction,  which  according  to  him 
may  be  witnessed  one-third  of  a  mile  N.  of  Tell 
Sheikfi  Tusuf:  so  that  they  enter  Hiileh,  as  they 
depart  from  it,  in  one  united  stream  (vol.  iii.  395). 
Its  passage  through  and  from  Genesareth  is  that  of 
uninterrupted  unity.  But  that  the  waters  of  the 
Jordan  do  not  condescend  to  mingle  in  any  sense 
with  those  of  the  lake,  is  as  true  as  that  the  Rhone 
and  the  lake  of  Geneva  never  embrace.  Any 
comparison  between  the  waters  of  the  Jordan,  as  a 
fertilizer,  or  as  a  beverage,  with  those  of  the  Nile, 
would  be  no  less  unreal  ;  while  from  the  immense 
amount  of  vegetable  matter  which  they  contain, 
the  former  decompose  with  a  rapidity  perfectly  mar- 
vellous when  kept.  Travellers,  theretore,  who  are 
desirous  of  preserving  them,  will  do  well  to  go  to 
the  fountain-heads  for  their  supply.  There  alone 
they  sparkle  and  look  inviting. 

"  The  Jordan  enters  Genesareth  about  two  miles 
below  the  ruins  of  the  ancient  city  Julias,  or  the 
Bethsaida  of  Geulonitis,  which  lay  upon  its  eastern 
bank.  At  its  mouth  it  is  about  70  feet  wide,  a 
lazy  turbid  stream,  flowing  between  low  alluvial 
banks.  There  are  several  bars  not  far  from  its 
mouth  where  it  can  be  forded.  .  .  .  From  the  site 
of  Bethsaida  to  Isir  Benat  Ya'kdb  is  about  six 
miles.  The  Jordan  here  rushes  along,  a  foaming 
torrent  (much  of  course  depending  on  the  season 


JORDAN 

when  it  is  visited),  through  a  narrow  winding 
ravine,  shut  m  hv  high  precipitous  banks.  Above 
the  bridge  the  current  is  less  rapid  and  the  banks 
are  lower.  The  whole  distance  from  the  lake  el- 
Huleh  to  the  sea  of  Tiberias  is  nearly  nine  miles, 
and  the  fall  of  the  river  is  about  600  feet  "  ( Porter's 
Handbook,  part  ii.  p.  426-7 ;  comp.  Stanley's  8.  fy  I'. 
p.  364,  note  1,  2nd  ed. 

The  two  principal  features  in  the  course  of  the 
Jordan  are  its  descent  and  its  sinuosity.  From  its 
fountain-heads  to  the  point  where  it  is  lost  to 
nature,  it  rushes  down  one  continuous  inclined 
plane,  only  broken  by  a  series  of  rapids  or  pveci* 
pitous  fills.  Between  the  lake  of  Tiberias  and  the 
Dead  Sea,  Lieutenant  Lynch  passed  down  27  rapids 
which  he  calls  threatening ;  besides  a  great  many 
more  of  lesser  magnitude.  According  to  the  com- 
putations which  were  then  made,  the  descent  of  the 
Jordan  in  each  mile  was  about  11*8  English  feel  ; 
the  depression  of  the  lake  of  Tiberias  below  the 
level  of  the  Mediterranean  653*3;  and  that  of  the 
Dead  Sea  1316'7  (Robinson,  i.  612,  note  xxx.). 
Thus  "the  Descender"  may  be  said  to  have  fairly 
earned  his  name.  Its  sinuosity  is  not  so  remark- 
able in  the  upper  part  of  its  course.  Lieutenant 
Lynch  would  regard  the  two  phenomena  in  the  light 
of  cause  and  effect.  "  ThjLgreat  secret,"  he  says,  "  of 
the  depression  between  lake  Tiberias  and  the  Dead  Sea 
is  solved  by  the  tortuous  course  of  the  Jordan.  In 
a  space  of  60  miles  of  latitude  and  4  or  5  miles  of 
longitude,  the  Jordan  traverses  at  least  200  miles" 
(  Off.  Letter,  p.  265  of  Narrat.),  During  the  whole 
passage  of  8J  days,  the  time  which  it  took  his  boats 
to  reach  the  Dead  Sea  from  Genesareth,  only  one 
straight  reach  of  any  length,  about  midway  between 
them,  i.  c.  on  the  4th  day,  is  noticed.  The  rate  of 
stream  seems  to  have  varied  with  its  relative  width 
and  depth.  The  greatest  width  mentioned  was 
180  yards,  the  point  where  it  enters  the  Dead  Sea. 
Here  it  was  only  3  feet  deep.  On  the  6th  day  the 
width  in  one  place  was  80  yards,  and  the  depth 
only  2  feet ;  while  the  current  on  the  whole  varied 
from  2  to  8  knots.  On  the  5th  day  the  width  was 
7<>  yards,  with  a  current  of  2  knots,  or  30  yards 
with  a  current  of  6  knots. 

The  only  living  tributaries  to  the  Jordan  noticed 
particularly  below  Genesareth  were  the  Yarm&h 
(Hieiomax)  and  the  Zerka  (Jabbok).  The  mouth 
of  the  former  of  these  was  passed  on  the  3rd  day, 
40  yards  wide,  with  moderate  current ;  while  the 
latter,  whose  course  became  visible  on  the  7th  day, 
was,  on  the  8th  day,  discovered  to  have  two  distinct 
outlets  into  the  main  stream,  one  of  which  was  then 
dry.  Older  writers  had  distinguished  two  beds  and 
banks  of  the  Jordan;  the  first,  that  occupied  by 
the  river  in  its  normal  state  ;  the  second,  comprising 
the  space  which  it  occupied  during  its  swelling  or 
overflow  (Martiniere,  Diet.  Geograph.  s.  t\).  Simi- 
larly  Lieutenant  Lynch  has  remarked,  "There  are 
evidently  two  terraces  to  the  Jordan,  and  through 
the  lowest  one  the  river  runs  its  serpentine  course. 
From  the  stream,  above  the  immediate  banks,  there 
is,  on  each  side,  a  singular  terrace  of  low  hills,  like 
truncated  cones,  which  is  the  bluff  terminus  of  an 
extended  table-land,  reaching  quite  to  the  moun- 
tains of  Hauran  on  the  E.,  and  the  high  hills  on 
the  western  side"  (Narrat.,  April  13,  and  comp. 
what  ('apt.  Newbold  says,  p.  22).  There  are  no 
bridges  over  Jordan  to  which  an  earlier  date  has 
been  assigned  than  that  of  the  Roman  occupation  ; 
and  there  are  vestiges  of  Roman  roads  in  different 
parts  of  the  country — between  Nabulus  and  Beisdn 


JORDAN 

for  instance — that  may  well  have  crossed  by  these 
bridges.  The  Saracens  afterwards  added  to  their 
number,  or  restored  those  which  they  found  in 
ruins.  Thus  the  bridge  called  el  Ghujan  over  the 
Hashbeiya,  has  two  pointed  arches  and  one  round 
( Newbold,  p.  13,),  while  the  entire  architecture  of 
the  Jisr  Benat  Ya'kob  (of  the  daughters  of  Jacob), 
'Jj  miles  to  the  S.  of  L.  Huleh,  as  well  as  of  the 
khan  adjacent   to   it  on  the   eastern  side,  is   pro- 

1 Deed  to  be  Saracenic  (ibid.,  p.  20).     A  Roman 

bridge  of  ten  arches, ,Jisr  Sernakh,  spans  the  Jordan 
near  the  village  bearing  that  name,  and  was  doubt- 
less on  the  route  from  Tiberias  and  Tarichea  to 
Gadara  and  Decapolis  (ibid.,  p.  21,  Irby,  p.  §0). 
Lastly,  the  bridge  of  Mejamich,  which  crosses  the 
Jordan  about  sis  miles  from  the  lake  of  Genesareth, 
was  Saracenic  ;  while  that  near  the  ford  Dutnich  was 
more  Roman  (Newbold,  p.  20,  and  Lynch,  Narr., 
April  16). 

Turning  from  these  artificial  constructions  to  the 
old  bridges  of  nature — the  fords,  we  find  a  remark- 
able, yet  perfectly  independent  concurrence  between 
the  narrative  of  Lieutenant  Lynch  and  what  has 
been  asserted  previously  respecting  the  fords  or  pas- 
sages of  the  Bible.  We  do  not  indeed  affirm  that 
the  localities  fit  into  each  other  like  the  pieces  of  a 
puzzle.  Yet  still  it  is  no  slight  coincidence  that  no 
more  than  three,  or  at  most  tour  regular  fords  should 
have  been  set  down  by  the  chroniclers  of  the  Ame- 
rican expedition.  The  two  first  occur  on  the  same 
day  within  a  few  hours  of  each  other,  and  are  called 
respectively  Wacabes  and  Sukwa  {Off.  Hep.  pp.  25 
and  26).  Eighteen  miles  E.  by  N.  of  the  last  of 
these  were  the  ruins  of  Jerash  (which  our  authority 
confounds  with  Pella),  exactly  in  a  line  with  which 
.  is  placed  the  site  of  Succoth,  or  Sakut,  in  the  map 
of  Dr.  Robinson  ;  though  he  admits  that  arguments 
are  not  wanting  for  placing  it  some  way  to  the  S. 
(vol.  iii.  p.  310).  The  next  ford  is  passed  the  fol- 
lowing, or  the  7th  day,  the  ford  of  D&mieh,  as  it 
is  railed,  opposite  to  the  commencement  of  the 
Wady  Zerka,  some  miles  above  the  junction  of  that 
river  with  the  Jordan,  and  where  the  load  from 
Nubulus  to  es-Salt  crossed.  Could  we  ascertain 
the  true  site  of  Succoth,  we  might  be  better  able  to 
decide  which  of  these  two  fords  answered  best  to 
the  Beth-barah  of  the  Old  Test.,  or  Bethabara  of  the 
New;  anil  then  Aenon  might  be  the  ford,  or  one  of 
the  two  folds,  to  the  N.  of  it.  It  is  perhaps  worthy 
of  note  that  the  neighbourhood  of  the  ford  Sukva 
is  represented  as  the  dreariest  wild  imaginable — 
fearful  solitude  and  monotony  [Narr.,  April  15). 
That  Messrs,  Irby  and  Mangles  forded  the  Jordan 
near  Tarichea  was  probably  due  to  the  ruins  of 
the  old  Roman  biidge  ;  on  the  contrary,  where  they 
folded  it  on  horseback,  1J  hr.  from  Beisan,  Lynch 
found  the  water  between  5  and  6  feet  deep. 

The  ford  el-Mashra'a  over  against  Jericho  was 
the  last  ford  put  upon  record,  and  it  is  too  well 
known  to  need  auy  lengthened  notice.  Here  tradi- 
tion has  chosen  to  combine  the  passage  of  the  Israel- 
ites under  Joshua  with  the  baptism  of  our  Lord— 
a  more  distant  ford  would  have  been  found  highly 
inconvenient  for  the  Jerusalem  pilgrims ;  and  here 
accordingly,  three  miles  below  the  mined  convent  of 
St.  John — in  honour  of  these  events — the  annual 
bathing  of  the  Oriental  pilgrims  takes  place;  of 
which  Professor  Stanlev  has  given  a  lively  picture 
{8.  ,V  /'•  p.  314-16  ;  com)..  Off.  Rep.  p.  29,  30  , 

We  have  observed  that  not  a  single  city  ever 
crowned  the  banks  of  the  Jordan.  Still  Bethshan 
and  Jericho  to  the  \V..  Gerasa,  Pella,  and  Gadara  to 


JORDAN 


1131 


the  E,  of  it,  were  impoitant  cities,  and  caused  a  good 
deal  of  traffic  between  the  two  opposite  banks. 
Under  the  sway  of  the  Egyptian  sultans,  the  bridge 
of  the  Daughters  of  Jacob  seems  to  have  been  one  of 
the  high-roads  to  Damascus.  Another  road  to  Da- 
mascus was  from  Nabulus  through  Beisan.  and  was 
brought  over  by  the  bridge  at  the  mouth  of  the 
Yermuk.  The  sites  of  these  cities,  with  their  history, 
are  discussed  under  their  respective  names  ;  and  for 
the  same  reason  we  abstain  from  going  deeply  into 
the  physical  features  of  the  Jordan,  or  of  the  Ghor, 
for  these  will  be  treated  of  more  at  large  under  the 
general  head  of  Palestine.  We  shall  confine  ourselves 
therefore  to  the  most  cursory  notice.  As  there  were 
slime-pits,  or  pits  of  bitumen,  and  salt-pits  (Gen.  xi. 
3  ;  Zeph.  ii.  9)  in  the  vale  of  Siddim,  on  the  extreme 
south,  so  Mr.  Thompson  speaks  of  bitumen  wells 
20  minutes  from  the  bridge  over  the  Hashbeiya  on 
the  extreme  north  ;  while  Ain-el  Mellahah  above 
L.  Huleh,  is  emphatically  "  the  fountain  of  the 
salt  works"  (Lynch's  Narrat.,  p.  470).  Thermal 
springs  are  frequent  about  the  lake  of  Tiberias ; 
the  most  celebrated,  below  the  town  bearing  that 
name  (Robinson,  ii.  384,  5)  ;  some  near  Emmaus 
(Lynch,  467),  some  near  Magdala,  and  some  not 
far  from  Gadara  (Irby,  90,  1).  The  hill  of  Dan 
is  said'  to  be  an  extinct  crater,  and  masses  of  volcanic 
rock  and  tufa  are  noticed  by  Lynch,  not  far  from  the 
mouth  of  the  Yermak  [Narrat.,  April  12).  Dark 
basalt  is  the  characteristic  of  the  rocks  in  the  upper 
stage  ;  trap,  limestone,  sandstone,  and  conglomerate, 
in  the  lower.  On  the  2nd  day  of  the  passage  a 
bank  of  fuller's-earth  was  observed. 

How  far  the  Jordan  in  olden  time  was  ever  a 
zone  of  cultivation,  like  the  Nile,  is  uncertain. 
Now,  with  the  exception  of  the  eastern  shores  of  the 
L.  Huleh,  the  hand  of  man  may  be  said  to  have 
disappeared  from  its  banks.  The  genuine  Arab  is 
a  nomad  by  nature,  and  contemns  agriculture. 
There,  however,  Dr.  Robinson,  in  the  month  of 
May,  found  the  land  tilled  almost  down  to  the 
lake ;  and  large  crops  of  wheat,  barley,  maize, 
sesame,  and  rice  rewarded  the  husbandman.  Horses, 
cattle,  and  sheep — all  belonging  to  the  Ghawarinah 
tribe — fattened  on  the  rich  pasture  ;  and  large  herds 
of  black  buffaloes  luxuriated  in  the  streams  and  in 
the  deep  mire  of  the  marshes  (vol.  iii.  p.  .'106 ). 
These  are  doubtless  lineal  descendants  of  the  "  fat 
bulls  of  Bashan ;"  as  the  "oaks  of  Bashan" 
are  still  the  magnificent  staple  tree  of  those 
regions.  Cultivation  degenerates  as  we  advance 
southwards.  Corn-fields  wave  round  Genesareth 
on  the  W.,  and  the  palm  and  vine,  fig  and  pome- 
granate, are  still  to  be  seen  here  and  there.  Melons 
grown  on  its  shores  aie  of  great  size  and  miich 
esteemed.  Rink  oleanders,  and  a  rose-coloured  spe- 
cies of  hollyhock,  in  great  profusion,  wait  upon 
every  approach  to  a  rill  or  spring.  These  gems  of 
nature  reappear  in  the  lower  course  of  the  Jordan. 
There  the  purple  thistle,  the  blight  yellow  mari- 
gold, and  scarlet  anemone,  saluted  the  adventurers 
of  the  New  World:  the  laurestinus  and  oleander, 
cedar  anil  arbutus,  willow  and  tamarisk,  accompa- 
nied them  on  their  route.  As  the  climate  became 
more  tropical,  and  the  lower  Ghdr  was  entered, 
huge  ghurrah  trees,  like  the  aspen,  with  silvery 
foliage,  overhung  them  ;  and  the  cane,  frequently 
impenetrable,  and  now  in  blossom,  "  was  ever  at  the 
water's  edge."  ( hdy  once  during  the  whole  voyage, 
on  the  4th  day.  were  patches  of  wdieat  and  barley 
visible;  RulMhe  hand  that  had  sowed  them  lived 
fir  away.     As  Jeremiah  in  the  O.  T.,  and  St.  Je- 

4  D  2 


1132 


JORIBAS 


rome  and  Phocas  (see  Reland  ns  above)  among  Chris- 
tian pilgrims,  had  spoken  of  the  Jordan  as  the 
resort  of  lions,  so  tracks  of  tigers,  wild  boars,  and 
the  like,  presented  themselves  from  time  to  time  to 
these  explorers.  Flocks  of  wild  ducks,  of  cranes,  of 
pigeons,  and  of  swallows,  were  scared  by  their  ap- 
proach ;  and  a  specimen  of  the  bulbul,  or  Syrian 
nightingale,  fell  into  their  hands.  The  scenery 
throughout  was  not  inspiring — it  was  of  a  subdued 
character  when  they  started  ;  profoundly  gloomy 
and  dreary  near  lord  Sukwa ;  and  then  utterly 
sterile  just  before  they  reached  Jericho.  With  the 
exception  of  a  few  Arab  tribes — so  savage,  as  scarce 
to  be  considered  exceptions — humanity  had  become 
extinct  on  its  banks. 

We  cannot  take  leave  of  our  subject  without  ex- 
pressing our  warmest  thanks  to  our  Transatlantic 
brethren.  It  was  not  enough  that  Dr.  Robinson 
should  have  eclipsed  all  other  writers  who  had  pre- 
ceded him  in  his  noble  work  upon  Palestine ;  but 
that  a  nation  from  the  extreme  W. — from  a  conti- 
nent utterly  unknown  to  the  Old  or  New  Testa- 
ment— should  have  been  the  first  to  accomplish  the 
navigation  of  that  sacred  river,  which  has  been 
before  the  world  so  prominently  for  nearly  4000 
years  ;  this  is  a  fact  which  surely  ought  not  to  be 
passed  over  by  any  writer  on  the  Jordan  in  silence, 
or  uncommemorated.  [E.  S.  Ff.] 

JO'EIBAS  {'l&pi&os:  Joribus  =  J arib  (1  Esd. 
viii.  44;  comp.  Ezr.  viii.  16). 

JO'RIBUS  ('Upipos :  Joribus)  =  Jarib  (1  Esd. 
ix.  19  ;  comp.  Ezr.  x.  18). 

JO'BIM  {'loipei/x),  son  of  Matthat,  in  the  genea- 
logy of  Christ  (Luke  iii.  29),  in  the  13th  generation 
from  David  inclusive ;  about  contemporary,  theie- 
fore,  with  Ahaz.  The  form  of  the  name  is  ano- 
malous, and  should  probably  be  either  Joram  or 
Joiarim.  [A.  C.  H.] 

JOE'KOAM  (Bj?jyV  :    'UK\di> ;    Alex.  'Iep- 

Kaav :  Jercaani),  either  a  descendant  of  Caleb  the 
son  of  Hezrou,  through  Hebron,  or,  as  Jarchi  says, 
the  name  of  a  place  in  the  tribe  of  Judah,  of  which 
Raham  was  prince  (1  Chr.  ii.  44).  It  Was  pro- 
bably in  the  neighbourhood  of  Hebron.  Jerome 
gives  it  in  the  form  Jerchaam  (Quacst.  Hebr.  in 
Parol.). 

JO'SABAD.      1.   03TV:    'Ia>a£a/3cS0 ;    Alex. 

'Ico£a/3a8  ;  Cod.  Fred.  Aug.  'Ia>fa£a/3  :  Jczabad.) 
Properly  Jozabad,  the  Gederathite,  one  of  the 
hardy  warriors  of  Benjamin  who  left  Saul  to  follow 
the  fortunes  of  David  during  his  residence  among 
the  Philistines  at  Ziklag  (1  Chr.  xii.  4). 

2.  (TajfoSSo's ;  Alex.  Taxra^So's :  Joscidus)  = 
Jozabad,  son  of  Jeshua  the  Levite  (1  Esd.  viii. 
63  ;  comp.  Ezr.  viii.  33). 

3.  (Alex.  'ntyPaSos:  Zabdiae),  one  of  the  sons 
of  Bebai  (1  Esd.  ix.  29).     [Zabbai.] 


a  According  to  the  order  of  the  narrative,  Rachel's 
death  preceded  the  selling:  of  Joseph  ;  it  is  unlikely 
that  17  years  should  have  elapsed  between  the  birth  of 
Joseph  and  that  of  Benjamin ;  and  as  Benjamin  had  ten 
sons  at  the  coming  into  Egypt  (xlvi.  21),  it  is  scarcely 
probable  that  he  was  born  no  more  than  22  years 
before.  There  is  moreover  no  mention  of  Rachel 
besides  the  allusion  in  the  speech  of  Judah  to  Joseph, 
quoted  above  (xliv.  20),  in  the  whole  subsequent  nar- 
rative, until  dying  Jacob,  when  he  blesses  Ephraim 


JOSEPH 

JO'SAFHAT  ('IwffcKpdT :  Josaphat)  -  Jeho- 
shaphat  king  of  Judah  (Matt.  i.  8). 

JOSAPH'IAS  ('laxracpias  :  Josaphias)  =  Jo- 
sirniAH  (1  Esd.  viii.  36;  comp.  Ezr.  viii.  10). 

JO'SEDEC  ('laxreSeK :  Josedec  ;  Josedech), 
1  Esd.  v.  5,  48,  56  ;  vi.  2  ;  ix.  19  ;  Ecclus.  xlix. 
12  =  Jehozadak  or  Jozadak,  the  father  of 
Jeshua,   whose   name  also  appears  as  Josedech 

(Hag.  i.  1). 

JO'SEPH  (flDi'' :  '\uffri<p :   Joseph).     1.  The 

elder  of  the  two  sous  of  Jacob  by  Rachel.  Like  his 
brethren,  he  received  his  name  on  account  of  the 
circumstances  of  his  birth.  We  read  that  Rachel 
was  long  barren,  but  that  at  length  she  "  bare  a  son  ;  . 
and  said,  God  hath  taken  away  (?|DN)  my  reproach : 
and  she  called  his  name  Joseph  (P|DV) ;  saying, 
The  Lord  will  add  (f]D^)  to  me  another  son"  (Gen. 
xxx.  23,  24)  ;  a  hope  fulfilled  in  the  birth  of  Ben- 
jamin (comp.  xxxv.  17).  This  passage  seems  to 
indicate  a  double  etymology  (from  P|DN  and 
S|D1').  There  is  nothing  improbable  in  this  ex- 
planation, because  of  the  relation  of  the  taking 
away  the  reproach  to  the  expectation  of  another 
son.  Such  double  etymologies  are  probably  more 
common  in  Hebrew  names  than  is  generally  sup- 
posed. 

The  date  of  Joseph's  biith  relatively  to  that  of 
the  coming  of  Jacob  into  Egypt  is  fixed  by  the 
mention  that  he  was  thirty  years  old  when  he 
became  governor  of  Egypt  (xli.  46),  which  agrees 
with  the  statement  that  he  was  "  seventeen  years 
old"  (xxxvii.  2)  about  the  time  that  his  brethren 
sold  him.  He  was  therefore  born  about  39  years 
before  Jacob  came  into  Egypt,  and,  according  to  the 
chronology  which  we  hold  to  be  the  most  probable, 
B.C.  cir.l906. 

After  Joseph's  birth  he  is  first  mentioned  when 
a  youth,  seventeen  years  old.  As  the  child  of 
Rachel,  and  "son  of  his  old  age"  (xxxvii.  3), 
and  doubtless  also  for  his  excellence  of  character, 
he  was  beloved  by  his  father  above  all  his  bre- 
thren. Probably  at  this  time  Rachel  was  already 
dead  and  Benjamin  but  an  iufant,  Benjamin,  that 
other  "child  of  his  old  age  "(xliv.  20),  whom 
Jacob  afterwards  loved  as  all  that  remained  of 
Rachel  when  he  supposed  Joseph  dead — "  his  bro- 
ther is  dead,  and  he  alone  is  left  of  his  mother, 
and  his  father  loveth  him  "  (I.  c.).a  Jacob  at  this 
time  had  two  small  pieces  of  land  in  Canaan, 
Abraham's  burying-place  at  Hebron  in  the  south, 
and  the  "  parcel  of  a  field,  where  he  [Jacob]  had 
spread  his  tent"  (Gen.  xxxiii.  19),  at  Shechem  in 
the  north,  the  latter  being  probably,  from  its  price, 
the  lesser  of  the  two.  He  seems  then  to  have  stayed 
at  Hebron  with  the  aged  Isaac,  while  his  sous  kept 
his  flocks.  Joseph,  we  read,  brought  the  evil  report 
of  his  brethren  to  his  father,  and  they  hated  him 


and  Manasseh,  returns  to  the  thought  of  his  beloved 
wife,  and  says,  "  And  as  for  me,  when  I  came  from 
Padan,  Rachel  died  by  me  in  the  land  of  Canaan  in 
the  way,  when  yet  [there  was]  but  a  little  way  to 
come  unto  Ephrath  :  and  I  buried  her  there  in  the 
way  of  Ephrath  ;  the  same  [is]  Beth-lehem  "  (xlviii. 
7).  Joseph's  anxiety  in  Egypt  to  see  Benjamin  seems 
to  favour  the  idea  that  he  had  known  him  as  a  child. 
When  Joseph  was  sold,  Benjamin  can,  however,  have 
only  been  very  young. 


JOSEPH 

because  his  father  loved  him  more  than  them,  and 
had  shown  his  preference  by  making  him  a  dress 

(D^DS  nj'riS),  which  appears  to  have  been  a  long 

tunic  with  sleeves,  worn  by  youths  and  maidens  of 
the  richer  class.b  The  hatred  of  Joseph's  brethren 
was  increased  by  his  telling  of  a  dream  foreshowing 
that  they  would  bow  down  to  him,  which  was  fol- 
lowed by  another  of  the  same  import.0  It  is  re- 
markable that  thus  early  prophetic  dreams  appear 
in  Joseph's  life.  This  part  of  the  history  (xxxvii. 
3-11)  may  perhaps  be  regarded  as  a  retrospective 
introduction  to  the  narrative  of  the  great  crime  of 
the  envious  brethren.  They  had  gone  to  Shechem 
to  feed  the  flock  ;  and  Joseph  was  sent  thither  from 
the  vale  of  Hebron  by  his  father  to  bring  him  word 
of  their  welfare  and  that  of  the  flock.  They  were 
not  at  Shechem,  but  were  gone  to  Dothan,  which 
appears  to  have  been  not  very  far  distant,  pasturing 
their  flock  like  the  Arabs  of  the  present  day,  wher- 
ever the  wild  country  (ver.  22)  was  unowned.  On 
Joseph's  approach,  his  brethren,  except  Reuben, 
resolved  to  kill  him  ;  but  Reuben  saved  him,  per- 
suading them  to  cast  him  into  a  dry  pit,  with  the 
intent  that  he  might  restore  him  to  his  father. 
Accordingly,  when  Joseph  was  come,  they  stripped 
him  of  his  tunic  and  cast  him  into  the  pit,  "  and 
they  sat  down  to  eat  bread :  and  they  lifted  up 
their  eyes  and  looked,  and,  behold,  a  company  of 
Ishmeelites  came  from  Gilead  with  their  camels 
bearing  spicery  [?]  and  balm  and  gum  ladanum  [?], 
going  to  carry  [it]  down  to  Egypt"  (ver.  25). — 
In  passing  we  must  call  attention  to  the  interest 
of  this  early  notice  of  the  trade  between  Palestine 
and  Egypt. — The  Ishmeelites  are  also  called  Mi- 
dianites  in  the  narrative :  that  the  two  names  are 
used  interchangeably  is  evident  from  ver.  28 ;  it 
must  therefore  be  supposed  that  one  of  them  is 
generic;  the  caravan  "came  from  Gilead"  and 
brought  balm  ;d  so  that  it  is  reasonable  to  infer 
the  merchants  to  have  been  Midianites,  and  that 


JOSEPH 


1133 


b  The  name  of  this  dress  seems  to  signify  "  a  tunic 
leaching  to  the  extremities."  It  was  worn  by  David's 
daughter  Tamar,  being  the  dress  of  "  the  king's 
daughters  [thatwere]  virgins"  (2  Sam.  xiii.  18,  see  19). 
There  seems  no  reason  for  the  LXX.  rendering  xl'T<av 
ttoiki'Aos,  or  the  Vulg.  polymita,  except  that  it  is  very 
likely  that  such  a  tunic  would  be  ornamented  with 
coloured  stripes,  or  embroidered.  The  richer  classes 
among  the  ancient  Egyptians  wore  long  dresses  of 
white  linen.  The  people  of  Palestine  and  Syria,  re- 
presented on  the  Egyptian  monuments  as  enemies  or 
tributaries,  wore  similar  dresses,  partly  coloured,  ge- 
nerally with  a  stripe  round  the  skirts  and  the  borders 
of  the  sleeves. 

0  From  Joseph's  second  dream,  and  his  father's 
rebuke,  it  might  be  inferred  that  Rachel  was  living 
at  the  time  that  he  dreamt  it.  It  is  indeed  possible 
that  it  may  have  occurred  some  time  before  the  sell- 
ing of  Joseph,  and  been  interpreted  by  Jacob  of  Rachel, 
who  certainly  was  not  alive  at  its  fulfilment,  so  that 
it  could  not  apply  to  her.  Yet,  if  Leah  only  survived, 
Jacob  might  have  spoken  of  her  as  Joseph's  mother. 
The  dream,  moreover,  indicates  eleven  brethren  be- 
sides the  father  and  mother  of  Joseph  :  if  therefore 
Benjamin  were  already  born,  Rachel  must  have  been 
dead  :  the  reference  is  therefore  more  probably  to 
Leah,  who  may  have  been  living  when  Jacob  went 
into  Egypt. 

a  The  three  articles  of  commerce  carried  by  the 
Caravan  we  have  rendered  spicery,  balm,  and  gum 
ladanum.  The  meaning  of  fliOJ  is  extremely 
doubtful  :    there    is  nothing   to  guide   us '  but   the 


they  are  also  called  Ishmeelites  by  a  kind  of  generic 
use  of  that  name.  Judah  suggested  to  his  brethren 
to  sell  Joseph  to  the  Ishmeelites,  appealing  at  once 
to  their  covetousness  and,  in  proposing  a  less  cruel 
course  than  that  on  which  they  were  probably  still 
resolved,  to  what  remnant  of  brotherly  feeling 
they  may  still  have  had.  Accordingly  they  took 
Joseph  out  of  the  pit  and  sold  him  "  for  twenty 
[shekels]  of  silver"  (ver.  28),  which  we  find  to 
have  been,  under  the  Law,  the  value  of  a  male  from 
five  to  twenty  years  old  (Lev.  xxvii.  5).e  Pro- 
bably there  was  a  constant  traffic  in  white  slaves, 
and  the  price,  according  to  the  unchangeableness  of 
eastern  customs,  long  remained  the  same.  It  is 
worthy  of  remark  that  we  here  already  find  the  de- 
scendants of  Abraham's  concubines  oppressing  the 
lawful  heirs.  Reuben  was  absent,  and  on  his  return 
to  the  pit  was  greatly  distressed  at  not  finding 
Joseph.  His  brethren  pretended  to  Jacob  that  Jo- 
seph had  been  killed  by  some  wild  beast,  taking 
to  him  the  tunic  stained  with  a  kid's  blood,  while 
even  Reuben  forbore  to  tell  him  the  truth,  all 
speaking  constantly  of  the  lost  brother  as  though 
they  knew  not  what  had  befallen  him,  and  even  as 
dead.  "  And  Jacob  rent  his  clothes,  and  put  sack- 
cloth upon  his  loins,  and  mourned  for  his  son  many 
days.  And  all  his  sons  and  all  his  daughters  rose 
up  to  comfort  him ;  but  he  refused  to  be  comforted  ; 
and  he  said,  For  I  will  go  down  unto  my  son 
mourning  into  the  grave.  Thus  his  father  wept  for 
him  "  (Gen.  xxxvii.  34,  35).f  Jacob's  lamentation 
shows  that  he  knew  of  a  future  state,  for  what 
comfort  would  he  have  in  going  into  his  own  grave 
when  he  thought  that  his  lost  son  had  been  torn 
by  wild  beasts?  This  is  one  of  the  cases  in  which 
we  should  ceitainly  understand  "  Hades  "  by  "  the 
grave,"  and  may  translate,  "  For  I  will  go  down 
unto  my  son  mourning  to  Hades."  ? 

The  Midianites  sold  Joseph  in  Egypt  to  Potiphar, 
"  an  officer  of  Pharaoh,  captain  of  the  executioners, 
an  Egyptian"  (xxxix.  1  ;  comp.  xxxvii.  36).h     We 


renderings  of  the  LXX.  Bvixiaixa  and  the  Vulg. 
aromata,  and  the  congruity  of  their  meaning  with 
that  of  the  name  of  the  second  article.  As  to  the 
"H^,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  it  was  a  kind  of  balm, 
although  its  exact  kind  is  difficult  to  determine.  The 
meaning  of  O?  is  not  certain  :  perhaps  gum  ladanum 
is  a  not  improbable  conjecture. 

e  Kalisch  remarks  [ad  /or.)  that  twenty  shekels 
was  "  a  price  less  than  that  ordinarily  paid  for  a 
Hebrew  slave  (Ex.  xxi.  32;  Lev.  xxvii.  5)."  The 
former  reference  is  to  the  fine  to  be  paid,  thirty 
shekels  of  silver,  to  the  owner  of  a  slave,  male  or 
female,  gored  to  death  by  an  ox  :  the  latter  dis- 
proves his  assertion. — The  payment  must  have  been 
by  weight,  since  there  is  no  reason  to  believe  that 
coined  money  was  known  at  this  remote  period. 
[Money.] 

f  The  daughters  here  mentioned  were  probably  the 
wives  of  Jacob's  sons  :  he  seems  to  have  had  but  one 
daughter  ;  and  if  he  had  many  granddaughters,  few 
would  have  been  born  thus  early. 

e  For  this  interesting  inference  we  are  indebted  to 
Dr.  Marks.  On  the  knowledge  of  _  the  future  state 
among  the  Israelites  during  and  after  the  sojourn  in 
Egypt,  see  art.  EGYPT. 

h  The  word  D'HD,  which  we  have  rendered 
"officer,"  with  the  A.V.,  properly  means  "eunuch," 
as  explained  in  the  margin,  although  it  is  also  used 
in  the  Bible  in  the  former  sense  (Ccsen.  Tlics.  s.  v.). 
Fotiphar's  office  would  scarcely  have  been  given  to  a 


1134 


JOSEPH 


have  probably  no  right  to  infer,  as  Gesenius  has 

done  (Thes.  s.  v.)  riSD),  that  by  the  executioners 

we  are  to  understand  the  same  as  the  king's  guard 
or  body-guard.'  This  may  be  the  case  when  the 
Chaldeans  are  spoken  of,  for  the  immediate  infliction 
of  punishment  under  the  very  eye  of  the  sovereign 
was  always  usual  both  with  Shemites  and  Tatars, 
as  a  part  of  their  system  of  investing  the  regal 
power  with  terror  ;  but  the  more  refined  Egyptians 
and  their  responsible  kings  do  not  seem  to  have 
practised  a  custom  which  nothing  but  necessity 
could  render  tolerable.  That  in  this  case  the  title 
is  to  be  taken  literally,  is  evident  from  the  control 
exercised  by  Potiphar  over  the  king's  prison  (xxxix. 
20),  and  from  the  fact  that  this  prison  is  afterwards 
shown  to  have  been  in  the  house  of  the  captain  of 
the  executioners,  that  officer  then  being  doubtless 
a  successor  of  Potiphar  (xl.  3,  4).  The  name 
Potiphar  is  written  in  hieroglyphics  Pet-PA-RA  or 
pet-p-ra,  and  signifies  "belonging  to  Ka"  (the 
sun).  It  occurs  again,  with  a  slightly  different 
orthography,  Poti-pherah,  as  the  name  of  Joseph's 
father-in-law,  priest  or  prince  of  On.  It  may  be 
remarked  that  as  ha  was  the  chief  divinity  of  On, 
or  Heliopolis,  it  is  an  interesting  undesigned  coin- 
cidence that  the  latter  should  bear  a  name  indicat- 
ing devotion  to  Ra.     [  Potiphar.] 

It  is  important  to  observe  that  a  careful  compa- 
rison of  evidence  has  led  us  to  the  conclusion  that, 
at  the  time  that  Joseph  was  sold  into  Egypt, 
the  country  was  not  unite!  under  the  rule  of  a 
single  native  line,  but  governed  by  several  dynasties, 
of  which  the  Fifteenth  Dynasty,  of  Shepherd  Kings, 
was  the  predominant  line,  the  rest  being  tributary 
to  it.  The  absolute  dominions  of  this  dynasty  lay 
in  Lower  Egypt,  and  it  would  therefore  always  be 
most  connected  with  Palestine.  The  manners  de- 
scribed are.  Egyptian,  although  there  is  apparently 
an  occasional  slight  tinge  of  Shemitism.  The  date 
of  Joseph's  arrival  we  should  consider  B.C.  cir. 
1890.    [Egypt  :  Chronology.] 

In  Egypt,  the  second  period  of  Joseph's  life 
begins.  As  a  child  he  had  been  a  true  son,  and 
withstood  the  evil  example  of  his  brethren.  He 
is  now  to  serve  a  strange  master  in  the  hard  state 
of  slavery,  and  his  virtue  will  be  put  to  a  severer 
proof  than  it  had  yet  sustained.  Joseph  prospered 
in  the  house  of  the  Egyptian,  who,  seeing  that  God 
blessed  him,  and  pleased  with  his  good  service,  ''set 
him  over  his  house,  and  all  [that]  he  had  he  gave 
into  his  hand"  (xxxix.  4,  comp.  5).  He  was  placed 
over  all  his  master's  property  with  perfect  trust,  and 
"  the  Lord  blessed  the  Egyptian's  house  for  Joseph's 
sake  "  (ver.  5).  The  sculptures  and  paintings  of  the 
ancient  Egyptian  tombs  bring  vividly  before  us 
the  daily  life  and  duties  of  Joseph.  The  property 
of  great  men  is  shown  to  have  been  managed  by 
scribes,  who  exercised  a  most  methodical  and  minute 
supervision  over  all  the  operations  of  agriculture, 
gardening,  the  keeping  of  live  stock,  and  fishing. 
Every  product  was  carefully  registered  to  check 
the  dishonesty  of  the  labourers,  who  in  Egypt  have 
always  been  famous  in  this  respect.  Probably  in 
no  country  was  farming  ever  more  systematic.  Jo- 
seph's  previous   knowledge   of  tending  flocks,  and 


eunuch,  and  there  is,  we  believe,  no  evidence  that 
there  were  such  in  the  Egyptian  courts  in  ancient 
times.  This  very  word  first  occurs  in  hieroglyphics, 
written  sars,  as  a  title  of  Persian  functionaries,  in 
inscriptions  of  the  time  of  the  Persian  dominion. 


JOSEPH 

perhaps  of  husbandry,  and  his  truthful  character, 
exactly  fitted  him  for  the  post  of  overseer.  How 
long  he  rilled  it  we  are  not  told.  "  Joseph  was 
fair  of  form  and  fair  in  appearance"  (xxxix.  6). 
His  master's  wife,  with  the  well-known  profligacy 
of  the  Egyptian  women,  tempted  him,  and  failing, 
charged  him  with  the  crime  she  would  have  made 
him  commit.  Potiphar,  incensed  against  Joseph, 
cast  him  into  prison.  It  must  not  be  supposed, 
from  the  lowness  of  the  morals  of  the  Egyptians  in 
practice,  that  the  sin  of  unfaithfulness  in  a  wife 
was  not  ranked  among  the  heaviest  vices.  The 
punishment  of  adulterers  was  severe,  and  a  moral 
tale  recently  interpreted,  "  The  Two  Brothers," 
is  founded  upon  a  case  nearly  resembling  that  of 
Joseph.  It  has,  indeed,  been  imagined  that  this 
story  was  based  upon  the  trial  of  Joseph,  and 
as  it  was  written  tor  the  heir  to  the  throne  of 
Egypt  at  a  later  period,  there  is  some  reason  in 
the  idea  that  the  virtue  of  one  who  had  held  so 
high  a  position  as  Joseph  might  have  been  in  the 
paind  of  the  writer,  were  this  part  of  his  history 
well-known  to  the  priests,  which,  however,  is  not 
likely.  This  incident,  moreover,  is  not  so  lemark- 
able  as  to  justify  great  stress  being  laid  upon  the 
similarity  to  it  of  the  main  event  of  a  moral  tale. 
The  story  of  Bellerophon  might  as  reasonably  be 
traced  to  it,  were  it  Egyptian  and  not  Greek. — The 
Muslims  have  founded  upon  the  history  of  Joseph 
and  Potiphar's  wife,  whom  they  call  Yoosuf  and 
Zeleekha,  a  famous  religious  allegory.  This  is  much 
to  be  wondered  at,  as  the  Kur-an  relates  the  tempt- 
ing of  Joseph  with  no  material  variation  in  the 
main  particulars  from  the  authentic  narrative.  The 
commentators  say,  that  after  the  death  of  Potiphar 
(Kitfeer),  Joseph  married  Zeleekha  (Sale,  ch.  xii.). 
This  mistake  was  probably  caused  by  the  circum- 
stance that  Joseph's  father-in-law  bore  the  same 
name  as  his  master. 

Potiphar,  although  convinced  of  Joseph's  guilt, 
does  not  appear  to  have  brought  him  before  a  tri- 
bunal, where  the  enormity  of  his  alleged  crime, 
especially  after  the  trust  placed  in  him,  mid  the 
tact  of  his  being  a  foreigner,  which  was  made  much 
of  by  his  master's  wife  (xxxix.  14,  17),  would  pro- 
bably have  ensured  a  punishment  of  the  severest 
kind.  He  seems  to  have  only  cast  him  into  the 
prison,  which  appears  to  have  been  in  his  house,  or, 
at  least,  under  his  control,  since  afterwards  prisoners 
are  related  to  have  been  put  "  in  ward  [in]  the 
house  of  the  captain  of  the  executioners,  into  the 
prison  "  (xl.  3),  ami  simply,  "  in  ward  [in]  the  cap- 
tain of  the  executioners'  house"  (xli.  10,  comp.  xl. 
7.)  The  prison  is  described  as  "  a  place  where  the 
king's  prisoners  [were]  bound"  (xxxix.  20).  Here 
the  hardest  time  of  Joseph's  period  of  probation 
began.  He  was  cast  into  prison  on  a  false  ac- 
cusation, to  remain  there  for  at  least  two  years, 
and  perhaps  for  a  much  longer  time.  At  first 
he  was  treated  with  severity  ;  this  we  learn  from 
Ps.  cv.,  "  He  sent  a  man  before  them,  Joseph 
[who]  :  was  sold  for  a  slave :  whose  feet  they 
afflicted  with  the  fetter :  the  iron  entered  into  his 
soul"  (ver.  17,  18).  There  is  probably  here  a 
connexion  between  "fetter"  and  "iron"  (comp. 
cxlix.  8),  in  which  case  the  signification  of  the  last 


1  D^rQt2n  "II^  must  mean  "  captain  of  the  execu- 
tioners," from  Potiphar's  connexion  with  the  prison, 
although  the  LXX.  renders  it  apxifi-6.yet.pos. 


JOSEPH 

clause  would  be  "  the  iron  entered  into  him," 
meaning  that  the  tetters  cut  his  feet  or  legs.     This 

is  not  inconsistent  with  the  statement  in  Genesis 
that  the  keeper  of  the  prison  treated  Joseph  well 
(xxxix.  '_'  1),  for  we  are  not  justified  in  thence  in- 
terring that  he  was  kind  from  the  rirst.k 

In  the  prison,  as  in  Potiphar' a  house,  Joseph 
was  found  worthy  of  complete  trust,  anil  the 
keeper  of  the  prison  placed  everything  under  his 
control,  God's  especial  blessing  attending  his  honest 
service.  After  a  while,  Pharaoh  was  incensed 
against  two  of  his  officers,  "the  chief  of  the  cup- 
bearers" (D^^n  lb),  and  "the  chief  of  the 
bakers  "  ^D^SIXH  "lL"),  and  cast  them  into  the  pri- 
son where  Joseph  was.  Here  the  chief  of  the  exe- 
cutioners, doubtless  a  successor  of  Potiphar  (for, had 
the  latter  been  convinced  of  Joseph's  innocence,  he 
would  not  have  left  him  in  the  prison,  and  if  not  so 
convinced,  he  would  not  have  trusted  him),  charged 
Joseph  to  serve  these  prisoners.  Like  Potiphar, 
they  were  "  officers"  of  Pharaoh  (xl.  '_'),  and  though 
it  may  be  a  mistake  to  call  them  grandees,  their 
easy  access  to  the  king  would  give  them  an  im- 
portance that  explains  the  care  taken  of  them  by 
the  chief  of  the  executioners.  Each  di  earned  a  pro- 
phetic dream,  which  Joseph  interpreted,  disclaim- 
ing human  skill  and  acknowledging  that  interpreta- 
tions were  of  God.  It  is  not  necessary  here  to 
discuss  in  detail  the  particulars  of  this  part  of  Jo- 
seph's history,  since  they  do  not  materially  affect 
the  leading  events  of  his  life  ;  they  are  however 
very  interesting  from  their  perfect  agreement  with 
the  manners  of  the  ancient  Egyptians  as  represented 
on  their  monuments."1  Joseph,  when  he  told  the 
chief  of  the  cupbearers  of  his  coming  restoration  to 
favour,  prayed  him  to  speak  to  Pharaoh  tor  him  ; 
but  he  did  not  remember  him. 


k  Joseph's  complaint  to  the  chief  of  the  cupbearers, 
"And  here  also  have  I  done  nothing  that  they  should 
put  me  into  the  dungeon"  ("1123,  xl.  15),  does  not 
throw  light  upon  this  matter  ;  for  although  the  word 
used  seems  "properly  to  mean  the  worst  kind  of  prison, 
or  the  worst  part  of  a  prison,  here-  it  must  be  merely 
equivalent,  as  in  xli.  14,  to  inDiTTl^S  (xxxix.  20, 
&c),  which  seems  properly  a'milder  term. 

m  It  has  heen  imagined,  from  the  account  of  the 
dream  of  the  chief  of  the  cupbearers,  that  the  wine 
then  drunk  by  the  king  of  Egypt  may  have  been  the 
fresh  unfermented  juice  of  the  grape  ;  but  the  nature 
of  the  dream,  which  embraces  a  long  period,  and 
merely  indicates  the  various  stages  of  the  growth  of 
the  tree  and  fruit  as  though  immediately  following 
one  another,  would  allow  the  omission  of  the  process 
of  preparing  the  wine.  The  evidence  of  the  monu- 
ments makes  it  very  improbable  that  unfermented 
wine  was  drunk  by  the  ancient  inhabitants,  so  that 
it  seems  impossible  that  it  should  ever  have  taken 
the  place  of  fermented  or  true  wine,  which  was  the 
national  beverage  of  the  higher  classes  at  least. 

"  Lit.  "at  the  end  of  two  years  of  days;"  but  we 
may  read  "after"  for  "at  the  end;"  and  the  word 
"  days  ",  appears  merely  to  indicate  that  the  year  was 
a  period  of  time,  or  possibly  is  used  to  distinguish 
the  ordinary  year  from  a  greater  period,  the  year  of 
days  from  the  year  of  years. 

"  'Ibis  word  is  probably  of  Egyptian  origin. 
[Egypt  ;   Nile.] 

''  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  this  is  an  Egyptian 
word.  The  l.XX.  does  not  translate  it  Ilea.  \li.  '2, 
IN;  Is.  xi\.  J);  and  Jesut)  the  son  of  Sirach,  an 
Egyptian  Jew,  uses  it  untranslated    Wisd.  si.  16   :  it 


JOSEPH  1135 

"  After  two  years,""  Joseph's  deliverance  came. 
Pharaoh  dreamed  two  prophetic  dreams.  "  He 
stood  by  the  river"  ["ISO,  the  Nile]."  And,  be- 
hold, coming  up  out  of  the  river  seven  kine  [or 
'  heifers  '],  beautiful  in  appearance  and  fat-fleshed; 
and  they  fed  in  the  marsh-grass  [-inN].P  And, 
behold,  seven  other  kine  coming  up  after  them  out 
of  the  river,  evil  in  appearance,  and  lean-fleshed" 
(xli.  1-3).  These,  afterwards  described  still  more 
strongly,  ate  up  the  first  seven,  and  yet,  as  is  said 
in  the  second  account,  when  they  had  eaten  them 
remained  as  lean  as  betbre  (xli.  1-4,  17-21).  Then 
Pharaoh  had  a  second  dream, — "  Behold,  seven  ears 
of  corn  coming  up  on  one  stalk,  fat  [or  '  full,'  ver. 
22]  and  good.  And,  behold,  seven  ears,  thin  and 
blasted  with  the  east  wind,'1  sprouting  forth  after 
them"  (ver.  5,  6).  These,  also  described  more 
strongly  in  the  second  account,  devoured  the  first 
seven  ears  (ver.  5-7,  22-24).  In  the  morning  Pha- 
raoh sent  for  the  "scribes,"  (Cftpin),  and  the 
"wise  men,"  and  they  were  unable  to  give  him  an 
interpretation.  Then  the  chief  of  the  cupbearers 
remembered  Joseph,  and  told  Pharaoh  how  a  young 
Hebrew,  "  servant  to  the  captain  of  the  execu- 
tioners," had  interpreted  his  and  his  fellow-pri- 
soner's dreams.  "Then  Pharaoh  sent  and  called 
Joseph,  and  they  made  him  hasten  out  of  the  pri- 
son:  and  he  shaved  [himself],  and  changed  his  rai- 
ment, and  came  unto  Pharaoh"  (ver.  14-).  The 
king  then  related  his  dreams,  and  Joseph,  when  he 
had  disclaimed  human  wisdom,  declared  to  him  that 
they  were  sent  of  God  to  forewarn  Pharaoh.  There 
was  essentially  but  one  dream.  Both  kine  and  ears 
symbolized  years.  There  were  to  be  seven  years  of 
great  plenty  in  Egypt,  and  after  them  seven  years 
of  consuming  and  "  very  heavy  famine."    The  dou- 


is  written  in  these  places  a\t,  a^ei.  Jerome  remarks 
that  when  he  asked  the  learned  Egyptians  what  this 
word  meant,  they  said  that  in  their  language  this 
name  was  given  to  every  kind  of  marsh-plant  ("  omne 
quod  in  palude  virens  nastitwr,"  Coin,  in  Is.  1.  c). 
The  change  of  the  ancient  Egyptian  vowel  ee  to  1  is 
quite  consistent  with  the  laws  of  permutation  which 
we  discover  by  a  comparison  of  Egyptian  and  Hebrew 
(Enc.  Brit.  8th  ed.  "Hieroglyphics").  This  word 
occurs  with  iXftJl  in  Job  viii.  11.  The  latter  we 
have  supposed  to  be  there  used  gencrically,  as  "  the 
reed"  [Egypt]  ;  but  from  the  occurrence  of  an 
Egyptian  word  with  it,  it  may  be  inferred  to  have 
its  special  signification,  "the  papyrus."  The  former 
word,  however,  seems  to  be  always  generic. 

'•  Bunscn  remarks  upon  this  word  :  "  Der  Ost- 
wind,  der  wegen  seiner  funfzigUigigen  Dauer  jet/.t 
in  Aegypten  Chamsin  hcisst,  ist  sehr  trocken  und 
hat  Verwandschaft  mit  dem  Samnm  (d.  h.  der 
Ciiftige),  dem  erstickenden  Sturmwind  des  w listen 
Arabien,  der  im  April  und  .Mai  berrscht"  Bibel- 
werk,  ad  loc).     But  it  should  he  observed:    1.  The 

east  wind  does  not  blow  during  the  Khamaseen. 
2.  The  spring  hot  winds  are  southerly.  :i.  They 
do  not  last  fifty  days.  '  1.  They  arc  not  called 
Chamsin '(Khamseen)  or  Khamaseen.  5.  They  pre- 
vail, usually  for  three  days  at  a  time,  during  the 
seven  weeks     !!i  days     following   Easter,    vulgarly 

called  ill  Egypt  Khamasecn,  which  is  a  plural  of 
Khamseen,  a  term  applied  in  the  singular  to  neither 
winds  nor  period,  though  they  arc  not  strictly  con- 
fined to  this  fluctuating  period.     6.  They  have  no 

relation  to  the  Samooiu,  which  occurs  in  any  hot 
weather,  ami  seldom  lasts  more  than  a  quarter  of 
an  hour.     7.  The  Samoom  is  not  peculiar  to  Arabia. 


1136 


JOSEPH 


bling  of  the  dream  denoted  that  the  events  it  fore- 
shadowed were  certain  and  imminent.  On  the  in- 
terpretation it  may  be  remarked,  that  it  seems  evi- 
dent that  the  kine  represented  the  animal  products, 
and  the  ears  of  corn  the  vegetable  products,  the 
must  important  object  in  each  class  representing  the 
whole  class.  Any  reference  to  Egyptian  supersti- 
tions, such  as  some  commentators  have  imagined, 
is  both  derogatory  to  revelation  and,  on  purely  cri- 
tical grounds,  unreasonable.  The  perfectly  Egyptian 
colour  of  the  whole  narrative  is  very  noticeable,  and 
nowhere  more  so  than  in  the  particulars  of  the  first 
dream.  The  cattle  coming  up  from  the  river  and 
feeding  on  the  bank  may  be  seen  even  now,  though 
among  them  the  lean  kine  predominate ;  and  the 
use  of  one  Egyptian  word,  if  not  of  two,  in  the 
narrative,  probably  shows  that  the  writer  knew  the 
Egyptian  language.  The  corn  with  many  ears  on 
one  stalk  must  be  wheat,  one  kind  of  which  now 
grown  in  Egypt  has  this  peculiarity.  Another  point 
to  be  remarked  is,  that  Joseph  shaved  before  he 
went  into  Pharaoh's  presence,  and  we  find  from  the 
monuments  that  the  Egyptians,  except  when  engaged 
in  war,  shaved  both  the  head  and  face,  the  small 
beard  thai  was  worn  on  the  chin  being  probably 
artificial.  Having  interpreted  the  dream,  Joseph 
counselled  Pharaoh  to  choose  a  wise  man  and  set 
him  over  the  country,  in  order  that  he  should 
take  the  fifth  part  of  the  produce  of  the  seven  years 
of  plenty  against  the  years  of  famine.  To  this 
high  post  the  king  appointed  Joseph.  Thus,  when 
he  was  thirty  years  of  age,  was  he  at  last  released 
from  his  state  of  suffering,  and  placed  in  a  position 
of  the  greatest  honour.  About  thirteen  years'  pro- 
bation had  prepared  him  for  this  trust ;  some  part 
passed  as  Potiphar's  slave,  some  part,  probably  the 
greater/  in  the  prison.  If  our  views  of  Hebrew  and 
Egyptian  chronology  be  correct,  the  Pharaoh  here 
mentioned  was  Assa,  Mauetho's  Assis  or  Asses, 
whose  reign  we  suppose  to  have  about  occupied  the 
first  halt'  of  the  nineteenth  century  B.C. 

■  Pharaoh,  seeing  the  wisdom  of  giving  Joseph, 
whom  he  perceived  to  be  under  God's  guidance, 
greater  powers  than  he  had  advised  should  be  given 
to  the  officer  set  over  the  country,  made  him  not 
onlv  governor  of  Egypt,  but  second  only  to  the 
sovereign.  We  read  :  "  And  Pharaoh  took  oil'  his 
sio-uet8  from  his  hand,  and  put  it  upon  Joseph's 
hand,  and  arrayed  him  in  vestures  of  fine  linen 
(,&&,  byssus),  .and  put  a  collar  of  gold  about  his 
neck  ;  and  he  made  him  to  ride  in  the  second  chariot 
which  he  had  ;  and  they  cried  before  him,  Abrech 
(T]~QX),  even  to  set  him  over  all  the  land  of 
Egypt"  (xli.  42,  43).  The  monuments  show  that 
on  the  investiture  of  a  high  official  in  Egypt, 
one  of  the  chief  ceremonies  was  the  putting  on 
him  a  collar  of  gold  (see  Ancient  Egyptians, 
pi.  80) ;  the  other  particulars,  the  vestures  of 
fine  linen  and  the  riding   in  the    second  chariot, 


r  We  only  know  that  Joseph  was  two  years  in 
prison  after  the  liberation  of  the  chief  of  the  cup- 
bearers. The  preponderance  of  evidence,  however, 
seems  in  favour  of  supposing:  that  he  was  longer  in 
prison  than  in  Potiphar's  house. 

s  The  signet  was  of  so  much  importance  with  the 
ancient  Egyptian  kings  that  their  names  (except 
perhaps  in  the  earliest  period)  were  always  enclosed 
in  an  oval  which  represented  an  elongated  signet. 

1  We  do  not  here  except  Bunsen's  etymology  (Bibel- 
wprk,  ad  loc),  for  we  doubt  that  the  root  bears  the 
.signification  he  gives  it,  and  think  the  construction 
inadmissible. 


JOSEPH 

are  equally  in  accordance  with  the  manners  of  the 
country.  The  meaning  of  what  was  cried  before 
him  has  not  been  satisfactorily  determined.1  We 
are  told  that  Pharaoh  named  Joseph  Zaphnath- 
paaneah  (xli.  45)  (Pipya  H32V,  "VovQojx<paviix)-> 
the  signification  of  which  is  doubtful.  [See  Zaph- 
nath-paaneah.]  He  also  "  gave  him  to  wife  Ase- 
nath'  daughter  of  Poti-pherah,  priest  [or  "prince," 
|n-3]  of  On"  (ver.  45).  Whether  Joseph's  father- 
in-law  were  priest  or  prince  cannot,  we  think,  be 
determined,"  although  the  former  seems  more  likely, 
since  On  was  a  very  priestly  city,  and  there  is  no 
good  reason  to  think  that  a  priest  would  have  been 
more  exclusive  than  any  other  Egyptian  function- 
ary. His  name,  implying  devotion  to  Ra,  the 
principal  object  of  worship  at  On,  though,  as 
already  noticed,  appropriate  to  any  citizen  of  that 
place,  would  be  especially  so  to  a  priest.  [Pon- 
piiah.]  It  is  worthy  of  remark  that  Oft  ap- 
pears to  have  been  the  capital,  and  seems  to  have 
been  certainly  the  religious  capital,  as  containing 
the  great  temple,  of  Apepee,  a  shepherd-kmg,  pro- 
bably of  the  same  line  as  Joseph's  Pharaoh.  {Select 
Papyri;  Brugsch,  Zeitschrift  d.  Deutsch.  Morgen- 
land.  Gesellschaft.  The  name  of  Joseph's  wife 
we  are  disposed  to  consider  to  be  Hebrew/ 
[Asenath.] 

Joseph's  history,  as  governor  of  Egypt,  shows 
him  in  two  relations,  which  may  be  here  separately 
considered.  We  shall  first  speak  of  his  administra- 
tion of  the  country,  and  then  of  his  conduct  to  his 
brethren.  In  one  respect,  as  bearing  upon  Joseph's 
moral  character,  the  two  subjects  are  closely  con- 
nected, but  their  details  may  be  best  treated  apart, 
if  we  keep  this  important  aspect  constantly  in  view. 

Joseph's  first  act  was  to  go  "  throughout  all  the 
land  of  Egypt"  (ver.  46).  During  "the  seven 
plenteous  years  "  there  was  a  very  abundant  pro- 
duce, and  he  gathered  the  fifth  part,  as  he  had 
advised  Pharaoh,  and  laid  it  up.  The  narrative, 
according  to  Semitic  usage,  speaks  as  though  he 
had  taken  the  whole  produce  of  the  country,  or  the 
whole  surplus  produce  (ver.  48) ;  but  a  com- 
parison with  a  parallel  passage  shows  that  our 
explanation  must-  be  correct  (ver.  34,  35).  The 
abundance  of  this  store  is  evident  from  the  state- 
ment that  "  Joseph  gathered  corn  as  the  sand  of 
the  sea,  very  much,  until  he  left  numbering;  for 
[it  was]  without  number  "  (ver.  49).  The  repre- 
sentations of  the  monuments,  which  show  that  the 
contents  of  the  granaries  were  accurately  noted  by 
the  scribes  when  they  were  filled,  well  illustrate 
this  passage. 

Before  the  years  of  famine  Asenath  bare  Joseph 
two  sons,  of  whom  we  read  that  he  named  "  the 
firstborn  Manasseh  [a  forgetter]  :  For  God  [said 
he]  hath  made  me  forget  all  my  toil,  and  all  my 
father's  house.  And  the  name  of  the  second  called 
he  Ephraim    [fruitful  ?]  :x    For  God  hath  caused 


u  The  very  old  opinion  that  |!"!3  means  prince  as 
well  as  priest  has  been  contradicted  by  Gesenius,  but 
not  disproved. 

v  It  may  be  remarked,  as  indicating  that  Joseph's 
family  did  not  maintain  an  Egyptian  mode  of  life, 
that  Manasseh  took  an  Aramitess  as  a  concubine 
(1  Chr.  vii.  14).  This  happened  in  his  father's 
lifetime ;  for  Joseph  lived  to  see  the  children  of 
Machir  the  son  of  this  concubine  (Gen.  1.  23). 

1  The  derivation  of  Ephraim  can  scarcely  be  doubted, 
although  there  is  difficulty  in  determining  it.  This  diffi- 
culty we  may  perhaps  partly  attribute  to  the  pointing. 


JOSEPH 

me  to  be  fruitful  in  the  land  of  my  affliction" 
(50-52).  Though,  as  was  natural,  the  birth  of  a 
.son  made  Joseph  feel  that  he  had  at  last  found  a 
home,  that  his  father's  house  was  no  longer  his 
home,  yet  it  was  not  in  utter  forgetfulness  of  his 
country  that  he  gave  this  and  the  other,  both  born  of 
his  Egyptian  wife,  Hebrew  names,  still  less,  names 
signifying  his  devotion  to  the  God  of  his  fathers. 

When   the   seven    good   years   had   passed,   the 
famine  began.     We  read  that  "the  dearth  was  in 
all  lands;   but  in  all  the  land  of  Egypt  there  was 
bread.     And    when   all    the    land    of   Egypt    was 
tarnished,  the  people  cried  to  Pharaoh  for  bread  : 
and  Pharaoh  said  unto  all  the  Egyptians,  Go  unto 
Joseph  ;  whathesaith  to  you,  do.     And  the  famine 
was  over  all  the  face  of  the  earth.     And  Joseph 
opened  all  the  storehouses  [lit.  '  all  wherein  '  wets'], 
and   sold   unto   the   Egyptians ;    and    the    famine 
waxed  sore  in  the  land  of  Egypt.     And  all  coun- 
tries came  into  Egypt  to  Joseph  for  to  buy  [corn]  ; 
'  because  that  the  famine  was  [so]  sore  in  all  lands  " 
(ver.   54-57).     The  expressions  here  used  do  not 
require  us  to  suppose  that  the  famine  extended  be- 
yond the  countries  around  Egypt,  such  as  Palestine, 
Syria,  and  Arabia,  as  well  as  some  part  of  Africa, 
although  of  course  it  may  have  been  more  widely 
experienced.     It  may  be  observed,  that  although 
famines  in   Egypt   depend    immediately   upon  the 
failure  of  the  inundation,  and   in  other  countries 
upon  the  failure  of  rain,  yet  that,  as  the  rise  of 
the -Nile  is  caused  by  heavy  rains  in  Ethiopia,  an 
extremely  dry  season  there,  and  in  Palestine  would 
produce  the  result  described  in  the  sacred  narrative. 
It  must  also  be  recollected  that  Egypt  was  anciently 
the  granary  of  neighbouring  countries,  and  that  a 
famine  there  would  cause  first  scarcity,  and  then 
famine,  around.     Famines  are  not  very  unfrequent 
in  the  history  of  Egypt;    but  the  famous  seven 
years'  famine  in  the  reign  of  the  Fatimee  Khaleefeh 
El-Mustansir-b-ill;th  is  the  only  known  parallel  to 
that  of  Joseph :  of  this  an  account  is  given  under 
Fa. mini:.     Early  in  the  time  of  famine,  Joseph's 
brethren  came  to  buy  corn,  a  part  of  the  history 
which   we   mention   here  only   as    indicating   the 
liberal  policy  of  the  governor  of  Egypt,  by  which 
the  storehouses  were  opened  to  all  buyers  of  what- 
ever nation  they  were. 

After  the  famine  had  lasted  for  a  time,  apparently 
two  years,  there  was  "  no  braid  in  all  the  land ; 
for  the  famine  [was]  very  sore,  so  that  the  land  of 
Egypt  and  [all]  the  land  of  Canaan  fainted  by 
reason  of  the  famine.  And  Joseph  gathered  up  all 
the  money  that  was  found  in  the  land  of  Egypt, 
and  in  the  land  of  Canaan,  for  the  corn  which  they 
bought:  and  Joseph  brought  the  money  into 
Pharaoh's  house" y  (xlvii.  13,  14).  When  all 
the  money  of  Egypt  and  Canaan  was  exhausted, 
baiter  became  necessary.  Joseph  then  obtained 
all  the  cattle  of  Egypt,2  and  in  the  next  year,  all 


JOSEPH 


1137 


the  land,  except  that  of  the  priests,  and  apparently, 
as  a  consequence,  the  Egyptians  themselves.  He 
demanded,  however,  only  a  fifth  part  of  the  pro- 
duce as  Pharaoh's  right.  It  has  been  attempted, 
to  trace  this  enactment  of  Joseph  in  the  fragments 
of  Egyptian  history  preserved  by  profane  writers, 
but  the  result  has  not  been  satisfactory.  Even 
were  the  latter  sources  trustworthy  as  to  the 
early  period  of  Egyptian  history,  it  would  be 
difficult  to  determine  the  age  referred  to,  as  the 
actions  of  at  least  two  kings  are  ascribed  by  the 
Greeks  to  Sesostris,  the  king  particularized.  Hero- 
dotus says  that,  according  to  the  Egyptians,  Sesos- 
tris "  made  a  division  of  the  soil  of  Egypt  among 
the  inhabitants,  assigning  square  plots  of  ground  of 
equal  size  to  all,  and  obtaining  his  chief  revenue 
from  the  rent  which  the'  holders  were  required  to 
pay  him  every  year"  (ii.  109).  Elsewhere  he 
speaks  of  the  priests  as  having  no  expenses,  being 
supported  by  the  property  of  the  temples  (37),  but 
he  does  not  assign  to  Sesostris,  as  has  been  rashly 
supposed,  the  exemption  from  taxation  that  we  may 
reasonably  infer.  Diodorus  Siculus  ascribes  the 
division  of  Egypt  into  nomes  to  Sesostris,  whom 
he  calls  Sesoosis.  Taking  into  consideration  the 
general  character  of  the  information  given  by 
Herodotus,  respecting  the  history  of  Egypt  at 
periods  remote  from  his  own  time,  we  are  not 
justified  in  supposing  anything  more  than  that 
some  tradition  of  an  ancient  allotment  of  the  soil 
by  the  crown  among  the  population  was  current 
when  he  visited  the  country.  The  testimony  of 
Diodorus  is  of  far  less  weight. 

The  evidence  of  the  narrative  in  Genesis  seems 
favourable  to  the  theory  we  support  that  Joseph 
ruled  Egypt  under  a  shepherd-king.  It  appears  to 
to  have  been  his  policy  to  give  Pharaoh  absolute 
power  over  the  Egyptians,  and  the  expression  of  their 
gratitude — "  Thou  hast  saved  our  lives :  let  us 
find  grace  in  the  sight  of  my  lord,  and  we  will  be 
Pharaoh's  servants  "  (xlvii.  25) — seems  as  though 
they  had  been  heretofore  unwilling  subjects.  The 
removing  the  people  to  cities  probably  means  that 
in  that  time  of  suffering  the  scattered  population 
was  collected  into  the  cities  for  the  more  convenient 
distribution  of  the  corn. 

There  is  a  notice,  in  an  ancient  Egyptian  inscrip- 
tion, of  a  famine  which  has  been  supposed  to  be 
that  of  Joseph.  The  inscription  is  in  a  tomb  at 
Benee-Hasan,  and  records  of  Amenee,  a  governor  of 
a  district  of  Upper  Egypt,  that  when  there  were 
years  of  famine,  his  district  was  supplied  with  food. 
This  was  in  the  time  of  Sesertesen  I.,  of  the  xiith 
Dynasty.  It  has  been  supposed  by  Baron  Bunsen 
i  Egypt  s  Place,  m.  334)  that  this  must  be  Joseph's 
famine,  but  not  only  are  the  particulars  of  the  record 
inapplicable  to  that  instance,"  but  the  calamity  it 
relates  was  never  unusual  in  Egypt  as  its  ancient 
inscriptions  and  modern  history  equally  testify.1" 


y  It  appears  from  this  narrative  that  purchase  by 
money  was,  in  Joseph's  time,  the  general  practice  in 
Egypt.  The  representations  of  the  monuments  show 
that  in  early  times  money  was  abundant,  not  coined, 
but,  in  the  form  of  rings  of  pold  and  silver,  weighed 
out  when  purchases  were  made. 

z  It  does  not  appear  whether,  after  the  money 
of  Canaan  was  exhausted,  Joseph  made  conditions 
with  the  Canaanites  like  those  he  had  made  with  the 
Egyptians. 

1  Huron  Bunsen's  quotation,  "  When,  in  the  time 
of  Sesortosis  I.,  the  great  famine  prevailed  in  all  the 
other   districts  of  Egypt,  there  was  corn  in  mine  " 


Egypt's  Place,  I.  e.),is  nowhere  in  the  original.  See 
Birch  in  Transactions  11.  Soc.  J. it.  2nd  Ser.  v.  Ft.  ii. 
232,  3  ;  Brugsch,  Eistoire  d'&gypte,  i.  5G. 

b  Dr.  Brugsch  remarks  on  this  inscription  :  "  La 
derniere  partie  de  cette  curieude  inscription  ofi  Amenj, 
se  reportant  a.  unc  famine  qui  avait  lieu  pendant  les 
annecs  de  son  Rouvernement,  sc  fait  un  panfigyrique 
d'avoir  prSvenu  les  malheurs  de  la  disettc  sans  se 
partialiscr,  a  attire  la  plus  grande  attention  de  ceux 
qui  y  voient,  et  nous  BJOUtons  trrs  a  propos,  un  pen- 
dant de  l'histoire  de  Joseph  en  E'gypte,  et  des  sept 
anneee  de  famine  de  ce  pays.  Cependant  il  ne  faut 
pas  croire,  que  le  roi  Ousertesen  I.,  sous  le  r£gne 


1138 


JOSEPH 


Joseph's  policy  towards  the  subjects  of  Pharaoh 
is  important  iu  reference  to  the  forming  an  estimate 
of  his  character.  It  displays  the  resolution  and 
•  breadth  of  view  that  mark  his  whole  career.  He 
perceived  a  great  advantage  to  be  gained,  and  he 
lost  no  part  of  it.  He  put  all  Egypt  under  Pharaoh. 
First  the  money,  then  the  cattle,  last  of  all  the  land, 
and  the  Egyptians  themselves,  became  the  property 
of  the  sovereign,  and  that  too  by  the  voluntary  act 
of  the  people  without  any  pressure.  This  being 
effected,  he  exercised  a  great  act  of  generosity,  and 
required  only  a  fifth  of  the  produce  as  a  recognition 
of  the  rights  of  the  crown.  Of  the  wisdom  of  this 
policy  there  can  be  no  doubt.  Its  justice  can  hardly 
be  questioned  when  it  is  borne  in  mind  that  the 
•Egyptians  were  not  forcibly  deprived  of  their 
liberties,  and  that  when  they  had  been  given  up, 
they  were  at  once  restored.  We  do  not  know  all 
the  circumstances,  but  if,  as  we  may  reasonably 
suppose,  the  people  were  warned  of  the  famine  and 
yet  made  no  preparation  dining  the  years  of  over- 
flowing abundance,  the  government  had  a  cleai 
claim  upon  its  subjects  for  having  taken  precautions 
they  had  neglected.  In  any  case  it  may  have  been 
desirable  to  make  a  new  allotment  of  land,  and  to 
reduce  an  unequal  system  of  taxation  to  a  simple 
claim  to  a  fifth  of  the  produce.  We  have  no  evi- 
dence whether  Joseph  were  in 'this  matter  divinely 
aided,  but  we  cannot  doubt  that  if  not  he  acted  in 
accord  with  a  judgment  of  great  clearness  in  dis- 
tinguishing good  and  evil. 

We  have  now  to  consider  the  conduct  of  Joseph 
at  this  time  towards  his  brethren  and  his  father. 
Early  in  the  time  of  famine,  which  prevailed  equally 
in  Canaan  and  Egypt,  Jacob  reproved  his  helpless 
sons  and  sent  them  to  Egypt,  where  he  knew  there 
was  corn  to  be  bought.  Benjamin  alone  he  kept  with 
him.  Joseph  was  now  governor,  an  Egyptian  iu 
habits  and  speech,  for  like  all  men  of  large  mind  he 
had  suffered  no  scruples  of  prejudice  to  make  him 
a  stranger  to  the  people  he  ruled.  In  his  exalted 
station  he  laboured  with  the  zeal  that  he  showed  in 
all  his  various  charges,  presiding  himself  at  the  sale 
of  corn.  We  read :  ''  And  the  sons  of  Israel  came 
to  buy  [com]  among  those  that  came;  for  the 
famine  was  in  the  land  of  Canaan.  And  Joseph, 
the  governor  over  the  land,  he  [it  was]  that  sold  to 
all  the  people  of  the  land  ;  and  Joseph's  brethren 
came,  and  bowed  down  themselves  before  him 
[with]  their  faces  to  the  earth  "  (xlii.  5,  6).  His 
brethren  did  not  know  Joseph,  grown  from  the  boy 
they  had  sold  into  a  man,  and  to  their  eyes  an 
Egyptian,  while  they  must  have  been  scarcely 
changed,  except  from  the  effect  of  time,  which 
would  have  been  at  their  ages  far  less  marked. 
Joseph  remembered  his  dreams,  and  behaved  to 
them  as  a  stranger,  using,  as  we  afterwards  learn, 
an  interpreter,  and  spoke  hard  words  to  them,  and 
accused  them  of  being  spies.  In  defending  them- 
selves they  thus  spoke  of  their  household.  "  Thv 
servants  [are]  twelve  brethren,  the  sons  of  one  man 
in  the  land  of  Canaan,  and,  behold,  the  youngest 
[is]  this  day  with  our  father,  and  one  [is]  not  " 
(13).  Thus  to  Joseph  himself  they  maintained  the 
old  deceit  of  his  disappearance.     He  at  once  desires 


duquel  line  famine  eut  lieu  en  E'gypte,  soit  le  Pharaon 
de  Joseph,  ee  qui  n'est  guere  admissible,  par  suite  de 
raisons  chronologiques.  Du  reste  ce  n'est  pas  la  seule 
inscription  qui  fasse  mention  de  la  famine  ;  il  en  existe 
d'autres,  qui  datant  de  rois  tout-a-fait  differents,  par- 
lent  du  meme  tieau  it  des  menus  precautions  prises 


JOSEPH 

to  see  his  brother,  first  refusing  that  they  should 
return  without  sending  for  and  bringing  Benjamin, 
then  putting  them  in  prison  three  days,  but  at  last 
releasing  them  that  they  might  take  back  corn,  on 
the  condition  that  one  should  be  left  as  a  hostage. 
They  were  then  stricken  with  remorse,  and  saw  that 
the  punishment  of  their  great  crime  was  come 
upon  them.  "  And  they  said  one  to  another,  We 
[are]  verily  guilty  concerning  our  brother,  in  that 
we  saw  the  anguish  of  his  soul,  when  he  besought 
us,  and  we  would  not  hear ;  therefore  is  this  distress 
come  upon  us.  And  Reuben  answered  them,  sav- 
ing, Spake  I  not  unto  you,  saying,  Do  not  sin 
against  the  child,  and  ye  would  not  hear  ?  therefore, 
behold,  also  his  blood  is  required.  And  they  knew 
not  that  Joseph  understood  [them]  ;  for  an  inter- 
preter [was]  between  them.  And  he  turned  him- 
self about  from  them,  and  wept;  and  returned  to 
them  again,  and  communed  with  them,  and  took 
from  them  Simeon,  and  bound  him  before  their 
eyes"  (21-24).  Thus  he  separated  one  of  them 
from  the  rest,  as  they  had  separated  him  fiom  his 
father.  Yet  he  restored  their  money  in  their 
sacks,  and  gave  them  provision  for  the  way,  besides 
the  corn  they  had  purchased.  The  discovery  of  the 
money  terrified  them  and  their  father,  who  refused 
to  let  them  take  Benjamin.  Yet  when  the  famine 
continued,  and  they  had  eaten  the  supply,  Jacob 
desired  his  sons  to  go  again  to  Egypt.  But  they 
could  not  go  without  Benjamin.  At  the  persuasion 
of  Judah,  who  here  appears  as  the  spokesman  of  his 
brethren,  Jacob  was  at  last  prevailed  on  to  let  them 
take  him,  Judah  offering  to  be  surety.  It  may  be 
remarked  that  Reuben  had  made  the  same  offer, 
apparently,  at  once  after  the  return;  when  Jacob 
had  withheld  his  consent,  telling  his  father  that  he 
might  slay  his  two  sons  if  he  did  not  bring  back 
Benjamin  (37,  38).  Judah  seems  to  have  been  put 
forward  by  his  brethren  as  the  most  able,  and  cer- 
tainly his  after-conduct  in  Egypt  would  have  jus- 
tified their  choice,  and  his  father's  trusting .  him 
rather  than  the  rest.  Jacob,  anxious  for  Benjamin, 
and  not  unmindful  of  Simeon,  touchingly  sent  to 
the  governor  out  of  his  scanty  stock  a  little  present 
of  the  best  products  of  Palestine,  as  well  as  double 
money  that  his  sons  might  repay  what  had  been 
returned  to  them. 

When  they  had  come  into  Egypt,  Joseph's  bre- 
thren, as  before,  found  him  presiding  at  the  sale  of 
corn.  Now  that  Benjamin  was  with  them  he  told 
his  steward  to  slay  and  make  ready,  for  they  should 
dine  with  him  at  noon.  So  the  man  brought  them 
into  Joseph's  house.  They  feared,  not  knowing, 
as  it  seems,  why  they  were  taken  to  the  house 
(xliii.  '_'.")),  and  perhaps  thinking  they  might  be  im- 
prisoned there.  Joseph  no  doubt  gave  his  com- 
mand in  Egyptian,  and  apparently  did  not  cause 
it  to  be  interpreted  to  them.  They  were,  how- 
ever, encouraged  by  the  steward,  and  Simeon 
was  brought  out  to  them.  When  Joseph  came 
they  brought  him  the  present,  again  fulfilling  his 
dreams,  as  twice  they  bowed  before  him.  At 
the  sight  of  Benjamin  he  was  greatly  affected. 
"  And  he  lifted  up  his  eyes  and  saw  his  brother 
Benjamin,  his  mother's  son,  and  said,    [Is]    this 


pour  le  prevenir." — Histoire  d'E'gypte,  i.  p.  56.  We 
are  glad  to  learn  from  this  new  work  that  Dr.  Brugseh, 
though  differing  from  us  as  to  the  Exodus,  is  disposed 
to  hold  Joseph  to  have  governed  Egypt  under  a  Shep- 
herd-king (pp.  7!),  80). 


JOSEPH 

your  younger  brother,  of  whom  ye  spake  unto  me? 
And  he  said,  God  be  gracious  unto  thee,  my  son. 
And  Joseph  made  haste,  for  his  bowels  did  yearn 
upon  his  brother,  and  he  sought  [where]  to  weep.^ 
and  lie  entered  into  [his]  chamber,  and  wept  there. 
And  he  washed  his  face,  and  went  out,  and  refrained 
himself"  (29^31).  The  description  of  Joseph's 
dinner  is  in  accordance  with  the  representations  of 
the  monuments.  The  governor  and  each  of  his 
guests  were  served  separately,  and  the  brethren 
were  placed  according  to  their  age.  But  though 
the  youngest  thus  had  the  lowest  place,  yet  when 
Joseph  sent  messes  from  before  him  to  his  bre- 
thren, he  showed  his  favour  to  Benjamin  by  a  mess 
rive  times  as  large  as  that  of  any  of  them.  "  And 
they  drank,  and  were  merry  with  him"  (32-34). 
It  is  mentioned  that  the  Egyptians  and  Hebrews  sat 
apart  from  each  other,  as  to  eat  bread  with  the 
Hebrews  was  "  an  abomination  unto  the  Egyptians  " 
(32).  The  scenes  of  the  Egyptian  tombs  show  us 
that  it  was  the  custom  for  each  person  to  eat 
singly,  particularly  among  the  great,  that  guests 
were  placed  according  to  their  right  of  precedence, 
and  that  it  was  usual  to  drink  freely,  men  and  even 
women  being  represented  as  overpowered  with  wine, 
probably  as  an  evidence  of  the  liberality  of  the 
entertainer.  These  points  of  agreement  in  matters 
of  detail  are  well  worthy  of  attention.  There  is  no 
evidence  as  to  the  entertaining  foreigners,  but  the 
general  exclusiveuess  of  the  Egyptians  is  in  harmony 
with  the  statement  that  they  did  not  eat  with  the 
Hebrews. 

The  next  morning,  wheii  it  was  light,  they  left 
the  city  (for  here  we  learn  that  Joseph's  house  was 
in  a  city),  having  had  their  money  replaced  in  their 
sacks,  and  Joseph's  silver  cup  put  in  Benjamin's  sack. 
His  steward  was  ordered  to  follow  them,  and  say 
I  claiming  the  cup),  "  Wherefore  have  ye  rewarded 
evil  tor  good  ?    [Is]  not  this  [it]  in  which  my  lord 
drinketh,  and  whereby  indeed  he  divineth  ?  Ye  have 
done  evil  in  so  doing"  (xliv.  4,  5).     When  they 
were  thus  accused,   they  declared  that  the  guilty 
person  should  die,  and  that  the  rest  should  be  bond- 
men.    So  the  steward  searched  the  sacks,  and  the 
cup  was  found  in  Benjamin's  sack  ;  whereupon  they 
rent  their  clothes,  and  returned  to  the  city,  and 
went  to  Joseph's  house,  and  "  fell  before  him  on 
the  ground.     Aud  Joseph  said  unto  them,  What 
deed  [is]  this  that  ye  have  done?  wot  ye  not  that 
such   a  man  as  I  can  certainly  divine?"     Judah 
then,  instead  of  protesting  innocence,  admitted  the 
alleged  crime,  and  declared  that  he  and  his  brethren 
were  the  governor's  servants.     But  Joseph  replied 
that  he  would  alone  keep  him  in  whose  hand  the 
cup  was  found.    Judah,  not  unmindful  of  the  trust 
he  held,  then  laid  the  whole  matter  before  Joseph, 
showing   him   that  he  could    not   leave   Benjamin 
without  causing  the  old  man's  death,  and  as  surety 
nobly  offered  himself  as  a  bondman  in  his  brother's 
stead.     Then,  at  the  touching  relation  of  his  father's 
love  and  anxiety,  and,  perhaps,  moved  by  Judah's 
generosity,  the  strong  will  of  Joseph  gave  way  to 
the  tenderness  he  had  so  long  felt,  but  restrained, 
and  he  made  himself  known  to  his   brethren,      tf 
hitherto  he  had  dealt  severely,  now  he  showed  his 
generosity.     He  sent  forth  every  one  but  his  bre- 
thren.   "  And  he  wept  aloud.  .  .  .  And  Joseph  said 
unto  his  brethren,  1  [am]  Joseph;  doth  my  father 
yet  live?    And  his  brethren  could  not  answer  him  ; 
for  they  were  troubled  at  his  presence.    And  Joseph 
said  unto   his  brethren,  Come  near  to  me,  I  pray 
you.     And  they  came  Dear.     And  he  said,  1  [am] 


JOSEPH 


1139 


Joseph  your  brother,  whom  ye  sold  into  Egypt. 
Now  therefore  be  not  grieved,  nor  angry  with 
yourselves,  that  ye  sold  me  hither:  for  God  did 
send  me  before  you  to  preserve  life.  For  these  two 
years  [hath]  the  famine  [been]  in  the  laud :  and 
yet  [there  are]  rive  years  in  the  which  [there  shall] 
neither  [be]  earing  nor  harvest.  And  God  sent  me 
before  you  to  preserve  you  a  posterity  in  the  earth, 
and  to  save  your  lives  by  a  great  deliverance.  So 
now  [it  was]  not  you  [that]  sent,  me  hither,  but 
God  "  (xlv.  2t8).  He  then  desired  them  to  bring 
his  father,  that  he  and  all  his  offspring  and  flocks 
and  herds  might  be  preserved  in  the  famine,  and 
charged  them  "to  tell  his  father  of  his  greatness  and 
glory.  "  And  he  fell  upon  his  brothel"  Benjamin's 
neck,  and  wept ;  and  Benjamin  wept  upon  his  neck. 
Moreover  he  kissed  all  his  brethren,  and  wept  upon 
them"  (14,  15).  Pharaoh  and  his  servants  were 
well  pleased  that  Joseph's  brethren  were  come,  and 
the  king  commanded  him  to  send  for  his  father 
according  to  his  desire,  and  to  take  wagons  for  the 
women  and  children.  He  said,  "  Also  let  not  your 
eye  spare  your  stuff;  for  the  good  of  all  the  land 
of  Egypt  [is]  yours"  (20).  From  all  this  we  see 
how  "highly  Joseph  was  regarded  by  Pharaoh  and 
his  court.  Joseph  then  gave  presents  to  his  bre- 
thren, distinguishing  Benjamin  as  before,  and  sent 
by  them  a  present  and  previsions  to  his  father,  dis- 
missing them  with  this  charge,  "  See  that  ye  fall 
not  out  by  the  way  "  c  (24).  He  feared  that  even 
now  their  trials  had  taught  them  nothing. 

Joseph's  conduct  towards  his  brethren  and  his 
father,  at  this  period,  must  be  well  examined  be- 
fore we  can  form  a  judgment  of  his  character.  We 
have  no  evidence  that  he  was  then  acting  under  the 
Divine  directions:  we  know  indeed  that  he  held 
that  his  being  brought  to  Egypt  was  providentially 
ordered  for  the  saving  of  his  father's  house :  from 
some  points  in  the  narrative,  especially  the  matter 
of  the  cup,  which  he  said  that  he  used  for  divina- 
tion, he  seems  to  have  acted  on  his  own  judgment. 
Supposing  that  this  inference  is  true,  we  have  to 
ask  whether  his  policy  towards  his  brethren  were 
founded  on  a  resolution  to  punish  them  from  re- 
sentment or  a  sense  of  justice,  as  well  as  his  desire 
to  secure  his  union  with  his  father,  or  again,  whe- 
ther the  latter  were  his  sole  object.  Joseph  had 
suffered  the  most  grievous  wrong.  According  to 
all  but  the  highest  principles  of  self-denial  he  would 
have  been  justified  in  punishing  his  brethren  as  an 
injured  person:  according  to  these  principles  he 
would  have  been  bound  to  punish  them  for  the  sake 
ot  justice,  if  only  he  could  pu* aside  a  sense  of  per- 
sonal injury  in  executing  judgment.  This  would 
require  the  strongest  self-command,  united  with  the 
deepest  feeling,  self-command  that  could  keep  feel- 
ing unda-,  and  feeling  that  could  subdue  resent- 
ment, so  that  justice  would  be  done  impartially. 
These  are  the  two  qualities  that  shine  out  most 
strongly  in  the  noble  character  of  Joseph.  We 
believe  therefore  that  he  punished  his  brethren,  but 
did  so  simply  as  the  instrument  of  justice,  feeling 
all  the  while  a  brother's  tenderness.  It  must  lie 
remembered  what  they  were.  Reuben  and  Judah, 
both  at  his  selling  and  in  the  journeys  into  Egypt, 
seem  better  than  the  rest  of  the  elder  brethren. 
But  Reuben  was  guilty  of  a  crime  that  was  lightly 
punished  by  the  loss  of  his  birthright,  and  Judah 
was  profligate  and  cruel.  Even  at  the  time  of  re- 
conciliation Joseph  saw.  or  thought,  as  his  parting 


This  is  tin'  most  probable  rendering. 


1140 


JOSEPH 


charge  shows,  that  they  were  either  not  less  wicked 
or  not  wiser  than  of  old.  After  his  father's  death, 
with  the  suspicion  of  ungenerous  and  deceitful 'men, 
they  feared  .Joseph's  vengeance,  and  he  again  ten- 
derly assured  them  of  his  love  for  them.  Joseph's 
conduct  to  Jacob  at  this  time  can,  we  think,  be 
only  explained  by  the  supposition  that  he  felt  it 
was  his  duty  to  treat  his  brethren  severely :  other- 
wise his  delay  and  his  causing  distress  to  his  father 
are  inconsistent  with  his  deep  affection.  The  send- 
ing for  Benjamin  seems  hard  to  understand,  except 
we  suppose  that  Joseph  felt  he  was  the  surest  link 
with  his  father,  and  perhaps  that  Jacob  would  more 
readily  receive  his  testimony  as  to  the  lost  son. 

There  is  no  need  here  to  speak  largely  of  the  rest 
of  Joseph's  history:  full  as  it  is  of  interest,  it 
throws  no  new  light  upon  his  character.  Jacob's 
spirit  revived  when  he  saw  the  wagons  Joseph  had 
sent.  Encouraged  on  the  way  by  a  Divine  vision, 
he  journeyed  into  Egypt  with  Ids  whole  house. 
"  And  Joseph  made  ready  his  chaiiot,  and  went  up 
to  meet  Israel  his  father,  to  Goshen,  and  presented 
himself  unto  him;  and  he  fell  on  his  neck,  and 
wept  on  his  neck  a  good  while.  And  Israel  said 
unto  Joseph,  Now  let  me  die,  since  I  have  seen  thy 
face,  because  thou  [art]  yet  alive"  (xlvi.  29,  30). 
Then  Jacob  and  his  house  abode  in  the  land  of 
Goshen,  Joseph  still  ruling  the  country.  Here 
Jacob,  when  near  his  end,  gave  Joseph  a  portion 
above  his  brethren,  doubtless  including  the  "  parcel 
of  ground"  at  Shechem,  his  future  buryingplace 
(rump.  John  iv.  5).  Then  he  blessed  his  sons,  Jo- 
seph most  earnestly  of  all,  and  died  in  Egypt. 
"  And  Joseph  fell  upon  his  father's  face,  and  wept 
upon  him,  and  kissed  him  "  (1.  1).  When  he  had 
caused  him  to  be  embalmed  by  "  his  servants  the 
physicians"  he  carried  him  to  Canaan,  and  laid  him 
in  the  cave  of  Maehpelah,  the  buryingplace  of  his 
fathers.  Then  it  was  that  his  brethren  feared  that, 
their  father  being  dead, -Joseph  would  punish  them, 
and  that  he  strove  to  remove  their  fears.  From 
his  being  able  to  make  the  journey  into  Canaan 
with  "a  very  great  company"  (9),  as  well  as  from 
his  living  apart  from  his  brethren  and  their  fear  of 
him,  Joseph  seems  to  have  been  still  governor  of 
Egypt.  We  know  no  more  than  that  he  lived  "  a 
hundred  and  ten  years"  (22,  26),  having  been  more 
than  ninety  in  Egypt ;  that  he  "  saw  Ephraim's 
children  of  the  third"  [generation],  and  that  "the 
children  also  of  Machir  the  son  of  Manasseh  were 
borne  upon  Joseph's  knees  "  (23)  ;  and  that  dying 
he  took  an  oath  of  his  brethren  that  they  should 
carry  up  his  bones  to  the  land  of  promise:  thus 
showing  in  his  latest  action  the  faith  (Heb.  xi.  22) 
which  had  guided  his  whole  life.  Like  his  father 
he  was  embalmed,  "and  he  was  put  in  a  coffin  in 
Egypt"  (1.  26).  His  trust  Moses  kept,  and  laid 
the  bones  of  Joseph  in  his  inheritance  in  Shechem, 
in  the  territory  of  Ephraim  his  offspring. 

The  character  of  Joseph  is  wholly  composed  of 
great  materials,  and  therefore  needs  not  to  be  mi- 
nutely portrayed.  We  trace  in  it  very  little  of  that 
balance  of  good  and  evil,  of  strength  and  weakness, 
that  marks  most  things  human,  and  do  not  any- 
where distinctly  discover  the  results  of  the  conflict 
of  motives  that  generally  occasions  such  great  diffi- 
culty- in  judging  men's  actions.  We  have  as  full 
an  account  of  Joseph  as  of  Abraham  and  Jacob, 
a  fuller  one  than  of  Isaac  ;  and  if  we  compare  their 
histories,  Joseph's  character  is  the  least  marked  by 
wrong  or  indecision.  His  first  quality  seems  to 
have  been  the  greatest  resolution.     He  not  only 


JOSEPH 

believed  faithfully,  but  could  endure  patiently,  and 
could  command  equally  his  good  and  evil  passions. 
Hence  his  strong  sense  of  duty,  his  zealous  work, 
his  strict  justice,  his  clear  discrimination  of  good 
and  evil.  Like  all  men  of  vigorous  character,  he 
loved  power,  but  when  he  had  gained  it  he  used  it 
with  the  greatest  generosity.  He  seems  to  have 
striven  to  get  men  unconditionally  in  his  power 
that  he  might  confer  benefits  upon  them.  Gene- 
rosity in  conferring  benefits,  as  well  as  in  forgiving 
injuries,  is  one  of  his  distinguishing  characteristics. 
With  this  strength  was  united  the  deepest  tender- 
ness. He  was  easily  moved  to  tears,  even  weeping 
at  the  first  sight  of  his  brethren  after  they  had 
sold  him.  His  love  for  his  father  and  Benjamin 
was  not  enfeebled  by  years  of  separation,  nor  by 
his  great  station.  The  wise  man  was  still  the 
same  as  the  true  youth.  These  great  qualities 
explain  his  power  of  governing  and  administering, 
and  his  extraordinary  flexibility,  which  enabled 
him  to  suit  himself  to  each  new  position  in  life. 
The  last  characteristic  to  make  up  this  great 
character  was  modesty,  the  natural  result  of  the 
others. 

In  the  history  of  the  chosen  race  Joseph  occupies 
a  very  high  place  as  an  instrument  of  Providence. 
He  was  "sent  before"  his  people,  as  he  himself 
knew,  to  preserve  them  in  the  terrible  famine,  and 
to  settle  them  where  they  could  multiply  and 
prosper  in  the  interval  before  the  iniquity  of  the-' 
Canaanites  was  full.  In  the  latter  days  of  Joseph's 
life,  he  is  the  leading  character  among  the  Hebrews. 
He  makes  his  father  come  into  Egypt,  and  diieets 
the  settlement.  He  protects  his  kinsmen.  Dying, 
he  reminds  them  of  the  promise,  charging  them  to 
take  his  bones  with  them.  Blessed  with  many 
revelations,  he  is  throughout  a  God-taught  leader 
of  his  people.  In  the  N.  T.  Joseph  is  only  men- 
tioned :  yet  the  striking  particulars  of  the  perse- 
cution and  sale  by  his  brethren,  his  resisting 
temptation,  his  great  degradation  and  yet  greater 
exaltation,  the  saving  of  his  people  by  his  hand, 
and  the  confounding  of  his  enemies,  seem  to  indi- 
cate that  he  was  a  type  of  our  Lord.  He  also 
connects  the  Patriarchal  with  the  Gospel  dispensa- 
tion, as  an  instance  of  the  exercise  of  some  of  the 
highest  Christian  virtues  under  the  less  distinct 
manifestation  of  the  Divine  will  granted  to  the 
father. 

The  history  of  Joseph's  posterity  is  given  in  the 
articles  devoted  to  the  tribes  of  Ephraim  and 
Manasseh.  Sometimes  these  tribes  are  spoken  of 
under  the  name  of  Joseph,  which  is  even  given  to 
the  whole  Israelite  nation.  Ephraim  is,  however, 
the  common  name  of  his  descendants,  for  the  divi- 
sion of  Manasseh  gave  almost  the  whole  political 
weight  to  the  brother-tribe.  That  great  people 
seems  to  have  inherited  all  Joseph's  ability  with 
none  of  his  goodness,  and  the  very  knowledge  of  his 
power  in  Egypt,  instead  of  stimulating  his  offspring 
to  follow  in  his  steps,  appears  only  to  have  con- 
stantly drawn  them  into  a  hankering  after  that 
forbidden  land  which  began  when  Jeroboam  intro- 
duced the  calves,  and  ended  only  when  a  treason- 
able alliance  laid  Samaria  in  ruins  and  sent  the 
ten  tribes  into  captivity.  [R.  S.  P.] 

2.  Father  of  I  gal  who  represented  the  tribe  of 
Issachar  among  the  spies  (Num.  xiii   7). 

3.  A  lay  Israelite  of  the  family  of  Bani  who 
was  compelled  by  Ezra  to  put  away  his  foreign 
wife  (Ezr.  x.  42).  In  1  Esdr.  it  is  given  as 
JOSEPHUS. 


JOSEPH 

4.  Representative  of  the  priestly  family  of 
Shebaniah,  in  the  next  generation  after  the  Return 
from  Captivity  (Neh.  xii.  14). 

5.  ('\w<Tri<pos).  A  Jewish  officer  defeated  by 
Gorgias  c.  KI4  B.C.  (1  Mace.  v.  8  ;   56,  60.). 

6.  In  2  Mace.  viii.  22,  x.  19,  Joseph  is  named 
among  the  brethren  of  Judas  Maccabaeus  apparently 
in  place  of  John  (Ewald,  Gesch.  iv.  384  note ; 
Grimm,  ad  2  Mace.  viii.  22).  The  confusion  of 
'iwdvvqs,  'lco<rr)(p,  'luxrTjs  is  well  seen  in  the  various 
readings  in  Matt.  xiii.  55. 

7.  AnaucestorofJudith(Jud.viii.  1).  [B.F.W.] 

8.  One  of  the  ancestors  of  Christ  (Luke  iii.  30), 
son  of  Jonan,  and  the  eighth  generation  from 
David  inclusive,  about  contemporary  therefore 
with  king  Ahaziah. 

9.  Another  ancestor  of  Christ,  son  of  Judah  or 
Abiud,  and  grandson  of  Joanna  or  Hanauiah  the 
son  of  Zerubbabel,  Luke  iii.  26.  Alford  adopts  the 
reading  Josek,  a  mistake  which  seems  to  originate 
with  the  common  confusion  in  Heb.  MSS.  between 
f)  and  "J. 

10.  Another,  son  of  Mattathias,  in  the  seventh 
generation  before  Joseph  the  husband  of  the  Virgin. 

11.  Son  of  Heli,  and  reputed  father  of  Jesus 
Christ.  The  recurrence  of  this  name  in  the  three 
above  instances,  once  before,  and  twice  after  Ze- 
rubbabel, whereas  it  does  not  occur  once  in  St. 
Matthew's  genealogy,  is  a  strong  evidence  of  the 
paternal  descent  of  Joseph  the  son  of  Heli,  as  traced 
by  St.  Luke  to  Nathan  the  son  of  David. 

All  that  is  told  us  of  Joseph  in  the  N.  T.  may 
be  summed  up  in  a  few  words.  He  was  a  just 
man,  and  of  the  house  and  lineage  of  David,  and 
was  known  as  such  by  his  contemporaries,  who 
called  Jesus  the  son  of  David,  and  were  disposed  to 
own  Him  as  Messiah,  as  being  Joseph's  son.  The 
public  registers  also  contained  his  name  under  the 
reckoning  of  the  house  of  David  (John  i.  45  ;  Luke 
iii.  23;  Matt.  i.  20;  Luke  ii.  4).  He  lived  at 
Nazareth  in  Galilee,  and  it  is  probable  that  his 
family  had  been  settled  there  for  at  least  two  preced- 
ing generations,  possibly  from  the  time  of  Matthat, 
the  common  grandfather  of  Joseph  and  Mary,  since 
Mary  lived  there  too  (Luke  i.  26,  27).  He  espoused 
Mary,  the  daughter  and  heir  of  his  uncle  Jacob, 
and  before  he  took  her  home  as  his  wife  received 
the  angelic  communication  recorded  in  Matt.  i.  20. 
it  must  have  been  within  a  very  short  time  of  his 
taking  her  to  his  home,  that  the  decree  went  forth 
from  Augustus  Caesar  which  obliged  him  to  leave 
Nazareth  with  his  wife  and  go  to  Bethlehem.  He 
was  there  with  Mary  and  her  first-born,  when  the 
shepherds  came  to  see  the  babe  in  the  manger,  and 
be  went  with  them  to  the  temple  to  present  the 
infant  according  to  the  law,  ami  there  beard  the 
prophetic  words  of  Simeon,  as  he  held  him  in  his 
arms.  When  the  wise  men  from  the  East  came 
to  Bethlehem  to  worship  Christ,  Joseph  was 
there;  and  be  went  down  to  Egypf  with  them 
by  night,  when  warned  by  an  angel  of  the  danger 
which  threatened  them;  and  on  a  second  message 
lie  returned  with  them  to  the  land  of  Israel,  in- 
tending to  reside  at  Bethlehem  the  city  of  David ; 
lmt  being  afraid  of  Archelaus  he  took  up  bis  abode, 
ore  bis  marriage,  al  Nazareth,  where  be  carried 
on  bis  trade  as  a  carpenter.  When  Jesus  was  12 
years  old  Joseph  and  Mary  took  him  with  them  to 
keep  the  Passover  at  Jerusalem,  and  when  they 
returned  to  Nazareth  be  continued  to  act  as  a  father 


JOSEPH 


1141 


to  the  child  Jesus,  and  was  reputed  to  be  so  indeed. 
But  here  our  knowledge  of  Joseph  ends.     That  he 
died  before  our  Lord's  crucifixion,  is  indeed  tolerably 
certain,  by  what  is  related,  John  xix.  27,  and  per- 
haps Mark  vi.  3  may  imply  that  he  was  then  dead. 
But  where,  when,   or  how  he  died,  we  know  not. 
What  was  his  age  when  he  married,  what  children 
he  had,  and  who  was  their  mother,  are  questions 
on  which  tradition  has  been  very  busy,  and  very 
contradictory,  and  on  which  it  affords  no  available 
information  whatever.     In    fact   the  different   ac- 
counts given  are  not  traditions,  but  the  attempts 
of  different  ages"  of  the  early  Church  to  reconcile 
the  narrative  of  the  Gospels  with  their  own  opi- 
nions, and  to  give  support,  as  they  thought,  to  the 
miraculous  conception.    It  is  not  necessary  to  detail 
or  examine  these  accounts  here,  as  they  throw  light 
rather   upon  the  history  of  those  opinions  during 
four  oi-  five  centuries,  than  upon  the  history  of  Jo- 
seph.    But  it  may  be  well  to  add  that  the  origin 
of  all  the  earliest  stories  and  assertions  of  the  fathers 
concerning  Joseph,  as,  e.  g.,  his  extreme  old  age,  his 
having  sons  by  a  former  wife,  his  having  the  cus- 
tody of  Mary  given  to  him   by  lot,  and  so  on,  is 
to  be  found   in  the  apocryphal  Gospels,  of  which 
the  earliest  is  the   l'rotevangelium    of  St.  James, 
apparently    the  work  of  a    Christian  Jew   of  the 
second    century,  quoted   by   Origen,  and   referred 
to  by  Clement  of  Alexandria  and  Justin   Martyr 
(Tischendorf,  Prolog,  xiii.).     The  same  stories  are 
repeated   in    the  other   apocryphal   Gospels.     The 
monophysite  Coptic  Christians   are  said    to    have 
first  assigned  a  festival  to  St.  Joseph  in  the  Ca- 
lendar, viz.,  on  the  20th  July,  which  is  thus   in- 
scribed in  a  Coptic  almanack : — "  Requies   sancti 
senis  justi  Josephi  fabri  lignarii,  Deiparae  Virginis 
Mariae  sponsi,  qui  pater  Christi  vocari  promeruit." 
The   apocryphal    Historia   Josephi  fabri  lignarii, 
which  now  exists  in  Arabic,  is  thought  bv  Tischen- 
dorf to  have  been  originally  written  in  Coptic,  and 
the  festival  of  Joseph  is  supposed  to  have  been  trans- 
ferred to  the  Western  Churches  from  the  East  as 
late  as  the  year  1399."     The  above-named  histoiy 
is  acknowledged  to  be  quite  fabulous,  though  it  be- 
longs probably  to  the  4th  century.     It  professes  to 
be  an  account  given  by  our  Lord  Himself  to   the 
apostles  on    the    Mount  of  Olives,  and  placed  by 
them  in  the  library  of  Jerusalem.     It  ascribes   111 
years  to  Joseph's  life,  and  makes  him  old  and  the 
father  of  4  sons  and  2  daughters  before  he  espoused 
HJary.     It  is   headed  with   this  sentence:  "  Bene- 
dictiones  ejus  et  preces  servant  nos  omnes,  o  fratres. 
Amen."     The  reader  who  wishes  to  know  the  opi- 
nion of  the  ancients  on   the  obscure  subject   of  Jo- 
seph's marriage  may  consult  Jerome's  acrimonious 
tract  Contra  Helvidivm.     He  will  see  that  Jerome 
highly  disapproves   the  common  opinion  (derived 
from  the  apocryphal  Gospels)  of  Joseph  being  twice 
mairied,  and  that  be  claims  the  authority  of  Igna- 
tius, Polycarp,  [renaeus,  Justin  Martyr,  and  "many 
other   apostolical   men,"  in  favour  of  his  own  view, 
that  our  Lord's  brethren  were  his  cousins  only',  or 
at   all   events  against   the   opinion   of  Helvidius, 
which  bad  1 n  held  by  Ebion,  Theodotus  of  By- 
zantium, and  Valentine,  that  they  were  the  children 
of  Joseph  and  Mary.     Those  who  held  this  opinion 
were  called  Antidicom  trianii  le,  as  enemies  of  the 
Virgin.     (Epiphanius,  Adv.   Haeres.  1.  iii.  t.  ii.  : 


■  Calmet,  however,  places  the  admission  of  Joseph 
into  the  calendar  of  the  Western  Church  as  early  as 
before  the  year  900.     See  Tischendorf,  it/  sup. 


1 142  JOSEPH  OF  ARTMATHAEA 
Haer.  lxxviii.,  also  Haer.  Ii.  Sec  also  Pearson  on 
the  Creed,  Art.  Virgin  Mary;  Mill,  on  the  Bre- 
thren of  the  Lord ;  Calraet,  de  S.  Joseph.  S.  Mar. 
17/v/.  conjuge;  and  for  an  able  statement  of  the 
opposite  view,  Al  ford's  note  on  Matt.  xiii.  55 ; 
Winer,  Rwb.  s.  m.  Jesus  and  Joseph.  [A.  C.  H.] 
^  JOSEPH  OF  ARTMATHAEA  Clw^  6 
anb  'ApL/jLaQalas),  a  rich  and  pious  Israelite  who 
had  the  privilege  of  performing  the  last  offices  of 
duty  and  affection  to  the  body  of  our  Lord.  He  is 
distinguished  from  other  persons  of  the  same  name 
by  the  addition  of  his  birth-place  Arimathaea,  a 
city  supposed  by  Kobinson  to  be  situated  somewhere 
between  Lydda  and  Nobe,  now  Beit  Nuba,  a  mile 
north-east  of  Yah  (Bibl.  Res.  ii.  239-41,  iii.  .142). 
..  Joseph  is  denominated  by  St.  Mark  (xv.  43)  an 
honourable  counsellor,  by  which  we  are  probably  to 
understand  that  he  was  a  member  of  the  Great 
Council,  or  Sanhedrim.  He  is  further  characterised 
as  "a  good  man  and  a  just"  (Luke  xxiii.  50),  one 
of  those  who,  bearing  in  their  hearts  the  words  of 
their  old  prophets,  was  waiting  for  the  kingdom  of 
God  (Mark  xv.  43;  Luke  ii.  25,  38,  xxiii.  51).  We 
are  expressly  told  that  he  did  not  "  consent  to  the 
counsel  and  deed  "  of  his  colleagues  in  conspiring  to 
bring  about  the  death  of  Jesus;  but  he  seems  to 
have  lacked  the  courage  to  protest  against  their 
judgment.  At  all  events  we  know  that  he  shrank, 
through  fear  of  his  countrymen,  from  professing 
himself  openly  a  disciple  of  our  Lord., 

The  awful  event,  however,  which  crushed  the 
hopes  while  it  excited  the  fears  of  the  chosen 
disciples,  had  the  effect  of  inspiring  him  with  a 
boldness  and  confidence  to  which  he  had  before  beeu 
a  stranger.  The  crucifixion  seems  to  have  wrought 
in  him  the  same  clear  conviction  that  it  wrought  in 
the  Centurion  who  stood  by  the  cross ;  for  on  the 
velv  evening  of  that  dreadful  day,  when  the  triumph 
of  the  chief  priests  and  rulers  seemed  complete, 
Joseph  "  went  in  boldly  unto  Pilate  and  craved  the 
body  of  Jesus."  The  tact  is  mentioned  by  all  four 
Evangelists.  Pilate,  having  assured  himself  that 
the  Divine  Sufferer  was  dead,  consented  to  the 
request  of  Joseph,  who  was  thus  rewarded  for  his 
faith  and  courage  by  the  blessed  privilege  of  con- 
signing to  his  own  new  tomb  the  body  of  his  cruci- 
fied Lord.  In  this  sacred  office  he  was  assisted  by 
Nicodemus,  who,  like  himself,  had  hitherto  been 
afraid  to  make  open  profession  of  his  faith,  but  now 
dismissing  his  fears  brought  an  abundant  store  of 
myrrh  and  aloes  for  the  embalming  of  the  body  of 
his  Lord  according  to  the  Jewish  custom. 

These  two  masters  in  Israel  then  having  enfolded 
the  sacred  body  in  the  linen  shroud  which  Joseph 
had  bought,  consigned  it  to  a  tomb  hewn  in  a  rock 
— a  tomb  where  no  human  corpse  had  ever  yet 
been  laid. 

It  is  specially  recorded  that  the  tomb  was  in  a 
garden  belonging  to  Joseph,  and  close  to  the  place 
of  crucifixion. 

The  minuteness  of  the  narrative  seems  purposely 
designed  to  take  away  all  ground  or  pretext  for  any 
rumour  that  might  be  spread,  after  the  Resurrection, 
that  it  was  some  other,  not  Jesus  Himself,  that  had 
risen  from  the  grave.  But  the  burial  of  Jesus  in 
the  new  private  sepulchre  of  the  rich  man  of  Ari- 
mathea  must  also  be  regarded  as  the  fulfilment  of 
the  prophecy  of  Isaiah  (liii.  9) :  according  to  the 
literal  rendering  of  Bishop  Lowth  "  with  the  rich 
man  was  His  tomb."  Nothing,  but  of  the  merest 
legendary  character,  is  recorded  of  Joseph,  beyond 
what  we  read  in  Scripture.     There  is  a  tradition, 


.    JOSHAFHAT 

surely  a  very  improbable  one,  that  he  was  of  the 
number  of  the  seventy  disciples.  Another,  whether 
authentic  or  not,  deserves  to  be  mentioned  as  ge- 
nerally current,  namely — that  Joseph  being  sent 
to  Great  Britain  by  the  Apostle  St.  Philip,  about 
the  year  63,  settled  with  his  brother  disciples  at 
Glastonbury,  in  Somersetshire;  and  there  erected 
of  wicker-twigs  the  first  Christian  oratory  in  Eng- 
land, the  parent  of  the  majestic  abbey  which  was 
afterwards  founded  on  the  same  site.  The  local 
guides  to  this  day  show  the  miraculous  thorn  (said 
to  bud  and  blossom  every  Christmas-day)  that 
sprung  from  the  staff  which  Joseph  stuck  in  the 
ground  as  he  stopped  to  rest  himself  on  the  hill 
top.  (See  Dugdale's  Monasticon,  i.  1  ;  and  Heame, 
Hist,  and  Ant.  of  Glastonbury  ;  Assemann,  Bibl. 
Orient,  iii.  319).  Winer  refers  to  a  monograph 
on  Joseph — Broemel,  Diss,  de  Josepho  Ariinath. 
Viteb.  1G83,  4to.  [E.  H.  .  .  .  s.] 

JO'SEPH,  called  BAR'SABAS,  and  sur- 
named  Justus;  one  of  the  two  persons  chosen  by 
the  assembled  church  (Acts  i.  23)  as  worthy  to  till 
the  place  in  the  Apostolic  company  from  which 
Judas  had  fallen.  He,  therefore,  had  been  a  com- 
panion of  the  disciples  all  the  time  that  they  fol- 
lowed Jesus,  from  His  baptism  to  His  ascension. 

Papias  (ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  39)  calls  him  Justus 
Barsabas,  and  relates  that  having  drunk  some 
deadly  poison  he,  through  the  grace  of  the  Lord, 
sustained  no  harm.  Eusebius  (H.  E.  i.  12)  states 
that  he  was  one  of  the  seventy  disciples.  He  is  to 
be  distinguished  from  Joses  Barnabas  (Acts  iv.  36) 
and  from  Judas  Barsabas  (Acts  xv.  22).  The 
signification  of  Barsabas  is  quite  uncertain.  Light- 
foot  (Nor.  Hebr.  Acts  i.  23)  gives  five  possible 
interpretations  of  it,  viz.,  the  son  of  conversion,  of 
quiet,  of  an  oath,  of  wisdom,  of  the  old  man.  He 
prefers  the  last  two ;  and  suggests  that  Joseph 
Barsabas  may  be  the  same  as  Joses  the  son  of  Al- 
phaeus,  and  that  Judas  Barsabas  may  be  his  brother 
the  Apostle.  [W.  T.  B.] 

JOSE'PHUS  ('Ic5<nj(/)os),  1  Esdr.  ix.  34. 
[Joseph,  3.] 

JO'SE-S  ('Iaxr^r,  'lrjffovs,  Alford ;  'Icotr^  is 
the  genitive  case).  1.  Son  of  Eliezer,  in  the  genea- 
logy of  Christ  (Luke  iii.  29),  15th  generation  from 
David,  i.  e.  about  the  reign  of  Manasseh. 

2.  One  of  the  Lord's  brethren  (Matt.  xiii.  55; 
Mark  vi.  3).  His  name  connects  him  with  the  pre- 
ceding. For  the  inquiry  who  these  brethren  of  the 
Lord  were,  see  James.  All  that  appears  with  cer- 
tainty from  Scripture  is  that  his  mother's  name  was 
Mary,  and  his  brother's  James  (Matt,  xxvii.  56). 

3.  Joses  Barnabas  (Acts  iv.  36).  [Bar- 
nabas.] [A.  C.  H.] 

JO'SHAH  (nfV  :  'Ioxrfa  ;  Alex.  'Iaxn'as  : 
Josa),  a  prince  of  the  house  of  Simeon,  son  of 
Amaziah,  and  connected  with  the  more  prosperous 
branch  of  the  tribe,  who,  in  the  days  of  Hezekiah, 
headed  a  marauding  expedition  against  the  peaceable 
Hamite  shepherds  dwelling  in  Gedor,  exterminated 
them,  and  occupied -their  pasturage  (1  Chr.  iv.  34, 
38-41). 

JO'SHAFHAT  (ttS^V :  'Iwaacpdr ;  Cod. 
Fred.  Aug.  'Iaxratf>ar  •  Josaphat),  the  Mithnite, 
one  of  David's  guard,  apparently  selected  from 
among  the  warriors  from  the  east  of  Jordan  (1  Chr. 
xi.  43).  Buxtorf  {Lex.  Talm.  p.  1284)  gives 
Mathnan  as  the  Chaldee  equivalent  of  Bashan,  by 


JOSHAVIAH 

which  the  latter  is  always  represented  in  the  Targ. 
Onk. ;  and  if  this  were  the  place  which  gave  Josha- 
phat  his  surname  he  was  probahly  a  Gadite.  In 
the  Syriac  Joshaphat  and  Uzziah  (ver.  44)  are 
interchanged,  and  the  latter  appears  as  "  Azi  of 
Anathoth." 

JOSHAVI'AH  (H^>:  'lacrla;  Cod.  Fred. 
Aug.  'Icixrela:  Josaia)',  the  son  of  Elnaam,  and  one 
of  David's   guards  (1   Chr.  xi.  46).     The    LXX. 

make  him  the  son  of  Jeiibai,  by  reading  133  for 
*J2.  The  name  appears  in  eight,  and  probably 
nine,  different  forms  in  the  MSS.  collated  by 
Kennieott. 

JOSHBEKA'SHAII  (ntrpat^ :  'UafacraKd: 
~2.efia.Kai.Tav,  Cod.  Alex. :  Jesbacassa),  head  of  the 
16th  course  of  musicians.  [JeSHARELAH.]  He 
belonged  to  the  house  of  Heman  (1  Chr.  xxv. 
4,  24).  [A.  C.  H.] 

JOSH'UA  (J?B>ii"P  :  'Iriffods  :  Josua  :  i.  e. 
"  whose  help  is  Jehovah,"  Gesen.,  or  rather  "  God 
the  Saviour,"  Pearson,  On  the  Creed,  Art.  II.,  p.  89, 
ed.  1843  :  on  the  import  of  his  name,  and  the  change 
of  it  from  Oshea  or  Hoshea,  Numb.  xiii.  16  =  •'  wel- 
fare "  or  "  salvation,"  see  Pearson,  I.  c. :  it  appears 
in  the  various  formsofHoSHEA,  Oshea,  Jehoshtxa, 
Jeshtja,  and  JEsrs.  1.  The  sou  of  Nun,  of  the 
tribe  of  Ephraim  (1  Chr.  vii.  '27).  The  future 
captain  of  invading  hosts  grew  up  a  slave  in  the 
brick-fields  of  Egypt.  Born  about  the  time  when 
Moses  fled  into  Midian,  he  was  a  man  of  nearly 
forty  years  when  he  saw  the  ten  .plagues,  and 
shared  in  the  hurried  triumph  of  the  Exodus.  The 
.  keen  eye  of  the  aged  Lawgiver  soon  discerned  in 
Hoshea  those  qualities  which  might  be  required  in 
a  colleague  or  successor  to  himself.  He  is  men- 
tioned first  in  connexion  with  the  fight  against 
Amalek  at  Rephidim,  when  he  was  chosen  (Ex. 
xvii.  9)  by  Moses  to  lead  the  Israelites.  When 
Moses  ascended  Mount  Sinai  to  receive  for  the  first 
time  (compare  Ex.  xxiv.  13,  and  xxxiii.  11)  the 
two  Tables,  Joshua,  who  is  called  his  minister  or 
servant,  accompanied  him  part  of  the  way,  and  was 
the  first  to  accost  him  in  his  descent  (Ex.  xxxii. 
17).  Soon  afterwards  he  was  one  of  the  twelve 
chiefs  who  were  sent  (Num.  xiii.  17)  to  explore 
the  land  of  Canaan,  and  one  of  the  two  (xiv.  6) 
wlio  gave  au  encouraging  report  of  their  journey. 
The  40  years  of  wandering  were  almost  passed, 
and  Joshua  was  one  of  the  few  survivors,  when 
Moses,  shortly  before  his  death,  was  directed  (Num. 
xxvii.  18)  to  invest  Joshua  solemnly  and  publicly 
with  definite  authority  in  connexion  with  Eleazar 
the  priest,  over  the  people.  And  after  this  was 
done,  God  Himself  gave  Joshua  a  charge  by  the 
mouth  of  the  dying  Lawgiver  ( I  tout.  xxxi.  14,  !'.">'. 

Under  the  direction  of  God  again  renewed  (Josh, 
i.  1),  Joshua,  now  in  his  85th  year  Joseph.  Anf.  v. 
1,  §'-'9),  assumed  the  command  of  the  people  at 
Shittim,  sent  spies  into  Jericho,  crossed  the  Jordan, 
fortified  a  camp  at  Gilgal,  circumcised  the  people, 
kept  the  passover,  and  was  visited  by  the  Captain" 
of  the  Lord's  Host.  A  miracle  made  the  fall  of 
Jericho  more  terrible  to  the  <  lanaanites.  A  miracu- 
lous repulse  in  the  first  assault  on  Ai  impressed  upon 


JOSHUA 


1143 


the  invaders  the  warning  that  they  were  the  instru- 
ments of  a  holy 'and  jealous  God.     Ai  tell :   and  the 

law  was  inscribed  on  Mount  Ebal,  and  read  by  their 
leader  in  the  presence  of  all  Israel. 

The  treaty  which  the  fear-stricken  Gibeonites 
obtained  deceitfully  was  generously  respected  by 
Joshua.  It  stimulated  and  brought  to  a  point  the 
hostile  movements  of  the  five  confederate  chiefs  of 
the  Amorites.  Joshua,  aided  by  an  unprecedented 
hailstorm,  and  a  miraculous  prolongation  of  the 
day,  obtained  a  decisive  victory  over  them  at  Mak- 
kedah,  and  proceeded  at  once  to  subjugate  the 
south  country'  as  far  as  Kadesh-baraea  and  Gaza. 
He  returned  to  the  camp  at  Gilgal,  master  of  half 
of  Palestine. 

In  another  campaign  he  marched  to  the  waters 
of  Merom,  where  he  met  and  overthrew  a  confe- 
deracy of  the  Canaanitish  chiefs  in  the  north,  under 
Jabin  king  of  Hazor  ;  and  in  the  course  of  a  pro- 
tracted war  he  led  his  victorious  soldiers  to  the 
gates  ofZidon  and  into  the  valley  of  Lebanon  under 
Hermon.  In  six  years,  six  nations  with  thirty-one 
kings  swell  the  roll  of  his  conquests  ;  amongst  others 
the  Anakim — the  old  terror  of  Israel — are  speciallv 
recorded  as  destroyed  everywhere  except  in  Phi- 
listia.  It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  extensive 
conquests  of  Joshua  were  not  intended  to  achieve 
and  did  not  achieve  the  complete  extirpation  of  the 
Canaanites,  many  of  whom  continued  to  occupy 
isolated  strongholds  throughout  the  land. 

Joshua,  now  stricken  in  years,  proceeded  in  con- 
junction with  Eleazar  and  the  heads  of  the  tribes 
to  complete  the  division  of  the  conquered  land  ;  and 
when  all  was  allotted,  Timnath-serah  in  Mount 
Ephraim  was  assigned  by  the  people  as  Joshua's 
peculiar  inheritance.  The  Tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation was  established  at  Shiloh,  six  cities  of 
refuge  were  appointed,  forty-eight  cities  assigned 
to  the  Levites,  and  the  warriors  of  the  trans- Jordan  ie 
tribes  dismissed  in  peace  to  their  homes. 

After  an  interval  of  rest,  Joshua  convoked  an 
assembly  from  all  Israel.  He  delivered  two  solemn 
addresses  reminding  them  of  the  marvellous  fulfil- 
ment of  God's  promises  to  their  fathers,  and  warn- 
ing them  of  the  conditions  on  which  their  pros- 
perity depended  ;  and  lastly,  he  caused  thein  to 
renew  their  covenant  with  God,  at  Shechem,  a  place 
already  famous  in  connexion  with  Jacob  (Gen.  xxxv. 
4),  and  Joseph  (Josh.  xxiv.  32). 

He  died  at  the  age  of  110  years,  and  was  buried 
in  his  own  city,  Timnath-serah. 

Joshua's  life  has  been  noted  as  one  of  the  very 
few  which  are  recorded  in  history  with  some  fulness 
ot  detail,  yet  without  any  stain  upon  them.  In 
his  character  have  been  traced,  under  an  Oriental 
garb,  such  features  as  chiefly  kindled  the  imagina- 
tion of  Western  chroniclers  and  poets  in  the  middle 
ages :  the  character  of  a  devout  warrior,  blameless 

and  ('earless,  who  has  been  taught  by  serving  as  a 
youth  how  to  command  as  a  man  ;  who  earns  by 
manly  vigour  a  quiet  honoured  old  age;  who  com- 
bines strength  with  gentleness,  ever  looking  up  for 
and  obeying  the  Divine  impulse  with  the  simplicity 
of  a  child,  while  he  wields  great  power  and  directs 
it  calmly,  and  without  swerving,  to  the  accom- 
plishment of  a  high  unselfish  purpose. 

»  It  lias  been  questioned  whether  the  Captain  of  the  First  Chitplcr,  faint).  1S-11,  p.  92).  But  .1.  (i.  Abicht 
Lord's  Host  was  a  created  being  or  not.  I>r.  \Y.  II.  De  Duce  Exercittis,  <v<-.,  ap.  Nov.  Thes.  Theologico- 
Mill  discusses  this  point  at  full  length  and  with  great  phUolog.  i.  503  is  of  opinion  that  He  was  the  un- 
learning, and  decides  in  favour  of  the  former  alter-  created  Angel,  the  Son  of  God.  Compare  also  Pfeiffer, 
native   [On   the  Historical  Character  of  St.  Luke's  Diff.  Script,  toe.  p.  173. 


1144 


JOSHUA 


All  that  part  of  the  book  of  Joshua  which  relates 
his  personal  history  seems  to  be  written  with  the 
unconscious,  vivid  power  of  an  eye-witness.  We 
are  not  merely  taught  to  look  with  a  distant  rever- 
ence upon  the  first  man  who  bears  the  name  which 
is  above  every  name.  We  stand  by  the  side  of  one 
who  is  admitted  to  hear  the  words  of  God,  and  see 
the  vision  of  the  Almighty.  The  image  of  the 
armed  warrior  is  before  us  as  when  in  the  sight  of 
two  armies  he  lifted  up  his  spear  over  unguarded 
Ai.  We  see  the  majestic  presence  which  inspired 
all  Israel  (iv.  14)  with  awe;  the  mild  father  who 
remonstrated  with  Achan  ;  the  calm  dignified  judge 
who  pronounced  his  sentence  ;  the  devout  worshipper 
prostrating  himself  before  the  Captain  of  the  Lord's 
host.  We  see  the  lonely  man  in  the  height  of  his 
power,  separate  from  those  about  him,  the  last  sur- 
vivor, save  one,  of  a  famous  generation ;  the  ho- 
noured old  man  of  many  deeds  and  many  sufferings, 
gathering  his  dying  energy  for  an  attempt  to  bind 
his  people  more  closely  to  the  service  of  God  whom 
he  had  so  long  served  and  worshipped,  and  whom 
he  was  ever  learning  to  know  more  and  more. 

The  great  work  of  Joshua's  life  was  more  ex- 
citing but  less  hopeful  than  that  of  Moses.  He 
gathered  the  first  fruits  of  the  autumn  harvest 
where  his  predecessor  had  sown  the  seed  in  spring. 
It  was  a  high  and  hopeful  task  to  watch  beside  the 
cradle  of  a  mighty  nation,  and  to  train  its  early 
footsteps  in  laws  which  should  last  for  centuries. 
And  it  was  a  fit  end  to  a  life  of  expectation  to  gaze 
with  longing  eyes  from  Pisgah  upon  the  Land  of 
Promise.  But  no  such  brightness  gleamed  upon 
the  calm  close  of  Joshua's  life.  Solemn  words,  and 
dark  with  foreboding,  fell  from  him  as  he  sat 
"  under  the  oak  that  was  by  the  sanctuary  of  the 
Lord  in  Shechem."  The  excitement  of  his  battles 
was  past ;  and  there  had  grown  up  in  the  mind  of 
the  pious  leader  a  consciousness  that  it  is  the  ten- 
dency of  prosperity  and  success  to  make  a  people 
wanton  and  worldly-minded,  idolaters  in  spirit  if 
not  in  act,  and  to  alienate  them  from  God. 

Holy  Scripture  itself  suggests  (Heb.  iv.  8)  the 
consideration  of  Joshua  as  a  type  of  Christ. 
Many  of  the  Christian  Fathers  have  enlarged  upon 
this  view;  and  Bishop  Pearson,  who  has  collected 
their  opinions  (On  the  Creed,  Art.  ii.  pp.  87-90, 
and  94-96,  ed.  1843),  points  out  the  following  and 
many  other  typical  resemblances:  (1.)  the  name 
common  to  both  ;  (2.)  Joshua  brings  the  people  of 
God  into  the  laud  of  promise,  and  divides  the  land 
among  the  tribes ;  Jesus  brings  His  people  into  the 
presence  of  God,  and  assigns  to  them  their  man- 
sions ;  (3.)  as  Joshua  succeeded  Moses  and  com- 
pleted his  work,  so  the  Gospel  of  Christ  succeeding 
the  law,  announced  One  by  whom  all  that  believe 
are  justified  from  all  things  from  which  we  could 
not  be  justified  by  the  Law  of  Moses  (Acts  xiii. 
39)  ;  (4.)  as  Joshua  the  minister  of  Moses  renewed 
the  rite  of  circumcision,  so  Jesus  the  minister  of 
the  circumcision  brought  in  the  circumcision  of  the 
heart  (Rom.  xv.  8,  ii.  29). 

The  treatment  of  the  Canaanites  by  their  Jewish 
conquerors  is  fully  discussed  by  Dean  Graves  On 
the  Pentateuch,  Pt.  3,  Lect.  i.  He  concludes  that 
the  extermination  of  the  Canaanites  was  justified  by 
their  crimes,  and  that  the  employment  of  the  Jews 
in  such  extermination  was  quite  consistent  with 
God's  method  of  governing  the  world.  Prof.  Fair- 
bairn  {Typology  of  Scripture,  bk.  iii.  ch.  4,  §1,  ed. 
1 854),  argues  with  great  force  and  candour  in  favour 
of  the  complete  agreement   of  the   principles    on 


JOSHUA,  BOOK  OF 

which  the  war  was  canned  on  by  Joshua  with  the 
principles  of  the  Christian  dispensation. 

Among  the  supernatural  occurrences  in  the  life 
of  Joshua,  none  has  led  to  so  much  discussion  as 
the  prolongation  of  the  day  of  the  battle  of  Mak- 
kedah  (x.  12-14).  No  great  difficulty  is  found,  in 
deciding  as  Pfeiifer  has  done  (Biff.  Script,  loc.  p. 
175),  between  the  lengths  of  this  day  and  that  of 
Hezekiah  (2  K.  xx.  11);  and  in  connecting  both 
days  with  the  Egyptian  tradition  mentioned  by  He- 
rodotus, ii.  142.  But  since  modern  science  revealed 
the  stupendous  character  of  this  miracle,  modern  cri- 
ticism has  made  several  attempts  to  explain  it  away. 
It  is  regarded  by  Le  Clerc,  Dathe,  and  others,  as 
no  miracle  but  an  optical  illusion  ;  by  Rosenmiiller, 
following  Ilgen,  as  a  mistake  of  the  time  of  day ; 
by  Winer  and  many  recent  German  critics,  with 
whom  Dr.  Davidson  (Litrod.  to  0.  T.  p.  644) 
seems  to  agree,  as  a  mistake  of  the  meaning  or  the 
authority  of  a  poetical  contributor  to  the  book  of 
Jasher.  So  Ewald  (Gesch.  Isr.  ii.  320)  traces  in 
the  latter  part  of  verse  13  an  interpolation  by  the 
hand  of  that  anonymous  Jew  whom  he  supposes  to 
have  written  the  book  of  Deuteronomy,  and  here 
to  have  misunderstood  the  vivid  conception  of  an 
old  poet:  and  he  cites  numerous  similar  conceptions 
from  the  old  poetry  of  Greece,  Rome,  Arabia,  and 
Peru.  But  the  literal  and  natural  interpretation 
of  the  text  as  intended  to  describe  a  miracle  is  suffi- 
ciently vindicated  by  Deyling,  Observ.  Sacr.  i. 
§  19,  p.  100  ;  and  J.  G.  Abicht,  Be  stations  Solis 
ap.  Nov.  Thes.  Thcol.-Philol.  i.  516  :  and  is  forcibly 
stated  by  Bishop  Watson  in  the  4th  letter  in  his 
Apology  for  the  Bible. 

Procopius,  who  flourished  in  the  6th  century, 
relates  (  Vandal,  ii.  10)  that  an  inscription  existed 
at  Tingis  in  Mauritania,  set  up  by  Phoenician  re- 
fugees from  Canaan,  and  declaring  in  the  Phoeni- 
cian language,  "  We  are  they  who  fled  from  the 
face  of  Joshua  the  robber  the  son  of  Nun."  Ewald 
(Gesch.  Isr.  ii.  297,  298)  gives  tound  reasons  for 
forbearing  to  use  this  story  as  authentic  history. 
It  is,  however,  accepted  by  Rawlinson  (Bampton 
Lecture,  for  1859,  iii.  91). 

Lightfoot  (Hor.  Heb.  in  Matt.  i.  5,  and  Chorogr. 
Lucae  praemis.  iv.  §3)  quotes  Jewish  traditions  to 
the  effect  that  Rahab  became  a  proselyte,  and  the 
wife  of  Joshua,  and  the  ancestress  of  nine  prophets 
and  priests  ;  also  that  the  sepulchre  of  Joshua  was 
adorned  with  an  image  of  the  Sun  in  memory  of 
the  miracle  of  Ajalon.  The  LXX.  and  the  Arab. 
Ver.,  add  to  Josh.  xxiv.  30  the  statement  that  in 
his  sepulchie  were  deposited  the  flint-knives  which 
were  used  for  the  circumcision  at  Gilgal  (Josh, 
v.  2). 

The  principal  occurrences  in  the  life  of  Joshua 
are  reviewed  by  Bishop  Hall  in  his  Contempla- 
tions on  the  0.  T.  bks.  7,  8,  and  9. 

2.  An  inhabitant  of  Bethshemesh,  in  whose  land 
was  the  stone  at  which  the  milch-kine  stopped, 
when  they  drew  the  ark  of  God  with  the  offerings 
of  the  Philistines  from  Ekron  to  Bethshemesh 
(1  Sam.  vi.  14,  18). 

3.  A  governor  of  the  eity  who  gave  his  name  to 
a  gate  of  Jerusalem  (2  K.  xxiii.  8). 

4.  (Called  Jeshua  in  Ezra  and  Nehemiah),  a  high- 
priest,  who  returned  from  the  Captivity  with  Zerub- 
babel.    For  details  see  Jeshua,  No.  4.  [W.  T.  B.] 

JOSHUA,  BOOK  OF.     1.  Authority.— The 

claim  of  the  book  of  Joshua  to  a  place  in  the 
Canon  of  the  0.  T.  has  never  been  disputed.     [See 


JOSHUA,  BOOK  OF 

Canon.]  (Bp.  Cosin's  Scholastical  History  of 
the  Canon;  Dr.  Wordsworth's  Discourses  on  the 
'  Canon.)  Its  authority  is  confirmed  by  the  refer- 
ences, in  other  books  of  Holy  Scripture,  to  the 
events  which  are  related  in  it;  as  l's.  lxxviii.  53- 
65;  Is.  xxviii.  21;  Hab.  iii.  11-13;  Acts  vii. 
45  ;  Heb.  iv.  8,  xi.  30-32  ;  James  ii.  25.  The 
miracles  which  it  relates,  and  particularly  that  of 
the  prolongation  of  the  day  of  the  battle  of 
Makkedah  have  led  some  critics  to  entertain  a  suspi- 
cion of  the  credibility  of  the  book  as  a  history. 
But  such  an  objection  does  not  touch  the  book  of 
Joshua  only.  It  must  stand  or  fall  with  nearly 
every  historical  book  of  the  Bible.  Some  Chris- 
tians may  be  more  or  less  disposed  by  excess  of 
candour,  or  a  desire  to  conciliate  opposition,  to 
regard  as  the  effect  of  natural  and  ordinary  causes, 
occurrences  which  have  always  been  and  still  are 
commonly  regarded  as  miraculous  ;  and  such  persons 
cannot  be  blamed  so  long  as  their  views  are  con- 
sistent with  a  fair  interpretation  of  the  Bible. 
But  it  cannot  be  allowed  that  any  canonical  book 
is  the  less  entitled  to  our  full  belief  because  it 
relates  miracles. 

The  treatment  of  the  Canaanites  which  is  sanc- 
tioned in  this  book  has  been  denounced  for  its 
severity  by  Eichhom  and  earlier  writers.  But 
there  is  nothing  in  it  inconsistent  with  the  divine 
attribute  of  justice,  or  with  God's  ordinary  way  of 
governing  the  world.  Therefore  the  sanction  which 
is  given  to  it  does  not  impair  the  authority  of  this 
book.  Critical  ingenuity  has  searched  it  in  vain 
for  any  incident  or  sentiment  inconsistent  with 
what  we  know  of  the  character  of  the  age,  or 
irreconcileable  with  other  parts  of  canonical  Scrip- 
ture. Some  discrepancies  are  alleged  by  De  Wette 
and  Hauff  to  exist  within  the  book  itself,  ami  have 
been  described  as  material  differences  and  contradic- 
tions. But  they  disappear  when  the  words  of  the 
text  are  accurately  stated  and  weighed,  and  they  do 
not  affect  the  general  credibility  of  the  book. 
Thus,  it  cannot  be  allowed  that  there  is  any  real 
disagreement  between  the  statement  xi.  16  and 
xii.  7  that  Joshua  took  all  the  land  and  gave  it  to 
Israel,  and  the  subsequent  statement  xviii.  3  and 
xvii.  1,  16  that  the  people  were  slack  to  possess  the 
land  which  was  given  to  them,  and  that  the 
Canaanites  were  not  entirely  extirpated :  of  course 
it  was  intended  (Ex.  xxiii.  28,  30)  that  the  people 
should  occupy  the  laud  by  little  and  little.  It 
cannot  be  allowed  that  there  is  any  irreconcileable 
contradiction  between  the  statement  xii.  10-12, 
that  the  kings  of  Jerusalem  and  Gezer  were  smitten 
and  their  country  divided,  and  the  statement  xv. 
6:1,  xvi.  In,  that  their  people  were  not  extirpated 
for  some  time  afterward.  It  cannot,  be  allowed 
that  the  general  statement  xi.  23  that  Joshua  gave 
the  land  unto  all  Israel  according  to  their  divisions 
by  their  tribes  is  inconsistent  with  the  fact  (xviii. 
1,  xix.  51  J,  that  many  subsequent  years  passed 
before  the  process  of  division  was  completed,  ami 
the  allotments  finally  adjusted.  Other  discre- 
pancies have  been  alleged  by  Dr.  Davidson,  with 
the  view  not  of  disparaging  the  credibility  of  the 
book,  but  of  supporting  the  theory  that  it  is  a 
compilation  from  two  distinct  documents.  The 
boundaries  of  the  different  tribes,  it  is  said,  are 
stated  sometimes  with  greater,  sometimes  with  less 
exactness.  Now,  this  may  be  a  fault  of  the  sur- 
veyors employed  by  Joshua;  but,  it  is  scarcely  an 
inconsistency  to  be  charged  on  the  writer  of  the 
book  who  transcribed   their   descriptions.      Again, 


JOSHUA,  BOOK  OF 


1145 


the  Divine  promise  that  the  coast  of  Israel  shall 
extend  to  the  Euphrates  (i.  4)  is  not  inconsistent 
with  the  fact  that  the  country  which  Joshua  was 
commanded  to  divide  (xiii.  16)  does  not  extend  so 
far.  Again,  the  statement  (xiii.  3)  that  Ekron,  Sec.; 
remained  yet  to  be  possessed  is  not  inconsistent 
with  the  subsequent  statement  (xv.  45)  that  it 
was  assigned  to  Judah.  Dr.  Davidson  gives  no 
proof  either  of  his  assertion  that  the  former  text 
is  in  fact  subsequent  to  the  latter,  or  of  his  supposi- 
tion that  Ekron  was  in  the  possession  of  Judah  at 
the  time  of  its  assignment.  Again,  it  would  seem 
that  Dr.  Davidson  pushes  a  theory  too  far  when  he 
assumes  (Introd.  to  0.  T.  637-8)  that  one  and 
the  same  writer  would  hardly  denote  a  "  tribe  " 
by  one  Hebrew  word  in  some  passages,  and  by  a 
synonymous  Hebrew  word  in  others;  or  that  he 
would  not  in  some  passages  designate  Moses  as  the 
servant  of  the  Lord,  and  in  others  mention  Moses 
without  so  designating  him ;  or  that  he  would  not 
describe  the  same  class  of  persons  in  one  place  as 
"  priests,"  and  in  another  as  "  sons  of  Aaron." 
Such  alleged  discrepancies  are  not  sufficient  either 
to  impair  the  authority  of  the  book,  or  to  prove 
that  it  was  not  substantially  the  composition  of  one 
author. 

2.  Scope  and  contents. — The  book  of  Joshua  is 
a  distinct  whole  in  itself.  Although  to  later 
generations  it  became  a  standing  witness  of  the 
faithfulness  of  God  in  fulfilling  His  promises  to 
Israel,  yet  the  immediate  aim  of  the  inspired  writer 
was  probably  of  a  more  simple  character.  He 
records,  for  the  information  of  the  nation  to  which 
he  belonged,  the  acts  of  Joshua  so  far  as  they  pos- 
sessed a  national  interest.  The  book  was  not 
intended  to  be  a  mere  ascription  of  praise  to  God, 
nor  a  mere  biography,  nor  a  mere  collection  of 
documents.  While  it  serves  as  a  link  between  that 
which  precedes,  and  that  which  follows  it,  it  has  a 
distinct  purpose,  which  it  fulfils  completely.  There 
is  not  sufficient  ground  for  treating  it  as  a  part  of 
the  Pentateuch,  or  a  compilation  from  the  same 
documents  as  formed  the  groundwork  of  the  Penta- 
teuch. The  fact  that  its  first  sentence  begins  with 
a  conjunction  does  not  show  any  closer  connexion 
between  it  and  the  Pentateuch  than  exists  between 
Judges  and  it.  The  references  in  i.  8,  viii.  31, 
xxiii.  6,  xxiv.  26,  to  the  "  book  of  the  law  "  rather 
show  that  that  book  was  distinct  from  Joshua. 
Other  references  to  events  recorded  in  the  Penta- 
teuch tend  in  the  same  direction.  No  quotation 
(in  the  strict  modem  sense  of  the  word)  from  the 
Pentateuch  can  be  found  in  Joshua.  The  author 
quotes  from  memory,  like  the  writers  of  the  N.  T., 
if  he  quotes  at  all  (comp.  xiii.  7  with  Num.  xxxiv. 
13;  xiii.  17  with  Num.  xxxii.  37;  xiii.  21,  22 
with  Num.  xxxi.  8;  xiii.  14,  33,  and  xiv.  4  with 
Deut.  xviii.  1,  2;  and  Num.  xviii.  20,  xxi.  with 
Num.  xxxv.). 

Perhaps  no  part  of  Holy  Scripture  is  more 
injured  than  the  first  half  of  this  book  by  being 
printed  in  chapters  and  verses.  The  first  twelve 
chapters  form  a  continuous  narrative,  which  seems 
never  to  halt  or  ting.  Ami  the  description  is 
frequently  so  minute  as  to  show  the  hand  not 
merely  of  a  contemporary,  but  of  an  eve-witness. 
An  awful  sense  of  the  Divine  Presence  reigns 
throughout.  We  are  called  out  from  the  din  and 
tumuli  of  each  battle-field  to  listen  to  the  still 
small  Voice.  The  progress  of  events  is  clearly 
foreshadowed  in  the  first  chapter  (vers.  5,  6). 
Step  by  step  we  are   led  on  through  the  solemn 

4   E 


1146 


JOSHUA,  BOOK  OF 


preparation,  the  arduous  struggle,  the  crowning 
triumph.  Moving  everything  around,  yet  himself 
moved  by  an  unseen  Power,  the  Jewish  leader  rises 
high  and  calm  amid  all. 

The  second  part  of  the  book  (ch.  xiii.-xxi.)  has 
been  aptly  compared  to  the  Domesday-book  of  the 
Norman  conquerors  of  England.  The  documents 
of  which  it  consists  were  doubtless  the  abstract  of 
such  reports  as  were  supplied  by  the  men  whom 
Joshua  sent  out  (xviii.  8)  to  describe  the  land.  In 
the  course  of  time  it  is  probable  that  changes  were 
introduced  into  their  reports — whether  kept  sepa- 
rately among  the  national  archives,  or  embodied  in 
the  contents  of  a  book — by  transcribers  adapting 
them  to  the  actual  state  of  the  country  in  later  times 
when  political  divisions  were  modified,  new  towns 
sprung  up,  and  old  ones  disappeared  (comp.  the 
two  lists  of  Levitical  towns,  Josh.  xxi.  and  1  Chr. 
vi.  54,  &c). 

The  book  may  be  regarded  as  consisting  of  three 
parts:  («)  the  conquest  of  Canaan,  (6)  the  partition 
of  Canaan,  (c)  Joshua's  farewell. 

a.  The  preparations  for  the  war,  and  the  passage 
of  the  Jordan,  ch.  1-5  ;  the  capture  of  Jericho,  G  ; 
the  conquest  of  the  south,  7-10  ;  the  conquest  of 
the  north,  11  ;   recapitulation,  12. 

b.  Territory  assigned  to  lleuben,  Gad.  and  half 
Manasseh,  13  ;  the  lot  of  Caleb  and  of  the  tribe  of 
Judah,  14,  15  ;  Ephraim  and  half  Manasseh,  16, 
17  ;  Benjamin,  IS  ;  Simeon,  Zebulun,  Issachar, 
Asher,  Naphtali  and  Dan,  19  ;  the  appointment  of 
six  cities  of  refuge,  20  ;  the  assignment  of  forty-eight 
cities  to  Levi,  21  ;  the  departure  of  the  transjordanic 
tribes  to  their  homes,  22. 

c.  Joshua's  convocation  of  the  people  and  first 
address,  23;  his  second  address  at  Shechem,  and 
his  death,  24. 

The  events  related  in  this  book  extend  over  a 
period  of  about  25  years  from  B.C.  1451  to  1426. 
The  declaration  of  Caleb,  xiv.  10,  is  useful  in 
determining  the  chronology  of  the  book. 

3.  'Author. — Nothing  is  really  known  as  to  the 
authorship  of  the  book.  Joshua  himself  is  gene- 
rally named  as  the  author  by  the  Jewish  writers 
and  the  Christian  Fathers;  and  a  great  number  of 
critics  acquiesce  more  or  less  entirely  in  that  belief. 
But  no  contemporary  assertion  or  sufficient  historical 
proof  of  the  fact  exists,  and  it  cannot  be  maintained 
without  qualification.  Other  authors  have  been 
conjectured,  as  Phinehas  by  Lightfoot ;  Eleazar  by 
Calvin  ;  Samuel  by  Van  Til ;  Jeremiah  by  Henry  ; 
one  of  the  elders  who  survived  Joshua,  by  Keil. 
Von  Lengerke  thinks  it  was  written  by  some  one 
in  the  time  of  Josiah  ;  Davidson  by  some  one  in  the 
time  of  Saul,  or  somewhat  later  ;  Masius,  Le  Clerc, 
Maurer,  and  others  by  some  one  who  lived  after 
the  Babylonish  captivity.  The  late  date  is  now 
advocated  for  the  most  part  in  connexion  with  a 
theory,  which  may  perhaps  help  to  explain  the 
composition  of  the  Pentateuch  ;  but  which,  when 
applied  to  a  book  so  uniform  in  its  style  as  Joshua, 
seems  to  introduce  more  difficulties  than  it  removes. 
It  has  been  supposed  that  the  book  as  it  now  stands 
is  a  compilation  from  two  earlier  documents  ;  one, 
the  original,  called  Elohistic,  the  other  supple- 
mentary, called  Jehovistic ;  they  are  distinguished 
by  the  names  given  in  them  to  God,  and  by  some 
other  characteristic  differences  on  which  the  sup- 
porters of  the  hypothesis  are  not  perfectly  agreed. 
Ewald's  theory  is  that  the  Pentateuch  and  the  book 
of  Joshua  form  one  complete  work :  that  it  is 
mainly  compiled   from    contemporary   and  ancient 


JOSHUA,  BOOK  OF 

documents,  and  that  it  has  grown  into  its  present 
form  under  the  hands  of  five  successive  writers  or 
editors ;  the  first  of  whom  composed  his  book  in 
the  time  of  the  Judges,  and  the  last  (to  whom  the 
book  of  Deuteronomy  is  assigned)  in  the  time  of 
Manasseh.  His  account  of  these  authors  or  com- 
pilers may  be  seen  in  Gesch.  Isr.  i.  81-174,  and  his 
method  of  apportioning  various  parts  of  the  book  of 
Joshua  to  the  several  writers  in  Gesch.  Isr.  i.  84 
and  ii.  299-305.  The  theory  of  this  able  critic, 
so  conjectural,  complicated,  and  arbitrary,  has  met 
with  many  opponents,  and  few,  if  any,  supporters 
even  in  his  own  country. 

No  one  would  deny  that  some  additions  to  the 
book  might  be  made  after  the  death  of  Joshua  with- 
out detracting  from  the  possible  fact  that  the  book 
was  substantially  his  composition.  The  last  verses 
(xxiv.  29-33)  were  obviously  added  by  some  later 
hand.  If,  as  is  possible,  though  not  certain,  some 
subordinate  events,  as  the  capture  of  Hebron,  of 
Debir  (Josh.  xv.  13-19,  and  Judg.  i.  10-15),  and  of 
Leshem  (Josh.  xix.  47,  and  Judg.  xviii.  7),  and 
the  joint  occupation  of  Jerusalem  (Josh.  xv.  63, 
and  Judg.  i.  21)  did  not  occur  till  after  Joshua's 
death,  they  may  have  been  inserted  in  the  book  of 
Joshua  by  a  late  transcriber.  The  passages  xiii. 
2-6,  xvi.  10,  xvii.  11,  which  also  are  subsequently 
repeated  in  the  book  of  Judges,  may  doubtless 
describe  accurately  the  same  state  of  things  existing 
at  two  distinct  periods. 

The  arguments  which,  though  insufficient  to 
prove  that  Joshua  was  the  author,  yet  seem  to 
give  a  preponderance  in  favour  of  him  when  com- 
pared with  any  other  person  who  has  been  named, 
may  be  thus  briefly  stated : — (a)  It  is  evident 
(xxiv.  26)  that  Joshua  could  and  did  write  some 
account  of  at  least  one  transaction  which  is  related 
in  this  book  ;  (6)  the  numerous  accounts  of  Joshua's 
intercourse  with  God  (i.  1,  iii.  7,  iv.  2,  v.  2,  9, 
vi.  2,  vii.  10,  viii.  1,  x.  8,  xi.  6,  xiii.  1,  2,  xx.  1, 
xxiv.  2),  ami  with  the  Captain  of  the  Lord's  Host 
(v.  13),  must  have  emanated  from  himself;  (c)  no 
one  is  more  likely  than  the  speaker  himself  to  have 
committed  to  writing  the  two  addresses  which  were 
Joshua's  legacy  to  his  people  (xxiii.  and  xxiv.)  ; 
(d)  no  one  was  so  well  qualified  by  his  position  to 
describe  the  events  related,  and  to  collect  the  docu- 
ments contained  in  the  book  ;  (e)  the  example  of 
his  predecessor  and  master,  Moses,  would  have 
suggested  to  him  such  a  record  of  his  acts ;  (/) 
one  verse  (vi.  25)  must  have  been  written  by  some 
person  who  lived  in  the  time  of  Joshua;  and  two 
other  verses,  v.  1  and  6 — assuming  the  common 
reading  of  the  former  to  be  correct — are  most  fairly 
interpreted  as  written  by  actors  in  the  scene. 

Hiivernick's  assertion  that  some-  grammatical 
forms  used  in  Joshua  are  less  ancient  than  the  corre- 
sponding forms  in  Judges,  may  be  set  against  Keil's 
list  of  expressions  and  forms  which  are  peculiar  to 
this  book  and  the  Pentateuch  ;  and  Hiivernick  is  not 
supported  by  facts  when  he  supposes  that  no  expe- 
dition of  any  separate  tribe  against  the  Canaanites 
could  have  occurred  in  the  lifetime  of  Joshua,  and 
that  the  book  was  therefore  written  some  time 
afterwards.  It  has  been  said  that  the  expression 
"  to  this  day,"  which  is  found  fourteen  times  in 
the  book,  presupposes  so  considerable  an  interval 
of  time  between  the  occurrence  of  the  event  and  the 
composition  of  the  history,  that  Joshua  could  not 
have  lived  long  enough  to  write  in  such  language. 
But  a  careful  examination  of  the  passages  will 
scarcely  bear  out  that  observation.     For  instance, 


JOSIAH 

in  three  places  (xxii.  8,  xxiii.  8,  9)  the  phrase 
denotes  a  period  unquestionably  included  within  the 
twenty-five  years  which  Joshua  lived  in  Canaan  ;  in 
xxii.  17  it  goes  but  a  little  farther  back  ;  in  iv.  9, 
vii.  26,  viii.  29,  and  x.  27  it  describes  certain  piles  of 
stones  which  he  raised  as  still  remaining— a  remark 
which  does  not  necessarily  imply  that  more  than 
twenty  years  had  elapsed  since  they  were  raised ; 
and  in  vi.  25  it  defines  a  period  within  the  lifetime 
of  a  contemporary  of  Joshua,  and  therefore  pro- 
bably within  his  own.  •  In  the  remaining  passages 
(viii.  28,  xiii.  13,  xiv.  14,  xv.  63,  xvi.  10)  there 
is  nothing  which  would  make  it  impossible  that 
Joshua  should  have  used  this  expression. 

4.  There  is  extant  a  Samaritan  Book  of  Joshua 
in  the  Arabic  language.  It  was  printed  for  the 
first  time  at  Leyden  in  1848,  with  the  title  "  Liber 
Josuae ;  Chronicon  Samaritanum,  edidit,  Latine 
vertit,  &c,  T.  G.  J.  Juyuboll."  Its  contents  were 
known  previously  from  the  accounts  given  of  it  by 
Hottinger  and  others.  It  was  written  in  the  13th 
century.  It  recounts  the  late  acts  of  Moses  ampli- 
fied from  the  book  of  Numbers,  a  history  of  Joshua 
interspersed  with  various  legends,  portions  of  the 
Jewish  law,  and  several  unconnected  historical  pas- 
sages more  or  less  falsified,  extending  down  to  the 
time  of  Hadrian. 

5.  Literature. — The  best  Commentary,  which  is 
accessible  to  the  English  reader,  is  the  translation 
of  Keil's  Commentary  on  Joshua  (Clark,  Edinburgh). 
A  complete  list  of  commentaries  may  be  found  in 
Rosenmiiller's  Scholia.  Among  the  Fathers,  Ephrem 
Syrus  has  written  an  explanation,  and  Augus- 
tine and  Theodoret  have  discussed  questions  con- 
nected with  the  book.  The  following  commentaries 
may  be  selected  as  most  useful : — That  oiJarchi  or 
Rashi  (Solomon  ben  Isaac),  translated  into  Latin 
bv  Breithaupt,  Gothae,  1710  ;  the  commentary  of 
Masius,  Antwerp,  1574,  inserted  in  the  Critici 
Sacri;  those  of  Le  Clerc,  Amsterdam,  1708; 
Losenmiiller,  Leipsic,  1833;  and  Keil,  Erlangen, 
1847.  [W.  T.  B.] 

JOSI'AH  (}n>EW:  'Icoo-ias:  Josias)    1.  The 

son  of  Anion  and  Jedidah,  succeeded  his  father  B.C. 
641,  in  the  eighth  year  of  his  age,  and  reigned  31 
years.  His  history  is  contained  in  2  K.  xxii.-xxiv. 
30 ;  2  Chr.  xxxiv.,  xxxv. ;  and  the  first  twelve 
chapters  of  Jeremiah  throw  much  light  upon  the 
general  character  of  the  Jews  in  his  days. 

He  began  in  the  eighth  year  of  his  reign  to  seek 
the  Lord  ;  and  in  his  twelfth  year,  and  for  six  years 
afterwards,  in  a  personal  progress  throughout  all 
the  land  of  Judah  and  Israel,  he  destroyed  every- 
where high  places,  groves,  images,  and  all  outward 
signs  and  relics  of  idolatry.  Those  which  Solomon 
and  Ahaz  had  built,  and  even  Hezekiah  had  spared, 
and  those  which  Manasseh  had  set  up  more  recently, 
now  ceased  to  pollute  the  land  of  Judah ;  and  in 
Israel  the  purification  began  with  Jeroboam's  chapel 
at  Bethel,  in  accordance  with  the  remarkable  pre- 
diction of  the  disobedient  prophet,  by  whom  Josiah 


JOSIAH 


1147 


*  Such  is  at  least  the  conjecture  of  Prideaux 
(Connexion,  anno  610),  and  of  Milman  (History  of 
tin  Jews,  i.  313).  But  the  Bible  ascribes  no  such 
chivalrous  motive  to  Josiah  :  and  it  does  not  occur 
to  Josephus,  who  attributes  (Ant.  x.  5,  §1)  Josiah's 
resistance  merely  to  Fate  urging  him  to  destruction  ; 
nor  to  the  author  of  1  Esd.  i.  28,  who  describes  him 
as  acting-  wilfully  against  Jeremiah's  advice  ;  nor  to 
Ewald,  who  (Gesch.  Tar.  iii.  707)  conjectures  that  it 


was  called  by  name  three  centuries  before  his  birth 
(1  K.  xiii.  2).  The  Temple  was  restored  under  a 
special  commission  ;  and  in  the  course  of  the  repairs 
Hilkiah  the  priest  [Hilkiah]  found  that  book  of 
the  Law  of  the  Lord  which  quickened  so  remarkably 
the  ardent  zeal  of  the  king.  The  question  as  to 
the  contents  of  that  book  has  been  discussed  else- 
where :  in  forming  an  opinion  on  it  we  should  bear 
in  mind  that  it  is  very  difficult  for  us  in  this  age 
and  country  to  estimate  the  scantiness  of  the  op- 
portunities which  were  then  open  to  laymen  of 
acquiring  literary  knowledge  connected  with  reli- 
gion. The  special  commission  sent  forth  by  Jeho- 
shaphat  (2  Chr.  xvii.  7)  is  a  proof  that  even  under 
such  kings  as  Asa  and  his  son,  the  Levites  were 
insufficient  for  the  religious  instruction  of  the 
people.  What  then  must  have  been  the  amount 
of  information  accessible  to  a  generation  which  had 
grown  up  in  the  reigns  of  Manasseh  and  Amon  ? 
We  do  not  know  that  the  Law  was  read  as  a  stated 
part  of  any  ordinary  public  service  in  the  Temple 
of  Solomon  (unless  the  injunction  Dent.  xxxi.  10 
was  obeyed  once  in  seven  years),  though  God  was 
worshipped  there  with  daily  sacrifice,  psalmody, 
and  prayer.  The  son  of  Amon  began  only  when  he 
was  sixteen  years  old  to  seek  the  God  of  David,  and 
for  ten  years  he  devoted  all  his  active  energies  to 
destroying  the  gross  external  memorials  of  idolatry 
throughout  his  dominions,  and  to  strengthening  and 
multiplying  the  visible  signs  of  true  religion.  It  is 
not  surprising  that  in  the  26th  year  of  his  age  he 
should  find  the  most  awful  words  in  which  God 
denounces  sin  come  home  to  his  heart  on  a  par- 
ticular occasion  with  a  new  and  strange  power,  and 
that  he  should  send  to  a  prophetess  to  inquire  in 
what  degree  of  closeness  those  words  were  to  be 
applied  to  himself  and  his  generation.  That  he  had 
never  read  the  words  is  probable.  But  his  conduct 
is  no  sufficient  proof  that  he  had  never  heard  them 
before,  or  that  he  was  not  aware  of  the  existence  of 
a  "  book  of  the  law  of  the  Lord." 

The  great  day  of  Josiah's  life  was  that  on  which 
he  and  his  people,  in  the  eighteenth  year  of  his 
reign,  entered  into  a  special  covenant  to  keep  the  law 
of  the  Lord,  and  celebrated  the  feast  of  the  Passover 
at  Jerusalem  with  more  munificent  offerings,  better 
arranged  services,  and  a  larger  concourse  of  worship- 
pers than  had  been  seen  on  any  previous  occasion. 

After  this,  his  endeavours  to  abolish  every  trace 
of  idolatry  and  superstition  were  still  carried  on. 
But  the  time  drew  near  which  had  been  indicated 
by  Huldah  (2  K.  xxii.  20).  When  Pharaoh-Necho 
went  from  Egypt  toCarchemish  to  carry  on  his  war 
against  Assyria  (comp.  Herodotus,  ii.  159),  Josiah, 
possibly  in  a  spirit  of  loyalty  to  the  Assyrian  king, 
to  whom  he  may  have  been  bound,"  opposed  his 
march  along  the  sea-coast.  Necho  reluctantly  paused 
and  gave  him  battle  in  the  valley  of  EsdraeloD  : 
and  the  last  good  king  of  Judah  was  carried  wounded 
from  Hadadrimmon,  to  die  before  he  could  arrive  at 
Jerusalem. 

He  was  buried  with  extraordinary  honours  ;  and 


may  have  •been  the  constant  aim  of  Josiah  to  restore 
not  only  the  ritual,  but  also  the  kingdom  of  David  in 
its  full  extent  and  Independence,  and  that  he  attacked 
Necho  as  an  invader  of  what  he  considered  as  his 
northern  dominions.  This  conjecture,  if  equally  pro- 
bable with  the  former,  is  equally  without  adequate 
support  in  the  Bible,  and  is  somewhat  derogatory  to 
the  character  of  Josiah. 

4  E  2 


1148 


JOSIAS 


a  funeral  dirge,  in  part  composed  by  Jeremiah, 
which  the  affection  of  his  subjects  sought  to  per- 
petuate as  an  annual  solemnity,  was  chanted  pro- 
bably at  Hadadrimmon.  Compare  the  narrative  in 
2  Chr.  xxxv.  25  with  the  allusions  in  Jer.  xxii.  10, 
18,  and  Zech.  xii.  11,  and  with  Jackson,  On  the 
Creed,  bk.  viii.  ch.  23,  p.  878.  The  prediction  of 
Huldah,  that  he  should  "  be  gathered  into  the 
grave  in  peace,"  must  be  interpreted  in  accordance 
with  the  explanation  of  that  phrase  given  in  Jer. 
xxxiv.  5.  Some  excellent  remarks  on  it  may  be 
found  in  Jackson,  On  the  Greed,  bk.  xi.  ch.  30, 
p.  064.  Josiah's  reformation  and  his  death  are 
commented  on  by  Bishop  Hall,  Contemplations  on 
the  0.  T.,  bk.  xx. 

It  was  in  the  reign  of  Josiah  that  a  nomadic 
horde  of  Scythians  overran  Asia  (Herodotus,  i. 
104-106).  A  detachment  of  them  went  towards 
Egypt  by  the  way  of  Philistia:  somewhere  south- 
ward of  Ascalon  they  were  met  by  messengers  from 
Psammitichus  and  induced  to  turn  back.  They 
are  not  mentioned  in  the  historical  accounts  of 
Josiah's  reign.  But  Ewald  {Die  Psalmen,  165) 
conjectures  that  the  59th  Psalm  was  composed  by 
king  Josiah  during  a  siege  of  Jerusalem  by  these 
Scythians.  The  town  Bethshan  is  said  to  derive 
its  Greek  name,  Scythopolis  (Reland,  Pal.  992  ; 
Lightfoot,  Chor.  Marc.  vii.  §2),  from  these  invaders. 
The  facility  with  which  Josiah  appears  to  have 
extended  his  authority  in  the  land  of  Israel  is  ad- 
duced as  an  indication  that  the  Assyrian  conquerors 
of  that  land  were  themselves  at  this  time  under 
the  restraining  fear  of  some  enemy.  The  prophecy 
of  Zephaniah  is  considered  to  have  been  written 
amid  the  terror  caused  by  their  approach.  The 
same  people  are  described  at  a  later  period  by 
Ezekiel  (xxviii.).  See  Ewald,  Gesch.  fsr.  iii.  689. 
Abarbanel  (ap.  Eisenmenger,  Ent.  Jud.  i.  858) 
records  an  oral  tradition  of  the  Jews  to  the  effect 
that  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant,  which  Solomon 
deposited  in  the  Temple  (1  K.  vi.  19),  was  re- 
moved and  hidden  by  Josiah,  in  expectation  of 
the  destruction  of  the  Temple ;  and  that  it  will 
not  be  brought  again  to  light  until  the  coming 
of  Messiah.  [W.  T.  B.] 

2.  The  son  of  Zephaniah,  at  whose  house  the 
prophet  Zechariah  was  commauded  to  assemble  the 
chief  men  of  the  captivity,  to  witness  the  solemn 
and  symbolical  crowning  of  Joshua  the  high-priest 
(Zech.  vi.  9).  It  has  been  conjectured  that  Josiah 
was  either  a  goldsmith,  or  treasurer  of  the  Temple, 
or  one  of  the  keepers  of  the  Temple,  who  received 
the  money  offered  by  the  worshippers,  but  nothing 
is  known  of  him.  Possibly  he  was  a  descendant  of 
Zephaniah,  the  priest  mentioned  in  Jer.  xxi.  1, 
xxxvii.  3,  and  if  Hen  in  Zech.  vi.  15  be  a  proper 
name,  which  is  doubtful,  it  probably  refers  to  the 
same  person,  elsewhere  called  Josiah.   [W.  A.  W.] 

JOSI'AS.  1.  {'luffias:  Josias).  Josiah,  king 
of  Judah  (1  Esd.  i.  1,  7,  18,  21-23,  25,  28,  29, 
32-34 ;  Ecclus.  xlix.  1,  4 ;  Bar.  i.  8 ;  Matt.  i. 
10,  11). 

2.  ('lecrias  ;  Alex,  'leacrlas:  Maasias).  Jeshaiah 
the  son  of  Athaliah  (1  Esd.  viii.  33 ;  comp.  Ezr. 
viii.  7). 

JOSIBI'AH  (rPnW,  i.  e.  Joshibiah :  'Ava^La ; 

Alex.  'ItrajSia:  Josabias),  the  father  of  Jehu,  a 
Simeonite,  descended  from  that  branch  of  the  tribe 
of  which  Shimei  was  the  founder,  and  which  after- 
wards became  most  numerous  (1  Chr.  iv.  35). 


JOZABAD 
JOSIPHIAH  (i-papr:  'luff€<pia:  Josphias), 

the  father  or  ancestor  of  Shelomith,  who  returned 
with  Ezra  (Ezr.  viii.  10).  A  word  is  evidently 
omitted  in  the  first  part  of  the  verse,  and  is  sup- 
plied both  by  the  LXX.  and  the  Syr.,  as  well  as  by 
the  compiler  of  1  Esd.  viii.  36.  The  LXX.  supply 
Baavi,  i.  e.  "03,  which,  from  its  resemblance  to  the 
preceding  word  "02,  might  easily  have  been  omitted 

by  a  transcriber.  The  verse  would  then  read,  "  of 
the  sons  of  Bani,  Shelomith'the  son  of  Josiphiah." 
In  the  Syriac  Shelomith  is  repeated,  but  this  is  not 
likely  to  have  been  correct.  Josiphiah  is  called  in 
Esdras  Josaphias. 

JOT'BAH  (rnp* :  'ierejSa  ;  Alex.  'IeraxaA; 

Jos.  'Ia/3aT7j :  Jetcba),  the  native  place  of  Meshul- 
lemeth,  the  queen  of  Manasseh,  and  mother  of  Anion 
king  of  Judah  (2  K.  xxi.  19).  The  place  is  not 
elsewhere  named  as  a  town  of  Palestine,  and  is 
generally  identified  with  Jotbath,  or  Jotbathah, 
mentioned  below.  This  there  is  nothing  either  to 
prove  or  disprove.  [*'.] 

JOT'BATH,   or  JOT'BATHAH  (nniW ; 

T   T    :t 

'ET€j3a0a;  Alex.  'UraPaBav:  Deut.  x.  7;  Num. 
xxxiii.  33),  a  desert  station  of  the  Israelites:  it  is 
described  as  "  a  land  of  torrents  of  waters ;  "  there 
are  several  confluences  of  Wadys  on  the  W.  of  the 
Arabah,  any  one  of  which  might  in  the  rainy  season 
answer  the  description,  and  would  agree  with  the 
general  locality.  [H.  H.] 

JOTHAM  (DllV  :  'loodOafi:  Joatham.)  1.  The 

youngest  son  of  Gideon  (Judg.  ix.  5),  who  escaped 
when  his  brethren,  to  the  number  of  69  persons, 
were  slain  at  (tphrah  by  their  half-brother  Abime- 
lech.  When  this  bloody  act  of  Abimelech  had  se- 
cured his  election  as  king,  Jotham,  ascending  Mount 
Gerizim,  boldly  uttered,  in  the  hearing  of  the  men 
of  Shechem,  his  well-known  warning  parable  of  the 
reign  of  the  bramble.  Nothing  is  known  of  him 
afterwards,  except  that  he  dwelt  at  Beer. 

2.  The  son  of  king  Uzziah  or  Azariah  and  Jeru- 
shah.  After  administering  the  kingdom  for  some 
years  during  his  father's  leprosy,  he  succeeded  to 
the  throne  B.C.  758,  when  he  was  25  years  old, 
and  reigned  16  years  in  Jerusalem.  He  was  con- 
temporary with  Pekah  and  with  the  prophet  Isaiah. 
His  history  is  contained  in  2  K.  xv.  and  2  Chi', 
xxvii.  He  did  right  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord,  and  his 
reign  was  prosperous,  although  the  high-places  were 
not  removed.  He  built  the  high  gate  of  the  Temple, 
made  some  additions  to  the  wall  of  Jerusalem,  and 
raised  fortifications  in  various  parts  of  Judah.  After 
a  war  with  the  Ammonites  he  compelled  them  to 
pay  him  the  tribute  they  had  been  accustomed  to 
pay  his  father.  Towards  the  end  of  his  reign  Rezin 
king  of  Damascus,  and  Pekah,  began  to  assume  a 
threatening  attitude  towards  Judah.      [W.  T.  B.] 

3.  A  descendant  of  Judah,  son  of  Jahdai  (1  Chr. 
ii.  47). 

JO'ZABAD.  1.  (inTP:  'Iw^iO ;  Alex. 
'Ia!(,a;8a5:  Jozabad.)  A  captain  of  the  thousands 
of  Manasseh,  who  deserted  to  David  before  the  battle 
of  Gilboa,  and  assisted  him  in  his  pursuit  of  the 
marauding  band  of  Amalekites  (1  Chi-,  xii.  20). 
One  of  Kennicott's  MSS.  reads  "13  IT,  i.  e.  Jochabar. 

2.  Cla><ra&ai6 ;  Alex.  'iwfajSe'S.)  A  hero  of 
Manasseh,  like  the  preceding  (1  Chr.  xii.  20). 


JOZACHAR 

3.  ('Ico£d/3a5;  Alex,  'loofr&ad,  in  2  Chr.  xxxi. 
13.)  A  Levite  iu  the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  who  was 
one  of  the  overseers  of  offerings  and  dedicated  things 
in  the  temple,  under  Cononiah  and  Shimei,  after 
the  restoration  of  the  true  worship. 

4.  (Josabacl.)  One  of  the  princes  of  the  Lerites, 
who  held  the  same  office  as  the  preceding,  and  took 
part  in  the  great  Passover  kept  at  Jerusalem  iu  the 
reign  of  Josiah  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  9). 

5.  A  Levite,  sou  of  Jeshua,  who  assisted  Mere- 
moth  and  Eleazar  in  registering  the  number  and 
weight  of  the  vessels  of  gold  and  silver  belonging 
to  the  Temple,  which  they  brought  with  them  from 
Babylon  (Ezr.  viii.  33).  He  is  called  Josaijad  in 
the  parallel  narrative  of  1  Esd.  viii.  63,  and  is  pro- 
bably identical  with  7. 

6.  ('Iaj£a/3o5  in  Ezra  ;  'CIkSStjAos  in  1  Esd.  ix. 
23 :  Jozabed.)  A  priest  of  the  sons  of  Pashur,  who 
had  married  a  foreigner  on  the  return  from  the 
captivity  (Ezr.  x.  22).  He  appears  as  Ocidelus  in 
the  A.  V.  of  1  Esd. 

7.  ('la>£a/3a8os  in  1  Esd.  ix.  23;  Jozabed,  Ezr. 
x.  22  ;  Jorabdus,  1  Esd.  ix.  23.)  A  Levite  among 
those  who  returned  with  Ezra  and  had  married 
foreign  wives.  He  is  probably  identical  with  Joza- 
bad  the  Levite,  who  assisted  when  the  law  was 
read  by  Ezra  (Neh.  viii.  7);  and  with  Jozabad,  one 
of  the  heads  of  the  Levites  who  presided  over  the 
outer  work  of  the  Temple  (Neh.  xi.  16).  [W.A.W.] 

JO'ZACHAR  ("OW  :  'IeC'PX«P  5  Alex.  'laCa- 
X&p  '•  Josachar),  the  son  of  Shimeath  the  Am- 
monitess,  and  one  of  the  murderers  of  Joash  king 
of.Judah(2  K.  xii.  21).  The  writer  of  the  Chronicles 
(2  Chr.  xxiv.  26)  calls  him  Zabad,  which  is  nothing 
more  than  a  clerical  error  for  Jozachar :  the  first 
syllable  being  omitted  in  consequence  of  the  final 
letters  of  the  preceding  word  V?]}.  In  18  MSS. 
of  Kennicott's  collation  the  name  in  the  Kings  is 
"I2f1\  i.  c.  Jozabad,  and  the  same  is  the  reading 
of  32  MSS.  collated  by  De  Rossi.  Another  MS.  in 
De  Rossi's  possession  had  *1DTT,  i.  c.  Jozachad,  and 
one  collated  by  Kennicott  "GTV,  or  Jozabar,  which 
is  the  reading  of  the  Peshito-Syriac.  Burrington 
concludes  that  the  original  form  of  the  word  was 
*73TV,  or  Jozabad  ;  but  for  this  there  does  not  seem 
sufficient  reason,  as  the  name  would  then  be  all  but 
identical  with  that  of  the  Moabite  Jehozabad,  who 
was  the  accomplice  of  Jozachar  iu  the  murder.  It 
is  uncertain  whether  their  conspiracy  was  prompted 


E  Ewald  observes  that  vers.  17-22  in  this  chapter 
should  be  read  immediately  after  ver.  7,  since  they 
carry  on  the  account  of  the  sabbatical  year,  and  have 
no  reference  to  the  year  of  Jubilee. 

b  It  does  not  seem  likely  that  the  rites  of  solemn 
humiliation  which  marked  the  great  Tast  of  the  year 
were  disturbed.  The  joyful  sound  probably  burst 
forth  in  the  afternoon,  when  the  high-priest  had 
brought  the  services  of  Atonement  to  a  conclusion. 
The  contrast  between  the  quiet  of  the  day  and  the 
loud  blast  of  the  trumpets  at  its  close,  must  have 
rendered  deeply  impressive  the  hallowing  of  the 
year  of  release  from  poverty  and  bondage.  But 
Hupfeld  is  so  offended  with  the  incongruity  of  this 
arrangement,  that  he  would  fain  repair  what  he 
thinks  must  be  a  defect  in  the  Hebrew  text,  in  order 
that  he  may  put  back  the  commencement  of  the  year 
of  Jubilee  from  the  Day  of  Atonement,  on  the  10th, 
to  the  Feast  of  Trumpets,  on  the  1st  of  Tisri. 
"  Hie  (»'.  e.  in  ver.  9)  vetus  mendum  latere  suspicor, 


JUBILEE,  THE  YEAR  OF     1U<) 

by  a  personal  feeling  of  revenge  for  the  death  of 
Zechariah,  as  Josephus  intimates  (Ant.  ix.  8,  §4), 
or  whether  they  were  urged  to  it  •by  the  family  of 
Jehoiada.  The  care  of  the  Chronicler  to  show  that 
they  were  of  foreign  descent  seems  almost  intended 
to  disarm  a  suspicion  that  the  king's  assassination 
was  an  act  of  priestly  vengeance.  But  it  is  more 
likely  that  the  conspiracy  had  a  different  origin 
altogether,  and  that  the  king's  murder  was  regarded 
by  the  Chronicler  as  an  instance  of  Divine  retri- 
bution. On  the  accession  of  Amaziah  the  conspira- 
tors were  executed.  [YV.  A.  W.] 

JO'ZADAK  (pTX)'  :    'Ia<re5e'/c :     Josedec), 

T    T  " 

Ezr.  iii.  2,  8  ;  v.  2  ;  x.  18;  Neh.  xii.  26.  The 
name  is  a  contraction  of  Jeiiozadak. 

JU'BAL  (^>3V  ;  'Iou^aA ;  Jubal),  a  son  of 
Lamech  by  Adah,  and  the  inventor  of  the  "  harp 
and  organ"  (Gen.  iv.  21  ;  Mnnor  veugab,  probably 
general  terms  for  stringed  and  wind  instruments). 
His  name  appears  to  be  connected  with  this  subject, 
springing  from  the  same  root  as  yobel,  "jubilee." 
That  the  inventor  of  musical  instruments  should 
be  the  brother  of  him  who  introduced  the  nomad 
life,  is  strictly  in  accordance  with  the  experience 
of  the  world.  The  connexion  between  music  and 
the  pastoral  life  is  indicated  in  the  traditions  of  the 
Greeks,  which  ascribed  the  invention  of  the  pipe  to 
Pan  and  of  the  lyre  to  Apollo,  each  of  them  being 
also  devoted  to  pastoral  pursuits.  [W.  L.  B.] 

JUBILEE,  THE  YEAR  OF  (^3i»n  D^;, 
and  simply  ;2V :  ctos  tt)s  d^eVecos,  acpiaeus 
ari/xdcna,  and  frcpecris :  annus  jubilaei,  and  jubi- 
lacus) ,  the  fiftieth  year  after  the  succession  of  seven 
Sabbatical  years,  in  which  all  the  land  which  had 
been  alienated  returned  to  the  families  of  those  to 
whom  it  had  been  allotted  in  the  original  distribu- 
tion, and  all  bondmen  of  Hebrew  blood  were  libe- 
rated. The  relation  in  which  it  stood  to  the  Sab- 
batical year  and  the  general  directions  for  its  ob- 
servance are  given  Lev.  xxv.  8-16  and  23-55.a 
Its  bearing  on  lands  dedicated  to  Jehovah  is  stated 
Lev.  xxvii.  16-25.  There  is  no  mention  .of  the 
Jubilee  in  the  book  of  Deuteronomy,  and  the  only 
other  reference  to  it  in  the  Pentateuch  is  in  the 
appeal  of  the  tribe  of  Manasseh,  on  account  of  the 
daughters  of  Zelophehad  (Num.  xxxvi.  4 :  see  below, 
§VI.  note  "). 

11.  The  year  was  inaugurated  on  the  Day  of  Atone- 
ment1'with  the  blowing  of  trumpets0  throughout 


forte  in  diei  numero,  "11^3,  primitus  positum  (pro 

iriNS)  cui  deinde  glo?sa  accessit  'die  expiationis' " 

(Comment,  de  vera  fist.  rat.  pt.  iii.  p.  20).  In  the 
same  vein  of  criticism,  considering  that  the  rest  of  the 
soil  is  alien  to  the  idea  of  the  Jubilee,  he  would  ex- 
punge ver.  1 1  as  an  interpolation.  lie  is  disposed  to 
deal  still  more  freely  with  that  part  of  the  chapter 
which  relates  to  the  sabbatical  year. 

n  The  trumpets  used  in  the  proclamation  of  the 
Jubilee  appear  to  have  been  curved  horns,  not  the 
long  straight  trumpets  represented  on  tlu'  Arch  of 
Titus,  and  which,  according  to  Hengstenberg  Egypt 
and  the  Books  of  Moses,  p.  131,  Eng.  trans.  ),   are  the 

only  ones   represented   in   Egyptian   sculptures  and 

paintings,    The  straight  trumpet  was  called  fPXVn 
the  other,  ~ISi^'  and  J~|p.     The  jubilee  horns' u-rd 

T  '  v'v  | 

in  the  siege  of  Jericho  arc  called  DvQlTl  nnSIL" 
(Josh.  vi.  4) ;  and,  collectively,  in  the  following  verse, 


1150 


JUBILEE,  YEAR  OF 


the    land,    and    by   a    proclamation    of  universal 
liberty. 

1 .  The  soil  was  kept  under  the  same  condition  of 
rest  as  had  existed  during  the  preceding  Sabbatical 
year.  There  was  to  be  neither  ploughing,  sowing, 
nor  reaping ;  but  the  chance  produce  was  to  be  left 
for  the  use  of  all  comers.     [Sabbatical  Year.] 

2.  Every  Israelite  returned  to  "his  possession 
and  to  his  family  ;"  that  is,  he  recovered  his  right 
in  the  land  originally  allotted  to  the  family  of 
which  he  was  a  member,  if  he,  or  his  ancestor,  had 
parted  with  it. 

(a)  A  strict  rule  to  prevent  fraud  and  injustice 
in  such  transactions  is  laid  down : — if  a  Hebrew 
urged  by  poverty ,d  had  to  dispose  of  a  field,  the 
price  was  determined  according  to  the  time  of  the 
sale  in  reference  to  the  approach  of  the  nest 
Jubilee.  The  transfer  was  thus,  not  of  the  land 
itself,  but  of  the  usufruct  for  a  limited  time. 
Deduction  was  systematically  made  on  account  of 
the  number  of  Sabbatical  years,  which  would  de- 
prive the  purchaser  of  certain  crops  within  that 
period.e 

(6)  The  possession  of  the  field  could,  at  any 
time,  be  recovered  by  the  original  proprietor,  if  his 
circumstances  improved,  or  by  his  next  of  kin* 
(?Ni,  i.  e.  one  wlio  redeems).  The  price  to  be 
paid  for  its  redemption  was  to  be  fixed  according  to 
the  same  equitable  rule  as  the  price  at  which  it 
had  been  purchased  (ver.  16). 

(c)  Houses  in  walled  cities  s  were  not  subject  to 
the  law  of  Jubilee,  but  a  man  who  sold  his  house 
could  redeem  it  at  any  time  within  a  full  year  of 
the  time  of  its  sale.  After  that  year,  it  became 
the  absolute  property  of  the  purchaser. 

(d)  Houses  and  buildings  in  villages,  or  in  the 
country,  being  regarded  as  essentially  connected 
with  the  cultivation  of  the  land,  were  not  excepted, 
but  returned  in  the  Jubilee  with  the  land  on  which 
they  stood. 


Sa'lTl  \~\p.  (See  Keil  on  Josh.  vi.  4.)  It  is  not 
quite  certain  whether  they  were  the  horns  of  oxen 
or  formed  of  metal  (Kranold,  p.  50),  but  the  latter 
seems  by  far  more  probable.  Connected  with  the 
mistake  as  to  the  origin  of  the  word  ?2,V  (which 
will  be  noticed  below),  was  the  notion  that  they  were 
rams'  horns.  It.  Jehuda,  in  the  Mishna,  says  that 
the  horns  of  rams  (□'H3T)  were  used  at  the  Feast  of 
Trumpets,  and  those  of  wild  goats  (QvJP)  at  the 
Jubilee.  But  Maimonides  and  Bartenora  say  that 
rams'  horns  were  used  on  both  occasions  (Rosh  Ha- 
shana,  p.  342,  edit.  Suren.).  Bochart  and  others 
have  justly  objected  that  the  horns  of  rams,  or  those  of 
wild  goats,  would  form  but  sorry  trumpets.  [Cornet.] 

It  is  probable  that  on  this,  as  on  other  occasions  of 
public  proclamation,  the  trumpets  were  blown  by  the 
priests,  in  accordance  with  Num.  x.  8.  (See  Kranold, 
Comment,  de  Jubilaeo,  p.  50 ;  with  whom  agree 
Ewald,  Bahr,  and  most  modern  writers.)  Bahr  sup- 
poses that,  at  the  proclamation  of  the  Jubilee,  the 
trumpets  were  blown  in  all  the  priests'  cities  and 
wherever  a  priest  might  be  living ;  while,  on  the 
Feast  of  Trumpets,  they  were  blown  only  in  the 
Temple.  Maimonides  says  that  every  Hebrew  at  the 
Jubilee  blew  nine  blasts,  so  as  to  make  the  trumpet 
literally  "sound  throughout  the  land"  (Lev.  xxv.  9). 
Such  a  usage  may  have  existed,  as  a  mere  popular 
expression  of  rejoicing,  but  it  could  have  been  no 
essential  part  of  the  ceremony. 

d  It  would  seem  that  the  Israelites  never  parted 
with  their  land  except  from  the  pressure  of  poverty. 
The  objection  of  Naboth  to  accept  the  offer  of  Ahab 


JUBILEE,  YEAR  OF 

(e)  The  Levitical  cities  were  not,  in  respect  to 
this  law,  reckoned  with  walled  towns.  If  a  Levite 
sold  the  use  of  his  house,  it  reverted  to  him  in  the 
Jubilee,  and  he  might  redeem  it  at  any  previous 
time.  The  lands  in  the  suburbs  of  the  Levites' 
cities  could  not  be  parted  with  under  any  condi- 
tion, and  were  not  therefore  affected  by  the  law  of 
Jubilee  (ver.  34). 

(/)  If  a  man  had  sanctified  a  field  of  his  patri- 
mony unto  the  Lord,  it  could  be  redeemed  at  any 
time  before  the  next  year  of  Jubilee,  on  his  paying 
one-fifth  in  addition  to  the  worth  of  the  crops, 
rated  at  a  stated  valuation  (Lev.  xxvii.  19).  If 
not  so  redeemed,  it  became,  at  the  Jubilee,  devoted 
for  ever.  If  the  man  had  previously  sold  the  usu- 
fruct of  the  field  to  another,  he  lost  all  right  to 
redeem  it  (vers.  20,  21). 

(</)  If  he  who  had  purchased  the  usufruct  of 
a  field  sanctified  it,  he  could  redeem  it  till  the  next 
Jubilee,  that  is,  as  long  as  his  claim  lasted  ;  but  it 
then,  as  justice  required,  returned  to  the  original 
proprietor  (ver.  22-24). 

3.  All  Israelites  who  had  become  bondmen, 
either  to  their  countrymen,  or  to  resident  foreigners, 
were  set  free  in  the  Jubilee  (Lev.  xxv.  40,  41), 
when  it  happened  to  occur  before  their  seventh 
year  of  servitude,  in  which  they  became  free  by 
the  operation  of  another  law  (Ex.  xxi.  2).  Those 
who  were  bound  to  resident  foreigners  might  re- 
deem themselves,  if  they  obtained  the  means,  at 
any  time  ;  or  they  might  be  redeemed  by  a  rela- 
tion. Even  the  bondman  who  had  submitted  to 
the  ceremony  of  having  his  ears  bored  (Ex.  xxi.  6) 
had  his  freedom  at  the  Jubilee.11 

Such  was  the  law  of  the  year  of  Jubilee,  as  it  is 
given  in  the  Pentateuch,  it  was,  of  course,  like 
the  law  of  the  Sabbatical  Year,  and  that  of  those 
rites  of  the  great  festivals  which  pertain  to  agricul- 
ture, delivered  proleptically.  The  same  formula 
is  used — "  When  ye  be  come  into  the  land  which 


(1  K.  xxi.  1)  appears  to  exemplify  the  sturdy  feeling 
of  a  substantial  Hebrew,  who  would  have  felt  it  to  be 
a  shame  and  a  sin  to  give  up  any  part  of  his  patri- 
mony— •"  The  Lord  forbid  it  me  that  I  should  give  the 
inheritance  of  my  fathers  to  thee."  If  Michaelis  had 
felt  as  most  Englishmen  do  in  such  matters,  he  would 
have  had  more  respect  for  the  conduct  of  Naboth. 
(See  Comment,  on  the  Mosaic  Law,  art.  73.)  But  the 
conduct  of  Naboth  has  been  questioned  on  different 
ground  in  a  dissertation  by  S.  Andreas,  in  the  Critici 
Sacri,  vol.  xiii.  p.  603. 

e  This  must  be  the  meaning  of  the  price  being  cal- 
culated on  "  the  years  of  fruits,"  rfX-'QlV^^  (Lev. 
xxv.  15,  16),  the  years  of  tillagp,  exclusive  of  the 
years  of  rest. 

f  Kranold  observes  (p.  54)  that  there  is  no  record 
of  the  goel  ever  exercising  his  right  till  after  the 
death  of  him  who  had  sold  the  field.  But  the  in- 
ference that  the  gocl  could  not  previously  exercise  his 
power  seems  to  be  hardly  warranted,  and  is  opposed 
to  what  is  perhaps  the  simplest  interpretation  of  Ruth 
iv.  3,  4.     See  note  %  §V. 

e  A  Jewish  tradition,  preserved  by  Maimonides  and 
others,  states  that  no  cities  were  thus  reckoned,  as 
regards  the  Jubilee,  but  such  as  were  walled  in  the 
time  of  Joshua,  According  to  this,  Jerusalem  was 
excluded. 

h  Maimonides  says  that  the  interval  between  the 
Feast  of  Trumpets  and  the  Day  of  Atonement,  in  the 
year  of  Jubilee,  was  a  time  of  riotous  rejoicing  to  all 
servants.  If  there  is  any  truth  in  the  tradition  that 
he  records  (which  is  in  itself  probable  enough)  the 
eight  days  must  have  been  a  sort  of  Saturnalia. 


JUBILEE,  YEAR  OF 

I  give  unto  you" — both  in  Lev.  xxv.  2,  and  Lev. 
xxiii.  10. 

III.  Josephus  (Ant.  iii.  12,  §3)  states  that  all 
debts  were  remitted  in  the  year  of  Jubilee,  while 
the  Scripture  speaks  of  the  remission  of  debts  only  in 
connexion  with  the  Sabbatical  Year  (Dent  xv.  1,  2). 
[SABBATICAL  Year.]  He  also  describes  the  terms 
on  which  the  holder  of  a  piece  of  land  resigned  it 
in  the  Jubilee  to  the  original  proprietor.  The 
former  (he  says)  produced  a  statement  of  the  value 
of  the  crops,  and  of  the  money  which  he  had  laid 
out  in  tillage.  If  the  expenses  proved  to  be  more 
than  the  worth  of  the  produce,  the  balance  was 
paid  by  the  proprietor  before  the  field  was  restored. 
But  if  the  balance  was  on  the  other  side,  the  pro- 
prietor simply  took  back  the  field,  and  allowed 
him  who  had  held  it  to  retain  the  profit. 

Philo  (I>e  Septenario,  ch.  13,  14,  vol.  v.  v.  37, 
edit.  Tauch.)  gives  an  account  of  the  Jubilee 
agreeing  with  that  in  Leviticus,  and  says  nothing 
of  the  remission  of  debts.1 

IV.  There  are  several  very  difficult  questions 
connected  with  the  Jubilee,  of  which  we  now  pro- 
ceed to  give  a  brief  view : — 

1.  Origin  of  the  loord  Jubilee. — The  doubt  on 
this  point  appears  to  be  a  very  old  one.  The 
Hebrew  word  is  treated  by  the  LXX.  in  different 
modes.  They  have  retained  it  untranslated  in 
Josh.  vi.  8,  13  (where  we  find  Keparivai  rod 
'Io>/3t7A,  and  oaXiriyt,  rov  'Ioj^tjA.).  In  Lev.  xxv. 
they  generally  render  it  by  &<pe<ns,  or  acpecrews 
irrifxdffia;  but  where  the  context  suits  it,  by  (pwvr) 
craXinyyos.  In  Ex.  xix.  13  they  have  ai  <po>va\ 
Kal  ai  ad\Triyyes.  The  Vulgate  retains  the  ori- 
ginal word  in  Lev.  xxv.,  as  well  as  in  Josh.  vi. 
(buccinae  quarum  usus  est  in  Jubilaeo),  and  by 
buccina  in  Ex.  xix.  13.  It  seems,  therefore,  be- 
yond doubt  that  uncertainty  respecting  the  word 
must  have  been  felt  when  the  most  ancient  versions 
of  the  0.  T.  were  made. 

Nearly  all  of  the  many  conjectures  which  have 
been  hazarded  on  the  subject  are  directed  to  explain 
the  word  exclusively  iu  its  bearing  on  the  year  of 
Jubilee.  This  course  has  been  taken  by  Josephus 
— eAevBeplav  8e  (TTj/xalvfL  -rovvofxa ;  and  by  St. 
Jerome — Johel  est  dcmittens  aut  mittens.  Many 
modern  writers  have  exercised  their  ingenuity  in 
the  same  track.  Now  in  all  such  attempts  at  ex- 
planation there  must  be  an  anachronism,  as  the  word 
is  used  in  Ex.  xix.  13,  before  the  institution  of  the 
Law,  where  it  can  have  nothing  to  do  with  the 
Year  of  Jubilee,  or  its  observances.     The  expression 


1  The  Misbna  contains  nothing  on  the  Jubilee  but 
unimportant  scattered  notices,  though  it  has  a  consi- 
derable treatise  on  the  Sabbatical  year  (Shebiith). 

k  The  grounds  on  ■which  the  opposite  view  rests 
are  stated  elsewhere.     [See  Cornet.] 

1  Carpzov  (App.  p.  449)  appears  to  have  been  the 
first  who  put  forth  this  view  of  the  origin  and  mean- 
ing of  the  word.  The  figure  of  the  pouring  along  of 
the  "  rich  stream  of  music "  is  familiar  enough  in 
most  languages  to  recommend  it  as  probable.  But 
Gesenius  prefers  to  make  a  second  root,  ?2\  Jubi- 
larc,  which  he  ascribes  to  onomatopoea,  like  the 
L&tia  jubilare,  and  the  Greek  6AoAv££i>>. 

The  fanciful  notion  that  72V  signifies  a  ram  has  some 
interest,  from  its  being  held  by  the  Jews  so  generally 
and  by  the  Chaldee  l'araphrast ;  and  from  its  having 
influenced  our  translators  in  Josh.  vi.  to  call  the 
horns  on  which  the  Jubilee  was  sounded,  trumpets 


JUBILEE,  YEAR  OF         1151 

there  used  is  VlVrl  Ijb^OS ;  similar  to  that  in 
Josh.  vi.  5,  blVr}  lyi'-fc'm.  The  question 
seems  to  be,  can  ?2'P  here  mean  the  peculiar  sound, 
or  the  instrument  for  producing  the  sound? 
Ewald  favours  the  latter  notion,  and  so  does  Gese- 
nius (Thes.  sub  TJK'O),  following  the  old  versions 
(with  which  our  own  agrees),  though  under  72'' 
he  explains  7"2V  as  clangor.  De  Wette  inclines 
the  same  way,  rendering  the  words  in  Ex.  xix.  13 
— beim  Blazen  ties  Jobclhorns.  Luther  translates 
the  same  words — wenn  es  wird  aber  lange  tonen 
(though  he  is  not  consistent  with  himself  in  ren- 
dering Josh.  vi.  5)  —  Bahr  renders  them,  cum 
trahetur  sonus,  and  most  recent  critics  agree  with 
him.  It  would  follow  from  this  view  that  what 
is  meant  in  Joshua,  when  the  trumpet  is  ex- 
pressly mentioned,  is,  "  When  the  sound  called 
Jubilee  (whatever  that  may  be)  is  prolonged  on 
the  horn."  k 

As  regards  the  derivation  of  the  word,  it  is  now 
very  generally  ascribed  to  the  root  s2>,  undavit, 
copiose  et  cum  quodam  impetu  fluxit.  Hence 
Kranold  explains  ?3V,  id  quod  rnagno  strepitu 
fluit ;  and  he  adds,  "  duplex  igitur  in  ea  radice 
vis  distinguitur,  lluendi  et  sonandi  altera  in  >130 
(diluvium),  Gen.  vi.  17,  altera  in  ?"2r\s  (artis 
musicae  inventor),  Gen.  iv.  21,  conspicua."  The 
meaning  of  Jubilee  would  thus  seem  to  be,  a 
rushing,  penetrating  sound.1  But'  in  the  uncer- 
tainty, which,  it  must  be  allowed,  exists,  our 
translators  have  taken  a  safer  course  by  retaining 
the  original  word  in  Lev.  xxv.  and  xxvii.,  than 
that  which  was  taken  by  Luther,  who  has  ren- 
dered it  by  Halljahr. 

2.  Was  the  Jubilee  every  49th  or  50th  year  ? — 
If  the  plain  words  of  Lev.  xxv.  10  are  to  be  followed, 
this  question  need  not  be  asked.  The  statement 
that  the  Jubilee  was  the  50th  year,  after  the  suc- 
cession of  seven  weeks  of  years,  and  that  it  was 
distinguished  from,  not  identical  with,  the  seventh 
Sabbatical  year,  is  as  evident  as  language  can  make 
it.  But  the  difficulty  of  justifying  the  wisdom  of 
allowing  the  land  to  have  two  years  of  rest  in  suc- 
cession has  been  felt  by  some,  and  deemed  sufficient 
to  prove  that  the  Jubilee  could  only  have  been  the 
49th  year,  that  is,  one  with  the  seventh  Sab- 
batical year.  But  in  such  a  case,  a  mere  a  priori 
argument   cannot  justly    be   deemed  sufficient    to 


of  rams'  horns.  It  appears  to  come  from  the 
strange  nonsense  which  some  of  the  rabbis  in  early 
times  began  to  talk  respecting  the  ram  which  was 
sacrificed  in  the  place  of  Isaac.  They  said  (It.  Bechai 
in  Ex.  xix.  ap.  Kranold)  that  after  the  ram  was 
burnt,  God  miraculously  restored  the  body.  His 
muscles  were  deposited  in  the  golden  altar ;  from 
his  viscera  were  made  the  strings  of  David's  harp  ; 
his  skin  became  the  mantle  of  Elijah  ;  his  left  horn 
was  the  trumpet  of  Sinai  ;  and  his  right  horn  was  to 
sound  when  Messiah  comes  (Is.  xxvii.  13).    R.  Akiba, 

to  connect  this  with  the  Jubilee,  affirms  that  ?2V 

is  the  Arabic  for  a  ram,  though  the  best  Arabic 
scholars  say  there  is  no  such  word  in  the  language. 

The  other  notions  respecting  the  word  may  be  found 
in  Fuller  [Misc.  Sac.  p.  102G,  sq. ;  Oritici  Sacri,  vol. 
ix.),  in  Carpzov  (p.  448,  sq.),  and,  most  completely 
given,  in  Kranold  (p.  11,  sq.). 


1152 


JUBILEE,  YEAR  OF 


overthrow  a  clear  unequivocal  statement,  involving 
no  inconsistency,  or  physical  impossibility."1 

Hug  has  suggested  that  the  Sabbatical  year  might 
have  begun  in  Nisan  and  the  Jubilee  Year  in  Tisri 
(Winer,  sub  voce).  In  this  way  the  labours  of  the 
husbandmen  would  only  have  been  intermitted  for 
a  year  and  a  half.  But  it  is  surely  a  very  harsh 
supposition  to  imagine  that  Moses  would  have 
spoken  of  the  institution  of  the  two  years,  and  ot 
the  relation  in  which  they  stand  to  each  other, 
without  noticing  such  a  distinction,  had  it  existed. 
It  is  most  probable  that  the  Sabbatical  year  and 
the  year  of  Jubilee  both  began  in  Tisri,  as  is 
stated  in  the  Mishna  (Rosh  Has/tana,  p.  300,  edit. 
Sureu.).     [Sabbatical  Year.] 

The  simplest  view,  and  the  only  one  which 
accords  with  the  sacred  text,  is,  that  the  year  which 
followed  the  seventh  Sabbatical  year  was  the 
Jubilee,  which  was  intercalated  between  two  series 
of  Sabbatical  years,  so  that  the  next  year  was  the 
Hrst  of  a  new  half  century,  and  the  seventh  year 
after  that  was  the  first  Sabbatical  year  of  the  other 
series.  Thus  the  Jubilee  was  strictly  a  Pentecost 
year,  holding  the  same  relation  to  the  piece  ling  seven 
Sabbatical  years,  as  the  day  of  Pentecost  did  to  the 
seven  Sabbath  days.  Substantially  the  same  formula, 
in  reference  to  this  point,  is  used  in  each  case  °  (cf. 
Lev.  xxiii.  15-16,  xxv.  8-10). 

3.  Were  debts  remitted  in  the  Jubilee? — Not  a 
word  is  said  of  this  in  the  0.  T.,  or  in  Philo.  The 
affirmative  rests  entirely  on  the  authority  of  Jose- 
phus.  Maimonides  says  expressly  that  the  remis- 
sion of  debts0  was  a  point  of  distinction  between 
the  Sabbatical  year  and  the  Jubilee.  The  Mishna 
is  to  the  same  effect  (Shebiith,  cap.  x.  p.  194,  edit. 
Suren.).  It  seems  that  Josephus  must  either  have 
wholly  made  a  mistake,  or  that  he  has  drawn  too 
wide  an  inference  from  the  general  character  of  the 
year.  Of  course  to  those  who  were  in  bondage  for 
their  debts,  the  freedom  conferred  by  the  Jubilee 
must  have  amounted  to  a  remission ;  as  did,  not 
less,  their  freedom  at  the  end  of  their  seven  years 
of  servitude. 

The  first  Jubilee  year  must  have  fallen  in  due 
course  after  the  first  seven  Sabbatical  years.  For 
the  commencement  of  the  series  on  which  the  suc- 
cession of  Sabbatical  years  was  reckoned,  see  CHRO- 
NOLOGY, p.  316,  and  Sabbatical  Year. 

V.  Maimonides,  and  the  Jewish  writers  in  general, 
consider  that  the  Jubilee  was  observed  till  the 
destruction  of  the  first  temple.  But  there  is  no 
direct  historical  notice  of  its  observance  on  any  one 


m  The  only  distinguished  Jewish  teacher  who  ad- 
vocated the  claims  of  the  49th  year  was  R.  Jehuda. 
He  was  followed  by  the  Gaonim,  certain  doctors  who 
took  up  the  exposition  of  the  Talmud  after  the  work 
was  completed,  from  the  seventh  to  the  eleventh 
century  (Winer,  sub  voce).  The  principal  Christian 
writers  on  the  same  side  are,  Scaliger,  Petavius, 
Ussher,  Cunaeus,  and  Schroeder. 

n  Ewald  (Atterthiimer,  p.  419),  and  others,  have 
referred  the  words  of  Is.  xxxvii.  30  to  the  jubilee 
year  succeeding  the  sabbath  year.  But  Gesenius 
adopts  another  view  of  the  passage,  which  accords 
better  with  the  context.  He  regards  it  as  merely 
referring  to  the  continuance  of  the  desolation  occa- 
sioned by  the  war  for  two  years. 

The  language  of  Josephus  and  of  Philo,  and  of  every 
eminent  Jewish  and  Christian  writer,  except  those 
that  have  been  mentioned,  are  in  favour  of  the  fiftieth 
year.  Ideler  has  taken  up  the  matter  very  satis- 
factorily (Handb.  der  Chron.  i.  p.  505). 

°  Whether  this  was  an  absolute  remission  of  debts, 


JUBILEE,  YEAR  OF 

occasion,  either  in  the  books  of  the  0.  T.,  or  in  any 
other  records.  The  only  passages  in  the  Prophets 
which  can  be  regarded  with  much  confidence,  as 
referring  to  the  Jubilee  in  any  way,  are  Is.  v.  7, 
8,  9, 10;  Is.  lxi.  1,2;  Ez.  vii.  12,  13  ;  Ez.  xlvi. 
16,  17,  18.  Regarding  Is.  xxxvii.  30,  see  note  n, 
§  IV.  Some  have  doubted  whether  the  law  of 
Jubilee  ever  came  into  actual  operation  (Michaelis, 
Laws  of  Moses,  art.  lxxvi.,  and  Winer,  sub  voce), 
others  have  confidently  denied  it  (Kranold,  p.  80  ; 
Hupfeld,  pt.  iii.  p.  20).  But  Ewald  contends  that 
the  institution  is  eminently  practical  in  the  character 
of  its  details,  and  that  the  accidental  circumstance  of 
no  particular  instance  of  its  observance  having  been 
recorded  in  the  Jewish  history  proves  nothing.  Be- 
sides the  passages  to  which  reference  has  been  made, 
he  applies  several  others  to  the  Jubilee.  He  con- 
ceives that  "the  year  of  visitation  "  mentioned  in  Jer. 
xi.  23,  xxiii.  12,  xlviii.  44  denotes  the  punishment 
of  those  who,  in  the  Jubilee,  withheld  by  tyranny 
or  fraud  the  possessions  or  the  liberty  of  the  poor.p 
From  Jer.  xxxii.  6-12  he  infers  that  the  law  was 
restored  to  operation  in  the  reign  of  Josiah q 
(Altcrthiimer,  p.  424,  note  1). 

VI.  The  Jubilee  is  to  be  regarded  as  the  outer 
circle  of  that  great  Sabbatical  system  which  com- 
prises within  it  the  sabbatical  year,  the  sabbatical 
month,  and  the  sabbath  day.  [Feasts.]  The  rest 
and  restoration  of  each  member  of  the  state,  in  his 
spiritual  relation,  belongs  to  the  weekly  sabbath 
and  the  sabbatical  month,  while  the  land  had  its 
rest  and  relief  in  the  sabbatical  year.  But  the 
Jubilee  is  more  immediately  connected  with  the 
body  politic  ;  and  it  was  only  as  a  member  of  the 
state  that  each  person  concerned  could  participate 
in  its  provisions.  It  has  less  of  a  formally  religious 
aspect  than  either  of  the  other  sabbatical  institu- 
tions, and  its  details  were  of  a  more  immediately 
practical  character.  It  was  not  distinguished  by 
any  prescribed  religious  observance  peculiar  to  itself, 
like  the  rites  of  the  sabbath  day  and  of  the  sabbatical 
month  ;  nor  even  by  anything  like  the  reading  of  the 
law  in  the  sabbatical  year.  But  in  the  Hebrew 
state,  polity  and  religion  were  never  separated,  nor 
was  their  essential  connexion  ever  dropped  out  of 
sight.  Hence  the  year  was  hallowed,  in  the  strict 
sense  of  the  word,  by  the  solemn  blast  of  the  Jubi- 
lee trumpets,  on  the  same  day  on.  which  the  sins  of 
the  people  had  been  acknowledged  in  the  general  fast, 
and  in  which  they  had  been  symbolically  expiated 
by  the  entrance  of  the  high-priest  into  the  holy 
of  holies  with  the  blood  of  the  appointed  victims. 


or  merely  ajustitium  for  the  year,  will  be  considered 
under  Sabbatical  Year. 

p  The  words  of  Isaiah  (v.  7-10)  may,  it  would  seem 
with  more  distinctness,  be  understood  to  the  same 
effect,  as  denouncing  woe  against  those  who  had 
unrighteously  hindered  the  Jubilee  from  effecting  its 
object. 

i  Is  there  not  a  difficulty  in  considering  this  passage 
to  have  any  bearing  on  the  Jubilee,  from  its  relating, 
apparently,  to  a  priest's  field  ?  (See  §11.  2  (e) .)  At 
all  events,  the  transaction  was  merely  the  transfer  of 
land  from  one  member  of  a  family  to  another,  with  a 
recognition  of  a  preference  allowed  to  a  near  rela- 
tion to  purchase.  The  case  mentioned  Ruth  iv.  3,  sq. 
appears  to  go  further  in  illustrating  the  Jubilee  prin- 
ciple.—  Naomi  is  about  to  sell  a  field  of  Elimelech's 
property.  Boaz  proposes  to  the  next  of  kin  to  pur- 
chase it  of  her,  in  order  to  prevent  it  from  going  out 
of  the  family,  and,  on  his  refusal,  takes  it  himself,  as 
having  the  next  right. 


JUBILEE,  YEAR  OF 

Hence  also  the  deeper  ground  of  the  provisions  of 
the  institution  is  stated  with  marked  emphasis  in 
the  law  itself. — The  land  was  to  be  restored  to  the 
families  to  which  it  had  been  at  first  allotted  by 
divine  direction  (Josh.  xiv.  2),  because  it  was  the 
Lord's.  "  The  land  shall  not  be  sold  for  ever :  for 
the  land  is  mine ;  for  ye  are  strangers  and  sojourners 
with  me"  (Lev.  xxv.  23).  "  1  am  the  Lord  your 
God  which  brought  you  forth  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt,  to  give  you  the  land  of  Canaan,  and  to  be 
your  God  "  (ver.  38). — The  Hebrew  bondman  was 
to  have  the  privilege  of  claiming  his  liberty  as  a 
right,  because  he  could  never  become  the  property 
of  any  one  but  Jehovah.  "  For  they  are  my  ser- 
vants which  I  brought  forth  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt ;  they  shall  not  be  sold  as  bondmen  "  (ver. 
42).  "  For  unto  me  the  children  of  Israel  are 
servants,  whom  I  brought  forth  out  of  the  laud  of 
Egypt  "r  (ver.  55). 

If  regarded  from  an  ordinary  point  of  view,  the 
Jubilee  was  calculated  to  meet  and  remedy  those 
incidents  which  are  inevitable  in  the  course  of 
human  society ;  to  prevent  the  accumulation  of 
inordinate  wealth  in  the  hands  of  a  few  ;  and  to 
relieve  those  whom  misfortune  or  fault  had  reduced 
to  poverty.  As  far  as  legislation  could  go,  its  pro- 
visions tended  to  restore  that  equality  in  outward 
circumstances  which  was  instituted  in  the  first 
settlement  of  the  land  by  Joshua.8  But  if  we  look 
upon  it  in  its  more  special  character,  as  a  part  of 
the  divine  law  appointed  for  the  chosen  people,  its 
practical  bearing  was  to  vindicate  the  right  of  each 
Israelite  to  his  part  in  the  covenant  which  Jehovah 
had  made  with  his  fathers  respecting  the  land  of 
promise j  The  loud  notes  of  the  Jubilee  horns 
symbolised  the  voice  of  the  Lord  proclaiming  the 
restoration  of  political  order,  as  (according  to  Jewish 
tradition)  the  blast  in  the  Feast  of  Trumpets  had, 
ten  days  before,  commemorated  the  creation  of  the 
world  and  the  completion  of  the  material  kosmos. 

In  the  incurable  uncertainty  respecting  the  fact 
of  the  observance  of  the  Jubilee,  it  is  important 
that  we  should  keep  in  mind  that  the  record  of  the 
law,  whether  it  was  obeyed  or  not,  was,  and  is,  a 
constant  witness  for  the  truth  of  those  great  social 
principles  on  which  the  theocracy  was  established.' 
Moreover,  from  the  allusions  which  are  made  to  it 
by  the  prophets,  it  must  have  become  a  standing 
prophecy  in  the  hearts  of  the  devout  Hebrews. 
They  who  waited  in  faith  for  the  salvation  of  Israel 
were  kept  in  mind  of  that  spiritual  Jubilee  which 


JUDA 


1153 


was  to  come  (Luke  iv.  19),  in  which  every  one  of 
the  spiritual  seed  of  Abraham  was  to  have,  in  the 
sight  of  God,  an  equality  which  no  accident  could 
ever  disturb ;  and  a  glorious  freedom,  in  that 
liberty  with  which  He  that  was  to  come  was  to 
make  him  free,  and  which  no  force  or  fraud  could 
ever  take  from  him. 

[There  are  several  monographs  on  the  Jubilee,  of 
which  Kranold  has  given  a  catalogue.  There  is  a 
treatise  by  Maimonides,  de  Anno  Sabbatico  et 
Jubilaeo.  Of  more  recent  works,  the  most  im- 
portant are  that  of  J.  T.  Kranold  himself,  Com- 
mentatio  de  anno  Hebraeorum  Jubilaeo,  Gottingen, 
1837,  4to,  and  that  of  Carpzov,  first  published  in 
1730,  but  afterwards  incorporated  in  the  Apparatus 
Historico  Criticus,  p.  447,  sq. ;  Ewald  (Alter- 
thumer,  p.  415,  sq.)  and  Bahr  (Symbolik,  vol.  ii. 
p.  572,  sq.),  but  especially  the  latter,  have  treated 
the  subject  in  a  very  instructive  manner.  Hupfeld 
(Commentatio  de  Hebraeorum  Festis,  pt.  iii.  1852) 
has  lately  dealt  with  it  in  a  wilful  and  reckless 
style  of  criticism.  Of  other  writers,  those  who 
appear  to  have  done  most  to  illustrate  the  Jubilee, 
are  Cunaeus  (de  Rep.  Hebr.  c.  ii.  §iv.,  in  the 
Critici  Sacri,  vol.  is.  p.  378,  sq.),  and  Michaelis 
(Commentaries  on  the  Laws  of  Moses,  vol.  i.  p.  376, 
sq.,  English  translation.  Vitringa  notices  the  pro- 
phetical bearing  of  the  Jubilee  in  lib.  iv.  c.  4,  of  the 
Observations  Sacrae.  Lightfoot  (Harm,  Evang. 
in  Luc.  iv.  19)  pursues  the  subject  in  a  fanciful 
manner,  and  makes  out  that  Christ  suffered  in  a 
Jubilee  year.  For  this  he  is  well  rebuked  by 
Carpzov  (App.  Hist.  Crit.  p.  468).  Schubert 
(Symbolik  des  Traums)  has  followed  in  nearly  the 
same  track ,  and  has  been  answered  by  Bahr.]    [S.C.] 

JU'CAL  (VZSV :  'lccdxaK:  Jt'chal),  son  of 
Shelemiah  (Jer.  xxxviii.  1).  Elsewhere  called 
Jehucal. 

JU'DA  ('IovSas,  i.  e.  Judas  ;  'loiSa  being  only 
the  genitive  case). 

1.  Son  of  Joseph  in  the  genealogy  of  Christ 
(Luke  iii.  30),  in  the  ninth  generation  from  David, 
about  the  time  of  king  Joash. 

2.  Son  of  Joanna,  or  Hananiah  [Hananiah,  8] 
(Luke  iii.  26).  He  seems  to  be  certainly  the  same 
person  as  Abiud  in  Matt.  i.  13.  His  name,  Hlin*, 
is  identical  with  that  of  TliTaX,  only  that  2X  is 
prefixed  ;  and  when  Rhesa  is  discarded  from  Luke's 
line,  and  allowance  is  made  for  St.  Matthew's  omis- 


1  The  foundation  of  the  law  of  Jubilee,  appears 
to  be  so  essentially  connected  with  the  children  of 
Israel,  that  it  seems  strange  that  Michaelis  should 
have  confidently  affirmed  its  Egyptian  origin,  while 
yet  he  acknowledges  that  he  can  produce  no  specific 
evidence  on  the  suhject  [Mas.  Law,  art.  73).  The 
only  well-proved  instance  of  anything  like  it  in  other 
nations  appears  to  be  that  of  the  Dalmatians,  men- 
tioned by  Strabo,  lib.  vii.  (p.  315,  edit.  Casaub.).  He 
says  that  they  redistributed  their  land  every  eight 
years.  Ewald,  following  the  statement  of  Plutarch, 
refers  to  the  institution  of  Lycurgus  ;  but  Mr.  Grote 
has  given  another  view  of  the  matter  (Wist,  of  Greece, 
vol.  ii.  p.  530). 

8  A  collateral  result  of  the  working  of  the  Jubilee 
must  have  been  the  preservation  of  the  genealogical 
tables,  and  the  maintenance  of  the  distinction  of  the 
tribes.  Ewald  and  Michaelis  suppose  that  the  tables 
were  systematically  corrected  and  filled  up  at  each 
Jubilee.  This  seems  reasonable  enough,  in  order 
that  the  fresh  names  might  be  tilled  in.  that  irregu- 
larities arising  from  the  dying  out  of  families  might 


be  rectified,  and  that  disputed  claims  might  be,  as  far 
as  possible,  authoritatively  met. 

Its  effect  in  maintaining  the  distinction  of  the 
tribes  is  illustrated  in  the  appeal  made  by  the  tribe 
of  Manasseh  in  regard  to  the  daughters  of  Zelophchad 
(Num.  xxxvi.  4).  The  sense  of  the  passage  is,  how- 
ever, obscured  in  most  versions.  It  is,  "  And  even 
when  the  Jubilee  comes,  their  inheritance  will  be  in 
another  tribe."  The  rendering  the  particle  QN  by 
etiamsi  is  satisfactorily  vindicated  by  Kranold,  p.  33. 

As  regards  the  reason  of  the  exception  of  houses 
in  towns  from  the  law  of  Jubilee,  Bahr  has  observed 
that,  as  they  were  chiefly  inhabited  by  artificers  and 
tradesmen,  whose  wealth  did  not  consist  in  lands,  it 
was  reasonable  that  they  should  retain  them  in  abso- 
lute possession.  It  has  been  conjectured  that  many 
of  these  tradesmen  were  foreign  proselytes,  who  could 
not  hold  property  in  the  land  which  was  subject  to 
the  law  of  Jubilee. 

1  This  view  is  powerfully  set  forth  by  Bahr, 


1154 


JUDAEA 


sion  of  generations  in  his  genealogy,  their  times 
will  agree  perfectly.  Both 'may  be  the  same  as 
Hodaiah  of  1  Chr.  iii.  24.  See  Hervey's  Genea- 
logies, p.  118,  sqq. 

3.  One  of  the  Lord's  brethren,  enumerated  in 
Mark  vi.  3.  [Joses  ;  Joseph.]  On  the  question 
of  his  identity  with  Jude  the  brother  of  James,  one 
of  the  twelve  Apostles  (Luke  vi.  16;  Acts  i.  13), 
and  with  the  author  of  the  general  Epistle,  see  p. 
1163,  seq.  In  Matt.  xiii.  55  his  name  is  given  in 
the  A.  V.  as  Judas. 

4.  The  patriarch  Judah  (Sus.  56 ;  Luke  iii.  33  ; 
Heb.  vii.  14;  Rev.  v.  5,  vii.  5).  [A.  C.  H.] 

JUDAEA  or  JUDE'A  ('IovSena),  a  terri- 
torial division  which  succeeded  to  the  overthrow  of 
the  ancient  landmarks  of  the  tribes  of  Israel  and 
J  udah  in  their  respective  captivities.  The  word  first 
occurs  Dan.  v.  13  (A.  V.  "  Jewry"),  and  the  first 
mention  of  the  "province  of  Judaea"  is  in  the 
book  of  Ezra  (v.  8)  ;  it  is  alluded  to  in  Neh.  xi.  3 
(Hebr.  and  A.  V.  "  Judah  "),  and  was  the  result  of 
the  division  of  the  Persian  empire  mentioned  by 
Herodotus  (iii.  89-97,),  under  Darius  (comp.  Esth. 
viii.  9  ;  Dan.  vi.  1).  In  the  Apocryphal  Books  the 
word  "  province "  is  dropped,  and  throughout  the 
books  of  Esdras,  Tobit,  Judith,  and  Maccabees,  the 
expressions  are  the  "  laud  of  Judaea,"  "  Judaea  " 
(A.  V.  frequently  "Jewry")  and  throughout  the 
N.  T.  In  the  words  of  Josephus,  "  The  Jews  made 
preparations  for  the  work  (of  rebuilding  the  walls 
under  Nehemiah) — a  name  which  they  received 
forthwith  on  their  return  from  Babylon,  from  the 
tribe  of  Judah,  which  being  the  first  to  arrive  in 
those  parts,  gave  name  both  to  the  inhabitants  and 
the  territory  "  {Ant.  xi.  5,  §7).  But  other  tribes 
also  returned  from  Babylon,  such  as  the  tribes  of 
Benjamin  and  Levi  (Ezr.  i.  5,  and  x.  5-9;  Neh. 
xi.  4-36);  scattered  remnants  of  the  "children  of 
Ephraim  and  Manasseh  "  (1  Chr.  ix.  3),  or  "  Israel," 
as  they  are  elsewhere  called  (Ezr.  ii.  70,  iii.  1,  and 
x.  5;  Neh.  vii.  73),  and  others  whose  pedigree  was 
not  ascertainable  (Ezr.  ii.  59).  In  tact  so  many 
returned  that  in  the  case  of  the  sin-offering  the 
number  of  he-goats  offered  was  twelve,  according 
to  the  original  number  of  the  tribes  (Ibid.  vi.  17, 
see  also  viii.  35).  There  had  indeed  been  more  or 
less  of  an  amalgamation  from  the  days  of  Hezekiah 
(2  Chr.  xxx.-xxxi.),  which  continued  ever  after- 
wards, down  to  the  very  days  of  our  Lord.  Anna, 
wife  of  Phanuel,  for  instance,  was  of  the  tribe  of 
Asher  (St.  Luke  ii.  36),  St.  Paul  of  the  tribe  of 
Benjamin  (Rom.  xi.  1),  St.  Barnabas,  a  Levite, 
and  so  forth  (Acts  iv.  36 ;  comp.  Acts  xxvi.  7; 
and  Prideaux,  Connection,  vol.  i.  p.  128-30,  ed. 
M'Caul.)  On  the  other  hand  the  schismatical 
temple  upon  Mount  Gerizim  drew  many  of  the 
disaffected  Jews  from  their  own  proper  country 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xi.  8) ;  Nazareth,  a  city  of  Galilee, 
was  the  residence  of  our  Lord's  own  parents  ;  Beth- 
saida,  that  of  three  of  'His  Apostles ;  the  borders 
of  the  sea  of  Galilee  generally,  that  of  most  of  them. 
The  scene  of  His  preaching — intended  as  it  was, 
during  His  earthly  ministry,  for  the  lost  sheep  of 
the  house  of  Israel,  was,  with  the  exception  of  the 
last  part  of  it,  confined  to  Galilee.  His  disciples 
are  addressed  by  the  two  Angels  subsequently  to  his 
Ascension,  as  "  the  men  of  Galilee  "  (Acts  i.  11), 
and  it  was  asked  by  the  multitude  that  came  toge- 
ther in  wonder  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  "  Are  not 
all  these,  who  speak,  Galileans  ?"  (Acts  ii.  7.)  Thus, 
neither  did  all  who  were  Jews  inhabit  that  limited 


JUDAH 

territory  called  Judaea;  nor  again  was  Judaea  in- 
habited solely  by  that  tribe  which  gave  name  to  it, 
or  even  insole  conjunction  with  Benjamin  and  Levi. 

Once  more  as  regards  the  territory.  In  a  wide  and 
more  improper  sense,  the  term  Judaea  was  some- 
times extended  to  the  whole  country  of  the  Canaan- 
ites,  its  ancient  inhabitants  (Joseph.  Ant.  i.  6,  §2)  ; 
and  even  in  the  Gospels  we  seem  to  read  of  the 
coasts  of  Judaea  beyond  Jordan  (St.  Matt.  xix.  I  ; 
St.  Mark  x.  1),  a  phrase  perhaps  countenanced  by 
Josephus  no  less  (Ant.  xii.  4,  §11;  comp.  Josh, 
xix.  34),  if  the  usual  rendering  of  these  passages  is 
to  be  followed  (see  Reland,  Palest,  i.  6),  "  He 
stirreth  up  the  people,  teaching  throughout  all 
Jewry  («:a0'  oAtjs  ttjs  'IovScu'a?)  beginning  from 
Galilee,  unto  this  place,"  said  the  chief  priests  of 
our  Lord  (St.  Luke  xxiii.  5).  With  Ptolemy, 
moreover  (see  Reland,  ibid.),  and  with  Dion  Cassius 
(xxxviii.  16),  Judaea  is  synonymous  with  Palestine- 
Syria  ;  the  latter  adding  that  the  term  Palestine 
had  given  place  to  it.  With  Stiabo  (xvi.  p.  700 
seq.)  it  is  the  common  denomination  for  the  whole 
inland  country  between  Gaza  and  Anti-Libanus, 
thus  including  Galilee  and  Samaria.  Similarly,  the 
Jews,  according  to  Tacitus  (Hist.  v.  6),  occupied 
the  country  between  Arabia  on  the  E.,  Egypt  on 
the  S.,  Phoenicia  and  the  sea  on  the  W.,  and  Syria 
on  the  N. ;  and  by  the  same  writer  both  Pompey 
and  Titus  are  said  to  have  conquered  Judaea,  the 
other  and  less  important  divisions  of  course  included. 

Still,  notwithstanding  all  these  large  significa- 
tions which  have  been  affixed  to  it,  Judaea  was,  in 
strict  language,  the  name  of  the  third  district,  west 
of  the  Jordan,  and  south  of  Samaria.  Its  northern 
boundary,  according  to  Josephus  (B.  J.  iii.  3,  §5) 
was  a  village  called  Anuath,  its  southern  another 
village  named  Jardas.  Its  general  breadth  was 
from  the  Jordan  to  Joppa,  though  its  coast  did  not 
end  there,  and  it  was  latterly  subdivided  into  eleven 
lots  or  portions,  with  Jerusalem  for  their  centre  (Jo- 
seph, ibid.).  In  a  word  it  embodied  "the  original 
territories  of  the  tribes  of  Judah  and  Benjamin,  to- 
gether with  Dan  and  Simeon ;  being  almost  the 
same  with  the  old  kingdom  of  Judah,  and  about 
100  miles  in  length  and  60  in  breadth"  (Lewis, 
Heb.  Republ.  i.  2). 

It  was  made  a  portion  of  the  Roman  province 
of  Syria  upon  the  deposition  of  Archelaus,  the  eth- 
narch  of  Judea  in  a.d.  6,  and  was  governed  by  a 
procurator,  who  was  subject  to  the  governor  of 
Syria.  The  procurator  resided  at  Caesarea  on  the 
coast,  and  not  at  Jerusalem  (Joseph.  Ant.  xvii.  13, 
§5;  xviii.  1,  §1  ;  2,  §1;  3,  §1).  Its  history  as  a 
Roman  province  is  related  under  Jerusalem  (p. 
1008,  seq.),  and  the  physical  features  of  the  country 
are  described  in  the  article  Palestine.  [E.  S.  Ff.] 

JUDAH  (PPl-liV,  ?'.  e.  Yelruda:  'iouSai/inGen. 
xxix.  35  ;  Alex.  'louSct ;  elsewhere  'lovSas  in 
both  MSS.  and  in  N.  T. ;  and  so  also  Josephus : 
Judo),  the  fourth  son  of  Jacob  and  the  fourth 
of  Leah,  the  last  before  the  temporary  cessation 
iu  the  births  of  her  children.  His  whole-brothers 
were  Reuben,  Simeon,  and  Levi,  elder  than  him- 
self— Issachar  and  Zebulun  younger  (see  xxxv. 
23).  The  name  is  explained  as  having  origi- 
nated in  Leah's  exclamation  of  "praise"  at  this 
fresh  gift  of  Jehovah — "  She  said,  '  now  will  I 
praise  (HliX,  odeh)  Jehovah,'  and  she  called  his 
name  Yehudah"  (Gen.  xxix.  35).  The  same  piny 
is  preserved    in  the  blessing  of  Jacob—"  Judah, 


JUDAH 

thou  whom  thy  brethren  shall  praise!"  (xlix.  8). 
The  name  is  not  of  frequent  occurrence  in  the 
0.  T.  In  the  Apocrypha,  however,  it  appears  in 
the  great  hero  Judas  Maccabaeus  ;  in  the  N.  T.  in 
Jude,  Judas  Iscariot,  and  others.  [JUDA ;  Jodas.] 

Of  the  individual  Judah  more  traits  are  pre- 
served than  of  any  other  of  the  patriarchs  with 
the  exception  of  Joseph.  In  the  matter  of  the  sale 
of  Joseph,  he  and  Reuben  stand  out  in  favourable 
contrast  to  the  rest  of  the  brothers.  But  for  their 
interference  he,  who  was  "  their  brother  and  their 
flesh,"  would  have  been  certainly  put  to  death. 
Though  not  the  firstborn  he  "  prevailed  above  his 
brethren  "  (1  Chr.  v.  2),  and  we  find  him  subse- 
quently taking  a  decided  lead  in  all  the  affairs  of  the 
family.  When  a  second  visit  to  Egypt  for  corn 
had  become  inevitable,  it  was  Judah  who,  as  the 
mouthpiece  of  the  rest,  headed  the  remonstrance 
against  the  detention  of  Benjamin  by  Jacob,  and 
finally  undertook  to  be  responsible  for  the  safety  of 
the  lad  (xliii.  3-1(1).  And  when,  through  Joseph's 
artifice,  the  brothers  were  brought  back  to  the 
palace,  he  is  again  the  leader  and  spokesman  of 
the  band.  In  that  thoroughly  Oriental  scene  it 
is  Judah  who  unhesitatingly  acknowledges  the 
guilt  which  had  never  been  committed,  throws 
himself  on  the  mercy  of  the  supposed  Egyptian 
prince,  offers  himself  as  a  slave,  and  makes  that 
wonderful  appeal  to  the  feelings  of  their  disguised 
brother  which  renders  it  impossible  for  Joseph  any 
longer  to  conceal  his  secret  (xliv.  14,  16-34).  So 
too  it  is  Judah  who  is  sent  before  Jacob  to  smooth 
the  way  for  him  in  the  land  of  Goshen  (xlvi.  28). 
This  ascendancy  over  his  brethren  is  reflected  in 
the  last  words  addressed  to  him  by  his  father — 
Thou  whom  thy  brethren  shall  praise  !  thy  father's 
sons  shall  bow  down  before  thee !  unto  him  shall 
be  the  gathering  of  the  people  (Gen.  xlix.  8-10). a 
In  the  interesting  traditions  of  the  Koran  and  the 
Midrash  his  figure  stands  out  in  the  same  promi- 
nence. Before  Joseph  his  wrath  is  mightier  and 
his  recognition  heartier  than  the  rest.  It  is  he  who 
hastens  in  advance  to  bear  to  Jacob  the  fragrant 
robe  of  Joseph  (Weil's  Biblical  Legends,  88-90). 

His  sons  were  five.  Of  these  three  were  by  his 
( lanaanite  wife  Bath-shua ;  they  are  all  insignificant, 
two  died  early,  and  the  third,  Shelah,  does  not 
come  prominently  forward,  either  in  his  person,  or 
his  family.  The  other  two,  Pharez  and  Zeraii 
— twins — were  illegitimate  sons  by  the  widow  of 
Er,  the  eldest  of  the  former  family.  As  is  not 
uni'requently  the  case,  the  illegitimate  sous  sur- 
passed the  legitimate,  and  from  Pharez,  the  elder, 
were  descended  the  royal,  and  other  illustrious 
families  of  Judah.  These  sons  were  bora  to  Judah 
while  he  was  living  in  the  same  district  of  Pales- 
tine, which,  centuries  after,  was  repossessed  by  his 
descendants  —  amongst  villages  which  retain  their 
names  unaltered  in  the  catalogues  of  the  time  of 
the  conquest.  The  three  sons  went  with  their 
lather  into  Egypt  at  the  time  of  the  final  removal 
thither  (Gen.  xlvi.  12  ;   Ex.  i.  2). 

When  we  again  meet  with  the  families  of  Judah 
they  occupy  a  position  among  the  tribes  similar  to 
that  which  their  progenitor  had  taken  amongst  tin' 
patriarchs.  The  numbers  of  the  tribeat  the  census 
at  Sinai  were  74,600  '  Num.  i.  2(1,  27),  considerably 
in  advance  of  any  of  the  others,  the  lar 
which — Dan — numbered  62,700.     On  the  borders 


JUDAH 


1155 


a  The  obscure  and  much  disputed  passage  in  verse 
10  will  be  best  examined  under  the  head  Snu.ou. 


of'  the  Promised  Land  they  were  76,500  (xxvi. 
22),  Dan  being  still  the  nearest.  The  chief  of  the 
tribe  at  the  former  census  was  Nahshon,  the  son 
of  Amminadab  (Num.  i.  7,  ii.  3,  vii.  12,  x.  14),  an 
ancestor  of  David  (Ruth  iv.  20).  Its  representative 
amongst  the  spies,  and  also  among  those  appointed 
to  partition  the  land,  was  the  great  Caleb  the  son 
of  Jephunneh  (Num.  xiii.  6;  xxxiv.  19).  During 
the  march  through  the  desert  Judah's  place  was  in 
the  van  of  the  host,  on  the  east  side  of  the  Taber- 
nacle, with  his  kinsmen  Issachar  and  Zebulun  (ii. 
3-9  ;  x.  14.  The  traditional  standard  of  the  tribe 
was  a  lion's  whelp,  with  the  words,  Rise  up,  Lord, 
and  let  thine  enemies  be  scattered !  (Targ.  Pseudojon. 
on  Num.  ii.  3). 

During  the  conquest  of  the  country  the  only 
incidents  specially  affecting  the  tribe  of  Judah 
are  —  (1)  the  misbehaviour  of  Achan,  who  was 
of  the  great  house  of  Zerah  (Josh.  vii.  1,  16-18)  ; 
and  (2)  the  conquest  of  the  mountain  -district 
of  Hebron  by  Caleb,  and  of  the  strong  city  Debir, 
in  the  same  locality,  by  his  nephew  and  son-in- 
law  Othniel  (Josh.  xiv.  6-15,  xv.  13-19).  It 
is  the  only  instance  given  of  a  portion  of  the 
country  being  expressly  reserved  for  the  person 
or  persons  who  conquered  it.  In  general  the  con- 
quest seems  to  have  been  made  by  the  whole 
community,  and  the  territory  allotted  afterwards, 
without  reference  to  the  original  conquerors  of 
each  locality.  In  this  case  the  high  character  and 
position  of  Caleb,  and  perhaps  a  claim  established 
by  him  at  the  time  of  the  visit  of  the  spies  to  "  the 
land  whereon  his  feet  had  trodden"  (Josh.  xiv.  9  ; 
comp.  Num.  xiv.  24),  may  have  led  to  the  exception. 

The  boundaries  and  contents  of  the  territory 
allotted  to  Judah  are  narrated  at  great  length,  and 
with  greater  minuteness  than  the  others,  in  Josh.  xv. 
20-63.  This  may  be  due  either  to  the  fact  that  the 
lists  were  reduced  to  their  present  form  at  a  later 
period,  when  the  monarchy  resided  with  Judah,  and 
when  more  care  would  naturally  be  bestowed  on  them 
than  on  those  of  any  other  tribe ;  or  to  the  fact 
that  the  territory  was  more  important  anl  more 
thickly  covered  with  towns  and  villages  than  any 
other  part  of  Palestine.  The  greater  prominence 
given  to  the  genealogies  of  Judah  in  1  Chr.  ii.  iii. 
iv.  no  doubt  arises  from  the  former  reason.  How- 
ever this  may  be,  we  have  in  the  records  of  Joshua  a 
very  full  and  systematic  description  of  the  allotment 
to  this  tribe.  The  north  boundary — for  the  most 
part  coincident  with  the  south  boundary  of  Benjamin 
— began  at  the  embouchure  of  the  Jordan,  entered  the 
hills  apparently  at,  or  about  the  present  road  from 
Jericho,  ran  westward  to  En-shemesh — probably  the 
present  Ain-HauJ,  below  Bethany — thence  over 
the  Mount  of  Olives  to  Enrogel,  in  the  valley 
beneath  Jerusalem ;  went  along  the  ravine  of 
Hinnom,  under  the  precipices  of  the  city,  climbed 
the  hill  in  a  N.  W.  direction  to  the  water  of 
Nephtoah  (probably  Lifta),  and  thence  by  Kirjath- 
Jearim  (probably  Kuriet  el-Ewib),  Bethshemesh 
( Ain  -  She/ns),  Timnath,  and  Ekron  to  Jabneel 
on  the  sea-coast.  On  the  east  the  Dead  Sea,  and 
on  the  west  the  Mediterranean  formed  the  boun- 
daries. The  southern  line  is  hard  to  determine, 
since  it  is  denoted  by  places  many  of  which  have 
not  been  identified.  It  left  the  Dead  Sea  at  its 
extreme  south  end,  and  joined  the  Mediterranean 
at  the  Wady  el-Arish;  but  between  these  two 
points  it  passed  through  Maaleh  Acrabbim,  the 
Wilderness  of  Zin,  Hezron,  Adar,  Karkaa,  and 
Azmon;    the  Wilderness  of  Zin  the  extreme  smith 


1150 


JUDAH 


of  all  (Josh.  xv.  1-12).  This  territory — in  ave- 
rage length  about  45  miles,  and  in  average  breadth 
about  50 — was  from  a  very  early  date  divided  into 
four  main  regions.  (1.)  The  south — the  undu- 
lating pasture  country,  which  intervened  between 
the  hills,  the  proper  possession  of  the  tribe,  and  the 
deserts  which  encompass  the  lower  part  of  Palestine 
(Josh.  xv.  21  ;  Stanley,  S.  §  P.).  It  is  this  which 
is  to  be  designated  as  the  wilderness  (midbar)  of 
Judali  (Judg.  i.  16).  It  contained  thirty-seven 
cities,  with  their  dependent  villages  (Josh.  xv.  20- 
32),  of  which  eighteen  of  those  farthest  south  were 
ceded  to  Simeon  (xix.  1-9).  Amongst  these  southern^ 
cities  the  most  familiar  name  is  Beersheba. 

(2.)  The  lowland  (xv.  33  ;  A.  V.  "  valley  ") 
— or,  to  give  it  its  own  proper  and  constant  appel- 
lation, the  Shefelah — the  broad  belt  or  strip 
lying  between  the  central  highlands — "  the  moun- 
tain " — and  the  Mediterranean  Sea ;  the  lower 
portion  of  that  maritime  plain,  which  extends 
through  the  whole  of  the  sea  board  of  Palestine, 
from  Sidon  in  the  north,  to  Rhinocolura  at  the 
south.  This  tract  was  the  garden  and  the  granary 
of  the  tribe.  In  it,  long  before  the  conquest  of  the 
country  by  Israel,  the  Philistines  had  settled  them- 
selves, never  to  be  completely  dislodged  (Neh.  xiii. 
23,  24).  There,  planted  at  equal  intervals  along 
the  level  coast,  were  their  five  chief  cities,  each  with 
its  circle  of  smaller  dependents,  overlooking,  from 
the  natural  undulations  of  the  ground,  the  "  standing 
corn,"  "shocks,"  "vineyards  and  olives,"  which 
excited  the  ingenuity  of  Samson,  and  are  still 
remarkable  by  modern  travellers.  "  They  are  all 
remarkable  for  the  beauty  and  profusion  of  the 
gardens  which  surround  them — the  scarlet  blossoms 
of  the  pomegranates,  the  enormous  oranges  which 
gild  the  green  foliage  ot  their  famous  groves  " 
(Stanley,  S.  $  P.  257).  From  the  edge  of  the 
sandy  tract,  which  fringes  the  immediate  shore 
right  up  to  the  very  wall  of  the  hills  of  Judah, 
stretches  the  immense  plain  of  corn-fields.  In  those 
rich  harvests  lies  the  explanation  of  the  constant 
contests  between  Israel  and  the  Philistines  (#.  Sf  P. 
258).  From  them  were  gathered  the  enormous 
cargoes  of  wheat,  which  were  transmitted  to  Phoe- 
nicia by  Solomon  in  exchange  for  the  arts  of  Hiram, 
and  which  in  the  time  of  the  Herods  still  "  nou- 
rished "  the  country  of  Tyre  and  Sidon  (Acts  xii.  20). 
There  were  the  olive  trees,  the  sycomore  trees,  and 
the  treasures  of  oil,  the  care  of  which  was  sufficient 
to  task  the  energies  of  two  of  David's  special  officers 
(1  Chr.  xxvii.  28).  The  nature  of  this  locality 
would  (seem  to  be  reflected  in  the  names  of  many 
of  its  towns  if  interpreted  as  Hebrew  words: — 
Dilean  =  cucumbers;  Gederah,  Gederoth, 
Gederothaim,  sheepfolds ;  Zoreah,  wasps ; 
Ex-gannim,  spring  of  gardens,  &c.  &c.  But  we 
have  yet  to  leam  how  far  these  names  are  Hebrew ; 
and  whether  at  best  they  are  but  mere  Hebrew 
accommodations  of  earlier  originals,  and  therefore 
not  to  be  depended  on  for  their  significations.  The 
number  of  cities  in  this  district,  without  counting 
the  smaller  villages  connected  with  them,  was  forty- 
two.     Of  these,  however,  many  which  belonged  to 

b  On  the  words  "  Judah  on  Jordan,"  used  in  de- 
scribing the  Eastern  termination  of  the  boundary  of 
Naphtali  (Josh.  xix.  34),  critics  have  strained  their 
ingenuity  to  prove  that  Judah  had  some  possessions  in 
that  remote  locality  either  by  allotment  or  inheritance. 
See  the  elaborate  attempt  of  Von  Raumer  {Pal.  405- 
410)  to  show  that  the  villages  of  Jair  are  intended. 
But  the  difficulty — maximus  atque  insolubilis  nodus, 


JUDAH 

the  Philistines  can  only  have  been  allotted  to  the 
tribe,  and  if  taken  possession  of  by  Judah  were 
only  held  for  a  time. 

What  were  the  exact  boundaries  of  the  Shefelah 
we  do  not  know.  We  are  at  present  ignorant  of 
the  principles  on  which  the  ancient  Jews  drew 
their  boundaries  between  one  territory  and  another. 
One  thing  only  is  almost  certain  that  they  were  not 
determined  by  the  natural  features  of  the  ground,  or 
else  we  should  not  find  cities  enumerated  as  in 
the  lowland  plain,  whose  modern  representatives 
are  fouud  deep  in  the  mountains.  [Jarmuth  ; 
JiPHTAH,  &c]  (The  latest  information  regarding 
this  district  is  contained  in  Toiler's  3tte  Wanderung, 
1859.) 

(3.)  The  third  region  of  the  tribe — the  moun- 
tain, the  "  hill-country  of  Judah  " — though  not 
the  richest,  was  at  once  the  largest  and  the  most 
important  of  the  four.  Beginning  a  few  miles 
below  Hebron,  where  it  attains  its  highest  level,  it 
stretches  eastward  to  the  Dead  Sea  and  westward 
to  the  Shefelah,  and  forms  an  elevated  district  or 
plateau,  which,  though  thrown  into  considerable 
undulations,  yet  preserves  a  general  level  in  both 
directions.  It  is  the  southern  portion  of  that 
elevated  hilly  district  of  Palestine  which  stretches 
north  until  intersected  by  the  plain  of  Esdraelon, 
and  on  which  Hebron,  Jerusalem,  and  Shechem  are 
the  chief  spots.  The  surface  of  this  region,  which 
is  of  limestone,  is  monotonous  enough.  Round 
swelling  hills  and  hollows,  of  somewhat  bolder  pro- 
portions than  those  immediately  north  of  Jerusalem, 
which,  though  in  early  times  probably  covered  with 
forests  [Hareth],  have  now,  where  not  cultivated, 
no  growth  larger  than  a  brushwood  of  dwarf-oak, 
arbutus,  and  other  bushes.  In  many  places  there  is 
a  good  soft  turf,  discoverable  even  in  the  autumn, 
and  in  spring  the  hills  are  covered  with  flowers. 
The  number  of  towns  enumerated  (Josh.xv.  48-60) 
as  belonging  to  this  district  is  38  ;  but,  if  we  may 
judge  from  the  ruins  which  meet  the  eye  on  every 
side,  this  must  have  been  very  far  below  the  real 
number.  Hardly  a  hill  which  is  not  crowned  by 
some  fragments  of  stone  buildings,  more  or  less 
considerable, — those  which  are  still  inhabited  sur- 
rounded by  groves  of  olive-trees,  and  enclosures  of 
stone  walls  protecting  the  vineyards.  Streams  there 
are  none,  but  wells  and  springs  are  frequent — in 
the  neighbourhood  of"  Solomon's  Pools"  at  Urtas 
most  abundant. 

(4.)  The  fourth  district  is  the  Wilderness  . 
{Midbar),  which  here  and  heie  only  appears  to  be 
synonymous,  with  Arabah,  and  to  signify  the  sunken 
district  immediately  adjoining  the  Dead  Sea.  It 
contained  only  six  cities,  which  must  have  been 
either,  like  Engedi,  on  the  slopes  of  the  cliffs  over- 
hanging the  Sea,  or  else  on  the  lower  level  of  the 
shore.  The  "city  of  Salt"  may  have  been  on  the 
salt  plains,  rJetween  the  sea  and  the  cliff's  which 
form  the  southern  termination  to  the  Ghor.b 

Nine  of  the  cities  of  Judah  were  allotted  to  the 
priests  (Josh.  xxi.  9-19).  The  Levites  had  noc  cities 
in  the  tribe,  and  the  priests  had  none  out  of  it. 

In  the  partition  of  the  territory  by  Joshua  and 


qui  plurimos  intcrpretes  torsit — has  defied  every 
attempt ;  and  the  suggestion  of  Ewald  (Gesch.  ii. 
380,  note)  is  the  most  feasible — that  the  passage  is 
corrupt,  and  that  Cinneroth  or  some  other  word 
originally  occupied  the  place  of  "  at  Judah." 

c  But  Bethlehem  appears  to  have  been  closely  con- 
nected with  them  (Judg.  xvii.  7,  9  ;  xix.  1). 


JUDAH 

Eleazar  (Josh.  six.  51),  Judah  had  the  first  allotment 
(xv.  1).  Joshua  had  on  his  first  entrance  into  the 
country  overrun  the  Shefelah,  destroyed  some  of  the 
principal  towns  and  killed  the  kings  (x.  28-35),  and 
had  even  penetrated  thence  into  the  mountains  as 
far  as  Hebron  and  Debir  (36-39)  ;  but  the  task  of 
really  subjugating  the  interior  was  yet  to  be  done. 
After  his  death  it  was  undertaken  by  Judah  and 
Simeon  (Judg.  i.  20).  In  the  artificial  contri- 
vances of  war  they  were  surpassed  by  the  Canaan- 
it  es.  and  in  some  places,1'  where  the  ground  admitted 
of  their  iron  chariots  being  employed,  the  latter  re- 
mained masters  of  the  field.  But  wherever  force 
and  vigour  were  in  question  there  the  Israelites 
succeeded,  and  they  obtained  entire  possession  of 
the  mountain  district  and  the  great  corn-growing 
tract  of  Philistia  (Judg.  i.  18,  19).  The  latter  was 
constantly  changing  hands  as  one  or  the  other  side 
got  stronger  (1  Sam.  iv.,  v.,  vii.  14,  &c.) ;  but  in 
the  natural  fortresses  of  the  mountains  Judah  dwelt 
undisturbed  throughout  the  troubled  period  of  the 
Judges.  Othniel  was  partly  a  member  of  the 
tribe  (Judg.  iii.  9),  and  the  Bethlehem  of  which 
Jr./. an  was  a  native  (xii.  8,  9)  may  have  been 
Bethlehem- Judah.  But  even  if  these  two  judges 
belonged  to  Judah,  the  tribe  itself  was  not  molested, 
and  with  the  one  exception  mentioned  in  Judg.  xx. 
19,  when  they  were  called  by  the  divine  oracle  to 
make  the  attack  on  Gibeah,  they  had  nothing  to  do 
during  the  whole  of  that  period  but  settle  them- 
selves in  their  home.  Not  only  did  they  take  no 
part  against  Sisera,  but  they  are  not  even  rebuked 
for  it  by  Deborah. 

Nor  were  they  disturbed  by  the  incursions  of  the 
Philistines  during  the  rule  of  Samuel  and  of  Saul, 
which  were  made  through  the  territory  of  Dan  and 
of  Benjamin  ;  or  if  we  place  the  valley  of  Elaii  at 
the  Wady  es-Sumt,  outy  on  the  outskirts  of  the 
mountains  of  Judah.  On  the  last  named  occasion, 
however,  we  know  that  at  least  one  town  of  Judah  — 
Bethlehem — furnished  men  to  Saul's  host.  The 
incidents  of  David's  flight  from  Saul  will  be  found 
examined  under  the  heads  of  David,  Saul,  Maon, 
Hachilah,  &c. 

The  main  inference  deducible  from  these  con- 
siderations is  the  determined  manner  in  which  the 
tribe  keeps  aloof  from  the  rest — neither  ottering  its 
aid  nor  asking  that  of  others.  The  same  inde- 
pendent mode  of  action  characterises  the  foundation 
of  the  monarchy  after  the  death  of  Saul.  There 
was  no  attempt  to  set  up  a  rival  power  to  Ish- 
bosheth.  The  tribe  had  had  full  experience  of  the 
man  who  had  been  driven  from  the  court  to  take 
shelter  in  the  caves,  woods,  and  fastnesses  of  their 
wild  hills,  and  when  the  opportunity  offered,  "the 
men  of  Judah  came  and  anointed  David  king  over 
the  house  of  Judah  in  Hebron"  (2  Sam.  ii.  4,  11). 
The  further  step  by  which  David  was  invested 
with  the  sovereignty  of  the  whole  nation  was  taken 
by  the  other  tribes  ;  Judah  having  no  special  part 
therein  ;  and  though  willing  enough,  if  occasion 
rendered  it  necessai  y.  t"  act  with  others,  their  con- 
duct later,  when  brought  into  collision  with  Ephraim 
on  the  matter  of  the  restoration  of  David,  shows 
that  the  men  of  Judah  had  preserved  their  inde- 
pendent mode  of  action.  The  king  was  near  of  kin 
to  them:  and  therefore  they,  and  they  alone,  set 
about  bringing  him  back.     It  had  been  their  own 


JUDAH,  KINGDOM  OF        1157 

affair,  to  be  accomplished  by  themselves  alone,  and 
they  had  gone  about  it  in  that  independent  manner, 
which  looked  like  "despising"  those  who  believed 
their  share  in  David  to  be  a  far  larger  one  (2  Sam. 
xix.  41-43). 

The  same  independent  temper  will  be  found  to 
characterise  the  tribe  throughout  its  existence  as 
a  kingdom,  which  is  considered  in  the  following 
article. 

2.  A  Levite  whose  descendants,  Kadmiel  and  his 
sons,  were  very  active  in  the  work  of  rebuilding 
the  Temple  after  the  return  from  captivity  (Ezr. 
iii.  9).  Lord  Hervey  has  shown  cause  for  believing 
(Genealogies,  &c,  119)  that  the  name  is  the  same 
as  Hodaviah  and  Hodevah.  In  1  Esd.  v.  58, 
it  appears  to  be  given  as  Jor>A. 

3.  ('IouSas,  'IcoSae'.)  A  Levite  who  was  obliged 
by  Ezra  to  put  away  his  foreign  wife  (Ezr.  x.  23). 
Probably  the  same  person  is  intended  in  Neh.  xii. 
8,  36.     In  1  Esd.  his  name  is  given  as  Judas. 

4.  A  Benjamite,  son  of  Senuah  (Neh.  xi.  9).  It 
is  worth  notice,  in  connexion  with  the  suggestion 
of  Lord  Hervey  mentioned  above,  that  in  the  lists 
of  1  Chr.  ix.,  in  many  points  so  curiously  parallel 
to  those  of  this  chapter,  a  Benjamite,  Hodaviah,  son 
of  Has-sennuah,  is  given  (ver.  7).  [G.] 

JUDAH,  KINGDOM  OF.  1.  When  the 
disruption  of  Solomon's  kingdom  took  place  at 
Shechem,  only  the  tribe  of  Judah  followed  the 
house  of  David.  But  almost  immediately  after- 
wards, when  Rehoboam  conceived  the  design  of 
establishing  his  authority  over  Israel  by  force  of 
arms,  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  also  is  recorded  as 
obeving  his  summons,  and  contributing  its  warriors 
to  make  up  his  army.  Jerusalem,  situate  within 
the  borders  of  Benjamin  (Josh,  xviii.  28,  &c),  yet 
won  from  the  heathen  by  a  prince  of  Judah,  con- 
nected the  frontiers  of  the  two  tribes  by  an  indis- 
soluble political  bond.  By  the  erection  of  the  city 
of  David,  Benjamin's  former  adherence  to  Israel 
(2  Sam.  ii.  9)  was  cancelled;  though  at  least  two 
Benjamite  towns,  Bethel  and  Jericho,  were  included 
in  the  northern  kingdom.  A  part,  if  not  all,  of 
the  territory  of  Simeon  (1  Sam.  xxvii.  6  ;  1  K.  xix. 
3 ;  cf.  Josh.  xix.  1)  and  of  Dan  (2  Chr.  xi.  10  ;  cf. 
Josh.  xix.  41,  42)  was  recognised  as  belonging  to 
Judah ;  and  in  the  reigns  of  Abijah  and  Asa,  the 
southern  kingdom  was  enlarged  by  some  additions 
taken  out  of  the  territory  of  Ephraim  (2  Chr.  xiii. 
19,  xv.  8,  xvii.  2).  After  the  conquest  and  depor- 
tation of  Israel  by  Assyria,  the  influence,  and  per- 
haps the  delegated  jurisdiction  of  the  king  of  Judah 
sometimes  extended  over  the  territory  which  for- 
merly belonged  to  Israel. 

2.  In  Edom  a  vassal-king  probably  retained  his 
fidelity  to  the  son  of  Solomon,  and  guarded  for 
Jewish  enterprise  the  road  to  the  maritime  trade 
with  Ophir.  Philistia  maintained  for  the  most 
part  a  quiet  independence.  Syria,  in  the  height  of 
her  brief  power,  pushed  her  conquests  along  the 
northern  and  eastern  frontiers  of  Judah  and  threat- 
ened Jerusalem  ;  but  the  interposition  of  the  terri- 
tory of  Israel  generally  relieved  Judah  from  any 
immediate  contact  with  that  dangerous  neighbour. 
The  southern  border  of  Judah,  resting  on  the  un- 
inhabited Desert,  was  no!  agitated  by  any  turbu- 
lent stream  of  commercial  activity  like  that  which 
flowed  by  the  rear  of  Israel,    fnmi   Damascus  to 


ll  The  word  here  (Judg-.  i.  10)  is  Emek,  entirely  a 
different  word  from  Shefelah,  and  rightly  rendered 
"valley."     It  is  difficult,  however,   to  fix  upon   any 


"valley"  in  this  region  sufficiently  important  to  he 
alluded  to.  Can  it  he  the  valley  of  Ki.ah,  where 
contests  with  the  Philistines  took  place  later? 


1158      JUDAH,  KINGDOM  OF 

Tyre.  And  though  some  of  the  Egyptian  kings 
were  ambitious,  that  ancient  kingdom  was  far  less 
aggressive  as  a  neighbour  to  Judah  than  Assyria 
was  to  Israel. 

3.  A  singular  gauge  of  the  growth  of  the  king- 
dom of  Judah  is  supplied  by  the  progressive  aug- 
mentation of  the  army  under  successive  kings.  In 
David's  time  (2  Sam.  xxiv.  9,  and  1  Chr.  sxi.  5) 
the  warriors  of  Judah  numbered  at  least  500,000. 
But  Rehoboam  brought  into  the  field  (1  K.  xii. 
21)  only  180,000  men:  Abijah,  eighteen  years 
afterwards,  400,000  (2  Chr.  xiii.  3):  Asa  (2  Chr. 
xiv.  8),  his  successor,  580,000,  exactly  equal  to  the 
sum  of  the  armies  of  his  two  predecessors:  Jehoshaphat 
(2  Chr.  xvii.  14-19),  the  next  king,  numbered  his 
warriors  in  five  armies,  the  aggregate  of  which  is 
1,160,000,  exactly  double  the  army  of  his  father, 
and  exactly  equal  to  the  sum  of  the  armies  of  his 
three  predecessors.  After  four  inglorious  reigns 
the  energetic  Amaziah  could  muster  only  300,000 
men  when  he  set  out  to  recover  Edom.  His  son 
Uzziah  had  a  standing  (2  Chr.  xxvi.  11)  force  of 
307,500  fighting  men.  It  would  be  out  of  place 
here  to  discuss  the  question  which  has  been  raised 
as  to  the  accuracy  of  these  numbers.  So  far  as 
they  are  authentic,  it  may  be  safely  reckoned  that 
the  population  subject  to  each  king  was  about  four 
times  the  number  of  the  fighting  men  in  his  domi- 
nions.   [Israel.] 

4.  Unless  Judah  had  some  other  means  beside 
pasture  and  tillage  of  acquiring  wealth  ;  as  by  ma- 
ritime commerce  from  the  Red  Sea  ports,  or  (less 
probably)  from  Joppa,  or  by  keeping  up  the  old 
trade  (1  K.  x.  28)  with  Egypt — it  seems  difficult 
to  account  for  that  ability  to  accumulate  wealth, 
which  supplied  the  Temple  treasury  with  sufficient 
store  to  invite  so  frequently  the  hand  of  the  spoiler. 
Egypt,  Damascus,  Samaria,  Nineveh,  and  Babylon, 
had  each  in  succession  a  share  of  the  pillage.  The 
treasury  was  emptied  by  Shishak  (1  K.  xiv.  26), 
again  bv  Asa  (1  K.  xv.  18),  by  Jehoash  of  Judah 
(2  K.  xii.  18),  by  Jehoash  of  Israel  (2  K.  xiv.  14), 
by  Ahaz  (2  K.  xvi.  8),  by  Hezekiah  (2  K.  xviii. 
15),  and  by  Nebuchadnezzar  (2  K.  xxiv.  13). 

5.  The  kingdom  of  Judah  possessed  many  advan- 
tages which  secured  for  it  a  longer  continuance  than 
that  of  Israel.  A  frontier  less  exposed  to  powerful 
enemies,  a  soil  less  fertile,  a  population  hardier  and 
more  united,  a  fixed  and  venerated  centre  of  admi- 
nistration and  religion,  an  hereditary  aristocracy  in 
the  sacerdotal  caste,  an  army  always  subordinate,  a 
succession  of  kings  which  no  revolution  interrupted, 
many  of  whom  were  wise  and  good,  and  strove  suc- 
cessfully to  promote  the  moral  and  spiritual  as 
well  as  the  material  prosperity  of  their  people  ;  still 
more  than  these,  the  devotion  of  the  people  to  the 
One  True  God,  which  if  not  always  a  pure  and 
elevated  sentiment,  was  yet  a  contrast  to  such  de- 
votion as  could  be  inspired  by  the  worship  of  the 
calves  or  of  Baal ;  and  lastly  the  popular  reverence 
for  and  obedience  to  the  Divine  law  so  far  as  they 
learned  it  from  their  teachers : — to  these  and  other 
secondary  causes  is  to  be  attributed  the  fact  that 
Judah  survived  her  more  populous  and  more  pow- 
erful sister  kingdom  by  135  years  ;  and  lasted  from 
B.C.  975  to  B.c.  586. 

6.  The  chronological  succession  of  the  kings  of 
Judah  is  given  in  the  article  Israel.  A  few  diffi- 
culties of  no  great  importance  have  been  discovered 
in  the  statements  of  the  ages  of  some  of  the  kings. 
They  are  explained  in  the  works  cited  in  that 
article  and  in  Keifs  Commentary  on  the  Book  of 


JUDAH,  KINGDOM  OF 

Kings.  A  detailed  history  of  each  king  will  be 
found  under  his  name. 

Judah  acted  upon  three  different  lines  of  policy 
in  succession.  First,  animosity  against  Israel :  se- 
condly, resistance,  generally  in  alliance  with  Israel, 
to  Damascus:  thirdly,  deference,  perhaps  vassalage 
to  the  Assyrian  king. 

(a.)  The  first  three  kings  of  Judah  seem  to  have 
cherished  the  hope  of  re-establishing  their  authority 
over  the  Ten  Tribes;  for  sixty  years  there  was  war 
between  them  and  the  kings  of  Israel.  Neither  the 
disbanding  of  Rehoboam's  forces  by  the  authority 
of  Shemaiah,  nor  the  pillage  of  Jerusalem  by  the 
irresistible  Shishak,  served  to  put  an  end  to  the  fra- 
ternal hostility.  The  victory  achieved  by  the 
daring  Abijah  brought  to  Judah  a  temporary  acces- 
sion of  territory.  Asa  appears  to  have  enlarged  it 
still  farther ;  and  to  have  given  so  powerful  a  sti- 
mulus to  the  migration  of  religious  Israelites  to 
Jerusalem,  that  Baasha  was  induced  to  fortify  Ra- 
mah  with  the  view  of  checking  the  movement. 
Asa  provided  for  the  safety  of  his  subjects  from 
invaders  by  building,  like  Kehoboam,  several  fenced 
cities ;  he  repelled  an  alarming  irruption  of  an 
Ethiopian  horde;  he  hired  the  armed  intervention 
of  Benhadad  I.,  king  of  Damascus,  against  Baasha  ; 
and  he  discouraged  idolatry  and  enforced  the  wor- 
ship of  the  true  God  by  severe  penal  laws. 

(6.)  Hanani's  remonstrance  (2  Chr.  xvi.  7)  pre- 
pares us  for  the  reversal  by  Jehoshaphat  of  the 
policy  which  Asa  pursued  towards  Israel  and  Da- 
mascus. A  close  alliance  sprang  up  with  strange 
rapidity  between  Judah  and  Israel.  For  eighty 
years,  till  the  time  of  Amaziah,  there  was  no  open 
war  between  them,  and  Damascus  appears  as 
their  chief  and  common  enemy ;  though  it  rose 
afterwards  from  its  overthrow  to  become  under 
Rezin  the  ally  of  Pekah  against  Ahaz.  Jehosha- 
phat, active  and  prosperous,  repelled  nomad  in- 
vaders from  the  desert,  curbed  the  aggressive  spirit 
of  his  nearer  neighbours,  and  made  his  influence 
felt  even  among  the  Philistines  and  Arabians.  A 
still  more  lasting  benefit  was  conferred  on  his  king- 
dom by  his  persevering  efforts  for  the  religious 
instruction  of  the  people,  and  the  regular  adminis- 
tration of  justice.  The  reign  of  Jehoram,  the 
husband  of  Athaliah,  a  time  of  bloodshed,  idolatry, 
and  disaster,  was  cut  short  by  disease.  Ahaziah 
was  slain  by  Jehu.  Athaliah,  the  granddaughter 
of  a  Tyrian  king,  usurped  the  blood-stained  throne 
of  David,  till  the  followers  of  the  ancient  religion 
put  her  to  death,  and  crowned  Jehoash  the  sur- 
viving scion  of  the  royal  house.  His  preserver,  the 
high -priest,  acquired  prominent  personal  influence 
for  a  time ;  but  the  king  fell  into  idolatry,  and 
failing  to  withstand  the  power  of  Syria,  was  mur- 
dered by  his  own  officers.  The  vigorous  Amaziah, 
flushed  with  the  recovery  of  Edom,  provoked  a  war 
with  his  more  powerful  contemporary  Jehoash  the 
conqueror  of  the  Syrians ;  and  Jerusalem  was  en- 
tered and  plundered  by  the  Israelites:  But  then- 
energies  were  sufficiently  occupied  in  the  task  of 
completing  the  subjugation  of  Damascus.  Under 
Uzziah  and  Jotham,  Judah  long  enjoyed  political 
and  religious  prosperity  till  the  wanton  Ahaz,  sur- 
rounded by  united  enemies,  with  whom  he  was 
unable  to  cope,  became  in  an  evil  hour  the  tributary 
and  vassal  of  Tiglath-Pileser. 

(c.)  Already  in  the  fetal  grasp  of  Assyria,  Judah 
was  yet  spared  for  a  chequered  existence  of  almost 
another  century  and  a  half  after  the  termination  of 
the  kingdom  of  Israel.     The  effect  of  the  repulse 


JUDAH,   KINGDOM  OF 

of  Sennacherib,  of  the  signal  religious  revival  under 
Hezekiah  and  under  Josiah,  and  of  the  extension  of 
their  salutary  influence  over  the  long- severed  terri- 
tory of  Israel,  was  apparently  done  away  by  the 
ignominious  reign  of  the  impious  Manasseh,  and 
the  lingering  decay  of  the  whole  people  under  the 
four  feeble  descendants  of  Josiah.  Provoked  by 
their  treachery  and  imbecility,  their  Assyrian  master 
drained  in  successive  deportations  all  the  strength 
of  the  kingdom.  The  consummation  of  the  ruin 
came  upon  them  in  the  destruction  of  the  Temple 
by  the  hand  of  Nebuzaradan,  amid  the  waitings  of 
prophets,  and  the  taunts  of  heathen  tribes  released 
at  length  from  the  yoke  of  David. 

7.  The  national  life  of  the  Hebrews  seemed  now 
extinct;  but  there  was  still,  as  there  had  been  all 
along,  a  spiritual  life  hidden  within  the  body. 

It  was  a  time  of  hopeless  darkness  to  all  but 
those  Jews  who  had  strong  faith  in  Cod,  with  a 
clear  and  steady  insight  into  the  ways  of  Providence 
as  interpreted  by  prophecy.  The  time  of  the  divi- 
sion of  the  kingdoms  was  the  golden  age  of  pro- 
phecy. In  each  kingdom  the  prophetical  office  was 
subject  to  peculiar  modifications  which  were  re- 
quired in  Judah  by  the  circumstances  of  the  priest- 
hood, in  Israel  by  the  existence  of  the  House  of 
Baal  and  the  Altar  in  Bethel.  If,  under  the  shadow 
of  the  Temple,  there  was  a  depth  and  a  grasp  else- 
where unequalled,  in  the  views  of  Isaiah  and  the 
prophets  of  Judah,  if  their  writings  touched  and 
elevated  the  hearts  of  thinking  men  in  studious 
retirement  in  the  silent  night-watches  ;  there 
was  also,  in  the  few  burning  words  and  energetic 
deeds  of  the  prophets  of  Israel,  a  power  to  tame  a 
lawless  multitude  and  to  check  the  high-handed 
tyranny  and  idolatry  of  kings.  The  organiza- 
tion and  moral  influence  of  the  priesthood  were 
matured  in  the  time  of  David ;  from  about  that 
time  to  the  building  of  the  second  Temple  the  in- 
fluence of  the  prophets  rose  and  became  predomi- 
nant. Some  historians  have  suspected  that  after 
the  reign  of  Athaliah,  the  priesthood  gradually 
acquired  and  retained  excessive  and  unconstitutional 
power  in  Judah.  The  recorded  facts  scarcely  sus- 
tain the  conjecture.  Had  it  been  so,  the  effect  of 
such  power  would  have  been  manifest  in  the  exor- 
bitant wealth  and  luxury  of  the  priests,  and  in  the 
constant  and  cruel  enforcement  of  penal  laws,  like 
those  of  Asa,  against  irreligion.  But  the  peculiar 
offences  of  the  priesthood,  as  witnessed  in  the  pro- 
phetic writings,  were  of  another  kind.  Ignorance 
of  God's  word,  neglect  of  the  instruction  of  the 
laity,  untruthfulness,  and  partial  -judgments,  are 
the  offences  specially  imputed  to  them,  just  such 
as  might  be  looked  for  where  the  priesthood  is  an 
hereditary  caste  and  irresponsible,  but  neither  am- 
bitious nor  powerful.  When  the  priest  either,  as 
was  the  case  in  Israel,  abandoned  the  land,  or, 
as  in  Judah,  ceased  to  be  really  a  teacher,  ceased 
from  spiritual  communion  with  God,  ceased  from 
living  sympathy  with  man,  and  became  the  mere 
image  of  an  intercessor,  a  mechanical  performer  of 
ceremonial  duties  little  understood  or  heeded  by 
himself,  then  the  prophet  was  raised  up  to  sup- 
ply some  of  his  deficiencies,  and  to  exercise  his 
functions  so  far  as  was  necessary.  Whilst  the 
priests  sink  into  obscurity  and  almost  disappear, 

except,    from    the    genealogical    tables,    the    prophets 

come  forward  appealing  everywhere  to  tie  con- 
science of  individuals,  in  Israel  as  wonder-workers, 
calling  together  God's  chosen  few  out  of  an  idola- 
trous nation,  and  in  Judah  as  teachers  and  seers, 


JUDAS 


1159 


supporting  and  purifying  all  that  remained  of  an- 
cient piety,  explaining  each  mysterious  dispensation 
of  God  as  it  was  unfolded,  and  promulgating  his 
gracious  spiritual  promises  in  all  their  extent.  The 
part  which  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  and  other  prophets 
took  in  preparing  the  Jews  for  their  captivity,  can- 
not indeed  be  fully  appreciated  without  reviewing 
the  succeeding  efforts  of  Ezekiel  and  Daniel.  But 
the  influence  which  they  exercised  on  the  national 
mind  was  too  important  to  be  overlooked  in  a  sketch 
however  brief  of  the  history  of  the  kingdom  of 
Judah.  [W.  T.  B.] 

JU'DAS  {'lovSas),  the  Greek  form  of  the 
Hebrew  name  Judah,  occurring  in  the  LXX. 
and  N.  T.     [Judah.] 

1.  1  Esd.  ix.  23.     [Judah,  3.] 

2.  The  third  son  of  Mattathias,  "  called  Macca- 
baeus"  (1  Mace.  ii.  4).     [Maccabees.] 

3.  The  son  of  Calphi  (Alphaeus),  a  Jewish  ge- 
neral under  Jonathan  (1  Mace.  xi.  70). 

4.  A  Jew  occupying  a  conspicuous  position  at 
Jerusalem  at  the  time  of  the  mission  to  Aristobulus 
[Aristobulus]  and  the  Egyptian  Jews  (2  Mace, 
i.  10).  He  has  been  identified  with  an  Essene, 
conspicuous  for  his  prophetic  gifts  (Jos.  Ant.  xiii. 
11,  2  ;  B.J.  i.  3,  5)  ;  and  with  Judas  Maccabaeus 
(Grimm  ad  foe).  Some  again  suppose  that  he  is  a 
person  otherwise  unknown. 

5.  A  son  of  Simon,  and  brother  of  Joannes 
Hyrcanus  (1  Mace.  xvi.  2),  murdered  by  Ptolemaeus 
the  usurper,  either  at  the  same  time  (c.  135  B.C.), 
with  his  father  (I  Mace.  xvi.  15  ff.),  or  shortly 
afterwards  (Jos.  Ant.  xiii.  8,  1 :  cf.  Grimm,  ad  Mace. 
I.  c). 

6.  Thepatriarch  Judah  (Matt.  i.  2, 3).  [B.  F.  W.] 

7.  A  man  residing  at  Damascus,  in  "  the  street 
which  is  called  .Straight,"  in  whose  house  Saul 
of  Tarsus  lodged  after  his  miraculous  conversion 
(Acts  ix.  11).  The  "Straight  Street"  may  be 
with  little  question  identified  with  the  "  Street  of 
Bazaars,"  a  long,  wide  thoroughfare,  penetrating 
from  the  southern  gate  into  the  heart  of  the  city 
which,  as  in  all  the  Syro-Greek  and  Syro-Roman 
towns,  it  intersects  in  a  straight  line.  The  so-called 
"  House  of  Judas"  is  still  shown  in  an  open  space 
called  "the  Sheykh's  Place,"  a  few  steps  out  of  the 
"  Street  of  Bazaars : "  it  contains  a  square  room  with 
a  stone  floor,  partly  walled  off  tor  a  tomb,  shown 
to  Maundrell  {Early  Trav.  Bohn,  494)  as  the 
"  tomb  of  Ananias."  The  house  is  an  object  of  re- 
ligious respect  to  Mussulmans  as  well  as  Christians 
(Stanley,  S.  #  P.  412 ;  Conyb.  and  Hows.  i.  102  ; 
Maundrell,  /.  c;  Pococke,  ii.  1 19.  [E.  V.] 

JU'DAS,      SURNAMED      BAR'SABAS 

ClovSas  6  i-jriKaAoiifxevos  Bapcra/ias  :  Judas  <jni 
cognominabatwr  Barsabas),  a  leading  member  of 
the  Apostolic  church  at  Jerusalem  (avr/p  riyov- 
fiivos  iv  tols  aZe\<pois),  Acts  xv.  22,  and  "  per- 
haps a  member  of  the  Presbytery"  (Xeander,   PI. 

c)-  Tr.  i.  123),  endued  with  the  gift  of  prophecy 

(ver.  32),  chosen  with  Silas  to  accompany  St.  Paul 
and  St.  Barnabas  as  delegates  to  the  church  at 
Antioch,  to  make  known  the  decree  concerning  the 
terms  of  admission  of  the  Gentile  converts,  and  to 
accredit  their  commission  and  character  by  personal 
communications  (ver.  27).  After  employing  their 
prophetical  gifts  for  the  confirmation  of  the  Syrian 
Christians  in  the  faith.  Judas  went  back  to  Jeru- 
salem, while  Silas  either  remained  at  Antioch  |  for 
the  reading  Acts  xv.  34  is  uncertain;  and  while 
some   MSS.,    followed    by    the   Vulgate,  add  /x6vos 


1160 


JUDAS 


'lovSas  8e  iitopivQ-t),  the  bust  omit  the  verse  alto- 
gether) or  speedily  returned  thither.  Nothing  fur- 
ther is  recorded  of  Judas. 

The  form  of  the  name  Barsabas  =  Son  of  Sabas, 
has  led  to  several  conjectures:  Wolf  and  Grotius 
probably  enough  suppose  him  to  have  been  a 
brother  of  Joseph  Barsabas  (Acts  i.  23);  while 
Schott  {Tsagog.  §103,  p.  431)  takes  Sabas  or  Zabas 
to  be  an  abbreviated  form  of  Zebedee,  regards  Judas 
as  an  elder  brother  of  James  and  John,  and  attri- 
butes to  him  the  "  Epistle  of  Jude."  Augusti,  on 
the  other  hand  {Die  Katholisch.  Briefe,  Lemgo, 
1801-8,  ii.  86),  advances  the  opinion,  though  with 
considerable  hesitation,  that  he  may  be  identical 
with  the  Apostle  'lovSas  'laKibfiov.  [E.  V.] 

JU'DAS  OF  GALILEE  ('lovSas  6  Ta\t- 
\a7os :  Judas  Galilaeus),  the  leader  of  a  popular 
revolt  "  in  the  days  of  the  taxing  "  (i.  e.  the  census, 
under  the  prefecture  of  P.  Sulp.  Quirinus,  a.d.  6, 
A.  u.  C.  759),  referred  to  by  Gamaliel  in  his  speech 
before  the  Sanhedrim  (Acts  v.  37).  According  to 
Josephus  {Ant.  xviii.  1,  §1),  Judas  wasa  Gaulonite 
of  the  city  of  Gamala,  probably  taking  his  name  of 
Galilaean  from  his  insurrection  having  had  its  rise  in 
Galilee.  His  revolt  had  a  theocratic  character,  the 
watchword  of  which  was  "  We  have  no  Lord  nor 
master  but  God,"  and  he  boldly  denounced  the  pay- 
ment of  tribute  to  Caesar,  and  all  acknowledgment 
of  any  foreign  authority,  as  treason  against  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  Mosaic  constitution,  and  signifying 
nothing  short  of  downright  slavery.  His  fiery  elo- 
quence and  the  popularity  of  his  doctrines  drew  vast 
numbers  to  his  standard,  by  many  of  whom  he  was 
regarded  as  the  Messiah  (  Orig.  Horm.il.  in  Luc.  xxv.), 
and  the  country  was  for  a  time  entirely  given  over 
to  the  lawless  depredations  of  the  fierce  and  licen- 
tious throng  who  had  joined  themselves  to  him  ;  but 
the  might  of  Rome  proved  irresistible :  Judas  him- 
self perished,  and  his  followers  were  "  dispersed," 
though  not  entirely  destroyed  till  the  final  over- 
throw of  the  city  and  nation. 

With  his  fellow  insurgent  Sadoc,  a  Pharisee, 
Judas  is  represented  by  Josephus  as  the  founder  of 
a  fourth  sect,  in  addition  to  the  Pharisees,  Sad- 
ducees,  and  Essenes  {Ant.  xviii.  1.  §1,  6;  B.  J. 
ii.  8,  §1).  The  only  point  which  appears  to  have 
distinguished  his  followers  from  the  Pharisees  was 
their  stubborn  love  of  freedom,  leading  them  to 
despise  torments,  or  death  for  themselves  or  their 
friends,  rather  than  call  any  man  master. 

The  Gaulonites,  as  his  followers  were  called, 
may  be  regarded  as  the  doctrinal  ancestors  of  the 
Zealots  and  Sicarii  of  later  days,  and  to  the  in- 
fluence of  his  tenets  Josephus  attributes  all  subse- 
quent insurrections  of  the  Jews,  and  the  final  de- 
struction of  the  City  and  Temple.  James  and 
John,  the  sons  of  Judas,  headed  an  unsuccessful 
insurrection  in  the  procuratorship  of  Tiberius 
Alexander,  a.d.  47,  by  whom  they  were  taken 
prisoners  and  crucified.  Twenty  years  later,  A.D, 
66,  their  younger  brother  Menahem,  following  his 
father's  example,  took  the  lead  of  a  band  of  des- 
peradoes, who,  after  pillaging  the  armoury  of 
Herod  in  the  fortress  of  Masada,  near  the  "  gardens 
of  Engaddi,"  marched  to  Jerusalem,  occupied  the 
city,  and  after  a  desperate  siege  took  the  palace, 
where  he  immediately  assumed  the  state  of  a  king, 
and  committed  great  enormities.  As  he  was  going 
up  to  the  Temple  to  worship,  with  great  pomp, 
Menahem  was  taken  by  the  partisans  of  Eleazar 
the  high-priest,  by  whom  he  was  tortured  and  put 
to  death  Aug.  15,  a.d.  litf  (Milman,  Hist,  of  Jews, 


JUDAS 

ii.  152,  231  ;  Joseph".  I.  c. ;  Orig.  in  Matt.  T.  xvii. 
§25).  [E.  V.] 

JU'DAS  ISCARIOT  {'lovSas  'lo-KapiArris  : 

Judas  Iscariotes).  He  is  sometimes  called  "  the 
son  of  Simon"  (John  vi.  71,  xiii.  2,  26),  but  more 
commonly  (the  three  Synoptic  Gospels  give  no  other 
name),  Iscariotes  (Matt.  x.  4  ;  Mark  iii.  19  ;  Luke 
vi.  16,  et  al.).  In  the  three  lists  of  the  Twelve 
there  is  added  in  each  case  the  fact  that  he  was  the 
betrayer. 

The  name  Iscariot  has  received  many  interpreta- 
tions more  or  less  conjectural. 

(1)  From  Kerioth  (Josh.  xv.  25),  in  the  tribe  of 
Judah,  the  Heb.  nVlp  £"K,  ISH  K'pjoth,  passing 
into  'ItTKopiwTTjs  in  the  same  way  as  21D  fcJ^N — 
Ish  Tob,  a  man  of  Tob — appears  in  Josephus  {Ant. 
vii.  6,  §1)  as  'Icrrufios  (Winer,  Bicb.  s.  v.). 
In  connexion  with  this  explanation  may  be  noticed 
the  reading  of  some  MSS.  in  John  vi.  71,  euro 
Kapiwrov,  and  that  received  by  Laehmann  and 
Tischendorf,  which  makes  the  name  Iscariot  belong 
to  Simon,  and  not,  as  elsewhere,  to  Judas  only.  On 
this  hypothesis  his  position,  among  the  Twelve, 
the  rest  of  whom  belonged  to  Galilee  (Acts  ii.  7), 
would  be  exceptional  ;  and  this  has  led  to 

(2)  From  Kartha  in  Galilee  (Kartan,  A.  V., 
Josh.  xxi.  32  ;  Ewald,  Gesch.  Israels,  v.  p.  321). 

(3)  As  equivalent  to  '\aaxapiaTr\s  (Grotius  on 
Matt.  x.  4;  Hermann,  Miscell.  Groning.  iii.  598, 
in  Winer,  i?ie&.). 

(4)  From  the  date-trees  (fcapiam'Ses)  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem  or  Jericho  (Bartolocci, 
Bibl.  Rabbin,  iii.  10,  in  Winer.  1.  c.  •  Gill,  Comm- 
on Matt.  x.  4. 

(5)  From  N^llpDN*  (  =  SCORTEA,  Gill,  I.e.)— 
a  leathern  apron,  the  name  being  applied  to  him  as 
the  bearer  of  the  bag,  and  =  Judas  with  the  apron 
(Lightfoot,  Hor.  Heb.  in  Matt.  x.  4). 

(6)  From  X13DN,  ascara  =  strangling  (an- 
gina), as  given  after  his  death,  and  commemorating 
it  (Lightfoot,  I.e.),  or  indicating  that  he  had  been 
subject  to  a  disease  tending  to  suffocation  previously 
(Heinsius  in  Suicer.  Thes.  s.  v.  'lovSas).  This  is 
mentioned  also  as  a  meaning  of  the  name  by  Ori- 
gen,  Tract,  in  Matt.  xxxv. 

Of  the  life  of  Judas,  before  the  appearance  of  his 
name  in  the  lists  of  the  Apostles,  we  know  abso- 
lutely nothing.  It  must  be  left  to  the  sad  vision  of 
a  poet  (Keble,  Lyra  Innocentium,  ii.  13)  or  the  fan- 
tastic fables  of  an  apocryphal  Gospel  (Thilo,  Cod. 
Apoc.  N.  T.  Evang.  Infant,  c.  35)  to  portray 
the  infancy  and  youth  of  the  traitor.  What  that 
appearance  implies,  however,  is  that  he  had  pre- 
viously declared  himself  a  disciple.  He  was  drawn, 
as  the  others  were,  by  the  preaching  of  the  Baptist, 
or  his  own  Messianic  hopes,  or  the  "gracious 
words"  of  the  new  teacher,  to  leave  his  former  life, 
and  to  obey  the  call  of  the  Prophet  of  Nazareth. 
What  baser  and  more  selfish  motives  may  have 
mingled  even  then,  with  his  faith  and  zeal,  we  can 
only  judge  by  reasoning  backward  from  the  sequel. 
Gifts  of  some  kind  there  must  have  been,  rendering 
the  choice  of  such  a  man  not  strange  to  others,  not 
unfit  in  itself,  and  the  function  which  he  exer- 
cised afterwards  among  the  Twelve  may  indicate 
what  they  were.  The  position  of  his  name,  uni- 
formly the  last  in  the  lists  of  the  Apostles  in  the 
Synoptic  Gospels,  is  due,  it  may  be  imagined,  to 
the  infamy  which  afterwards  rested  on  his  name, 
but,  prior  to  that  guilt,  it  would  seem  that  he 
took  his  place  in  the  group  of  four  which  always 


JUDAS  ISCAKIOT 

stand  last  in  order,  as  if  possessing  neither  the  love, 
nor  the  faith,  nor  the  devotion  which  marked  the 
sons  of  Zebedee  and  Jonah. 

The  choice  was  not  made,  we  must  remember, 
without  a  prevision  of  its  issue.  "  Jesus  knew 
from  the  beginning  ....  who  should  betray 
Him"  (John  vi.  64);  and  the  distinctness  with 
which  that  Evangelist  records  the  successive  stages 
of  the  guilt  of  Judas,  and  his  Master's  discernment 
of.it  (John  xii.  4,  xiii.  2,  27),  leaves  with  us  the 
impression  that  he  too  shrank  instinctively  (Bengel 
describes  it  as  "  singularis  antipathia,"  Gnomon 
N.  T.  on  John  vi.  64)  from  a  nature  so  opposite 
to  his  own.  We  can  hardly  expect  to  solve  the 
question  why  such  a  man  was  chosen  for  such  an 
office.  Either  we  must  assume  absolute  fore- 
knowledge, and  then  content  ourselves  with  saying 
with  Calvin  that  the  judgments  of  God  are  as  a 
great  deep,  and  with  Ullmann  (Siindlosiijk.  Jesu, 
p.  97)  that  he  was  chosen  that  the  Divine  pur- 
pose might  be  accomplished  through  him  ;  or  else 
with  Neander  {Leben  Jcsu,  §77)  that  there  was 
a  discernment  of  the  latent  germs  of  evil,  such  as 
belonged  to  the  Son  of  Man,  in  his  insight  into  the 
hearts  of  men  (John  ii.  25 ;  Matt.  ix.  4 ;  Mark 
xii.  15),  yet  not  such  as  to  exclude  emotions  of 
sudden  sorrow  or  anger  (Mark  iii.  5),  or  astonish- 
ment (Mark  vi.  6;  Luke  vii.  9),  admitting  the 
thought  "  with  men  this  is  impossible,  but  not  with 
God."  Did  He  in  the  depth  of  that  insight,  and  in 
the  fulness  of  His  compassion,  seek  to  overcome  the 
evil  which,  if  not  conquered,  would  be  so  fatal? 
It  gives,  at  any  rate,  a  new  meaning  and  force  to 
many  parts  of  our  Lord's  teaching  to  remember 
that  they  must  have  been  spoken  in  the  hearing  of 
Judas,  and  may  have  been  designed  to  make  him 
conscious  of  his  danger.  The  warnings  as  to  the 
impossibility  of  a  service  divided  between  God  and 
Mammon  (Matt.  vi.  19-34),  and  the  destructive 
power  of  the  "  cares  of  this  world,  and  the  deceit- 
fulness  of  riches  "  (Matt.  xiii.  22,  23),  the  pointed 
words  that  spoke  of  the  guilt  of  unfaithfulness  in 
the  "  unrighteous  Mammon"  (Luke  xvi.  11),  the 
proverb  of  the  camel  passing  through  the  needle's 
eye  (Mark  x.  25)  must  have  fallen  on  his  heart  as 
meant  specially  for  him.  He  was  among  those 
who  asked  the  question,  Who  then  can  be  saved  ? 
(Mark  x.  26).  Of  him,  too,  we  may  say,  that, 
when  he  sinned,  he  was  "  kicking  against  the 
pricks,"  letting  slip  his  "  calling  and  election," 
frustrating  the  purpose  of  his  Master,  in  giving  him 
so  high  a  work,  and  educating  him  for  it  (comp. 
Chrysost.  Horn,  on  Utatt.  xxvi.  xxvii.,  John  vi.). 

'flu'  germs  (see  Stier's  Words  of  Jesus,  infra)  of 
the  evil,  in  air  likelihood,  unfolded  themselves 
gradually.  The  rules  to  which  the  Twelve  were 
subject  in  their  first  journey  (Matt.  x.  9,  lni  shel- 
tered him  from  the  temptation  that  would  have 
been  most  dangerous  to  him.  The  new  form  of 
life,  of  which  we  find  the  first  traces  in  Luke  viii. 
3,  brought  that  temptation  with  it.  As  soon  as  the 
Twelve  were  recognised  as  a  body,  travelling  hither 
ami  thither  with  their  Master,  receiving  money  and 
other  offerings,  and  redistributing  what  they  re- 
ceived tu  the  poor,  it  became  necessary  that  some 
one  should  act  as  the  steward  and  almoner  of  the 
small  society,  and  this  fell  to  Judas  (John  xii.  (i, 
xiii.  '_".i!,  either,  as  having  flu1  gifts  that  qualified 
him  for  it,  or,  as  we  may  conjecture,  from  his  cha- 
racter,  because  he  sought  it,  or,  as  some  have 
imagined,  in  rotation  from  time  to  time.  The 
Galilaean  or  Judaean  peasant  (we  have  no  reason 


JUDAS  ISCARIOT 


1161 


for  thinking  that  his  station  differed  from  that  of 
the  other  Apostles)  found  himself  entrusted  with 
larger  sums  of  money  than  before  (the  three  hundred 
denarii  of  John  xii.  5,  are  spoken  of  as  a  sum  which 
he  might  reasonably  have  expected),  and  with  this 
there  came  covetousness,  unfaithfulness,  embezzle- 
ment. It  was  impossible  after  this  that  he  could 
feel  at  ease  with  One  who  asserted  so  clearly  and 
sharply  the  laws  of  faithfulness,  duty,  unselfishness ; 
and  the  words  of  Jesus,  "  Have  I  not  chosen  you 
Twelve,  and  one  of  you  is  a  devil  ?"  (John  vi.  70), 
indicate  that  even  then,"  though  the  greed  of  imme- 
diate, or  the  hope  of  larger  gain,  kept  him  from 
"  going  back,"  as  others  did  (John  vi.  66),  hatred 
was  taking  the  place  of  love,  and  leading  him  on  to 
a  fiendish  malignity. 

In  what  way  that  evil  was  rebuked,  what 
discipline  was  applied  to  counteract  it,  has  been 
hinted  at  above.  The  scene  at  Bethany  (John  xii. 
1-9  ;  Matt.  xxvi.  6-13  ;  Mark  xiv.  3-9)  showed 
how  deeply  the  canker  had  eaten  into  his  soul. 
The  warm  out-pouring  of  love  calls  forth  no  sym- 
pathy. He  utters  himself,  and  suggests  to  others, 
the  complaint  that  it  is  a  waste.  Under  the  plea 
of  caring  for  the  poor  he  covers  his  own  miserable 
theft. 

The  narrative  of  Matt,  xxvi.,  Mark  xiv.  places 
this  history  in  close  connexion  (apparently  in  order 
of  time)  with  the  fact  of  the  betrayal.  It  leaves 
the  motives  of  the  betrayer  to  conjecture  (comp. 
Neander,  Leben  Jesu,  §264).  The  mere  love  of 
money  may  have  been  strong  enough  to  make  him 
clutch  at  the  bribe  offered  him.  He  came,  it  may 
be,  expecting  more  (Matt,  xxvii.  15)  ;  he  will  take 
that.  He  has  lost  the  chance  of  dealing  with  the 
three  hundred  denarii ;  it  will  be  something  to  get 
the  thirty  shekels  as  his  own.  It  may  have  been 
that  he  felt  that  his  Master  saw  through  his  hidden 
guilt,  and  that  he  hastened  on  a  crisis  to  avoid  the 
shame  of  open  detection.  Mingled  with  this  there 
may  have  been  some  feeling  of  vindictiveness,  a 
vague,  confused  desire  to  show  that  he  had  power 
to  stop  the  career  of  the  teacher  who  had  reproved 
him.  Had  the  words  that  spoke  of  "  the  burial  " 
of  Jesus,  and  the  lukewarmness  of  the  people,  and 
the  conspiracies  of  the  priests  led  him  at  last  to  see 
that  the  Messianic  kingdom  was  not  as  the  king- 
doms of  this  world,  and  that  his  dream  of  power 
and  wealth  to  be  enjoyed  in  it  was  a  delusion  ? 
(Ewald,  Gesch.  Israels,  v.  p.  441-446.)  There 
may  have  been  the  thought  that,  after  all,  the 
betrayal  could  do  no  harm,  that  his  Master  would 
prove  his  innocence,  or  by  some  supernatural  mani- 
festation effect  his  escape  (Lightfoat,  Hor.  Heb. 
p.  886,  in  Winer,  and  Whitby  on  Matt,  xxvii.  4). 
Another  motive  has  been  suggested  (comp.  Neander, 
Leben  Jesu,  I.  c. ;  and  Whately,  Essays  •■a  Dangers 
to  Christian  Faith,  discourse  iii.)  of  an  entirely 
different  kind,  altering  altogether  the  character  of 
the  act.  Not  the  love  <it'  money,  nor  revenge,  nor 
fear,  nor  disappointment,  bul  policy,  a  subtle  plan 
to  force  on  the  hour  of  the  triumph  of  tin1  Messianic 
m,  tin-  belief  that,  lor  this  service  he  would 
receive  as  high  a  place  as  Peter,  <>v  James,  or  John  ; 
this  it  was  that  made  him  the  traitor.  It'  he  could 
place  his  Master  in  a  position,  from  which  retreat 
would  be  impossible,  where  In-  would  he  compelled 
to  throw  himself  on  file  people,  and  he  raised   by 


a  Awful  as  the  words  wcrr,  however,  we  must 
remember  that  like  \*>rds  yere  spoken  of  and  tq 
Peter  'Matt.  xvi.  23). 

4  F 


1162 


JUDAS  ISCAEIOT 


them  to  the  throne  of  His  father  David,  then  he 
might  look  forward  to  being  foremost  and  highest 
in  that  kingdom,  with  all  his  desires  for  wealth  and 
power  gratified  to  the  full.  Ingenious  as  this 
hypothesis  is,  it  fails  for  that  very  reason.b  It  attri- 
butes to  the  Galilaean  peasant  a  subtlety  in  fore- 
easting  political  combinations,  and  planning  strata- 
gems accordingly,  which  is  hardly  compatible  with 
his  character  and  learning,  hardly  consistent  either 
with  the  pettiness  of  the  faults  into  which  he  had 
hitherto  fallen.  Of  the  other  motives  that  have 
been  assigned  we  need  not  care  to  fix  on  any  one,  as 
that  which  singly  led  him  on.  Crime  is  for  the 
most  part  the  result  of  a  hundred  motives  rushing 
with  bewildering  fury  through  the  mind  of  the 
criminal. 

During  the  days  that  intervened  between  the 
supper  at  Bethany  and  the  Paschal  or  quasi-Paschal 
gathering,  he  appeared  to  have  concealed  his 
treachery.  He  went  with  the  other  disciples  to 
and  fro  from  Bethany  to  Jerusalem,  and  looked  on 
the  acted  parable  of  the  barren  and  condemned  tree 
(Mark  xi.  20-24),  and  shared  the  vigils  in  Geth- 
semane  (John  xviii.  2).  At  the  Last  Supper  he  is 
present,  looking  forward  to  the  consummation  of 
his  guilt  as  drawing  nearer  every  hour.  All  is  at 
first  as  if  he  were  still  faithful.  He  is  admitted  to 
the  feast.  His  feet  are  washed,  and  for  him  there 
are  the  fearful  words,  "  Ye  are  clean,  but  not  all." 
He,  it  may  be,  receives  the  bread  and  the  wine 
which  were  the  pledges  of  the  new  covenant.0 
Then  come  the  sorrowful  words  which  showed  him 
that  his  design  was  known.  "  One  of  you  shall 
betray  me."  Others  ask,  in  their  sorrow  and  con- 
fusion, "  Is  it  I  ?"  He  too  must  ask  the  same  ques- 
tion, lest  he  should  seem  guilty  (Matt.  xxvi.  25): 
He  alone  hears  the  answer.  John  only,  and  through 
him  Peter,  and  the  traitor  himself,  understand  the 
meaning  of  the  act  which  pointed  out  that  he  was 
the  guilty  one  (John  xiii.  26).d  After  this  there 
comes  on  him  that  paroxysm  and  insanity  of  guilt  as 
of  one  whose  human  soul  was  possessed  by  the  Spirit 
of  Evil — '■'  Satan  entered  into  him  "  (John  xiii.  27). 
The  words,  "  What  thou  doest,  do  quickly,"  come  as 
a  spur  to  drive  him  on.  The  other  disciples  see  in 
them  only  a  command  which  they  interpret  as  con- 
nected with  the  work  he  had  hitherto  undertaken. 
Then  he  completes  the  sin  from  which  even  those 
words  might  have  drawn  him  back.  He  knows 
that  garden  in  which  his  Master  and  his  com- 
panions had  so  often  rested  after  the  weary  work 
of  the  day.     He  comes,  accompanied  by  a  band  of 


JUDAS  ISCAEIOT 

officers  and  servants  (John  xviii.  3),  with  the  kiss 
which  was  probably  the  usual  salutation  of  the  dis- 
ciples. The  words  of  Jesus,  calm  and  gentle  as 
they  were,  showed  that  this  was  what  embittered 
the  treachery,  and  made  the  suffering  it  inflicted 
more  acute  (Luke  xxii.  48). 

What  followed  in  the  confusion  of  that  night  the 
Gospels  do  not  record.  Not  many  students  of  the 
N.  T.  will  follow  Heumann  and  Archbp.  Whately 
{Essays  on  Dangers,  I.  e.)  in  the  hypothesis  that 
Judas  was  "  the  other  disciple"  that  was  known  to 
the  high-priest,  and  brought  Peter  in  (comp.  Meyer 
on  John  xviii.  15).  It  is  probable  enough,  indeed, 
that  he  who  had  gone  out  with  the  high-priest's 
officers  should  return  with  them  to  wait  the  issue 
of  the  trial.  Then,  when  it  was  over,  came  the 
re-action.  The  fever  of  the  crime  passed  away. 
There  came  back  on  him  the  recollection  of  the 
sinless  righteousness  of  the  Master  he  had  wronged 
(Matt,  xxvii.  3).  He  repented,  and  his  guilt  and 
all  that  had  tempted  him  to  it  became  hateful.0' 
He  will  get  rid  of  the  accursed  thing,  will  transfer 
it  back  again  to  those  who  with  it  had  lured  him  on 
to  destruction.  They  mock  and  sneer  at  the  tool 
whom  they  have  used,  and  then  there  comes  over 
him  the  horror  of  great  darkness  that  precedes  self- 
murder.  He  has  owned  his  sin  with  "  an  exceeding 
bitter  cry,"  but  he  dares  not  turn,  with  any  hope 
of  pardon,  to  the  Master  whom  he  has  betrayed. 
He  hurls  the  money,  which  the  priests  refused  to 
take,  into  the  sanctuary  (vaos)  where  they  were 
assembled.  For  him  there  is  no  longer  sacrifice  or 
propitiation/  He  is  "  the  son  of  perdition"  (John 
xvii.  12).  "  He  departed  and  went  and  hanged 
himself"  (Matt,  xxvii.  5).  He  went  "  unto  his 
own  place" s  (Acts  i.  25). 

We  have  in  Acts  i.  another  account  of  the  cir- 
cumstances of  his  death,  which  it  is  not  easy  to 
harmonise  with  that  given  by  St.  Matthew.  There, 
in  words  which  may  have  been  spoken  by  St.  Peter 
(Meyer,  following  the  general  consensus  of  inter- 
preters), or  may  have  been  a  parenthetical  notice 
inserted  by  St.  Luke  (Calvin,  Olshausen,  and  others), 
it  is  stated — 

(1)  That,  instead  of  throwing  the  money  into 
the  temple,  he  bought  (£kt71o-o.to)  a  field  with  it. 

(2)  That,  instead  of  hanging  himself,  "  falling 
headlong,  he  burst  asunder  in  the  midst,  and  all 
his  bowels  gushed  out." 

(3)  That  for  this  reason,  and  not  because  the 
priests  had  bought  it  with  the  price  of  blood,  the 
field  was  called  Aceldama. 


b  Comp.  the  remarks  on  this  hypothesis,  in  which 
Whately  followed  (unconsciously  perhaps)  in  the 
footsteps  of  Faulus,  in  Ersch  u.  Gruber's  AUgem. 
Encycl.  art.  "  Judas." 

c  The  question  whether  Judas  was  a  partaker  of  the 
Lord's  Supper  is  encompassed  with  many  difficulties, 
both  dogmatic  and  harmonistic.  The  general  con- 
sensus of  patristic  commentators  gives  an  affirmative, 
that  of  modern  critics  a  negative  answer.  (Comp. 
Meyer,  Comm.  on  John,  xiii.  36.) 

d  The  combination  of  the  narratives  of  the  four 
Gospels  is  not  without  grave  difficulties,  for  which 
harmonists  and  commentators  may  be  consulted.  We 
have  given  that  which  seems  the  most  probable  result. 

e  This  passage  has  often  been  appealed  to,  as 
illustrating  the  difference  between  ixera(j.e\ela  and 
ixnavoLa.  It  is  questionable,  however,  how  far  the 
N.  T.  writers  recognise  that  distinction  (comp.  Grotius 
in  loc).  Still  more  questionable  is  the  notion  above- 
referred  to,  that  St.  Matthew  describes  his  disappoint- 


ment at  a  result  so  different  from  that  which  he  had 
reckoned  on. 

f  It  is  characteristic  of  the  wide,  far-reaching  sym- 
pathy of  Origen,  that  he  suggests  another  motive  for 
the  suicide  of  Judas.  Despairing  of  pardon  in  this  life, 
he  would  rush  on  into  the  world  of  the  dead,  and  there 
(yvfu'rj  Tfj  tyvxv)  meet  his  Lord,  and  confess  his  guilt 
and  ask  for  pardon  {Tract,  in  Matt.  xxxv. :  comp.  also 
•Theophanes,i7om.  xxvii.,  in  Suicer,  Thes.  s.  v.  ToiiSas). 

s  The  words  iSios  tojtos  in  St.  Peter's  speech  con- 
vey to  our  minds,  probably  were  meant  to  convey  to 
those  who  heard  them,  the  impression  of  some  dark 
region  in  Gehenna.  Lightfoot  and  Gill  [in  loc.)  quote 
passages  from  Rabbinical  writers  who  find  that  mean- 
ing in  the  phrase,  even  in  Gen.  xxxi.  55,  and  Num. 
xxiv.  25.  On  the  other  hand  it  should  be  remem- 
bered that  many  interpreters  reject  that  explanation 
(comp.  Meyer,  in  loc),  and  that  one  great  Anglican 
divine  (Hammond,  Comment,  on  N.  T.  in  loc.)  enters 
a  distinct  protest  against  it. 


JUDAS  ISCARIOT 

•  It  is,  of  course,  easy  to  cut  the  knot,  as  Strauss 
ami  I>e  Wette  have  done,  by  assuming  one  or  both 
accounts  to  be  spurious  and  legendary.  Receiving 
both  as  authentic,  we  are  yet  led  to  the  conclusion 
that  the  explanation  is  to  be  found  in  some  un- 
known series  of  facts,  of  which  we  have  but  two 
fragmentary  narratives.  The  solutions  that  have 
been  suggested  by  <ommentators  and  harmonists 
are  nothing  more  than  exercises  of  ingenuity  seeking 
to  dovetail  into  each  other  portions  of  a  dissected 
map  which,  for  want  of  missing  pieces,  do  not  fit. 
Such  as  they  are,  it  may  be  worth  while  to  state 
the  chief  of  them. 

As  to  (1)  it  has  been  said  that  there  is  a  kind 
of  irony  in  St.  Peter's  words,  "  This  was  all  he 
got."  That  which  was  bought  with  his  money  is 
spoken  of  as  bought  by  him  (Meyer  in  foe). 

As  to  (2)  we  have  the  explanations — 

(a)  That  cbrrj-ylixTo,  in  Matt,  xxvii.  5,  includes 
death  by  some  sudden  spasm  of  suffocation  (angina 
pectoris  !),  such  as  might  be  caused  by  the  over- 
powering misery  of  his  remorse,  and  that  then  came 
the  fall  described  in  the  Acts  (Suicer,  Thes.  s.  v. 
airdyxw,  Grotius,  Hammond,  Lightfoot,  and  others). 
By  some  this  has  even  been  connected  with  the 
name  Iscariot,  as  implying  a  constitutional  tendency 
to  this  disease  (Gill). 

(b)  That  the  work  of  suicide  was  but  half- 
accomplished,  and  that,  the  halter  breaking,  he  fell 
(from  a  fig-tree,  in  one  tradition)  across  the  road, 
and  was  mangled  and  crushed  by  the  carts  and 
waggons  that  passed  over  him.  This  explanation 
appears,  with  strange  and  horrible  exaggerations,  in 
the  narrative  of  Papias,  quoted  by  Oecumenius  on 
Acts  L,  and  in  Theophylact.  on  Matt,  xxvii. 

As  to  (3)  we  have  to  choose  between  the 
alternatives — 

(a)  That  there  were  two  Aceldamas.  [Acel- 
dama.] 

(6)  That  the  potter's  field  which  the  priests  had 
bought  was  the  same  as  that  in  which  the  traitor 
met  so  terrible  a  death. 

The  life  of  Judas  has  been  represented  here  in 
the  only  light  in  which  it  is  possible  for  us  to  look 
on  it,  as  a  human  life,  and  therefore  as  one  of 
temptation,  struggle,  freedom,  responsibility.  If 
another  mode  of  speaking  of  it  appears  in  the  N.  T. ; 
if  words  are  used  which  imply  that  all  happened 
as  it  had  been  decreed;  that  the  guilt  and  the 
misery  were  parts  of  a  Divine  plan  (John  vi.  64, 
xiii.  IS;  Acts  i.  16),  we  must  yet  rernember  that 
this  is  no  single,  exceptional  instance.  All  human 
actions  are  dealt  with  in  the  same  way.  They 
appear  at  one  moment  separate,  free,  uncontrolled; 
at  another  tiny  are  links  in  a  long  chain  of  causes 
and  effects,  the  beginning  and  the  end  of  which  are 
in  the  "  thick  darkness  where  God  is,"  or  deter- 
mined by  an  inexorable  necessity.  No  adherence 
to  a  philosophical  system  frees  men  altogether  from 
inconsistency  in  their  language.  Jn  proportion  as 
their  minds  are  religious,  and  not  philosophical,  the 
transitions  from  one  to  the  other  will  be  frequent, 
abrupt,  and  startling. 

With  the  exception  of  the  stories  already  men- 
tioned, there  are  but  few  traditions  that  gather 
round  the  name  of.  Judas,  it  appears,  however,  in 
a  strange,  hardly  intelligible  way  in  the  history  of 
the  wilder  heresies  «t'  the  second  century.  The 
sect  of  Cainites,  consistent  in  their  inversion  of  all 
that  Christians  in  general  believed,  was  reported  to 
have  honoured  him  as  the  only  A  postle  that  was 


JUDE,  OR  JUDAS 


1163 


in  possession  of  the  true  gnosis,  to  have  made 
him  the  object  of  their  worship,  and  to  have  had  a 
Gospel  bearing  his  name  (comp.  Neander,  Church 
History,  ii.  153,  Eng.  transl. ;  Iren.  ado.  Haer.  i. 
35;  Tertull.  de  l'raesc.  c.  47).  For  the  general 
literature  connected  with  this  subject,  especially 
for  monographs  on  the  motive  of  Judas  and  the 
manner  of  his  death,  see  Winer,  Rich.  For  a 
full  treatment  of  the  questions  of  the  relation  in  . 
which  his  guilt  stood  to  the  life  of  Ghrist,  comp. 
Stier's  Words  of  the  Lord  Jeans,  on  the  passages 
where  Judas  is  mentioned,  and  in  particular  vol. 
vii.  pp.  40-67,  Eng.  transl.  [E.  H.  P.] 

JUDE,  or  JU'DAS,  LEBBE'US  and 
THADDE'US  ('IouSas  'laKtbfiov:  Judas  Ja- 
cobi:  A.  V.  "Judas  the  brother  of  James"),  one 
of  the  Twelve  Apostles  ;  a  member,  together  with 
his  namesake  "  Iscariot,"  James  the  son  of  Al- 
phaeus,  and  Simon  Zelotes,  of  the  last  of  the  three 
sections  of  the  Apostolic  body.  The  name  Judas 
only,  without  any  distinguishing  mark,  occurs  in 
the  lists  given  by  St.  Luke  vi.  16;  Acts  i.  13; 
and  in  John  xiv.  22  (where  we  find  "  Judas  not 
Iscariot"  among  the  Apostles),  but  the  Apostle 
has  been  generally  identified  with  "  Lebbeus  whose 
surname  was  Thaddeus  "  (AsfSficuos  6  eVt/cArjOels 
0a55a?os),  Matt.  x.  3  ;  Mark  iii.  18,  though 
Schleiermacher  (Crit.  Essay  on  St.  Luke,  p.  93) 
treats  with  scorn  any  such  attempt  to  reconcile 
the  lists.  In  both  the  last  quoted  places  there 
is  considerable  variety  of  reading ;  some  MSS. 
having  both  in  St.  Matt,  and  St.  Mark  Aef}/lcuos, 
or  QaSSaios  alone  ;  others  introducing  the  name 
'lovdus  or  Judas  Zelotes  in  St.  Matt.,  where 
the  Vulgate  reads  Thaddaeus  alone,  which  is 
adopted  by  Lachmann  in  his  Berlin  edition  of 
1832.  This  confusion  is  still  further  increased 
by  the  tradition  preserved  by  Eusebius  (H.  E.  i. 
13)  that  the  true  name  of  Thomas  (the  twin)  was 
Judas  ('IouSas  6  koX  @a>/j.as),  and  that  Thaddeus 
was  one  of  the  "  Seventy,"  identified  by  Jerome  in 
Matt.x.  with  "Judas  Jacobi "  [Thaddeus]  ;  as 
well  as  by  the  theories  of  modern  scholars,  who 
regard  the  "  Levi "  (Aeuis  6  rod  'A\(patov)  of 
Mark  ii.  14;  Luke  v.  27,  who  is  called  "Lebes" 
(Ae/Sr/s)  by  Origen  (Cont.  Cels.  1.  i.  §62),  as 
the  same  with  Lebbaeus.  The  safest  way  out  of 
these  acknowledged  difficulties  is  to  hold  fast  to  the 
ordinarily  received  opinion  that  Jude,  Lebbaeus, 
and  Thaddaeus,  were  three  names  for  the  same 
Apostle,  who  is  therefore  said  by  Jerome  (in 
Matt,  x.)  to  have  been  "  trionimus,''  rather  than 
introduce  confusion  into  the  Apostolic  catalogues, 
and  render  them  erroneous  either  in  excess  or 
defect. 

The  interpretation  of  the  names  Lebbaeus  and 
Thaddaeus  is  a  question  besef  with  almost  equal 
difficulty.     The  former  is  interpreted  by  Jerome 

"hearty,"  corcnhun,  as  from  37,  cor,  and  Thad- 
daeus has  been  erroneously  supposed  to  have  a  cog- 
nate signification,  homo  pectorosus,  as  from  the  Sy- 
riac  *in,  pectus  (Lightfoot,  War.  Heb.  p.  235, 
Bengel ;  Matt,  x.  3),  the  true  signification  of  1F1 
heinu  imtmma  (Angl.  teat),  Bu'xtorf,  Lex.  '/'-'/in. 
2565.  Winer  (Jiwb.  s.  v.)  would  combine  the 
two  and  interpret  them  as  meaning  Herzei 
Another   interpretation   of    Lebbaeus  is  the 

-:  as  from  N*27,  leo   (Schleusner, 
S.  v.),  while  Lightfoot  and  Baumg.  Cms.   would 

4  F  2 


1164 


<JUDE,  OR -JUDAS 


derive  it  from  Lebba,  a  maritime  town  of  Galilee 
mentioned  by  Pliny  (Hist.  Nat.  v.  19),  where, 
however,  the  ordinary  reading  is  Jebba.  Thad- 
daeus  appeal's  in  Syriac  under  the  form  Adai,  and 
Michaelis  admits  the  idea  that  Adai,  Thaddaeus, 
and  Judas,  may  be  different  representations  of  the 
same  word  (iv.  370),  and  Wordsworth  (Gr.  Test. 
in  Matt.  x.  3)  identities  Thaddaeus  with  Judas,  as 

'both  from  mill,  "to   praise."     Chrysostom,  De 

Prod.  Jud.  1.  i.  c.  2,  says  that  there  was  a  "  Judas 
Zelotes  "  among  the  disciples  of  our  Lord,  whom  he 
identities  with  the  Apostle.  In  the  midst  of  these 
uncertainties  no  decision  can  be  arrived  at,  and  all 
must  rest  on  conjecture.  ' 

Much  difference  of  opinion  has  also  existed  from 
the  earliest  times  as  to  the  right  interpretation  of  the 
words  'lovSas  'laKcvfiov.  The  generally  received 
opinion  is  that  there  is  an  ellipse  of  the  word 
a5e\cp6s,  and  that  the  A.  V.  is  right  in  translating 
"  Judas  the  brother  of  James."  This  is  defended 
by  Winer  (Rwb.  s.  v. ;  Gramm  of  N.  T.  Diet., 
Clark's  edition,  i.  203),  Arnaud  [Recher.  Crit.  sur 
FEp.  de  Jude),  and  accepted  by  Burton,  Alford, 
Tregelles,  Michaelis,  &c.  This  view  has  received 
strength  from  the  belief  that  the  "  Epistle  of 
Jude,''  the  author  of  which  expressly  calls  himself 
"  brother  of  James,"  was  the  work  of  this  Apostle. 
But  if,  as  will  be  seen  hereafter,  the  arguments  in 
favour  of  a  non-apostolic  origin  for  this  Epistle  are 
such  as  to  lead  us  to  assign  it  to  another  author,  the 
mode  of  supplying  the  ellipse  may  be  considered 
independently  ;  and  since  the  dependent  genitive 
almost  universally  implies  the  filial  relation,  and  is 
so  interpreted  in  every  other  case  in  the  Apostolic 
catalogues,  we  may  be  allowed  to  follow  the 
Peshito  and  Arabic  versions,  the  Benedictine  editor 
of  Chrysostom,  Horn.  XXXII.,  in  Matt.  x.  2,  and 
the  translation  of  Luther,  as  well  as  nearly  all  the 
most  eminent  critical  authorities,  and  render  the 
words  "Judas  the  son  of  James,"  that  is,  either 
"  James  the  son  of  Alphaeus,"  with  whom  he 
is  coupled  Matt.  x.  3,  or  some  otherwise  unknown 
person. 

The  name  of  Jude  only  occurs  once  in  the  Gospel 
narrative  (John  xiv.  22),  where  we  find  him  taking 
part  in  the  last  conversation  with  our  Lord,  and 
sharing  the  low  temporal  views  of  Mieir  Master's 
kingdom,  entertained  by  his  brother  Apostles. 

Nothing  is  certainly  known '  of  the  later  history 
of  the  Apostle.  There  may  be  some  truth  in  the 
tradition  which  connects  him  with  the  foundation  of 
the  church  at  Edessa ;  though  here  again  there  is 
much  confusion,  and  doubt  is  .thrown  over  the  ac- 
count by  its  connexion  with  the  worthless  fiction  of 
"  Abgarus  king  of  Edessa"  (Euseb.  H.  E.  i.  13; 
Jerome,  Comment  in  Matt,  x.)  [Thaddaeus]. 
Nicephorus  (H.  E.  ii.  40)  makes  Jude  die  a  natural 
death  in  that  city  after  preaching  in  Palestine, 
Syria,  and  Arabia.  The  Syrian  tradition  speaks  of 
his  abode  at  Edessa,  but  adds  that  he  went  thence 
to  Assyria,  and  was  martyred  in  Phoenicia  on  his 
return ;  while  that  of  the  west  makes  Persia  the 
field  of  his  labours  and  the  scene  of  his  martyrdom. 

The  tradition  preserved  by  Hegesippus,  which 
appears  in  Ensebius,  relative  to  the  descendants 
of  Jude,  has  reference,  in  our  opinion,  to  a  differ- 
ent Jude.     See  next  article.  [E.  V.] 

JUDAS,  THE  LORD'S  BROTHER. 
Among  the  brethren  of  our  Lord  mentioned  by  the 
people  of  Nazareth  (Matt.  xiii.  55  ;  Mark  vi.  3) 
occurs  a  "  Judas,"  who  lias  been  sometimes  identi- 


JUDE,  EPISTLE  OF 

fied  with  the  Apostle  of  the  same  name;  a  theory 
which  rests  on  the  double  assumption  that  'IouSa? 
'laKuifiov  (Luke  vi.  16)  is  to  be  rendered  "Judas 
the  brother  of  James,"  and  that N"  the  sons  of 
Alphaeus  "  were  "  the  brethren  of  our  Lord,"  and 
is  sufficiently  refuted  by  the  statement  of  St.  John 
vii.  5,  that  "  not  even  his  brethren  believed  on 
Him."  It  has  been  considered  with  more  pro- 
bability that  he  was  the  writer  of  the  Epistle 
which  bears  the  name  of  "  Jude  the  brother  of 
James,"  to  which  the  Syriac  version  incorporated 
with  the  later  editions  of  the  Peshito  adds  "and  of 
Joses "  (Origen  in  Matt.  xiii.  55 ;  Clem.  Alex. 
Adumb.  6;  Alford,  Gk.  Test.,  Matt.  xiii.  55). 
[Jude,  Epistle  of  ;  James.] 

Eusebius  gives  us  an  interesting  tradition  of  He- 
gesippus (H.  E.  iii.  20,  32)  that  two  grandsons  of 
Jude,  "  who  according  to  the  flesh  was  called  the 
Lord's  brother"  (cf.  1  Cor.  ix.  5),  were  seized  and 
carried  to  Rome  by  orders  of  Domitian,  whose  appre- 
hensions had  been  excited  by  what  he  had  heard  of 
the  mighty  power  of  the  kingdom  of  Christ ;  but  that 
the  Emperor  having  discovered  by  their  answers  to 
his  inquiries,  and  the  appearance  of  their  hands, 
that  they  were  poor  men,  supporting  themselves  by 
their  labour,  and  having  learnt  the  spiritual  nature 
of  Christ's  kingdom,  dismissed  them  in  contempt, 
and  ceased  from  his  persecution  of  the  church, 
whereupon  they  returned  to  Palestine  and  took  a 
leading  place  in  the  churches,  "  as  being  at  the 
same  time  confessors  and  of  the  Lord's  family  " 
( uis  av  Sri  fxaprvpas  dfiov  Kal  dirb  yiveos  ovras 
rov  Kvpiov),  and  lived  till  the  time  of  Trajan. 
Nicephorus  (i.  23)  tells  us  that  Jude's  wife  was 
named  Mary.  [E.  V.] 

JUDE,  EPISTLE  OF.     I.  Its  authorship.— 

The  writer  of  this  Epistle  styles  himself,  ver.  I, 
;'  Jude  the  brother  of  James  "  (aSe\(pbs  'laKufiov), 
and  has  been  usually  identified  with  the  Apostle 
Judas  Lebbaeus  or  Thaddaeus,  called  by  St.  Luke,  vi. 
10,  'lovSas  'lauccfiov,  A.  V.  "  Judas  the  brother  of 
James."  It  has  been  seen  above  [Judas  Leb- 
baeus] that  this  mode  of  supplying  the  ellipse, 
though  not  directly  contrary  to  the  Usus  loquendi, 
is,  to  say  the  least,  questionable,  and  that  there  are 
strong  reasous  for  rendering  the  words  "  Judas  the 
son  of  James:"  and  inasmuch  as  the  author  appears, 
ver.  17,  to  distinguish  himself  from  the  Apostles, 
and  bases  his  warning  rather  on  their  authority  than 
on  his  own,,  we  may  agree  with  eminent  critics  in 
attributing  the  Epistle  to  another  author.  Jerome, 
Tertullian,  and  Origen,  among  the  ancients,  and 
Calmet,  Calvin,  Hammond,  Hanlein,  Lange,  Ya- 
tablus,  Arnaud,  and  Tregelles,  among  the  moderns, 
agree  in  assigning  it  to  the  Apostle.  Whether  it 
were  the  work  of  an  Apostle  or  not,  it  has  from 
very  early  times  been  attributed  to  "  the  Lord's 
brother"  of  that  name  (Matt.  xiii.  55  ;  Mark  vi.  .">)  : 
a  view  in  which  Origen,  Jerome,  and  (if  indeed  the 
Adumbrationes  be  rightly  assigned  to  him)  Clemens 
Alexandrinus  agree;  which  is  implied  in  the  words 
of  Chrysostom  (Horn.  48  in  Joan.),  confirmed  by 
the  epigraph  of  the  Syriac  versions,  and  is  accepted 
by  most  modern  commentators,  Arnaud,  Ben  gel, 
Burton,  Hug,  Jessien,  Olshausen,  Tregelles,  &c. 
The  objection  .that  has  been  felt  by  Neander  (PI. 
and  Tr.  i.  392),  and  others,  that  if  he  had  been 
"  the  Lord's  brother "  lie  would  have  directly 
styled  himself  so,  and  not  merely  "the  brother  of 
James,"  has  been  anticipated  by  the  author  of  the 
"  Adumbrationes'*  (Bunsen,  Analect.  Ante-Nicaen. 
i.  330),  who  says,    "  Jude,  who  wrote  the  Catholic 


JUDE,  EPISTLE  OF 

Epistle;  brother  of  the  sons  of  Joseph,  an  extremely 
religious  man,  though  he  was  aware  of  his  relation- 
ship to  the  Lord,  did  not  call  himself  His  brother  ; 
but  what  said  he?  '  Jude  the  servant  of  Jesus 
Christ'  as  his  Lord,  but  'brother  of  James.'" 
We  may  easily  believe  that  it  was  through  hu- 
mility, and  a  true  sense  of  the  altered  relations 
between  them,  and  Him  who  had  been  "  de- 
clared to  be  the  Son  of  God  with  power  .... 
by  the  resurrection  from  the  dead "  (cf.  2  Coi\ 
v.  16),  that  both  St.  Jude  and  St.  James  forbore  to 
-•all  themselves  the  brethren  of  Jesus.  The  argu- 
ments concerning  the  authorship  of  the  Epistle  are 
ably  summed  up  by  Jessien  (de  Authent.  Ep.  Jud. 
Lips.  1821),  and  Arnaud  (Seeker.  Critiq.  sur  I'Ep. 
ilc  Jitde,  Strasb.  1851,  translated  Brit,  and  For. 
Ev.  Rev,  Jul.  1859)  ;  and  though  it  is  by  no  means 
clear  of  difficulty,  the  most  probable  conclusion 
is  that  the  author  was  Jude,  one  of  the  brethren  of 
Jesus,  and  brother  of  James,  not  the  Apostle  the 
son  of  Alphaeus,  but  the  Bishop  of  Jerusalem,  of 
whose  dignity  and  authority  in  the  Church  he 
avails  himself  to  introduce  his  Epistle  to  his  readers. 

II.  Genuineness  and  canonicity. — Although  the 
Epistle  of  Jude  is  one  of  the  so  called  Antilego- 
mena,  and  its  canonicity  was  questioned  in  the 
earliest  ages  of  the  Church,  there  never  was  any 
doubt  of  its  genuineness  among  those  by  whom  it 
was  known.  It  was  too  unimportant  to  be  a 
forgery  ;  few  portions  of  Holy  Scripture  could,  with 
reverence  be  it  spoken,  have  been  more  easily  spared  ; 
and  the  question  was  never  whether  it  was  the 
work  of  an  impostor,  but  whether  its  author  was  of 
sufficient  weight  to  warrant  its  admission  into  the 
Canon. 

This  question  was  gradually  decided  in  its  favour, 
and  the  more  widely  it  was  known  the  more  gener- 
ally was  it  received  as  canonical,  until  it  took  its 
place  without  further  dispute  as  a  portion  of  the 
volume  of  Holy  Scripture. 

The  state  of  the  case  as  regards  its  reception  by 
the  Church  is  briefly  as  follows : 

It  is  wanting  in  the  Peshito  (which  of  itself 
proves  that  the  supposed  Evangelist  of  Edessa  could 
not  have  been  its  author),  nor  is  there  any  trace  of 
its  use  by  the  Asiatic  Churches  up  to  the  com- 
mencement  of  the  4th  century;  but  it  is  quoted 
as  Apostolic  by  Ephrem  Syrus  ((>/>p.  %>'.  i.  p. 
1 36). 

The  earliest  notice  of  the  Epistle  is  in  the  famous 
Muratorian  Fragment  (circa  A.r>.  170)  where  we 
read  "  Epistola  sane  Judae  et  superscript]  Johannis 
duae  in  Catholica,"  (Bunsen,  Analect.  Ante--Nic.  i. 
l.v_',  reads  "  Catholicis")  "  habentur." 

Clement  of*Alexandria  is  the  first  father  of  the 
Church  by  whom  it  is  recognised  (Paedag.  1.  iii. 
r.  s,  ]..  259,  Ed.  Sylburg.;  Stromat.  1.  iii.  c  '_',  p. 
431,  Adumbr.  I.  <'■)■  Eusebius  also  informs  us 
( //.  /:'.  vi.  14)  that  it  was  among  the  books  of 
Canonical  Scripture,  of  which  explanations  were 
given  in  tlie  Rypotyposes  of  Clement;  and  Cassio- 
dorus  ( l'.unsen,  Analect.  Ante-Nic*  i.  330^333) 
gives  some  notes  on  this  Epistle  drawn  from  the 
itirce. 

Origen  refers  to  it  expressly  as  the  work  of  the 
Lord's  brother  {Comment,  in  Matt.  -\iii.  55,56, 
t.  x.  §17;:  "Jude  wrote  an  Epistle  of  bui  lew 
verses,  vet  filled  with  vigorous  words  bf  heavenly 
grace."  He  quotes  it  several  times  i  Homil.  in 
Gen.  \iii. ;  in  Josu.  vii. ;  in  Ezech.  iv.;  Com- 
ment, in  Matt.  t.  xiii.  27,  xv.  '_'7.  wii.  30;  in 
Joann.  t.  xiii.  §37  :  in  Horn.  I.  iii.  §6,  v.  §1  ;  /><• 


JUDE,  EPISTLE  OF 


1165 


Princip.  1.  iii.  c.  2,  §1),  though  he  implies  in  one 
place  the  existence  of  doubts  as  to  its  canonicity, 
"  if  indeed  the  Epistle  of  Jude  be  received  "  {Com- 
ment, in  Matt.  xxii.  23,  t.  xvii.  §30). 

Eusebius  (H.  E.  iii.  25)  distinctly  classes  it 
with  the  Antilegomena,  which  were  nevertheless 
recognised  by  the  majority  of  Christians ;  and 
asserts  (ii.  23)  that  in  common  with  the  Epistle  of 
James,  it  was  "deemed  spurious"  (voOevercu), 
though  together  with  the  other  Catholic  Epistles 
publicly  read  in  most  churches. 

Of  the  Latin  Fathers,  Tertullian  once  expressly 
cites  this  Epistle  as  the  work  of  an  Apostle  (de 
Hah.  Mulieb.  i.  3),  as  does  Jerome,  "  from  whom 
(Enoch)  the  Apostle  Jude  in  his  Epistle  has 
given  a  quotation"  (in  Tit.  c.  i.  p.  708),  though 
cu  the  other  hand  he  informs  us  that  in  con- 
sequence of  the  quotation  from  this  apocryphal 
book  of  Enoch  it  is  rejected  by  most,  adding,  that 
"  it  has  obtained  such  authority  from  antiquity 
and  use,  that  it  rs  now  reckoned  among  Holy 
Scripture"  (Catal.  Scriptor.  Eccles.).  He  refers 
to  it  as  the  work  of  an  Apostle  (Epist.  ad 
Paulin.  iii.). 

The  Epistle  is  also  quoted  by  Malchian,  a  pres- 
byter of  Antioch,  in  a  letter  to  the  bishops  of  Alex- 
andria and  Rome  (Euseb.  //.  E.  vii.  30),  and  by 
Palladius,  the  friend  of  Chrysostom  (Chrys.  Opp. 
t.  xiii.,  Dial.  cc.  18,  20),  and  is  contained  in  the 
Laodicene  (a.d.  363),  Carthaginian  (397),  and  so- 
called  Apostolic  Catalogues,  as  well  as  in  those 
emanating  from  the  churches  of  the  East  and  West, 
with  the  exception  of  the  Synopsis  of  Chrysostom, 
and  those  of  Cassiodorus  and  Ebed  Jesu. 

Various  reasons  might  be  assigned  for  delay  in 
receiving  this  Epistle,  and  the  doubts  long  prevalent 
respecting  it.  The  uncertainty  as  to  its  author, 
and  his  standing  in  the  Church  ;  the  unimportant, 
nature  of  its  contents,  and  their  almost  absolute 
identity  with  2  Pet.  ii. ;  and  the  supposed  quotation 
of  apocryphal  books  ;•  would  all  tend  to  create  a 
prejudice  against  it,  which  could  be  only  overcome 
by  time,  and  the  gradual  recognition  by  the  leading 
churches  of  its  genuineness  and  canonicity. 

At  the  Reformation  the  doubts  on  the  canonical 
authority  of  this  Epistle  were  revived,  and  have 
been  shared  in  by  modern  commentators.  They 
were  more  or  less  entertained  by  Grotius,  Luther, 
Calvin,  Bergen,  Bolten,  Dahl,  Michaelis,  and  the 
Magdeburg  Centuriators.  It  has  been  ably  defended 
by  Jessien,  de  Autkerdia  Ep.  Judae,  hips.  1831. 

III.  Time  and  place  of  xoriting. — Here  all  is 
conjecture.  The  author  being  not  absolutely  cer- 
tain, there  are  no  external  grounds  for  deciding  the 
point;  and  the  internal  evidence  is  but  small.  The 
question  of  its  date  is  connected  with  that  of  its 
relation  to  2  Peter  (see  below,  §vi.),  and  an  earlier 
or  later  period  has  been  assigned  to  it  according  as 
it  has  been  considered  to  have  been  ant.  rior  or  pos- 
terior to  that  Epistle.  From  the  character  of  the 
errors  against  which  it  is  directed,  it  cannot  be 
placed  \erv  early;  though  there  is  no  sufficient 
ground  for  Schleiermacher's  opinion  that  "  in  the 
last  time"  'iv  errY.aT&>  XP<W*  ver-  ,s-  ''''■ 
1  John  ii.  is,  fVxottj  &pa  6<tti),  forbids  our 
placing  it  in  the  Apostolic  age  at  all.  Lardnei 
plai  e  ii  between  \.i>.  6  1  and  66,  Dai  idson 
a.i'.  70,  Credner  \.i>.  80)  Calmet,  Estius,  Witsius, 
and  Neander,  afti  r  the  death  of  all  the  \\»  sties 
but  John,  and  perhaps  alter  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  ; 
although  considerable  weigh!   is.1  en  to  the 

i     at  of  De  Wette  '  /.,  V.  T.  p 


1166 


JUDE,  EPISTLE  OF 


that  if  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  had  already 
taken  place,  some  warning  would  have  been  drawn 
from  so  signal  an  instance  of  God's  vengeance  on 
the  "  ungodly." 

There  are  no  data  from  which  to  determine  the 
place  of  writing.  Burton,  however,  is  of  opinion 
that  inasmuch  as  the  descendants  of  "  Judas  the 
brother  of  the  Lord,"  if  we  identify  him  with  the 
author  of  the  Epistle,  were  found  in  Palestine,  he 
probably  "  did  not  absent  himself  long  from  his 
native  country,"  and  that  the  Epistle  was  published 
there,  since  he  styles  himself  "  the  brother  of 
James,"  "  an  expression  most  likely  to  be  used  in 
a  country  where  James  was  well  known"  {Eccles. 
Hist.  i.  334). 

IV.  For  tehat  readers  designed. — The  readers 
are  nowhere  expressly  defined.  The  address  (ver.  1) 
is  applicable  to  Christians  generally,  and  there  %is 
nothing  in  the  body  of  the  Epistle  to  limit  its 
reference ;  and  though  it  is  not  improbable  that  the 
author. had  a  particular  portion  of  the  church  in 
view,  and  that  the  Christians  of  Palestine  were  the 
immediate  objects  of  his  warning,  the  dangers  de- 
scribed were  such  as  the  whole  Christian  world 
was  exposed  to,  and  the  adversaries  the  same  which 

'  had  everywhere  to  be  guarded  against. 

V.  Its  object,  contents,  and  style. — The  object 
of  the  Epistle  is  plainly  enough  announced,  ver.  3: 
"  it  was  needful  for  me  to  write  unto  you  and  ex- 
hort you  that  ye  should  earnestly  contend  for  the 
faith  that  was  once  delivered  unto  the  saints : " 
the  reason  for  this  exhortation  is  given  ver.  4,  in 
the  stealthy  introduction  of  certain  "  ungodly  men, 
turning  the  grace  of  our  God  into  lasciviousness, 
and  denying  the  only  Lord  God  and  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ."  The  remainder  of  the  Epistle  is 
almost  entirely  occupied  by  a  minute  depiction 
of  these  adversaries  of  the  .faith — not  heretical 
teachers  (as  has  been  sometimes  supposed),  which 
constitutes  a  marked  distinction  between  this 
Epistle  and  that  of  St.  Peter — whom  in  a  torrent 
of  impassioned  invective  he  describes  as  stained 
with  unnatural  lusts,  like  "  the  angels  that  kept 
not  their  first  estate"  (whom  he  evidently  iden- 
tifies with  the  "  sons  of  God,"  Gen.  vi.  2),  and 
the  inhabitants  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  —  are 
despisers  of  all  legitimate  authority  (ver.  8) — mur- 
derers like  Cain — covetous  like  Balaam — rebellious 
like  Korah  (ver.  11) — destined  from  of  old  to  be 
signal  monuments  of  the  Divine  vengeance,  which 
he  confirms  hy  reference  to»  a  prophecy  current 
among  the  Jews,  and  traditionally  assigned  to 
Enoch  (ver.  14,  15). 

The  Epistle  closes  hy  hriefly  reminding  the 
readers  of  the  oft-repeated  prediction  of  the  Apostles 
— among  whom  the  writer  seems  not  to  rank  him- 
self— that  the  faith  would  be  assailed  by  such 
enemies  as  he  has  depicted  (ver.  17-19),  exhorting 
them  to  maintain  their  own  steadfastness  in  the 
faith  (ver.  20,  21),  while  they  earnestly  sought  to 
rescaie  others  from  the  corrupt  example  of  those 
licentious  livers  (ver.  22,  23),  and  commending 
them  to  the  power  of  God  in  language  which 
forcibly  recalls  the  closing  benediction  of  the  Epistle 
to  the  Romans  (ver.  24,  25;  cf.  Rom.  xvi.  25-27). 

This  Epistle  presents  one  peculiarity,  which,  as 
we  learn  from  St.  Jerome,  caused  its  authority  to 
be  impugned  in  very  early  times — the  supposed 
citation  of  apocryphal  writings  (ver.  9,  14,  15). 

The  former  of  these  passages,  containing  the 
reference  to  the  contest  of  the  archangel  Michael 
and   the  devil  "  about  the   body  of  Moses,"   was 


JUDE,  EPTSTLE  OF 

supposed  by  Origen  to  have  been  founded  on  a 
Jewish  work  called  the  "  Assumption  of  Moses " 
( '  AraA^vJ/is  Ma>cre'a>s),  quoted  also  by  Oecumenius 
(ii.  629).  Origen's  words  are  express,  "which 
little  work  the  Apostle  Jude  has  made  mention  of 
in  his  Epistle"  (de  Princip.  iii.  2,  i.  p.- 138); 
and  some  have  sought  to  identify  the  book 
with  the   H^'O  JTVEQ,  "  The  death  of  Moses," 

which  is,  however,  proved  by  Michaelis  (iv.  382)  to 
be  a  modern  composition.  Attempts  have  also  been 
made  by  Lardner,  Macknight,  Vitringa,  and  others, 
to  interpret  the  passage  in  a  mystical  sense,  by 
reference  to  Zech.  iii.  1,  2;  hut  the  similarity 
is  too  distant  to  afford  any  weight  to  the  idea. 
There  is,  on  the  whole,  little  question  that  the 
writer  is  here  making  use  of  a  Jewish  tradition, 
based  on  Deut.  xxxiv.  6,  just  as  facts  unrecorded 
in  Scripture  are  referred  to  by  St.  Paul  (2  Tim.  iii. 
8  ;  Gal.  iii.  19) ;  by  the  writer  of  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  (ii.  2,  xi.  24) ;  by  St.  James  (v.  17), 
and  St.  Stephen  (Acts  vii.  22,  23,  30). 

As  regards  the  supposed  quotation  from  the 
Book  of  Enoch,  the  question  is  not  so  clear  whether 
St.  Jude  is  making  a  citation  from  a  work  already 
in  the  hands  of  his  readers — which  is  the  opinion 
of  Jerome  (/.  c.)  and  Tertullian  (who  was  in  con- 
sequence inclined  to  receive  the  Book  of  Enoch  as 
canonical  Scripture),  and  has  been  held  by  many 
modern  critics — or  is  employing  a  traditionary 
prophecy  not  at  that  time  committed  to  writing 
(a  theory  which  the  words  used,  "  Enoch  prophesied 
saying"  ^irf)o<pr)T(v(r€v  .  .  .  'F,vu>x  Aeywi',  seem 
rather  to  favour),  but  afterwards  embodied  in  the 
apocryphal  work  already  named  [Enoch,  the 
Book  of].  This  is  maintained  by  Tregelles  (Sortie's 
Introd.  10th  ed.,  iv.  621),  find  has  been  held  by 
Cave,  Hofmann  (Schriftbeweis,  i.  420),  Lightfoot 
(ii.  117),  YVitsius,  and  Calvin  (cf.  Jerom.  Comment, 
in  Eph.  c.  v.  p.  647,  8  ;  in  Tit.  c.  1,  p.  70S). 

The  main  hody  of  the  Epistle  is  well  charac- 
terised by  Alford  (Gk.  Test.  iv.  147)  as  an  im- 
passioned invective,  in  the  impetuous  whirlwind 
of  which  the  writer  is  hurried  along,  collecting 
example  after  example  of  Divine  vengeance  on  the 
ungodly;  heaping  epithet  upon  epithet,  and  piling 
image  upon  image,  and  as  it  were  labouring  for 
words  and  images  strong  enough  to  depict  the 
polluted  character  of  the  licentious  apostates  against 
whom  he  is  warning  the  church;  returning  again 
and  again  to  the  subject,  as  though  all  language 
was  insufficient  to  give  an  adequate  idea  of  their 
profligacy,  and  to  express  his  burning  hatred  of 
their  perversion  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Gospel. 

The  Epistle  is  said  by  De  Wette  (Einleit.  in  N.  T. 
p.  300)  to  be  tolerably  good  Greek,  though  there  are 
some  peculiarities  of  diction  which  have  led  Schmid 
{Einleit.  i.  314)  and  Bertholdt  (vi.  3194)  to  ima- 
gine an  Aramaic  original. 

VI.  Relation  between  the  Epistles  of  Jude  and 
2  Peter. — It  is  familiar  to  all  that  the  larger  por- 
tion of  this  Epistle  (ver.  3-16)  is  almost  identical 
in  language  and  subject  with  a  part  of  the  Second 
Epistle  of  Peter  (2  Pet.  ii.  1-19).  In  both  the 
heretical  enemies  of  the  Gospel  are  described  in 
terms  so  similar  as  to  preclude  all  idea  of  entire 
independence.  This  question  is  examined  in  the 
article  Peter,  Second  Epistle  of. 

As  might  be  expected  from  the  comparatively 
unimportant  character  of  the  Epistle,  critical  and 
exegetical  editions  of  it  have  not  been  numerous. 
We    may   specify   Arnaud,   Becherches    Grit,    sur 


JUDGES 

FEpUre  de  Judc,  Strasb.  and  Par.  1851;  Laur- 
mann,  Not.  Grit,  et  Commentar.  in  Ep.  Jud., 
Groningae,  1818;  Scharling,  Jacob,  et  Jud.  Ep. 
Cathol.  comment.,  Havniae,  1841  ;  Stier,  On  the 
Epistles  of  James  and  Jiide ;  Herder,  Brief e 
zweencr  Briider  Jcsu,  Lemgo,  1775 ;  Augusti, 
Welcker,  Benson,  and  Macknight,  on  the  Catholic 
Epistles.  [E.  V.] 

JUDGES.  The  administration  of  justice  in  all 
early  Eastern  nations,  as  amongst  the  Arabs  of  the 
desert  to  this  day,  rests  with  the  patriarchal  se- 
niors ;a  the  judges  being  the  heads  of  tribes,  or  of 
chief  houses  in  a  tribe.  Such  from  their  elevated 
position  would  have  the  requisite  leisure,  would  be 
able  to  make  their  decisions  respected,  and  through 
the  wider  intercourse  of  superior  station  would 
decide  with  fuller  experience  and  riper  reflection. 
Thus  in  the  book  of  Job  (xxix.  7,  8,  9)  the  patri- 
archal magnate  is  represented  as  going  forth  "  to 
the  gate "  amidst  the  respectful  silence  of  elders, 
princes,  and  nobles  (comp.  xxxii.  9).  The  actual 
chiefs  of  individual  tribes  are  mentioned  on  various 
occasions,  one  as  late  as  the  time  of  David,  as  pre- 
serving importance  in  the  commonwealth  (Num. 
vii.  2,  10,  11,  xvii.  6,  or  17  in  Heb.  text;  xxxiv. 
18  ;  Josh.  xxii.  14;  so  perh.  Num.  xvi.  2,  xxi.  18). 
Whether  the  princes  of  the  tribes  mentioned  in 
1  Chr.  xxvii.  16,  xxviii.  1,  are  patriarchal  heads, 
or  merely  chief  men  appointed  by  the  king  to 
govern,  is  not  strictly  certain ;  but  it  would  be 
foreign  to  all  ancient  Eastern  analogy  to  suppose 
that  they  forfeited  the  judicial  prerogative,  until 
reduced  and  overshadowed  by  the  monarchy,  which 
in  David's  time  is  contrary  to  the  tenor  of  history. 
During  the  oppression  of  Egypt  the  nascent  people 
would  necessarily  have  few  questions  at  law  to 
plead ;  and  the  Egyptian  magistrate  would  take 
cognizance  of  theft,  violence,  and  other  matters  of 
police.  Yet  the  question  put  to  Moses  shows  that 
"  a  prince  "  and  "  a  judge  "  were  connected  even 
then  in  the  popular  idea  (Ex.  ii.  14;  comp.  Num. 
xvi,  13).  When  they  emerged  from  this  oppres- 
sion into  national  existence,  the  want  of  a  machinery 
of  judicature  began  to  press.  The  patriarchal  se- 
niors did  not  instantly  assume  the  function,  having 
probably  been  depressed  by  bondage  till  rendered 
unfit  for  it,  not  having  become  experienced  in  such 
matters,  nor  having  secured  the  confidence  of  their 
tribesmen.  Perhaps  for  these  reasons  Moses  at 
first  took  the  whole  burden  of  judicature  upon  him- 
self, then  at  the  suggestion  of  Jethro  (Ex.  xviii. 
14-24)  instituted  judges  over  numerically  gra- 
duated sections  of  the  people.  These  were  chosen 
for  their  moral  fitness,  but  from  Dent.  i.  l.">,  It;, 
we  may  inter  that  they  were  taken  from  amongst 
those  to  whom  primogeniture  would  have  assigned 
it.  Save  in  offences  of  public  magnitude,  criminal 
cases  do  not  appear  to  have  been  distinguished  from 
civil.  The  duty  of  teaching  the  people  the  know- 
of  the  law  which  pertained  to  the  Levites, 
doubtless  included  such  instruction  as  would  assist, 
•the  judgment  of  those  who  were  thus  to  lecide 
according  to  it.  The  Levites  were  thus  the  ulti- 
mate sources  of  ordinary  jurisprudence,  and  perhaps 
the  "teaching"  aforesaid  may  merely  mean  the 
expounding  the  law  as  applicable  to  difficult  cases 
arising  in  practice.  Beyond  this,  it  is  not  possible 
to  indicate  any  division  of  the  provinces  of  deciding 
on    pciuts   ot    law    as   distinct   from   points  ot    <  ict. 


JUDGES 


1167 


1  The  expression   2X"JV3  N^'J   (Num.  xxv.  14; 
i  narkable,  and  seems  to  mean  the  patriarchal 


The  judges  mentioned  as  standing  before  Joshua  in 
the  great  assemblies  of  the  people  must  be  under- 
stood as  the  successors  to  those  chosen  by  Moses, 
and  had  doubtless  been  elected  with  Joshua's  sanc- 
tion from  among  the  same  general  class  of  patri- 
archal seniors  (Josh.  iv.  2,  4,  xxii.  14,  xxiv.  1). 

The  judge  was  reckoned  a  sacred  person,  and 
secured  even  from  verbal  injuries.  Seeking  a  deci- 
sion at  law  is  called  "  enquiring  of  God "  (Ex. 
xviii.  15).  The  term  "gods"  is  actually  applied 
to  judges  (Ex.  x*i.  6;  comp.  Ps.  lxxxii.  1,  G).  The 
judge  was  told,  "thou  shalt  not  be  afraid  of  the 
face  of  men,  for  the  judgment  is  God's  ;"  and  thus 
whilst  human  instrumentality  was  indispensable, 
the  source  of  justice  was  upheld  as  divine,  and  the 
purity  of  its  administration  only  sank  with  the 
decline  of  religious  feeling,  in  this  spirit  speaks 
Ps.  lxxxii., — a  lofty  charge  addressed  to  all  who 
judge ;  comp.  the  qualities  regarded  as  essential  at 
the  institution  of  the  office,  Ex.  xviii.  21,  and  the 
strict  admonition  of  Deut.  xvi.  18-20.  But  besides 
the  sacred  dignity  thus  given  to  the  only  royal 
function,  which,  under  the  Theocracy,  lay  in  human 
hands,  it  was  made  popular  by  being  vested  in  those 
who  led  public  feeling,  and  its  importance  in  the 
public  eye  appears  from  such  passages  as  Ps.  lxix. 
12  (comp.  cxix.  23),  lxxxii.,  cxlviii.  1 1  ;  Prov.  viii. 
15,  xxxi.  4,  5,  23.  There  could  have  been  no  con- 
siderable need  for  the  legal  studies  and  expositions 
of  the  Levites  during  the  wanderings  in  the  wilder- 
ness while  Moses  was  alive  to  solve  all  questions, 
and  while  the  law  which  they  were  to  expound 
was  not  wholly  delivered.  The  Levites,  too,  had  a 
charge  of  cattle  to  look  after  in  that  wilderness 
like  the  rest,  and  seem  to  have  acted  also,  being 
Moses'  own  tribe,  as  supports  to  his  executive  au- 
thority. But  then  few  of  the  greater  entanglements 
of  property  could  arise  before  the  people  were 
settled  in  their  possession  of  Canaan.  Thus  they 
were  disciplined  in  smaller  matters,  and  under 
Moses'  own  eye,  for  greater  ones.  When,  however, 
the  commandment,  "  judges  and  officers  shalt  thou 
make  thee  in  all  thy  gates"  (Dent.  xvi.  18),  came 
to  be  fulfilled  in  Canaan,  there  were  the  following 
sources  from  which  those  officials  might  be  sup- 
plied:— 1st,  the  ex  officio  judges,  or  their  succes- 
sors, as  chosen  by  Moses;  2ndly,  any  surplus  left 
of  patriarchal  seniors  when  they  were  taken  out  (as 
has  been  shown  from  Deut.  i.  15,  16)  from  that 
class;  and  3rdly,  the  Levites.  On  what  principle 
the  non-Levitical  judges  were  chosen  alter  Divine 
superintendence  was  interrupted  at  Joshua's  death 
is  not  clear.  A  simple  way  would  have  been  for 
the  existing  judges  in  every  town,  &c.,  to  choose 
their  own  colleagues,  as  vacancies  fell,  from  among 
the  limited  number  of  persons  who,  being  heads 
of  families,  were  competent.  Generally  speaking,  the 
reputation  for  superior  wealth,  as  some  guarantee 
against  facilities  ot'  corruption,  would  determine  the 
choice  oi'a  judge,  and,  taken  in  connexion  with  per- 
sonal qualities,  would  tend  to  limit  the  choice  to 
probably  a  very  few  persons  in  practice.  The  sup- 
position  that  judicature  will   always  he  | .  ..i    i 

tor  is  carried  through  all  the  1 ks  of  the  i.au    see 

Ex.  xxi.  6,  xxii.  /uixs.;   Lev.  six.  15;  Num.  xxw. 
24  ;    Kent.  i.   16,   xx  i.  IS,   xxv.  1).       And   all    that 
we  know  ot'  the  facts  of  later  history  confirms  the 
supposition.   The  Hebrews  were  sensitive 
the  administration  of  justice ;  nor  is  tin'  lice  spirit 


senior  of  a  subdivision  of  the  tribe  (comp.  1  Chr.  iv. 
88,  Jndg.  v.  :;,  l :,  . 


11GS 


JUDGES 


of  their  early  commonwealth  in  anything  more 
manifest  than  in  the  resentment  which  followed  the 
venal  or  partial  judge.  The  fact  that  justice  re- 
posed on  a  popular  basis  of  administration  largely 
contributed  to  keep  up  this  spirit  of  independence, 
which  is  the  ultimate  check  on  all  perversions  of 
the  tribunal.  The  popular  aristocracy b  of  heads 
of  tribes,  sections  of  tribes,  or  families,  is  found  to 
fall  into  two  main  orders  of  varying  nomenclature, 
and  rose  from  the  capite  ccnsi,  or  mere  citizens, 
'upwards.  The  more  common  name  for  the  higher 
order -is  "princes,"  and  for  the  lower,  "elders" 
(Judg.  viii.  14;  Ex.  ii.  14;  Job  xxix.  7,  8,  9 ; 
Ezr.  x.  8).  These  orders  were  the  popular  element 
of  judicature.  On  the  other  hand  the  Levitical 
body  was  imbued  with  a  keen  sense  of  allegiance  to 
God  as  the  Author  of  Law,  and  to  the  Covenant 
as  His  embodiment  of  it,  and  soon  gained  whatever 
forensic  experience  and  erudition  those  simple  times 
could  yield ;  hence  they  brought  to  the  judicial 
task  the  legal  acumen  and  sense  of  general  pan- 
ciples  which  complemented  the  ruder  lay  element. 
Thus  the  Hebrews  really  enjoyed  much  of  the 
viitue  of  a  system  which  allots  separate  provinces 
to  judge  and  jury,  although  we  cannot  trace  any 
such  line  of  separation  in  their  functions,  save  in 
so  far  as  has  been  indicated  above.  To  return  to 
the  first  or  popular  branch,  there  is  reason  to  think, 
from  the  general  concurrence  of  phraseology  amidst 
much  diversity,  that  in  every  city  these  two  ranks 
of  "princes"  and  "elders"0  had  their  analogies, 
and  that  a  variable  number  of  heads  of  families 
and  groups  of  families,  in  two  ranks,  were  popu- 
larly recognised,  whether  with  or  without  any  form 
of  election,  as  charged  with  the  duty  of  administer- 
ing justice.  Succoth  d  (Judg.  viii.  14)  may  be  taken 
as  an  example.  Evidently  the  ex  officio  judges  of 
Jfoses'  choice  would  have  left  their  successors  when 
the  tribe  of  Gad,  to  which  Succoth  pertained  (Josh. 
xiii.  27),  settled  in  its  territory  and  towns:  and 
what  would  be  more  simple  than  that  the  whole 
number  of  judges  in  that  tribe  should  be  allotted 
to  its  towns  in  proportion  to  their  size  ?  As  such 
judges  were  mostly  the  headmen  by  genealogy, 
they  would  fall  into  their  natural  places,  and 
symmetry  would  be  preserved.     The  Levites  also 


b  This  term  is  used  for  want  of  a  better  ;  but  as 
regards  privileges  of  race,  the  tribe  of  Levi  and  house 
of  Aaron  were  the  only  aristocracy,  and  these,  by  their 
privation  as  regards  holding  land,  were  an  aristocracy 
very  unlike  what  has  usually  gone  by  that  name. 

0  A  number  of  words— e.  g.K  N^'3,  ~)C,  T'JJ,  and 
(especially  in  the  book  of  Job)  ^ll — are  sometimes 
rendered  "prince"  in  the  A.  V.  :  the  first  most  nearly 
uniformly  so,  which  seems  designative  of  the  passive 
eminence  of  high  birth  or  position;  the  next,  ~E>, 
expresses  active  and  official  authority.  Yet  as  the 
iO£'3  was  most  likely,  nay,  in  the  earlier  annals, 
certain,  to  be  the  "IE^,  we  must  be  careful  of  ex- 
cluding from  the  person  called  by  the  one  title  the 
qualities  denoted  by  the  other.  Of  the  two  remaining 
terms,  il|13,  expressing  princely  qualities,  approaches 
most  nearly  to  fcOCO,  and  T1^,  expressing  promi- 
nence of  station,   to  ~)C*. 

d  The  princes  and  elders  here  were  together  77. 
The  subordination  in  numbers,  of  which  Ten  is  the 
base  of  Ex.  xviii.  and  Dent.  i.  10,  strongly  suggests 
that  70 -f- 7  were  the  actual  components;  although 
they  are    spoken  of  rather  as  regards  functions  of 


JUDGES 

were  apportioned  on  the*  whole  equally  among  the 
tribes  ;  and  if  they  preserved  their  limits,  there 
were  probably  few  parts  of  Palestine  beyond  a 
day's  journey  from  a  Levitical  city. 

One  great  hold  which  the  priesthood  had,  in 
their  jurisdiction,  upon  men's  ordinary  life  was  the 
custody  in  the  Sanctuary  of  the  standard  weights 
and  measures,  to  which,  in  cases  of  dispute,  reference 
was  doubtless  made.  It  is,  however,  reasonable  to 
suppose  that  in  most  towns  sufficiently  exact  models 
of  them  for  all  ordinary  questions  would  be  kept, 
since  to  refer  to  the  Sanctuary  at  Shiloh,  Jeru- 
salem, &c,  in  every  case  of  dispute  between  dealers 
would  be  nugatory  (Ex.  xxx.  13  ;  Num.  iii.  47  ; 
Ezek.  xlv.  12).  Above  "all  these,  the  high-priest 
in  the  ante-regal  period  was  the  resort  in  difficult 
cases  (Deut.  xvii.  12),  as  the  chief  jurist  of  the 
nation,  and  who  would  in  case  of  need  be  perhaps 
oracularly  directed  ;  yet  we  hear  of  none  acting  as 
judge  save  Eli:e  nor  is  any  judicial  act  recorded  of 
him ;  though  perhaps  his  not  restraining  his  sons  is 
meant  to  be  noticed  as  a  failure  in  his  judicial  duties. 
Now  the  judicial  authority  of  any  such  supreme 
tribunal  must  have  wholly  lapsed  at  the  time  of  the 
events  recorded  in  Judg.  xix.f  It  is  also  a  fact  of 
some  weight,  negatively,  that  none  of  the  special 
deliverers  called  Judges,  was  of  priestly  lineage,  or 
even  became  as  much  noted  as  Deborah,  a  woman. 
This  seems  to  show  that  any  central  action  of  the 
high-priest  on  national  unity  was  null,  and  of  this 
supremacy,  had  it  existed  in  force,  the  judicial 
prerogative  was  the  main  element.  Difficult  cases 
would  include  cases  of  appeal,  and  we  may  presume 
that,  save  so  far  as  the  authority  of  those  special 
deliverers  made  itself  felt,  there  was  no  judge  in  the 
last  resort  from  Joshua  to  Samuel.  Indeed  the 
current  phrase  of  those  deliverers  that  they  "judged" 
Israel  during  their  term,  shows  which  branch  of 
their  authority  was  most  in  request,  and  the  demand 
of  the  people  for  a  king  was,  in  the  first  instance, 
that  he  mi^ht  "judge  them,"  rather  than  that  he 
might  "  right  their  battles  "  (1  Sam.  viii.  5,  20). 

These  judges  were  15  in  number: — 1.  Othniel ; 
2.  Ehud  ;  3.  Shamgar;  4.  Deborah  and  Barak  ;  5. 
Gideon;  6.  Abimelech ;  7.  Tola;  8.  Jair;  9. 
Jephthah;     10.    Ibzan ;     11.    Elon;     12.    Abdon  ; 


ruling  generally  than  of  judging  specially,  yet  we 
need  not  separate  the  two,  as  is  clear  from  Deut.  i.  16. 
Such  division  of  labour  assuredly  found  little  place  in 
primitive  times.  No  doubt  these  men  presided  "  in 
the  gate."  The  number  of  Jacob's  family  (with  which 
Succoth  was  traditionally  connected,  Gen.  xxxiii.  17) 
having  been  70  on  their  coming  down  into  Egypt 
(Gen.  xlvi.  27),  may  have  been  the  cause  of  this 
number  being  that  of  the  "  elders "  of  that  place, 
besides  the  sacred  character  of  the  factor  7.  See  also 
Ex.  xxiv.  9.  On  the  other  hand,  at  Ramah  about 
30  persons  occupied  a  similar  place  in  popular  esteem 
(1  Sam.  ix.  22  :  see  also  ver.  13,  and  vii.  17). 

e  The  remark  in  the  margin  of  the  A.  V.  on  1  Sam. 
iv.  18  seems  improper.  It  is  as  follows:  "He  seems 
to  have  been  a  judge  to  do  justice  only,  and  that  in 
South-west  Israel."  -When  it  was  inserted,  the  func- 
tion of  the  high-priest,  as  mentioned  above,  would 
seem  to  have  been  overlooked.  That  function  was 
certainly  designed  to  be  general,  not  partial ;  though 
probably,  as  hinted  above,  its  execution  was  in- 
adequate. 

f  It  ought  not  to  be  forgotten  that  in  some  cases 
of  "blood"  the  " congregation "  themselves  were  to 
"judge"  (Num.  xxxv.  24),  and  that  the  appeal  of 
Judg.  xx.  4-7  was  thus  in  the  regular  course  of  con- 
stitutional law. 


JUDGES 

13.  Samson;  14.  Eli;  15.  Samuel'.     Their  history 

is  related  under  their  separate  names,  and  some  re- 
-marks upon  the  first  thirteen,  contained  in  the  book 
of  Judges,  are  made  in  the  following  article.  The 
chronology  of  this  period  is  discussed  under  Chro- 
nology (p.  323). 

This  function  of  the  priesthood,  being,  it  may  be 
presumed,  in  abeyance  during  the  period  of  the 
Judges,  seems  to  have  merged  in  the  monarchy. 
The  kingdom  of  Saul  suffered  too  severely  from 
external 'toes  to  allow  civil  matters  much  promi- 
nence. Hence  of  his  only  two  recorded  judicial 
acts,  the  one  (1  Sam.  xi.  13)  was  the  mere  remis- 
sion of  a  penalty  popularly  demanded  ;  the  other 
the  pronouncing  of  a  sentence  (ib.  xiv.  44,  45) 
which,  if  it  was  sincerely  intended,  was  over-ruled 
in  turn  by  the  right  sense  of  the  people.  In 
David's  reign  it  was  evidently  the  rule  for  the 
king  to  hear  causes  in  person,  and  not  merely  be. 
passively,  or  even  by  deputy  (though  this  might 
also  be  included),6  the  "  fountain  of  justice  "  to  his 
people.  For  this  purpose  perhaps  it  was  prospec- 
tively ordained  that  the  king  should  "  write  him  a 
copy  of  the  law,"  and  "  read  therein  all  the  days  of 
his  life"  (Deut.  xvii.  18,  19).  The  same  class  of 
eases  which  were  reserved  for  Moses  would  pro- 
bably fall  to  his  lot ;  and  the  high-priest  was  of 
Course  ready  to  assist  the  monarch.  This  is  further 
presumable  from  the  fact  that  no  officer  analogous 
to  a  chief  justice  ever  appears  under  the  kings.  It 
has  been  supposed  that  the  subjection  of  all  Israel 
to  David's  sway  caused  an  influx  of  such  cases, 
and  that  advantage  was  artfully  taken  of  this  by 
Absalom  (2  Sam.  xv.  1-4);  but  the  rate  at  which 
cases  were  disposed  of  can  hardly  have  been  slower 
among  the  ten  tribes  after  David  had  become  their 
king,  than  it  was  during  the  previous  anarchy.  It 
is  more  probable  that  during  David's  uniformly 
successful  wars  wealth  and  population  increased 
rapidly,  and  civil  cases  multiplied  faster  than  the 
king,  occupied  with  war,  could  attend  to  them, 
especially  when  the  summary  process  customary  in 
the  East  is  considered.  Perhaps  the  arrangements, 
mentioned  in  1  Chr.  xxiii.  4,  xxvi.  29  (comp.  v. 
■">'-',  "rulers"  probably  including  judges),  of  the 
6000  Levites  acting  as  "officers  and  judges,"  and 
amongst  them  specially  "  Chenaniahand  his  sons;" 
with  others,  for  the  fcrans-Jordanic  tribes,  may  have 
been  made  to  meet  the  need  of  suitors.  In  Solomon's 
character,  whose  reign  of  peace  would  surely  be 
fertile  in  civil  questions,  the  "  wisdom  to  judge  " 
was  the  fitting  first  quality  (1  K.  iii.  9  ;  comp. 
Ps.  lxxii.  1-4).  As  a  judge  Solomon  shines  "  in  all 
hi-  -lory"  (1  K.  iii.  16,  &C;).  No  criminal  was 
too  powerful  for  his  justice,  as  some  had  been  for 
his  father's  (2  Sam.  i'ii.  39  ;  1  K.  i'i.  5,  ii,  33,34). 
The  examples  of  direct  royal  exercise  of  judicial 
authority  an'  2  Sam.  i.  15,  iv.  9-12,  where  sen- 
tence  i>  summarily  executed,11  ami  the  supposed 
case  of  2  Sam.  xiv.   1-21.     The   denunciation    of 


B  See  2  Sam.  xv.  3,  where  the  text  gives  probably 
a  better  rendering  than  the  margin. 

h  The  cases  of  Annum  and  Absalom,  in  which  no 
notice  was  taken  of  cither  crime,  though  set  down  by 
Michaelis  ;  Laws  of  Moses,  bk.  i.  art.  x.)  as  instances  of 
justice  forborne  through  politic  consideration  of  the 
criminal's  power,  seem  rather  to  be  examples  of  mere 
weakness,  either  of  government  or  of  personal  cha- 
racter, in  David.  His  own  criminality  w  ith  I'.ath- 
sheba  it  is  superfluous  to  argue,  since  the  matter  was 
by  Divine  interference  removed  from  the  cognizance 
of  human  law. 


JUDGES  1169 

2  Sam.  xii.  5,  6,  is,  though  not  formally  judicial, 
yet  in  the  same  spirit.  Solomon  similarly  pro- 
ceeded in  the  cases  of  Joab  and  Shimei  (1  K.  ii. 
34,  4G ;  comp.  2  K.  xiv.  5,  6).  It  is  likely 
that  royalty  in  Israel  was  ultimately  unfavourable 
to  the  local  independence  connected  with  the 
judicature  of  the  "princes"  and  "elders"  in  the 
territory  and  cities  of  each  tribe.  The  tendency  of 
the  monarchy  was  doubtless  to  centralise,  and  we 
read  of  large  numbers  of  king's  officers  appointed 
to  this  and  cognate  duties  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  4,  xxvi. 
29-32)/  If  the  general  machinery  of  justice  had 
been,  as  is  reasonable  to  think,  deranged  or  retarded 
during  a  period  of  anarchy,  the  Levites  afforded 
the  fittest  materials  for  its  reconstitution.'  Being 
to  some  extent  detached,  both  locally,  and  by 
special  duties,  exemptions,  &c,  from  the  mass  of 
the  population,  they  were  more  easily  brought  to 
the  steady  routine  which  justice  requires,  and, 
what  is  no  less  important,  were,  in  case  of  neglect 
of  duty,  more  at  the  mercy  of  the  king  (as  shown 
in  the  case  of  the  priests  at  Nob,  1  Sam.  xxii.  17). 
Hence  it  is  probable  that  the  Levites  generally 
superseded  the  local  elders  in  the  administration  of 
justice.  But  subsequently,  when  the  Levites  with- 
drew from  the  kingdom  of  the  ten  tribes,  judicial 
elders  probably  again  filled  the  gap.  Thus  they 
conducted  the  mock  trial  of  Naboth  (1  K.  xxi. 
8-13).  There  is  in  2  Chr.  xix.  5,  &c.,a  special 
notice  of  a  reappointment  of  judges  by  Jehoshaphat 
and  of  a  distinct  court,  of  appeal  perhaps,  at  Jeru- 
salem, composed  of  Levitical  and  of  lay  elements. 
In  the  same  place  (as  also  in  a  previous  one,  1  Chr, 
xxvi.  32)  occurs  a  mention  of"  the  king's  matters" 
as  a  branch  of  jurisprudence.  The  rights  of  the 
prerogative  having  a  constant  tendency  to  encroach, 
and  needing  continual  regulation,  these  may  have 
grown  probably  into  a  department,  somewhat  like 
our  exchequer. 

,One  more  change  is  noticeable  in  the  pre-Baby- 
lonian  period.  The  "  princes  "  constantly  appear 
as  a  powerful  political  body,  increasing  in  influence 
and  privileges,  and  having  a  fixed  centre  of  action  at 
Jerusalem  ;  till,  in  the  reign  of  Zedekiah,  they  seem 
to  exercise  some  of  the  duties  of  a  privy  council  ; 
and  especially  a  collective  jurisdiction  (2  Chr.  xxviii. 
21;  Jer.  xxvi.  10,  16).  These  "princes"  are 
probably  the  heads  of  great  houses'1  in  Jttdah  and 
Benjamin,  whose  fathers  had  once  been  the  pillars 
of  local  jurisdiction  ;  but  who,  through  the  attrac- 
tions of  a  court,  and  probably  also  under  the  con- 
stant alarm  of  hostile  invasion,  became  gradually 
residents  in  the  capital,  and  formed  an  oligarchy, 
which  drew  to  itself,  amidst  the  growing  weakness 
of  the  latter  monarchy,  whatever  vigour  was  left 
in  the  state,  and  encroached  on  the  sovereign  attri- 
bute of  justice.  The  employment  in  offices  of  ti  usf 
and  emolument  would  tend  also  in  the  same  way, 
and  such  chief  families  would  probablv  monopolise 
such  employment.     Hence  the  constant  burden   of 


1  From  Num.  iv.  3,  23,  30,  it  would  seem  that 
after  all  years  of  age  the  Levites  were  excused  from 
the  service  of  the  tabernacle.  This  was  perhaps  a 
provision  meant  to  favour  their  usefulness  in  deciding 
on  points  of  law,  since  the  maturity  of  a  jud 
hardly  begun  at  that  age,  and  before  it  thej  Would 
have  in  iii  junior  to  their  lay  coadjutors. 

k  That  some  of  the  heads  of  such  houses,  however,  re- 
tained their  proper  sphere,  seems  clear  from  Jer.  xxvi. 

1  7,  where  "  elders  of  the  land  "  address  an  "  assembly 
of  the  people."     Still,  the  occasion  is  not  judicial. 


1170 


JUDGES 


the  prophetic  strain,  denouncing  the  neglect,  the 
perversion,  the  corruption,  of  judicial  functionaries 
(Is.  i.  17,  21,  v.  7,  x.  2,  xxviii.  7,  lvi.  1,  lix.  4  ; 
Jer.  ii.  8,  y.  1,  vii.  5,  xxi.  12;  Ez.  xxii.  27, 
xlv.  8,  9  ;  Hos.  v.  10,  vii.  5,  7;  Amos  v.  7,  15, 
24,  vi.  12;  Hab.  i.  4,  &c).  Still,  although  far 
changed  from  its  broad  and  simple  basis  in  the 
earlier  period,  the  administration  of  justice  had 
little  resembling  the  set  and  rigid  system  of  the 
Sanhedrim  of  later  times.m  [See  Sanhedrim.] 
This  last  change  arose  from  the  fact  that  the 
patriarchal  seniority,  degenerate  and  corrupted  as 
it  became  before  the  captivity,  was  by  that  event 
broken  up,  and  a  new  basis  of  judicature  had  to  be 
sought  for. 

With  regard  to  the  forms  of  procedure  little 
more  is  known  than  may  be  gathered  from  the 
two  examples,  Ruth  iv.  2,  of  a  civil,  and  1  K.  xxi. 
8-14,  of  a  criminal  character  ; n  to  which,  as  a 
specimen  of  royal  summary  jurisdiction,  may  be 
added  the  well-known  "judgment"  of  Solomon. 
Boaz  apparently  empanels  as  it  were  the  first  ten 
"elders"  whom  he  meets  "  in  the  gate,"  the  well- 
known  site  of  the  Oriental  court,  and  cites  the 
other  party  by  "  Ho,  such  an  one ; "  and  the 
people  appear  to  be  invoked  as  attesting  the  legality 
of  the  proceeding.  The  whole  aiiair  bears  an 
extemporaneous  aspect,  which  may,  however-,  be 
merely  the  result  of  the  terseness  of  the  narrative. 
In  Job  ix.  19,  we  have  a  wish  expressed  that  a 
"time  to  plead"  might  be  "set"  (comp.  the 
phrase  of  Roman  law,  diem  dicere).  In  the  case  of 
the  involuntary  homicide  seeking  the  city  of  refuge, 
he  was  to  make  out  his  case  to  the  satisfaction  of 
its  elders  (Josh.  xx.  4),  and  this  failing,  or  the 
congregation  deciding  against  his  claim  to  sanctuary 
there  (though  how  its  sense  was  to  be  taken  does 
not  appear),  he  was  not  put  to  death  by  act  of 
public  justice,  but  left  to  the  "  avenger  of  blood  " 
(Deut.  xix.  12).  The  expressions  between  "blood 
and  blood,"  between  "  plea  and  plea  "  (Deut.  xvii. 
8),  indicate  a  presumption  of  legal  intricacy  arising, 
the  latter  expression  seeming  to  imply  something 
like  what  we  call  a  "  cross-suit."  We  may  infer 
from  the  scantiness,  or  rather  almost  entire  absence 
of  direction  as  regards  forms  of  procedure,  that  the 
legislator  was  content  to  leave  them  to  be  provided 
for  as  the  necessity  for  them  arose,  it  being  impos- 
sible by  any  jurisprudential  devices  to  anticipate 
chicane.  It  is  an  interesting  question  hoV  far 
judges  were  allowed  to  receive  fees  of  suitors ; 
Michaelis  reasonably  presumes  that  none  were 
allowed  or  customary,  and  it  seems,  from  the  words 
of  1  Sam.  xii.  3,  that  such  transactions  would 
have  been  regarded  as  corrupt.  There  is  another 
question  how  far  advocates  were  usual.  There 
is  no  reason  to  think  that  until  the  period  of 
Greek  influence,  when  we  meet  with  words  based 
on  awi)yopos  and  Trapd/cA^ros,  any  professed 
class  of  pleaders  existed.  Yet  passages  abound  in 
which  the  pleading  of  the  cause  of  those  who  are 
unable  to  plead  their  own,  is  spoken  of  as,  what  it 
indeed  was,  a  noble  act  of  charity;  and  the  expres- 
sion has  even  (which  shows  the  popularity  of  the 
practice)   become   a    basis   of    figurative    allusion 


m  The  Sanhedrim  is,  by  a  school  of  Judaism  once 
more  prevalent  than  now,  attentptcd  to  be  based  on 
the  70  elders  of  Num.  xi.  1G,  and  to  be  traced  through 
the  O.  T.  history.  Those  70  were  chosen  when  judi- 
cature had  been  already  provided  for  (Ex.  xviii.  25), 
and  their  office  was  to  assist  Moses  in  the  duty  of 


JUDGES,  BOOK  OF 

(Job  xvi.  21;  Prov.  xxii.  23,  xxiii.  11,  xxxi.  9; 
Is.  i.  17  ;  Jer.  xxx.  13,  1.  34,  li.  36).  The  blessed- 
ness of  such  acts  is  forcibly  dwelt  upon,  Job  xxix.' 
12,  13. 

There  is  no  mention  of  any  distinctive  dress  or 
badge  as  pertaining  to  the  judicial  officer.  A  staff 
or  sceptre  was  the  common  badge  of  a  ruler  or 
prince,  and  this  perhaps  they  bore  (Is.  xiv.  5; 
Am.  i.  5,  8).  They  would  perhaps,  when  officia- 
ting, be  more  than  usually  careful  to  comply  with 
the  regulations  about  dress  laid  down  in  Num.  xv. 
38,  39;  Deut.  xxii.  12.  The  use  of  the  "white 
asses"  (Judg.  v.  10),  by  those  who  "sit  in  judg- 
ment," was  perhaps  a  convenient  distinctive  mark 
for  them  when  journeying  where  they  would  not 
usually  be  personally  known. 

For  other  matters  relating  to  some  of  the  forms 
of  law,  see  Oaths,  Officers,  Witnesses.  [H.H.] 

JUDGES,   BOOK   OF  (D*t3E)iB> ;    Kpnal ; 

liber  Judicium).  I.  Title. — The  period  of  history 
contained  in  this  book  reaches  from  Joshua  to  Eli, 
and  is  thus  more  extensive  than  the  time  of  the 
Judges.  A  large  portion  of  it  also  makes  no  men- 
tion of  them,  though  belonging  to  their  time.  But 
because  the  history  of  the  Judges  occupies  by  far 
the  greater  part  of  the  narrative,  and  is  at  the  same 
time  the  history  of  the  people,  the  title  of  the 
whole  book  is  derived  from  that  portion.  The 
book  of  Ruth  was  originally  a  part  of  this  book. 
But  about  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century  after 
Christ  it  was  placed  in  the  Hebrew  copies  imme- 
diately after  the  Song  of  Solomon.  In  the  LXX. 
it  has  preserved  its  original  position,  but  as  a 
separate  book. 

II.  Arrangement. — The  book  at  first  sight  may 
be  divided  into  two  parts — i.-xvi.  and  xvii. -xxi. 

A.  i.-xvi. — The  subdivisions  are — (a)  i.-ii.  5, 
which  may  be  considered  as  a  first  introduction, 
giving  a  summary  of  the  results  of  the  war  carried 
on  against  the  Canaanites  by  the  several  tribes  on 
the  west  of  Jordan  after  Joshua's  death,  and  form- 
ing a  continuation  of  Josh.  xii.  It  is  placed  first, 
as  in  the  most  natural  position.  It  tells  us  that 
the  people  did  not  obey  the  command  to  expel  the 
people  of  the  land,  and  contains  the  reproof  of  them 
by  a  prophet,  (b)  ii.  6-iii.  6. — This  is  a  second 
introduction,  standing  in  nearer  relation  to  the  fol- 
lowing history.  It  informs  us  that  the  people  fell 
into  idolatry  after  the  death  of  Joshua  and  his 
generation,  and  that  they  were  punished  for  it  by 
being  unable  to  drive  out  the  remnant  of  the 
inhabitants  of  the  land,  and  by  falling  under  the 
hand  of  oppressors.  A  parenthesis  occurs  (ii.  16- 
19)  of  the  highest  importance  as  giving  a  key  to 
the  following  portion.  It  is  a  summary  view  of 
the  history :  the  people  fall  into  idolatry  ;  they  are 
then  oppressed  by  a  foreign  power;  upon  their 
repentance  they  are  delivered  by  a  Judge,  after 
whose  death  they  relapse  into  idolatry,  (c)  iii.  7- 
xvi. — The  words,  "and  the  .children  of  Israel  did 
evil  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord,"  which  had  been 
already  used  in  ii.  11,  are  employed  to  introduce 
the  history  of  the  13  Judges  comprised  in  this 
book.     An  account  of  six  of  these   13  is  given  at 

governing.  But  no  influence  of  any  such  body  is 
traceable  in  later  times  at  any  crisis  of  history.  They 
seem  in  fact  to  have  left  no  successors. 

n  The  example  of  Susannah  and  the  ciders  is  loo 
suspicious  an  authority  to  be  cited. 


JUDGES,  BOOK  OF 

greater  or  less  length.  The  account  of  the  remain- 
ing seven  is  very  short,  and  merely  attached  to  the 
longer  narratives.  These  narratives  are  as  follows: — 

(1)  The  deliverance  of  Israel  by  Othniel,  iii.  7-11. 

(2)  The  history  of  Ehud,  and  (in  31)  that  .of 
Shamgar,  iii.  12-31.  (3)  The  deliverance  by 
Deborah  and  Barak,  iv.-v.  (4)  The  whole  passage 
is  vi.-x.  5.  The  history  of  Gideon  and  his  son 
Abimelech  is  contained  in  vi.-ix.,  and  followed  by 
the  notice  of  Tola,  x.  1,  2,  and  Jair,  x.  3-5.  This 
is  the  only  case  in  which  the  history  of  a  Judge  is 
continued  by  that  of  his  children.  But  the  ex- 
ception is  one  which  illustrates  the  lesson  taught 
by  the  whole  book.  Gideon's  sin  in  making  the 
ephod  is  punished  by  the  destruction  of  his  family 
by  Abimelech,  with  the  help  of  the  men  of  She- 
chem,  who  in  their  turn  become  the  instruments  of 
each  other's  punishment.  In  addition  to  this,  the 
short  reign  of  Abimelech  would  seem  to  be  re* 
corded  as  being  an  unauthorised  anticipation  of  the 
kingly  government  of  later  times.  (5)  x.  fi-xii. 
The  history  of  Jephthah,  x.  G-xii.  7  ;  to  which  is 
added  the  mention  of  Ibzan,  xii.  8-10;  Elon,  11, 
12;  Abdon,  13-15.  (6)  The  history  of  Samson, 
consisting  of  twelve  exploits,  and  forming  three 
groups  connected  with  his  love  of  three  Philistine 
women,  xiii.-xvi.  We  may  observe  in  general  on 
this  portion  of  the  book,  that  it  is  almost  entirely 
a  history  of  the  wars  of  deliverance :  there  are  no 
sacerdotal  allusions  in  it ;  the  tribe  of  Judah  is  not 
alluded  to  after  the  time  of  Othniel ;  and  the 
greater  part  of  the  Judges  belong  to  the  northern 
half  of  the  kingdom. 

B.  xvii.-xxi. — This  part  has  no  formal  connexion 
with  the  preceding,  and  is  often  called  an  appendix. 
No  mention  of  the  Judges  occurs  in  it.  It  con- 
tains allusions  to  "  the  house  of  God,"  the  ark,  and 
the  high-priest.  The  period  to  which  the  narrative 
relates  is  simply  marked  by  the  expression,  "  when 
there  was  no  king  in  Israel"  (xix.  1;  cf.  xviii.  1). 
It  records  (a)  the  conquest  of  Laish  by  a  portion 
of  the  tribe  of  Dan,  and  the  establishment  there 
of  the  idolatrous  worship  of  Jehovah  already  insti- 
tuted by  Micah  in  Mount  Ephraim.  The  date  of 
this  occurrence  is  not  marked,  but  it  has  been 
thought  to  be  subsequent  to  the  time  of  Deborah, 
as  her  song  contains  no  allusion  to  any  northern 
settlements^!'  the  tribe  of  Dan.  (6)  The  almost 
total  extinction  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  by  the 
whole  people  of  Israel,  in  consequence  of  their  sup- 
porting the  cause  of  the  wicked  men  of  Gibeah, 
and  the  means  afterwards  adopted  tor  preventing  its 
becoming  complete.  The  date  is  in  some  degree 
marked  by  the  mention  of  Phinehas,  the  grandson 
of  Aaron  (w.  28),  and  by  the  proof  of  the  una- 
nimity still  prevailing  among  the  people. 

III.  Design. — We  have  already  seen  that  there 
is  an  unity  of  plan  in  i.-xvi.,  the  clue  to  which  is 
stated  in  ii.  16-19.  There  can  be  little  doubt  of 
the  design  to  enforce  the  view  there  expressed. 
But  the  words  of  that  ]>as>;'.'j.r  must  not  be  pressed 
too  closely.  It  is  a  general  view,  to  which  the 
facte  of  the  history  correspond  in  different  degrees. 
Thus  the  people  is  contemplated  as  a  whole;  the 
Judges  are  spoken  of  with  the  reverence  due  to 
Gods  instruments,  and  the  deliverances  appear 
complete.  But  it  would  seem  that  the  people  were 
•in  no  instance  under  exactly  the  same  circum- 
stances, and  the  Judges  in  some  points  fill  short 

of  the  ideal.  Thus  Gideon,  who  in  some  respeds 
is  the  most  eminent  of  them,  is  only  the  head  of 
his    own   tribe,    and    has    to    appease    tiie    men    of 


JUDGES,  BOOK  OF 


1171 


Ephraim  by  conciliatory  language  in  the  moment 
of  his  victory  over  the  Midianites ;  and  he  himself 
is  the  means  of  leading  away  the  people  from  the 
pure  worship  of  God.  In  Jephthah  we  find  the 
chief  of  the  land  of  Gilead  only,  affected  to  some 
extent  by  personal  reasons  (xi.  9):  his  war  against 
the  Ammonites  is  confined  to  the  east  side  of  Jor- 
dan, though  its  issue  prdbably  also  freed  the  western 
side  from  their  presence,  and  it  is  followed  by  a 
bloody  conflict  with  Ephraim.  Again,  Samson's 
task  was  simply  "to  begin  to  deliver  Israel"  (xiii. 
5):  and  the  occasions  which  called  forth  his  hos- 
tility to  the  Philistines  are  of  a  kind  which  place 
him  on  a  different  level  from  Deborah  or  Gideon. 
This  shows  that  the  passage  in  question  is  a  general 
review  of  the  collective  history  of  Israel  during  the 
time  of  the  Judges,  the  details  of  which,  in  their 
varying  aspects,  are  given  faithfully  as  the  narrative 
proceeds. 

The  existence  of  this  design  may  lead  us  to 
expect  that  we  have  not  a  complete  history  of  the 
times — a  fact  which  is  clear  from  the  book  itself. 
We  have  only  accounts  of  parts  of  the  nation  at 
any  one  time.  We  may  easily  suppose  that  there 
were  other  incidents  of  a  similar  nature  to  those 
recorded  in  xvii.-xxi.  And  in  the  history  itself 
there  are  points  which  are  obscure  from  want  of 
fuller  information,  e.  g.  the  reason  for  the  silence 
about  the  tribe  of  Judah  (see  also  viii.  18;  ix.  26). 
Some  suppose  even  that  the  number  of  the  Judges 
is  not  complete ;  but  there  is  no  reason  for  this 
opinion.  Sedan  (1  Sam.  xii.  11)  is  possibly  the 
same  as  Abdon.  Ewald  {Gesch.  ii.  477)  rejects  the 
common  explanation  that  the  word  is  a  contracted 
form  of  Ben-Dan,  i.  e.  Samson.  And  Jael  (v.  6) 
need  not  be  the  name  of  an  unknown  Judge,  or  a 
corruption  of  Jair,  as  Ewald  thinks,  but  is  pro- 
bably the  wife  of  Heber.  "  The  days  of  Jael " 
would  carry  the  misery  of  Israel  up  to  the  time 
of  the  victory  over  Sisera,  and  such  an  expression 
could  hardly  be  thought  too  great  an  honour  at 
that  time  (see  v.  24). 

IV.  Materials. — The  author  must  have  found 
certain  parts  of  his  book  in  a  definite  shape :  c.  g. 
the  words  of  the  prophet  (ii.  1-5),  the  song  of 
Deborah  (v.),  Jotham's  parable  (ix.  7-20:  see  also 
xiv.  14,  18,  xv.  7,  16).  How  far  these  and  the 
rest  of  his  materials  came  to  him  already  written 
is  a  matter  of  doubt.  Stahelin  [Krit.  Untersuch. 
p.  106)  thinks  that  iii.  7-xvi.  present  the  same 
manner  and  diction  throughout,  and  that  then'  is 
no  need  to  suppose  written  sources.  So  Hiivernick 
{Einleitung,  i.  1,  p.  68  sqq.  107)  only  recognises 
the  use  of  documents  in  the  appendix.  Other 
critics,  however,  trace  them  throughout.    Bertheau 

(  On  Judges,  p.  xxviii.-xndi.)  says  that  the  difference 
of  the  diction  in  the  principal  narratives,  coupled 
with  the  fact  that  they  are  united  in  one  plan, 
points  to  the  incorporation  of  parts  of  previous 
histories.  Thus,  according  to  him,  the  author 
found  the  substance  of  iv.  2-2  1-  already  accom- 
panying  the  song  of  Deborah;  in  vi.-ix.  two  dis- 
tinct authorities  are  used— a  lite  of  Gideon,  and  a 

history  of  Shechem  and  its  usurper;  in  the  account. 
Of  Jephthah  a  history  of  the  tribes  on  the  east  of 
Jordan  is  employed,  which  meets  us  again  in  diltcr- 
ent  parts  of  the  Pentateuch  and  Joshua  ;  and  the 
history  of  Samson  is  taken  from  a  longer  work  on 
the  Philistine  wars.  Ewald's  view  is  similar  Gesch. 
i.  is  l  sqq.,  ii.  486  sqq.). 

V.  Relation  toother  Books. — (A)  to  Joshua. — 
Josh.  xv.-.\\i.   must  be  compared  with  Judg.  i.  in 


1172 


JUDGES,  BOOK  OF 


order  to  understand  fully  how  far  the  several  tribes 
failed  in  expelling  the  people  of  Canaan.  Nothing 
is  said  in  ch.  i.  about  the  tribes  on  the  east  of  Jor- 
dan, which  had  been  already  mentioned  (Josh.  xiii. 
13),  nor  about  Levi  '(see  Josh.  xiii.  33,  xxi.  1-42). 
The  carrying  ou  of  the  war  by  the  tribes  singly  is 
explained  by  Josh.  xxiv.  28.  The  book  begins  with 
a  reference  to  Joshua's  death,  and  ii.  6-9  resumes 
the  narrative,  suspended  by  i.-ii.  5,  with  the  same 
words  as  are  used  in  concluding  the  history  of 
Joshua  (xxiv.-28-31).  In  addition  to  this  the  fol- 
lowing passages  appear  to  be  common  to  the  two 
books :— compare  Judg.  i.  10-15,  20,  21,  27,  29, 
with  Josh.  xv.  14-19,  13,  63,  xvii.  12,  xvi.  10. 
A  reference  to  the  conquest  of  Laish  (Judg.  xviii.) 
occurs  in  Josh.  xix.  47. 

(B)  to  the  books  of  Samuel  and  Kings. — We  find 
in  i.  28,  30,  33,  35,  a  number  of  towns  upon 
which,  "  when  Israel  was  strong,"  a  tribute  of 
bond-service  was  levied:  this  is  supposed  by  some 
to  refer  to  the  time  of  Solomon  (1  K.  ix.  13-22). 
The  conduct  of  Saul  towards  the  Kenites  (1  Sam. 
xv.  6),  and  that  of  David' (1  Sam.  xxx.  29),  is  ex- 
plained by  i.  16.  A  reference  to  the  continuance 
of  the  Philistine  wars  is  implied  in  xiii.  5.  The 
allusion  to  Abimelech  (2  Sam.  xi.  21)  is  explained 
by  ch.  ix.  Chapters  xvii.-xxi.  and  the  book  of  Ruth 
are  more  independent,  but  they  have  a  general 
reference  to  the  subsequent  history. 

The  question  now  arises  whether  this  book  forms 
one  link  in  an  historical  series,  or  whether  it  has 
a  closer  connexion  either  with  those  that  precede 
or  follow  it.  We  cannot  infer  anything  from  the 
agreement  of  its  view  and  spirit  with  those  of  the 
other  books.  But  its  form  would  lead  to  the  con- 
clusion that  it  was  not  an  independent  book  ori- 
ginally. The  history  ceases  with  Samson,  excluding 
Eli  and  Samuel;  and  then  at  this  point  two  •his- 
torical pieces  are  added — xvii.-xxi.  and  the  book  of 
Ruth,  independent  of  the  general  plan  and  of  each 
other.  This .  is  sufficiently  explained  by  Ewald's 
supposition  that  the  books  from  Judges  to  2  Kings 
form  one  work.  In  this  case  the  histories  pf  Eli 
and  Samuel,  so  closely  united  between  themselves, 
are  only  deferred  on  account  of  their  close  con- 
nexion with  the  rise  of  the  monarchy.  And  Judg. 
xvii.-xxi.  is  inserted  both  as  an  illustration  of  the 
sin  of  Israel  during  the  time  of  the  Judges,  in  which 
respect  it  agrees  with  i.-xvi.,  and  as.  presenting  a 
contrast  with  the  better  order  prevailing  in  the 
time  of  the  kings.  Ruth  follows  next,  as  touching 
on  the  time  of  the  Judges,  and  containing  inform- 
ation about  David's  family  history  which  does  not 
occur  elsewhere.  The  connexion  of  these  books, 
however,  is  denied  by  De.Wette  i  Einleit.  §186) 
and  Thenius  {Kurzgef.  Exeg.  Handb.  Sam.  p.  xv., 
Koitni,  p.  i.).  Bertheau,  on  the  other  hand,  thinks 
that  one  editor  may  be  traced  from  Genesis  to 
2  Kings,  whom  he  believes  to  be  Ezra,  in  agreement 
with  Jewish  tradition. 

VI.  Date. — The  only  guide  to  the  date  of  this 
book  which  we  find  in  ii.  6-xvi.  is  the  expression 
"  unto  this  day,"  the  last  occurrence  of  which 
(xv.  19)  implies  some  distance  from  the  time  of 
Samson.  But  i.  21,  according  to  the  most  natural 
explanation,  would  indicate  a  date,  for  this  chapter 
at  least,  previo'us  to  the  taking  of  debus  by  David 
(2  Sam.  v.  6-9).  Again,  we  should  at  first  sight 
suppose'i.  28,  30,  33,  35,  to  belong  to  the  time  of 
the  Judges;  but  these  passages  are  taken  by  most 
modern  critics  as  pointing  to  the  time  of  Solomon 
(cf.  1  K.  ix.  21).     i.-xvi.  may  therefore  have  been 


JUDGES,  BOOK  OF 

originally,  as  Ewald  thinks  (Gcsch.  i.  202,  3),  the 
commencement  of  a  larger  work  reaching  down 
to  above  a  century  after  Solomon  (see  also  David- 
son, Introduction,  649,  50).  Again,  the  writer 
of  the  appendix  lived  when  Shiloh  was  no  longer  a 
religious  centre  (xviii.  31);  he  was  acquainted  with 
the  regal  form  of  government  (xvii.  6,  xviii.  1). 
•  There  is  some  doubt  as  to  xviii.  30.  It  is  thought 
by  some  to  refer  to  the  Philistine  oppression,  lint 
it  seems  more  probable  that  the  Assyrian  captivity 
is  intended,  in  which  case  the  writer  must  have 
lived  after  721  B.C.  The  whole  book  therefore 
must  have  taken  its  present  shape  after  that  date. 
And  jf  we  adopt  Ewald's  view,  that  Judges  to 
2  Kings  form  one  book,  the  final  arrangement  of 
the  whole  must  have  been  after  the  thirty-seventh 
year  of  Jehoiachin's  csptivity,  or  B.C.  562  (2  K. 
xxv.  27)."  Bertheau's  suggestion  with  respect  to 
Ezra  brings  it  still  lower.  But  we  may  add,  with 
reference  to  the  subject  of  this  and  the  two  pre- 
ceding sections,  that,  however  interesting  such  in- 
quiries may  be,  they  are  only  of  secondary  import- 
ance. Few  persons  are  fully  competent  to  conduct 
them,  or  even  to  pass  judgment  on  their  discordant 
results.  And  whatever  obscurity  may  rest  upon 
the  whole  matter,  there  remains  the  one  important 
fact  that  we  have,  through  God's  providence,  a 
continuous  history  of  the  Jewish  people,  united 
throughout  by  the  conviction  of  their  dependence, 
upon  God  and  government  by  Him.  This  con- 
viction finds  its  highest  expression  in  parts  ni'  the 
Pentateuch,  the  Psalms,  and  the  Prophets:  but  it 
was  confirmed  by  the  events  of  the  history — 
although,  at  times,  in  a  manner  which  gave  room 
to  Faith  to  use  its  power  of  perception,  and  allowed 
men  in  those  days,  as  well  as  in  these,  to  refuse  to 
recognise  it. 

.VII.  Chronology. — The  time  commonly  assigned 
to  the  period  contained  in  this  book  is  299  years. 
But  this  number  is  not  derived  directly  from  it. 
The  length  of  the  interval  between  Joshua's  death 
and  the  invasion  of  Cushau-rishathaim,  and  of  the 
time  during  which  Shamgar  was  Judge,  is  not 
stated.  The  dates  which  are  given  amount  to  41 1) 
years  when  reckoned  consecutively  ;  and  Acts  xiii. 
20  would  show  that  this  was  the  computation 
commonly  adopted,  as  the  450  years  seem  to  result 
from  adding  40  years  for  Eli  to  the  410  of  this 
book.  But  a  difficulty  is  created  by  xi.  26,  and  in 
a  still  greater  degree  by  1  K.  vi.  1,  where  the  whole 
period  from  the  Exodus  to  the  building  of  the 
temple  is  stated  at  480  years  (440,  LXX.).  One 
solution  questions  the  genuineness  of  the  date  in 
1  Kings.  Kennicott  pronounces  against  it  (Diss. 
Gen.  80,  §3),  because  it  is  omitted  by  Origen  when 
quoting  the  rest  of  the  verse.  And  it  is  urged  that 
Josephus  would  not  have  reckoned  592  years  for 
the  same  period;  if  the  present  reading  had  existed 
in  his  time.  But  it  is  defended  by  Thenius  (ad 
foe),  and  is  generally  adopted,  partly  on  account 
of  its  agreement  with  Egyptian  chronology.  Most 
of  the  systems  therefore  shorten  the  time  of  the 
Judges  by  reckoning  the  dates  as  inclusive  or  con- 
temporary. But  all  these  combinations  are  arbitrary. 
And  this  may  be  said  of  Ke'il's  scheme,  which  is 
one  of  those  least  open  to  objection.  He  reckons 
the  dates  successively  as  far  as  Jair,  but  makes 
Jephthah  and  the  three  following  Judges  contempo-  . 
rary  with  the  40  years  of  the  Philistine  oppression 
(cf.  x.  6-xiii.  1);  and  by  compressing  the  period 
between  the  division  of  the  land  and  Cushan- 
rishathaim  into  10  years,  and  the  Philistine  wars 


JUDGMENT  HALL 

to  the  death  of  Saul  into  39',  he  arrives,  ultimately 
at  the  480  years.  Ewald  and  Bertheau  have  pro- 
posal ingenious  but  unsatisfactory  explanations— 
differing  in  details,  but  both  built  upon  the  sup- 
position  that  the  whole  period  from  the  Exodus  to 
Solomon  was  divided  into  12  generations  of  40 
years;  and  that,  for  the  period  of  the  Judges,  this 
system  has  become  blended  with  the  dates  of  an- 
other more  precise  reckoning.  On  the  whole,  it 
seems  safer  to  give  up  the  attempt  to  ascertain  the 
chronology  exactly.  The  successive  narratives  give 
us  the  history  of  only  parts  of  the  country,  and 
Some  of  the  occurrences  may  have  been  contempo- 
rary (x.  7).  Round  numbers  seem  to  have  been 
used — the  number  40  occurs  four  times;  and  two 
of  the  periods  are  without  any  date.  On  this  diffi- 
cult subject  see  also  Chronology,  p.  323. 

VIII.  Commentaries. — The  following  list  is  taken 
from  Bertheau  (Eurzgef.  Exeg.  Handb.  z.  A.  T., 
Das  Buck  der  Richter  u.  Rut),  to  whom  this  article 
is  principally  indebted.  (1)  Rabbinical :  In  addition 
to  the  well-known  commentaries,  see  R.  Tanchumi 
Hierosol.  ad  libros  Vet.  Test.'  commentarii  Arabici 
specimen  una  cum  annotationibus  ad  aliquot  loca 
libri  Judd.,  ed.  Ch.  Fr.  Schnurrer,  Tubing.  .1791, 
4to. ;  R.  Tanchumi  Hierosol.  Comment,  in  pro- 
phctas  Arab,  specimen  (on  Judg.  xiii.-xxi.),  ed.  Th. 
Haarbriicker,  Halis,  184!>,  8vo.  (2)  Christian: 
Victor  Strigel,  Scholia  in  libr.  Judd.,  Lips.  1586; 
Sermrius,  Comment,  in  libros  Jos.  Judd.,  etc.,  1609  ; 
Critici  Sacri,  torn.  ii.  Loud.  1660  ;  Sebast.  Schmidt, 
In  libr.  Judd,.,  Argentor.  1706,  4to. ;  Clerici  V.  T. 
libri  historici,  Amstelod.  1708,  fol. ;  J.  D.  Michaelis, 
Deutsche  Uebers.  des  A.  T.  Gottingen,  1772  ; 
Dathe,  Libri  hist.  Lat.  vers.  1784  ;  Exeget.  ffandb. 
d.  A.  T. ;  Maurer,  Comme/it.  gramm.  crit.  pp. 
126-153  ;  Rosenmiilleri  Scholia,  vol.  ii.  Lipsiae, 
1835  ;  Gottl.  Ludw.  Studer,  das  Buch  der  Richter 
grammat.  und  histor.  erhldrt.  1835.  There  are 
many  separate  treatises  on  ch.  v.,  a  list  of  which  is 
found  in  Bertheau,  p.  80.  [E.  R.  O.] 

JUDGMENT-HALL.  The  word  Praetorium 
(TlpaiToopioi')  is  so  translated  five  times  in  the 
A.  V.  of  the  N.  T. ;  and  in  those  five  passages  it 
denotes  two  different  places. 

I.  In  John  xviii.  28,  33,  xxix.  9,  it  is  the  re- 
silience which  Pilate  occupied  when  he  visited  Jeru- 
salem ;  to  which  the  Jews  brought  Jesus  from  the 
house  of  Caiaphas,  and  within  which  He  was  ex- 
amined by  Pilate,  and  scourged  and  mocked  by  the 
soldiers,  while  the  Jews  were  waiting  without  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  the  judgment-seat  (erected  on 
the  Pavement  in  front  of  the  Praetorium),  on  which 
Pilate  sat  when  he  pronounced  the  final  sentence. 
The  Latin  word  praetorium  originally  signified  (see 
Smith's  Diet,  of  Ant. ,)  the  general's  tent  in  a  Wo- 
man camp  (Liv.  xxviii.  27,  &C.) ;  and  afterwards 
it  had,  among  other  significations,  that,  of  the 
palace  in  which  a  governor  of  a  province  lived  and 
administered  justice  (Cic.  Verr.  ii.  4,  §2<S,  &C.). 
The  site  of  Pilate's  praetorium  in  Jerusalem  lias 
given  rise  to  much  dispute,  some  supposing  it  to 
lie  the  palace  of  king  Herod,  others  the  tower  of 
Autoiiia;  but  it  has  been  shown  elsewhere  that  the 
latter  was  probably  the  Praetorium,  which  was 
then  and  long  afterwards  the  citadel   of  Jerusalem. 

[Jerusalem,  p.  1032a.  |    This  is  supported  by  the 

fact  that  at  the  time  of  the  trial  of  Christ,  Herod 
was  in  Jerusalem,  doubtless  inhabiting  the  palace 
of  his  father  (Luke  xxiii.  7).  It  appears,  however, 
from  a  passage  of  Josephus  (B. ./.  ii.  14.  §8),  that 


JUDITH,  THE  BOOK  OF     1173 

the  Roman  governor  sometimes  resided  in  the  palace, 
and  set  up  his  judgment-seat  in  front  of  it.  Pilate 
certainly  lived  there  at  one  time  (Philo,  I^eg.  in 
< 'aium,  38,  39).  Winer  conjectures  that  the  pro- 
curator, when  in  Jerusalem,  resided  with  a  body- 
guard iu  the  palace  of  Herod  (Jos.  B.  J.  ii.  15, 
§5),  while  the  Roman  garrison  occupied  Antonia. 
Just  in  like  manner,  a  former  palace  of  Hiero  became 
the  praetorium,  in  which  Verres  lived  in  Syracuse 
(Cic.  Verr.  ii.  5,  §12). 

2-In  Acts  xxiii.  35  Herod's  judgment-hall  or 
praetorium  iu  Caesarea  was  doubtless  a  part  of  that 
magnificent  range  of  buildings,  the  erection  of  which 
by  king  Herod  is  described  in  Josephus  (Ant.  xv. 
9,  §6;  see  also  B.J.  i.  21,  §5-8). 

3.  The  word  "  palace,"  or  "  Caesar's  court,"  in 
the  A.  V.  of  Phil.  i.  13,  is  a  translation  of  the  same 
word  praetorium.  The  statement  in  a  later  part 
of  the  same  Epistle  (iv.  22)  would  seem  to  connect 
this  praetorium  with  the  imperial  palace  at  Rome  ; 
but  no  classical  authority  is  found  for  so  designating 
the  palace  itself.  The  praetorian  camp,  outside 
the  northern  wall  of  Rome,  was  far  from  the 
palace,  and  therefore  unlikely  to  be  the  praetorium 
here  mentioned.  An  opinion  well  deserving  con- 
sideration has  been  advocated  by  Wieseler,  and  by 
Conybeare  and  Howson  (Life  of  St.  Paul,  ch.  26), 
to  the  effect  that  the  praetorium  here  mentioned 
was  the  quarter  of  that  detachment  of  the  Prae- 
torian Guards  which  was  in  immediate  attendance 
upon  the  emperor,  and  had  barracks  in  Mount 
Palatine.  It  will  be  remembered  that  St.  Paul,  on 
his  arrival  at  Rome  (Acts  xxviii.  16),  was  delivered 
by  the  centurion  into  the  custody  of  the  praetorian 
prefect. 

4.  The  word  praetorium  occurs  also  in  Matt, 
xxvii.  27,  where  it  is  translated  "common  hall," 
and  in  Mark  xv.  16.  In  both  places  it  denotes 
Pilate's  residence  in  Jerusalem.  [W.  T.  B.] 

JUDITH,    1.    (rPTirP;     'lovSid,   'lovSeie, 

'lovfiriB),  "  the  daughter  of  Beeri  the  Hittite,"  and 
wife  of  Esau  (Gen.  xxvi.  34).     [Aholibamaii.] 

2.  The  heroine  of  the  apocryphal  book  which 
bears  her  name,  who  appears  as  an  ideal  type  of  • 
piety  (Jud.  viii.  6),  beauty  (xi.  21),  courage,  and 
chastity  (xvi.  22  ft'.).  Her  supposed  descent  from 
Simeon  (ix.  2),  and  the  manner  in  which  she  refers 
to  his  cruel  deed  (Gen.  xxxiv.  25  ft'.),  mark  the 
conception  of  the  character,  which  evidently  belongs 
to  a  period  of  stern  and  perilous  conflict.  The  most 
unscrupulous  daring  (xiii.)  is  combined  with  zealous 
ritualism  (xii.  1  ft'.),  and  faith  is  turned  to  action 
rather  than  to  supplication  (viii.  I!l  ff.).  Clement 
of  Lome  (Ep.  i.  55)  assigns  to  Judith  the  epithet 
given  to  Jael  ('lovSeld  77  fxaKapia)  ;  and  Jerome 
sees  in  her  exploit  the  image  of  the  victory  of  the 
( 'lunch  over  the  power  of  evil  (Ep.  I  xxix.  11,  p.  508  ; 
Judith  ...  in  typo  Ecclesiae  diabolum  capite  trun- 
cavit;  cf.  Ep.  xxii.  21,  p.  105). 

The  name  is  properly  the  feminine  form  of 
"H-liT,  Judaeus  (cf.  Jer.  xxxvi.  1+,  21).  In  the 
pa  i  e  of  Genesis  it  is  generally  taken  as  the  cor- 
relative ofJudah,  i.  e.  "praised."       [B.  F.  H'.J 

JUDITH,  1H 1 1 :  P.OOK  OF,  like  that  of 
Tobit,  belongs  to  the  earliest  specimens  of  historical 
fiction.  The  narrative  of  the  reign  of  "Nebu- 
chadnezzar King  of  Jfmeveh"  (i.  I),  of  the  cam- 
paign of  rlolofernes,  and  the  deliverance  of  Bethu- 
lia,  through  the  stratagem  an  1  courage  of  the  Jewish 
heroine,  contains  loo  many  and  too  serious  ditli- 


1174      JUDITH,  THE  BOOK  OF 

cultics,  both  historical  and  geographical,  to  allow 
of  the  supposition  that  it  is  either  literally  true,  or 
even  carefully  moulded  on  truth.  The  existence  of 
a  kingdom  of  Nineveh  and  the  reign  of  a  Nebu- 
chadnezzar are  in  themselves  inconsistent  with  a 
date  after  the  Return  ;  and  an  earlier  date  is  ex- 
cluded equally  by  internal  evidence  and  by  the 
impossibility  of  placing  the  events  in  harmonious 
connexion  with  the  course  of  Jewish  history.  The 
latter  tact  is  seen  most  clearly  in  the  extreme 
varieties  of  opinion  among  those  cities  who  hare 
endeavoured  to  maintain  the  veracity  of  the  story. 
Nebuchadnezzar  has  been  identified  with  Oambyses, 
Xerxes,  Esarhaddon,  Kiniladan,  Merodach  Baladan, 
&c,  without  the  slightest  show  of  probability. 
But  apart  from  this,  the  text  evidently  alludes  to 
the  position  of  the  Jews  after  the  exile  when  the 
Temple  was  rebuilt  (v.  18,  19,  iv.  3),  and  the 
hierarchical  government  established  in  place  of  the 
kingdom  (xv.  8,  T]  yepovaia  rwv  vicov  'Iffpa^A  ; 
cf.  iv.  4,  Samaria;  viii.  6,  irpoffafSfSaTov,  Trpou/rrj- 
viov) ;  and  after  the  Return  the  course  of  authentic 
history  absolutely  excludes  the  possibility  of  the 
occurrence  of  such  events  as  the  book  relates. 
This  fundamental  contradiction  of  tacts,  which 
underlies  the  whole  narrative,  renders  it  super- 
fluous to  examine  in  detail  the  other  objections 
which  may  be  urged  against  it  (e.  g.  iv.  6,  Joacim  ; 
cf.  1  Chr.  vi.;   Joseph.  Ant.  x.  8,  §6,  Joacim). 

2.  The  value  of  the  book  is  not,  however,  less- 
ened by  its  fictitious  character.  On  the  contrary 
it  becomes  even  more  valuable  as  exhibiting  an 
ideal  type  of  heroism,  which  was  outwardly  embo- 
died in  the  wars  of  independence.  The  self-sacri- 
ficing faith  and  unscrupulous  bravery  of  Judith 
were  the  qualities  by  which  the  champions  of 
Jewish  freedom  were  theu  enabled  to  overcome  the 
power  of  Syria,  which  seemed  at  the  time  scarcely 
less  formidable  than  the  imaginary  hosts  of  Holo- 
fernes.  The  peculiar  character  of  the  book,  which 
is  exhibited  in  these  traits,  affords  the  best  indica- 
tion of  its  date  ;  for  it  cannot  be  wrong  to  refer  its 
origin  to  the  Maccabaean  period,  which  it  reflects 
not  only  in  its  general  spirit  but  even  in  smaller 
traits.  The  impious  design  of  Nebuchadnezzar  finds 
a  parallel  in  the  prophetic  description  of  Antiochus 
(Dan.  xi.  31  ft.),  and  the  triumphant  issue  of 
Judith's  courage  must  be  compared  not  with  the 
immediate  results  of  the  invasion  of  Apollonius  (as 
Bertholdt,  Einl.  2553  ft'.),  but  with  the  victory 
which  the  author  pictured  to  himself  as  the  reward 
of  faith.  But  while  it  seems  certain  that  the  book 
is  to  be  referred  to  the  second  century  B.C.  (175- 
100  B.C.),  the  attempts  which  have  been  made  to 
fix  its  date  within  narrower  limits,  either  to  the 
time  of  the  war  of  Alexander  Jannaeus  (105-4  B.C., 
Movers)  or  of  Demetrius  II.  (129  B.C.,  Ewald), 
rest  on  very  inaccurate  data.  It  might  seem  more 
natural  (as  a  mere  conjecture)  to  refer  it  to  an 
earlier  time,  c.  170  B.C.,  when  Antiochus  Epiphanes 
made  his  first  assault  upon  the  Temple. a 

3.  In  accordance  with  the  view  which  has  been 
given  of  the  character  and  date  of  the  book,  it  is 
probable  that  the  several  parts  may  have  a  distinct 
symbolic  meaning.  Some  of  the  names  can  scarcely 
have  been  chosen  without  regard  to  their  deriva- 


a  The  story  of  Volkenar  (Das  vierte  Buck  Ezra, 
p.  6;  Theol.  Jahrb.  1856-7)  that  the  book  of  Judith 
refers  to  the  period  of  the  Parthian  war  of  Trajan, 
need  only  be  noticed  in  passing,  as  it  assumes  the 
spnriousness  of  the  first  epistle  of  Clement  (§6). 


JUDITH,  THE  BOOK  OF 

tion  {e.g.  Achior  —  Brother  of  Light ;  Judiths 
Jewess ;  Bethulia  =  il  vlFQ,  the  virgin  of  Je- 
hovah), and  the  historical  difficulties  of  the  person 
of  Nebuchadnezzar  disappear  when  he  is  regarded 
as  the  Scriptural  type  of  worldly  power.  But  it 
is,  perhaps,  a  mere  play  of  fancy  to  allegorise  the 
whole  narrative,  as  Grotius  has  done  {Prol.  in 
Jud.),  who  interprets  Judith  of  the  Jewish  nation 
widowed  of  outward  help,  Bethulia  (rP~7N-fi''2) 
of  the  Temple,  Nebuchadnezzar  of  the  devil,  and 
Holofernes  (CTO  "IQ^II,  Uetor  serpentis')  of  An- 
tiochus, his  emissary ;  while  Joacim,  the  high- 
priest,  conveys,  as  he  thinks,  by  his  name  the 
assurance  that  "  God  will  rise  up"  to  deliver  this 
people. 

4.  Two  conflicting  statements  have  been  pre- 
served as  to  the  original  language  of  the  book. 
Origen  speaks  of  it  together  with  Tobit  as  "  not 
existing  in  Hebrew  even  among  the  Apocrypha " 
in  the  Hebrew  collection  (Ep.  ad  Afric.  §13, 
ovSe  yap  txovaiv  °-vra.  [oi  'EjSpaioi]  Kal  iv 
' AlTOKplHpOlS    'E/3pai'<TTi,    U)S    &7r'    aVT.WV   fiadoVTfS 

eyvwKafxzv),  by  which  statement  he  seems  to  imply 
that  the  book  was  originally  written  in  Greek.  Je- 
rome, on  the  other  hand,  says  that  "  among  the 
Hebrews  the  book  of  Judith  is  read  among  the  Ha- 
giographa  [Apocrypha]  .  .  .  and  being  written  in 
the  Chaldee  language  is  reckoned  among  the  his- 
tories" (Praef.  ad  Jud.).  The  words  of  Origen  are, 
however,  somewhat  ambiguous,  and  there  can  be 
little  doubt  that  the  book  was  written  in  Palestine 
in  the  national  dialect  (Syro-Chaldaic),  though  Jahn 
(Einl.  ii.  §3)  and  Eichhorn  (Einl.  in  d.  Apokr. 
327)  maintain  the  originality  of  the  present  Greek 
text,  on  the  authority  of  some  phrases  which  may 
be  assigned  very  naturally  to  the  translator  or  re- 
viser.1" 

5.  The  text  exists  at  present  in  two  distinct  re- 
censions, the  Greek  (followed  by  the  Syriac)  and 
the  Latin.  The  former  evidently  is  the  truer  re- 
presentative of  the  original,  and  it  seems  certain 
that  the  Latin  was  derived,  in  the  main,  from  the 
Greek  by  a  series  of  successive  alterations.  Jerome 
confesses  that  his  own  translation  was  free  (magis 
sensum  e  sensu  quam  verbum  e  verbo  transfereus) ; 
and  peculiarities  of  the  language  (Fritzsche,  p. 
122)  prove  that  he  took  the  old  Latin  as  the  basis 
of  his  work,  though  he  compared  it  with  the  Chaldee 
text,  which  was  in  his  possession  (sola  ea  quae  in- 
telligeutia  integra  in  verbis  Chaldaeis  invenire  potui 
Latinis  expressi).  The  Latin  text  contains  many 
curious  errors,  which  seem  to  have  arisen  in  the 
first  instance  from  false  hearing  (Bertholdt,  Einl. 
2574  f ;  e.  g.  x.  5,  Kal  &pTwv  KaOapeov.  Vulg.  et 
panes  et  caseum,  i.  e.  Kal  rvpov,  xvi.  2,  oti  els 
irap€fjL^o\as  avrov.  Vulg.  qui  posuit  castra  sua, 
i.e.  6  6eis ;  xvi.  17,  Kal  KXavaovrai  eV  alffO-r^crei. 
Vulg.  ut  urantur  et  sentiant) ;  and  Jerome  re- 
marks that  it  had  been  variously  corrupted  and  inter- 
polated before  his  time.  At  present  it  is  impossible 
to  determine  the  authentic  text.  In  many  instances 
the  Latin  is  more  full  than  the  Greek  (iv.  8-15, 
v.  11-20,  v.  22-24,  vi.  15  fL,  ix.  6  ff.),  which 
however  contains  peculiar  passages  (i.  13-10,  vi. 
1,  &c).     Even  where  the  two  texts  do  not  (lifter  in 


b  The  present  Greek  text  offers  instances  of  mis- 
translation which  clearly  point  to  an  Aramaic  ori- 
ginal :  e.g.  iii:  9,  xvi.  3,  i.  8  ;  ef.  v.  15,  IS  (Vaihinger, 
in  Herzog's  Enci/kl.  s.  v. ;  Fritzsche,  Einl.  §2  ;  De 
Wette.  Einl.  §308,  c). 


JUEL 

the  details  of  the  narrative,  as  is  often  the  ease 
(e.g.  1.  3  ft".,  ill-  9,  v.  9,  vi.  13,  vii.  2  ft'.,  x.  12  ft'., 
xt.  11,  xvi.  25),  they  yet  differ  in  language  (e.  g. 
c.  xv.,  &c),  and  in  names  (e.g.  viii.  1)  and  uum- 
'  hers  (e.  //.  i.  2)  ;  and  these  variations  can  only  be 
explained  by  going  back  to  some  still  more  remote 
source  (cf.  Bertholdt,  Einl.  2568  ft'.),  which  was 
probably  an  earlier  Greek  copy.0 

6.  The  existence  of  these  various  recensions  of 
the  book  is  a  proof  of  its  popularity  and  wide  cir- 
culation, but  the  external  evidence  of  its  use  is 
very  scanty.  Josephus  was  not  acquainted  with  it, 
or  it  is  likely  that  he  would  have  made  some  use 
of  its  contents,  as  he  did  of  the  apocryphal  additions 
tn  Esther  (Jos.  Ant.  xi.  G,  §1  ft'.).  The  first  refer- 
ence to  its  contents  occurs  in  Clem.  Rom.  (Ep.  i. 
55),  and  it  is  quoted  with  marked  respect  by 
Origen  (Sel.  inJerem.  23  ;  cf.  Horn.  ix.  inJud.  i.), 
Hilary  (in  Psal.  exxv.  6),  and  Lucifer  (De  non 
pare.  p.  955).  Jerome  speaks  of  it  as  "  reckoned 
among  the  Sacred  Scriptures  by  the  Synod  of  Nice," 
by  which  he  probably  means  that  it  was  quoted  in 
the  records  of  the  Council,  unless  the  text  be  corrupt. 
It  has  been  wrongly  inserted  in  the  catalogue  at 
the  close  of  the  Apostolic  Canons,  against  the  best 
authority  (cf.  Hody,  De  Blbl.  Text.  646  «),  but  it 
obtained  a  place  in  the  Latin  Canon  at  an  early 
time  (cf.  Hilar.  Prol.  in  I's.  15),  which  it  com- 
monly maintained  afterwards.     [Canon.] 

7.  The  Commentary  of  Fritzsche  (Kurzgefasstes 
Exeg.  Handbuch,  Leipzig,  1853)  is  by  far  the  best 
which  has  appeared :  within  a  narrow  compass  it 
contains  a  good  critical  apparatus  and  scholarlike 
notes.  [B.  F.  W.] 

JU'EL  ('IourjA.:  Johel,  Jessei).  1.  1  Esd.  ix. 
34.     [Uel.]      2.  1  Esd.  ix.  35.     [Joel,  13.] 

JU'LIA  ('lov\ia),  a  Christian  woman  at  Rome, 
probably  the  wife,  or  perhaps  the  sister,  of  Philo- 
logus,  in  connexion  with  whom  she  is  saluted  by 
St.  Paul  (Rom.  xvi.  15).  Origen  supposes  that 
they  were  master  and  mistress  of  a  Christian  house- 
hold which  included  the  other  persons  mentioned  in 
the  same  verse.  Some  modern  critics  have  con- 
jectured that  the  name  may  be  that  of  a  man, 
Julias.  [W.  T.  B.] 

JU'LTUS  ('lovAios),  the  courteous  centurion  of 
"  Augustus'  band,"  to  whose  charge  St.  Paul  was 
delivered  when  he  was  sent  prisoner  from  Caesarea 
to  Rome  (Acts  xxvii.  1,  3). 

Augustus'  band  has  been  identified  by  some 
commentators  with  the  Italian  band  (Acts  x.  1)  ; 
by  others,  less  probably,  with  trie  body  of  cavalry 
denominated  Sebasteni  by  Josephus  (Ant.  xix.  9, 
§2,  &c).  Conybeare  and  Howson  (Life  of  St.  Paul, 
ch.  21)  adopt  in  the  main  VVieseler's  opinion,  that 
the  Augustan  cohort  was  a  detachment  of  the 
Praetorian  Guards  attached  to  the  person  of  the 
Roman  governor  at  Caesarea;  and  that  this  Julius 
may  be  tin'  same  as  Julius  Priscus  (Tacit,  /fist.  ii. 
92,  iv.  1  1  },  sometime  centurion,  afterwards  prefect 
of  the  Praetorians.  [W.  T.  B.] 

JTJ'NIA  ('lovvlas,  i.e.  JrNi.v),  a  Christian  at 
Rome,  menti 1  by  St.  Paul  as  one  of  his  kins- 
folk and  fellow-prisoners,  of  note  among  the 
Apostles,  and  in  Christ  before  St.  Paul  (Rom. 
.xvi.  7).  Origen  conjectures  that  he  was  possibly 
one  of  the  seventy  disciples.     Hammond  also  takes 


JUPITER 


1175 


c  Of  modern  versions  the  English  follows  the  Sret  i , 
ami  that  of  Luther  the  Latin  text. 


the  name  to  be  that  of  a  man,  Junias,  which  would 
be  a  contraction  (as  Winer  observes)  of  Junilius  or 
Junianus.  Chrysostom,  holding  the  more  common, 
but  perhaps  less  probable,  hypothesis  that  the  name 
is  that  of  a  woman,  Junia,  remarks  on  it,  "How 
great  is  the  devotion  of  this  woman,  that  she  should 
be  counted  worthy  of  the  name  of  Apostle  !"  Nothing 
is  known  of  the  imprisonment  to  which  St.  Paul 
refers :  Origen  supposes  that  it  is  that  bondage  from 
which  Christ  makes  Christians  free.      [W.  T.  B.] 

JUNIPER  (Drh,  from  Qjy\,  "  bind,"  Gesen. 

p.  1317  ;  pad/xev,  (pvrbv,  1  K.  xix.  4,  5  ;  juiupcras). 
It  has  been  already  stated  [Cedar]  that  the 
oxycedrus  or  Phoenician  juniper  was  the  tree  whose 
wood,  called  "  cedar-wood,"  was  ordered  by  the 
law  to  be  used  in  ceremonial  purification  (Lev.  xiv. 
4 ;  Num.  xix.  6).  The  word,  however,  which  is 
rendered  in  A.  V.  juniper,  is  beyond  doubt  a  sort 
of  broom,  Genista  monosperma,  G.  raetam  of 
Forskiil.  answering  to  the  Arabic  Rethem,  which 
is  also  found  in  the  desert  of  Sinai  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  the  true  juniper  (Robinson,  ii.  124). 
It  is  mentioned  as  affording  shade  to  Elijah  in  his 
flight  to  Horeb  (1  K.  xix.  4,  5),  and  as  affording 
material  for  fuel,  and  also,  in  extreme  cases,  for 
human  food  (Ps.  cxx.  4;  Job  xxx.  4).  It  is  very 
abundant  in  the  desert  of  Sinai,  aud  affords  shade 
and  protection,  both  in  heat  and  storm,  to  tra- 
vellers (Virg.  Georg.  ii.  434,  436).  Its  roots  are 
very  bitter,  and  would  thus  serve  as  food  only 
in  extreme  cases ;  but  it  may  be  doubted  whether 

t£Ht?  (Job  xxx.  4)  is  to  be  restricted  to  roots  only, 

or  to  be  taken  in  a  wider  sense  of  product,  and 
thus  include  the  fruit,  which  is  much  liked  by 
sheep,  and  may  thus  have  sometimes  served  for 
human  food  (Gesen.  p.  1484).  The  roots  are  much 
valued  by  the  Arabs  for  charcoal  for  the  Cairo 
market.  Thus  the  tree  which  afforded  shade  to 
Elijah  may  have  furnished  also  the  "coals"  or 
ashes  for  baking  the  cake  which  satisfied  his  hunger 
(1  K.  xix.  6 ;  see  also  Ps.  cxx.  4,  "  coals  of 
juniper").  The  Rothem  is  a  leguminous  plant,  and 
bears  a  white  flower.  It  is  found  also  in  Spain, 
Portugal,  and  Palestine.  Its  abundance  in  the 
Sinai  desert  gave  a  name  to  a  station  of  the 
Israelites,  Rithmah  (Num.  xxxiii.  18,  19;  Burck- 
hardt,  Syria,  pp.  483,  537;  Robinson,  i.  203,  205; 
Lord  Lindsay,  Letters,  p.  183  ;  Pliny,  //.  A*,  xxiv. 
9,  65;  Balfour,  Plants  of  the  Bible,  p.  50  ;  Stanley, 
S.  4-  P.  20,  79,  521).  [H.  W.  P.] 

JUTITER  (Zeis,  LXX.).  Among  the  chief 
measures  which  Antiochus  Epiphanes  took  for  the 
entire  subversion  of  the  Jewish  faith  was  that  of 
dedicating  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem  to  the  service 
of  Zeus  Olympius  (2  Mace.  vi.  2),  and  at  the  same 
time  the  rival  temple  on  Gerizim  was  dedicated  to 
Zeus  Xenius  (Jupiter  hospitalis,  Vulg.).  The  choice 
of  the  first  epithet  is  easily  intelligible.  The  Olym- 
pian Zeus  was  the  national  god  of  the  Hellenic  race 
(Thucyd.  iii.  14),  as  well  as  the  supreme  ruler  of 
th''  h.athen  world,  and  as  such  formed  the  tine 
opposite  to  Jehovah,  who  had  revealed  Himself  as 
the  God  of  Abraham.  The  application  of  the 
second  epithet,  "  the  <  lod  of  hospitality  "  (^t\  Grimm, 
on  _'  Mace.  /.  c),  is  more  obscure.  In  2  Mace.  vi.  2 
it  is  explained  by  the  clause.  ••  as  was  the  character 
of  those  who  dwelt  in  the  place,"  which  may,  how- 
ever, be  an  ironical  comment  of  the  writer  (cf. 
Q.  Curt.  iv.  .">.  8),  and  not  a  sincere  eulogj  of  the 


1176 


JUSHAB-HESED 


hospitality  of  the  Samaritans  (as  Ewald,  Gesch.  iv. 
339  n.). 

Jupiter  or  Zeus  is  mentioned  in  one  passage  of 
the  N.  T.,  on  the  occasion  of  St.  Paul's  visit  to 
Lystra  (Acts  xiv.  12,  13),  where  the  expression 
"  Jupiter,  which  was  before  their  city,"  means  that 
his  temple  was  outside  the  city.  [B.  F.  W.] 

JU'SHATJ-HE'SED  (IDPl  3DT  :  'Ao-ojBe'8, 
'Affoj3a4crS,  Cod.  Alex.:  Jdsubhcsed),  son  of  Zerub- 
babel  (1  Chr.  iii.  20).  It  does  not  appear  why  the 
rive  children  in  this  verse  are  separated  from  the 
three  in  ver.  19.  Bertheau  suggests  that  they  might 
be  by  a  different  mother,  or  possibly  born  in  Judaea 
after  the  return,  whereas  the  three  others  were 
born  at  Babylon.  The  name  of  Jushab-hesed,  i.  e. 
"  Loving-kindness  is  returned,"  taken  in  conjunction 
with  that  of  his  father  and  brothers,  is  a  striking 
expression  of  the  feelings  of  pious  Jews  at  the  return 
from  captivity,  and  at  the  same  time  a  good  illus- 
tration of  the  nature  of  Jewish  names.    [A.  C.  H.] 

JUSTUS  ('IoOo-tos).  Schoettgen  (Hor.  Hebr. 
in  Act.  Ap.)  shows  by  quotations  from  Kabbiuical 
writers  that  this  name  was  not  unusual  among  the 
Jews.  1.  A  surname  of  Joseph  railed  Barsabas 
(Actsi.  23).     [Joseph  Baksabas,  p.  1142.] 


a  This— with  one  t — is  the  form  given  in  Harm's 
text  of  xv.  55  ;  Michaelis  and  Walton  insert  a  dagesh, 
but  it  was  apparently  unknown  to  any  of  the  old 


JUTTAH 

2.  A  Christian  at  Corinth,  with  whom  St.  Paul 
lodged  (Acts  xviii.  7).  The  Syr.  and  Arab,  have 
Titus,  while  the  Vulg.  combines  both  names  Titus 
Justus. 

3.  A  surname  of  Jesus,  a  friend  of  St.  Paul 
(Col.  iv.  11).     [Jesus,  p.  1039.] 

JUT'TAH  (HttV,  i.e.  Jutah;a  also  HJ3V,  and 
in  xxi.  16,  !"lt3* :  'Iray,  Alex.  'Ie-r-ra  ;  Tavv,  Alex, 
omits  :  Iota,  leta),  a  city  in  the  mountain  region  of 
Judah,  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Maori  and  Carmel 
(Josh.  xv.  55).  It  was  allotted  to  the  priests 
(xxi.  16),  but  in  the  catalogue  of  1  Chr.  vi.  57-59, 
the  name  has  escaped.  In  the  time  of  Eusebius  it 
was  a  large  village  {kui/xt]  fxeylffrri),  18  miles 
southward  of  Eleutheropolis  (Onomasticon,  "Jet- 
tan").  A  village  called  Yutta  was  visited  by 
Robinson,  close  to  Main  and  Kurmul  (B.  II.  1  eJ. 
ii.  195,  628),  which  doubtless  represents  the  ancient 
town. 

Reland  {Pal.  870)  conjectures  that  Jutta  is  the 
tt6\ls  'IouSa,  A.  V.  "a  city  of  Juda"  in  the  hill 
country,  in  which  Zacharias,  the  father  of  John  the 
Baptist,  resided  (Luke  i.  39).  But  this,  though 
feasible,  is  not  at  present  confirmed  by  any  positive 
evidence.  [G.] 


translators,  in  whose  versions  (with  the  exception  of 
the  Alex.  LXX.),  whatever  shape  the  word  assumes, 
it  retains  a  single  t. 


END  OF  THE  FIRST  VOLUME. 


JDOH  :    PJSINTED   BI    W.  CI.oWK.s  Ar.D  SONS,  STAMFOKD  ml.  I  l 
AND   CHAKING   CROSS. 


Princeton  Theological  Semmary-Speer  Library 


1   1012  01124  4425 


DATE  DUE 


—  ,  M  v  h  t 

Dt*& 

GAYLORD 

PRINTED  IN  U.S.  A.